# Is Brexit actually going to happen?



## Kaka Tim (Jun 27, 2016)

IS BREXIT ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN? 


I dont think Brexit is going to happen. The forces who don't want it to happen are too great.

Opposed are the majority of the british political establishment, the Civil Service, the education and arts institutions,  the City of London, large corporate interests, the TUC, the US, the EU, international finance, Scotland, Northern Ireland and half the population - and that proportion is likely to grow as the cluster fuck unfolds. 

For Brexit - UKIP, some of the right wing press plus Tory Euro Sceptics - whose leading lights suddenly seem distinctly half arsed about the prospect. Plus whatever pressure the democratic mandate of a 52-48% referendum result can bring to bear.

As well as the political and popular resistance to brexit – not forgetting the parliamentary blocs than could be thrown in the way -  there is the herculean task of unpicking the legal ties of the UK from the EU, the massive disruption to the economy and people’s lives plus the prospect of Scotland going independent and the mess it will make of Northern Ireland. 

Where is the political will and influence that is going to push all this through? How much popular support is there going to be for this move as it become clear that it is not going to free up loads of cash, it wont reduce immigration and it will likely have negative effects on things like pensions, house prices, unemployment, regional funding in places like wales and cornwall, the cost of imports, holidays – plus the likely hood of recession. 

I don’t see it happening. There will be climbdowns and fudges and lots of jiggery pokery until there’s just enough argument for a second referendum and we will be back where we where – apart from seeing the near complete meltdown of the british political establishment and possible splitting or even destruction of both of the main parties.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2016)

The ballot papers said remain or leave the EU and the voters chose leave.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 27, 2016)

It certainly appears that the political "leaders" are doing their best to make it look impossible.

Where's the option for a second referendum with another exit vote that nobody understands?

And we won't necessarily lose Scotland. 38% voted leave, some remainers will be torn between UK and EU, a large number don't want the Euro, oil is down in price, they'll see the rest of Britain eventually get moving towards an EFTA deal... I hope we don't lose them anyway, however friendly we may all stay afterwards.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jun 27, 2016)

weltweit said:


> The ballot papers said remain or leave the EU and the voters chose leave.


Since when has what voters wanted counted for anything?


----------



## weltweit (Jun 27, 2016)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Since when has what voters wanted counted for anything?


Indeed, and since when has a politician's promise meant anything?


----------



## Miss Caphat (Jun 27, 2016)

As an outsider it looks very wonky. I think it won't stand. I think that perhaps mostly because London, which we all see as the political and economic hub of the country, was so opposed. It just doesn't seem to make any sense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2016)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Since when has what voters wanted counted for anything?


Only when it accords with what politicians want


----------



## JimW (Jun 27, 2016)

We'll end up with the the Poundland EEA version


----------



## Obediah Marsh (Jun 27, 2016)

You think we have chaos now, just wait until the 'London elites' annul the result.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 27, 2016)

According to the headline to his Telegraph piece, Leadership contender Jeremy Hunt will rock up with the USP of offering a 2nd referendum.
Lol


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jun 27, 2016)

It's a fascinating situation; tricky to predict what will happen next. The Civil Service, having apparently done virtually no contingency planning, is now apparently preparing to leave 100% with Oliver Letwin at the helm, even though there's no certainty who the next PM will be, and whether they will actually trigger article 50. The EU elite is trying to flex its muscles but nothing happens without a political decision from the UK. A right good mess.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2016)

Fuck it. i'll trigger it.


----------



## Supine (Jun 27, 2016)

Something between 2 and 3.

A lot of very clever people are trying to avoid a full exit.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 27, 2016)

The bracket in the first option in the poll might need NI & Gib included if reports are right.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 27, 2016)

Supine said:


> Something between 2 and 3.
> 
> A lot of very clever people are trying to avoid a full exit.


Powerful more than clever, I'd say.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 27, 2016)

brogdale said:


> Powerful more than clever, I'd say.


_Invested _i would say.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

Supine said:


> Something between 2 and 3.
> 
> A lot of very clever people are trying to avoid a full exit.


It does somewhat feel like the politicians are determined to "prove" that a leave is chaotic. I wonder how many of them realise it just makes them look incompetent and unelectable.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> _Invested _i would say.


Quite so.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> It does somewhat feel like the politicians are determined to "prove" that a leave is chaotic. I wonder how many of them realise it just makes them look incompetent and unelectable.


They don't care about looking unelectable...people keep voting them in regardless.


----------



## xenon (Jun 28, 2016)

Miss Caphat said:


> As an outsider it looks very wonky. I think it won't stand. I think that perhaps mostly because London, which we all see as the political and economic hub of the country, was so opposed. It just doesn't seem to make any sense.



 Since when does it have to make sense. 

 I suspect a classic British fudge maybe in the works.  Too late now, the genie is out of the bottle, the bottle has been smashed.


----------



## Skyfallsz (Jun 28, 2016)

It would kind of be a waste because even though for me personally the EU is great, I am still optimistic enough about the world to see that it could be a great thing that we can finally stop pretending it's ok. Things do still happen. A lot of people don't make these connections like the EU to the migrant crisis or terrorism which is insane. 
My dream is that the EU is reformed from a 20th century institution into a 21st century one, but I have never even contributed to that in the slightest. 
One undeniable thing about the referendum was that the EU itself did very little to help it's cause. They had a couple of finance ministers snort at the very idea and post some veiled threats. Like anybody trusts an EU finance minister, 'oh how's that going by the way?


----------



## Miss Caphat (Jun 28, 2016)

xenon said:


> Since when does it have to make sense.
> 
> I suspect a classic British fudge maybe in the works.  Too late now, the genie is out of the bottle, the bottle has been smashed.



To put it another way, it looks like a big mistake to the rest of the world. Who do have some influence considering the financial aspect. And sure, it can be argued that is nothing new. But it also looks reversible.


----------



## Wookey (Jun 28, 2016)

If this "ridicusitch" (ridiculous situation, mine, you can borrow it) if this ridiculsitch was a meal, it would be a dodgy 22-second omelette off of that Saturday Kitchen; under-seasoned, no finesse, raw in the middle and likely to make us all sick if we eat it.

I think everyone's balls are up in the air, and I'm aware that I'm scanning the sky looking for my type of balls. (Which means I might be selectively choosing my evidence!) The dissonance in the media is worse than I've ever seen it, contradictions and agendurbation (agenda masturbation) almost everywhere. I wish I was illiterate and oblivious, I really do.

But that said, I can't see Article 50 being triggered (click-boom!)any time soon, mainly because no-one has a fucking Scooby what to do for the best once they press the button, which I imagine will be red, and secreted in a beachwood box underneath whoever-will-be the PMs's desk. Scotland is a gorgeous tartan spanner in the works, Gib a slightly rockier and uglier spanner, NI a spiky shamrock of shenanigans - the ripples from this are tsunami-size. My sense is that various vested interests are scrabbling round for the least damaging way out of this which might (as Jeremy Cunt writes today) be something like a revised Norway-type deal that keeps the kingdom together in the single market, but falls short of using Article 50. (A finger of fudge is just enough...!)

Honestly, it feels at times like I've woken up in a shonky Robert Harris novel, in which he envisions a dystopian British future, where through some twisted sequence of hitherto unlikely-looking events, our witless prime minister has actually managed to sleepwalk the nation into the spinning propeller blades of his own creation, and seen us spat out the other side in bloodied chunks, as barely recognisable gobbets of country, riven by border checkpoints and dangerous regionalism, a capital superstate in the south and race violence everywhere else, our cities smothered in sad decline, gutted out by social chaos and eventual war. Somewhere. With someone. Ourselves probably! If this is the end of civilisation, I for one didn't expect it to happen this way, and I haven't prepared any lunch or packed a bag. 

But you wouldn't believe it if you read it, would you?! It's like when you have a really long and involved dream, and it's so fucking real, and you come down the next morning and say "You won't believe this dream I had, honest to god...it was so scary, like the end of times! I dreamed everyone split up, Scotland fucked off, Northern Ireland exploded, government virtually collapsed, the pound dropped through the floor, everyone resigned including the Downing Street cat, Richard Branston was crying...and half the people we knew actually voted for it! Thank fuck I woke up..."

But we're not gonna wake up, are we? Or maybe we have.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

That's a draft right?


----------



## Skyfallsz (Jun 28, 2016)

Wookey said:


> If this "ridicusitch" (ridiculous situation, mine, you can borrow it) if this ridiculsitch was a meal, it would be a dodgy 22-second omelette off of that Saturday Kitchen; under-seasoned, no finesse, raw in the middle and likely to make us all sick if we eat it.
> 
> I think everyone's balls are up in the air, and I'm aware that I'm scanning the sky looking for my type of balls. (Which means I might be selectively choosing my evidence!) The dissonance in the media is worse than I've ever seen it, contradictions and agendurbation (agenda masturbation) almost everywhere. I wish I was illiterate and oblivious, I really do.
> 
> ...



I sort of agree with your sentiment but England punching Europe was bound to happen

How can you not punch each other, when you're exactly the same?


----------



## Wookey (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> That's a draft right?



I've been polishing that for over a week, you bitch!


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> It does somewhat feel like the politicians are determined to "prove" that a leave is chaotic. I wonder how many of them realise it just makes them look incompetent and unelectable.



I think that, after the last few days, they all realise.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jun 28, 2016)

They will have to trigger article 50 asap. I agree it has to wait until a negotiating team can be assembled & that might take 3mnths & I see nothing wrong with informal talks first but it cannot be open ended. The referendum result cannot be overturned or rerun until a desired result that is achieved. ignoring election results they don't like is the stuff of dictatorships.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

Wookey said:


> If this "ridicusitch" (ridiculous situation, mine, you can borrow it) if this ridiculsitch was a meal, it would be a dodgy 22-second omelette off of that Saturday Kitchen; under-seasoned, no finesse, raw in the middle and likely to make us all sick if we eat it.
> 
> I think everyone's balls are up in the air, and I'm aware that I'm scanning the sky looking for my type of balls. (Which means I might be selectively choosing my evidence!) The dissonance in the media is worse than I've ever seen it, contradictions and agendurbation (agenda masturbation) almost everywhere. I wish I was illiterate and oblivious, I really do.
> 
> ...



People love a bit of drama, don't they? The seats will all be rearrranged and we'll go back to normal fairly soon.


----------



## emanymton (Jun 28, 2016)

I want to know what chilango thinks, then I'll go with the opposite.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

emanymton said:


> I want to know what chilango thinks, then I'll go with the opposite.



Ha.

I don't think it will happen. There you go


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have to trigger article 50 asap. I agree it has to wait until a negotiating team can be assembled & that might take 3mnths & I see nothing wrong with informal talks first but it cannot be open ended. The referendum result cannot be overturned or rerun until a desired result that is achieved. ignoring election results they don't like is the stuff of dictatorships.



They can trigger it whenever they want and as long as they don't they control the situation. They won't do it until they get the best deal that they can.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jun 28, 2016)

tim said:


> They can trigger it whenever they want and as long as they don't they control the situation. They won't do it until they get the best deal that they can.


I don't think Europe can exist in a limbo with no time limit. I would agree the UK can control the situation but there has to be some sort of time limit. There does seem some sort of idea emerging that if you put this off long enough it will just eventually go away with normal service resumed. That does not seem credible.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Jun 28, 2016)

Obediah Marsh said:


> You think we have chaos now, just wait until the 'London elites' annul the result.



Well yes. 

Not least, it would give the far right a really juicy issue for their potential mass base to feel (even more) aggrieved and betrayed about.


----------



## emanymton (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> Ha.
> 
> I don't think it will happen. There you go



Right then, I just voted for a Norway type deal. 

I think that that seems the most plausible at the moment.  But really, fuck knows what's going to happen. It's all so exciting.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I don't think Europe can exist in a limbo with no time limit. I would agree the UK can control the situation but there has to be some sort of time limit. There does seem some sort of idea emerging that if you put this off long enough it will just eventually go away with normal service resumed. That does not seem credible.



It's the EU not Europe. The geographical entity will continue tobexist regardless. As to the time limit, well the point is that there is no time limit so it's credible and sensible to take a leisurly approach if that gets you the best deal.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jun 28, 2016)

tim said:


> It's the EU not Europe. The geographical entity will continue tobexist regardless. As to the time limit, well the point is that there is no time limit so it's credible and sensible to take a leisurly approach if that gets you the best deal.


I said Europe because one can include non EU countries which will include the UK eventually. I agree there needs to be time allowed to get things in place. That can within limits take as long as it takes but first it was to wait for the next prime minister in place now it is being suggested then there would need to be a general election before anything can be started. It just seems to me that there is a move afoot to delay things indefinitely.


----------



## Johnny. (Jun 28, 2016)

The will of the UK people must be respected.


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have to trigger article 50 asap. I agree it has to wait until a negotiating team can be assembled & that might take 3mnths & I see nothing wrong with informal talks first but it cannot be open ended. The referendum result cannot be overturned or rerun until a desired result that is achieved. ignoring election results they don't like is the stuff of dictatorships.



Of course you're right.  But I suspect this will be the moment when our rulers drop their democratic masks and force us to follow their will.  It will be interesting to see how the people respond.  I hope they respond angrily.


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Not least, it would give the far right a really juicy issue for their potential mass base to feel (even more) aggrieved and betrayed about.



Not just the far Right.  If our rulers try to annul or ignore this vote, _everyone _should feel angry and betrayed.  They should do more than feel actually.


----------



## Poot (Jun 28, 2016)

As others say, and regardless of what I voted, I think we need to shit or get off the pot before (if) the weather heats up and we all start getting irritable.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jun 28, 2016)

Jeremy Cunt(probable candidate for prime minister)on R4 just now saying a deal should be decided beforehand & put to the electorate at the next GE in 2020 before triggering Article 50.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

Johnny. said:


> The will of the UK people must be respected.


Why?


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I don't think Europe can exist in a limbo with no time limit. I would agree the UK can control the situation but there has to be some sort of time limit. There does seem some sort of idea emerging that if you put this off long enough it will just eventually go away with normal service resumed. That does not seem credible.



I actually feel this is what they are going to try, fudge, fudge, Tories elect a new leader! EU grudgingly offers ' more concessions'  new Tory leader decides on a GE to  'gauge' the nations 'mood' 
I honestly feel they have the arrogance to try this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

Johnny. said:


> The will of the UK people must be respected.


Which view of the UK people would you see taking priority here?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> Not just the far Right.  If our rulers try to annul or ignore this vote, _everyone _should feel angry and betrayed.  They should do more than feel actually.


Yes they should condemn a little more and understand a little less


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

coley said:


> I actually feel this is what they are going to try, fudge, fudge, Tories elect a new leader! EU grudgingly offers ' more concessions'  new Tory leader decides on a GE to  'gauge' the nations 'mood'
> I honestly feel they have the arrogance to try this.



You bet they do.  Is there any way to stop them?  The democratically expressed will of the people looks awfully weak in the face of such powerful vested interests....


----------



## Johnny. (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Why?


Democracy!


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> Which view of the UK people would you see taking priority here?


Increasingly the 'remainers'


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> Why?



It's called "democracy."


----------



## Johnny. (Jun 28, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> Which view of the UK people would you see taking priority here?



Democracy should take priority! The people have spoken.


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> You bet they do.  Is there any way to stop them?  The democratically expressed will of the people looks awfully weak in the face of such powerful vested interests....


Esp as the ' result' was so 'narrow' this is the card that will be played increasingly over the next few weeks and months.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 28, 2016)

Why Brexit Might Not Happen at All - The New Yorker


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 28, 2016)

Poot said:


> As others say, and regardless of what I voted, I think we need to shit or get off the pot before (if) the weather heats up and we all start getting irritable.



I'm thinking a summer of discontent against our utterly void politicians and parties is just what needs to happen.


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

coley said:


> Esp as the ' result' was so 'narrow' this is the card that will be played increasingly over the next few weeks and months.



Aye.  Give it a couple more days and we'll be deluged with opinion polls claiming to prove that we've changed our minds...


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

Johnny. said:


> Democracy should take priority! The people have spoken.


When most vote against the Tories but they still get to govern, that's 'democracy' when people vote for something the establishment don like? That's a ' mistake'


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> Aye.  Give it a couple more days and we'll be deluged with opinion polls claiming to prove that we've changed our minds...


Expect thon ' petition'  to play an increasing role in the efforts to correct our ' mistake'


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> Fuck it. i'll trigger it.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

Democracy?


----------



## samk (Jun 28, 2016)

If there is a re-referendum I expect it would be on multiple options for exit, then remain could win with the vote split between efta, wto etc. Outright ignoring the referendum result may cause civil unrest.


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> Why Brexit Might Not Happen at All - The New Yorker


Thought this as soon  as Cameron announced his resignation.


----------



## The Boy (Jun 28, 2016)

stethoscope said:


> I'm thinking a summer of discontent against our utterly void politicians and parties is just what needs to happen.



Tbf, this would stand regardless of the referendum outcome.


----------



## Poot (Jun 28, 2016)

stethoscope said:


> I'm thinking a summer of discontent against our utterly void politicians and parties is just what needs to happen.


I don't disagree with the theory but I'm a bit scared. I'm not as young as I was and I would worry about my foreign friends and neighbours who would inevitably end up worse off, there already seems to be plenty of local tension. I think that much of the anger would be misdirected.


----------



## stethoscope (Jun 28, 2016)

The Boy said:


> Tbf, this would stand regardless of the referendum outcome.



Yes, I was intending to write regardless!


----------



## andysays (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have to trigger article 50 asap. I agree it has to wait until a *negotiating team can be assembled & that might take 3mnths & I see nothing wrong with informal talks first* but it cannot be open ended. The referendum result cannot be overturned or rerun until a desired result that is achieved. ignoring election results they don't like is the stuff of dictatorships.



Two points

There's no reason, constitutional, practical or otherwise, why it *has* to take three months to elect a new leader of the Tory party and/or assemble a negotiating team. Three fucking months!!?!

All the business about informal talks or pre-negotiation negotiation ignores not only the fact that the other EU countries don't have to do any negotiating until Article 50 has been triggered, but also that any negotiations, even informal ones, have to be with negotiators actually able to speak for the British government. At the moments, *no one* is able to speak for the government, precisely because of Cameron's actions

Cameron's decision not to trigger Article 50 immediately (in clear contradiction of his suggested course of action before the referendum) and his vague unhurried suggestion that we should have a new PM by October, maybe, looks like a blatant attempt to avoid the situation created by his decision to hold a referendum.

I reckon (  ) The Conservatives, along with all the other members and representatives of the ruling classes, will now do *everything* in their power to avoid accepting and following through with the decision for Brexit. 

This could lead to a real crisis in democracy, the effects of which could be even more significant (and dangerous, depending on your point of view and/or the way things unfold)  than if they'd just accepted the decision and got on with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

Johnny. said:


> Democracy should take priority! The people have spoken.


Yes. But what the Scots as a whole have said and what the residents of Northern Ireland have said is they want to stay in Europe. Do you think the break up of the UK worth it?


----------



## andysays (Jun 28, 2016)

emanymton said:


> I want to know what chilango thinks, then I'll go with the opposite.



I was thinking about putting a tenner on the Donald Tusk option, except even if I win I won't be able to collect


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> It's called "democracy."


Yeah, like the δῆμος who voted "Oxi"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

samk said:


> If there is a re-referendum I expect it would be on multiple options for exit, then remain could win with the vote split between efta, wto etc. Outright ignoring the referendum result may cause civil unrest.


Don't think it will be outright ignoring but time not right etc then in 18 months someone saying the verdict expired


----------



## pengaleng (Jun 28, 2016)

if theres another vote I aint gonna bother, begrudgingly did it the last time, they need to sort their shit out.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think it will be outright ignoring but time not right etc then in 18 months someone saying the verdict expired


Not forgetting 'radically changed circumstances', 'unforeseen threats to national interest', 'rapidly escalating geo-political crises' etc. etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

brogdale said:


> Not forgetting 'radically changed circumstances', 'unforeseen threats to national interest', 'rapidly escalating geo-political crises' etc. etc.


Yeh exactly so


----------



## Skyfallsz (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I don't think Europe can exist in a limbo with no time limit. I would agree the UK can control the situation but there has to be some sort of time limit. There does seem some sort of idea emerging that if you put this off long enough it will just eventually go away with normal service resumed. That does not seem credible.



All of the biggest crises that the EU has faced have just been put off long enough in the hope that they will just go away


----------



## gosub (Jun 28, 2016)

Potentially they could shell game article 50 using a general election. Only that wouldn't be 'feeling' a bit stupid. - it's a massive erosion of democracy and leverage.  One thing is for sure for our politicians to get any influence back, they'd have to remove any chance of public consultation on the issue of EUrope both as is and on treaties moving forward.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2016)

What does "leave the EU" actually mean?


----------



## coley (Jun 28, 2016)

gosub said:


> Potentially they could shell game article 50 using a general election. Only that wouldn't be 'feeling' a bit stupid. - it's a massive erosion of democracy and leverage.  One thing is for sure for our politicians to get any influence back, they'd have to remove any chance of public consultation on the issue of EUrope both as is and on treaties moving forward.


That's a given,  if we back off from leaving the EU will screw us into the ground, they are  outraged and angry at us but imagine the retribution if we tried to creep back in.


----------



## gosub (Jun 28, 2016)

weltweit said:


> What does "leave the EU" actually mean?


Whatever is decided in the negotiation subsequent to article 50 being invoked


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)




----------



## Flavour (Jun 28, 2016)

who will lose more credibility from the ongoing non-brexit fudge? who can benefit from that?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

Flavour said:


> who will lose more credibility from the ongoing non-brexit fudge? who can benefit from that?


Corbyn & capital respectively.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 28, 2016)

not boris johnson then?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

Flavour said:


> not boris johnson then?


Sorry, my glib reply was not (100%) serious...well, the first part that is.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 28, 2016)

Capital will obviously survive this, and there are good opportunities here for Euro capital if it can take advantage of global insecurities in Britain - for a long time the UK has been seen as more stable than the Eurozone - a temporary blip in that status could actually benefit the Eurozone's centers of capital, much as I would like this to further damage the structural integrity of the EU, it could yet come out stronger as a result


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 28, 2016)

Lots of talk about hard choices
Result will be the soft option


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 28, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> Why Brexit Might Not Happen at All - The New Yorker



The writer suggests a credible scenario - another General Election where labour run on a platform of offering a 2nd referendum - hence the desperation to ditch corbyn so a pro-EU, market orientated party can take over from the Tory brexiters.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

If Brexit was abandoned does anyone here think the leave voters will take to the streets? 

I don't.

..and I bet the politicians don't either. That's what they'll bank on should they go ahead and bluff it out.

That said, I'd imagine UKIP would be rubbing their hands at the votes they'll get next election should this happen.


----------



## gosub (Jun 28, 2016)

brogdale said:


>




What the civil service has been leafing through while simultaneously trying to help the anti immigration lead Brexitiers through their homework. (though its probably been amended to include an Lichtenstein cul de sac) might stick with version the Adam Smith Institute borrowed from it.


From Comres


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2016)

I cannot stress too much that Britain is part of Europe – and always will be


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

There is a real gap here. A lot of people are talking about this in terms of politics - in terms of personalities and parties when what's key here is the state and capital. The state manages the short-medium term interests of _total _capital as without such a function the immediate short-term competitive nature of _individual _capitals leads to ruin and the things required for its continued existence not happening (large scale infra-structure, education, circulation networks, political legitimacy etc). When the state fails to provide one/any number of these things, or acts against the plans of that total capital - both situations that exist today - you have a legitimation crisis _from above_. The trad legitimation crisis (from below)  is when the w/c no longer trusts in the state to deliver its basic needs as a result of a substantive defeat by capital and the state not being able to reconcile the two. We now have a massive gap between capital and its state and the w/c and the state that is supposed to integrate them into capital. Whatever happens now is not going to be because an individual decides to do something. Looking at the politicians is looking in the wrong places.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> If Brexit was abandoned does anyone here think the leave voters will take to the streets?


Yes they would. 100%.


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> If Brexit was abandoned does anyone here think the leave voters will take to the streets?



Some of them will--the far right, to be precise.  It would be a shame if it was only them.


----------



## pengaleng (Jun 28, 2016)

anyone else think it's hilarious that people think everyone who is an immigrant will be 'sent home' lol mostly old dears with not enough hobbies (read relatives)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 28, 2016)

No one is going to be sent home, whatever happens


----------



## pengaleng (Jun 28, 2016)

I know  but they are still gonna die soon


----------



## Lord Camomile (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> Yes they would. 100%.


Yup. Friend and I were talking about this last night and both felt that if we don't leave the EU then there will be riots. He used the term "civil war" which I think was possibly a bit far, but it will be nasty.

It's one of the main reasons I'm uncomfortable supporting any "2nd ref" or "find a loophole" movements - the fallout may well be even worse than an exit*. Plus it sets a dodgy-as-all-hell precedent.




*ill-informed speculation on my part, of course.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> Some of them will--the far right, to be precise.  It would be a shame if it was only them.



The far-right are already on the streets. Always have been.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

pengaleng said:


> anyone else think it's hilarious that people think everyone who is an immigrant will be 'sent home' lol mostly old dears with not enough hobbies (read relatives)




It would be if those of racist bent were not using it as an excuse to abuse anyone they don't like the look of


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

Anyway, a new PM will be along soon and article 50 will be triggered and we shall leave the EU. Why are so many people in denial about this? It is what was voted for. And now having been voted for this is exactly what they have said they will do.

You can ignore Jeremy Hunt, everyone else always has done, the snivelling little weasel.


----------



## phildwyer (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> The far-right are already on the streets. Always have been.



But this time they'd have a legitimate cause, which would win them allies and fellow-travelers.  Yet another reason why it would be foolish to attempt to ignore the result.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> But this time they have a legitimate cause, which will win them allies and fellow-travelers.  Yet another reason why it would be foolish to attempt to ignore the result.



Yeah.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jun 28, 2016)

phildwyer said:


> But this time they'd have a legitimate cause, which would win them allies and fellow-travelers.  Yet another reason why it would be foolish to attempt to ignore the result.


Good thing that the powers that be have been careful to shun foolishness, so far.


----------



## pengaleng (Jun 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It would be if those of racist bent were not using it as an excuse to abuse anyone they don't like the look of




you misunderstand what I said.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 28, 2016)

Business as usual for the EU. Portugal failed to meet its 3% budget deficit target and looks like it will now be fined and have access to EU funds withdrawn. Left Bloc calls for referendum if there are sanctions.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> There is a real gap here. A lot of people are talking about this in terms of politics - in terms of personalities and parties when what's key here is the state and capital. The state manages the short-medium term interests of _total _capital as without such a function the immediate short-term competitive nature of _individual _capitals leads to ruin and the things required for its continued existence not happening (large scale infra-structure, education, circulation networks, political legitimacy etc). When the state fails to provide one/any number of these things, or acts against the plans of that total capital - both situations that exist today - you have a legitimation crisis _from above_. The trad legitimation crisis (from below)  is when the w/c no longer trusts in the state to deliver its basic needs as a result of a substantive defeat by capital and the state not being able to reconcile the two. We now have a massive gap between capital and its state and the w/c and the state that is supposed to integrate them into capital. Whatever happens now is not going to be because an individual decides to do something. Looking at the politicians is looking in the wrong places.


Spot on. Precisely the locus of competing interests.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

pengaleng said:


> you misunderstand what I said.



No I didn't.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

The39thStep said:


> Business as usual for the EU. Portugal failed to meet its 3% budget deficit target and looks like it will now be fined and have access to EU funds withdrawn. Left Bloc calls for referendum if there are sanctions.


I assume they realise they'd have to do better than 61.31%?


----------



## keybored (Jun 28, 2016)

tim said:


> They can trigger it whenever they want and as long as they don't they control the situation. *They won't do it until they get the best deal that they can.*



But negotiations can't even begin until after Article 50 is triggered.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

keybored said:


> But negotiations can't even begin until after Article 50 is triggered.


Of course they're happening right now. Just maybe not with who we are led to think.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 28, 2016)

pengaleng said:


> anyone else think it's hilarious that people think everyone who is an immigrant will be 'sent home' lol mostly old dears with not enough hobbies (read relatives)



No I don't think it's hilarious. The kids I work with, mostly Romanian, have been shouted at in the street and told to fuck off home.


----------



## weltweit (Jun 28, 2016)

I have just heard Angela "Speaking as a mother" Leadsom on Women's Hour saying that she does not want freedom of movement nor the single market.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

weltweit said:


> I have just heard Angela "Speaking as a mother" Leadsom on Women's Hour saying that she does not want freedom of movement nor the single market.


What a leading (never heard of here actually) brexit campaigner saying that? On radio 4. Fancy.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

A week or so before the referendum, I read an article that I can't find right now, which said some huge number (57% maybe) or leave voters felt that this result would not be respected. The article read as though they were silly conspiracy theorists. I know some of those leave voters, on Friday they were still saying "It's amazing, but I don't see that the politicians will allow this". I feel very fucking stupid, I genuinely thought the politicians would get behind any result, however much they dislike it. Now with all this chaos being caused by their lack of action and leadership I really feel they won't and that is what will cause the most damage to our country because yes there will be riots and yes this feeds the growth of the far right, which will damage our country for a generation or more. I'm disgusted, I'm sad and I'm waiting to find out what march to join to have democracy respected.


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> Somebody I was speaking to the other day reckoned that a Brexit vote would simply be ignored and there would be no withdrawal from the EU.
> 
> I could see that happening if the vote was narrow or the turnout was low or any other excuse there could be invalidate the mandate.
> 
> ...



Was howled down with derision for posting this less than a month ago.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

chilango said:


> Was howled down with derision for posting this less than a month ago.


Yeah, but you followed it up with a 60%+ lead for remain...


----------



## chilango (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, but you followed it up with a 60%+ lead for remain...



I know 

I'm at a loss to see how this is all gonna pan out frankly....


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> It certainly appears that the political "leaders" are doing their best to make it look impossible.
> 
> Where's the option for a second referendum with another exit vote that nobody understands?
> 
> And we won't necessarily lose Scotland. 38% voted leave, some remainers will be torn between UK and EU, a large number don't want the Euro, oil is down in price, they'll see the rest of Britain eventually get moving towards an EFTA deal... I hope we don't lose them anyway, however friendly we may all stay afterwards.


Whilst I voted yes, I'd struggle this time to decide  esp if it's an EFTA deal vs potentially joining the euro. However- and this may be down to having lots of "yes" friends- I appear to be in the minority on this point. But the sneering on Facebook last few days at thick racist little englanders has been so bad I've deactivated my account. I don't hold out much hope for future working class representation in Scotland when they are turning out to protest against people in communities they have never set foot in. 


chilango said:


> If Brexit was abandoned does anyone here think the leave voters will take to the streets?
> 
> I don't.
> 
> ...



No. Last few days has been project fear turned up to 11, I think most would be happy for everything just to settle down....but yeah big boost for UKIP.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

weltweit said:


> I have just heard Angela "Speaking as a mother" Leadsom on Women's Hour saying that she does not want freedom of movement nor the single market.


Sounds like the tory faithful will have a choice presented to them.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> A week or so before the referendum, I read an article that I can't find right now, which said some huge number (57% maybe) or leave voters felt that this result would not be respected. The article read as though they were silly conspiracy theorists. I know some of those leave voters, on Friday they were still saying "It's amazing, but I don't see that the politicians will allow this". I feel very fucking stupid, I genuinely thought the politicians would get behind any result, however much they dislike it. Now with all this chaos being caused by their lack of action and leadership I really feel they won't and that is what will cause the most damage to our country because yes there will be riots and yes this feeds the growth of the far right, which will damage our country for a generation or more. I'm disgusted, I'm sad and I'm waiting to find out what march to join to have democracy respected.


I have to say, though, that there are some thing which just _cannot_ be respected. And, to be frank, if someone told me (as they did) that their reason for wanting to vote Leave was any one (or more of) "I want to control immigration"/"We can manage on our own"/"Bring back the Spitfire"/"I want my country back", then I, too, would be having trouble respecting their decision.

I fully accept that, as a remain voter, the echo chamber I inhabit doesn't tend to have a lot of Leave voters in it - but there are still quite a few, and they seem to have been very short on reasoned, cogent arguments for getting out of Europe. Where they did, I could respect their views, even if I didn't agree with them. But the vast bulk seemed to me to be basing their decision on little more than "Waaaaah, don't wanna!".

So I didn't find myself overwhelmed with a desire to respect this position.


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

keybored said:


> But negotiations can't even begin until after Article 50 is triggered.



Says who?


----------



## emanymton (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> There is a real gap here. A lot of people are talking about this in terms of politics - in terms of personalities and parties when what's key here is the state and capital. The state manages the short-medium term interests of _total _capital as without such a function the immediate short-term competitive nature of _individual _capitals leads to ruin and the things required for its continued existence not happening (large scale infra-structure, education, circulation networks, political legitimacy etc). When the state fails to provide one/any number of these things, or acts against the plans of that total capital - both situations that exist today - you have a legitimation crisis _from above_. The trad legitimation crisis (from below)  is when the w/c no longer trusts in the state to deliver its basic needs as a result of a substantive defeat by capital and the state not being able to reconcile the two. We now have a massive gap between capital and its state and the w/c and the state that is supposed to integrate them into capital. Whatever happens now is not going to be because an individual decides to do something. Looking at the politicians is looking in the wrong places.


How do you think it will pan out? 
My current feeling (until I change my mind latter) is that we will 'leave' but on terms that keep things pretty much as they are. Doing otherwise would be too damaging to the 'political legitimacy' of the state. But with such a close vote maybe not?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

tim said:


> Says who?


Says quite a lot of the EU hierarchy, from what I can tell. Though I imagine all kinds of informal discussions will be taking place _sub rosa_, all the same...


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

emanymton said:


> How do you think it will pan out?
> My current feeling (until I change my mind latter) is that we will 'leave' but on terms that keep things pretty much as they are. Doing otherwise would be too damaging to the 'political legitimacy' of the state. But with such a close vote maybe not?


We will be presented with something cooked up by non-politicians but that politicians will try to sell us over the next few weeks. It's first attempt will be well short of brexit and will really be a re-badged status quo. They'll use it as a tester - to see what the reaction is.


----------



## emanymton (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> We will be presented with something cooked up by non-politicians but that politicians will try to sell us over the next few weeks. It's first attempt will be well short of brexit and will really be a re-badged status quo. They'll use it as a tester - to see what the reaction is.


Sounds plausible, and not too far from what I suggested. Something that allows them to pretend they are respecting the result, but with smallest amount of real change they can get away with. 

Of course this will just further antagonise the hard core leavers.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> I have to say, though, that there are some thing which just _cannot_ be respected. And, to be frank, if someone told me (as they did) that their reason for wanting to vote Leave was any one (or more of) "I want to control immigration"/"We can manage on our own"/"Bring back the Spitfire"/"I want my country back", then I, too, would be having trouble respecting their decision.
> 
> I fully accept that, as a remain voter, the echo chamber I inhabit doesn't tend to have a lot of Leave voters in it - but there are still quite a few, and they seem to have been very short on reasoned, cogent arguments for getting out of Europe. Where they did, I could respect their views, even if I didn't agree with them. But the vast bulk seemed to me to be basing their decision on little more than "Waaaaah, don't wanna!".
> 
> So I didn't find myself overwhelmed with a desire to respect this position.


I bet your echo chamber of remain talked a bunch of emotional crap too, so what? I asked many a remain supporter "do you agree with the 5 presidents report's vision for the EU", only ever met one who'd even read it, never met one who agreed with its vision for the EU. Huge numbers voted for remain based on fear of the impact of change on the economy and a wishy washy ideal that doesn't exist, or because they kept being told it was "status quo" when it wasn't, it was ongoing integration, ongoing austerity and privatisation over lack of care for its citizens rights. Sometimes people don't express themselves very well, that's when you read some of the many articles where people better express the issues. Sure, not everybody thought through every point, that wasn't the case on either side and it never will be. I'd still rather have democracy, what would you prefer?


----------



## keybored (Jun 28, 2016)

tim said:


> Says who?


There's only been a referendum, invoking Article 50 is what begins the formal negotiations (butcher's point in #108 taken though). There will be no "deal" until/after then.

Merkal et al have even been quite clear that there are to be no *in*formal talks until then either.

European leaders rule out informal Brexit talks before article 50 is triggered


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 28, 2016)

keybored said:


> There's only been a referendum, invoking Article 50 is what begins the formal negotiations (butcher's point in #108 taken though). There will be no "deal" until/after then.
> 
> Merkal et al have even been quite clear that there are to be no *in*formal talks until then either.
> 
> European leaders rule out informal Brexit talks before article 50 is triggered


'we don't negotiate with terrorists'


(elements of us have been talking with elements of thiers for years on the down low etc)


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> I bet your echo chamber of remain talked a bunch of emotional crap too, so what?


Yes, it did. But I pride myself on having sufficient critical thinking skills to separate out the emotional crap from actual arguments, even if I can't actually delude myself into thinking I'm totally independent.

What has seemed very clear to me is that a large proportion of those self-declaring as Leave voters really didn't have the first clue about what they were voting for. I take your point about the Remain voters who haven't informed themselves to your satisfaction...but then the Remain voters weren't the ones demanding that we take a great leap into the completely unknown.



wheelie_bin said:


> Sure, not everybody thought through every point, that wasn't the case on either side and it never will be. I'd still rather have democracy, what would you prefer?


Good question. Right now, my biggest concern is that, if what we have just seen was democracy in action, and if that really is the best system, then we're utterly fucked.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

keybored said:


> There's only been a referendum, invoking Article 50 is what begins the formal negotiations (butcher's point in #108 taken though). There will be no "deal" until/after then.
> 
> Merkal et al have even been quite clear that there are to be no *in*formal talks until then either.
> 
> European leaders rule out informal Brexit talks before article 50 is triggered




Cameron is off to Brussels today to meet with Merkel, doubt their conversation will be exclusively about cheese & beans.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> I take your point about the Remain voters who haven't informed themselves to your satisfaction...but then the Remain voters weren't the ones demanding that we take a great leap into the completely unknown.


Don't pretend the outcome was status quo. Can you give me a coherent argument for the changes proposed in the 5 presidents report?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> What has seemed very clear to me is that a large proportion of those self-declaring as Leave voters really didn't have the first clue about what they were voting for.



No they didn't and we're still not sure. But as can be seen by the result, the majority of people in this country have been shat on so fucking hard for so long that they no longer gave a fuck and went with the anything other than this option. 

If people still won't accept this then violent revolution is the only thing left.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> Don't pretend the outcome was status quo. Can you give me a coherent argument for the changes proposed in the 5 presidents report?


No, and I am not going to rush off and bone up on it in order to pretend that I can.

I voted "remain" simply because, flawed as the European project might be, it's better than the ludicrous appeals to rose-tinted hindsight and optimistic guesswork that the Leave camp were trying to persuade us with. And because I believe that the UK is perfectly capable, as it has in the past, of playing its part in ensuring that Europe worked to our best advantage. I watched as Leave told lie after lie about the benefits of leaving, and I felt - although I admit I was going to take some serious persuading - that, if the best they could offer was fearmongering (yes, I know Remain did their share of that), and a tissue of paper-thin lies about how leaving was going to make everything better (lies which I note that, before the referendum result was cold, were being backed away from), then there was little there to persuade me otherwise.

These things are complex. All of us have, to some extent, to rely on others whom we have some measure of trust in to advise us as to what the options and implications are. I chose to trust those "experts" that a lot of the Leave heavyweights insisted we ignore, who were warning of the likely economic, legal, and social consequences of an exit. From what I have seen since Friday morning, they look to have been a lot closer to the mark than the rapidly-disintegrating Leave arguments, most of which don't even seem to appeal much to their own camp any more, in any case.


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No they didn't and we're still not sure. But as can be seen by the result, the majority of people in this country have been shat on so fucking hard for so long that they no longer gave a fuck and went with the anything other than this option.
> 
> If people still won't accept this then violent revolution is the only thing left.


I suspect that violence, even if it isn't revolutionary, is very much in the offing. For at least a decade (and I think it's probably a lot longer than that), the political system here has been slanted increasingly towards a professional political/economic class, broadening the divide between the expectations and aspirations of an increasingly large slice of the population. I am not quite sure how we've managed to dodge serious unrest so far, but what I think we're staring in the face now is a serious level of disaffection with politics and politicians, with a nice vein of really unpleasant racist and hard-right nonsense threaded through it. If that doesn't flare up into some major disorder quite soon, I'll be surprised.


----------



## gosub (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> There is a real gap here. A lot of people are talking about this in terms of politics - in terms of personalities and parties when what's key here is the state and capital. The state manages the short-medium term interests of _total _capital as without such a function the immediate short-term competitive nature of _individual _capitals leads to ruin and the things required for its continued existence not happening (large scale infra-structure, education, circulation networks, political legitimacy etc). When the state fails to provide one/any number of these things, or acts against the plans of that total capital - both situations that exist today - you have a legitimation crisis _from above_. The trad legitimation crisis (from below)  is when the w/c no longer trusts in the state to deliver its basic needs as a result of a substantive defeat by capital and the state not being able to reconcile the two. We now have a massive gap between capital and its state and the w/c and the state that is supposed to integrate them into capital. Whatever happens now is not going to be because an individual decides to do something. Looking at the politicians is looking in the wrong places.


UK 10-year gilt yield falls below 1% - FT.com


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

existentialist said:


> No, and I am not going to rush off and bone up on it in order to pretend that I can.
> 
> I voted "remain" simply because, flawed as the European project might be, it's better than the ludicrous appeals to rose-tinted hindsight and optimistic guesswork that the Leave camp were trying to persuade us with. And because I believe that the UK is perfectly capable, as it has in the past, of playing its part in ensuring that Europe worked to our best advantage. I watched as Leave told lie after lie about the benefits of leaving, and I felt - although I admit I was going to take some serious persuading - that, if the best they could offer was fearmongering (yes, I know Remain did their share of that), and a tissue of paper-thin lies about how leaving was going to make everything better (lies which I note that, before the referendum result was cold, were being backed away from), then there was little there to persuade me otherwise.
> 
> These things are complex. All of us have, to some extent, to rely on others whom we have some measure of trust in to advise us as to what the options and implications are. I chose to trust those "experts" that a lot of the Leave heavyweights insisted we ignore, who were warning of the likely economic, legal, and social consequences of an exit. From what I have seen since Friday morning, they look to have been a lot closer to the mark than the rapidly-disintegrating Leave arguments, most of which don't even seem to appeal much to their own camp any more, in any case.


Yes, it's complex. Thanks for admitting that you didn't do basic research yourself. I did, which is why I voted leave. Many other people did too. The issues since Friday are caused by our political leaders not being prepared, not caused by the EU being some fairytale force for good. The politicians must get prepared or get kicked out.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

gosub said:


> UK 10-year gilt yield falls below 1% - FT.com


Which means there is not much chance of interest rates going up. Did anybody think they would?


----------



## Skyfallsz (Jun 28, 2016)

I think it would be more sensible if people had organised against the way that the EU is being run and forced our politicians to be more active in representing us in it, rather than just fucking it off and then expecting that the fallout is some victory
I don't see why some force for positive social change is going to suddenly come about as a result of this, it probably would be an amazing opportunity for the British left to influence the way our society is organised in light of such a massive failure for capitalism, if the British left had any meaningful impact on society. Most people just won't listen to you if you start banging on about 'capital'. You may be right, but it won't hold water, I'd guess that people were generally voting out of disillusionment with the system more than anything else, but it doesn't follow that positive change will come about


----------



## tim (Jun 28, 2016)

keybored said:


> There's only been a referendum, invoking Article 50 is what begins the formal negotiations (butcher's point in #108 taken though). There will be no "deal" until/after then.
> 
> Merkal et al have even been quite clear that there are to be no *in*formal talks until then either.
> 
> European leaders rule out informal Brexit talks before article 50 is triggered



Everyone has to save face but Merkel and the others know that no sensible British PM will trigger article 50 until they know they've got the best deal possible. It's just practical poliitics. You exploit the power that you have.


----------



## Thomas_ (Jun 28, 2016)

We could have a referendum on whether to invoke Article 50?


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> Yes, it's complex. Thanks for admitting that you didn't do basic research yourself.


That is not actually what I said. 

In misrepresenting what I wrote, you appear to be applying the same relationship between statements and truth that was so much in evidence during the pre-referendum campaign, and particularly amongst certain areas of the Leave campaign...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Cameron is off to Brussels today to meet with Merkel, doubt their conversation will be exclusively about cheese & beans.



Presumably they'll also be looking into the thorny issue of cream first or jam first.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

Existentialism - Your remain vote was supporting a unification strategy that you admit you haven't read. The experts predicted some early disruption, I don't think there are any Leave voters who expected none. The worst case scenarios in the PWC report for example still have UK on higher GDP in year 15, just not as much, this is in the worst case that takes into account no other areas of improvement. Research means not just looking at the sound bites of remain's campaign or leave's campaign and gut instinct, but reading actual full reports. I'm sorry if my comment was overly harsh, it just came across that you hadn't done much when you were criticising others for the same.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably they'll also be looking into the thorny issue of cream first or jam first.




"Ze jam, zen ze cream!"

And that kids is how WW3 started


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No they didn't and we're still not sure. But as can be seen by the result, the majority of people in this country have been shat on so fucking hard for so long that they no longer gave a fuck and went with the anything other than this option.
> 
> If people still won't accept this then violent revolution is the only thing left.



...I've been explaining to some of my younger colleagues - very unsettled and upset by this result ( esp. by the stories emerging of racially focused hostility as a couple are of Indian background ) how their immediate and understandable fear that London is suddenly going to receive an economic bullet in the head with mass closure of employers, head offices pulling out, business sectors collapsing as they are hung out to dry is exactly what happened in the 80's across entire regions of the country - that correspond largely to the areas that voted so strongly for Leave - and all done by their own government...and left high & dry ever since....


----------



## existentialist (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> Existentialism - Your remain vote was supporting a unification strategy that you admit you haven't read. The experts predicted some early disruption, I don't think there are any Leave voters who expected none. The worst case scenarios in the PWC report for example still have UK on higher GDP in year 15, just not as much, this is in the worst case that takes into account no other areas of improvement. Research means not just looking at the sound bites of remain's campaign or leave's campaign and gut instinct, but reading actual full reports. I'm sorry if my comment was overly harsh, it just came across that you hadn't done much when you were criticising others for the same.


The harshness of your comment was not an issue; its lack of accuracy was.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

Ok, any more becomes a pointless argument and we have more than enough politicians doing that right now, so I'll just leave it there.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> I bet your echo chamber of remain talked a bunch of emotional crap too, so what? I asked many a remain supporter "do you agree with the 5 presidents report's vision for the EU", only ever met one who'd even read it, never met one who agreed with its vision for the EU. Huge numbers voted for remain based on fear of the impact of change on the economy and a wishy washy ideal that doesn't exist, or because they kept being told it was "status quo" when it wasn't, it was ongoing integration, ongoing austerity and privatisation over lack of care for its citizens rights. Sometimes people don't express themselves very well, that's when you read some of the many articles where people better express the issues. Sure, not everybody thought through every point, that wasn't the case on either side and it never will be. I'd still rather have democracy, what would you prefer?


Haha, I kept referring to it as the status quo which I thought  obviously meant on going integration/austerity, then was surprised when after the vote many were saying "if we voted remain everything would have stayed the same!" Surely status quo could loosely be used to refer to one particular direction of travel? Good point though I'd never looked at it that way.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

Haha, I'd never thought of it that way but you're right to a degree, it means literally staying the same, which I guess politically could imply the integration road of travel as well as austerity.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 28, 2016)

Considering that Donald Tusk is currently president of Europe, Merkel is certainly throwing her weight around!
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when I heard this, this morning 

"She made clear that Britain could not expect full access to the European Union’s common market without accepting its conditions, including the free movement of people. Immigration was the crux of the often ugly debate that accompanied the so-called Brexit campaign." http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/world/europe/brexit.html?_r=0

What is clear is that we still have a long long way to go!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2016)

hash tag said:


> Considering that Donald Tusk is currently president of Europe, Merkel is certainly throwing her weight around!



According to Forbes she is the second most powerful person on Earth. 

And no one knows who the fuck Donald Tusk is.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 28, 2016)

weltweit said:


> The ballot papers said remain or leave the EU and the voters chose leave.


And most of those people voted leave based on bullshit they'd been fed by the media. I declare it null and void.


----------



## Sea Star (Jun 28, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have to trigger article 50 asap. I agree it has to wait until a negotiating team can be assembled & that might take 3mnths & I see nothing wrong with informal talks first but it cannot be open ended. The referendum result cannot be overturned or rerun until a desired result that is achieved. ignoring election results they don't like is the stuff of dictatorships.


Nope. Dictatorships don't get election results they don't like. This is the stuff of a nuanced and complex parliamentary democracy


----------



## hash tag (Jun 28, 2016)

To make sure I haven't missed Tusk anywhere, I just searched him. The most recent news to appear for/from him is that he tweeted that " winter is coming " in reference to Englands performance in Europe. Not sure if he is talking about some sporting event or something political!


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jun 28, 2016)

AuntiStella said:


> And most of those people voted leave based on bullshit they'd been fed by the media. I declare it null and void.



Did the media only peddle pro-leave bullshit or was there some remain bovine excrement on offer as well? Or is it that remain voters were undupeable?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 28, 2016)

AuntiStella said:


> And most of those people voted leave based on bullshit they'd been fed by the media. I declare it null and void.





AuntiStella said:


> Nope. Dictatorships don't get election results they don't like. This is the stuff of a nuanced and complex parliamentary democracy



The process is fine - it's the voters i disagree with who are shit. Is that right?


----------



## brogdale (Jun 28, 2016)

hash tag said:


> To make sure I haven't missed Tusk anywhere, I just searched him. The most recent news to appear for/from him is that he tweeted that " winter is coming " in reference to Englands performance in Europe. Not sure if he is talking about some sporting event or something political!


Even more  was conflating England ("footballers") with the UK.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

AuntiStella said:


> And most of those people voted leave based on bullshit they'd been fed by the media. I declare it null and void.


No, you believe the media that gives you bullshit that people voted leave because of the campaigns. I can't think of anyone I know who said they liked either the remain or the leave campaign. The Ashcroft report shows over 50% had made their minds up by the beginning of this year, the splits on when people decided are almost exactly equal basis between leave and remain. So you could have run the referendum in January amongst the "decided" voters and got an almost identical result (slightly higher for leave). Look at the stats.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

Donald Tusk said that Brexit would likely bring about the end of Western political civilisation. To be fair, it is an omnishambles right now.

Ah, found it: Donald Tusk: Brexit could destroy Western political civilisation - BBC News.


----------



## hash tag (Jun 28, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> The process is fine - it's the voters i disagree with who are shit. Is that right?



Are the voters the issue or is it really the so called politicians, particularly those with personal agenda's and ambitions.
If, I reiterate if, Boris did become PM, he could well have one hell of an issue to sort out and I reckon he has already realised it is a bit of a poisoned chalice. That said, nothing will stop him going for it


----------



## 1%er (Jun 28, 2016)

Cameron made it clear during the campaign that he would trigger article 50 "as soon as possible after a Leave vote" and "the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away", typical political speak, sounds like a commitment but isn't really when you read it properly.  

Oh the irony, an EU commissioner (from Sweden I think) talking about democracy, claiming that if the UK does not trigger article 50 by the end of the year, the other 27 countries may well act using article 7 of the Lisbon treaty to suspend the UK. He went on to explain that if the UK government doesn't follow the will of UK citizens the UK government will be "in breach of the basic principles of democracy" so article 7 can be used (I don't think that would wash in the real world, its just bluster ). 

I will not believe the UK intends to leave until article 50 has been triggered, no major UK political party that currently has any chance of being in power wants to leave, they will say it was a non-binding referendum and all the party's will have a policy in their manifesto saying they want to remain in the EU.

Politicians ignore electorate shocker


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 28, 2016)

Skyfallsz said:


> I think it would be more sensible if people had organised against the way that the EU is being run and forced our politicians to be more active in representing us in it, rather than just fucking it off and then expecting that the fallout is some victory
> I don't see why some force for positive social change is going to suddenly come about as a result of this, it probably would be an amazing opportunity for the British left to influence the way our society is organised in light of such a massive failure for capitalism, if the British left had any meaningful impact on society. Most people just won't listen to you if you start banging on about 'capital'. You may be right, but it won't hold water, I'd guess that people were generally voting out of disillusionment with the system more than anything else, but it doesn't follow that positive change will come about


Whilst it's true the left is shite at talking to people you don't want to go all the way to the other side and not talk about capital because what else can you call it? All that obsession with communist history could be dropped...."Comrade" (this carry on  is particularly alienating for Eastern Europeans living here in my experience) I'm not sure people generally voted without thinking about it- many knew the Norway model for example would be on the table. But I don't think either side expected the chaos and so soon, this doesn't make leavers irresponsible nutters- all that happened on Thursday was votes were counted. We haven't even triggered article fifty yet. who knew. It does indicate we were in a precarious situation to begin with though no? 



AuntiStella said:


> And most of those people voted leave based on bullshit they'd been fed by the media. I declare it null and void.



Most? The only poll on this subject  seems to suggest otherwise. facebook threads were full of insightful comments from leavers. Facebook! It never came as a surprise to me when I learned 68 per cent voted leave for logical reasons.



wheelie_bin said:


> Donald Tusk said that Brexit would likely bring about the end of Western political civilisation. To be fair, it is an omnishambles right now.
> 
> Ah, found it: Donald Tusk: Brexit could destroy Western political civilisation - BBC News.



He was duped, he believed all those ISIS brexit demands. It's a shame that wasn't an option on the Ashcroft poll, now we'll never know how many voted for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

1%er said:


> Cameron made it clear during the campaign that he would trigger article 50 "as soon as possible after a Leave vote" and "the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away", typical political speak, sounds like a commitment but isn't really when you read it properly.
> 
> Oh the irony, an EU commissioner (from Sweden I think) talking about democracy, claiming that if the UK does not trigger article 50 by the end of the year, the other 27 countries may well act using article 7 of the Lisbon treaty to suspend the UK. He went on to explain that if the UK government doesn't follow the will of UK citizens the UK government will be "in breach of the basic principles of democracy" so article 7 can be used (I don't think that would wash in the real world, its just bluster ).
> 
> ...


Yes. But by putting a decision off (my successor will do it will be followed by time not yet right etc) after 18 months I think they'll turn round and say openly 'it is now December 2017 and a referendum held 18 months ago no longer represents the view of the people'


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

1%er said:


> I will not believe the UK intends to leave until article 50 has been triggered, no major UK political party that currently has any chance of being in power wants to leave, they will say it was a non-binding referendum and all the party's will have a policy in their manifesto saying they want to remain in the EU.
> 
> Politicians ignore electorate shocker


So what then, we end up with a couple of little splinter parties and UKIP charging off with the vote. As well as a few riots. Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> So what then, we end up with a couple of little splinter parties and UKIP charging off with the vote. As well as a few riots. Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.


Yeh. But you're not a politician.


----------



## 1%er (Jun 28, 2016)

wheelie_bin said:


> So what then, we end up with a couple of little splinter parties and UKIP charging off with the vote. As well as a few riots. Doesn't sound like a good plan to me.


I have no idea what the British people should do, maybe have some tea and calm down a little.

They could do what has just happened here and have a political coup


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 28, 2016)

1%er said:


> Oh the irony, an EU commissioner (from Sweden I think) talking about democracy, claiming that if the UK does not trigger article 50 by the end of the year, the other 27 countries may well act using article 7 of the Lisbon treaty to suspend the UK. He went on to explain that if the UK government doesn't follow the will of UK citizens the UK government will be "in breach of the basic principles of democracy" so article 7 can be used (I don't think that would wash in the real world, its just bluster ).



....presumably would need to be unanimous ...we can assume the French'll be first to sign up....but it does looks like some hard core federalists in the EU techno-structure really want us out - finally clearing that stubborn blockage in the way of the bright shiny autobahn to the US of E...


----------



## 1%er (Jun 28, 2016)

hot air baboon said:


> ....presumably would need to be unanimous ...we can assume the French'll be first to sign up....but it does looks like some hard core federalists in the EU techno-structure really want us out - finally clearing that stubborn blockage in the way of the bright shiny autobahn to the US of E...


The french politicians maybe, not the french people as they know what it is like to have a referendum and have the result ignored. They along with the Dutch voted against the European Constitution but got all the articles anyway in the Treaty of Lisbon, that's how democracy works in the EU.

The people throw things out of the front door and the EU brings them back in via the back door.


----------



## wheelie_bin (Jun 28, 2016)

That's not quite true, sometimes the EU throws them back in through a window.


----------



## Kesher (Jul 1, 2016)

Brexecution ain't happening because the referendum result was 2-2 draw. I hope so.

Constitutional expert on why Brexit should not happen


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 1, 2016)

hash tag said:


> To make sure I haven't missed Tusk anywhere, I just searched him. The most recent news to appear for/from him is that he tweeted that " winter is coming " in reference to Englands performance in Europe. Not sure if he is talking about some sporting event or something political!


Long range weather forecast


----------



## brogdale (Jul 1, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> Long range weather forecast


Far less impressive than that; merely an expression of the inevitable, linear progression of seasonal change related to the planet's orbit and tilt relative to insolation.
Man's clearly a simpleton.


----------



## Sirena (Jul 1, 2016)

Legends have it that great heroes lie only sleeping until their country needs them.

Bran the Blessed, whose head is buried under Tower Hill, King Arthur, whose body was taken to Lyonesse... On these we can call, when this land has need of them.

And, now, Cometh the day, Cometh the man....... 

Tony Blair hints at role as Brexit negotiator in EU talks that will require 'serious statesmanship'


----------



## emanymton (Jul 4, 2016)

I think this is the most revelvant thread for this

UK government faces pre-emptive legal action over Brexit decision

I've not had time to read the article in full yet and I need to head of to work in a minute. But it was reported on the Today programme this morning that it is being organised by a group of academics and business leaders. Something the guardian does not seem to mention on a quick skim. Maybe I should cross post it in the guardian is shit thread.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 4, 2016)

emanymton said:


> I think this is the most revelvant thread for this
> 
> UK government faces pre-emptive legal action over Brexit decision
> 
> I've not had time to read the article in full yet and I need to head of to work in a minute. But it was reported on the Today programme this morning that it is being organised by a group of academics and business leaders. Something the guardian does not seem to mention on a quick skim. Maybe I should cross post it in the guardian is shit thread.


This plays on the irony of 'sovereignty' being returned to the _mother of Parliaments _by undermining its sovereignty.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 4, 2016)

emanymton said:


> I think this is the most revelvant thread for this
> 
> UK government faces pre-emptive legal action over Brexit decision
> 
> I've not had time to read the article in full yet and I need to head of to work in a minute. But it was reported on the Today programme this morning that it is being organised by a group of academics and business leaders. Something the guardian does not seem to mention on a quick skim. Maybe I should cross post it in the guardian is shit thread.




It's like the Cairo Fly Fishing Championship.

Article 50 will be triggered by the new Tory PM. 

Why the fuck wouldn't it be? You're the new Tory PM and you can trigger A50 and end the thing that has been tearing your party apart for the past 40 years, or you can not do it and nuke your party in to history. Your choice.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 4, 2016)

Two legal blog posts relevant to this thread:

The Mishcon de Reya legal challenge on Article 50 – some thoughts

Parliament, Article 50, and the Leave Paradox


----------



## andysays (Jul 4, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> Two legal blog posts relevant to this thread:
> 
> The Mishcon de Reya legal challenge on Article 50 – some thoughts
> 
> Parliament, Article 50, and the Leave Paradox



Following up this "Leave paradox" thing, which I've seen touted in various places


> Those who campaigned Leave so as to uphold Parliamentary Sovereignty are now unhappy at prospect of Parliament being sovereign about whether to Leave.



Some of those who *campaigned* for Leave may have done so on the basis of Parliamentary Sovereignty, but I suspect many of those who *voted* for Leave will be less than impressed if their wishes are over-ruled on that basis.

If nothing else, it will be an object lesson in just where the limits of our national democracy lie #Iwantmycountryback


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 4, 2016)

It's quite simple. While there may be parliamentary sovereignty (and the two most influential political defenders of this idea in modern times were both virulently anti-eu) this doesn't mean that parliamentary representatives are free from the requirement to observe the _political _realities of nationwide expressions of political belief. And the wider point this raises if they are there - as they are in the foundation of the  theory of parliamentary sovereignty -  to represent a wider popular sovereignty then to argue this wider sovereignty is secondary to parliamentary supremacy is to take us back to pre-civil war days. 

Within 24 hours i've seen two different remain cases being made that are pre-democratic and reactionary and that were recognised as such as early as the 17th century. (The other being here).


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 4, 2016)

andysays said:


> Following up this "Leave paradox" thing, which I've seen touted in various places
> 
> 
> Some of those who *campaigned* for Leave may have done so on the basis of Parliamentary Sovereignty, but I suspect many of those who *voted* for Leave will be less than impressed if their wishes are over-ruled on that basis.
> ...


Indeed. There are several points that play out here. 

1.There is an obvious clash between the concepts of "national sovereignty" and "parliamentary sovereignty": they are not synonyms, though many nationalists and others may present them (and even see them) as such. In British constitutional terms, parliament is where power resides (through the concept of Crown-in-Parliament), but the parliament is not the nation, and to assume unity of interests between the two concepts is erroneous. 

2. The electorate is not sovereign under British constitutional tradition. This may come as a shock to many. It may even make them angry if confronted with this reality in a stark enough manner. 

3. Parliament is not there to represent the wishes of the people. It is there to impose the wishes of the powerful onto the people.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 4, 2016)

If you're asking me to predict what _will_ happen, though, I imagine the political class will find it hard to justify going against the result of the referendum. (Despite it being advisory when they could have made it legislative if they'd wanted). 

But that's just a guess.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 4, 2016)

butchersapron said:


> and the two most influential political defenders of this idea in modern times were both virulently anti-eu


Who where you thinking of? Benn?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 4, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> Who where you thinking of? Benn?


Benn and Enoch Powell.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 4, 2016)

Which is why we should  - correctly - call these _ignore the referendum_ types Powellites.


----------



## andysays (Jul 4, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> If you're asking me to predict what _will_ happen, though, I imagine the political class will find it hard to justify going against the result of the referendum. (Despite it being advisory when they could have made it legislative if they'd wanted).
> 
> But that's just a guess.



They will certainly find it hard, but they are having (and will continue to have) a jolly good go, and in doing so they reveal realities they would have preferred to keep hidden.

This is one of the reasons I voted for Leave, although I can't pretend I predicted it would work out quite like this


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jul 4, 2016)

weltweit said:


> I have just heard Angela "Speaking as a mother" Leadsom on Women's Hour saying that she does not want freedom of movement nor the single market.



Of course she doesn't.
Her "family money" comes from market hedging. Anything that disturbs the _status quo_ has potential for hedge funds and other speculative arms of capital.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2016)

We Conservatives are all Leavers now. We must unite to build a new and better Britain


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> We Conservatives are all Leavers now. We must unite to build a new and better Britain


yeh being as it was conservatives who did so much to fuck it up in the first place it is only right and fitting they put it right. but i am not confident they won't cock it up again.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh being as it was conservatives who did so much to fuck it up in the first place it is only right and fitting they put it right. but i am not confident they won't cock it up again.


I'm not liking the sound of what he has in mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm not liking the sound of what he has in mind.


so often the title sounds nice and good but the verbiage within is vile and nasty


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2016)




----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 5, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm not liking the sound of what he has in mind.


The Tories using the shock of a Leave vote and a strengthening of the party right to help push the country in an even more neo-liberal direction was, I would say, the most predictable outcome of all this. I hope no-one here was so naïve as to fail to see it coming.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 5, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> If you're asking me to predict what _will_ happen, though, I imagine the political class will find it hard to justify going against the result of the referendum. (Despite it being advisory when they could have made it legislative if they'd wanted).
> 
> But that's just a guess.



That's the prevailing wisdom at the moment, but only in public discourse, and it may well go off the boil, particularly as the economic consequences of the referendum start to bite and the reality sinks in that there is no deal with the EU on the table that isn't poisonous. What to do about A50 is not a decision that needs to be taken urgently, unless we enter a new financial crisis, in which case it may become easier to undo the referendum result. If that doesn't happen, Theresa May and/or her successors may find ways of delaying the decision until such time as no-one is quite so bothered any more. I wouldn't be too surprised if we see something similar to Gordon Brown's five tests for joining the Euro.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2016)

Raheem said:


> That's the prevailing wisdom at the moment, but only in public discourse, and it may well go off the boil, particularly as the economic consequences of the referendum start to bite and the reality sinks in that there is no deal with the EU on the table that isn't poisonous. What to do about A50 is not a decision that needs to be taken urgently, unless we enter a new financial crisis, in which case it may become easier to undo the referendum result. If that doesn't happen, Theresa May and/or her successors may find ways of delaying the decision until such time as no-one is quite so bothered any more. I wouldn't be too surprised if we see something similar to Gordon Brown's five tests for joining the Euro.


That's a possibility.  And it's worth noting David Allen Green's understanding of the government stance: the European Communities Act 1972 is still in force and would need to be repealed by a parliamentary vote before Article 50 could be triggered.


----------



## gosub (Jul 5, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> That's a possibility.  And it's worth noting David Allen Green's understanding of the government stance: the European Communities Act 1972 is still in force and would need to be repealed by a parliamentary vote before Article 50 could be triggered.


Nope That makes no sense at all. 72 Communities is way down the track after Article 50


----------



## Raheem (Jul 5, 2016)

gosub said:


> Nope That makes no sense at all. 72 Communities is way down the track after Article 50



No, that's not right. The legal objection is that triggering A50 would impliedly go against ECA72, so you need to repeal or amend it first, which can only be done by parliament. Having a vote later on would not deal with the objection. Ignoring the objection also won't deal with it, because it will end up in court.

I don't think it really matters what you make of the objection. The government is not going to fight tooth and nail to avoid consulting parliament. It's going to feign annoyance and reluctantly accept the legal advice it makes sure it gets. Or, if it hasn't learned the lesson about not treating the country as a gambling chip in Casino Tory Party, it may go to court, confident of losing, purely for the theatrics and hubris.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 6, 2016)

I think that the delay/fudge will be couched largely in practical terms - the Civil Service doesn't have the spare capacity to quickly examine 40 years worth of legislation and treaties/we don't have enough skilled trade negotiators to reframe them anyway/best leave it until after the 2017 French and German elections are over etc


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

Raheem said:


> No, that's not right. The legal object
> ion is that triggering A50 would impliedly go against ECA72, so you need to repeal or amend it first, which can only be done by parliament. Having a vote later on would not deal with the objection. Ignoring the objection also won't deal with it, because it will end up in court.
> 
> I don't think it really matters what you make of the objection. The government is not going to fight tooth and nail to avoid consulting parliament. It's going to feign annoyance and reluctantly accept the legal advice it makes sure it gets. Or, if it hasn't learned the lesson about not treating the country as a gambling chip in Casino Tory Party, it may go to court, confident of losing, purely for the theatrics and hubris.



Well good job you've been looking at this for a long time
Eta Fuck knows what happened there


----------



## Raheem (Jul 6, 2016)

gosub said:


> Well good job you've been looking at this for a whole then



Er, probably.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

gosub said:


> Nope That makes no sense at all. 72 Communities is way down the track after Article 50


Nope.


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> Nope.



My biggest concern here, is people telling interested parties 'don't worry can't happen, rather than listening to their concerns and passing them on (in your case to Victoria Quay.)  

As to whether we use the emergency exit as laid down or first, repeal the act that binds us to using the prescribed exit  mechanism; I will concede there is not unanimity over this (oddly).  The route as described by you ends up in a Vienna Convention mess and would most likely NOT be taken.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

gosub said:


> My biggest concern here, is people telling interested parties 'don't worry can't happen, rather than listening to their concerns and passing them on (in your case to Victoria Quay.)
> 
> As to whether we use the emergency exit as laid down or first, repeal the act that binds us to using the prescribed exit  mechanism; I will concede there is not unanimity over this (oddly).  The route as described by you ends up in a Vienna Convention mess and would most likely NOT be taken.


In "my case"? I have passed on a legal expert's reading of what government lawyers yesterday said. I made no case.


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> In "my case"? I have passed on a legal expert's reading of what government lawyers yesterday said. I made no case.



In your case, as in: you live in Scotland. Victoria Quay
If I still lived in Scotland, the odd bevvy on a Friday down by Teuchter's and I might feel less concerned.  As is, I don't (more's the pity)


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

It must be me, but I seldom have any idea what you're on about.  

However, I have a sister who lives in near Leith Links, and I can confirm that there's a nearby pub of that name.  So I've come out of this exchange with one certainty.


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> It must be me, but I seldom have any idea what you're on about.
> 
> However, I have a sister who lives in near Leith Links, and I can confirm that there's a nearby pub of that name.  So I've come out of this exchange with one certainty.



As is the nature of our modern world, no one person (or group) has the entire picture, and ahead of formal notifications there is a lot of colouring in required.  Rather than critique Mrs Sturgeon, I would again highlight the importance of relevant and pertinent information from all over the UK heading back into the system so the outcome can be better tailored.   There is a danger that  SNP @ground level,rather than assisting where it could really help, goes "la-la-la-EU"-which helps noone.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

So you're not actually talking to me or about anything I said?

OK.


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> So you're not actually talking to me or about anything I said?
> 
> OK.





gosub said:


> As to whether we use the emergency exit as laid down or first, repeal the act that binds us to using the prescribed exit  mechanism; I will concede there is not unanimity over this (oddly).  The route as described by you ends up in a Vienna Convention mess and would most likely NOT be taken.



Article 50 is the exit route, 72 European Communities the  act that binds us to the EU.  The only reason you'd repeal the 72 firstis coz you weren't planning on using the perscribed exit.  Bunature of the UN t that lands us in trouble at the UN due to our signature of the Vienna convention.


But now you'll say that you are just quoting experts.  

Teutcher's gets the latest sun of all the pubs on the Shore


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 6, 2016)

Brexit ain't going to happen is it?


----------



## gosub (Jul 6, 2016)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Brexit ain't going to happen is it?


depends how you define it.


----------



## andysays (Jul 6, 2016)

danny la rouge said:


> It must be me, but I seldom have any idea what you're on about...



It's certainly not *just* you...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 6, 2016)

gosub said:


> depends how you define it.



Tories vote in a Tory PM who's in bed with Eurocrats, & they get out of Brexit. Fuck democracy?

ps. A very moot reply, granted, but Wales are about to kick Portugal's arse out of the Euro's


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

gosub said:


> But now you'll say that you are just quoting experts.


I'll "say" that, will I? 

Do you think I'm advancing a particular line or something? My interest in these events is to see what will happen. The links I'm providing are to illuminate the topic of the thread. 

Out of interest, what axe did you think  I was grinding?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2016)

andysays said:


> It's certainly not *just* you...


That comes as a relief.


----------



## gosub (Jul 7, 2016)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

gosub said:


>


yeh but your little graphick misses out the initial choice which is whether to invoke article 50 in the first place. there is no chance of that happening before 8 september: and, frankly, people seem fairly confident a bill has to pass through parliament for the article to come into force. nothing can happen imo before 10 october - 3.5 months after the referendum


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 7, 2016)

And with May looking good for PM, they'll be a proper Tory U-Turn on Brexit I reckon.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

Mr.Bishie said:


> And with May looking good for PM, they'll be a proper Tory U-Turn on Brexit I reckon.



Looking good-ish, but not a shoo-in at this stage.

As I think I said above, I think there'll be a u-turn in any scenario. Come what May, if you catch what I did there with my drift. It's more about the logic of the thing and the fact that money talks louder than any referendum result than it is about which fake eurosceptic is at the controls.


----------



## gosub (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Looking good-ish, but not a shoo-in at this stage.
> 
> As I think I said above, I think there'll be a u-turn in any scenario. Come what May, if you catch what I did there with my drift. It's more about the logic of the thing and the fact that money talks louder than any referendum result than it is about which fake eurosceptic is at the controls.


define "Looking good-ish" .  Contempt of public will would be a fucking disaster, let alone all the knock on difficulties for European relations.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Mr.Bishie said:


> And with May looking good for PM, they'll be a proper Tory U-Turn on Brexit I reckon.


there will be no u-turn, as people have pointed out that would be fatal. what i think there'll be is a 'not yet', 'great uncertainty', 'need to increase stability', 'we're sorting out our negotiating position', 'negotiations will begin', 'delayed again', 'after so long we no longer believe the result of the referendum held 18 months ago continues to represent the will of the british people'.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jul 7, 2016)

That's still a slippery U-Turn though?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

gosub said:


> define "Looking good-ish" .  Contempt of public will would be a fucking disaster, let alone all the knock on difficulties for European relations.



Good-ish: She's currently ahead in polling but there's a while to go yet.

I think the next few years, if it takes that long, are about choosing between fucking disasters, and it's yet to be seen how much the public will notice, believe or care that it is being held in contempt (not that I'm saying it won't).


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

Mr.Bishie said:


> That's still a slippery U-Turn though?



Bingo.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Mr.Bishie said:


> That's still a slippery U-Turn though?


by no means, it is recognising that public opinion shifts and after 18 months would it really be right to take such a momentous step when an advisory plebiscite, which - let us not forget - only gave leave a small majority, represents but a snapshot of the public mood. it may be that before entering into substantive negotiations it is only right and proper the mood should be tested again.[/theresa may] 
in addition it's not a u-turn if you never intended to do it in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Bingo.


i would be more impressed if you were able to make your own points


----------



## Kesher (Jul 7, 2016)

As Heseltine said recently regarding EU referendum result: "democracy is not static"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Kesher said:


> As Heseltine said recently regarding EU referendum result: "democracy is not static"


quite so. and 18 months is long enough so that there wouldn't be a static shock from ignoring it.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> i would be more impressed if you were able to make your own points



Really? Fascinating.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Really? Fascinating.


thank you for your input


----------



## gosub (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Good-ish: She's currently ahead in polling but there's a while to go yet.
> 
> I think the next few years, if it takes that long, are about choosing between fucking disasters, and it's yet to be seen how much the public will notice, believe or care that it is being held in contempt (not that I'm saying it won't).


so what is it you think May will/won't do?

ETAsorry read youR bingo: So you think she'll stall for 18 months and then drop. 
Well I  suppose if she can get through the 18 months of 'events' it might look different But she'd be an idiot that way lies dreams of being the EU's Puerto Rico


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> by no means, it is recognising that public opinion shifts and after 18 months would it really be right to take such a momentous step when an advisory plebiscite, which - let us not forget - only gave leave a small majority, represents but a snapshot of the public mood. it may be that before entering into substantive negotiations it is only right and proper the mood should be tested again.[/theresa may]
> in addition it's not a u-turn if you never intended to do it in the first place.



May's current position is Brexit means Brexit, no second referendum etc etc. A u-turn accompanied by an explanation, or which you always intended to perform, is still a u-turn.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> May's current position is Brexit means Brexit, no second referendum etc etc. A u-turn accompanied by an explanation, or which you always intended to perform, is still a u-turn.


let's see what happens, because there's a lot can change: it's not like the tories have a great majority, and i wouldn't be surprised if there was an early general election.


----------



## gosub (Jul 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> let's see what happens, because there's a lot can change: it's not like the tories have a great majority, and i wouldn't be surprised if there was an early general election.



That more depends on what happens within Labour.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 7, 2016)

gosub said:


> so what is it you think May will/won't do?
> 
> ETAsorry read youR bingo: So you think she'll stall for 18 months and then drop.
> Well I  suppose if she can get through the 18 months of 'events' it might look different But she'd be an idiot that way lies dreams of being the EU's Puerto Rico



Puerto Rico might be an exaggeration (I'm only saying "might"), but yes, we do stand to gradually become a poorer and less influential country. However, as things stand, that process is only going to accelerate once A50 is triggered. The only realistic way out is to forget the whole thing. That might change in the detail (for example, if the other 27 agree at some point that A50 is reversible), but I think it's basically inescapable that that's what we will have to do. I don't think leadership elections or general elections will make much difference. It's a bigger issue than that. Delay, of what ever length is needed, may look silly from the point-of-view of economics, but some delay is probably going to be politically necessary, unless Theresa May's courage is greater than meets the eye.


----------



## gosub (Jul 7, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Puerto Rico might be an exaggeration (I'm only saying "might"), but yes, we do stand to gradually become a poorer and less unfluential country. However, as things stand, that process is only going to accelerate once A50 is triggered. The only realistic way out is to forget the whole thing. That might change in the detail (for example, if the other 27 agree at some point that A50 is reversible), but I think it's basically inescapable that that's what we will have to do. I don't think leadership elections or general elections will make much difference. It's a bigger issue than that. Delay, of what ever length is needed, may look silly from the point-of-view of economics, but some delay is probably going to be politically necessary, unless Theresa May's courage is greater than meets the eye.


 Standing on the path of least resistance, watching you drown.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 7, 2016)

The EU already has a Puerto Rico, it's called Greece.


----------



## coley (Jul 8, 2016)

Whey, it looks like May is likely to be the next PM, but she has to get the endorsement of the grassroots members, something that might be difficult if she starts backsliding on her " Brexit is Brexit" statement and her opponent her supporters will be looking at every word she utters looking for the chance to expose her as a  'backslider' and destroyer of democracy.
But I immediately  (when he announced his 'timely'  resignation)  thought that The pig suckers blatant betrayal of his pre referendum commitments was designed to bring about this opportunity to fudge, delay and probably bring about a second referendum.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 8, 2016)

She's not going to be planning to backslide during her leadership campaign. Next year, though, the general mood may be that backsliding is the right and proper thing to do. Or, it may be that she lets parliament decide, making out all the while that her view remains unchanged and her inability to pull the chain on A50 is a personal disappointment.


----------



## coley (Jul 8, 2016)

Raheem said:


> She's not going to be planning to backslide during her leadership campaign. Next year, though, the general mood may be that backsliding is the right and proper thing to do. Or, it may be that she lets parliament decide, making out all the while that her view remains unchanged and her inability to pull the chain on A50 is a personal disappointment.



All very possible and much the same scenario I painted the day the result was announced, and a total disaster if she tries it.
 The disgusting but relatively minor incidents of racism and extreme right wing triumphalist activity, instead of fading away, will rear their head and become permanently, aggressively mainstream.
The result has taken the steam out of the extreme right wing, and it needs to be taken forward in such a way that they remain marginalised and ridiculed.
A positive move would be for the disappointed remainers to just accept the new status quo and work together in achieving the best outcome for all of us here in the UK, rather than vent their disappointment and frustration by sneering at the majority.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 8, 2016)

coley said:


> All very possible and much the same scenario I painted the day the result was announced, and a total disaster if she tries it.
> The disgusting but relatively minor incidents of racism and extreme right wing triumphalist activity, instead of fading away, will rear their head and become permanently, aggressively mainstream.
> The result has taken the steam out of the extreme right wing, and it needs to be taken forward in such a way that they remain marginalised and ridiculed.
> A positive move would be for the disappointed remainers to just accept the new status quo and work together in achieving the best outcome for all of us here in the UK, rather than vent their disappointment and frustration by sneering at the majority.



Whatever happens, we're in for a tough time. Not leaving the EU is, I agree, only going to further aid and strengthen the far-right.

But you are misunderstanding if you think I'm sneering at anyone or I'm particularly calling for an anti-Brexit mobilisation, even though it is, of course, everyone's right to ignore being told to shut up. I think what will happen is already written, just because there's too much at stake for too many people with influence.


----------



## coley (Jul 8, 2016)

Raheem said:


> Whatever happens, we're in for a tough time. Not leaving the EU is, I agree, only going to further aid and strengthen the far-right.
> 
> But you are misunderstanding if you think I'm sneering at anyone or I'm particularly calling for an anti-Brexit mobilisation, even though it is, of course, everyone's right to ignore being told to shut up. I think what will happen is already written, just because there's too much at stake for too many people with influence.


I totally apologise if you think I was directing my comments towards you, I certainly didn't intend that, but there is that seething anger amongst many disappointed remainders and it certainly has been seen
 in the disparaging remarks directed against us in the leave camp!
Yours sincerely, Coley, uneducated northern thicko, racist xenophobic, couldn't care less about they younger generation, etc etc
TBF, one description fits, want to guess?


----------



## Obediah Marsh (Jul 8, 2016)

The "wait 18 months" stratagem will only work if we have peace and quiet internationally. I hope Syria settles down and the turmoil of last year wont repeat itself.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jul 8, 2016)

coley said:


> I totally apologise if you think I was directing my comments towards you, I certainly didn't intend that, but there is that seething anger amongst many disappointed remainders and it certainly has been seen
> in the disparaging remarks directed against us in the leave camp!
> Yours sincerely, Coley, uneducated northern thicko, racist xenophobic, couldn't care less about they younger generation, etc etc
> TBF, one description fits, want to guess?



Northern.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 3, 2016)

thread bump as im interested in seeing what people think now we're a few months on. 
May signalling she was going for hard brexit was a bit of a surprise - and a major shock for a lot of the upper echelons of finance, politics and the civil service. The resulting collapse in the value in sterling is a wake up call that brexit could lead to massive economic upheavals. The complexities, dangers and difficulties of leaving the EU are becoming ever more apparent - I think the push to overturn the referendum result or hold another one will only become stronger - but the tories have painted themselves into a corner. The whole thing is an unparalleled cluster fuck.


----------



## Fez909 (Nov 3, 2016)

Prevent Brexit or face political fallout, German economists warn EU


----------



## Chz (Nov 5, 2016)

At the time, I gave it a 70/30 chance of happening. I'd say it's more 80/20 now, since May seems gung-ho and there's no-one to stop her. The only reason I still give it a 20% chance of not happening is because the economy might annihilate itself before we leave.

I voted for complete independence above, but what I _really_ think will happen is a transitional period of Norwegian style trade while everything gets sorted out eventually leading to a complete break. The reason being that the populace deems freedom of movement to be unacceptable. The anti-EU feelings will not end until the borders are shut.


----------



## killer b (Nov 5, 2016)

Not even then - closed borders are no spur to warmer neighbourly relations.


----------



## killer b (Nov 5, 2016)

And what are they going to do once the border with the EU is shut, and it has almost no impact on the numbers of immigrants?


----------



## Chz (Nov 5, 2016)

killer b said:


> And what are they going to do once the border with the EU is shut, and it has almost no impact on the numbers of immigrants?


Well the remainers get to laugh for a bit, and then cry because it won't change anything.
The leavers will just continue to be angry, but they'll have to blame their own government for a change. I'm still surprised that no-one pointed out at any time in the campaign that far more people immigrate to the UK from outside the EU...


----------



## killer b (Nov 5, 2016)

they did


----------



## Poi E (Nov 5, 2016)

killer b said:


> And what are they going to do once the border with the EU is shut, and it has almost no impact on the numbers of immigrants?



Pogroms? Start with those who don't wear a poppy.


----------



## killer b (Nov 6, 2016)

Poi E said:


> Pogroms? Start with those who don't wear a poppy.


I think if you look at the actions and rhetoric of those in power over the past few years (but particularly this year), you can only conclude that there's a few possible things going on: either 1) they're fucking idiots and don't understand what they're messing with, 2) It's some desperate cowardly balancing act, while waiting for some magic solution to present itself, or 3) this is actually what they want to happen. When you consider that this government - as well at those across Europe - are perfectly happy to bomb the shit out of the middle east, let refugees drown, turn them back at borders into the weapons of their persuers, allow them to live in subhuman conditions in refugee camps and the like, why would they baulk at whipping up anti-immigrant feeling here to shore up their own support?

There has to be a point where we stop giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming it's idiocy or cowardice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2016)

Poi E said:


> Pogroms? Start with those who don't wear a poppy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2016)

Chz said:


> The reason being that the populace deems freedom of movement to be unacceptable


does it? last i saw about half the voting electorate said they were quite happy with it.


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 6, 2016)

no.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 6, 2016)

was trying to think of a word that would fall between hard and soft and all that comes to mind is semi. Semi-brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 6, 2016)

Chz said:


> I voted for complete independence above, but what I _really_ think will happen is a transitional period of Norwegian style trade while everything gets sorted out eventually leading to a complete break. The reason being that *the populace deems freedom of movement to be unacceptable*. The anti-EU feelings will not end until the borders are shut.


Can you show your workings on that? 48 per cent voted in a way that would definitely have led to a continuation of freedom of movement. 52 per cent voted in a way that might lead to its end, but also might not - it is mistaken to think that all those 52 per cent were voting to end freedom of movement - no doubt many were, possibly even most, but by no means all, and by no means the 95 per cent of them that would be required to make your statement tenable.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> was trying to think of a word that would fall between hard and soft and all that comes to mind is semi. Semi-brexit.



Pliable? Bendy?


----------



## J Ed (Nov 6, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> was trying to think of a word that would fall between hard and soft and all that comes to mind is semi. Semi-brexit.



Flacid-Brexit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 6, 2016)

sexit


----------



## Wilf (Nov 6, 2016)

Kaka Tim said:


> thread bump as im interested in seeing what people think now we're a few months on.
> May signalling she was going for hard brexit was a bit of a surprise - and a major shock for a lot of the upper echelons of finance, politics and the civil service. The resulting collapse in the value in sterling is a wake up call that brexit could lead to massive economic upheavals. The complexities, dangers and difficulties of leaving the EU are becoming ever more apparent - I think the push to overturn the referendum result or hold another one will only become stronger - but the tories have painted themselves into a corner. The whole thing is an unparalleled cluster fuck.


May's position is certainly surprising, I don't know whether to characterise it as pure self interest or not. If she'd gone for a soft brexit - the thing she almost certainly believes in as the next best option to remaining - she could have got a majority for it in the commons.  However _she_ would now be the one facing the ire of ukip, daily mail, tory right etc.  I suppose ultimately she's doing a balancing act between the single market and freedom of movement, with one eye on what will actually work in policy terms, but a, erm, 'bigger eye' on how it works for her as leader/PM.

But in terms of it not happening, the only route is surely the Tories losing a general election before article 50 is triggered (either she calls an election in the next few weeks - unlikely - or the whole thing drags out for 4 more years without it being triggered - equally unlikely).  Labour (or Lab + Nats + Pissyellows) would have to have gone into such an election offering a 2nd referendum - very unlikely - and would then have to win the election - 100% impossible given the state of the Labour Party at the moment).  So, we have a PM who will end up driving through the very thing she doesn't really want.  It's a clusterfuck alright, but the judges intervention may well have actually _shored up_ the chances of a hard brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2016)

Kaka Tim said:


> The whole thing is an unparalleled cluster fuck.


there speaks someone who has forgotten libya and iraq.


----------



## Chz (Nov 6, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you show your workings on that? 48 per cent voted in a way that would definitely have led to a continuation of freedom of movement. 52 per cent voted in a way that might lead to its end, but also might not - it is mistaken to think that all those 52 per cent were voting to end freedom of movement - no doubt many were, possibly even most, but by no means all, and by no means the 95 per cent of them that would be required to make your statement tenable.


It doesn't need to be a majority. Or are you unaware of the way politics has worked in this country for the last... forever? It doesn't matter if the actual majority think that immigration is kinda okay, but they're not really fussed either way because most of them didn't vote anyhow. What matters is the extraordinarily loud people who have an extreme view either way. And the anti-immigration front have a sizeable lead there.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 6, 2016)

Chz said:


> It doesn't need to be a majority. Or are you unaware of the way politics has worked in this country for the last... forever? It doesn't matter if the actual majority think that immigration is kinda okay, but they're not really fussed either way because most of them didn't vote anyhow. What matters is the extraordinarily loud people who have an extreme view either way. And the anti-immigration front have a sizeable lead there.


Most people did vote. The turnout is one thing you can't quibble with. But the vote was not about limiting immigration. People voting for that were doing so only indirectly - voting for a thing that might then allow this other thing that they wanted. I don't doubt that many or probably most of the leave voters voted with immigration at or very near the top of their list of concerns. It's not just about how vocal such people are now, but how such people, including the likes of Farage and rags like the Mail and Express, are falsely claiming that limiting immigration is 'the will of the British people'. And May is following their lead at the moment, as this is what is electorally most valuable to her and the tories (who also don't need a majority to vote for them to be returned to power).


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

If places like Clacton are mirrored throughout the UK & I suspect they are then most did vote leave to stop immigration. These are people who decades ago were saying 'kick out the Pakis' & they have never changed. You cannot reason with these people. They believe immigrants come here to fiddle the system, commit crime & so on. These are mostly not evil, shaven headed BNP types they are normal middle aged mild mannered working people & pensioners. They will always have voted Tory even in '97 & more lately most will have voted UKIP.

The are impervious to counter argument. You can give them statistics that easily prove all their reasoning is totally incorrect. They just smile & shake their heads. I think people who live more cosmopolitan lives in cities & so on have no idea people like this exist. They are just the most normal mundane people you could hope to meet. This is why the result was such a shock to the political elite. That such normal folk could hold such entrenched virulently racist views did not even occur to them.

The government is truly fucked. The leave politicians all said vote leave & develop trade with the rest of the world & in India today they are learning that there are going to be no trade deals without a relaxation of immigration rules for Indian citizens coming to UK. This is just the start. They will find this whoever in the world they try to do trade deals with.


----------



## bimble (Nov 7, 2016)

Something that adds to my feeling that no real brexiting will actually happen, and that May is just doing a performance to appease the DM/ ukip is the decision she announced to go and challenge the recent high court ruling at the Supreme Court.  . Why do this? Why not just get on with it. The chances of the high court finding a different answer seems really small, it doesn't seem to make any sense unless she's just trying to buy time and carry on appearing to be the brexit means brexit champion.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 7, 2016)

The whole thing could end up being like Ukraine in reverse. Endless power struggles, regime changes, break away states,  civil war and general apocalypse all within the process of trying to exit the Eu rather than join it.

/Grim monday morning blues


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2016)

pocketscience said:


> The whole thing could end up being like Ukraine in reverse. Endless power struggles, regime changes, break away states,  civil war and general apocalypse all within the process of trying to exit the Eu rather than join it.
> 
> /Grim monday morning blues



with france anexing scotland maybe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If places like Clacton are mirrored throughout the UK & I suspect they are then most did vote leave to stop immigration. These are people who decades ago were saying 'kick out the Pakis' & they have never changed. You cannot reason with these people. They believe immigrants come here to fiddle the system, commit crime & so on. These are mostly not evil, shaven headed BNP types they are normal middle aged mild mannered working people & pensioners. They will always have voted Tory even in '97 & more lately most will have voted UKIP.


17m people voted to leave. no more than about 4m people have voted UKIP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

Kaka Tim said:


> with france anexing scotland maybe.


The auld alliance renewed


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> 17m people voted to leave. no more than about 4m people have voted UKIP.



yeah but -  clacton.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> The auld alliance renewed



which would probably mean Nicola Sturgeon would have to marry Nicolas Sarkozy or something.


----------



## bimble (Nov 7, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not just about how vocal such people are now, but how such people, including the likes of Farage and rags like the Mail and Express, are falsely claiming that limiting immigration is 'the will of the British people'. And May is following their lead at the moment, as this is what is electorally most valuable to her and the tories (who also don't need a majority to vote for them to be returned to power).


 As perfectly exemplified in todays DM:

and the commentators below the line are lapping it up, full of enthusiastic support for May.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If places like Clacton are mirrored throughout the UK & I suspect they are





Kaka Tim said:


> yeah but -  clacton.


yeh but read the post


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

bimble said:


> As perfectly exemplified in todays DM:
> View attachment 95103
> and the commentators below the line are lapping it up, full of enthusiastic support for May.


a GANG


----------



## bimble (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> a GANG


of PLOTTERS


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

bimble said:


> of PLOTTERS


or lost the plotters according to much of the media


----------



## bimble (Nov 7, 2016)

Meanwhile, the bloke who actually wrote article 50 chimes in to suggest that the one thing which the government and the judges did agree on, that the process of leaving is irrevocable once the article is 'triggered' isn't in fact true, that A50 is not irrevocable at all. 
Britain could still change its mind over EU divorce, says man who drafted Article 50


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

bimble said:


> Meanwhile, the bloke who actually wrote article 50 chimes in to suggest that the one thing which the government and the judges did agree on, that the process of leaving is irrevocable once the article is 'triggered' isn't in fact true, that A50 is not irrevocable at all.
> Britain could still change its mind over EU divorce, says man who drafted Article 50


tbh just because you draft something doesn't mean it is your property.


----------



## bimble (Nov 7, 2016)

Yeah but he might know what he's talking about when he says ""During that period, if a country were to decide actually we don't want to leave after all, everybody would be very cross about it being a waste of time," he said. "They might try to extract a political price but legally they couldn't insist that you leave."


----------



## andysays (Nov 7, 2016)

bimble said:


> Yeah but he might know what he's talking about when he says ""During that period, if a country were to decide actually we don't want to leave after all, everybody would be very cross about it being a waste of time," he said. "They might try to extract a political price but legally they couldn't insist that you leave."



He might well know what he intended it to mean, but it's now out of his hands. And the judges didn't offer an opinion during the recent court case, because it wasn't a point at issue (both sides agreed that A50 is irrevocable).

If it ever comes to the point where it needs to be legally established (it hasn't yet and it may never actually arise), the opinion which will really matter will be that of the courts, ultimately the ECJ, as has been mentioned on the Brexit Process thread.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> 17m people voted to leave. no more than about 4m people have voted UKIP.


So what? It's not just UKIP voters that are racist. What I was mostly alluding to is that the extent of the racist views of people who appear absolutely mundane & normal is not understood. They hold these entrenched views but they do not argue or push those views particularly. Not everybody who voted leave was racist of course but the extent of racism in the UK is not really evident because most people do not air their views except among their like minded peer groups.


----------



## sihhi (Nov 7, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people did vote. The turnout is one thing you can't quibble with.



Turnout was higher in 1992 and every single election before compared to this referendum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> So what? It's not just UKIP voters that are racist.


yeh cos that's _really_ what i said  in the 2015 general election ukip got 3.88m votes. this was across 624 constituencies, so that's an average of 6130 votes per constituency. hardly 'most people' even around the coast.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people did vote. The turnout is one thing you can't quibble with.


no one quibbled with the result of the welsh devolution referendum, where about 50% of the eligible population voted with about 50% in favour and 50% against, which would no doubt have been brought into play if the turnout had been lower.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> So what? It's not just UKIP voters that are racist. What I was mostly alluding to is that the extent of the racist views of people who appear absolutely mundane & normal is not understood. They hold these entrenched views but they do not argue or push those views particularly. Not everybody who voted leave was racist of course but the extent of racism in the UK is not really evident because most people do not air their views except among their like minded peer groups.



By way of a recap: Ashcroft polls told 81% of people who voted leave think Multiculturalism is a "force for ill" and likewise 80% Immigration is "a force for ill" (and i dont think they were thinkjing about brits on the costa del sol). The other stats on that list are worth a check too.

May isnt stupid - she knows exactly what what she needs to say to these people, who no doubt put and keep her in power. She may be being cynical about it - pandering - or she may be on board..who knows. Best guess (according to the Goldman Sachs tape) is she's pandering.






You cant ask if people are racist, but those questions give a strong impression of attitudes and outlook.



bimble said:


> Meanwhile, the bloke who actually wrote article 50 chimes in to suggest that the one thing which the government and the judges did agree on, that the process of leaving is irrevocable once the article is 'triggered' isn't in fact true, that A50 is not irrevocable at all.
> Britain could still change its mind over EU divorce, says man who drafted Article 50


When it says "Britain" i guess it means parliament. My understanding is that Parliament could always vote for anything it wanted if the house agreed to it, but it really isnt the point - its doesnt matter if Article 50 is binding by law, it matters who would dare overturn a referendum result. But thats where the long game kicks in........its not conceivable now, but theres the slimmest possibility it be in the future...

That guy Kerr who drafted it clearly has an agenda though "Kerr wants either parliament or the public - through an election or a second referendum - to revisit the decision to leave the EU in a year to 18 months time, the BBC said." He's a bonafide blocker


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The leave politicians all said vote leave & develop trade with the rest of the world & i*n India today they are learning that there are going to be no trade deals without a relaxation of immigration rules for Indian citizens coming to UK.* This is just the start. They will find this whoever in the world they try to do trade deals with.


Has that been reported or is that a hunch?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> Has that been reported or is that a hunch?


Theresa May rejects calls to raise Indian visa quota - BBC News
"Nine out of 10 visa applications from India are already accepted," she said.
...
Her government also intends to make it easier for wealthy Indian business executives to come to the UK.

A small group of high-net-worth individuals and their families will be offered access to the Great Club - a bespoke visa and immigration service - to make visa applications smoother.

Thousands of Indians on work visas will also be able to join the Registered Travellers Scheme which will mean they can get through UK border controls more quickly.

"As we leave the EU, we want to ensure that the UK remains one of the most attractive countries in the world to do business and invest," Mrs May said.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> By way of a recap: Ashcroft polls told 81% of people who voted leave think Multiculturalism is a "force for ill" and likewise 80% Immigration is "a force for ill" (and i dont think they were thinkjing about brits on the costa del sol). The other stats on that list are worth a check too.


No, that's not what that chart says.

It says that 81% of people who think multiculturalism is a force for ill voted to leave.

EDIT: I'm also sure that's the second time that that misreading has been made on here.


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 7, 2016)

lol leave the EU but give everyone in the world we wanna sell shit to relaxed visa rules 

you couldnt make this shit up 

what a joke.


----------



## gosub (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> no one quibbled with the result of the welsh devolution referendum, where about 50% of the eligible population voted with about 50% in favour and 50% against, which would no doubt have been brought into play if the turnout had been lower.


Actually talked to Plaid people a couple of years after who reckoned it was down to 2/3 dodgy bags of postal votes (but wasn't them)


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> Has that been reported or is that a hunch?


That appears to be Indian public opinion as mentioned on Beeb news yesterday. It depends who holds the upper hand. Who needs who the most. There is no reason why it should only be the EU that believes free movement of people should be part of free trade.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 7, 2016)

pengaleng said:


> lol leave the EU but give everyone in the world we wanna sell shit to relaxed visa rules
> 
> you couldnt make this shit up
> 
> what a joke.


It is unlikely that immigration will fall with Brexit. This was clearly apparent prior to the vote. Judging by some of my "friends" they were too blind to see this. They continue to wind me up!


----------



## stethoscope (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> By way of a recap: Ashcroft polls told 81% of people who voted leave think Multiculturalism is a "force for ill" and likewise 80% Immigration is "a force for ill" (and i dont think they were thinkjing about brits on the costa del sol).



No it doesn't.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2016)

stethoscope said:


> No it doesn't.


what have i missed


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> what have i missed


You're reading it the wrong way round. The polling shows 81% of people who consider multiculturalism a force for ill voted for leave *not* that 81% of leave voters consider multiculturalism a force for ill.


----------



## stethoscope (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> what have i missed



It says that 'of those that think multiculturalism is a 'force for ill', 81% voted leave, and 19% voted remain.
And 'of those that think immigration is a 'force for ill', 80% voted leave, and 20% voted remain.

That's not 81% (or 80%) of people voted leave think multiculturalism (immigration) is a 'force for ill'.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2016)

stethoscope said:


> It says that 'of those that think multiculturalism is a 'force for ill', 81% voted leave, and 19% voted remain.
> And 'of those that think immigration is a 'force for ill', 80% voted leader, and 20% voted remain.
> 
> That's not 81% (or 80%) of people voted leave think multiculturalism (immigration) is a 'force for ill'.


i stand corrected...bloody polls....i blame the lemsip!

*i think we went through this last time...im a slow learner


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 7, 2016)

fuck people who cant decipher statistics or graphs.


----------



## gosub (Nov 7, 2016)

ska invita said:


> i stand corrected...bloody polls....i blame the lemsip!
> 
> *i think we went through this last time...im a slow learner



oi! Don't diss Lemsip!   Only thing thats got me through the last week.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh cos that's _really_ what i said  in the 2015 general election ukip got 3.88m votes. this was across 624 constituencies, so that's an average of 6130 votes per constituency. hardly 'most people' even around the coast.


This has no relevance to the point I was alluding to in post #262. Which was the extent of the racist(& I suppose xenophobic)views held by people who present themselves as normal quiet mundane people who live in their parochial little worlds & go about their business without making a fuss. This is why the referendum result was not the one expected by the political elite. The leavers won but not by much & you can be pretty certain it was those that voted leave only for racist/xenophobic reasons that swung it. Whatever political party they voted for at last GE they all voted leave.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> This has no relevance to the point I was alluding to in post #262. Which was the extent of the racist(& I suppose xenophobic)views held by people who present themselves as normal quiet mundane people who live in their parochial little worlds & go about their business without making a fuss. This is why the referendum result was not the one expected by the political elite. The leavers won but not by much & you can be pretty certain it was those that voted leave only for racist/xenophobic reasons that swung it. Whatever political party they voted for at last GE they all voted leave.


i am grateful to you for pointing out that what you say should not be taken as what you mean.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

I have no idea what you are on about Pickers. Please explain more fully.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I have no idea what you are on about Pickers. Please explain more fully.


you posted some guff about people voting tory in 1997 and ukip more recently which i mistakenly believed you intended people to take seriously.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

They will have voted Tory in '97. This despite a large swing to Labour in '97 Clacton area constituency still in '97 returned a Tory MP by a large majority. More recently Clacton has twice returned a UKIP MP. This would suggest that the specific people I was referring to have totally entrenched views & nothing will change their minds. Most of those around me did vote UKIP at the last GE.

I have nothing better to do Pickers so shall I keep answering your posts until we ruin the thread?


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 7, 2016)

actually fuck this brexit shit, I am REALLY struggling to buy american spirit tobacco round my ends

I sucked off my mate yesterday cus I said I'd give head for american spirit and he found me some
\

am firmly blaming brexit for this shit


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

I had to google that to find out what it was. Price rise will be caused by brexit £ collapse against $.


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 7, 2016)

it was a serious thing tho, smelling regular tobacco makes me feel sick


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have voted Tory in '97. This despite a large swing to Labour in '97 Clacton area constituency still in '97 returned a Tory MP by a large majority. More recently Clacton has twice returned a UKIP MP. This would suggest that the specific people I was referring to have totally entrenched views & nothing will change their minds. Most of those around me did vote UKIP at the last GE.
> 
> I have nothing better to do Pickers so shall I keep answering your posts until we ruin the thread?



labour took the seat in 1997 and held it till 2005. Its always had a high proportion of narrow minded fuck wits though (i left in 1991).


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They will have voted Tory in '97. This despite a large swing to Labour in '97 Clacton area constituency still in '97 returned a Tory MP by a large majority. More recently Clacton has twice returned a UKIP MP. This would suggest that the specific people I was referring to have totally entrenched views & nothing will change their minds. Most of those around me did vote UKIP at the last GE.
> 
> I have nothing better to do Pickers so shall I keep answering your posts until we ruin the thread?


go on then


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I had to google that to find out what it was. Price rise will be caused by brexit £ collapse against $.


thought you'd have encountered giving head before.


----------



## pengaleng (Nov 7, 2016)

I have


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2016)

Yes, my mistake. The boundaries have now changed & Clacton constituency no longer includes Harwich which it did when last there was a Labour MP. New Clacton constituency returned Carswell as a Tory & more recently as a  UKIP MP. As mentioned by Kaka Tim I live my life surrounded by the narrow minded fuckwits  referred to & most I speak to changed from Tory to UKIP.

If you look at the district councillors for the whole Tendring area in north Essex the Clacton wards are just about all UKIP. Harwich is mostly all Labour with one UKIP with the more rural parts mostly Tory. From what I could find on google the district has 23 Tory councillors 14 UKIP  4 Labour 1 Lib Dem & the rest 12 various independants.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2016)

ska invita said:


> By way of a recap: Ashcroft polls told 81% of people who voted leave think Multiculturalism is a "force for ill" and likewise 80% Immigration is "a force for ill" (and i dont think they were thinkjing about brits on the costa del sol). The other stats on that list are worth a check too.
> 
> May isnt stupid - she knows exactly what what she needs to say to these people, who no doubt put and keep her in power. She may be being cynical about it - pandering - or she may be on board..who knows. Best guess (according to the Goldman Sachs tape) is she's pandering.
> 
> ...



Not enough info on those stats to say too much as they don't include the 'neithers ' . Would like to see the full stats though as you could then work out an overall picture of how many people really are anti immigration.

Eta: actually you can work out how many 'neithers' there are knowing the overall vote was 52:48. But it involves a bit of maths that I'm not going to do atm


----------



## bimble (Nov 8, 2016)

I think the fact that the Daily Mail is now the UK's favourite source of news, overtaking the Sun and telegraph for the top spot,  is maybe quite important.

Mail Online hit daily ABC record of 15.3m in August as Sun Online was fastest growing site – Press Gazette


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2016)

The difficulty here is that ime the racists/xenophobes don't look or act like racists/xenophobes. The normal mundane folk who live around me will reveal their feelings to people they know in general conversation & they would think multiculturalism is a force for ill but I doubt they would reveal that in random phone polls & other methods used to gauge public opinion. They might say things like "weeelll we can just keep letting everybody in" but it takes a bit more conversation to reveal their true feelings. These people are not unintelligent though but tend to parochial. I wonder if they are influenced by what papers like the Mail print or does the Mail just print what these people want to read?


----------



## bimble (Nov 8, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I wonder if they are influenced by what papers like the Mail print or does the Mail just print what these people want to read?


Its got to be all about selling clicks / papers for the owners of the DM but that doesn't mean they aren't responsible for stirring up real hatred and misinformation. In general, the higher the immigration rate to an area the more likely it was to vote remain, so that at least to some extent anti-immigrant feeling is strongest where there are very few immigrants and you just read about them, in the DM.
Fear of immigration drove the leave victory – not immigration itself

Also, this has got some really interesting stats in it, about the way that concern about immigration has risen to become the number one issue that people in the UK say they are worried about. Charts showing the relationship between actual net migration, newspaper stories about migration and how worried people feel. 
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/D...ting-ground-attitudes-to-immigration-2016.pdf


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2016)

Yes, I can believe that. Around where I live there is little industry so not that may European immigrants but people around me have been racist for decades so nothing new.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The difficulty here is that ime the racists/xenophobes don't look or act like racists/xenophobes.


Pity otherwise they could be separated out from all non-racists. Incidentally what proportion of the UK population are racists in your opinion?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 8, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> Pity otherwise they could be separated out from all non-racists. Incidentally what proportion of the UK population are racists in your opinion?



What a bizarre question.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> Pity otherwise they could be separated out from all non-racists. Incidentally what proportion of the UK population are racists in your opinion?


I think you've missed the thrust of SJ's posts. The point is rather the opposite - that there are a sizeable number of people who hold racist attitudes of one kind or another who are not evil people, just a bit ignorant, a bit bigoted and a bit racist. IME a lot of people are a bit racist, often without really knowing it.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 8, 2016)

I think you may have in turn missed rs' thrust about the nonsense of people potentially looking like racist xenophobes. What would that person look like do you think?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you've missed the thrust of SJ's posts. The point is rather the opposite - that there are a sizeable number of people who hold racist attitudes of one kind or another who are not evil people, just a bit ignorant, a bit bigoted and a bit racist. IME a lot of people are a bit racist, often without really knowing it.


But she hasn't talked about racism or racist attitudes, she's talked about _racists_, as if we can divide people up into two camps. The racists and the non-racists.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> Pity otherwise they could be separated out from all non-racists. Incidentally what proportion of the UK population are racists in your opinion?


I have no idea. I can only go by the people I have actually met in the course of my life living & working in a provincial area which is has never been an area with any sort of immigrant population. I have always been suprised at the virulent racism displayed by the otherwise most urbane & mundane people you could hope to meet. This will be those doing manual work & up the scale to managerial. They don't get on soapboxes but it comes out in conversation. Decades ago it was "Pakis" & so on & nowadays it is no different directed at current immigration. What I do notice is the reluctance by them to understand the difference between legal immigration from the EU & immigration, legal & illegal from rest of world.


----------



## killer b (Nov 8, 2016)

ska invita said:


> By way of a recap: Ashcroft polls told 81% of people who voted leave think Multiculturalism is a "force for ill" and likewise 80% Immigration is "a force for ill" (and i dont think they were thinkjing about brits on the costa del sol). The other stats on that list are worth a check too.


You're misreading that (everyone did at the time) - it's the other way round. 81% of people who think multiculturalism is a force for ill voted for brexit. IIRC the figures weren't quite so stark the other way round.


----------



## Jurrihahay (Nov 8, 2016)

littlebabyjesus said:


> IME a lot of people are a bit racist, often without really knowing it.


What on earth can you do about 'these people?'


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> But she hasn't talked about racism or racist attitudes, she's talked about _racists_, as if we can divide people up into two camps. The racists and the non-racists.


It would depend how you view it. One could just call these people bigoted & ignorant or you could call them racist but what I am alluding to is the casual & virulent racism displayed in conversation from ordinary white people like "I hate 'em, send the cunts home, Enoch was right" & so on. This attitude is not new, it is decades old.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It would depend how you view it. One could just call these people bigoted & ignorant or you could call them racist but what I am alluding to is the casual & virulent racism displayed in conversation from ordinary white people like "I hate 'em, send the cunts home, Enoch was right" & so on. This attitude is not new, it is decades old.


Apart from you haven't just alluded to such opinions, you've assigned all UKIP voters to the racist bin (and bin is exactly what it is as you've claimed that nothing will change the minds of these racists). And how much further do we go? After all it wasn't UKIP that developed the UKs current immigration policies, are all Tory voters racist? LibDem voters? Labour voters? Was that "bigoted woman" that tackled Gordon Brown a racist? By the time you've finished there's no going to be many non-racists, but never mind they can all pat each other on the back.

Can't you see the political outcome of writing off a huge proportion (probably a majority) of the UK population?


----------



## Jurrihahay (Nov 8, 2016)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It would depend how you view it. One could just call these people bigoted & ignorant or you could call them racist but what I am alluding to is the casual & virulent racism displayed in conversation from ordinary white people like "I hate 'em, send the cunts home, Enoch was right" & so on. This attitude is not new, it is decades old.


Why does it surprise you? As a society, and not just in Britain, we are reaping the rewards of de-industrialisation and the growth of the McJob economy, the demise of significant working class organisation, the retreat of the left, in its powerlessness to affect the economy, into identity politics, and the room this has opened up for the neo-liberals to deepen their project. No amount of moralising or hand-wringing (another major characteristic of today's left) can really affect this. Things would be much worse without the distraction of pointless consumerism and the vent offered by internet foaming.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 8, 2016)

I have not been drawing any conclusions from this I have just been posting up my observations made over decades. The casual racism displayed by the most normal of people has always suprised me.


----------



## terapija (Nov 10, 2016)

redsquirrel said:


> Can't you see the political outcome of writing off a huge proportion (probably a majority) of the UK population?


Motivation for the vote was xenophobia, racism and also ignorance. So, how would you call those people?

Also it's the city of london you should direct your anger at...not brussels or berlin if we're going to be honest...


----------



## Raheem (Nov 11, 2016)

Jurrihahay said:


> What on earth can you do about 'these people?'



You can put quote marks around them as a rhetorical trick.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 11, 2016)

Jurrihahay said:


> What on earth can you do about 'these people?'


'these people' include a larger number of people I know. I wasn't talking in the abstract. Ultimately, you can hope that, when they die, the new generation can be better. Also, you can try to nudge them towards something better, but in the knowledge that you will probably fail.

I don't pretend to have solutions to everything. I'm also not framing such people as monsters, which I think was also saskia jayne's point, but that always gets drowned out whenever this subject is discussed on here.

I'd expect better from you, tbh. That's a shit response. Just shit.


----------



## Jurrihahay (Nov 11, 2016)

So what? We all know them.

There's no reason to think that any new generation will be 'better' than the last, as it largely depends on factors outside the control of anybody, and whereas you might think you're a representative of 'something better', those you are talking to might not (they might even laugh or yawn.)


----------



## bimble (Nov 11, 2016)

Article 50 could be reversed, government may argue in Brexit case


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2016)

bimble said:


> Moon made of green cheese, government may argue in Brexit case


c4u


----------



## bimble (Nov 11, 2016)

I'm totally ready to believe that the moon's made of moon, but not entirely convinced that the tory government really wants brexit. If you look at its a clever argument (which they might & might not make) would mean they would get to win at the Supreme Court but can always still blame everyone else for any failure to actually do the brexiting.


----------



## andysays (Nov 11, 2016)

bimble said:


> Article 50 could be reversed, government may argue in Brexit case



We touched on the question of if A50 was reversible about a week ago on the Brexit Process thread, in the immediate aftermath of the High Court judgement, including whether it might be necessary to go to the ECJ to get a definitive answer.

Do keep up Guardian


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2016)

bimble said:


> I'm totally ready to believe that the moon's made of moon, but not entirely convinced that the tory government really wants brexit. If you look at its a clever argument (which they might & might not make) would mean they would get to win at the Supreme Court but can always still blame everyone else for any failure to actually do the brexiting.


Yeh. well,  the longer we go without its invocation the less likely it is to actually happen


----------



## gosub (Nov 19, 2016)

bimble said:


> Article 50 could be reversed, government may argue in Brexit case



Nope (quelle surprise)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 20, 2016)

bimble said:


> Article 50 could be reversed, government may argue in Brexit case



Clearly neither the government nor the Guardian clearly have read either article 50 or the previous court judgement


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2016)

I'd wish they'd hurry up, so we can move the country somewhere warmer, like the Caribbean.


----------



## CrabbedOne (Nov 26, 2016)

From what I can see the remaining countries are losing patience. The Brits can't dither forever. The three Brexiteers appear to be pissing away what good will there is. May will probably pull the plug on Article 50 in the Spring. It'll be for a Hard Brexit as Britain has a weak hand to negotiate anything elaborate. Maybe there'll be some transitional arrangement where the UK pays through the nose to maintain some rights. The new trade deals will probably take a decade to sort out. It's what the Tories do when liberated from the slight constraints of the EU that may be the most damaging to the typical grumbling Leaver.

But POTUS Trump is probably going to be far more signifiant in his effects globally than little old Brexit.


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2016)

CrabbedOne said:


> From what I can see the remaining countries are losing patience. The Brits can't dither forever. The three Brexiteers appear to be pissing away what good will there is. May will probably pull the plug on Article 50 in the Spring. It'll be for a Hard Brexit as Britain has a weak hand to negotiate anything elaborate. Maybe there'll be some transitional arrangement where the UK pays through the nose to maintain some rights. The new trade deals will probably take a decade to sort out. It's what the Tories do when liberated from the slight constraints of the EU that may be the most damaging to the typical grumbling Leaver.
> 
> But POTUS Trump is probably going to be far more signifiant in his effects globally than little old Brexit.



Still confident transitional arrangement will be financially neutral, and the savvy move.  Faith in politicians and the media that spin them though, completely out the window.  Long term arrangement, I agree, will take a decade at least.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 27, 2016)

By spring 2019 the EU possibly won't exist anyway, so all this is academic.


----------



## red & green (Nov 27, 2016)

There will be no negotiation - Eu will say our way or the highway


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> By spring 2019 the EU possibly won't exist anyway, so all this is academic.


Yes, I think there will be several 'events' along the way that will change the landscape of brexit. The daftest thing about particularly the Beeb coverage of brexit is the way it is made out that the EU is some sort of united rock solid institution when clearly it is not.


----------



## CrabbedOne (Nov 27, 2016)

On Bloomberg Carney Seeks Brexit ‘Buffer’ for Single Market, Times Reports


> ...
> *Current Rules*
> 
> Carney’s proposal would allow companies to continue using current rules until at least 2021, allowing additional time to adapt to trading conditions after Brexit. Neither the Bank of England nor May’s office responded to requests for comment on the Sunday Times report.
> ...


Not so much a Soft Brexit as a Slow one.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 28, 2016)

Brexit: Legal battle over UK's single market membership - BBC News

Interesting; leaving the EU may not automatically mean leaving the EEA. If that is the case that could really fuck shit up for all sides in this clusterfuck


----------



## gosub (Nov 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Brexit: Legal battle over UK's single market membership - BBC News
> 
> Interesting; leaving the EU may not automatically mean leaving the EEA. If that is the case that could really fuck shit up for all sides in this clusterfuck



Was sort of banking on it actually.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 28, 2016)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Brexit: Legal battle over UK's single market membership - BBC News
> 
> Interesting; leaving the EU may not automatically mean leaving the EEA. If that is the case that could really fuck shit up for all sides in this clusterfuck



This would be a good way of fudging it, but it looks like less of a sure thing that the Article 50 case. The EEA agreement doesn't read like it confers any rights or obligations on the UK directly, only by virtue of it being an EU member state.


----------



## ris (Dec 3, 2016)

Hello everyone, I am from the Netherlands and me and a friend are doing a research about the BREXIT. we would be very pleased if you could fill in our survey. only serious answers pls.
its a survey from max 5 min. thanks in advance!
surveylink: Survey about the BREXIT


----------



## ddraig (Dec 3, 2016)

ris said:


> Hello everyone, I am from the Netherlands and me and a friend are doing a research about the BREXIT. we would be very pleased if you could fill in our survey. only serious answers pls.
> its a survey from max 5 min. thanks in advance!
> surveylink: Survey about the BREXIT


Terms of Service and Rules | urban75 forums


----------



## Santino (Dec 3, 2016)

I gave silly answers.


----------



## gosub (Dec 3, 2016)

Raheem said:


> This would be a good way of fudging it, but it looks like less of a sure thing that the Article 50 case. The EEA agreement doesn't read like it confers any rights or obligations on the UK directly, only by virtue of it being an EU member state.


Streamlines EFTA membership though.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 3, 2016)

ris said:


> Hello everyone, I am from the Netherlands and me and a friend are doing a research about the BREXIT. we would be very pleased if you could fill in our survey. only serious answers pls.
> its a survey from max 5 min. thanks in advance!
> surveylink: Survey about the BREXIT


Hallo ris. I've answered your survey but you don't really have a clue what is going on here. Suggest you do much more reseach. Feel free to ask some specific questions.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2016)

Think the roadblock is going to be that the Supreme Court insist the Great Repeal Act is passed ahead of Art 50.  (The Repeal act in itself isn't a problem we'll need it to help MRA arrangements), the problem being that quite a lot of stuff within the Act would be classified as "devolved matters"....


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2016)

Exposed: Labour's Brexit betrayal as deputy leader in Brussels deletes lines from key report in 'sneaky' attempt to water down EU terms

Oh dear.  The amendments bit are true, BUT the dog in the night-time is :
"11. Notes that this new type of ‘associate status’ could also be one of the possible outcomes to respect the will of the majority of the citizens of the United Kingdom to leave the EU; stresses that this wish must be respected, given that the withdrawal of the United Kingdom, as one of the larger Member States, and as the largest non-euro-area member, affects the strength and the institutional balance of the Union – a new situation that adds to the need for revision of the Treaties;"

The Leviathan aims to continue on its path as outlined in October 2013.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 9, 2017)

thought it might be timely to resurrect this thread seeing as we've had a General election since then, A50 has been triggered and negotiations have started.
On balance - i think i still stick to the opinion that it is not going to happen - its fiendishly complex and more and more problems are being thrown up. 

Delivering brexit would be tricky enough with a strong, effective government that was firmly in control of the agenda, a united country and popular support. 
But instead it is being led a weak, bitterly divided government led by a lame duck leader with little authority. It is opposed by large sections of the business, manufacturing and banking sector and the senior civil service. The academic and cultural sectors are implacably opposed. The public is split down the middle. The majority of MPs are opposed and – whilst they may feel bound by the result – the narrowness of the “leave” victory make that commitment questionable. Then there is the constitutional dogs dinner it serves up in northern Ireland and – potentially – Scotland.

The negotiations are also undermined by the fact that any positions taken by the UK are undermined by the threat of a leadership challenge to May, cabinet shenanigans and very unstable parliamentary arithmetic  

I just don't think it politically possible to get any sort of deal that isn't quite shit and a Hard Brexit crash out will be vigorously opposed by just about everyone bar a few dozen tory headbangers and the the Daily Mail.  
Potential scenario - A long-grass-tastic Transitional arrangement followed by a humiliating climbdown and toxic political repercussions ("stab in the back" anyone?). 

Cant help thinking that the last election was the perfect result for labour - all the fun of humiliating the tories followed by the luxury of standing on the side lines watching the vermin have to eat up the big pile of steaming Brexit from the political carpet.


----------



## Favelado (Sep 9, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Cant help thinking that the last election was the perfect result for labour - all the fun of humiliating the tories followed by the luxury of standing on the side lines watching the vermin have to eat up the big pile of steaming Brexit from the political carpet.



Just like the 92-97 parliament. Hysterically funny implosion of Tories as the sun shines ever stronger on the opposition.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 9, 2017)

Whilst I would agree that it's a dog's dinner, there is this rather nasty power grab to be taken into consideration, which if they manage to pull it off with the assistance of the DUP does not bode well for what currently passes as democracy in the UK.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2017)

I still think no brexit is probably the most likely eventual outcome, on balance. But I get a sense that the EU is increasingly warming to the idea of a CETA (Canada) type arrangement with the UK. Barnier seems to have been suggesting this recently. The main risk for them in this is that it would increase the cost of banking in the UK and Eurozone business would not be able to extricate itself. But there was an interview yesterday on France 24 with someone from Frankfurt, who was the CEO of some sort of city corporation. He may well have had reason to talk things up a bit, but he was saying he had a queue of international banks with their relocation plans all worked out and ready to go. If that's reflective at all of the reality, then you can see why it might be looking like an attractive scenario from their perspective.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2017)

I was speaking with a German lawyer from Frankfurt this week who was remarking how promising things are.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I still think no brexit is probably the most likely eventual outcome, on balance. But I get a sense that the EU is increasingly warming to the idea of a CETA (Canada) type arrangement with the UK. Barnier seems to have been suggesting this recently. The main risk for them in this is that it would increase the cost of banking in the UK and Eurozone business would not be able to extricate itself. But there was an interview yesterday on France 24 with someone from Frankfurt, who was the CEO of some sort of city corporation. He may well have had reason to talk things up a bit, but he was saying he had a queue of international banks with their relocation plans all worked out and ready to go. If that's reflective at all of the reality, then you can see why it might be looking like an attractive scenario from their perspective.



Have you met many city bankers?

They are British, American, South African, Australian and then French, German and so on.

The first four on the list have no desire at all to relocate themselves and their families to Germany, or France, or Switzerland. They don't speak the language and are not familiar with the culture.

Of course banks are moving their EU operations out of London, but their core operations are going nowhere.

Besides, if the bankers did all fuck off, good riddence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

Anyway, an anti-Brexit march in town again today, what do these berks think they can possibly achieve?


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 9, 2017)

They've taken a lesson from the Brexit campaign: Real change is possible, but sometime you have to grumble for 40 years first.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Besides, if the bankers did all fuck off, good riddence.


This is the key point. London would be a much better place without them.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Have you met many city bankers?
> 
> They are British, American, South African, Australian and then French, German and so on.
> 
> ...



I don't claim to know what's on the minds of bank directors, but I've never heard anyone suggest that the whole of the CoL is going to get up and walk over the channel overnight. Clearly, the biggest players would only move some of their operations out of London, at least in the first instance. It might not be so easy, though, for banks headquartered outside Europe for whom London is an outpost. In any event, I don't think the EU27 need to be realistically looking at taking over the whole of the UK financial sector in order to make the prospect appetising.

I'm not all that fussed about whether London will be better without so many bankers or not, because I don't live there. All I'm thinking of is what the calculations of the EU negotiating team will be. If they believe that they can realistically expect a big enough increase in banking capacity within the Eurozone, then the problems with not having banking covered in a Brexit agreement are greatly diminished, from their perspective. And they are undoubtedly increasingly in a good position to know fairly accurately how things will turn out.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I don't claim to know what's on the minds of bank directors, but I've never heard anyone suggest that the whole of the CoL is going to get up and walk over the channel overnight. Clearly, the biggest players would only move some of their operations out of London, at least in the first instance. It might not be so easy, though, for banks headquartered outside Europe for whom London is an outpost. In any event, I don't think the EU27 need to be realistically looking at taking over the whole of the UK financial sector in order to make the prospect appetising.
> 
> I'm not all that fussed about whether London will be better without so many bankers or not, because I don't live there. All I'm thinking of is what the calculations of the EU negotiating team will be. If they believe that they can realistically expect a big enough increase in banking capacity within the Eurozone, then the problems with not having banking covered in a Brexit agreement are greatly diminished, from their perspective. And they are undoubtedly increasingly in a good position to know fairly accurately how things will turn out.




Just saying, when you see some smug prick in Frankfurt or Paris claiming to be mopping up the UK's banking business, that's bullshit. For better or worse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just saying, when you see some smug prick in Frankfurt or Paris claiming to be mopping up the UK's banking business, that's bullshit. For better or worse.


Sadly I think you're right. Destroying a chunk of the UK's financial sector would be a huge plus from brexit, but sadly it's not going to happen.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just saying, when you see some smug prick in Frankfurt or Paris claiming to be mopping up the UK's banking business, that's bullshit. For better or worse.



I guess time will tell, but I really don't see how you can be confident of that. The pricks in Paris don't seem so smug. They seem to be saying that Frankfurt is running rings around them and getting all the interest. That suggests to me that there's something real going on.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Just saying, when you see some smug prick in Frankfurt or Paris claiming to be mopping up the UK's banking business, that's bullshit. For better or worse.



Just going on what a lawyer was saying who works for banking and finance companies; things are looking up even if it's only a small bit of business. And expat packages for top personnel and their families make cultural differences less of an issue. International schools etc. Earning ££££ minimises the stress!


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Anyway, an anti-Brexit march in town again today, what do these berks think they can possibly achieve?



Perhaps they are raising awareness/expressing solidarity, all those useful things?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Perhaps they are raising awareness/expressing solidarity, all those useful things?



Raising awareness that white, middle class guardian readers don't want Brexit? Or expressing solidarity in a way they couldn't be fucked to when it came to public service pay being screwed over, or any other fucking cause except wanting to stay in the fucking EU? Heroes one and all.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Raising awareness that white, middle class guardian readers don't want Brexit? Or expressing solidarity in a way they couldn't be fucked to when it came to public service pay being screwed over, or any other fucking cause except wanting to stay in the fucking EU? Heroes one and all.



lol. "My name is Bahnhof Strasse and I am *projecting*"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Just going on what a lawyer was saying who works for banking and finance companies; things are looking up even if it's only a small bit of business. And expat packages for top personnel and their families make cultural differences less of an issue. International schools etc. Earning ££££ minimises the stress!



A significant % of my customers are companies that raise funds for large infrastructure projects, £1bn for a dam or power station in Africa, that kind of thing. These types of businesses are still flocking to London and the amount of businesses of this type we deal with has doubled in the past 12 months, the largest two have moved here from Luxembourg as their Swedish senior personal couldn't stand the place and did not want their kids to go to school there and also cos of the way that Luxembourg's advantages are shortly to be wiped out. They could have gone to Frankfurt, they are EU citizens themselves, but they have chosen to come here and pay my mortgage off instead, could be cos I'm such a nice guy, they may have more solid business reasons for that choice...


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sadly I think you're right. Destroying a chunk of the UK's financial sector would be a huge plus from brexit, but sadly it's not going to happen.



Destroying a chunk of the UK's financial sector sounds great. If it's merely going to be _displaced_, though, it's harder to see the net gain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is the key point. London would be a much better place without them.


Yeh
 This is where you make out you're all radical ignoring that about 95% of the people who work in the city but aren't bankers.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> lol. "My name is Bahnhof Strasse and I am *projecting*"



From their own fucking bleating-rag:

Calls for unity as thousands attend anti-Brexit rally in London



> Among the largely white, often self-admittedly middle class crowd, the raw emotion and despondency of many remainers was all too evident



But do carry on with your ill-informed *projecting*


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

I'm glad she's sad, her dreams of working double shifts on the fry station at McShits in Bucharest have just been stolen from her...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 115381
> 
> 
> I'm glad she's sad, her dreams of working double shifts on the fry station at McShits in Bucharest have just been stolen from her...


It's another makeup fail. Andorians don't look like that at all







An andorian recently


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> From their own fucking bleating-rag:
> 
> Calls for unity as thousands attend anti-Brexit rally in London
> 
> ...



Not me who facilitates the international flow of capital, brother



> A significant % of my customers are companies that raise funds for large infrastructure projects, £1bn for a dam or power station in Africa, that kind of thing. These types of businesses are still flocking to London and the amount of businesses of this type we deal with has doubled in the past 12 months, the largest two have moved here from Luxembourg as their Swedish senior personal couldn't stand the place and did not want their kids to go to school there and also cos of the way that Luxembourg's advantages are shortly to be wiped out. They could have gone to Frankfurt, they are EU citizens themselves, but they have chosen to come here and pay my mortgage off instead, could be cos I'm such a nice guy, they may have more solid business reasons for that choice...



Fight the power.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

Ah, you're just confused. As you were then.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A significant % of my customers are companies that raise funds for large infrastructure projects, £1bn for a dam or power station in Africa, that kind of thing. These types of businesses are still flocking to London and the amount of businesses of this type we deal with has doubled in the past 12 months, the largest two have moved here from Luxembourg as their Swedish senior personal couldn't stand the place and did not want their kids to go to school there and also cos of the way that Luxembourg's advantages are shortly to be wiped out. They could have gone to Frankfurt, they are EU citizens themselves, but they have chosen to come here and pay my mortgage off instead, could be cos I'm such a nice guy, they may have more solid business reasons for that choice...



My companies' customers are all major banking and financial institutions (we're in payments), so we get a fair insight, too.


----------



## 8den (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> H
> Besides, if the bankers did all fuck off, good riddence.



I'm sure the tens of thousands of cleaners, waiting staff, dry cleaners, restaurants, mini cab firms etc, will share your delight at this sudden good fortune. 

(Being slightly facetious, the point is, if London loses even a sizeable chunk of its banking centre a lot of low-income tertiary people are going to suffer quite badly in at least the short term).


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ah, you're just confused. As you were then.



Fair enough, I do find things to be almost impossibly complex sometimes, and struggle to articulate

But i'm not clear why you were so antagonistic to those people who marched? How are they different from you in any meaningful way? This is an honest question btw


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Fair enough, I do find things to be almost impossibly complex sometimes, and struggle to articulate
> 
> But i'm not clear why you were so antagonistic to those people who marched? How are they different from you in any meaningful way? This is an honest question btw



They are selfish scumbags who believe poor people deserve to be poor in equal measure to themselves deserving to be comfortably off. Liberals.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They are selfish scumbags who believe poor people deserve to be poor in equal measure to themselves deserving to be comfortably off. Liberals.



Oh. OK.  All of them? I'm sure you know best.


----------



## sealion (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> From their own fucking bleating-rag:
> 
> Calls for unity as thousands attend anti-Brexit rally in London
> 
> Among the largely white, often self-admittedly middle class crowd, the raw emotion and despondency of many remainers was all too evident


----------



## J Ed (Sep 9, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 115381
> 
> 
> I'm glad she's sad, her dreams of working double shifts on the fry station at McShits in Bucharest have just been stolen from her...



More like the dreams of _others_ doing low paid work in exploitative conditions.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 9, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Destroying a chunk of the UK's financial sector sounds great. If it's merely going to be _displaced_, though, it's harder to see the net gain.


Oh, I'm merely speaking selfishly. If a chunk of the banking sector in London fucked off, London would be a much easier and more pleasant place to live in for the rest of us. 

There is much hype about how much they contribute to the economy but we would survive just fine without them. To those bemoaning the low-paid service jobs that would disappear, new opportunities to do stuff would appear - other people who've been priced out of London would be able to reoccupy the places they formerly used to live in and make businesses in. It's not like low-paid service workers are paid more by rich bankers than other people who are less rich and want the same or similar services. They're not, and what they are paid goes less far with inflated prices and pressures.


----------



## J Ed (Sep 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Oh, I'm merely speaking selfishly. If a chunk of the banking sector in London fucked off, London would be a much easier and more pleasant place to live in for the rest of us.
> 
> There is much hype about how much they contribute to the economy but we would survive just fine without them. To those bemoaning the low-paid service jobs that would disappear, new opportunities to do stuff would appear - other people who've been priced out of London would be able to reoccupy the places they formerly used to live in and make businesses in. It's not like low-paid service workers are paid more by rich bankers than other people who are less rich and want the same or similar services. They're not, and what they are paid goes less far with inflated prices and pressures.



Of course when the next crisis and bailout comes, or doesn't, we wouldn't be collectively held hostage by the vested interests which demand our ever accelerating immiseration.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Of course when the next crisis and bailout comes, or doesn't, we wouldn't be collectively held hostage by the vested interests which demand our ever accelerating immiseration.


Yep. and that. It's all win.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Of course when the next crisis and bailout comes, or doesn't, we wouldn't be collectively held hostage by the vested interests which demand our ever accelerating immiseration.



Fair point. I guess it's well-documented that countries with smaller banking sectors are pretty much immune to that sort of thing when the shit hits the fan.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Fair point. I guess it's well-documented that countries with smaller banking sectors are pretty much immune to that sort of thing when the shit hits the fan.


----------



## tim (Sep 10, 2017)

8den said:


> I'm sure the tens of thousands of cleaners, waiting staff, dry cleaners, restaurants, mini cab firms etc, will share your delight at this sudden good fortune.
> 
> (Being slightly facetious, the point is, if London loses even a sizeable chunk of its banking centre a lot of low-income tertiary people are going to suffer quite badly in at least the short term).


The

Many of them wouldn't be suffering in London thought, as they would have been deported for being low-skilled European undesirables.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 10, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Perhaps they are raising awareness/expressing solidarity, all those useful things?


Don't see much solidarity with comrades in Greece (and elsewhere) _by cheering on the EU_, the entity that is currently killing people.

I wonder if any of the speakers called for Corbyn to resign this time. Though plenty of time for LD and Conservative speakers I see.

"The LDs are here as a sensible, middle of the road party" - wonderful, where would be be without them!


----------



## mather (Sep 10, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Of course when the next crisis and bailout comes, or doesn't, we wouldn't be collectively held hostage by the vested interests which demand our ever accelerating immiseration.



Another crisis will come, that is inevitable if you look at the fact that all the bailout money that was given out is not being used for lending or investing but is instead being hoarded.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 10, 2017)

mather said:


> Another crisis will come, that is inevitable if you look at the fact that all the bailout money that was given out is not being used for lending or investing but is instead being hoarded.



And whatever value exists in whatever is being hoarded will vanish in another crash (aside from tidy sums for coupon clipping functionaries and financial coroners.) Add a radical right and inflation...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2017)

Who made gains at the last general election? On what platform? Was it the nazi party? Led by Hitler?


----------



## sihhi (Sep 11, 2017)

8den said:


> (Being slightly facetious, the point is, if London loses even a sizeable chunk of its banking centre a lot of low-income tertiary people are going to suffer quite badly in at least the short term).



Beware that "A lot of low-income tertiary people are" already "suffering quite badly"


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 11, 2017)

Re anti-Brexit marchers :



Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They are selfish scumbags who believe poor people deserve to be poor in equal measure to themselves deserving to be comfortably off. Liberals.



Probably true of plenty of people on the actual march. But how many were there? 

I'd hazard that more broadly,  most Remain-*voters* in 2016, plenty if them much more left-wing than the above,  do not think like the above at all, and are also, now,  much more pragmatic about there being  very little chance of Brexit being stopped altogether.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Re anti-Brexit marchers :
> 
> 
> 
> Probably true of plenty of people on the actual march. But how many were there?



By the BBC estimate (over-estimate cos this is a cause they approve of), 2.5% the number who marched against attacking Iraq.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Re anti-Brexit marchers :
> 
> 
> 
> Probably true of plenty of people on the actual march. But how many were there?


No one knows and fewer care


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 11, 2017)

In other words then, a very small number, and therefore not to be taken as representative of people who voted Remain in 2016. IMO ...


----------



## killer b (Sep 11, 2017)

not _all_ remainers


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 11, 2017)

Absolutely, and I should have said so, but my main point were that those marchers are surely Remain-outliers.


----------



## killer b (Sep 11, 2017)

My post was mostly a jibe at the way you pop up to defend remain voters as if any criticism of them is a personal broadside at you tbh though. Like how dudes pop up to say 'not all men...' when women are talking about misogyny. 

However... the total contempt many remain supporters hold leave supporters in remains widespread IME. Among those motivated enough to go on a march? Much higher.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Who made gains at the last general election? On what platform? Was it the nazi party? Led by Hitler?



Labour and the Tories.

Your optimism is endearing.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Labour and the Tories.
> 
> Your optimism is endearing.


But you mentioned a 'radical right' didn't you? Can you point to them and people turning towards them? That was the point of the post after all.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2017)

I was referring to matters internationally when discussing bail outs (which was the point of the post.) Oh I get it: your narrative is "liberal opposes Brexit says alarmist thing will result from Brexit." 

Have a smiley face at the blow struck to capitalism by Brexit


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2017)

I get it, brexit has opened the door to international (probably intergalactic) fascism. Have one back


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2017)

Humour is best way to approach the farce (for it is not a tragedy.)


----------



## Supine (Sep 11, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Humour is best way to approach the farce (for it is not a tragedy.)



It has started as a farce and will end in tragedy. A good story to follow.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2017)

Austerity is a tragedy. Brexit is not.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 11, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Austerity is a tragedy. Brexit is not.



Yes, it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Austerity is a tragedy. Brexit is not.


Is there any connection at all do you think? Maybe ask a greek to help.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Yes, it's not the fall that kills you, it's the landing.


The cunts what pushed you off are nowhere in the picture though.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Is there any connection at all do you think? Maybe ask a greek to help.



You can patronise better than that.


----------



## 8den (Sep 11, 2017)

Right now if Britain woke up tomorrow and just starting lying to everyone that "We've never heard of Brexit" I think the rest of world would let you get away with it. We'd chalk it up to one of those weird British fads that started and were forgotten about completely within a few months. Like "The Darkness" and that time ITV tried to remake Roseanne/


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2017)

Here's a thing.

Despite the fact that it looks more and more  the most likely outcome - The government seems to have made no planning for a "no deal" scenario. Now apparently they have legal advice that a50 is reversable - so the argument goes that if there is no deal on the table, the government will stop brexit, David Cameron will come out of the shower and we realise that the last 18 months was all a dream. 

Now assuming the A50 is not binding thing is true - then the EU know this as well. So it is arguably in the interests of both sides in the negotiations for there to be no deal. This allows the UK to crawl back.

The EU can let themselves be magnanimous - they would much rather the UK was part of the EU  - (big economy, important market, disruptive influence if outside the EU, useful military strength etc etc ) and may consider the UKs self inflicted humiliation as enough punishment - lesson sent to other countries, whilst not wishing to fuel anti-EU resentment (avoiding a sort of watered re-run of the treaty of Versailles).

This means that  both sets of negotiators are effectively playing out a charade where they work together to extract the UK from the brexit path with as little political pain all around.

No deal does look like the most likely option - there are too many intractable problems- and even hard brexiters like peter north believe this will cause significant chaos and pain (although north - being a sociopathic right wing cunt, is looking forward to this as a year zero moment - see his blog here - Pete North Politics Blog: I don't like this Brexit, but I will live with it)

Bernard Jenkin and others are already accusing the Chancellor of conspiring with Brussels to make a brexit deal difficult. I think he has a point.

Beyond the likes of Rees Mogg, possibly liam fox and a few headbangers, the I dont think anyone in the government thinks "no deal" will be anything but a disaster. Johnson is just a gobshite and wouldn't dare go for if it was up to him.

I think they probably started off hoping to get some sort of not-too painful deal but as that's started to drift out of view they are now looking to deploy the reverse gear whilst still moving and trying to do this without blowing up the car.

I suspect there are some very interesting back channel chats between the EU and UK gov.

Still - the brexit lobby still will be screaming blue murder if this comes to pass and Theresa will be the great betrayer. It certainly makes sense of why they have kept her in place. Shes the Martyr - maybe she's up for the role and thinks she will be seen by future generations as someone who sacrificed herself to protect the nation. I think its more likely she will be seen as a fucking idiot - but there you go.

Now shoot me down guys - im musing here. But i still believe the fudge making abilities of the EU and UK political class and the sheer weight of powerful forces opposed to crashing out without a deal make this a plausible scenario.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> (avoiding a sort of watered re-run of the treaty of Versailles).


nice to see the auld canard get an outing again


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Here's a thing.
> 
> Despite the fact that it looks more and more  the most likely outcome - The government seems to have made no planning for a "no deal" scenario. Now apparently they have legal advice that a50 is reversable - so the argument goes that if there is no deal on the table, the government will stop brexit, David Cameron will come out of the shower and we realise that the last 18 months was all a dream.
> 
> ...



Hopefully, this is the plan - or at least, a potential scenario - for the majority of senior civil servants, and perhaps for Keir Starmer and the majority of Labour MPs. I can't believe that anyone in the Cabinet would actively be hoping for an outcome like this, though, because it would destroy the Conservative party. 

So, it's a lovely thought, but it requires the government to fall, or for May to be replaced with a hard Brexiteer against whom sensible Tories feel able to rebel.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 11, 2017)

I see Hammond is now coming right out as the voice of reason. The brexiteers want May to sack him but this would probably have more ramifications than sacking Boris I guess? The US claim their system is resiliant to the possibility of electing a headbanger as a president & this seems to be proving the case. I wonder if the UK system has anything that can stop the country descending into chaos because that is what the people voted for?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I see Hammond now coming right out as the voice of reason. The brexiteers want May to sack him but this would probably have more ramifications than sacking Boris I guess? The US claim their system is resiliant to the possibility of electing a headbanger as a president & this seems to be proving the case. I wonder if the UK system has anything that can stop the country descending into chaos because that is what the people voted for?



I have a horrible feeling that all we have in that regard is Lilibet Mountbatten. And yes, it's really impressive how Trump-proof US structures are, and how flimsy ours seem by comparison.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The US claim their system is resiliant to the possibility of electing a headbanger as a president & this seems to be proving the case.


you should pay more attention to what's happening in the united states, and what effect the trump presidency is having on e.g. us foreign policy


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> you should pay more attention to what's happening in the united states, and what effect the trump presidency is having on e.g. us foreign policy



On domestic policy, though, she is absolutely right. So it's a fair call to ask about what we have by way of checks, balances, legal remedies to the withdrawal of rights, and so on.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 11, 2017)

I am hoping we are incinerated in a nuclear inferno rather  than have to go through several more years of brexit to me / to you shite.

I have given up now. I don't care any more.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am hoping we are incinerated in a nuclear inferno rather  than have to go through several more years of brexit to me / to you shite.
> 
> I have given up now. I don't care any more.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> On domestic policy, though, she is absolutely right. So it's a fair call to ask about what we have by way of checks, balances, legal remedies to the withdrawal of rights, and so on.


so the way the trump administration has chopped services to which it objects is to you nothing


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> so the way the trump administration has chopped services to which it objects is to you nothing



It has been prevented from doing many more worse things. That's the point.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2017)

I think the tories are now just looking at damage limitation. Any deal they get will be a shit one as far as most brexiters are concerned. A no deal scenario (the more likely outcome IMO) will meet ferocious political resistance and will cause massive damage to them politically. Exiting brexit as no deal could be reached (possibly via a 2nd ref) will also cause them political damage - but probably more recoverable from than driving the whole country off the cliff.
They are fucked whatever they do. Party splits. General election. May cancelling article 50 and then slitting her wrists in the bath - all on the cards.


----------



## hipipol (Oct 11, 2017)

I detect the true nature of the "negotiations" being carried out is to drive Brussels into such a rage that we are expelled from the EU. At first glance you would think:- Implicit in that statement is the assumption that there is some coherent plan at work...- which is why this strategy is so fiendish - it doesn't actually need any attempt at logic, merely wild infighting, incomprehensible tosh about " all the progress being made" while the PM slowly dies of shame.
That'll get us out


----------



## lazythursday (Oct 11, 2017)

hipipol said:


> I detect the true nature of the "negotiations" being carried out is to drive Brussels into such a rage that we are expelled from the EU. At first glance you would think:- Implicit in that statement is the assumption that there is some coherent plan at work...- which is why this strategy is so fiendish - it doesn't actually need any attempt at logic, merely wild infighting, incomprehensible tosh about " all the progress being made" while the PM slowly dies of shame.
> That'll get us out


It all seems wildly inconsistent and contradictory to me. On the one hand, no real preparation for a 'no deal' (or even for an actual deal as anything that leaves the customs union will require vast new customs infrastructure). On the other, it seems no real attempt at positive engagement with the negotiations / difficult issues like Northern Ireland - making 'no deal' seem more likely. Part of me wants to believe that this is indeed smoke and mirrors mostly designed to save face within the Tory Party and there is some sort of plan for a fudge. Another part of me worries that this inconsistency and chaotic approach is simply happening because of the lack of agreement within the government / May's lack of power and indeed the country is careering towards an unprepared-for crash exit while the Tories bicker amongst themselves.

What I don't understand is why the party representing capital is not being heavily lent on by its mates in the financial sector in particular to sort this out ASAP.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 11, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think the tories as now just looking at damage limitation. Any deal they get will be a shit one as far as most brexiters are concerned. A no deal scenario (the more likely outcome IMO) will meet ferocious political resistance and will cause massive damage to them politically. Exiting brexit as no deal could be reached (possibly via a 2nd ref) will also cause them political damage - but probably more recoverable from than driving the whole country off the cliff.
> They are fucked whatever they do. Party splits. General election. May cancelling article 50 and then slitting her wrists in the bath - all on the cards.


I think a lot of this goes to Cameron's decision to hold the referendum. The one issue that has obsessed the tory party for decades ... and when it finally happened they hadn't got a clue how to do it.  The more swivel eyed had the absurd notion that the UK was so important as a market/financial centre/pal of America that they'd be able to bully their way through the negotiations.  Instead it's been one fuck up after another.  Ultimately, for me, brexit v remain were about choosing between versions of neo-liberalism and that remains the long term issue. But it's hard to British finances or GDP gaining in even the medium term.  But ultimately, it's the issue of how it could be stopped?  I just posted (on the wrong thread ) that it's hard to see a scenario where the current cabinet - or some kind of cross party alliance - pulls the plug.  How any of them would see it as being in their short term personal/political interest to do so?  As you say, a second ref or general election around the terms of the deal is just about the only way this all stops. But I still can't see which group of politicians are going to take on the tide of criticism they would encounter. Equally, it's hard to see how a remoaner could win any ballot to replace May - a pre-requisite to the notion of revisiting brexit.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 11, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> ..Now shoot me down guys - im musing here. But i still believe the fudge making abilities of the EU and UK political class and the sheer weight of powerful forces opposed to crashing out without a deal make this a plausible scenario.



i think - and i voted remain, if without a great deal of enthusiasm - that your theory is predicated on three errors: firstly that Legal advice has any great bearing, i) because if you consult 10 lawyers you'll get 11 definative opinions, and just because the UK's legal advice is that A50 is reversible, whats to say that the Commissions, or EU parliaments, or the differing member states is that its reversible, ii) the legalities or otherwise simply aren't driving this - its politics, and the legal advice only matters if it points in the direction that politicians want it to. if it doesn't, they'll get new legal advice, and iii) getting a pronouncement from the ECJ on whether its reversible or not is akin to kicking into the long grass. who ever gets the answer they don't want will appeal - and and it certainly won't be finished in time to help a truck driver sat at Calais on the 30th March 2019 with a trailer full of rotting produce.

secondly it ignores the pretty spectacular breakdown in relations between the wider UK state apparatus and the EU - you'll not find many civil servants at senior levels who will privately praise the way the UK government has handled this, but you'll find plenty who are agast at the way the EU has gone about it. from what i can gather - conversations with people at a senior level, or working for them, reading blogs, seeing what hacks are saying, the 'deep states' view is that the EU is going about the thing in the way most likely to see it fail - and quite deliberately.

thirdly it ignores what pretty much every politician has grasped, that the economic and other downsides to brexit are as nothing to the political and societal downsides of a stitch-up to prevent brexit.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> thirdly it ignores what pretty much every politician has grasped, that the economic and other downsides to brexit are as nothing to the political and societal downsides of a stitch-up to prevent brexit.




That's a very large claim. I'd suggest that Caring about Brexit is the preserve of a small minority, while caring about food on the shelves and the affordability of public services is mainstream. 

Yes, there would be demos. They would likely be largely peaceful. The UKIP vote would be a complicating factor in every constituency again - but not in Westminster. 

Most people wouldn't give much of a toss. Many people would believe that Brexit had happened, even after BINO.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> thirdly it ignores what pretty much every politician has grasped, that the economic and other downsides to brexit are as nothing to the political and societal downsides of a stitch-up to prevent brexit.


 In yesterday's LBC interview, you could see Theresa May's brain had a few neural pathways that stopped her saying she would vote for brexit today.  In some kind of science fiction, 'press this button and breixt goes away with no consequences for you of the party' she'd fall on it. Trouble is, in the absence of such a button, she's stuck, as you say.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 11, 2017)

I think the EU is mostly worried about the loss of UK £6.5bill net annual contribution. Without that the other few net contributor countries will have to pay more which will most likely increase still further EU dissent within those countries.  So whether we leave or not the EU will demand an annual cost of around that amount for any continued access to EU market. Unless the EU capitulate a long way from this it is difficult to see how any deal is possible.

As for Tory 'friends' & financial backers leaning on the party to see sense I wonder if any of the current crop apart from perhaps Hammond are actually on the bankers & industrialists party invite list? I'm sure Cameron & Osborne were & also Blair & Brown before them but it's difficult to imagine the likes of Carney etc regarding the likes of Johnson etc with anything but utter contempt.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think the EU is mostly worried about the loss of UK £6.5bill net annual contribution...



i had believed that to be the case, but not anymore - but its, imv, more complex than that.

within the EU _structures_, i've come to the belief that its not the money thats the driving force, its the project. the determination is to show that the loss of the UK isn't a loss, its full steam ahead now the pesky brits have gone - and as evidence of this, look at the way the EU is expanding its remit into the defence sphere, its moved ahead quite significantly in a couple of areas in the short time since the UK lifted its veto, and as part of the _project_, i very much take the view that the UK must be seen to suffer as a result of the leaving the EU.

within the member states i think its much more about money and trade, Germany doesn't want the bill, France doesn't want to have to start paying its own farmers, but the member states (particularly the eastern member states) are, imv, willing to be much more flexible in order to keep the UK involved in NATO - they understand the political reality that if Romania, Poland, the Baltic states etc.. are the 'enemy' in a trade war with the UK, the UK is unlikely to keep sending its significant military deployments to the border with their troublesome neighbour.

i don't think there will be a deal, i think the UK will crash out in march 2019.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 11, 2017)

It is difficult to see the present government lasting anywhere near to March '19 without some progress towards a sensible settlement. Surely the daily turmoil cannot continue that long? If there is another GE I can see Labour winning with some sort of majority which I'm sure urban will be mostly rooting for. What will happen then is anybodies guess. Labour seem to be carrying on their tack of attacking the Tories on anything but brexit. Today in parliment Jezza was on Universal credit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2017)

lazythursday said:


> What I don't understand is why the party representing capital is not being heavily lent on by its mates in the financial sector in particular to sort this out ASAP.



Because in spite of all the doom mongering, business will do very nicely from the UK leaving with no deal. Generally business would rather continue with the status quo, but in the absence of that a no deal is the most profitable option.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It is difficult to see the present government lasting anywhere near to March '19 without some progress towards a sensible settlement. Surely the daily turmoil cannot continue that long?




It can continue for that long, the EU won’t do a deal until we go, then it will be a scramble on both sides to sort something out, but they stand to lose more than we do, that’s not to say we won’t lose out too, cos we will, but the EU bods don’t care about people and business, The Project is everything to them.


----------



## Riklet (Oct 12, 2017)

My Dad told me 50,000 turn out on the anti-Brexit march he went to in Manchester.  Middle-class, jolly, well-behaved and so on, obviously, lols.  Major police presence, taking photos and all (total cunts as per) but no one could even be bothered to shout at them or oppose them.

Definitely don't see any sign of a political swing effect against Brexit yet.  Not while Labour looks like a government in waiting with a far more interesting economic plan for the country in terms of addressing inequality and what people want/need than what continued membership of the EU seems to offer.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Because in spite of all the doom mongering, business will do very nicely from the UK leaving with no deal. Generally business would rather continue with the status quo, but in the absence of that a no deal is the most profitable option.



"No deal" is catastrophic for the UK. For the people who live here anyway.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> "No deal" is catastrophic for the UK. For the people who live here anyway.



It really isn’t quite the doomsday scenario that some people are painting it to be, I suspect that those telling us the sky will fall in have an agenda one way in the same way that those who tell us it will be rice AND chips for tea have theirs. The reality will be somewhere in between and no worse for yer average person than these past 7 years of austerity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It really isn’t quite the doomsday scenario that some people are painting it to be, I suspect that those telling us the sky will fall in have an agenda one way in the same way that those who tell us it will be rice AND chips for tea have theirs. The reality will be somewhere in between and no worse for yer average person than these past 7 years of austerity.


Mean mode or median?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Mean mode or median?



Mod.

Zoot-suits for everybody come March 2019!


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> The EU can let themselves be magnanimous - they would much rather the UK was part of the EU  - (big economy, important market, disruptive influence if outside the EU, useful military strength etc etc ) and may consider the UKs self inflicted humiliation as enough punishment - lesson sent to other countries, whilst not wishing to fuel anti-EU resentment (avoiding a sort of watered re-run of the treaty of Versailles).


I can buy the idea that certain members of the cabinet/government/opposition would be perfectly happy with the scenario you outlined, but I can't it happening. First I think there's enough people in the Tory party that are determined to push ahead they won't just stand on the sidelines, but more importantly it would make the party of the government that backed down absolutely toxic.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I can buy the idea that certain members of the cabinet/government/opposition would be perfectly happy with the scenario you outlined, but I can't it happening. First I think there's enough people in the Tory party that are determined to push ahead they won't just stand on the sidelines, but more importantly it would make the party of the government that backed down absolutely toxic.



But if the only alternative is a cliff edge brexit?  As someone argued above - all the options seem impossible - but one has got to happen. I'd say the forces lined up against "no deal" are too strong - it includes half the cabinet for starters. The tories are fucked whatever they do.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> ... I'd say the forces lined up against "no deal" are too strong - it includes half the cabinet for starters. The tories are fucked whatever they do.



I disagree, I think the overwhelming view within the Tory party, and within mainstream politics, is that Brexit has to be delivered regardless of virtues or consequences - and that that is a genuinely held moral standpoint, and that it's held even by a majority who's preference was for remain.

The _political_ view, imv, is that you might electorally survive fucking up something difficult if what you were trying to do was at the behest of the electorate, but that you won't electorally survive if you ignore the electorate regardless of what sunlit uplands you provide.

Effectively, that the party that fails to provide Brexit, almost regardless of what it costs, gets to be Neville Chamberlain for the next 50 years.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

I have six close friends from school days (a long time ago).  Three of them have partners who are from EU countries, two of which are married with children.  All this cavalier talk of no deal is very worrying for them to say the least.  Its all very well saying something will be done, but nothing has happened yet and this shit show is horrible for them.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I disagree, I think the overwhelming view within the Tory party, and within mainstream politics, is that Brexit has to be delivered regardless of virtues or consequences -



I agree with you up to the "regardless of consequences" bit. I think what is happening is the realisation that any sort of deal is going to fiendishly difficult to pull off. The EU are not going to make any meaningful concessions and hard brexit is looming. 

You will struggle to find anyone who thinks a crash will not cause severe pain - the fringe nut jobs see this as a golden opportunity, but everyone else - including many/most tory mps  - think it will be a disaster. 

"No deal" would be resisted by parliament. A chunk of tory mps will rebel. I dont think the DUP would support it either. May and Hammand dont want "no deal" - they didn;t even vote for brexit in the first place. 
I think they are now trying to negotiate a way out of the dilemma.

 And if both the EU and UK accept that A50 is reversible (and - as i have argued - the EU has good reasons to go along with that) - then that presents an escape route. Yes - its political suicide - but the government  is now in a position of  looking at a choice of political suicides. 

In fact - thinking about it - the EU's position all along may have been to force the UK to back out of A50 and come crawling back. Its the same as what they did with Greece.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I have six close friends from school days (a long time ago).  Three of them have partners who are from EU countries, two of which are married with children.  All this cavalier talk of no deal is very worrying for them to say the least.  Its all very well saying something will be done, but nothing has happened yet and this shit show is horrible for them.



If an EU citizen is married to a UK citizen, why are they worried?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> In fact - thinking about it - the EU's position all along may have been to force the UK to back out of A50 and come crawling back. Its the same as what they did with Greece.



And Greece is now the land of milk & honey, yeah?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And Greece is now the land of milk & honey, yeah?


yoghurt and honey i think you'll find


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If an EU citizen is married to a UK citizen, why are they worried?



There is currently nothing in place to say what their status will be after Brexit.  There are threads all over this site of people having spouses from outside the EU and the time, expense and stress that goes into trying to live with them in the UK.  

As I say, it seems obvious that something will be resolved but I'm not them and its not my life that has so much uncertainty.  One of them has started the wheels for British citizenship now and all that entails just for some certainty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There is currently nothing in place to say what their status will be after Brexit.  There are threads all over this site of people having spouses from outside the EU and the time, expense and stress that goes into trying to live with them in the UK.
> 
> As I say, it seems obvious that something will be resolved but I'm not them and its not my life that has so much uncertainty.  One of them has started the wheels for British citizenship now and all that entails just for some certainty.


enemy aliens


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There is currently nothing in place to say what their status will be after Brexit.  There are threads all over this site of people having spouses from outside the EU and the time, expense and stress that goes into trying to live with them in the UK.
> 
> As I say, it seems obvious that something will be resolved but I'm not them and its not my life that has so much uncertainty.  One of them has started the wheels for British citizenship now and all that entails just for some certainty.



If you are married to a UK citizen and have been living in the UK there really will be no bar to staying in the UK and gaining UK citizenship. If they are worried though they really should be lobbying hard the leaders of their nation states to get them to tell the EU to pull their fingers out and end the uncertainty. Pressure from Merkel or Macron to stop fucking EU citizens about may have some affect on these psychos, probably not though, they seem very happy to use EU citizens as pawns in their games.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you are married to a UK citizen and have been living in the UK there really will be no bar to staying in the UK and gaining UK citizenship.



Sure, not knowing what form it'll take is the key here.  You live in a country for years, you pay your taxes, you raise your kids, you play the game.  Then they change the rules but won't tell you what they are.



> If they are worried though they really should be lobbying hard the leaders of their nation states to get them to tell the EU to pull their fingers out and end the uncertainty. Pressure from Merkel or Macron to stop fucking EU citizens about may have some affect on these psychos, probably not though, they seem very happy to use EU citizens as pawns in their games.



Yeah, I'm not really taking sides on this one.  Everyone is fucking with them for there own personal agenda.  That being said I do think the issue of EU citizens should have been established a long time ago and its something the UK government could and should have done.  They are the ones changing the rules the onus was really on them, the bollocks they offered up was pretty thin gruel.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If an EU citizen is married to a UK citizen, why are they worried?



Citizenship is a long way from automatic for people from other countries married to British citizens, they need to spend several years and thousands of pounds jumping through a lot of hoops, with no guarantee of success at the end of it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Citizenship is a long way from automatic for people from other countries married to British citizens, they need to spend several years and thousands of pounds jumping through a lot of hoops, with no guarantee of success at the end of it.



The UK has been looking for reciprocal arrangements with the EU, but...



Teaboy said:


> Yeah, I'm not really taking sides on this one.  Everyone is fucking with them for there own personal agenda.  That being said I do think the issue of EU citizens should have been established a long time ago and its something the UK government could and should have done.  They are the ones changing the rules the onus was really on them, the bollocks they offered up was pretty thin gruel.



I think it is becoming more and more clear that whatever the UK government offer it will be snubbed. This whole 'we can't talk about this until we have made enough progress on that' shit, but never accepting that enough progress has been made is what we were told they would do and is exactly what they are doing.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And Greece is now the land of milk & honey, yeah?



What's your point? 
My point was that greece rejected the EUs austerity with a threat to leave the union. The EU called their bluff and they had to crawl back and eat up their gruel. 
The UK is not in the same state as Greece economically and is not having to take ECB terms to stay solvent - but on the issue of trying to gain concessions in the event of leaving the union, the position is the same -as is the EUs response. 
Its Hotel California - Brussels style.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The UK has been looking for reciprocal arrangements with the EU, but...
> 
> 
> 
> I think it is becoming more and more clear that whatever the UK government offer it will be snubbed. This whole 'we can't talk about this until we have made enough progress on that' shit, but never accepting that enough progress has been made is what we were told they would do and is exactly what they are doing.



Yeah, my argument is this shouldn't have formed part of the negotiation.  They could have made a proper statement up front and said 'this is what is going to happen'.  It would have put them on the front foot from the word go, it was the UK government that's trying to tie everything into a trade agreement because they are so worried about the shit hand they hold.  I dunno, none of this is to assuage the EU technocrats of their deplorable behavior but this can't be right.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> What's your point?



Why on earth would the UK government accept your proposal, which seems to be 'suffer financially for a unknown period by leaving, or suffer financially forever by staying as the EU's bitch' ?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think it is becoming more and more clear that whatever the UK government offer it will be snubbed. This whole 'we can't talk about this until we have made enough progress on that' shit, but never accepting that enough progress has been made is what we were told they would do and is exactly what they are doing.



Yes. Id say that is exactly what is happening - and what many predicted would happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah, my argument is this shouldn't have formed part of the negotiation.  They could have made a proper statement up front and said 'this is what is going to happen'.  It would have put them on the front foot from the word go, it was the UK government that's trying to tie everything into a trade agreement because they are so worried about the shit hand they hold.  I dunno, none of this is to assuage the EU technocrats of their deplorable behavior but this can't be right.



The UK government has no choice but to tie it to a trade deal, they can hardly go back to the country and say that they have no trade deal but have gained a million Romanians. The EU know this too, which is why these so called negotiations are a sham and will fail.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you are married to a UK citizen and have been living in the UK there really will be no bar to staying in the UK and gaining UK citizenship.



That's entirely dependent on whether an agreement is reached and what it is. I have a friend who is American. I'm not sure how long she has been in the country, but I have known her a few years. In a few years time, she will be entitled to apply for citizenship. At the moment, though, she is in a minimum wage job or thereabouts and her British husband was unemployed until recently. The rules are that they are not entitled to claim any state support, so he couldn't sign on, claim housing benefit or anything else.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yes. Id say that is exactly what is happening - and what many predicted would happen.



Which is why many people wanted to be separated from the EU in the first place.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why on earth would the UK government accept your proposal, which seems to be 'suffer financially for a unknown period by leaving, or suffer financially forever by staying as the EU's bitch' ?



Its not my proposal. Im trying to work out what might happening. Im saying that a way for the UK to reverse brexit is what the Eu is pushing for - and that parts of the government may be coming to the conclusion that that is the least shit option. 
National humiliation and humble pie - yes. (Dont know where you get "suffer financially forever" by staying in?)  
The question is weather that's better or worse than crashing out and facing protracted recession and economic/political/social chaos.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> That's entirely dependent on whether an agreement is reached and what it is. I have a friend who is American. I'm not sure how long she has been in the country, but I have known her a few years. In a few years time, she will be entitled to apply for citizenship. At the moment, though, she is in a minimum wage job or thereabouts and her British husband was unemployed until recently. The rules are that they are not entitled to claim any state support, so he couldn't sign on, claim housing benefit or anything else.



I don't know of this rule that says a UK citizen can not claim any state support if they are married to a non-UK citizen.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don't know of this rule that says a UK citizen can not claim any state support if they are married to a non-UK citizen.



She must be making it up, then.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> There is currently nothing in place to say what their status will be after Brexit...



i think the blame for that one lies at the EU's doorstep - May made overtures to the EU within weeks of becoming PM about sorting out a reciprical status agreement - they gave her the long finger.

even now they've made it as difficult as possible - the situation appears to both sides have got to the point where aggreement has been reached on who can stay where, but bizaarely the EU has decided that its red line for this issue is that the arbetor for any UK-EU agreement will be the ECJ. the UK would not accept a reciprical status agreement with the US where the final arbetor was the US Supreme Court, so why would the EU even consider putting a red line around it?

they then, to make matters even less likely to be resolved, bundles the status issue in with the money. if you wanted to doom something to failure, thats how you'd do it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Which is why many people wanted to be separated from the EU in the first place.



hobsons choice innit? Power blocs look after their own interests shock. Britain not a world power anymore shock.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The UK government has no choice but to tie it to a trade deal, they can hardly go back to the country and say that they have no trade deal but have gained a million Romanians.



I don't accept that.  There could have been a graduated scheme of some description depending on how long you have been in the country. Those EU residents (nowhere near a million Romanians) are likely to stay anyway so why not put something in place? Certain sections of the electorate may not like it but that's the nature of divorce.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im saying that a way for the UK to reverse brexit is what the Eu is pushing for - and that parts of the government may be coming to the conclusion that that is the least shit option.



It is not going to happen.



> National humiliation and humble pie - yes. (Dont know where you get "suffer financially forever" by staying in?)
> The question is weather that's better or worse than crashing out and facing protracted recession and economic/political/social chaos.



After Greece had to climb down the EU didn't steam in with any kind of rescue package for them, things are worse than ever there now and they will be for generations to come. Millions of people punished in perpetuity as a great big warning not to fuck. Well, we have fucked and unless we want a dose of the same we need to go through and make the best of the shit hand we have.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i think the blame for that one lies at the EU's doorstep - May made overtures to the EU within weeks of becoming PM about sorting out a reciprical status agreement - they gave her the long finger.



Its something she could have done anyway, because it was the right thing to do. Remember it is the UK that has changed the rules therefore the onus is on them.  If the EU then set about stitching up UK citizens abroad then that's up to them, you can only control what you can do.  Let's face it though they won't - whats in it for them on this one issue?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don't know of this rule that says a UK citizen can not claim any state support if they are married to a non-UK citizen.



Doesn't sound too far-fetched, there are all kinds of rules on minimum income requirements etc. for British citizens trying to sponsor foreign spouses - to cut immigration numbers, the government has deliberately been making it as difficult as they can.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Doesn't sound too far-fetched, there are all kinds of rules on minimum income requirements etc. for British citizens trying to sponsor foreign spouses - to cut immigration numbers, the government has deliberately been making it as difficult as they can.



I'm aware of those rules, my very best mate Al is married to a Brazilian, Geo and that had a hard time as he was spuriously self-employed (mechanic, but like a Deliveroo contract type thing). But whilst this was going on their daughter went to school, they got housing benefit and child benefit, so am curious to hear that there is a rule that cuts you off from all state support the moment you say I do to a non-UK citizen.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is not going to happen.
> 
> 
> 
> After Greece had to climb down the EU didn't steam in with any kind of rescue package for them, things are worse than ever there now and they will be for generations to come. Millions of people punished in perpetuity as a great big warning not to fuck. Well, we have fucked and unless we want a dose of the same we need to go through and make the best of the shit hand we have.



But the Uk is not asking for rescue package. How - and why - would the EU punish the UK financially? The best outcome for them is the UK humiliated but still a major power within the EU bloc - and Id say there is a decent chance of that happening.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you are married to a UK citizen and have been living in the UK there really will be no bar to staying in the UK and gaining UK citizenship. If they are worried though they really should be lobbying hard the leaders of their nation states to get them to tell the EU to pull their fingers out and end the uncertainty. Pressure from Merkel or Macron to stop fucking EU citizens about may have some affect on these psychos, probably not though, they seem very happy to use EU citizens as pawns in their games.



Unless the end situation treats EU spouses like spouses from elsewhere. Then there's an income requirement - and the income has to be earned by the British spouse and earned every year (a high-earning Japanese man was deported because his British wife was on maternity leave) - and the paperwork and applications cost thousands, which people with EU spouses won't have planned for - and there are usually restrictions on the non-uk partner's rights to work, claim benefits or travel out of the country. Apart from all that I guess they have nothing about though. Except fuck ups causing detention and deportation even if you do meet all those requirements.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> How - and why - would the EU punish the UK financially?



Loss of rebate, increased payments, fewer subsidies; to put the boot in and make sure no one else dares step out of line again.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Its something she could have done anyway, because it was the right thing to do. Remember it is the UK that has changed the rules therefore the onus is on them.  If the EU then set about stitching up UK citizens abroad then that's up to them, you can only control what you can do.  Let's face it though they won't - whats in it for them on this one issue?



if May - or Corbyn - had unilaterally provided future security of status for EU citizens currently in the UK, they would have removed, at a stroke, the future security of status of UK citizens living in the EU. which _doesn't_ sound like the right thing to do to me...

at the time there was lots of ho-ha about how such a move would be immediately recprocated, about how it would set the tone of the negotiations - sadly, have you seen anything in the conduct of the negotiations which suggests that 'play nice' was the EU's Plan A?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Unless the end situation treats EU spouses like spouses from elsewhere. Then there's an income requirement - and the income has to be earned by the British spouse and earned every year (a high-earning Japanese man was deported because his British wife was on maternity leave) - and the paperwork and applications cost thousands, which people with EU spouses won't have planned for - and there are usually restrictions on the non-uk partner's rights to work, claim benefits or travel out of the country. Apart from all that I guess they have nothing about though. Except fuck ups causing detention and deportation even if you do meet all those requirements.



So you would think it is within the mandate of the EU to ensure that this doesn't happen, yet any overtures from the UK government to resolve the issue have been rebuffed and will continue to be rebuffed until March 2019.


----------



## agricola (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> if May - or Corbyn - had unilaterally provided future security of status for EU citizens currently in the UK, they would have removed, at a stroke, the future security of status of UK citizens living in the EU. which _doesn't_ sound like the right thing to do to me...
> 
> at the time there was lots of ho-ha about how such a move would be immediately recprocated, about how it would set the tone of the negotiations - sadly, have you seen anything in the conduct of the negotiations which suggests that 'play nice' was the EU's Plan A?



Making unilateral provision would be daft - but she (or Corbs) could easily have just openly said that our intention was that all EU citizens currently in the UK (and UK citizens currently in the EU) should be free to remain under the same terms as before and then challenged the EU not to accept it.  As was said above, we were told how they would negotiate.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don't know of this rule that says a UK citizen can not claim any state support if they are married to a non-UK citizen.



The unemployed Brit wouldn't have been eligible for benefits due to his wife's income and the wife wouldn't have been eligible for benefits at all. They might have been eligible for housing benefit on a discretionary basis but councils aren't generous with that these days because they've been cut to the bone already.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Loss of rebate, increased payments, fewer subsidies; to put the boot in and make sure no one else dares step out of line again.



Its possible but - it ignores the fact that the UK has a few cards to play that greece doesn't - much bigger economy and trading zone, usefully large military, certain amount of international influence (security council member), lots of mutually beneficial arrangements in lots of areas like finance, academia, research, manufacturing. I would say its more in their interests to make britains re-entry more or less painless other than punctured pride.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So you would think it is within the mandate of the EU to ensure that this doesn't happen, yet any overtures from the UK government to resolve the issue have been rebuffed and will continue to be rebuffed until March 2019.



What overtures have there been? And why overtures rather than properly laid out plans? 

It's not simple for the EU here either - they have to get 27 countries to agree to a decision made by one country. 

Do you admit now that EU citizens have cause to be worried even if they're married to a Brit?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> bizaarely the EU has decided that its red line for this issue is that the arbetor for any UK-EU agreement will be the ECJ. the UK would not accept a reciprical status agreement with the US where the final arbetor was the US Supreme Court, so why would the EU even consider putting a red line around it?



We have all kinds of reciprocal agreements with the US where the USSC is the final arbiter. What do you think happens in contentious extradition cases, for example?

The EU is not exactly bending over backwards. But I don't see how it is bizarre that they would want an immigration agreement to be subject to EU law. From their perspective, HMG cannot be trusted to enter into an agreement - on immigration of all issues - and not later seek to use its power as a legislator to breach the agreement. They need a legal recourse in that eventuality. They may not be right about everything all of the time, but they are right about that.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> if May - or Corbyn - had unilaterally provided future security of status for EU citizens currently in the UK, they would have removed, at a stroke, the future security of status of UK citizens living in the EU. which _doesn't_ sound like the right thing to do to me...



It does to me.  You take the lead in negotiations, you actually lead them - show the way.  Why would UK citizens be kicked out of EU countries?  What's in it for the countries?*  

There seems to me to be an inherent contradiction here.  On one hand we're blithely saying that everything will be OK for EU citizens come Brexit and they have no need to worry on the other hand we're saying that we can't take the lead on this because something bad may happen to UK citizens abroad.  Strikes me as an odd stance.

My position is that it's clearly game playing by a bunch of cunts.  Something will clearly be done which sorts this one part out amicably so why not have already done it. As the instigator the UK government could have sorted this and it would have set a better tone than the macho bollocks that has failed miserably, by tying it into the negotiations it basically gave the game away that the hand is weak.


*Obviously the Iberian Peninsula will want to be shot of Stan


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> We have all kinds of reciprocal agreements with the US where the USSC is the final arbiter. What do you think happens in contentious extradition cases, for example?



you mean like like the ones where the UK government says 'no' and the US says, 'oh, ok...'


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> you mean like like the ones where the UK government says 'no' and the US says, 'oh, ok...'



The UK courts, normally. But yes. And vice versa. Which is precisely the point. They don't want an agreement where the UK can suddenly just say "no", and there's nothing they can do. Why would you expect them to?


----------



## Winot (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So you would think it is within the mandate of the EU to ensure that this doesn't happen, yet any overtures from the UK government to resolve the issue have been rebuffed and will continue to be rebuffed until March 2019.



The EU set out its position on citizens' rights on 12 June 2017 (pdf)

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sit...essential-principles-citizens-rights_en_0.pdf



> The Withdrawal Agreement should protect the rights of EU27 citizens, UK nationals and their family members who, at the date of entry into force of the Withdrawal Agreement, have enjoyed rights relating to free movement under Union law, as well as rights which are in the process of being obtained and the rights the enjoyment of which will intervene at a later date [for example pension rights].


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

scifisam said:


> The unemployed Brit wouldn't have been eligible for benefits due to his wife's income and the wife wouldn't have been eligible for benefits at all. They might have been eligible for housing benefit on a discretionary basis but councils aren't generous with that these days because they've been cut to the bone already.



They said the wife was on minimum wage, that would not stop him from getting benefits. 



scifisam said:


> Do you admit now that EU citizens have cause to be worried even if they're married to a Brit?



I think they should be concerned, which is why I have already said, they should be voicing their concerns to the nation-heads.


----------



## Winot (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think they should be concerned, which is why I have already said, they should be voicing their concerns to the nation-heads.



That's not how the process works.

1. The nation heads have agreed a position and instructed Barnier to negotiate within the agreed terms.
2. Barnier has no power to change those terms. 
3. The UK has agreed to the procedure (i.e. the sequencing order of sorting out citizens' rights, the money and the NI border before trade talks).

The link I posted above shows that the EU wants full rights for EU citizens (UK and rEU) post Brexit. The UK won't agree to it though because it wants to be able to expel dirty foreigners to placate the Daily Mail.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Winot said:


> The EU set out its position on citizens' rights on 12 June 2017 (pdf)
> 
> https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sit...essential-principles-citizens-rights_en_0.pdf



Yep, purposely laid down as unacceptable; ECJ supremacy and unlimited immigration from even non EU27 countries.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 12, 2017)

The UK wants (needs) dirty forreners, but only ones that work in the black economy and are invisible in official figures


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2017)

Winot said:


> The UK won't agree to it though because it wants to be able to expel dirty foreigners to placate the Daily Mail.



Racist proles being racist and proley.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 12, 2017)

I want to change my vote.  I no longer think that a fudge will be done to keep us in the EU.  That was a bit of denial on my part, which I'm over now.  I think we're charging full steam ahead.  I don't see any mechanism in place that could stop it.


----------



## Winot (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yep, purposely laid down as unacceptable; ECJ supremacy and unlimited immigration from even non EU27 countries.



That pesky EU eh? Curse it for forcing us into this position


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 12, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I want to change my vote.



Trying to frustrate the will of the people, eh?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 12, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I want to change my vote.  I no longer think that a fudge will be done to keep us in the EU.  That was a bit of denial on my part, which I'm over now.  I think we're charging full steam ahead.  I don't see any mechanism in place that could stop it.


 
I didn't get involved in the brexit discussions on here really, as I abandoned any residual principles I held for rational pragmatism - pointless me contributing in the heat of the debate. I genuinely fear the worst of all scenarios now .I just cannot see anything good coming out of this in the next decade or so for the vast majority of the populace, however I view it


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They said the wife was on minimum wage, that would not stop him from getting benefits.
> 
> 
> 
> I think they should be concerned, which is why I have already said, they should be voicing their concerns to the nation-heads.



Yes it would. Your partner has to be earning very little for you to be denied benefits. If they work more than 24 hours per week you don't get JSA. 

If his wife were a British, Irish or (atm) EU citizen they could claim HB on the grounds of low income and possibly claim universal credit as a couple, but not if the American wife has a spousal visa barring her from claiming benefits, because she would have to be on the claim. So they really would get nothing. 

(If he'd paid enough NI then he'd be eligible for six months regardless of her income, but a lot of self employed people don't bother with paying that and after six months you lose it anyway).


----------



## doodlelogic (Oct 12, 2017)

Arbitral courts exist for lots of treaties - TTIP for example.

But the ECJ is a bit better than many of them because its judgements are public and binding on future cases in national courts and it is relatively accessible to the public. Many of the cases before the ECJ are brought by individuals or small businesses, where the international treaties normally involve such huge costs only multinationals can use them. Also you can rely on your EC rights in a British court, which you might not be able to do with rights under a multilateral treaty (even as I understand it the Norwegian EFTA court model).

Then there is the whole misunderstanding between the Luxembourg court and the Strasbourg human rights court (which has nothing to do with the EU).  Suspect after whatever Brexit we have there will be lots of tabloid stories about 'Europe' still controlling us (we practically wrote the Convention on Human Rights and it does a lot of good in places like Russia keeping organisations like Memorial somewhat safe from Putin's goons).


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I want to change my vote.  I no longer think that a fudge will be done to keep us in the EU.  That was a bit of denial on my part, which I'm over now.  I think we're charging full steam ahead.  I don't see any mechanism in place that could stop it.



Yes and increasingly it looks like the crash out option.  I'm just trying to work out what that'll actually mean though, in real terms.  Instinctively I think it would be an almighty mess, certainly initially.  I honestly don't know but my gut tells me it may work out for the best in the medium to long term but I think in the short term (for us lot essentially) it'll fuck us.  I can't really back that up with anything though.

Anyway I'm still backing London to break away, its all the fashion these days.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 12, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I want to change my vote.  I no longer think that a fudge will be done to keep us in the EU.  That was a bit of denial on my part, which I'm over now.  I think we're charging full steam ahead.  I don't see any mechanism in place that could stop it.


May may very well not be in place much longer, so who knows what the Tory line will be after her? And then who knows how long that person will be in place? I think there's still a huge amount of uncertainty.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes and increasingly it looks like the crash out option.  I'm just trying to work out what that'll actually mean though, in real terms.  Instinctively I think it would be an almighty mess, certainly initially.  I honestly don't know but my gut tells me it may work out for the best in the medium to long term but I think in the short term (for us lot essentially) it'll fuck us.  I can't really back that up with anything though.
> 
> Anyway I'm still backing London to break away, its all the fashion these days.


What is the mechanism by which fucking things up short-term leads to a good medium- to long-term outcome? I don't see it. If you want a good medium- to long-term outcome, the best springboard for that is a good short-term outcome.


----------



## Winot (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Yes and increasingly it looks like the crash out option.  I'm just trying to work out what that'll actually mean though, in real terms.  Instinctively I think it would be an almighty mess, certainly initially.



At some point fairly soon, the likes of British Airways are going to be putting *a lot* of pressure on the government to sort out the Open Skies agreement (for example) to ensure that planes can fly to rEU.

The optimist in me can't see that the Tories (natural party of the free market and big business) will take the suicidal route of a no deal Brexit. I think we'll have the transitional (sorry - implementation) period promised in the Florence speech to kick the can down the road.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What is the mechanism by which fucking things up short-term leads to a good medium- to long-term outcome? I don't see it. If you want a good medium- to long-term outcome, the best springboard for that is a good short-term outcome.



Sure ideally, but that option doesn't appear to be on offer. 

I'm being blindly optimistic, but if I gaze into my crystal ball again I can see the writing on the wall for the EU in many aspects.  Should that come to pass the UK will be well ahead of the game when the shit hits the fan.

Is there a trade of for guaranteeing short term stability?  Is that a long term positive?


----------



## gosub (Oct 12, 2017)

Winot said:


> At some point fairly soon, the likes of British Airways are going to be putting *a lot* of pressure on the government to sort out the Open Skies agreement (for example) to ensure that planes can fly to rEU.
> 
> The optimist in me can't see that the Tories (natural party of the free market and big business) will take the suicidal route of a no deal Brexit. I think we'll have the transitional (sorry - implementation) period promised in the Florence speech to kick the can down the road.



Flying to rEU won't be the problem.  (took me a little while to track down what Hammond was talking about) the ANO is still in place and reissuing AOCs under it will be a piece of piss given the gold plating EASA  added to it.   Problem will be CABOTAGE - the flying done once inside rEU to secondary destinations.   

That underlies where the real difficulty lies, dramatic but superficial difficulties grab the imagination and the headlines, whilst the the real devil in the detail gets washed over.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Sure ideally, but that option doesn't appear to be on offer.
> 
> I'm being blindly optimistic, but if I gaze into my crystal ball again I can see the writing on the wall for the EU in many aspects.  Should that come to pass the UK will be well ahead of the game when the shit hits the fan.
> 
> Is there a trade of for guaranteeing short term stability?  Is that a long term positive?



i dont see this. It has problems - but the mutually beneficial nature of free movement and free trade between the major european nations are too great. Anti-EU sentiment in france, germany, spain, italy and the benelux countries has flared up to an extent - but nothing like the level seen here - and its very much tied to resentment to austerity - and immigration.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> its very much tied to resentment to austerity - and immigration.



But not to intra-EU immigration.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I have six close friends from school days (a long time ago).  Three of them have partners who are from EU countries, two of which are married with children.  All this cavalier talk of no deal is very worrying for them to say the least.  Its all very well saying something will be done, but nothing has happened yet and this shit show is horrible for them.


What are they actually worried about?
I'm in that bracket (Mrs & Offspring are Eu) and I really haven't lost a minutes sleep over it.

eta: forget that...  i see you've answered mr Bahnhof who asked virtually the same question on the next page


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

Winot said:


> The optimist in me can't see that the Tories (natural party of the free market and big business) will take the suicidal route of a no deal Brexit. I think we'll have the transitional (sorry - implementation) period promised in the Florence speech to kick the can down the road.



AFAICT...

If you reach the deadline and you have a deal, you get a transition in order to adjust and prepare.

If you reach the deadline and you have no deal, but you do have ongoing talks and the prospect of getting a deal, you get an Article 50 extension.

But the question that can probably only be answered once we get there is whether you get anything at all simply in order to kick the can down the road. My instinct is don't count on it.


----------



## gosub (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> AFAICT...
> 
> If you reach the deadline and you have a deal, you get a transition in order to adjust and prepare.
> 
> ...


 The EC meeting this month will come and go without agreement. But we'll know by Xmas


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

We're currently spectators to a pantomime anyway. The correct response to May saying she's preparing for no deal is "Oh no you're not!", rather than "Oh shit that's that then."


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> We're currently spectators to a pantomime anyway. The correct response to May saying she's preparing for no deal is "Oh no you're not!"



no, its not.

the government, or bits of it, _are_ preparing for the crashing out scenario. a much more interesting question would be whether, even if you had an unlimited budget, unlimited people, and unlimited political cover, could you do all the work neccessary to make the crash-out pretty ordered in the space of 5 years, let alone 18 months?

without wishing to give the government, the tories or the brexiteers a free pass, the whole A50 process was designed from the first time pen went to paper to be as difficult for the leaving country as possible. it was designed to fail - it shouldn't put anyone on their arse when it does....


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> no, its not.
> 
> the government, or bits of it, _are_ preparing for the crashing out scenario.



That's just not true. There is undoubtedly a lot of report writing going on. But, at this distance, preparing would mean things like setting up shadow regulatory bodies, mass recruitment of border staff, emergency budgeting and so on. I'm not saying by any means that it can't possibly happen, but the government is not making any preparations yet, which means it is not yet expecting it to happen.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> That's just not true. There is undoubtedly a lot of report writing going on. But, at this distance, preparing would mean things like setting up shadow regulatory bodies, mass recruitment of border staff, emergency budgeting and so on. I'm not saying my any means that it can't possibly happen, but the government is not making any preparations yet, which means it is not expecting it to happen.


and as i posted weeks ago requests from civil servants for money to do certain such things are supposedly being actively rejected by departments. Seems that theres very little activity going on behind the scenes considering the potential bureaucratic iceberg on the horizon


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> What are they actually worried about?
> I'm in that bracket (Mrs & Offspring are Eu) and I really haven't lost a minutes sleep over it.



What's that line from that Kipling poem?  "If you can keep your head when all around you are losing theirs.........."*


*You've probably misjudged the situation.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 12, 2017)

I do know a bit about transport. Before '93 when everything from EU had to be customs cleared. Trucks had to either park up at dock after leaving ferry & wait approx 2-4hrs for customs clearance or they got road clearance to drive to an inland clearance depot(ICD). Clearance could take all day if there was a paperwork problem or customs decided to turn out trailer & inspect load. Each load had T forms an inch thick. Each port had a large team of customs men for cargo clearance. There are none at all now.

In those days there was much less driver accompanied. That is trailers coming in behind foreign reg trucks. Many trailers were dropped at the foreign ports, shipped unaccompanied & picked up by UK reg tractor units from local transport companies. This worked well enough because trailers shipped in on the morning ferry could be customs cleared & be ready for collection late afternoon by UK truck artic units who would drop of their loaded export trailer at same time.

If everything coming in from Europe after Mar '19 has to be customs cleared the following will be required...

Several 100 new customs officer jobs at Dover to do road clearance for arriving trucks 24/7. There is not much parking space at Dover docks so it would be essential that all trucks were road cleared quickly to go to ICDs in other parts of UK.

Other roro ports Portsmouth, Harwich, Teeside etc have the parking space to handle unaccompanied trailers. 1000s more dock staff & customs staff would have to be recruited & trained. Also many more UK based 44tonne truck drivers would be needed & there is a great shortage of these in the UK with many eastern european EU nationals working for UK transport companies. Obviously new IT sytems would need to be developed. Very large wharehouses with parking for 100s of trucks would be needed around the country for ICDs. All this ready to go on March '19. Worth pointing out that huge amounts of fruit, veg & meat for UK supermarkets are imported from EU on a daily basis 24/7.

So on a positive note many 1000s of reasonably well paid jobs often in low wage areas could be created.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 12, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> What's that line from that Kipling poem?  "If you can keep your head when all around you are losing theirs.........."*
> 
> 
> *You've probably misjudged the situation.


Maybe I am a bit naive, but my general attitude is that I don't want to live anywhere that doesn't want to have me or my family. If neither the UK nor the Eu want any members of our family, then we'll have to fuck off elsewhere.
...and it's not about misjudging the situation. We have a large ex-pat circle of friends in the same boat and most are fairly relaxed about it. The usual suspects get in a tizzy about everything. If it ain't Trump and Kim jung lI causing a nuclear war, Europe's imminent financial implosion, Fukushima, Refugees, Chinese cheap labour, ebola... then its fucking Brexit.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> What are they actually worried about?
> I'm in that bracket (Mrs & Offspring are Eu) and I really haven't lost a minutes sleep over it.
> 
> eta: forget that...  i see you've answered mr Bahnhof who asked virtually the same question on the next page



I think most people are worried that they're going to be treated like an immigrant from outside the EU - which shows how poorly those immigrants are treated, really - and that makes a difference when it comes to work, benefits, voting, student fees, etc etc. A couple of friends who have council flats are worried they'll lose them. The difference could be enormous. I wouldn't advocate worrying because it's futile (though understandable) but it is also naive to assume everything will be OK.


----------



## Winot (Oct 12, 2017)

Raheem said:


> AFAICT...
> 
> If you reach the deadline and you have a deal, you get a transition in order to adjust and prepare.
> 
> ...



We need the approval of the European Council to extend the 2 year period or we crash out:




			
				Article 50 said:
			
		

> The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.



Article 50

I'm not counting on it, but think it's the most likely outcome.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

Winot said:


> We need the approval of the European Council to extend the 2 year period or we crash out:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But the question is whether the EU27 will unanimously agree that delaying the inevitable is a good enough reason to grant an extension.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 12, 2017)

Or, we revoke.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

scifisam said:


> I think most people are worried that they're going to be treated like an immigrant from outside the EU - which shows how poorly those immigrants are treated, really - and that makes a difference when it comes to work, benefits, voting, student fees, etc etc. A couple of friends who have council flats are worried they'll lose them. The difference could be enormous. I wouldn't advocate worrying because it's futile (though understandable) but it is also naive to assume everything will be OK.



conversely, while i don't discount the idea that their might be a bit of red meat thrown to the Daily Heil in order to shore up whoever happens to be PM in 2019, you also should remember that we'll be in a 'tit-for-tat' relationship with the EU - what the UK does, they'll respond to.

now, this is where the reasuring bit is - EU people living in the UK overwhelmingly either contribute or cost very little. UK migrants in the EU however _tend_ to be retired, so they contribute not much and are expensive for the host country (insert joke about our favourite Iberian itinerant here). so, if the UK makes life hard and people go back to the EU, the EU will respond, and we'll have boat loads of pension -grabbing, A&E clogging coffin-dodgers being unloaded at Dover.

which, i promise you, is not not what any government of any flavour wants.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Maybe I am a bit naive, but my general attitude is that I don't want to live anywhere that doesn't want to have me or my family. If neither the UK nor the Eu want any members of our family, then we'll have to fuck off elsewhere.
> ...and it's not about misjudging the situation. We have a large ex-pat circle of friends in the same boat and most are fairly relaxed about it. The usual suspects get in a tizzy about everything. If it ain't Trump and Kim jung lI causing a nuclear war, Europe's imminent financial implosion, Fukushima, Refugees, Chinese cheap labour, ebola... then its fucking Brexit.




Yeah, I wasn't suggesting you've misjudged the situation it was just an old joke about that poem which seemed apposite. FWIW I think you have exactly the right attitude but I can see why others in the same boat would be worried.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 12, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Or, we revoke.



which is abut as likely as Michelle Obama sexting Donald Trump.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> conversely, while i don't discount the idea that their might be a bit of red meat thrown to the Daily Heil in order to shore up whoever happens to be PM in 2019, you also should remember that we'll be in a 'tit-for-tat' relationship with the EU - what the UK does, they'll respond to.
> 
> now, this is where the reasuring bit is - EU people living in the UK overwhelmingly either contribute or cost very little. UK migrants in the EU however _tend_ to be retired, so they contribute not much and are expensive for the host country (insert joke about our favourite Iberian itinerant here). so, if the UK makes life hard and people go back to the EU, the EU will respond, and we'll have boat loads of pension -grabbing, A&E clogging coffin-dodgers being unloaded at Dover.
> 
> which, i promise you, is not not what any government of any flavour wants.



I wonder how many of these ex-pats actually intend to live out their remainder abroad.  I have no data to back this up but I would have a guess that many do / will retreat to the arms of the NHS (and in the process be closer to their families) as soon as they are in the situation where regular medical intervention and care is required.  They're all drawing pensions already anyway.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> conversely, while i don't discount the idea that their might be a bit of red meat thrown to the Daily Heil in order to shore up whoever happens to be PM in 2019, you also should remember that we'll be in a 'tit-for-tat' relationship with the EU - what the UK does, they'll respond to.
> 
> now, this is where the reasuring bit is - EU people living in the UK overwhelmingly either contribute or cost very little. UK migrants in the EU however _tend_ to be retired, so they contribute not much and are expensive for the host country (insert joke about our favourite Iberian itinerant here). so, if the UK makes life hard and people go back to the EU, the EU will respond, and we'll have boat loads of pension -grabbing, A&E clogging coffin-dodgers being unloaded at Dover.
> 
> which, i promise you, is not not what any government of any flavour wants.



That is all sensible, but the problem is that this government isn't. They are so utterly incompetent that I could see them actually doing something as stupid as stranding a million British pensioners in the EU.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 12, 2017)

kebabking said:


> which is abut as likely as Michelle Obama sexting Donald Trump.



A formal A50 extension requires the E27 to play ball. Revocation is the unilateral declaration of extension, a buccaneering move in the grand tradition of Drake and Hawkins, a swaggering play in the great game of negotiations, leaving the EU with a baffling choice of throwing us out or reopening negotiations on new terms. That's all anyone needs to tell the Telegraph, anyway. And the element of truth in that story makes it a solid possibility.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

thing is  - as we approach a hard brexit, if we see investment pull out, companies relocate and the pound's value collapse - then the pressure on the government to pull back from the cliff edge is going to become more and more intense. Will the media start screaming "jump" or "stop! you lunatics!"?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 12, 2017)

Where will the pressure come from though? The moderate Tories & Blairite Labour MPs seem quiet. The baying rabid Tory brexiteers are smelling the blood of a no deal & will probably be pushing to walk away in December & commit the funds required for hard brexit preparation. The left wing Corbyn led Labour are not EU fans at all so may just let it happen in order to benefit from the chaos. They will have loads of ammo to throw at the Tories but I reckon they will be shouting loudest about the neglected domestic issues housing etc less so about the failing brexit. They will be hoping for the Tory Government to collapse in chaos at some point with a majority proper left wing Labour government elected at next GE.

This what urban has always wanted surely? Yes?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> thing is  - as we approach a hard brexit, if we see investment pull out, companies relocate and the pound's value collapse - then the pressure on the government to pull back from the cliff edge is going to become more and more intense. Will the media start screaming "jump" or "stop! you lunatics!"?


Not sure companies will want to rerelocate


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> companies relocate and the pound's value collapse -


I would have thought these two things cancel each other out.
Doesn't currency speculation mean that if the pound dips, orders for UK goods and services rise (as  happened immediately after the referendum &  A50 trigger)?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Where will the pressure come from though? The moderate Tories & Blairite Labour MPs seem quiet. The baying rabid Tory brexiteers are smelling the blood of a no deal & will probably be pushing to walk away in December & commit the funds required for hard brexit preparation. The left wing Corbyn led Labour are not EU fans at all so may just let it happen in order to benefit from the chaos. They will have loads of ammo to throw at the Tories but I reckon they will be shouting loudest about the neglected domestic issues housing etc less so about the failing brexit. They will be hoping for the Tory Government to collapse in chaos at some point with a majority proper left wing Labour government elected at next GE.
> 
> This what urban has always wanted surely? Yes?



from the majority of mps who are anti-hard brexit, from the CBI, the city of london, the divolved parliaments, house of lords, the media, academia, the civil service, from a collapse in investment and in the value of the pound. Crashing out will cause all sorts of myriad types of chaos.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I would have thought these two things cancel each other out.
> Doesn't currency speculation mean that if the pound dips, orders for UK goods and services rise (as  happened immediately after the referendum &  A50 trigger)?



they will want because of the likely chaos, because of the status of their non-uk staff, because they wont be able to do tariff free business with the EU and because of the uncertainty. It could well become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even the brexiters now freely admit a "no deal" scenario is going to cause acute disruption. I dont believe that the UK government is going to let "no deal" happen - and their noticeable lack of preparation for that scenario suggest the same. And a weak pound may help some exports - but not the stuff that is dependant on importing more expensive goods and services from the EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 12, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> they will want because of the likely chaos, because of the status of their non-uk staff, because they wont be able to do tariff free business with the EU and because of the uncertainty. It could well become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even the brexiters now freely admit a "no deal" scenario is going to cause acute disruption. I dont believe that the UK government is going to let "no deal" happen - and their noticeable lack of preparation for that scenario suggest the same. And a weak pound may help some exports - but not the stuff that is dependant on importing more expensive goods and services from the EU.


That all sounds very pessimistic. If you're going to speculate about "likely chaos" due to the effects of trade tariffs then the weakening effects on the Euro also apply. Add the fact that the Eu will be losing a net contributor & a vital export market, a dip in the Euro value would mean those Eu goods and services will be more affordable. Again, the arguments cancel themselves out.
Even if the Eu increases their import tariffs out of spite (and in all likelihood they will - coz that's the way they seem to be rolling) then UK businesses can always buy elsewhere.
Ex-pat citizens rights or trade don't need to be the the big problem they're becoming. The Brexit vote was a slap in the face for the Eu, and now, being the vindictive bunch they are, the Eu wants their chance to have a slap back.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That all sounds very pessimistic. If you're going to speculate about "likely chaos" due to the effects of trade tariffs then the weakening effects on the Euro also apply. Add the fact that the Eu will be losing a net contributor & a vital export market, a dip in the Euro value would mean those Eu goods and services will be more affordable. Again, the arguments cancel themselves out.
> Even if the Eu increases their import tariffs out of spite (and in all likelihood they will - coz that's the way they seem to be rolling) then UK businesses can always buy elsewhere.
> Ex-pat citizens rights or trade don't need to be the the big problem they're becoming. The Brexit vote was a slap in the face for the Eu, and now, being the vindictive bunch they are, the Eu wants their chance to have a slap back.



just going on what everybody - including leading brexiters are saying about the effects of no deal - which is chaos, disruption, recession and people lives being fucked.


----------



## binka (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Doesn't currency speculation mean that if the pound dips, orders for UK goods and services rise (as  happened immediately after the referendum &  A50 trigger)?


I don't know quite how much that will happen though. If a company in the UK exports to Europe and sells their products in Euros then if sterling falls they could reduce the Euro price to increase competitiveness and increase sales, however they may choose to just keep the Euro price the same and bank the difference as extra profit.

They may see this as the safer option because if sales increase too much they would likely have to invest to grow the capacity to produce which would have a lot of risks especially as no one seems to know whats going to happen next


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That all sounds very pessimistic. If you're going to speculate about "likely chaos" due to the effects of trade tariffs then the weakening effects on the Euro also apply. Add the fact that the Eu will be losing a net contributor & a vital export market, a dip in the Euro value would mean those Eu goods and services will be more affordable. Again, the arguments cancel themselves out.



The arguments only cancel each other out if we are talking about equal and opposite effects. But the EU27 is a much bigger market than the UK, so the effects won't be the same size both sides of the mirror.



> Even if the Eu increases their import tariffs out of spite (and in all likelihood they will - coz that's the way they seem to be rolling) then UK businesses can always buy elsewhere.



If we have no deal, the EU's tariffs are the EU's tariffs. WTO rules won't allow them to provide us with higher or lower import tariffs than they set generally. UK businesses can look elsewhere to sell, sure. But it won't be possible to find cheaper tariffs than they currently get by trading with the EU. So, they will be down on the deal. When they buy from other countries, the tariff will always be the same - whatever is set by the UK government. Again, that's WTO rules.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 13, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Or, we revoke.



you mean as in say 'oops, we've changed our minds, we'd like to stay in please'?

wouldn't this require the agreement of the 27 EU states?  (i thought i'd read something to that effect but it may have been balls)

would they all say 'ok, forget it', or would some at least be inclined to say 'piss off'?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 13, 2017)

Looking at where we are now it does look quite an attractive proposition to just stop all this idiocy & just go back to running the country like before. Not quite that simple though. Supposing the vote had been for remain or Cameron had not been rash enough to call a referendum in the first place? Presumably then Cameron/Osborne would still be running things & austerity would be getting worse as they pretended the economy was booming with shit min wage jobs?

What all this has brought on is the possibility of a proper left wing Labour government. I find it suprising that something I have wanted since my teens in the 1970s may now come to pass. Urban is a left wing forum but oddly I'm seeing very little enthusiasm for what should be an exciting prospect.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> you mean as in say 'oops, we've changed our minds, we'd like to stay in please'?
> 
> wouldn't this require the agreement of the 27 EU states?  (i thought i'd read something to that effect but it may have been balls)
> 
> would they all say 'ok, forget it', or would some at least be inclined to say 'piss off'?



You're right; I think that Verhofstadt said that a retraction would require agreement. And others have said that it it is irrevocable. 

But the government is not denying that they are sitting on legal advice to the contrary. The author of the treaty is firmly of the opinion that it is revocable. Fundamentally, it's a black box until the ECJ is asked to rule.

And the circumstances in which the ECJ is asked to rule would be ones in which one of the E27 is asking that the UK be expelled, rather than the revocation be accepted. That would be quite a large political ask.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2017)

binka said:


> I don't know quite how much that will happen though. If a company in the UK exports to Europe and sells their products in Euros then if sterling falls they could reduce the Euro price to increase competitiveness and increase sales, however they may choose to just keep the Euro price the same and bank the difference as extra profit.
> 
> They may see this as the safer option because if sales increase too much they would likely have to invest to grow the capacity to produce which would have a lot of risks especially as no one seems to know whats going to happen next



Businesses won’t want to increase sales in the event of no deal?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2017)

Raheem said:


> The arguments only cancel each other out if we are talking about equal and opposite effects. But the EU27 is a much bigger market than the UK, so the effects won't be the same size both sides of the mirror.
> 
> 
> 
> If we have no deal, the EU's tariffs are the EU's tariffs. WTO rules won't allow them to provide us with higher or lower import tariffs than they set generally. UK businesses can look elsewhere to sell, sure. But it won't be possible to find cheaper tariffs than they currently get by trading with the EU. So, they will be down on the deal. When they buy from other countries, the tariff will always be the same - whatever is set by the UK government. Again, that's WTO rules.




Where on earth are you getting this nonsense from?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Where on earth are you getting this nonsense from?


 
That's my understanding of the WTO rules too. You can't show preference to another WTO nation unless you are trading with them outside of WTO frameworks. With all the conclusions Raheem suggests.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That's my understanding of the WTO rules too. You can't show preference to another WTO nation unless you are trading with them outside of WTO frameworks. With all the conclusions Raheem suggests.



You understand wrong then.


----------



## Winot (Oct 13, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You understand wrong then.



WTO | Understanding the WTO - principles of the trading system

On phone so can’t quote properly but see bottom of page here. 

What’s your understanding?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2017)

Winot said:


> What’s your understanding?



That anything is possible in a positive direction, negative direction is limited.

Also on phone, on way to meet a potential new client, so will expand later maybe.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 13, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> thing is  - as we approach a hard brexit, if we see investment pull out, companies relocate and the pound's value collapse - then the pressure on the government to pull back from the cliff edge is going to become more and more intense. Will the media start screaming "jump" or "stop! you lunatics!"?


It’s too late, companies are already relocating.  They can’t afford to wait and see what happens in 2019, they need to have ensured a seamless transition and that means enacting contingency plans now.  Every insurer I know based on London is already setting up an EU company and transferring it’s EU business to be run out of that company.  It’s happening. It’s happened.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It’s too late, companies are already relocating.  They can’t afford to wait and see what happens in 2019, they need to have ensured a seamless transition and that means enacting contingency plans now.  Every insurer I know based on London is already setting up an EU company and transferring it’s EU business to be run out of that company.  It’s happening. It’s happened.



Do you have any view on how easy those programmes would be to reverse, assuming EEA/EFTA with passporting, or status quo?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 13, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Do you have any view on how easy those programmes would be to reverse, assuming EEA/EFTA with passporting, or status quo?


Sunk cost fallacy combined with long term antipathy to the UK regulator means that I’m not sure that they would actually want to be reversed, but yes — it’s easily doable as we speak for most firms.  Right now it is more easy to reverse it than carry on for most. At some point in early 2018, however, the tipping point will be reached.  The legal work will have been done, capital will have been shifted and it reversing it will be a matter of repeating the whole process again in reverse, which there will be no appetite for.

The irony is that it’s not even necessarily a case of going to jurisdictions of lower tax or lower worker rights.  Lloyd’s and Amlin are going to Belgium.  One of the biggest players, Chubb, is even moving it’s EU business to France, which has 10% higher corporation tax than London and is notoriously difficult to deal with as regards worker rights.   All that talk about how low tax rates and making it easy to fire people was what you needed to keep businesses in the UK, and now we see what nonsense it was.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

Three months for the tyranny of the people to be overthrown, then. Oh, that they had but one neck.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2017)

kebabking said:


> if May - or Corbyn - had unilaterally provided future security of status for EU citizens currently in the UK, they would have removed, at a stroke, the future security of status of UK citizens living in the EU. which _doesn't_ sound like the right thing to do to me...
> 
> at the time there was lots of ho-ha about how such a move would be immediately recprocated, about how it would set the tone of the negotiations - sadly, have you seen anything in the conduct of the negotiations which suggests that 'play nice' was the EU's Plan A?


tbh we should be grateful they're playing at all


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It’s too late, companies are already relocating.  They can’t afford to wait and see what happens in 2019, they need to have ensured a seamless transition and that means enacting contingency plans now.  Every insurer I know based on London is already setting up an EU company and transferring it’s EU business to be run out of that company.  It’s happening. It’s happened.


Setting up a company in another country and relocating are two different things.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh we should be grateful they're playing at all



not really, they want the money - some haven't grasped the idea that if we get no deal and crash out in March 2019 on WTO rules we won't be making a payment on the 1st April 2019. the UK contribution is about 10% of the EU budget - what proportion of your Christmas fund would you safely bet on the EU having either budgeted for having 10% less cash to spend, or agreed who is going to plug the the shortfall?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2017)

kebabking said:


> not really, they want the money - some haven't grasped the idea that if we get no deal and crash out in March 2019 on WTO rules we won't be making a payment on the 1st April 2019. the UK contribution is about 10% of the EU budget - what proportion of your Christmas fund would you safely bet on the EU having either budgeted for having 10% less cash to spend, or agreed who is going to plug the the shortfall?


i have no christmas fund, it having all been spent


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 13, 2017)

i cant be arsed getting sucked into the minutiae of exchange rates, what counts as a re-location, immigration rules etc - but I think its safe to say that "no deal" would be hugely disruptive and negative for the economy and society. Its impossible to say exaclty what will happen - because there are so many complex interrelations - but there will be multiple unforseen problems thrown up as ordinary actions hit legal and regulatory blocs thrown up by a severing of realtionships with the EU. The UKs governance and economy is deeply interlinked with the EU - thats why its a fucking nightmare to unpick and just junking the whole lot will be hugely chaotic. 
If there is no progress on a deal by the new year I think we will see a growing storm of anguish from multiple sectors as everything from research programs to manufacturing orders to airline logistics to the  employment and residency  status of hundreds of thousands of workers gets sucked into the brexit black hole. Oh - and a million UK citizens living in the EU. And northern ireland. I mean - pick your cluster fuck. 
Will a government which is - at best - half arsed about the whole process press ahead into this hurricane when the "reset" button is available? 
The EU are not going to do a deal that's anything other than politically and financially savage -  they want to force the UK gov to press the exit-brexit button.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Where on earth are you getting this nonsense from?



Tell me a single error in what I wrote or wear a sign saying "moron" for a day.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 13, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Setting up a company in another country and relocating are two different things.


Not if you also move your EU operations from your original UK entity to the company you have now set up elsewhere.  If I currently write all EU insurance business from my base in London but now I have to set up an EU entity and write the EU business from there instead then the UK has just lost all the work and all the profit associated with the EU business.  The EU business has been relocated via the mechanism of creating a new company.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 13, 2017)

them earning are not going to come back from their new base of their own accord


----------



## binka (Oct 13, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Businesses won’t want to increase sales in the event of no deal?


Businesses won't want to invest to increase capacity if they don't know what's going to happen 6 months down the line. They'll take the easy and safer option of same sales with a higher margin.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 13, 2017)

kebabking said:


> not really, they want the money - some haven't grasped the idea that if we get no deal and crash out in March 2019 on WTO rules we won't be making a payment on the 1st April 2019. the UK contribution is about 10% of the EU budget - what proportion of your Christmas fund would you safely bet on the EU having either budgeted for having 10% less cash to spend, or agreed who is going to plug the the shortfall?



Wouldn't be 10% because of what is redistributed to regions of the UK. Still a few bob though.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 13, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Looking at where we are now it does look quite an attractive proposition to just stop all this idiocy & just go back to running the country like before. Not quite that simple though. Supposing the vote had been for remain or Cameron had not been rash enough to call a referendum in the first place? Presumably then Cameron/Osborne would still be running things & austerity would be getting worse as they pretended the economy was booming with shit min wage jobs?
> 
> What all this has brought on is the possibility of a proper left wing Labour government. I find it suprising that something I have wanted since my teens in the 1970s may now come to pass. Urban is a left wing forum but oddly I'm seeing very little enthusiasm for what should be an exciting prospect.



One way of looking at it, but another way is that the Tories only hit the buffers when they started on domestic policy, esp of the we'll take your savings for social care type. Labour's positive offer took off and the Maybot just stared at the headlights. 

Brexit just about saved the Tories at the last election. It was the main thing sustaining their share.


----------



## gosub (Oct 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh we should be grateful they're playing at all


Yesem master.




Junckers speech today, Ffs  now thinking May gave Bone the right answer... No point in extending time frame if that's his attitude.


----------



## gosub (Oct 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i have no christmas fund, it having all been spent


Same as the EU then


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> Same as the EU then


no, i have presents to show for it


----------



## gosub (Oct 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Not if you also move your EU operations from your original UK entity to the company you have now set up elsewhere.  If I currently write all EU insurance business from my base in London but now I have to set up an EU entity and write the EU business from there instead then the UK has just lost all the work and all the profit associated with the EU business.  The EU business has been relocated via the mechanism of creating a new company.


In reality doesn't that just mean an extra churn?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> In reality doesn't that mean an extra churn?


depends what i've had for dinner


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 13, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Brexit just about saved the Tories at the last election. It was the main thing sustaining their share.


Tell us again about how Labour need to get rid of Corbyn to avoid a wipeout (and so that they can move left).


----------



## 1%er (Oct 13, 2017)

Don't worry about Brexit and what will happen after, it will have little effect on your day to day lives, most of you wont even notice any difference. You'll be far better off than in a Federal Europe, which is where you'll end up if you remain members of the EU.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 13, 2017)

1%er said:


> Don't worry about Brexit and what will happen after, it will have little effect on your day to day lives, most of you wont even notice any difference. You'll be far better off than in a Federal Europe, which is where you'll end up if you remain members of the EU.



This is reassuring. Thanks.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

Raheem said:


> This is reassuring. Thanks.



Hadn't occurred to me, either. I feel a bit silly now.


----------



## lazythursday (Oct 13, 2017)

I lean towards remain but I'm not really passionate either way on Brexit - but I find it just mystifying that so many people on the Leave side can't seem to see that this will be an enormous change, with huge ramifications, and will affect an awful lot of people (especially a 'no deal' outcome) and there's every reason to be concerned about the short term impact even if you have the belief that it will be a good thing long-term.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 13, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Tell us again about how Labour need to get rid of Corbyn to avoid a wipeout (and so that they can move left).



I thought that at the time. When given the chance Corbyn did great so I was clearly wrong. Try to get over it. I expect at the time you thought criticisms of Ed Miliband were just a Blairite plot too. Call it a draw if you like.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Not if you also move your EU operations from your original UK entity to the company you have now set up elsewhere.  If I currently write all EU insurance business from my base in London but now I have to set up an EU entity and write the EU business from there instead then the UK has just lost all the work and all the profit associated with the EU business.  The EU business has been relocated via the mechanism of creating a new company.



It's funny you mention the insurance industry because I heard a CEO of one of the major UK insurers on radio 4 a few months ago singing the praises of brexit. His take was how it will finally free them up to do more global business while encapsulating their over regulated Eu operations into a satellite subsidiary on the mainland. His take was that his company will have net growth out of Brexit. I'll try and dig the interview out.

Frankly, I 'm surprised that any major insurance company worth their salt doesn't already have major subsidiaries dotted all over the Eu already. Did you get in a tizzy whenever one of the FTSE 100 companies set up a subsidiary in the Eu before brexit? or an entity in China, India, the US etc...?

Even from from a business perspective, then that's still a pessimistic view. 
Although I hate the premise of the fabel, "Who Moved my Cheese", it does have a valid point about how different characters react to change.
Up-thread Kaka Tim mentioned self fulfilling prophecy. I'm not sure what he/she was getting at, but imo one thing#s for sure: the attitudes of individuals impacted by Brexit in the UK will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you face the changes of those impacts with a positive attitude, you'll see the opportunities arising from it. Conversely, if you see every thing arising from it as negative then negative outcomes will be the result. 

As the remain vote lost the referendum, its not surprising its supporters are now more vocal than those that wanted brexit - and less surprising they 're only vocal about the negative aspects of leaving.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 13, 2017)

Another couple of months of Tory fratricide and we'll be heading into Christmas with a clear majority for turning back the clock, and a second referendum properly on the cards.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> In reality doesn't that just mean an extra churn?


No, not at all.  That premium is real income generating real profit, on which real tax is paid.  The work was performed by real UK workers getting real UK income.  It’s churn within Europe but it’s money out the door for the UK


----------



## kabbes (Oct 13, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> It's funny you mention the insurance industry because I heard a CEO of one of the major UK insurers on radio 4 a few months ago singing the praises of brexit. His take was how it will finally free them up to do more global business while encapsulating their over regulated Eu operations into a satellite subsidiary on the mainland. His take was that his company will have net growth out of Brexit. I'll try and dig the interview out.
> 
> Frankly, I 'm surprised that any major insurance company worth their salt doesn't already have major subsidiaries dotted all over the Eu already. Did you get in a tizzy whenever one of the FTSE 100 companies set up a subsidiary in the Eu before brexit? or an entity in China, India, the US etc...?
> 
> ...


Good for the insurance company is not the same thing as good for the UK.

And yes, companies had branches all over Europe.  But the income still previously came back to the UK, as did all the back office work.  Branches tended to be relatively small.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Another couple of months of Tory fratricide and we'll be heading into Christmas with a clear majority for turning back the clock, and a second referendum properly on the cards.


we'll all be turning back the clock in a couple of weeks


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 13, 2017)

....


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 13, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Up-thread Kaka Tim mentioned self fulfilling prophecy. I'm not sure what he/she was getting at, but imo one thing#s for sure: the attitudes of individuals impacted by Brexit in the UK will become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you face the changes of those impacts with a positive attitude, you'll see the opportunities arising from it. Conversely, if you see every thing arising from it as negative then negative outcomes will be the result.
> 
> As the remain vote lost the referendum, its not surprising its supporters are now more vocal than those that wanted brexit - and less surprising they 're only vocal about the negative aspects of leaving.



And the positve aspects would be ... what? 

And as for the guff about having "a more positive attitude" - really? smile your way to prosperity? 


When i mentioned a "self fulfilling prophecy" i was referring to the same logic that drives runs on banks and panic buying of petrol - people make a rational decision based on what they believe other people are going to do - thus bringing it about.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 13, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> And the positve aspects would be ... what?


The positive aspects of remaining in the Eu, or of leaving?
The remain camp needs to make their case for the Eu, although I reckon that'd be too little, too late. Had they done it from the off they'd have won the referendum.
The positives of leaving? For me personally, SaskiaJayne nailed it a couple of pages ago here



Kaka Tim said:


> And as for the guff about having "a more positive attitude" - really? smile your way to prosperity?


It's not guff. If you run a business and constantly face change with a negative attitude your business will either soon fold, or you'll end up having a nervous breakdown. The same applies in all aspects of life. There were, and always will be stock-market crashes, oil price fluctuations, wars, diseases, natural disasters, etc. If you spend all your time worrying about the potential of negative occurrences in your life, or even worse, deny to yourself about the fact that things _are _changing, you'll end up in a life of fear. Nothing would get done.



Kaka Tim said:


> When i mentioned a "self fulfilling prophecy" i was referring to the same logic that drives runs on banks and panic buying of petrol - people make a rational decision based on what they believe other people are going to do - thus bringing it about.


That's exactly the psyche the Eu's tapping into with their stance. The fear of the UKs citizens. The result of which is people still speculating about a 2nd referendums (denial).  Fuck that.

If you want negative speculation, how about imagining beyond a second referendum where remain win, and upon the announcement of the result the Eu turns around with a big 'Fuck You!'... 'You can only come back on the conditions you agree to an increased of the UKs contributions by 300%, hand over all the euro pass-porting rights to Frankfurt, and you have to get rid of the pound sterling'.
You know, like what they did to Greece.
How far would you be willing to bend over their barrel?


----------



## gosub (Oct 14, 2017)

The box is open, and there's a lot of shit that will need addressing before hope can be nurtured.

This isn't the Brexit I wanted but we are where are. That it was that hard to get a plebiscite at all made me stick with a side that did nothing during the official campaign to enamour itself.

But I've seen nothing either since from EU 27 to make me want to rejoin ship... Far from it.


----------



## oryx (Oct 14, 2017)

Someone* said that we are faced with such incredibly complicated political situations in the modern world that we look for simple solutions.

The 'get on with it!' rhetoric from leavers is an example of this. There is probably an equivalent view from remainers but it lacks a succinct slogan-type thing - maybe 'second referendum' is a rough equivalent.

The imaginary countdown to March 2019 is ticking loudly and no progress whatsoever has been made.

I think the EU do want the UK to stay in, as there are movements towards EU exit in other countries such as France and The Netherlands, as well as the possible Grexit scenario of two years ago. I haven't followed the situation in other PIGS nations but it's hardly likely the EU would want the start of a significant mass defection. The UK is an innovative nation - first to industrialise and then deindustrialise, and we are an innovator in the sense of being the first to formally give notice to exit the EU. Whatever you think about leaving or remaining, that is a very significant move.

The so-called 'Three Brexiteers'  are clearly out of their depth (Johnson especially is shocking) and I can't see them negotiating an orderly, dignified and positive way out of a paper bag, never mind the EU.

The situations around trade and borders are immensely complicated and I can see no way they will be successfully negotiated by March 2019.

* I think it was Adam Curtis, CBfuckingA to Google and I've no doubt a lot of others have said it.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 14, 2017)

Other nations deindustrialised at the same time as the UK.


----------



## DownwardDog (Oct 14, 2017)

gosub said:


> This isn't the Brexit I wanted.



Both sides can use that for their slogan in the second referendum.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> It's not guff. If you run a business and constantly face change with a negative attitude your business will either soon fold, or you'll end up having a nervous breakdown. The same applies in all aspects of life. There were, and always will be stock-market crashes, oil price fluctuations, wars, diseases, natural disasters, etc. If you spend all your time worrying about the potential of negative occurrences in your life, or even worse, deny to yourself about the fact that things _are _changing, you'll end up in a life of fear. Nothing would get done.



"Positive thinking" is a load of  individualistic, liberal hippy wank. Try using "positive thinking" when your on minimum wage or benefits and see if it magically pays your rent or pays the electricity. And its certainly not going to create some sunlit brexit island either.


----------



## phillm (Oct 14, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> The positive aspects of remaining in the Eu, or of leaving?
> 
> It's not guff. If you run a business and constantly face change with a negative attitude your business will either soon fold, or you'll end up having a nervous breakdown. The same applies in all aspects of life. There were, and always will be stock-market crashes, oil price fluctuations, wars, diseases, natural disasters, etc. If you spend all your time worrying about the potential of negative occurrences in your life, or even worse, deny to yourself about the fact that things _are _changing, you'll end up in a life of fear. Nothing would get done.



Or even worse spend most of your waking hours finessing perfect posts to mostly randoms on an obscure internet board.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 14, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> "Positive thinking" is a load of  individualistic, liberal hippy wank. Try using "positive thinking" when your on minimum wage or benefits and see if it magically pays your rent or pays the electricity. And its certainly not going to create some sunlit brexit island either.


Errrrr.... I am on the dole/ benefits.
I have rent to pay, a family to feed, lekky & gas bills etc.
I guess I'm what's classed now days as the precariate; working in the gig economy with zero financial security. We have no rich parents to bail us out and live hand to mouth.
I have the choice to stay positive or be a whinger.
I find taking a positive attitude helps me to keep picking up gigs, whereas If I just whinged about everything, I'd have topped myself long ago.
Oh, and I've never owned or read a hippy dippy self-help book in my life.
it's you talking guff.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2017)

Well bully for you - but the point is that applying platitudanal nonsense about "positive thinking" to society and the economy in general is wank. Like we can make brexit work through "being positive" - its David Brent type shit. 
Its not going magic up a massively increased manufacturing base or melt trade tarrifs or keep the free trade vultures away once the UK crashes out of the EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 14, 2017)

Yeah whatever. and whinging constant negative neo-liberal platitudes about brexit is Juncker type shit.
Here's an offer: I'll stop asking you to try to be positive, if you'll at least be balanced in your negativity. 
The Eu, and remaining in it, is not a bed of roses.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah whatever. and whinging constant negative neo-liberal platitudes about brexit is Juncker type shit.
> Here's an offer: I'll stop asking you to try to be positive, if you'll at least be balanced in your negativity.
> The Eu, and remaining in it, is not a bed of roses.



No. its quite shit. but i dont see anyone here flag waving for brussels. 
But the alternative is worse - and no deal would be very shit - it would impoverish the country and fuck up lots of people lives. Pointing that out on a thread about brexit is not "whinging".


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 14, 2017)




----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 14, 2017)

Depends if you are glass half full or glass half empty I suppose? I dont think it affects any outcome it's is just an individual's attitude to that outcome. Do you wring your hands in despair or do you shrug your shoulders & say "ah well, onwards & upwards"? Do you give a fuck or not? 

The Boris Johnson school of thought though. "Smile & be happy & it will all be ok" does come across as all a bit "dear leader" though ie those that are not clapping & cheering loud enough get taken away never to be seen again.

As I indicated earlier. The positive for me in all this is that there does seem a chance of the present government imploding leading to a vote of no confidence & a GE with a good chance of a Labour victory.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 14, 2017)

With the Tories running the show it's not so much a case of glass half-empty or glass half-full as it is "Somebody has pissed in this glass."


----------



## eoin_k (Oct 15, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> ...
> Frankly, I 'm surprised that any major insurance company worth their salt doesn't already have major subsidiaries dotted all over the Eu already...



There is a difference between a subsidiary that is the financial services industry's equivalent of an assembly plant, providing mainly low paid admin work, and a subsidiary to manage the business strategically across the EU; just like there is a difference between a FTSE listed company and a sector of the economy that employs people domestically. Likewise, there are plenty of well-paid professional jobs in London, created by international finance choosing the city as a European Headquarters.

None of which is to argue that an economy based around financial services (and arms dealing) is positive, just, that this change could have much more impact than you're suggesting. British company's could do okay out of Brexit from a shareholder perspective, while it also reduced the level of high skilled employment in the economy.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 15, 2017)

So the choice would appear to be between a bad deal or no deal which would be even worse? What to do eh? The good thing here is that the Tories have painted themselves into a corner with no way out that will not bring about the demise of the present government. So we can look forward enthusiastically & positively to the next general election next year I would guess. Always look on the bright side of life etc.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 15, 2017)

Maybe TM has been aiming for a bad deal all along. Maybe "no deal is better than a bad deal" was meant to be read in the same way as "there ain't no party like an S Club party".


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> So the choice would appear to be between a bad deal or no deal which would be even worse? What to do eh? The good thing here is that the Tories have painted themselves into a corner with no way out that will not bring about the demise of the present government. So we can look forward enthusiastically & positively to the next general election next year I would guess. Always look on the bright side of life etc.



yes - there is a possible, positive chain of events. Torys forced to cancel brexit, are turfed out of office and descend even further into chaos and civil war. Relatively Left wing labour government does quite well cos of weakness of opposition - takes the fight against austerity to the EU. Meanwile, post imperial delusions of the little englander variety wither and die having been shown to be based on nothing but bluster and hubris (or - more likely - fester away feeding off "stab in the back" myths)


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 15, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> With the Tories running the show it's not so much a case of glass half-empty or glass half-full as it is "Somebody has pissed in this glass."



You think they’d grace us with a glass cup? It’ll be a dirty polystyrene thimble leased from G4S and quarter-filled by the lowest bidder in the tender for piss-filling services. Served up in a food bank, provided only to those who have exhausted all other means of hydration such as drinking the fluid from their children’s eyeballs.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2017)

Some genuine shit appears to be hitting the fan. This is the sort of thing that gets the attention of a government like ours, right?


----------



## gosub (Oct 15, 2017)




----------



## gosub (Oct 15, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Some genuine shit appears to be hitting the fan. This is the sort of thing that gets the attention of a government like ours, right?




and then you have all the weekend papers full of Hammond should go for not believing in unicorns


----------



## Riklet (Oct 15, 2017)

If we are a poorer society post-Brexit and I lose every penny I have from it, but a fairer society domestically and internationally is the consequence then I dont think it could be classed as a bad move.

Although I think shit will hit the fan a bit, I dont quite see total economic meltdown happening. As a country we will probably be poorer for years. But who will hold more of the wealth? This is still to be decided.

Fair enough being pointlessly positive is naive, but I'm not planning on crying into my baguette and EU flag quite yet. There is no going back, only forward from here.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 15, 2017)

Riklet said:


> As a country we will probably be poorer for years. But who will hold more of the wealth? This is still to be decided.



All the same, we know very well what the decision would be.


----------



## Riklet (Oct 15, 2017)

Oh so that's it, is it? All over already....

Things were shit before Brexit. I left Britain partly cos of that! Ok maybe I dont have much faith in Labour creating Lefty Paradise but the future is not decided yet.

A depressed and defeated liberal middle class and business elite reeling from Brexit might actually open up more uncertainly and possibility of future change than anything else in the past 30 years.

What do we want, socialism or cheery stories in the Telegraph and Guardian?


----------



## gosub (Oct 15, 2017)

Riklet said:


> If we are a poorer society post-Brexit and I lose every penny I have from it, but a fairer society domestically and internationally is the consequence then I dont think it could be classed as a bad move.
> 
> Although I think shit will hit the fan a bit, I dont quite see total economic meltdown happening. As a country we will probably be poorer for years. But who will hold more of the wealth? This is still to be decided.
> 
> Fair enough being pointlessly positive is naive, but I'm not planning on crying into my baguette and EU flag quite yet. There is no going back, only forward from here.


gilt markets may well moderate tone and pace


----------



## Raheem (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> What do we want, socialism or cheery stories in the Telegraph and Guardian?



If that's the choice, I guess it depends how cheery the stories are exactly.

Whatever happens, we are not on the brink of nationalising the FTSE100, are we?


----------



## Riklet (Oct 16, 2017)

Nowhere near.

Not quite anywhere near crashing out of the world's top 10 economies either. The rest depends on how many people are willing to fight for their slice of the future pie.

Fat fucking chance of that succeeding in May 2016. Is a potential major labour shortage and push for higher wages really so much worse?


----------



## gosub (Oct 16, 2017)

Raheem said:


> If that's the choice, I guess it depends how cheery the stories are exactly.
> 
> Whatever happens, we are not on the brink of nationalising the FTSE100, are we?



looking at it, National Accounts articles - Office for National Statistics,(fig 8)  what we had was overly cheery stories a couple of years ago


----------



## Raheem (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> Not quite anywhere near crashing out of the world's top 10 economies either.



Hmmm...

Provided nothing happens to upset the applecart.


----------



## gosub (Oct 16, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> Provided nothing happens to upset the applecart.


South Korea, current number 11, might have other things to worry about


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> But who will hold more of the wealth? This is still to be decided.



No it isn't. The whole point of a no deal brexit is to force the UK to adopt free trade wholesale. Open our entire economy up to international competition and the deregulation that goes with it. Finally kill off the NHS so US healthcare companies can gain market share here for starters. Deregulate food imports so we can be importers of the sort of food that europe is protecting us from.

The strident brexiters aren't using no deal brexit as a bargaining tactic. They actually want no deal brexit to turn the UK into an unrestricted low tax and low regulation state, in the same way some religious groups want to see WW3 to bring about the second coming. What may seem bad to others seems just great to them.

The idea that anyone but the already wealthy will benefit from such events is nonsense. It's why they're arguing so strongly for it, under the cover of nationalism.


----------



## Happy Larry (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> Is a potential major labour shortage and push for higher wages really so much worse?



No. It's exactly what British workers need. If the massive influx of foreign unskilled and semi skilled workers stops, and it is already decreasing, wages for British workers will increase merely due to the law of supply and demand. Not to mention the benefit of easing pressure on hospitals, schools and social welfare institutions.


----------



## Happy Larry (Oct 16, 2017)

Gerry1time said:


> They actually want no deal brexit to turn the UK into an unrestricted low tax and low regulation state



Sounds great to me. British farmers and manufacturers will then have an advantage over their competitors overseas, and who enjoys paying tax?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 16, 2017)

& yet Larry it does seem quite feasible that the senario the rabid right wing brexiteers crave, that is no deal to transform the UK into some sort of ultra capitalist distopia will most likely deliver brexit into the hands of the left wing lexiteers. Unfortunately we do have elections here & the law of unforseen consequenses caused Corbyn's Labour to do rather better than the Tories ever believed possible when they threw away a small but working majority because they arrogantly believed they would get that huge majority they expected to show those nasty Europeans that the British people were right behind them on brexit.

Thatcherite/Blairite capitalism delivered for a while but as was predicted decades ago prosperity based on the price of houses was never going to last & all we have now is an almost eequally divided society roughly house owners with mortgages paid off or mostly paid off on one side & on the other side house renters along with huge mortgage payers who know they are only a months pay from bankruptcy with barely any benefits system to fall back on.

It does appear that the have nots right at the bottom are now beginning to engage politically. Most young people do not read newspapers or even watch tv news so the gutter tabloid press will have very little influence on the outcome of next general election. It will all come from social media.

The Tories tired mantra about aspiration & house owership is lost on generation rent. They want council housing & controlled rents. Lastest Tory policies are just trying to steal Labour's clothes & nobody believes them anymore.

In the end people will vote with their wallets. Older people with mortgages paid may well see the Tories as a better bet to retain the value of their houses but they are being taken over by generation rent plenty of those already in their 40s with reasonably well paid jobs who still cannot get on the housing ladder. If most voters in their 40s or below vote Labour then we will have a left wing Labour government who will inherit not brexit but the lexit the left have always wanted.

Obama's explanation of the election of Trump was that people voted "to shake things up". The UK electorate did that also with brexit & will do so again to kick out these tired old Tories, I think.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2017)

Interesting to see brexiteers still talking about a Brit Singapore model - that’s the Singapore where the government provides 85% of the housing, owns pretty much all the land and still owns the infrastructure and utilities as a whole.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 16, 2017)

i think the argument that a hard brexit will somehow lead to UK reborn as a fair and just land of social democracy and socialism is utterly delusional. No deal will shrink GDP and create economic chaos - so lots of job losses, businesses failing and much reduced government spending power. So, rather than borrowing to invest in housing and the NHS - the government (of whatever stripe) will have to borrow (at worse rates) just to try and stem the bleeding.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2017)

Who will benefit financially from a Brexit arranged by very rich people in a political party that hates poor people? It's a mystery! 



Riklet said:


> Oh so that's it, is it? All over already....
> 
> Things were shit before Brexit. I left Britain partly cos of that!



So you don't actually live in the UK? No wonder you think it's fine if people in the UK become poorer.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 16, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Another couple of months of Tory fratricide and we'll be heading into Christmas with a clear majority for turning back the clock, and a second referendum properly on the cards.


You might be right though, to be honest, I'd interpret those figures as the leave vote staying fairly solid. There were a whole set of factors that might have produced buyers remorse - the notion the original vote was as much about anti-politician anger, the way the negotiations have actually gone, the withdrawal of the promise of increased NHS funding etc.  That we haven't seen remain get to even 50% is complex and messy and it's hard to see many people who voted leave suddenly summoning up some pro-EU enthusiasm. But the figures above are one of the reasons why the calculating lizard brains of our politicians mean there won't be any serious attempts at re-running the referendum.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> You might be right though, to be honest, I'd interpret those figures as the leave vote staying fairly solid. There were a whole set of factors that might have produced buyers remorse - the notion the original vote was as much about anti-politician anger, the way the negotiations have actually gone, the withdrawal of the promise of increased NHS funding etc.  That we haven't seen remain get to even 50% is complex and messy and it's hard to see many people who voted leave suddenly summoning up some pro-EU enthusiasm. But the figures above are one of the reasons why the calculating lizard brains of our politicians mean there won't be any serious attempts at re-running the referendum.



The figures had been incredibly static for ages, so even a slight move is interesting. But I agree that a really substantial change is unlikely. On the last point, surely it depends on the politician and their constituency?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 16, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The figures had been incredibly static for ages, so even a slight move is interesting. But I agree that a really substantial change is unlikely. On the last point, surely it depends on the politician and their constituency?


Sorry, yes, I wasn't being very specific. Certainly _backbenchers_ and even front benchers with a small majority will think in those terms. I just can't see how any front bench - Labour or Tory - will get to the point where they call for a 2nd referendum. If the referendum was in some part about an opportunity to vote against politicians here and in Brussels, then overturning it ramps that up exponentially (as well as overturning the 'will of the people' in a more generic sense).  I'd have thought the only conceivable device for any kind of remain/soft brexit majority in Parliament to get a rethink would be through the messy mechanism of a general election.  In large part May has already ruled that out by holding one unnecessarily this year.  Brexit will rumble on as a battle between no deal and some kind of shabby, desperate last minute deal, but there won't be any opportunity to turn it into lexit and it can't be stopped.


----------



## bemused (Oct 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> [..] it's hard to see many people who voted leave suddenly summoning up some pro-EU enthusiasm.



I don't know, I suspect there are enough that are fed up enough to vote for to remain just to have an easy life. What I find interesting is the apparent lack of any real public interest in the negotiations.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 16, 2017)

Gerry1time said:


> No it isn't. The whole point of a no deal brexit is to force the UK to adopt free trade wholesale. Open our entire economy up to international competition and the deregulation that goes with it. Finally kill off the NHS so US healthcare companies can gain market share here for starters. Deregulate food imports so we can be importers of the sort of food that europe is protecting us from.
> 
> The strident brexiters aren't using no deal brexit as a bargaining tactic. They actually want no deal brexit to turn the UK into an unrestricted low tax and low regulation state, in the same way some religious groups want to see WW3 to bring about the second coming. What may seem bad to others seems just great to them.


Is that your opinion or have they actually stated this?


Gerry1time said:


> The idea that anyone but the already wealthy will benefit from such events is nonsense. It's why they're arguing so strongly for it, under the cover of nationalism.


I suspect the strident (Tory) brexiters are probably split between those wanting to use the no deal as a bargaining chip and those wanting the things you mention above. 
Even then, there are a lot of tories stridently against a no deal. So those you mention are a subset of a subset of tories (UKIP basically). How many MPs do you think that amount to?
As long as there's still democracy in the UK, no party will hold a majority with those policies.


----------



## Riklet (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Who will benefit financially from a Brexit arranged by very rich people in a political party that hates poor people? It's a mystery!
> 
> So you don't actually live in the UK? No wonder you think it's fine if people in the UK become poorer.



I most certainly _do_ think it's fine if _some_ peoole in the UK become poorer, sure. I dont believe in trickle down economics.

 But if you seriously think that the enormous job losses and massive impact on the poor are swiftly about to materialise then youre kidding yourself.  The entire premise of 'no deal' is total nonsense for starter. What, so the day after Brexit hundreds of European companies that ship to the UK will have gone bust and the supermarket shelves will be empty? Let's save this crap for Guardian comments.

I dont see why I don't have the same right to have an opinion just because im working abroad temporarily. Im not some expat cunt who whinges about Britain all the time and hates it. But sure, people do vote with their wallets and anti-Brexit London some possibly have more to lose than the rest of the country over the next 30 years. Maybe.

I won't be retiring for 40 fucking years minimum so that's quite a while to live in a low wage, deskilled economy, reduced social support little no chance of getting onto the housing market without the bank of M&D helping the lucky few.

Take a look at the news in the rest of EU, even from the past week. This is the shoddy direction things are going. Right wing economics and decreasing democracy.  The privatised horror vision of 'Brexit Island'  is already well and truly in motion everywhere else across the EU.


----------



## Winot (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Who will benefit financially from a Brexit arranged by very rich people in a political party that hates poor people? It's a mystery!



Spot on. If poor people haven't benefited during the years of plenty there's no way they will benefit during the years of famine.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 16, 2017)

weltweit said:


> The ballot papers said remain or leave the EU and the voters chose leave.



OK. A pre-election manifesto is pretty much the same as a referendum, you are voting for he party that is closest to your views. It often transpires, that because of unforeseen circumstances, the winning party is not able to deliver its manifesto. This occasionally leads to an early election. Is that scenario vastly different to the cluster-fuck that is unfolding? Now that we know a wee bit more, could a case not be made for a second referendum?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> If we are a poorer society post-Brexit and I lose every penny I have from it, but a fairer society domestically and internationally is the consequence then I dont think it could be classed as a bad move.
> 
> Although I think shit will hit the fan a bit, I dont quite see total economic meltdown happening. As a country we will probably be poorer for years. But who will hold more of the wealth? This is still to be decided.
> 
> Fair enough being pointlessly positive is naive, but I'm not planning on crying into my baguette and EU flag quite yet. There is no going back, only forward from here.



Eh? I'm speechless. We go back a century, but it is worth it? The poor, the very people you profess to support would go under, there would be genuine famine. All worth it though.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 16, 2017)

Bill it as a national survey. Do it online, so it looks as little as possible like a referendum re-run. Ask respondents to prioritise a list of options ranging from status quo, to EFTA, to WTO.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 16, 2017)

Wilf said:


> You might be right though, to be honest, I'd interpret those figures as the leave vote staying fairly solid. There were a whole set of factors that might have produced buyers remorse - the notion the original vote was as much about anti-politician anger, the way the negotiations have actually gone, the withdrawal of the promise of increased NHS funding etc.  That we haven't seen remain get to even 50% is complex and messy and it's hard to see many people who voted leave suddenly summoning up some pro-EU enthusiasm. But the figures above are one of the reasons why the calculating lizard brains of our politicians mean there won't be any serious attempts at re-running the referendum.


 You have left those that didn't vote out of the equation. I know quite a few people who didn't vote, because it was never going to be no. (Same with the Scottish referendum, people who didn't go and vote no last time, will if there is another referendum.)


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 16, 2017)

sky will fall, rains of blood, the french cheeses all but a memory 


lol famine. Kali Yuga is truly here etc etc


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 16, 2017)

while EZB bankers sail up the Thames in their yachts, lighting cigars with 100€ notes


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 16, 2017)

Geldof's flotilla trailing forlornly behind


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 16, 2017)

he's one of the lucky ones who'll have fucked off with his irish citizenship to never ending party that is Berlin*. 

*fast forward to 2022: in a weird twist of fate, Gedolf organises a flotilla up the Spree, protesting against the newly elected AfD government.


----------



## sealion (Oct 16, 2017)

Winot said:


> Spot on. If poor people haven't benefited during the years of plenty there's no way they will benefit during the years of famine.


So nothing to lose the by voting to leave then. The cabal that is the eu couldn't give a fuck either way.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2017)

Riklet said:


> I most certainly _do_ think it's fine if _some_ peoole in the UK become poorer, sure. I dont believe in trickle down economics.
> 
> But if you seriously think that the enormous job losses and massive impact on the poor are swiftly about to materialise then youre kidding yourself.  The entire premise of 'no deal' is total nonsense for starter. What, so the day after Brexit hundreds of European companies that ship to the UK will have gone bust and the supermarket shelves will be empty? Let's save this crap for Guardian comments.
> 
> ...



I do think the economy will get worse, but I really don't know by how much. It could be disastrous or it could just be a bit of a slowdown. But you were proposing a hypothetical, that everyone in the UK would be poorer for years, and you are fine with that.

And yes, you living outside the UK makes a difference. You still have a valid opinion obviously but it's much, much easier to be OK with people being poorer when you're not one of them.


----------



## Winot (Oct 16, 2017)

sealion said:


> So nothing to lose the by voting to leave then. The cabal that is the eu couldn't give a fuck either way.



It will get worse.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Geldof's flotilla trailing forlornly behind


'Give us the fookin' money multi billion pound divorce settlement'


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2017)

Its classic Nash game theory innit ( or tweaked mechanism theory I suppose)  - the stuff that the pointy headed lot love referencing . I am sure that the unelected cabal of gravy train fat cat euro administrators have the best brains in Europe working on game models and likely outcomes to adopt- they have plenty of cash and a lot riding on the outcome of these talks ( more than us I would say). I am not sure what game play we  have been running through, but it more Mousetrap or Hungry Hippos than Risk.


----------



## sealion (Oct 16, 2017)

Winot said:


> It will get worse.


I keep hearing this. You poor people don't know what you have done etc etc. I was earning £50 a day labouring on site in 1986, Labourers are getting less today. It has already gotten worse for many under this cabal.


----------



## Winot (Oct 16, 2017)

sealion said:


> I keep hearing this. You poor people don't know what you have done etc etc. I was earning £50 a day labouring on site in 1986, Labourers are getting less today. It has already gotten worse for many under this cabal.



Well I don't know anything about that labour market so I'll take your word for it. And I can understand the 'fuck It - fuck them' response if that's the reality of your position. But that's an explanation for why some people voted the way they did - it's not the same as saying that they''ll be better off after Brexit, is it?


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2017)

sealion said:


> I keep hearing this. You poor people don't know what you have done etc etc. I was earning £50 a day labouring on site in 1986, Labourers are getting less today. It has already gotten worse for many under this cabal.



So fuck it all, may as well make it even worse? I can sort of empathise with that feeling (I'm on disability benefits), but it's pretty illogical.

"This cabal" is one of the reasons I voted remain. A Brexit under Labour would have been a very different proposition. Unfortunately all it's going to do now is give the Tories more power to fuck us all over.


----------



## sealion (Oct 16, 2017)

Winot said:


> Well I don't know anything about that labour market so I'll take your word for it. And I can understand the 'fuck It - fuck them' response if that's the reality of your position. But that's an explanation for why some people voted the way they did - it's not the same as saying that they''ll be better off after Brexit, is it?


You are saying it will get worse for the poor. If you have fuck all and are threatened with losing that, you are still left with the grand total of fuck all. People voted for change because the status quo keeps them where thay are with no hope of anything being different. If something is not working for you, do you keep doing the same thing to try and fix it or try an alternative ?


----------



## sealion (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> A Brexit under Labour would have been a very different proposition.


Seeing as this (brexit) has never happened before how can you say ? and how can you negotiate with a set up that just wants a large pile of money if you won't play by there rules.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> So fuck it all, may as well make it even worse? I can sort of empathise with that feeling (I'm on disability benefits), but it's pretty illogical.
> 
> "This cabal" is one of the reasons I voted remain. A Brexit under Labour would have been a very different proposition. Unfortunately all it's going to do now is give the Tories more power to fuck us all over.



Who do you think will be presiding over Brexit? If it happens? It *should* be the Labour Party right - I mean if we don't have an election within a year that'll be because the unions and Corbyn's labour didn't force one.

More power to the Tories? What power do you think they have now? As a result of the Brexit referendum they've torn themselves apart. If we'd voted to stay in you'd be looking at a confident grinning Cameron as PM right now, not May dieing on her arse.

I just don't get this obsession with the idea Brexit will empower the Tories - what the fuck do you think the EU was stopping the Tories doing before? And how do you not see how fucked the Tories are?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2017)

I am genuinely torn between economic pragmatism and the remote chance of real societal and structural change emerging from a narsty brexit

Time for me to fuck off out of this thread again


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2017)

Ps - any option that leads to bloody regicide will get my full backing


----------



## Winot (Oct 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Ps - any option that leads to bloody regicide will get my full backing



Now that would be an interesting referendum.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> A Brexit under Labour would have been a very different proposition.


A brexit under Labour will be a very different proposition. Lexit in fact. Not that long to wait. Probably well before 2022.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 16, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> A brexit under Labour will be a very different proposition. Lexit in fact. Not that long to wait. Probably well before 2022.



A Brexit negotiated by Labour would be a soft Brexit. A Labour government that came to power following a no deal Brexit would not be able to deliver on its promises and would be blamed for all the shit. Corbyn would be Britain's answer to Hollande.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 16, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> sky will fall, rains of blood, the french cheeses all but a memory
> 
> 
> lol famine. Kali Yuga is truly here etc etc



OK you sarky git, famine was the wrong word.  Hardship isn't though.


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 16, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> OK you sarky git, famine was the wrong word.  Hardship isn't though.



It's like the Tories, and Labour following the same politics, hasn't fucked people over for decades. And yet its suddenly 'brexit' that gets all the liberals concerned for the working class.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 16, 2017)

I think there is more than brexit at work here. It does seem like 38yrs of Thatcherism/Blairism has run it's course & there is a genuine appetite for change. I think this would have happened with no brexit & Cameron still as PM but it might have taken a bit longer. I don't think Labour leadership is that bothered about what brexit we get they just want the Tories to fuck it up enough to get a Labour victory at next GE.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Ps - any option that leads to bloody regicide will get my full backing


((((reg))))


----------



## Wilf (Oct 16, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> ((((reg))))


----------



## Fingers (Oct 16, 2017)

Alistair Campbell has only gone and said it....

The time has come for Theresa May to tell the nation: Brexit can’t be done | Alastair Campbell


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 16, 2017)

Lol. A remainiac's wank dream. It is in the style of the speeches he wrote for his mate Tony.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 16, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think there is more than brexit at work here. It does seem like 38yrs of Thatcherism/Blairism has run it's course & there is a genuine appetite for change. I think this would have happened with no brexit & Cameron still as PM but it might have taken a bit longer. I don't think Labour leadership is that bothered about what brexit we get they just want the Tories to fuck it up enough to get a Labour victory at next GE.



Yep - I don't see Brexit making all that much difference in the long run, at least not for people lucky enough to not have to worry about residency issues - people will probably be a little bit worse off and the Tories may eventually end up a little stronger, but no massive change. Britain's not going to suddenly turn into Singapore or Albania because of it. The vote that really has a chance to be transformative will be the one on electing a left-wing  Labour government, and if that happens I'll be very happy to admit I was wrong about Brexit.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 16, 2017)

sealion said:


> I keep hearing this. You poor people don't know what you have done etc etc. I was earning £50 a day labouring on site in 1986, Labourers are getting less today. It has already gotten worse for many under this cabal.


So the solution is to do something that inflates away the value of that £50 even faster? Strange logic...


----------



## sealion (Oct 16, 2017)

Wolveryeti said:


> So the solution is to do something that inflates the value of that £50 even faster?


Everything bad is down to brexit


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 16, 2017)

"I'm a Tory and loved Thatcher, especially weakening the power of unions and privatising huge amounts of public assets, but isn't brexit awful"

"I vote Labour even though they're invested in selling off the social housing around here and part privatised services, but isn't brexit awful"

"I vote Lib Dem even though we colluded with the Tories in coalition to ram through austerity and fees, but isn't brexit awful"

Spare me.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 16, 2017)

the uk out side the EU will be even more prey to neo-liberal forces - the downsides to the trade deals that will need to be signed to try and make up the gap on export markets will be much greater - and the uk will be in a weak negotiating position. 
And the poor will suffer - the nhs will be more fucked, there will be even less investment in social housing, charities and community programs will be fucked, wages will be even lower, there will be less jobs - its will be shit. Every single forecast of a hard brexit points this way - and hard brexit is the only brexit that will be available.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 16, 2017)

and famine. You forgot the famine


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who do you think will be presiding over Brexit? If it happens? It *should* be the Labour Party right - I mean if we don't have an election within a year that'll be because the unions and Corbyn's labour didn't force one.
> 
> More power to the Tories? What power do you think they have now? As a result of the Brexit referendum they've torn themselves apart. If we'd voted to stay in you'd be looking at a confident grinning Cameron as PM right now, not May dieing on her arse.
> 
> I just don't get this obsession with the idea Brexit will empower the Tories - what the fuck do you think the EU was stopping the Tories doing before? And how do you not see how fucked the Tories are?



Of course it will give the Tories more power. It'd be impossible for it not to. There will be no more European Court of Justice, for one example. This isn't an opinion - it's a fact that leaving the EU gives the British govt more power (all that "taking back control" stuff) and the party in power right now is the Tory Party. I honestly find it a bit weird that you'd actually try to deny this. 

It's also impossible for us to have an election before Brexit because it's already happening. Thought you might have noticed that.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 16, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> "I'm a Tory and loved Thatcher, especially weakening the power of unions and privatising huge amounts of public assets, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> "I vote Labour even though they're invested in selling off the social housing around here and part privatised services, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> ...



This is fine, so long as you're not confusing hypocrisy with being wrong.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 16, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> "I'm a Tory and loved Thatcher, especially weakening the power of unions and privatising huge amounts of public assets, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> "I vote Labour even though they're invested in selling off the social housing around here and part privatised services, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> ...


Who is this aimed at?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 16, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Who is this aimed at?


Anybody who opposed Brexit?


----------



## scifisam (Oct 16, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Anybody who opposed Brexit?



Surely not - that'd be pretending that only middle class people voted remain, which is bollocks.


----------



## gosub (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Surely not - that'd be pretending that only middle class people voted remain, which is bollocks.


Clearly.   The old Etonians represented.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 16, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Surely not - that'd be pretending that only middle class people voted remain, which is bollocks.


It strikes me that the brexit vote can be sliced in many different ways to reflect back at you what you want to see. Yes, on average, the average wage of brexit voters was a little less than that of remain voters, but only a bit, and that masks all kinds of other things. By age, there is a massive difference - way more young people voted remain. A large majority of BAME people voted remain. More people who own their own homes mortgage free voted brexit - although the age bias probably accounts for this. In terms of voting intentions, labour voters voted around 2:1 remain, tory voters voted heavily brexit. Working class areas voted very differently depending on the area - working class London voted majority remain, other cities majority brexit. 

Yes, some people who feel fucked off and alienated by the system that is fucking them over voted brexit, but many others voted remain, and not out of a deep love of Europe - I don't think the majority of black people voted remain out a desire to wrap themselves in the eu flag. In and of itself, that someone is fucked off and wants change doesn't say anything about _this change_ and what it means. People who vote for the far right are normally fucked off and want change. That's an empty argument.


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Is that your opinion or have they actually stated this?



Post-Brexit Britain should phase out tariffs on food, says thinktank

'No-deal' Brexit likely to hit low-income families hardest



> Some Conservative MPs have said that prices will fall rather than rise as a result of Brexit, because it will be possible for the government to unilaterally reduce all tariffs to zero so consumers can get goods at the cheapest price on the world market.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 17, 2017)

sealion said:


> Everything bad is down to brexit


Yes. I confess - I am a wicked minion sent by Project Fear to con people with the self-evidently spurious link between the massive depreciation in the value of Sterling on the day of the result and the rollicking inflation that has followed.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Gerry1time said:


> Post-Brexit Britain should phase out tariffs on food, says thinktank


That article is about tariffs. The deregulations you etioned "so we can be importers of the sort of food that europe is protecting us from" comes under NTMs (Non Tariff Measures).
I've read nowhere that a post brexit uk will do away with standards (via NMBs).
but while you mention tariffs - from that article:



			
				the Graun said:
			
		

> Although the average EU agricultural tariff is 8.5%, EU rates for fresh beef and veal can add up to 65% to the cost of boneless cuts, while boneless mutton is 72% more expensive, potentially making these products expensive for British consumers.


 ​As for washing chickens in chlorinated water - the last time I went to the swimming baths, parents were happily bathing with their babies in chlorinated water.


Gerry1time said:


> 'No-deal' Brexit likely to hit low-income families hardest


from that article.



			
				the Graun said:
			
		

> Sharp price rises could cost average household £260 a year if UK leaves EU without a trade deal while richest will be least affected


£260 a  year isn't exactly the armageddon some on here are predicting - and putting a positive spin onit; if someone offered me the choice to have the tories annihilated to the point that they were out of government for a generation for 260 quid, I'd bit their hand off.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> As for washing chickens in chlorinated water - the last time I went to the swimming baths, parents were happily bathing with their babies in chlorinated water.
> 
> .



The issue isn't the water itself, it's that all manner of squalid, cruel and insanitary slaughterhouse practices are permissible if the corpse is dunked briefly before it enters the supply chain. 

Lexiteers, now reduced to defending US agribiz.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That article is about tariffs. The deregulations you etioned "so we can be importers of the sort of food that europe is protecting us from" comes under NTMs (Non Tariff Measures).
> I've read nowhere that a post brexit uk will do away with standards (via NMBs).
> but while you mention tariffs - from that article:
> ​As for washing chickens in chlorinated water - the last time I went to the swimming baths, parents were happily bathing with their babies in chlorinated water.
> ...



Pete North (who runs the Leave Alliance and is a trade expert) has been savage on Twitter about the underestimates of the no deal bill which are based solely on a totting up of tariffs. He goes into more detail on his blog:

Pete North Politics Blog: Brexit: stupidity squared

He is a committed Leaver remember.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Pete North (who runs the Leave Alliance and is a trade expert) has been savage on Twitter about the underestimates of the no deal bill which are based solely on a totting up of tariffs. He goes into more detail on his blog:
> 
> Pete North Politics Blog: Brexit: stupidity squared
> 
> He is a committed Leaver remember.



Better link here:

What’s wrong with the WTO Option?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Pete North (who runs the Leave Alliance and is a trade expert) has been savage on Twitter about the underestimates of the no deal bill which are based solely on a totting up of tariffs. He goes into more detail on his blog:
> 
> Pete North Politics Blog: Brexit: stupidity squared
> 
> He is a committed Leaver remember.



The Norths - Richard and Pete both - are committed EFTA supporters (Flexcit) and are angrier about hard Brexit than anyone else on the Internet. I rather liked Richard's eureferendum.com blog for a while, because of the level of detail on phytosanitary inspections and the consequences of third countryhood, but it's getting really cross and repetitive now.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Norths - Richard and Pete both - are committed EFTA supporters (Flexcit) and are angrier about hard Brexit than anyone else on the Internet. I rather liked Richard's eureferendum.com blog for a while, because of the level of detail on phytosanitary inspections and the consequences of third countryhood, but it's getting really cross and repetitive now.



I have some sympathy - I’m getting cross and repetitive too.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The issue isn't the water itself, it's that all manner of squalid, cruel and insanitary slaughterhouse practices are permissible if the corpse is dunked briefly before it enters the supply chain.
> 
> Lexiteers, now reduced to defending US agribiz.


Sorry, but the Eu regulations stopping "insanitary slaughterhouse practices" don't exist . The UK is fully in line with Eu regulations yet still manage to get away with this:
UK has nearly 800 livestock mega farms, investigation reveals
Rise of mega farms: how the US model of intensive farming is invading the world

if anything, leaving the Eu could just as well enable the banning of these mega farms in the UK...could... could make it worse... I didn't make the speculative claim as if it were a fact though - that's why I asked if Gerry1time could back these claims up.

eta: and here - in the heart of the Eu:

Belgian chicken meat exported to Africa is tested for banned insecticide


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> I have some sympathy - I’m getting cross and repetitive too.



Oh, me too. But it pisses me off when the Norths fulminate about the situation given that they were still, fundamentally, cheerleaders for leave and contributors to a decade of anti-EU agitation. And they never actually admit that the state we're in is an inevitable consequence of holding a referendum with meaningless, undefined, choices, preferring to blame the Cabinet for not reading their monographs.


----------



## ohmyliver (Oct 17, 2017)

Brexit http://edm.sw1a.net/article/articleview/2689307/Brexit: disaster capitalism it's worth reading up on why the Legatum institute (linked to the hedgefundamentalist 'taxpayers alliance, and US healthcare big business) is pushing for hard brexit.  They've got the ear of people like Redwood, and other Tory hard brexitiers.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> Brexit http://edm.sw1a.net/article/articleview/2689307/Brexit: disaster capitalism it's worth reading up on why the Legatum institute (linked to the hedgefundamentalist 'taxpayers alliance, and US healthcare big business) is pushing for hard brexit.  They've got the ear of people like Redwood, and other Tory hard brexitiers.


Disaster capitalists, eh. Good insight.
These scumbags are probably hedging their options, as they must have been having a field day with the Eu induced disasters across Europe in the last 10 years.


----------



## ohmyliver (Oct 17, 2017)

it's more about inducing an economic shock which will make the NHS/Welfare state unaffordable in the short to medium term, and then providing a 'solution' which will be the rolling back of workers rights and wages, low taxes, low regulation, 'no tarrifs' free trade etc.  Look at how it's worked in the tiger economies, and South America.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 17, 2017)

The richest countries in the world just told Britain to reverse Brexit or destroy the economy

Considering theresa may said last week there wasn't going to be another referendum, there's every chance there will be


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> it's more about inducing an economic shock which will make the NHS/Welfare state unaffordable in the short to medium term, and then providing a 'solution' which will be the rolling back of workers rights and wages, low taxes, low regulation, 'no tarrifs' free trade etc.  Look at how it's worked in the tiger economies, and South America.


... and certain European countries, no?


----------



## ohmyliver (Oct 17, 2017)

Yes, and?  In the context of the UK 'hard brexit' will be the hammer that smashes what remains of the nhs, etc on the anvil of the 'free market'


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

as pointed out many times on these boards, the NHS is taking a hammering whilst we're in the Eu anyway.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> It's like the Tories, and Labour following the same politics, hasn't fucked people over for decades. And yet its suddenly 'brexit' that gets all the liberals concerned for the working class.



Define liberal.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think there is more than brexit at work here. It does seem like 38yrs of Thatcherism/Blairism has run it's course & there is a genuine appetite for change. I think this would have happened with no brexit & Cameron still as PM but it might have taken a bit longer. I don't think Labour leadership is that bothered about what brexit we get they just want the Tories to fuck it up enough to get a Labour victory at next GE.



Fair enough. To extrapolate that scenario, it takes us back to Wilson's time. How long then before Corbyn and McDonnell bankrupt the country, go begging to the IMF and devalue the currency?

Do not forget, neither Corbyn or McDonnell have even been a PPS, never mind held ministerial office.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Yep - I don't see Brexit making all that much difference in the long run, at least not for people lucky enough to not have to worry about residency issues - people will probably be a little bit worse off and the Tories may eventually end up a little stronger, but no massive change. Britain's not going to suddenly turn into Singapore or Albania because of it. The vote that really has a chance to be transformative will be the one on electing a left-wing  Labour government, and if that happens I'll be very happy to admit I was wrong about Brexit.



A left wing Labour government will bankrupt the country, and destroy the remaining value of the currency. Borrow and spend, tax and spend. No thought to repayment. Of course, Corbyn's paymasters will be looking for preference for their members, to the detriment of everyone else.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> "I'm a Tory and loved Thatcher, especially weakening the power of unions and privatising huge amounts of public assets, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> "I vote Labour even though they're invested in selling off the social housing around here and part privatised services, but isn't brexit awful"
> 
> ...


 You'll be voting for the Monster Raving Loonie candidate then?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> as pointed out many times on these boards, the NHS is taking a hammering whilst we're in the Eu anyway.


and that the eu didn't gift uk workers their rights.


----------



## Whagwan (Oct 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Do not forget, neither Corbyn or McDonnell have even been a PPS, never mind held ministerial office.



Bit like Cameron then?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

Whagwan said:


> Bit like Cameron then?



Once elected, Blair's political ascent was rapid. He received his first front-bench appointment in 1984 as assistant Treasury spokesman.

In 1987, he stood for election to the Shadow Cabinet, receiving 71 votes.[44] When Kinnock resigned after a fourth consecutive Conservative victory in the 1992 general election, Blair became Shadow Home Secretary under John Smith.

In June 2003, Cameron was appointed a shadow minister in the Privy Council Office as a deputy to Eric Forth, then Shadow Leader of the House

He was appointed Opposition frontbench local government spokesman in 2004, before being promoted to the Shadow Cabinet that June as head of policy co-ordination.

So, both had extensive experience before becoming PM, Cameron also had advisory roles to the Chancellor and Home Secretary, before becoming an MP.

As I said, the gruesome twosome have no experience whatsoever.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and that the eu didn't gift uk workers their rights.



In a civilised country, workers should not have to fight for their rights.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> In a civilised country, workers should not have to fight for their rights.



but that world does not exist.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

I was keen not to leave the EU, but the way they have acted since the vote has reversed that mindset.  If we had another referendum, I’d vote leave this time round.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

i fear they wish to fist us so hard we can taste knuckles


----------



## Whagwan (Oct 17, 2017)

I hardly call Cameron's two years before being elected Tory leader "extensive experience."  If that is going to count you could the two years since Jezza got elected "extensive experience" for McDonnel.


----------



## emanymton (Oct 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> i fear they wish to fist us so hard we can taste knuckles


Now we know why you voted leave.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> but that world does not exist.



Indeed, and more is the pity.

'The labourer _is_ worthy of his reward.'.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I was keen not to leave the EU, but the way they have acted since the vote has reversed that mindset.  If we had another referendum, I’d vote leave this time round.



Goodness. What could a sane person, familiar with the fiscal and social risks of hard Brexit, object to so? Is it the sequencing of negotiations? The indivisibility of the freedoms? The interest in funding pension liabilities? What about the EU's position could possibly have come as a surprise?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 17, 2017)

Whagwan said:


> I hardly call Cameron's two years before being elected Tory leader "extensive experience."  If that is going to count you could the two years since Jezza got elected "extensive experience" for McDonnel.



The Conservatives' unexpected success in the 1992 election led Cameron to hit back at older party members who had criticised him and his colleagues, saying "whatever people say about us, we got the campaign right," and that they had listened to their campaign workers on the ground rather than the newspapers. He revealed he had led other members of the team across Smith Square to jeer at Transport House, the former Labour headquarters.[43]Cameron was rewarded with a promotion to Special Adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Norman Lamont.[44]

After Lamont was sacked, Cameron remained at the Treasury for less than a month before being specifically recruited by Home Secretary Michael Howard. It was commented that he was still "very much in favour"[52] and it was later reported that many at the Treasury would have preferred Cameron to carry on.[53] At the beginning of September 1993, Cameron applied to go on Conservative Central Office's list of Prospective Parliamentary Candidates.[54]

Maths not your strong point?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Once elected, Blair's political ascent was rapid. He received his first front-bench appointment in 1984 as assistant Treasury spokesman.
> 
> In 1987, he stood for election to the Shadow Cabinet, receiving 71 votes.[44] When Kinnock resigned after a fourth consecutive Conservative victory in the 1992 general election, Blair became Shadow Home Secretary under John Smith.
> 
> ...



So the problem with Corbyn and McDonnell is that they've never served in the shadow cabinet?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> A left wing Labour government will bankrupt the country, and destroy the remaining value of the currency. Borrow and spend, tax and spend. No thought to repayment. Of course, Corbyn's paymasters will be looking for preference for their members, to the detriment of everyone else.



Lucky the tories haven't been borrowing any money eh? I mean if they had been borrowing vastly more than any government in history, while investment in public services had nosedived, that would make you full of shit wouldn't it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lucky the tories haven't been borrowing any money eh? I mean if they had been borrowing vastly more than any government in history, while investment in public services had nosedived, that would make you full of shit wouldn't it?


Not just that. You can trace back over decades that the tories borrow more on average than Labour. It's one of the big lies of British politics that somehow still seems to hold traction in the face of clear evidence that it's bollocks.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Goodness. What could a sane person, familiar with the fiscal and social risks of hard Brexit, object to so? Is it the sequencing of negotiations? The indivisibility of the freedoms? The interest in funding pension liabilities? What about the EU's position could possibly have come as a surprise?


They’ve been a right bunch o’cunts, innit


----------



## Whagwan (Oct 17, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> The Conservatives' unexpected success in the 1992 election led Cameron to hit back at older party members who had criticised him and his colleagues, saying "whatever people say about us, we got the campaign right," and that they had listened to their campaign workers on the ground rather than the newspapers. He revealed he had led other members of the team across Smith Square to jeer at Transport House, the former Labour headquarters.[43]Cameron was rewarded with a promotion to Special Adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Norman Lamont.[44]
> 
> After Lamont was sacked, Cameron remained at the Treasury for less than a month before being specifically recruited by Home Secretary Michael Howard. It was commented that he was still "very much in favour"[52] and it was later reported that many at the Treasury would have preferred Cameron to carry on.[53] At the beginning of September 1993, Cameron applied to go on Conservative Central Office's list of Prospective Parliamentary Candidates.[54]
> 
> Maths not your strong point?



Cognition doesn't appear to be yours.  My post was in direct response to yours in which you stated he became a shadow minister in 2003.  You're just detailled his years as a party PR man, he wasn't even an MP until 97

If being a PR man before becoming an MP and then two years in the Shadow Cabinet counts as "extensive experience" then you seem to be ignoring McDonnels years in GLC, his years as an MP, and his Cameron matching 2 years in the Shadow Cabinet.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

Whagwan said:


> Cognition doesn't appear to be yours.  My post was in direct response to yours in which you stated he became a shadow minister in 2003.  You're just detailled his years as a party PR man, he wasn't even an MP until 97
> 
> If being a PR man before becoming an MP and then two years in the Shadow Cabinet counts as "extensive experience" then you seem to be ignoring McDonnels years in GLC, his years as an MP, and his Cameron matching 2 years in the Shadow Cabinet.


and el corbvz 30 years (man and boy) as MP


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

All this doom-mongering is a tried and tested strategy straight out of the Tory/ Eu austerity toolbox.

Reading this thread, you see why Sanders lost the Democrat nomination. 
Is the socialists/ working class left really so full of people _lacking the courage_ to make a go for real change, or are they lacking _the will _for real change due to the fear of potentially upsetting the neo-liberal middle class order that they've become so invested in?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Is the socialists/ working class left really so full of people _lacking the courage_ to make a go for real change, or are they lacking _the will _for real change due to the fear of potentially upsetting the neo-liberal middle class order that they've become so invested in?



Another way of upsetting the neo-liberal middle-class order would be an epidemic of untreatable and fatal plague. It would create real change in social structures and break down many of the mechanisms by which capitalists effect control. It would lead to local decision-making and accountability at a community level. It would undoubtedly be a social leveller. 

How do your arguments apply to Brexit and not to plague?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Another way of upsetting the neo-liberal middle-class order would be an epidemic of untreatable and fatal plague. It would create real change in social structures and break down many of the mechanisms by which capitalists effect control. It would lead to local decision-making and accountability at a community level. It would undoubtedly be a social leveller.
> 
> How do your arguments apply to Brexit and not to plague?


i notice you excluded my comments about doom-mongering when quoting my post...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> i notice you excluded my comments about doom-mongering when quoting my post...



But you seem to be trying to invalidate the pov that thinks brexit is going to make all kinds of things worse, including social inequality. There are some pretty solid reasons for believing that social inequality will worsen with a tory-led brexit (which is the only  brexit we have atm). We know there are tories out there who seek a race to the bottom wrt tax and trade. We know it because the current brexit secretary laid it all out for us in a pamphlet he wrote last year. He is one of them, as is Fox. Johnson doesn't really believe in anything, but his track record as London mayor shows that he does not give a flying fuck about social inequality. So there you go - the three idiots entrusted with conducting the tory-led brexit. This is not socialists not daring to 'make a go of real change'.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> All this doom-mongering is a tried and tested strategy straight out of the Tory/ Eu austerity toolbox.
> 
> Reading this thread, you see why Sanders lost the Democrat nomination.
> Is the socialists/ working class left really so full of people _lacking the courage_ to make a go for real change, or are they lacking _the will _for real change due to the fear of potentially upsetting the neo-liberal middle class order that they've become so invested in?



this is utter lefty bubble piss flaps. Brexit - especially hard brexit - will give us more austerity and more neo-liberalism. It will fuck the poorest, most deprived parts of the country and the poorest and most vulnerable people even harder than are being fucked now. Anyone who calls themselves a socialist and is pushing for hard brexit is a fucking idiot. 
also - a brexit reverse and the accompanying humiliation will shatter the tories   for a generation and may well explode the post imperial delusions of little englander nationalism. It will die with the baby boomers.


----------



## gosub (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Goodness. What could a sane person, familiar with the fiscal and social risks of hard Brexit, object to so? Is it the sequencing of negotiations? The indivisibility of the freedoms? The interest in funding pension liabilities? What about the EU's position could possibly have come as a surprise?



The complete denial that its happening.... the offers of associate membership that were on the table anyway, the complete lack of effort to work out how and when they will restructure themselves...


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There are some pretty solid reasons for believing that social inequality will worsen with a tory-led brexit (which is the only brexit we have atm).



If we have a hard Brexit, this is only half the problem, because it will inevitably cause capital flight to some degree, and probably quite a significant degree. We might be better off with a Labour government in that scenario, but it doesn't fundamentally matter who is in charge. They are going to be negotiating with capital from a position of weakness and they won't have a practical choice about it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> also - a brexit reverse and the accompanying humiliation will shatter the tories   for a generation and may well explode the post imperial delusions of little englander nationalism. It will die with the baby boomers.


This is an excellent point, and reason enough for any of us to want this particular project to come unstuck. It is also one of the reasons why Labour would be well-advised not to get too specific about brexit, except to say that it should be protecting worker rights and to push firmly that _any kind of brexit_ is not acceptable - that it would be a dereliction of their duty as opposition to just vote through whatever. Labour would do well to remember that about two thirds of current labour voters voted remain, as did a large number of former labour voters in the SNP, a party whose support they will probably need if they ever get to form a govt. Out of those younger people energised to vote for Corbyn this year, a very very large majority of them oppose brexit.

People bang on about honouring the referendum result, but not holding the govt to account now for what it is doing now for fear of those who bang on about honouring the referendum result is an actual real threat to what little democracy we do have.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> They’ve been a right bunch o’cunts, innit


Because they're sticking up for the best interests of the 27 member states, none of which wanted the UK to leave, still less expelled us from the club? The cunts are the ones that brought this fiasco about and now seem hell bent on making it as painful as possible for all concerned.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not just that. You can trace back over decades that the tories borrow more on average than Labour. It's one of the big lies of British politics that somehow still seems to hold traction in the face of clear evidence that it's bollocks.



A plentiful supply of credulous, bitter old fuckers like Sasaferrato probably helps with this big-lie-spreading strategy.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 17, 2017)

its almost like they are trying to punish the brexiters.. but oh no they wouldnt be so bitter would they ? ( ah this is the torys we are talking about  )


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Because they're sticking up for the best interests of the 27 member states, none of which wanted the UK to leave, still less expelled us from the club? The cunts are the ones that brought this fiasco about and now seem hell bent on making it as painful as possible for all concerned.


Many of the actions are contrary to the best interests of the 27 member states.  They are in the best interests of the institutions of the EU, not the member states.  It is not in the interests of the member states to leave citizens fucked on residency rights, nor is it in the interests of member states to end up with trade tariffs.  The process has laid bare the problems with devolving your decision making to institutions whose interests are not necessarily aligned with yours.

In addition, the EU have really pushed ahead with further federalisation in the 18 months since the Brexit vote.  Even if the vote had been to remain, their current direction of travel would have given me pause in and of itself.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Many of the actions are contrary to the best interests of the 27 member states.  They are in the best interests of the institutions of the EU, not the member states.  It is not in the interests of the member states to leave citizens fucked on residency rights, nor is it in the interests of member states to end up with trade tariffs.  The process has laid bare the problems with devolving your decision making to institutions whose interests are not necessarily aligned with yours.
> 
> In addition, the EU have really pushed ahead with further federalisation in the 18 months since the Brexit vote.  Even if the vote had been to remain, their current direction of travel would have given me pause in and of itself.



The UK had an open offer to opt out "ever closer union". And as it stands, the member states and the European Parliament are being rather tougher over negotiations than the Commission or the Council


----------



## kebabking (Oct 17, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Because they're sticking up for the best interests of the 27 member states, none of which wanted the UK to leave, still less expelled us from the club? The cunts are the ones that brought this fiasco about and now seem hell bent on making it as painful as possible for all concerned.



i don't see much in the EU's decision making with regards to brexit that seems focused on the best interests of the member states - if you design a negotiating pathway who'se most likely result is the UK storming off in a huff in 2019 and paying not one cent into the EU budget and with huge queues of French, Spanish, Italian etc.. produce rotting in trucks at Calais, then 'looking out for the best interests of the member states' looks to be pretty low on your list of priorities...

the best interests of the member states consists of the UK continuing to buy huge quantities of their stuff, paying into specific joint programmes, legacy commitments and for free trade access, and using its diplomatic, intelligence and military weight to support EU defence and security policy. pretty obviously then, a process that makes those things more difficult is not in the member states best interests.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i don't see much in the EU's decision making with regards to brexit that seems focused on the best interests of the member states - if you design a negotiating pathway who'se most likely result is the UK storming off in a huff in 2019 and paying not one cent into the EU budget and with huge queues of French, Spanish, Italian etc.. produce rotting in trucks at Calais, then 'looking out for the best interests of the member states' looks to be pretty low on your list of priorities...
> 
> the best interests of the member states consists of the UK continuing to buy huge quantities of their stuff, paying into specific joint programmes, legacy commitments and for free trade access, and using its diplomatic, intelligence and military weight to support EU defence and security policy. pretty obviously then, a process that makes those things more difficult is not in the member states best interests.



This is a rizla away from prosecco and cake. Member states have quite a bit to gain from ensuring that existing EU, EFTA and EEA structures aren't compromised.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 17, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i don't see much in the EU's decision making with regards to brexit that seems focused on the best interests of the member states - if you design a negotiating pathway who'se most likely result is the UK storming off in a huff in 2019 and paying not one cent into the EU budget and with huge queues of French, Spanish, Italian etc.. produce rotting in trucks at Calais, then 'looking out for the best interests of the member states' looks to be pretty low on your list of priorities...
> 
> the best interests of the member states consists of the UK continuing to buy huge quantities of their stuff, paying into specific joint programmes, legacy commitments and for free trade access, and using its diplomatic, intelligence and military weight to support EU defence and security policy. pretty obviously then, a process that makes those things more difficult is not in the member states best interests.


Thank you David Davis


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Many of the actions are contrary to the best interests of the 27 member states.  They are in the best interests of the institutions of the EU, not the member states.  It is not in the interests of the member states to leave citizens fucked on residency rights, nor is it in the interests of member states to end up with trade tariffs.  The process has laid bare the problems with devolving your decision making to institutions whose interests are not necessarily aligned with yours.
> 
> In addition, the EU have really pushed ahead with further federalisation in the 18 months since the Brexit vote.  Even if the vote had been to remain, their current direction of travel would have given me pause in and of itself.


Silas loom is right about the ever closer union - the UK was semi-detached anyway and would have remained so. (There is also the question about how the UK still being in the EU would have affected that direction of travel - the UK was very far from a passive member having stuff done to it.)

As for residency rights, who is it that has been the biggest cunt about this? It's quite a competition given the cunty things the cunts in the UK government have been saying (and refusing to say).


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

Hey, I never said our bunch of cunts gave me any great hope for our future.  The point is, though, the EU as an institution has not seriously engaged with any of the attempts even of our bunch of cunts to tie up residency rights.  It’s pretty clear that the EU as an institution has punishment of the UK not matter what damage it does elsewhere at the top of its agenda, and that’s a long way from acting in the interests of its member states.

I do get that the closer union would have been different for the UK, but in practice it isn’t great to be ever more disjoint from the club your are trying to be part of.  There are all kinds of problems that creates in and of itself.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> (There is also the question about how the UK still being in the EU would have affected that direction of travel - the UK was very far from a passive member having stuff done to it.).



This. In particular, the single market in services is less likely to adapt and strengthen without the hard work that the UK historically contributed.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> the EU as an institution has not seriously engaged with any of the attempts even of our bunch of cunts to tie up residency rights.



As far as I can tell, their cunts have been encouraging our cunts to make a better offer. There's a difference between not engaging and not backing down.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

Raheem said:


> As far as I can tell, their cunts have been encouraging our cunts to make a better offer. There's a difference between not engaging and not backing down.


It’s hard to see through the sea of cunts, but I don’t see the EU suggesting a way forward.  Making somebody negotiate with themselves is a good tactic for winning but not a constructive way of ending up with the best solution for all.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It’s hard to see through the sea of cunts, but I don’t see the EU suggesting a way forward.  Making somebody negotiate with themselves is a good tactic for winning but not a constructive way of ending up with the best solution for all.


Did you actually expect anything different? From either side?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It’s hard to see through the sea of cunts, but I don’t see the EU suggesting a way forward.  Making somebody negotiate with themselves is a good tactic for winning but not a constructive way of ending up with the best solution for all.



The Council has made it _entirely plain_ that the ways forward need to be modelled on an existing relationship - either Norway, Canada or a country with no relationship. It's hardly their fault that the Conservative party has no idea which of those it wants, and prefers to kick the can and deal in slogans. And the Council can't be blamed for adopting that position given the time it takes to negotiate a deal from scratch. Yes, they probably want us to do the sane thing and join EFTA for the only unproblematic Brexit possible, but they are hardly being obstructive. 

The only point about the sequencing where you could argue that they are being unreasonable is Ireland, and the UK suggestions on that score so far are totally vacuous.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Did you actually expect anything different? From either side?


God no.  It’s still laid bare the different interests of the EU and it’s member states though.


Silas Loom said:


> The Council has made it _entirely plain_ that the ways forward need to be modelled on an existing relationship - either Norway, Canada or a country with no relationship. It's hardly their fault that the Conservative party has no idea which of those it wants, and prefers to kick the can and deal in slogans. And the Council can't be blamed for adopting that position given the time it takes to negotiate a deal from scratch. Yes, they probably want us to do the sane thing and join EFTA for the only unproblematic Brexit possible, but they are hardly being obstructive.
> 
> The only point about the sequencing where you could argue that they are being unreasonable is Ireland, and the UK suggestions on that score so far are totally vacuous.


The Council has indeed adopted a route most advantageous to the Council.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It’s hard to see through the sea of cunts, but I don’t see the EU suggesting a way forward.  Making somebody negotiate with themselves is a good tactic for winning but not a constructive way of ending up with the best solution for all.



In what sense has the EU 'made' the UK negotiate with itself? It was entirely reasonable for the EU to work on the basis that the UK knew what it wanted and had a coherent plan, given that it was the UK that fired the starting pistol on the whole process by triggering Article 50.

I suspect the EU has been a bit taken aback by how incompetent the UK has been. The EU has been transparent and consistent from the beginning. It made its position clear on residency rights on 12 June. It's becoming clear that the UK has been arguing amongst itself from the beginning. There was no need for May to trigger Article 50 when she did. The blame for the pressure we (and the EU) are now under is entirely the fault of the UK government.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> God no.  It’s still laid bare the different interests of the EU and it’s member states though.
> 
> The Council has indeed adopted a route most advantageous to the Council.



The Council is the member states. The hardline is coming from the political leaders of the other 27 EU countries, not from nameless EU bureaucrats.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But you seem to be trying to invalidate the pov that thinks brexit is going to make all kinds of things worse, including social inequality. There are some pretty solid reasons for believing that social inequality will worsen with a tory-led brexit (which is the only  brexit we have atm). We know there are tories out there who seek a race to the bottom wrt tax and trade. We know it because the current brexit secretary laid it all out for us in a pamphlet he wrote last year. He is one of them, as is Fox. Johnson doesn't really believe in anything, but his track record as London mayor shows that he does not give a flying fuck about social inequality. So there you go - the three idiots entrusted with conducting the tory-led brexit. This is not socialists not daring to 'make a go of real change'.


No I'm sticking with the facts we know now and not getting my knickers in a twist.
Funny how the narrative as moved to Brexit (all kinds, not just a hard brexit) equals economic meltdown, worsening social inequality, death of the NHS, tax haven etc 

The doom and gloom is built on a series of massive assumptions: a) that the negotiations break down completely. b) that the government goes for a hard brexit. c) that the government gets that hard brexit past parliament d) the Eu economy doesn't go tits-up in the meantime.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> No I'm sticking with the facts we know now and not getting my knickers in a twist.
> Funny how the narrative as moved to Brexit (all kinds, not just a hard brexit) equals economic meltdown, worsening social inequality, death of the NHS, tax haven etc
> 
> The doom and gloom is built on a series of massive assumptions: a) that the negotiations break down completely. b) that the government goes for a hard brexit. c) that the government gets that hard brexit past parliament d) the Eu economy doesn't go tits-up in the meantime.



If assumption (a) holds then there is nothing the government or parliament can do. The default is that we crash out. There is no (b) or (c).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2017)

Raheem said:


> The Council is the member states. The hardline is coming from the political leaders of the other 27 EU countries, not from nameless EU bureaucrats.



which is so demonstrably obvious you wouldn't think it needs spelling out. The Uk has not ever agreed to anything within the EU that the government of the time didn't think was good for them - and nor has france or germany or italy etc etc. 
The terms that the EU negotiating team are laying down are done after consulting with the 27 Eu governments -  after Germany has told them what to say.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> No I'm sticking with the facts we know now and not getting my knickers in a twist.
> Funny how the narrative as moved to Brexit (all kinds, not just a hard brexit) equals economic meltdown, worsening social inequality, death of the NHS, tax haven etc


Although not put in such apocalyptic terms, that's been my narrative on a tory-led brexit on here for the last two years.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> If assumption (a) holds then there is nothing the government or parliament can do. The default is that we crash out. There is no (b) or (c).



And all that is required for a) to hold is that the current red lines remain in place. Oh, and that the DUP have a say on the Northern Ireland solution. 

Quite why an EU economic collapse (d) would help the Brexiteer cause, and end gloom, is very unclear.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> this is utter lefty bubble piss flaps. Brexit - especially hard brexit - will give us more austerity and more neo-liberalism. It will fuck the poorest, most deprived parts of the country and the poorest and most vulnerable people even harder than are being fucked now.


Can't you see what you're doing? Associating anyone wanting Brexit with now supporting a Tory led shambles hard brexit while adding the usual doom mongering rhetoric used by the tory and & Eu neo-liberal elite.


Kaka Tim said:


> Anyone who calls themselves a socialist and is pushing for hard brexit is a fucking idiot.


Who would that be then? Show me anyone here pushing for hard brexit.


Kaka Tim said:


> also - a brexit reverse and the accompanying humiliation will shatter the tories for a generation and may well explode the post imperial delusions of little englander nationalism. It will die with the baby boomers.


Indeed a humiliation for the whole nation. Not to mention a breakdown in democracy causing a huge dejection, particularly in the working class of the north that voted for brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Indeed a humiliation for the whole nation. Not to mention a breakdown in democracy causing a huge dejection, particularly in the working class of the north that voted for brexit.


Democracy did not end in June 2016. The idea that you push ahead with something regardless of the consequences and that nobody should be held to account for doing so. That is a breakdown in democracy.

As for 'humiliation for the whole nation', it would be a humiliation for a government is not a humiliation for a nation, although if such a thing were to happen, putting paid to the various neo-colonialist, militarist ambitions of various UK leaders, that would be a thoroughly good thing. Bit of national humiliation over hubristic ideas would be good for Britain and good for the rest of the world.

There was a basic contradiction in process with the referendum. A government wanting to make a change and calling a referendum with options 'this change/no change' is one thing. It can campaign on the basis  of what the change is and how they propose to do it. But a govt calling a referendum where they want the 'no change' option and offer no solution at all as to how to do the 'change' option is contradictory, and leads to this mess. All kinds of nasty shit is now projected about what the referendum _really means_, including limiting EU immigration, which a majority of leave voters are said to have wanted, but far from a majority of everyone. Even 90 per cent of 52 is less than 50.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> the usual doom mongering rhetoric used by the tory and & Eu neo-liberal elite.



Its not doom mongering - its absolutely the consensus amongst everyone who's looked at the facts outside of a handful of twats like Rees mogg. Many brexiteers openly admit it - but see it as worth it as a way of ridding the UK of decadent EU influences like workers rights and health and safety regulations (coupled with deluded post imperial hubris).


.



pocketscience said:


> Indeed a humiliation for the whole nation. Not to mention a breakdown in democracy causing a huge dejection, particularly in the working class of the north that voted for brexit.



But you may get to a situation where most of the nation are demanding the whole process be aborted because its headed for disaster. And fuck off with this betraying the "working clases of the north" (of which i am one btw) - they didn't all vote brexit (check out the %s in manchester, liverpool, leeds, sheffield etc) . And what about the young working classes? or working classes of london? or scotland? or nothern ireland? Or do you get double points for being a miserable old cunt in a flat cap or something? 

And this notion that the working class are "pro-brexit" needs dumping - the biggest brexit demographic were retired home owners


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> A brexit under Labour will be a very different proposition. Lexit in fact. Not that long to wait. Probably well before 2022.



See now you're going the other way and talking as if it's cut and dried - there won't be an election until 2022 unless somebody forces the Tories to have one.



Raheem said:


> A Brexit negotiated by Labour would be a soft Brexit. A Labour government that came to power following a no deal Brexit would not be able to deliver on its promises and would be blamed for all the shit. Corbyn would be Britain's answer to Hollande.



What does a soft Brexit even mean? 

If a Labour Govt was in power and "shit" happened it would be their bloody fault - the whole point of getting them into power remember is to try to advance the transformation of society, into one that isn't shit. 

Honestly, between the wide eyed optimisim and fatalistic pessimism I can't breathe.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> the uk out side the EU will be even more prey to neo-liberal forces



What, even more so than inside a trade block that forces member states to privatise water? Christ get a fucking brain cell


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Of course it will give the Tories more power. It'd be impossible for it not to. There will be no more European Court of Justice, for one example. This isn't an opinion - it's a fact that leaving the EU gives the British govt more power (all that "taking back control" stuff) and the party in power right now is the Tory Party. I honestly find it a bit weird that you'd actually try to deny this.
> 
> It's also impossible for us to have an election before Brexit because it's already happening. Thought you might have noticed that.



What has the ECJ stopped the Tories doing? There was thing about overfishing years ago and thats literally it. The ECJ like the EU itself is totally committed to austerity.

Nothing is happening you tool. Nothing. Tell me one thing that has changed since the referendum regarding Britain's membership of the EU. No one in the Tory govt or the Council of Ministers has a fucking clue what's going on.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What, even more so than inside a trade block that forces member states to privatise water? Christ get a fucking brain cell



AIUI the relevant EU regs insist on free and fair competition unless the water supply is completely public. Do you have any information to the contrary? That’s not the same thing as forcing privatisation even if it annoys jurisdictions which have spun out their utilities.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

...sorry guys...I would apologise for hijacking the thread but it's ALREADY BEEN HIJACKED BY SWIVEL EYED LOONS WHO KEEP GOING ON ABOUT FACTS WHILE REPEATEDLY STATING UNTRUE THINGS ffs I have never known a political issue reduce so many people's IQ by so much.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> AIUI the relevant EU regs insist on free and fair competition unless the water supply is completely public. Do you have any information to the contrary?



You've literally just supplied info backing up my point, if you're gonna do it for me what do you want?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> If a Labour Govt was in power and "shit" happened it would be their bloody fault -



This is obviously not true. Shit things can happen without them being the government's fault. If Labour were to come to power shortly after Brexit, they would have to deal with whatever the consequences of Brexit are. They might cope relatively well or relatively badly, but they won't be able to just make the consequences not happen.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> If assumption (a) holds then there is nothing the government or parliament can do. The default is that we crash out. There is no (b) or (c).


unless may resigns / calls an election


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> But you may get to a situation where most of the nation are demanding the whole process be aborted because its headed for disaster. And fuck off with this betraying the "working clases of the north" (of which i am one btw) - they didn't all vote brexit (check out the %s in manchester, liverpool, leeds, sheffield etc) . And what about the young working classes? or working classes of london? or scotland? or nothern ireland? Or do you get double points for being a miserable old cunt in a flat cap or something?
> 
> And this notion that the working class are "pro-brexit" needs dumping - the biggest brexit demographic were retired home owners


nothing mutually exclusive about working class and a home owner now days.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> And this notion that the working class are "pro-brexit" needs dumping - the biggest brexit demographic were retired home owners


AKA older working class people, many of who own their own house- well, at least the bank does.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...sorry guys...I would apologise for hijacking the thread but it's ALREADY BEEN HIJACKED BY SWIVEL EYED LOONS WHO KEEP GOING ON ABOUT FACTS WHILE REPEATEDLY STATING UNTRUE THINGS ffs I have never known a political issue reduce so many people's IQ by so much.


Hijack it to fuck, I'm despondent and need amusing


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 17, 2017)

Plenty of w/c pensioners who own their own homes with mortgages long paid off who had been born 40yrs later than they were would be generation rent now.


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...sorry guys...I would apologise for hijacking the thread but it's ALREADY BEEN HIJACKED BY SWIVEL EYED LOONS WHO KEEP GOING ON ABOUT FACTS WHILE REPEATEDLY STATING UNTRUE THINGS ffs I have never known a political issue reduce so many people's IQ by so much.



Innit. This is precisely what Butchers said a few times about this reaction by mostly Labour moderates and left-liberals.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What, even more so than inside a trade block that forces member states to privatise water? Christ get a fucking brain cell



Scotland's water is in public ownership


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Scotland's water is in public ownership


And the fourth railway package doesn't really exist because France has nationalised industries.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Scotland's water is in public ownership



Yeah, it seems to be a bendy banana issue for Lexiteers; the detail of the situation is too boring and too complex for them to grasp. 

Basically, don't spin out a utility or have a preferred contractor - even if it is state-owned - and expect to be able to get away without open competition. Do everything yourself and you are fine.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

I think my favourite one was when someone raised the spectre of the death penalty being introduced. So we have had war, famine, death....what have we on pestilence? I'm sure people can think of something


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

Raheem said:


> This is obviously not true. Shit things can happen without them being the government's fault. If Labour were to come to power shortly after Brexit, they would have to deal with whatever the consequences of Brexit are. They might cope relatively well or relatively badly, but they won't be able to just make the consequences not happen.



Getting in the excuses for the inevitable social democratic betrayal early eh?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Scotland's water is in public ownership



No, you're thinking of Ireland. Get it right eh?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Yeah, it seems to be a bendy banana issue for Lexiteers; the detail of the situation is too boring and too complex for them to grasp.
> 
> Basically, don't spin out a utility or have a preferred contractor - even if it is state-owned - and expect to be able to get away without open competition. Do everything yourself and you are fine.



You're in no position to lecture anyone on complexity sonny jim - and you're wrong. Read the Lisbon treaty.


----------



## scifisam (Oct 17, 2017)

Fine. No working class people voted remain, taking away a load of rules and regulations and a final court of appeal won't make any difference to anybody at all, people who actually argue for this are the clever ones and also up is down, the Pope's a Muslim and bears only shit in non-wooded areas.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I think my favourite one was when someone raised the spectre of the death penalty being introduced. So we have had war, famine, death....what have we on pestilence? I'm sure people can think of something






> "Infectious diseases spread across borders and we need to work together, but also develop policies together, to control these diseases and fund large research programmes, and that can only be done within the EU."



Would Brexit compromise the future of UK science?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 17, 2017)

scifisam said:


> Fine. No working class people voted remain, taking away a load of rules and regulations and a final court of appeal won't make any difference to anybody at all, people who actually argue for this are the clever ones and also up is down, the Pope's a Muslim and bears only shit in non-wooded areas.



And if you've got a problem with it, you're a stupid, lying, doom-mongering liberal who will spoil Brexit and wreck the country with the sheer force of your shitty attitude.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 17, 2017)

The thread title is speculative so invites speculative posts. As the days & weeks pass events that have occurred & will occur may well change the direction of that speculation. Who knows what is going on behind the scenes? All sorts of consiracy theories could spring to mind. It is understandable that many folk have mixed & confused feelings about brexit whichever way one voted at the time.

To me there is nothing wrong with posting one's current feelings about brexit on this thread. Feelings can change from day to day. One must find optimism from somewhere & I find it from the prospect of a Corbyn led Labour government in possibly the next few yrs. Will it be better than what we have now? I'm prepared to give it a go.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 17, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Would Brexit compromise the future of UK science?



Brexit has even wrecked Betteridge's law.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> And if you've got a problem with it, you're a stupid, lying, doom-mongering liberal who will spoil Brexit and wreck the country with the sheer force of your shitty attitude.


In fairness, you might also be an advocate of the tory europhile tendency who thinks the goblins of Tory past have come to destroy any hope of achieving a euro-bloc parity with the other major powers. Although I don't think that anyone of that persuasion posts here


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

Oh well, at least the right will have a script for doom mongering when Labour come to power.


----------



## stethoscope (Oct 17, 2017)

I see the neoliberal/pro-market OECD have now weighed into the 'reverse brexit or' threats.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, you're thinking of Ireland. Get it right eh?


Irish Water and Scottish Water are both Statutory companies, though it is a shit argument.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

The OECD doesn't know its arse from its elbow. Preached austerity for years then reversed that last year when member economies ground to a halt. Suddenly, the idea of government borrowing for infrastructure at record low interest rates became advisable.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Irish water and Scottish water are both Statuatory companies, though it is a shit argument.



 A response on a specific point. There exists within the EU water companies in public ownership, and there have been moves towards the remunicipalisation of water supplies in some regions in the EU.


----------



## magneze (Oct 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I think my favourite one was when someone raised the spectre of the death penalty being introduced. So we have had war, famine, death....what have we on pestilence? I'm sure people can think of something


In order to solve the famine we'll need to import lots of GM crops from the US which will inevitably be riddled with genetic disease that the EU would never let happen.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Getting in the excuses for the inevitable social democratic betrayal early eh?



I'd say it's more that I'm not choosing to delude myself that it's not what would happen, fairly automatically.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> A response on a specific point. There exists within the EU water companies in public ownership, and there have been moves towards the remunicipalisation of water supplies in some regions in the EU.


Aye in Scotland and Ireland. However the EU are forcing Greece to privatize their water, despite the fact cities in Germany have been buying back their water as it was all to fuck.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I think my favourite one was when someone raised the spectre of the death penalty being introduced. So we have had war, famine, death....what have we on pestilence? I'm sure people can think of something



Years of plenty followed by years of famine - I would have thought you would have recognised the biblical metaphor.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

magneze said:


> In order to solve the famine we'll need to import lots of GM crops from the US which will inevitably be riddled with genetic disease that the EU would never let happen.



And they'll introduce that awful "fast food".


----------



## magneze (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> And they'll introduce that awful "fast food".


Long lunches to be banned.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

People will have to work day and night, not knowing how many hours they might get.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Years of plenty followed by years of famine - I would have thought you would have recognised the biblical metaphor.



skinny cows and fat cows yes. Sasseferato invoked the _fear gorta_ more literally


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

If a hard brexit comes they'll want to sell off public assets and encourage casino capitalism. Destroy our socialist utopia.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

I reckon they'll bring back pints at lunchtime though.


----------



## magneze (Oct 17, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> I reckon they'll bring back pints at lunchtime though.


That went away?!


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

And thank fuck the 568ml mark on the pint glass will go. Freedom.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2017)

magneze said:


> That went away?!



You can still have half a litre just after siesta, if you want.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2017)

the point about being more prey to neo-liberal forces outside the EU is that the UK will be desperate for trade with the likes of the US who are likely to want clauses that would allow private companies getting a slice of things like the NHS and far more restrictive clauses on what is allowed to be state run than under the EU. 
And add to that that the people negotiating these trade deals will be the fucking right wing of the tory party. 

As for working class homeowners - a retired person owns their home outright is in a hugely more privileged position than  low to average paid workers - and its exactly that group that will least affected by the negative effects of brexit. 
why the fuck should they get a special status because maybe they used to work in a car plant? they're pulling the ladder up behind them and voting to take away the decent wages and welfare protection that they enjoyed from everyone under 40.  

The EU is a self serving power bloc heavily influenced by neo-liberalism thats institutionalised into its rules and in bodies like the ECB. Its also massively corrupt. 

But the only plausible alternative right now is even more shit by an order of magnitude. Brexit means recession,  a shrinking of GDP and less protection from market forces - and that in turn means a shrinking welfare state, higher prices, lower wages,more austerity and a shit load of social problems - as well people's lives being fucked over cos of their citizenship status. Oh - and nothern ireland. And things like joint academic projects suffering. And people not being able to go and freely travel and work around the europe. 

Yeah - some of that might turn not as bad as forecast. But nothing is going to be better.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> why the fuck should they get a special status because maybe they used to work in a car plant?


Pretty sure they got one vote each same as the rest of us.


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 17, 2017)

I have a failure of imagination.  I can't imagine Brexit actually happening and being accepted in places such as London or Scotland.   I also can't imagine Brexit being openly reversed.  Something is going to go BANG! I think.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2017)

Poi E said:


> If a hard brexit comes they'll want to sell off public assets and encourage casino capitalism. Destroy our socialist utopia.



I am struggling to think of anything left to flog off- air maybe ?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2017)

Scotland.


----------



## Riklet (Oct 17, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I was keen not to leave the EU, but the way they have acted since the vote has reversed that mindset.  If we had another referendum, I’d vote leave this time round.



Same. It's all very There Is No Alternative.

The rightwing neoliberal parasites wont be going anywhere whatever happens. They are already major influences on EU policy. Most influential newspaper at the European Comission is the Financial Times, which may not be shock doctrine, but shows who's been pulling strings. It's also one of the reasons Brexit is a devastating blow to the EU, as they have been looking to London more than anywhere else over the past decade or two. Brexit will influence that trend, for sure. It has already made the EU cautious about implementing more austerity and imposing fines on Greece or Spain.

Sadly the future of the NHS was not looking too great in May 2016 with Labour nowhere and smug Tories predicting a Brexit stroll and followed by some more sell offs. For all the things wrong with the Leave campaign and the crazies, at least we are pursuing an aggressive strategy, not a defensive limp one, grounded in the hope of the liberal left in the EU saving the day and changing the EU's political direction (granted this did happen in Belgium with CETA). I lost faith in that with Greece. Since Brexit we have seen a continuation of the real nasty face which dictated the shit response to the financial crisis.

And yes most under 30s voted Remain but how many of us were happy with the status quo? A lucky few. And for a generation raised on neoliberalism there's always that hope you too can join them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Poi E said:


> there have been moves towards the remunicipalisation of water supplies in some regions in the EU.



Where?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Aye in Scotland and Ireland. However the EU are forcing Greece to privatize their water, despite the fact cities in Germany have been buying back their water as it was all to fuck.



I'll stand corrected on Scotland although I'm surprised - EU very clear last year that there is no exemption for Ireland.

European Commission confirms its view that we are no longer exempt from water charges


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'll stand corrected on Scotland although I'm surprised - EU very clear last year that there is no exemption for Ireland.
> 
> European Commission confirms its view that we are no longer exempt from water charges



You're well within your rights to object to this decision, but it isn't to do with whether water can be publicly owned.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> You're well within your rights to object to this decision, but it isn't to do with whether water can be publicly owned.



The article refers to charging for water rather than renationalisation of water services but charging for water is one of the key aspects of the privatisation agenda - added to which while the EU allows public ownership in cases of 'established practice' the Lisbon treaty does not allow the re-nationalisation of services once privatised, which is why I shared - at the time I read something much better than The Journal on this but cant remember where right now - I know it has been discussed in more detail on the water charges movement thread.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> the Lisbon treaty does not allow the re-nationalisation of services once privatised, which is why I shared



No, this is a brexiteer canard. There have been plenty of nationalisations since the Lisbon treaty. Think about British banks and rail franchises, just for starters.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

In any case, both Scottish and Irish water are statutory companies which are subject to govt regulation and I believe in Scotland price setting but they're not publicly owned utilities.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> No, this is a brexiteer canard. There have been plenty of nationalisations since the Lisbon treaty. Think about British banks and rail franchises, just for starters.



Those were not re-nationalisations. They were bail out packages. The banks and the *one* rail franchise that was taken into public ownership were not subject to state control and were immediately re-privatised. Don't be dishonest. Where has there been a re-nationalisation of a service in the EU?

And if you're gonna engage, don't use phrases like "Brexiteer canard". At least try not to sound like a wanker.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 18, 2017)

nobody ever said neoliberalism wasn't fine with socialising business debt. Thats pretty much one of its defining features right? privatise profits, nationalise debts


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> At least try not to sound like a wanker.



I can't be bothered.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> added to which while the EU allows public ownership in cases of 'established practice' the Lisbon treaty does not allow the re-nationalisation of services once privatised,


That's not true. This was linked to in another thread. I may dig it out if I can be bothered, but it's simply not true. There is provision for nationalisation in the national interest - the other thread had a link to the particular bit.

I'm not defending the Lisbon treaty here, but you're misrepresenting it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> In any case, both Scottish and Irish water are statutory companies which are subject to govt regulation and I believe in Scotland price setting but they're not publicly owned utilities.



Who owns Scottish Water then?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not true. This was linked to in another thread. I may dig it out if I can be bothered, but it's simply not true. There is provision for nationalisation in the national interest - the other thread had a link to the particular bit.
> 
> I'm not defending the Lisbon treaty here, but you're misrepresenting it.



Kind of irrelevant cos the ECJ decides how the treaty is interpreted. I'm not misrepresenting it though, and if you're going to argue maybe make the effort to find your proof.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Kind of irrelevant cos the ECJ decides how the treaty is interpreted. I'm not misrepresenting it though, and if you're going to argue maybe make the effort to find your proof.


Maybe you could make the effort. I already have done once on here. Maybe read it and link to the relevant bit if you're so sure. After all, you're the one making the claim.

You could search on here. The discussion concerned rail privatisation in particular and how it would be possible under EU rules.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Who owns Scottish Water then?



You could argue the Scottish government does - but it doesn't directly control it which I always think is a key feature of ownership.

The Scottish govt does set prices for water, but it does that by benchmarking against private water companies in England and Wales.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe you could make the effort. I already have done once on here. Maybe read it and link to the relevant bit if you're so sure. After all, you're the one making the claim.



At least link me up to where you've said that? I'm pretty sure we've both down this to death to be fair. Meh.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You could argue the Scottish government does



You could argue it, if you can find someone who thinks they don't.

How about we switch glasses. Can you find some examples of the ECJ or any other organ of the EU blocking the nationalisation of a private company?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 18, 2017)

Let me help you... Nationalisation Is Not Against EU Law | HuffPost UK


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Let me help you... Nationalisation Is Not Against EU Law | HuffPost UK



From the article you posted: "Professor Nicol raises an important point. The EU probably encroaches on the sovereignty of member states to its most egregious degree when it comes to market liberalisation. Art. 176 TFEU commits member states to the expansion of markets."

This is a better source than HuffPost - How the Single Market blocks socialist policies

Explains it a bit better than I have, admittedly, but then I don't even know why I'm bothering - "Large-scale nationalisation would breach the Lisbon Treaty. Small-scale nationalisation would have to comply with competition laws which make it ineffective, or breach the Lisbon Treaty. Big state subsidies to save or create jobs would breach the Lisbon Treaty."


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> From the article you posted: "Professor Nicol raises an important point. The EU probably encroaches on the sovereignty of member states to its most egregious degree when it comes to market liberalisation. Art. 176 TFEU commits member states to the expansion of markets."
> 
> This is a better source than HuffPost - How the Single Market blocks socialist policies
> 
> Explains it a bit better than I have, admittedly, but then I don't even know why I'm bothering - "Large-scale nationalisation would breach the Lisbon Treaty. Small-scale nationalisation would have to comply with competition laws which make it ineffective, or breach the Lisbon Treaty. Big state subsidies to save or create jobs would breach the Lisbon Treaty."



I'm certainly not going to question the expertise of the Nottingham Socialist Party. However, it must be the case that their looking at EU legislation and talking about what it maybe might possibly theoretically mean in practice is not quite definitive. It is a fact that lots of nationalisations have happened in EU countries. and it's also a fact (or so I believe) that none has ever been blocked. It's not clear from the article what is meant by "large scale nationalisation", but I am willing to concede that attempting to nationalise the entire economy would probably be difficult while remaining a member of the EU. I think that's a bridge to discuss when we come to it, though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I'm certainly not going to question the expertise of the Nottingham Socialist Party. However, it must be the case that their looking at EU legislation and talking about what it maybe might possibly theoretically mean in practice is not quite definitive. It is a fact that lots of privatisations have happened in EU countries. and it's also a fact (or so I believe) that none has ever been blocked. It's not clear from the article what is meant by "large scale nationalisation", but I am willing to concede that attempting to nationalise the entire economy would probably be difficult while remaining a member of the EU. I think that's a bridge to discuss when we come to it, though.



I didn't ask for the referendum and given the choice I would rather elect a government that would break the Lisbon treaty through large scale nationalisation than have had the referendum - crossing the bridge as we come to it as you put it. But you don't get to choose, this is what's going on. In any case what I said was that the treaty prohibits taking services back into public ownership - thank you for conceding that is the case.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> thank you for conceding that is the case.



And thank you for this silly, transparent bullshit.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 18, 2017)

I think one reason for brexit was the UK's following of EU rules to the letter over the decades whereas other countries just seemed to avoid the bits that did not suit them. For example whereas UK companies developed whole business models to take advantage of cheap & plentiful immigrant labour other countries like France by retaining strong employment law made it much less easy & profitable to employ foreign workers.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> The EU is a self serving power bloc heavily influenced by neo-liberalism thats institutionalised into its rules and in bodies like the ECB. Its also massively corrupt.
> 
> But the only plausible alternative right now is even more shit by an order of magnitude.


If you are relying on the EU (or the Labour Party/SNP/Greens for that matter) to protect people then you're already up shit creek.

The changes that will improve our society will only come from labour. I'm under no illusions that leaving the EU will lead to socialism, it won't even necessarily lead to a situation where labour power is increased. But it does have the potential to open doors, reversing the vote now would not only shut the door on those possibilities it would reinvigorate the EU and capital - empower it to murder even more in Greece, Spain, Italy etc.

Let's be clear capital backed Remain en masse, indeed it still backs the EU project. That alone should be enough to give anyone who claims to be a socialist pause for thought.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> *Yes, and?  *In the context of the UK 'hard brexit' will be the hammer that smashes what remains of the nhs, etc on the anvil of the 'free market'


The chief culprit of such policies of any European country is Luxembourg. To point towards a single person in Luxembourg's recent history responsible for implementing such policies you'd have to point to Juncker. As prime-minister of Luxembourg he turned the country into exactly that what you fear. Because he was so ruthless about how he did that he was rewarded for that with the job heading up the Eu and steering a transition to a federal state. I wonder what his agenda will be there? The writings on the wall (well, wikipedia actually).


> In early November 2014, just days after becoming head of the commission, Juncker was hit by media disclosures—derived from a document leak known as LuxLeaks—that Luxembourg under his premiership had turned into a major European centre of corporate tax avoidance. With the aid of the Luxembourg government, companies transferred tax liability for many billions of euros to Luxembourg, where the income was taxed at a fraction of 1%. Juncker, who in a speech in Brussels in July 2014 promised to "try to put some morality, some ethics, into the European tax landscape", was sharply criticized following the leaks. A subsequent motion of censure in the European parliament was brought against Juncker over his role in the tax avoidance schemes. The motion was defeated by a large majority.
> *
> In 2017, leaked diplomatic cables show Juncker, as Luxembourg’s prime minister from 1995 until the end of 2013, blocked EU efforts to fight tax avoidance by multinational corporations. Luxembourg agreed to multinational businesses on an individualised deal basis, often at an effective rate of less than 1%.*


A 2nd referendum is a vote for this cunt!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 18, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> A plentiful supply of credulous, bitter old fuckers like Sasaferrato probably helps with this big-lie-spreading strategy.


Fuck off cunt face.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 18, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Many of the actions are contrary to the best interests of the 27 member states.  They are in the best interests of the institutions of the EU, not the member states.  It is not in the interests of the member states to leave citizens fucked on residency rights, nor is it in the interests of member states to end up with trade tariffs.  The process has laid bare the problems with devolving your decision making to institutions whose interests are not necessarily aligned with yours.
> 
> In addition, the EU have really pushed ahead with further federalisation in the 18 months since the Brexit vote.  Even if the vote had been to remain, their current direction of travel would have given me pause in and of itself.


Davis should be playing hard ball, as in 'Do you ever want to sell another car into the UK?'. Or bottle of wine, or cheese etc etc. There is nothing we buy from the rest of the EU that we cannot buy elsewhere. It would be a huge financial hit for the EU. 

We should be developing new markets now, if we have somewhere else to sell our goods and services, it would put immense pressure on the EU.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 18, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and el corbvz 30 years (man and boy) as MP


Neither have been a shadow minister. McDonnell hasn't a clue about serious finance.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 18, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think one reason for brexit was the UK's following of EU rules to the letter over the decades whereas other countries just seemed to avoid the bits that did not suit them. For example whereas UK companies developed whole business models to take advantage of cheap & plentiful immigrant labour other countries like France by retaining strong employment law made it much less easy & profitable to employ foreign workers.


Thanks, I was about to post pretty much the same thing.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> We should be developing new markets now, if we have somewhere else to sell our goods and services, it would put immense pressure on the EU.



That never seems to work out so well.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Neither have been a shadow minister. McDonnell hasn't a clue about serious finance.


 
Not a prerequisite if you look over recent history


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Davis should be playing hard ball, as in 'Do you ever want to sell another car into the UK?'. Or bottle of wine, or cheese etc etc. There is nothing we buy from the rest of the EU that we cannot buy elsewhere. It would be a huge financial hit for the EU.
> 
> We should be developing new markets now, if we have somewhere else to sell our goods and services, it would put immense pressure on the EU.



No one with any sense is going to take the UK seriously for a decade wrt negotiations. Diplomats across the globe are pulling their hair out at the performance of HMG back home -its a black running joke in some places now


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> If you are relying on the EU (or the Labour Party/SNP/Greens for that matter) to protect people then you're already up shit creek.
> 
> The changes that will improve our society will only come from labour. I'm under no illusions that leaving the EU will lead to socialism, it won't even necessarily lead to a situation where labour power is increased. But it does have the potential to open doors, reversing the vote now would not only shut the door on those possibilities it would reinvigorate the EU and capital - empower it to murder even more in Greece, Spain, Italy etc.
> 
> Let's be clear capital backed Remain en masse, indeed it still backs the EU project. That alone should be enough to give anyone who claims to be a socialist pause for thought.




Hard brexit - and that is the only kind likely to be available - will mean a significant reduction in the amount of money the government can spend on stuff like social housing and the NHS. It really is  a no brainer. 

It will fuck me, my freinds (esp those who are EU nationals) and it will fuck the community where i work - which is in one of the most deprived areas of leeds. It will further tighten both the squeeze on Local authority budgets and the pot of money for charities - services that people utterly depend on will be slashed or junked all together - ( oh - it would also threaten my own job) . At the moment we are looking at a community housing programme in the area - desperately needed, decent quality, rented accommodation. Stuff like that all over the country will be under serious threat. oh - yeah - then there's all the EU funded projects directed at low income areas. 

Rather than choose a hypothectical - and frankly pretty unlikley - road to socialism via economic misery - i'll go with what is most likely to lead to better conditions in the here and now.

and "junker is a cunt" is not much of an argument. There is no shortage of cunts on both sides of the brexit split.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think one reason for brexit was the UK's following of EU rules to the letter over the decades whereas other countries just seemed to avoid the bits that did not suit them. For example whereas UK companies developed whole business models to take advantage of cheap & plentiful immigrant labour other countries like France by retaining strong employment law made it much less easy & profitable to employ foreign workers.




And Germany going back on their word and outright refusing to allow new EU citizens from the east freedom of movement in to Germany at the agreed date, leaving them with just the UK to head to, probably the biggest reason for the leave vote.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'll stand corrected on Scotland although I'm surprised - EU very clear last year that there is no exemption for Ireland.
> 
> European Commission confirms its view that we are no longer exempt from water charges


I see your confusion, we in Scotland do however pay water charges. Via the council tax.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> A 2nd referendum is a vote for this cunt!



If you really want to be out from under the EU yoke, a second referendum is likely to be your best shot, IMO.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> and "junker is a cunt" is not much of an argument. There is no shortage of cunts on both sides of the brexit split.


The difference is, one's in a very commanding position right now and you don't have a chance of removing him, while the others are in a complete shambles and on the brink of annihilation and in all likelihood will be defeated in a landslide at the next election.

You have a very unique chance at this very moment in history to kill those two birds with one stone.
You appear to me to be bottling it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> You have a very unique chance at this very moment in history to kill those two birds with one stone.
> You appear to me to be bottling it.



But the tories are fucked whatever they do. Labour government still in the EU will have far more opportunity to do something positive than labour government inheriting hard brexit. mainly because the economy will be fucked. 
Arguing for  the option that doesn't see  the poorest half of the population get even more fucked is not "bottling it". What a pathetic comment.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Fuck off cunt face.



Nicely put. I'll take it as an admission that you have no evidence that a Labour government would definitely bankrupt the nation with excessive borrowing beyond a parrot-like repetition of hackneyed tory party propaganda shall I?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> But the tories are fucked whatever they do.
> Labour government still in the EU will have far more opportunity to do something positive than labour government inheriting hard brexit. mainly because the economy will be fucked.
> Arguing for  the option that doesn't see  the poorest half of the population get even more fucked is not "bottling it". What a pathetic comment.


A 2nd referendum going against brexit would bring the core neo-liberal tories come back to the Eu fold (i.e where the vast majority of the Eu27 are right now - centre right)
Corbyn is as much as a threat to Juncker as brexit is. Labour would be out in the cold, and Juncker would finish Corbyn off in no time. Just look what happed to greece


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Rather than choose a hypothectical - and frankly pretty unlikley - road to socialism via economic misery - i'll go with what is most likely to lead to better conditions in the here and now.


Hang on, I've literally just said that I *don't* believe leaving the EU will lead to socialism so this a complete and utter strawman.

As for the argument that 'hard brexit' (whatever is meant by that) = recession. We'll I don't think that's necessarily true but if it does lead to a recession then I think you should ask yourself _why. _The answer being because capital will try to punish labour when it doesn't behave in the manner it wants. 

Do you think that capital will not try to punish any attempt to oppose neo-liberalism? For example the nationalisation of industries, higher tax rates etc. If you give up arguing for a course of action based on what capital wants than you've already given up on socialism.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> A 2nd referendum going against brexit would bring the core neo-liberal tories come back to the Eu fold (i.e where the vast majority of the Eu27 are right now - centre right)
> Corbyn is as much as a threat to Juncker as brexit is. Labour would be out in the cold, and Juncker would finish Corbyn off in no time. Just look what happed to greece


I still come back to the mechanics and practicalities of a second referendum. Tories are in power for 5 years, which sees them beyond Brexit and they aren't going to pull another early election after what happened this year.  I can't see any Tory faction coming out with an actual proposal to go for a second referendum before departure day - nor build a cross party coalition to defeat the brexit majority in the tory party (not so much the people who were always pro-brexit, but the tories who see no way back from brexit). Aside from some unexpected events there won't be a second ref because nobody thinks there's a successful political campaign/career around the idea of a second ref (give or take the libdem lice).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> As for the argument that 'hard brexit' (whatever is meant by that) = recession. We'll I don't think that's necessarily true but if it does lead to a recession then I think you should ask yourself _why. _The answer being because capital will try to punish labour when it doesn't behave in the manner it wants.
> 
> .



It will likely cause a recession because of a the interrelated impact of a  fall in value of currency, capital flight, the inevitable chaos of severing 40 years of legal and trade agreements, a decline in investment and companies folding as a result of losing their biggest export market and rise in the cost of imports from the EU. This will happen not because of a conscious decision of the agents of Capital to punish uppity "brexiters" - but because of cold hard sums on balance sheets. These things matter and have a real impact on people.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> A 2nd referendum going against brexit would bring the core neo-liberal tories come back to the Eu fold (i.e where the vast majority of the Eu27 are right now - centre right)
> Corbyn is as much as a threat to Juncker as brexit is. Labour would be out in the cold, and Juncker would finish Corbyn off in no time. Just look what happed to greece


Can you give an example of one of the ways the EU could fuck over the UK that is comparable to how it fucked over Greece?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> It will likely cause a recession because of a the interrelated impact of a  fall in value of currency, capital flight, the inevitable chaos of severing 40 years of legal and trade agreements, a decline in investment and companies folding as a result of losing their biggest export market and rise in the cost of imports from the EU.


What do you think capital flight is except by an attempt by capital to punish labour.



Kaka Tim said:


> This will happen not because of a conscious decision of the agents of Capital to punish uppity "brexiters" - but because of cold hard sums on balance sheets. These things matter and have a real impact on people.


I've not talked about agents of capital. And as for cold hard sums, well you mean like the cold hard sums of the OBR, which they've admitted have been bollocks for the last decade. Economics is an ideology not a science. As for things having a real impact on people, I couldn't agree more, the attacks of the EU on Greece have lead to a 5% increase in the infant mortality rate.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 18, 2017)

What I'm confused about is that some of the same people who have been banging the drum for free trade and the importance of the free markets for years (and have shouted down any suggestion that free trade isn't good for everyone), now seem to be the exact same people who are bang up for starting a fuck off big trade war with our largest trading partner and most obvious trade partner for the future.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you give an example of one of the ways the EU could fuck over the UK that is comparable to how it fucked over Greece?


I mentioned it here:


pocketscience said:


> If you want negative speculation, how about imagining beyond a second referendum where remain win, and upon the announcement of the result the Eu turns around with a big 'Fuck You!'... 'You can only come back on the conditions you agree to an increased of the UKs contributions by 300%, hand over all the euro pass-porting rights to Frankfurt, and you have to get rid of the pound sterling'. You know, like what they did to Greece. How far would you be willing to bend over their barrel?


in general, I don't think they'd really want us back. The UK's now a liability, a major risk to their project.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I mentioned it here:
> ​in general, I don't think they'd really want us back. The UK's now a liability, a major risk to their project.


That particular list of conditions would be politically impossible and lead to a sure exit of the EU by the UK. This is one of the problems with the idea of ruling by referendum - _we must leave at any cost_ or _we must stay at any cost_. Both are stupid positions.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That particular list of conditions would be politically impossible and lead to a sure exit of the EU by the UK. This is one of the problems with the idea of ruling by referendum - _we must leave at any cost_ or _we must stay at any cost_. Both are stupid positions.


you asked for an example, I gave you three.
A second referendum with remain winning wouldn't be an automatic reversal of A50 and it wouldn't absolve us from further negotiations. It would put us in a much weaker position than now.

Greece showed us that the Eu is run by a bunch of vindictive sociopaths, who once have the upper-hand in a negotiation will go to any length to further demoralise their opponent and squeeze them for every last morsel they have.
We are now their opponents. It would take a Labour government to restore diplomatic order now, however the outcome of the negotiations. Better Labour doing that from the outside imo.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> What do you think capital flight is except by an attempt by capital to punish labour.
> 
> I've not talked about agents of capital. And as for cold hard sums, well you mean like the cold hard sums of the OBR, which they've admitted have been bollocks for the last decade. Economics is an ideology not a science. As for things having a real impact on people, I couldn't agree more, the attacks of the EU on Greece have lead to a 5% increase in the infant mortality rate.




The uk would be even more of the bitch of international capital outside the EU. As would greece - which is why they had no choice but to stay. 

And the UK is not in the Euro - which gives it considerably more freedom of action than other EU nationals - unlike other EU countries the UK did not have to chose austerity to appease the ECB.

As for the list of unpleasant demands that the EU might make on the UK - well that entirely hypothetical and would completely change the nature of the debate wrt abandoning brexit. But noboby - AFAIK - is suggesting that the EU would make those demands. 
the uk is not greece - it has a much bigger economy, is not bankrupt, its one of the biggest financial centres in the world, it has (i think) the largest military capacity in the EU, is a much larger market, has a seat on the security council, its a major world centre for research and academia and a lot of EU nationals live and work here- these things matter.  

Im waiting to see one single positive argument for brexit in terms of material conditions. All im getting is junkers a cunt, the EU are cunts,  it will tweak the nose of international capital, it might open up possibilities for a more socialist economy - maybe, fingers crossed. 

None of that is going to build a single council house, save a hospital from closure or stop a family going to the wall.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> you asked for an example, I gave you three.
> A second referendum with remain winning wouldn't be an automatic reversal of A50 and it wouldn't absolve us from further negotiations. It would put us in a much weaker position than now.
> 
> Greece showed us that the Eu is run by a bunch of vindictive sociopaths, who once have the upper-hand in a negotiation will go to any length to further demoralise their opponent and squeeze them for every last morsel they have.
> We are now their opponents. It would take a Labour government to restore diplomatic order now, however the outcome of the negotiations. Better Labour doing that from the outside imo.


You give no indication as to how those things would be forced on the UK in the way that measures were forced on Greece.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> But the tories are fucked whatever they do. Labour government still in the EU will have far more opportunity to do something positive than labour government inheriting hard brexit. mainly because the economy will be fucked.
> Arguing for  the option that doesn't see  the poorest half of the population get even more fucked is not "bottling it". What a pathetic comment.



What would be the point of a Labour govt if it isn't radical enough to get us kicked out of the EU?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> The uk would be even more of the bitch of international capital outside the EU. As would greece - which is why they had no choice but to stay.



There is no alternative?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You give no indication as to how those things would be forced on the UK in the way that measures were forced on Greece.


The obvious one would be If they string the 2 year limit of a50 out with the legal arguement that A50 is not reversable, then we'd be technically out of the Eu. We'd need to reapply for membership if we wanted back in, at which point they can enforce whatever the want.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What would be the point of a Labour govt if it isn't radical enough to get us kicked out of the EU?


Radicals are ignorant of cold, hard, economic facts y'ken.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> .
> As for the list of unpleasant demands that the EU might make on the UK - well that entirely hypothetical and would completely change the nature of the debate wrt abandoning brexit. But noboby - AFAIK - is suggesting that the EU would make those demands..


Hasn't stopped you banging on about the hypothetical effects of a hard brexit here.



Kaka Tim said:


> .
> the uk is not greece - it has a much bigger economy, is not bankrupt, its one of the biggest financial centres in the world, it has (i think) the largest military capacity in the EU, is a much larger market, has a seat on the security council, its a major world centre for research and academia - these things matter.
> ... Snip...
> None of that is going to build a single council house, save a hospital from closure or stop a family going to the wall.


----------



## Winot (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> The obvious one would be If they string the 2 year limit of a50 out with the legal arguement that A50 is not reversable, then we'd be technically out of the Eu. We'd need to reapply for membership if we wanted back in, at which point they can enforce whatever the want.



What are you talking about? Article 50(3) requires our agreement to extend the 2 year period. How is that “forcing” a measure on the UK?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> What are you talking about? Article 50(3) requires our agreement to extend the 2 year period. How is that “forcing” a measure on the UK?


i didn't mention a50 being extended


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> What are you talking about? Article 50(3) requires our agreement to extend the 2 year period. How is that “forcing” a measure on the UK?


Clearly talking about the realistic scenario that would occur after a 2nd ref. You get your second ref, it's remain(I'm not even sure that's likely)  but 2 year period stands. Would be near enough impossible to get back in without joining the Eurozone you would expect. Corbyn govt is now EXACTLY in the same position Syriza was. At the very least it would get LBJ to stop reminding us the UK isn't in the Eurozone :-D


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What would be the point of a Labour govt if it isn't radical enough to get us kicked out of the EU?


This is a good question.  An alternative approach is one that agitates to change the eu. But as France has shown many eu rules are unenforceable against a powerful state, which the UK still is comparatively speaking.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Clearly talking about the realistic scenario that would occur after a 2nd ref. You get your second ref, it's remain(I'm not even sure that's likely)  but 2 year period stands. Would be near enough impossible to get back in without joining the Eurozone you would expect. Corbyn govt is now EXACTLY in the same position Syriza was. At the very least it would get LBJ to stop reminding us the UK isn't in the Eurozone :-D


If the terms are that shit you stick with brexit. It's not hard.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is a good question.  An alternative approach is one that agitates to change the eu. But as France has shown many eu rules are unenforceable against a powerful state, which the UK still is comparatively speaking.


And people that have agitated to change the EU have shown us what a waste of time that is.


----------



## Winot (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Clearly talking about the realistic scenario that would occur after a 2nd ref. You get your second ref, it's remain(I'm not even sure that's likely)  but 2 year period stands. Would be near enough impossible to get back in without joining the Eurozone you would expect. Corbyn govt is now EXACTLY in the same position Syriza was. At the very least it would get LBJ to stop reminding us the UK isn't in the Eurozone :-D



OK, I understand now. So the scenario is that having decided to leave, if we changed our mind then we would be in a weaker position than before. 

Yes, I agree that’s the case. It’s one reason why I voted remain.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If the terms are that shit you stick with brexit. It's not hard.


Eh? So in this post second ref scenario the Tories are suddenly going to be really incensed when the terms are shit for workers and what, give us a third one? Sigh.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Eh? So in this post second ref scenario the Tories are suddenly going to be really incensed when the terms are shit for workers and what, give us a third one? Sigh.



It's a scenario that relies on the idea that it's in the interests of the EU27 to force the UK out even if it comes back on its hands and knees begging to be allowed to stay. If that happens, the integrity of the EU is saved and the economic damage to them as well as to us is averted.

In any case, when and how did it come about that predicting domesday Brexit outcomes became a plank of pro-Brexit arguments?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> In any case, when and how did it come about that predicting domesday Brexit outcomes became a plank of pro-Brexit arguments?


We're talking remain atm... Hence the domesday shizzle. 
All in the interest of balanced discussion


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It's a scenario that relies on the idea that it's in the interests of the EU27 to force the UK out even if it comes back on its hands and knees begging to be allowed to stay. If that happens, the integrity of the EU is saved and the economic damage to them as well as to us is averted.
> 
> In any case, when and how did it come about that predicting domesday Brexit outcomes became a plank of pro-Brexit arguments?


 
We were talking about the terms we are likely to get back in on though. As it stands all UK would have to do to put them in a position that would make them vulnerable to a Greece type scenario is agree to a couple of clauses in yon offending article of the Maastricht treaty that they are currently exempt from. As I understand it, the EU have always been pissed off that we are in the position we are in. Given the standard of debate on this issue and the extent to which VoteRemain diehards are desperate that we stay in, i'd be surprised if anyone even noticed these shitter terms, far less kick up a stink about them. So who would decide that we Brexit in that case? Not a hard decision from our point of view but would Be a hard one to fight- most Remain voters do not, like many on urban, even accept the EU is really shit. 

All hypothetical of course!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Eh? So in this post second ref scenario the Tories are suddenly going to be really incensed when the terms are shit for workers and what, give us a third one? Sigh.


We're already in fantasy land with the idea of a punitive all powerful eu dictating punitive terms.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

I don't want a second ref btw. It's not a popular position on here but I didn't want the first one


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're already in fantasy land with the idea of a punitive all powerful eu dictating punitive terms.


Nope, just the upper hand. 


littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't want a second ref btw. It's not a popular position on here but I didn't want the first one


We kind of need to move on from that though, we've had it. Don't the circular arguments hurt people's heads? I guess not, two minutes on twitter proves that.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> We were talking about the terms we are likely to get back in on though. As it stands all UK would have to do to put them in a position that would make them vulnerable to a Greece type scenario is agree to a couple of clauses in yon offending article of the Maastricht treaty that they are currently exempt from. As I understand it, the EU have always been pissed off that we are in the position we are in. Given the standard of debate on this issue and the extent to which VoteRemain diehards are desperate that we stay in, i'd be surprised if anyone even noticed these shitter terms, far less kick up a stink about them. So who would decide that we Brexit in that case? Not a hard decision from our point of view but would Be a hard one to fight- most Remain voters do not, like many on urban, even accept the EU is really shit.
> 
> All hypothetical of course!



Yes, if the UK were to leave and then want to rejoin down the line, we might risk not being able to negotiate the Euro and Shengen opt outs and the CAP rebate we have at the moment. It's one more reason not to leave. I don't see where the "Greece type scenario" comes into it though, and I don't think it's likely that no-one would notice.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Hasn't stopped you banging on about the hypothetical effects of a hard brexit here.



1.Hard brexit is a likely scenario.
2. the overwhelming consensus from just about everyone than other johnson and rees mogg is that the effect of hard brexit will be extremely negative across a of  whole range of areas - not just the economy but also the fuck up and chaos of things things like residency status and n.ireland.
3. The EU dictating harsh terms for the - hypothetical - scenario of the UK remaining  is not backed by any evidence other than your own conjecture - and it could be equally argued that they will do no such thing because they want the UK to reject brexit not force them out.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2017)

Funnily enough the overwhelming consensus amongst the "everyone" you speak of is that Neoliberalism is the dogs bollocks. Correlation or causation? Economic Science Experts.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 18, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't want a second ref btw. It's not a popular position on here but I didn't want the first one



Yep, at least we've demonstrated to other countries that if they are going to vote on exiting the European Union, it's better to have some clue about what exiting might involve first.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> What do you think capital flight is except by an attempt by capital to punish labour.



I always enjoy and usually agree with your posts but I think this is going a bit too far. _Capital _and _Labour _are abstract nouns, abstract nouns can't _punish _or even really _do _anything.

Capital in any case is represented by companies, business, enterprises. The punishment of labour(ers) may (_may_) even be an actual motive for some decision makers, but the real motive for capital flight is saving money / increasing profits / mitigating losses. In terms of the underlying attitudes of the actual people who make policy decisions like where to base their business, I guess (in fact I assume) there IS a degree of class enmity and snobbery, but such decisions will be made by _groups_. Boards, meetings of real people. I find it extremely difficult to believe that the directors of whatever bank is deciding to move their HQ and create 3000 redundancies are sitting together saying, ''How can we punish those naughty proles?'' They're looking at balance sheets and projected losses / profits, and that's all. The bottom line is the bottom line. 

I think bringing in emotive concepts like punishing labour doesn't help with credibility any more than predictions of war, famine and nasty old pestilence &c help those arguing that this whole exercise with this government in charge is a colossal mistake.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 18, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> 1.Hard brexit is a likely scenario.
> 2. the overwhelming consensus from just about everyone than other johnson and rees mogg is that the effect of hard brexit will be extremely negative across a of  whole range of areas - not just the economy but also the fuck up and chaos of things things like residency status and n.ireland.
> 3. The EU dictating harsh terms for the - hypothetical - scenario of the UK remaining  is not backed by any evidence other than your own conjecture - and it could be equally argued that they will do no such thing because they want the UK to reject brexit not force them out.


Personally, I think that there would be less chance of a - hypothetical - hard brexit than there would of the Eu dictating harsh terms for the - hypothetical - scenario of the UK remaining. 

This very thread is based on a (your) hypothetical condition, with loads of added doom and gloom about another hypothetical condition that could, maybe, at a very long stretch - facilitate the original hypothetical condition...
I know it's your thread & I'm cool with you stacking these assumptions but at least do it in a balanced/ objective manner. You started out like you were setting the case out for placing a bet with the bookies on the second ref, but your recent posts have just been repetitive doom mongering. 

Just to be clear - an acrimonious hard brexit will also fuck the Eu on a huge, huge scale.All those nasty things you said could happen to the UK could also happen to the Eu.
Do you really think the Eu wants to risk those things happening, just to hang on to a couple of petty-minded principles that the vast majority of honest decent european citizens don't even give a shit about?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 18, 2017)

I think (and I accept I may be wrong, it's a belief) that most European governments don't want the UK to leave. Certainly I think most actual EU citizens don't want the UK to leave the EU. The EU itself doesn't want the UK to leave - in part because it's pretty incontrovertible evidence the project is failing, then again in part because of the capital the UK contributes (so much that we get all kinds of special treatment already)

EtA: I meant to say I think this is really the reason for harsh terms. They think if it's made hard enough for us to leave, we'll change our collective mind, or something. Not to punish us.

Anyway, whatever. I'm enjoying the thread a lot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 18, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> We kind of need to move on from that though, we've had it. Don't the circular arguments hurt people's heads? I guess not, two minutes on twitter proves that.


Move on from what? I don't think there will be any moving on from the basic point that those who advocated leave in the referendum are not now being held accountable for their positions. That's a huge failure in democratic accountability, and it is ongoing.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 18, 2017)

I think it's simply they do not want to lose the UK financial contribution. They know the EU project is failing & the loss of the UK contribution will either have to be made up by the taxpayers of the contributor countries or the bulk of EU members the taker countries will have to receive less. Either way it will cause further dissatisfaction with the EU project which really needs to reduce itself to more of just a free trade group & forget about the closer integration that probably the ordinary folk of most member states do not want.

I don't think the EU will give an inch. They will continue to demand amounts of cash that they know the UK can never possibly agree to & hope the UK parliament tears itself apart to such an extent that we end up staying in in some form or another rather than leave without a deal which might be good for the EU but possibly not so much for the UK.


----------



## gosub (Oct 18, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think it's simply they do not want to lose the UK financial contribution. They know the EU project is failing & the loss of the UK contribution will either have to be made up by the taxpayers of the contributor countries or the bulk of EU members the taker countries will have to receive less. Either way it will cause further dissatisfaction with the EU project which really needs to reduce itself to more of just a free trade group & forget about the closer integration that probably the ordinary folk of most member states do not want.
> 
> I don't think the EU will give an inch. They will continue to demand amounts of cash that they know the UK can never possibly agree to & hope the UK parliament tears itself apart to such an extent that we end up staying in in some form or another rather than leave without a deal which might be good for the EU but possibly not so much for the UK.



But no deal means no UK cash which means beaucoup arguments among the EU27 about how to make up the shortfall


----------



## gosub (Oct 18, 2017)

I think no deal Brexit isn't just a death sentence for the tories, its a death sentence for the Oxbridge PPE and fast track to Parliament brigade that refers to itself as an 'elite'.  Everybody with a half decent job outside politics has questions and headaches about the shit that needs sorting...our elected representatives ain't raising them - i they stuff this up, what exactly were/are they elite at?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I don't think the EU will give an inch



Centimetre.

But I don't think they'll have any cause to. They just need to wait. May is over there tomorrow and she will have shifted a bit to their position and they will tell her she's welcome to come back as often as she likes whenever she feels like shifting a bit more.

Also tomorrow, Corbyn meets with Michel Barnier for the first time.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Move on from what? I don't think there will be any moving on from the basic point that those who advocated leave in the referendum are not now being held accountable for their positions. That's a huge failure in democratic accountability, and it is ongoing.


Please don't tell me you are talking about voters, or people on this board?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 19, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Please don't tell me you are talking about voters, or people on this board?


No, I'm talking about politicians. The people who are now deciding how to do brexit.


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> I think no deal Brexit isn't just a death sentence for the tories, its a death sentence for the Oxbridge PPE and fast track to Parliament brigade that refers to itself as an 'elite'.  Everybody with a half decent job outside politics has questions and headaches about the shit that needs sorting...our elected representatives ain't raising them - i they stuff this up, what exactly were/are they elite at?



What about a no deal Brexit with a very slimmed down token deal.  Such as we will generally agree not to nuke each other.  Unless provoked of course.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Funnily enough the overwhelming consensus amongst the "everyone" you speak of is that Neoliberalism is the dogs bollocks. Correlation or causation? Economic Science Experts.



What  - are you paraphrasing michael "we've had enough of experts "gove" now? Its the UKs biggest trading partner. The UK has  40 odd years of interrelated legal, trading and regulatory agreements with the EU. The whole economy is deeply entwined with it. If thats all dumped - how can it not cause huge disruption? It hardly take a nobel prize in economics to see that. 

What about n.ireland? academia? the respective residency status of EU and UK citizens? taking away the right of people to live and work in the EU? For what? Especially from any sort of left perspective - 

And the most ardent free marketeers are in the brexit camp. And they think it will cause an economic shit storm as well - but think its a price worth paying to bring about their Freidmanite wet dream.  

FFS - start another thread about it - Potential Positives of Brexit - cos im fucked if i can think of any and you haven't offered any. This is getting nowhere. Its like arguing with climate change deniers.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> There is no alternative?



please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> But no deal means no UK cash which means beaucoup arguments among the EU27 about how to make up the shortfall


Quite so but this is a game of high stakes. The EU are gambling everything on the UK not walking away with no deal & I do think that no deal would bring down the government which might be to the EU's advantage.


----------



## gosub (Oct 19, 2017)

toblerone3 said:


> What about a no deal Brexit with a very slimmed down token deal.  Such as we will generally agree not to nuke each other.  Unless provoked of course.



Best not tie our hands, leave all options open


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.


Have you not met Tina?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> What  - are you paraphrasing michael "we've had enough of experts "gove" now?



I like that phrase, particularly how it is used in Streeks essay. You don't appreciate the accidental truth in it? (((((leading economists)))))))


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

The crap on this thread over the last few days a perfect example of what exasperates me about this debate, the implicit assumption that those voting Leave don't care about 'stopping families going to the wall' or the cuts to services. It's crap every bit as much as if I were to argue that Remain voters are supporting the murder in Greece, the EU supported concentration camps etc.

British socialism has been anti-EU for a long time, a lot of (perhaps most) socialists supported a Leave vote (e.g. the majority of socialist/communist/anarchist groups, Benn, Crow), the most radical union in the country called for a Leave vote. Now you don't have to agree with them, you can think they are wrong but I do think you owe them the courtesy of (1) listening and trying to understand their reasons for voting the way they did, (2) recognising that even if you don't agree with their reasoning that they did what they did for the of best intentions.

I can recognise and understand why some socialists voted Remain, essentially the same argument made by Corbyn - that despite it's problems the EU offers some form of protection. Now I don't like that argument, I don't agree with the assumptions behind it and ultimately I don't accept it. But I don't deny that people who voted on such a basis did so because they genuinely felt it was the best option. I still consider them comrades.

---------



Kaka Tim said:


> Im waiting to see one single positive argument for brexit in terms of material conditions. All im getting is junkers a cunt, the EU are cunts,  it will tweak the nose of international capital, it might open up possibilities for a more socialist economy - maybe, fingers crossed.


You've been repeatedly given positive arguments - that it weakens the EU (one of levers of capital), that it creates cracks in capital that open possibilities for labour, that it increase the ability of future UK governments to nationalise businesses. You might disagree with those opinions, OK but don't say they haven't been made because they have.



Kaka Tim said:


> None of that is going to build a single council house, save a hospital from closure or stop a family going to the wall.


Neither will staying in the neo-liberal EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 19, 2017)

gosub said:


> Best not tie our hands, leave all options open


Talking of going nuclear, a couple of months ago, I recall reading somewhere about the potential effects that a (hypothetical) hard brexit case could have on the UK clearing house business.

Essentially, the Eu had identified the risk that in the event of an acrimonious hard exit, the UK could essentially cripple the Eurozone within minutes by raising clearing margins, even by moderate levels, on Euro derivative trading. 
The started ti investigate new laws to enable trading in the Eurozone (Paris was proposed iirc) but they faced the reality that 1. such a transition would take up to a decade, and 2. The Americans wouldn't stand for it as and politely asked them reconsider their plans.

This seems to be a big leverage, and one on the scale the Eu doesn't hold over the UK in the short term hard ball stakes.
It just goes to show how stupid and stubborn the Eu stance is on not holding the divorce bill talks and trade talks in parallel.

I'll see if i can find the article (it may even have been on here in the global financial implosion thread)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You've been repeatedly given positive arguments - that it weakens the EU (one of levers of capital), that it creates cracks in capital that open possibilities for labour, that it increase the ability of future UK governments to nationalise businesses. You might disagree with those opinions, OK but don't say they haven't been made because they have.



but these are all vague and hypothetical - and dependant on many other things to happen - getting the uber neo-cons out of the economic driving seat for starters. It sounds like "emiseration theory" to me - "i.e. if things get worse than the power of capital is weakened and the working class are more likely to turn to socialism." 
That may or may not be true - but to argue for actions that bring about worse conditions in pursuit of an ideological objective is a RCP stylee wank. Nobody is explicitly arguing that - but unless you can show that conditions wont get worse post-brexit then that is the implication of the lexit position. 

There is no tangible, identifiable benefit in hard brexit. Thats what im asking for. Anti-brexit can give a long long list of detailed negative effects backed up by mountains of data. Im not hearing anything that refutes or engages with with that - other than "economists are cunts" - so give me a non-cunt economist with a sunny brexit argument. 



redsquirrel said:


> Neither will staying in the neo-liberal EU.



Leaving the EU will make it much much harder to invest in positive social stuff like housing and health because the uk - and most of its people - will be significantly poorer. There is no getting round that. Unless you can convincingly argue that hard brexit will not seriously weaken the economy (never mind all the other negatives) than the Lexit argument is the most busted of busted flushes. 

Will elements within the EU27 be unhappy with a left wing labour government - yes. But their ability to do anything about it is constrained because - and praise be - the Uk is not in the Euro and can ignore what the ECB says. And there is  a long history of EU members ignoring the supposed rules and nobody batting an eyelid - i.e Germany. The EU can put the squeeze on the likes of greece and ireland - because they needed bailouts - but the UK is a much more powerful entity with an independent national bank.
IF - and we're off into hypothesis land again - the EU tries to clips the wings an anti-austerity labour government - then you have a potential case for lexit. But in terms of here and now and what can be done it really is a no-brainer.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, I'm talking about politicians. The people who are now deciding how to do brexit.


Good, so I just meant the conversation on here needs to move on from rehashing why people didn't want  a referendum in the first place. It needs to move onto how Brexit is actually done surely, it will be impossible to hold anyone to account as long as remain voters keep harassing leave voters about how they chose to vote in referendum they didn't really ask for either.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

And vice versa of course.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> but these are all vague and hypothetical - and dependant on many other things to happen - getting the uber neo-cons out of the economic driving seat for starters.


I don't see them as anymore vague of hypothetical than the scenarios you have put forward.



Kaka Tim said:


> It sounds like "emiseration theory" to me - "i.e. if things get worse than the power of capital is weakened and the working class are more likely to turn to socialism."That may or may not be true - but to argue for actions that bring about worse conditions in pursuit of an ideological objective is a RCP stylee wank. Nobody is explicitly arguing that - but unless you can show that conditions wont get worse post-brexit then that is the implication of the lexit position.


 I'm sorry but that's cobblers. I might as well argue that the implication of your position is that EU should continue with it's neo-liberal attacks on the people of Europe and paying dictators huge sums to keep refugees out of Fortress EU.



Kaka Tim said:


> There is no tangible, identifiable benefit in hard brexit. Thats what im asking for.


 What are the tangible, identifiable benefits in a soft brexit, or remaining? And people have certainly argued that leaving will result in a tangible benefit - an increased ability/likelihood of re-nationalisation of services (I'm not saying they are right but it's simply false to say that it hasn't been argued). And why are you assuming I and other socialists want what you are calling a hard brexit (and what does that even mean?)



Kaka Tim said:


> Anti-brexit can give a long long list of detailed negative effects backed up by mountains of data. Im not hearing anything that refutes or engages with with that - other than "economists are cunts" - so give me a non-cunt economist with a sunny brexit argument.


Why would I give an argument by an economists when the whole philosophy of economics is an ideology I reject. (And even in their own world they are shit)



Kaka Tim said:


> Leaving the EU will make it much much harder to invest in positive social stuff like housing and health because the uk - and most of its people - will be significantly poorer. There is no getting round that.


Rubbish, that might be the case but the idea that it is, and has to be, some objective fact is nonsense.



Kaka Tim said:


> Unless you can convincingly argue that hard brexit will not seriously weaken the economy (never mind all the other negatives) than the Lexit argument is the most busted of busted flushes.


Are you going to apply the same argument to potential nationalisations? Capital constantly tells us they will damage the economy, so I guess we better not do that either?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 19, 2017)

There might be a possibility of a crack for Labour in the future, but the brexit that's happening now is one led by Tory free marketeers, because that was the only one on the table.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> There might be a possibility of a crack for Labour in the future, but the brexit that's happening now is one led by Tory free marketeers, because that was the only one on the table.



I think any argument about the rights and wrongs of Brexit is a bit odd if it's built on which political party is in power. The process of Brexit (by which I mean the whole of the disentanglement, not just the act of leaving) is going to take a long time - even leavers accept that. And which party is in power can change (fingers crossed) in that time. 

I think Brexit is a bad idea no matter which party is in power.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

I've specifically talked about labour not Labour. And if by free marketeers you mean Randian type loons then that's garbage. (1) the cabinet/government is neo-liberal (like the Cameron/Blair/Brown/Major governments) and still sees a role for the state (not a role that I support but they aren't going for some Randian wet dream), (2) since the GE we've already seen numerous examples of the government being forced to make concessions, minor ones ok but concessions nether the less (see the climbdown on the UC helpline yesterday), to the sort of social democratic policies that caught them on hop in June.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Good, so I just meant the conversation on here needs to move on from rehashing why people didn't want  a referendum in the first place. It needs to move onto how Brexit is actually done surely, it will be impossible to hold anyone to account as long as remain voters keep harassing leave voters about how they chose to vote in referendum they didn't really ask for either.



is anyone actually doing that here? (either way) I think its more that the terms of the debate have changed because "no deal" is looking like a definite possibility - so you a situation where the push to abandon brexit altogether is getting stronger - and the question is weather that is a. a realistic outcome. and b. the likely political consequences. 

I think the argument for weather hard brexit could have a potential positive effect and/or weather the dire predictions are bogus is a separate debate. I've taken the doomsday scenario as a given and the left argument against that hypothesis is a new one to me - Im not convinced by it (you may have noticed) - but would like more detail - but preferably on another thread. 

Peace out comrades.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 19, 2017)

I meant labour too but my phone capitalised it, and by free marketers I mean that the brexit they are working on includes lowering barriers, protections, more competition etc it's the point of brexit for them. It isn't a theory - it's what they want to happen and they are in power.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is a good question.  An alternative approach is one that agitates to change the eu. But as France has shown many eu rules are unenforceable against a powerful state, which the UK still is comparatively speaking.



Can you give examples of how France has shown this?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> please offer one. on another thread. knock yourself out.



Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.

Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.
> 
> Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*



and this is best achieved via recession, resurgent nationalism and with Jacob Rees Mogg leading the way is it?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

Who is struggling? What does the struggle consist of, specifically? Is there the chance the struggle will end in people's deaths? Whose?

I'm a bit tired of abstract nouns replacing empathy tbc. Real people suffer, abstract nouns don't.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> and this is best achieved via recession, resurgent nationalism and with Jacob Rees Mogg leading the way is it?


So long as it ends up with his head on a pike somewhere on prominent display, that's fine by me.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why don't you go and start another thread? Your contributions are by far the dullest here and you aren't engaging with anyone.
> 
> Here''s an alternative for you - replace austerity with Socialism. Yes, it'll be difficult - that's why it's called *struggle*



Perhaps it _would_ be a good idea for there to be a thread about the chances of stopping Brexit which doesn't get derailed by lexiteering. There's a lexit thread which is similarly prescriptive.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> I meant labour too but my phone capitalised it, and by free marketers I mean that the brexit they are working on includes lowering barriers, protections, more competition etc it's the point of brexit for them. It isn't a theory - it's what they want to happen and they are in power.


That's been happening for the last 30-40 years during the time the UK has been in the EU. And lowering barriers, protections, increased competition is part of the purpose of the neo-liberal EU. That's currently what's happening with the killings in Greece.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 19, 2017)

Is Greece the equivalent of the Tories shouting Venezuela or something?.

Do you think the people running brexit (No hypotheticals) have the interest of labour at heart?.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

Do you think the people running the EU have the interest of labour at heart? 

They're all the enemy, I want to see the lot of them hanging from lampposts


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)

Yup, lampposts, pikes. I'm not fussy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 19, 2017)

well the point with greece was it was where I could no longer think that for all its fualts, better in than out. Mind you some people say that couldn't happen here, neatly showing how little they give a shit about greeks having to eat out of bins. Don't look at the kid getting a kicking, just be glad it isn't you. yuk


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Yup, lampposts, pikes. I'm not fussy.


it's not one or the other, it can be both. but first lampposts then pikes.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> well the point with greece was it was where I could no longer think that for all its fualts, better in than out. Mind you some people say that couldn't happen here, neatly showing how little they give a shit about greeks having to eat out of bins. Don't look at the kid getting a kicking, just be glad it isn't you. yuk


not to mention what so many people have to do here already.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 19, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not one or the other, it can be both. but first lampposts then pikes.


Hang them from lamppost and then use the pikes Pinata style to see what they're made of. It's a compromise I know, a mixed-method if you like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Hang them from lamppost and then use the pikes Pinata style to see what they're made of. It's a compromise I know, a mixed-method if you like.


the street justice equivalent of beans then cheese


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Hang them from lamppost and then use the pikes Pinata style to see what they're made of. It's a compromise I know, a mixed-method if you like.


Wow, great idea for my son's next birthday


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

diamarzipan said:


> Wow, great idea for my son's next birthday


if you get in quick you could string up iain duncan smith tho' he's in great demand


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)

'I've got a little list...'


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

teqniq said:


> 'I've got a little list...'


----------



## teqniq (Oct 19, 2017)

Ditch neoliberalism to win again, Jeremy Corbyn tells Europe’s centre-left parties


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 19, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Ditch neoliberalism to win again, Jeremy Corbyn tells Europe’s centre-left parties


no mention of wether or not they sung 'oh jeremy corbyn' in euro accents


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 19, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Perhaps it _would_ be a good idea for there to be a thread about the chances of stopping Brexit which doesn't get derailed by lexiteering. There's a lexit thread which is similarly prescriptive.


tbf the lexit thread got derailed by the bremoaners (seeing as we're reverting to name calling too)


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 19, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> tbf the lexit thread got derailed by the bremoaners (seeing as we're reverting to name calling too)



Yeah, that's the thing. On any site, from Conservative Home through to Urban to pigeon fancier forums to village bulletin boards, the best solution is likely to be separate threads. It's fundamentally a polarised debate; there might as well be structures for constructive discussion that admit that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I always enjoy and usually agree with your posts but I think this is going a bit too far. _Capital _and _Labour _are abstract nouns, abstract nouns can't _punish _or even really _do _anything.


 OK, here we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't believe capital and labour are just abstract nouns, they are principle forces who's interaction causes the changes in our society.



mojo pixy said:


> I find it extremely difficult to believe that the directors of whatever bank is deciding to move their HQ and create 3000 redundancies are sitting together saying, ''How can we punish those naughty proles?''


 I'm not arguing that that is happening. But when economists release data showing how terrible Brexit will be that's not a prediction, it's a threat - thou shalt have no other gods before me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> and this is best achieved via recession, resurgent nationalism and with Jacob Rees Mogg leading the way is it?



You are so dishonest it's not even funny. Point to where I've said we should have any of those things. We already have an economic crisis, we have had resurgent racism/nationalism for decades as the old organisations of the working class had collapsed.




mojo pixy said:


> Who is struggling? What does the struggle consist of, specifically? Is there the chance the struggle will end in people's deaths? Whose?
> 
> I'm a bit tired of abstract nouns replacing empathy tbc. Real people suffer, abstract nouns don't.



Everybody - life under capitalism is struggle. I'm pleased you're concerned about the suffering of real people - I take it you like me want to see and end to working class people dieing because of Tory benefit cuts or Syrian refugees drowning in the Med because Fortress Europe doesn't give a shit. I take it you, like me, will feel similar revulsion to the politicians that allow this to happen, whether it be May or Merkel or Macron.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> But when economists release data showing how terrible Brexit will be that's not a prediction, it's a threat - thou shalt have no other gods before me.



Kind of, but I'd say it actually stems from fear. Those economists lack the imagination to see beyond their models and they're terrified of change which is set to wreck those models and create new ones which they don't understand and can't control. Hence the threats. They want us to be as frightened as they are.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Perhaps it _would_ be a good idea for there to be a thread about the chances of stopping Brexit which doesn't get derailed by lexiteering. There's a lexit thread which is similarly prescriptive.



I had no idea it was a thread about stopping Brexit, sorry. I assumed it was a thread about whether or not the Tories were going to try and wriggle out of it.

I can answer the question for you though - nobody on this thread will stop Brexit but if May continues to look like a political corpse with a stick up her back then the Tories may do so. And presumably the EU is 'hardballing' on everything so that in the final analysis the choice for whatever government will be 'no deal' or reverse the process and ask to be let back in. A bit like Rajoy is doing by threatening to implement direct rule in Catalonia.


----------



## seventh bullet (Oct 19, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not one or the other, it can be both. but first lampposts then pikes.



Oh, some have got plenty of work in them before they expire. Just those caught up in the fury will be swinging.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I had no idea it was a thread about stopping Brexit, sorry. .



No, not at all, I was suggesting a whole new thread for those of us for whom Brexit is worse than anything else that has happened, ever, and who are baffled as to how they can fight it. Like you, I thought this thread was essentially predictive.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Oct 19, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not arguing that that is happening. But when economists release data showing how terrible Brexit will be that's not a prediction, it's a threat - thou shalt have no other gods before me.


No it's a prediction, a threat is a suggested response to encourage or deter desired behaviour and it may or may not happen depending on how the threatened react.
What most if not all economists are predicting is that there will in the short to medium term a negative loss to the UK economy in the event of a hard brexit, polictical idealogies are not relevant, Maths doesn't care  about left or right or what people want to happen, it's just an analysis of the data available.
The data could be wrong or it could be incomplete, but trying to deny it based on your own idealogy is pointless it won't change anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2017)

seventh bullet said:


> Oh, some have got plenty of work in them before they expire.


yeh canal digging in south georgia for most of them.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> What most if not all economists are predicting is that there will in the short to medium term a negative loss to the UK economy in the event of a hard brexit, polictical idealogies are not relevant, Maths doesn't care  about left or right or what people want to happen, it's just an analysis of the data available.



Political ideologies are central where economics is concerned because that's what economics _*is*_.

Economics isn't 'just an analysis of the data available'


butchersapron said:


> It's not about _wealth and how to raise living standards_ it's about how to justify wealth inequalities and contain living standards _through_ the suggestion that there is a science called economics.
> 
> That;'s literally what all it is.





BemusedbyLife said:


> The data could be wrong or it could be incomplete, but trying to deny it based on your own idealogy is pointless it won't change anything.


 First remove the beam out of your own eye.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> those of us for whom Brexit is worse than anything else that has happened, ever



Er...what? Is that what you think?



BemusedbyLife said:


> Maths doesn't care  about left or right or what people want to happen, it's just an analysis of the data available.
> The data could be wrong or it could be incomplete, but trying to deny it based on your own idealogy is pointless it won't change anything.




You are a fucking moron.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Er...what? Is that what you think?



Yes. Well, worst thing I can remember, thinking only of the UK. I doubt many on here feel similarly.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You are so dishonest it's not even funny. Point to where I've said we should have any of those things. We already have an economic crisis, we have had resurgent racism/nationalism for decades as the old organisations of the working class had collapsed..



i never said you did - but its what's likely to happen. And economic crises, resurgent nationalism and the material conditions of the working class will be made worse by brexit.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Er...what? Is that what you think?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Tsk! if you wish to disagree with me you are welcome to do so but please explain why.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> i never said you did - but its what's likely to happen. And economic crises, resurgent nationalism and the material conditions of the working class will be made worse by brexit.


There's a resurgent nationalism across most of the west, Brexit isn't the cause of that it's a product. Now I admit it _could_ feed back into it, but if you think a Remain vote wouldn't have also provided a route for feedback then I think you're fooling yourself (UKIP would have made hay). Moreover, there's no reason why the UK leaving the EU _has to_ go in a nationalist direction - that's still to be fought over.

Likewise I don't accept that the material conditions of the working class_ will necessarily_ be made worse by Brexit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm pleased you're concerned about the suffering of real people - I take it you like me want to see and end to working class people dieing because of Tory benefit cuts or Syrian refugees drowning in the Med because Fortress Europe doesn't give a shit. I take it you, like me, will feel similar revulsion to the politicians that allow this to happen, whether it be May or Merkel or Macron.



That's as may be but if you want to propose that the people who pushed so hard for brexit and are now running it feel the same then I simply don't believe it.

I don't believe the EU cares about people either, on case anyone feels like slinging some whataboutery in this direction. But as far as I can see this isn't actually about the EU because none of the socioeconomic assumptions of the EU are being challenged _in any way_ by brexit in its current form. This is about a small group of right wingers who finally got their way.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I don't believe the EU cares about people either, on case anyone feels like slinging some whataboutery in this direction. But as far as I can see this isn't actually about the EU because none of the socioeconomic assumptions of the EU are being challenged _in any way_ by brexit in its current form.


Corbyn has just delivered a speech urging European centre-left parties to move to the left 


> He said: “The neoliberal economic model … doesn’t work for most people. Inequality and low taxes for the richest are hurting our people and the economy, as even the IMF acknowledges. Our thinking must become the new consensus.”


The UK is (probably) going to leave, Melachon was hostile to the EU in France, the Portugeuse communists have called for a referendum, there's Greece (obviously). Now I'm no social democrat or fan of Labour but I do think there are some positive moves being build that attack the neo-liberalism of the EU.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> i never said you did - but its what's likely to happen. And economic crises, resurgent nationalism and the material conditions of the working class will be made worse by brexit.



So you keep saying. What's your track record on the crystal ball?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> But as far as I can see this isn't actually about the EU because none of the socioeconomic assumptions of the EU are being challenged _in any way_ by brexit in its current form.



What is Brexit's "current form"?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Tsk! if you wish to disagree with me you are welcome to do so but please explain why.



Because you think that numbers don't lie, and don't seem to grasp that people use statistics and data to support their position/argument.



BemusedbyLife said:


> Maths doesn't care  about left or right or what people want to happen, it's just an analysis of the data available.



It's not maths, it's economics. And every theoretical approach to economics carries with it it's own particular premises - none of which (unless you're talking about political economy) takes into account the working class as a social force capable of shaping the future.


----------



## inva (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not maths, it's economics. And every theoretical approach to economics carries with it it's own particular premises - none of which (unless you're talking about political economy) takes into account the working class as a social force capable of shaping the future.


i'm not sure political economy especially took that into account more than economics... wasn't that one of the ways Marx criticised it for example? it can address the action of working class people, as a problem or cost to be managed/reduced.
(agree with your general point though)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

inva said:


> i'm not sure political economy especially took that into account more than economics... wasn't that one of the ways Marx criticised it for example? it can address the action of working class people, as a problem or cost to be managed/reduced.
> (agree with your general point though)



Yes, but post Marx lots of approaches to political economy do attempt to factor in subjective/collective agency etc


----------



## inva (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes, but post Marx lots of approaches to political economy do attempt to factor in subjective/collective agency etc


after playing my Marx card i'm now showing my ignorance as i didn't even know political economy was still a thing


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> no mention of wether or not they sung 'oh jeremy corbyn' in euro accents


I read that there was a few rounds of it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

killer b said:


> I read that there was a few rounds of it.


Seriously?


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2017)

Well, I dunno. The reporter on twitter I read seemed serious but you can never tell. 

It's just for lols anyway isn't it? I don't think anyone has ever sung a round of _ohhh jeremy corbyn _without a firm sense of the ridiculous.


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2017)

although the french sing _ah-ho-ee-oh-ee-oh jeremy corbyn_, of course. (sorry)


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

killer b said:


> It's just for lols anyway isn't it? I don't think anyone has ever sung a round of _ohhh jeremy corbyn _without a firm sense of the ridiculous.


Yeah, wasn't meaning it as a criticism, just that it's sometimes hard to know if these things are real or not.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Corbyn has just delivered a speech urging European centre-left parties to move to the left
> 
> The UK is (probably) going to leave, Melachon was hostile to the EU in France, the Portugeuse communists have called for a referendum, there's Greece (obviously). Now I'm no social democrat or fan of Labour but I do think there are some positive moves being build that attack the neo-liberalism of the EU.



I know there's plenty of opposition to the EU on the political left all across Europe, and their criticisms reflect a lot of my own opinions on the matter. I've said it before and I may again but I voted remain not because of the EU but because of the tory government.

Because largely,


SpackleFrog said:


> What is Brexit's "current form"?









(at best)


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2017)

Looks like he's doing an Oaten there.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

killer b said:


> although the french sing _ah-ho-ee-oh-ee-oh jeremy corbyn_, of course. (sorry)



_Ah vous dirai-je Corbyn_


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2017)

_le garcon absolu_


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I know there's plenty of opposition to the EU on the political left all across Europe, and their criticisms reflect a lot of my own opinions on the matter. I've said it before and I may again but I voted remain not because of the EU but because of the tory government.
> 
> Because largely,
> 
> ...



That's your answer? Brexit = David Davis?

What does that mean?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

David Davis is the UK's ''chief brexit negotiator''. He's working for Theresa May. Foreign secretary just now is Boris Johnson. International Trade Sec is Liam Fox.

Other deeply involved parties are all the Barniers and the Junckers others generously dubbed _cunts_ on this thread.

What does it mean? These are the people in charge of what the UKs exit from the EU will look like. None of them are going to challenge a neoliberal consensus any time soon. What this is about (as far as I can see) is not_ challenging the neoliberal consensus_, it's about getting a bigger slice of the neoliberal pie. It was always and only about that, from the point of view of the people running the show, who are (whatta coincidence!) the people who argued for it loudest (on the wider public stage, at least).

We can blue-sky this as much as we want but let's not lose sight of what's actually happening, for the time being. David Davis and Michel Barnier and all their besuited bosses and lackeys. _None_ of them enemies of neoliberalism, _all_ of them trying to get as much of the imagined pie as possible.

* * *

How could we (The People, or at least Some People We Trust) gain control of _the process? _At the moment, for me, this is the most important question around brexit. I think this is the question the left should be finding an answer to. An answer that doesn't just involve waiting for the tory party to fuck it up and melt down (not necessarily in that order)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> David Davis is the UK's ''chief brexit negotiator''. He's working for Theresa May. Foreign secretary just now is Boris Johnson. International Trade Sec is Liam Fox.
> 
> Other deeply involved parties are all the Barniers and the Junckers others generously dubbed _cunts_ on this thread.
> 
> ...



I think it's myopic and unscientific to believe that only elite actors can influence any of this - but we'll agree to disagree there cos your question at the end is very important and perhaps there we agree. 

I don't think there's any point seeing Brexit seperately from austerity - anger at the Tories and at whats happening drove the vote to leave in large part (as well as some racism and nationalism before anyone says it, that too) and both the Tories and the various other right wing ruling parties in Europe are the enemy. How we can gain control of the process is I agree an excellent question, and I think the answer lies in the escalating strike action taking place, as well as Corbyn's Labour Party. Without the TUC or anyone on the organised left really making it happen (in fact the TUC are doing their best to put their foot on the brakes) workplace disputes are erupting everywhere and all it would take to get rid of the Tories would be to co-ordinate these strikes and disputes. Add in the community campaigns that are developing around the NHS, or housing (particularly after Grenfell) and you don't need to look for an army, it's there in front of us. This government is so weak that if we got our act together we could quite literally blow them away.

Then there's the question of what replaces them - at the moment we have the remnants of an old social democratic party led by a nice social democratic type but infested with neoliberals who are using the EU as their main point of attack against the Left. The main strength of Corbynism isn't Corbyn but the hundreds of thousands of new Labour members. If, alongside building a movement to get rid of the Tories, we had a serious campaign to democratise the Labour Party and empower those hundreds of thousands of new members to exercise control over the Party, then we would have an organisation capable of delivering the future we want - in or out of the EU.

I voted leave, you voted remain, I would vote leave a thousand times over again if I could - but I never thought there was anything in our future but misery unless we get rid of the Tories. The EU ref has severely weakened them but they're still in power and that cannot be allowed to continue. I agree completely that we can't just wait for them to fuck it up - everyone in the movement should be clear that we have to force them out. Otherwise they'll hang on like grim death and yeah, they'll be in charge of post-Brexit Britain. In or out of the EU, the key task is getting rid of the Tories and building an organisation that will act as a political voice for the working class.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Oct 19, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Because you think that numbers don't lie, and don't seem to grasp that people use statistics and data to support their position/argument.
> It's not maths, it's economics. And every theoretical approach to economics carries with it it's own particular premises - none of which (unless you're talking about political economy) takes into account the working class as a social force capable of shaping the future.


A more reasoned argument than your last one, and this contain points I agree with. Numbers don't lie, people do and they certainly put their own spin on the facts but facts are still facts.
At the moment though as far as I am aware and I have certainly seen no evidence otherwise  all 'experts' (and I am sure we disagree on who these are) from both sides of the political spectrum are of the opinion that there will a modest drop in the UK's economic activity post Brexit. Long term no-one can possibly predict what will happen whether we will become a shining beacon on the hill for world socialism or a mini-version of the state of Kentucky (sadly I personally suspect the latter is more likely than the first but happy to be proved wrong)
The working class have always been a force for social change, be it via the ballot box or Madam La Guilotine butit's not the only force for social change and at the moment as mojo pixy has pointed out, it doesn't even have a seat at the table.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 19, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> A more reasoned argument than your last one, and this contain points I agree with. Numbers don't lie, people do and they certainly put their own spin on the facts but facts are still facts.
> At the moment though as far as I am aware and I have certainly seen no evidence otherwise  all 'experts' (and I am sure we disagree on who these are) from both sides of the political spectrum are of the opinion that there will a modest drop in the UK's economic activity post Brexit. Long term no-one can possibly predict what will happen whether we will become a shining beacon on the hill for world socialism or a mini-version of the state of Kentucky (sadly I personally suspect the latter is more likely than the first but happy to be proved wrong)
> The working class have always been a force for social change, be it via the ballot box or Madam La Guilotine butit's not the only force for social change and at the moment as mojo pixy has pointed out, it doesn't even have a seat at the table.



Sigh.


----------



## bemused (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> International Trade Sec is Liam Fox.



What happened to toady Liam?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

Why, he's recently been promoting the benefits of Free Trade, along with prominent business and political figures, of course.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

Cheltenham-based fragrance house Marmalade of London is celebrated success in Canada following 2 orders over the summer and anticipated sales of almost £1.4 million over the next 5 years

That's brexit sorted then


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 19, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> there will a modest drop in the UK's economic activity post Brexit.


I've never understood why this is such an issue for people.

The economy is currently the largest it's ever been, but living standards are falling. If it can happen that way around, why not the other?

Why can't a smaller UK economy mean a more equal society, and a better deal for the WC?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 19, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Cheltenham-based fragrance house Marmalade of London is celebrated success in Canada following 2 orders over the summer and anticipated sales of almost £1.4 million over the next 5 years
> 
> That's brexit sorted then



If they are Cheltenham-based, how can they be Anything of London?


----------



## killer b (Oct 19, 2017)

I doubt there's many places that manufacture in London itself anymore. They'll have a shop there though, like all the other 'of London' places in London that sell things not made in London.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 19, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If they are Cheltenham-based, how can they be Anything of London?



Literally anything is possible, with Brexit!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 20, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Literally anything is possible, with Brexit!



Anything comrade


----------



## kabbes (Oct 20, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If they are Cheltenham-based, how can they be Anything of London?


They don’t make marmalade either.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2017)

kabbes said:


> They don’t make marmalade either.



Cunts


----------



## hot air baboon (Oct 20, 2017)

I think the quote from De Gaulle at the time was that Britain "...must be stripped naked in the negotiation chamber.." and that was on the way *IN*...with Heath's negotiating position a direct predecessor of the "deal-at-any-price" brigade now - bent over with trousers around ankles.

we can then spend a few decades pouring money into the EU "empire" whilst dishing out managed decline at home ( cf the map of Leave areas ) and now the great & good of our establishment are virtually to a man all lining up eagerly to grab ankles & adopt the position again ...( public school thing ? )

....funny old world as they say....

leaving aside the whole money issue I don't think you particularly need to be a fan of the B-word, let alone May to be less than impressed by the attitude of "the enemy" - sorry "our close valued partners"- snubbing at meetings, giving 5 minutes after dinner to present & generally going in for maximum belittlement - but given all the above who can blame them. Or a Thatcher fan to admit that she was the only UK leader who ever strong-armed anything back via the rebates.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 20, 2017)

OK, _now_ I think Brexit is definitely going to happen.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 20, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> OK, _now_ I think Brexit is definitely going to happen.
> 
> View attachment 118296



I just had to check that that does actually exist. 


By the way do you still get remaindered bookstores?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 20, 2017)

clegg couldn't stop a clock even if he took the batteries out


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 20, 2017)

Latest YouGov is dismayingly _je Bregret rien_; last week may have been a blip. 

Right to leave - 42%(nc)
Wrong to leave 45%(-2)

Cunts. Not YouGov, the public.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 20, 2017)

fathers4Remain with silas loom wearing a harley quinn outfit. Not the full body jesters onsie, the hotpants


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 20, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> fathers4Remain with silas loom wearing a harley quinn outfit. Not the full body jesters onsie, the hotpants



If I thought it would do the trick, I'd wear them in perpetuity, not just to scale shopping centres.


----------



## Winot (Oct 20, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Latest YouGov is dismayingly _je Bregret rien_; last week may have been a blip.
> 
> Right to leave - 42%(nc)
> Wrong to leave 45%(-2)
> ...



I thought this was probably on the money:


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 20, 2017)

But when they turn - as they did on the Tories in 1992 - it will be utterly savage. Sadly, it will be too late.


----------



## Fingers (Oct 20, 2017)

Someone has leaked some of those Brexit impact reports

@JolyonMaugham - Twitter Search


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 20, 2017)

Is Ian Dunt regarded as a cunt on here? He appears to be a bit Blairite. I like reading his website though. Stuff like this on here today.

Week in Review: An economy sacrificed at the altar of Brexit


----------



## Winot (Oct 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Is Ian Dunt regarded as a cunt on here? He appears to be a bit Blairite. I like reading his website though. Stuff like this on here today.
> 
> Week in Review: An economy sacrificed at the altar of Brexit



His book on Brexit is excellent.


----------



## Fingers (Oct 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Is Ian Dunt regarded as a cunt on here? He appears to be a bit Blairite. I like reading his website though. Stuff like this on here today.
> 
> Week in Review: An economy sacrificed at the altar of Brexit



Heard him interviewed a load of times on LBC, he knows his shit, Blairite or not. shall get round to reading his book soon.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Is Ian Dunt regarded as a cunt on here? He appears to be a bit Blairite. I like reading his website though. Stuff like this on here today.
> 
> Week in Review: An economy sacrificed at the altar of Brexit


That article is appalling. An excellent example of the anti-social crap worshipping at the alter of economics leads to. Certainly suggests he's a cunt.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 20, 2017)

Not read his book though but interesting stuff on his website on a daily basis I find. They did go all out on the Labour annhilation theme in the run up to last GE so it was a bit egg on face afterwards. The article linked to on website today does seem quite believable.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 20, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> clegg couldn't stop a clock even if he took the batteries out


Clegg _*is*_ a clock with the batteries taken out.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 20, 2017)

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...ysis_economic_impact_of_eu_membership_web.pdf

2016 bruh


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 20, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> That article is appalling. An excellent example of the anti-social crap worshipping at the alter of economics leads to. Certainly suggests he's a cunt.


It is seeing things from a centrist pov, I think which will not be lexiteer's view which could be that we are well rid of the city boys.

Brexit itself can be the battle between right & left wing extremes with the centrists in the middle wringing their hands in despair.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 20, 2017)

I see that Macron is having his larks, suggesting UK is bluffing over the notion of 'no deal'.  His intervention is all part of the game, but I suspect he's right. Certainly with regard to May, if not the more swivel eyed.  To be honest though, I thought there would have been more mischievous comments from the various EU bods than there have been.  Supposed David Davis et al have been so shit there's been no need to play games.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It is seeing things from a centrist pov, I think which will not be lexiteer's view which could be that we are well rid of the city boys.
> 
> Brexit itself can be the battle between right & left wing extremes with the centrists in the middle wringing their hands in despair.


It's not just centrist, it's a neo-liberal viewpoint. Economics as a neutral science, rather than a deeply destructive political ideology.


----------



## Riklet (Oct 20, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Latest YouGov is dismayingly _je Bregret rien_; last week may have been a blip.
> 
> Right to leave - 42%(nc)
> Wrong to leave 45%(-2)
> ...



I see little point in continuing the debate with bitter whiny liberals when I read stuff like this. It almost, almost makes me want to say "you lost....". But not quite.  No surprise you see no future for Britain if the public are cunts and the whole world is just North Korea May Twitter Junker The Government says.

Big challenge, undoubtedly, but bringing down a Tory government and creating a democreatic left shift in British society is _the _challenge for the future, which requires developing the tools needed to do this. At least this is a fucking vision! Lets go back to 2007 happy land oh yay I like baguettes and Italian wine, on the other hand. How profoundly, profoundly fucking depressing. Can any leftie here not say they would be fucking ashamed to say this to one of their long dead political heroes? I mean Jesus....

 No wonder the current left is half dead when this is the brexit vision the TUC etc can only just about get behind. For the rest of us, time for a bit of optimism while the Tories tear themselves appart and even libberals and the right are busy wibbling. _We're dooooomed!_


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 20, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Clegg _*is*_ a clock with the batteries taken out.



But still manages to be wrong 24 hours a day, can't even manage the two minutes of right that other clocks do. Go Nick


----------



## Wilf (Oct 20, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> But still manages to be wrong 24 hours a day, can't even manage the two minutes of right that other clocks do. Go Nick


"Yes, YES, it actually _is_ twenty to six, I'm right, I'm right! Oh, shit, too late"


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 20, 2017)

I would agree that we can be optimistic that the next majority government will be Labour. I think now the numbers will add up to get Labour voted in. This may well have happened though even with a remain vote & Cameron & Osborne still in charge.


----------



## inva (Oct 20, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> OK, _now_ I think Brexit is definitely going to happen.
> 
> View attachment 118296


fair play to whoever designed the cover for putting fuck all effort in


----------



## Winot (Oct 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I would agree that we can be optimistic that the next majority government will be Labour. I think now the numbers will add up to get Labour voted in. This may well have happened though even with a remain vote & Cameron & Osborne still in charge.



Pessimistic version - Labour gets in as the next majority government just as Brexit shit hits the fan. Voters blame economic collapse caused by Brexit on Labour. Tories get back into power again on basis of mantra of 'Labour cannot be trusted with the economy'.


----------



## Combustible (Oct 20, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Someone has leaked some of those Brexit impact reports



Surely it hardly requires leaked documents to know that a country which has no trade deal with the EU will have less access to EU markets than countries which have some form of trade deal.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 21, 2017)

Turns out foreign direct investment in the UK by companies is plummeting. 120 billion surplus in the first half of 2016, 26 billion outflow in the first six months of 2017. Source is a Telegraph article dated 15 October, subject to paywall. Seems rather a lot to disappear.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 21, 2017)

On R4 news this morning. UK has offered £18bill & is prepared to go £36bill if they could get it through parliment. EU want about £48bill but France/Germany say nothing less than£60bill obviously fearing anti EU backlash in their own countries if they have to make up shortfall. EU worried that if they push for too much money May could get booted out in favour of Johnson & fears the chaos that could result. £60bill is like staying in EU for about another 8yrs.

Whatever one's feelings leave or remain one has to ask if it is all worth it?


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Turns out foreign direct investment in the UK by companies is plummeting. 120 billion surplus in the first half of 2016, 26 billion outflow in the first six months of 2017. Source is a Telegraph article dated 15 October, subject to paywall. Seems rather a lot to disappear.



Nope.

British outward investment, was projected to be 120 billion surplus (after years of negative projections), turned out to still be negative.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 21, 2017)

gosub said:


> Nope.
> 
> British outward investment, was projected to be 120 billion surplus (after years of negative projections), turned out to still be negative.



Don't follow you. What's the link between UK outward and inward FDI?


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Don't follow you. What's the link between UK outward and inward FDI?



the actual graph the article was based on:   (n.b  NET)





someone in the treasury (on the yellow line) thought that the either the rest of the world would stop holding UK assets or UK interests would move to a more international portfolio, but it didn't happen anywhere near as much as projected most likely because the fall in the pound made the UK relative bargains if you were buying from a dollar/euro position.

I'd guess the yellow line was a hangover from Osbourne's doom mongering over a stock market collapse in the event of Brexit (it didn't, it rose).  Either that or some pre-election figure massaging.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 21, 2017)

Is that not how much UK enterprises are investing abroad?


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Is that not how much UK enterprises are investing abroad?


yes minus how much Foreign enterprises are investing in the UK


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> Pessimistic version - Labour gets in as the next majority government just as Brexit shit hits the fan. Voters blame economic collapse caused by Brexit on Labour. Tories get back into power again on basis of mantra of 'Labour cannot be trusted with the economy'.



That is pessimism elevated to an art form to be fair.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2017)

Combustible said:


> Surely it hardly requires leaked documents to know that a country which has no trade deal with the EU will have less access to EU markets than countries which have some form of trade deal.



What would be interesting is how he knows that the EU will not be prepared to agree to a deal giving the UK equal trading access with Yemen. Which they might not be like but it's interesting he''s so certain.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 21, 2017)

the pm at a tricky conference yesterday -


----------



## Poi E (Oct 21, 2017)

gosub said:


> yes minus how much Foreign enterprises are investing in the UK



Isn't the discrete amount of FDI a better indicator of external confidence in the UK's economy? I guess whichever side you look at its not looking shit hot.


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Isn't the discrete amount of FDI a better indicator of external confidence in the UK's economy? I guess whichever side you look at its not looking shit hot.


Not such a striking headline though
That telegraph story started life as half a trillion lost!


----------



## teqniq (Oct 22, 2017)

Liam Fox stands by claim that Brexit trade deal will be 'easiest in human history'

Why aren't you in prison?


----------



## extra dry (Oct 22, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the pm at a tricky conference yesterday -


I called every one of you plants pots here, this lovely autum afternoon, to reasure and announce that water will be available just as soon as I can fix a ground breaking deal for everyone living indeed now, for now is a very important time ...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 22, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Liam Fox stands by claim that Brexit trade deal will be 'easiest in human history'
> 
> Why aren't you in prison?


The loonspud end of brexit have no arguments left so they just bluster. I suppose a trade deal would be easy if the EU & the rest of the world were fully behind brexit & would all work together to achieve brexit success but as the reverse is true Fox, Johnson & co are just reduced to spluttering rhetoric.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 22, 2017)

The pendulum seems to have swung back the past few days as it has become apparent to the EU fuckos that May’s fragility isn’t such a good thing for them, if she was to go and be replaced by that Johnson cunt it would be hard Brexit and that means Merkel & Macron have to tell their voters that they need to cough up a lot more dough.


Still think there will be no meaningful deal in the end and if that will be the case telling th EU to get fucked today would be the better move, we still have 18 months before we leave, but preparing now for no deal would mean we could get our shit together and make the best of the car crash that has been happening since that pig fucker called the referendum.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 22, 2017)

extra dry said:


> I called every one of you plants pots here, this lovely autum afternoon, to reasure and announce that water will be available just as soon as I can fix a ground breaking deal for everyone living indeed now, for now is a very important time ...



"I understand that this conference room may be a somewhat challenging environment for you, but sunlight doesn't just fall from the sky, you know."


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 22, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the pm at a tricky conference yesterday -



Mayhem came to regret tasking Liam Fox with arranging a few plants for the press conference


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 22, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The pendulum seems to have swung back the past few days as it has become apparent to the EU fuckos that May’s fragility isn’t such a good thing for them, if she was to go and be replaced by that Johnson cunt it would be hard Brexit and that means Merkel & Macron have to tell their voters that they need to cough up a lot more dough.
> 
> 
> Still think there will be no meaningful deal in the end and if that will be the case telling th EU to get fucked today would be the better move, we still have 18 months before we leave, but preparing now for no deal would mean we could get our shit together and make the best of the car crash that has been happening since that pig fucker called the referendum.



I don't get your position. Do you favour a Brexit conclusion that's no deal, or do you think the 2016 referendum was a pigfucker of a thing?

Not sure the two are compatible with each other  ... if so for you, how??


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 22, 2017)

I think it is unlikely they will walk away with no deal anytime soon. Labour are now claiming they can get enough cross party support to vote down any no deal scenario.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 22, 2017)

'no deal' is posturing by a bunch of idiots who still don't know what kind of deal they actually want. I don't think 'no deal' was ever a possibility.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 22, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the pm at a tricky conference yesterday -


To think that only yesterday
I was cheerful, bright and gay
Looking forward to, well who wouldn't do?
The role I was about to play
But as if to knock me down
Reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch
Cut me into little pieces
Leaving me to doubt
Talk about God in his mercy
Oh, if he really does exist
Why did he desert me?
In my hour of need
I truly am indeed
Alone again, naturally


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think it is unlikely they will walk away with no deal anytime soon. Labour are now claiming they can get enough cross party support to vote down any no deal scenario.



What role do you see for parliament or Labour? 

My understanding is that unless agreement is reached with the EU, the default on 29 March 2019 is that we will leave the EU with no deal in place. So the government might give parliament a role to *approve* a deal that has been reached, but parliament cannot create a deal in the absence of agreement.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> What role do you see for parliament or Labour?
> 
> My understanding is that unless agreement is reached with the EU, the default on 29 March 2019 is that we will leave the EU with no deal in place. So the government might give parliament a role to *approve* a deal that has been reached, but parliament cannot create a deal in the absence of agreement.



Well, some think that Article 50 can be revoked. But, supposing that is wrong, in the event of no deal by the deadline, the Council of Ministers still has the power to make space for further negotiation by extending the Article 50 period. Undoubtedly, they would do that if they received a request and, probably, a vote in parliament could oblige the government of the day to make a request.


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Well, some think that Article 50 can be revoked. But, supposing that is wrong, in the event of no deal by the deadline, the Council of Ministers still has the power to make space for further negotiation by extending the Article 50 period. Undoubtedly, they would do that if they received a request and, probably, a vote in parliament could oblige the government of the day to make a request.



You are talking about a scenario in which the UK government is not in favour of making the extension request and is forced to do so by losing a vote in the Commons (if they are in favour, there is no need for parliamentary approval). 

I think in practice if that happened it would be seen as a no confidence vote and the government would fall. And for that reason I fear that it will not happen.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> What role do you see for parliament or Labour?



The EU Withdrawal Bill is not going to have an untroubled passage, to say the least.


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The EU Withdrawal Bill is not going to have an untroubled passage, to say the least.



Agreed. Don’t think that affects the (no) deal with the EU though.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> You are talking about a scenario in which the UK government is not in favour of making the extension request and is forced to do so by losing a vote in the Commons (if they are in favour, there is no need for parliamentary approval).
> 
> I think in practice if that happened it would be seen as a no confidence vote and the government would fall. And for that reason I fear that it will not happen.



A no confidence vote can only follow a formal no confidence motion. If the government's Brexit proposals are defeated, it's just a government defeat, and the world keeps turning. Even if there were a no confidence vote, there would still be a Prime Minister, because the old one stays until the new one takes up office. So there would still be someone in position to act on the will of parliament.


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> A no confidence vote can only follow a formal no confidence motion. If the government's Brexit proposals are defeated, it's just a government defeat, and the world keeps turning. Even if there were a no confidence vote, there would still be a Prime Minister, because the old one stays until the new one takes up office. So there would still be someone in position to act on the will of parliament.



Do you think it’s likely that Labour can force an extension to Article 50?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Well, some think that Article 50 can be revoked. But, supposing that is wrong,.


In what way could it be wrong? If all concerned agree it can be revoked, it can be revoked.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> Do you think it’s likely that Labour can force an extension to Article 50?



I'm not sure I can see it being necessary. But yes, I think they hypothetically can. More importantly, asserting themselves now will potentially change the Brexit narrative, by making it harder to pretend that no deal is an option.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 22, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In what way could it be wrong? If all concerned agree it can be revoked, it can be revoked.



I sort of agree, but I've also spotted an "if" in there. I'm not sure about the technicalities, but I would say a revocation has to be unilateral. If it goes to the Council of Ministers, they are not revoking it (they never triggered it in the first place), they are annulling it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 23, 2017)

Winot said:


> Agreed. Don’t think that affects the (no) deal with the EU though.



Not directly, no, but a crucial Bill that has trouble passing both Houses has to have a delaying impact, and in turn that must shape the government position wrt exit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I sort of agree, but I've also spotted an "if" in there. I'm not sure about the technicalities, but I would say a revocation has to be unilateral.


Sure, but the point is that any technicalities can be overcome if there is the will to do it. There is no precedent, and a lot of hot air is spoken by all sides about what may or may not be possible. Politically, I would say that it would be impossible for the rest of the EU to refuse to cancel brexit if the UK were to request such a thing, whatever the rules might say. There have been some rather fanciful ideas posited about various penalties that they would try to impose, but I don't see how any of that would be possible. I'm not saying brexit won't happen. I have my doubts, but I have no idea - nobody does - but I am saying that it could not happen very easily if the UK were to want it not to happen. The rest of the EU doesn't want brexit, after all.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 23, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sure, but the point is that any technicalities can be overcome if there is the will to do it. There is no precedent, and a lot of hot air is spoken by all sides about what may or may not be possible. Politically, I would say that it would be impossible for the rest of the EU to refuse to cancel brexit if the UK were to request such a thing, whatever the rules might say. There have been some rather fanciful ideas posited about various penalties that they would try to impose, but I don't see how any of that would be possible. I'm not saying brexit won't happen. I have my doubts, but I have no idea - nobody does - but I am saying that it could not happen very easily if the UK were to want it not to happen. The rest of the EU doesn't want brexit, after all.



Yes, I agree, except in the scenario where our request is "we want no deal, but please can we do it in a bit?" (which I also don't think will happen).


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The pendulum seems to have swung back the past few days as it has become apparent to the EU fuckos that May’s fragility isn’t such a good thing for them, if she was to go and be replaced by that Johnson cunt it would be hard Brexit and that means Merkel & Macron have to tell their voters that they need to cough up a lot more dough.
> .


Though...
Jean-Claude Juncker's chief of staff denies May dinner leaks

May of course is truly fucked, in every way. Didn't want Brexit, fucked up over the election, cough cough, bounced around by Johnson et al, no progress in the deal - and her whole Premiership defined by all of this.  But then she's stuck with it, can't resign as she then gets the reputation of being the worst PM ever, putting her bruised ego above the national interest.  I suspect she truly _is_ tormented. In the words of Grumpycat, GOOD!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2017)

This is from Robert Peston, via the guardian's news feed:


> The most revealing statement made today was a Tweet by Juncker’s chief of staff, the German lawyer Martin Selmayr, that he and Juncker have “no interest in weakening PM” ...
> 
> As it happens I have been told repeatedly and reliably that Merkel in particular regards the prospect of Johnson becoming prime minister, and therefore her counterpart in Brexit talks, with the relish that most of us would feel if presented with a plate of steaming sick.
> 
> And the knee-jerk Tweet from Selmayr, who is close to Merkel - when accused by May’s former aide NickTimothy of being the leaker - more or less confirmed that.


 This just about allows Johnson's vassals in the tory party to portray May as almost the creature of the EU, clinging on with the support of Junker, Merkel et al.  However I still can't see them replacing her in the short term. Just adds to the shit sloshing around the party and further weakens May.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 24, 2017)

If I was in the unfortunate position of being in charge, here's what I reckon I'd do:

- Get a proposed set of terms, whatever is available quickly, present it as best we'll be offered

- Put it to the nation as a Yes/No vote, where No is ambiguous but in theory means back to the Brexit drawing board rather than explicitly rejecting whole thing

- Repeat Remainers plus greedy Brexiteers surely means it's a No (although we all know how these gambles go)

- Blame everyone else

- Call another election, probably lose but at least lose as the democratic party that tried

- Leave the 'WTF now' to the even more unfortunate replacement

- ???

- Profit


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 24, 2017)

mauvais said:


> If I was in the unfortunate position of being in charge, here's what I reckon I'd do:
> 
> - Get a proposed set of terms, whatever is available quickly, present it as best we'll be offered
> 
> ...



Do you mean terms for the eventual relationship, or terms for the interim relationship? Neither are available quickly, except perhaps for Norway+ (EFTA/EEA + comprehensive customs agreement).


----------



## mauvais (Oct 24, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Do you mean terms for the eventual relationship, or terms for the interim relationship? Neither are available quickly, except perhaps for Norway+ (EFTA/EEA + comprehensive customs agreement).


Both. It doesn't necessarily have to be final and binding, just a skeleton of a plan within the parameters of the now-possible. Plus some details like a figure for the bill to pay, etc, enough to be able to say 'this needs to be put to the public'.

Plus half the bloody thing is predicated on it being rejected, so as long as that doesn't go wrong, who cares!


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Oct 24, 2017)

mauvais said:


> If I was in the unfortunate position of being in charge, here's what I reckon I'd do:
> 
> - Get a proposed set of terms, whatever is available quickly, present it as best we'll be offered
> 
> ...


You're David Cameron aren't you?


----------



## mauvais (Oct 24, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> You're David Cameron aren't you?


I suppose it is pretty much the same plan, but mine's new and improved: instead of presenting an alluring dream that people will unexpectedly vote for, simply offer up a plate of shit and then go home early when noone wants to eat it.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 24, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I suppose it is pretty much the same plan, but mine's new and improved: instead of presenting an alluring dream that people will unexpectedly vote for, simply offer up a plate of shit and then go home early when noone wants to eat it.



But, as Cameron found out, one man's plate of shit is what half the country fancies for breakfast. Metaphorically speaking.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 24, 2017)

Under Cameron we had two referendums, both of the most profound social, economic and political consequence. What a democrat.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 24, 2017)

Raheem said:


> But, as Cameron found out, one man's plate of shit is what half the country fancies for breakfast. Metaphorically speaking.


Funny you say that. I've spent a lot of time in Germany over the last couple of decades and one constant standing joke the Germans like to reel out at every opportunity to us Brits, is the one about the quality of our breakfasts:  'How could you eat such a fatty pile of unhealthy shit?', 'beans for breakfast, you'll be farting all day...', 'musli is so much healthier than than your englisch shit!', 'it's a plate of shit..!' etc.
let's just say (on paper) I had a hard time defending one of my primordial culinary delights.... until that is, I was invited last year to a "sehr _deutsch_" all inclusive holiday on the Canary Islands (4 stars)
Mornings, in the grand breakfast hall, the displays of _healthy shit _like diced fruit, musli, endless sorts of continental cheeses and hams, wholemeal bread, figs, grapes, yoghurt, sliced gherkins, ect were being completely ignored by the punters (90% Deutsch). No-one near it.
Right at the back of the hall, in a dark dingy corner, was a 5 meter long frying platter with about a million fried eggs on the go, 5 million rashers of bacon sizzling away next to about 600 litres of baked beans.
In front of said platter was an unruly melee of Germans in white socks and sandals silently barging in and trying their best to push their way to the front (coz queuing isn't part of their culture) to order this masterpiece  ... gagging for it they were!

so, metaphorically speaking, this shows how your average European is well accustomed to accept, and even enjoy, the most unsavoury plates of British shit


----------



## gosub (Oct 24, 2017)

There in lies the rub; nothing beats a British breakfast...... If someone else is cooking it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I suppose it is pretty much the same plan, but mine's new and improved: instead of presenting an alluring dream that people will unexpectedly vote for, simply offer up a plate of shit and then go home early when noone wants to eat it.



I'm glad you've no chance of being in charge then, you sound too much like the Tories.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 24, 2017)

gosub said:


> There in lies the rub; nothing beats a British breakfast...... If someone else is cooking it


----------



## Raheem (Oct 24, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm glad you've no chance of being in charge then, you sound too much like the Tories.



Except he has some sort of plan.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Except he has some sort of plan.



A plate of shit is a plate of shit regardless of the level of planning that went into serving it up.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 24, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> A plate of shit is a plate of shit.



Now who sounds like a Tory?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 25, 2017)

It's a red white and blue plate of shit


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Now who sounds like a Tory?


you do


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 25, 2017)

Michael Bloomberg breaks cover and states the bleedin' obvious Michael Bloomberg: Brexit is stupidest thing any country has done besides Trump

But it's not all doom and gloom for everyone, as Arron Banks is set to cash in from a Hollywood film of his book The Bad Boys of Brexit A £60 million film about Brexit is reportedly coming next year — and Nigel Farage wants to play himself


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 25, 2017)

the wise old billionaire has spoken


----------



## J Ed (Oct 25, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Michael Bloomberg breaks cover and states the bleedin' obvious Michael Bloomberg: Brexit is stupidest thing any country has done besides Trump






> Bloomberg argued that “it is really hard to understand why a country that *was doing so well *wanted to ruin it”



Not for me it wasn't, which is something that he and his fellow travellers don't know about because they aren't in the least bit interested even from a purely narrow, selfish perspective so of course they have no idea why Brexit happened.

I can count the number of die hard remainers who have shown any interest in this question on one hand too. It's because we're stupid, or racist, or were tricked by Russia. Neoliberalism cannot be failed, we can only fail it with our herd-like stupidity. Which is why we are at the food banks, have falling wages in real terms comparable to Greece and are dying off at an increasing rate with a lowered life expectancy.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 25, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Not for me it wasn't


And clearly not for millions of others either. But there were many people who pushed for and voted Brexit that were already doing very nicely thank you, who did so for ideological reasons, and many did so in order to cash in on it themselves with scant regard for the millions who'd inevitably lose out - Arron Banks being one such example.

They didn't give a shit about the people using food banks, but they played on people's poor circumstances, fears, hopes and ignorance to sway them into believing that leaving the EU would bring them a brighter tomorrow - based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever. So if you want to talk about people acting out of a 'purely narrow, selfish perspective', there are many more here at home who would be more appropriate for that discussion than Michael Bloomberg.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 25, 2017)

yes thats the 'thickos who believed the NHS bus pledge' stuff again isn't it?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 25, 2017)

Now you're stereotyping


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

So Davis tells the HoC that any transition deal will be done at the last minute, and any Parliamentary vote on it will take place after we have exited on those terms. Then May, in PMQs immediately afterwards, says that she is confident there will be plenty of time for a meaningful vote.

Confusion and evasiveness and nonsense like this surely can’t go on.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Confusion and evasiveness and nonsense like this surely can’t go on.


I'm not sure, it's looking increasingly like it's the Tories' deliberate _modus operandi_


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> I'm not sure, it's looking increasingly like it's the Tories' deliberate _modus operandi_



It's May's MO. To a degree, it's become DexEU's, too. But the headbangers want clarity. And the sensibles - not just the Soubry/Grieve/Morgan/Clarke lot - are increasingly restive. I know Urban doesn't care what evil businessmen say, but the majority of Tory MPs really do. So I don't see a Tory majority, or even a Cabinet majority, for obfuscation, and I can't believe that things will carry on like this, even if the Withdrawal Bill is delayed to prevent any opportunities for rebellion.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2017)

"In circumstances where I have no control over my party, cabinet or even my own throat, all of the following options may happen at some point or may not. Strong and Stable".

"I have though, _*definitively*_ ruled out the possibility of eating what I believe are called 'chips', in public EVER AGAIN".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Now who sounds like a Tory?



In what sense?



Silas Loom said:


> Confusion and evasiveness and nonsense like this surely can’t go on.



It will until we get rid of this government.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> It will until we get rid of this government.



Who is "we"? Are you a Tory backbencher?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Who is "we"? Are you a Tory backbencher?





We = the labour movement, the working class, ordinary people that don't eat truffles and swan for breakfast.


----------



## Corax (Oct 25, 2017)

My money's still on a pudding mix of agreement that in total amount to abiding by all the EU rules and regulations, paying for the privilege, but not having any votes on them.

Yay Brexit.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> We = the labour movement, the working class, ordinary people that don't eat truffles and swan for breakfast.



The Labour movement has a chance of getting rid of the government, but only when it is led again by eaters of truffled swan who can do business with the Tory left. Otherwise, it's entirely down to the Tories.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2017)

Corax said:


> My money's still on a pudding mix of agreement that in total amount to abiding by all the EU rules and regulations, paying for the privilege, but not having any votes on them.
> 
> Yay Brexit.


The really impressive thing about the eye swivelling ideological strand of all things brexity, is that they don't seem to have given the UK's future outside the EU a moment's thought. Well done lads.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 25, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> They didn't give a shit about the people using food banks, but they played on people's poor circumstances, fears, hopes and *ignorance* to sway them into believing that leaving the EU would bring them a brighter tomorrow - based on absolutely no evidence whatsoever.





DotCommunist said:


> yes thats the 'thickos who believed the NHS bus pledge' stuff again isn't it?





Dr. Furface said:


> Now you're stereotyping



Who's stereotyping


----------



## Dr. Furface (Oct 25, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who's stereotyping


I was generalising, he was stereotyping. And I didn't mention that fucking bus.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 25, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> I was generalising, he was stereotyping. And I didn't mention that fucking bus.



So what was the ignorance of the poor people that was played upon by the rich people to make them vote to leave the EU?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

There's widespread ignorance about international trade agreements, non-tariff barriers, WTO small print, the machinery of the EU bodies, and all the rest of it. Poor people are ignorant. Rich people are ignorant. Journalists are ignorant. MPs are ignorant. This ignorance was played upon by people who didn't give a shit what the truth actually was.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> There's widespread ignorance about international trade agreements, non-tariff barriers, WTO small print, the machinery of the EU bodies, and all the rest of it. Poor people are ignorant. Rich people are ignorant. Journalists are ignorant. MPs are ignorant. This ignorance was played upon by people who didn't give a shit what the truth actually was.



So people who voted leave were thickos. Those who voted remain were thickos. Everyone was/is a thicko. Is that it?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 25, 2017)

are you the keeper of this sacred truth, silas loom?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So people who voted leave were thickos. Those who voted remain were thickos. Everyone was/is a thicko. Is that it?



Ignorance about the staggeringly complex doesn't make anybody thick. We're all - well, most of us are - ignorant about theoretical physics. It's just that no-one has been fuckwitted enough to try and settle questions about superstrings through a referendum.


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> are you the keeper of this sacred truth, silas loom?



I certainly know more about it now than I did in June 2016, because - very slowly - mainstream bloggers and commentators are beginning to understand the issues, one by one, and write about them in words I can understand.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Ignorance about the staggeringly complex doesn't make anybody thick. We're all - well, most of us are - ignorant about theoretical physics. It's just that no-one has been fuckwitted enough to try and settle questions about superstrings through a referendum.



Jesus, that really is quite special


----------



## gosub (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It's May's MO. To a degree, it's become DexEU's, too. But the headbangers want clarity. And the sensibles - not just the Soubry/Grieve/Morgan/Clarke lot - are increasingly restive. I know Urban doesn't care what evil businessmen say, but the majority of Tory MPs really do. So I don't see a Tory majority, or even a Cabinet majority, for obfuscation, and I can't believe that things will carry on like this, even if the Withdrawal Bill is delayed to prevent any opportunities for rebellion.


'We've got 6 weeks left before we've lost the battle': The City's top official has a stark warning about the coming Brexit 'exodus' from London

UK Brexit chief says he expects talks to go down to the wire

Things can only get.. Interesting.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> There's widespread ignorance about international trade agreements, non-tariff barriers, WTO small print, the machinery of the EU bodies, and all the rest of it. Poor people are ignorant. Rich people are ignorant. Journalists are ignorant. MPs are ignorant. This ignorance was played upon by people who didn't give a shit what the truth actually was.


I think ignorance as in thick is not quite correct. Plenty I know are intelligent people doing well paid jobs. They admit that they simply don't do politics because they find it boring. They pay £50pm to Sky to watch sport, films & box sets not politics. Plenty I know are now slightly worried about brexit they voted for. They notice prices rising in shops & their £ buys less when they they go to Spain. They worry mostly about their houses being devalued.

Certainly there are the pig ignorant "why ain't we facking left yet?" But most people will tell you they have no interest in the detail. They genuinely cannot see any point in the EU because they have no interest in France/Germany etc. The minute by minute detail of brexit many of the users of this forum follow avidly is lost on them because they have no interest. Their solution would be that Boris should be PM "he would sort them out".

I have a right laff telling them all that the brexit they voted for will probably destroy their precious Tories & Corbyn will be PM soon. That's when their eyes glaze over & they go into denial mode.

It's not hard to get a handle on it all if one does a bit of reading the internet which is what I do & I conclude that I have no idea if brexit will make me personally better or worse off but if we do get a social democratic government that builds council houses plenty will be much better off.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 25, 2017)

Corax said:


> My money's still on a pudding mix of agreement that in total amount to abiding by all the EU rules and regulations, p*aying for the privilege, but not having any votes on them*.
> 
> Yay Brexit.


To large extent, that's been the situation for the UK since 2011 when the pig fucker played his veto card.



> As a result of Mr Cameron's veto, the BBC said, 23 other countries have now agreed to seek their own fiscal pact involving deep integration around the tax and spending powers of member governments. Standing on its rights as a member of the current EU treaties, Britain argues that such a pact within a union should not be allowed to use the institutions that legally belong to the 27, such as the European Commission, the European Council or the European Court of Justice. At one point, an EU diplomat informed me in an overnight email, Mr Cameron could be heard arguing with his fellow-leaders that when members of the new club of 23 hold their planned monthly summits, they should not be allowed to use the buildings and meeting rooms of the European Council.


----------



## Corax (Oct 25, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> To large extent, that's been the situation for the UK since 2011 when the pig fucker played his veto card.


Petty little shit eh?  I say, acting surprised.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Labour movement has a chance of getting rid of the government, but *only when it is led again by eaters of truffled swan who can do business with the Tory left.* Otherwise, it's entirely down to the Tories.



Ahhhhhhhhhhhh, now I see.

So what we need is a Labour leader that will continue with austerity, war and racism but take us back to the paradise of the EU at the same time?


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ahhhhhhhhhhhh, now I see.
> 
> So what we need is a Labour leader that will continue with austerity, war and racism but take us back to the paradise of the EU at the same time?



I think that there would be a better chance of a Westminster solution to the current, genuine, political crisis without Labour being represented on economics by McDonnell.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 25, 2017)

gosub said:


> 'We've got 6 weeks left before we've lost the battle': The City's top official has a stark warning about the coming Brexit 'exodus' from London
> 
> UK Brexit chief says he expects talks to go down to the wire
> 
> Things can only get.. Interesting.



Good. Let them go.


----------



## J Ed (Oct 25, 2017)

What the fuck is 'the Tory left'?


----------



## Corax (Oct 25, 2017)

J Ed said:


> What the fuck is 'the Tory left'?


These days, probably Cameron.


----------



## agricola (Oct 25, 2017)

J Ed said:


> What the fuck is 'the Tory left'?



Rory Stewart, after four years of Corbyn.  He will only have survived because of his previous experiences in the wild.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I think that there would be a better chance of a Westminster solution to the current, genuine, political crisis without Labour being represented on economics by McDonnell.



Don't want a 'Westminster' solution ta very much


----------



## Silas Loom (Oct 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't want a 'Westminster' solution ta very much



What do you suggest instead?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I certainly know more about it now than I did in June 2016, because - very slowly - mainstream bloggers and commentators are beginning to understand the issues, one by one, and write about them in words I can understand.



Do you know any truth that doesn't come from the mainstream?



Silas Loom said:


> What do you suggest instead?





SpackleFrog said:


> I think it's myopic and unscientific to believe that only elite actors can influence any of this - but we'll agree to disagree there cos your question at the end is very important and perhaps there we agree.
> 
> I don't think there's any point seeing Brexit seperately from austerity - anger at the Tories and at whats happening drove the vote to leave in large part (as well as some racism and nationalism before anyone says it, that too) and both the Tories and the various other right wing ruling parties in Europe are the enemy. How we can gain control of the process is I agree an excellent question, and I think the answer lies in the escalating strike action taking place, as well as Corbyn's Labour Party. Without the TUC or anyone on the organised left really making it happen (in fact the TUC are doing their best to put their foot on the brakes) workplace disputes are erupting everywhere and all it would take to get rid of the Tories would be to co-ordinate these strikes and disputes. Add in the community campaigns that are developing around the NHS, or housing (particularly after Grenfell) and you don't need to look for an army, it's there in front of us. This government is so weak that if we got our act together we could quite literally blow them away.
> 
> ...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 25, 2017)

It is accurate -


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 25, 2017)

Nine Bob Note said:


>



Cheese on beans or beans on ch---

Hold on, is that _Emmenthal?? _


----------



## Raheem (Oct 25, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> It is accurate -




I bet there's at least one group of oddbods who claim to be the rightful government of Czechoslovakia. If not, I propose we start one.


----------



## binka (Oct 26, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I know Urban doesn't care what evil businessmen say, but the majority of Tory MPs really do. So I don't see a Tory majority, or even a Cabinet majority, for obfuscation, and I can't believe that things will carry on like this, even if the Withdrawal Bill is delayed to prevent any opportunities for rebellion.


I do agree with this. The company I work for does some trade with Europe and already we're talking about what are we going to do. We don't just buy and sell on a whim, we have agreements to supply for 6/12 months and have relationships with suppliers and customers that have been ongoing for years. If we don't know what our costs are going to be we can't plan ahead. We're just small fry though so I imagine the people who have the real money will make sure it doesn't carry on like this


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 26, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I bet there's at least one group of oddbods who claim to be the rightful government of Czechoslovakia. If not, I propose we start one.



I did a quick search to see if there was anyone still claiming to be king, but, alas, no.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 26, 2017)

binka said:


> I do agree with this. The company I work for does some trade with Europe and already we're talking about what are we going to do. We don't just buy and sell on a whim, we have agreements to supply for 6/12 months and have relationships with suppliers and customers that have been ongoing for years. If we don't know what our costs are going to be we can't plan ahead. We're just small fry though so I imagine the people who have the real money will make sure it doesn't carry on like this


The people with real money are coping with it by doing thing like setting up EU sister companies and transferring their EU trade to those companies.  Taking some of their business out of the UK, in other words.  This may or may not be a price worth paying in order to gain political freedom from the EU block (depending on your political philosophy) but I don’t think we should pretend it isn’t happening.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 26, 2017)

Nine Bob Note said:


> I did a quick search to see if there was anyone still claiming to be king, but, alas, no.



Brilliant! Bagsy minister for hats and headwear.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 26, 2017)

Nine Bob Note said:


> I did a quick search to see if there was anyone still claiming to be king, but, alas, no.



Karl von Habsburg might come closest, according to this list of current pretenders, which does not include Chrissie Hynde.

List of current pretenders - Wikipedia


----------



## binka (Oct 26, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The people with real money are coping with it by doing thing like setting up EU sister companies and transferring their EU trade to those companies.  Taking some of their business out of the UK, in other words.  This may or may not be a price worth paying in order to gain political freedom from the EU block (depending on your political philosophy) but I don’t think we should pretend it isn’t happening.


Oh I don't doubt that but it isn't an option for every large company. High street retailers for example will continue to need premises, staff and stock in the UK.


----------



## gosub (Oct 28, 2017)

We got the marker in before ship tax. [emoji12]


----------



## gosub (Nov 5, 2017)

*Theresa May kickstarts trade talks by accepting £53bn bill*


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2017)

ah well. I am sure we can just print some more billions to cover it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 5, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> ah well. I am sure we can just print some more billions to cover it.


The bill's in euros, note. 

Love how they're selling that as a bargain. It's approximately six months of the NHS budget, given that NHS spending seems to be the go-to marker.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2017)

we should negotiate the settlement to be in GBP, then trigger a period of super hyper inflation, send a truck full of worthless 10 quid notes across & call it quits.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 6, 2017)

From February:

Liam Fox dismisses 'absurd' claim that UK will face £50 billion Brussels bill after Brexit

Etc.  Remember the days of being told that it was “absurd” that we would pay €40-60bn?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 6, 2017)

Paying that much would be the same as staying in the EU 8yrs or more paying usual annual net contribution so the brexiteers would claim it was remain disgused as leave particularly as it may leave a route for a future UK government to rejoin the EU that we had not really left. I would guess most leave voters would see paying that sort of money to keep free trade as much of a betrayal as cancelling brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 6, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Paying that much would be the same as staying in the EU 8yrs or more paying usual annual net contribution so the brexiteers would claim it was remain disgused as leave particularly as it may leave a route for a future UK government to rejoin the EU that we had not really left. I would guess most leave voters would see paying that sort of money to keep free trade as much of a betrayal as cancelling brexit.


There's another side to the 'net contributor' story. The UK isn't the only net contributor and isn't the biggest net contributor, and when you visit the net receivers, you see countries that have in many cases come a long way in a short time. The money isn't just pissed away. Nobody seems to want to talk in a generous way about giving to the EU, the long-term benefit of which is a more prosperous Europe (which would result in the net contributors' bills coming down).


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Paying that much would be the same as staying in the EU 8yrs or more paying usual annual net contribution so the brexiteers would claim it was remain disgused as leave particularly as it may leave a route for a future UK government to rejoin the EU that we had not really left. I would guess most leave voters would see paying that sort of money to keep free trade as much of a betrayal as cancelling brexit.



How much of this notional fee is (1) our contribution to projects we have already agreed to before voting to leave, and how much is (2) the ticket price for continuing to have access to the single market? I can't see how we can be discussing (2) yet.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 6, 2017)

The points made in the last 2 posts will be lost on leave voters. Leave politicians will spin it as continuing to pay into the EU for however many years will be no different to remain. Leave politicians mostly seem ok with leaving with a no deal rather than pay a vast amount to leave. While paying as if we stay in for another 2 yrs transition period would be seen as just about an acceptable compromise I can't see any much higher amount being ok.


----------



## bemused (Nov 6, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Paying that much would be the same as staying in the EU 8yrs or more paying usual annual net contribution so the brexiteers would claim it was remain disgused as leave particularly as it may leave a route for a future UK government to rejoin the EU that we had not really left. I would guess most leave voters would see paying that sort of money to keep free trade as much of a betrayal as cancelling brexit.



Purely anecdotal, but I don't get the sense that there is any large noisy section of the electorate who care what the deal looks like just as long as it is signed and they have a job after it.


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The points made in the last 2 posts will be lost on leave voters. Leave politicians will spin it as continuing to pay into the EU for however many years will be no different to remain. Leave politicians mostly seem ok with leaving with a no deal rather than pay a vast amount to leave. While paying as if we stay in for another 2 yrs transition period would be seen as just about an acceptable compromise I can't see any much higher amount being ok.



I think you are probably right, and for that reason I think the rift in the UK caused by this referendum is not going to be healed no matter what the outcome. 

I suspect we are going to need an economic boom (with everyone benefitting) for Leavers to happy. And by voting Leave they have reduced the chance of that happening.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 6, 2017)

was there jam coming tomorrow under the eu then? I bet there was. Its always tomorrow.


----------



## sealion (Nov 6, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> was there jam coming tomorrow under the eu then? I bet there was. Its always tomorrow.


You beat me to it - Look what you could have won


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 6, 2017)

sealion said:


> You beat me to it - Look what you could have won



schuables towing away the yacht I nearly won while bully shakes his head.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> was there jam coming tomorrow under the eu then? I bet there was. Its always tomorrow.



We've still got plenty of jam. It's just slightly more expensive now.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

The lack of economic destruction that remainers predicted would def happen is now key remainers anti-brexit argument.


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

Raheem said:


> We've still got plenty of jam. It's just slightly more expensive now.



Innovative jam.


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> was there jam coming tomorrow under the eu then? I bet there was. Its always tomorrow.



Nope, but there were less-worse times. And ordinary people weren’t complaining about the EU when the economy was doing better.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Nope, but there were less-worse times. And ordinary people weren’t complaining about the EU when the economy was doing better.


Yes they were - people like you just couldn't see or hear them.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 6, 2017)

Round here in Essex leave land they would have voted to leave anytime in the last 30yrs. This is why the actual referendum campaign didn't really make much difference imo. All anybody wanted was an opportunity to vote leave.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

This is what has caused a lot of the ongoing mental devastation for a certain type of remainer. It's like they've discovered an alien race living in the basement of the house they thought was theirs to do with as they please. These same types also seem to think that house cleans itself, the shelfs stock themselves and all other work is done by magic.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2017)

Yeah, whereas the obvious reality is that all work is done by leavers.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 6, 2017)

C2DE was represented heavily in the leave vote yes. But note he says 'certain type' of remainer. Thats not an absolutist thing as your rejoinder suggests. I've heard solid and well argued left remain arguments, I just did not buy them.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Yeah, whereas the obvious reality is that all work is done by leavers.


The point wasn't about work being done by leavers but about people who are unable to see the reality of society around them and instead are able to see only themselves. Two different examples - not one.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 6, 2017)

..


----------



## ohmyliver (Nov 6, 2017)

- how accurate is this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> - how accurate is this?



what's he go on to say?


----------



## ohmyliver (Nov 6, 2017)

click on the link, you should be able to read it in a browser.


----------



## sealion (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> And ordinary people weren’t complaining about the EU when the economy was doing better.


Depends on how many ' ordinary ' people you know i suppose. This ^ is patronising crap.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> what's he go on to say?


The pro-eu pro-market oxbridge author went on over 34 related tweets to say that brexit is bad. That being his job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> click on the link, you should be able to read it in a browser.


or you could do a screengrab


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

sealion said:


> Depends on how many ' ordinary ' people you know i suppose. This ^ is patronising crap.


I don't think it's _know_, i really do think that it's _see_. People like that don't see people like that on their radar as real people - even when they know them, interact with them.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The pro-eu pro-market oxbridge author went on over 34 related tweets to sat that brexit is bad. That being his job.



Indeed. I can only be arsed to quote this one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2017)

sealion said:


> Depends on how many ' ordinary ' people you know i suppose. This ^ is patronising crap.


shouldn't surprise you, not from whine-ot


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

elbows said:


> Indeed. I can only be arsed to quote this one.



Interesting to note the daft game people like this are playing - it's positioned as anti-hard brexit, pro-soft-brexit/good for the UK. Then they drop in a few stuff about brexit not needing to happen at all. That was the point of the previous 30 tweets. They really think that they're seeding something. Deluded.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

The magic word, that he's longing to hear, thats the aim of the fear, oh dear.


----------



## ohmyliver (Nov 6, 2017)

I'm not actually talking about those bits, I'm talking about things like the UK backtracking on comitments to EU residents, effects of crashing out on radiology, aviation, NI farming,  the actual meat of his thread.  How accurate is that?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> I'm not actually talking about those bits, I'm talking about things like the UK backtracking on comitments to EU residents, effects of crashing out on radiology, aviation, NI farming,  the actual meat of his thread.  How accurate is that?


Ok, let's start with what meeting he was at. Or was it just a VERY IMPORTANT MEETING in BRUSSELS?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> I'm not actually talking about those bits, I'm talking about things like the UK backtracking on comitments to EU residents, effects of crashing out on radiology, aviation, NI farming,  the actual meat of his thread.  How accurate is that?



I'm not sure anything in that thread is ridiculous, but a lot of it flows from post 19 ("if the UK refuses to pay..."). That's not going to happen.

In other words, yes, if we decide to break off the negotiations at this point, we are obviously fucked unless we try to abandon the whole thing. But this relies on an assumption.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Ok, let's start with what meeting he was at. Or was it just a VERY IMPORTANT MEETING in BRUSSELS?



I'll start with what he wrote in the Guardian a month ago.



> An extension to article 50 could enjoy broad public appeal. When leave voters see that in the transition we will pay the same money and follow the same rules, they may also want the government to retain the same voice. Remain voters, and indeed MPs, will be tempted by the additional prospect of a parliamentary vote or second referendum which offers meaningful options. Such a vote can only take place before we leave.





> A deferred cliff-edge is still a cliff-edge – and as we navigate that ruinous path, extending article 50 alone guarantees the antidote. If we are to leave the EU, we must do so when we are ready and not a day before. It is the only pragmatic and patriotic path available.



Forget ‘transition’. We must stay in the EU until a deal to leave is agreed | Jonathan Lis


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

elbows said:


> I'll start with what he wrote in the Guardian a month ago.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He's pretty clearly gone to a pro-EU meeting - a VERY IMPORTANT ONE and spun it out like he's been sitting on negotiations. His spinning is inconsistent (a danger for all spinning things) as he tries to scare us with a tweet saying the letter of A50 is going to be enforced by the EU. But also that an unprovided for extension and an unprovided for revocation of A50.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

With his delusional comments about 'broad public appeal' I really wonder who he thinks he is preaching to.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There's another side to the 'net contributor' story. The UK isn't the only net contributor and isn't the biggest net contributor, and when you visit the net receivers, you see countries that have in many cases come a long way in a short time. The money isn't just pissed away. Nobody seems to want to talk in a generous way about giving to the EU, the long-term benefit of which is a more prosperous Europe (which would result in the net contributors' bills coming down).



I generally like what you have to say on other subjects but this is just daft - more prosperous Europe? The Eurozone is crisis ridden and increasingly unstable, a result of neoliberal policies. The EU will continue to use member states contributions to enforce the rule of the market on Europe, particularly in the peripheral debt laden economies where ECB money will be used to provide loans to member states on the condition they continue with ruthless programs of austerity and privatisation. Who do you think that creates a more prosperous Europe for?

If I said the Tories economic policies were disastrous you wouldn't bat an eyelid, but you seem utterly blind to the actions of the ECB, the Council of Ministers, the Commission and the direction of travel of the whole institution.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Nope, but there were less-worse times.



Do you mean the times where growth was driven by de-regulation, privatisation and financialisation? Or the times before the EU when we had social democratic governments?


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

elbows said:


> With his delusional comments about 'broad public appeal' I really wonder who he thinks he is preaching to.



Apparently the answer is Leeds.


----------



## elbows (Nov 6, 2017)

The website of the organisation he works for is a right barrel of laughs.



> Issue-led data-driven insight
> 
> Influence is an advisory and advocacy service that combines EU expertise and sentiment measuring to give your business a leading edge.
> 
> ...



Home - Influence Group



> Jonathan read English at Trinity College, Cambridge before completing a Masters degree in social sciences at the London School of Economics.
> 
> In 2012, Jonathan became the senior assistant to Charles Tannock MEP, the Conservative coordinator on foreign affairs and human rights at the European Parliament.
> 
> ...



People

Well at least he got a job out of Brexit


----------



## teqniq (Nov 6, 2017)

'sentiment measuring' lol.


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

sealion said:


> Depends on how many ' ordinary ' people you know i suppose. This ^ is patronising crap.



I meant as opposed to politicians. Could have chosen my wording better. 

Historically the EU has come quite far down the list of ‘important issues’ when voters have been polled. I can’t find figures going back further than 2010 but there is a breakdown back to then in this pdf. 

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...rs-Issues(2)-Most-important-issues-140415.pdf


----------



## Winot (Nov 6, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you mean the times where growth was driven by de-regulation, privatisation and financialisation? Or the times before the EU when we had social democratic governments?



Yes I agree that’s what the EU represents. If you want out of that then I can see why you might vote to leave. I’m not convinced that Lexit is what drove the majority of Leavers though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Yes I agree that’s what the EU represents. If you want out of that then I can see why you might vote to leave. I’m not convinced that Lexit is what drove the majority of Leavers though.



Nobody said it was, but 40 years of those exact policies may have had an impact on why people voted to leave.


----------



## sealion (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> I’m not convinced that Lexit is what drove the majority of Leavers though.


People tend to vote for what they think is best for them and there family. The reasons and needs will vary from household to household. To lump them all together and be presumptuous won't prove anything.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Yes I agree that’s what the EU represents. If you want out of that then I can see why you might vote to leave. I’m not convinced that Lexit is what drove the majority of Leavers though.


I suspect that you're pretty clear about what millions of people that you couldn't see voted on though.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 6, 2017)

What drove leave voters that I know was that they could not see the point of the EU. They were not & are not receptive to any rational argument it"s just basically fuck the EU.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 6, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> What drove leave voters that I know was that they could not see the point of the EU. They were not & are not receptive to any rational argument it"s just basically fuck the EU.



What rational argument can you make for why they shouldn't hate the EU?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What rational argument can you make for why they shouldn't hate the EU?



Well, if it's true that they don't know why they hate the EU, that would be a fairly good reason.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> What rational argument can you make for why they shouldn't hate the EU?



In my experience - bearing in mind I live in one of the least diverse parts of the UK - the most vocal pro-Leave voices I've heard have been older people who hate Pakis.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Well, if it's true that they don't know why they hate the EU, that would be a fairly good reason.





TheHoodedClaw said:


> In my experience - bearing in mind I live in one of the least diverse parts of the UK - the most vocal pro-Leave voices I've heard have been older people who hate Pakis.



Neither of you have really responded to my question. I'll rephrase: what rational argument can you make for why people should support the EU?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Neither of you have really responded to my question. I'll rephrase: what rational argument can you make for why people should support the EU?



That's not rephrasing. It's a different question. And it's also the wrong one. The correct question is: _Why should people not support leaving the EU?_ And, even if you don't agree with the reasons, you don't really need me to list them, do you?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Neither of you have really responded to my question. I'll rephrase: what rational argument can you make for why people should support the EU?



Well I think it rather falls on you to argue against the status quo?

It's not a matter of being pro-EU, it's the matter of how the economy of this country is now so deeply entrenched within the single market and the customs union. Breaking that isn't a political thing that can be finessed, it's a legal thing. And it is likely to be very, very difficult.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Well I think it rather falls on you to argue against the status quo?



FUCK YOU man, right now the status quo is indefensible. It's fucking indefensible. And at the best of times the status quo is a pile of fucking shite. So no, it's not on me to argue against the status quo, not that's even what I was doing. 



TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's not a matter of being pro-EU, it's the matter of how the economy of this country is now so deeply entrenched within the single market and the customs union. Breaking that isn't a political thing that can be finessed, it's a legal thing. And it is likely to be very, very difficult.



And this is just illiterate stuff. It's _international relations_, it's politics, it's about more than a set of rules which weren't designed to deal with this situation.

I'll repeat the question: can anybody who think's Brexit is _irrational _give me a rational argument for membership of the EU?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> can anybody who think's Brexit is _irrational _give me a rational argument for membership of the EU?



This is a different question again!

Please have a think and decide on a definitive question that is one you will accept responses to without saying that they are responses to the wrong question.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> FUCK YOU man, right now the status quo is indefensible. It's fucking indefensible. And at the best of times the status quo is a pile of fucking shite. So no, it's not on me to argue against the status quo, not that's even what I was doing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Don't want more borders. Same reason why I opposed Scottish nationalism.  The Brexit argument is it exists for this brexit is at root a nationalist one. And a right-nationalist one at that. Fuck that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Raheem said:


> This is a different question again!
> 
> Please have a think and decide on a definitive question that is one you will accept responses to without saying that they are responses to the wrong question.



Can you answer any variation on it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Don't want more borders. Same reason why I opposed Scottish nationalism.  The Brexit argument is it exists for this brexit is at root a nationalist one. And a right-nationalist one at that. Fuck that.



Is that intended as an answer to my question?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Can you answer any variation on it?



I answered the first one, and I'm happy to answer again provided I know the question is going to sit still. But also note my above comment: _Why should people support the EU?_ is the wrong question.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is that intended as an answer to my question?


Yes. I like that the Eu has open borders.  I would like open borers to be extended and deplore the borders that exist beyond the eu. But withdrawing from these open borders does not open up others.  It simply closes these.  This is rexit that we're getting not any kind of lexit . Present a rational argument against that.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> And this is just illiterate stuff. It's _international relations_, it's politics, it's about more than a set of rules which weren't designed to deal with this situation.



It is about a set of rules though?  Trade agreements aren't a small thing.



> illiterate


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 7, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> that’s the Singapore where the government provides 85% of the housing, owns pretty much all the land and still owns the infrastructure and utilities as a whole.



Yes, that's the one. The Singapore which actively and wholeheartedly promotes business, has no capital gains tax, no inheritance tax, a maximum individual tax rate of 22%, a company tax rate of 17% and only taxes income earned in Singapore. The place where most people have an enthusiastic work ethic and don't spend much of their time moaning about the government. A place where people want to be given the opportunity to earn their own wealth rather than have a part of what others have. The downside is that I often can't get a seat in my favourite Starbucks because loads of students are there doing their homework.


----------



## editor (Nov 7, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Yes, that's the one. The Singapore which actively and wholeheartedly promotes business, has no capital gains tax, no inheritance tax, a maximum individual tax rate of 22%, a company tax rate of 17% and only taxes income earned in Singapore. The place where most people have an enthusiastic work ethic and don't spend much of their time moaning about the government. A place where people want to be given the opportunity to earn their own wealth rather than have a part of what others have. The downside is that I often can't get a seat in my favourite Starbucks because loads of students are there doing their homework.


You mean this Singapore:


> Singapore's political environment is stifling. Citizens continue to face severe restrictions on their basic rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly through overly broad legal provisions on security, public order, morality, and racial and religious harmony.





> Singapore was ranked 153rd out of 175 nations by Reporters Without Borders in the Worldwide Press Freedom Index.





> Singapore enforces the death penalty by hanging and has, according to Amnesty International, one of the world's highest execution rates relative to its population





> Singapore does not provide basic protection for foreign domestic workers, such as a standard number of working hours and rest days, minimum wage and access to employment benefits. The recruitment fees of domestic workers can be up to 40% of the workers salary in a two-year contract. As of the end of 2010, Singapore's government had refused to regulate the recruitment fees



You are a fucking useless troll. Or just stupid.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 7, 2017)

Talk about stupidity. You give several unsubstantiated statement, whilst wanting those who disagree with you to provide substantiation for their opinion. So who's the troll?

Singapore ranks 5th on the United Nations Human Development Index, out of 188 nations. The UK ranks 16th.

Human Development Index 2016 - HDI - Nations Online Project

Explain away that fact.

Maybe you should open your other eye sometimes.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 7, 2017)

"Singapore does not provide basic protection for foreign domestic workers, such as a standard number of working hours and rest days, minimum wage and access to employment benefits. The recruitment fees of domestic workers can be up to 40% of the workers salary in a two-year contract."

Domestic Workers apply for a work visa to come to Singapore. They have to have agreed an employment contract with their employer before their visa is approved. The recruitment fees they have paid has nothing at all to do with the government of Singapore as it is paid voluntarily by the worker in the country of origin. On renewing their contract with their Singaporean employer, no recruitment fee is paid as the contract is renewed in Singapore.

The government of Singapore provides huge benefits to its people in terms of schooling, medical facilities and housing, but it is not the kind of Nanny state that many in the UK desire, and allows people to enter into employment contracts without interference from a Nanny State type of government.

Instead of being so bigoted against Singapore, why not actually do some research and read articles like this one :

Why does Singapore top so many tables?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 7, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> "Singapore does not provide basic protection for foreign domestic workers, such as a standard number of working hours and rest days, minimum wage and access to employment benefits. The recruitment fees of domestic workers can be up to 40% of the workers salary in a two-year contract."
> 
> Domestic Workers apply for a work visa to come to Singapore. They have to have agreed an employment contract with their employer before their visa is approved. The recruitment fees they have paid has nothing at all to do with the government of Singapore as it is paid voluntarily by the worker in the country of origin. On renewing their contract with their Singaporean employer, no recruitment fee is paid as the contract is renewed in Singapore.
> 
> ...



Singapore's "not a nanny state?" I don't know what the fuck you're smoking but it's probably something that would get you quite a few lashes in Singapore.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 7, 2017)

this is shit trollery Larry. Sorry but it’s low low quality


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes. I like that the Eu has open borders.  I would like open borers to be extended and deplore the borders that exist beyond the eu. But withdrawing from these open borders does not open up others.  It simply closes these.  This is rexit that we're getting not any kind of lexit . Present a rational argument against that.


Yeah those lovely "open borders" I mean it's not like the EU pays dictators and authoritarian regimes millions of Euros to stop people coming entering it.



TheHoodedClaw said:


> It is about a set of rules though?  Trade agreements aren't a small thing.


Yep better not upset/disturb those trade agreements. FFS aren't you supposed to be a socialist, or at least a social democrat? These trade agreement's are entirely designed to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. If you're not willing to throw them out then you might as well go off and sign up with filth like Blair, Mandelson, Obama, Clinton etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes. I like that the Eu has open borders.  I would like open borers to be extended and deplore the borders that exist beyond the eu. But withdrawing from these open borders does not open up others.  It simply closes these.  This is rexit that we're getting not any kind of lexit . Present a rational argument against that.



"I like" doesn't really touch rational or logical. Particularly when the EU maintains such a strict border.


----------



## stuff_it (Nov 7, 2017)

Heading for a retail crash now, just before Xmas. 

UK retail sales falter in 'meagre' October, but house prices climb – business live


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2017)

In who's view? No one* on that Guardian feed mentions the word "crash".



*EDIT well no one as of 11 am anyway


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 7, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> Heading for a retail crash now, just before Xmas.
> 
> UK retail sales falter in 'meagre' October, but house prices climb – business live



are we having the january sales in december then?


----------



## sealion (Nov 7, 2017)

stuff_it said:


> Heading for a retail crash now, just before Xmas.
> 
> UK retail sales falter in 'meagre' October, but house prices climb – business live


So people are spending less money on shit. Good news!


----------



## sealion (Nov 7, 2017)

Non-food sales in slowest growth on record


----------



## JimW (Nov 7, 2017)

Saw those stories earlier. It's still growth, however small, so not exactly start of the end times surely.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 7, 2017)

JimW said:


> Saw those stories earlier. It's still growth, however small, so not exactly start of the end times surely.


The world already ended for some people in june 2016 for some people. 

Anyway, it's good that people are spending more on activities and life than non-food commodities isn't it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The world already ended for some people in june 2016 for some people.
> 
> Anyway, it's good that people are spending more on activities and life than non-food commodities isn't it?



To be fair that's probably cos they can't aford to buy non essential goods. So no.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair that's probably cos they can't aford to buy non essential goods. So no.


The British Retail Consortium who provide the figures seem to think it's



> “The decline was driven by the worst performance of non-food sales since our record began in January 2011, as consumers appear to have opted for outdoor experiences and excursions during half term, over visits to the shops. The growth in food sales meanwhile, adds some colour to this otherwise anaemic picture, but these figures are very much buoyed by inflation.



+ saving in expectation of price drops and sales + rise in cost of borrowing + delay in new iphone


----------



## Raheem (Nov 7, 2017)

People have less disposable income now, as is also clear from the link your provide, Butchers. It's not that they are spending the money they would have spent at the shops on outdoor experiences and excursions, it's that going bowling is a cheaper way to spend a Saturday than buying a new sofa.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 7, 2017)

Raheem said:


> it's that going bowling is a cheaper way to spend a Saturday than buying a new sofa.



If my local bowling alley is typical it's not that much cheaper


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

sealion said:


> So people are spending less money on shit. Good news!


Not if you work for someone selling shit, presumably.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> FUCK YOU man, right now the status quo is indefensible. It's fucking indefensible. And at the best of times the status quo is a pile of fucking shite. So no, it's not on me to argue against the status quo, not that's even what I was doing.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Firstly influence, proportionally the UK is  17% of the EU's economy, 13% of the population and its most powerful military, the biggest break on the UK's influence within the EU is in fact our reluctance to use that influence, using that influence to shape the EU will give us more influence on the world stage (for good or bad) than we will ever have alone, Outside the EU we will most likely align ourselves more with the US, I have a feeling you would be unhappy with that. 
Secondly social trends, the EU has its faults but in many ways it has acted as a brake on the actions of UK governments especially Tory ones, the European Courts in particular have prevented much, Outside the EU, I suspect the UK will tack more to the polictical right, reducing such things as employment rights (in the name of economic growth)  especially given that a backlash against immigration was a major drive in the leave vote.
The idea that the EU is holding back a working class uprising is even dafter than the idea than the one they're stopping us from rebuilding an empire.
The economic arguments are many but the best one is the fact that our economy is so tightly intertwined with the EU, I will give you an example, someone at work was bragging to me that he had bought a Ford rather than a BMW because of Brexit, firstly the Ford Focus is built in Germany  not the UK as he believes, there are no Ford car factories in the UK but there are 2 Ford factories which make parts that are shipped to Germany to be put into the cars. Trading under WTO rules doesn't just mean that UK charges tariffs on the complete cars coming here, it means that the Germans charge tariffs on the gearboxes going there from Dagenham, Ford have already announced they will review the fate of the Dagenham plant post Brexit,  at some point it may very well decide it makes sense to just make the gearboxes in Germany as well, There are a LOT of UK businesses like that and it makes sense to move production from the smaller market to the larger one, a post-Brexit Labour government would be powerless to stop it and a post-Brexit Tory one wouldn't even try.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'll repeat the question: can anybody who think's Brexit is _irrational _give me a rational argument for membership of the EU?


The EU takes 43% of all UK exports, and we will have to pay higher tariffs to do this business.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 7, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> The EU takes 43% of all UK exports, and we will have to pay higher tariffs to do this business.



Quite. Although compared with non-tariff barriers, the tariff issue is almost inconsequential.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2017)

By 'rational argument', what you really mean is 'an argument I will agree with'. Misuse of the word 'rational'.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> The idea that the EU is holding back a working class uprising is even dafter than the idea than the one they're stopping us from rebuilding an empire.


absurd caricature repeated enough its become your sorts second favourite trope next to the thickos belived the bus pledge stuff


BemusedbyLife said:


> but in many ways it has acted as a brake on the actions of UK governments especially Tory ones


_citation needed_


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> absurd caricature repeated enough its become your sorts second favourite trope next to the thickos belived the bus pledge stuff
> 
> _citation needed_



I've read that a couple of times and still don't understand what it means if you could please rephrase I'll have a bash at answering it. 
As for citations these are a couple I thought of straightaway, There are plenty more I could find if those annoying people next door would stop bothering me with work.

http://www2.cipd.co.uk/pm/peopleman...-holiday-pay-ruling-may-never-become-law.aspx
R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh - Wikipedia


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> The British Retail Consortium who provide the figures seem to think it's
> 
> 
> 
> + saving in expectation of price drops and sales + rise in cost of borrowing + delay in new iphone



I suspect at least a big part of it is reduced income/spending power - as you say BRC seem to think "consumers appear to have opted for outdoor experiences and excursions during half term".


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I suspect at least a big part of it is reduced income/spending power - as you say BRC seem to think "consumers appear to have opted for outdoor experiences and excursions during half term".








a consumer opting for an outdoor experience during half-term recently


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 7, 2017)

Less shopping / Growth in food sales: translation - we are not consuming more of anything , just spending more on day to day rations


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Firstly influence, proportionally the UK is  17% of the EU's economy, 13% of the population and its most powerful military, the biggest break on the UK's influence within the EU is in fact our reluctance to use that influence, using that influence to shape the EU will give us more influence on the world stage (for good or bad) than we will ever have alone, Outside the EU we will most likely align ourselves more with the US, I have a feeling you would be unhappy with that.
> Secondly social trends, the EU has its faults but in many ways it has acted as a brake on the actions of UK governments especially Tory ones, the European Courts in particular have prevented much, Outside the EU, I suspect the UK will tack more to the polictical right, reducing such things as employment rights (in the name of economic growth)  especially given that a backlash against immigration was a major drive in the leave vote.
> The idea that the EU is holding back a working class uprising is even dafter than the idea than the one they're stopping us from rebuilding an empire.
> The economic arguments are many but the best one is the fact that our economy is so tightly intertwined with the EU, I will give you an example, someone at work was bragging to me that he had bought a Ford rather than a BMW because of Brexit, firstly the Ford Focus is built in Germany  not the UK as he believes, there are no Ford car factories in the UK but there are 2 Ford factories which make parts that are shipped to Germany to be put into the cars. Trading under WTO rules doesn't just mean that UK charges tariffs on the complete cars coming here, it means that the Germans charge tariffs on the gearboxes going there from Dagenham, Ford have already announced they will review the fate of the Dagenham plant post Brexit,  at some point it may very well decide it makes sense to just make the gearboxes in Germany as well, There are a LOT of UK businesses like that and it makes sense to move production from the smaller market to the larger one, a post-Brexit Labour government would be powerless to stop it and a post-Brexit Tory one wouldn't even try.



Leaving aside your bizarre valorisation of the ECJ as a progressive body, this is just what you "expect", ie that the UK will align itself to the US (which it has always done, remember Iraq?) move to the right (Why? It's moving to the left now), that the UK will have to trade under WTO rules (not gonna happen). It's not a rational argument.

As for the intertwined thing - the UK economy has always been intertwined with Europe, that isn't going to change.

The issue here - to put it as clearly as I possibly can - is that a lot of posters here are repeatedly describing Leave voters as "irrational". But none of you can say anything positive about the EU (fantasies about the ECJ telling the Tories to be nicer aside). That should matter given that the Remain campaign in the referendum was entirely focused on predicting disaster if we left - nobody on the Remain side could make a positive argument for remaining. All you can do when people question the established economic order is either to sneer, or to proclaim that doom will swiftly follow if we deviate from the rule of the Market - There Is No Alternative. It's straight up Thatcherism. And you expect people to listen to you? You are Thatcherites. You're the enemy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> By 'rational argument', what you really mean is 'an argument I will agree with'. Misuse of the word 'rational'.



Your argument was literally "I don't like borders" - you said nothing of why other people shouldn't like borders. Pot kettle black mate. Shall I assume you also don't think Catalonians should have the right to determine their future?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I've read that a couple of times and still don't understand what it means if you could please rephrase I'll have a bash at answering it.
> As for citations these are a couple I thought of straightaway, There are plenty more I could find if those annoying people next door would stop bothering me with work.
> 
> HR news, jobs & blogs | Human resources jobs, news & events - People Management
> R (Secretary of State for the Home Department) v Immigration Appeal Tribunal and Surinder Singh - Wikipedia



A speculative story from a HR magazine (why are you reading that I wonder?) and a case from 25 years ago?

Slow clap.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> That should matter given that the Remain campaign in the referendum was entirely focused on predicting disaster if we left - nobody on the Remain side could make a positive argument for remaining.



Had Remain had half a brain they would have published a positive from the EU; calls + data roaming being the same cost on the Costas as in the Home Counties. Drumming that fact home alone would have probably swung it. But they chose to make crass and vulgar hand gestures at the thickos whilst going up the Thames instead.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Had Remain had half a brain they would have published a positive from the EU; calls + data roaming being the same cost on the Costas as in the Home Counties. Drumming that fact home alone would have probably swung it. But they chose to make crass and vulgar hand gestures at the thickos whilst going up the Thames instead.



I'm not sure cheap calls in the EU would have had quite the impact your suggesting - and the fact that's the best go to I think proves my point


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure cheap calls in the EU would have had quite the impact your suggesting - and the fact that's the best go to I think proves my point



It _is_ the best thing I can think of. And I reckon enough people have had bad phone bills coming back from holidays to have swung it, my brother and sister-in-law two years running came back with over £1000 run up by their son, (who now does not have a smart phone!), they voted leave and may well have voted remain on this alone...


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> As for the intertwined thing - the UK economy has always been intertwined with Europe, that isn't going to change.



Are you really arguing that the UK’s trade with the EU isn’t going to change post-Brexit? You sound like David Davis.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> A speculative story from a HR magazine (why are you reading that I wonder?) and a case from 25 years ago?
> 
> Slow clap.


Is there something wrong with a job in HR? I don't  but I wasn't aware there was anything criminal about it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Is there something wrong with a job in HR? I don't  but I wasn't aware there was anything criminal about it.



Yeah, if you work in HR you spend your days justifying pay "restraint", redundancies and increased workload. Not unlike the EU I suppose... So yeah, there is something wrong with having a job in HR.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Is there something wrong with a job in HR? I don't  but I wasn't aware there was anything criminal about it.


yeh everyone i've ever met who worked in hr was a smug wanker.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> A speculative story from a HR magazine (why are you reading that I wonder?) and a case from 25 years ago?
> 
> Slow clap.


i'd read it on the basis know thine enemy


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Winot said:


> Are you really arguing that the UK’s trade with the EU isn’t going to change post-Brexit? You sound like David Davis.



No, I'm not saying it's not going to change, just that the no deal/WTO scenario isn't realistic. What you don't seem to understand is the politics of this - the EU is hardballing in an attempt to at least keep Britain in the single market and the Tories are posturing that they can pick and choose which bits they stay in. Neither side is accurately reflecting what will happen, but that isn't what it's about - exit isn't until 2019 and we'll likely have an election before then so it's irrelevant.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd read it on the basis know thine enemy



And that would be fair enough but I don't think that's why our Bemused friend is citing it somehow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> And that would be fair enough but I don't think that's why our Bemused friend is citing it somehow.


looking for stuff to put on a job application to work in hr no doubt


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah, if you work in HR you spend your days justifying pay "restraint", redundancies and increased workload. Not unlike the EU I suppose... So yeah, there is something wrong with having a job in HR.


Now that's just personal prejudice showing there, the HR department where I work are a rather pleasant bunch who have certainly never done any of those thngs, I admit they keep losing my timesheet for my overtime but that hardly makes them part of some conspiracy to suppress the proletariat.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Now that's just personal prejudice showing there, the HR department where I work are a rather pleasant bunch who have certainly never done any of those thngs, I admit they keep losing my timesheet for my overtime but that hardly makes them part of some conspiracy to suppress the proletariat.



The only thing showing here is your ignorance.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2017)

It's nothing to do with the fact with whether they are pleasant or not. It's to do with their role in the system.

They might be very nice people, like some bosses, like some landlords - doesn't mean that the role they are engaged in is not at odds with employees/renters.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, I'm not saying it's not going to change, just that the no deal/WTO scenario isn't realistic. What you don't seem to understand is the politics of this - the EU is hardballing in an attempt to at least keep Britain in the single market and the Tories are posturing that they can pick and choose which bits they stay in. Neither side is accurately reflecting what will happen, but that isn't what it's about - exit isn't until 2019 and we'll likely have an election before then so it's irrelevant.



Bemused gave a specific example of the 'intertwining' - the car industry - which as I understand it relies on the UK being in the single market for production (as it currently stands) to work. You said that we have always been intertwined with the EU and that isn't going to change. But on the specific example, there is going to be a change because we are going to be leaving the single market. So how is production in the car industry going to work once we have left?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Winot said:


> Bemused gave a specific example of the 'intertwining' - the car industry - which as I understand it relies on the UK being in the single market for production (as it currently stands) to work. You said that we have always been intertwined with the EU and that isn't going to change. But on the specific example, there is going to be a change because we are going to be leaving the single market. So how is production in the car industry going to work once we have left?



No, I said the British economy (not we, I'm not a boss, are you?) has always been intertwined with the EU. Who said we were leaving the single market?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, I said the British economy (not we, I'm not a boss, are you?) has always been intertwined with the EU. Who said we were leaving the single market?


Seriously?  you do understand what is meant by the terms Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit ?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2017)

Winot said:


> Bemused gave a specific example of the 'intertwining' - the car industry - which as I understand it relies on the UK being in the single market for production (as it currently stands) to work. You said that we have always been intertwined with the EU and that isn't going to change. But on the specific example, there is going to be a change because we are going to be leaving the single market. So how is production in the car industry going to work once we have left?


Over a period of time something like this I guess. The UK has a large home market for cars so car makers are not going to leave. We export 80% of UK produced cars & import about same percentage into UK. If imported cars become more expensive then more home produced cars might be sold & UK makers will make more cars to suit the UK market as less will be exported. Components that are currently sourced from EU might be sourced more cheaply from new factories built in the UK or from rest of world cheaper markets.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, I said the British economy (not we, I'm not a boss, are you?) has always been intertwined with the EU. Who said we were leaving the single market?



Well May has said we’re leaving and the EU has said no cherry picking so that’s looking most likely now (I would prefer to stay in). Yes we could stay in the EEA but right now that doesn’t look like it’s on the cards. 

Do you want to leave the SM or not?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Seriously?  you do understand what is meant by the terms Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit ?


Does anybody? Soundbites that appeal to journalists. Throw a stone and get a different definition.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Over a period of time something like this I guess. The UK has a large home market for cars. We export 80% of UK produced cars & import about same percentage into UK. If imported cars become more expensive then more home produced cars might be sold & UK makers will make more cars to suit the UK market as less will be exported. Components that are currently sourced from EU might be sourced more cheaply from new factories built in the UK or from rest of world cheaper markets.


This could happen or they could build new factories in Europe (Poland say where labour is cheaper) and accept the tariffs on exporting to the UK, you do realise that the largest British owned car manufacturer is Aston Martin who make a few thousand cars a year, all the bigger factories are foreign owned including several that were once British.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Seriously?  you do understand what is meant by the terms Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit ?



I think those terms are meaningless and I'm sick of you using them. Why not chuck in a sunny side up Brexit as well? I'll repeat: who said we are leaving the single market?




Winot said:


> Well May has said we’re leaving and the EU has said no cherry picking so that’s looking most likely now (I would prefer to stay in). Yes we could stay in the EEA but right now that doesn’t look like it’s on the cards.
> 
> Do you want to leave the SM or not?



A Tory politician who wants us to stay in says we're leaving and the EU who want us to stay in say no cherry picking? I'm totally convinced. As I said, it's a political process.

Yes, I want to leave the EU, leave the SM, and fight for a Socialist government. Not neccessarily in that order but there we go, this is where we're at.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think those terms are meaningless and I'm sick of you using them. Why not chuck in a sunny side up Brexit as well? I'll repeat: who said we are leaving the single market?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



OK fair enough. I guess we’ll have to see what happens. 

But you asked for a positive reason for staying in the EU and you’ve been given one (OK strictly speaking it relates to the SM). You might disagree that it is a positive of course, but don’t wave your hands and say nothing will change if we leave the SM, because that’s bollocks.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Winot said:


> OK fair enough. I guess we’ll have to see what happens.
> 
> But you asked for a positive reason for staying in the EU and you’ve been given one (OK strictly speaking it relates to the SM). You might disagree that it is a positive of course, but don’t wave your hands and say nothing will change if we leave the SM, because that’s bollocks.



How is that a positive? All you're doing is stating that there will be economic collapse if we leave, which is a bit hard for people to understand because the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> How is that a positive? All you're doing is stating that there will be economic collapse if we leave, which is a bit hard for people to understand because the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it.



If the UK car industry collapses then the number of people struggling will increase. And if you think that’s a price worth paying as a staging post to a socialist utopia then you’re going to have to convince those people that lose their jobs that a socialist utopia really is around the corner. But you’re going to be in danger of sounding like Norman Lamont on inflation.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 7, 2017)

At the risk of sounding like a swivel eyed tory hard brexiteer loon. The UK has a massive home market for cars. Foreign companies put factories where there is a market for their product.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> How is that a positive? All you're doing is stating that there will be economic collapse if we leave, which is a bit hard for people to understand because the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it.


Ah thank you that explains the mob of starving children I had to fight my way through heading for the bus stop tonight


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> all the bigger factories are foreign owned including several that were once British.



This is always a lol from the remain, waive their baguettes down the Dilly, yet fall back on some kind of jingoism when it comes to ownership of businesses. It really makes no difference if the owner of a company is British or not.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> At the risk of sounding like a swivel eyed tory hard brexiteer loon. The UK is a massive home market for cars. Foreign companies go where there is a market for their product.


Indeed they do but one of the reasons that the EU (including the UK) has so much car production is that it uses its economic clout to defend that market, indeed the Toyota factory a few miles down the road from where I currently sit came to the UK entirely on that basis. A UK alone is a market 1/8th the size of that and has correspondingly less weight. Car and part manufacturers will build factories in the UK if that is the more profitable route otherwise it may just be cheaper to build the cars somewhere else (not necessarily the EU) and ship them here and pay the tariffs (if any)
The UK is a big market yes but the UK in the EU is a far bigger one.
And the car industry isn't unique in this regards, Airbus wings are built in the UK and then flown to France to be assembled, do you really think British Aerospace won't follow the profit trail?
or Snecma will not seize this chance to try and elbow out Rolls-Royce who respond by sending more work to their plant in Germany?
I don't really give a shit about corporate profits but this too easily translates into job losses.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> At the risk of sounding like a swivel eyed tory hard brexiteer loon. The UK has a massive home market for cars. Foreign companies put factories where there is a market for their product.


That's why they're in the EU. Most foreign marque cars have an EU production line even if that represents duplication of production in their home country - and this isn't exclusive to the EU, e.g. BMWs and Japanese cars made in the US.

However, it doesn't necessarily scale down to Britain. For example it's only because of the relative low cost and sharing the requirement with other rich countries that we continue to get RHD variants.

Without a trade deal of some kind that maintains parity with what we currently have, the outlook would be pretty bleak for UK car manufacturing.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is always a lol from the remain, waive their baguettes down the Dilly, yet fall back on some kind of jingoism when it comes to ownership of businesses. It really makes no difference if the owner of a company is British or not.


Does if they decide to ship the plant (and associated jobs) abroad there is enough of that happening now, do yout think it won't get worse if we get less competitive against European based plants?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

Winot said:


> If the UK car industry collapses then the number of people struggling will increase. And if you think that’s a price worth paying as a staging post to a socialist utopia then you’re going to have to convince those people that lose their jobs that a socialist utopia really is around the corner. But you’re going to be in danger of sounding like Norman Lamont on inflation.



The UK car industry collapsed a long time ago. But if Ford threatens to move a gearbox plant somewhere or whatever, the correct response is to mobilise to nationalise that plant and protect the jobs, not fall over ourselves begging Ford to stay. 

There is no future for industry in Britain on the basis of capitalism but there can be on the basis of a Socialist transformation of the economy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Ah thank you that explains the mob of starving children I had to fight my way through heading for the bus stop tonight



Cunt. Do you think that's funny when child poverty is at a record high?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Cunt. Do you think that's funny when child poverty is at a record high?


I don't think child poverty is funny at all but "your most people think the economy has collapsed already" really was too stupid to let slide


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> The UK car industry collapsed a long time ago. But if Ford threatens to move a gearbox plant somewhere or whatever, the correct response is to mobilise to nationalise that plant and protect the jobs, not fall over ourselves begging Ford to stay.
> 
> There is no future for industry in Britain on the basis of capitalism but there can be on the basis of a Socialist transformation of the economy.


Right so we nationalise the plant and then what build gearboxes and pile them up in


SpackleFrog said:


> The UK car industry collapsed a long time ago. But if Ford threatens to move a gearbox plant somewhere or whatever, the correct response is to mobilise to nationalise that plant and protect the jobs, not fall over ourselves begging Ford to stay.
> 
> There is no future for industry in Britain on the basis of capitalism but there can be on the basis of a Socialist transformation of the economy.



So we nationalise the gearbox plant at Dagenham, then what? keep making gearboxes and pile them up in the fields next to it?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> The UK car industry collapsed a long time ago. But if Ford threatens to move a gearbox plant somewhere or whatever, the correct response is to mobilise to nationalise that plant and protect the jobs, not fall over ourselves begging Ford to stay.
> 
> There is no future for industry in Britain on the basis of capitalism but there can be on the basis of a Socialist transformation of the economy.


The UK car industry is doing very well, one of the few manufacturing successes, and therefore this is clueless balls.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

Sorry clicked post too early there


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I don't think child poverty is funny at all but "your most people think the economy has collapsed already" really was too stupid to let slide



For most people, horrific levels of child poverty is what economic collapse looks like. Clearly not for you though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> The UK car industry is doing very well, one of the few manufacturing successes, and therefore this is clueless balls.



Oh aye? On what basis?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 7, 2017)

Now they care about economic problems. Economic collapse.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Right so we nationalise the plant and then what build gearboxes and pile them up in
> 
> 
> So we nationalise the gearbox plant at Dagenham, then what? keep making gearboxes and pile them up in the fields next to it?



Having nationalised manufacturing centres, we could actually make cars without bosses or multinational companies. It's possible.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Oh aye? On what basis?


Makes more stuff (not just cars) and employs more people - and skilled people - than at many points in its beleaguered past, possibly ever. JLR, Nissan, Honda, various others and a huge industry supplying them.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Having nationalised manufacturing centres, we could actually make cars without bosses or multinational companies. It's possible.


Do you know anything about car manufacturing?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Makes more stuff (not just cars) and employs more people - and skilled people - than at many points in its beleaguered past, possibly ever. JLR, Nissan, Honda, various others and a huge industry supplying them.



Primarily high end premium cars or sports vehicles. Not basic transport models, and even then not on the scale of what was produced in the 1960's and '70's.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Do you know anything about car manufacturing?



I know you don't need a multinational or shareholders to do it. What do you know about car manufacturing?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know you don't need a multinational or shareholders to do it. What do you know about car manufacturing?


A little. Modern car manufacturing (of affordable cars anyway) is an inherently global business, and yet despite that, the return on capital investment is still relatively poor.

Take almost any modern mass market car of your choosing and I'll show you a globally-appropriate design, a platform shared with multiple other vehicles quite often including those of other manufacturers, an integration of thousands of off-the-shelf parts from various manufacturers that also appear in countless other vehicles, and after all of that, the duplication is too high, the margin is still questionably weak and the manufacturer may go bust.

In the actual reality we inhabit, your home-made, go-it-alone Car of Britain is either a £250k Bristol Bullet (and it needs an engine) , or it's a Trabant.


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2017)

In terms of car production, for some years now the industry body has been predicting the possibility of beating the 1972 record for number of cars produced. Last time I checked they had to push their prediction a few more years down the road, and Brexit may already have killed the confidence of the predictors, I don't know, but it seems clear to me that the sector is far larger than some assume. Yes there were decades of bad news and some focus on the devastation caused as specific plants got shuttered, especially here in the midlands, but it seems the bad news has perhaps left the wrong overall impression in peoples minds.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Primarily high end premium cars or sports vehicles. Not basic transport models, and even then not on the scale of what was produced in the 1960's and '70's.


Nissan don't make high end vehicles, do they?

The British car manufacturing peak was 1.9m cars in 1972, significantly more than during the 60s or later 70s. Now we make about 1.7m, and a lot more exported via the secondary tier than ever before (major parts etc, 2.5m engines), hence why I say we make more stuff.

And about 850,000 people employed.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Having nationalised manufacturing centres, we could actually make cars without bosses or multinational companies. It's possible.


If we nationalised every car plant and car component plant in the UK we wouldn't have a car manufacturing industry we would have several incomplete ones since the UK can't nationalise the component manufacturers that are outside the UK, it would cost billions maybe tens of billions to nationalise them and as much money again to try and retool them to work together. Money which could be better spent on other things like doing something about record child poverty for example.
If your objective is to simply save jobs (an admirable goal) then this can probably be achieved more easily by staying in the EU or at least the single market.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Nissan don't make high end vehicles, do they?



The Washington plant's two biggest production lines are for the Qashqai and the Juke, which are pretty run-of-the-mill motors I think.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The Washington plant's two biggest production lines are for the Qashqai and the Juke, which are pretty run-of-the-mill motors I think.


Indeed. To be fair the UK does make plenty of high end stuff (Aston Martin, Bentley, Lotus, some JLR models) but inevitably the big numbers are formed by the ordinary.


----------



## elbows (Nov 7, 2017)

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the misunderstanding, including luxury vehicle stuff, stems from many of the bad news stories from recent decades have been centred around ownership of car companies and brands, ie the loss of British-owned companies, rather than whats manufactured here.


----------



## yield (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Nissan don't make high end vehicles, do they?


Infiniti but it's mainly for the North American Market. Didn't know that Mitsubishi had joined Renault-Nissan? So there's those too.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

yield said:


> Infiniti but it's mainly for the North American Market. Didn't know that Mitsubishi had joined Renault-Nissan? So there's those too.


Yeah - Mitsubishi's cars business especially in Europe has long been in trouble due to a general failure to sort out the aforementioned sharing activities.


----------



## Supine (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Having nationalised manufacturing centres, we could actually make cars without bosses or multinational companies. It's possible.



Hahahahahahaha.. no.


----------



## yield (Nov 7, 2017)

Supine said:


> Hahahahahahaha.. no.


Of course you can there's nothing inevitable about bosses or multinationals. That's just a result of historical circumstance.

Most of the fall in productivity in the West is due to monopolies, bad pay, inefficiency and poor management.

Probably not the not what SpackleFrog had in mind but take Mondragon Corporation - Wikipedia as an example.

Capitalism at its best should be a meritocracy but the reality is that access to limited fee paying schools is a fast track to management.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2017)

You could certainly build a modern 'people's car' if you could replace globalised capitalism with globalised something-else-cooperative, thus sustaining the necessary scale and commonality, but you would need to have changed the entire world first, unlike most products where a local initiative would yield far better results. So perhaps not the first item on the revolutionary's morning agenda. Better to get rid of the car and pretend that was the aim


----------



## yield (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Better to get rid of the car and pretend that was the aim


Ha!  Think the internal combustion engine maybe on the scrap heap of history. Not sure about the car though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 7, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Ah thank you that explains the mob of starving children I had to fight my way through heading for the bus stop tonight


is starving kids begging on the streets your metric for existing poverty?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 7, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> At the risk of sounding like a swivel eyed tory hard brexiteer loon. The UK has a massive home market for cars. Foreign companies put factories where there is a market for their product.



Australia and New Zealand no longer make any cars. I'm not saying that's what's in store for the UK, or that the cases are even comparable (population sizes are an obvious difference), but it does show that there is no law of nature that says just because you have a consumer market for cars you will automatically have car production to match.

A big thing to take into account in the UK case is the very close relationship between the car industry in the EU and the French and German governments. The French government owns a massive slice of it. I don't think it is likely that EU workers will be being made redundant after Brexit in order to benefit UK workers and/or consumers. Even in a no deal scenario, it will be imperative for them to keep the UK as an export market, and they will do what it takes.


----------



## yield (Nov 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> is starving kids begging on the streets your metric for existing poverty?


Child poverty in Britain set to soar to new record, says thinktank
02/11/17


> The number of children living in poverty will soar to a record 5.2 million over the next five years as government welfare cuts bite deepest on households with young families, a leading UK thinktank has said.


That's fucking appalling.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2017)

mauvais said:


> A little. Modern car manufacturing (of affordable cars anyway) is an inherently global business, and yet despite that, the return on capital investment is still relatively poor.
> 
> Take almost any modern mass market car of your choosing and I'll show you a globally-appropriate design, a platform shared with multiple other vehicles quite often including those of other manufacturers, an integration of thousands of off-the-shelf parts from various manufacturers that also appear in countless other vehicles, and after all of that, the duplication is too high, the margin is still questionably weak and the manufacturer may go bust.
> 
> In the actual reality we inhabit, your home-made, go-it-alone Car of Britain is either a £250k Bristol Bullet (and it needs an engine) , or it's a Trabant.






elbows said:


> In terms of car production, for some years now the industry body has been predicting the possibility of beating the 1972 record for number of cars produced. Last time I checked they had to push their prediction a few more years down the road, and Brexit may already have killed the confidence of the predictors, I don't know, but it seems clear to me that the sector is far larger than some assume. Yes there were decades of bad news and some focus on the devastation caused as specific plants got shuttered, especially here in the midlands, but it seems the bad news has perhaps left the wrong overall impression in peoples minds.



Will have to admit defeat here, as you both clearly have far more extensive knowledge of car production than I 

However:



BemusedbyLife said:


> If we nationalised every car plant and car component plant in the UK we wouldn't have a car manufacturing industry we would have several incomplete ones since the UK can't nationalise the component manufacturers that are outside the UK, it would cost billions maybe tens of billions to nationalise them and as much money again to try and retool them to work together. Money which could be better spent on other things like doing something about record child poverty for example.
> If your objective is to simply save jobs (an admirable goal) then this can probably be achieved more easily by staying in the EU or at least the single market.



This is just nonsense. Yes it would require massive investment to restructure production - but why shouldn't we invest in it? We spend billions on bombs and wars and bailing out banks and keeping Parliament in subsidised booze and whatever else. Why shouldn't we redirect that money? Would you argue that we shouldn't convert weapons production into socially useful industry for example?

Your last sentence just reveals again your complete moral bankruptcy. To you the only way to save jobs is to obey the law of the Market - the same Market that takes away those jobs as it sees fit. As far as you're concerned you'll pay any price to satisfy the Market - including 5.2 million and rising kids in poverty.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> is starving kids begging on the streets your metric for existing poverty?


I have seen starving kids on the streets begging lots of them but not in this country though, this country is nowhere near a collapsed economy and won't be even after Brexit, don't try and use emotion especially misdirected emotion as a substitute for logical argument.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 7, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Will have to admit defeat here, as you both clearly have far more extensive knowledge of car production than I
> 
> However:
> 
> ...


Because we haven't got it? there are other far more important things to spend it on. Yes we waste money on lots of other useless things there is no excuse for wasting more when we have real problems like an unequal society, the effects of austerity on the poorest rungs of society, inadequate housing, an underfunded NHS.
The British weapons industry is the second largest in the world and that fact is nothing to be proud of but if  a future government decides to change that, then those jobs will simply go, swords aren't beaten into ploughshares, they just aren't made any more. You won't find anyone in the TUC pressing for arms sales reductions.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 7, 2017)

When it comes to a post-brexit picture, I have to say agriculture is something I'd like to know more about. Obviously negotiations being what they are I'm learning little, but I do know as well as anyone that we're far from self-sufficient in anything but whisky, cheese and cider. That's fine but what will the kids eat?

a huge proportion of our trade in food and drink is with the EU. If that becomes more expensive - perhaps even _considerably _more expensive - what are some of the potential outcomes?

It's extremely hard to find any clear information or even confident projections, and I have to admit possible outcomes in this area are worrying me the most.


----------



## agricola (Nov 8, 2017)

yield said:


> Child poverty in Britain set to soar to new record, says thinktank
> 02/11/17
> 
> That's fucking appalling.



It is, but it isn't welfare cuts (or at least in direct terms) that are doing it - the damage is being done by the lack of affordable quality housing, and the gradual disappearance of secure, stable employment.  Provide them and you would almost certainly reduce the benefits bill and poverty at the same time, because the state would stop subsidizing landlords and bad employers and instead put the money where it was actually needed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Because we haven't got it? there are other far more important things to spend it on. Yes we waste money on lots of other useless things there is no excuse for wasting more when we have real problems like an unequal society, the effects of austerity on the poorest rungs of society, inadequate housing, an underfunded NHS.



What kind of economic policies produced this society do you think?



BemusedbyLife said:


> The British weapons industry is the second largest in the world and that fact is nothing to be proud of but if  a future government decides to change that, then those jobs will simply go, swords aren't beaten into ploughshares, they just aren't made any more. You won't find anyone in the TUC pressing for arms sales reductions.



You can retrain skilled engineers to make socially useful things instead of bombs and bullets. You can adapt and redevelop industrial sites to suit new purposes. There are a great many trade unionists who are in favour of shifting production away from weapons towards socially useful things within the TUC unions, although perhaps not so much in the leadership.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You can retrain skilled engineers to make socially useful things instead of bombs and bullets. You can adapt and redevelop industrial sites to suit new purposes.



Are you as sure about this as you were about your opinions of how the car industry is?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Are you as sure about this as you were about your opinions of how the car industry is?



Do you disagree?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you disagree?



Yes, things are extremely specialised nowadays.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I have seen starving kids on the streets begging lots of them but not in this country though, this country is nowhere near a collapsed economy and won't be even after Brexit, don't try and use emotion especially misdirected emotion as a substitute for logical argument.


ah. You've been to india. Untill we are there then everything is fine. There has been no spike in youth homelessness. No real drop in working wages and conditions. I can see the blindess talked of earlier now. BTW, I make no appeal to emotion. No point with your sort. 

Its long past being a cliche now but _this is why you lost_.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> You won't find anyone in the TUC pressing for arms sales reductions.


Really. Guess these must be figments of my imagination then
TUC calls for UN arms trade treaty
Stop Arming Saudi
CAAT - Get Involved - Trade Union Network

EDIT: Yes (too) many in the union movement are willing to defend the arms trade but the idea that no-one is arguing against arms sales is nonsense.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> ah. You've been to india. Untill we are there then everything is fine. There has been no spike in youth homelessness. No real drop in working wages and conditions. I can see the blindess talked of earlier now. BTW, I make no appeal to emotion. No point with your sort.
> 
> Its long past being a cliche now but _this is why you lost_.


Actually no I haven't been to India though I have been a great many other places, There has been a spike in youth homelessness, there has been a drop in wages and conditions (including mine I might add)  and there is child poverty in this country all of these are serious issues that are a scandal in a society as rich as ours is (and we are a very rich society it's just not as evenly spread as it should be) and urgently need dealing with.
But child poverty in this country consists  of missing meals and the risk of being forced to move school because your parents tosser of a landlord has decided to chuck you out, it doesn't involve knocking on car windows trying to sell crap, sleeping in gutters or being summarily executed by the police for making the place look untidy.
For all of this country's serious issues which are being ignored by the current government,  SpackleFrog's claim that "the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it." is idiotic


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Really. Guess these must be figments of my imagination then
> TUC calls for UN arms trade treaty
> Stop Arming Saudi
> CAAT - Get Involved - Trade Union Network
> ...


Good points I accept your argument, I suspect when we next get a Labour government there will be much soul searching but I still suspect that they will ultimately decide preserving jobs is more important than a moral stance. People vote for jobs more than they vote for taking a stance.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2017)

are you now defining child poverty to suit your argument? I remember the tories doing that once.


----------



## seventh bullet (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Actually no I haven't been to India though I have been a great many other places, There has been a spike in youth homelessness, there has been a drop in wages and conditions (including mine I might add)  and there is child poverty in this country all of these are serious issues that are a scandal in a society as rich as ours is (and we are a very rich society it's just not as evenly spread as it should be) and urgently need dealing with.
> But child poverty in this country consists  of missing meals and the risk of being forced to move school because your parents tosser of a landlord has decided to chuck you out, it doesn't involve knocking on car windows trying to sell crap, sleeping in gutters or being summarily executed by the police for making the place look untidy.
> For all of this country's serious issues which are being ignored by the current government,  SpackleFrog's claim that "the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it." is idiotic




I know child poverty in this society (actually lived it), and it's much more. Your post is really offensive, and that's being polite.  One thing you do have to get used to is that there are plenty of self-appointed m/c experts ready to assert their superior understanding of the 'realities' of your life.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> there has been a drop in wages and conditions (including mine I might add)...SpackleFrog's claim that "the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it." is idiotic


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> are you now defining child poverty to suit your argument? I remember the tories doing that once.


and you aren't?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Actually no I haven't been to India though I have been a great many other places, There has been a spike in youth homelessness, there has been a drop in wages and conditions (including mine I might add)  and there is child poverty in this country all of these are serious issues that are a scandal in a society as rich as ours is (and we are a very rich society it's just not as evenly spread as it should be) and urgently need dealing with.
> But child poverty in this country consists  of missing meals and the risk of being forced to move school because your parents tosser of a landlord has decided to chuck you out, it doesn't involve knocking on car windows trying to sell crap, sleeping in gutters or being summarily executed by the police for making the place look untidy.
> For all of this country's serious issues which are being ignored by the current government,  SpackleFrog's claim that "the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it." is idiotic


yeh. you should recall the auld adage, it is better to keep silent and be thought a fool than open your gob and prove yourself one.


----------



## seventh bullet (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> are you now defining child poverty to suit your argument? I remember the tories doing that once.



It's not _that_ bad.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 8, 2017)

The economy definitely hasn't collapsed - it's one of the biggest in the world and seems to be in reasonably good health, by the kind of indicators used to measure that kind of thing. But economies aren't measured by the amount of child poverty, there's plenty of places like Angola where the economy is considered to be booming and plenty of children are still dying of starvation.

I think the real issue is that while the economy might be doing fine, inequality is so high that it might as well have collapsed for all the good it's doing a large swathe of the population.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 8, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I think the real issue is that while the economy might be doing fine, inequality is so high that it might as well have collapsed for all the good it's doing a large swathe of the population.



The thing is it's relative. Actually, I'd say that inequality growth can amount to a collapsed economy for a disadvantaged class of people - not simply something that "might as well" be collapsed. But, at the same time, it is objectively a long way from true that there are large numbers of people in the country whose economic situation is so bad that it can't conceivably worsen. A "what's the economy every done for us anyway?" stance around Brexit is just silly.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2017)

What do people mean when they talk about "the economy"? The same thing that economists and the government mean?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Actually no I haven't been to India though I have been a great many other places, There has been a spike in youth homelessness, there has been a drop in wages and conditions (including mine I might add)  and there is child poverty in this country all of these are serious issues that are a scandal in a society as rich as ours is (and we are a very rich society it's just not as evenly spread as it should be) and urgently need dealing with.
> But child poverty in this country consists  of missing meals and the risk of being forced to move school because your parents tosser of a landlord has decided to chuck you out, it doesn't involve knocking on car windows trying to sell crap, sleeping in gutters or being summarily executed by the police for making the place look untidy.
> For all of this country's serious issues which are being ignored by the current government,  SpackleFrog's claim that "the economy has already collapsed as far as the vast majority of people understand it." is idiotic



How long do you think it will be before kids are regularly selling stuff on the street or sleeping rough? Because I've seen that in my city already.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Good points I accept your argument, I suspect when we next get a Labour government there will be much soul searching but I still suspect that they will ultimately decide preserving jobs is more important than a moral stance. People vote for jobs more than they vote for taking a stance.



People do care about keeping their jobs - that's why the only way to move away from arms production without alienating skilled workers in those industries is to offer paid retraining and pay protected alternative employment.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

Raheem said:


> The thing is it's relative. Actually, I'd say that inequality growth can amount to a collapsed economy for a disadvantaged class of people - not simply something that "might as well" be collapsed. But, at the same time, it is objectively a long way from true that there are large numbers of people in the country whose economic situation is so bad that it can't conceivably worsen. A "what's the economy every done for us anyway?" stance around Brexit is just silly.



I'm not taking that stance - I'm saying what has the neoliberal model, the dominant economic model of the last 40 years in Europe and around the world which was primarily designed to restore profitability for the wealthy has done nothing for us.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2017)

(wrong thread)


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> How long do you think it will be before kids are regularly selling stuff on the street or sleeping rough? Because I've seen that in my city already.


teenagers or primary school age? Neither is acceptable in a first world country but  if its the first not the second then it isn't the same thing,


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not taking that stance - I'm saying what has the neoliberal model, the dominant economic model of the last 40 years in Europe and around the world which was primarily designed to restore profitability for the wealthy has done nothing for us.


Agree with that but unlike you I am fairly confident things will get worse not better outside the EU, Of all the worlds powerblocs the EU is the most liberal (in the true meaning of the word)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> teenagers or primary school age? Neither is acceptable in a first world country but  if its the first not the second then it isn't the same thing,



Are teenagers not kids as far as you're concerned then? Both, as it goes you nasty shit.



BemusedbyLife said:


> Agree with that but unlike you I am fairly confident things will get worse not better outside the EU, Of all the worlds powerblocs the EU is the most liberal (in the true meaning of the word)



In OR Out the future is economic crisis you economic illiterate - the only solution to that is to change the economic system. In or out.


----------



## paolo (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not taking that stance - I'm saying what has the neoliberal model, the dominant economic model of the last 40 years in Europe and around the world which was primarily designed to restore profitability for the wealthy has done nothing for us.



It’s a good question.

(Full declaration, I think in the the middle of compromises, better in than out - -and I hear people wince)

But the flipside? The upside?

As a stand-alone nation, not grouped with anyone else, will there be a fairer society? Better healthcare or tax policy?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

paolo said:


> It’s a good question.
> 
> (Full declaration, I think in the the middle of compromises, better in than out - -and I hear people wince)
> 
> ...



No, but neither would there be within the EU. What the Brexit vote has done is fucked the Tories and given us an opportunity to transform our society - but we still need to take it. Nothing is going to get better whether Brexit happens or not, unless we get rid of the Tories and replace them with something better.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, but neither would there be within the EU. What the Brexit vote has done is fucked the Tories and given us an opportunity to transform our society - but we still need to take it. Nothing is going to get better whether Brexit happens or not, unless we get rid of the Tories and replace them with something better.


So why are you so keen on leaving then?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> So why are you so keen on leaving then?



Can you not be arsed to read?

I voted leave to get Cameron out and fuck the Tories primarily (which worked better than voting Labour in 2015 did), and secondarily against an imperialist neoliberal economic bloc which forces austerity on to the peripheral member states in the Eurozone, stokes economic and military conflict in Eastern Europe and lets brown kids drown in the med.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

I can sympathise with the first, though getting him out simply replaced him with an ineffectual fuckwit who deserves more credit than anyone for fucking the Tory Party up, however they are still in power and in charge of negotiating the UK's exit. Let's assume that your assessment of the EU's foreign and economic policy is correct (I believe it is far more complex than that but never mind), then us leaving will change nothing, it will not cool down the conflict in Ukraine, relieve economic problems in Greece or save the life of a single refugee. It is true that us staying under a Tory govt wouldn't do that either but have you considered that a UK led by a left or centre-left govt might have done? As I pointed out earlier the main reason why we haven't had a positive effect on the EU's foreign policy is our govt just didn't want to?


----------



## Winot (Nov 8, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, but neither would there be within the EU. What the Brexit vote has done is fucked the Tories and given us an opportunity to transform our society - but we still need to take it. Nothing is going to get better whether Brexit happens or not, unless we get rid of the Tories and replace them with something better.



This is Brexit as revolution-lite: we can't have a revolution proper but this is the best we'll get. It's a interesting mix of the ideological and and the pragmatic. It makes perfect sense from a particularly left-wing perspective. I'm just not sure that it's what the majority of Leavers thought they were voting for.

But that's the beauty/evil of a referendum - it's a tabula rasa on which the ideological (of all persuasions) can write their own script.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2017)

between the reff and the election I heard a lot about britain's inevitable, possibly permanent lurch to the right. Post corbyn winning, this has not been so hotly touted from r/w or liberal people.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> between the reff and the election I heard a lot about britain's inevitable, possibly permanent lurch to the right. Post corbyn winning, this has not been so hotly touted from r/w or liberal people.



When you look at the unmitigated, objective disaster the government has been and then at their showing in opinion polls, I'm not so sure that this thesis has yet been disproved.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> between the reff and the election I heard a lot about britain's inevitable, possibly permanent lurch to the right. Post corbyn winning, this has not been so hotly touted from r/w or liberal people.


I don't think a lurch to the right is inevitable though I do think it is very likely, SpackleFrog's fascinating logic aside most of the people I know who voted Leave proffered immigration as their main reason, so there is definitely a strong public appetite for more right wing politics (this saddens me greatly but I can't pretend it's not there).
Corbyn didn't win despite mine and I am sure your efforts he just didn't lose anywhere as badly as pundits predicted. Which is good even great of course, even if he loses the next election and steps down as Labour Leader, he deserves considerable credit for getting even the idea of left or centre-left politics back on the table.


----------



## paolo (Nov 8, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> between the reff and the election I heard a lot about britain's inevitable, possibly permanent lurch to the right. Post corbyn winning, this has not been so hotly touted from r/w or liberal people.



That’s very true.

The fucker is - right now - we don’t know where we’ll end up.

There’s probably only shades o gray between Corbyn’s position and the tories. I’ll buy Corbyn any day, but he’s not giving a hugely different position.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2017)

tbf liberals were more of the  'look what unholy terror has been unleashed' whereas the right scum were in full on gloating triumphalism mode. Only both were wrong and now its a near daily 3 ring circus of a government.

I didn't vote corbyn either. The devil he tempts.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

Winot said:


> This is Brexit as revolution-lite: we can't have a revolution proper but this is the best we'll get. It's a interesting mix of the ideological and and the pragmatic. It makes perfect sense from a particularly left-wing perspective. I'm just not sure that it's what the majority of Leavers thought they were voting for.
> 
> But that's the beauty/evil of a referendum - it's a tabula rasa on which the ideological (of all persuasions) can write their own script.



Who said most Leave voters thought they were voting for anything in particular? Remainers are obsessed with the idea that people "didn't know what they were voting for", as if it wasn't abundantly obvious to people that voting to Leave was an uncertain thing. Of course it was - but what people were faced with was most of the Tory establishment and most of the Labour establishment and most of the media telling them to vote to remain, maintain the status quo, continue within the EU economic model, carry on with austerity, carry on with what was already happening.

I think people have mentioned earlier that Europe has always been low on voters priorities in most polls. That's true but it also tells you people really don't care about being in either. I think that's secondary for most people, however they express it, to just seeing it as a chance to stick two fingers up and say "no, we're not going to vote for more of the same because it's shit".

I think your criticism of what I'm saying by the way would be fair if I was saying Brexit was the only thing that could possibly improve things. But I'm not saying that, I don't think it will improve things. But I do think to build a movement for something better you need to consistently oppose the architects of neo liberalism and austerity whether that be the ECB or the Tories or the ECJ. In Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and elsewhere there have been incredible mass mobilisations against austerity, and in the Eurozone that means directly against the EU as well as their own governments. The least we can do here is use Brexit to make clear our own politics, reject the economic model of the last 40 or 50 years, and get our own sack of shit austerity government out as soon as possible. And helpfully the Leave vote has weakened the enemy. Can you imagine if Cameron had won the ref and hadn't resigned? Would he have had an election this year do you think?

As DotCommunist said above, a lot of people said a vote to leave would usher in an age of reaction and things are actually shifting to the left dramatically. I think the referendum has acted as a lighthing rod for a lot of this - it's not the platform I would have chosen but we have to react to events as they unfold.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 8, 2017)

Well put I think you are wildly optimistic and will be proved spectacularly wrong but that is the best argument you have put forward so far.


----------



## Winot (Nov 8, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Well put I think you are wildly optimistic and will be proved spectacularly wrong but that is the best argument you have put forward so far.



Agreed.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 8, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Yes, that's the one. The Singapore which actively and wholeheartedly promotes business, has no capital gains tax, no inheritance tax, a maximum individual tax rate of 22%, a company tax rate of 17% and only taxes income earned in Singapore. The place where most people have an enthusiastic work ethic and don't spend much of their time moaning about the government. A place where people want to be given the opportunity to earn their own wealth rather than have a part of what others have. The downside is that I often can't get a seat in my favourite Starbucks because loads of students are there doing their homework.



Singapore is always cited by those of an authoritarian and simplistic mind.

The great man: "_I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today."
_
Etc etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2017)

paolo said:


> That’s very true.
> 
> The fucker is - right now - we don’t know where we’ll end up.
> 
> There’s probably only shades o gray between Corbyn’s position and the tories. I’ll buy Corbyn any day, but he’s not giving a hugely different position.



I agree, but again Corbyn isn't much more than an opportunity. This is the thing - Brexit, Corbyn, all these cracks that are thrown up, these aren't the key points in themselves but the opportunities they provide. I think Corbyn's useless but his supporters are a legit mass movement and the best chance of building a genuine anti austerity workers party.

No we don't know where we'll end up. We haven't since 2008, this is the new normal. But we can't build an alternative around defending the status quo.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree, but again Corbyn isn't much more than an opportunity. This is the thing - Brexit, Corbyn, all these cracks that are thrown up, these aren't the key points in themselves but the opportunities they provide. I think Corbyn's useless but his supporters are a legit mass movement and the best chance of building a genuine anti austerity workers party.
> 
> No we don't know where we'll end up. We haven't since 2008, this is the new normal. But we can't build an alternative around defending the status quo.



What proportion of the electorate went for UKIP in 2015, about 10%? And maybe another 40% for the Tories? How many of those twats are going to change their minds?

Brexit is going to be a massive failure. It couldn't possibly be anything else - the UKippers and Tories and Labour voters and miscellaneous who voted for it have nothing else in common except voting to leave the European Union. There is no possible deal that would please all those different groups of voters.

The whole thing is just a distraction - Brexit will happen in one form or another, there will be some kind of deal worked out in which things are mostly the same but a bit shittier, a lot of people will lose their jobs, and we'll still be here 5 years from now complaining about the same old shit. The amount of electable anti-austerity workers parties built will be zero, the amount of rich people getting richer will be immense, and the amount of poor people getting poorer will be even more immense. And that will be partly because people who could otherwise have made a difference spent their time concentrating on this stupid Brexit shit instead of anything that will actually change anything.

That's how I see it, anyway, I'll be very happy if I get proved wrong.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What proportion of the electorate went for UKIP in 2015, about 10%? And maybe another 40% for the Tories? How many of those twats are going to change their minds?



Millions of these "twats" you refer to have already changed their mind and voted Labour this year actually. Wanna know something that will really blow your mind? Some people will have voted UKIP in 2015 and Corbyn''s Labour in 2017. And they won't see a contradiction in that at all, and there largely isn't.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Millions of these "twats" you refer to have already changed their mind and voted Labour this year actually. Wanna know something that will really blow your mind? Some people will have voted UKIP in 2015 and Corbyn''s Labour in 2017. And they won't see a contradiction in that at all, and there largely isn't.



Is that actually what happened? 

No doubt there was some crossover, but I thought it was a case of different voters turning out: People who hadn't voted in general elections for many years were inspired to vote by Brexit, and younger voters were inspired to come out and vote in larger numbers than usual by Corbyn.

If all the same people had voted in both the referendum and the general election, it might have been a different result in both cases.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 9, 2017)

The xenophobic pensioner "bring back maggie"-ites who deserted the tories for UKIP will have voted leave because they hate Europe despite going on holiday there several times a yr. The younger poor who if they voted at all might have voted UKIP will have voted leave to fuck the smooth tory gits like Cameron/Osborne.

The pensioners will go back to the tories & the younger poor could be persuaded to vote Labour if they are convinced Labour might improve their lot which for many will be the provision of decent & affordable rented housing. So provided Corbyn can make his claim to build a million council houses believable he might be on a winner.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What proportion of the electorate went for UKIP in 2015, about 10%? And maybe another 40% for the Tories? How many of those twats are going to change their minds?
> 
> Brexit is going to be a massive failure. It couldn't possibly be anything else - the UKippers and Tories and Labour voters and miscellaneous who voted for it have nothing else in common except voting to leave the European Union. There is no possible deal that would please all those different groups of voters.
> 
> ...



I don't agree with the _twats_ bit (i don't think voting either way in the referendum is by itself a good metric for twattishness) but I do agree that this process is going to satisfy nobody and will probably result in no deal. What happens after that, I don't want to speculate, in the same way as I wouldn't draw a circle on a balloon, say ''this bit will land right _here_'' and then pop it.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I don't agree with the _twats_ bit (i don't think voting either way in the referendum is by itself a good metric for twattishness)



I don't think voting Remain or Leave is any measure of twattishness, but I just don't have a lot of time for people who looked back at five years of shitty coalition government in 2015 and decided to give the Conservatives more power. I'll cheerfully withdraw "twats" in the case of UKIP voters who thought voting UKIP was the best way to undermine the EU and bring in a socialist British government, but I'm not sure if that applies to too many people.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> What proportion of the electorate went for UKIP in 2015, about 10%? And maybe another 40% for the Tories? How many of those twats are going to change their minds?


You're massively out on the Tory vote, it was 8.4 and 24.4% for UKIP and the Conservatives, respectively. 



Yossarian said:


> No doubt there was some crossover, but I thought it was a case of different voters turning out: People who hadn't voted in general elections for many years were inspired to vote by Brexit, and younger voters were inspired to come out and vote in larger numbers than usual by Corbyn.


I've not seen any systematic analysis of where the UKIP vote went, but if you look at Labour seats with a strong UKIP vote in 2015, I think a significant proportion of that vote went across to the Conservatives in 2017.


----------



## Winot (Nov 9, 2017)

Which explains Labour’s fence-sitting Brexit policy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You're massively out on the Tory vote, it was 8.4 and 24.4% for UKIP and the Conservatives, respectively.
> 
> I've not seen any systematic analysis of where the UKIP vote went, but if you look at Labour seats with a strong UKIP vote in 2015, I think a significant proportion of that vote went across to the Conservatives in 2017.



I'm not sure I totally agree - many traditional Labour areas that voted Leave in massive numbers also registered biggest votes for Labour in decades eg Doncaster, Rotherham near me. Lots of those people probably voted UKIP in 2015, but not many voted Tory in 2017.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 9, 2017)

Labour's _fence-sitting _more likely comes from a pro-leave leader leading a broadly pro-remain party.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You're massively out on the Tory vote, it was 8.4 and 24.4% for UKIP and the Conservatives, respectively.



The government puts it at 36.4% for the Tories and 12.4% for UKIP.

General Election 2015 - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 9, 2017)

I agree with SpackleFrog on this one thing, I think UKIP voters are more likely to otherwise naturally vote Labour, a lot of people voted UKIP for much the same reason Americans voted for Trump, they were offering a solution to those voters feeling of being marginalised (ok it's a dumb one that won't work but at least it was offered). Now we actually have a choice that isn't Tory or Tory-lite then things have changed somewhat and we have a genuine chance at a centre-left government that will make some progress on addressing the serious inequality that has plagued this country for decades.
Pity it could have achieved so much more inside the EU but there we are.
As for a full blooded socialist government nationalising industries and seizing the means of production, Well SpackleFrog I admire your revolutionary zeal but Nope not going to happen not in my lifetime certainly, probably never.
People want fairness and social justice not socialism.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure I totally agree - many traditional Labour areas that voted Leave in massive numbers also registered biggest votes for Labour in decades eg Doncaster, Rotherham near me. Lots of those people probably voted UKIP in 2015, but not many voted Tory in 2017.


Well Rotherham had a drop of -8098 (-21.4%) in the UKIP vote and an increase in the Con vote of +5361 (+14.1%) between 2015 and 2017.

For Doncaster North the equivalent figures are -6190 (-16.1%) and +4452 (9.3%).

So there's a bigger drop in the UKIP vote than increase in the Tory vote, but I think there must be a decent amount of UKIP->Con transfer.

For the North East it's more equal
Hartlepool, UKIP -6251 (-16.5%), Con +6063 (+13.3%)
Sunderland Central, UKIP -5788 (-14.3%), Con +5279 (+9.9%)


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> The government puts it at 36.4% for the Tories and 12.4% for UKIP.
> 
> General Election 2015 - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament


No that's the share of the _*vote*_, you talked about the *electorate* in #1298. So you need to multiply those figures by 0.664


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 9, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Labour's _fence-sitting _more likely comes from a pro-leave leader leading a broadly pro-remain party.


Corbyn has said he wouldn't change his remain vote.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> No that's the share of the _*vote*_, you talked about the *electorate* in #1298. So you need to multiply those figures by 0.664



My mistake, I'm glad the share of Tory voters is the lower figure.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 9, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Pity it could have achieved so much more inside the EU but there we are.


_citation needed_


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 9, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> _citation needed_


No its a opinion like most of the things in this forum please feel free to present a dissenting argument


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 9, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> No its a opinion like most of the things in this forum please feel free to present a dissenting argument


just checking. I had a little look at attitudes to socialism vs capitalism. Yougov poll from last year has socialism in the UK viewed overall more favourably than capitalism. Breaks down by age with the over 60s quite anti. So your assertion was also opinion, and wrong. Thanks for calling.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 9, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> just checking. I had a little look at attitudes to socialism vs capitalism. Yougov poll from last year has socialism in the UK viewed overall more favourably than capitalism. Breaks down by age with the over 60s quite anti. So your assertion was also opinion, and wrong. Thanks for calling.



Hadn't seen that before, interesting stuff - men a lot more likely than women to declare themselves capitalists or socialists, Scots much less likely than anybody else to call themselves capitalits, and a deeply confused 2% of Conservative voters say they're socialists.

YouGov | What the world thinks


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 9, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Hadn't seen that before, interesting stuff - men a lot more likely than women to declare themselves capitalists or socialists, Scots much less likely than anybody else to call themselves capitalits, and a deeply confused 2% of Conservative voters say they're socialists.
> 
> YouGov | What the world thinks


found the US comparisons interesting as well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 9, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> just checking. I had a little look at attitudes to socialism vs capitalism. Yougov poll from last year has socialism in the UK viewed overall more favourably than capitalism. Breaks down by age with the over 60s quite anti. So your assertion was also opinion, and wrong. Thanks for calling.


The opinion that a left-of-centre UK govt in the shape of Corbyn-led Labour could achieve more inside the EU than outside it is one worth examining, though. r/w UK govts have done a lot to shape the character of the EU over recent decades - what kind of influence in a different direction might a l/w govt have? What kinds of practical restraints on policy might a l/w govt outside the EU face? How might the interests of capital dictate to a post-brexit UK? Might they be strengthened, limiting the scope for action even more tightly?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The opinion that a left-of-centre UK govt in the shape of Corbyn-led Labour could achieve more inside the EU than outside it is one worth examining, though. r/w UK govts have done a lot to shape the character of the EU over recent decades - what kind of influence in a different direction might a l/w govt have? What kinds of practical restraints on policy might a l/w govt outside the EU face? How might the interests of capital dictate to a post-brexit UK? Might they be strengthened, limiting the scope for action even more tightly?


well to take a single issue 'the EU would not allow nationalising of the rail' to which the answer as usual turned out to be yes and no, but full state ownership uncontested is off the cards. iirc. As for influencing its the EU's direction of travel, well I'm not going to speculate beyond 'I recon' on a counterfactual but from the overall behaviour of the entity we'd get nowhere with that change-from-within idea imo.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 9, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> well to take a single issue 'the EU would not allow nationalising of the rail' to which the answer as usual turned out to be yes and no, but full state ownership uncontested is off the cards. iirc. As for influencing its the EU's direction of travel, well I'm not going to speculate beyond 'I recon' on a counterfactual but from the overall behaviour of the entity we'd get nowhere with that change-from-within idea imo.


Rail would have been an interesting test case. My understanding of the new EU regs for rail is the same as yours, but there are other rather vague provisions within EU rules that allow for things to be done if they are judged to be in the national interest. Get-out clauses, basically. Would a new govt elected with full rail renationalisation as a clear manifesto objective be prevented from doing this by the EU? There are plenty of examples from elsewhere in the EU of its rules being openly flouted by large countries - France breaking the borrowing rules of the euro for years, for instance.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Now we actually have a choice that isn't Tory or Tory-lite then things have changed somewhat and we have a genuine chance at a centre-left government that will make some progress on addressing the serious inequality that has plagued this country for decades.
> Pity it could have achieved so much more inside the EU but there we are.
> As for a full blooded socialist government nationalising industries and seizing the means of production, Well SpackleFrog I admire your revolutionary zeal but Nope not going to happen not in my lifetime certainly, probably never.
> People want fairness and social justice not socialism.



Social democracy cab achieve more inside the EU? Like Syriza you mean? You really are unrelentingly dense.

People do want fairness and justice. And they're never gonna get it on the basis of capitalism, and certainly not on the basis of neoliberalism, of the EU, or any of the other tired, outdated redundant ideas you cling too. People have already abandoned your politics en masse, not that you've noticed. People are searching for solutions, and that inevitably brings them closer and closer to Socialist ideas. So excuse me if I remain indifferent to your pessimism.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2017)

L


littlebabyjesus said:


> The opinion that a left-of-centre UK govt in the shape of Corbyn-led Labour could achieve more inside the EU than outside it is one worth examining, though. r/w UK govts have done a lot to shape the character of the EU over recent decades - what kind of influence in a different direction might a l/w govt have? What kinds of practical restraints on policy might a l/w govt outside the EU face? How might the interests of capital dictate to a post-brexit UK? Might they be strengthened, limiting the scope for action even more tightly?



We've had r/w govts everywhere in the EU for decades - how many l/w govts would have to get into power and stay in power before even the tiniest changes were seen?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 9, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Corbyn has said he wouldn't change his remain vote.



Of course he has, what else could he say, realistically?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 9, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Of course he has, what else could he say, realistically?


You think he supports brexit but doesn't want to admit it?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 9, 2017)

I think he's a politician and will say what he thinks he needs to say to keep his party together.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 9, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Social democracy cab achieve more inside the EU? Like Syriza you mean? You really are unrelentingly dense.
> 
> People do want fairness and justice. And they're never gonna get it on the basis of capitalism, and certainly not on the basis of neoliberalism, of the EU, or any of the other tired, outdated redundant ideas you cling too. People have already abandoned your politics en masse, not that you've noticed. People are searching for solutions, and that inevitably brings them closer and closer to Socialist ideas. So excuse me if I remain indifferent to your pessimism.



Well looking at the votes cast in the last general election the number of votes cast for overtly Marxist/Socialist Parties (I'm excluding the Labour Party as  guess you do) is under 2000 out of 32 million, I must confess I am very impressed by your optimism


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> You think he supports brexit but doesn't want to admit it?



He's *always* consistently opposed membership of the EU - right up until the point he became Labour leader anyway.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 9, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I think he's a politician and will say what he thinks he needs to say to keep his party together.


His party is for upholding the result, so why wouldn't he say he would change his vote now?. 

It's a bit of a slight on his honesty to suggest he's lying - or is it just lexiters wishful thinking?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 9, 2017)

It's not a slight on any politician to suggest that what they say is expedient rather than 100% frank. The word _politician_ itself rather suggests expediency over honesty.


----------



## elbows (Nov 9, 2017)

Brown is echoing some stuff that sounds familiar - anything new in this?


> Former prime minister Gordon Brown has warned that the UK may hit a "crisis point next summer" as the UK edges closer to Brexit and held out the possibility that the UK may not leave the EU.
> 
> He said that he was not now advocating a second referendum, but suggested that there "may be scope for a reassessment" as voters began to realise, he suggested, that the promises of the Leave side of the referendum campaign would not be fulfilled.
> 
> He suggested that there could be a "game changer" from the EU side that allowed the UK to rethink.



Gordon Brown warns of Brexit 'crisis point'


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 9, 2017)

elbows said:


> Brown is echoing some stuff that sounds familiar - anything new in this?
> Gordon Brown warns of Brexit 'crisis point'


Nah I make no secret of the fact that I think voting to leave was the stupidest thing the population of this country has ever collectively done but I'm sure we're going to leave and let the shit land where it falls, I can only see 2 possible scenario's to stay, 1. The City finally loses its rag with the Tories and cuts off all that sweet cash they so love or 2. There's another election soon and a minority Labour government strikes a deal with the SNP to knock it on the head. I don't consider either scenario more than wild fantasies,  Brexit has been the most divisive issue in this country since we broke from Rome and ain't nobody going to suddenly see sense. We're going to have to deal with this shit whatever it turns out to be.


----------



## Winot (Nov 9, 2017)

A prediction of how it’s likely to go here (not sure who he is but it sounds plausible):

How Brexit will unfold – Britain will get a deal, but it’ll come at a price | Charles Grant


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2017)

Winot said:


> A prediction of how it’s likely to go here (not sure who he is but it sounds plausible):
> 
> How Brexit will unfold – Britain will get a deal, but it’ll come at a price | Charles Grant


you could have done a quick google and his interest would have become apparent Charles Grant


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 9, 2017)

He's undoubtably a lot more qualified on the subject than anyone on these forums but he's assuming that the politicians are acting rationally, dangerous assumption especially with the tossers doing the negotiating for the UK


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 9, 2017)

While no 'leading politicians'(if that is the correct phrase)& also those like Gord whose opinions might be considered newsworthy are actually yet coming out & stating publicly this whole thing is not fit for purpose, brexit should be stopped. & politics should just get back to normal things like running the country they are getting closer to it. Heseltine on R4 this lunchtime was on much the same tack.

I think Gord is about right on the timing though. It will take until around the middle of next yr for it to either have some sort of workable agreement properly taking shape or the whole thing will have descended into chaos & something seismic will occur.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> While no 'leading politicians'(if that is the correct phrase)& also those like Gord whose opinions might be considered newsworthy are actually yet coming out & stating publicly this whole thing is not fit for purpose, brexit should be stopped. & politics should just get back to normal things like running the country they are getting closer to it. Heseltine on R4 this lunchtime was on much the same tack.
> 
> I think Gord is about right on the timing though. It will take until around the middle of next yr for it to either have some sort of workable agreement properly taking shape or the whole thing will have descended into chaos & something seismic will occur.


By next June we will be burning politicians at the stake for being mildly inconsiderate to someone 30 years ago

Bring it on


----------



## kabbes (Nov 10, 2017)

At this point, the momentum seems to be more towards a slower exit rather than a cancelled one.  It has the feel of countless projects I have been involved with over the years — somebody sets an unrealistic deadline, everybody pretends that deadline has been writ by God himself and panics trying to achieve it and then as the deadline approaches people start asking why that deadline actually is the deadline and it gets pushed further out.  Generally, the bigger the project, the more this happens, and with several iterations of it to boot.  Eventually, the project does achieve its end (with some or all of its goals), but rarely to the original date.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 10, 2017)

May is being utterly stupid on attempting to set a fixed departure date. She really has no fucking intelligence or grasp on reality at all


----------



## kebabking (Nov 10, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> May is being utterly stupid on attempting to set a fixed departure date. She really has no fucking intelligence or grasp on reality at all



On the contrary, she's making a virtue out of a necessity - according to the A50 process the UK will fall out of the EU on the 2nd anniversary of the triggering of A50 unless the UK government asks for an extension, which the rest of the EU is not obligated by the treaty to agree to. The UK government is not going to ask for such an extension for several reasons, one being that it knows that the granting of that extension will be a negotiation requiring concessions in itself, another being that it doesn't believe that an extension will change much within the negotiations - the EU doesn't _want_ to make a trade deal with the UK before it leaves (for several reasons), so the Government view is that we would go from a two year negotiation where one side doesn't really want to play, to a four year negotiation where one side doesn't really want to play.

I voted remain by the way...


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

May saying she “will not tolerate” any enemy-of-the-people stuff from Westminster w/r/t the glorious march over the cliff. I wonder if that means that the whip will end up being withdrawn from Clarke and Soubry? May tends to fuck up showdowns. Hopefully, if she decides to play hardball with the remainist backbenchers, she’ll miscalculate and lose her majority.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 10, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> May saying she “will not tolerate” any enemy-of-the-people stuff from Westminster w/r/t the glorious march over the cliff. I wonder if that means that the whip will end up being withdrawn from Clarke and Soubry? May tends to fuck up showdowns. Hopefully, if she decides to play hardball with the remainist backbenchers, she’ll miscalculate and lose her majority.



She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.



You'd have thought so, but in that case, what does "will not tolerate" even mean?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 10, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You'd have thought so, but in that case, what does "will not tolerate" even mean?



Nothing if we assume that she can tolerate the ruin of her own premiership even less.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 10, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> She can't withdraw the whip from anyone at all with the numbers as they are.



Depends on timing I would say - with, say, a month to go for the exit date and it being obvious that there won't be a deal - she could probably withdraw the whip from quite a few. At that stage Labour aren't going to try and stop Brexit, the political cost at home would be too high so they might criticise, but they aren't going to try to stop it. So who can these ex-tory rebels vote with to stop it?

in a vote of no confidence, even abstaining would end their careers, and they aren't going to vote for Corbyn to become PM - and neither are the DUP.

She doesn't need a majority of the house to be Tory and DUP, she just needs a majority who don't want to end their careers or want Corbyn to be PM. That's all that matters in a vote of no confidence, she needs 50%+1, where those votes come from, whether signed up Tories and DUP or 'independants' is of no consequence...


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Depends on timing I would say - with, say, a month to go for the exit date and it being obvious that there won't be a deal - she could probably withdraw the whip from quite a few. At that stage Labour aren't going to try and stop Brexit, the political cost at home would be too high so they might criticise, but they aren't going to try to stop it. So who can these ex-tory rebels vote with to stop it?
> 
> in a vote of no confidence, even abstaining would end their careers, and they aren't going to vote for Corbyn to become PM - and neither are the DUP.
> 
> She doesn't need a majority of the house to be Tory and DUP, she just needs a majority who don't want to end their careers or want Corbyn to be PM. That's all that matters in a vote of no confidence, she needs 50%+1, where those votes come from, whether signed up Tories and DUP or 'independants' is of no consequence...



Historically, any defeat of the government on a major policy issue has been treated as a lost vote of confidence. How that plays with the definition of VONCs in the FTPA is complicated and untested, I was reading up on this when thinking about the opportunities for the House to oust Johnson.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 10, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Historically, any defeat of the government on a major policy issue has been treated as a lost vote of confidence. How that plays with the definition of VONCs in the FTPA is complicated and untested, I was reading up on this when thinking about the opportunities for the House to oust Johnson.



I fear that 'historically' is no longer applicable - particularly if she were to win a no confidence vote immediately afterwards.

Cameron lost a 'war and peace' vote in the commons as part of a coalition, there was no subsequent NC vote and it wasn't treated as such, whereas historically it would have been.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

kebabking said:


> *I fear* that 'historically' is no longer applicable - particularly if she were to win a no confidence vote immediately afterwards.
> 
> Cameron lost a 'war and peace' vote in the commons as part of a coalition, there was no subsequent NC vote and it wasn't treated as such, whereas historically it would have been.



I actually see this as a good thing (cf the Govt of National Unity thread), in that - if you're right - there's an opportunity for Tory rebels and the rump of Labour to push a BINO or kick the can, without triggering an election in which parties and candidates on both sides might be forced to sign up to a Lancaster House position. 

Whether or not one is enthused by the prospect of a Corbyn government, there's no reason for optimism  that Corbyn would win any election following a government collapse - the latest YouGovs show Lab has made not a dent in the Tory share of vote, despite the shambles May is making of government. The risk of May getting her majority back is real; so is the current opportunity to thwart hard Brexit in Westminster.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 10, 2017)

EU playing hardball

The EU just warned Britain it has 14 days to stop Brexit being a disaster

and why not the ball is so in their court


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

Good trend now on the polling air cover for a reverse ferret:


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 10, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> e voters feeling of being marginalised


all about the _feelings
_



> Regional economic disparities grounded in successive rounds of uneven development and biased official policy are not peculiar to Britain. As David Harvey has written, ‘capitalism is uneven geographical development’—and, if anything, becoming more so. The era of neoliberal globalization multiplied opportunities for ‘the uneven insertion of different territories and social formations into the capitalist world market’. [55] As regulatory powers are stripped away, wealth is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of the opulent few. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, mouthpiece for free-market economies, notes that ‘while gaps in GDP per capita across OECD countries have narrowed over the last two decades, within their own borders countries are witnessing increasing income gaps among regions, cities and people.’ Such is the common pattern. Davos is looking nervously over its shoulder as the popular backlash intensifies. [56]
> 
> Yet Britain is indeed a special case of uneven development within the Europe on which its voters were invited to express their verdict in 2016. The astonishing fact is that the UK is more lopsided economically than Italy, despite its notoriously incomplete Risorgimento; than Spain, with its historic polarity of Catalan–Basque industry and Andalusian latifundia; than Germany, where a quarter of a century after reunification GDP per head in the East was still only two-thirds of that in the West; than France, enshadowed by a metropolis great enough to warrant comparison with its cross-Channel neighbour. At sub-regional level, output per head is eight times higher in inner west London than in west Wales and the Valleys, the largest difference to be found in anyEU member state from Bantry Bay to the Dniester. [57]
> 
> So it is that a former regional-policy advisor at the European Commission can observe that ‘the economic geography of the UK nowadays increasingly reflects the patterns typically observed in developing or former-transition economies rather than in other advanced economies.’ In several peripheral European states—Ireland and Portugal in the far west; the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia to the east—only the capital-city region achieves output per capita above the EU average. [58] The UK is richer, but its long-run development, aside from the short Victorian interlude of factory capitalism, has been similarly monocentric. Northwards redistribution of economic activity from London and the South has never featured high on the list of national political priorities. Today just 2 per cent of households in the North East feature in the top decile of wealth, set against 22 per cent in the South East and 18 per cent in London. Under the Cameron coalition, median household wealth in London increased by 14 per cent, while it fell 8 per cent in Yorkshire and the Humber. [59] The real average jobless rate was last clocked at over 11 per cent in the two most northerly English regions, rising above 16 per cent in the worst blackspots, compared to just 3 or 4 per cent in large parts of the South. At the bottom end of the income ladder, very high deprivation looms largest in a quintet of northern boroughs: Middlesbrough, Knowsley, Hull, Liverpool and Manchester. The South East, of course, has problems of its own. Gentrification is taking the edge off the poverty statistics for east London, but out in the sticks, forgotten Jaywick on the Essex coast is England’s single most destitute neighbourhood. [60] Nevertheless, the phenomenal amount of wealth sloshing around the capital does much to shield the London commentariat from the degradation of outer regions, flattering to deceive that government economic policy is working for the country at large. ‘I’ll tell you what’s at stake’, warned George Osborne, a millionaire Londoner, as the referendum loomed: ‘the prosperity of the British economy, people’s incomes would be hit, the ability to provide for their families would be hit. We’ve not even talked about unemployment.’ [61] His parliamentary seat was a Tory constituency in leafy east Cheshire, one of only four out of 38 areas across northern England where household income per head is above rather than below the national average.



Tom Hazeldine: Revolt of the Rustbelt. New Left Review 105, May-June 2017.


----------



## Winot (Nov 10, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Depends on timing I would say - with, say, a month to go for the exit date and it being obvious that there won't be a deal - she could probably withdraw the whip from quite a few. At that stage Labour aren't going to try and stop Brexit, the political cost at home would be too high so they might criticise, but they aren't going to try to stop it. So who can these ex-tory rebels vote with to stop it?
> 
> in a vote of no confidence, even abstaining would end their careers, and they aren't going to vote for Corbyn to become PM - and neither are the DUP.
> 
> She doesn't need a majority of the house to be Tory and DUP, she just needs a majority who don't want to end their careers or want Corbyn to be PM. That's all that matters in a vote of no confidence, she needs 50%+1, where those votes come from, whether signed up Tories and DUP or 'independants' is of no consequence...



^ This sounds plausible. I wonder though whether before we get to that stage big business will put so much pressure on the Tory party about Brexit uncertainty that they will do a Thatcher on May and replace her with someone else and use that as an excuse to extend the Art. 50 deadline. 

In terms of timing Davis has said it might go to the wire and the HoC might not have time to vote beforehand so if they are going to get rid of May then they need to do it earlier.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> In terms of timing Davis has said it might go to the wire



He was generally agreed to be talking complete bollocks by everyone with any idea about how the EU works, though.

Note that today's two week deadline from Barnier applies because it will take three weeks for the EU Council to mull over whether to declare "sufficient progress". The idea that everything could be sorted out at the last minute is nonsense on stilts.


----------



## Winot (Nov 10, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> He was generally agreed to be talking complete bollocks by everyone with any idea about how the EU works, though.
> 
> Note that today's two week deadline from Barnier applies because it will take three weeks for the EU Council to mull over whether to declare "sufficient progress". The idea that everything could be sorted out at the last minute is nonsense on stilts.



True dat.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> ^ This sounds plausible. I wonder though whether before we get to that stage big business will put so much pressure on the Tory party about Brexit uncertainty that they will do a Thatcher on May and replace her with someone else and use that as an excuse to extend the Art. 50 deadline...



the left always wildly overstates the impact big business has on tory policy or machinations - if big business were that powerful the referendum would never have happened and the tory party would not have been furiously selecting swivel-eyed loons as parliamentary candidates for the last 30 years.

we had a referendum, and Bill Cash, JRM, John Redwood and IDS are all still MP's, so....

lobbying by the CBI or whatever isn't going to shut up the europhobes anymore than the views of the head of JCB change the minds of Anna Soubry or Philip Hammond - it also fails to grasp the 'reset' that has occured within UK government, both at a political and official level, since David Camerons efforts to get a _reordering _of the relationship, and which has accelerated beyond measure since the referendum: pretty much the whole of government and the wider state has found the process of dealing with the EU, even over matters where the views are very similar, utterly exasperating.

in 2016 virtually the whole of the government and the senior levels of the civil service were for remain. i wouldn't be suprised if that had dropped by half, and i'd be amazed if you could find 20% of people at that level who think we should rejoin.


----------



## Winot (Nov 10, 2017)

Well I am married to a senior civil servant and I am not sure about your last point but agree that I might be indulging in wishful thinking in relation to the rest.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> Well I am married to a senior civil servant and I am not sure about your last point but agree that I might be indulging in wishful thinking in relation to the rest.



I work in a dept that was solidly, from bottom to top, vigorously remain, and one that has suffered significantly since the referendum - the attitude here has gone from 90%+ for remain to 'fuck em' in 18 months...


----------



## Winot (Nov 11, 2017)

Further to the discussion about UK car industry up thread:

MPs given stark Brexit warning – UK-based car makers could leave


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 11, 2017)

Well, the Mirror would have you believe that it isn't(their hearts in the right place, bless em), but unfortunately it is.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I work in a dept that was solidly, from bottom to top, vigorously remain, and one that has suffered significantly since the referendum - the attitude here has gone from 90%+ for remain to 'fuck em' in 18 months...



They found being a member of the EU attractive while they were part of it, but soured on it when they found themselves negotiating from outside it? 

Where is it that you work, the Department of the Bleeding Obvious?


----------



## kebabking (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> ...Where is it that you work, the Department of the Bleeding Obvious?



Ministry of the Observant. _Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. _

the world has changed, events have been reset, that which was is no longer - the wailing of the the remoaners is the wailing of an alleged grown-up who wishes they could return to a time when they believed in Father Christmas. pitiful and contemptable.

its done, the (quite good actually) deal we had within the EU is no longer available, a 're-deal' would be both more expensive (loss of the rebate) and come with less attractive baggage - Schengen, possibly the Euro, loss of opt-outs on the CDSP, and generally a much smaller seat at the table than had previously been the case.

no thanks.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Ministry of the Observant. _Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. _
> 
> the world has changed, events have been reset, that which was is no longer - the wailing of the the remoaners is the wailing of an alleged grown-up who wishes they could return to a time when they believed in Father Christmas. pitiful and contemptable.
> 
> ...



Sounds like you work in the Ministry of Saying What People Already Know, in the Department of Being a Condescending Bastard.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Sounds like you work in the Ministry of Saying What People Already Know, in the Department of Being a Condescending Bastard.



given the deafness of some, that condescension seems not unwarranted...


----------



## bimble (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Sounds like you work in the Ministry of Saying What People Already Know, in the Department of Being a Condescending Bastard.


Where do I send my cv?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Ministry of the Observant. _Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis. _
> 
> the world has changed, events have been reset, that which was is no longer - the wailing of the the remoaners is the wailing of an alleged grown-up who wishes they could return to a time when they believed in Father Christmas. pitiful and contemptable.
> 
> ...




Sez you. Unless you have access to some secret EU Council protocols and private ECJ guidance, you have no idea what would happen in the event of a referendum re-run or a unilateral Westminster revocation.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 11, 2017)

bimble said:


> Where do I send my cv?



My company is always on the look out for condescending bastard team members.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> given the deafness of some, that condescension seems not unwarranted...



Wait, aren't you the guy who boasted about leading a regiment into Iraq, but getting stuck on a bridge and then trying to go the wrong way?

You're basically a war criminal, and one so incompetent that you needed a do-over to complete the deed. And now you work for the government.

Is there a reason why you think anybody should trust what you're saying?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 11, 2017)

Christ. You really calling all the soldiers that took part in Iraq (and Afghanistan) war criminals?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> You're basically a war criminal



Out of fucking order


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> You're basically a war criminal



That’s not really fair or reasonable, is it?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 11, 2017)

The lawyers do state that brexit could be stopped by the UK government before Mar '19. No renegotiation just stop & carry on as before. This appears to be the legal position unless I am wrong? So there does appear to be a way out if negotiations become impossible. It does seem rather unbelievable that we could go over a cliff edge just because of the intransigence of government. It would be more believable if we had a govenment with a large majority but this one has no majority.

It is very difficult to see where we go from here. It's ok for public opinion to say "they are a bunch of cunts so fuck'em" but they probably don't live in NI or have jobs that depend entirely on free trade with EU.


----------



## Winot (Nov 11, 2017)

The issue with stopping Brexit isn’t legal it’s political.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That’s not really fair or reasonable, is it?



Having found the post in question, I withdraw the accusation - he was merely an incompetent accessory to an illegal invasion.


> Would you like to hear a funny story about a handsome, witty, talented and hugely successful Royal Artillery Officer and the entire AS90 Regiment (28 self propelled guns, nearly 100 other vehicles and about 800 soldiers) that had to reverse down a single track 'road' for 3 miles while invading an unnamed middle Eastern country that rhymes with _back_ because someone had misread a weight limit estimate for a bridge..?
> 
> 'Ah well, stuff happens..' this person's boss didn't say.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

Winot said:


> The issue with stopping Brexit isn’t legal it’s political.



True to a certain extent, but if there is a political impasse involving a British reverse ferret and EU27 unwillingness to accept the status quo ante, the ECJ would definitely have to rule on what Kerr’s article and related treaty law actually implies.


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 11, 2017)

Winot said:


> The issue with stopping Brexit isn’t legal it’s political.



Either way, it will happen; thread over.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The lawyers..



surely any decision about the revocation of A50 is far more about politics than Law - the Lawyer who wrote it says he _thinks_ it would be revocable with no say from anyone but the UK government, but its never been tested, and its not his decision - its the ECJ's, the other member states decision and the EU parliaments decision. 

its a bit like thinking that if you withdraw your divorce petition you will automatically going back to honeymoon status and lots of sex. optomistic is i think one way of putting it....


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

cyril_smear said:


> Either way, it will happen; thread over.



Not the case. What the sovereignty fetishists think that Brexit means and what they will get over the course of a tortuous “transition period” are completely different. British politics will be plagued by people demanding that Brexit happens for the next dozen years.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> surely any decision about the revocation of A50 is far more about politics than Law - the Lawyer who wrote it says he _thinks_ it would be revocable with no say from anyone but the UK government, but its never been tested, and its not his decision - its the ECJ's, the other member states decision and the EU parliaments decision.
> 
> its a bit like thinking that if you withdraw your divorce petition you will automatically going back to honeymoon status and lots of sex. optomistic is i think one way of putting it....



A few flowers, remember birthdays, take the bins out regularly, and there’s a good chance of sex again. The parallels may not be exact, but your metaphor, not mine.


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 11, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Not the case. What the sovereignty fetishists think that Brexit means and what they will get over the course of a tortuous “transition period” are completely different. British politics will be plagued by people demanding that Brexit happens for the next dozen years.



ye right


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That’s not really fair or reasonable, is it?



Also, I don't feel like bringing it up is particularly irrelevant or below the belt - if somebody has almost literally spearheaded what turned out to be a disastrous foreign policy exercise that left more than a million people dead and destabilised an entire region, and is now acting like they're some kind of master of realpolitik because they changed their mind about Brexit, I think mentioning the past that they have bragged about is fair play.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

cyril_smear said:


> ye right



Well, if you’re right, and we’re heading for a no-deal crash-out with empty shelves, dizzying price inflation and a collapse in public services, rather than a protracted implementation argument, then there’s going to be a valid argument about rejoining - even on the terms that Kebabking suggests.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Also, I don't feel like bringing it up is particularly irrelevant or below the belt - if somebody has almost literally spearheaded what turned out to be a disastrous foreign policy exercise that left more than a million people dead and destabilised an entire region, and is now acting like they're some kind of master of realpolitik because they changed their mind about Brexit, I think mentioning the past that they have bragged about is fair play.



You can mention the past views/behaviour of someone without calling them (and thousands of others) a war criminal. And you've not shown that kebabking's thought the Iraq invasion was a good idea. The fact that he took part doesn't mean that he thought (or does think) that it should have gone ahead, I know some in the armed forces that were involved but thought the whole thing was wrong.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 11, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You can mention the past views/behaviour of someone without calling them (and thousands of others) a war criminal. And you've not shown that kebabking's thought the Iraq invasion was a good idea. The fact that he took part doesn't mean that he thought (or does think) that it should have gone ahead, I know some in the armed forces that were involved but thought the whole thing was wrong.



don't worry about it, that Yossarian thinks that i might be devastated by his accusations - and utterly fails to understand the nature of our political system (whatever you may think of it) - makes him about as erudite and observer and participant as pondweed.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You can mention the past views/behaviour of someone without calling them (and thousands of others) a war criminal. And you've not shown that kebabking's thought the Iraq invasion was a good idea. The fact that he took part doesn't mean that he thought (or does think) that it should have gone ahead, I know some in the armed forces that were involved but thought the whole thing was wrong.



I have no problem at all with enlisted men on either side who took part in that conflict. Officers who followed orders they knew were illegal ... is a question for a different thread.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 11, 2017)

I'm not taking any remainer/remoaner/brexit denier stance here. I'm just looking at the mechanics of it & there does not seem to be any solution. The EU will demand so much money for such a period of time that it will cost more than staying in. France/Germany/Holland will not move from this position because without UK money it will be mostly their taxpayers making up the difference which will only strengthen nationalistic political parties in their countries.

The only trade deal that could work would involve staying as we are now. The EU has stated they will not accept UK picking just the good bits of membership for a leaving deal. Norway is in Shengen but still has customs posts on it's borders with Sweden but we don't want customs posts on NI/ROI border.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 11, 2017)

kebabking said:


> don't worry about it, that Yossarian thinks that i might be devastated by his accusations - and utterly fails to understand the nature of our political system (whatever you may think of it) - makes him about as erudite and observer and participant as pondweed.



I don't think you're going to be devastated by anybody's accusations, I don't think you're going to be devastated by what anybody else thinks about anything, those feelings must have been beaten out of you at a public school before you were 12. And then it was time for the officer corps...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 11, 2017)

Am I correct in thinking that the main problem with the NI/ROI border is that for locals there is no border, ie local suppliers of both goods & services work on both sides of the border, yes? So for that to continue after brexit we would have to remain in the customs union?


----------



## cyril_smear (Nov 11, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> we’re heading for a no-deal crash-out with empty shelves, dizzying price inflation and a collapse in public services, rather than a protracted implementation argument,



Yep.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Am I correct in thinking that the main problem with the NI/ROI border is that for locals there is no border, ie local suppliers of both goods & services work on both sides of the border, yes? So for that to continue after brexit we would have to remain in the customs union?



Yes. Either the UK does, or NI does - which means some sort of sea border and unionist apoplexy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 11, 2017)

I think a hard border there is considered unwise due to history and possible futury.


----------



## Winot (Nov 11, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I'm not taking any remainer/remoaner/brexit denier stance here. I'm just looking at the mechanics of it & there does not seem to be any solution. The EU will demand so much money for such a period of time that it will cost more than staying in. France/GermanyHolland will not move from this position because without UK money it will be mostly their taxpayers making up the difference which will only strengthen nationalistic political parties in their countries.
> 
> The only trade deal that could work would involve staying as we are now. The EU has stated they will not accept UK picking just the good bits of membership for a leaving deal. Norway is in Shengen but still has customs posts on it's borders with Sweden but we don't want customs posts on NI/ROI border.



I agree with all of this. There is no solution that works. So we either have (1) crashing out with no deal; (2) a prolonged messy compromise; or (3) staying in the EU. 

(3) is politically unacceptable
(2) is the pragmatic choice 
(1) is what we’re heading for


----------



## Raheem (Nov 11, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> They found being a member of the EU attractive while they were part of it, but soured on it when they found themselves negotiating from outside it?
> 
> Where is it that you work, the Department of the Bleeding Obvious?



Civil servants are not, on the whole, negotiating with the EU, though, are they? They're watching the news like the rest of us.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 12, 2017)

editor said:


> You mean this Singapore:



No.

I mean the real Singapore, as described in the Guardian :

The UK can learn a lot from Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore


----------



## seventh bullet (Nov 12, 2017)

Liberal applause for dictatorship, and?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 12, 2017)

seventh bullet said:


> Liberal applause for dictatorship, and?



They are praising a state which maims people for graffiti. We always knew the guardian is scum, seems Happy Larry is too.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 12, 2017)

The UK should be more like Singapore ffs


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 12, 2017)

Boris and Gove's plot to 'hijack' Number 10 exposed | Daily Mail Online

What’s going on at the Heil? They are deploying every stylistic trick they have to paint Johnson and Gove as sinister figures and to mock hard Brexiteers. Interesting repositioning from Dacre.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 12, 2017)

Perhaps Dacre is worried a hard brexit will make him poorer?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 12, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Boris and Gove's plot to 'hijack' Number 10 exposed | Daily Mail Online
> 
> What’s going on at the Heil? They are deploying every stylistic trick they have to paint Johnson and Gove as sinister figures and to mock hard Brexiteers. Interesting repositioning from Dacre.




Completely contrary to how that link is headlined, the *date and time* of it being posted online ([Sat] 11th November, 22:03. updated 23:54) suggests the article was due to appear in the Mail On Sunday -- which is significantly less Brexit-fanatical then the Daily Mail?
(I could be wrong here  but online articles for any newspaper tend to pop up online the day before the relevant printed edition)


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Nov 12, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> No.
> 
> I mean the real Singapore, as described in the Guardian :
> 
> The UK can learn a lot from Lee Kuan Yew and Singapore


We probably couldn't learn much from North Korea, Somalia or Venezuela but for the most part we could learn from how other nations do things and they could learn much from us, the idea that there is a one size fits all approach to nation building is silly, There's much that can be admired about the US and much that makes me think WTF? 
Just like people, nations can learn from each others successes and mistakes.
Yes Singapore has achieved a great deal and it has paid a great cost as well, economic growth is very important but it's not all there is to success.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 12, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Completely contrary to how that link is headlined, the *date and time* of it being posted online ([Sat] 11th November, 22:03. updated 23:54) suggests the article was due to appear in the Mail On Sunday -- which is significantly less Brexit-fanatical then the Daily Mail?
> (I could be wrong here  but online articles for any newspaper tend to pop up online the day before the relevant printed edition)



Yes, good point. That difference has been there for a while and the date should have been a giveaway.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 12, 2017)

I mean, Singapore has given us good food, finance and cheap consumer goods. Used to be some good shipyards there, too. What more do you want?


----------



## elbows (Nov 12, 2017)

Poi E said:


> I mean, Singapore has given us good food, finance and cheap consumer goods. Used to be some good shipyards there, too. What more do you want?



Murdoch loves it too, such are the joys.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 12, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Completely contrary to how that link is headlined, the *date and time* of it being posted online ([Sat] 11th November, 22:03. updated 23:54) suggests the article was due to appear in the Mail On Sunday -- which is significantly less Brexit-fanatical then the Daily Mail?



Turns out that yes, the Johnson/Gove article *was* in the Mail on Sunday. I usually avoid it, but I read the article in a left-behind copy of the MoS in the pub. MoS are not nearly as Brexit-crazy as the weekday Mail. In fact that was clearly an article intended at undermining Brexiters in Cabinet. 

Nauseatingly pro-May piece though


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 13, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> the idea that there is a one size fits all approach to nation building is silly



Er, except that nobody has claimed this. The article in the Guardian merely suggests that we could learn a lot from Singapore. It is way above us in the UN's Human Development Index for reasons that we would do well to take note of. 



Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They are praising a state which maims people for graffiti.



Singaporeans would no doubt smile at your ignorance regarding the meaning of the word "maim". You are perhaps referring to the punishment of caning for serial offences related to defacing buildings. Caning was fairly common in the UK until relatively recently.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 13, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Er, except that nobody has claimed this. The article in the Guardian merely suggests that we could learn a lot from Singapore. It is way above us in the UN's Human Development Index for reasons that we would do well to take note of.
> 
> 
> 
> Singaporeans would no doubt smile at your ignorance regarding the meaning of the word "maim". You are perhaps referring to the punishment of caning for serial offences related to defacing buildings. Caning was fairly common in the UK until relatively recently.



Are you in favor of caning for any offence? Would you like to see it brought back to the UK, post brexit?


----------



## Smangus (Nov 13, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> The UK should be more like Singapore ffs



Yeah let's ban Durian in public places


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 13, 2017)

Be lovely to see a reply this time, Happy Larry instead of the usual drive-by posts.


----------



## Supine (Nov 13, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Yeah let's ban Durian in public places



If they grew here we would ban them


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 13, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Singaporeans would no doubt smile at your ignorance regarding the meaning of the word "maim". You are perhaps referring to the punishment of caning for serial offences related to defacing buildings. Caning was fairly common in the UK until relatively recently.



Why would they smile, do they not have dictionaries in Singapore?


And quite recently in the UK huh? If talking in geological terms you might be right, other than that you are an ignorant dickhead.


----------



## Rimbaud (Nov 13, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Er, except that nobody has claimed this. The article in the Guardian merely suggests that we could learn a lot from Singapore. It is way above us in the UN's Human Development Index for reasons that we would do well to take note of.



So you are suggesting we should transform the entire UK into a city-state strategically based for servicing world shipping routes?


----------



## Smangus (Nov 13, 2017)

Supine said:


> If they grew here we would ban them



Pah! You and your wishy washy liberal excuses!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

Larry, you obviously have no understanding of how Singers operates.You have no idea of how Singers uses and discards workers from its poorer neighbours - it cannot function a city state and centre of wealth creation ( lolz ) without an unseen army of cheap indentured/ black market  labour force - $20 a day is the current going rate for illegals. You know fuck all quite frankly. Stop posting up shite to rile people. its crap.


----------



## Supine (Nov 13, 2017)

On a more positive spin Singapore's relative lack of corruption and political stability have allowed global corporations to invest there in factories and company offices. 

This has had a knock on affect giving Malay people the opportunity to earn good money by crossing the border each day on their corporate sponsored commuter buses. Better to earn $20 per day (sometime much more) rather than $5 per day back home.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 13, 2017)

Supine said:


> On a more positive spin Singapore's relative lack of corruption and political stability have allowed global corporations to invest there in factories and company offices.
> 
> This has had a knock on affect giving Malay people the opportunity to earn good money by crossing the border each day on their corporate sponsored commuter buses. Better to earn $20 per day (sometime much more) rather than $5 per day back home.


Don't you have any non-commercial values?


----------



## teqniq (Nov 13, 2017)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

Supine said:


> On a more positive spin Singapore's relative lack of corruption and political stability have allowed global corporations to invest there in factories and company offices.
> 
> This has had a knock on affect giving Malay people the opportunity to earn good money by crossing the border each day on their corporate sponsored commuter buses. Better to earn $20 per day (sometime much more) rather than $5 per day back home.


 
over half of the total population - over 2m IIRC- are not Singapore nationals- there may be more who are not on the books  and working black - there are huge differences between the holders of the lower tiers of visa rights and stuff- never mind those that are outside the system. Its great if you are legal & want to pay 10% tax or are company getting credit back for tax paid overseas, but its a bit different for the hordes who keep the place afloat and dont make a fuss


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

that read like a lecture. its not. apols all if it comes across that way


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> that read like a lecture. its not. apols all if it comes across that way


lectures traditionally last in the region of an hour and that doesn't.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> lectures traditionally last in the region of an hour and that doesn't.



and often feature tea and biscuits afterwards. hobnobs, or pink wafers if its friday...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2017)

kebabking said:


> and often feature tea and biscuits afterwards. hobnobs, or pink wafers if its friday...


i like the way you're thinking


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> lectures traditionally last in the region of an hour and that doesn't.


 
I know< I have to present a paper this week and my mindset is in blunt delivery mode. grr


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

so there will be a parliamentary vote apparently.

This entire Brexit issue is going to hang over the country for decades like an Albanian  blood feud.


----------



## hipipol (Nov 13, 2017)

Given that the Chuckup Brothers are now mates again after the "Gove for King" debacle it is fair to assume a collapsing stumble across the finish line in the race to see just how bad the obsessive ambition and greed that animates the Tory gut can make life for everyone else - especially for a British citizen, caught in another countries internal political wranglings, end up getting her sentence INCREASED, primarily because, being foreign and having no previous experience with these shysters, they were believed.
Not a mistake the EU will make
They hold them, May, Davis, the whole lying venal incompetent pile of ordure that is "The UK Govt" in complete and total contempt
It will happen as we are going to be evicted, every day and with every idiotic utterance the "Negotiating Team" deepen the dislike and anger and push is towards being the Giant Orange Pillock latest gimp "ally"


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 13, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> This entire Brexit issue is going to hang over the country for decades like an Albanian  blood feud.



You sound like Boris Johnson addressing the Tirana Chamber of Commerce.


----------



## hipipol (Nov 13, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> so there will be a parliamentary vote apparently.
> 
> This entire Brexit issue is going to hang over the country for decades like an Albanian  blood feud.


Is this the famous "After the Event" vote?
Or the clamoured for "Meaningful" vote?
In functional terms, both are synonyms for "Pointless" vote, but there ye, reclaim democracy you lazy buggers, bring it home, with all the chickens for a wee rest


----------



## hipipol (Nov 13, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> so there will be a parliamentary vote apparently.
> 
> This entire Brexit issue is going to hang over the country for decades like an Albanian  blood feud.


Sadly more like the US Civil War - 150+ years on, they still aint got the racist bollocks from out of their thought and public life


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

Thinking more akin to the Miners strike - still splitting families to this day


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 13, 2017)

Anyway, this is a bit of con - Davis is saying that it will be policy to have a vote but not statute, so they scupper Grieve's amendment and leave the door open for backsies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Anyway, this is a bit of con - Davis is saying that it will be policy to have a vote but not statute, so they scupper Grieve's amendment and leave the door open for backsies.


is that like handsies?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

So this vote  it will be like eating in a really shit fake morleys resturant with a "0" hygene rating

1) Accept what slightly whiffy putrescent chicken wings you are given and chum it down, holding your nose and trying to avoid vomiting
2) Walk out and spend the rest of the night with your face pressed up against the oily glass, watching the other diners hold their noses and avoid vomiting

No Option 3)

3) Go to the Ivy and work your way through the evening menu, then start on the cask aged port. Which is what we were promised.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 13, 2017)

...


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 13, 2017)

Option 3 is stay in the EU
Option 3 is ask for a negotiating extension.


----------



## Supine (Nov 13, 2017)

toblerone3 said:


> Option 3 is stay in the EU
> Option 3 is ask for a negotiating extension.



I think there are only two options on offer


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 13, 2017)

And not one of them is a Golden Future


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 13, 2017)

So MPs get to vote on the deal
Do MPs also get to vote on the option of crashing out of the EU with no deal?

What happens if they reject both?


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2017)

So is this May using Russia against hard brexiteers?

May: EU deal to 'counter' Russia threat


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

it is likey to be accept or crash out ?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 13, 2017)

It think it depends on how the bill turns out. It hasn't been drafted yet, and MPs will be able to propose amendments.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> it is likey to be accept or crash out ?


Yes


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2017)

oh good. no supper at the Ivy then.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 14, 2017)

Rimbaud said:


> So you are suggesting we should transform the entire UK into a city-state strategically based for servicing world shipping routes?





Ask your Mum to explain to you what the article in the Guardian was suggesting.


----------



## Rimbaud (Nov 14, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Ask your Mum to explain to you what the article in the Guardian was suggesting.



Invest more in infrastructure? Well, duh.

So you'll be voting Labour next election I take it then?


----------



## elbows (Nov 14, 2017)




----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2017)

Honda UK warns MPs of consequences of leaving EU customs union


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> Honda UK warns MPs of consequences of leaving EU customs union


I do know a bit about transport. The 350 trucks a day running parts from all over Europe to Swindon will nowadays be mostly east European drivers earning about £200pw living out in their trucks for months at a time. The big multinational freight forwarding firms might be Dutch/German/French but the truck units in front of the trailers will have Romainian numberplates or Hungarian although those Hungarian trucks might well be driven by Ukranian or Russian nationals. Many of these drivers will be set impossible deadlines & will be exceeding ther legal driving hours. They will be constantly fatigued & at risk of accident.

It wasn't always this way. Back before the customs union in the early 90s it worked like this. Parts for Vauxhall for example were loaded into trailers at the German factories & driven to Holland by Dutch drivers. The trailers were dropped at the port in Holland then shipped overnight to Harwich. They were customs cleared when they arrived in Harwich & then delivered the next day by transport companies based locally in Harwich driven by UK drivers. The system worked perfectly. The deliveries were timed & delivered on time.

There is no reason why that could not work again. The complaints by the car industry are neoliberal bollocks. Their parts delivery system now relies on poorly paid & exploited eastern European drivers who are often dangerously fatigued.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I do know a bit about transport. The 350 trucks a day running parts from all over Europe to Swindon will nowadays be mostly east European drivers earning about £200pw living out in their trucks for months at a time. The big multinational freight forwarding firms might be Dutch/German/French but the truck units in front of the trailers will have Romainian numberplates or Hungarian although those Hungarian trucks might well be driven by Ukranian or Russian nationals. Many of these drivers will be set impossible deadlines & will be exceeding ther legal driving hours. They will be constantly fatigued & at risk of accident.
> 
> It wasn't always this way. Back before the customs union in the early 90s it worked like this. Parts for Vauxhall for example were loaded into trailers at the German factories & driven to Holland by Dutch drivers. The trailers were dropped at the port in Holland then shipped overnight to Harwich. They were customs cleared when they arrived in Harwich & then delivered the next day by transport companies based locally in Harwich driven by UK drivers. The system worked perfectly. The deliveries were timed & delivered on time.
> 
> There is no reason why that could not work again. The complaints by the car industry are neoliberal bollocks. Their parts delivery system now relies on poorly paid & exploited eastern European drivers who are often dangerously fatigued.



So is the difference today that the drivers stay on the ferries with the trucks and so end up working longer hours?

Presumably clearance is quicker under the customs union regime (no checking?) and so they can increase profits. But if we weren't in a customs union, would the drivers be any less exploited? Wouldn't they just sit on the trucks for longer due the increased checks?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 15, 2017)

While we are in the customs union goods move from Frankfurt to Swindon as easily as from Birmingham to Swindon. Load is collected. Driver has delivery notes & drives straight to delivery point. Tbf all this could be automated if customs clearance is tequired. The truck could drive from Frankfurt to Calais drive off the ferry at Dover & straight to Swindon as it does now. There could be numberplate recognition to check that clearance was done vat paid & the truck could proceed without stopping. This obviously requires the IT systems to be up & running & operate reliably when we leave the customs union.

Yes the eastern European drivers will still be exploited. I doubt we would return to German & UK drivers driving the trucks because Romainians are cheaper. Some might hope that foreign reg trucks would be banned from UK soil with British jobs for British drivers but it ain't going to happen. There is always a shortage of HGV drivers in the UK & there are thousands of eastern Europeans living in the UK driving for UK transport companies & it is fair to say if they all went home the supermarket shelves would be empty.

Certainly customs clearance on goods from EU will add hugely to costs & it will create plenty of new public & private sector jobs in customs clearance who need recruiting & training asap.

Also worth pointing out plenty of trailers are sent unaccompanied on the longer sea crossings Holland/Harwich Holland/Hull for example. The trucks that collect them from UK port might be UK reg trucks with east European drivers or they could be foreign reg trucks allowed by EU rules to work within the UK. Among UK drivers pulling trailers off the dock is about the least desirable HGV jobs going, worst paid, worst hours. UK firms struggle to find drivers for this sort of work so many of the drivers are east European nationals.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes the eastern European drivers will still be exploited. I doubt we would return to German & UK drivers driving the trucks because Romainians are cheaper. Some might hope that foreign req trucks would be banned from UK soil with British jobs for British drivers but it ain't going to happen. There is always a shortage of HGV drivers in the UK & there are thousands of eastern Europeans living in the UK driving for UK transport companies & it is fair to say if they all went home the supermarket shelves would be empty.



So the way to stop exploitation of drivers is strict rules about length of shifts and strict enforcement of those rules. Not leaving the Customs Union.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> So the way to stop exploitation of drivers is strict rules about length of shifts and strict enforcement of those rules. Not leaving the Customs Union.



The EU has regulations about minimum pay, driving hours and breaks for lorry drivers. The problem is enforcement.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 15, 2017)

There always has been strict rules for drivers hours & rest periods. The UK was the country that enforced these rules most strongly. The tories desire to shrink the state resulted in virtually no roadside enforcement nowadays. Fraud is rife with foreign drivers having more than one digi tacho card. The odd one that is caught in the UK is parked up for 24hrs & fined. Fines are just regarded as running costs by the big international hauliers. Usually the way a foreign driver is caught exceeding legal hours is after another horrendous motorway accident often caused by falling asleep at the wheel. 

UK transport companies have always been the best regulated in Europe. Dutch & Danish drivers were always the ones that ran bent as fuck. Ironically when east Europe was still communist their truck drivers that drove in the west ran dead legal. Now all the old commie state run transport companies have been replaced by massive private companies like Waberers from Hungary that run 1000s of trucks all over Europe.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2017)

Raheem said:


> The EU has regulations about minimum pay, driving hours and breaks for lorry drivers. The problem is enforcement.



I can imagine.

I guess there won't be an enforcement problem if there are no longer any regulations as a result of leaving the EU.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 15, 2017)

all be pretty academic when the driverless lorries start


'Self-driving' lorries to be tested in UK


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 15, 2017)

The drivers hours regulations have always existed in the UK & will continue to exist after brexit. All EU countries have always had their own system of enforcement & punishment. UK based transport companies have to keep tacho records which are examined & so on. UK transport firms working within the UK do generally stick to the rules. A UK HGV licence holder risks suspension of licence if they are nicked for running over their hours. Other countries penalties are generally much less severe. The main culprits of driving on UK roads far in excess of legal hours are eastern Europeans who are driving in & out of the UK.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2017)

..


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2017)

..


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2017)

..


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2017)

and thats enough from me

back to the discussion


----------



## sealion (Nov 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> So the way to stop exploitation of driverass is strict rules about length of shifts and strict enforcement of those rules.


Perhaps paying them more than £40 a day would be a way forward.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The drivers hours regulations have always existed in the UK & will continue to exist after brexit. All EU countries have always had their own system of enforcement & punishment. UK based transport companies have to keep tacho records which are examined & so on. UK transport firms working within the UK do generally stick to the rules. A UK HGV licence holder risks suspension of licence if they are nicked for running over their hours. Other countries penalties are generally much less severe. The main culprits of driving on UK roads far in excess of legal hours are eastern Europeans who are driving in & out of the UK.


and fines- this goes for trans european LWB van deliveries as well. I knew one driver who was taken to a weighbridge and found more than wanting. The company 'generously' fronted the fine then deducted the cost of that from his wages in instalments. Anything involving legality or license in employment and the fallout from misdeeds wrt tends to focus on fucking the worker AND the company for money. Only one of the parties can afford it and the other usually cannot


----------



## sealion (Nov 15, 2017)

The EU = the biggest sub contractor of cheap labour since Mcalpines.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2017)

sealion said:


> Perhaps paying them more than £40 a day would be a way forward.



Yes drivers should be paid more than that. It’s less than the minimum wage. Are you suggesting UK drivers are paid that? If so, it’s illegal. If it’s East European drivers then how will our leaving the EU help?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> Yes drivers should be paid more than that. It’s less than the minimum wage. Are you suggesting UK drivers are paid that? If so, it’s illegal. If it’s East European drivers then how will our leaving the EU help?



Some of them are entitled to the UK minimum wage under EU law, even if perhaps not all of those that are actually get it. Presumably, they will lost that right after Brexit.


----------



## sealion (Nov 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> If it’s East European drivers then how will our leaving the EU help?


It won't but will improve wages over here. Companies are having to offer higher rates because of eu workers leaving the uk. Its already happening here in Sussex. I firmly believe that the eu only exists to make money for big companies and themselves by providing cheap labour.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2017)

the romanian and UKR drivers corral their wagons at Rotterdam Europort sometimes when waiting for their ride to the UK. for days sometimes until their slot comes up. They catch local rabbits and cook them on open fires at night. I dont think these lads are on any kind of wage + o/n allowance.

/ anecdote


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Some of them are entitled to the UK minimum wage under EU law, even if perhaps not all of those that are actually get it. Presumably, they will lost that right after Brexit.


presumably if we had stayed in the EU they would have tightened up the sort of sharp practise that shafts semi and unskilled labour in differing ways throughout the nascent economic polity and introduced a pay and conditions agreement european wide while fostering the growth of EU wide trade unions. That was so on the cards.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 16, 2017)

Wages for truck drivers working for UK based transport firms driving UK reg trucks in the UK are reasonable. For example take home pay including expenses for Felixtowe based container drivers working all over UK can be £700pw albeit for 9hr driving days spread over 15hr working days & sleeping in truck on motorway services all week. Drivers do run legal hours. The are many eastern Europeans living in the UK working for these companies & many have made their lives in the UK. 

The separate issue is drivers working from their own countries earning wages which are normal in say, Romania/Hungary but a fraction of the wages earned by truck drivers from UK/Holland/France etc. Waberers for example is a Hungarian based transport company running 1000s of trucks. The drivers do not go home to Hungary after every trip they stay out for weeks running continuously between western European countries. Waberers also employs non EU nationals Ukranians etc legally working from Hungary so they then are working all over EU on explotitive wages.

Other large western European transport companies particularly Dutch have opened companies in name only in Poland, Romania etc so they can employ Poles etc on wages from those countries driving Polish reg trucks but running in the liveries of the Dutch companies working from Holland to all European destinations. Notice the trucks of large Dutch companies like Wolter Koops & Heisterkamp mostly have Polish number plates.

Smaller east European transport companies will subcontract to these larger firms. Yes, you will see groups of truck parked up in Rotterdam & in the UK waiting for loads. The drivers are cooking communal meals. There are totally inadequate truck parking facilities in the UK. In Kent for example locals complain of drivers parked in laybys for days with no facilities hanging around getting pissed leaving piles of rubbish & shit.

The brexiteers might indicate that all this could change when we leave the EU. It is certainly feasible. We could ban foreign trucks from UK soil.All trailers could be shipped unaccompanied to be hauled by UK reg trucks in the UK but really it ain't going to happen. I'm sure things will continue much as now. The is always a shortage of HGV drivers in the UK. The take home pay can be reasonable but most people don't want 15hr days & 3am starts.


----------



## Winot (Nov 16, 2017)

sealion said:


> It won't but will improve wages over here. Companies are having to offer higher rates because of eu workers leaving the uk. Its already happening here in Sussex. I firmly believe that the eu only exists to make money for big companies and themselves by providing cheap labour.



I hope conditions do improve for workers. But as the Tories have just defeated an amendment which would have guaranteed no loss of employment rights post-Brexit, I think I can see which way *they’re* going.


----------



## gosub (Nov 16, 2017)

May needed to master the new politics that Brexit demands. But she’s failed | Simon Jenkins


----------



## co-op (Nov 16, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I do know a bit about transport. The 350 trucks a day running parts from all over Europe to Swindon will nowadays be mostly east European drivers earning about £200pw living out in their trucks for months at a time. The big multinational freight forwarding firms might be Dutch/German/French but the truck units in front of the trailers will have Romainian numberplates or Hungarian although those Hungarian trucks might well be driven by Ukranian or Russian nationals. Many of these drivers will be set impossible deadlines & will be exceeding ther legal driving hours. They will be constantly fatigued & at risk of accident.
> 
> It wasn't always this way. Back before the customs union in the early 90s it worked like this. Parts for Vauxhall for example were loaded into trailers at the German factories & driven to Holland by Dutch drivers. The trailers were dropped at the port in Holland then shipped overnight to Harwich. They were customs cleared when they arrived in Harwich & then delivered the next day by transport companies based locally in Harwich driven by UK drivers. The system worked perfectly. The deliveries were timed & delivered on time.
> 
> There is no reason why that could not work again. The complaints by the car industry are neoliberal bollocks. Their parts delivery system now relies on poorly paid & exploited eastern European drivers who are often dangerously fatigued.



Did the pre-customs union arrangement allow for genuine just-in-time logistics? Or did that come in with the CU?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 16, 2017)

Just in time logistics predates the customs union. For the car industry the idea of a factory that carries very little stock with parts being delivered just in time meaning parts can be paid for as late possible was a Japanese idea from the 1970s. Customs clearance does not have to slow things down. That can all be done while the truck is moving from collection to delivery point provided the IT systems are there to facilitate it.

Pre customs union & pre internet when goods had to be customs cleared when they entered UK the clearance generally took only the morning or less provided all the pre entries had been made & vat paid so delay was not excessive. As well as clearance facilities at ports there were large inland clearance facilities which have all closed now so new very large wharehouses with truck parking space would have to be acquired all over the country to be up & running on leave day.

Provided the will & the resources are there it can all be done because it has been done before & once up & running it would allow freight to move with not much delay but it is a massive job with massive costs. It all seems rather pointless when what we have now works ok.

The ideolog politicians failed to understand the massive amount of practical work involved in leaving the customs union. Anybody with knowledge of European transport will be shaking their heads in despair but those who think their corgettes & peppers grow behind Tesco will wonder what the fuss is all about.


----------



## co-op (Nov 16, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Anybody with knowledge of European transport will be shaking their heads in despair but those who think their corgettes & peppers grow behind Tesco will wonder what the fuss is all about.



Hey relax. The internet of things means we will just tool our courgettes and peppers on the spot in future.


----------



## Winot (Nov 16, 2017)

The Home Office select committee has published a very critical report today. According to Faisal Islam on Twitter, the lorry park that was needed won’t now be ready and so DfT are planning on parking lorries on the central reservation of the M20 so other traffic can get past. 

Grayling’s words here:

 

pdf report here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmhaff/540/540.pdf


----------



## Lorca (Nov 16, 2017)

elbows said:


>




since when did Tim Dim-But-Nice become a Tory MP?


----------



## Winot (Nov 16, 2017)

Jesus that select committee report doesn't pull any punches.


----------



## gosub (Nov 16, 2017)

Winot said:


> Jesus that select committee report doesn't pull any punches.




+https://www.politico.eu/article/bre...s-hopes-of-something-better-than-canada-deal/


....so we are looking at around £40bn to get a deal that cost Canada f.a., and if we don't take it Kent turns into a car park with shed loads of food rotting in port.


Election in January.


----------



## Riklet (Nov 16, 2017)

Head of Goldman Sachs wants a second refurendum.

Democracy until it goes the right way, quelle surprise.

I am looking forward to more whinging and moaning and bleeting from these cunts over the next year. Good to have them on the back foot, for once.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

I may be repeating things here, so apologies if so. 

I've seen quite a bit of talk from Remain people online (to disclose I voted remain) that the Labour Party should adopt a straight anti-Brexit position, which would be an "open goal" and see it massively ahead in the polls. 

Any thoughts on the truth or otherwise of that view?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2017)

Riklet said:


> Head of Goldman Sachs wants a second refurendum.
> 
> Democracy until it goes the right way, quelle surprise.
> 
> I am looking forward to more whinging and moaning and bleeting from these cunts over the next year. Good to have them on the back foot, for once.


yeh. i wonder how happy people will be if there isn't a second referendum but a fudge which sees us either remain in or leave and pay to access the customs union and single market.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 17, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I may be repeating things here, so apologies if so.
> 
> I've seen quite a bit of talk from Remain people online (to disclose I voted remain) that the Labour Party should adopt a straight anti-Brexit position, which would be an "open goal" and see it massively ahead in the polls.
> 
> Any thoughts on the truth or otherwise of that view?



I think that might work.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 17, 2017)

Latest: Simon Coveney says there is a lack of clarity surrounding Brexit negotiations

Johnson unable to explain how the border issue would be resolved - he will sort it out later. The Irish seem less than convinced


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

"We're taking back control of our borders."

"There will be no border." 

Does not compute.


----------



## gosub (Nov 17, 2017)

Riklet said:


> Head of Goldman Sachs wants a second refurendum.
> 
> Democracy until it goes the right way, quelle surprise.
> 
> I am looking forward to more whinging and moaning and bleeting from these cunts over the next year. Good to have them on the back foot, for once.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I may be repeating things here, so apologies if so.
> 
> I've seen quite a bit of talk from Remain people online (to disclose I voted remain) that the Labour Party should adopt a straight anti-Brexit position, which would be an "open goal" and see it massively ahead in the polls.
> 
> Any thoughts on the truth or otherwise of that view?


Remind me again, what happened to the vote at the last election for the LibDems, the party that specifically marketed itself around Remain/pro-EU.


----------



## gosub (Nov 17, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Remind me again, what happened to the vote at the last election for the LibDems, the party that specifically marketed itself around Remain/pro-EU.


25% increase in their number of MP's


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 17, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I may be repeating things here, so apologies if so.
> 
> I've seen quite a bit of talk from Remain people online (to disclose I voted remain) that the Labour Party should adopt a straight anti-Brexit position, which would be an "open goal" and see it massively ahead in the polls.
> 
> Any thoughts on the truth or otherwise of that view?


Gish i wonder why they'd say that. 

Wouldn't it apply to all parties then? Given that people in this scenario only seem to be voting on brexit and nothing else.


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2017)

Good blog on Lexit, which is bound to annoy lots of people on here (e.g. doesn't mention Greece).

Everything you need to know about Lexit in five minutes


----------



## Supine (Nov 17, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Remind me again, what happened to the vote at the last election for the LibDems, the party that specifically marketed itself around Remain/pro-EU.



I don't think that can be used as a marker to decide how popular a pro remain policy would be.


----------



## stethoscope (Nov 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Good blog on Lexit, which is bound to annoy lots of people on here (e.g. doesn't mention Greece).
> 
> Everything you need to know about Lexit in five minutes



It's usual Dunt dreadful.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

They're saying that because they want to reverse Brexit. They obviously think that standing on that position would win a party a general election, which would effectively become another referendum - or promising another referendum maybe.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Good blog on Lexit, which is bound to annoy lots of people on here (e.g. doesn't mention Greece).
> 
> Everything you need to know about Lexit in five minutes


no it makes no moral case whatsoever, drowning syrians go unmentioned for instance. But it does make a particularly narrow and specious economic one. And no I'm not going to debate this, I'm just going to mock your sources  5 minutes blog on the subject.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Good blog on Lexit, which is bound to annoy lots of people on here (e.g. doesn't mention Greece).
> 
> Everything you need to know about Lexit in five minutes



Yer, because Greece isn't in the EU.

Oh, wait.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2017)

Supine said:


> I don't think that can be used as a marker to decide how popular a pro remain policy would be.


Why not? It's specifically what the LibDems were trying to target. 

Now I agree you can't simply translate the effect on being strongly pro-EU on the LD vote over onto the Labour vote but it does indicate that the EU was not the big issue at the last election that centrists wanted it to be. If if was then why did the LD, SNP, PC and the Greens (all parties that opposed leaving) all have a swing against them?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Why not? It's specifically what the LibDems were trying to do. Now I agree you can't simply translate the effect on the LD vote over onto the Labour vote but it does indicate that the EU was not the big issue at the last election that centrists want it to be. If if was then why did the LD, SNP, PC and the Greens (all parties that opposed leaving) all have a swing against them?



I think you're right that it wasn't seen as a big issue. I think it was seen as settled - UKIP completely collapsed, didn't they, having achieved their purpose? 

Whether or not it's a big issue at the next election will probably depend on when the next election is and what happens in negotiations or as a result of the negotiations. "Strong and stable..." = "weak and short term"

I wonder if we might not see some reallignment of MPs around it though - perhaps even some Tories joining the Lib Dems.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 17, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> no it makes no moral case whatsoever, drowning syrians go unmentioned for instance. But it does make a particularly narrow and specious economic one. And no I'm not going to debate this, I'm just going to mock your sources  5 minutes blog on the subject.


Ian Dunt is plainly a Blairite so everything he writes has to be seen in that context. I do like reading his website though.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2017)

Winot said:


> Good blog on Lexit, which is bound to annoy lots of people on here (e.g. doesn't mention Greece).
> 
> Everything you need to know about Lexit in five minutes



eeuggh - smug, patronsising, sneery - makes me want join team brexit.


----------



## gosub (Nov 17, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> eeuggh - smug, patronsising, sneery - makes me want join team brexit.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2017)

stethoscope said:


> It's usual Dunt dreadful.



Facts wrong?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

I have a friend who voted Leave from a left-wing perspective. 

His main arguments (that he's shared with me) were that big business, international finance, banks etc were in favour of remaining and leaving would shake things up. He also (I'm in Cardiff in south Wales) had seen what he regarded as cronyism and near corruption in the distribution of some EU funds in Wales and thought if those funds were arriving through a different mechanism then they might be distributed more fairly. 

He is cerainly not anti-immigration or -immigrant at all and is completely and committedly anti-racist. 

There you go. A completely unscientific, anecdotal take on Lexit!


----------



## J Ed (Nov 17, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I have a friend who voted Leave from a left-wing perspective.
> 
> His main arguments (that he's shared with me) were that big business, international finance, banks etc were in favour of remaining and leaving would shake things up. He also (I'm in Cardiff in south Wales) had seen what he regarded as cronyism and near corruption in the distribution of some EU funds in Wales and thought if those funds were arriving through a different mechanism then they might be distributed more fairly.
> 
> ...



Next you should ask your mate about what he thinks of the Democratic primaries...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

I can tell you now if you want, J Ed. 

He's not bothered.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 17, 2017)

Thanks for asking though.


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I can tell you now if you want, J Ed.
> 
> He's not bothered.


Bernie Sanders was robbed.  but why Trump still bangs on about Clinton I don't know, he's only there cos Bernie Sanders was robbed.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 18, 2017)

Countries need to elect left wing governments because they are better for ordinary folk. We need a Corbyn Labour government. The US should have elected Bernie. The French are already pissed off with Macron. I fail to see why they voted for him when he is obviously a neoliberal. They had an ok left wing candidate that they did not vote for.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I have a friend who voted Leave from a left-wing perspective.
> 
> His main arguments (that he's shared with me) were that big business, international finance, banks etc were in favour of remaining and leaving would shake things up. He also (I'm in Cardiff in south Wales) had seen what he regarded as cronyism and near corruption in the distribution of some EU funds in Wales and thought if those funds were arriving through a different mechanism then they might be distributed more fairly.
> 
> ...



I'll be fascinated to know his thoughts when he finds out the money won't be arriving at all rather than via a different mechanism. 

Anyone who thinks lexit will be successful at this point is an idiot. Rexit is currently the only shitty game in town. 

(Can I trademark rexit?)


----------



## Chz (Nov 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. i wonder how happy people will be if there isn't a second referendum but a fudge which sees us either remain in or leave and pay to access the customs union and single market.


Leaving and paying for access seems the worst of both worlds, though.

I'm normally all in favour of compromise, but what in hell is the point of that? We don't get the nebulous "freedoms" that people are striving for, because we still have to follow all the EU's rules to do so. And we do it while giving up any say or influence that we had in such rules. You'll upset the half of the population who wanted to stay, because you've left. And you'll upset the half of the population who wanted to leave, because you've left and received *nothing at all* in exchange with all the trade rules still written in Brussels. Everyone will hate it. It gives up things we have in the EU, but doesn't actually allow us to do whatever we please.

No, if we're going to leave we may as well go whole hog. I'd rather we stayed, but half-in-half-out is a waste of everyone's time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2017)

Chz said:


> Leaving and paying for access seems the worst of both worlds, though.
> 
> I'm normally all in favour of compromise, but what in hell is the point of that? We don't get the nebulous "freedoms" that people are striving for, because we still have to follow all the EU's rules to do so. And we do it while giving up any say or influence that we had in such rules. You'll upset the half of the population who wanted to stay, because you've left. And you'll upset the half of the population who wanted to leave, because you've left and received *nothing at all* in exchange with all the trade rules still written in Brussels. Everyone will hate it. It gives up things we have in the EU, but doesn't actually allow us to do whatever we please.
> 
> No, if we're going to leave we may as well go whole hog. I'd rather we stayed, but half-in-half-out is a waste of everyone's time.


Yeh but it's on the cards my love


----------



## Poi E (Nov 18, 2017)

((((money tree))))


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 18, 2017)

Supine said:


> Rexit is currently the only shitty game in town.
> 
> (Can I trademark rexit?)



I think that one belongs to Scooby Doo.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 18, 2017)

Supine said:


> I'll be fascinated to know his thoughts when he finds out the money won't be arriving at all rather than via a different mechanism.
> 
> Anyone who thinks lexit will be successful at this point is an idiot. Rexit is currently the only shitty game in town.
> 
> (Can I trademark rexit?)



He's already decided he regrets voting that way. I suspect he didn't think Brexit would win.


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

Chz said:


> Leaving and paying for access seems the worst of both worlds, though.
> 
> I'm normally all in favour of compromise, but what in hell is the point of that? We don't get the nebulous "freedoms" that people are striving for, because we still have to follow all the EU's rules to do so. And we do it while giving up any say or influence that we had in such rules. You'll upset the half of the population who wanted to stay, because you've left. And you'll upset the half of the population who wanted to leave, because you've left and received *nothing at all* in exchange with all the trade rules still written in Brussels. Everyone will hate it. It gives up things we have in the EU, but doesn't actually allow us to do whatever we please.
> 
> No, if we're going to leave we may as well go whole hog. I'd rather we stayed, but half-in-half-out is a waste of everyone's time.



If I told you that would lead to 2/3 of supermarket shelves being empty, would you still advocate it?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Nov 18, 2017)

It was all going to be so simple...

"Mr Johnson announced a £62m order for County Antrim firm Wrightbus.

However, ahead of June's EU referendum he has discussed why he thinks the UK would be better off outside the European Union.

He told the BBC a Brexit would leave arrangements on the Irish border "absolutely unchanged".

"There's been a free travel area between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland for, I think, getting on for 100 years," he said.

"There's no reason at all why that should cease to be the case."

Northern Ireland farming relies heavily on EU subsidies, but Mr Johnson said NI farmers would be no worse off outside the EU and "in many ways better off".

"You would be able to target the subsidy and we'd be getting money back from the EU that currently goes to Brussels and goes on heaven knows what," he said.

"We lose about £8.5bn to £9bn per year and we never see it again.""

Brexit would not affect border: Johnson (February 2016)


----------



## Raheem (Nov 18, 2017)

gosub said:


> If I told you that would lead to 2/3 of supermarket shelves being empty, would you still advocate it?



Bah! We used to manage fine without any supermarkets at all.


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Bah! We used to manage fine without any supermarkets at all.


Over 60% of our food is imported.

The problem vaguely illuded to in the Home Affairs report is non tariff barriers - its all got to be tested and tested at port (and there's no physical room at Dover). You can do deals and align specs to reduce the amount of testing but no agreement on paying our 'bill' and where is the motivation to play ball on that?... No deal Brexit is just that, a gnarly cliff edge.


Our relationship with Europe has been woven together over 40 years, our foreign secretary may think he can deal with it the same way his namesake dealt with the Gordian knot, but that's a dull move.. Need slow and meticulous unpicking


----------



## NoXion (Nov 18, 2017)

gosub said:


> Over 60% of our food is imported.
> 
> The problem vaguely illuded to in the Home Affairs report is non tariff barriers - its all got to be tested and tested at port (and there's no physical room at Dover). You can do deals and align specs to reduce the amount of testing but no agreement on paying our 'bill' and where is the motivation to play ball on that?... No deal Brexit is just that, a gnarly cliff edge.
> 
> ...



Tested for what? Imported food isn't suddenly going to become potentially toxic just because we left the EU.


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Tested for what? Imported food isn't suddenly going to become potentially toxic just because we left the EU.


That it was what it says it is. WTO third country regs. In some ways it's good.. No chance of horse meat lasagna or botulism eggs any more... Cos the assumption it meets our spec can't be made.... Also applies to our exports.


Bad news for Irish dairy industry and even harder if we green light US chlorinated chicken and GM food


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Tested for what? Imported food isn't suddenly going to become potentially toxic just because we left the EU.


If I had any food of dubious quality, I'd truck it to UK in the early days of Brexit to try and take advantage of the inevitable confusion... At the very least get the money back off the insurance as it rots pre customs


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 18, 2017)

IMO the issue of "food security" is the most important brexit issue, yet what's getting the attention is a leaving bill and freedom of movement and banking and air traffic. Essentially trivial stuff for most people. It's almost as if nobody wants to think about what happens when food imports suddenly cost more. We don't even know how much more yet, but there's no way things will be cheaper.

We'll all be eating cheese and cider in 2019, because that's just about all we produce enough of.

I worry for the kids. They didn't ask for this.


----------



## gosub (Nov 18, 2017)

Meat and grain prices are actually lower on the global market... Which means headaches for farmers... It's more about a manageable transition


As for the kids... Their you'll be dead soon attitude is quite off putting


----------



## Winot (Nov 18, 2017)

Cheese and cider sounds OK tbh


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2017)

Supine said:


> I'll be fascinated to know his thoughts when he finds out the money won't be arriving at all rather than via a different mechanism.
> 
> Anyone who thinks lexit will be successful at this point is an idiot. Rexit is currently the only shitty game in town.
> 
> (Can I trademark rexit?)


You should be happy then


Supine said:


> So, as the only libdem voter I feel the need to justify my vote. Luckily I can!!!
> 
> Tim Farron is my local MP. Last time he got 55% and the Cons got 33%. Labour got knowhere, below ukip.
> 
> A vote for anyone but libdem would help the conservatives get back in.





Supine said:


> On a more positive spin Singapore's relative lack of corruption and political stability have allowed global corporations to invest there in factories and company offices.
> 
> This has had a knock on affect giving Malay people the opportunity to earn good money by crossing the border each day on their corporate sponsored commuter buses. Better to earn $20 per day (sometime much more) rather than $5 per day back home.





Supine said:


> I'm not trolling! I'm honestly bemused by the anti capitalist arguments on U75 and elsewhere thoughout my life. What is wrong with a system in which effort gives reward and the state is used to ensure those at the bottom are not allowed to drown?


----------



## Winot (Nov 18, 2017)

Medicines Agency stuff is serious shit


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 18, 2017)

I just want to go back to the days before Brexit when people posted articles on a readable blog site rather than sentence by sentence upside down on a social media platform utterly unsuited to the purpose.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 18, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I just want to go back to the days before Brexit when people posted articles on a readable blog site rather than sentence by sentence upside down on a social media platform utterly unsuited to the purpose.



You're about ten years wide of the mark.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I just want to go back to the days before Brexit when people posted articles on a readable blog site rather than sentence by sentence upside down on a social media platform utterly unsuited to the purpose.


For once I agree with you.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You should be happy then



Stalker. Scary person.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2017)

Because I can remember that you're a liberal prick and use the search function. Yeah real scary!


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> Cheese and cider sounds OK tbh



I agree, but as I posted upthread..



mojo pixy said:


> That's fine but what will the kids eat?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> Cheese and cider sounds OK tbh


Spuds, carrots, turnips, onions, sprouts, mackerel, lamb. Home grown, whats not to like?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> Cheese and cider sounds OK tbh



Unless you're in Scotland.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 18, 2017)

We're also self-sufficient in whisky.

...till Scotland leaves the UK, heh


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2017)

Winot said:


> Medicines Agency stuff is serious shit




Like many other things we'll most likely end up paying more for third party access to the EMA, lose any say in how it operates, and lose a lot of highly skilled jobs when it gets relocated out of the UK.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 18, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> *Home grown*, what's not to like?



Makes me almost like Brexit .... if that kind of prospect improves


----------



## paolo (Nov 19, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> no it makes no moral case whatsoever



I can get the lexit idealogic position.

Greece would be in a better place if they’d not joined the Euro. It fucked them ten times the way they were already fucking themselves.

A Greek colleague - and I realise this is just anecdotal evidence - laughs about the whole EU. “We don’t pay any tax.” He says it with a chuckle that betrays dismay. He told another story of Greek politicians paying travel money, punting people across Europe, to shore up local votes. One way or another, Greece needs some healing,

In the meantime, when the UK leaves, Greece gets - just a bit - poorer.

Richer nations pay in, poorer nations get something back. 

Greece won’t be fixed by this shit show. Not one bit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 19, 2017)

paolo said:


> Richer nations pay in, poorer nations get something back.


This is one of the things that annoyed me most about right leave campaigners - their bleating about the 8 billion a year net input. Some of that went towards running the bureaucracy, for sure (and much of that spend will come back to the UK when it has to run all its own affairs), but the rest is money that went to help the more deprived regions. When Johnson talked of this money going 'god knows where', he was being deliberately disingenuous. And the UK isn't top of the list of net inputters per capita - some other countries pay even more.


----------



## paolo (Nov 19, 2017)

.  Boring myself now


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 20, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> but the rest is money that went to help the more deprived regions



Therein lies the problem. If the UK had control of its own funds, the "deprived regions" in our own country could have benefited instead.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 20, 2017)

Probable new elections in Gemany which might kick out Merkel. UK about to double the offer possibly with the brexiteers onboard. Junckers now saying there could be a comprehensive free trade deal coming together. So looking a bit better? Don’t think it will help the Tories medium term though because neolibralism has run it’s course imo. Onwards to a Labour victory at next GE.


----------



## elbows (Nov 20, 2017)

The noose tightens further:



> Barnier said: “The UK has chosen to leave the EU. Does it want to stay close to the European model or does it want to gradually move away from it? The UK’s reply to this question will be important and even decisive because it will shape the discussion on our future partnership and shape also the conditions for ratification of that partnership in many national parliaments and obviously in the European parliament. I do not say this to create problems but to avoid problems.”



Barnier says EU will not compromise standards in future UK trade deal


----------



## sealion (Nov 20, 2017)

More shit from the guardian. Were all going to starve now 
Five-a-day eating targets 'will be unaffordable for millions after Brexit'
Unless we keep the cheap labour.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 20, 2017)

I was actually thinking about this over the weekend ^^^^

have to get my thoughts compiled and work through them - but the impact of Cheap EU labour, a price war ( and the decimation of the supermarkets blue chip rating + profits ), the demands by the UK Supermarket groups for the suppliers to cu their costs even more  and the inflation escalator stuff in the background - it will mean food price inflation could sky rocket . We are already seeing the creeping up of shelf prices/ reduction in packet size.

this (obviously) is going to fuck over those at the bottom the most- its is not likely we will introduce some lovely COLA to cover these movements


----------



## sealion (Nov 20, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I was actually thinking about this over the weekend ^^^^
> 
> have to get my thoughts compiled and work through them - but the impact of Cheap EU labour, a price war ( and the decimation of the supermarkets blue chip rating + profits ), the demands by the UK Supermarket groups for the suppliers to cu their costs even more  and the inflation escalator stuff in the background - it will mean food price inflation could sky rocket . We are already seeing the creeping up of shelf prices/ reduction in packet size.
> 
> this (obviously) is going to fuck over those at the bottom the most- its is not likely we will introduce some lovely COLA to cover these movements


I don't doubt what you say, it's the way the likes of the guardian spit it out that irks me. Shock tactics for there seething readers.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 20, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Therein lies the problem. If the UK had control of its own funds, the "deprived regions" in our own country could have benefited instead.



Naivety or wishful thinking. Can't decide.


----------



## elbows (Nov 20, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Naivety or wishful thinking. Can't decide.



Especially given that, as far as I'm aware, EU funding of various projects did enable some redistribution of wealth to deprived UK regions at times. Including times the 1980's tories didn't even pretend to give two shits about those regions.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 20, 2017)

A good day overall for Remainite optimists, with the stewards’ enquiry into Vote Leave’s funny money reopening, and the apology in the Lords over a50 revocability.


----------



## Winot (Nov 20, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> A good day overall for Remainite optimists, with the stewards’ enquiry into Vote Leave’s funny money reopening, and the apology in the Lords over a50 revocability.



Didn’t end so well, with Labour whipping its MPs to withdraw from the SM.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> Didn’t end so well, with Labour whipping its MPs to withdraw from the SM.



Didn't know that was happening. Not a surprise, I suppose. Was that SM pre- or post-transition? I can't see any references to it, seem to be slow with google suddenly.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 20, 2017)

Impressed by the new negotiating stance being reported by the BBC. Seems to be something like:

EU: You must give us more money, and then we can move on to trade talks.
UK: No chance. Do you think we were fucking born yesterday? Tell you what, OK, we will give you more money, but only on one condition. You have to be willing to move on to trade talks.
EU: Well, we must be crazy but, since it's you, OK, it's a deal.
Daily Mail: Victory for May!​


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 21, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Countries need to elect left wing governments because they are better for ordinary folk.



Of course. The people of Zimbabwe will verify that fact, for sure.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 21, 2017)

Dear oh dear Larry. You are confusing corrupt cult of personality dictatorships with social democracies.

The Tories are finished. Brexit or no brexit they are out at next GE. They have run their course. If they had not then why would have the provinces voted brexit to tell the London centric neolib ultra captilists to go to fuck? As far as most folk are concerned the city money men can fuck off to Paris or wherever. 

Just tell us Larry what the Tories have got to offer? It’s time for something different.


----------



## Riklet (Nov 21, 2017)

I have been watching Question Time closely in recent weeks (dont bother normally) and been very unimpressed with Labour, generally.

I still dont think there's any guarantee of Labour sweeping to power in the next election, however much May keeps fucking it up. They need a bit more spine in standing up to the EU and commitment in carving something better out of the ruins of Brexit.

Cos expensive tomatoes or no expensive tomatoes, it's all at stake here for the 'left'.


----------



## Winot (Nov 21, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Didn't know that was happening. Not a surprise, I suppose. Was that SM pre- or post-transition? I can't see any references to it, seem to be slow with google suddenly.



John McDonnell just joined the Tories in voting against an Brexit amendment to protect the customs union


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 21, 2017)

Labour can do one of 2 things. They can oppose the Tories at every move on brexit to the extent they could be accused of trying to stop brexit or they can help the Tories dig their own grave to be more certain of a Labour victory at next GE. I would think the arrogance of the EU is now making people more pro brexit & Labour need to go with that. I think the Tories are heading for a massive fight among themselves over increasing payments so Labour should do nothing to make things easier for the Tories by appearing to be anti brexit.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> John McDonnell just joined the Tories in voting against an Brexit amendment to protect the customs union



Oh, okay. Consistent - just - with a position of trying not to close off any options at all in the short term. Not that anybody could or should trust the current Labour leadership on Brexit, of course.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 21, 2017)

The offer is being upped to £40bill on condition of trade talks starting. This will cause uproar. If the EU rejects that then probably it is clear they are trying to force another referendum. That the government is now cracking & prepared to offer much more could be used by remainers to reinforce their argument that leave voters were duped & it was not made clear what the size of the leaving bill might be.

Rabid brexiteers will say we should leave with no deal. Remainers will argue with the sums demanded it’s not worth leaving. Also it makes the EU look like the bullying anti democratic cunts they are. Labour need to be ready to pick up the pieces whatever happens because I doubt voters will forgive the Tories for this.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 21, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If the EU rejects that then probably it is clear they are trying to force another referendum.



I don't think so. The EU is not particularly looking for a second referendum, not least because it might just confirm the first one. Their whole negotiating stance is that they are an immovable rock and the UK is just going to have to deal with that. So, they won't budge. From their perspective, this is about a debt, not a purchase, so haggling doesn't come into it.

It should be recognised also that the UK is not about to offer 40B, just like it didn't previously offer 20B. The figures are Downing Street spin. I think what they are trying to achieve is agreeing to pay the EU's bill in full while telling the British public that they are only agreeing to pay part of it. The trouble is that this won't be acceptable for the EU, because it just stores up problems for a later date.


----------



## gosub (Nov 21, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The offer is being upped to £40bill on condition of trade talks starting. This will cause uproar. If the EU rejects that then probably it is clear they are trying to force another referendum. That the government is now cracking & prepared to offer much more could be used by remainers to reinforce their argument that leave voters were duped & it was not made clear what the size of the leaving bill might be..



I don't think a large bill will endear the EU to anybody..not that that will stop the remainers who are starting to remind me of the toaster in Red Dwarf


----------



## Flavour (Nov 21, 2017)

the Irish have already they don't give a toss how much the UK agrees to pay, if there's no border agreement in writing for NI then there can be no other talks


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2017)

paolo said:


> Greece won’t be fixed by this shit show. Not one bit.


as its you I did have a think about that and honestly I was confused by it to start with. Its not my position that conditions in greece will improve because we voted out. Thats not really what the moral argument is about (and it is simply a part of a wider position anyway). I've highlighted greece, as have many because a greece fronted by a left wing government asked for terms- terms to end austerity. Breathing space, its a nation state for gods sake. They are good for the money eventually if you take your foot of the damn neck. And so they were told 'jog on'. From one of the highest election turnouts for greece to one of the very lowest. In between that voting period szyria, every greek who voted for the people who said 'we can ease this if we get into power, we can negotiate' were brought to heel by the EU institutions. that was my straw breaking the camels back. That was my Iraq war means labour can go swivel. Do you see what I am saying? There are hosts and host of other- more central imo - arguments against the EU and continued membership of for ALL member states. But we've done them ad nauseum

you cast it as blind ideological throw of the dice with assuming its simply greece at issue here


----------



## Raheem (Nov 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> as its you I did have a think about that and honestly I was confused by it to start with. Its not my position that conditions in greece will improve because we voted out. Thats not really what the moral argument is about (and it is simply a part of a wider position anyway). I've highlighted greece, as have many because a greece fronted by a left wing government asked for terms- terms to end austerity. Breathing space, its a nation state for gods sake. They are good for the money eventually if you take your foot of the damn neck. And so they were told 'jog on'. From one of the highest election turnouts for greece to one of the very lowest. In between that voting period szyria, every greek who voted for the people who said 'we can ease this if we get into power, we can negotiate' were brought to heel by the EU institutions. that was my straw breaking the camels back. That was my Iraq war means labour can go swivel. Do you see what I am saying? There are hosts and host of other- more central imo - arguments against the EU and continued membership of for ALL member states. But we've done them ad nauseum
> 
> you cast it as blind ideological throw of the dice with assuming its simply greece at issue here



The difficulty I have with this is that is that I have never heard it argued (perhaps it can be argued, but I have never heard it) that the EU had no choices in the Greece crisis. It was said at the time, and it is still said, that a different, more generous settlement for Greece was always possible and (particularly with hindsight) could have been more successful. Not simply as a matter of abstract theory, but in the very actual sense that there were realisable proposals and some degree of political will in the various European capitals that could have brought them to fruition. The problem was the overbearing power of German public opinion and the willingness of the German government to frustrate anything that didn't serve it politically. 

If it is true that things could have been different if only..., then surely what we are looking at is a failure rather than a systemic incapacity that is doomed to play out time and time again (even though I would not deny that the EU has systemic problems).


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I have never heard it argued (perhaps it can be argued, but I have never heard it) that the EU had no choices in the Greece crisis. It was said at the time, and it is still said, that a different, more generous settlement for Greece was always possible and (particularly with hindsight) could have been more successful. Not simply as a matter of abstract theory, but in the very actual sense that there were realisable proposals and some degree of political will in the various European capitals that could have brought them to fruition


post 2008 they bailed the Republic of Ireland out to the tune of 64 billion euros. Greece had been in a shit state since before the crash and they just tightened the screws. It was an enormous fuck you to a member state unable to do anything about it. It was ideological, pure and simple. The same reasons they are going to do their level best to dry bum the UK for daring to opt out.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> post 2008 they bailed the Republic of Ireland out to the tune of 64 billion euros. Greece had been in a shit state since before the crash and they just tightened the screws. It was an enormous fuck you to a member state unable to do anything about it. It was ideological, pure and simple. The same reasons they are going to do their level best to dry bum the UK for daring to opt out.



I'm not sure I would disagree with any of that, apart from the last sentence, maybe. But it doesn't seem widely disputed that the key ideological driver in the whole thing was a parochial "my country's not going to pay for your country's mistakes". Absent that, things would probably have been different. Or do you think it wasn't really about that?


----------



## elbows (Nov 21, 2017)

I see there has been a partial climbdown over maintaining the scope of the EU charter on fundamental rights, in order to avoid a possible defeat in parliament:

Government backs down over EU human rights to avoid risk of defeat



> Several of the amendments were tabled by Dominic Grieve, the Tory former attorney general and a leading Brexit rebel, with speculation that enough of his fellow Tories would back some of these to inflict defeat.
> 
> However, the solicitor general, Robert Buckland, said the government was willing to work with Grieve to see how rights under the charter could be kept after Brexit, and would introduce its own amendment to this effect later in the bill’s passage.
> 
> Grieve said this was sufficient reassurance for him and that he would not press for a vote on his amendments.


----------



## Hollis (Nov 21, 2017)

What a shame, I'd have felt so much safer under a British Bill of Rights.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I'm not sure I would disagree with any of that, apart from the last sentence, maybe. But it doesn't seem widely disputed that the key ideological driver in the whole thing was a parochial "my country's not going to pay for your country's mistakes". Absent that, things would probably have been different. Or do you think it wasn't really about that?


Tabloid jingoism aside its not really that parochial or chauvinist imo. Elements in there perhaps. But the european project demands, thats what it was. Remember they had a vote in greece on wether to stay in the EU or not, and they stayed. Fears from the days of the generals, fears of exclusion from the markets making things even worse- lots of factors. At the time it was said that schaubles was willing to release a 40blln pound gift for them to get out of the union. Came to nothing of course.

you have to remember with our state as well its the haute bourgeoisie absolutely committed to this pan european project where capital has no borders but labour representation-effectively- does.

theres loads to unpack about this and its ground covered so many times but for all its faults I thought the EU might, might be able to be influenced before greece. And so it is, by its strongest members in the end. Weaker nations just get to eat shit and cut social programs


----------



## coley (Nov 21, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is one of the things that annoyed me most about right leave campaigners - their bleating about the 8 billion a year net input. Some of that went towards running the bureaucracy, for sure (and much of that spend will come back to the UK when it has to run all its own affairs), but the rest is money that went to help the more deprived regions. When Johnson talked of this money going 'god knows where', he was being deliberately disingenuous. And the UK isn't top of the list of net inputters per capita - some other countries pay even more.



One country pays more, Germany, and what country benefits most from the EU?


----------



## coley (Nov 21, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Therein lies the problem. If the UK had control of its own funds, the "deprived regions" in our own country could have benefited instead.



Very true, and given the UK is one of the most, if not the most generous country in the World,  when  it come to charity or just helping out generally, then I doubt if those deprived areas abroad are going to suffer.
No doubt the deprived areas of the UK won't see any benefit.


----------



## coley (Nov 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Tabloid jingoism aside its not really that parochial or chauvinist imo. Elements in there perhaps. But the european project demands, thats what it was. Remember they had a vote in greece on wether to stay in the EU or not, and they stayed. Fears from the days of the generals, fears of exclusion from the markets making things even worse- lots of factors. At the time it was said that schaubles was willing to release a 40blln pound gift for them to get out of the union. Came to nothing of course.
> 
> you have to remember with our state as well its the haute bourgeoisie absolutely committed to this pan european project where capital has no borders but labour representation-effectively- does.
> 
> theres loads to unpack about this and its ground covered so many times but for all its faults I thought the EU might, might be able to be influenced before greece. And so it is, by its strongest members in the end. Weaker nations just get to eat shit and cut social programs



The EU has, in the last few years become the Neoliberals 'wet dream' 
I've despised them for donkeys years, but for them to use the EU arrest warrant against  democratically elected Representatives of the Catalonian region?
Fuck em.
Out, as soon as.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 21, 2017)

coley said:


> The EU has, in the last few years become the Neoliberals 'wet dream'
> I've despised them for donkeys years, but for them to use the EU arrest warrant against  democratically elected Representatives of the Catalonian region?


Is that really the definition of a neoliberal's wet dream?


----------



## coley (Nov 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but it's on the cards my love



No, the more the EU comes across as a blackmailing bunch of turds, the more people in the UK will see them for what they are.
A bunch of unelected corporation loving Neoliberals.
I love the way they are belabouring the UK for the money while ignoring the unravelling of their 'principles'  in Poland, jeez, a Nazi rally and it hardly gets a mention in the hallowed halls of the EU?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 21, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Tabloid jingoism aside its not really that parochial or chauvinist imo. Elements in there perhaps. But the european project demands, thats what it was.



Could you explain what you think the European project demanded? It doesn't seem very obvious that the way things unfolded was useful to the EU project, except maybe as a lesson about what not to do.


----------



## coley (Nov 21, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> We're also self-sufficient in whisky.
> 
> ...till Scotland leaves the UK, heh



A distillery recently opened in the Lake District and the Japanese hold the gold medal for the 'best' malt whisky.
 And NZ makes a canny whisky, along with its very decent wines.


----------



## coley (Nov 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Is that really the definition of a neoliberal's wet dream?



The imposition of a ( corporation financed ) bureaucracy over a democratically elected ( if however imperfect) party?
Aye, I imagine it is.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> The imposition of a ( corporation financed ) bureaucracy over a democratically elected ( if however imperfect) party?
> Aye, I imagine it is.



But surely the neoliberal system turning in on itself and arresting its own is a good thing?


----------



## coley (Nov 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> But surely the neoliberal system turning in on itself and arresting its own is a good thing?


It is, but the philosophy of the destruction of Neoliberalism has been turned on its head, in Europe its facing real opposition while in the US it's just received a huge boost due to the Trump.
We live in 'interesting times'


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Could you explain what you think the European project demanded? It doesn't seem very obvious that the way things unfolded was useful to the EU project, except maybe as a lesson about what not to do.



and yet it happened anyway. These competent managers of a pan european bloc simply allowed this to happen? No agency, no overriding logic? As for the rest well the thing is you are assuming a huge amount of good faith in what the eu is for and how it operates and for whom.

enough for tonight from me tho. Discuss this anon


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> No, the more the EU comes across as a blackmailing bunch of turds, the more people in the UK will see them for what they are.
> A bunch of unelected corporation loving Neoliberals.




I hope so. There are still some here though who love "big government" and not just those with a vested interest like the politicians and importers.

We entered a customs union/tariff free zone. The EU has expanded into a body that appears to want total control over the decisions made in its member states.


----------



## coley (Nov 22, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> I hope so. There are still some here though who love "big government" and not just those with a vested interest like the politicians and importers.
> 
> We entered a customs union/tariff free zone. The EU has expanded into a body that appears to want total control over the decisions made in its member states.



I voted to join a common market many moons ago, the sly, incremental imposition of a federal States of Europe wasn't something I wanted or expected, so I was more than happy to get a vote to reject it.
It's something that could have happened, in a gradual way, to the benefit of all,  but the EU elite wanted it now, in their electoral lifetime.

So, fuck em.

And Australian/NZ/SA wine is soooooo better, sorry France


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> No, the more the EU comes across as a blackmailing bunch of turds, the more people in the UK will see them for what they are.
> A bunch of unelected corporation loving Neoliberals.
> I love the way they are belabouring the UK for the money while ignoring the unravelling of their 'principles'  in Poland, jeez, a Nazi rally and it hardly gets a mention in the hallowed halls of the EU?


Yet it's still on the cards


----------



## 2hats (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> And Australian/NZ/SA wine is soooooo better, sorry France


Drinking French instead of Italian wine - easy mistake to make.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 22, 2017)

Raheem said:


> ...the key ideological driver in the whole thing was a parochial "my country's not going to pay for your country's mistakes".


Of all countries, you'd have thought that Germany would have come to understand the value of transnational altruism when it comes to dealing with another country's past misdemeanours. After paying fuck all reparations to the countries it had occupied and destroyed (including Greece), having its external debts significantly slashed post war, having other nations heavily invest in setting up its now "civil" society - you'd think so, right?
Well now we now. That civility stays within its borders and they wont be applying such altruism to their brothers and sisters within the "union" they so greatly sing the praises of.
.and that's not even getting into how complicit German politicians and businesses were in exploiting the corruption plaguing Greece, when it suited them, in the late 90's and early naughties.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Of all countries, you'd have thought that Germany would have come to understand the value of transnational altruism when it comes to dealing with another country's past misdemeanours. After paying fuck all reparations to the countries it had occupied and destroyed (including Greece), having its external debts significantly slashed post war, having other nations heavily invest in setting up its now "civil" society - you'd think so, right?
> Well now we now. That civility stays within its borders and they wont be applying such altruism to their brothers and sisters within the "union" they so greatly sing the praises of.
> .and that's not even getting into how complicit German politicians and businesses were in exploiting the corruption plaguing Greece when it suited them in the late 90's and early naughties.


yeh. you do know about the factories dismantled and taken to the ussr, right?


----------



## alex_ (Nov 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Of all countries, you'd have thought that Germany would have come to understand the value of transnational altruism when it comes to dealing with another country's past misdemeanours. After paying fuck all reparations to the countries it had occupied and destroyed (including Greece), having its external debts significantly slashed post war, having other nations heavily invest in setting up its now "civil" society - you'd think so, right?



Because reparations worked out so well in 1918.

Alex


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Because reparations worked out so well in 1918.
> 
> Alex


not to mention that a decision was made at yalta that 1918 wouldn't be repeated and reparations would be taken in plant.


----------



## ohmyliver (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> The EU has, in the last few years become the Neoliberals 'wet dream'


You've read up on the Legatum institute, the think tank behind the Tory brexitiers?


----------



## ohmyliver (Nov 22, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> We entered a customs union/tariff free zone. The EU has expanded into a body that appears to want total control over the decisions made in its member states.



With all due respect, the European Parliament had tax raising powers since 1970, and greater political/economic convergence was always a stated goal, it's been a lot slower than the proposals of the early 70s..   You might want to read up on why parliamentarians like Benn, and Powell, were vocal supporters of the leave campaign in '75.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2017)

ohmyliver said:


> With all due respect, the European Parliament had tax raising powers since 1970, and greater political/economic convergence was always a stated goal, it's been a lot slower than the proposals of the early 70s..   You might want to read up on why parliamentarians like Benn, and Powell, were vocal supporters of the leave campaign in '75.


yeh. he might want to. but he won't.


----------



## gosub (Nov 22, 2017)

tbf The Europeans have been pretty clear about the direction of travel since before we joined.  Its our politicians who've spent the last 40 years saying the train isn't going where they said it was going.   Which must have been pretty frustrating for the other passangers, especially as there was another train simultaneously going to where the UK said it wanted to go - EFTA, which is far more the we just want a common market trading relationship type train.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 22, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Because reparations worked out so well in 1918.
> 
> Alex


I can't work out if you're trying to reiterate my point or argue against it in some disingenuous way.

The fact that the allies rescinded Germany's debts and reparation obligations (which would have doubtlessly crippled the German economy further) makes Germany's insistence on austerity for the Greek economy, just to pay off ever mounting interest on ever mounting debts, all the more shameful.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 22, 2017)

coley said:


> One country pays more, Germany, and what country benefits most from the EU?


The meaningful stat is payment per capita. By that measure, lots of countries pay in more than the UK. Due to its rebate, the UK pays less than other equivalently rich countries. Despite its debt problems, Italy pays more than the UK currently.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 23, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Countries need to elect left wing governments because they are better for ordinary folk.



OK, so those "ordinary folk" who supported Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Kim Jung-un, Chavez, Castro etc are better off, are they?


----------



## alex_ (Nov 23, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> OK, so those "ordinary folk" who supported Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Mugabe, Kim Jung-un, Chavez, Castro etc are better off, are they?



Straw man


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 23, 2017)

I need a "Nazis were left wing" and a "Capitalists made your computer" before I have bingo.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 23, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I need a "Nazis were left wing" and a "Capitalists made your computer" before I have bingo.


give it long enough and we'll get 'pinochet had it right'


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 23, 2017)

Have we had ''Unions holding the country to ransom'' yet?

Soon come.


----------



## coley (Nov 23, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I need a "Nazis were left wing" and a "Capitalists made your computer" before I have bingo.



Whey, the Nazis were the National 'socialists' and its claimed the communist party of China are a 'Capitalist' 
command economy'
Shout 'hoose' now

Or 'bingo' in the more rarefied parts of the world.


----------



## coley (Nov 23, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Have we had ''Unions holding the country to ransom'' yet?
> 
> Soon come.



Now comes the winter of our discontent.


Again


----------



## coley (Nov 23, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yet it's still on the cards



What's "still on the cards"?Junker and Barnier threatening to hold Poland to its EU obligations? Or the other states in the area to dismantle their barbed wire fences and treat refugees like human beings?
If anything has become glaringly obvious of late, it's the EUs obsession with money, wringing the last pound of flesh from Greece and sticking us for as much as they can get, while voicing  hypocritical 'concerns' about citizens rights and the Irish border.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 24, 2017)

coley said:


> If anything has become glaringly obvious of late, it's the EUs obsession with money, wringing the last pound of flesh from Greece and sticking us for as much as they can get, while voicing  hypocritical 'concerns' about citizens rights and the Irish border.



Why are citizens  rights and the Irish border hypocritical ‘concerns’ ?

Alex


----------



## Crispy (Nov 24, 2017)

The Irish border seems to be the thorniest problem. Opposition to every mooted solution is too strong for any of them to work.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 24, 2017)

Lastest bit of hubris from EU. UK kicked out of the European city of culture. EU now believe they can redraw the map of Europe.


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Lastest bit of hubris from EU. UK kicked out of the European city of culture. EU now believe they can redraw the map of Europe.



It’s an EU project. The rules clearly state that you need to be a member state of the EU in order to take part. The hubris is on the part of the UK.


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

Crispy said:


> The Irish border seems to be the thorniest problem. Opposition to every mooted solution is too strong for any of them to work.



It’s logically impossible for the Irish border problem to be solved if the UK decides to leave the customs union. 

This has been all over Twitter and summarises the position nicely:


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> It’s an EU project. The rules clearly state that you need to be a member state of the EU in order to take part. The hubris is on the part of the UK.



It's open to EFTA members as well; there is still time to sneak back in.


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

Looks like Boris put pressure on cities in 2016 to carry on with comp

Boris Johnson raises concerns as Government considers abandoning 2023 European Capital of Culture duties


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 24, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It's open to EFTA members as well; there is still time to sneak back in.


 
Also those on the waiting list for entry - Like Turkey (lolz)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2017)

coley said:


> What's "still on the cards"?Junker and Barnier threatening to hold Poland to its EU obligations? Or the other states in the area to dismantle their barbed wire fences and treat refugees like human beings?
> If anything has become glaringly obvious of late, it's the EUs obsession with money, wringing the last pound of flesh from Greece and sticking us for as much as they can get, while voicing  hypocritical 'concerns' about citizens rights and the Irish border.


as you well know i meant paying for access to the single market and customs union without having a seat at the top table.


----------



## gosub (Nov 24, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It's open to EFTA members as well; there is still time to sneak back in.



reentering the EU as we need to encourage people to visit Milton Keynes is definitely in the baps, bagels, and muffins category - a type of toast I hadn't considered when I decided I didn't want toast , but the answer is still no toast.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> It’s an EU project. The rules clearly state that you need to be a member state of the EU in order to take part. The hubris is on the part of the UK.


Yes, this will be Reykjavik in 2000 Stavanger in 2008 & Istanbul in 2010 then? The EU can of course make the rules up as it goes along. This is an arts/cultural thing that could be kept outside politics. Instead of trying to accomodate a democratic decision of a member state the EU the EU shows itself again how nasty & mean spirited it is being over this. If it was serious about trying to reach a deal with UK it would not be as petty as this. 

As well as disrespecting a democratic decision of a member state it is also disrespecting the 48% of UK voters that voted remain. Something the remainers are missing perhaps?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 24, 2017)

oh look someone defining culture and then excluding others from it. New feeling for the booj I suppose


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes, this will be Reykjavik in 2000 Stavanger in 2008 & Istanbul in 2010 then? The EU can of course make the rules up as it goes along. This is an arts/cultural thing that could be kept outside politics. Instead of trying to accomodate a democratic decision of a member state the EU the EU shows itself again how nasty & mean spirited it is being over this. If it was serious about trying to reach a deal with UK it would not be as petty as this.
> 
> As well as disrespecting a democratic decision of a member state it is also disrespecting the 48% of UK voters that voted remain. Something the remainers are missing perhaps?


how do you think arts and culture are not inherently political?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes, this will be Reykjavik in 2000 Stavanger in 2008 & Istanbul in 2010 then? The EU can of course make the rules up as it goes along. This is an arts/cultural thing that could be kept outside politics. Instead of trying to accomodate a democratic decision of a member state the EU the EU shows itself again how nasty & mean spirited it is being over this. If it was serious about trying to reach a deal with UK it would not be as petty as this.


Like it or not, the decision to set up a City of Culture thing was political. It was set up to help to foster a sense of unity within the EU. There are few things I could care less about, but why would the UK want to remain part of it? Why should they be allowed to? Presumably there's some kind of budget set aside for this from the EU. Maybe the UK wants to stay part of this bit of the EU and would like to contribute? What other parts would they like to stay part of? Not the bits that have the richer countries helping the poorer countries - that part of fostering European unity is one they don't want.

Can't have your cake and eat it - either they want out of the EU or not.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 24, 2017)

However you view it this is a mean spirited act that shows what a bunch of cunts the EU are. There was no need to add this to the mix at all. It will achieve nothing. Unless the EU believe they have the power to redraw the map of the world then best they rename it the EU city of culture.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> However you view it this is a mean spirited act that shows what a bunch of cunts the EU are. There was no need to add this to the mix at all. It will achieve nothing. Unless the EU believe they have the power to redraw the map of the world then best they rename it the EU city of culture.


This is just waffle. It's an EU thing. They set it up.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> However you view it this is a mean spirited act that shows what a bunch of cunts the EU are. There was no need to add this to the mix at all. It will achieve nothing. Unless the EU believe they have the power to redraw the map of the world then best they rename it the EU city of culture.


 
mean spirited or financially pragmatic ?


----------



## elbows (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes, this will be Reykjavik in 2000 Stavanger in 2008 & Istanbul in 2010 then? The EU can of course make the rules up as it goes along.



I don't think they have changed the rules at all:



> The title of European Capital of Culture rotates around eligible countries.
> 
> Cities from non-EU countries have held the title before - but if a country isn't in the EU, it must be a candidate to join or must be in the European Free Trade Association or European Economic Area.



Brexit torpedoes UK 2023 culture plans


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Why are citizens  rights and the Irish border hypocritical ‘concerns’ ?
> 
> Alex



The EU state that trade can not be discussed until the Irish border issue is resolved, but as the issue with the border is how to trade across it, that problem can't be resolved until trade is discussed.

The EU are not looking to make a deal with the UK, they want to string us along and fuck us up as much as they can in the process. Telling them to go whistle today saves us the £20bn £40bn, or whatever it will be next week and means we can get on being ready for March 2019.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU are not looking to make a deal with the UK, they want to string us along and fuck us up as much as they can in the process. Telling them to go whistle today saves us the £20bn £40bn, or whatever it will be next week and means we can get on being ready for march 2019.


Ready for what? Being fucked? 

Who's 'we'?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

"Brexit means Brexit" innit. Now we can't have a City of Culture, we'll have to think of something else to bring in the tourists, like affordable hotels, friendly locals or even good cooking.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ready for what? Being fucked?
> 
> Who's 'we'?



We = the UK.

If the UK carries on playing the EU's game, once March 2019 arrives we will have shovelled a fortune to the EU and they will tell us to go whistle. As has been discussed at length, customs systems need to be in place from day one if we are to leave the customs union, rather than give Junker £40bn the UK should be spending on making sure it is in a state to trade the day after it leaves the EU. 

Or else it will be fucked.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> "Brexit means Brexit" innit. Now we can't have a City of Culture, we'll have to think of something else to bring in the tourists, like affordable hotels, friendly locals or even good cooking.


 

Hmmmm...could be a problem there


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If the UK carries on playing the EU's game,


By 'the UK', you mean this tory administration. You are making common purpose with May, Johnson, Davis et al.


----------



## 2hats (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> it will be fucked.


You could have saved yourself a lot of typing.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 24, 2017)

The UK is fucked whatever route opens up for us.

/ scowling miserable wanker


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> By 'the UK', you mean this tory administration. You are making common purpose with May, Johnson, Davis et al.



You've used "we" several times in this thread to mean Britain, so you're guilty of the same.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've used "we" several times in this thread to mean Britain, so you're guilty of the same.


yeh yer man's urban's greatest hypocrite: and an arch-liberal, to boot.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> By 'the UK', you mean this tory administration. You are making common purpose with May, Johnson, Davis et al.



No, I mean the UK. We were told explicitly what the EU would do and now they are doing it. The Tory administration are the ones who seem blind to that and content to bumble along until March 2019 when we turn in to one of the hundreds of other non-EU countries in the world, except we don't have the infrastructure in place to deal with being a non-EU country cos we spend the past two years playing games with Junker, Barnier, Tusk et al.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, I mean the UK. We were told explicitly what the EU would do and now they are doing it. The Tory administration are the ones who seem blind to that and content to bumble along until March 2019 when we turn in to one of the hundreds of other non-EU countries in the world, except we don't have the infrastructure in place to deal with being a non-EU country cos we spend the past two years playing games with Junker, Barnier, Tusk et al.


pissing the time away


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU state that trade can not be discussed until the Irish border issue is resolved, but as the issue with the border is how to trade across it, that problem can't be resolved until trade is discussed.



David Davis agreed to this order of discussion (sequencing as it is called). After claiming earlier in the year it would be the 'row of the summer'.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> David Davis agreed to this order of discussion (sequencing as it is called). After claiming earlier in the year it would be the 'row of the summer'.



Yeah, another fucking moronic imbecile in the Tory cabinet, who knew?


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

If I was a Leaver I'd be fucking furious at the inept way the Tories have handled this.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2017)

For those who have forgotten:

The man who took on the EU has destroyed Theresa May's Brexit tactics



> Former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis has described Theresa May’s Brexit negotiation tactics as "precisely wrong".
> 
> Mr Varoufakis, who in 2015 attempted to negotiate a settlement for Greece with the European Union, said the PM's main problems in the talks would stem from bureaucratic practices in Brussels, combined with a "technocracy that is desperately clinging on to its own exorbitant illegitimate power".





> Britain will have to be made an example of, any recalcitrant government that steps outside the modus vivendi will be crushed. You are going against a combination of a bureaucracy in Brussels and politicians who feel the ground under their feet is increasingly brittle, like Angela Merkel.




Cor, it's like he's got a crystal ball.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> However you view it this is a mean spirited act that shows what a bunch of cunts the EU are. There was no need to add this to the mix at all. It will achieve nothing. Unless the EU believe they have the power to redraw the map of the world then best they rename it the EU city of culture.


I bet it's part of the stuff they're arguing the UK signed up and committed to, to justify their 50-100 billion divorce bill.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 24, 2017)

Does anyone know which reports are coming out on Wednesday?  I have heard rumours within the party (and at this point they are rumours) that if the reports show massive economic damage to the country Labour will take a hard revoke Article 50 stance.

I expected them to do this as some point and with the withdrawal date fast approaching it is now or never I guess. All about playing the long game whilst this Tories tear themselves apart.


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 24, 2017)

coley said:


> What's "still on the cards"?Junker and Barnier threatening to hold Poland to its EU obligations? Or the other states in the area to dismantle their barbed wire fences and treat refugees like human beings?
> If anything has become glaringly obvious of late, it's the EUs obsession with money, wringing the last pound of flesh from Greece and sticking us for as much as they can get, while voicing  hypocritical 'concerns' about citizens rights and the Irish border.



I voted remain.

However, the decision went the other way and, yes, I was disappointed for a couple of days or so. After that, well, my attitude was, the vote's been had now, so let's try to forge ahead and make the best deal we can. For all concerned. The UK and Europe. Bitching and moaning, hissy fits and threats won't help anyone, I thought.

Boy was I wrong.

First off, I have no time for May and The Crony Party. She is inept, a lightweight Prime Minister, totally out of her depth and leading a party of dangerous jokers. Sadly, the opposition parties are no better. And all this combined, hasn't helped the Brexit process, that's for sure. But, hey, we're stuck with them, the lot of them for the next few years, so let's try and make the best of out a very bad lot (hard, I know, but there you go).

And yet....the more I see of the EU, or rather it's Orwellian leaders and shakers, the more obvious it's becoming: they are truly worse than any party in Westminster. They are twisting the knife as much as they can, whilst flashing smiles that can't betray their contempt and loathing of what's occurred. Ego and greed and vanity seem to rule their reasoning. Far more than any political party here. Bullying too. Observe them closely and you'll see a kind of cruel relish in the way they've operated since the UK vote. And there's one very good reason for that: fear.

They fear other European countries may leave, if the UK does happen (by some chance) to make a success of it. So their solution? Make it as hard as possible for them (the UK) so that we (the EU)  can send out a chilling message; try to upset the cattle cart and this is what you'll get. We'll make things extremely difficult indeed. It's a classic bully boy tactic. And as time's gone on, it's become more and more clear. Even to a Remain voter like myself. It's all very unedifying and counter productive. Europe is already heading into a volatile future as it stands, and as such, we can all do without the vindictiveness and recriminations that seem to be fouling the air. From all sides.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was a Leaver I'd be fucking furious at the inept way the Tories have handled this.


Why only Leave voters?!


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Why only Leave voters?!



Well I took it as read that Remainers are already furious.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 24, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> However you view it this is a mean spirited act that shows what a bunch of cunts the EU are. There was no need to add this to the mix at all. It will achieve nothing. Unless the EU believe they have the power to redraw the map of the world then best they rename it the EU city of culture.



Unbelievable. They're a bunch of punishy cunts aren't they? Next thing you know they'll be saying Brexit means they'll stop sending us farm subsidies and we won't be able to take our turn with the rotating EU presidency thing any more.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, I mean the UK. We were told explicitly what the EU would do and now they are doing it. The Tory administration are the ones who seem blind to that and content to bumble along until March 2019 when we turn in to one of the hundreds of other non-EU countries in the world, except we don't have the infrastructure in place to deal with being a non-EU country cos we spend the past two years playing games with Junker, Barnier, Tusk et al.



And come March 2019, it’ll be 

“these people we told you we couldn’t trust, it turns out that we couldn’t trust them, how could we possibly have predicted that you couldn’t trust the people we told you you couldn’t trust !!”

Twats 

Alex


----------



## Raheem (Nov 24, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It's open to EFTA members as well; there is still time to sneak back in.


Or, by 2023 maybe we'll be eligible as a candidate country.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 24, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> They fear other European countries may leave, if the UK does happen (by some chance) to make a success of it. So their solution? Make it as hard as possible for them (the UK) so that we (the EU)  can send out a chilling message; try to upset the cattle cart and this is what you'll get. We'll make things extremely difficult indeed. It's a classic bully boy tactic. And as time's gone on, it's become more and more clear. Even to a Remain voter like myself. It's all very unedifying and counter productive. Europe is already heading into a volatile future as it stands, and as such, we can all do without the vindictiveness and recriminations that seem to be fouling the air. From all sides.



How would making it easy to leave and giving good terms help to keep the EU together?. There has to be a negative to not being in it.


----------



## elbows (Nov 24, 2017)

Perhaps people were expecting a leaving present, a card with kind words and maybe a messy pub crawl.


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 24, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> How would making it easy to leave and giving good terms help to keep the EU together?. There has to be a negative to not being in it.



I didn't say the EU should make it easy to leave.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 24, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> I didn't say the EU should make it easy to leave.


You said their behaviour was very unedifying and counter productive.


----------



## gosub (Nov 24, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Or, by 2023 maybe we'll be eligible as a candidate country.


NO TOAST!


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 24, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> You said their behaviour was very unedifying and counter productive.



It is. That doesn't mean to say the UK should leave with a golden handshake. Not at all. And, of course, negotiations will be tough and at times hard fought. That's understandable. And expected. But my own view is I'm seeing more than that here; I'm seeing a spite, a vindictiveness permeating throughout the EU leadership.An intransigence and arrogance. A sense of 'we'll teach them a lesson for doing this.'  And I'm saying this as one who voted to remain. But sometimes, organisations (like people) show their true colours when unmasked. And I now regard Juncker and co with real disdain and contempt. Even more so than I do with the Tory part here.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> I'm seeing a spite, a vindictiveness permeating throughout the EU leadership.An intransigence and arrogance.



So not unlike the UK's behaviour towards the EEC / EC / EU for the last 40-odd years then.


----------



## RainbowTown (Nov 24, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> So not unlike the UK's behaviour towards the EEC / EC / EU for the last 40-odd years then.



Ah, the hackneyed, cliched blame game circus rolls into view. What would the world be without it? 

(A whole lotter better).

Look, all European countries were playing the same game in some form or another. It's so last season now.


----------



## Smangus (Nov 24, 2017)

The EU is a monolith institution the nature of which makes it niegh on impossible to get an agreement within the proposed time frame. 27 parliments have to agree a deal. Within those there are some that have regional assemblies that have to agree a deal also before the national parliament can. Then there are those with specific interests that will use brexit for their own leverage eg Spain and the Gibraltar question.  Why is anyone surprised  it's not going to plan? The eu is sticking to its stated agenda and order of battle which is not to the UK's liking.  No fucking shit Sherlock.


----------



## sealion (Nov 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was a Leaver I'd be fucking furious at the inept way the Tories have handled this.


Do you think Labour would be able to do better ?


----------



## elbows (Nov 24, 2017)

Smangus said:


> The EU is a monolith institution the nature of which makes it niegh on impossible to get an agreement within the proposed time frame. 27 parliments have to agree a deal. Within those there are some that have regional assemblies that have to agree a deal also before the national parliament can. Then there are those with specific interests that will use brexit for their own leverage eg Spain and the Gibraltar question.  Why is anyone surprised  it's not going to plan? The eu is sticking to its stated agenda and order of battle which is not to the UK's liking.  No fucking shit Sherlock.



And in addition to all the actual shit that is really going wrong behind the scenes, there is also the long history of politicians from many countries, most certainly including the uk to consider. I'm talking about how public statements & posturing over all things involving EU negotiations at the best of times have often been at odds with what they actually say privately in EU meetings. Ken Clarke was going on about this in parliament recently, albeit in a more limited context than I'm applying it to. I will probably find the quote shortly.



> Under the Major Government, we introduced a process whereby parts of the European Council meetings were held in public. The Council of Ministers do hold public sessions, and an attempt was made to reach decisions in public sessions. It probably still goes on. _[Interruption.] _It does not amount to very much.





> We did try to tackle this criticism. What happened was that each of the 28 Ministers gave little speeches entirely designed for their national newspapers and television, and negotiations and discussion did not make much practical progress. When the public sessions were over, the Ministers went into private session to negotiate and reach agreement. I used to find that the best business at the European Council was usually done over lunch. I have attended more European Council meetings than most people have had hot dinners. The dinners and the lunches tended to be where reasonable understandings were made. There were very few votes, but Governments made it clear when they opposed anything. When the council was over, everyone gave a press conference. It was a slightly distressing habit, because some of the accounts of Ministers for the assembled national press did not bear a close resemblance to what they had been saying inside the Council. I regret to say that some British Ministers fell into that trap. British Ministers and Ministers of other nationalities who had fiercely advocated regulating inside the Council would hold a press conference describing their valiant efforts to block what had now come in, which confirms some of my hon. Friend’s criticisms.



European Union (Withdrawal) Bill - Hansard Online

Now to be fair he then goes on to play down how often the British Government failed to make it clear what they really approved and disapproved of, but I thought I'd throw it out there now anyway.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 24, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> I voted remain.
> 
> However, the decision went the other way and, yes, I was disappointed for a couple of days or so. After that, well, my attitude was, the vote's been had now, so let's try to forge ahead and make the best deal we can. For all concerned. The UK and Europe. Bitching and moaning, hissy fits and threats won't help anyone, I thought.
> 
> ...


I don't believe you. I don't think you voted remain at all.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 24, 2017)

RainbowTown said:


> Ah, the hackneyed, cliched blame game circus rolls into view. What would the world be without it?



It's not about a ''blame game'', it's about watching the hypocrisy of people now pointing out the arrogance of the EU when the UK has spent decades demanding (and getting) preferential treatment in almost every negotiation we've entered, and for why exactly? Not _arrogance_, surely?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 24, 2017)

I don't really get the 'let's make it a success' line. A success for whom? By what measure? 

I don't see any upsides to the UK leaving the EU. Pretty shit but not a complete fucking catastrophe is the best result I see happening. Yet somehow we're all supposed to get on and forge ahead? No thanks. What kind of twisted idea of a democracy is it where those on the wrong side of a vote are then expected to support the thing they opposed in the vote? I'll carry on opposing it and arguing against it, thanks very much.


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Why are citizens  rights and the Irish border hypocritical ‘concerns’ ?
> 
> Alex


Mmmm, because they seem to be the reasons the EU 'negotiators'  can keep raising to deflect from their real 'obsession' to give us the 'money honey' to paraphrase


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> as you well know i meant paying for access to the single market and customs union without having a seat at the top table.


Did I? I must be unique in knowing what you say or mean, Pickers auld chep,


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like it or not, the decision to set up a City of Culture thing was political. It was set up to help to foster a sense of unity within the EU. There are few things I could care less about, but why would the UK want to remain part of it? Why should they be allowed to? Presumably there's some kind of budget set aside for this from the EU. Maybe the UK wants to stay part of this bit of the EU and would like to contribute? What other parts would they like to stay part of? Not the bits that have the richer countries helping the poorer countries - that part of fostering European unity is one they don't want.
> 
> Can't have your cake and eat it - either they want out of the EU or not.


Strangely enough, I think most of what's left of the 'WC'  won't feel left out of the 'city of culture' , thingimigib,


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is just waffle. It's an EU thing. They set it up.



And they can keep it


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ready for what? Being fucked?
> 
> Who's 'we'?


A fucking growing majority, the uncertainty that bubbled up after the vote is being dissipated by the EUs obvious desire to screw the last pound of flesh from any trade negotiation.
Fuck em, let's just take our chances with the WTO and make sure those twisty gits in the EU have to play by the same rules.......or are the EU exempted from WTO rules when playing outside there cosy little school yard?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 24, 2017)

coley said:


> A fucking growing majority, the uncertainty that bubbled up after the vote is being dissipated by the EUs obvious desire to screw the last pound of flesh from any trade negotiation.
> Fuck em, let's just take our chances with the WTO and make sure those twisty gits in the EU have to play by the same rules.......or are the EU exempted from WTO rules when playing outside there cosy little school yard?


it's not  much of a negotiation when the only people who have half a notion what they're doing are er the eu. didn't you notice months back the reports of how the uk's bereft of trade negotiators?


----------



## coley (Nov 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> For those who have forgotten:
> 
> The man who took on the EU has destroyed Theresa May's Brexit tactics
> 
> ...



Mebbes, but also he could be saying the Uk  has the ability to kick the EU in the nuts, whereas Greece couldnt.


----------



## oryx (Nov 25, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> For those who have forgotten:
> 
> The man who took on the EU has destroyed Theresa May's Brexit tactics
> 
> ...



AFAIK* Varoufakis's position on the EU is that for all its bureaucracy, neo-liberalism etc. etc. European countries are better off in than out, and that the EU desperately needs reform (which won't come as a surprise).

*this is going on what my partner, who recently read _Adults In The Room_, told me


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Unbelievable. They're a bunch of punishy cunts aren't they? Next thing you know they'll be saying Brexit means they'll stop sending us farm subsidies and we won't be able to take our turn with the rotating EU presidency thing any more.



Aye,and why shouldnt the rotating EU capital include the other members!? if I was an MEP I would be outraged that me and my staff couldn't enjoy the first class travel and accommodation afforded to the vast political entourage shuttling atween Strasbourg and Brussels.
They should obviously take it in turns, mmmm,  Warsaw in winter might not be the typical EU operatives 'cup of tea'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 25, 2017)

oryx said:


> AFAIK* Varoufakis's position on the EU is that for all its bureaucracy, neo-liberalism etc. etc. European countries are better off in than out, and that the EU desperately needs reform (which won't come as a surprise).
> 
> *this is going on what my partner, who recently read _Adults In The Room_, told me


Yep, that's about the shape of it. 'radical remain' is what he's called it. Stay but push for change from within. His perspective is also influenced by the fact that within his living memory his own country was a military dictatorship. He doesn't take it for granted that such things can't happen again, and he sees the EU, for all its ugly warts, as a bulwark against it.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Unbelievable. They're a bunch of punishy cunts aren't they? Next thing you know they'll be saying Brexit means they'll stop sending us farm subsidies and we won't be able to take our turn with the rotating EU presidency thing any more.



Freed from the shackles of the fussy old European Union, Britain can now freely explore opportunities to have American or Asian cities of culture.


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not  much of a negotiation when the only people who have half a notion what they're doing are er the eu. didn't you notice months back the reports of how the uk's bereft of trade negotiators?



Aye, I noticed that we are bereft of 'EU standard trade negotiators' 
Hopefully we will produce some 'home grown negotiators' in the next year or so, that can negotiate and conclude agreements, on a time scale quicker than the geophysical upgrowth  of most continents.


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Freed from the shackles of the fussy old European Union, Britain can now freely explore opportunities to have American or Asian cties of culture.



Now there's an interesting option, mebbes not the US ( at the moment)


----------



## oryx (Nov 25, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Freed from the shackles of the fussy old European Union, Britain can now freely explore opportunities to have American or Asian cties of culture.



Why not, eh? Israel seems to do pretty well in UEFA and Eurovision. 

ETA well not pretty well, but they're in it!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 25, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's about the shape of it. 'radical remain' is what he's called it. Stay but push for change from within. His perspective is also influenced by the fact that within his living memory his own country was a military dictatorship. He doesn't take it for granted that such things can't happen again, and he sees the EU, for all its ugly warts, as a bulwark against it.



That's a mischaracterisation of his very weak/largely pro EU position. I suspect you have read none of what he's written on it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 25, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Does anyone know which reports are coming out on Wednesday?  I have heard rumours within the party (and at this point they are rumours) that if the reports show massive economic damage to the country Labour will take a hard revoke Article 50 stance.
> 
> I expected them to do this as some point and with the withdrawal date fast approaching it is now or never I guess. All about playing the long game whilst this Tories tear themselves apart.



If they do that it will be fucking suicide and we'll get another Tory govt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's a mischaracterisation of his very weak/largely pro EU position. I suspect you have read none of what he's written on it.


It's a pretty exact characterisation of what he said on the subject during and directly after the referendum campaign, during which he was explicit about his fears for peace in Europe if the EU breaks up. Plus This kind of thing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 25, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> His perspective is also influenced by the fact that within his living memory his own country was a military dictatorship. He doesn't take it for granted that such things can't happen again, and he sees the EU, for all its ugly warts, as a bulwark against it.






littlebabyjesus said:


> It's a pretty exact characterisation of what he said on the subject during and directly after the referendum campaign, during which he was explicit about his fears for peace in Europe if the EU breaks up. Plus This kind of thing.



Nowhere in that article does Varoufakis make the argument that the EU is a bulwark against military dictatorship.

You lying, dishonest little shit.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> If they do that it will be fucking suicide and we'll get another Tory govt.



Depends what the reports reveal on Wednesday. I am guessing they are going to report some slightly short of financial Armageddon


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Unbelievable. They're a bunch of punishy cunts aren't they? Next thing you know they'll be saying Brexit means they'll stop sending us farm subsidies and we won't be able to take our turn with the rotating EU presidency thing any more.


We are leaving the EU not Europe. We cannot leave Europe because we cannot redraw the world map any more than the EU can. This is the EU throwing it’s toys out of the pram. It is petty.


----------



## gosub (Nov 25, 2017)

coley said:


> A fucking growing majority, the uncertainty that bubbled up after the vote is being dissipated by the EUs obvious desire to screw the last pound of flesh from any trade negotiation.
> Fuck em, let's just take our chances with the WTO and make sure those twisty gits in the EU have to play by the same rules.......or are the* EU exempted from WTO rules* when playing outside there cosy little school yard?


um yes for reasons I did explain abut a year ago, but am currently too pissed to remember (i'll come back and edit when sober but its to do with safety in numbers)


----------



## oryx (Nov 25, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nowhere in that article does Varoufakis make the argument that the EU is a bulwark against military dictatorship.
> 
> You lying, dishonest little shit.



I think calling LBJ a lying, dishonest little shit is going a bit OTT, really. They said 'plus this kind of thing' and didn't claim that the article referred to Varoufakis's views on the Greek military dictatorship.

The really important words from Varoufakis (and as he's a highly regarded economist, former government minister and someone who has negotiated with the EU at the sharp end, you're hard pushed to do better than to quote him) are:

_However, voting to leave the EU would only benefit a wealthy elite as keen to liberate itself from Brussels as it is to rule over the majority of British people._


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> We are leaving the EU not Europe. We cannot leave Europe because we cannot redraw the world map any more than the EU can. This is the EU throwing it’s toys out of the pram. It is petty.



Leaving the EU means we can no longer assume we have a right to apply for EU grants, which is what Capital of Culture basically is. It's not really about toys and prams, but about money and drains.

I expect we'll be showing we're not so petty by launching a rival European Capital of Culture programme to give British taxpayers' money away to EU cities.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 25, 2017)

oryx said:


> I think calling LBJ a lying, dishonest little shit is going a bit OTT, really. They said 'plus this kind of thing' and didn't claim that the article referred to Varoufakis's views on the Greek military dictatorship.
> 
> The really important words from Varoufakis (and as he's a highly regarded economist, former government minister and someone who has negotiated with the EU at the sharp end, you're hard pushed to do better than to quote him) are:
> 
> _However, voting to leave the EU would only benefit a wealthy elite as keen to liberate itself from Brussels as it is to rule over the majority of British people._



Consider it a comment on LBJ's (love it) selective and cumulative contributions to the thread rather than purely that one comment - but LBJ's only point in the post was to imply that Varoufakis had in some way parroted one of those daft "the EU is pro democracy" type arguments, and then to supply an unrelated link with no further comment, so I think actually that is a cunt's trick that needs highlighting.

I'm well aware of Varoufakis's contradictory views on the EU. I have no idea for the record who it is you believe admires him these days - he will go down as one of history's biggest failures when it comes to political negotiations. Although I suppose maybe your point is he's well placed to advice Theresa May?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 25, 2017)

coley said:


> Fuck em, let's just take our chances with the WTO and make sure those twisty gits in the EU have to play by the same rules.......or are the EU exempted from WTO rules when playing outside there cosy little school yard?



The EU has literally hundreds of trade agreements with non-EU entities. When we leave we've got to start from scratch.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 25, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> We are leaving the EU not Europe. We cannot leave Europe because we cannot redraw the world map any more than the EU can. This is the EU throwing it’s toys out of the pram. It is petty.



"hello I would like to leave your club, but also still be a member of your club"


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The EU has literally hundreds of trade agreements with non-EU entities. When we leave we've got to start from scratch.



Point basically correct, but I'm not sure it is literally hundreds.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 25, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Does anyone know which reports are coming out on Wednesday?  I have heard rumours within the party (and at this point they are rumours) that if the reports show massive economic damage to the country Labour will take a hard revoke Article 50 stance.
> 
> I expected them to do this as some point and with the withdrawal date fast approaching it is now or never I guess. All about playing the long game whilst this Tories tear themselves apart.


These like your rumours that a massive scandal story was going to break on UKIP?

Where are these rumours coming from? Members? Backbenchers? The Shadow Cabinet? It sounds like absolute bollocks to me. Labour's purposely ill-defined stance has done them pretty well so far why the hell would they suddenly decide to make a huge U-turn and (attempt to) stop the UK leaving the EU?


----------



## Fingers (Nov 25, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> These like your rumours that a massive scandal story was going to break on UKIP?
> 
> Where are these rumours coming from? Members? Backbenchers? The Shadow Cabinet? It sounds like absolute bollocks to me. Labour's purposely ill-defined stance has done them pretty well so far why the hell would they suddenly decide to make a huge U-turn and (attempt to) stop the UK leaving the EU?



Rumours, as I stated. it might be bollocks, or it might be not be. I guess we will see after the papers are published.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 25, 2017)

Revocation is a reasonable component of a soft Brexit stance; if the conclusion is EEA + a CU, and immediate negotiations with EFTA, then we’ll need more than 15 months. Stopping the clock is a better way to do that than hoping for an extension.

It’s also compatible with a second referendum position, especially if the first one is no longer believed to have been “free and fair”. So there are a whole lot of ways for revocation to be in the Labour lexicon without going full remainist.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 25, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Rumours, as I stated. it might be bollocks, or it might be not be. I guess we will see after the papers are published.


From where though? Your mate Dave? Seriously this is Jazzz shite.


----------



## Fingers (Nov 25, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> From where though? You're mate Dave? Seriously this is Jazzz shite.



Whatever


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 25, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Whatever



This sums up brexit better than anything I've seen so far. Literally.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 25, 2017)

oryx said:


> Why not, eh? Israel seems to do pretty well in UEFA and Eurovision.
> 
> ETA well not pretty well, but they're in it!


They shouldn't be in uefa or eurovision, or fifa


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 25, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Whatever



Hope the rumours are accurate, anyway. Not that it reflects poorly on you or your source if the 58 reports are published, they predict disaster, and Labour equivocates. There must be a dozen different strategic plans, each with some claim to authority, floating around.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 25, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> This sums up brexit better than anything I've seen so far. Literally.


True enough. There are entrenched remainers & entrenched leavers. Then there are those of us with mixed feelings. I certainly don’t like the EU. It is undemocratic & neoliberal. Right now they are acting like dictators. Instead of respecting a democratic vote from a member state & trying to work with that member state to endure the best outcome for us all living in the same continent they appear determined to do us down. They appear to be ignoring the 48% that voted remain.

However I do think it is not really worth it when what we have trade wise works ok but staying in the customs union means we are not really leaving so the brexiteers say. There is no solution I don’t think. We either say fuck’em & walk away without paying a penny or we stay in or in the customs union at least. If the next Labour government wants to borrow to invest & build a million council houses then we will still need free movement of people to come here & build them.

So really if the whole thing was cancelled I would be ok with that as well. I think with brexit is absolutely fine to sit on the fence. One does not to be for or against brexit.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 25, 2017)

The lovely cuddly vanis
Before You Applaud Varoufakis' New European “Democracy” Movement, Think Again


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 25, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Hope the rumours are accurate, anyway. Not that it reflects poorly on you or your source if the 58 reports are published, they predict disaster, and Labour equivocates. There must be a dozen different strategic plans, each with some claim to authority, floating around.


I’m sure there are plenty working behind the scenes on both sides of the channel to stop or mitigate brexit at least to the extent we remain in the customs union. They will probably make themselves heard in the coming months. As far as Labour is concerned though the bigger the disaster brexit is the better their chances of a landslide victory at next GE I would have thought?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 25, 2017)

This arrant stupidity about the EU’s position from people who don’t understand why the four freedoms are indivisible, or why customs union has to be accompanied by regulatory union, and see arrogance, bullying and dictatoriality in the EU’s failure to accept that we can have our cake and eat it - this fuckwittery, which is surprisingly well represented on Urban, is the political cover for hard Brexit. Someone, somewhere, knows what they are doing.

That’s to your earlier point, though, Saskia, rather than to your most recent one. Which is perfectly reasonable, as far as it goes.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 25, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> True enough. There are entrenched remainers & entrenched leavers. Then there are those of us with mixed feelings. I certainly don’t like the EU. It is undemocratic & neoliberal. Right now they are acting like dictators. Instead of respecting a democratic vote from a member state & trying to work with that member state to endure the best outcome for us all living in the same continent they appear determined to do us down. They appear to be ignoring the 48% that voted remain.
> 
> However I do think it is not really worth it when what we have trade wise works ok but staying in the customs union means we are not really leaving so the brexiteers say. There is no solution I don’t think. We either say fuck’em & walk away without paying a penny or we stay in or in the customs union at least. If the next Labour government wants to borrow to invest & build a million council houses then we will still need free movement of people to come here & build them.
> 
> So really if the whole thing was cancelled I would be ok with that as well. I think with brexit is absolutely fine to sit on the fence. One does not to be for or against brexit.



Yeah all of that, probably, but I meant more generally even. The negotiators on each side are giving off more than a little of the "meh, whatever" attitude to each other's positions.  The public beyond the hardcore jingoists have pretty much given up caring as far as I can see. We all know that practically speaking we have no further say in this than do farm animals, having jumped the fence last year all we can do now is bleat. We've ended up with the worst of all possible outcomes so far and no improvement looks likely. Come March 2019 I think the best we'll be able to manage is a great collective _meh, whatever _as we tap EFTA on the shoulder and look for sympathy there.

Creeping apathy due to utter powerlessness. Or were we taking back control? To be honest I've forgotten what this was all meant to be about.


----------



## gosub (Nov 25, 2017)

coley said:


> A fucking growing majority, the uncertainty that bubbled up after the vote is being dissipated by the EUs obvious desire to screw the last pound of flesh from any trade negotiation.
> Fuck em, let's just take our chances with the WTO and make sure those twisty gits in the EU have to play by the same rules.......or are the EU exempted from WTO rules when playing outside there cosy little school yard?



Sobered up ahead of the rugby.

As a single member of the WTO it would be unlawful for the UK to single out the EU and place extra tarrifs on their goods, we'd have to apply a tarrif on specific goods regardless of their point of origin.   The EU however, because it has a collection of WTO members, qualifies as having Regional Trading Agreements, this gives them the right to single out other countries for 'special treatment' ie higher tariffs... So the EU could lawfully discriminate against UK exports, and it would be unlawful for the UK to retaliate.


----------



## gosub (Nov 25, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The EU has literally hundreds of trade agreements with non-EU entities. When we leave we've got to start from scratch.



Yes.  But a lot of the graft in a trade agreement is assuring that both parties are on the same page *vis*-a-*vis* safety standards and the like.  Which we clearly are, so we can cut the time taken significantly using a Mutual Recognition Agreement(MRA)


----------



## elbows (Nov 25, 2017)

So whats the detail on this story about Australia being unhappy with an aspect of the potential deal? Either the story is missing key info, isn't well written or my brain hasn't really woken up today! Cheers.

Australia knocks UK Brexit trade plan


----------



## gosub (Nov 25, 2017)

elbows said:


> So whats the detail on this story about Australia being unhappy with an aspect of the potential deal? Either the story is missing key info, isn't well written or my brain hasn't really woken up today! Cheers.
> 
> Australia knocks UK Brexit trade plan



Two parties enter into a contract, then one side wants to tinker with the internals of their side of the contract, then the other is going to want a say.  If you sub let half your flat without talking to the landlord he wouldn't be too happy. 
Its not just Australia Trump administration rejects PM's post-Brexit agriculture deal with EU - Farming UK News

I'd guess its down to currency fluctuation, dividing TRQ's based on historical imports and consumption seems fair, but we aren't going to eat as much, say, New Zealand lamb any more coz the pounds gone down so its more expensive....they'd rather have more market opportunity where that hasn't happened i.e rest of EUrope.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 25, 2017)

coley said:


> Mmmm, because they seem to be the reasons the EU 'negotiators'  can keep raising to deflect from their real 'obsession' to give us the 'money honey' to paraphrase



Or perhaps they think those are important - you know freedom of movement being one of the fundamental rights of eu member citizens.

And maybe they recongnise that the border issue is pretty important to at least one of their remaining members, bearing in mind the good Friday agreement.

Or maybe “conspiracy!”

Alex


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Or perhaps they think those are important - you know freedom of movement being one of the fundamental rights of eu member citizens.
> 
> And maybe they recongnise that the border issue is pretty important to at least one of their remaining members, bearing in mind the good Friday agreement.
> 
> ...





gosub said:


> um yes for reasons I did explain abut a year ago, but am currently too pissed to remember (i'll come back and edit when sober but its to do with safety in numbers)



Sober yet? No, don't sweat it, I'm not


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Leaving the EU means we can no longer assume we have a right to apply for EU grants, which is what Capital of Culture basically is. It's not really about toys and prams, but about money and drains.
> 
> I expect we'll be showing we're not so petty by launching a rival European Capital of Culture programme to give British taxpayers' money away to EU cities.



This is what really pisses me off, forget the daft bus, the point was, the money we currently pour down the EU drain can be redirected/allocated to U.K. Interests as opposed to being spread over a number of EU projects.
*They* don't 'give us a penny farthing' they, at present give us some of the money *we contribute *back as a 'rebate'
Why the hell we are offering them billions to continue trading with us, is frankly beyond me.
The threats of U.K. Lorries being held up waiting for EU customs clearance? Imagine the queues on the continent!
And all the other 'imagined horrors' being pushed daily by the BBC and the Guardian et al, the EU isn't stupid but its negotiators are obviously reading and listening to the above^^.
They might end up getting a fucking shock.
And yes, telling them to 'shove it' might hurt us in the short term, but on many levels it will hurt the 'EU project'  even more.


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> They shouldn't be in uefa or eurovision, or fifa


Why not? Geography or politics?


----------



## coley (Nov 25, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Or perhaps they think those are important - you know freedom of movement being one of the fundamental rights of eu member citizens.
> 
> And maybe they recongnise that the border issue is pretty important to at least one of their remaining members, bearing in mind the good Friday agreement.
> 
> ...


Money, pure and simple, 
The EU is like Groucho Marx, "if you don't like my principles, I have others"


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 25, 2017)

I don't think London, Scotland and Northern Island will accept Brexit. Without their acceptance Brexit will collapse.


----------



## sealion (Nov 25, 2017)

Gave me a giggle
‘I thought I’d put in a protest vote’: the people who regret voting leave


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2017)

coley said:


> Sober yet? No, don't sweat it, I'm not





gosub said:


> Sobered up ahead of the rugby.
> 
> As a single member of the WTO it would be unlawful for the UK to single out the EU and place extra tarrifs on their goods, we'd have to apply a tarrif on specific goods regardless of their point of origin.   The EU however, because it has a collection of WTO members, qualifies as having Regional Trading Agreements, this gives them the right to single out other countries for 'special treatment' ie higher tariffs... So the EU could lawfully discriminate against UK exports, and it would be unlawful for the UK to retaliate.


um pissed again  70/80 mins a good game.
The global gig is skewed towards national amalgamations coz that what makes life easier for them and the global corps. But its only through going through this sort of shit that the rules of the actual house get disseminated and absorbed.  Mid time frame EFTA membership would class us as in a RTA.




some of us thought this through.


----------



## Nylock (Nov 26, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Therein lies the problem. If the UK had control of its own funds, the "deprived regions" in our own country could have benefited instead.





Happy Larry said:


> Of course. The people of Zimbabwe will verify that fact, for sure.


It's like having our very own Donald Trump. Just when you think he can't be any more of an obtuse wanker, along he comes to lower the bar yet further...


----------



## mauvais (Nov 26, 2017)

coley said:


> This is what really pisses me off, forget the daft bus, the point was, the money we currently pour down the EU drain can be redirected/allocated to U.K. Interests as opposed to being spread over a number of EU projects.
> *They* don't 'give us a penny farthing' they, at present give us some of the money *we contribute *back as a 'rebate'


I'm curious about this.

I live in the north of England. Amongst many things, the transport infrastructure is falling apart due to years of underinvestment relative to elsewhere in the UK. To fix it would require a significant redistributive effort (if only there was a political name for this) in which Londoners & southerners would, for some time, pay more than they received in return. There are reasons other than charity as to why this would be a good idea for them, but nonetheless it would have a cost.

In theory at least, the EU actually does do this redistribution amongst its members (including to the north of England, hilariously), of whom we are one of the richer, and you are against it.

So I wonder whether you object to the principle, or it transcending national borders, or something about overheads, or what?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

Irish border now moving centre stage? Solution appears to be for whole of UK to stay in customs union & free trade area? So the answer to the op might be no, not really. Would the DUP support staying in customs union/free trade area as a solution? Can somebody enlighten me? I know very little about Irish politics.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 26, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I'm curious about this.
> 
> I live in the north of England. Amongst many things, the transport infrastructure is falling apart due to years of underinvestment relative to elsewhere in the UK. To fix it would require a significant redistributive effort (if only there was a political name for this) in which Londoners & southerners would, for some time, pay more than they received in return. There are reasons other than charity as to why this would be a good idea for them, but nonetheless it would have a cost.
> 
> In theory at least, the EU actually does do this redistribution amongst its members (including to the north of England, hilariously), of whom we are one of the richer, and you are against it.



Yep, one of the things that made me lean Remain is how the EU was willing to spend money in places like Merseyside while Conservative governments would have cheerfully let the place rot because people there were never going to vote Tory anyway. I know there's an element of the poisoned chalice or whatever but EU money did make a big difference in places like Birkenhead during the years when the British government was looking more at "managed decline," as in Geoffrey Howe's memo to Thatcher in 1981:


> "It would be even more regrettable if some of the brighter ideas for renewing economic activity were to be sown only on relatively stony ground on the banks of the Mersey.
> 
> "I cannot help feeling that the option of managed decline is one which we should not forget altogether. We must not expend all our limited resources in trying to make water flow uphill."


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Irish border now moving centre stage? Solution appears to be for whole of UK to stay in customs union & free trade area? So the answer to the op might be no, not really. Would the DUP support staying in customs union/free trade area as a solution? Can somebody enlighten me? I know very little about Irish politics.



As a fairly hard Brexiteer I've got no problem with staying in the customs union, but staying in the EEA just feels like Remaining by any other name, especially if we have to accept freedom of movement as a condition of EEA membership. It would be the worst of all possible worlds.


----------



## bimble (Nov 26, 2017)

How come the issue of the Irish border 'crisis' is being presented as a surprise ? Surely it was a blindingly obvious problem from before the referendum was even called.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2017)

coley said:


> Why not? Geography or politics?


The geography of the zionist entity is political


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

Some Thatcher loving old git I was talking to yesterday was giving it all the old fuck’em rhetoric. I told him he was an anarchist. Perhaps plenty of leave voters could be described as thus although many would need to look the word up in the dictionary.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> How come the issue of the Irish border 'crisis' is being presented as a surprise ? Surely it was a blindingly obvious problem from before the referendum was even called.



One of the many, many issues that should've been discussed in public and at length before or even during the referendum, but was glossed over in favour of soundbites and dog-whistling.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Some Thatcher loving old git I was talking to yesterday was giving it all the old fuck’em rhetoric. I told him he was an anarchist. Perhaps plenty of leave voters could be described as thus although many would need to look the word up in the dictionary.



Ah yes, the old "all Leave voters are stupid" argument. Nothing like insulting 52% of the population at a stroke, is there?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

Leaving the EU was never up for a serious discussion. It was always an emotional thing. Both for leavers & remainers. The referendum was offered by Cameron because he thought he would lose votes to UKIP if he did not. It was always just a knee jerk thing. It had to be I suppose because any serious discussion would have become bogged down by entrenched opposite veiws?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Ah yes, the old "all Leave voters are stupid" argument. Nothing like insulting 52% of the population at a stroke, is there?


Read the post again. Yes he is a Thatcher loving old git & a racist. His politics is at polar opposites to mine. And yet the anarchist part of me that has always been there recognises the anarchy in him & many of the leave voters. They are angry about their lives & angry about the successive governments that have done them down. They are still happy to leave the EU. They do not care about the consequences. They would be happy for anarchy to reign. However I do doubt many would even know the meaning of the word. 

This is why as I have mentioned previously I doubt there was much in the referendum campaign that would have changed minds. Those who voted leave had made their minds up decades ago.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 26, 2017)

there is no solution to the irish border issue other than the whole of the UK staying in the customs union or crashing out with no deal - and a hard border. The latter will cause massive problems in northern ireland. Moving to a "sea border" (where NI stays in the single market but the rest of UK stays out) will be blocked by the DUP and violently opposed by their supporters. 

yes another brexit inspired "all pain no gain scenario". I definitely think that a large section of the british establishment is desperately trying to find a way to extract the UK from brexit without a political meltdown. 

For the pro-brexit faction it has nothing to do with nationalism, reducing immigration or taking back control - they see it as on opportunity to drive down wages and shred employment and H&S regulations so the UK can compete with china, Vietnam  and indonesia via sweatshop conditions and an oligarch friendly tax regime. whatever the lexit vision of brexit - and the inequities of the international pooling of neo-liberal wankery that is the EU - that is the only brexit on offer.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> there is no solution to the irish border issue other than the whole of the UK staying in the customs union or crashing out with no deal - and a hard border.



There is a third option- IRexit and a return to the Punt. I'm dreaming I know


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> There is a third option- IRexit and a return to the Punt. I'm dreaming I know



Fuck off with that one....if it's what I think you mean....
Ireland leaves just to keep the brits happy?
Yeah......




No


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Fuck off with that one....if it's what I think you mean....
> Ireland leaves just to keep the brits happy?
> Yeah......
> 
> ...



No I meant Ireland leaves for the benefit of both nations. We've got far more in common than we have apart, surely?


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Irish border now moving centre stage? Solution appears to be for whole of UK to stay in customs union & free trade area? So the answer to the op might be no, not really. Would the DUP support staying in customs union/free trade area as a solution? Can somebody enlighten me? I know very little about Irish politics.



Arlene Foster (DUP leader) quoted yesterday as saying they will not countenance any deal in which NI is treated differently to rest of UK. So that’s a no. 

This is another major May fuck up. There probably was a solution with the UK staying in CU and not being in FM (like Turkey). By making clear early on that we are leaving CU she has created impossible situation. 

It’s looking more and more likely that we are going to crash out with no deal. Or the government somehow falls - not sure how.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> How come the issue of the Irish border 'crisis' is being presented as a surprise ? Surely it was a blindingly obvious problem from before the referendum was even called.


I simply can't imagine why the eu and its public supporters in this country and ireland would seek to manufacture then escalate an issue that could be presented as potentially blocking brexit and developing an image of ongoing and insurmountable chaos meaning the only option is to void the referendum results. It's beyond me.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> No I meant Ireland leaves for the benefit of both nations. We've got far more in common than we have apart, surely?






No.....why the fuck should we leave for the benefit of britain?
Are you for real?
The EU made Ireland....it did more for the country since 1973 than the brits EVER did....it would not be mutually beneficial for Ireland to leave just to keep the Brits happy because it would leave us completely broke and with no real support from britain apart from a thank you note.....so...no...
Ireland needs to stay in the eu for it's own good....

Eta...Ireland was fucked over by britain repeatedly.
Don't ever think that the country will trust britain. There is a political civility and relative peace but feelings run very quiet and very deep and historically every family in Ireland has paid the price of independence from britain with blood.
There is no way that will ever be forgotten....and there is no way we will go back to being part of a united kingdom even if it's only for monetary / trade reasons.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

Winot said:


> Arlene Foster (DUP leader) quoted yesterday as saying they will not countenance any deal in which NI is treated differently to rest of UK. So that’s a no.
> 
> This is another major May fuck up. There probably was a solution with the UK staying in CU and not being in FM (like Turkey). By making clear early on that we are leaving CU she has created impossible situation.
> 
> It’s looking more and more likely that we are going to crash out with no deal. Or the government somehow falls - not sure how.



Just to be pedantic, we can be in a CU, but not the CU. A CU would be fine, though. Very easy to negotiate, as long as we have regulatory convergence. So we’d be leaving the CU whatever flavour of soft Brexit happened.


----------



## bimble (Nov 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I simply can't imagine why the eu and its public supporters in this country and ireland would seek to manufacture then escalate an issue that could be presented as potentially blocking brexit and developing an image of ongoing and insurmountable chaos meaning the only option is to void the referendum results. It's beyond me.


So its not a real problem at all just a manufactured one. ok.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I simply can't imagine why the eu and its public supporters in this country and ireland would seek to manufacture then escalate an issue that could be presented as potentially blocking brexit and developing an image of ongoing and insurmountable chaos meaning the only option is to void the referendum results. It's beyond me.



Because it's actually a simple issue, easy to resolve by


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Just to be pedantic, we can be in a CU, but not the CU. A CU would be fine, though. Very easy to negotiate, as long as we have regulatory convergence. So we’d be leaving the CU whatever flavour of soft Brexit happened.



Do you know if politicians have been carefully talking about *the* customs union to leave them wiggle room?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

Winot said:


> Do you know if politicians have been carefully talking about *the* customs union to leave them wiggle room?



It’s a nice idea but you have to wonder if they have the subtlety, cunning, understanding or foresight to do anything like that.


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> So its not a real problem at all just a manufactured one. ok.



Manufactured in the sense that the whole of Brexit is.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> So its not a real problem at all just a manufactured one. ok.


You asked why is it suddenly an issue - i offered a compelling suggestion as to why. Why does something that  - as you point out - has been known about since the whistle went suddenly _become _an issue? Maybe it's just silly brexiters?

Of course this faux-ignorance as to what is going on, who is doing it and why is part of the plan to either create or project an image of chaos that can only be overcome by overturning the results of the referendum. This stuff seems to make up 80% of the entire internet now.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I simply can't imagine why the eu and its public supporters in this country and ireland would seek to manufacture then escalate an issue that could be presented as potentially blocking brexit and developing an image of ongoing and insurmountable chaos meaning the only option is to void the referendum results. It's beyond me.



“Manufacture”. The GFA and the Irish border. A “manufactured” issue. Escalated by those crafty remainers. Nothing real there.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

Lexit is so ridiculous that it has soi-disant anarchists talking piously about “overturning the results of the referendum” as if it would be the greatest anti-democratic horror.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2017)

...and here we have the supercilious wing of the army, as opposed to the_ blimey, what's going on here can someone explain it to little old me_ wing.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Eta...Ireland was fucked over by britain repeatedly.




It was, sadly.



> Don't ever think that the country will trust britain. There is a political civility and relative peace but feelings run very quiet and very deep and historically every family in Ireland has paid the price of independence from britain with blood.
> There is no way that will ever be forgotten....



You are probably right. It's a real shame because I believe the British and Irish working classes are essentially one people who have been fucked over by the Church, the Aristocracy and latterly by modern capitalism. 

We have far more in common than we have apart but I think the ship has sailed and is somewhere over the next horizon sadly.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

Which church?


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> It was, sadly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Im not talking about the ordinary british people....The politicians and monarchy are the ones who fucked over Ireland for centuries. And there's no reason to believe that they wont do it again.


----------



## bimble (Nov 26, 2017)

butchersapron your constant refrain of 'You know this' is (in my case at least) mistaken. I get your point though in answer to my question of why its being presented as a sudden surprise problem.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 26, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> ...and here we have the supercilious wing of the army, as opposed to the_ blimey, what's going on here can someone explain it to little old me_ wing.



Supercilious brexit, meet supercilious bremain. Have you met before? I'm sure you have plenty to talk about.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Which church?


Both of them....


----------



## 2hats (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Ah yes, the old "all Leave voters are stupid" argument. Nothing like insulting 52% of the population at a stroke, is there?


27%.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> No.....why the fuck should we leave for the benefit of britain?
> Are you for real?
> The EU made Ireland....it did more for the country since 1973 than the brits EVER did...


What the celtic tiger crap that saw the rich make profits and corporation tax dropped, the austerity water charges. I'm not going to defend the UK's interactions in Ireland but fuck this bullshit of the EU helping the Irish WC.


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It’s a nice idea but you have to wonder if they have the subtlety, cunning, understanding or foresight to do anything like that.



The key issue for May seems to be our freedom to agree independent trade deals after Brexit, which I understand is constrained if we are in *the* CU. But presumably not in a CU.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Yep, one of the things that made me lean Remain is how the EU was willing to spend money in places like Merseyside while Conservative governments would have cheerfully let the place rot because people there were never going to vote Tory anyway. I know there's an element of the poisoned chalice or whatever but EU money did make a big difference in places like Birkenhead during the years when the British government was looking more at "managed decline," as in Geoffrey Howe's memo to Thatcher in 1981:



its been the insistence of remainers that 'the leave areas saw the most EU input anyway!' -  but heres a thing:


> Regional economic disparities grounded in successive rounds of uneven development and biased official policy are not peculiar to Britain. As David Harvey has written, ‘capitalism _is_ uneven geographical development’—and, if anything, becoming more so. The era of neoliberal globalization multiplied opportunities for ‘the uneven insertion of different territories and social formations into the capitalist world market’. [55] As regulatory powers are stripped away, wealth is becoming more and more concentrated in the hands of the opulent few. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, mouthpiece for free-market economies, notes that ‘while gaps in GDP per capita across OECD countries have narrowed over the last two decades, within their own borders countries are witnessing increasing income gaps among regions, cities and people.’ Such is the common pattern. Davos is looking nervously over its shoulder as the popular backlash intensifies. [56]
> 
> Yet Britain is indeed a special case of uneven development within the Europe on which its voters were invited to express their verdict in 2016. The astonishing fact is that the UK is more lopsided economically than Italy, despite its notoriously incomplete Risorgimento; than Spain, with its historic polarity of Catalan–Basque industry and Andalusian _latifundia_; than Germany, where a quarter of a century after reunification GDP per head in the East was still only two-thirds of that in the West; than France, enshadowed by a metropolis great enough to warrant comparison with its cross-Channel neighbour. At sub-regional level, output per head is eight times higher in inner west London than in west Wales and the Valleys, the largest difference to be found in _any_EU member state from Bantry Bay to the Dniester. [57]
> 
> So it is that a former regional-policy advisor at the European Commission can observe that ‘the economic geography of the UK nowadays increasingly reflects the patterns typically observed in developing or former-transition economies rather than in other advanced economies.’ In several peripheral European states—Ireland and Portugal in the far west; the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania and Slovakia to the east—only the capital-city region achieves output per capita above the EU average. [58] The UK is richer, but its long-run development, aside from the short Victorian interlude of factory capitalism, has been similarly monocentric. Northwards redistribution of economic activity from London and the South has never featured high on the list of national political priorities. Today just 2 per cent of households in the North East feature in the top decile of wealth, set against 22 per cent in the South East and 18 per cent in London. Under the Cameron coalition, median household wealth in London increased by 14 per cent, while it fell 8 per cent in Yorkshire and the Humber. [59] The real average jobless rate was last clocked at over 11 per cent in the two most northerly English regions, rising above 16 per cent in the worst blackspots, compared to just 3 or 4 per cent in large parts of the South. At the bottom end of the income ladder, very high deprivation looms largest in a quintet of northern boroughs: Middlesbrough, Knowsley, Hull, Liverpool and Manchester. The South East, of course, has problems of its own. Gentrification is taking the edge off the poverty statistics for east London, but out in the sticks, forgotten Jaywick on the Essex coast is England’s single most destitute neighbourhood. [60] Nevertheless, the phenomenal amount of wealth sloshing around the capital does much to shield the London commentariat from the degradation of outer regions, flattering to deceive that government economic policy is working for the country at large. ‘I’ll tell you what’s at stake’, warned George Osborne, a millionaire Londoner, as the referendum loomed: ‘the prosperity of the British economy, people’s incomes would be hit, the ability to provide for their families would be hit. We’ve not even talked about unemployment.’ [61] His parliamentary seat was a Tory constituency in leafy east Cheshire, one of only four out of 38 areas across northern England where household income per head is above rather than below the national average.



So we have to wonder where all this extra EU largesse was going? Why was it not felt _in real terms_ by the leave areas? Again and again the remain crowd point to this fact that the EU funded leave areas higher than anywhere in the country, I mean this is great for the remainer because it confirms the belief that silly racists cut their noses off to spite their faces. But again, in real terms, not liberal paper talking points, where was the jam?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

The pre brexit spiel was the world would be queuing for trade deals. For that we needed to be out of the CU which meant we could also to control immigration. If we want a trade deal with India they will be apparently happy to oblige if it includes free movement of people.


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

So the UK is far more unequal for its wealth than all those other EU countries? Suggests it might have something to do with the UK government rather than the EU


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2017)

Winot said:


> So the UK is far more unequal for its wealth than all those other EU countries? Suggests it might have something to do with the UK government rather than the EU


but but but a minute ago the EU was the rising tide that raises all boats, now it sort of was but the UK government is at fault here. Will you be having your cake AND eating it now sor?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

Well yes, the vote to leave was caused by successive UK governments not by the EU. Holland for example does not have the UK scale of min wage migrants because it’s employment law would not allow the business models developed in the UK to take advantage of the cheap eastern European labour pool available after 2004. Several EU countries have been able to limit migration staying within EU rules. You don’t see roadside car washes in Holland & France for example.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> but but but a minute ago the EU was the rising tide that raises all boats, now it sort of was but the UK government is at fault here. Will you be having your cake AND eating it now sor?


 A little EU money redistributed is not going to solve the UK's problems, but why would you expect it to?

It's far from largesse but it would appear to be a better return than the domestic government is interested in committing to. The quote you've just put up is ample evidence of a very British failure. This is what it comes down to again & again - between the EU and the short to medium term prospects for a non-EU UK government, who offers more benefits in the areas of interest - in this case, funding for things outside the South East?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2017)

mauvais said:


> A little EU money redistributed is not going to solve the UK's problems, but why would you expect it to?
> 
> It's far from largesse but it would appear to be a better return than the domestic government is interested in committing to. The quote you've just put up is ample evidence of a very British failure. This is what it comes down to again & again - between the EU and the short to medium term prospects for a non-EU UK government, who offers more benefits in the areas of interest - in this case, funding for things outside the South East?


a soc/dem labour government which would have been unthinkable if remain had won- you'd still have cameron hanging on with tory MPs grousing about how 'he said he would step down soon'. 

clearly the EU was doing nothing about income disparity- again, the jam, where was it? in the pockets of local booj? hmm? 

you can thank me later for corbyns epic victory and the continuing destruction in the median term of the tories. I accept gift vouchers as well


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> What the celtic tiger crap that saw the rich make profits and corporation tax dropped, the austerity water charges. I'm not going to defend the UK's interactions in Ireland but fuck this bullshit of the EU helping the Irish WC.




From joining the EC in 1973  Ireland developed beyond anything the UK could possibly have offered.....if we had remained part of the UK...and the economy grew..right up to the mid 90s.
I'm not talking about the Celtic tiger...that was very much a greed driven debacle ...and run by scurrilous banks who didnt give a toss about the potentially devastating repercussions of loaning people 4 times their salary to buy overpriced houses ... and Irelanf wasnt alone in that crapology....as we all know. 
Dont blame the EU for that debacle

Ireland is better off in every way remaining within the EU...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> a soc/dem labour government which would have been unthinkable if remain had won- you'd still have cameron hanging on with tory MPs grousing about how 'he said he would step down soon'.


Yes this absolutely. We have gone in a couple of yrs from a Tory government that had a working majority with a sharp suited pair in charge who at least walked the walk & talked the talk even if it was mostly shite to the weak & chaotic government we have now all because of the leave vote.

I always thought as the non property owning demographic increases in number with the Tory voting property owners decreasing as they die off we would eventually get a more socialist government but the brexit vote has speeded things up imo.

Ironically the worse that brexit ends with the Tories totally discredited the larger the majority of the next Corbyn led government I reckon. The supreme irony will be that the brexit conceived by the ultra capitalist atlantisists will end up being owned by the lexiteers.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> its been the insistence of remainers that 'the leave areas saw the most EU input anyway!' -  but heres a thing:
> 
> 
> So we have to wonder where all this extra EU largesse was going? Why was it not felt _in real terms_ by the leave areas? Again and again the remain crowd point to this fact that the EU funded leave areas higher than anywhere in the country, I mean this is great for the remainer because it confirms the belief that silly racists cut their noses off to spite their faces. But again, in real terms, not liberal paper talking points, where was the jam?



I wasn't talking about a leave area, I was talking about Merseyside.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> I wasn't talking about a leave area, I was talking about Merseyside.


perhaps I should have quoted mauvais. Yeah,
I just read back, its his comment I should have been quoting


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> From joining the EC in 1973  Ireland developed beyond anything the UK could possibly have offered.....if we had remained part of the UK...and the economy grew..right up to the mid 90s.
> I'm not talking about the Celtic tiger...that was very much a greed driven debacle ...and run by scurrilous banks who didnt give a toss about the potentially devastating repercussions of loaning people 4 times their salary to buy overpriced houses ... and Irelanf wasnt alone in that crapology....as we all know.
> Dont blame the EU for that debacle
> 
> Ireland is better off in every way remaining within the EU...



Ireland and Denmark joined the EEC originally  because the UK joined, and trade with the UK was central to their economies. With Ireland at least that is still the case so the harder the Brexit the worse it will be for the Irish economy. Ireland leaving the EU would not be sensible, but at the same time it would not be sensible for British negotiators not to exploit the power they have to damage the Irish economy, in their efforts to achieve the most favourable deal.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Just been listening to Ms Foster's views and God help NI....
It's like being back in 1986....
What a dinosaur.....
Hard to write this...but Ian Paisley in his last 8 years was more enlightened and progressive than madam Foster...




tim said:


> Ireland and Denmark joined the EEC originally  because the UK joined, and trade with the UK was central to their economies. With Ireland at least that is still the case so the harder the Brexit the worse it will be for the Irish economy. Ireland leaving the EU would not be sensible, but at the same time it would not be sensible for British negotiators not to exploit the power they have to damage the Irish economy, in their efforts to achieve the most favourable deal.



So...because britain wants to leave they're going to fuck us over...again...?
You do realise that the  Great British economy was made on the backs of the colonies? On the likes of the Irish...working for fuck all to put food on British tables whilst they themselves were starving?

If the brits think they can pressure Ireland into a hard border they're delusional. Ireland wont bow to pressure from the UK..and history will be repeated ..NI will turn into a massive money pit for the british government as they try to piece together a shattered peace agreement...
 it really will be back to the days of the IRA and INLA fighting Unionists and all the bigots will rule.
The British government are playing with peace in the north...and ultimately they are playing games with people's lives.

Ireland is not a pawn to be shoved around by the British government.


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> So...because britain wants to leave they're going to fuck us over...again...?
> You do realisr that the fucking great British economy was made on the backs of the colonies? On the likes of the Irish...working for fuck all to put food on British tables whilst they themselves were starving?
> You need to wake up mate....
> If the brits think they can pressure Ireland into a hard border they're delusional. Ireland wont bow to pressure from the UK..and history will be repeated ..NI will turn into a massive money pit for the UK as they try to piece together a shattered peace agreement...
> ...



It's not what I think should happen, it's what I assume will happen because it is the way politics work. I don't like the way that Greece has been crushed by Germany economic interests, but my feelings are irrelevant. If the negotiators fail to find a compromise, the hard internal border will be imposed by the EU, regardless of the views of the Irish government. This won't be good for the British economy but it'll be a disaster for Ireland. So, Ireland is a pawn in the game. The British government has so much to lose from a bad deal, that it will exploit the advantages that it has.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

tim said:


> It's not what I think should happen, it's what I assume will happen because it is the way politics work. I don't like the way that Greece has been crushed by Germany economic interests, but my feelings are irrelevant. If the negotiators fail to find a compromise, the hard internal border will be imposed by the EU, regardless of the views of the Irish government. This won't be good for the British economy but it'll be a disaster for Ireland. So, Ireland is a pawn in the game. The British government has so much to lose from a bad deal, that it will exploit the advantages that it has.



If we are assuming things...then I would assume that the British government (who really dont want Brexit)  wont want to be responsible for messing up the peace agreement in Ireland. 

I'd put momey on another referendum happening before long.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> From joining the EC in 1973  Ireland developed beyond anything the UK could possibly have offered.....



I think one of the reasons for that is that Ireland did so badly from independence up to that point. 

With the benefit of 20 20 hindsight I could make a powerful case in 1920 for Ireland to remain in the UK, but it's a hundred years too late now.


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> If we are assuming things...then I would assume that the British government (who really dont want Brexit)  wont want to be responsible for messing up the peace agreement in Ireland.
> 
> I'd put momey on another referendum happening before long.



My assumption  is that there will be no second referendum, which would cause loss of face and might still have the same result. I do assume that there will be a lot of compromising and a BREXITsoft reality, in a shell of hard rhetoric.


----------



## Juno4000 (Nov 26, 2017)

I would vote the first option, but I disagree Scotland will be independent any time soon, so there are no options I can vote for.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> I think one of the reasons for that is that Ireland did so badly from independence up to that point.
> 
> With the benefit of 20 20 hindsight I could make a powerful case in 1920 for Ireland to remain in the UK, but it's a hundred years too late now.



Ireland was in a shit state before 1916...and people realised that the British governemt were always going to treat Ireland and it's population like dirt. From 1821 the Btitish government had shown how little they thought of Ireland and it's population.  Dont forget...we were citizens of the UK....but were treated like scum. 
The Starvation (mislabelled the famine) was a deliberate genocide and it left the country with a massively diminished population....survivors didn't forget...and after the Rising in 1916 the british government once again showed how little regard they had for the Irish...with executions and the black and tans sent over here....to kill. 
Between 1923 and 1973 Ireland was actually very progressive in some ways. The biggest hydroelectric power station in Europe was built on the Shannon.... The ESB (still one of the best electricity providers in europe) was born during that time in Ireland. I think the country was penniless though....which made it very hard. It was running on empty because it had no wealth...all it's wealth had gone to Britain for years. 

The EEC was great for Irish industry and farming and infrastructure which were areas that had been neglected prior to that by the British government.  

No point thinking about anything in hindsight ....because what happened, happened and destroyed people's lives for decades afterwards...but...I think the vast majority of Irish people would not go back to change that history .


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> From joining the EC in 1973  <snip>.and the economy grew..


And this is what so much of the the pro-EU consist of. The _economy_.



bubblesmcgrath said:


> I'm not talking about the Celtic tiger...that was very much a greed driven debacle ...and run by scurrilous banks who didnt give a toss about the potentially devastating repercussions of loaning people 4 times their salary to buy overpriced houses ... and Irelanf wasnt alone in that crapology....as we all know.
> Dont blame the EU for that debacle


The politics that resulting in the Celtic Tiger, the GFC and now the water charges and other austerity measures are all the same politics. The same neo-liberal politics of the EU that you seek to defend.



bubblesmcgrath said:


> So...because* britain* wants to leave they're going to fuck *us *over...again...?
> You do realise that the  Great British economy was made on the backs of the colonies? On the likes of the *Irish*...working for fuck all to put food on *British* tables whilst they themselves were starving?
> 
> If the *brits* think they can pressure* Ireland *into a hard border they're delusional. Ireland wont bow to pressure from the UK..and history will be repeated ..NI will turn into a massive money pit for the british government as they try to piece together a shattered peace agreement...


Good to see the nice fluffy nationalism of Remain.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Good to see the nice fluffy nationalism of Remain.


That smacks of oxymoronism......
There is no discussion on Ireland leaving so....what's your beef?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2017)

Why your whole post was filled with nationalistic rubbish - Ireland vs GB. 
My beef is the writing out of the working class. 

Whatever their views on the EU no socialist should have anything to do with you or Loom.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Why your whole post was filled with nationalistic rubbish - Ireland vs GB.
> My beef is the writing out of the working class.
> 
> Whatever their views on the EU no socialist should have anything to do with you or Loom.




Lol.....what do you think the Irish population was to the British empire only the underclass....not even working class.
My posts are to do with what will happen if there is a hard border between Ireland and NI....(UK)

But carry on with your rather weird attack...


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Lol.....what do you think the Irish population was to the British empire only the underclass....not even working class.
> My posts are to do with what will happen if there is a hard border between Ireland and NI....(UK)
> 
> But carry on with your rather weird attack...


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Ireland was in a shit state before 1916...and people realised that the British governemt were always going to treat Ireland and it's population like dirt. From 1821 the Btitish government had shown how little they thought of Ireland and it's population.  Dont forget...we were citizens of the UK....but were treated like scum.
> The Starvation (mislabelled the famine) was a deliberate genocide and it left the country with a massively diminished population....survivors didn't forget...and after the Rising in 1916 the british government once again showed how little regard they had for the Irish...with executions and the black and tans sent over here....to kill.
> Between 1923 and 1973 Ireland was actually very progressive in some ways. The biggest hydroelectric power station in Europe was built on the Shannon.... The ESB (still one of the best electricity providers in europe) was born during that time in Ireland. I think the country was penniless though....which made it very hard. It was running on empty because it had no wealth...all it's wealth had gone to Britain for years.
> 
> ...



Actually I would agree with pretty much all of that, but it doesn't stop me wishing things were different 

FWIW (which is nothing) my own fantasy would be a federal UK, with an administrative capital in Manchester but devo max max *MAX* to Dublin, Edinburgh, Cardiff and London. As the largest nation population wise, England would be sub-divided into regions with less, but still substantial, powers than the national parliaments in Wales, Scotland and Ireland to prevent any one part of the UK dominating.

But that's what it is- total fantasy, and getting off topic too.....


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

gosub said:


>


Anglo Irish.... lived inside the Pale.... protestant ascendancy class...


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 26, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Actually I would agree with pretty much all of that, but it doesn't stop me wishing things were different
> 
> FWIW (which is nothing) my own fantasy would be a federal UK, with an administrative capital in Manchester but devo max max *MAX* to Dublin, Edinburgh, Cardiff and London. As the largest nation population wise, England would be sub-divided into regions with less, but still substantial, powers than the national parliaments in *Wales, Scotland and Ireland to prevent any one part of the UK dominating.*
> 
> But that's what it is- total fantasy, and getting off topic too.....



But....Eire is not part of the UK....and we do not want to be... why is this so hard for people to get? 

I better leave this thread...my posts are not adding anything to the discourse.

Good luck to all the brexiters and those who sail in you... 
Let's hope the outcome is not a monumental disaster.


----------



## Winot (Nov 26, 2017)

Actually I have really appreciated the RoI perspective you have given bubblesmcgrath so thank you. I hope you do keep posting.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 26, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> But....Eire is not part of the UK....and we do not want to be... why is this so hard for people to get?



 I completely get it, and I get why.  I just said I wished things were different.

I too appreciate a different perspective on these things


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 26, 2017)

It’s blatantly obvious why the Irish wouldn’t want to assist the UK government, hundreds of years of abuse and now the balance of power is shifted.

What I don’t get is the insistence that trade can’t be discussed until the border situation is sorted. Surely the border issue is all about trade, so can’t be sorted without bringing trade in to it?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 26, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What I don’t get is the insistence that trade can’t be discussed until the border situation is sorted. Surely the border issue is all about trade, so can’t be sorted without bringing trade in to it?



Because you can either discuss CETA and a sea border, or Norway+ with a soft land border. And it needs to be clear which is being discussed, without a fudge. No one in Brussels or Dublin is being unreasonable on that score.


----------



## planetgeli (Nov 26, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What I don’t get is the insistence that trade can’t be discussed until the border situation is sorted. Surely the border issue is all about trade, so can’t be sorted without bringing trade in to it?



It’s almost like Yannis Varoufakis was right when he said they’d tie us in knots in negotiations.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 26, 2017)

I doubt the EU have any intention of reaching any sort of settlement about anything. Imo they are trying to prevent brexit.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I doubt the EU have any intention of reaching any sort of settlement about anything. Imo they are trying to prevent brexit.


That's one way of looking at it. On the other hand you might see the UK as being deliberately awkward and stubborn because Davis et al have wanted a hard brexit all along - which they know is a much more likely outcome of a failed negotiation process than us remaining in the EU.


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Well yes, the vote to leave was caused by successive UK governments not by the EU. Holland for example does not have the UK scale of min wage migrants because it’s employment law would not allow the business models developed in the UK to take advantage of the cheap eastern European labour pool available after 2004. Several EU countries have been able to limit migration staying within EU rules. You don’t see roadside car washes in Holland & France for example.




You might not find roadside car washes in the Netherlands,  but if you want to find exploited foreign workers look in the windows of the many brothels or in the glasshouses of the horticulturalists. Who do you think picks all those tasteless but cheap Dutch tomatoes in your fridge?


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The geography of the zionist entity is political



As is that of Judea and Samaria


----------



## tim (Nov 26, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Read the post again. Yes he is a Thatcher loving old git & a racist. His politics is at polar opposites to mine. And yet the anarchist part of me that has always been there recognises the anarchy in him & many of the leave voters. They are angry about their lives & angry about the successive governments that have done them down. They are still happy to leave the EU. They do not care about the consequences. They would be happy for anarchy to reign. However I do doubt many would even know the meaning of the word.



Patronising ageist bilge!


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

tim said:


> You might not find roadside car washes in the Netherlands,  but if you want to find exploited foreign workers look in the windows of the many brothels or in the glasshouses of the horticulturalists. Who do you think picks all those tasteless but cheap Dutch tomatoes in your fridge?


Did I say Holland treats migrant workers better than UK? Not necessarily. What It manages to do within EU laws is make migrant workers less welcome & better employment laws & enforcement of those laws in Holland makes it less worthwhile for companies to employ migrant workers. France manages to do similar so it has less migrant workers.

Migration from the EU was a factor in the referendum result. The perception by some leave voters was that there are too many migrant workers in the UK & that these migrant workers are somehow prioritised over UK workers. The truth of that is not relevant. What is relevant is that enough UK voters thought that to vote leave to probably swing the result to leave. Call them racist, call them what you like but in a narrow result their votes probably swung it.

Going back to the original point the leave vote was most likely caused not by the EU but by the UK’s staying absolutely within EU rules when other countries often attempt to circumvent EU rules if it suits them.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Lol.....what do you think the Irish population was to the British empire only the underclass....not even working class.
> My posts are to do with what will happen if there is a hard border between Ireland and NI....(UK)


No your posts are nationalistic defence of the EU. What's pathetic is that so the same people who are willing to write off leave voters as racists, nationalists etc are willing to cosy up to such nonsense.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

tim said:


> Patronising ageist bilge!


Yawn. Must try harder. The bloke was old & fairly typical of older people in my very leave voting town. There are certainly more old people like him around where I live than lefty old people like me. His totally ideologically driven approach to brexit rather than be troubled by any facts did rather make him an anarchist I thought. I reserve my right to dislike nasty racist old cunts like him.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

This.....and much worse....is why Ireland ...as in the Irish people...will not trust the British establishment ..




I dont know how to make the photo a spoiler....sorry if its too graphic....but it needs to be so that people like redsquirrel see why the Irish are not queuing up to join up to the UK again.



redsquirrel said:


> No your posts are nationalistic defence of the EU. What's pathetic is that so the same people who are willing to write off leave voters as racists, nationalists etc are willing to cosy up to such nonsense.



My posts are..to quote you.." nationalistic defence" for never being part of the uk again....
You haven't a fucking clue about Eire or our history...and you are just spouting gobshite....
How can you possibly understand Ireland? You've never been colonised...and you are whingeing about fuck all from a position where your country's  history is one of conquest, slavery, oppression and suppression.
You......redsquirrel.... know fuck all at all...
It's easy for you to spout about nationalism from a perspective of dominance over 1/3 of the world.....get the fuck out of NI and then talk to me about nationalism.
You're pro brexit...because you want england to rule itself....lol....learn your own history...england has never  been on its own...it thrives because of its commonwealth....you've got your own version of the eu..
Good luck to you....fool....


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> but it needs to be so that peoole like redsquirrel see why the Irish are not queuing up to join up to the UK again.



I'm not sure that many in the UK want to be joined with them. They do,however, believe that the people of Northern Ireland deserve their protection from the murderers in the IRA, if they want to remain part of the UK.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> I'm not sure that many in the UK want to be joined with them. They do,however, believe that the people of Northern Ireland deserve their protection from the murderers in the IRA, if they want to remain part of the UK.



A hard border is not the answer then.
The people living in NI comprise of nationalists and unionists...and neither want a hard border or a return to the troubles.....
NI is part of the UK...but the peace process and GFA have been fantastic for NI....from every perspective.
Nobody gave NI any thought before the Brexit referendum...
They should have though...

By the way....the black and tans were paid by the british government to kill their own peoole. Dont forget that Ireland was still part of the uk when the black and tans were sent in.
NI nationalists have a dread of British soldiers too...for similar reasons. The british government has taken a very long time to respect the nationalist people in NI despite their being british citizens....


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> By the way....the black and tans were paid by the british government to kill their own peoole. Dont forget that Ireland was still part of the uk when the black and tans were sent in...



Yep. It was possibly too late by that point to keep the country together but disgusting actions like the ones you describe above ensured decades of mistrust which is only now beginning to subside.

Getting this somewhere back on topic, like I say I'm a hard Brexiteer but I think a hard border in Ireland would be a disaster.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 27, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Getting this somewhere back on topic, like I say I'm a hard Brexiteer but I think a hard border in Ireland would be a disaster.



Then, what do you want? A special status for NI with shared EU and UK governance and a hard sea border? Or what? So far, you aren’t saying much more than David Davis is.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> I'm not sure that many in the UK want to be joined with them. They do,however, believe that the people of Northern Ireland deserve their protection from the murderers in the IRA, if they want to remain part of the UK.



Sorry but the irony is strong here...^^^
You're talking about the people of NI as if they're all unionists..they are not.....this is exactly what I was trying to get across to you. 
You say the people of NI deserve protection from the IRA....sure...of course.
By the same token...the people of Northern Ireland deserved protection from the british soldiers too...and with the history of how British soldiers treated the Irish throughout the island you surely can see why there's a big problem with a hard border.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

I can only speak for myself but having always lived in sth east corner of UK I have very little knowledge of day to day issues on the island of Ireland. I don’t think many leave voters around my way even thought about Ireland. I’m sure if asked they would give an opinion but without taking time to read up about the history of Ireland I would think any answer they might give would not be a realistic one. From what I understand the best way would be to leave things as they are. Anything else would be a retrograde step.


----------



## Winot (Nov 27, 2017)

Well it’s all very complicated isn’t it, with multiple dependent issues that few voters are expert in. Almost as if it shouldn’t be reduced to a simplistic yes/no referendum question...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

Indeed, a circular argument. A bit like this thread.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

Winot said:


> Well it’s all very complicated isn’t it, with multiple dependent issues that few voters are expert in. Almost as if it shouldn’t be reduced to a simplistic yes/no referendum question...


Although of course one way might be a simplistic yes/no referendum. Then about 18mnths to discuss the nuts & bolts of it followed by another referendum when there is more idea of what the result might look like? Are you all sure you still want to do this? Maybe for such a fundemental change more like an 80% vote might be needed rather than 51%? Stuff like that.

Or perhaps make the referendum result not legally binding so result can be ignored if disaster is looming?..oh hang on they already did that more by luck than judgement...


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> I dont know how to make the photo a spoiler....sorry if its too graphic....but it needs to be so that people like redsquirrel see why the Irish are not queuing up to join up to the UK again.


 I've not made any such argument.


bubblesmcgrath said:


> My posts are..to quote you.." nationalistic defence" for never being part of the uk again....


No you've argued that the EU has helped the Irish working class.


bubblesmcgrath said:


> You're pro brexit...because you want england to rule itself....lol....learn your own history...england has never  been on its own...it thrives because of its commonwealth....you've got your own version of the eu..
> Good luck to you....fool....


Again total crap. I've never made any such argument. I'm a communist, personally I think it is in the advantage of the working class (UK, Irish, European and worldwide) for the collapse of the EU. But whether you are arguing for the UK to remain part of the EU or to leave what you  must do is argue from a class based perspective. You talk about "Ireland" and "the UK" as though those nations had some existential existence rather than being deeply divided by class.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> I'm not sure that many in the UK want to be joined with them. They do,however, believe that the people of Northern Ireland deserve their protection from the murderers in the IRA, if they want to remain part of the UK.



Well, perhaps the people also deserve protection from the murderers in the crown forces, UDA, UFF etc as well.

For parity's sake, yeah?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

Winot said:


> Well it’s all very complicated isn’t it, with multiple dependent issues that few voters are expert in. Almost as if it shouldn’t be reduced to a simplistic yes/no referendum question...


Yeah, can't trust the thicko's. Should be left to our betters (the same betters that have driven inequality to a level equal to that during Victorian times)


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

The ROI is well rid of the nefarious British influence in the EU.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I've not made any such argument.
> No you've argued that the EU has helped the Irish working class.
> Again total crap. I've never made any such argument. I'm a communist, personally I think it is in the advantage of the working class (UK, Irish, European and worldwide) for the collapse of the EU. But whether you are arguing for the UK to remain part of the EU or to leave what you  must do is argue from a class based perspective. You talk about "Ireland" and "the UK" as though those nations had some existential existence rather than being deeply divided by class.



BS.
The "working class" in Ireland?
Every fucking person in Ireland up to joining the EU was working class....
Middle and upper were anglo irish ...
Anyone working in Ireland presently in regular jobs is working class.
Do you mean the people who are generationally supported by the social welfare system? That only fully came into being when we joined the EU.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

Prefect example of what I've been talking about. All Irish in the same class, no capitalism in Ireland! You utter berk.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

To clarify my previous post; when I say British influence - I'm talking about the various UK governments. Not the British people who have made their decision.

But the ROI doesn't have to slavishly follow that direction.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah, can't trust the thicko's. Should be left to our betters (the same betters that have driven inequality to a level equal to that during Victorian times)


I would agree it is simplistic to suggest people who are not politically aware are thickos. Most people do not do politics. They find it boring & they have no interest. They apply their intellect to their work & their families. This is why this thickos voted leave argument does not wash. I’m sure most voters leave or remain did not do extensive research into advantages/disadvantages of leave/remain.

So yes it is too simplistic for those on the remain side to brand leavers thickos because I’m sure most remainers did not do extensive research before they voted either. I guess most voters will have voted for what they saw as most relevant to themselves. If their work &/or leisure time takes them in the direction of Europe then they probably voted remain. If they have no interest or connection with Europe in their day to day lives then they may have voted leave. Only the politically aware might have based their vote on their entrenched political views


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I would agree it is simplistic to suggest people who are not politically aware are thickos. Most people do not do politics.


Rubbish, people "do" politics constantly. They work, they have kids, they interact with their communities that _*is*_ "doing" politics. Politics is not what happens at Westminster or Brussels it is how we live and work.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Rubbish, people "do" politics constantly. They work, they have kids, they interact with their communities that _*is*_ "doing" politics. Politics is not what happens at Westminster or Brussels it is how we live and work.



And those who don't vote or say they hate politics but still interact with their communities/families/work etc?


----------



## Winot (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah, can't trust the thicko's. Should be left to our betters (the same betters that have driven inequality to a level equal to that during Victorian times)



I didn’t say they were thickos.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> And those who don't vote or say they hate politics but still interact with their communities/families/work etc?


How would not voting = not "doing" politics when I've just said that politics doesn't consist of who's in power at Westminster. Likewise if people say they "hate politics" then the probably mean they hate politicians and what is defined by those in power as politics, it doesn't mean they aren't "doing" politics. 


Winot said:


> I didn’t say they were thickos.


Nope you just implied it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> How would not voting = not "doing" politics when I've just said that politics doesn't consist of who's in power at Westminster. Likewise if people say they "hate politics" then the probably mean they hate politicians and what is defined by those in power as politics, it doesn't mean they aren't "doing" politics.



Are you saying they are unaware they're doing politics?


----------



## Winot (Nov 27, 2017)

So what is the solution to the NI border problem redsquirrel? Apart from full communism everywhere immediately?


----------



## Winot (Nov 27, 2017)

Oh well, I guess we'll just have to all 'politic' our way through it.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Rubbish, people "do" politics constantly. They work, they have kids, they interact with their communities that _*is*_ "doing" politics. Politics is not what happens at Westminster or Brussels it is how we live and work.


What you appear to be saying is that everything is political & yes you have a point. Unfortunately most folk would not see it that way. Do you seriously think that if you told most people that everything they do is political they would understand the point your are trying to make or agree with it if you explained it in detail?

Politics should always be about the art of the possible otherwise it’s just impotent discussions far into the night with kindred spirits. You might say that people do politics constantly. It might even be true but most people would not agree or believe that they are doing politics constantly. They would say they are just getting on with their day to day lives & the politicians are doing the politics.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> What you appear to be saying is that everything is political & yes you have a point. Unfortunately most folk would not see it that way. Do you seriously think that if you told most people that everything they do is political they would understand the point your are trying to make or agree with it if you explained it in detail?
> 
> Politics should always be about the art of the possible otherwise it’s just impotent discussions far into the night with kindred spirits. You might say that people do politics constantly. It might even be true but most people would not agree or believe that they are doing politics constantly. They would say they are just getting on with their day to day lives & the politicians are doing the politics.



Totally.

Of course, our everyday lives are dictated to by politics. But ask most people and their concerns are about family, work, health and the price of a meal or a pint.

That's not to dismiss the activists and politicans who actually strive to make our world a better one, btw.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 27, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Then, what do you want? A special status for NI with shared EU and UK governance and a hard sea border? Or what? So far, you aren’t saying much more than David Davis is.


I want to stay in the customs union and keep free movement of people throughout the whole of Britain and Ireland.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 27, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> I want to stay in the customs union and keep free movement of people throughout the whole of Britain and Ireland.



You want the UK to be in a customs union with the EU? You know that requires regulatory convergence and would make deals with other countries fiendishly difficult to do? Turkey has the theoretical ability to have deals outside WTO or EU agreements, but AIUI in fact doesn't.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 27, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> I want to stay in the customs union and keep free movement of people throughout the whole of Britain and Ireland.



An admirable solution for the UK, but not one that works for the Republic, given that they wish to retain free movement of people within the EU.

Unfortunately, if the UK wants to end free movement, then it has to do so at its borders, given the attachment to free movement within the EU.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 27, 2017)

I have no sympathy at all for May ever, an awful, despicable talent free piece of shit - but fucking hell, this is a turbocharged Schleswig-Holstein horror to have to deal with


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 27, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have no sympathy at all for May ever, an awful, despicable talent free piece of shit - but fucking hell, this is a turbocharged Schleswig-Holstein horror to have to deal with



It would be a lot easier for her if her priorities of self, party and country were reversed, though.


----------



## Slo-mo (Nov 27, 2017)

kebabking said:


> An admirable solution for the UK, but not one that works for the Republic, given that they wish to retain free movement of people within the EU.
> 
> Unfortunately, if the UK wants to end free movement, then it has to do so at its borders, given the attachment to free movement within the EU.


It all depends what you mean by free movement. I don't see any reason why we need to restrict the actual movement of EU nationals into the UK with a hard border,  merely end their automatic right to work here, with the exception of Irish citizens who  have always had the right to come and work here.

We don't need a hard border with border posts, it can all be done at employment level.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 27, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> ...We don't need a hard border with border posts, it can all be done at employment level.



i don't think it can - given that one of the drivers for this is immigration, and not just employment with companies that obey the law.

personally i'd take the same view as you - keep it at employment level, and while there will be those who slip under the radar and operate in the grey/black economy, their numbers aren't enough of a problem to abandon the seemless move to and from the EU - but there is a very significant political constituancy for whom that number of undocumented EU 'illegals' is enough of a problem to be worth ending the seemless nature of the future border.

that constituancy appears to be in the driving seat...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i don't think it can - given that one of the drivers for this is immigration, and not just employment with companies that obey the law.
> 
> personally i'd take the same view as you - keep it at employment level, and while there will be those who slip under the radar and operate in the grey/black economy, their numbers aren't enough of a problem to abandon the seemless move to and from the EU - but there is a very significant political constituancy for whom that number of undocumented EU 'illegals' is enough of a problem to be worth ending the seemless nature of the future border.
> 
> that constituancy appears to be in the driving seat...


You would be fine with a situation in which there is a growth in undocumented workers exploited to fuck by employers? Leaving borders open but creating hurdles to legal employment will only increase exploitation of the worst-paid.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 27, 2017)

The EU and Ireland is a complicated issue. So complicated that the Irish paid/pays 42% of all EU banking debt.
42% of Europe’s banking crisis paid by Ireland Thanks EU.

The simple solution to the border in the short term is a sea border.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2017)

It's an issue that neatly encapsulates the shitty isolationist nature of brexit, imo. Fuck erecting new borders. It's a shitty thing to do that will only have shitty consequences.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 27, 2017)

It's an issue that neatly encapsulates the shitty isolationist nature of Kate Hoey, as well. Put up new borders and make the Irish pay for them, she said this morning, channelling her inner Trump.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 27, 2017)

Those borders never went away.


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2017)

flypanam said:


> ...
> The simple solution to the border in the short term is a sea border.


not for a government propped up by the DUP


----------



## flypanam (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> The EU made Ireland



Really, I thought Ireland was made by a highly skilled workforce, that endured decades of wage restraint, workers being told to stop being greedy and accept partnerships deals between the bosses, the dail and union bosses. I was also under the impression that the structural funding that Ireland got came at the cost of ignoring Irish referendums. That the Irish state instead of helping the poorest in Ireland gifted factories to the likes of BOSE. Who promptly left when their great tax arrangements ended.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's an issue that neatly encapsulates the shitty isolationist nature of brexit, imo. Fuck erecting new borders. It's a shitty thing to do that will only have shitty consequences.


Shuffling the border is not erecting new borders tho it will create new problems


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You would be fine with a situation in which there is a growth in undocumented workers exploited to fuck by employers? Leaving borders open but creating hurdles to legal employment will only increase exploitation of the worst-paid.


You forget all workers are exploited


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> The british government has taken a very long time to respect the nationalist people in NI despite their being british citizens....



Perhaps the British government is not keen on those who support the IRA, or anyone else who murders men, woman and children indiscriminately with car bombs, executions etc 

There was fault on both sides, as is common with most conflicts.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Perhaps the British government is not keen on those who support the IRA, or anyone else who murders men, woman and children indiscriminately with car bombs, executions etc
> 
> .



i think you will find the british government is quite selective on its attitude to terrorists and their political backers. Perhaps you haven't noticed which northern irish party is currently propping up Theresa May?


----------



## flypanam (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Perhaps the British government is not keen on those who support the IRA, or anyone else who murders men, woman and children indiscriminately with car bombs, executions etc
> 
> There was fault on both sides, as is common with most conflicts.



Must troll harder.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 27, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Perhaps the British government is not keen on those who support the IRA, or anyone else who murders men, woman and children indiscriminately with car bombs, executions etc
> 
> There was fault on both sides, as is common with most conflicts.



I am no fan of the IRA but they came about for a reason. The fault lies much more with the British aparatus and the way Catholics were persecuted in NI/6counties.


----------



## tim (Nov 27, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> BS.
> The "working class" in Ireland?
> Every fucking person in Ireland up to joining the EU was working class....
> Middle and upper were anglo irish ...
> ...



Clearly this is not true well before the EU, and well before independence there was a substantial Catholic middle class.

The most famous piece of Irish twentieth century literature was written  by a bourgeois Catholic and it's opening portrays well-to-do intelectual  chaps horsing around in a very Catholic way



> *Episode 1 - Telemachus*
> STATELY, PLUMP BUCK MULLIGAN CAME FROM THE STAIRHEAD, bearing a bowl of lather on which a mirror and a razor lay crossed. A yellow dressing gown, ungirdled, was sustained gently-behind him by the mild morning air. He held the bowl aloft and intoned:
> 
> 
> ...





And being a protestant was no guarantee that you wouldn't die of hunger during the famine 

Shankill remembers Protestant and Catholic victims of   Famine

The Protestant ascendancy went into slow decline from 1800 onwards not  from the start of the 1970s 

Protestant Ascendancy: Decline, 1800 to 1930 - Dictionary definition of Protestant Ascendancy: Decline, 1800 to 1930 | Encyclopedia.com: FREE online dictionary


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Prefect example of what I've been talking about. All Irish in the same class, no capitalism in Ireland! You utter berk.


What he's saying if I've read him right & from what I e read of Irish history is that the workers were Irish but the bosses were anglo Irish ie brits


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 27, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Perhaps you haven't noticed which northern irish party is currently propping up Theresa May?



Quite. And with good reason, too.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 27, 2017)

KeeperofDragons said:


> What he's saying if I've read him right & from what I e read of Irish history is that the workers were Irish but the bosses were anglo Irish ie brits



There is a sense of that but it's not true for instance William Martin Murphy, him of the Lock-out was an Irish boss.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Prefect example of what I've been talking about. All Irish in the same class, no capitalism in Ireland! You utter berk.



Lol....blinkered a bit are you?


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Nov 27, 2017)

tim said:


> Clearly this is not true well before the EU, and well before independence there was a substantial Catholic middle class.
> 
> The most famous piece of Irish twentieth century literature was written  by a bourgeois Catholic and it's opening portrays well-to-do intelectual  chaps horsing around in a very Catholic way
> 
> ...



There was not a substantial middle class catholic base outside the pale.
Most ordinary people living in the countryside and in slums  in the city were what you might call working class although many had very little work and very little in the way of income. Theu lived in abject poverty.
Middle class catholics existed but they were few and far between.  Most  middle class were anglo irish or protestant.

Anyway   look... I'm out  of this debate.
Brexit is the business of Britain....
It is unfortunate that it will impact negatively on Ireland...but nothing new in the British establishmemt not giving a toss about it's neighbour.

Good luck to you all...Brexiteers and Remainers. It's not going to be an easy time for any of you.....or us.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Are you saying they are unaware they're doing politics?


I'm saying that I don't believe that there is such a thing as "doing" politics. It's not something separate from people's lives


krtek a houby said:


> But ask most people and their concerns are about family, work, health and the price of a meal or a pint.


And how are these not political concerns? I know you don't believe in the class war but it's real and it affects us (and us it).


SaskiaJayne said:


> What you appear to be saying is that everything is political & yes you have a point. Unfortunately most folk would not see it that way. Do you seriously think that if you told most people that everything they do is political they would understand the point your are trying to make or agree with it if you explained it in detail?.


No I accept that many people do see politics as something outside of their lives, something that is intrinsically linked to politicians. But that's because they've be told that's what politics is by the media, by politicians, by capital etc. But it's not true, and we (socialists) shouldn't go along with that line.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

I do believe in the class war, in as far as some activists might be pushing it a bit far when people just aren't interested. You tell a working class person that they're in a class war and they'd be better off doing socialism instead of not voting/not participating and they might look at you a bit funny. IMHO, of course.

Now, it's quite possible that they would be better off in a socialist state. It can't be any worse than it is now under successive tory and tory-lite governments.

I think it's maybe how you go about converting people to the cause. How to get them interested. The Brexit referendum got people interested; why was that?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> The Brexit referendum got people interested; why was that?



In no small part, because they were told to be interested. And, given that there was a referendum, they were sort of forced to be.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> You tell a working class person that they're in a class war and they'd be better off doing socialism instead of not voting/not participating and they might look at you a bit funny.



Of course they do. Using words like "working class" is just so cheesy and old fashioned. You sound like some kind of dinosaur from days gone by. We are no longer living in the days when tens of millions of people performed manual labour in coal mines, farms and heavy industry.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I do believe in the class war,



Really, so when you came out with this stuff below you were talking crap? 



			
				krtek a houby said:
			
		

> I believe that "class" and reducing everything down to "class" is identity politics.


(from here)


krtek a houby said:


> Class, religion, politics - all identities.





krtek a houby said:


> I have argued (unsuccessfuly,it must be said) that class is part of identity politics.





krtek a houby said:


> One thing I won't miss with this country is the obsssession with "class".
> 
> Am amazed how some elements of the "left" have alligned themselves with Brexiteer stars like Farage and co.
> 
> Am fucking grieving today - if you want to make a class thing out of it; fine but it means nothing to me.





krtek a houby said:


> Oh, that old chestnut. Used to silence any dissent over the class obsession.





krtek a houby said:


> Of course there are "class" and economic factors.





krtek a houby said:


> You're talking about liberal capitalism. I was talking about people's lives being erased because of their politics and or "class".





krtek a houby said:


> Because identity politics isn't just a "liberal" thing. When people mention working class and blaming everything on the liberals, that's a prime example of it.





krtek a houby said:


> Do I think the working class are worthier than liberals? No. I believe they both indulge in identity politics.





krtek a houby said:


> As for working class - someone who has a job? I don't subscribe to class systems. Being a tree hugging wooly fiendish liberal thicko and all...





krtek a houby said:


> Not arguing with you there, Danny. I've dismantled it in my mind. It's a start.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Really, so when you came out with this stuff below you were talking crap?
> (from here)



Oh, cross thread beef. 

Read what I said again - I do believe in the class war, *in as far as some activists might be pushing it a bit far when people just aren't interested.
*
Engaging by waging war on others, getting them to "do" socialism and join the fight. It's not going to happen (especially not with the hectoring you engage in) because the ordinary person just wants to get on with life.

Once you start berating/lecturing your audience with the idea of "class war", you've lost their interest. 

It just comes across as very Alan Parker Urban Warrior, unfortunately.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Oh, cross thread beef.


Pointing out that ever since you've posted on U75 you've attacked the idea of class and thus that you're utterly inconsistent is not cross thread beef. The fact that you contradict yourself constantly isn't my fault. 



krtek a houby said:


> Read what I said again - I do believe in the class war, *in as far as some activists might be pushing it a bit far when people just aren't interested.*


I've no idea what that means and how it is consistent with your previous insistence that class either doesn't exist or is an identity I've no idea.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 28, 2017)

Raheem said:


> In no small part, because they were told to be interested. And, given that there was a referendum, they were sort of forced to be.


Many people who don't usually vote say they don’t because they don’t think their vote will make a difference. Usual reason they give is that they think all politicians are the same ie wankers or that they don’t understand politics. I think voters understood that the referendum was different because all votes would make a difference. That their vote would count. So many voted for the first time in their lives.

To vote people need to have a reason to vote. Those who feel excluded need to have a reason to feel included. The chance of a council house might do it. I think house ownership is not on the radar of many younger people now. They just want a decent & affordable home. If they can be convinced that Labour will build council houses then they will vote Labour. If they are not convinced by Labour then I doubt they will vote Tory. They just won’t vote.

I think Labour did better than expected at last GE because those who don’t usually vote, mostly younger people did vote & they voted Labour. So I think Labour can probably win just by convincing those who see no point in voting at elections to vote Labour.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

KeeperofDragons said:


> What he's saying if I've read him right & from what I e read of Irish history is that the workers were Irish but the bosses were anglo Irish ie brits


Yes and in what way is that not nationalising the class struggle? All the bosses were British? Even in 1973? In 2017?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

Incidentally I hope those arguing against leaving the EU on economic grounds didn't vote Labour, going to be even more damaging! 


> Morgan Stanley warned of the UK’s fragile political situation, saying: “For much of the past 30 years and more, a change of government ultimately had a relatively limited impact on the UK equity market, as policy settings didn’t change too dramatically. However, this may not be the case if we see a Labour government take power under its current leadership, given its very different policy approach.
> 
> “It is certainly plausible that the Labour party could ultimately moderate some of its more radical policy ideas; the alternative could be the most significant political shift in the UK since the end of the 1970s.”


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Pointing out that ever since you've posted on U75 you've attacked the idea of class and thus that you're utterly inconsistent is not cross thread beef. The fact that you contradict yourself constantly isn't my fault.
> 
> I've no idea what that means and how it is consistent with your previous insistence that class either doesn't exist or is an identity I've no idea.



Clearly you have no idea. Given that your first statment is a load of bollocks. I understand the British obsession with class, I do. It took me a while but I still don't subscribe to it. But with you, everything boils down to class.

It's a lazy, shouty way to shut down dialogue. There's not going to be a glorious revolution, at least, not on your terms. As long as you hector and bridle that not everyone sees things as clearly as you do.

Sorry Alan, but that's just the way it is. I've met people like you who would bore for Britain with class this class that and managing to alienate would be converts. Then I've met real activists who actually talk about issues and do stuff without the patronising class war shite.

You need to update your spreadsheet in the meantime.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Clearly you have no idea. Given that your first statment is a load of bollocks. I understand the British obsession with class, I do. It took me a while but I still don't subscribe to it. But with you, everything boils down to class.


Right so you don't believe in class war then? FFS you can't even maintain a straight line in the space of three posts.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Right so you don't believe in class war then? FFS you can't even maintain a straight line in the space of three posts.



Calm down, Alan. You obviously are incapable of reading what I asked you to re-read. I'm not going to spell it out for you. Just add it to your spreadsheet or give me a polygraph. Whatever puts your mind at ease.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> Of course they do. Using words like "working class" is just so cheesy and old fashioned. You sound like some kind of dinosaur from days gone by. We are no longer living in the days when tens of millions of people performed manual labour in coal mines, farms and heavy industry.



Yeah because everyone's satisfied with their lot, the job losses, entire communities decimated, food banks and so on. They just got on their bikes and became IT consultants or speculated on the markets, right?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 28, 2017)

The Morgan Stanley thing is typical US red under every bed bollocks. A Corbyn led government is not going to be some loony far left regime it will be democratic socialism.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 28, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> You tell a working class person that they're in a class war and they'd be better off doing socialism instead of not voting/not participating and they might look at you a bit funny. IMHO, of course.
> 
> ...
> 
> I think it's maybe how you go about converting people to the cause.



This is all a bit patronising and clearly shows the weakness of a _class as identity_ position.

It's too early for me to deconstruct it all but put simply, the people I work with (all working class, such is the nature of our work) might look a but funny if I start on about "class war" ... but if we start talking about how our bosses are not on our side and the company's priorities and motives are different and in fact usually opposite to ours (as low-status frontline workers) then I can tell you, everyone agrees. Nobody _looks funny_. And in my experience most workplace mithering consists broadly of variations on that conversation. Working class people get there is a class war.

The only question is_ yeah well what can we do about it, while wages are low and we have no time or energy to do anything but keep working?_


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The Morgan Stanley thing is typical US red under every bed bollocks. A Corbyn led government is not going to be some loony far left regime it will be democratic socialism.


Of course, but if you arguing against the UK leaving the EU because of the economic damage it will cause then you're inviting this bollocks. Two sides of the same coin.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> This is all a bit patronising and clearly shows the weakness of a _class as identity_ position.
> 
> It's too early for me to deconstruct it all but put simply, the people I work with (all working class, such is the nature of our work) might look a but funny if I start on about "class war" ... but if we start talking about how our bosses are not on our side and the company's priorities and motives are different and in fact usually opposite to ours (as low-status frontline workers) then I can tell you, everyone agrees. Nobody _looks funny_. And in my experience most workplace mithering consists broadly of variations on that conversation. Working class people get there is a class war.
> 
> The only question is_ yeah well what can we do about it, while wages are low and we have no time or energy to do anything but keep working?_



Ah! But the phrasing is different, it's not hectoring at all. I agree entirely - I've been there at those meetings. I joined my union back in the day because it was the right thing to do. There were many discussions about the lot of us on the ground and the lot of them upstairs. The dirty tricks, the backstabbings, the justifications for us not getting a raise in wages even though we were being made redundant and more and more work to take on, those that was left.

At no point in the meetings did any earnest class war discussion take place. And that's what I'm saying puts people off. The concerns of the workers is what mattered. The abyss between us and them was self-evident, a given. In the end, we were defeated, castrated whatever you want to call it. Maybe there *should* have been more militancy in our stance but that's the way it ended.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 28, 2017)

So what I'm saying is, nobody uses the phrase Class War except as a joke, right? Especially in the actual workplace.

But going from there to a position that working class people don't understand the nature of the struggle is both patronising and completely wrong.

The problem isn't _what's the problem? _The problem is _what are we meant to do about the problem?_ A completely different problem.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 28, 2017)

..especially when striking and even working to rule are treated more or less as disciplinary matters by the company.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> So what I'm saying is, nobody uses the phrase Class War except as a joke, right? Especially in the actual workplace.
> 
> But going from there to a position that working class people don't understand the nature of the struggle is both patronising and completely wrong.
> 
> The problem isn't _what's the problem? _The problem is _what are we meant to do about the problem?_ A completely different problem.



I'm not saying that people don't understand the phrase, rather that it's too alienating. But of course, nomenclature aside, it's how to deal with the problem that faces workers up and down the country. And will it get better or worse, post-brexit?

Will the unions lose even more teeth when you leave the EU?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course, but if you arguing against the UK leaving the EU because of the economic damage it will cause then you're inviting this bollocks. Two sides of the same coin.


You have to see the context of the Morgan Stanley thing. They are advising US investors. A right wing brexit with the loony right wing brexiteers in power would be good for the US because for example US medical insurance co’s would have access to UK market as NHS was privatised. However it looks like we might well get a left wing Labour government & lexit so less profit for US investors.

Even without brexit & Cameron still in charge I think we would have got Labour in at next GE because more & more people don’t like the Tories & I think Labour would have still have got younger people out to vote Labour. The issue would still be unaffordable housing. The Tories will never solve the housing crisis without completely stealing Labour’s clothes.

So Morgan Stanley advice to their investors is simply that a socialist government in UK would mean less profits for them. In the greater UK scheme of things it amounts to absolutely fuck all & will be yesterday’s news as early as this evening imo.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> You have to see the context of the Morgan Stanley thing. They are advising US investors. A right wing brexit with the loony right wing brexiteers in power would be good for the US because for example US medical insurance co’s would have access to UK market as NHS was privatised. However it looks like we might well get a left wing Labour government & lexit so less profit for US investors.
> <snip>
> So Morgan Stanley advice to their investors is simply that a socialist government in UK would mean less profits for them. In the greater UK scheme of things it amounts to absolutely fuck all & will be yesterday’s news as early as this evening imo.


So we can ignore Morgan Stanley but when Goldman Sachs tells us that Brexit will be terrible for the economy we have to listen to them? 

I'm not arguing that this report by the financial institution is anything but rubbish. I'm arguing that it's hypocritical to argue about how leaving the EU will cause the economy to collapse while dismissing the same arguments by the same set of bastards about Labour.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 28, 2017)

I think we can safely ignore all advice from US investment banks who are simply giving advice to their investors & are always going to attempt to further their own profits. They have their own interests at heart obviously which are not those of normal working people in the UK.

A US investment bank’s advice on foreign investments will advise investment in countries with a cheap flexible labour force with little collective power & little union representation. If they see a possibility of an incoming government changing that then they will advise caution from their investors.


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> So we can ignore Morgan Stanley but when Goldman Sachs tells us that Brexit will be terrible for the economy we have to listen to them?
> 
> I'm not arguing that this report by the financial institution is anything but rubbish. I'm arguing that it's hypocritical to argue about how leaving the EU will cause the economy to collapse while dismissing the same arguments by the same set of bastards about Labour.



What do you think about the TUC’s position that Brexit will harm the economy and workers’ rights?

TUC says EU exit would hit wages


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> So we can ignore Morgan Stanley but when Goldman Sachs tells us that Brexit will be terrible for the economy we have to listen to them?
> 
> I'm not arguing that this report by the financial institution is anything but rubbish. I'm arguing that it's hypocritical to argue about how leaving the EU will cause the economy to collapse while dismissing the same arguments by the same set of bastards about Labour.




Its not just goldman sachs saying brexit would be bad though is it? Its everybody apart from the likes of jacob rees mogg and the magical thinkers of Lexit penning furious  articles in _Workers' Spirit Level_ or somesuch.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

What does "harm the economy" actually mean? I've already said economics is a religion, one that I do not subscribe to.

Why focus on workers' rights rather than workers' power? Has been part of the EU stopped the massive increase in insecure unemployment, the contraction of wages, the anti-trade union legislation?

The TUC, and the majority of unions, should listen to the RMT, probably the only union in this country that can actually say that it's really managed to maintain conditions for it's members.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Its not just goldman sachs saying brexit would be bad though is it? Its everybody apart from the likes of jacob rees mogg and the magical thinkers of Lexit penning furious  articles in _Workers' Spirit Level_ or somesuch.


What like the Bank of England, great. A lovely neutral body, not a deeply ideological institution whose purpose is to further the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> What like the Bank of England, great. A lovely neutral body, not a deeply ideological institution whose purpose is to further the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich.



Pretty sure their low inflation target looks after workers.

Alex


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Pretty sure their low inflation target looks after workers.
> 
> Alex



Haven’t you been paying attention? Red squirrel doesn’t subscribe to inflation.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> Haven’t you been paying attention? Red squirrel doesn’t subscribe to inflation.



I’d quite like to not subscribe to inflation, how do I sign up ?

Alex


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Pretty sure their low inflation target looks after workers.
> 
> Alex


Come on. Is that the level of political insight and analysis on these boards these days? - In response to redsquirrel's post pointing out that the BofE is not a neutral, dispassionate institution your reply is that they look after workers with their inflation targets?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> Haven’t you been paying attention? Red squirrel doesn’t subscribe to inflation.


This is the worst kind of strawmanning. Disagree with him by all means, but don't misrepresent what he's saying.


----------



## JimW (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Pretty sure their low inflation target looks after workers.
> 
> Alex


I thought it was the suppression of our wages helped their inflation target, but there you go


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2017)

It's called wage restraint now. All nice and voluntary. It's big in Europe as well.


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> This is the worst kind of strawmanning. Disagree with him by all means, but don't misrepresent what he's saying.



Fair enough - I apologise.

I am just frustrated with ivory tower idealism, whereas in the real world (imo) workers will suffer.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Pretty sure their low inflation target looks after workers.


Seriously? BTW how is inflation "controlled" by the BoE?


----------



## alex_ (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Seriously? BTW how is inflation "controlled" by the BoE?



Really?

The boe’s primacy role is monetary stability which means low inflation, they control this with interest rates and recently quantitive easing.

What do you think they do ? ( when they aren’t grinding the common man into the dirt)

Bank of England - Wikipedia

It also has a free museum which is great, you can hold a real gold bar, it’s heavy.

Alex


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 28, 2017)

Morgan Stanley got 100bn from the bailout in 08 . They are more shit than Goldman Sachs. Or less shit depending on yer perspective.

Recent ipsos  mori poll stuff about brexit shown lots of Chinese interest in a hard brexit as it will be a fire sale where they can spunk their wads of cash on emancipated British companies . 


No link as on train


----------



## yield (Nov 28, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Morgan Stanley got 100bn from the bailout in 08 . They are more shit than Goldman Sachs. Or less shit depending on yer perspective.
> 
> Recent ipsos  mori poll stuff about brexit shown lots of Chinese interest in a hard brexit as it will be a fire sale where they can spunk their wads of cash on emancipated British companies .


As you know Goldman Sachs were shorting, betting against, the shit they were selling so didn't lose as much as the others. Even so they needed a loan from Warren Buffett.


alex_ said:


> Really?
> 
> The boe’s primacy role is monetary stability which means low inflation, they control this with interest rates and recently quantitive easing.
> 
> ...


That's not the Bank of Englands primary role it's to raise debt for government spending. Quantitative easing was an experiment an attempt to reinflate assets for the rich.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Really?
> 
> The boe’s primacy role is monetary stability which means low inflation, they control this with interest rates and recently quantitive easing.


As JimW pointed out inflation has been _controlled_ by wage restraint (alongside increase job insecurity and maintaining the correct levels of unemployment).

---------

The last page of nonsense does show why we need a thread on what economics is, why it needs to be rejected.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> The last page of nonsense does show why we need a thread on what economics is, why it needs to be rejected.



I salute your arrogance.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 28, 2017)

no economics thread. ever. terrible shit


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Really?
> 
> The boe’s primacy role is monetary stability which means low inflation, they control this with interest rates and recently quantitive easing.
> 
> What do you think they do ? ( when they aren’t grinding the common man into the dirt)


This is what they are _supposed_ to do.  However, inflation is classically believed to be suppressed by putting up interest rates, not keeping them low.  And quantitative easing is classically supposed to lead to high inflation.  So the Bank of England's actions of late have not been those of an institution obsessed by inflation.

In fact, their actions have been perfectly reasonable for a body focussed on trying to keep the levels of capital moving properly.  There is too little activity in the economy to be worried about the kind of inflation that can be dealt with by monetary policy, so they haven't been worried about it.

By the way, the classic relationship between inflation and unemployment is an inverse one, i.e. the lower the inflation, the higher the unemployment.  This is known as the Phillips curve.  So if you believe in the primacy of economic relationships and you wish to emphasise workers over capital, you should be concerned about a state institution devoted to keeping inflation down.  Of late, however, the Phillips curve has been just another piece of classical economic wisdom that has taken a battering, reinforcing redsquirrel 's point that (classical) economics is more of a religion than a science.

(I would defend the recent crossover between economics, sociology and psychology that has led to testable and applicable behavioural economic/social psychological insights, but that is not the basis of mainstream economic analysis as things stand).


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

kabbes said:


> This is what they are _supposed_ to do.  However, inflation is classically believed to be suppressed by putting up interest rates, not keeping them low.  And quantitative easing is classically supposed to lead to high inflation.  So the Bank of England's actions of late have not been those of an institution obsessed by inflation.
> 
> In fact, their actions have been perfectly reasonable for a body focussed on trying to keep the levels of capital moving properly.  There is too little activity in the economy to be worried about the kind of inflation that can be dealt with by monetary policy, so they haven't been worried about it.
> 
> ...



Was there ever a time when all economists agreed? If it was ever a religion, it was the broadest of churches, and surely the articles of faith on which there has been consensus have varied over the years.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Was there ever a time when all economists agreed? If it was ever a religion, it was the broadest of churches, and surely the articles of faith on which there has been consensus have varied over the years.


They agreed on the fundamentals and disagreed about the interpretations of the arcane texts.  Much like the scholars of all religions, really.  Classical economics was always based on the concept of the rational economic actor, who was easy to analyse and create simple curves around.  Unfortunately, no actual person is a rational economic actor.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

kabbes said:


> They agreed on the fundamentals and disagreed about the interpretations of the arcane texts.  Much like the scholars of all religions, really.  Classical economics was always based on the concept of the rational economic actor, who was easy to analyse and create simple curves around.  Unfortunately, no actual person is a rational economic actor.



My impression was that once you get into modern monetary policy you have left the fundamentals behind and wandered into the realm of the post-classical.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> My impression was that once you get into modern monetary policy you have left the fundamentals behind and wandered into the realm of the post-classical.


Neo-classical rather than post-classical, I would say.  But I am not privy to the discussions held in the BoE, so what do I know?  They might actually be using all sorts of theory I've never heard of.

I can say, though, that some of their disaster scenarios I have to provide figures around don't really make any sense to me as a coherent set of economic indicators.  So maybe they do actually have a healthy distrust of their own models and are now just interested in planning for things transpiring along completely unprecedented and unexpected lines.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> My impression was that once you get into modern monetary policy you have left the fundamentals behind and wandered into the realm of the post-classical imaginary .


Cfu


----------



## gosub (Nov 28, 2017)

KeeperofDragons said:


> What he's saying if I've read him right & from what I e read of Irish history is that the workers were Irish but the bosses were anglo Irish ie brits


Normans


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

Expertise itself is not called into question just because experts disagree, or accept that their expertise has limits and is incomplete. This applies to economics, to psychiatry, and to all those other areas where those on whom expertise is inflicted start wittering about naked emperors. 

In short, we're better off when monetary and fiscal policy is determined by people who believe in economic than we'd be if it was determined by people who think it's a con.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> In short, we're better off when monetary and fiscal policy is determined by people who believe in economic than we'd be if it was determined by people who think it's a con.


pisspoor


----------



## gosub (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Expertise itself is not called into question just because experts disagree, or accept that their expertise has limits and is incomplete. This applies to economics, to psychiatry, and to all those other areas where those on whom expertise is inflicted start wittering about naked emperors.
> 
> In short, we're better off when monetary and fiscal policy is determined by people who believe in economic than we'd be if it was determined by people who think it's a con.


or..come back Sir Ivan Rodgers all is forgiven


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

gosub said:


> or..come back Sir Ivan Rodgers all is forgiven



There's nothing to forgive.


----------



## sealion (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> What do you think about the TUC’s position that Brexit will harm the economy and workers’ rights?
> 
> TUC says EU exit would hit wages



But another union chief, the RMT's Mick Cash, said the EU had pursued a "race to the bottom" on workers' rights and could never be reformed.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Expertise itself is not called into question just because experts disagree, or accept that their expertise has limits and is incomplete. This applies to economics, to psychiatry, and to all those other areas where those on whom expertise is inflicted start wittering about naked emperors.
> 
> In short, we're better off when monetary and fiscal policy is determined by people who believe in economic than we'd be if it was determined by people who think it's a con.


You need certain factors to be true to create expertise.  These factors include predictability, feedback loops rapid enough for the burgeoning expert to build the patterns of cause and effect and the development of established training methods designed to take advantage of these feedback loops.  These factors are why a golf professional can materially improve by hitting 20 balls from the same spot whilst an amateur can play round after round without ever improving.

I don't see in economics the factors necessary for the creation of expertise.  Results are chaotic, in that they are fine tuned to the precise circumstances of the time, and complex, in that they depend on huge numbers of rapidly changing variables.  This makes predictability a difficult problem.  Feedback loops, where they exist at all, are of the order of decades -- this is how long it takes to look back and gain some insight into what happened.  The models that try to make sense of these things are not based on analysing predictions and adjusting them.  Furthermore, those models will ignore whole classes of explanatory factors in an attempt to make the maths tractable.  

The consequence is that we end up with people with lots of _learning_ and lots of _experience_ but very little actual _expertise_.  Their predictions are no more accurate than those with little experience.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2017)

Not wanting to get bogged down in any mire, but it's worth restating that "my-enemy's-enemy-is-my-friend" is a fallacy.  Neither the Tory Brexiteers nor the institutions of the EU are the champions of the workers.  Being critical of one does not imply support for the other.  

And if people are _seriously_ arguing that the BofE is a _friend to the worker_, then there's no hope for critical thinking on these boards at all.


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

sealion said:


> But another union chief, the RMT's Mick Cash, said the EU had pursued a "race to the bottom" on workers' rights and could never be reformed.



Sure. But the argument was that it is only right wing neoliberal organisations that believe that Brexit will be damaging and that's clearly not true.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 28, 2017)

heh, reminded of this snippet from banks:
'The market is a good example of evolution in action; the try-everything-and-see-what-works approach. This might provide a perfectly morally satisfactory resource-management system so long as there was absolutely no question of any sentient creature ever being treated purely as one of those resources. The market, for all its (profoundly inelegant) complexities, remains a crude and essentially blind system, and is—without the sort of drastic amendments liable to cripple the economic efficacy which is its greatest claimed asset—intrinsically incapable of distinguishing between simple non-use of matter resulting from processal superfluity and the acute, prolonged and wide-spread suffering of conscious beings.'

anyway...


----------



## sealion (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> But the argument was that it is only right wing neoliberal organisations that believe that Brexit will be damaging and that's clearly not true.


All speculation and fear mongering until it happens.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

kabbes said:


> You need certain factors to be true to create expertise.  These factors include predictability, feedback loops rapid enough for the burgeoning expert to build the patterns of cause and effect and the development of established training methods designed to take advantage of these feedback loops.  These factors are why a golf professional can materially improve by hitting 20 balls from the same spot whilst an amateur can play round after round without ever improving.
> 
> I don't see in economics the factors necessary for the creation of expertise.  Results are chaotic, in that they are fine tuned to the precise circumstances of the time, and complex, in that they depend on huge numbers of rapidly changing variables.  This makes predictability a difficult problem.  Feedback loops, where they exist at all, are of the order of decades -- this is how long it takes to look back and gain some insight into what happened.  The models that try to make sense of these things are not based on analysing predictions and adjusting them.  Furthermore, those models will ignore whole classes of explanatory factors in an attempt to make the maths tractable.
> 
> The consequence is that we end up with people with lots of _learning_ and lots of _experience_ but very little actual _expertise_.  *Their predictions are no more accurate than those with little experience*.



That last point begs the question rather. Predictions aren't the be all and end all. Expertise has other types of potential value, such as the explanatory.


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

sealion said:


> All speculation and fear mongering until it happens.



You're right, there's no problem running off the cliff edge. It only hurts when you hit the ground.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That last point begs the question rather. Predictions aren't the be all and end all. Expertise has other types of potential value, such as the explanatory.


But what value is the supposedly explanatory if you can't provide any evidence for why your explanation is the right one?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 28, 2017)

lot of concern about workers rights from quarters that hitherto had been fairly quiet on that subject. Been the way throughout. I remember the whole 'bonfire of workers rights' stuff in the papers from remainers, people who had been rather quiet when the tories introduced their latest anti-union bill. Toynbee was the kicker for me as I recall her record on supporting actual strikes being patchy at best. Its also tied into this amazing alt history world where the EU gifted us our workers rights.


----------



## sealion (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> You're right, there's no problem running off the cliff edge. It only hurts when you hit the ground.



Give it a rest


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> lot of concern about workers rights from quarters that hitherto had been fairly quiet on that subject. Been the way throughout. I remember the whole 'bonfire of workers rights' stuff in the papers from remainers, people who had been rather quiet when the tories introduced their latest anti-union bill. Toynbee was the kicker for me as I recall her record on supporting actual strikes being patchy at best. Its also tied into this amazing alt history world where the EU gifted us our workers rights.


Have you not been reading that hot bed of workers and tenants rights - the brixton forum then?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 28, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But what value is the supposedly explanatory if you can't provide any evidence for why your explanation is the right one?


Haven't you been listening? They're experts. Isn't that enough?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 28, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But what value is the supposedly explanatory if you can't provide any evidence for why your explanation is the right one?



It's got value when the degree of fit with a particular model can be explored by someone who has applied that model in a number of different circumstances. You can have an opinion on the degree of rightness, without a comprehensive understanding of everything that might bear on the model. 

I agree that economics is more contestable than many other disciplines. It's going too far to call it a superstition or a pseudoscience, though, and as long as it isn't in that category, there's such a thing as expertise.


----------



## JimW (Nov 28, 2017)

Might as well hire a well-qualified astrologer if you need one.


----------



## Smangus (Nov 28, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Haven't you been listening? They're experts. Isn't that enough?



 Careful, you're starting to sound like a certain Pob faced tory there....


----------



## Santino (Nov 28, 2017)

JimW said:


> Might as well hire a well-qualified astrologer if you need one.


One who can provide explanatory value for what's already happened to you.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 28, 2017)

The Good Friday Agreement has long inspired me as an example of how politics can succeed, and how communities can begin to heal even the most festering of wounds.

People from so many backgrounds, countries and parties came together to make it work.

The first item on the agenda after the referendum result last year should have been the Irish border issue.

There should have been top level summits as soon as possible, but the UK "government" simply could not be bothered, and left it over a year to put out a document this August that was laughable.

Now, with a tight timetable, they and the Brexit headbangers are in panic and lashing out.

This isn't some uni assignment that can be left till the night before.

The disrespect, neglect and disregard shown to the people of the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland is flat-out disgusting.

The failure of the UK "government" to begin to address the issue till it's too late alone displays their utter incompetence and inability to navigate the Brexit process as a whole.

I'm no EU cheerleader, but the scale of this train-crash is jaw-dropping even to an aging cynic like me.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Nov 28, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Careful, you're starting to sound like a certain Pob faced tory there....



His anti-intellectual rejection of experts has led me to think of him as Pol Pob, but it may be a bit too obtuse to catch on.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 28, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> As JimW pointed out inflation has been _controlled_ by wage restraint (alongside increase job insecurity and maintaining the correct levels of unemployment).
> 
> ---------
> 
> The last page of nonsense does show why we need a thread on what economics is, why it needs to be rejected.



Here is the governor of the Bank of England explaining what he is doing about inflation.

UK interest rate rise likely as inflation hits 3%

The Bank of England has an objective to manage inflation

Some more stuff about it on their website Monetary Policy Framework | Bank of England

Perhaps if you want to reject it you should learn some more about it ?

Alex


----------



## Santino (Nov 28, 2017)

Checkmate.


----------



## Rimbaud (Nov 28, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The Good Friday Agreement has long inspired me as an example of how politics can succeed, and how communities can begin to heal even the most festering of wounds.
> 
> People from so many backgrounds, countries and parties came together to make it work.
> 
> ...



I reckon there will be an election in 2018, caused by the border issue.

These are the following options:
1-Cancel Brexit and retain the status quo. Not gonna happen.
2-Make Ireland leave the EU customs union. Won't happen.
3-Create a hard border, effectively ending the GFA and causing a return to sectarian violence. Might happen but it is a pretty terrible option.
4-Insist on special status for NI and a sea border. The only sensible option really, BUT can't happen because of the DUP. The only hope to solve it is to try and persuade the DUP to accept it, which won't succeed, but will cause a collapse of the government and early election. Frankly, I suspect some of the Tory leadership would prefer to give up power and cede responsibility to someone else, and there is always the slim possibility that they will win and be done with the DUP, thus being able to establish a special status for NI. 

Of these bad or impossible options, number 4 is the least terrible for the Tory party, and at least allows them to live to fight another day.


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2017)

Or 5 kick can down the road by having long transitional period with UK inc. NI having left EU but not SM or CU. Would probably require May’s head though.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 28, 2017)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> The Good Friday Agreement has long inspired me as an example of how politics can succeed, and how communities can begin to heal even the most festering of wounds.
> 
> People from so many backgrounds, countries and parties came together to make it work.
> 
> The first item on the agenda after the referendum result last year should have been the Irish border issue.


Seriously it’s becoming a bit sickening all this talk about the border. You have FG and FF and the DUP each raising the spectre of a return to conflict over this issue. Once again you have bigots jostling to shore up their electorates over the Border. It’s sickening watching FG who couldn’t give too fucks now wearing the green. Like all of sudden uk labour showing some concern and the tories too. All just a fucking game.

The border if it comes will be ignored. Just like it was in the 50’s through to the dismantling of the watch towers. I grew up on the border. We didn’t give a fuck. We smuggled if we wanted. Crossed when we wanted. Stoped and told lies to the soldiers and the customs.

As for the GFA, the only thing it’s done is entrench the communities, which are more seperate than ever. Think the worst aspects of establishment multiculturalism and it doesn’t even cover it.

eta: was pissed last night apols.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 28, 2017)

Winot said:


> Or 5 kick can down the road by having long transitional period with UK inc. NI having left EU but not SM or CU. Would probably require May’s head though.



6. The UK stays within the CU after Brexit. Think that's what Brussels is looking for.


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> I do believe in the class war, in as far as some activists might be pushing it a bit far when people just aren't interested. You tell a working class person that they're in a class war and they'd be better off doing socialism instead of not voting/not participating and they might look at you a bit funny. IMHO, of course.
> 
> Now, it's quite possible that they would be better off in a socialist state. It can't be any worse than it is now under successive tory and tory-lite governments.
> 
> I think it's maybe how you go about converting people to the cause. How to get them interested. The Brexit referendum got people interested; why was that?



Possibly because they thought, for once their 'vote' could make a difference?

And now we have all the remainers fighting a rearguard action in the hope that if they can keep the stew of uncertainty and fear bubbling long enough that their desire to have a second referendum will be achievable.
These people,  Vince Cable et al, clearly don't give a stuff about democracy and the damage they are doing to the UK, but do care they will lose their place at the long established EU feeding  trough.
I would have thought that the rights of EU citizens across Europe, the simplification of borders, post EU and other objectives ensuring that people and businesses don't suffer would be a priority?
But, and I'm open to being proven wrong, the stumbling block seems to be how much we are prepared to pay?
Reading between the lines, it seems to be the position that,  we can have whatever deal we want, if we are prepared to pay for it?
But do we really need to pay, to access an increasingly fractious, unstable part of the worldwide market?
Personally, I think looking at the hugely disparate needs/objectives/ politically unbalanced levels  of the other 27 members, we will be well out of it.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 29, 2017)

coley said:


> Possibly because they thought, for once their 'vote' could make a difference?
> 
> And now we have all the remainers fighting a rearguard action in the hope that if they can keep the stew of uncertainty and fear bubbling long enough that their desire to have a second referendum will be achievable.
> These people,  Vince Cable et al, clearly don't give a stuff about democracy and the damage they are doing to the UK, but do care they will lose their place at the long established EU feeding  trough.
> ...



Nearly half the country voted (rightly or wrongly) to remain. Didn't Brexiteers use fear as well in their campaign?
Fwiw, the decision has been made and there should be a Brexit regardless of what the 48.1% want.

The most important issue is what happens about the hard border possibility, which seems to be an afterthought with May'sgovt. IMHO.


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> It's called wage restraint now. All nice and voluntary. It's big in Europe as well.


Aye, Msr Macron, a great supporter of the EU project is going to do a total Thatcher on the French WC.
Vive le Handbag


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

alex_ said:


> Really?
> 
> The boe’s primacy role is monetary stability which means low inflation, they control this with interest rates and recently quantitive easing.
> 
> ...


You mean wor Gordon left us with a real gold bar or is it one of Moist Von Lipwigs? 'Specials'


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

gosub said:


> Normans



Good idea, blame it all on those Norman ( early EU types)


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Nearly half the country voted (rightly or wrongly) to remain. Didn't Brexiteers use fear as well in their campaign?
> Fwiw, the decision has been made and there should be a Brexit regardless of what the 48.1% want.
> 
> The most important issue is what happens about the hard border possibility, which seems to be an afterthought with May'sgovt. IMHO.


Sorry hinny, but from where I'm looking,  all the EU aristocracy seems to be concerned about is the hole in their budget once we leave, bugger the WC and SMEs.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 29, 2017)

coley said:


> Sorry hinny, but from where I'm looking,  all the EU aristocracy seems to be concerned about is the hole in their budget once we leave, bugger the WC and SMEs.



Quite possibly. There's no need for name calling, though


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> All speculation and fear mongering until it happens.



From the 'remainers camp' at least.


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Quite possibly. There's no need for name calling, though


'Hinny' is not name calling, it's a friendly term, sorry if you feel offended.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 29, 2017)

coley said:


> 'Hinny' is not name calling, it's a friendly term, sorry if you feel offended.



Ok, I misread it at a dig at my parentage. No worries, coley.
Back on topic, yes, it does seem that the EU biggies are worried more about budgets than the people. Not much of a surprise. But into the unknown, will the "independent" UK govt suddenly grow a sense of responsibility to the welfare of its people?


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

krtek a houby said:


> Ok, I misread it at a dig at my parentage. No worries, coley.
> Back on topic, yes, it does seem that the EU biggies are worried more about budgets than the people. Not much of a surprise. But into the unknown, will the "independent" UK govt suddenly grow a sense of responsibility to the welfare of its people?



Who knows? but it's certainly going to be easier to hold local MPs to account, MPs who can't pass the buck to MEPs and their 'superstate'
One thing that bugs me to beyond and back is this 'belief' that the EU actually 'gives us money' rather than RE-distributes money we hand over to them.....less their cut....something highlighted in an BBC education news article, children were alarmed that leaving the EU would mean there  would be less money available from the EU for their future education!


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> Sure. But the argument was that it is only right wing neoliberal organisations that believe that Brexit will be damaging and that's clearly not true.


Really? Where have I, or anyone else, made such an argument?

I know plenty of people that I respect (including some posters on this board) that voted Remain because they thought it was the best option for labour. I disagreed with them, but I still consider them comrades and recognise that while our analyses  differed the basis of which we thought about the issue was the same (a class based one).

Many, many of the those talking about how leaving the EU will "be damaging" are the same people that have argued for privatisations, de-regulation, how the very mild social-democrat policies Labour campaigned on last time will also damage the economy. By talking about how leaving the EU will cause "economic harm" you are accepting a whole range of assumptions and ideological positions. Ideological positions that support capitalism, that is an absurd road for any socialist to take. You are falling into their trap.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Forget Brexit for a minute and forget the reality of modern politics and just think about this thing called “the economy” without further context.  What people mean by “growth in the economy” is itself an ideological position, you see.  It is focus on overall national output with no metric for how that is distributed.  Let me ask you this.  What would help ordinary people more: “growth in the economy” with no change in wealth distribution, or a reduction in inequality with no economic growth?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 29, 2017)

Well yes, a change of government could bring about a reduction in inequality & an increase in tax revenues by preventing tax avoidence & evasion with no economic growth. The more the Tories fuck this up the better the chance of a change in government.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Forget Brexit for a minute and forget the reality of modern politics and just think about this thing called “the economy” without further context.  What people mean by “growth in the economy” is itself an ideological position, you see.  It is focus on overall national output with no metric for how that is distributed.  Let me ask you this.  What would help ordinary people more: “growth in the economy” with no change in wealth distribution, or a reduction in inequality with no economic growth?



Not sure who you’re asking but I would have thought most here recognised the importance of inequality reduction. But imo leaving the EU doesn’t increase the likelihood of that happening, whereas it is likely (imo) to decrease the total pot available to redistribute.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 29, 2017)

I think the "It was all a plot to cripple the tories" is the best one ever.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

£83bn is today’s headline figure, paid over 40 years, so 7 x £350m a week for 40 years.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 29, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think the "It was all a plot to cripple the tories" is the best one ever.


There did not need to be any plot to cripple the Tories. Brexit is crippling the Tories well enough & they brought it on themselves. Labour just need to sit in deckchairs & munch popcorn.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £83bn is today’s headline figure, paid over 40 years, so 7 x £350m a week for 40 years.


We should spend that on the NHS instead.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> We should spend that on the NHS instead.



We can spend the remaining 45 x £350m a year on the NHS, is that what ‘remain’ is all about?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £83bn is today’s headline figure, paid over 40 years, so 7 x £350m a week for 40 years.



The joke's going to be on them if that's payable in pounds.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 29, 2017)

coley said:


> One thing that bugs me to beyond and back is this 'belief' that the EU actually 'gives us money' rather than RE-distributes money we hand over to them.....less their cut....something highlighted in an BBC education news article, children were alarmed that leaving the EU would mean there  would be less money available from the EU for their future education!


Who thinks this aside from some children? But more importantly, as I asked you on Saturday, do you disagree with redistribution or not, and if so, why?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 29, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> The joke's going to be on them if that's payable in pounds.


The way things are going that sum won't even buy the bus soon


----------



## 2hats (Nov 29, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> The joke's going to be on them if that's payable in pounds.


That’d be why they always specify it in Euro...


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Who thinks this aside from some children? But more importantly, as I asked you on Saturday, do you disagree with redistribution or not, and if so, why?


The redistribution? I certainly don't disagree with it, just that I believe it should remain in the UK.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> We can spend the remaining 45 x £350m a year on the NHS, is that what ‘remain’ is all about?


The liabilities are spread over that long, but the payments are not divided up like that, maths fail.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 29, 2017)

coley said:


> The redistribution? I certainly don't disagree with it, just that I believe it should remain in the UK.


So it's a question of borders. Why? Does collective benefit stop at the Channel?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> The liabilities are spread over that long, but the payments are not divided up like that, maths fail.



Oh, can you bung up the schedule of payments then, for us fails please?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> Not sure who you’re asking but I would have thought most here recognised the importance of inequality reduction. But imo leaving the EU doesn’t increase the likelihood of that happening, whereas it is likely (imo) to decrease the total pot available to redistribute.


Not only do I not know whether that is true or not, I don't even have a way of measuring it, because nobody actually tries to systematically capture that kind of metric.

What if "the economy" referred to a basket of goods and services affordable by at least 75% or 90% of society?  Health care, housing, food, education, entertainment, etc.  And some measure of social wellbeing too -- anxiety, loneliness, purpose.  And what if we measured growth in that basket of goods and services as being the growth in the economy?  Over the last 50 years, how would that measure fare?  Can 75% of the population afford more or less of those things now than 15, 30, 50 years ago?  Because "the economy" as it is always measured -- i.e. real GNP per head -- is enormously higher than it was 50 years ago.  But I don't see in that time that at least 75% of the population (let alone 90%) is better housed, cared for and educated.  I don't see that 75% of the population has better social cohesion.  So what has that economic growth actually achieved for 75% of the population?  A bigger pot to distribute?  Who cares, if the growth of the pot all goes to just 1% of the population?


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

So what you are saying is that the ‘politics’ is more important than ‘economics’? Whereas I am saying that politics starts with the pot and it’s best if you can get both right.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> So what you are saying is that the ‘politics’ is more important than ‘economics’? Whereas I am saying that politics starts with the pot and it’s best if you can get both right.


No, I’m saying that what you are measuring and calling “economics” is itself political.  You are making a political decision about what to use as your success measure.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> No, I’m saying that what you are measuring and calling “economics” is itself political.  You are making a political decision about what to use as your success measure.



I am not defining ‘success’ by economics alone though. I have made it clear that I believe that life will be worse for a lot of the population post-Brexit. You may disagree. I hope I am wrong.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 29, 2017)

So according to the Graun the UK owes €80bn for it's commitments to the EU - yet the EUs commitments to the UK only amount to €20bn.

Argue all you like about redistribution, it's hard to justify being in such a club.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £83bn is today’s headline figure, paid over 40 years, so 7 x £350m a week for 40 years.



Interesting use of maths there. To me 7 x 350m per week x 40 years comes to over five trillion.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> I am not defining ‘success’ by economics alone though. I have made it clear that I believe that life will be worse for a lot of the population post-Brexit. You may disagree. I hope I am wrong.


But your basis for that is a projected reduction in this thing you are calling “the economy”, which you have not shown to be fit for your purpose.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Interesting use of maths there. To me 7 x 350m per week x 40 years comes to over five trillion.



£350m a week for 7 weeks a year x 40 years = £80bn. We get the £350m a week to spend on coke and hookers for the other 45 weeks of every year.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But your basis for that is a projected reduction in this thing you are calling “the economy”, which you have not shown to be fit for your purpose.



I get the feeling that we are talking at cross purposes. It would be useful to help me understand your position if you could set out how you see it panning out for the ordinary person post-Brexit and why. 

In the meantime I have work to do.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think the "It was all a plot to cripple the tories" is the best one ever.



side benefit. It was mentioned (before the vote) as a *possibility *that space might be opened up, tories might be weakened. Of course in between wailing racists!  other remainers a) took this as the entirety of a position and b) took the piss out of that straw man because it seemed so ludicrous an idea to the sensible grownup Economy fetishists, they had to laugh. They were wrong.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> What would help ordinary people more: “growth in the economy” with no change in wealth distribution, or a reduction in inequality with no economic growth?



That's a great question for a scenario where those are the two available options. But it's  rubbish as a critique of anyone else's position otherwise.


----------



## Borp (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £350m a week for 7 weeks a year x 40 years = £80bn. We get the £350m a week to spend on coke and hookers for the other 45 weeks of every year.



Brexit = coke and hookers.

The bill to be paid really doesn't work as an argument for remain does it. It's 6.5 years of EU contributions. Apparently paid over 40 years.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 29, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> So according to the Graun the UK owes €80bn for it's commitments to the EU - yet the EUs commitments to the UK only amount to €20bn.
> 
> Argue all you like about redistribution, it's hard to justify being in such a club.


Is it? Do I really need to mansplain socialism on u75? What would income tax on rich Londoners look like in the same terms?

Of all the things about the EU, I don't get this one. Whether EU redistribution actually represents a valuable return, socially or economically, holistically or to the benefit of UK capital, I couldn't honestly tell you. But it certainly has the potential to on any of those bases. If we spent €Xbn on improved transport links across Europe and it yielded more than that in cost savings to British business, then at least in capitalistic terms, it would be a success.

Similarly if we paid to improve the quality of life in, say, Romania, perhaps more Romanians stay put and it reduces the burden of uncontrolled immigration that Eurosceptics so despise.

Even under capitalism there are significant benefits to some level of redistribution even when you are the net contributor by some margin. Henry Ford or the less accurate caricature thereof is the most obvious example of this. For the UK, domestic geographic inequality is one of the biggest threats to its long term future in its current form. And on individual terms it's what keeps you, should you find yourself with the most, from being on the sharp end of an angry mob or strung up from a lamp post.

So by all means point at the inefficiencies or the targets of the spending or whatever else, but I'm surprised to see the very nature of it being criticised without any depth - it leaves me wondering what else you'd throw under the bus for money.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

Borp said:


> Brexit = coke and hookers.
> 
> The bill to be paid really doesn't work as an argument for remain does it. It's 6.5 years of EU contributions. Apparently paid over 40 years.



It doesn't really work very well as a beating stick, especially as much of that is paying for the healthcare of Brits in Spain etc. and Peter Mandleson and Neil Kinnock's pensions.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 29, 2017)

Its a bit crude to try to boil any discussion on the EU down to purely numbers. Neither backing nor criticising the EU here, but a couple of generations of MBA's flooding the ranks of the employed do seem to have distilled things down to a mechanistic P&L level.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> That's a great question for a scenario where those are the two available options. But it's  rubbish as a critique of anyone else's position otherwise.


It's not a critique, it's a starting point.  If we don't even agree on what success looks like, how can we agree how to measure that success, let alone whether it has been achieved?

I'm saying that arguments based on whether or not "the economy" is growing or slowing are almost entirely irrelevant.  There is precious little to suggest that the measure people mean when they talk about "the economy" is the driving force behind improvements in the life of ordinary people.  It might be correlated in certain circumstances, but the long view actually suggests that GDP per capita has damn little to do with the wellbeing of residents, so long as it is maintained above a certain minimum level.

Why is that relevant to discussions about the impact of Brexit?  Only that if you want to convince me that Brexit is a bad idea, please talk about something other than the rate at which "the economy" is growing.  If your whole argument rests on changes in GDP, I really couldn't give a monkeys.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Leaving aside whether redistribution is a good thing, and whether economists are fraudsters, the financial settlement is going to have an impact on the popular view of Brexit. Labour and LDs are shamelessly pretending to be aghast at the cost of our real and implicit commitments, now that they have been conceded. 

You'd have to be really fucking stupid to see that concession as a reason to resile from a Brexit which would otherwise have been sensible, but there are an awful lot of voters in that category. And maybe it's the leavers' turn to see popular misapprehensions screw their mandate.

So let's see what this all does to the YouGov Brexit tracker, and how Labour in particular positions itself as a result.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Look, here is real GDP per capita from 1960 to the present day (all presented in 2000 equivalent dollars).



That's basically a three-fold increase since 1960.

Are people three times better off than they were in 1960?  Are they better off at all?  What about the doubling since the mid-1970s?

Do we still have free university education on a full grant?  Is the NHS as well staffed?  Do people have as ready access either to council housing or the ability to buy their own home?  Are they as able to heat their homes?  Or do they have more free time, maybe?  Less stressed?  Stronger bonds with others?  Less mental health problems?

Are things _three times_ better than 1960 and _two times _better than 1975 across these things that actually matter to people?

If no, then please -- for the love of God _please -- _stop pretending that we should care about what happens to GDP.  If "the economy" halved but we went back to 1970s levels of personal wellbeing, we'd be better off.  GDP is a side-effect of what matters, not the thing we should be concentrating on.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Leaving aside whether redistribution is a good thing, and whether economists are fraudsters, the financial settlement is going to have an impact on the popular view of Brexit. Labour and LDs are shamelessly pretending to be aghast at the cost of our real and implicit commitments, now that they have been conceded.
> 
> You'd have to be really fucking stupid to see that concession as a reason to resile from a Brexit which would otherwise have been sensible, but there are an awful lot of voters in that category. And maybe it's the leavers' turn to see popular misapprehensions screw their mandate.
> 
> So let's see what this all does to the YouGov Brexit tracker, and how Labour in particular positions itself as a result.


I can't see how being aghast help Labour and Lib Dems, stay in and we'd pay the same money if not more.  Might help the fuck email entirely contingent ie UKIP but they are dead in the water anyway


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

gosub said:


> I can't see how being aghast help Labour and Lib Dems, stay in and we'd pay the same money if not more.  Might help the fuck email entirely contingent ie UKIP but they are dead in the water anyway



If the discussion about Brexit was sensible, you'd be right. But it's not. Which is why I said that they were shameless.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Look, here is real GDP per capita from 1960 to the present day (all presented in 2000 equivalent dollars).
> 
> View attachment 121637
> 
> ...







butchersapron said:


> Don't you have any non-commercial values?




Why is this shit so hard for people to grasp?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 29, 2017)

There is a discussion going on ( and has been for a while ) in academia, about Economics being fit for purpose and whether the output of universities are well rounded enough to add to the debates rather than being adept at producing stuff that plays the game. Green Economics( name = urgh)  for e.g , looking at quality rather than numerical  output. whole different discussion thoyugh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 29, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Is it? Do I really need to mansplain socialism on u75? What would income tax on rich Londoners look like in the same terms?
> 
> Of all the things about the EU, I don't get this one. Whether EU redistribution actually represents a valuable return, socially or economically, holistically or to the benefit of UK capital, I couldn't honestly tell you. But it certainly has the potential to on any of those bases. If we spent €Xbn on improved transport links across Europe and it yielded more than that in cost savings to British business, then at least in capitalistic terms, it would be a success.
> 
> ...


And to put EU spending in its entirety into some perspective, it's roughly running at 1 per cent total EU GDP. imo that's a better way of looking at it than talking of X billions of pounds per year. The argument then should be is that too much, about right or too little, given what the money goes on. And given that a chunk of that 1 % (and I couldn't tell you how much either) goes on genuinely worthwhile development grants to underprivileged areas across the EU, while another chunk goes on paying for regulation that individual govts would otherwise have to do (a post-Brexit UK will have to do for itself re trading standards, etc, which is surely an inefficient way to do it), the current level doesn't jump out at me as a superstate in the process of taking over. As a comparison, in the US, the federal govt spends 20 % of GDP. National govts within the EU spend between around 35 and 50 %.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> If the discussion about Brexit was sensible, you'd be right. But it's not. Which is why I said that they were shameless.


Along with the meaningful Parliamentary debates based on objective reports......neither of which do you get when ratifying EU treaties.  Admitted that was one benefit to leaving I had hoped for, and hasn't materialised (yet)


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And to put EU spending in its entirety into some perspective, it's roughly running at 1 per cent total EU GDP. imo that's a better way of looking at it than talking of X billions of pounds per year. The argument then should be is that too much, about right or too little, given what the money goes on. And given that a chunk of that 1 % (and I couldn't tell you how much either) goes on genuinely worthwhile development grants to underprivileged areas across the EU, while another chunk goes on paying for regulation that individual govts would otherwise have to do (a post-Brexit UK will have to do for itself re trading standards, etc, which is surely an inefficient way to do it), the current level doesn't jump out at me as a superstate in the process of taking over. As a comparison, in the US, the federal govt spends 20 % of GDP. National govts within the EU spend between around 35 and 50 %.









CAP payments are significant.


eta  Its the  EEA setup thats chip in for admin costs and the rest goes on developing poorer bits of EUrope AND they are a lot more trasparent on how the money is spent. https://eeagrants.org/Results-data


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Look, here is real GDP per capita from 1960 to the present day (all presented in 2000 equivalent dollars).
> 
> View attachment 121637
> 
> ...



Some mistakes I think you are making.

1) Shifting from talking about "the economy" to talking about per capita GDP as if they were the same thing.

2) Judging GDP as if it were a measure of individual wellbeing, when that's not what it is.

3) Although you correctly identify that GDP growth is not a societal panacea, switching this around to suggest we should not therefore care about it is faulty logic. It's basically saying that, since we live in an unequal society, it would make no difference if we suddenly fell into an economic depression. But it most definitely would make a difference.

4) "GDP is a side-effect of what matters" - this is completely true, in a sense, but it is also inconsistent with the idea that we should not care about it. If you are trying to make the point that it would be crazy to run an economy on the basis of only one economic indicator, then that would be a fair point, but it would also go without saying, and it's a very different proposition from "who gives a toss about the economy anyway?"


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

I don't think I am making any of those mistakes.

1) It's not me making the mistake of talking about "the economy" as if it were the same as per capita GDP.  It's the dominant discourse.  (Actually, it's slightly worse since the "per capita" bit tends to get ignored).  When people talk about "growth", they are talking about changes in the measurement of GDP.  When we hear that growth is now 1.4% instead of the previously anticipated 2.0%, this is what people are talking about.  Not my mistake; in fact, this is the mistake I am fundamentally pointing out.

2) Of course GDP isn't wellbeing.  That's my whole bloody point!

3) That's not what I said.  My quote: "It might be correlated in certain circumstances, but the long view actually suggests that GDP per capita has damn little to do with the wellbeing of residents, so long as it is maintained above a certain minimum level."  If we fell into a depression, that would be a short view.  But it wouldn't be the fact that the measurement of the economy is now showing negative that would in itself be the problem.  It would be the reaction to it.  It would be the retrenchment of capital in order to protect their share whilst creating problems amongst the poor.  It wouldn't be a lack of resources _per se_.  The resources are still three times those from the 1960s.

4) So what exactly is that that you think people mean when they talk about the economy growing and shrinking?  Is it my previously suggested metric of "a basket of goods and services affordable by at least 75% or 90% of society; health care, housing, food, education, entertainment, etc. And some measure of social wellbeing too -- anxiety, loneliness, purpose."?  Or is it purely a measure of national output?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Some mistakes I think you are making.
> 
> 1) Shifting from talking about "the economy" to talking about per capita GDP as if they were the same thing.
> 
> ...



You're listing his mistakes but you've clearly not understood what he has written.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 29, 2017)

GDP , like Inflation, is often seen as shorthand as to how well *we* are doing - although this is bollocks when viewed alone , its often quoted, as it has that emotional trigger of perceived wellbeing  for many


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> You're listing his mistakes but you've clearly not understood what he has written.



I have a feeling that might make three of us.


----------



## Chz (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> You're listing his mistakes but you've clearly not understood what he has written.


His main mistake is what to choose to rail against. Per capita GDP is only interesting when measured against other countries' per capita GDP. It has almost no meaning measured against itself over time, other than as a measure of inflation.

The *point* stands that specific measures of the economy are a poor measure of personal well-being, but it's inane to suggest that there isn't some link between the economic well-being of the state and the well-being of its citizens.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> GDP , like Inflation, is often seen as shorthand as to how well *we* are doing - although this is bollocks when viewed alone , its often quoted, as it has that emotional trigger of perceived wellbeing  for many



Was never the same after the Berlin Wall came down, adverts all over the place.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Chz said:


> His main mistake is what to choose to rail against. Per capita GDP is only interesting when measured against other countries' per capita GDP. It has almost no meaning measured against itself over time, other than as a measure of inflation.
> 
> The *point* stands that specific measures of the economy are a poor measure of personal well-being, but it's inane to suggest that there isn't some link between the economic well-being of the state and the well-being of its citizens.


Why is it inane?  Do you have any evidence that personal well-being is linked to national economic success, beyond a certain minimum threshold of that economic success?  Because there is certainly plenty of evidence to suggest the opposite.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

Chz said:


> The *point* stands that specific measures of the economy are a poor measure of personal well-being, but it's inane to suggest that there isn't some link between the economic well-being of the state and the well-being of its citizens.



Bingo.


----------



## Chz (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Why is it inane?  Do you have any evidence that personal well-being is linked to national economic success, beyond a certain minimum threshold of that economic success?  Because there is certainly plenty of evidence to suggest the opposite.


The 1930s and right now would be excellent examples. Growth never really recovered after 2008 and people have expressed that they're worse off (because it's hard to _measure_ well-being) across the developed world. The economy is barely back to where it was (questionable if it is yet, even), and has 10 years of inflation to figure into it.

Edit: I'm all for debt, up to a point. Balanced budgets and debt-free nations are idiocy, the way world economics works. But you can only spend up to a point before the ROTW starts to call things in. The UK's got a helluva ways to go before it becomes Greece or Portugal, but if you pull the rug out from under things you severely limit the government's ability to spend on what matters to people. This is, of course, ignoring the problem that the current government _doesn't want_ to spend money on making lives better.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

God save us from those that understand a little bit of economics.
My suggestion that growth in GDP -- which is what people are talking about when they talk about "growth" -- is meaningless is not at all something those who understand it would disagree with.  Even the Economist, for the love of Pete, have tried to look at alternatives:

https://www.economist.com/news/lead...ng-time-fresh-approach-how-measure-prosperity

And here is the FT pointing out its many flaws:

Has GDP outgrown its use?

But the main point is that it is simply not the case that increased wealth brings increased wellbeing.  This is true up to the point that your needs are satisfied and then it ceases to be so.  And, in fact, the point at which increased wealth ceases to bring increased wellbeing is pretty darned low.

This references a study -- The Success Paradox -- that indicates the crossover point is about £22,000 in the UK. 

GDP per capital versus life satisfaction is well studied, for example here:






It's hard to see in that particular graph, unfortunately (I've seen others where it is clearer), but beyond about $35,000, the trend line is basically vertical.  In other words, adding additional GDP per capita beyond that point doesn't really make any difference.  It's other cultural factors that matter beyond that point.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

^ Dodgy stats : Theres no way the UK are more self satisfied than the French.


----------



## bimble (Nov 29, 2017)

I thought Vanuatu was the highest for happiness index, not Norway.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

bimble said:


> I thought Vanuatu was the highest for happiness index, not Norway.



That doesn't list all countries, Bhutan for example, where happiness is a stated aim of government, is missing too.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

This is such a well known phenomenon that it even has its own name -- the Easterlin Paradox.  There have been several attempts to debunk the paradox over the years (by one economist in particular) but the latest thinking suggests that even the very, very slight link that appears to exist between GDP and life satisfaction in rich countries is actually explainable by other factors.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> God save us from those that understand a little bit of economics.
> My suggestion that growth in GDP -- which is what people are talking about when they talk about "growth" -- is meaningless is not at all something those who understand it would disagree with.  Even the Economist, for the love of Pete, have tried to look at alternatives:
> 
> https://www.economist.com/news/lead...ng-time-fresh-approach-how-measure-prosperity
> ...


That graph shows a strong correlation between wealth and happiness. A few things I'd also want to see - how do rich and poor within the same country compare? How does the graph look when relating happiness not to wealth but to growth - how much is direction of travel more important than current location? Does that partly explain the outliers in Latin America, a region where there have been significant improvements in overall material wellbeing in recent decades as measured by such things as education levels, nutrition, infant mortality or life expectancy, in stark contrast to sub-Saharan Africa, which dominates the bottom of both charts and has seen precious little improvement in anything.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That graph shows a strong correlation between wealth and happiness.


Not above $35,000 it doesn't.  Nobody is disputing that if a country is truly poor then its wellbeing is improved by additional wealth.

This is the relevant part of the graph

 

The very slight trend that exists in this part of the curve is readily explained by demographic factors other than wealth.



> A few things I'd also want to see - how do rich and poor within the same country compare? How does the graph look when relating happiness not to wealth but to growth - how much is direction of travel more important than current location? Does that partly explain the outliers in Latin America, a region where there have been significant improvements in overall material wellbeing in recent decades as measured by such things as education levels, nutrition, infant mortality or life expectancy, in stark contrast to sub-Saharan Africa, which dominates the bottom of both charts and has seen precious little improvement in anything.


Well, when you've found those things please let us know.  I would be interested to know.

Plenty of people are researching this, and their general conclusions to date are that (a) you really want to have more than about $30,000 per capita; and (b) after that, inequality is the most important factor, with additional wealth being largely irrelevant.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Is this the thread where a man with an rather high income tells us all that wealth is immaterial to happiness?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

The further into the tail you get, the more the relationship breaks down, by the way.  Above about $40,000, it looks like this:


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Is this the thread where a man with an rather high income tells us all that wealth is immaterial to happiness?


Who would know better?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Is this the thread where a man with an rather high income tells us all that wealth is immaterial to happiness?



I should have thought a person will wealth is as equally qualified to discuss happiness as someone without.  Ideally you'd have someone who has experienced both but then you'd really need loads of loads to make it a worthwhile exercise.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Who would know better?



Fair point, I suppose.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

gosub said:


> ^ Dodgy stats : Theres no way the UK are more self satisfied than the French.



Also Thailand has sneaked into Latin America.  It must be the military junta tribute act thing they've got going on at the moment.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Ideally you'd have someone who has experienced both


Srallan makes much of his days as the little man but now he's rich he still looks like an angry scrotum


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Is this the thread where a man with an rather high income tells us all that wealth is immaterial to happiness?



I think actually it's a classic U75 thread where someone assumes that (a) because other posters have been talking about topic A those posters (b) care only about topic A and (c) know nothing about topic B.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Anyway, back to Brexit, Verhofstadt has sent Barnier a note saying that the current state of play on citizens' rights and Ireland won't count as sufficient progress.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Anyway, back to Brexit, Verhofstadt has sent Barnier a note saying that the current state of play on citizens' rights and Ireland won't count as sufficient progress.



Take a feather and knock me down with it.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Is the Ireland border thing a real sticking point or a red herring?  I can't really work it out because it appears to me that everyone is saying no hard border so why is this proving such an issue.  It strikes me as just the latest battle ground for people to sound off about rather than anything that will be particularly difficult to resolve.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Is the Ireland border thing a real sticking point or a red herring?  I can't really work it out because it appears to me that everyone is saying no hard border so why is this proving such an issue.  It strikes me as just the latest battle ground for people to sound off about rather than anything that will be particularly difficult to resolve.



Are you trolling?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> God save us from those that understand a little bit of economics.



Please put this comment a long way up your bottom and don't pull it out again.



> My suggestion that growth in GDP -- which is what people are talking about when they talk about "growth" -- is meaningless is not at all something those who understand it would disagree with.



This is nonsense, but we don't need to talk about that now. If you don't like GDP as a measure, then you're not obliged to use it. In fact, for argument's sake, let's just agree that GDP is only a number at the end of the day and numbers never hurt anyone, so we can safely not worry about it.

I don't see how that stops us needing to worry about other economic indicators such as, say, unemployment or infant malnutrition. Those are definitely not smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Is the Ireland border thing a real sticking point or a red herring?  I can't really work it out because it appears to me that everyone is saying no hard border so why is this proving such an issue.  It strikes me as just the latest battle ground for people to sound off about rather than anything that will be particularly difficult to resolve.



Because if you don't have a hard border and the UK is out of the customs union and single market then goods/services/people can get between the EU and UK freely. So the UK could do a trade deal with the US and the US could flood the EU market with its dodgy chicken via NI.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Is the Ireland border thing a real sticking point or a red herring?  I can't really work it out because it appears to me that everyone is saying no hard border so why is this proving such an issue.  It strikes me as just the latest battle ground for people to sound off about rather than anything that will be particularly difficult to resolve.



All three big points are red herrings, the EU does not want to do a deal, but rather than come out with that and give the UK 2 years to prepare for No Deal they want to string the UK along.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Well, when you've found those things please let us know.  I would be interested to know..


I may have a look for something relating happiness to growth, both economic growth and improvements in living standards.

Japan jumps out at me in that regard. Still a very rich country, but basically about the same amount of rich as it was 25 years ago. Be interesting to know if that stagnation at a high level has coincided with a slump in satisfaction.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Are you trolling?



No, I'm fully aware of the issues involved - it just strikes me that there is a general consensus on what they don't want to see.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> No, I'm fully aware of the issues involved - it just strikes me that there is a general consensus on what they don't want to see.



How do you get from that to it suddenly being an easy area to resolve?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Is the Ireland border thing a real sticking point or a red herring?  I can't really work it out because it appears to me that everyone is saying no hard border so why is this proving such an issue.  It strikes me as just the latest battle ground for people to sound off about rather than anything that will be particularly difficult to resolve.


its our last, best hope to save the country from brexit according to some views.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> No, I'm fully aware of the issues involved - it just strikes me that there is a general consensus on what they don't want to see.



Not really sure that you could put one UK government minister in a room and get a consensus on whether there should be a hard or open border.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> Because if you don't have a hard border and the UK is out of the customs union and single market then goods/services/people can get between the EU and UK freely. So the UK could do a trade deal with the US and the US could flood the EU market with its dodgy chicken via NI.



Is that likely to happen?  Could it be legislated against?  What happens on the EU's Eastern borders?  

Obviously its an issue if there is a no deal situation but presumably its an issue now because a deal is trying to be done.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Anyway, back to Brexit, Verhofstadt has sent Barnier a note saying that the current state of play on citizens' rights and Ireland won't count as sufficient progress.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I don't see how that stops us needing to worry about other economic indicators such as, say, unemployment or infant malnutrition. Those are definitely not smoke and mirrors.


Not at all, those are very relevant.  I'm only asking people to stop quoting predictions for "economic growth" as if they have any relevance whatsoever to people's everyday lives.  If you want to address unemployment then you need to look at structural issues such as labour relations.  And if you want to address infant malnutrition then you should place inequality first and foremost.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Not really sure that you could put one UK government minister in a room and get a consensus on whether there should be a hard or open border.



There's a pretty clear government consensus that there should be a magic border, using technology which is yet to be invented. They might get a bit shifty on what the transition process to the magic border looks like, though.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Not really sure that you could put one UK government minister in a room and get a consensus on whether there should be a hard or open border.



Is anyone advocating a hard border?

A quick search suggests there are a couple like this Councillor from FF: FF Councillor in shock 'hard border' call - Independent.ie

She seems a bit obsessed with immigrants though.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Not at all, those are very relevant.  I'm only asking people to stop quoting predictions for "economic growth" as if they have any relevance whatsoever to people's everyday lives.  If you want to address unemployment then you need to look at structural issues such as labour relations.  And if you want to address infant malnutrition then you should place inequality first and foremost.



And what happens if I don't do that, given my relatively limited power in the situation?


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Not at all, those are very relevant.  I'm only asking people to stop quoting predictions for "economic growth" as if they have any relevance whatsoever to people's everyday lives.  If you want to address unemployment then you need to look at structural issues such as labour relations.  And if you want to address infant malnutrition then you should place inequality first and foremost.



Freedom of movement is quite clearly a structural issue affecting employment. Even if the outcomes are complex. 

Whatever proxies for good times you prefer to GDP, Brexit will have an impact.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 29, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> No, I'm fully aware of the issues involved - it just strikes me that there is a general consensus on what they don't want to see.



theres certainly concensus in what they want to see, but almost none whatsoever in how it could/should be achieved.

the EU's version is 'simples, either don't leave or divide up your country', which - amazingly, and the astonishment of all - didn't get a wholly positive response. the Irish version is rather more nuanced and understands the politics, but it requires EU support to actually make it work, and nuance and understanding aren't getting EU support at the moment.

the Irish are stuck in a cleft stick - if they don't agree to a non-satisfactory fudge then the time table means there will end up being chaos on Brexit day with the hardest of hard borders, and if they do agree to a non-satisfactory fudge, they then lose all influence within the process to clear it up.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> And what happens if I don't do that, given my relatively limited power in the situation?


That seems a rather sulky response.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Whatever proxies for good times you prefer to GDP


they told me the 90s was good times as well, and it was in some ways. Didn't expect to hear it being said at this end of near a decades austerity


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> That seems a rather sulky response.



That seems like a non-answer.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they told me the 90s was good times as well, and it was in some ways. Didn't expect to hear it being said at this end of near a decades austerity



I've heard that too.  All I can remember is going to Helter Skelter at the sanctuary in Milton Keynes, the rest is a bit blurry.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Freedom of movement is quite clearly a structural issue affecting employment. Even if the outcomes are complex.
> 
> Whatever proxies for good times you prefer to GDP, Brexit will have an impact.


Yes, of course it will.  And I'd like to have a chance to concentrate on that without people getting distracted by whatever growth predictions are currently being made by those who genuinely have a vested interest in growth, because they will be the recipients of it.

It isn't clear to me that the factors that genuinely affect wellbeing, which are chiefly inequality related, are harmed by Brexit.  It does very much seem that they are in many ways harmed by membership of the EU, because this is basically a mechanism that allows for wealth distribution from poor to rich.  I don't think it is an accident that our membership of the EU has coincided with such rapid increase in inequality.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they told me the 90s was good times as well, and it was in some ways. Didn't expect to hear it being said at this end of near a decades austerity


maybe the quality of MDMA impacts on the happiness index


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I may have a look for something relating happiness to growth, both economic growth and improvements in living standards.
> 
> Japan jumps out at me in that regard. Still a very rich country, but basically about the same amount of rich as it was 25 years ago. Be interesting to know if that stagnation at a high level has coincided with a slump in satisfaction.


On the other hand, the UK has had sufficient growth as to treble its real GDP per capita since 1960 and double it since 1975.  Do you think that well being has increased commensurately over that time frame?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> That seems like a non-answer.


I'm sorry, what precisely is it you want an answer for?  You want me to reassure you that you are so irrelevant to anything that you can happily carry on concentrating on economic growth without it affecting the square root of fuck all?  Well, OK then.  Be so reassured.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Yes, of course it will.  And I'd like to have a chance to concentrate on that without people getting distracted by whatever growth predictions are currently being made by those who genuinely have a vested interest in growth, because they will be the recipients of it.
> 
> It isn't clear to me that the factors that genuinely affect wellbeing, which are chiefly inequality related, are harmed by Brexit.  It does very much seem that they are in many ways harmed by membership of the EU, because this is basically a mechanism that allows for wealth distribution from poor to rich.  I don't think it is an accident that our membership of the EU has coincided with such rapid increase in inequality.



So far, orthodox Bennite lexitry. But there isn't a choice on the table between the EU and reversion to some prelapsarian model of equitable distribution (pre-industrial or neo-feudal depending on how your nostalgia is bounded). The real choice is between deep trade relationships with the EU, and striking up new relationships with the US, China and elsewhere - on worse terms, and with fewer protections for employers and consumers. People who cheerlead for Leave because it's consistent with an imaginary scenario where everything is suddenly better are fundamentally irresponsible.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It isn't clear to me that the factors that genuinely affect wellbeing, which are chiefly inequality related, are harmed by Brexit.  It does very much seem that they are in many ways harmed by membership of the EU, because this is basically a mechanism that allows for wealth distribution from poor to rich.  I don't think it is an accident that our membership of the EU has coincided with such rapid increase in inequality.



As well as inequality there are wellbeing issues that affect some people but not others. Families who have mixed EU parentage are going to see their wellbeing take a dive if they lose citizen rights for example.  Same for people who would otherwise have gone to live/work in the rEU.


----------



## bimble (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It isn't clear to me that the factors that genuinely affect wellbeing, which are chiefly inequality related, are harmed by Brexit.  It does very much seem that they are in many ways harmed by membership of the EU, because this is basically a mechanism that allows for wealth distribution from poor to rich.  I don't think it is an accident that our membership of the EU has coincided with such rapid increase in inequality.



Has there been a similar exacerbation of inequality in other EU member countries too ? I thought the UK was an outlier in this (the extent of our inequality matching only america and russia or something?) .


----------



## kabbes (Nov 29, 2017)

Indeed, and these are all reasons I voted remain.  But since then, we've had a resurgence of the left in the UK and a retrenchment of the right in the EU.  That has rather changed the complexion of how the future might be seized.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I'm sorry, what precisely is it you want an answer for?  You want me to reassure you that you are so irrelevant to anything that you can happily carry on concentrating on economic growth without it affecting the square root of fuck all?  Well, OK then.  Be so reassured.



What I was really looking for was clearer advice, given your complete understanding of economics. If there's a recession, might I be adversely affected, or am I safe so long as I focus on reforming labour law  and that other thing you mentioned? And what happens if I get distracted?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 29, 2017)

Here's a prediction to hold me to in a few years:

If brexit happens, economic inequality in the UK will increase significantly during the first five years post-EU.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

bimble said:


> Has there been a similar exacerbation of inequality in other EU member countries too ? I thought the UK was an outlier in this (the extent of our inequality matching only america and russia or something?) .


how much does a Grecian earn?



littlebabyjesus said:


> Here's a prediction to hold me to in a few years:
> 
> If brexit happens, economic inequality in the UK will increase significantly during the first five years post-EU.


as a result of ongoing austerity policies and brexit chaos? probably. Things have been getting worse for a long time, for some.


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> how much does a Grecian earn?.



Whatever he's ode.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Whatever he's ode.



we need a _groan_ button...


----------



## Silas Loom (Nov 29, 2017)

kebabking said:


> we need a _groan_ button...



Lazy Llama 

Another request for Xenforo Post Ratings . . .


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2017)

Heres a blog post this thread needs:

Neoliberalism works for the world?

"The empirical evidence supports Marx’s view that, under capitalism, poverty (as defined) and inequality of income and wealth have not really improved under capitalism, neoliberal or otherwise. Any improvement in poverty levels globally, however measured, is mainly explained by in state-controlled China and any improvement in the quality and length of life comes from the application of science and knowledge through state spending on education, on sewage, clean water, disease prevention and protection, hospitals and better child development.  These are things that do not come from capitalism but from the common weal.

So Marx’s prediction 150 years ago that capitalism would lead to greater concentration and centralisation of wealth, in particular, the means of production and finance, has been borne out.  Contrary to the optimism and apologia of mainstream economists like Smith, poverty for billions around the world remains the norm, with little sign of improvement, while inequality within the major capitalist economies increases as capital is accumulated and concentrated in ever smaller groups."


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Heres a blog post this thread needs:
> 
> Neoliberalism works for the world?
> 
> ...



You may need to spell out why you think this is especially relevant to the thread.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> if they lose citizen rights for example.


What are the chances if this ? Any evidence that this will happen ?


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

If if if ,,,,,,,,,


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> What are the chances if this ? Any evidence that this will happen ?



It's still up for discussion but is expected to be resolved soon. My guess is that they will solve this one.

However people are nervous because the UK's position up to now leaves EU nationals who have lived for years in the UK in a worse position than they were previously.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> However people are nervous because the UK's position up to now leaves EU nationals who have lived for years in the UK in a worse position than they were previously.


Is this down to the process of negotiatons with the EU ? They seem to be setting the agenda and calling all the shots, maybe it could have been sorted but those lovely caring blokes at the Eu want to cause fear and uncertainty for there members.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> My guess is that they will solve this one.


What outcome do you forsee ?


----------



## bimble (Nov 29, 2017)

Uk was great to my parents when they showed up here 40+years ago and I don’t think they’d get residency now either of them, that’s not EUs fault it’s domestic changes here, hardening attitudes to immigrants.
I don’t think the eu are to blame for people’s anxiety about whether or not they’ll be allowed to stay here after Brexit either , Nobody wants all those ageing brits living in spain to come home after all.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Is this down to the process of negotiatons with the EU ? They seem to be setting the agenda and calling all the shots, maybe it could have been sorted but those lovely caring blokes at the Eu want to cause fear and uncertainty for there members.



They’re setting the agenda because they are united, organised and know what they want. And it’s an EU process. 

The EU set out their position on citizenship in June. It’s pretty fair imo but does require ECJ oversight which May has foolishly made a red line.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> What outcome do you forsee ?



I’m not up to speed with the detail and am by no means an expert, so don’t know.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

My guess is just based on reading the commentary, and the fact that the citizenship issue has lots of factors and there can be give and take to reach a compromise. 

I really can’t see how the NI border issue can be solved though.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> I really can’t see how the NI border issue can be solved though.


Jump ramps.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> because they are united


Questionable wether it's member states are mind.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Questionable wether it's member states are mind.



So far they are. They have given Barnier a clear negotiating mandate and he had stuck to it. 

Might change of course.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Monies


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> You may need to spell out why you think this is especially relevant to the thread.


well, its been explicitly spelled out the disparity in real terms that correlate to leave areas- this in response to feverish abstracts about 'growth'. You see you lot really do want to have the cake and eat it. Littlebabyjesus for instants wants to be pious about borders while ignoring racist schengian ones.
People want to argue about growth as defined by those whose metrics are important to their own narrow interests, those whose arguments being parroted would see you as pondlife btw. Its pointed out that this might not be the greatest way to discuss these things with any real meaning to people, you react as if you'd been tasked with ending world hunger rather than being shown your focus is ill equipped to deal with why people voted out.


in the end I think some of you have a very hard time believing that people have had it shit for quite some time. Which is why LBJ confidently predicted 'things will get shitter' asi if people hadn't noticed that ongoing proccess._ Oh but its not like kids are begging in the street is it _which we have had on these threads.

so the relevance of the economic situation, the disparities, discussed in that blog is why it was posted.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

All the negotiating seems pointless seeing as were either gonna die from Chicken poisoning or be be driven off the side of a cliff. It's death by cliff for me if i had to choose


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 29, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here's a prediction to hold me to in a few years:
> 
> If brexit happens, economic inequality in the UK will increase significantly during the first five years post-EU.




Take the person who after 40 years of EU has nothing. Multiply his nothing by any number you like, what has he now got?


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

No cliff Richard puns please


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> It's death by cliff for me if i had to choose,



Given the time of year this is inevitable.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> No cliff Richard puns please



Too late.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

brexit time
north korean missiles and whine


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Take the person who after 40 years of EU has nothing. Multiply his nothing by any number you like, what has he now got?



Is a hypothetical existence in a discussion on a webforum not enough for him?


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Question for those who voted remain. We keep hearing, reading that leave voters didn't know what they were voting for. Did the remainers know what they were voying for ? Where do they see the Eu going ? What's the future for us if we were to stay in ? I ask because the EU won't stand still, it will keep on ploughing ahead/ moving with the times. So why did you vote remain and what's in store for it's members next ?


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

This gave a smile. A quote from hedge fund manager, investment banker and remainer- Gina miller.

" A cabal of tycoons would see their wealth and influence turbocharged, while the mass of the population would see their prosperity, their security and, ultimately, their liberty dwindle away. And this is the dark nature of the inner doll: the end of the western model of capitalism married to liberal democracy. The turbulence caused by crashing out of the EU would just be another opportunity for these individuals"

No irony there.

Strip away the layers and Brexit becomes ever more murky | Gina Miller


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Question for those who voted remain. We keep hearing, reading that leave voters didn't know what they were voting for. Did the remainers know what they were voying for ? Where do they see the Eu going ? What's the future for us if we were to stay in ? I ask because the EU won't stand still, it will keep on ploughing ahead/ moving with the times. So why did you vote remain and what's in store for it's members next ?



Well, if you're Catalonian its a big old blind eye whilst you get a truncheon wrapped round your head.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Question for those who voted remain. We keep hearing, reading that leave voters didn't know what they were voting for. Did the remainers know what they were voying for ? Where do they see the Eu going ? What's the future for us if we were to stay in ? I ask because the EU won't stand still, it will keep on ploughing ahead/ moving with the times. So why did you vote remain and what's in store for it's members next ?



i voted remain, though not out of any great love for the EU, nor out of any great desire to go where the EU has been straining at the harness to get to.

my vote was primarily based on geo-strategic issues. it can pretty much be boiled down to 'better to be in a very big, very rich gang than a very small, not nearly so rich gang'. big, bitey sharks don't attack Orca's, but seals are very much on the menu..

i also assumed that the process would be flooded with bad blood, and that there wouldn't be a recognition of mutal interest, just lots of antagonism and cutting off noses to spite faces.

i will caveat my 'remain' vote by saying that having had some experience within the nacient EU military/_external action _apparatus and therefore having been exposed to the 'deep EU' thoughts on such things, my vote may well have been different in 5 years time.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

Brexit is looking good news for bankers:


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Yeah the bankers have been on there knees for years under the EU


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i will caveat my 'remain' vote by saying that having had some experience within the nacient EU military/_external action _apparatus and therefore having been exposed to the 'deep EU' thoughts on such things, my vote may well have been different in 5 years time.


That's why i asked the question. What's in store for the future if we stay was one of my concerns.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 29, 2017)

The nightmare scenarios being presented all seem to rely on a post brexit UK with a right wing Tory government in charge being led presumably by the likes of Johnson, Gove, Fox et al? It does seem more likely though that we will end up with a post brexit UK being run by a Corbyn led Labour majority government who would presumably take the country in a completely different direction?


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Yeah the bankers have been on there knees for years under the EU



Well it looks like the EU has a regulation which caps bonuses. The article says:

“The UK and the EU have long clashed over the bonus cap, with the UK threatening to legally challenge the measure before eventually introducing it.”

So as a result of leaving it looks like the bankers will be even better off.


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> Well it looks like the EU has a regulation which caps bonuses. The article says:
> 
> “The UK and the EU have long clashed over the bonus cap, with the UK threatening to legally challenge the measure before eventually introducing it.”
> 
> So as a result of leaving it looks like the bankers will be even better off.


I never mentioned bonuses. Why did you vote to remain ? Where do you see the EU (in it's current form ) heading ?  Whats in store for the future ?


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 29, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Is this the thread where a man with an rather high income tells us all that wealth is immaterial to happiness?


money?
Depression and Antidepressants: A Nordic Perspective
The World's Happiest Countries Take The Most Antidepressants


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> I never mentioned bonuses


bankers perks are a symptom and a Mirror headline ennit, not a serious look.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

sealion said:


> Why did you vote to remain ?



Non-exhaustive list:

1. The university sector (particularly in science) is closely enmeshed with the EU. There are loads of people and projects doing really good work.The people are EU nationals and the money comes from the EU. That is all threatened by leaving.

2. I don't believe that the UK is or should be a global big hitter. I think we are better off in a club pooling resources.

3. Free trade with our neighbours.

4. Free movement of people is a wonderful thing. The downsides (to some) of immigration could have been tempered by other means.

5. I had a fairly good idea that leaving would be very difficult and take years of planning and resources. That isn't a reason not to leave if you are certain that being out is better than being in, but it tips the balance in favour of staying in. I'd have needed to be convinced that being out was certain to be better in order for leaving to have been worth the pain.

6. And in any event I do not believe that the destination will be better. I believe that we are much more likely to be squashed by the US and China outside of the EU. I believe that the people who are likely to end up running the UK want a deregulated Singapore style country. I've read Daniel Hannan and I don't want his like in charge.

As for the future of the EU without us - I don't really know. If we had stayed then there might have been a prospect for a two speed EU that might have worked.


----------



## magneze (Nov 29, 2017)

Winot said:


> Brexit is looking good news for bankers:
> 
> View attachment 121678


Man without ability to do thing says thing could happen. Terrific.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The nightmare scenarios being presented all seem to rely on a post brexit UK with a right wing Tory government in charge being led presumably by the likes of Johnson, Gove, Fox et al? It does seem more likely though that we will end up with a post brexit UK being run by a Corbyn led Labour majority government who would presumably take the country in a completely different direction?



It all obviously depends a lot on how the Brexit negotiations go and what happens in domestic politics over the next five years. But, broadly, I would predict that one of the key effects of Brexit would be to increase the influence of capital over public policy relative to what it is now. How far that happens will be a factor of how much of a Brexit we get. But if, for example, we are in a situation where the country is hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs (I think this is likely with a hard Brexit), the government will be forced to make concessions to manufacturers in order to stem the bleed. Ditto for financial services. A government which tried to resist couldn't last. So, in a nightmare scenario, I don't think having a Labour government will help very much. If things are less drastic, having a Labour government might compensate for some of the negative effects (or it might not), but it won't do anything to prevent them, and there's no foreseeable way that we will be any better off under a Labour government post-Brexit than we would under a Labour government sans Brexit.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 29, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It all obviously depends a lot on how the Brexit negotiations go and what happens in domestic politics over the next five years. But, broadly, I would predict that one of the key effects of Brexit would be to increase the influence of capital over public policy relative to what it is now. How far that happens will be a factor of how much of a Brexit we get. But if, for example, we are in a situation where the country is hemorrhaging manufacturing jobs (I think this is likely with a hard Brexit), the government will be forced to make concessions to manufacturers in order to stem the bleed. Ditto for financial services. A government which tried to resist couldn't last. So, in a nightmare scenario, I don't think having a Labour government will help very much. If things are less drastic, having a Labour government might compensate for some of the negative effects (or it might not), but it won't do anything to prevent them, and there's no foreseeable way that we will be any better off under a Labour government post-Brexit than we would under a Labour government sans Brexit.


It depends who you mean by “we”. It does appear the right wing brexiteers plans include allowing US medical insurers in to slowly privatise the NHS & one can be fairly sure the tax breaks would all be for the rich & the welfare state would continue to shrink.

Conversely it would appear Labour are willing to build council houses & generally have policies generally more friendly to those on lower incomes. So if by “we” we mean those on lower incomes them whatever the given state of the economy then “we” will be better off with Labour.

This may relate to kabbes earlier point that growth in the economy does not benefit the poor if only the rich benefit from that growth.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Conversely it would appear Labour are willing to build council houses & generally have policies generally more friendly to those on lower incomes. So if by “we” we mean those on lower incomes them whatever the given state of the economy then “we” will be better off with Labour.



That might be true, but only to the extent that it might be true irrespective of Brexit. Council houses, for example, are something that may or may not happen whether we do or don't leave the EU. The only connecting factor I can think of that any public investment proposal might be harder to realise if tax revenues fall significantly and/or the cost of government borrowing rises.


----------



## Supine (Nov 29, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The nightmare scenarios being presented all seem to rely on a post brexit UK with a right wing Tory government in charge being led presumably by the likes of Johnson, Gove, Fox et al? It does seem more likely though that we will end up with a post brexit UK being run by a Corbyn led Labour majority government who would presumably take the country in a completely different direction?



You seem very positive about a labour win next time. I can't see any evidence so far that corbyn will win however badly the conservatives do. And they surely can't do any worse than they have been


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

Supine said:


> You seem very positive about a labour win next time. I can't see any evidence so far that corbyn will win however badly the conservatives do. And they surely can't do any worse than they have been



Worse than low 40s in the polls? I think they will manage it.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2017)

I voted Remain because there was _no actual plan_ for the UK to leave the EU.
I think starting a big project without a plan is a terrible idea.
Nobody knew what we were voting for. We still don't know what we've voted for.


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I voted Remain because there was _no actual plan_ for the UK to leave the EU.
> I think starting a big project without a plan is a terrible idea.
> Nobody knew what we were voting for. We still don't know what we've voted for.



The EU needs to come up with an explicit VISION with capital letters.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2017)

I think it's the UK that needs to come up with a vision. We should have had the vision before the vote, tbf.


----------



## Supine (Nov 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> I think it's the UK that needs to come up with a vision. We should have had the vision before the vote, tbf.



That is the EU's attitude. Quiet rightly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2017)

'the UK' by which we mean the tory party in this instance had a vision. That was project fear .2, watch the proles roll over and then plain sailing till jolly dave hands over to anointed successor and let the austerity continue, nay let it deepen. Literally thats the plan they had. Whatever else you want to say, those plans _may _have encountered some difficulties now.


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2017)

Article on the Irish border issue. Sets out alleged Dublin tests. 

https://www.politico.eu/article/dublins-5-brexit-demands-show-path-to-sufficient-progress/


----------



## sealion (Nov 29, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Nobody knew what we were voting for. We still don't know what we've voted for.


People knew they didn't want more of the same either so voted leave regardless. No shame in that.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2017)

There's nothing to say it won't be more of the same.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 29, 2017)

toblerone3 said:


> The EU needs to come up with an explicit VISION with capital letters.



A new one that I heard today from some management speak types- what we need is an *ideas shower*

Hopefully a *golden ideas shower*


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> A new one that I heard today from some management speak types- what we need is an *ideas shower*
> 
> Hopefully a *golden ideas shower*



Well, we've definitely got a shower. If the EU have got some ideas then we're good to go.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2017)

Still, there's always hope. 
I hope there is.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2017)

Shit. Reduced to _hope_.
I'd swap hope for a good plan, any day.


----------



## coley (Nov 29, 2017)

mauvais said:


> So it's a question of borders. Why? Does collective benefit stop at the Channel?



Buggered if  I know where you are going with this? the whole idea of leaving the EU is to get back control of our National decision making, esp in where our taxes are spent.
I'm very much in favour of helping out others who are worse off than us, but *we *should decide on our priorities.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> Shit. Reduced to _hope_.
> I'd swap hope for a good plan, any day.


Baldrick would have had a plan


----------



## gosub (Nov 30, 2017)

coley said:


> Buggered if  I know where you are going with this? the whole idea of leaving the EU is to get back control of our National decision making, esp in where our taxes are spent.
> I'm very much in favour of helping out others who are worse off than us, but *we *should decide on our priorities.


racist.  


(sorry, some of the shit on facebook sinks in)


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Baldrick would have had a plan



A cunning one though. Not a good one.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> 'the UK' by which we mean the tory party in this instance had a vision. That was project fear .2, watch the proles roll over and then plain sailing till jolly dave hands over to anointed successor and let the austerity continue, nay let it deepen. Literally thats the plan they had. Whatever else you want to say, those plans _may _have encountered some difficulties now.


there were a few visions out there in the mainstream. That was one. Another involved less people committing the crime of speaking foreign in public. For those of us who might speak foreign in public, or just look foreign in public, that vision had a certain poigniancy.


----------



## coley (Nov 30, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> GDP , like Inflation, is often seen as shorthand as to how well *we* are doing - although this is bollocks when viewed alone , its often quoted, as it has that emotional trigger of perceived wellbeing  for many



kabbes  has it about right, GDP?  productivity indexes? all the metrics of corporations/capitalism screwing the last ounce out of the working class.
Ooooh GDP has fallen by .0001%"..."..panic, ...cobra meetings....CBI warned of this happening due to Brexit...
Oh bollocks.
This country is awash with money, just needs a bit of 'sensible redistribution' 
You can afford to spend 17k on a bottle of wine that you don't even know if it's drinkable? What's that, you own 20 millions worth of antique cars?
Let's have a look at your recent tax returns me old son
I would concede  that capitalism has benefitted many, but I would argue that capitalism is now 'out of control' and needs  serious and urgent restraint.
That 'restraint'  will never happen in a superstate, be it the EU, the US or even Putins Russia.


----------



## coley (Nov 30, 2017)

Chz said:


> His main mistake is what to choose to rail against. Per capita GDP is only interesting when measured against other countries' per capita GDP. It has almost no meaning measured against itself over time, other than as a measure of inflation.
> 
> The *point* stands that specific measures of the economy are a poor measure of personal well-being, but it's inane to suggest that there isn't some link between the economic well-being of the state and the well-being of its citizens.



But the "well being" of certain privileged 'parts of the state' as opposed to the general "well being"?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

ska invita said:


> there were a few visions out there in the mainstream. That was one. Another involved less people committing the crime of speaking foreign in public. For those of us who might speak foreign in public, or just look foreign in public, that vision had a certain poigniancy.


happy birthday for yesterday

obviously racism did not vanish with the crumbling of UKIP, it wouldn't have vanished if we'd stayed in- can we forget labours immigration mug? their pandering to it all? I can't. Its one of the reasons I still can't vote for them. I think it was post-brexit we had sarah champion on the 'pakistani peados' chat its a problem thats not going away. How many years have we had this stuff endorsed from all sides of the party political spectrum, eliding refugee with EU migrant, declaring this man 'illegal' and tarring entire communities with the actions of x individual ec etc. Non stop tabloid and socially sanctioned racism. anti immigration vans, yarls wood. 

We got two arguments presented, two sides of the right, one the more overtly xenophobic, the other edging closer to economic nationalism as defined within a european framework happy to accommodate member states with racist policies and rhetoric. And yes, I know this is easy for me to say, given who I am. The EU is pefectly happy with member states engaging in the most egregious racist state-sanctioned behaviour though, we know this.


----------



## coley (Nov 30, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Anyway, back to Brexit, Verhofstadt has sent Barnier a note saying that the current state of play on citizens' rights and Ireland won't count as sufficient progress.



Read, 45billion is a step in the right direction, but we want more, sooner.
Reply should be........fuck right off,....now 40billion.
Jeez, rather than the pension liabilities for the trough feeders and other bits and pieces, where does the EU justify its blackmail?


----------



## Raheem (Nov 30, 2017)

coley said:


> But the "well being" of certain privileged 'parts of the state' as opposed to the general "well being"?



Fair point. I guess the end of privilege will be one of the upsides of Brexit.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> happy birthday for yesterday
> 
> obviously racism did not vanish with the crumbling of UKIP, it wouldn't have vanished if we'd stayed in- can we forget labours immigration mug? their pandering to it all? I can't. Its one of the reasons I still can't vote for them. I think it was post-brexit we had sarah champion on the 'pakistani peados' chat its a problem thats not going away. How many years have we had this stuff endorsed from all sides of the party political spectrum, eliding refugee with EU migrant, declaring this man 'illegal' and tarring entire communities with the actions of x individual ec etc. Non stop tabloid and socially sanctioned racism. anti immigration vans, yarls wood.
> 
> We got two arguments presented, two sides of the right, one the more overtly xenophobic, the other edging closer to economic nationalism as defined within a european framework happy to accommodate member states with racist policies and rhetoric. And yes, I know this is easy for me to say, given who I am. The EU is pefectly happy with member states engaging in the most egregious racist state-sanctioned behaviour though, we know this.


i hear you dc. None the less, me and/or my girlfriend got shouted at to Leave from a van the day after the vote. The effect of which didn't make me regret abstaining, put it that way.
Visions....


----------



## coley (Nov 30, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> Is that likely to happen?  Could it be legislated against?  What happens on the EU's Eastern borders?
> 
> Obviously its an issue if there is a no deal situation but presumably its an issue now because a deal is trying to be done.



What happens on the EU's Eastern borders? 

Not a problem, 10 foot high  barbed wire fences and "security forces" that make the SAS look like social workers! The EU at its 'inclusive best''


----------



## coley (Nov 30, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Fair point. I guess the end of privilege will be one of the upsides of Brexit.


It's usual, when being sarcastic or attempting humour to include some of these 
'Removing privilege' I hope, will be that much easier the 'closer to home' that privilege is


----------



## Raheem (Nov 30, 2017)

coley said:


> 'Removing privilege' I hope, will be that much easier the 'closer to home' that privilege is



I don't see any reason to suppose so, or even that it will be.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 30, 2017)

...


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 30, 2017)

bimble said:


> Uk was great to my parents when they showed up here 40+years ago and I don’t think they’d get residency now either of them, that’s not EUs fault it’s domestic changes here, hardening attitudes to immigrants.
> I don’t think the eu are to blame for people’s anxiety about whether or not they’ll be allowed to stay here after Brexit either , Nobody wants all those ageing brits living in spain to come home after all.


Wow. Your parents were able to settle in the UK before the Eu even existed. Maybe the UK should leave the Eu so that others can settle in the uk too.


----------



## Happy Larry (Nov 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> We got two arguments presented, two sides of the right, one the more overtly xenophobic



What utter tripe. Firstly, both parties pushed for the remain vote. Secondly, just because so many people in Britain believe that immigration into the country has been excessive and has reduced the level of housing and jobs etc for those already here, doesn't make them xenophobic.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 30, 2017)

coley said:


> Buggered if  I know where you are going with this? the whole idea of leaving the EU is to get back control of our National decision making, esp in where our taxes are spent.
> I'm very much in favour of helping out others who are worse off than us, but *we *should decide on our priorities.


You don't get this control with most spending at this level. For example, Scotland currently has higher public expenditure than it collects from the Scottish in tax revenue, so English taxpayer money is flowing there, and yet much of the spending decisions are devolved to the Scottish parliament, quite rightly. All you can do about it is attempt to vote out the entire system. As you can and presumably have with the EU.

But if you were going to complain about it on the basis of the money, rather than say, 'who gives a fuck about Scotland', then you'd probably have some kind of tangible complaint to share about why the money was undeserved or misspent.

So where this is going, not exactly concealed, is poking at your attitude to redistribution. Basically, on what's presented so far, I don't believe you. I think you're either throwing a principle that you're in favour of under the bus in exchange for a stick with which to beat the EU, when countless others are available for free, or, you have no actual interest in redistribution of funds in the first place, at least outside British borders. I wouldn't like to guess which. I think this not because of you per se but because it's a common trope when it comes to the subject of giving away money - e.g. 'charity starts at home' as a hapless cover for no charity at all.


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Wow. Your parents were able to settle in the UK before the Eu even existed. Maybe the UK should leave the Eu so that others can settle in the uk too.


Good idea. Brexit, the obvious choice for those who hope immigrants will continue to come here and staff the NHS for us. Oh hang on.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

That's what you hope, that nurses and doctors from other countries (often less prosperous) leave the (often understaffed) health services of those countries and work in the NHS?


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2017)

I was taking the piss out of pocketscience's idea that leaving the EU will lead to more people being able to settle here in the welcoming UK.. But now that you ask, yes, i'm selfish like that, I hope people do keep coming here to staff the NHS, i think we're short of some 40,000 nurses at the moment.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

Lovely, exploitation of workers and less prosperous countries as 'freedom of movement'.


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Lovely, exploitation of workers and less prosperous countries as 'freedom of movement'.


Yes. I'm sure that they'll be really grateful for the show of concern for their welfare that is Brexit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

Yeah that's it, if you oppose the forced migration and exploitation of workers and you must be a xenophobe. Pathetic. 

And of course the EU had those lovely open borders, no paying of authoritarian governments millions of euros to set up camps. No racist attacks on Roma, forcing them to emigrate. No barbed wire fences and barriers set up by countries in the EU. Never happened.


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2017)

I didn't say any of that though did i? Pocketscience said


pocketscience said:


> Maybe the UK should leave the Eu so that others can settle in the uk too.


 Which is it then, immigration good or immigration is exploitation?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

FFS, that's it. A reduction to a moronic binary choice. As I said, absolutely pathetic.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 30, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> That's what you hope, that nurses and doctors from other countries (often less prosperous) leave the (often understaffed) health services of those countries and work in the NHS?



It’s a tricky one, it’s good for the individuals and it’s good for this country, but it’s not so good for the country they leave. maybe we should identify which country the best ones come from and fund nurses training there, formalise the arrangement.

Alex


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

Happy Larry said:


> What utter tripe. Firstly, both parties pushed for the remain vote. Secondly, just because so many people in Britain believe that immigration into the country has been excessive and has reduced the level of housing and jobs etc for those already here, doesn't make them xenophobic.



Nobody cares what you think larry. Go back to looking at borderline videos on youtube


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

Or maybe the government could stop attacking the pay and working conditions of nurses and more people would be willing to go/stay in the profession.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 30, 2017)

The cause of the skills shortage in this country is short termism that started in the 80s. Prior to that building companies & factories offered apprenticeships with day release college & city&guild exams. There were also government training centres as well that taught skills to older people. A friend now in his 60s who was a complete waster in his teens & early 20s decided to sort himself out & did a government training course in plumbing which has earnt him a good living since. That could not happen now. The centres have all closed.

The apprenticeship scheme we have now was intially paid for by taxpayers but now employers are expected to pay apprenticeship levy the level of apprenticeships has dropped dramatically. Companies having to pay to train their own workers? Perish the though eh? The apprenticeships are bollocks anyway, demeaning the meaning of the word. An apprenticeship is a 4yr course to learn a skilled trade not being taught to work in a shop.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 30, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah that's it, if you oppose the forced migration and exploitation of workers and you must be a xenophobe. Pathetic.



Not sure if all that many foreign workers in the NHS would consider themselves to be "forced migrants," tbf. The cumulative effect on some countries is indeed terrible - especially the Philippines, where they are seeing doctors retrain as nurses to get jobs overseas - but I think these workers generally see themselves as using their skills to move to a more prosperous country for a better life for themselves and their children, a situation not wildly different from that of many British people moving to Australia, for example.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

I thought most NHS migrant workers were from outside of the EU anyway,


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Not sure if all that many foreign workers in the NHS would consider themselves to be "forced migrants," tbf. The cumulative effect on some countries is indeed terrible - especially the Philippines, where they are seeing doctors retrain as nurses to get jobs overseas - but I think these workers generally see themselves as using their skills to move to a more prosperous country for a better life for themselves and their children, a situation not wildly different from that of many British people moving to Australia, for example.


Many/most people would deny that they are being exploited by working but they are. Does the fact that many in the armed forces would say that they have chosen to enlist because they want to protect their country mean that economic conscription doesn't exist? 

To ignore the material conditions that drive migration is absurd. This is why the reduction of freedom of movement (or other 'freedoms') to the merely legal domain is so dangerous.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2017)

Raheem said:


> You may need to spell out why you think this is especially relevant to the thread.


It's a useful primer on the global economic consensus that popped up in my feedly, and it made me think of the last few pages on here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah that's it, if you oppose the forced migration and exploitation of workers and you must be a xenophobe. Pathetic.
> 
> And of course the EU had those lovely open borders, no paying of authoritarian governments millions of euros to set up camps. No racist attacks on Roma, forcing them to emigrate. No barbed wire fences and barriers set up by countries in the EU. Never happened.


This is it, isn't it?  The false dichotomy that's presented by the Remain media. It's a polarisation into Good and Bad that doesn't bear scrutiny.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

We’re being hurt by the fixation on economic growth at all costs | Larry Elliott
heh, just what was being discussed yesterday around GDP:


----------



## kabbes (Nov 30, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> We’re being hurt by the fixation on economic growth at all costs | Larry Elliott
> heh, just what was being discussed yesterday around GDP:


The Guardian follow my posts and just use them as article fodder.  The obvious conclusion.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The Guardian follow my posts and just use them as article fodder.  The obvious conclusion.


I've never seen you and Larry Elliot in the same room. #justsayin


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 30, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The Guardian follow my posts and just use them as article fodder.  The obvious conclusion.


Presumably why the Guardian is going down the pan? They nick their content from lefty internet forums.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 30, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The cause of the skills shortage in this country is short termism that started in the 80s. Prior to that building companies & factories offered apprenticeships with day release college & city&guild exams. There were also government training centres as well that taught skills to older people. A friend now in his 60s who was a complete waster in his teens & early 20s decided to sort himself out & did a government training course in plumbing which has earnt him a good living since. That could not happen now. The centres have all closed.
> 
> The apprenticeship scheme we have now was intially paid for by taxpayers but now employers are expected to pay apprenticeship levy the level of apprenticeships has dropped dramatically. Companies having to pay to train their own workers? Perish the though eh? The apprenticeships are bollocks anyway, demeaning the meaning of the word. An apprenticeship is a 4yr course to learn a skilled trade not being taught to work in a shop.



You don't think that the Labour government setting pay rates for apprentices, had something to do with the loss of apprenticeships? When a final year apprentice was being paid 80% of a journeyman's wage, it became a bit much. The company that my brother in law was apprenticed to took in two apprentices a year up until that point. My brother in law was their last apprentice.


----------



## bimble (Nov 30, 2017)

Largest annual fall in net migration since records began was announced today, and we’ve not even brexited yet.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 30, 2017)

bimble said:


> Largest annual fall in net migration since records began was announced today, and we’ve not even brexited yet.




When I was in hospital recently, most of the staff came from abroad. 

The fuckwitted idea of doing away with bursaries for student nurses, and making them pay tuition fees, will deter a lot of people from taking up nursing.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Nov 30, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> You don't think that the Labour government setting pay rates for apprentices, had something to do with the loss of apprenticeships? When a final year apprentice was being paid 80% of a journeyman's wage, it became a bit much. The company that my brother in law was apprenticed to took in two apprentices a year up until that point. My brother in law was their last apprentice.


I think point is why should it be necessary for there to be any government intervention in companies training their staff? For yrs after around the 80s when firms stopped training their staff they were to be able to advertise for experienced staff & recruit them. This was because of the massive unemployment in the 80s. The lament of the unemployed was always “how can I get any experience if nobody will train me?”

Obviously the lack of training being offered would eventually come back to bite them on the bum & we now have a skills shortage. Why should paying people properly while they are being trained be any issue at all?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 30, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Not sure if all that many foreign workers in the NHS would consider themselves to be "forced migrants," tbf. The cumulative effect on some countries is indeed terrible - especially the Philippines, where they are seeing doctors retrain as nurses to get jobs overseas - but I think these workers generally see themselves as using their skills to move to a more prosperous country for a better life for themselves and their children, a situation not wildly different from that of many British people moving to Australia, for example.


 Do you have a source for that? Doctors are more in demand across the world than nurses.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 30, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think point is why should it be necessary for there to be any government intervention in companies training their staff? For yrs after around the 80s when firms stopped training their staff they were to be able to advertise for experienced staff & recruit them. This was because of the massive unemployment in the 80s. The lament of the unemployed was always “how can I get any experience if nobody will train me?”
> 
> Obviously the lack of training being offered would eventually come back to bite them on the bum & we now have a skills shortage. Why should paying people properly while they are being trained be any issue at all?


 The pay rates set by Wilson's (IIRC) government were too high for small companies, who by their number actually trained the most apprentices. I do take your point about unemployment, I was a victim of it. I moved my family from Scotland to the South of England for employment.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 30, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> The fuckwitted idea of doing away with bursaries for student nurses, and making them pay tuition fees, will deter a lot of people from taking up nursing.



Just as a large contingent of experienced nurses are approaching retirement age too.

It's almost as if voting tory was somehow a bad idea.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 30, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Do you have a source for that? Doctors are more in demand across the world than nurses.





> Doctors who have retrained as nurses (known as “nurse medics”) in order to seek overseas employment are a new and growing phenomenon. While exact numbers are not available, a study on this trend showed that in 2001, approximately 2,000 doctors became nurse medics and by 2003, that number increased to about 3,000 (Pascual, Marcaida, and Salvador 2003).



Nurse Migration from a Source Country Perspective: Philippine Country Case Study


----------



## sealion (Nov 30, 2017)

bimble said:


> Largest annual fall in net migration since records began was announced today, and we’ve not even brexited yet.


The official statisticians say the reduction could be due to economic changes across the EU, such as improved job opportunities and the fall in the value of the pound. There's also been an increase in skilled workers visas.


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You don't get this control with most spending at this level. For example, Scotland currently has higher public expenditure than it collects from the Scottish in tax revenue, so English taxpayer money is flowing there, and yet much of the spending decisions are devolved to the Scottish parliament, quite rightly. All you can do about it is attempt to vote out the entire system. As you can and presumably have with the EU.
> 
> But if you were going to complain about it on the basis of the money, rather than say, 'who gives a fuck about Scotland', then you'd probably have some kind of tangible complaint to share about why the money was undeserved or misspent.
> 
> So where this is going, not exactly concealed, is poking at your attitude to redistribution. Basically, on what's presented so far, I don't believe you. I think you're either throwing a principle that you're in favour of under the bus in exchange for a stick with which to beat the EU, when countless others are available for free, or, you have no actual interest in redistribution of funds in the first place, at least outside British borders. I wouldn't like to guess which. I think this not because of you per se but because it's a common trope when it comes to the subject of giving away money - e.g. 'charity starts at home' as a hapless cover for no charity at all.



As you say,  there are  'countless sticks with which to beat the EU with' but the one that annoys me most is the perception that the EU actually funds projects within the U.K. ...it doesn't... it only redistributes money that we have  paid into the EU budget.
It does not provide extra funding, it give us a proportion of the money we have already paid, back to the UK but only into projects that the EU decides are 'worthy' 
The NHS bus was, as most would agree,  a clumsy attempt to highlight this point.
I would be more than happy to see a UK based organisation deciding on the 'redistribution' of the nations wealth.
Other, than a Tory govt that is


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> That's what you hope, that nurses and doctors from other countries (often less prosperous) leave the (often understaffed) health services of those countries and work in the NHS?



Or mebbes leaving the EU will open up the possibility of us dipping into the pockets of the corporations  (currently running the U.K., including the NHS)  who are currently exploiting migrants? Not just in the UK,but worldwide?


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Lovely, exploitation of workers and less prosperous countries as 'freedom of movement'.


Oops, did you see the 'principles' of the EU in a more compassionate light?


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> When I was in hospital recently, most of the staff came from abroad.
> 
> The fuckwitted idea of doing away with bursaries for student nurses, and making them pay tuition fees, will deter a lot of people from taking up nursing.



Requiring nurses to take a 'degree' is the 'fuckwitted' bit  same as 'fast tracking' graduates into senior police posts.
And now requiring a degree to apply for job as a a copper?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 1, 2017)

coley said:


> Requiring nurses to take a 'degree' is the 'fuckwitted' bit  same as 'fast tracking' graduates into senior police posts.
> And now requiring a degree to apply for job as a a copper?



I am a qualified nurse, and completely agree that it should not be a degree course. Our training comprised time on the wards, and time in the school of nursing. Most of the time was spent on the wards. That gives you the ability to spot immediately, the patient who is starting to deteriorate.

My mate Gary, who is still working as a nurse for the army, was walking along behind a 'degree' nurse when a patient asked her for a urine bottle. The 'degree' replied 'I'll get someone else, I didn't go to university to hand out urine bottles'. Gary's comment to her got her to fetch the urine bottle, and him an interview with the boss re 'tone and manner'.


----------



## ddraig (Dec 1, 2017)

coley said:


> As you say,  there are  'countless sticks with which to beat the EU with' but the one that annoys me most is the perception that the EU actually funds projects within the U.K. ...it doesn't... it only redistributes money that we have  paid into the EU budget.
> It does not provide extra funding, it give us a proportion of the money we have already paid, back to the UK but only into projects that the EU decides are 'worthy'
> The NHS bus was, as most would agree,  a clumsy attempt to highlight this point.
> I would be more than happy to see a UK based organisation deciding on the 'redistribution' of the nations wealth.
> Other, than a Tory govt that is


what part of "net beneficiary" do you not understand?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 1, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what part of "net beneficiary" do you not understand?


 We are not 'net beneficiaries' of the EU, we pay circa £10Bn a year more than the EU 'spends' in the UK. I am a 'Remain' voter just the same.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 1, 2017)

according to a man in the newspaper this is as bad as the time we invaded iraq with no plan of what to do after saddam has toppled. lol.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 1, 2017)

Reading something about the fish bonanza that awaits after we leave, as we have about 80% of the European mature herring in our waters at present- fishermen rubbing their hands with glee at the riches awaiting once caps and quotas are ripped up. Short memories I fear-  there was a 6/7 year moratorium on herring in the late 70s that rescued the stocks.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 1, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> according to a man in the newspaper this is as bad as the time we invaded iraq with no plan of what to do after saddam has toppled. lol.



Football Lads are the Shia militia, I guess.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 1, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> according to a man in the newspaper this is as bad as the time we invaded iraq with no plan of what to do after saddam has toppled. lol.



Not quite, but there do seem to be things that are only now being considered.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 1, 2017)

Scottish independence has been considered for a long time


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 1, 2017)

not-bono-ever said:


> Reading something about the fish bonanza that awaits after we leave, as we have about 80% of the European mature herring in our waters at present- fishermen rubbing their hands with glee at the riches awaiting once caps and quotas are ripped up. Short memories I fear-  there was a 6/7 year moratorium on herring in the late 70s that rescued the stocks.


 Yep, there have to be quotas or the greedy bastards will fish them to near extinction again.

I lived in Fort William at the time of the white fish boom. There was a 20 ton lorry coming out of Mallaig every twenty minutes, day and night. If you have been to Mallaig, you will see a lot of big houses, just as you come into the town, they were all built at that time. There isn't a single boat fishing out of there now.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 1, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> Yep, there have to be quotas or the greedy bastards will fish them to near extinction again.
> 
> I lived in Fort William at the time of the white fish boom. There was a 20 ton lorry coming out of Mallaig every twenty minutes, day and night. If you have been to Mallaig, you will see a lot of big houses, just as you come into the town, they were all built at that time. There isn't a single boat fishing out of there now.


I was on a boat out fishing off Mallaig this very summer


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 1, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I was on a boat out fishing off Mallaig this very summer
> View attachment 121883



I'd always pictured you as clean shaven and bipedal. But that's the Internet for you.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 1, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I'd always pictured you as clean shaven and bipedal. But that's the Internet for you.


That’s Ben, who sadly died last month.  But he had a long and happy life first.  He loved that holiday to the highlands.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 1, 2017)

Oh, commiserations. It's the long and happy life that counts. Hope you're bearing up, and getting to the point where you can consider a new puppy.


----------



## Winot (Dec 1, 2017)

Possible pragmatic fix reported here - UK stays in airline safety body post-Brexit which necessitates some 'indirect' ECJ jurisdiction.

Govt to stay in EU air safety body in blurring of Brexit red line


----------



## Poi E (Dec 1, 2017)

the petits four will all be fudge from here on in.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 1, 2017)

*Faisal Islam*‏Verified account @faisalislam
Wow. Tusk announces in Dublin that Irish Government gets formal veto over Brexit sufficient progress - he will consult with Varadkar to sign off any move to next phase


----------



## phillm (Dec 1, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I am a qualified nurse, and completely agree that it should not be a degree course. Our training comprised time on the wards, and time in the school of nursing. Most of the time was spent on the wards. That gives you the ability to spot immediately, the patient who is starting to deteriorate.
> 
> My mate Gary, who is still working as a nurse for the army, was walking along behind a 'degree' nurse when a patient asked her for a urine bottle. The 'degree' replied 'I'll get someone else, I didn't go to university to hand out urine bottles'. Gary's comment to her got her to fetch the urine bottle, and him an interview with the boss re 'tone and manner'.



Sounds like a case of taking the piss by not taking the piss.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 1, 2017)

Tusk:-

“We agreed today that before proposing guidelines on transition and future relations I will consult the Taoiseach on [whether or not] the UK offer is sufficient for the Irish Government.

“Let me say very clearly if the UK offer is unacceptable for Ireland it will be unacceptable for the EU,” he said.


----------



## Winot (Dec 1, 2017)

^ is anyone surprised by this?


----------



## Smangus (Dec 1, 2017)

Winot said:


> ^ is anyone surprised by this?



Only Rees Moggy probably. Bet he's astounded at their audacity


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 1, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Only Rees Moggy probably. Bet he's astounded at their audacity



He won’t be though, he favours telling them all to get fucked. Which is pretty much what we should be doing right now.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 1, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He won’t be though, he favours telling them all to get fucked. Which is pretty much what we should be doing right now.



Classic Urban diplomacy in action


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I am a qualified nurse, and completely agree that it should not be a degree course. Our training comprised time on the wards, and time in the school of nursing. Most of the time was spent on the wards. That gives you the ability to spot immediately, the patient who is starting to deteriorate.
> 
> My mate Gary, who is still working as a nurse for the army, was walking along behind a 'degree' nurse when a patient asked her for a urine bottle. The 'degree' replied 'I'll get someone else, I didn't go to university to hand out urine bottles'. Gary's comment to her got her to fetch the urine bottle, and him an interview with the boss re 'tone and manner'.


Some professions obviously reqire "degree level education' but many do not, those that do not,  are the ones intrerfacing the public, Nursing,  the police, (politicians?) etc
You start at the bottom and based on intelligence and skills you rise to the top, SWMBOd is a good example (in the nursing arena)
Ignoring this basic fact is why 'labour' is so out of touch with Joe Soap.
But this is a digression from the topic.


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

DexterTCN said:


> Tusk:-
> 
> “We agreed today that before proposing guidelines on transition and future relations I will consult the Taoiseach on [whether or not] the UK offer is sufficient for the Irish Government.
> 
> “Let me say very clearly if the UK offer is unacceptable for Ireland it will be unacceptable for the EU,” he said.


Nice bit of passing the blame


----------



## kabbes (Dec 1, 2017)

Lots of Irish people on a R4 vox pop this evening saying Britain was betraying them by leaving the EU, and basically acting like the British people determining their own future with respect to their own status in the EU was nothing but a slight to the Irish.  Talk about self-absorbed.  Their attitude was basically that Britain should stay in the EU because that was better for Ireland.


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

ddraig said:


> what part of "net beneficiary" do you not understand?


Mmm, feeling the need to be a bit sarky are we bonnie lad/person?
Just the extent of our net loss, most agree we pay more in than we get out,
But amounts differ considerably depending on what equation (or news source) you look at, most 'remain' supporters (the BBC esp) will use every trick in the book to narrow down the difference between recipient and provider, but most agree we are a 'net contributer'  rather than a 'net recipient'
But wheyup, what's a few billions atween 'friends'


----------



## coley (Dec 1, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Lots of Irish people on a R4 vox pop this evening saying Britain was betraying them by leaving the EU, and basically acting like the British people determining their own future with respect to their own status in the EU was nothing but a slight to the Irish.  Talk about self-absorbed.  Their attitude was basically that Britain should stay in the EU because that was better for Ireland.


Eh? You sound surprised!? that's the whole tack of the EU, we 'perfidious Albion' are putting the whole EU dream in jeopardy by pursuing our 'national interest'
Let's not remember that the original 'steel and coal commission' was set up to benefit two particular players


----------



## sealion (Dec 2, 2017)

The predicted mass exodus from the city of London is looking less likely.
City firms on hiring spree


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 2, 2017)

sealion said:


> The predicted mass exodus from the city of London is looking less likely.
> City firms on hiring spree



According to Hays, and data from *peers over glasses* Adzuna. OK


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Lots of Irish people on a R4 vox pop this evening saying Britain was betraying them by leaving the EU, and basically acting like the British people determining their own future with respect to their own status in the EU was nothing but a slight to the Irish.  Talk about self-absorbed.  Their attitude was basically that Britain should stay in the EU because that was better for Ireland.


The British people determining their own future? Is that what this process is?

From what I remember, the border issue wasn't much of an issue during the campaign other than in Northern Ireland, where there was a majority remain, including a very large Nationalist remain. There were also assurances from leave campaigners that the border would remain open. If that turns out not to be true, who is held accountable for the failure? I think people in Northern Ireland who voted remain and didn't believe the lie that there would be no border issue have every right to be angry about all of this right now. They're being thrown under a bus. People in the south have every right to be peeved as well if their movement across the island of Ireland is to be restricted by a vote they weren't allowed to take part in. Why shouldn't they be? It's a pretty narrow nationalist argument to contend otherwise.

Here's Arlene Foster, leader of the only NI party that campaigned for leave, just after the referendum result. 



> We campaigned to leave the EU. This is the democratic decision of the people of the UK. This is a UK-wide decision and every vote is equal within the UK. I am proud of the fact that this decision was taken by the people.



Brexit means many things to many people. It's very clear what it means to Foster and her mad bunch of hateful bigots.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They're being thrown under a bus. People in the south have every right to be peeved



Except, so far, they're not being thrown under a bus, because HMG is in no position. They do have a right to be peeved but, more to the point, they have a right to stand up for themselves.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Except, so far, they're not being thrown under a bus, because HMG is in no position. They do have a right to be peeved but, more to the point, they have a right to stand up for themselves.


There's an assumption among some leave people that there is a way to do 'hard' brexit that doesn't put the gfa in jeopardy.  I see no reason why there has to be one tbh. I don't see one and I've not heard anyone suggest one yet.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think people in Northern Ireland who voted remain and didn't believe the lie that there would be no border issue have every right to be angry about all of this right now. They're being thrown under a bus.


It wasn’t the people of NI being interviewed, nor is it the people of NI that I am talking about.



> People in the south have every right to be peeved as well if their movement across the island of Ireland is to be restricted by a vote they weren't allowed to take part in. Why shouldn't they be? It's a pretty narrow nationalist argument to contend otherwis.


People in the south can be as peeved as they like with the prospect of Brexit, but that is different to being actively offended that the people of Britain aren’t putting their convenience first when making decisions. I don’t feel that I somehow have the right for the French to arrange their affairs to benefit me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> People in the south can be as peeved as they like with the prospect of Brexit, but that is different to being actively offended that the people of Britain aren’t putting their convenience first when making decisions. I don’t feel that I somehow have the right for the French to arrange their affairs to benefit me.



You can't think of a reason why relations with Ireland are fundamentally different to those with France?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You can't think of a reason why relations with Ireland are fundamentally different to those with France?


It doesn’t matter.  A sovereign nation shouldn’t expect that another sovereign nation will arrange its own governance in any way other than those which its citizens find most appealing.


----------



## bimble (Dec 2, 2017)

i don't know where to put this but Jacob Rees-Mogg met Steve Bannon to discuss US-UK politics I just hope that those who predict a Labour victory soon are correct, and that brexit won't all be decided by people like the Mogg, or the 'economic nationalism' of his new friends.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 2, 2017)

coley said:


> As you say,  there are  'countless sticks with which to beat the EU with' but the one that annoys me most is the perception that the EU actually funds projects within the U.K. ...it doesn't... it only redistributes money that we have  paid into the EU budget.
> It does not provide extra funding, it give us a proportion of the money we have already paid, back to the UK but only into projects that the EU decides are 'worthy'
> The NHS bus was, as most would agree,  a clumsy attempt to highlight this point.
> I would be more than happy to see a UK based organisation deciding on the 'redistribution' of the nations wealth.
> Other, than a Tory govt that is


It's worth nothing that the portion of UK govt spending that goes to the EU is about 1%....


----------



## Winot (Dec 2, 2017)

On the Irish border issue, this sums it up:


----------



## Winot (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t matter.  A sovereign nation shouldn’t expect that another sovereign nation will arrange its own governance in any way other than those which its citizens find most appealing.



True for both RoI and UK.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 2, 2017)

bimble said:


> i don't know where to put this but Jacob Rees-Mogg met Steve Bannon to discuss US-UK politics I just hope that those who predict a Labour victory soon are correct, and that brexit won't all be decided by people like the Mogg, or the 'economic nationalism' of his new friends.


I can't help but notice we're seeing the Mogg on the Telly pontificating about various things a lot recently, there are nearly 300 Tory backbenchers but it's always him, is this some plan to get us used to seeing him?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t matter.  A sovereign nation shouldn’t expect that another sovereign nation will arrange its own governance in any way other than those which its citizens find most appealing.



Well we've certainly got form for arranging matters to our own benefit as regards the fate of the Irish people.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 2, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I can't help but notice we're seeing the Mogg on the Telly pontificating about various things a lot recently, there are nearly 300 Tory backbenchers but it's always him, is this some plan to get us used to seeing him?



There are undoubtedly forces in the BBC who have a vested interest in promoting brand Mogg, as there were with Johnson back when he was a nonentity.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 2, 2017)

Winot said:


> On the Irish border issue, this sums it up:




I'm inclined to agree. The only other alternative anyone has come up with is a hard border made to look like it isn't a hard border, which is neither feasible nor an actual solution to the problem.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 2, 2017)

Winot said:


> True for both RoI and UK.


Absolutely.  And when the ROI veto further Brexit discussions due to the insoluble border question, I for one won’t be resentful of the citizens of the ROI for that decision.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t matter.  A sovereign nation shouldn’t expect that another sovereign nation will arrange its own governance in any way other than those which its citizens find most appealing.


Sorry which world is this that you're talking about?  You're essentialising nations here, divorcing them from their history and the reason they exist as they do. This is nationalist politics you're doing here. It really stinks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2017)

Surely the solution has already been mooted on this thread? We are leaving THE customs union, nothing to stop us creating A customs union. Our standards are as the EU requires, cos we've been in the EU for 40 years, probably better in fact as we seem to be the country that complies most rigorously with EU diktat. So a two tier union, stuff we import/export that doesn't meet EU regulations we don't send to the EU.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry which world is this that you're talking about?  You're essentialising nations here, divorcing them from their history and the reason they exist as they do. This is nationalist politics you're doing here. It really stinks.


There are shades of grey and fuzzy boundaries, alright.  But wherever the line is, it lies a long way behind the point at which citizens of the ROI feel they have the right to tell citizens of the UK that they have to remain in the EU because it benefits the ROI for them to do so.

It wasn’t really the border, incidentally, that the vox pop interviewees were incensed about.  It was actually largely about ease of trade exports for the ROI.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Surely the solution has already been mooted on this thread? We are leaving THE customs union, nothing to stop us creating A customs union. Our standards are as the EU requires, cos we've been in the EU for 40 years, probably better in fact as we seem to be the country that complies most rigorously with EU diktat. So a two tier union, stuff we import/export that doesn't meet EU regulations we don't send to the EU.


David Davis's vision. Sell freely to the EU at EU standards then undercut it with exports elsewhere as you race to the bottom. There is an obvious flaw to that, aside from the fact that it is something all workers should oppose.


----------



## Winot (Dec 2, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Surely the solution has already been mooted on this thread? We are leaving THE customs union, nothing to stop us creating A customs union. Our standards are as the EU requires, cos we've been in the EU for 40 years, probably better in fact as we seem to be the country that complies most rigorously with EU diktat. So a two tier union, stuff we import/export that doesn't meet EU regulations we don't send to the EU.



Isn’t the problem that you will still need checks on the Irish border to stop the stuff that doesn’t meet EU regs getting in?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 2, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> There are undoubtedly forces in the BBC who have a vested interest in promoting brand Mogg, as there were with Johnson back when he was a nonentity.


I'll add a bucket to my Xmas wish list then


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 2, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Surely the solution has already been mooted on this thread? We are leaving THE customs union, nothing to stop us creating A customs union. Our standards are as the EU requires, cos we've been in the EU for 40 years, probably better in fact as we seem to be the country that complies most rigorously with EU diktat. So a two tier union, stuff we import/export that doesn't meet EU regulations we don't send to the EU.


There's also the problem that standards will drift apart over time, Assuming we can sign a trade deal with the madman on the other side of the pond, it might very well involve us taking the feared chlorinated chicken for example, the Irish and the EU will want to keep that out, over time we'll change or simply not keep up on lots of fronts such as environmental issues, quality standards or employment rights.
If we stay in the customs union then we have to keep up with these things, one of the big attraction of a hard Brexit to a lot of politicians is cutting back on what they see as red tape from the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> There are shades of grey and fuzzy boundaries, alright.  But wherever the line is, it lies a long way behind the point at which citizens of the ROI feel they have the right to tell citizens of the UK that they have to remain in the EU because it benefits the ROI for them to do so.
> 
> It wasn’t really the border, incidentally, that the vox pop interviewees were incensed about.  It was actually largely about ease of trade exports for the ROI.


tbh whatever the reason given, there is a point here. Where was the consultation with ROI before the referendum from leave campaigners? It just highlights yet again that there was no plan for how to do it. The vote was empty in that sense - remain, well we knew what that meant; we still don't know what leave really means. 

The history of this stuff matters. It is not a coincidence that the UK and Ireland joined the EU at the same time. There has been a common travel area since long before that. And before that, the UK ruled Ireland, in not a very nice way.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> There's also the problem that standards will drift apart over time, Assuming we can sign a trade deal with the madman on the other side of the pond, it might very well involve us taking the feared chlorinated chicken for example, the Irish and the EU will want to keep that out, over time we'll change or simply not keep up on lots of fronts such as environmental issues, quality standards or employment rights.
> If we stay in the customs union then we have to keep up with these things, one of the big attraction of a hard Brexit to a lot of politicians is cutting back on what they see as red tape from the EU.


Davis is explicit about this - it is what he wants. Deals with the likes of India and China that do not meet the environment, quality or employment standards of the EU. imo this alone is reason enough to oppose brexit, and it's what the pro-brexit tories have been after from the start. We knew this. 

Beyond its intrinsic evilness in nakedly racing to the bottom, the idiocy of the Davis position is its hopeless naivety about how the EU is likely to respond to such a wheeze.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 2, 2017)

Winot said:


> Isn’t the problem that you will still need checks on the Irish border to stop the stuff that doesn’t meet EU regs getting in?



No, because we will give them our word that the poisonous chicken and North Korean video recorders we’re flogging are for outside of the EU only.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh whatever the reason given, there is a point here. Where was the consultation with ROI before the referendum from leave campaigners? It just highlights yet again that there was no plan for how to do it. The vote was empty in that sense - remain, well we knew what that meant; we still don't know what leave really means.
> 
> The history of this stuff matters. It is not a coincidence that the UK and Ireland joined the EU at the same time. There has been a common travel area since long before that. And before that, the UK ruled Ireland, in not a very nice way.


I’m not sure what it is you’re saying here.  Is it that the UK should consult with foreign powers before deciding on whether or not to hold a referendum?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh whatever the reason given, there is a point here. Where was the consultation with ROI before the referendum from leave campaigners? It just highlights yet again that there was no plan for how to do it. The vote was empty in that sense - remain, well we knew what that meant; we still don't know what leave really means.


so you think the leave campaign should have consulted with the irish government  pisspoor





> The history of this stuff matters. It is not a coincidence that the UK and Ireland joined the EU at the same time. There has been a common travel area since long before that. And before that, the UK ruled Ireland, in not a very nice way.


yeh. and what do you make of the uk's post-1922 administration of the six counties?

it may not be a coincidence that the uk & ireland joined the eec (not eu) at the same time but anyone who knows anything of the subject knows that the uk had tried to join in the 1960s only to meet de gaulle's famous _non_


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I’m not sure what it is you’re saying here.  Is it that the UK should consult with foreign powers before deciding on whether or not to hold a referendum?


It's one of the many contradictions inherent to the idea that a government would call a referendum over a change that the government itself _doesn't_ want. Propose something that has such fundamental consequences that you consider a referendum necessary - that's one thing. You set out your plan (which would include consulting with the ROI over the border issue), and if you win, great, you get to do that thing, but you're still held accountable if it goes wrong. Lose, well you don't get to do that thing.

But propose not doing something that has fundamental consequences and holding a referendum over that? Why? If you win, fine, you don't have to do anything. But if you lose, then what? You didn't want to do it. You might not even consider it possible. You might consider it damaging. You certainly haven't worked out how to do it, and those campaigning for doing that thing could say whatever they wanted - UKIP in particular knew full well that they wouldn't be involved in doing brexit so they could peddle whatever lies they wanted with no accountability.

So there were plenty of plans, but there was no plan. Why is brexit happening - to what end? The tories in charge of it now have stated several times - May in particular - that it has to mean _controlling immigration_, so stopping all those Poles from coming here and working, the fiends. But I didn't see immigration on the ballot paper. It's a fuck-up, and there's nothing democratic about this process. The idea that it is 'the will of the British people' is a sick joke, and is being used by some very nasty people with very nasty aims - the likes of Arlene Foster, quoted earlier.


----------



## Winot (Dec 2, 2017)

I think the political class will be very wary of any further referendums. And I think Remainers calling for a second referendum are mistaken.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 2, 2017)

Winot said:


> I think the political class will be very wary of any further referendums. And I think Remainers calling for a second referendum are mistaken.



I'm agnostic on a second referendum. But if 16-18s are allowed to join in, and there are a complex number of options for participants to weight, and it's billed as a "democratic consultation" or somesuch, it could provide air cover for doing the sensible thing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 2, 2017)

see ireland had to be polled twice to get the 'right' answer over Lisbon. different times though. pre-crash


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 2, 2017)

Twice for Nice too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> see ireland had to be polled twice to get the 'right' answer over Lisbon. different times though. pre-crash


Yep. That was shit, and the Lisbon Treaty contains a lot of stuff that needs to be opposed.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 2, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It doesn’t matter.  A sovereign nation shouldn’t expect that another sovereign nation will arrange its own governance in any way other than those which its citizens find most appealing.


There’s a big difference between what the Irish state is saying and the personal opinions of irish citizens. But on that point everyone in The six counties entitled to irish citizenship. Maybe they should not have an opinion and air it.Yet the British state has always had it say in the free state. Even to the point of placing bombs in Dublin and Monaghan and even my home town. So yes the free marketeers should shut up but don’t get so outraged over radio interviews.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 2, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> see ireland had to be polled twice to get the 'right' answer over Lisbon. different times though. pre-crash


Also on the basis that the EU thought we owed them something after the structural funding. Blair and Brown were a big pusher for the re run of the referendums


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

So, indications so far would suggest that there isn't going to be any kind of resolution on the three main issues today.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

not the line being reported on R4 this morning which was about positivity & optomism. 

Even if we clear the Irish veto thing that is just a foretaste of all the other veto's that can be played like a whole pack of Jokers as the poker game shifts to the trade agreement


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> not the line being reported on R4 this morning which was about positivity & optomism.
> 
> Even if we clear the Irish veto thing that is just a foretaste of all the other veto's that can be played like a whole pack of Jokers as the poker game shifts to the trade agreement



Getting a bit boring now... The man who took on the EU has destroyed Theresa May's Brexit tactics


Either go crawling back to the EU and pretend the whole thing never happened or fuck 'em off now and spend the next 15 months getting ready for WTO.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> not the line being reported on R4 this morning which was about positivity & optomism.
> 
> Even if we clear the Irish veto thing that is just a foretaste of all the other veto's that can be played like a whole pack of Jokers as the poker game shifts to the trade agreement




It's not a poker game, and that analogy is genuinely toxic. This isn't about information asymmetry, it's about trade-offs between competing priorities. Stuff from Davis about "showing our hand" is a lie to cover up the lack of any solutions to the absurd constraints the Tories have set themselves.


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2017)

Turns out the potato-munchers had some formidable backers;


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2017)

Ah'll jist leave this here, och aye the noo, hoots mon:


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Turns out the potato-munchers had some formidable backers;



Let me guess, the same "formidable backers" that review and rubber stamp their budget before even their own government or population has the privilege to do so?


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 4, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Let me guess, the same "formidable backers" that review and rubber stamp their budget before even their own government or population has the privilege to do so?


They are also kind to their old mum.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

This Connelly chap now says _The draft text on Ireland has since been updated to include the phrase "continued regulatory alignment" rather than "no regulatory divergence", acc to well-placed sources
_
That is not enough for a seamless border, surely.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

just seen a rather clever comment elsewhere to the effect if May offers the same to Scotland then she can swap the DUP for the SNP  ( she may ask for her billion pound cheque back aswell )


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 4, 2017)

Why's that a clever comment when the SNP have ruled out any deal to prop up the Tories? I know that the word of politicians isn't to be relied on but the SNP would have to be idiots to make any such deal, it'd damage them immensely.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Stay on this board for long enough and it's possible to agree with redsquirrel about something.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

I read somewhere that they can expect to lose seats back to labour next time around, any deal with satan would make it a lot of seats


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Ah'll jist leave this here, och aye the noo, hoots mon:



I thought it was just a further demonstration of how much the SNP bullshitted in the Indy referendum.  "There wouldn't be a hard border with England" they said, "We'd still be a member of EU" they said....Catalonia?


If they had thought things through then, and  said 'we'll go down the EFTA route', not only would I have voted YES but rUK would probably now be following their lead.  Rather than Scotland being a wallflower in negotiations and Sturgeon being made to look stupid with her desperate shenanigans after the EU referendum


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Getting a bit boring now... The man who took on the EU has destroyed Theresa May's Brexit tactics
> 
> 
> Either go crawling back to the EU and pretend the whole thing never happened or fuck 'em off now and spend the next 15 months getting ready for WTO.



article is from 6 months ago.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Turns out the potato-munchers]





Idris2002 said:


> Ah'll jist leave this here, och aye the noo, hoots mon:
> ]


has Prince Philip got your log in or is this just you


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

oh alright - how's the Ashes going ?


----------



## bemused (Dec 4, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> Turns out the potato-munchers had some formidable backers;




Surely that means that the rest of the UK will be in the same regulatory regime? Unless there is some amazing plan to put a border between Northern Ireland and Wales, Scotland and England?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

bemused said:


> Surely that means that the rest of the UK will be in the same regulatory regime? Unless there is some amazing plan to put a border between Northern Ireland and Wales, Scotland and England?


see the posts about a border in the irish sea _passim_


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> see the posts about a border in the irish sea _passim_



if thats the case it wont be long before we hear the dulcet tones of the norn iron unionist headbangers screaming in apoplectic rage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> if thats the case it wont be long before we hear the dulcet tones of the norn iron unionist headbangers screaming in apoplectic rage.


screaming in apoplectic rage is the only tone they have


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> if thats the case it wont be long before we hear the dulcet tones of the norn iron unionist headbangers screaming in apoplectic rage.


And there's the DUP that campaigned to Leave. Almost as if they didn't think it through, the stupid bigotted twats.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And there's the DUP that campaigned to Leave. Almost as if they didn't think it through, the stupid bigotted twats.


I think DUP got as far as "what do the Fenians want? we'll do the opposite"


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> I think DUP got as far as "what do the Fenians want? we'll do the opposite"


Yep. McGuinness was very vocal in opposing the very idea of a referendum.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> This Connelly chap now says _The draft text on Ireland has since been updated to include the phrase "continued regulatory alignment" rather than "no regulatory divergence", acc to well-placed sources
> _
> That is not enough for a seamless border, surely.



it's starting to sound like a mathematical definition.

"Lines which do not converge? Or lines which converge at infinity? _It matters!"_


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2017)

A border drawn by MC Escher.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

A fractal border.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A fractal border.


Brexit could be delayed forever while they measure it


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Brexit could be delayed forever while they measure it


It most certainly needs examining at every level.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Brexit could be delayed forever while they measure it


The devil's in the detail.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> article is from 6 months ago.



I know and everything he said was going to happen is happening. There will be no deal from the EU, they are stringing the UK along, so we either crawl back or fuck 'em off. All this pissing about we're seeing is just a waste of precious time.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Neither crawl back not fuck 'em off are meaningful positions on their own. Either would require talks. Lots of talks. Talks take time. In fact, there's nothing at all that could conceivably be done in the remaining Article 50 time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Neither crawl back not fuck 'em off are meaningful positions. Either would require talks. Lots of talks. Talks take time. In fact, there's nothing at all that could conceivably be done in the remaining Article 50 time.


oh i think the government will think of some way to while the time away


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

‘*In the absence of agreed solutions* the UK will ensure that there continues to be no divergence from *those rules* of the internal market + customs union which, now or in the future, support North South cooperation +protection of the GFA.’

so the Irish Gov has leaked this draft as "we got NI" whilst there's a fair amount of fudge in there unless I'm much mistaken


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

It's not vacuous. If true, it means continued ECJ governance, and accepting new rules, as part of the (prolonged) interim. Across the whole UK.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Neither crawl back not fuck 'em off are meaningful positions on their own. Either would require talks. Lots of talks. Talks take time. In fact, there's nothing at all that could conceivably be done in the remaining Article 50 time.



Fuck 'em off doesn't need talks. We plant the nut on Junkers and catch the next Eurostar home. No €50bn bollocks, just a phone call to the WTO to get that ball rolling, get building some customs facilities and from March 2019 be one of the countries of the world which is not one of the 27 members of the EU.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck 'em off doesn't need talks. We plant the nut on Junkers and catch the next Eurostar home. No €50bn bollocks, just a phone call to the WTO to get that ball rolling, get building some customs facilities and from March 2019 be one of the countries of the world which is not one of the 27 members of the EU.



You do realise that this is complete nonsense? Even no-dealers are clear that they mean a no-deal deal, rather than the absence of any deal at all. The impact of what you suggest would be insane. There would, quite genuinely, be no food in the shops.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck 'em off doesn't need talks. We plant the nut on Junkers and catch the next Eurostar home. No €50bn bollocks, just a phone call to the WTO to get that ball rolling, get building some customs facilities and from March 2019 be one of the countries of the world which is not one of the 27 members of the EU.


So what? British people living in the EU, EU people living in Britain? Just fuck em. 

That's not an option. It never has been.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So what? British people living in the EU, EU people living in Britain? Just fuck em.
> 
> That's not an option. It never has been.


of course it's an option. it might not be to your taste, but it's still an option.

your liberal blinkers are getting in the way of your thinking. again.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck 'em off doesn't need talks. We plant the nut on Junkers and catch the next Eurostar home. No €50bn bollocks, just a phone call to the WTO to get that ball rolling, get building some customs facilities and from March 2019 be one of the countries of the world which is not one of the 27 members of the EU.



How are you going to get your clients flown home on 1 April 2019?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So what? British people living in the EU, EU people living in Britain? Just fuck em.
> 
> That's not an option. It never has been.



Yeah, fuck 'em all.

Unless the EU want to start talking seriously about moving forward, I would suggest that Eire prepares for waves of refugees flooding in from Kilburn...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

Winot said:


> How are you going to get your clients flown home on 1 April 2019?



In a Lancaster Bomber.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> ‘*In the absence of agreed solutions* the UK will ensure that there continues to be no divergence from *those rules* of the internal market + customs union which, now or in the future, support North South cooperation +protection of the GFA.’
> 
> so the Irish Gov has leaked this draft as "we got NI" whilst there's a fair amount of fudge in there unless I'm much mistaken



turns out there wasn't any red or blue paint available for May's "red, white and blue Brexit"


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, fuck 'em all.
> 
> Unless the EU want to start talking seriously about moving forward, I would suggest that Eire prepares for waves of refugees flooding in from Kilburn...


yeh that will go down really well in e.g. cricklewood, liverpool and glasgow.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, fuck 'em all.
> 
> Unless the EU want to start talking seriously about moving forward, I would suggest that Eire prepares for waves of refugees flooding in from Kilburn...


don't think you've been to Kilburn in a while


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, fuck 'em all.
> 
> Unless the EU want to start talking seriously about moving forward, I would suggest that Eire prepares for waves of refugees flooding in from Kilburn...



The EU is talking seriously. The people who are talking frivolously are the ones who are pretending that immediate independence from the EEA, the ECJ and the EU customs union is in any way possible.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> turns out there wasn't any red or blue paint available for May's "red, white and blue Brexit"


You read it here first.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck 'em off doesn't need talks. We plant the nut on Junkers and catch the next Eurostar home. No €50bn bollocks, just a phone call to the WTO to get that ball rolling, get building some customs facilities and from March 2019 be one of the countries of the world which is not one of the 27 members of the EU.


So who is part of the decision making process at the WTO? Anyone you’ve told to fuck off recently?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> turns out there wasn't any red or blue paint available for May's "red, white and blue Brexit"


I think there was some yellow paint though.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The EU is talking seriously. The people who are talking frivolously are the ones who are pretending that immediate independence from the EEA, the ECJ and the EU customs union is in any way possible.


Possible yes, in any way desirable, no.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

shifting as a stage 1 into one of the half way houses EEA or EFTA ( can't remember which one was the most palatable ) & then going to WTO in a controlled way always seemed the most sensible option with the only real objection being the over-hanging threat that it could be used to be walked back into the EU again


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

2hats said:


> So who is part of the decision making process at the WTO? Anyone you’ve told to fuck off recently?



No, but the day is still young, not even 9am in Washington...


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> shifting as a stage 1 into one of the half way houses EEA or EFTA ( can't remember which one was the most palatable ) & then going to WTO in a controlled way always seemed the most sensible option with the only real objection being the over-hanging threat that it could be used to be walked back into the EU again



It's not really a choice between two options. Being in EFTA means you are a member of the EEA. There are possibly other ways of staying within the EEA, although there probably isn't time to negotiate them.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> shifting as a stage 1 into one of the half way houses EEA or EFTA ( can't remember which one was the most palatable ) & then going to WTO in a controlled way always seemed the most sensible option with the only real objection being the over-hanging threat that it could be used to be walked back into the EU again


EFTA was simpler to do as more off the peg, EEA only,was more bespoke


----------



## flypanam (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, fuck 'em all.
> 
> Unless the EU want to start talking seriously about moving forward, I would suggest that Eire prepares for waves of refugees flooding in from Kilburn...



And England prepares for all the English refugees forced out of west Cork, all demanding their sea side vistas.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Let's just remind ourselves of the May administration's form for claiming that a deal has been agreed with the DUP, when it hasn't.

If they'll lie about it to Brenda, they won't mind telling porkies to the lobby.

And the precedent is that they end up paying through the nose as a result.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

I think I have the perfect solution.
Hand NI to the RoI.  Reunite Ireland.
It's perfect in its irony.  It'll piss off the very people in NI that voted for Brexit on nationist grounds and provide those on the republican side who voted against Brexit exactly what they wanted all along.  Furthermore, it solves the whole Irish border problem at a stroke.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Let's just remind ourselves of the May administration's form for claiming that a deal has been agreed with the DUP, when it hasn't.
> 
> If they'll lie about it to Brenda, they won't mind telling porkies to the lobby.
> 
> And the precedent is that they end up paying through the nose as a result.



bye bye Mrs May more likely.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I think I have the perfect solution.
> Hand NI to the RoI.  Reunite Ireland.
> It's perfect in its irony.  It'll piss off the very people in NI that voted for Brexit on nationist grounds and provide those on the republican side who voted against Brexit exactly what they wanted all along.  Furthermore, it solves the whole Irish border problem at a stroke.



Why would anyone in the Republic want that? NI runs on subsidy, so it would be a hideous burden. And Irish parliamentary politics is complicated enough without having a DUP contingent involved.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> bye bye Mrs May more likely.



She does have an extraordinary knack for hanging on, though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I think I have the perfect solution.
> Hand NI to the RoI.  Reunite Ireland.
> It's perfect in its irony.  It'll piss off the very people in NI that voted for Brexit on nationist grounds and provide those on the republican side who voted against Brexit exactly what they wanted all along.  Furthermore, it solves the whole Irish border problem at a stroke.



It's genius, we get to dump all the loyalist loons and spymaster on Dublin. If we cut away all the other shitty bits too we can whittle Brexit down to Farage standing in a field. On his own. Next to a crashed plane.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Why would anyone in the Republic want that? NI runs on subsidy, so it would be a hideous burden. And Irish parliamentary politics is complicated enough without having a DUP contingent involved.


Tough shit, sometimes you get a Christmas present you never wanted.

You telling me that if Britain offered to return the north to Irish control that Irish politicians would be able to look their public in the eye and say "no thank you"?  At the very least, if that happened, it would utterly change the face of everything involving Ireland, Britain and the relationship thereof.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Why would anyone in the Republic want that?



I know right, nobody ever votes shinner either do they, thats why its not the third largest party there


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> She does have an extraordinary knack for hanging on, though.


She's defied my expectations by lasting this long. Clearly nobody else wants to do it.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Tough shit, sometimes you get a Christmas present you never wanted.
> 
> You telling me that if Britain offered to return the north to Irish control that Irish politicians would be able to look their public in the eye and say "no thank you"?  At the very least, if that happened, it would utterly change the face of everything involving Ireland, Britain and the relationship thereof.



It would be a really complicated conversation. And while the conversation took place, unionist paramilitary groups in NI would be carrying out atrocities. It wouldn't help matters much.

Anyway, it's a mad fantasy. This is the Conservative and Unionist party we're talking about. If we want sensible answers to the conundra, there are easier options on the table - EFTA, for a start.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I know right, nobody ever votes shinner either do they, thats why its not the third largest party there



I meant the sensible people who would be tasked with making it all happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Tough shit, sometimes you get a Christmas present you never wanted.
> 
> You telling me that if Britain offered to return the north to Irish control that Irish politicians would be able to look their public in the eye and say "no thank you"?  At the very least, if that happened, it would utterly change the face of everything involving Ireland, Britain and the relationship thereof.



They can't turn it down, but then they're fighting against being given €13bn from Apple, so who knows?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> She's defied my expectations by lasting this long. Clearly nobody else wants to do it.



No-one wants any of the people mad enough to want to do it, is how I think it works.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It would be a really complicated conversation. And while the conversation took place, unionist paramilitary groups in NI would be carrying out atrocities. It wouldn't help matters much.


Seriously if they do it will be as shit as the AWB effort was in S. Africa.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

flypanam said:


> Seriously if they do it will be as shit as the AWB effort was in S. Africa.


yesterdays men and all that


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

flypanam said:


> Seriously if they do it will be as shit as the AWB effort was in S. Africa.



Even if it's only a couple of hundred proper nutters, there would be enough ranting about betrayal in NI, in English right wing circles, and of course with Scottish sectarians, for the whole thing to be pretty ugly.

I like Kabbes, but he's beginning to remind me of Michael Gove in his fondness for dramatic, dreadful solutions, and his mistrust of experts.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2017)

and right on cue - the DUP are pouring cold water over whatever london and dublin have supposedly agreed. 

DUP expresses doubts about UK-EU post-Brexit Irish border deal - Politics live


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I like Kabbes, but he's beginning to remind me of Michael Gove in his fondness for dramatic, dreadful solutions, and his mistrust of experts.


I wasn't being entirely serious about the Irish (final) solution.
It would definitely work, though.  More importantly, it would be really funny.

Incidentally, I have a great respect for experts.  What I also have, however, is a mistrust of people claiming expertise on things that do not lend themselves to the accumulation of expertise -- a phenomenon that is of well-trodden academic study at this point.  My old neighbour spent years learning in great depth everything there is to know about homeopathy.  Is she an expert?  Or just a quack that thinks she is an expert?


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> and right on cue - the DUP are pouring cold water over whatever london and dublin have supposedly agreed.
> 
> DUP expresses doubts about UK-EU post-Brexit Irish border deal - Politics live


Reads to me like UK should do EFTA and revisit the issue in a few years.   Happy with that. I think SNP could live with that. Most remainers I think could live with that... Would just be immigration lead leavers that couldn't.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Incidentally, I have a great respect for experts.  What I have is a mistrust of people claiming expertise on things that do not lend themselves to the accumulation of expertise -- something that is of well-trodden academic study at this point.  My old neighbour spent years learning in great depth everything there is to know about homeopathy.  Is she an expert?  Or just a quack that thinks she is an expert?



Fair enough, the only actual point of contention is whether economists are like (say) structural engineers or whether they are like homeopaths.

Although your neighbour still had expertise. She was an authority on something useless and absurd, but she still had knowledge about a body of lore and doctrine which (presumably) is internally coherent. You can be an expert theologist, for instance.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

The Michael Gove comparison was going too far, and I withdraw.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Fair enough, the only actual point of contention is whether economists are like (say) structural engineers or whether they are like homeopaths.


Indeed.  Or something in between, where there is the potential for something to be understood, but the complexity and length of feedback loops are such that they currently defy the ability to gain expertise.

We have seismologists that understand plate tectonics incredibly well, but if one predicted where an earthquake is going to be next year, you'd tell him to get to fuck.  (Warning: my understanding of seismology is very limited and this analogy may not actually work).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> I wasn't being entirely serious about the Irish (final) solution.
> It would definitely work, though.  More importantly, it would be really funny.
> 
> Incidentally, I have a great respect for experts.  What I also have, however, is a mistrust of people claiming expertise on things that do not lend themselves to the accumulation of expertise -- a phenomenon that is of well-trodden academic study at this point.  My old neighbour spent years learning in great depth everything there is to know about homeopathy.  Is she an expert?  Or just a quack that thinks she is an expert?



She's an expert in the quackery that is homeopathy.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She's an expert in the quackery that is homeopathy.


Not somebody you want advising you on how to treat your cancer, then.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

economists are invested with a more shamanic power than homeopaths. Everyone knows homeopaths are full of it but you put that dragons den presenter on bbc news and he is A Voice of Authority


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

He's not actually an economist, is he?

(ETA - actually, he is. Thought he was just a correspondent turned presenter)


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> He's not actually an economist, is he?


' In October 2001,Davis took over from Peter Jay as the BBC's economics editor. He left this post in April 2008 to become a presenter on BBC Radio 4's Today programme'

PPE rather than pure E tho


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Not somebody you want advising you on how to treat your cancer, then.



Nah.

Incidentally we rented a villa in France for six weeks a couple of years ago to help us all get over BB2's meningitis. The owner of that place introduced himself via email as a Doctor (Homeopathy). One night Frau Bahn and I got on one and ran out of booze, we broke in to his locked booze cupboard and necked a bottle of vodka that had only had a sip already drunk from it. Frau Bahn refilled the bottle with water, "It'll have the memory of vodka." she said. Which is about the funniest thing she's ever said.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> In October 2001,Davis took over from Peter Jay as the BBC's economics editor. He left this post in April 2008 to become a presenter on BBC Radio 4's Today programme



And more importantly he worked at the IFS.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Is she an expert?  Or just a quack that thinks she is an expert?


See also: religion.


kabbes said:


> We have seismologists that understand plate tectonics incredibly well, but if one predicted where an earthquake is going to be next year, you'd tell him to get to fuck.  (Warning: my understanding of seismology is very limited and this analogy may not actually work).


You’re on shaky ground!
We are getting to the stage that for some systems we can see that an event is very likely, perhaps imminent for a given location. Predicting the precise timing though is what is difficult (not unlike state of the art weather modelling - we can foresee the potential nature/size/evolutionary path of an event however the timing can be a bit off, and in that case delta time => delta location).

Anyway, back to the train crash.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 4, 2017)

The DUP will 'not accept' Brexit deal being brokered by May if it 'separates' Northern Ireland from rest of UK


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

I'm not sure if someone else said the same thing upthread, or if I'm quoting one of the Guardian opiners who fill your blackened anarchist hearts with such rage, but the NI clusterfuck is such a fantastic excuse for revoking A50 and chucking the whole thing over to a Royal Commission to report on in 2028 that if May doesn't take it, she's an idiot.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 4, 2017)

Striking a deal that effectively leaves NI in the EU whilst the rest of the UK leaves is not going to go down well with the evolution deniers, It will take a while, couple of decades at least but the more NI becomes a special case, the more people are going to ask exactly why NI is still part of the UK, It's unthinkable now but once mainstream politicians at Westminster start asking that then the Union is stuffed. 
In the shorter term if NI gets a special deal there is no way on Earth, the Scots aren't going to demand one as well, even if they can't hold that over the head of the Tories they will certainly do so over a Labour government.
I'm going to have start buying popcorn by the sack at this rate.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 4, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> economists are invested with a more shamanic power than homeopaths. Everyone knows homeopaths are full of it but you put that dragons den presenter on bbc news and he is A Voice of Authority


Economics isn't a proper science like physics or biology, it's more like pyschology a sort of quasi-science much of which is opinion but there are some hard facts in there though, the concept of supply and demand has pretty much proven itself unassailable, homeopathy is like religion just sheer drivel.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Economics isn't a proper science like physics or biology, it's more like pyschology a sort of quasi-science much of which is opinion but there are some hard facts in there though, the concept of supply and demand has pretty much proven itself unassailable, homeopathy is like religion just sheer drivel.



There is a prominent philosopher of science (Paul Feyerabend) who argues quite convincingly that even science isn't a science. He puts scientists on the same level as witch doctors.

ETA witch doctors not with doctors


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

I don't do twitter nor LBC. Could someone who does please kick this cunt's stool from under him. He doesn't speak for 17.4million people and he's had nearly 20 years on the snide, been paid shed loads of tax payers money and has never actually formulated a plan for leaving the EU.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 4, 2017)

Taking a nice little pension too


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

Ha ha


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2017)

Yep Sturgeon's been out of the blocks pretty quick to say the same.


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2017)

This isn't a special status for NI, its an acceptance that the UK as a whole will be in regulatory alignment with the EU.  It can work no other way.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

agricola said:


> This isn't a special status for NI, its an acceptance that the UK as a whole will be in regulatory alignment with the EU.  It can work no other way.



You'd have thought so. But Arlene presumably has been briefed otherwise. She can't just be cavilling because she's such an ardent Brexiteer.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

agricola said:


> This isn't a special status for NI, its an acceptance that the UK as a whole will be in regulatory alignment with the EU.  It can work no other way.


concur. Which is even more government by fax than EFTA is supposed to be but I suppose 'immigrants!' makes it alright to some


----------



## kabbes (Dec 4, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Economics isn't a proper science like physics or biology, it's more like pyschology a sort of quasi-science much of which is opinion but there are some hard facts in there though, the concept of supply and demand has pretty much proven itself unassailable, homeopathy is like religion just sheer drivel.


Psychology is fundamentally driven by an attempt to deal scientifically with problems that are difficult to deal with scientifically.  Experiments are performed all the time, involving hypotheses, controls and statistical evaluation of the outcomes.  Qualitative analytical methods have been developed to try to apply some rigour to richer data sources.  The result is something that makes testable predictions and adapts according to whether or not those predictions are accurate.  To put it in the same bracket as economics is highly insulting.


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You'd have thought so. But Arlene presumably has been briefed otherwise. She can't just be cavilling because she's such an ardent Brexiteer.



TBH she has probably been begged to suggest otherwise as part of the confidence and supply deal; if she came out and said that it was a UK-wide agreement the sky would very quickly fall in on May's head.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 4, 2017)

London staying in the EU and the rest of England being out is barmy by any standards, London already gets more than its fair share  of investment how much worse would it get under those circumstances? We might as well just bulldoze everything north of Milton Keynes flat and just forget it exists.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> London staying in the EU and the rest of England being out is barmy by any standards, London already gets more than its fair share  of investment how much worse would it get under those circumstances? We might as well just bulldoze everything north of Milton Keynes flat and just forget it exists.



It's not a serious suggestion. It's the NI deal giving heart to soft Brexit advocates.


----------



## Santino (Dec 4, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Psychology is fundamentally driven by an attempt to deal scientifically with problems that are difficult to deal with scientifically.  Experiments are performed all the time, involving hypotheses, controls and statistical evaluation of the outcomes.  Qualitative analytical methods have been developed to try to apply some rigour to richer data sources.  The result is something that makes testable predictions and adapts according to whether or not those predictions are accurate.  To put it in the same bracket as economics is highly insulting.


Psychology may be full of unrepeatable findings, but at least they are in principle things that can be proven or disproven. Economic theories seem to be immune to evidence.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Santino said:


> Psychology may be full of unrepeatable findings, but at least they are in principle things that can be proven or disproven. Economic theories seem to be immune to evidence.



MRI scanners and the proposed move away from p<=0.05 will add to the sciencyness of pschology


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

Juncker sounds quite optimistic. Less so than May. Both refusing to take questions, though.


----------



## bimble (Dec 4, 2017)

Is there not an official logo for Brexit yet?


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2017)

I know its Denis MacShane, but if he is right that this is the text then we are staying in the Single Market:


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You'd have thought so. But Arlene presumably has been briefed otherwise. She can't just be cavilling because she's such an ardent Brexiteer.


cavilling: making petty or unnecessary objections. why do you think her objections petty or unnecessary?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

agricola said:


> I know its Denis MacShane, but if he is right that this is the text then we are staying in the Single Market:




But there's no agreement. So there's no text.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 4, 2017)

agricola said:


> This isn't a special status for NI, its an acceptance that the UK as a whole will be in regulatory alignment with the EU.  It can work no other way.



May - back in the dim & distant past pre-election had all sorts of Heath Robinson suggestions for slicing & dicing the customs union in terms of sector deals etc so she clearly thinks they are going to somehow hive off NI


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 4, 2017)

bimble said:


> Is there not an official logo for Brexit yet?



Yep, there's a whole new name and graphic identity for the rUK following Scottish and NI seccession. The starting point was our gloriously independent currency.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

bimble said:


> Is there not an official logo for Brexit yet?


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> But there's no agreement. So there's no text.



Not yet, no.



hot air baboon said:


> May - back in the dim & distant past pre-election had all sorts of Heath Robinson suggestions for slicing & dicing the customs union in terms of sector deals etc so she clearly thinks they are going to somehow hive off NI



Perhaps, but to do that would destroy her majority (and probably her government) and it is almost impossible to imagine how it would ever work - it would mean internal passport controls in the UK, internal customs and the rest. 

Accepting regulatory alignment for the whole of the UK - if that is what she is proposing - would be a much better idea, especially if the whole issue is based on how the changes affect Good Friday Agreement because it would mean any change from the EU side would have to be negotiated over as well, which could actually result in the UK having more of a say rather than less.  The Brexiteers will still look to defenestrate her of course.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

Interesting Facebook post from Robert Peston suggesting may is fucked



> When Jeremy Hunt said on Peston On Sunday that his party faced a choice of backing Theresa May or risking seeing the UK stay in the EU, he was addressing his cabinet colleagues Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, as much as estranged Brexiteering ultras on his backbenches.
> 
> Here is why (this is a dense and nuanced argument - but please bear with me).
> 
> ...


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

This Brexit disaster could mean the end of Theresa May's Government – and the beginning of Corbyn's


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> This Brexit disaster could mean the end of Theresa May's Government – and the beginning of Corbyn's


Sadly there is no Love It! button just a Like, the man's got a point though, Mayhem is in shit so deep she needs a snorkel, Her only hope is to call an election and hope that she gets a big enough majority to ride roughshod over the DUP, I bet she must fucking hate David Cameron at this point.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Sadly there is no Love It! button just a Like, the man's got a point though, Mayhem is in shit so deep she needs a snorkel, Her only hope is to call an election and hope that she gets a big enough majority to ride roughshod over the DUP, I bet she must fucking hate David Cameron at this point.



it is all rather hilarious to see the state they have got themselves in.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 4, 2017)

Is this it. Posting breathless clinkbait nonsense of people's fantasies. No more Brexit!

BTW where's the Labour announcement you claimed was going to happen last week?


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

I have no idea if announcements are going to be made or not. it is all rather fluid at the moment.

Are you wound up again?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 4, 2017)

You confronted where you got those "rumours" (bullshit) from? What's your next big scoop?


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> You confronted where you got those "rumours" (bullshit) from? What's your next big scoop?



you are wound up again


----------



## teqniq (Dec 4, 2017)

It's all an epic slow motion car crash and subsequently ripe for any kind of wild speculation.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

teqniq said:


> It's all an epic slow motion car crash and subsequently ripe for any kind of wild speculation.



Quite. Interesting times indeed! There is very little I would rule out at the moment.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 4, 2017)

Today's scores....

Ireland 1-0 UK
Europe v UK   game postponed


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> you are wound up again


I'm not wound up at all. You've (yet again) shown yourself up as a bullshitter who's gets mugged every time. Breathless nonsense from pro-brexit commentators from a clickbait website isn't analysis.


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Interesting Facebook post from Robert Peston suggesting may is fucked



I agree with Peston, and it will probably trigger some form of challenge from the Brexiteers - but I don't think she is in as bad a position as "fucked" would suggest.  The Brexiteers are a significant part of the top of the Tory Party, but they aren't in the Commons and not in the country (at least in terms of people who share their actual views).


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not wound up at all. You've (yet again) shown yourself up as a bullshitter who's gets mugged every time. Breathless nonsense from pro-brexit commentators from a clickbait website isn't analysis.



Go and whinge to someone who gives more than a couple of tosses what you think mate. You are wasting your time here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> You are wasting your time here.


If you think that's a bad thing I'm not sure what you're doing on urban.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> This Brexit disaster could mean the end of Theresa May's Government – and the beginning of Corbyn's


But what do you think?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> Interesting Facebook post from Robert Peston suggesting may is fucked


We've been told May's been fucked ever since the general election and it's getting rather stale now


----------



## J Ed (Dec 4, 2017)

Not that I'm fussed about the clickbait stuff but it does seem difficult to me to see how the May government can continue to receive the support of the DUP and also pursue the position on the border with Ireland which is being demanded by the Irish government.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 4, 2017)

it's impossible, isn't it? 

They've promised no hard border - or Ireland will veto moving on to trade talks, 

The DUP won't support any border between NI and the rest of the UK. 

If the whole UK stays in the customs union and the single market then Boris and Gove will have to storm out of cabinet and go and play with William Rees Fucking Mogg in some new Hard Brexit Tory party. 

I suppose the DUP will have to decide if they're prepared to risk another general election with Corbyn's Labour looking strong (first poll giving Lab a parliamentary majority today apparently).


----------



## kebabking (Dec 4, 2017)

DexterTCN said:


> Today's scores....
> 
> Ireland 1-0 UK...



If the Irish Government thinks that they are idiots, perhaps even greater idiots than someone who relies on DIP votes thinking they will get away with putting the Irish border in the Irish sea.

If there is no agreement on having 'a bit' of a border, whether that has a physical manifestation or not, then the UK will fall out of the EU with no deal of any kind in place in March 2019. At which point there will have to be a full border put in place - which, as any Irish political or economic commentator will tell you, will do far more harm to the Republic than it will to the UK, or even just NI.

If you don't like borders, then having a little bit of a border is probably a better result than having a lot of a border. The Irish government have, IMV, taken their succour from the economic argument of the UK pushing for an EU trade deal and failed to consider the optics of a foreign government demanding economic, and therefore political, partition of a sovereign country for their own political and economic interests.

Which is somewhat ironic....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> it's impossible, isn't it?



It's chaos 



FuckShitUp


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 4, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's chaos
> 
> 
> 
> FuckShitUp


Love it ,kaos baby


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 4, 2017)

If there's going t be chaos anyway, I don't think it would be premature for London, Liverpool, Newcastle, and Cardiff to secede if they can't get the same deal as NI, the whole "UK as Singapore" idea might come to pass in a different way than some originally hoped.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 4, 2017)

Arlene is revelling in her little power trip.

Twit....


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 4, 2017)

Ah yes she maybe and she is certainly playing with her spanner and if that gives TM a headache , all good


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 4, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I suppose the DUP will have to decide if they're prepared to risk another general election with Corbyn's Labour looking strong (first poll giving Lab a parliamentary majority today apparently).


No. There's been a number of polls with a Labour lead (in fact a majority). The Indie is getting breathless over a poll by Survation giving Lab an 8 point lead - while at the same time ignoring all the other polls that have it much closer.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> This Brexit disaster could mean the end of Theresa May's Government – and the beginning of Corbyn's



So that Corbyn can have a go at fucking up Brexit?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 4, 2017)

Fair enough. The one I saw said it was the first that showed Labour would win a parliamentary majority (I think it said around 10 seats) based on some electoral calculus (!) I'm not going to understand, not just that they'd have the most votes. I won't pretend I've been closely monitoring polls, mind.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> If there's going t be chaos anyway, I don't think it would be premature for London, Liverpool, Newcastle, and Cardiff to secede if they can't get the same deal as NI, the whole "UK as Singapore" idea might come to pass in a different way than some originally hoped.


That's the richer areas of those towns attempting to secede from the areas that make their money for them? I'd be well up for that.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 4, 2017)

I'm right on a disputed border in my city!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I'm right on a disputed border in my city!


which side are you on boy?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 4, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> which side are you on boy?



I wonder sometimes...


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 4, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> That's the richer areas of those towns attempting to secede from the areas that make their money for them? I'd be well up for that.



The first two more akin to Scotland or NI in the breadth of the Remain vote, probably a different story with Newcastle.

But if NI is seen as benefiting from uneven application of the Brexit rules, even the Isle of Wight or Lincolnshire might end up looking for deals.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

who would have guessed the muddy fields of Fermanagh and Tyrone could be so problematic


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2017)

well today's brexit shenanigans were Hilariously cack handed - even by Theresa May's standards. 
Who would have thought that the DUP would not go along with special status being given to northern ireland? - apart from everyone who has spent 30 seconds familiarising themselves with the DUP's core political beliefs. 
May is politically paralysed. She painted her self into a corner a year ago by ruling out staying in the single market - and then chopped her own legs off by gambling away her commons majority - now she is utterly trapped. 
You'd expect most leaders on her position to throw in the towel - but she appears to be like some sort of masochistic limpit - miserably clinging on to office for no discernible purpose - she has no authority and is unable to make a single meaningful political decision.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> well today's brexit shenanigans were Hilariously cack handed - even by Theresa May's standards.
> Who would have thought that the DUP would not go along with special status being given to northern ireland? - apart from everyone who has spent 30 seconds familiarising themselves with the DUP's core political beliefs.
> May is politically paralysed. She painted her self into a corner a year ago by ruling out staying in the single market - and then chopped her own legs off by gambling away her commons majority - now she is utterly trapped.
> You'd expect most leaders on her position to throw in the towel - but she appears to be like some sort of masochistic limpit - miserably clinging on to office for no discernible purpose - she has no authority and is unable to make a single meaningful political decision.


cos if she goes we get Boris.

Boris vs Corbyn vs spunking cock.   right made my mind up, bring on the next election


----------



## 8115 (Dec 4, 2017)

I can't see how Brexit can not happen, and I also kind of can't see how it can happen. Basically, we've got Schroedinger's Brexit at the moment, is how I feel.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> cos if she goes we get Boris.
> 
> Boris vs Corbyn vs spunking cock.   right made my mind up, bring on the next election



I suspect Boris has very little chance of taking over. Although he will try undoubtedly.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 4, 2017)

8115 said:


> I can't see how Brexit can not happen, and I also kind of can't see how it can happen. Basically, we've got Schroedinger's Brexit at the moment, is how I feel.



How it can happen is simple inertia - as it stands, and bar the LibDems winning a GE in the next 18 months, the UK will simply drop out of the EU on the 29th March 2019. There doesn't have to be a deal or an agreement of any kind in place, or on the table for it to happen, it will just happen in exactly the same way as you letting your gym membership lapse...

What the consequences if that might be is up for discussion, but that's what the process is.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I suspect Boris has very little chance of taking over. Although he will try undoubtedly.


who ever it is, tories are painted themselves into continued austerity and limited house building coupled with an unworkable Brexit that leads to the breakup of the UK.


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2017)

I'd find this political shenanigans intensely enjoyable if it was going to fuck our country over.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2017)

kebabking said:


> How it can happen is simple inertia - as it stands, and bar the LibDems winning a GE in the next 18 months, the UK will simply drop out of the EU on the 29th March 2019. There doesn't have to be a deal or an agreement of any kind in place, or on the table for it to happen, it will just happen in exactly the same way as you letting your gym membership lapse...



Funny you should mention that...


David Davis pays £50m to get out of gym contract


----------



## ska invita (Dec 4, 2017)

talking of Corbyn, supposedly today he said
“It is disappointing that there has not been progress in the Brexit negotiations after months of delays and grandstanding. Labour has been clear from the outset that we need a jobs first Brexit deal that works for the whole of the United Kingdom” - does anyone know for certain what that position is yet? I wildly guess from that its a stay in the common market position is it? Jobs First Brexit is not really much clearer that a Red White and Blue one, unless I've missed something?


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2017)

ska invita said:


> talking of Corbyn, supposedly today he said
> “It is disappointing that there has not been progress in the Brexit negotiations after months of delays and grandstanding. Labour has been clear from the outset that we need a jobs first Brexit deal that works for the whole of the United Kingdom” - does anyone know for certain what that position is yet? I wildly guess from that its a stay in the common market position is it? Jobs First Brexit is not really much clearer that a Red White and Blue one, unless I've missed something?



It's a load of vacuous tosh. Easy to say when your in opposition.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 4, 2017)

Winot said:


> So that Corbyn can have a go at fucking up Brexit?


logic seems to dictate that Corbyn would do what May is _trying _to do now, namely go along with those key EU demands. Brexit would at least happen under those terms I guess. What it would do to Labours support is hard to predict...I guess would depend how much blood on the walls there will be after the Tory party finally rips itself apart over Europe once and for all...enough mess and critics might go along with it as the only option, for the time being at least.


----------



## toblerone3 (Dec 4, 2017)

8115 said:


> I can't see how Brexit can not happen, and I also kind of can't see how it can happen. Basically, we've got Schroedinger's Brexit at the moment, is how I feel.



Exactly how I feel.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 4, 2017)

Ulster says No.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 4, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ulster says No.



It's feckin genetic at this stage
...

Arlene is using this to make a name for herself. She looked positively joyous..like a kid getting the best toy in the shop...only it's broken and there wont be any returning it and it's fooked without batteries and they aren't for sale in her part of her imaginary world full of only unionists who cant fix a toy to warm themselves.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

ska invita said:


> talking of Corbyn, supposedly today he said
> “It is disappointing that there has not been progress in the Brexit negotiations after months of delays and grandstanding. Labour has been clear from the outset that we need a jobs first Brexit deal that works for the whole of the United Kingdom” - does anyone know for certain what that position is yet? I wildly guess from that its a stay in the common market position is it? Jobs First Brexit is not really much clearer that a Red White and Blue one, unless I've missed something?



Anything concrete he says at this point is likely to lose him ground somehow. I daresay someone at labour HQ has run the numbers on this and decided that the best thing to do at this point is quietly watch the tories fuck the pooch. Best thing for the labour party that is, not necessarily what anyone thinks is in the national interest.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ulster says No.


I'm not a fan of the DUP, but they got that right. Shittist possible deal that would have had EU picking off bits of the UK over the next 20years.  That May even considered it means she's got to go.

EFTA all the way


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2017)

ska invita said:


> talking of Corbyn, supposedly today he said
> “It is disappointing that there has not been progress in the Brexit negotiations after months of delays and grandstanding. Labour has been clear from the outset that we need a jobs first Brexit deal that works for the whole of the United Kingdom” - does anyone know for certain what that position is yet? I wildly guess from that its a stay in the common market position is it? Jobs First Brexit is not really much clearer that a Red White and Blue one, unless I've missed something?



Official Labour policy seems to be that they would stay in single market transitionally or permanently. Which I would argue is a retreat from the "Jobs First" line that they used in the GE - I quite liked that, no point saying what you would do in negotiations you're not part of but sets out a basic aim, and while it is vague like the RWB Brexit at least its a vague promise of prioritising jobs rather than nationalism. Whether or not you agree that the Jobs First thing is compatible with single market membership depends on what your job creation strategy is really - presumably Corbyn's was going to focus on public sector and nationalisation, I don't think this fits.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 4, 2017)

When you enemies are having a bad day, leave them to get on with it.  Labour will form a solid position when the Tories have finally imploded, likely before next year's general election.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 4, 2017)

What's marvellous here is that at some point the tories are going to have to say fuck the DUP.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> I'm not a fan of the DUP, but they got that right. Shittist possible deal that would have had EU picking off bits of the UK over the next 20years.  That May even considered it means she's got to go.
> 
> EFTA all the way



It's way too soon to say 'shittest possible deal'. If there's a good deal on the table at any point someone will sabotage it for some stupid fucking reason and we'll end up with a last minute fag-packet deal that will go down in history as the UK's suicide note.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> When you enemies are having a bad day, leave them to get on with it.  Labour will form a solid position when the Tories have finally imploded, likely before next year's general election.



Agreed but I'd rather Labour carried on letting the tories fuck up brexit a bit longer, just to make sure it is all the tories' fault.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2017)

Fingers said:


> When you enemies are having a bad day, leave them to get on with it.  Labour will form a solid position when the Tories have finally imploded, likely before next year's general election.



What will it be?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2017)

mx wcfc said:


> Agreed but I'd rather Labour carried on letting the tories fuck up brexit a bit longer, just to make sure it is all the tories' fault.



I don't know if you've noticed but aside from the Brexit sideshow this Tory government is quite literally killing people with its domestic policies. Election can't come soon enough for me.


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's way too soon to say 'shittest possible deal'. If there's a good deal on the table at any point someone will sabotage it for some stupid fucking reason and we'll end up with a last minute fag-packet deal that will go down in history as the UK's suicide note.


That we had NI going going no special treatment with London and Scotland simultaneously demanding we'll have what their having tells you that route is a dead end for UK.  Eire can't wind their neck in either so logically fails the unanimity of the 27.
EFTA gives no hard border and equality of treatment while being MORE detached and isn't a back of a fag packet solution


The alternative, a fag packet solution where we carve off a bit of the country to better control immigration - fuck dat.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2017)

gosub said:


> That we had NI going going no special treatment with London and Scotland simultaneously demanding we'll have what their having tells you that route is a dead end for UK.  Eire can't wind their neck in either so logically fails the unanimity of the 27.
> EFTA gives no hard border and equality of treatment while being MORE detached and isn't a back of a fag packet solution



EFTA is the only sensible way to go. Which is why it won't happen.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 4, 2017)

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/...e-dup-dark-money-and-a-saudi-prince-1.3083586
What connects Brexit, the DUP, dark money and a Saudi prince?
Could Brexit have been influenced... and not just the dark machinations of the DUP
Revealed: how US billionaire helped to back Brexit

Fair play to the ROI government for their patience...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

Brexit is one ugly many-headed monster. No bit of it - the 'divorce bill', the border issue, the shite about 'settled status' for EU immigrants costing them more than a grand - is anything other than vile. 

Weirdly, the DUP, in their disgusting bigotted way, are one of the few principled actors in all this. Incoherent - pro-leave despite the obvious problems - but principled. May should already have known that their 'guiding light' was the Union, and that they were evangelical in their simplistic zeal over this issue. They say it often enough. Anything that weakens that will be resisted, regardless of any other consequences. I am glad at least that the deal with the DUP is finally starting to hurt May.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Brexit is one ugly many-headed monster. No bit of it - the 'divorce bill', the border issue, the shite about 'settled status' for EU immigrants costing them more than a grand - is anything other than vile.
> 
> Weirdly, the DUP, in their disgusting bigotted way, are one of the few principled actors in all this. Incoherent - pro-leave despite the obvious problems - but principled. May should already have known that their 'guiding light' was the Union, and that they were evangelical in their simplistic zeal over this issue. They say it often enough. Anything that weakens that will be resisted, regardless of any other consequences. I am glad at least that the deal with the DUP is finally starting to hurt May.


We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Weirdly, the DUP, in their disgusting bigotted way, are one of the few principled actors in all this. Incoherent - pro-leave despite the obvious problems - but principled. May should already have known that their 'guiding light' was the Union, and that they were evangelical in their simplistic zeal over this issue.



I think it's extremely unlikely that the DUP didn't assent to the deal. Maybe May can be blamed for not predicting that they would renege, but it's clearly a case of the DUP either not consulting widely enough in their own ranks, deliberately planning to fuck May over (less likely) or else just getting spooked once they heard it on Radio 4 and realised how it would sound to their people.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Brexit is one ugly many-headed monster. No bit of it - the 'divorce bill', the border issue, the shite about 'settled status' for EU immigrants costing them more than a grand - is anything other than vile.
> 
> Weirdly, the DUP, in their disgusting bigotted way, are one of the few principled actors in all this. Incoherent - pro-leave despite the obvious problems - but principled. May should already have known that their 'guiding light' was the Union, and that they were evangelical in their simplistic zeal over this issue. They say it often enough. Anything that weakens that will be resisted, regardless of any other consequences. I am glad at least that the deal with the DUP is finally starting to hurt May.



There is nothing "principled" about the DUP...and there never has been.
They are just extremely UNIONIST and detest Eire and all she stands for...and Brexit gives them back their mouthpiece.
Arlene Foster became a 1970s Ian Paisley yesterday. She revelled in Unionism. The DUP dont give a fuck about anyone but unionists in NI....they will never represent the rest of the population of NI and that is a massive problem. They're bigotted arseholes who have returned to the hard line politics of a previous generation ...
Jeez .. even Paisley changed and grew to work with the SDLP and Sinn Fein because eventually peace became the ONLY way forward.
Foster is a fucking fool....principles like hers got many people killed and fucked up society in NI for too long. She is a failure as the leader of NI. She rejects half the population and still only represents unionists...she doesnt get the fact that as head of government she has to look at all aspects and represent all the population of NI.

Blinkered fool....


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Fingers said:


> When you enemies are having a bad day, leave them to get on with it.  Labour will form a solid position when the Tories have finally imploded, likely before next year's general election.





Fingers said:


> Does anyone know which reports are coming out on Wednesday?  I have heard rumours within the party (and at this point they are rumours) that if the reports show massive economic damage to the country Labour will take a hard revoke Article 50 stance.
> 
> I expected them to do this as some point and with the withdrawal date fast approaching it is now or never I guess. All about playing the long game whilst this Tories tear themselves apart.


Two weeks ago you claimed that a hard revoke A50 stance was coming shortly. You're now admitting this was rubbish? 

----------

I'm still not convinced that there *will* be an election, it might happen but it's far from certain. The lack of challenge to May after the election shows that there's not much appetite for a leadership campaign in the Tories, and at the moment no challenger that can draw support from the different strands within the party. The DUP can bluster and shout but putting out the Tories would be a big step. And the FTPA provides more stability for minority governments.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 5, 2017)

The DUP. Surely the ultimate in identity politics.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Anything concrete he says at this point is likely to lose him ground somehow. I daresay someone at labour HQ has run the numbers on this and decided that the best thing to do at this point is quietly watch the tories fuck the pooch. Best thing for the labour party that is, not necessarily what anyone thinks is in the national interest.


I agree with you about the LP, but what the hell is "the national interest"? You're supposed to be an anarchist and you think such a thing exists?

Come on this is nonsense. The interests of capital are not the interest of labour, there is no national interest, it's as much a nonsense as "the economy".


----------



## Fingers (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Two weeks ago you claimed that a hard revoke A50 stance was coming shortly. You're now admitting this was rubbish?
> 
> ----------
> 
> I'm still not convinced that there *will* be an election, it might happen but it's far from certain. The lack of challenge to May after the election shows that there's not much appetite for a leadership campaign in the Tories, and at the moment no challenger that can draw support from the different strands within the party. The DUP can bluster and shout but putting out the Tories would be a big step. And the FTPA provides more stability for minority governments.



For the record, i still think that over the coming weeks Labour will either harden into an anti A50 stance or at the very least, a pause and reflect stance when this current shower of shit goes tits up.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I think it's extremely unlikely that the DUP didn't assent to the deal. Maybe May can be blamed for not predicting that they would renege, but it's clearly a case of the DUP either not consulting widely enough in their own ranks, deliberately planning to fuck May over (less likely) or else just getting spooked once they heard it on Radio 4 and realised how it would sound to their people.



I cant see anyway that the DUP would have agreed any deal that meant separate status for northern ireland. That would have been even more extraordinary than sealing such a deal without consulting the "no surrender" merchants in the first place - (which is what seem to have happened yesterday). Blinkered intransigence is what they do.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Official Labour policy seems to be that they would stay in single market transitionally or permanently. Which I would argue is a retreat from the "Jobs First" line that they used in the GE - I quite liked that, no point saying what you would do in negotiations you're not part of but sets out a basic aim, and while it is vague like the RWB Brexit at least its a vague promise of prioritising jobs rather than nationalism. Whether or not you agree that the Jobs First thing is compatible with single market membership depends on what your job creation strategy is really - presumably Corbyn's was going to focus on public sector and nationalisation, I don't think this fits.



Labour has only softened on SM membership for a transitional period. It hasn’t changed its position from the General Election afaik, which stated clearly to end FoM (and therefore end to SM).


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Fingers said:


> For the record, i still think that over the coming weeks Labour will either harden into an anti A50 stance or at the very least, a pause and reflect stance when this current shower of shit goes tits up.


Pause and reflect on leaving the EU?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Seems to me that the DUP have done the right thing, if for the wrong reasons. Why should there be a special arrangement for one part of the UK? If you take the position that a hard border would be damaging to NI then it's inconsistent to say that a hard border would not be damaging for the rest of the UK, for similar reasons.

If the fact that NI voted to remain is the justification then I don't see how you can deny the same arrangement to Scotland or London.

Are any of urban's Lexiteers on this thread? What did you assume would be the solution to the NI question, when you voted for Brexit?


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Seems to me that the DUP have done the right thing, if for the wrong reasons. Why should there be a special arrangement for one part of the UK? If you take the position that a hard border would be damaging to NI then it's inconsistent to say that a hard border would not be damaging for the rest of the UK, for similar reasons.
> 
> If the fact that NI voted to remain is the justification then I don't see how you can deny the same arrangement to Scotland or London.
> 
> Are any of urban's Lexiteers on this thread? What did you assume would be the solution to the NI question, when you voted for Brexit?



Because the DUP do not represent many people living in NI who are Irish..... who have dual citizenship

This was thrashed out as part of the GFA. 

The DUP seem to want to ignore that agreement fot the sake of being in power. 
It's the whiff of power that's gotten to Arlene Foster....not any duty of service to the people living in NI


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 5, 2017)

Peter A Bell and 11 others liked


*James Melville*‏ @JamesMelville 11h11 hours ago
"Hello, is that Sky? This is Theresa. I'd like to cancel my subscription but still receive all your channels, but in only one room of my house. If you give me this package, I'm willing to pay up to three times the current subscription fee for this deal."






32 replies1,037 retweets1,631 likes


----------



## Fedayn (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Because the DUP do not represent many people living in NI who are Irish..... who have dual citizenship
> 
> This was thrashed out as part of the GFA.
> 
> ...



In fairness to the DUP they never signed the GFA.....

On a serious note, of course one of the possibly delicious ironies of their actions is the collapse of the Government, a snap election and a Corbyn victory. A scenario the DUP will presumably like even less.....


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Are any of urban's Lexiteers on this thread? What did you assume would be the solution to the NI question, when you voted for Brexit?



Right, just some background. I a socialist and I'm Irish. I voted to leave. The reason being that the EU is an organisation pushing a neo liberal agenda. I also thought that by leaving a space might open up for left wing politics. That seems to be happening.

As regards the NI question, I never for one minute ever thought of it as solved and I suspect that no lefty on Urban did either. The solution has always been a 32 county Republic, although I would prefer a 32 county Workers' Republic. However in the here and now a lot of my British workmates are questioning why the British state is in the North.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Seems to me that the DUP have done the right thing, if for the wrong reasons. Why should there be a special arrangement for one part of the UK? If you take the position that a hard border would be damaging to NI then it's inconsistent to say that a hard border would not be damaging for the rest of the UK, for similar reasons.
> 
> ?


why shouldn't there be a special arrangement? All parts of the uk currently have all kinds of special arrangements...NI currently has its own laws, separate from those of the rest of the union for example.

 clearly a border  within Ireland has a unique meaning and history that makes it different to a border in the sea.

no one knows what happened to make the DUP balk when a few hours earlier it seemed there was agreement...my total guess is that it dawned on them that this would be another small step towards a united Ireland and open more room for the uk to fragment elsewhere, though you'd expect they already knew that. It is weird


----------



## Arbeter Fraynd (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Are any of urban's Lexiteers on this thread? What did you assume would be the solution to the NI question, when you voted for Brexit?



Not that I'm one of them, but surely almost all 'lexiteers' would want to see a united Ireland?


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

Arbeter Fraynd said:


> Not that I'm one of them, but surely almost all 'lexiteers' would want to see a united Ireland?



Absolutely. If you believe 5 impossible things before breakfast, why not add a 6th?


----------



## teqniq (Dec 5, 2017)




----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

flypanam said:


> Right, just some background. I a socialist and I'm Irish. I voted to leave. The reason being that the EU is an organisation pushing a neo liberal agenda. I also thought that by leaving a space might open up for left wing politics. That seems to be happening.
> 
> As regards the NI question, I never for one minute ever thought of it as solved and I suspect that no lefty on Urban did either. The solution has always been a 32 county Republic, although I would prefer a 32 county Workers' Republic. However in the here and now a lot of my British workmates are questioning why the British state is in the North.



I'm not quite clear - when you voted for leave did you think you were voting for a 32 county republic as part of the deal?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 5, 2017)

Timed for just before the Cabinet meeting. Perhaps a gentle reminder that the Scottish Tory MPs should not be taken for granted?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> why shouldn't there be a special arrangement? All parts of the uk currently have all kinds of special arrangements...NI currently has its own laws, separate from those of the rest of the union for example.



My question would be what the reasoning is behind giving NI a special arrangement, and why this reasoning doesn't apply to the whole of the UK, or to other parts of the UK like Scotland or London.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> My question would be what the reasoning is behind giving NI a special arrangement, and why this reasoning doesn't apply to the whole of the UK, or to other parts of the UK like Scotland or London.


because there doesnt need to be a border anywhere else other than with The Continent and with RoI


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I'm not quite clear - when you voted for leave did you think you were voting for a 32 county republic as part of the deal?



I can't say that I thought it would be an immediate outcome, but I did think it would expose the contradictions of the British presence in the six counties, to a wider public.

eta: Quite a few of my workmates are surprised that the current border is a 20th century invention and are starting to question why it is there. That to me is progress.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Because the DUP do not represent many people living in NI who are Irish..... who have dual citizenship
> 
> This was thrashed out as part of the GFA.



Are you saying that the fact that there are people in NI with dual citizenship is a reason not to have a hard border? If so, why?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

flypanam said:


> I can't say that I thought it would be an immediate outcome, but I did think it would expose the contradictions of the British presence in the six counties, to a wider public.


If you didn't think it would be an "immediate outcome" what arrangement were you expecting to exist before it becoming the eventual outcome?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> because there doesnt need to be a border anywhere else other than with The Continent and with RoI


I don't see how this answers my question.


----------



## bimble (Dec 5, 2017)

What was that old tv gameshow where the audience would encourage the contestants to choose the 'mystery prize' behind the spangly curtain, which might turn out to be anything, a speedboat or a bronze-effect carriage clock or a joke plastic poo. Brexit reminds me of that.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> If you didn't think it would be an "immediate outcome" what arrangement were you expecting to exist before it becoming the eventual outcome?



As I said up thread, a border in the sea.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Are you saying that the fact that there are people in NI with dual citizenship is a reason not to have a hard border? If so, why?



Because half the population of NI are Irish.... and they want to maintain the overwhelmingly positive GFA.....
And a DUP blinkered arsehole is the last thing NI really  needs. 
Stop thinking if NI as all unionists...


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

flypanam said:


> As I said up thread, a border in the sea.


Doesn't that leave NI still subject to the EU's neoliberal agenda - the one that was your reason for voting leave?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Because half the population of NI are Irish.... and they want to maintain the overwhelmingly positive GFA.....
> And a DUP blinkered arsehole is the last thing NI really  needs.
> Stop thinking if NI as all unionists...


Around half the population of NI don't want a hard border with the republic.
Around half the population of the UK don't want a hard border with the EU.
But we had the vote and Brexit is Brexit. Why the special treatment for just one portion of the population?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't see how this answers my question.


London and Scotland asking for special arrangements are just trying it on. Ultimately "London" didn't vote Remain, nor did "Scotland". There's been a UK wide referendum the result of which was Leave. London and Scotland are part of the UK so have to deal with the decision as it stands.

Brexit means there needs to be a border with the EU, namely where it meets RoI and the Continent. London doesnt need a unique customs border. Nor does Scotland. Whatever Sturgeon or Khan say theres no need to give it to them. The argument "you gave it to them, why not us" may work with some weak parents with lots of children, but it doesnt apply here, no matter how much Khan and Sturgeon wish it does. Though good luck to them stirring the pot..the more infighting the better


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't that leave NI still subject to the EU's neoliberal agenda - the one that was your reason for voting leave?



...NI voted as follows....


Blue = brexit vote.
Yellow = remain.
Again...the blue is representative of the protestant unionists living in the more affluent parts of NI.
Maybe a new border is needed....leave the blue areas in NI and let the yellows join Eire


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Around half the population of NI don't want a hard border with the republic.
> Around half the population of the UK don't want a hard border with the EU.
> But we had the vote and Brexit is Brexit. Why the special treatment for just one portion of the population?



Because the GFA supercedes brexit and it needs to work more than anything else in NI.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Because the GFA supercedes brexit and it needs to work more than anything else in NI.



I'd agree with this.

I am strongly remain but if we are going to leave the EU then the only solution which leaves the UK and the GFA intact is for the whole of the UK to remain in the customs union and single market.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> London and Scotland asking for special arrangements are just trying it on. Ultimately "London" didn't vote Remain, nor did "Scotland". There's been a UK wide referendum the result of which was Leave. London and Scotland are part of the UK so have to deal with the decision as it stands.
> 
> Brexit means there needs to be a border with the EU, namely where it meets RoI and the Continent. London doesnt need a unique customs border. Nor does Scotland. Whatever Sturgeon or Khan say theres no need to give it to them. The argument "you gave it to them, why not us" may work with some weak parents with lots of children, but it doesnt apply here, no matter how much Khan and Sturgeon wish it does. Though good luck to them stirring the pot..the more infighting the better



You've still not answered the question of why NI deserves a special arrangement any more than these other parts of the UK.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You've still not answered the question of why NI deserves a special arrangement any more than these other parts of the UK.



You should read more


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You've still not answered the question of why NI deserves a special arrangement any more than these other parts of the UK.


its not a special arrangement "*for* NI", its an arrangement for the UK to set up a border with the RoI.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> its not a special arrangement "*for* NI", its an arrangement for the UK to set up a border with the RoI.


No it's not - a special border between NI and the rest of the UK is not a border with the RoI, unless NI becomes part of the RoI.
And if a special border can be set up between NI and the rest of the UK, then why can't the same be done for, say, Scotland?


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> No it's not - a special border between NI and the rest of the UK is not a border with the RoI, unless NI becomes part of the RoI.
> And if a special border can be set up between NI and the rest of the UK, then why can't the same be done for, say, Scotland?


Exactly. May was prepared to sign up to a deal that would schism the UK apart in short order.	SHE HAS TO GO.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't that leave NI still subject to the EU's neoliberal agenda - the one that was your reason for voting leave?


Ah, you seem to be under the illusion that the left thought one result and the whole system would crash to the ground. No-one was under that illusion.
Does the UK leaving weaken the EU? Yes, it no longer can present itself as the only game in town.
Does a sea border, weaken the notion of a British presence in Ireland? Yes it does. the six counties becomes a special case, politically part of the UK, economically separate. Subject to customs checks at British ports like every other country. Which MIGHT cause some unionists to question the political union.
Does Brexit put pressure on the Irish establishment and State? Yes it does. A shitty healthcare system, a housing crisis, an expensive transport means that Ireland is not attractive to investors. Leading some sectors to demand greater state investment in these sectors. Greater state involvement is counter to Lisbon Treaty (EU policy). Witness a growing campaign in Ireland for a National Health Service, which has been agreed in principal by a government commission.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> No it's not - a special border between NI and the rest of the UK is not a border with the RoI, unless NI becomes part of the RoI.


It's an arrangement to deal with the border with RoI.



teuchter said:


> And if a special border can be set up between NI and the rest of the UK, then why can't the same be done for, say, Scotland?


It_ could _be done for Scotland. Anything is possible in politics. But there is no justification for it. A I said, just because Sturgeon wants to be in the Customs UNion/Common Market doesnt mean she can get it. "Scotland Voted Remain" is not really true. The UK voted Leave. I'm repeating myself now. If you dont get my point I cant explain it clearer.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> Exactly. May was prepared to sign up to a deal that would schism the UK apart in short order.	SHE HAS TO GO.



And of course if that were to happen Spain would gobble up Gibraltar in the blink of an eye.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> It's an arrangement to deal with the border with RoI.



Whatever words you use to describe it - it's an arrangement that involves drawing a border within the UK. The question is simply: why should that border only separate off NI, rather than including other parts of the UK that don't want to leave the customs union etc.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> No it's not - a special border between NI and the rest of the UK is not a border with the RoI, unless NI becomes part of the RoI.




It's not a border between NI and the rest of the UK. It's between ROI and NI. Something that has not existed since the GFA 


Gee... you really don't get it do you....


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> It's an arrangement to deal with the border with RoI.
> 
> 
> It_ could _be done for Scotland. Anything is possible in politics. But there is no justification for it. A I said, just because Sturgeon wants to be in the Customs UNion/Common Market doesnt mean she can get it. "Scotland Voted Remain" is not really true. The UK voted Leave. I'm repeating myself now. If you dont get my point I cant explain it clearer.



If "Scotland Voted Remain" is not really true then "NI Voted Remain" isn't either.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Whatever words you use to describe it - it's an arrangement that involves drawing a border within the UK. The question is simply: why should that border only separate off NI, rather than including other parts of the UK that don't want to leave the customs union etc.



Again...please read more ...and stop the nonsense. It is not a border within the UK. Eire is not not will it ever be in the UK


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> If "Scotland Voted Remain" is not really true then "NI Voted Leave" isn't either.



Eh? NI voted Remain. Do you mean Wales? Or am I misunderstanding the point?


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> It's not a border between NI and the rest of the UK. It's between ROI and NI. Something that has not existed since the GFA
> 
> 
> Gee... you really don't get it do you....



I think there's some misunderstanding here. There are 2 scenarios:

(1) Border between NI and RoI. Breaks GFA. Everyone's trying to avoid this.
(2) Border between NI and rUK. That is effective outcome of regulatory divergence between NI and rUK that was suggested as solution yesterday. That is what teuchter is saying shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I'm not quite clear - when you voted for leave did you think you were voting for a 32 county republic as part of the deal?


When you voted remain were you voting for Greece to be asset-stripped by bankers?


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Eh? NI voted Remain. Do you mean Wales? Or am I misunderstanding the point?



Cock up on my part. Have edited.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Whatever words you use to describe it - it's an arrangement that involves drawing a border within the UK. The question is simply: why should that border only separate off NI, rather than including other parts of the UK that don't want to leave the customs union etc.


there are none so blind as those that will not see


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> It's not a border between NI and the rest of the UK. It's between ROI and NI. Something that has not existed since the GFA
> 
> 
> Gee... you really don't get it do you....



What is "not a border between NI and the rest of the UK"?

Any special customs or freedom of movement arrangement for NI by definition creates a border of some kind between NI and the rest of the UK. You can't have your cake and eat it.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> I think there's some misunderstanding here. There are 2 scenarios:
> 
> (1) Border between NI and RoI. Breaks GFA. Everyone's trying to avoid this.
> (2) Border between NI and rUK. That is effective outcome of regulatory divergence between NI and rUK that was suggested as solution yesterday. That is what teuchter is saying shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly.



There is no border between NI and UK. 
Nor should there be. 
There was only ever one border....the one between ROI and NI/UK. 
That border was eliminated as part of the GFA. Nobody in the entire island of Ireland wants that border back


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What is "not a border between NI and the rest of the UK"?
> 
> Any special customs or freedom of movement arrangement for NI by definition creates a border of some kind between NI and the rest of the UK. You can't have your cake and eat it.



Actually.....its the UK that wants their cake and to eat it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> I think there's some misunderstanding here. There are 2 scenarios:
> 
> (1) Border between NI and RoI. Breaks GFA. Everyone's trying to avoid this.
> (2) Border between NI and rUK. That is effective outcome of regulatory divergence between NI and rUK that was suggested as solution yesterday. That is what teuchter is saying shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly.


yeh. you do know there is, and has been for many years, just such a border on the island of ireland?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> That is what teuchter is saying shouldn't happen. If I understand correctly.



Not necessarily saying it shouldn't happen - it's more that I'm questioning the logic that justifies it, and how it can be consistent with not having similar arrangements for other parts of the UK, or indeed how it can be consistent with saying that the rest of the UK should leave the customs union etc.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Actually.....its the UK that wants their cake and to eat it.


I should have said "one can't have one's cake and eat it".
Assign blame to whichever subgroup of the population you want. The point is, it's not possible for NI to have a different customs arrangement from the rest of the UK, and also have no customs border anywhere.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. you do know there is, and has been for many years, just such a border on the island of ireland?


bubblesmcgrath disagrees with you. But it's besides the point.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Not necessarily saying it shouldn't happen - it's more that I'm questioning the logic that justifies it, and how it can be consistent with not having similar arrangements for other parts of the UK, or indeed how it can be consistent with saying that the rest of the UK should leave the customs union etc.



Well...what the UK does with it's constituent parts is none of the ROI business...however the agreement made during the GFA was made between the people and governments of NI and Eire. It was done so with great good will and a desire for peace in Ireland.
It is frightening how this agreement has been ignored by the DUP in their rush headlong to align themselves with Mrs May and her government.  It's as if the DUP wants to ignore a huge portion of the people it supposedly is governing (in NI) and they appear to be disrespecting the work of many great people who brokered a peace agreement in NI
 Quite frankly the DUP's attitide and behaviour is anti GFA and is unsettling to many people living in NI.and Eire


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> bubblesmcgrath disagrees with you. But it's besides the point.


https://www.ucd.ie/ibis/filestore/wp2006/79/79_kr.pdf
BBC News | History | 1923-38: The fixing of the Irish border


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> Well...what the UK does with it's constituent parts is none of the ROI business...however the agreement made during the GFA was made between the people and governments of NI and Eire. It was done so with great good will and a desire for peace in Ireland.
> It is frightening how this agreement has been ignored by the DUP in their rush headlong to align themselves with Mrs May and her government.  It's as if the DUP wants to ignore a huge portion of the people it supposedly is governing (in NI) and they appear to be disrespecting the work of many great people who brokered a peace agreement in NI
> Quite frankly the DUP's attitide and behaviour is anti GFA and is unsettling to many people living in NI.and Eire



Did the DUP not oppose the GFA and not sign it? If so, their position this week is consistent.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> bubblesmcgrath disagrees with you. But it's besides the point.



I don't disagree with picky...
There is an unmanned soft border...and has been since GFA...its indicated on a map....but that's all ..
Freedom of movement to and from NI has been part of this country since the GFA.

Nobody wants a return to a hard border. The border was awful.....barbed wire....soldiers pointing guns at you....arrests for having an Irish name...intimidation....
Fuck that lark.

I'll guarantee this....if they bring back a hard border they will bring back the hell of terrorism....on both sides.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> When you voted remain were you voting for Greece to be asset-stripped by bankers?


I think it was the Crushing of Catalonia he had in mind as the best bit


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did the DUP not oppose the GFA and not sign it? If so, their position this week is consistent.


Ian Paisley: Why 'Dr No' finally said yes to peace


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> bubblesmcgrath disagrees with you. But it's besides the point.


if bubbles disagrees with me, she can tell me so herself. i see you're quite happy stepping forward and speaking for her. it looks more than a bit sexist from where i'm sitting.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

bubblesmcgrath said:


> There was only ever one border....the one between ROI and NI/UK.
> That border was eliminated as part of the GFA. Nobody in the entire island of Ireland wants that border back





Pickman's model said:


> you do know there is, and has been for many years, just such a border[*] on the island of ireland?



* Pickman's reference to "such a border" refers to:
_(1) Border between NI and RoI. Breaks GFA. _
(highlighted in red, by pickman's, within Winot's quote)

Argue amongst yourselves.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Argue amongst yourselves.


Lol..
You just cant read can you.....lol


----------



## Poi E (Dec 5, 2017)

Good new


TheHoodedClaw said:


> Timed for just before the Cabinet meeting. Perhaps a gentle reminder that the Scottish Tory MPs should not be taken for granted?




Empty fucking vessel banging on about independence again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Argue amongst yourselves.


yeh. you did see i was replying to Winot and not to bubbles? if you don't want to appear stupid step back.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> When you voted remain were you voting for Greece to be asset-stripped by bankers?


When I voted remain, I made some kind of assessment of the consequences of the vote going either way. I didn't feel that voting leave would result in a significantly different policies being applied in Greece. I hope that answers your enquiry.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. you did see i was replying to Winot and not to bubbles? if you don't want to appear stupid step back.


Indeed I did. I've edited my post to make everything super-clear. Hope this helps.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 5, 2017)

Independence for England and Wales is the only way ahead.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Independence for England and Wales is the only way ahead.


minus london


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Indeed I did. I've edited my post to make everything super-clear. Hope this helps.


nothing you do ever helps.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Independence for England and Wales is the only way ahead.



But London can stay with Scotland, NI and any municipalities which wish to, in the EU?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Perhaps a China Mieville _City and the City_ solution would work. Crosshatched areas in East London, for instance.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 5, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Independence for England and Wales is the only way ahead.



They should hold another referendum where people just circle the places on the map they think should be in the same country/countries.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Perhaps a China Mieville _City and the City_ solution would work. Crosshatched areas in East London, for instance.


the london bourgeoisie already have the _unseeing _part down perfectly


----------



## Poi E (Dec 5, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> They should hold another referendum where people just circle the places on the map they think should be in the same country/countries.



Job of the foreign office.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> When you voted remain were you voting for Greece to be asset-stripped by bankers?


No I didn't but the 2 things aren't even remotely connected.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> No I didn't but the 2 things aren't even remotely connected.


Clearly they are.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Clearly they are.


How?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 5, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Independence for England and Wales is the only way ahead.




Bring Eire back in to the UK. No return to terror as the island of Ireland would be united again.



Right, off to sort out them jokers in Korea next.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Clearly they are.



not really - Greece would continue to be subject to the EU's whims regardless of whether the UK was or was not a member, so voting one way or t'other has absolutely no impact whatsoever on Greece.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 5, 2017)

_Star Fraction_ style Balkanisation edges closer.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> not really - Greece would continue to be subject to the EU's whims regardless of whether the UK was or was not a member, so voting one way or t'other has absolutely no impact whatsoever on Greece.


I'm all right Jack.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> How?


You were asked whether you wanted to remain a member of a supranational entity that, as a matter of policy, punishes the poorest of its inhabitants for the failures of a capitalist economy, with a view to further enriching already wealthy elites, and you answered 'yes'.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I'm all right Jack.



?

send code key again, over...


----------



## Poi E (Dec 5, 2017)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> _Star Fraction_ style Balkanisation edges closer.


Balkan comparisons are not helpful. The peoples of former Yugoslavia had a history of internecine animosity, forcible union, venal politicians exploiting national differences for political gain etc.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I'm all right Jack.


That's a idiotic answer, by any reasonable definition the poorest members of society in the UK are far richer than the population of sub Saharan Africa, by the logic you have just espoused you could justify cutting state benefits by 75% and send the money saved overseas as foreign aid. Do you think that's a good idea?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Anyone who takes the Santino line needs to explain what it is about the EU institutions we are leaving, and Greece, that they object to. If they don't distinguish on Greek debt and sustainability between IMF (very hawkish), ESM (less hawkish), ECB (self-serving), and if they don't say what specific things they wanted the European Parliament, Commission or Council to have done differently, they haven't contributed anything more meaningful than any other kind of hand-waving Brexiteer.

Greece is a reasonable argument against joining the Euro. Not enough of one, in my view.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I'm all right Jack.


No, that's not what was meant at all. Explain how brexit helps Greece.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> That's a idiotic answer, by any reasonable definition the poorest members of society in the UK are far richer than the population of sub Saharan Africa, by the logic you have just espoused you could justify cutting state benefits by 75% and send the money saved overseas as foreign aid. Do you think that's a good idea?



What sort of cunt espouses taking the money from the poorest in the UK? Take it from the richest, dur.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I'm all right Jack.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What sort of cunt espouses taking the money from the poorest in the UK? Take it from the richest, dur.


I'm not I think it's a fucking awful idea but I'm illustrating the point that the average person in this country can't be expected to accept responsibility for the worlds problems


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

Given that Greece is a large net recipient from the EU, if anything the 'I'm alright Jack' argument applies to those brexit people who moan about the UK's net contribution, which they want to take away.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

and its the brexiteers who are parochial r/wingers lol


BemusedbyLife said:


> average person in this country can't be expected to accept responsibility for the worlds problems


----------



## kabbes (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I'm not I think it's a fucking awful idea but I'm illustrating the point that the average person in this country can't be expected to accept responsibility for the worlds problems


But somebody in Kent who wants out of the EU should be expected to take responsibility for the difficulties in establishing a border in Northern Ireland?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and its the brexiteers who are parochial r/wingers lol


Wanting to help others is noble in the extreme but are you trying to tell me that EVERY decision you make in your life, you stop and think about the good of all mankind first?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But somebody in Kent who wants out of the EU should be expected to take responsibility for the difficulties in establishing a border in Northern Ireland?


Nope the Government should that's their job (and they're absolute shit at it)


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I'm not I think it's a fucking awful idea but I'm illustrating the point that the average person in this country can't be expected to accept responsibility for the worlds problems


Only the Bankers' problems.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

It's almost as if a complex situation can't meaningfully be boiled down to a simple binary question on a ballot paper. 

Do you want brexit? _Yes please. _And if it jeopardises peace in Ireland? Still yes? _No, I want a brexit that doesn't jeopardise peace._ Right, well, that ain't doable. _Well find a way. _

Switzerland was placed in a similar bind by one of its referendums. Do you want to end free movement of people from the EU? _Yes please._ So you want tariffs? _Oh no. _But that's what it means. It means tariffs. _Well find a way. _

Nasty anti-immigrant buttons are pushed to win these referendums, and we're left with these nasty messes as a result.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

flypanam said:


> Only the Bankers' problems.


We most certainly shouldn't accept any responsibility for the problems of the banks, my biggest beef with the bailout was not the money we spent but the fact that none of the fuckers faced any kind of prosecution afterwards.
What happened in Greece was a classic example of skewed values in the world, I don't think there was any malicious intent but obviously the banks getting their money back was prioritised over anything else.
But I don't accept that by voting Remain I was promoting that behavour anymore than someone voting Leave was voting for Irish reunification.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Wanting to help others is noble in the extreme but are you trying to tell me that EVERY decision you make in your life, you stop and think about the good of all mankind first?


Not every decision. But maybe, you know, voting on major political events. Maybe.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Anyone who takes the Santino line needs to explain what it is about the EU institutions we are leaving, and Greece, that they object to. If they don't distinguish on Greek debt and sustainability between IMF (very hawkish), ESM (less hawkish), ECB (self-serving), and if they don't say what specific things they wanted the European Parliament, Commission or Council to have done differently, they haven't contributed anything more meaningful than any other kind of hand-waving Brexiteer.
> 
> Greece is a reasonable argument against joining the Euro. Not enough of one, in my view.


What is it about the EU institutions we may be leaving, and Greece, that you don't object to?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> What is it about the EU institutions we may be leaving, and Greece, that you don't object to?


Wrong person to ask, he's in favour the politics that has seen inequality rise to the level of Victorian times, the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and the murders in Greece.

What's mad is supposed socialists thinking that this prick is in any way an ally.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> That's a idiotic answer, by any reasonable definition the poorest members of society in the UK are far richer than the population of sub Saharan Africa, by the logic you have just espoused you could justify cutting state benefits by 75% and send the money saved overseas as foreign aid. Do you think that's a good idea?


Do you often find yourself using the arguments that, say, a conservative libertarian would use to argue against the principle of universal healthcare?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> What is it about the EU institutions we may be leaving, and Greece, that you don't object to?



EU funding for good, redistributive projects in Greece. Which we contribute to, as part of our responsibility to the EU polity.

Actually, there's nothing about the EU and Greece that I do object to. All the issues concern the Eurozone. Which is different, or at least it was until we decided to fuck that distinction up by leaving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I'm not I think it's a fucking awful idea but I'm illustrating the point that the average person in this country can't be expected to accept responsibility for the worlds problems


just to benefit from them, eh


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Not every decision. But maybe, you know, voting on major political events. Maybe.


So do I, I voted Remain because I believed (still do) that in both the short and long term it is in the best interests of the population of country of the UK, the EU and the world in general, I'm not saying the EU is perfect far from it.
But is the better of the two choices that were on offer and everything that has happened since has convinced me I was right and us leaving the EU will do more harm than good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> there's nothing about the EU and Greece that I do object to


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

kabbes said:


> But somebody in Kent who wants out of the EU should be expected to take responsibility for the difficulties in establishing a border in Northern Ireland?



If they vote in a referendum which has consequences then yes, surely they do assume some of the responsibility. If they vote for a politician who embezzles cash for his ducks, they have a certain degree of responsibility. Fortunately, in most cases, they can change their mind at the next election.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> just to benefit from them, eh


Of course I do and so do you willingly or otherwise


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Wrong person to ask, he's in favour the politics that has seen inequality rise to the level of Victorian times, the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and the murders in Greece.
> 
> What's mad is supposed socialists thinking that this prick is in any way an ally.



Out of interest, what political grouping do you believe me to be aligned with?


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> So do I, I voted Remain because I believed (still do) that in both the short and long term it is in the best interests of the population of country of the UK, the EU and the world in general, I'm not saying the EU is perfect far from it.


Then why not just say that instead of claiming that the treatment of Greece was irrelevant to the subject of leaving/staying in the EU?


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Out of interest, what political grouping do you believe me to be aligned with?


Centrist Dads.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Then why not just say that instead of claiming that the treatment of Greece was irrelevant to the subject of leaving/staying in the EU?


Fair point perhaps I waffle too much when I get worked up


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Balkan comparisons are not helpful. The peoples of former Yugoslavia had a history of internecine animosity, forcible union, venal politicians exploiting national differences for political gain etc.



And we've had none of that here?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Out of interest, what political grouping do you believe me to be aligned with?


Neo-liberal filth. Hence your support for New Labour, for some shitty "National Coalition", your defence of the EU and economics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Of course I do and so do you willingly or otherwise


yeh. there's some cognitive dissonance here, chuck, where you say they can't be expected to take responsibility for the world's problems but they're expected iyo to benefit from them. yeh, i do benefit from where i live. but i also realise my responsibility for problems elsewhere and in my own small way i do my best to minimise my responsibility for them. for example, you won't catch me knowingly buying produce from the zionist entity or food out of season here which has been flown in from the nether reaches of the world.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Fair point perhaps I waffle too much when I get worked up


So what is to be done about the EU's general policies towards Greece, and other countries that may (will) get into similar problems?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Centrist Dads.



I think I saw them playing a set of Paul Weller covers in the back room of my local last week.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Wrong person to ask, he's in favour the politics that has seen inequality rise to the level of Victorian times, the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and the murders in Greece.
> 
> What's mad is supposed socialists thinking that this prick is in any way an ally.



Do you actually want allies? Your posting style suggests otherwise.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think I saw them playing a set of Paul Weller covers in the back room of my local last week.


they were supporting Whiggish Prick and The Remainers. 12 quid on the door


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. there's some cognitive dissonance here, chuck, where you say they can't be expected to take responsibility for the world's problems but they're expected iyo to benefit from them. yeh, i do benefit from where i live. but i also realise my responsibility for problems elsewhere and in my own small way i do my best to minimise my responsibility for them. for example, you won't catch me knowingly buying produce from the zionist entity or food out of season here which has been flown in from the nether reaches of the world.


Good for you but couldn't you do more such as give away most of salary?, I'm not suggesting you should but at some point everyone has to accept we've done whats' reasonable not what's possible, if you've found that point I'm pleased for you.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> Do you actually want allies? Your posting style suggests otherwise.


How can I (a communist) ally with someone who supports, and indeed wants an extension of, the very political system that I believe is responsible for so much damage to society? That supports the politics that has seen the welfare state taken apart and inequality rise to a level equal to that at the beginning of the 20th century, that supports the structures and systems that are currently killing people both in Greece and in the UK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Good for you but couldn't you do more such as give away most of salary?, I'm not suggesting you should but at some point everyone has to accept we've done whats' reasonable not what's possible, if you've found that point I'm pleased for you.


i give most of my salary away already.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> How can I (a communist) ally with someone who supports, and indeed wants an extension of, the very political system that I believe is responsible for so much damage to society? That supports the politics that has seen the welfare state taken apart and inequality rise to a level equal to that at the beginning of the 20th century, that supports the structures and systems that are currently killing people both in Greece and in the UK.



I'm suggesting that if you want to persuade more people to join your cause you might lay off the personal abuse.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they were supporting Whiggish Prick and The Remainers. 12 quid on the door


Very disappointed when the former Octet bassist Otto D'Esque joined them.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Neo-liberal filth. Hence your support for New Labour, for some shitty "National Coalition", your defence of the EU and economics.



New Labour without a doubt, the national coalition only as a response to the current, and very odd, circumstances. But yes, your dislike of me seems to be reasonably well informed. Carry on!


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> I'm suggesting that if you want to persuade more people to join your cause you might lay off the personal abuse.


Silas isn't going to join "my side". He's been posting his crap forever. There's a time for persuasion and there's a time for calling pricks pricks.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

oh grow up winot. Fair words are as oft to hide foul deeds as an honest fuck you is to tell the real feeling


Silas Loom said:


> New Labour without a doubt, the national coalition only as a response to the current, and very odd, circumstances. But yes, your dislike of me seems to be reasonably well informed. Carry on!


the labour party, all branches, rejected blair and all his works before brexit


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> So what is to be done about the EU's general policies towards Greece, and other countries that may (will) get into similar problems?


I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts. 
The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Centrist Dads.



I really like that term, and am delighted that it has been reclaimed by the CD movement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> He's been posting his crap forever.


the forever bore


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> the labour party, all branches, rejected blair and all his works before brexit



Iraq aside, that's simply not true.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts.
> The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.


So what's the plan?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts.
> The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.



do you recon any democratically elected greek party already attempted to negotiate that sort of thing? And got told to go swivel?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts.
> The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.


perhaps the germans might give them back their gold too


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts.
> The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.


They can, and should, write off the money. They'll have to eventually. 

But that still doesn't answer the question to santino - how does brexit help Greece?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I personally would like to see Greece given more breathing space, longer to pay back the money and lower interest rates (like maybe 0%), obviously the EU can't just write the money off but its priority should be getting the Greek economy back on its feet not preventing the bankers from losing their shirts.
> The Greek government needs to get its act together and sort out corruption and collect taxes properly but it seems to me that if the EU was willing to write a equivalent amount of debt off on the understanding that the collected taxes were re-invested back into the local economy that would probably help as well.



Greece doesn't owe the EU any money.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

I can't imagine that any sensible Remain voters didn't have a workable plan for reforming the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I can't imagine that any sensible Remain voters didn't have a workable plan for reforming the EU.


How does brexit help Greece?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> do you recon any democratically elected greek party already attempted to negotiate that sort of thing? And got told to go swivel?


Of course I do but they weren't negotiating with me or you were they?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Greece doesn't owe the EU any money.


It owes the banks, the IMF and the ECB has a consequence of an EU brokered deal, the EU has massive clout in this situation.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They can, and should, write off the money. They'll have to eventually.


They may very well have no choice eventually but I would imagine that they're reluctant to do it up front while Greece is still a bottomless pit.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How does brexit help Greece?


Do you continue to support a club that bullies one of its members? (And has it pretty much written into its constitution that it will keep doing so.) Or do you leave?

At least by leaving you withdraw support for the abuse, and maybe you undermine the club a bit.

By staying and not immediately and incessantly demanding an end to the abuse, and taking actions to back up those demands, you are endorsing it.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> It owes the banks, the IMF and the ECB has a consequence of an EU brokered deal, the EU has massive clout in this situation.



Which EU institution do you suggest has the clout?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Which EU institution do you suggest has the clout?


In order of importance I would say the Council and the Commission have the most clout with the Parliament having very little (pity really since its the one I feel would be most sympathetic to a fairer solution)
The Council tends to distorted by its members putting national interests first and the Commission is dominated by too many technocrats like Junkers and his mates, I would like to see it elected directly myself.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Do you continue to support a club that bullies one of its members? (And has it pretty much written into its constitution that it will keep doing so.) Or do you leave?
> 
> At least by leaving you withdraw support for the abuse, and maybe you undermine the club a bit.
> 
> By staying and not immediately and incessantly demanding an end to the abuse, and taking actions to back up those demands, you are endorsing it.


That's pretty abstract. I don't particularly see how it has a real-world effect to negate effect on Greece of taking away the UK contribution to the pot. The UK govt has played a full role in that kind of abuse in recent years, abusing its own people in the name of bailing out banks. Didn't even need to be forced to do it by the EU. The problem with lexit arguments is that lexit isn't happening.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> not really - Greece would continue to be subject to the EU's whims regardless of whether the UK was or was not a member, so voting one way or t'other has absolutely no impact whatsoever on Greece.


tbf, since the brexit vote, the EU appears to be trying to show its humane side with Greece (or at least taken its foot off the sadistic/ humiliation pedal for now).
My guess is that a sizeable portion of the €1.8bn QE that the ECB has been printing every day is finding its way to the poorer corners of the Eu, just to keep them quite while the brexit megaton bomb is being defused.
So indirectly, the brexit vote possibly did Greece a favour for the short term - and therefore Santino's point is as relevant/ flawed as teuchters original one that a vote for brexit = a vote for a 32 county republic.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> In order of importance I would say the Council and the Commission have the most clout with the Parliament having very little (pity really since its the one I feel would be most sympathetic to a fairer solution)
> The Council tends to distorted by its members putting national interests first and the Commission is dominated by too many technocrats like Junkers and his mates, I would like to see it elected directly myself.



And you think they have that clout over the EFSF? I'd say that they really are just observers. When the Eurozone finance ministers and their treasury officials are gathered together, there's nothing that really trumps them, supranationally speaking.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's pretty abstract. I don't particularly see how it has a real-world effect to negate effect on Greece of taking away the UK contribution to the pot. The UK govt has played a full role in that kind of abuse in recent years, abusing its own people in the name of bailing out banks. Didn't even need to be forced to do it by the EU. The problem with lexit arguments is that lexit isn't happening.


Let's be clear - the argument to Leave wasn't that it would directly or immediately help Greece, it was that the EU is the sort of place where things like that happen to countries like Greece. And we were asked whether we wanted to be a part of that. Your answer is that we should.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> And you think they have that clout over the EFSF? I'd say that they really are just observers. When the Eurozone finance ministers and their treasury officials are gathered together, there's nothing that really trumps them, supranationally speaking.


Vote Remain.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Do you continue to support a club that bullies one of its members? (And has it pretty much written into its constitution that it will keep doing so.) Or do you leave?
> 
> At least by leaving you withdraw support for the abuse, and maybe you undermine the club a bit.
> 
> By staying and not immediately and incessantly demanding an end to the abuse, and taking actions to back up those demands, you are endorsing it.



Is your position that there is no mechanism for reform from within the EU that can be influenced by its citizens?


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> And you think they have that clout over the EFSF? I'd say that they really are just observers. When the Eurozone finance ministers and their treasury officials are gathered together, there's nothing that really trumps them, supranationally speaking.


Yes you're undoubtably right, in fact you have just demolished the 2nd biggest pro-brexit argument (it's taking power away from Westminster), the finance ministers of the member states are the people with the power not the unelected commissioners.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Let's be clear - the argument to Leave wasn't that it would directly or immediately help Greece, it was that the EU is the sort of place where things like that happen to countries like Greece. And we were asked whether we wanted to be a part of that. Your answer is that we should.


I'm willing to bet that very few people who cast a vote in the Referendum either Leave or Remain were concerned with the effect that vote would have on Greece


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Vote Remain.


this is why the greece situation has remain voters on a cleft stick. Either you are happy with technocrats and bankers effectively running the wider polity (silas is, with no feelings of shame) or you have the LBJ position which doesn't want to admit that the remain position is basically holding the bullies coat


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Is your position that there is no mechanism for reform from within the EU that can be influenced by its citizens?


Mine pretty much is.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino'' post: 15346572 said:
			
		

> ...By staying and not immediately and incessantly demanding an end to the abuse, and taking actions to back up those demands, you are endorsing it.



thats fine if Greece is the only iron in the fire, but its not - well, it might be if you're Citizen Smith from the Free Tooting Collective - but for the rest of us its a plate spinning act of Greece, the GFA and associated Irish issues, concern/fear over the path UK politics might take post-Brexit, the economy/trade, concern over what deals might be struck by a post-Brexit government desperate for non-EU trade agreements, and the lexit argument that the EU rules and structures tie us into spiv capitalism.

all of those carry weight, all of those have both upsides and downsides, and all have uncertainties. 

if you only considered one of them, and gave no thought to either the others, then you're probably an idiot.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Is your position that there is no mechanism for reform from within the EU that can be influenced by its citizens?


Is your position that there is?


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> thats fine if Greece is the only iron in the fire, but its not - well, it might be if you're Citizen Smith from the Free Tooting Collective - but for the rest of us its a plate spinning act of Greece, the GFA and associated Irish issues, concern/fear over the path UK politics might take post-Brexit, the economy/trade, concern over what deals might be struck by a post-Brexit government desperate for non-EU trade agreements, and the lexit argument that the EU rules and structures tie us into spiv capitalism.
> 
> all of those carry weight, all of those have both upsides and downsides, and all have uncertainties.
> 
> if you only considered one of them, and gave no thought to either the others, then you're probably an idiot.


I also considered what Nick Clegg would have done, and then did the opposite.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> thats fine if Greece is the only iron in the fire, but its not - well, it might be if you're Citizen Smith from the Free Tooting Collective - but for the rest of us its a plate spinning act of Greece, the GFA and associated Irish issues, concern/fear over the path UK politics might take post-Brexit, the economy/trade, concern over what deals might be struck by a post-Brexit government desperate for non-EU trade agreements, and the lexit argument that the EU rules and structures tie us into spiv capitalism.
> 
> all of those carry weight, all of those have both upsides and downsides, and all have uncertainties.
> 
> if you only considered one of them, and gave no thought to either the others, then you're probably an idiot.



Exactly. Most votes have an element of holding your nose. Oh to have the freedom of an ideologue.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Back to whether Brexit is going to happen, Davis has put some interesting markers on what "regulatory alignment" means: _"alignment does not mean the same standards"....it means regulations "that give similar results"_

It now sounds like something that Dublin would be less inclined to trust and take seriously. Certainly very different from regulatory convergence.

Now that everyone is being forced to clarify their fudge, there's surely no chance of anything being settled in the next couple of days.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> Is your position that there is?


Yes.
Now your answer?


----------



## kebabking (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I also considered what Nick Clegg would have done, and then did the opposite.



did you do the same regarding Jeremy Clarkson?


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> did you do the same regarding Jeremy Clarkson?


How did he vote?


----------



## kebabking (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> How did he vote?



no idea, i wasn't in the booth with him.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Yes.
> Now your answer?


I'm not aware of any mechanism that offers any practical hope in the short or even medium term, but perhaps you are privy to some information that would challenge this.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

kebabking said:


> no idea, i wasn't in the booth with him.


Well, what public pronouncements did he make? Perhaps we can make a cautious inference from those.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 5, 2017)

A quick google reveals that Clarkson voted remain.

Jeremy Clarkson: I wanted to stay in EU but, so far, Brexit has been fun



> AS YOU probably know, I was very keen that Britain should remain in the EU and very worried when I woke on that fateful Friday morning to find that we had voted to leave.


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

Well then, by accident I also did the opposite of Clarkson. kebabking , how about you?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

as I said at the time clarkeson may enjoy the notoriety of being a comedy bigot but he's rich enough that this could fuck with his many travel plans, property values and the atmosphere in the rich peoples seats at Le Mans will be toxic. So remain he did


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I'm not aware of any mechanism that offers any practical hope in the short or even medium term, but perhaps you are privy to some information that would challenge this.


Your strategy seems to rely on all countries eventually leaving the EU, or at least, enough countries leaving the EU that its in your opinion undemocratic leadership changes its ways so as to protect itself from complete dissolution. To me, that strategy doesn't seem to offer any practical hope in the short or medium term.
The mechanism that I'm privy to is the fact that the EU does have an elected parliament and that it is subject to influence from the elected national governments of its member countries. You presumably feel that this mechanism does not work in practice, and that the whole system ends up reflecting the interests of business and so on. I'd say that is maybe true as long as the same applies to the majority of the national governments that are part of that system. And if it applies to the national governments too then I don't really see that citizens can have more influence outside of the EU but still governed by those institutions.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> How did he vote?


Remain. did an article saying added customs checks would make filming top gear impossible
Opps article already linked to


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Your strategy seems to rely on all countries eventually leaving the EU, or at least, enough countries leaving the EU that its in your opinion undemocratic leadership changes its ways so as to protect itself from complete dissolution. To me, that strategy doesn't seem to offer any practical hope in the short or medium term.
> The mechanism that I'm privy to is the fact that the EU does have an elected parliament and that it is subject to influence from the elected national governments of its member countries. You presumably feel that this mechanism does not work in practice, and that the whole system ends up reflecting the interests of business and so on. I'd say that is maybe true as long as the same applies to the majority of the national governments that are part of that system. And if it applies to the national governments too then I don't really see that citizens can have more influence outside of the EU but still governed by those institutions.


You misunderstand my strategic objective.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> did an article saying added customs checks would make filming top gear impossible



Just so long as he is held to that in the eventuality.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Back to whether Brexit is going to happen, Davis has put some interesting markers on what "regulatory alignment" means: _"alignment does not mean the same standards"....it means regulations "that give similar results"_



If he's happy with the results why does he want to change the regulations?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If he's happy with the results why does he want to change the regulations?



It's Legatum speak. 

https://lif.blob.core.windows.net/l...ult-library/brexitinflectionvweb.pdf?sfvrsn=0

_"The challenge is therefore to agree regulatory recognition between the UK and EU on the basis that the regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges."
_
Essentially, it's back to "cake and eat it" and the Lancaster House red lines. Amazing that Varadkar ever went for it.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> You misunderstand my strategic objective.


And you're not going to tell me in what way. Oh well.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> The mechanism that I'm privy to is the fact that the EU does have an elected parliament and that it is subject to influence from the elected national governments of its member countries.



A genuine question, when has the European Parliament overridden a decision by the European commission? And has that changed the opinion of the commission?


----------



## Santino (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> And you're not going to tell me in what way. Oh well.


I wouldn't want to volunteer information that you hadn't expressly asked for, as I know this can upset you.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It's Legatum speak.
> 
> https://lif.blob.core.windows.net/l...ult-library/brexitinflectionvweb.pdf?sfvrsn=0
> 
> ...



And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?



I suspect it would be down to whoever drew up the new regulations at our end simply telling everyone that the outcomes would be the same. Although again, I can't see how there's any need to have new regulations at all if we're happy with the existing outcomes. Clearly the intention is not to get back to where we started via a different set of procedures, but to deregulate. If this weren't the case then people would be more open about exactly which EU regulations they (or their corporate sponsors) actually object to.

And that's before we even get to the challenge of drawing up new regulations for absolutely everything in 18 months. Most likely we'll be reclaiming our sovereignty by phoning up Trump or Putin or Xi and asking what they'd like our new regulations to be.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> _"The challenge is therefore to agree regulatory recognition between the UK and EU on the basis that the regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges."
> _
> Essentially, it's back to "cake and eat it" and the Lancaster House red lines. Amazing that Varadkar ever went for it.



Because "_regulatory systems meet the same objectives, even if the detail of technical regulation diverges" = "regulatory systems are identical except in ways that matter to no-one"._


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> And who decides if the same result has been reached? Presumably not the ECJ?



Presumably not.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

flypanam said:


> A genuine question, when has the European Parliament overridden a decision by the European commission? And has that changed the opinion of the commission?


eg
http://www.ciel.org/news/historical...ocrine-disrupting-chemicals-stands-eu-health/

and the European Council can also block Commision proposals.

Directive Proposal - Soil - Environment - European Commission


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

Santino said:


> I wouldn't want to volunteer information that you hadn't expressly asked for, as I know this can upset you.


Oh well.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 5, 2017)

This is the mental picture I have of May and Davis rocking up in Brussels.



Two big fucking misadventures, the referendum and an early election. They're never climbing out of this hole, the hopeless shits.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> This is the mental picture I have of May and Davis rocking up in Brussels.
> 
> 
> 
> Two big fucking misadventures, the referendum and an early election. They're never climbing out of this hole, the hopeless shits.



tbf to may (just this once) it was Cameron who made the first miscalculation about peoples opinion on the SQ

the hung parliament is all hers to own tho lol


----------



## Mr Retro (Dec 5, 2017)

<shoves head around the door>

Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Mr Retro said:


> <shoves head around the door>
> 
> Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


no, i don't think the attorney general's been much in evidence recently


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

Mr Retro said:


> <shoves head around the door>
> 
> Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


I saw him on the cover of GQ. I don't know how they airbrushed the scruff out but they did. His beard was trimmed with the precision of a beppe de marco


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Mr Retro said:


> <shoves head around the door>
> Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


too busy reading the Guardian


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

Mr Retro said:


> <shoves head around the door>
> 
> Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


I think he was in Portugal yesterday?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> too busy reading the Guardian




That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.



nah.   that'll be 


sailing into wind if he's trying to change Today's news agenda.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.





Silas Loom said:


> Corbyn would have focused forensically on NHS waiting lists.


and you wonder why you enjoy such an unhappy reputation.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Mr Retro said:


> <shoves head around the door>
> 
> Any of you lot seen Jeremy?


you're not the only one asking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That'll be his big focus in PMQs tomorrow then.


tbh he could produce world peace and happiness ever after and you'd still be whining on and on


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> you're not the only one asking.




I think he'll do exactly this sooner or later, he just wants to give the tories a tiny bit more rope first.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> you're not the only one asking.



they should let Stormzy run Corbyn's twitter account. Just for the lols


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> you're not the only one asking.




Doesn't feel like Labour thinks this is the time for clarity.That Polly Toynbee stuff about Steptoe having converted to remainism looks increasingly like wishful thinking.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Doesn't feel like Labour thinks this is the time for clarity.




Opening sentence is pretty clear by current standards. Particularly coming on the back of the failure of negotiations around the Ireland question.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think he'll do exactly this sooner or later, he just wants to give the tories a tiny bit more rope first.



I'll put a year's supply of snacks and nibbles on "later".


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Opening sentence is pretty clear by current standards. Particularly coming on the back of the failure of negotiations around the Ireland question.



"Retains the benefits" is alarmingly close to Davis and Legatum's "getting to the same means by different outcomes". The benefits could be anything you like.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> "Retains the benefits" is alarmingly close to Davis and Legatum's "getting to the same means by different outcomes". The benefits could be anything you like.



Anything the EU27 like.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Opening sentence is pretty clear by current standards. Particularly coming on the back of the failure of negotiations around the Ireland question.



“Retain the benefits” = keep the bit about trade and ditch freedom of movement so we don’t lose voters to UKIP. Cake and eat it in other words.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 5, 2017)

Labour seem to be playing it about right. It would be a mistake to offer an alternative way to do brexit because brexit as in leave everything which is what all the leavers I know voted for is not doable & anything else is probably worse than staying in. So they need to keep pushing the tories on domestic issues to expose they have just not fucked up brexit. Labour probably have already decided that winning the next election is more important than the outcome of brexit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> “Retain the benefits” = keep the bit about trade and ditch freedom of movement so we don’t lose voters to UKIP. Cake and eat it in other words.



Well clearly the EU is not going to stand for that. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous and doomed to backfire.

This whole fiasco has been caused by Cameron wanting to claw votes back from UKIP. It's time to stop playing that game. Particularly as UKIP is currently deader than the Pat Sharp mullet.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

Winot said:


> “Retain the benefits” = keep the bit about trade and ditch freedom of movement so we don’t lose voters to UKIP. Cake and eat it in other words.



That's not cake and eat it, IMO. There will be a price to pay, but it can be paid in money and restricted access for services, which would suit the EU well enough. They wouldn't have been on the verge of agreeing otherwise.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Labour seem to be playing it about right. It would be a mistake to offer an alternative way to do brexit because brexit as in leave everything which is what all the leavers I know voted for is not doable & anything else is probably worse than staying in. So they need to keep pushing the tories on domestic issues to expose they have just not fucked up brexit. Labour probably have already decided that winning the next election is more important than the outcome of brexit.



I disagree on EFTA being worse than staying in. And "playing it about right" -if they thought they could get away with handing in a note saying "Please excuse Jeremy from playing games.  Signed Jeremy's Mum" they fucking would


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Labour probably have already decided that winning the next election is more important than the outcome of brexit.



They're not wrong. Brexit may ruin us in ten years time, tory austerity could do it in three.


----------



## sealion (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> I disagree on EFTA being worse than staying in. And "playing it about right" -if they thought they could get away with handing in a note saying "Please excuse Jeremy from playing games.  Signed Jeremy's Mum" they fucking would


It's great being the opposition 

John McDonnell: we must leave the single market to respect the referendum result

Tom Watson: we should stay in the single market and customs union permanently

Jon Ashworth, Jenny Chapman: we have to leave the single market

Diane Abbott: we should keep freedom of movement

Jeremy Corbyn, Keir Starmer: freedom of movement ends with Brexit

Barry Gardiner: staying in the customs union would be a disaster

Corbyn: whipped vote against single market and customs union membership

Starmer: we should stay in the single market and customs union (which means keeping free movement)


----------



## bimble (Dec 5, 2017)

Paddy power is giving these odds at the moment. I'm not much good at reading this but think it's saying that most people think there'll be "no deal" brexit (?) Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

bimble said:


> Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.
> View attachment 122205



Odds on bets which pay out in ten years time are always going to be quite attractive.


----------



## sealion (Dec 5, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paddy power is giving these odds at the moment. I'm not much good at reading this but think it's saying that most people think there'll be "no deal" brexit (?) Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.
> View attachment 122205


The same company had remain to win at 1/4.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

sealion said:


> The same company had remain to win at 1/4.


yeh but if people will chuck their money away...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paddy power is giving these odds at the moment. I'm not much good at reading this but think it's saying that most people think there'll be "no deal" brexit (?) Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.
> View attachment 122205


no, it's not saying that at all.

what it's saying is that a load of money has gone on the top bet. could simply be one person chucking on £10k.


----------



## sealion (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but if people will chuck their money away...


Paddy's yer man,,,,
Seriously don't understand people gambling on politics at such short odds.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 5, 2017)

unpredictability. If you'd have bet on corbyn to be labour leader before the post 2015 leadership election then you'd have made _bare P's_


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> unpredictability. If you'd have bet on corbyn to be labour leader before the post 2015 leadership election then you'd have made _bare P's_


and if you'd had an accumulator with leicester winning the league and britain leaving the eu you'd never have to work again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paddy power is giving these odds at the moment. I'm not much good at reading this but think it's saying that most people think there'll be "no deal" brexit (?) Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.
> View attachment 122205


It doesn't cover all options, of course. If brexit is abandoned, I would expect that to come after May has been deposed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It doesn't cover all options, of course. If brexit is abandoned, I would expect that to come after May has been deposed.


yeh. as anyone who frequents bookies knows, they do not display an exhaustive list of all outcomes.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> *Given that Greece is a large net recipient from the EU*



You're a nasty piece of work.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're a nasty piece of work.


You've selectively quoted to divorce that from its context, which is dishonest.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 5, 2017)

Paddy power lol


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> EU funding for good, redistributive projects in Greece. Which we contribute to, as part of our responsibility to the EU polity.
> 
> Actually, there's nothing about the EU and Greece that I do object to.



You're even worse.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're a nasty piece of work.



Because he stated a matter of empirical fact? You're a weirdo. Here you are, net EU contribution divided by population.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're even worse.


So tell me, how does brexit help Greece?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're even worse.



Because I've been banging on about the distinctions between the EU and the Eurozone, the IMF and the EMS, and so on? Or why?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're a nasty piece of work.


he is indeed. liberals always are.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2017)

bimble said:


> Paddy power is giving these odds at the moment. I'm not much good at reading this but think it's saying that most people think there'll be "no deal" brexit (?) Odds on us trying to get back in in a decade's time are quite good though.
> View attachment 122205


I'd have thought Theresa May will almost certainly be PM when we leave, so 2/1 is a good price (technically, she might resign _between_ a final deal being agreed and the UK actually withdrawing). It's the madness of the current circumstances, everything is fucked up and unmanageable but doesn't quite add up to a scenario for someone challenging her.  Like watching a drunk weaving through the traffic, no way they can survive but you somehow know they will.  I also can't see her resigning. Her position is pitiful, but her sense of self is tied up getting through to the finishing line. It's not redemption for calling the 2017 election, but it's all that she's got.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Wilf said:


> I'd have thought Theresa May will almost certainly be PM when we leave, so 2/1 is a good price_ *(technically, she might resign between a final deal being agreed and the UK actually withdrawing)*_. It's the madness of the current circumstances, everything is fucked up and unmanageable but doesn't quite add up to a scenario for someone challenging her.  Like watching a drunk weaving through the traffic, no way they can survive but you somehow know they will.  I also can't see her resigning. Her position is pitiful, but her sense of self is tied up getting through to the finishing line. It's not redemption for calling the 2017 election, but it's all that she's got.



There will be quite a lot of headroom for that, and the knives will be out the very second that the final outcome can be pinned on her. Hence the price, I guess.


----------



## andysays (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> ...Are any of urban's Lexiteers on this thread? What did you assume would be the solution to the NI question, when you voted for Brexit?



I voted to Leave primarily on the basis that a successful vote would cause the Tories major problems, although I'll also be happy to see us out of the EU.

I confess that a solution to the NI question wasn't at the forefront of my mind, but if all the current shenanigans and the impossibility of squaring the circle left by the GFA if the UK leaves but some sort of stitch-up is attempted for NI and this brings a united Ireland (the only sensible long term solution) any closer, then I'll certainly be claiming my share of the credit for that too


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

The Guardian has been working all day to find a Tory who will call for May to go. The best they can find is a plumbing firm boss with a Pat Sharp haircut who donated £7.50 to Cameron and now has buyer's remorse.

If anyone was going to break ranks, they would have done so. Grant Shapps's Pickmans-esque failure to rustle up the requisite numbers for a challenge won't be bettered for a while.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So tell me, how does brexit help Greece?



At this point, for Greece, the only future worth having is outside the Eurozone. So anything that damages the EU is good for Greek workers - and if Corbyn was doing a better job of proposing co-operation across Europe outside EU structures, with particular reference to the Southern peripheral states, then that could be even more positive.

You should read this - it doesn't mention Britain at all so maybe you'll be able to take some of it in: Is The Left Finally Waking Up To Eurozone Realities?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Guardian has been working all day to find a Tory who will call for May to go. The best they can find is a plumbing firm boss with a Pat Sharp haircut who donated £7.50 to Cameron and now has buyer's remorse.
> 
> If anyone was going to break ranks, they would have done so. Grant Shapps's Pickmans-esque failure to rustle up the requisite numbers for a challenge won't be bettered for a while.


If you'll recall it was your shapps-esque decision to make it a vote on your staying. Three more votes and you're honour-bound to go.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom make that two more votes


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Two weeks ago you claimed that a hard revoke A50 stance was coming shortly. You're now admitting this was rubbish?
> 
> ----------
> 
> I'm still not convinced that there *will* be an election, it might happen but it's far from certain. The lack of challenge to May after the election shows that there's not much appetite for a leadership campaign in the Tories, and at the moment no challenger that can draw support from the different strands within the party. The DUP can bluster and shout but putting out the Tories would be a big step. And the FTPA provides more stability for minority governments.



This is the thing innit - if May doesn't have to call an election she won't. The view that Corbyn and Labour just need to sit tight and wait is false - they and the entire labour movement need to be focused on forcing the election *and* on what we're gonna do afterwards. Nobody wants May's job and very few MP's want Corbyn in so she's stuck there and we're all stuck here until we get rid of them.


----------



## bemused (Dec 5, 2017)

Why is anyone surprised that a free trade deal would require some sort of regulatory alignment and that having an open border with Ireland requires a free trade deal?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> There will be quite a lot of headroom for that, and the knives will be out the very second that the final outcome can be pinned on her. Hence the price, I guess.


Yes, I would put good money on her being in post at the point of the pen hitting the document, but after that they turn the life support off.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Just throwing this out by the way - is there not a 3rd option whereby UK and EIRE just do a straightforward no border deal between both countries? Or would that violate Single Market rules?


----------



## bemused (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just throwing this out by the way - is there not a 3rd option whereby UK and EIRE just do a straightforward no border deal between both countries? Or would that violate Single Market rules?



That's the single market.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Or would that violate Single Market rules?



Of course it would. Not just the deal, but even the fact of negotiating one. 

Interesting that someone with such a shaky grasp on the issues has such firm views on them.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just throwing this out by the way - is there not a 3rd option whereby UK and EIRE just do a straightforward no border deal between both countries? Or would that violate Single Market rules?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Silas Loom make that two more votes



Could you two not shit all over _another_ thread with this silly little game please?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> At this point, for Greece, the only future worth having is outside the Eurozone.


Yet a couple of years back Greeks by a strong majority (more than 2-1) wanted to remain in the Eurozone - which tied Syriza's hands considerably . I'd be interested to see polling for that now though. Just read a little about the most recent budget in Greece...grim doesn't begin to describe it...national strike coming up later this month in response supposedly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

dp


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Because he stated a matter of empirical fact? You're a weirdo. Here you are, net EU contribution divided by population.


That graph's from 2007 - before the greek crisis. Since then the troika's hamstrung the greeks and started on its asset stripping... and decided that Poland should get the money instead.
Explain the logic of that please.

Here's a current graph - from 2017:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> That's the single market.



No, that would be a treaty/deal between 2 governments, not 28.




Silas Loom said:


> Of course it would. Not just the deal, but even the fact of negotiating one.
> 
> Interesting that someone with such a shaky grasp on the issues has such firm views on them.



So what you're saying is that it's explicit in the Single Market regs that (for example) Greece cannot make any kind of deal with Turkey, or that Sweden cannot make a deal with Norway - it all has to be done through the EU and that is explicit in the regs? Which article or treaty says that? Since your understanding is less shaky than mine? 

I'm well aware that's the intent - that member states don't do individual deals. But does it explicitly forbid that somewhere and if so where?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> that graph is from 2007 - before the greek crisis. So since the the troika has hamstrung the greeks and started on its asset stripping its decided that the money should go to Poland instead.
> 
> Here's one from 2017:


Yours isn't divided by population. Poland has a much larger population than Greece.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Yet a couple of years back Greeks by a strong majority (more than 2-1) wanted to remain in the Eurozone - which tied Syriza's hands considerably . I'd be interested to see polling for that now though. Just read a little about the most recent budget in Greece...grim doesn't begin to describe it...national strike coming up later this month in response supposedly.



In 2015 they voted to reject the memorandum which I think most people realised would have consequences for the relationship - I agree with this broadly but I don't think Syriza should be allowed the excuse that their hands were tied. I reckon at this point they'd happily leave the Eurozone if it meant the austerity measures stopped.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That graph's from 2007 - before the greek crisis. Since then the troika's hamstrung the greeks and started on its asset stripping... and decided that Poland should get the money instead.
> Explain the logic of that please.
> 
> Here's a current graph - from 2017:



It still shows that Greece is a large net recipient. In fact the 2nd biggest in absolute terms - before you take into account population size.


----------



## bemused (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, that would be a treaty/deal between 2 governments, not 28.



Ireland couldn't do it because they'd be allowing goods into the single market.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Could you two not shit all over _another_ thread with this silly little game please?


Yeh heaven forfend the serious and wholly worthy argument about Greece and Brexit be interrupted for even an instant. Or Poland or whatnot.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> In 2015 they voted to reject the memorandum which I think most people realised would have consequences for the relationship - I agree with this broadly but I don't think Syriza should be allowed the excuse that their hands were tied. I reckon at this point they'd happily leave the Eurozone if it meant the austerity measures stopped.


At any point they can have a referendum on that, to this day. IIRC Yanis V was pushing Syriza to do just that: essentially wanting to say to the Troika give us debt relief or we'll default and go back to the drachma. The fact that the Greek people didn't want that to happen was a factor in the neutering of that threat and that plan. Thats my understanding/memory of it anyhow. I think it was a lot more complex than that, but it does boil down to something around that mark.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It still shows that Greece is a large net recipient. In fact the 2nd biggest in absolute terms - before you take into account population size.


Yeh. And what has that to do with brexit, chuck?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

ska invita said:


> At any point they can have a referendum on that, to this day. IIRC Yanis V was pushing Syriza to do just that: essentially wanting to say to the Troika give us debt relief or we'll default and go back to the drachma. The fact that the Greek people didn't want that to happen was a factor in the neutering of that threat and that plan. Thats my understanding/memory of it anyhow. I think it was a lot more complex than that, but it does boil down to something around that mark.



Syriza put the memorandum to a referendum and Greece voted 'oxi' - the Syriza government accepted the memorandum anyway. I think the main factor in neutering that plan was that Syriza didn't want to be put in a position where they had to try and build a future for Greece outside the Eurozone.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> Ireland couldn't do it because they'd be allowing goods into the single market.



I was wondering on what scale that would be and whether anyone would really care but it doesn't matter as apparently we're talking significant levels of trade: Reality Check: How much trade is there between UK and Ireland?


----------



## bemused (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I was wondering on what scale that would be and whether anyone would really care but it doesn't matter as apparently we're talking significant levels of trade: Reality Check: How much trade is there between UK and Ireland?



It matters because it is the law. If you're in the single market you can't make unilateral trade agreements.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I was wondering on what scale that would be and whether anyone would really care but it doesn't matter as apparently we're talking significant levels of trade: Reality Check: How much trade is there between UK and Ireland?



It certainly seems like people care. There's this whole big fuss about it look.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> It matters because it is the law. If you're in the single market you can't make unilateral trade agreements.



It’s more that if you are in the EU you can’t. It’s in the Maastricht treaty (Spacklefrog can find chapter and verse himself).

Non-EU EEA or EFTA members can. If we were in the EEA (via EFTA) and sought a customs union as well, though, we probably couldn’t get that ability.


----------



## bemused (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It’s more that if you are in the EU you can’t. It’s in the Maastricht treaty (Spacklefrog can find chapter and verse himself).
> 
> Non-EU EEA or EFTA members can. If we were in the EEA (via EFTA) and sought a customs union as well, though, we probably couldn’t get that ability.




Never understood why they just didn't go the EFTA route. Politics nerds would have moaned but given how quickly the EU referendum dropped off the political radar once the vote was done I doubt it would have mattered.


----------



## 8den (Dec 5, 2017)

All other members of the NI Assembly & everyone in Ireland right now...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> Never understood why they just didn't go the EFTA route. Politics nerds would have moaned but given how quickly the EU referendum dropped off the political radar once the vote was done I doubt it would have mattered.


My understanding is that a UK accession to efta would have been problematic as the UK would have been by far the largest economy in the association, a very big fish in a rather small pond


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> It matters because it is the law. If you're in the single market you can't make unilateral trade agreements.



Politics tends to trump law, particularly in the international sphere. It is not an obstacle that couldn't be overcome should there be political will to do so.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

They have made overtures saying that they would welcome an application.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

MPs and peers criticise tight security around Brexit impact reports


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> It’s more that if you are in the EU you can’t. It’s in the Maastricht treaty (Spacklefrog can find chapter and verse himself).
> 
> Non-EU EEA or EFTA members can. If we were in the EEA (via EFTA) and sought a customs union as well, though, we probably couldn’t get that ability.



So now you're saying it is possible if a state is in the EEA or EFTA?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> They have made overtures saying that they would welcome an application.



Link?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> So now you're saying it is possible if a state is in the EEA or EFTA?



Ireland is in the EU. You suggested that the UK and Ireland could do a side deal. I don’t know what earlier post of mine you’ve misread.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

bemused said:


> Never understood why they just didn't go the EFTA route. Politics nerds would have moaned but given how quickly the EU referendum dropped off the political radar once the vote was done I doubt it would have mattered.


nerds would have been fine, its the IMMIGRANTS! lot (as opposed to actual immigrants) that would will be apoplectic, but  for them nothing in this counrty has been right since that nice Mr. Powell died. They wouldn't be happy even if they got what they wanted.  They are not the sort of people to be happy.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

Joining Efta court may be Britain's only road to 'deep and special' EU partnership, says its president



SpackleFrog said:


> Link?



How about one from today? Baudenbacher has been begging the UK to talk to him all year, though.

I’m not sure why I’m doing your googling for you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Link?


The Iceland foreign minister said it was an interesting idea a few months back


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Ireland is in the EU. You suggested that the UK and Ireland could do a side deal. I don’t know what earlier post of mine you’ve misread.



I actually was asking about EU rules in general, not specifically Britain and Ireland. But presumably what you're saying is that if Britain were in EFTA or EEA they could do this deal?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Joining Efta court may be Britain's only road to 'deep and special' EU partnership, says its president
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You stupid boy. The public bit of that article says nothing about joining efta.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> It certainly seems like people care. There's this whole big fuss about it look.


Is there? In the real world outside the Westminster bubble? If people care so much then why wasn't the EU a bigger issue at the last election?

The "fuss" about it shows that politicians and commentators care about it, not that people necessarily do.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Joining Efta court may be Britain's only road to 'deep and special' EU partnership, says its president
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks. Presumably you have nothing better to do. Actually, you definitely have nothing better to do. But cheers, that was a useful link that backed up your claim, well done!


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> I actually was asking about EU rules in general, not specifically Britain and Ireland. But presumably what you're saying is that if Britain were in EFTA or EEA they could do this deal?



Yes, but not if Britain wanted to negotiate a customs union into the bargain -or an agreement on the areas of trade not covered by EFTA.

You’re being rather importunate for someone who wants me to leave, by the way.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You stupid boy. The public bit of that article says nothing about joining efta.



Joining the EFTA court, so presumably joining EEA. Unless I'm getting my onion like layers of EU bureaucracy confused!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Yes, but not if Britain wanted to negotiate a customs union into the bargain -or an agreement on the areas of trade not covered by EFTA.
> 
> You’re being rather importunate for someone who wants me to leave, by the way.



I'm hoping it'll speed up the process. A bit like how when you defend the EU, people want to leave it more.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Thanks. Presumably you have nothing better to do. Actually, you definitely have nothing better to do. But cheers, that was a useful link that backed up your claim, well done!


That shows nothing of the sort, it suggests the UK joining the EFTA court as that might be an alternative to the ecj for disputes with the eu


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Joining the EFTA court, so presumably joining EEA. Unless I'm getting my onion like layers of EU bureaucracy confused!


Seemed to be about the EFTA court as a substitute for the ecj


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Seemed to be about the EFTA court as a substitute for the ecj


EFTA Court does for members of EFTA what ECJ does for EU members


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> EFTA Court does for members of EFTA what ECJ does for EU members


Yeh. Perhaps you could help me out and point to where yer man said explicitly the UK should join efta


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Perhaps you could help me out and point to where yer man said explicitly the UK should join efta



I can't access the whole article, but surely the only reason to join the EFTA court is to use it as the arbitrator for EFTA membership of the EEA?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I can't access the whole article, but surely the only reason to join the EFTA court is to use it as the arbitrator for EFTA membership of the EEA?


Yeh. But yer man says as per headline joining the court may be Britain's way out of ecj morass, not come and join efta.


----------



## bubblesmcgrath (Dec 5, 2017)

Fedayn said:


> In fairness to the DUP they never signed the GFA.....
> 
> On a serious note, of course one of the possibly delicious ironies of their actions is the collapse of the Government, a snap election and a Corbyn victory. A scenario the DUP will presumably like even less.....



No. But they agreed to the power sharing agreement ...and Paisley snr helped broker all that was eventually agreed on to bring about the reality that has existed in NI since 2009. 
The DUP has a responsibility to maintain the peace that has been part and parcel of NI since then.... they will be answerable if peace is destroyed


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> MPs and peers criticise tight security around Brexit impact reports



Most closely guarded blank flash drive in the western world.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Joining the EFTA court, so presumably joining EEA. Unless I'm getting my onion like layers of EU bureaucracy confused!



EEA = EU + EFTA I think. EFTA membership might require us to stick with those pesky 'human rights' Theresa May is so rabidly opposed to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most closely guarded blank flash drive in the western world.


It'll be found on the trans-pennine express between Doncaster and Scunthorpe


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

OK so the EEA is EU + EFTA - Switzerland because nothing can just be simple can it? Note all the current EFTA countries are within the Schengen area.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> EEA = EU + EFTA I think. EFTA membership might require us to stick with those pesky 'human rights' Theresa May is so rabidly opposed to.


The Council of Europe ones you mean?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> It'll be found on the trans-pennine express between Doncaster and Scunthorpe



Impossible. The Transpennine express doesn't go to Scunthorpe.

Oh no wait yes it does. Anyone currently on that train maybe check under your seat for any top-secret impact assessments. They may be written in crayon.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The Council of Europe ones you mean?



Whoever it is that keeps telling us we can't deport people into the vacuum of space.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Whoever it is that keeps telling us we can't deport people into the vacuum of space.



That'll be why Dyson is pro-Brexit, maybe.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK so the EEA is EU + EFTA - Switzerland because nothing can just be simple can it? Note all the current EFTA countries are within the Schengen area.


but Schengen ISN'T an actual requirement of EFTA. We WILL join EFTA but not be in Schengen.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> The Council of Europe ones you mean?


But you can't be in any of the EUropean clubs if you don't adhere to the Council of Europe's Convention on Human Rights.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. But yer man says as per headline joining the court may be Britain's way out of ecj morass, not come and join efta.


Can't find the article in the actual print version of the paper.  But is only a way out of ECJ morass if you are a member of EFTA.  Its an EFTA thing, it only applies to EFTA members


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 5, 2017)

gosub said:


> Can't find the article in the actual print version of the paper.  But is only a way out of ECJ morass if you are a member of EFTA.  Its an EFTA thing, it only applies to EFTA members



If you really want to appease Pickers, there are dozens of articles about Baudenbacher saying how great EFTA would be for the UK. He does seem to be the main cheerleader, though, and presumably there would be other views within EFTA.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> If you really want to appease Pickers, there are dozens of articles about Baudenbacher saying how great EFTA would be for the UK. He does seem to be the main cheerleader, though, and presumably there would be other views within EFTA.


I'm more inclined to burn down his fucking library and then demand I'm tried in Tokyo High Court


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> If you really want to appease Pickers, there are dozens of articles about Baudenbacher saying how great EFTA would be for the UK. He does seem to be the main cheerleader, though, and presumably there would be other views within EFTA.


So yer man is making efta overtures


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 5, 2017)

teuchter said:


> It still shows that Greece is a large net recipient. In fact the 2nd biggest in absolute terms - before you take into account population size.





littlebabyjesus said:


> Yours isn't divided by population. Poland has a much larger population than Greece.



Why should Poland (and to a greater extent Hungary on a per capita basis) receive so much while greece is being forced below the breadline and asset stripped 
Regardless of populations sizes, Poland, Hungary and the Baltics are nowhere near as in need of financial support as the Greeks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Why should Poland (and to a greater extent Hungary on a per capita basis) receive so much while greece is being forced below the breadline and asset stripped
> Regardless of populations sizes, Poland, Hungary and the Baltics are nowhere near as in need of financial support as the Greeks.


I don't defend anything that has been done to Greece. But the UK leaving the EU, for many advocates of brexit, is in order to give zero to Greece or anywhere else. That said don't underestimate the challenges facing places like Hungary. They have inherited decades of neglect that need addressing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> decades of neglect


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't defend anything that has been done to Greece. But the UK leaving the EU, for many advocates of brexit, is in order to give zero to Greece or anywhere else. That said don't underestimate the challenges facing places like Hungary. They have inherited decades of neglect that need addressing.


I actually know Hungary quite well. I dont see any signs of major neglect. In fact it seems fairly affluent considering (unemployment rate below 5% compared to greece's 21%)


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't defend anything that has been done to Greece. *But the UK leaving the EU, for many advocates of brexit, is in order to give zero to Greece or anywhere else*. That said don't underestimate the challenges facing places like Hungary. They have inherited decades of neglect that need addressing.



Not for many (or at least anyone sensible, as far as I can see) here, so this isn't really an honest argument in the context of the discussion we're having here.

I for one have nothing against the principle of redistribution from richer to poorer, but whatever benefits the Greek people may have derived from EU money in the past, it appears to me that the major beneficiaries of the payments from net contributor EU countries currently are the bankers for whose benefit the Greek people are now compelled to follow super-austerity. 

Or maybe you can point to beneficial new projects about to start in Greece which will be jeopardised by the loss of Britain's future contributions to Greece, the new schools or hospitals, for instance, which they're just about to build?


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

What a fucking mess.
Parliamentlive.tv
David Davis explains that the dog ate all of his homework .


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2017)

andysays said:


> Not for many (or at least anyone sensible, as far as I can see) here, so this isn't really an honest argument in the context of the discussion we're having here.
> 
> I for one have nothing against the principle of redistribution from richer to poorer, but whatever benefits the Greek people may have derived from EU money in the past, it appears to me that the major beneficiaries of the payments from net contributor EU countries currently are the bankers for whose benefit the Greek people are now compelled to follow super-austerity.
> 
> Or maybe you can point to beneficial new projects about to start in Greece which will be jeopardised by the loss of Britain's future contributions to Greece, the new schools or hospitals, for instance, which they're just about to build?


Not to mention how much of this "re-distribution" comes with strings attached regarding "open up markets", "reforms", etc, etc. 

You might as well argue the G8 was a good thing because it wrote off the debt of some developing countries (in exchange for measures attacking society).


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> What a fucking mess.
> Parliamentlive.tv
> David Davis explains that the dog ate all of his homework .



He started off saying that, but has now conceded that he doesn't actually have a dog.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

Can it really be true that there are no impact assessments at all?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 6, 2017)

The impact is astronomical.  I dont know what my company spent on Brexit in 2017 but I do know it has budgeted $15m for 2018.  And this is light compared with others in the market.  No value add for that spend either, just money into the aether.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

It says here that 500 billion pounds 'has been made available' for the process of brexiting. Don't know if that Includes the cost of hiring 8,000 more civil servants.
(Is that a typo seems completely mad?)


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 6, 2017)

Did I mishear that the cabinet decided to leave the customs union without doing an economic impact assessment?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

Over what timeframe? Government spends roughly £780bn a year IIRC.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 6, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Did I mishear that the cabinet decided to leave the customs union without doing an economic impact assessment?


No. Would have been too complicated, apparently.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Did I mishear that the cabinet decided to leave the customs union without doing an economic impact assessment?



It isn't really a choice. If you leave the EU you leave the customs union.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2017)

Impact Assessments would've involved listening to experts, which Gove famously reckoned everyone had had enough of of doing.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> It isn't really a choice. If you leave the EU you leave *the* customs union.



You can be in _a_ customs union, though. Which is the option which was rejected rather high-handedly.

That said, there were some options proposed by think-tanks for associate membership which would have preserved membership of the EU customs union together with some other mechanisms for BINO. With enough goodwill and commitment to preserving the status quo I guess anything would have been theoretically possible.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 6, 2017)

Clarity on the Labour Brexit  position? Keeping in the customs union and the single market, + long transition period 
i cant imagine them doing anything else but that at this stage
Labour announces fundamental shift in Brexit policy


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Clarity on the Labour Brexit  position? Keeping in the customs union and the single market, + long transition period
> i cant imagine them doing anything else but that at this stage
> Labour announces fundamental shift in Brexit policy



That report massively overstates what Starmer said, which anyway was followed up by a clarifying piece of spokespersonry that muddled things still further. Labour is still flexibility and cake.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 6, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Clarity on the Labour Brexit  position? Keeping in the customs union and the single market, + long transition period
> i cant imagine them doing anything else but that at this stage
> Labour announces fundamental shift in Brexit policy


I love this line  “the government opened a veto bar up in front of a bunch of veto-holics"


----------



## ska invita (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That report massively overstates what Starmer said, which anyway was followed up by a clarifying piece of spokespersonry that muddled things still further. Labour is still flexibility and cake.


you might well be right - hence my use of a ? mark. My hunch is this is the direction of travel though


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2017)

worth it for the 'veto bar open in front of veto holics'  line tho


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

ska invita said:


> Clarity on the Labour Brexit  position? Keeping in the customs union and the single market, + long transition period
> i cant imagine them doing anything else but that at this stage
> Labour announces fundamental shift in Brexit policy



Have you ever stood behind someone at an airline checkin who spends 20 minutes fucking around?

That person is more decisive and less frustrating that the Labour Brexit policy.

At this point, I've just gotten used to them not having one.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You can be in _a_ customs union, though. Which is the option which was rejected rather high-handedly.
> 
> That said, there were some options proposed by think-tanks for associate membership which would have preserved membership of the EU customs union together with some other mechanisms for BINO. With enough goodwill and commitment to preserving the status quo I guess anything would have been theoretically possible.



I wouldn't be surprised if we end up with some one-way tariff-based trade deal. A euro tax.


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

For Labour to retain it's current polling, it needs to both keep hold of the anti-brexit voters that overwhelmingly supported them at the general election, and keep hold of the pro-brexit voters which didn't abandon them as expected. Any position other than the ambiguous holding pattern they currently have risks losing one or the other part of that coalition, and any chance of them being able to wrench power from the tories if/when the government collapses. It might be frustrating, but it's good politics.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 6, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


>


One of the most polluted places on the planet. It doesn't surprise me that it's up there in the EU net recipient list at the moment.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 6, 2017)

Absolutely it’s good politics. Labour just need to let the tories die at their own chosen speed.

Different posters will have different views. Mine is that a Labour victory at next GE is more important than the outcome of brexit.


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> It isn't really a choice. If you leave the EU you leave the customs union.



How does it work for Turkey then? Isn't it in *the* CU?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> For Labour to retain it's current polling, it needs to both keep hold of the anti-brexit voters that overwhelmingly supported them at the general election, and keep hold of the pro-brexit voters which didn't abandon them as expected. Any position other than the ambiguous holding pattern they currently have risks losing one or the other part of that coalition, and any chance of them being able to wrench power from the tories if/when the government collapses. It might be frustrating, but it's good politics.


true, but theres tea leaf reading to be done in regards what their real position is, and i think there is a position...I think its a safe bet that Starmer at least wants to stay in the common market etc


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

I think their position is to remain as flexible as possible, and allow as few hostages to fortune as possible.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> How does it work for Turkey then? Isn't it in *the* CU?



It's in a customs union with the EU, not in the EU customs union. For example, Turkey there is a 4.7% tariff on agricultural goods from Turkey as it is excluded from the CU. The CU only covers industrial goods but excluded things the UK would like to sell; services for example.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think their position is to remain as flexible as possible, and allow as few hostages to fortune as possible.



They just look lost to me. Every time I hear Keir Starmer talk he has a different point of view - at some point that's going to become a running joke. They aren't doing themselves any favours, one of the reasons Corbyn is popular with people who like him is that he's pretty straightforward.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 6, 2017)

Labour set out "6 tests for Brexit" earlier this year:



> _1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
> 
> 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
> 
> ...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 6, 2017)

Excitingly, I have learned through watching this thing that a lot of pro-Brexit MPs are complete and utter fucking lying idiots.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 6, 2017)

You have to feel a little bit sorry for David Davis. Homework so late and dog so imaginary that he was desperate to bravely die his death anywhere but Brexit, scrabbling around for grenades to eat on Damian Green's porn-infested hill, but none were to be found.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 6, 2017)

Indeed. But at least he managed to deliver his lies with enormous condescension and obvious contempt for the committee. By the end of it he couldn't even look any of them in the eye. What a shambles.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2017)

ha. Just reading a piece where tory reminers are reffered to as 'tory moderates'. So thats it now, Labour moderates= the labour right. Tory moderates= tory remainers. Glad thats all sorted and none of these 'moderates' are actually dangerous ideologues and spivs regardless of their brexit stance


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Labour set out "6 tests for Brexit" earlier this year:



Did you post those tests because you thought they represented a plausible Brexit strategy? There's enough conflict between 2,3 and 4 for the list to be essentially cakist.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You have to feel a little bit sorry for David Davis. Homework so late and dog so imaginary that he was desperate to bravely die his death anywhere but Brexit, scrabbling around for grenades to eat on Damian Green's porn-infested hill, but none were to be found.



Agreed. The Porn Ultimatum always looked like a sneaky way to scurry off, dignity theoretically intact.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> Can it really be true that there are no impact assessments at all?



The level of obfuscation going on certainly suggests a stalling tactic while someone in another room hastily cobbles any old shit together.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> The level of obfuscation going on certainly suggests a stalling tactic while someone in another room hastily cobbles any old shit together.


When Mogg spoke it was to underline that there definitely were no impact assessments at all whatsoever no siree. It is very weird.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You have to feel a little bit sorry for David Davis. Homework so late and dog so imaginary that he was desperate to bravely die his death anywhere but Brexit, scrabbling around for grenades to eat on Damian Green's porn-infested hill, but none were to be found.



There is a curse, they say _may your wishes be granted. _Davis wanted brexit and now he's got it, etched on a millstone slung round his own neck.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> When Mogg spoke it was to underline that there definitely were no impact assessments at all whatsoever no siree. It is very weird.



Was that the same committee meeting? I didn't last more than five minutes of Davis' pathetic blustering.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

Yep this morning's shitshow. I watched the whole thing, until the end where Davis walks off and someone says 'right', into to the silent room.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Did you post those tests because you thought they represented a plausible Brexit strategy? There's enough conflict between 2,3 and 4 for the list to be essentially cakist.


no, they represent the "flexibility" of the labour position


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> Yep this morning's shitshow. I watched the whole thing, until the end where Davis walks off and someone says 'right', into to the silent room.


The Perm Sec at DExEU was on after Davis. He said the Civil Service bible had a definition of what an 'impact assessment' was, and the work carried out by the CS for the redacted report handed over to MPs was not such an assessment.


Still, I've got some new lines to try on my bank manager- a so called expert who refuses to believe I'm going to win the lottery next month.


----------



## Mr Retro (Dec 6, 2017)

Shit display there by the lad Jeremy


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2017)




----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


>



It's a variation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle - you can know the detail of the impact studies or their existence, but not both.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> It's a variation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle - you can know the detail of the impact studies or their existence, but not both.



Nah, it's this:


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> They just look lost to me. Every time I hear Keir Starmer talk he has a different point of view - at some point that's going to become a running joke. They aren't doing themselves any favours, one of the reasons Corbyn is popular with people who like him is that he's pretty straightforward.


I think their line is pretty straightforward tbh: honour the result of the referendum while retaining as many of the benefits of the EU as possible, and flexibility on how that is achieved. 

Starmer has been consistent throughout, as far as I've seen - what's he said where he's contradicted himself?


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> I think their line is pretty straightforward tbh: honour the result of the referendum while retaining as many of the benefits of the EU as possible, and flexibility on how that is achieved.
> 
> Starmer has been consistent throughout, as far as I've seen - what's he said where he's contradicted himself?



Labour MPs were, two weeks ago, whipped into voting against continued membership of the Single Market and the Customs Union.  Some of those who defied the whip lost jobs apparently.


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2017)

gosub said:


> Labour MPs were, two weeks ago, whipped into voting against continued membership of the Single Market and the Customs Union.  Some of those who defied the whip lost jobs apparently.



Strictly speaking they were whipped to abstain, but it was because the party doesn't support full single market membership:

Corbyn sacks three frontbenchers after single market vote


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Strictly speaking they were whipped to abstain, but it was because the party doesn't support full single market membership:
> 
> Corbyn sacks three frontbenchers after single market vote


only now Starmer wants it back on the table.   I think he's right, but its hardly consistent.

Omnishambles all  round


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

gosub said:


> Labour MPs were, two weeks ago, whipped into voting against continued membership of the Single Market and the Customs Union.  Some of those who defied the whip lost jobs apparently.


Yeah, I'm fairly sure that would have compromised the 'flexibility' bit of the Labour position.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

gosub said:


> only now Starmer wants it back on the table.   I think he's right, but its hardly consistent.
> 
> Omnishambles all  round



I believe this is called 'doing a Starmer'


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

Most of those Labour backbench amendments that were supported by 25 MPs were never meant to achieve anything but either bounce the leadership into committing to something it wasn't going to commit to, or political posturing to the remainer base. They don't actually reveal anything about the party's position, other than a refusal to be pinned down.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> Most of those Labour backbench amendments that were supported by 25 MPs were never meant to achieve anything but either bounce the leadership into committing to something it wasn't going to commit to, or political posturing to the remainer base. They don't actually reveal anything about the party's position, other than a refusal to be pinned down.



It was a whipped vote, MPs lost shadow positions for expressing the view of their constituents. 'refusal to be pinned down' sums up the Labour position very well.


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

...yes. That's explicitly their position. It's not that hard to understand is it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2017)

Winot said:


> Strictly speaking they were whipped to abstain, but it was because the party doesn't support full single market membership:
> 
> Corbyn sacks three frontbenchers after single market vote


So two lots of sackings then, five months ago and two weeks ago. How confusing


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> ...yes. That's explicitly their position. It's not that hard to understand is it?



It is hard to understand, for me at least, why a major political party doesn't have a policy guiding one of the biggest political questions of a generation beyond being as vague as possible. The excuse 'we don't want to upset our voters' doesn't really cut it. Surely a party that wants to be the government should be more courageous than that and articulate a real view, rather than marking Davis' homework?


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

But it does have a policy, which is (essentially):



killer b said:


> honour the result of the referendum while retaining as many of the benefits of the EU as possible, and flexibility on how that is achieved.



Abstaining on backbencher amendments which are mostly there to make trouble for their own party's leadership is ensuring they're able to remain flexible is all.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

It might tactically make sense for them to just stay out of it get photographed by GQ with your sleeves rolled up and say as little as possible about brexit but not convinced that's doing a great job of being the Opposition.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> It might tactically make sense for them to just stay out of it get photographed by GQ with your sleeves rolled up and say as little as possible about brexit but not convinced that's doing a great job of being the Opposition.



Precisely.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> But it does have a policy, which is (essentially):



That's the same objectives at the Tories.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> backbencher amendments which are mostly there to make trouble for their own party's leadership



Seriously, you are Karie Murphy AICM€5


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Seriously, you are Karie Murphy AICM€5


Oh, I've no illusions that Corbyn spent most of his political career doing exactly the same thing. But lets call it what it is.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2017)

not being The Opposition is failing to come out with reassuringly pro EU lines of policy isn't it? And given you, silas, have stated you'd rather this was all sorted out by labour lords behind closed doors, have some neck to give it precisely.

besides as Theresa May has amply demonstrated, red lines at this time are not red lines, they're climbdowns in waiting


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> That's the same objectives at the Tories.


So what you want is an anti-brexit party?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 6, 2017)

bimble said:


> It might tactically make sense for them to just stay out of it get photographed by GQ with your sleeves rolled up and say as little as possible about brexit but not convinced that's doing a great job of being the Opposition.



Yes but that's how being in opposition works, the clue is in the name.  You just attack the government and only make vague claims yourself, why would you deflect the pressure from the government onto yourself?  You really only announce concrete policies come election time.  That's how its always been done by both Labour and the tories.  Its frustrating but that is how you be in opposition, you oppose.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> not being The Opposition is failing to come out with reassuringly pro EU lines of policy isn't it? And given you, silas, have stated you'd rather this was all sorted out by labour lords behind closed doors, have some neck to give it precisely.



This is gibberish. Happy to answer it when it is rephrased and makes sense.


----------



## bimble (Dec 6, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> *not being The Opposition is failing to come out with reassuringly pro EU lines of policy isn't it? *And given you, silas, have stated you'd rather this was all sorted out by labour lords behind closed doors, have some neck to give it precisely.
> 
> besides as Theresa May has amply demonstrated, red lines at this time are not red lines, they're climbdowns in waiting



I thought maybe in this case being the opposition might mean saying how you differ from the tory party in your views of how brexit should be done, what you think it should mean, what we should be trying to get out of any deal, that sort of thing.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 6, 2017)

Labour are not in power so its pretty irrelevant what they want because it can't happen.  We'd need an election and they didn't win the one we had recently.  It could be a very different situation when the next election comes round so why would you tie yourself to something now?


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> It was a whipped vote, MPs lost shadow positions for expressing the view of their constituents. 'refusal to be pinned down' sums up the Labour position very well.


or for that matter the governments.  Though she is having to stand astride so many horses to keep her slender majority going I suppose that is to be expected.

One thing I did take from from Davis' non impact assessment was that they privately think the impact to be so damaging and Brexit so unsettled, that it was expedient not to commission them.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

killer b said:


> So what you want is an anti-brexit party?



I'd like Labour to have a more grown-up face of brexit than Starmer - he looks like he's being held hostage. He's neither good at attacking the government position nor articulating a pragmatic Labour position.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 6, 2017)

The Government doesn't even have a final position on the settlement they'd like to see - Hammond has just admitted it. 

Personally, I think a lot of the Conservative Party - including quite likely Davis - are quite happy for a no deal Brexit to go through so they can privatise the fuck out of everything left in public ownership and sell off the NHS to American health insurance companies.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 6, 2017)

yeah they'll be coming for the rail and the post


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 6, 2017)

There's a scene in Life of Brian where the People's Front of Judea and the Judean Peoples Front sneak into Pontius Pilates palace and then start beating shit out of each other while the Romans just watch, this is what it feels like watching the Tories negotiate Brexit, At the moment everyone is so distracted by the awesome shit show on offer that most folks don't seem to be paying attention to the fact that Labour are keeping schtum. 
But sooner or later they need to start laying down a position, preferably sooner because the Tory bloodbath is getting so far out of hand that Corbyn might (probably as much to his surprise as anyone else) find himself in the hot seat of running the negotiations.


----------



## bemused (Dec 6, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Personally, I think a lot of the Conservative Party - including quite likely Davis - are quite happy for a no deal Brexit to go through so they can privatise the fuck out of everything left in public ownership and sell off the NHS to American health insurance companies.



I don't think so, I think they feel that a free(ish) trade deal is achievable and want to get to that bit asap. Then we can sign those cracking free trade deals with the independent powerhouses like New Zealand.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 6, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> Labour are keeping schtum.
> But sooner or later they need to start laying down a position



They have laid down their position. Nothing they say further will change the car-crash the tories are making of this, all a firm promise will do is tie Labour in knots once St Corbs hits #10, so best just sit back until such a time as what they say can make a difference to the outcome.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> places on the planet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That report massively overstates what Starmer said, which anyway was followed up by a clarifying piece of spokespersonry that muddled things still further. Labour is still flexibility and cake.


Yeh. You know a thing or two about overstating, of course, such as your claim the president of the EFTA court was making  overtures on behalf of EFTA to the UK

Not so sure you're right about sks's comments being overstated here, tho, seemed reasonable reporting to me


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 6, 2017)

bemused said:


> I don't think so, I think they feel that a free(ish) trade deal is achievable and want to get to that bit asap. Then we can sign those cracking free trade deals with the independent powerhouses like New Zealand.



I think you are right about some of the Tory party. But I think they know that also know that any decent free trade deal is going to look so much like continued membership, including probably some sort of free movement, that their headbangers (some of whom I do think have Murdoch's disaster capitalism glinting in their eyes) and ageing activist party who think Mr Churchill's new Austin motors will be all the rage in the colonies won't buy it. 

I reckon any "impact assessments" or whatever term they can come up with show such a fucking catastrophe for anything other than remaining in the single market in some form that it would be impossible for any responsible MP to vote against that. Those really terrible economic predictions released around the budget statement the other week were all assuming some sort of "good" Brexit. Imagine what a no-deal Brexit looks like economically. 

Europe was always going to destroy the Tory party and Theresa May is just trying to delay the execution as long as possible. 

Odds at online bookies for an election in 2018 are now evens I believe.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 6, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


>


Hungary faces enormous, and expensive-to-fix, problems with air and water pollution. It has some of the worst arsenic contamination of water in the world, which costs a lot to put right. A lot of EU money has gone towards fixing that. 

Information about what EU money is spent on is freely available on the internet.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> available on the internet.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 6, 2017)

For some reason Hungary also seems to have a stubbornly high suicide rate.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> For some reason Hungary also seems to have a stubbornly high suicide rate.



Same with Finland, which suggests that there's either something about Finno-Ugric language and concepts which engenders despair, or that Uralic tribes were particularly, and heritably, gloomy.


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ...Information about what EU money is spent on is freely available on the internet.



Any update on all the beneficial-to-ordinary-Greek-people projects which are about to be compromised by the loss of the UK's financial contribution after Brexit?


----------



## sealion (Dec 6, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hungary faces enormous, and expensive-to-fix, problems with air and water pollution. It has some of the worst arsenic contamination of water in the world, which costs a lot to put right. A lot of EU money has gone towards fixing that.
> 
> Information about what EU money is spent on is freely available on the internet.


Indeed


----------



## teuchter (Dec 6, 2017)

The EU rightly ignored the nonsense about glyphosate being dangerous to human health.

Instead of wasting time humoring pseudoscientific scare campaigns we should be looking at the fundamentally problematic issues in modern agriculture to do with soil depletion and so on.

In fact the EU set up the Soil Framework Directive to do just that. But it was scuppered thanks to the help of the UK government and farming lobby.


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2017)




----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

Meh. Bercow was never actually going to have him locked up in the clocktower.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Meh. Bercow was never actually going to have him locked up in the clocktower.



Undergoing maintenance anyway. That just leaves the Tower.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Undergoing maintenance anyway. That just leaves the Tower.



Don’t think that’s in his gift, is it? Anyway, plenty of noisome basements in the Palace of Westminster that could serve as dungeons, or perhaps turrets that could work like the sky cells in House Arryn’s Eyrie.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 6, 2017)

gosub said:


>





Didn't the government recently change the rules so that they had an automatic majority on all committees?


----------



## Poi E (Dec 6, 2017)

Sell the fucking place off and move it up north. Building and contents not fit for purpose.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 6, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> Didn't the government recently change the rules so that they had an automatic majority on all committees?



Yep. Despite being a minority administration.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 6, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Yep. Despite being a minority administration.




That's democracy for you


----------



## Poi E (Dec 6, 2017)

Support for independence up in Scotland


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Same with Finland, which suggests that there's either something about Finno-Ugric language and concepts which engenders despair, or that Uralic tribes were particularly, and heritably, gloomy.





Is that what that suggests to you?


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 7, 2017)

Actually, I now think that the only possible Brexit is a softest of soft Brexit - as close to staying in both the CU and the SM as can possibly be achieved.
If a hard border is out of the question, and so is regulatory and customs divergence from the rest of the UK, it's the only option left.
And the cost of that would be free movement,  ECJ jurisdiction  and joining the EEA.
Nothing else is remotely feasible


----------



## Raheem (Dec 7, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> Actually, I now think that the only possible Brexit is a softest of soft Brexit - as close to staying in both the CU and the SM as can possibly be achieved.
> If a hard border is out of the question, and so is regulatory and customs divergence from the rest of the UK, it's the only option left.
> And the cost of that would be free movement,  ECJ jurisdiction  and joining the EEA.
> Nothing else is remotely feasible



True as far as goods are concerned, IMO, but there's nothing logically forcing the continuation of the status quo wrt services and employment at this stage, and you can't logically do that without freedom of movement, so quite a bit of a shift would be needed to make it possible. Excluding services would probably have been considered a hard Brexit at the time of the referendum, but I guess things have drifted somewhat.

Trivia: "Brexit" seems to have been added to my spellcheck dictionary.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 7, 2017)

fair point on services, but then the EU have us so completely over a barrel on services they can more or less dictate terms anyway


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Same with Finland, which suggests that there's either something about Finno-Ugric language and concepts which engenders despair, or that Uralic tribes were particularly, and heritably, gloomy.



An innate tendency towards suicide, even if it could be genetically transmitted, would for obvious reasons be unlikely to persist in any population for long.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> fair point on services, but then the EU have us so completely over a barrel on services they can more or less dictate terms anyway


How different it might be if there was anyone on the British side you'd trust to turn a tap on and off


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> An innate tendency towards suicide, even if it could be genetically transmitted, would for obvious reasons be unlikely to persist in any population for long.



Evolutionary advantage and disadvantage are far more complicated than that. For a start, suicidality is a part of the human condition. It hasn't been bred out of us. It has persisted in the global population. Presumably there is some positive consequence for the long-term success of a tribe, to balance the obvious impact that suicidality has on numbers. Perhaps there's something about the existence of depression, self-hatred, low self-esteem and so on which are bad for the individual and good for the tribe; perhaps they are allied to the capacity for shame and guilt and therefore mitigate the excesses of self-interest. Maybe it's something to do with the capacity for self-sacrifice in tough times. No idea. But there clearly is some associated evolutionary advantage which explains why humans have evolved with a tendency to suicidality.

We might not be happy with suggesting that this capacity for suicidality manifests to greater or lesser extents in racial groups. That depends on whether you want to believe in racial differences, and the very concept of race. The alternative, considering the Finno-Ugrics, is to link it to linguistic communities. How one does that, depends on your view of whether language is a shaper or a translator of reality, and whether it is innate or acquired.

Anyway, this is all a little off-topic on a discussion about our great national act of self-harm.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 7, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> An innate tendency towards suicide, even if it could be genetically transmitted, would for obvious reasons be unlikely to persist in any population for long.



I believe in Hungary there is a concept of _national sorrow.  _That being said I've traveled to many of the old Eastern block countries and they all seem to have it in their own way.  I also think Hungary doesn't have the taboos around suicide that other countries may have.  As you say, none of this is innate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Evolutionary advantage and disadvantage are far more complicated than that. For a start, suicidality is a part of the human condition. It hasn't been bred out of us. It has persisted in the global population. Presumably there is some positive consequence for the long-term success of a tribe, to balance the obvious impact that suicidality has on numbers. Perhaps there's something about the existence of depression, self-hatred, low self-esteem and so on which are bad for the individual and good for the tribe; perhaps they are allied to the capacity for shame and guilt and therefore mitigate the excesses of self-interest. Maybe it's something to do with the capacity for self-sacrifice in tough times. No idea. But there clearly is some associated evolutionary advantage which explains why humans have evolved with a tendency to suicidality.
> 
> We might not be happy with suggesting that this capacity for suicidality manifests to greater or lesser extents in racial groups. That depends on whether you want to believe in racial differences, and the very concept of race. The alternative, considering the Finno-Ugrics, is to link it to linguistic communities. How one does that, depends on your view of whether language is a shaper or a translator of reality, and whether it is innate or acquired.
> 
> Anyway, this is all a little off-topic on a discussion about our great national act of self-harm.


Surprised no reference to auld durkheim


----------



## Borp (Dec 7, 2017)

Don't know if this has been referenced yet, but head of hmrc said last wednesday that they don't see a need for a border between northern Ireland and RoI. Quite an interesting session that.

Parliamentlive.tv


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Borp said:


> Don't know if this has been referenced yet, but head of hmrc said last wednesday that they don't see a need for a border between northern Ireland and RoI. Quite an interesting session that.
> 
> Parliamentlive.tv



Rather more happens at borders than the administration of excise duties, of course.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

David Davis seen recently:


----------



## Borp (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Rather more happens at borders than the administration of excise duties, of course.



But isn't customs the main reason people are arguing why a border is necesarry?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

The House of Lords has released a report - is it an Impact Assessment? I dunno! - on Brexit and particularly a no-deal Brexit. 

House of Lords - Brexit: deal or no deal - European Union Committee


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Borp said:


> But isn't customs the main reason people are arguing why a border is necesarry?



Yes, but customs generally includes export and import permits and licenses and certifications and all the rest of it. AFAIK HMRC just handles the excise bit of customs, and the inspection bit of customs is managed by what used to be UKBA.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> The House of Lords has released a report - is it an Impact Assessment? I dunno! - on Brexit and particularly a no-deal Brexit.
> 
> House of Lords - Brexit: deal or no deal - European Union Committee


Noel Edmunds was called in for consultation


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Noel Edmunds was called in for consultation


Mr Blobby is already running the show.


----------



## Borp (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Yes, but customs generally includes export and import permits and licenses and certifications and all the rest of it. AFAIK HMRC just handles the excise bit of customs, and the inspection bit of customs is managed by what used to be UKBA.



The suggestion seemed to be that it could all be handled away from the border. Not sure about inspections though. Will have to look what ukba view is.


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

Borp said:


> The suggestion seemed to be that it could all be handled away from the border. Not sure about inspections though. Will have to look what ukba view is.


Home Affairs SC heard evidence from four of the 20 or so agencies tied in to running a border, that its a bad idea - the more inland you bring nasties you want to keep out, be it plague carrying rats, rabid dogs, deadly spiders, plant diseases...the more likely they are to get a toehold


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

I think they're pretending when they say it's all about a few milk lorries to be honest. 

I found this when I was talking to someone about the "Norway option" a while ago:

Is the Norway-Sweden border a model for UK-Ireland? 

It's quite technical and includes a link to the HMG official position. The comments are interesting too.


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I think they're pretending when they say it's all about a few milk lorries to be honest.
> 
> I found this when I was talking to someone about the "Norway option" a while ago:
> 
> ...


That only works if we stay in the Single Market, leave the single market and potentially diverge from its regulatory regime and the checks become much more stringent


----------



## Borp (Dec 7, 2017)

gosub said:


> Home Affairs SC heard evidence from four of the 20 or so agencies tied in to running a border, that its a bad idea - the more inland you bring nasties you want to keep out, be it plague carrying rats, rabid dogs, deadly spiders, plant diseases...the more likely they are to get a toehold



In that particular session I linked to the policy director for animal and plant health at defra said brexit doesn't increase the risk. It may do as time goes by but that there is no immediate increase in risk from day one.

I do need to watch the rest of those hearings though.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I found this when I was talking to someone about the "Norway option" a while ago:
> 
> Is the Norway-Sweden border a model for UK-Ireland?
> 
> It's quite technical and includes a link to the HMG official position. The comments are interesting too.


There was a BBC article about the technology some weeks back. The main upshot of it was that it requires close collaboration between either side to have any chance of working (so a good job HMG hasn’t pissed off any close neighbours recently then) irrespective of how fancy the tech is.

Also, more recently this item with a comment from Swedish minister Ann Linde that their ‘frictionless’ border with Norway only works if both sides are members of the CU/SM and since Norway isn’t in the former there is friction - the same article reports feedback from a few thousand Swedish companies that the country it was most difficult for them to export to was … Norway (more so than China, even). Despite the tech there is paperwork and there are delays at the border.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

gosub said:


> That only works if we stay in the Single Market, leave the single market and potentially diverge from its regulatory regime and the checks become much more stringent



Sorry, I should have added to the "it's quite technical" that it's far too technical for me! Apologies if it isn't relevant here.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 7, 2017)

A couple of years back I worked for a Norwegian company.  The manufacturing plant was in Norway which meant everything we sold into the UK market got delivered from Norway.  Our stuff would frequently get held up at customs as it was being processed, this made our lead times longer than all of the competition and was one of the reasons we were not competitive.  I would hope that we are not heading back to that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Mr Blobby is already running the show.


plenty of crinkley bottoms in the house of lords etc etc


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

The Spectator - that house organ of the insane, flag-waving, no-deal, Singapore-on-Thames, Rexit right - is now calling for a second referendum.

Nick Clegg is right: we need a second Brexit referendum | Coffee House

First and second preference votes for three options - accept the deal, revert to status quo ante, crash out -  and AV to determine the winner. 

Bring it on, I think remain could win that. 

And it's interesting that some Brexitloons will be so angry about any settlement which looks like soft Brexit that they'd happily roll the dice again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Spectator - that house organ of the insane, flag-waving, no-deal, Singapore-on-Thames, Rexit right - is now calling for a second referendum.
> 
> Nick Clegg is right: we need a second Brexit referendum | Coffee House
> 
> ...


It's no surprise you were so mistaken about the EFTA overtures when you mistake a blog for the spectator changing direction.

You're all over the shop, chuck


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> plenty of crinkley bottoms in the house of lords etc etc





> He David Davis told today’s Mail on Sunday: “HBOS Brexit had robbed me of my marriage, my family, my businesses, my long-standing friend and business partner; my income, my investments, my self-respect, my reputation, my privacy, my physical and mental health.
> 
> “It cost me my security, my image rights, my collection of classic cars – and very nearly my life.”



Noel Edmonds secures litigation funding for Lloyds Bank legal battle


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> A couple of years back I worked for a Norwegian company.  The manufacturing plant was in Norway which meant everything we sold into the UK market got delivered from Norway.  Our stuff would frequently get held up at customs as it was being processed, this made our lead times longer than all of the competition and was one of the reasons we were not competitive.  I would hope that we are not heading back to that.


We're not.

It will be worse than that.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Spectator - that house organ of the insane, flag-waving, no-deal, Singapore-on-Thames, Rexit right - is now calling for a second referendum.
> 
> Nick Clegg is right: we need a second Brexit referendum | Coffee House
> 
> ...


I think there's a fair chance that could ne the outcome, through no more than 50-50. In any referendum it would be very easy for Brexiteers to portray the re-run as elites ignoring the people - pretty much what it would be. And for that reason alone, nobody in government or indeed Corbyn is/are going to seriously argue for a re-run.


----------



## The39thStep (Dec 7, 2017)

Can't see there being a second referendum under this govt tbh and Labour would be barmy to call for one.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Agreed. The maths is one of putting together diehard rebellious Brexiteers with diehard rebellious Remainers in the HoC. That still doesn't beat the craven pragmatists. 

That said, though, lexiteers of Urban, how would you vote in those circumstances? Assume that the deal is - essentially - EEA + CU for an extendable, open-ended transition period with a view to Canada-style agreement in the future.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> Can't see there being a second referendum under this govt tbh and Labour would be barmy to call for one.


Indeed. In some fairy godmother free wishes, Cher related scenario, May, Corbyn and plenty of others would wish they could turn back time to a more innocent era where the ideologically anti-EU lot just huffed and puffed in the golf club. Opening it up to a referendum, which allowed everybody else the opportunity to vent their anxieties and contempt for the whole shooting match is a genie that doesn't go back in the bottle.  It's not a Lexit genie because there never was a Lexit, but the sentiments expressed were real.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Agreed. The maths is one of putting together diehard rebellious Brexiteers with diehard rebellious Remainers in the HoC. That still doesn't beat the craven pragmatists.
> 
> That said, though, lexiteers of Urban, how would you vote in those circumstances? Assume that the deal is - essentially - EEA + CU for an extendable, open-ended transition period with a view to Canada-style agreement in the future.


Good luck in translating that into a snappy ballot paper question.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

David Cameron - lobbying China for investment firm
Daniel Hanan - currently on speaking tour in Argentina 
Douglas Carswell - condescending tweets and not-at-all sinister "big data election campaigns" company with Brexit campaign git 
Nigel Farage - no more politics for me, except the pension of course 
...


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Good luck in translating that into a snappy ballot paper question.



I guess that by then it will just be called "the deal", I'm only defining it in advance of reality so that the Lexit oddsters can answer the question.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Nigel Farage - no more politics for me, except the pension of course
> ...


 That's the beef I have with the universe. Falange has got 'look at me, I won brexit' at the heart of his self image. A smug cunt doing the chat shows, raking it in till the end of recorded time. Instead, every single fucking day of his miserable life should be made up of paper cuts, stones in shoes, burnt toast and stubbed toes. C'mon karma, you lazy bastard, do your fucking stuff!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

Maybe the FBI will karma him?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I guess that by then it will just be called "the deal", I'm only defining it in advance of reality so that the Lexit oddsters can answer the question.


As a (semi-detached) member of the Lexit oddster community you'll be hearing from my solicitor. Or twitter.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Maybe the FBI will karma him?


Flurry of paper cuts requiring a blended blood donation from all of the 27.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> That's the beef I have with the universe. Falange has got 'look at me, I won brexit' at the heart of his self image. A smug cunt doing the chat shows, raking it in till the end of recorded time. Instead, every single fucking day of his miserable life should be made up of paper cuts, stones in shoes, burnt toast and stubbed toes. C'mon karma, you lazy bastard, do your fucking stuff!



2018 will be 2016's murderous little sister...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The Spectator - that house organ of the insane, flag-waving, no-deal, Singapore-on-Thames, Rexit right - is now calling for a second referendum.
> 
> Nick Clegg is right: we need a second Brexit referendum | Coffee House
> 
> ...


I think remain would almost certainly win that. How many of the 48 per cent who voted remain would do anything other than vote remain again? Very few, I would think. The 52 per cent leave voters will be split by the other two options. I couldn't see anything other than Remain winning that. Seems unlikely to happen.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think remain would almost certainly win that. How many of the 48 per cent who voted remain would do anything other than vote remain again? Very few, I would think. The 52 per cent leave voters will be split by the other two options. I couldn't see anything other than Remain winning that. Seems unlikely to happen.


No split votes with AV


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think remain would almost certainly win that. How many of the 48 per cent who voted remain would do anything other than vote remain again? Very few, I would think. The 52 per cent leave voters will be split by the other two options. I couldn't see anything other than Remain winning that. Seems unlikely to happen.



If all the 52% who voted leave had the two flavours of Brexit as first and second preference, in either order, then under AV there would still be a Brexit.


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think remain would almost certainly win that. How many of the 48 per cent who voted remain would do anything other than vote remain again? Very few, I would think. The 52 per cent leave voters will be split by the other two options. I couldn't see anything other than Remain winning that. Seems unlikely to happen.


Martin Schulz wants 'United States of Europe' within five years Five Presidents again   (not sure what it would actually take for this lot to change agenda)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> If all the 52% who voted leave had the two flavours of Brexit as first and second preference, in either order, then under AV there would still be a Brexit.


yeah, but they won't. There would only need to be a very few of those voting 'soft' preferring 'remain' to 'hard' for remain to win.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Crispy said:


> No split votes with AV


Yes, fair point. I stand corrected.  I still think this would produce a remain result.


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> yeah, but they won't. There would only need to be a very few of those voting 'soft' preferring 'remain' to 'hard' for remain to win.


Come across more Hard or Remain, including the bloke at the Spectator who wrote that


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, fair point. I stand corrected.  I still think this would produce a remain result.



Yeah, that's my view as well.

You're calling the deal "soft", btw. I'd call the deal outlined above "soft, transitioning to hard". I wouldn't call no deal "hard", I'd call it "insane".

What if the options were: none, soft, soft transitioning to hard, insane?

Much more difficult to work out how that would end up playing under AV.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Yeah, that's my view as well.
> 
> You're calling the deal "soft", btw. I'd call the deal outlined above "soft, transitioning to hard". I wouldn't call no deal "hard", I'd call it "insane".
> 
> ...


With that one, I still think there'd be close to that 48 percent figure for 'none' as first pref. AV tends to produce the least-hated option as the winner, not necessarily the most liked, and in that scenario, I would guess that the vast majority of those voting 'none' would have 'soft' as their second pref. So I think 'none' would still stand a very good chance of winning, with the only other option even remotely possible as a winner being 'soft'. 'soft-to-hard' and 'insane' would be a long way back.

ETA: I actually still think it would be very unlikely that 'none' would lose. But if, say, soft and none were the top two after the other two are eliminated, maybe soft could squeak it. If 'soft to hard' and 'none' are the top two, that would mean 'none' winning, probably comfortably, as enough 'soft's would have 'none' as second-pref.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> With that one, I still think there'd be close to that 48 percent figure for 'none' as first pref. AV tends to produce the least-hated option as the winner, not necessarily the most liked, and in that scenario, I would guess that the vast majority of those voting 'none' would have 'soft' as their second pref. So I think 'none' would still stand a very good chance of winning, with the only other option even remotely possible as a winner being 'soft'. 'soft-to-hard' and 'insane' would be a long way back.



You'd have thought.

Two complicating factors.

1) People have a tendency to choose the middle option rather than the extremes. Especially when they feel they are being asked a difficult question. Yes, I know that few people faced with a ballot paper choose the LDs, but that's rather more complicated and tribal.

2) People who support none are likely not to bother selecting the other options as second and third preferences. This always happens in AV, to a huge extent. It's because people are fairly dim and AV is confusing. The 52% are likely to select at least two out of the three brexit options, though. All of this could skew the figures should second preferences come into play.

Anyway, despite all this, I'd still (second preference) like it to happen and I still think it won't. My first preference is for a remainist fudge, of course - revoke, set up a  Royal Commission, and hope everyone forgets about it.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?



See thread title.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?


As Silas Loom says. It is entirely on-topic.


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?



I was just about to make a similar comment.

The answer, I suspect, is because that's all the diehard remainers have got now...


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?


If our politicans can cocoon themselves in fantasy worlds why not the urbanites?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

andysays said:


> I was just about to make a similar comment.
> 
> The answer, I suspect, is because that's all the diehard remainers have got now...


Are you going to start calling people 'remoaners' next?


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As Silas Loom says...



Didn't you have even the slightest pause for thought after typing those four words?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> See thread title.





littlebabyjesus said:


> As Silas Loom says. It is entirely on-topic.



If you want to be literal to the thread title then this thread could be closed after one post: YES.

What brexit looks like when it's done is another matter, but all this devising referendum formulas that could reverse the result of the first one is childish drivel.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you want to be literal to the thread title then this thread could be closed after one post: YES.
> 
> What brexit looks like when it's done is another matter, but all this devising referendum formulas that could reverse the result of the first one is childish drivel.



You say reverse, others might say clarify. As it stands, the answer provided last year is meaningless.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

gosub said:


> If our politicans can cocoon themselves in fantasy worlds why not the urbanites?



Cos most of us here are better than the scum in Westminster & Brussels. 

Most of us, anyway.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

andysays said:


> Didn't you have even the slightest pause for thought after typing those four words?


No. I'm capable of disagreeing with someone's politics while still being able to agree with something they say. Extraordinary, perhaps, but there it is.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You say reverse, others might say clarify. As it stands, the answer provided last year is meaningless.



Oh give over, the question was should the UK leave the EU, the answer was YES. How would you like that clarifying?


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are you going to start calling people 'remoaners' next?



I don't think I've previously used that term, and I wasn't intending to start now.

BTW, are you making any progress tracking down all the EU projects currently benefiting the people of Greece which are about to be suspended after the loss of the UK's contribution? The way you've been banging on on this subject, I'm slightly disappointed you didn't already have a list ready to post when I asked you the first time, but maybe it's just slipped your mind while engaging in day dreams of what Nick Clegg would do


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> With that one, I still think there'd be close to that 48 percent figure for 'none' as first pref. AV tends to produce the least-hated option as the winner, not necessarily the most liked, and in that scenario, I would guess that the vast majority of those voting 'none' would have 'soft' as their second pref. So I think 'none' would still stand a very good chance of winning, with the only other option even remotely possible as a winner being 'soft'. 'soft-to-hard' and 'insane' would be a long way back.


All speculative of course, as it won't happen. My guess though is that turnout would be down, _possibly_ hitting the brexit vote more than remain. Not so much former brexiteers changing their minds or sitting on their hands, more a case of having done the fuck you protest and not bothering to do it again. Equally though, the brexit campaign would have an open goal to portray the other side as Remoaning minnies, liberal elites trying to get the voters to overturn a vote they didn't like. But then again... the brexit campaign wouldn't be able to pull the 'free money for the NHS' stunt. Instead the Remoaniacs would be able to point out it will cost £50 billion for starters.

Right, I've displayed my vacillation working out: I'd guess Remain might win 54-46 if we had a re-run in, say, January. Game of Battleships for 2 out of 3?


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh give over, the question was should the UK leave the EU, the answer was YES. How would you like that clarifying?



On what terms, without collapsing the economy and with due consideration for the Good Friday Agreement, the rights of EU citizens in the UK, and so on? 

Pretending that any of this is simple puts you in rock-hard Brexiteer territory. There isn't a Lexit space for pretending this isn't complicated. The only consistent position you can adopt while saying "it ain't complex, let's just leave" is the Singapore on Thames one which has travel agents retraining as potato harvesters and moving to Lincolnshire.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> All speculative of course, as it won't happen. My guess though is that turnout would be down, _possibly_ hitting the brexit vote more than remain. Not so much former brexiteers changing their minds or sitting on their hands, more a case of having done the fuck you protest and not bothering to do it again. Equally though, the brexit campaign would have an open goal to portray the other side as Remoaning minnies, liberal elites trying to get the voters to overturn a vote they didn't like. But then again... the brexit campaign wouldn't be able to pull the 'free money for the NHS' stunt. Instead the Remoaniacs would be able to point out it will cost £50 billion for starters.
> 
> Right, I've displayed my vacillation working out: I'd guess Remain might win 54-46 if we had a re-run in, say, January. Game of Battleships for 2 out of 3?





> Why has this turned in to a remainer fantasies thread?


Curses, I've been made to look foolish!


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> All speculative of course, as it won't happen. My guess though is that turnout would be down, _possibly_ hitting the brexit vote more than remain. Not so much former brexiteers changing their minds or sitting on their hands, more a case of having done the fuck you protest and not bothering to do it again. Equally though, the brexit campaign would have an open goal to portray the other side as Remoaning minnies, liberal elites trying to get the voters to overturn a vote they didn't like. But then again... the brexit campaign wouldn't be able to pull the 'free money for the NHS' stunt. Instead the Remoaniacs would be able to point out it will cost £50 billion for starters.
> 
> Right, I've displayed my vacillation working out: I'd guess Remain might win 54-46 if we had a re-run in, say, January. Game of Battleships for 2 out of 3?


You do know that £50 billion was going to the EU anyway?  Had someone on facebook trying to say lets stay, and spend the £50billion on the NHS -more dodgy than the bus claim.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> On what terms



Did you read the ballot paper? Terms were not offered. It was simple yes or no, 50%+1 would win. End of. And no amount of bleating or baguette waiving will change that. However much of a disaster the tory fuckwits make of it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> one which has travel agents retraining as potato harvesters and moving to Lincolnshire.



That sounds like a nice life, might do that when I retire from my US travel agency.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> On what terms, without collapsing the economy and with due consideration for the Good Friday Agreement, the rights of EU citizens in the UK, and so on?
> 
> Pretending that any of this is simple puts you in rock-hard Brexiteer territory. There isn't a Lexit space for pretending this isn't complicated. The only consistent position you can adopt while saying "it ain't complex, let's just leave" is the Singapore on Thames one which has travel agents retraining as potato harvesters and moving to Lincolnshire.


The consequences of the vote might be messy and/or complex and/or bad. But the vote really was simple. A second referendum wasn't built in - probably should have been - but can't be time travelled into being.  Or alternatively some group of politicians has to risk their careers and try and unpick the whole thing. Outside of libdem arsery, it ain't going to happen.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did you read the ballot paper? Terms were not offered. It was simple yes or no, 50%+1 would win. End of. And no amount of bleating or baguette waiving will change that. However much of a disaster the tory fuckwits make of it.



You're the one who wants to waive the baguettes, I'm suggesting that they need to be enforced.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> A second referendum wasn't built in - probably should have been - but can't be time travelled into being.


Out of complacency, I'm guessing - don't think Cameron thought he could lose.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> You're the one who wants to waive the baguettes, I'm suggesting that they need to be enforced.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 122351



Meh. Qu'ils agitent de la brioche.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

gosub said:


> Martin Schulz wants 'United States of Europe' within five years Five Presidents again   (not sure what it would actually take for this lot to change agenda)



So? We had an exemption from "ever closer union", should that sort of thing upset you.


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> So? We had an exemption from "ever closer union", should that sort of thing upset you.


the exemption was granted at the same time as our mathematical ability to block EUrozone taking over the shop was removed. I said at the time we'd be the lunatic relative locked in the attic....more so now


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 122351


Evidence that the sun shines on the self-righteous.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 7, 2017)

not even the winners know what they've won!


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> not even the winners know what they've won!


yes we do....  Geoffrey the Elephant.



shame, I wanted the speedboat


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That sounds like a nice life, might do that when I retire from my US travel agency.



Driving one of these does look like it could be fun - but as far as perks go, I think I'd rather have cheap flights than free spuds.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> but as far as perks go, I think I'd rather have cheap flights than free spuds.
> 
> View attachment 122352


I'm disappointed.


----------



## Winot (Dec 7, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did you read the ballot paper? Terms were not offered. It was simple yes or no, 50%+1 would win. End of. And no amount of bleating or baguette waiving will change that. However much of a disaster the tory fuckwits make of it.



Which is why we now need to discuss the terms.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Driving one of these does look like it could be fun - but as far as perks go, I think I'd rather have cheap flights than free spuds.
> 
> View attachment 122352



Frau Bahn hates flying but loves chips, so, ya’ know...


----------



## The39thStep (Dec 7, 2017)

Wilf said:


> Indeed. In some fairy godmother free wishes, Cher related scenario, May, Corbyn and plenty of others would wish they could turn back time to a more innocent era where the ideologically anti-EU lot just huffed and puffed in the golf club. Opening it up to a referendum, which allowed everybody else the opportunity to vent their anxieties and contempt for the whole shooting match is a genie that doesn't go back in the bottle.  It's not a Lexit genie because there never was a Lexit, but the sentiments expressed were real.


The remarkable thing is despite the wailing and a weeping of the Remainers there is little or no evidence to show any change in views over leave or remain.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 7, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> The remarkable thing is despite the wailing and a weeping of the Remainers there is little or no evidence to show any change in views over leave or remain.



Apart from, you know, YouGov’s tracker. Which does just that.


----------



## killer b (Dec 7, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> The remarkable thing is despite the wailing and a weeping of the Remainers there is little or no evidence to show any change in views over leave or remain.


There's a small change tbf. I think a lot of that is just down to how disasterously the process is being managed by the government though.


----------



## Supine (Dec 7, 2017)

Don't think the tracker shows much change in the last 18 months


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 7, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> The remarkable thing is despite the wailing and a weeping of the Remainers there is little or no evidence to show any change in views over leave or remain.



‘Tis the thing with liberals who consider themselves to be educated; James O’Brien on LBC spent forever being a condescending twat comparing those who fancied Corbyn’s chances to those who believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden. He got his arse handed to him on that one, so he’s full on ‘leave are thicko racists’, five days a week, bleating away. This is the same James O’Brien who used his position as a journalist to back the Iraq war, as the ‘facts’ showed the threat Saddam posed. The posh prick should be signing on, yet he continues to get paid to push his bullshit on to the unwashed.


----------



## sealion (Dec 7, 2017)

Will remainers be happy if this happens ? https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025/


----------



## gosub (Dec 7, 2017)

sealion said:


> Will remainers be happy if this happens ? https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025/


Posted it earlier.  Looks more likely than ever.   Remember driving to Kerry a few years back and they were discussing the EUrozone problems on the radio, and it was talked about like a forgone conclusion... Turned out biggest road block was Germany, but now Merkel needs Schultz to form a government...


----------



## Winot (Dec 7, 2017)

sealion said:


> Will remainers be happy if this happens ? https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025/



As noted earlier, UK had an opt out from that. Personally I’m not bothered, but I recognise tide is in other direction in UK.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 7, 2017)

sealion said:


> Will remainers be happy if this happens ? https://www.politico.eu/article/spds-martin-schulz-wants-united-states-of-europe-by-2025/



It's a shame that what anyone in the UK thinks is currently all but irrelevant.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 8, 2017)

The39thStep said:


> The remarkable thing is despite the wailing and a weeping of the Remainers there is little or no evidence to show any change in views over leave or remain.


sure, but that's because the economic shitstorm hasn't even really begun to hit home yet. and it will - we can't possibly avoid it
Equally, sooner or later May will have to choose between the softest of Brexits - that means, continued free movement, ECJ jurisdiction, and trade rules as dictated by Brussels, or an economic catastrophe.
THEN we'll see the moment of truth


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

I heard some pollster today (or yesterday, or the day before, it's all a blur now) say that people are changing their views around the edges of Brexit - in the direction of having a less favourable view of how things will go, less favourable view of how the Government is handling negotiations things like that - but very few are changing their view on the central question of how they would vote, which he reckoned was too fundamental, tribal and tied up with personal identity to shift.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> sure, but that's because the economic shitstorm hasn't even really begun to hit home yet. and it will - we can't possibly avoid it
> Equally, sooner or later May will have to choose between the softest of Brexits - that means, continued free movement, ECJ jurisdiction, and trade rules as dictated by Brussels, or an economic catastrophe.
> THEN we'll see the moment of truth


can get out of ECJ thorough EFTA court and at some fucking stage THE NOTION THAT RULES ARE GLOBAL MUST KICK IN otherwise your iPhone wouldn't work globally, imperical America wouldn't be buying the same cars as metric EUrope, bananas would be more bendy....

and/or economic catastrphe


----------



## Santino (Dec 8, 2017)

Maybe the Leave voters just need to be reminded how thick and racist they are a few more times, and then they'll fall into line.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It's a shame that what anyone in the UK thinks is currently all but irrelevant.


IS IT?
I'll take the learning curve of the incomers any day over the stale and clockwork thinking of the niche as was, of the UK EUropean debate.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 8, 2017)

Winot said:


> As noted earlier, UK had an opt out from that. Personally I’m not bothered, but I recognise tide is in other direction in UK.


Is it. Then why did so many in France vote for Le Pen and Mélenchon in the presidential elections, both who took something of an anti-EU line. The FPÖ took 26% of the vote in Austria in October, the AfD had it's best ever result, likewise the PVV in the Netherlands - all anti-EU to a greater or lesser degree.

If the "tide" is in the other direction that's because liberal politicians are beloved of the EU, not because their electorates are.

EDIT: Oh and add the Portuguese communists to the list too. And FSM in Italy.


----------



## Winot (Dec 8, 2017)

Irish border kicked into long grass. If UK can’t find a solution then it would seem to in effect be staying in SM/CU. 
M


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

The interesting thing now will be how loud the squeals of betrayal are from the Tory ultras.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 8, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> sure, but that's because the economic shitstorm hasn't even really begun to hit home yet. and it will - we can't possibly avoid it
> Equally, sooner or later May will have to choose between the softest of Brexits - that means, continued free movement, ECJ jurisdiction, and trade rules as dictated by Brussels, or an economic catastrophe.
> THEN we'll see the moment of truth



Aha! The moment of truth cometh. The same one that was due the day after the referendum, then in the months following and so on. All this end of financial days loonery is as dull as its religious counterpart. And those trotting out this line still do not get why leave won, yet somehow walk around like the leave voters are the thickos, stunning lack of awareness.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

Santino said:


> Maybe the Leave voters just need to be reminded how thick and racist they are a few more times, and then they'll fall into line.


It'd be great if this strategy was headed by Ian Hislop. That would work.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

Joint report from the negotiators of the European Union and the United Kingdom Government on progress during phase 1 of negotiations under Article 50 TEU on the United Kingdom's orderly withdrawal from the European Union.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

"Both Parties have reached agreement in principle across the following three areas under consideration in the first phase of negotiations, on which further detail is set out in this report: a. protecting the rights of Union citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the Union; b. the framework for addressing the unique circumstances in Northern Ireland; and c. the financial settlement. 

3. Progress was also made in achieving agreement on aspects of other separation issues."


----------



## ska invita (Dec 8, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aha! The moment of truth cometh. The same one that was due the day after the referendum, then in the months following and so on. All this end of financial days loonery is as dull as its religious counterpart. And those trotting out this line still do not get why leave won, yet somehow walk around like the leave voters are the thickos, stunning lack of awareness.


 its  fair to say we haven't left the eu yet, won't really until 2021 it looks like(2 year minimum transition most likely now, could still stretch longer), and until it really happens and the terms are locked down only then will any new economic reality kick in. If it's a very soft Brexit  the"shock'  may be negligible. A lot can still happen over the next few years. That's not doom mongering, its just a recognition of the fact that the process is long and drawn out.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 8, 2017)

As I understand it no deal brexit can't happen now and May will match eu regs unless there is some other arrangement. Brexit means Brexit!


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

Does anyone know whether the 140 areas covered by the GFA include trade in any services? I’m unsure whether a commitment to regulatory convergence (although it surely eliminates Fox’s job) also entails FOM as the default option. If it does, joy can be unconfined.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Does anyone know whether the 140 areas covered by the GFA include trade in any services? I’m unsure whether a commitment to regulatory convergence (although it surely eliminates Fox’s job) also entails FOM as the default option. If it does, joy can be unconfined.


Joy will be confined by borders as comedy will be subject to wco rules


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

Does that mean Mrs Brown's Boys are still legal?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

ska invita said:


> its fair to say we haven't left the eu yet


Nobody disputes that, do they?

Nothing i_n this document_ suggests that the UK won't cease to be in the EU as of 29th March 2019.   What it does say is that the UK will continue to pay after that date.  (para 63 - "By derogation, for contingent liabilities related to legal cases as a result of participation in the budget, programmes and policies, the cut-off date will be 31 December 2020").

However, it does look like the UK will be in the Single Market and Customs Union in all but name.


----------



## hipipol (Dec 8, 2017)

Given that the Osborne cuts have been postponed and the Brexit damage has yet to kick in, I expect that things are going to get much tougher. Will the EU be sending aid parcels to their Citizens in the North of Ireland when the shit lands? DUP, we must be treated exactly the same as the rest of the UK, mysteriously quiet on their private parachute. Brexit will occur, expect the UK to do a mighty unravel in the early 2020s as a result


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

At the risk of being unpopular, I was mildly impressed May got this over the line.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> However, it does look like the UK will be in the Single Market and Customs Union in all but name.



I don't think they'll be in the Single Market. I still suspect we'll end up with a one-way tariff.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh give over, the question was should the UK leave the EU, the answer was YES. How would you like that clarifying?


innit.


Silas Loom said:


> You say reverse, others might say clarify. As it stands, the answer provided last year is meaningless.


I see you neglected to breakdown the remain vote options in your fantasy referendum into the thorny issues of Federal USofEu for UK or sidelined ?, Currency Union for UK or sidelined, etc .
You'd have just as much of a fucking mess if remain had won - continued austerity across the board, the pig fucker and gideon locked out of the Eurozone room humiliated and missing all the juicy negotiations on future European finances.
The UK's setup has been incompatible with the EUs direction of travel for decades now and the door has long been closed on any more UK privileges.
If remain had won and you don't want the Euro and full fiscal union for the UK, then it would be you needing to  explain your remain corner into the minutiae. But somehow I doubt you would. You'd be sitting on the side making righteous posts about how wrong the referendum question was and how thick everyone else was for voting either way.


----------



## Winot (Dec 8, 2017)

Lots of Leavers on here getting self-righteous about Leavers being called thick racists. I haven't seen any posters here saying that. The continued bleating victimhood is a bit odd from the side that won.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2017)

Amazingly you can’t keep all of the people happy all of the time…


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I don't think they'll be in the Single Market. I still suspect we'll end up with a one-way tariff.


I don't think they'll be in The Single Market either. If this document is anything to go by, they'll be in a newly designed agreement which is called something different but which is to all intents and purposes the SM and CU. (Which is what I said in my post).


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think they'll be in The Single Market either. If this document is anything to go by, they'll be in a newly designed agreement which is called something different but which is to all intents and purposes the SM and CU. (Which is what I said in my post).



The EU has never signed a trade agreement which gives equal access to the custom union or single market as EU members, I don't think they'll start with us.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> At the risk of being unpopular, I was mildly impressed May got this over the line.



I reckon the EU are probably desperate to keep her there. If she resigns or is deposed it might mean a general election with more delay and instability and god knows what result or an equally destabilising Tory leadership election which seems quite likely to produce a hard-core UKIPy-NO-DEAL-FUCK-YOU-EUSSR leadership.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 8, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Nobody disputes that, do they?
> .


i was making the point to BS who was challenging the fact that the economic doommongers said we'd be fucked by now.

Capital seems to be largely sitting on its hands waiting to see exactly how it plays out. Those with ties and investments particularly don't want the upheaval id imagine. My point to BS is only once we really really leave will the economic impact be known.

 I'm not sure what's happened today re the break in the impasse but seems to me hard Brexit tories are going to have a go yet.
**i still see a contradiction over free movement as it stands**


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

listening to some stuff on the radio it seems like we might end up in some never-ending transition status?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> The EU has never signed a trade agreement which gives equal access to the custom union or single market as EU members, I don't think they'll start with us.


Have you looked at the document?  I posted it at the top of this page.

I have no crystal ball.  All I'm doing is reading the document released today.  Like you can if you want.  Things may of course change.  But my reading of this document, especially the sections regarding NI, strongly suggest a SM and CU in all but name is what is being proposed by both sides.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 8, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aha! The moment of truth cometh. The same one that was due the day after the referendum, then in the months following and so on.



According to?


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> As I understand it no deal brexit can't happen now and May will match eu regs unless there is some other arrangement. Brexit means Brexit!


Not out of the woods yet.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Have you looked at the document?  I posted it at the top of this page.
> 
> I have no crystal ball.  All I'm doing is reading the document released today.  Like you can if you want.  Things may of course change.  But my reading of this document, especially the sections regarding NI, strongly suggest a SM and CU in all but name is what is being proposed by both sides.



I read it this on the BBC site morning.

Paras 49 and 50 do not suggest any tacit agreement for partial CU or SM membership because EU members won't accept it. These paras lay down what the UK government would need to do if a trade deal doesn't appear. It's a holding position until the trade talks get going.




> 49. The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.
> 
> 50. In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 8, 2017)

Raheem said:


> According to?



The Chancellor of the Exchequer backed by Her Majesty's Treasury for starters; Immediate recession with 1/2 million job losses, an immediate increase in the premium for lending to business and personal lending and so on.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> Paras 49 and 50 do not suggest any tacit agreement for partial CU or SM membership because EU members won't accept it. These paras lay down what the UK government would need to do if a trade deal doesn't appear. It's a holding position until the trade talks get going.



TBF it may not matter whether they accept it; if the argument if that the GFA mandates there has to be a frictionless border between the UK and Eire (and that partial CU / SM membership follows on from that) then the EU as a whole are bound by it as much as the UK is.


----------



## Winot (Dec 8, 2017)

Doesn't para 49 keep open Freedom of Movement into the UK?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

2hats said:


> Amazingly you can’t keep all of the people happy all of the time…



Well if he's unhappy, then I'm happy.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> TBF it may not matter whether they accept it; if the argument if that the GFA mandates there has to be a frictionless border between the UK and Eire (and that partial CU / SM *membership* follows on from that) then the EU as a whole are bound by it as much as the UK is.



Yes. 

Although not membership, access. The UK stays in transition until the 2026 sunset clause (although that could probably be extended) and loses all say over regulation. It's better than hard Brexit but it's still shit, which is why people saying that the EU won't wear it are wrong.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

Winot said:


> Doesn't para 49 keep open Freedom of Movement into the UK?



If there are services aspects to the all-island Irish economy then, yes. There must be, surely. If they aren't specifically mentioned in the GFA, though, that could be a worry.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> TBF it may not matter whether they accept it; if the argument if that the GFA mandates there has to be a frictionless border between the UK and Eire (and that partial CU / SM membership follows on from that) then the EU as a whole are bound by it as much as the UK is.



The agreement published today acknowledge that no trade agreement may be met and then it is incumbent on the UK government to solve the problem to the Irish government's satisfaction. I'm very sceptical we'll end up with tariff-free, unfettered, access to the single market. It would undermine one of the planks of the EU premise.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

Winot said:


> Doesn't para 49 keep open Freedom of Movement into the UK?



Not really, if you are Irish you're able to live in the UK anyway.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

'Full regulatory alignment' but only applying to NI? That's not going to work is it? Amounts to either an Irish sea border, or an open back door that the EU won't tolerate.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 8, 2017)

Nigel Farage doesn't seem thrilled by the news that Brussels might still be checking his bananas for bendiness.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well if he's unhappy, then I'm happy.


All he has to do is solve the Irish problem.







Good luck with that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Nigel Farage doesn't seem thrilled by the news that Brussels might still be checking his bananas for bendiness.
> 
> View attachment 122388



Soup of the day: brexiteer crocodile tears.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

I reckon this might split the Tory party though. Good news there.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> The agreement published today acknowledge that no trade agreement may be met and then it is incumbent on the UK government to solve the problem to the Irish government's satisfaction. I'm very sceptical we'll end up with tariff-free, unfettered, access to the single market. It would undermine one of the planks of the EU premise.



It would, but the EU are almost certainly legally bound to at least offer it (tariff-free, unfettered access to the single market) because of the nature of the GFA; that is why Article 51 is there.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> All he has to do is solve the Irish problem.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



you mean solve the British problem?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Soup of the day: brexiteer crocodile tears.



Farage can fuck off. He's a retiring politician and radio shock jock.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Dec 8, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Nigel Farage doesn't seem thrilled by the news that Brussels might still be checking his bananas for bendiness.
> 
> View attachment 122388



Where did he expect his £73k per year pension to come from?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> 'Full regulatory alignment' but only applying to NI? That's not going to work is it? Amounts to either an Irish sea border, or an open back door that the EU won't tolerate.


It works if the whole of the UK remains fully aligned.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Poi E said:


> you mean solve the British problem?



True.  You can't now solve the Irish problem without creating a Scottish problem (and maybe a Welsh problem) so yeah, British problem seems more apt.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 8, 2017)

I was thinking more along the lines of the legacy of British colonialism in Ireland, but yeah, that works too!


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Nigel Farage doesn't seem thrilled by the news that Brussels might still be checking his bananas for bendiness.
> 
> View attachment 122388



He's thrilled by the pension he'll be getting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> True.  You can't now solve the Irish problem without creating a Scottish problem (and maybe a Welsh problem) so yeah, British problem seems more apt.


We shall return to the heptarchy


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

It is quite gratfiying to see that the legacy of Britain's past colonial fuckery and denial of self-determination to the Irish people is that we are ourselves are now denied self-determination.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 8, 2017)

“We”?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

Poi E said:


> “We”?


Ourselves alone


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> It would, but the EU are almost certainly legally bound to at least offer it (tariff-free, unfettered access to the single market) because of the nature of the GFA; that is why Article 51 is there.



Para 51:



> 51. Both Parties will establish mechanisms to ensure the implementation and oversight of any specific arrangement to safeguard the integrity of the EU Internal Market and the Customs Union



That's there to stop Ireland becoming some sort of backdoor into the Single Market. For example, you could see the EU/UK agree to rebate any trade within the island of Ireland if any tariffs applied in a deal, but, apply them to any of that trade that flows into the rest of the EU.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

Poi E said:


> “We”?



We who have benefited and continue to benefit from the legacy of colonialism yes.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> Para 51:
> 
> That's there to stop Ireland becoming some sort of backdoor into the Single Market. For example, you could see the EU/UK agree to rebate any trade within the island of Ireland if any tariffs applied in a deal, but, apply them to any of that trade that flows into the rest of the EU.



That would be impossible to enforce - all you'd need is two companies either side of the border and then export into the EU from the one in the Republic.  Ireland *is* a backdoor into the EU.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

From the GFA, appparently:


Areas for North-South co-operation and implementation may include the
following:
1. Agriculture - animal and plant health.
2. Education - teacher qualifications and exchanges.
3. Transport - strategic transport planning.
4. Waste management.
5. Waterways - inland waterways.
6. Social Security/Social Welfare - entitlements of cross-border workers
and fraud control.
7. Tourism - promotion, marketing, research, and product development.
8. Relevant EU Programmes such as SPPR, INTERREG, Leader II and
their successors.
9. Inland Fisheries.
10. Aquaculture and marine matters
11. Health: accident and emergency services and other related crossborder
issues.
12. Urban and rural development.

Hmm. Hopefully a lot of north-south cooperation has developed outside of the GFA.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> At the risk of being unpopular, I was mildly impressed May got this over the line.


They were sick of watching her squirm


----------



## Poi E (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> We who have benefited and continue to benefit from the legacy of colonialism yes.



Costs a lot to prop up NI. Not sure anyone is benefiting.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> That would be impossible to enforce - all you'd need is two companies either side of the border and then export into the EU from the one in the Republic.  Ireland *is* a backdoor into the EU.



I agree Ireland is a backdoor into the EU, one neither side know how to close. Some shitty compromise will be made. The Republic of Ireland isn't going to be able to force the other EU member states to agree to unfettered market access to the UK because of the GFA.Obviously, I'd like to see that because it would be amazing for the UK, but I'm not holding out hope for it to happen.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I agree Ireland is a backdoor into the EU, one neither side know how to close. Some shitty compromise will be made. The Republic of Ireland isn't going to be able to force the other EU member states to agree to unfettered market access to the UK because of the GFA.Obviously, I'd like to see that because it would be amazing for the UK, but I'm not holding out hope for it to happen.



That is the beauty of the EU negotiation team raising the GFA as such an issue though; they are bound by it as much as the UK is and it isn't something the rest of the EU member states can legitimately oppose given that its already in force and has been for nearly twenty years.   The only thing they could do is boot Ireland out of the single market, which would certainly set an interesting precedent.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 8, 2017)

just marking a place in the thread.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> That would be impossible to enforce - all you'd need is two companies either side of the border and then export into the EU from the one in the Republic.  Ireland *is* a backdoor into the EU.



Would be hilarious if hundreds of businesses suddenly spring up in the North and South of Ireland.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I read it this on the BBC site morning.
> 
> Paras 49 and 50 do not suggest any tacit agreement for partial CU or SM membership because EU members won't accept it. These paras lay down what the UK government would need to do if a trade deal doesn't appear. It's a holding position until the trade talks get going.


I wasn't particularly thinking of those paragraphs. I was thinking of 44 and 51 specifically, and between the lines otherwise.

You seem very keen on a particular reading. I have no horse in this race, so I have no interest in a fundamentalist debate. I see myself as an observer.  It's fine if you disagree with my reading; I don't really care.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

curious as to what EFTA make of this...probably end up using their courts, though without chipping in to the development of EUrope through EFTA grants and I think theoretically no freedom of movement


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2017)

When is a Brexit not a Brexit ? In answer to the Op's question I clicked 'no' but not because i think we'll officially stay in the EU, more that there'll be something that is just called brexit on the tin .


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

I can't believe it's not Brexit!


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> You seem very keen on a particular reading.



I'm just reading the text without putting stuff between the lines. The EU has been consistent in saying access to the SM is only via. the four pillars - and we don't seem to want EFTA. The GFA doesn't seem a viable way to bypass that. Who knows?


----------



## 8den (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> Not really, if you are Irish you're able to live in the UK anyway.



Has that been settled post Brexit?


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> curious as to what EFTA make of this...probably end up using their courts, though without chipping in to the development of EUrope through EFTA grants and I think theoretically no freedom of movement



The EU aren't going to grant the same access EFTA has without freedom of movement.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> The EU aren't going to grant the same access EFTA has without freedom of movement.



was writing a reply to your previous.  EFTA isn't access, EFTA is membership of the Single Market.  -membership for Countries that don't want anything to with CAP, fois gras farmers, imaginary olive trees and fences, lots and lots of fences


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Europe just turned its voice at the WTO up to 11...In exchange for the UK blindly excepting any health & safety and environmental gold plating the EU comes up with.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I'm just reading the text without putting stuff between the lines. The EU has been consistent in saying access to the SM is only via. the four pillars - and we don't seem to want EFTA. The GFA doesn't seem a viable way to bypass that. Who knows?



I don't know the text of the gfa off the top of my head, but surely for matters not involving customs checks, it should be substantially possible to have bilateral arrangements with roi that don't provide any benefits in mainland Europe. So, for example, Ireland can agree to recognise UK qualifications without it logically meaning that Spain has to.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> was writing a reply to your previous.  EFTA isn't access, EFTA is membership of the Single Market.



It's the EEA, but that still requires accepting the four freedoms. I can't see the EU agreeing to the same deal but without free movement.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> It's the EEA, but that still requires accepting the four freedoms. I can't see the EU agreeing to the same deal but without free movement.


EU signed CETA earlier this  year which removes 99% of tarriffs and no freedom of movement...and we've all signed up to TBT so everything else, apart from H&s AND environment will be global standards


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2017)

Just had a look at the comments on the daily mail following today’s news and they are apoplectic with rage. Eg) ‘now I know what the Czechs felt like in 1938’.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> EU signed CETA earlier this  year which removes 99% of tarriffs and no freedom of movement...



But it doesn't cover services (and 99% is either wrong or misleading).


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Raheem said:


> But it doesn't cover services (and 99% is either wrong or misleading).


but there isn't a Single Market in Services


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

Raheem said:


> But it doesn't cover services (and 99% is either wrong or misleading).



It covers services if you want to sell services to Canada, but not the other way around. It also allows the EU to take part in government procurement, but not the other way around. Happily, for Canadian cheese makers their quota has tripled and the famous Canadian chocolate industry can trade tariff-free with the EU. Although if you're a farmer you'll still need to pay tariffs on some meats, corn etc.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> but there isn't a Single Market in Services



Under CETA there is. A market in which the EU can sell services to Canada, but Canada can't sell them to the EU.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> Just had a look at the comments on the daily mail following today’s news and they are apoplectic with rage. Eg) ‘now I know what the Czechs felt like in 1938’.



Tbh that sounds like the comments under every other mail article...


----------



## Supine (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> Just had a look at the comments on the daily mail following today’s news and they are apoplectic with rage. Eg) ‘now I know what the Czechs felt like in 1938’.



I’d take that as a good sign


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I can't believe it's not Brexit!



If this isn't tomorrow's Sun headline I'll be very surprised.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> When is a Brexit not a Brexit ? In answer to the Op's question I clicked 'no' but not because i think we'll officially stay in the EU, more that there'll be something that is just called brexit on the tin .



I call for a second vote. The question wasn't clear!


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If this isn't tomorrow's Sun headline I'll be very surprised.



Get it trademarked quickly and let Murdoch pay for your xmas presents


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I call for a second vote. The question wasn't clear!



Wouldn't be surprised if some leavers started singing this very song, and with 100% refusal to admit that there's any kind of irony or double standard in them doing so.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Wouldn't be surprised if some leavers started singing this very song, and with 100% refusal to admit that there's any kind of irony or double standard in them doing so.



That was pretty much exactly what Ross Clark did in the Spectator yesterday, in advance of this. Hence the discussion last night which upset Urban's brexiteers so.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> That was pretty much exactly what Ross Clark did in the Spectator yesterday, in advance of this. Hence the discussion last night which upset Urban's brexiteers so.



They'll start whispering it sooner or later.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> ‘now I know what the Czechs felt like in 1938’.


“We’ve got Trident for a reason, this is the time to unleash it on Brussels and show the EUSSR the full might of Britain. Those quislings will soon come to the table after that.”
Barry, Hornchurch.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 8, 2017)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Tbh that sounds like the comments under every other mail article...


_which _czechs as well, some of the sudeten germans were acually quite pleased to see old one ball


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 8, 2017)

2hats said:


> “We’ve got Trident for a reason, this is the time to unleash it on Brussels and show the EUSSR the full might of Britain. Those quislings will soon come to the table after that.” Barry, Hornchurch.
> View attachment 122408



It had to be Hornchurch. Superb.


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

2hats said:


> “We’ve got Trident for a reason, this is the time to unleash it on Brussels and show the EUSSR the full might of Britain. Those quislings will soon come to the table after that.” Barry, Hornchurch.
> View attachment 122408



I've checked, we'd be safe NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein phew!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Wouldn't be surprised if some leavers started singing this very song, and with 100% refusal to admit that there's any kind of irony or double standard in them doing so.



I was joking about the question at the top of the thread!


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I've checked, we'd be safe NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein phew!



careful now, impact studies, when they exist, are invariably wrong apparently.   
Learnt that off some bloke who claims he was in the SAS


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> I've checked, we'd be safe NUKEMAP by Alex Wellerstein phew!



All those kippers on the SE coast best keep their windows shut.


----------



## marty21 (Dec 8, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I can't believe it's not Brexit!


It's beginning to sound a lot like soft #brexitmas


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2017)




----------



## Teaboy (Dec 8, 2017)

He's not happy.  I bet May is getting in the neck from her back benchers as well.  It was always going to be an impossible task, is it to much to hope that this whole process will hole the tories below the water line?  Schism anyone?


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2017)

Plenty of people on daily mail today are swearing they'll not vote tory again after May's betrayal of the true meaning of brexit.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> Plenty of people on daily mail today are swearing they'll not vote tory again after May's betrayal of the true meaning of brexit.



Every cloud etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> Plenty of people on daily mail today are swearing they'll not vote tory again after May's betrayal of the true meaning of brexit.


Yeh

But they love it, they'll go back to the blue if they're still alive at the next election.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> View attachment 122417



Things must be bad for him to be reduced to Victoria Tower Gardens as a place to pose for photos in.


----------



## bimble (Dec 8, 2017)

agricola said:


> Things must be bad for him to be reduced to Victoria Tower Gardens as a place to pose for photos in.


I did wonder where he was. It works quite well though as a poignant portrait of pyrrhic victory, the festive tie and fallen leaves behind.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> He's not happy.  I bet May is getting in the neck from her back benchers as well.  It was always going to be an impossible task, is it to much to hope that this whole process will hole the tories below the water line?  Schism anyone?



I think most tory MPs care more about keeping their seats and staying in power than they do about, well anything else.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


> I did wonder where he was. It works quite well though as a poignant portrait of pyrrhic victory, the festive tie and fallen leaves behind.


Pity not up against the wall at the north end staring down a dozen barrels


----------



## bemused (Dec 8, 2017)

Out of all the 17.4m who voted to stop paying the EU how many want a pension from them once they've left?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 8, 2017)

They've been stabbing each other in the brains about Europe forever. Now, even in having a final reckoning on the issue they are continuing to stab each other in the brains.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2017)

2hats said:


> “We’ve got Trident for a reason, this is the time to unleash it on Brussels and show the EUSSR the full might of Britain. Those quislings will soon come to the table after that.”
> Barry, Hornchurch.
> View attachment 122408



Ever get the feeling people certain people will probably still be unhappy regardless of what happens?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Dec 8, 2017)

bimble said:


>



"Dear Mr Farage,

We are writting to inform you that your application to become Her Majesty the Queen's ambassador to the United States of America has not been successful at this time. We do, however, have a position in Syria for which we believe you would be well suited. Etc..."


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 8, 2017)

Nine Bob Note said:


> "Dear Mr Farage,
> 
> We are writting to inform you that your application to become Her Majesty the Queen's ambassador to the United States of America has not been successful at this time. We do, however, have a position in Syria for which we believe you would be well suited. Etc..."



"Dear Nigel. Brexit isn't the only thing around here that can't get hard. I'm going back to Gemany and taking the kids."


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 8, 2017)

Need a straightener: Barry from Hornchurch vs. Ronnie Pickering.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 8, 2017)

One simple question. Will we be able to control immigration under this new deal?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Dec 8, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Need a straightener: Barry from Hornchurch vs. Ronnie Pickering.



A non-event sayeth Mike Phelps of Yeovil.


----------



## agricola (Dec 8, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Pity not up against the wall at the north end staring down a dozen barrels



the Burghers of Calais monument nearby could also provide guidance in that respect


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 8, 2017)

lbc will be fun tonight , might even call in , noel frrom ltj bukem , if i can be arsed, which i probably wont


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 8, 2017)

I do wonder whether overall this has been something of a boon stability-wise for the EU, in that its amply demonstrated to some of the more recalcitrant populations what happens when even a relatively big player tries to break away from the bloc.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 8, 2017)

bemused said:


> Out of all the 17.4m who voted to stop paying the EU how many want a pension from them once they've left?



Could you, or somebody,  expand on this a bit please? (I'll Google as well when I have time later) -- but at the risk of confessing complete ignorance, I have no idea how EU-related pension obligations work


----------



## Raheem (Dec 8, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Could you, or somebody,  expand on this a bit please? (I'll Google as well when I have time later) -- but at the risk of confessing complete ignorance, I have no idea how EU-related pension obligations work



It's about NF (never noticed his initials before) saying he fully intends to take his enormous MEP's pension because why should his family be the ones to pay the price.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Could you, or somebody,  expand on this a bit please? (I'll Google as well when I have time later) -- but at the risk of confessing complete ignorance, I have no idea how EU-related pension obligations work


You work as an MEP or a civil servant at the Commission ECJ or Parliament, a judge, a translator or whatever then the EU(or related body) was your employer and you are entitled to 3.5% of final salary for each year worked up to 70%.  Money has come from somewhere-the member states at present, so we were on the hook for it. Its a pooled pot, so are also chipping in so a retired Italian MEP can keep the lifestye to which he is accustomed...Conversely part of Farage's pension will be paid by the Germans

If you worked as a party hack or researcher its down to the actual Party to fund it rather than EU.  So we have to pay for Farage's gin ad infinitum, but not his wife's Valium* (having employed her thats UKIP's problem)



* I have no idea if she takes Valium but I don't see how else she'd manage


----------



## teuchter (Dec 8, 2017)

I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?


Arsonists rarely receive insurance payouts.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 8, 2017)

Thanks for those answers Raheem and gosub 

You've confirmed what I'd dimly thought already, that they related specifically to the pensions of MEPS and EU staff/civil servants etc .... for some reason I thought bemused  's post implied broader obligations somehow 

(ETA to correct relevant poster's name to bemused  )


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 8, 2017)

A mate of mine used to work directly for the EU Commission in Brussels (and occasionally Strasbourg), the fatcat bureaucrat** 

**(as we used to pisstake him in the pub  ).

(He was an expert in his field though -- very technical -- I won't say here)


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?


That bit was always a no brainer, after all we've got to this thing through the EUropean Parliament...

Issue was more.. Say EU green lights a new autobahn tommorow.. Something that will take decades to build but it only got green lighted coz British MEPs voted for it.. How much should the UK pay for that? Or even worse got green lighted in spite of UK MEPs, as part of a system we respected, how much then.?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> Arsonists rarely receive insurance payouts.


Invalid analogy.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2017)

Rob Ray said:


> I do wonder whether overall this has been something of a boon stability-wise for the EU, in that its amply demonstrated to some of the more recalcitrant populations what happens when even a relatively big player tries to break away from the bloc.


hmmm. not so sure about that. Everyone was singing the praises of EU stability after the french and dutch elections earlier in the year. Then brussels collectively shat their pants when the AFD did so well in German elections in autumn.
 If the Germans get any more eurosceptic the games up with Brussels. What with all the talk of Schultz forcing Merkel to make a grand coalition back EU federalism we could see Euroscepticism go off the charts. Germany's done very nicely with the satus quo - i.e profiting from the poorer nations position - there's a huge portion of the german population that would prefer to grab the money and run rather than have all those southern debts put on them and have thier tax cash decided upon by some portugese or italian in Brussels.


----------



## Mr Moose (Dec 8, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?



Because he did fuck all for it? He didn’t represent the UK, he didn’t contribute to the EU’s work or explain it’s decisions. It’s also massive hypocrisy.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2017)

Mr Moose said:


> Because he did fuck all for it? He didn’t represent the UK, he didn’t contribute to the EU’s work or explain it’s decisions. It’s also massive hypocrisy.


He did just not in a constructive manner.
Hard to say he didn't represent the UK when iirc they were our largest party there... And the only party to be fully on the winning side of the referendum.


Still a cunt though


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 8, 2017)

gosub said:


> Hard to say he didn't represent the UK when iirc they were our largest party there



Largest party only since 2014, but yeah he's been there since 1999. 

I'm not a great big fan of retroactively stripping people of their pension rights, even massive cunts.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 8, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> hmmm. not so sure about that. Everyone was singing the praises of EU stability after the french and dutch elections earlier in the year. Then brussels collectively shat their pants when the AFD did so well in German elections in autumn.
> If the Germans get any more eurosceptic the games up with Brussels. What with all the talk of Schultz forcing Merkel to make a grand coalition back EU federalism we could see Euroscepticism go off the charts. Germany's done very nicely with the satus quo - i.e profiting from the poorer nations position - there's a huge portion of the german population that would prefer to grab the money and run rather than have all those southern debts put on them and have thier tax cash decided upon by some portugese or italian in Brussels.


Xtimes-people knowing that many germans think that. The game is at least on edge.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 8, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?



No, there's no logic says he in particular shouldn't get it. But there's a certain amount of hypocrisy if someone's been (a) spending a decade decrying the EU gravy train and (b) spending a year insisting that Britain doesn't have to be responsible for, inter alia, MEPs' ongoing pensions.


----------



## dweller (Dec 8, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I don't really get why people are going on about NF's pension. What logic, moral or otherwise, says that he shouldn't recieve it?



He insists that we should pay no divorce bill. 
The divorce bill includes money for MEPs pensions. 
Hence he is in effect asking to not be paid a pension.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

Every boring cunt who does't understand why or give a doesn't shit about dealing with why it happened on this thread last 20 pages.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

wtf happened here - it's not like there's a shortfall of dull liberal  pro-eu commentary with dull neo-liberal assumptions out there.

Why are you here?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Every boring cunt who does't understand why or give a doesn't shit about dealing with why it happened on this thread last 20 pages.



Cogent, incisive analysis as always. C'mon, make an effort to explain to us lesser mortals at least occasionally.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Cogent, incisive analysis as always. C'mon, make an effort to explain to us lesser mortals at least occasionally.


Explain what? Every post is from posh people talking about how it effects them in some parody of involvement. Not a single one about what drove brexit - because, we're out the picture already. It's the posh remainers brexit as much as the posh brexiters brexit. This disgusting thread shows it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Explain what? Every post is from posh people talking about how it effects them in some parody of involvement. Not a single one about what drove brexit - because, we're out the picture already. It's the posh remainers brexit as much as the posh brexiters brexit. This disgusting thread shows it.



What on earth is your definition of posh here?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What on earth is your definition of posh here?


For this, winot and loom.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2017)

[


butchersapron said:


> Explain what? Every post is from posh people talking about how it effects them in some parody of involvement. Not a single one about what drove brexit - because, we're out the picture already. It's the posh remainers brexit as much as the posh brexiters brexit. This disgusting thread shows it.


Fuck off. You don't get to tell who is posh or not or whose is concern is not

You have a totally unrealistic idea about people's concerns. Your absurd dismissal of their ideas as 'posh' shows that.

Come here to London and tell us that. You don't have the first idea what it is to be struggling in London.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What on earth is your definition of posh here?



anyone with an opinion by the looks of it


----------



## Raheem (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> It's the posh remainers brexit as much as the posh brexiters brexit.



You may be onto something here. I guess no-one would have predicted it, but it suddenly looks unlikely to turn out to be a prole's Brexit. Or not so suddenly.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> [
> 
> Fuck off. You don't get to tell who is posh or not or whose is concern is not
> 
> ...


_Come here to london_. Are you serious - i live on a fucking campbed at work for 5 days a week? I'm 47. I'm homeless. I get £112 a week. You private school boy try to privilege me?

Also, your outraged post failed to have anything to do with my post.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2017)

Us Londoners have it easy eh.

Don't try to out 'I'm fucked up than you me' than me. Really. You don't have a fucking clue.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Us Londoners have it easy eh.
> 
> Don't try to out 'I'm fucked up than you me' than me. Really. You don't have a fucking clue.


Who said any such thing? I didn't.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Us Londoners have it easy eh.
> 
> Don't try to out 'I'm fucked up than you me' than me. Really. You don't have a fucking clue.


Are you gonna beat me? Go on.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

What would £112 a week get you lbj? In london.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Every boring cunt who does't understand why or give a doesn't shit about dealing with why it happened on this thread last 20 pages.


Why it happened is the history of governments in the the UK since about 1980. Fuck me you are as bad as Stan when you are pissed.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> What would £112 a week get you lbj? In london.



Enough cans to be quite pissed?

Edit: Nowt wrong with that like, I hasten to add


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> _Come here to london_. Are you serious - i live on a fucking campbed at work for 5 days a week? I'm 47. I'm homeless. I get £112 a week. You private school boy try to privilege me?
> 
> Also, your outraged post failed to have anything to do with my post.



Whilst I don't want to pry into the circumstances of a complete stranger on a buletin board, why do you only get £112 a week if you work 5 days a week?


----------



## Santino (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Us Londoners have it easy eh.


"We Londoners..."


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Gove appears to be positioning himself for PM sometime in the future. Gove says voters can change Brexit deal it could read as his suggesting a Tory leadership at next GE offering to make brexit harder whereas Labour might be offering a softer version. I suppose it’s a clever move? It’s pointless the hard brexitiers continuing to rail against the government’s compromise of paying £billions etc so let the voters decide at next GE? 

It does rather assume though that at next GE voters main priority will be brexit & not housing & the NHS.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Whilst I don't want to pry into the circumstances of a complete stranger on a buletin board, why do you only get £112 a week if you work 5 days a week?



Performance related pay for LibDem campaign manager.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> [
> 
> Fuck off. You don't get to tell who is posh or not or whose is concern is not.



You've not encountered Butchers before then I take it? Telling other people who they are and what comcerns them is pretty much his entire job around here.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Whilst I don't want to pry into the circumstances of a complete stranger on a buletin board, why do you only get £112 a week if you work 5 days a week?



Because he lives in the 1930s.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

This is how you - an anarchist - lost the vote for your super state.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

Note the likes for that post. We don't exist.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

..


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2017)

2hats said:


> Amazingly you can’t keep all of the people happy all of the time…



I like the bit about Paedo Ted


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Whilst I don't want to pry into the circumstances of a complete stranger on a buletin board, why do you only get £112 a week if you work 5 days a week?



Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


You don't see us. You don't know we exist, or didn't care. Brexit made you see. Day after day of this class stuff on here BTW. Day after day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Us Londoners have it easy eh.
> 
> Don't try to out 'I'm fucked up than you me' than me. Really. You don't have a fucking clue.


Yeh. Butchers doesn't have to bear your burden of being an effete and ineffectual liberal, which outweighs anything anyone else has ever suffered.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

Worthless people. Worthless lives.


----------



## killer b (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


fucking hell.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.



Butcher's might not be everyone's cup of tea but that's a particularly shitty thing to say.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.



Bit cuntish, no?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


You'd be at home in the tories: you really are a shit


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

killer b said:


> fucking hell.



Listen, sunshine, if that knob can speculate randomly about me being posh then I can guess at scenarios for his strange, angry life.

And he says “we”. And “us”. He’s uniquely an arse; he’s not representative. He’s not anything that should have been seen by anyone.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Listen, sunshine, if that knob can speculate randomly about me being posh then I can guess at scenarios for his strange, angry life.
> 
> And he says “we”. And “us”. He’s uniquely an arse; he’s not representative. He’s not anything that should have been seen by anyone.


Yeh. When you're in a hole you should quit digging. Your mask's slipped again Silas and it's not easily replaced.


----------



## killer b (Dec 9, 2017)

Dude, you just shat your pants. Don't go smearing it up the walls too.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

This is what all those last few pages are about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Listen, sunshine, if that knob can speculate randomly about me being posh then I can guess at scenarios for his strange, angry life.
> 
> And he says “we”. And “us”. He’s uniquely an arse; he’s not representative. He’s not anything that should have been seen by anyone.


It's not really speculation, is it, when for starters you have a Latin tagline you expect other people to understand.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Listen, sunshine, if that knob can speculate randomly about me being posh then I can guess at scenarios for his strange, angry life.
> 
> And he says “we”. And “us”. He’s uniquely an arse; he’s not representative. He’s not anything that should have been seen by anyone.



Your remarks are fucking disgusting.


----------



## andysays (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.



Butchers can certainly be a bit abrasive at times, but you come across as a cunt pretty much *all* the time.


Silas Loom said:


> ...He’s uniquely an arse; he’s not representative. He’s not anything that should have been seen by anyone.



You are uniquely an arse and your contributions here are something that shouldn't have to be read by anyone.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 9, 2017)

How was voting for a Brexit managed by the Tories going to turn out into anything else?.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


Urgh. You utter prick.

Wasn't going to like PMs post but very tempted to now.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.



This is grotesque, what on earth goes through a person's head when they write something disgusting like this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Urgh. You utter prick.
> 
> Wasn't going to like PMs post but very tempted to now.


Let him get the hounding he deserves instead. I don't think he's the honour to stand by his former statement and leave anyway


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Listen, sunshine, if that knob can speculate randomly about me being posh then I can guess at scenarios for his strange, angry life.



Ah, so of course being called "posh" is the uber insult that justifies you being a complete cunt about someone's personal circumstances is it? 

Sounds like your value systems are completely fucked


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2017)

Was the otherwise pointless and meaningless inclusion of 'extract surplus value from his labour' supposed to make those disgusting comments, which even most Tories would have the sense not to write, seem socialist or something?


----------



## Santino (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


You are a small man.


----------



## bimble (Dec 9, 2017)

Thread's improved no end after that intervention. Great.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Was the otherwise pointless and meaningless inclusion of 'extract surplus value from his labour' supposed to make those disgusting comments, which even most Tories would have the sense not to write, seem socialist or something?



No. It was to suggest that Butchersapron’s circumstances, whatever they are (and I - like previous posters - found what he wrote implausible), stem from his grotesque political orthodoxy in all things. Which is why I don’t think he’s representative of anything that drove Brexit.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas's posts were bang out of order Not fucking on at all. Fuck that unnecessary twattishness 

But I do disagree with butchers' dismissal of this thread, or the recent pages of it anyway, as utterly worthless though -- amidst all the argy-bargy and boring parts, I've learned a lot from some posts.

I also completely disagree that if you voted Remain and think Brexit has all sorts of real dangers to it, you necessarily have no understanding of why the Brexit vote happened. That's illogical, and contrary to what a fair few critical-of-Brexit posts have actually said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> No. It was to suggest that Butchersapron’s circumstances, whatever they are (and I - like previous posters - found what he wrote implausible), stem from his grotesque political orthodoxy in all things. Which is why I don’t think he’s representative of anything that drove Brexit.


He's saying the politics of people like you and lbj drove brexit. And how right he is.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Let him get the hounding he deserves instead. I don't think he's the honour to stand by his former statement and leave anyway



Remind me please where do I like?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Remind me please where do I like?


Tory Death Spiral


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Presumably his work is unpaid. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to extract surplus value from his labour, but it’s plausible that a charity or non-profit is too scared to stop him from turning up and using their IT facilities, and setting up his campbed in the meeting room, and bathing in the kitchen sink.


And that's your politics right there. Jesus.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Tory Death Spiral



Ta  think I got the right one.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Leaving aside the the 'posh' claim, butchers is completely right that there has been a whole load of support for neo-liberal assumptions on this thread (and in P&P in general in recent times).

You've had people arguing for economics as a neutral measure, talking about 'economic damage', you've had people reducing freedom of movement to the legal rights granted by an institution that pays for concentration camps and utters not a word about the ethnic cleansing of Roma, you've had people talking about the importance of free trade and trade agreements, you've had immigration promoted based on the CBI line, _its required to keep the NHS/farming/hospitality sector running, _with the accompanying (either explicit or implicit) _because British workers won't do these jobs_!


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Good to partake in another referendum......


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> And that's your politics right there. Jesus.



The point was absolutely a personal one rather than a political one and was intended to reinforce that suggestion w/r/t BA. 

I guess that point was made unsuccessfully though, and it’s riled not just his chums, but some people whose opinion I respect. So I probably allowed my dislike of the man to overstep boundaries. The post was clearly misjudged.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> So I probably allowed my dislike of the man to overstep boundaries. The post was clearly misjudged.



Will you do the decent thing and apologise then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The point was absolutely a personal one rather than a political one and was intended to reinforce that suggestion w/r/t BA.
> 
> I guess that point was made unsuccessfully though, and it’s riled not just his chums, but some people whose opinion I respect. So I probably allowed my dislike of the man to overstep boundaries. The post was clearly misjudged.


Oh your point came across clearly my sweet. You couldn't have made your nefandous politics clearer if you'd tried.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The point was absolutely a personal one rather than a political one


Rubbish, it might have been a personal insult directed at butchers but it was absolutely shot through with your horrible politics.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2017)

A thought, does May's capitulation signal a potential re-opening of political space to the right of the present government? Electorally, if UKIP or a UKIP type formation started to take votes off the Tories again then it would worsen the government's precarious electoral position.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

bimble said:


> Thread's improved no end after that intervention. Great.


Shall we cross over the road?


----------



## Winot (Dec 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> A thought, does May's capitulation signal a potential re-opening of political space to the right of the present government? Electorally, if UKIP or a UKIP type formation started to take votes off the Tories again then it would worsen the government's precarious electoral position.



I assumed that was what Gove’s rather odd intervention was about - an appeal to the right of the Tory party.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> The point was absolutely a personal one rather than a political one and was intended to reinforce that suggestion w/r/t BA.
> 
> I guess that point was made unsuccessfully though, and it’s riled not just his chums, but some people whose opinion I respect. So I probably allowed my dislike of the man to overstep boundaries. The post was clearly misjudged.


You don't have to like butcherapron, but your chosen insults did rather give away more than you probably intended about yourself and your values.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> A thought, does May's capitulation signal a potential re-opening of political space to the right of the present government? Electorally, if UKIP or a UKIP type formation started to take votes off the Tories again then it would worsen the government's precarious electoral position.


I think it probably does. Much depends of course on where the negotiations go next, but on the strength of this document (and reactions to it), May's certainly got a constituency she isn't carrying with her at the moment.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> A thought, does May's capitulation signal a potential re-opening of political space to the right of the present government? Electorally, if UKIP or a UKIP type formation started to take votes off the Tories again then it would worsen the government's precarious electoral position.



I think so.  I also think a tory schism is becoming likely, closely followed by a Labour one.  Strange days.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

J Ed said:


> A thought, does May's capitulation signal a potential re-opening of political space to the right of the present government? Electorally, if UKIP or a UKIP type formation started to take votes off the Tories again then it would worsen the government's precarious electoral position.


It can only happen from their right. Their right has 1 serious option. UKIP. That's the only electoral game.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> I think so.  I also think a tory schism is becoming likely, closely followed by a Labour one.  Strange days.



and to think the referendum was supposed to put the tory europe issue to bed for a generation or two. All going well....


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Will you do the decent thing and apologise then?



Okay. I apologise sincerely and in serious, appalled contrition to anyone (other than BA) who is in difficult circumstances and felt that my post mocked or insulted them. I'm surprised that it could be read that way, but if you were offended, I'm very sorry. I would apologise in a rather more neutral way to anyone who took offence on behalf of an assumed group of this kind. I'd apologise very grudgingly to anyone who was genuinely offended by the post because they have some degree of affection for BA.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> He's saying the politics of people like you and lbj drove brexit. And how right he is.


Certainly successive UK governments slavish devotion to the EU neoliberal cause drove brexit but articulate responses from across the political spectrum from a cross section of posters whose reasons for their posted content are as diverse as their personal circumstances makes for a much more interesting thread than coded incoherent ramblings.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> You don't have to like butcherapron, but your chosen insults did rather give away more than you probably intended about yourself and your values.



I dislike him enormously. I just re-read his post and thought how I'd react if anyone else had posted it. I had to concede that I would automatically have given anyone else the benefit of the doubt and been concerned about their circumstances, and sympathetic. Even if it was Pickmans, weird thought experiment as that was.

Anyway, going out to walk the dog now, and hopefully we can all get back to serious discussion of Brexit.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 9, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and to think the referendum was supposed to put the tory europe issue to bed for a generation or two. All going well....



I remember a fair few 'lets fuck this shit up' comments on the brexit thread before the vote.  Achievement unlocked.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Okay. I apologise sincerely and in serious, appalled contrition to anyone (other than BA) who is in difficult circumstances and felt that my post mocked or insulted them. I'm surprised that it could be read that way, but if you were offended, I'm very sorry. I would apologise in a rather more neutral way to anyone who took offence on behalf of an assumed group of this kind. I'd apologise very grudgingly to anyone who was genuinely offended by the post because they have some degree of affection for BA.



I don't know why anyone would bother to do this, why write this non-apology? You are making things even worse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Certainly successive UK governments slavish devotion to the EU neoliberal cause drove brexit but articulate responses from across the political spectrum from a cross section of posters whose reasons for their posted content are as diverse as their personal circumstances makes for a much more interesting thread than coded incoherent ramblings.


Yeh. You have it the wrong way round, that it was slavish devotion to the nl EU cause - the EU of course responds to its member states' agendas as transmitted through the council of ministers. The EU was slavishly devoted to the nl agenda of member states such as the UK.


----------



## Knotted (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> I dislike him enormously. I just re-read his post and thought how I'd react if anyone else had posted it. I had to concede that I would automatically have given anyone else the benefit of the doubt and been concerned about their circumstances, and sympathetic. Even if it was Pickmans, weird thought experiment as that was.
> 
> Anyway, going out to walk the dog now, and hopefully we can all get back to serious discussion of Brexit.



He wasn't looking for your sympathy.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

This is a good thread that has evolved over it’s run time as poster’s opinions might have altered over the evolving period of brexit. One has to hope it can get back on track.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. You have it the wrong way round, that it was slavish devotion to the nl EU cause - the EU of course responds to its member states' agendas as transmitted through the council of ministers. The EU was slavishly devoted to the nl agenda of member states such as the UK.


Well yes of course. It works either way around but the result is the same. If brexit results in Corbyn lead Labour at next GE then brexit will have been worth it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> This is a good thread that has evolved over it’s run time as poster’s opinions might have altered over the evolving period of brexit. One has to hope it can get back on track.


Tbh it's holed below the waterline when some posters think EU neoliberalism originated in Brussels rather than London, Berlin etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Well yes of course. It works either way around but the result is the same. If brexit results in Corbyn lead Labour at next GE then brexit will have been worth it.


Corbyn led labour in power will be more noted for its continuities with the may administration than its changes from today's government


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Corbyn led labour in power will be more noted for its continuities with the may administration than its changes from today's government


We will have to wait & see. Obviously politics must always be about the art of the possible but with the Tories as only alternative I will be certainly be happy to see a majority Corbyn led Labour government come to power & see what sort of a fist they make of it. If they build council houses that will be an improvement.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> This is a good thread that has evolved over it’s run time as poster’s opinions might have altered over the evolving period of brexit. One has to hope it can get back on track.



I'll try. First up I'm glad people already in the UK are going to have the right to stay for as long as they wish. Ditto UK nationals abroad. Whilst I never seriously thought it would come to deportations, I'm really glad it's been cleared up.

I'm also glad there will be no hard border in Ireland.

Now, is anyone any clearer if we are staying in the EEA or not? Cos I'm very confused.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> We will have to wait & see. Obviously politics must always be about the art of the possible but with the Tories as only alternative I will be certainly be happy to see a majority Corbyn led Labour government come to power & see what sort of a fist they make of it. If they build council houses that will be an improvement.


Yeh. But iyo corbyn-led labour in power worth all the racist attacks and deportation attempts. I'm not so sure, especially as Corbyn-led govt by no means a certain thing.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. But iyo corbyn-led labour in power worth all the racist attacks and deportation attempts. I'm not so sure, especially as Corbyn-led govt by no means a certain thing.


You don’t have to be for or against brexit. I’ve always been happy to be a fence sitter. The EU project is nice if it’s all of Europe helping each other so theres no WW3 etc which is why I think some folk are so devastated at the prospect of leaving but of course the EU is a neolib construct who is happy to see workers bulk transported across the face of Europe to be exploited in more wealthy countries at the expense of local workers. The UK has embraced this ethos more so than say Holland & France who have worked within the EU rules & their own domestic employment law to miminise migration unlike UK who has done as much as possible to encourage it.

This is how we got to brexit. If it gets us a Labour government then I will be happy with that & then go from there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> You don’t have to be for or against brexit. I’ve always been happy to be a fence sitter. The EU project is nice if it’s all of Europe helping each other so theres no WW3 etc which is why I think some folk are so devastated at the prospect of leaving but of course the EU is a neolib construct who is happy to see workers bulk transported across the face of Europe to be exploited in more wealthy countries at the expense of local workers. The UK has embraced this ethos more so than say Holland & France who have worked within the EU rules & their own domestic employment law to miminise migration unlike UK who has done as much as possible to encourage it.
> 
> This is how we got to brexit. If it gets us a Labour government then I will be happy with that & then go from there.


Yeh. And if there is no labour govt?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. And if there is no labour govt?


To join up both ends of this circular argument. We go from there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> To join up both ends of this circular argument. We go from there.


To return to your it's all worth it if Corbyn wins the election: what if your test falls and it's not been worth it? Obvs "we go from there" but where would you have us go?


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

If Corbyn doesn't win the next election his successor will almost certainly win the one after. The Tories have won the last three elections. Four elections in a row is rare, five is unheard of. It's shit for everyone suffering now, but providing Labour keeps left we *will* have a socialist government at some point in the next nine and a half years.

And as Jayne says we then go from there....


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> To return to your it's all worth it if Corbyn wins the election: what if your test falls and it's not been worth it? Obvs "we go from there" but where would you have us go?


In other threads & probably somewhere in this one I will have referred to the haves & have nots in the context of the house owners & the non house owners. As time passes then naturally as owners decrease & the non owners increase the more the likely a party that promises to build a million council houses will be to be elected. It is perverse to believe that voters who need affordable housing & an NHS will vote for a Tory government that promises to turn the UK into the USA. Why should brexit not be owned by lexit? I can see no reason. Demographcally it has to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> In other threads & probably somewhere in this one I will have referred to the haves & have nots in the context of the house owners & the non house owners. As time passes then naturally as owners decrease & the non owners increase the more the likely a party that promises to build a million council houses will be to be elected. It is perverse to believe that voters who need affordable housing & an NHS will vote for a Tory government that promises to turn the UK into the USA. Why should brexit not be owned by lexit? I can see no reason. Demographcally it has to happen.


Yeh. Only there is no necessity that it is a left-wing party that makes the promise. It wasn't after all a left-wing government which introduced social security to this country, or which built the first social housing. Things have a way of turning out as they shouldn't more frequently than they end as they should.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> If Corbyn doesn't win the next election his successor will almost certainly win the one after. The Tories have won the last three elections. Four elections in a row is rare, five is unheard of. It's shit for everyone suffering now, but providing Labour keeps left we *will* have a socialist government at some point in the next nine and a half years.
> 
> And as Jayne says we then go from there....


Yeh. Let's not forget that Blair considered himself a socialist. You're rather more sanguine than I am a) that a Labour government will be elected, and b) that they will be better than the current shower.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> If Corbyn doesn't win the next election his successor will almost certainly win the one after. The Tories have won the last three elections. Four elections in a row is rare, five is unheard of. It's shit for everyone suffering now, but providing Labour keeps left we *will* have a socialist government at some point in the next nine and a half years.
> 
> And as Jayne says we then go from there....



You could argue that Thatcher won nine elections on the bounce, and one of those from beyond the grave.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You could argue that Thatcher won nine elections on the bounce, and one of those from beyond the grave.


Yeah, I actually make it ten! The three she actually did win plus the one Major won makes four. Then you've got the three Blair won makes seven, the two Cameron wins makes nine and the one ( so far) May has won.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Yeah, I actually make it ten! The three she actually did win plus the one Major won makes four. Then you've got the three Blair won makes seven, the two Cameron wins makes nine and the one ( so far) May has won.



I'm counting May's as a loss, or at least a no-score draw.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm counting May's as a loss, or at least a no-score draw.



Cameron didn't win an election in 2010, in that case.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 9, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Note the likes for that post. We don't exist.



Maybe if you were less quick to invent biographical information about other posters then people would be more likely to believe what you say about yourself.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 9, 2017)

I think you've done enough to show where you're coming from already thanks Frank.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

mainly macro: First Stage Reality and Brexiters

Good blog here on the oddity that Tory Brexiteer aren't kicking up a fuss. They can't, runs the argument, because if they accept that last week's agreement makes some version of CU and SM inevitable, with FOM in all but name, then they leave open the question of why we are doing this at all. There's no prospect of a job for Fox, or of reducing immigration. So the only thing they can hold on to is BINO with all influence abandoned, because the alternative is to concede that it makes more sense to revoke.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

Silas Loom said:


> Cameron didn't win an election in 2010, in that case.


Yeah I'm counting a win as most votes and most seats, not necessarily an overall majority.

You can't seriously argue Theresa May was running on a platform that differed massively from Thatcherism, and nor for that matter were the DUP. 

To me, this year's election was another win for Mrs T, although arguably it was her closest yet.


----------



## Silas Loom (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Yeah I'm counting a win as most votes and most seats, not necessarily an overall majority.
> 
> You can't seriously argue Theresa May was running on a platform that differed massively from Thatcherism, and nor for that matter were the DUP.
> 
> To me, this year's election was another win for Mrs T, although arguably it was her closest yet.



May's platform was different from Thatcherism in some ways that felt important to her and to Nick Timothy and might possibly have represented an advance on Thatcherism, if they hadn't been drowned out by dog-whistling to a socially conservative base, by her absurd interpretation of the referendum result, and by her acceptance (more or less) of Osborneomics. Worker representation on boards, for instance. That was an interesting idea. There's definitely a strand of post-crash Toryism which is sceptical about business in a way that has usefully shifted debates about regulation and governance. 

Obviously I'd argue with you about 1997, 2001, and 2005. But that's a separate debate, and it ends with one side shouting "sure start and minimum wage" while the other side shouts "Iraq", and who wants that?


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 9, 2017)

Here's Eamonn McCann on the deal:



Spoiler: this is behind a spoiler because it's a cut-and-paste job



While politicians and commentators from all points on the conservative spectrum are debating the meaning of the latest EU fudge, one thing is certain – the deal speeds the militarisation of the union and copper-fastens austerity.

This was made crystal clear by EU negotiator Michel Barnier in a speech to the Berlin Security Conference on November 30th. Minutes after he stepped off the platform, he hot-footed it to Dublin, where he will have known he was guaranteed a hearty welcome. For bone-headed Nationalists of one sort and another, he was a grand fellow altogether as long as he kept bashing the Brits.

Nobody in Ireland could be blamed for enjoying the humiliation of May, Davis, Johnston etc. in the last few weeks. They had it coming. Millions of British people, too, were chuckling at their discomfiture.

But we shouldn’t fool ourselves into thinking that Barnier, Tusk and the rest of the Brussels bureaucracy have the interests of the mass of the Irish people at heart. Far from it.

It’s worth quoting Barnier’s account in Berlin of progress towards a militarised EU with a common foreign policy and an army capable idea of defending European interests anywhere in the world. He celebrated how far the Union had come and outlined “the road-map we need to follow between now and 2025.” 
“In September 2014, Jean Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, called for a relaunch of European defence.
“In June 2016, Federica Mogherini renewed our integrated approach with the Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy, which defines the Union's level of ambition as a global player.
“In a historic declaration in July 2016, President Juncker, Donald Tusk and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg relaunched the strategic partnership between the European Union and NATO.
“In November 2016, Vice-President Jyrki Katainen and Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska proposed a European Defence Fund so that defence technologies and equipment could be financed jointly from the European budget for the first time.
“In June 2017, we strengthened our capacity to plan and conduct external operations – including training missions in Mali, Somalia and Central African Republic.
“Also in June 2017, the Commission set out ideas for discussion on the future of Europe's defence, even suggesting the establishment of a common defence.
“Most recently, on 20 November 2017 in Brussels, 23 Member States stated their intention of implementing the Permanent Structured Cooperation [PESCO]. This initiative, which owes a great deal to the personal determination of the German Minister Ursula von der Leyen, will serve to step up the commitment to European defence – in terms of capacity and at operational and industrial level.”

All this with a “global” reach.

The four of the 27 States which didn’t sign up were Denmark, Malta, Portugal, Ireland and, of course, the UK. The Dail put that “right” as far as Ireland is concerned on December 7th with a vote to sign the pact, supported by Fine Gael and Fianna Fail and a number of “Independent” TDs beholden to the government. It had taken them a week to come around to doing what the EU bosses wanted.

As Robert Emmet didn’t say - “Ireland has taken her place among the imperialist nations of the earth” – to the cheers of some who fancy themselves as “anti-imperialists.”

What’s the relevance of all this to Brexit? Barnier explained:

“The United Kingdom has not been the spearhead of European defence. 
“The British contribution to EU-led military operations is limited - barely five percent of the personnel deployed.
“The British have never wanted to turn the Union into a military power.
“The British have always resisted setting up a European Headquarters.”

Now, with the Brits out of the way, it’s full steam ahead for Irish armoured cars, and tanks and guns to join with the French, Italians, Germans etc. in confronting any threat, real or imagined, to Western, and specifically EU interests.

Of course, the reason the British were so stand-offish from the notion of an EU army had nothing to do with a distaste for militarism, but everything to do with the Tories’ continuing delusions of imperial grandeur. Whatever the reason, the departure of Britain removes an obstacle to the expansive, military scheming of the cabal at the top of the EU.

Does anybody imagine that Dublin will be allowed to dodge its “duty?” Not a chance. The EU States, as they constantly tell us, have stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the South in facing down Britain. Tusk emphasised that the Irish would have a veto over whatever agreement emerged. “We will consult Leo Varadkar before accepting an agreement.”

Commentators in every Dublin newspaper gloried in the State’s new status, a fully-fledged member of the elite at last, stronger than Britain for the first time in history in a set-piece confrontation.

But there’s pay-back to come. No chance, none at all of the Irish being given a bye-ball when it comes, for example, to repelling desperate people risking their lives in efforts to cross the Mediterranean. Most Irish people felt good about themselves as the navy ship LÉ Eithne rescued hundreds from the sea and took them to shore in an EU country.

It’s highly unlikely the EU will allow that sort of thing in future. EU policy on migrants plucked from the Mediterranean is to dump them back in Libya, a failed State as a result of bombardment by EU States, where they can be subjected to torture, rape and murder.

Meanwhile, more than a thousand kilometres of barbed wire “protects” the EU’s eastern flank from “invasion” by refugees.

Soft border? Not if you are a refugee.

These are some of the implications of the deal welcomed by Fine Gael, Fianna Fail, Sinn Fein and Labour in the South, by the DUP, UUP, Sinn Fein and Alliance in the North.

In the run-up to the EU referendum, People Before Profit denounced the EU, urged both NI and the Republic to leave, and advanced the slogan “In or Out, the fight goes on.”

Events of the last few days confirms us in this view.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You could argue that Thatcher won nine elections on the bounce, and one of those from beyond the grave.


This was because people were able to buy their own homes, watch them go up in value, remortgage & buy cars & holidays. Life was good for many for a while & for those sitting in their paid for homes it still is. Blair nicked the ‘97 onwards GEs by stealing the tories clothes. It was just a cynical & expertly executed power grab. The good times that arrived for older people gradually watered down to where we are now with the expanding younger demographic experiencing none of these good times.

For a few yrs any suggestion of building council housing by Labour was countered by Tory accusations of “stifling ambition” but nobody believes this anymore. I think change will come inevitably simply from the expanding younger demographic.


----------



## Winot (Dec 9, 2017)

Was just listening to the Saturday Any Questions and David Gauke (DWP SoS) pretty much admitted that the UK would be staying in the SM and CU for the transitional period.

This is sensible but what will Tory Brexit die-hards make of it?

Also, I'm still not clear how a transitional period works - I saw some commentary that suggested that you couldn't have a transitional agreement until you knew what you were transitioning to. However a deferral of the Art 50 period would seem politically impossible for May, because then we won't have left the EU by end March 2019.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

I think one has to see where we are today as simply work in progress. I don’t think there is much indication right now of exactly where this is going. I think that the ultra capitalist dreams of the hard brexiteers  will not be realised. Gove’s desperation is apparant in his Torygraph article today. I did always think that after the brexit result the work would start to make leave look as much like remain as possible. In a sense this will be a good compromise & allow the government of the day to address the real problems in this country.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think one has to see where we are today as simply work in progress. I don’t think there is much indication right now of exactly where this is going. I think that the ultra capitalist dreams of the hard brexiteers  will not be realised.



Actually I would consider myself a hard(ish*) Brexiteer but my dreams are anything but ultra capitalist.


*ish, in the sense that I don't want to stay in the EEA, which I consider remain by the back door. I'm pretty agnostic about the customs union, and if it helps avoid a hard border in Ireland, then fine, but I'm dead against staying in the EEA.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Actually I would consider myself a hard(ish*) Brexiteer but my dreams are anything but ultra capitalist.
> 
> 
> *ish, in the sense that I don't want to stay in the EEA, which I consider remain by the back door. I'm pretty agnostic about the customs union, and if it helps avoid a hard border in Ireland, then fine, but I'm dead against staying in the EEA.


I would see the end game as more to improving the quality of life of ordinary people in the UK more than a rigid ideology. Clearly the UK political model that began at the end of the 70s is not fit for purpose & really never was but in order to vote in something new within the system we have here then voters have to vote for change & importantly those who have never seen the point of voting have to be persauded to vote for change.  Real politics has to be about the art of the possible otherwise it remains as political theory.

So I tend to see brexit however it turns out more as a means to an end which is the election of a majority Corbyn led Labour government. This is possible which is why it matters. It has already been pointed out elsewhere in the thread that the prosperity of a country counts for little if that prosperity is not fairly distributed which leads us neatly back to the reason for the leave vote.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> This was because people were able to buy their own homes, watch them go up in value, remortgage & buy cars & holidays. Life was good for many for a while & for those sitting in their paid for homes it still is. Blair nicked the ‘97 onwards GEs by stealing the tories clothes. It was just a cynical & expertly executed power grab. The good times that arrived for older people gradually watered down to where we are now with the expanding younger demographic experiencing none of these good times.
> 
> For a few yrs any suggestion of building council housing by Labour was countered by Tory accusations of “stifling ambition” but nobody believes this anymore. I think change will come inevitably simply from the expanding younger demographic.


What expanding younger demographic? 

You're having a laugh


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2017)

Idris2002 said:


> "In or Out, the fight goes on"


Precisely.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> What expanding younger demographic?
> 
> You're having a laugh


At least try to understand context. You can do that by reading the post. It’s the expanding younger generation of non house owners aka generation rent who cannot afford to get onto the housing ladder. Whose housing costs are becoming increasingly unaffordable due to the housing shortage & not the older generation of house owners who will gradually die because nobody lives forever. When people become 18 they can vote. When they die they cannot. All clear now?

Now a challenge for you Pickers. Instead of googling for pointless graphs to make zero scoring points why not post some original content?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> At least try to understand context. You can do that by reading the post. It’s the expanding younger generation of non house owners aka generation rent who cannot afford to get onto the housing ladder. Whose housing costs are becoming increasingly unaffordable due to the housing shortage & not the older generation of house owners who will gradually die because nobody lives forever. When people become 18 they can vote. When they die they cannot. All clear now?
> 
> Now a challenge for you Pickers. Instead of googling for pointless graphs to make zero scoring points why not post some original content?


I have, chuck, I already have.


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 9, 2017)

Personally I'd rather see an endless parade of accurate copy-pastes than posts made original only by their inaccuracy.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 9, 2017)

So who was silas loom on here before sept 2017?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> So who was silas loom on here before sept 2017?


Maurice picarda


----------



## Poi E (Dec 9, 2017)

Ah


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Real politics has to be about the art of the possible otherwise it remains as political theory.
> 
> So I tend to see brexit however it turns out more as a means to an end which is the election of a majority Corbyn led Labour government.


This is part of the problem. Anything more than vote Labour for mild reform is "theoretical","unreal". Never-mind the fact that both past and present experience has shown that what social democratic parties say in opposition and do in government are often vastly different. Never-mind that the material conditions that paved the way for the post-war consensus are no longer present. Throw away socialism and help Labour get elected.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Is it possible to see a Labour vote (government) as a 1st step to socialism at all?

Genuine question.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 9, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Is it possible to see a Labour vote (government) as a 1st step to socialism at all?
> 
> Genuine question.


Perhaps its greatest obstacle


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This is part of the problem. Anything more than vote Labour for mild reform is "theoretical","unreal". Never-mind the fact that both past and present experience has shown that what social democratic parties say in opposition and do in government are often vastly different. Never-mind that the material conditions that paved the way for the post-war consensus are no longer present. Throw away socialism and help Labour get elected.


So what to do then? Not something that might bring about change in the far future or never but to bring about change in maybe the next year or 2? Do tell.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Is it possible to see a Labour vote (government) as a 1st step to socialism at all?
> 
> Genuine question.


Yes & I think most posters on this thread will be voting Labour at the next GE. Otherwise they might as well draw a spunking cock on their ballot paper or save the effort & stay at home.


----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2017)

Ah spunking cock the default urban option.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Is it possible to see a Labour vote (government) as a 1st step to socialism at all?
> 
> Genuine question.


Possible perhaps, but utterly mistaken. 


SaskiaJayne said:


> So what to do then? Not something that might bring about change in the far future or never but to bring about change in maybe the next year or 2? Do tell.


Those are the options are they? Either barrack for Labour or else your just a dreamer? That's the same line that Blair and co used.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Why don’t you post up your options?


----------



## Riklet (Dec 9, 2017)

It's fair to criticise Labour. And their pragmatic crowd-pleasing shambolic Brexit strategy with a different MP saying something different every night.

It's also fair to accept there is no magic button, no easy path to socialism or even 2018 social democracy. There is no decent roadmap and plenty of hard graft required.

If it was easy and popular and able to be rolled out next year well then.... It wouldn't be a radical political rethink. This is something which is going to make the people ripping us off and fucking us over furious. It's not to be taken lightly. No surprises Corbyn cant quite get most queesling labour scum in line.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 9, 2017)

Change needs to be voted for in this country. To get that change will require very careful planning & execution by some very astute people. Just sayin like.


----------



## Rimbaud (Dec 9, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This is part of the problem. Anything more than vote Labour for mild reform is "theoretical","unreal". Never-mind the fact that both past and present experience has shown that what social democratic parties say in opposition and do in government are often vastly different. Never-mind that the material conditions that paved the way for the post-war consensus are no longer present. Throw away socialism and help Labour get elected.



I appreciate that, but we're all fumbling in the dark to some extent. You could well say that parties guided by marxism have always failed to live up to their ideals too. There are no real successful models to look to and there is no blueprint. Who is to say the failure of social democracy was not because of the historical conditions of that time or flaws in the institutions/political culture/tactics of socialist activists, and that we can't learn from these mistakes? Or perhaps things have changed so much that social democracy can now be used to abandon capitalism? These are at least things worth having a serious discussion about rather than dismissing outright. 

We are all prisoners of our historical circumstances, and right now I cannot find any more productive use of my time politically than backing the Labour Party. (and I'm also involving in Diem25). Even if I took your objections to social democracy on board, and I do take them seriously, it means absolutely nothing practical to me and would just mean I go from supporting Labour and trying to push it leftwards to, well, doing nothing at all really. And you can't just blame me for not understanding it; if your politics are hard to figure out how to get involved in then that is a problem with your politics which you need to figure out a solution to. Left of Labour, the Trots are actually the most accessible but you also seem to have contempt for them too.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 9, 2017)

bemused said:


> Not really, if you are Irish you're able to live in the UK anyway.



It's not that straightforward. 

Brexit puts special rights for Irish citizens in UK ‘at risk’


> “The British government has consistently promised that Brexit will not weaken the situation of Irish citizens in the UK, or the movement of Irish citizens to and from the UK. Yet it has not made public how it will deliver on this promise,” said report author Simon Cox, a leading migration lawyer and barrister at Doughty Street Chambers. “A close look at current British laws shows a patchwork that may fall apart under post-Brexit political and practical pressure



The detail will be important.

It also needs to be remembered that it wasn't that long ago when Irish weren't universally welcomed here in UK.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2017)

I am not convinced Corbyn in power would make it harder for grassroots stuff to happen as it seems to me decades of Tories have really cut the knackers  off the WC, I think for all the anarchist panic 're putting too much faith in a more left wing Labour I think in comparison to the previous 30 years WC people seem to be showing more confidence generally esp in England and the backing of JC is just an expression of that. It's not ideal but getting really angsty about WC people voting Labour is only going to alienate people. If you truly have no faith in electoral politics just let it go, because it isn't going to matter who is power. It really is possible to vote Labour and go on strike at the same time.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2017)

PS I have no faith in Labour but I have learned screaming about that just means I am only ever going to be talking to hard lefties. My family all voted Corbyn having never voted Labour EVER, some of them read red tops too. Try quoting Marx at them and see how far it gets, we need to be more flexible in our approach guys.


----------



## Winot (Dec 9, 2017)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> PS I have no faith in Labour but I have learned screaming about that just means I am only ever going to be talking to hard lefties. My family all voted Corbyn having never voted Labour EVER, some of them read red tops too. Try quoting Marx at them and see how far it gets, we need to be more flexible in our approach guys.



What did they vote before and what changed their minds?


----------



## Humberto (Dec 9, 2017)

If you don't push left you are going to get out muscled and outmaneuvered by those who look down on you with something akin to hate and dominate every institution in the land and further afield. Accepting a Corbyn Soc Dem administration can only be a temporary concession in that landscape/minefield.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> PS I have no faith in Labour but I have learned screaming about that just means I am only ever going to be talking to hard lefties. My family all voted Corbyn having never voted Labour EVER, some of them read red tops too. Try quoting Marx at them and see how far it gets, we need to be more flexible in our approach guys.


Perhaps not quoting someone who's been dead for 134 years might be a start. It's not like you need to, the Labour party's history gives enough ammunition


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> What did they vote before and what changed their minds?


Lib dems in the case of my mum(we are from Inverness and everyone likes Charles Kennedy) I think the rest had a tendency to not be arsed with voting. But this past year they have really gotten vocal about issues, they haven't been worshipping Corbyn so much more slagging off Trump and talking about other injustices, I had only found out they had all voted Labour day after, I myself had been sitting outside the polling station thinking should I abstain then I realised the best thing to do was to add to the country wide vote share to show the UK what happens when someone at least tries to put forward socialist policies. And I am glad I did, even though Labour is dead in Orkney- I would have voted cock  and balls otherwise!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

*sorry I am drunk- the lib dem  vote in the highlands is tradition, it is full of small places, Orkney still votes lib due to Jo Grimmond who was weel Kent and weel liked.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps not quoting someone who's been dead for 134 years might be a start. It's not like you need to, the Labour party's history gives enough ammunition


I know that Pickmans, I was writing a comment not a PHD in how to talk to the working class, which is also me, I am just loosely referring to what other people try to do, there is a whole list of dos and don'ts. 


And I don't read much Marx being a thicko single mum.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps not quoting someone who's been dead for 134 years might be a start. It's not like you need to, the Labour party's history gives enough ammunition


You obviously have a plan Pickers. Hows about posting it up?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I know that Pickmans, I was writing a comment not a PHD in how to talk to the working class, which is also me, I am just loosely referring to what other people try to do, there is a whole list of dos and don'ts.
> 
> 
> And I don't read much Marx being a thicko single mum.


Yeh. Fair enough. Sure you could read Marx if you wanted to, and with profit, anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> You obviously have a plan Pickers. Hows about posting it up?


Yes. I have lots of plans but don't divulge them simply on the say-so of some never-was no-hoper on the interweb.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes. I have lots of plans but don't divulge them simply on the say-so of some never-was on the interweb.


Yes, thats as good a way as any of admitting you don’t have one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes, thats as good a way as any of admitting you don’t have one.


it's as good a way as any of not posting it on the internet.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Fair enough. Sure you could read Marx if you wanted to, and with profit, anyway.


I did a fair bit of Marx in college but I tend to spend what little time I have with my son now and I make sure I get Fuck loads of sleep lest my post natal terror is triggered again. 


I do believe anyone that demands YOU JUST READ BOOKS has a poor concept of time limitations many people face. 

Thankfully I know urban, and it's clever, concise posters, cheers guys!!!!!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I did a fair bit of Marx in college but I tend to spend what little time I have with my son now and I make sure I get Fuck loads of sleep lest my post natal terror is triggered again.
> 
> 
> I do believe anyone that demands YOU JUST READ BOOKS has a poor concept of time limitations many people face.
> ...


I'm not demanding you read books. I'm not demanding you read Marx. I'm not even suggesting you either read Marx or anything else. I was responding to your being thick bit, as you didn't come across as stupid.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not demanding you read books. I'm not demanding you read Marx. I'm not even suggesting you either read Marx or anything else. I was responding to your being thick bit, as you didn't come across as stupid.


I was just using the stereotype for humor, anyway let's not argue, I like your posts stressful pedantry aside :-D


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Drunk innit


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 10, 2017)

Smangus said:


> Is it possible to see a Labour vote (government) as a 1st step to socialism at all?
> 
> Genuine question.


no, it isn't. If there was a parliamentary road to socialism, we would have found it a long, long time ago
e2a: I will still vote, and vote Labour, next time. But I will do so with very few illusions


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2017)

Not sure how the 'with no illusions' thing has caught on so much on the left in this country, pretty sure that everything I do is done with many illusions. I make toast in the morning with illusions.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 10, 2017)

Rimbaud said:


> Who is to say the failure of social democracy was not because of the historical conditions of that time or flaws in the institutions/political culture/tactics of socialist activists, and that we can't learn from these mistakes? Or perhaps things have changed so much that social democracy can now be used to abandon capitalism? These are at least things worth having a serious discussion about rather than dismissing outright.


We can look at the factors that drove the post-war consensus - a strong, militant w-c, capital's demand for a educated workforce - and see whether those factors are present today. They pretty clearly aren't, capital is now pushing for a larger "unskilled" workforce in order reduce the pay and conditions of workers even further. There are also the changes to the global political situation that IMO make a return to something like the post-war consensus unlikely. I think the post-war consensus arose out of a particular set of circumstances and those circumstances no longer exist. The post-war consensus is gone, and I've not seen any social democrat really address this.



Rimbaud said:


> We are all prisoners of our historical circumstances, and right now I cannot find any more productive use of my time politically than backing the Labour Party. (and I'm also involving in Diem25). Even if I took your objections to social democracy on board, and I do take them seriously, it means absolutely nothing practical to me and would just mean I go from supporting Labour and trying to push it leftwards to, well, *doing nothing at all really. *And you can't just blame me for not understanding it; if your politics are hard to figure out how to get involved in then that is a problem with your politics which you need to figure out a solution to. Left of Labour, the Trots are actually the most accessible but you also seem to have contempt for them too.


(my emphasis). Of course you'd still be doing things if you weren't in the Labour party. You'd still be working, you still interacting with your friends and family, all of that is political. The idea that the alternatives are joining the Labour party (or Trots) or doing nothing is nonsense, it's based on the assumption that the LP, or any other party, is the driver of change. It's not, the only force that is capable of improving society is the action of labour, is working-class insurgency.

Now you might feel that the best way to maximise the power of labour is to join the LP. Personally I think that is the wrong move, there's no shortage of examples of people that have joined the LP in order to use it only to end up being used by the party, nor of the examples of betrayal and selling out. However, while joining the LP is not a course I favour I do understand why people are doing it and there are people I consider comrades in the LP. But it's vital to recognise that the LP (or any party) cannot be anything but a tool, a means to an end. The post-war consensus wasn't brought about strong social democratic parties*, strong social democratic parties were brought about by the post-war consensus. Likewise any fight back against capital in the modern world will not originate from Labour but from labour.

As I said, personally I think joining the LP is a wrong move, and I'm perfectly willing to have that debate if you want, but what I'm criticising of SaskiaJaynes (and others) posts is not people joining the LP but_ the replacement of the working class with the Labour Party_ - or anything party/movement for that matter. You mentioned the failures of "parties guided by marxism", by which I presume you mean communist/socialist parties, well I'd argue that those failures were brought about by thinking I've outlined - the supposition of the party, or state, etc, for the working class. For me socialism means the workers control of the MoP, not the states/parties control of the MoP.


*It's worth noting that for much of the post-war consensus across the west centre-right parties were often in government and the centre-left in opposition, here, in Australia, in NZ etc.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes. I have lots of plans but don't divulge them simply on the say-so of some never-was no-hoper on the interweb.



If you're too important to talk to us why do you have the second highest postcount on here?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

I would say most pressing & widespread UK problem is housing. Those affected by insecure & unaffordable housing can find their lives blighted by it. Those unaffected may well be completely unaware there is any problem. To me there appears to be an easy solution. I was around in the 60s/70s when there was extensive council home building in Colchester. The supply of council housing was so good that even single people were applying for council flats & moving in just in months. Rents were contolled & low. Private sector rents were equally low £4pw for bedsit with wages for even low paid jobs well over £20pw by the early 70s.

So build council houses on the scale of what has been easily achieved in the past. It just needs an incoming government with the will to do it. Corbyn claims he will build a million council houses. Whether he delivers or not it is achievable just like reforming employment law is quite achievable so is bringing railways back into public ownership as the franchises run out. Other repatriation of once public assets back to public ownership is less achievable if one remains pragmatic but is possible over a much longer term. The Tories will do none of that so we can at least see if Labour will.

What I do know is that people around me who previously had no interest in voting are willing to vote Labour. They are prepared to give it a go. If Labour are returned with a large mandate then they will have to make a good attempt to deliver on their promises. If they do not then we will feel free to take to the streets.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 10, 2017)




----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> View attachment 122558



Can't believe people are wasting their time on things like that


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2017)

'A bleedin mess'

'Worst decade for UK productivity since Napoleon'



> Britain is now suffering its worst decade for productivity - the broadest measure of fundamental economic performance - for as long as two centuries, according to Sky News analysis.
> 
> 
> Figures released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) revealed that productivity - calculated by dividing gross domestic product by the number of hours people worked - is now lower than it was a decade ago.
> ...



Why there's little hope for Greece's unemployed



> If you want evidence of how dire the situation is in *Greece*, just look at its long-term unemployment figures.
> 
> *Eurostat figures* show *73.5pc* of people who were unemployed in Greece in 2014 had been out of work for more than a year, compared with *67.1pc* in 2013.
> 
> *Attiki*, which includes Athens and Piraeus, has the highest long-term unemployment share of any European region - *at 77.3pc*. The western Greek region of *Dytiki Ellada* isn't far behind, with a long-term unemployment share of *76.7pc*.



Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s speech at the Hungarian Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s ceremony to mark the start of the 2017 business year – miniszterelnok.hu



> First of all, I find it very important that we should preserve our ethnic homogeneity. Nowadays one can say such a thing, though a few years ago one would have been executed for such a turn of phrase. But now one can say things like that, because life has confirmed that too much mixing causes trouble



Police in Catalonia hunt for hidden ballot boxes in bid to foil refere



> MADRID (Reuters) - Armed police in Spain have raided several print works and newspaper offices in Catalonia in recent days in a hunt for voting papers, ballot boxes and leaflets to be used in an Oct. 1 independence referendum which Madrid vehemently opposes.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 10, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Can't believe people are wasting their time on things like that


Still can't believe the fucking country is!


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2017)

Dr. Furface said:


> Still can't believe the fucking country is!



Amazing how politics began and ended on the 24th of June 2016


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Amazing how politics began and ended on the 24th of June 2016


Certainly then plenty of people who had never voted before realised their vote could actually make a difference & they know it can make difference again. So that was the date politics began for many but it has not ended yet.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Certainly then plenty of people who had never voted before realised their vote could actually make a difference & they know it can make difference again. So that was the date politics began for many but it has not ended yet.



and of course plenty of others realised in horror that _their_ vote mattered and that _they _could make a difference.


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2017)

I remember thinking post-2008 as austerity bit harder ‘why aren’t people rioting?’. 

And then on 23 June 2016 they in effect did. And stupidly I didn’t see it coming.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 10, 2017)

August 2011 passed you by?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> If you're too important to talk to us why do you have the second highest postcount on here?


I am talking to you. Are you too important to listen?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

J Ed said:


> and of course plenty of others realised in horror that _their_ vote mattered and that _they _could make a difference.


I find it difficult to believe that people who voted leave did not actually want to leave at the time. Often people do not like uncertainty & they may not like the uncertainty brexit has brought but imo the uncertainty is likely to help elect Corbyn Labour which I view as rather more important than the end result of brexit. I think those that voted for the first time in the referendum are most likely to vote Labour if they vote again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> I remember thinking post-2008 as austerity bit harder ‘why aren’t people rioting?’.
> 
> And then on 23 June 2016 they in effect did. And stupidly I didn’t see it coming.


Should have gone to specsavers, chuck


----------



## Raheem (Dec 10, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> If there was a parliamentary road to socialism, we would have found it a long, long time ago.



Maybe, but why would that not be true of any other road?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Maybe, but why would that not be true of any other road?


People have been looking for a parliamentary road to socialism for well over a hundred years. Engels thought it would be found very quickly.


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 10, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> People have been looking for a parliamentary road to socialism for well over a hundred years. Engels thought it would be found very quickly.



Plus in the intervening time we've gone through far better setups for that road to be walked than either then or now. I still don't get what the reasoning is to think a Britain crushed between the US/EU/China in a hegemonic neoliberal system with a rampantly powerful, globalised, highly mobile elite against a working class with no properly functioning extraparliamentary organs of class struggle is going to have its fortunes turned around in any meaningful way by the election of Labour. Reforms which might temporarily give some people a break, okay that could be plausible and is not necessarily to be sniffed at, but a road to socialism? No.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 10, 2017)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Drunk innit




Something that explains many a vote for Carmichael.


----------



## sealion (Dec 10, 2017)

Winot said:


> I remember thinking post-2008 as austerity bit harder ‘why aren’t people rioting?’.


You could have started it if you wanted to!


----------



## 2hats (Dec 10, 2017)

Remind me what the plan is when the WTO is flushed down the shitter?

The WTO is under threat from the Trump administration.

Trump attack on WTO sparks backlash from members.

Or other WTO members object to post-brexit trade agreements between the UK and EU?

Global powers lobby to stop special Brexit deal for UK.


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2017)

2hats said:


> Remind me what the plan is when the WTO is flushed down the shitter?
> 
> The WTO is under threat from the Trump administration.
> 
> ...


UN Court and arbitration


----------



## 2hats (Dec 10, 2017)

gosub said:


> UN Court and arbitration


Phew. Good job then that no major players on the world stage are looking to disrupt the UN either.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 10, 2017)

2hats said:


> Remind me what the plan is when the WTO is flushed down the shitter?
> 
> The WTO is under threat from the Trump administration.
> 
> ...


Are you seriously implying that it would be a bad thing for the WTO to break apart? What about the IMF or the World Bank?


----------



## sealion (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> So build council houses on the scale of what has been easily achieved in the past. It just needs an incoming government with the will to do it. Corbyn claims he will build a million council houses.


He can claim what he likes. How will Jeremy deliver this ? Does he think developers and house builders will suddenly stop erecting luxury flats and student accomodation to concentrate on something with no instant profits ? Never mind having the will, where is the land and finance for all these houses coming from ?


----------



## bemused (Dec 10, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> It's not that straightforward.



 I can't see any real reluctance from the UK government to revert to the settled status of Irish citizens postt Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2017)

sealion said:


> He can claim what he likes. How will Jeremy deliver this ? Does he think developers and house builders will suddenly stop erecting luxury flats and student accomodation to concentrate on something with no instant profits ? Never mind having the will, where is the land and finance for all these houses coming from ?


There is a very easy way to do it, which is to do exactly what private companies do. You borrow the money. Only difference is that a government can borrow at a better rate than private companies. You could even make it a symbolic thing by releasing new housing bonds or something. 

All that quantitative easing could have gone towards council housing if the political will to do it had been there.


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There is a very easy way to do it, which is to do exactly what private companies do. You borrow the money. Only difference is that a government can borrow at a better rate than private companies. You could even make it a symbolic thing by releasing new housing bonds or something.
> 
> All that quantitative easing could have gone towards council housing if the political will to do it had been there.



Would have undermined the stability of the banks rather than shoring them up


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 10, 2017)

sealion said:


> He can claim what he likes. How will Jeremy deliver this ? Does he think developers and house builders will suddenly stop erecting luxury flats and student accomodation to concentrate on something with no instant profits ? Never mind having the will, where is the land and finance for all these houses coming from ?


Some things are doable by an incoming Labour government.  Others like destroying global capitalism or state requisitioning of PFI hospitals probably are not. Large scale council house building has been done by UK governments before. It was done because there was a need for affordable good housing for people to live securely with their families & build their futures. The money is there. The land around towns is there. So it can be done.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It was done because there was a need for affordable good housing for people to live securely with their families & build their futures. The money is there. The land around towns is there. So it can be done.


But that's been true of the last 150+ years, why did such building occur after WWII but not pre-WWI, not between the wars, why has it not occurred in the last 40 years.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> But that's been true of the last 150+ years, why did such building occur after WWII but not pre-WWI, not between the wars, why has it not occurred in the last 40 years.


That's a good question. However, whatever its answer, there are no real blockers to doing it now. It's not something that would be blocked by capital. There are even sectors on the right that want to see this happen, and there would be no shortage of pension funds or insurance companies to take up long-term housing bonds.

Not quite true about housing between the wars, btw. A fair bit was built.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 10, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not quite true about housing between the wars, btw. A fair bit was built.


Yes that was slightly rhetorical, but the point is key. The welfare state no more came about because of Labour government than the WWI came about because of the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 10, 2017)

Look at what's happening in Scotland - right to buy abolished, and a much greater commitment to building new social rent housing than in E&W. It's what people vote for. It's not impossible.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 10, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> ... The money is there. The land around towns is there. So it can be done.



The money may be there to buy the bricks and pay the Brickies, but the price of land - whether land earmarked for development, agricultural land in places people might like to live, or even wet bog in the uplands of mid-Wales - has shot up exponentially in the last 20 years.

You don't think that 300 miles of railway track costs £40billion do you - it's the land to put the tracks on that's costing the money, not what you put on it.

I don't think Labour have a clue where they will build a million homes - and it will need to be 2 million by 2025.

My neighbour, who farms the land at the back of my house, says that his land increases in value by 10% every time Corbyn voices the word 'housing'. Either an incoming Labour government pays through the nose for the land in wants, or it puts compulsory purchase legislation through and spends the next 5 years fighting it out in the courts.

The abandoned air bases have gone, there's very little easy pickings left...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes that was slightly rhetorical, but the point is key. The welfare state no more came about because of Labour government than the WWI came about because of the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand.



housing was a word on a lot of politicians lips back then ennit, iirc N. Chamberlain was in housing before he rose to become the man with the piece of paper


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 10, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> But that's been true of the last 150+ years, why did such building occur after WWII but not pre-WWI, not between the wars, why has it not occurred in the last 40 years.



The tragic answer to this is that after WW2 the rich saw the genuine slums that the majority of the country were living in and realised that if they wanted their gilded existence to continue they need to close the gap a little and let people live in sanitary, warm houses. That done they set about fleecing the poor again for every last penny and what we saw with pig fucker and chums was a continuation of that fleecing without the awareness that you need to at least toss a few crumbs to the proles. Hence Brexit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 10, 2017)

kebabking said:


> Either an incoming Labour government pays through the nose for the land in wants, or it puts compulsory purchase legislation through and spends the next 5 years fighting it out in the courts.



First tax the shit out of anyone holding on to buildable land and not building on it, then watch as the building firms either suddenly decide to start building houses (to improved mandatory standards of quality, efficiency and design) or sell their land off cheap.

Also make it illegal to build those nightmarish squiggle estates with dozens of roads, none of which lead anywhere. And bring back terraces. This might need a new thread actually.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 10, 2017)

bemused said:


> I can't see any real reluctance from the UK government to revert to the settled status of Irish citizens postt Brexit.



It looks like now the deal with EU is that existing EU nationals will have rights protected. At this point. Things may change. There is a long way to go.

That doesn't apply to EU nationals coming here after whatever cut off date is agreed.

The article I put up points out that over the years the rights of citizens of the Republic of Ireland have been connected to being in the EU.

I've recently had chats with brexit supporters. When I bring up issue of EU nationals living here they shrug there shoulders and say "something" will be worked out. When pressed one said the government could have a Green Card type Policy I pointed out that is less rights than they have now. At which point he started to get annoyed.

The other said Brexit has been decided but existing EU nationals will stay. When asked how he had no answer. Again this person started to get annoyed.

I work with EU nationals like Poles. For years. They are my friends. My partner is from another EU country. This isn't some abstract political issue for me.

This government imo would not have given any gaurentees to EU nationals unless forced to in these negotiations.


----------



## bemused (Dec 10, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> The article I put up points out that over the years the rights of citizens of the Republic of Ireland have been connected to being in the EU.



The common travel area between the Republic and the UK existed prior to the EU and is still UK law, the 1971 immigration act grants Irish citizens settled status. I've not seen anyone suggest that the CTA is to be abolished. the UK and Irish governments have committed to it, so unless the EU has some problem maintaining the arrangement I can't see why it changes.

As far as I can tell the real issue the EU has with UK/Irish relations is how they exclude the UK from full access to the single market whilst retaining their commitment to the GFA.


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2017)

bemused said:


> The common travel area between the Republic and the UK existed prior to the EU and is still UK law, the 1971 immigration act grants Irish citizens settled status. I've not seen anyone suggest that the CTA is to be abolished. the UK and Irish governments have committed to it, so unless the EU has some problem maintaining the arrangement I can't see why it changes.
> 
> As far as I can tell the real issue the EU has with UK/Irish relations is how they exclude the UK from full access to the single market whilst retaining their commitment to the GFA.


Brexit deal allows for three different types of Irish Border


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 10, 2017)

bemused said:


> The common travel area between the Republic and the UK existed prior to the EU and is still UK law, the 1971 immigration act grants Irish citizens settled status. I've not seen anyone suggest that the CTA is to be abolished. the UK and Irish governments have committed to it, so unless the EU has some problem maintaining the arrangement I can't see why it changes.
> 
> As far as I can tell the real issue the EU has with UK/Irish relations is how they exclude the UK from full access to the single market whilst retaining their commitment to the GFA.



The issue for citizens of republic is whether the rights they have here in UK will remain the same. Rights of access to free NHS care for example. The Labour MP Bill Conor McGinn amendment to the EU withdrawal bill still going through parliament is to ensure this.

My reading of this issue is that the situation of the rights of citizens of the Irish Republic here are at best unclear post Brexit. The rights of Eire citizens have been built up over years. It's not just the law but now it's been interpreted. Belonging to EU is a factor.

I've tried reading some of the legal arguments and it's complicated. I can understand why the Labour MP is making this an issue. His amendment is to ensure Irish here now from republic have all the rights they had under EU as well as rights under previous UK agreements.

Another thing about settled status. My Irish friend who grew up here but whose father migrated to London from the republic has never been interested in being naturalised as British. He , despite growing up here, holds Eire passport. So what's his status going to be? I'm not clear on this..

See here:




> However, an academic at the University of Leicester believes this could be called into question due to the inevitable overhaul of legislation following the referendum on EU membership.
> 
> “It’s assumed that when Irish people come to the UK, they have this ‘special status’ but it’s not rooted in legislation or at least not based strongly enough in legislation,” said Professor Bernard Ryan. “Things are likely to change for EU citizens coming to the UK after Brexit but there needs to be a separate discussion with regards to the Irish.
> 
> “It is something which needs to be sorted out because we can’t rely on what is already there.”


NEW LAW NEEDED TO KEEP IRISH RIGHTS - Irish World

I don't like to much cut and paste but with Brexit existing rights need to be clarified or several years down the line Irish in Britain of those who come here post Brexit could find themselves in situation where there rights to move freely and rights to services are curtailed. This isn't to do with EU. Im not so sanguine about existing rights being ensured in the future.


----------



## bemused (Dec 10, 2017)

gosub said:


> Brexit deal allows for three different types of Irish Border



It's the movement of goods and services they are struggling with, the movement of people isn't an issue. There is no reason to change the CTA.


----------



## bemused (Dec 10, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> The issue for citizens of republic is whether the rights they have here in UK will remain the same.



Any change would require changing laws that existed prior to EU membership. The common travel area has existed since the 1950s. I can understand why people may want it clarified but the movement and rights of Irish citizens as it stands will be the same as they were prior to 1973 - which is the same as they are now. Nothing in the EU would prevent that bilateral agreement.

The issue isn't people, its things. Can I sell a product I make in the Republic in Northern Ireland after Brexit? At the moment not without a tariff.

Here is the government paper on the CTA The Common Travel Area and the special status of Irish nationals in UK law - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Something that explains many a vote for Carmichael.


I have never voted Carmichael and indeed my best friend was in amongst the Orkney four! But they like the guy because he does the local thing well. And I get that, why should they give a shit about anything outside of Orkney. Plus SNP voters tend to call them all zombies. The Orkney "left" is as much to blame for that.

Edit: Carmichaels bairns were bullied in school off the back of that carry on too, so it was all about tensions running high, people being understandably upset friends and neighbours were being picked on, that kind of thing. It's hard when it gets personal, what do you say?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2017)

The Orkney Four being the guys that took the cunt to court.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Any change would require changing laws that existed prior to EU membership. The common travel area has existed since the 1950s. I can understand why people may want it clarified but the movement and rights of Irish citizens as it stands will be the same as they were prior to 1973 - which is the same as they are now. Nothing in the EU would prevent that bilateral agreement.
> 
> The issue isn't people, its things. Can I sell a product I make in the Republic in Northern Ireland after Brexit? At the moment not without a tariff.
> 
> Here is the government paper on the CTA The Common Travel Area and the special status of Irish nationals in UK law - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament



That looks to me like a briefing report for MPs. Not a government report as such. The summary also quotes Professor Ryan who I quoted in above post.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> It's the movement of goods and services they are struggling with, the movement of people isn't an issue. There is no reason to change the CTA.


The question is for how long, and what are the practicalities. CTA has been easy to implement because of the commonalities. If you're an EU citizen in Ireland legally, then currently you can legally stroll into the UK, no problem. Will that remain the case long term? If not, then the very fact there is misalignment and the need to handle it will put the CTA under threat. There's no such thing as a process that's invisible to British/Irish citizens and successfully filters everyone else.

This problem is a product of Ireland's EU membership and so didn't exist at the outset of the CTA. UK/Eire membership of the EU was simultaneous so there has never been this difference.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2017)

Surely the easiest solution to all this is to persuade RoI to leave the EU too.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Surely the easiest solution to all this is to persuade RoI to leave the EU too.


That's not as easy as handing NI to the RoI.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> That's not as easy as handing NI to the RoI.



The hard part would be getting the ROI to accept it. Mostly likely they'd hide behind the sofa and pretend to be out when the courier showed up.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> The hard part would be getting the ROI to accept it. Mostly likely they'd hide behind the sofa and pretend to be out when the courier showed up.


Just so long as we have proof of postage, we should be fine.  We'll raise a ticket with EUbay and show them that we no longer have the item in our hands.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

mauvais said:


> The question is for how long, and what are the practicalities. CTA has been easy to implement because of the commonalities. If you're an EU citizen in Ireland legally, then currently you can legally stroll into the UK, no problem. Will that remain the case long term? If not, then the very fact there is misalignment and the need to handle it will put the CTA under threat. There's no such thing as a process that's invisible to British/Irish citizens and successfully filters everyone else.
> 
> This problem is a product of Ireland's EU membership and so didn't exist at the outset of the CTA. UK/Eire membership of the EU was simultaneous so there has never been this difference.



If at some point thousands of non-Irish citizens start using the land border as a way of illegally entering the UK it may be an issue. I'm not sure once we're outside the EU that illegal migration of EU citizens into the UK is going to be an issue anyway, there are plenty of other places those people can go to work with legal protections within the EU.

At the moment I've not seen anyone in government suggest immigration checks at the border.

The issue still seems to be the movement of things, not people. It's dressed up as supporting the GTA when in fact it is a fudge until they sort out trade talks, I'm sure it'll come up again if some sort of tariff system is put in place; unless the Republic get a dispensation. Frankly, it is the EUs problem to fix, the UK and Irish governments want to maintain a long-established arrangement, if the EU doesn't like it they should suggest solutions.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Just so long as we have proof of postage, we should be fine.  We'll raise a ticket with EUbay and show them that we no longer have the item in our hands.


There will be a finite number of attempted deliveries before the item is simply returned to us, although we could put a fake return address on it I suppose.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> If at some point thousands of non-Irish citizens start using the land border as a way of illegally entering the UK it may be an issue. I'm not sure once we're outside the EU that illegal migration of EU citizens into the UK is going to be an issue anyway, there are plenty of other places those people can go to work with legal protections within the EU.


Yes, but you are thinking about this like a rational pragmatist, not the bonkers Brexiteer brigade actually in charge.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Frankly, it is the EUs problem to fix, the UK and Irish governments want to maintain a long-established arrangement, if the EU doesn't like it they should suggest solutions.


Ireland is still going to be part of the EU. It's not like Ireland and the EU are separate entities.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 11, 2017)

if you're on Shitter and you enjoy that sort of thing I can recommend having a look at Daniel Hannan or Douglas Carswell's accounts. They're filled with Daniel and Douglas making technocrat-sounding statements about how the press/pundit class/the EU itself doesn't have the first idea about how all this beautiful free trade is going to work once Her Majesty's finest tea clippers are free to roam the globe selling our artificial intelligence flying cars and then being corrected 17,000 times on all the detail they've got wrong. I like it, but it might not be your thing.


----------



## gosub (Dec 11, 2017)

https://g8fip1kplyr33r3krz5b97d1-wp...ntent/uploads/2017/12/2017-12-08-08-37_01.pdf

3. As regards transition, the European Council notes the proposal put forward by the United Kingdom for a transition period of around two years, and agrees to negotiate a transition period covering the whole of the EU acquis,while the United Kingdom, as a third country, will no longer participate in or nominate or elect members of the EU institutions.

4. Such transitional arrangements, which will be part of the Withdrawal Agreement, must be in the interest of the Union, clearly defined and limited in time. In order to ensure a level playing field based on the same rules applying throughout the Single Market, changes to the acquis adopted by EU institutions and bodies will have to apply both in the United Kingdom and the EU.All existing Union regulatory, budgetary, supervisory, judiciary and enforcement instruments and structures will also apply. As the United Kingdom will remain a member of the Customs Union and the Single Market (with all four freedoms) during the transition, it will have to continue to apply and collect EU customs tariffs and ensure all EU checks are being performed on the border vis-à-vis other third countries.


----------



## Winot (Dec 11, 2017)

gosub said:


> https://g8fip1kplyr33r3krz5b97d1-wp...ntent/uploads/2017/12/2017-12-08-08-37_01.pdf
> 
> 3. As regards transition, the European Council notes the proposal put forward by the United Kingdom for a transition period of around two years, and agrees to negotiate a transition period covering the whole of the EU acquis,while the United Kingdom, as a third country, will no longer participate in or nominate or elect members of the EU institutions.
> 
> 4. Such transitional arrangements, which will be part of the Withdrawal Agreement, must be in the interest of the Union, clearly defined and limited in time. In order to ensure a level playing field based on the same rules applying throughout the Single Market, changes to the acquis adopted by EU institutions and bodies will have to apply both in the United Kingdom and the EU.All existing Union regulatory, budgetary, supervisory, judiciary and enforcement instruments and structures will also apply. As the United Kingdom will remain a member of the Customs Union and the Single Market (with all four freedoms) during the transition, it will have to continue to apply and collect EU customs tariffs and ensure all EU checks are being performed on the border vis-à-vis other third countries.



I can't see how it can work any other way. It does at least defer the need to install new customs checks.

It will however go down like a wet paper bag of sick with the Brexit head bangers. All it will take is the Daily Mail to point out that nothing has changed in relation to immigration and May will be in a precarious position. It's going to be interesting to see how that plays out.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 11, 2017)

Winot said:


> It will however go down like a wet paper bag of sick with the Brexit head bangers. All it will take is the Daily Mail to point out that nothing has changed in relation to immigration and May will be in a precarious position. It's going to be interesting to see how that plays out.



Might turn out to be a minor quibble in the scheme of things, though.


----------



## gosub (Dec 11, 2017)

Raheem said:


> Might turn out to be a minor quibble in the scheme of things, though.


What, that potentially, five years after the referendum,the only real change is Farage is out of a job?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 11, 2017)

gosub said:


> What, that potentially, five years after the referendum,the only real change is Farage is out of a job?



Yeah, compared to forever.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> if you're on Shitter and you enjoy that sort of thing I can recommend having a look at Daniel Hannan or Douglas Carswell's accounts. They're filled with Daniel and Douglas making technocrat-sounding statements about how the press/pundit class/the EU itself doesn't have the first idea about how all this beautiful free trade is going to work once Her Majesty's finest tea clippers are free to roam the globe selling our artificial intelligence flying cars and then being corrected 17,000 times on all the detail they've got wrong. I like it, but it might not be your thing.



Dan Hannan isn't that bad. Whenever I see, hear or read anything about Carswell I have this urge to swallow my tongue.


----------



## bimble (Dec 11, 2017)

Theresa May goes on facebook to ask EU citizens to please stay. Things are weird, even without reading the comments.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2017)

may's been winding me up for months now


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

I think the middle manager stuff is her element.


----------



## Winot (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Dan Hannan isn't that bad. Whenever I see, hear or read anything about Carswell I have this urge to swallow my tongue.



Have you read Hannan's book? He comes across as reasonable in his style (lots of 'of course' this and 'naturally' that) but he's a proper right wing libertarian loon. Basically he sees Brexit as just the start of the road towards getting rid of the state entirely, so that companies aren't unduly hampered by pesky rules preventing them from maximising profit.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 11, 2017)

kabbes said:


> That's not as easy as handing NI to the RoI.



If we do that, we’ll have all the DUP fruitcakes swimming across the Irish Sea to claim political asylum from the Pope. Is that really what we want?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> If we do that, we’ll have all the DUP fruitcakes swimming across the Irish Sea to claim political asylum from the Pope. Is that really what we want?


House 'em on the Isle of Wight.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Dan Hannan isn't that bad. Whenever I see, hear or read anything about Carswell I have this urge to swallow my tongue.



I find him pretty bad. He calls himself an "Old Whig". He's not joking. 

He wants us to be Singapore or Switzerland to Europe but he - according to one of his supporters I was talking to - obfuscated this (free movement in Switzerland for example, Singapore is a tiny authoritarian city state) during the referendum campaign in order to keep a "winning coalition" together. He's been an MEP since 1999, he's sent his children to free EU supplied schools in Belgium and will - like the rest of them who say the parliament is an illegitimate organisation - no doubt collect his pension with no problem for his conscience. 

Any mention of socialism and he's off on one about Venezuala. 

And the amusing Twitter thread thing is sort of what I say it is. He makes some grandiose claim about Brexit and has to be corrected. 

Carswell is now in "big data" with Thomas Borwick of Vote Leave.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> If we do that, we’ll have all the DUP fruitcakes swimming across the Irish Sea to claim political asylum from the Pope. Is that really what we want?


yes. very few of them, if any, will make it.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Winot said:


> Have you read Hannan's book?



That would mean giving him money. I don't agree with him on a lot, although prior to Brexit he was suggesting an EFTA model for the UK which I thought wouldn't be too bad. He always seems polite and good-natured, which goes a long way in my book.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> That would mean giving him money.


non sequitur


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> non sequitur



That and it looked dull.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 11, 2017)




----------



## Nylock (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Dan Hannan isn't that bad. Whenever I see, hear or read anything about Carswell I have this urge to swallow my tongue.


Not that bad?! Hannan is a cunt of the first order. Among his many examples of cuntitude is that he was one of the talking heads that helped fuel the 'NHS Death Panel' narrative when the Obamacare debate started heating up in the US. If that fucker has his way our healthcare system will be the full-blooded darwinian nightmare that is the US-style one quicker than you could say 'how much?!?!?!'. I wouldn't give him the steam off my piss!


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Nylock said:


> Not that bad?! Hannan is a cunt of the first order. Among his many examples of cuntitude is that he was one of the talking heads that helped fuel the 'NHS Death Panel' narrative when the Obamacare debate started heating up in the US. If that fucker has his way our healthcare system will be the full-blooded darwinian nightmare that is the US-style one quicker than you could say 'how much?!?!?!'. I wouldn't give him the steam off my piss!



I'm not denying he's a twit, but I can watch him and not want to kill myself.

Funny you should mention death panels, I travel the US a fair bit at the moment and two weeks ago I was having lunch with some co-workers over there and death panels came up. I did my best to correct the notion that the NHS is one up from the folks who had a cart and called 'bring out your dead'


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> If at some point thousands of non-Irish citizens start using the land border as a way of illegally entering the UK it may be an issue. I'm not sure once we're outside the EU that illegal migration of EU citizens into the UK is going to be an issue anyway, there are plenty of other places those people can go to work with legal protections within the EU.
> .



When you say "when we are outside the EU". Is that your personal opinion on Brexit? That once brexit happens EU nationals shouldn't be allowed here?


----------



## Mordi (Dec 11, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> If we do that, we’ll have all the DUP fruitcakes swimming across the Irish Sea to claim political asylum from the Pope. Is that really what we want?




..Yes?

You're welcome to them, I'd be more worried about those who'd stay to fight.
They, and me, would be pissed to find a Republic even less willing to subside us than our Imperial masters.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> When you say "when we are outside the EU". Is that your personal opinion on Brexit? That once brexit happens EU nationals shouldn't be allowed here?



When we leave the EU we'll be outside of it. EU nationals will be able live and work here the same way anyone outside the EU can now - or whatever immigration agreement they end up with. As I understand it they'll be legacying in residency for people here already.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2017)

Mordi said:


> ..Yes?
> 
> You're welcome to them, I'd be more worried about those who'd stay to fight.
> They, and me, would be pissed to find a Republic even less willing to subside us than our Imperial masters.


Subsidise?


----------



## Mordi (Dec 11, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Subsidise?



Nah, it's a gradual plan to let the 6 counties slowly be reclaimed by the waves.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2017)

Mordi said:


> Nah, it's a gradual plan to let the 6 counties slowly be reclaimed by the waves.


Innovative


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2017)

mauvais said:


> The question is for how long, and what are the practicalities. CTA has been easy to implement because of the commonalities. If you're an EU citizen in Ireland legally, then currently you can legally stroll into the UK, no problem. Will that remain the case long term? If not, then the very fact there is misalignment and the need to handle it will put the CTA under threat. There's no such thing as a process that's invisible to British/Irish citizens and successfully filters everyone else.
> 
> This problem is a product of Ireland's EU membership and so didn't exist at the outset of the CTA. UK/Eire membership of the EU was simultaneous so there has never been this difference.



Ive tried to look up some of the issues. You are correct. Whilst CTA preceded EU membership over the years in updating CTA its been expanded to include other EU nationals. With Brexit the legislation around free movement of Irish will needed to be revisited. Its why the Labour MP I quoted put forward an amendment to the withdrawal bill. To try to ensure Eire citizens not only keep rights under CTA but to keep rights they got under EU.

https://www.freemovement.org.uk/brexit-briefing-impact-on-common-travel-area-and-the-irish/

Its going to be in the boring details of negotiations that this will be played out.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> When we leave the EU we'll be outside of it. EU nationals will be able live and work here the same way anyone outside the EU can now - or whatever immigration agreement they end up with. As I understand it they'll be legacying in residency for people here already.



I was asking your opinion. Brexit doesnt have to mean ending free movement. 

After all ROI , who btw left the Commonwealth,  have rights for there citizens to free movement.  This could be extended.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I was asking your opinion. Brexit doesnt have to mean ending free movement.
> 
> After all ROI , who btw left the Commonwealth,  have rights for there citizens to free movement.  This could be extended.



Free movement is going to end.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> I'm not denying he's a twit, but I can watch him and not want to kill myself.
> 
> Funny you should mention death panels, I travel the US a fair bit at the moment and two weeks ago I was having lunch with some co-workers over there and death panels came up. I did my best to correct the notion that the NHS is one up from the folks who had a cart and called 'bring out your dead'


And Daniel Hannan is partly responsible for this notion. One of the main players pushing it in the US. He's not a twit. He's a complete cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Free movement is going to end.


Free movement from the ROI to here?


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Free movement from the ROI to here?



Free movement for EU citizens outside whatever legacy agreement they sign up to. The Irish will still be able to use the border freely, I assume if EU citizens want to illegally migrate to the UK they could use that route - although I can't see there being a huge wave of EU nationals wanting to do that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

One partial way to resolve this would be to introduce ID cards and make it compulsory to carry them at all times. A post-EU UK could be more like the rest of Europe than ever.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One partial way to resolve this would be to introduce ID cards and make it compulsory to carry them at all times. A post-EU UK could be more like the rest of Europe than ever.



Fuck that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Free movement for EU citizens outside whatever legacy agreement they sign up to. The Irish will still be able to use the border freely, I assume if EU citizens want to illegally migrate to the UK they could use that route - although I can't see there being a huge wave of EU nationals wanting to do that.


Tighten up on employers, estate agents and the like in checking residency permits. Get them to do the work for you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Fuck that.


You may say fuck that, but we need to get a proper grip on our borders, and if that means doing something most of the world already does, then it's a price worth paying. We'll all get used to it after a while. It will be fine. Those who are here legally will have nothing to fear.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You may say fuck that, but we need to get a proper grip on our borders, and if that means doing something most of the world already does, then it's a price worth paying. We'll all get used to it after a while. It will be fine. Those who are here legally will have nothing to fear.



Can't we just ask them to name the three finalists from the latest series of Celebrity Eating Monkey Bollocks in the Jungle?


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Free movement is going to end.



I reckon that is likely to happen with this government. What Im asking is your opinion on that. Do you think its a good thing?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> Can't we just ask them to name the three finalists from the latest series of Celebrity Eating Monkey Bollocks in the Jungle?


Right, I'll be off then. 

It will not surprise me if this kind of thing is proposed, not in the slightest. We'll need to shout it down again, but Blair got pretty close last time, and brexit could provide an extra impetus to the argument if it's done again. 'taking back control', but without the 'back' bit, which obviously was always bollocks.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I reckon that is likely to happen with this government. What Im asking is your opinion on that. Do you think its a good thing?



I think without it we'll never lance the brexit boil. With some sort of migration agreement between the EU and the UK they'll not be able to whine about protecting the boarders.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2017)

bemused said:


> I think without it we'll never lance the brexit boil. With some sort of migration agreement between the EU and the UK they'll not be able to whine about protecting the boarders.


Do you think that lances the brexit boil though? I don't. I think lots of people, including most young people, will be extremely pissed off by the end of free movement.


----------



## bemused (Dec 11, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you think that lances the brexit boil though? I don't. I think lots of people, including most young people, will be extremely pissed off by the end of free movement.



It takes away the #1 criticism of the EU, lack of border of control. You'll still be able to travel to the EU under the same conditions, working there could be more tricky.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2017)

So no new 'illegal immigrants', just more 'illegal workers'?

Yay!


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you think that lances the brexit boil though? I don't. I think lots of people, including most young people, will be extremely pissed off by the end of free movement.


When did this free movement start?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One partial way to resolve this would be to introduce ID cards and make it compulsory to carry them at all times. A post-EU UK could be more like the rest of Europe than ever.


Carrying “papers” at all times has always been alien to the UK island fortress mentality. Islanders defend their island & repel the invaders. Those living on continental land masses with land borders are used to showing id to prove their entitlement to be in that country for allsorts of reasons. Accessing healthcare etc. I can’t see compulsory id card carrying going down well in UK.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 12, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> When did this free movement start?


Good question. For exploited eastern European workers about 2004 I think. For Brits who can barely afford their rent it never started. For middle class Brits enjoying their southern European playgrounds it has always been there & won’t end with brexit. I think thats what you were alluding to, yes?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 12, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> When did this free movement start?



Must have been some time after World War II. During, it would have provided too much of a loophole.


----------



## Winot (Dec 12, 2017)

Treaty of Rome was 1957.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 12, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think thats what you were alluding to, yes?


I'm criticising the nonsense in the post immediately above this and throughout this thread - the reduction of freedom to a matter of legality.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Dec 12, 2017)

Fuck off with your ID card nonsense.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 12, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm criticising the nonsense in the post immediately above this and throughout this thread - the reduction of freedom to a matter of legality.


Yes. People’s freedom to travel is limited much more by their lack of income & their daily need to go out & earn that income than by their legal right to travel anywhere in the world.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 12, 2017)

mwgdrwg said:


> Fuck off with your ID card nonsense.


Absolutely agree. We will have none of this id card shit on our island fortress which we will defend with our very lives.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Dec 12, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Absolutely agree. We will have none of this id card shit on our island fortress which we will defend with our very lives.



 It'll be bodypaint and bonfires at the Menai Straits before I have an ID card, that's for sure!


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You may say fuck that, but we need to get a proper grip on our borders, and if that means doing something most of the world already does, then it's a price worth paying. We'll all get used to it after a while. It will be fine. Those who are here legally will have nothing to fear.



Is this satire?


----------



## Poi E (Dec 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Tighten up on employers, estate agents and the like in checking residency permits. Get them to do the work for you.



Won't do a thing to touch the slum landlord/people trafficking vermin.


----------



## bimble (Dec 12, 2017)

bemused said:


> I think without it we'll never lance the brexit boil. With some sort of migration agreement between the EU and the UK they'll not be able to whine about protecting the boarders.


Don't be daft. There'll still be far too many brown people.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm criticising the nonsense in the post immediately above this and throughout this thread - the reduction of freedom to a matter of legality.


Poles were better off when they needed a visa to work here?

I don't reduce freedom to legality. But legality is a part of it.  Ridiculous to pretend otherwise.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 12, 2017)

So ID cards and biometrics rendered at all major interactions with public and private entities?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 12, 2017)

"Freedom of Movement" in most European countries comes with stringent conditions. The usual process is along the lines of:  1. Mandatory registration of residency with authorities upon arrival (ID). 2. Find job within (max.) 3 months (or already have job lined  up) 3. Purchase a mandatory local health insurance.

I've know of people from Eu countries deported from another Eu country after 3 months because they did't secure meaningful employment (i.e didn't meet condition 2) and therefore couldn't afford to meet condition 3). It's a system, established throughout most of the richer EU countries, and it's wide open for abuse by exploitative employers.

The rub is that the UK hasn't been doing the deporting business because the infrastructure isn't in place or there's no need to meet conditions 1&3.

For every Brussels Eurocrat or retired ex-pat on the costa brava enjoying their "Freedom of Movement", there are hundreds, if not thousands of underpaid Greek cleaners, Portugese brickies, polish mechanics etc  being ripped off by the wealthier nations employers.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 12, 2017)

I think the whole id card thing is satirical yes. I recall as a kid at school learning about countries behind the iron curtain. We we told the people that lived in those countries were not free. That they had to carry papers & had to show them on demand or be arrested. So living in a free country meant that one was free to roam & was not expected to prove your identity by carrying an id card. 

So older Brits, I think will have an aversion to carrying id cards for that reason. Yes it is satire because we are now probably the most identified & watched nation on earth.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2017)

Poi E said:


> Won't do a thing to touch the slum landlord/people trafficking vermin.


That wouldn't be the intention. The intention would be to be seen to be tackling the immigration problem. Tie the Daily Heil up in knots but they've prioritised the evil immigrant now.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 12, 2017)

This is worth repeating


butchersapron said:


> wtf happened here - it's not like there's a shortfall of dull liberal  pro-eu commentary with dull neo-liberal assumptions out there.


After persuading the ROI to leave, carrying ID cards, the joys of 'free' movement. Christ, whatever happens, what follows will be a massive attack on workers. Corbyn won't save you. Does anyone have a picture of a post '19 landscape in which the tories will continue to wage their war?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You may say fuck that, but we need to get a proper grip on our borders, and if that means doing something most of the world already does, then it's a price worth paying. We'll all get used to it after a while. It will be fine. Those who are here legally will have nothing to fear.



I hope to christ this is satire, but I fear it's not.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

bimble said:


> Theresa May goes on facebook to ask EU citizens to please stay. Things are weird, even without reading the comments.




Value them enough to take their money off them in taxes but not enough to let them vote in the referendum. Classy.


----------



## bimble (Dec 12, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I hope to christ this is satire, but I fear it's not.


Definitely satire from littlebabyjesus


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> You've not encountered Butchers before then I take it? Telling other people who they are and what comcerns them is pretty much his entire job around here.





SpookyFrank said:


> Because he lives in the 1930s.



I'm retracting these posts with apologies to butchersapron, in light of having actually read the posts he was responding to.


----------



## gosub (Dec 12, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Value them enough to take their money off them in taxes but not enough to let them vote in the referendum. Classy.


If they had been allowed to vote, and remain had won, by less than the estimated number of foreign nationals...I think the number of unpleasant incidents would have been higher than than it was


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2017)

gosub said:


> If they had been allowed to vote, and remain had won, by less than the estimated number of foreign nationals...I think the number of unpleasant incidents would have been higher than than it was



What about denying British citizens living, or 'domiciled' overseas a vote then?


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 12, 2017)




----------



## Poi E (Dec 12, 2017)

..


----------



## kabbes (Dec 12, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 122863
> View attachment 122864


It makes me wonder for my sanity to like an article from the Telegraph, but I do actually like that.


----------



## Winot (Dec 12, 2017)

Canada Dry


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 12, 2017)

sukarno. Replaced by suharto and the bloodiest anti-communist purge in history.


----------



## bemused (Dec 12, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Value them enough to take their money off them in taxes but not enough to let them vote in the referendum. Classy.



EU nationals can't vote in the general election either. I don't think the concept that only citizens can vote for their government is that controversial.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 12, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It makes me wonder for my sanity to like an article from the Telegraph, but I do actually like that.



Author seems a bit dodgy. 

Salon | Newsreal: The Pied Piper of the Clinton conspiracists


----------



## teuchter (Dec 12, 2017)

I don't like the article and its tone, and pretentious intellectual name-dropping. He's looked up a quote from Plato. Well done.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 12, 2017)

To my surprise that Telegraph article was very readable, and even seems to contain some actual analysis. Quite a good/clear outline of the Hard Brexit position even.

But Ambrose Evans-Pritchard's record more generally is of being a raving lunatic -- which made me pretty surprised at how non-raving that article looked 

But his record still leads me to question his _factual_ reliability


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 12, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Author seems a bit dodgy.
> 
> Salon | Newsreal: The Pied Piper of the Clinton conspiracists




Full-on conspiraloon then, as well as just a common or garden raving lunatic ....


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 12, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> Full-on conspiraloon then, as well as just a common or garden raving lunatic ....


People called ambrose / ambrosio generally dodgy.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 12, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Good question. For exploited eastern European workers about 2004 I think. For Brits who can barely afford their rent it never started. For middle class Brits enjoying their southern European playgrounds it has always been there & won’t end with brexit. I think thats what you were alluding to, yes?



I was in the office last week ( this is in London and it's regular guys on working class wages) Brexit came up. They all to a man opposed Brexit. Saw the debate about Brexit being about immigration. Didn't see Brexit as in there economic interests as well.

These are average working class people. They also saw end of free movement in EU negatively.

It's my common experience in London. Majority of working class people I know were remainers.

One Afro Carribbean friend , who is a postman, told me he was remain as people were going on about East European immigrants here in same way as they went on about his Fathers generation. The Windrush generation.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 13, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 122863
> View attachment 122864



I find the comparison made wrong. European colonisation of other countries was brutal and violent. It was also racist. To compare opposition to EU with opposition to racist colonial subjection of people in other lands is imo distasteful.

There was nothing subtle about Europeans colonisation in Africa, Asia or the Middle East. It was not an "invisible administration" shaping people's lives in every detail. It was done with brute force.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I was in the office last week ( this is in London and it's regular guys on working class wages) Brexit came up. They all to a man opposed Brexit. Saw the debate about Brexit being about immigration. Didn't see Brexit as in there economic interests as well.
> 
> These are average working class people. They also saw end of free movement in EU negatively.
> 
> ...


It's depressing that on here even, talking in internationalist rather than nationalist terms has you marked as some kind of elitist apologist for neoliberalism. Everything said here about Eastern Europeans being 'forced' to come here out of economic necessity by the evil system could have been said of the Windrush generation, and with balls on.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2017)

Gramsci said:


> I find the comparison made wrong. European colonisation of other countries was brutal and violent. It was also racist. To compare opposition to EU with opposition to racist colonial subjection of people in other lands is imo distasteful.
> 
> There was nothing subtle about Europeans colonisation in Africa, Asia or the Middle East. It was not an "invisible administration" shaping people's lives in every detail. It was done with brute force.



Nothing subtle about Greece. But don't worry they're working on the brute force.





littlebabyjesus said:


> It's depressing that on here even, talking in internationalist rather than nationalist terms has you marked as some kind of elitist apologist for neoliberalism. Everything said here about Eastern Europeans being 'forced' to come here out of economic necessity by the evil system could have been said of the Windrush generation, and with balls on.



1) Yes, you could say the same about the Windrush generation. What don't you understand about economic migration?
2) Wind your neck in you sanctimonious git - you're no more of an internationalist than my racist uncle.


----------



## Supine (Dec 13, 2017)

^ I don't see why being an 'internationalist' is a bad thing. I cherish the ability to travel and work throughout Europe. I'm also happy for the same freedom to be extended to my European fam. To see it as exploitative is very narrow minded.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> 1) Yes, you could say the same about the Windrush generation. What don't you understand about economic migration?


If 'freedom of movement' is merely a tool of capital, then within the confines of the realistic, what would you prefer to see instead? An end to migration?


----------



## seventh bullet (Dec 13, 2017)

Wow.  Cracking  stuff here.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


>




Some of these folks will be pulling out of NATO then? Now they've sorted their own security.


----------



## bimble (Dec 13, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> _Come here to london_. Are you serious - *i live on a fucking campbed at work for 5 days a week? I'm 47. I'm homeless. I get £112 a week.* You private school boy try to privilege me?


is this true ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> Some of these folks will be pulling out of NATO then? Now they've sorted their own security.


Did you never hear of the weu?


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Did you never hear of the weu?



No, but I just googled it. Interesting stuff.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 13, 2017)

mauvais said:


> If 'freedom of movement' is merely a tool of capital,


Nobody has implied that 'freedom of movement' is a capitalist tool here. What has been implied is that the rules of the EU's FOM are stacked up to benifit capital.


mauvais said:


> then within the confines of the realistic, what would you prefer to see instead? An end to migration?


IMO, if the EU was serious about FOM, they'd do well to look at expanding the UK model across the continent. No ID, No Registration, NHS for all.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 13, 2017)

mauvais said:


> If 'freedom of movement' is merely a tool of capital, then within the confines of the realistic, what would you prefer to see instead? An end to migration?



That's a bit of a false dichotomy tbf. Better would be a situation where people migrated only because they wanted to and not because they had to. I don't see how the UK leaving the EU will facilitate this state of affairs. But the UK remaining in won't help either.

Basically, whichever way it's sliced, capital wins, and IMO it's a pretty shabby joke that Brexit is going to help the poorest any more than the EU would do. Either way, migration is still going to stay open for the rich and closed for the poor.


----------



## seventh bullet (Dec 13, 2017)

bimble said:


> is this true ?



Why would he make it up?


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Nobody has implied that 'freedom of movement' is a capitalist tool here. What has been implied is that the rules of the EU's FOM are stacked up to benifit capital.
> 
> IMO, if the EU was serious about FOM, they'd do well to look at expanding the UK model across the continent. No ID, No Registration, NHS for all.


Ironically, domestic resistance to this is arguably a large part of what gave us Brexit.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> Some of these folks will be pulling out of NATO then? Now they've sorted their own security.


NATO is not necessarily sustainable, which recent events have made clearer, and dissolution of NATO poses an existential threat to the European defence model - that meaning not just the literal defence of Europe but all the other stuff that goes with it. If America becomes isolationist, or its interests sufficiently divergent, then Europe has a big problem. It's not a new one - this is why things like GALILEO exist - but it may be growing.

Some big ifs ahoy - if you treat this as a serious possibility, and if you consider Europe to have a common defence interest, and it should go without saying if you come at this from existing defence perspectives (i.e. you don't regard it all as an expensive waste of time), then European defence collaboration is a sensible & practical goal. The non-US elements of NATO are not enormously well aligned - there's lots of missing or duplicate capability - and putting some structure in place helps reduce this.

All that is to say, it doesn't require imperialist ambitions of a federal EU for this idea to exist - though it surely doesn't preclude them - as it can be considered a re-envisioning of NATO with purely European interests. Also, following the money, not bad news for Airbus and the like.

Probably bad news for Britain, which would seemingly rather side with the Americans come what may rather than timeshare aircraft carriers with the French.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nothing subtle about Greece. But don't worry they're working on the brute force.




Every time I see Juncker's name I get a little jolt of gladness that Britain will be leaving the EU.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Probably bad news for Britain, which would seemingly rather side with the Americans come what may rather than timeshare aircraft carriers with the French.



Given how slow the EU are at reacting to anything doubt we'll see the EU armed forces doing much.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 13, 2017)

They'd never know if they were to march east or west.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 13, 2017)

Given the relative might of the UK armed services (compared to most of Europe) this is one area the UK would have a serious bargaining chip in general negotiations.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2017)

Supine said:


> ^ I don't see why being an 'internationalist' is a bad thing. I cherish the ability to travel and work throughout Europe. I'm also happy for the same freedom to be extended to my European fam. To see it as exploitative is very narrow minded.



Nobody is saying internationalism is a bad thing. I'm so happy you have the ability to travel and work throughout Europe and you're happy to extend this to your European fam (what about non-European while we're being internationalist? Or are they not fam?) but not everybody in Europe can because what is being called freedom of movement in this context ain't that free.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I hope to christ this is satire, but I fear it's not.


Clearly a misjudged post, given the reaction. The imposition of new border controls and the current strength of anti-immigration feeling produce forces for such authoritarian measures. If not that particular one, then others. Absence of id cards is something I value in the UK, but I'm not too confident that a majority of people value it as much. The 'if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear' argument is often accepted when freedoms are curtailed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Clearly a misjudged post, given the reaction. The imposition of new border controls and the current strength of anti-immigration feeling produce forces for such authoritarian measures. If not that particular one, then others. Absence of id cards is something I value in the UK, but I'm not too confident that a majority of people value it as much. The 'if you have done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear' argument is often accepted when freedoms are curtailed.


i think you'll find it's the 'if you have nothing to hide...' argument.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> Given how slow the EU are at reacting to anything doubt we'll see the EU armed forces doing much.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2017)

the electoral commission finished their look into shenanigans the other day and among other ideas was photo ID at the polling booth. Given how many voters are without a passport or the means to easily afford it, well, its not on. I could see that being an 'in' for the card. Free voters card, counts as ID for fags/signing up at a job agency/etc

thing is you can see it being demanded at the hospital and all. Never been a fan of the idea of ID cards tbf.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 122934


mark urban, the edge?


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 13, 2017)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ukraine-Be...=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1513166037&sr=1-2


----------



## Crispy (Dec 13, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 122934


Maybe it's not that European armies are too small, but that the American one is grotesquely large?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 13, 2017)

mauvais said:


> Ironically, domestic resistance to this is arguably a large part of what gave us Brexit.


How so?
I don't see any compelling evidence on how having a pan european public health service would have favoured the Brexit vote. If anything, I'd say it would have worked more for the Remain vote (it would have at least taken out the argument used by the DM in their campaign that east europeans only come to the UK to abuse the NHS)


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> How so?
> I don't see any compelling evidence on how having a pan european public health service would have favoured the Brexit vote. If anything, I'd say it would have worked more for the Remain vote (it would have at least taken out a huge argument used by the DM in their campaign)


EU immigrants coming over here using our services, drain on our NHS, etc. - even though the reality was that they underused them. And the flipside has no benefit. Noone reading the DM gives a shit about being able to get free healthcare in Bucharest or wherever.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find it's the 'if you have nothing to hide...' argument.



The whole thing really. But mostly the implication that certain people, because of where they come from, should be hiding and should live in fear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> The whole thing really. But mostly the implication that certain people, because of where they come from, should be hiding and should live in fear.


The nothing to hide different from the nothing wrong as it's strange how proponents of the nothing to hide argument rarely invite people to see the intimate areas of their lives.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 13, 2017)

mauvais said:


> EU immigrants coming over here using our services, drain on our NHS, etc. - even though the reality was that they underused them. And the flipside has no benefit. Noone reading the DM gives a shit about being able to get free healthcare in Bucharest or wherever.


We'll have to agree to disagree how such a hypothetical scenario would have played out - hypothetical being the the key word there, so the point is moot.
My initial point was that EU has zero interest in a pan European public health service with regards to FOM, favouring instead the E111 system  that links up for the most part what amounts to a bunch of private health companies, thus facilitating profits for capital - while also, the high costs of private health are used as a barrier to control poorer people upping sticks and enjoying one of their 4 basic 'Freedoms'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 122934



Fails to mention who exactly we need all this crap to defend ourselves from. Even the US couldn't effectively occupy Afghanistan or Iraq, even with compliant puppet governments. I'm sure this fact isn't lost on Putin, for whom the cost/benefit of invading Lithuania or wherever just doesn't stack up at all. That only really leaves the Chinese with military resources comparable to Europe's, and there's really nothing for them to gain by invading people either. 

The only major wild card on the world stage is Trump, and even he has checks and balances staying his hand. And if the US did go completely off the reservation and invade, say, Spain then it wouldn't make much difference if they had six working jets or two dozen, they'd still be completely fucked.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2017)

What if Trump thinks hes playing Civilization and is going for a military victory?

Our only chance is to launch for Alpha Centuri before he manages it!


----------



## 2hats (Dec 13, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Our only chance is to launch for Alpha Centuri before he manages it!


Or persuade him he personally needs to get there first.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2017)

Trumps more of a Risk man imo


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> Trumps more of a Risk man imo


monopoly


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2017)

Snakes and Ladders


----------



## Supine (Dec 13, 2017)

Deal or No Deal


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

Top Trumps


----------



## Poi E (Dec 13, 2017)

Nuke'em from Butler Brothers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> monopoly



Fucking tiddlywinks more like.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2017)

Disappointed no-one's mentioned Beggar My Neighbour yet


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 13, 2017)

andysays said:


> Disappointed no-one's mentioned Beggar My Neighbour yet


Mentioned here.


----------



## agricola (Dec 13, 2017)

Government defeat over Grieve's amendment 7.  Not really a surprise given how the debate went, he pretty much destroyed the front bench this afternoon.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2017)

309 to 305 though. Sweet.


----------



## agricola (Dec 13, 2017)

killer b said:


> 309 to 305 though. Sweet.



They'd have lost that by triple figures on a free vote.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2017)

A close defeat is more disappointing for the scum though. They thought they'd got it over the line.


----------



## agricola (Dec 13, 2017)

killer b said:


> A close defeat is more disappointing for the scum though. They thought they'd got it over the line.



Open season on whoever rebelled, probably - especially Grieve, who will get no reward for what was probably his finest hour in the Commons.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

I'm not sure what they have won. If they vote no on the deal what happens then, we leave with no deal?


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 13, 2017)

bimble 

BBC basic outline of it here, if that helps?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 13, 2017)

agricola said:


> Open season on whoever rebelled, probably - especially Grieve, who will get no reward for what was probably his finest hour in the Commons.



Impressive performance.  "Now witness the firepower of this fully armed and operational Queen's Counsel etc etc"


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Sorry for the Twitter sourcing but it's being suggested - quoting Oliver Letwin - that it means they can stop Brexit by voting that they can't leave with no deal, but that they deal on offer is no good (so, presumably go back and get a better one) meaning, practically that the government can't leave.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)




----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

It's also made Nigel "Roy Moore" Farage very unhappy. Oh dear.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> [..]practically that the government can't leave.



Not voting for the deal isn't the same as not leaving. I think if I were May I'd tell my party if you don't vote for the deal I'm calling a general election, then fuck off and leave them too it.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2017)

A general election is the most likely result of a deal being voted down anyway tbf.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> Not voting for the deal isn't the same as not leaving. I think if I were May I'd tell my party if you don't vote for the deal I'm calling a general election, then fuck off and leave them too it.


and if i were her party i'd say go on then

being in government rather a poisoned chalice atm


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

They can vote against an offered deal and also vote against no-deal exit meaning there is no leaving. 

I'm no expert on this - at all - I'm just passing on the argument which has been shared by a QC who seems to think it's right. 

I reckon it is pretty likely we'll get a general election as some sort of stand-in for a second referendum now. Oh what joy that will be!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> and if i were her party i'd say go on then
> 
> being in government rather a poisoned chalice atm



Indeed! I'm really not sure what Labour is supposed to do at the moment. . . maybe free votes on Brexit stuff? My MP (Jo Stevens in Cardiff) has voted to support Remain stuff saying that's how her constituency voted. 

Referendums are stupid ideas. Thanks David Cameron!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Referendums are stupid ideas. Thanks David Cameron!


and tony blair


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Bloody hell, curse my attention span! Yep, I'd forgotten them. . . 

I think the Brexit one was particularly stupid though.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> They can vote against an offered deal and also vote against no-deal exit meaning there is no leaving.
> 
> I'm no expert on this - at all - I'm just passing on the argument which has been shared by a QC who seems to think it's right.
> 
> I reckon it is pretty likely we'll get a general election as some sort of stand-in for a second referendum now. Oh what joy that will be!



Be interest to read views if what happens if the two-year timer ends with no deal.

50.1 reads as we exit at the end of two years, deal or no deal. Extending it is just a slow death if the Parliment votes it down every time.



> 3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

I think the argument is that they can - with a "meaningful vote" - revoke article 50. 

To be honest, any views I have beyond that (wot I red on Twitter) is not in any way encumbered by personal knowledge!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Worth going to the tweet here... 


MightyTibberton said:


>




There's a bit more on the arguments in the replies.


----------



## sealion (Dec 13, 2017)

There is no leave. The political classes will see to that .


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Worth going to the tweet here...
> 
> 
> There's a bit more on the arguments in the replies.



That's good stuff. We could end up with an accept the deal or stay in EU referendum. Depends on how much of a risk taker May wants to be. Given that she'll not be leader at the next GE she may as well start playing hardball.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> That's good stuff. We could end up with an accept the deal or stay in EU referendum. Depends on how much of a risk taker May wants to be. Given that she'll not be leader at the next GE she may as well start playing hardball.



Apparently they've already sacked one of the rebel Tory MPs from his job - a chairman of the party.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Referendums are stupid ideas


they are the only time the electorate is asked a straight question tbf.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they are the only time the electorate is asked a straight question tbf.



I can see the attraction of that, but there aren't any simple questions to be asked and you end up with a binary choice and now we have years of rows about what leaving the EU actually means - the single market? the customs union? the court? just the EU?... 

Independence referendums (referenda?) might be a different case as I can't see an alternative. 

How does Switzerland do it? Don't they have them quite often?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I can see the attraction of that, but there aren't any simple questions to be asked and you end up with a binary choice and now we have years of rows about what leaving the EU actually means - the single market? the customs union? the court? just the EU?...
> 
> Independence referendums (referenda?) might be a different case as I can't see an alternative.
> 
> How does Switzerland do it? Don't they have them quite often?


Well I don't know with switzerland but I spoil my ballots in generals, councils and PCC elections. Its all FPTP and in the case of a GE its FPTP based on the heavily 'massaged' seat system. Its not a million miles away from being as plastic as athenian 'democracy'. If rule was done on the popular vote el trumpo wouldn't be in. Not that I fancy the alternatives to him much either but thats not the point. The process is gamed in both cases, uk and us.

I still enjoy a good GE though and who knows, maybe another one sooner than 2022


----------



## J Ed (Dec 13, 2017)

Good so far.

So are we going to get the 'deselection is violence' stuff over Dorries' comments that we got about the merest not-even hint of deselection of Labour MPs?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> How does Switzerland do it? Don't they have them quite often?



There's a fair bit of devolution in Switzerland and canton-level referendums are relatively common IIRC. Popular movements can also trigger national referenda, such as that unpleasant one which led to the banning of mosque minarets ten years ago.


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

The DEAL can't actually be worked up til after we leave March 2019 when we enter full on government by fax transition period of up to 2years... If the deal ain't good enough they can vote to stay in limbo


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

Nice shot across the bow from EASA backed by FAA today will link when home but effectively Commit to transition or lose aviation sector


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> They can vote against an offered deal and also vote against no-deal exit meaning there is no leaving.



is it as simple as that, though?

can 'we' (as in the government of the UK at the time that is) just say to the EU in 2019 "oops, sorry, we haven't quite got it all sorted yet, so we're staying for the time being"?

could the EU then say "tough.  sod off" or words to that effect?  (and would it have to be unanimous among the other countries to agree staying?)


----------



## Winot (Dec 13, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is it as simple as that, though?
> 
> can 'we' (as in the government of the UK at the time that is) just say to the EU in 2019 "oops, sorry, we haven't quite got it all sorted yet, so we're staying for the time being"?
> 
> could the EU then say "tough.  sod off" or words to that effect?  (and would it have to be unanimous among the other countries to agree staying?)



We can ask, and they can say no.


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is it as simple as that, though?
> 
> can 'we' (as in the government of the UK at the time that is) just say to the EU in 2019 "oops, sorry, we haven't quite got it all sorted yet, so we're staying for the time being"?
> 
> could the EU then say "tough.  sod off" or words to that effect?  (and would it have to be unanimous among the other countries to agree staying?)


Possible but unlikely in that form.  The pdf link I put a couple of days ago pretty much covers the arrangement as will be

https://g8fip1kplyr33r3krz5b97d1-wp...ntent/uploads/2017/12/2017-12-08-08-37_01.pdf


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I can see the attraction of that, but there aren't any simple questions to be asked and you end up with a binary choice and now we have years of rows about what leaving the EU actually means - the single market? the customs union? the court? just the EU?...
> 
> Independence referendums (referenda?) might be a different case as I can't see an alternative.


And of course the choice at general elections are clear and unambiguous. I mean it's not like anybody who voted LibDem because of their pledge re tuition fees ending up putting a party that tripled HE fees into government.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> Nice shot across the bow from EASA backed by FAA today will link when home but effectively Commit to transition or lose aviation sector


I suspect you are referring to this report?

There was this report a couple of weeks ago suggesting that the government was going to try to stay in EASA and thus effectively have to accept ECJ rulings.


----------



## gosub (Dec 13, 2017)

2hats said:


> I suspect you are referring to this report?
> 
> There was this report a couple of weeks ago suggesting that the government was going to try to stay in EASA and thus effectively have to accept ECJ rulings.


No it's an EASA letter published today Tapatalk Cloud - Downlaoad File 2017-12-11-notice-to-stakeholders-air-transport.pdf


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2017)

gosub said:


> Nice shot across the bow from EASA backed by FAA today will link when home but effectively Commit to transition or lose aviation sector



Presumably there will be a lot more of these in the post from other sectors.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

Winot said:


> We can ask, and they can say no.



I think that is unlikely. The EU doesn't want us to leave, they'd have to plug the budget hole and it'll add costs to business. However, I can't see them hanging on forever.


----------



## Fingers (Dec 13, 2017)

So is the the final nail in the coffin for St Theresa? Will she survive this?

That list of no confidence MPs will surely get longer after this.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> And of course the choice at general elections are clear and unambiguous. I mean it's not like anybody who voted LibDem because of their pledge re tuition fees ending up putting a party that tripled HE fees into government.



True. I do think representative democracy is the least bad system though. I wish we had some form of PR, which - unfortunately for my previous sweeping anti-referendum stance - we'd need another referendum for...... 

Benevolent dictator? I dunno. . .


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

bemused said:


> I think that is unlikely. The EU doesn't want us to leave, they'd have to plug the budget hole and it'll add costs to business. However, I can't see them hanging on forever.



Sorry to be constantly quoting twitter at you, but I've seen it argued on there that if this does happen it's likely to be an offer of a full membership, including the Euro, and I can't see that going down well. (Sorry not to have a proper source at this moment - it wasn't just some random, it was at least a journalist, possibly even an actual expert!)


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Fingers said:


> So is the the final nail in the coffin for St Theresa? Will she survive this?
> 
> That list of no confidence MPs will surely get longer after this.



Nadine Dorries is calling for all the rebel MPs to be deselected instantly! Civil war continues in the Tory party on Europe.

(Edited for spelling Nadine's name wrong. I am sorry.)


----------



## Fingers (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Nadine Dorries is calling for all the rebel MPs to be deselected instantly! Civil war continues in the Tory party on Europe.
> 
> (Edited for spelling Nadine's name wrong. I am sorry.)



The look on the faces on the front benches was priceless


----------



## 2hats (Dec 13, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> Presumably there will be a lot more of these in the post from other sectors.


Euratom next up.


----------



## bemused (Dec 13, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Nadine Dorries is calling for all the rebel MPs to be deselected instantly! Civil war continues in the Tory party on Europe.
> 
> (Edited for spelling Nadine's name wrong. I am sorry.)



I didn't realise Nadine was an MP, I thought she was a second rate jungle competitor.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 13, 2017)

Voted off then.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

I think we are heading towards Norway which realistically was always going to happen. There will be plenty of impotent gnashing of teeth & renting of clothes from the hard brexiteers, I’m sure.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> True. I do think representative democracy is the least bad system though. I wish we had some form of PR, which - unfortunately for my previous sweeping anti-referendum stance - we'd need another referendum for......
> 
> Benevolent dictator? I dunno. . .



How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.

Eg for the EU one:

Is the European Court of Justice an EU institution?

Is the European Parliament elected?

Etc.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think we are heading towards Norway which realistically was always going to happen. There will be plenty of impotent gnashing of teeth & renting of clothes from the hard brexiteers, I’m sure.



But no oil fund, no regional  democracy like councils setting income and wealth taxes etc.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.
> 
> Eg for the EU one:
> 
> ...


how about appreciate that landless men and women under 25 waited a long fucking time and spilt a fair bit of blood to gain the vote* and them exercising it in a manner that displeases you isn't sufficient grounds to start measuring the skulls of people before they get a vote


*not that its perfect but ffs


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.


this would rule out much of the parliamentary conservative party for a start


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> how about appreciate that landless men and women under 25 waited a long fucking time and spilt a fair bit of blood to gain the vote* and them exercising it in a manner that displeases you isn't sufficient grounds to start measuring the skulls of people before they get a vote
> 
> 
> *not that its perfect but ffs



But not this type of government. This is about giving people a role in the executive. Still unlimited franchise ( I’d lower it to 15) for elections to the representative.

We haven’t been able to have direct democracy in the executive since we moved from city states. Technology now makes it possible.

How about you stop equating me to a fascist because I propose an idea that would take revolutionary control away from the cadres and actually give it to the people?


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> this would rule out much of the parliamentary conservative party for a start


Another benofit of this system I had’t considered...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> But not this type of government. This is about giving people a role in the executive. Still unlimited franchise ( I’d lower it to 15) for elections to the representative.
> 
> We haven’t been able to have direct democracy in the executive since we moved from city states. Technology now makes it possible.
> 
> How about you stop equating me to a fascist because I propose an idea that would take revolutionary control away from the cadres and actually give it to the people?


I thought you wanted a special body to set special tests to see if someone is qualified to vote on a given subject or question? Power to the people, power to the people right on


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

Anyway, just been on the Mail’s comment section. It gives me a warm feeling inside.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

Maybe a requirement to prove that you have some sort of investment in the good of the country too a380?


----------



## 2hats (Dec 14, 2017)

Poi E said:


> But no oil fund, no regional  democracy like councils setting income and wealth taxes etc.


No foresight.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I thought you wanted a special body to set special tests to see if someone is qualified to vote on a given subject or question? Power to the people, power to the people right on


But only for executive refureda. So for example if we were having a vote on widget safety just to see if you knew for example what widgets did, how many we make and what the current safety regime for wigits is. 

Nothing apart from being alive and over 15 for any representive elections.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

Oh look, we've just decided the EU is a specialist not a political issue.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe a requirement to prove that you have some sort of investment in the good of the country too a380?


No, that would be a shit idea and take us back to the 20th century.

But you won’t wind me up, I’m still happy from all those Daily Mail readers’ comments.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> No, that would be a shit idea and take us back to the 20th century.
> 
> But you won’t wind me up, I’m still happy from all those Daily Mail readers’ comments.


It would take us back to the 17th century. Nevertheless, it's your suggestion.

What on earth does your second attempt at a paragraph mean?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe a requirement to prove that you have some sort of investment in the good of the country too a380?


surely people who had no stake in the good of the country would be best placed to offer a disinterested, objective view of the merits of the proposal, people who had an investment in the good of the country would of course be biased in favour of their own interests.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2017)

2hats said:


> No foresight.



lieutenant backsight foresight


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> It would take us back to the 17th century. Nevertheless, it's your suggestion.
> 
> What on earth does your second attempt at a paragraph mean?


It was only 1964 that the US removed the ability of states to restrict the franchise to tax payers. I must admit I hadn’t realised it was that late. I thought it was in the 1920s.

The second paragraph means I enjoy reading the ranting tantrums of Kipper loons* on the website of their favourite newspaper. This, I know,  makes me a bad person.

* And no, this doesn’t mean I think that everyone who wants to exit the EU is a kipper loon. I can see the lexit arguments.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> surely people who had no stake in the good of the country would be best placed to offer a disinterested, objective view of the merits of the proposal, people who had an investment in the good of the country would of course be biased in favour of their own interests.



Presumably this is why the proprietors of the Telegraph, Sun and Mail see themselves as best placed to try and rungjis country.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> It was only 1964 that the US removed the ability of states to restrict the franchise to tax payers. I must admit I hadn’t realised it was that late. I thought it was in the 1920s.
> 
> The second paragraph means I enjoy reading the ranting tantrums of Kipper loons* on the website of their favourite newspaper. This, I know,  makes me a bad person.
> 
> * And no, this doesn’t mean I think that everyone who wants to exit the EU is a kipper loon. I can see the lexit arguments.


I wonder, would your proposed voting restrictions extend to asking people which state they think they live in?


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder, would your proposed voting restrictions extend to asking people which state they think they live in?


No. World government.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> No. World government.


I think you should not have had that last drink before going to bed last night. Bye.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> I think you should not have had that last drink before going to bed last night. Bye.


You are probably right. Anyway, off out for a day sightseeing.


----------



## bemused (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think we are heading towards Norway which realistically was always going to happen. There will be plenty of impotent gnashing of teeth & renting of clothes from the hard brexiteers, I’m sure.



Norway has freedom of movement, this is why they are talking about some fictional 'Canada plus plus plus' deal.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 14, 2017)




----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

bemused said:


> Norway has freedom of movement, this is why they are talking about some fictional 'Canada plus plus plus' deal.


Yes but I’m thinking stopping freedom of movement may not be an issue when reality bites & people realise that any comprehensive trade deals with India & China will have to include freedom of movement.


----------



## bemused (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes but I’m thinking stopping freedom of movement may not be an issue when reality bites & people realise that any comprehensive trade deals with India & China will include freedom of movement.



Indian companies can move people here to work, Norwegian citizens can just move here to live without a job. The UK government won't want to accept freedom of movement, the problem they'll have is the EEA trade deal is the one they want. Both parties have the odd idea that they'll be able to get an EEA type deal without freedom of movement, if the EU agrees to that you'll see many EU countries want to restrict freedom of movement within the EU.

Ironically I think May would get an EEA type deal through Parliment judging on the vote last night.


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes but I’m thinking stopping freedom of movement may not be an issue when reality bites & people realise that any comprehensive trade deals with India & China will have to include freedom of movement.


No, they would have a section on freedom of movement ALL trade deals do. It amounts to number of visas issued per year as opposed to an open door


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 14, 2017)

bemused said:


> Indian companies can move people here to work, Norwegian citizens can just move here to live without a job. The UK government won't want to accept freedom of movement, the problem they'll have is the EEA trade deal is the one they want. Both parties have the odd idea that they'll be able to get an EEA type deal without freedom of movement, if the EU agrees to that you'll see many EU countries want to restrict freedom of movement within the EU.
> 
> Ironically I think May would get an EEA type deal through Parliment judging on the vote last night.



Is that true? I thought even EU citizens were supposed to leave - or could be removed - after six months without a job?


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Is that true? I thought even EU citizens were supposed to leave - or could be removed - after six months without a job?


Not sure, but thought that was agreed as part of Cameron's last ditch deal, and as such never got a chance to be implimented


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 14, 2017)

Do EU jobseekers have to leave if they can’t find work after six months?

It seems it's been there for a while. I'm not sure how Norway differs though?


----------



## bemused (Dec 14, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Do EU jobseekers have to leave if they can’t find work after six months?
> 
> It seems it's been there for a while. I'm not sure how Norway differs though?



Norway has the same rules, not sure how you prove they are a burden on the welfare system, merely claiming means you're putting a burden on it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.





How about we ask you some questions and if you don't get them right we shoot you? 



A380 said:


> But only for executive refureda. So for example if we were having a vote on widget safety just to see if you knew for example what widgets did, how many we make and what the current safety regime for wigits is.
> 
> Nothing apart from being alive and over 15 for any representive elections.



So people can vote for the Tories but they can't have a view on the EU unless they pass your test?


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2017)

The whole thing has become a morass of casuistry


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.
> 
> Eg for the EU one:
> 
> ...


I can understand the impulse to want those voting on a specific issue to have first spent the time to understand the issue.  But your suggestion is riven with problems.

1) Who decides what the baseline knowledge should be?

2) What criteria are there for setting the baseline?  In your EU referendum example, you chose facts about the ECJ and European Parliament, but why are these the important things to know?  What about things that affect people day to day, such as facts about typical undercutting of local labour prices in affected areas?  Or things that speak to the political ideology of the EU, such as details about the EU's interventions in Greece?  Or things related to trade, such as details about the EIOPA regulation of banking and the insurance industry?  

3) Are you keeping your test a secret and giving it to everybody at the same time?  How?  Or will the test be given in a staggered fashion (such as at the polling booth), in which case how are you preventing the questions leaking out?  Who is marking it?  

4) Are the baseline criteria and question set going to be known in advance?  How will this affect the results of the exam?  Are you aware that there is a strong class effect to exam taking?  Being raised to be nervous of exams affects your performance in the exam.

I could honestly go on, but you get the point.  Aside from the in-principle objections to the idea, the practical reality would be impossible.


----------



## discokermit (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> rungjis


you failed the spelling test. no vote for you, cuntchops.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 14, 2017)

bemused said:


> Norway has the same rules, not sure how you prove they are a burden on the welfare system, merely claiming means you're putting a burden on it.



It says that that is taken in UK law as meaning you claim for six months. You're not allowed to claim anything for the first three months then you're allowed to claim benefits for six months in total (doesn't have to be consecutive by the looks of things). The question seems to be one of enforcement - are people actually deported? It seems if they are it isn't very many but there's no real way of knowing if it's everyone who could be. And does Human Rights legislation get in the way of these rules?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.
> 
> Eg for the EU one:
> 
> ...


The history in the US of voting rights/literacy test not enough to tell you what's wrong with this idea?

Read the following passage:

Διαφέρομεν δὲ καὶ ταῖς τῶν πολεμικῶνμελέταις τῶν ἐναντίων τοῖσδε. τήν τε γὰρπόλιν κοινὴν παρέχομεν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὅτεξενηλασίαις ἀπείργομέν τινα ἢ μαθήματοςἢ θεάματος, ὃ μὴ κρυφθὲν ἄν τις τῶνπολεμίων ἰδὼν ὠφεληθείη, πιστεύοντες οὐταῖς παρασκευαῖς τὸ πλέον καὶ ἀπάταις ἢ τῷ ἀφ' ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐς τὰ ἔργα εὐψύχῳ· καὶ ἐν ταῖς παιδείαις οἱ μὲν ἐπιπόνῳ ἀσκήσειεὐθὺς νέοι ὄντες τὸ ἀνδρεῖον μετέρχονται,ἡμεῖς δὲ ἀνειμένως διαιτώμενοι οὐδὲν ἧσσονἐπὶ τοὺς ἰσοπαλεῖς κινδύνους χωροῦμεν.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

discokermit said:


> you failed the spelling test. no vote for you, cuntchops.


You failed the use of capitalisation test. So you only get to vote for e.e. cummings. What a lovely turn of phrase ‘cuntchops’ I shall add it to my vocabulary, thanks.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> The history in the US of voting rights/literacy test not enough to tell you what's wrong with this idea?
> 
> Read the following passage:
> 
> Διαφέρομεν δὲ καὶ ταῖς τῶν πολεμικῶνμελέταις τῶν ἐναντίων τοῖσδε. τήν τε γὰρπόλιν κοινὴν παρέχομεν, καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ὅτεξενηλασίαις ἀπείργομέν τινα ἢ μαθήματοςἢ θεάματος, ὃ μὴ κρυφθὲν ἄν τις τῶνπολεμίων ἰδὼν ὠφεληθείη, πιστεύοντες οὐταῖς παρασκευαῖς τὸ πλέον καὶ ἀπάταις ἢ τῷ ἀφ' ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐς τὰ ἔργα εὐψύχῳ· καὶ ἐν ταῖς παιδείαις οἱ μὲν ἐπιπόνῳ ἀσκήσειεὐθὺς νέοι ὄντες τὸ ἀνδρεῖον μετέρχονται,ἡμεῖς δὲ ἀνειμένως διαιτώμενοι οὐδὲν ἧσσονἐπὶ τοὺς ἰσοπαλεῖς κινδύνους χωροῦμεν.



That’s a massive issue and why this should not be used for elections to the legislature. Just to functional referenda. I don’t read Greek so wouldn’t be able to vote in a technical referendum about Greek language. Which is probably how it should be.


I think this mornings thought experiment shows the problems of referenda.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2017)

_Representative_ democracy ain't that great either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> _Representative_ democracy ain't that great either.


neither representative nor democratick


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> I don’t read Greek so wouldn’t be able to vote in a technical referendum about Greek language.


It's a passage from Pericles' Funeral Oration, and a fundamental, foundational text on democracy and constitutions. I don't think you should vote in any referendum about democracy or constitutions.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

Time to bump  this thread.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Time to bump  this thread.


Not how to bump a thread.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> It's a passage from Pericles' Funeral Oration, and a fundamental, foundational text on democracy and constitutions. I don't think you should vote in any referendum about democracy or constitutions.


Ok . I won’t.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> It's a passage from Pericles' Funeral Oration, and a fundamental, foundational text on democracy and constitutions. I don't think you should vote in any referendum about democracy or constitutions.


To be honest, in the future all funeral orations will be no more than 140 characters.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 14, 2017)

Going even further off topic now, there's a report out on electoral reform for the Welsh Assembly, the headlines for which are more Assembly Members, voting from 16, and a "more proportional voting system" (single transferable vote is what they'd prefer, with a "gender quota"). I'm not sure how that gets adopted or not - consultation period comes next. 

Creating a parliament that works for Wales: report of the Expert Panel on Assembly Electoral Reform


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, in the future all funeral orations will be no more than 140 characters.


I was at a funeral a couple of weeks ago where people were_ taking selfies_ (not at the graveside: at the reception, but still, it made me feel old and adrift without a compass on a sea of modern morality).


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2017)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, in the future all funeral orations will be no more than 140 characters.


280


----------



## gosub (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I was at a funeral a couple of weeks ago where people were_ taking selfies_ (not at the graveside: at the reception, but still, it made me feel old and adrift without a compass on a sea of modern morality).


no, you have, and can use a compass, moral or otherwise.....the others will just keep going til their satnav tells them to stop


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Time to bump  this thread.


The problem with this sort of stuff is that most people don’t read it & yet they still need affordable housing. So what to do?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The problem with this sort of stuff is that most people don’t read it & yet they still need affordable housing. So what to do?


What sort of stuff? An analysis of the anti-democratic nature of liberalism? I don't see why people reading that thread or not makes any different to fighting for affordable housing.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> What sort of stuff?


The political theory in your thread in the link. You know perfectly well what I am getting at. I know plenty of people spending half their income on housing. I know for a fact they would not be interested in reading the stuff in your thread. Not because they are stupid but because they could not see the slightest relevance of it to their lives. So can you answer my question. How do we fix the housing crisis in the UK?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The political theory in your thread in the link. You know perfectly well what I am getting at. I know plenty of people spending half their income on housing. I know for a fact they would not be interested in reading the stuff in your thread. Not because they are stupid but because they could not see the slightest relevance of it to their lives. So can you answer my question. How do we fix the housing crisis in the UK?


This is a complete non sequiter. How does people having an interest in political theory or not make it more or less difficult to fix the housing crisis in the UK? There's no connection there, unless you have some sort of nonsense vanguardism in mind, that the people need to be led to the 'correct' way of thinking.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> The political theory in your thread in the link. You know perfectly well what I am getting at. I know plenty of people spending half their income on housing. I know for a fact they would not be interested in reading the stuff in your thread. Not because they are stupid but because they could not see the slightest relevance of it to their lives. So can you answer my question. How do we fix the housing crisis in the UK?


I don't get this. Why does redsquirrel starting a thread discussing something (anything) on a bulletin board mean anything other than he started a discussion on a bulletin board?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This is a complete non sequiter. How does people having an interest in political theory or not make it more or less difficult to fix the housing crisis in the UK? There's no connection there, unless you have some sort of nonsense vanguardism in mind, that the people need to be led to the 'correct' way of thinking.


You appear to be saying that your interest in the type of politics that you post about has no relevance at all to what is happening in the UK right now. Is that correct? I was under the impression that what you post on this thread had some sort of relevance to the subject of the thread & that you had some sort of idea of the political direction you would like to see the UK taking?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Is that correct?


No.

Hth


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't get this. Why does redsquirrel starting a thread discussing something (anything) on a bulletin board mean anything other than he started a discussion on a bulletin board?


Because he linked to it on this thread suggesting it had some sort of relevance to this thread.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> You appear to be saying that your interest in the type of politics that you post about has no relevance at all to what is happening in the UK right now. Is that correct?


No



SaskiaJayne said:


> Because he linked to it on this thread suggesting it had some sort of relevance to this thread.


It does. Have you not read the last couple of pages with A380 arguing the type of rubbish outlined on the thread I linked?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Because he linked to it on this thread suggesting it had some sort of relevance to this thread.


It does have relevance to the discussion on this thread. It was directly related to the suggestion that people be tested for competence before being allowed to vote in referendums such as the Brexit referendum. So it was relevant to the discussion occurring at the time.

I'm still not very sure what your thought process are.  But I'll explain where I am on this:

I don't think there should be restrictions on voting of the sort discussed. I think that's a terrible, elitist step (further) away from democracy and egalitarianism.

I think it is possible for me and anyone else to say so and still be appalled by the inadequate housing in these islands. 

I don't think having a say on the former means I therefore have to come up with a solution to the latter, but I'm happy to discuss my ideas about housing should it come up. I've been a long term supporter of various actions on housing, and will continue to have views on it.


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you think that lances the brexit boil though? I don't. I think lots of people, including most young people, will be extremely pissed off by the end of free movement.



Most people are not well off middle class liberals who live in big cities or nice second homes in the countryside. Do you really think public opinion wants more immigration let alone freedom of movement? It is this kind of detachment from reality and the rest of the country that, in part, lost you the referendum.


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

Supine said:


> ^ I don't see why being an 'internationalist' is a bad thing. I cherish the ability to travel and work throughout Europe. I'm also happy for the same freedom to be extended to my European fam. To see it as exploitative is very narrow minded.



Only someone who is financially comfortable could ever say something like this. Only backs up my view that supporting the EU and a certain type of internationalism is a middle class cause that is actively hostile to working class and struggling people.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> It does have relevance to the discussion on this thread. It was directly related to the suggestion that people be tested for competence before being allowed to vote in referendums such as the Brexit referendum. So it was relevant to the discussion occurring at the time.
> 
> I'm still not very sure what your thought process are.  But I'll explain where I am on this:
> 
> ...


What I was trying to get across was that plenty of links to left wing theory are posted on this & other threads. There is plenty of slagging of posters who are perceived to be centrist Blairite neoliberals etc. None of this seems offer an achievable solution to the problems facing the UK today. If I am missing something here then probably the vast majority of ordinary people at the lower end of the income scale are missing it too because they do not read the sort of political stuff that is regularly posted in links on here.

There will never be true democracy. Democracy by it’s nature is always a compromise however you do it. So let’s stick with the democracy we have in the UK which we will have to make work in our favour because we live here. If anybody here does not think the best way forward is to try to get a majority Corbyn lead Labour government elected sometime in the next few yrs then can they suggest a better alternative that is actually achievable?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> can they suggest a better alternative that is actually achievable?


Maybe you need to do a thread specifically dedicated to this question.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2017)

dude the 'no head measuring before voting rights' is a fairly tame position I'd have thought, certainly its sticking with what we have rather than my solution:


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Maybe you need to do a thread specifically dedicated to this question.


No need. They can post it on this thread.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> What I was trying to get across was that plenty of links to left wing theory are posted on this & other threads.


I don't think it's "leftwing theory" to say that it's a bad idea to introduce competency tests before people are allowed to vote. And I don't think it's obscure or academic-y to say the suggestion comes from a worryingly anti-democratic tendency. Quite the reverse, in fact!


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it's "leftwing theory" to say that it's a bad idea to introduce competency tests before people are allowed to vote. And I don't think it's obscure or academic-y to say the suggestion comes from a worryingly anti-democratic tendency. Quite the reverse, in fact!


It's not like there's a widespread contempt of politicians nor that part of the reason why many people voted to leave the EU was because they felt that it was some remote, undemocratic body.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

And this criticism of the lack of democracy doesn't just extend to Westminster/Brussels/the local council, how many people can say that there _aren't _criticisms of the lack of democracy in their workplace. That senior managers aren't criticised for ignoring the ideas and desires of staff.


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> they are the only time the electorate is asked a straight question tbf.



Which is why so many liberals hate the idea of referendums, they give us more power than any  vote in an election.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it's "leftwing theory" to say that it's a bad idea to introduce competency tests before people are allowed to vote. And I don't think it's obscure or academic-y to say the suggestion comes from a worryingly anti-democratic tendency. Quite the reverse, in fact!


I think SaskiaJayne was talking about the contents of the bumped thread rather than A380's voter exam suggestion, which I don't think was a very serious one.


----------



## bimble (Dec 14, 2017)

The Swiss, with their very frequent referendums, you (every citizen) get a big pile of paper in the post with an introduction to the issues and the main arguments set out by each side. Nobody is forced to read any of it obvs.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it's "leftwing theory" to say that it's a bad idea to introduce competency tests before people are allowed to vote. And I don't think it's obscure or academic-y to say the suggestion comes from a worryingly anti-democratic tendency. Quite the reverse, in fact!


Tbf Danny I wasn’t really seeing any of that as serious discussion. Nobody is going to introduce competency tests before anybody is alowed to vote in the UK although one might argue the voting age limit is in itself a competency test & could be lowered.

So what am I trying to get across? It’s this. If people want change they need to vote for change. On this forum we discuss stuff & post links to interesting political theory. However, the vast majority of voters do not do politics & they do not read the sort of informative political stuff in the links that get posted on here. So their politics will not be influenced by reading the sometimes very complex stuff that is available online.

 I think most people’s politics comes from what is going on around them in their day to day lives. What they read in the papers if they read papers or what they discuss on social media & with family & work colleauges perhaps? So voting patterns will not be influenced by reading about politics in other countries & other times but by what is happening now in their lives. Does that make sense?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

And isn't "liberals" a bit of a lazy term? 

ie. one of those things that people (esp on u75) like to call other people, but few would describe themselves as such, and if they did, it would have a different meaning to them?


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.
> 
> Eg for the EU one:
> 
> ...


Here it is, the liberal middle class hatred of the idea that working class people have an equal vote to them. Because behind all the bullshit sophistry of this twats arguement, this policy would end up having the effect of disenfranchising working class voters to the benefit of the middle classes, which is exactly why such arguements are made.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> However, the vast majority of voters do not do politics


You keep saying this but it is absolute nonsense. Indeed you immediately contradict yourself when you say


SaskiaJayne said:


> I think most people’s politics comes from what is going on around them in their day to day lives. What they read in the papers if they read papers or what they discuss on social media & with family & work colleauges perhaps? So voting patterns will not be influenced by reading about politics in other countries & other times but by what is happening now in their lives.


Politics is not going to the polls once every four years (or even every year), it's not about supporting the red or the blue team. Politics is about how we work, how we live, how we interact with other people. And people are absolutely familiar with the lack of control they have over their lives, how decisions in their communities and workplaces are made without any input by them and often to their detriment. People "do" politics constantly.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

Lets try again. The majority of people do not do politics as in reading & studying it. The do not read poltical history or political theory. Their politics comes from their day to to day lives. As we apparently are both in agreement with. Which why I alluded to your thread & pointed out most people don’t read that sort of stuff.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

Most people might not read political history or post on a thread about political theory but they are intimately aware of the fact that their workplace isn't democratic, that their community isn't democratic, that the society they live in isn't democratic. They may express such opinions in a different form but it's genuinely crazy to suggest that the overwhelming majority of people in this country, or any other, aren't aware that they don't have real meaningful input into the decisions that affect them.

For god's sake one of the reasons for the leave vote winning was precisely because so many people felt this lack of democracy.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> Here it is, the liberal middle class hatred of the idea that working class people have an equal vote to them. Because behind all the bullshit sophistry of this twats arguement, this policy would end up having the effect of disenfranchising working class voters to the benefit of the middle classes, which is exactly why such arguements are made.


I think my mistake was having more faith in the working classes than you do.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Most people might not read political history or post on a thread about political theory but they are intimately aware of the fact that their workplace isn't democratic, that their community isn't democratic, that the society they live in isn't democratic. They may express such opinions in a different form but it's genuinely crazy to suggest that the overwhelming majority of people in this country, or any other, aren't aware that they don't have real meaningful input into the decisions that affect them.
> 
> For god's sake one of the reasons for the leave vote winning was precisely because so many people felt this lack of democracy.


If I ask most people I know. Friends, neighbours etc if they do politics they will say no. They will say all politicians are as bad as each other & that they have zero interest in politics. Yes they are aware they have no input into decisions that affect them which is why they say they do not do politics & they have little interest in voting. Most never vote in local elections because they feel their vote will have no influence on local decisions. Some will vote in general elections & much more of them voted in the referendum because they felt more strongly about it than general election results. Most voted leave & most gave reasons along the lines of not wanting EU input into UK law & taking back control of borders.

All of which is of course political but but my friends & neighbours would deny it because by their own admissions they do not do politics. I wonder what they would say if I told them they were doing politics?


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> I think my mistake was having more faith in the working classes than you do.



Yeah, because the working classes exist solely for the purpose of sustaining your faith, you smug, entitled, arrogant twat.

You know they people I despise the most are people like you. Read most things in media or comments on internet and you will find that the majority of anti working class comments now comes from the likes of you. Honestly at this rate it is better to ask if the working class should have any faith in the left, given that it has been hijacked by the middle classes which focuses solely on the pet obsessions.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> Here it is, the liberal middle class hatred of the idea that working class people have an equal vote to them. Because behind all the bullshit sophistry of this twats arguement, this policy would end up having the effect of disenfranchising working class voters to the benefit of the middle classes, which is exactly why such arguements are made.



Nice of you to assume the working class are less politically educated than the middle class. You condescending fuckwit.


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Nice of you to assume the working class are less politically educated than the middle class. You condescending fuckwit.



I did nothing of the sort, I'm not the one calling for a voter qualification system. A system that has a proven record of disenfranchising working class and poorer people, which is exactly why he wants it.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> I did nothing of the sort, I'm not the one calling for a voter qualification system. A system that has a proven record of disenfranchising working class and poorer people, which is exactly why he wants it.



You said a policy that set some sort of political awareness test would disenfranchise the working class. The only logical conclusion of this is you equate working class with stupid and middle class with clever.

I find that offensive.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

At the risk of muddying the waters, there's a big difference between _stupid _and _uninformed_. A lot of clever people are uninformed IME. How exactly that relates to class seems complicated, to say the least.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> I did nothing of the sort, I'm not the one calling for a voter qualification system. A system that has a proven record of disenfranchising working class and poorer people, which is exactly why he wants it.


Nor did I. Read the idea. Nothing about a limited franchise. Just about having executive referenda.

At least the other posters on here are are actually attacking my idea not some straw man they have constructed.

As to smug, arrogent and entitled. Well you’re right on the first two! But I don’t think you know me. So play the ball  not the player.

I’m not entitled though. My parents gave my childhood working for the revolution that never came. They gave me love and warmth and my left wing politics but nothing material.

I thought we attacked ideas on this part of the board,  not our own stereotyped opinions of who and what other posters are?


----------



## Supine (Dec 14, 2017)

Some people can be stupid and uninformed. They could also be from any class.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> You said a policy that set some sort of political awareness test would disenfranchise the working class. The only logical conclusion of this is you equate working class with stupid and middle class with clever.
> 
> I find that offensive.



Me too! It’s bollocks. I trust my class, the working class.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 14, 2017)

I’m trying to get a handle on this working class/middle class thing from the pov of where I live in north Essex. Plenty of people around me are builders. Some are very wealthy. They have built up portfolios of buy to let properties by shrewd buying decisions over they decades but they still install kitchens & bathrooms on a daily basis. They also employ people. Others are less wealthy & work on their own doing small jobs concreting etc. But they are all mates & all drink in the same pub at the end of the day. They would all call themselves working class I think.

Plenty of retired people about living in paid for houses with imaculate gardens & new cars in the drive. I don’t know whether they would call themselves middle class or not. I think they would if you asked them but they might tell you all they have was achieved by hard work in their working lives.

Rather than working class or middle class one could perhaps divide the divided UK into the older house owners who were able to buy their own houses at a time it was feasible for a working person to buy their own house & the younger working people who might describe themselves as either middle or working class but share the common bond of paying high percentages of their wages or salaries to the rentiers for homes they will never own.

As for the “politically educated” these might be people who find politics fascinating rather than boring & could  describe themselves working class or middle class as they wish.


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> You said a policy that set some sort of political awareness test would disenfranchise the working class. The only logical conclusion of this is you equate working class with stupid and middle class with clever.
> 
> I find that offensive.



So you don't think that such a system/test would mean that someone with a degree in politics or EU law would have an advantage over someone who doesn't have one? With uni fees at £9000 a year, uni is out of bounds for most working class young people. Not because they are any less intelligent but because having less money, time and support means that you cannot take full advantages of what education offers.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

Class isn't really about feels and describing oneself, it's functional. I mean, Alan Sugar might feel working class, but he's clearly not. A call-centre worker with a comfy flat and a nice car and a collar and tie can _feel_ middle class, but they're as working class as someone who works on a production line or in a warehouse.


----------



## discokermit (Dec 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Nice of you to assume the working class are less politically educated than the middle class. You condescending fuckwit.


put it another way, working class people are less likely to pass a test set by the middle class, for the middle class, in the language of the middle class.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Nice of you to assume the working class are less politically educated than the middle class. You condescending fuckwit.


This as well. Over the course of my involvement with the left there does seem to be a certain cadre of people who don’t actually have any faith in the intelligence of their fellow workers.
I don’t know if Mather is one of those or not though. I hope not.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

discokermit said:


> put it another way, working class people are less likely to pass a test set by the middle class, for the middle class, in the language of the middle class.


Yes it's nonsense to suggest such a test wouldn't disenfranchise the working class, that's the whole point of such proposals. That's how they've been used in the past.

EDIT: 






			
				a cunt said:
			
		

> That kind of trust is not just unjustified, it’s borderline insane. No sensible person thinks majority opinion is a good guide to best practice in health, education, engineering, or pretty much everything else. So why would public policy be any exception?


See this crap, it's whole basis is to make politics a specialist subject, only to be practised by those with the 'correct' knowledge.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

discokermit said:


> put it another way, working class people are less likely to pass a test set by the middle class, for the middle class, in the language of the middle class.



I’m not sure my proposal would work in our current system. Obviously you would aspire for it to be fair.

Perhaps it’s an idea for one part of the system of how we govern ourselves post capitalism?


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> So you don't think that such a system/test would mean that someone with a degree in politics or EU law would have an advantage over someone who doesn't have one? With uni fees at £9000 a year, uni is out of bounds for most working class young people. Not because they are any less intelligent but because having less money, time and support means that you cannot take full advantages of what education offers.



Oh ffs. Do you honestly think he was narrowing this down to those with degrees in EU law and politics? (And btfuckingway, I have a degree in politics and was born and bred in council house poverty.) I’m not interested in current tuition fees, which obviously discriminate against the working class. But you are defining intelligence and awareness in terms of middle class, clever, working class, thick, which is offensive. There are all sorts of ways the working class get educated enough in politics, beyond your crude graduate test. Stop being so fucking condescending.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 14, 2017)

discokermit said:


> put it another way, working class people are less likely to pass a test set by the middle class, for the middle class, in the language of the middle class.



Yes. But he’s not putting it ‘another way’. He just has some crude notion of what intelligence is, what political awareness is and how it’s gained by the working class, and, above all, that the working class can’t pass tests and the middle class can. 

Fuck that.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 14, 2017)

There should have been public meetings and only people who registered to vote at a public meeting could vote. Maybe.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

Good grief, I haven’t heard the term
Lumpenproletariat used seriously for a good few  years. But it seems to me that some people may still hold to it. I really hope this is just my perception based on posts and it’s not people’s real view that most working people are ignorant and disengaged. 

Had I have known this second hand idea for adjudicating on widget size would have started this I’d have put it up years ago.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

Who's used it now.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> Good grief, I haven’t heard the term
> Lumpenproletariat used seriously for a good years. But it seems to me that some people may still hold to it. I really hope this is just my perception based on posts and it’s not people’s real view that most workering people are ignorant and disengaged.
> 
> Had I have known this second hand idea for adjudicating on widget size would have started this I’d have put it up years ago.


You'll be linking to use of this term won't you?


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> You'll be linking to use of this term won't you?


No,I trust most people on here are familiar with it, or can look it up.

As do you, I disagree with you over lots of things. But I’ve never once got the impression that you don’t trust the intelligence of people from the working class.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Who's used it now.


No one.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> A system that has a proven record of disenfranchising working class and poorer people, *which is exactly why he wants it.*



There's a horrible tendency on here for many people to always assume the worst about others. Like they are just looking for righteous excuses to vent hatred.

And I think it's something that really puts a lot of people off "politics" in general.

In my early days on u75 there were various concepts I met. Like say "class war". I was dismissive of it as a concept largely because it seemed to be associated with an assumption that two people in different class positions had to hate each other personally, or at least that's how it so often came across. Over time though, I've come to accept it as a valid notion. I accept that there's a sense that structurally, different classes are "at war"; that there's an inevitable conflict of interests. I've come to that point of view thanks to the discussions take part in or read on here, in which there is always some level of hatred going around, often directed at me. The kind of accusation you make towards A380; that he wants to disenfranchise the working class - that's what he _really wants, _the monster. It couldn't be a misguided attempt to get people (of all classes) to enter into a referendum with a level of base information that might help them make a better decision, maybe even a decision that was most in their interests. Nope, it must be that there's a sinister motive behind this idea somewhere. Anyway, I stick around on u75 and have changed my views quite a bit on quite a lot of things, because I'm relatively unbothered by people on the internet accusing me of all sorts of motivations. I sort of feel that doesn't apply to most people though, and they are put off by it, and they are possibly put off the kind of ideas that you might like more people to share with you.

This is a separate but not totally unrelated point to the one saskiajayne was making earlier, about obstruse theoretical discussions being irrelevant to many people, in terms of their daily lives. I'm not saying those discussions shouldn't be had by the way. But when the question is asked of someone who's dismissive of all seemingly pragmatic routes to make change - who maybe even spoils their ballot paper to satisfy themselves of their own intellectual integrity - when the question is asked, "what's your solution/suggestion" and they come back with some generalised commitment to grassroots activism, or to refining their analysis of power relations, or whatever, then it all feels a bit hopeless to me.

These points are not unrelated, in the sense that they both have some relevance to the failure of "the left" (and I don't really like using that term because it's so vague and so widely applied) to gain traction with voters. And a total failure to gain the amount of traction that would allow some kind of revolutionary change outside of our parliamentary setup.

I've rambled somewhat off topic.

Anyway, it's a popular narrative here, to say that the Brexit vote was a mark of people's desperation with the establishment, the middle classes, the metropolitan elites. Alternatively it's a failure of those who want to reduce the disproportionate power of those particular groups to provide people with a way of using their franchise to do so. You've done your political theory to death, now you have to actually persuade people what you're saying makes sense. You persuade me, more than you probably think, that it makes sense. Check out teuchter's handy tips above for ways to persuade people without being so offputting that they walk away before you've even had the chance to do so.


----------



## Supine (Dec 14, 2017)

Good post


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

teuchter said:


> when the question is asked of someone who's dismissive of all seemingly pragmatic routes to make change


Do you have an example of this?


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> Yeah, because the working classes exist solely for the purpose of sustaining your faith, you smug, entitled, arrogant twat.
> 
> You know they people I despise the most are people like you. Read most things in media or comments on internet and you will find that the majority of anti working class comments now comes from the likes of you. Honestly at this rate it is better to ask if the working class should have any faith in the left, given that it has been hijacked by the middle classes which focuses solely on the pet obsessions.



sounds like a bit of class prejudice coming out here


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Do you have an example of this?


here maybe?

In a more general sense, many of those who are dismissive of Corbynism, perhaps.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 14, 2017)

teuchter said:


> here maybe?
> 
> In a more general sense, many of those who are dismissive of Corbynism, perhaps.


Is Pickman's model "dismissive of all seemingly pragmatic routes to make change"? How are you measuring that assertion?

Or do you just mean dismissive of a particular route _you_ hope will bring change? ("All" meaning actually just one).


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2017)

teuchter said:


> here maybe?
> 
> In a more general sense, many of those who are dismissive of Corbynism, perhaps.


Tosh teuchter


----------



## mather (Dec 14, 2017)

rubbershoes said:


> sounds like a bit of class prejudice coming out here



Well its not like they didn't start it. There is only so much being told your some thicko who should have their vote taken away cos they didn't go to uni and didn't vote the 'right' way.

It's really telling that A380 can spout his elitist crap that would see many people voting rights taken away and say crap like how working classes failed him and his "faith", but hey I'm the one with a problem for having issues with that.


----------



## rubbershoes (Dec 14, 2017)

mather said:


> Well its not like they didn't start it.



always a good argument to gain the moral high ground


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2017)

I'm chuckling that 'the labour left' has become 'Corbynism' as if the man has new things and new routes. Maybe he does, maybe he will sweep to victory and this time, this time social democracy will prove stable enough. I mean the conditions for it being tolerated seemed to have passed but these are stranger times so who can say. You'll have to let me know. If it can improve the here and now for all, bring it. I'll not complain. Much*. I'm not convinced it won't end up with Dan Jarvis begging bowl out to the IMF in a callaghan after wilson position though. With attendant austerity conditions. But I'm sure the salt-of-the-earth p/b know better than I about such things

*this is a lie I'll never be happy with a managerial layer


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

While I get the thing about abuse on here, tbh A380 had it coming. It's an offensive idea.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2017)

mather : You do appreciate that A380's "idea" was a complete outlier don't you, as well as being rubbish? And that he wasn't even seriously proposing it? I read it as mad kiteflying rather than any kind of serious proposal.

Anyway, there was a point by point destruction of it by kabbes further back, taking the whole thing apart as not only wrong in principle but unworkable in practice.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> Is Pickman's model "dismissive of all seemingly pragmatic routes to make change"?



That's the impression I get, yes.


danny la rouge said:


> How are you measuring that assertion?


Over about ten years of posting on urban.



danny la rouge said:


> Or do you just mean dismissive of a particular route _you_ hope will bring change? ("All" meaning actually just one).



No, that's not what I mean. 

In the example I linked to, he refused to give any positive suggestions himself. He seems pretty sure of his position, yet I've never seen him actually state clearly what he wants to see happen and how. It's always about dismissing what others suggest.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 14, 2017)

bemused said:


> Indian companies can move people here to work,


Not that easily. The people have to be Tier 1, or on spousal or dependants visa, or the company have to jump through all sorts of qualifying hoops to satisfy the authorities (it lies between home office and BEIS) that they need that person and no UK or EU citizen would do just as well


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Would it be a really bad spoiler if I just came out and said the answer to the op is no?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm chuckling that 'the labour left' has become 'Corbynism' as if the man has new things and new routes. Maybe he does, maybe he will sweep to victory and this time, this time social democracy will prove stable enough. I mean the conditions for it being tolerated seemed to have passed but these are stranger times so who can say. You'll have to let me know. If it can improve the here and now for all, bring it. I'll not complain. Much*. I'm not convinced it won't end up with Dan Jarvis begging bowl out to the IMF in a callaghan after wilson position though. With attendant austerity conditions. But I'm sure the salt-of-the-earth p/b know better than I about such things
> 
> *this is a lie I'll never be happy with a managerial layer



How would you like to see people vote? If you wouldn't like to see them vote, then what instead, and what to achieve, and how?

Your post above is the kind of thing I'm talking about really.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm chuckling that 'the labour left' has become 'Corbynism' as if the man has new things and new routes. Maybe he does, maybe he will sweep to victory and this time, this time social democracy will prove stable enough. I mean the conditions for it being tolerated seemed to have passed but these are stranger times so who can say. You'll have to let me know. If it can improve the here and now for all, bring it. I'll not complain. Much. I'm not convinced it won't end up with Dan Jarvis begging bowl out to the IMF in a callaghan after wilson position though. With attendant austerity conditions. But I'm sure the salt-of-the-earth p/b know better than I about such things


I'm not convinced it wouldn't end like that either. No reason not to be keen to try it. We have austerity now, without even the honourable failure to have caused it. It's only two years ago that Corbyn/McDonnell were elected leaders of Labour. It's easy to forget how gobsmacking that was for many people, including me, at the time. Really? Wow. Suddenly things were being talked about as if they were talking about the same world as the one I live in. 

So at the moment, I am still keen on the idea of getting labour in. Whatever with brexit. If brexit destroys the tories for a generation and results in a Corbyn/McDonnell Labour party gaining power, I'll take that, whatever happens next. It may very well be crushing disappointment, but it won't be like Blair in 97. It will be something with actual potential.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> Not that easily. The people have to be Tier 1, or on spousal or dependants visa, or the company have to jump through all sorts of qualifying hoops to satisfy the authorities (it lies between home office and BEIS) that they need that person and no UK or EU citizen would do just as well


Yep. It's a longstanding gripe from India. Irrespective of brexit, it's fucking shit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

But it's not a complete outlier, that's the whole point William of Walworth. There have been any number of comments about how those who voted leave were either stupid and/or 'just didn't understand what they were doing'. 

There have been/are arguments that representative democracy is valuable precisely because is ensures that _responsible_ individuals govern rather than the masses. The nonsense proposed by A380 is not an outlier, it's part of the long continuing trend of liberalism that is opposed to democracy, read the pieces linked on the thread I started.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> There have been/are arguments that representative democracy is valuable precisely because is ensures that _responsible_ individuals govern rather than the masses. =.


Really? From whom? Surely the argument in favour of representative democracy is that those who are delegated to make the decisions are then held accountable by those who elected them for the results of those decisions?


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 14, 2017)

A380 said:


> How about referenda, but in order to vote on each one, something like the electoral commission comes up with a bank of questions to see if you have a GCSE level of understanding about the issue. So when people wanted to vote they would need to ave an idea or study what was going on.
> 
> Eg for the EU one:
> 
> ...


for a whole host of practical reasons which others have amply given on this thread, your idea would end up as a full throttle onslaught against people's democratic rights.
It's practically totalitarian. Plus, completely bonkers and fucking scary with it


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Really? From whom? Surely the argument in favour of representative democracy is that those who are delegated to make the decisions are then held accountable by those who elected them for the results of those decisions?


This prick for one.


> The mistake, however, is to assume that this trust is in the majority’s ability to reach fair and wise decisions about specific policies. That kind of trust is not just unjustified, it’s borderline insane. No sensible person thinks majority opinion is a good guide to best practice in health, education, engineering, or pretty much everything else. So why would public policy be any exception?



EDIT: Or how about this crap





Or here.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Really? From whom? Surely the argument in favour of representative democracy is that those who are delegated to make the decisions are then held accountable by those who elected them for the results of those decisions?



You need both of those elements to really support a representative democracy.

Though redsquirrel’s part needs to flow from your part by necessity.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel : I was a Remain voter, now and all along very critical of Brexit, but who completely disagrees with other Remainers just dismissing Leave voters as stupid or racist etc. (and I'd agree there's been too many of them out there -- very few on  Urban though, I'd contend -- at least, very few that I've seen anyway).

I also agreed with pretty much everything kabbes said in that post I linked to. I also remember reading that Julian Baggini article you linked to further back and thought it was a pile of elitist nonsense at the time.

But I tend to think the chances of voting competence tests actually been introduced are pretty low tbh .... and I still don't think A380 was serious ....


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This prick for one.



The truth is not decided by plebiscite.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> I tend to think the chances of voting competence tests actually been introduced are pretty low tbh .... and I still don't think A380 was serious ....



The idea of such tests makes me shudder- it will obviously be used in the service of power and the status quo.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2017)

teuchter said:


> How would you like to see people vote?


in a system where a vote was meaningful. Outside of key marginal swing seats (or those pesky reff's eh!), it isn't. As for the rest, well give me your detailed and thoroughly explained  roadmap of the parliamentary route to socialism and I'll tell you if I agree or do not agree. You want me to produce the new world, lets see you do it.



littlebabyjesus said:


> No reason not to be keen to try it.


well yes, why the fuck not? the debate has shifted from deficit fetishism on both sides to a lurching realisation that shit has gone well and truly south. As I say, if it can improve material conditions here and now, let me not stand in the way. I do reserve the right to say it isn't what I want, and I don't think it sustainable. its not . And nobody is measuring my head.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> The truth is not decided by plebiscite.


It's a false distinction he's making there, though, perhaps unconsciously, between 'the people' and, well, who? people like him? Politicians? If politicians, that's circular, because they're only politicians because people voted for them.  

He's right about it being bollocks about politicians 'trusting the people'. They go to great lengths to influence people with knowingly dishonest propaganda. But even then, there's an unconscious division being made.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

Can’t argue with any of that


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

ETA, fucked up my quote.


----------



## A380 (Dec 14, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> But I tend to think the chances of voting competence tests actually been introduced are pretty low tbh .... and I still don't think A380 was serious ....



What are you saying .

Actually I was just lobbing a second hand, slightly idealistic  SF idea in here to see what people thought.

I had no idea of the staw man monster I would create. I must post in this section more often.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 14, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> But I tend to think the chances of voting competence tests actually been introduced are pretty low tbh ....


Actual tests may be, but further attempts to push back any democratic control of society are happening at this moment. Look at how it has become an orthodoxy that national banks must be 'independent' of government. So orthodox that the current supposedly social democratic Labour leadership don't challenge it, despite the BoE only becoming independent within the last 20 years. Look at the imposition of technocratic ministers/advisors by governments, the removal of any traces of workplace democracy, the removal of more and more areas of government to the control of _independent experts_.

Liberalism has always been anti-democratic, the methods by which it opposes democracy change but it's hatred and fear of the masses is constant.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Actual tests may be, but further attempts to push back any democratic control of society are happening at this moment. Look at how it has become an orthodoxy that national banks must be 'independent' of government. So orthodox that the current supposedly social democratic Labour leadership don't challenge it, despite the BoE only becoming independent within the last 20 years. Look at the imposition of technocratic ministers/advisors by governments, the removal of any traces of workplace democracy, the removal of more and more areas of government to the control of _independent experts_.
> 
> Liberalism has always been anti-democratic, the methods by which it opposes democracy change but it's hatred and fear of the masses is constant.


I agree with this and you make a very good point about the national bank. Corbyn/McDonnell is a very different beast from Blair/Brown, though - the fuckers who made the bank 'independent' (it isn't really, of course, but you're right that a measure of democratic accountability has been removed from it). It is depressing when you put it like that how much just needs to be clawed back, let alone making progress, but we are where we are. From here, Corbyn is more than I would have hoped for a couple of years ago.

ETA:

With my deluded optimist head on, Corbyn is the closest the UK has to Melenchon in France. Just as UKIP and the FN are part of the same thing, I do think there is overlap between the kinds of things Corbyn wants and the likes of Melenchon. That he could be elected is cause for some optimism, no? At least _some_.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

I like Corbyn -seems like a lovely bloke. Not sure whether he has the ideas we need to negotiate the future, though.

Then again, I think he’s more likely than most to be willing to listen to those who might.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2017)

8ball said:


> I like Corbyn -seems like a lovely bloke. Not sure whether he has the ideas we need to negotiate the future, though.
> 
> Then again, I think he’s more likely than most to be willing to listen to those who might.


We're left with narrow margins. Sanders could have been US Pres. Melenchon wasn't that far from sneaking into the last two in France, from where he would probably have won. Corbyn could be PM here still. With just little tweaks in reality all of these things could happen. They're not impossible. However, in reality, we have Trump, Macron and May. 

On the optimistic side, such things can and do happen in Latin America.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2017)

I think things will shift a little in the next few years.  I see people in work saying things that would have been seen as barkingly left-wing just a couple of years ago.


----------



## MrSpikey (Dec 15, 2017)

bemused said:


> I'm not denying he's a twit, but I can watch him and not want to kill myself.



I can watch Hannan and not want to kill myself. I don't think that's unusual.

Watching Hannan and not wanting to kill him, however...


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> in a system where a vote was meaningful. Outside of key marginal swing seats (or those pesky reff's eh!), it isn't. As for the rest, well give me your detailed and thoroughly explained  roadmap of the parliamentary route to socialism and I'll tell you if I agree or do not agree.



You're dodging the question by throwing it back to me. 

Is it fair to say that you don't have a roadmap to socialism, using a parliamentary route or anything else?

I don't claim to have one. But if people think that voting for corbyn is the best option at present, I'm not going to sneer at them for doing so, unless I've got a better alternative to propose.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You're dodging the question by throwing it back to me.


you dodge the question it seems, as you cannot defend the status quo nor can you describe a socialism done through parliament. Thats fine, I didn't expect you to, in fact I'm heartened to find that the end goal of socialism is shared here. How reticent you have been on this subject in the past.



teuchter said:


> s it fair to say that you don't have a roadmap to socialism, using a parliamentary route or anything else?


oh all sorts of ideas gleaned from various reading and lived experience, but mid term pragmatism? Well thats a different question isn't it? I'd discuss it but you and saskyia are both doing the fresh convert to labour thing of 'if not us, what?' so y'know. My patience for that is limited. Particularly as I'm afraid I don't think you argue in good faith. Yes I know, water off a ducks back to you etc etc but you'll have to live with the fact that I don't think you have any interest in discussing what could be, just what is pragmatic. As you define it. 



teuchter said:


> I don't claim to have one. But if people think that voting for corbyn is the best option at present, I'm not going to sneer at them for doing so


nor will I. Oh no I will take the piss a bit and at turns laud C-byn as a hip-hop legend, allotment ghoul and the second coming of christ. Because it amuses me to do so.

however none of this actually stems from the subject that has driven this tangent does it? This is you just saying 'well what do you imagine will happen without a monarch?' 


however if your new found interest about non parliamentary routes to socialism is genuine then why not start a thread? I think you'll get the same raised eyebrow you are getting from me but who knows, maybe the conversation might bear fruit. Don't let me hold you back


----------



## Winot (Dec 15, 2017)

You do write beautifully DC.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2017)

That's an impressively long-winded way of saying you've got nothing to offer, except maybe in secret to a selected audience. It's the same answer as pickmans'.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> That's an impressively long-winded way of saying you've got nothing to offer, except maybe in secret to a selected audience. It's the same answer as pickmans'.


its not really is it? I make no secret of the fact that I think only a revolution is capable of bringing about real change. Nor do I imagine such a thing is just around the corner, nor do I have every answer. I'm reminded suddenly that we are but two months and a hundred years away from something that was impossible until it happened. In the meantime by all means, you vote for left labour. Have at it my son. Let the dice fall as they may. But lets not have any of this demanding of answers when your own are less than forthcoming.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 15, 2017)

I don’t think this argument about people not being qualified/educated enough to vote is a serious one. Democracy is everybody voting. The “Guardianista” type articles on the subject come across as the hysterical whingings of Blairite journos for whom the brexit vote was like a bereavement. I think their love of all things EU comes from their lifestyles of flitting around Europe for work & spare time spent at French holiday homes rather than any belief that EU membership benefits the UK. Most working people cannot travel freely in Europe because of lack of money & lack of spare time off work.

I am absolutely happy to go with a Corbyn lead government & see how it goes. Cheers teuchter for those excellent posts.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> But if people think that voting for corbyn is the best option at present, I'm not going to sneer at them for doing so.


And who's been doing that then?



SaskiaJayne said:


> Democracy is everybody voting.


No it's not, it's about people having real control over their communities. To reduce democracy to simply voting is as mistaken to make "the economy" something meaningful. The legal requirement for unions to ballot members before striking hasn't increased democracy it's reduced it.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> No it's not, it's about people having real control over their communities. To reduce democracy to simply voting is as mistaken to make "the economy" something meaningful. The legal requirement for unions to ballot members before striking hasn't increased democracy it's reduced it.


I’ve read some of your link & it is heavy going. Fact is nobody who should be reading this stuff will be reading it. Political campaigning has to be kept much more simple than that because people have other stuff to do work/leisure/family. Hence “soundbite politics” stuff that can be consumed on the go when people have a few moments of spare time. Politicians have to come to the people. They cannot expect the people to come to them.

The left’s job is to condense reams of difficult to read text into easy to understand soundbites to get their message across. Democracy is everybody voting if they choose to vote or even if they can be arsed to vote. For that to happen they have to believe there is anything worth voting for & that their vote might make a difference.

So back to the art of the possible. It is possible for an incoming Labour government to strengthen employment law so people know their income from week to week & generally get their employers to treat them like human beings. It is possible for them to begin a large council house building program. I watched about 2 square miles of green fields on the edge of Colchester change into Greenstead Estate in the 60s/70s so it is possible because it has been done before by UK governments. In the meantime it is possible for them to introduce rent controls on private lets. It is also possible for them to take railways back into public ownership as the franchises run out.

I follow politics all the time. Tbf I do stick to UK & UK related politics simply because It gets too time consuming if I try to get a handle rest of world politics as well. I like well written current stuff. Stuff that is easy to read & understand. Stuff that entertains & makes current politics interesting. If you want people to vote you need to make them interested enough to vote.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I’ve read some of your link & it is heavy going. Fact is nobody who should be reading this stuff will be reading it
> ......
> Politicians have to come to the people. They cannot expect the people to come to them.
> ......
> The left’s job is to condense reams of difficult to read text into easy to understand soundbites to get their message across. Democracy is everybody voting if they choose to vote or even if they can be arsed to vote. For that to happen they have to believe there is anything worth voting for & that their vote might make a difference.


This sums up the entirety of our political differences. You believe that the gospel has to be spread to the heathen, that the working class are some passive body who have to be instructed by 'the left' before change can be effected. I utterly reject that view, for me the working class are the only actor capable about of bringing changes that will improve society, if socialists have any 'job' it's recognising that and acting in the way that advances the power of labour.

People do not need to read Marx to bring about change, they don't need a in depth knowledge of the history of socialism. The Russian revolution, the Spanish revolution, the Paris Commune, etc, etc didn't come about because 'politicians went to the people',  they came about because workers stood up to fight for a better society for themselves and their comrades.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This sums up the entirety of our political differences. You believe that the gospel has to be spread to the heathen, that the working class are some passive body who have to be instructed by 'the left' before change can be effected. I utterly reject that view, for me the working class are the only actor capable about of bringing changes that will improve society, if socialists have any 'job' it's recognising that and acting in the way that advances the power of labour....


How's that working out?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This sums up the entirety of our political differences. You believe that the gospel has to be spread to the heathen, that the working class are some passive body who have to be instructed by 'the left' before change can be effected. I utterly reject that view, for me the working class are the only actor capable about of bringing changes that will improve society, if socialists have any 'job' it's recognising that and acting in the way that advances the power of labour.


I take it by heathen you mean those that do not believe in or have no faith in politics & politicians? So yes it is up to politicians to bang on doors & stand on stumps to spread their gospel but that gospel has got to be believable enough to make people believe change is possible. Otherwise the people will go & do stuff that bores them less.

Your post contradicts itself. Why do I believe that the working class are “passive”? I pointed out in an earlier post that this definition of class does not quite fit the UK anyway. The w/c(for want of a better term)do not need “instruction” they need information condensed down from the hard & boring to read political articles to stuff that they have time to read that still puts the message across. Social media seems to be the way forward in UK these days. The left need to do this. If Labour get in one would hope that they live up to expectations & indeed act in the way that advances the power of labour(with small l). If they do then they will be voted back in in subsequent GEs.

I actually think we are singing from the same hymn sheet. The argument is your very complicated & detailed way of putting the message across compared with my seeing the need to take that message & condense it down into something that can be put across quickly & briefly in the modern way.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I actually think we are singing from the same hymn sheet. The argument is your very complicated & detailed way of putting the message across compared with my seeing the need to take that message & condense it down into something that can be put across quickly & briefly in the modern way.


No we are not. I don't believe any 'message' needs to be put across. I don't believe that politicians going out doorstepping is what causes change, you make the Labour Party the actor of change not the working class, I don't believe people need 'information condensed down' before they can bring about change. 

As for the working class, I'm not talking about speaking with an accent or being in the C2-E census catagories, I mean it in the Marxist sense and it's as applicable as it ever was.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> That's the impression I get, yes.


OK, leaving aside whether that's true of him individually, you're suggesting it's also true of a wider group of posters here.  I don't recognise that.  I recognise that there are people who see a parliamentary road to socialism and some who don't, but I don't think it's fair to say the latter are "dismissive" and the former not; you yourself were pretty dismissive about a "commitment to grass-roots activism".  And fair enough: you don't have to see it as a way forward, but why is that not "dismissive"?



> In the example I linked to, he refused to give any positive suggestions himself. He seems pretty sure of his position, yet I've never seen him actually state clearly what he wants to see happen and how. It's always about dismissing what others suggest.


That's your view of Pickman's model.  I'll leave him to respond to that, but you haven't established it's symptomatic of anything but your assessment of one person's posting style.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> This sums up the entirety of our political differences. You believe that the gospel has to be spread to the heathen, that the working class are some passive body who have to be instructed by 'the left' before change can be effected. I utterly reject that view, for me the working class are the only actor capable about of bringing changes that will improve society, if socialists have any 'job' it's recognising that and acting in the way that advances the power of labour.


I have a lot of sympathy for your position, although I also think you're wilfully turning common ground into argument a little too often. But one of the principle problems with this view is, if you like, whether there is fertile ground to plant any seeds. Historically the working class had a lot more physical commonality - e.g. they literally worked together in the same fields, factories, etcetera. There were far stronger community institutions providing the basis for the sort of natural action that I think you're talking about.

The great success of Thatcherism is obviously that so much of this was destroyed, and now the WC is massively fractured, atomised even, and individualism is strong. So whilst parliamentary politics may not offer anything new, the entire landscape has changed to our detriment, raising the question of whether this worsened position makes PP any better a route. Either that or there needs to be a means of overcoming this disadvantage, e.g. establishing tangible organisation, which I think goes to the core of what people are asking when they ask, 'well what do you propose instead?'


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> That's the impression I get, yes.


yes, because there are none so blind they will not see





> Over about ten years of posting on urban.


but not, i note, reading





> No, that's not what I mean.
> 
> In the example I linked to, he refused to give any positive suggestions himself. He seems pretty sure of his position, yet I've never seen him actually state clearly what he wants to see happen and how. It's always about dismissing what others suggest.


in the example you gave i was asked about plans i might have. there is nothing incumbent on me to share with the entire english-speaking world plans which it would be a breach of confidence, not to mention security, to share.

so i have been so unpragmatic over the years as to not sign petitions, to not suggest people join unions, not to suggest people go on demonstrations, to not suggest people in unions ask their branches to donate to for example the orgreave justice campaign, i'm fairly certain i've advised people to contact councillors and mps to get things changed.

you're full of shit, teuchter.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> I have a lot of sympathy for your position, although I also think you're wilfully turning common ground into argument a little too often. But one of the principle problems with this view is, if you like, whether there is fertile ground to plant any seeds. Historically the working class had a lot more physical commonality - e.g. they literally worked together in the same fields, factories, etcetera. There were far stronger community institutions providing the basis for the sort of natural action that I think you're talking about.


I certainly would not disagree that in many many ways society is more atomised than in has been in the past. But how did those previous community institutions come about? Through working class self-organisation. History abounds with examples of community institutions becoming atrophied or even barriers to change and them being replaced by the working class creating new institutions that better suit their current demands. That will happen again and again.  



mauvais said:


> The great success of Thatcherism is obviously that so much of this was destroyed, and now the WC is massively fractured, atomised even, and individualism is strong. So whilst parliamentary politics may not offer anything new, the entire landscape has changed to our detriment, raising the question of whether this worsened position makes PP any better a route. Either that or there needs to be a means of overcoming this disadvantage, e.g. establishing tangible organisation, which I think goes to the core of what people are asking when they ask, 'well what do you propose instead?'


You're combining two different, although admittedly related, questions -_ what is the agent of change in society_ with _what is the best means of advancing such change_. As I said in a previous post my criticism is directed mostly at the first not at the second. Do I think people are better off fighting outside the LP than in it, yes I do. But whether they want to centre their activities around the LP or not it's vital to recognise that the only agent of bringing about change is the working class. You may think that the LP may be the best lever to assist that change but it is still only a tool not the real actor.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> I certainly would not disagree that in many many ways society is more atomised than in has been in the past. But how did those previous community institutions come about? Through working class self-organisation. History abounds with examples of community institutions becoming atrophied or even barriers to change and them being replaced by the working class creating new institutions that better suit their current demands. That will happen again and again.


This is the bit that I think is weakest. Perhaps I'm overly pessimistic. Common physicality, common fabric and stark clarity of the issues made it comparatively easy in the past. As an example of each: monolithic lifetime employment, pubs, being killed at work. Where we are now, these kind of institutions are unlikely to naturally re-form at significant scale without an impetus, the clearest of which is the self-defeating case of everything becoming significantly worse.

It's not an absolute, they do exist - near me, plenty of local Facebook groups are organising local action like cleaning up their streets, for example, and we see the gig economy crowd organising - but they are still fragmented and not in a good position to tackle resistance to whatever they want to do. I think holistically the direction of travel is not good. This invokes the question of how WC organisation can be helped or even whether outside help is required. Because of my pessimistic view of the whole environment, rather than I hope something altogether more patronising, I do think help is urgently required, and I see some manifestation of the Labour Party - not necessarily the current one - as potentially one of the better means to provide it. I have no great allegiance to it though so I'm quite prepared to revise this opinion & admit that I'm wrong, but ideally after being presented with some alternative.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> This is the bit that I think is weakest. Perhaps I'm overly pessimistic. Common physicality, common fabric and stark clarity of the issues made it comparatively easy in the past.


 Sorry but that's nonsense. Look at the struggle to set up trade unions, people went to jail, they died for that fight. The Charists didn't have it easy, trade unionists didn't have it easy, the Russian workers didn't have it easy.

Working class organisation has always been made in the teeth of opposition from capital, but the w/c have continually found new ways to bring the fight back to capital. That doesn't just mean people should twiddle their thumbs wan wait for the inevitability of socialism but it does mean that they should take inspiration from the activities of the w/c and the new directions for fight they open up


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but that's nonsense. Look at the struggle to set up trade unions, people went to jail, they died for that fight. The Charists didn't have it easy, trade unionists didn't have it easy, the Russian workers didn't have it easy.
> 
> Working class organisation has always been made in the teeth of opposition from capitial.


This is what I mean about your propensity for disagreement. Obviously, I don't mean that actually achieving anything was easy, it clearly wasn't - but that it was easy (easier) to associate and organise in order to have that fight in the first place.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2017)

But that's still nonsense, there have been past laws that have specifically banned the w/c from meeting and organising together and yet working class self-organisation still occurred.

Working class organisation and insurgency are the only forces that have brought about the changes I want, they are the only forces that are capable of bringing about change for the better. Maybe that organisation and insurgency will be structured through the LP, maybe not. But either way it won't have been the LP that has brought about such changes anymore than it was the LP that created the welfare state.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> But that's still nonsense, there have been past laws that have specifically banned the w/c from meeting and organising together and yet working class self-organisation still occurred.
> 
> Working class organisation and insurgency are the only forces that have brought about the changes I want, they are the only forces that are capable of bringing about change for the better. Maybe that organisation and insurgency will be structured through the LP, maybe not. But either way it won't have been the LP that has brought about such changes anymore than it was the LP that created the welfare state.


if people placed their faith in labour without taking action themselves there'd have been a poll tax till at least 1997


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 15, 2017)

Dear Ranbay,

Last week’s agreement on phase one of the Brexit talks seemed to suggest that ‘full alignment’ with the European Single Market and the Customs Union could be the shape of the final deal between the UK and the EU.

If this is the case, the UK could be heading towards a Brexit in name only, with significant implications for the property market, given some investors had been voiding the UK for fear of a ‘cliff edge’ exit. If the flow of news next year appears to confirm that a soft Brexit is emerging as the most likely option, we would expect interest in UK real estate to increase quickly.



___________________


just got this from work.....


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> Dear Ranbay,
> 
> Last week’s agreement on phase one of the Brexit talks seemed to suggest that ‘full alignment’ with the European Single Market and the Customs Union could be the shape of the final deal between the UK and the EU.
> 
> ...


from what was being said on this morning's today programme the logic of no hard border in ireland or the irish sea is staying in the sm & cu. so there may be some unhappiness ahead. the more things change, the more they stay the same


----------



## Winot (Dec 15, 2017)

It sounds like you think the working class will inevitably organise to foment Marxist revolution redsquirrel and there's nothing that needs to be done in the meantime. That seems a bit jam tomorrow for the people struggling with high rents, low wages etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

Winot said:


> It sounds like you think the working class will inevitably organise to foment Marxist revolution redsquirrel and there's nothing that needs to be done in the meantime. That seems a bit jam tomorrow for the people struggling with high rents, low wages etc.


did you read #3538?

here, have another look:



redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but that's nonsense. Look at the struggle to set up trade unions, people went to jail, they died for that fight. The Charists didn't have it easy, trade unionists didn't have it easy, the Russian workers didn't have it easy.
> 
> Working class organisation has always been made in the teeth of opposition from capital, but the w/c have continually found new ways to bring the fight back to capital. That doesn't just mean people should twiddle their thumbs wan wait for the inevitability of socialism but it does mean that they should take inspiration from the activities of the w/c and the new directions for fight they open up


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> But that's still nonsense, there have been past laws that have specifically banned the w/c from meeting and organising together and yet working class self-organisation still occurred.
> 
> Working class organisation and insurgency are the only forces that have brought about the changes I want, they are the only forces that are capable of bringing about change for the better. Maybe that organisation and insurgency will be structured through the LP, maybe not. But either way it won't have been the LP that has brought about such changes anymore than it was the LP that created the welfare state.


You are still interpreting all of this in a way that best offers disagreement. I'm well aware of the barriers to freedom of association, organisation of labour, and so on - but my point has been entirely about the natural ability to assemble and cooperate, because you know, live alongside and permanently work alongside people with a directly aligned interest. Whether the state & capital tries to stop you doing so is something else, and to a large extent independent of the former - I mean, they can do that now on top of the problems of getting people together in the first place.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You are still interpreting all of this in a way that best offers disagreement. I'm well aware of the barriers to freedom of association, organisation of labour, and so on - but my point has been entirely about the natural ability to assemble and cooperate, because you know, live alongside and permanently work alongside people with a directly aligned interest. Whether the state & capital tries to stop you doing so is something else, and to a large extent independent of the former - I mean, they can do that now on top of the problems of getting people together in the first place.


and yet here we are, discussing sedition on a device the peterloo dead would have seen as devilry. Swings &


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 15, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> Dear Ranbay,
> 
> Last week’s agreement on phase one of the Brexit talks seemed to suggest that ‘full alignment’ with the European Single Market and the Customs Union could be the shape of the final deal between the UK and the EU.
> 
> ...



I reckon there will be a "Hard Brexit" revolt against this flow at some point...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

mauvais said:


> You are still interpreting all of this in a way that best offers disagreement. I'm well aware of the barriers to freedom of association, organisation of labour, and so on - but my point has been entirely about the natural ability to assemble and cooperate, because you know, live alongside and permanently work alongside people with a directly aligned interest. Whether the state & capital tries to stop you doing so is something else, and to a large extent independent of the former - I mean, they can do that now on top of the problems of getting people together in the first place.


the first mention of a 'job for life' i could find in the times is in a letter from the 1920s. so this permanently work alongside bit is of very recent creation: and there were only five or six mentions of the notion in the times before the second world war. yet in the nineteenth century people who didn't have jobs for life were able to work together: and they didn't have to live right beside each other to do it. a more recent case in point: the anti-poll tax movement. people from a wide range of backgrounds, employment statuses (stati?) and locations came together to resist the community charge. i don't know what's given you the notion that you have to live beside or work with someone to have a hope of assembling and cooperating with them, it's just not borne out by my political experience in a range of movements from (as mentioned) the poll tax, through the anarchist and anti-fascist movements to prisoner solidarity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> and yet here we are, discussing sedition on a device the peterloo dead would have seen as devilry. Swings &


captain swings


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I reckon there will be a "Hard Brexit" revolt against this flow at some point...



UKIP are slowly edging back up in the polls again, though still only at 5%.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 15, 2017)

If we get lexit from the brexit which was engineered by those wanting to turn the UK into the USA then this will be change in the teeth of opposition from capital. The polital landscape is changing faster today than anybody ever expected. In 2015 we had the prospect of centre right Tory government for the foreseeable future with a left wing Labour party in the political wilderness. Now we have a definitely electable Corbyn led Labour government in waiting. I think we are doing ok.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 15, 2017)

Ranbay said:


> Dear Ranbay,
> 
> Last week’s agreement on phase one of the Brexit talks seemed to suggest that ‘full alignment’ with the European Single Market and the Customs Union could be the shape of the final deal between the UK and the EU.
> 
> ...


I think brexit in name only was always going to be the end result.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 15, 2017)

It’s a deal – on Brexit phase one 

An analysis of the "deal" so far.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 15, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> UKIP are slowly edging back up in the polls again, though still only at 5%.



This whole bloody thing is practically speaking the result of an internal Tory party rift! 

UKIP drained off anti-EU voters (also from Labour, yep), give UKIP what they want to get those voters back (yep, also to Lab). They get what they want! But it'll never be enough because the more centrist/pro-EU Tories in parliament aren't going to give them a Hard Brexit that they know will cause a major economic shock. 

So the row will continue...


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2017)

danny la rouge said:


> OK, leaving aside whether that's true of him individually, you're suggesting it's also true of a wider group of posters here.  I don't recognise that.  I recognise that there are people who see a parliamentary road to socialism and some who don't, but I don't think it's fair to say the latter are "dismissive" and the former not; you yourself were pretty dismissive about a "commitment to grass-roots activism".  And fair enough: you don't have to see it as a way forward, but why is that not "dismissive"?



Yup it's true that I am dismissive of responses to the question of what can/should be done that I see as vague or ineffectual, and maybe there is some kind of hypocrisy there. But I'm not someone with a strong political position. I'm a perennial waverer. I know some people find that despicable, but that's just how it is. I am constantly persuaded by different arguments. I'm not someone who's deeply well read in political theory and history, and I don't feel that I can know anything with enough certainty to be strongly committed to a certain ideology. I don't claim to have a coherent approach to political questions. I guess I hold others on here to a different standard because the tone in which they post is one of certainty. And it's that certainty, I think which feeds into their confident judgement of others' moral character and motivations, which is something that I think is a bigger problem than that of dismissing others' suggestions without offering an alternative.

I should say that it's not something you do danny la rouge. I have a lot of respect for your posting style, the amount of thought that you put into what you write, and your ability to disagree with people without it turning into a personal hate-fest or petty bickering. You're an example to us all.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

*The Prime Minister has recorded a Brexit-themed festive album in an attempt to raise funds for the UK’s EU divorce bill.*

The PR stunt is also designed to improve the mood of the nation after a series of Brexit cock-ups, misinformation and negotiating incompetence.

A Tory spokesman said, “Brexit’s turning out to be bloody expensive so we’re taking a leaf out of Bob Geldof’s book and raising money via a hastily recorded seasonal record.

“Also, even people who voted for Brexit are apparently starting to think that leaving the EU might not be the best idea after all, which is far from ideal. So to cheer everyone up we’re releasing an album of jaunty, feel-good songs about how great Brexit is.

“Yes, we’ve basically taken a number of well known Christmas songs and shoe-horned ‘Brexit’ into the lyrics. We don’t think the electorate will notice though – they’re generally not very bright and we’re very good at pulling the wool over their eyes.”

Mrs May sings lead on most of the tracks with backing vocals provided by the Maybots: Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg and David Davis.

The album will be called ‘A Brexit Gift for You’ and the full tracklisting is as follows:


I Wish it Could Be Brexit Everyday
White Brexit (lead vocal: Boris Johnson)
Driving Home for Brexit
Brexit Blunderland (lead vocal: David Davis)
Brexit is Coming to Town
Do They Know it’s Brexit?
Brexit Island
Last Brexit
Little Brexit Boy
Thank God it’s Brexit (lead vocal: Jacob Rees-Mogg)
Have Yourself a Merry Little Brexit


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> so i have been so unpragmatic over the years as to not sign petitions, to not suggest people join unions, not to suggest people go on demonstrations, to not suggest people in unions ask their branches to donate to for example the orgreave justice campaign, i'm fairly certain i've advised people to contact councillors and mps to get things changed.



Buried amongst your many thousands of snarky posts, yes you may have proposed things like going on demonstrations and writing letters. But they don't exactly float to the surface in my reading of your body of work on here.

Not very exciting proposals though if you don't mind my saying so. The sort of things I might suggest myself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Buried amongst your many thousands of snarky posts, yes you may have proposed things like going on demonstrations and writing letters. But they don't exactly float to the surface in my reading of your body of work on here.
> 
> Not very exciting proposals though if you don't mind my saying so. The sort of things I might suggest myself.


Yeh. First you denounce me for not being pragmatic then when I show I have been it's not good enough. You're full of shit, teuchter.

e2a: i've always supported a diversity of tactics. people should use every option available to them, whichever one works best. sometimes it's lobbying and petitions, sometimes it's violence on the streets. you won't win if you keep using a hammer for a job that wants a screwdriver, chuck.


----------



## sealion (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> Also, even people who voted for Brexit are apparently starting to think that leaving the EU might not be the best idea after all,


The same as people who voted remain are seeing what cunts the eu really are


----------



## gosub (Dec 15, 2017)

sealion said:


> The same as people who voted remain are seeing what cunts the eu really are


Nah, they are too busy working on their time machines to take us back to EUtopia


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2017)

gosub said:


> Nah, they are too busy working on their time machines to take us back to EUtopia



Some of us are rubbing our crystal balls and seeing a future where brexit didn't actually happen


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 15, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> so there may be some unhappiness ahead. the more things change


Yup: massed ranks of UKIPpers, _daily heil_ readers and other brexiters going absolutely apoca-ballistic!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

Streathamite said:


> Yup: massed ranks of UKIPpers, _daily heil_ readers and other brexiters going absolutely apoca-ballistic!


Super nige has gone ballistic, his politics are atrocious


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

sealion said:


> The same as people who voted remain are seeing what cunts the eu really are


I'm well aware that cunts rise to the top with good old capitalism- you don't have to tell me that.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If we get lexit from the brexit which was engineered by those wanting to turn the UK into the USA then this will be change in the teeth of opposition from capital. The polital landscape is changing faster today than anybody ever expected. In 2015 we had the prospect of centre right Tory government for the foreseeable future with a left wing Labour party in the political wilderness. Now we have a definitely electable Corbyn led Labour government in waiting. I think we are doing ok.


So Corbyn is anti-capitalist? Is that what you are saying? If that is what you believe then you are in for an unpleasant suprise. Folks got all exited over Obama- and look what happened there, no doubt Corbyn will be a simliar kind of let down.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> So Corbyn is anti-capitalist? Is that what you are saying? If that is what you believe then you are in for an unpleasant suprise. Folks got all exited over Obama- and look what happened there, no doubt Corbyn will be a simliar kind of let down.



Share your cynicism to an extent but Obama and Corbyn is hardly a relevant comparison.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> So Corbyn is anti-capitalist? Is that what you are saying? If that is what you believe then you are in for an unpleasant suprise. Folks got all exited over Obama- and look what happened there, no doubt Corbyn will be a simliar kind of let down.



The Mail et al seem to have decided that going with an HE'S AN ACTUAL FUCKING COMMUNIST HE'S GOING TO TAKE YOUR HOUSE AWAY line is the best bet against him.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Share your cynicism to an extent but Obama and Corbyn is hardly a relevant comparison.


All I know is that poor working class women were forced to move into slums in Dennis Skinner's constituency thanks to social cleansing- and good old Dennis denies these women and their slum homes exist. The left hand of capitalism is not the answer.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

People just love capitalism, even those who profess to be 'socialists'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> All I know is that poor working class women were forced to move into slums in Dennis Skinner's constituency thanks to social cleansing- and good old Dennis denies these women and their slum homes exist. The left hand of capitalism is not the answer.



Should we take that comment literally?


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Should we take that comment literally?


I'm not attempting to commincate in riddles. I wouldn't have typed it if it was not to be taken literally.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> I'm not attempting to commincate in riddles. I wouldn't have typed it if it was not to be taken literally.



I think you could be a bit clearer. But I meant the bit when you said "All I know is". I agree with you social democracy is not the answer. Just trying to tease out a little more detail.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

The sad reality is that people insist on propping up the capitalist system- leaving people like me to try and soften the blows to the working class (which includes myself and my own family) by voting in elections and referendums- I voted remain because I was aware of the harm that brexit would inflict on the already battered working class in Britain. People vote for Labour lefties for the same reason.

But I don't think Corbyn is doing the right thing. Ultimately he is not calling for or supporting direct action and working class self-organising.

He is unlikely to- he is a capitalist politician.

But, though I have been tempted to support him as the only available option- he is not the solution- if he was he would be calling for and trying to organise mass squatting and occupations and a general strike- but he wont' and therefore he will not achieve anywhere near enough.

Even if he does get in it will only be a matter of time before he is voted out again.

I guess I'm going off topic so I'll leave it there.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> The sad reality is that people insist on propping up the capitalist system- leaving people like me to try and soften the blows to the working class





Thanks bud, ta for that.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Thanks bud, ta for that.


You're welcome


----------



## sealion (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> Even if he does get in it will only be a matter of time before he is voted out again.


More likely stabbed in the back by his own party before we go back to the polls.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> All I know is that poor working class women were forced to move into slums in Dennis Skinner's constituency thanks to social cleansing- and good old Dennis denies these women and their slum homes exist. The left hand of capitalism is not the answer.



Got a link for that? It sounds like an interesting story. 

On the other hand of course, there are thousands of his own constituents, trade unionists, ordinary people, who have stories of thanks in supporting Dennis for the largely principled and helpful to working class people his life has encompassed. Which might just outweigh your one story. But maybe not eh? Got a link?



Humirax said:


> People just love capitalism, even those who profess to be 'socialists'.



Got a link? Does that extend to thousands of  working class people who call themselves socialist...but have the temerity to, you know, wear shoes and shit? Buy televisions. The capitalism loving cunts. Got a link?

FTR...revolutionary socialist here, working class born and bred. Not a massive fan of the Labour Party but no fan either of people slagging off working class people who have done good for other working class people, just because they think they can prove a point with ‘clever’ (not really) pithy phrases like ‘the left hand of capitalism’.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Got a link for that? It sounds like an interesting story.
> 
> On the other hand of course, there are thousands of his own constituents, trade unionists, ordinary people, who have stories of thanks in supporting Dennis for the largely principled and helpful to working class people his life has encompassed. Which might just outweigh your one story. But maybe not eh? Got a link?


I heard it from the mouth of someone in the know- someone very closely involved in the housing and social-cleansing struggle. A struggle that was being fought effectively before it was replaced with all this electoral Corbyn bollocks- draining away the energy of that campaign. The person who told me this knew very well what they were telling me and knows the futilty of voting Labour instead of meaningful action and self-organisation of working class people.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Got a link for that? It sounds like an interesting story.
> 
> On the other hand of course, there are thousands of his own constituents, trade unionists, ordinary people, who have stories of thanks in supporting Dennis for the largely principled and helpful to working class people his life has encompassed. Which might just outweigh your one story. But maybe not eh? Got a link?
> 
> ...


I was referring to the more direct and active sort of support for capitalism. I'm aware that there are working class people (and middle class people) who identify as socialist but who, in practice are infact capitalists and a minority of working class (and middle class) people identifying as socialist that are genuine about that.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> I was referring to the more direct and active sort of support for capitalism. I'm aware that there are working class people (and middle class people) who identify as socialist but who, in practice are infact capitalists and a minority of working class (and middle class) people identifying as socialist that are genuine about that.


Usually in discussions about socialism it turns out that there are differing views on its definition. So, while you might hold those who are not socialists in the pure or technical sense of the term are not "genuine", from their point of view they simply disagree about the scope of what the term means.


----------



## Humirax (Dec 15, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Usually in discussions about socialism it turns out that there are differing views on its definition. So, while you might hold those who are not socialists in the pure or technical sense of the term are not "genuine", from their point of view they simply disagree about the scope of what the term means.


No shit


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2017)

Humirax said:


> No shit


Ach, teuchter's full of it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2017)

Humirax said:


> I'm aware that there are working class people (and middle class people) who identify as socialist but who, in practice are infact capitalists


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

Interesting stuff on R4 lunchtime news today. Plenty about that still there has been no real conversation about immigration at government level. Plenty of views from folk in a pub in Notts & so on but nobody, people or journos picked up on the lax UK employment laws that makes the UK far more attractive to European migrants than countries like Holland & France. The pub folk generally were annoyed we had not left yet. No real thought about the complexities of the leaving.

Also nothing about trade deals that will have to be done with India who have already stated that any trade deal will have to include free movement of their people into UK.  This would in fact be welcomed by large employers who could use labour from the sub continent in place of European migrant Labour & none of that would satisfy the leave voters. Diane Abbot was on there choosing her words very carefully & saying not much at all. Another commentator pointed out that if UKIP leave voters think they have been shafted they won’t return to centre ground they will move further right.

I think the Beeb is deliberatly soft pedalling here. Failing to ask the really hard questions but they are struggling to get any Tory ministers on there now. All they get on there now is rent a gobs like Dunked in shit & Redwood spouting the usual bollocks. The Beeb are fucked here really. If they go too hard they are accused of remoaning so the news is just getting painful to listen to now.


----------



## sealion (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Diane Abbot was on there choosing her words very carefully & saying not much at all.


Diane Abbott: Labour does not support a second EU referendum


----------



## goldenecitrone (Dec 17, 2017)

sealion said:


> Diane Abbott: Labour does not support a second EU referendum



She probably meant to say Labour does not support a _third_ EU referendum.


----------



## sealion (Dec 17, 2017)

goldenecitrone said:


> She probably meant to say Labour does not support a _third_ EU referendum.


I m not sure they know what they want. They are all over the shop just like the tories. What a mess.


----------



## bemused (Dec 17, 2017)

sealion said:


> Diane Abbott: Labour does not support a second EU referendum



Yet - who would bet against it at this moment?

Some consistent polls over the next few months and someone in the commons is bound to put forward an amendment to put the final deal to a referendum. 

The simple notion that the public would now be voting for an actual deal to leave or stay would be hard to paint as 'undemocratic'


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

sealion said:


> I m not sure they know what they want. They are all over the shop just like the tories. What a mess.


It is a difficult call for both parties. A brexit that works at all is not going to satisfy the leave voter in the street. Neither party dares to spell that out. At some point they will have to.


----------



## sealion (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> A brexit that works at all is not going to satisfy the leave voter in the street.


I guess most will be happy just leaving whatever the terms set by the cabal might entail.


SaskiaJayne said:


> Neither party dares to spell that out.


Telling the truth to people is not in either's interest. Just gaining or retaining power at any cost.


----------



## bemused (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It is a difficult call for both parties. A brexit that works at all is not going to satisfy the leave voter in the street. Neither party dares to spell that out. At some point they will have to.



I'm not so sure. The election appears to have broken the myth that UKIP voters would migrate to the Tories. Brexit didn't even seem a blip in the election.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 17, 2017)

Where did the (majority of the) UKIP vote go if not to the Tories?

EDIT: Ashcroft has 57% of 2015 UKIP voters going to the Tories 2017, YouGov has it 45%, so lower but still significant. So, in short, you seem to be talking absolute garbage.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2017)

It's all over - privately educated and oxbridge career/life  elitist Lord Malloch-Brown had been appointed to talk the sillies down. Because of his common touch, great renown and massive respect i think.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 17, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> It's all over - privately educated and oxbridge career/life  elitist Lord Malloch-Brown had been appointed to talk the sillies down.


Saw that and thought about posting it on the Guardian is shit thread. Nothing says grass-roots like a former diplomat.


----------



## stethoscope (Dec 17, 2017)

Blair still at it too...
Stopping Brexit more important than Labour winning next election, says Tony Blair


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2017)

redsquirrel said:


> Where did the (majority of the) UKIP vote go if not to the Tories?
> 
> EDIT: Ashcroft has 57% of 2015 UKIP voters going to the Tories 2017, YouGov has it 45%, so lower but still significant. So, in short, you seem to be talking absolute garbage.



It didn't really *migrate* to the Tories though. In the main, people who didn't stay loyal to UKIP in the GE reverted to their previous voting behaviour. The theory that UKIP would be a stepping-stone for Labour voters to become Tory voters didn't play out.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Also nothing about trade deals that will have to be done with India *who have already stated that any trade deal will have to include free movement of their people into UK*.


Got a link to that? Comedy ask.
So basically not interested in a trade deal...


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 17, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It didn't really *migrate* to the Tories though. *In the main, people who didn't stay loyal to UKIP in the GE reverted to their previous voting behaviour. *The theory that UKIP would be a stepping-stone for Labour voters to become Tory voters didn't play out.


You got evidence of the bolded part? I mean I think it's probably pretty accurate (the Tory+UKIP vote in safe Labour seats is often pretty constant over the last 3 elections) but I've not seen any actual data that has directly shown it.

But even if we accept that it doesn't alter the fact that bemused was talking nonsense, the movement (back) to the Conservatives of former UKIP voters was a significant cause of the formers increased vote. It also means that any dropping off from Brexit by the Tories opens up space on their flank to UKIP.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Got a link to that? Comedy ask.
> So basically not interested in a trade deal...


Loads about it if you google here It's time to recognise the truth – a trade deal with India means concessions on immigration for example. They are going to want consessions on immigration for any deal to happen.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Loads about it if you google here It's time to recognise the truth – a trade deal with India means concessions on immigration for example. They are going to want consessions on immigration for any deal to happen.


that whole article is based on one quote from Modi:


> “Education is vital for our students and will define our engagement in a shared future. We must therefore encourage greater mobility and participation of young people in education and research opportunities.”


going from "greater mobility" (for students) to freedom of movement is an almighty leap.
Even Indian negotiators wouldn't be so stupid to expect anything more than a  visa quota increase for any FTA. They have a 1.25bn population ffs. total nonsense.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> that whole article is based on one quote from Modi:
> ​going from "greater mobility" (for students) to freedom of movement is an almighty leap.
> Even Indian negotiators wouldn't be so stupid to expect anything more than a  visa quota increase for any FTA. They have a 1.25bn population ffs. total nonsense.


Always shows the hidden  _swamped with a different culture _of much of anti-brexit thought.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 17, 2017)

The world stops and the borders start where the EU says. That's internationalism.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> going from "greater mobility" (for students) to freedom of movement is an almighty leap.
> Even Indian negotiators wouldn't be so stupid to expect anything more than a  visa quota increase for any FTA. They have a 1.25bn population ffs. total nonsense.


It has long annoyed the UK Asian community that they cannot easily bring in people to do lower paid jobs in their businesses & also family members. In any trade deal that will be an issue.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It has long annoyed the UK Asian community that they cannot easily bring in people to do lower paid jobs in their businesses & also family members. In any trade deal that will be an issue.


That's not freedom of movement though is it. Using the FoM phrase for a potential Indian trade agreement on a brexit thread where we all know exactly what Freedom of Movement implies (Eu context) is misleading at best.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That's not freedom of movement though is it. Using the FoM phrase for a potential Indian trade agreement on a brexit thread where we all know exactly what Freedom of Movement implies (Eu context) is misleading at best.


Look at it in the context that the leave voters never getting the brexit they want as I was alluding to earlier. Business in this country is addicted to cheap migrant labour. If they cannot get cheap labour from Europe they will get it elsewhere. The right wing hard brexiteers want a low tax cheap labour economy. If trade deals are made with rest of world they will be happy to bring in as many migrants as they need to replace the European migrants.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Look at it in the context that the leave voters never getting the brexit they want as I was alluding to earlier. Business in this country is addicted to cheap migrant labour. If they cannot get cheap labour from Europe they will get it elsewhere. The right wing hard brexiteers want a low tax cheap labour economy. If trade deals are made with rest of world they will be happy to bring in as many migrants as they need to replace the European migrants.



Yep - Its pretty clear that brexit will NOT mean an end, or even a reduction, in the numbers of foreign workers -  the anti-immigrant faction of the brexit vote were sold a pup on that score.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Look at it in the context that the leave voters never getting the brexit they want as I was alluding to earlier. Business in this country is addicted to cheap migrant labour. If they cannot get cheap labour from Europe they will get it elsewhere. The right wing hard brexiteers want a low tax cheap labour economy. If trade deals are made with rest of world they will be happy to *bring in as many migrants as they need* to replace the European migrants.


'Bring in' - FoM implies 'let in'.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> 'Bring in' - FoM implies 'let in'.


I think you are splitting hairs. A good amount of EU migrant workers are “brought in” through labour agencies to do specific work from farms to Sports Direct. If you live in a leave area like me listen to leave voters around you or listen to local radio phone ins. They blame everything from NHS waiting lists to the housing shortage on migration. Some of the phone in callers get so racist they get cut off. The racists did not become racist overnight. Decades ago they were railing against migration from the Indian subcontinent. The narrative was the same then “send ‘em home”. The leavers will tell you they voted to end Europe “making our laws” & to end migration & control our borders. I don’t know what percentage overall voted leave for that reason but theres an awful lot around my way. They are well pissed off with the arrogance of the EU as they see it & they are absolutely happy with their leave vote decision. However brexit ends up it will not be the brexit they voted for.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 17, 2017)

I'm not splitting hairs. The implications of the point you made that a trade deal with india could lead to freedom of movement is ludicrous. So, pedantic maybe (depending how much you believe it could happen) but it's not splitting hairs.


SaskiaJayne said:


> Also nothing about trade deals that will have to be done with India who have already stated that any trade deal will have to include free movement of their people into UK.


How many Indians do you think would roll up to the UK in the first year after this 'freedom of movement' based trade deal?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> How many Indians do you think would roll up to the UK in the first year after this 'freedom of movement' based trade deal?



It's going to be however many are permitted, isn't it?


----------



## gosub (Dec 17, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think you are splitting hairs. A good amount of EU migrant workers are “brought in” through labour agencies to do specific work from farms to Sports Direct. If you live in a leave area like me listen to leave voters around you or listen to local radio phone ins. They blame everything from NHS waiting lists to the housing shortage on migration. Some of the phone in callers get so racist they get cut off. The racists did not become racist overnight. Decades ago they were railing against migration from the Indian subcontinent. The narrative was the same then “send ‘em home”. The leavers will tell you they voted to end Europe “making our laws” & to end migration & control our borders. I don’t know what percentage overall voted leave for that reason but theres an awful lot around my way. They are well pissed off with the arrogance of the EU as they see it & they are absolutely happy with their leave vote decision. However brexit ends up it will not be the brexit they voted for.


No its not splitting hairs its visas issued mainly to companies strictly limiting numbers as opposed freedom of movement as we understand it in a EUropean context


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 17, 2017)

On the other hand, we'd be able to go to live and work in India more easily. No more visa / work permit requirement for UK citizens, presumably. India's so big that the whole country could go there and as long as we spread ourselves about a bit, nobody would even notice really.


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> On the other hand, we'd be able to go to live and work in India more easily. No more visa / work permit requirement for UK citizens, presumably. India's so big that the whole country could go there and as long as we spread ourselves about a bit, nobody would even notice really.


Bollocks. Its the number of working visas that are to be made available.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 18, 2017)

mojo pixy said:


> On the other hand, we'd be able to go to live and work in India more easily. No more visa / work permit requirement for UK citizens, presumably. India's so big that the whole country could go there and as long as we spread ourselves about a bit, nobody would even notice really.



Disabuse yourself now of the notion that the future consists of symmetrical deals where we get what we give.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 18, 2017)

I forgot not to post facetiously without a 
never mind, it's all fuel on the fire


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 18, 2017)

Raheem said:


> It's going to be however many are permitted, isn't it?


I would say so. 
Granting permissions (i.e setting restrictions via visas/ green cards etc) is a bit different than implementing freedom of movement. 
Its not a trivial difference and if pointing it out us splitting hairs then any discussion on brexit is pointless, seeing as it's one of the key negotiation factors.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

Look at this nonsense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Look at this nonsense.


caution: sun link


----------



## sealion (Dec 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> caution: sun link


Caution- guardian link
Brexit will usher in a dark chapter for new British authors, warns publisher


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

sealion said:


> Caution- guardian link
> Brexit will usher in a dark chapter for new British authors, warns publisher


a good time for british horror: rise of the maybot and so forth


----------



## sealion (Dec 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> a good time for british horror: rise of the maybot and so forth


I like reading the comments from the seething liberals


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

sealion said:


> Caution- guardian link
> Brexit will usher in a dark chapter for new British authors, warns publisher


explains why you had all the history authors coming out for remain before the referendum with their nonsense about end of history


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

gosub said:


> explains why you had all the history authors coming out for remain before the referendum with their nonsense about end of history


end of the end of history. and the start of something different.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

I thought history ended when the Berlin Wall came down. Who restarted it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I thought history ended when the Berlin Wall came down. Who restarted it?


it restarted when it became clear that fukuyama's end of history was a load of auld shite


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it restarted when it became clear that fukuyama's end of history was a load of auld shite



Sorry, the correct answer is: 

B) Phil out of Time Team, who kicked it up the jacksy with his biggest, muddiest boots.


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I would say so.
> Granting permissions (i.e setting restrictions via visas/ green cards etc) is a bit different than implementing freedom of movement.
> Its not a trivial difference and if pointing it out us splitting hairs then any discussion on brexit is pointless, seeing as it's one of the key negotiation factors.


Its a whole can of worms within itself.   Wen, Chinese wife of a mate of mine, did some work at one of thosee Chinese medicine places - found the staff to be completely exploited, with the hold over them being :don't like it we'll cancel your visa and get someone else over who won't complain...


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 18, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> caution: sun link


True, and I don't generally believe a word the sun says, but it will be Very Bad Indeed if the 48 hour week and the agency workers directives are scrapped. Neither is an inevitable consequence of Brexit and you'd hope, with such a tiny majority, the government would struggle to get such a thing through.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 18, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> True, and I don't generally believe a word the sun says, but it will be Very Bad Indeed if the 48 hour week and the agency workers directives are scrapped. Neither is an inevitable consequence of Brexit and you'd hope, with such a tiny majority, the government would struggle to get such a thing through.



The UK has an opt out anyway.  Every contract I've seen encourages you to opt out.  teuchter is right, its a proper dumb article.


----------



## Slo-mo (Dec 18, 2017)

Teaboy said:


> The UK has an opt out anyway.  Every contract I've seen encourages you to opt out.  teuchter is right, its a proper dumb article.


Is the 48 hour week compulsory in other European countries then? As in you can't do more than 48 hours even if you want to?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 18, 2017)

every agency I've ever worked for encouraged you to opt out 'clients are looking for flexibility' and so on. I didn't bother looking past the currant bun headline cos wtf


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 18, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Is the 48 hour week compulsory in other European countries then? As in you can't do more than 48 hours even if you want to?



I believe so yes, if that country has signed up to it.  There maybe exceptions I would imagine.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Slo-mo said:


> Is the 48 hour week compulsory in other European countries then? As in you can't do more than 48 hours even if you want to?



There's a big, heavy duty report on that here: Opting out of the European Working Time Directive | Eurofound

From what I can see, 12 countries (including Italy, Ireland and the Scandinavian EU countries) don't allow any opt out from the directive. The others do allow opt outs and they are used to varying degrees - UK is one of four countries with "generalised use" of the opt outs. . .  

There's a map on page 11. 

(I'm no expert in this stuff, please do check this yourself!)


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Apparently May is saying that the plan is for the UK to leave the single market and customs union "but access would continue as now". But that's just not possible.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Apparently May is saying that the plan is for the UK to leave the single market and customs union "but access would continue as now". But that's just not possible.



Especially given this: Brexit: Chief EU negotiator says 'no way' to bespoke trade deal for UK

The May government might be fucking Brexit up royally, but even if they weren't the intransigence of the Eurocrats is disgusting.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 18, 2017)

Heisenburg's Brexit - existing in all possible states simultaneously


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Apparently May is saying that the plan is for the UK to leave the single market and customs union "but access would continue as now". But that's just not possible.


It is for the transition


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Especially given this: Brexit: Chief EU negotiator says 'no way' to bespoke trade deal for UK
> 
> The May government might be fucking Brexit up royally, but even if they weren't the intransigence of the Eurocrats is disgusting.


i don't know why. i thought this is a reason for lexit, laying the vicious intransigence of the eu bare for all to see. surprised they're being so genial and flexible myself.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

gosub said:


> It is for the transition



I don't think so. 

 

The Transition, as I understand it, will just be us staying in everything (the EU says, and we say leaving CAP and fisheries and some other things) but not having votes on anything. This is for the deal afterwards.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

(I don't think that's Andy Bell out of Erasure, but I haven't checked.)


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't think so.
> 
> View attachment 123299
> 
> The Transition, as I understand it, will just be us staying in everything (the EU says, and we say leaving CAP and fisheries and some other things) but not having votes on anything. This is for the deal afterwards.


 run a Google search on the _Europa_ website for "cherry picking" and "Brexit" and you will get over 200 separate entries. From the highest to the lowest. EU officials have been at pains to point out to the UK that options are limited.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Indeed, while British politicians continue to tell the UK electorate that they can have all that lovely free trade without any of the nasty "political" stuff. Something's got to give at some point.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> the intransigence of the Eurocrats is disgusting.



In what way, exactly?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> In what way, exactly?



They're making this more difficult than it has to be. They want this to be a fuckup for the ordinary people of the UK while benefiting the EU project, deal or no deal. They say it's about not giving the UK special treatment, but that's bollocks.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> They're making this more difficult than it has to be. They want this to be a fuckup for the ordinary people of the UK while benefiting the EU project, deal or no deal. They say it's about not giving the UK special treatment, but that's bollocks.


How so? Are you saying they are acting against the interests of EU member states?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> How so? Are you saying they are acting against the interests of EU member states?



No I'm not. What on Earth prompted you to think that?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

What would you like them to do differently?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> No I'm not. What on Earth prompted you to think that?


 
When you said they wanted it to benefit the "EU project" I thought that maybe you meant an overarching political aim of the central bureaucracy, or something like that, rather than the EU as a collection of member states.

Why would you expect them to negotiate in any other way, than to the benefit of the EU? That's what negotiation's about.


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> When you said they wanted it to benefit the "EU project" I thought that maybe you meant an overarching political aim of the central bureaucracy, or something like that, rather than the EU as a collection of member states.
> 
> Why would you expect them to negotiate in any other way, than to the benefit of the EU? That's what negotiation's about.



I see. Well it depends on the EU state in question, doesn't it? The EU project has had different effects on Germany and Greece.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 18, 2017)

according to Nick Timothy ( yeah OK, him ) in the Telegraph it was the Canadians that actually acted to limit the scope of the trade deal - which I think is the first time I've seen that point made. The narrative seems to be that as it ended up represents the Ultima Thule of what could possibly be wrested from the EU



Theresa May means it when she says she wants a 'Canada Plus' Brexit deal. And she should get it

on an unrelated side note : seems like if you go to write for the Guardian you have to grow a beard but if you go to the Telegraph you have to shave it off


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> They're making this more difficult than it has to be. They want this to be a fuckup for the ordinary people of the UK while benefiting the EU project, deal or no deal. They say it's about not giving the UK special treatment, but that's bollocks.


If you go to to a pizzeria, and try ordering a curry, how many times does the waiter have to tell you its a pizzeria before you consider him intransigence ?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

gosub said:


> If you go to to a pizzeria, and try ordering a curry, how many times does the waiter have to tell you its a pizzeria before you consider him intransigence ?



It's intransigent. And your analogy is crap, it's more like a supermarket that has eggs in stock, but refuses to sell them to you because you stated your intention to start shopping elsewhere.


----------



## hipipol (Dec 18, 2017)

Crispy said:


> Heisenburg's Brexit - existing in all possible states simultaneously


Lets set them sort the "entanglements" in the non correlated, Pirate, drug smuggling UK returned to its roots, hurragh, cheese buckets for all!!!!
Oh Dear, I seem to have had a Boris inspired flight of fancy moment.....


----------



## hipipol (Dec 18, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't think so.
> 
> View attachment 123299
> 
> The Transition, as I understand it, will just be us staying in everything (the EU says, and we say leaving CAP and fisheries and some other things) but not having votes on anything. This is for the deal afterwards.


There's is NO FUCKING SANTA, give me my fucking presents you Brussels scum...
Oh Bril.....


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

As I understand it, the EU has done a number of deals on "most favoured nation" terms, including the deal with Canada, that means that any deal with another partner - enter the UK - has to be matched with them. 

Now, this is technical international trade talk and until about a week ago I knew virtually sod all about it! This is where I've seen it explained by people who seem to know what they're talking about!

The MFN clause as a challenge to a bold and ambitious UK-EU FTA | Norton Rose Fulbright 

It reminds me of the "I must be the highest paid player at the club" clause that is rumoured to be one of the reasons why Jimmy Ffloyd Hasselbaink left Leeds United!


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> I see. Well it depends on the EU state in question, doesn't it? The EU project has had different effects on Germany and Greece.


Yes.

But that doesn't answer the question of why you are disgusted at their intransigence. They are in a negotiation where they want to secure the best deal for themselves. What specifically is it that they are doing that is disgusting?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> It's intransigent. And your analogy is crap, it's more like a supermarket that has eggs in stock, but refuses to sell them to you because you stated your intention to start shopping elsewhere.


What do these eggs represent in your analogy?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Yes.
> 
> But that doesn't answer the question of why you are disgusted at their intransigence. They are in a negotiation where they want to secure the best deal for themselves. What specifically is it that they are doing that is disgusting?



So in your mind, negotiating a deal necessarily involves being obstructive and trying to set the other party up to fail? I hope I don't ever have to discuss the terms of anything with you.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> So in your mind, negotiating a deal necessarily involves being obstructive and trying to set the other party up to fail? I hope I don't ever have to discuss the terms of anything with you.


You've still not said exactly what it is that they are doing that's not on. Can you give any examples?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> You've still not said exactly what it is that they are doing that's not on. Can you give any examples?



...did you not see the article I linked to? It's just one of a number of options that the EU have denied the UK thus far. Doubtless progress in the negotiations is being hindered by the ramshackle government of May the Useless, but you're being obtuse if you really think the EU is entirely blameless for that.


----------



## Supine (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> It's intransigent. And your analogy is crap, it's more like a supermarket that has eggs in stock, but refuses to sell them to you because you stated your intention to start shopping elsewhere.



It’s more like standing in Tesco and insisting loudly that the eggs you buy must be from Waitrose. Tesco just want you to fuck off and stop disturbing their customers.


----------



## gosub (Dec 18, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What do these eggs represent in your analogy?


what, the ones that are only available as part of a multi buy special offer?


----------



## Winot (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> ...did you not see the article I linked to? It's just one of a number of options that the EU have denied the UK thus far. Doubtless progress in the negotiations is being hindered by the ramshackle government of May the Useless, but you're being obtuse if you really think the EU is entirely blameless for that.



The EU has a set of rules. Some are negotiable - and the UK has a history of getting opt-outs from those. Some are non-negotiable, like the 4 freedoms. The EU had been clear from the start of this process that the UK cannot get a better deal outside the EU than in. It cannot have all the benefits of the single market if it refuses to have freedom of movement. 

The EU has a right to determine the rules of the club, and the UK has the right to walk away. It’s hardly intransigence to insist that the rules are followed.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 18, 2017)

Changing the subject slightly, there's a petition from "Going to Work from the TUC" asking that all current workers rights derived from EU law be kept as EU rules are put into UK law as part of the Brexit process. 

Don't cut a single workers' right when making new UK laws | Going to Work


----------



## teuchter (Dec 18, 2017)

NoXion said:


> ...did you not see the article I linked to? It's just one of a number of options that the EU have denied the UK thus far. Doubtless progress in the negotiations is being hindered by the ramshackle government of May the Useless, but you're being obtuse if you really think the EU is entirely blameless for that.


I did read the article. What he says seems quite reasonable and predictable.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 19, 2017)




----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2017)

I like how it's kind of presented as a drunkard falling down some stairs.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 19, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> View attachment 123359 View attachment 123360



They got the DUP's Red Hands of Ulster the wrong way around.


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2017)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2017)

Quick round up of what some of the parasites building careers in our movement have to say:

Tony Blair is helpfully making clear what his disciples in the Labour Party actually think by full on saying he thinks it's more important to stop Brexit than to get rid of the Tories: Stopping Brexit more important than Labour winning next election, says Tony Blair

Chuka Umunna, presumably in order to demonstrate how quickly he can respond to Blair's orders, is demanding that Labour come out in support of remaining in the single market, basically meaning we stay in the EU but don't get a seat at the table, can see that being a real vote winner: Labour must say it: Britain should stay in the single market after Brexit | Chuka Umunna

And perhaps most breath takingly offensively, Frances O'Grady says Watch out, the Brexiteers might be coming for your paid holidays | Frances O’Grady - but doesn't say a damn thing about what the TUC would do if this semi collapsed zombie government were to try and scrap the working time directive. Presumably she feels an article in the Guardian warning about something that might happen is sufficient.

Not that the WTD applies to most young low paid workers who are forced to opt out of it of course. But for fucks sakes Frances, you're the head of the TUC, what is the POINT of you?


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 19, 2017)

Facilitating the demobilisation and channeling of union power into ineffective avenues whenever possible, mainly. Though it has to be said Frances is pretty limp even for that role.

I was one of the 100 or so people who watched her internet steamed interview with Eddie Izzard for heart unions week a wee while back during the "fightback" against the Trade Union Bill. Izzard managed to come of as the more militant of the two.

Having listened to her telling the audience to lobby anyone they might know in the House of Lords (seriously) Eddie asked "Is there anything we can do beyond that?"

Cue awkward silence.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 19, 2017)

There is a petition if you want to sign it: Don't cut a single workers' right when making new UK laws | Going to Work


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 19, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Super nige has gone ballistic, his politics are atrocious


brilliant!


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 19, 2017)

NoXion said:


> Especially given this: Brexit: Chief EU negotiator says 'no way' to bespoke trade deal for UK
> 
> The May government might be fucking Brexit up royally, but even if they weren't the intransigence of the Eurocrats is disgusting.


on what you quote, not really. They can offer a deal which they know ALL their members will accept - and virtually none of their members will accept giving the UK a deal that leaves us better off outside.
In other words, no cake and eat it extra special favour. 
As, tbf, they have pretty much said all along


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 19, 2017)

Once we leave the EU, the Tories aren't going to stand up in Parliament and say "Yay we're free now let's shit all over the plebs!" (OK one or two might think it). It will happen slowly over a period of a couple of years and in the name of economic growth not restricting rights (they never say that), Instead of opting out of the 48hr WTD, you'll be opted out automatically and have to opt in, then there will be 'special cases'  where your employer can decide you can't opt in.  Then things like holiday rights or maternity rights will get reduced, not all at once but a bit at a time since we need to be more competitive.
In the absence of the EU the next best thing is a strong Trade Union movement which we no longer have, Even now the UK has the most restrictive labour laws in the EU and only something like 25% of the workforce are in one.
The people who need to be a union the most are the least likely to be in one and would find it hardest to organise without being victimised. 
of course if we elect a Labour government (assuming it follows it current leadership philosophy) soon after Brexit then this will happen much slower but the Tories will get back in eventually in 5 years or 10 so in the long term its hard not to imagine that employment rights will be lost.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> There is a petition if you want to sign it: Don't cut a single workers' right when making new UK laws | Going to Work



Christ, fuck the petition, this govt is like a wounded animal trying to eat itself, the TUC could and should be beating them up and taking their dinner money. Not begging to keep the minimal protections EU regs provide. 

But signed it, anyway, cos yeah. Suppose I better had.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

Sorry to be always posting from Twitter, but here are a couple of interesting threads:

Guardian Brussels Corespondent after an interview with Michael Barnier on the EU view of negotiations: 

 

A former UK trade negotiator (now there's a specialist job!) who is now an adamant Stop Brexit person on what he sees as political negatives of the process:

Unrolled thread from @GuitarMoog


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

Oh, and a short but sweet one! 

 

If you are interested in following Brexit on Twitter, this man is a good person to follow, particularly as he has an interesting and unusual perspective. He is basically very centrist/soft left, and writes for the Financial Times on legal things. He is a former Eurosceptic who believes the UK should have left at the time of the Maastricht Treaty, after which - he says - leaving became too complex and costly to be a practical proposition. So, he doesn't like the EU, but he doesn't like leaving it either.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 20, 2017)

That’s probably my view. Don’t particularly like the EU but wonder if leaving is worth the effort & will it achieve anything? Something along the lines of better being inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Possibly. Caller to LBC yesterday hit nail on head. “Leavers(the ones that call radio phone in shows anyway)only want to leave. They don’t want to know about trade deals or the Irish border”.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> Oh, and a short but sweet one!
> 
> View attachment 123462
> 
> If you are interested in following Brexit on Twitter, this man is a good person to follow, particularly as he has an interesting and unusual perspective. He is basically very centrist/soft left, and writes for the Financial Times on legal things. He is a former Eurosceptic who believes the UK should have left at the time of the Maastricht Treaty, after which - he says - leaving became too complex and costly to be a practical proposition. So, he doesn't like the EU, but he doesn't like leaving it either.


This lib-dem party members previous euro-scepticism largely consisted of him arguing the EU wasn't liberal enough - liberal that is, in the sense of aggressively pushing free trade  - which in the modern era means aggressive neo-liberalism.


----------



## Winot (Dec 20, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> That’s probably my view. Don’t particularly like the EU but wonder if leaving is worth the effort & will it achieve anything? Something along the lines of better being inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Possibly. Caller to LBC yesterday hit nail on head. “*Leavers(the ones that call radio phone in shows anyway)only want to leave. They don’t want to know about trade deals or the Irish border*”.



Why the referendum was a terrible idea, in a nutshell.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> This lib-dem party members previous euro-scepticism largely consisted of him arguing the EU wasn't liberal enough - liberal that is, in the sense of aggressively pushing free trade  - which in the modern era means aggressive neo-liberalism.



I did initially think he was a Tory. I hadn't heard of him before, but I have heard of his blog, Jack of Kent, but I've never read it. 

Here's his Sceptic tweet:


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 20, 2017)

He's long been _a friend of this board. _His nuanced and sensible non-extremist  liberalism consists exactly of denial that the ideological positions he takes and assumptions he starts from are in anyway ideological. Like much of recent postings on this thread in fact.


----------



## Supine (Dec 20, 2017)

Any politician who says it's be easy to leave is a complete moron who should be treated with disdain. They should be voted out if their seats next election due to their stupidity.

I wish anyway


----------



## Winot (Dec 20, 2017)

EU says Brexit transition to end by 2021


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2017)

to me the most likely outcome is a humiliating crawling back at some point in the spring of 2019


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> to me the most likely outcome is a humiliating crawling back at some point in the spring of 2019



I reckon No Deal is more likely in current circumstances. A General Election might change everything, but then it might not!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2017)

Supine said:


> Any politician who says it's be easy to leave is a complete moron who should be treated with disdain. They should be voted out if their seats next election due to their stupidity.
> 
> I wish anyway


it's easy to leave. what's hard is going to be persuading people that the settlement is in fact leaving rather than remaining under worse terms.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 20, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> View attachment 123359 View attachment 123360



The red line of regulatory autonomy has already gone thought has it not? And if the ECJ red line hasn't gone yet it soon will when the practicalities of 'regulatory alignment' start to reveal themselves. And when negotations on trade start we'll presumably learn that we'll not get fuck all from anyone without some provision for freedom of movement.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> it's easy to leave. what's hard is going to be persuading people that the settlement is in fact leaving rather than remaining under worse terms.



On that thread from the Guardian reporter I posted earlier is a tweet saying that the UK is signatory to 750 international agreements via the EU. We now have to sort all those out. . . No doubt, much of it is very simple, but is all of it? 

We should have a Most Extreme Scenario thread: 

how about leaving with no trade deal and signing versions of TTIP with anyone who'll let us. Northern Ireland leaving the UK to remain in single market and customs union with the Republic. Scottish IndyRef 2 on the way. . . Erm, war with France!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 20, 2017)

War with Span over Gibraltar, rather! Boris'll be promising us a colonial administration in Madrid.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> On that thread from the Guardian reporter I posted earlier is a tweet saying that the UK is signatory to 750 international agreements via the EU. We now have to sort all those out. . . No doubt, much of it is very simple, but is all of it?
> 
> We should have a Most Extreme Scenario thread:
> 
> how about leaving with no trade deal and signing versions of TTIP with anyone who'll let us. Northern Ireland leaving the UK to remain in single market and customs union with the Republic. Scottish IndyRef 2 on the way. . . Erm, war with France!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 20, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> to me the most likely outcome is a humiliating crawling back at some point in the spring of 2019



I can't think of any outcome that isn't riddled with plot-holes at this point. 

If you accept that everything will be terrible no matter what happens, it all becomes quite fun to watch. The whole thing with the DUP, and the fact that May brought it on herself, is just perfect. If it was happening in a fictional TV show I wouldn't believe it because it's _too_ perfect.


----------



## A380 (Dec 20, 2017)

Remainers absolutely loving Brexit now


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can't think of any outcome that isn't riddled with plot-holes at this point.
> 
> If you accept that everything will be terrible no matter what happens, it all becomes quite fun to watch. The whole thing with the DUP, and the fact that May brought it on herself, is just perfect. If it was happening in a fictional TV show I wouldn't believe it because it's _too_ perfect.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 20, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can't think of any outcome that isn't riddled with plot-holes at this point.
> 
> If you accept that everything will be terrible no matter what happens, it all becomes quite fun to watch. The whole thing with the DUP, and the fact that May brought it on herself, is just perfect. If it was happening in a fictional TV show I wouldn't believe it because it's _too_ perfect.



If it were happening to France we'd be so fucking graceless about the whole thing it would be really unbecoming.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> Why the referendum was a terrible idea, in a nutshell.


Yes. It could be argued that the referendum was always going to open up divisions & unleash the beast of racism that lurks in the heart of many of the most urbane folk you could choose to meet. So for that reason alone it should not have been held. It’s like bringing back hanging. Decades ago every time there was a particularly nasty murder particularly terrorist related the tabloids would argue for the return of the death penalty. Opinion polls always said a if referendum was held the voters would be in favour so for that sensible reason no government of the day even entertained it.


----------



## Santino (Dec 20, 2017)

Christ, what if democracy actually meant enacting the will of the people? I mean, can you imagine?


----------



## Winot (Dec 20, 2017)

Santino said:


> Christ, what if democracy actually meant enacting the will of the people? I mean, can you imagine?



Come on then - what's *your* solution to the Irish border problem?


----------



## gosub (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> Come on then - what's *your* solution to the Irish border problem?


Nuke it from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure. To be sure


----------



## kebabking (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> Come on then - what's *your* solution to the Irish border problem?



are you saying that because the Irish border is a somewhat thorny problem, 60-something million people can't be allowed to decide if they want their country to remain in the EU or not?


----------



## Winot (Dec 20, 2017)

kebabking said:


> are you saying that because the Irish border is a somewhat thorny problem, 60-something million people can't be allowed to decide if they want their country to remain in the EU or not?



I’m saying that having a referendum before the ‘thorny problems’ were explored was a massive mistake. The civil service were banned from doing any preparatory work for the biggest political change in the UK for decades. There were other ways to prepare for a referendum if that’s what people wanted, eg a Royal Commission to prepare an options paper.


----------



## kebabking (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> I’m saying that having a referendum before the ‘thorny problems’ were explored was a massive mistake. The civil service were banned from doing any preparatory work for the biggest political change in the UK for decades. There were other ways to prepare for a referendum if that’s what people wanted, eg a Royal Commission to prepare an options paper.



no, what you're saying that that electorates can only be allowed to have their say on a subject once a series of politically acceptable answers have been divised by whatever political/societal elite happens to be in power - answers that have been screened by that political/social elite to ensure that, most importantly, the priorities of the political/social elite in power are met by whichever option the electorate are allowed to choose.

you're saying that the electorate have no right to do something you consider wrong.

if its not the Irish border it'll be something else, like passporting rights for financial institutions, or free movement rights, or the next thing thats just too complicated for little people to understand. 

thats fundamentally why Remain lost the referendum, because it said that this stuff is too complex and too difficult for people to make a black or white decision about, with too much at stake - and the electorate said 'watch me'.


----------



## Winot (Dec 20, 2017)

You think breaking everything is going to make things better. I think it’s going to make things worse. I guess we’ll have to return to this thread in a few years’ time and see who was right.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 20, 2017)

I think lots of stuff is too complex and difficult to make a black or white decision about. In fact, that's pretty much life: stuff that's too complex and difficult to make black or white decisions about. Is this now a controversial position?


----------



## gosub (Dec 20, 2017)

Thats why we invented 'duvet days'


----------



## kebabking (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> You think breaking everything is going to make things better. I think it’s going to make things worse. I guess we’ll have to return to this thread in a few years’ time and see who was right.



i voted remain - and the reason remain lost, and your posts attract such distain, is not whether brexit will make this or that better, but whether the electorate has the right to make decisions that fall outside the 'this is generally considered a good idea' bucket.

when marriages fall apart the circumstances - children, residual feelings, joint assets, pensions etc.. make it far too complex for black or white decisions, yet we make those decisions anyway, we accept the downsides of those decisions and we just get on with it. your position is that people don't have the right to end their marriages because the divorce and life afterwards is just too messy and compromised, and they will just have to live with their unhappiness for the sake of the house, the pensions, the children and the PCP on the Audi on the drive. 

not so.


----------



## Santino (Dec 20, 2017)

.


----------



## Santino (Dec 20, 2017)

Winot said:


> Come on then - what's *your* solution to the Irish border problem?


To ignore people's interests and politically expressed desires. What's yours?


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 20, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i voted remain - and the reason remain lost, and your posts attract such distain, is not whether brexit will make this or that better, but whether the electorate has the right to make decisions that fall outside the 'this is generally considered a good idea' bucket.
> 
> when marriages fall apart the circumstances - children, residual feelings, joint assets, pensions etc.. make it far too complex for black or white decisions, yet we make those decisions anyway, we accept the downsides of those decisions and we just get on with it. your position is that people don't have the right to end their marriages because the divorce and life afterwards is just too messy and compromised, and they will just have to live with their unhappiness for the sake of the house, the pensions, the children and the PCP on the Audi on the drive.
> 
> not so.



The same people have the right to remarry.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i voted remain - and the reason remain lost, and your posts attract such distain, is not whether brexit will make this or that better, but whether the electorate has the right to make decisions that fall outside the 'this is generally considered a good idea' bucket.
> 
> when marriages fall apart the circumstances - children, residual feelings, joint assets, pensions etc.. make it far too complex for black or white decisions, yet we make those decisions anyway, we accept the downsides of those decisions and we just get on with it. your position is that people don't have the right to end their marriages because the divorce and life afterwards is just too messy and compromised, and they will just have to live with their unhappiness for the sake of the house, the pensions, the children and the PCP on the Audi on the drive.
> 
> not so.


That's quite a bizarre interpretation of Winot's "position" as far as I can see.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 21, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> That’s probably my view. Don’t particularly like the EU but wonder if leaving is worth the effort & will it achieve anything? Something along the lines of better being inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Possibly. Caller to LBC yesterday hit nail on head. “Leavers(the ones that call radio phone in shows anyway)only want to leave. They don’t want to know about trade deals or the Irish border”.


tbf we've been out side the tent and pissing in for a good few years now. 
To follow on wit your analogy, post-brexit's probably more akin to not having a tent and pissing where you like.


----------



## Winot (Dec 21, 2017)

Santino said:


> To ignore people's interests and politically expressed desires. What's yours?



Thanks Yoda


----------



## Raheem (Dec 21, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> To follow on wit your analogy, post-brexit's probably more akin to not having a tent and pissing where you like.



I got some really mardy looks for that at Glastonbury. 1992, I think.


----------



## Winot (Dec 21, 2017)

kebabking said:


> i voted remain - and the reason remain lost, and your posts attract such distain, is not whether brexit will make this or that better, but whether the electorate has the right to make decisions that fall outside the 'this is generally considered a good idea' bucket.
> 
> when marriages fall apart the circumstances - children, residual feelings, joint assets, pensions etc.. make it far too complex for black or white decisions, yet we make those decisions anyway, we accept the downsides of those decisions and we just get on with it. your position is that people don't have the right to end their marriages because the divorce and life afterwards is just too messy and compromised, and they will just have to live with their unhappiness for the sake of the house, the pensions, the children and the PCP on the Audi on the drive.
> 
> not so.



If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


----------



## RD2003 (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


Maybe just go fort it instead, and see what happens.

Life is an adventure...


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 21, 2017)

Raheem said:


> I got some really mardy looks for that at Glastonbury. 1992, I think.


Coz the maastricht treaty kicked in. Piss anywhere you like up to 1991


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


with that attitude I doubt you'll get the choice


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 21, 2017)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I don’t think this argument about people not being qualified/educated enough to vote is a serious one. Democracy is everybody voting.





SaskiaJayne said:


> Yes. It could be argued that the referendum was always going to open up divisions & unleash the beast of racism that lurks in the heart of many of the most urbane folk you could choose to meet. So for that reason alone it should not have been held. It’s like bringing back hanging. Decades ago every time there was a particularly nasty murder particularly terrorist related the tabloids would argue for the return of the death penalty. Opinion polls always said a if referendum was held the voters would be in favour so for that sensible reason no government of the day even entertained it.


So what you actually mean is that democracy is everybody voting when it's _sensible._ (BTW IIRC the latest opinions polls, taken just after the referendum, show a majority opposed to the death penalty).


Winot said:


> There were other ways to prepare for a referendum if that’s what people wanted, eg a Royal Commission to prepare an options paper.


You can have any _option_ who want so long as it's in blue and yellow.


Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


The unspoken belief here being that anyone properly _informed_ would, of course, be opposed to leaving.

A few pages the dismissal of the innate anti-democracy of liberalism you've got the same anti-democratic arguments being repeated, that the government, of the _informed_, need to manage the people. We can't just expect the common human to appreciate these complex issues, no their job is to put a cross in a box every four years and let the informed people get on with things.



> On the practicability or desirability of political and industrial democracy… If the bulk of the people were to remain poor and uneducated, was it desirable, was it even safe, to entrust them with the weapon of trade unionism, and, through the ballot box, with making and controlling the government of Great Britain with its enormous wealth and its far-flung dominions?





> Like all fundamentalisms, democratic extremism takes a noble idea, that everyone’s political views should count equally, too far. But if democracy is to endure, voters must inform themselves of the facts, avoid being swayed by prejudice and emotion, and to base judgements on evidence. The romantic invocation of popular sovereignty is no substitute for calm deliberation.


Early 20th or early 21st century, who can tell.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.



The consequence of divorce is that you are no longer married. 

I thought leavers were supposed to be the thickies.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I think lots of stuff is too complex and difficult to make a black or white decision about. In fact, that's pretty much life: stuff that's too complex and difficult to make black or white decisions about. Is this now a controversial position?


What about when a black or white decision is necessary on stuff that is too complex and difficult for black or white decisions?

Is it best in that case to have a referendum on the underlying black or white principle and then let those responsible for implementation get on with implementing that principle as best they can?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> What about when a black or white decision is necessary on stuff that is too complex and difficult for black or white decisions?
> 
> Is it best in that case to have a referendum on the underlying black or white principle and then let those responsible for implementation get on with implementing that principle as best they can?


What do you mean by "necessary", assuming you are talking about the EU referendum?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What do you mean by "necessary", assuming you are talking about the EU referendum?


It is always necessary as a country to decide whether or not we should be in the EU.  That decision is constantly remade, either positively or by inaction.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> It is always necessary as a country to decide whether or not we should be in the EU.  That decision is constantly remade, either positively or by inaction.


But why is it necessary to present it as a "black and white" decision?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

teuchter said:


> But why is it necessary to present it as a "black and white" decision?


The principle — and the final result — is indeed black or white.  Either we want to be in the EU or we don’t.  The details follow, they don’t determine the principle.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> The principle — and the final result — is indeed black or white.  Either we want to be in the EU or we don’t.  The details follow, they don’t determine the principle.


Nah, that's entirely arbitrary. You could just as easily come up with some other principle, of which membership or not of the EU would be one of the details.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah, that's entirely arbitrary. You could just as easily come up with some other principle, of which membership or not of the EU would be one of the details.


Indeed.


----------



## Chz (Dec 21, 2017)

gosub said:


> Nuke it from orbit.  It's the only way to be sure. To be sure


To add a bit of cheerfulness to the thread, this used to be my opinion of it. So much hate, and so many people tied up in their hate, and no-one willing to forgive. There's no hope, may as well carpet bomb the area and start over.

Then the GFA happened. And it gave me... what? Actual *hope* in humanity? That people can actually sort their shit out when the will is there? Holy cripes. And that's why I refuse to accept that there's not some sort of peaceful solution to Israel and the general Middle-East. Before Ulster sorted itself out, I'd have said the rest of the world is better off without them and approved of a (limited) nuclear exchange to reset things to zero. 

And that's why I'm horrified at the notion of it falling apart. It was such an example to the rest of the world of how to put your hatred aside and just learn to get on with one another. You could always say "Look. Just _look_ at the history there. And they got over it. Why don't you give it a try?"


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah, that's entirely arbitrary. You could just as easily come up with some other principle, of which membership or not of the EU would be one of the details.


Go on then.  Put forward your principle and we'll see what it implies.

I'd say that the principle of where the sovereignity of a country lies -- what its ultimate authority is in terms of courts, trade and all those other things -- is a pretty fundamental one, to be honest.  But if you have something even more fundamental, I'd be interested to hear it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> Go on then.  Put forward your principle and we'll see what it implies.
> 
> I'd say that the principle of where the sovereignity of a country lies -- what its ultimate authority is in terms of courts, trade and all those other things -- is a pretty fundamental one, to be honest.  But if you have something even more fundamental, I'd be interested to hear it.



National sovereignty is never absolute. It's a bit of a post-imperial conceit of places like the UK to pretend otherwise. Smaller countries know full-well that the idea, and even the aspiration to work towards it, is silly.

Every international treaty signed limits national sovereignty. Which of those limits you consider to be the most significant is an individual judgement. Does membership of the EU limit national sovereignty more than, say, membership of NATO? Which bits of national sovereignty are you interested in? Which bits are taken away by membership of the EU? Does membership of a particular international group weaken or strengthen national autonomy - it's not obvious that leaving the EU means more autonomy: without the backing of a larger group that shares certain ideas, the smaller entity may be less able to decide upon its terms when dealing with the rest of the world. And this is not an abstract idea - the UK will confront this problem when trying to strike new trade deals.

So even the principle 'we would like to strengthen Westminster' (one that I am not keen on, btw) does not necessarily mandate leaving the EU as one of its details.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 21, 2017)

The notorious "excrutiating detail" sectorial analyses - I NEVER SAID IMPACT ASSESSMENTS - have been published by the Exiting the EU Committee (and MPs are sharing bits of them on social media). 

Publications - Exiting the EU Committee 

I don't have any specialist knowledge in any of this stuff, but I had a quick look at the Broadcasting one on the basis that it might be more understandable to the layperson. It looks very, erm, padded is the first impression.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

littlebabyjesus said:


> National sovereignty is never absolute. It's a bit of a post-imperial conceit of places like the UK to pretend otherwise. Smaller countries know full-well that the idea, and even the aspiration to work towards it, is silly.
> 
> Every international treaty signed limits national sovereignty. Which of those limits you consider to be the most significant is an individual judgement. Does membership of the EU limit national sovereignty more than, say, membership of NATO? Which bits of national sovereignty are you interested in? Which bits are taken away by membership of the EU? Does membership of a particular international group weaken or strengthen national autonomy - it's not obvious that leaving the EU means more autonomy: without the backing of a larger group that shares certain ideas, the smaller entity may be less able to decide upon its terms when dealing with the rest of the world. And this is not an abstract idea - the UK will confront this problem when trying to strike new trade deals.
> 
> So even the principle 'we would like to strengthen Westminster' (one that I am not keen on, btw) does not necessarily mandate leaving the EU as one of its details.


I'm sorry, but none of that detracts from the fact that whether or not we want to have our government subordinate to a supra-national body is pretty bloody fundamental a principle.

NATO, you say?  Well, it wouldn't be an unreasonable principle to have a vote on either.  But saying you'll be in a defensive pact is a long, long way short of saying you'll allow your laws to be set elsewhere.


----------



## 1%er (Dec 21, 2017)

I don't have a dog in the EU fight so don't really have a side to choose. Before the referendum I don't recall hearing talk of a hard-brexit or soft-brexit but I believe I now understand the difference.

My question is about if brexit doesn't happen. Could the debate then move too, would it be a soft-remain or a hard-remain. Could the other EU 27 then tell the UK if you want to remain/rejoin you can on the same terms you had just prior to the referendum, that would be a soft-remain, or could the EU 27 tell the UK you can remain/rejoin but you have to join the Euro, sign up to schengen and or other EU agreements, that would be a hard-remain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 21, 2017)

1%er said:


> I don't have a dog in the EU fight so don't really have a side to choose. Before the referendum I don't recall hearing talk of a hard-brexit or soft-brexit but I believe I now understand the difference.
> 
> My question is about if brexit doesn't happen. Could the debate then move too, would it be a soft-remain or a hard-remain. Could the other EU 27 then tell the UK if you want to remain/rejoin you can on the same terms you had just prior to the referendum, that would be a soft-remain, or could the EU 27 tell the UK you can remain/rejoin but you have to join the Euro, sign up to schengen and or other EU agreements, that would be a hard-remain.


as i understand it, the government can at any point say whoops we've changed our mind and rescind the article 50 bit, at which point the position as it was on 23/6/16 would resume. however, british influence in the eu corridors of power would i suspect be significantly less than it was before the referendum.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> as i understand it, the government can at any point say whoops we've changed our mind and rescind the article 50 bit, at which point the position as it was on 23/6/16 would resume. however, british influence in the eu corridors of power would i suspect be significantly less than it was before the referendum.



Not with any great further knowledge, I've seen it put about that if we do go ahead and formally leave but then are driven to ask to come back in because of a crippling shortage of soft cheese or something that the EU are likely to insist on a Full, No-Messing-About membership with the Euro included. 

I've seen it said also I think that the rebate is probably gone even if we go back before properly leaving - "I'm sure I left my coat in the kitchen...!"


----------



## 1%er (Dec 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> as i understand it, the government can at any point say whoops we've changed our mind and rescind the article 50 bit, at which point the position as it was on 23/6/16 would resume. however, british influence in the eu corridors of power would i suspect be significantly less than it was before the referendum.


I don't know if Article 50 can be rescind, I've read stuff from lawyers on both sides of the debate, so I guess it will have to go to Court for a definitive answer. There is no mention of revocation in the text of Article 50, but then it is an appalling example of legal drafting, so it will not in the end be a political decision rather a legal one.

I do find the question of a "hard or soft remain" an interesting concept.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 21, 2017)

1%er said:


> I don't know if Article 50 can be rescind, I've read stuff from lawyers on both sides of the debate, so I guess it will have to go to Court for a definitive answer. There is no mention of revocation in the text of Article 50, but then it is an appalling example of legal drafting, so it will not in the end be a political decision rather a legal one.
> 
> I do find the question of a "hard or soft remain" an interesting concept.


tbh leave or remain it's a question of a hard fuck or a soft fuck, but a fucking there will be


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 21, 2017)

I've always thought it was a stupid question to have a referendum on - the ramifications of "leave" were/are mindbogglingly complex - as clearly demonstrated by nobody having a clue about how this is going to pan out. Its not like having a referendum on equal marriage. Direct democracy is not well served by Yes/No choices - people need to be engaged in the decision making and in a constructing a range of choices (the writing of Iceland's constitution probably the best known example of this).

Also i dont think having a popular majority automatically means that gives the majority a right to inflict potentially very negative consequences on a sizeable chunk of the population.
The fact that a big chunk of retired home owners (who are likely to be pretty well protected from the outcome) voted leave, whilst a big chunk of younger people (who will have to live with the consequences) voted remain sucks big time in my view - and undermines the notion that the "will of the people" should be sacrosanct.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 21, 2017)

Out of interest - and absolutely not expressing support for the idea of tests for voting - does anyone who's younger than me (born 1971) or who has kids have any idea if there is any education about politics or governance in schools these days? We had something called citizenship when I was at school, but I think that was just an optional cse subject. There's political content in all sorts of courses, of course, history, geography, English I guess, (others too I suppose), but is there a dedicated "this is how the government works" course? I can't recall learning anything about the EU in school - or EEC! 

I saw that Leanne Wood of Plaid Cymru brought up improving political education the other day,


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 21, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


>



I like the big dangling cock and balls above mainland Europe.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 21, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> Also i dont think having a popular majority automatically means that gives the majority a right to inflict potentially very negative consequences on a sizeable chunk of the population.
> The fact that a big chunk of retired home owners (who are likely to be pretty well protected from the outcome) voted leave, whilst a big chunk of younger people (who will have to live with the consequences) voted remain sucks big time in my view - and undermines the notion that the "will of the people" should be sacrosanct.


This I certainly agree with.  It applies to a lot more than this Brexit decision though.  The tyranny of the majority is a major problem throughout society, most certainly including the impact of fiscal decision-making on the disenfranchised and marginalised.


----------



## sealion (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.


What are the consequences of staying in a relationship because it's better the devil you know ? You say people voting leave didn't know what they were voting for. Do remain voters have some inside info on where the cabal is heading ? The eu has changed a bit since it's inception and will carry on doing so. What's in store for us if we stay in ? What plans have they got for us next ?


----------



## Winot (Dec 21, 2017)

kabbes said:


> This I certainly agree with.  It applies to a lot more than this Brexit decision though.  The tyranny of the majority is a major problem throughout society, most certainly including the impact of fiscal decision-making on the disenfranchised and marginalised.



Doesn’t a referendum automatically include this risk?


----------



## Winot (Dec 21, 2017)

sealion said:


> What are the consequences of staying in a relationship because it's better the devil you know ? *You say people voting leave didn't know what they were voting for. *Do remain voters have some inside info on where the cabal is heading ? The eu has changed a bit since it's inception and will carry on doing so. What's in store for us if we stay in ? What plans have they got for us next ?



Actually I’m more annoyed by the politicians not researching the implications. For all my Remoaning, I don’t blame voters (you might not believe that but it’s true). I have to accept the result of the referendum. My biggest gripe is the way it’s been handled since - May has fucked up every strategic decision she’s had to take.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 21, 2017)

sealion said:


> What are the consequences of staying in a relationship because it's better the devil you know ? You say people voting leave didn't know what they were voting for. Do remain voters have some inside info on where the cabal is heading ? The eu has changed a bit since it's inception and will carry on doing so. What's in store for us if we stay in ? What plans have they got for us next ?


You won't believe what they're planning next


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 21, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I like the big dangling cock and balls above mainland Europe.


the drip of 'sweat' looks suss now you mention it


----------



## gosub (Dec 21, 2017)

sealion said:


> What are the consequences of staying in a relationship because it's better the devil you know ? You say people voting leave didn't know what they were voting for. Do remain voters have some inside info on where the cabal is heading ? The eu has changed a bit since it's inception and will carry on doing so. What's in store for us if we stay in ? What plans have they got for us next ?


A Fundamental Law of the European Union | Spinelli Group


----------



## sealion (Dec 21, 2017)

Winot said:


> Actually I’m more annoyed by the politicians not researching the implications.


 Thinking remain was a foregone conclusion shows how out of touch and arrogant they are.


Winot said:


> My biggest gripe is the way it’s been handled since - May has fucked up every strategic decision she’s had to take.


I think the lot of them (labour and tory) are a joke, so it makes no difference as they'd both fuck it up.


----------



## sealion (Dec 21, 2017)

gosub said:


> A Fundamental Law of the European Union | Spinelli Group


Do the people get a say or vote on these proposals ?


----------



## sealion (Dec 21, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> You won't believe what they're planning next


I was hoping a remainer could tell us, as they seem to know what they were voting for. Only a thicko would vote without reading a manifesto first


----------



## gosub (Dec 21, 2017)

sealion said:


> Do the people get a say or vote on these proposals ?


even MP's wouldn't have had a meaningful vote.

Sorry, forgot Cameron's Referendum Act, further integration so would have been a referendum...which had it gone the "wrong" way Pressure from EU27 to have another and get it "right" ....the ship is unsteerable


----------



## MightyTibberton (Dec 21, 2017)

That is only a pressure group of about 100 MEPs and fewer than 8,000 "real people".... 

I honestly think that very few people in the UK - outside those who are professionally engaged with it in some way - know very much about the EU. Our media has never really taken reporting on it seriously and a good part of our print media has engaged in a decades-long campaign of lies about it. UKIP was only able to gain a foothold in UK politics because the turnouts at European elections are so poor that their initially fringe views were able to gain representation and crucially funding by winning seats in the European parliament. 

I think that's one (of the many) reasons why Leave won: they were able to go with simple, positive messages, but because there's very little genuine popular enthusiasm for the EU in the UK (rightly or wrongly, I think it's fair to say that's true - even in somewhere like South Wales where there's a huge amount of visble evidence of the EU spending lots of money locally) Remain went with quite a negative tone.


----------



## Santino (Dec 21, 2017)

MightyTibberton said:


> That is only a pressure group of about 100 MEPs and fewer than 8,000 "real people"....
> 
> I honestly think that very few people in the UK - outside those who are professionally engaged with it in some way - know very much about the EU. Our media has never really taken reporting on it seriously and a good part of our print media has engaged in a decades-long campaign of lies about it. UKIP was only able to gain a foothold in UK politics because the turnouts at European elections are so poor that their initially fringe views were able to gain representation and crucially funding by winning seats in the European parliament.
> 
> I think that's one (of the many) reasons why Leave won: they were able to go with simple, positive messages, but because there's very little genuine popular enthusiasm for the EU in the UK (rightly or wrongly, I think it's fair to say that's true - even in somewhere like South Wales where there's a huge amount of visble evidence of the EU spending lots of money locally) Remain went with quite a negative tone.


It's possible that greater knowledge of how the EU works would have meant a stronger Leave vote.


----------



## Supine (Dec 21, 2017)

The problem for me is remainers wanted to stay for a few key reasons. Avoiding another world war, freedom of travel, belonging to a wider community. 

The brexit types had many more reasons for wanting to leave. Some of those were macro reasons like taking back control of our own destiny. For that I can kind of understand. Unfortunately there were loads of micro reasons that people voted for In self interest. Things like fishermen voting for improved fishing. Racists voting for less foreign types. People suffering austerity and wanting to improve their lot by having fewer people in the UK. People who protest voted not realising they actually made a difference. People who suffered from globalisation thinking brexit would change that. 

I forget who said it, but referendums are like a sledgehammer to democracy. Sometimes the huge decisions should be made by people who have the time to study the subject in detail. Those who did almost all want to remain. 

My 2p. Although it's probably only worth 1.12p now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 21, 2017)

Supine said:


> The problem for me is remainers wanted to stay for a few key reasons. Avoiding another world war, freedom of travel, belonging to a wider community.



NATO has kept peace in Europe (US &UK at the end of the day)

Freedom of travel was always there and still will be, of course it will still be restricted to those with the cash to do so.

What a simpering pile of bollocks.


----------



## 1%er (Dec 22, 2017)

sealion said:


> What are the consequences of staying in a relationship because it's better the devil you know ? You say people voting leave didn't know what they were voting for. Do remain voters have some inside info on where the cabal is heading ? The eu has changed a bit since it's inception and will carry on doing so. What's in store for us if we stay in ? What plans have they got for us next ?


Isn't it clear where it is heading and what plans they have for Europe?

Didn't the UK press carry Jean Claude-Juncker recent speech? They want one President and a vice President who would also be the European Finance minister (just like the position of Chancellor of the Exchequer in the UK), it is proposed that the vice-president would have the power to go into member states and make “structural reforms” to their domestic budgets . They want one currency, a European army (they will use Trumps insecurity over NATO to help push that through and also that it will save individual States billions) and to move away from unanimity of all governments to a majority of governments to carry the vote, they already have a Central Bank and European Anthem.

Now as I said above, I don't have a dog in the fight as I don't live in Europe, but I do read the European press and watch the European news and from where I'm sitting it looks like things are moving towards a European superstate. Jean Claude-Juncker talked about the "current momentum of confidence" and wants to push through and get a commitment on some of the things mentioned in the paragraph above before the UK leaves the EU in 2019, so if the UK changes its mind, they will have to accept them if they want to remain.

While I don't have a view really on leave or remain, I believe the people of Europe should make such big decisions, but I fear the people of Europe will not be asked or given the choice.

Good luck and I wish you all well whichever way your ship ends up sailing


----------



## kebabking (Dec 22, 2017)

I've said it before and and I'll say it again - I voted remain for many reasons, one of which was my fear over the difficulty of leaving, but having been tangentially involved in the EU's military/foreign policy ambitions/policy, in 5 years I'd probably have voted to leave regardless of the likely difficulties - in 10/15 years I don't think we'll recognise the EU, not least because Brexit has forced the structures to ram through a massive centralisation of power to ensure that the next time someone thinks about leaving it will be physically impossible...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

Santino said:


> It's possible that greater knowledge of how the EU works would have meant a stronger Leave vote.


Wait till there's a referendum on leaving the EU - English union - then we'll see how knowledge of the state's workings affects the result


----------



## Badgers (Dec 22, 2017)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 22, 2017)

From the incredibly detailed sector impact assessments, a quote.

"Electricity is a fundamental part of modern society. Residential and industrial users rely on its use to ensure basic and vital needs such as lighting, heating or refrigeration are met on a daily basis"


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 22, 2017)

I’m glad Britain left the EU because despite the huge cost of leaving because it’s good to show the liberal London elite that they can’t have it all their own way. 

Still my UK passport runs out next year and I’m going to get an Irish one instead just in case.


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 22, 2017)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 123620


That sort of smug bullshit during the campaign definitely contributed in a small way to Leave winning.


----------



## Winot (Dec 22, 2017)

kebabking said:


> I've said it before and and I'll say it again - I voted remain for many reasons, one of which was my fear over the difficulty of leaving, but having been tangentially involved in the EU's military/foreign policy ambitions/policy, in 5 years I'd probably have voted to leave regardless of the likely difficulties - in 10/15 years I don't think we'll recognise the EU, not least because Brexit has forced the structures to ram through a massive centralisation of power to ensure that the next time someone thinks about leaving it will be physically impossible...



That doesnt seem logical - if you thought it was going to get worse why not get out now?


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> I’m glad Britain left the EU because despite the huge cost of leaving because it’s good to show the liberal London elite that they can’t have it all their own way.


What do you mean by the huge cost of leaving?


----------



## kebabking (Dec 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> That doesnt seem logical - if you thought it was going to get worse why not get out now?



Because there's a difference between immediate, tangible dangers and more medium term theoretical dangers?


----------



## bemused (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> I’m glad Britain left the EU because despite the huge cost of leaving because it’s good to show the liberal London elite that they can’t have it all their own way.



Elites tend to get their own way.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2017)

in terms of this so-called "divorce" the circumstances strike me as rather more of a flat-share of convenience with people you've never got along particularly well with anyway & are now arguing over who's taken more food out of the fridge & how to split the electricity bill. To the extent the marital analogy holds water then the remainer narrative of the UK being so fat, ugly & stupid that no-one else will love it & is doomed to die wretched & alone if it leaves sounds more like the controlling partner in a rather unpleasant & abusive relationship than one of wedded bliss. This holds as much between the so-called "elites" & their populaces as between UK & EU. Its true I suppose the EU has kept the peace in Europe inasamuch as Germany is now able to control Europe without having to go to the expense of all those panzer divisions  ( _terrible_ carbon footprint for one thing )


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 22, 2017)

Farage concentrating on the important issues:


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you mean by the huge cost of leaving?


It’s not cheap right?


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> It’s not cheap right?


So do you just mean the 'divorce bill' ?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 22, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I like the big dangling cock and balls above mainland Europe.



Glad I'm not the only one who's ever thought Sweden and Finland together kind of resemble a great big cock and balls ..


----------



## bemused (Dec 22, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Farage concentrating on the important issues



Now he's confirmed that he'll be getting payments from the EU until he dies he is free to focus on how awful it is the UK is paying the EU.


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> So do you just mean the 'divorce bill' ?


No.


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> No.


Um ok. I was trying to get a better idea of what you meant when you said that it’s going to cost a lot but it’s worth it to teach the ‘London liberal elite’ a lesson. I’m curious whether there’s any cost that you’d say would make it no longer worth it for that reason.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you mean by the huge cost of leaving?


what, you mean apart from the great economic downturn which will happen as a direct result?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Um ok. I was trying to get a better idea of what you meant when you said that it’s going to cost a lot but it’s worth it to teach the ‘London liberal elite’ a lesson. I’m curious whether there’s any cost that you’d say would make it no longer worth it for that reason.


you could of course have asked 'why do you think it will be worth it?'


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Um ok. I was trying to get a better idea of what you meant when you said that it’s going to cost a lot but it’s worth it to teach the ‘London liberal elite’ a lesson. I’m curious whether there’s any cost that you’d say would make it no longer worth it for that reason.


I believe there will be a massive negative economic impact from Brexit, however that’s not to say a crash wouldn’t have happened with Remain anyway, so it’s not really about hard figures, but saying the gamble was probably worth it in terms of disruption of the normal way of doing things. 

Of course whether people are in a position to take advantage of the disruption to create a more economically democratic society is another matter. If they are then we will know how much it was worth it.


----------



## Winot (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> I’m glad Britain left the EU because despite the huge cost of leaving because it’s good to show the liberal London elite that they can’t have it all their own way.



It would have been cheaper to prohibit avocado imports.



Terry Manners said:


> Still my UK passport runs out next year and I’m going to get an Irish one instead just in case.



Oh well as long as you're OK


----------



## gosub (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> Still my UK passport runs out next year and I’m going to get an Irish one instead just in case.



In same boat but NOT taking the Irish one... Got a sneaky suspicion it will end up tieing you into Federal EU tax claims at some time in the future.. Just like how the likes of Boris get a capital gains bill off the US treasury every time he moves house in London


----------



## teuchter (Dec 22, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> Its true I suppose the EU has kept the peace in Europe inasamuch as Germany is now able to control Europe without having to go to the expense of all those panzer divisions



I feel like I'm seeing more of these kinds of comments around recently and I don't like it at all.


----------



## gosub (Dec 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I feel like I'm seeing more of these kinds of comments around recently and I don't like it at all.


German 'hypocrisy' over Greek military spending has critics up in arms


----------



## Supine (Dec 22, 2017)

gosub said:


> German 'hypocrisy' over Greek military spending has critics up in arms



7% spend on weapons us huge. The Greeks obviously love their toys of war.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 22, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> That sort of smug bullshit during the campaign definitely contributed in a small way to Leave winning.


Of course it was... 

I am more interested in my next government paperwork anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

Badgers said:


> Of course it was...
> 
> I am more interested in my next government paperwork anyway.
> 
> View attachment 123651


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I feel like I'm seeing more of these kinds of comments around recently and I don't like it at all.


count them so we don't have to rely solely on your impressions


----------



## mather (Dec 22, 2017)

bemused said:


> Elites tend to get their own way.



Apart from Brexit.


----------



## mather (Dec 22, 2017)

Supine said:


> 7% spend on weapons us huge. The Greeks obviously love their toys of war.



They keep are large army to keep the Turks out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

mather said:


> Apart from Brexit.


tbh parts of the elite on that one too. the metropolitan elites so despised by everyone aren't monolithic, and some of them vocally desired departure


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 22, 2017)

mather said:


> Apart from Brexit.



mmm, possibly. Boris has done reasonably well out of it, mind...


----------



## Supine (Dec 22, 2017)

mather said:


> They keep are large army to keep the Turks out.



I know they have history but would turkey dare attack a member of the EU? Surely not.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2017)

see comments on EU defence capability upthread


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 22, 2017)

Supine said:


> I know they have history but would turkey dare attack a member of the EU? Surely not.



Diplomatic relations weren't too hot when Erdogan visited Greece recently and the Cyprus divide still remains. Hard to tell, these days. With all the internal upheaval, you'd think he'd be sorting out the domestic stuff but a conflict with Greece or Cyprus might be just what's needed to do that.

I hope not.


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> I feel like I'm seeing more of these kinds of comments around recently and I don't like it at all.


I don't know if this is what you meant but me I find it odd and quite alienating that pretty much every time i see a mention of the EU as an institution which reduces the chances of war between the member nations of Europe its almost always expressed in that sort of jokey way. This seems to me a serious matter, given that we were going at eachother for much of the past few centuries, so I can't figure out why its treated as a joke, could be a peculiar British thing perhaps our little island not having been invaded for such a long time.


----------



## gosub (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> I don't know if this is what you meant but me I find it odd and quite alienating that pretty much every time i see a mention of the EU as an institution which reduces the chances of war between the member nations of Europe its almost always expressed in that sort of jokey way. This seems to me a serious matter, given that we were going at eachother for much of the past few centuries, so I can't figure out why its treated as a joke, could be a peculiar British thing perhaps our little island not having been invaded for such a long time.


coz its probably more down to NATO which has been doing Defense for decades, rather than EU which started last Wednesday.  And we've still had wars on Europes borders and fuck knows how Catalonia is going to pan out....plus its an extension OF the old ideas that meant wars still happened but on a scale that sucked every one in..


----------



## teuchter (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> I don't know if this is what you meant but me I find it odd and quite alienating that pretty much every time i see a mention of the EU as an institution which reduces the chances of war between the member nations of Europe its almost always expressed in that sort of jokey way. This seems to me a serious matter, given that we were going at eachother for much of the past few centuries, so I can't figure out why its treated as a joke, could be a peculiar British thing perhaps our little island not having been invaded for such a long time.


It's partly that but also why do criticisms of the german government, german national policy or anything else have to make mention of germany's past involvement in war? The germany today is not the Germany of 80 or 100 years ago, and I don't like the implication that there's something inherent in Germans that they are prone to forcibly take control of Europe. Aside from the fact that I count quite a few germans as friends it's basically a kind of racism, and the sort of bigoted thinking that I thought we'd left behind by now, possibly partly thanks to the EU. Furthermore for any Brit to make any comments about Germany's militaristic past is somewhat hypocritical.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> so I can't figure out why its treated as a joke




its not a joke - try reading The Tainted Source by John Laughland or Varoufakis's Adults in the Room - all you need do is just threaten to close the banks down

Exclusive: Chopra says ECB's threats to Ireland were 'outrageous' - Independent.ie


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> its not a joke - try reading The Tainted Source by John Laughland or Varoufakis's Adults in the Room - all you need do is just threaten to close the banks down
> 
> Exclusive: Chopra says ECB's threats to Ireland were 'outrageous' - Independent.ie



The relevance of this is that economic armtwisting by the central bank is the same thing as war? I was being completely literal, talking about actual war, which I know is unfashionable.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 22, 2017)

mather said:


> Apart from Brexit.


Like Farage and Johnson?


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

sleaterkinney said:


> Like Farage and Johnson?


Rees-Mogg, man of the people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> I don't know if this is what you meant but me I find it odd and quite alienating that pretty much every time i see a mention of the EU as an institution which reduces the chances of war between the member nations of Europe its almost always expressed in that sort of jokey way. This seems to me a serious matter, given that we were going at eachother for much of the past few centuries, so I can't figure out why its treated as a joke, could be a peculiar British thing perhaps our little island not having been invaded for such a long time.


Didn't auld clausewitz say war is politics carried out by other means? Tbh a lot of people have facile politics and something that sounds good will be repeated regardless of its truth


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> I was being completely literal, talking about actual war



why on earth do you need to resort to a "war" if you can throw your weight around & control your hegemonic system by other means - this is hardly a new phenomenon

_At a fractious European Community meeting last week, Germany announced to its partners that it was planning to recognize Slovenia and Croatia, even if it had to do so alone. To preserve a semblance of unity, the 12 member countries approved a resolution authorizing recognition of new nations that meet certain conditions, including stable borders, respect for democracy, and protection of minority rights. Thousands Killed in Fighting

Several European leaders, as well as President Bush and Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar of the United Nations, had urged Germany not to proceed with plans to recognize the two republics immediately. They suggested instead that recognition be withheld until it could be granted as part of an overall peace settlement._

Slovenia and Croatia Get Bonn's Nod


----------



## agricola (Dec 22, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> Didn't auld clausewitz say war is politics carried out by other means? Tbh a lot of people have facile politics and something that sounds good will be repeated regardless of its truth



Not always - the tenth / eleventh (or fourth / fifth if one prefers) century Syrian poet al-Ma'arri once said that there were two sorts of people in the world; those with reason but no religion and those with religion but no reason.

Sadly it did not catch on no matter how good it sounds, and they beheaded his statue nine hundred years after his death which perhaps proves how right he was.


----------



## mather (Dec 22, 2017)

hot air baboon said:


> why on earth do you need to resort to a "war" if you can throw your weight around & control your hegemonic system by other means - this is hardly a new phenomenon
> 
> _At a fractious European Community meeting last week, Germany announced to its partners that it was planning to recognize Slovenia and Croatia, even if it had to do so alone. To preserve a semblance of unity, the 12 member countries approved a resolution authorizing recognition of new nations that meet certain conditions, including stable borders, respect for democracy, and protection of minority rights. Thousands Killed in Fighting
> 
> ...



Germany up to it's old tricks yet again.


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

That article from 1991 seems a bit bonkers to me hot air baboon , with its ‘4th reich’ crap. Still, hitler’s always handy when you want to say anything a bit derogatory about the Germans.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 22, 2017)

there's Martin Selmayr - pulling Junker's strings. In Varoufakis he quotes Schauble directly as admitting the utterly destructive & unachievable Greek austerity punishment beating was designed with only one aim to get the Troika in Paris. If people want to say Germany is not first among equals in the EU then we're going to have to disagree


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

Everyone knows it’s the economically dominant nation in the eu but what, do you think this is because they have an innate Teutonic Will To Power or something?


----------



## agricola (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Everyone knows it’s the economically dominant nation in the eu but what, do you think this is because they have an innate Teutonic Will To Power or something?



Perhaps not, but its fairly clear they rate their own concerns over everyone else's; just look at whats happened with the refugee crisis to see the truth of that.


----------



## Winot (Dec 22, 2017)

agricola said:


> Perhaps not, but its fairly clear they rate their own concerns over everyone else's; just look at whats happened with the refugee crisis to see the truth of that.



They let in hugely more than we did, didn’t they?


----------



## agricola (Dec 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> They let in hugely more than we did, didn’t they?



They did - and they did it unilaterally, without any recognition of what it would do to the other EU member states that the refugees had to pass through and without supporting the refugees themselves on the journey to Germany.  

If another country had done that - especially Greece or Italy - they'd have gone absolutely bananas and would probably have put borders back up.


----------



## mather (Dec 22, 2017)

agricola said:


> They did - and they did it unilaterally, without any recognition of what it would do to the other EU member states that the refugees had to pass through and without supporting the refugees themselves on the journey to Germany.
> 
> If another country had done that - especially Greece or Italy - they'd have gone absolutely bananas and would probably have put borders back up.



Exactly, Germany unilaterally decided to take them in and when it turned out that German voters were none to pleased the German government forced the rest of the EU members to take their 'fair share'.

Also, does anyone apart from naive liberals actually believe that Merkel's decision was a humanitarian gesture? Of course it wasn't, it was simply in keeping with the interests of the German ruling class which is to have a never ending supply of cheap labour that can be used to counter strikes/industrial action and depress wages.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Everyone knows it’s the economically dominant nation in the eu but what, do you think this is because they have an innate Teutonic Will To Power or something?


I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but IMO a disproportionately high number compared with most other countries.
On a national level it does start to paint an ugly picture and these individual characteristics seem to lend themselves particularly well to politicians, who obviously end up being the ones shaping policies reflecting these characteristics on the nation both internally and abroad.
I think you'll find most germans from center left to the outer left wing fringes would openly agree with a lot of this - particularly on the outer fringes e.g: German Antifa won't have a good word to say about the nation as a whole and it's not uncommon to meet people making it their life mission to hinder what they believe is the inevitable reoccurrence of fascism in Germany.

On a topical note: why do you think it's Germany standing alone opposing closer federal unity, and particularly a federal fiscal policy in the EU? and realistically, do you really think there's a chance that the remaining 26 nations will be able to overturn the german 'will' on that policy?

German have full hegemony in the Eu right now. I doubt they'll be letting go of that too soon.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but i find it a disproportionately high number compared with a lot of other countries.


the fuck, c'mon.


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. .



wow. this is all quite fascinating, I had no idea this german-hating stuff went so deep. You won the war in the end remember.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> the fuck, c'mon.


take it up with slime too (hamburg hardcore anarcho punks)

Deutschland muss sterben, damit wir leben koennen - Germany must die, so that we can live


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> wow. this is all quite fascinating, I had no idea this german-hating stuff went so deep.


I don't hate Germans as a whole. I hate it when these characteristics raise their ugly head (anywhere)



bimble said:


> You won the war in the end remember.


OK so now you're doing exactly that what you were complaining about


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

You seem oblivious to the massive importance of 'never -againism' in Germany pocketscience , like Hitler just died last week or something. _Vergangenheitsbewältigung _they call it- the effort to come to terms with the past, particularly the nazi past. I think British could do with a bit of that tbh.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 22, 2017)

Look, bollocks to the national stereotypes you’re hearing from some here bimble but that doesn’t take away Germany’s ability to centre itself as the predominant partner in the EU, the leader of neo-liberalism, and all that entails. That has (or shouldn’t have) nothing/anything to do with German hating but is simply a recognition of how economic laws and favours in the EU have worked in Germany’s favour. You do need to read Varoufakis. And some here need to re-read Varoufakis without xenophobic blinkers on.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> You seem oblivious to the massive importance of 'never -againism' in Germany pocketscience , like Hitler just died last week or something. _Vergangenheitsbewältigung _they call it- the effort to come to terms with the past, particularly the nazi past.


Come on, the Audi advert with the pool side towel cliche did't stem from nowhere


bimble said:


> I think British could do with a bit of that tbh.


So you have opinions about the british? fine.
and I agree with you on that


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> The Audi advert with the pool side towel clique did't stem from nowhere


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


>


*cliche 
are you german bimble?


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> *cliche
> are you german bimble?


Nope, never even been there tbh but lets say my family history (eastern eurpoean jews) is intertwined with that of Germany. So yeah, I'm interested in what happened back then not being attributed to some peculiarly German trait, because i think that would be very stupid.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> Nope, never even been there tbh but lets say my family history (eastern eurpoean jews) is intertwined with that of Germany. So yeah, I'm interested in what happened back then not being attributed to some peculiarly German trait, because i think that would be very stupid.


OK. I would have been surprised if a German of your political persuasion (based on the posts I've read here) would strongly disagree with what I wrote.
I'd say accepting and understanding these characteristics are an important part of the  _Vergangenheitsbewältigungsprozess._
Anyone who's been on a demo in gemany will have heard the unanimous nie wider deuschland. A lot of the left would prefer to have the whole nation nullified and dispersed. That course starts to get interesting when you have the Bundesregierung actively resisting a federal union in the Eu.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> *Look, bollocks to the national stereotypes you’re hearing from some here* bimble but that doesn’t take away Germany’s ability to centre itself as the predominant partner in the EU, the leader of neo-liberalism, and all that entails. That has (or shouldn’t have) nothing/anything to do with German hating but is simply a recognition of how economic laws and favours in the EU have worked in Germany’s favour. You do need to read Varoufakis. And some here need to re-read Varoufakis without xenophobic blinkers on.


of course. It's not like anyone has partaken in national stereotyping of the british in this thread...


----------



## bimble (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I'd say accepting and understanding these characteristics are an important part of the  _Vergangenheitsbewältigungsprozess.._


What do you mean? That all German schoolchildren should be taught to acknowledge that they have a special tendency to be 'selfish inconsiderate crafty & persistant' more than they would had they been born elsewhere?


----------



## Winot (Dec 22, 2017)

planetgeli said:


> Look, bollocks to the national stereotypes you’re hearing from some here bimble but that doesn’t take away Germany’s ability to centre itself as the predominant partner in the EU, the leader of neo-liberalism, and all that entails. That has (or shouldn’t have) nothing/anything to do with German hating but is simply a recognition of how economic laws and favours in the EU have worked in Germany’s favour. You do need to read Varoufakis. And some here need to re-read Varoufakis without xenophobic blinkers on.



National stereotypes and xenophobia? Straight out racism if you ask me. I’ve reported your post pocketscience. Suggest you apologise and edit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 22, 2017)

bimble said:


> What do you mean? That all German schoolchildren should be taught to acknowledge that they have a special tendency to be 'selfish inconsiderate crafty & persistant' more than they would had they been born elsewhere?


Many of them will have been born elsewhere


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

Winot said:


> National stereotypes and xenophobia? Straight out racism if you ask me. I’ve reported your post pocketscience. Suggest you apologise and edit.


If you knew my personal circumstances you'd realise just how ridiculous that is. Many a time in Germany I've been in a kneipe and had germans generalising to me about their opinions of the british characteristics (or other nationalities). It never occurred to me that they were being racist or that I should ask the barman to sling them out.
Do you spend much time in Germany? 
Here's a recent comedy on the German national broadcaster. Maybe bimble would care to translate it to you.



bimble said:


> What do you mean? That all German schoolchildren should be taught to acknowledge that they have a special tendency to be 'selfish inconsiderate crafty & persistant' more than they would had they been born elsewhere?


No. But I do think that teachers should be aware of such characteristics and try to encourage more civil, altruistic and socially aware behavior wherever needed. and certainly not just in germany for that matter.


----------



## paolo (Dec 22, 2017)

From what I’ve learnt about German local law - in terms of tenants rights and employment law, at least - I’d say the U.K. is faaaaar more neoliberal and has been for a very long time.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but IMO a disproportionately high number compared with most other countries.


What a lot of utter racist nonsense.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

teuchter said:


> What a lot of utter racist nonsense.


Why do you think that's racist? If I said that I generally find Russians to be a bit cold and chary while Jamaicans tend to be warm and hearty, would that be racist?
These are observations. I've heard far worse from Germans about themselves and indeed it was Germans that first opened my eyes to how the underlying issues in their society possibly make up the national psyche that underlay some of their historical misdemeanours. There are other characteristics the Germans have that I highly respect.
I was following on from bimble 's  question on whether their is a collective German 'will to power'. Do you think the Germans have a will to power? Does the very question incur racism for you?


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Why do you think that's racist? If I said that I generally find Russians to be a bit cold and chary while Jamaicans tend to be warm and hearty, would that be racist?
> These are observations. I've heard far worse from Germans about themselves and indeed it was Germans that first opened my eyes to how the underlying issues in their society possibly make up the national psyche that underlay some of their historical misdemeanours. There are other characteristics the Germans have that I highly respect.
> I was following on from bimble 's  question on whether their is a collective German 'will to power'. Do you think the Germans have a will to power? Does the very question incur racism for you?



Generalisations about groups of people based on stereotypes, cant't imagine how that might stray close to the racism line.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

bloody wingeing poms


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Generalisations about groups of people based on stereotypes, cant't imagine how that might stray close to the racism line.


like I said before, people don't hold back about the british on here. Must be the low self-esteem the british have of themselves. Funny characteristic that one.
And then there's the welsh, irish & scots in the football forum when england play. like a klan meeting it is.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> like I said before, people don't hold back about the british on here. Must be the low self-esteem the british have of themselves. Funny characteristic that one.
> And then there's the welsh, irish & scots in the football forum when england play. like a klan meeting it is.



Go to bed, you're drunk. (That's the most charitable interpretation I can manage)


----------



## Wookey (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> bloody wingeing poms



Oh, you're Australian!!

That explains _everything_!!


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 22, 2017)

Wookey said:


> Oh, you're Australian!!
> 
> That explains _everything_!!


Howso?... (careful , no ugly generalisations about our antipodean friends now)


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 22, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> like I said before, people don't hold back about the british on here. Must be the low self-esteem the british have of themselves. Funny characteristic that one.
> And then there's the welsh, irish & scots in the football forum when england play. like a klan meeting it is.



All people of all nationalities make fun of each other. The vast majority of all people of all nationalities are racist / xenophobic. 

Judging by all the Brexit talk it seems low self-esteem is one fault the English can't be accused of. 

Did I mention some of my best friends are black?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 23, 2017)

C,mon - what pocket science is only the same as stating that - 

the irish are thick
scots are tight fisted
the spanish are lazy
the greeks smell
and the welsh shag sheep. 

so not racist at all.


----------



## gosub (Dec 23, 2017)




----------



## Riklet (Dec 23, 2017)

This stingy cold vicious blablabla Germany is perhaps  one of the European countries that had the most organised working class and Comunist party etc.

I mean fair enough criticising German economic policy in Europe but it's far too easy to read too deeply into national traits and characteristics. Are my British 'traits' responsible for colonialism the slave trade and imperial slaughter? It is never anywhere near as black and white...


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 23, 2017)

Riklet said:


> This stingy cold vicious blablabla Germany is perhaps  one of the European countries that had the most organised working class and Comunist party etc.
> .


From my experience, it's those very working class Germans that for the decades since the war have done the most soul searching about how their ancestors caused the atrocities of ww2.



Riklet said:


> I mean fair enough criticising German economic policy in Europe but it's far too easy to read too deeply into national traits and characteristics. Are my British 'traits' responsible for colonialism the slave trade and imperial slaughter? It is never anywhere near as black and white...


For some posters here it's apparently not a matter of _lookung too deeply into_ national traits or characteristics, rather simply recognising oo acknowledging  any such traits or characteristics.

I wonder how say Bill Bryson is thought of in this respect. In his travel books like 'Tales from a small Island' or 'down under' he constantly refers to national stereotypes of the Brits and aussies in his own humourous way. It'd be hard to label him racist though.
Maybe it's just that I used those negative attributes for germany.
For example, one of the characteristics if germans that I most love is their honesty. They often cant help themselves telling the brutal truth, sometimes in the most sensitive of situations, when it would have probably been best just to keep their thoughts to themselves (not far different to how I've described them above). Ironic isn't it.
Then there's that old chestnut of their brilliant social organisation,  which enables them such great engineering. Racist stereotype?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 23, 2017)

Riklet said:


> This stingy cold vicious blablabla Germany is perhaps  one of the European countries that had the most organised working class and Comunist party etc.
> 
> I mean fair enough criticising German economic policy in Europe but it's far too easy to read too deeply into national traits and characteristics. Are my British 'traits' responsible for colonialism the slave trade and imperial slaughter? It is never anywhere near as black and white...


Perhaps you have it arse over tit and empire responsible for British traits than the other way round - and to which British traits do you refer?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 23, 2017)

Productive discussion. Let's do interpreting European politics and sociology through phrenology next!


----------



## bimble (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> For example, one of the characteristics if germans that I most love is their honesty. They often cant help themselves telling the brutal truth, sometimes in the most sensitive of situations, when it would have probably been best just to keep their thoughts to themselves


But also they are very 'crafty'. ok.


----------



## A380 (Dec 23, 2017)

Most of the Germans I know identify themselves as being from their regigion/land/old state first then as Germans.

So they will say they are Bavarian or from Saxony then German. In a similar way to people who say they are English, Welsh or Scottish before they are British.

The exception to this is people I know from Prussia*who all seem quite negative about their Prussioness.

My sample size isn’t huge c 25 people. I wonder if any German Urbs or people with other links to Germany could share their views.

I think being ‘German’ is a slightly different concept than  that  of perhaps being ‘French’ or being ‘American’.

This might, might, be a reason many German people are so committed to the EU?

(* One chap who’s family was so distrusted by the DDR regime that, before they let him go to medical school, they made him do FIVE years compulsory military service, most in the old USSR. Mind you he got to command a katyusha rocket unit. So not all bad then...)


----------



## JimW (Dec 23, 2017)

Neither Holy or Roman


----------



## A380 (Dec 23, 2017)

JimW said:


> Neither Holy or Roman


Not really an empire either...


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want.



Have you lost your mind? Describing negative or "unsavoury" characteristics as being "deeply ingrained" into a population is almost the dictionary definition of racism. So please stop doing it.

 I know a lot of German people, including my mother-in-law, and they're all different, it's almost as if they came from a country of 80 million individuals with their own characteristics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 23, 2017)

You missed out clinical, efficient and bastards with the sunbeds


pocketscience said:


> I'd say that yes. Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but IMO a disproportionately high number compared with most other countries.
> On a national level it does start to paint an ugly picture and these individual characteristics seem to lend themselves particularly well to politicians, who obviously end up being the ones shaping policies reflecting these characteristics on the nation both internally and abroad.
> I think you'll find most germans from center left to the outer left wing fringes would openly agree with a lot of this - particularly on the outer fringes e.g: German Antifa won't have a good word to say about the nation as a whole and it's not uncommon to meet people making it their life mission to hinder what they believe is the inevitable reoccurrence of fascism in Germany.
> 
> ...


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience 

What about Germans that follow Judaism? Or Islam?

Do they have a subsection of characteristics from the broader German traits you have described?

Germans whose parents were born in Turkey or Poland?

What about the Germans whose parents were born in Africa?

Are they all the same or little differences between the wider groups based where there parents were born and/or lived?

I need to know.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> pocketscience
> 
> What about Germans that follow Judaism? Or Islam?
> 
> ...


Interesting - placing traits/characteristics/assumptions on huge swathes of people is only acceptable to you when done on the basis of class.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

butchersapron said:


> Interesting - placing traits/characteristics/assumptions on huge swathes of people is only acceptable to you when done on the basis of class.



Nope. Just voting. I am working class. Maybe my upbringing wasn't working class enough for you though.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

For example. If you are working class and you vote tory you have to be thick.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 23, 2017)

oh sweet jesus of nazareth


----------



## gosub (Dec 23, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> For example. If you are working class and you vote tory you have to be thick.



Out of curiosity who do you vote for if you are working class? What with Labour turning itself into the party of the impoverished graduate.


----------



## J Ed (Dec 23, 2017)

gosub said:


> Out of curiosity who do you vote for if you are working class? What with Labour turning itself into the party of the impoverished graduate.



So you can't be an 'impoverished' graduate and working-class then?


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

gosub said:


> Out of curiosity who do you vote for if you are working class? What with Labour turning itself into the party of the impoverished graduate.



My understanding from urban is that a lot of people don't vote either because they are all the same or because real change can't come about through the ballot box. 

But as an impoverished graduate I vote for labour. I encourage others to vote for whoever they believe will improve their situation.


----------



## sealion (Dec 23, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> For example. If you are working class and you vote tory you have to be thick.


Just as well labour are looking out for us 
http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/ash-london-labour-list.jpg
Social Cleansing and the Destruction of Council Estates Exposed at Screening of ‘Dispossession’ by Endangered New Cross Residents 		| 		Andy Worthington


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

sealion said:


> Just as well labour are looking out for us
> http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/ash-london-labour-list.jpg
> Social Cleansing and the Destruction of Council Estates Exposed at Screening of ‘Dispossession’ by Endangered New Cross Residents		 |		 Andy Worthington



And the tories are?


----------



## sealion (Dec 23, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> And the tories are?


Not the point. Anyway you have form on here for digging out the working class. Thick and racist you cry, so fuck off.


----------



## gosub (Dec 23, 2017)

J Ed said:


> So you can't be an 'impoverished' graduate and working-class then?


I suppose theorically but a bit of a waste of a degree, chances are your average poultry plucker or warehouse night shifter is going to think you're at least lower middle class by the time you graduate.

Anyway, was not an original observation by me, was a comment on stress fractures to come by Prof Curtice last week


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

sealion said:


> Not the point. Anyway you have form on here for digging out the working class. Thick and racist you cry, so fuck off.



I disagree with some of my fellow working class views. Oh no!


----------



## J Ed (Dec 23, 2017)

gosub said:


> I suppose theorically but a bit of a waste of a degree, chances are your average poultry plucker or warehouse night shifter is going to think you're at least lower middle class by the time you graduate.
> 
> Anyway, was not an original observation by me, was a comment on stress fractures to come by Prof Curtice last week



Surprised you didn't go with the example of chimney sweep. You think there aren't any graduates working in warehouses?


----------



## mather (Dec 23, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> I disagree with some of my fellow working class views. Oh no!



Yeah, it was much more than mere disagreement though wasn't it you disingenuous twat.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 23, 2017)

Anyway, blue passports - is that just something they've thrown out to distract/delight the nuttier brexitters while May backpedals on hard Brexit? Does that mean 'soft Brexit' is winning?  The twitter lot seem pointlessly  cross about it.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 23, 2017)

mather said:


> Yeah, it was much more than mere disagreement though wasn't it you disingenuous twat.



Was it. More than a disagreement between people on the internet. Not for me?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 23, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> C,mon - what pocket science is only the same as stating that -
> 
> the irish are thick
> scots are tight fisted
> ...


or:
 …your typical northern working class Brexit voter is: 


Kaka Tim said:


> a miserable old cunt in a flat cap


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 23, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Anyway, blue passports - is that just something they've thrown out to distract/delight the nuttier brexitters while May backpedals on hard Brexit? Does that mean 'soft Brexit' is winning?  The twitter lot seem pointlessly  cross about it.


They're not as good as the auld blue passports


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 23, 2017)

A380 said:


> I wonder if any German Urbs or *people with other links to Germany could share their views.*
> 
> 
> ...




I guess that’s a bit to do with me. I’ll fess up.

For the last couple of generations my direct (irish /british) family has branched out internationally meaning now our immediate extended family has a fairly even four way split across Ireland, UK, Denmark and … wait for it… yes, Germany. Meaning I have cousins, uncles, aunts and in-laws spread all across those countries.

We’re all very close and love one another to bits. I can honestly say that I never know of any animosity amongst the whole lot. We meet whenever possible in the various countries and keep in touch as groups on a regular, or individually on a daily basis.

For as far back as I can remember, it’s been normal for (at least the adults) to honestly and openly share our perceptions of the traits, characterisations, idiosyncrasies etc of each other’s nationalities. There’s no rang order, no baiting and certainly no ridicule. It’s at a point where where we use it to understand each other better, so we can laugh about it or even take the piss out of one another or ourselves to laugh about it (particularly the Germans do well holding their own in that dept) all without any fallout what so ever. Obviously, sometimes it touches on serious issues (the troubles, ww2, world cup penalty shoot-outs, etc) which are done with tact and thoughtfulness (extra wide berth for the germans here, lol).

It’s really never once occurred to me that even just expressing such observations would be racist. I was so shocked at the response here this morning I talked about what I’d said and about some of the comments with one German relative who shares an interest in (left) politics - she didn’t get it either.

So, my point is, that I honestly think it’s bonded us and keeps us together better than it would have if we didn’t do it, ignore it –these stereotypes are all around us for better or for worse (see the German tv vid upthread I linked to for example) it’s hugely impractical to just ignore them as well. I also reckon we have the good honesty quality of the germans in my family to thank for this frankness (no they're not from frankfurt lol)


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 23, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Have you lost your mind? Describing negative or "unsavoury" characteristics as being "deeply ingrained" into a population is almost the dictionary definition of racism. So please stop doing it. .



Please, put it in context: I was honestly answering @bimbles question on whether there’s an innate German ‘will to power’ – in this case contributing to their _political _hegemony. It’s a recurring question that I’ve thought about over the last 30 odd years. For the first time today I’m trying to work out how anyone could answer the question other way – yes or no – whilst giving an explanation, without being racist 

Give a reason for a yes = stereotyping

Say no and explain then why German has such relenting success in politics, industry, finance, sport etc = stereotyping

It's almost like the question was some kind of entrapment to point fingers and say ‘racist’ to anyone that answered? bimble I notice you offered no opinion.



Yossarian said:


> I know a lot of German people, including my mother-in-law, and they're all different, it's almost as if they came from a country of 80 million individuals with their own characteristics.



No shit! I have a german mother-in law too 
She gave me this book for Christmas a few years ago like. She's also a great individual. she does however have a few stereotypical traits (both of mother-in-laws, and of germans)
(maybe you could give your mother-in law a copy ot the book next year? - for the craic, like )

Anyway, I’d say this derail is enough now, and this otherwise engaging thread needs to get back on topic. 
Maybe there’s a need for a ‘German Hegemony’ thread? Or would that be too racist?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 23, 2017)

And that punchline eh?

_...but it turned out the passports could have stayed blue all along.

 
_


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 23, 2017)

Pickman's model said:


> They're not as good as the auld blue passports



My first passport was blue in the same way that a priest's socks are blue


----------



## teuchter (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> I guess that’s a bit to do with me. I’ll fess up.
> 
> For the last couple of generations my direct (irish /british) family has branched out internationally meaning now our immediate extended family has a fairly even four way split across Ireland, UK, Denmark and … wait for it… yes, Germany. Meaning I have cousins, uncles, aunts and in-laws spread all across those countries.
> 
> ...



Did you tell your German relative that you think that the majority of German individuals are deeply ingrained with multiple unsavoury traits including selfishness, being inconsiderate and being "crafty"?


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2017)

Germany’s Dystopian Plans for Europe: From Fantasy to Reality? | naked capitalism

_By Thomas Fazi, a writer, activist and award-winning filmmaker. He is the author of The Battle for Europe: How an Elite Hijacked a Continent – and How We Can Take It Back, published by Pluto Press. He is a regular contributor to Social Europe Journal, il manifesto, Green European Journal and other journals. He collaborates with the Italian civil society network Sbilanciamoci!. His website is thomasfazi.net. Originally published at openDemocracy_

After Emmanuel Macron’s election in France, many (including myself) claimed that this signalled a revival of the Franco-German alliance and a renewed impetus for Europe’s process of top-down economic and political integration – a fact that was claimed by most commentators and politicians, beholden as they are to the Europeanist narrative, to be an unambiguously positive development.

Among the allegedly ‘overdue’ reforms that were said to be on the table was the creation of a pseudo-‘fiscal union’ backed by a (meagre) ‘euro budget’, along with the creation of a ‘European finance minister’, the centre-points of Macron’s plans to ‘re-found the EU’ – a proposal that raises a number of very worrying issues from both political and economic standpoints, which I have discussed at length elsewhere.

The integrationists’ (unwarranted) optimism, however, was short-lived. The result of the German elections, which saw the surge of two rabidly anti-integrationist parties, the right-wing FDP and extreme right AfD; the recent collapse of coalition talks between Merkel’s CDU, the FDP and the Greens, which most likely means an interim government for weeks if not months, possibly leading to new elections (which polls show would bring roughly the same result as the September election); and the growing restlessness in Germany towards the 13-year-long rule of Macron’s partner in reform Angela Merkel, means that any plans that Merkel and Macron may have sketched out behind the scenes to further integrate policies at the European level are now, almost certainly, dead in the water. Thus, even the sorry excuse for a fiscal union proposed by Macron is now off the table, according to most commentators.

At this point, the German government’s most likely course in terms of European policy – the one that has the best chance of garnering cross-party support, regardless of the outcome of the coalition talks (or of new elections) – is the ‘minimalist’ approach set in stone by the country’s infamous and now-former finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, in a ‘non-paper’ published shortly before his resignation.

The main pillar of Schäuble’s proposal – a long-time obsession of his – consists in giving the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), which would go on to become a ‘European Monetary Fund’, the power to monitor (and, ideally, enforce) compliance with the Fiscal Compact. This echoes Schäuble’s previous calls for the creation of a European budget commissioner with the power to reject national budgets – a supranational fiscal enforcer.

The aim is all too clear: to further erode what little sovereignty and autonomy member states have left, particularly in the area of fiscal policy, and to facilitate the imposition of neoliberal ‘structural reforms’ – flexibilisation of labour markets, reduction of collective bargaining rights, etc. – on reluctant countries.

_*To this end, the German authorities even want to make the receipt of EU cohesion funds conditional on the implementation of such reforms, tightening the existing arrangements even further. Moreover, as noted by Simon Wren-Lewis, the political conflict of interest of having an institution lending within the eurozone would end up imposing severe austerity bias on the recovering country.*_

Until recently, these proposals failed to materialise due, among other reasons, to France’s opposition to any further overt reductions of national sovereignty in the area of budgetary policy; Macron, however, staunchly rejects France’s traditional souverainiste stance, embracing instead what he calls ‘European sovereignty’, and thus represents the perfect ally for Germany’s plans.

Another proposal that goes in the same direction is the German Council for Economic Experts’ plan to curtail banks’ sovereign bond holdings. Ostensibly aimed at ‘severing the link between banks and government’ and ‘ensuring long-term debt sustainability’, it calls for: (i) removing the exemption from risk-weighting for sovereign exposures, which essentially means that government bonds would no longer be considered a risk-free asset for banks (as they are now under Basel rules), but would be ‘weighted’ according to the ‘sovereign default risk’ of the country in question (as determined by credit rating agencies); (ii) putting a cap on the overall risk-weighted sovereign exposure of banks; and (iii) introducing an automatic ‘sovereign insolvency mechanism’ that would essentially extend to sovereigns the bail-in rule introduced for banks by the banking union, meaning that if a country requires financial assistance from the ESM, for whichever reason, it will have to lengthen its sovereign bond maturities (reducing the market value of those bonds and causing severe losses for all bondholders) and, if necessary, impose a nominal ‘haircut’ on private creditors.

As noted by the German economist Peter Bofinger, the only member of the German Council of Economic Experts to vote against the sovereign bail-in plan, this would almost certainly ignite a 2012-style self-fulfilling sovereign debt crisis, as periphery countries’ bond yields would quickly rise to unsustainable levels, making it increasingly hard for governments to roll over maturing debt at reasonable prices and eventually forcing them to turn to the ESM for help, which would entail even heavier losses for their banks and an even heavier dose of austerity.

It would essentially amount to a return to the pre-2012 status quo, with governments once again subject to the supposed ‘discipline’ of the markets, particularly in the context of a likely tapering of the ECB’s quantitative easing (QE) program. 

_The aim of this proposal is the same as that of Schäuble’s ‘European Monetary Fund’: to force member states to implement permanent austerity.

Of course, national sovereignty in a number of areas – most notably fiscal policy – has already been severely eroded by the complex system of new laws, rules and agreements introduced in recent years, including but not limited to the six-pack, two-pack, Fiscal Compact, European Semester and Macroeconomic Imbalances Procedure (MIP).

As a result of this new post-Maastricht system of European economic governance, the European Union has effectively become a sovereign power with the authority to impose budgetary rules and structural reforms on member states outside democratic procedures and without democratic control.

The EU’s embedded quasi-constitutionalism and inherent (structural) democratic deficit has thus evolved into an even more anti-democratic form of ‘authoritarian constitutionalism’ that is breaking away with elements of formal democracy as well, leading some observers to suggest that the EU ‘may easily become the postdemocratic prototype and even a pre-dictatorial governance structure against national sovereignty and democracies’._

To give an example, with the launch of the European Semester, the EU’s key tool for economic policy guidance and surveillance, an area that has historically been a bastion of national sovereignty – old-age pensions – has now fallen under the purview of supranational monitoring as well. Countries are now expected to (and face sanctions if they don’t): (i) increase the retirement age and link it with life expectancy; (ii) reduce early retirement schemes, improve the employability of older workers and promote lifelong learning; (iii) support complementary private savings to enhance retirement incomes; and (iv) avoid adopting pension-related measures that undermine the long term sustainability and adequacy of public finances.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2017)

This has led to the introduction in various countries of several types of automatic stabilizing mechanisms (ASMs) in pension systems, which change the policy default so that benefits or contributions adjust automatically to adverse demographic and economic conditions without direct intervention by politicians. Similar ‘automatic correction mechanisms’ in relation to fiscal policy can be found in the Fiscal Compact.

The aim of all these ‘automatic mechanisms’ is clearly to put the economy on ‘autopilot’, thus removing any element of democratic discussion and/or decision-making at either the European or national level. _These changes have already transformed European states into ‘semi-sovereign’ entities, at best. In this sense, the proposals currently under discussion would mark the definitive transformation of European states from semi-sovereign to de facto (and increasingly de jure) non-sovereign entities._

Regardless of the lip service paid by national and European officials to the need for further reductions of national sovereignty to go hand in hand with a greater ‘democratisation’ of the euro area, the reforms currently on the table can, in fact, be considered the final stage in the thirty-year-long war on democracy and national sovereignty waged by the European elites, aimed at constraining the ability of popular-democratic powers to influence economic policy, thus enabling the imposition of neoliberal policies that would not have otherwise been politically feasible.

In this sense, the European economic and monetary integration process should be viewed, to a large degree, as a class-based and inherently neoliberal project pursued by all national capitals as well as transnational (financial) capital. However, to grasp the processes of restructuring under way in Europe, we need to go beyond the simplistic capital/labour dichotomy that underlies many critical analyses of the EU and eurozone, which view EU/EMU policies as the expression of a unitary and coherent transnational (post-national) European capitalist class.

The process underway can only be understood through the lens of the geopolitical-economic tensions and conflicts between leading capitalist states and regional blocs, and the conflicting interests between the different financial/industrial capital fractions located in those states, which have always characterised the European economy. 

_*In particular, it means looking at Germany’s historic struggle for economic hegemony over the European continent.

It is no secret that Germany is today the leading economic and political power in Europe, just as it is no secret that nothing gets done in Europe without Germany’s seal of approval. In fact, it is commonplace to come across references to Germany’s ‘new empire’. A controversial Der Spiegel editorial from a few years back event went as far as arguing that it is not out place to talk of the rise of a ‘Fourth Reich’:

That may sound absurd given that today’s Germany is a successful democracy without a trace of national-socialism – and that no one would actually associate Merkel with Nazism. But further reflection on the word ‘Reich’, or empire, may not be entirely out of place. The term refers to a dominion, with a central power exerting control over many different peoples. According to this definition, would it be wrong to speak of a German Reich in the economic realm?

More recently, an article in Politico Europe – co-owned by the German media magnate Axel Springer AG – candidly explained why ‘Greece is de facto a German colony’. It noted how, despite Tsipras’ pleas for debt relief, the Greek leader ‘has little choice but to heed the wishes of his “colonial” masters’, i.e., the Germans.*_

This is because public debt in the eurozone is used as a political tool – a disciplining tool – to get governments to implement socially harmful policies (and to get citizens to accept these policies by portraying them as inevitable), which explains why Germany continues to refuse to seriously consider any form of debt relief for Greece, despite the various commitments and promises to that end made in recent years: debt is the chain that keeps Greece (and other member states) from straying ‘off course’.

Even though the power exercised by Europe’s ‘colonial masters’ is now openly acknowledged by the mainstream press, it is however commonplace to ascribe Germany’s dominant position as an accident of history: according to this narrative, we are in the presence of an ‘accidental empire’, one that is not the result of a general plan but that emerged almost by chance – even against Germany’s wishes – as a result of the euro’s design faults, which have allowed Germany and its satellites to pursue a neo-mercantilist strategy and thus accumulate huge current account surpluses.

Now, it is certainly true that the euro’s design – strongly influenced by Germany – inevitably benefits export-led economies such as Germany over more internal demand-oriented economies, such as those of southern Europe. However, there is ample evidence to support the argument that Germany, far from having accidently stumbled upon European dominance, has been actively and consciously pursuing an expansionary and imperialist strategy in – and through – the European Union for decades.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2017)

Even if we limit our analysis to Germany’s post-crisis policies (though there is much that could be said about Germany’s post-reunification policies and subsequent offshoring of production to Eastern Europe in the 1990s), it would be very naïve to view Germany’s inflexibility – on austerity, for example – as a simple case of ideological stubbornness, considering the extent to which the policies in question have benefited Germany (and to a lesser extent France).

Germany (and France) have been the main beneficiaries of the sovereign bailouts of periphery countries, which essentially amounted to a covert bailout of German (and French) banks, as most of the funds were channelled back to the creditor countries’ banks, which were heavily exposed to the banks (and to a lesser degree the governments) of periphery countries. German policy, Helen Thompson wrote, overwhelmingly ‘served the interests of the German banks’.

This is a telling example of how Germany’s policies (and the EU’s policies more in general), while nominally ordoliberal – i.e., based upon minimal government intervention and a strict rules-based regime – are in reality based on extensive state intervention on behalf of German capital, at both the domestic and European level.

As Andy Storey notes, not only did the German government, throughout the crisis, show a blatant disregard for ordoliberalism’s non-interference of public institutions in the workings of the market, by engaging in a massive Keynesian-style programme in the aftermath of the financial crisis and pushing through bailout programmes that largely absolved German banks from their responsibility for reckless lending to Greece and other countries; German authorities have also been more than happy to go along with – or to encourage – the European institutions’ ‘exercise of unrestrained executive power and the more or less complete abandonment of strict, rules-based frameworks’ – Storey is here referring in particular to the ECB’s use of its currency-issuing monopoly to force member states to follows its precepts – ‘to maintain the profitability of German banks, German hegemony within the Eurozone, or even the survival of the Eurozone itself’.

Germany (and France) are also the main beneficiaries of the ongoing process of ‘mezzogiornification’ of periphery countries – often compounded by troika-forced privatisations –, which in recent years has allowed German and French firms to take over a huge number of businesses (or stakes therewithin) in periphery countries, often at bargain prices. A well-publicised case is that of the 14 Greek regional airports taken over by the German airport operator Fraport.

France’s corporate offensive in Italy is another good example: in the last five years, French companies have engaged in 177 Italian takeovers, for a total value of $41.8 billion, six times Italy’s purchases in France over the same period. This is leading to an increased ‘centralisation’ of European capital, characterised by a gradual concentration of capital and production in Germany and other core countries – in the logistical and distribution sectors, for example – and more in general to an increasingly imbalanced relationship between the stronger and weaker countries of the union.

These transformations cannot simply be described as processes without a subject: while there are undoubtedly structural reasons involved – countries with better developed economies of scale, such as Germany and France, were bound to benefit more than others from the reduction in tariffs and barriers associated with the introduction of the single currency – we also have to acknowledge that there are loci of economic-politic power that are actively driving and shaping these imperialist processes, which must be viewed through the lens of the unresolved inter-capitalist struggle between core-based and periphery-based capital.

From this perspective, the dichotomy that is often raised in European public discourse between nationalism and Europeanism is deeply flawed. The two, in fact, often go hand in hand. In Germany’s case, for example, Europeanism has provided the country’s elites with the perfect alibi to conceal their hegemonic project behind the ideological veil of ‘European integration’. Ironically, the European Union – allegedly created as an antidote to the vicious nationalisms of the twentieth century – has been the tool through which Germany has been able to achieve the ‘new European order’ that Nazi ideologues had theorised in the 1930s and early 1940s.

_*In short, the European Union should indeed be viewed a transnational capitalist project, but one that is subordinated to a clear state-centred hierarchy of power, with Germany in the dominant position. In this sense, the national elites in periphery countries that have supported Germany’s hegemonic project (and continue to do so, first and foremost through their support to European integration) can thus be likened to the comprador bourgeoisie of the old colonial system – sections of a country’s elite and middle class allied with foreign interests in exchange for a subordinated role within the dominant hierarchy of power.*_

From this point of view, the likely revival of the Franco-German bloc is a very worrying development, since it heralds a consolidation of the German-led European imperialist bloc – and a further ‘Germanification’ of the continent. This development cannot be understood independently of the momentous shifts that are taking place in global political economy – namely the organic crisis of neoliberal globalisation, which is leading to increased tensions between the various fractions of international capital, most notably between the US and Germany.

Trump’s repeated criticisms of Germany’s beggar-thy-neighbour mercantilist policies should be understood in this light. The same goes for Angela Merkel’s recent call – much celebrated by the mainstream press – for a stronger Europe to counter Trump’s unilateralism. Merkel’s aim is not, of course, that of making ‘Europe’ stronger, but rather of strengthening Germany’s dominant position vis-à-vis the other world powers (the US but also China) through the consolidation of Germany’s control of the European continental economy, in the context of an intensification of global inter-capitalist competition.

This has now become an imperative for Germany, especially since Trump has dared to openly challenge the self-justifying ideology which sustains Germany’s mercantilism – a particular form of economic nationalism that Hans Kundnani has dubbed ‘Exportnationalismus’, founded upon the belief that Germany’s massive trade surplus is uniquely the result of Germany’s manufacturing excellence (Modell Deutschland) rather than, in fact, the result of unfair trade practices.

This is why, if Germany wants to maintain its hegemonic position on the continent, it must break with the US and tighten the bolts of the European workhouse. To this end, it needs to seize control of the most coveted institution of them all – the ECB –, which hitherto has never been under direct German control (though the Bundesbank exercises considerable influence over it, as is well known). Indeed, many commentators openly acknowledge that Merkel now has her eyes on the ECB’s presidency. This would effectively put Germany directly at the helm of European economic policy.

Even more worryingly, Germany is not simply aiming at expanding its economic control over the European continent; it is also taking steps for greater European military ‘cooperation’ – under the German aegis, of course. As a recent article in Foreign Policy revealed, ‘Germany is quietly building a European army under its command’.

This year Germany and two of its European allies, the Czech Republic and Romania, announced the integration of their armed forces, under the control of the Bundeswehr. In doing so, the will follow in the footsteps of two Dutch brigades, one of which has already joined the Bundeswehr’s Rapid Response Forces Division and another that has been integrated into the Bundeswehr’s 1st Armored Division.

In other words, Germany already effectively controls the armies of four countries. And the initiative, Foreign Policy notes, ‘is likely to grow’. This is not surprising: if Germany (‘the EU’) wants to become truly autonomous from the US, it needs to acquire military sovereignty, which it currently lacks.

Europe is thus at a crossroads: the choice that left-wing and popular forces, and periphery countries more generally, face is between (a) accepting Europe’s transition to a fully post-democratic, hyper-competitive, German-led continental system, in which member states (except for those at the helm of the project) will be deprived of all sovereignty and autonomy, in exchange for a formal democratic façade at the supranational level, and its workers subject to ever-growing levels of exploitation; or (b) regaining national sovereignty and autonomy at the national level, with all the short-term risks that such a strategy entails, as the only way to restore democracy, popular sovereignty and socioeconomic dignity. In short, the choice is between European post-democracy or post-European democracy.

There is no third way. Especially in view of the growing tensions between Germany, the US and China, periphery countries should ask themselves if they want to be simple pawns in this ‘New Great Game’ or if they want to take their destinies into their own hands.


----------



## hot air baboon (Dec 23, 2017)

_During the institution of the German Customers Union (1834/Zollverein), plans were first developed for a "large-area economy" under German leadership. The manufacturing nations of Prussia and Austria were to assume hegemony over an area extending from the North Sea to the Black Sea. The countries of eastern and south-eastern Europe were assigned the status of producers of food and raw materials. At the same time they were to serve as markets for German products and as a trade bridge to the Middle East. Areas of Africa and Latin America were seen as "complementary zones".

This continental imperialism was to endow Germany with major-power status in competition with Russia and the naval powers of England and France. The economic penetration of large areas of eastern and south-eastern Europe was based on control of the Danube plus the construction of railroad lines, which Prussian and Austrian financiers were pushing ahead rapidly.

.....

After the end of the socialist system German economic interests strove for a separation of economically lucrative areas and production zones and their complete detachment from economically uninteresting and debt-ridden areas in eastern and south-eastern Europe.

This was the fundamental background for German support of the dissolution of Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet-Union. The new Baltic states, the Czech Republic, Croatia and Slovenia were closely bound to the European Union by means of association treaties, whose conditions forced them to restructure their economies. This was combined with the louder and louder propagation of the idea of a Europe with a hard core (Kerneuropa), that is, the creation of a hierarchy within the European Union, the decision-making centre of which was to consist of Germany as the leading power and France as a junior partner. After an attempt by *Wolfgang Schäuble *and Karl Lamers in 1993 was firmly repulsed by the other states of the EU, the German concept of a European nucleus with concentric circles of varying depths of production and degrees of bonding has meanwhile been gradually implemented by Gerhard Schröder and Josef Fischer.

Economic Expansion_


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 23, 2017)

Why are you just posting up opinion pieces?


----------



## bimble (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Please, put it in context: I was honestly answering @bimbles question on whether there’s an innate German ‘will to power’ ..
> It's almost like the question was some kind of entrapment to point fingers and say ‘racist’ to anyone that answered? bimble I notice you offered no opinion.


It was a sarcastic joke type question! I did not expect you to answer in the affirmative .


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 23, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> or:
> …your typical northern working class Brexit voter is:



except that is not what i said - you duplicitous tosser - in fact i was making the exact opposite point about what constitutes a typical working class northerner. 



> "And fuck off with this betraying the "working classes of the north" (of which i am one btw) - they didn't all vote brexit (check out the %s in manchester, liverpool, leeds, sheffield etc) . And what about the young working classes? or working classes of london? or scotland? or northern ireland? Or do you get double points for being a miserable old cunt in a flat cap or something? "



You were ascribing negative individual personality traits based on someone's nationality. Which is racist. and fucking ignorant. And you are so thick you cant see it even though its been repeatedly pointed out to you.


----------



## Winot (Dec 23, 2017)

Dogsauce said:


> Anyway, blue passports - is that just something they've thrown out to distract/delight the nuttier brexitters while May backpedals on hard Brexit? Does that mean 'soft Brexit' is winning?  The twitter lot seem pointlessly  cross about it.



I seem to remember passport colour being an issue a while back - you could buy blue leatherette passport covers in the 1990s in the back pages of the Telegraph iirc. 

It’s both ridiculous and totemic as an issue. It has a certain extrinsic heft, reminscent of 17th century religious arguments.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 23, 2017)

Is it just me that thinks that if we leave and restrict EU migration and generally alienate Europe that we'll just end up cutting deals to get lots of Indian and Chinese people to fill all the skill shortages and the leave voters who were anti-immigration will end up nostalgic for the days when 'at least the immigrants were white'?


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 23, 2017)

Apparently those new passports will have to be imported.  Some scurrilous types are suggesting they'll have to come from Germany.


----------



## gosub (Dec 23, 2017)

.


----------



## agricola (Dec 23, 2017)

gosub said:


> .



A disgraceful slur on _Homo Erectus_, if not all early hominids.  You'd have to go back hundreds of millions of years in the fossil record to find beings excited by blue passports - and even then that would be due to the development of stereoscopic colour vision, rather than the change of colour signifying a return to the glory days of the British Empire.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 24, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> except that is not what i said - you duplicitous tosser - in fact i was making the exact opposite point about what constitutes a typical working class northerner.


That certainly not the way it reads to me. Initially you seem to be trying to mansplain to me that not all northern working class voted for brexit by mentioning some metropolitan areas,  then the young and then London.
You then seem to go on the offensive about that whats left of the norths working class  i.e: brexit voters (that you sarcastically imply that I give double credits to) describing as being 'miserable flat cap wearing cunts'.







Kaka Tim said:


> You were ascribing negative individual personality traits based on someone's nationality. Which is racist. and fucking ignorant. And you are so thick you cant see it even though its been repeatedly pointed out to you.


Now your being duplicitous (or thick). I said that I found those negative individual personality traits to be of a far higher proportion than in most other countries.  Makes a massive difference.  For the record the record I think the uk isn't far behind them on the selfish/ ego scale and what i find worrying is that it seems to be growing - and not just in the uk but across the western world.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 24, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> That certainly not the way it reads to me. Initially you seem to be trying to mansplain to me that not all northern working class voted for brexit by mentioning some metropolitan areas,  then the young and then London.
> You then seem to go on the offensive about that whats left of the norths working class  i.e: brexit voters (that you sarcastically imply that I give double credits to) describing as being 'miserable flat cap wearing cunts'.



which was a comment on the popular sterotype of the "traditional working class northerner" as protrayed by lazy commentators discussing who voted brexit and why.
The equivalent to your comment would be swaying "i find most Yorkshire people to be more tight fisted and  stupid than the national average"





pocketscience said:


> Now your being duplicitous (or thick). I said that I found those negative individual personality traits to be of a far higher proportion than in most other countries.  Makes a massive difference.  .



you said about german people -



> Combined with other unsavoury individual characteristics like selfishness and being inconsiderate that seem to be deeply ingrained into the majority of the population. I also find they're crafty and persistent at getting what they want. Not all germans mind, but IMO a disproportionately high number compared with most other countries.



which is quite staggering in both its crassness and pomposity. You are an expert on "individual national characteristics" are you?  How else can you make such a sweeping generalisation about a country of 80 million people? And you  compare them with "most other countries" - what - in the world? How do Germans compare with Venezuelans in the selfishness department? And  is "craftyness" more deeply ingrained in the "national charterer" of the Nepalese? We need to know.
In fact you should send your findings to _national geographic_. Or Jeremy Clarkson.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 24, 2017)

I'm fascinated by the use of mansplain in this context.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 24, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Did you tell your German relative that you think that the majority of German individuals are deeply ingrained with multiple unsavoury traits including selfishness, being inconsiderate and being "crafty"?


They know that already.
And I don't know why you or others are getting so hung up about the word crafty. It doesnt necessary need to always be negative. I probably could have used (the scottish) canny in its place.
I mean, look at the dieselgate emmisions manipulation scandal. To pull that off on such a grand scale. There must have been thousands of people in the know. Perpetrated across multiple concerns - the backbone of the german economy, the turbine of europe, government authorities turning a blind eye, distributing fake products across the whole world with emissions up to ten times over the regulatory limit... Nowadays you hardly hear about it german media.  The greens were even a nats cock away from getting into government recently on a manifesto that only mentiond it in the small print - wanting to join the ruling conservatives who'd just let those companies completly off the hook while transferring huge cost onto the car owners themselves.
What do the EU have to say about it?
Hmmm.   Errrr... Mmmm.. 
Any other country would be going apeshit while facing international sanctions.
Crafty bit engineering if you ask me!


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 24, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> which was a comment on the popular sterotype of the "traditional working class northerner" as protrayed by lazy commentators discussing who voted brexit and why.
> The equivalent to your comment would be swaying "i find most Yorkshire people to be more tight fisted and  stupid than the national average"
> 
> .



You used the flat cap lazy steroetype exactly how somone would go down the irish thicko route. Sarcasm or not.
The word 'cunt' was the dead giveaway

 -


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 24, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> You used the flat cap lazy steroetype exactly how somone would go down the irish thicko route. Sarcasm or not.
> The word 'cunt' was the dead giveaway
> 
> -



This is mad.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 24, 2017)

Kaka Tim said:


> -
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's not crass or pompous. My eye opener was in international charity relief. For a country with  comparitivly very high disposable income and private cash saving Germany is notoriously tight in giving compared to other much poorer nations. Since the i've kept an eye on it or followed it up with research and unfotunatly found little to prove otherwise.

Anyway, im off for xmas now. Frohes Weihnachten!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 24, 2017)

Winot said:


> If I was going to get divorced I’d quite like it if someone explained the consequences to me so that I could make an informed decision.



Maybe you should just accept that people don't feel the same as you anymore.


----------



## Winot (Dec 24, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> Maybe you should just accept that people don't feel the same as you anymore.



Was that Michael Howard’s alternative slogan?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 24, 2017)

gosub said:


> .



The backlash to the blue passports thing has actually managed to exceed the pointlessness and annoyance of the people who want the change in the first place. Quite impressive actually.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 24, 2017)

J Ed said:


> The backlash to the blue passports thing has actually managed to exceed the pointlessness and annoyance of the people who want the change in the first place. Quite impressive actually.



James O’Brien managed to do a whole three hour show on it, mind you he’s done 18 months of solid whinging so far, so it’s not a great shock.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 24, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> They know that already.


Did you ask them specifically about what you wrote here though?


----------



## J Ed (Dec 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> James O’Brien managed to do a whole three hour show on it, mind you he’s done 18 months of solid whinging so far, so it’s not a great shock.



Time for a little thing I call the Ben Goldacre fact check!! I think you'll find actually that the old passport was BLACK, not blue. Checkmate. Brexit is cancelled.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 24, 2017)

To my own surprise, I'm really not bothered _either way_ about blue passports, as in, I'd never have campaigned to reintroduce them (not caring much for Sun-led campaigns!  ), but I''m not up in arms, or even bothered,  about them being reintroduced either ...

My current passport is EU-brranded Burgundy and I don't care about that, it's just a thing that will get me to India in February once I've got my visa. And when it expires in 2023 I'll replace it with blue without being bothered at all.

I'm a critical-of-Brexit Remainer, but there are many other things that are far more important than passport design ....


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 24, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Time for a little thing I call the Ben Goldacre fact check!! I think you'll find actually that the old passport was BLACK, not blue. Checkmate. Brexit is cancelled.



I've occasionally seen the old passports in the recentish past in the course of my work (they were so old that they were invalid as ID, having expired). They _looked_ as good as black admittedly, but really, if memory serves, they were very dark navy blue. Is this correct though??


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 24, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> I've occasionally seen the old passports in the recentish past in the course of my work (they were so old that they were invalid as ID, having expired). They _looked_ as good as black admittedly, but really, if memory serves, they were very dark navy blue. Is this correct though??



Yeah, same as old bill and sailor's uniforms.


----------



## gosub (Dec 24, 2017)

J Ed said:


> Time for a little thing I call the Ben Goldacre fact check!! I think you'll find actually that the old passport was BLACK, not blue. Checkmate. Brexit is cancelled.


ICAO do not permit passports to be issued in black, blue they do.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 24, 2017)

Don't the Kiwis have black passports?


----------



## sealion (Dec 24, 2017)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> James O’Brien managed to do a whole three hour show on it, mind you he’s done 18 months of solid whinging so far, so it’s not a great shock.


He keeps on about leavers being lied to by lying to his own listeners


----------



## gosub (Dec 24, 2017)

Yossarian said:


> Don't the Kiwis have black passports?


Oh sorry, black is acceptable.Its black, blue, red or green.
Passport Index 2017 |  World's passports in your pocket.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 24, 2017)

thre groan was amusingly childish yesterday. Leading on the website with a story that was headlined 'blue passports will mean delays' cos an EU bod said so so ner, and a sub story about how they won't be made in england. Jesus who gives a fuck, d'ancona endlessly farting into his hand and sniffing it.

They were black in my memory anyway, and all I care about is that its not much change from a ton


----------



## sealion (Dec 24, 2017)

Guardian readers still spitting and angry 

						 SonofSagan					  						 LordMoore					  
						 15h ago											   






I look forward very much to when you and your 'majority' are driven into the sea. I'm sure you are a nice person but you are representative of an intellectual cancer that is is rotting our country and dividing our society in irreparable ways. But Merry Christmas to you.
-------------------

						 michaelsherif					  						 LordMoore					  
						 15h ago

 


Is it humane to give myopic Brexiteers passports? This will enable to travel abroad - albeit with extra disadvantages - and ensure that they come face-to-face with non-English people, which could blow their tiny little minds.
---------------------------


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 24, 2017)

So yeah, be good if people could not make it harder for other people to discuss and analyse imperialist power relations within and beyond the EU by throwing out irrelevant cultural stereotypes and xenophobia.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 24, 2017)

SpackleFrog said:


> So yeah, be good if people could not make it harder for other people to discuss and analyse imperialist power relations within and beyond the EU by throwing out irrelevant cultural stereotypes and xenophobia.


NB how, above, VW's misdemeanors are blamed not on the economic motives, decision making structure and relationship to government of a large corporation, but the ingrained character flaws of 'the Germans'.


----------



## bemused (Dec 24, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> thre groan was amusingly childish yesterday. Leading on the website with a story that was headlined 'blue passports will mean delays' cos an EU bod said so so ner [...]




I read that, they said we'd have to use a similar system to the ESTA in the US. I  travel to the US about once a month and the ESTA is pretty painless. It was a story about the shocking fact that if you aren't the EU you'll need to go through with some form of visa.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 24, 2017)

bemused said:


> I read that, they said we'd have to use a similar system to the ESTA in the US. I  travel to the US about once a month and the ESTA is pretty painless. It was a story about the shocking fact that if you aren't the EU you'll need to go through with some form of visa.



Yeah, as with most stuff in that ‘paper’ it is wrong. They stated that all non-EU passports need a visa to enter the EU, which is a lie. We will need to show our passports, as we currently do when entering the Schengen zone from the UK or Ireland, nothing will change except the EU Lane will be closed to us, unless it isn’t.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 24, 2017)

I want a green passport. What foolishness do I need to vote for to get one of them?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 24, 2017)

SpookyFrank said:


> I want a green passport. What foolishness do I need to vote for to get one of them?



Get Irish citizenship, then agitate for iexit, once that’s done if things don’t look too clever the politicos will make the glorious pronouncement that the hated burgundy book is to return to splendid green. And much Guinness will be drunk that fine day.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 24, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> thre groan was amusingly childish yesterday. *Leading on the website with a story that was headlined 'blue passports will mean delays' cos an EU bod said so so ner, and a sub story about how they won't be made in england. *Jesus who gives a fuck, d'ancona endlessly farting into his hand and sniffing it.
> 
> They were black in my memory anyway, and all I care about is that its not much change from a ton



As bad Guardian remainism went, that was *particularly* bad. (And I'm a Remainer myself   )

Passport colour based shite is the lowest level Brexit 'controversy' ever ....


----------



## gosub (Dec 24, 2017)

William of Walworth said:


> As bad Guardian remainism went, that was *particularly* bad. (And I'm a Remainer myself   )
> 
> Passport colour based shite is the lowest level Brexit 'controversy' ever ....


I think the contraversy is of ALL the shit that's up in the air... I need a blue bit from my red white and blue Brexit.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 26, 2017)

I had one of the last of the old blue passports issued, summer 1991, first passport I ever had. The fondness I have for it was the handwritten date of birth, with a very short '1' that a skilled friend was able to neatly and convincingly amend into a nice round zero with a dark pencil, giving me the ability to drink in US bars several months early.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 26, 2017)

teuchter said:


> Did you ask them specifically about what you wrote here though?


No, as I said, they know already. We've spoken at length about it many a time. 
Just to show how fucking pathetic it is to label me racist/ xenophobic for what I said (and trying to get me banned for it lol), very close relatives of mine are from Saxony in the former East Germany. They're ashamed and deplored by the fact that the majority of the population in their constituency are (in the true sense of the words) racist and xenophobic. They wouldn't hesitate to confirm that the majority of the population in the region they live in is racist, most likely more racist that anywhere else in Europe. They hate racism and xenophobia and are actively fighting it, but are realists.
Yet according to some imbecilic posters on this thread, they'd be, by the dictionary definition, racist and xenophobic themselves.
Unfuckingbelievable... pat yourselves on the back.

Borders were/are set up by cunts for their self fulfilling intentions - primarily to maintain their own power within these borders. These cunts set up systems within these borders that  indoctrinate the people within. How the fuck is it racist to highlight the resulting differences of what goes on either side of these political borders? Either unsavoury or pleasant.


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 26, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> No, as I said, they know already. We've spoken at length about it many a time. Just to show how fucking pathetic it is to label me racist/ xenophobic for what I said (and trying to get me banned for it lol), very close relatives of mine are from Saxony in the former East Germany. They're ashamed and deplored by the fact that the majority of the population in their constituency are (in the true sense of the words) racist and xenophobic. They wouldn't hesitate to confirm that the majority of the population in the region they live in is racist, most likely more racist that anywhere else in Europe. They hate racism and xenophobia and are actively fighting it, but are realists.
> Yet according to some imbecilic posters on this thread, they are, by the dictionary definition, racist and xenophobic themselves. Unfuckingbelievable... pat yourselves on the back.
> 
> Borders were/are set up by cunts for their self fulfilling intentions - primarily to maintain their own power within these borders. These cunts set up systems within these borders that  indoctrinate the people within. How the fuck is it racist to highlight the resulting differences of what goes on either side of these political borders? Either unsavoury or pleasant.



Tell us more about national characteristics?

Albanians?
Belgians?
Canadians?
Danish?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 26, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Tell us more about national characteristics?
> 
> Albanians?
> Belgians?
> ...


Fuck off and ask a dentist about ingrowing toenails


----------



## B.I.G (Dec 26, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> Fuck off and ask a dentist about ingrowing toenails



I don't get it. Is it cos I is English?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 26, 2017)

pocketscience said:


> No, as I said, they know already. We've spoken at length about it many a time.
> Just to show how fucking pathetic it is to label me racist/ xenophobic for what I said (and trying to get me banned for it lol), very close relatives of mine are from Saxony in the former East Germany. They're ashamed and deplored by the fact that the majority of the population in their constituency are (in the true sense of the words) racist and xenophobic. They wouldn't hesitate to confirm that the majority of the population in the region they live in is racist, most likely more racist that anywhere else in Europe. They hate racism and xenophobia and are actively fighting it, but are realists.
> Yet according to some imbecilic posters on this thread, they'd be, by the dictionary definition, racist and xenophobic themselves.
> Unfuckingbelievable... pat yourselves on the back.
> ...


These are your anecdotes - you say that the majority of people in one part of germany are racist, therefore you are justified in making sweeping generalisations about the country as a whole. My anecdote - having lived for a little while in germany, visiting quite frequently and having a good few german friends - my opinion is that what you said, about the majority of german individuals having various unpleasant character traits, is a load of utter nonsense.

You have to have a look at what you actually wrote. Maybe you just happened to word things badly, but what you wrote comes across as very dodgy which is why I ask if you have let your german relatives see the detail of what you said. It's one thing making observations about cultural norms that may cause one group of people to tend to behave slightly differently, on average, in certain situations, than another. It's another thing though to start talking about ingrained negative characteristics in the majority of a certain group of people. You specifically said "majority" and also used the word "individuals". The whole tone of your post feels dangerously close to full on racism that implies negative traits are genetic. That's why people have reacted. I realise you did not say that explicitly and may not have intended to imply anything like that but you should go and look at your wording and try and see why it skims on very dubious territory. And the word "crafty" which means getting things by underhand means. You do realise that's pretty much exactly the stereotype employed against Jews in earlier periods of German history?

I don't have a problem with observations about germany's geographical and economic position being significant in how it interacts with the rest of Europe, and comparisons of  the current situation with other periods in history. But as soon as you start talking about things like personality traits - you have to be very careful. Because that exactly is the kind of stuff that excuses racism and judging people on the basis of the group you've assigned them to rather than the individual themselves. And you don't get out of it with 'some of my best friends are German' backpedalling.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 26, 2017)

bimble said:


> Rees-Mogg, man of the stork-people.



Fixed that for you.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 26, 2017)

so they are going to trial the ID required at polling stations wheeze at next years locals. Five areas. Passports and drivers licenses cost money. 70 quid+. This is far more important than the goddam colour of the item. If the state requires me to have a passport to travel it should provide one, if it wants it for a vote then everyone should get it free. this policy had better be in the next labour manifesto.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 26, 2017)

B.I.G said:


> Tell us more about national characteristics?
> 
> Albanians?
> Belgians?
> ...



Albanians - Violent vendetta-seekers.
Belgians - Paedophiles.
Canadians - Wanna-be US of A-ians.
Danes - crypto-Krauts.

Just a few I've heard recently, along with French - subsidy-guzzling garlic munchers; Poles - nation where all males are wife-beaters; Serbs - violently-xenophobic expansionist nationalists.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 26, 2017)

teuchter said:


> These are your anecdotes - you say that the majority of people in one part of germany are racist, therefore you are justified in making sweeping generalisations about the country as a whole. My anecdote - having lived for a little while in germany, visiting quite frequently and having a good few german friends - my opinion is that what you said, about the majority of german individuals having various unpleasant character traits, is a load of utter nonsense.
> 
> You have to have a look at what you actually wrote. Maybe you just happened to word things badly, but what you wrote comes across as very dodgy which is why I ask if you have let your german relatives see the detail of what you said. It's one thing making observations about cultural norms that may cause one group of people to tend to behave slightly differently, on average, in certain situations, than another. It's another thing though to start talking about ingrained negative characteristics in the majority of a certain group of people. You specifically said "majority" and also used the word "individuals". The whole tone of your post feels dangerously close to full on racism that implies negative traits are genetic. That's why people have reacted. I realise you did not say that explicitly and may not have intended to imply anything like that but you should go and look at your wording and try and see why it skims on very dubious territory. And the word "crafty" which means getting things by underhand means. You do realise that's pretty much exactly the stereotype employed against Jews in earlier periods of German history?
> 
> I don't have a problem with observations about germany's geographical and economic position being significant in how it interacts with the rest of Europe, and comparisons of  the current situation with other periods in history. But as soon as you start talking about things like personality traits - you have to be very careful. Because that exactly is the kind of stuff that excuses racism and judging people on the basis of the group you've assigned them to rather than the individual themselves. And you don't get out of it with 'some of my best friends are German' backpedalling.



There's an issue in former DDR _lande_ that anti-fascism and anti-racism are not as well-integrated into everyday thinking as in the former West Germany.  This is supposedly - according to bodies like SOS Racisme and HRW - due to a lack of political de-Nazification (as opposed to de-Nazification by liquidation) in the east, and to a post-reunification landscape that left those _lande_ with little industry, and with that little under a regulatory stranglehold.  Easy to blame "the other", whether that's Brandenburgers or blacks, and there have always been politicians, post-reunification, who are willing to stir the pot, whether about unemployment, housing or general welfare.  Such othering isn't innate though, as some posters appear to imply.  It's very obviously a product of social attitudes that were born in the political class, pumped through the media, and normalised into "common-sense" usage over a period of time.  Same old scapegoating shit, produced by a new class of arseholes.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 26, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> If the state requires me to have a passport to travel it should provide one, if it wants it for a vote then everyone should get it free.



If they have any sense, the voting ID card will be free, just because it will otherwise be describable as a "poll tax".


----------



## NoXion (Dec 26, 2017)

ViolentPanda said:


> Albanians - Violent vendetta-seekers.
> Belgians - Paedophiles.
> Canadians - Wanna-be US of A-ians.
> Danes - crypto-Krauts.
> ...



Pretty sure I read once that the British consume more garlic than the French. So much for that particular "national characteristic", it would seem.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 26, 2017)

Urgh. The Mail (yes, I’m at the parents) is having a whine about leave campaign donors getting hit with a tax bill for their campaign contributions, without mentioning at all that the same tax demands have been made of remain campaign contributors. The worst bit is a quote from someone in Boris Johnson’s office describing leave backers as ‘plucky individuals’ rather than cunts.


----------



## Terry Manners (Dec 27, 2017)

I’ve never heard a single real Brexit voter go on about passport colour it seems to be purely a Media obsession from both sides of the aisle.


----------



## Santino (Dec 27, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> so they are going to trial the ID required at polling stations wheeze at next years locals. Five areas. Passports and drivers licenses cost money. 70 quid+. This is far more important than the goddam colour of the item. If the state requires me to have a passport to travel it should provide one, if it wants it for a vote then everyone should get it free. this policy had better be in the next labour manifesto.


This policy could determine older voters more than younger voters. If it dents the Tory turnout significantly then it would be dropped pretty sharpish. 

Or I suppose they might introduce free ID for 60+ people. It'd still be a hassle though.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 27, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> I’ve never heard a single real Brexit voter go on about passport colour it seems to be purely a Media obsession from both sides of the aisle.



Even the media don't care, it's just a stick for them to stir the shit with.


----------



## bemused (Dec 27, 2017)

Terry Manners said:


> I’ve never heard a single real Brexit voter go on about passport colour it seems to be purely a Media obsession from both sides of the aisle.



The only complaint I've hread about passports is why aren't they an app yet.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 27, 2017)

DotCommunist said:


> so they are going to trial the ID required at polling stations wheeze at next years locals. Five areas. Passports and drivers licenses cost money. 70 quid+. This is far more important than the goddam colour of the item. If the state requires me to have a passport to travel it should provide one, if it wants it for a vote then everyone should get it free. this policy had better be in the next labour manifesto.



There is no legal requirement to have a passport to travel. Of course try travelling without one and I imagine it will be a tad tiresome. Similar to women never been banned from driving in Saudi, they just can’t have a driving license.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 27, 2017)

I recall a bloke burnt his passport & declared himself a citizen of the world. Then he wrote a book about his valiant attempts to travel the world without a passport. I think he managed it but got banged up a few times.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Dec 27, 2017)

I've been to France and back without showing my passport either way, (on a coach aboard the ferry), It will be interesting to see how things happen after Brexit, When I went to Ireland, I had to show it at Dublin Airport even though there is supposed to be a free travel area, coming back to East Mids, no-one asked to see it but every single flight I've taken, I've had to show it with the ticket. 
I've never taken an internal UK flight does anyone know what you have to show for that?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 27, 2017)

Airport Security, they call it. Backed by anti-terror legislation.


----------



## A380 (Dec 27, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I've been to France and back without showing my passport either way, (on a coach aboard the ferry), It will be interesting to see how things happen after Brexit, When I went to Ireland, I had to show it at Dublin Airport even though there is supposed to be a free travel area, coming back to East Mids, no-one asked to see it but every single flight I've taken, I've had to show it with the ticket.
> I've never taken an internal UK flight does anyone know what you have to show for that?


EasyJet only accept passports or full, not provisional driving licences for internal UK flights. They used to take other photo ID, but not anymore.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 27, 2017)

Until a couple of yrs ago passport was not required to leave the UK only for entry. You could go out through Eurotunnel through auto checkin & drive onto train without showing passport unless French immigration which is at UK end of both tunnel & Dover port looked at it & mostly they could not be arsed.

Then that changed & law required record of all those leaving UK. It was terrorist related, I think. So now when you make ferry or tunnel booking you have to declare all passengers & give passport details & also French immigration usually check passport as well. At channel ports checks going in & out of country have become much more intrusive in last couple of yrs but I think it is more terrorist related than brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 28, 2017)

BemusedbyLife said:


> I've been to France and back without showing my passport either way, (on a coach aboard the ferry), It will be interesting to see how things happen after Brexit, When I went to Ireland, I had to show it at Dublin Airport even though there is supposed to be a free travel area, coming back to East Mids, no-one asked to see it but every single flight I've taken, I've had to show it with the ticket.
> I've never taken an internal UK flight does anyone know what you have to show for that?





A380 said:


> EasyJet only accept passports or full, not provisional driving licences for internal UK flights. They used to take other photo ID, but not anymore.



BA doesn’t require photo id for domestic/Ireland flights, Ryanair & Easyjet do.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 29, 2017)

Could also go in 'Tory death spiral'

Top Government adviser quits over Brexit and accuses Theresa May of being 'voice of Ukip'



> Theresa May's infrastructure tsar Lord Adonis has quit his post in a row over Brexit where he accused the Prime Minister of being 'the voice of Ukip'.
> 
> The pro-European Labour peer has stepped down from his role at the National Infrastructure Commission over his opposition to the decision to leave the European Union, which he described as "a dangerous populist and nationalist spasm worthy of Donald Trump"....


----------



## bimble (Dec 29, 2017)

Lord Adonis? Good online dating name but pics are a bit disappointing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 29, 2017)

teqniq said:


> Could also go in 'Tory death spiral'
> 
> Top Government adviser quits over Brexit and accuses Theresa May of being 'voice of Ukip'



Not sure how damaging that will be given he's a pro EU Labour Peer? I mean I know he's advising May but can't be that big a deal can it?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Dec 29, 2017)

He is now free to call for brexit to be reversed along with the likes of Blair/Heseltine/Cable etc who are all well known enough to be given all the space they might ask for in the mainstream media. Whether anybody will listen is another matter.


----------



## coley (Dec 31, 2017)

Sasaferrato said:


> I am a qualified nurse, and completely agree that it should not be a degree course. Our training comprised time on the wards, and time in the school of nursing. Most of the time was spent on the wards. That gives you the ability to spot immediately, the patient who is starting to deteriorate.
> 
> My mate Gary, who is still working as a nurse for the army, was walking along behind a 'degree' nurse when a patient asked her for a urine bottle. The 'degree' replied 'I'll get someone else, I didn't go to university to hand out urine bottles'. Gary's comment to her got her to fetch the urine bottle, and him an interview with the boss re 'tone and manner'.



SWMBOd started her nursing career as a 'cadet' at 15,which involved most of what you describe, a a mixture of  'hands on nursing, understudying and getting your hands dirty with a fair amount of studying in the "school of nursing' 
In 35 years of marriage the only time I have heard her swear,  was when discussing the new 'approach to nursing'
But, the same disasters appear in the military and police,where the road to fast promotion seems to be a mediocre university degree and a willingness to defend the deterioration in the provision of services by supporting the Govt position.
The current boss of the Met is a classical example.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> These are your anecdotes - you say that the majority of people in one part of germany are racist, therefore you are justified in making sweeping generalisations about the country as a whole.


No, you've got it the wrong way around again. My "generlaisations" are based on 3 decades of first hand experience. The anecdote I told of saxony was a microcosmic example from a regional inhabitant highlighting _*actual *_racism. You'd label that inhabitant a racist for bringing it up.


teuchter said:


> My anecdote - having lived for a little while in germany, visiting quite frequently and having a good few german friends - my opinion is that what you said, about the majority of german individuals having various unpleasant character traits, is a load of utter nonsense.


With all due respect, and I can understand how you might come to such an opinion, but I've got infinitely more experience than you to make judgment here.


teuchter said:


> You have to have a look at what you actually wrote. *Maybe you just happened to word things badly,*


very possible but I stand by what I said


teuchter said:


> but what you wrote comes across as very dodgy which is why I ask if you have let your german relatives see the detail of what you said.


I thought I'd made it quire clear beforehand, they and many other germans have been the amongst the reasons (i.e convinced me) to believe what I wrote.


teuchter said:


> It's one thing making observations about cultural norms that may cause one group of people to tend to behave slightly differently, on average, in certain situations, than another. It's another thing though to start talking about ingrained negative characteristics in the majority of a certain group of people.


Why? Where are the limits? If I were to say that I think the majority of British (at least in recent years) tend to be superficial and have an overestimation of their own self importance, would you call me racist?


teuchter said:


> You specifically said "majority" and also used the word "individuals". The whole tone of your post feels dangerously close to full on racism that implies negative traits are genetic. That's why people have reacted. I realise you did not say that explicitly and may not have intended to imply anything like that but you should go and look at your wording and try and see why it skims on very dubious territory. And the word "crafty" which means getting things by underhand means. You do realise that's pretty much exactly the stereotype employed against Jews in earlier periods of German history?


See quote above.


teuchter said:


> I don't have a problem with observations about germany's geographical and economic position being significant in how it interacts with the rest of Europe, and comparisons of  the current situation with other periods in history. But as soon as you start talking about things like personality traits - you have to be very careful. Because that exactly is the kind of stuff that excuses racism and *judging people on the basis of the group you've assigned them to rather than the individual themselves.*


So you don't agree with a collective summary of any group of individuals that have the same traits? Don't forget it  was in context to the question on whether there's a german will to power. I made my case for discussion offering some reasoning as to why it may be the case, based in my opinion, on the political will of the electorate (Individuals) If you want to stifle such discussion, then you too need to be very careful.


teuchter said:


> And you don't get out of it with 'some of my best friends are German' backpedalling.


I'm not needing to get out of anything you might be dreaming about putting me in, you mug. So fuck off with this patronising shit. You don't know half of it.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> My anecdote - having lived for a little while in germany, visiting quite frequently and having a good few german friends - my opinion is ...





teuchter said:


> And you don't get out of it with 'some of my best friends are German' backpedalling.


really? I don't know why I'm bothering engaging with you, you muppet


----------



## Doppelgänger (Jan 7, 2018)

Terry Manners said:


> I’ve never heard a single real Brexit voter go on about passport colour it seems to be purely a Media obsession from both sides of the aisle.



This kind of says it all really:

EU dismisses May's claim blue passports are sovereignty statement


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2018)

Doppelgänger : No it doesn't.

Article above is dated 23rd December (not today!  ).

But in any case, all that's said in it is already fairly familar and not all that unknown.

And even Remainers like me don't give a fuck about passport colour anyway.

I also very much doubt whether any Brexiters (other than the most barking ones), give a fuck either.


----------



## Doppelgänger (Jan 7, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Doppelgänger : No it doesn't.
> 
> Article above is dated 23rd December (not today!  ).
> 
> ...



Since no one else referenced it I thought it was my duty 

I don't give two hoots about the colour either, but it seems important enough to make the national press, so someone must be reading...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 8, 2018)

The problem with the binary nature of the referendum is this shoving of so many reasons into two big tents. 

There must be some people who care about blue passports I guess. Years back I can remember furious letters in my local paper because a council building was flying an EU flag (Hitler couldn't bring down the Union flag, but... sort of stuff!) 

It's mad to slander all Leave voters as nostalgic Little Englanders, but, and mostly within UKIP probably I reckon, there is a decent number who are. 

I SAW a poll the other day that reported over half of Leave voters wanted to bring back the death penalty, and I've had a bit of personal experience of older voters who do, broadly, just think that things were better in the past and we should go back to those days. 

Even some of the so-called intellectual heavyweights of Brexit are self-consciously and obviously retro. Rees Mogg and Garage are and Daniel Hannan even styles himself as an Old Whig, a political party that died in the 19th century!


----------



## gosub (Jan 8, 2018)

\while it is a non issue, I'd rather have the size and hard back nature of the old one back rather than colour issues, felt more official and harder to lose


----------



## 2hats (Jan 8, 2018)

What colour should the eventual phone app/contactless card/dooberry be?


----------



## gosub (Jan 8, 2018)

2hats said:


> What colour should the eventual phone app/contactless card/dooberry be?


Can't see ICAO wearing that, whole point of regulationg is you have something than can be read by immigration of Metropolis and and a shack in Deepest Darkest Puru


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 8, 2018)

Sorry, I'm on a phone and not typing well and ended up rambling there!

I meant also to say that people do vote for all sorts of reasons. I know personally a couple of Lexit voters, one Leave voter who says it was about red tape, two who told me it was about the expense of the EU, one who is a racist, and online I was told by one an that it was all about Free Movement, and one who was a big Hannan fanboy and echoed his global free trade stuff.

And some people vote for no very good reason at all. There was a bit of a fuss about a viral clip of a French voter saying she was voting for Le Pen because, well, fuck it! 

Of course, if you suggest for one minute that voters don't always act without at least great common sense then you're damned as a sneering elitist. But I think it's certainly true that a lot of people are not that interested in politics and the vast majority of our most popular printed media is slanted carp.


----------



## coley (Jan 8, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Doppelgänger : No it doesn't.
> 
> Article above is dated 23rd December (not today!  ).
> 
> ...



Fair do's,  given the way the world is going, iris identification is going to replace passports in the near future, and if you have brown eyes, the system is going to make your world turn blue


----------



## coley (Jan 8, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Sorry, I'm on a phone and not typing well and ended up rambling there!
> 
> I meant also to say that people do vote for all sorts of reasons. I know personally a couple of Lexit voters, one Leave voter who says it was about red tape, two who told me it was about the expense of the EU, one who is a racist, and online I was told by one an that it was all about Free Movement, and one who was a big Hannan fanboy and echoed his global free trade stuff.
> 
> ...



"Most of the printed media is "slanted Carp"
True, they are a fishy lot.
And most of the pro EU lot, print a load of 'codswallop'
And most financial bodies  go fishing for bad news stories and end up with 'empty nets'


----------



## 2hats (Jan 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> Can't see ICAO wearing that, whole point of regulationg is you have something than can be read by immigration of Metropolis and and a shack in Deepest Darkest Puru


Not now. But my point was - it'll change at some future time anyway.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 8, 2018)

You put me in my placid without even having to flex your mussels!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2018)

.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 8, 2018)

Commemorated in stamps.

Words fail me:


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2018)

pogofish said:


> Words fail me:


even the central african republic is laughing at our politicians


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2018)

Farage doing the 'throwing an invisible pot' pose


----------



## kabbes (Jan 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Farage doing the 'throwing an invisible pot' pose


And as for the Pig-Sticker's pose...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 8, 2018)

kabbes said:


> And as for the Pig-Sticker's pose...



He's having a shit, or blowing his muck in a dead pigs's mouth.

or quite possibly, both.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 8, 2018)

deffo a 'bustin a nut' face, as the yank dem say


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 8, 2018)

Those stamps are surely not real!


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 8, 2018)

that's the "I've just joined ISIS" pose isn't it


----------



## pogofish (Jan 8, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Those stamps are surely not real!



They absolutely are..!

Stamperija
Stamperija

The Central African Republic seems to have a thriving thematic stamp industry dedicated to international events/personalities/flora and fauna.

I've just ordered these two, featuring Sergei Kolorev:


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 8, 2018)

When I was a kid and had a stamp album, I seem to remember Bhutan issued lots of "collectible" stamps.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 8, 2018)

v


pogofish said:


> They absolutely are..!
> 
> Stamperija
> Stamperija
> ...



But Energia/Buran had nothing to do with him! Hrrmpf


----------



## pogofish (Jan 8, 2018)

Crispy said:


> But Energia/Buran had nothing to do with him! Hrrmpf



Other than that Energia is now property of the S P Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation, whilst the Buran development team was the result of a forced merger of Korolev and Glushko's former research groups.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 8, 2018)

pogofish said:


> Other than that Energia is now property of the S P Korolev Rocket and Space Corporation, whilst the Buran development team was the result of a forced merger of Korolev and Glushko's former research groups.



Nominated for least predictable thread tangent of the fortnight.


----------



## Doppelgänger (Jan 8, 2018)

pogofish said:


> They absolutely are..!
> 
> Stamperija
> Stamperija



Sadly the Brexit ones are fake, but they are hilariously funny. There are some coins out there issued by the Cook Islands though:

No Royal Mail Brexit stamps? Try these UK-EU souvenirs instead


----------



## Winot (Jan 9, 2018)

Leaked letter in FT of Davis whining that EU is - shock - preparing for Brexit.


----------



## bemused (Jan 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> View attachment 124894 View attachment 124895
> 
> Leaked letter in FT of Davis whining that EU is - shock - preparing for Brexit.



Did he use the same pen he uses to tag his name on the bus?


----------



## Supine (Jan 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> Leaked letter in FT of Davis whining that EU is - shock - preparing for Brexit.



The level of stupidity and incompetence being shown by our glorious leaders is well and truly embarrassing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> View attachment 124894 View attachment 124895
> 
> Leaked letter in FT of Davis whining that EU is - shock - preparing for Brexit.



Reads like the work of a child who read a grown-up letter once and thought he'd give it a go.


----------



## BemusedbyLife (Jan 9, 2018)

You get the impression that deep down Davis thinks all these problems would go away if Johnny Foreigner would stop messing around and just accept his place in the proper order of things, he doesn't seem to handle reality too well.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 9, 2018)

BemusedbyLife said:


> You get the impression that deep down Davis thinks all these problems would go away if Johnny Foreigner would stop messing around and just accept his place in the proper order of things, he doesn't seem to handle reality too well.



Stephen Collins on David Davis and Brexit – cartoon


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

This is another example - city of culture, agencies leaving - of Brexit being exactly what you would expect and UK government running round like idiots in shock and horror. I gather this was kicked off because a letter was sent from the EU saying that on the date of leaving the UK would no longer be a part of a road haulage licensing scheme run by the EU. 

What a fucking joke this government is. 

And don't forget a good number of Tory MPs want No Deal so they can live out their libertarian fantasies and privatise the fuck out of what little we have left of public ownership in this country. 

The idea that we're going to have negotiated dozens of new free trade deals around the world before we leave is a fucking fantasy. And these Sovereignty fuckers better be so worried about off-shore decision making when we sign a deal with America that allows trans-Atlantic investment courts to decide that, yes, it is just fine for the Ayn Rand Insurance Corp of Delaware to charge your father for heart surgery because they can do it in Ohio and you can't make laws that interfere with their business model.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> View attachment 124903


there are not enough facepalms in the world for the way hmg is (mis)handling this. it's the sorriest thing i have ever seen in a long list of sorry things i have seen.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

I am starting to think that they are doing it deliberately. 

There are more than enough Leave Means Leave/no deal is better than a bad deal Tory MPs to bring the Government down in a second if they feel like it. They have to be appeased. It's also been doing the rounds in the last couple of days that the Tory party now only has around 70,000 members - I should imagine that's a pretty hardcore group now. 

Any deal is going to be (I accept this maybe just in the short term) worse for the economy and cause a big economic shock. And, in any case, May has made Red Line promises that just don't add up and cannot all be kept. 

Brexiters are desperately spinning an "unreasonable EU" line coupled with best-off-out-of-it stuff about further intergration and armies and superstates and Turkey and the imminent collapse of the whole shebang (which some of them want), and will in the end - I now think, unless there's an election - throw up their hands and scream, "we can't do a deal with these people!" No Deal will follow. . . 

I never wanted a second referendum, largely on the basis that the first one was so divisive and stressful, but I think the Labour Party should now think about offering a Final Say vote on the deal. I still personally don't know quite what I think is right, but I think we're going to No Deal. 

Only Oprah can save us now!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I am starting to think that they are doing it deliberately.
> 
> There are more than enough Leave Means Leave/no deal is better than a bad deal Tory MPs to bring the Government down in a second if they feel like it. They have to be appeased. It's also been doing the rounds in the last couple of days that the Tory party now only has around 70,000 members - I should imagine that's a pretty hardcore group now.
> 
> ...


tbh i still think the government's going to row back because there is no way they can get any sort of deal which doesn't bugger the economy. there is no surer way of ushering jeremy corbyn into 10 downing street than the government pursuing the course they're on.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

You seem to think that the government are competent, honest, and primarilly interested in the public good, Pickman.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

Supine said:


> The level of stupidity and incompetence being shown by our glorious leaders is well and truly embarrassing.



The EU shouldn't be spared criticism either, if Barnier has really demanded the right to terminate contracts without compensation - certainly it will not have gone down well at EDF, DB, Sodexo, Capgemini etc.  They do own or operate far more of our infrastructure than we do of theirs, after all.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> View attachment 124894 View attachment 124895
> 
> Leaked letter in FT of Davis whining that EU is - shock - preparing for Brexit.


Bunch of waffle dressed up as a plan, isn't it? 'increase engagement'? Isn't engagement with the EU just 'doing his job'. Other than that, his only suggestion is to get British businesses to lobby harder - 'Hey guys, can you do brexit for us? We're not doing it very well. "Brexit was not your idea," you say? Well perhaps not, but it is your problem.'


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> The EU shouldn't be spared criticism either, if Barnier has really demanded the right to terminate contracts without compensation - certainly it will not have gone down well at EDF, DB, Sodexo, Capgemini etc.  They do own or operate far more of our infrastructure than we do of theirs, after all.



That seems a very big if.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> That seems a very big if.



I can't really believe that they would threaten it either (given that the effect would be much worse on them than us) but they have not denied it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> The EU shouldn't be spared criticism either, if Barnier has really demanded the right to terminate contracts without compensation - certainly it will not have gone down well at EDF, DB, Sodexo, Capgemini etc.  They do own or operate far more of our infrastructure than we do of theirs, after all.



the whole edf shebang is an incompetent scandal of the first water. Heads should have rolled. I don't know whose heads, but heads. Paying through the nose year on year for a shonky reactor


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> I can't really believe that they would threaten it either (given that the effect would be much worse on them than us) but they have not denied it.



How will it be worse for them? 

It'll be bad for those businesses, no doubt, but there are 27 EU countries, and they've made it clear they're not going to make loads of exceptions to the rules for the UK. I'm not a lawyer, but we're walking out of (this is in the case of a hypothetical No Deal at the moment) hundreds (thousands?) of systems that - for better or worse - are vital to our economy. 

There's this Farage/Hannan fantasy that German car makers are going to rise up and say, "yes, let them keep all the trade stuff without any of the political things they don't like," and I think this is just a fantasy. 

As a bonus, it looks like lots of lawyers are going to make shedloads of money off Brexit! Always a bright side!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

EG: 

 

But, people say, "oh, they won't really ground planes when it comes to it," but they fucking will! They have to, otherwise all their laws and systems are essentially meaningless.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> I can't really believe that they would threaten it either (given that the effect would be much worse on them than us) but they have not denied it.



What do you think Barnier should be doing? Should he be setting up a compensation fund for multinationals that face losing business because of Brexit?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 9, 2018)

After Brexit, England will have to rethink its identity | Robert Winder

in between detailing the true horror of brexit- worldwide commentariat laughing at us (zut alors! I cannot stand the mockery!)
we get an odd treatise on englishness that includes this gem



> As has often been said, modern England is a land of cricket matches and cathedral choirs; but it is also a land of pub darts, Indian saris and Islamic minarets.


'pub darts' yeah, whippets, flat caps and clogs as well mate. 


also, my town is in a song the author of the piecve quotes 
_From Colwyn Bay to Kettering
They’re sobbing themselves to sleep._
_Their shrieks and wails_
_In the Yorkshire dales_

which is ...nice?


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> How will it be worse for them?
> 
> It'll be bad for those businesses, no doubt, but there are 27 EU countries, and they've made it clear they're not going to make loads of exceptions to the rules for the UK. I'm not a lawyer, but we're walking out of (this is in the case of a hypothetical No Deal at the moment) hundreds (thousands?) of systems that - for better or worse - are vital to our economy.
> 
> ...



That is the thing though - this *isn't* a Farage / Hannan fantasy, indeed I am sure the idea that they could unilaterally cancel pre-Brexit contracts solely because a firm wasn't based in the UK never even entered their tiny minds.  

This is a threat from the EU side which, if reciprocated, would do much more damage to them than it would to us - the EDF nuclear deal alone is worth north of £40 billion - simply because their firms are far more entrenched in our economy and infrastructure than ours are in theirs.  I find it very difficult to understand why Barnier has even brought it up.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> What do you think Barnier should be doing? Should he be setting up a compensation fund for multinationals that face losing business because of Brexit?



Macron and previous French administrations have already been bailing out EDF.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> the whole edf shebang is an incompetent scandal of the first water. Heads should have rolled. I don't know whose heads, but heads. Paying through the nose year on year for a shonky reactor



Instead they all got higher-paying jobs.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> Macron and previous French administrations have already been bailing out EDF.



And so..?


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> And so..?



... and so they'd have to bail them out even more.


----------



## Smangus (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> EG:
> 
> View attachment 124908
> 
> But, people say, "oh, they won't really ground planes when it comes to it," but they fucking will! They have to, otherwise all their laws and systems are essentially meaningless.



Finding it difficult to sympathise with Ryan Air (especially), any other of those companies mentioned or their shareholders tbh. fuck em.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> That is the thing though - this *isn't* a Farage / Hannan fantasy, indeed I am sure the idea that they could unilaterally cancel pre-Brexit contracts solely because a firm wasn't based in the UK never even entered their tiny minds.
> 
> This is a threat from the EU side which, if reciprocated, would do much more damage to them than it would to us - the EDF nuclear deal alone is worth north of £40 billion - simply because their firms are far more entrenched in our economy and infrastructure than ours are in theirs.  I find it very difficult to understand why Barnier has even brought it up.



Can you point me to somewhere where it is being reported that Barnier has threatened to void contracts illegally as part of the negotiations. 

Wouldn't it be illegal to void contracts in the UK for overseas businesses? 

What the EU is doing is ending access to EU-wide things to businesses that aren't in a country that is in the club aren't they? I can't see that they have any choice on that - fudging it all makes membership pointless. 

The Farage/Hannan fantasy was - and remains, I think - that UK businesses were so important to the EU that they would offer us a super-duper deal that would essentially be membership of the single market but leaving us out of things that Farage and co don't like, chiefly, I suppose freedom of movement. 

They've made it clear they're not going to do that. We can be like Norway or like Canada. 

And, yes, fuck Ryan Air, and lots of these other companies, that example was shared as an example of how this is being reported outside the UK but doesn't seem to be being reported inside the UK and that real businesses are taking steps to mitigate what a lot of Brexit supporters are just dismissing as tosh.


----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Can you point me to somewhere where it is being reported that Barnier has threatened to void contracts illegally as part of the negotiations



It is mentioned in the Guardian piece and in a piece from the FT last year (admittedly as the EC being the ones demanding it, thoughBarnier is their chief negotiator of course) also Davis refers to it in his letter above.  



MightyTibberton said:


> Wouldn't it be illegal to void contracts in the UK for overseas businesses?



At the moment it probably would be, though that would change if it had been brought in by the rest of the EU as threatened.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

Thank you! I can't read the FT one I'm afraid as I'm not a subscriber. 

But the Guardian one just mentions jeopardising existing contracts as does Davis' (I've got a big felt-tip pen!) letter.  

Surely this just means stuff like "passporting" for financial services doesn't it? They do business in the EU on the basis of a piece of paper granted to them because of the UK's membership of the EU. We're leaving the EU. No more piece of paper. No more business. The same with that road haulage thing. No more EU. No more membership of that scheme. They treat us like any Finnish or Argentinian trucker. That seems perfectly legit and straight forward. And these are hypotheticals based on a no-deal scenario that our government has started mouthing off about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 9, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Thank you! I can't read the FT one I'm afraid as I'm not a subscriber.
> 
> But the Guardian one just mentions jeopardising existing contracts as does Davis' (I've got a big felt-tip pen!) letter.
> 
> Surely this just means stuff like "passporting" for financial services doesn't it? They do business in the EU on the basis of a piece of paper granted to them because of the UK's membership of the EU. We're leaving the EU. No more piece of paper. No more business. The same with that road haulage thing. No more EU. No more membership of that scheme. They treat us like any Finnish or Argentinian trucker. That seems perfectly legit and straight forward. And these are hypotheticals based on a no-deal scenario that our government has started mouthing off about.



Finland is in the EU.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 9, 2018)

I was a bit worried that it might be, Mr Railway Station Street (I know enough about Europe to speak two words of German!). . . I am very much not an expert on any of this. .  . 

And, I seem to remember Argentina being proposed for membership of the Six Nations European rugby tournament, so perhaps they could join too!


----------



## Supine (Jan 10, 2018)

agricola said:


> The EU shouldn't be spared criticism either, if Barnier has really demanded the right to terminate contracts without compensation - certainly it will not have gone down well at EDF, DB, Sodexo, Capgemini etc.  They do own or operate far more of our infrastructure than we do of theirs, after all.



Your missing the point to an extent. The letter on page 1 mentions the disappointment in the EU specifying Qualified Persons must be located in Europe after brexit. This isn't a case of the EU terminating contracts early, it's a legal requirement based on the UK triggering article 50. 

We have brought it on ourselves and pharma companies will need the next year and a bit to put alternative arrangements in place. It'll be greatly damaging to the UK but is self inflicted. Legally UK pharma companies will not be able to release batches of medicines for sale in Europe anymore. 

For Davis to say it's premature to start implementing is idiotic.


----------



## bemused (Jan 10, 2018)

Davis and Hammond make plea to Germany in pursuit of Brexit deal

Standby for corporation tax cuts to offset any costs to transact with the EU.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2018)

notes:
Article 50 exists so that countries can make a departure from the EU should their electorate decide so

The EU and its people handling brexit are non-ideological. They are the face of implacable fairness. Britain is merely throwing toys from pram, and deserves the firm guidance of an EU willing to make us a warning to others.

At no point can a mention of EU instransigence and obstacle throwing be termed so. They are realists, everyone else is not (that means you to smelly prole, now reap the rewards of your ignorance!)

theres a very disgusting liberal bootlicker line of thought in this isn't there


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

This government is doing exactly that. 

They're taking things that are completely run-of-the-mill consequences of Brexit - no longer being in EU institutions - and running around like it's some sort of freshly hatched plot against Britain. 

Are you calling David Davis a "smelly prole"? 

What should the government do then? What should the EU do? What should the Labour Party do? What should a communist do?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 10, 2018)

I don't think anyone's said that the EU's people handling Brexit are non-ideological, or "implacably fair", are they?

The EU's people are doing what anyone could expect - negotiating in the interests of the EU.


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't think anyone's said that the EU's people handling Brexit are non-ideological, or "implacably fair", are they?
> 
> The EU's people are doing what anyone could expect - negotiating in the interests of the EU.



They are also following the process which is an inevitable result of the UK's triggering Article 50. Now you could argue that the way the EU is set up is wrong, that the process for leaving is wrong and that the UK should never have agreed to it in the future. But given that the UK did agree to all that, it is bound to now follow the process.

Of course, there were different ways of handling Brexit, but the UK government chose to do it this way.


----------



## Supine (Jan 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> notes:
> Article 50 exists so that countries can make a departure from the EU should their electorate decide so
> 
> The EU and its people handling brexit are non-ideological. They are the face of implacable fairness. Britain is merely throwing toys from pram, and deserves the firm guidance of an EU willing to make us a warning to others.
> ...




I'd say that was spot on


----------



## Crispy (Jan 10, 2018)

Quite apart from any notions of "fairness" or "reasonableness" the simple weight of numbers favours the 27. These negotiations are confrontational and they are by far the biggest guy in the room. What did anyone expect?


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Quite apart from any notions of "fairness" or "reasonableness" the simple weight of numbers favours the 27. These negotiations are confrontational and they are by far the biggest guy in the room. What did anyone expect?



I think that depends on the identity of the 'anyone'.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2018)

Lol at the hard headed realists sagely nodding.


teuchter said:


> I don't think anyone's said that the EU's people handling Brexit are non-ideological, or "implacably fair", are they?


Its in every word of discussion about these ongoing negotiations. You will now of course deny this. The fact that its taken as non-ideological is why it isn't mentioned. Why would you? This is all perfectly normal. lol


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> What should a communist do?


cheerlead for a racist pan european trading club maybe


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> cheerlead for a racist pan european trading club maybe



Instead of cheerleading for a Tory and DUP government's negotiationshambles you mean?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Instead of cheerleading for a Tory and DUP government's negotiationshambles you mean?


these moves are so old we're doing them reflexively now lol


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Instead of cheerleading for a Tory and DUP government's negotiationshambles you mean?


Negsham


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Finland is in the EU.


That makes it even worse


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:
			
		

> What should a communist do?


Stand with Farage, Johnson and Rees-Mogg!


----------



## bimble (Jan 10, 2018)

wot no biscuits?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> View attachment 124985
> wot no biscuits?


not surprised he's packing a biography of one of britain's greatest drinkers alongside the gin


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2018)

Who rather liked French wine.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2018)

And what the fuck is British gin? On the shelf with British whisky? In fact, looks like it's all from England, with tea from the colonies for good measure.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 10, 2018)

I didn't know we could grow tea here.


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2018)

As someone on Twitter pointed out, PG Tips and Marmite are made by Unilever.


----------



## Doppelgänger (Jan 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> As someone on Twitter pointed out, PG Tips and Marmite are made by Unilever.



Unilever is Anglo-Dutch. A great European partnership, oh hang on...


----------



## Raheem (Jan 10, 2018)

So much for Brexit going ahead unhampered.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> View attachment 124985
> wot no biscuits?



Aww look, a biography of a racist cunt. How charmingly apt.


----------



## Mordi (Jan 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I didn't know we could grow tea here.



We used to steal Cornish tea from Waitrose.
S'pretty good.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

I wonder what'll happen to all those things that have EU designated protection of origin (or whatever it's called exactly), they'll be firing up the Melton Mowbray-style pork pie machines across Poland and Italy and getting their Cheddar labels out of storage in France!


----------



## Raheem (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I wonder what'll happen to all those things that have EU designated protection of origin (or whatever it's called exactly), they'll be firing up the Melton Mowbray-style pork pie machines across Poland and Italy and getting their Cheddar labels out of storage in France!



Just for the sake of being know-it-all, cheddar doesn't have protection. Cheddar cheese is basically any hard cheese that's been chopped up and squeezed a second time, so you can make it anywhere you like.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

First of all I reveal that I thought Finland wasn't in the EU. Now I shame myself as a cheese ignoramus! Zut a-fucking-lors! 

That would explain Somerset Brie and the like, I suppose?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

Although, I have a partial point: 

The term "Cheddar cheese" is widely used, but has no protected designation of origin within the European Union. However, in 2007, a Protected Designation of Origin, "West Country Farmhouse Cheddar", was created and only Cheddar produced from local milk within Somerset, Dorset, Devon and Cornwall and manufactured using traditional methods may use the name.[7][8] Outside Europe, the style and quality of cheeses labelled as cheddar may vary greatly; furthermore, cheeses that are more similar in taste and appearance to Red Leicester are sometimes popularly marketed as "Red Cheddar".

"Red Cheddar"?! Yoiks!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2018)

Canada makes the best cheddar.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Canada makes the best cheddar.



Really? Shit, that was the ace up our sleeve.


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I wonder what'll happen to all those things that have EU designated protection of origin (or whatever it's called exactly), they'll be firing up the Melton Mowbray-style pork pie machines across Poland and Italy and getting their Cheddar labels out of storage in France!



My understanding is that the UK will no longer be bound and so our products will no longer have that protection but equally within the UK the use of ‘champagne’, ‘Parma ham’ etc. will not be protected under the geographical designation rules. 

The UK common law of passing off will still apply though so we might see a return of Advocaat type cases here. 

Erven Warnink BV v J Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd - Wikipedia


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> My understanding is that the UK will no longer be bound and so our products will no longer have that protection but equally within the UK the use of ‘champagne’, ‘Parma ham’ etc. will not be protected under the geographical designation rules.
> 
> The UK common law of passing off will still apply though so we might see a return of Advocaat type cases here.
> 
> Erven Warnink BV v J Townend & Sons (Hull) Ltd - Wikipedia


Thank you. 

I hope they can do some sort of deal on that. I can't see how it benefits anyone in the UK or the EU to get rid of it, though I suppose it might be closed to new applications and UK would have to pay an admin fee.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2018)




----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 11, 2018)

I wonder how far that's a career move for Nige.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Canada makes the best cheddar.


What metric are you judging this on?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 11, 2018)

The guy actually has no shame.

'my mind is actually changing on this'

Nigel Farage: Maybe there should be a second Brexit referendum


----------



## souljacker (Jan 11, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I wonder how far that's a career move for Nige.



Wasn't he quoted as being out of work and broke recently? A 2nd referendum should get him some slots on Question Time and the Andrew Marr show again.


----------



## billy_bob (Jan 11, 2018)

Yeah, my first thought was 'bit of a gamble', but then, there's no need for a Farage in a world where Brexit's been decided on, whereas if a second referendum went the other way he'd be guaranteed a prominent role as long as he wants it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

souljacker said:


> Wasn't he quoted as being out of work and broke recently?



Didn't understand that, he has his MEP's salary (and gilt-edged pension come March 2019), he has a show on LBC four nights a week + plenty of people lining up to interview him now the Tories are making such a dog's dinner of Brexit.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2018)

there was a Mail reacharound that took the angle of nige going 'I'm middle age, single and broke'. Bullshit is he broke.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

teqniq said:


> The guy actually has no shame.
> 
> 'my mind is actually changing on this'
> 
> Nigel Farage: Maybe there should be a second Brexit referendum



His mind is only changing on the calls for a second referendum, he thinks that if it were run again leave would gain a larger % of the vote and the Guardian would vanish up it's hole.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 11, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Yeah, my first thought was 'bit of a gamble'


That's how we got Brexit in the first place, so why not?


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 11, 2018)

I can't see any point in a second referendum until we actually have a deal to vote on.


----------



## bemused (Jan 11, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> His mind is only changing on the calls for a second referendum, he thinks that if it were run again leave would gain a larger % of the vote and the Guardian would vanish up it's hole.



I think a referendum on the final deal would be a political lifeline to most of the parties. I'm sure the EU would agree to wait for that to happen they could hold it Feb 2019.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> I can't see any point in a second referendum until we actually have a deal to vote on.


there won't be a second referendum as there will be a fudge deal


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 11, 2018)

I tried Yorkshire tea once, but despite the name it's neither bitter nor cheap.


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there won't be a second referendum as there will be a fudge deal



Well that's precisely why I want a referendum on the deal, to stop them fudging it!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 11, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Well that's precisely why I want a referendum on the deal, to stop them fudging it!



Presumably the referendum question would be: Do you want this fudge or an even more hastily cobbled-together fudge created by the exact same idiots?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Well that's precisely why I want a referendum on the deal, to stop them fudging it!


yeh. but it's precisely why you won't get a referendum on the deal


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 11, 2018)

May has said that any vote in Parliament will be a take-it-or-leave-it on the deal with the default answer being "Brexit with no deal" hasn't she? 

I do think Farage is playing personal games though. I very much doubt that he's anywhere near "skint" in any normal definition of the word, but I also doubt he's anywhere near as rich as he thinks he ought to be.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


>




May with nothing going on anymore says somethig to try and stay relevant shocker....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

bemused said:


> I think a referendum on the final deal would be a political lifeline to most of the parties. I'm sure the EU would agree to wait for that to happen they could hold it Feb 2019.



If that were proposed the EU would just state that terms of the trade deal are that the UK has access to the single market upon paying £700m a week and taking 100,000 Romanians an hour.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 11, 2018)

And i mean that about Badgers also.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 11, 2018)

24-hour Farage. The new channel on Freeview 666 coming this summer from Express TV!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

http://newsthump.com/2018/01/09/dav...the-no-deal-scenario-he-threatened-them-with/


*The Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union today attacked the EU for “unfairly” ensuring they are prepared for the no deal Brexit he threatened was a very real possibility.*

Speaking today, Mr Davis said, “Myself and other Brexit supporting ministers have been consistent in saying that no deal is better than a bad deal. It’s kind of my motto.

“Indeed, many of my erstwhile colleagues have argued that we should just leave the European Union today, without paying them a penny.

“So you can imagine how furious it has made me, finding out that the European Union has taken these comments and actually begun to prepare for such an outcome, should the things I said might happen, actually happen.

“It is unfair. It is not something _we_ have prepared for; in fact we haven’t prepared for anything at all, and it is that state of unpreparedness that we assumed would be mirrored by the Commission.

“This is typical of EU bureaucrats, diligently going about their business, doing their jobs, and ensuring they stand up for the remaining members of the EU.

“There are a growing number of instances where the UK is now being treated differently. Treated as if we are about to leave the European Union.

“I didn’t want it to come to this, but if the EU continues to act professionally and show us up for the incompetents we are, the UK government will be forced to implement sanctions against them.

“We have a lot of leverage, with the banning of the exports of homemade jams being the nuclear option.”


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

If we do have a second vote, i think it should only be the for people that could be bothered to vote in the first ballot.


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> If we do have a second vote, i think it should only be the for people that could be bothered to vote in the first ballot.


How would you police that?


----------



## bimble (Jan 11, 2018)

He's lost the crowd completely. If you click on this you can see his followers tweeting their incredulity and suspicion that maybe Soros got to him too.


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> How would you police that?


Voting records.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> If we do have a second vote, i think it should only be the for people that could be bothered to vote in the first ballot.


what about people who wanted to vote but were too young?


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> what about people who wanted to vote but were too young?


Yes give them a vote too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Yes give them a vote too.


that shows a good spirit


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> that shows a good spirit


Should have stated that anyway


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

bimble said:


> He's lost the crowd completely


Reading the comments in todays guardian article, he seems to have gained some new friends to level things up. The liberals have now got a soft spot for ' the nasty little racist'


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Voting records.


Do we keep such records? If we do we probably shouldn't.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Should have stated that anyway



And folk who were banged up in June 2016.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Do we keep such records? If we do we probably shouldn't.



Yes they do. Each person has a number and it is ticked off when they hand you the voting card. 

No record of how you vote is kept of course, as no one can know unless you choose to tell them.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> If we do have a second vote, i think it should only be the for people that could be bothered to vote in the first ballot.



I take it you're posting with your Brexit-favouring hat on there ....


----------



## sealion (Jan 11, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I take it you're posting with your Brexit-favouring hat on there ..


Maybe maybe not  I just think if you cared then you would have voted either way. I used to vote for labour, they never got in but i didn't want another go.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> At no point can a mention of EU instransigence and obstacle throwing be termed so. They are realists, everyone else is not (that means you to smelly prole, now reap the rewards of your ignorance!)
> theres a very disgusting liberal bootlicker line of thought in this isn't there



Not a lot more disgusting than some peoples' Brexit-favouring (or Lexit-minded) and just plain lazy line of thought that implies that very single person who would have prefered to remain is a liberal Guardian-worshipping sneerer at the ignorant racist working classes 

ETA : And obviously, Remain voters are absolutely incapable of _ever_ criticising anything about the EU either. And equally obviously,  "we" can't wait to meet Barnier, or Juncker because we dream of licking their boots, with licking their arses as a delectable desert 

*FFS* DotCommunist ... you can do a *LOT* better** than that!!  

**(even when pisstaking, which you're normally pretty bloody good at  )


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Maybe maybe not  I just think if you cared then you would have voted either way. I used to vote for labour, they never got in but i didn't want another go.



I'm quite critical of those old folks who voted Brexit  , but to _balance_  that, I'm also quite critical of those young folks who couldn't be arsed to vote Remain 

</sterotyping based on some element of truth  >


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm quite critical of those old folks who voted Brexit  , but to _balance_  that, I'm also quite critical of those young folks who couldn't be arsed to vote Remain
> 
> </sterotyping based on some element of truth  >



One option (getting a bit off topic) would be compulsory voting, small fine, no criminal record, more like a parking ticket. You would obviously need a 'none of the above' option or other option to spoil. 

That said, I don't really favour it, and in any case political engagement in the young is (slowly) rising, has been since the SIndy ref.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 12, 2018)

Yes, I don't favour compulsory voting either.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2018)

"You're going to enjoy freedom and democracy, whether you like it or not, peasant! "  

Compulsory voting has to be the most underpants-on-head stupid idea I have ever heard. Totally missing the point.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> "You're going to enjoy freedom and democracy, whether you like it or not, peasant! "
> 
> Compulsory voting has to be the most underpants-on-head stupid idea I have ever heard. Totally missing the point.



You're not Australian I'm guessing.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> You're not Australian I'm guessing.



I've heard that Australia has that idiotic policy. Given that it doesn't seem to be significantly different to all the other bourgeois democracies, I'm not sure what problem compulsory voting is supposed to solve.

If voting was compulsory here I'd be tempted to stay away from polling stations at all times just on general principle.


----------



## Slo-mo (Jan 12, 2018)

Again, just to be clear, I don't support compulsory voting at all. I was just noting that at least one major democracy has it.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Again, just to be clear, I don't support compulsory voting at all. I was just noting that at least one major democracy has it.



The results speak for themselves. Australia is not noticeably any less dysfunctional than any other bourgeois democracies so far as I can tell, considering that worms like Krudd can get so far.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> If we do have a second vote, i think it should only be the for people that could be bothered to vote in the first ballot.



I think there should be a referendum open only to those who had the good sense not to vote in the last one. 

The question should be: the devil or the deep blue sea?


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 12, 2018)

Have we had the commemorative coin yet? Not actually a Viz parody.



Note the American date formatting, done slightly differently each time. Also 'Independance'.

(It was real but has been taken down)


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 13, 2018)

Further to the "Skint Nigel Wants 2nd Ref to Remain Relevant and Employed in TV Studios" conspiracy theory being put about by the likes of, erm, me, Nige is being done for fiddling his expenses at the European Parliament, and because he hasn't paid it back is having around half of his salary docked until it is paid back. Tragic news.


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 13, 2018)

My thoughts:
A narrow result (+/- 5 points or so) for ANY election / referendum should result in a second vote.

The flood of refugees from the Middle East that dominated the news that summer heavily influenced the result.

The government should stop saying "The British people have voted Leave". No, only half (who voted) want to leave. Are the wishes of the Remainers invalid and not to be remembered, then?

Oh, and stop calling them "Remoaners". It's disrespectful, rude, condescending and patronising and smacks of "We won, so... nyah".

Old people and white nationalists who wanted to pull up the drawbridge from across the channel also made up the majority of the Leave vote.

Now that the Leave campaign misinformation has been seen as such and the economic negative effects are starting to be felt then voters in a second vote would be more informed.

Reduce the voting age to 16. Let young people have a say in their future instead of being dictated to by old people who have less of a future, some of whom remember WW2.

Prediction: we leave the EU but apply to rejoin in 10 years or so when the UK has all gone to shit.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 13, 2018)

Helen Back said:


> Oh, and stop calling them "Remoaners". It's disrespectful,* rude, condescending and patronising* and smacks of "We won, so... nyah".
> 
> *Old people and white nationalists who wanted to pull up the drawbridge from across the channel also made up the majority of the Leave vote*.





Helen Back said:


> condescending and patronising





Helen Back said:


> Now that the Leave campaign misinformation has been seen as such and the economic negative effects are starting to be felt then voters in a second vote would be more informed.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 13, 2018)

MightyTibberton likes this.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 13, 2018)

Those dreadful old people with their memories of WWII.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 13, 2018)

This liberal 'we need gas granddad to stop Brexit' intergenerational stuff is becoming more and more common isn't it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Those dreadful old people with their memories of WWII.



Scum, the lot of ‘em.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 13, 2018)

little makes me - who voted remain - more likely to vote 'out, like my fucking trousers are on fire', like the utterly vile pronouncements and attitudes of the remoaners.

and yes, i say remoaners, knowing with utter certainty that had remain won, and leave campaigners were still griping at the result, the abuse would be flowing at full whack at them for not accepting the result. 

fuck 'em, i hope they fucking choke.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

Best retreat, Helen Back ... you'll only ever get abuse here on Lexit75 

Us 'Remoaners' will only *ever* be accused of 'elitist' 'liberal' 'condescension' if 'we' even _dream_ of suggesting that the Leave 52pc/Remain 48pc result might principally have been driven by differential turnout** 

**Plus by a whole lot of completely justifiable anti-Tory/anti-Toryism anger, and by the thorough incompetence/complacency of the Cameron/Osbourne led Remain campaign ....


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Best retreat, Helen Back ... you'll only ever get abuse here on Lexit75
> 
> Us 'Remoaners' will only *ever* be accused of 'elitist' 'liberal' 'condescension' if 'we' even _dream_ of suggesting that the Leave 52pc/Remain 48pc result might principally have been driven by differential turnout**
> 
> **Plus by a whole lot of completely justifiable anti-Tory/anti-Toryism anger, and by the thorough incompetence/complacency of the Cameron/Osbourne led Remain campaign ....


You think leavers are happy with the campaign they ran?


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 14, 2018)

gosub said:


> You think leavers are happy with the campaign they ran?



tbf, I don't think many of them are very happy with the way Brexit's going either.


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2018)

gosub said:


> You think leavers are happy with the campaign they ran?


Most people want(ed) a trade relationship with EU and that's EFTA.. Dismissed by both sets of lunatics early on in the referendum


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

gosub : IMO Leave campaign leaders were pretty shocked that Leave won, and not necessarily all that delighted (after June 24th 2016) that this was the outcome.


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> gosub : IMO Leave campaign leaders were pretty shocked that Leave won, and not necessarily all that delighted (after June 24th 2016) that this was the outcome.


Leave LEADERS put fuck all previous effort into understanding the issue and how to get out of it. The only effort they put in to the hard core that grasped the realities was so they could tick box in order to pick up the state funding


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

Helen Back said:


> My thoughts:
> A narrow result (+/- 5 points or so) for ANY election / referendum should result in a second vote.
> 
> The flood of refugees from the Middle East that dominated the news that summer heavily influenced the result.
> ...


Fuck off.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Us 'Remoaners' will only *ever* be accused of 'elitist' 'liberal' 'condescension


I can't think why!

-----------
Reduce the voting age to 16. Let young people have a say in their future instead of being dictated to by old people who have less of a future, some of whom remember WW2

Old people and white nationalists who wanted to pull up the drawbridge from across the channel also made up the majority of the Leave vote.
------------


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

<edited for rethink>


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> I can't think why!
> 
> -----------
> Reduce the voting age to 16. Let young people have a say in their future instead of being dictated to by old people who have less of a future, some of whom remember WW2
> ...


Fuck em and the ideals of democratic accountabily they put their lives on the line for. People can't handle shit like that.. It gets in the way of playing Nintendo


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

J Ed said:


> This liberal 'we need gas granddad to stop Brexit' intergenerational stuff is becoming more and more common isn't it.


ties in with a similar 'we'll outlive and breed conservatives' line of thought also favoured among liberals. Good luck with waiting for the other person to just die ennit, thats a philosophy of hope right there


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> <edited for rethink>


You contradicted your first reply. There is no rethink needed. It makes you look daft, give it up.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

I don't deny being daft, but I'm thoroughly fed up with pretty much all Brexit-related stuff at the moment.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

Of people I know that voted leave. Broadly their reasons were to stop us being ruled by The EU. To stop immigration for which they blame the crisis in the NHS & the housing crisis. None of them even considered trade & still don’t. You can call it an ideology. They voted leave & they want to leave. Listen to LBC & local radio phone ins. The leavers mostly have this anger in them. When questioned about trade they don’t really seem to care. They gloss over the nuts & bolts of actually leaving. Their worry now seems to be that they are being shafted by the government & that in the end we won’t actually leave.

If the above seems vague then it is. It’s not really a conclusion. Just an overall impression.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Best retreat, Helen Back ... you'll only ever get abuse here on Lexit75
> 
> Us 'Remoaners' will only *ever* be accused of 'elitist' 'liberal' 'condescension' if 'we' even _dream_ of suggesting that the Leave 52pc/Remain 48pc result might principally have been driven by differential turnout**
> 
> **Plus by a whole lot of completely justifiable anti-Tory/anti-Toryism anger, and by the thorough incompetence/complacency of the Cameron/Osbourne led Remain campaign ....


Absolute cobblers. People who come out with anti-democrtatic, patronising garbage like Helen Black will get pulled up on it though, rightly. In fact there was little/no abuse of Helen Black at all, some piss taking/dismissal of the crap they posted.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

I don't think it should be considered controversial or condescending to say that we don't have an enormously politically engaged electorate with a fantastically sophisticated popular political culture. Politics is a bit of fringe interest, and to be interested to the point where you're discussing it on the likes of Urban 75...!

It is sad that the very nature of that fucking referendum has encouraged a lot of binary and broad-brush reaction but it's not too surprising.

It certainly does flow both ways. The people who disrupted Sadiq Khan's speech yesterday were described as pro-Brexit, and they brought along a model of a bloody gallows. 'Traitors', 'enemies of the people', 'pick up a rifle', 'ready for war'... and this Isn't from someone on some message board, it's on newspaper front pages and from political parties. Perhaps it'll wind down in time... but even yesterday I heard a pro-Brexit Tory MP say he thought that a second referendum would 'render the country ungovernable'! So maybe not...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

On LBC just now. Talking about whether Labour should be in favour of staying in single market & customs union. Caller saying he voted leave & “would crawl over broken glass to leave again” he said yes we should leave single market/customs union & let the government get the best deal possible. He couldn’t explain it any further than that. I doubt he cares about anything except leaving the EU. I think many leave voters just want their choice respected. That comes before anything else. They voted leave to stop paying into the EU & to stop immigration. Anything less than that & they will feel cheated.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

I should say that I don't believe that I'm some sophisticated political genius... no no no nooooooo! I do think it'd be good if we did have a more engaged electorate and a more sophisticated popular political culture though and I wonder how you go about getting that. I think we'd have more left-wing politics if we did.


----------



## J Ed (Jan 14, 2018)

If only voters had the sort of nous required to dismiss 52% of the country as either 'old people or white nationalists'.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't think it should be considered controversial or condescending to say that we don't have an enormously politically engaged electorate with a fantastically sophisticated popular political culture. Politics is a bit of fringe interest, and to be interested to the point where you're discussing it on the likes of Urban 75...!


Helen Black talked about 'Old people and white nationalists', 'old people who have less of a future, some of whom remember WW2.' not about 'political engagement'.

But while it's less crude than the rubbish Helen Black came out with, your post actually has much of the same liberal condescension. What is 'political engagement' or a 'sophisticated popular political culture'? How are these measured? 

It seems to mean little more than voting in elections and being a liberal. And again the unpolitical masses appear, they don't do what you want to restrict politics to so they aren't political.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

Perhaps see this in terms of those with opposing views at daggers drawn with each other with no common ground whatsoever? Remainers & leavers are equally dissmissive of each other’s views & many remainers & leavers are passionate about the views they hold. Leavers are at worst ignorant racists & remainers at worst are hand wringing liberal snobs who cannot accept they lost.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

The creation of 'leavers' and 'remainers' as political groups speaks volumes. The political reasoning for voting Remain or Leave, or to abstain, is washed away and we're just left with these two supposed groups. 

I'm not a leaver I'm a communist. And I might be dismissive of 'remainers' but I'm not dismissive of comrades who voted remain.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> a pro-Brexit Tory MP say he thought that a second referendum would 'render the country ungovernable'!


Where do I sign up for that? 


J Ed said:


> If only voters had the sort of nous required to dismiss 52% of the country as either 'old people or white nationalists'.


Maybe they only have sufficient nous to dismiss 27% of the country?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

There is a whole internet full of intellectual views & reasoning for both leave & remain but it takes plenty of time to read, learn, inwardly digest & draw conclusions from all of this. Most probably do not have the time to do this so it just comes down to continuous leave/remain soundbites.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

you probably need to stop assuming your getting a representative sample from radio phone in callers m8


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What is 'political engagement' or a 'sophisticated popular political culture'? How are these measured?


regular watching of newsnight probably


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> There is a whole internet full of intellectual views & reasoning for both leave & remain but it takes plenty of time to read, learn, inwardly digest & draw conclusions from all of this. Most probably do not have the time to do this so it just comes down to continuous leave/remain soundbites.



I'd agree with that. I'd also say that someone committed enough to phone up a talk show to defend his views is probably an outlier too. 

If committed remainders want a second referendum they should certainly lay off the simplistic caricatures and focus on people who weren't' that committed and who might have voted on the basis of the £350 million promise or the idea of  prosperity via global trade. Also on the around 30% of people who didn't vote. 

One of the biggest positives for them, I think, is the Brexiters who are coming out now with, 'well, we always said it was going to be hard...' because I don't think that that's how people will remember the Leave campaign. 

FWIW I think Garage is just stirring it for personal and purely political means and I don't think there is a massive public outcry for a second vote. That said people on Twitter keep referencing very high numbers of Labour voters in favour of soft Brexit (stay in SM) and in favour of a vote on the deal, but I haven't actually seen the poll they reference.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> you probably need to stop assuming your getting a representative sample from radio phone in callers m8


I’m getting a representive sample of those who phone into talk radio. So people with strong enough views to actually want to air them. To comment on people’s views you have to hear them. Apart from the people you might talk about it with, friends neighbours & others you meet in the course of your life you only have the internet & media sources. If none of those are representitive samples then what is?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

Can we have some examples of what is a 'sophisticated popular political culture', and how people might increase their 'political sophistication', which web pages should they read?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

try the daily mail comment section as well maybe, that'll also give you a high opinion of people


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Absolute cobblers. People who come out with anti-democrtatic, patronising garbage like Helen Black will get pulled up on it though, rightly. In fact there was little/no abuse of Helen Black at all, some piss taking/dismissal of the crap they posted.



I won't delete my response last night to Helen's post, but I've had a rethink and I agree with far less of her post than I initially thought I did. There's a couple of lines in it that were (IMO) just factual common sense, but I do think she's wrong to attribute the majority of Leave voting to anti-foreigner motives. As I see it, wish to generally to kick the arse of those in charge was just one of the much more important drivers for most (oversimplifying for brevity there, but you get my point I'm sure).


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

J Ed said:


> If only voters had the sort of nous required to dismiss 52% of the country as either 'old people or white nationalists'.



You sum in one line why I don't agree with Helen Back's post any more. 

I was an idiot for missing or overlooking (  ) that particular line you quote from her post 
Yesterday's beer and cider contributed to my idiocy there  (explanation not excuse)


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

A poll by Comres (I can't do links on this machine! Sorry!) In the last week of the campaign found that immigration was the most important issue for the majority of Leave supporters. Doesn't make all those people racists of course, but I saw a huge amount of anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook during the campaign. Yet more fun problems of fitting a mash of hugely complex issues into a one-question vote!

Don't mix beer and cider! Yoiks


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> A poll by Comres (I can't do links on this machine! Sorry!) In the last week of the campaign found that immigration was the most important issue for the majority of Leave supporters. Doesn't make all those people racists of course, but I saw a huge amount of anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook during the campaign. Yet more fun problems of fitting a mash of hugely complex issues into a one-question vote!
> 
> Don't mix beer and cider! Yoiks


Nothing wrong with snakebite


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What is 'political engagement' or a 'sophisticated popular political culture'? How are these measured?
> 
> It seems to mean little more than voting in elections and being a liberal. And again the unpolitical masses appear, they don't do what you want to restrict politics to so they aren't political.



Not voting in general elections, not voting in council elections, not running for the local council or assisting someone who is (a very select little group, that one), not joining or positively contributing action to a union at work, not being involved in any kind of collective action in the workplace apart from going to work, not organising or joining protests, demonstrations, not writing letters to councillors and/or MPs, not organising or joining local actions to support some group in need or just to pick up litter, not actively boycotting X or Y...

_I've got no time. It's boring. It's not my thing_. _People are already doing that._

It's not just _not voting_ that makes people politically disengaged.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> A poll by Comres (I can't do links on this machine! Sorry!) In the last week of the campaign found that immigration was the most important issue for the majority of Leave supporters. Doesn't make all those people racists of course, but I saw a huge amount of anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook during the campaign. Yet more fun problems of fitting a mash of hugely complex issues into a one-question vote!
> 
> Don't mix beer and cider! Yoiks


Whatever the mix of motives was for leave voters (anti-immigration Vs more positive anti-politician revenge, responding to neo-liberal abandonment etc.), whatever the % of the electorate who voted, whatever went on on facebook, a majority voted for it.  In the sense of the rules of the game, the common understanding of those who set up the referendum and those who voted in it, 52% was enough to sway it.  FWIW, I have a feeling neo-liberalism outside of the EU will be marginally worse than inside of it, mainly because of the process of disengagement and the trading position the UK will encounter in the future. I was a natural leave voter, but couldn't vote leave in the sense of voting for anything headed by Johnson, farage et al - along with, more importantly, the absence of any kind of lexit option. But then whilst I have a feeling things will get worse after we leave, it really is end of story. There will be plenty of parliamentary and inter-elite wrangling over access/semi-access to the single market, plenty of that. But ultimately, any kind of narrative around the idea the voters were racist and/or hoodwinked is pointless.

Equally FWIW, in terms of any kind of democratic theory/constitutional position, the idea of a 2nd referendum would have been entirely proper. However Cameron was too thick/arrogant to contemplate a defeat so, again, there's no validity for doing it as a retro-fit.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Nothing wrong with snakebite


People who drink snakebite are unpeople. 

There! I said it! You were all thinking it but I had the courage to say it!


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

Whether “things will get worse” after brexit is probably more down to which UK government is elected at next GE rather than brexit itself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> People who drink snakebite are unpeople.
> 
> There! I said it! You were all thinking it but I had the Courage to say it!


Have  a double diamond


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Whether “things will get worse” after brexit is probably more down to which UK government is elected at next GE rather than brexit itself.


Because...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

Pubs used to refuse to serve cider/bitter mix in same pint pot due to issues of extreme drunkeness among heavy users of this cocktail.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Of people I know that voted leave. Broadly their reasons were to stop us being ruled by The EU. To stop immigration for which they blame the crisis in the NHS & the housing crisis. None of them even considered trade & still don’t. You can call it an ideology. They voted leave & they want to leave. Listen to LBC & local radio phone ins. The leavers mostly have this anger in them. When questioned about trade they don’t really seem to care. They gloss over the nuts & bolts of actually leaving. Their worry now seems to be that they are being shafted by the government & that in the end we won’t actually leave.
> 
> If the above seems vague then it is. It’s not really a conclusion. Just an overall impression.



Stop listening to James Liberal as fuck o'brien and his hand picked goons that phone in. He won't have anyone on that has a decent arguement, just irate Dave from Essex! I don't believe half the stuff you write on here, it's just regurgitated soundbites from shitty liberal phone ins with a few anecdotes thrown in.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

I reckon that whoever is in charge there will be quite a big economic shock from Brexit. If it's a No Deal one then even bigger. 

If it's a Tory gov it's easy to see them going full disaster-capitalist on remaining public services. If it's Corbynite Labour it's easy to see them struggling to get their programme up and working, presumably against massive press and business opposition. 

I find No Deal scenarios quite scary.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> On LBC just now. Talking about whether Labour should be in favour of staying in single market & customs union. Caller saying he voted leave & “would crawl over broken glass to leave again” he said yes we should leave single market/customs union & let the government get the best deal possible. He couldn’t explain it any further than that. I doubt he cares about anything except leaving the EU. I think many leave voters just want their choice respected. That comes before anything else. They voted leave to stop paying into the EU & to stop immigration. Anything less than that & they will feel cheated.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Nothing wrong with snakebite




I promise you that we weren't drinking that  Just harmless local ale** and harmless local scrumpy** whose maker we know personally ... and we drank the two seperately from each other!! 

**Well, harmless except for the quantity anyway


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Have  a double diamond




You're on a wind up now!


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Just harmless local ale


It harmed you lastnight mate


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

I know, I've edited the post above to say so


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 14, 2018)

Anyway, I've real, proper, better thought-out stuff to say about Brexit, but I'd prefer to leave posting it until after today.

festivaldeb will be back in a minute and we're going out ...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

Snakebite pernod and black was the sophisticated drink when I was a young drinking man.


----------



## Winot (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Whether “things will get worse” after brexit is probably more down to which UK government is elected at next GE rather than brexit itself.



That might well be true, but it cuts both ways. National governments get voted out, but Brexit is for life. Accordingly it’s illogical to vote for Brexit if the advantages are dependent on having a Labour government.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

Winot said:


> but Brexit is for life.


Who says that ?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> Stop listening to James Liberal as fuck o'brien and his hand picked goons that phone in. He won't have anyone on that has a decent arguement, just irate Dave from Essex! I don't believe half the stuff you write on here, it's just regurgitated soundbites from shitty liberal phone ins with a few anecdotes thrown in.


If you listen to phone ins you get people’s opinions. Same as if you read the internet or any form of media outlet both UK & foreign. Where does one get unbiased opinion? You tell me. I read/listen to anything I find from any source. Some of it I post it on here on the relevant thread to see what posters on here think about it. Thankyou for your opinion.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> If you listen to phone ins you get people’s opinions. Same as if you read the internet or any form of media outlet both UK & foreign. Where does one get unbiased opinion? You tell me. I read/listen to anything I find from any source. Some of it I post it on here on the relevant thread to see what posters on here think about it. Thankyou for your opinion.


You don't get to hear peoples opinions on Lbc unless they are from a sneering middle class liberal. O'brien in particular ties people in knots and then patronizes and belittles them. Wheres the debate there ? There is plenty of stuff out there but you choose and quote from what you hear on lbc and the 'fackin' Essex bods you apparantly talk to. Hardly a broad church is it.


----------



## bemused (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> You don't get to hear peoples opinions on Lbc unless they are from a sneering middle class liberal. O'brien in particular ties people in knots and then patronizes and belittles them. Wheres the debate there ? There is plenty of stuff out there but you choose and quote from what you hear on lbc and the 'fackin' Essex bods you apparantly talk to. Hardly a broad church is it.



I stopped listening to LBC because of O'Brien.


----------



## bemused (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> Who says that ?



No one.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I stopped listening to LBC because of O'Brien.


Same here! He is a boring, predictable,wet sap. No debate just snobbery and regular apologies from him for being privileged.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

last time I tuned into a talk radio they had some formerly disgraced drug cheat olypian on discussing his new book, some dude rings in and gives it both barrels finishing with 'I'M GONNA BUY YOU BOOK AND BURN IT!'
'Yeah mate, its all money to me'

that was quite enough of that and I moved the dial away from the talk and back to the songs


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I stopped listening to LBC because of O'Brien.



Nah he's alright. Self confessed liberal and makes a fucking change from Farage and tory boy tosspots.


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2018)

But yeah, politics phone in shows are not broadly representative. You get wingnuts, Mr angry or boring single issue types too much for that.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

xenon said:


> Self confessed liberal


But is he ? Self appointed maybe and well paid for it. There is no balance in his debates just handringing. Boring as ,,,,,


----------



## Winot (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> Who says that ?



You’re right, we could go back in. Doesn’t seem likely though as we’d probably lose all the concessions that we’d negotiated over the years. 

In any event in terms of timescales we change governments far more often and more easily. What I’m really saying is that it’s a bad idea to base your decision to Brexit on the basis that a more left wing government might get in.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 14, 2018)

the lexit position always assumed the 'opening up of space' thing to be an off hand, secondary who-knows speculate thing. It was the point picked up on and relentlessly mocked though, wasn't it. And fuck me if the labour left didn't rise from the ashes while europes former social democratic parties crumble unto dust and macron. Funny old world. One thing we can all agree on, that was a bad call by T. May.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

When i lived in London i was surrounded by these liberal types. They were oh so liberal but wouldn't let there kids knock about with "those black kids" or the ones from the " estates" My son went to school with there kids and was regularly shocked by there veiled racism and ignorance. He punched one of them for it   and the parents threatened us with the old bill, I told the father that his son explained to my son, that he wasn't allowed by you to mix with blacks and chavs, he slammed the door on me


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> But is he ? Self appointed maybe and well paid for it. There is no balance in his debates just handringing. Boring as ,,,,,



He talks about stuff no one else seems to on radio. And doesn't let people off the hook. I can see how he might wind some up. He does sometimes over do it with seeming faux naivety, cossitted lifestyle and bit too much middle class self fladgulating thing... But fuck it, I like him. And As for taking people apart, good. If someone phones up with a load of half baked crap, why not call them out on it.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> When i lived in London i was surrounded by these liberal types. They were oh so liberal but wouldn't let there kids knock about with "those black kids" or the ones from the " estates" My son went to school with there kids and was regularly shocked by there veiled racism and ignorance. He punched one of them for it   and the parents threatened us with the old bill, I told the father that his son explained to my son, that he wasn't allowed by you to mix with blacks and chavs, he slammed the door on me


So someone you decided to categorise as a "liberal type" failed outright to fit in that category


----------



## alex_ (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> When i lived in London i was surrounded by these liberal types. They were oh so liberal but wouldn't let there kids knock about with "those black kids" or the ones from the " estates" My son went to school with there kids and was regularly shocked by there veiled racism and ignorance. He punched one of them for it   and the parents threatened us with the old bill, I told the father that his son explained to my son, that he wasn't allowed by you to mix with blacks and chavs, he slammed the door on me



They aren’t “liberal types” they are “cunts”

Alex


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Snakebite pernod and black was the sophisticated drink when I was a young drinking man.



ah - the purple nasty.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So someone you decided to categorise as a "liberal type"


No they sing the virtues of how liberal thay all are. I know them you don't. They are racist and don't even know it.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

xenon said:


> He talks about stuff no one else seems to on radio. And doesn't let people off the hook.


It's all contrived shit with no substance. He doesn't want debate just handwringing and ' i told you so' callers/ debate. I've never heard a phone in by him on the benefits of brexit, just why did you vote leave type of stuff. It's very circular and repetetive but serves his ego/image well.


xenon said:


> He does sometimes over do it with seeming faux naivety, cossitted lifestyle and bit too much middle class self fladgulating thing..


Just a little!


xenon said:


> And As for taking people apart, good. If someone phones up with a load of half baked crap, why not call them out on it.


I've heard some good reasons put forward by callers and he just turns on them. Implying thet are racist and ill informed. That's his mo and it won't change.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

UKIP leader is reportedly on the way out over racistgirlfriendgate and other stuff. Farage being floated as possible returning Messiah.


----------



## marty21 (Jan 14, 2018)

They will fight us on the beaches and that


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2018)

marty21 said:


> They will fight us each other on the beaches and that


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> When i lived in London i was surrounded by these liberal types. They were oh so liberal but wouldn't let there kids knock about with "those black kids" or the ones from the " estates" My son went to school with there kids and was regularly shocked by there veiled racism and ignorance. He punched one of them for it   and the parents threatened us with the old bill, I told the father that his son explained to my son, that he wasn't allowed by you to mix with blacks and chavs, he slammed the door on me


They sound more like Blairite centrists than genuine left wing liberals tbh.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> They sound more like Blairite centrists than genuine left wing liberals tbh.


They are remainers to a man and liberals. I never mentioned the left.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> They are remainers to a man and liberals. I never mentioned the left.



Guardianistas, faux liberals really, the very worst of the middle class.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Guardianistas, faux liberals really, the very worst of the middle class.



Yes, the guardian that famously racist newspaper.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Yes, the guardian that famously racist newspaper.



A newspaper is an inanimate object.

Many Guardianistas do however seem exceedingly uncomfortable in the company of anyone who is ‘other’.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

As a cheerleader and subscriber to liberalism the Guardian is certainly sexist and racist. When it was cheering on the Tory/LD austerity cuts for example it showed it's racism/sexist - the effects of those cuts fall on disproportionally on women and ethnic minorities.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A newspaper is an inanimate object.


it is also a business


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> No they sing the virtues of how liberal thay all are. I know them you don't.


Who is it that you know, exactly? All people in London that claim they are "liberals"? And they're all racists? And remainers? Therefore remainers are racists who pretend to be liberal, or something?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 14, 2018)

Fascist centrist dads making people vote for brexit.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Who is it that you know, exactly? All people in London that claim they are "liberals"? And they're all racists? And remainers?


Typical you  Do you want names and postcodes or something ?


----------



## bimble (Jan 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Who is it that you know, exactly? All people in London that claim they are "liberals"? And they're all racists? And remainers? Therefore remainers are racists who pretend to be liberal, or something?


Describes where you and me live perfectly, 79% faux-liberal racists.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

bimble said:


> Describes where you and me live perfectly, 79% faux-liberal racists.


What point are making here ?


----------



## bimble (Jan 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> What point are making here ?


What point were you making? Just that you met some arseholes whilst you lived in that London, I think.


----------



## sealion (Jan 14, 2018)

bimble said:


> What point were you making? Just that you met some arseholes whilst you lived in that London, I think.


You are being selective as well. I never said i met some arseholes when i lived in London.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> As a cheerleader and subscriber to liberalism the Guardian is certainly sexist and racist. When it was cheering on the Tory/LD austerity cuts for example it showed it's racism/sexist - the effects of those cuts fall on disproportionally on women and ethnic minorities.



Yes, well to the right of the daily mail, sun and express.

Alex


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 14, 2018)

Pathetic. No one has made such a claim, but keep on avoiding the point.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Pathetic. No one has made such a claim, but keep on avoiding the point.



Who are you replying too ?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 14, 2018)

After his pwning by Frank Lampard it's hard to image how o'brien ever managed to cling on to his broadcasting career


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

I'd never heard of him until last year. Now I have to google Frank Lampard and him. What strange days these are...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 14, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> After his pwning by Frank Lampard it's hard to image how o'brien ever managed to cling on to his broadcasting career



His whole career is marked by being wrong. Which is why Brexit seems like the right thing.

And for someone who was pushed through one of the poshest schools on the planet, he’s pretty fucking ignorant of even very simple aspects of the world around us, too wrapped up in his own bubble to take in what is happening under his nose.

I no longer listen to LBC due to his continued bleating about Brexit, before which he was bleating that Corbyn fans believe in fairies at the bottom of the garden. How did that condescending shite go for him? Oh, about the same as his support for the Iraq war I guess.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 14, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I'd never heard of him until last year. Now I have to google Frank Lampard and him. What strange days these are...


Chelsea were going into a massive champions league semi final vs Barcelona at the time, so Lampard calling into a chat show and succinctly defending himself against the commentariat and winning was fairly unprecedented.
Probably not up there with Rooney fucking the granny saga for lols, but it was all over the news at the time.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> His whole career is marked by being wrong. Which is why Brexit seems like the right thing.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 14, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Chelsea were going into a massive champions league semi final vs Barcelona at the time, so Lampard calling into a chat show and succinctly defending himself against the commentariat and winning was fairly unprecedented.
> Probably not up there with Rooney fucking the granny saga for lols, but it was all over the news at the time.



Well well well, that's an interesting story and fair play to Frank Lampard for defending himself like that. I read a transcript but haven't heard it. 

I looked up Wikipedia on it and I guess you're not going to be too chuffed to learn that young James actually won a broadcasting award for that specific exchange!

It's a funny business this opinion journalism.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 15, 2018)

Latest country for us to be in relation to EU is Turkey! Bad luck Norway, Switzerland, Canada, Singapore Eric. 

The Sky journalist, Faisal Islam spotted something in a taxation bill that would allow HMG to form a customs union much more easily than they can now. 

I understand that Turkey is in a customs union with the EU without being in the actual customs union of the EU. And after that it all gets rather technical for me... Reportedly Ken Clarke thought it meant retaining the free trade agreements we currently have via the EU.

No mention of us being used as a scary monster to get other countries out though. 'GET OUT! 65 MILLION BRITS ARE COMING...'

It won't be enough for some on each side no doubt...


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 15, 2018)

I see Boris Johnson is now joining in this growing narrative of “brexit may not happen because the nasty neoliberal elite are going all out to stop it” sort of thing. Well known arch remainers, Blair, Heseltine etc have always suggested brexit might not happen but now Farage & Johnson are jumping on the bandwagon. I don’t think leavers are going to be taking to the streets & burning things if leave does get watered down to remain in all but name so what is going on here? Is everybody starting to wish brexit would just go away?.. adjusts deckchair & opens another bag of popcorn...


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 15, 2018)

I don't know if calling off Brexit is going to be on the table but at this point, the government probably sees a "soft versus hard" Brexit referendum as a more appealing prospect than, say, an election where different parties could offer different versions of Brexit to voters.

The different sides might be gearing up for it already, I saw this shared on Facebook a few days ago:


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 15, 2018)

Do you know who UNITY are, Yossarian?


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 15, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Do you know who UNITY are, Yossarian?



Never heard of them before, apparently they're a pro-hard Brexit group that started up in Scotland last month with social media campaigns etc. Big fans of Winston Churchill, and not of Tony Blair, Nicola Sturgeon, Theresa May, the "toff-elite," and so on. Looking a little closer, it's not entirely clear whether the group consists of more than one person.

"On Friday the 24th of November, Unity attempted to confront the EU elites directly at the EU commission office in Edinburgh.  Sadly, they refused to answer the door to our calls.  Their hide-away attitude reflects their unwillingness to confront ordinary working people."

Unity


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2018)

Ah yes Winston Churchill, well known scourge of the toff elite.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> Ah yes Winston Churchill, well known scourge of the toff elite.


wot Lord Halifax? and forcing Edward VIII to abdicate is pretty good credentials


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 15, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I see Boris Johnson is now joining in this growing narrative of “brexit may not happen because the nasty neoliberal elite are going all out to stop it” sort of thing. Well known arch remainers, Blair, Heseltine etc have always suggested brexit might not happen but now Farage & Johnson are jumping on the bandwagon. I don’t think leavers are going to be taking to the streets & burning things if leave does get watered down to remain in all but name so what is going on here? Is everybody starting to wish brexit would just go away?.. adjusts deckchair & opens another bag of popcorn...



"Friends of..."

Boris Johnson would 'rather stay in' the EU than accept a soft Brexit

Not that it really matters what Johnson tells the Sun political editor through "friends" what he wants us to believe he thinks, he's only interested in his own personal gain: a record of years of staunch EU support (including supporting Turkey joining!) who campaigned for Leave, now he's in a position where he might have to take responsibility for something he's cacking himself. You know the sneering argument thrown at communists when they insist that the Soviet Union wasn't actually a Marxist state? Prepare for years of "it wasn't the right sort of Brexit" from the winners of this!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

May faces tougher transition stance from EU amid Norway pressure

Quite a detailed run down of various issues in the talks here.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I understand that Turkey is in a customs union with the EU without being in the actual customs union of the EU. And after that it all gets rather technical for me... Reportedly Ken Clarke thought it meant retaining the free trade agreements we currently have via the EU.



Quite a lot of countries that aren't member states within the EU operate within structures that require them to adhere to EU rules and regs. This is particularly true since further enlargement became politically unpopular, so now the EU uses its 'Neighbourhood' ( European Neighbourhood Policy - Wikipedia ) policies to get countries in Eastern Europe and elsewhere to conform to their neoliberal trade regulations. 

So yeah, there is no need for ripping up contracts etc as you seem to think, and what will happen is some sort of Norway type status.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

'Ripping up contracts' is David Davis and in the event of a No Deal Brexit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> You seem to think that the government are competent, honest, and primarilly interested in the public good, Pickman.



He's a sweet lad, but hopelessly naive.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Quite apart from any notions of "fairness" or "reasonableness" the simple weight of numbers favours the 27. These negotiations are confrontational and they are by far the biggest guy in the room. What did anyone expect?



Davis, Fox and Johnson appear to all have expected to be fellated. Davis and Johnson by "Euro-lovelies", and Fox by Adam Werrity.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I tried Yorkshire tea once, but despite the name it's neither bitter nor cheap.



Thank you for a much-needed laugh.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't think it should be considered controversial or condescending to say that we don't have an enormously politically engaged electorate with a fantastically sophisticated popular political culture. Politics is a bit of fringe interest, and to be interested to the point where you're discussing it on the likes of Urban 75...!
> 
> It is sad that the very nature of that fucking referendum has encouraged a lot of binary and broad-brush reaction but it's not too surprising.
> 
> It certainly does flow both ways. The people who disrupted Sadiq Khan's speech yesterday were described as pro-Brexit, and they brought along a model of a bloody gallows. 'Traitors', 'enemies of the people', 'pick up a rifle', 'ready for war'... and this Isn't from someone on some message board, it's on newspaper front pages and from political parties. Perhaps it'll wind down in time... but even yesterday I heard a pro-Brexit Tory MP say he thought that a second referendum would 'render the country ungovernable'! So maybe not...



Shades of "the stab in the back" that the German right fulminated about after the Versailles treaty was signed in 1919. Just waiting for _Freikorps__ Free Corps Hannan _to be formed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> A poll by Comres (I can't do links on this machine! Sorry!) In the last week of the campaign found that immigration was the most important issue for the majority of Leave supporters. Doesn't make all those people racists of course, but I saw a huge amount of anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook during the campaign. Yet more fun problems of fitting a mash of hugely complex issues into a one-question vote!
> 
> Don't mix beer and cider! Yoiks



Load of bollocks.

Stout and cider mixed, is a fine drink...for the first four pints.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 16, 2018)

its the grape and the grain that should never be mixed. Never.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A newspaper is an inanimate object.
> 
> Many Guardianistas do however seem exceedingly uncomfortable in the company of anyone who is ‘other’.



Not true.

They're exceedingly uncomfortable in the company of anyone who is in an "othered" group that Guardian readers haven't been told to approve of, by the Guardian.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its the grape and the grain that should never be mixed. Never.


 Quite. I once drank a glass of red wine after 10 pints of cider. Puked my arse up out of my throat, I did!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Quite. I once drank a glass of red wine after 10 pints of cider. Puked my arse up out of my throat, I did!



Your cider’s made with grain? No wonder you was ill.


fwiw Beer then wine and you’ll feel fine, wine then beer and you’ll feel queer


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Your cider’s made with grain? No wonder you was ill.
> 
> 
> fwiw Beer then wine and you’ll feel fine, wine then beer and you’ll fell queer




Someone once told me that there's a German version of that saying that advises the exact opposite Safe Drinking Order - perhaps this is what Brexit is really about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Someone once told me that there's a German version of that saying that advises the exact opposite Safe Drinking Order - perhaps this is what Brexit is really about.



Tis why yer German is so stroppy, savage hangovers


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

I saw a programme on TV once (I think it might have been Jonathan Meades (sp?)) that argued there was a sort of cultural divide in Europe that was along a border between daily wine and daily beer drinkers - it's about the middle of Belgium, iirc. No mention of the cider-crazed yobbos of the British Isles.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

Back on Brexit and whether or not it will happen, there's a conspiracy theory going around on Twitter that Nige's change of tune on wanting a second vote is related to today's subpoena of Steve Bannon. 

It's been reported today but apparently it happened last week, when Nige did his 180. Bannon ran pro-Brexit Breitbart, and Cambridge Analytica, who were Leave's digital secret weapon (with some funny stuff going on around payments too). Bannon has also recently visited the UK and met with Jacob Rees Mogg.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Someone once told me that there's a German version of that saying that advises the exact opposite Safe Drinking Order - perhaps this is what Brexit is really about.


Not true. The german version is the same.
Wein auf Beer, rate ich dir - Beer auf Wein, lass das sein.


----------



## sealion (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> there's a conspiracy theory going around on Twitter


As rare as rocking horse shit


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Not true. The german version is the same.
> Wein auf Beer, rate ich dir - Beer auf Wein, lass das sein.



Ah! Apologies. Google has given me a Dutch bloke saying they say it the opposite way round, and a few people quoting the UK version the opposite way to what I - and apparently everyone here - thought was the "correct" way! Also mention of Spanish and French versions that don't all agree on the Safe Drinking Order.  



sealion said:


> As rare as rocking horse shit



Indeed. This is one of the less outlandish ones though. I did make the mistake of reading - and sharing here I'm sorry to say - some Louise Mensch stuff a while back, but I've learned from that mistake (she is playing some strange game I reckon!). It would be as funny as fuck If Farage got dragged into TrumpRussiaGate though. He was named as a "person of interest" by the FBI iirc, whatever that means in practical terms - he's certainly close with Bannon if he was willing to go all the way to Alabama to campaign for a deranged Christian fundamentalist (alleged) serial sexual abuser who would give even UKIP palpitations over here.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 16, 2018)

Reverse vampires, in association with the bannonites who are guided by Wendi Deng Murdoch who is manipulating Kushner on behalf of the Chinese State....open your eyes people


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Reverse vampires, in association with the bannonites who are guided by Wendi Deng Murdoch who is manipulating Kushner on behalf of the Chinese State....open your eyes people



I thought Wendi was going to be the Prince Harry shock engagement announcement. She's certainly very well connected.


----------



## sealion (Jan 16, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Ah! Apologies. Google has given me a Dutch bloke saying they say it the opposite way round, and a few people quoting the UK version the opposite way to what I - and apparently everyone here - thought was the "correct" way! Also mention of Spanish and French versions that don't all agree on the Safe Drinking Order.
> 
> 
> 
> Indeed. This is one of the less outlandish ones though. I did make the mistake of reading - and sharing here I'm sorry to say - some Louise Mensch stuff a while back, but I've learned from that mistake (she is playing some strange game I reckon!). It would be as funny as fuck If Farage got dragged into TrumpRussiaGate though. He was named as a "person of interest" by the FBI iirc, whatever that means in practical terms - he's certainly close with Bannon if he was willing to go all the way to Alabama to campaign for a deranged Christian fundamentalist (alleged) serial sexual abuser who would give even UKIP palpitations over here.


I really couldn't give a shit


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 17, 2018)

'We tried to warn him...!'

I once stood next to a young man at a pub bar while he ordered a red wine with coke in a pint glass with a straw! 

Can't tell you if he had a hangover or not but I would bet he probably had a lively night!


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

Wages would rise in the event of a Brexit, Lord Rose admits


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> Wages would rise in the event of a Brexit, Lord Rose admits



article is two years old.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> article is two years old.


He still said it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> He still said it.



but nobody has made much of this argument since - is he basing this on a supposed shortage of migrant labour? cant see the logic TBH. I thought the tory hard brexit wing nuts see the whole thing as an opportunity to strip workers rights and lower wages to make the uk more "competetive".


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 17, 2018)

The Tories will make damned sure that there is a sufficient flow of labour to keep workers wages down post Brexit.  There will be bureaucracy and work permits and people treated like shit, but capitalism will not allow a shortage of labour to push up workers wages.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> is he basing this on a supposed shortage of migrant labour? cant see the logic TBH.


I presume so. Farmers here in Sussex are having to offer more money to get workers in.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> The Tories will make damned sure that there is a sufficient flow of labour to keep workers wages down post Brexit.  There will be bureaucracy and work permits and people treated like shit, but capitalism will not allow a shortage of labour to push up workers wages.


How long before most of this work is automated anyway ? I'm not sure anyone will have a manual job sooner or later.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> The Tories will make damned sure that there is a sufficient flow of labour to keep workers wages down post Brexit.


Who ever is in power will.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> How long before most of this work is automated anyway ? I'm not sure anyone will have a manual job sooner or later.



It is not just manual work that is under threat.  I am seeing people who are trying to reduce white collar jobs to apps run by AI as well. And office jobs have been automated and cut by computerisation for years.  

Capitalism is driving to reduce the reward to labour constantly - witness the cuts in till staff and their replacement with self service in supermarkets, witness the drive towards self driving cars to put cabbies out of work.

Of course, capitalism also needs consumers, and if we are all out of work, we can't buy anything....

Capitalism will eat itself, but a lot of people will get truely fucked over in the process.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> It is not just manual work that is under threat.


I know. I jokingly suggested to my son, that he trains to be a barber and fucks off uni and saves us all some money. Frightening if you sat down and listed all the trades/ careers that probably won't exist sooner or later.


mx wcfc said:


> Of course, capitalism also needs consumers, and if we are all out of work, we can't buy anything...


It's an interesting one!


mx wcfc said:


> Capitalism will eat itself,


I keep hearing this. When ? Got any good news on this one ?


----------



## paolo (Jan 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> How long before most of this work is automated anyway ? I'm not sure anyone will have a manual job sooner or later.



Picking work on farms is difficult to automate cost effectively. Decent pickers can earn £15+ an hour, and they’re still more cost effective than machines.


----------



## sealion (Jan 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> Picking work on farms is difficult to automate cost effectively. Decent pickers can earn £15+ an hour, and they’re still more cost effective than machines.


Thats good to hear.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> I keep hearing this. When ? Got any good news on this one ?



Well, I think that was Marx's view, but if I hear anything I'll let you know, comrade!


----------



## paolo (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> Thats good to hear.



The problematic thing, in a Brexit context, is that in East Anglia at least, there is high employment. Native brits do not want this kind of £15 an hour work. They have other choices.

If - and it *is* and if - the tipping point for automation is lower than the tipping point for local labour take up (by way of increased pay), then the jobs simply disappear, rather than being taken up UK citizens.

I have no idea how it will play out.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> Picking work on farms is difficult to automate cost effectively. Decent pickers can earn £15+ an hour, and they’re still more cost effective than machines.



They are working on it though: 

What this apple-picking robot means for the future of farm workers

Fruit picking has been a migrant thing from well before the EU hadn't it? Just internal migrants.  Those famous East Enders having a holiday in the hop fields. Where I'm from a lot of the fruit harvest was picked by Travellers when I was a kid. 

I wonder if - in the same way that rich, powerful professions allow themselves to organise and put up all manner of barriers to entry while stripping those rights from the less well off - there will be some moves made against robots and AI now they're moving up the food chain. I think lawyers and journalists are under threat now. Or will that only happen when Robocop 5 decides President Ivanka serves no purpose to it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

I remember reading somewhere that a lot of the more low skill low pay jobs are safe from automation - a lot of crop picking would be difficult to automate also care work, catering, labouring - its actually a bit further up the chain where it makes more impact. 
As with all technology it has the capacity to improve lives - (lets face it - things like delivery and taxi driving are not fun and rewarding jobs, nor is bank teller or supermarket shop assistant)  but not if deployed mainly for profit.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2018)

People seem to be talking about automation at the moment as if it's some kind of new trend, rather than what's been going on since the industrial revolution.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> People seem to be talking about automation at the moment as if it's some kind of new trend, rather than what's been going on since the industrial revolution.



...although not at a uniform rate of acceleration.


----------



## paolo (Jan 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> People seem to be talking about automation at the moment as if it's some kind of new trend, rather than what's been going on since the industrial revolution.



Sure. It’s in the context of Brexit though. What areas of employment might be reduced if labour costs rise as a result of Brexit? Which ones will the number of jobs be unaffected?


----------



## bimble (Jan 18, 2018)

Let us pause to commemorate it's one year today since this was front page of the Mail.


----------



## Smangus (Jan 18, 2018)

Gag.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

bimble said:


> Let us pause to commemorate it's one year today since this was front page of the Mail.
> View attachment 125583


Yeh steel but rusty not stainless


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

bimble said:


> Let us pause to commemorate it's one year today since this was front page of the Mail.
> View attachment 125583


She should have jumped


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I remember reading somewhere that a lot of the more low skill low pay jobs are safe from automation - a lot of crop picking would be difficult to automate also care work, catering, labouring - its actually a bit further up the chain where it makes more impact.
> As with all technology it has the capacity to improve lives - (lets face it - things like delivery and taxi driving are not fun and rewarding jobs, nor is bank teller or supermarket shop assistant)  but not if deployed mainly for profit.



It will be deployed mainly for profit. 

Though I have seen universal basic income being raised more and more as a possible response.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 18, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Though I have seen universal basic income being raised more and more as a possible response.


UBI will be the final nail in the coffin of the welfare state. Everyone gets their "free" money and they're "free" to spend it on whatever "public services" they need.

The options are luxury automated communism or cyberpunk dystopia.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 18, 2018)

Crispy said:


> UBI will be the final nail in the coffin of the welfare state. Everyone gets their "free" money and they're "free" to spend it on whatever "public services" they need.
> 
> It's luxury automated communism or cyberpunk dystopia.



Then it becomes clear that having a filling done will cost ~1month's UBI payment and that if you want a decent doctor or urgent surgery you'll have to get a job to be able to afford it...

I wonder what accommodation options will available for people on UBI too, and how much the average monthly rent will be as a proportion of UBI etc

Sorry, wrong thread, but whenever the idea of Universal Basic Income is mentioned it scares the bejeesus out of me.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

bimble said:


> Let us pause to commemorate it's one year today since this was front page of the Mail.





bimble said:


> Let us pause to commemorate it's one year today since this was front page of the Mail.
> View attachment 125583


Looking back at the guardians headlines is good for a laugh too! I havn't seen an aeroplane since we voted


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Our homes will be worthless and war is likely. What have these wacists done to our cosy lives


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> Our homes will be worthless and war is likely. What have these wacists done to our cosy lives


the little girl's thinking "daddy's a fucking loon. why have mummy and daddy forced this humiliation on us?"


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> Our homes will be worthless and war is likely. What have these wacists done to our cosy lives



I wish we could see who or what he's shouting at - is it the concept of Brexit itself? Or maybe it's these counter-demonstrators, one of which looks about ready to hit somebody with his Brexit stick.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> one of which looks about ready to hit somebody with his Brexit stick.


It looks nothing of the sort


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the little girl's thinking "daddy's a fucking loon. why have mummy and daddy forced this humiliation on us?"


That's without bringing his attire in to the equation


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

This patronising div takes some beating


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 18, 2018)

Instead of having another referendum or whatever they should have that EU flag guy and this bozo fight it out in a cage match.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I wish we could see who or what he's shouting at - is it the concept of Brexit itself? Or maybe it's these counter-demonstrators, one of which looks about ready to hit somebody with his Brexit stick.
> 
> 
> View attachment 125609


A local demo for local people


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Instead of having another referendum or whatever they should have that EU flag guy and this bozo fight it out in a cage match.
> 
> View attachment 125613


The person with the placard is anything but a young briton


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I wish we could see who or what he's shouting at - is it the concept of Brexit itself? Or maybe it's these counter-demonstrators, one of which looks about ready to hit somebody with his Brexit stick.
> 
> 
> View attachment 125609


I notice that he has run out of 'E' stencils and has had to use a sideways 'M' instead. Or maybe he is just making a stand against typographical regulation; the sort of thing we will soon be free of.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Instead of having another referendum or whatever they should have that EU flag guy and this bozo fight it out in a cage match.


I'll have a few euros on it with you, although purple tie man looks fucking angry, i don't  reckon he's got the bollocks for a row. Seconds out round one ,,,,


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> That's without bringing his attire in to the equation









It's the kind of sartorial disaster that seems popular in places like Madrid.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's the kind of sartorial disaster that seems popular in places like Madrid.


Youv'e nailed it. He's a matador


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 18, 2018)

I think his only hope of surviving the fight will be to wave that EU flag until an enraged UK Suit Man charges and knocks himself out on a tree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I think his only hope of surviving the fight will be to wave that EU flag until an enraged UK Suit Man charges and knocks himself out on a tree.


or statue


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> Looking back at the guardians headlines is good for a laugh too! I havn't seen an aeroplane since we voted


It's almost like it hasn't happened yet!.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

Already voting those pesky human rights out of UK law though!


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's almost like it hasn't happened yet!.


It was supposed to happen the day after the vote according to the remianers in fleet street.


----------



## bimble (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> It was supposed to happen the day after the vote according to the remianers in fleet street.


Happily they were wrong and everything is going Just Fine.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

bimble said:


> Happily they were wrong and everything is going Just Fine.


Thanks for that little miss echo.


----------



## paolo (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> It was supposed to happen the day after the vote according to the remianers in fleet street.



Naaah.

In tone, maybe, but specifically “the day after”. Naaah.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

^^^

What else was there ?

Immediate recession- We have had growth and Marc Carney saying he's quietly optimistic about brexit

Up to 3 million people will lose ther jobs- job seekers numbers fell

Universities will lose it's funding horizon 2020-  Funding remains in place.

Loads of misinformation on both sides, but the leavers were the only ones lied to


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

There’s Still Hope for U.K. Financial Services in Brexit Deal


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> ^^^
> 
> What else was there ?
> 
> ...



Who is it that predicted an immediate recession or 3 million job loses or losing Horizon 2020 funding before we even leave the EU?


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Who is it that predicted an immediate recession or 3 million job loses or losing Horizon 2020 funding before we even leave the EU?


Remainers. There was piles of it, did you not read the guardian and other liberal rags at the time.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> Remainers. There was piles of it, did you not read the guardian and other liberal rags at the time.



Not as much as I heard leave talking heads bullshitting about it.


----------



## sealion (Jan 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Not as much as I heard leave talking heads bullshitting about it.


There you have it ^^ Your lies/ bullshit were worse than our lies and bullshit


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

sealion said:


> There you have it ^^ Your lies/ bullshit were worse than our lies and bullshit



That's certainly how it is, but you're missing the point. Forecasts that don't come true are not necessarily lies or bullshit in the first place.

But believing in a fantasy where all the doom-mongers have been proven wrong and actually Brexit is all going pretty well? I can't believe I'm having to point out that it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> But believing in a fantasy where all the doom-mongers have been proven wrong and actually Brexit is all going pretty well? I can't believe I'm having to point out that it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny.


And even if you are a Brexiteer, look at the inept way the government is handling it and the fact they've had give in to all the EU's preconditions - and the negotiations over the deal haven't even started yet, I wouldn't be crowing.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 18, 2018)

I think the impossibility of brexit is negotiating a trade deal that can only be worse that the one you have already. The purpose of negotiation is to make something better. If you want to make something worse you don’t negotiate you just say fuck off & die you bunch of cunts. Whether one is a leaver or remainer & whatever one thinks of the EU that is the main difficulty I think.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think the impossibility of brexit is negotiating a trade deal that can only be worse that the one you have already. The purpose of negotiation is to make something better. If you want to make something worse you don’t negotiate you just say fuck off & die you bunch of cunts. Whether one is a leaver or remainer & whatever one thinks of the EU that is the main difficulty I think.



And which side has stated that the end result must be a worse outcome for 60 million current EU citizens?


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And which side has stated that the end result must be a worse outcome for 60 million current EU citizens?


It is not possible to leave the EU & have as good a trade deal with the rest of the EU as if you were still a member of the EU. That the EU has stated this is beside the point. You don’t negotiate to make something worse. If you want to make something worse you don’t negotiate at all. I’m not taking sides here leave or remain. I’m pointing out that negotiation to make something worse than what you have already is a contradiction in terms. This is the impossibility of brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> It is not possible to leave the EU & have as good a trade deal with the rest of the EU as if you were still a member of the EU.



Why not?





> That the EU has stated this is beside the point. You don’t negotiate to make something worse. If you want to make something worse you don’t negotiate at all. I’m not taking sides here leave or remain. I’m pointing out that negotiation to make something worse than what you have already is a contradiction in terms. This is the impossibility of brexit.



The UK voted to leave the EU, that’s all. The EU has responded by taking the position that the UK must be worse off financially outside than inside and their negotiating strategy is aimed at fulfilling that ideal and bugger the human cost of their position.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why not?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



They are looking after the political interests of the EU27 - what do you expect them to do? Since when have moral arguments ever trumped national self interest?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

You can't have a club that allows non-members all the benefits of membership.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> They are looking after the political interests of the EU27 - what do you expect them to do? Since when have moral arguments ever trumped national self interest?



Quite. But SaskiaJayne stated that it is not possible to leave the EU etc. That is not true. However the EU could well have used Brexit to their advantage in a positive manner, but instead chose from day one to take a negative approach, and as SaskiaJayne corrrectly states, that is no way to conduct negotiations.

Like everyone, I dispair at how ill-prepared the UK government has been over this, but that is matched by the EU’s shock at the result of the referendum and shit way they have blundered on from there. Both sides are bollocksing things up quite spectacularly, which is a shame as things could so easily be better for the citizens of the EU and the soon to be ex-citizens if those we have trusted (and paid handsomely) to handle things weren’t such fucking twats.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> You can't have a club that allows non-members all the benefits of membership.



Says who?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And which side has stated that the end result must be a worse outcome for 60 million current EU citizens?


What would be the point of having a union if there are not advantages to being in it?, and disadvantages to being outside?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 18, 2018)

What are the EU supposed to say - you're better off outside?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Quite. But SaskiaJayne stated that it is not possible to leave the EU etc. That is not true. However the EU could well have used Brexit to their advantage in a positive manner, but instead chose from day one to take a negative approach, and as SaskiaJayne corrrectly states, that is no way to conduct negotiations.
> 
> Like everyone, I dispair at how ill-prepared the UK government has been over this, but that is matched by the EU’s shock at the result of the referendum and shit way they have blundered on from there. Both sides are bollocksing things up quite spectacularly, which is a shame as things could so easily be better for the citizens of the EU and the soon to be ex-citizens if those we have trusted (and paid handsomely) to handle things weren’t such fucking twats.



What would this positive approach look like? Their priorities are to safegaurd the right of EU citizens in the UK, the irish border, preserve the integrity of the EU and then to take advantage of the political and economic opportunities of the UK leaving. And they have been quite open about that since day 1.
On what planet would they have acted any differently?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> However the EU could well have used Brexit to their advantage in a positive manner...



Expand a bit on this. I'm intrigued.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Says who?



I admire your optimism!


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The UK voted to leave the EU, that’s all. The EU has responded by taking the position that the UK must be worse off financially outside than inside and their negotiating strategy is aimed at fulfilling that ideal and bugger the human cost of their position.


Of the small sample of leave voters I actually speak to none of them voted leave to negotiate anything. As you point out. They voted to leave the EU thats all. It is self evident that if you leave you cannot continue to enjoy the benefits of membership. Nobody I know voted to continue to enjoy the benefits membership. They want to leave the EU because they don’t want to be ruled by the non elected EU.they want to live by laws made by an elected UK government. This would seem a logical reason for leaving. 

The government state that they want to negotiate a “comprehensive free trade deal”. By definition that cannot be as good as the comprehensive free trade deal we have as members of the EU. If it was possible there would be no need to negotiate because it would be the same trade deal as we have now. So we are back to the impossibility of negotiating brexit. If you are leaving then there is nothing to negotiate as plenty of brexiteers have pointed out.

 What we have now is leading to no brexit or brexit in name only. Unless at some point the negotiations fail then we have the brexit that was voted for. You cannot negotiate to make things worse. Only to make things better.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Expand a bit on this. I'm intrigued.





Kaka Tim said:


> What would this positive approach look like? Their priorities are to safegaurd the right of EU citizens in the UK, the irish border, preserve the integrity of the EU and then to take advantage of the political and economic opportunities of the UK leaving. And they have been quite open about that since day 1.
> On what planet would they have acted any differently?



The UK and Ireland never signed up to Schengen, their borders were secure. When the EU expanded
Eastwards to hoover up a load of cheap labour Germany stalled and refused to open their borders to free movement, Blair didn’t stall, cos he’s a rabid Tory scumbag. Germany stalling whilst the UK opened their borders is the leading reason for Brexit.

Most of us on these boards are of an age to remember the signs changing at the airports, EEC, EEA, EU etc. with no explanation as to why. With the former Eastern Block countries being invited to join, even though their economies were nowhere near comparable to those in Western Europe, free movement was only ever going to lead to many people heading west, but Germany said NO and the Benelux countries copied France in making themselves an unappealing destination, so many people headed to the UK. And many people in the UK felt that too many came here. Whether they did or whether certain sectors of the media just portrayed it that way is moot, that is the main reason why most people voted leave.

Germany famously went on to allow a million refugees in and the backlash was savage. They will now be taking a similar line to their neighbours, razor wire fences and so on.

France just makes itself very unappealing to anyone moving in that they don’t want, the Jungle has gone, the refugees haven’t, go to Calais, they are still there, living in worse conditions than ever.

The UK leaving the EU is us pulling up the drawbridge, that leaves France and Germany as the big countries and the rulers of those countries are fully aware of how a large increase in migrants will go down with their electorates.

There is no reason why the UK can’t have an economic relationship with the rEU that is pretty seemless, and that will benefit UK citizens and EU citizens except the EU as represented by Germany and France (Benelux are included in them two) doesn’t want the UK to stop taking Eastern Europeans cos their countries will react badly to taking up that slack.


Maybe.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There is no reason why the UK can’t have an economic relationship with the rEU that is pretty seemless, and that will benefit UK citizens and EU citizens except the EU as represented by Germany and France (Benelux are included in them two) doesn’t want the UK to stop taking Eastern Europeans cos their countries will react badly to taking up that slack.



That's not really the only reason. But apart from that, why would it be in their interests to do something their countries will react badly to? You don't seem to be saying anything more than that what HMG wants isn't compatible with what the EU27 want. A description of the problem, rather than a solution to it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's not really the only reason. But apart from that, why would it be in their interests to do something their countries will react badly to?



The UK is leaving the EU, it is happening. It would be in their interests to make it work for all parties involved, but they, like many here that think it will somehow not happen, are trying to make it as bad as possible for all sides in the forlorn hope that their negative actions will provide the positive result they desire. Yet Bexiteers are the delusional ones.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The UK and Ireland never signed up to Schengen, their borders were secure. When the EU expanded
> Eastwards to hoover up a load of cheap labour Germany stalled and refused to open their borders to free movement, Blair didn’t stall, cos he’s a rabid Tory scumbag. Germany stalling whilst the UK opened their borders is the leading reason for Brexit.
> 
> Most of us on these boards are of an age to remember the signs changing at the airports, EEC, EEA, EU etc. with no explanation as to why. With the former Eastern Block countries being invited to join, even though their economies were nowhere near comparable to those in Western Europe, free movement was only ever going to lead to many people heading west, but Germany said NO and the Benelux countries copied France in making themselves an unappealing destination, so many people headed to the UK. And many people in the UK felt that too many came here. Whether they did or whether certain sectors of the media just portrayed it that way is moot, that is the main reason why most people voted leave.
> ...


What relationship, specifically, are you proposing? What does a "seamless economic relationship" mean? Where does free movement come into this? You seem to be implying some scenario where the UK continues to take in migrants, to divert them from France and Germany, or something


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What relationship, specifically, are you proposing? What does a "seamless economic relationship" mean? Where does free movement come into this? You seem to be implying some scenario where the UK continues to take in migrants, to divert them from France and Germany, or something




Try thinking harder about it. If after 24 hours you still can’t think of an answer, ask again.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What relationship, specifically, are you proposing? What does a "seamless economic relationship" mean? Where does free movement come into this? You seem to be implying some scenario where the UK continues to take in migrants, to divert them from France and Germany, or something



I think the scenario he's suggesting is that we effectively do everything more or less the same, but the UK is exempted from free movement, and that would be easy and benefit everyone, except the petty Eurotyrants don't want the extra migrants. Correct me if I haven't thought hard enough about it, BS.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The UK is leaving the EU, it is happening. It would be in their interests to make it work for all parties involved, but they, like many here that think it will somehow not happen, are trying to make it as bad as possible for all sides in the forlorn hope that their negative actions will provide the positive result they desire. Yet Bexiteers are the delusional ones.



The EU is going to make it as awkward as possible for the UK to leave. Which is entirely predictable as its the obvious thing to do - they have far less to lose. 
Its also probable they want the whole brexit thing to come off the tracks and the UK comes back to the fold.  

I dont think thats a delusional position at all. Its entirely logical. 

Hard brexit is seen as too damaging to the UK - this is clearly the belief of the UK government bar the headbangers - and its certainly the postion of UK buisness and finance sectors. 

Soft Brexit is pretty pointless - the UK is still subject to much of the EU rules and regs but has no input into shaping them. However this is where we are seemingly heading. 

A large chunk of the uk establishment is trying to plot a path where they whole thing gets called off and are waiting for a critical mass of people to realise that its a colossal waste of time. 

All three outcomes look politically impossible - but one has got to happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> The EU is going to make it as awkward as possible for the UK to leave. Which is entirely predictable as its the obvious thing to do - they have far less to lose.



They don’t. If they carry on as they are and the UK doesn’t suffer a catastrophic meltdown they risk the breakup of the EU itself. They could have set a
course for a friendly parting, they have chosen not to. Who stands to lose what here?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Try thinking harder about it. If after 24 hours you still can’t think of an answer, ask again.


You are welcome to have 24hrs to write something substantially less hand-wavy.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

How do you think Leave voters here will react to a deal whereby we swap free trade for allowing the thing - eastern European immigration - that made them angry enough to vote to leave the EU? You'll have poor Nigel reaching for his rifle again. 

Germany and France will still have free movement with EU members from eastern Europe, they can't fudge that. People from the poorer countries will go to the richer ones with most jobs, for the moment we are not that, and, as a result - to the joy of some Leavers - the number of EU immigrants has already gone down quite a lot I believe. 

I do agree that the decision to allow in the A8 countries was very important and while I was looking just now I found some good figures on migration and an interesting article too:

Migrants in the UK: An Overview - Migration Observatory

The huge political cost of Blair's decision to allow Eastern European migrants unfettered access to Britain


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They don’t. If they carry on as they are and the UK doesn’t suffer a catastrophic meltdown they risk the breakup of the EU itself.



No they dont. The only risk is if the post brexit  uk suddenly flourishes with booming economic growth and exports but with less of those pesky immigrants. They are betting that this is not likely to happen (and they are certainly not going to facilitate it).

And as safe bets go .....


----------



## paolo (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They don’t. If they carry on as they are and the UK doesn’t suffer a catastrophic meltdown they risk the breakup of the EU itself. They could have set a
> course for a friendly parting, they have chosen not to. Who stands to lose what here?



I’d say that setting a precedent of allowing a state to leave, but keep benefits a la carte, is what would risk the breakup of the EU.

e.g. If I was the current (awful, imho) Polish leadership, I’d leave, but keep the EU money, the freedom of movement, but tell the EU not to ask anything of, say, judicial independence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You are welcome to have 24hrs to write something substantially less hand-wavy.



OK, if you can’t be fucked to use the brains you was born with, at 0630 tomorrow Ceebebies starts up again, set your alarm.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 18, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Germany and France will still have free movement with EU members from eastern Europe, they can't fudge that. People from the poorer countries will go to the richer ones with most jobs



Why do you think they are so fucking desperate for us not to leave?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think they are so fucking desperate for us not to leave?



Any evidence for this "desperation"? 
Seems the attitude of the EU27 ranges between (at most) regretful resignation to "off you fuck then".


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They don’t. If they carry on as they are and the UK doesn’t suffer a catastrophic meltdown they risk the breakup of the EU itself. They could have set a
> course for a friendly parting, they have chosen not to. Who stands to lose what here?


As you point out UK position has always been that it is in the best interests of all concerned to have a comprehensive trade deal as good as we have now. Maybe in the death the EU will agree to that? Or it might not. That is not a negotiation it is an ultimatum. Brexit cannot be negotiated. There is nothing to negotiate.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They don’t. If they carry on as they are and the UK doesn’t suffer a catastrophic meltdown they risk the breakup of the EU itself. They could have set a
> course for a friendly parting, they have chosen not to. Who stands to lose what here?



This friendly parting thing... they can read our press and hear our politicians and watch Farage turning up for the 10 minutes a year he spends not on TV sofas to call them all counts to their faces. The British press wrote so much rubbish about the EU  that they had to set up a special unit to rebut it.

European Commission in the UK - European Commission

A good relationship is in everyone's interests, I hope something can be worked out. Do you know what Boris' latest not-at-all-a-distraction contribution is? A bridge across the Channel. 

I think we should all be concerned at the possibility of a No Deal being engineered in order to go to town on the rest of our public services and possibly much worse than that. Why are human rights being stripped out of UK law, why are ministers being given powers to make legislation with no parliamentary check, why was animal sentience dropped?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think they are so fucking desperate for us not to leave?



Why do you think they're building so much office space in Frankfurt and Paris?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 18, 2018)

As a breaking news aside...


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think they are so fucking desperate for us not to leave?



This is the Leaver's Achilles delusion, IMO. They're not at all desperate for us not to leave, it's not their objective and it was never likely to be. Because it's not an outcome they can directly deliver, and because there are clear upsides to us leaving in the right way. So long as we're in or nearly in the CU, they're protected from the worst of the damage, they can take chunks out of our services sector and/or extort money in lieu, and they're rid of our veto.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Germany and France will still have free movement with EU members from eastern Europe, they can't fudge that. People from the poorer countries will go to the richer ones with most jobs,


Yeah, for 1 euro an hour jobs... what a utopia


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah, for 1 euro an hour jobs... what a utopia



So you voted leave to protect the UK's generosity towards asylum seekers?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> So you voted leave to protect the UK's generosity towards asylum seekers?


Sorry, I don't recall that multiple choice question being on the ballot paper


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sorry, I don't recall that multiple choice question being on the ballot paper



In which case, what's the relevance of your link?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> In which case, what's the relevance of your link?


A reminder to Mighty Tibberton that the word 'free' in freedom of movement , has more to do with what the poor workers of eastern europe will be working for, than any sacred Eu human right.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Since when have moral arguments ever trumped national self interest?



Don't you think Brexit was against the national interest?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> A reminder to Mighty Tibberton that the word 'free' in freedom of movement , has more to do with what the poor workers of eastern europe will be working for, than any sacred Eu human right.



So a link that was something to do with the poor workers of Eastern Europe would probably have been better, no?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> They are looking after the political interests of the EU27 - what do you expect them to do? Since when have moral arguments ever trumped national self interest?


So, noses will be cut off. Faces will be spited.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> So a link that was something to do with the poor workers of Eastern Europe would probably have been better, no?


It is!


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Why?



Really?

ETA: And no it isn't, obviously.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> Picking work on farms is difficult to automate cost effectively. Decent pickers can earn £15+ an hour, and they’re still more cost effective than machines.



Er. U wot m8?



paolo said:


> Native brits do not want this kind of £15 an hour work. They have other choices.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> You can't have a club that allows non-members all the benefits of membership.



It's not a golf club, it's a supranational legislative and judicial body, what are you on about?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


>



tbf, if they're not doing it, it doesn't really pay £15 an hour. According to my torrenting software, I can earn thousand of pounds a day working from home.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Really?
> ETA: And no it isn't, obviously.


Yes it is. The one-euro-job system in germany is part of the Hartz 4 concept.
Its applies to germans, eu citizens, refugees...


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yes. The one-euro-job system in germany is part of the Hartz 4 concept.
> Its applies to germans, eu citizens, refugees...



How many Germans are working for a euro an hour then?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not a gold club, it's a supranational legislative and judicial body, what are you on about?



Obviously, no membership organisation is tenable, whether isn't a supranational legislative thingy or a bowls club, if it gives greater benefits to and asks fewer obligations of non-members compared to members.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Er. U wot m8?



Sorry, £12 hour (top end on piece rate).

Info came from this article, along with the question of automation.

https://www.economist.com/news/brit...nimbler-robots-help-get-harvest-british-farms


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> Sorry, £12 hour (top end on piece rate).
> 
> Info came from this article, along with the question of automation.
> 
> https://www.economist.com/news/brit...nimbler-robots-help-get-harvest-british-farms



You read it wrong twice:

"Many farms pay above the minimum wage of £7.50 ($9.65) an hour, and fast pickers can earn up to £12 on piecework."

Up to £12 an hour on piecework, quite a drop from your £15+ an hour.

E2A: I see you editing.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> E2A: I see you editing.



Trying not to misquote it twice.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> How many Germans are working for a euro an hour then?


140k in 2015 and dropped 90k last year  mostly due to new regulations making it harder for employers to abuse.
Hartz IV: Endstation Ein-Euro-Job
So now, the employers are using the minijobs (450€ / month - tax free) mostly for part time workers.There are over 2.5 million stuck in those jobs.
Deutschland: Zahl der Minijobber steigt auf knapp 2,5 Millionen - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Eta:
I doubt its possible to find out how many actual germans make up those numbers but I'd go out on a limb and say proportionally less than foreigners


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't you think Brexit was against the national interest?



well a significant chunk of the uk power establishment clearly thinks it isn't in the national interest - which is why it may well not happen and why it has such a destabilising effect on uk politics.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There is no reason why the UK can’t have an economic relationship with the rEU that is pretty seemless, and that will benefit UK citizens and EU citizens except the EU as represented by Germany and France (Benelux are included in them two) doesn’t want the UK to stop taking Eastern Europeans cos their countries will react badly to taking up that slack.
> 
> 
> Maybe.


Just on this, for example, Germany has 2,850,000 polish immigrants where the UK has 813,000 - what is this _slack _you're imagining.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah, for 1 euro an hour jobs... what a utopia



I don't make any claims for utopia. That 1 euro scheme as far as I can see, is for the long-term unemployed and that money is paid to them on top of their benefits. It has been expanded to cover refugees, who also get some benefits too.

I don't see what it has to do with freedom of movement. Our leaving the EU will have no effect on it. And we make unemployed people work for nothing and will probably continue to do so unless and until we get a new government. 

How can it be controversial to say that in general people move to try to get a better deal? When the British economy was struggling and Thatcher decimated industry lots of UK people went to Europe. As poorer former communist bloc countries have joined, people from those countries have tended to come west. I don't doubt that some, perhaps a lot, are exploited and disappointed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Just on this, for example, Germany has 2,850,000 polish immigrants where the UK has 813,000 - what is this _slack _you're imagining.



So you are selectively quoting to suit your agenda. In the very post you took that snippet from the question you ask is answered.

And therein lies one of the big issues with Brexit, the two sides are so dogmatically opposed that they refuse to open their minds to any position other than that they have already decided upon and will mendaciously defend it.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 19, 2018)

I don’t see any middle ground except the staus quo. The best trade deal is the one we have already. If a better trade deal is the one we already have minus the unrestricted migration from the EU & minus any payments after our existing financial commitments to the EU have been settled then come on. France & Germany would never agree to that because it would be their taxpayers who would mostly have to make up the shortfall which would lead to an increase in support for populist political parties in their countries & if they gained control they would push for the end of the EU as it is now to just a free trade area which is what the UK would want as well.

To the likes of Macron the EU is an ideaolgy. The “4 freedoms” which include free movement of labour cannot be separated because free trade also means freedom to sell one’s labour anywhere in the EU not just goods. Go to Holland. Look at building sites. See the Polish reg builder’s vans parked there. No longer crappy old wrecks but new properly sign written vans. EU citizens making good money selling their labour where they can make the most profit. Plenty of Dutch object to this of course because it reduces their wages. 

In Holland though the law does crack down on the worst excesses of exploitation of foreign labour by Dutch companies. France deliberately makes itself unattractive to foreign labour by very tight employment law. Twats Blair/Brown understood none of this. They threw open the doors & also allowed UK firms to invent entire exploititive business models to encourage foreign labour which lead to the insanity we have now.

Why the EU idealogs have to pull in a direction that a good proportion of populations of the net contributor countries do not want is beyond me. The genie has been allowed to escape from the bottle in the UK but so far the bottles of out near neighbours are being kept corked by their leaders who are at odds with a fair few of their voters.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 19, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> Plenty of Dutch object to this of course because it reduces their wages.



Does it though? That's a genuine question. It makes sense to me that it could but I keep seeing economists saying that it doesn't't or that there is only a very small effect at the very unskilled end of the labour market.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So you are selectively quoting to suit your agenda. In the very post you took that snippet from the question you ask is answered.
> 
> And therein lies one of the big issues with Brexit, the two sides are so dogmatically opposed that they   refuse to open their minds to any position than that they have already decided upon and will mendaciously defend it.



You're not seeing the real reason behind it at all, Germany has a greater % of its population as immigrants, but they also have a better housing situation, Labour laws etc.

 It's Tory policies, in paticular austerity that caused brexit, not too much of them foreigners.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 19, 2018)

It’s the unskilled or skilled tradesman end of the market that made people vote to leave. This is what was so annoying when politicians used to go on about migrant IT workers & migrant city workers when the migrants that were visible to leave voters were the crowds of unskilled migrants speaking in their own languages in the leave voter’s local Tescos.

Obviously the perception is not the reality but it is the perception that matters & that caused the leave vote. The Tories always blatted on about “the market” the idea that the economy improves & wages go up up as employers compete for a fixed labour pool. That can be shafted though if a company can simply phone up for a bus load of Romanian workers to fill the positions so wages remain at min wage.


----------



## Winot (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse 3 points in response to your grand plan:

1. You seem to be arguing that the EU should compromise more because it is ultimately in its interests to do so. The EU has been compromising for years. The UK has a special deal already. 
2. The UK had options to lessen the effects that have lead to Brexit but chose not to exercise them e.g. making EU immigrants wait longer for benefits.
3. You fail to deal with the issue raised above, namely if the EU offers the UK special terms outside of the EU, what's to stop other member states asking for the same?


----------



## Winot (Jan 19, 2018)

In the meantime, this seems like an excellent analysis. Requires free registration. 

Subscribe to read


----------



## Crispy (Jan 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> In the meantime, this seems like an excellent analysis. Requires free registration.
> 
> Subscribe to read


Or just google the headline "Power will always trump mutual interest in the Brexit talks" and follow the link from there to skip the paywall.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof's narrative, which I am not cognitively equipped to appreciate the full depth of, seems to imply that the EU was motivated by the potential influx of low wage workers when they (we) decided to let the eastern european states join. Then he says that Germany, France and Benelux didn't want these immigrants. That seems a big contradiction to me. Or is it that he thinks the membership of the eastern states was pushed through by UK and the mediterranean states, or something? I don't understand. Sorry for being too stupid.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Just on this, for example, Germany has 2,850,000 polish immigrants where the UK has 813,000 - what is this _slack _you're imagining.


I don't know where you got that 2million+ figure from. The official number is 780k - which is very little when you come to think of the historical ... ehem.. overlaps... the two countries have had in recent history. Lot's of people in Poland with German surnames.

(on a side note: there's a very interesting documentary on Netflix atm called "What our fathers did: A Nazi Legacy"  about the German occupation of Poland)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

the uk was keen to extend membership - i remember the argument at the time was to dilute the federalist push from france and germany.


----------



## SaskiaJayne (Jan 19, 2018)

I think there is a perception in the UK that unskilled migrant workers drive down wages. Employers argue that migrants do work that locals do not want. The counter argument could be that if firms had no pool of cheap migrant labour to draw from then they would have to make the work attractive to locals with better pay/conditions.

There is illegal explotation of migrant labour in our near neighbours but their much better employment laws are enforced & there are procecutions & fines. Firms are also forced to reimburse migrant workers money that they have been cheated out of as well. This certainly the case in Holland. That way a level playing field is created to allow migrants & locals to compete equally for the available work. So if anything migrants are actively discouraged rather that encouraged as has been the case in the UK.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I don't know where you got that 2million+ figure from. The official number is 780k - which is very little when you come to think of the historical ... ehem.. overlaps... the two countries have had in recent history. Lot's of people in Poland with German surnames.
> 
> (on a side note: there's a very interesting documentary on Netflix atm called "What our fathers did: A Nazi Legacy"  about the German occupation of Poland)


That doesn't count the number who are German citizens.

Polen in Deutschland: Verstecken war gestern


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I don't make any claims for utopia. That 1 euro scheme as far as I can see, is for the long-term unemployed and that money is paid to them on top of their benefits. It has been expanded to cover refugees, who also get some benefits too.


Yeah the 1 euro is for long term unemployed and now refuges and limited now to 6 months - thereafter the recipient usually gets pushed into the minijob system which is indefinite.
The minijob system works out at about 2 euro's an hour and some basic benefits like health insurance are covered. if a spouse earns a normal wage, then the benefits disappear.
The statistics for people landing in this system and later moving on to fair payed employment is ridiculously low.


MightyTibberton said:


> I don't see what it has to do with freedom of movement.


 It's very relevant for those poorer, unskilled Eu citizens whose countries' economies have been destroyed be enforced austerity, who happen to exercise their right of freedom of movement. To a very large extent, these are the jobs they (the unskilled/ most desperate) will be ending up in. The reason I linked to it was because of the context of the discussion (i.e why east europeans leap frogged germany/ france and head to the UK)



MightyTibberton said:


> Our leaving the EU will have no effect on it. And we make unemployed people work for nothing and will probably continue to do so unless and until we get a new government.


Yeah but the UK has a much free er employment market and much more opportunities to earn a better wage than germany. Plus the german system is very highly regulated and tones of upfront paperwork is needed before even starting to work.



MightyTibberton said:


> How can it be controversial to say that in general people move to try to get a better deal? When the British economy was struggling and Thatcher decimated industry lots of UK people went to Europe. As poorer former communist bloc countries have joined, people from those countries have tended to come west. I don't doubt that some, perhaps a lot, are exploited and disappointed.


That starts getting even more murky when certain countries of the Eu have been complicit in the destruction of a smaller counties economy, then inviting the workers of those countries to take up the cheep jobs in it's own country at rates way below a minimum wage.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> That doesn't count the number who are German citizens.


obviously not. They're German.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> obviously not. They're German.


Just because you acquire citizenship doesn't stop you being an immigrant.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Just because you acquire citizenship doesn't stop you being an immigrant.


Do you think all the survivors of the concentration camps that were set up across Poland, that fled to the UK before, during and after the war - their sons, daughters, grandchildren etc are in the 815K figure of the UKs polish immegrants you quoted?

Besides, large swathes of Poland were Germany. It's only the circumstances of ww2 that many Germans became polish citizens. Many have repatriated since the fall of the Berlin wall. I wouldn't categorise them as immigrants, just as i wouldn't a Bavarian that moves to lower Saxony.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah the 1 euro is for long term unemployed and now refuges and limited now to 6 months - thereafter the recipient usually gets pushed into the minijob system which is indefinite.
> The minijob system works out at about 2 euro's an hour and some basic benefits like health insurance are covered. if a spouse earns a normal wage, then the benefits disappear.
> The statistics for people landing in this system and later moving on to fair payed employment is ridiculously low.
> It's very relevant for those poorer, unskilled Eu citizens whose countries' economies have been destroyed be enforced austerity, who happen to exercise their right of freedom of movement. To a very large extent, these are the jobs they (the unskilled/ most desperate) will be ending up in. The reason I linked to it was because of the context of the discussion (i.e why east europeans leap frogged germany/ france and head to the UK)
> ...



Thank you for the long detailed answer. I appreciate it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Do you think all the survivors of the concentration camps that were set up across Poland, that fled to the UK before, during and after the war - their sons, daughters, grandchildren etc are in the 815K figure of the UKs polish immegrants you quoted?


No, because their sons, grandchildren etc are not immigrants, they did not immigrate, they were born here.

I'm not sure what argument you're trying to have here, i am pointing out that Germany has a greater number of Poles and indeed a greater number of immigrants than the UK full stop.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> well a significant chunk of the uk power establishment clearly thinks it isn't in the national interest - which is why it may well not happen and why it has such a destabilising effect on uk politics.



Liberal's can never answer a simple question can they?

I'm well aware that the majority of the ruling class don't want Brexit to happen, I asked if you thought it was against the national interest. Yes or no?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Liberal's can never answer a simple question can they?
> 
> I'm well aware that the majority of the ruling class don't want Brexit to happen, I asked if you thought it was against the national interest. Yes or no?




So thinking brexit is a shit idea = "liberal" does it 

The interests of the state and the interests of the people are not the same thing. On brexit the interests of the state are split - mostly they want to stay - but a significant section - "small state" uber freidmanites and romantic nationalists - want to leave. 

For myself - at this time, with the current political power structure, government etc I cant see that brexit will be anything but detrimental to most people in the uk.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> No, because their sons, grandchildren etc are not immigrants, they did not immigrate, they were born here.
> 
> I'm not sure what argument you're trying to have here, i am pointing out that Germany has a greater number of Poles and indeed a greater number of immigrants than the UK full stop.


I'm not trying to have an argument - and it's no "full stop" I'm afraid.
The statistics you provided are from an entirely different context to the discussion bein had on the last few pages (i.e Eu economic migration). 
Most of the earlier polish arriving in Germany post war who took up german citizenship are German Spätaussiedler (returning German Immigrants _to Poland). _They get a fast tracked German Citizenship process. They are Germans who got caught on the wrong side of the tracks at the end of WW2.
_



			
				"Wiki - Spätaussiedler said:
			
		


			Seit den 1950er Jahren kamen in die Bundesrepublik insgesamt ca. 2,5 Millionen Menschen aus Polen, vor allem Aussiedler, aber auch politische Emigranten der Solidarność-Zeit.
		
Click to expand...

_



			
				Google Translate said:
			
		

> Since the 1950s, about 2.5 million people have come to the Federal Republic of Poland [16],* mainly Aussiedler*, but also political emigrants of the Solidarity period



The statistics I provided are in the correct context and somewhat undermine your point that there are more Polish immigrants in Germany than the UK.
Like I say, I'm not after an argument - just pointing out your mistake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> They are Germans who got caught on the wrong side of the tracks at the end of WW2.


a great number of the germans who got caught on the wrong side of the tracks never made it to germany, they got deported to siberia

see e.g. the fate of the volga germans:


Volga Germans - Wikipedia


----------



## gosub (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't you think Brexit was against the national interest?


If you share a flat with 2 of your best mates.. When they decide to get married... It's probably in Everyone's long term interest for you to move out.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Thank you for the long detailed answer. I appreciate it.


No Problem. Here's a more subjective article on the topic.



> The €1 jobs are anything but a “social labour market.” They do not involve a labour relationship. No wages are paid. Instead, in addition to Hartz IV social welfare benefits, claimants receive compensation up to the equivalent of €1, or, occasionally, €2 per hour for a thirty-hour work week. The claimants have to use the additional compensation to cover costs such as transportation. If they become sick and are forced to stay at home, they receive no additional compensation.
> 
> The unemployed rarely accept these jobs voluntarily. They are compelled to do so with the threat of benefit cuts if they do not.
> 
> Forced community service is a better description of the €1 jobs than the euphemistic term “social labour market.” Academic studies have compared these jobs to “welfare-to-work” programmes and the underlying concept of workfare, referred to in Germany as “working for the bare essentials” and “the duty to work in exchange for state provision of the basic necessities of life.”


Not enough to live on and too much to die on.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> So thinking brexit is a shit idea = "liberal" does it .


No but very many of the arguments advanced on this thread (and others) have been shot through with liberalism.

Anyway couple of good and relevant articles posted by 1 killer b and 2 butchersapron


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> a great number of the germans who got caught on the wrong side of the tracks never made it to germany, they got deported to siberia
> 
> see e.g. the fate of the volga germans:
> 
> ...


Indeed.
Another small subset are the Danube Swabians. I have a very good friend who's of Hungarian Swabian decent who's grandparents had to hot foot it out of Budapest when the Russians rolled up.

eta link


----------



## gosub (Jan 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So you are selectively quoting to suit your agenda. In the very post you took that snippet from the question you ask is answered.
> 
> And therein lies one of the big issues with Brexit, the two sides are so dogmatically opposed that they refuse to open their minds to any position other than that they have already decided upon and will mendaciously defend it.


The DEAL May is trying to do is more than than difficult due to the most favored nation status of existing EU trade deals Anything they offer us that's better than those deals, they will legally have to amend the other deals and give them to.  The join EFTA work around by passes that due to us just tagging on to an existing deal.... And is better than status quo coz is cheaper and more transparent payment, most of the legislation stuff doesn't have to be followed blindly except mostly technical regulation and we and the rest of EUrope have signed up to WTO technical barriers to trade which declares this technical regulation should be decided globally - where we would be getting our voice back


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm not trying to have an argument - and it's no "full stop" I'm afraid.
> The statistics you provided are from an entirely different context to the discussion bein had on the last few pages (i.e Eu economic migration).
> Most of the earlier polish arriving in Germany post war who took up german citizenship are German Spätaussiedler (returning German Immigrants _to Poland). _They get a fast tracked German Citizenship process. They are Germans who got caught on the wrong side of the tracks at the end of WW2.
> 
> ...


No, you are just giving me figures of exclusively polish people, which exclude people who naturalized after coming there.
It also doesn't change the fact that they are immigrants which have had to be absorbed.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

If we are talking about which EU states have the most recent immigrants from other EU states, perhaps this is the relevant table. Sorted by % of population "born in other EU state". Doesn't tell us how many of those are from the more recently joined eastern states but it does support the notion that Germany (and others) takes significantly more EU immigrants than we do.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> No, you are just giving me figures of exclusively polish people, which exclude people who naturalized after coming there.
> It also doesn't change the fact that they are immigrants which have had to be absorbed.


... but most of the people in the figures you provided _*were german to begin with*_.
If you want to extrapolate that far, then you may as well say Germany took in 20 million east European immigrants from west Poland in 1990. Then yes... wunderbar! Germany has more east European immigrants than the UK


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> does support the notion that Germany (and others) takes significantly more EU immigrants than we do.


Yeah a whopping 0.7% more - for a country with nearly 4000km of physical boarders to other nations. Austria, Switzerland,Czech, France, Luxemburg, Belgium, Holland & Poland, Denmark - all of which have had large swathes of german "migrants" (for want of a better word) in the last century and a half


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> That starts getting even more murky when certain countries of the Eu have been complicit in the destruction of a smaller counties economy, then inviting the workers of those countries to take up the cheep jobs in it's own country at rates way below a minimum wage.



Poland’s economy is going from strength to strength, as I understand it.

Economy of Poland - Wikipedia

“unlike many other European countries, Poland did not implement austerity but rather boosted domestic demand through Keynesian policy of tax cut, and foreign-assistance funded public spending. An additional reason for its success lay in the fact that Poland is outside the Euro zone.”

I assume, in terms of imposed austerity, you’re more specifically referring to Greece. But Greece isn’t, comparatively, a major source of labour for other EU countries. I don’t think the two - austerity and cheap labour - are part of a joined up plan. If they are, it doesn’t seem to working very well.

(Edited after pocketscience had already replied below)


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

..


paolo said:


> Poland’s economy is going from strength to strength, as I understand it.
> 
> Economy of Poland - Wikipedia
> 
> I assume you’re more specifically referring to Greece.


Yes, I was.
And good that you mention the polish economy. Having their own currency meant they were able to avoid any enforced austerity from Brussels in the aftermath of the gfc. They printed and invested. Not a ringing endorsement for the Eu fin policy makers.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> ..
> 
> Yes, I was.
> And good that you mention the polish economy. Having their own currency meant they were able to avoid any enforced austerity from Brussels in the aftermath of the gfc. They printed and invested. Not a ringing endorsement for the Eu fin policy makers.



Fully in agreement that joining the Euro was a massive mistake for Greece (and that the ECB should/must have known it had the potential to go very badly).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Since when have moral arguments ever trumped national self interest?





Kaka Tim said:


> I cant see that brexit will be anything but detrimental to most people in the uk.





How can Brexit have happened then?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> If you share a flat with 2 of your best mates.. When they decide to get married... It's probably in Everyone's long term interest for you to move out.



Fuck are you on about? Why are you all obsessed with marriage and divorce these are not the same things as international politics


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How can Brexit have happened then?



cos the likes of you and I dont decide what constitutes the "national self interest". and it hasn't happened yet.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> cos the likes of you and I dont decide what constitutes the "national self interest". and it hasn't happened yet.



Haha, true! But I got the impression you had already decided that whatever *has* happened has not been in the national interest.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> I assume, in terms of imposed austerity, you’re more specifically referring to Greece. But Greece isn’t, comparatively, a major source of labour for other EU countries. I don’t think the two - austerity and cheap labour - are part of a joined up plan. If they are, it doesn’t seem to working very well.


Answering after your edit ;-)
Not sure to be honest. I wouldn't go so far to say it is a joined-up plan but the north-west european nations are certainly profiting from it.
The big winner though is the suppressed value of the Euro. Nations primarily exporting outside of the euro-zone (mostly Germany) are helped massively by the hardship of the poorer nations in the euro-zone. I'm convinced that that is a joined-up plan.
The one thing that would eradicate the ongoing disparity beyween the norhtern & southern nations of the Euro-zone is fiscal union - but it's constantly being put in the long grass for over 10 years now.
When you compare the progress made in the last 10 years on establishing a federal fiscal union, to the urgency that the Eu want to deal with brexit, to you realise that the EU's priorities are firmly based on a stable status quo.
Where's the Barnier for the impoverished southern peoples of Euroland?
The exploitation of a few southern Europeans is merely a micro economic benefit they probably don't care less about, while there's a constant stream of refugees to use for even less cost. (yes, I'm very cynical)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Haha, true! But I got the impression you had already decided that whatever *has* happened has not been in the national interest.



I dont give a toss about the national interest - which  is essentially "the interests of the ruling class" . But no - i don't think its in the interests of most people in the UK.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I dont give a toss about the national interest - which  is essentially "the interests of the ruling class" . But no - i don't think its in the interests of most people in the UK.



HOLD UP A MINUTE.

You mean to tell me that the ruling class has *seperate *interests to the rest of us and that actually "the national interest" is a meaningless term?

Is someone else logged in as you?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> HOLD UP A MINUTE.
> 
> You mean to tell me that the ruling class has *seperate *interests to the rest of us and that actually "the national interest" is a meaningless term?
> 
> Is someone else logged in as you?



erm ... I dont believe i have ever believed any different.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 19, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Sunk cost fallacy combined with long term antipathy to the UK regulator means that I’m not sure that they would actually want to be reversed, but yes — it’s easily doable as we speak for most firms.  Right now it is more easy to reverse it than carry on for most. At some point in early 2018, however, the tipping point will be reached.  The legal work will have been done, capital will have been shifted and it reversing it will be a matter of repeating the whole process again in reverse, which there will be no appetite for


For the record, I’d say the tipping point has now been reached.  Even if Brexit is reversed, I think most London Market insurers are committed to their new continental set-ups.  Turns out that other regulators are just easier to deal with than the PRA, so who wants to stay in London anyway, now the hard work is done?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah a whopping 0.7% more - for a country with nearly 4000km of physical boarders to other nations. Austria, Switzerland,Czech, France, Luxemburg, Belgium, Holland & Poland, Denmark - all of which have had large swathes of german "migrants" (for want of a better word) in the last century and a half


4.2/3.6 = 15% more actually.

Yes, Germany has many physical borders, and with countries from which some immigrants may be germans "returning".

On the other hand, the UK has been open to migration from the accession countries since 2004 and Germany only since 2011.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> 4.2/3.6 = 15% more actually.


So the difference between 4.2% and 3.6% is 15%. 
Right...


----------



## gosub (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fuck are you on about? Why are you all obsessed with marriage and divorce these are not the same things as international politics


Sharing a Union with a full on federalized EUrozone


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> So the difference between 4.2% and 3.6% is 15%.
> Right...


Per head of population, Germany has 15% more EU-born immigrants than the UK, yes.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Per head of population, Germany has 15% more EU-born immigrants than the UK, yes.


In absolute terms yes, but that's a completely meaningless statistic.
Do you think Sweden with its 9 million population should also have 3.4 million immigrants born in another Eu state - just because Germany does.

again. why am I bothering...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> Sharing a Union with a full on federalized EUrozone



What has that got to do with sharing a flat?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> In absolute terms yes, but that's a completely meaningless statistic.
> Do you think Sweden with its 9 million population should also have 3.4 million immigrants born in another Eu state - just because Germany does.
> 
> again. why am I bothering...



No, the point is that it's not an absolute number. It's per head of population. More accurately it's 16.7% more, rather than 15% more.

Sweden, with its 9 million population, at 3.6% (the same as Germany) would have 324,000 immigrants born in another state. At 4.2% (the UK rate) it would have 378,000 immigrants. 16.7% more.

As it happens, Sweden's rate is 5.1% and therefore has 477,000 - even more than the UK or Germany, per head of population.


----------



## gosub (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What has that got to do with sharing a flat?


LMGTFY


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> No, the point is that it's not an absolute number. It's per head of population. More accurately it's 16.7% more, rather than 15% more.
> 
> Sweden, with its 9 million population, at 3.6% (the same as Germany) would have 324,000 immigrants born in another state. At 4.2% (the UK rate) it would have 378,000 immigrants. 16.7% more.
> 
> As it happens, Sweden's rate is 5.1% and therefore has 477,000 - even more than the UK or Germany, per head of population.


 Your 16.7% _is based on absolute numbers._ IMO that's a misleading metric for the discussion being had. The only meaningful metric is the one already on the table you provided; Proportional percentages of the total population of each nation - and for that, Germany has 0.7% more immigrants than the UK (0.6% immigrants born in Eu).
If you want to do more statistical gymnastics you could crunch the numbers for immigrants proportional to population density, or land area, or gdp etc...
The numbers are there on the table for a reason. It's because they're the most representative _proportionally._


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> So the difference between 4.2% and 3.6% is 15%.
> Right...



In the same way that 2% is double 1%, as a proportion of the whole.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Your 16.7% _is based on absolute numbers._


No it's not.
EU immigrants per head of population is very definitely not an absolute number.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

Let’s take another example. If the service charge in a restuarant went up from 10% to 20%, has it doubled, or only gone up 10%?

If you’d say it has doubled, teuchter’s representation is correct.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let’s take another example. If the service charge in a restuarant went up from 10% to 20%, has it doubled, or only gone up 10%?
> 
> If you’d say it has doubled, teuchter’s representation is correct.


Yeah well, I'm saying its gone up 10%... Woopee doo.

The meaningful numbers are on Teuchters table. Ger:4.2% vs UK:3.6%... i.e negligable numbers for both nations in the grand scheme of things, the difference between having just over a half of an EU born immigrant amongst every hundred persons.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 19, 2018)

As a boring pedant I'm glad to bore in here with the BBC 's rule on this. 

If something has increased from 10% to 20% the BBC would say that it has gone up 'by 10 percentage points' to refer to the numbers and differentiate from the '100%' proportional increase.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 19, 2018)

I wonder if the UK might see a reversal of some of that Polish immigration if this forecast is accurate?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> negligable numbers for both nations in the grand scheme of things



Most Brexiteers, it would seem, would disagree.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> As a boring pedant I'm glad to bore in here with the BBC 's rule on this.
> 
> If something has increased from 10% to 20% the BBC would say that it has gone up 'by 10 percentage points' to refer to the numbers and differentiate from the '100%' proportional increase.



Aha. I did wonder how to express the two different things.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I wonder if the UK might see a reversal of some of that Polish immigration if this forecast is accurate?




Immigration from the EU27 is already slowing. I expect there’s a few underlying factors.


----------



## sealion (Jan 19, 2018)

SaskiaJayne said:


> I think there is a perception in the UK that unskilled migrant workers drive down wages. Employers argue that migrants do work that locals do not want.


The sub contractors and builders keep the wages ( certainly for general labourers and groundworkers) low. It's very hard to get on a site in London now because most of the labour is sent form eastern europe. Construction firms now source direct from agencies( many are uk companies) based abroad. There was a time when you could walk onto any site in London and get work and a decent daily rate, now, if your lucky you are given a business card and told to go through the Budapest based agency. Blokes from abroad today are earning no more than i did as a groundworker in 1985. I don't blame them for coming, im not bitter towards them because i would do the same to feed my family as my parents did when they arrived here in the late sixties.

The fact that there are working class people of all nationalities in full time work and still having to and are eligible to claim benefits, suggests people are doing work they don't want to do and that something is seriously fucking wrong.


----------



## sealion (Jan 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm well aware that the majority of the ruling class don't want Brexit to happen,


I wonder why


----------



## mather (Jan 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> The EU is going to make it as awkward as possible for the UK to leave. Which is entirely predictable as its the obvious thing to do - they have far less to lose.
> Its also probable they want the whole brexit thing to come off the tracks and the UK comes back to the fold.
> 
> I dont think thats a delusional position at all. Its entirely logical.



I get the logic, but it is still delusional. Yes, they will play hard ball to try and either force us to back off from Brexit or punish us to make an example should we leave. I get that the EU wishes to use us as an example to scare other European countries from leaving the EU, however if they go down this route it will blowback in their faces, and the blowback has the potential to be far more radical and even unsavoury than anything we have so far witnessed. Should the EU go down this route, it will simply confirm to anyone left who still doubts the authoritarian and undemocratic nature of the EU that the EU is beyond any possibility of reform and will never change its ways. Indeed the EU's solution to any problem is more integration, more EU, even when those problems are caused by the EU itself. If the EU elites think that such a course will not have consequences and if they think that voters won't opt to punish them by voting for radical parties when they have elections, then the EU elites are beyond delusional. That said, you may be right and they still go for such a poor choice, their funeral if they do.

Any political party or movement that works to stop Brexit can kiss it's political popularity and relevance goodbye. They will, if they are lucky, become as small and as inconsequential as the Lib Dems. Even amongst those who voted Remain during the referendum, only a minority back the 'Stop Brexit' position.


----------



## mather (Jan 20, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I think we should all be concerned at the possibility of a No Deal being engineered in order to go to town on the rest of our public services and possibly much worse than that.



I'm so sick of this nonsense talking point. What exactly has the EU done since we have had austerity? Where was the EU when my family was lumped with the bedroom tax? Where was the EU (EEC back then) when Thatcher waged war on the unions. At the end of the workers only have themselves, no one else is our ally. Instead of dreaming about some fairytale world where neo-liberal EU technocrats somehow stand for and defend the rights of workers, why not get down to the business of actually working and organising with workers about _their_ issues and struggles? The British trade unions made this mistake, offshore the class struggle to the capitalist elites of Europe and then act all surprised when it gets pointed out that the union movement is weak and incapable of leading workers struggles.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> LMGTFY



Congrats, you're the first person I've met who can't use LMGTFY in the correct context.


----------



## gosub (Jan 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Congrats, you're the first person I've met who can't use LMGTFY in the correct context.


tbf I just worked on the basis that someone SO stupid as to not know what a metaphor is, might need extra help.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> tbf I just worked on the basis that someone SO stupid as to not know what a metaphor is, might need extra help.



My point is, your metaphor is fucking stupid and you are fucking stupid. I understand you're trying to use metaphor. What I'm asking is how you think your attempt is in any way useful.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 20, 2018)

mather said:


> I'm so sick of this nonsense talking point. What exactly has the EU done since we have had austerity? Where was the EU when my family was lumped with the bedroom tax? Where was the EU (EEC back then) when Thatcher waged war on the unions. At the end of the workers only have themselves, no one else is our ally. Instead of dreaming about some fairytale world where neo-liberal EU technocrats somehow stand for and defend the rights of workers, why not get down to the business of actually working and organising with workers about _their_ issues and struggles? The British trade unions made this mistake, offshore the class struggle to the capitalist elites of Europe and then act all surprised when it gets pointed out that the union movement is weak and incapable of leading workers struggles.



I'm not referring to any EU protections, but to the exploitation of the economic shock that will probably accompany a No Deal exit. 

The bedroom tax was taken to court using the European Convention on Human Rights. Not directly an EU thing I know, but as part of Brexit they are removing EU rights from British law and they hate the Human Rights Act that includes the ECHR. 

You seem to be saying that the EU is both too undemocratic to allow us to make our own laws and then complaining that it doesn't protect people enough from our own laws. 

Not many people think the EU is ideal. Nobody thinks it is a socialist organisation - it's a big free trade club. I just think being in is better than being out. 

I agree completely with what you say about local organising and campaigning and I hope that happens. That would be very positive.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2018)

mather said:


> the EU wishes to use us as an example to scare other European countries from leaving the EU,



The EU *is* other countries.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jan 20, 2018)

And this stuff about playing hardball and punishing I don't get.

Because the EU position has to be agreed by all those countries it has to be very simple. And it is. And they've published what it is - a series of options. And that includes protecting the integrity of the single market.

The UK government position seems to be that it can somehow split the 27 to break that stated position and deliver on the promises of all the trade with none of the stuff Farage doesn't like. Maybe they can. 

I am worried, and I think it's fair to be, that this position (and contradictory red lines on Ireland) will be used to say a decent deal can't be done so duck it we'll have No Deal and an attempt will evade to turn us into the low tax, low wage, low regulation Singapore fantasy of Daniel Hannah's dreams. 

If instead we turn into a lovely democratic socialist green paradise I'll be very pleased and very surprised!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2018)

Remainers get called remoaners. But there seem to be a lot who supported Brexit who are now moaning that the EU is not being nice to us. Shut up, it's what you voted for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 20, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The EU *is* other countries.


Hell *is* other people


----------



## Santino (Jan 20, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Remainers get called remoaners. But there seem to be a lot who supported Brexit who are now moaning that the EU is not being nice to us. Shut up, it's what you voted for.


If a woman asks to divorce her husband is she entitled to complain if he's being a prick about it?


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

The remainers are still moaning and are spending big money trying to overturn the result. Shut up it's called democracy.


----------



## paolo (Jan 20, 2018)

Santino said:


> If a woman asks to divorce her husband is she entitled to complain if he's being a prick about it?



Tells, not asks.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 20, 2018)

paolo said:


> Tells, not asks.


You apply for a divorce - so ask is more appropriate. Your application can actually be turned down!


----------



## paolo (Jan 20, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> You apply for a divorce - so ask is more appropriate. Your application can actually be turned down!



True.

So the divorce analogy isn’t quite right for Brexit. We’ve not asked to leave, we’ve told.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> The remainers are still moaning and are spending big money trying to overturn the result. Shut up it's called democracy.



you are absolutely right. the people have spoken and that's the end of it. i will ask a moderator to close the thread.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Remainers get called remoaners. But there seem to be a lot who supported Brexit who are now moaning that the EU is not being nice to us. Shut up, it's what you voted for.


Here:
Before the poster claimed that the EU were non ideological and that all this was process not ideology.

He now reverses this but cannot term it in any other way than 'not being nice'- this you see is to infantalise complaints. All of a sudden its 'well, what did you expect' said with a satisfied smirk. So we see a complete reversal of your earlier position but rather rather than a sober analysis about why you might have been wrong we get this. Still, remainers we're wrong about the vote, the reasons for the vote, the effects it would have on the domestic political landscape and now, haltingly they admit they we're wrong about the EU being a benign non political entity


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> you are absolutely right. the people have spoken and that's the end of it. i will ask a moderator to close the thread.


You could get a load of venture capitalists, hedge fund managers and a ex prime minister/ murderer to try and change a democratic vote. Oh wait a minute,,,


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

mather said:


> I get the logic, but it is still delusional. Yes, they will play hard ball to try and either force us to back off from Brexit or punish us to make an example should we leave. I get that the EU wishes to use us as an example to scare other European countries from leaving the EU, however if they go down this route it will blowback in their faces, and the blowback has the potential to be far more radical and even unsavoury than anything we have so far witnessed. Should the EU go down this route, it will simply confirm to anyone left who still doubts the authoritarian and undemocratic nature of the EU that the EU is beyond any possibility of reform and will never change its ways. Indeed the EU's solution to any problem is more integration, more EU, even when those problems are caused by the EU itself. If the EU elites think that such a course will not have consequences and if they think that voters won't opt to punish them by voting for radical parties when they have elections, then the EU elites are beyond delusional. That said, you may be right and they still go for such a poor choice, their funeral if they do.
> 
> Any political party or movement that works to stop Brexit can kiss it's political popularity and relevance goodbye. They will, if they are lucky, become as small and as inconsequential as the Lib Dems. Even amongst those who voted Remain during the referendum, only a minority back the 'Stop Brexit' position.



Fristly - who is this "us" and "we" that the EU are seeking to punish? Why are supposed anarchists and revolutionaries identifying themselves with bourgeois notions of national identity? 

And as for the idea that if the EU punishes the UK this will cause some sort of blowback amongst the people of other EU countries - i dont see that at all.

 The pressure to ensure that the UK does not do better out of the EU than in is coming from the national governments of the EU27 - because their own populations want the UK to go bollocks. I would imagine the harder the EU is on the UK - the more support it would get from the citizens of the rest of the EU - Britain is not well liked in Europe, and brexit has compounded that view. 

AS far as i can see the only significant groups in Europe who think brexit is to be welcomed (because of the damage it does to the EU) are the far right.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> You could get a load of venture capitalists, hedge fund managers and a ex prime minister/ murderer to try and change a democratic vote. Oh wait a minute,,,



yawn - or you could get the daily mail, a load of right wing nationalists and the uber freidmanites of the tory party to push for the UK to exit ASAP on the most extreme terms.

Or how about recognising that the leading forces on both sides of the issue  are a bunch of utter cunts?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2018)

If you still think the EU is left-wing, take a look at its latest rising star

found this from last year interesting. Clickbait headline off course, indy


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> yawn - or you could get the daily mail, a load of right wing nationalists and the uber freidmanites of the tory party to push for the UK to exit ASAP on the most extreme terms.


Corbyn wants out, is he a right wing nationalist in your book as well ?


Kaka Tim said:


> Or how about recognising that the leading forces on both sides of the issue are a bunch of utter cunts?


Thats a given and hardly breaking news.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> Corbyn wants out, is he a right wing nationalist in your book as well ?
> 
> Thats a given and hardly breaking news.



Would that be the same Jeremy Corbyn who voted  and campaigned for remain - and says he would do so again?


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Would that be the same Jeremy Corbyn who voted and campaigned for remain


That means sweet fa and i never stated he voted out. What has he said about the eu ? He's been scathing of them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2018)

Really good piece on Brexit from Cillian Gillespie from Socialist Party Ireland if anyone's interested, particularly on the issue of a hard border.

Ireland, the EU and the Brexit divorce deal- a socialist analysis


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Here:
> Before the poster claimed that the EU were non ideological and that all this was process not ideology.
> 
> He now reverses this but cannot term it in any other way than 'not being nice'- this you see is to infantalise complaints. All of a sudden its 'well, what did you expect' said with a satisfied smirk. So we see a complete reversal of your earlier position but rather rather than a sober analysis about why you might have been wrong we get this. Still, remainers we're wrong about the vote, the reasons for the vote, the effects it would have on the domestic political landscape and now, haltingly they admit they we're wrong about the EU being a benign non political entity



No - you're getting carried away with your imagination again. Or you're just a liar.

1) I did not previously say they were non-ideological. Here's what I said before:



teuchter said:


> I don't think anyone's said that the EU's people handling Brexit are non-ideological, or "implacably fair", are they?
> 
> The EU's people are doing what anyone could expect - negotiating in the interests of the EU.



2) It's not "all of a sudden it's well what did you expect". That's exactly what I said before.

So there is no "complete reversal of position". Just you putting words in my mouth, as usual.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Its in every word of discussion about these ongoing negotiations. You will now of course deny this. The fact that its taken as non-ideological is why it isn't mentioned. Why would you? This is all perfectly normal.



as was said at the time. Still, you'll claim to mean whatever suits you this week. Wriggle as you like.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> as was said at the time. Still, you'll claim to mean whatever suits you this week. Wriggle as you like.


As was said by you, you nutter! Not me.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> That means sweet fa and i never stated he voted out. What has he said about the eu ? He's been scathing of them.



you said he "wants out". I dont see any evidence of that. Hes opposed to large parts of the EU program but - like lots of people - voted remain because of the likely negative consequences of leaving


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> you said he "wants out". I dont see any evidence of that. Hes opposed to large parts of the EU program but - like lots of people - voted remain because of the likely negative consequences of leaving


I thought he'd made it clear that he wants the result of the referendum to be respected and that this means leaving. In that sense he does 'want out' surely?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> you said he "wants out". I dont see any evidence of that. Hes opposed to large parts of the EU program but - like lots of people - voted remain because of the likely negative consequences of leaving



He's opposed membership for decades and he's heavily influenced by the Tribuite/CP British Road to Socialism stuff, of course he doesn't want to be in the EU.


----------



## Winot (Jan 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> He's opposed membership for decades and he's heavily influenced by the Tribuite/CP British Road to Socialism stuff, of course he doesn't want to be in the EU.



If you’re correct he is either a liar or a hypocrite.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I thought he'd made it clear that he wants the result of the referendum is to be respected and that this means leaving. In that sense he does 'want out' surely?



I thought it was about "constructive ambiguity". Corbyn and Labour going with the path of least resistance, trying to sit it out whilst giving themselves enough wriggle room to change tack if popular opinion decisively changes. And a  "jobs first" brexit suggests that they would vote against a deal which undermined employment levels and wages - and they are on record as opposing a "hard brexit".
My point earlier was that corbyn can't be described as someone who is a "leading brexiteer" - and that the brexit faction is led by right wing tories and nationalists (does anyone really dispute that?)
The labour brexit mix is further queered by the progress mob using the remain argument it as a wedge issue - Umunna being at the forefront.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> If you’re correct he is either a liar or a hypocrite.



I certainly don't think he's been very clear about his position. Probably much less of a liar and a hypocrite than most MP's still though.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> If you’re correct he is either a liar or a hypocrite.


it was decided at conference that labour would be pro-remain. Regardless of his own opinions, corbyn thusly reflected that. It was mentioned at the time that his support seemed less than full throated! libs were complaining some went as far to mutter darkly in the groan about how his half heartedness cost us dearly etc

I don't think its news that Corbyns been of a leave mind for many many years now, this is common knowledge surely?


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> If you’re correct he is either a liar or a hypocrite.


An mp being a liar and hypocrite. That would never ever happen would it ?


----------



## Winot (Jan 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> it was decided at conference that labour would be pro-remain. Regardless of his own opinions, corbyn thusly reflected that. It was mentioned at the time that his support seemed less than full throated! libs were complaining some went as far to mutter darkly in the groan about how his half heartedness cost us dearly etc
> 
> I don't think its news that Corbyns been of a leave mind for many many years now, this is common knowledge surely?



Yes of course we know he’s leave. But he said recently he’d vote remain (again?).


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Fristly - who is this "us" and "we" that the EU are seeking to punish? Why are supposed anarchists and revolutionaries identifying themselves with bourgeois notions of national identity?



I dunno about you, but I happen to live in the UK, so any macho hardball bullshit or punitive measures the EU takes will inevitably affect me. Even if the EU elites are actually taking aim at their counterparts over here, that shit will trickle down.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> The remainers are still moaning and are spending big money trying to overturn the result. Shut up it's called democracy.


People do change their mind about things, what are the polls now?


----------



## sealion (Jan 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> what are the polls now?


I don't care anymore. The polls are only pulled up when it suits the rhetoric .


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> People do change their mind about things, what are the polls now?



I voted remain and if they run it again I'm voting leave.

Any polls would be pretty meaningless absent any real prospect of another referendum.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Voted leave, would vote leave again if there was another referendum. Nothing has changed since the last one, if anything the events that have transpired in the meantime have only confirmed my suspicions about the EU.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Any polls would be pretty meaningless absent any real prospect of another referendum.


Yes very much so. 


> There’s also a question of how useful a referendum voting intention question is when there isn’t actually a second referendum due. The most likely route to a second referendum is a referendum on the terms of the deal…which obviously aren’t known yet. In my experience, most people who contact polling companies asking whether we’ve asked a Brexit referendum question aren’t primarily interested in how people would vote in a second referendum, but really want to see if the public have changed their mind about how they voted in the first one…


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 20, 2018)

Can I just ask what it is you're actually going to _sell_ to the rest of the world?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can I just ask what it is you're actually going to _sell_ to the rest of the world?



Maybe some of us have this notion that part of the problem with the EU (and capitalism in general), is this idea that we should be pimping ourselves out to whatever degree that international capital demands?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Maybe some of us have this notion that part of the problem with the EU (and capitalism in general), is this idea that we should be pimping ourselves out to whatever degree that international capital demands?


But you need to exist, right?   You use money?

What will you trade, to generate income?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But you need to exist, right?   You use money?
> 
> What will you trade, to generate income?



Homemade jams and plastic police tit hats.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But you need to exist, right?   You use money?
> 
> What will you trade, to generate income?



I need to exist, yeah. But I don't think we need exclusive access to EU markets to exist. Plenty of other countries manage to get along fine without completely prostrating themselves before Brussels.

I also use money. But since I generally use Pound Sterling rather than the Euro or any other currency, I'm not sure what the relevance is.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I need to exist, yeah. But I don't think we need exclusive access to EU markets to exist. Plenty of other countries manage to get along fine without completely prostrating themselves before Brussels.
> 
> I.



do they? most countries are being butt fucked trade wise by corporations and/or the likes of the USA and china.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> do they? most countries are being butt fucked trade wise by corporations and/or the likes of the USA and china.



USA and China eh? Neither of those sound close to Brussels. Plus it's not like the EU has done much to rein in multinational corporations.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> USA and China eh? Neither of those sound close to Brussels. Plus it's not like the EU has done much to rein in multinational corporations.




Come come now, Junker was the guvnor of Luxembourg and look how they have reined the fuckers in.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 20, 2018)

Bizarre reification  of referendums here. If Ireland's referendum on abortion this year goes the wrong  way will such arguments still be  used?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 20, 2018)

I was challenging your assertion that "Plenty of other countries manage to get along fine without completely prostrating themselves before Brussels".


----------



## agricola (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Would that be the same Jeremy Corbyn who voted  and campaigned for remain - and says he would do so again?



TBH Corbyn is the one politician at the top that has a sane position on the EU; ie: that there are serial and severe problems with it, but that the idea that this edition of the Tory Party could be trusted with negotiating our way out of it is something that is best avoided.  It is like being aboard a ship which is barely afloat - you do want to call attention to the problem the vessel is in, but you don't want to really trust the bloke who is telling you that the best way to save yourself is to leap into the water after setting yourself on fire.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I need to exist, yeah. But I don't think we need exclusive access to EU markets to exist. Plenty of other countries manage to get along fine without completely prostrating themselves before Brussels.
> 
> I also use money. But since I generally use Pound Sterling rather than the Euro or any other currency, I'm not sure what the relevance is.


What will you sell (or trade) to _any_ market, to any nation or state or entity, allowing access to the global market, that will keep a balanced and healthy economy?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I was challenging your assertion that "Plenty of other countries manage to get along fine without completely prostrating themselves before Brussels".



By shooting yourself in the foot through pointing out the influence of Washington and Beijing?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What will you sell (or trade) to _any_ market, to any nation or state or entity, allowing access to the global market, that will keep a balanced and healthy economy?



I dunno, I'm no economist, but I reckon we could trade whatever we have left after Brexit causes the spontaneous combustion of all the UK's productive industries.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What will you sell (or trade) to _any_ market, to any nation or state or entity, allowing access to the global market, that will keep a balanced and healthy economy?



Do you have any values other than monetary ones?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 20, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Do you have any values other than monetary ones?



Not to mention the completely unwarranted assumption that allowing access to the global market is what will "keep a balanced and healthy economy". Balanced and healthy *for whom?*


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> By shooting yourself in the foot through pointing out the influence of Washington and Beijing?



cant follow your reasoning here. The uk will be less able to negotiate favourable deals with the USA and China then what it could get through the EU.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can I just ask what it is you're actually going to _sell_ to the rest of the world?





DexterTCN said:


> But you need to exist, right?   You use money?
> 
> What will you trade, to generate income?



Who is the _you're/you_ referred to here? (As if I don't know).

Whether the UK is part of the EU or not, _I, _and the vast majority of people in the UK will generate income by the exploitation of my labour, either directly or indirectly. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> Bizarre reification  of referendums here. If Ireland's referendum on abortion this year goes the wrong  way will such arguments still be  used?


By who?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I dunno, I'm no economist, but I reckon we could trade whatever we have left after Brexit causes the spontaneous combustion of all the UK's productive industries.


What productive industries?  What do you produce, what can you trade that belongs to you?  Steel, cars, coal, fridges, cutlery, TVs?   What do you make?  What natural resources?

What will you trade?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What productive industries?  What do you produce, what can you trade that belongs to you?  Steel, cars, coal, fridges, cutlery, TVs?   What do you make?  What natural resources?
> 
> What will you trade?



Well, I personally will be trading my labour power for an inadequate compensation, just like I have been doing for most of my adult life.

If you're talking about the UK in general, most workers in the UK  - you know, the people who actually create the wealth - are not going to vanish in a puff of smoke once we leave the EU.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Well, I personally will be trading my labour power for an inadequate compensation, just like I have been doing for most of my adult life.
> 
> If you're talking about the UK in general, most workers in the UK  - you know, the people who actually create the wealth - are not going to vanish in a puff of smoke once we leave the EU.


So you don't know?

You're entering the global market on your own and don't know what commodities you have for equity?   You don't know who you'll trade with, you have no agreements, you don't have any industries*, you have no geographical advantages** and very few friends***.

You have no trade advantages, no labour cost advantages (uh-oh...guess what happens there).  Even if you can attract inward investment...the profit goes out of the country (either to foreign investors or tax havens if it's an 'internal' UK company).  You have no economic model.   All you can do is sell the family silver and there's precious little of that left (nhs?) and pimp of the labour force for *no value*.

*no industries that are not stronger in other parts of the world and can outbid/undercut you or already have strong agreements in place.  Unless you can name one.

** too close to europe, too far from everyplace else.  

*** none, basically


----------



## NoXion (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So you don't know?
> 
> You're entering the global market on your own and don't know what commodities you have for equity?   You don't know who you'll trade with, you have no agreements, you don't have any industries*, you have no geographical advantages** and very few friends***.
> 
> ...



If the UK is such an unproductive, uncompetitive country that needs to have capital and underpaid workers regularly pumped into it to prevent economic collapse, then in the EU or out of the EU, we're fucked either way.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I dunno, I'm no economist, but I reckon we could trade whatever we have left after Brexit causes the spontaneous combustion of all the UK's productive industries.



I’m no economist either.

45% of our trade is with the EU27 countries.

It won’t vanish on exit day. It won’t continue either, on that level.

What we’re *told* is that the slack, and more to boot, will be filled by other countries. It’s a promise. No deals have been done (legally we can’t), but trust the politicians, it will be fine.

Hands up who trusts this to happen? (If you see inter country trade as a bad thing, fill your boots. You can do this right away, you’ve won already)


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If the UK is such an unproductive, uncompetitive country that needs to have capital and underpaid workers regularly pumped into it to prevent economic collapse, then in the EU or out of the EU, we're fucked either way.



One thing with our economy, much like say Germany and France, is we’re getting older. Healthcare costs rise, tax revenue goes down (in proportion).

Immigrant workers - for now at least - are net positive. They pay more in tax than they draw in services.

I’d like better protection for their labour. I’m not sure “fuck off” is the answer for that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> One thing with our economy, much like say Germany and France, is we’re getting older. Healthcare costs rise, tax revenue goes down (in proportion).


_Who's_ economy, the UK's? How is that _our_ economy?

People on U75 rightly pour scorn on Cameron or May talking about how "we're all in it together", why are some now following them, and Farage, the CBI, the DoI, LibDems, BoE and all the other wankers into giving weight to this nonsense.

----

If we are going to have this debate then lets start at the beginning - what is the UK/British/rUK (whichever you prefer) economy when it's at home?


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> _Who's_ economy, the UK's? How is that _our_ economy?
> 
> People on U75 rightly pour scorn on Cameron or May talking about how "we're all in it together", why are some now following them, and Farage, the CBI, the DoI, LibDems, BoE and all the other wankers into giving weight to this nonsense.
> 
> ...



I’m talking basics. Paying for healthcare. The NHS is part of our economy, and can’t be wished away.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m talking basics. Paying for healthcare. The NHS is part of our economy, and can’t be wished away.


In my view you are, with the greatest respect, talking gibberish. The individual words may make sense but the sentence is meaningless. 

You are constructing a false contention upon a whole heap of assumptions, many of which I don't accept, indeed I consider them politically regressive. I mean you keep on talking about "our economy", who is the _our_ here? What do you mean by an economy?


----------



## alex_ (Jan 21, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If the UK is such an unproductive, uncompetitive country that needs to have capital and underpaid workers regularly pumped into it to prevent economic collapse, then in the EU or out of the EU, we're fucked either way.



I know what’ll help - let’s make it harder to trade with our biggest export/import market.

Alex


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In my view you are, with the greatest respect, talking gibberish. The individual words may make sense but the sentence is meaningless.
> 
> You are constructing a false contention upon a whole heap of assumptions, many of which I don't accept, indeed I consider them politically regressive. I mean you keep on talking about "our economy", who is the _our_ here? What do you mean by an economy?



I’m not sure how to answer that.

Do you mean an economy is a false contstruct? Or one (and there’s meat here) that it values the wrong things?

Any bystanders help me now. Is it just a made up word? What *is* an economy.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In my view you are, with the greatest respect, talking gibberish. The individual words may make sense but the sentence is meaningless.
> 
> You are constructing a false contention upon a whole heap of assumptions, many of which I don't accept, indeed I consider them politically regressive. I mean you keep on talking about "our economy", who is the _our_ here? What do you mean by an economy?



If you wish to take part in this conversation perhaps you should get a dictionary so you can understand some of the basics.

This might help.

economy | Definition of economy in English by Oxford Dictionaries

I’d image he means the British economy.

Alex


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

There can also be a broader definition. You can include things that are socially useful, but not income generating - raising children, caring for a relative, doing work in the community etc.

How all that plays into pro/anti Brexit, might be too much for my brain right now.


----------



## stethoscope (Jan 21, 2018)

alex_ said:


> If you wish to take part in this conversation perhaps you should get a dictionary so you can understand some of the basics.
> 
> This might help.



RS understands more about economies than most of you dicks.

What he's asking is _our economy_? Unpack it, what does that really mean? The 'economy' isn't mine, or other workers. It's that of those with class and capital interests and power.


----------



## stethoscope (Jan 21, 2018)

_Won't somebody think of our economy?_

Well, actually I'm a libertarian communist, so no.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m not sure how to answer that.
> 
> Do you mean an economy is a false contstruct? Or one (and there’s meat here) that it values the wrong things?
> 
> Any bystanders help me now. Is it just a made up word? What *is* an economy.


I consider "the British economy" as referred to by the media, politicians and on here a political construct, one that was designed to facilitate the exploitation of labour. Thus, we have statements about how free trade is "good for the [British] economy" and that nationalisation and/or higher taxes are "harmful to the economy". And the use of this construct removes class and reinforces nationhood, "our economy", meaning British not labour.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m not sure how to answer that.
> 
> Do you mean an economy is a false contstruct? Or one (and there’s meat here) that it values the wrong things?
> 
> Any bystanders help me now. Is it just a made up word? What *is* an economy.


The UK has a market economy, so to a large extent the economy belongs to the markets (capital). You'd be able to take more ownership of a planned economy and therefore say it's 'ours' - at least on a democratic level.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The UK has a market economy, so I guess the economy belongs to the markets. You'd be able to take more ownership of a planned economy and therefore say it's 'ours' - at least on a democratic level.


Schoolboy error. Like every country the UK has a mixed economy. #economics101


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Schoolboy error. Like every country the UK has a mixed economy. #economics101


True. Any indicators on where  the UK is on a scale between public and private compared to other economies?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 21, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> RS understands more about economies than most of you dicks.


No he doesn't, as is absolutely plain from his posts where he tries to force everything into his own world-view.  And your insulting attitude adds nothing but heat when we need light, as usual.   Why not contribute to a discussion about an extremely serious situation instead of giving us your shite about a libertarian communistic fantasy.

Dealing with the real world here, you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> True. Any indicators on where  the UK is on a scale between public and private compared to other economies?


Very hard to say when so much infrastructure owned by companies linked to foreign governments.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So you don't know?
> 
> You're entering the global market on your own and don't know what commodities you have for equity?   You don't know who you'll trade with, you have no agreements, you don't have any industries*, you have no geographical advantages** and very few friends***.
> 
> ...


redsquirrel is right, but if we ignore that and play the “our economy”game:

If the rest of the world was wiped out in a freak plague that only a combination of tea, umbrellas and queuing gave immunity against, would the UK cease to function?  In the long term, would it be unable to look after itself?

What about, in the actual globalised society we current have: after Brexit, will UK ownership of overseas assets cease to be valid?

How about whether culture, education and infrastructure provide any advantages to an economy?

In short, is the UK in the top half dozen economies only because of 40 years of free trade with the EU?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo, a question for you to (hopefully) help elucidate the point I'm trying to make.

It is the mainstream political consensus that the UK (and other countries) economy in the 1970s was "in trouble", that it was doing "badly". Would you agree with that consensus?


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> True. Any indicators on where  the UK is on a scale between public and private compared to other economies?



I’d be really interested to see 
some numbers on that.

Doing ‘better’ can’t be measured solely on company profit and wages.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> How about whether culture, education and infrastructure provide any advantages to an economy?



Contrary to what is generally thought by absolutely no-one, yes they do.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> paolo, a question for you to (hopefully) help elucidate the point I'm trying to make.
> 
> It is the mainstream political consensus that the UK (and other countries) economy in the 1970s was "in trouble", that it was doing "badly". Would you agree with that consensus?



I can’t say I have much of an idea beyond the conventional history books. Reflecting on my childhood experience (statistically erase), the 70s in hindsight seemed fucked. We were investing in things better left to commerce (eg cars), and underinvesting in more important stuff (Rail).

I don’t think the 70s was a good time. Bad industrial relations, bad nationalisation. Strikes, power cuts, it wasn’t good.

It seems like more recently - last few decades - we’ve bounced the entirely wrong way.

I’m going way off the Brexit discussion. Zzzzzp.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I don’t think the 70s was a good time. Bad industrial relations, bad nationalisation. Strikes, power cuts, it wasn’t good.


It was the peak for wage equality, though.  And lots of associated wellbeing measures.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 21, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Contrary to what is generally thought by absolutely no-one, yes they do.


I wasn’t suggesting it was a controversial point.

If culture, education and infrastructure are important, that is becaus they provide a competitive advantage that will still exist post-Brexit.  How will the UK thrive without open access EU markets?  Using the same competitive advantages it currently uses, is how.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 21, 2018)

Of course its been massaged into popular memory as the hell of that Winter of Discontent.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I wasn’t suggesting it was a controversial point.
> 
> If culture, education and infrastructure are important, that is becaus they provide a competitive advantage that will still exist post-Brexit.  How will the UK thrive without open access EU markets?  Using the same competitive advantages it currently uses, is how.



The same competitive advantages it will have fewer of.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 21, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The same competitive advantages it will have fewer of.


It’s losing its culture and education?  And its infrastructure, bar the nebulous idea that trading rights comprise “infrastructure”?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I can’t say I have much of an idea beyond the conventional history books.



So you think we're fucked outside the EU but you don't know anything about the time before our membership of EEC/EU and the advent of Thatcherism?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 21, 2018)

https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/mcvities-digestives-packs-shrink-rising-ingredient-costs/


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/mcvities-digestives-packs-shrink-rising-ingredient-costs/


But what do you think about it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So you think we're fucked outside the EU but you don't know anything about the time before our membership of EEC/EU and the advent of Thatcherism?


Tbh we're fucked in or out of the eu


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s losing its culture and education?  And its infrastructure, bar the nebulous idea that trading rights comprise “infrastructure”?



Well, yes Brexit presents real and obvious threats to British culture and education, variable depending on how things resolve themselves. But that wasn't really my point. If we leave the EU, the British economy will face new impediments in various regards. To point out that there may be some regards in which the impediments are lesser or even non-existent doesn't negate that, and also isn't really an insight.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> https://inews.co.uk/news/uk/mcvities-digestives-packs-shrink-rising-ingredient-costs/



Brexit really takes the biscuit.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 21, 2018)

Doppelgänger said:


> Sadly the Brexit ones are fake, but they are hilariously funny.



Fake or not, I now have a set in my possession!  








As well as the Korolev centenary set:


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I can’t say I have much of an idea beyond the conventional history books. Reflecting on my childhood experience (statistically erase), the 70s in hindsight seemed fucked. We were investing in things better left to commerce (eg cars), and underinvesting in more important stuff (Rail).
> 
> I don’t think the 70s was a good time. Bad industrial relations, bad nationalisation. Strikes, power cuts, it wasn’t good.


So you seem to, by and large, concur with the consensus view that the British economy "was struggling". OK, but it was the 1970s when wages were highest as a % of GDP, it was in the mid-70s that the Gini coefficient was the lowest and that social mobility was at it's height.

Incidentally you say the strikes '[weren't] good" but the equality that was present in the 70s was brought about by those strikes.


paolo said:


> It seems like more recently - last few decades - we’ve bounced the entirely wrong way.


So was the British economy better in the 90s/00s than the 70s in your opinion? A period where inequality reached the same level as at the beginning of the 20th century? 

When you talk about things being bad for "the economy" what do you mean? Because the period that capital, politicians and the media talk about as being a period of economic difficulties had labour power at it's height.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So you think we're fucked outside the EU but you don't know anything about the time before our membership of EEC/EU and the advent of Thatcherism?



Two points:

My hunch is that we will be worse off. It’s just a hunch. Right now we don’t know. There’s some good commentaries on this thread about why I might be wrong. Power to them.

Point two: Unless you’re as decrepid as I am, fuck off with your ideas about what I grew up with.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So you seem to, by and large, concur with the consensus view that the British economy "was struggling". OK, but it was the 1970s when wages were highest as a % of GDP, it was in the mid-70s that the Gini coefficient was the lowest and that social mobility was at it's height.
> 
> Incidentally you say the strikes '[weren't] good" but the equality that was present in the 70s was brought about by those strikes.
> So was the British economy better in the 90s/00s than the 70s in your opinion? A period where inequality reached the same level as at the beginning of the 20th century?
> ...



Ok, I’m now responsible for the last 40 years.

I’ll need some time to work the data.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 21, 2018)

We have different industries, technology etc than in the 70s, another thing that has changed is that supply lines are split across more countries now so throwing up more barriers has got to be a bad thing.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 21, 2018)

from the label of the first of the graphs "The era of Margareth" sounds like something out of the Lord of the Rings.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> We have different industries, technology etc than in the 70s



Indeed. No truck with that.


----------



## paolo (Jan 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So you seem to, by and large, concur with the consensus view that the British economy "was struggling". OK, but it was the 1970s when wages were highest as a % of GDP, it was in the mid-70s that the Gini coefficient was the lowest and that social mobility was at it's height.
> 
> Incidentally you say the strikes '[weren't] good" but the equality that was present in the 70s was brought about by those strikes.
> So was the British economy better in the 90s/00s than the 70s in your opinion? A period where inequality reached the same level as at the beginning of the 20th century?
> ...



My comment about strikes was in the context of being a child. I was roughly 7 years old.

But my recollection is statistically irrelevant. I’ll look at your graphs. Numbers work better.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Brexit really takes the biscuit.



Whats the relevance of that story? The word Brexit literally doesn't appear on the page.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> Two points:
> 
> My hunch is that we will be worse off. It’s just a hunch. Right now we don’t know. There’s some good commentaries on this thread about why I might be wrong. Power to them.
> 
> Point two: Unless you’re as decrepid as I am, fuck off with your ideas about what I grew up with.



I'm not decrepit at all, I just know a bit about 20th century history.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Whats the relevance of that story? The word Brexit literally doesn't appear on the page.



Well, that's what you get for reading a link.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

For those who's main concern is mammon: EU Growth Protecting The UK From Brexit Shock, Says Jim O'Neill


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> For those who's main concern is mammon: EU Growth Protecting The UK From Brexit Shock, Says Jim O'Neill


What are you saying?   

The url says the uk is protected from the brexit shock

and it's a Tory peer.

the link says ...

"Speaking to the BBC ahead of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, he also sounded the alarm on hard Brexit and pondered how much better the UK would be doing had it not opted for divorce."

and it's a Tory peer.

he says... “Now, my own view is if we go for a really hard Brexit or a no-deal Brexit, we’ll probably suffer more than that 3%."

and then says "But if it is only 3%,"

and it's a Tory peer.

Are you agreeing with it or disagreeing with it?  And what are you agreeing or disagreeing with?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What are you saying?
> 
> The url says the uk is protected from the brexit shock
> 
> ...



Very aggressive aren’t you.

He’s a staunch remainer who has a shitload more experience than you in dealing with the UK economy, the apparent threats to which seem to make you agitated, yet he is now saying that he believes the economic hit to the UK from Brexit will be a mere blip and not noticeable.

You can choose to ignore him if you wish, after all he’s saying what many leavers have been saying from the start, Brexit is not the economic suicide that the Guardian wallies say it is, and to those such as yourself who’s biggest bug bear over Brexit is the apparent threat to your own lifestyle, what this man is saying doesn’t fit the narrative.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Very aggressive aren’t you.
> 
> He’s a staunch remainer who has a shitload more experience than you


----------



## sealion (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What are you saying?
> 
> The url says the uk is protected from the brexit shock
> 
> ...



Another Tory peer for you 
Parliamentary fightback against Brexit on cards


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

I don't give a fuck who he is...I was just asking what you were saying.


Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ...You can choose to ignore him if you wish...


the tory peer, right?   The tory who I presume (not entirely au fait,) being a peer, is from the house of lords?

You're saying I should listen to the tory peer?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

He’s also an ex-banker. A total shitcunt.

But when it comes to the UK economy that you hold so dear, he is one of the fuckers that runs it, so yeah, you should listen to him.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He’s also an ex-banker. A total shitcunt.
> 
> But when it comes to the UK economy that you hold so dear, he is one of the fuckers that runs it, so yeah, you should listen to him.



I don't care about the UK economy mate, I'm Scottish, which means I don't listen to tories either, and if someone posts a link to them I'll give it a critical eye.   But brexit has a (large) effect here too.

You're the one who suggested plastic titties, I think, when I asked what you would trade?   Ever come up with something better?

Where we going?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't give a fuck who he is...I was just asking what you were saying.
> 
> the tory peer, right?   The tory who I presume (not entirely au fait,) being a peer, is from the house of lords?
> 
> You're saying I should listen to the tory peer?


But you must totally agree with him, right, because he's a remainer?

Defend him!!!


----------



## bemused (Jan 22, 2018)

It does feel like Labour and Tories are seeing who will blink first in terms of 2nd referendum. I wouldn't be surprised if one happens and the World can laugh at us when we vote to stay. I could be wrong.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't care about the UK economy mate, I'm Scottish, which means I don't listen to tories either, and if someone posts a link to them I'll give it a critical eye.   But brexit has a (large) effect here too.
> 
> You're the one who suggested plastic titties, I think, when I asked what you would trade?   Ever come up with something better?
> 
> Where we going?



The Scotland that voted to stay in the UK? The Scotland that let the Conservatives take SNP
seats last year? 

You’re idiotic questioning about what would various people on these boards trade got the response it deserved.

You make out you don’t like the Tories but at the slightest whiff of a threat to your cushy lifestyle you bemoan the fact that Cameron isn’t still in Downing St and unassailable.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Scotland that voted to stay in the UK? The Scotland that let the Conservatives take SNP
> seats last year?
> 
> You’re idiotic questioning about what would various people on these boards trade got the response it deserved.
> ...


Lol...ok going there.

Relative.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't care about the UK economy mate, I'm Scottish, which means I don't listen to tories either, and if someone posts a link to them I'll give it a critical eye.   But brexit has a (large) effect here too.
> 
> You're the one who suggested plastic titties, I think, when I asked what you would trade?   Ever come up with something better?
> 
> Where we going?



If you don't care about the UK economy, then why the fuck are you getting so worked up about Brexit's supposed effects on it?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If you don't care about the UK economy, then why the fuck are you getting so worked up about Brexit's supposed effects on it?


Worked up?

Tell me an export?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Worked up?
> 
> Tell me an export?



McEwans? Time to lay off it perhaps.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Worked up?
> 
> Tell me an export?



I'll give you ten: https://realbusiness.co.uk/any-other-business/2016/03/28/the-top-ten-uk-exports-in-2016/


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I'll give you ten: https://realbusiness.co.uk/any-other-business/2016/03/28/the-top-ten-uk-exports-in-2016/


Cars?

UK makes loads of cars aye?   Which ones?

Art?   Art?

£4 billion pounds worth of medical devices?  £4 billion pounds?   Well....rulers of the world economy there then eh.   Let's not google chewing gum.   £4 billion....fuck me...never have I seen the likes.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Cars?
> 
> UK makes loads of cars aye?   Which ones?
> 
> ...


so come on then, what's the UK going to export if it stays in the Eu?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Cars?
> 
> UK makes loads of cars aye?   Which ones?
> 
> ...



What's your point, caller?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> so come on then, what's the UK going to export if it stays in the Eu?


Inside the EU you really only have to import...other states deal with the exporting shit.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Inside the EU you really only have to import...other states deal with the exporting shit.


Fuck me, you've got me.
So the Eu's like a massive dole office and we just sign on and watch Jeremy Kyle all day whilst enjoying our imported stuff. Why didn't I realise that before


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> so come on then, what's the UK going to export if it stays in the Eu?



The question is really more "how much?" than "what?"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Inside the EU you really only have to import...other states deal with the exporting shit.



Wow


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> so come on then, what's the UK going to export if it stays in the Eu?



I said the UK doesn't need to when it's in the EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The question is really more "how much?" than "what?"


The question was Dexter's and he seems to believe the answer to both "what" and "how much" is "fuck all".
Pointless.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I said the UK doesn't need to when it's in the EU.


You're repeating yourself!
So what happens if the exports of the other Eu countries goes to shit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I said the UK doesn't need to when it's in the EU.



Could you talk me through this world view please?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The question was Dexter's and he seems to believe the answer to both "what" and "how much" is "fuck all".
> Pointless.



Yeah, my post was really for Dexter's attention too.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 23, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Could you talk me through this world view please?


What kind of explanation would you like? 

One where you act like a cunt playing to your audience?   Or one where you discuss it?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What kind of explanation would you like?



Speaking for myself only, just one that makes the slightest bit of sense would be good.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 23, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Speaking for myself only, just one that makes the slightest bit of sense would be good.


It's the simplest thing to ask, what you will trade.


----------



## gosub (Jan 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's the simplest thing to ask, what you will trade.


So... You're asking what we All do for a living?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's the simplest thing to ask, what you will trade.


It's the idea that if we're in the EU we don't need to export anything that I'm interested in. How does that work in the EU but not outside of the EU?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 24, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's the idea that if we're in the EU we don't need to export anything that I'm interested in. How does that work in the EU but not outside of the EU?


We are all European then, so it comes circular like pass the parcel, neither export nor import.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 24, 2018)

Maybe if we sent everything we produce in diplomatic mailbags to a warehouse in Estonia, where it would be repackaged and forwarded on, then we would technically have no exports. I'm struggling with why Brexit would stop us from doing this, so maybe Dexter has something even more cunning in mind.


----------



## Winot (Jan 24, 2018)

I thought we all knew that the answer was innovative jam?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's the idea that if we're in the EU we don't need to export anything that I'm interested in. How does that work in the EU but not outside of the EU?


Why don't you hazard a guess?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Why don't you hazard a guess?


It would be a lot more straightforward if you just explain what you mean. If for some reason you don't want to explain, then whatevs.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It would be a lot more straightforward if you just explain what you mean. If for some reason you don't want to explain, then whatevs.


I need to explain what I mean when I say a country in a large trading bloc doesn't need to export - but would have to export if it was on its own?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I need to explain what I mean when I say a country in a large trading bloc doesn't need to export - but would have to export if it was on its own?



Countries in trading blocs most certainly do export stuff. I gave you a whole list of things that the UK exports which are in demand worldwide - your sneering doesn't change that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Countries in trading blocs most certainly do export stuff. I gave you a whole list of things that the UK exports which are in demand worldwide - your sneering doesn't change that.


You gave a list, it wasn't a whole list it was a 'top ten'.  It was also garbage.

You certainly did not define that they were UK exports, only that they were exported from the UK.  No names were given.  'Cars' ?  What UK cars were the top of your list?   What car industry does the UK have?   Answer that, thanks.  Tell me the number one car export.

All I asked was...what will you trade?  That's not sneering.


----------



## gosub (Jan 24, 2018)

You certainly did not define that they were UK exports, only that they were exported from the UK.  No names were given.  'Cars' ?  What UK cars were the top of your list?   What car industry does the UK have?   Answer that, thanks.  Tell me the number one car export.

All I asked was...what will you trade?  That's not sneering.[/QUOTE]

 Qashqai


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I need to explain what I mean when I say a country in a large trading bloc doesn't need to export - but would have to export if it was on its own?


Exports are any goods or services sold to another country.  
You might have a bit of a point if there was only one currency in the EU *and* it had a full fiscal union - but alas, that's still a pipe dream. So export we do.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Exports are any goods or services sold to another country.
> You might have a bit of a point if there was only one currency in the EU *and* it had a full fiscal union - but alas, that's still a pipe dream. So export we do.


No idea what you're talking about.

Absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No idea what you're talking about.
> 
> Absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.



If you're going to ignore requests to explain what it is you are going on about, that's your prerogative I guess. But it's a bit much to then complain about being misunderstood.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Worked up?
> Tell me an export?





DexterTCN said:


> Inside the EU you really only have to import...other states deal with the exporting shit.





pocketscience said:


> Exports are any goods or services sold to another country.
> You might have a bit of a point if there was only one currency in the EU *and* it had a full fiscal union - but alas, that's still a pipe dream. So export we do.





DexterTCN said:


> No idea what you're talking about.
> Absolutely nothing to do with what I was saying.


Congratulations. 152 pages of brexiteers and remoaners arguing the fuck with each other and finally we've found something that everyone can agree upon: That you're off your fucking trolley!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Congratulations. 152 pages of brexiteers and remoaners arguing the fuck with each other and you've become the first thing amongst all this, that everyone can agree upon: That you're off your fucking trolley!


I missed the bit where you told me about something of value that you will export.   The fact that it's misunderstood...well I can't take responsibility for that.

All I'm asking, no need to get personal.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I missed the bit where you told me about something of value that you will export.


it's been explained to you. In the most basic terms as the value of labour, then as physical goods. You just huff and dismiss it. Yet you ask again.
Here, more of the same (all be it from a few years ago):





What are you trying to say?  That the UK does'nt actually need to do all that business because it's in the EU?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2018)

Did you even read that?

Gemstones and precious metals £12 billion?

Yeah...that'll be the fucking emerald mine down Yorkshire, aye?   The gold mountains of Devon?   £12 billion a year in precious metals and gemstones?  Aye?  Every year?

There are not £23 billion worth of UK cars in the world, never mind a year.  Name a UK car!   Then name a UK car, or 20 of them, or 200 of them, that can sell £23 billion a year?   I'm not the one who needs a trolley.   You think Rolls-Royce sell 76000 cars a year every year?

Also...7 years old.  Worst google ever.

Just...fuck off.   Honestly.   You don't know what you're talking about.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There are not £23 billion worth of UK cars in the world, never mind a year.


Toyota and Volkswagen alone sold over $500 Billion worth of cars last year. What makes you think the UK cant make a measly £23 billion out of the automotive market?


----------



## gosub (Jan 24, 2018)

Thats odd, coz I already told you the most exported car was the Nissan Qashqai,

77% of UK manufactured cars are exported. 1.25 million of them.   






And while the the dollar has crept back up to pre referendum levels, the lower rates against the euro has made them more competetive


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Just...fuck off.   Honestly.   You don't know what you're talking about.


Come on then, oh wise one. How does the UK generate cash today, being in the Eu, without exporting?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Gemstones and precious metals £12 billion?
> Yeah...that'll be the fucking emerald mine down Yorkshire, aye?   The gold mountains of Devon?   £12 billion a year in precious metals and gemstones?  Aye?  Every year?


Never heard of Glencore? Billiton? Rio Tinto?..


----------



## gosub (Jan 25, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Never heard of Glencore? Billiton? Rio Tinto?..


Between the pair of us he's talking shite cos either the Brits working for Japanese companies count or the Aussies asset stripping their country for UK companies do.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 25, 2018)

gosub said:


> Between the pair of us he's talking shite cos either the Brits working for Japanese companies count or the Aussies asset stripping their country for UK companies do.


Exactly, Economies exploiting resources on a global scale.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Did you even read that?
> 
> Gemstones and precious metals £12 billion?
> 
> ...



What's your point here? That the diagram is just figures made up by an intern? Or something else?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2018)

gosub said:


> Thats odd, coz I already told you the most exported car was the Nissan Qashqai,
> 
> 77% of UK manufactured cars are exported. 1.25 million of them.
> 
> ...


Jaguar is Indian.
Toyota, Nissan and Honda are Japanese.
Vauxhall is American.
Minis are German.

None of those are UK exports, they are exports and sales _from_ the UK but the profits do not stay in the UK, the control of them does not reside in the UK.  

(Well...some profits may stay in the UK but *only* when the parent company wants to invest/buy up/consolidate other things such as smaller service/goods providers to their larger companies...those ancillary profits will still not stay in the UK)


----------



## Supine (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Jaguar is Indian.
> Toyota, Nissan and Honda are Japanese.
> Vauxhall is American.
> Minis are German.
> ...



The UK currently adds value to the supply chain during manufacture. If production starts moving to mainland Europe - and it will - we loose jobs and £.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> The UK currently adds value to the supply chain during manufacture. If production starts moving to mainland Europe - and it will - we loose jobs and £.


That is certainly one of the easiest consequences to reasonably predict.  Markets will withdraw from the UK or extract a heavy price for keeping some of their business here.


----------



## bemused (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That is certainly one of the easiest consequences to reasonably predict.  Markets will withdraw from the UK or extract a heavy price for keeping some of their business here.



Isn't that the  UKs lever with the EU - a reasonable deal stops the UK incentivising businesses to set up her by offsetting any barrier costs with the tax system?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Jaguar is Indian.
> Toyota, Nissan and Honda are Japanese.
> Vauxhall is American.
> Minis are German.
> ...


If you're going to play that game, you better add all the profits of globally operating UK companies like GlaxoSmithKline and BP and half of companies like Gencore and Shell to your UK "exports".

But no, that's not how exports work.  Exports are the value of goods taken out of the country for sale elsewhere.  Imports are the value of goods brought into the country.  The manufacture of Nissan cars involves import of raw materials and intangible goods (like intellectual property) and the export of a car.


----------



## andysays (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What will you sell (or trade) to _any_ market, to any nation or state or entity, allowing access to the global market, that will keep a balanced and healthy economy?



Commemorative Brexit dinner services with pictures of the Queen, Churchill, Thatcher and Farage on them, obviously.

Because clearly absolutely no one in Britain is able to produce anything that anyone else in the world would want to buy, ever...


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> None of those are UK exports, they are exports and sales _from_ the UK but the profits do not stay in the UK, the control of them does not reside in the UK.


It's irrelevant if the "profits do not stay in the UK". Let's take Dyson as an example then. His profits (after tax) "stay in the UK" - but more importantly they're actually "staying" in his pocket. Then he might spend all that money on imported goods for all that matters... your point is irrelevant.
In the example gosub gave, the profits listed are made within the UK and are therefore subject to UK taxes. TATA (Owner of JLR) might me an Indian registered company but as a public listed company, all the shareholders creaming off _their _profits could be British for all you know. Your point is still irrelevant


----------



## gosub (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Jaguar is Indian.
> Toyota, Nissan and Honda are Japanese.
> Vauxhall is American.
> Minis are German.
> ...



So we are a mining giant then, and oil and gas what with UK's Gasprom's massive fields in Russia..You can't have it both ways.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 25, 2018)

18 months and 153 pages in this is quite a stunning run of batshit ignorance by DexterTCN, fair play!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> 18 months and 153 pages in this is quite a stunning run of batshit ignorance by DexterTCN, fair play!


Awesome.  Anyway I know you lot have a lot of work to support right-wing tory policy so I'll let you get on with it.

If you ever think of an export, let me know.   If you find those 'british' cars, too.  Could be a qashquai cash cow for you.  And keep stealing those gems from the poor countries...never know when they'll come in handy.   I think you'll probably be needing them.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Awesome.  Anyway I know you lot have a lot of work to support right-wing tory policy so I'll let you get on with it.
> 
> If you ever think of an export, let me know.   If you find those 'british' cars, too.  Could be a qashquai cash cow for you.  And keep stealing those gems from the poor countries...never know when they'll come in handy.   I think you'll probably be needing them.




Since we don't actually need exports, though, why should anyone care about this?


----------



## free spirit (Jan 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Since we don't actually need exports, though, why should anyone care about this?


do we not?

Maybe if we didn't want to import anything that could work, but other than that it's a bit of an odd suggestion.


----------



## Santino (Jan 25, 2018)

free spirit said:


> do we not?
> 
> Maybe if we didn't want to import anything that could work, but other than that it's a bit of an odd suggestion.


We don't export anything now, because of the EU.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 25, 2018)

free spirit said:


> do we not?
> 
> Maybe if we didn't want to import anything that could work, but other than that it's a bit of an odd suggestion.



Yes, it's an odd suggestion, but read up the thread.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes, it's an odd suggestion, but read up the thread.


ah. ok fair enough.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What kind of explanation would you like?
> 
> One where you act like a cunt playing to your audience?   Or one where you discuss it?





Ok...



DexterTCN said:


> Inside the EU you really only have to import...other states deal with the exporting shit.



You think you could have a successful economy which imported things but did not export things? That is ridiculous it would not work.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...You think you could have a successful economy which imported things but did not export things? That is ridiculous it would not work.


No, I didn't say that.

I said that inside the largest trading bloc in the world not all states have to be exporters, and britain certainly is not in any way an exporter, it's more um...a post-empire bottom-feeding fencer of stolen goods.  Look at some of the examples people have given in the last few pages of uk exports.   It's laughable...but still gets no scrutiny from anyone. (not just this lot, the people in charge too)

Britain isn't going to be in that bloc shortly...I asked 'what will now be traded'.  Never got there, but next I would ask 'to whom' and then 'for how much and in which currencies'.  This lot would argue that day is night, though. (as do the people in charge)

And in no way is britain a successful economy (which is the totality of goods, services, currency and the consumption and production of those things, I didn't say that to act smart, just to define what I'm talking about).  It's propped up by expensive loans, lines of credit and lots of money coming in (but sadly going out again). 

London* is a successful economy (as such/in ways), Scotland is.  Wales and NI are not, England is not.   That's not their fault, that's the way the centralised system has allowed it to become.   That's purely the fault of the people in charge.

You don't just have to look after yourself, you come attached with unsuccessful and broken economies which have suffered from decades of lack of development and investment.  Or worse you got that investment but at insane rates that you pay for decades.  (people in charge again)

Now what you should have done was gotten an English parliament imo, not brexit.   But meh.  

*not only is london a massive economy within itself, it's nigh on a country within a country.


----------



## gosub (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No, I didn't say that.
> 
> I said that inside the largest trading bloc in the world not all states have to be exporters, and britain certainly is not in any way an exporter, it's more um...a post-empire bottom-feeding fencer of stolen goods.  Look at some of the examples people have given in the last few pages of uk exports.   It's laughable...but still gets no scrutiny from anyone. (not just this lot, the people in charge too)
> 
> ...


Dennis Healey's rule of holes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No, I didn't say that.
> 
> I said that inside the largest trading bloc in the world not all states have to be exporters, and britain certainly is not in any way an exporter, it's more um...a post-empire bottom-feeding fencer of stolen goods.  Look at some of the examples people have given in the last few pages of uk exports.   It's laughable...but still gets no scrutiny from anyone. (not just this lot, the people in charge too)
> 
> ...


Yeh. We're leaving. Right.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2018)

Nissan's new Qashqai smashes UK car production record | This is Money



> ‘Together with the pioneering first generation version, there are now more than 2.5million Qashqais on the road in* Europe*, making Nissan the undisputed leader in the crossover sector.’


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 26, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Did you tell your German relative that you think that the majority of German individuals are deeply ingrained with multiple unsavoury traits including selfishness, being inconsiderate and being "crafty"?


Interesting article here in Der Spiegel today based on a study by psychologists from the Charite Hospital, Berlin.
All racism aside (these are German psychologists studying  Germans, in Germany) there are some rather unsavoury traits coming up in their findings; namely that grandiose narcissism is at epidemic levels in Germany. Now you may or may not agree that this _could _lend some evidence to the statements I made earlier on the thread, but I'd be interested in knowing if you think these doctors/academics are also racist?

Edit:
Note: when they refer to NPD they mean Narcistic Personality Disorder not the nazi's.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nissan's new Qashqai smashes UK car production record | This is Money


what's your point? A British developed and manufactured car made with the badge of another global publicly owned company - who's shares are probably mostly in the hands of large investment banks who just happen to be... post-empire bottom-feeding fencers of stolen goods?


----------



## gosub (Jan 26, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> what's your point? A British developed and manufactured car made with the badge of another global publicly owned company - who's shares are probably mostly in the hands of large investment banks who just happen to be... post-empire bottom-feeding fencers of stolen goods?


Far be it from me to second guess the machinations of Dexters brain (or lack of) but the Europe was bolded so presumably ,he's back to not being an export....I suppose they just sit there parked,  waiting for the fateful day the EU expands into the Middle East so they an have access to petrol.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> what's your point? A British developed and manufactured car made with the badge of another global publicly owned company ...


They're getting sold in Europe.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They're getting sold in Europe.


For a car squarely aimed at European markets, that would be expected. I'm still missing your point. 
Can you try being less vague in you posting style. These last 3 pages could have been summed up in 2 or 3 posts.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> For a car squarely aimed at European markets, that would be expected. I'm still missing your point.
> Can you try being less vague in you posting style. These last 3 pages could have been summed up in 2 or 3 posts.


Look...it's not a british car...it's a japanese car made in europe to sell to europeans.  The car is made inside the european market.  You're not going to be in that market.   So...

who is going to suffer in that scenario, multiple choice, one answer only

A: japanese car industry?
B: european car industry?
C: uk car industry?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Look...it's not a british car...it's a japanese car made in europe to sell to europeans.  The car is made inside the european market.  You're not going to be in that market.   So...


So? Do you think not being in a single market means your banned form the single market. How many Apple MacBook Pros are manufactured in the Eu?
The UK manufactured qashqai's are also sold in Russia & the middle east. It can be sold their after the UK leaves the EU too.



DexterTCN said:


> who is going to suffer in that scenario, multiple choice, one answer only
> 
> A: japanese car industry?
> B: european car industry?
> C: uk car industry?


One answer? I'd say no one needs to suffer_._


----------



## gosub (Jan 26, 2018)

UK manufacturing output at its highest for 10 years - UK manufacturing output best for 10 years


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 26, 2018)

gosub said:


> UK manufacturing output at its highest for 10 years - UK manufacturing output best for 10 years





> Sterling's fall in value following the Brexit referendum has made UK exports more competitive.



What do you think 'competitive' means there?

It's because you're selling them cheaper, that's what competitive means there.   That's not an increase in productivity...that's having to make more to keep the same amount of revenue because your money is worth less.  You either put the price up or produce more for the same price.

"Private housebuilding is only growing sector"


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What do you think 'competitive' means there?
> 
> It's because you're selling them cheaper, that's what competitive means there.   That's not an increase in productivity...that's having to make more to keep the same amount of revenue because your money is worth less.  You either put the price up or produce more for the same price.
> 
> "Private housebuilding is only growing sector"


What do you actually do for a living?
Tbf Me, currently I sell aviation engineering. Tings is good
Economics in our favour, paperwork is where the headaches lie


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What do you think 'competitive' means there?
> 
> It's because you're selling them cheaper, that's what competitive means there.   That's not an increase in productivity...that's having to make more to keep the same amount of revenue because your money is worth less.  You either put the price up or produce more for the same price.
> 
> "Private housebuilding is only growing sector"


How many mac book pro's were sold in Europe in 2017?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What do you think 'competitive' means there?
> 
> It's because you're selling them cheaper, that's what competitive means there.   That's not an increase in productivity...that's having to make more to keep the same amount of revenue because your money is worth less.  You either put the price up or produce more for the same price.
> 
> "Private housebuilding is only growing sector"


How many Netflix subscriptions in europe 2017?


----------



## J Ed (Jan 27, 2018)

Pret a Manger locations and Leave/Remain


----------



## Badgers (Jan 27, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 27, 2018)

^ Damn, beat me to it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2018)

gosub said:


> What do you actually do for a living?
> Tbf Me, currently I sell aviation engineering. Tings is good
> Economics in our favour, paperwork is where the headaches lie


I work for the revenue.  Tings is not good.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 126191



...and of course the grammar is wrong


----------



## kabbes (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They're getting sold in Europe.


You know that the stuff we sell to countries in Europe still counts as exports, right?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You know that the stuff we sell to countries in Europe still counts as exports, right?


yup

could you answer my question in #4592?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> yup
> 
> could you answer my question in #4592?


Reminds me of an exam question I’d have had at 22.

The answer is complicated.  It depends on an awful lot more factors than are currently apparent.  It could any of those three ways, in truth.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Reminds me of an exam question I’d have had at 22.
> 
> The answer is complicated.  It depends on an awful lot more factors than are currently apparent.  It could any of those three ways, in truth.


It's not complicated.

Neither the export of these goods nor their manufacture is a decision made in the uk.   The only reason they are built here is because we are in europe.  They will not be exported to europe if we leave, they will only be for the uk market and any new markets we enter into.   

What will that mean for the uk factories and workforce?  

Are you aware of any upcoming post-brexit contracts?   If you were to surmise them do you think they would be equal to, better or worse than our current contracts, and why?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No, I didn't say that.
> 
> I said that inside the largest trading bloc in the world not all states have to be exporters, and britain certainly is not in any way an exporter, it's more um...a post-empire bottom-feeding fencer of stolen goods.  Look at some of the examples people have given in the last few pages of uk exports.   It's laughable...but still gets no scrutiny from anyone. (not just this lot, the people in charge too)
> 
> ...



I see.




DexterTCN said:


>




Got shit hair though hasn't he?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 27, 2018)

possibly a syrup.


----------



## sealion (Jan 27, 2018)

He's like a deranged David Mellor.
https://capx.co/the-strange-case-of-guy-verhofstadt-free-market-federalist/


----------



## Badgers (Jan 27, 2018)




----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2018)

_Don't mention the Brexit!_


----------



## Badgers (Jan 27, 2018)

BREAKING: House of Lords set to BLOCK EU WITHDRAWAL BILLYour Brexit


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 27, 2018)

Badgers said:


> BREAKING: House of Lords set to BLOCK EU WITHDRAWAL BILLYour Brexit


That's um...an interesting site.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I see.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



finally - something we can agree on.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> finally - something we can agree on.



Actually, I'm going to have dissent. There's nothing wrong with his hair per se. It's only in the context of the rest of his head that it looks awful.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 27, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Actually, I'm going to have dissent. There's nothing wrong with his hair per se. It's only in the context of the rest of his head that it looks awful.



yeah - would probably look fine on its original owner.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Actually, I'm going to have dissent. There's nothing wrong with his hair per se. It's only in the context of the rest of his head that it looks awful.



I'm sorry, you could put that hair on any head you wanted and it would still look fucking disgusting.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That's um...an interesting site.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 28, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Interesting article here in Der Spiegel today based on a study by psychologists from the Charite Hospital, Berlin.
> All racism aside (these are German psychologists studying  Germans, in Germany) there are some rather unsavoury traits coming up in their findings; namely that grandiose narcissism is at epidemic levels in Germany. Now you may or may not agree that this _could _lend some evidence to the statements I made earlier on the thread, but I'd be interested in knowing if you think these doctors/academics are also racist?
> 
> Edit:
> Note: when they refer to NPD they mean Narcistic Personality Disorder not the nazi's.


 
The paper talks about an alleged narcissism epidemic in "modern western societies", not specifically in Germany. It does not set out to compare Germany with other countries; it looks at the differences between former east and west germans.

So, it does not support in any way the generalisations that you claim apply to the majority of Germans.

No, I don't think it's a racist paper. It doesn't make wide-ranging generalisations based on anecdote. It looks carefully at differences based on responses to a survey and considers whether any tendencies that might appear are statistically significant.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The paper talks about an alleged narcissism epidemic in "modern western societies", not specifically in Germany. It does not set out to compare Germany with other countries; it looks at the differences between former east and west germans.
> 
> So, it does not support in any way the generalisations that you claim apply to the majority of Germans.
> 
> No, I don't think it's a racist paper. It doesn't make wide-ranging generalisations based on anecdote. It looks carefully at differences based on responses to a survey and considers whether any tendencies that might appear are statistically significant.


How does it compare to, say, the racism of the mail or express?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> How does it compare to, say, the racism of the mail or express?


Are you under the impression that I am talking about a newspaper?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Are you under the impression that I am talking about a newspaper?


Only from your first two words.

e2a yes, genuinely thought it was


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The paper talks about an alleged narcissism epidemic in "modern western societies", not specifically in Germany. It does not set out to compare Germany with other countries; it looks at the differences between former east and west germans.
> 
> So, it does not support in any way the generalisations that you claim apply to the majority of Germans.


But it does draw a conclusion that national cultures do influence specific (in this case unsavoury) traits.


teuchter said:


> No, I don't think it's a racist paper. It doesn't make wide-ranging generalisations based on anecdote. It looks carefully at differences based on responses to a survey and considers whether any tendencies that might appear are statistically significant.


I agree, drawing a conclusion from a snapshot survey of 2000 Germans is not racist - but, neither is drawing a conclusion from my half century of close, first hand experience.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2018)

christ - not this again.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2018)

anway BINO. 







"Brexit in Name Only" would seem to be where May is heading - probably cos its the easyist, least painful option and is very much where business and finance and the civil service are pushing things. 
Brexiteers understandably unhappy and now moving to oust her
Its also make the whole farrago (farage?) an exercise in utter pointlessness.

But what happens if may gets replaced with a brexiteer? 

How much more fun can we take?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 29, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> christ - not this again.


Soz, don't let me distract you from the sage like economic advice from dexter... carry on...


----------



## bimble (Jan 29, 2018)

Just to help tie pocketscience 's work into the pressing issues of the day, here's something The Sun published today, about how you can now book your sun lounger on Thomas Cook Holidays. Look who they got to comment on why this is important.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 29, 2018)

bimble said:


> Just to help tie pocketscience 's work into the pressing issues of the day, here's something The Sun published today, about how you can now book your sun lounger on Thomas Cook Holidays. Look who they got to comment on why this is important.
> View attachment 126295


Ellenbogengesellschaft


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> anway BINO.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But David Davies is pro-brexit, he is theoretically in charge of the negotiations.  He's a man who's not scared of resigning, so if this is going as you describe why is he silent?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> But David Davies is pro-brexit, he is theoretically in charge of the negotiations.  He's a man who's not scared of resigning, so if this is going as you describe why is he silent?



you'd have to ask him yourself (tbh - i think Davies has thrown in the towel and is just going through the motions) . im just going on what been reported over the past few days. the hacks may all have it totally wrong - but the consensus is "brexiteers spitting dummies cos BINO".


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Soz, don't let me distract you from the sage like economic advice from dexter... carry on...



Why don't you start your own thread  where everyone can post up their favourite, quasi- racist, negative national stereotypes? Irish are thick. Greeks smell. germans are devious and selfish. that kind of thing.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> But it does draw a conclusion that national cultures do influence specific (in this case unsavoury) traits.


No it doesn't.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> But David Davies is pro-brexit, he is theoretically in charge of the negotiations.  He's a man who's not scared of resigning, so if this is going as you describe why is he silent?



Because by now he'll have heard from a thousand different people that hard brexit won't work. He knows that zero things have been done to ensure that all the stuff we delegate to the EU can magically be done in house by next year. He knows that the Irish situation has been kicked into the long grass but not actually resolved.

I personally think Davis is a fairly dim individual who has basically just blue-screened after being faced with the prospect of having some actual work to do.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2018)

bimble said:


> Just to help tie pocketscience 's work into the pressing issues of the day, here's something The Sun published today, about how you can now book your sun lounger on Thomas Cook Holidays. Look who they got to comment on why this is important.
> View attachment 126295



They should've got Thomas Cook to reserve Poland back in '39. Would've saved all sorts of bother.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I agree, drawing a conclusion from a snapshot survey of 2000 Germans is not racist - but, neither is drawing a conclusion from my half century of close, first hand experience.



By the way, seeing as you manage to draw inaccurate conclusions from (not properly) reading an academic paper, I have little trust in the objectivity of your conclusions drawn from your half century of selective observation.


----------



## big eejit (Jan 29, 2018)

Brexit backing billionaire buys Maltese citizenship. Cos Brexit is only for the little people. 

Major Brexit supporter obtains Maltese passport - FT


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 29, 2018)

PM

"The formal directives [setting out the EU’s position on the Brexit transition] will be released this afternoon. This will be a negotiation and there will naturally be some distance in the detail of our starting positions."

Indeedy


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> By the way, seeing as you manage to draw inaccurate conclusions from (not properly) reading an academic paper, I have little trust in the objectivity of your conclusions drawn from your half century of selective observation.


wut? That's not the point here. I'm not trying to get you to agree with me on _my_ conclusions. Your own subjectivity won't enable that.


> By analyzing a large, heterogeneous community sample, we demonstrated that individuals from former West Germany have higher grandiose narcissism scores than individuals who grew up in former East Germany, in agreement with our hypothesis. In contrast to our hypothesis, individuals from former East Germany had higher self-esteem than individuals from former West Germany.


What you've just proven is that you're a hypocrite and have ignored the very basis of the study to try to score a political point in an underhand way - after jumping at any opportunity to label anyone who disagree's with you on brexit as a racist.
fuck it.  doffs flat-cap to thread, grabs whippets and fucks off to the dales for a pint of bitter.
Tschüß!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> wut? That's not the point here. I'm not trying to get you to agree with me on _my_ conclusions. Your own subjectivity won't enable that.
> 
> What you've just proven is that you're a hypocrite and have ignored the very basis of the study to try to score a political point in an underhand way - after jumping at any opportunity to label anyone who disagree's with you on brexit as a racist.
> fuck it.  doffs flat-cap to thread, grabs whippets and fucks off to the dales for a pint of bitter.
> Tschüß!



You think what you've quoted tells us something about Germany as a nation, compared to others. It doesn't. It simply compares two subsets of the German population. It makes some comments about differences observed between those who've grown up under capitalist vs. quasi-communist regimes. It doesn't say anything about differences observed between capitalistic nations in western Europe. The differences it considers are those brought about by differences in political regime, not differences brought about by "national culture" as you claim.

Additionally, I don't jump to label "anyone who disagrees with me on Brexit" as a racist. I am fairly sure you're the only person on this thread who I've suggested has made racist comments. Furthemore I have said that I'm willing to consider that your comments were not made with racist intent but that the impression was given by badly chosen wording.


----------



## gosub (Jan 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Why don't you start your own thread  where everyone can post up their favourite, quasi- racist, negative national stereotypes? Irish are thick. Greeks smell. germans are devious and selfish. that kind of thing.


Germans gasing monkeys..


----------



## bimble (Jan 30, 2018)

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...224151/lexit_paper_finalONLINE.pdf?1517224151
^ just putting it here. Got it from a guardian article - the doc was published today by some Labour people who want to push for a very soft brexit, and say Corbyn should get off the fence.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Jan 30, 2018)

big eejit said:


> Brexit backing billionaire buys Maltese citizenship. Cos Brexit is only for the little people.
> 
> Major Brexit supporter obtains Maltese passport - FT


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2018)

bimble said:


> https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.n...224151/lexit_paper_finalONLINE.pdf?1517224151
> ^ just putting it here. Got it from a guardian article - the doc was published today by some Labour people who want to push for a very soft brexit, and say Corbyn should get off the fence.


Thanks for posting.

I found the section on renationalisation of particular interest.

I look forward to the thread's lexiteers' responses.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Thanks for posting.
> 
> I found the section on renationalisation of particular interest.
> 
> I look forward to the thread's lexiteers' responses.


It's no surprise to see Blairites back the idea of the 4th railway package is it? a neo-liberal framework for mandatory competitive tendering of public services.
Personally, I cant see how any effective nationalisation of the rail system would be workable with the enforced separation of train operations from infrastructure management and the threat of being taken to the european court if subsidies are used to protect the tax payers company.
Expecting a working nationalised rail industry in conjunction with the 4th railway package is like expecting Article 50 to be triggered and our leaving the Eu to go unchallenged.

And anyway, a quick google of Dr Andy Tarrent (the author) shows he's a EU Competition lawyer. Hmm... no conflict of interest there then.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> ...And anyway, a quick google of Dr Andy Tarrent (the author) shows he's a EU Competition lawyer. Hmm... no conflict of interest there then.



Or you could have just read it.



> Dr Andy Tarrant has a background in the telecoms industry, where he has worked in the public and private sector as an EU competition and regulatory lawyer. More recently he has been an advisor to Labour shadow ministers for pensions and for Europe. He currently works for a not-for-profit workplace pension provider.


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Or you could have just read it.


Thanks Einstein. Missed that.
I did notice this line of his though - had to think of you 


> 40% of* UK exports to the EU* involve products which are then exported from a partner-EU country to the rest of the world


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 30, 2018)

savage tooth abcess and associated painkillers here so I'm not up for reading the essays as yet. I'd be interested to see the nationalisation within an eu framework essay (there was lots of discussion around that one on here) but my initial snap judgement is yet another tedious labour right attempt to force the leadership into a solid position beyond 'jobs first brexit'. But I'll read it, when my jaw stops looking like desperate dans jaw. Can't say fairer than that etc


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Thanks Einstein. Missed that.
> I did notice this line of his though - had to think of you


Should have just search for 'export'



> First, there are the so-called “static” effects whereby fewer exports, a higher exchange rate, and lower foreign direct investment depress economic growth. These may accumulate over time – as leaving the EU means regulatory standards gradually diverge and make it harder for the exporters of vacuum cleaners, Welsh lamb or insurance products to sell in the European market. Second, over time trade also improves productivity – the amount we produce per hour. So-called “dynamic” effects also accumulate over time: so less trade leads to lower productivity and lower living standards.





> . In 1945, UK manufacturing production was entirely domestic and its exports were orientated to a captive imperial market that was forced to buy British. At that time, the geographical coverage of a national monopoly mapped onto all the production sites of producers. In 2017, UK manufacturing and services are highly integrated into EU supply chains





> The EU is, by some distance, the UK’s largest trading partner. In 2016, it was the destination for some 43% of UK exports in goods and services.57 This is the case for good reason. The Customs Union allows for trade in goods that is unencumbered by customs duties or rules of origin checks, while the Single Market ensures common product standards, health and safety regulations and consumer and environmental protections, and the right to deliver services across the continent.





> For example, although they are important markets, Australia accounts for just 1.7% of UK exports, India 1.7%, Indonesia 0.2% and New Zealand 0.2%.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> It's no surprise to see Blairites back the idea of the 4th railway package is it? a neo-liberal framework for mandatory competitive tendering of public services.
> Personally, I cant see how any effective nationalisation of the rail system would be workable with the enforced separation of train operations from infrastructure management and the threat of being taken to the european court if subsidies are used to protect the tax payers company.
> Expecting a working nationalised rail industry in conjunction with the 4th railway package is like expecting Article 50 to be triggered and our leaving the Eu to go unchallenged.


Have you bothered to read what he says in his piece?


----------



## pocketscience (Jan 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Have you bothered to read what he says in his piece?


I did. Cut to the chase.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> yet another tedious labour right attempt to force the leadership into a solid position beyond 'jobs first brexit'.



In fairness, the Labour leadership is unlikely to be forced into anything by a pamphlet.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 2, 2018)

Does anyone else picture JRM in a uniform?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Does anyone else picture JRM in a uniform?



yeh


----------



## paolo (Feb 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Does anyone else picture JRM in a uniform?




The idea reminds me of Spitting Image, when they had Tebbit in a tank.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Does anyone else picture JRM in a uniform?




What a fucking demented thing to say, not least because of 'economic and financial' which is a bit like saying, this is gonna cost you and also you'll pay for it. With money.

Redwood has always given me the fear tbh. Got a serious 'demon headmaster' vibe going on.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What a fucking demented thing to say, not least because of 'economic and financial' which is a bit like saying, this is gonna cost you and also you'll pay for it. With money.
> 
> Redwood has always given me the fear tbh. Got a serious 'demon headmaster' vibe going on.



Nah mate Jack Straw is the demon head master.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Feb 5, 2018)

I've never seen Redwood, Straw or the Demon Head Master in the same room together...


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 5, 2018)

New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
Renew Britain - People from outside politics to renew Britain’s hope


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> Renew Britain - People from outside politics to renew Britain’s hope


this will end well


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> Renew Britain - People from outside politics to renew Britain’s hope


they've fucked up the name, it should be called cashback or something, renew's what you do with library books


----------



## agricola (Feb 5, 2018)

Doctor Carrot said:


> I've never seen Redwood, Straw or the Demon Head Master in the same room together...



the darkness shrouds them all


----------



## ska invita (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this will end well


this will end quickly


----------



## agricola (Feb 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they've fucked up the name, it should be called cashback or something, renew's what you do with library books



given the quality of the people involved and the concious aping of Macron, it is an achievement that they haven't called this new party _Market _tbh


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

Rip-off merchants. I've been saying for years that Britain should be the innovation superpower to revolutionise opportunity.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 5, 2018)

They also say they want to build social housing and increase taxes.


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

What they actually say is they will build houses and "make sure that many of these homes are ring fenced for social housing and for key workers in health, teaching and the emergency services".


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

"More can be done to implement existing EU rules such as repatriation of those who have not found work in a reasonable time frame."


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

"*James Torrance* is an accountant and London Business School MBA. He has worked in India, China and Northern Ireland and was a world champion in 2014 in competitive debating. He was the Kensington stop Brexit independent candidate in the last general election and his vote count was enough to ensure the Kensington Brexiter Conservative MP Victoria Borwick lost."

This is inspiring stuff!


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> What they actually say is they will build houses and "make sure that many of these homes are ring fenced for social housing and for key workers in health, teaching and the emergency services".



the devil is as ever in the detail


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> "*James Torrance* is an accountant and London Business School MBA. He has worked in India, China and Northern Ireland and was a world champion in 2014 in competitive debating. He was the Kensington stop Brexit independent candidate in the last general election and his vote count was enough to ensure the Kensington Brexiter Conservative MP Victoria Borwick lost."
> 
> This is inspiring stuff!



Nothing to do with Corbyn or Labour then? All down to the plucky James Torrance...


----------



## agricola (Feb 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nothing to do with Corbyn or Labour then? All down to the plucky James Torrance...



... and his 393 votes.  However it is good news for John Lloyd (Alliance for Green Socialism, 49 votes) and Peter Marshall (Independent, 98 votes) who also kicked out Borwick.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 5, 2018)

sounds like a mass debater


----------



## teuchter (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> What they actually say is they will build houses and "make sure that many of these homes are ring fenced for social housing and for key workers in health, teaching and the emergency services".


Are you saying that there is a way of interpreting this as meaning they do not want to build social housing?


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Are you saying that there is a way of interpreting this as meaning they do not want to build social housing?


Their rhetoric suggests that for them it would suffice to build lots of houses, some of which would be 'affordable' (sold at 80% of market value) or available on a part-buy scheme to certain workers. It certainly doesn't suggest that genuinely affordable houses available to rent would be built in large numbers.

What does it suggest to you?


----------



## gosub (Feb 5, 2018)

That life's too short.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 5, 2018)

gosub said:


> That life's too short.


but art is long


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 5, 2018)

gosub said:


> That life's too short.



Longest thing you’ll ever do.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> Their rhetoric suggests that for them it would suffice to build lots of houses, some of which would be 'affordable' (sold at 80% of market value) or available on a part-buy scheme to certain workers. It certainly doesn't suggest that genuinely affordable houses available to rent would be built in large numbers.
> 
> What does it suggest to you?



So when you wrote "what it actually says is..." what you meant was "what their rhetoric suggests to me is..."


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So when you wrote "what it actually says is..." what you meant was "what their rhetoric suggests to me is..."


No.


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So when you wrote "what it actually says is..." what you meant was "what their rhetoric suggests to me is..."


Do you think they would build social housing? And what do you think this would actually mean?


----------



## gosub (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> Do you think they would build social housing? And what do you think this would actually mean?


Surely do you think that they'll win 326 seats? Is more to the point


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

gosub said:


> Surely do you think that they'll win 326 seats? Is more to the point


Centrist Dadism must be resisted whenever it rears its ugly head.


----------



## gosub (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> Centrist Dadism must be resisted whenever it rears its ugly head.


Had to look up centrist dadism.... I've done my tour of tilting at windmills... But that's how you end up a centrist dad.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 5, 2018)

Santino said:


> No.


So you were simply making an inaccurate statement.


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So you were simply making an inaccurate statement.


No.


----------



## Santino (Feb 5, 2018)

You're not putting in the effort like you used to.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 6, 2018)

Santino said:


> No.


Yes.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 6, 2018)

gosub said:


> Had to look up centrist dadism.... I've done my tour of tilting at windmills... But that's how you end up a centrist dad.


Look into centrist dadaism as an alternative.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 6, 2018)

Santino said:


> You're not putting in the effort like you used to.


No-one is. Shall we just wind up the whole edifice?


----------



## gosub (Feb 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Look into centrist dadaism as an alternative.


Googled that first thinking it was a thing


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 6, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> New anti-Brexit party to be launched in UK with help from France
> Renew Britain - People from outside politics to renew Britain’s hope



wonder if tony blair will offer to lead it to a glorious whatever?

and generally 

i can see some people i know getting excited by this.

 again

including someone whose political journey has gone something along the lines of SDP - SLD - Lib Dem - New Labour - Green - Lib Dem (with a brief foray somewhere in to Wessex Regionalist somewhere along the line but I can't remember quite when)

i've given up talking politics to him...


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 6, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> wonder if tony blair will offer to lead it to a glorious whatever?
> 
> and generally
> 
> ...


I think there's been about four or five attempts to set up new parties for a second referendum , they've all never got off the ground. Even one that had a coalition of established MPs would struggle imo.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 6, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> I think there's been about four or five attempts to set up new parties for a second referendum , they've all never got off the ground. Even one that had a coalition of established MPs would struggle imo.



I think actually that's what it would need to get off the ground. I actually think that will probably happen at some point, but not until Corbyn/Labour polling drops a bit.


----------



## agricola (Feb 6, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think actually that's what it would need to get off the ground. I actually think that will probably happen at some point, but not until Corbyn/Labour polling drops a bit.



The fundamental problem with this belief is that centrist dadism of that kind is one of the things that is keeping Corbyn (and May as well) so high in the polls.  As an alternative to anything except themselves they are useless.


----------



## bimble (Feb 7, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2018)

bimble said:


> View attachment 126932


he only has one constituent?


----------



## klang (Feb 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> he only has one constituent?


and not for much longer, it seems.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 7, 2018)

bimble said:


> View attachment 126932



has nick clegg been radicalised by some evil metropolitan- liberal hate preacher ...?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2018)

"We have watched have you have stoked the fires of Brexit and led us to this moment...THE REAL 48 PER CENT "

Incomprehensible jibberish anti-brexit frothing, must be a Guardian journalist.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2018)

Total made up nonsense which Goldsmith seems to have fallen for or more likely is happy to go along with.


----------



## ohmyliver (Feb 7, 2018)

My money's* on fake, like the Mogg attack.  

*not actual money obv


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> "We have watched have you have stoked the fires of Brexit and led us to this moment...THE REAL 48 PER CENT "
> 
> Incomprehensible jibberish anti-brexit frothing, must be a Guardian journalist.


The Aga Meinhoff Group.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The Aga Meinhoff Group.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Total made up nonsense which Goldsmith seems to have fallen for or more likely is happy to go along with.



Aren't you one of his constituents? Protesting loudly


----------



## ohmyliver (Feb 7, 2018)

Didn't Mogg have a private meeting with Bannon, and then was 'roughed up' with a Brietbart camera crew really conveniently present.   It's hard not to see it as part of that, tbh.  The Tory hard right trying to whip up sympathy/an excuse to shut down protests as the sunny uplands gets cloudier by the day.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aren't you one of his constituents? Protesting loudly



No, these days I am in a neighboring constituency where the 80 year old is the MP.

ETA: Maybe that's who sent the message.  Maybe they met at a whist drive and fell out somewhat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> "We have watched have you have stoked the fires of Brexit and led us to this moment...THE REAL 48 PER CENT "
> 
> Incomprehensible jibberish anti-brexit frothing, must be a Guardian journalist.


My source tells me it's none other than nick cohen


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The Aga Meinhoff Group.


V. good.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 7, 2018)

bimble said:


> View attachment 126932


That's appalling


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 7, 2018)




----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 7, 2018)




----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 7, 2018)

To be fair...the Wales one looks like a typo of some sort.

Anyway, what are other brexiteers saying?


----------



## bimble (Feb 8, 2018)

oh. Its all true after all, this'll go down well in some quarters. George Soros's foundation backs campaign to reverse Brexit


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2018)




----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



"I'm the international trade minister"
"That's what worries me"


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 8, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> "I'm the international trade minister"
> "That's what worries me"



It makes you wonder whether these people have ever managed any sort of negotiation, even staying up an hour later than usual to watch match of the day.


----------



## sealion (Feb 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> oh. Its all true after all, this'll go down well in some quarters. George Soros's foundation backs campaign to reverse Brexit


Hardly breaking news is it. A stinking rich cunt that wants his own way


----------



## bimble (Feb 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Hardly breaking news is it. A stinking rich cunt that wants his own way


 Unlike Aaron Banks etc. The telegraph has gone with front page headline on this calling it 'a Secret Plot'. Co-written by Mrs May's ex chief of staff. If you can't see what's going on there i can't help you.


----------



## sealion (Feb 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Unlike Aaron Banks etc.


Typical response. They started it first so ner 




bimble said:


> The telegraph


What do you expect ? 


bimble said:


> If you can't see what's going on there i can't help you.


It's you that reads this shit and then dumps it on threads (all innocently of course). You are right you can't help me, thankfully.


----------



## bimble (Feb 8, 2018)

Don't be dick sealion, yes ok maybe the problem is me having silly expectations like that the front page of a government-supporting paper might not publish an article totally inspired by far right tropes & that when they do people might have a problem with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Don't be dick sealion, yes ok maybe the problem is me having silly expectations like that the front page of a government-supporting paper might not publish an article totally inspired by far right tropes & that when they do people might have a problem with it.


all mainstream newspapers support government

doesn't mean they're not inspired now and again by far right tropes.


----------



## bimble (Feb 8, 2018)

ok carry on nothing to see here, just another dastardly secret plot by those 'citizens of nowhere'.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Hardly breaking news is it. A stinking rich cunt that wants his own way


Like this guy?


----------



## gosub (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Like this guy?


Think I prefer that to Redwoods investing advice of avoid UK coz of Brexit


----------



## gosub (Feb 8, 2018)

On Beyond 100 days at the mo Select Committee in States asking if US companies influenced Brexit... Iirc Obama flew over to tell us to stay in... And their asking YouTube if it hosted any Russian made videos


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> Think I prefer that to Redwoods investing advice of avoid UK coz of Brexit


And which part of the UK economy would it be auspicious to invest in for brexit?

Both external and internal investment, where should people put their money?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And which part of the UK economy would it be auspicious to invest in for brexit?
> 
> Both external and internal investment, where should people put their money?


Firms that move businesses abroad of course


----------



## editor (Feb 8, 2018)




----------



## sealion (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Like this guy?



What has investment banker Miller and her hubby ( the original 'Mr hedgefund') got to lose i wonder.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> What has investment banker Miller and her hubby ( the original 'Mr hedgefund') got to lose i wonder.


It's a direct tweet.  Ask her yourself.


----------



## sealion (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's a direct tweet.  Ask her yourself.


Don't do twitter. I guess you know the answer anyway.


----------



## paolo (Feb 8, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The Aga Meinhoff Group.



That's beyond good. Sign up for a panel show.


----------



## paolo (Feb 8, 2018)

OMFG

The guy is saying "Our position has always been clear".

If I watch all of this, will I have finally understood?

Go on, let's play a game. You've already seen the video, I've not.

The game is like this:

I pop out for a smoke, when I come back, someone explains the "clear position".


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Don't do twitter. I guess you know the answer anyway.


hmmm...

"wtf you talking about, JRM is prime mover in brexit and might make billions from it!  u trollin bra!"  maybe?


----------



## Santino (Feb 8, 2018)

Ask her what Britain will export.


----------



## paolo (Feb 8, 2018)

paolo said:


> OMFG
> 
> The guy is saying "Our position has always been clear".
> 
> ...



Smoke done. Extending the deadline... to... oh fuck it, next year.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 8, 2018)

editor said:


>




Someone should gently inform him that Yorkshire puddings are grown in Belgium.


----------



## agricola (Feb 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> To be fair...the Wales one looks like a typo of some sort.
> 
> Anyway, what are other brexiteers saying?




the Welsh one assumes that the reconquest will be easier without England being supported by the relations overseas (Germans, Danes, Geats etc)


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 8, 2018)

agricola said:


> the Welsh one assumes that the reconquest will be easier without England being supported by the relations overseas (*Germans, Danes, Geats* etc)



I predict a huge Welsh shepherds vs Euro Geatherds war ... with pedants as referees ...


----------



## paolo (Feb 9, 2018)

OMG That interview.

To tell you what you voted for, would compromise our position to negotiate what you voted for. Which you voted for, let's be clear, but you *aren't* allowed to know what it was. How can I act in *your* best interests, if I tell *you* what *your* interests are?

It's like being in a police station, and when your solicitor turns up, he does a "no comment" interview directly to you, when you try to get him to represent you. "I'm your solicitor. So I can't talk to you, only the police".


----------



## Supine (Feb 9, 2018)

editor said:


>




That is hilarious


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 9, 2018)

editor said:


>


----------



## Fez909 (Feb 9, 2018)

satire/parody init


----------



## Raheem (Feb 9, 2018)

Fez909 said:


> satire/parody init


It's a parody within a satire.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 9, 2018)

Yep, a parody - an fairly obvious and quite mean-spirited one, but it's still being reported as evidence of how stupid Brexit voters are.

Yorkshire Tea have revealed a secret that has Brexit voters up in arms


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 9, 2018)

this will go well ....

Northern Ireland will stay in single market after Brexit, EU says


----------



## Winot (Feb 9, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> this will go well ....
> 
> Northern Ireland will stay in single market after Brexit, EU says



Don’t worry, Theresa’s gonna sort it out

PM 'considering NI trip to clinch deal'


----------



## gosub (Feb 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And which part of the UK economy would it be auspicious to invest in for brexit?
> 
> Both external and internal investment, where should people put their money?


I heard yesterday that tax receipts are up.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

editor said:


>



That's just... fabulous.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Question for those who voted remain. We keep hearing, reading that leave voters didn't know what they were voting for. Did the remainers know what they were voying for ?


Sure.

I voted mainly for a greater connectedness with other EU countries, and the ability to influence other EU nations away from a veer towards the hard right. I voted against the sense of entitlement and superiority that has remained in Britain since colonial times, and against the image of our country as arrogant that is held abroad.

All of which hold very much true.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> People knew they didn't want more of the same either so voted leave regardless. No shame in that.


Yes there is. It's fucking idiotic, frankly.

*I don't like this splinter in my toe so I'm going to ram it deep into my retina instead*


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 9, 2018)

Was just reading a bod from youtube denying the dark hand of the russians* in the brexit vote. The most interesting thing though is that the youtube spokesbod is calle Juniper Downs. Thats beautiful. Weird, bit hippy, but a solidly poetic name




*because ffs people get a grip


----------



## sealion (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Yes there is. It's fucking idiotic, frankly.
> 
> *I don't like this splinter in my toe so I'm going to ram it deep into my retina instead*


You could say that about the people who voted remain, because of all its downsides it's still better than the devil you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> You could say that about the people who voted remain, because of all its downsides it's still better than the devil you know.


tbh if people had known on 23/6/16 that boris johnson, michael gove, theresa may and david davis would have the posts they do today the vote to remain would have been something like 70/30 in favour of remain.


----------



## sealion (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh if people had known on 23/6/16 that boris johnson, michael gove, theresa may and david davis would have the posts they do today the vote to remain would have been something like 70/30 in favour of remain.


Maybe, Many people wanted out no matter the circumstances and probably never even considered the mechanics of it all. I still believe, no matter who has to deal with this current debacle labour or tory would do no better. The eu in my opinion are cunts and are worried about losing there grip if other countries follow us and want to leave. Its all punitive measures which ever you try to negotiate with them.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Sure.
> 
> I voted mainly for a greater connectedness with other EU countries, and the ability to influence other EU nations away from a veer towards the hard right. I voted against the sense of entitlement and superiority that has remained in Britain since colonial times, and against the image of our country as arrogant that is held abroad.
> 
> All of which hold very much true.



Plus to counteract all the shite about immigrunts ruining our country, which had fuck all to do with the EU, or the vote, but which was hijacked by the media and politicians just wanting to be the nasty cunts they already are.

I still can't get my head around why the referendum happened in the first place? Without going all tin foil hatted about it, who the fuck has benefitted or was supposed to benefit from it? What was the motive?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Maybe, Many people wanted out no matter the circumstances and probably never even considered the mechanics of it all. I still believe, no matter who has to deal with this current debacle labour or tory would do no better. The eu in my opinion are cunts and are worried about losing there grip if other countries follow us and want to leave. Its all punitive measures which ever you try to negotiate with them.


yeh. but we don't have anyone trying to negotiate with them. we have people who turn up to make up the numbers.

the eu are cunts. the tory party are cunts. the labour party are cunts. the ruling class are cunts. they're all a bunch of cunts.


----------



## sealion (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the eu are cunts. the tory party are cunts. the labour party are cunts. the ruling class are cunts. they're all a bunch of cunts.


Great tagline right there!


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 9, 2018)

Rosemary Jest said:


> I still can't get my head around why the referendum happened in the first place?


the europhile tories wanted to put the EU argument to bed for a generation. That went badly. Then came the snap election, a grab based on putting labour to bed for a generation while bolstering the dominant euroskeptic arm. And thats all gone according to plan, in another timeline.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> That's just... fabulous.


It’s fake, ffs


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Sure.
> 
> I voted mainly for a greater connectedness with other EU countries, and the ability to influence other EU nations away from a veer towards the hard right. I voted against the sense of entitlement and superiority that has remained in Britain since colonial times, and against the image of our country as arrogant that is held abroad.
> 
> All of which hold very much true.



How does staying in the EU enable any of that?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s fake, ffs


Very effective way of showing up the prejudices of a certain type of brexiter. And what those prejudices appear to centre on.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 9, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> the europhile tories wanted to put the EU argument to bed for a generation. That went badly.



That's not quite how it was. It's understandable to have blotted it from your memory because it seems like an absurd dream but, three years ago, everyone thought it was totally impossible for Ed Milliband not to be the next Prime Minister and that Ukip would take seats from the Tories all over the country. So our pig-bothering friend put the referendum in his manifesto to appease backbenchers worried about having to rely solely on their second incomes, safe in the knowledge that he would never have to act on it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2018)

gosub said:


> I heard yesterday that tax receipts are up.


Nope.

But...even if it were true it would be explained by one of two things:-

as mentioned before the pound has dropped in value...increased sales (and thus tax) is not an increase in productivity it's working and selling harder just to stay in the same place

or

fire sale (having this anyway btw...foreign producers will raise output so they can finish contracts, use up stocks and then leave or threaten to leave in order to get a better deal, the majority of contracts will be void at brexit...consider that)

There is nothing, absolutely nothing to indicate, imply or infer that the UK will be in anything other than a much worse financial position after brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> as mentioned before the pound has dropped in value...increased sales (and thus tax) is not an increase in productivity it's working and selling harder just to stay in the same place


£1 = $1.40-ish right now.  That's well up on it's immediate post-referendum position, which was about £1 = $1.20.  In fact, it's back broadly to its position just before the referendum.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Yes there is. It's fucking idiotic, frankly.
> 
> *I don't like this splinter in my toe so I'm going to ram it deep into my retina instead*



I’m alright Jack.

The correct analogy is “I have lung cancer, I’ll swap it for pancreatic cancer if it causes grief for the cunts who gave me cancer in the first place.”


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh if people had known on 23/6/16 that boris johnson, michael gove, theresa may and david davis would have the posts they do today the vote to remain would have been something like 70/30 in favour of remain.


Johnson and Gove were at the front of the Leave campaign.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Johnson and Gove were at the front of the Leave campaign.


Yeh I know. So?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh I know. So?


So why wouldn't you think they would have prominent roles?. Both were running for PM afterwards.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> So why wouldn't you think they would have prominent roles?. Both were running for PM afterwards.


Were they? Check your memory. At what point did Johnson announce his candidature for leader of the tory party?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they? Check your memory. At what point did Johnson announce his candidature for leader of the tory party?


It was his before Gove knifed him in the back.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It was his before Gove knifed him in the back.


when did Johnson run for pm as you said a minute back?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> when did Johnson run for pm as you said a minute back?


Conservative Party (UK) leadership election, 2016 - Wikipedia


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> So why wouldn't you think they would have prominent roles?. Both were running for PM afterwards.


Anyway being as johnson's a famous xenophobe and liar it's a great surprise anyone would let him preside over the foreign office


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Conservative Party (UK) leadership election, 2016 - Wikipedia


So thank you for confirming he didn't run


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> So thank you for confirming he didn't run


He announced he would seek the leadership.



(This is a fun friday night, isn't it?)


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh if people had known on 23/6/16 that boris johnson, michael gove, theresa may and david davis would have the posts they do today the vote to remain would have been something like 70/30 in favour of remain.


Or in fact, if they'd known what a leave Britain would mean. Which we _*still*_ don't...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> He announced he would seek the leadership.
> 
> 
> 
> (This is a fun friday night, isn't it?)


Yes. And like so many others his name never appeared on a ballot


----------



## Santino (Feb 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes. And like so many others his name never appeared on a ballot


Good to see you polishing your pedant's credentials.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

Santino said:


> Good to see you polishing your pedant's credentials.


So it's your contention bj ran. Anything to support it?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> £1 = $1.40-ish right now.  That's well up on it's immediate post-referendum position, which was about £1 = $1.20.  In fact, it's back broadly to its position just before the referendum.


Well yeah but the dollar's weak just now but never mind.

A 6% growth (or loss) in a month for a currency isn't crazy unusual but I'm not going to argue the point on something so high variance.  Just because the US isn't doing well is no reason for us to feel better.

The spike probably means something but it's no more comforting than when a diner smiles and points at a lobster in a tank.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Or in fact, if they'd known what a leave Britain would mean. Which we _*still*_ don't...


So how do you know whether we'd have voted for it or not if we don't even like know the thing that would have had the biggest influence on our vote? Anyway this is playground stuff, nobody knows what would have happened either way, in other news the brahan seer spoke a lot of shite.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Well yeah but the dollar's weak just now but never mind.
> 
> A 6% growth (or loss) in a month for a currency isn't crazy unusual but I'm not going to argue the point on something so high variance.  Just because the US isn't doing well is no reason for us to feel better.
> 
> The spike probably means something but it's no more comforting than when a diner smiles and points at a lobster in a tank.


The dollar is *quite* an important comparator when you are talking about whether a currency is strong or weak.  You may have seen the US economy cropping up as an influence here and there.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 9, 2018)

None of it is strong, it's a catastrophe waiting to happen! Don't any of you guys get drunk in Vegas you'll be  finished!


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Plus to counteract all the shite about immigrunts ruining our country, which had fuck all to do with the EU, or the vote, but which was hijacked by the media and politicians just wanting to be the nasty cunts they already are.
> 
> I still can't get my head around why the referendum happened in the first place? Without going all tin foil hatted about it, who the fuck has benefitted or was supposed to benefit from it? What was the motive?


The tories. That promise won them a lot of swing votes, and quite possibly made the difference that kept them in power last time round.

My brother pointed out a major effect that Brexit will have earlier. Vets in abattoirs. No vet from the this country qualifies thinking that they really want to slaughter animals, and there's a shortage of them in the UK so they do't need to do that job. Every abattoir has to have a vet, so almost all of then are from Eastern Europe.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s fake, ffs


Not 'fake' exactly, but it turns out it's a parody account. Sadly. 

There's plenty of genuine ones in a similar vein though.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Not 'fake' exactly, but it turns out it's a parody account. Sadly.
> 
> There's plenty of genuine ones in a similar vein though.


Parody is fake.  That’s the point.

And no there aren’t.  Not like that.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Parody is fake.  That’s the point.
> 
> And no there aren’t.  Not like that.


But they *are* like that.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2018)

People like corax i mean.


----------



## Corax (Feb 9, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> How does staying in the EU enable any of that?


Lots of it is either subtle power, or so patently obvious that I'm sure you don't actually need the likes of me to explain it to you.

One clear one is the swing to the right in member states. The EU has already threatened Hungary (I think - might have the country wrong) with withdrawing voting rights, or even funding, should they continue their rightwards lurch. As a major power within the EU we had the power to influence such actions. Now, we don't.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Lots of it is either subtle power, or so patently obvious that I'm sure you don't actually need the likes of me to explain it to you.
> 
> One clear one is the swing to the right in member states. The EU has already threatened Hungary (I think - might have the country wrong) with withdrawing voting rights, or even funding, should they continue their rightwards lurch. As a major power within the EU we had the power to influence such actions. Now, we don't.


Whats driving this swing to the right ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2018)

Corax said:


> Lots of it is either subtle power, or so patently obvious that I'm sure you don't actually need the likes of me to explain it to you.
> 
> One clear one is the swing to the right in member states. The EU has already threatened Hungary (I think - might have the country wrong) with withdrawing voting rights, or even funding, should they continue their rightwards lurch. As a major power within the EU we had the power to influence such actions. Now, we don't.


Thus would be the rightwards drift that started what four years ago? The eu ain't going to do shit.


----------



## Santino (Feb 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> So it's your contention bj ran.


No.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> My brother pointed out a major effect that Brexit will have earlier. Vets in abattoirs. No vet from the this country qualifies thinking that they really want to slaughter animals, and there's a shortage of them in the UK so they do't need to do that job. Every abattoir has to have a vet, so almost all of then are from Eastern Europe.



Thing is Brexit is not going to mean we kick out anyone who's from Eastern Europe, or stop absolutely anyone new from coming. So slaughtering, building etc are not going to automatically grind to a halt, although pay for jobs typically done by EU citizens will probably have to go up in a lot of cases.


----------



## Corax (Feb 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> And no there aren’t.  Not like that.


I'll facetiously direct you towards Farage's twitter account.


butchersapron said:


> People like corax i mean.


Not just "like" - they _*adore* _ me.


----------



## Corax (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Whats driving this swing to the right ?


Fear of the other, and misplaced anger at macro-economics and the actions of their sovereign government.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2018)

They really believe this shit you know.


----------



## Corax (Feb 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Thus would be the rightwards drift that started what four years ago? The eu ain't going to do shit.


No,but they'll hold in their hand a piece of paper in a threatening manner.


----------



## gosub (Feb 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nope.
> 
> But...even if it were true it would be explained by one of two things:-
> 
> ...



All you had to do was stick to with the shit you actually deal with.   Receipts ARE up .   Leave the the rest of it to us that actually do it.


----------



## Corax (Feb 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Thing is Brexit is not going to mean we kick out anyone who's from Eastern Europe, or stop absolutely anyone new from coming. So slaughtering, building etc are not going to automatically grind to a halt, although pay for jobs typically done by EU citizens will probably have to go up in a lot of cases.


Maybe so, but there's already plenty of anecdotal reports of people from EU states upping sticks and going home because they feel that post-Brexit Britain is an unwelcoming place.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Thing is Brexit is not going to mean we kick out anyone who's from Eastern Europe, or stop absolutely anyone new from coming.


Do you know anyone from Eastern Europe who lives here? You may not be concerned but many of those who live here and would like to continue living here are.


----------



## Corax (Feb 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they? Check your memory.


4Gb currently. Spare slots, so going to upgrade it.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Maybe so, but there's already plenty of anecdotal reports of people from EU states upping sticks and going home because they feel that post-Brexit Britain is an unwelcoming place.



Which is one of the reasons they will need to be paid more in future if we need them to stay.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you know anyone from Eastern Europe who lives here? You may not be concerned...



Yes, and where did I say I wasn't concerned?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you know anyone from Eastern Europe who lives here? You may not be concerned but many of those who live here and would like to continue living here are.


 all the more reason to stress how unlikely it is they are all going to be deported en masse, no?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> One clear one is the swing to the right in member states. The EU has already threatened Hungary (I think - might have the country wrong) with withdrawing voting rights, or even funding, should they continue their rightwards lurch. As a major power within the EU we had the power to influence such actions. Now, we don't.



Funny how our trusty anti fascist comrades seem to be deal with a lurch to the left rather swiftly indeed. What's going on?



Corax said:


> misplaced anger at macro-economics and the actions of their sovereign government.


Maybe it's the time of night but I can no longer assume these arguments are made in good faith. ETA... Girlfriend!


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Not 'fake' exactly, but it turns out it's a parody account. Sadly.
> 
> There's plenty of genuine ones in a similar vein though.


This is exactly why Remain lost.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> I'll facetiously direct you towards Farage's twitter account.


Farage does things like think Yorkshire tea is grown in Yorkshire?

You believed that twitter account was genuine because you think there are people out there angrily reacting to stuff like finding out tea isn’t grown in Yorkshire.  You thought that was credible, and underlined this belief by saying, “there’s plenty of genuine ones like that”.  Don’t you see why this kind of caricature is unhelpful?  Ironically, it’s just as twisted as the views you are imputing onto the people you don’t agree with.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Fear of the other, and misplaced anger at macro-economics and the actions of their sovereign government.


Why is their anger at macroeconomics (or, more specifically, the policies pursued in the name of it) and anger at the actions of their government misplaced?  Has their well-being improved?  Have they shared in the prosperity of their nation?


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I’m alright Jack.
> 
> The correct analogy is “I have lung cancer, I’ll swap it for pancreatic cancer if it causes grief for the cunts who gave me cancer in the first place.”



How many of the people who voted leave do you reckon did so for this reason (it can't get worse for me so I want you bastards to suffer too) - basically out of spite / nihilism  and not for the reasons they mostly said like controlling immigration less power to unelected beaurocrats etc?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Thing is Brexit is not going to mean we kick out anyone who's from Eastern Europe, or stop absolutely anyone new from coming. So slaughtering, building etc are not going to automatically grind to a halt, although pay for jobs typically done by EU citizens will probably have to go up in a lot of cases.


Absolutley , over supply of labour = low/minimum wage. Theres already reports of construction wages rising.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Maybe so, but there's already plenty of anecdotal reports of people from EU states upping sticks and going home because they feel that post-Brexit Britain is an unwelcoming place.


The fact , rather than anecdote, is that the Polish economy is growing , it lost a million workers due labour migration and estimates it needs to attract five million more .The govt has campaigned for Polish labour to return and for many its attractive because after being exploited here in low wage/high hour jobs  they will have a better standard of living.There are labour shortages in Czech republic and Romania causing wages to rise hence the return.


----------



## J Ed (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Not 'fake' exactly, but it turns out it's a parody account. Sadly.
> 
> There's plenty of genuine ones in a similar vein though.



Interesting how fabricated tweets can serve the dual function of either being evidence of something outright and/or being true anyway because even if it isn't true it is basically true as we know that they are like that.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

Corax said:


> Lots of it is either subtle power, or so patently obvious that I'm sure you don't actually need the likes of me to explain it to you.
> 
> One clear one is the swing to the right in member states. The EU has already threatened Hungary (I think - might have the country wrong) with withdrawing voting rights, or even funding, should they continue their rightwards lurch. As a major power within the EU we had the power to influence such actions. Now, we don't.



Well if the role of the EU is to dictate to its members which sort of political parties they can elect its got quite a job on its hands.Just to be clear on the scale of  swing to the right within EU states , Poland and Hungary have right wing governments,in  Romania , Sweden, Norway Finland and Denmark right wing parties have breached the 20% mark and taken part in government, Le Pen got a third of the vote in France and in Germany and Holland they are the opposition.


----------



## J Ed (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Well if the role of the EU is to dictate to its members which sort of political parties they can elect its got quite a job on its hands.Just to be clear on the scale of  swing to the right within EU states , Poland and Hungary have right wing governments,in  Romania , Sweden, Norway Finland and Denmark right wing parties have breached the 20% mark and taken part in government, Le Pen got a third of the vote in France and in Germany and Holland they are the opposition.



Rhetoric aside, the EU seems infinitely more hospitable to far-right governments than it does any government that threatens to break with neoliberalism.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2018)

The UK also has a right wing government.  The current PM was responsible a while back for messages going around telling immigrants to go home.  Hate crimes have gone up noticeably and the media is out of control.


Does anyone think the UK will move to the left after brexit?


----------



## J Ed (Feb 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Does anyone think the UK will move to the left after brexit?



It already has.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The UK also has a right wing government.  The current PM was responsible a while back for messages going around telling immigrants to go home.  Hate crimes have gone up noticeably and the media is out of control.
> View attachment 127127
> 
> Does anyone think the UK will move to the left after brexit?


Hasn't the Mirror just bought the Express?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> How many of the people who voted leave do you reckon did so for this reason (it can't get worse for me so I want you bastards to suffer too) - basically out of spite / nihilism  and not for the reasons they mostly said like controlling immigration less power to unelected beaurocrats etc?



That's the real bitter pill. Immigration won't fall, the proportion from the EU will (may, anyway. Anyone with the right amount of cash will still find the doors wide open wherever they migrate from). And as for unelected bureaucrats it's not as if we don't have those, and brexit isn't going to affect their power. They'll just be British unelected bureaucrats same as now. Vengeful nihilism has more validity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Hasn't the Mirror just bought the Express?


Yes.  Do you think there will be an editorial shift?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Absolutley , over supply of labour = low/minimum wage. Theres already reports of construction wages rising.



Sure, but it's important to note that we're talking about specific, skilled jobs where Brexit causes a reduction in supply of labour. Most people are not going to get a real terms Brexit pay rise. That would only happen with a marked increase in the level of employment.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> How many of the people who voted leave do you reckon did so for this reason (it can't get worse for me so I want you bastards to suffer too) - basically out of spite / nihilism  and not for the reasons they mostly said like controlling immigration less power to unelected beaurocrats etc?



One million, seven hundred and twenty three thousand, six hundred and nine.




Read the quote I was replying to for context.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Well if the role of the EU is to dictate to its members which sort of political parties they can elect its got quite a job on its hands.Just to be clear on the scale of  swing to the right within EU states , Poland and Hungary have right wing governments,in  Romania , Sweden, Norway Finland and Denmark right wing parties have breached the 20% mark and taken part in government, Le Pen got a third of the vote in France and in Germany and Holland they are the opposition.



And that’s without even mentioning Adolf Hitler’s home nation...


----------



## J Ed (Feb 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The UK also has a right wing government.  The current PM was responsible a while back for messages going around telling immigrants to go home.  Hate crimes have gone up noticeably and the media is out of control.
> View attachment 127127
> 
> Does anyone think the UK will move to the left after brexit?



It was good when before the EU referendum, the Express, newspaper in an EU member state, wasn't a far-right tabloid.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Sure, but it's important to note that we're talking about specific, skilled jobs where Brexit causes a reduction in supply of labour. Most people are not going to get a real terms Brexit pay rise. That would only happen with a marked increase in the level of employment.


Not disagreeing but will make two comments  1) it's already happening not because of Brexit but because of the buoyant East European economies attracting labour back and 2) Fruit and veg picker wages are rising .


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yes.  Do you think there will be an editorial shift?


I think they've already said no,but we'll wait and see.The interesting thing is despite the headlines most surveys show that people accept both foreign students and foreign workers in jobs where there is a skill shortage .obviously begs the question why there is a skill shortage.


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Fruit and veg picker wages are rising .


Not as fast as the growers are deciding to move their operations abroad to carry on getting the cheap fruit that supermarkets demand according to this:
Lack of migrant workers left food rotting in UK fields last year, data reveals


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 10, 2018)

J Ed said:


> It already has.


I keep forgetting how far Corbs is ahead in the polls.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> Not as fast as the growers are deciding to move their operations abroad to carry on getting the cheap fruit that supermarkets demand according to this:
> Lack of migrant workers left food rotting in UK fields last year, data reveals


Typical Project Fear Guardain article imo . One blueberry supplier says they are moving to China and anectodal claims that fruit and veg are being left to rot in the ground because of labour shortages. The truth is that according to Defra (2017) a fifth of lettuces and a tenth of strawberries are left to rot on farms each year .10,000 tonnes of strawberries, worth £24m, and 38,000 tonnes of lettuces, worth £7m, were wasted in 2015, becaese supermarkets rejected them as not being uniform and being too ugly.The equivalent to the daily needs of 4.4m people.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> Not as fast as the growers are deciding to move their operations abroad to carry on getting the cheap fruit that supermarkets demand according to this:
> Lack of migrant workers left food rotting in UK fields last year, data reveals


Maybe they were fed up of having to live in on site caravans and earning a pittance.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Typical Project Fear Guardain article imo . One blueberry supplier says they are moving to China and anectodal claims that fruit and veg are being left to rot in the ground because of labour shortages. The truth is that according to Defra (2017) a fifth of lettuces and a tenth of strawberries are left to rot on farms each year .10,000 tonnes of strawberries, worth £24m, and 38,000 tonnes of lettuces, worth £7m, were wasted in 2015, becaese supermarkets rejected them as not being uniform and being too ugly.The equivalent to the daily needs of 4.4m people.


Don't let facts get in the way of a liberal knee jerk.


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> Maybe they were fed up of having to live in on site caravans and earning a pittance.


It’s still campsites & daily ‘productivity targets’ and national living wage, do you think brexit will change that?


----------



## J Ed (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> Maybe they were fed up of having to live in on site caravans and earning a pittance.



_Other people _picking cabbages for less than minimum wage, crammed ten to a one bedroom house... it's what being a real European is really about. *ode to joy starts playing*


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Typical Project Fear Guardain article imo . One blueberry supplier says they are moving to China and anectodal claims that fruit and veg are being left to rot in the ground because of labour shortages. The truth is that according to Defra (2017) a fifth of lettuces and a tenth of strawberries are left to rot on farms each year .10,000 tonnes of strawberries, worth £24m, and 38,000 tonnes of lettuces, worth £7m, were wasted in 2015, becaese supermarkets rejected them as not being uniform and being too ugly.The equivalent to the daily needs of 4.4m people.


That’s terrible but it’s a separate issue from the figures in that report about lack of people to fill the jobs isnt it?


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> It’s still campsites & daily ‘productivity targets’ and national living wage, do you think brexit will change that?


Well down in Sussex the farmers are having to offer more to get labour in as are building firms. Would you leave your home and travel hundreds of miles away from your family to pick fruit and live in a caravan for next to fuck all ?


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> Well down in Sussex the farmers are having to offer more to get labour in as are building firms. Would you leave your home and travel hundreds of miles away from your family to pick fruit and live in a caravan for next to fuck all ?


Are you saying that Brexit will mean improved pay and conditions for fruit pickers instead of the production moving elsewhere to keep the supermarkets happy? I don’t see it myself but hope you’re right.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> Are you saying that Brexit will mean improved pay and conditions for fruit pickers instead of the production moving elsewhere to keep the supermarkets happy? I don’t see it myself but hope you’re right.


Yes. You won't see it because you read and quote the guardian.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble would you leave your home and family to work abroad for a pittance whilst living in a caravan ( on site)


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> bimble would you leave your home and family to work abroad for a pittance whilst living in a caravan ( on site)


No. What is the relevance of this? Because I wouldn’t do the job under current conditions you think the jobs conditions will improve because of Brexit so that it will become one we’d all want to do?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> bimble would you leave your home and family to work abroad for a pittance whilst living in a caravan ( on site)


The answer from most Remainers would be is Nope but it's ok for the Europeans .


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> No.


So you are one of those lazy english people the guardian rants about 


bimble said:


> What is the relevance of this? Because I wouldn’t do the job under current conditions you think the jobs conditions will improve because of Brexit so that it will become one we’d all want to do?


Why should anyone else then ?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> No. What is the relevance of this? Because I wouldn’t do the job under current conditions you think the jobs conditions will improve because of Brexit so that it will become one we’d all want to do?


Apparently a Tory Brexit will completely stop people working in such conditions, so not supporting it means you are in favour of them...


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> Why should anyone else then ?


What has this got to do with Brexit?
Why ‘should’ anyone be working for £1 a day in a sweatshop in Bangladesh to produce cheap clothes for us to buy in primark?
They shouldn’t but they are.
You think Brexit will help reduce inequality across the EU so that nobody in Romania / Bulgaria will feel the need to travel far from their families to richer countries for seasonal jobs that I wouldn’t do?


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> What has this got to do with Brexit?



I will leave it there. You are a wind up.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Apparently a Tory Brexit will completely stop people working in such conditions,


According to who ?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> According to who ?


You're saying the Tory brexit won't completely stop people working in such conditions?


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You're saying the Tory brexit won't completely stop people working in such conditions?


I'm not saying that. I'm asking you where you got the idea from ? Or are you just been sarky ?


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said 'down in sussex' things are on the up already, if we brexit hard enough maybe minimum wage insecure jobs will become a thing of the past.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> I'm not saying that. I'm asking you where you got the idea from ? Or are you just been sarky ?


I am being sarky, I don't think voting for a Tory Brexit will change things in a positive way.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> sealion said 'down in sussex' things are on the up already, if we brexit hard enough maybe minimum wage insecure jobs will become a thing of the past.


Don't misquote me. I said no such thing and you are shit stirrer and a poor one to boot.

Well down in Sussex the farmers are having to offer more to get labour in as are building firms. Is what i said. I said nothing of things being on the up already.


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

I honestly don't care about the personal insults so give them a rest maybe.
You do think though that Brexit will be a good thing for wages and working conditions in general? That’s what I think you’ve been arguing all day.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I am being sarky, I don't think voting for a Tory Brexit will change things in a positive way.


What is a tory brexit ? Have they decided yet


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> I honestly don't care about the personal insults so give them a rest maybe.


I don't care for you twisting things nor your sly, shiity, little veiled digs about people who voted leave.


----------



## bimble (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> I don't care for you twisting things nor your sly, shiity, little veiled digs about people who voted leave.


I was trying to get you to explain your position , why you think Brexit will make things better in the fruit picking industry for instance, not having a dig at ‘people who voted leave’ who did so for loads of different reasons. But never mind.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> I was trying to get you to explain your position , why you think Brexit will make things better in the fruit picking industry for instance, not having a dig at ‘people who voted leave’ who did so for loads of different reasons. But never mind.


You dumped this  Is Brexit actually going to happen?  here earlier. I told you farmers and builders are now having to offer more money to get in labour. So i have given you an example, but you are still chipping away and bringing up sweat shops in Bangladesh when we are discussing the eu.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> Yes. You won't see it because you read and quote the guardian.


I read and quote the guardian. Mostly disparagingly.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I read and quote the guardian. Mostly disparagingly.


I love the liberal meldowns in the comments section. It brightens up a dull day!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> It’s still campsites & daily ‘productivity targets’ and national living wage, do you think brexit will change that?


disappointed not to see you dismiss these 'productivity targets' as reminiscent of the norms we heard so much about in eg day in the life of Ivan denisovich


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> I love the liberal meldowns in the comments section. It brightens up a dull day!


It's not so good since they changed the size and it stopped being a perfect fit for the cat's litter tray


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not so good since they changed the size and it stopped being a perfect fit for the cat's litter tray


The inconsiderate bastards


----------



## Winot (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> I don't care for you twisting things nor your sly, shiity, little veiled digs about people who voted leave.



I think you’re seeing things that aren’t there.


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> I think you’re seeing things that aren’t there.


Along comes a knight in shining cling film


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> I think you’re seeing things that aren’t there.


Have a trip to specsavers


----------



## sealion (Feb 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> I think you’re seeing things that aren’t there.


This is why people like you get on my tits. Fucking ignorance is bliss isn't it eh!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2018)

sealion said:


> This is why people like you get on my tits. Fucking ignorance is bliss isn't it eh!


And he is fucking ignorant


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> This is why people like you get on my tits. Fucking ignorance is bliss isn't it eh!


I like how you got riled enough to respond twice, I always do that.... 3 posts later....AND ANOTHER THING, YOU LIBERAL SHITFACE!!!!


----------



## Badgers (Feb 11, 2018)

A running total of how much brexit has cost so far.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


> A running total of how much brexit has cost so far.


They're a bit off on cops and who cares how many border guards could have been employed. Be better if it said how many libraries saved and compared total lost to how much Boris Johnson had earned lying.


----------



## Horus Snacks (Feb 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


> A running total of how much brexit has cost so far.


Is there a source for that?


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


> A running total of how much brexit has cost so far.



The problem with this (which I expect is the work of a remain liberal), just like any far-stretched counterclaims by the leave right, is that we all know damn well that even if we stayed in the EU, then this money wouldn't be getting spent on nurses, hospitals and everything else it lists.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 11, 2018)

J Ed said:


> _Other people _picking cabbages for less than minimum wage, crammed ten to a one bedroom house... it's what being a real European is really about. *ode to joy starts playing*



Paying less than minimum wage and substandard housing is about enforcement, not where migrants come from. Similar conditions are experienced by restaurant workers from the rest of the world. Brexit campaigners like Priti Patel were clear that they wished certain interests, like the restaurant trade to be able to get cheap workers for curry houses as people in the UK won’t do it. Where will they live? In a nice flat or someone’s converted shed?

Brexit changes nothing If the will to stop exploitation isn’t there. Pretty clear where JRM, Boris etc would stand on it.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 11, 2018)

Horus Snacks said:


> Is there a source for that?


I got it from the impact papers


----------



## J Ed (Feb 11, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Paying less than minimum wage and substandard housing is about enforcement, not where migrants come from. Similar conditions are experienced by restaurant workers from the rest of the world. Brexit campaigners like Priti Patel were clear that they wished certain interests, like the restaurant trade to be able to get cheap workers for curry houses as people in the UK won’t do it. Where will they live? In a nice flat or someone’s converted shed?
> 
> Brexit changes nothing If the will to stop exploitation isn’t there. Pretty clear where JRM, Boris etc would stand on it.



Staying in the EU will change nothing in regards to enforcement, as well.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 11, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Staying in the EU will change nothing in regards to enforcement, as well.



Yes, that’s clear. Either way it’s a model of exploitation.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


> I got it from the impact papers


You mean the assessments they said didn't exist and tried to hide?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You mean the assessments they said didn't exist and tried to hide?


Yes the ones you lot laughed at for not existing.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 11, 2018)

Badgers said:


> A running total of how much brexit has cost so far.


In the fourth largest economy in the world even hospitals in London were relying on student nurses to make up the numbers when they should be there to shadow people and learn. Now it's shrunk to the fifth we've to look to economic growth to solve our problems? What shite. Would be just as useful to tell us how many cans of Tyskie or bottles of Moray Cup it might buy us. Maths is fun


----------



## Humirax (Feb 12, 2018)




----------



## paolo (Feb 12, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> The problem with this (which I expect is the work of a remain liberal), just like any far-stretched counterclaims by the leave right, is that we all know damn well that even if we stayed in the EU, then this money wouldn't be getting spent on nurses, hospitals and everything else it lists.



The money issue is transparent, albeit you might not like.

 It’s like tax in London. Raises huge cash, pays out much more to the country, than it notionally gets back. But London would be fucked if drew up the drawbridge.

To the EU. Poorer countries, eg Poland, Greece are cash benefactors. Richer nations (us, France, Germany) pay more in. 

One can argue whether this is right. But do think about it.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 12, 2018)

It's like I couldn't have possibly given a lot of thought about this, from a socialist, pro-worker (inc. EU) perspective which might offer some marginals gains over capital, whilst liberals like you went down the 'thicko racist leaver' insinuation angle and offered not one bit of analysis. And now you've got the cheek to 'ask' me to 'think about it'? Nah sorry, off you fuck paolo.


----------



## paolo (Feb 12, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> It's like I couldn't have possibly given a lot of thought about this, from a socialist, pro-worker (inc. EU) perspective which might offer some marginals gains over capital, whilst liberals like you went down the 'thicko racist leaver' insinuation angle and offered not one bit of analysis. Nah sorry, off you fuck paolo.



You don’t know me.

Actually to be fair I’d say “we” (the regulars here) have a good tone. We’re massively opposed but most of us avoid the cheap shots. We’ll argue rational, ideology, poke holes in each other, but I think the thicko racist stuff (I hope) is long gone.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 12, 2018)

Are you serious?


----------



## paolo (Feb 12, 2018)

In a recent story, May apparently challenges Merkel. Angela asked Theresa what she wanted. May said “Make me an offer”. Merkel said “No, you’re leaving, make *me* an offer” and this went round and round.

I’m beginning to wonder why the EU had this referendum in the first place. *

(* Stolen Line from the rightwing/leftwing biased BBC.)


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 12, 2018)

Isn't this better suited to the germany thread?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2018)

paolo said:


> You don’t know me.



We don't need to - you're not unique or special.



paolo said:


> Actually to be fair I’d say “we” (the regulars here) have a good tone. We’re massively opposed but most of us avoid the cheap shots. We’ll argue rational, ideology, poke holes in each other, but I think the thicko racist stuff (I hope) is long gone.





Never underestimate the ability of lieing racist shitbag liberals to *genuinely* believe they're the good guys.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2018)

bimble said:


> Unlike Aaron Banks etc. The telegraph has gone with front page headline on this calling it 'a Secret Plot'. Co-written by Mrs May's ex chief of staff. If you can't see what's going on there i can't help you.



I can see what's going on with you. Aaron Banks uses his vast undeserved wealth to influence the democratic process and you shit bricks. George Soros uses his vast undeserved wealth to influence the democratic process and you think he's a hero. 

Does the stench of hypocrisy make you feel sick sometimes or do you just not notice it any more?


----------



## sealion (Feb 12, 2018)

Labour’s priority is Brexit. But it should be the left-behind | Austin Mitchell


----------



## bimble (Feb 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog no you're not getting what i was talking about with pointing out the the 'secret plot' thing  but I don't want to go into it, plenty of people did see what that was about its just not of interest here on this thread.


----------



## sealion (Feb 12, 2018)

Dance classes tonight 7pm, Tuscany high street. We will be teaching the liberal sidestep and swerve technique. Beginners welcome!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2018)

bimble said:


> SpackleFrog no you're not getting what i was talking about with pointing out the the 'secret plot' thing, but I don't want to go into it, plenty of people did see what that was about its just not of interest here on this thread.



Yeah, we know, anti semitic conspiracy theories about secret Jewish plots etc.

Thing is what sealion said:



sealion said:


> Hardly breaking news is it. A stinking rich cunt that wants his own way



is nothing to do with any of that. It's just a factual observation. And as you say it's not relevant to the thread. So why mention it at all? Cos you want to imply sealion is an anti-semitic conspiracy theorist without actually saying it cos you know it's bollocks.


----------



## bimble (Feb 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So why mention it at all? Cos you want to imply sealion is an anti-semitic conspiracy theorist without actually saying it cos you know it's bollocks.


Don't be daft.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2018)

bimble said:


> Don't be daft.



Why did you respond at all then? You've just said it isn't relevant to the thread.


----------



## bimble (Feb 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why did you respond at all then? You've just said it isn't relevant to the thread.


I was really angry when i saw that headline in the telegraph. I did not 'attempt to smear sealion' as an antisemite conspiracy theorist contrary to your accusation above.  Can you drop it please.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2018)

bimble said:


> I was really angry when i saw that headline in the telegraph. I did not 'attempt to smear sealion' as an antisemite conspiracy theorist contrary to your accusation above.  Can you drop it please.



As long as we're all agreed nobody on this thread is an antisemite conspiracy theorist, then consider it dropped


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 12, 2018)

Space Raiders have gone up to 25p.

Happy with what you've done now, Farage?


----------



## 2hats (Feb 12, 2018)

Rich Tea biscuits seem to have shrunk even further. The outer concentric ring of 12 dimples, in the packet I had at the weekend, seemed to be even more perilously closer to the circumference than I recall before. (Or I have fake biscuits!  )


----------



## Raheem (Feb 12, 2018)

2hats said:


> Rich Tea biscuits seem to have shrunk even further. The outer concentric ring of 12 dimples, in the packet I had at the weekend, seemed to be even more perilously closer to the circumference than I recall before. (Or I have fake biscuits!  )



You need to stick with shop's own. They don't need to maintain the same margins and a lot of the time use smaller factories that have less incentive to retool.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2018)

Thank heavens the EU defends workers rights
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/02/02/eu-imposes-anti-union-law-on-greece/


----------



## gosub (Feb 14, 2018)

Full text: Boris Johnson’s Brexit speech | Coffee House


----------



## Raheem (Feb 14, 2018)

gosub said:


> Full text: Boris Johnson’s Brexit speech | Coffee House



You should have posted sections of it as if they were your own thoughts, then sat back to watch the likes comes flooding in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 14, 2018)

2hats said:


> Rich Tea biscuits seem to have shrunk even further. The outer concentric ring of 12 dimples, in the packet I had at the weekend, seemed to be even more perilously closer to the circumference than I recall before. (Or I have fake biscuits!  )


Jaffa cakes down from 12 to 10


----------



## gosub (Feb 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You should have posted sections of it as if they were your own thoughts, then sat back to watch the likes comes flooding in.


tried candp it but it was too long.   But yeah, do think he hit a lot of marks.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 14, 2018)

It was just a load of waffle, no specifics, full of have your cake and eat it ideas - no change since the referendum.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 14, 2018)

gosub said:


> tried candp it but it was too long.   But yeah, do think he hit a lot of marks.



 

I suppose I was only half joking.


----------



## gosub (Feb 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I suppose I was only half joking.


Other than it was BoJo (fair enough) whats your problem with it then?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

It didn't say anything new. It didn't mention the Irish thing. It didn't address any specific problems.


----------



## gosub (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It didn't say anything new. It didn't mention the Irish thing. It didn't address any specific problems.


Having got in trouble last week for thinking he was Health Secretary, treading on Davis' toes wouild have been a bit much


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2018)

Interesting survey that shows that the UK is more liberal and tolerant than many of the EU member states
Would You Feel Comfortable If Your Child Was In A Relationship With X?


----------



## Eeepet (Feb 14, 2018)

This is actually real. Dear God.


----------



## sealion (Feb 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Thank heavens the EU defends workers rights
> https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/02/02/eu-imposes-anti-union-law-on-greece/


It would be good to hear a remainer/ pro eu view on this. I thought someone would pop in to shoot it down.


----------



## sealion (Feb 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Interesting survey that shows that the UK is more liberal and tolerant than many of the EU member states
> Would You Feel Comfortable If Your Child Was In A Relationship With X?


It's no surprise to me and the figures confirm that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Interesting survey that shows that the UK is more liberal and tolerant than many of the EU member states
> Would You Feel Comfortable If Your Child Was In A Relationship With X?


That was 2015 though. 

Here's a more recent one, unfortunately.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf



> In 2016/17, there were 80,393 offences recorded by the police in which one or more hate crime strands were deemed to be a motivating factor. This was an increase of 29 per cent compared with the 62,518 hate crimes recorded in 2015/16, the largest percentage increase seen since the series began in 2011/12.  The increase over the last year is thought to reflect both a genuine rise in hate crime around the time of the EU referendum and also due to ongoing improvements in crime recording by the police.


A 29% increase in hate crimes.  'a genuine rise in hate crime' in case people argued about statistics


----------



## sealion (Feb 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That was 2015 though.


Bur still racist all the same.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> Bur still racist all the same.


What?


----------



## sealion (Feb 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What?


The rest of them, you posted gives figures that are for here. You ignored the rest of europe.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That was 2015 though.
> 
> Here's a more recent one, unfortunately.
> 
> ...


I dont think those attitudes will have changed in any significant manner what so ever over two years. Worth noting its a survey about attitudes not an attempt to measure hate crime or racially aggravated crime across Europe.The latter is hard to do becuase there isnt an EU standard in reporting or definition of crime.In  those that have been done on that basis ,aside from the UK/Brexit spike, one of  the commonalities is the spikes that relate to terrorist incidents.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> I dont think those attitudes will have changed in any significant manner what so ever over two years. Worth noting its a survey about attitudes not an attempt to measure hate crime or racially aggravated crime across Europe.The latter is hard to do becuase there isnt an EU standard in reporting or definition of crime.In  those that have been done on that basis ,aside from the UK/Brexit spike, one of  the commonalities is the spikes that relate to terrorist incidents.


I'm sure they haven't. Those charts show that there's a racist rump in the least racist countries in Europe, such as the UK, Netherlands, Denmark or Sweden, of perhaps 15 per cent, while rather more than that may be amenable to anti-Muslim sentiments. That tallies pretty well with the top-end that racist political parties can achieve in elections in those countries, which tends to top out around 15 %.  

Said racist rump was emboldened by the brexit vote, though. I think it's hard to deny that.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm sure they haven't. Those charts show that there's a racist rump in the least racist countries in Europe, such as the UK, Netherlands, Denmark or Sweden, of perhaps 15 per cent, while rather more than that may be amenable to anti-Muslim sentiments. That tallies pretty well with the top-end that racist political parties can achieve in elections in those countries, which tends to top out around 15 %.
> 
> Said racist rump was emboldened by the brexit vote, though. I think it's hard to deny that.



I'd be very surprised if there wasnt a racist rump in any of those countries and that would also  include those from minorities who  hold anti jewish, anti muslim  and anti black prejudices.

Re the far right topping out at 15% ,heres a map of far right election results (just hover over different countries and their regions) that might help you.
How the Populist Right Is Redrawing the Map of Europe


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

sealion said:


> It would be good to hear a remainer/ pro eu view on this. I thought someone would pop in to shoot it down.


Actually it prompted me to do a lot of reading.

I wanted to find out what the actual change in legislation is. Because the article linked to suggested that the change is in the required proportion of trade union members voting *for* a strike. That is, that >50% of the union membership must vote in favour of a strike. But other articles I've found imply that the new requirement is that >50% of union members must vote in the ballot in order for it to be valid, which is different.

None of the articles I've been able to find go into much detail. And nowhere can I find the actual text of the reforms. In an IMF report I find the following statement:



> In Greece, only 33 to 25 percent (at the second ballot) of first level union members need to be represented in the decision to call a strike.



That sounds to me to be saying we are talking about a threshold % of members voting, rather than threshold % of members voting in favour.

If that's true then the linked article is not correct.

Any clarifications welcome.


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Actually it prompted me to do a lot of reading.
> 
> I wanted to find out what the actual change in legislation is. Because the article linked to suggested that the change is in the required proportion of trade union members voting *for* a strike. That is, that >50% of the union membership must vote in favour of a strike. But other articles I've found imply that the new requirement is that >50% of union members must vote in the ballot in order for it to be valid, which is different.
> 
> ...


What is your opinion of the legislation, in either case?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Actually it prompted me to do a lot of reading.
> 
> I wanted to find out what the actual change in legislation is. Because the article linked to suggested that the change is in the required proportion of trade union members voting *for* a strike. That is, that >50% of the union membership must vote in favour of a strike. But other articles I've found imply that the new requirement is that >50% of union members must vote in the ballot in order for it to be valid, which is different.
> 
> ...



Seems like it's to do with increasing the participation thresholds, but it also seems like they have quite a complex arrangement in Greece, where local strikes have a higher threshold and the threshold also varies according to the result of the ballot (I'm joining the dots, but presumably very close votes require a higher level of participation to be valid). It seems like quite a substantial increase, where the threshold in many cases will be double what it was.

I haven't been able to find out by what mechanism the Greek government has been forced into this or whether or not it was the EU doing the forcing. Obviously, it can't be considered a good thing in any event.

Lesson closer to home: Don't rely on Counterpunch for accuracy.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

It's a condition of the bailout stuff, isn't it? That's the mechanism, if you want the cash accept our terms.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

Santino said:


> What is your opinion of the legislation, in either case?


I don't like the principle of messing with peoples' right to take industrial action. That said, I'd like to understand more of the context. What's your opinion? Opaque, I assume.


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't like the principle of messing with peoples' right to take industrial action. That said, I'd like to understand more of the context. What's your opinion? Opaque, I assume.


My opinion is that it is bad.


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's a condition of the bailout stuff, isn't it? That's the mechanism, if you want the cash accept our terms.


What is your opinion of an EU country being made to accept changes to employment law as a condition of accepting 'bailout' money?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

Santino said:


> What is your opinion of an EU country being made to accept changes to employment law as a condition of accepting 'bailout' money?


It depends on a hugely complicated context which I make no pretence at fully understanding.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

Santino said:


> My opinion is that it is bad.


How does the revised Greek leglislation compare with its equivalents in other EU countries which have been enacted by national sovereign governments?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's a condition of the bailout stuff, isn't it? That's the mechanism, if you want the cash accept our terms.



Yes, I understand that it's to do with the bailout. But was this specific measure stipulated by the loan agreement? Is it an attempt by the Greek government to meet some objective they're required to? Is it the result of some process they were forced to undertake? And, beyond that, is it the EU, IMF, both or someone else who is behind the underlying requirement?


----------



## Santino (Feb 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> How does the revised Greek leglislation compare with its equivalents in other EU countries which have been enacted by national sovereign governments?


Is that relevant to whether it is or is not bad?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

Santino said:


> Is that relevant to whether it is or is not bad?


It depends what you mean by "bad". What do you mean by "bad"? Is your "bad" absolute?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes, I understand that it's to do with the bailout. But was this specific measure stipulated by the loan agreement? Is it an attempt by the Greek government to meet some objective they're required to? Is it the result of some process they were forced to undertake? And, beyond that, is it the EU, IMF, both or someone else who is behind the underlying requirement?


It's not something I'm very clear about. The answers may be in here

Financial assistance to Greece


----------



## J Ed (Feb 16, 2018)

Not that the argument is made in good faith, but a frequent argument made by remain dead-enders who in reality would fight nationalisation tooth and nail is that of course nationalisation would be possible inside the EU since France has nationalised rail. Well...

Spinetta report urges SNCF to prepare for competition



> FRANCE: The national railway must refocus on ‘the areas where it has greatest relevance’: transporting large numbers of passengers within urban areas, and providing high speed connectivity between France’s principal cities.
> 
> This mission statement is at the heart of a landmark report handed to Prime Minister Edouard Philippe on February 15 by former Air France Chief Executive Jean-Cyril Spinetta. The report was commissioned in October last year by Transport Secretary Elisabeth Borne, and Spinetta was given a wide-ranging remit to assess the future of the French rail sector in the context of SNCF’s ongoing indebtedness, and the requirement under the EU’s Fourth Railway Package to liberalise the domestic passenger market.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 16, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Not that the argument is made in good faith, but a frequent argument made by remain dead-enders who in reality would fight nationalisation tooth and nail is that of course nationalisation would be possible inside the EU since France has nationalised rail. Well...
> 
> Spinetta report urges SNCF to prepare for competition



Does this article mention any sort of privatisation?


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 16, 2018)

'Liberalise the market'.

(I'm sure you know this)


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

There's no new news here. 

Except for inftastructure which I think should remain in state ownership I'm not that bothered about whether our rail services are nationalised or not. I'm more interested in them being organised and regulated effectively and funded properly. And I've more faith in the EU making that happen than any UK government.

I feel that most people who bang on about nationalisation being the magic solution to our railway problems probably spend much of their time driving around in privately owned cars and simply aren't interested in thinking about some of the good reasons for the changes to the structuring of Europe's railways in an era of cheap flights and of roads excessively clogged with freight that should be on the rails. 

As for the question of whether the liberalisation process is an obstruction to nationalisation, that was discussed at some length in the document posted a few pages back.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> 'Liberalise the market'.
> 
> (I'm sure you know this)



No I don't know it at all. The Fourth Package basically requires administrative separation between track and rolling stock. One effect of this will be to make it easier in countries that have state-owned train companies and don't currently have such a separation for future governments to privatise parts of their train network. So, don't be in any doubt that it is a bad thing from that perspective.

However, even if it will make it easier to privatise, the reverse isn't true. There's nothing about it that will make it harder to nationalise, or that will force governments into privatisation against their will.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 17, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No I don't know it at all. The Fourth Package basically requires administrative separation between track and rolling stock. One effect of this will be to make it easier in countries that have state-owned train companies and don't currently have such a separation for future governments to privatise parts of their train network. So, don't be in any doubt that it is a bad thing from that perspective.
> 
> However, even if it will make it easier to privatise, the reverse isn't true. There's nothing about it that will make it harder to nationalise, or that will force governments into privatisation against their will.



And why risk getting into an argument re the complexities of nationalising where there is now mandatory competitive tendering when you can just neglect to mention it altogether! 


teuchter said:


> I feel that most people who bang on about nationalisation being the magic solution to our railway problems probably spend much of their time driving around in privately owned cars


Working class people are always chomping at the bit for privatisation, aren't they. Listen to the ones on these boards "PRIVATISE THE LOT!"


----------



## kabbes (Feb 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I feel that most people who bang on about nationalisation being the magic solution to our railway problems probably spend much of their time driving around in privately owned cars and simply aren't interested in thinking about some of the good reasons for the changes to the structuring of Europe's railways in an era of cheap flights and of roads excessively clogged with freight that should be on the rails.


With all due respect to your magic feels, most of the time I hear people “banging on” about it, it’s from people standing on platforms waiting for delayed trains, or people stuffed dangerously into overcrowded carriages because the previous train was cancelled and so two already overfull trains’ worth are being pushed into one train.

I don’t really hear anybody “banging on” about it who goes around in private cars all the time.  They don’t tend to give a shit.

But hey, you have your feels.  You commute on the rail network at rush hour every day though, right?  To get those feels?  Feels are pretty important.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 17, 2018)

Teuchter's really showing his political colours these days.


----------



## J Ed (Feb 17, 2018)

Privatisation's not so bad since we Brits are irreedeeambly bad anyway we deserve what we are getting and more. Let's face it, inside or out of the EU there is no way that we can get to heaven and anyway all the people who use trains are posh unlike the salt of the earth car users so privatisation is good because it punishes those hypothetical posh people. What's a bus?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 17, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Teuchter's really showing his political colours these days.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

Commuters understandably complain about overcrowded and unreliable services because many of our commuter routes are at capacity, yes. And when people tell them that these problems could be solved by nationalisation many seem to buy it. I don't. 

Commuting by rail doesn't preclude people from privately owning a car and using it for other journeys or indeed to and from the station. It also doesn't make them interested in or knowledgable about aspects of rail or indeed public transport outside of their commute. 

Britain is a nation of car drivers and so far that's how Britain seems to have voted.

I just wish that the apparent enthusiasm for rail nationalisation - which I don't think will solve our transport problems - could instead be spent on deeper changes to transport policy that could.

You lot feel free to spin that desire into whatever sinister agenda you like. Or alternatively, instead of feeble snidey comments about "political colours" and so on feel free to discuss the actual points.

One of the aims of the EU policy is to encourage transnational freight, which can currently move freely, by private road hauliers, across borders but which faces certain obstacles by rail. Maybe there are better ways to improve this, than the EU open access approach. More than happy to hear them.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Privatisation's not so bad since we Brits are irreedeeambly bad anyway we deserve what we are getting and more. Let's face it, inside or out of the EU there is no way that we can get to heaven and anyway all the people who use trains are posh unlike the salt of the earth car users so privatisation is good because it punishes those hypothetical posh people. What's a bus?


You've got your parody all the wrong way round I'm afraid.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 17, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Not that the argument is made in good faith, but a frequent argument made by remain dead-enders who in reality would fight nationalisation tooth and nail is that of course nationalisation would be possible inside the EU since France has nationalised rail. Well...
> 
> Spinetta report urges SNCF to prepare for competition


It's a bit or a straw man though, isn't it. We don't have nationalised rail in this country and a Tory Brexit will not make this more likely, in fact the trade deals we will be offered outside the EU will make it even less likely.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Commuters understandably complain about overcrowded and unreliable services because many of our commuter routes are at capacity, yes. And when people tell them that these problems could be solved by nationalisation many seem to buy it. I don't.


But you don’t actually experience it, do you?  You don’t get caught in the system of everybody blaming everybody else with no apparent accountability at all.  You don’t get told you can’t use a train because your ticket isn’t applicable for that rail operating company.  You don’t get the daily frustration of the consequences of privatisation.



> Commuting by rail doesn't preclude people from privately owning a car and using it for other journeys or indeed to and from the station. It also doesn't make them interested in or knowledgable about aspects of rail or indeed public transport outside of their commute.


Yeah, fuck people who actually spend ten hours a week using the trains.  What do they know?  They probably even also have a car!


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> But you don’t actually experience it, do you?  You don’t get caught in the system of everybody blaming everybody else with no apparent accountability at all.  You don’t get told you can’t use a train because your ticket isn’t applicable for that rail operating company.  You don’t get the daily frustration of the consequences of privatisation.



Yes, I do. I don't commute every day by rail, but I do travel on rush hour services, I am sometimes left standing on the platform at my local station because there's physically no room to get on the train, and I do run up against ticketing issues and am frequntly frustrated by them.

Where we disagree is what the solution is. I've said it before many times; I opposed privatisation when it happened and I don't think the current system works. I don't think nationalisation is the answer though. I want more investment of public money, strategic oversight, and I want changes to the way the franchising system is regulated. I want the same to happen with local buses and I want the two systems to be properly integrated. These are not things that the UK government shows any sign of doing. These are things that are more or less evident in other European countries and there's not a correlation with state/private ownership.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 17, 2018)

Public money finding its way into something that's not publicly owned is pretty much the shit neoliberal position we're in now to a degree, isn't it?!


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 17, 2018)

J Ed said:


> e we Brits are irreedeeambly bad anyway we deserve what we are getting and more


the projected self loathing of the middle classes has been pronounced in the wake of brexit. David Michellesque self-hatred only its not a joke. More fool me for taking the light self deprecation at face value and not noticing the well of despair behind it. Punish us barnier


----------



## J Ed (Feb 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's a bit or a straw man though, isn't it. We don't have nationalised rail in this country and a Tory Brexit will not make this more likely, in fact the trade deals we will be offered outside the EU will make it even less likely.



A Tory anything won't make it more or less likely, a point which is entirely separate from the discussion we are having.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Public money finding its way into something that's not publicly owned is pretty much the shit neoliberal position we're in now to a degree, isn't it?!


I don't have a dogmatic approach to exactly what kind of entities public money goes to. Perhaps you do. Fair enough. I don't happen to think it's an approach that will sort out transport issues. I'm more interested in what the public money buys and whether it's useful.


----------



## Santino (Feb 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't have a dogmatic approach to exactly what kind of entities public money goes to. Perhaps you do. Fair enough. I don't happen to think it's an approach that will sort out transport issues. I'm more interested in what the public money buys and whether it's useful.


What's your approach to public money going to entities that, by their very nature, seek to maximise the proportion of that money that is kept for shareholders and minimise the tax they pay?


----------



## binka (Feb 17, 2018)

Santino said:


> What's your approach to public money going to entities that, by their very nature, seek to maximise the proportion of that money that is kept for shareholders and minimise the tax they pay?


Not sure if you're aware of this or not but private companies being inherently more efficient than publicly owned entities it means shareholders can take their cut while still delivering better quality services. Everybody wins


----------



## J Ed (Feb 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't have a dogmatic approach to exactly what kind of entities public money goes to. Perhaps you do. Fair enough. I don't happen to think it's an approach that will sort out transport issues. I'm more interested in what the public money buys and whether it's useful.



Behold, the re-birth of Giddens


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

Santino said:


> What's your approach to public money going to entities that, by their very nature, seek to maximise the proportion of that money that is kept for shareholders and minimise the tax they pay?


In the instance of rail - well written and specified franchise contracts. What's yours? Nationalise every entity in the supply chain?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

binka said:


> Not sure if you're aware of this or not but private companies being inherently more efficient than publicly owned entities it means shareholders can take their cut while still delivering better quality services. Everybody wins


Just to kill this off, I don't believe this. I don't think there's any clear evidence for whether private or public works best for rail services. That's why I'm not too bothered either way. Give me persuasive evidence - I'll change my mind.


----------



## J Ed (Feb 17, 2018)

Who writes the contracts? Who enforces them?


----------



## J Ed (Feb 17, 2018)

What does better mean? Better for who? The status quo is better now, for some.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 17, 2018)

J Ed said:


> A Tory anything won't make it more or less likely, a point which is entirely separate from the discussion we are having.


No, because a Tory Brexit is what we're having.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> No, because a Tory Brexit is what we're having.



And the EU is committed to the liberalising (privatising) of markets, including rail, so what's your point?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 17, 2018)

binka said:


> Not sure if you're aware of this or not but private companies being inherently more efficient than publicly owned entities it means shareholders can take their cut while still delivering better quality services. Everybody wins



Aside from arriving on time what else would make a quality railway service ?

What is it with private companies that make them inherently more efficient btw?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 17, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> And the EU is committed to the liberalising (privatising) of markets, including rail, so what's your point?


As I said we have privatisation already and a Tory Brexit won't change this, in fact they plan more liberalising off the back of it.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> As I said we have privatisation already and a Tory Brexit won't change this, in fact they plan more liberalising off the back of it.



Tories will do what Tories will do in regards to liberalising markets. And yet, so do the EU.


----------



## binka (Feb 17, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Aside from arriving on time what else would make a quality railway service ?
> 
> What is it with private companies that make them inherently more efficient btw?


I was doing that thing where people say the opposite of what they mean


----------



## Santino (Feb 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> As I said we have privatisation already and a Tory Brexit won't change this, in fact they plan more liberalising off the back of it.


It was better when the EU stopped them privatising everything.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 17, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Who writes the contracts? Who enforces them?


An arm of government. Effectively the same people as those who would make strategic decisions if the railways were nationalised.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 17, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Tories will do what Tories will do in regards to liberalising markets. And yet, so do the EU.


Exactly, the tory brexit won't smash neo-liberalism, it will continue as before.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Exactly, the tory brexit won't smash neo-liberalism, it will continue as before.



It certainly will in the EU, and yet the liberal breakdowns about what Tories will do post-leave with Labour being destroyed for a generation hasn't materialised. The Tories are all over the shop and split as ever and Labour actually made ground since (not that I care much for Labour being some sort of salvation though). As has been argued before, capital wanted remain and so (even marginal) opportunities to disrupt capital and the status quo still exist.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 18, 2018)

Obo has a piece today in opinion section once more saying that Labour must now back Remain, noting that its working class vote in the last election was majority remain so thats it. Labour did not in fact win though, good show tho. So it might need to be appealing to more than simply who they've already got. Now this article is from Best for Britain who I read about the other day, its gina millers thing. I'd heard of them the other day from this amusing aside

Seymour:


> It would be an insult to astroturf to call this astroturf. There may come a time when the "movement" rhetoric comes with some simulation of an actual movement. But thus far it is a campaign with about half a dozen people involved. And it claims to be "powered by Best for Britain, Open Britain, The European Movement, and the GCG". Best for Britain, everyone knows as the Gina Miller-led campaign. Open Britain is the successor to the dynamic and very successful and in no way shambolic business-led Britain Stronger in Europe campaign. The European Movement is essentially a bunch of pro-EU Tory MPs like Ken Clarke and Douglas Hurd. And "the GCG"? That's Chuka Umunna and Anna Soubry. (I still remember those halcyon, early Brexit days when Chuka was an immigrant-bashing Blue Labourite).
> 
> 
> So, as I say, it's not even astroturf. The only grassroots in this campaign are those burrowing into the remains of Jean Monnet. Now, here's the thing. The Brexit press has been running a series of conspiracy-tinged articles complaining about George Soros funding the Remainer plot. If these people weren't bonkers, they would be laughing themselves sick. These Remain campaigns, from BSE to 'Another Europe is Possible' (because chillstep and solidarity), have all been unutterably fucking naff. And this is by far the worst. "Old folks will die soon, so why should we have Brexit?" Really? Of all the reasons to be opposed to, or sceptical about, Brexit, this is the most sociopathic and inane. If you're a serious-minded Remainer, or even just someone who prefers politics to be political, this should be offensive.
> ...



lol


----------



## J Ed (Feb 18, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Obo has a piece today in opinion section once more saying that Labour must now back brexit, noting that its working class vote in the last election was majority remain so thats it. Labour did not in fact win though, good show tho. So it might need to be appealing to more than simply who they've already got. Now this article is from Best for Britain who I read about the other day, its gina millers thing. I'd heard of them the other day from this amusing aside
> 
> Seymour:
> 
> ...



It's interesting isn't it that we don't, unlike with working-class leavers, get these pathologisations and anthropological studies of dead-end remainers.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 18, 2018)

So, basically the author of that piece - politics degree > job at European Parliament > consultancy job doing work for/with EU institutions > CEO of BfB.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 18, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> So, basically the author of that piece - politics degree > job at European Parliament > consultancy job doing work for/with EU institutions > CEO of BfB.


Do have a look at where she got her masters from as well.



> According to _The Times_, the "College of Europe, in the medieval Belgian city of Bruges, is to the European political elite what the Harvard Business School is to American corporate life. It is a hothouse where the ambitious and talented go to make contacts".[4]_The Economist_ describes it as "an elite finishing school for aspiring Eurocrats."[5] The _Financial Times_ writes that "the elite College of Europe in Bruges" is "an institution geared to producing crop after crop of graduates with a lifelong enthusiasm for EU integration."[6] European Commissioner for Education Ján Figeľ described the college as "one of the most emblematic centres of European studies in the European Union".[7] The BBC has referred to it as "the EU's very own Oxbridge".[8] The college has also been described as "the leading place to study European affairs"[9] and as "the elite training center for the European Union's political class".[10] RFE/RL has referred to the college as "a Euro-federalist hot-spot."[11] _The Global Mail_ has described its students as "Europe's leaders-in-waiting."[12]


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 18, 2018)

Christ!


----------



## teqniq (Feb 20, 2018)

I had a smile..

David Davis: Brexit will not plunge Britain into Mad Max dystopia

At the headline that is.

David Davis will be the guy who loses the tips of his fingers to the feral boy's sharpened boomerang in Mad Max 2 should such a dystopian future occur.

One can only but hope.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 20, 2018)

teqniq said:


> I had a smile..
> 
> David Davis: Brexit will not plunge Britain into Mad Max dystopia
> 
> ...



Given how so far everything Davis has said definitely wouldn't happen has happened, this is worrying. They really need to get him to deny that Brexit will unlock the secrets of everlasting life. He's our most reliable tool, if only we knew how to use him.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 20, 2018)

another day another group


> Embarrassed by his mistake, but not by changing his mind – “there is always more passion in a convert” – he is one of four young people to found a youth campaign, Our Future Our Choice (Ofoc), which aims to put young people at the forefront of stopping Brexit. Next month, he will take a year out from studying PPE at Oxford to devote himself full time to the campaign.


Stopping Brexit: ‘The kids don’t want what’s being forced on them’


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> another day another group
> 
> Stopping Brexit: ‘The kids don’t want what’s being forced on them’


Very death camps that slogan. 
_
Our Future. Our choice. 

Not yours old-timer. You can fuck off._


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 20, 2018)

> One influence has been La République En Marche, the pro-European centrist party founded by Emmanuel Macron in France in April 2016. According to Lara Spirit, 21, a third-year student in politics and international relations at Cambridge, and another Ofoc founder, it inspired them to build support



can they not field anyone who isn't a miller of tomorrow?

 C


> alum Millbank, 25, an ex-apprentice, now a third-year engineering student at City, University of London, who spent part of a tough childhood with his family in women’s refuges.
> 
> “My role is really being open to understanding people from all walks of life


is as close as we have here


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 20, 2018)

teqniq said:


> I had a smile..
> 
> David Davis: Brexit will not plunge Britain into Mad Max dystopia
> 
> ...


A Swedish robot is mowing his lawn, he expects deliveries from Amazon by drone.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> A Swedish robot is mowing his lawn, he expects deliveries from Amazon by drone.


Blimey - you didn't say 'tory brexit'. You feeling ok?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

Interesting extract from areport on  Macron's speech at Davos


> The most controversial part of his speech was for a "stronger Europe" that had more political, supra-national powers over individual countries' laws and tax regimes. A new, more ambitious Europe was the answer to the barriers of nationalism, he said. "If we want to avoid this fragmentation of the world we need a stronger Europe."
> 
> "My view is we have to redesign a 10-year strategy ... to make Europe an economic, social, green, scientific, and political power. That's what we have to build."
> 
> "You need more ambition than the 27" countries that form the basis of the EU, he said. The less ambitious countries — Britain, presumably, which has voted to leave the EU — should get out of the way, he said. He also argued that the EU might want to abandon its longheld principal of only making changes if all 27 countries agree to the change. Countries that want more European power should be allowed to get it, he said. "Those who don't want to move forward should not block the most ambitious people in the room."


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Very death camps that slogan.
> _
> Our Future. Our choice.
> 
> Not yours old-timer. You can fuck off._


The comments re 'the elderly' under that article reads like it was written by The Eugenics Advocacy Agency


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> A Swedish robot is mowing his lawn, he expects deliveries from Amazon by drone.


Happens every day in working class communities in Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The comments re 'the elderly' under that article reads like it was written by The Eugenics Advocacy Agency


_carousel! carousel!_


----------



## mauvais (Feb 20, 2018)

I'd love to see - from an illegal drone's eye view - what his lawnmower's done to the place whilst he's out.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

The end of the world as we know it



> * Brexit is deterring au pair *
> 
> Brexit is deterring au pairs
> 
> ...


----------



## sealion (Feb 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The end of the world as we know it


Each year, an estimated 40,000 families offer young foreigners a home, food and pocket money.
-----------------------------------------------------
But no wages!


----------



## sealion (Feb 20, 2018)

Stick them in a dormer to sleep, deduct from wages and give them some pocket money. # were all european now!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The end of the world as we know it



People being forced to raise their own children, whatever next?


----------



## sealion (Feb 20, 2018)

“Brexit has really damaged us,” said Rebecca Haworth-Wood, chairwoman of the British Au Pair Agencies Association (BAPAA). “Many families rely on au pairs but this year our agencies are struggling to find them. Europeans are just less willing to come because Britain is perceived to be anti-foreigner. They want to go to families in places like Ireland instead.”
--------------------
Nanny Slaves: Former au pairs reveal life of hell with Irish families


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 20, 2018)

Ooh they may be in for a shock if they meet my family....


----------



## J Ed (Feb 20, 2018)

No wonder the media isn't alienated by Mogg, apparently having a nanny is normal


----------



## Raheem (Feb 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> A Swedish robot is mowing his lawn, he expects deliveries from Amazon by drone.



All that needs is a yelp and The Fall have a new lyricist.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> “Brexit has really damaged us,” said Rebecca Haworth-Wood, chairwoman of the British Au Pair Agencies Association (BAPAA). “Many families rely on au pairs but this year our agencies are struggling to find them. Europeans are just less willing to come because Britain is perceived to be anti-foreigner. They want to go to families in places like Ireland instead.”
> --------------------
> Nanny Slaves: Former au pairs reveal life of hell with Irish families


Ireland must be awash with au pairs being pro foreigner and all that


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 20, 2018)

This is interesting


> In the past year, the Home Office has issued 18,950 visas under its domestic workers in private households scheme, which allows foreign families to bring domestic staff with them when staying in the UK.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> Each year, an estimated 40,000 families offer young foreigners a home, food and pocket money.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> But no wages!


 
the local forum seems to reckon Aps get 120-150 pw cash in hand  + phone + oyster + wifi + own room with on suite as standard + weekends off

just saying like


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 20, 2018)

I suppose being leched at by the husband is part of the package as well

/cynic


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> All that needs in a yelp and The Fall have a new lyricist.



Swedish robotic lawn
Amazon drones to your Home
Forward-Thinking
Brexit School
Birmingham School of Brexit School
Birmingham School of Brexit School
In the heart of Britain
The big heart of England
Exciting developments
The Birmingham School of Brexit School


----------



## Raheem (Feb 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> People being forced to raise their own children, whatever next?



At least they'll no longer be forced to raise other people's children, says Jacob Rees-Mogg.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 20, 2018)

J Ed said:


> No wonder the media isn't alienated by Mogg, apparently having a nanny is normal



Nothing so bourgeois as a nanny.

Nannies get paid.


----------



## souljacker (Feb 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The end of the world as we know it



They need to widen their horizons. I'm sure they could get some subservient Filipino or Costa Rican girl if they tried. They could probably pay them less and beat them occasionally too.


----------



## billbond (Feb 20, 2018)

Oh dear seems some middle class luvvies might have to spend some time with their kids and do their own washing up !
#shutthecountrydown


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> another day another group
> 
> Stopping Brexit: ‘The kids don’t want what’s being forced on them’


Oxford student Will Dry voted leave because he thought they would give 350 mil to the NHS. Mmm hmmm 


The39thStep said:


> The comments re 'the elderly' under that article reads like it was written by The Eugenics Advocacy Agency


Anyone over 50 apparently


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 20, 2018)

sealion said:


> Each year, an estimated 40,000 families offer young foreigners a home, food and pocket money.
> -----------------------------------------------------
> But no wages!


Pocket money


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Feb 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Ireland must be awash with au pairs being pro foreigner and all that



If there’s a sudden glut of would be au pairs in Ireland, I suspect it will have more to do with recent court decisions extending the minimum wage and other employment protections to au pairs than it will with fear of Brexit.

(The horrified coverage of the minimum wage decision in the media here was almost as funny as the horrified coverage of the Jobstown acquittals. Our court system is usually pretty reliable from an establishment point of view and the papers don’t take it well when something goes wrong and the plebeians win).


----------



## billbond (Feb 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I suppose being leched at by the husband is part of the package as well
> 
> /cynic


 I bet Brendan Cox is looking into it

#cynic


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 21, 2018)

Nigel Irritable said:


> If there’s a sudden glut of would be au pairs in Ireland, I suspect it will have more to do with recent court decisions extending the minimum wage and other employment protections to au pairs than it will with fear of Brexit.
> 
> (The horrified coverage of the minimum wage decision in the media here was almost as funny as the horrified coverage of the Jobstown acquittals. Our court system is usually pretty reliable from an establishment point of view and the papers don’t take it well when something goes wrong and the plebeians win).


this is fairly bitter and pompous in the IT (I had to look did't I) The idea of the trial being politically motivated should be 'treated with the derison it deserves' and 'the jury we're all but nobbled and the trial a fix, but we can't say that straight'

Jobstown acquittals: jury trials under strain


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Feb 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> this is fairly bitter and pompous in the IT (I had to look did't I) The idea of the trial being politically motivated should be 'treated with the derison it deserves' and 'the jury we're all but nobbled and the trial a fix, but we can't say that straight'
> 
> Jobstown acquittals: jury trials under strain



Half the journalists in Ireland were on twitter mournfully declaring that the fascist mob had won. It was great.

The squealing about the injustice of having to pay au pairs was more personal. It was less about the right wing media’s world view and more about columnists and journalists panicking at the prospect of having to pay the help. A sample: Equating au pairs with employees is ludicrous


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 27, 2018)

If the elite ever cared about the have-nots, that didn’t last long | John Harris


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 27, 2018)

eta.
weak.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 27, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> If the elite ever cared about the have-nots, that didn’t last long | John Harris





> This is not to dispute that Brexit is a bad idea, or that the people who have taken charge of the process are inept beyond words.


but also....


> The angels of their better natures are present and correct, if only the supposed forces of progress would finally create conditions in which they could fly. Have we forgotten so quickly?


I think he might mean the angel of the north.  Or beelzebub, maybe.   It's unclear.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> but also....
> 
> I think he might mean the angel of the north.  Or beelzebub, maybe.   It's unclear.


It's very clear. 

A) that there is a lot of sneery liberals who support remain who painted their support in terms of giving a shit for the working class - and that now this mask has been dropped

B) Posh people have trapped and enclosed all avenues for class betterment to the benefit of their own elite careers


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> but also....
> 
> I think he might mean the angel of the north.  Or beelzebub, maybe.   It's unclear.


All your posts over the last  year are utter drivel btw. Incoherent gluehead drivel. Like a man remembering what he meant to say to someone else years ago about something that he wants to happen but has dodgy reasons to not be able to say what he wants to happen


----------



## 8115 (Feb 27, 2018)

We're almost halfway through the formal leaving process. 

What's actually been agreed so far?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 27, 2018)

8115 said:


> We're almost halfway through the formal leaving process.
> 
> What's actually been agreed so far?


Are we?

That we're out.


----------



## 8115 (Feb 27, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Are we?
> 
> That we're out.


Yeah, they just seem to be leaving a lot to the last minute though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2018)

8115 said:


> We're almost halfway through the formal leaving process.
> 
> What's actually been agreed so far?


Brexit means brexit. Or maybe not.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Brexit means brexit. Or maybe not.



It's quite striking that no preparations seem to be being made to replicate the EU-wide stuff that will now need to be done in-house. Like, none at all.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 27, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's quite striking that no preparations seem to be being made to replicate the EU-wide stuff that will now need to be done in-house. Like, none at all.



...that _would _need to be done in-house.


----------



## agricola (Feb 27, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's quite striking that no preparations seem to be being made to replicate the EU-wide stuff that will now need to be done in-house. Like, none at all.



Yes, but we manage to travel to Tower Hill (changing at Victoria) so everything will be alright.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 27, 2018)

Raheem said:


> ...that _would _need to be done in-house.



Good point, subtly expressed


----------



## Supine (Feb 28, 2018)

8115 said:


> We're almost halfway through the formal leaving process.
> 
> What's actually been agreed so far?



Brexit means brexit


----------



## Riklet (Feb 28, 2018)

Terrible tactical decision by Labour and Corbyn.

Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.

Every relieved businessman, farmer and luvvie remainer is another nail in the coffin for Labour's chances of winning an election and doing anything remotely radical.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Feb 28, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.


I disagree - to me it is just pragmatism and pre-empting the government which will I think as a minimum have to accept a CU as a precondition for any deal. This is because it avoids a hard border in NI, and I don't believe the Parliamentary maths will allow one between GB and NI. Can't see the EU ever selling out Ireland on that given that the article 50 clock running down means all the EU need to do is wait for the UK to fold.


----------



## andysays (Feb 28, 2018)

Looks like 'something' may actually happen today

*EU to publish first draft of Brexit treaty*


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 28, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Terrible tactical decision by Labour and Corbyn.
> 
> Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.
> 
> Every relieved businessman, farmer and luvvie remainer is another nail in the coffin for Labour's chances of winning an election and doing anything remotely radical.


Agree. Terrible politics.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 28, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Terrible tactical decision by Labour and Corbyn.
> 
> Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.
> 
> Every relieved businessman, farmer and luvvie remainer is another nail in the coffin for Labour's chances of winning an election and doing anything remotely radical.


What should they have done instead and how would the irish issue be dealt with?


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Terrible tactical decision by Labour and Corbyn.
> 
> Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.
> 
> Every relieved businessman, farmer and luvvie remainer is another nail in the coffin for Labour's chances of winning an election and doing anything remotely radical.



I'm not convinced at all that it is a terrible tactical decision.  Its not a winner in its own right agreed, but its probably a step towards a more reasonable position.


----------



## Hollis (Feb 28, 2018)

If it's a step towards second referendum or Labour campaigning to remain all the better..


----------



## sealion (Feb 28, 2018)

Hollis said:


> If it's a step towards second referendum or Labour campaigning to remain all the better..


Isn't Corbyn anti EU ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I'm not convinced at all that it is a terrible tactical decision.  Its not a winner in its own right agreed, but its probably a step towards a more reasonable position.


What's a _reasonable _position in your view?


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

We need to keep the option of abandoning Brexit entirely.  If this is done a compact is needed to address some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit (apart from the most overtly racist reasons for voting for Brexit). We need to heal the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> We need to keep the option of abandoning Brexit entirely.  If this is done a compact is needed to address some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit (apart from the most overtly racist reasons for voting for Brexit). We need to heal the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode.


ok. we stay in the eu, lots of unhappy people. we leave the eu, lots of unhappy people. we have some sort of in between arrangement with the eu, lots of unhappy people. just how would you propose that 'the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode' be healed?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

Trench warfare.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Trench warfare.


divisions from trench warfare have healed well in europe and america


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 28, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Terrible tactical decision by Labour and Corbyn.
> 
> Christ they really have no bloody spine or bottle. What a crackingly shit negotiating position 'a customs union' is.
> 
> Every relieved businessman, farmer and luvvie remainer is another nail in the coffin for Labour's chances of winning an election and doing anything remotely radical.


Didn't the majority of Labour voters vote remain?

It's a great move, backs May even further into a corner.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Didn't the majority of Labour voters vote remain?
> 
> It's a great move, backs May even further into a corner.


Don't want may backed into a corner, want her defenestrated


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 28, 2018)

literally?


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> ok. we stay in the eu, lots of unhappy people. we leave the eu, lots of unhappy people. we have some sort of in between arrangement with the eu, lots of unhappy people. just how would you propose that 'the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode' be healed?



The healing is going to be difficult whatever happens and I think that perhaps we have got a lot more trench warfare fighting to be done first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> The healing is going to be difficult whatever happens and I think that perhaps we have got a lot more trench warfare fighting to be done first.


Yeh? Who's in these trenches of yours?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

Is it labour v tory?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

Is it may v barnier?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

Is it the serried ranks of Brexit voters v metropolitan elites?


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> The healing is going to be difficult whatever happens and I think that perhaps we have got a lot more trench warfare fighting to be done first.



Healing like this you mean? Nah, off you fuck


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Is it labour v tory?



Well I'm hoping that Labour will be a stalwart against HARD brexit, but also remainer Tories, SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and Sinn Fein and the DUP.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Well I'm hoping that Labour will be a stalwart against HARD brexit, but also remainer Tories, SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and Sinn Fein and the DUP.



Liberal, anti-socialist politics. Right there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Well I'm hoping that Labour will be a stalwart against HARD brexit, but also remainer Tories, SNP, Greens, Lib Dems and Sinn Fein and the DUP.


The choice is stop in EU or hard brexit. Soft brexit is a myth
A customs union won’t help – there is no such thing as a ‘soft’ Brexit | Vernon Bogdanor


----------



## teqniq (Feb 28, 2018)

Meanwhile that nice Mr.Macron is taking on the unions over workers rights and the future of SNCF. The article claims that the publicly owned company is haemorrhaging money but provides no sources for these claims though interestingly does provide links for similar claims in regard to Network Rail...

Contrary to Macron's claims it looks like the first steps towards privatisation to me and anyway why should i take the word of a one-time investment banker?


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Liberal, anti-socialist politics. Right there.



Not necessarily.


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The choice is stop in EU or hard brexit. Soft brexit is a myth
> A customs union won’t help – there is no such thing as a ‘soft’ Brexit | Vernon Bogdanor



I agree. The British electorate ended up voting for something which is impossible.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Not necessarily.



Not neccessarily?  You're advocating a 'rainbow coalition' for remain of neoliberal parties including the Tories and DUP!


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Meanwhile that nice Mr.Macron is taking on the unions over workers rights and the future of SNCF. The article claims that the publicly owned company is haemorrhaging money but provides no sources for these claims though interestingly does provide links for similar claims in regard to Network Rail...



Not just Macron it should be noted, EU institutions have already been making demands for France to weaken and reform labour/worker rights - make their labour force 'more flexible'.

Going back to 2014, privatisation of the SNCF was already on the cards and was EU-led.


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Not neccessarily?  You're advocating a 'rainbow coalition' for remain of neoliberal parties including the Tories and DUP!



Not a coalition just a means to an end of defeating Hard Brexit.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Not a coalition just a means to an end of defeating Hard Brexit.



Somehow 'defeating hard brexit' by aligning with Tories, DUP and other neoliberal parties, and then regarding it as 'not neccessarily' anti-socialist is proper fucking nonsense.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 28, 2018)

none of the solutuions on offer would seem to realistically offer much in the ways of a path to socialism, however this is hoped for. shit always rises to the top and all that. . i am a pessimist though


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Somehow 'defeating hard brexit' by aligning with Tories, DUP and other neoliberal parties, and then regarding it as 'not neccessarily' anti-socialist is proper fucking nonsense.



yes it is. 

But alinging with a coalition of ultra right wing tories, UKIPers and the DUP  to ensure hard brexit is not exactly bringing britain to socialism either. 

but that's the choices that we are being offered. 

And the EU's laying down of the law today looks like they are going to use brexit as an opportunity to fuck the UK up the arse whatever happens.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

I mean, by all means argue against a hard brexit, but on that basis, fuck me.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> And the EU's laying down of the law today looks like they are going to use brexit as an opportunity to fuck the UK up the arse whatever happens.



Isn't the EU a force for good 

Inbetween screwing over French workers.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 28, 2018)

Wtf is this choice? Where do i register my input tim?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Wtf is this choice? Where do i register my input tim?



here you go

The world’s platform for change

with enough people signing - we can get  that input  DEBATED IN PARLIAMENT.


----------



## Smangus (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Trench warfare.



With a Christmas footy truce


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> divisions from trench warfare have healed well in europe and america



TBF though everyone involved is dead now. Maybe that's how Brexit will end up working.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> TBF though everyone involved is dead now. Maybe that's how Brexit will end up working.


A better call to hurry it up I've never heard. Quick, a ravening mob with pitchforks etc to Whitehall on the double


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 28, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> here you go
> 
> The world’s platform for change
> 
> with enough people signing - we can get  that input  DEBATED IN PARLIAMENT.



Jesus


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> yes it is.
> 
> But alinging with a coalition of ultra right wing tories, UKIPers and the DUP  to ensure hard brexit is not exactly bringing britain to socialism either.
> 
> ...


Never was the caca in your username so apt


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Somehow 'defeating hard brexit' by aligning with Tories, DUP and other neoliberal parties, and then regarding it as 'not neccessarily' anti-socialist is proper fucking nonsense.


Somehow standing with Johnson and Farage and voting for a Tory Brexit to advance socialism is proper fucking nonsense.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 28, 2018)

we are in a bit of a pickle, thats for sure


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 28, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Somehow standing with Johnson and Farage and voting for a Tory Brexit to advance socialism is proper fucking nonsense.


_Tory brexit_ is back. Sub farage rhetoric and no actual politics. Order restored.


----------



## stethoscope (Feb 28, 2018)

I score 25 points


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Tory brexit_ is back. Sub farage rhetoric and no actual politics. Order restored.


It's ever present.


----------



## 8115 (Feb 28, 2018)

"Theresa May has said no prime minister in the UK would ever accept the EUs draft document". (Radio 4 news). This is going well.


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Somehow 'defeating hard brexit' by aligning with Tories, DUP and other neoliberal parties, and then regarding it as 'not neccessarily' anti-socialist is proper fucking nonsense.



No it is not.  And how is aligning with UKIP and the right-wing of the Tory party to support hard brexit necessarily pro-socialist FFS.  Its the very opposite.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 28, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> we are in a bit of a pickle, thats for sure



If only we were in a bit of a jam. Then Corbyn would know what to do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> No it is not.  And how is aligning with UKIP and the right-wing of the Tory party to support hard brexit necessarily pro-socialist FFS.  Its the very opposite.


It's always a disappointment to see your thought processes


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's always a disappointment to see your thought processes



OK so you're playing for time until you can come up with a riposte. What are your thought processes?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> OK so you're playing for time until you can come up with a riposte. What are your thought processes?


Ukip? You raise that spectre and you look a clueless muppet. What fucking ukip - four leaders in a mite over 18 months, they're broadly gone. Plus the ripping of the Tory party hasn't even really started. A hard brexit fucks the tory party as it's fucked ukip. It opens up the potential for new political possibilities.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Ukip? You raise that spectre and you look a clueless muppet. What fucking ukip - four leaders in a mite over 18 months, they're broadly gone. Plus the ripping of the Tory party hasn't even really started. A hard brexit fucks the tory party as it's fucked ukip. It opens up the potential for new political possibilities.



now thats positivity. This had better work out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> OK so you're playing for time until you can come up with a riposte. What are your thought processes?


How much more time do you need for your riposte? A day? A week? A month? Longer?


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Liberal, anti-socialist politics. Right there.


given that a hard Brexit will fuck over the working classes very, very badly indeed, I fail to see what is socialist about it - or, indeed, any form of Brexit.
The one thing it is most certainly not, is 'workers of the world unite'.
So a pragmatic alliance to stop it may also be Indeed more liberal than socialist - but it makes progressive sense.
Brexit is a hard right scam posing as a workers triumph


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> given that a hard Brexit will fuck over the working classes very, very badly indeed, I fail to see what is socialist about it - or, indeed, any form of Brexit.
> The one thing it is most certainly not, is 'workers of the world unite'.
> So a pragmatic alliance to stop it may also be Indeed more liberal than socialist - but it makes progressive sense.
> Brexit is a hard right scam posing as a workers triumph


It's all fucked up, no matter how it plays out.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 28, 2018)

sealion said:


> Isn't Corbyn anti EU ?


no, not really.
'Euro-pragmatic-lukewarm' is probably as close as you could get


----------



## Riklet (Feb 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What should they have done instead and how would the irish issue be dealt with?



Why would there have to be a hard border anhway? It's just hot air.

They should stop harping on about what labour fucking members, MPs or even voters think in trite condescending manner.

They should play for time and spin it out until they can force a better hand. They need to seem like a credible ruling party not a bunch of Guardian journalists.

They should aknowledge the reality (and the reason I relectantly voted remain). There is no democracy with the EU and no debate. No negotiation has been achieved and none will be, as this is the EU's tactic and strength. Thru should appeal to a progressive future Europe as the basis of who 'we' should be dealing with. That means across Europe in other countries. An internationalist tradition fit for 21st century.  And fierce debate in Britain. In all the areas where people did have do and might vote for brexit (edit: I meant Labour!). Convincing people politically and shifting society is the aim, not building the party. Have they learnt nothing?

They should tell every banker and businessman not paying the living wage and still laughing at the hand-outs from 2008-2009 to do one and get on with gearing Britain's economy for the future as a high tech high wage society or fuck kindly off. Not buy into the 'we need cheap nurses and fruit pickers' political farce.

They should aknowledge that not everyone will like this. And GOOD. What do we want, a democratic future for Europe and the majority/working class or smooth deal for the City and the better off in society.

First step is calling the bluff of 'the economy' using langauge people understand and relate too. Why is the economy growing but most people are getting poorer? Why is the extension of the EU and the euro inherently linked to this? Why is there poverty misery depression and a wasted generation across EU 2018?

Which is more important fundamentally, directly engaging with whats hapoening or scoring points from the Tory party while making yourself less electable in half your key seats? The task should be on shifting minds in a progressive left direction and any talk of reversing brexit second refurendums and staying in the single market should be dealt with openly and firmly with sound arguments.

But when even the head of what remains of the workers movements and unions are telling everyone the beaurocrats and Macrons of this world created workers' rights, theyve got a job on their hands.


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's all fucked up, no matter how it plays out.


totally (even EEA, CU & SM is just damage limitation)


----------



## VeganMight (Feb 28, 2018)

The barbaric treatment of animals in Europe is reason enough to get out of there - We should join with Israel in becoming the first fully Vegan nation 
This is the vegan capital of the world


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

Tory vegan brexit


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> given that a hard Brexit will fuck over the working classes very, very badly indeed, I fail to see what is socialist about it - or, indeed, any form of Brexit.
> The one thing it is most certainly not, is 'workers of the world unite'.
> So a pragmatic alliance to stop it may also be Indeed more liberal than socialist - but it makes progressive sense.
> Brexit is a hard right scam posing as a workers triumph


There's nothing socialist about it.  

It's the policy of thatcher, kilroy-silk, farage and rees-mogg.

The working class voted against brexit. Do solidarity and brotherhood stop at the border now?  Maybe an urban brexiteer can explain the dichotomy?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

Just pages of shite.


Worsening my hangover.

Bristol coalition of shite.

ETA: do you get one day hangover bans?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The working class voted against brexit.


thats not really the story told by a demographic breakdown though.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thats not really the story told by a demographic breakdown though.


You can tell the middle class voted leave from all the shouting they are doing about it


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> We need to keep the option of abandoning Brexit entirely.  If this is done a compact is needed to address some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit (apart from the most overtly racist reasons for voting for Brexit). We need to heal the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode.





toblerone3 said:


> The healing is going to be difficult whatever happens and I think that perhaps we have got a lot more trench warfare fighting to be done first.





toblerone3 said:


> We need to keep the option of abandoning Brexit entirely.  If this is done a compact is needed to address some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit (apart from the most overtly racist reasons for voting for Brexit). We need to heal the wounds of what is proving to be a deeply divisive episode.


So reasonable actually means more of the same politics that we've had for the last 30-40 years, the politics that produced the Leave vote getting 52%, and "addres[sing] some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit" means paying lip service to the "white working class" before telling them to go back and let the grown ups talk. 

This is exactly what John Harris was criticising the piece linked to a few pages back.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> But alinging with a coalition of ultra right wing tories, UKIPers and the DUP  to ensure hard brexit is not exactly bringing britain to socialism either.





sleaterkinney said:


> Somehow standing with Johnson and Farage and voting for a Tory Brexit to advance socialism is proper fucking nonsense.


Exactly who has aligned themselves with "a coalition of ultra right wing tories, UKIPers and the DUP", who is "standing with Johnson and Farage"?

The above apply to perhaps one or two U75 poster at most (and none of the people posting on this thread), nor do they apply to wider left-wing groups that backed a leave vote. The people in a coalition with the Tories were the liberals and centre-left with their Better Together grouping.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

'voting brexit to bring socialism about is stupid'

closest we've been to getting a marxist into No11 since god knows when, and we still have this ( I have no illusions about labour here, just pointing out a certain blindness). Even by the terms of an argument put in the mouths of lexit voters by their detractors, we were right


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 1, 2018)

It was really good when UKIP were polling at 15 per cent though.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Exactly who has aligned themselves with "a coalition of ultra right wing tories, UKIPers and the DUP", who is "standing with Johnson and Farage"?
> 
> The above apply to perhaps one or two U75 poster at most (and none of the people posting on this thread), nor do they apply to wider left-wing groups that backed a leave vote. The people in a coalition with the Tories were the liberals and centre-left with their Better Together grouping.



the point is that there are two opposing sides in the brexit issue - and they are both led by shit bags and neither represent any sort of advance for progressive politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> the point is that there are two opposing sides in the brexit issue - and they are both led by shit bags and neither represent any sort of advance for progressive politics.


go on, name these sides.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> the point is that there are two opposing sides in the brexit issue - and they are both led by shit bags and *neither represent any sort of advance for progressive politics.*


(my emphasis)
Well I don't accept those are the only two positions, but leaving that to one side the bolded part is clearly not what has been argued by many on this thread (and others). Streathamite's post #5080, clearly argues that one side _does_ represent a advance for progressive politics (or is at least more progressive than the other), so do the posts of toblerone I quoted above, see Dexters nonsense. It's been argued by many on U75 for 2+ years that to argue for anything other remain is right-wing/racist/whatever.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> go on, name these sides.



the EU plus  most of the business lobby plus the liberal factions of the british state vs the freidmanite factions of the british state plus anti-EU corporate interests plus nationalist populism.   
leftist forces have no power to affect the arguments of the leave side (other than in a "useful idiot" capacity) and can not advance a radical agenda on the remain side- given the EUs predicable "take it or leave it" position. 

So they are left with opposing regressive measures from the brexit side (NI border, employment rights, food safety). This pushes the UK towards BINO - but this leaves the UK less able to resist neo-liberal pressures from the EU than if it had stayed in. 

Its a total dogs breakfast. 

Given this, I think labours position - sceptical remain, help the tories hang themselves, on standby to pick up the pieces - is the least worst option.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> the EU plus  most of the business lobby plus the liberal factions of the british state vs the freidmanite factions of the british state plus anti-EU corporate interests plus nationalist populism.
> leftist forces have no power to affect the arguments of the leave side (other than in a "useful idiot" capacity) and can not advance a radical agenda on the remain side- given the EUs predicable "take it or leave it" position.
> 
> So they are left with opposing regressive measures from the brexit side (NI border, employment rights, food safety). This pushes the UK towards BINO - but this leaves the UK less able to resist neo-liberal pressures from the EU than if it had stayed in.
> ...


is that the most succinct you can be?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> is that the most succinct you can be?


 
Sorry. Im all out of snappy, zingy slogans. "The unstoppable farce meets the immovable objections" is the best i can come up with right now. Its shit but no shitter than "brexit means brexit"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Sorry. Im all out of snappy, zingy slogans. "The unstoppable farce meets the immovable objections" is the best i can come up with right now. Its shit but no shitter than "brexit means brexit"


i thought you might be able to name these sides of yours with some concision.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought you might be able to name these sides of yours with some concision.



a pile of wank vs a pile of wank. (hope that helps)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> a pile of wank vs a pile of wank. (hope that helps)


you're ruining your reputation for being able to express yourself in a meaningful way


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thats not really the story told by a demographic breakdown though.


YouGov |  How Britain Voted

Labour voters 65% remain

The only political groupingss with a leave majority were tory and ukip.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

you said 'the working class' not 'labour voters'. I know labour voters were majority remain, its why some in the party have insisted that SM and CU is a must because they think thats a mandate or something.

Thats something quite different to what you said though.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you're ruining your reputation for being able to express yourself in a meaningful way



its brexit - why are you  looking for meaningful expression? a monkey with a typewriter would make as much sense of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its brexit - why are you  looking for meaningful expression? a monkey with a typewriter would make of much sense of it.


you claim to identify two sides. but the logorrhoea you came out with obscures more than illuminates.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you claim to identify two sides. but the logorrhoea you came out with obscures more than illuminates.



sorry to let you down - but its the best i can do.


----------



## tim (Mar 1, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Well if the role of the EU is to dictate to its members which sort of political parties they can elect its got quite a job on its hands.Just to be clear on the scale of  swing to the right within EU states , Poland and Hungary have right wing governments,in  Romania , Sweden, Norway Finland and Denmark right wing parties have breached the 20% mark and taken part in government, Le Pen got a third of the vote in France and in Germany and Holland they are the opposition.



This is the far-right you are talking about not the Right. Merkel leads a party of the right. The opposition are the further  right


----------



## Raheem (Mar 1, 2018)

The two sides in Brexit are the two factions of the Conservative party. Everyone else is a passenger.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So reasonable actually means more of the same politics that we've had for the last 30-40 years, the politics that produced the Leave vote getting 52%, and "addres[sing] some of the real world reasons why some people voted for Brexit" means paying lip service to the "white working class" before telling them to go back and let the grown ups talk.
> 
> This is exactly what John Harris was criticising the piece linked to a few pages back.



No it doesn't it means being upfront about the potential negative impacts of economic migration and refugees on a significant part of the population and the pressure on infrastructure and the environment and using the overall economic benefits to Britain as a whole to fund some kind of new deal involving wealth redistribution and infrastructure investment.  But in a dynamic way that reskills and empowers people (perhaps enabling involvement in environmental and infrastructure projects) not creating a permanent welfare underclass. Also minimum income and employment laws need to be robustly enforced to avoid undercutting.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> you said 'the working class' not 'labour voters'. I know labour voters were majority remain, its why some in the party have insisted that SM and CU is a must because they think thats a mandate or something.
> 
> Thats something quite different to what you said though.


I wonder what is his basis for disagreeing with John Curtice that "Leave voters were disproportionately working class." Maybe he could explain - i doubt it though given that his evidence for his claim that the working class voted against Brexit is actually contains definitive evidence that this is not the case. Click the link at the end and you'll see that every section of the working class voted to leave - and by large, even huge majorities. Maybe dexter should have.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So reasonable actually means more of the same politics that we've had for the last 30-40 years, the politics that produced the Leave vote getting 52%....
> 
> This is exactly what John Harris was criticising the piece linked to a few pages back.



From that John Harris piece...

"Back in 2016, it was briefly fashionable to feign interest in at least some of the places that voted for Brexit and Trump and argue that people with so-called progressive politics ought to think about their problems. But *in some quarters*, the “in” thing is now a sour, dismissive attitude to millions of people and their supposed complaints. *The underlying worldview is simple*: whatever the economic context, one part of society is seen as racist, stupid, nostalgic, and brimming with senseless emotion, while another is logical, enlightened and forward-thinking and, despite the fact that the era of alleged rationalism that has now been overturned brought us such disasters as the Iraq war and a huge economic crash, the modern nightmare boils down to the fact that the first group are suddenly in charge."

I don't have that "underlying worldview" that people "in some quarters" have.  I'm not coming from that place at all.  I do think, however, that there has been a awful lot of poisonous coverage of Europe from the right-wing media and muckraking and pandering to xenophobic and racist sentiments.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 1, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder what is his basis for disagreeing with John Curtice that "Leave voters were disproportionately working class." Maybe he could explain - i doubt it though given that his evidence for his claim that the working class voted against Brexit is actually contains definitive evidence that this is not the case. Click the link at the end and you'll see that every section of the working class voted to leave - and by large, even huge majorities. Maybe dexter should have.
> 
> View attachment 128915



The social class scale doesn't provide a good proxy for social class as we would normally think of it, though, because it's mainly about manual versus non-manual work, so it doesn't take into account that many people do low-paid clerical/non-manual work. The data for household income is what we should be looking at, even if it doesn't give a radically different picture.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> you said 'the working class' not 'labour voters'. I know labour voters were majority remain, its why some in the party have insisted that SM and CU is a must because they think thats a mandate or something.
> 
> Thats something quite different to what you said though.


It's not 'quite different'.  I said...


> The working class voted against brexit. Do solidarity and brotherhood stop at the border now? Maybe an urban brexiteer can explain the dichotomy?


So maybe you would like to explain it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's not 'quite different'.  I said...
> 
> So maybe you would like to explain it.



yes, yes it is.

 The international proletariat didn't get a vote in a british referendum for some reason. BTW when you were banging the scots nationalist drum had you suddenly stopped extending solidarity and brotherhood beyond the hadrians? or did you want out of an arrangement you felt was bad for the people of scotland? Because I think you're trying to have the cake and eat it. Among my 'remainer symptoms' list this one features heavily


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's not 'quite different'.  I said...
> 
> So maybe you would like to explain it.


You would like dotcommunist to explain why you said the working class voted against brexit and then linked to a report saying that they voted heavily in favour of brexit?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> yes, yes it is.
> 
> The international proletariat didn't get a vote in a british referendum for some reason. BTW when you were banging the scots nationalist drum had you suddenly stopped extending solidarity and brotherhood beyond the hadrians? or did you want out of an arrangement you felt was bad for the people of scotland? Because I think you're trying to have the cake and eat it. Among my 'remainer symptoms' list this one features heavily


The reason internationals didn't get a vote was because they were not allowed to by those who created brexit.  

When we had our (first) ref we were perfectly happy to let anyone who lives here have a vote, wherever they're from.  Unlike you.  

We are openly and actively pro-immigration.  Unlike you.

And we certainly did extend the hand of solidarity, saying let's work together and beat the tories.  You decided not to do that though.

You've no idea.

Anyway...third time.   How does your self-imagined solidarity and family-only brotherhood sit with closed borders and anti-immigration policies?

Maybe a straight answer this time?


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 1, 2018)

tim said:


> This is the far-right you are talking about not the Right. Merkel leads a party of the right. The opposition are the further  right


I am using the words that the poster I was replying to used .He was refering to the far right government in Hungary.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The reason internationals didn't get a vote was because they were not allowed to by those who created brexit.
> 
> When we had our (first) ref we were perfectly happy to let anyone who lives here have a vote, wherever they're from.  Unlike you.
> 
> ...



Who's 'you' - DotCom? (because that's a non-sensical and bollocks argument), or people in England? (because that's a non-sensical and bollocks argument too).


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The reason internationals didn't get a vote was because they were not allowed to by those who created brexit.
> 
> When we had our (first) ref we were perfectly happy to let anyone who lives here have a vote, wherever they're from.  Unlike you.
> 
> ...



The UK isnt moving to closed borders.It has and has always had for the past 150 years immigration control


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The reason internationals didn't get a vote was because they were not allowed to by those who created brexit.
> 
> When we had our (first) ref we were perfectly happy to let anyone who lives here have a vote, wherever they're from.  Unlike you.
> 
> ...



sorry, you said 'the working class voted against brexit. This is demonstrably false. And you've gone into 'we' and 'you'. I don't identify with a nation state in the same way as you do dexter. I find such a thing worrying. So, for a third time, would you care to correct the grievous falsehood? You know, the one you supplied evidence for yourself?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

good job the EU stopped that hunger strike in yarls wood eh dex


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 1, 2018)

Dexter posts such a lot of shit it's unreal


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> sorry, you said 'the working class voted against brexit. This is demonstrably false. And you've gone into 'we' and 'you'. I don't identify with a nation state in the same way as you do dexter. I find such a thing worrying...


I find it 'worrying' when someone brings nationalism into a conversation.  Or accuses some else of it.  Well normally it's 'worrying'.  On urban it's usually just a  deflection from someone with no answers. (normally followed by an abusive post from one of their mates)


DotCommunist said:


> ..BTW when you were banging the scots nationalist drum...


See?  I'm not working class when it doesn't suit you...I'm suddenly a nationalist, eh?  Because you and your mates are always right, anyone who disagrees is...'worrying'.  

I'm experiencing your version of brotherhood first hand.  It speaks volumes.  It's an education.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I find it 'worrying' when someone brings nationalism into a conversation.  Or accuses some else of it.  Well normally it's 'worrying'.  On urban it's usually just a  deflection from someone with no answers. (normally followed by an abusive post from one of their mates)
> 
> See?  I'm not working class when it doesn't suit you...I'm suddenly a nationalist, eh?  Because you and your mates are always right, anyone who disagrees is...'worrying'.
> 
> I'm experiencing your version of brotherhood first hand.  It speaks volumes.  It's an education.


what was that you were saying about deflections?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I find it 'worrying' when someone brings nationalism into a conversation.  Or accuses some else of it.  Well normally it's 'worrying'.  On urban it's usually just a  deflection from someone with no answers. (normally followed by an abusive post from one of their mates)
> 
> See?  I'm not working class when it doesn't suit you...I'm suddenly a nationalist, eh?  Because you and your mates are always right, anyone who disagrees is...'worrying'.
> 
> I'm experiencing your version of brotherhood first hand.  It speaks volumes.  It's an education.


hahaha, all at sea. Frozen sea as it is now. I'm not going to bother further Dex, you talked shit and got pulled on it- no biggie. Not to me anyway.


----------



## paolo (Mar 1, 2018)

The WC trigger is pulled left right and bloody everywhere on urban. It’s tedious because it’s become meaningless.

But I think it’s faded away from the Brexit discussion, here. Hopefully. It’s another version of “the will of the people”. Ffs.


(I’m not too sure what we’re even discussing now, here, these days, but hey, same as the people running the shit show. It’s like we’re debating something as graspable as a blancmange).


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> No it doesn't it means being upfront about the potential negative impacts of economic migration and refugees on a significant part of the population and the pressure on infrastructure and the environment and using the overall economic benefits to Britain as a whole to fund some kind of new deal involving wealth redistribution and infrastructure investment.  But in a dynamic way that reskills and empowers people (perhaps enabling involvement in environmental and infrastructure projects) not creating a permanent welfare underclass. Also minimum income and employment laws need to be robustly enforced to avoid undercutting.


And that's going to be achieved by forming an alliance with Pro-remain Tories, LibDems etc in order to reverse any move to leave the EU. This post is the same type of gash that Blair, May and Cameron have been coming out with for the last 20 years - "reskilling", "welfare underclass", maybe we can have a free-trade agreement to with with it eh? Ugh pass the sick bucket. 


toblerone3 said:


> <snip>
> I don't have that "underlying worldview" that people "in some quarters" have.  I'm not coming from that place at all.


Yes you do, yes you are. You've specifically said that Labour should ignore the majority leave vote and work with filth like pro-remain Tories and LDs to stay in the EU. You've called anyone who wants a "hard Brexit" (whatever that means) anti-socialist, you've called any position that supports leaving unreasonable, you've called "left-wingers" who supported a leave vote fools.


----------



## sealion (Mar 1, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> no, not really.
> 'Euro-pragmatic-lukewarm' is probably as close as you could get



Corbyn voted against membership in 1975, voted against the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, and voted against the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. He has opposed the EU at every opportunity.


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 1, 2018)

sealion said:


> Corbyn voted against membership in 1975, voted against the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, and voted against the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. He has opposed the EU at every opportunity.


true, but since 2009 his views have changed. He campaigned energetically for Remain - it just got ignored by the media


----------



## sealion (Mar 1, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> true, but since 2009 his views have changed


I doubt that.


Streathamite said:


> He campaigned energetically for Remain - it just got ignored by the media


Righto.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 1, 2018)

he didnt seem that enthusiastic at the time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> he didnt seem that enthusiastic at the time.


Were you relying on the media for your information?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 1, 2018)

i have to say that i never came F2F with JC  during my the run up, so yes, most likely all meeja based. was i mistaken ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 1, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> i have to say that i never came F2F with JC  during my the run up, so yes, most likely all meeja based. was i mistaken ?


This would be the media who have had it in for JC... So quite possibly


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2018)

I'm sure the CND Vice President who is now pro-Trident will remain steadfast in his position.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 1, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> He campaigned energetically for Remain - it just got ignored by the media



This in the Irish Times from April 16 doesn't seem a bad representation of where JC was for the referendum campaign.

But reporting him talking fairly calmly wasn't as newsworthy as the cameron / osborne types shouting that the sky would fall if we voted out, or nigel farrago shouting about immigrants and so on...

A certain Angela Eagle is reported (more here) as having said of JC's campaigning in the referendum campaign “Jeremy is up and down the country, pursuing an agenda that would make a 25-year-old tired. He has not stopped. We are doing our best, but if we are not reported it is difficult.”


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 1, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> true, but since 2009 his views have changed. He campaigned energetically for Remain - it just got ignored by the media


What do you think it was since 2009 that made him see the light? The EUs altruistic handling of the greece crisis? Pacifistic expansionism in the Ukraine?
The man of principle now enlightend.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 1, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Why would there have to be a hard border anhway? It's just hot air.
> 
> They should stop harping on about what labour fucking members, MPs or even voters think in trite condescending manner.
> 
> ...



So: their position on Brexit should be that we leave the single market. And you think this can be compatible with having no hard border with Eire. Is that right?


----------



## sealion (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What do you think it was since 2009 that made him see the light? The EUs altruistic handling of the greece crisis?


Corbyn in 2015 ,,,A Europe of Domination or of Solidarity?


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> This in the Irish Times from April 16 doesn't seem a bad representation of where JC was for the referendum campaign.
> 
> But reporting him talking fairly calmly wasn't as newsworthy as the cameron / osborne types shouting that the sky would fall if we voted out, or nigel farrago shouting about immigrants and so on...
> 
> A certain Angela Eagle is reported (more here) as having said of JC's campaigning in the referendum campaign “Jeremy is up and down the country, pursuing an agenda that would make a 25-year-old tired. He has not stopped. We are doing our best, but if we are not reported it is difficult.”


Eagle made that  statement about the  time when she went to stab him in the back


----------



## Riklet (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So: their position on Brexit should be that we leave the single market. And you think this can be compatible with having no hard border with Eire. Is that right?



I think so, yeah.  I don't see leaving the EU as compatible with anything else.  Might as well just ignore the referendum and stay in the EU otherwise.  Politically I just think it would be best if they stopped trying to play nice with everybody, it´s already starting to prove a mess.

Just say they don't want a hard border, regardless of anything.  If Eire choose to do that then that's up to them.  Call the EU's bluff rather than the current approach which seems to be being forced into doing one of several shit or relatively bad options. Even being drawn into "the future of Northern Ireland" should be put off... in the end this should be for (Norn) Ireland to decide.

I also think the best way to "move away" from the divisive Brexit referendum is not by getting drawn into political wrangling with the EU for 20 years.  Instead, Labour or the progressive left should be moving on in practical terms, by starting to develop structures, models, technologies and ideas which will be meaningful and useful in the future.  And which will get people involved, across society, at a local level, regardless of how they voted in the referendum.

I know this seems to lump me in with some right wing loonies, but too bad.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

Is there a precedent anywhere in the world for an open border between two countries which aren't in a customs union?


----------



## Riklet (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is there a precedent anywhere in the world for an open border between two countries which aren't in a customs union?



Is there a precedent for anything which has not yet happened in the future?

Open borders and a pissed off EU.  Might be worth a shot  Especially because there is _no bloody way_  politically/economically an Irish government could take any action against it, regardless of what Brussels orders.  We need a bit more imagination, here.

If formality were essential, what about a dual-sovereignty agreement over a period of 20 years, some kind of Andorra-style agreement? Or transitional dual sovereignty "to be discussed" in 10 years.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> true, but since 2009 his views have changed. He campaigned energetically for Remain - it just got ignored by the media



He didn't campaign for remain because his views have changed, but he had fuck all option otherwise with the aggressive Progress/Labour moderates out to make everything difficult for him at the time. Now that he's managed to exercise more power and authority in the party, you've seen him more confident on pushing for leave.

There has been some proper denial on behalf of Corbyn supporters over this whom are also strong remainers. It doesn't matter, but accept his (and left leave arguments), understand them, and move on, not play mind tricks with yourselves.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 2, 2018)

Corbyn's office says he was a busy man during the referendum campaign:

"Jeremy led from the front in the EU referendum campaign. He made the positive case for remaining and reforming the EU up and down the country.
His activity included:

10 EU rallies, with speeches and meetings in London, Bristol, Stroud, Newquay, Perranporth, Cardiff, Blackpool, Bournemouth, Liverpool, Runcorn, Manchester, Truro, Sheffield, Widnes, Doncaster, Rotherham, Hastings, Brighton, Dundee, Aberdeen and Birmingham.
These included a meeting with student nurses in Birmingham, a factory in Runcorn, a clean beaches event in Truro and campaigning with activists in Scotland.
Launched the Labour In bus and the Ad Van.
A debate on Sky News with Faisal Islam, also talked about the EU on the Agenda and the Last Leg. Appeared on the Andrew Marr show twice and on Peston on Sunday.
Written two op-eds, one in the Observer and another in The Mirror.
Reached more than 10 million people on social media.
Six statements to the House of Commons and 10 PMQs on the EU.
He has been consistent on this issue from day one of his leadership, issuing a statement in September that “Labour will be campaigning in the referendum for the UK to stay in the European Union."


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Which doesn't contradict anything I've said. It's called politics. What do you think Corbyn's Office has to be seen to say? What options did Corbyn have given both his own MPs relentless campaigns to destabilise him? Right wing media turning the screw over divisions? Even if on the balance of things, he campaigned for remain as he thought leave would be a rocky road (it is, no one has denied that especially not left leavers), doesn't change his long held convictions and arguments which are on record.

And still, even now a resurgent Corbyn has positioned for 'soft brexit' (which I notice not one Corbyn supporter has wanted to mention), still it continues


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

'Baby eating anarchists' are sounding more like fucking Polly Toynbee nowadays


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 2, 2018)

Corbyn does get bonus points for refusing to attend a Remain rally where he would have had to appear on the same platform as Tony Blair.

Jeremy Corbyn refused to share platform with Tony Blair at pro-EU rally, says Gordon Brown


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Which doesn't contradict anything I've said. It's called politics. What do you think Corbyn's Office has to be seen to say? What options did Corbyn have given both his own MPs relentless campaigns to destabilise him? Right wing media turning the screw over divisions? Even if on the balance of things, he campaigned for remain as he thought leave would be a rocky road (it is, no one has denied that especially not left leavers), doesn't change his long held convictions and arguments which are on record.
> 
> And still, even now a resurgent Corbyn has positioned for 'soft brexit' (which I notice not one Corbyn supporter has wanted to mention), still it continues


Even now he still is saying he would have voted remain...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> 'Baby eating anarchists' are sounding more like fucking Polly Toynbee nowadays


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

last time I looked the remain heads in the papers were crying that he hadn't done enough, that his heart wasn't in it and that he retains a bennite distrust of the EU etc.

just the other day was a line about 'the lexiteer undertow he still carries'

so which is it? Secret remainer all 35 years in the game* (man and boy) or bowed to what was decided at conference? 


*if that be so, then he's hidden it well eh


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Even now he still is saying he would have voted remain...



Have you got any quotes/articles more recently than end of last year I can read? Even then, what was being said 'officially'/in public seems different to what he was admitting to backbenchers.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

I'll accept the Rick gif as a failure of much else to say (anybody who's met me knows I'm pretty much the antithesis of that).


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I'll accept the Rick gif as a failure of much else to say (anybody who's met me knows I'm pretty much the antithesis of that).


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

I'm the antithesis of that too, you fucking nob


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 2, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> last time I looked the remain heads in the papers were crying that he hadn't done enough, that his heart wasn't in it and that he retains a bennite distrust of the EU etc.
> 
> just the other day was a line about 'the lexiteer undertow he still carries'
> 
> ...



From what he was saying before the referendum, he sounded like a Eurosceptic unconvinced by the merits of a Conservative-led Brexit.



> "Over the years I have continued to be critical of many decisions taken by the EU and I remain critical of its shortcomings, from its lack of democratic accountability to the institutional pressure to deregulate or privatise public services. Europe needs to change. But that change can only come from working with our allies in the EU. It’s perfectly possible to be critical and still be convinced we need to remain a member ... It is sometimes easier to blame the EU, or worse to blame foreigners than to face up to our own problems. At the head of which right now is a Conservative government that is failing the people of Britain ... There is a strong socialist case for staying in the European Union, just as there are is also a powerful socialist case for reform and progressive change in Europe."


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Even now he still is saying he would have voted remain...


Funny, i must have imagined the near 50 posts from you on the Corbyn thread as to why he is shit, has shit policies, is incapable of leading labour effectively, of doing well electorally and needs to go asap etc - given that you are now suggesting  what you claim is support for your position from him (not very well evidenced i must say) somehow gives it some more weight.

I do believe you've just executed a perfect Toynbee - 10/10.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

talking of toynbee and brexit, her column today urges sinn fein to take their seats in parliament and save us from brexit. No, seriously.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> talking of toynbee and brexit, her column today urges sinn fein to take their seats in parliament and save us from brexit. No, seriously.



I was going to post that on the Guardian is shit thread, jesus


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 2, 2018)

its a hellish worm hole of self serving politikery


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> talking of toynbee and brexit, her column today urges sinn fein to take their seats in parliament and save us from brexit. No, seriously.


this is not the first time such a suggestion has been made, so on top of it being nonsense it is unoriginal nonsense.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Is there a precedent for anything which has not yet happened in the future?
> 
> Open borders and a pissed off EU.  Might be worth a shot  Especially because there is _no bloody way_  politically/economically an Irish government could take any action against it, regardless of what Brussels orders.  We need a bit more imagination, here.
> 
> If formality were essential, what about a dual-sovereignty agreement over a period of 20 years, some kind of Andorra-style agreement? Or transitional dual sovereignty "to be discussed" in 10 years.


Basically dump the problem on Ireland, and let them work out how to resolve a crisis that's not of their making.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this is not the first time such a suggestion has been made, so on top of it being nonsense it is unoriginal nonsense.


 
You would think Pols would have an inkling of the reasons for this stance and maybe consider why SF may feel little obligation to give us brits a helping hand on Westminster issues.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> You would think Pols would have an inkling of the reasons for this stance and maybe consider why SF may feel little obligation to give us brits a helping hand on Westminster issues.


perhaps because most irish republicans would prefer to see a border in the irish sea


----------



## Riklet (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Basically dump the problem on Ireland, and let them work out how to resolve a crisis that's not of their making.



Not quite what I said. But long term, yes. Because it's Ireland anyway.

Obviously there would be benefits both ways to such an arrangement. Ireland will be far far more fucked by a hard border than most of  Britain.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Not quite what I said. But long term, yes. Because it's Ireland anyway.
> 
> Obviously there would be benefits both ways to such an arrangement. Ireland will be far far more fucked by a hard border than most of  Britain.


Britain has caused Ireland enough problems over the years. It doesn't seem very neighbourly.

I don't see how it's at all plausible that the EU could accept an open border between the UK and Eire. Saying it's up to the EU or Eire is not any different in effect to the UK saying "we're going to create a hard border with Ireland".


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Britain has caused Ireland enough problems over the years. It doesn't seem very neighbourly.
> 
> I don't see how it's at all plausible that the EU could accept an open border between the UK and Eire. Saying it's up to the EU or Eire is not any different in effect to the UK saying "we're going to create a hard border with Ireland".


What you're suggesting by this continual focus on Ireland is 'not any different' to saying the people of Britain aren't allowed to leave the EU because it may adversely affect people elsewhere.


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Britain has caused Ireland enough problems over the years. It doesn't seem very neighbourly.
> 
> I don't see how it's at all plausible that the EU could accept an open border between the UK and Eire. Saying it's up to the EU or Eire is not any different in effect to the UK saying "we're going to create a hard border with Ireland".



Leaving aside the EU, it seems that the UK would itself be breaking WTO rules if there were no checks (which is what no border means). See Bonus Section here. One example given is that no checks would effectively mean no tariffs; and if no tariffs then under WTO rules the UK would have to offer no tariffs to all WTO members (under the 'most favoured nation' rules).


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What you're suggesting by this continual focus on Ireland is 'not any different' to saying the people of Britain aren't allowed to leave the EU because it may adversely affect people elsewhere.



Labour's (new) policy goes some way to sorting the Irish border issue though. Still enables leaving the EU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> No it is not.  And how is aligning with UKIP and the right-wing of the Tory party to support hard brexit necessarily pro-socialist FFS.  Its the very opposite.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Funny, i must have imagined the near 50 posts from you on the Corbyn thread as to why he is shit, has shit policies, is incapable of leading labour effectively, of doing well electorally and needs to go asap etc - given that you are now suggesting  what you claim is support for your position from him (not very well evidenced i must say) somehow gives it some more weight.
> 
> I do believe you've just executed a perfect Toynbee - 10/10.


I still think that, the Tories are making a mess of brexit, mired in sleaze, Labour should be much further ahead than they are. 

But he is starting to offer an alternative to the Tories on brexit (finally), as he should. He campaigned for remain and as late as last October was saying he would vote for that.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What you're suggesting by this continual focus on Ireland is 'not any different' to saying the people of Britain aren't allowed to leave the EU because it may adversely affect people elsewhere.


I'm saying that you can't ignore the fact that it will have effects on others. If your position is that you don't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland then fair enough, that's your position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm saying that you can't ignore the fact that it will have effects on others. If your position is that you don't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland then fair enough, that's your position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance.



Political decisions will always have direct and indirect consequences positive and negative for people and places, and rarely even agreed upon by those affected. What a bizarre argument to go down complete with 'you don't care' sneer.


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

What I would say is that it's not my responsibility as a Leave voter to come up with a solution, nor should the problems around the Irish border issue (or any other issue which is, at bottom, the result of EU or WTO regulations) be used to undermine the choice people made to leave the EU, which is what teuchter appears to be doing


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What I would say is that it's not my responsibility as a Leave voter to come up with a solution,



You'll still complain when someone else can't come up with one for you, though.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Did you care about consequences for Greece or French worker rights under EU austerity and reform with your remain vote?


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You'll still complain when someone else can't come up with one for you, though.


Will I? Let's wait and see shall we?

This is pretty desperate stuff from you, attempting to slur me and other Leave voters with positions you imagine we hold


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Did you care about consequences for Greece or French worker rights under EU austerity and reform with your remain vote?


Yes.


----------



## agricola (Mar 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I still think that, the Tories are making a mess of brexit, mired in sleaze, Labour should be much further ahead than they are.



There is certainly a sizeable group of people who have decided that no amount of evidence or reality will ever result in them voting Corbyn, but there is always the very real fact that the media coverage of him is far more hostile than accorded to May - as the reaction to that Brexit speech showed (a mix of polite surprise that the CBI and IOD liked the speech, contrasted with the condemnation from the Tories and the remaining opposition in the PLP).


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> Will I? Let's wait and see shall we?


Ok. If we end up with some kind of "brexit in name only" I'll keep my eye out for your complaints or lack of.


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2018)

May going for soft Brexit in her speech. Sticking with EU regulatory standards. No chlorinated chicken. ECJ to play a role.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Yes.



I see.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I see.


That's right.


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Ok. If we end up with some kind of "brexit in name only" I'll keep my eye out for your complaints or lack of.


What does that have to do with the issue of the Irish border?

Most people who voted Leave won't be judging whether Brexit is genuine or in name only by what happens to the Irish border


----------



## agricola (Mar 2, 2018)

Winot said:


> May going for soft Brexit in her speech. Sticking with EU regulatory standards. No chlorinated chicken. ECJ to play a role.



That she specifically mentioned the European Medicines Agency as a body we should be part of is bizarre, given its post-Brexit history.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What does that have to do with the issue of the Irish border?
> 
> Most people who voted Leave won't be judging whether Brexit is genuine or in name only by what happens to the Irish border


The practicalities of what happens to the Irish border have an impact on what type of Brexit we can have, whether or not your head is in the sand.


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What does that have to do with the issue of the Irish border?
> 
> Most people who voted Leave won't be judging whether Brexit is genuine or in name only by what happens to the Irish border



Agreed, but the Irish border issue could mean that we stay in the Customs Union (and maybe the SM). Would you be happy with that?


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

Winot said:


> Agreed, but the Irish border issue could mean that we stay in the Customs Union (and maybe the SM). Would you be happy with that?


I don't actually agree with your premise here. If Britain does stay in the CU or the SM, how will we know whether this is because of the Irish border issue?


----------



## agricola (Mar 2, 2018)

I'd be willing to bet that this was originally a speech written for her as part of the Remain campaign, then quickly re-written to add the necessary Brexit language.  We are already members of nearly all the organizations and practices she has cited.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

UK will refuse to enforce hard Irish border with EU even in 'no deal' Brexit, says cabinet minister



			
				Indie said:
			
		

> Britain would refuse to enforce any new border in Ireland even if there is a ‘no deal’ Brexit, a Cabinet minister has told _The Independent_.
> 
> The minister said it would be “impossible” to put a hard border in place simply because the area needing to be enforced is too great.
> 
> ...



Whilst the Tories can fuck off and it could be bargaining bluff and fluff, even they seem to be advocating a more radical approach to this than most liberals and the EU who are the ones demanding that there will have to be a border if Britain comes out of the SM/CU.


----------



## Winot (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> I don't actually agree with your premise here. If Britain does stay in the CU or the SM, how will we know whether this is because of the Irish border issue?



Well we won't know for sure. But what we do know is that the Tories want to leave the CU and the SM and that causes problems in IE/NI. 

Also, Labour deciding to stay in CU likely to have been influenced by IE/NI - and could lead to government losing vote in Commons.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> What does that have to do with the issue of the Irish border?
> 
> Most people who voted Leave won't be judging whether Brexit is genuine or in name only by what happens to the Irish border


It's not an Irish border, it's a UK border.  And that would break the GFA...everyone knows where that could end.

May gave guarantees on this last year but now can't keep to them because she's weak against the tory right-wingers.  Davis said in the absence of any better deal NI would stay in the customs union after brexit.  Internal fighting means May wants that off the table.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

Winot said:


> Well we won't know for sure. But what we do know is that the Tories want to leave the CU and the SM and that causes problems in IE/NI.
> 
> Also, Labour deciding to stay in CU likely to have been influenced by IE/NI - and could lead to government losing vote in Commons.




you know opinion in the tory party divided, right? 

perhaps the government wants to leave the cu & sm, doesn't mean the tories want to. do you think anna soubry and ken clark hanker for leaving the cu & sm?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

Nothing like the austerity-enabling now ousted Clegg telling us how we won't be in the 'driving seat' anymore.


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's not an Irish border, it's a UK border.  *And that would break the GFA...everyone knows where that could end*.
> 
> May gave guarantees on this last year but now can't keep to them because she's weak against the tory right-wingers.  Davis said in the absence of any better deal NI would stay in the customs union after brexit.  Internal fighting means May wants that off the table.



Strictly speaking it's the UK/Eire border, but I'm pretty sure we all know which border is being referred to here.

The GFA wasn't handed down from above on tablets of stone. It, like every other agreement, is capable of revision or even of being done away with if circumstances or political realities change.

The whole implication that Britain leaving the EU will lead to a resumption of terrorist violence in NI and that British Leave voters will somehow be responsible for that is a load of old nonsense, but it's no surprise to see you and others continue to suggest this.

And I'm quite happy to see the continued Tory infighting around various Brexit issues - it far exceeds my hopes when I voted Leave back in June 2016


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> The whole implication that Britain leaving the EU will lead to a resumption of terrorist violence in NI and that British Leave voters will somehow be responsible for that is a load of old nonsense,



If Britain leaving the EU leads to a socialist revolution and subsequently established utopia will Leave voters deny any responsibility/credit for that too?

Or, from the spectrum of possible political outcomes do you get to cherry pick which ones are "consequences" of the Brexit decision?

You appear happy to consider the vote a cause of Tory infighting for example.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> The GFA wasn't handed down from above on tablets of stone. It, like every other agreement, is capable of revision or even of being done away with if circumstances or political realities change.



Like the Brexit referendum result?

Brexit means brexit. GFA means GFA until it's inconvenient.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 2, 2018)

What?!


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If Britain leaving the EU leads to a socialist revolution and subsequently established utopia will Leave voters deny any responsibility/credit for that too?
> 
> Or, from the spectrum of possible political outcomes do you get to cherry pick which ones are "consequences" of the Brexit decision?
> 
> You appear happy to consider the vote a cause of Tory infighting for example.



At least some of the current Tory infighting clearly *is* a result of the Leave vote, and I'm on record here (somewhere) of saying before the referendum that was a large part of why I voted Leave.

I'll go on record here and now that I don't think Britain leaving the EU will, in itself, lead to a socialist revolution and subsequently established utopia, anymore than it will, in itself, lead to the resumption of terrorist violence in NI.


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Like the Brexit referendum result?
> 
> Brexit means brexit. GFA means GFA until it's inconvenient.



The result of the referendum (that a majority of people voted Leave) can't be changed, but of course it is *possible* that the British government may, in the end, decide not to follow through with the result of that referendum. 

It's also *possible* that Britain may leave the EU and decide at a later date to rejoin, though I think that's pretty unlikely.

Again, by quoting 'Brexit means Brexit' at me, you appear to assume that I have adopted a position which I never have.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

What's the position that you haven't adopted?


----------



## andysays (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What's the position that you haven't adopted?



The one which you attributed to me and which I quoted in the post you've just responded to


teuchter said:


> Like the Brexit referendum result?
> 
> *Brexit means brexit. GFA means GFA until it's inconvenient.*


I never said either of those things. Nor did I say anything which justifies this


teuchter said:


> I'm saying that you can't ignore the fact that it will have effects on others. If your position is that you don't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland then fair enough, that's your position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance.


or this


teuchter said:


> You'll still complain when someone else can't come up with one for you, though.


You seem to be struggling to keep up with what you yourself have said, far less what anyone else has said, which doesn't make for a very productive discussion.

Unless you can raise your game a little, I'm not sure there's much point in my continuing to engage with you


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 129051





So fucking what... this is tedious nit-picking ... plenty of UKIP-like tory MPs in the right-wing of the party.  Indeed, its almost as though UKIP has taken over the Tory party. This doesn't dilute in the slightest my substantive point that you're making common cause with the right. Why are you posting up this irrelevant material.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> The one which you attributed to me and which I quoted in the post you've just responded to
> 
> I never said either of those things. Nor did I say anything which justifies this
> 
> ...



In one instance you're misreading "you" as talking about you rather than in the sense of "one" which is why you've got confused.

_I'm saying that one can't ignore the fact that it will have effects on others. If one's position is that one doesn't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland then fair enough, that's one's position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance.
_
It's not all about you. However, if instead of getting indignant you could just state what your position is, then there would be less room for misunderstanding and assumption. You objected to the idea that you might associate with the "Brexit is Brexit" line. Why? That seems surprising for a Leave voter.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

andysays said:


> ...The GFA wasn't handed down from above on tablets of stone. It, like every other agreement, is capable of revision or even of being done away with if circumstances or political realities change.
> 
> The whole implication that Britain leaving the EU will lead to a resumption of terrorist violence in NI and that British Leave voters will somehow be responsible for that is a load of old nonsense, but it's no surprise to see you and others continue to suggest this....



There's no room for 'revision'. 

If one side reneges on an agreement that has kept peace for decades, then yes they are at fault.  And worse.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> In one instance you're misreading "you" as talking about you rather than in the sense of "one" which is why you've got confused.
> 
> _I'm saying that one can't ignore the fact that it will have effects on others. If one's position is that one doesn't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland then fair enough, that's one's position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance._


I call Bullshit. When you wrote 'That's *your* position' you were obviously aiming it directly at andysays in the 2nd person 'you'.
 'that's ones position...' just sounds fucking weird in that prince charles-like 'one' point of view.

Besides the sneering sign offs on your posts, you put words in peoples mouths time and again. Now you've been rightly pulled up about it, in this case bang to rights, yet it's quite revealing how you disingeneously try to twist it yet again.
I recall dotcommunist pulling you up a short while ago on this very thread for doing a similar. I noticed it in our little spats too.
You have such an underhand way of discussing topics which in my book makes you look dishonest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> So fucking what... this is tedious nit-picking ... plenty of UKIP-like tory MPs in the right-wing of the party.  Indeed, its almost as though UKIP has taken over the Tory party. This doesn't dilute in the slightest my substantive point that you're making common cause with the right. Why are you posting up this irrelevant material.


It's not irrelevant. I've told you you look a twat with this ukip bollocks. You do your case no favours by this ukip taking over tory party froth either. Your tedious hysterical shrill whine says far more about your stunted politics and inability to comprehend what's been said than about mine or butchersapron's: and none of it good


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There's no room for 'revision'.
> 
> If one side reneges on an agreement that has kept peace for decades, then yes they are at fault.  And worse.


The Potsdam Agreement of 1945 was superceded by the '2 plus 4 Agreement' of 1990 after German reunification without a WW2 reloaded.
Things change and these agreements get updates...


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And that's going to be achieved by forming an alliance with Pro-remain Tories, LibDems etc in order to reverse any move to leave the EU. This post is the same type of gash that Blair, May and Cameron have been coming out with for the last 20 years - "reskilling", "welfare underclass", maybe we can have a free-trade agreement to with with it eh? Ugh pass the sick bucket.



I've already dealt with the point regarding voting alliances.  What kind of purist deluded world are you living in?  In your second sentence here you don't seem to like the word "reskilling". What is wrong with it do you think that once somebody starts working in one job there should just be smooth transition in their career and that people should never have to even consider retraining.  Aren't you being a bit unrealistic here?  When I mentioned the phrase "welfare underclass" I was just mentioning it as a potential danger/argument against creating a generous welfare state perhaps involving a BIS and one that shouldn't prevent the funding of a proper welfare system. You don't seem to have your brain switched on. You just here a phrase that you might have heard spoken by a politician that you didn't like and think that anybody who uses that phrases ever again is making the same argument made by those politicians.  Don't just act so viscerally, flip out, vomit and shut down.  That is what I mean by you not having your brain switched on.



redsquirrel said:


> Yes you do, yes you are. You've specifically said that Labour should ignore the majority leave vote and work with filth like pro-remain Tories and LDs to stay in the EU. You've called anyone who wants a "hard Brexit" (whatever that means) anti-socialist, you've called any position that supports leaving unreasonable, you've called "left-wingers" who supported a leave vote fools.



I specifically said don't ignore the concerns of those who voted Leave, but I still believe that the EU Ref was for many reasons a deeply flawed vote (many others here agree with me on this). I do believe the Leave vote is against the interests of those who want social justice/socialism/whatever in this country.  I have called left wingers who supported a Leave vote misguided.  That doesn't mean that I'm a bad person or a patronising git.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not irrelevant. I've told you you look a twat with this ukip bollocks. You do your case no favours by this ukip taking over tory party froth either. Your tedious hysterical shrill whine says far more about your stunted politics and inability to comprehend what's been said than about mine or butchersapron's: and none of it good



OK forget I ever said UKIP. I was attacked for advocating making common cause with parties on the left and centre and moderate right of the political spectrum in Westminster, while Lexiters are making common cause with the extreme right. (right wing Tories).  I'm sorry that you're finding me tedious and that you find it difficult to put together a coherent argument.  What does 'stunted politics' mean anyway. Is it just a way of saying I am right and you are wrong?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I'm sorry that you're finding me tedious and that you it difficult to put together a coherent argument


Come back when you can put together a coherent sentence


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> OK forget I ever said UKIP


nah


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Come back when you can put together a coherent sentence



Do you just nit pick and slink around because you don't have anything much to say?


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> nah



I don't understand your weird thinking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Do you just nit pick and slink around because you don't have anything much to say?


Right. I'm incoherent because I point out that the ukip you hold up as a *really* big threat are going down the plughole. You say it's like ukip have taken over the Tory party. You think you're coherent, but really you're hysterical. And wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I don't understand your weird thinking.


Don't blame me for your shortcomings


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Right. I'm incoherent because I point out that the ukip you hold up as a *really* big threat are going down the plughole. You say it's like ukip have taken over the Tory party. You think you're coherent, but really you're hysterical. And wrong.



the ukip you hold up as a *really* big threat - where did you read that I certainly didn't say it.
You say it's like ukip have taken over the Tory party - It sometimes feels like, yes it really does but its an aside in any case to the main point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.

So you're twisting what I said and putting words in my mouth about UKIP, nit-picking because I've just demolished the argument which you weighed in on about political alliances. and then just called me incoherent, hysterical and wrong.

I'm not going to bother calling you incoherent and hysterical.  I will just say that you are wrong and trying to cover it up by being slippery


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The Potsdam Agreement of 1945 was superceded by the '2 plus 4 Agreement' of 1990 after German reunification without a WW2 reloaded.
> Things change and these agreements get updates...


Updates?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> the ukip you hold up as a *really* big threat - where did you read that I certainly didn't say it.
> You say it's like ukip have taken over the Tory party - It sometimes feels like, yes it really does but its an aside in any case to the main point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.
> 
> So you're twisting what I said and putting words in my mouth about UKIP, nit-picking because I've just demolished the argument which you weighed in on about political alliances. and then just called me incoherent, hysterical and wrong.
> ...


Pls link to this post where you think you demolished this argument. I don't think it exists


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> You say it's like ukip have taken over the Tory party


No,that was me quoting you  

You don't even know what you've said


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Updates?


update, revision, amend, version.. .what ever the fuck you say when you rewrite a peace agreement due to the changing political circumstances.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> update, revision, amend, version.. .what ever the fuck you say when you rewrite a peace agreement due to the changing political circumstances.


Not sure what the word is when one side reneges on a peace treaty...pretty sure it's not update.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Not sure what the word is when one side reneges on a peace treaty...pretty sure it's not update.


Circumstances change and contracts get rewritten. Either in the form of new contracts, amended versions/ revisions, an addendum or two, whatever. 
Do you think a terrorist campaign is likely if the UK pulls out of the existing contract and proposes a new one?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Circumstances change and contracts get rewritten. Either in the form of new contracts, amended versions/ revisions, an addendum or two, whatever.
> Do you think a terrorist campaign is likely if the UK pulls out of the existing contract and proposes a new one?


Contract? it's a peace treaty, why are you being so disingenuous?   They're not proposing any new one, they're proposing breaking the current one.   If something bad happens it is not a terrorist campaign, it is the result of one side breaking the peace treaty.  

I don't recall this being mentioned in the campaign.  Ever.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 2, 2018)

to be accurate its an agreement and an ongoing peace process


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Contract? it's a peace treaty, why are you being so disingenuous?   They're not proposing any new one, they're proposing breaking the current one.   If something bad happens it is not a terrorist campaign, it is the result of one side breaking the peace treaty.
> 
> I don't recall this being mentioned in the campaign.  Ever.


It's not a peace treaty. It's an agreement.

eta: too slow


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I call Bullshit. When you wrote 'That's *your* position' you were obviously aiming it directly at andysays in the 2nd person 'you'.
> 'that's ones position...' just sounds fucking weird in that prince charles-like 'one' point of view.



I didn't just write "That's your position", though, did I? I wrote



teuchter said:


> *If *your position is that you don't care about the consequences for Eire or for Northern Ireland *then* fair enough, that's your position, but state that clearly rather than taking the "nothing to do with me guvnor" stance.



So, even if I had been aiming it directly at Andysays - which I wasn't, which can be seen reading it in context, as it was a response to his interjection into a conversation I was having with Riklet - even if I had been aiming it at Andysays, then the words "if" and "then" are somewhat important, are they not? 

So what were you saying about putting words into peoples' mouths?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Circumstances change and contracts get rewritten. Either in the form of new contracts, amended versions/ revisions, an addendum or two, whatever.
> Do you think a terrorist campaign is likely if the UK pulls out of the existing contract and proposes a new one?


If it's a return to the hard border then I can't see nationalists taking part in the peace process.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 2, 2018)

Haven't had time yet to pay attention to May's speech today and try to work out if it means anything, but John Redwood on Newsnight defending it and looking like he could burst into tears at any moment was worth about a decade's licence fee. At one point EM interrupted him and the way he responded you could tell he was thinking 'Isn't this humiliating enough without you being so obviously uninterested in what I'm saying?'


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> If it's a return to the hard border then I can't see nationalists taking part in the peace process.


if it's a hard boarder enforced by the Eu, they (the nationalists) may well look a bit silly doing so. They'd also be dragging the Eu into calling the shots, no?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Haven't had time yet to pay attention yo May's speech today and try to work out if it means anything,


Managed Ambitious Cake eating.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> if it's a hard boarder enforced by the Eu, they may well look a bit sill doing so, also dragging the Eu into calling the shots, no?


No, the UK will still have an obligation to collect tariffs, it can't just say no border. Hence May going on about free trade today.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> No, the UK will still have an obligation to collect tariffs, it can't just say no border. Hence May going on about free trade today.


on what basis would the UK be obliged to collect tariffs? genuine question as that's new to me.

eta, my understanding is that the wto only sets upper limits


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No,that was me quoting you
> 
> You don't even know what you've said



I know exactly what I said  you dip. I was commenting on you quoting me that's why I put a "-" after the word "party"  Just the same as i put a dash after the word "threat"  those were two comments on things that *YOU* said. My comment on the UKIP comment was that you were deliberately nit picking on a minor point to hide your lack of argument on the substantive point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.  I could have made it clearer by putting both of the two things I was commenting on in quotes instead I just put a dash after the two things I was commenting on.


----------



## tompinch (Mar 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Come back when you can put together a coherent sentence


You, sir, are a rude man.
You have no class.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 2, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I know exactly what I said  you dip. I was commenting on you quoting me that's why I put a "-" after the word "party"  Just the same as i put a dash after the word "threat"  those were two comments on things that *YOU* said. My comment on the UKIP comment was that you were deliberately nit picking on a minor point to hide your lack of argument on the substantive point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.  I could have made it clearer by putting both of the two things I was commenting on in quotes instead I just put a dash after the two things I was commenting on.



It was quite clear to me, the way you wrote it. 

He's just trying to wind you up (instead of making an honest argument).


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I didn't just write "That's your position", though, did I? I wrote
> 
> 
> 
> So, even if I had been aiming it directly at Andysays - which I wasn't, which can be seen reading it in context, as it was a response to his interjection into a conversation I was having with Riklet - even if I had been aiming it at Andysays, then the words "if" and "then" are somewhat important, are they not?


it's the use of the word 'your'. it's specifically 2nd person.  it doesn't translate to the prince charlesesque 1st/3rd person POV of 'one' that you used when you tried to wriggle out of it.



teuchter said:


> So what were you saying about putting words into peoples' mouths?


still stands


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 3, 2018)

Thank you teuchter that is exactly what I thought Pickman's model is being dishonest and is on a wind up.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> on what basis would the UK be obliged to collect tariffs? genuine question as that's new to me.
> 
> eta, my understanding is that the wto only sets upper limits



You can only have one default set of tariffs under WTO rules. They can be as low as you like, but without a post-Brexit trade agreement, we can't give preferential treatment to the EU. Plus we'd need to find an awful lot of money to subsidise UK farmers and manufacturers so they could compete.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> it's the use of the word 'your'. it's specifically 2nd person.



No, it's completely normal to use 'you' as a generic pronoun, and that was how it was intended. You announcing that it is "specifically 2nd person" doesn't make it so. But as I say, even if I'd been using it as such, you'd still be wrong. Case closed.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> No, it's completely normal to use 'you' as a generic pronoun, and that was how it was intended. You announcing that it is "specifically 2nd person" doesn't make it so. But as I say, even if I'd been using it as such, you'd still be wrong. Case closed.


Reread the exchange from here. Ignoring the fact that it started with you again putting works in Ricklets mouth, the subsequent exchange with andysays was direct and in the 2nd person.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Reread the exchange from here. Ignoring the fact that it started with you again putting works in Ricklets mouth, the subsequent exchange with andysays was direct and in the 2nd person.


My use of the present continuous in the contentious post further demonstrates that I'm not talking about andysays but about the ongoing conversation he has just inserted himself into. I'm happy for readers to make their own minds up, in the unlikely event that anyone else cares.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You can only have one default set of tariffs under WTO rules. They can be as low as you like, but without a post-Brexit trade agreement, we can't give preferential treatment to the EU. Plus we'd need to find an awful lot of money to subsidise UK farmers and manufacturers so they could compete.


So ignoring subsidies for the moment - if the Uk decided on a zero tariff default set, then the onus would be on the EU to decide if they wanted to reciprocate that. By their own principle of "it's the UKs decision to leave, so the UK needs to propose the solution to the EU<>UK Border issue, as it's responsible for potentially jeopardising the GFA" , then by the same token, it would be the EUs decision to enforce tariffs that require a hard boarder, therefore the onus should be on the EU to find a solution that quells any nationalist anxiety.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 3, 2018)

Why bother, really.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Well this grammatical and semantic nit-picking is totally enlightening. It may be worth more of several participants time to look into WTO rules, Most Favoured Nation status etc. Basically engage with Raheem rather than the tedious nit-pickers.
> 
> Edit: haha, well fuck, that's me pre-empted


yes I agree, much better discussing things with someone who doesn't put words in your mouth, make insulting remarks, and constantly sneer at the leaver idiots.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> So ignoring subsidies for the moment - if the Uk decided on a zero tariff default set, then the onus would be on the EU to decide if they wanted to reciprocate that. By their own principle of "it's the UKs decision to leave, so the UK needs to propose the solution to the EU<>UK Border issue, as it's responsible for potentially jeopardising the GFA" , then by the same token, it would be the EUs decision to enforce tariffs that require a hard boarder, therefore the onus should be on the EU to find a solution that quells any nationalist anxiety.



I think the part that you're not taking into account is that neither the UK nor the EU can set zero tariffs in relation to one another (without a trade agreement) without doing the same in relation to the rest of the world, which would be economic suicide in either case.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I think the part that you're not taking into account is that neither the UK nor the EU can set zero tariffs in relation to one another (without a trade agreement) without doing the same in relation to the rest of the world.


Sorry, then i misunderstood the point in your previous post;


Raheem said:


> *You can only have one default set of tariffs under WTO rules. They can be as low as you like*,





Raheem said:


> but without a post-Brexit trade agreement, we can't give preferential treatment to the EU. Plus we'd need to find an awful lot of money to subsidise UK farmers and manufacturers so they could


How does preferential treatment come into it?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm happy for readers to make their own minds up, in the unlikely event that anyone else cares.


You're being dishonest and can't even offer any admission or concession for it even when called out. HTH


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 3, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I've already dealt with the point regarding voting alliances.  What kind of purist deluded world are you living in?  In your second sentence here you don't seem to like the word "reskilling". What is wrong with it do you think that once somebody starts working in one job there should just be smooth transition in their career and that people should never have to even consider retraining.  Aren't you being a bit unrealistic here?  When I mentioned the phrase "welfare underclass" I was just mentioning it as a potential danger/argument against creating a generous welfare state perhaps involving a BIS and one that shouldn't prevent the funding of a proper welfare system. You don't seem to have your brain switched on. You just here a phrase that you might have heard spoken by a politician that you didn't like and think that anybody who uses that phrases ever again is making the same argument made by those politicians.  Don't just act so viscerally, flip out, vomit and shut down.  That is what I mean by you not having your brain switched on.


 Oh, I guess I just I'm just another purist _unreasonable _leave voter. If only we had our brains switched on like you, willing to make deals with the filth that have increased inequality back to Victorian levels, who have made the poor poorer and the rich richer, who have seen decades of politics that lead to inequality, poverty and early deaths.




toblerone3 said:


> I specifically said don't ignore the concerns of those who voted Leave, but I still believe that the EU Ref was for many reasons a deeply flawed vote (many others here agree with me on this). I do believe the Leave vote is against the interests of those who want social justice/socialism/whatever in this country.  I have called left wingers who supported a Leave vote misguided.  That doesn't mean that I'm a bad person or a patronising git.


You might have said those "concerns" should be listened to but there's no more meaning to that statement than the words of May, Trump, Cameron or Blair. You've specifically said that the British government should ignore the way they voted and remain in the EU. Your _listening_ to concerns is nothing but a patronising statement while continuing with the same politics that have caused so much social damage for the last 30 years.

You didn't call people who vote leave misguided (I linked to the posts FFS) you called them fools and anti-socialist. You've said that they are making common cause with the Tories/UKIP. I'd say that was pretty patronising.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

tompinch said:


> You, sir, are a rude man.
> You have no class.


Everybody has class. You're just ignorant.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sorry, then i misunderstood the point in your previous post;
> 
> 
> How does preferential treatment come into it?


Because you are giving the eu zero tariffs but every other country has to pay x.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I know exactly what I said  you dip. I was commenting on you quoting me that's why I put a "-" after the word "party"  Just the same as i put a dash after the word "threat"  those were two comments on things that *YOU* said. My comment on the UKIP comment was that you were deliberately nit picking on a minor point to hide your lack of argument on the substantive point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.  I could have made it clearer by putting both of the two things I was commenting on in quotes instead I just put a dash after the two things I was commenting on.


Yeh. So you claim that you mean what you say. Good. So you'll be able to back up this political alliance bit, which you'll be able to say when and where and by who it was made. If it ever existed of course.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 3, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> ...
> the substantive point which was to do with the unsavoury political alliances that the Left wing leave advocates have made.



Left leavers haven't made any 'unsavoury political alliances', we've been pretty much out there on our own advocating and arguing this from pro-socialist/working class positions, whilst attacking the right but also continually being smeered by a more powerful liberal remain machine which actually has made overt and public alliances with the right - which even you lent support too only a few pages ago of this thread!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Thank you teuchter that is exactly what I thought Pickman's model is being dishonest and is on a wind up.


Yeh. Link to that post where you demolished the arguments pls, second time of asking, if it exists now would be the time to link to it. You dishonest and underhand abomination.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Left leavers haven't made any 'unsavoury political alliances', we've been pretty much out there on our own advocating and arguing this from pro-socialist/working class positions, whilst attacking the right but also continually being smeered by a more powerful liberal remain machine which actually has made overt and public alliances with the right - which even you lent support too only a few pages ago of this thread!


Yeh. Is honesty a foreign concept to toblerone3?


----------



## Badgers (Mar 3, 2018)

I have changed my position since reading this


----------



## Badgers (Mar 3, 2018)

Can't believe I ever thought we should remain.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Because you are giving the eu zero tariffs but every other country has to pay x.


And when every other country doesn't have to pay x?


----------



## andysays (Mar 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There's no room for 'revision'...



You seem to know all there is to know about the GFA, so maybe you can point to the specific clause which states this categorically.


DexterTCN said:


> ...If one side reneges on an agreement that has kept peace for decades, then yes they are at fault.  And worse.


I'm not talking about anyone reneging on anything. There is absolutely no reason why the British and Irish governments can't come up with agreed revisions to the GFA and, although it may be difficult to get other groups who were part of the original GFA to agree, it's not impossible.

Or are you suggesting that there is still a general appetite for violence in NI, that all those who have experienced peace for nearly 20 years have actually just been waiting for an excuse to go back to bombing and shooting? That's a ridiculous claim, but that's the implication of what you're saying.


----------



## JimW (Mar 3, 2018)

Especially since those actually interested in continued armed conflict have ignored the GFA anyway.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 3, 2018)

andysays said:


> You seem to know all there is to know about the GFA, so maybe you can point to the specific clause which states this categorically.
> 
> There is absolutely no reason why the British and Irish governments can't come up with agreed revisions to the GFA and, although it may be difficult to get other groups who were part of the original GFA to agree, it's not impossible.



But we're not talking about minor revision. There would be barely any point to a version of the GFA that incorporated a hard border, and what's the incentive for the Irish government to agree to it anyway?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> And when every other country doesn't have to pay x?


So you're saying any country will be able to export to the UK, no restrictions?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2018)

So toblerone3 no link. No post. No demolition. Same auld story, the liberal - that's you - tells lies, isn't believed, tells more lies and then buggers off. Don't ruin the happy ending.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> So you're saying any country will be able to export to the UK, no restrictions?


No I'm not saying anything. Please don't go all teuchter on me and start putting words in my mouth?
I've asked you (and raheem) a couple genuine questions because you seem to have much more knowledge about wto rules vs trade agreements than me.

I just wanted to know if it's an unreasonable suggestion that a county could have no tariffs in place, in a globalised world?

(eta: anyway googled it now - Hong Kong & Singapore)


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> No I'm not saying anything. Please don't go all teuchter on me and start putting words in my mouth?
> I've asked you (and raheem) a couple genuine questions because you seem to have much more knowledge about wto rules vs trade agreements than me.
> 
> I just wanted to know if it's an unreasonable suggestion that a county could have no tariffs in place, in a globalised world?
> ...


We could have, but that would mean the country being open to goods from anywhere, cheap food, cheap goods etc, our own industries would be wiped out.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 3, 2018)

Hard to imagine that there's even cheaper shit out there than the all the crap we're flooded with already.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Hard to imagine that there's even cheaper shit out there than the all the crap we're flooded with already.



Well, imagine that currently incorporated into the prices are import tariffs.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 3, 2018)

Badgers said:


> I have changed my position since reading this




I'm going to assume you mean because it gave you a hardon and you were in polite company.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 4, 2018)




----------



## Badgers (Mar 4, 2018)

Dutch paper


----------



## teuchter (Mar 4, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 129245 View attachment 129246


This post a magnet for likes from sneery middle class types


----------



## Badgers (Mar 4, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This post a magnet for likes from sneery middle class types


Thought you would like it


----------



## paolo (Mar 4, 2018)

Does anyone know what’s going on?

The Brexit DUP say there has to be hard border. *

That won’t fly. No matter how hard the Brexit say.

* DUP / “it can all be worked out”: Run this.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Sorry, late to this thread and my first post.
Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?
Is there anybody at all, in the universe, who can persuade me that there is anything good about brexit?
Just to make it easy, start with the day to day practical solutions to the land border on the island of Ireland. We are told brexit voters knew what they were doing, so if there is a brexit voter reading this, tell me your plan for the border that you knew about before voting in the referendum.
I am 65, the son of a bus cleaner and a waitress in a cafe, who went into care at an early age and have worked all my life. Despite apparently being of the demographic who is supposed to have voted brexit I can't believe that any sentient being with the capacity to think would have voted brexit.
I will personally hate and despise anybody I know who voted brexit until my dying day (which isn't far off), brexit won, it is your country now and I hold brexit voters in utter contempt.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Sorry, late to this thread and my first post.
> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?
> Is there anybody at all, in the universe, who can persuade me that there is anything good about brexit?
> Just to make it easy, start with the day to day practical solutions to the land border on the island of Ireland. We are told brexit voters knew what they were doing, so if there is a brexit voter reading this, tell me your plan for the border that you knew about before voting in the referendum.



Off you fuck then.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Another great poster bought to you by the Dulwich Hamlet forum.


----------



## rubbershoes (Mar 4, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This post a magnet for likes from sneery middle class types




Thanks for alerting me to the post.  I've now liked it


----------



## Badgers (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Another great poster bought to you by the Dulwich Hamlet forum.


Is that still a thing?


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?


If you are a thick ignorant cunt then you'd be right.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Is that still a thing?



It is, I personally blame it for Onket's departure!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Off you fuck then.


Fuck off yourself.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Fuck off yourself.



Get used to the initiation rights


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> If you are a thick ignorant cunt then you'd be right.


So there was a good reason for voting brexit was there?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Get used to the initiation rights


What, you're in charge are you?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So there was a good reason for voting brexit was there?



You could always spend some time reading the various threads here about it to see what arguments have been made for both leave and remain. Or you could jump in feet first and call people thicko racists.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

Would it surprise anyone here to learn that this poster also came here via the dulwich hamlet forum?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Would it surprise anyone here to learn that this poster also came here via the dulwich hamlet forum?



Already done a few posts up


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So there was a good reason for voting brexit was there?


Loads of them.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Already done a few posts up


Sorry - missed that. Remarkable consistency of approach no matter what side they come down on isn't there?


----------



## JimW (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So there was a good reason for voting brexit was there?


I had to try something to stop the EU killing those refugees on the boats and the Greek pensioners.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You could always spend some time reading the various threads here about it to see what arguments have been made for both leave and remain. Or you could jump in feet first and call people thicko racists.


There are arguments _for _Brexit?
What? Like reasoned, logical, researched, sustained and practical arguments?
This malarkey has been going on heavily for a couple of years I have noticed that nobody on any platform has sustained an argument of any kind that goes much beyond the hatred of 'foreigners'.
Have you heard any others?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There are arguments _for _Brexit?
> What? Like reasoned, logical, researched, sustained and practical arguments?
> This malarkey has been going on heavily for a couple of years I nobody on any platform has sustained an argument of any kind that goes much beyond the hatred of 'foreigners'.
> Have you heard any others?





stethoscope said:


> You could always spend some time reading the various threads here about it to see what arguments have been made for both leave and remain. Or you could jump in feet first and call people thicko racists.


.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> in the universe, who can persuade me that there is anything good about brexit?


watching people like you latching onto easy liberal narratives and semi-conscious class prejudices has been entertaining I have to say. It was better in the aftermath when your sort were talking about euthanasia the elderly and making IQ tests necessary for voting. The best bit is the intellectual laziness and dilettantish nature of your limited thinking means you'll never confront it and stop (simply aren't capable of it)- merely tone it down for politeness sake. Acquisition (sorry _aspiration_) and politeness being the self-perceived cultural lodestones of the brit bourgeoisie, whether they voted in or out, they are still in thrall to the same wormlike tendencies. You've become what you mythologised yourselves to be only as everyone elses lives slid out of view, not part of the narrative UK PLC. The truth of it is this genuine bewilderment, the five stages of grief we've seen played out. Its why you lost.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> watching people like you latching onto easy liberal narratives and semi-conscious class prejudices has been entertaining I have to say. It was better in the aftermath when your sort were talking about euthanasia the elderly and making IQ tests necessary for voting. The best bit is the intellectual laziness and dilettantish nature of your limited thinking means you'll never confront it and stop (simply aren't capable of it)- merely tone it down for politeness sake. Acquisition (sorry _aspiration_) and politeness being the self-perceived cultural lodestones of the brit bourgeoisie, whether they voted in or out, they are still in thrall to the same wormlike tendencies. You've become what you mythologised yourselves to be only as everyone elses lives slid out of view, not part of the narrative UK PLC. The truth of it is this genuine bewilderment, the five stages of grief we've seen played out. Its why you lost.



People like me?
You have only the slightest idea what I am 'like' by a couple of posts on here.
Like I imagine you have, each poster has a hinterland that you or I will never know about based on a few things they post, so if you want to make assumptions about what kind of person I am like, you base that assumption on a very narrow bit of evidence.
Then you spin it out to include 'liberal', semi-conscious class prejudices', intellectual laziness, dilettantish, limited thinking, predictions about what I will or won't ever do or what I am capable of doing, politeness (oh the irony).
I do agree with one point you make, I have become hateful towards brexit voters just as they seem hateful in themselves towards others, but that isn't why I lost.
I don't know if you count yourself as a winner or a loser, but the sheer arrogance of a post that starts with 'people like you' makes me suspect that you are a brexit voter, one who I would despise.
If you are, you won, take control if you think you can.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> People like me?
> You have only the slightest idea what I am 'like' by a couple of posts on here.
> Like I imagine you have, each poster has a hinterland that you or I will never know about based on a few things they post, so if you want to make assumptions about what kind of person I am like, you base that assumption on a very narrow bit of evidence.
> Then you spin it out to include 'liberal', semi-conscious class prejudices', intellectual laziness, dilettantish, limited thinking, predictions about what I will or won't ever do or what I am capable of doing, politeness (oh the irony).
> ...


yet you can judge the millions who voted a different way to you and dismiss them with no sense of irony or self awareness


----------



## JimW (Mar 4, 2018)

This must be some new meaning of the word “philosophical” I wasn't aware of, maybe it's that irony i hear is popular among the non league hipsters.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> so if you want to make assumptions about what kind of person I am like, you base that assumption on a very narrow bit of evidence.


You said this -------Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Have you heard the one about the liberal that walks into a bar of far left leavers?





He lexit.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> yet you can judge the millions who voted a different way to you and dismiss them with no sense of irony or self awareness



Yes over 17 million voted brexit, and I accept they might not all be racists, but I don't want to dismiss them principally because of the damage they have done.
To use a cliche I want to hold their metaphorical feet to the fire and get them to tell me the practical steps they planned before voting to make brexit happen.
I have asked this elsewhere, and instead of any brexit voter being able to suggest any practical solutions they tend to attack me as a form of diversion. This place is no different.
Take my opening post, nobody so far has responded to the challenge regarding the Irish border, but people have responded to the fact that I hate and despise brexiters (for the damage they have done). This is a typical brexit response, no actual ideas, but give a kicking to the losers because they don't love big brother as it were.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> You said this -------Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?


 Did you miss the question mark?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Did you miss the question mark?



Cos the question mark makes a difference


----------



## JimW (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes over 17 million voted brexit, and I accept they might not all be racists, but I don't want to dismiss them principally because of the damage they have done.
> To use a cliche I want to hold their metaphorical feet to the fire and get them to tell me the practical steps they planned before voting to make brexit happen.
> I have asked this elsewhere, and instead of any brexit voter being able to suggest any practical solutions they tend to attack me as a form of diversion. This place is no different.
> Take my opening post, nobody so far has responded to the challenge regarding the Irish border, but people have responded to the fact that I hate and despise brexiters (for the damage they have done). This is a typical brexit response, no actual ideas, but give a kicking to the losers because they don't love big brother as it were.


Maybe try sticking to the question then. Or knock yourself out with one of the many answers on the thread you couldn't be arsed to read before wading in to.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Did you miss the question mark?


No. Carry on


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Cos the question mark makes a difference



Yes, because it is a chance to disavow me of that assumption.
However you, like others, took it as an invitation to wade in.
Not that it bothers me particularly.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 4, 2018)

#brexwichhamlet


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

JimW said:


> Maybe try sticking to the question then. Or knock yourself out with one of the many answers on the thread you couldn't be arsed to read before wading in to.



The question being 'is brexit actually going to happen'?
Seeing as how there seems to be more definitions of brexit than atoms in the universe, which particular brexit is inherent in 'the question'?


----------



## JimW (Mar 4, 2018)

Certainly makes you wonder if it will affect any future Hamlet European campaigns.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> but the sheer arrogance of a post that starts with 'people like you'


treat others as you wish to be treated, its a 'philosophy' you may have heard of but not followed as you slapped your dick on the table before declaring everyone who voted differently to you is a thick racist nationalist.


----------



## JimW (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The question being 'is brexit actually going to happen'?
> Seeing as how there seems to be more definitions of brexit than atoms in the universe, which particular brexit is inherent in 'the question'?


The question you wanted an answer to in your opening screed. Bit rich to lard all the rest of that post in then moan that's what got the reaction.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes, because it is a chance to disavow me of that assumption.
> However you, like others, took it as an invitation to wade in.



You mean that entirely non-prejudiced starting position of:



			
				philosophical said:
			
		

> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?



Besides, it was _you_ that waded in


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> treat others as you wish to be treated, its a 'philosophy' you may have heard of but not followed as you slapped your dick on the table before declaring everyone who voted differently to you is a thick racist nationalist.



I didn't declare it thought did I?

You have mis read my post by ignoring 'Am I right in assuming' and it ending with a question mark.
I think it was your own dick waving that led you into your quaint 'people like you' tirade, or was it eagerness of some kind?
Either way your misrepresentation of what I wrote was interwoven by reference to 'politeness', and now you go on about treating others as one would wish to be treated.
Tell you what, I'll start by trying to respect what you write rather than twisting it. You might care to follow my example.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You mean that entirely non-prejudiced starting position of:
> 
> 
> Besides, it was _you_ that waded in



You might say that, I would say it was an effort to provoke a discussion.
Not that it has worked mind you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

JimW said:


> The question you wanted an answer to in your opening screed. Bit rich to lard all the rest of that post in then moan that's what got the reaction.



I accept that it is your judgement to say what I wrote was 'a bit rich', but I don't agree with you.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I didn't declare it thought did I?
> 
> You have mis read my post by ignoring 'Am I right in assuming' and it ending with a question mark.
> It think it was your own dick waving that led you into your quaint 'people like you' tirade, or was it eagerness of some kind?
> ...


your example can't see where politeness isn't being used in a positive sense so no. In fact you can't conceive of how it might not be used in a positive light, which underscores my 'quaint rant' nicely. 

as for loaded questions and what they reveal about what you think...well. Did you honestly expect some reasoned discussion to flow from that? 'I'm just asking questions' aye right.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> your example can't see where politeness isn't being used in a positive sense so no. In fact you can't conceive of how it might not be used in a positive light, which underscores my 'quaint rant' nicely.
> 
> as for loaded questions and what they reveal about what you think...well. Did you honestly expect some reasoned discussion to flow from that? 'I'm just asking questions' aye right.



You're doing it again. Making assumptions about what I can or can't conceive?
Going by your two assumptions about me I would say that if they represent who you are, you seem to be judgemental.
I at least couched mine by asking 'am i right in assuming', but you went straight for the jugular.
As for honestly expecting reasoned discussion, well in my first post I asked about the Irish border, a chance for some reasoned discussion which nobody has taken up.
It seems to be much more fun to try to attack me, not for what I say, but for assumptions about what kind of person I might be, and therefore it is easier to conclude that brexiters (if that is what those who replied to me are) are indeed bereft of ideas, and in that regard ignorant.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I didn't declare it thought did I?
> 
> You have mis read my post by ignoring 'Am I right in assuming' and it ending with a question mark.



Am I right in assuming philosophical is a fool?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You're doing it again. Making assumptions about what I can or can't conceive?
> Going by your two assumptions about me I would say that if they represent who you are, you seem to be judgemental.
> I at least couched mine by asking 'am i right in assuming', but you went straight for the jugular.


You're a savile worshipping paedo - am i right?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Am I right in assuming philosophical is a fool?


Depends how you define fool.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You're a savile worshipping paedo - am i right?



Are you asking me?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you asking me?


Yes, who else?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You're doing it again. Making assumptions about what I can or can't conceive?
> Going by your two assumptions about me I would say that if they represent who you are, you seem to be judgemental.
> I at least couched mine by asking 'am i right in assuming', but you went straight for the jugular.
> As for honestly expecting reasoned discussion, well in my first post I asked about the Irish border, a chance for some reasoned discussion which nobody has taken up.
> It seems to be much more fun to try to attack me, not for what I say, but for assumptions about what kind of person I might be, and therefore it is easier to conclude that brexiters (if that is what those who replied to me are) are indeed bereft of ideas, and in that regard ignorant.


if you read the thread, and other related brexit threads then come back without the hatred (you've admitted your hatred here remember?) I'll give you a fair shake. Which is more than you deserve. Till then you can fuck off, so far as I am concerned.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, who else?


No I am not a Saville worshipping paedo. If you are concerned than I am happy to put your mind at rest.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Depends how you define fool.



Someone who comes on to a Brexit discussion thread asking if you are right in thinking that the majority of people who voted in the referendum are racists.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> if you read the thread, and other related brexit threads then come back without the hatred (you've admitted your hatred here remember?) I'll give you a fair shake. Which is more than you deserve. Till then you can fuck off, so far as I am concerned.



'More than I deserve?'
'Fuck off?'
And you want to lecture me about politeness. Have I annoyed you because I have asked you about your tendency to sit in judgement over others, and you now have nowhere else to go?
Fair enough, stalk off into your tent like Achilles for all I care.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> And you want to lecture me about politeness.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Someone who comes on to a Brexit discussion thread asking if you are right in thinking that the majority of people who voted in the referendum are racists.


I disagree with that definition.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with that definition.



You don’t think that doing so is foolish? That’s cos you’re a fool.


----------



## billbond (Mar 4, 2018)




----------



## Raheem (Mar 4, 2018)

JimW said:


> I had to try something to stop the EU killing those refugees on the boats and the Greek pensioners.



I bet they haven't even sent you a thank you card.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You don’t think that doing so is foolish? That’s cos you’re a fool.


Do all the posters on here sit in judgement of others as you and DotCommunist seem to do.
Isn't that what you seem to be accusing me of, apparently judging brexiters? Yet you do it towards me?
Some might call that foolish behaviour.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Do all the posters on here sit in judgement of others as you and DotCommunist seem to do.



Can’t speak for anyone else but yeah, I like to make a judgment based on what people say. And upon reading your opening shot I judged you as a fool, so asked if I was correct to assume that and you have kindly confirmed that you are. Thanks, fool.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2018)

You will personally hate and despise us until your dying day.... Is it your memory or grasp of the English language that's failing here, I can't tell.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You will personally hate and despise us until your dying day.... Is it your memory or grasp of the English language that's failing here, I can't tell.


When you say 'us' can I assume by that that you voted brexit?
If you are, you are the first person on here that I have in any way interacted with who has declared their position.
It need not worry you that an old man like me hates and despises you, because I would never translate that hatred into action, and also be comforted that it is likely that I will die before you.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It need not worry you that an old man like me hates and despises you, because I would never translate that hatred into action, and also be comforted that it is likely that I will die before you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Can’t speak for anyone else but yeah, I like to make a judgment based on what people say. And upon reading your opening shot I judged you as a fool, so asked if I was correct to assume that and you have kindly confirmed that you are. Thanks, fool.


I will take that as a compliment seeing as how your judgement is based on a formidable degree of ignorance, and I would not wish a person as ignorant as you seem to be, to judge me as anything other than a fool.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> When you say 'us' can I assume by that that you voted brexit?
> If you are, you are the first person on here that I have in any way interacted with who has declared their position.
> It need not worry you that an old man like me hates and despises you, because I would never translate that hatred into action, and also be comforted that it is likely that I will die before you.



I have no meat in this sandwich, but can you understand why a LW leaning board may have considered brexit a good move ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have no meat in this sandwich, but can you understand why a LW leaning board may have considered brexit a good move ?



I am not sure what LW stands for, does it stand for 'Left Wing'?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I will take that as a compliment seeing as how your judgement is based on a formidable degree of ignorance, and I would not wish a person as ignorant as you seem to be, to judge me as anything other than a fool.



Fuckin’ listen to yourself. One positive of Brexit, it annoys the fuck out of you.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have no meat in this sandwich, but can you understand why a LW leaning board may have considered brexit a good move ?


I doubt the whole board, or even the all of the Left wingers think it is a good move. This poll had it more than 2:1 remain. Brexit or Bremain - Urban votes


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 4, 2018)

Yep of course, but looking to see if the poster has taken on board why this may be supported by many left people.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuckin’ listen to yourself. One positive of Brexit, it annoys the fuck out of you.


*One* positive of brexit, are there any others then?

Anyway listen to yourself, you are unable to sustain any reasoned argument, and perhaps it is my posting here has 'annoyed the fuck' out of you seeing as how you are reduced to this kind of post. Some people complained when I asked if my assumption that brexit voters were ignorant. You are simply strengthening that assumption.

First you sit in judgement, then you move on to abuse.

Be comforted, you won the vote it is now your country in which you can get pleasure in annoying a remainer like me, I assume that is why you voted brexit in the first place, to annoy people, congratulations on your victory.

Why don't you ignore my posts, I think it is a position you might find easier to sustain?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Be comforted, you won the vote it is now your country in which you can get pleasure in annoying a remainer like me, I assume that is why you voted brexit in the first place, to annoy people, congratulations on your victory.



Yes, left and far left posters obviously voted leave just to annoy people like you.

You twat.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Yep of course, but looking to see if the poster has taken on board why this may be supported by many left people.


I assume that some left leaning people are against the EU because they think of it as some kind of big businesspeoples club.

The attraction of the EU to me is that it means that the UK is less in the thrall of the same ruling class that has lorded it over us for all of my life. I see brexit as moving from a decent democracy to a shabby coterie of the ruling class within the UK, the business aspect is less of an issue for me, however the Irish border is a big issue for me and no political party left right or centre has come up with a practical answer to that problem.
Which in a sense is where I started.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Yes, left and far left posters obviously voted leave just to annoy people like you.
> 
> You twat.



His binary half-thoughts are quite astonishing in their idiocy.

Annoying twonks like him is a happy side effect though


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes over 17 million voted brexit, and I accept they might not all be racists, but I don't want to dismiss them principally because of the damage they have done.
> To use a cliche I want to hold their metaphorical feet to the fire and get them to tell me the practical steps they planned before voting to make brexit happen.
> I have asked this elsewhere, and instead of any brexit voter being able to suggest any practical solutions they tend to attack me as a form of diversion. This place is no different.
> Take my opening post, nobody so far has responded to the challenge regarding the Irish border, but people have responded to the fact that I hate and despise brexiters (for the damage they have done). This is a typical brexit response, no actual ideas, but give a kicking to the losers because they don't love big brother as it were.



The European Union, as an entity, is a poisonous, anti-democratic neoliberal bosses' club that claims to work for the betterment for everybody involved but mostly does the opposite -  they're heartless cunts who would cheerfully let Greeks starve if they can't make debt payments, and want to create a Fortress Europe where refugees end up enslaved in Libya or somewhere before they can get anywhere near a European country. It's better to fuck them off now while the chance is there and hold out the hope of creating something better - and if it doesn't work, at least it's a kick in the balls to the existing order, and one which might open up more opportunities to change things.

I wouldn't have voted for it because I think a Brexit led by the Conservative Party is a pile of shit that is only going to make things shittier than they were before, but I don't see anything particularly hard to grasp about the Brexit - and Lexit - point of view.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Yes, left and far left posters obviously voted leave just to annoy people like you.
> 
> You twat.



Reduced to abuse too?
I don't know which poster here is either left or far left, but I do know which posters have posted ignorant abuse like you have.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The European Union, as an entity, is a poisonous, anti-democratic neoliberal bosses' club that claims to work for the betterment for everybody involved but mostly does the opposite -  they're heartless cunts who would cheerfully let Greeks starve if they can't make debt payments, and want to create a Fortress Europe where refugees end up enslaved in Libya or somewhere before they can get anywhere near a European country. It's better to fuck them off now while the chance is there and hold out the hope of creating something better - and if it doesn't work, at least it's a kick in the balls to the existing order, and one which might open up more opportunities to change things.
> 
> I wouldn't have voted for it because I think a Brexit led by the Conservative Party is a pile of shit that is only going to make things shittier than they were before, but I don't see anything particularly hard to grasp about the Brexit - and Lexit - point of view.


Agree with this. It works the other way as well, of course - being opposed to Brexit doesn't mean you're in a love-in with the EU.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Reduced to abuse too?
> I don't know which poster here is either left or far left, but I do know which posters have posted ignorant abuse like you have.


you could've read some of the fucking thread or another brexit one in the time you've been pissing about on here
as suggested by a few posters
do yourself a favour and read some before assuming and kicking off


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The European Union, as an entity, is a poisonous, anti-democratic neoliberal bosses' club that claims to work for the betterment for everybody involved but mostly does the opposite -  they're heartless cunts who would cheerfully let Greeks starve if they can't make debt payments, and want to create a Fortress Europe where refugees end up enslaved in Libya or somewhere before they can get anywhere near a European country. It's better to fuck them off now while the chance is there and hold out the hope of creating something better - and if it doesn't work, at least it's a kick in the balls to the existing order, and one which might open up more opportunities to change things.
> 
> I wouldn't have voted for it because I think a Brexit led by the Conservative Party is a pile of shit that is only going to make things shittier than they were before, but I don't see anything particularly hard to grasp about the Brexit - and Lexit - point of view.



I appreciate the honesty of this post. I assume that you would hold out very little hope that the EU could be reformed for the better, and I sense that the financials are part of what motivated your post.
I disagree because I see the EU as _more _democratic than the UK with it's monarchy, House of Lords and eternal privileged ruling class that emerge from the shires.
You hope for something better while the chance is there, I see those who voted brexit as imprisoning me in this UK system of 'fuck off and die' Toryism forever.
Seeing as how you are hoping for something better, perhaps you might like to explain the practical steps you would now take (seeing as how you won) to solve the Irish border issue.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> you could've read some of the fucking thread or another brexit one in the time you've been pissing about on here
> as suggested by a few posters
> do yourself a favour and read some before assuming and kicking off



Are you one of those left or far left people that have been mentioned on here. It is often said that ultimately the far left become authoritarian, and judging by what you write you are heading down the authoritarian road.
You have no need to tell me what I should or shouldn't do, and I will try to reciprocate.


----------



## ddraig (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you one of those left or far left people that have been mentioned on here. It is often said that ultimately the far left become authoritarian, and judging by what you write you are heading down the authoritarian road.
> You have no need to tell me what I should or shouldn't do, and I will try to reciprocate.


oh do fuck off


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree because I see the EU as _more _democratic than the UK with it's monarchy, House of Lords and eternal privileged ruling class that emerge from the shires.
> You hope for something better while the chance is there, I see those who voted brexit as imprisoning me in this UK system of 'fuck off and die' Toryism forever.



Christ.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

ddraig said:


> oh do fuck off



Some people complained when I asked if brexit voters were ignorant.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I appreciate the honesty of this post. I assume that you would hold out very little hope that the EU could be reformed for the better, and I sense that the financials are part of what motivated your post.
> I disagree because I see the EU as _more _democratic than the UK with it's monarchy, House of Lords and eternal privileged ruling class that emerge from the shires.
> You hope for something better while the chance is there, I see those who voted brexit as imprisoning me in this UK system of 'fuck off and die' Toryism forever.
> Seeing as how you are hoping for something better, perhaps you might like to explain the practical steps you would now take (seeing as how you won) to solve the Irish border issue.



I didn't actually vote for Brexit, I was restating the argument for it as I understand it. I was against it at the time because I saw it as giving the British state and the Conservative Party more power than they had previously. I was surprised to find out that nobody involved seems to have given much thought to the Irish border issue.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Christ.



Is this a heavily Christian forum too?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I didn't actually vote for Brexit, I was restating the argument for it as I understand it. I was against it at the time because I saw it as giving the British state and the Conservative Party more power than they had previously. I was surprised to find out that nobody involved seems to have given much thought to the Irish border issue.


I apologise for assuming from your post that you voted brexit.
My assumption regarding the Irish border is that those voting brexit thought they could blag it with the Irish, who brexiters hate anyway for racist reasons.
Hence my initial question regarding ignorance and racism.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Some people complained when I asked if brexit voters were ignorant.



You think that the EU is democratic in spite of its president openly rejoicing in the lack of democratic accountability of it.

You think that Brexit means we’re locked in to Tories in spite of Corbyn’s Labour taking so many votes even with a majority of his MPs actively trying to sabotage the party’s chances, in spite of UKIP all but dead and the Tories tearing themselves to bits.

You are either chronically stupid or trolling.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> who brexiters hate anyway for racist reasons.


I voted leave, my parents and wider family are Irish. There is no hate here for the Irish.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> or trolling.


BIG troll i think


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You think that the EU is democratic in spite of its president openly rejoicing in the lack of democratic accountability of it.
> 
> You think that Brexit means we’re locked in to Tories in spite of Corbyn’s Labour taking so many votes even with a majority of his MPs actively trying to sabotage the party’s chances, in spite of UKIP all but dead and the Tories tearing themselves to bits.
> 
> You are either chronically stupid or trolling.


The president openly rejoicing in the lack of democratic accountability?
Either you have no evidence for this, or the president is simply wrong.
The EU is more democratic than the UK, it might seem remote, it might seem a different version of 'democracy' than the one you prefer, but it is more democratic. For a start EU citizens dont have to be subject to the vote of Lady Whatshername who's family trampled ordinary people for power ages ago. The EU has proportional representation, yer in the election before last the Greens and UKIP (spit) got four million votes and one seat.
if you can't see how undemocratic the UK is maybe you are the one who is chronically stupid.
As for Corbyns Labour, they want to leave the EU too, so despite their hopeful agenda they are shooting themselves in the foot by having that stance.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> As for Corbyns Labour, they want to leave the EU too


Are they all racists as well then ?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I apologise for assuming from your post that you voted brexit.
> My assumption regarding the Irish border is that those voting brexit thought they could blag it with the Irish, who brexiters hate anyway for racist reasons.
> Hence my initial question regarding ignorance and racism.



I don't remember the Irish border coming up that often in the pre-Brexit debates, it was like everybody assumed there was some basic level of competence involved.

Anyway, there are a lot of very smart people here making good cases for Brexit, many of them have been made on this thread already, if you treat people with a bit of respect they might talk to you about it, if you call everybody ignorant racists then they probably won't.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Do you/did you vote Lib Dem, @philosophical?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

This confused old gentleman's (who should maybe think about laying off the sunday lunchtime pints) ill-informed vitriol disgusting smears and illogical evidence free attempts at argument strike me as simply being the less polite version of what many of the more prolific anti-brexit posters on this thread have put forward.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The president openly rejoicing in the lack of democratic accountability?
> Either you have no evidence for this, or the president is simply wrong.






			
				Jean Claude Junker said:
			
		

> I'm ready to be insulted as being insufficiently democratic, but I want to be serious ... I am for secret, dark debates



Regarding the French referendum




			
				Jean Claude Junker said:
			
		

> If it's a Yes, we will say 'on we go', and if it's a No we will say 'we continue’



On the introduction of the Euro



			
				Jean Claude Junker said:
			
		

> We decide on something, leave it lying around, and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.






Democratic deficit in the European Union - Wikipedia

Wake up.


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Mar 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The European Union, as an entity, is a poisonous, anti-democratic neoliberal bosses' club that claims to work for the betterment for everybody involved but mostly does the opposite -  they're heartless cunts who would cheerfully let Greeks starve if they can't make debt payments, and want to create a Fortress Europe where refugees end up enslaved in Libya or somewhere before they can get anywhere near a European country. It's better to fuck them off now while the chance is there and hold out the hope of creating something better - and if it doesn't work, at least it's a kick in the balls to the existing order, and one which might open up more opportunities to change things.
> 
> I wouldn't have voted for it because I think a Brexit led by the Conservative Party is a pile of shit that is only going to make things shittier than they were before, but I don't see anything particularly hard to grasp about the Brexit - and Lexit - point of view.



20 months since the referendum campaign and I've never managed to put it so brilliantly. 

Fuck em.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> I voted leave, my parents and wider family are Irish. There is no hate here for the Irish.


And I travel on an Irish passport, my brother lives in Ballycasey, my family from Rath Luric, and I voted remain to keep that connection strong.
In my view the disregard for the Irish land border issue is something that has arisen from ignorance and anti-Irish downright racism. Hence my opening 'assumption' question.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> Are they all racists as well then ?


Possibly the ones who voted brexit are.


----------



## rubbershoes (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Do you/did you vote Lib Dem, @philosophical?



I don't see that is relevant to anything other than feeding your prejudices


----------



## ddraig (Mar 4, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> I don't see that is relevant to anything other than feeding your prejudices


it's relevant to their posting style and goal post moving


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Do you/did you vote Lib Dem, @philosophical?


No. My son was the first tranche of students paying the £9000 fee, which shamed me because I got my education free. Also those who regard Education as utilitarian, and all about employment and earnings I regard as ignorant too. I would never, and have never voted Liberal.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I don't remember the Irish border coming up that often in the pre-Brexit debates, it was like everybody assumed there was some basic level of competence involved.
> 
> Anyway, there are a lot of very smart people here making good cases for Brexit, many of them have been made on this thread already, if you treat people with a bit of respect they might talk to you about it, if you call everybody ignorant racists then they probably won't.



It took a nanosecond for those smart people to 'cunt' me off, and judge me, and tell me to fuck off, so maybe my assumption about ignorance and racism isn't far off the mark.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> I don't see that is relevant to anything other than feeding your prejudices



Lol.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This confused old gentleman's (who should maybe think about laying off the sunday lunchtime pints) ill-informed vitriol disgusting smears and illogical evidence free attempts at argument strike me as simply being the less polite version of what many of the more prolific anti-brexit posters on this thread have put forward.



butchersapron, you are the person who enquired if I was a 'saville loving paedo', so perhaps you might like to reflect on 'disgusting smears' and ill informed vitriol.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regarding the French referendum
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That Junker quote does not back up your assertion.
Ahem, House of Lords, Eton, Oxford Westminster, first past the post, Monarchy...perhaps you need to wake up.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> butchersapron, you are the person who enquired if I was a 'saville loving paedo', so perhaps you might like to reflect on 'disgusting smears' and ill informed vitriol.


The point of such enquiry passing you by unperceived of course. Did someone else write your first few posts or do you not hold yourself to the same standards of behaviour that you ineptly demand others adhere to?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Yes, us anarchists just love the British establishment and monarchy


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The point of such inquiry passing you by unperceived of course. Did someone else write your first few posts or do you not hold yourself to the same standards of behaviour that you ineptly demand that others adhere to?


I am not the hypocrite you appear to be.
What extended polite debate were you after when you enquired if I was a 'saville loving paedo'? What exactly was your 'point'.
I am prepared to defend what I write, are you?


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In my view the disregard for the Irish land border issue is something that has arisen from ignorance and anti-Irish downright racism.


If you are going to reduce everything brexit down to racism, then i don't see any point in having a discussion with you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Yes, us anarchists just love the British establishment and monarchy



I am surprise that anarchists love the Monarchy and the British establishment, I dislike both institutions so I am certainly not an anarchist. 
Possibly what you write is an attempt to be ironic.


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Possibly the ones who voted brexit are.


I have black and asian mates that voted brexit, are they racists as well ?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not the hypocrite you appear to be.
> What extended polite debate were you after when you enquired if I was a 'saville loving paedo'? What exactly was your 'point'.
> I am prepared to defend what I write, are you?


Could someone explain it to him?  Actually don't bother. He's very unlikely to grasp it after having missed the point after having it directly explained to him.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> If you are going to reduce everything brexit down to racism, then i don't see any point in having a discussion with you.


That is a good 'out' for you, and I wasn't aware we were having a discussion, just regular posters (presumably) on here forming a queue to have a dig.
Stalk off in a huff if you like, but it helpfully avoids any need for you to suggest a practical solution to the Irish border question, which you presumably had a plan for before you voted brexit (if indeed you voted brexit).


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> I have black and asian mates that voted brexit, are they racists as well ?


They might well be.
I don't want to make assumptions about people simply because of their ethnicity.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Could someone explain it to him?  Actually don't bother. He's very unlikely to grasp it after having missed the point after having it directly explained to him.


Another dodger huh?
You asked me if I were a saville loving paedo, and nobody at all has explained if there is some kind of subtle meaning to that.
As far as I am concerned you accuse me of child sexual abuse, and of approving of those who indulge in child sexual abuse.
I am simply observing the level of debate you're capable of.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Another dodger huh?
> You asked me if I were a saville loving paedo, and nobody at all has explained if there is some kind of subtle meaning to that.
> As far as I am concerned you accuse me of child sexual abuse, and of approving of those who indulge in child sexual abuse.
> I am simply observing the level of debate you're capable of.


When exactly, did the horse kick you in the head?


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> They might well be.
> I don't want to make assumptions about people simply because of their ethnicity.


Shit trolling. Off you fuck.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> When exactly, did the horse kick you in the head?



 You continually make my point for me.

You wrote:
'This confused old gentleman's (who should maybe think about laying off the sunday lunchtime pints) ill-informed vitriol disgusting smears and illogical evidence free attempts at argument strike me as simply being the less polite version of what many of the more prolific anti-brexit posters on this thread have put forward.'

Yet you 'evidence free' suggest that I am a paedophile by asking me if i were. Nothing to do with brexit or this debate, nothing to do with the 'logic' of this debate, nothing to do with being polite.
I suppose it is possible that you are revealing aspects of your own personal agenda by going down a child sexual abuse route I wouldn't know.
Perhaps you could say something worthwhile and sustain examination of what you say.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> Shit trolling. Off you fuck.


My wife is Chinese, my son is mixed race, I am well aware of some ethnic issues, so it is you who is shit trolling by introducing the 'some of my best friends are black' angle.
You are of course at liberty to fuck off yourself.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In my view the disregard for the Irish land border issue is something that has arisen from ignorance and anti-Irish downright racism. Hence my opening 'assumption' question.



First you'd need to establish that the Irish border question was being disregarded. To me it seems like practically everything else brexit-related has gone on the back burner because of the Irish border question. Hard to see how it could be given more regard than that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

but he was simply asking a question, were not your own first posts on the thread simply asking a question?


----------



## free spirit (Mar 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> First you'd need to establish that the Irish border question was being disregarded. To me it seems like practically everything else brexit-related has gone on the back burner because of the Irish border question. Hard to see how it could be given more regard than that.



It was largely disregarded during the referendum debate, and for a fair time after it - only really when the EU made clear that the Irish had a veto on the issue did it really start to dawn on the UK brexit team that they needed to give it some serious attention.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> First you'd need to establish that the Irish border question was being disregarded. To me it seems like practically everything else brexit-related has gone on the back burner because of the Irish border question. Hard to see how it could be given more regard than that.


I ought to have phrased it better and not used the word 'disregard'. I am really asking for a solution.
To be provocative I would suggest that brexiters voted for 310 miles of razor wire fencing, and British machine gun nests every twenty yards to 'regain control of the UK borders'. If my example is wrong, then what did brexit voters hope for when voting brexit to regain control of the land border? 
At the moment no workable suggestion has been suggested, but you're are right is hasn't been disregarded because I suppose people like me bang on about it all the time.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

^ Oh my


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> but he was simply asking a question, were not your own first posts on the thread simply asking a question?


Are you referring to the horse question?
If you are the answer is that I have not been kicked in the head by a horse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you referring to the horse question?
> If you are the answer is that I have not been kicked in the head by a horse.


Not yet anyway


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not yet anyway


Do you anticipate that it will happen?
I would say that it is very unlikely, I don't tend to hang around horses, and I regard the horse/human interaction as an example of animal cruelty.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you referring to the horse question?
> If you are the answer is that I have not been kicked in the head by a horse.



nope


philosophical said:


> Yet you 'evidence free' suggest that I am a paedophile by asking me if i were. Nothing to do with brexit or this debate, nothing to do with the 'logic' of this debate, nothing to do with being polite.



here, the question was insinuating so you say. It suggested. And yet your laden questions are supposed to be taken as arid, not loaded, not suggesting bias- in no way offensive because you are simply asking questions. Yet when you are asked questions, they are suggesting?

nice try


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

free spirit said:


> It was largely disregarded during the referendum debate, and for a fair time after it - only really when the EU made clear that the Irish had a veto on the issue did it really start to dawn on the UK brexit team that they needed to give it some serious attention.



There's also the DUP-tory match made in hell, which effectively prevents any kind of divergence between NI and GB.

But lets not pretend Ireland was the only thing nobody bothered to think about in advance. Zero homework was done by anyone, leavers remainers or deep-state lawful neutral types.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Do you anticipate that it will happen?
> I would say that it is very unlikely, I don't tend to hang around horses, and I regard the horse/human interaction as an example of animal cruelty.


Yeh. Other whacks on the head are available.


----------



## David Clapson (Mar 4, 2018)

Just thought I'd lob some Rees-Mogg factoids into this thread. He is the bookies favourite to be next PM, ahead of Corbyn. He has £100 million pounds. He bought a Bentley when he was 23. He's against abortion even in cases of incest and rape.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> nope
> 
> 
> here, the question was insinuator so you say. It suggested. And yet your laden questions are supposed to be taken as arid, not loaded, not suggesting bias- in no way offensive because you are simply asking questions. Yet when you are asked questions, they are in no way suggesting?
> ...


I am trying to make sense of this post.
Admittedly it is a struggle.
If you are discussing the nature of questions and then read back, you may notice that my replies have been direct and straightforward however much the questions directed towards me may have been insinuating something else.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> Just thought I'd lob some Rees-Mogg factoids into this thread. He is the bookies favourite to be next PM, ahead of Corbyn. He has £100 million pounds. He bought a Bentley when he was 23. He's against abortion even in cases of incest and rape.



Rees-Mogg has his own thread and in any case you'd struggle to find anyone around here who wasn't already aware he was a nasty and potentially very dangerous character.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not the hypocrite you appear to be.
> What extended polite debate were you after when you enquired if I was a 'saville loving paedo'? What exactly was your 'point'.
> I am prepared to defend what I write, are you?


The same polite debate you were after when you enquired if we were all ignorant racists.


sealion said:


> I have black and asian mates that voted brexit, are they racists as well ?


Was voting leave an act of fear, or an act of love?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. Other whacks on the head are available.


I live in Lewisham in South East London, if you are suggesting that you would like to come and see me and hit me over the head say so. Would it be too far for you to travel?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> Just thought I'd lob some Rees-Mogg factoids into this thread. He is the bookies favourite to be next PM, ahead of Corbyn. He has £100 million pounds. He bought a Bentley when he was 23. He's against abortion even in cases of incest and rape.


JUST SCREEDS OF CONTEXTLESS FACTS


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The same polite debate you were after when you enquired if we were all ignorant racists.
> 
> Was voting leave an act of fear, or an act of love?
> 
> View attachment 129306


In answer to your first point, my initial post was attention grabbing, but as I mentioned above it took a nanosecond for people to react to me in a negative way. if you wish to equate enquiries about racism with enquiries about child abuse then you are free to do so, but the difference is I am not here to tell others how to 'be' as it were, but others wish to tell me.
The holier than thou stuff some people on here have come out with simply doesn't work.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> To be provocative I would suggest that brexiters voted for 310 miles of razor wire fencing, and British machine gun nests every twenty yards to 'regain control of the UK borders'. If my example is wrong, then what did brexit voters hope for when voting brexit to regain control of the land border?
> At the moment no workable suggestion has been suggested, but you're are right is hasn't been disregarded because I suppose people like me bang on about it all the time.



My ballot paper was less specific than yours as regards the spacing of the gun nests but considering your standard modern machine gun commands a range of much more than twenty yards, and considering they would presumably be installed so as to give a 180 degree field of fire, I would suggest that you're proposing a somewhat over-engineered and over-manned solution to this problem.

I mean, you'd be looking at 27,280 gun nests. 27,281 actually, assuming you want one at either end of your fence. Then two men per nest, three shifts per day, that's over 163,000 soldiers needed to man the border. We could add in reserves and personnel at border crossing points but there's really no point when we've already got a number greater than the entire strength of the UK regular armed forces.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In answer to your first point, my initial post was attention grabbing, but as I mentioned above it took a nanosecond for people to react to me in a negative way. if you wish to equate enquiries about racism with enquiries about child abuse then you are free to do so, but the difference is I am not here to tell others how to 'be' as it were, but others wish to tell me.
> The holier than thou stuff some people on here have come out with simply doesn't work.


Have you ever accused someone of being racist right off the bat and had a positive reaction ?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am trying to make sense of this post.
> Admittedly it is a struggle.
> If you are discussing the nature of questions and then read back, you may notice that my replies have been direct and straightforward however much the questions directed towards me may have been insinuating something else.


tidied the post up so a re-read will make more sense

You take umbrage at a question- a question you now see insinuation in. You are offended by the question- deny all you like, you posted as much yourself. But your own questions, carrying far larger a load of assumptions, are to be taken as simple questions. Merely because you phrased them so? this is hypocrisy. In any case Butchersaprons question wasn't meant in seriousness at all but simply to point out that 'only asking a question' doesn't wash here. If you object to the saville question then others are free to read what they do into your innocent questions aren't they?

Thats what butchers was pointing out by asking you the saville question. A massive hypocrisy


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> My ballot paper was less specific than yours as regards the spacing of the gun nests but considering your standard modern machine gun commands a range of much more than twenty yards, and considering they would presumably be installed so as to give a 180 degree field of fire, I would suggest that you're proposing a somewhat over-engineered and over-manned solution to this problem.
> 
> I mean, you'd be looking at 27,280 gun nests. 27,281 actually, assuming you want one at either end of your fence. Then two men per nest, three shifts per day, that's over 163,000 soldiers needed to man the border. We could add in reserves and personnel at border crossing points but there's really no point when we've already got a number greater than the entire strength of the UK regular armed forces.


Would that eat up the £350 million per week the brexiters promised the NHS?


----------



## sealion (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'some of my best friends are black'


Don't misquote me
#5383


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Would that eat up the £350 million per week the brexiters promised the NHS?



With this level of whip-smart, up-to-the-minute satire you could get a job as writer on the Now Show.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I live in Lewisham in South East London, if you are suggesting that you would like to come and see me and hit me over the head say so. Would it be too far for you to travel?


If I was suggesting that believe me I'd be suggesting that. It wouldn't be too far for me to travel. But south if the river at this time of night? You're having a laugh.


----------



## David Clapson (Mar 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Rees-Mogg has his own thread and in any case you'd struggle to find anyone around here who wasn't already aware he was a nasty and potentially very dangerous character.



I feel he belongs in this thread because, along with higher food prices and job losses, his premiership is one of the very real risks of the Brexit vote. Brexiteers need to think about that. I would hope that the prospect of Rees-Mogg having power over us all would make more people change their minds and push for a 2nd ref.

Had it not been for the Brexit win, Rees-Mogg would just be a backbencher. This is what people mean when they say that the referendum enabled Tory ultras to hold the country hostage. For everyone's sake we need these egomaniacs to return to backbench obscurity.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Have you ever accused someone of being racist right off the bat and had a positive reaction ?


Is this question relevant? I didn't accuse somebody of racism right off the bat, read back we have been over this ground. Others say my post insinuated racism (and ignorance) but subsequent posts regarding Ireland might help you to understand why I enquired, even insinuated if you like, that brexit voters may well have been strongly motivated by anti Irish racism.
If that enquiry is off the agenda here (which it seems to be) then my suspicion in thinking brexit voters were motivated by racism is strengthened.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 4, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> I feel he belongs in this thread because, along with higher food prices and job losses, his premiership is one of the very real risks of the Brexit vote. Brexiteers need to think about that. I would hope that the prospect of Rees-Mogg having power over us all would make more people change their minds and push for a 2nd ref.
> 
> Had it not been for the Brexit win, Rees-Mogg would just be a backbencher. This is what people mean when they say that the referendum enabled Tory ultras to hold the country hostage. For everyone's sake we need these egomaniacs to return to backbench obscurity.



He is still just a backbencher, if you hate him so much stop talking him up ffs.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> tidied the post up so a re-read will make more sense
> 
> You take umbrage at a question- a question you now see insinuation in. You are offended by the question- deny all you like, you posted as much yourself. But your own questions, carrying far larger a load of assumptions, are to be taken as simple questions. Merely because you phrased them so? this is hypocrisy. In any case Butchersaprons question wasn't meant in seriousness at all but simply to point out that 'only asking a question' doesn't wash here. If you object to the saville question then others are free to read what they do into your innocent questions aren't they?
> 
> Thats what butchers was pointing out by asking you the saville question. A massive hypocrisy


Nice try, but butchersapron, and yourself wanted to wrap up your responses by going on about manners or 'politeness' yet at the earliest opportunity both of you start spraying around the judgements and insults. That is the hypocrisy, and I fully understand if that suggestion doesn't sit well with you and your mates.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If I was suggesting that believe me I'd be suggesting that. It wouldn't be too far for me to travel. But south if the river at this time of night? You're having a laugh.


If you weren't suggesting hitting me in the head yourself, were you suggesting it would happen by proxy, you would encourage something or somebody to do something you would like to have happen without your stir?
So what were you suggesting then? If you want to come to see me and physically attack me then you might try, you might even become a youtube star.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Nice try, but butchersapron, and yourself wanted to wrap up your responses by going on about manners or 'politeness' yet at the earliest opportunity both of you start spraying around the judgements and insults. That is the hypocrisy, and I fully understand if that suggestion doesn't sit well with you and your mates.



you still don't get how I was talking about politeness do you? never mind.

You do get the hypocrisy of your own position though, that much is clear. The protestations grow ever more shrill. And still you won't have the common fucking courtesy to read back on the thread to get an idea of what the conversation is and where people are coming from. 

I know you are in defensive mode now and will give it 'this all proves I am right' etc etc.  Carry on.


----------



## David Clapson (Mar 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> He is still just a backbencher, if you hate him so much stop talking him up ffs.


Weeping dicks.  He's a backbencher who is the bookie's favourite for next Prime Minister. If I post about him here I doubt it affects his chances.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If you weren't suggesting hitting me in the head yourself, were you suggesting it would happen by proxy, you would encourage something or somebody to do something you would like to have happen without your stir?
> So what were you suggesting then? If you want to come to see me and physically attack me then you might try, you might even become a youtube star.


I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I was simply saying there are other ways to get your brains addled than by being kicked by a horse. Your brains appear already to have been addled, and further addling likely superfluous.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> Weeping dicks.  He's a backbencher who is the bookie's favourite for next Prime Minister. If I post about him here I doubt it affects his chances.



It's like none of P&P posters have ever heard of him or knows what he's like.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

sealion said:


> Don't misquote me
> #5383


You asked if people who are black and asian that voted brexit could be racist, and you said you knew people who had. I haven't a clue if you were trying to make some kind of point beyond a rather weak attempt to strive for some kind of moral high ground.
To answer your point again, yes black and Asian people could well have been motivated to vote brexit because they are racist, being in an ethnic minority voting brexit does not automatically mean said person voted for other reasons.
I am sorry to repeat this, but yes, raising the Black and Asian point did come across to me as the rather poor 'some of my best friends are black' trope, it reminded me of the kind of thing David Cameron might have said.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I wasn't suggesting anything of the sort. I was simply saying there are other ways to get your brains addled than by being kicked by a horse. Your brains appear already to have been addled, and further addling likely superfluous.


You are mistaken in your belief. When you said 'other whacks are available' I assumed you were threatening being Bertie Big Bollocks yourself, so 'available' is the key word here, not that there are 'other ways'.
Don't you fancy youtube fame then?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am sorry to repeat this, but yes, raising the Black and Asian point did come across to me


and yet all the 'points' raised in your 'provoking' questions are to be taken at face value, there is nothing there to see. They are simply questions.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> you still don't get how I was talking about politeness do you? never mind.
> 
> You do get the hypocrisy of your own position though, that much is clear. The protestations grow ever more shrill. And still you won't have the common fucking courtesy to read back on the thread to get an idea of what the conversation is and where people are coming from.
> 
> I know you are in defensive mode now and will give it 'this all proves I am right' etc etc.  Carry on.


I am not at all in defensive mode, despite your apparent mind reading qualities. That you think I am shrill is a fair enought judgement for you to make, I can detect how much you like sitting in judgement, but unsurprisingly I disagree with you. How exactly were you talking about politeness then? When you told me to 'fuck off'?
I am afraid that a lecture on common courtesy coming from a person who demonstrates the hypocrisy your posts demonstrate is rather unconvincing. Mind you it helps me to understand where you are 'coming from'.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> and yet all the 'points' raised in your 'provoking' questions are to be taken at face value, there is nothing there to see. They are simply questions.


You might be clearer if you posted some examples.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not at all in defensive mode


of course not. Perish the thought.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> of course not. Perish the thought.



Wow.
Are you the Archbishop of Banterbury or something?

Given the florid nature and textual diarrhoea of your first post replying to me I thing you could be a bit more creative.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Wow.
> Are you the Archbishop of Banterbury or something?
> 
> Given the florid nature and textual diarrhoea of your first post replying to me I thing you could be a bit more creative.


you thing do you? Well thangyew, thangyew very much.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> you thing do you? Well thangyew, thangyew very much.


Apologies for my typo, I ought to have written 'think' and proof read what I wrote more carefully.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are mistaken in your belief. When you said 'other whacks are available' I assumed you were threatening being Bertie Big Bollocks yourself, so 'available' is the key word here, not that there are 'other ways'.
> Don't you fancy youtube fame then?


Jesus you're a twat


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Jesus you're a twat



He is coming across as a right bellend.

Perhaps after the inflammatory start to life on these boards outside Hipster FC he has been defined by his admittedly trolling approach to things?

So, philosophical, why does the fact that some people voted for the UK to leave the EU make you hate those people so much that in your dieing day you will spend time to hate them some more?

And for a bonus round, I voted leave, what do you suppose is my tenuous connection to Dulwich Hamlet?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Apologies for my typo, I ought to have written 'think' and proof read what I wrote more carefully.


#lastword


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Jesus you're a twat


Some people would regard that as blasphemy.
Personally I would say that your hints at violence towards me were especially twattish.
Are you going to follow your own suggestion up, or are you shy of being filmed?


----------



## Winot (Mar 4, 2018)

OK which of you Leavers invented philosophical to make us Remainers look bad?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Some people would regard that as blasphemy.
> Personally I would say that your hints at violence towards me were especially twattish.
> Are you going to follow your own suggestion up, or are you shy of being filmed?



Jesus, you _are a twat._


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 4, 2018)

there were no threats of violence bro'


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> there were no threats of violence bro'


There seemed to be an implied threat.  And some stuff was unacceptable (but apparently fine with some urbanites).

This is the worst I've seen.  The guy owned them and they were left slagging typos and name-calling, it was embarrassing.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He is coming across as a right bellend.
> 
> Perhaps after the inflammatory start to life on these boards outside Hipster FC he has been defined by his admittedly trolling approach to things?
> 
> ...



I am not a Dulwich Hamlet fan, and I have no idea regarding the significance of why it is being applied to me beyond their discussion being a route in to this forum. I was interested in why some capitalist bastards want to damage a community institution like Dulwich Hamlet with a property play. Perhaps the constant references to Dulwich Hamlet on here has some internal masonic significance but I wouldn't know.

The reason I hate you if you voted brexit, is because what you have achieved is condemning me to a future of Tory or Tory-lite rule, where at least within the EU there was some hope that the alt right and the nationalists could be held at bay by the EU as an institution.

The damage done by brexit voters is reflected in the Irish border issue (and the manifest fact that brexit voters don't or didn't give a toss about that) which wraps up nationalism which I hate, racism which I hate, ignorance which troubles me, and an astonishing distain for others. 

All achieved very neatly by a brexit vote.

I was born in 1953, and lived through the appalling terrorism visited on these lands and I fear a return to those days. I don't know how old you are yourself, but maybe you don't realise the risk to life you caused by your brexit vote, but if you do I have reason to hate you even more for wanton disregard.

It is all very well sloganising and posturing, and that may be a left wing trait, but as I attempted to ask in a round about way my very first post today, eventually the slogans and posturing has to come up against practical reality, and the way I see it, nobody who voted brexit (who declare they knew what they were voting for) is able to engage with that practical reality.

10% of me decided to post here today in the vague hope that somebody on these forums might offer some hope of a solution, but I was quickly disavowed of that hope by the bilious reaction of you and others.

So my stance is that just as your actions in voting brexit demonstrate what I take to be a direct hatred of me, I hate you right back.

The idea that Corbyns Labour offer some hope is dashed in my eyes because Labour hasn't come out against brexit. They are gung ho for it, going on about the 'will of the people'.  My last remaining hope is that individual parliamentary candidates can vote according to their personal consciences, and not be a robotic battalion voting according to party lines, and brexit can be halted.

I doubt that will happen, so amazingly and organically I find myself hating brexit voters like you even more than I hate Tories which disturbs me enoughh to keep me awake at night.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> This is the worst I've seen.  The guy owned them and they were left slagging typos and name-calling, it was embarrassing.



Do you live in a parallel universe or are you just a contrarian?!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> there were no threats of violence bro'


Really, are you sure?
Not that I am in any way afraid, a bit of sweaty passion might be what is called for.
However in my view the blow to the head references were a threat of violence and I invite that poster to try to follow up what they said.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not a Dulwich Hamlet fan, and I have no idea regarding the significance of why it is being applied to me beyond their discussion being a route in to this forum. I was interested in why some capitalist bastards want to damage a community institution like Dulwich Hamlet with a property play. Perhaps the constant references to Dulwich Hamlet on here has some internal masonic significance but I wouldn't know.
> 
> The reason I hate you if you voted brexit, is because what you have achieved is condemning me to a future of Tory or Tory-lite rule, where at least within the EU there was some hope that the alt right and the nationalists could be held at bay by the EU as an institution.
> 
> ...


_White tears_


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Some people would regard that as blasphemy.
> Personally I would say that your hints at violence towards me were especially twattish.
> Are you going to follow your own suggestion up, or are you shy of being filmed?


If I'd threatened violence I wouldn't have beaten round the bush, you cunt. Being as I haven't threatened or suggested violence it'll be tricky to follow up on these suggestions.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _White tears_



Have you got a second tune to go with your child sex abuser refrain?
When can I expect the full album?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not a Dulwich Hamlet fan, and I have no idea regarding the significance of why it is being applied to me beyond their discussion being a route in to this forum. I was interested in why some capitalist bastards want to damage a community institution like Dulwich Hamlet with a property play. Perhaps the constant references to Dulwich Hamlet on here has some internal masonic significance but I wouldn't know.
> 
> The reason I hate you if you voted brexit, is because what you have achieved is condemning me to a future of Tory or Tory-lite rule, where at least within the EU there was some hope that the alt right and the nationalists could be held at bay by the EU as an institution.
> 
> ...


Tl;dr


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Have you got a second tune to go with your child sex abuser refrain?
> When can I expect the full album?


I think the penny has well and truly dropped with you. But you cannot now bring yourself to admit that your unbelievably crude and sub-trump attempt at a form of apophasis in your opening posts could be dismantled and ridiculed simply by returning serve to you. And now you can't stop whining - a little surprising after such a robust entrance. But there you go, empty vessels and all that.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If I'd threatened violence I wouldn't have beaten round the bush, you cunt. Being as I haven't threatened or suggested violence it'll be tricky to follow up on these suggestions.


Your references to a person, me, being subject to blows to the head make you the cunt I'm afraid. It also adds up to a threat of violence. You even said you were holding back because you didn't want to travel south of the river.
You wish to give out the threats and insults directly to me hidden away behind your keyboard, calling me a cunt and all, but you are reluctant to turn that threat of violence into a reality.
I understand why, if you felt sure you wouldn't be caught you might be able to follow it up, but of course being filmed and put on youtube following up your threats has made you backtrack.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Tl;dr


Wow, you have to be a mason or something to follow the code.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

I bet this prat laughed at that tory squawking that _questions have been raised _to andrew neill too - not realising he was laughing at his own MO.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I think the penny has well and truly dropped with you. But you cannot now bring yourself to admit that your unbelievably crude and sub-trump attempt at a form of apophasis in your opening posts could be dismantled and ridiculed simply by returning serve to you. And now you can't stop whining - a little surprising after such a robust entrance. But there you go, empty vessels and all that.


You really don't know when to let it drop do you? You want to lecture me about unbelievable crudeness whilst at the same time asking if I am a child sex abuser. You have had ample opportunity to explain if that particular post is some oh so subtle code for something or other, and doesn't mean what I have taken it to mean, but you have backed away from justifying you own words.
You might call me an empty vessel, which I something i welcome because you sense my noise, but your own particular rancid contributions lack both noise and substance beyond showing you up for the weasel you appear to be.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Do you live in a parallel universe or are you just a contrarian?!


Certainly not.  I could as well say that you must be reading a different thread.  Look at what you are justifying otherwise.

Maybe we could get back to discussing brexit.  

May said last year there would be no border, she's just broken that promise because of fanatic tory right-wingers and internal party fighting.


----------



## Smangus (Mar 4, 2018)

This is all very entertaining  Urban circa 2001 ish.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not a Dulwich Hamlet fan, and I have no idea regarding the significance of why it is being applied to me beyond their discussion being a route in to this forum. I was interested in why some capitalist bastards want to damage a community institution like Dulwich Hamlet with a property play. Perhaps the constant references to Dulwich Hamlet on here has some internal masonic significance but I wouldn't know.
> 
> The reason I hate you if you voted brexit, is because what you have achieved is condemning me to a future of Tory or Tory-lite rule, where at least within the EU there was some hope that the alt right and the nationalists could be held at bay by the EU as an institution.
> 
> ...




Fuck sakes. After your ill-judged, admitted trolling intro I was offering you a forum to start again, and you state that you hate me.

I voted leave. For some reason that act, in your mind makes me racist. Would you care to explain why you deem me racist?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You really don't know when to let it drop do you?



Is that a threat? Help me dexter.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck sakes. After your ill-judged, admitted trolling intro I was offering you a forum to start again, and you state that you hate me.
> 
> I voted leave. For some reason that act, in your mind makes me racist. Would you care to explain why you deem me racist?


I think you are racist because you can't offer an alternative explanation as to why you voted in a manner that is anti Irish.
If my effort at a long and reasoned explanation isn't good enough, that one will have to do.
However why don't you rejoice in your victory, you have no cause to seek any approval from me?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think you are racist


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Is that a threat? Help me dexter.



I will try to help understanding by posting the whole of what I wrote, then you might begin to ascertain if it is a threat or not.

'You really don't know when to let it drop do you? You want to lecture me about unbelievable crudeness whilst at the same time asking if I am a child sex abuser. You have had ample opportunity to explain if that particular post is some oh so subtle code for something or other, and doesn't mean what I have taken it to mean, but you have backed away from justifying you own words.
You might call me an empty vessel, which I something i welcome because you sense my noise, but your own particular rancid contributions lack both noise and substance beyond showing you up for the weasel you appear to be.'


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

God, wait till he sees Irish people in Ireland who are anti-eu.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Banhof Strasse your selective quoting is not working for me.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think you are racist because you can't offer an alternative explanation as to why you voted in a manner that is anti Irish.



This will blow your mind then...
People Before Profit Alliance - Wikipedia


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think you are racist because you can't offer an alternative explanation as to why you voted in a manner that is anti Irish.
> If my effort at a long and reasoned explanation isn't good enough, that one will have to do.
> However why don't you rejoice in your victory, you have no cause to seek any approval from me?



It may blow your feeble mind to learn than the number of people who voted leave to fuck over the Irish is around none. That really is one of the most dickish positions that has ever been mooted here.

Born 1953, 9 years younger than my dad, how have you managed to live live so many years with so little awareness of who and what is around you?



ETA, I have quoted all your drivel there, hth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your references to a person, me, being subject to blows to the head make you the cunt I'm afraid. It also adds up to a threat of violence. You even said you were holding back because you didn't want to travel south of the river.
> You wish to give out the threats and insults directly to me hidden away behind your keyboard, calling me a cunt and all, but you are reluctant to turn that threat of violence into a reality.
> I understand why, if you felt sure you wouldn't be caught you might be able to follow it up, but of course being filmed and put on youtube following up your threats has made you backtrack.


I haven't backtracked because I haven't made any threats. There is nothing to backtrack from. You say you're from south London. But you don't recognise 'south London at this time of night? You're having a laugh' as being a joke, a bit of humour. You're a sour cunt, that's for sure, and with a strange inability to understand our fair language, seeing threats where none in fact exist. I'd say have a good sleep but you'd likely interpret that as a threat too.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> These lot will blow your mind then...
> People Before Profit Alliance - Wikipedia


I have just looked at this People Before Profit stuff, but can't see anything about the practical solutions to the Irish border or the significance of the Belfast agreement.
Perhaps you would be good enough to post a link to the practical post brexit solutions to the border issue that the People Before Profit Alliance propose.


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You hope for something better while the chance is there, I see those who voted brexit as imprisoning me in this UK system of 'fuck off and die' Toryism forever.
> Seeing as how you are hoping for something better, perhaps you might like to explain the practical steps you would now take (seeing as how you won) to solve the Irish border issue.



I note that no one has responded to your request for their views on the Irish border issue, even after several requests.

As long as all posters refuse to painstakingly review all their previous posts on this thread and repost the relevant ones for philosophical's consideration, they are imprisoning him in a system of "having to read posts made before his first one to understand the debate so far" Toryism forever. 

For shame, Urban.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I will try to help understanding by posting the whole of what I wrote, then you might begin to ascertain if it is a threat or not.
> 
> 'You really don't know when to let it drop do you? You want to lecture me about unbelievable crudeness whilst at the same time asking if I am a child sex abuser. You have had ample opportunity to explain if that particular post is some oh so subtle code for something or other, and doesn't mean what I have taken it to mean, but you have backed away from justifying you own words.
> You might call me an empty vessel, which I something i welcome because you sense my noise, but your own particular rancid contributions lack both noise and substance beyond showing you up for the weasel you appear to be.'



He did not ask if you are a child sex abuser.

Just how fucking stupid are you?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It may blow your feeble mind to learn than the number of people who voted leave to fuck over the Irish is around none. That really is one of the most dickish positions that has ever been mooted here.
> 
> Born 1953, 9 years younger than my dad, how have you managed to live live so many years with so little awareness of who and what is around you?
> 
> ...



The consequence of voting brexit is to fuck over the Irish. Whatever motivated people can be guessed at, I am guessing that they did it because of anti Irish racism.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The consequence of voting brexit is to fuck over the Irish. Whatever motivated people can be guessed at, I am guessing that they did it because of anti Irish racism.



The consequence of me farting after a lamb bhuna is a butterfly in the Amazon has its flight disrupted, don’t mean I set out to disrupt the butterfly’s flight when I went for a curry.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 4, 2018)

theres plenty of discussion on the thread as to why people on the board have a take on brexit- nearly 200 pages- have a trawl and see if you can work out the reasoning of those who support it as a mechnaism for change - its not all baseless shouty toss and death threats you know. I dont think you have anything to worry about kicking wise.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I haven't backtracked because I haven't made any threats. There is nothing to backtrack from. You say you're from south London. But you don't recognise 'south London at this time of night? You're having a laugh' as being a joke, a bit of humour. You're a sour cunt, that's for sure, and with a strange inability to understand our fair language, seeing threats where none in fact exist. I'd say have a good sleep but you'd likely interpret that as a threat too.



Oh the 'South London at this time of night' is supposed to be some kind of taxi drivers humour reference is it. Not your middle class hang up stereotyping of those of us who live here. i understand language about as well as most people, but am more careful certainly than you are when using it.
Remember it was you who suggested there were alternative ways to get a blow to the head beyond being kicked by a horse. A grenade you chucked out there, and now your precious 'norf ov ver rivver' sensibilities want to deny that there are consequences to your words. I may indeed be a sour cunt, but you are a bigger cunt by suggesting that physical violence would be an appropriate thing to happen to me.
Sleep well yourself, and dream about using language with a little more care.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

MrSpikey said:


> I note that no one has responded to your request for their views on the Irish border issue, even after several requests.
> 
> As long as all posters refuse to painstakingly review all their previous posts on this thread and repost the relevant ones for philosophical's consideration, they are imprisoning him in a system of "having to read posts made before his first one to understand the debate so far" Toryism forever.
> 
> For shame, Urban.


I am invited to go back to June 2016, and read over 170 pages of this thread before posters on here think I can qualify and be allowed to express myself without being the subject of abuse.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

Interesting logic. You - understandably -  don't want to read anything and have reached the conclusion that the only way to achieve this is _to not read anything._


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He did not ask if you are a child sex abuser.
> 
> Just how fucking stupid are you?


Go on then, explain what was meant by asking if I worshipped (or admired I forget which) saville and if I was a paedo. There have been loads of opportunities to explain to me that reference, I have repeated several times that it was in effect an offensive thing to write, but explanations come there none.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The consequence of voting brexit is to fuck over the Irish. Whatever motivated people can be guessed at, I am guessing that they did it because of anti Irish racism.


Perhaps you should have had a word in the ear of the Irish socialists People Before Profit about their 'anti Irish' brexit call then.


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am invited to go back to June 2016, and read over 170 pages of this thread before posters on here think I can qualify and be allowed to express myself without being the subject of abuse.


I would think reading previous posts, or perhaps using the search function, would allow you to see opinions related to the subject you are interested in.

Do you think taking the attitude of "Right, I'm here now, but can't be bothered to catch up on the thread. Everybody please restate your opinions so I can catch up" demonstrates the respect and politeness you seem so keen on?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The consequence of me farting after a lamb bhuna is a butterfly in the Amazon has its flight disrupted, don’t mean I set out to disrupt the butterfly’s flight when I went for a curry.


Your intentions are irrelevant after the act, the consequences remain.
No brexiter can provide a practical solution to the Irish border problem, however superior and fancy with words they like to look on this thread.
They voted for it, now they need to solve it. However it is a good distraction to spend the best part of the day digging me out because it covers for the vacuum in their thinking, and distances them from responsibility.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Go on then, explain what was meant by asking if I worshipped (or admired I forget which) saville and if I was a paedo.



He was parodying your first post on this thread.


You fik cunt.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Interesting logic. You - understandably -  don't want to read anything and have reached the conclusion that the only way to achieve this is _to not read anything._


No. I read the link provided to the People Before Profit Alliance and made a comment. Is that what you mean by not reading anything?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your intentions are irrelevant after the act, the consequences remain.
> No brexiter can provide a practical solution to the Irish border problem, however superior and fancy with words they like to look on this thread.
> They voted for it, now they need to solve it. However it is a good distraction to spend the best part of the day digging me out because it covers for the vacuum in their thinking, and distances them from responsibility.



Born 1953; so any mother/father/aunt/uncle is responsible for the holocaust cos they bought a Carl Zeiss lens in 1935? What an utter shitcunt you are, people more perceptive than me told you to fuck off ages ago, they were right. Scum.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No. I read the link provided to the People Before Profit Alliance and made a comment. Is that what you mean by not reading anything?


No, it's not. I meany any substantial reading of debate before your _i'm here now!_ entrance.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

MrSpikey said:


> I would think reading previous posts, or perhaps using the search function, would allow you to see opinions related to the subject you are interested in.
> 
> Do you think taking the attitude of "Right, I'm here now, but can't be bothered to catch up on the thread. Everybody please restate your opinions so I can catch up" demonstrates the respect and politeness you seem so keen on?


If that is what I have done you may have a point, I have not asked anybody to either state or restate their opinions. I am only discovering little by little who voted brexit. You might like to read back to who started the mantra about respect and politeness, it wasn't me, but one of the hypocrites who promptly told me to fuck off.
If you don't wish to read back that is OK by me by the way.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 4, 2018)

Speed of this thread all of a sudden is amazing. Seems like what we all really love about Brexit is the chance to call people we've never met names.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He was parodying your first post on this thread.
> 
> 
> You fik cunt.


In my first post I made no reference at all to child sexual abuse, if you think that such a reference is some kind of obscure appropriate 'parody' on a brexit thread then it is you who are the thick cunt, as you have been demonstrating regularly on this thread today.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Another great poster bought to you by the Dulwich Hamlet forum.



Says who?!?!?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

Oh god.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Would it surprise anyone here to learn that this poster also came here via the dulwich hamlet forum?



It would surprise me.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 4, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Speed of this thread all of a sudden is amazing. Seems like what we all really love about Brexit is the chance to call people we've never met names.



Like philosophical assuming anyone who votes leave is a thicko racist, without ever meeting us, you mean?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> No, it's not. I meany any substantial reading of debate before your _i'm here now!_ entrance.


You said 'not reading anything' even putting it in italics in some kind of lame effort to emphasise your point. Now it turns out that I have at least read _something but _what I have read isn't good enough for you. What are you going to do, give me a reading list then set a test to see if I qualify to post?


----------



## MrSpikey (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If that is what I have done you may have a point, I have not asked anybody to either state or restate their opinions.



Really?



philosophical said:


> Take my opening post, nobody so far has responded to the challenge regarding the Irish border



That does seem like you are asking people to state their opinions. Or, in many cases, restate them, as they have already been covered earlier in the thread.



philosophical said:


> You might like to read back to who started the mantra about respect and politeness, it wasn't me, but one of the hypocrites who promptly told me to fuck off.



So you don't care about respect or honesty then? Fair enough.



philosophical said:


> If you don't wish to read back that is OK by me by the way.



No shit.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Born 1953; so any mother/father/aunt/uncle is responsible for the holocaust cos they bought a Carl Zeiss lens in 1935? What an utter shitcunt you are, people more perceptive than me told you to fuck off ages ago, they were right. Scum.


Is that the best you can come up with? You are right to say there are people more perceptive than you, and more articulate too. You are reduced to rather cliched abuse 'utter shitcunt', with a bit of effort you can do better than that surely?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You said 'not reading anything' even putting it in italics in some kind of lame effort to emphasise your point. Now it turns out that I have at least read _something but _what I have read isn't good enough for you. What are you going to do, give me a reading list then set a test to see if I qualify to post?


Given that you were replying to a post about not reading the previous posts on this thread (or, it seems any of the other long running ones on this issue) I think it's pretty clear what I was referring to you not reading. And the mad logic that led you to your inaction and defence of such self willed ignorance.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Like philosophical assuming anyone who votes leave is a thicko racist, without ever meeting us, you mean?



Yeah, f'rexample.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Like philosophical assuming anyone who votes leave is a thicko racist, without ever meeting us, you mean?


but that didn't include a swearword and had a question mark, so under the terms of _politeness_, no injury was done.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Like philosophical assuming anyone who votes leave is a thicko racist, without ever meeting us, you mean?


Why don't you change tack and suggest a solution to the Irish border problem? Move the discussion on as it were.
No I have never met you, but if I had the misfortune to meet you, and discover you have voted brexit, then our encounter wouldn't last long that's for sure.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In my first post I made no reference at all to child sexual abuse, if you think that such a reference is some kind of obscure appropriate 'parody' on a brexit thread then it is you who are the thick cunt, as you have been demonstrating regularly on this thread today.



He was asking if you were a nonce cos you claim that when you called all Brexit voters racist it was not a statement but a question, so he asked a question back to you.

You are a massive wanker though, given multiple opportunities to engage but don’t. So fuck you. And if as you claim me putting a cross in the leave box will be the last thing that goes through your mind before your die; good.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 4, 2018)

I reckon it't a bot or a simple AI. But even if it's not those it's pretty much a troll.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> then our encounter wouldn't last long that's for sure.


threats of violence!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He was asking if you were a nonce cos you claim that when you called all Brexit voters racist it was not a statement but a question, so he asked a question back to you.
> 
> You are a massive wanker though, given multiple opportunities to engage but don’t. So fuck you. And if as you claim me putting a cross in the leave box will be the last thing that goes through your mind before your die; good.



What does nonce mean? A child sex abuser? 
I didn't claim that any thought of you would be the last thing that goes through my head before I die, what I said is that I would hate brexit voters like you until the day I die. I don't know you beyond you being a brexit voter and florid with your abuse, which is no surprise coming from a brexit voter actually. 
I can only speak for myself of course, but I suspect there may be others that hate you too for what you have done, but rejoice, you won, now face the practical consequence of your cross in the leave box.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Given that you were replying to a post about not reading the previous posts on this thread (or, it seems any of the other long running ones on this issue) I think it's pretty clear what I was referring to you not reading. And the mad logic that led you to your inaction and defence of such self willed ignorance.


You may think you were clear, is that why you emphasised your point with italics?
It looks to me like you are ignorant.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> threats of violence!


No I would extricate myself from the meeting. There might be a low risk of contamination.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I would extricate myself from the meeting. There might be a low risk of contamination.


I think its quite clear that you were implying more than that. Your abuse has escalated to veiled threats. For shame.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I think its quite clear that you were implying more than that. Your abuse has escalated to veiled threats. For shame.


You may think that but you are wrong.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may think that but you are wrong.


thats steph and pickmans you've offered out now. Really a bad show.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 4, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thats steph and pickmans you've offered out now. Really a bad show.


You are wrong, but keep posting away if it makes you happy. Your lame attempts at trying to turn tables in some way, or use irony might get you approval from your mates and keep them happy too.
My last word today is that I at least wont have to live the rest of my lifetime knowing I voted brexit, but many of you will.
Rejoice in your victory, but maybe you could hone the abuse towards other posters a bit, because a lot of what the people on here have written is frankly very dreary.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> last word


#lastword


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My last word today is that I at least wont have to live the rest of my lifetime knowing I voted brexit


It's the least of your worries after tonights performance.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Today's "intervention" has provided a perhaps convenient distraction from where the discussion about the irish border stuff had got to yesterday, which was something like "but can't we just not have any import tariffs at all".


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

You win then. Happy days.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 5, 2018)

This came out from an academic at Queen's University Belfast today.


----------



## Riklet (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Britain has caused Ireland enough problems over the years. It doesn't seem very neighbourly.
> 
> I don't see how it's at all plausible that the EU could accept an open border between the UK and Eire. Saying it's up to the EU or Eire is not any different in effect to the UK saying "we're going to create a hard border with Ireland".



Since you've mentioned our discussion was going somewhere....

I would say leaving it up to the EU is precisely the right move. Let the Irish government and EU build a border if they want one - and show their true colours.

Since when has the British state been neighbourly anyway? And even assuming we had a progressive government then yes, they would need to playhardball with Irelands pro-EU centre-right new leader. Greece tried playing nice while negotiating with the EU and look how that went.

Neighbourly is ensuring a decent future for Ireland. What future is there when/if another Eurozone or global recession takes place and Ireland gets shafted again with another forced bailout?

I feel like your arguments assume a constant - that had remain won things would have stayed hunky dorey in Europe, Ireland, Britain etc. The same issues would be going on. There would still be dissident republicans and risks of violence and the island of Ireland would still be divided and at the mercy of bigger more powerful forces in Brussels. Possibly even more than it is currently. The EU has backed down from hardballing Spain and Italy since the Brexit vote, I know that for a fact. For them, now is the time to win liberal hearts and minds, not business as usual. But no good PR campaign is carried out just for its own sake or for meaningless popularity.

As it stands, the EU seems fully prepared to sacrifice Ireland on the altar if it means a tough hand against Britain. Whose interests are being considered by these A-E narrow options which are the only ones on the table, apparently.  

Anyway, what do _you_ think will be the implications of right of all norn Ireland peeps to have Irish passports? What do you see happening in Ireland?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Oh the 'South London at this time of night' is supposed to be some kind of taxi drivers humour reference is it. Not your middle class hang up stereotyping of those of us who live here. i understand language about as well as most people, but am more careful certainly than you are when using it.
> Remember it was you who suggested there were alternative ways to get a blow to the head beyond being kicked by a horse. A grenade you chucked out there, and now your precious 'norf ov ver rivver' sensibilities want to deny that there are consequences to your words. I may indeed be a sour cunt, but you are a bigger cunt by suggesting that physical violence would be an appropriate thing to happen to me.
> Sleep well yourself, and dream about using language with a little more care.


Yeh. You seem to be alone in discerning any suggestion of a semblance of a threat of violence. I've said none was intended. You're calling me a liar. You can fuck off. 

As is well known this is a south London based board. Yet no one else including those from south london  is taking your side as no one agrees with you

Perhaps you might find other Internet sites more to your taste


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Since you've mentioned our discussion was going somewhere....
> 
> I would say leaving it up to the EU is precisely the right move. Let the Irish government and EU build a border if they want one - and show their true colours.
> 
> ...


The British state has always been neighbourly

In a neighbours from hell way


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Like philosophical assuming anyone who votes leave is a thicko racist, without ever meeting us, you mean?


Not to mention 52% of the population hating him, which is suggestive of a degree of paranoia


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have just looked at this People Before Profit stuff, but can't see anything about the practical solutions to the Irish border or the significance of the Belfast agreement.
> Perhaps you would be good enough to post a link to the practical post brexit solutions to the border issue that the People Before Profit Alliance propose.


I note Irish republicans have proposed a solution to the national question for many decades, yet you show no interest in that. Why?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I would extricate myself from the meeting. There might be a low risk of contamination.


Yeh but people might still catch something from you


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My last word today is that I at least wont have to live the rest of my lifetime knowing I voted brexit, but many of you will.


Yeh. So?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

"_What are you doing on that bloody computer darling, come to bed. You've not even spoken to your son all evening".

"Just having the last word now, there's loads of them. I've definitely won this though."_


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> "_What are you doing on that bloody computer darling, come to bed. You've not even spoken to your son all evening".
> 
> "Just having the last word now, there's loads of them. I've definitely won this though."_


I can imagine yer man saying that. First in one higher pitched voice, then in his normal tone.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Today's "intervention" has provided a perhaps convenient distraction from where the discussion about the irish border stuff had got to yesterday, which was something like "but can't we just not have any import tariffs at all".


And more welcoming, a distraction from your smug, dishonest sneering.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> And more welcoming, a distraction from your smug, dishonest sneering.


With his fascination with locked doors teuchter could become a customs official


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Today's "intervention" has provided a perhaps convenient distraction from where the discussion about the irish border stuff had got to yesterday, which was something like "but can't we just not have any import tariffs at all".


"Which was something like".... You're twisting peoples words again. You really cant help yourself can you.. Its a rhetorical style that only causes trouble and gets in the way of any informative, progressive discussions.
Give it a rest ffs


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> "Which was something like".... You're twisting peoples words again. You really cant help yourself can you.. Its a rhetorical style that only causes trouble and gets in the way of any informative, progressive discussions.
> Give it a rest ffs


Giving it a rest would mean his ceasing posting as it's core to his posts


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Since you've mentioned our discussion was going somewhere....
> 
> I would say leaving it up to the EU is precisely the right move. Let the Irish government and EU build a border if they want one - and show their true colours.
> 
> ...


You are missing out a lot. It is the UK that voted brexit to regain control of its borders not the Irish or the EU. Or maybe you think it wasn't about 'taking back control'.
Now you suggest the UK abandons that aspect of brexit. To me you are suggesting avoiding responsibility for the brexit vote and it's consequences.
It is typical of brexit voters to run away from the difficulties they have caused, it is the UK showing it's 'true colours'.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

It's your beloved EU that is making the demands that a hard border will have to exist if outside of the SM/CU.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. You seem to be alone in discerning any suggestion of a semblance of a threat of violence. I've said none was intended. You're calling me a liar. You can fuck off.
> 
> As is well known this is a south London based board. Yet no one else including those from south london  is taking your side as no one agrees with you
> 
> Perhaps you might find other Internet sites more to your taste


You speak for everyone do you?
Prove it.
Your embarrassment at suggesting a violent head injury is understandable I suppose, as is your desire for control and censorship, but reflect. I didn't suggest you received blows to the head, but you suggested I should.
So fuck off yourself, and stop trying to excuse your propensity towards violence by turning it into a rant against me. Look in the mirror.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not to mention 52% of the population hating him, which is suggestive of a degree of paranoia


You are right. I am paranoid about the 52% of people who voted brexit, shocked too that there are so many in this country who want to do such wanton damage.


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> It's your beloved EU that is making the demands that a hard border will have to exist if outside of the SM/CU.



WTO actually.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I note Irish republicans have proposed a solution to the national question for many decades, yet you show no interest in that. Why?


You are interested in why?
Irish republicans have proposed united Ireland, a victory for nationalism. I see nationalism as akin to fascism and would prefer no borders anywhere.
Brexit voters who use the term 'we' when talking about the UK don't speak for me and some others as part of that 'we', they speak for the vile UK nationalists who reenforced that nationalism by voting brexit.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are right. I am paranoid about the 52% of people who voted brexit, shocked too that there are so many in this country who want to do such wanton damage.



I didn't like it either, initially, but the people have spoken. Why go against the democratic wishes of the electorate?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. So?


Rejoice in your victory. The UK is yours. Have a party with your mate Boris.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I didn't like it either, initially, but the people have spoken. Why go against the democratic wishes of the electorate?


Because the electorate don't know how to do it, so shift responsibility to the Tories to do it for them, and the Tories are experts at self serving exploitation for their own ends.
The nature of what constitutes democratic is questionable anyway. 16 and 17 year old people were not able to participate in that so called democratic exercise.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see nationalism as akin to fascism and would prefer no borders anywhere.


I do love a good “reckon” in the morning.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I can imagine yer man saying that. First in one higher pitched voice, then in his normal tone.





stethoscope said:


> It's your beloved EU that is making the demands that a hard border will have to exist if outside of the SM/CU.


No it is your beloved brexit voters who want to take back control.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You speak for everyone do you?
> Prove it.
> Your embarrassment at suggesting a violent head injury is understandable I suppose, as is your desire for control and censorship, but reflect. I didn't suggest you received blows to the head, but you suggested I should.
> So fuck off yourself, and stop trying to excuse your propensity towards violence by turning it into a rant against me. Look in the mirror.


I don't speak for everyone but no one speaks for you. I didn't suggest you should receive blows to the head but don't just take my word for it, revisit the posts you've so signally misunderstood.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Rejoice in your victory. The UK is yours. Have a party with your mate Boris.


You clueless cunt.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> WTO actually.


The only person I've seen say this is the outgoing head of the WTO, Lamy. Also a key architect of the SM under Delors. Of course he's going to make out its 'impossible', he wants to protect capitalist structures.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are interested in why?
> Irish republicans have proposed united Ireland, a victory for nationalism. I see nationalism as akin to fascism and would prefer no borders anywhere.
> Brexit voters who use the term 'we' when talking about the UK don't speak for me and some others as part of that 'we', they speak for the vile UK nationalists who reenforced that nationalism by voting brexit.


Yeh people struggling to end an oppressor's rule are fascistic. Is that what you made of other anti-colonial struggles? Here's a tip: try to make your opinions ones worth holding rather than ones which make you look a clueless twat.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't speak for everyone but no one speaks for you. I didn't suggest you should receive blows to the head but don't just take my word for it, revisit the posts you've so signally misunderstood.


I speak for me isn't that good enough for you? Does your control freakery disallow that, as you scour this board for support and deny your earlier threats?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No it is your beloved brexit voters who want to take back control.



You've got stuck on repeat already


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You clueless cunt.


Not at all, you can call me a cunt all you like (ironic as yesterday you spoke of our fair language), but if you voted brexit accept you are in bed with Boris and the rest. Have a nice cuddle.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> "Which was something like".... You're twisting peoples words again. You really cant help yourself can you.. Its a rhetorical style that only causes trouble and gets in the way of any informative, progressive discussions.
> Give it a rest ffs


At least he's stopped saying "hand wavy"


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh people struggling to end an oppressor's rule are fascistic. Is that what you made of other anti-colonial struggles? Here's a tip: try to make your opinions ones worth holding rather than ones which make you look a clueless twat.


Other anti colonial struggles were a fight against often violent oppression (something I imagine you know about given your own violent tendencies), not a struggle to establish fascistic nationalistic governments, which was the unintended consequence of those struggles very often.
The consequence of the brexit vote will be similar in my view, and reading some of the posts on here from Brexit voters I can see fascist authoritarianism arriving quite soon.
I am trying not to dress my posts with abuse as you tend to do, because I don't want you to feel flattered by imitation.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not at all, you can call me a cunt all you like (ironic as yesterday you spoke of our fair language), but if you voted brexit accept you are in bed with Boris and the rest. Have a nice cuddle.


Well, there was no "get rid of the Tories" option on the ballot. I don't vote Tory, I don't vote for the right wing migrant drowning EU. Yet those who voted for the latter have the moral high ground ? Fuck off.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh people struggling to end an oppressor's rule are fascistic. Is that what you made of other anti-colonial struggles? Here's a tip: try to make your opinions ones worth holding rather than ones which make you look a clueless twat.





HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well, there was no "get rid of the Tories" option on the ballot. I don't vote Tory, I don't vote for the right wing migrant drowning EU. Yet those who voted for the latter have the moral high ground ? Fuck off.


Is 'fuck off' the best you can do?
You voted brexit, and the consequence of that is to give confidence to the Tories. If that concerns you why did you do it?
The migrant drowning EU also contains Mediterranean countries struggling to help refugees, and Germany opened its doors to many others.
By voting brexit you and your mates are slamming the door in the face of refugees and migrants, and Boris and his mates are probably privately commenting on what mugs you are.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

We'll soon be reaching 'scratch a liberal, find a...' territory


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because the electorate don't know how to do it, so shift responsibility to the Tories to do it for them, and the Tories are experts at self serving exploitation for their own ends.
> The nature of what constitutes democratic is questionable anyway. 16 and 17 year old people were not able to participate in that so called democratic exercise.



The electorate don't know how to vote? Or they don't know what their own wishes are?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is 'fuck off' the best you can do?
> You voted brexit, and the consequence of that is to give confidence to the Tories.


Which is why they had a majority the day before the vote and don’t now.


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 5, 2018)

Philosophical for goodness' sake stop, this is making my toes curl.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> The electorate don't know how to vote? Or they don't know what their own wishes are?


I am sorry if I wasn't clear. The electorate don't know how to do brexit, how to make it happen if you like. They know how to vote, as for their individual wishes I imagine they are many and varied, but overall the consequence of their vote is to condemn me at least to an eternity of Tory or Tory-lite rule, and to whip up a hatred towards foreigners as my wife and son could testify. I wonder if brexit voters are concerned that their actions have led to the validation of racism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am trying not to dress my posts with abuse as you tend to do, because I don't want you to feel flattered by imitation.


yeh. you started abusing me, not the other way round: bertie big bollocks a term of endearment down your way? you really are the most clueless twat it's ever been my misfortune to happen across.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Philosophical for goodness' sake stop, this is making my toes curl.


A fan or censorship or persuasion?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is 'fuck off' the best you can do?
> You voted brexit, and the consequence of that is to give confidence to the Tories.


You mean the Tories that were supposedly in a commanding lead before the EU ref and were going to settle this division once and for all, whilst Labour were going to be 'destroyed for a generation'. And instead we now have Tory infighting at its worse, absolutely clueless what to do because Cameron's big head didn't plan for a leave vote, May hemorrhaging votes having ill-advisadly called an election, and a resurgent Labour led by Corbyn. Yes, confidence working out there for them


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 5, 2018)

More "oh God he really doesn't see how much of a fool he's making of himself, this is painful to watch".


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No it is your beloved brexit voters who want to take back control.


why do you quote me in this post?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I speak for me isn't that good enough for you? Does your control freakery disallow that, as you scour this board for support and deny your earlier threats?


i don't have to deny any threats as i have made no threats.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. you started the abuse: bertie big bollocks a term of endearment down your way? you really are the most clueless twat it's ever been my misfortune to happen across.


Look in the mirror then if you want an encounter with cluelessness.
My Bertie Big Bollocks retort was after your threat of violence towards me, not before. If you don't believe I have the right to defend myself against your attacks you are the clueless twat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Look in the mirror then if you want an encounter with cluelessness.
> My Bertie Big Bollocks retort was after your threat of violence towards me, not before. If you don't believe I have the right to defend myself against your attacks you are the clueless twat.


there has been no threat of violence. and i see now you're saying it's fine for you to abuse people but heaven forfend they respond in kind.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> the consequence of their vote is to condemn me at least to an eternity of Tory or Tory-lite rule


Have you actually been paying attention to anything since the referendum result?  Did the 2017 election completely bypass you?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't have to deny any threats as i have made no threats.


Yes you have, and this is now denial squared.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> A fan or censorship or persuasion?


it is a truth universally acknowledged that philosophical is a can short of a crate.

e2a: or is that pride and prejudice?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes you have, and this is now denial squared.


yeh. if you think there's been a threat of violence you should bring it to the attention of the board moderators, who i am sure will treat any report you care to make with the attention it deserves.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is 'fuck off' the best you can do?
> 
> Europe also contains working class people in  Mediterranean countries  struggling to help refugees, and  twat Angela Merkel opened Germany's doors to many others before slamming it the fuck shut again.
> By voting brexit you and your mates are slamming the door in the EU's face whilst hoping Greece will be next in line to do the same


I quite Agree!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You mean the Tories that were supposedly in a commanding lead before the EU ref and were going to settle this division once and for all, whilst Labour were going to be 'destroyed for a generation'. And instead we now have Tory infighting at its worse, absolutely clueless what to do because Cameron's big head didn't plan for a leave vote, May hemorrhaging votes having ill-advisadly called an election, and a resurgent Labour led by Corbyn. Yes, confidence working out there for them


I am not suggesting it is working out, indeed glad it seems to not be. However your brexit vote fuels their confidence as they go on about the 'will of the people', you people.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> why do you quote me in this post?


Which post? Maybe it is something about how this site works.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not suggesting it is working out, indeed glad it seems to not be. However your brexit vote fuels their confidence as they go on about the 'will of the people', you people.








narodnaya volya


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there has been no threat of violence. and i see now you're saying it's fine for you to abuse people but heaven forfend they respond in kind.


It is about the order of events. You attack and I defend.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Which post? Maybe it is something about how this site works.


this post


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it is a truth universally acknowledged that philosophical is a can short of a crate.
> 
> e2a: or is that pride and prejudice?


Universally acknowledged. Your craving for validation emerges again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It is about the order of events. You attack and I defend.


so your introduction of abuse into the exchange was purely defensive and, i suppose, intended to calm things down and prevent things you considered further attacks.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

Ooops, edited out "German twat" to just twat as it sounded I like I was using German as a slur, apols Germany.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not suggesting it is working out, indeed glad it seems to not be. However your brexit vote fuels their confidence as they go on about the 'will of the people', you people.


So the thing people inadvertently voted for, ie perpetual Toryism, has turned out to not be a thing they inadvertently voted for, because it hasn’t happened in line with the fact that they never actually intended it to happen?  Well, that’s a relief.  Or it was a bullshit assumption in the first place.  I always get those two mixed up.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am sorry if I wasn't clear. The electorate don't know how to do brexit, how to make it happen if you like. They know how to vote, as for their individual wishes I imagine they are many and varied, but overall the consequence of their vote is to condemn me at least to an eternity of Tory or Tory-lite rule, and to whip up a hatred towards foreigners as my wife and son could testify. I wonder if brexit voters are concerned that their actions have led to the validation of racism.



I dunno, I can't speak for them, nor would I even try to. I've learnt my lesson on making sweeping generalisations.

Tory rule would have continued (imho) with or without Brexit happening. The odds (sadly) are against a Labour govt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Universally acknowledged. Your craving for validation emerges again.


jesus mary and joseph.

it's a reference to jane austen:



the opening line of pride and prejudice, rather than possession. my bad.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not suggesting it is working out, indeed glad it seems to not be. However your brexit vote fuels their confidence as they go on about the 'will of the people', you people.



If you mean 'you people' as against borders, anti-Tory, anti-capitalist, demolish EU neoliberal structures, pro-working class, communist, sort of people?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I dunno, I can't speak for them, nor would I even try to. I've learnt my lesson on making sweeping generalisations.
> 
> Tory rule would have continued (imho) with or without Brexit happening. The odds (sadly) are against a Labour govt.


The Tories had rule in their grasp for five full years.  The Brexit vote was the direct reason they now don’t have it.


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> I would say leaving it up to the EU is precisely the right move. Let the Irish government and EU build a border if they want one - and show their true colours.



Did you read the stuff up-thread about WTO rules about Most Favoured Nation? It's not the EU which requires checking at the border. It's the basics of international trade.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. if you think there's been a threat of violence you should bring it to the attention of the board moderators, who i am sure will treat any report you care to make with the attention it deserves.


No. I a bringing it to your attention.
I invited you to come to Lewisham and attempt to make manifest your threats but yesterday you declined.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No. I a bringing it to your attention.
> I invited you to come to Lewisham and attempt to make manifest your threats but yesterday you declined.


i cannot make my threats manifest as i have made no threats to you.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The Tories had rule in their grasp for five full years.  The Brexit vote was the direct reason they now don’t have it.



Who has it now, again?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am sorry if I wasn't clear. The electorate don't know how to do brexit, how to make it happen if you like. They know how to vote, as for their individual wishes I imagine they are many and varied, but overall the consequence of their vote is to condemn me at least to an eternity of Tory or Tory-lite rule, and to whip up a hatred towards foreigners as my wife and son could testify. I wonder if brexit voters are concerned that their actions have led to the validation of racism.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Have you actually been paying attention to anything since the referendum result?  Did the 2017 election completely bypass you?


No. I participated, went to the hustings and voted Labour. The election has not shifted the obstacle of the brexit vote though has it? It has been a continuation of the Tories so beloved by many on here, who got into bed with the DUP.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I quite Agree!


Your quote serves to imply I wrote the second part which I didn't.


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

Anyway, I did some reading about the GFA over the weekend. My take (no expert so happy to be corrected):

1. I couldn't see anything in the Agreement per se that precluded a hard IE/NI border.

2. The GFA will definitely need to be re-written because it's full of references to EU bodies. It appears that will take time and be politically difficult, but in principle the changes aren't intellectually difficult.

3. The problem of a border seems more political/psychological than legal (not to diminish it). Memories of checkpoints etc.

4. Big problem though for NI trade with IE if there is a border - the same kind of custom/origin checks that will be needed at any EU/UK border. NI likely to be poorer - wonder how the DUP will square that with the electorate?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

hold me back lads

Why not book the dome for this top of the bill bout you seem to be angling for? its not far from Lewisham and in easily accessible on public transport for the crowds expected. And there is a wide selection of food and drink outlets on site as well.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> The only person I've seen say this is the outgoing head of the WTO, Lamy. Also a key architect of the SM under Delors. Of course he's going to make out its 'impossible', he wants to protect capitalist structures.


It was Lamy that also suggested N.Ireland could become a member of the WTO in its own right, thus avoiding the hard border that Winot says the WTO are making demands of.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your quote serves to imply I wrote the second part which I didn't.


All your quotes are pish, though.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It has been a continuation of the Tories so beloved by many on here, who got into bed with the DUP.



Yeah, definitely wandered into the right forum here


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this post
> View attachment 129324


The site scooped up both quotes, I was replying to the second one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No. I participated, went to the hustings and voted Labour. The election has not shifted the obstacle of the brexit vote though has it? It has been a continuation of the Tories so beloved by many on here, who got into bed with the DUP.


yeh. why not go back and read what's been said since the beginning of the thread so you don't embarrass yourself with shit like this again

the only reason i can see for you not spending a bit of time reading is that you like posting up ignorant wank.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

The EU's strategy on borders is _more and more, hard and harder and racialised if possible_ - extending them well beyond the bounds of it's own territory by paying poorer countries to establish and man them (complete with the sort of camps that would outrage if they happened on precious sovereign democratic EU soil). This is for economic (orderly sorting of suitable cheap labour that can be tidily _exported _when their worth has been squeezed out and cheaper human commodities found elsewhere), political (stopping immigration that's not economically valuable to capital as the neo-liberal policies that the EU imposes and polices cause reaction across europe - effectively the EU scapegoating immigrants for its own plans - not failures, note - plans) security (the inept failure of the EU to deal with the fallout of the implementation of its economic policies internationally - that is, driving down wages and conditions, and it's non-policy and non-action as regards assad).

For a now relatively soft example of this before the current acceleration see this:



> Spain’s North African enclave of Melilla, one of the locations visited in my new book Illegality, Inc., illustrates these absurd and tragic dynamics. When the first undocumented sub-Saharan migrants arrived there in the 1990s, they simply walked across the enclave’s border. Then the first fences were built to keep them out, and suddenly a ‘threat scenario’ emerged. The migrants now came running uncontrollably – the only way of entering. As cooperation with Morocco deepened, increasing crackdowns fed the desperation among migrants, who came to see the fences around Melilla and Ceuta as a last escape route. As a result, the fences were strengthened again in 2005 with the help of EU funds. In Melilla, triple fences soon rose six metres above ground, accompanied by sensors, thermal cameras, pepper-spray mechanisms, bright spotlights and an intricate mesh of steel cables meant to trap any intruder. This mass display of force ‘worked’ for a while – until 2013 and 2014, when desperate migrants found new ways across. This February, 15 migrants died when they tried to swim around Ceuta’s fortified sea perimeter, dodging rubber bullets fired by the Spanish civil guards. Yet despite the violence, the migrants keep coming, triggering calls for further investments, on top of the €72m already spent on the fences since 2005. Madrid has asked for more money from Brussels; fortified the Melilla border with manpower, razor wire and an anti-climbing mesh; and extended cooperation with Morocco – which now involves building one more fence outside Melilla’s triple barrier, as well as another on the long border with Algeria.



On Gemany and refugees, what actually happened was Merkel/Germany unilaterally deciding to simply ignore existing EU policy to deal with a domestic crisis and impose that across europe  - no democratic input from any of the other states to whom germany then insisted take 'their share' of the refugees. And a close look at how Germany then used this tighten up the  - already harsh - existing terms of residence etc for both refugees and immigrants and introduce much harsher new rules severely limiting paths to citizenship and other civil rights would be in order. This is EU democracy - germany says what happens and that's it.

To see someone argue both that the EU is more democratic than its component states including the UK (which no serious EU politician does, they are terrified by its planned lack of democratic participation and the anger this is producing but trapped by their fear of what would happen if they ever allowed any substantive democratic input) and that it supports open borders is laughable.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> Anyway, I did some reading about the GFA over the weekend. My take (no expert so happy to be corrected):
> 
> 1. I couldn't see anything in the Agreement per se that precluded a hard IE/NI border.
> 
> ...


did your reading note that the DUP were the only party to oppose the GFA? those paisleyite scum...but in ireland they are supposed to be sharing power. Mind you the tories compromised the role of the brit state as nuetral arbiter in the proccess by jumping into bed with the DUP. Represents a conflict of interest imo.

of course none of the suddenly concerned about ireland crew said shit about it then, but there you go, we've seen many issues that hitherto went unmentioned by these people become Hot Button Topics if they are deemed important to brexit


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> All your quotes are pish, though.


So you have made some up and attributed them to me? Duplicitous and dishonest are you?


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> did your reading note that the DUP were the only party to oppose the GFA? those paisleyit scum...but in ireland they are supposed to be sharing power. Mind you the tories compromised the role of the brit state as nuetral arbiter in the proccess by jumping into bed with the DUP. Represents a conflict of interest imo.



Agreed


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So you have made some up and attributed them to me? Duplicitous and dishonest are you?




Hahaha, I think it's fairly obvious to anyone reading it that my amazing edits were just that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So you have made some up and attributed them to me? Duplicitous and dishonest are you?


you'd know something of dishonesty, having made up threats of violence.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The EU's strategy on borders is _more and more, hard and harder and racialised if possible_ - extending them well beyond the bounds of it's own territory by paying poorer countries to establish and man them (complete with the sort of camps that would outrage if they happened on precious sovereign democratic EU soil). This is for economic (orderly sorting of suitable cheap labour that can be tidily _exported _when their worth has been squeezed out and cheaper human commodities found elsewhere), political (stopping immigration that's not economically valuable to capital as the neo-liberal policies that the EU imposes and polices cause reaction across europe - effectively the EU scapegoating immigrants for its own plans - not failures, note - plans) security (the inept failure of the EU to deal with the fallout of the implementation of its economic policies internationally - that is, driving down wages and conditions, and it's non-policy and non-action as regards assad).
> 
> For a now relatively soft example of this before the current acceleration see this:
> 
> ...


Your first part of this post sounds to me exactly what brexit voters voted for.
If my point about comparative democracies is laughable explain how in the UK two parties get 4 million votes and two seats and explain why the House of Lords exists?
Instead of laughing you have the opportunity to debate and convince if you want to try that.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your first part of this post sounds to me exactly what brexit voters voted for.
> If my point about comparative democracies is laughable explain how in the UK two parties get 4 million votes and two seats and explain why the House of Lords exists?
> Instead of laughing you have the opportunity to debate and convince if you want to try that.



Why don't you give Butchers some respect and give his excellent post a proper reading and a response it deserves. You might actually learn something or find your opinions challenged by it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you'd know something of dishonesty, having made up threats of violence.


No,not made up. You keep on going on about it, possibly because on reflection you are now ashamed about the threats you made yesterday.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your first part of this post sounds to me exactly what brexit voters voted for.



It certainly sounds like something a lot of remain voters say about brexit voters. I wonder why i pointed that out to you?

From the rest of your response i see that this isn't worth the candle.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Why don't you give Butchers some respect and give his excellent post a proper reading and a response it deserves. You might actually learn something.


What is the difference between a reading (which I have done) and a 'proper' reading? One which elicits a response that fits your world view?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are mistaken in your belief. When you said 'other whacks are available' I assumed you were threatening being Bertie Big Bollocks yourself, so 'available' is the key word here, not that there are 'other ways'.
> Don't you fancy youtube fame then?


how did you get from this 'i assumed' to your current invitation to 'make manifest your threats', in the light of my constant position that no threats were intended?

you invented these threats, my lovely, and i'd be grateful if you could uninvent them pronto.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What is the difference between a reading (which I have done) and a 'proper' reading? One which elicits a response that fits your world view?



You barely read it and you know damn well you didn't, as your quick reactionary reply merely shows. You have absolutely no intention of having a genuine, honest discussion here at all.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

Philosophical, if we wanted a perfect example of liberal sneering, you provide it. In fact if we wanted an example of the attitudes that drove people into voting brexit, you provide that too.  2 years on and no lessons learned, no reflection.  All you've got is clinging on to the view that the bulk of people are thick racists.  You really are what is wrong with British politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You barely read it and you know you damn well you didn't, as your quick reactionary reply merely shows. You have absolutely no intention of having a genuine, honest discussion here at all.


he wouldn't know honesty if it offered him a free meal at a fancy restaurant on the strand.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

its basically tuechters id unmodified by superego


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its basically tuechters id unmodified by superego



Innit


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> how did you get from this 'i assumed' to your current invitation to 'make manifest your threats', in the light of my constant position that no threats were intended?
> 
> you invented these threats, my lovely, and i'd be grateful if you could uninvent them pronto.


Other whacks are available?
You wrote that, it is a threat of violence from you towards me.
Not difficult to understand really.
You may well want to deny it but that is an issue for you, initially you let the Genie of your desire out of the bottle.
Perhaps 'whacks' are the ultimate destination of debates you engage in.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You barely read it and you know damn well you didn't, as your quick reactionary reply merely shows. You have absolutely no intention of having a genuine, honest discussion here at all.


I do have that intention, even through the melee of cunting off I have been subject to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Other whacks are available?
> You wrote that, it is a threat of violence from you towards me.
> Not difficult to understand really.
> You may well want to deny it but that is an issue for you, initially you let the Genie of your desire out of the bottle.
> Perhaps 'whacks' are the ultimate destination of debates you engage in.


i ask again: how did you get from your 'i assumed' to your invitation to 'make manifest your threats'? please describe the evolution of your belief threats had been made, in the light of my constant declaration that no threats had been made. and try to keep it honest, not a repetition of this mealy-mouthed lying like your post quoted.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I do have that intention, even through the melee of cunting off I have been subject to.



if you'd shown one iota of respect and good faith for the forum and its posters you waded into with your loaded and entirely innacurate vilifying first post, and at least conceded that early on instead of knowing you've been an idiot now but dug your heels in too far, that could have happened. This is no-ones fault but your own.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Philosophical, if we wanted a perfect example of liberal sneering, you provide it. In fact if we wanted an example of the attitudes that drove people into voting brexit, you provide that too.  2 years on and no lessons learned, no reflection.  All you've got is clinging on to the view that the bulk of people are thick racists.  You really are what is wrong with British politics.


So what is your solution to the Irish border issue then? Your post is an example of the shoot the messenger style response from the ignorant who won't take responsibility for their action, and use pigeon holing as a diversion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So what is your solution to the Irish border issue then? Your post is an example of the shoot the messenger style response from the ignorant who won't take responsibility for their action, and use pigeon holing as a diversion.


in the context you could have used a better choice of phrase.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

you are not really engaging here are you ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> A fan or censorship or persuasion?


congratulations on your 100th post on the thread


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> he wouldn't know honesty if it offered him a free meal at a fancy restaurant on the strand.


I at least know that an attempt at reasoning is a development from threats of violence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> you are not really engaging here are you ?


i like to think i am.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i ask again: how did you get from your 'i assumed' to your invitation to 'make manifest your threats'? please describe the evolution of your belief threats had been made, in the light of my constant declaration that no threats had been made. and try to keep it honest, not a repetition of this mealy-mouthed lying like your post quoted.


It is down to you to explain the term 'other whacks are available', not for me to assist your wriggling.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So what is your solution to the Irish border issue then? Your post is an example of the shoot the messenger style response from the ignorant who won't take responsibility for their action, and use pigeon holing as a diversion.


Which actions am I not taking responsibility for?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

not you, him. the lewisham dynamo, Golden boy, the pride of Catford of whatever his ring moniker is


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> if you'd shown one iota of respect and good faith for the forum and its posters you waded into with your loaded and entirely innacurate vilifying first post, and at least conceded that early on instead of knowing you've been an idiot now but dug your heels in too far, that could have happened. This is no-ones fault but your own.


You don't hold the keys to respect. If you wish to read back and contemplate the abuse I have received here you might wish to reflect on the meaning of respect.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Which actions am I not taking responsibility for?


Apologies. I assumed you voted brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I at least know that an attempt at reasoning is a development from threats of violence.


yeh. this would be a return to the post which you admit above you assumed contained a threat of violence. you have moved from this assumption to a solid belief that there was a threat of violence. if i had threatened violence, as i've said, i would have done so in no uncertain terms. i did not threaten violence towards you, any belief i did is solely in your own mind.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> not you, him. the lewisham dynamo, Golden boy, the pride of Catford of whatever his ring moniker is


Others accuse me of sneering, but I would suggest this post is a good example of sneering in itself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Apologies. I assumed you voted brexit.


yeh. you've assumed a lot of people have, and not always accurately


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You don't hold the keys to respect. If you wish to read back and contemplate the abuse I have received here you might wish to reflect on the meaning of respect.



Your first post was the problem, you can argue out of this all you want now you're trying to put on a brave face, but that started it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It is down to you to explain the term 'other whacks are available', not for me to assist your wriggling.


i cannot understand how you see that as a threat of violence to you. i didn't introduce the concept of people getting whacked in the head into this thread, you did. you said it was unlikely you'd get a horse kick: but other whacks in the head ARE available, for example bumping your head on a door. i see you can't explain to me how you got from assuming to knowing it was a threat of violence. you're too embarrassed to show the paucity of your thought process. but you might like to contemplate it yourself.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Others accuse me of sneering, but I would suggest this post is a good example of sneering in itself.


 
whateves, I tried to assist and give you some pointers as to engaging and understanding the background early on if you look back. You clearly want to have to piss taken out of your, else you would have changed tack.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> whateves, I tried to assist and give you some pointers as to engaging and understanding the background early on if you look back. You clearly want to have to piss taken out of your, else you would have changed tack.


who'd have thought one man could contain so much urine.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So what is your solution to the Irish border issue then? Your post is an example of the shoot the messenger style response from the ignorant who won't take responsibility for their action, and use pigeon holing as a diversion.


It's interesting that you classify my post as a _diversion_. The real diversion here is your post, beginning as it does with 'So...'. The 'So' being a rather inelegant way of signalling that you are about to ignore the post or deal with the issues raised.  You are still stuck with characterising leave voters as thick racists - still no engagement as to why millions interpreted their experiences in a particular way and voted as they did. 

I didn't vote for brexit, didn't vote actually. In the absence of a lexit I felt unable to translate my contempt of EU neo-liberalism into a vote. But that doesn't stop me thinking about this as the culmination of 40 years of neo-liberalism, 40 years of contempt.  I don't see any signs at all that you are willing to get beyond your visceral contempt for those voters.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Your first post was the problem, you can argue out of this all you want now you're trying to put on a brave face, but that started it.


Yep.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It is down to you to explain the term 'other whacks are available', not for me to assist your wriggling.


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 5, 2018)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

Got to admit, was thinking last night that what this debate needed was a contributor who was a mix of:

 

 

Really moved it along.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 5, 2018)

But it hasn't really move it anywhere much has it? A clarification on leftward-leaning reasons for voting leave and a wheelbarrow-load of sneering assumptions and trollery from our man in Lewisham.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Others accuse me of sneering, but I would suggest this post is a good example of sneering in itself.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i ask again: how did you get from your 'i assumed' to your invitation to 'make manifest your threats'? please describe the evolution of your belief threats had been made, in the light of my constant declaration that no threats had been made. and try to keep it honest, not a repetition of this mealy-mouthed lying like your post quoted.


No I am not indulging in lying. I repeat you said to me other whacks are available not the other way round.
I have explained to you frequently that I consider it a threat of violence from you towards me.
Understood, or do you want to go round again?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I do have that intention, even through the melee of cunting off I have been subject to.



Have you tried being less wrong?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I am not indulging in lying.


oh but you are





> I repeat you said to me other whacks are available not the other way round.
> I have explained to you frequently that I consider it a threat of violence from you towards me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I am not indulging in lying. I repeat you said to me other whacks are available not the other way round.
> I have explained to you frequently that I consider it a threat of violence from you towards me.
> Understood, or do you want to go round again?


reread my post 5416.


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have explained to you frequently that I consider it a threat of violence from you towards me.



Please just stop with this, you've not got him on the ropes it just looks like a transparent, cringeworthy attempt to stick one on an opponent. No-one here is reading your posts thinking "goodness that PM is a thug," he has no history of making threats on this forum and has repeatedly explained to you that he is not and was not threatening violence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I am not indulging in lying.


do you recognise this post?


philosophical said:


> Rejoice in your victory. The UK is yours. Have a party with your mate Boris.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

./ no more boxing references


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

This might be the right time and place to re-post this:

The ex-IRA men: ‘United Ireland? It’s all guff’


But these four veterans of the Provisional IRA’s armed campaign, who are all now critics of Sinn Féin policy, do not think that Brexit will derail the peace process. They see that threat as little more than a scare tactic to force the future of the 499km Border to the centre of the two-year Brexit negotiations.

“I think a lot of the concerns are exaggerated,” says Tommy McKearney, an IRA volunteer originally from Moy, in Co Tyrone, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for killing a part-time Ulster Defence Regiment soldier in 1976.

“Certainly, I think we can rule out the idea of a hard Border with British troops on the Border. That was not to do with economics. That was a security situation. I don’t think we are going to see that again.”

...

Lynagh adds, “There is a vested interest in hyping up the political impact and the scare tactics that it is going to open a hornet’s nest of dissident activity against British rule. I don’t see that.”

...

He believes that Brexit will instead encourage various shades of dissenting republicans to engage politically and that there is a chance of a postsectarian debate among unionists, republicans and nationalists, north and south, about what is in the best economic and sovereign interests for both parts of the island.

...

“The European Union is as much of an imperial power as – if not more than – Britain at the moment,” Lynagh says. “We are faced with the possibility of two foreign powers implementing the partition of Ireland, and where is the demand in Ireland to say, ‘What gives you the power to do this?’ ”


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

This, if you pretend the fields endorsement at the top doesn't exist, is very good - and it has the E.P Thompson anti-EEC line that i was groping for during the campaign and just couldn't find:

“For when an altruistic glint gets into the bourgeois eye one can be sure that someone is about to catch it"

The Lexit ‘mythbuster’ that never was

‘Busting the Lexit myths’, the new paper from Open Britain (OB), contains some pertinent and accurate analysis, but sadly a fair few straw men and sleights of hand. Overall, it doesn’t do what it says on the tin - those ‘myths’ are still standing.

Busting the ‘Lexit myths’ entails demonstrating the following: EU democracy is in fine health, the EU’s treatment of Greece was fair and reasonable, TTIP was a great idea, the single currency is a sound economic project which has not devastated the lives of millions across southern Europe, the EU has not enforced austerity across the periphery, we don’t actually make much contribution at all to EU budgets, and the EU in no way imposes privatisation and market liberalisation. For all its gloss, research and considerable resources, the OB paper doesn’t achieve this, nor does it come close.

The OB paper is broken down into sections, ‘myths’, so we’ll respond in kind.


----------



## Supine (Mar 5, 2018)

It's like the bloke who walks into the pub and joins in a conversation uninvited half way through and tries to take it over.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

If a border with customs checks isn't something that most people in Ireland (either side of the border) would have a problem with, and if the necessary changes to the GFA are ones that most people in Ireland would agree to, then I'd change my view and say that it's not a big issue, and not one that should be used to stall Brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This, if you pretend the fields endorsement at the top doesn't exist, is very good - and it has the E.P Thompson anti-EEC line that i was groping for during the campaign and just couldn't find:
> 
> “For when an altruistic glint gets into the bourgeois eye one can be sure that someone is about to catch it"
> 
> ...


philosophical , any thoughts?


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This, if you pretend the fields endorsement at the top doesn't exist, is very good - and it has the E.P Thompson anti-EEC line that i was groping for during the campaign and just couldn't find:
> 
> “For when an altruistic glint gets into the bourgeois eye one can be sure that someone is about to catch it"
> 
> ...


Thanks for this, as it confirms how I read it at the time. I had to re-read Tarrent's nationalisation myth-busting piece a couple of times to understand the idiocy of his proposal.
i.e: The UKs nationalised companies could flourish in the internal free market tendering process by the government favourably weighting their proposals so they win the contracts, or if a selected _private_ company happened to win the tendering (or a foreign _state owned_ company) then the UK could forcibly nationalise that company if they see fit (good luck nationalising a Deutsche Bahn or SNCF UK subsidiary). Basically his myth-busting amounted to going to all that effort just to appease the regulations put in place by the EU to facilitate the neo-liberal model of breaking up nationalised industries 

Completely absurd. Why spend a fortune on the tendering and selection processes in the fist place?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

Supine said:


> It's like the bloke who walks into the pub and joins in a conversation uninvited half way through and tries to take it over.


it's like the bloke who speaks only esperanto who walks into the pub...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. this would be a return to the post which you admit above you assumed contained a threat of violence. you have moved from this assumption to a solid belief that there was a threat of violence. if i had threatened violence, as i've said, i would have done so in no uncertain terms. i did not threaten violence towards you, any belief i did is solely in your own mind.


'I would have done so in no uncertain terms.'


Pickman's model said:


> yeh. this would be a return to the post which you admit above you assumed contained a threat of violence. you have moved from this assumption to a solid belief that there was a threat of violence. if i had threatened violence, as i've said, i would have done so in no uncertain terms. i did not threaten violence towards you, any belief i did is solely in your own mind.


'I would have done so in no uncertain terms'.
What does that mean, your threat would have been clearer, or you would have carried out your threat?
Made your threat manifest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'I would have done so in no uncertain terms.'
> 
> 'I would have done so in no uncertain terms'.
> What does that mean, your threat would have been clearer, or you would have carried out your threat?
> Made your threat manifest.


it means that had i threatened you the threat would have been explicit. in the exchange you persist in discussing there was no threat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'I would have done so in no uncertain terms.'
> 
> 'I would have done so in no uncertain terms'.
> What does that mean, your threat would have been clearer, or you would have carried out your threat?
> Made your threat manifest.


moving on to your claim never to lie, perhaps you could apologise for lying about me.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 5, 2018)

can someone in the pride of lewisham's corner throw in the towel please ?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

Please can you stop this ridiculous diversion @philosophical, and if anything, engage with the posts/links that Butchers has presented.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Your first post was the problem, you can argue out of this all you want now you're trying to put on a brave face, but that started it.


My first post started with a question.
Clearly.
Others have said I was being disingenuous and directly accusing brexit voters of racism and ignorance.
The irony is that those who have taken my clear opening question, and extrapolated from that, are also those who want me to forensically examine the detail of what they themselves say.
I was jumped on within moments of posting here, and when the jumping was in abusive terms I defended myself in kind.
I have not _initiated _any abuse to any individual here, but stood up for myself when it has come my way.
Although the flood of abuse directed towards me has been hard to keep up with admittedly.
I have been accused of not being prepared to engage, yet I have posted thoughts regarding the border, and that I believe brexiters opened the door to the Tories and worse, I have mentioned reasons as to why in my view the UK version of 'democracy' is worse than the EU one, I have tried to explain why I think a brexit vote was anti Irish for what I believe to be racist reasons.
I have been invited to read this whole thread from the start in order to somehow qualify to engage, but there is too much of it going back nearly two years to do that. However I fully admit to not having read this thread from the start. I came here because (despite me asking elsewhere long before the referendum) the Irish border question is current.
For those who say I am simply a troll, and want to dismiss me with abuse and suggestions that I am a 'paedo' perhaps you would like to think again. My efforts to engage have not matched the frankly pathetic efforts to respond.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not _initiated _any abuse to any individual here


that's a lie. and it contradicts what you've already said.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i cannot understand how you see that as a threat of violence to you. i didn't introduce the concept of people getting whacked in the head into this thread, you did. you said it was unlikely you'd get a horse kick: but other whacks in the head ARE available, for example bumping your head on a door. i see you can't explain to me how you got from assuming to knowing it was a threat of violence. you're too embarrassed to show the paucity of your thought process. but you might like to contemplate it yourself.


I didn't, it was another poster here who asked if I had been kicked in the head by a horse.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> who'd have thought one man could contain so much urine.


Well remove it as you will. Your postings make one wonder how one man can contain so much bile.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well remove it as you will. Your postings make one wonder how one man can contain so much bile.


i've been barely bilious to you, despite your repeated lying about what i've said.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My first post started with a question.
> Clearly.
> Others have said I was being disingenuous and directly accusing brexit voters of racism and ignorance.
> The irony is that those who have taken my clear opening question, and extrapolated from that, are also those who want me to forensically examine the detail of what they themselves say.
> ...


Right, you've said all that, you've emerged from your liberal safehouse - very bravely facing up to the vicious death threats you've been facing, real and present danger.... right, done all that, _what about post 5647_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I didn't, it was another poster here who asked if I had been kicked in the head by a horse.


nonetheless i did not introduce the suggestion of blunt force trauma.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> It's interesting that you classify my post as a _diversion_. The real diversion here is your post, beginning as it does with 'So...'. The 'So' being a rather inelegant way of signalling that you are about to ignore the post or deal with the issues raised.  You are still stuck with characterising leave voters as thick racists - still no engagement as to why millions interpreted their experiences in a particular way and voted as they did.
> 
> I didn't vote for brexit, didn't vote actually. In the absence of a lexit I felt unable to translate my contempt of EU neo-liberalism into a vote. But that doesn't stop me thinking about this as the culmination of 40 years of neo-liberalism, 40 years of contempt.  I don't see any signs at all that you are willing to get beyond your visceral contempt for those voters.


I accept your complaint regarding my inelegance. You want to discuss years of neo-liberalism which is fair enough, I prefer to now concentrate on the practical realities brought about as a consequence of the vote. Realities that are happening now. What you want to engage with is of course valid, as is what I want to engage with. 
If we are not on the same page on this it is nobody's fault.


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My first post started with a question.


Then got all shouty with this crap below.

I will personally hate and despise anybody I know who voted brexit until my dying day (which isn't far off), brexit won, it is your country now and I hold brexit voters in utter contempt.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Have you tried being less wrong?


You are entitled to your opinion.
have you tried writing something more interesting?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

sealion said:


> Then got all shouty with this crap below.
> 
> I will personally hate and despise anybody I know who voted brexit until my dying day (which isn't far off), brexit won, it is your country now and I hold brexit voters in utter contempt.


an admirable summary


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My first post started with a question.
> Clearly.
> Others have said I was being disingenuous and directly accusing brexit voters of racism and ignorance.
> The irony is that those who have taken my clear opening question, and extrapolated from that, are also those who want me to forensically examine the detail of what they themselves say.
> ...



A more obvious approach would have been to:
1) Spend some time reading this and other threads first to get a feel for the posters here and their politics;
2) Having discovered a reasonable number of left and far left posters here have voted left leave, try and read and appreciate some of the argument put forward for such - even if you don't agree with them;
3) Engage based on that with a non-prejudiced, non-loaded question, which might be on the lines of...

'I've spent some time reading some of the posts here, especially those that voted brexit but appear to be on the left, but I'm still struggling with the arguments... how that doesn't just end up emboldening the right..., etc.

So, please stop with this disingenuous 'I just asked a question' stuff, because you didn't, and you know you didn't. And its got people's backs up because it smeers them, many of us who have proud anti-capitalist, anti-fascist political histories. Many of us who have been patient for the last two years putting forward sound arguments for leaving the EU from a left perspective.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I accept your complaint regarding my inelegance. You want to discuss years of neo-liberalism which is fair enough, I prefer to now concentrate on the practical realities brought about as a consequence of the vote. Realities that are happening now. What you want to engage with is of course valid, as is what I want to engage with.
> If we are not on the same page on this it is nobody's fault.


But to remind you - you were the one who introduced a statement on the causes of the vote.


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?



I and others disagree with you and have made points such as the one you quoted. Now, you don't seem to want to talk about why the vote came about.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> that's a lie. and it contradicts what you've already said.


Where have I initiated abuse, or said that I have initiated abuse?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are entitled to your opinion.
> have you tried writing something more interesting?


he often is very interesting, and always worth reading. you, by contrast, fall short on argument and long on boredom.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Where have I initiated abuse, or said that I have initiated abuse?


it's back to your big bertie bollocks er bollocks.

now, about that apology...


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Now, you don't seem to want to talk about why the vote came about.


He never did. He's gone for the lazy assumptions route.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

For those inviting me to read recent posts I certainly will. I have been out and am trying to catch up with the chronology.


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> For those inviting me to read recent posts I certainly will. I have been out of my nut and am trying to catch up with the chronology.


Fixed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> For those inviting me to read recent posts I certainly will. I have been out and am trying to catch up with the chronology.


oh, i thought you were familiar with the order of posts which had so aroused your ire.

as you now say you're not i'll look forward to your apology forthwith.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> reread my post 5416.



This was your post 5416:

If I was suggesting that believe me I'd be suggesting that. It wouldn't be too far for me to travel. But south if the river at this time of night? You're having a laugh.

I am particularly taken with the 'believe me I'd be suggesting that'.
You then reveal that you have thought about the practicalities 'It wouldn't be too far for me to travel'.
Yet you suggest your posts about whacking around the head, the 'you'd know about it if it happened' type of stuff, your pondering on the journey is a million miles away from constituting a threat?
You have also initiated and peppered your responses to me with a lot of rather predictable sweary stuff. 
You refuse to see your behaviour, or ought I to say your posts, as belligerent towards me, and then you constantly complain when I point it out.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Please just stop with this, you've not got him on the ropes it just looks like a transparent, cringeworthy attempt to stick one on an opponent. No-one here is reading your posts thinking "goodness that PM is a thug," he has no history of making threats on this forum and has repeatedly explained to you that he is not and was not threatening violence.


I responded to the post above before reading this one.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> do you recognise this post?


Yes, your point being?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This was your post 5416:
> 
> If I was suggesting that believe me I'd be suggesting that. It wouldn't be too far for me to travel. But south if the river at this time of night? You're having a laugh.
> 
> ...


throughout this exchange you've taken the blinkered point of view that i have threatened you with violence.

i haven't.

i may have responded flippantly, in the post you quote, because the notion anyone could think i was threatening you seemed to me utterly outlandish - it still does.

but don't have the gall to complain about my use of anglo-saxon vernacular when the first one of us to introduce insults into the exchange was you. 

now, you claimed boris johnson was my mate and i await an apology.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes, your point being?


it's riddled with lies


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This might be the right time and place to re-post this:
> 
> The ex-IRA men: ‘United Ireland? It’s all guff’
> 
> ...



This is an interesting nationalist perspective. The individuals quoted here don't speak for all nationalists in a formal sense. However I have trouble with the whole divisive nature of nationalism, certainly expressed as I see it in the winning brexit vote.
I am a fan believe it or not of cooperation and collaboration, and that the nationalists quoted use the term 'foreign powers' suggests to me their desire for parochial power and control, not any particular desire to cooperate.
I said in a post yesterday that I don't detect many degrees of separation  between nationalism of either an Irish kind or a brexit kind, and the very unfortunate manifestations of nationalism in History.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

Do you not think the Irish should have complete autonomy and rule over themselves? I thought you said were against the British establishment?

OK for the EU to have some control over them though?

Do we need a neoliberal trading bloc ala the EU to co-operate? I'd rather we demolish the EU and build a new European socialist bloc.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I said in a post yesterday that I don't detect many degrees of separation  between nationalism of either an Irish kind or a brexit kind, and the very unfortunate manifestations of nationalism in History.


No, you said nationalism was akin to fascism.  Here it is:



philosophical said:


> Irish republicans have proposed united Ireland, a victory for nationalism.* I see nationalism as akin to fascism *and would prefer no borders anywhere.



You've still not explained, however, how nationalism -- either that as espoused by Brexit or that by those who seek a united Ireland -- is necessarily radical (i.e. it rejects tradition and seeks to rebuild society based on the development of new ideas) or authoritarian (i.e. it seeks the centralisation of control with no state accountability) in its style, which are both necessary components of fascism.  Nor have you explained how it fits in with this necessary component of fascism:



> Fascists believe that liberal democracy is obsolete and they regard the complete mobilization of society under a totalitarian one-party state as necessary to prepare a nation for armed conflict and to respond effectively to economic difficulties.[12] Such a state is led by a strong leader—such as a dictator and a martial government composed of the members of the governing fascist party—to forge national unity and maintain a stable and orderly society.[12] Fascism rejects assertions that violence is automatically negative in nature and views political violence, war and imperialism as means that can achieve national rejuvenation.[13][14][15][16] Fascists advocate a mixed economy, with the principal goal of achieving autarky through protectionist and interventionist economic policies.



Irish nationalists want a totalitarian one-party state?  Brexit voters believe that armed conflict is the appropriate response to economic difficulty?  This is just nonsense.

You're doing the classic thing of thinking your small amount of knowledge privileges you to use concepts you think you understand but, in practice, have not actually made any actual study of.  So you're throwing around these concepts in the belief they somehow bolster your position, whereas they are actually just making you look like an idiot.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This, if you pretend the fields endorsement at the top doesn't exist, is very good - and it has the E.P Thompson anti-EEC line that i was groping for during the campaign and just couldn't find:
> 
> “For when an altruistic glint gets into the bourgeois eye one can be sure that someone is about to catch it"
> 
> ...


I have been reading this since you provided a link.
The point about democracy I have covered before. The EU in my view has a better and stronger history and current practice of their form of 'democracy' than the UK. Many Scandinavian countries for example had votes for women long before the UK, the system of proportional representation in my view is better than the first past the post one, the UK has historic constraints wrapped up in places like the House of Lords and general seemingly never ending rule by the same class, and money driven right wing media which influences the close up 'democracy' than the EU one.
The EU form of democracy might have felt remote and unwieldy to many voters, but the Tories and others kept saying that the EU was actually 'undemocratic' which it isn't. It is such a shame that this myth was one of many shovelled out there to persuade people to vote brexit.
On immigration the paper starts by recognising the value of immigration, even referencing food, but then goes on about the impact on jobs and wages and access to services and then comes out with the drawbridge manoeuvre 'no society has a boundless ability to absorb new people'.
Oh yeah?
Who is making claim to the boundaries of that society, who is a new or old person in this context, who are to be the masters of entitlement?
In purely geographic and mathematical terms the UK can take many more people physically, and it is frequently reported how much immigrants are net contributors to public services. Yet the shame of encouraging voters to vote brexit by pointing at immigrants is allowed to continue, and continue it does in this paper.
We live in a world, on a planet, what next 'independence' for Islington or something?
I do agree about the danger of the creep of corporate forces in the EU, but would see that as something that could be resisted. The appetite for many in the UK is not to use the opportunities offered by EU 'democracy' to influence change, but to bail out.
I am going for lunch now, but the paper linked is flawed in my view for some of the reasons I have outlined, and I don't have the time right now to respond to it all.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If a border with customs checks isn't something that most people in Ireland (either side of the border) would have a problem with, and if the necessary changes to the GFA are ones that most people in Ireland would agree to, then I'd change my view and say that it's not a big issue, and not one that should be used to stall Brexit.


The border is 310 miles long with 200 road crossing points, and many others unmarked, with properties that straddle the border.
How do you think those practicalities would be managed if a border with checks were in place?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> philosophical , any thoughts?


see below


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it means that had i threatened you the threat would have been explicit. in the exchange you persist in discussing there was no threat.


Explicit?
It seems very explicit to me. Why post it at all if it was in some weird universe less than explicit?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I The EU in my view has a better and stronger history and current practice of their form of 'democracy' than the UK.


What does "in my view" mean, beyond your uneducated reckons?  What is your metric for democracy?  Let's read on and find out...



> Many Scandinavian countries for example had votes for women long before the UK


So what?  Is this supposed to represent the current practice of the EU institution?  Not to mention that Norway is not even part of the EU.



> the system of proportional representation in my view is better than the first past the post one,


We're back to "in my view", I see.  Are you aware that there is no "best" electoral system?  Mathematically, all systems have flaws that mean that they can't be objectively ranked.  So your preference for proportional representation is ideological, not objective.  Personally, I feel better represented by an individual who I know is personally accountable to a local community first and foremost, rather than a list that produces a candidate based on party politics.


> the UK has historic constraints wrapped up in places like the House of Lords and general seemingly never ending rule by the same class, and money driven right wing media which influences the close up 'democracy' than the EU one.


This is getting ridiculous now.  Are you really arguing that the ultimate exponent of Pork Barrel Politics that is the EU is somehow _less_ prone to money-driven influence and oligarchical decision making than the nation state of the UK?  Good grief.


> The EU form of democracy might have felt remote and unwieldy to many voters, but the Tories and others kept saying that the EU was actually 'undemocratic' which it isn't. It is such a shame that this myth was one of many shovelled out there to persuade people to vote brexit.


Are you aware that in all of the above, you haven't actually referenced _any evidence at all _for your vaunted democracy in the EU?  You've talked about who got to female franchise first 100 years ago, you've made a reckon about electoral systems and you've made a quite astonishing claim about who is the worst when it comes to corruptible influences.  But there's nothing there to demonstrate how EU democracy is actually put into practice.



> On immigration the paper starts by recognising the value of immigration, even referencing food, but then goes on about the impact on jobs and wages and access to services and then comes out with the drawbridge manoeuvre 'no society has a boundless ability to absorb new people'.
> Oh yeah?
> Who is making claim to the boundaries of that society, who is a new or old person in this context, who are to be the masters of entitlement?
> In purely geographic and mathematical terms the UK can take many more people physically, and it is frequently reported how much immigrants are net contributors to public services. Yet the shame of encouraging voters to vote brexit by pointing at immigrants is allowed to continue, and continue it does in this paper.
> ...


And this all misses the point entirely, which is that the EU only promotes migration within its own borders, and is happy to let the rest of the world go to hell.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> moving on to your claim never to lie, perhaps you could apologise for lying about me.


I have not lied about you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> nonetheless i did not introduce the suggestion of blunt force trauma.


No, you expanded on it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Explicit?
> It seems very explicit to me. Why post it at all if it was in some weird universe less than explicit?


that was a quick lunch. go on, take another 50 minutes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not lied about you.


another lie.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

sealion said:


> Then got all shouty with this crap below.
> 
> I will personally hate and despise anybody I know who voted brexit until my dying day (which isn't far off), brexit won, it is your country now and I hold brexit voters in utter contempt.


You can interpret that as shouty crap, I say it is an honest personal response.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 5, 2018)

UK-US Open Skies talks hit Brexit turbulence


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> OK for the EU to have some control over them though?



Ireland is part of the EU. The EU is not a separate thing. Ireland can choose not to be part of the EU, if it wants, like we have.

Also, NI can choose not be part of the UK, can it not? Isn't that part of the GFA?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You can interpret that as shouty crap, I say it is an honest personal response.


And, whatever way you wish to dice it, an offensive one.  You literally go on the offensive, hating people you have never met with no consideration for any context whatsoever.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

was it two or three times they had to vote on lisbon before the right answer came?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> was it two or three times they had to vote on lisbon before the right answer came?


i don't know, i lost count.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> was it two or three times they had to vote on lisbon before the right answer came?


Democracy in action.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

'Jean-Pierre Jouyet, the French Europe Minister, said, ‘The most important thing is that the ratification process must continue in the other countries and then we shall see with the Irish what type of legal arrangement could be found’ Nikola Sarkozy, said it the Irish would simply be ignored. The Irish were told to vote again'


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Ireland is part of the EU. The EU is not a separate thing. Ireland can choose not to be part of the EU, if it wants, like we have.



It's part of a series of questions put forward to @philosophical based on previous posts, not for you to pick one out and answer it individually.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> A more obvious approach would have been to:
> 1) Spend some time reading this and other threads first to get a feel for the posters here and their politics;
> 2) Having discovered a reasonable number of left and far left posters here have voted left leave, try and read and appreciate some of the argument put forward for such - even if you don't agree with them;
> 3) Engage based on that with a non-prejudiced, non-loaded question, which might be on the lines of...
> ...


If you are irritated that my approach was not to dance to the tune you would prefer I acknowledge your discomfort.
You declare that your suggested approach would have been the more obvious one, almost as if you make up the rules here.
You all spend a lot of time telling me my approach was wrong, but the silence towards those who are abusive towards me is kind of deafening, and when there is noise it sounds like hypocrisy. Within moment of posting here I had the 'people like you' response, the 'are you a paedo' response was told to fuck off and called a cunt.
Do you miss the irony in you telling me how to behave, but tacitly approving of, and joining in with the behaviour of others?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The border is 310 miles long with 200 road crossing points, and many others unmarked, with properties that straddle the border.
> How do you think those practicalities would be managed if a border with checks were in place?


I don't know exactly how the practicalities would be managed. I'm not a Brexiteer myself so don't feel obliged to think up the solution. However, whatever the solution were, I'd be trying to gauge how the people who actually live in Ireland and who would be affected by it, felt about it, in trying to figure out my opinion on it. I'd hope our Lexiteer friends would be doing the same. Earlier in the thread I felt that the response from some was that this didn't need to be considered because it's not "our" fault that the border question arises.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

I still think that Brexit is a net bad idea for the everyday man, because it will fuck things up so much.  But people like philosophical basically guarantee that I will vote leave if a second referendum ever comes my way.  The EU is really, really shit.  Whatever goodness it may once have had has long since been dissolved into an ever more authoritarian and right-wing morass of inequality and promotion of business interests over human ones.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If you are irritated that my approach was not to dance to the tune you would prefer I acknowledge your discomfort.
> You declare that your suggested approach 'would have been better', almost as if you make up the rules here.
> You all spend a lot of time telling me my approach was wrong, but the silence towards those who are abusive towards me is kind of deafening, and when there is noise it sounds like hypocrisy. Within moment of posting here I had the 'people like you' response, the 'are you a paedo' response was told to fuck off and called a cunt.
> Do you miss the irony in you telling me how to behave, but tacitly approving of, and joining in with the behaviour of others?


if you don't want to be called a cunt, don't start abusing other people and lying about them.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> It's part of a series of questions put forward to @philosophical based on previous posts, not for you to pick one out and answer it individually.



Oh, ok. I'll wait for your permission before commenting on your ever-so-precious words in future.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> But to remind you - you were the one who introduced a statement on the causes of the vote.
> 
> 
> I and others disagree with you and have made points such as the one you quoted. Now, you don't seem to want to talk about why the vote came about.


As I said I am catching up. But thank you for quoting my original question accurately.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Oh, ok. I'll wait for your permission before commenting on your ever-so-precious words in future.



Good


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> But people like philosophical basically guarantee that I will vote leave if a second referendum ever comes my way.


To what extent do you feel that philosophical is a caricature cooked up by those who'd like it to be a true representation of the typical remain voter?


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Also, NI can choose not be part of the UK, can it not? Isn't that part of the GFA?



Yes


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> To what extent do you feel that philosophical is a caricature cooked up by those who'd like it to be a true representation of the typical remain voter?


to the same extent that i think you are a caricature cooked up by those who'd like you to be a true representation of an anal toilet and dogging obsessive


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> throughout this exchange you've taken the blinkered point of view that i have threatened you with violence.
> 
> i haven't.
> 
> ...


The first use of anglo saxon stuff was pointed in my direction.
You 'may have responded flippantly' is it now?
Pause to consider what was achieved by what you now call a flippant response going on about other whacks (to my head) being available.
It certainly didn't move any debate on in any kind of positive direction, but came across to me (as I have said repeatedly) as a threat of violence.
In my view those who voted brexit are mates with Boris Johnson and I don't apologise for that at all.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> to the same extent that i think you are a caricature cooked up by those who'd like you to be a true representation of an anal toilet and dogging obsessive


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In my view those who voted brexit are mates with Boris Johnson and I don't apologise for that at all.


and how do you know such people? please post the basis of your knowledge.

you made it up, didn't you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Do you not think the Irish should have complete autonomy and rule over themselves? I thought you said were against the British establishment?
> 
> OK for the EU to have some control over them though?
> 
> Do we need a neoliberal trading bloc ala the EU to co-operate? I'd rather we demolish the EU and build a new European socialist bloc.


It depends on how you define 'the Irish' and 'themselves' and it also depends on the nature of autonomy and rule.
I am not against the concept of socialism at all, but I am concerned by the authoritarianism that frequently seems to come with it. The 'we' in your question has hints to me of Thatcher asking if somebody was 'one of us'. 'You' might demolish anything you want, but to turn a 'you' into a 'we' takes persuasion and agreement because, to use a word you used above, each person is autonomous.


----------



## JimW (Mar 5, 2018)

Which scandinavian countries didn't have votes for women prior to the existence of the EU? Mad stuff.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

JimW said:


> Which scandinavian countries didn't have votes for women prior to the existence of the EU? Mad stuff.


Possibly only Sweden? The UK has a long and proud history through ground-up organising, unions, etc. that has led the way to many worker/employment rights, LGBT rights, women's suffrage, etc. years before the EU. Other EU member countries have done the same, whilst some EU countries are still lagging behind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The first use of anglo saxon stuff was pointed in my direction.
> You 'may have responded flippantly' is it now?
> Pause to consider what was achieved by what you now call a flippant response going on about other whacks (to my head) being available.
> It certainly didn't move any debate on in any kind of positive direction, but came across to me (as I have said repeatedly) as a threat of violence.


right. so you're calling me a liar. i'll have an apology for that, my sweet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and how do you know such people? please post the basis of your knowledge.
> 
> you made it up, didn't you.


philosophical don't go all coy on me, post up that apology


----------



## Wilf (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The EU form of democracy might have felt remote and unwieldy to many voters, but the Tories and others kept saying that the EU was actually 'undemocratic' which it isn't. It is such a shame that this myth was one of many shovelled out there to persuade people to vote brexit.


 Fwiw, I wouldn't regard the EU as particularly democratic, in the formal sense. Members of the EU Parliament are directly elected, but the Parliament has relatively little power and we have no formal influence on the Commission of permanent bureaucracy.  But that just isn't the point. EVen if it was 'more' democratic, that wouldn't alter people's experiences of the forces and ideology represented by the EU. In fact if you want to think about the relationship of the EU to formal democracy, think about Syriza's losing battle with the EU. The significant thing there was that austerity was imposed on Greece, against the wishes of the Greek people - but even more so, there was a horror in the upper reaches of the EU _when Syriza tried to use 'democracy'_ - a referendum - against the imposition of further cuts.


----------



## JimW (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Possibly only Sweden? The UK has a long and proud history through ground-up organising, unions, etc. that has led the way to many worker/employment rights, LGBT rights, women's suffrage, etc. years before the EU. Other EU countries have done the same, and some EU countries are still lagging behind.


I really hate the way various democratic struggles across the continent have been reduced to the largesse of the EU by people who defend it based on historical ignorance.


----------



## Santino (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical don't go all coy on me, post up that apology


This is incredibly boring for everyone else.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It depends on how you define 'the Irish' and 'themselves' and it also depends on the nature of autonomy and rule.
> I am not against the concept of socialism at all, but I am concerned by the authoritarianism that frequently seems to come with it. The 'we' in your question has hints to me of Thatcher asking if somebody was 'one of us'. 'You' might demolish anything you want, but to turn a 'you' into a 'we' takes persuasion and agreement because, to use a word you used above, each person is autonomous.



Well, at least we know where your politics lie.

'We' is about everybody, the people, organising themselves for the common social good, shared ownership and means of production. Not business, capitalist structures and institutions. Not sure why you persist in carrying on with this 'allusions to Tory' stuff which doesn't even exist with the people you're arguing?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you said nationalism was akin to fascism.  Here it is:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I see fascism as beginning with a definition of what constitutes a 'state' in the first place, and as such is exclusive to others. I see brexit as another version of the powerful wanting to define what a state actually is. If you complain that I have not made enough of a study for your liking then that is up to you, but not having studied something enough to satisfy you does not mean that a point made is not valid.
You seem to say  what is 'idiocy' comes from a definition decided by those who promote themselves a superior which is what you are trying to do.
This place seems riddled by rules about what is allowed and what isn't, and when someone is perceived by another person to not be toeing the line they are subject to abuse.
Is that part of the definition of Authoritarianism and control freakery?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

JimW said:


> I really hate the way various democratic struggles across the continent have been reduced to the largesse of the EU by people who defend it based on historical ignorance.


our state in all its apparatus seems committed to unseeing the labour movement- it never existed, there was just nice Christian reformers and abolitionists, progressive whigs. Don't look at the banners of the days gone by etc


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see fascism as beginning with a definition of what constitutes a 'state' in the first place, and as such is exclusive to others.



What about a neoliberal superstate called the EU that is exclusive based on its own power structures? How do normal people have any influence or say in their lives within it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What does "in my view" mean, beyond your uneducated reckons?  What is your metric for democracy?  Let's read on and find out...
> 
> So what?  Is this supposed to represent the current practice of the EU institution?  Not to mention that Norway is not even part of the EU.
> 
> ...


So a person posting their view is invalid now unless it passes some kind of kabbes test?
If you want detail about how actual EU democracy is put into practice, then educate yourself as you urge me to.
I am struck by your term 'nation state', something I think is a theme on here. You say that the UK is a nation state as if that is a) true, b) has meaning and c) contains gravitas.
The UK as I see it is a loose alliance of groups of people who have decided to draw a line in the map, and has current political significance (certainly for brexiters) but for me is an accident of geography and birth.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:
			
		

> The EU in my view has a better and stronger history and current practice of their form of 'democracy' than the UK. Many Scandinavian countries for example had votes for women long before the UK
> ...





stethoscope said:


> Possibly only Sweden? The UK has a long and proud history through ground-up organising, unions, etc. that has led the way to many worker/employment rights, LGBT rights, women's suffrage, etc. years before the EU. Other EU member countries have done the same, whilst some EU countries are still lagging behind.



When you have a moment @philosophical...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> another lie.


How long before you reach my dad is bigger than your dad territory?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if you don't want to be called a cunt, don't start abusing other people and lying about them.


I have not 'started' abusing others, nor lying about them.
I accept that people wish to call me a cunt, but point out the hypocrisy of those same people trying to lecture me about civil discourse.


----------



## JimW (Mar 5, 2018)

Since only nation states can be EU members, philosophical has just defined us out anyway, big Boris mate you must be.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How long before you reach my dad is bigger than your dad territory?


how long before you give me an apology for lying about me and auld boris johnson?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

JimW said:


> Since only nation states can be EU members, philosophical has just defined us out anyway, big Boris mate you must be.


a mate of the blond beast


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and how do you know such people? please post the basis of your knowledge.
> 
> you made it up, didn't you.


My assertion is based on the reality that Boris Johnson and brexiters voted the same way.
I know it is a bit of a stretch for all 17plus million voters to all be mates with Boris, but I have my suspicions on this one, and have come to the conclusion based on the vote, that brexit voters are indeed mates with Boris.
Now if you didn't vote brexit then I humbly apologise, you don't need to forgive me, I would be totally wrong.
You could even have a free hit (or whack if you prefer) if you didn't vote brexit like Boris.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

Your politics can't really be this simplistic can it?!


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 5, 2018)

I live in a town, which seems to be an important unit of definition for some but I prefer to think of it as a loose collection of hamlets that emerged from the industrial revolution into a larger polity. Indeed, defining what a town is seems akin to fascism imo


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

JimW said:


> Since only nation states can be EU members,



Who says?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Who says?


er the eu


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 5, 2018)

tbf every Scandinavian country had universal women's suffrage before the UK.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Well, at least we know where your politics lie.
> 
> 'We' is about everybody, the people, organising themselves for the common social good, shared ownership and means of production. Not business, capitalist structures and institutions. Not sure why you persist in carrying on with this 'allusions to Tory' stuff which doesn't even exist with the people you're arguing?


I am afraid your definition contains further questions.
I will try to list them. Who constitutes 'the people' are there any exclusions?
What is the 'common social good'? Is that a matter for agreement, would any discussion be time limited, and how would that agreement (if that is what you mean) come to a final conclusion.
Shared ownership? Like with absolutely anybody from anywhere, or those who created it (collectively if you like) be the ones to distribute the ownership? To the exclusion of others?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> er the eu


Where is this requirement stated?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Where is this requirement stated?


on the application form and on this website


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbf every Scandinavian country had universal women's suffrage before the UK.


QED the EU is more democratic than the UK.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> on the application form


How did Belgium get in?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> How did Belgium get in?


founder member innit


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> What about a neoliberal superstate called the EU that is exclusive based on its own power structures? How do normal people have any influence or say in their lives within it?


It is not at all ideal, but I prefer it as an expanded system than one that is narrow and parochial and open to abuse. However I might be tempted to change my mind if the offer was freedom for Lewisham.


----------



## JimW (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Where is this requirement stated?


 maastricht treaty and Copenhagen criteria


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

JimW said:


> maastricht treaty and Copenhagen criteria


and the aforementioned application form.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> on the application form and on this website



*shudders*




			
				Europa.EU said:
			
		

> a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
> the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> founder member innit


What about Bosnia and Herzegovina?

Bosnia and Herzegovina - European Neighbourhood Policy And Enlargement Negotiations - European Commission


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this website



Can't see anything about nation states there.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> *shudders*





> a functioning market economy and the capacity to cope with competition and market forces in the EU;
> the ability to take on and implement effectively the obligations of membership, including adherence to the aims of political, economic and monetary union



Note the above has to be written into national constitutions for new members as well.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What about Bosnia and Herzegovina?
> 
> Bosnia and Herzegovina - European Neighbourhood Policy And Enlargement Negotiations - European Commission


what about them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Can't see anything about nation states there.


never mind.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> To what extent do you feel that philosophical is a caricature cooked up by those who'd like it to be a true representation of the typical remain voter?


Hmm.  You mean philosophical might be a false flag?  An interesting point.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> never mind.


Apology accepted.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see fascism as beginning with a definition of what constitutes a 'state' in the first place, and as such is exclusive to others. I see brexit as another version of the powerful wanting to define what a state actually is. If you complain that I have not made enough of a study for your liking then that is up to you, but not having studied something enough to satisfy you does not mean that a point made is not valid.
> You seem to say  what is 'idiocy' comes from a definition decided by those who promote themselves a superior which is what you are trying to do.
> This place seems riddled by rules about what is allowed and what isn't, and when someone is perceived by another person to not be toeing the line they are subject to abuse.
> Is that part of the definition of Authoritarianism and control freakery?


What are you talking about?

You don't get to define fascism for yourself.  It is a well-defined phrase of political science.  It means a combination of radical authoritarianism with nationalism.  It has certain features, as defined in the Wikipedia article I linked to that you plainly never even clicked.  The fact that you "reckon" it's something other than this is neither here nor there.  The voters of Brexit don't even come *close* to fulfilling the tenets of fascism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Apology accepted.


when i make an apology i'll let you know.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So a person posting their view is invalid now unless it passes some kind of kabbes test?
> If you want detail about how actual EU democracy is put into practice, then educate yourself as you urge me to.
> I am struck by your term 'nation state', something I think is a theme on here. You say that the UK is a nation state as if that is a) true, b) has meaning and c) contains gravitas.
> The UK as I see it is a loose alliance of groups of people who have decided to draw a line in the map, and has current political significance (certainly for brexiters) but for me is an accident of geography and birth.


You literally don't understand any of this stuff, do you?  It's just words plucked out of the air.  The UK is a "loose alliance of groups of people"?  So its entire state infrastructure is, what, just a current position of convenience that might be discarded tomorrow if this loose alliance decides it has no more use for it?  This is extraordinary.

And yes, a person posting their uninformed reckons is invalid.  After all, isn't that your position about the 17 million voters of Brexit?  That they are uninformed and hence should be discounted?

I know very well how the political "democracy" of the EU functions, by the way, and clearly much better than you do.  The main decision making body of the EU is the European Commission.  The members of the Commission are nominated by member state governments.  They are not directly elected by anybody and their accountability is extremely limited.  Only the president of the Commission can dismiss a Commissioner.  It has close links to business leaders and its decision making is opaque.  And it has now been established that the Commission can create criminal law, in addition to its previous functions.  Yum yum, that's some tasty democracy right there.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What are you talking about?
> 
> You don't get to define fascism for yourself.  It is a well-defined phrase of political science.  It means a combination of radical authoritarianism with nationalism.  It has certain features, as defined in the Wikipedia article I linked to that you plainly never even clicked.  The fact that you "reckon" it's something other than this is neither here nor there.  The voters of Brexit don't even come *close* to fulfilling the tenets of fascism.


What are you talking about yourself?
The definition of something is not because it is set in stone by wikipedia, that may be a helpful reference point, but certain concepts, even political ones, can be fluid, and can certainly have additions. What I might 'reckon' is one stitch in the tapestry.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What are you talking about yourself?
> The definition of something is not because it is set in stone by wikipedia, that may be a helpful reference point, but certain concepts, even political ones, can be fluid, and can certainly have additions. What I might 'reckon' is one stitch in the tapestry.


Please do link to some established recent practice of fascism merely being synonymous with nationalism.

You know that you're making yourself look more and more ridiculous here, right?  You're now arguing against referenced sources (via Wikipedia, which lists those sources) as to how fascism is defined.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You literally don't understand any of this stuff, do you?  It's just words plucked out of the air.  The UK is a "loose alliance of groups of people"?  So its entire state infrastructure is, what, just a current position of convenience that might be discarded tomorrow if this loose alliance decides it has no more use for it?  This is extraordinary.
> 
> And yes, a person posting their uninformed reckons is invalid.  After all, isn't that your position about the 17 million voters of Brexit?  That they are uninformed and hence should be discounted?
> 
> I know very well how the political "democracy" of the EU functions, by the way, and clearly much better than you do.  The main decision making body of the EU is the European Commission.  The members of the Commission are nominated by member state governments.  They are not directly elected by anybody and their accountability is extremely limited.  And it has now been established that the Commission can create criminal law, in addition to its previous functions.  Yum yum, that's some tasty democracy right there.


Where have I said that those voting brexit 'should be discounted'?
The state governments who do the nominations you mention are directly elected. There was one such election last year in the UK.
If it seems remote and unaccountable to you, you can participate and try to change it, or vote brexit of course, which is what happened.
Rejoice in that victory, don't discount it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What are you talking about yourself?
> The definition of something is not because it is set in stone by wikipedia, that may be a helpful reference point, but certain concepts, even political ones, can be fluid, and can certainly have additions. What I might 'reckon' is one stitch in the tapestry.



stanley g payne, 'fascism', p.4

you might want to read the anatomy of fascism https://libcom.org/files/Robert O. Paxton-The Anatomy of Fascism  -Knopf (2004).pdf


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Please do link to some established recent practice of fascism merely being synonymous with nationalism.
> 
> You know that you're making yourself look more and more ridiculous here, right?  You're now arguing against referenced sources (via Wikipedia, which lists those sources) as to how fascism is defined.


Rubbish. I said a scource like wikipedia may be helpful. How is that arguing against it?
If I look ridiculous here you seem desperate to join me.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Where have I said that those voting brexit 'should be discounted'?
> The state governments who do the nominations you mention are directly elected. There was one such election last year in the UK.
> If it seems remote and unaccountable to you, you can participate and try to change it, or vote brexit of course, which is what happened.
> Rejoice in that victory, don't discount it.


Incredible.  So your position -- let me get this right -- is that if I vote for a government and that government then chooses a Commissioner who can never in practice then be deseated_, _that is somehow more democratic than just voting for a government?

Because you said that the EU is more democratic than the UK.  But that is the implication: the people one UK government chose for life are democratically more accountable to me than the the UK government that chose them.

Are you following this at all?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 5, 2018)

I'm lost for words at this point. Truly.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Rubbish. I said a scource like wikipedia may be helpful. How is that arguing against it?
> If I look ridiculous here you seem desperate to join me.


Still waiting for that contemporary source showing that fascism is now simply synonymous with nationalism.  No, your reckons don't count for this.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?


No, you are not right in assuming this.  You have, however, well and truly demonstrated your own ignorance of all the relevant concepts that matter in this debate.  Whether or not you are a tosser is left as an exercise to the reader.


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you are not right in assuming this.  You have, however, well and truly demonstrated your own ignorance of all the relevant concepts that matter in this debate.  Whether or not you are a tosser is left as an exercise to the reader.



I reckon


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Incredible.  So your position -- let me get this right -- is that if I vote for a government and that government then chooses a Commissioner who can never in practice then be deseated_, _that is somehow more democratic than just voting for a government?
> 
> Because you said that the EU is more democratic than the UK.  But that is the implication: the people one UK government chose for life are democratically more accountable to me than the the UK government that chose them.
> 
> Are you following this at all?


Yes I am following this. Are you aware of the relationship between the commissioner and the European parliament and the extent of a commissioners powers? I am aware that there are elections to the European Parliament that we directly participate in.
The problem for me is the type of government the UK elects that leads to their choice of commissioner. If you have a problem with the commissioner, take it up with this apparently democratic government.
I think the EU system is more democratic than the one in the UK for reasons I have posted several times above criticising aspects of the UK version of democracy.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you are not right in assuming this.  You have, however, well and truly demonstrated your own ignorance of all the relevant concepts that matter in this debate.  Whether or not you are a tosser is left as an exercise to the reader.


He's not reached the stage of being able to use them as concepts. They remain terms - simple words - for him.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> I reckon


Reckon?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you are not right in assuming this.  You have, however, well and truly demonstrated your own ignorance of all the relevant concepts that matter in this debate.  Whether or not you are a tosser is left as an exercise to the reader.


Relevant?
'That matter'?
Control freakery?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He's not reached the stage of being able to use them as concepts. They remain terms - simple words - for him.


More simple words than terms, as far as I can see.  He doesn't understand that the words as terms have a rich history of use and common consensus as to what they imply and what those implications in turn are related to.  They're just insults to be thrown around, like a monkey with its faeces.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Incredible.  So your position -- let me get this right -- is that if I vote for a government and that government then chooses a Commissioner who can never in practice then be deseated_, _that is somehow more democratic than just voting for a government?
> 
> Because you said that the EU is more democratic than the UK.  But that is the implication: the people one UK government chose for life are democratically more accountable to me than the the UK government that chose them.



Your underlined bits - commissioners are there for a 5 year term, aren't they?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Relevant?
> 'That matter'?
> Control freakery?


If you are going to use concepts like "fascism" and "democracy" you should have some clue as to what they mean, yes.  Not just a guess based on your own misuse of them over the last 65 years.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Your underlined bits - commissioners are there for a 5 year term, aren't they?


This is true in theory.  Nothing stops them simply being rolled forward though.


----------



## agricola (Mar 5, 2018)

I'd like to congratulate the Prime Minister for managing to set a new low in terms of Brexit performances at the Commons today.  Given how bad some of her and her Government's utterances have been on the subject these past eighteen months, to actually come up with a display even worse than those takes real gumption.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

agricola said:


> I'd like to congratulate the Prime Minister for managing to set a new low in terms of Brexit performances at the Commons today.  Given how bad some of her and her Government's utterances have been on the subject these past eighteen months, to actually come up with a display even worse than those takes real gumption.


I'd like to think she's an actual participant on this thread and so will read your congratulations.  She's probably philosophical -- that would make a lot of sense, actually.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> More simple words than terms, as far as I can see.  He doesn't understand that the words as terms have a rich history of use and common consensus as to what they imply and what those implications in turn are related to.  They're just insults to be thrown around, like a monkey with its faeces.


You are no authority on what i do or don't understand.
You are reduced above to saying I was attacking wikipedia, and that I said those voting brexit should be discounted. Both of your statements were the opposite of true, yet there you are alluding to monkeys.
My only comment on this particular matter is when your IQ reaches 50, I advise you to sell.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is true in theory.  Nothing stops them simply being rolled forward though.


It's up to each one's nominating country whether they are rolled forward or not, isn't it?
Looking at the current lot, 21 out of the 28 were not previously commissioners.
I don't understand what you meant by saying that they in practice can never be deseated. Clearly 2/3rds were "deseated" last time round. The European Parliament has a vote to approve the new bunch of commissioners each time round. The entire commission can also be ousted by a vote of no confidence* in the European Parliament.

*E2A: here's when this happened in 2014.

Motion of censure against the Commission rejected by a large majority | News | European Parliament

UKIP and the French National Front initiated that vote of no confidence. In that instance it was voted down. The MEPs could have dismissed the entire commission at this point, had the will extended far enough beyond UKIP and FN.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are no authority on what i do or don't understand.
> You are reduced above to saying I was attacking wikipedia, and that I said those voting brexit should be discounted. Both of your statements were the opposite of true, yet there you are alluding to monkeys.
> My only comment on this particular matter is when your IQ reaches 50, I advise you to sell.


This is quite incredible.

Do you or do you not agree that fascism is defined as radical authoritarian nationalism?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If you are going to use concepts like "fascism" and "democracy" you should have some clue as to what they mean, yes.  Not just a guess based on your own misuse of them over the last 65 years.


Rubbish. the use of terms is organic, and a poster above linked to such a discussion regarding fascism. 
65 years ago the term 'bitch' wasn't the shocking insult it is today, and 'gay' simply meant happy. Things change and evolve, they are not defined by a moment in time pinned to the internet by wikipedia, or by something like the Victorians trying to set in stone the rules of the use of language.
Your constant snide digs at me based on your self perceived superior knowledge is tiresomely pompous.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's up to each one's nominating country whether they are rolled forward or not, isn't it?
> Looking at the current lot, 21 out of the 28 were not previously commissioners.
> I don't understand what you meant by saying that they in practice can never be deseated. Clearly 2/3rds were "deseated" last time round. The European Parliament has a vote to approve the new bunch of commissioners each time round. The entire commission can also be ousted by a vote of no confidence in the European Parliament.


Looking back, I can see the ambiguity in what I wrote compared with what I was trying to convey, and my apologies for that.  I'm trying to say firstly that the decision to get rid of a commissioner does not come through common vote.  Once in place, they cannot be removed during their term.  And secondly, yes, a government can choose not to return them, but the decision making behind that process is way more opaque than a straightforward popular mandate.  A commissioner is not a party political animal.

On your final sentence: I would say that the entire commission can be ousted by a vote of no confidence is really neither here nor there, since the constitutional crisis that this would create and the conditions necessary for it to come about would be so extreme that the process is not something that speaks to the everyday democracy of the EU.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical 

Fascism has evolved into the alt-right but it is still fascism.


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I'm lost for words at this point. Truly.



TBH, I'm baffled by why so many people have wasted so much time on this buffoon.

They have nothing to contribute to this or any other thread, a fact which has been glaringly obvious from their very first post.


----------



## agricola (Mar 5, 2018)

teqniq said:


> philosophical
> 
> Fascism has evolved into the alt-right but it is still fascism.



Whoever would have thought that a bunch of rods bound together, signifying the ability of the holder to beat others into submission, would ever be associated with radical authoritarian nationalism?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Rubbish. the use of terms is organic, and a poster above linked to such a discussion regarding fascism.
> 65 years ago the term 'bitch' wasn't the shocking insult it is today, and 'gay' simply meant happy. Things change and evolve, they are not defined by a moment in time pinned to the internet by wikipedia, or by something like the Victorians trying to set in stone the rules of the use of language.
> Your constant snide digs at me based on your self perceived superior knowledge is tiresomely pompous.





kabbes said:


> Please do link to some established recent practice of fascism merely being synonymous with nationalism.





kabbes said:


> Still waiting for that contemporary source showing that fascism is now simply synonymous with nationalism.  No, your reckons don't count for this.





kabbes said:


> This is quite incredible.
> 
> Do you or do you not agree that fascism is defined as radical authoritarian nationalism?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Try googling 'nationalism and fascism' and then fill your boots.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Looking back, I can see the ambiguity in what I wrote compared with what I was trying to convey, and my apologies for that.  I'm trying to say firstly that the decision to get rid of a commissioner does not come through common vote.  Once in place, they cannot be removed during their term.  And secondly, yes, a government can choose not to return them, but the decision making behind that process is way more opaque than a straightforward popular mandate.  A commissioner is not a party political animal.
> 
> On your final sentence: I would say that the entire commission can be ousted by a vote of no confidence is really neither here nor there, since the constitutional crisis that this would create and the conditions necessary for it to come about would be so extreme that the process is not something that speaks to the everyday democracy of the EU.



Your wording didn't seem very ambiguous to me.

See my edit. A vote of no confidence took place in 2014.

I don't really see that the process to get rid of a commissioner is particularly less direct then the process, say, to get rid of a UK government minister. That, effectively, can't be forced by "common vote" either. The UK parliament, let alone the electorate, can't vote to get rid of a particular minister, can they?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Your wording didn't seem very ambiguous to me.
> 
> See my edit. A vote of no confidence took place in 2014.
> 
> I don't really see that the process to get rid of a commissioner is particularly less direct then the process, say, to get rid of a UK government minister. That, effectively, can't be forced by "common vote" either. The UK parliament, let alone the electorate, can't vote to get rid of a particular minister, can they?


I don’t get your point.  Are you also arguing that the EU commission is more democratic than the U.K. government or are you just in quibble mode?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Try googling 'nationalism and fascism' and then fill your boots.


Ok, I tried that and it just gave me sources for how they are not the same thing.

Did you actually try your suggestion before suggesting it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Ok, I tried that and it just gave me sources for how they are not the same thing.
> 
> Did you actually try your suggestion before suggesting it?


Good for you for trying, I did too and had a cursory read of some articles and came across a concept I am less familiar with called 'futurism' which appears to be an allied idea. Reminded me in some ways of those socialist concepts of building a better state sometime on the future, or 'five year plans' or 'great leaps forward' or even 'jam tomorrow'.
Maybe that is what brexit will morph into, jam tomorrow but tomorrow never comes.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t get your point.  Are you also arguing that the EU commission is more democratic than the U.K. government or are you just in quibble mode?



I wouldn't try to argue that, no. However, there's an ongoing idea that the EU is fundamentally undemocratic. I have to say that this has prompted me to find out more about how the EU works, over the past year or so. I can certainly see that there are ways in which its processes can be distant from an electorate that, in the UK at least, doesn't seem all that interested in it (yep, I too couldn't tell you off hand who my MEP is). 

At the same time I've seen a lot of things said about the EU in relation to its democratic processes that when I go and look it all up, seem simply not to be true. So when you said



kabbes said:


> Incredible.  So your position -- let me get this right -- is that if I vote for a government and that government then chooses a Commissioner who can never in practice then be deseated_, _that is somehow more democratic than just voting for a government?
> 
> Because you said that the EU is more democratic than the UK.  But that is the implication: the people one UK government chose for life are democratically more accountable to me than the the UK government that chose them.



and it seemed that you were rather specifically implying that commissioners are chosen for life and that they can't, in practice, be deseated, that didn't seem to reflect reality, and when I went and checked it out, yes, it does seem to be complete nonsense.

In that sense, yes I am in quibble mode but it seems like quite a big, and reasonable, quibble.

My point in comparing commissioners with UK ministers is that I don't see such a fundamental difference in the processes, whereas it seems you do; it seems that you consider the EU quite deeply undemocratic in its processes given your claims quoted above - which I'm not really clear how they were open to misinterpretation.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Good for you for trying, I did too and had a cursory read of some articles and came across a concept I am less familiar with called 'futurism' which appears to be an allied idea. Reminded me in some ways of those socialist concepts of building a better state sometime on the future, or 'five year plans' or 'great leaps forward' or even 'jam tomorrow'.
> Maybe that is what brexit will morph into, jam tomorrow but tomorrow never comes.



So you don't understand futurism either then?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> So you don't understand futurism either then?


Does anybody?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Does anybody?



Yes.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Yes.


Well bully for them?


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> So you don't understand futurism either then?


I'm coming to the conclusion that a list of the things this poster doesn't understand would be a long, long list


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm coming to the conclusion that a list of the things this poster doesn't understand would be a long, long list


You may be right. There is a very long list of things that I don't understand to the depth that would satisfy others. Although I have a sneaking feeling that those others who wish to stand in judgement and assert some kind of superiority are blagging it.
Possibly it is my misfortune and was the nature of my working life to know a little bit about everything but not a whole lot about anything, that's the way things are. Mind you it serves some purpose because it provides an open door for snide remarks like yours.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may be right. There is a very long list of things that I don't understand to the depth that would satisfy others. Although I have a sneaking feeling that those others who wish to stand in judgement and assert some kind of superiority are blagging it.
> Possibly it is my misfortune and was the nature of my working life to know a little bit about everything but not a whole lot about anything, that's the way things are. Mind you it serves some purpose because it provides an open door for snide remarks like yours.


You were boasting about your free university education earlier ffs


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may be right. There is a very long list of things that I don't understand to the depth that would satisfy others. Although I have a sneaking feeling that those others who wish to stand in judgement and assert some kind of superiority are blagging it.
> Possibly it is my misfortune and was the nature of my working life to know a little bit about everything but not a whole lot about anything, that's the way things are. Mind you it serves some purpose because it provides an open door for snide remarks like yours.


You’re the one wondering about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You were boasting about your free university education earlier ffs


No I wasn't. I said I felt shame about my free education when now my generation has pulled up the ladder for others.
In what way is that a boast?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I wasn't. I said I felt shame about my free education when now my generation has pulled up the ladder for others.
> In what way is that a boast?


So you're both playing the poor simple working man and uni educated.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You’re the one wondering about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.


Is this something else you're making up, like your saying EU commissioners have jobs for life, or that I said brexiters should be disregarded, or I was rubbishing wikipedia?
Ignorance might be applied to degree of parcels of knowledge, it might also be applied to a persons behaviour, and you making things up to dig somebody out is much more in the domain of ignorance than blue sky thinking.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So you're both playing the poor simple working man and uni educated.


You what?
You have no evidence regarding my education, and I have never said I am a poor simple working man, these are labels you wish to apply to me to help your desire to classify.
'The'
Tsk, surely you can do better than this?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You what?
> You have no evidence regarding my education, and I have never said I am a poor simple working man, these are labels you wish to apply to me to help your desire to classify.
> 'The'
> Tsk, surely you can do better than this?


You have said that you were ashamed at getting a free education when your 'son' was in the first tranche to pay 9 grand tuition fees. A few a posts above you play the simple working man card. It's all there.

I don't need to do any better than this. Not a word forward on anything substantive from you all day.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You have said that you were ashamed at getting a free education when your 'son' was in the first tranche to pay 9 grand tuition fees. A few a posts above you play the simple working man card. It's all there.
> 
> I don't need to do any better than this. Not a word forward on anything substantive from you all day.



You really are scraping some kind of barrel and coming up with utter bollocks. There is absolutely no conflict between saying I had a free education, and had a working life (it is you who has added the term 'simple' for some reason). 
My comment on a free education was in response to somebody asking if I had voted or was a Liberal, and I said no, nay, never, and cited their duplicity regarding tuition fees compared with the educational benefits I enjoyed. I then went further by complaining that Education is now becoming something that is utilitarian and money related and job related, and to see Education in those terms is an extremely narrow world view.
However you would have had less fun and more difficulty in misrepresenting me if you had included that stuff.
Has it dawned on you yet that a person could have enjoyed the benefit of an education, yet also had a working life as I have? It isn't difficult a concept to grasp, a lot of people do both things.
I suggest you scurry away and try to dream up your next snide comment.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You really are scraping some kind of barrel and coming up with utter bollocks. There is absolutely no conflict between saying I had a free education, and had a working life (it is you who has added the term 'simple' for some reason).
> My comment on a free education was in response to somebody asking if I had voted or was a Liberal, and I said no, nay, never, and cited their duplicity regarding tuition fees compared with the educational benefits I enjoyed. I then went further by complaining that Education is now becoming something that is utilitarian and money related and job related, and to see Education in those terms is an extremely narrow world view.
> However you would have had less fun and more difficulty in misrepresenting me if you had included that stuff.
> Has it dawned on you yet that a person could have enjoyed the benefit of an education, yet also had a working life as I have? It isn't difficult a concept to grasp, a lot of people do both things.
> I suggest you scurry away and try to dream up your next snide comment.


Massive OUTRAGE to avoid offering substantive posts in reply to others. I get it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You’re the one wondering about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.





philosophical said:


> Is this something else you're making up, like your saying EU commissioners have jobs for life, or that I said brexiters should be disregarded, or I was rubbishing wikipedia?


Good grief, surely you haven’t already forgotten your first post?


philosophical said:


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?



I.e. wondering about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.



philosophical said:


> Ignorance might be applied to degree of parcels of knowledge, it might also be applied to a persons behaviour, and you making things up to dig somebody out is much more in the domain of ignorance than blue sky thinking.


Is this you now admitting you were wrong to claim that nationalism and fascism are now considered synonyms and that the thing you told me to look up actually shows the opposite?  Because you seemed to avoid that subject earlier, and I just want to make sure we agree that you were totally wrong about that, despite you saying all sorts about me having low IQ whilst also being superior for pointing out your error.  I mean, “sorry” would be a more usual apology, but if you simply want to admit to “parcels of ignorance” instead, I guess that’s fine too.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

I mean, it was your 'LUNCH' earlier but you carried on posting non-stop for the next hour.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Massive OUTRAGE to avoid offering substantive posts in reply to others. I get it.


Massive?
I am simply reflecting back to you your own corrupt and snide tendencies, this isn't about me, it is about you floundering around trying to find something to be a dickhead about.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I mean, it was your 'LUNCH' earlier but you carried on posting non-stop for the next hour.


Call the lunch police in then.
Sheesh!


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may be right. There is a very long list of things that I don't understand to the depth that would satisfy others. Although I have a sneaking feeling that those others who wish to stand in judgement and assert some kind of superiority are blagging it.
> Possibly it is my misfortune and was the nature of my working life to know a little bit about everything but not a whole lot about anything, that's the way things are. Mind you it serves some purpose because it provides an open door for snide remarks like yours.


To be clear, there's nothing wrong with not knowing all about everything. The problem arises when you behave as if you do, which you have done consistently from your very first post, and simultaneously demonstrate that you actually know far less than you think or claim.

You're merely the latest in a succession of no-nothing remain supporters who has apparently swallowed a load of establishment nonsense about Brexit and how ghastly Leave voters are, and is now regurgitating something you haven't ever understood.

I for one won't be wasting any more time on you.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm coming to the conclusion that a list of the things this poster doesn't understand would be a long, long list


Well he doesn't realise Europe and the EU are two different things for starters. Bloody hell women's suffrage predates the ECSC never mind the EU, still it's certainly a new take on "the EU stops war" stuff, so 10 points for originality.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Good grief, surely you haven’t already forgotten your first post?
> 
> 
> I.e. wondering about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.
> ...



I have tried google translate with this post but it still makes no sense.
What you say I have claimed simply isn't the case, but then you accurately quote my opening post as if it makes some kind of point on your behalf!
This was my opening post:

Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?

Get it? A question right. A question with provocative features but a question nonetheless.

I don't owe you any kind of apology for any reason, neither have I avoided any subject, I have replied to more or less everybody who has addressed or quoted me, and even replied to your requests about fascism and nationalism. You seem to have a problem with the nature of my replies, maybe because seen from your lofty perch they are not good enough for you.
As I said earlier, your pomposity is so tiresome.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

The only provocation was you making clear that it wasn't a question.

Are you really 65?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> To be clear, there's nothing wrong with not knowing all about everything. The problem arises when you behave as if you do, which you have done consistently from your very first post, and simultaneously demonstrate that you actually know far less than you think or claim.
> 
> You're merely the latest in a succession of no-nothing remain supporters who has apparently swallowed a load of establishment nonsense about Brexit and how ghastly Leave voters are, and is now regurgitating something you haven't ever understood.
> 
> I for one won't be wasting any more time on you.



Thank god for that, one less pompous creep who wants to post in judgement about what i write.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well he doesn't realise Europe and the EU are two different things for starters. Bloody hell women's suffrage predates the ECSC never mind the EU, still it's certainly a new take on "the EU stops war" stuff, so 10 points for originality.


I realise that Europe and the EU are two different things. For example the UK is situated on the continent of Europe but is soon to be out of the EU, due to the votes of brexiters.
'For starters'? That is a funny one.
Got anything else?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The only provocation was you making clear that it wasn't a question.
> 
> Are you really 65?


Yes I am 65. Why would you doubt it when I said it yesterday?
Is it some kind of trick question, or will it be an entree into another one of your snide remarks?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I realise that Europe and the EU are two different things. For example the UK is situated on the continent of Europe but is soon to be out of the EU, due to the votes of brexiters.


Why did you credit women gaining the vote to the EU, then? UK will still be situated on the continent of Europe when we leave, as is Norway. Say we just stuck to the worries of Leading Economists, even by those standards the SKY IS FALLING IN stuff is nuts, as evidently capital in northern European countries outside of the EU is doing well for itself. Your bullshit order will likely be restored, don't you worry about that.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have tried google translate with this post but it still makes no sense.
> What you say I have claimed simply isn't the case, but then you accurately quote my opening post as if it makes some kind of point on your behalf!
> This was my opening post:
> 
> ...


A question in which you wondered about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.

Do you understand what “wondered” means?  It means you questioned it.


----------



## bimble (Mar 5, 2018)

Twenty pages of people being entertained by ‘philosophical’. This is worse than the counting with pictures thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

bimble said:


> Twenty pages of people being entertained by ‘philosophical’. This is worse than the counting with pictures thread.


A post saying the same as _i'm here yoohoo!_

No one cares if you are bored.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Why did you credit women gaining the vote to the EU, then? UK will still be situated on the continent of Europe when we leave, as is Norway. Say we just stuck to the worries of Leading Economists, even by those standards the SKY IS FALLING IN stuff is nuts, as evidently capital in northern European countries outside of the EU is doing well for itself. Your bullshit order will likely be restored, don't you worry about that.


I said that Europeans had a long and decent history regarding democracy and one example I gave was Scandinavian countries giving women the vote long before the UK.
Seeing as how the UK eventually gave women equality in something like 1928, way before the EU was formed I couldn't have been conflating the two in that comment of mine. However never mind that wouldn't suit your narrative of lies.
The worries of leading economists don't trouble me, you may be obsessed by money but I am not, my concerns are in other areas. You may well define 'doing well' in monetary terms, but to me that is an example of the kind of obsession the Tories and their brexiters mates have, the filthy lucre. Doing well as far as I am concerned has other definitions, such as the nature of democracy and how the EU does it better than the UK.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I said that Europeans had a long and decent


No you said the EU did. Just fuck off.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> A question in which you wondered about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.
> 
> Do you understand what “wondered” means?  It means you questioned it.


To wonder can mean to muse or meditate on something, it doesn't mean a question directly. What are you, the champion of misusing the dictionary as well as the champion of declaring I have said things I didn't?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

You are getting desperate now.
In the UK women got voting equality before the war, the EU was established after the war.
And in what is becoming a bit of a feature on here regarding the abuse you and others throw in my direction, fuck off yourself.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

> I said that Europeans had a long and decent history regarding democracy and one example I gave was Scandinavian countries giving women the vote long before the UK.






> Doing well as far as I am concerned has other definitions, such as the nature of democracy and how the EU does it better than the UK.




AM NOT CONFUSING THE EU WITH EUROPEANS NAH


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are getting desperate now.
> In the UK women got voting equality before the war, the EU was established after the war.
> And in what is becoming a bit of a feature on here regarding the abuse you and others throw in my direction, fuck off yourself.


Cheers for putting my own earlier post in your words.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are getting desperate now.
> In the UK women got voting equality before the war, the EU was established after the war.
> And in what is becoming a bit of a feature on here regarding the abuse you and others throw in my direction, fuck off yourself.


Italy got fascism before the EU. Opposing the EU is fascism. Something happening before something means that the later can take all the stuff from the earlier and take on all it characteristics.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> AM NOT CONFUSING THE EU WITH EUROPEANS NAH


You're actually learning something. I don't blame you for shouting in delight. A breakthrough for you is it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Italy got fascism before the EU. Opposing the EU is fascism. Something happening before something means that the later can take all the stuff from the earlier and take on all it characteristics.


You might be on to something in a standing on the shoulders of kind of way, it may need a bit of contemplation, but brexiters standing on the shoulders of fascists has a compelling ring to it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> A question in which you wondered about the ignorance of 17 million of your fellow citizens.
> 
> Do you understand what “wondered” means?  It means you questioned it.


Mostly tories though, yeah?

The majority were tories, weren't they? ...

yup remain/leave

tories  39/61
lab	  65/35
lib	   68/32
ukip	 05/95


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

Usual abstainers not worthy a mention...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Mostly tories though, yeah?
> 
> The majority were tories, weren't they? ...
> 
> ...


The master of stats - the person who says the w/c voted against brexit then links to a piece showing that they did. The facile idea that the w/c = labour (check his nationalist posts about just this regarding scotland) - just bizarre old man stuff.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Usual abstainers not worthy a mention...


Not when talking about people who voted, no.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Mostly tories though, yeah?
> 
> The majority were tories, weren't they? ...
> 
> ...


So how many of the 17 million dismissed as ignorant were Labour voters?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So how many of the 17 million dismissed as ignorant were Labour voters?


He's a nationalist, which makes him a fascist according to his new best mate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Not when talking about people who voted, no.


New voters. The turnout was up. This passed you by?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> New voters. The turnout was up. This passed you by?



18-24 were 71/29 in favour of remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 18-24 were 71/29 in favour of remain.


How did the w/c vote DexterTCN


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 18-24 were 71/29 in favour of remain.


Try again.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Try again.


I think I've supplied enough figures without reasoned reply to not bother, cheers.


----------



## Winot (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Usual abstainers not worthy a mention...



If only there was some way in which abstainers could make sure they were counted.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I think I've supplied enough figures without reasoned reply to not bother, cheers.


Kicked in the head by a horse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I think I've supplied enough figures without reasoned reply to not bother, cheers.


I disagree


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> New voters. The turnout was up. This passed you by?


Life passed him by and unlike the good samaritan did not stop to help him


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So how many of the 17 million dismissed as ignorant were Labour voters?


I didn't dismiss anyone as ignorant.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Goodness knows why so many here are dancing the Quadrille of vote counting. Brexit won, isn't the important bit the next stage?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Goodness knows why so many here are dancing the Quadrille of vote counting. Brexit won, isn't the important bit the next stage?





philosophical said:


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

...and he's he's a savile worshipping paedo.

The more you learn the less...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Your point in quoting me being..........a mystery concealing an enigma hiding a vacuum containing nothing?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> If only there was some way in which abstainers could make sure they were counted


Read on


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> ...and he's he's a savile worshipping paedo.
> 
> The more you learn the less...


I assume you are saying that I am a saville worshiping paedo?
Originality not your strong point is it?
Are there no other abusive references you can throw my way?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I assume you are saying that I am a saville worshiping paedo?
> Originality not your strong point is it?
> Are there no other abusive references you can throw my way?


What danger do a ? hold?

You prat. And get out of them stables. You been told.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What danger do a ? hold?
> 
> You prat. And get out of them stables. You been told.


I have to laugh, _you _telling me anything. 
You could be right though, asking you a direct question has turned out to be pissing in the wind, which has a poetic appropriateness as you're all wind and piss anyway.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your point in quoting me being..........a mystery concealing an enigma hiding a vacuum containing nothing?





philosophical said:


> Brexit won, isn't the important bit the next stage?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have to laugh, _you _telling me anything.
> You could be right though, asking you a direct question has turned out to be pissing in the wind, which has a poetic appropriateness as you're all wind and piss anyway.


Ok


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

Part of the next stage being brexiters taking back control of the borders including the land border in Ireland. However you have not suggested any practical answer to that, instead spent the best part of the day demanding that I answer your question about nationalism and fascism. To be fair it worked as a diversion, however the post brexit realities now have to be faced and I have a sense that my original question is being answered right here and as they say, right now.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Part of the next stage being brexiters taking back control of the borders including the land border in Ireland. However you have not suggested any practical answer to that, instead spent the best part of the day demanding that I answer your question about nationalism and fascism. To be fair it worked as a diversion, however the post brexit realities now have to be faced and I have a sense that my original question is being answered right here and as they say, right now.


The EU seems more bothered than anyone else. 

Ever felt that you've been used?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The EU seems more bothered than anyone else.
> 
> Ever felt that you've been used?


Not really. I have a dog in this fight for the reasons I explained yesterday, and the lack of any coherent suggestion from brexiters appals me as to the actions of those voters who utilised their vote without a plan for the border they intended to create. It has been going on long enough, and as well as the Tories, any left wing voting brexiters, or brexiters of any political persuasion have not suggested a border solution. I an especially appalled by those who purport to be from the left so eagerly joining with the Tories and worse, and it is not even mitigated by left wingers having a practical plan to compensate for the stupidity and distain from the right.
If you are suggesting that you are not bothered as part of 'anyone else' you reflect that distain as well. 
However the bald fact is brexiters won, but now can't solve the problems they created, whatever political wing the statistics suggest they come from. A further irony is how eager brexiters are to point out the faults in the EU, but don't seem to want to acknowledge their own fault regarding the thoughtlessness over the border issue.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 5, 2018)

I doubt either side gave much thought to it. It was a straight question is all.

status quo or not?

more austerity or not?

There is way too much 'they are all racist' thinking.


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not really. I have a dog in this fight for the reasons I explained yesterday, and the lack of any coherent suggestion from brexiters appals me as to the actions of those voters who utilised their vote without a plan for the border they intended to create. It has been going on long enough, and as well as the Tories, any left wing voting brexiters, or brexiters of any political persuasion have not suggested a border solution. I an especially appalled by those who purport to be from the left so eagerly joining with the Tories and worse, and it is not even mitigated by left wingers having a practical plan to compensate for the stupidity and distain from the right.
> If you are suggesting that you are not bothered as part of 'anyone else' you reflect that distain as well.
> However the bald fact is brexiters won, but now can't solve the problems they created, whatever political wing the statistics suggest they come from. A further irony is how eager brexiters are to point out the faults in the EU, but don't seem to want to acknowledge their own fault regarding the thoughtlessness over the border issue.


More digs and projection  It's not down to the people who voted out to solve anything.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 5, 2018)

Humberto said:


> There is way too much 'they are all racist' thinking.



There's way too much _people not really knowing anything about the EU but wanting to be in it anyway_.

I voted _Remain _because of the tory party being in govt. for the process, which I don't like at all. But like many others I'm becoming more and more glad that _Leave _won. I confess, I was one of them who voted first and _then _started to actually learn about the EU properly.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2018)

sealion said:


> More digs and projection  It's not down to the people who voted out to solve anything.


I disagree, it is certainly down to the people who voted out to solve the problems they voted for. Who else, a fairy godmother?


----------



## Humberto (Mar 5, 2018)

It fucked the Tories up anyway


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree, it is certainly down to the people who voted out to solve the problems they voted for. Who else, a fairy godmother?



Have you ever heard the maxim that every problem is an opportunity? I'm guessing you're not a huge fan of that one


----------



## sealion (Mar 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree, it is certainly down to the people who voted out to solve the problems they voted for Who else, a fairy godmother?


How about politicians. The voters have done there bit. What are you and your fellow leavers doing about austerity within the eu ? A fairy godmother won't stop the debt.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not really. I have a dog in this fight for the reasons I explained yesterday, and the lack of any coherent suggestion from brexiters appals me as to the actions of those voters who utilised their vote without a plan for the border they intended to create. It has been going on long enough, and as well as the Tories, any left wing voting brexiters, or brexiters of any political persuasion have not suggested a border solution. I an especially appalled by those who purport to be from the left so eagerly joining with the Tories and worse, and it is not even mitigated by left wingers having a practical plan to compensate for the stupidity and distain from the right.
> If you are suggesting that you are not bothered as part of 'anyone else' you reflect that distain as well.
> However the bald fact is brexiters won, but now can't solve the problems they created, whatever political wing the statistics suggest they come from. A further irony is how eager brexiters are to point out the faults in the EU, but don't seem to want to acknowledge their own fault regarding the thoughtlessness over the border issue.


 That's just a bizarre linkage. What have you get next for us, you are amazed at those who thought it was a good idea for United to buy back Paul Pogba didn't think about the Forth Rail Bridge disaster?

More importantly, you've just got it wrong in your interpretation about what the brexit vote was. Yes, clearly, it was going to at the very least pose questions about border arrangements - just as it was going to pose questions about much of our relationship with the rest of the world (diplomatic, economic etc). All pretty obvious. But a referendum isn't an exam paper where everyone needs to bring along their blueprints for the very things that they have no control over. People voted for/against brexit for complex reasons, on both sides. They were entirely rational reasons, reflecting their experiences over decades, their identity and all sorts of specifics. But you seem to take it that if someone didn't enter the voting booth with worked out scenarios on tax, borders or God knows what that they are idiots.  Life just isn't like that - why would people have bloody worked out position papers on things that they are never consulted on and never have a say in - and still don't.

To take an example, the Northeast devolution referendum - I voted against it.  I thought Labour were being cynical, detested them and thought John Prescott was a wanker - along with the fact the powers on offer were minimal. My vote was a bit of straight political schadenfreude. Does that mean I'm forever open to people whining at me for my short sightedness and making me personally responsible for the North-South divide. I'd say not.  I made one of my rare forays into the voting booth (well, postal vote) and my vote represented a real thing, even if I hadn't given a moments thought to the minor representative role that some Labour hack Northeast Tzar would have wielded.

Edited: typos!


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree, it is certainly down to the people who voted out to solve the problems they voted for. Who else, a fairy godmother?



The UK government employs civil servants for this kind of stuff. It's not the fault of the voters that the government gave them inadequate time and  insufficient means to prepare for a Brexit result.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

The whole Irish border question would be solved by reunifying Ireland.  There, job done.  Of course that has other problems, but so does staying in the EU.  There is never an answer to anything that satisfies everyone.


----------



## Supine (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Have you ever heard the maxim that every problem is an opportunity? I'm guessing you're not a huge fan of that one



More a management buzz word rathter than a maxim. And it's bullshit designed to keep workers working on problems. If anything with brexit it's an opportunity to make the country worse at the hands of rabid right wing conservatives with a little support from left wing dreamers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

Humberto said:


> It fucked the Tories up anyway


And ukip


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Have you ever heard the maxim that every problem is an opportunity? I'm guessing you're not a huge fan of that one


How might you realistically and practically use this opportunity to resolve the Irish border problem so that it satisfies those who voted brexit to regain control?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> How about politicians. The voters have done there bit. What are you and your fellow leavers doing about austerity within the eu ? A fairy godmother won't stop the debt.


I pay taxes and would be happy to pay double. I would additionally be happy for those on low income to not pay taxes at all.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> That's just a bizarre linkage. What have you get next for us, you are amazed at those who thought it was a good idea for United to buy back Paul Pogba didn't think about the Forth Rail Bridge disaster?
> 
> More importantly, you've just got it wrong in your interpretation about what the brexit vote was. Yes, clearly, it was going to at the very least pose questions about border arrangements - just as it was going to pose questions about much of our relationship with the rest of the world (diplomatic, economic etc). All pretty obvious. But a referendum isn't an exam paper where everyone needs to bring along their blueprints for the very things that they have no control over. People voted for/against brexit for complex reasons, on both sides. They were entirely rational reasons, reflecting their experiences over decades, their identity and all sorts of specifics. But you seem to take it that if someone didn't enter the voting booth with worked out scenarios on tax, borders or God knows what that they are idiots.  Life just isn't like that - why would people have bloody worked out position papers on things that they are never consulted on and never have a say in - and still don't.
> 
> ...


The brexit vote is 'interpreted' to mean many things. You may think my interpretation is wrong fair enough, but does it make your interpretation right? Very probably not.
You ask why people ought to have thought things through before the vote, well brexit voters constantly say they knew what they were voting for so my answer to that is tell us the details of the land border in Ireland then if you knew what you were doing. A brexit referendum is a one time event unlike a general election every five years, the Good Friday Agreement is an international treaty. Brexit voters wanted it, knew what they were doing, but surprise surprise practical solutionx are either a secret or for others to do the dirty work.
Whatever motivated voters doesn't matter now the damage is done what matters is for brexit voters to reveal the solutions they had in mind. Brexit voters abdicating responsibility put me in mind of Marie Antoinette saying 'let them eat cake'. You write above that voters didn't have a say, yes they did they had a vote and used it. And brexit won. In my view it is 100% down to all those brexit voters to reveal their solutions to the problems.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The UK government employs civil servants for this kind of stuff. It's not the fault of the voters that the government gave them inadequate time and  insufficient means to prepare for a Brexit result.


I disagree, brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, and it is insulting to say they didn't.
Are you saying then, that brexit voters actually didn't know what they were doing?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The whole Irish border question would be solved by reunifying Ireland.  There, job done.  Of course that has other problems, but so does staying in the EU.  There is never an answer to anything that satisfies everyone.


That might be a solution, however it would create other problems. If it happened because the UK voted brexit then it is an imposition on the people in the republic who didn't get to vote.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> That might be a solution, however it would create other problems. If it happened because the UK voted brexit then it is an imposition on the people in the republic who didn't get to vote.


So people in the UK have to stay in the EU because people in the ROI don't want to be in a united Ireland?


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree, brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, and it is insulting to say they didn't.
> Are you saying then, that brexit voters actually didn't know what they were doing?



They did know what they were voting for. They were voting on whether the UK should remain a member of the EU. It's the job of the politicians and civil servants to sort out the details. That's what we pay our taxes for, is it not?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So people in the UK have to stay in the EU because people in the ROI don't want to be in a united Ireland?


So people in the ROI have to dance to the tune of UK brexit voters without having any say themselves?
Yesterday you were complaining about the nature of EU democracy yet this answer suggests denying the people of the republic any democracy.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> They did know what they were voting for. They were voting on whether the UK should remain a member of the EU. It's the job of the politicians and civil servants to sort out the details. That's what we pay our taxes for, is it not?


So if the ballot paper asked if people wanted eternal life and that won it would be down to the civil servants to deliver? If they then said it isn't possible all bets are off, status quo would you accept that?
Nothing other than a completely open border is deliverable, is that the 'will of the people'?
The Irish border question might seem a mere detail to any colonial minded, and indeed racist minded Briton, but in my experience it is a situation that demands more than the casual distain brexit voters give it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So people in the ROI have to dance to the tune of UK brexit voters without having any say themselves?


Well, yes.  That's the nature of sovereign states. People in a state can make a decision to benefit themselves and people in other states then make their own decisions accordingly.


> Yesterday you were complaining about the nature of EU democracy yet this answer suggests denying the people of the republic any democracy.


The people of the ROI have their own right to decide to deny reunification.  This is a perfectly acceptable outcome, but it means that they have to actually front up and state that this is what they want.  You're suggesting a have-their-cake-and-eat-it approach, in which they get to simultaneously act as if a united Ireland is desirable but not actually want a united Ireland.  If the ROI don't want reunification, why are we even debating the problems of a divided Ireland?


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So if the ballot paper asked if people wanted eternal life and that won it would be down to the civil servants to deliver? If they then said it isn't possible all bets are off, status quo would you accept that?
> Nothing other than a completely open border is deliverable, is that the 'will of the people'?
> The Irish border question might seem a mere detail to any colonial minded, and indeed racist minded Briton, but in my experience it is a situation that demands more than the casual distain brexit voters give it.



There's no need for a referendum on eternal life. Biologists worldwide are already working on the problem, or at least beginning to.

If the people on either side of the Irish border aren't interested in closing it, then who the fuck are the EU to say otherwise? Brussels' intransigence will be their undoing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

of course when the matter is settled, as it will be, we'll move onto the next thing thats deffo a crises and the sky can fall in all over again. Columns in the guardian will be written. Shall we have a guess on which one comes next? single market rows within both parties?. Less than a year to go as well so they'd best get on it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Columns in the guardian will be written.


they're all generated by computer which then applies a random name from a list to the byline.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If the people on either side of the Irish border aren't interested in closing it, then who the fuck are the EU to say otherwise? Brussels' intransigence will be their undoing.



Why does this keep getting repeated on here? It’s been pointed out multiple times that it is international trade rules (determined by the WTO) that requires border checks.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, yes.  That's the nature of sovereign states. People in a state can make a decision to benefit themselves and people in other states then make their own decisions accordingly...



Fascism


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Why does this keep getting repeated on here? It’s been pointed out multiple times that it is international trade rules (determined by the WTO) that requires border checks.



Why aren't they happening already then? I don't think you know what "required" means.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Why does this keep getting repeated on here? It’s been pointed out multiple times that it is international trade rules (determined by the WTO) that requires border checks.


Depends on if, or what kind of a trade agreement is put in place, no?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Like liberal gravity.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I pay taxes and would be happy to pay double.


That's very noble of you but it won't solve the debt issues. Just throw money at it and let the eu carry on as it is 


philosophical said:


> I would additionally be happy for those on low income to not pay taxes at all.


That's already the case isn't it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, yes.  That's the nature of sovereign states. People in a state can make a decision to benefit themselves and people in other states then make their own decisions accordingly.
> The people of the ROI have their own right to decide to deny reunification.  This is a perfectly acceptable outcome, but it means that they have to actually front up and state that this is what they want.  You're suggesting a have-their-cake-and-eat-it approach, in which they get to simultaneously act as if a united Ireland is desirable but not actually want a united Ireland.  If the ROI don't want reunification, why are we even debating the problems of a divided Ireland?


The nature of the Good Friday Agreement is a clue here.
Are you suggesting that the brexit vote was an offer by the UK to have a United Ireland?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> There's no need for a referendum on eternal life. Biologists worldwide are already working on the problem, or at least beginning to.
> 
> If the people on either side of the Irish border aren't interested in closing it, then who the fuck are the EU to say otherwise? Brussels' intransigence will be their undoing.


I see it as the UK wanting a border, the brexit vote frequently being declared as a method of regaining control of the border.
Who are the UK voters to say what the Irish should accept?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

take a chill pill man. its all going to be cool.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> of course when the matter is settled, as it will be, we'll move onto the next thing thats deffo a crises and the sky can fall in all over again. Columns in the guardian will be written. Shall we have a guess on which one comes next? single market rows within both parties?. Less than a year to go as well so they'd best get on it.


I don't share your faith that the matter will be settled, but you say it will be, do you want to say how?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> That's very noble of you but it won't solve the debt issues. Just throw money at it and let the eu carry on as it is
> 
> That's already the case isn't it.


I think your use of the word 'let' is a problem for me. I would use the fully available and decent EU democratic structures to try to resist what I wouldn't want to 'let' happen. I certainly wouldn't expect others to do it for me.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see it as the UK wanting a border, the brexit vote frequently being declared as a method of regaining control of the border.
> Who are the UK voters to say what the Irish should accept?


What was your previous activity as regards the UK Irish border?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> That's very noble of you but it won't solve the debt issues. Just throw money at it and let the eu carry on as it is
> 
> That's already the case isn't it.


No it isn't. People pay taxes long before their income rises to a liveable level.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Why aren't they happening already then? I don't think you know what "required" means.



Because we haven't left the EU yet.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think your use of the word 'let' is a problem for me. I would use the fully available and decent EU democratic structures to try to resist what I wouldn't want to 'let' happen. I certainly wouldn't expect others to do it for me.


You voted for them therefore you voted for more of the same.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Because we haven't left the EU yet.



So border checks aren't actually required.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Depends on if, or what kind of a trade agreement is put in place, no?



Yes that's true in that the extent of the tariffs and agreements on stuff like how chlorinated a chicken can be will determine the extent of the checks. But if we leave the SM/CU then the resulting deal will never be as frictionless as before. So there will be checks.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see it as the UK wanting a border, the brexit vote frequently being declared as a method of regaining control of the border.
> Who are the UK voters to say what the Irish should accept?



Declared by whom?


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So border checks aren't actually required.



 Are you being so clever that I am missing the point or so stupid that you are?

Whilst we are in the SM and CU we are one market with the EU. Free movement of goods etc. Checks arise when we are in different markets.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What was your previous activity as regards the UK Irish border?


he was in the border campaign obvs


Winot said:


> So there will be checks.


and it'll be 1969 all over again, even the music.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What was your previous activity as regards the UK Irish border?


You like to play the man not the ball quite a lot, for example asking about my age yesterday?
If it interests you I was born in Kent, but have an Irish passport, I have a brother and wider family living in the Republic, as a child, because of the obvious Irishness of my mother (accent) I and my family were subject to anti Irish racist abuse. I travel to and from the Republic frequently, and I have lived a lot of my life under the shadow of, and very close to, the Irish related terrorism generated from the late sixties to the mid nineties. 
More specifically, I have raised the issues of the Irish border in debate before the referendum, and continually ever since. Including directly in hustings face to face before last years election, and in writing to my MP.
I don't know if that qualifies as activity, but it qualifies as a bit of experience.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No it isn't. People pay taxes long before their income rises to a liveable level.


Yet you talk of tax on income.

This is shameless.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Are you being so clever that I am missing the point or so stupid that you are?
> 
> Whilst we are in the SM and CU we are one market with the EU. Free movement of goods etc. Checks arise when we are in different markets.



So there are arrangements in which checks are not required. You've almost got it.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You like to play the man not the ball quite a lot, for example asking about my age yesterday?
> If it interests you I was born in Kent, but have an Irish passport, I have a brother and wider family living in the Republic, as a child, because of the obvious Irishness of my mother (accent) I and my family were subject to anti Irish racist abuse. I travel to and from the Republic frequently, and I have lived a lot of my life under the shadow of, and very close to, the Irish related terrorism generated from the late sixties to the mid nineties.
> More specifically, I have raised the issues of the Irish border in debate before the referendum, and continually ever since. Including directly in hustings face to face before last years election, and in writing to my MP.
> I don't know if that qualifies as activity, but it qualifies as a bit of experience.


So nothing. No activity. Yet suddenly sprung into action in the last year or so.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No it isn't. People pay taxes long before their income rises to a liveable level.


There are are thousands of low paid workers in full time employment claiming benefits to top up there wages.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So there are arrangements in which checks are not required. You've almost got it.



Oh do fuck off.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Oh do fuck off.



Concession accepted.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Oh do fuck off.


There you go, knew we'd get the brixton gentrifier out of you before long.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Why does this keep getting repeated on here? It’s been pointed out multiple times that it is international trade rules (determined by the WTO) that requires border checks.


It's been claimed, but not sure it's actually been demonstrated.

As far as I can see, however, whatever the WTO says, it's the EU regs which would require a hard border to control what goods go into the EU and 'protect' all EU countries (not just Eire) from 'contamination'


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Concession accepted.



Yes the great thing about U75 is that you can read the views of people who have a different perspective to you, learn new things and sometimes even change your own mind.  It's a shame that in between there is patronising crap from people who mistake being unclear and gnomic for being smart.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's been claimed, but not sure it's actually been demonstrated.
> 
> As far as I can see, however, whatever the WTO says, *it's the EU regs which would require a hard border* to control what goods go into the EU and 'protect' all EU countries (not just Eire) from 'contamination'



I'd be interested to hear more about this.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> You voted for them therefore you voted for more of the same.


More of the same structures certainly, with an opportunity to influence change from the 'same'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yes the great thing about U75 is that you can read the views of people who have a different perspective to you, learn new things and sometimes even change your own mind.  It's a shame that in between there is patronising crap from people who mistake being unclear and gnomic for being smart.


you can change people's minds. you did change mine, as once upon a time i thought you might occasionally post stuff worth reading. i know better now.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> with an opportunity to influence change from the 'same'.


What influence do yo have ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Declared by whom?


Theresa may is one example. She repeated it last Friday, and last Sunday too. The brexiters friend Farage says it, they all say it. A cursory watch of question time, and other similar programmes you hear lots of people say it.
It is continually repeated that the British people voted brexit to regain control of it's borders.
This stuff may have passed you by, but I assure you it is true.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Theresa may is one example. She repeated it last Friday, and last Sunday too. The brexiters friend Farage says it, they all say it. A cursory watch of question time, and other similar programmes you hear lots of people say it.
> It is continually repeated that the British people voted brexit to regain control of it's borders.
> This stuff may have passed you by, but I assure you it is true.



The word of right-wing politicians being of course totally unimpeachable.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> What influence do yo have ?


Participating in the EU democratic structures. About the same degree of influence as most people.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The word of right-wing politicians being of course totally unimpeachable.


The right wing politicians and 17 million others who won the brexit vote. That is the problem. We are in the realm of action, action guided by the word of the Alt Right. It alarms me that those purporting to be of the left seem so sanguine about that.
Brexit has chained people to the right wing, even Corbyns Labour are going for it despite their chance to be an alternative.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Participating in the EU democratic structures. About the same degree of influence as most people.


What are these opportunities you speak of ? How are going you going to influence change and what changes are you on about here?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Yet you talk of tax on income.
> 
> This is shameless.


I said people pay tax before their income is high enough, I didn't talk of income tax as such. There are other forms. I reckon income tax is fair enough for certain people though, even if you think that is shameless.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The right wing politicians and 17 million others who won the brexit vote. That is the problem. We are in the realm of action, action guided by the word of the Alt Right. It alarms me that those purporting to be of the left seem so sanguine about that.
> Brexit has chained people to the right wing, even Corbyns Labour are going for it despite their chance to be an alternative.



You're doing it again. On what basis do you assume that all 17 million people voted Brexit because of border issues? None. My Brexit vote certainly had nothing to do with it. Thanks for the smear of racism by the way.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I said people pay tax before their income is high enough, I didn't talk of income tax as such. There are other forms. I reckon income tax is fair enough for certain people though, even if you think that is shameless.


You were replying to a post about income tax. Pathetic shape-shifting.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Participating in the EU democratic structures. About the same degree of influence as most people.


Enumerate the many ways please.

Also, the people who aren't most people  - companies who get direct un-elected representation on bodies above what 'most people' get - what of them? Isn't that akin to - or worse - than your dreaded House of Lords?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> What are these opportunities you speak of ? How are going you going to influence change and what changes are you on about here?


EU elections for one.
The same kind of opportunities UK voters have domestically, but without the contamination of a Monarchy and House of Lords, and a first past the post system.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You were replying to a post about income tax. Pathetic shape-shifting.


You may wish to read back and get things right.
'Pathetic'?
As I said earlier playing the man not the ball.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Enumerate the many ways please.


See 5953


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Thanks for the smear of racism by the way.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> See 5953


A post in the future - l look forward to it.

I've added to my post but i may as well add it here as well:

Also, the people who aren't most people - companies who get direct un-elected representation on EU bodies above what 'most people' get - what of them? Isn't that akin to - or worse - than your dreaded House of Lords?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may wish to read back and get things right.
> 'Pathetic'?
> As I said earlier playing the man not the ball.


There is no ball.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's been claimed, but not sure it's actually been demonstrated.
> 
> As far as I can see, however, whatever the WTO says, it's the EU regs which would require a hard border to control what goods go into the EU and 'protect' all EU countries (not just Eire) from 'contamination'



Article here which sets out implication of WTO rules. Which bit of this is inaccurate?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How might you realistically and practically use this opportunity to resolve the Irish border problem so that it satisfies those who voted brexit to regain control?



I personally favour a united Ireland which, as stated, would solve the "Irish border problem" in one fell swoop. It would at the same time turn the "problem" into a far more transparent _British Nationalist _problem, which IMO would be easier to deal with anyway.

I recognize this is unlikely to be the actual solution employed, but that's hardly my fault.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Enumerate the many ways please.
> 
> Also, the people who aren't most people  - companies who get direct un-elected representation on bodies above what 'most people' get - what of them? Isn't that akin to - or worse - than your dreaded House of Lords?


Certainly not worse. If you say anybody 'gets direct unelected representation' how does that happen, do they get appointed or smash down the door and seize a seat at the table?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Certainly not worse. If you say anybody 'gets direct unelected representation' how does that happen, do they get appointed or smash down the door and seize a seat at the table?


They are invited to be part of the planning of the EU and how it operates - of how we are told to live. Did you really not know this?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I personally favour a united Ireland which, as stated, would solve the "Irish border problem" in one fell swoop. It would at the same turn the "problem" into a far more transparent _British Nationalist _problem, which IMO would be easier to deal with anyway.
> 
> I recognize this is unlikely to be the actual solution employed, but that's hardly my fault.



I don't know if you voted in the referendum, or which way, but what are the practical steps you would now take to bring about a United Ireland with substantial consensus?
My personal opinion is that the brexit vote is an obstacle in the way of any decent progression for Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> They are invited to be part of the planning of the EU and how it operates - of how we are told to live. Did you really not know this?


Invited by who?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Invited by who?


Have a guess - is it you via your democratic input?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Oh you poor naive thing - you _really _didn't know did you?


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Article here which sets out implication of WTO rules. Which bit of this is inaccurate?



And here is the WTO on this topic.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't know if you voted in the referendum, or which way, but what are the practical steps you would now take to bring about a United Ireland with substantial consensus?
> My personal opinion is that the brexit vote is an obstacle in the way of any decent progression for Ireland.



You do know how I voted, because I posted that just before.

I appreciate what you think you're trying to do but it's not up to me (or anyone here) to come up with a plan for Irish unification. Any more than it's up to you to come up with a plan for making the EU into something worth being in.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)




----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't know if you voted in the referendum, or which way, but what are the practical steps you would now take to bring about a United Ireland with substantial consensus?
> My personal opinion is that the brexit vote is an obstacle in the way of any decent progression for Ireland.



The majority Unionist population is the real obstacle, Brexit or no Brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The nature of the Good Friday Agreement is a clue here.
> Are you suggesting that the brexit vote was an offer by the UK to have a United Ireland?


I'm simply saying that one solution to the border issue is to create a reunified Ireland.  Or, if the ROI don't want reunification, for them to make that plain, and thus for the ROI to put a hard border in place in line with their own wishes, which ends the whole border discussion.  

I'm not saying this will happen, nor am I saying it is "what people voted for" (as if every decision needed to create Brexit each had its own tick-box).  I'm just saying it is a solution.  It is never the case that there are no solutions, it's just that the solution set that people are willing to consider is restricted ideologically.  That's fine, but lets have that ideology front and centre.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

there is very little possibility of a united ireland and even less possibility of either side confirming this


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> I'd be interested to hear more about this.


I'm on my phone ATM, but there was an article on the BBC website at the weekend where TM was saying she didn't want a hard border but the Irish FM was saying one would be necessary the reason I mentioned.

(All this of course assuming a formal agreement can't be reached)


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> there is very little possibility of a united ireland and even less possibility of either side confirming this


The fact that both sides are ideologically committed to keeping NI as part of the UK is really not my fault.  I was asked for my preferred solution and I have given it.  Where is my tick box referendum that I might vote for this, in line with the apparent need to vote for all elements of Brexit?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> there is very little possibility of a united ireland and even less possibility of either side confirming this


Bur suddenly interested parties - ones who previously had nothing to say whatsoever  about partition or border - insist that it is at the forefront of their minds, the thing that keeps them up at night. Some of them even have irish passports and brothers who've been to ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm on my phone ATM, but there was an article on the BBC website at the weekend where TM was saying she didn't want a hard border but the Irish FM was saying one would be necessary the reason I mentioned.
> 
> (All this of course assuming a formal agreement can't be reached)



A customs union won’t help – there is no such thing as a ‘soft’ Brexit | Vernon Bogdanor


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> there is very little possibility of a united ireland and even less possibility of either side confirming this



Not at this moment in time, for sure. The DUP/tory alliance has set that particular goal back years. IMHO.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> See 5953


OK...


not-bono-ever said:


> there is very little possibility of a united ireland and even less possibility of either side confirming this


Hmm.  Not sure how that related to your point, but so be it.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Article here which sets out implication of WTO rules. Which bit of this is inaccurate?


Thanks, I'll have a read and then respond later


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Article here which sets out implication of WTO rules. Which bit of this is inaccurate?


Mad when you think about it. Eu sets >50% tariffs on Lamb and beef to protect EU farmers. And here are the Irish, who's Beef & lamb farmers export largely to the UK, playing hard ball on behalf of the EU ideologists. 
Walk away and the Irish suffer while the UK consumers prices sink. 

Unless I missing something obvious that IT article still doesn't demonstrate the border impacts of a zero tariff UK scenario (equal treatment for all) which kind of undermines its main argument.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Mad when you think about it. Eu sets >50% tariffs on Lamb and beef to protect EU farmers. And here are the Irish, who's Beef & lamb farmers export largely to the UK, playing hard ball on behalf of the EU ideologists.
> Walk away and the Irish suffer while the UK consumers prices sink.
> 
> Unless I missing something obvious that IT article still doesn't demonstrate the border impacts of a zero tariff UK scenario (equal treatment for all) which kind of undermines its main argument.


Sort of suggests that there's _something else_ at play here doesn't it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Have a guess - is it you via your democratic input?


Yes. If those doing the inviting are elected.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes. If those doing the inviting are elected.


Democracy-squared


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Article here which sets out implication of WTO rules. Which bit of this is inaccurate?



Just to point out, this the above is an abridged version of the this opinion piece from the FT.

But even from the comments under that article, it seems there's plenty of disagreement about it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> You do know how I voted, because I posted that just before.
> 
> I appreciate what you think you're trying to do but it's not up to me (or anyone here) to come up with a plan for Irish unification. Any more than it's up to you to come up with a plan for making the EU into something worth being in.





mojo pixy said:


> You do know how I voted, because I posted that just before.
> 
> I appreciate what you think you're trying to do but it's not up to me (or anyone here) to come up with a plan for Irish unification. Any more than it's up to you to come up with a plan for making the EU into something worth being in.


I apologise if I missed it, but if you voted brexit I do see it being up to you I'm afraid.
If not the brexiteers, then who?


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Unless I missing something obvious that IT article still doesn't demonstrate the border impacts of a zero tariff UK scenario (equal treatment for all) which kind of undermines its main argument.



I think the point is that the UK could choose to have zero tariffs (and therefore no customs checks for goods going into the UK) but in practice that would be politically impossible.

What I don't know is what would happen in that theoretical scenario with goods going the other way into the EU. I'm guessing they would be zero tariff that way too, but don't know enough to say for sure.

I think the bigger problem is the non-tariff barriers (e.g. food safety) requiring checks.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes. If those doing the inviting are elected.


So you invited the big capitalists into the decision making bodies of the EU? Take some responsibility for that - it's your world now. Thanks for that.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Sort of suggests that there's _something else_ at play here doesn't it?


I hope you're not suggesting that the Irish politicians are possibly being leaned on by their EU rulers? That would be unprecedented


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I apologise if I missed it, but if you voted brexit I do see it being up to you I'm afraid.
> If not the brexiteers, then who?


Why have you responded to every single poster who clearly has said that they didn't vote to leave the EU as if they did vote to leave the EU? A perfunctory, oh i didn't see that might cover it once - but over and over? 

Do you still think Dexter is a fascist btw?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> The majority Unionist population is the real obstacle, Brexit or no Brexit.


And the Good Friday Agreement has been a step forward in engaging with the Unionists (majority?). Brexit and the UK election has pushed extreme Unionists closer to the Tories, and made that obstacle much bigger.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I hope you're not suggesting that the Irish politicians are possibly being leaned on by their EU rulers? That would be unprecedented


OUTRAGEOUS


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The brexit vote is 'interpreted' to mean many things. You may think my interpretation is wrong fair enough, but does it make your interpretation right? Very probably not.
> You ask why people ought to have thought things through before the vote, well brexit voters constantly say they knew what they were voting for so my answer to that is tell us the details of the land border in Ireland then if you knew what you were doing. A brexit referendum is a one time event unlike a general election every five years, the Good Friday Agreement is an international treaty. Brexit voters wanted it, knew what they were doing, but surprise surprise practical solutionx are either a secret or for others to do the dirty work.
> Whatever motivated voters doesn't matter now the damage is done what matters is for brexit voters to reveal the solutions they had in mind. Brexit voters abdicating responsibility put me in mind of Marie Antoinette saying 'let them eat cake'. You write above that voters didn't have a say, yes they did they had a vote and used it. And brexit won. In my view it is 100% down to all those brexit voters to reveal their solutions to the problems.


But you're doing it again. You miss the point of representative democracy - it's about people _not_ being involved, _not_ having power, _not_ being in a position to influence policy in direct ways. It's the passing of all that power to politicians. Similarly, the referendum was set up as a single event. There were no subsidiary questions or 2nd referenda on the final deal with the EU. Or, to get straight to it: you seem to expect voters should have had a solution to the Irish border in mind when voting. Even if that is reasonable, how would those 17m ideas on the Irish border have been put into practice?  How would it have worked? The mechanics of voting in the referenda had no way of scooping up those numerous and diverse ideas.  OKay, here's my solution - a united Ireland. Technically, I wasn't a brexit voter, but there you go, you want a solution. But where does that go? How does it get fed into decision making? Answer: it doesn't.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> And the Good Friday Agreement has been a step forward in engaging with the Unionists (majority?). Brexit and the UK election has pushed extreme Unionists closer to the Tories, and made that obstacle much bigger.



The GFA could not have forseen Brexit, I feel it throws the whole thing into mass confusion. Genuinely worried about what happens next.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I'm simply saying that one solution to the border issue is to create a reunified Ireland.  Or, if the ROI don't want reunification, for them to make that plain, and thus for the ROI to put a hard border in place in line with their own wishes, which ends the whole border discussion.
> 
> I'm not saying this will happen, nor am I saying it is "what people voted for" (as if every decision needed to create Brexit each had its own tick-box).  I'm just saying it is a solution.  It is never the case that there are no solutions, it's just that the solution set that people are willing to consider is restricted ideologically.  That's fine, but lets have that ideology front and centre.


It may be a solution, but the problem is the practical steps to, as you say, 'create' a United Ireland. Have you any practical steps to suggest?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It may be a solution, but the problem is the practical steps to, as you say, 'create' a United Ireland. Have you any practical steps to suggest?


You're very demanding in terms of other people creating an entire end to end process for every aspect of this thing.  There's a whole army of civil servants that are employed to create the practical steps to achieve an agreed goal.

My first practical step is to shoot Theresa May into space with a banner that reads "NORTHERN IRELAND IS YOUR PROBLEM NOW LOL"

Of course, reunification is an impossible practical reality.  Look at Germany, still separated into East and West.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

as long we the mainland brits are not getting bombed , then Ireland was out of the picture. Now it has raised it head again, we are all interested. Everyone is an expert.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> I think the point is that the UK could choose to have zero tariffs (and therefore no customs checks for goods going into the UK) but in practice that would be politically impossible.
> 
> *What I don't know is what would happen in that theoretical scenario with goods going the other way into the EU. I'm guessing they would be zero tariff that way too, but don't know enough to say for sure.*
> 
> I think the bigger problem is the non-tariff barriers (e.g. food safety) requiring checks.


The shoe would be on the other foot re the border/ GFA impact/ moral high ground. imo the EU have inadvertently given the UK leverage in the negotiations by making such a drama out of it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Bur suddenly interested parties - ones who previously had nothing to say whatsoever  about partition or border - insist that it is at the forefront of their minds, the thing that keeps them up at night. Some of them even have irish passports and brothers who've been to ireland.



You can't resist the snide can you? Or playing the person not the issue, which might explain your enquiry above as to my interest in the matter.

Not 'suddenly', and I have had plenty to say, but haven't said it on here...as I indicated above. However you were in disguise asking for my interest, it wasn't a genuine enquiry, but an attempt to gain some kind of ammunition that you can misuse. Your approach to this discussion suggests to me an eagerness for some kind of validation from your mates because you have selected what you might percieve to be an easy target.

I try to refrain from asking others personal questions about their lives, but if a person is open enough to disclose something, I wouldn't then use it as a stick to try to beat them with.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Democracy-squared


Democracy nonetheless.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Democracy nonetheless.


And good for you that you are satisfied with it as a process.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Why have you responded to every single poster who clearly has said that they didn't vote to leave the EU as if they did vote to leave the EU? A perfunctory, oh i didn't see that might cover it once - but over and over?
> 
> Do you still think Dexter is a fascist btw?


I am uncertain exactly how people voted, tried to track down the post that revealed it and failed, hence the use of the word 'if'.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You're very demanding in terms of other people creating an entire end to end process for every aspect of this thing.  There's a whole army of civil servants that are employed to create the practical steps to achieve an agreed goal.
> 
> My first practical step is to shoot Theresa May into space with a banner that reads "NORTHERN IRELAND IS YOUR PROBLEM NOW LOL"
> 
> Of course, reunification is an impossible practical reality.  Look at Germany, still separated into East and West.



Not to forget Cyprus


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Why have you responded to every single poster who clearly has said that they didn't vote to leave the EU as if they did vote to leave the EU? A perfunctory, oh i didn't see that might cover it once - but over and over?
> 
> Do you still think Dexter is a fascist btw?


As mentioned above, you continually ask me questions, often for personal disclosure, and then you're straight in with the snide comment. Will your next one be in order to gain validation and approval from Dexter?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am uncertain exactly how people voted, tried to track down the post that revealed it and failed, hence the use of the word 'if'.


They literally say how they voted in the posts that you pretend to respond to. Over and over.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> As mentioned above, you continually ask me questions, often for personal disclosure, and then you're straight in with the snide comment. Will you next one be in order to gain validation and approval from Dexter?


I do think so, yes. Come on Dexter - out with it.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You're very demanding in terms of other people creating an entire end to end process for every aspect of this thing.  There's a whole army of civil servants that are employed to create the practical steps to achieve an agreed goal.
> 
> My first practical step is to shoot Theresa May into space with a banner that reads "NORTHERN IRELAND IS YOUR PROBLEM NOW LOL"
> 
> Of course, reunification is an impossible practical reality.  Look at Germany, still separated into East and West.


I'm sure philosophical just cant wait to provide us with his detailed roadmap of how the EUs Federal Convergence programme should be implemented and how the UK would achieve a fair representation within it, considering its ever shrinking role (had remain had won the ref that is).
Obviously he had the whole thing scoped and planned before casting his vote at the ref


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> But you're doing it again. You miss the point of representative democracy - it's about people _not_ being involved, _not_ having power, _not_ being in a position to influence policy in direct ways. It's the passing of all that power to politicians. Similarly, the referendum was set up as a single event. There were no subsidiary questions or 2nd referenda on the final deal with the EU. Or, to get straight to it: you seem to expect voters should have had a solution to the Irish border in mind when voting. Even if that is reasonable, how would those 17m ideas on the Irish border have been put into practice?  How would it have worked? The mechanics of voting in the referenda had no way of scooping up those numerous and diverse ideas.  OKay, here's my solution - a united Ireland. Technically, I wasn't a brexit voter, but there you go, you want a solution. But where does that go? How does it get fed into decision making? Answer: it doesn't.


Representative democracy is (to an extent that can be debated) about people _being _involved, _having _power, _being _in a position to influence policy.
It is not about passing all that power to politicians, there are plenty of examples from history where politicians with power are challenged and have to change, votes for women being one.
Representative democracy is about the interaction of people, not about the abdication of responsibility.
If your contention is that the voters could not possibly be expected to have a border solution in mind when voting, then what happens next?
Nobody has any solution, yet the brexit winners continually demand one when saying they have regained control of the borders. Do you not see how absurd that position is.
Finding a solution to the Irish border, a practical solution, would at least test the mettle of brexit voters, and might even throw up a pleasant surprise, but all I see is brexit voters (not you) avoiding responsibility, or even trying to take the single first step in their 1000 mile journey.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

(to an extent that can be debated) 

What a superb thing to put in brackets! Well done!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm sure philosophical just cant wait to provide us with his detailed roadmap of how the EUs Federal Convergence programme should be implemented and how the UK would achieve a fair representation within it, considering its ever shrinking role (had remain had won the ref that is).
> Obviously he had the whole thing scoped and planned before casting his vote at the ref


I'll let you provide a road map to a border solution first, it's more pressing.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Representative democracy is (to an extent that can be debated) about people _being _involved, _having _power, _being _in a position to influence policy.
> It is not about passing all that power to politicians, there are plenty of examples from history where politicians with power are challenged and have to change, votes for women being one.
> Representative democracy is about the interaction of people, not about the abdication of responsibility.
> If your contention is that the voters could not possibly be expected to have a border solution in mind when voting, then what happens next?
> ...


Did you vote remain solely on the border issues ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> (to an extent that can be debated)
> 
> What a superb thing to put in brackets! Well done!


When I have collected enough of your snide comments do I win a prize?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I'll let you provide a road map to a border solution first, it's more pressing.


Didn't you plan it all out when you voted to allow big capital to have the dominant say on where the EU is headed then?

You are just so...shit.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> When I have collected enough of your snide comments do I win a prize?


You are a snidey piece yourself. Expect it back.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> When I have collected enough of your snide comments do I win a prize?


Try interspersing your snideness with substantive content. Goes a long way.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Did you vote remain solely on the border issues ?


It was a huge factor for me, but another huge factor was not wanting to validate the alt right position and give them the extra power.
I considered the financials much less important that the issues of democracy, and my aspiration was towards collaboration and collective problem solving than simply running away from it all.
If you allow me to use this analogy, if a French Nuclear Installation on it's North Coast went into meltdown, the contamination wouldn't stop at the UK borders, however much brexiters said they had taken back control.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

The EU would have stopped it? 

Is this really happening?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> You are a snidey piece yourself. Expect it back.


Oh yeah? Where have I _initiated _snide personal remarks to another poster?
However I note that you acknowledge that butchersapron's remarks are snide ones.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Oh yeah? Where have I _initiated _snide personal remarks to another poster?
> However I note that you acknowledge that butchersapron's remarks are snide ones.


Do you really go through life like this? How have you manged to reach 65?

a) You're all racist cunts and i hate you each and everyone.
b) Wtf?
c) How dare you disagree with me, that's abuse - and you started it. 

(d) make mexico pay)


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Try interspersing your snideness with substantive content. Goes a long way.


I have made several substantive comments, you must have missed them, or maybe they didn't pass your test as to what is substantive enough.
However instead of pointing that out straightforwardly, you are reduced to snide personal digs after extracting bits of personal information from me.
Why don't you intersperse your addiction to snideness by suggesting an Irish border solution that would work?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have made several substantive comments, you must have missed them, or maybe they didn't pass your test as to what is substantive enough.
> However instead of pointing that out straightforwardly, you are reduced to snide personal digs after extracting bits of personal information from me.
> Why don't you intersperse your addiction to snideness by suggesting an Irish border solution that would work?


_You _came in with your _during the war_ bollocks and attempted to use it as a point of authority - i didn't extract it.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Just to point out, this the above is an abridged version of the this opinion piece from the FT.
> 
> But even from the comments under that article, it seems there's plenty of disagreement about it.



Do any of the comments suggest it is the EU imposing these rules rather than the WTO?


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> but another huge factor was not wanting to validate the alt right position and give them the extra power.


The eu and there polocies are doing that for them.


philosophical said:


> and my aspiration was towards collaboration and collective problem solving


Juncker will be calling you any minute now for your collective input.


philosophical said:


> simply running away from it all.


Another shit dig


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The EU would have stopped it?
> 
> Is this really happening?


No the EU wouldn't have stopped it, but working in partnership might have led to a solution. Stalking off and saying, 'no, not my problem' wouldn't help.
I agree about 'is this really happening' in terms of the agenda of many on here to play the man so as to avoid the issues.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Representative democracy is (to an extent that can be debated) about people _being _involved, _having _power, _being _in a position to influence policy.
> It is not about passing all that power to politicians, there are plenty of examples from history where politicians with power are challenged and have to change, votes for women being one.
> Representative democracy is about the interaction of people, not about the abdication of responsibility.
> If your contention is that the voters could not possibly be expected to have a border solution in mind when voting, then what happens next?
> ...


Go on, tell me how it works: the question of the border - are we just asking brexit voters or remain as well?  How do they put their diverse opinions on the border into practice? Series of meetings? Some kind of electronic democracy? Does government have to go with the outcome of this process?

Of course none of that was in place, none of that happened, *not of that ever happens*. _So what does your notion that brexit voters should have had a border policy add up to?_


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No the EU wouldn't have stopped it, but working in partnership might have led to a solution. Stalking off and saying, 'no, not my problem' wouldn't help.
> I agree about 'is this really happening' in terms of the agenda of many on here to play the man so as to avoid the issues.


Yes, that's will happen now. _No - nuclear contamination you're not coming in_. Jesus.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Do you really go through life like this? How have you manged to reach 65?
> 
> a) You're all racist cunts and i hate you each and everyone.
> b) Wtf?
> ...


Nice try. But way off.
I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.
You don't disagree with me, simply snipe from your scraghole from time to time. To disagree would be to engage, but you don't want to do that in my case, preferring to go down the personal route.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Oh yeah? Where have I _initiated _snide personal remarks to another poster?


Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Nice try. But way off.
> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.
> You don't disagree with me, simply snipe from your scraghole from time to time. To disagree would be to engage, but you don't want to do that in my case, preferring to go down the personal route.


_I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.
_
Relentless pub-bore stupidity.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see brexit voters as racists.


Whatever happened to your much-vaunted all-important get-out-of-jail-free question mark?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Nice try. But way off.
> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.
> You don't disagree with me, simply snipe from your scraghole from time to time. To disagree would be to engage, but you don't want to do that in my case, preferring to go down the personal route.



This is proper childish stuff, you can't be the age you are surely?!


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.



And this is going to achieve what? Apart from make you feel awesome, obvs.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Nice try. But way off.
> *I see brexit voters as racists*, and it is those ones I hate.
> You don't disagree with me, simply snipe from your scraghole from time to time. To disagree would be to engage, but you don't want to do that in my case, preferring to go down the personal route.


The irony is, many of the people you are arguing with on this thread have been involved in anti-racist politics for years. Have you?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?


I love that _*Sorry*, late to this thread and my first post. _like we can all now start now the hero of the story has arrived.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.


This is the basis for your arguement. You have no interest in why people voted leave ( there are many posts from people explaining there reasons) but no matter what, you will resort to using the race card. hating millions of people must be eating away at you. Good


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> This is the basis for your arguement. You have no interest in why people voted leave ( there are many posts from people explaining there reasons) but no matter what, you will resort to using the race card. hating millions of people must be eating away at you. Good


Aye page after page of posters going through their non-racist reasons for voting brexit.... 'but, but, but you're all racists'.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The irony is, many of the people you are arguing with on this thread have been involved in anti-racist politics for years. Have you?


Yes I have, and to an extent live it too. My wife is Chinese, my son is mixed race, I regularly hear from both of them about racist incidents and abuse, I was on the receiving end as a child. During my working life as an enthusiastic and active Trade Unionist I supported all initiatives that would help minority victims, or any victims actually.
Is your question another dreary ploy to get me to disclose personal information that can be thrown back in my face in some way?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> And this is going to achieve what? Apart from make you feel awesome, obvs.


What may be obvious to you, is exactly that, obvious to you. Cuddle up close to that thought, because you are not always correct...obviously.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Aye page after page of posters going through their non-racist reasons for voting brexit.... 'but, but, but you're all racists'.


It must quite frustrating to be so ignorant and thick. That's all he has.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My wife is Chinese, my son is mixed race


That old chestnut  Didn't you pull me for saying i had black and asian mates ?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes I have, and to an extent live it too. My wife is Chinese, my son is mixed race, I regularly hear from both of them about racist incidents and abuse, I was on the receiving end as a child. During my working life as an enthusiastic and active Trade Unionist I supported all initiatives that would help minority victims, or any victims actually.
> Is your question another dreary ploy to get me to disclose personal information that can be throw back in my face in some way?


Not really no. You repeatedly accuse people on this very thread of being racist, I was wondering what active contribution you yourself have made to fighting racism.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> And this is going to achieve what? Apart from make you feel awesome, obvs.


PS I never said my hatred will achieve anything much, but is sits there and grows. Perhaps I have come onto discussions like this to seek reasons to hate less, driven by my subconscious or something, but my experience so far on Urban 75 has not reduced my hatred. Not that it need matter to you or anybody.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> This is the basis for your arguement. You have no interest in why people voted leave ( there are many posts from people explaining there reasons) but no matter what, you will resort to using the race card. hating millions of people must be eating away at you. Good


Wehey. I have made someone happy, the day isn't completely wasted then.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

More projection


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> PS I never said my hatred will achieve anything much, but is sits there and grows. Perhaps I have come onto discussions like this to seek reasons to hate less, driven by my subconscious or something, but my experience so far on Urban 75 has not reduced my hatred. Not that it need matter to you or anybody.


It is a lonely cross you bear.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> PS I never said my hatred will achieve anything much, but is sits there and grows. Perhaps I have come onto discussions like this to seek reasons to hate less, driven by my subconscious or something, but my experience so far on Urban 75 has not reduced my hatred. Not that it need matter to you or anybody.



I'm amazed you ever get outside your front door tbh.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> That old chestnut  Didn't you pull me for saying i had black and asian mates ?



I was asked to mention anti racist effort and that is part of my background. I also asked if personal disclosure was to provide ammunition for others to write snide digs at me and in your case like a mug fell for it again.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I'm amazed you ever get outside your front door tbh.


He has to get his IRISH PASSPORT which NO ONE HAS ASKED ABOUT renewed every now and then.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

'Speaking on behalf of the ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser community, I apologise sincerely for not having produced a dossier on the Irish border issue when voting 2 years ago'. There, that's better - confession really _is_ good for the soul.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> It is a lonely cross you bear.


I don't need any sympathy from you if that is your intention.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I'm amazed you ever get outside your front door tbh.


I will be going out very shortly ta very much.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Oh that poor little boozer.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

I’m guessing newly retired and doesn’t know what to do with his days


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He has to get his IRISH PASSPORT which NO ONE HAS ASKED ABOUT renewed every now and then.


It that the prizewinning snide dig, or do I have to wait for some more?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> 'Speaking on behalf of the ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser community, I apologise sincerely for not having produced a dossier on the Irish border issue when voting 2 years ago'. There, that's better - confession really _is_ good for the soul.


You are probably forgiven if you didn't vote brexit, so if that is the case don't be so hard on yourself.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m guessing newly retired and doesn’t know what to do with his days



Unless your work is being a poster on here full time, which you seem to be, I would guess you're retired too.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are probably forgiven if you didn't vote brexit, so if that is the case don't be so hard on yourself.


Thank you Sir, to be allowed back into the liberal fold means a lot to me. I'll be back on the Guardian website as soon as you can say Barnier's yer uncle.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Unless your work is being a poster on here full time, which you seem to be, I would guess you're retired too.


No, just well ninja at my job.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

Yay, I've had Liberal Absolution! Polly Toynbee sold me a couple of Indulgences, but said I had to pay in Bitcoins.  Still, I'm not wallowing in racist ignorance like you lot!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yay, I've had Liberal Absolution! Polly Toynbee sold me a couple of Indulgences, but said I had to pay in Bitcoins.  Still, I'm not wallowing in racist ignorance like you lot!


You're going to drown in our racist seas though. Whose laughing now?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Thank you Sir, to be allowed back into the liberal fold means a lot to me. I'll be back on the Guardian website as soon as you can say Barnier's yer uncle.



Did you miss the word 'probably'?
You need no validation from me anyway, seek it rather from your close mates who post here, I am sure it will be readily forthcoming.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Did you miss the word 'probably'?
> You need no validation from me anyway, seek it rather from your close mates who post here, I am sure it will be readily forthcoming.


We actually all hate each other when we’re not united in the common cause of reacting to your shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> We actually all hate each other when we’re not united in the common cause of reacting to your shit.


this is true.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You're going to drown in our racist seas though. Whose laughing now?


But as I slip beneath the waves, I know that Angela Merkel will float by and dump a structural adjustment package on me.
Hang on a minute, that's not helping!


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Thank you Sir, to be allowed back into the liberal fold means a lot to me. I'll be back on the Guardian website as soon as you can say Barnier's yer uncle.


The divisions between remainers and brexiteers could probably be resolved if philosophical had a Guardian column tbh.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

'Not _quite_ as thick, ignorant, racist and nationalist as the brexit lot'.
My search for a new tagline is complete!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> 'Not _quite_ as thick, ignorant, racist and nationalist as the brexit lot'.
> My search for a new tagline is complete!


Just say 'not cool'.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What may be obvious to you, is exactly that, obvious to you. Cuddle up close to that thought, because you are not always correct...obviously.



Blah


----------



## JimW (Mar 6, 2018)

How come all this racism didn't melt away during the thirty years we frolicked in the warm embrace of the EU? How could it possibly have remained to rear its ugly head the moment an in/out vote was offered? What a puzzle.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

JimW said:


> How come all this racism didn't melt away during the thirty years we frolicked in the warm embrace of the EU? How could it possibly have remained to rear its ugly head the moment an in/out vote was offered? What a puzzle.


To be honest, I was hiding my racism. But as soon as pigfucker announced the referendum, well, what can I say. It was my moment.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> 'Speaking on behalf of the ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser community, I apologise sincerely for not having produced a dossier on the Irish border issue when voting 2 years ago'. There, that's better - confession really _is_ good for the soul.



That's actually a good point, mind. I wonder how many voters actively had NI/6 counties in mind when they cast their votes...


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> That's actually a good point, mind. I wonder how many voters actively had NI/6 counties in mind when they cast their votes...



As someone said up-thread, most people take the view that it's the job of politicians and civil servants to sort out the details. In this case of course the CS were banned from doing any pre-referendum prep for Brexit.  The border issue was discussed though - Major and Blair did a press thing from Belfast warning of the problems.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> That's actually a good point, mind. I wonder how many voters actively had NI/6 counties in mind when they cast their votes...


How many people generally in all elections have people they don't know and who are far away in their minds when they vote?  Many do, for sure.  But lots also vote based on personal interest and what will help them and theirs.

(Actually, I should know better.  This isn't how decisions are made at all.  In reality, we have a model in our heads for the way the world works, a model in our heads for who we are and a model for how people modelled like us tend to react within the world we have modelled.  When we have a decision to make, the model spits out the answer for how people like us would behave in a situation like this.  There is no rational weighing up of pros and cons, nor is there cold dispassionate decision making.  Not unless we force there to be, which we save for the special circumstances where our model fails.  But let's pretend there is, for a moment.)


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> That's actually a good point, mind. I wonder how many voters actively had NI/6 counties in mind when they cast their votes...


Outside of the 6, relatively few I'd guess. Scottish voters probably had a parallel set of issues in mind. But that's the point philosophical  still doesn't get. Whether people thought about these things, had positions on them, there's no way a referendum on in/out was a mechanism for manifesting voter positions on the border.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

Anyway, I wish Chris Morris would get the fuck on with doing a Brexit Brass Eye special. Would save us having to keep flaunting our bad racism on this thread.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Anyway, I wish Chris Morris would get the fuck on with doing a Brexit Brass Eye special. Would save us having to keep flaunting our bad racism on this thread.



Oooh, is that for real?

Chris Morris, not bad racism...


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

JimW said:


> How come all this racism didn't melt away during the thirty years we frolicked in the warm embrace of the EU? How could it possibly have remained to rear its ugly head the moment an in/out vote was offered? What a puzzle.


Who said it went away?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

10p!

Proving the point Jim makes you deranged clanger.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Who said it went away?
> 
> View attachment 129434



Jesus fuck. Wish they'd stick to banging on about weather apocalypses and Diana


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> 10p!


Isn't it:

*10p! *cheaper than the Daily Mail


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Isn't it:
> 
> *10p! *cheaper than the Daily Mail



Wonder what the focus will be, post Brexit, from the Express. Or will it just eat itself at that stage?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Anyway, I wish Chris Morris would get the fuck on with doing a Brexit Brass Eye special. Would save us having to keep flaunting our bad racism on this thread.


You (not at wilf, just the general brexiters here) don't have to...your  colleagues such as Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Desmond, Murdoch, Littlejohn and the rest will get on with most of that side of things.  

Leaving you to say you have clean hands.  That's what's important?  

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf

I'd hate you to say you forgot about the 29% rise in hate crimes (78% of these race based).  Am I accusing urbanites of hate-crimes?

See...it seems you lot are saying that because _you're_ not racist then there is no racism in brexit?	 There is racism within the ranks of brexit, absolutely, because it's full of kippers and britain firsters and right wing tories.

Who denies it?

But you spend your time attacking a remainer and instead of acknowledging that taint of racism you only deny that you yourselves are racists and act all affronted?   It only helps them, *you *only help them. 

Anyway...a timeline for those with hazy memories.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You (not at wilf, just the general brexiters here) don't have to...your  colleagues such as Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Desmond, Murdoch, Littlejohn and the rest will get on with most of that side of things.
> 
> Leaving you to say you have clean hands.  That's what's important?
> 
> ...



clean hands, cool head and a warm heart


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> We actually all hate each other when we’re not united in the common cause of reacting to your shit.


Common cause?
Like brexiters finding common cause with Boris Johnson and his mates?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> The divisions between remainers and brexiteers could probably be resolved if philosophical had a Guardian column tbh.


I doubt that I have the literary skills enough to write any newspaper column.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I doubt that I have the literary skills enough to write any newspaper column.


all the qualifications you need for a successful career at the guardian


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Major and Blair


You are scraping the barrel now with those two cunts. A lying murderer and a weak fuckwit who now wants a second vote.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You (not at wilf, just the general brexiters here) don't have to...your  colleagues such as Farage, Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Desmond, Murdoch, Littlejohn and the rest will get on with most of that side of things.
> 
> Leaving you to say you have clean hands.  That's what's important?
> 
> ...



I don't deny the rise in hate figures and for that matter I don't deny that the referendum was part of that spike. But again, this reduces it down to 'ignore your politics, ignore what you think about neo-liberalism, line up, line up!'.  And just to pick up one of the building blocks of your logic:



> See...it seems you lot are saying that because _you're_ not racist then there is no racism in brexit?	 There is racism within the ranks of brexit, absolutely, because it's full of kippers and britain firsters and right wing tories.



17m kippers and right wing Tories?  17 million explicit racists and Britain firsters?  Well, if that's the case, we're all lost, forever.  But then that's not the reality is it?

By the way, there were about 13m didn't vote for either the SPD or Hitler in 1933.  Just saying.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Outside of the 6, relatively few I'd guess. Scottish voters probably had a parallel set of issues in mind. But that's the point philosophical  still doesn't get. Whether people thought about these things, had positions on them, there's no way a referendum on in/out was a mechanism for manifesting voter positions on the border.


I disagree with this, the referendum is gone, and the outcome is reality is now made manifest including the issue of the border.
Do you really believe that voters voted with no mind to the consequences?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

One good thing about brexit is that is has exposed what utter cunts everyone with an interest in this really is . No, not the voters, Leave or Remain, they were patsies - but those vested interest factions on all sides that have crawled out, along with their carpetbagger fellow travellers. its an existential land grab to the ultimate detriment of those who voted for/against/ CBA. .


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with this, the referendum is gone, and the outcome is reality is now made manifest including the issue of the border.
> Do you really believe that voters voted with no mind to the consequences?


nothing has been made manifest, which is why there's such confusion


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> You are scraping the barrel now with those two cunts. A lying murderer and a weak fuckwit who now wants a second vote.


say what you like about major, he wasn't much of a murderer

not as much as blair anyway


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Summary of todays debate; We are all racists, We support Boris and his mates ( does he have any?) We will be feeding off of chorlinted chicken. Bring it on


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> say what you like about major, he wasn't much of a murderer


I know. Just a week fuckwit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> I know. Just a week fuckwit.


sadly much longer than that


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Common cause?
> Like brexiters finding common cause with Boris Johnson and his mates?


Yep.  Or like remainers finding common cause with Blair, Cameron, Osbourne, May, Merkel, Macron and Juncker.  Not to mention Carillion, Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Apple and every other multinational you care to name.
Or, for that matter, like employees finding common cause with their CEO.
Or like pretty much anybody in a pension scheme finding common cause with, say, Imperial Tobacco.

Isn't modern consumer-capitalism just wonderful in its common causes?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Summary of todays debate; We are all racists, We support Boris and his mates ( does he have any?) We will be feeding off of chorlinted chicken. Bring it on


my chickens aren't chorlinted


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> my chickens aren't chorlinted


We havn't left yet


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> We havn't left yet


they aren't chorlinting my chickens


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they aren't chorlinting my chickens


You own chickens ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> You own chickens ?


i'm just looking after them for a friend.

he told me not to let anyone chorlint them while he's away


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they aren't chorlinting my chickens


You voted for chorlinting chickens, so you'll just have to get used to them, like the rest of us who didn't even know there wassuch a thing


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> You voted for chorlinting chickens, so you'll just have to get used to them, like the rest of us who didn't even know there wassuch a thing


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm just looking after them for a friend.


Cough cough


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they aren't chorlinting my chickens


"As the young Theresa skipped through the farmer's cornfield, a troubling thought threatened her innocent mood. 'One day our Tresa, you'll be responsible for chlorinating the nation's chickens'. Theresa skipped on, but somehow she never found her way back to that cornfield".


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

the corn fields were only ever ephemeral, some remembered for you wholesale glitching flashes. But there never was a cornfield.


Loving Dexter giving it _J'accuse _from his saltire draped palace


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

What goes through a middle class persons mind when they see a white person on a motability vehicle?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2018)

"Hi Saint Peter, just about the only thing I have to own up to is the referendum and all that racism I personally caused"
- Oh, don't worry about that. It's the chickens thing that we have to look at.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Outside a wetherspoons say


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What goes through a middle class persons mind when they see a white person on a motability vehicle?


Depends if they step out in front of it without noticing, in which case the answer is "the motability vehicle".


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> ...17m kippers and right wing Tories?  17 million explicit racists and Britain firsters?  Well, if that's the case, we're all lost, forever.  But then that's not the reality is it?...


No it isn't reality, it's also not what I said.

I've already posted the voting breakdown, you obviously didn't read it.

There's no dialogue here, is there.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Depends if they step out in front of it without noticing, in which case the answer is "the motability vehicle".


In which case i feel you not experiencing life the way our love of wisdom is.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No it isn't reality, it's also not what I said.
> 
> I've already posted the voting breakdown, you obviously didn't read it.
> 
> There's no dialogue here, is there.


You didn't read it - it showed that you were 100% wrong. Comical.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No it isn't reality,


you couldn't handle reality


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

The many lies of yet to happen edit in wings here


----------



## Smangus (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What goes through a middle class persons mind when they see a white person on a motability vehicle?



Benidorm.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> And here is the WTO on this topic.



OK, having read that and the Bogdanor article which Pickman's model linked to, I accept that I was mistaken and that it's the WTO rules *as well as* the EU's demands that any nation wanting MFN status must accept the other criteria (like free movement and identical standards and regulations) which would necessitate a hard Irish border if agreement couldn't be reached.

Here, for what it's worth, is the article I referred to earlier where the Irish Foreign Minister talked explicitly about the need for a hard border to protect the EU's market.
Brexit: Dublin casts doubt on UK's latest NI border plan


> The EU is unlikely to accept the UK's latest proposal for avoiding a "hard border" on the island of Ireland after Brexit, the Irish government has said. Theresa May has said 80% of firms would face no new customs checks between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic and others would be simplified. But Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney said he was not sure it would adequately protect the EU's market.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> nothing has been made manifest, which is why there's such confusion


Unless you agree stuff like confusion constitutes a manifestation.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

Schools out


----------



## Anju (Mar 6, 2018)

Nice to see the politically principled are still holding out for a miracle. You do know James Stewart is dead?

Here are some links relating to either good stuff the EU does, addressing deliberately held misconceptions and and on shit stuff to do with the UK domestic issues. I would love to be reassured that there is hope for the good things to be replicated or improved post brexit, the misconceptions to be replaced with actions that will benefit normal people and the shitty things about UK domestic policy to be reversed.

The screenshots are from the leave eu Facebook page. We're not racist we just post 4 or 5 times more comments on things that are not related to the EU if they're about non white people. If you care to visit their page and look at the comments they include all the leave voters in their number. 17.4 million . The will of the people still seems pretty racist to me. 

Yes I realise that Leave EU are not representative of all leave voters but the leave campaign pandered to their fears and desires without the need to make any concessions to people who may have been offended by those views, so it seems reasonable to assume that a sizeable majority of leave voters have no problem with a bit of xenophobia. 

 


Environmental policy of the European Union - Wikipedia

Cooperatives - Aναπτυξη - European Commission

Fact Check: do new EU rules make it impossible to renationalise railways?

Subscribe to read

From the FT article as it may be subscription only. I had to complete a survey to access it.

 

Normal number of comments.
 
When a post has nothing to do with brexit but features the wrong sort of people.
 
 

Tories are currently pulling themselves together  now Labour are looking like a threat. Labour are probably going to start fighting over single market access. Somehow a reasonable number of the population are happy with the way negotiations are going. 

As things stand, with just over a year to go things look exactly as they did just post referendum. A big old lurch to the right with a catastrophic, for the NHS especially, trade deal with the US pushed through in time for the Tories to win the next election because any trade deal no matter how damaging to the interests of us will be spun as proof the Tories got everything right. 

All the problems the government have faced have been self inflicted. Incompetent as they are they are more than capable of putting their differences aside for the sake of remaining in power. If that wasn't an overriding motivated the 48 letters would have been sent by now and Rees-Mogg would be PM.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Yep.  Or like remainers finding common cause with Blair, Cameron, Osbourne, May, Merkel, Macron and Juncker.  Not to mention Carillion, Amazon, Starbucks, Google, Apple and every other multinational you care to name.
> Or, for that matter, like employees finding common cause with their CEO.
> Or like pretty much anybody in a pension scheme finding common cause with, say, Imperial Tobacco.
> 
> Isn't modern consumer-capitalism just wonderful in its common causes?


Personally I don't think so, however as you point out sometimes people act in concert, and a lot of people acted in concert with the alt right when voting for brexit, and they won.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Personally I don't think so, however as you point out sometimes people act in concert, and a lot of people acted in concert with the alt right when voting for brexit, and they won.


Back on the racist shit again


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Back on the racist shit again


Back on the unimaginative snide shit again.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Back on the unimaginative snide shit again.


That's not snide. Your post is another snidey veiled reference to racism, but you know that, it's all you have.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> That's not snide. Your post is another snidey veiled reference to racism, but you know that, it's all you have.



All I have?

Is this really happening?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Personally I don't think so, however as you point out sometimes people act in concert, and a lot of people acted in concert with the alt right when voting for brexit, and they won.


A lot of people acted in concert with the alt-right when they voted remain too, because the alt-right swings both ways.  More to the point, though, everybody who voted remain (including me) most definitely acted in concert with the traditional right wing, ie capital, who were and are very firmly in favour of a big EU superstate.  Why do you think the likes of Soros is now funding a campaign to reverse the decision?  Because he’s turned suddenly socialist?

This Brexit debate simply doesn’t boil down to bedfellows, because there are shits everywhere you look.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> A lot of people acted in concert with the alt-right when they voted remain too, because the alt-right swings both ways.  More to the point, though, everybody who voted remain (including me) most definitely acted in concert with the traditional right wing, ie capital, who were and are very firmly in favour of a big EU superstate.  Why do you think the likes of Soros is now funding a campaign to reverse the decision?  Because he’s turned suddenly socialist?
> 
> This Brexit debate simply doesn’t boil down to bedfellows, because there are shits everywhere you look.



However the brexit debate is now over isn't it? The results in and everything?
So as somebody pointed out above, brexiters want to now wash their hands of the consequences of their actions when they say it is now up to somebody else to sort it all out.
The EU superstate is defeated, but the Irish border question is a stark reality staring brexiters in the face, and for many, possibly all, those brexiters say it isn't their problem.
I think it is, the EU is the thing that isn't their problem any more, that ship has sailed, the practical realities and consequences are the brexiters problem.
Anyway  for brexiters it is easy to continue to lash out rather than provide solutions.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

You’re the one lashing out.  You’ve come on this thread and declared all Brexiters to be racists and that you hate them.  If that isn’t lashing out, what is?

And in what way is the EU superstate defeated?  It grows ever stronger.  Why are you so keen to endorse its direction of travel?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You’re the one lashing out.  You’ve come on this thread and declared all Brexiters to be racists and that you hate them.  If that isn’t lashing out, what is?
> 
> And in what way is the EU superstate defeated?  It grows ever stronger.  Why are you so keen to endorse its direction of travel?



No I didn't 'declare' as you put it. I framed it as a question.
If saying that I hate those who voted brexit is lashing out that is your interpretation. For me it is a statement of fact, I do hate them.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You’re the one lashing out.  You’ve come on this thread and declared all Brexiters to be racists and that you hate them.  If that isn’t lashing out, what is?
> 
> And in what way is the EU superstate defeated?  It grows ever stronger.  Why are you so keen to endorse its direction of travel?



I would prefer the direction of travel of the EU, to that of the UK. Prefer doesn't make me 'keen' necessarily, but as a choice between the two institutions the EU is my preference.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

Anju said:


> Tories are currently pulling themselves together  now Labour are looking like a threat. Labour are probably going to start fighting over single market access. Somehow a reasonable number of the population are happy with the way negotiations are going.
> 
> As things stand, with just over a year to go things look exactly as they did just post referendum. A big old lurch to the right with a catastrophic, for the NHS especially, trade deal with the US pushed through in time for the Tories to win the next election because any trade deal no matter how damaging to the interests of us will be spun as proof the Tories got everything right.
> 
> All the problems the government have faced have been self inflicted. Incompetent as they are they are more than capable of putting their differences aside for the sake of remaining in power. If that wasn't an overriding motivated the 48 letters would have been sent by now and Rees-Mogg would be PM.


?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I would prefer the direction of travel of the EU, to that of the UK. Prefer doesn't make me 'keen' necessarily, but as a choice between the two institutions the EU is my preference.


Where is the EU heading?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Where is the EU heading?


Read above, that ship has sailed and wherever it is heading is not relevant compared to where the UK is heading.
Now, about the Irish border, have you thought up any solutions yet?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No I didn't 'declare' as you put it. I framed it as a question.


ORLY??


philosophical said:


> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.


Where’s the question in that, then?


> If saying that I hate those who voted brexit is lashing out that is your interpretation. For me it is a statement of fact, I do hate them.


Yes, saying you hate people is indeed lashing out.  Not to mention an interesting parallel with the manifestation of racism.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ORLY??
> 
> Where’s the question in that, then?
> Yes, saying you hate people is indeed lashing out.  Not to mention an interesting parallel with the manifestation of racism.


You're right there. To have a blanket hatred for brexiters has a clear overlap with any blanket hatred, like for a certain race. There is a difference though, I hate brexiters for what they do, I should say 'done'.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You're right there. To have a blanket hatred for brexiters has a clear overlap with any blanket hatred, like for a certain race. There is a difference though, I hate brexiters for what they do, I should say 'done'.


Plus you did indeed declare that Brexiters are racists like I said and like you objected to, right?  Not a question, was it?


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> OK, having read that and the Bogdanor article which Pickman's model linked to, I accept that I was mistaken and that it's the WTO rules *as well as* the EU's demands that any nation wanting MFN status must accept the other criteria (like free movement and identical standards and regulations) which would necessitate a hard Irish border if agreement couldn't be reached.
> 
> Here, for what it's worth, is the article I referred to earlier where the Irish Foreign Minister talked explicitly about the need for a hard border to protect the EU's market.
> Brexit: Dublin casts doubt on UK's latest NI border plan



It makes more sense if you think of the EU being a single country as far as trade is concerned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

Anju said:


> Nice to see the politically principled are still holding out for a miracle. You do know James Stewart is dead?
> 
> Here are some links relating to either good stuff the EU does, addressing deliberately held misconceptions and and on shit stuff to do with the UK domestic issues. I would love to be reassured that there is hope for the good things to be replicated or improved post brexit, the misconceptions to be replaced with actions that will benefit normal people and the shitty things about UK domestic policy to be reversed.
> 
> ...


tl; dr


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

Anju said:


> Nice to see the politically principled are still holding out for a miracle. You do know James Stewart is dead?
> 
> Here are some links relating to either good stuff the EU does, addressing deliberately held misconceptions and and on shit stuff to do with the UK domestic issues. I would love to be reassured that there is hope for the good things to be replicated or improved post brexit, the misconceptions to be replaced with actions that will benefit normal people and the shitty things about UK domestic policy to be reversed.
> 
> ...


Oh spotted that bit about the tories pulling themselves together. Really? That's a pile of auld shite, it's utter nonsense. But all one can expect from you.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> brexiters want to now wash their hands of the consequences of their actions when they say it is now up to somebody else to sort it all out.


The electorate aren't politicians. What do you think one of us nasty racist leavers can do to solve the border issue in Ireland ? What power do you think we have that a politicion hasn't ?


----------



## JimW (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Read above, that ship has sailed and wherever it is heading is not relevant compared to where the UK is heading.
> Now, about the Irish border, have you thought up any solutions yet?


The end of politics, the abandonment of democracy. You won't engage with half the country you live in and hand the future over to a remote super-state to go where it will. Passive surrender to the never-ending capitalist death cult.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> The electorate aren't politicians. What do think one of us nasty racist leavers can do to solve the border issue in Ireland ? What power do you think we have that a politicion hasn't ?


Northern Ireland voted to remain.   Unfortunately the superstate it is a part of had different ideas so they got fucked.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ORLY??
> 
> Where’s the question in that, then?
> Yes, saying you hate people is indeed lashing out.  Not to mention an interesting parallel with the manifestation of racism.


The way I say I see things is valid, but it is not the same as stating a fact.


kabbes said:


> Plus you did indeed declare that Brexiters are racists like I said and like you objected to, right?  Not a question, was it?


Yeah right.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> The electorate aren't politicians. What do think one of us nasty racist leavers can do to solve the border issue in Ireland ? What power do you think we have that a politicion hasn't ?


Given the evidence available to me so far I would say the leavers can do jack, and the politicians too, however the point I make repeatedly is that the leavers are the ones who ought to come up with workable practical suggestions, and their politician mates as well, because there are only about 14 months left, and the leavers and their politicians have already had about 20 months so far.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 6, 2018)

So one solution to the Irish border thing is just to leave, and leave the border open, and blame Ireland / the EU for any hard border that then appears, and/or call the buff of the WTO on enforcement of their rules, and if no border appears then just accept zero-tariff imports to the UK and the consequences for domestic businesses that might accompany that. Fair enough.

Another is to do the Brexit In Name Only, so leave the EU but agree to continue in complete harmonisation with their regs, tariffs and so on, and continue to accept the free movement of people if that's what the EU requires. 

What's the justification for choosing the first option over the second - is it based on an interpretation of what people voted for and why?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 6, 2018)

Another is to place the hard border between NI and GB


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

JimW said:


> The end of politics, the abandonment of democracy. You won't engage with half the country you live in and hand the future over to a remote super-state to go where it will. Passive surrender to the never-ending capitalist death cult.


The vote has been cast geddit? I won't be handing anything over to the EU, even if I wanted to and least of all the future. The future is brexit, the future is Gove, Johnson, Redwood, Hoey and the rest of them. They are the people, along with all those who voted brexit who have got us here, they hold the reins, they have to come up with the solutions. Certainly not me, I didn't vote for it, but the winners, and they have to face the consequences, one being the issue of the land border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> leavers are the ones who ought to come up with workable practical suggestions,


Why ? What difference would it make ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Why ? What difference would it make ?


The difference would be, if the leavers were able to magic up a solution, is that the practicalities of everyday life would become clear, and ordinary progress would be workable.
The leavers have the chance to make that happen, I don't know how, but they have the chance and so far have come up with nothing at all.


kabbes said:


> Another is to place the hard border between NI and GB


It would be, but there are just a couple of degrees of separation to get round. Brexiters are welded to the Tories, the Tories are welded to the DUP, and the DUP are welded to insanity.
I am hoping that 'practical' and 'workable' can be eased into the plans brexiters have made.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So one solution to the Irish border thing is just to leave, and leave the border open, and blame Ireland / the EU for any hard border that then appears, and/or call the buff of the WTO on enforcement of their rules, and if no border appears then just accept zero-tariff imports to the UK and the consequences for domestic businesses that might accompany that. Fair enough.
> 
> Another is to do the Brexit In Name Only, so leave the EU but agree to continue in complete harmonisation with their regs, tariffs and so on, and continue to accept the free movement of people if that's what the EU requires.
> 
> What's the justification for choosing the first option over the second - is it based on an interpretation of what people voted for and why?


You have offered up sensible options, neither of which I anticipate will come to pass.
What about honesty boxes and self declaration of people?
Or what about a micro chip in the earlobe of everybody on the planet, that can be read by Boris style 'technology'?


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

I'm quite enjoying the liberal guilt trippers throwing the same old tired punch. People who couldn't give a shit about Ireland are now using it as a stick to whack leavers with. I reckon remainers thought no more about the border when ticking that box than leavers did.


----------



## Anju (Mar 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh spotted that bit about the tories pulling themselves together. Really? That's a pile of auld shite, it's utter nonsense. But all one can expect from you.



Reply is also to BA as he also seemed to ? my perspective. 

There is a sudden silence on the internal struggles of the government, even some support for May from the more extreme pro brexit side. It's not because everyone has suddenly got what they want and it's not because there has been a mass u turn on either side.  They are going to firm it.


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The leavers have the chance to make that happen, I don't know how,


 We will leave it right there then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2018)

Anju said:


> Reply is also to BA as he also seemed to ? my perspective.
> 
> There is a sudden silence on the internal struggles of the government, even some support for May from the more extreme pro brexit side. It's not because everyone has suddenly got what they want and it's not because there has been a mass u turn on either side.  They are going to firm it.




Utter bilge.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

Anju said:


> Reply is also to BA as he also seemed to ? my perspective.
> 
> There is a sudden silence on the internal struggles of the government, even some support for May from the more extreme pro brexit side. It's not because everyone has suddenly got what they want and it's not because there has been a mass u turn on either side.  They are going to firm it.



You appear to be in a fantasy world, because the divisions in the Tory ranks are still very much there and are regularly reported on. They've no idea what and where they're at. Meanwhile, Labour are resurgent again.

Though I suspect it must fucking hurt for you liberals that Corbyn is now backing brexit as official policy too. Will you be off to the austerity-enabling Lib Dems for consolation?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> I'm quite enjoying the liberal guilt trippers throwing the same old tired punch. People who couldn't give a shit about Ireland are now using it as a stick to whack leavers with. I reckon remainers thought no more about the border when ticking that box than leavers did.


You make the assumption that people didn't give a shit about Ireland, but in my experience many did. Certainly I did.
I would agree that brexiters didn't, and it looks like they still don't.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So one solution to the Irish border thing is just to leave, and leave the border open, and blame Ireland / the EU for any hard border that then appears, and/or call the buff of the WTO on enforcement of their rules, and if no border appears then just accept zero-tariff imports to the UK and the consequences for domestic businesses that might accompany that. Fair enough.
> 
> Another is to do the Brexit In Name Only, so leave the EU but agree to continue in complete harmonisation with their regs, tariffs and so on, and continue to accept the free movement of people if that's what the EU requires.
> 
> What's the justification for choosing the first option over the second - is it based on an interpretation of what people voted for and why?


BINO isn't going to happen most likely, it would require tax regulation harmony and the much stricter EU laws come into effect just around the time we're leaving...an amazing coincidence.

There's always been concerns about UK banking.

brexit frees those (and other) institutions to carry on, cc charges will most likely return/increase, less regulation of the internal markets...tory stuff.  'Restandardisation' of many things just before trade deals are announced - shit like that.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So one solution to the Irish border thing is just to leave, and leave the border open, and blame Ireland / the EU for any hard border that then appears, and/or call the buff of the WTO on enforcement of their rules, and if no border appears then just accept zero-tariff imports to the UK and the consequences for domestic businesses that might accompany that. Fair enough.
> 
> Another is to do the Brexit In Name Only, so leave the EU but agree to continue in complete harmonisation with their regs, tariffs and so on, and continue to accept the free movement of people if that's what the EU requires.
> 
> What's the justification for choosing the first option over the second - is it based on an interpretation of what people voted for and why?





kabbes said:


> Another is to place the hard border between NI and GB


Another would be to negotiate a trade agreement (which as far as I'm aware of, both sides have said they intend to do/ are currently doing)


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> We will leave it right there then.


Until the aggravation starts?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2018)

BINO could happen with NI though, sorry.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Another would be to negotiate a trade agreement (which as far as I'm aware of, both sides have said they intend to do/ are currently doing)


Or finish in the situation where 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.
What then?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> and ordinary progress would be workable.



What even is that?


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I would agree that brexiters didn't, and it looks like they still don't.


Yeah, you keep repeating that.


----------



## Winot (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Another would be to negotiate a trade agreement (which as far as I'm aware of, both sides have said they intend to do/ are currently doing)



Yes I think this is the most likely in the long term but could take 5-10 years to negotiate. A long transition period would help. Not sure if this is politically possible.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Or finish in the situation where 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.
> What then?


I would assume the negotiators then negotiate the other options, in order of their priorities


----------



## Anju (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You appear to be in a fantasy world where the massive divisions in the Tory ranks are still very much there and are regularly reported on. They've no idea what and where they're at. Meanwhile, Labour are resurgent again.
> 
> Though I suspect it must fucking hurt for you liberals that Corbyn is now backing brexit as official policy too. Will you be off to the austerity-enabling Lib Dems for consolation?



If there was an election tomorrow I would vote Labour. Trouble is that's not going to happen. 

It does pain me that there is currently no party offering a feasible option for people who would prefer to stay in the EU. 

Does it not worry you that there could be a Tory brexit followed by austerity xxl, destruction of the NHS and more trickle up economics. 

That's my fear and if Labour are the only defence against that there is a good chance of it becoming reality.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yes I think this is the most likely in the long term but could take 5-10 years to negotiate. A long transition period would help. Not sure if this is politically possible.


it's been agreed by both sides as the main objective since day one (or at least when they agreed on the A50 negotiation roadmap). Barnier said he wanted to push trade agreement negotiations to phase 2, after the divorce bill settlement negotiations (last years "the sky's falling in" story) but I cant recall him ever saying it was off the table. So that's where we are now. I'm not even aware that any of the other fall back options have ever been seriously considered by the negotiations teams. They surface as posturing and threats (mostly in the biased media outlets), but I don't recall seeing any official pitch for them from either side.
I'd assume a longer transition will also be agreed too, to accommodate that 5-10 years you mention.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 6, 2018)

The EU has done precisely _dick_ to stop austerity. In fact they've done their own bit of belt-tightening. Around the neck of Greece.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Or finish in the situation where 'no deal is better than a bad deal'.
> What then?


You seem to be of the lazy, arrogant opinion that the UK would have be absolved of having to make any tough negotiations with the EU in the future if remain had won and we were still in the european union.


philosophical said:


> More specifically, I have raised the issues of the Irish border in debate before the referendum, and continually ever since. Including directly in hustings face to face before last years election, and in writing to my MP.
> I don't know if that qualifies as activity, but it qualifies as a bit of experience.


I reckon you're one of the "I'm alright jack" north west europeans that have been creaming off the spoils while the southern nations have been arse raped by austerity.
It would be nice to see all the "activity" you've been doing. Letters to MPs, MEPs, Mr Junker, Schaeuble, Dijstelbloem et al, raising your concerns of starving family's , rises in infant mortality rates, youth unemployment at over 50% . Was you flexing your democratic muscles in Brussels? I bet you didn't give a shit.
Oh but the irish border... lamb tariffs... Boris's mates... ffs zzz


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 6, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> evidently capital in northern European countries outside of the EU is doing well for itself..


correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every one of them in the SM and CU, and that is crucial to them?


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every one of them in the SM and CU, and that is crucial to them?


norway isnt in a CU


----------



## Streathamite (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> norway isnt in a CU


ahhh...I stand corrected


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> You seem to be of the lazy, arrogant opinion that the UK would have be absolved of having to make any tough negotiations with the EU in the future if remain had won and we were still in the european union.
> 
> *Your perception is wrong. As is the reality. Remain didn't win.*
> 
> ...



Like your activity eh?

While we're on the subject of reckoning, I reckon you are one of the young over indulged 'me' generation, with a sense of entitlement, posturing over others with your faux concern, reacting to dreadful events by becoming all the more shrill, whilst doing nothing at all of any practical use to anybody, except you and your ego.

I might be wrong though.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Like your activity eh?
> 
> While we're on the subject of reckoning, I reckon you are one of the young over indulged 'me' generation, with a sense of entitlement, posturing over others with your faux concern, reacting to dreadful events by becoming all the more shrill, whilst doing nothing at all of any practical use to anybody, except you and your ego.
> 
> I might be wrong though.


Pish. Your "look at me" show rudely interrupted an ongoing discussion here people were having about the irish border - you know the topic you've been writing to your MP about for years (faux concern) and there's you for 20 odd pages now not even having the decency to interact on the topic but drowning it out... with your shrill reaction to events that ... well... add nothing at all of any practical use to anybody...
like a bullshitter in a china shop.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Pish. Your "look at me" show rudely uninterrupted an ongoing discussion here people were having about the irish border - you know the topic you've been writing to your MP about for years (faux concern) and there's you for 20 odd pages now not even having the decency to interact on the topic but drowning it out... with you're shrill reaction to events that ... well... add nothing at all of any practical use to anybody...
> like a bullshitter in a china shop.



I doubt getting the facts straight matters very much to you, but not once have I said I have been writing to my MP 'for years'. 
You and your mates are drowning out an alternative perspective by abuse and snide remarks with every intention of diverting away from discussion of any practical issue, in order to line up and attempt. to censor a perspective that doesn't fit in with your world view.
That you lecture me on decency in this place especially is hypocrisy writ large, there are those on here whose idea of 'interaction' is on the level of 'fuck off you cunt'. Your own form of abuse is to 'reckon' stuff about me that you don't have a clue about, but your eager attempt to stratify fits in with somebody who is strong on posturing, but weak on substance.
Your shrill concern for the oppressed may seem to you to validate your existence, but your rank hypocrisy cancels out any smidgen of genuine sensitivity towards those who suffer.
You are the bullshitter who carries their own china shop around with them, with a look at me placard stapled to a splintering bit of wood in case anybody misses you.
'Decency' FFS, 'rudeness' FFS, are you for real?
Ignore me, and then I won't need to remind you of your duplicitous hypocrisy, that would certainly be a good outcome all round.

PS do you mean 'interrupted', or 'uninterrupted'?


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I doubt getting the facts straight matters very much to you, but not once have I said I have been writing to my MP 'for years'.
> You and your mates are drowning out an alternative perspective by abuse and snide remarks with every intention of diverting away from discussion of any practical issue, in order to line up and attempt. to censor a perspective that doesn't fit in with your world view.
> That you lecture me on decency in this place especially is hypocrisy writ large, there are those on here whose idea of 'interaction' is on the level of 'fuck off you cunt'. Your own form of abuse is to 'reckon' stuff about me that you don't have a clue about, but your eager attempt to stratify fits in with somebody who is strong on posturing, but weak on substance.
> Your shrill concern for the oppressed may seem to you to validate your existence, but your rank hypocrisy cancels out any smidgen of genuine sensitivity towards those who suffer.
> ...


fuck off you cunt


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> fuck off you cunt



That's a roll back. A couple of days ago I was a 'shitcunt', surely there should be some progression up your 'rudeness' and 'decency' scale.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 6, 2018)

You do seem to have a huge lack of awareness though @philosophical. There was a discussion going on here (if a bit circular at times) until you rudely stomped in with your size nines and we've had 20 pages of this self-important, hard of thinking shit from you now completely taking over.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 6, 2018)

wow, first time I've put someone on ignore. The thread looks normal again.
but with a  kind of digital smell in the room. scanner darkly-esque


----------



## teqniq (Mar 6, 2018)

just lol

David Davis says Britain and EU disagree on so many aspects of planned Brexit transition deal he cannot remember them all


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> You seem to have a huge lack of awareness though philosophical. There was a discussion going on here (if a bit circular at times) until you rudely stomped in with your size nines and we've had 20 pages of this self-important shit from you.


The so called self important shit hasn't been the whole twenty pages though, there has also been the abuse and hypocrisy from many posters here. And amusingly I get lectured on decency and proper behaviour from those same hypocrites.
Yes I am certainly a latecomer on here, and was naive in not realising that it was a closed community that wasn't open to the perspective of another person. I have not stopped anybody from discussing anything by the way, unless of course this community is so weedy and startled that anyone could pitch up, not conforming to mysterious rules you have spread amongst yourselves in some kind of morphic manner, and cause a halt to your discourse.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 6, 2018)

troll = 0/10


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The so called self important shit hasn't been the whole twenty pages though


----------



## sealion (Mar 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> troll = 0/10


Yep. A shit, boring repetitive one to boot.


----------



## JimW (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes I am certainly a latecomer on here, and was naive in not realising that it was a closed community that wasn't open to the perspective of another person.


Trouble is it's a ten-a-penny perspective available in a million media outlets that you can only repeat and not back up in any argument, with a big old larding of misunderstood terms chucked in to drag it down a bit further. Shame, as otherwise I was going to tell you my ten-point foolproof plan for the Irish border.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 6, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't every one of them in the SM and CU, and that is crucial to them?


I knew someone would pull me up on that though  but his sort even behave as if EFTA would be the end of days NO SEAT AT THE TABLE OMG


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

JimW said:


> Trouble is it's a ten-a-penny perspective available in a million media outlets that you can only repeat and not back up in any argument, with a big old larding of misunderstood terms chucked in to drag it down a bit further. Shame, as otherwise I was going to tell you my ten-point foolproof plan for the Irish border.


Stick me on ignore like the other geezer then.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Yep. A shit, boring repetitive one to boot.


It seems there is an ignore facility available here, you and the others ought to use it.
Or you could try closing your eyes, sticking fingers in your ears and wailing whah whah whah, but I imagine the ignore button might be easier.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

anyway, you've had some fun on here for the past couple of days. Thats what matters.Welcome aboard.

What is your take on baked potatoes- Cheese or beans first ? this is important


----------



## teqniq (Mar 6, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> anyway, you've had some fun on here for the past couple of days. Thats what matters.Welcome aboard.
> 
> What is your take on baked potatoes- Cheese or beans first ? this is important


Depends on the cheese if you're asking me.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

I rest my case


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Depends on the cheese if you're asking me.



Typical liberal. You've got to commit to a particular theory of cheese/beans on here, and be prepared to defend yourself against deluded fundamentalists of the opposite stripe.

(It's fucking cheese then beans)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 6, 2018)

Hoisted by his own petard.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Typical liberal. You've got to commit to a particular theory of cheese/beans on here, and be prepared to defend yourself against deluded fundamentalists of the opposite stripe.
> 
> (It's fucking cheese then beans)


I am wary. I have disclosed personal information on here already and had it thrown back in the form of snide remarks.
However I will be brave and say that first and foremost the cheese has to be vegetarian.

hashtagthecuntsafuckingvegetarianaswell


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> And amusingly I get lectured on decency and proper behaviour from those same hypocrites.


amusingly I mocked the idea of moderated bourgeois politeness some people do that fails in concealing the naked hatreds of the working class you are willing to put on display. This went far over your head, three times no less. I did later ask you to treat people as you wish to be treated and so far thats going as expected.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

and its cheesy beans on a buttered spud


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> amusingly I mocked the idea of moderated bourgeois politeness some people do that fails in concealing the naked hatreds of the working class you are willing to put on display. This went far over your head, three times no less. I did later ask you to treat people as you wish to be treated and so far thats going as expected.


Naked hatred of the working class? Why was it only the working class that voted brexit then?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 6, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Why was it only the working class that voted brexit then?


they are lowly tumultuous men, they who hath no stake in the kingdom, aroused by base passions and easily led. You should pay them no heed except to pity them as befits your station as judge.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Personally I don't think the working class are lowly as the character quoted does.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Why was it only the working class that voted brexit then?



_The kingdom was lost for want of a comma._


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> _The kingdom was lost for want of a comma._


Yeah, well spotted.
Too late for me to edit now and I wish I hadn't overlooked it.


----------



## David Clapson (Mar 7, 2018)

How did this thread put on another 25 pages since Sunday? Madness.

France24 news was filming a Brexit story in Brixton today. They're also filming in Boston, Lincs, where the Brexit vote was the winningest. There's a sort of twinning arrangement with Brixton now - coach parties to and forth to learn about the 'other'. France24 will be back if anyone wants to spout about Brexit to the French. You can contact them via the B£.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> How did this thread put on another 25 pages since Sunday? Madness.


This thread had better not stop now, I've been up all night working out a solution to the Irish border.  Downloaded some software, did all the modelling and everything.  Who do I send it to?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This thread had better not stop now, I've been up all night working out a solution to the Irish border.  Downloaded some software, did all the modelling and everything.  Who do I send it to?


The boys, obvs


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2018)

Brexit impasse: Ireland has boxed itself in on Border issue



> The unpleasant truth is that for Brexiteers, economic damage to Northern Ireland and some undermining of the Belfast Agreement was a price worth paying to get to their promised land of a UK outside the EU


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

Well if the Irish Times says it, it must be true, since they are the font of all knowledge for what was in the heads of 17 million people when they voted to leave the EU.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Brexit impasse: Ireland has boxed itself in on Border issue



I suppose the Irish Times is much more up close and personal to the issue, than the arms length brexiters who are trying to blag it.
The 17 million people who voted to leave the EU won.
They have had a long time now to come up with a solution but haven't, and it seems to me that there is general distain and contempt towards those asking them to outline their solution, probably because the questions are too difficult to answer.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I suppose the Irish Times is much more up close and personal to the issue, than the arms length brexiters who are trying to blag it.
> The 17 million people who voted to leave the EU won.
> They have had a long time now to come up with a solution but haven't, and it seems to me that there is general distain and contempt towards those asking them to outline their solution, probably because the questions are too difficult to answer.


It's strange.  There's a fair number with Irish links on urban.  They've had very little to say, if anything, on this thread.  It wasn't that long ago some were demanding people read books on Irish history.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well if the Irish Times says it, it must be true, since they are the font of all knowledge for what was in the heads of 17 million people when they voted to leave the EU.


Did you read the article or just glance at the pull-out quote? When they say 'Brexiteers' here they are very clearly talking about politicians, not voters.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Did you read the article or just glance at the pull-out quote? When they say 'Brexiteers' here they are very clearly talking about politicians, not voters.


I’m talking about what Dexter chose to quote context-free.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m talking about what Dexter chose to quote context-free.


And getting it wrong.

Fuck me the quality of debate on both sides on this thread had been dismal.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And getting it wrong.
> 
> Fuck me the quality of debate on both sides on this thread had been dismal.


You assert that it is wrong, but the article does not say that it is talking about the UK government's Brexit-supporting MPs when it makes that statement.  Yes, the first part of the article is criticising the UK goverment's approach to the issue generally.  But that's the government as a whole, whether it is ideologically Brexit or not.  The statement about "Brexiteers", which occurs after a subheading where the theme is being more widely developed, strongly implies that it is talking about people in the UK that support Brexit.  There is nothing to particularly suggest it just means the likes of Rees-Mogg.  When that statement is made, it is the first use of the word "Brexiteer" in the article.  Up until that point, it had repeatedly referred to the UK government's actions by referring to it as the UK government.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This thread had better not stop now, I've been up all night working out a solution to the Irish border.  Downloaded some software, did all the modelling and everything.  Who do I send it to?



Don't send it to the government's 'sensible ideas' dpeartment, it's just a fax machine connected to a shredder.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m talking about what Dexter chose to quote context-free.


I posted a link to the article so it wasn't context free, you're really quite underhand at times.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Don't send it to the government's 'sensible ideas' dpeartment, it's just a fax machine connected to a shredder.


Oh contraire! A few years ago I thought it would be a good idea if the Highway Agencies allowed motorists to ring in if there were traffic cones out and no roadworks being done. Got a Knighthood out of that one (though I'm pretty certain it was Fred Goodwin's old gong they recycled ).


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This thread had better not stop now, I've been up all night working out a solution to the Irish border.  Downloaded some software, did all the modelling and everything.  Who do I send it to?


You're probably taking the problem more seriously than Boris, glad to see someone is


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I posted a link to the article so it wasn't context free, you're really quite underhand at times.


Since the article is about something really quite different to the quote you pulled out of it, what was the context you were seeking to create by pulling out that quote in particular?


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I posted a link to the article so it wasn't context free, you're really quite underhand at times.


So what do you think about what the article says? Do you have an opinion on possible outcomes or solutions to the position we find ourselves in?

And a separate question to anyone who might be able to fill me in on the general position of the Irish Times, including towards the EU and possible reunification.


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I suppose the Irish Times is much more up close and personal to the issue, than the arms length brexiters who are trying to blag it.
> The 17 million people who voted to leave the EU won.
> They have had a long time now to come up with a solution but haven't, and it seems to me that there is general distain and contempt towards those asking them to outline their solution, probably because the questions are too difficult to answer.


There have been potential solutions suggested on this thread, both before and since you rolled up, including that as a majority in NI who voted wanted to remain in the EU, the people of NI be offered the opportunity for Irish reunification.

You may not like this suggested solution, but to deny it's been made is simply dishonest.

ETA edited for clarification


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's strange.  There's a fair number with Irish links on urban.  They've had very little to say, if anything, on this thread.  It wasn't that long ago some were demanding people read books on Irish history.


yeh. i'm just demanding you read books. it would be a start.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

The use of language by the Irish Times and others confuses matters.
There is talk of hard and soft brexit, hard, soft and 'frictionless' borders.
Any kind of brexit is going to be hard, certainly hard to do, and a border is a border.

This bit chimes:

'If the UK is to leave the single market, customs union and jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice then EU law and World Trade Organisation rules mean that border checks between EU states (including Ireland) and the UK are unavoidable.

The British government has not been honest about this, but is now boxed in by its own dishonesty. After centuries of being the big player in a bilateral relationship with Ireland, the British government appears to have assumed that it could get away with making reassuring noises about not wanting “a return to the borders of the past” but then brushing aside Irish protests if such a promise got in the way of their desire for a meaningful Brexit.'


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> a border is a border.


please could you eschew the mayism


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

Yes, there is no doubt that the British government is utterly shit, clueless and flailing around in a totally hopeless manner on the whole topic.  I doubt you will find many here to disagree with that.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> There have been potential solutions suggested on this thread, both before and since you rolled up, including that as a majority in NI who voted wanted to remainin the EU, they be offered the opportunity to do so as part of Eire.
> 
> You may not like this suggested solution, but to deny it's been made is simply dishonest.



Citizens of Northers Ireland already are entitled to have both British and Irish passports. I believe as a consequence of the Good Friday Agreement.
If the suggestion you have outlined is offered what are people supposed to do in reality? Those who wish to remain scoop up their Irish passports and decamp south?
It may be a suggestion, but I don't see it as a workable solution, and if it has been suggested by anybody serious it is disingenuous. The dramatic scenario would be brexit Northern Irish turning on their neighbours and saying 'if you don't like it, go back to your own country, you have the passport, you have the opportunity'.
I don't see what you have outlined as any kind of potential solution, unless someone posted it here as an obvious joke or non runner.
Incidentally I am consistently urging a workable and practical solution, and you may assume I am in denial, but I have yet to read on here anything that would be workable or practical.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 7, 2018)




----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

Reunification is both workable and practical.  It's just ideologically undesirable to too many people.  That doesn't make it unworkable or impractical, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Citizens of Northers Ireland already are entitled to have both British and Irish passports. I believe as a consequence of the Good Friday Agreement.
> If the suggestion you have outlined is offered what are people supposed to do in reality? Those who wish to remain scoop up their Irish passports and decamp south?
> It may be a suggestion, but I don't see it as a workable solution, and if it has been suggested by anybody serious it is disingenuous. The dramatic scenario would be brexit Northern Irish turning on their neighbours and saying 'if you don't like it, go back to your own country, you have the passport, you have the opportunity'.
> I don't see what you have outlined as any kind of potential solution, unless someone posted it here as an obvious joke or non runner.
> Incidentally I am consistently urging a workable and practical solution, and you may assume I am in denial, but I have yet to read on here anything that would be workable or practical.


no one bar you is suggesting anyone decamp south

and i do assume you're in denial


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> please could you eschew the mayism


If you are serious about wanting me to explain, then I think terms such as a 'soft border' or a 'frictionless border' are mealy mouthed.
You may say 'aha, a border exists now, are you calling that a 'hard' border?' I am not, because there is completely free movement of individual people to and fro, and beyond some obscure trusted trader scheme in certain goods, there is complete movement of traffic to and fro.
To my mind the terms used are disingenuous, and utilised to give brexiters some kind of 'out' when they finally say 'We never said there would be no border *at all*, all we ever said was no _hard_ border'. And then bosh, stricter border measures are introduced to the consternation of many.


----------



## agricola (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no one bar you is suggesting anyone decamp south
> 
> and i do assume you're in denial



philosophical got that far south already?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Reunification is both workable and practical.  It's just ideologically undesirable to too many people.  That doesn't make it unworkable or impractical, though.


OK. I go along with that to an extent.
I hesitate when you use the word 'just' though.
The ideological undesirability is wrapped up in a lot of history, politics and bloodshed. For many reasons those features are an anchor weighing down progress, let alone the devil being in the practical details.
As an aspiration reunification is fair enough I suppose, and I think it is unworkable and impractical because this issue has now become time limited.
In just over a year brexit voters will have 'taken back control', and I suspect reunification would take rather longer.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no one bar you is suggesting anyone decamp south
> 
> and i do assume you're in denial


You are wrong on both counts.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Since the article is about something really quite different to the quote you pulled out of it, what was the context you were seeking to create by pulling out that quote in particular?


What...the bit where they separate it and put it in larger text than the rest of the article?  They were giving context by doing so, not me.   They emphasised it.

As you'd know if you'd bothered to read it before posting about my quote.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If you are serious about wanting me to explain, then I think terms such as a 'soft border' or a 'frictionless border' are mealy mouthed.
> You may say 'aha, a border exists now, are you calling that a 'hard' border?' I am not, because there is completely free movement of individual people to and fro, and beyond some obscure trusted trader scheme in certain goods, there is complete movement of traffic to and fro.
> To my mind the terms used are disingenuous, and utilised to give brexiters some kind of 'out' when they finally say 'We never said there would be no border *at all*, all we ever said was no _hard_ border'. And then bosh, stricter border measures are introduced to the consternation of many.


thread on the mayism the theresa mayism


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> thread on the mayism the theresa mayism


Ah I have been educated, there are things called Mayisms, and when I said a border is a border it was one of those.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Reunification is both workable and practical.  It's just ideologically undesirable to too many people.  That doesn't make it unworkable or impractical, though.


Could say the same about lots of things. Including a second referendum, or abandoning Brexit altogether.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

how's about a unification of ireland but with a twist, dublin gets england wales and scotland too.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Could say the same about lots of things. Including a second referendum, or abandoning Brexit altogether.


Well, a second referendum wouldn't solve anything if it gave the same result.
Abandoning Brexit would also be a solution, yes.  I don't disagree with that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, a second referendum wouldn't solve anything if it gave the same result.
> Abandoning Brexit would also be a solution, yes.  I don't disagree with that.


a second referendum might return the same result but with a greater plurality, which would go some way to resolving the thing.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> a second referendum might return the same result but with a greater plurality, which would go some way to resolving the thing.


For God's sake don't let Philosophical frame the question:

'Are you a thick, smelly northern racist who hasn't given a moment's thought to frictionless trade and the Irish Border?' YES/NO


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> For God's sake don't let Philosophical frame the question:
> 
> 'Are you a thick, smelly northern racist who hasn't given a moment's thought to frictionless trade and the Irish Border?' YES/NO



No way in a million years would I want a second referendum.
At no time have I mentioned fragrance, or 'The North' for that matter (unless you mean Northern Ireland).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> how's about a unification of ireland but with a twist, dublin gets england wales and scotland too.


Wilf surely this would resolve everything, as the uk would no longer exist and a greater ireland would take its place.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> For God's sake don't let Philosophical frame the question:
> 
> 'Are you a thick, smelly northern racist who hasn't given a moment's thought to frictionless trade and the Irish Border?' YES/NO



It seems like you object to the idea that some people might not have given a moment's thought to these things. Do you?


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Citizens of Northers Ireland already are entitled to have both British and Irish passports. I believe as a consequence of the Good Friday Agreement.
> If the suggestion you have outlined is offered what are people supposed to do in reality? Those who wish to remain scoop up their Irish passports and decamp south?
> It may be a suggestion, but I don't see it as a workable solution, and if it has been suggested by anybody serious it is disingenuous. The dramatic scenario would be brexit Northern Irish turning on their neighbours and saying 'if you don't like it, go back to your own country, you have the passport, you have the opportunity'.
> I don't see what you have outlined as any kind of potential solution, unless someone posted it here as an obvious joke or non runner.
> Incidentally I am consistently urging a workable and practical solution, and you may assume I am in denial, but I have yet to read on here anything that would be workable or practical.



Possibly my previous post was unclear so to clarify, the solution I'm talking about is the reunification of Ireland which has already been suggested by various posters on this thread, including kabbes very recently.

This solution could be offered by the British government to both the Irish government and the people of NI, and if it's accepted the whole of the island of Ireland becomes one nation and can continue to be a part of the EU. And any of the current inhabitants of NI who don't want to be part of this solution can, if they wish, make use of either their British passports to come and live in Britain, or their Irish passports to live elsewhere in the EU if they prefer.


----------



## Riklet (Mar 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It seems like you object to the idea that some people might not have given a moment's thought to these things. Do you?[/QUOTE
> 
> Did everyone who supportef remain have a complex and well informed position on all facets of political and economic life in the UK and in the EU?
> 
> ...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Possibly my previous post was unclear so to clarify, the solution I'm talking about is the reunification of Ireland which has already been suggested by various posters on this thread, including kabbes very recently.
> 
> This solution could be offered by the British government to both the Irish government and the people of NI, and if it's accepted the whole of the island of Ireland becomes one nation and can continue to be a part of the EU. And any of the current inhabitants of NI who don't want to be part of this solution can, if they wish, make use of either their British passports to come and live in Britain, or their Irish passports to live elsewhere in the EU if they prefer.


... and if the people of the ROI don't want reunification, then it would completely reframe the whole question of why a hard border between the north and the south matters at all.


----------



## Riklet (Mar 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It seems like you object to the idea that some people might not have given a moment's thought to these things. Do you?



Did everyone who supportef remain have a complex and well informed position on all facets of political and economic life in the UK and in the EU?

Did they fuck. And does this invalidate their political opinions? Does it fuck.

There is a real danger here of us deferring to well paid 'experts' here as the ones who should be doing all the thinking and deciding for us


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ... and if the people of the ROI don't want reunification, then it would completely reframe the whole question of why a hard border between the north and the south matters at all.



That's also true.

I have no idea what the position of the current Irish government might be if this offer was made to them (and it would have to be made initially to the government, I suppose), nor what the feelings of the Irish population in general might be, but if Dublin weren't prepared to treat such an offer seriously it would certainly demonstrate that the situation is rather more complex than those accusing Brexit voters of not caring about NI are making out...


----------



## billbond (Mar 7, 2018)

"Abandoning Brexit would also be a solution, yes. I don't disagree with that."

So not a big fan of Democracy then
Maybe not the country for you then as these are the rules we have always followed in the UK
Why not throw the torys out of Power and let Labour take over .I dont disagree with that
Maybe just  not have any voting at all
Whats the point really if you follow this logic
Or why not who ever comes runner up in the voting stakes be the winner
After the second vote if it took place and it went in favor of staying in the EU that would be 1-1, all level
So surely the Brexiters should demand another referendum as thats only fair and Democratic
oh no forgot you dont want that system


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Reunification is both workable and practical.  It's just ideologically undesirable to too many people.  That doesn't make it unworkable or impractical, though.



This is (has been) the conventional wisdom, but I'm not sure it's necessarily still the case.

In any event, I suspect the people in Britain for whom abandoning Brexit is ideologically undesirable outnumber those ideologically opposed to reunification.


----------



## Winot (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> That's also true.
> 
> I have no idea what the position of the current Irish government might be if this offer was made to them (and it would have to be made initially to the government, I suppose), nor what the feelings of the Irish population in general might be, but if Dublin weren't prepared to treat such an offer seriously it would certainly demonstrate that the situation is rather more complex than those accusing Brexit voters of not caring about NI are making out...



As pointed out earlier, the GFA allows for reunification if desired by the majority of NI. In fact I think it is mandatory i.e. Britain can't stop it.

The majority of NI also voted to remain in the EU so on the face of this would be an elegant solution (a modest proposal?) to tick both boxes.

It might also have the effect of bringing down May's government 

Well done Urban I think we've cracked it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

billbond said:


> "Abandoning Brexit would also be a solution, yes. I don't disagree with that."
> 
> So not a big fan of Democracy then
> Maybe not the country for you then as these are the rules we have always followed in the UK
> ...


Not big on following the thread of a conversation, eh?  Bless.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 7, 2018)

Reunification Ideology >Reunification practicality 

( generally obvs & highly subjective :from what I have taken on board over the years)


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Possibly my previous post was unclear so to clarify, the solution I'm talking about is the reunification of Ireland which has already been suggested by various posters on this thread, including kabbes very recently.
> 
> This solution could be offered by the British government to both the Irish government and the people of NI, and if it's accepted the whole of the island of Ireland becomes one nation and can continue to be a part of the EU. And any of the current inhabitants of NI who don't want to be part of this solution can, if they wish, make use of either their British passports to come and live in Britain, or their Irish passports to live elsewhere in the EU if they prefer.



It seems partly that you are outlining my speculation in reverse. I said one consequence might be remainers urged to decamp south, and if I read it right you are suggesting brexiters in Northern Ireland and if this plan is acceptedpossibly decamp elsewhere , you specifically mention Britain (great Britain without the Northern Ireland).
I don't know if it is in the gift of the British to offer all the Irish a solution anyway (it would seem to many a form of good old British colonial patronage, doing the Irish a favour), but Theresa May has repeated several time that she would not break up the union.

As I said earlier, the whole malarkey is now time limited, and whatever the ideological benefits or drawbacks of a united Ireland, it is not practical or workable in my opinion.


billbond said:


> "Abandoning Brexit would also be a solution, yes. I don't disagree with that."
> 
> So not a big fan of Democracy then
> Maybe not the country for you then as these are the rules we have always followed in the UK
> ...



What constitutes democracy is open to debate, but as I see it the rules followed in the UK (in the main) are that there is an election every five years or so, and a chance for change on those occasions, but the brexit referendum is a one time and forever vote and is of a different nature, a different version of democracy if you like (dare I say just as EU democracy is a different form)
The brexit referendum isn't undemocratic in that sense, the UK parliamentary system isn't undemocratic, and the EU isn't undemocratic. However none of those systems are ideal (in my view) either.
The issue now is for the brexiters to get on with it and implement it (whatever it is), and if brexiters are unable to follow through on the result of their victory we reach an impasse, which might lead to change utilising some different form of democracy as yet untried.
It is entirely down to brexiters to resolve this, some call it squaring the circle because of it's seeming impossibility.
Just as we are now faced with the consequences of the brexit vote, in just over a year we might be faced with the consequence that brexit voters have not been able to deliver (unless falling off a cliff edge is what they intended all along).


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

To be fair, I proposed the reunification of Ireland on this thread three whole months ago, when young philosophical was but a glint in the editor’s eye:


kabbes said:


> I think I have the perfect solution.
> Hand NI to the RoI.  Reunite Ireland.
> It's perfect in its irony.  It'll piss off the very people in NI that voted for Brexit on nationist grounds and provide those on the republican side who voted against Brexit exactly what they wanted all along.  Furthermore, it solves the whole Irish border problem at a stroke.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Apologies, I responded separately, but my ham fisted skills have wrapped them up together.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Wilf surely this would resolve everything, as the uk would no longer exist and a greater ireland would take its place.


I'll put my team on it right away.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> To be fair, I proposed the reunification of Ireland on this thread three whole months ago, when young philosophical was but a glint in the editor’s eye:


The concept of Irish unification goes back further than three months.


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It seems partly that you are outlining my speculation in reverse. I said one consequence might be remainers urged to decamp south, and if I read it right you are suggesting brexiters in Northern Ireland and if this plan is acceptedpossibly decamp elsewhere , you specifically mention Britain (great Britain without the Northern Ireland).
> *I don't know if it is in the gift of the British to offer all the Irish a solution* anyway (it would seem to many a form of good old British colonial patronage, doing the Irish a favour), but Theresa May has repeated several time that she would not break up the union.
> 
> As I said earlier, the whole malarkey is now time limited, and whatever the ideological benefits or drawbacks of a united Ireland, it is not practical or workable in my opinion...



And there's something else to add to the list of things you don't know, even though it's just been outlined how it might work *and* pointed out that the GFA has provision for this to happen.

What you reckon is once again demonstrated to be worth rather less than you appear to believe...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The concept of Irish unification goes back further than three months.


I hadn’t seen it proposed as a solution to the Brexit border problem prior to then, although feel free to point me to where it was.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It seems like you object to the idea that some people might not have given a moment's thought to these things. Do you?


see post 6225/7.


----------



## Winot (Mar 7, 2018)

Riklet said:


> There is a real danger here of us deferring to well paid 'experts' here as the ones who should be doing all the thinking and deciding for us



Representational democracy you mean?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> And there's something else to add to the list of things you don't know, even though it's just been outlined how it might work *and* pointed out that the GFA has provision for this to happen.
> 
> What you reckon is once again demonstrated to be worth rather less than you appear to believe...


You may have that opinion, but I disagree with you (unsurprisingly).
You have outlined a couple of examples, especially your second on, that would lead to people having to choose to stay in their home community, or go away if they objected to what happens. I see that as a cavalier approach to the lives of others, perhaps that is something you don't realise.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I hadn’t seen it proposed as a solution to the Brexit border problem prior to then, although feel free to point me to where it was.



Perhaps you could research matters of Irish home rule from 1870.

This is what you posted:

To be fair, I proposed the reunification of Ireland on this thread three whole months ago, when young philosophical was but a glint in the editor’s eye:


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2018)

kabbes said:


> To be fair, I proposed the reunification of Ireland on this thread three whole months ago, when young philosophical was but a glint in the editor’s eye:


You certainly did.

Did you forget about the Democratic *Unionist* Party who are currently propping up the tories.  How do you think the democratic *unionist* party and the conservative and *Union* party would take your suggestion of trading in part of the union?

Also...nice to see you'd consider selling out your fellow citizens for convenience.  NI voted remain and now you want them to fix your mess by suggesting they leave the UK?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> see post 6225/7.



Those posts contain someone else's response to the question. 

They seem to accept that many people will have voted without thinking or knowing about the full consequences of the decision they opted for. 

I feel that some people on here alternate between (a) taking offence at the idea that the vote was made in ignorance of the consequences for Ireland, and (b) saying that it's for the politicians to propose and work out solutions. Those two things seem contradictory to me.


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You may have that opinion, but I disagree with you (unsurprisingly).
> You have outlined a couple of examples, especially your second on, that would lead to people having to choose to stay in their home community, or go away if they objected to what happens. I see that as a cavalier approach to the lives of others, perhaps that is something you don't realise.





DexterTCN said:


> You certainly did.
> 
> Did you forget about the Democratic *Unionist* Party who are currently propping up the tories.  How do you think the democratic *unionist* party and the conservative and *Union* party would take your suggestion of trading in part of the union?
> 
> Also...nice to see you'd consider selling out your fellow citizens for convenience.  NI voted remain and now you want them to fix your mess by suggesting they leave the UK?



Let's be clear here. No one is suggesting that NI is simply given back to Ireland, or that people will be forced to leave their communities or that anyone's citizenship will be "sold out".

What is being suggested is that the question of reunification is put to the vote and that is a majority of the NI population wants it, then reunification takes place. As has already been pointed out, this is explicitly provided for in the GFA.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Let's be clear here. No one is suggesting that NI is simply given back to Ireland, or that people will be forced to leave their communities or that anyone's citizenship will be "sold out".
> 
> What is being suggested is that the question of reunification is put to the vote and that is a majority of the NI population wants it, then reunification takes place. As has already been pointed out, this is explicitly provided for in the GFA.


A vote in Northern Ireland alone?


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> A vote in Northern Ireland alone?



Who do you think should vote to decide the future of NI if not the people of NI?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> Who do you think should vote to decide the future of NI if not the people of NI?


The people of the whole island perhaps


----------



## Santino (Mar 7, 2018)

Is there anything worth reading on tg the last 5 pages of this thread?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

Santino said:


> Is there anything worth reading on tg the last 5 pages of this thread?


Everything except philosophical's posts and of course 6251


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The people of the whole island perhaps



That suits me too, though I can see that some in NI might object...

More seriously, that's not what the GFA sets out, so I don't think it can be put forward in the current situation.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Everything except philosophical's posts and of course 6251



How generous. If you don't want to read my posts, put me on ignore.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 7, 2018)

Santino said:


> Is there anything worth reading on tg the last 5 pages of this thread?


Well, I’ve posted a few times.


----------



## Winot (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> A vote in Northern Ireland alone?






			
				Article 1 of the GFA said:
			
		

> The two Governments:
> (i) recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland



Here's the whole thing if you fancy a read:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/136652/agreement.pdf


----------



## Santino (Mar 7, 2018)

Do I need to repeat the question?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2018)

Santino said:


> Do I need to repeat the question?


Leave out the tg if you do repeat it


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

I have highlighted the bit that says a United Ireland would have to be agreed by both the North and the South, and not by Northern ireland alone.

 Article 3 1. It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that *a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. *Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution.


----------



## prunus (Mar 7, 2018)

Not wanting to derail the discussion but I do like the fact that the (current) poll results above mirror the overall referendum nicely, with 48.1% on the 'no' side and the sum of the 2 'yes' types being (unsurprisingly) 51.9%.

EU Referendum Results

(now some ducker's going to go and vote and mess it up I expect).


----------



## billbond (Mar 7, 2018)

What constitutes democracy is open to debate, but as I see it the rules followed in the UK (in the main) are that there is an election every five years or so, and a chance for change on those occasions, but the brexit referendum is a one time and forever vote and is of a different nature, a different version of democracy if you like (dare I say just as EU democracy is a different form)
The brexit referendum isn't undemocratic in that sense, the UK parliamentary system isn't undemocratic, and the EU isn't undemocratic. However none of those systems are ideal (in my view) either.
The issue now is for the brexiters to get on with it and implement it (whatever it is), and if brexiters are unable to follow through on the result of their victory we reach an impasse, which might lead to change utilising some different form of democracy as yet untried.
It is entirely down to brexiters to resolve this, some call it squaring the circle because of it's seeming impossibility.
Just as we are now faced with the consequences of the brexit vote, in just over a year we might be faced with the consequence that brexit voters have not been able to deliver (unless falling off a cliff edge is what they intended all along).[/QUOTE]

You should go into Politics 
More twisting and turning than George Best in his heyday
I bet your  fav tv programme was "Yes Minister"
Thats how they used to talk


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2018)

billbond said:


> What constitutes democracy is open to debate, but as I see it the rules followed in the UK (in the main) are that there is an election every five years or so, and a chance for change on those occasions, but the brexit referendum is a one time and forever vote and is of a different nature, a different version of democracy if you like (dare I say just as EU democracy is a different form)
> The brexit referendum isn't undemocratic in that sense, the UK parliamentary system isn't undemocratic, and the EU isn't undemocratic. However none of those systems are ideal (in my view) either.
> The issue now is for the brexiters to get on with it and implement it (whatever it is), and if brexiters are unable to follow through on the result of their victory we reach an impasse, which might lead to change utilising some different form of democracy as yet untried.
> It is entirely down to brexiters to resolve this, some call it squaring the circle because of it's seeming impossibility.
> Just as we are now faced with the consequences of the brexit vote, in just over a year we might be faced with the consequence that brexit voters have not been able to deliver (unless falling off a cliff edge is what they intended all along).



You should go into Politics
More twisting and turning than George Best in his heyday
I bet your  fav tv programme was "Yes Minister"
Thats how they used to talk[/QUOTE]

I bet you work for Blake Morgan.

Put me on ignore.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 7, 2018)

prunus said:


> Not wanting to derail the discussion but I do like the fact that the (current) poll results above mirror the overall referendum nicely, with 48.1% on the 'no' side and the sum of the 2 'yes' types being (unsurprisingly) 51.9%.
> 
> EU Referendum Results
> 
> (now some ducker's going to go and vote and mess it up I expect).



Sorry to break your theory a little, because I voted to leave (and still believe that to be the right thing to do), but voted no in the poll because the question posed was 'will we have a brexit' and I was quite expecting (as per kaka tim's OP) at that moment, that the united pressure from capital, threats from the City, hardliner remain groups, EU, etc. would ramp it up to prevent us leaving at any cost (indeed we still have persistent calls for a 2nd referendum from the likes of Blair).


----------



## Winot (Mar 7, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have highlighted the bit that says a United Ireland would have to be agreed by both the North and the South, and not by Northern ireland alone.
> 
> Article 3 1. It is the firm will of the Irish nation, in harmony and friendship, to unite all the people who share the territory of the island of Ireland, in all the diversity of their identities and traditions, recognising that *a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island. *Until then, the laws enacted by the Parliament established by this Constitution shall have the like area and extent of application as the laws enacted by the Parliament that existed immediately before the coming into operation of this Constitution.



Yes I think you're right (it's confusingly drafted, because the bit you've quoted is actually amendments to be made to the Irish Constitution). I guess the focus was on a majority for reunification in NI because in practice that was/is the bit that needed to change.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 8, 2018)

This article reckons a no deal crash-out is the most likely outcome.

Crash Out Brexit Now the Defender Position | naked capitalism


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This article reckons a no deal crash-out is the most likely outcome.
> 
> Crash Out Brexit Now the Defender Position | naked capitalism


Decent article, doesn't go very in-depth but does outline the difficulties.  

And of course this is only about NI where RoI has a veto, there's still Gibraltar where Spain has a veto and everything else to be dealt with.


----------



## Supine (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Incidentally I am consistently urging a workable and practical solution, and you may assume I am in denial, but I have yet to read on here anything that would be workable or practical.



Why should you expect to read anything here that would be workable or practical? This is a thread about whether brexit will actually happen.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Supine said:


> Why should you expect to read anything here that would be workable or practical? This is a thread about whether brexit will actually happen.


In the absence of any particular definition  of what brexit means then workable and practical is my choice.
Therefore it is as legitimate a definition as any other on this thread  when discussing  brexit isn't  it?
So whether a practical and workable brexit will happen is legitimate...unless I am missing something and you have an alternative or improved definition of brexit...or even any definition at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> In the absence of any particular definition  of what brexit means then workable and practical is my choice.
> Therefore it is as legitimate a definition as any other on this thread  when discussing  brexit isn't  it?
> So whether a practical and workable brexit will happen is legitimate...unless I am missing something and you have an alternative or improved definition of brexit...or even any definition at all.


it's taken me about 20 months to get 420 posts on this thread. looks like it'll take you fewer than 20 days.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

Supine said:


> Why should you expect to read anything here that would be workable or practical? This is a thread  about whether brexit will actually happen.


He's here to tell anyone that voted leave that they are racist because we havn't considered the border issue in Ireland. Ignoring the fact that people voted in or out for various reasons and for reasons that affect them personally. He's banging the drum on the border issue because it's close to his heart (thats okay because it's me me me) but anyone else voting for personal reasons is the villian here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> He's here to tell anyone that voted leave that they are racist because we havn't considered the border issue in Ireland. Ignoring the fact that people voted in or out for various reasons and for reasons that affect them personally. He's banging the drum on the border issue because it's close to his heart (thats okay because it's me me me) but anyone else voting for personal reasons is the villian here.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> He's here to tell anyone that voted leave that they are racist because we havn't considered the border issue in Ireland. Ignoring the fact that people voted in or out for various reasons and for reasons that affect them personally. He's banging the drum on the border issue because it's close to his heart (thats okay because it's me me me) but anyone else voting for personal reasons is the villian here.


Villain?
Do go on.
The 'me me me look at me' trope can be applied to anybody writing things on a messageboard on the internet.
All that leads to is mere opinion regarding degrees.
Your opinion is just that, like mine, the opinion of one individual.
Seeing as how you mention the border, can you suggest any practical and workable solution?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

I was about to ask the same.  Instead of just mouthing off.

I doubt he even knows what the border situation is.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Seeing as how you mention the border, can you suggest any practical and workable solution?


Give me 25 reasons why you voted remain and i might think about it.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I was about to ask the same.  Instead of just mouthing off.
> 
> I doubt he even knows what the border situation is.


If thats what you think you should expect no answer from me then.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

Fuck all about the border on this


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

It seems to me the only real solutions to the border issue are:

Full 'hard' border between the 6 counties and the rest of Ireland
Border in the Irish sea (preferably this side of the Isle of Man because they're weird)
A united Ireland
A shit border where people make the right noises but no one really gives a fuck (fudge option)
It'd be some sort of fudge I reckon but any of the above will leave some people pissed off, but there are no perfect solutions here.  The situation is clearly not perfect at the moment so its just swapping one imperfect situation for another.

I'm convinced that in the medium term we will see an united Ireland and an independent Scotland.  The best thing to do now would be to accept that reality and work under that assumption.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

Solutions needed for Massive youth unemployment in europe, Eu refugee camps, Fruit pickers and labourers living 6 to a caravan, Roi being a tax haven for big business yet the workers don't benefit from this. I DEMAND immediate answers or i'll stick a guilt trip on you and call you racsist


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> If thats what you think you should expect no answer from me then.


I'm serious.

I don't think you know what the situation is re the border, where it is proposed to be, who is against it, how the tories tried to trick everyone and who caused this situation.

And I never expect an answer from you in this thread.   A quick scan of your posts confirms that you're just a troll with nothing to contribute.

https://www.urban75.net/forums/search/51580583/


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Give me 25 reasons why you voted remain and i might think about it.





sealion said:


> Solutions needed for Massive youth unemployment in europe, Eu refugee camps, Fruit pickers and labourers living 6 to a caravan, Roi being a tax haven for big business yet the workers don't benefit from this. I DEMAND immediate answers or i'll stick a guilt trip on you and call you racsist


Call me a racist then.
I don't feel guilt. Hatred yes, but guilt no.
I suppose I would feel guilty if I voted brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Solutions needed for Massive youth unemployment in europe, Eu refugee camps, Fruit pickers and labourers living 6 to a caravan, Roi being a tax haven for big business yet the workers don't benefit from this. I DEMAND immediate answers or i'll stick a guilt trip on you and call you racsist


Don't forget the need for a solution to problems like the Double Irish With a Dutch Sandwich, which is certainly related to the problem of RoI being a tax haven but is in truth a whole separate class of problems to itself that comes about due to unfettered trade access between EU nations.  As fast as loopholes can be shut, tax lawyers and accountants come up with three more.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Solutions needed for Massive youth unemployment in europe, Eu refugee camps, Fruit pickers and labourers living 6 to a caravan, Roi being a tax haven for big business yet the workers don't benefit from this. I DEMAND immediate answers or i'll stick a guilt trip on you and call you racsist


The vote has been and gone and the brexiters won.
For that reason I feel no inclination to dance to your tune and provide you with 25 reasons why I voted remain.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The vote has been and gone and the brexiters won.
> For that reason I feel no inclination to dance to your tune and provide you with 25 reasons why I voted remain.


That would only make sense if you now endorse Brexit.  Otherwise, you still need to justify why you disagree with it, when disagreeing with Brexit means agreeing with staying in the EU and all its attendant problems.

And even then, it's illogical to say that people that cast a vote one way in a ballot need to have worked out solutions for all the problems associated with that vote, whilst those who cast their vote the other way don't need to have worked out any such solutions.  The subsequent results of the vote are irrelevant to a judgement of the thought process involved in the vote.  Either both sides need to justify themselves or neither do.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

I disagree with brexit for reasons stated many times above. I voted remain for other reasons also stated above (for example not wanting to side with the Tories, the EU democracy being preferable to the UK one, because the concept of a sovereign UK is a fancy word to cover nationalism, because I wanted to signal to 'foreigners' that not everybody hates them).
None of my reasons matter because brexit won. Brexiters have got the people into this mess, and if they have no solutions, as far as I'm concerned they should have thought about that before voting.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with brexit for reasons stated many times above. I voted remain for other reasons also stated above (for example not wanting to side with the Tories, the EU democracy being preferable to the UK one, because the concept of a sovereign UK is a fancy word to cover nationalism, because I wanted to signal to 'foreigners' that not everybody hates them).
> None of my reasons matter because brexit won. Brexiters have got the people into this mess, and if they have no solutions, as far as I'm concerned they should have thought about that before voting.


So all your reasons amount to voting AGAINST rather than voting FOR.

Well then, who should yes voters not also have voted AGAINST rather than FOR?


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with brexit for reasons stated many times above. I voted remain for other reasons also stated above (for example not wanting to side with the Tories, the EU democracy being preferable to the UK one, because the concept of a sovereign UK is a fancy word to cover nationalism, because I wanted to signal to 'foreigners' that not everybody hates them).
> None of my reasons matter because brexit won. Brexiters have got the people into this mess, and if they have no solutions, as far as I'm concerned they should have thought about that before voting.



Get over yourself you pompous twit.

I voted remain but this shit show is ours now.  Anyway its just a different flavour of shit sandwich.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with brexit for reasons stated many times above. I voted remain for other reasons also stated above (for example not wanting to side with the Tories, the EU democracy being preferable to the UK one, because the concept of a sovereign UK is a fancy word to cover nationalism, because I wanted to signal to 'foreigners' that not everybody hates them).
> None of my reasons matter because brexit won. Brexiters have got the people into this mess, and if they have no solutions, as far as I'm concerned they should have thought about that before voting.


yeh.  you know there were tories campaigning for remain too, right? to be true to yourself you should have abstained.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Fuck all about the border on this


sadly the ballot designers discarded my recommendation that the question remain the same but the options be yes and no


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So all your reasons amount to voting AGAINST rather than voting FOR.
> 
> Well then, who should yes voters not also have voted AGAINST rather than FOR?


My preference for the EU version of democracy is a FOR my desire to appear welcoming to 'foreigners' is a FOR. There are others that I didn't mention, like collaboration in others areas such as harmonisation and high standards in medicines. I didn't list them all because I said I wasn't going to dance to the 25 reasons tune demanded above.
Your question needs to be rephrased in order for me to understand what you're asking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My preference for the EU version of democracy


the eu version of democracy is imposing governments as occurred in e.g. italy and greece and forcing reruns of referenda as in e.g. denmark


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh.  you know there were tories campaigning for remain too, right? to be true to yourself you should have abstained.


Your point is valid. I have associated myself very regrettably with some Tories, and I ought to have abstained. I saw it as an emergency to stand against Gove, Farage, Johnson, and the like.
However having voted I now see it as a ticket that validates my demand that the winners solve the problems they created.
Abstaining would probably have been a good decision, but there you go. I am prepared to accept responsibility for voting remain.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the eu version of democracy is imposing governments as occurred in e.g. italy and greece and forcing reruns of referenda as in e.g. denmark


Indeed.
However brexit won. We are under the constraints of the UK version of 'democracy' now.
That is the preference of those voting in the referendum, so the winners ought to suggest solutions to the problems they caused, in my view most especially the land border on the island of Ireland.
Time is running out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Indeed.
> However brexit won.
> That is the preference of those voting in the referendum, so the winners ought to suggest solutions to the problems they caused, in my view most especially the land border on the island of Ireland.
> Time is running out.


i think you'll find that the brexiteers did not cause the land border on the island of ireland which is rather down to the likes of david lloyd george and winston spencer churchill.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Get over yourself you pompous twit.
> 
> I voted remain but this shit show is ours now.  Anyway its just a different flavour of shit sandwich.



'Ours'?
Thanks for the compliment though.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find that the brexiteers did not cause the land border on the island of ireland which is rather down to the likes of david lloyd george and winston spencer churchill.


I agree with you. Brexiters did not cause the establishment of the six counties and the death and pain it has caused. However the combination of both countries being in the EU, and the Good Friday Agreement has reduced the death and pain considerably.
Brexiters have now put the recent years of peace and harmony and efforts at collaboration at risk.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I agree with you. Brexiters did not cause the establishment of the six counties and the death and pain it has caused. However the combination of both countries being in the EU, and the Good Friday Agreement has reduced the death and pain considerably.
> Brexiters have now put the recent years of peace and harmony and efforts at collaboration at risk.


the uk and roi joined the eec/eu in 1973. just as you can't set the killings in the troubles at the eu's door you can't set the decline in deaths there either.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'Ours'?
> Thanks for the compliment though.



Yes, in the way that I didn't vote for the tories but May is still my prime minister. That's the thing about democracy sometimes (all of the time) you just have to suck it up and make the best of what you end up with.  Unless of course you are planning personally on ceding from the UK.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the uk and roi joined the eec/eu in 1973. just as you can't set the killings in the troubles at the eu's door you can't set the decline in deaths there either.


I said it was a combination. For many both countries being outwardly facing towards the EU softened the notion that was forever to be in thrall to the UK, which helped to remove one part of the justification for conflict, then there was reform to the corrupt electoral features that were then inherent in Northern Ireland, then their was the Good Friday Agreement.
At my age there have been several life dominating features involving conflict and threat. The results of the second world war were to be seen everywhere as a child, I was born under rationing, we had to live in a prefab, play on what we called bomb sites, our teachers were frequently limbless, or damaged in other ways having fought in the war like my father did.
Another threat came from the cold war and threat of nuclear Armageddon, and from my teens to my forties everyday life was lived in the shadow of Irish related terrorism.
At least two of those features of my life has led me to welcome the hope signalled by the existence of the EU, and pretty well established peace in Ireland.
You may wish to dismiss the relevance of my life experience, but I see the  combination of factors leading to a decline in deaths in Ireland have been very much helped by the existence of the EU.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, in the way that I didn't vote for the tories but May is still my prime minister. That's the thing about democracy sometimes (all of the time) you just have to suck it up and make the best of what you end up with.  Unless of course you are planning personally on ceding from the UK.


You can vote May out next time. I see brexit as damage forever.
I certainly wouldn't mind ceding from the UK, but an accident of birth places me here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I said it was a combination. For many both countries being outwardly facing towards the EU softened the notion that was forever to be in thrall to the UK, which helped to remove one part of the justification for conflict, then there was reform to the corrupt electoral features that were then inherent in Northern Ireland, then their was the Good Friday Agreement.
> At my age there have been several life dominating features involving conflict and threat. The results of the second world war were to be seen everywhere as a child, I was born under rationing, we had to live in a prefab, play on what we called bomb sites, our teachers were frequently limbless, or damaged in other ways having fought in the war like my father did.
> Another threat came from the cold war and threat of nuclear Armageddon, and from my teens to my forties everyday life was lived in the shadow of Irish related terrorism.
> At least two of those features of my life has led me to welcome the hope signalled by the existence of the EU, and pretty well established peace in Ireland.
> You may wish to dismiss the relevance of my life experience, but I see the  combination of factors leading to a decline in deaths in Ireland have been very much helped by the existence of the EU.


the results of the second world war are still to be seen all around. as are the results of slavery and the abolition thereof.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the results of the second world war are still to be seen all around. as are the results of slavery and the abolition thereof.


I completely agree, but it is worth trying to learn lessons from those terrible things, and trying to make things better, and trying to head off a repeat of such things, isn't it?


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I certainly wouldn't mind ceding from the UK, but an accident of birth places me here.



So you're intending to sit around sulking while Brexit happens,ignoring its impacts on you and everyone around you (other than to complain that everyone's racist) because you didn't like the outcome of a vote? How constructive.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You can vote May out next time. I see brexit as damage forever.
> I certainly wouldn't mind ceding from the UK, but an accident of birth places me here.



You can vote lib dem next time, they'd have us back in the EU in a Parliament I reckon.  Also if you have a UK and Irish passport you can go and live virtually anywhere in Europe, which is a dam lot better than most can - just ask those poor souls drowning in the med.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> So you're intending to sit around sulking while Brexit happens,ignoring its impacts on you and everyone around you (other than to complain that everyone's racist) because you didn't like the outcome of a vote? How constructive.


You're absolutely right. I certainly don't feel the desire, the need or the requirement to be constructive. I bang on and on about the Irish border because I am *not *ignoring the impact of brexit.
Because the vote is forever I hate it's outcome, so you may describe my position as sulking if you like. I see it differently.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> You can vote lib dem next time, they'd have us back in the EU in a Parliament I reckon.  Also if you have a UK and Irish passport you can go and live virtually anywhere in Europe, which is a dam lot better than most can - just ask those poor souls drowning in the med.


I won't vote libdem because they have a capitalist view of Education.
When you say I can live anywhere in the EU by dint of my passport, is that simply a statement of fact, or a round about way of saying 'if you don't like it leave'?
The poor desperate and exploited drowning souls in the med are a humanitarian crisis for all of us aren't they? In or out of the EU, in Europe or anywhere else on the planet?


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> you may describe my position as sulking if you like. I see it differently.



Whinging and not constructively contributing is indistinguishable from sulking afaics, so I'm not sure it matters how you'd see it. You've made your view that Brexit is Bad clear, what is to be gained from endlessly repeating yourself? What are you hoping to achieve here?

Are you looking for Brexiters to have a Damascene conversion and suddenly cry out "oh my, you were right all along, I _am_ a racist"? Do you think that's likely, especially here where most of the pro Leave camp have consistently explained they didn't vote that way because of immigration issues in the first place? Are you hoping for people to fall on their knees and say "oh no, Brexit is going wrong, _save me philosophical_" so you can laugh and feel all warm and fuzzy about being correct? What is this about?


----------



## andysays (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the results of the second world war are still to be seen all around. as are the results of slavery and the abolition thereof.


All those are clearly the fault of Brexit voters too, as is the fact that Spurs were beaten by Juventus last night.

Brexit voters are to blame for EVERYTHING bad ever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

andysays said:


> All those are clearly the fault of Brexit voters too, as is the fact that Spurs were beaten by Juventus last night.
> 
> Brexit voters are to blame for EVERYTHING bad ever.


spurs getting beaten is not bad


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I won't vote libdem because they have a capitalist view of Education.



Hang on, I thought Brexit was vitally important?  Are you saying you weigh up various factors when deciding to vote and then make a decesion based on what you think is most important?  Seems an odd way to go about things?



> When you say I can live anywhere in the EU by din't of my passport, is that simply a statement of fact, or a round about way of saying 'if you don't like it leave'?



Simply a statement of fact. It is as an accident of birth where you are born and grow up but in theory at least you can go and live anywhere you wish in Europe.  You said you wanted to cede.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 8, 2018)

Are these EU voting stats correct? 

EU facts behind the claims: UK influence


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Whinging and not constructively contributing is indistinguishable from sulking afaics, so I'm not sure it matters how you'd see it. You've made your view that Brexit is Bad clear, what is to be gained from endlessly repeating yourself? What are you hoping to achieve here?
> 
> Are you looking for Brexiters to have a Damascene conversion and suddenly cry out "oh my, you were right all along, I _am_ a racist"? Do you think that's likely, especially here where most of the pro Leave camp have consistently explained they didn't vote that way because of immigration issues in the first place? Are you hoping for people to fall on their knees and say "oh no, Brexit is going wrong, _save me philosophical_" so you can laugh and feel all warm and fuzzy about being correct? What is this about?



I suppose it is about pressing the pro leave camp on what their next step is going to be.

I am not seeking for anybody to say I am correct, because the vote is now over. It is about wandering into a left wing site and being taken aback that there are those here who voted brexit, but nevertheless accepting that has happened, and asking those people what the next step will be. My confusion is about whether two political extremes have suddenly snapped closed the circle like a bracelet, where the politics of the alt left and alt right are now in alliance.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Hang on, I thought Brexit was vitally important?  Are you saying you weigh up various factors when deciding to vote and then make a decesion based on what you think is most important?  Seems an odd way to go about things?
> *
> The decision regarding Liberals was about deciding how NOT to vote, they are liars. Anyway they shared a government with the Tories, who would want to vote for them however glossy their politics may seem?*
> 
> ...



Thank you for clearing that up, for a moment I thought it was a riff on 'piss off out of it'. I don't see living elsewhere as the same as ceding. I would like to cede from the UK because there are aspects of this country that are detestable, but other forces keep me here so I am obliged to play the hand I'm dealt, isn't that true for most people in terms of location?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Thank you for clearing that up, for a moment I thought it was a riff on 'piss off out of it'. I don't see living elsewhere as the same as ceding. I would like to cede from the UK because there are aspects of this country that are detestable, but other forces keep me here so I am obliged to play the hand I'm dealt, isn't that true for most people in terms of location?


secede


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My confusion is about whether two political extremes have suddenly snapped closed the circle like a bracelet, where the politics of the alt left and alt right are now in alliance.



Alright so short answer to this, no. The "alt-left" is largely a phantasm made up by the tabloids in the any case (the closest political tendency I could think of would be the younger set of tankies around stuff like Red London), but Lexit voters have totally different motivations in comparison to John Bull rightists, [edit-->] eg. concerns with the capture of the overwhelming part of the EU's institutions by neoliberal interests and associated fallout (such as Viking-Laval, or enforced privatisation policies), or a forthright analysis of the way the EU acts to enable what amounts to an abusive relationships between powerful northern European states and weaker southern ones (most notably Greece).

Some even have specifically anti-racist reasons linked to the militarisation and attempted consolidation of "Fortress Europe", which Butchers alluded to when he pulled up that piece about the borders between Spain and Africa.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Alright so short answer to this, no. The "alt-left" is largely a phantasm made up by the tabloids in the any case (the closest political tendency I could think of would be the younger set of tankies around stuff like Red London), but Lexit voters have totally different motivations in comparison to John Bull rightists.


it's gone over yer man's head


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 8, 2018)

andysays said:


> All those are clearly the fault of Brexit voters too, as is the fact that Spurs were beaten by Juventus last night.
> 
> Brexit voters are to blame for EVERYTHING bad ever.



I dunno, spurs have been a joke since loooooong before the brexit vote.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> secede



Blimey, you're right. I've been using the wrong cede for a while now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Blimey, you're right. I've been using the wrong cede for a while now.


now i've planted the right seed in your mind


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I dunno, spurs have been a joke since loooooong before the brexit vote.


little sir echo


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> secede


Yes you're right.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's gone over yer man's head


No it hasn't. It provides food for thought.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Alright so short answer to this, no. The "alt-left" is largely a phantasm made up by the tabloids in the any case (the closest political tendency I could think of would be the younger set of tankies around stuff like Red London), but Lexit voters have totally different motivations in comparison to John Bull rightists, [edit-->] eg. concerns with the capture of the overwhelming part of the EU's institutions by neoliberal interests and associated fallout (such as Viking-Laval, or enforced privatisation policies), or a forthright analysis of the way the EU acts to enable what amounts to an abusive relationships between powerful northern European states and weaker southern ones (most notably Greece).
> 
> Some even have specifically anti-racist reasons linked to the militarisation and attempted consolidation of "Fortress Europe", which Butchers alluded to when he pulled up that piece about the borders between Spain and Africa.



OK, the term alt left is equally as meaningless as alt right, and can be translated into John Bullers and Lexiters?
Incidentally you attribute what you believe to be the motivation of Lexit voters, but my attributions has been seen as invalid by some here, not because they have pointed out I am wrong for a reason, but because I couldn't know the range of reasons why 17 or so million people voted brexit. In this sense we are the same in assuming stuff about voter motivation.
I am not unaware that there are issues within the EU as an institution, but am astonished that the reaction of Lexiters by your interpretation is to bail out and we then get a frying pan/fire interface. There are many groups in many countries in the EU that share concerns regarding the EU as a structure, I don't understand why the Lexiters wouldn't want to collaborate with such groups if they have common cause. Online technology will always be a mystery to me, but I imagine there would be ways to collaborate using it and other means. It is the notion perhaps initiated by brexiters, that the EU would be better reformed by reducing it to bite sized nation states, changing them, and then hope that would have a domino effect throughout Europe that very much troubles me.
To me that approach is fraught with danger but that is where lexiters and brexiters have landed the UK. Now a nation state of sorts, maybe with an 'independent Wales, and Scotland, and parcels of Ireland to come, maybe with an independent 'north' or London. How small does it have to be before that direction of travel stops?
I also see the danger that smaller groupings are more open to exploitation by the powerful, more quickly, more easily and more permanently. Yes of course there is exploitation in the greater EU, but instead of resisting that rushing to the arms of the permanent ruling class that has always held sway in the UK seems to me to invite shackles, not move towards shaking them off.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)




----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> OK, the term alt left is equally as meaningless as alt right, and can be translated into John Bullers and Lexiters?



Generally "alt-right" is considered to encompass a fractured but specific wing of the far-right/fascist movement, mostly congregated around Breitbart, which coalesced with the aim of putting Donald Trump in power. It tends to be online-savvy and media oriented, distinct from the likes of the Tea Party but more or less closely aligned with racist patriot groups. Alt-left is just an attempt to take a scary-sounding term and apply it to people considered unacceptably left wing by the mainstream press.

And no, it's significantly more complicated than John Bull v Lexit, because people voted Leave for a massive spectrum of reasons. Hell my folks voted Leave because they thought, although it wouldn't win, that a close vote would screw over the Tories. They were of course half-right.



philosophical said:


> In this sense we are the same in assuming stuff about voter motivation.



I'm not assuming the motivations of 17 million people though, I'm explaining the stated motivations over many years of people on here who have been in favour of Lexit, often backed in part or whole by the main purveyors of Lexit at the time of the referendum. The concerns over neoliberal capture of institutions and the evisceration of democratic reach for the masses over things like TTIP in particular were cited throughout the course of the Lexit campaign as its main motivation.



philosophical said:


> your interpretation is to bail out and we then get a frying pan/fire interface



I actually voted Remain, because I didn't share the optimism of Lexit that the process of leaving could be shifted away from reactionary outcomes and felt it would likely lead to Britain going further down the rainy fascist island path, while getting bullied as an isolated minor player stuck between major superpowers.

But that's not to say I don't understand and sympathise with much of the critique - including that it's naive as hell to think that the EU is open to capture by a cross-EU progressive alliance. Bar some truly spectacular change in circumstance, the EU is going to continue to decline as both a democratic and a progressive entity, and tbh, if this question were asked again in ten years' time I might reckon that there was no more point in staying. A desire to get out of that bind and try to reassert popular progressive sovereignty in an independent country is perfectly rational and not in any way racist.


----------



## Winot (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> But that's not to say I don't understand and sympathise with much of the critique - including that it's naive as hell to think that the EU is open to capture by a cross-EU progressive alliance. Bar some truly spectacular change in circumstance, the EU is going to continue to decline as both a democratic and a progressive entity, and tbh, *if this question were asked again in ten years' time* I might reckon that there was no more point in staying. A desire to get out of that bind and try to reassert popular progressive sovereignty in an independent country is perfectly rational and not in any way racist.



A sensible Brexit policy would have had a ten year lead up anyway.


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

Sadly sensible was never an option.


----------



## Winot (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


>




It's looking more and more like a 'no deal' Brexit. Apparently the Government is running scared of a vote on a Customs Union because they might lose to the combined forces of Anna Soubry et al. and Labour.

Does anyone know if Labour can force a vote on this issue? It's looking like a good time to bring the Government down.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The vote has been and gone and the brexiters won.
> For that reason I feel no inclination to dance to your tune and provide you with 25 reasons why I voted remain.



You're the one who insists that the people who voted leave should be the ones who come up with all the details to make it work. Had Remain won, would you be insisting that Remainers provide detailed justifications for why they voted the way they did? I doubt it very much.


----------



## andysays (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


>




Time to get TM on the phone kabbes


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Generally "alt-right" is considered to encompass a fractured but specific wing of the far-right/fascist movement, mostly congregated around Breitbart, which coalesced with the aim of putting Donald Trump in power. It tends to be online-savvy and media oriented, distinct from the likes of the Tea Party but more or less closely aligned with racist patriot groups. Alt-left is just an attempt to take a scary-sounding term and apply it to people considered unacceptably left wing by the mainstream press.
> 
> And no, it's significantly more complicated than John Bull v Lexit, because people voted Leave for a massive spectrum of reasons. Hell my folks voted Leave because they thought, although it wouldn't win, that a close vote would screw over the Tories. They were of course half-right.
> 
> ...



Thank you for this interesting post, and taking the trouble to write it.

Some of it is very informative.

I will have to question my assumption that the intention of every brexit voter is racist, even though I am mired in the sense that I believe the consequence of the vote being to give validation to racism, and I need to resolve this and try to express myself better. My thinking has been as simple as 'if you weren't racist then, you're part of racism now', and that is very hard to shake off.

This has been strengthened almost daily by the actions of the brexit victors in the distain shown for others, most particularly towards foreigners, and of course towards matters in Ireland in particular.

Others have said that the Irish solution is to have a United Ireland, and whilst I have not necessarily been against that, to me it would be the establishment of another nation state with all the risks that has. Here is where we diverge. You mention sovereignty, and an independent country and it is those concepts I have trouble with. Even to the point of questioning whether sovereignty and independence even exist at all, or that they have terms that have meaning for me. If Ireland is unified it wouldn't be independent in my view because I see all places as interdependent, not even as an aspiration but as a reality. If sovereignty is simply a term for groups or units of people agreeing on stuff for the common good then fine. I see it used as a term (perhaps because it has the word 'sovereign' in it) that relates to power nationalism, separation, and indeed race.

Anyway thank you for your post.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> You're the one who insists that the people who voted leave should be the ones who come up with all the details to make it work. Had Remain won, would you be insisting that Remainers provide detailed justifications for why they voted the way they did? I doubt it very much.



I don't have to because leave won.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I will have to question my assumption that the intention of every brexit voter is racist.



Well, that's a start, nice one


----------



## agricola (Mar 8, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's looking more and more like a 'no deal' Brexit. Apparently the Government is running scared of a vote on a Customs Union because they might lose to the combined forces of Anna Soubry et al. and Labour.
> 
> Does anyone know if Labour can force a vote on this issue? It's looking like a good time to bring the Government down.



They aren't running scared of a customs union, they just don't want to be the ones blamed by the pro-Brexit crowd when that is what they end up with (even though that (ie: a bespoke customs union) would be the best possible outcome from any talks).


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't have to because leave won.



The point is that either everybody has to, or nobody has to. Anything else is just self-serving bullshit.


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 8, 2018)

Generally speaking, throwing your hands up and saying "fuck this do what you want" is alright if it's just someone you know being a bit of a dick, as the consequences are mostly to them. It's less useful if you're also chained together.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The point is that either everybody has to, or nobody has to. Anything else is just self-serving bullshit.


I fully accept everybody has to leave. I don't see your point.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I fully accept everybody has to leave. I don't see your point.



You know full well what I meant. Brexit is far from a done deal, so you can't use that as a self-serving excuse for why Leavers should have to explain themselves while Remainers don't.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> You know full well what I meant. Brexit is far from a done deal, so you can't use that as a self-serving excuse for why Leavers should have to explain themselves while Remainers don't.


Thank you for assuming I am telepathic, but sorry to say I'm not.
Brexit is a done deal isn't it? Or do you mean what some describe as 'negotiations'? I believe leavers should explain their plans now. It is a bit rich if you're saying that remainers should also be telepathic and know the brexiters plans.
Brexit does not mean remainers have to sort it all out. That would be dumping responsibility on them for a situation they didn't want, very especially when brexiters are not even making a start.
I might be self serving, but don't intend to be brexiters serving.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Brexit is a done deal isn't it?



If it was then this thread wouldn't exist.



> I believe leavers should explain their plans now. It is a bit rich if you're saying that remainers should also be telepathic and know the brexiters plans.



I'm not saying that Remainers should know Leavers' plans, you fucking idiot. I'm saying that expecting people to justify Leave, without also expecting people to justify Remain, is one-sided bollocks.



> Brexit does not mean remainers have to sort it all out.



I never said that. You're putting words in my mouth. Again.



> That would be dumping responsibility on them for a situation they didn't want, very especially when brexiters are not even making a start.
> I might be self serving, but don't intend to be brexiters serving.



Try actually paying attention to what people are saying to you.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If it was then this thread wouldn't exist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> A post ago you declared I 'knew full well' what you meant. So when I attempt to know (full well) by translating what you say to gain understanding I am putting words in your mouth
> Perhaps only a fucking idiot would want it both ways.



Perhaps instead of quibbling over this bullshit, you could explain to us why you think ordinary citizens should be doing all the planning work that civil servants and politicians get paid to do.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Perhaps instead of quibbling over this bullshit, you could explain to us why you think ordinary citizens should be doing all the planning work that civil servants and politicians get paid to do.



Because it is not possible for civil servants and politicians to do the planning work. 
The ordinary citizens frequently say they knew what they were voting for, so now is their chance to supply the blueprint.
It is a bit like the ordinary citizens voting that proof should be found that ghosts exist, and then telling the politicians and civil servants to supply that proof.
Or perhaps the other analogy in this conundrum is to be found in the story 'The Emperors New Clothes', the clothes didn't exist, and solutions don't exist, but if the Emperor and people insist they do, they have to prove it.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because it is not possible for civil servants and politicians to do the planning work.
> The ordinary citizens frequently say they knew what they were voting for, so now is their chance to supply the blueprint.
> It is a bit like the ordinary citizens voting that proof should be found that ghosts exist, and then telling the politicians and civil servants to supply that proof.
> Or perhaps the other analogy in this conundrum is to be found in the story 'The Emperors New Clothes', the clothes didn't exist, and solutions don't exist, but if the Emperor and people insist they do, they have to prove it.



Why is it not possible? Most of them have got a fancy education, experience in civil matters, and so on. Even if they don't have those things, then they've still got the resources of the government to draw on, the rest of us don't. If they can't do it, how the fuck do you expect anyone else to be able to do it?

People knew what they were voting for, whether they voted Leave or Remain. I dunno about you, but I didn't see a section on the ballot paper where I could pencil in my plans about how to proceed. I just saw a simple choice, Leave or Remain.

I don't know why you're mentioning ghosts. Or do you really think that countries should have no choice but to stay within the EU once they join up?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Why is it not possible? Most of them have got a fancy education, experience in civil matters, and so on. Even if they don't have those things, then they've still got the resources of the government to draw on, the rest of us don't. If they can't do it, how the fuck do you expect anyone else to be able to do it?
> 
> People knew what they were voting for, whether they voted Leave or Remain. I dunno about you, but I didn't see a section on the ballot paper where I could pencil in my plans about how to proceed. I just saw a simple choice, Leave or Remain.
> 
> I don't know why you're mentioning ghosts. Or do you really think that countries should have no choice but to stay within the EU once they join up?


All the fancy education in the world, and all the resources have led us to nowhere so far. Given all the time the educated, the Politicians and the civil servants have had they have come up with nothing, so that is why I think it isn't possible.
If as you say people knew what they were voting for how come it isn't going along swimmingly, perhaps they didn't know but were pretending.
I don't think countries should have no choice whether to stay or remain but they should have a plan.
If somebody says 'I'm divorcing you but moving to Australia, but nevertheless I expect you to drop the kids off at my place every weekend', the reasonable response might well be 'have you thought this through?'
Brexit has won, the EU assumes the UK has thought it through, and have been reasonably asking the UK for answers, but the UK doesn't seem to have any, and it isn't because the EU are asking the wrong questions.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> All the fancy education in the world, and all the resources have led us to nowhere so far. Given all the time the educated, the Politicians and the civil servants have had they have come up with nothing, so that is why I think it isn't possible.
> If as you say people knew what they were voting for how come it isn't going along swimmingly, perhaps they didn't know but were pretending.
> I don't think countries should have no choice whether to stay or remain but they should have a plan.
> If somebody says 'I'm divorcing you but moving to Australia, but nevertheless I expect you to drop the kids off at my place every weekend', the reasonable response might well be 'have you thought this through?'
> Brexit has won, the EU assumes the UK has thought it through, and have been reasonably asking the UK for answers, but the UK doesn't seem to have any, and it isn't because the EU are asking the wrong questions.



So the politicians and civil servants fucked it up, and you think the voters are to blame for that?


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I suppose the Irish Times is much more up close and personal to the issue, than the arms length brexiters who are trying to blag it.
> The 17 million people who voted to leave the EU won.
> They have had a long time now to come up with a solution but haven't, and it seems to me that there is general distain and contempt towards those asking them to outline their solution, probably because the questions are too difficult to answer.



You voted remain. Why do you hate the Greeks? Where’s your plan?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> You voted remain. Why do you hate the Greeks? Where’s your plan?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So the politicians and civil servants fucked it up, and you think the voters are to blame for that?


You assume the politicians and civil servants messed it up, what if they tried and the 'will of the people' was impossible to do? Isn't that the moment to ask the people to do it themselves?
There is an old tale that when Laurence Olivier was filming Henry V in Ireland, he told an Irish extra that the next shot required the extra to hide in a tree, and jump on an armoured knight galloping past on his horse, and bring him to the ground. The Irish extra said to Laurence 'could you just show me how it's done?'.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I suppose the Irish Times is much more up close and personal to the issue, than the arms length brexiters who are trying to blag it.
> The 17 million people who voted to leave the EU won.
> They have had a long time now to come up with a solution but haven't, and it seems to me that there is general distain and contempt towards those asking them to outline their solution, probably because the questions are too difficult to answer.



Why do you like Turkey’s approach to refugees so much? You voted for it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> You voted remain. Why do you hate the Greeks? Where’s your plan?


I don't need a plan, I lost.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Why do you like Turkey’s approach to refugees so much? You voted for it.


I wasn't aware that Turkey was in the EU.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You assume the politicians and civil servants messed it up, what if they tried and the 'will of the people' was impossible to do? Isn't that the moment to ask the people to do it themselves?
> There is an old tale that when Laurence Olivier was filming Henry V in Ireland, he told an Irish extra that the next shot required the extra to hide in a tree, and jump on an armoured knight galloping past on his horse, and bring him to the ground. The Irish extra said to Laurence 'could you just show me how it's done?'.



I'm not assuming, they didn't even write shit down.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

Fuck this. You’re incapable of honest debate @Philosophicall. Reading or comprehension about anything re hunan motives.. Waste of bits.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I'm not assuming, they didn't even write shit down.


Because they were worried the freedom of information act would winkle it out of them? I have my doubts about that regarding civil servants.
Or was it because there was nothing for the Politicians to tell the civil servants to actually write down (possible) or nothing good to write down (probable)?
If we saw what they wrote down maybe it would be idle doodling anyway. I don't see not writing things down as messing up, but more a sort of paralysis.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I wasn't aware that Turkey was in the EU.



And? Who’s dealing with Turkey? You can join our club maybe if you hold these people. Oh have some cash too.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because they were worried the freedom of information act would winkle it out of them? I have my doubts about that regarding civil servants.
> Or was it because there was nothing for the Politicians to tell the civil servants to actually write down (possible) or nothing good to write down (probable)?
> If we saw what they wrote down maybe it would be idle doodling anyway. I don't see not writing things down as messing up, but more a sort of paralysis.



Paralysis in this case is the same thing. They messed up by not producing a plan before the referendum result. Polling was predicting a Remain win, but it's hardly as if a Leave result was completely out of the question. You're clutching at straws and speculating based on fuck-all.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I'm not assuming, they didn't even write shit down.


Well...that's nonsense.



> But, speaking to the BBC, Lord O'Donnell (top, and above) said: "Every single civil servant will be thinking ‘what if, what are the different possibilities, different scenarios’ and I will be absolutely sure that they will be hoovering up all the work that is done by the outside world and the foreign office.



That is just garbage.  Lord O'Donnell being reported in the telegraph as reported by the bbc saying that every civil servant is working on brexit?  Just lies, it's fantasy.

We're in 2018, two years after that article.  Does it look like every civil servant has been working on everything?   Anything?   

The civil service have been doing their jobs, like normal.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Well...that's nonsense.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's exactly my point you flailing imbecile. They clearly haven't been working on the possibility of Leave winning the Brexit vote, even though they should have.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And I never expect an answer from you in this thread. A quick scan of your posts confirms that you're just a troll with nothing to contribute.


What have you contributed apart from snide drunken shit ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Paralysis in this case is the same thing. They messed up by not producing a plan before the referendum result. Polling was predicting a Remain win, but it's hardly as if a Leave result was completely out of the question. You're clutching at straws and speculating based on fuck-all.



I am not defending the Politicians. I am looking at where the UK has landed, and it is without a plan from either the politicians, the civil servants of the brexiters. Brexiters are already blaming the EU for messing up and not having a plan, to blame the civil servants too is another layer. I suspect it is because it is dawning on brexiters that this disaster does not have a solution.
Remainers can't intervene as they will be accused of sabotaging brexit, so where does that leave us, time is running out?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Fuck this. You’re incapable of honest debate @Philosophicall. Reading or comprehension about anything re hunan motives.. Waste of bits.


Because I am not going down the path you want me to go and justifying aspects of EU policy that you select?
How many times does it need to be said? Brexit won. The merits or otherwise of the EU don't matter any more, and I don't have to either condemn or justify EU policy.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's looking more and more like a 'no deal' Brexit. Apparently the Government is running scared of a vote on a Customs Union because they might lose to the combined forces of Anna Soubry et al. and Labour.
> 
> Does anyone know if Labour can force a vote on this issue? It's looking like a good time to bring the Government down.


This was mentioned on radio 4 yesterday. Saying the eu would be happy for a no deal, the fall of the government and labour in power in the hope that brexit would be scrapped.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

Would a no deal brexit lead to a government collapse under the terms of the parliament act?
My understanding is that there could be a no deal scenario, but this government could still continue until 2022.


----------



## Winot (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Would a no deal brexit lead to a government collapse under the terms of the parliament act?
> My understanding is that there could be a no deal scenario, but this government could still continue until 2022.



I think you’re right.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because I am not going down the path you want me to go and justifying aspects of EU policy that you select?
> How many times does it need to be said? Brexit won. The merits or otherwise of the EU don't matter any more, and I don't have to either condemn or justify EU policy.




Logical  consistency by your own terms, you do. If remain won, according to your framing, you should answer for the EU imposed Greek situation .

Philosophy 101


----------



## Winot (Mar 8, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Paralysis in this case is the same thing. They messed up by not producing a plan before the referendum result. Polling was predicting a Remain win, but it's hardly as if a Leave result was completely out of the question. You're clutching at straws and speculating based on fuck-all.



Civil servants were banned by Cameron from working up any Leave plans in case it looked defensive.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Logical  consistency by your own terms, you do. If remain won, according to your framing, you should answer for the EU imposed Greek situation .
> 
> Philosophy 101



I think you are wrong about the logic simply because remain _didn't _win. According to my framing it is over to the brexiters now.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 8, 2018)

Is this Silas again?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> What have you contributed apart from snide drunken shit ?


Graphs, quotes from those involved in the negotiations, crime statistics, demographic breakdowns of voters, a direct quote from Tusk saying nothing happens until Ireland is sorted out, questions on trade, answers on productivity, currency valuation...stuff like that.

You?


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Graphs, quotes from those involved in the negotiations, crime statistics, demographic breakdowns of voters, a direct quote from Tusk saying nothing happens until Ireland is sorted out, questions on trade, answers on productivity, currency valuation...stuff like that.
> 
> You?


Trolling apparantly


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think you are wrong about the logic simply because remain _didn't _win. According to my framing it is over to the brexiters now.



Sad.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

Union activist, with nothing to say apart from brexitrs are racist. Glad you’re retired TBH.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

Rissable really. Arrogantly ignorantly ploughing on. Sad.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> Trolling apparantly


I know, I posted the link.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Union activist, with nothing to say apart from brexitrs are racist. Glad you’re retired TBH.


Hang on a little longer and you can be glad I'm dead.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 8, 2018)

sealion said:


> This was mentioned on radio 4 yesterday. Saying the eu would be happy for a no deal, the fall of the government and labour in power in the hope that brexit would be scrapped.


Interesting that the EU are so desperate for the UK to stay. Of course a Labour victory is impossible on a scrap Brexit ticket.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Interesting that the EU are so desperate for the UK to stay.


The defecit in the eu budget would take a big hit if we did leave. I guess that would mean them having to lean on the remaining members to plug that gap. I can't see that going down well with there members.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Hang on a little longer and you can be glad I'm dead.



Don’t be daft. U75 isn’t exactly a hotbed of racists. Maybe read a bit more and accuse a bit less.


----------



## sealion (Mar 8, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Of course a Labour victory is impossible on a scrap Brexit ticket.


Do you think that's what JC wants ?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 8, 2018)

xenon said:


> Don’t be daft. U75 isn’t exactly a hotbed of racists. Maybe read a bit more and accuse a bit less.


On accusation, maybe you should follow your own advice.
You are saying you are glad I'm retired, which indicates that you see retirement means that a person no longer contributes to society, is parked out of the way as it were. What exactly do you mean by that? Older people ought to be stored in structured kralls until they are no longer a drain on your society?
I have no idea about your work, or if you are in work or not, or your gender or anything. However if I did I would not use your personal circumstances to put you down. I regret disclosing things about myself on this thread, including having been active in my trade union, because what I have disclosed has been thrown back at me as you have done above.
Next time you feel inclined to lecture me about correct behaviour, tape it and play it to yourself occasionally.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Do you think that's what JC wants ?



Of course it isn't. Corbyn would want the election to be about his platform, not about Brexit. OTOH, Brexit isn't going to be very helpful to him in delivering his platform, in that he needs reliable tax revenues and could do without an increase in the cost of government borrowing. So, what he ideally wants is for Brexit to sink before he ends up obliged to sail it.


----------



## xenon (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> On accusation, maybe you should follow your own advice.
> You are saying you are glad I'm retired, which indicates that you see retirement means that a person no longer contributes to society, is parked out of the way as it were. What exactly do you mean by that? Older people ought to be stored in structured kralls until they are no longer a drain on your society?
> I have no idea about your work, or if you are in work or not, or your gender or anything. However if I did I would not use your personal circumstances to put you down. I regret disclosing things about myself on this thread, including having been active in my trade union, because what I have disclosed has been thrown back at me as you have done above.
> Next time you feel inclined to lecture me about correct behaviour, tape it and play it to yourself occasionally.



 You offered your    Circumstances as a background or  a buttress to your political position. How dare us comment on it. Jesus fucking Christ. Of course I don’t think retired people should be locked away or whatever bat shit  you’ve imagined.   Let’s not forget, you rocked up   Calling everyone who voted Brexit racist. You retracted the question mark later, explicitly saying you think they are racist, remember.  And yet you are the sensitive hurt one. 

 Yes I do work, I didn’t vote Brexit, I spoiled my ballot, other shit. Shoot away.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

xenon said:


> You offered your	Circumstances as a background or  a buttress to your political position. How dare us comment on it. Jesus fucking Christ. Of course I don’t think retired people should be locked away or whatever bat shit  you’ve imagined.   Let’s not forget, you rocked up   Calling everyone who voted Brexit racist. You retracted the question mark later, explicitly saying you think they are racist, remember.  And yet you are the sensitive hurt one.
> 
> Yes I do work, I didn’t vote Brexit, I spoiled my ballot, other shit. Shoot away.


I unwisely responded to several questions about my personal circumstances, including revealing I am retired. Those unwise words have not attracted what you quaintly call 'comment', but strff such as you saying you're glad I am retired. Meaning what? That counts as comment does it? 
I have never said I am hurt, but aware of what is happening around me, especially hypocrisy.


----------



## xenon (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I unwisely responded to several questions about my personal circumstances, including revealing I am retired. Those unwise words have not attracted what you quaintly call 'comment', but strff such as you saying you're glad I am retired. Meaning what? That counts as comment does it?
> I have never said I am hurt, but aware of what is happening around me, especially hypocrisy.


   I meant glad you’re retired, as a union rep.   Some of your members may have voted Brexit but you would dismiss them as racist.  No analysis, no questioning, just knee-jerk tabloid rubbish.   I don’t know what union you were, are in. It doesn’t matter. But look at what some unions are saying about the EU.


----------



## xenon (Mar 9, 2018)

I am on my phone, so forgive the lack of a link. But   look at all those  racist unions.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

xenon said:


> I meant glad you’re retired, as a union rep.   Some of your members may have voted Brexit but you would dismiss them as racist.  No analysis, no questioning, just knee-jerk tabloid rubbish.   I don’t know what union you were, are in. It doesn’t matter. But look at what some unions are saying about the EU.


'As a union rep' is it now?
Not just plain retired as you wrote earlier.
Hypocrisy.
I am not responsible for other unions, and I did my extensive union work unpaid and in my own time. 
My retirement was from paid employment, and I continue to pay my union dues (at a now lower rate).
You are a hypocrite to try to dilute what you said, I wouldn't even know why, stand by it, it was a revealing comment, own it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'As a union rep' is it now?
> Not just plain retired as you wrote earlier.
> Hypocrisy.


No:


xenon said:


> Union activist, with nothing to say apart from brexitrs are racist. Glad you’re retired TBH.


That clearly implies xenon is glad you are retired from being a union activist.  It’s the only interpretation that is coherent in the structure of the post as a whole.  Why would he suddenly ma,e the non-sequitur to talking about employment generally, and doubly so why would he do so immediately after placing it within the context of talking about the tension between being a union activist on one hand and having hate and contempt’s for union members on the other?  Not to mention that the fact that he then subsequently reiterated that this indeed is what he meant removes any possible doubt.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

Subsequently reiterated?
Not in the 'subsequent' posts 6379 or 6383.
Either way retired from Trade Union activity or work in general the implication isn't easy to misunderstand.
I really don't feel worried about his or her personal digs by the way, or the implied dig about old people generally, I simply point out the hypocrisy to any of those oh so pure souls here who want to lecture about proper behaviour.
He or she said it, they ought to stand by it.

The general strategy here is not difficult to follow, dig out a poster, they defend themselves and therefore are accused of attention seeking and it all being 'look at me' or being a troll. It is bollocks. A poster earlier put me on ignore, wouldn't that be a better policy, a personal bit of what people these days call 'no platforming'?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

Jesus fucking Christ.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Subsequently reiterated?
> Not in the 'subsequent' posts 6379 or 6383.
> Either way retired from Trade Union activity or work in general the implication isn't easy to misunderstand.
> I really don't feel worried about his or her personal digs by the way, or the implied dig about old people generally, I simply point out the hypocrisy to any of those oh so pure souls here who want to lecture about proper behaviour.
> ...


There’s a difference between “no platforming” and feeling that life is too short to be bothered interacting with a total dick.


----------



## andysays (Mar 9, 2018)

I'd like to echo philosophical's suggestion and encourage EVERYONE to put them on ignore, or at least stop responding to them.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> There’s a difference between “no platforming” and feeling that life is too short to be bothered interacting with a total dick.


Use the ignore facility.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Use the ignore facility.



come on, not far to go now 


people who've replied most to this thread since its inception in june 2016


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'd like to echo philosophical's suggestion and encourage EVERYONE to put them on ignore, or at least stop responding to them.





andysays said:


> I'd like to echo philosophical's suggestion and encourage EVERYONE to put them on ignore, or at least stop responding to them.


Yay. Follow the leaders encouragement.
Baaaaa.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Do you think that's what JC wants ?





Raheem said:


> Of course it isn't. Corbyn would want the election to be about his platform, not about Brexit. OTOH, Brexit isn't going to be very helpful to him in delivering his platform, in that he needs reliable tax revenues and could do without an increase in the cost of government borrowing. So, what he ideally wants is for Brexit to sink before he ends up obliged to sail it.


This presupposes that Brexit is somehow an inconvenience to Corbyn  because it gets in the way of the rest of the plaform. Maybe it is for the sections of the Labour Party membership ie its TUC backers and the middle class but Im not sure it is for Corbyn who has  over his lifetime been anti EU.I think he sees Brexit as a real opportunity. Any retreat on Brexit though is problematic for any attempt Labour wants to make in connecting with the working class in the majority of the country.
The issues of tax revenues and cost of government borrowing , if indeed they are issues, apply to the Tories as well and aren't depedent on Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yay. Follow the leaders encouragement.
> Baaaaa.


leader's

wake up sheeple


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> leader's
> 
> wake up sheeple



'sheeple'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'sheeple'?


sheeple.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Use the ignore facility.


My life’s not too short when I’m at work.  Interact with the dicks here or there, what difference does it make.


----------



## JimW (Mar 9, 2018)

It's quite surprising that with such an engaging debating style the remain side lost the vote.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 9, 2018)

JimW said:


> It's quite surprising that with such an engaging debating style the remain side lost the vote.



Thickos, the lot of 'em


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

it's such a pity there's no 'try before you buy' brexit option.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 9, 2018)

Good piece from Gary Younge today, which sums up a lot of the morass pretty well:

The shambles of Brexit diverts attention from the EU’s democratic deficit | Gary Younge


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

Some intersting news about the youth vote but this time in Italy .


> The vast majority of young Italians -born in 1999, first time voters- either voted for the populist 5 Star, national populist League or right-wing Forza


 Luigi Scazzieri @LScazzieri*  *


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Good piece from Gary Younge today, which sums up a lot of the morass pretty well:
> 
> The shambles of Brexit diverts attention from the EU’s democratic deficit | Gary Younge


He avoids  - or, maybe worse, isn't aware - that a fully democratic eu imposing aggressive neo-liberalism (what we have now and what has been written into it's structures to avoid any democratic accountability or the possibility of it - they are quite open about this) will produce the exact same results. It's the results of neo-liberalism and peoples awareness of where it wants to drive them in the future that's producing this continent wide disaffection - not a lack of EU democracy, but a lack of democracy, choice and options in everyday real life. That's why it's been replicated in states with different traditions and forms of institutions, whether nominally under the control of the left or the right.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Good piece from Gary Younge today, which sums up a lot of the morass pretty well:
> 
> The shambles of Brexit diverts attention from the EU’s democratic deficit | Gary Younge



At least that is some recognition that the EU isn't quite  the promised land that we are leaving. One of the most disappointing things about the morass a lot of Remainers have now deteriorated  into is the complete absence of any suggestion that the EU could/should be reformed.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

Terry Christian now conducting Twitter polls on should Brexit voters be sacked first if there are redundancies .


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 9, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Terry Christian now conducting Twitter polls on should Brexit voters be sacked first if there are redundancies .



Only if remain voters are first in line to be shot when the EU finally mutates into a fascist dystopia and starts rolling out the death squads.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Terry Christian now conducting Twitter polls on should Brexit voters be sacked first if there are redundancies .


I rarely go on twitter now but when i do i often find the first thing on my  mates list is you replying to one of his eu idiocies. His repeated insistence that he hasn't lost touch with his roots unlike nearly everyone else is hilarious.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I rarely go on twitter now but when i do i often find the first thing on my  mates list is you replying to one of his eu idiocies. His repeated insistence that he hasn't lost touch with his roots unlike nearly everyone else is hilarious.



He's obssessed its the only issue in his life.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 9, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Only if remain voters are first in line to be shot when the EU finally mutates into a fascist dystopia and starts rolling out the death squads.



Given some of the recent election results across Europe it looks like a fair few would welcome that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 9, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Given some of the recent election results across Europe it looks like a fair few would welcome that.



My post was only half-joking tbh.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 9, 2018)

twitter is a circle jerk of idiocy mostly


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> twitter is a circle jerk of idiocy mostly


twatter


----------



## xenon (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Subsequently reiterated?
> Not in the 'subsequent' posts 6379 or 6383.
> Either way retired from Trade Union activity or work in general the implication isn't easy to misunderstand.
> I really don't feel worried about his or her personal digs by the way, or the implied dig about old people generally, I simply point out the hypocrisy to any of those oh so pure souls here who want to lecture about proper behaviour.
> ...



No. this ^ is bollocks.  kabbes correctly read the meaning in my posts. There was no dig about old people. I've not mentioned age. There was a dig, an explicit one, about you being a trade union activist whilst displaying such ignorant, wilfully blind views regarding the reasons many voted brexit and denouncing them on mass with a wave of your hand. Many of your union members may have voted out. Various unions have opposed the EU and were pro brexit. But Philosophical has spoken, they're all racists and his hands are clean.

What a joke.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

xenon said:


> No. this ^ is bollocks.  kabbes correctly read the meaning in my posts. There was no dig about old people. I've not mentioned age. There was a dig, an explicit one, about you being a trade union activist whilst displaying such ignorant, wilfully blind views regarding the reasons many voted brexit and denouncing them on mass with a wave of your hand. Many of your union members may have voted out. Various unions have opposed the EU and were pro brexit. But Philosophical has spoken, they're all racists and his hands are clean.
> 
> What a joke.



Read my post 6330.

As you said yourself, explicit dig about me, and about me being a retired person.
To say you're glad I'm retired was to mean what? Because I am no longer active in the workplace I can do no more damage?
If I had simply said I work, or am a trade union activist, but had not mentioned anything about my age where would you have gone then with your faux outrage?
Own it, your dig, which you are certainly at liberty to give out at will, was wrapped up in stereotyping and prejudice to do with age.
So what?
I don't really care that much beyond I think you (and some others) who lecture me about behaviour and manners exhibit hypocrisy.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

_Jesus fucking christ_


----------



## sealion (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Own it, your dig,





philosophical said:


> was wrapped up in stereotyping


Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## xenon (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Read my post 6330.
> 
> As you said yourself, explicit dig about me, and about me being a retired person.
> To say you're glad I'm retired was to mean what? Because I am no longer active in the workplace I can do no more damage?
> ...



For the last time because this is quite boring now. I had a dig at you based on you being a union rep whilst holding the views you do. Since you've retired, presumably are no longer a union rep. Therefore, something to be glad about as your uninformed, politically junk views regarding brexit voters can't come into play in that role. I don't care how old you are. I've said nothing perjorative about retired people, union reps in general or what ever else you're going to imagine next.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This post a magnet for likes from sneery middle class types


that was a pity like from Badgers


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

xenon said:


> For the last time because this is quite boring now. I had a dig at you based on you being a union rep whilst holding the views you do. Since you've retired, presumably are no longer a union rep. Therefore, something to be glad about as your uninformed, politically junk views regarding brexit voters can't come into play in that role. I don't care how old you are. I've said nothing perjorative about retired people, union reps in general or what ever else you're going to imagine next.


there's still time for you to say something pejorative yet


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

xenon said:


> For the last time because this is quite boring now. I had a dig at you based on you being a union rep whilst holding the views you do. Since you've retired, presumably are no longer a union rep. Therefore, something to be glad about as your uninformed, politically junk views regarding brexit voters can't come into play in that role. I don't care how old you are. I've said nothing perjorative about retired people, union reps in general or what ever else you're going to imagine next.



I agree that it is boring now.
It is a pity you couldn't have said you think my views are uninformed and politically junk regarding brexit, and left it at that.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

This piece linked to by hot air baboon on another thread needs to be read, as does the second piece from last year.

A very EU coup: Martin Selmayr’s astonishing power grab - How a bureaucrat seized power in nine minutes

Revealed: How Jean-Claude Juncker's 'monster' is plotting to punish Britain for Brexit

Or for those who'll just go _oh the spectator or telegraph_ and ignore what's happening, there's these:

Brussels backlash to Martin Selmayr’s appointment -Rage against the European Commission’s communications machine.

How Martin Selmayr became EU’s top (un)civil servant

The move was classic Martin Selmayr — deeply shrouded in secrecy, designed to bulldoze any and all opposition, and catching even some of the most senior EU officials by complete surprise. Only this time, the Machiavellian machinations of President Jean-Claude Juncker’s powerful chief of staff were decidedly personal: springing a vote on European commissioners to install him as secretary-general, the Commission’s top civil service job.

Selmayr has won fame and disdain and spurred envy and fury by deploying ruthless autocracy in the name of European democracy. His sudden election ensures the German lawyer and avowed European federalist will retain a perch at the apex of power in Brussels beyond the end of Juncker’s mandate in 2019 — for as long as he desires, or until a new set of commissioners dares to try to remove him.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 9, 2018)

*Skips pages*



philosophical said:


> I agree that it is boring now.
> It is a pity you couldn't have said you think my views are uninformed and politically junk regarding brexit, and left it at that.



_That_ simple hmm? OK then.



philosophical said:


> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?



No. Next.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I agree that it is boring now.
> It is a pity you couldn't have said you think my views are uninformed and politically junk regarding brexit, and left it at that.


that's B.I.G of you

sealion


----------



## philosophical (Mar 9, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> *Skips pages*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Read post 5301.
Read post 6330.
That is a simple thing to do.


----------



## Winot (Mar 9, 2018)

Back to the original question, this article reckons the answer is ‘at the last minute’:

No Brexit Deal Until Next Year, U.K. Officials Say Privately


----------



## teuchter (Mar 9, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> At least that is some recognition that the EU isn't quite  the promised land that we are leaving. One of the most disappointing things about the morass a lot of Remainers have now deteriorated  into is the complete absence of any suggestion that the EU could/should be reformed.


I don't think there's a complete absence at all. In my observation of remainers there is a ubiquitous suggestion that the EU could/should be reformed.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't think there's a complete absence at all. In my observation of remainers there is a ubiquitous suggestion that the EU could/should be reformed.


Can you give me some recent examples, I must be following the wrong Remainers


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 9, 2018)

I think there is little chance of reform of the EU.  Cameron tried to change a bit and got laughed at.  The UK voted out but they seem more convinced of their righteousness then ever.  Across Europe people are turning to the far right.  They all celebrated that creep Macron winning in France but the fact the far right were in with a shout and are now the de-facto opposition should have shit them up properly, but no.  They lumber on relentlessly utterly convinced they are doing everything right and if anything bad happens its the fault of someone else.

I do not believe the EU in its current guise can be reformed in any meaningful way


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I don't think there's a complete absence at all. In my observation of remainers there is a ubiquitous suggestion that the EU could/should be reformed.



I think there's this lot:







Who think the EU = Europe basically and is perfect.

And then there are more thoughtful Guardianista types who think the EU could/should be reformed.

Both completely deluded in my view. But Remainers are not a monolith any more than Leave voters are.


----------



## paolo (Mar 9, 2018)

What does the EU need to reform?

That’s a starting point.

What is it we’re not getting, that we could get outside of it?

If there’s clarity on that, then we can further the debate. Can the EU be bent to the objectives, or not?

But what are they?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 9, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I think there is little chance of reform of the EU.  Cameron tried to change a bit and got laughed at.



He didn't really try to "reform" anything, though. He just tried to get more special treatment for the UK, which is not really the same.

The EU most definitely will undertake reforms in the near future (although the undertaking itself might take a while), because everybody understands that there are multiple potential disasters ahead otherwise. Whether they're the reforms you have in mind (assuming you are thinking of anything specific) is another matter.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 9, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think there's this lot:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They just throw in "oh well of course it has its faults" every now and then just to not sound like total dicks


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 9, 2018)

/sweeping generalisation mode


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> What does the EU need to reform?
> 
> That’s a starting point.
> 
> ...


Could you - as a remainer  - kick us off? And maybe with not such an odd question. Maybe more of an internationalist approach or something?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 9, 2018)

I thought you lot would like this.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 9, 2018)

Yaaaaaawn


----------



## Winot (Mar 9, 2018)

The way that the UK has handled Brexit is so weak and incompetent that it has taken the pressure off the EU to reform.


----------



## sealion (Mar 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> The way that the UK has handled Brexit is so weak and incompetent that it has taken the pressure off the EU to reform.


Shouldn't that be down to the remaining members ?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> The way that the UK has handled Brexit is so weak and incompetent that it has taken the pressure off the EU to reform.


It is your responsibility  to outline then push and pressure for the reforms you would like to see isn't it? What are they and how far have you got with with them?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Shouldn't that be down to the remaining members ?


No.  Firstly they've agreed to fuck the tories up.  Next they'll probably be looking for a replacement.

Twitter is a brilliant place for EU discussion.  Of course if you just go in to call people cunts you won't get far.  It's not like urban.  Look around and you'll find the proper hashtags.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No.  Firstly they've agreed to fuck the tories up.  Next they'll probably be looking for a replacement.
> 
> Twitter is a brilliant place for EU discussion.  Of course if you just go in to call people cunts you won't get far.  It's not like urban.  Look around and you'll find the proper hashtags.


What the fuck happened to you?


----------



## sealion (Mar 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Firstly they've agreed to fuck the tories up. Next they'll probably be looking for a replacement.


Who ?


DexterTCN said:


> Twitter is a brilliant place for EU discussion. Of course if you just go in to call people cunts you won't get far. It's not like urban. Look around and you'll find the proper hashtags.


I'll have to take your word for that.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> He didn't really try to "reform" anything, though. He just tried to get more special treatment for the UK, which is not really the same.
> 
> The EU most definitely will undertake reforms in the near future (although the undertaking itself might take a while), because everybody understands that there are multiple potential disasters ahead otherwise. Whether they're the reforms you have in mind (assuming you are thinking of anything specific) is another matter.



And which reforms will they most definitely be undertaking?


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I thought you lot would like this.
> 
> View attachment 129651


No reform there then , just naked self interest from another unelected elite


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2018)

Winot said:


> The way that the UK has handled Brexit is so weak and incompetent that it has taken the pressure off the EU to reform.


There was no pressure on the eu to reform


----------



## T & P (Mar 9, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I think there's this lot:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I have never met a single remainer or indeed anyone else who ever claimed the EU was perfect or remotely close to it. One had to be mad not to agree it is deeply flawed.

But the purpose of the referendum was not a about a vote of confidence or approval for the EU. It was about whether the UK is better off in it or out, regardless of the EU’s many shortcomings. And I myself can’t see any scenario in which the UK will be better off out.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I thought you lot would like this.
> 
> View attachment 129651


Indeed I do, Milord Adonis is the first person I usually turn to for political analysis!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

T & P said:


> I have never met a single remainer or indeed anyone else who ever claimed the EU was perfect or remotely close to it. One had to be mad not to agree it is deeply flawed.
> 
> But the purpose of the referendum was not a about a vote of confidence or approval for the EU. It was about whether the UK is better off in it or out, regardless of the EU’s many shortcomings. And I myself can’t see any scenario in which the UK will be better off out.


Now you have the opp to outline and push for EU reform. Maybe to stop brexit, to position yourself for a 2nd referendum or just to offer some tips to your Eu remain fellows.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 9, 2018)

T & P said:


> I have never met a single remainer or indeed anyone else who ever claimed the EU was perfect or remotely close to it. One had to be mad not to agree it is deeply flawed.
> 
> But the purpose of the referendum was not a about a vote of confidence or approval for the EU. It was about whether the UK is better off in it or out, regardless of the EU’s many shortcomings. And I myself can’t see any scenario in which the UK will be better off out.


You post is some way short of the daftness exhibited by philosophical in terms of what the vote was. But equally, it falls into a similar trap of overly being confident about how people saw its purpose.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 9, 2018)

Is the EU going to be reformed by Britain leaving? When we talk about the EU, we're talking about something that's 15% British, not a totally foreign entity - how did British MEPs vote on issues like Greek debt?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is the EU going to be reformed by Britain leaving? When we talk about the EU, we're talking about something that's 15% British, not a totally foreign entity - how did British MEPs vote on issues like Greek debt?


What vote did they get yoss?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 9, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is the EU going to be reformed by Britain leaving? When we talk about the EU, we're talking about something that's 15% British, not a totally foreign entity - how did British MEPs vote on issues like Greek debt?


Do the brexiteers have a plan?  They seem very concerned.

How will brexit, or brexiteers who talk about Greece, help Greece?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 9, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What vote did they get yoss?



I don't know, I thought there had at least been a resolution or two but the records seem impenetrable. Is there any record of dissent to the Greek deal from British members of the European Commission?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Do the brexiteers have a plan?  They seem very concerned.
> 
> How will brexit, or brexiteers who talk about Greece, help Greece?



Well, they probably won't be imposing more austerity on it...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 9, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I don't know, I thought there had at least been a resolution or two but the records seem impenetrable. Is there any record of dissent to the Greek deal from British members of the European Commission?


They had no vote. It wasn't anything to do with them. Designed not to be.

Or you.


----------



## paolo (Mar 9, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Well, they probably won't be imposing more austerity on it...



Pro rata, about £200m less paid to Greece once we’ve stopped paying.

That’s entirely hypothetical I should add. No EU decision on how to rebalance payments yet.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

paolo said:


> Pro rata, about £200m less paid to Greece once we’ve stopped paying.
> 
> That’s entirely hypothetical I should add. No EU decision on how to rebalance payments yet.


Explain this


----------



## Raheem (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> They had no vote. It wasn't anything to do with them. Designed not to be.
> 
> Or you.



Well, it was nothing to do with the UK, because it's not part of the Eurogroup. Which means re-run the same scenario post-Brexit and the only difference is that Greece is probably getting less EU subsidy.

There were votes in other European parliaments, though. Which is where the problem lay, specifically in the case of Germany. So one question for the future of the EU is about national sovereignty versus solidarity between member states.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Now you have the opp to outline and push for EU reform. Maybe to stop brexit, to position yourself for a 2nd referendum or just to offer some tips to your Eu remain fellows.


This is one organisation people can get involved in if they are interested in EU reform.

What is DiEM25?

Even Yanis doesn't think Brexit is going to help democracy in Europe, Greece, or Britain. I seem to remember him describing Brexit as the lazy response to dissatisfaction with EU institutions and how they are dealing with Greece.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This is one organisation people can get involved in if they are interested in EU reform.
> 
> What is DiEM25?
> 
> Even Yanis doesn't think Brexit is going to help democracy in Europe, Greece, or Britain. I seem to remember him describing Brexit as the lazy response to dissatisfaction with EU institutions and how they are dealing with Greece.



Why should we be listening to Yanis?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> solidarity between member states.



You can't be serious?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You can't be serious?



I didn't say what will be chosen, but it's clear what the choice is.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Why should we be listening to Yanis?



Well....put it another way, why shouldn't we?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

T & P said:


> I have never met a single remainer or indeed anyone else who ever claimed the EU was perfect or remotely close to it. One had to be mad not to agree it is deeply flawed.


Maybe you should open your eyes. You've got someone on this very thread who has repeatedly insists that the EU is more democratic than the UK, you had marches with people (and people on U75) insisting that the EU is the anti-racist pro-freedom of movement  alternative to the racist UK. There's plenty of people who have argued not just that Remain is the least worst option but that the EU is a genuinely good thing.


----------



## billbond (Mar 10, 2018)

"EU is a genuinely good thing."

Not for me its not and millions of others
All about opinions i spose


----------



## Supine (Mar 10, 2018)

billbond said:


> Not for me its not and millions of others



It is for me and millions of others


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Well....put it another way, why shouldn't we?


I'm happy with the question as it was originally posed, are you able to answer it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Maybe you should open you're eyes. You've got someone on this very thread who has repeatedly insists that the EU is more democratic than the UK, you had marches with people (and people on U75) insisting that the EU is the anti-racist pro-freedom of movement  alternative to the racist UK. There's plenty of people who have argued not just that Remain is the least worst option but that the EU is a genuinely good thing.


 The UK version of democracy is worse than the EU.  One example is that yesterday a link was posted about a corrupt jobs for the boys scenario in the EU, but it still wasn't a job for life, and such patronage can be tackled (albeit remotely) when elections happen, and commissioners changed. The patronage in the UK is that somebody can be awarded a gig in the House of Lords for life.
EU reform is surely irrelevant anyway as the vote has happened and brexit won, more pressing situations need resolving, like the 310 mile land border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

That's your response to the the selmayr corruption? Jesus fucking christ.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That's your response to the the selmayr corruption? Jesus fucking christ.


Yes it is because the UK has voted out, from Selmayr, Junker, Tusk and everybody else, so it isn't a pressing issue for me and because the systems everywhere are susceptible to corruption, because the corruption and patronage in the UK is in my view worse (as a consequence  of the brexit vote, and because institutions like the House of Lords and the poor electoral situation are more immediate).
Situations like the Selmayr one are not as pressing as the border brexiters voted to take back control of.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

Jesus fucking christ


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

I can imagine you well being on the case should remain have won of course. We could have rested safe at night.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 10, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Well....put it another way, why shouldn't we?



Because the cunt demonstrated that he had the all the spine of a jellyfish by instantly caving in to the Eurocrats. Fuck him.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I can imagine you well being on the case should remain have won of course. We could have rested safe at night.


Remain lost.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Remain lost.


It's almost as if nearly the whole of the establishment and ruling class doesn't agree and is working very hard to establish a narrative that brexit not only can be overturned but is the only democratic thing to do. Good to see your forward thinking on this issue. I'm sure your shoulder to the wheel is really appreciated.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes it is because the UK has voted out, from Selmayr, Junker, Tusk and everybody else, so it isn't a pressing issue for me and because the systems everywhere are susceptible to corruption, because the corruption and patronage in the UK is in my view worse (as a consequence  of the brexit vote, and because institutions like the House of Lords and the poor electoral situation are more immediate).
> Situations like the Selmayr one are not as pressing as the border brexiters voted to take back control of.


Utterly pathetic. You've an unelected right-wing bureaucrat taking effective control of the major governing body (unelected itself) of the EU and whose politics are the liberal shite that has overseen the murders in Greece (and elsewhere) and helped the rise of the hard-right and according to you there's nothing to see here.

Again, people like you are why Leave won. You're the enemy.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> It's almost as if nearly the whole of the establishment and ruling class doesn't agree and is working very hard to establish a narrative that brexit not only can be overturned but is the only democratic thing to do. Good to see your forward thinking on this issue. I'm sure your shoulder to the wheel is really appreciated.


I have never said brexit could or should be overturned or that it would be the 'democratic' thing to do, never once beyond a vague hope that MPs vote according to tbeir personal beliefs. My theme has been that brexit has happened so brexiters should no sort out the resulting problems, the land border on the island of Ireland being the most pressing.
My preference would have been to remain, but as I have said repeatedly that ship has sailed, and my challenge to those who voted brexit is to sort out the things they said they were voting for, like taking back control of the UK borders.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have never said brexit could or should be overturned or that it would be the 'democratic' thing to do, never once beyond a vague hope that MPs vote according to tbeir personal beliefs. My theme has been that brexit has happened so brexiters should no sort out the resulting problems, the land border on the island of Ireland being the most pressing.
> My preference would have been to remain, but as I have said repeatedly that ship has sailed, and my challenge to those who voted brexit is to sort out the things they said they were voting for, like taking back control of the UK borders.


As i said, you're a great help to those working to achieve what you want. I'm sure they're grateful for people like you.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ... so brexiters should no sort out the resulting problems...


This is telling, there are only "brexiters" and remainers, all political reasons for people voting for one or neither is obliterated.

You can have any politics you like so long as it's brexiter or remainer.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This is telling, there are only "brexiters" and remainers, all political reasons for people voting for one or neither is obliterated.
> 
> You can have any politics you like so long as it's brexiter or remainer.


Or none and shout how you will hate to your dying breath all leavers. It's like listening to an idiot 12 year old.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Because the cunt demonstrated that he had the all the spine of a jellyfish by instantly caving in to the Eurocrats. Fuck him.



Instantly, really???.	I listen to him. He makes interesting informed points.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 10, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Instantly, really???.	I listen to him. He makes interesting informed points.



Yet he crumbled when he actually got the opportunity to put his words into action.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Utterly pathetic. You've an unelected right-wing bureaucrat taking effective control of the major governing body (unelected itself) of the EU and whose politics are the liberal shite that has overseen the murders in Greece (and elsewhere) and helped the rise of the hard-right and according to you there's nothing to see here.
> 
> Again, people like you are why Leave won. You're the enemy.



Murderous, liberal thickos, the lot of 'em.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yet he crumbled when he actually got the opportunity to put his words into action.


If he'd managed to put his words into action, would you have approved?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Murderous, liberal thickos, the lot of 'em.


I don't know about thick but yes Selmayr, his cohort, the commissioners etc are murderous liberal filth. You going disagree, or just post more weepy shit?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> As i said, you're a great help to those working to achieve what you want. I'm sure they're grateful for people like you.


Thanks for the compliment. A bit unexpected mind you.A note of caution regarding the phrase 'people like you' you have a fraction of a notion as to what kind of person I might be.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't know about thick but yes Selmayr, his cohort, the commissioners etc are murderous liberal filth. You going disagree, or just post more weepy shit?



Kill 'em all


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This is telling, there are only "brexiters" and remainers, all political reasons for people voting for one or neither is obliterated.
> 
> You can have any politics you like so long as it's brexiter or remainer.


Bit like the binary choice on the referendum ballot isn't it?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Kill 'em all


Empty as always. Going to call me a white racist or threaten to kill yourself next?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Or none and shout how you will hate to your dying breath all leavers. It's like listening to an idiot 12 year old.


Shout? The internet code for shouting is putting it in capital letters I believe. I didn't put it in capital letters.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have never said brexit could or should be overturned or that it would be the 'democratic' thing to do, never once beyond a vague hope that MPs vote according to tbeir personal beliefs. My theme has been that brexit has happened so brexiters should no sort out the resulting problems, the land border on the island of Ireland being the most pressing.
> My preference would have been to remain, but as I have said repeatedly that ship has sailed, and my challenge to those who voted brexit is to sort out the things they said they were voting for, like taking back control of the UK borders.


What on earth are you hoping to gain out of any of this?  

It can't be to understand those who think differently, since you aren't remotely interested in any ideas beyond "those who voted for Brexit are racists and I hate them"
It can't be discussion about how to make Brexit work, since you declare that this isn't your problem because you didn't vote for it
It can't be discussion about how to make the EU work, since any issues related to the EU are rebuffed with "I don't care about that because remain lost"
It can't be a discussion about how to overturn Brexit, since anything on this regard is dismissed as "I have never said brexit should or could be overturned"
It can't be to build community, because you've done nothing but antagonise every single person regardless of their underlying position
I am genuinely bewildered as to what it is you hoping to achieve with the posts your are making.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Murderous, liberal thickos, the lot of 'em.





krtek a houby said:


> Kill 'em all



These attempts of yours to try and turn around what you perceive as the rhetoric of those who disagree with you are really fucking pathetic.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Empty as always. Going to call me a white racist or threaten to kill yourself next?



I wonder how beef exports will do, post Brexit


----------



## NoXion (Mar 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If he'd managed to put his words into action, would you have approved?



If it helped the people of Greece, sure why not. No doubt you'll now try to be clever and fail.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> These attempts of yours to try and turn around what you percieve as the rhetoric of those who disagree with you is really fucking pathetic.



I'm with you 100%, chum!


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I wonder how beef exports will do, post Brexit


Amazing. You post an empty wanker one line reply to a post of mine, in an attempt to start an argument and I'm the one with a "beef".


----------



## teuchter (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> If it helped the people of Greece, sure why not. No doubt you'll now try to be clever and fail.


Well, I just wanted to know whether your dislike of him was based on your judgement of his character, or the basic ideas he promotes as well.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Amazing. You post an empty wanker one line reply to a post of mine attempting to start an argument and I'm the one with a "beef".



I'll have it rare and bloody, please


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

I see krtek has finished his _act normal _performance for this year and it's back to the self-obsessed cry-bullying.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I'll have it rare and bloody, please


Stop replying to me or I'LL HAVE TO KILL MYSELF!


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Stop replying to me or I'LL HAVE TO KILL MYSELF!



Calm down, Alan. I'm on your side, thick and thin.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Stop replying to me or I'LL HAVE TO KILL MYSELF!


He's got a new trick now - he sends you an aggressive insulting PM in the hope that you'll respond in kind then adds in a mod to the conversation to show how he's being abused.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 10, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I'm with you 100%, chum!



No you aren't. You're stirring shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Well, I just wanted to know whether your dislike of him was based on your judgement of his character, or the basic ideas he promotes as well.


Always with the binaries


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> No you aren't. You're stirring shit.



Not at all. Learned the error of my ways and sought very hard to make amends. Brexit is almost upon the UK and it's great. Seriously. The remainers haven't got a leg to stand on. Even better, Ireland may (serious border issues aside) may actually benefit from all this, should the big companies chose to invest in the Republic.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He's got a new trick now - he sends you an aggressive insulting PM in the hope that you'll respond in kind then adds in a mod to the conversation to show how he's being abused.


Lovely, always the charmer.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What on earth are you hoping to gain out of any of this?
> 
> It can't be to understand those who think differently, since you aren't remotely interested in any ideas beyond "those who voted for Brexit are racists and I hate them"
> It can't be discussion about how to make Brexit work, since you declare that this isn't your problem because you didn't vote for it
> ...



I am now aware of your genuine bewilderment. Genuine.
I am here to discover if brexiters have thought up a solution to the Irish border situation.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He's got a new trick now - he sends you an aggressive insulting PM in the hope that you'll respond in kind then adds in a mod to the conversation to show how he's being abused.



Do you want to post the pm, or shall I? *Then* we can discuss whether or not it was aggressive or insulting. Otherwise, it's pretty pointless making this thread all about me, as you usually do. Cheers.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have never said brexit could or should be overturned or that it would be the 'democratic' thing to do, never once beyond a vague hope that MPs vote according to tbeir personal beliefs. My theme has been that brexit has happened so brexiters should no sort out the resulting problems, the land border on the island of Ireland being the most pressing.
> My preference would have been to remain, but as I have said repeatedly that ship has sailed, and my challenge to those who voted brexit is to sort out the things they said they were voting for, like taking back control of the UK borders.


I'll get on the phone to ma pal Terri right now like


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I'll get on the phone to ma pal Terri right now like


I am pleased for you that you have a pal, and jealous naturally.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Well, I just wanted to know whether your dislike of him was based on your judgement of his character, or the basic ideas he promotes as well.


for my part both, he is a fraud, and the basic ideas he promotes - social democrats rising up within the EU and changing it for the better - are deluded. As well he knows. But that's been done to death on these boards and you have been here longer than me.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am now aware of your genuine bewilderment. Genuine.
> I am here to discover if brexiters have thought up a solution to the Irish border situation.


Ok, you have your answer.  Thanks for stopping by.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Ok, you have your answer.  Thanks for stopping by.


What do you mean by that? Are you the gatekeeper or the no-platforming security guard?


----------



## bimble (Mar 10, 2018)

That special kind of ’no platforming’where you get to dominate the conversation for a week boring everyone senseless.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

bimble said:


> That special kind of ’no platforming’where you get to dominate the conversation for a week boring everyone senseless.


Wehey. You speak for 'everyone' do you?
What will you bring out next? The 'people like you' trope?


----------



## bimble (Mar 10, 2018)

Ok you’re right, some folk here seem to find you well worth reading and responding to, me personally I’m waiting patiently for you to go away (I voted remain by the way in case you care).


----------



## teqniq (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical  No-one speaks for everyone here but yes imo too you're pretty fucking boring. Furthermore you didn't just come here to ask about the Irish border. You spent a fair bit of time sneering and trolling before you dragged that one out and you're still trolling now.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 10, 2018)

I've no problem with philosophical .

As I've posted before, nothing's moving forward until the Ireland situation is sorted.

DUP refuse to have a border between them and Britain (and have the tories by the nuts), EU (all of it) won't accept one on the Irish border as per GFA.  

Haven't even started on Gibraltar yet and only a year left.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

Interesting that the only poster still bothering with philosophical is someone that he thinks  is a fascist and racist.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What do you mean by that? Are you the gatekeeper or the no-platforming security guard?



I mean this:



kabbes said:


> What on earth are you hoping to gain out of any of this?
> 
> It can't be to understand those who think differently, since you aren't remotely interested in any ideas beyond "those who voted for Brexit are racists and I hate them"
> It can't be discussion about how to make Brexit work, since you declare that this isn't your problem because you didn't vote for it
> ...



Your only response to the above is that you wanted an answer to a specific question.  Now you have your answers to that specific question — regardless of how good or satisfying you think those answers were — what else is it you want?  Seriously, what do you expect from us?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

teqniq said:


> philosophical  No-one speaks for everyone here but yes imo too you're pretty fucking boring. Furthermore you didn't just come here to ask about the Irish border. You spent a fair bit of time sneering and trolling before you dragged that one out and you're still trolling now.





bimble said:


> Ok you’re right, some folk here seem to find you well worth reading and responding to, me personally I’m waiting patiently for you to go away (I voted remain by the way in case you care).


Fair enough and thank you for your patience, politely expressed.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I mean this:
> 
> 
> 
> Your only response to the above is that you wanted an answer to a specific question.  Now you have your answers to that specific question — regardless of how good or satisfying you think those answers were — what else is it you want?  Seriously, what do you expect from us?


I should have expressed myself more fully, I was hoping for a workable realistic and practical answer to the Irish border question. So no there hasn't been an answer, and it is not particularly down to one individual here to supply one, but I am entitled to live in hope.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I should have expressed myself more fully, I was hoping for a workable realistic and practical answer to the Irish border question. So no there hasn't been an answer, and it is not particularly down to one individual here to supply one, but I am entitled to live in hope.


And now what?  You’ll keep on asking the same question endlessly until somebody here provides you with an answer that meets your personal criteria?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

teqniq said:


> philosophical  No-one speaks for everyone here but yes imo too you're pretty fucking boring. Furthermore you didn't just come here to ask about the Irish border. You spent a fair bit of time sneering and trolling before you dragged that one out and you're still trolling now.



Sneering and trolling? OK, you're entitled to think that of course but on this thread I have not initiated any abuse to an individual, been on the receiving end, but at that point given it back or at the very least pointed it out. If trolling means starting abusing then not guilty. 
If trolling means being persistent then of course I am guilty of that, if trolling is defined on the hoof by a person using it as a put down then that is up to them.
Boring is fair comment, but an opinion, this board is not exactly flush with Oscar Wildes though. 
As for the Irish border, yes I came on here to mention it, so what?
The sneering? You must have missed the string of snide remarks in my direction, especially when I have disclosed personal information, but the snide remarks would be easy to miss when they're shared around.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> And now what?  You’ll keep on asking the same question endlessly until somebody here provides you with an answer that meets your personal criteria?


Any criteria would be a start...sorry any practical workable and realistic criteria.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My preference would have been to remain, but as I have said repeatedly that ship has sailed, and my challenge to those who voted brexit is to sort out the things they said they were voting for, like taking back control of the UK borders.


 Well, you've said this several times. Would you be willing to advise brexit voters on this thread _where_ they go to 'sort things'?  Is there a big suggestion box somewhere? Or has David Davis got the kettle on for people to call in with their solutions (probably best to email him beforehand)? 

As you know full well, neither Westminster democracy or EU democracy allow people to 'sort things'. That's not the intention of democracy.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I mean this:
> 
> 
> 
> Your only response to the above is that you wanted an answer to a specific question.  Now you have your answers to that specific question — regardless of how good or satisfying you think those answers were — what else is it you want?  Seriously, what do you expect from us?





Wilf said:


> Well, you've said this several times. Would you be willing to advise brexit voters on this thread _where_ they go to 'sort things'?  Is there a big suggestion box somewhere? Or has David Davis got the kettle on for people to call in with their solutions (probably best to email him beforehand)?
> 
> As you know full well, neither Westminster democracy or EU democracy allow people to 'sort things'. That's not the intention of democracy.



The fresh Irish border problem is a consequence of one narrow kind of democracy expressed in the referendum.
Are you really advising me to ask something of brexit voters (which I have been doing anyway)?
If you are, then a metaphorical suggestion box would be a good start.
I wonder, do you have any solutions to suggest yourself? Oops, practical, workable and reasonable solutions within the limited time period David Davis is faced with?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am here to discover if brexiters have thought up a solution to the Irish border situation.


Oh Gawd, right, let's get this sorted. I'm going to book a church hall, maybe in Birmingham. Won't be many coming down from Scotland, but it should be pretty central for all the other guilty brexiteers to sneak along to. There'll be 3 options, powerpoint and everything. Not doing that shaky hands thing though, it's really shit. Can somebody do the teas and coffees?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Oh Gawd, right, let's get this sorted. I'm going to book a church hall, maybe in Birmingham. Won't be many coming down from Scotland, but it should be pretty central for all the other guilty brexiteers to sneak along to. There'll be 3 options, powerpoint and everything. Not doing that shaky hands thing though, it's really shit. Can somebody do the teas and coffees?



Post the details and I will be there, and chip in towards the expenses too.

It would be interesting, because within the churn of this thread only kabbes has been prepared to offer any kind of an idea, even if it has been argued against as unworkable. It has been far easier for brexiters and others to have digs at me than to suggest anything themselves regarding the Irish border, maybe your Birmingham event will be better. What date did you have in mind?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Post the details and I will be there, and chip in towards the expenses too.
> 
> It would be interesting, because within the churn of this thread only kabbes has been prepared to offer any kind of an idea, even if it has been argued against as unworkable. It has been far easier for brexiters and others to have digs at me than to suggest anything themselves regarding the Irish border, maybe your Birmingham event will be better. What date did you have in mind?


Well, Farage's birthday is April 3rd, so I'll see if it's free then. Only trouble will be if I book it on behalf of 'The Thick Much Hated Racists', the church might get a bit anxious.

Oh, by the way, presume you voted Labour, say in 2005 (or libdem?)?  Presume you went into the voting booth with at least outline plans for postwar reconstruction in Iraq, improving the cost-benefit calculations done by NICE, school repairs budget...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Well, Farage's birthday is April 3rd, so I'll see if it's free then. Only trouble will be if I book it on behalf of 'The Thick Much Hated Racists', the church might get a bit anxious.
> 
> Oh, by the way, presume you voted Labour, say in 2005 (or libdem?)?  Presume you went into the voting booth with at least outline plans for postwar reconstruction in Iraq, improving the cost-benefit calculations done by NICE, school repairs budget...



How did you guess?
For me the war porn enjoyed by many as a result of the Labour led initiative in Iraq has been disgusting, but to an extent there has also been a bit of victim porn going on too.
Lots of people express outrage at those who have suffered either in war, or as migrants, or because of economic damage visited upon folk, or for many other reasons, but for the most part it seems vapid and insincere.
All the 'what about?' stuff is rather Michael Jackson, and it was a nice moment when Jarvis Cocker showed his arse to the faux concerned who want to parade that concern around for others to notice.
I have never voted for the Liberals by the way.
When it comes to school repairs, I would hope general society would question some of the assumptions about schooling and education in the first place, not see it as glorified child minding which it seems to have become, however whilst those buildings mind those children, my plan would be to double suitable taxes to pay for those repairs.
When you mention NICE, do you mean the national Institute for health and care excellence?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

A hard border in Ireland is both practicable and workable — you’re just ideologically opposed to it.  But this is the problem, isn’t it?  The various things people want are in tension with each other (the things all wanted by the same person, even), so something has to give.

You’re assuming that the border situation in Ireland is the most important thing of all and so anything that threatens it is de facto evil.  But other people have other priorities, and that’s is entirely fair enough.  Why should somebody in Lincolnshire prioritise the desire of people in Ireland to travel effortlessly between north and south over the problems faced in their own life — their own lived reality?  People aren’t racist, ignorant or “being a tosser” just because they have different priorities to you which make them willing to have different compromises.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You’re assuming that the border situation in Ireland is the most important thing of all and so anything that threatens it is de facto evil.  But other people have other priorities, and that’s is entirely fair enough.  Why should somebody in Lincolnshire prioritise the desire of people in Ireland to travel effortlessly between north and south over the problems faced in their own life — their own lived reality?  People aren’t racist, ignorant or “being a tosser” just because they have different priorities to you which make them willing to have different compromises.


Exactly. The other thing about the vote in 2016 was that it was called at a time when people weren't actually that fussed about the EU.  The majority were Eurosceptic but it wasn't a high priority issue for voters. The Tories dragged it back centre stage, ensuring it was going to be messy plebiscite around lots of issues and, even more so, lots of experiences. I'm happy to admit that some voters - a fair number - were willing to pick immigration out of the list of reasons in the multiple choice opinion polls that followed brexit, but the wider set of motivations were complex. These absolutely included experiences of neo-liberalism. Wailing 'thick wacist' at people not only misses the mark, it also exemplifies how we got to bexit.  Concerns with/experiences of free movement are not the same active racism.  Neo-Liberalism itself is based on a much deeper racism.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> A hard border in Ireland is both practicable and workable — you’re just ideologically opposed to it.  But this is the problem, isn’t it?  The various things people want are in tension with each other (the things all wanted by the same person, even), so something has to give.
> 
> You’re assuming that the border situation in Ireland is the most important thing of all and so anything that threatens it is de facto evil.  But other people have other priorities, and that’s is entirely fair enough.  Why should somebody in Lincolnshire prioritise the desire of people in Ireland to travel effortlessly between north and south over the problems faced in their own life — their own lived reality?  People aren’t racist, ignorant or “being a tosser” just because they have different priorities to you which make them willing to have different compromises.



Well I suppose it *is* practical if there is a 310 mile long 15 meter fence topped with razor wire, and machine gun nests suitably spaced along it, that is one idea...although it might not go down well with farming folk who have one farm in both countries.

It might be practical to use drones and check points and random spot checks on workers, or everybody has an ID card, or is obliged to be chipped in the ear lobe or something, these things might be workable. Is that kind of stuff what you think brexit voters mean by taking back control of the UK borders? 

If not that, then what others solutions might there be, the notion that something has to give because the circle can't be squared as it were is an interesting one, until one comes up against the notion that people in the Republic are those who have to do the giving to help along the brexit vote result from the people in the UK.

Not only do I have ideological issues, I have issues regarding how the hard border will impact people day to day.

A 'fudge' has been proposed, but a friend in Northern Ireland sent me this:
_
' I do not believe that a fudge is possible, for the very simple reason that WTO rules would make such a fudge the default position for the external borders of both the EU and UK in trade terms, post Brexit.

There has to be a detailed agreement to define the relationship between the the two parties, in both of their interests.

As for the potential for violence, I have mentioned that the PSNI are convinced that the presence of any customs infrastructure on (or near) the border in Northern Ireland would be a target for dissidents. It's precisely what has happened before on the border, and could reasonably be expected to happen again (the post on the border at Aughnacloy was destroyed by a car bomb in the 1970s and the gutted remanats remained until about 10-15 years ago).

The key point about the GFA is that joint membership of the EU was assumed in terms of the relationship between the UK and Ireland - just like breathing is assumed for any of us discussing this.'_

The reason the people in Lincolnshire should be concerned is that until things improve the brexit referendum was a UK wide vote, and when they voted, they voted for something that impacts the lives of those who are called UK citizens in Lincolnshire, and in Cornwall, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland whether that suits them or not. 
Indeed it is frequently said that those struggling in various regions object to decisions made about their lives by the remote metropolitan elite in London, yet that is what they have done themselves, made decisions about the lives of people miles away. 

You ask why folk in Lincolnshire should 'prioritise' their agenda to be subsumed by those in Ireland who wish to travel freely to and fro, and my answer is that if you don't wish to order your priorities, then you should have a solution ready if your own priorities have a negative impact on others. 

It is a bit like polluting the water upstream because getting rid of that waste is your 'priority', and not caring about what happens to the people who depend on that water downstream.

If that analogy has any resonance or meaning, could it be that the people upstream see themselves as superior to the people downstream in some way? Would that kind of attitude be a doorway into a racist, ignorant and tosser like perspectives?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Oh Gawd, right, let's get this sorted. I'm going to book a church hall, maybe in Birmingham. Won't be many coming down from Scotland, but it should be pretty central for all the other guilty brexiteers to sneak along to. There'll be 3 options, powerpoint and everything. Not doing that shaky hands thing though, it's really shit. Can somebody do the teas and coffees?


I reckon I can get my remain-with -nose-held scottish comrades down, a lot of this was down to driving for Indy 2 though the loudest all sound like Dexter


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> _
> The key point about the GFA is that joint membership of the EU was assumed in terms of the relationship between the UK and Ireland - just like breathing is assumed for any of us discussing this.'_



Demonstrate this claim.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I suppose it *is* practical if there is a 310 mile long 15 meter fence topped with razor wire, and machine gun nests suitably spaced along it, that is one idea...although it might not go down well with farming folk who have one farm in both countries.
> 
> It might be practical to use drones and check points and random spot checks on workers, or everybody has an ID card, or is obliged to be chipped in the ear lobe or something, these things might be workable. Is that kind of stuff what you think brexit voters mean by taking back control of the UK borders?


This is just nonsense.  Borders don't need to be 15m fences with machine gun nests.  They exist all around the world in all kinds of forms.  It's this kind of over the top rhetoric that just makes people roll their eyes and get on with ignoring anything you have to say.



> If not that, then what others solutions might there be, the notion that something has to give because the circle can't be squared as it were is an interesting one, until one comes up against the notion that people in the Republic are those who have to do the giving to help along the brexit vote result from the people in the UK.


Yes, if no deal can be reached then people both in the EU -- including the ROI -- and in the UK are going to have to give things up.  _That's what happens when a country leaves a free trade zone_.  That's what has been voted for and what is being implemented.  People in France are also having to give things up as a result of Brexit, as are people in Romania and people in Greece.  And so are people in Lincolnshire.  There is the opportunity for things being given up to be minimised, if the EU would get on with prioritising this rather than prioritising the punishment of the UK in order to teach a lesson about the evils of leaving its club.



> Not only do I have ideological issues, I have issues regarding how the hard border will impact people day to day.
> 
> A 'fudge' has been proposed, but a friend in Northern Ireland sent me this:
> _
> ...


Since you are the only one apparently interested in the idea of a fudge, I'm not going to bother with it.  I've given you two solutions now that both don't involve a fudge -- reunite Ireland or institute a hard border between NI and RoI.  It may be that the Irish people will need to choose between these two options.
_



			As for the potential for violence, I have mentioned that the PSNI are convinced that the presence of any customs infrastructure on (or near) the border in Northern Ireland would be a target for dissidents. It's precisely what has happened before on the border, and could reasonably be expected to happen again (the post on the border at Aughnacloy was destroyed by a car bomb in the 1970s and the gutted remanats remained until about 10-15 years ago).

The key point about the GFA is that joint membership of the EU was assumed in terms of the relationship between the UK and Ireland - just like breathing is assumed for any of us discussing this.'
		
Click to expand...

_So it's OK for people in Northern Ireland to expect that everybody in Britain should maintain a relationship with the EU that they, as a whole, do not want under threat of violence? 

You have a very one-sided view of where responsibility to others should lie.



> The reason the people in Lincolnshire should be concerned is that until things improve the brexit referendum was a UK wide vote, and when they voted, they voted for something that impacts the lives of those who are called UK citizens in Lincolnshire, and in Cornwall, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland whether that suits them or not.
> Indeed it is frequently said that those struggling in various regions object to decisions made about their lives by the remote metropolitan elite in London, yet that is what they have done themselves, made decisions about the lives of people miles away.
> 
> You ask why folk in Lincolnshire should 'prioritise' their agenda to be subsumed by those in Ireland who wish to travel freely to and fro, and my answer is that if you don't wish to order your priorities, then you should have a solution ready if your own priorities have a negative impact on others.
> ...


Fuck me, you really do think that people in Lincolnshire are morally repugnant if they prioritise their own existence over the right of Irish people to travel unimpeded between north and south.  And you are apparently willing to tell them this on the grounds that the people of Northern Ireland can't cope with political change without killing others, and that's a fair enough reason.  I thought I might have gone too far, but apparently I didn't go far enough.

And you wonder why Remain lost.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Exactly. The other thing about the vote in 2016 was that it was called at a time when people weren't actually that fussed about the EU.  The majority were Eurosceptic but it wasn't a high priority issue for voters. The Tories dragged it back centre stage, ensuring it was going to be messy plebiscite around lots of issues and, even more so, lots of experiences. I'm happy to admit that some voters - a fair number - were willing to pick immigration out of the list of reasons in the multiple choice opinion polls that followed brexit, but the wider set of motivations were complex. These absolutely included experiences of neo-liberalism. Wailing 'thick wacist' at people not only misses the mark, it also exemplifies how we got to bexit.  Concerns with/experiences of free movement are not the same active racism.  Neo-Liberalism itself is based on a much deeper racism.



Does this whole, to quote Lord Buckethead 'shitshow', now have to be dealt with whatever the motivations of the voters? You attempt to mock those with rhotacism as if they are somehow chinless wonders, but if they were not wailing 'thick racist' before the vote, many are wailing it now, and it could be caused by alarm at the open racism that has been ushered in by the result and consequence of the vote, and therefore easy to understand. 
Many EU migrants have expressed how they thought they were accepted in a community in the UK, but the vote, and subsequent outwardly racist behaviour shown by those they once thought were their friends, means that their friends were in disguise all along, and secretly hated them, but now hate them openly. The latent anti Irish racism has been awarded similar licence to bestride the land as a result of the brexit vote.
My concern that brexit voters were racist has been pushed back at by many here many times, but my contention is that the vote is over, we are where we are, and this land is far more openly racist as a result, and it is the result of the brexit referendum. Not many people who have responded to me on this thread seem to want to accept that.
Indeed I posted above that possibly not all brexit voters are racist, and when discussing 'Lexit' accepted that there may have been other reasons why people voted brexit, but those people have ushered in and given licence to more open racism whether they want to admit to it or not in my view. Maybe brexit voters could express regret at that, and focus on the Irish border as a symbol that at least that they don't want the racist result of brexit to prevail.  Again that kind of concept has been dismissed with distain by many posting here who said nobody considered Ireland before the vote, why should it matter now.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Demonstrate this claim.


I don't have to, read my post more carefully and you will realise why.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't have to, read my post more carefully and you will realise why.


You mean that you can't. 

The idea that something exists and therefore must always exist actually destroys any idea of history - and with it, any politics whatsoever - including whatever nonsense that you've posted about why the eu is great. It's religious bullshit and should not be tolerated as debate or argument.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

As i suspected, you're a total blagger as regards the GFA.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is just nonsense.  Borders don't need to be 15m fences with machine gun nests.  They exist all around the world in all kinds of forms.  It's this kind of over the top rhetoric that just makes people roll their eyes and get on with ignoring anything you have to say.
> 
> Yes, if no deal can be reached then people both in the EU -- including the ROI -- and in the UK are going to have to give things up.  _That's what happens when a country leaves a free trade zone_.  That's what has been voted for and what is being implemented.  People in France are also having to give things up as a result of Brexit, as are people in Romania and people in Greece.  And so are people in Lincolnshire.  There is the opportunity for things being given up to be minimised, if the EU would get on with prioritising this rather than prioritising the punishment of the UK in order to teach a lesson about the evils of leaving its club.
> 
> ...


I wish the people in Northern Ireland could cope with change without killing others, however it is not only me that sees a risk here, the police service of Northern Ireland see it as a risk too.
(incidentally I have a niece in the Wolds, and another in Normanby by Spital and have been to Lincolnshire rather a lot), and isn't it you who said that the Lincolnshire people should or did put their own priorities first without having to think of the wider impact? This is what you wrote above:

Why should somebody in Lincolnshire prioritise the desire of people in Ireland to travel effortlessly between north and south over the problems faced in their own life — their own lived reality?

And now you seem to be saying they would be morally repugnant for doing so. Unless I am missing something obvious here.

We fundamentally disagree on one thing. This bit:

'if the EU would get on with prioritising this rather than prioritising the punishment of the UK in order to teach a lesson about the evils of leaving its club.'

The club that is being left was helped in its structures by the actions of the UK for the past over 40 years, including people from the UK representing Lincolnshire. The UK knew full well what the rules of the club were and are. I think it is 100% down to the UK, and brexiters to do the prioritising and suggesting, and I would expect the EU to stick to it's rules, because they are it's rules, and they are not sticking to them to 'punish' anybody but simply being themselves. If a person divorces their partner it is unreasonable of them to expect their partner to have plastic surgery during the process because it suits them.
The UK is doing the suggesting, the EU is doing the reacting, nothing to see there is there?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am missing something obvious here.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You mean that you can't.
> 
> The idea that something exists and therefore must always exist actually destroys any idea of history - and with it, any politics whatsoever - including whatever nonsense that you've posted about why the eu is great. It's religious bullshit and should not be tolerated as debate or argument.


No, I mean that I was quoting somebody else. 
However the situation where both the Republic and the UK were both in the EU helped the peace process considerably, however that may not be possible to demonstrate to your satisfaction.
I think the rest of what you say about history and politics is wrong because I have never said something should always exist, indeed I have repeatedly said the brexit vote has happened and things have changed. If anybody is acting like a fundamentalist preacher here it isn't me, but it might be somebody who thunders that something 'should not be tolerated'.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> As i suspected, you're a total blagger as regards the GFA.


I posted a link to article 6 of the GFA on this thread some days ago regarding the processes required to have a vote on a United Ireland, so you misuse the word 'total'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Well, Farage's birthday is April 3rd, so I'll see if it's free then. Only trouble will be if I book it on behalf of 'The Thick Much Hated Racists', the church might get a bit anxious.
> 
> Oh, by the way, presume you voted Labour, say in 2005 (or libdem?)?  Presume you went into the voting booth with at least outline plans for postwar reconstruction in Iraq, improving the cost-benefit calculations done by NICE, school repairs budget...


Not to mention the 2001 election with detailed costed plans for the rebuilding of Serbia


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I posted a link to article 6 of the GFA on this thread some days ago regarding the processes required to have a vote on a United Ireland, so you misuse the word 'total'.


Entire. Complete. Utter.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

You missed out the first word which was 'unless'.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No, I mean that I was quoting somebody else.
> However the situation where both the Republic and the UK were both in the EU helped the peace process considerably, however that may not be possible to demonstrate to your satisfaction.
> I think the rest of what you say about history and politics is wrong because I have never said something should always exist, indeed I have repeatedly said the brexit vote has happened and things have changed. If anybody is acting like a fundamentalist preacher here it isn't me, but it might be somebody who thunders that something 'should not be tolerated'.


Why are you quoting someone else unless you both agree and think it correct? Now you think that it's not correct? 

And no, i don't think think religious style arguments should be tolerated as grounds for social-political issues. I don't think that you understand what this means though.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I wish the people in Northern Ireland could cope with change without killing others, however it is not only me that sees a risk here, the police service of Northern Ireland see it as a risk too.
> (incidentally I have a niece in the Wolds, and another in Normanby by Spital and have been to Lincolnshire rather a lot), and isn't it you who said that the Lincolnshire people should or did put their own priorities first without having to think of the wider impact? This is what you wrote above:
> 
> Why should somebody in Lincolnshire prioritise the desire of people in Ireland to travel effortlessly between north and south over the problems faced in their own life — their own lived reality?
> ...


Could you at least try and stick to either the state or people who voted Brexit in the one sentence just for clarity? Those who voted to stay in the common market in 1975 had no idea what changes the Tories/EU would force through decades later.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I posted a link to article 6 of the GFA on this thread some days ago regarding the processes required to have a vote on a United Ireland, so you misuse the word 'total'.


I think the ability to type GFA into google then C&P some results is exactly the sort of thing blaggers rely on.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Why are you quoting someone else unless you both agree and think it correct? Now you think that it's not correct?
> 
> _I quoted another person to inform you that there are perspectives other than mine. I do agree with that post as it happens so that should please your narrative._
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

See


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I think the ability to type GFA into google then C&P some results is exactly the sort of thing blaggers rely on.



Well I bow to your expertise, you are prolific yourself at providing links from googled sources.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Could you at least try and stick to either the state or people who voted Brexit in the one sentence just for clarity? Those who voted to stay in the common market in 1975 had no idea what changes the Tories/EU would force through decades later.


I shall try to be more precise in making that distinction.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I bow to your expertise, you are prolific yourself at providing links from googled sources.


Relevant, interesting and  possibly unseen ones - yes, i am.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Relevant, interesting and  possibly unseen ones - yes, i am.



Others do it and they are blaggers, you do it and you're being relevant, interesting, and revealing stuff.
Yeah right.
The link you provided about Selmayr was all over the internet way before you posted it on here, so in terms of 'revealing' it was already out there.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Others do it and they are blaggers, you do it and you're being relevant, interesting, and revealing stuff.
> Yeah right.
> The link you provided about Selmayr was all over the internet way before you posted it on here, so in terms of 'revealing' it was already out there.


Oh lord.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yet he crumbled when he actually got the opportunity to put his words into action.



You would have probably done exactly the same thing in the circumstances.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You missed out the first word which was 'unless'.


Nope.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I suppose it *is* practical if there is a 310 mile long 15 meter fence topped with razor wire...



The EU has exactly that, well 325 miles long, on its eastern flank, erected to explicitly keep brown people from entering EU territory. And after a week of your rubbish not one thing you have posted has changed my opinion of you as a massive wanker.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU has exactly that, well 325 miles long, on it eastern flank, erected to explicitly keep brown people from entering EU territory. And after a week of your rubbish not one thing you have posted has changed my opinion of you as a massive wanker.


I was thinking that's where he got the idea from.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU has exactly that, well 325 miles long, on it eastern flank, erected to explicitly keep brown people from entering EU territory. And after a week of your rubbish not one thing you have posted has changed my opinion of you as a massive wanker.



Thank goodness for that, your approval is the last thing I seek.


----------



## Santino (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I suppose it *is* practical if there is a 310 mile long 15 meter fence topped with razor wire, and machine gun nests suitably spaced along it, that is one idea...although it might not go down well with farming folk who have one farm in both countries.
> 
> It might be practical to use drones and check points and random spot checks on workers, or everybody has an ID card, or is obliged to be chipped in the ear lobe or something, these things might be workable. Is that kind of stuff what you think brexit voters mean by taking back control of the UK borders?
> 
> ...


I get emails like this too. Because that's a normal thing.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I was thinking that's where he got the idea from.



I doubt the myopic twat’s ever considered it tbf. A tad ironic calling leave voters racist for an action that could result in a border between Irish people, whilst being a keen supporter of an institution that had a fence erected explicitly to repel brown people. His own moronic logic would	 classify him as a racist.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Indeed I posted above that possibly not all brexit voters are racist, and when discussing 'Lexit' accepted that there may have been other reasons why people voted brexit, but those people have ushered in and given licence to more open racism whether they want to admit to it or not in my view. Maybe brexit voters could express regret at that, and focus on the Irish border as a symbol that at least that they don't want the racist result of brexit to prevail.  Again that kind of concept has been dismissed with distain by many posting here who said nobody considered Ireland before the vote, why should it matter now.


 so, you think brexit voters should apologise for ushering in racism when, as I've mentioned on this thread to you, many who voted for brexit are active anti-racists.  And then, what, your desire that people should come up with a solution for the border is a bit like detention at school - doing lines?  Truly bizarre logic. Again, as pointed out to you, nobody on the left brought this referendum about - the tories did. And your logic seems to be that the spike in hate crimes somehow becomes the fault of people who have... long campaigned against hate crimes.  This is tenuous, 'but for a horse a kingdom was lost' attribution.  Racism and nationalism happened because of the very era we live in, the social forces in play, the failures of the left, not some fucking vote.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I doubt the myopic twat’s ever considered it tbf. A tad ironic calling leave voters racist for an action that could result in a border between Irish people, whilst being a keen supporter of an institution that had a fence erected explicitly to repel brown people. His own moronic logic would	 classify him as a racist.


Indeed, philosophical is the ultimate nationalist. An institution built on exploitation and exclusion. God bless the racism of the free market and its tarrifs.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I doubt the myopic twat’s ever considered it tbf. A tad ironic calling leave voters racist for an action that could result in a border between Irish people, whilst being a keen supporter of an institution that had a fence erected explicitly to repel brown people. His own moronic logic would	 classify him as a racist.


'Keen supporter' is it now?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Indeed, philosophical is the ultimate nationalist. An institution built on exploitation and exclusion. God bless the racism of the free market and its tarrifs.




He’s a nasty piece of work.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

Christ liberals are too feart to even follow through with their own arguments. It's tough holding that middle ground.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> so, you think brexit voters should apologise for ushering in racism when, as I've mentioned on this thread to you, many who voted for brexit are active anti-racists.  And then, what, your desire that people should come up with a solution for the border is a bit like detention at school - doing lines?  Truly bizarre logic. Again, as pointed out to you, nobody on the left brought this referendum about - the tories did. And your logic seems to be that the spike in hate crimes somehow becomes the fault of people who have... long campaigned against hate crimes.  This is tenuous, 'but for a horse a kingdom was lost' attribution.  Racism and nationalism happened because of the very era we live in, the social forces in play, the failures of the left, not some fucking vote.



You talk of tenuous, yet don't see the irony in saying something like 'your logic seems to be that the spike in hate crimes somehow becomes the fault of people who have... long campaigned against hate crimes'. Making a tenuous link regarding nothing I have said.

As regard to the significance of the vote and racism and nationalism, sometimes there are moments that have huge significance in history (would you grant me that?), the election or emergence of certain leaders can usher in societies of all sorts and fundamental changes can follow. My partner for example had to live through the cultural revolution in China, where her mother and father were removed without notice for six years, and then restored without notice to their previous jobs, there are many tales to tell about the seismic impact of the cultural revolution in China. Or there may be a disaster, or a violent event, or something. A more recent (hopefully society changing event) is the Harvey Weinstein affair. In the face of centuries of abuse by the powerful towards the weak for selfish purposes there seems to be a sea change that says enough is enough.
Of course Brexit isn't the Cultural revolution or the Holocaust, of course not. But Brexit is happening now, in the era in which we live, it is significantly impactful, others say it is the most significant moment for the UK since the Second World War. It does not seem to be a gradual or inevitable result of some sociological process which is almost absorbed unknowingly, but a massive explosion or revelation of something. As I said, the serious impact of brexit has been seen by many as not another step along the road, but as having reached a massive fork in the road. And it has happened precisely because of 'some fucking vote' as has the dreadful emergence of Trump (at least he won't last forever).
I don't know if it is your intention to downplay the significance of brexit as just another one of those things, it can't (in my view) be regarded as some kind of Ealing Comedy where schoolchildren suffer in a dusty classroom, but as you might realise I see it as serious and impactful where the dramatic shift in 'social forces' has thrown up serious questions that spread out beyond the intelligentsia.
My thoughts may come across as 'totally bizarre' to you, but that is how I see it, you see it differently.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> He’s a nasty piece of work.


Wehey!
Couldn't you be a bit more creative than that?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 10, 2018)

I still have no idea what point philosophical is trying to make or what he is trying to achieve with his several hundred posts on this thread.  It’s a total mystery.  There is no argument being set forth, no theory, no evidence, nothing.  Just reaction that attempts to close down any hint of a position.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You talk of tenuous, yet don't see the irony in saying something like 'your logic seems to be that the spike in hate crimes somehow becomes the fault of people who have... long campaigned against hate crimes'. Making a tenuous link regarding nothing I have said.
> 
> As regard to the significance of the vote and racism and nationalism, sometimes there are moments that have huge significance in history (would you grant me that?), the election or emergence of certain leaders can usher in societies of all sorts and fundamental changes can follow. My partner for example had to live through the cultural revolution in China, where her mother and father were removed without notice for six years, and then restored without notice to their previous jobs, there are many tales to tell about the seismic impact of the cultural revolution in China. Or there may be a disaster, or a violent event, or something. A more recent (hopefully society changing event) is the Harvey Weinstein affair. In the face of centuries of abuse by the powerful towards the weak for selfish purposes there seems to be a sea change that says enough is enough.
> Of course Brexit isn't the Cultural revolution or the Holocaust, of course not. But Brexit is happening now, in the era in which we live, it is significantly impactful, others say it is the most significant moment for the UK since the Second World War. It does not seem to be a gradual or inevitable result of some sociological process which is almost absorbed unknowingly, but a massive explosion or revelation of something. As I said, the serious impact of brexit has been seen by many as not another step along the road, but as having reached a massive fork in the road. And it has happened precisely because of 'some fucking vote' as has the dreadful emergence of Trump (at least he won't last forever).
> ...


It's about social forces, long term political projects, competing visions of neo-liberalism.  But if you are worried about racism, worried about austerity, worried about the impact on communities, what's the productive thing to do? Brexit will happen in some shape, form and fudge. Neo Liberalism will continue. Get involved? Fight back?


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I suppose it *is* practical if there is a 310 mile long 15 meter fence topped with razor wire, and machine gun nests suitably spaced along it, that is one idea...although it might not go down well with farming folk who have one farm in both countries.
> 
> It might be practical to use drones and check points and random spot checks on workers, or everybody has an ID card, or is obliged to be chipped in the ear lobe or something, these things might be workable. Is that kind of stuff what you think brexit voters mean by taking back control of the UK borders?


Go and have a lie down my friend or a couple of pints you will feel so much better, even in the worst case scenario, the very hardest of Hard Borders will contain very little in the way of anything physical, it will consist of checkpoints on the main road crossing guarded by men armed with nothing more dangerous than a clipboard. The whole point of a 'hard' border is to inspect goods going UK->ROI and ROI->UK and making sure that health and safety standards are met and most important of all both governments are getting their cut in the form of tariffs.  
Only commercial vehicles need to be stopped, private cars and people on foot could travel without hindrance. 
There are problems with this of course, there are hotheads on both sides of the border who will regard any kind of border as outrageous provocation and such a border will be an invitation to enterprising Irish businessmen to come up with creative ways to not pay or claim back tax refunds.
No-one is going to be shipping guns across it though there will be too much money to be made moving booze, fags or cheap consumer goods.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I still have no idea what point philosophical is trying to make or what he is trying to achieve with his several hundred posts on this thread.  It’s a total mystery.  There is no argument being set forth, no theory, no evidence, nothing.  Just reaction that attempts to close down any hint of a position.



It had no point to make, it’s just a tedious twat. 

If you ever fancy doing yet another degree, perhaps look in to why divs who give themselves monikers like DeepThinker, Philosopical, etc. are invariably the opposite of what they brand themselves as. There must be something that fuels this delusion.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You talk of tenuous, yet don't see the irony in saying something like 'your logic seems to be that the spike in hate crimes somehow becomes the fault of people who have... long campaigned against hate crimes'. Making a tenuous link regarding nothing I have said.
> 
> As regard to the significance of the vote and racism and nationalism, sometimes there are moments that have huge significance in history (would you grant me that?), the election or emergence of certain leaders can usher in societies of all sorts and fundamental changes can follow. My partner for example had to live through the cultural revolution in China, where her mother and father were removed without notice for six years, and then restored without notice to their previous jobs, there are many tales to tell about the seismic impact of the cultural revolution in China. Or there may be a disaster, or a violent event, or something. A more recent (hopefully society changing event) is the Harvey Weinstein affair. In the face of centuries of abuse by the powerful towards the weak for selfish purposes there seems to be a sea change that says enough is enough.
> Of course Brexit isn't the Cultural revolution or the Holocaust, of course not. But Brexit is happening now, in the era in which we live, it is significantly impactful, others say it is the most significant moment for the UK since the Second World War. It does not seem to be a gradual or inevitable result of some sociological process which is almost absorbed unknowingly, but a massive explosion or revelation of something. As I said, the serious impact of brexit has been seen by many as not another step along the road, but as having reached a massive fork in the road. And it has happened precisely because of 'some fucking vote' as has the dreadful emergence of Trump (at least he won't last forever).
> ...


Well, ultimately we have to wait and see how bad it gets. My guess is that the simple process of 'doing brexit', at least the tory version of it, will have an economic cost. But that's not going to guilt trip me into saying I should have voted against it. It wasn't my referendum. And ultimately the people who are at the shitty end of the stick will be the same people who always were/are.  Yes, I suspect there will be people who have lived here for years who get kicked out. We'll have to see how many. It will be shit for a fair number of  families. Pretty much like those from outside the EU who get kicked out now. But y'know, what to do? Fight back, get organised? The usual stuff.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It had no point to make, it’s just a tedious twat.
> 
> If you ever fancy doing yet another degree, perhaps look in to why divs who give themselves monikers like DeepThinker, Philosopical, etc. are invariably the opposite of what they brand themselves as. There must be something that fuels this delusion.


People that keep trying to beef up tweets  and that by dropping "the facts" in wherever possible whilst either not coming up with any FACTS or not managing to apply randomly googled FACTS to the discussion at hand  must fit in here too.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> People that keep trying to beef up tweets  and that by dropping "the facts" in wherever possible whilst either not coming up with any FACTS or not managing to apply randomly googled FACTS to the discussion at hand  must fit in here too.



The analogy of this place as a pub works well. Walk in and declare you hate half the punters. See how that works for you.

 Then alienate the other half by being an obnoxious arse.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Well, ultimately we have to wait and see how bad it gets. My guess is that the simple process of 'doing brexit', at least the tory version of it, will have an economic cost. But that's not going to guilt trip me into saying I should have voted against it. It wasn't my referendum. And ultimately the people who are at the shitty end of the stick will be the same people who always were/are.  Yes, I suspect there will be people who have lived here for years who get kicked out. We'll have to see how many. It will be shit for a fair number of  families. Pretty much like those from outside the EU who get kicked out now. But y'know, what to do? Fight back, get organised? The usual stuff.


Yes. Fighting back, getting organised is what to do. However as Sun Tuz says, engage your enemy at a place of your choosing not theirs.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Go and have a lie down my friend or a couple of pints you will feel so much better, even in the worst case scenario, the very hardest of Hard Borders will contain very little in the way of anything physical, it will consist of checkpoints on the main road crossing guarded by men armed with nothing more dangerous than a clipboard. The whole point of a 'hard' border is to inspect goods going UK->ROI and ROI->UK and making sure that health and safety standards are met and most important of all both governments are getting their cut in the form of tariffs.
> Only commercial vehicles need to be stopped, private cars and people on foot could travel without hindrance.
> There are problems with this of course, there are hotheads on both sides of the border who will regard any kind of border as outrageous provocation and such a border will be an invitation to enterprising Irish businessmen to come up with creative ways to not pay or claim back tax refunds.
> No-one is going to be shipping guns across it though there will be too much money to be made moving booze, fags or cheap consumer goods.


You are more optimistic than me.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes. Fighting back, getting organised is what to do. However as Sun Tuz says, engage your enemy at a place of your choosing not theirs.


You're not going to engage anyone anywhere anytime over anything. You're just a void.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You're not going to engage anyone anywhere anytime over anything. You're just a void.


Nice one, definite signs of creative progress here.
The anyone anywhere anytime anything bit is borderline poetic.
Borderline...see what I did there?
You have a chance to up your game further if your inclined to do so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Nice one, definite signs of creative progress here.
> The anyone anywhere anytime anything bit is borderline poetic.
> Borderline...see what I did there?
> You have a chance to up your game further if your inclined to do so.


Yeh. At least he's got a game.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. At least he's got a game.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Goodness me, and then you turn up, the game must be snap.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Pickman's model said:
> 
> 
> > Yeh. At least he's got a game.


why not add something of your own?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> why not add something of your own?


In what regard?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> why not add something of your own?


Gawd, don't be encouraging him.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It had no point to make, it’s just a tedious twat.


It?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes. Fighting back, getting organised is what to do. However as Sun Tuz says, engage your enemy at a place of your choosing not theirs.


Other than on this thread, where will you be engaging your enemy?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 10, 2018)

"Scotland" has arrived. Rest of us better hud oor weesht.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Other than on this thread, where will you be engaging your enemy?


At the meeting you are organising in Birmingham possibly.


----------



## sealion (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> At the meeting you are organising in Birmingham possibly.


Proper trolling now you wanker. You mean the fla march and you are implying that Wilf is a member.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> At the meeting you are organising in Birmingham possibly.


This is what it comes down to though isn't it? All your anger, all your outrage, all your concern about racism - and you will be doing _nothing_.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Proper trolling now you wanker. You mean the fla march and you are implying that Wilf is a member.


No. Read back and it will make sense.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Proper trolling now you wanker. You mean the fla march and you are implying that Wilf is a member.


No. He suggested organizing a meeting in a church hall in Birmingham.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This is what it comes down to though isn't it? All your anger, all your outrage, all your concern about racism - and you will be doing _nothing_.


Have you called your meeting off then?


----------



## sealion (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No. Read back and it will make sense.


None of what you say makes sense. You are a troll plain and simple.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> None of what you say makes sense. You are a troll plain and simple.


If you look at post 6531 you will see you are wrong, pure and simple.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> None of what you say makes sense. You are a troll plain and simple.


Yep, we've reached the point of v signs and fart noises, no attempt to discuss anything.


----------



## sealion (Mar 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> we've reached the point of v signs and fart noises


 a fair summary


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Proper trolling now you wanker. You mean the fla march and you are implying that Wilf is a member.


Did you bother to read post 6531, or would you rather gloss over that one?


----------



## Winot (Mar 11, 2018)

Have just been discussing Brexit in Club 414 (Brixton) with a guy whose dad was in the IRA #sentencesineverthoughtidwrite


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> At the meeting you are organising in Birmingham possibly.


So the limits of your willingness to do anything beyond post on this message board is a non-appearance at a fictitious meeting that was made up as a rhetorical device to illustrate the meaningless of your demands for all brexiters to agree on an answer aside.

Or is there anything else on top of that particular zero?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2018)

Winot said:


> Have just been discussing Brexit in Club 414 (Brixton) with a guy whose dad was in the IRA #sentencesineverthoughtidwrite


Was it interesting?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So the limits of your willingness to do anything beyond post on this message board is a non-appearance at a fictitious meeting that was made up as a rhetorical device to illustrate the meaningless of your demands for all brexiters to agree on an answer aside.
> 
> Or is there anything else on top of that particular zero?[/QUOTE
> 
> ...


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Getting to the point where Im considering we should be arguing for a second refrendum and voting remain just to get philosophical off this thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


>


Nothing to say I see


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> {Irrelevant stuff about the past that doesn’t answer the question snipped}
> 
> As for the future? I expect to do other bits and pieces as circumstances allow.



So that’s nothing then.

And what is it you expect of us on this thread, again?  Why are you here?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Getting to the point where Im considering we should be arguing for a second refrendum and voting remain just to get philosophical off this thread.


I would argue against a second referendum personally. If for no other reason that the whole malarkey will go on forever.
Brexit won, I am trying to get over it, brexiters have to get on with it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So that’s nothing then.
> 
> And what is it you expect of us on this thread, again?  Why are you here?


When you get to my age the past provides a platform to inform the future, but you would 'snip' that away as not relevant which is convenient for you isn't it?
No, not nothing. However I am not going to list my activities for you and your groupthink cohort to sneer at.
I have paid dues in struggling to try to effect change and I will do what I can in the future. Do you think it will make a difference if I mentioned some of the things I have done? I doubt it, but it will give posters here a chance to put the personal boot in and get fresh fuel for their snide comments.
When you enquire as to why I am here, is that some kind of question you have been nurturing since you last saw a Samuel Beckett play?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> groupthink cohort


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Nothing to say I see


I would imagine in your case that is obvious to long term posters here.
Every so often you pop up and say 'beep !' like one of those children's toys, I imagine it is an attempt to curry favour and get approval which is an understandable human quality.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Can't defend your view? They must be ganging up  lol


I have been defending myself on here constantly. It is for others to decide whether they think my views are valid or the defence successful.
Others have accused me of not having a view, but you have moved it on to me defending that apparently non existent view.
I really don't care about any ganging up, I feel I am able to handle it. But there are examples of groupthink expressed on this thread and I don't blame posters here in being thirsty for the approval of others, it seems to be a bit of a human trait.
It is my observation of what happens here, and does not particularly bother me.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


>


Apologies. I quoted your post before you reduced it in your edit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 11, 2018)

That's ok, it seemed needlessly mean so I took it out, but it can stay in your quote.

You're right when you say you have been defending yourself, but I actually posted _defend your view_, which is why you can't do it. There's nothing defensible in what you've posted so far. You started by branding half the electorate as ignorant racists with a bad-faith pretend "question" and you've come on all surprised that it got up people's noses (even quite a few Remain voters btw) and now you're reduced to posting shit like _groupthink cohort_. If you're _defending your view_ then you're Germany, your view is Stalingrad, and I claim my five Euros.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> That's ok, it seemed needlessly mean so I took it out, but it can stay in your quote.
> 
> You're right when you say you have been defending yourself, but I actually posted _defend your view_, which is why you can't do it. There's nothing defensible in what you've posted so far. You started by branding half the electorate as ignorant racists with a bad-faith pretend "question" and you've come on all surprised that it got up people's noses (even quite a few Remain voters btw) and now you're reduced to posting shit like _groupthink cohort_. If you're _defending your view_ then you're Germany, your view is Stalingrad, and I claim my five Euros.


Bit of a subtle difference though. I have been defending myself (as you seem to agree) but I have acknowledged my _views _can and are disagreed with.
When others here want to move it on to the personal such as 'fuck off you shitcunt', then respective viewpoints are abandoned and we are in red in tooth and claw territory.
It does not suit the agenda of others, and it appears you as well, to acknowledge that I have modified the stance taken by what you describe as a 'bad faith question' on a couple of occasions due to reflection on what some others have said. 
However I make no apology whatsoever to those hypocrites here who are abusive in a personal sense, nor will I dance to the tune they demand but will plough my own furrow.
Isn't it tiresome to be talking about me anyway? It was better when there was discussion about the nature of democracy or brexit and the Irish border.
As for groupthink, yeah in my view there is some of that going on here.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> groupthink cohort


Before you turned up, this thread comprised 180 pages of that “groupthink cohort” arguing with each other.  About 50/50 Brexit/Remain.  Since you’ve turned up, though, it’s just been 40 pages of people thinking you’re a prick.  Go figure.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I would imagine in your case that is obvious to long term posters here.
> Every so often you pop up and say 'beep !' like one of those children's toys, I imagine it is an attempt to curry favour and get approval which is an understandable human quality.


You've been beeping a lot and your nearly 400 posts demonstrate an empty vessel makes the loudest noise. And you're not gaining approval


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Before you turned up, this thread comprised 180 pages of that “groupthink cohort” arguing with each other.  About 50/50 Brexit/Remain.  Since you’ve turned up, though, it’s just been 40 pages of people thinking you’re a prick.  Go figure.


Yep I have contemplated this and concluded you think I am a prick, and you wish to invoke 'people' as having the same view as you. If that isn't a description of groupthink it is an aspiration.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You've been beeping a lot and your nearly 400 posts demonstrate an empty vessel makes the loudest noise. And you're not gaining approval


I think you misunderstand me, I believe your own brief interventions are a search for approval.
If I sought approval here I would go about things differently


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

I'm personally happy to 'take you at your word' that you've done 'bits and bobs'. Bits and bobs doesn't actually sound a lot but - just so you don't think I'm making some kind of more activist than thou point - probably describes my own level of activism over the last 2/3 years (for similar reasons - health).  But yes, part of my reason for asking that question was part of the battle on this thread. If you say you are appalled by racism, what are you doing about racism seems like a reasonable question to me. But there's a more important level to it. Racism has been there for a long time. The extent to which the right version of Brexit focused that racism, precipitated it is a matter for debate. But racism and nationalism didn't start with Brexit. If you want to oppose racism, by all means make your point about brexit. But that isn't the origin of racism. Seems more productive to focus on the nature of contemporary capitalism, to oppose the state and its divide and rule, to think about a world that uses parts of the globe as a repository for cheap labour.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yep I have contemplated this and concluded you think I am a prick, and you wish to invoke 'people' as having the same view as you. If that isn't a description of groupthink it is an aspiration.


No, I’m invoking people having completely different views as me _except on one specific subject_, namely your contributions to this thread_.
_
My evidence for this is this thread.  180 pages of arguments with each other followed by 40 pages of people arguing with you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I'm personally happy to 'take you at your word' that you've done 'bits and bobs'. Bits and bobs doesn't actually sound a lot but - just so you don't think I'm making some kind of more activist than thou point - probably describes my own level of activism over the last 2/3 years (for similar reasons - health).  But yes, part of my reason for asking that question was part of the battle on this thread. If you say you are appalled by racism, what are you doing about racism seems like a reasonable question to me. But there's a more important level to it. Racism has been there for a long time. The extent to which the right version of Brexit focused that racism, precipitated it is a matter for debate. But racism and nationalism didn't start with Brexit. If you want to oppose racism, by all means make your point about brexit. But that isn't the origin of racism. Seems more productive to focus on the nature of contemporary capitalism, to oppose the state and its divide and rule, to think about a world that uses parts of the globe as a repository for cheap labour.


Thank you for this.
 I use 'bits and bobs' as a safe descriptor because it is an attempt to land somewhere between showing off, and insincere humility.

I certainly agree that racism has existed long before brexit, but I suppose part of my argument is that brexit can be used as a significant marker in the road. It seems to me to be (in relation to brexit) a 'look what you have done, do you really mean it, do you regret it?' kind of opportunity.
Maybe I see it as akin to casual everyday sexism where a major event such as the Weinstein scandal leads the unthinking to think again and to modify their behaviour.
Part of me thinks that there is an opportunity provided by brexit for people involved in casual (or overt) racism to think about the impact of what they have done and maybe change. In a dramatic see if racists actually see their 'foreign' neighbours dragged away and bundled onto transport, they might change their thinking quite a lot.
In another dramatic sense if people see checkposts and armed infrastructure on the Irish border they may think again about what they have done.
What will it achieve this time?
Probably not much in practical terms because brexit has won, but possibly when the next big event comes along people might consider the impact of what they do more carefully. So I bang on about the border because I want the impact of brexit to be made manifest, certainly not because I want a border to exist.
Apologies if I am mixing you up with somebody else, but if it was you, did your encounter with the child of an IRA person introduce anything to your thinking regarding the border?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, I’m invoking people having completely different views as me _except on one specific subject_, namely your contributions to this thread_.
> _
> My evidence for this is this thread.  180 pages of arguments with each other followed by 40 pages of people arguing with you.


'Except on one specific subject'. That is a good one. You wish to invoke your imagined cohort on one subject alone, then you permit them to diversify?
That's good of you.


----------



## Supine (Mar 11, 2018)

BORING


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2018)

Ok, well.  I asked what you hoped to achieve and I have my non-answer.  I don’t think there’s anything else to discuss except in the unlikely chance you actually take a position or stance on something, or ask a meaningful question or, well, engage with anything.  In the meantime, I have nothing further to say.  I can only wait for the point that this diversion is done and we can all start arguing properly with each other again.


----------



## sealion (Mar 11, 2018)

Winot said:


> Have just been discussing Brexit in Club 414 (Brixton) with a guy whose dad was in the IRA #sentencesineverthoughtidwrite


You had a sensible conversation with someone at a trance Night ?  #notthe414iusedtoknow


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 11, 2018)

Amazing stuff here - he invents a cohort then attacks someone for his invention and attributes it to them. Truly astonishing performance.


----------



## Winot (Mar 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Was it interesting?



I don’t think either of us were at our best tbh.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Isn't it tiresome to be talking about me anyway? It was better when there was discussion about the nature of democracy or brexit and the Irish border.



If you'd bother to read the first 175 pages you'd discover that before you arrived that was exactly what was happening. Then you came along and posted this:

''Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''

Which makes it clear that your main interest is not in_ the nature of democracy_ but in insulting anyone you happen to disagree with.

So, welcome to a place where you get as good as you (think you can) give.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Apologies if I am mixing you up with somebody else, but if it was you, did your encounter with the child of an IRA person introduce anything to your thinking regarding the border?


No, not me.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> If you'd bother to read the first 175 pages you'd discover that before you arrived that was exactly what was happening. Then you came along and posted this:
> 
> ''Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''
> 
> ...


It really as simple as this philosophical . I've only dropped into this thread from time to time, but it's been an ongoing battle of evenly matched forces. In fact as mentioned at some point, urban generally voted for remain. Beyond that, the tide has probably gone with the lexit/brexit side on this thread. They/we have been a bit louder, particularly at attempts to portray brexit voters as thick racists. But my point is, there was a side for you to join, allies to make. Have a think why that hasn't happened. Have a think why several people who actually voted remain have been giving you stick. Again, the pub analogy: somebody walks in, plonks themselves down and loudly announces 'you are all thick racists, I hate you'. How does that play out?


----------



## paolo (Mar 11, 2018)

This was posted?

“'Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''”

It was about a year ago or two when mud was being slung. We managed to bore ourselves into civilised discussion.

That’s the theme now. I hope. No tropes.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2018)

paolo said:


> This was posted?
> 
> “'Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''”
> 
> ...


no, a week ago.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 11, 2018)

A week is a long time in the Politics forum...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Ok, well.  I asked what you hoped to achieve and I have my non-answer.  I don’t think there’s anything else to discuss except in the unlikely chance you actually take a position or stance on something, or ask a meaningful question or, well, engage with anything.  In the meantime, I have nothing further to say.  I can only wait for the point that this diversion is done and we can all start arguing properly with each other again.


Thank goodness for that.
Argue 'properly' away, and don't assign to me so much power.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Amazing stuff here - he invents a cohort then attacks someone for his invention and attributes it to them. Truly astonishing performance.



How come you are referring to me as 'he'?
Yesterday you referred to me as 'it'.
Mind you dehumanisation is a good tactic for a Nazi to use.
Truly astonishing actually.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> If you'd bother to read the first 175 pages you'd discover that before you arrived that was exactly what was happening. Then you came along and posted this:
> 
> ''Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''
> 
> ...


Thank you for the welcome. I was never going to read back over 170 pages going back nearly two years though.
And you are right insulting is a two way street, but personal insulting of individuals here has not been initiated by me, but I will certainly give it back, and I am persistent.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> No, not me.


Apologies.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

paolo said:


> This was posted?
> 
> “'Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''”
> 
> ...



There was a time a couple of years ago when mud was being slung on here?
And now it has stopped and it is civilised?
Wow.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How come you are referring to me as 'he'?
> Yesterday you referred to me as 'it'.
> Mind you dehumanisation is a good tactic for a Nazi to use.
> Truly astonishing actually.


No, not me. Yet again you have the wrong poster.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 11, 2018)

Great effort though - call someone a nazi and get the wrong person.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> No, not me. Yet again you have the wrong poster.


You are absolutely right, it was banhof strasse who referred to me as 'it'.
I owe you many apologies for suggesting it was you, clearly you have no need to accept my apology, but what I wrote was absolutely wrong and totally incorrect.
I regret mixing you up with banhof strasse, and it is a humbling lesson for me.
I will try to improve.
I am sorry.


----------



## andysays (Mar 11, 2018)

At least Vince Cable agrees with you, philosophical 

Brexit: Older Leave voters nostalgic for 'white' Britain, says Cable


> Too many older people who voted for Brexit were "driven by nostalgia" for a world where "faces were white," Sir Vince Cable has said. The Lib Dem leader said the votes of the older generation had "crushed the hopes and aspirations of young people for years to come."





> The Lib Dem leader went to say too many older voters were driven by "nostalgia for a world where passports were blue, faces were white and the map was coloured imperial pink. And it was their votes on one wet day in June which crushed the hopes and aspirations of young people for years to come," he said.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> At least Vince Cable agrees with you, philosophical
> 
> Brexit: Older Leave voters nostalgic for 'white' Britain, says Cable


He is rather loose with his terms, and I wouldn't trust his sincerity in these matters myself. For a start I have encountered 'younger people' (I wonder where he draws the line) who express unashamed racist views, and general hatred of foreigners which influenced their vote one wet day in June 2016.
If he is trying to make a point with the 'one wet day' comment it might be about how a moment in time can imprison us all, and it might be about brexit being forever, yet Parliamentary Elections are for a limited term.
I don't trust him and his party for turning education into a business instead of considering whether education is actually a human right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think you misunderstand me, I believe your own brief interventions are a search for approval.
> If I sought approval here I would go about things differently


I'm not seeking approval


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> He is rather loose with his terms, and I wouldn't trust his sincerity in these matters myself. For a start I have encountered 'younger people' (I wonder where he draws the line) who express unashamed racist views, and general hatred of foreigners which influenced their vote one wet day in June 2016.


  23 june 2016 was not a wet day, certainly not in london.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not seeking approval


Then I accept my belief is mistaken. There must be some other mysterious reason.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> 23 june 2016 was not a wet day, certainly not in london.


Maybe somewhere else then.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> At least Vince Cable agrees with you, philosophical
> 
> Brexit: Older Leave voters nostalgic for 'white' Britain, says Cable


Oh yes, the days when the majority of these old racists wanted to stay in the common market, those were the days.


----------



## rekil (Mar 11, 2018)

I'm not sure it's very big or clever for Cable to accuse anyone of racism since he still has questions to answer about the hanging of black people.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2018)

Normandy advert to seduce UK firms after Brexit banned


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> He is rather loose with his terms, and I wouldn't trust his sincerity in these matters myself. For a start I have encountered 'younger people' (I wonder where he draws the line) who express unashamed racist views, and general hatred of foreigners which influenced their vote one wet day in June 2016.



Yo Bro' - I voted remain- a pragamtic through my gritted yellowed teeth remain vote, be clear on that - and let me just say that you are doing your corner no fucking favours with this latest cacalcade of toss.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Yo Bro' - I voted remain- a pragamtic through my gritted yellowed teeth remain vote, be clear on that - and let me just say that you are doing your corner no fucking favours with this latest cacalcade of toss.


I don't have a corner, just me.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> At least Vince Cable agrees with you, philosophical
> 
> Brexit: Older Leave voters nostalgic for 'white' Britain, says Cable


I was under the impression that most of the immigration from the EU is white.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> 23 june 2016 was not a wet day, certainly not in london.


Apparently heavy showers and flash flooding in parts of London and South East around tea time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Apparently heavy showers and flash flooding in parts of London and South East around tea time.


On a mostly dry day doesn't have quite the same ring


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

paolo said:


> This was posted?
> 
> “'Sorry, late to this thread and my first post. Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?''”
> 
> ...


The small fact that a third of the ethnic minority's vote was for Brexit is just one of things that should be skated over.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> On a mostly dry day doesn't have quite the same ring


What is it with weather and racism ?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> I was under the impression that most of the immigration from the EU is white.



In fairness, there were definitely some leavers who struggled with that nuance. A small minority, it should be stressed, but a real one I think.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2018)

It was bin day st mary's ward kettering. Thursday. Maybe psephologists can pore over the significance of that. You've got dressed to take the bins round the front, its a nice day for walking and votin'.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Obviously the older voters in 'white Britain in 1975 were a different kettle of fish



andysays said:


> At least Vince Cable agrees with you, philosophical
> 
> Brexit: Older Leave voters nostalgic for 'white' Britain, says Cable


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Obviously the older voters in 'white Britain in 1975 were a different kettle of fish
> View attachment 129831



Well, yes, obviously. But why?


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Well, yes, obviously. But why?


Good question . What do you think?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The small fact that a third of the ethnic minority's vote was for Brexit is just one of things that should be skated over.


Not at all.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Good question . What do you think?



I really don't know. But what I would say is that the comparison doesn't directly tell us anything about the role of race and immigration as voting issues in 2016 because, for reasons of context, these were not prominent in the 1975 debate.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I really don't know. But what I would say is that the comparison doesn't directly tell us anything about the role of race and immigration as voting issues in 2016 because, for reasons of context, these were not prominent in the 1975 debate.


Immigration in that period was from the Commonwealth and a large percentage were non white.EU immigration to Britain didn't really take off until the mid 2000s.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 11, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Immigration in that period was from the Commonwealth and a large percentage were non white.EU immigration to Britain didn't really take off until the mid 2000s.



Yes, precisely.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes, precisely.


I found this , and only this   from a study looking at demographic trends in both referendum:
"Based on views towards immigration – specifically, whether it was important or not for the government to repatriate immigrants – support for membership stood at 68 per cent of those for whom this was important, 73 per cent amongst those who were not sure and 74 per cent of those who said it was not important."
Clearly possible to be in favour of immigration controls and be a remainer in 1975.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 12, 2018)

Cable rows back on his thinly veiled comments about old racists 
Vince Cable denies calling Brexit supporters racist


----------



## Wilf (Mar 12, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Cable rows back on his thinly veiled comments about old racists
> Vince Cable denies calling Brexit supporters racist


'The Old Racists', sounds like a new sitcom, loosely based on the correspondence of Kingsley Amis and Philip Larkin.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 12, 2018)

Copied and pasted for anybody interested.

Cliff Taylor: After Brexit – the danger of a ‘Boris Border’


----------



## Badgers (Mar 12, 2018)

Wilf said:


> 'The Old Racists', sounds like a new sitcom, loosely based on the correspondence of Kingsley Amis and Philip Larkin.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 12, 2018)

I wonder how many people voted remain attracted by  the EU's aggressive pushing of the hardest of borders around the white homeland - _keep Rhodesia white_ style. This after all is a strong part of the contemporaries european far-rights turn to welfare chauvinism (i.e strong borders to better protect and expand social provisions for _natives)_?


----------



## Hollis (Mar 12, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Obviously the older voters in 'white Britain in 1975 were a different kettle of fish
> View attachment 129831



They probably were a very different kettle of fish - for a start they'd have lived through one, if not two world and european wars.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 12, 2018)

Hollis said:


> They probably were a very different kettle of fish - for a start they'd have lived through one, if not two world and european wars.


Yes you are right but the referendum was about staying in  a trade agreement.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder how many people voted remain attracted by  the EU's aggressive pushing of the hardest of borders around the white homeland - _keep Rhodesia white_ style. This after all is a strong part of the contemporaries european far-rights turn to welfare chauvinism (i.e strong borders to better protect and expand social provisions for _natives)_?


Its a point worth discussing as EU nationals recieve  an easier time re immigration than workers from the majority black and asian Commonwealth


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

I think this is quite a good article on immigration trends , public opinion and the EU. Especially as it was written the year before the referendum. Also helps to answer the issue why immigration despite the emergence of the NF wasn't such an issue in 1975.
Immigration and Euroscepticism: the rising storm


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> I think this is quite a good article on immigration trends , public opinion and the EU. Especially as it was written the year before the referendum. Also helps to answer the issue why immigration despite the emergence of the NF wasn't such an issue in 1975.
> Immigration and Euroscepticism: the rising storm


by 1975 the nf had of course been around for 8 years


----------



## sealion (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> by 1975 the nf had of course been around for 8 years


The nf back then were more anti irish iirc. They often marched around Walworth / Bermondsey shouting anti irish shit. My dad and his mates from work, the pub and Millwall would go and get stuck into them. By the late seventies they were aiming there rage more and more at black and asian people.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> by 1975 the nf had of course been around for 8 years


Emergence of them as having some impact as a political force .


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Emergence of them as having some impact as a political force .


in march 1968 andrew fountaine picked up 1,400 votes - 5.6% of the total - when he stood in acton. i'd say that's making some impact as a political force for a young and marginal party.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

not to mention fairly uncritical coverage in the guardian  times, e.g.

times 24/4/1968


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

The NF growth was from 1972 onwards,starting with the Ugandan Asian protests. The big West Brom vote and the election of the Blackburn councillors came a bit later.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The NF growth was from 1972 onwards,starting with the Ugandan Asian protests. The big West Brom vote and the election of the Blackburn councillors came a bit later.


there's this rather pathetic report from july 1969


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 13, 2018)

I was slightly narked by the time of the 1975 referendum it being a few months before my 18th birthday and I was itching to take part in the democratic process, the whole thing was a lot lower key than the one last year.
I seem to remember the turnout in the small Cheshire town where I grew up was pitiful, I imagine it was a lot more last year.
Immigration from Europe wasn't an issue then since there were only 9 countries in the EU then and most of them were better off than us,  we were the East Europeans then going off to work in Germany.
People voted for Leave for all sorts of reasons but I think a lot of those who did, did so citing immigration but it goes deeper than simple racism, I think a major reason was economic and social insecurity, due to the lack of decent jobs, opportunities and housing, the perception that they were being squeezed out in their own country. Mass immigration is far and away the most visible effect of the EU on ordinary citizens and thus the one they think about the most and it gives people someone and something to blame.
Putting the blame where it really lies on globalisation and technical advancement is no good since that means you have to accept you can't actually do anything about it, Whereas you can vote to stop immigrants coming in in the belief that it will make things better. It won't and will probably end up making things worse but easy (if false) solutions to complex problems always sell well.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there's this rather pathetic report from july 1969
> View attachment 129938


how do you get the back issue images?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> how do you get the back issue images?


Work has access to times digital archive


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Work has access to times digital archive


have you got access to the Telegraph?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 13, 2018)

I'm currently on the red telephone to the relevant authorities discussing Pickman's model 's distribution of this paid-for subscription content on the publick internet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm currently on the red telephone to the relevant authorities discussing Pickman's model 's distribution of this paid-for subscription content on the publick internet.


Yeh no surprise I always know knew you were a tout


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> have you got access to the Telegraph?


Not so much


----------



## Hollis (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Yes you are right but the referendum was about staying in  a trade agreement.



I think you're missing the point.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Hollis said:


> I think you're missing the point.


Ok what point do you think I'm missing


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not so much


See if you can get the front page report on the NUS conference re the Harrington Out campaign prob 1984/5 please


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> See if you can get the front page report on the NUS conference re the Harrington Out campaign prob 1984/5 please


I'll see what I can do tomorrow


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll see what I can do tomorrow


You're a good man .Thanks


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 13, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> You're a good man .Thanks


don't have it. i had a look on the databases and e-resources lists, we've got it from 2000: but when i'm next up the british library i'll dig you out a copy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 14, 2018)

Red Brexiters wise up – a housing crash won’t bring us socialism  | Zoe Williams

peak guardian for the opening lines:
Alexa, what is red Brexit?” tweeted Aaron Bastani, the founder of the exhilarating Novara Media

hehe


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Mar 15, 2018)

Consolation for Britons: Russian secret service settles in London (Dutch)



> The decision by Unilever to choose Rotterdam over London is a sensitive blow to the United Kingdom. Yet the same day there is still comfort: the Russian secret service FSB will move the head office to the British capital.
> 
> "Many of our activities take place in Great Britain," says FSB director Alexander Bortnikov. "For us, London was therefore a logical choice."
> 
> British Prime Minister Theresa May is delighted: "The arrival of the FSB shows that the Brexit organizations do not scare away from Great Britain. This provides an enormous amount of extra jobs in the criminal investigation and in the medical sector. "


----------



## kabbes (Mar 15, 2018)

The official line is that Unilever’s decision is nothing to do with Brexit.  Officially.


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

Back to the Irish border. HoC committee (chaired by a Brexiteer) finds that - surprise surprise - there is no existing technological solution to enable a magic invisible border. 

No progress in finding solution to Brexit border problem - News from Parliament


----------



## philosophical (Mar 16, 2018)

Winot said:


> Back to the Irish border. HoC committee (chaired by a Brexiteer) finds that - surprise surprise - there is no existing technological solution to enable a magic invisible border.
> 
> No progress in finding solution to Brexit border problem - News from Parliament


The report says brexit hinges on finding a border solution, at least unless there is a no deal cliff edge brexit. The border issue encapsulates so much that is a problem regarding what brexiters have done.
A no deal brexit will damage Ireland and the Irish, which matters nothing to brexiters who disregarded and were distainful towards the Irish issue when they voted.
The brexit voters seem to think they can blag it, or that it is somebody else's problem. The attitude expressed in the brexit vote is resonant of centuries of anti Irish sentiment.
To counteract that, brexiters could try to suggest a solution to the nightmare they voted for. The EU is gone, the pressing problem is the border they voted to take back control of.


----------



## sealion (Mar 16, 2018)

Right on cue


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

Anyway it's all OK because according to Chris Grayling those borders we were going to take back control of after Brexit aren't going to appear *anywhere*.

Grayling: No Brexit lorry checks at Dover


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 16, 2018)

Winot said:


> Anyway it's all OK because according to Chris Grayling those borders we were going to take back control of after Brexit aren't going to appear *anywhere*.
> 
> Grayling: No Brexit lorry checks at Dover


And here in lies the fundamental problem facing the government it doesn't really want to leave the EU but stay in and just ignore all the stuff it doesn't like.


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> And here in lies the fundamental problem facing the government it doesn't really want to leave the EU but stay in and just ignore all the stuff it doesn't like.



As someone said the other day (Luxembourg PM?) - the UK was in the EU for years but wanted loads of opt-outs; now it wants to leave but have loads of opt-ins.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The attitude expressed in the brexit vote is resonant of centuries of anti Irish sentiment.



These days, I don't know about that. I think your average remainer/brexiter aren't particularly bothered about Ireland. I doubt it was first and foremost on their minds when casting the vote. The referendum was about the UK leaving the EU, not whether the peace process could be put in jeopardy.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

sealion said:


> Right on cue


Hopefully not the same Ireland that voted against the Lisbon Treaty


----------



## philosophical (Mar 16, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> These days, I don't know about that. I think your average remainer/brexiter aren't particularly bothered about Ireland. I doubt it was first and foremost on their minds when casting the vote. The referendum was about the UK leaving the EU, not whether the peace process could be put in jeopardy.


Yet the problem with the Irish border is turning out to be something brexiters ought to have had front and centre of their thinking, because without a solution brexiters are not going to get brexit.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Hopefully not the same Ireland that voted against the Lisbon Treaty



Still, keep running referendum's until the 'right' result is achieved!


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yet the problem with the Irish border is turning out to be something brexiters ought to have had front and centre of their thinking, because without a solution brexiters are not going to get brexit.



But _why_ should the average British voter care about Ireland's future? I assuming they are concerned about the future of the UK and anything else is very secondary.


----------



## sealion (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Hopefully not the same Ireland that voted against the Lisbon Treaty


Concessions got them there in the end. The government want concessions on brexit but are laughed at by the usual suspects.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 16, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> But _why_ should the average British voter care about Ireland's future? I assuming they are concerned about the future of the UK and anything else is very secondary.


The UK as an institution are party to an international agreement regarding Ireland, so if they care about the future of the UK they should be concerned about the UK living up to the agreement they signed.


----------



## krtek a houby (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The UK as an institution are party to an international agreement regarding Ireland, so if they care about the future of the UK they should be concerned about the UK living up to the agreement they signed.



Ah, but that's the UK govt as opposed to the average voter who went out (rightly or wrongly) and cast their vote on June 23rd. I'm pretty sure that Ireland,her borders and her turbulent relationship with Britain were far, far from voters thoughts.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 16, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Ah, but that's the UK govt as opposed to the average voter who went out (rightly or wrongly) and cast their vote on June 23rd. I'm pretty sure that Ireland,her borders and her turbulent relationship with Britain were far, far from voters thoughts.


Indeed, implicit in somebody asking you for your preference in a decision is the understanding that once you have expressed your preference, the person asking has a way of making it workable.  Otherwise, it's a false choice.  It's pure pass-agg, in fact.  

The UK government asked the UK people whether they would prefer to be in or out of the EU.  If the UK government didn't have a way of making one of those options workable in practice, they shouldn't have asked the question.  You can't blame people for stating a preference when they are asked for one, based on whatever factors are important to them at the time.


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If the UK government didn't have a way of making one of those options workable in practice, they shouldn't have asked the question.



Quite.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Indeed, implicit in somebody asking you for your preference in a decision is the understanding that once you have expressed your preference, the person asking has a way of making it workable.  Otherwise, it's a false choice.  It's pure pass-agg, in fact.
> 
> The UK government asked the UK people whether they would prefer to be in or out of the EU.  If the UK government didn't have a way of making one of those options workable in practice, they shouldn't have asked the question.  You can't blame people for stating a preference when they are asked for one, based on whatever factors are important to them at the time.


So there shouldnt have been a referendum because its difficult to enact one of the options?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> So there shouldnt have been a referendum because its difficult to enact one of the options?



Or maybe the groundwork on what exactly leaving the EU would entail and what would need to happen for it to be workable should have been done before any referendum, not after it or (as the current plan seems to be) never.

The referendum was called on the assumption that there was only one possible outcome. This is not a sensible or a democratic way to behave.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The referendum was called on the assumption that there was only one possible outcome. This is not a sensible or a democratic way to behave.



And the pig-fucker who called it walked away the day it went wrong for him. Ham-faced prick needs all his and his family's assets sequestering.


----------



## andysays (Mar 16, 2018)

Why is the EU like the Hotel California?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> Why is the EU like the Hotel California?



Warm smell of colitas?


----------



## andysays (Mar 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Warm smell of colitas?


No, silly, because you can vote 'Out' any time you want, but you can never Leave, according to some on this thread.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 16, 2018)

I watched question time last night, and one feature of the discussion was nitty gritty practicalities. There was mention in relation to Dover quite a lot. Would a small increase in checks lead to a 29 mile lorry tailback, the road transport to Manston to stack lorries, road conditions generally, the notion of dealing with it by placing a string of portaloos along the M20, the specific checks needed on agricultural products and goods, the lack of, or impracticalities of electronic infrastructure either in Dover or Ireland.
What struck me was that local people were concerned by the practicalities.
It may be that each of those practicalities can be overcome, but it takes a plan and investment and infrastructure, and so far there simply isn't one.
If brexit means control of the UK borders then now that the EU is history for the UK, how in practical details will the UK demonstrate that control? And if any practical suggestions are put forward what will be the cost in financial and political terms, and in everyday life?
The question was put to the country without any of those details outlined, yet the country voted for it anyway and the UK is where it is. It won't change the present reality to look back and say it shouldn't have been framed the way it was, the present reality is to seemingly do the impossible.
Brexiters are running out of time to get a grip.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, silly, because you can vote 'Out' any time you want, but you can never Leave, according to some on this thread.


also no matter how you stab it with your steelen knives, you just can't kill the beast


----------



## andysays (Mar 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> also no matter how you stab it with your steelen knives, you just can't kill the beast


That as well, obviously


----------



## kabbes (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> So there shouldnt have been a referendum because its difficult to enact one of the options?


You tell me.  Is there a meaningful pathway to leaving the EU or not?  If not, why the fuck were we asked the question?  If so, why is it the voter's fault if the government fuck up that pathway?


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ... the UK living up to the agreement they signed.



That would pretty much be a first.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Or maybe the groundwork on what exactly leaving the EU would entail and what would need to happen for it to be workable should have been done before any referendum, not after it or (as the current plan seems to be) never.
> 
> The referendum was called on the assumption that there was only one possible outcome. This is not a sensible or a democratic way to behave.


Wouldnt that entail showing the potential hand youd have even before the necessary negotiations began? What makes you think that Cameron thought that there was only one potential outcome?


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You tell me.  Is there a meaningful pathway to leaving the EU or not?  If not, why the fuck were we asked the question?  If so, why is it the voter's fault if the government fuck up that pathway?


I was asking you the question as thats what I thought your post implied.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> I was asking you the question as thats what I thought your post implied.


And now what do you think?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> the EU is history for the UK




when did we leave?


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> And now what do you think?


i think that the complexity of the negotiations and the stance of the EU over Ireland reinforces the view of how monolithic the EU has become.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 16, 2018)

spain are going to do their best to bagsy the rock as well. Presumably with the EU's blessing, like the crushing of catalonia


----------



## Supine (Mar 16, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yet the problem with the Irish border is turning out to be something brexiters ought to have had front and centre of their thinking, because without a solution brexiters are not going to get brexit.



Are you still banging on about this?

Perhaps the establishment are using 'no border' as away of minimising brexit as it will force regulatory alignment.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> spain are going to do their best to bagsy the rock as well. Presumably with the EU's blessing, like the crushing of catalonia


no more red telephone boxes


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Wouldnt that entail showing the potential hand youd have even before the necessary negotiations began? What makes you think that Cameron thought that there was only one potential outcome?



The type of discussions we are having now (about the Irish border for example) could and should have been had before the referendum. Outlining the options (in/out SM; in/out CU) and the implications wouldn’t have revealed the UK’s hand. It would however have forced politicians to be straight with the public about the trade-offs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> no more red telephone boxes


They're being removed on a daily basis


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 16, 2018)

Winot said:


> The type of discussions we are having now (about the Irish border for example) could and should have been had before the referendum. Outlining the options (in/out SM; in/out CU) and the implications wouldn’t have revealed the UK’s hand. It would however have forced politicians to be straight with the public about the trade-offs.


So there should have been more questions on the referendum voting paper?


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 16, 2018)

Winot said:


> The type of discussions we are having now (about the Irish border for example) could and should have been had before the referendum. Outlining the options (in/out SM; in/out CU) and the implications wouldn’t have revealed the UK’s hand. It would however have forced politicians to be straight with the public about the trade-offs.


It should have been but wasn't because Cameron didn't believe Leave would win, all this crap is because he wanted to stop his own backbenchers from stabbing him in the back, it descends further into chaos every day  because Mayhem doesn't have the will or the strength to control her own party and puts preserving Tory Party unity above all else.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> What makes you think that Cameron thought that there was only one potential outcome?



The fact he gambled his political career on it.


----------



## Winot (Mar 16, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> So there should have been more questions on the referendum voting paper?



I think referendums - if they are held - only really work with a simple yes/no question.

There are various ways in which the option of leaving the EU could have been presented to the people. The first would have been for a political party to have it in its manifesto and win a GE on that ticket. That would have been my preference.

Another option would be for the two sides of the debate (there were official organisations remember) to have each been required to present a manifesto for what happened after the vote. Obviously it wouldn't work like a parliamentary party manifesto, and I'm not sure how it could have been made binding, but it would at least have shone a light on the post-Brexit scenarios and forced engagement with them.

A better alternative (if you were going to have a referendum) would be to make clear from the outset that there would be two. The first would be to require the Government to set up a Royal Commission (or something) to come back in a fixed time period with a plan for leaving the EU. Then a second referendum would vote on whether to implement that plan - yes or no.

I'm sure that holes can be picked in this - it's just a few ideas off the top of my head.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Indeed, implicit in somebody asking you for your preference in a decision is the understanding that once you have expressed your preference, the person asking has a way of making it workable.  Otherwise, it's a false choice.  It's pure pass-agg, in fact.
> 
> The UK government asked the UK people whether they would prefer to be in or out of the EU.  If the UK government didn't have a way of making one of those options workable in practice, they shouldn't have asked the question.  You can't blame people for stating a preference when they are asked for one, based on whatever factors are important to them at the time.


Sounds like an argument for having a second referendum. Voters stated preference for an option. Turns out that option is unworkable. Not voters' fault they were given a false choice. Therefore say sorry to them and offer a chance to vote again, based on workable options.


----------



## andysays (Mar 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for having a second referendum. Voters stated preference for an option. *Turns out that option is unworkable*. Not voters' fault they were given a false choice. Therefore say sorry to them and offer a chance to vote again, based on workable options.



The fact that the team currently tasked with sorting it out are making a right pig's ear of it doesn't mean it is unworkable.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> The fact that the team currently tasked with sorting it out are making a right pig's ear of it doesn't mean it is unworkable.


And therefore what?


----------



## andysays (Mar 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> And therefore what?



And therefore your assertion that it's unworkable is typical teuchter bollocks


----------



## teuchter (Mar 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> And therefore your assertion that it's unworkable is typical teuchter bollocks


I wasn't asserting it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> And therefore your assertion that it's unworkable is typical teuchter bollocks


How is it fixed?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> The fact that the team currently tasked with sorting it out are making a right pig's ear of it doesn't mean it is unworkable.


I'm hard put to see how the shower in government could avoid making a right pig's ear of it when they make a right pig's ear of everything else


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Another option would be for the two sides of the debate (there were official organisations remember) to have each been required to present a manifesto for what happened after the vote.



dunno really.

I don't think there is / was a single vision for the outcome either way.  Lexit or little england racist brexit?  EU as protectors of workers rights or EU for more neoliberalism?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for having a second referendum. Voters stated preference for an option. Turns out that option is unworkable. Not voters' fault they were given a false choice. Therefore say sorry to them and offer a chance to vote again, based on workable options.


This is one possibility.  I’m certainly not against the idea of a second referendum, although if we’re going to have one, we need to make sure this time it’s nailed on what is being voted for, because there is no point just having another one about a principle.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is one possibility.  I’m certainly not against the idea of a second referendum, although if we’re going to have one, we need to make sure this time it’s nailed on what is being voted for, because there is no point just having another one about a principle.


The problem with a second referendum is going to be what options are on the slip, Will it be on the terms of the deal? Any deal has to be negotiated, neither the EU nor the UK government get to dictate the terms of the deal, it will have to be agreed between them so what will the alternative be? Accept the deal or crash out with no deal? Accept the deal or stay in? (for which the UK will need the agreement of all other member states)
Accept the deal or ask to stay in temporarily whilst we try and get another one and subject that to a third referendum?  
I was opposed to the first referendum on the grounds that it was a blatantly cynical effort by one man to rally his party, I'm opposed to a second on the grounds it will just stir more shit that can't be predicted or controlled.
We need the Govt to stop messing around, stop talking through its arse about red lines, accept it won't get everything it wants (or that the public want for that matter) and negotiate seriously. 
The Labour Party needs to start taking this seriously and get a position it can rally around, I know sitting on the sidelines watching the Tories eat each other is fun but the country needs leadership from somewhere and we aren't getting it from the shower in Downing St.
It would have been better if we weren't in this position in the first place but here we are so let's try and make the best of it.


----------



## Winot (Mar 17, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno really.
> 
> I don't think there is / was a single vision for the outcome either way.  Lexit or little england racist brexit?  EU as protectors of workers rights or EU for more neoliberalism?



I think you’ve just put your finger on why the referendum was a bad idea.


----------



## Pwerus (Mar 17, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I was opposed to the first referendum on the grounds that it was a blatantly cynical effort by one man to rally his party, I'm opposed to a second on the grounds it will just stir more shit that can't be predicted or controlled.
> 
> The Labour Party needs to start taking this seriously and get a position it can rally around, I know sitting on the sidelines watching the Tories eat each other is fun but the country needs leadership from somewhere and we aren't getting it from the shower in Downing St.
> It would have been better if we weren't in this position in the first place but here we are so let's try and make the best of it.



I feel like the Labour Party has been less resistant to Brexit than the conservatives. Knowing their stances, it's hard to imagine Labour being more pro-Brexit than the conservatives, but I refuse to believe that the conservatives can possibly make the same mistakes of publicly announcing what deals they'll get from the EU and what the EU wants without actually checking with them first. It's got to be a deliberate attempt to prevent Brexit, particularly considering David Cameron only promised it in his last general election because he was scared of how UKIP was growing, and wanted to steal support. Meanwhile Corbyn has taken his "I didn't want it, but that ship has sailed, so might as well get it over with" stance.


----------



## billbond (Mar 18, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is one possibility.  I’m certainly not against the idea of a second referendum, although if we’re going to have one, we need to make sure this time it’s nailed on what is being voted for, because there is no point just having another one about a principle.



And if that referendum(it wont happen) result comes out to stay
Then another should take place
Brexiters will be out the next day protesting like the EU lovers did
Best of 3................and on and on


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> And if that referendum(it wont happen) result comes out to stay
> Then another should take place
> Brexiters will be out the next day protesting like the EU lovers did
> Best of 3................and on and on


Perhaps the easiest way to resolve this is the way the government has chosen which is to do fuck all to prepare for it and then go oh noes we can't leave cos we've not done the prep


----------



## billbond (Mar 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps the easiest way to resolve this is the way the government has chosen which is to do fuck all to prepare for it and then go oh noes we can't leave cos we've not done the prep



Terrible the way it has been handled
Many people on other sites ive looked on are saying "thank god for this Russia "incident" at least its put  this constant talk of Brexit  on the the side"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> Terrible the way it has been handled
> Many people on other sites ive looked on are saying "thank god for this Russia "incident" at least its put  this constant talk of Brexit  on the the side"


Yeh thank god for nerve gas


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> "thank god for this Russia "incident" at least its put this constant talk of Brexit  on the the side"



Does this amount to a very basic level of Tory competence**? 

(**With Putin's assistance obvs -- I'm no conspiraloon  )


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 19, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The problem with a second referendum is going to be what options are on the slip, Will it be on the terms of the deal? Any deal has to be negotiated, neither the EU nor the UK government get to dictate the terms of the deal, it will have to be agreed between them so what will the alternative be? Accept the deal or crash out with no deal? Accept the deal or stay in? (for which the UK will need the agreement of all other member states)


By the same token, if brexit were to somehow be overturned by any type of second ref, brexit voters would be justified to argue for having a referendum for every decision the EU subsequently makes on its impending road to federalism. What happens then, when (and in all likely hood it would happen) the UK votes to reject each of the steps along that road?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 19, 2018)




----------



## agricola (Mar 19, 2018)

On a very quick read of the transition agreement it looks like we have surrendered.


----------



## Gromit (Mar 19, 2018)

I’ve held onto the slim hope Brexit might fall apart and not happen. 

This transition agreement has destroyed that hope. Oh shit the fucking idiots are really going to do this!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)

agricola said:


> On a very quick read of the transition agreement it looks like we have surrendered.


we are now the cheese-eating surrender monkeys of europe


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)




----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 19, 2018)

agricola said:


> On a very quick read of the *transition agreement***** it looks like we have surrendered.



**BBC report on this

Text of actual draft agreement (PDF)


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 19, 2018)

The above links are just for peoples' easy reference -- I haven't had time to look at the detail ....


----------



## philosophical (Mar 19, 2018)

The DUP won't accept the 'backstop' suggestion.


----------



## andysays (Mar 19, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The DUP won't accept the 'backstop' suggestion.


Oh well, if the DUP won't accept it, we'd better just accept that we'll have to stay in  the EU then...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Oh well, if the DUP won't accept it, we'd better just accept that we'll have to stay in  the EU then...


Don't you see?  A crucial part of the narrative is that there is no possible solution to the NI border issue.  Any mooted solution must therefore by definition be not possible.  QED.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for having a second referendum. Voters stated preference for an option. Turns out that option is unworkable. Not voters' fault they were given a false choice. Therefore say sorry to them and offer a chance to vote again, based on workable options.


Second referendum, get the house of Lords to intervene, take out a court case, get the MPs to stop it. Hallmarks of democrats after a referendum result they didnt like.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 19, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Don't you see?  A crucial part of the narrative is that there is no possible solution to the NI border issue.  Any mooted solution must therefore by definition be not possible.  QED.


I would say there are 'solutions', but they would come at a very high price.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 19, 2018)

one small step...
UK and EU agree Brexit transition terms


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 19, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I would say there are 'solutions', but they would come at a very high price.


A lot more than £100,000,000 per DUP vote this time, most likely.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 19, 2018)

Take back control.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 19, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> one small step...
> UK and EU agree Brexit transition terms




I linked to that ahead of you, but never mind


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 19, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Second referendum



I'm a remainer, but I can't think of anything that I'd less like than a second referendum -- if you want to provoke an even bigger majority for Brexit, make voters feel insulted by imposing, I mean "offering", a new referendum ...


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 19, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm a remainer, but I can't think of anything that I'd less like than a second referendum -- if you want to provoke an even bigger majority for Brexit, make voters feel insulted by imposing, I mean "offering", a new referendum ...



A new election would be more like it.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> A new election would be more like it.


If we had another election what do you think the result would be?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 19, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> If we had another election what do you think the result would be?



Labour win, which is why I'm not expecting one until 2022.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 19, 2018)

Maybe we should have an erection instead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm a remainer, but I can't think of anything that I'd less like than a second referendum -- if you want to provoke an even bigger majority for Brexit, make voters feel insulted by imposing, I mean "offering", a new referendum ...


that's why one won't be offered but in the next nine months it will become clear that the country is woefully ill-prepared to leave and that therefore - on the basis that a narrow majority in a vote held two years ago - it is simpler to remain. the government will say 'we did our best (and that will be true) but a) it's too complex for us and b) we really can't get the staff'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Maybe we should have an erection instead.


something else may can't offer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> A new election would be more like it.


a new election with the same auld parties.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 19, 2018)

Could have had more data from other member states of the EU but nevertheless quite thought provoking 
The Euro May Already Be Lost | HuffPost


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 19, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Could have had more data from other member states of the EU but nevertheless quite thought provoking
> The Euro May Already Be Lost | HuffPost


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> View attachment 130466


That'll be about £54 now


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> View attachment 130466



Why? You have posted a picture of a mis-printed price label. What were you hoping to achieve by doing so?


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why? You have posted a picture of a mis-printed price label. What were you hoping to achieve by doing so?


I think he's trying to say that Brexit's so bad he's having to resort to buying recycled jeans


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I think he's trying to say that Brexit's so bad he's having to resort to buying recycled jeans


As long as you can laugh at people having to use charity shops, eh  

Here's a joke for you...you sound like a tory.

"aw he has to buy recycled jeans...haw haw haw"

A joke about someone having to buy cheap clothes?	Fuck off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> As long as you can laugh at people having to use charity shops, eh
> 
> Here's a joke for you...you sound like a tory.
> 
> ...


You're having a laugh if you think £60 jeans are cheap


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I think he's trying to say that Brexit's so bad he's having to resort to buying recycled jeans


Hes a george man 100%


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> As long as you can laugh at people having to use charity shops, eh
> 
> Here's a joke for you...you sound like a tory.
> 
> ...


Tory lol. 
I'm well aquainted with charity shops and I've never seen a pair of baked beans for 50 odd quid in one.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 20, 2018)

Hammered out a great transition deal there.


'consulted'...great job


----------



## Rob Ray (Mar 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Could have had more data from other member states of the EU but nevertheless quite thought provoking
> The Euro May Already Be Lost | HuffPost



Interesting, though I suspect they underestimate the elites' ability to pull together tighter political unions in spite of public mood. The amount of national integration achieved within the Eurozone is already formidable.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 20, 2018)

I can't be bothered to look into this latest deal in any detail but I assume it's basically just kicking all the real issues down the line a bit, to the end of the transition period, rather than actually resolving any of them?

In which case an indefinite period of transitional purgatory seems the likely outcome. By the time we're done transitioning the EU will probably be crumbling anyway.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 20, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Interesting, though I suspect they underestimate the elites' ability to pull together tighter political unions in spite of public mood. The amount of national integration achieved within the Eurozone is already formidable.



They're also overstating the negativity of the public mood. For example, by highlighting that not far from half of Dutch voters would support a referendum on the EU, but not mentioning that only 18% would actually vote out, per the same survey.

There are complex issues to with attitudes towards the EU on the continent. The rising popularity of the far-right can't be denied. But there's a long way to go before it reaches anything like a tipping-point.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> They're also overstating the negativity of the public mood. For example, by highlighting that not far from half of Dutch voters would support a referendum on the EU, but not mentioning that only 18% would actually vote out, per the same survey.
> 
> There are complex issues to with attitudes towards the EU on the continent. The rising popularity of the far-right can't be denied. But there's a long way to go before it reaches anything like a tipping-point.



The thing about tipping points is that you often don't see them coming.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 20, 2018)

The article ommitted Italy where the Euro sceptic 5 star was the largest party. Interestingly enough its young voters in Italy that are most for leaving the EU. 
The tribes of Europe :Attitudes towards the EU test
Tribes of Europe


----------



## Raheem (Mar 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The thing about tipping points is that you often don't see them coming.



Semantics, but I think tipping-points are foreseeable, by definition. You can also have unexpected step-changes, which are not.


----------



## Winot (Mar 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can't be bothered to look into this latest deal in any detail but I assume it's basically just kicking all the real issues down the line a bit, to the end of the transition period, rather than actually resolving any of them?
> 
> In which case an indefinite period of transitional purgatory seems the likely outcome. By the time we're done transitioning the EU will probably be crumbling anyway.



I haven't read the deal, but the commentary I've seen suggests that the UK has agreed to pretty much all of the EU's demands apart from the NI border which has been kicked down the road as you say.

The UK has won the great victory of being able to negotiate trade agreements with 3rd parties during the transitional period but in practice it is thought this is unlikely to happen because 3rd parties will want to know what relationship we have with the EU before they sign.

Oh and we've left the EU in charge of the fish which has annoyed Rees Mogg.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Semantics, but I think tipping-points are foreseeable, by definition. You can also have unexpected step-changes, which are not.



I think it's fair to say that the EU is not going to collapse into dust in the next week. Will it be unchanged in five years though? Too many factors in play to say one way or another. It's definitely possible to imagine a scenario where the EU project becomes unviable in that kind of time scale.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think it's fair to say that the EU is not going to collapse into dust in the next week. Will it be unchanged in five years though? Too many factors in play to say one way or another. It's definitely possible to imagine a scenario where the EU project becomes unviable in that kind of time scale.



Yes, not unimaginable, but then lots of things are not unimaginable. But there's no data to suggest Europe is on an existential Eurosceptic trend, which is what the article linked tries to make out. In terms of Eurozone reform, it's the least of the problems, really.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> I haven't read the deal, but the commentary I've seen suggests that the UK has agreed to pretty much all of the EU's demands apart from the NI border which has been kicked down the road as you say.
> 
> The UK has won the great victory of being able to negotiate trade agreements with 3rd parties during the transitional period but in practice it is thought this is unlikely to happen because 3rd parties will want to know what relationship we have with the EU before they sign.
> 
> Oh and we've left the EU in charge of the fish which has annoyed Rees Mogg.


The last 5 words justify an awful lot of pain, If he's against it, I'm pretty much for it even though I realise this is a petty attitude for me to take.
The NI border problem is one that is going to cause endless pain, whilst there are several workable solutions to it there isn't one that won't end up creating at least as many problems as it solves or won't piss people off.
Mayhem can't decide who she cares about the least despite the whole point of being PM is making decisions.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 20, 2018)

So is Brexit actually going to happen?  Has the transition agreement changed the odds in any way in your opinion?   I'm not convinced it has.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 21, 2018)

Its jigged about with the decision point pushing it further along the track and also awareness of the full negative effects of Brexit, the realisation that Britain cannot have its cake and eat it.  This moves the effective decision point further along the electoral cycle and also potentially informs it with more information about the paucity of economic benefits that can be obtained by free trade arrangements with countries outside the EU.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 21, 2018)

It looks very much like we are heading for BINO - (brexit in name only) - which is completely pointless (as it offers not one single advantage over the present arrangement) , but will still result in considerable disruption and costs. This is because it is the only politically possible outcome. 
The question is weather the pointlessness of the exercise will result enough people arguing to call the whole thing off as a complete waste of time.


----------



## bemused (Mar 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> It looks very much like we are heading for BINO - (brexit in name only) - which is completely pointless (as it offers not one single advantage over the present arrangement) , but will still result in considerable disruption and costs. This is because it is the only politically possible outcome.



Sush .... let us get our heads down and get through it. Once it's over they won't be any more referendums, UKIP is about to go bust (hahahaha) and anyone moaning about the EU once we're done will be considered a boring twat.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 21, 2018)

This week was the anniversary of Warrington and we have been reminded of the Funeral Murders.
If brexit leads to a return of that kind of thing, anybody moaning about it certainly won't be considered a boring twat by everybody.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 21, 2018)

Far be it from you to suggest that Brexit would inevitably entail something like the corporal killings of course.


----------



## andysays (Mar 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This seek was the anniversary of Warrington and we have been reminded of the Funeral Murders.
> If brexit leads to a return of that kind of thing, anybody moaning about it certainly won't be considered a boring twat by everybody.


Fuck off, you boring trolling twat


----------



## philosophical (Mar 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> Fuck off, you boring trolling twat


Are you in charge?
You are entitled to call my post boring of course.
However I am curious to know your authority to tell me to fuck off or your qualifications to sit in judgement on twattishness, as far as I can tell my post was perfectly reasonable


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 21, 2018)

Everyone here has the right, it happens all the time. 

I'd get used to it if I were you, especially if you mean to go on as you have been


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> as far as I can tell my post was perfectly reasonable




Still a massive wanker then.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 21, 2018)

Fuck is he still going, I had dropped out for at least a week !!!


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 21, 2018)

bemused said:


> Sush .... let us get our heads down and get through it. Once it's over they won't be any more referendums, UKIP is about to go bust (hahahaha) and anyone moaning about the EU once we're done will be considered a boring twat.


ukip gained its objective, a bit weird to laugh at them when they won

you know they've just all gone back to being tories, yeah?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> ukip gained its objective, a bit weird to laugh at them when they won
> 
> you know they've just all gone back to being tories, yeah?


What do you think ukip's objective is? Oblivion?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you in charge?
> You are entitled to call my post boring of course.
> However I am curious to know your authority to tell me to fuck off or your qualifications to sit in judgement on twattishness, as far as I can tell my post was perfectly reasonable


All of us sit in judgment of twattishness but we rarely find someone like you who admits the offence


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> ukip gained its objective, a bit weird to laugh at them when they won
> 
> you know they've just all gone back to being tories, yeah?


Define “they”


----------



## bemused (Mar 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> ukip gained its objective, a bit weird to laugh at them when they won



I'm laughing at them because they are going bankrupt after using a child abuse scandal to libel their political rivals.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All of us sit in judgment of twattishness but we rarely find someone like you who admits the offence


Offence?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Offence?


Indeed


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Indeed


Eggshells around Picknose who is outrage in search of a bogeyman.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Eggshells around Picknose who is outrage in search of a bogeyman.


why not give the faq a read, and i'd direct your attention specifically to the bit about not pissing about with usernames


----------



## Winot (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Eggshells around Picknose who is outrage in search of a bogeyman.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> why not give the faq a read, and i'd direct your attention specifically to the bit about not pissing about with usernames


Maintaining standards now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Maintaining standards now?


Yeh little things like not lying about other people, not putting them down as e.g. racist without evidence, not pissing about with usernames, things you might give a try sometime.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh little things like not lying about other people, not putting them down as e.g. racist without evidence, not pissing about with usernames, things you might give a try sometime.


I have not lied about anyone, and the context of the 'racist' stuff is not as you imply, otherwise carry on as I see you have taken things personally.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not lied about anyone, and the context of the 'racist' stuff is not as you imply, otherwise carry on as I see you have taken things personally.


you lied about me. repeatedly. perhaps your memory's not what it was, so i'll remind you: i made no threats to you, despite your repeated insistence such threats existed. and if you look back you'll see i called this lying about me lying at the time.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Sigh.
You denied you were making threats at a time that I felt you were making threats. Remember?
When you say lying about 'other people' you really mean you don't you?


----------



## teqniq (Mar 22, 2018)

cheapass troll


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Sigh.
> You denied you were making threats at a time that I felt you were making threats. Remember?
> When you say lying about 'other people' you really mean you don't you?


right. so despite my posts and despite other people's posts you thought you were being threatened. i suggested you bring it to the attention of the mods:


Pickman's model said:


> yeh. if you think there's been a threat of violence you should bring it to the attention of the board moderators, who i am sure will treat any report you care to make with the attention it deserves.


and i'd hardly do that if i'd been saying 'i'm on the next 21 to lewisham to wander the streets until by chance i happen upon you or someone who looks as i suspect you might'.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> right. so despite my posts and despite other people's posts you thought you were being threatened. i suggested you bring it to the attention of the mods:
> and i'd hardly do that if i'd been saying 'i'm on the next 21 to lewisham to wander the streets until by chance i happen upon you or someone who looks as i suspect you might'.


So not lying then, glad we've cleared that up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So not lying then, glad we've cleared that up.


yeh you've not been not lying.

nigel farage would have loved you, chuck, you'd have made his job so much easier in may and june of '16. there'd have been a greater plurality of leave with you on the remain battle bus.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 22, 2018)

Dutch local elections:Wilders PVV win 74 seats
Anti-Islam PVV wins city council seats in 30 municipalities


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> It looks very much like we are heading for BINO - (brexit in name only) - which is completely pointless (as it offers not one single advantage over the present arrangement) , but will still result in considerable disruption and costs. This is because it is the only politically possible outcome.


Challenging the status quo was always going to bring considerable disruption... or to view it another way, considerable disruption was always going to be the ideal time to challenge the status quo.=

and the biggest cost of Brexit so far is being paid by the toffs with their reputation. don't you see that as an advantage?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Challenging the status quo was always going to bring considerable disruption... or to view it another way, considerable disruption was always going to be the ideal time to challenge the status quo.=
> 
> and the biggest cost of Brexit so far is being paid by the toffs with their reputation. Or don't you see that as an advantage?



With BINO there will still be considerable financial and time costs to the state. For zero benefit. How that will play out in its impact on the rest of us is too diffuse to tie down - but it will probably be resources - financial and personal  - being redirected from more socially useful stuff like education and health, environmental management, health and safety,  or HMRC chasing tax evaders. Boris Johnson being thought of as even more of a twat than before is really small potatoes. 
Overall, the state will have less money than it would have done - and that shortfall will be made up the usual way - by squeezing the public sector and benefit bills.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> With BINO there will still be considerable financial and time costs to the state. For zero benefit. How that will play out in its impact on the rest of us is too diffuse to tie down - but it will probably be resources - financial and personal  - being redirected from more socially useful stuff like education and health, environmental management, health and safety,


That depends on the policies of who ever governs the country, and how they govern it after brexit. You and nobody knows that today.  It's not really a thing that just because the tories were in charge when brexit happened, that they get to keep it forever - contrary to the trope repeated on here of the "tory brexit".


Kaka Tim said:


> or HMRC chasing tax evaders.


 that's part of the status quo that needs challenging. The toffs and corporations taking the piss. Some fair legislation put in place would be a start to stop the piss taking going on...


Kaka Tim said:


> Boris Johnson being thought of as even more of a twat than before is really small potatoes.


 to reduce it to just johnsons twatishness isn't doing it justice. We had Cameron and Gideon previously. JRM making himself look a cunt every day of the week. That fact he's even in contention to take the reigns is laughable. The eton boys are scraping the barrel with every iteration . Showing themselves up in plain sight for what they are: not fit for purpose and a waste of 40k a year for a child's education.


Kaka Tim said:


> Overall, the state will have less money than it would have done - and that shortfall will be made up the usual way - by squeezing the public sector and benefit bills.


Again, that battle hasn't been fought. It depends on the policies of who ever governs the country, and how they govern it after brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> ...or HMRC chasing tax evaders...


Over 90,000 people in 05, around 30,000 now.  That's for every business, investment, tc claimant, child benefit getter, pension, dividend, company car allowance, director, actor, smuggler, worker, employer, taxi driver...everything.

Chasing tax evaders these days includes clawing back tax credits from the poorest in society.

More cuts to come.

The rich don't suffer.   HMRC don't get near them.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Over 90,000 people in 05, around 30,000 now.  That's for every business, investment, tc claimant, child benefit getter, pension, dividend, company car allowance, director, actor, smuggler, worker, employer, taxi driver...everything.
> 
> Chasing tax evaders these days includes clawing back tax credits from the poorest in society.
> 
> ...


HMRC.. the clue's in the name... intentionally armed with blunt pencils to fight brendas mates taking the piss from Caribbean islands.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> HMRC.. the clue's in the name... intentionally armed with blunt pencils to fight brendas mates taking the piss from Caribbean islands.


As to offshore stuff...leaving lets the UK keep that, there are EU laws coming into force around Jan 19 (shocked face and loud music) to start smothering that shit.   The upcoming change in tax laws was a notable thing in brexit.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> As to offshore stuff...leaving lets the UK keep that, there are EU laws coming into force around Jan 19 (shocked face and loud music) to start smothering that shit.   The upcoming change in tax laws was a notable thing in brexit.


Arise, Sir Juncker, Knight of Anti Tax Avoidance


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Arise, Sir Juncker, Knight of Anti Tax Avoidance


Praiser of nakedly rigged elections.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Arise, Sir Juncker, Knight of Anti Tax Avoidance


It was public knowledge at the time...any semi-aware brexiter knew they were voting for tax avoidance.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It was public knowledge at the time...any semi-aware brexiter knew they were voting for tax avoidance.


and not to forget the reintroduction of proxy bomb use on the streets of Derry... as stated on the ballot


----------



## Ax^ (Mar 22, 2018)

*wanders in*

anyways been watching the news today on the blue passport thingy..


does that give a good indication of the exit bring British manufacturing jobs back into the united kingdom


its cheaper to outsource it out of the country


----------



## Santino (Mar 22, 2018)

Remember when the EU stopped the Tories and Lib Dems gutting the NHS? Happier times.


----------



## Ax^ (Mar 22, 2018)

Well at least they  can now justify opening it up to US Pharma and get praise for new global trade deals

everyones a winner baby...


----------



## Smangus (Mar 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Over 90,000 people in 05, around 30,000 now.  That's for every business, investment, tc claimant, child benefit getter, pension, dividend, company car allowance, director, actor, smuggler, worker, employer, taxi driver...everything.



Its about 56,000 now, not as low as 30,000  but they have to make further 5% cuts for the next 3 (?) years. Still 40% ish lower than 10 years ago though.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 22, 2018)

Santino said:


> Remember when the EU stopped the Tories and Lib Dems gutting the NHS? Happier times.


EU didn't vote them in. EU didn't give the tories a majority the next time.  EU doesn't give the UK a tory government most of the time.  UK does that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 23, 2018)




----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 23, 2018)

Owen Smith. Did anyone wonder where he'd gone? Last we heard he was just saying some thick shit about northern ireland (he's not alone in that is he?), massaging his 20 foot cock and so on. But now he is back as the saviour of brexit. The guardian has rolled him out like a political titan, a big beast has spoken. Roared. Rather than Owen fucking Smith whose leadership challenge was a poignantly sad affair in retrospect. The ice creams that never were eaten.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> View attachment 130713


Well done. You seem to be suggesting this is why the referendum was called-at least I think that’s why you are mentioning timing.  Everyone knows it was called because the Tories thought they (REMAIN) would win.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> *wanders in*
> 
> anyways been watching the news today on the blue passport thingy..
> 
> ...


Not sure whether being smug about either cheap labour (ie people being paid shit wages) or people struggling to get work is a good look for progressives tbh.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> the Tories thought they (REMAIN) would win.


everyone thought remain would win. I thought they would, I woke up the next day and the man on the news looked like he'd just had to pass a square turd with sharpened edges.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

*wanders in*
*fucks up moment by nonsensical wording of 2nd paragraph*
*not like it wasn’t mentioned already loads of times anyway*


----------



## Ax^ (Mar 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Not sure whether being smug about either cheap labour (ie people being paid shit wages) or people struggling to get work is a good look for progressives tbh.



But that's what will be required to keep the country competitive post exit


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Not sure whether being smug about either cheap labour (ie people being paid shit wages) or people struggling to get work is a good look for progressives tbh.


depends who's struggling to get work. if it's former tory mps then i'm all for a bit of smugness.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 23, 2018)

It's obviously a function of who I am, where I live, the company I keep and so on, but I always thought Leave would win. 

Reflexive blame-the-EU stuff is has been so pervasive as to be unremarkable since I was a kid. The vast majority (god knows what the figures are by circulation) of the British press are rabidly anti-EU and have been for decades. I know plenty of people who voted Remain - and loads who I think probably did - but I don't think I know a single person who would say, "I really passionately love the EU!" I've always known lots of people who were single-issue fucking batshit obsessed by getting out of (and hopefully destroying) the EU. Politicians as a whole, as a class, are extremely unpopular - vote against politicians was always going to be a winner.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 23, 2018)

I've seen loads of people giving it the 'I love the EU', and its been a prominent narrative in the Guardian, the New European, etc. The marches last year were very much in this vein - all or nothing - you're either for the EU or you're a thicko/racist/right-winger.

(when I'm sure many are conflating European with the EU as a political bloc)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

You’ve not seen the flags? The marches? My one time hero Gruff Rhys releasing “I love EU”?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> depends who's struggling to get work. if it's former tory mps then i'm all for a bit of smugness.


Fair point


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 23, 2018)

I've only seen that enthusiasm since the referendum and only on social media. (Again only personal experience and I should have written in my first post that I didn't know before the referendum anyone who would have said that - and I knew someone who worked for the EU!)


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 23, 2018)

I'll go further and say that the reason I thought that we would never have a referendum was because they (the powers that be, I guess) must know that we'd vote to leave.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 23, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> but I don't think I know a single person who would say, "I really passionately love the EU!"


Why don't you read some of the many threads where there has been a mountain of evidence of such nonsense has been posted - like the march organised by Geldof fo example.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Why don't you read some of the many threads where there has been a mountain of evidence of such nonsense has been posted - like the march organised by Geldof fo example.


Still so difficult to decide which flotilla wanker was the biggest wanker


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 23, 2018)

because I don't need to read a thread to know what my personal experience was.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> because I don't need to read a thread to know what my personal experience was.


Enrich yer personal experience then man the dig


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 23, 2018)

I'm flotillad out.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You’ve not seen the flags? The marches? My one time hero Gruff Rhys releasing “I love EU”?



As a big fan of Gruff and the furries I'm glad I missed that.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> As a big fan of Gruff and the furries I'm glad I missed that.


I was a teenager when the anti-capitalist song “Download” was included in The Big Issue on it’s free CD, complete with an interview with them. What happened man?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well done. You seem to be suggesting this is why the referendum was called-at least I think that’s why you are mentioning timing.  Everyone knows it was called because the Tories thought they (REMAIN) would win.


'everyone knows remain would win'  this is the garbage currently being thrown around by brexiters who are starting to realise what's happening

and if there was any element of trust on these boards, civility or respect, we could have a proper conversation on these matters...but you and your friends make it abundantly clear that that's not an option...so in that spirit...in your spirit...

/nothing


----------



## Raheem (Mar 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I was a teenager when the anti-capitalist song “Download” was included in The Big Issue on it’s free CD, complete with an interview with them. What happened man?



Cover-mounted CDs just fell out of fashion, for a variety of reasons.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> because I don't need to read a thread to know what my personal experience was.


If your personal experience is contradicted by the mountains of evidence provided by people maybe it isn't very informative.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 'everyone knows remain would win'  this is the garbage currently being thrown around by brexiters who are starting to realise what's happening



This is terrible trolling or you really did sustain a bang to head  Cameron called the ref because he was supremely confident (in that smug way of his) that it would put to bed the battle within the Tories (and electorally) for at least a generation. He gambled with it and lost. Even most ardent remainers never ever saw the vote going to leave before or during ref. And thats why there was such shock the morning after the ref, Cameron resigning, etc. I mean, have you even been following any of this stuff properly?!


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 'everyone knows remain would win'  this is the garbage currently being thrown around by brexiters who are starting to realise what's happening
> 
> and if there was any element of trust on these boards, civility or respect, we could have a proper conversation on these matters...but you and your friends make it abundantly clear that that's not an option...so in that spirit...in your spirit...
> 
> /nothing


Disgusting utterly dishonest quote invention and attribution there. Fits in with your history of posts that are seemingly coming from another world though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 'everyone knows remain would win'  this is the garbage currently being thrown around by brexiters who are starting to realise what's happening
> 
> and if there was any element of trust on these boards, civility or respect, we could have a proper conversation on these matters...but you and your friends make it abundantly clear that that's not an option...so in that spirit...in your spirit...
> 
> /nothing


You couldn't have a proper conversation over even the most trivial matter as you'd be as honest there as you are in this post - not at all.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 24, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> This is terrible trolling or you really did sustain a bang to head  Cameron called the ref because he was supremely confident (in that smug way of his) that it would put to bed the battle within the Tories (and electorally) for at least a generation. He gambled with it and lost. Even most ardent remainers never ever saw the vote going to leave before or during ref. And thats why there was such shock the morning after the ref, Cameron resigning, etc. I mean, have you even been following any of this stuff properly?!



I agree with this. I was very late to realise  how close the vote was going to be, and I thought until the end that Remain would scrape through, just. 

But I was aware for a lot longer that Cameron/Osborne in particular were running an utterly crap campaign and were being thoroughly complacent with it.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 24, 2018)

I think Cameron's first priority in calling the referendum was to win the 2015 general election by stealing UKIP's USP. Who knows how far beyond that he really thought? (Has he released an autobiography yet? I suppose he'll spill his beans at some point.) 

I'm sure he thought his side would win, but even in 2015 polls were very close - (YouGov |  EU referendum polling: is the 'Leave' number soft?) - and he and other Remain people must have known this. Perhaps he thought he'd get more changes in his vaunted renegotiation. 

If there wasn't substantial support for leaving the EU - and my personal experience aside, you'd have to live under a rock to be unaware of that - then there wouldn't be any electoral advantage in him calling a referendum. 

I don't doubt he and his team were smug, overconfident tossers and that this played into a poor campaign, but my personal experience, despite being uninformative, turned out to be right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> I think Cameron's first priority in calling the referendum was to win the 2015 general election by stealing UKIP's USP. Who knows how far beyond that he really thought? (Has he released an autobiography yet? I suppose he'll spill his beans at some point.)
> 
> I'm sure he thought his side would win, but even in 2015 polls were very close - (YouGov |  EU referendum polling: is the 'Leave' number soft?) - and he and other Remain people must have known this. Perhaps he thought he'd get more changes in his vaunted renegotiation.
> 
> ...


You've missed out the important point about the concessions he managed to wring out of the eu which in their paucity doubtless did more to motivate the leave vote than encourage the remainers. A referendum not really a usp as it was not u.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 24, 2018)

I thought UKIP were previously the only party promising a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU? 

I think you're definitely right about the concessions. From what I've seen - again, from limited personal and online experience, but I think there's polling to back it up - what lots of UKIP Leavers (leaving Lexiters aside) want is free trade but no free movement, and I don't think you're ever going to get that.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2018)

Labour repeatedly promised one - making it a manifesto commitment in 2005. Then dropping it, then promising it again in 2007.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 24, 2018)

Exciting news for our Global Britain future though! 



I saw some compilation of Bolton going around the other day as he got the job - war, war, war basically - and he mentioned Brexit briefly: "I think you'll find that once Britain is freed from the entaglements of...." sort of thing. 

Off we go to Iran then!


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Labour repeatedly promised one - making it a manifesto commitment in 2005. The dropping it, then promising it again in 2007.



Ah, sorry, I didn't recall that.


----------



## andysays (Mar 24, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> ...If there wasn't substantial support for leaving the EU - and my personal experience aside, you'd have to live under a rock to be unaware of that - then there wouldn't be any electoral advantage in him calling a referendum...


I'm starting to suspect your natural habitat is under a bridge rather than under a rock, TBH


----------



## Combustible (Mar 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Labour repeatedly promised one - making it a manifesto commitment in 2005. Then dropping it, then promising it again in 2007.


And the Lib Dems


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 24, 2018)

Combustible said:


> And the Lib Dems


they genuinely believe in nothing.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 24, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> I think Cameron's first priority in calling the referendum was to win the 2015 general election by stealing UKIP's USP. Who knows how far beyond that he really thought? .



In 2015 it was, according to all experts, talking heads and so forth, pretty much scientifically impossible for Cameron to get a working majority in the GE. He put the referendum in his manifesto to appease a large group of Tory backbenchers worried about UKIP, safe in the knowledge that either Ed Millliband would be PM or else the Tories would be in a coalition and the manifesto would be out of the window. Then, once the impossible happened, he found that he had trapped himself.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm starting to suspect your natural habitat is under a bridge rather than under a rock, TBH



I'm not trolling and I honestly don't know how you would think I am. Never mind though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> I thought UKIP were previously the only party promising a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU?
> 
> I think you're definitely right about the concessions. From what I've seen - again, from limited personal and online experience, but I think there's polling to back it up - what lots of UKIP Leavers (leaving Lexiters aside) want is free trade but no free movement, and I don't think you're ever going to get that.


I would but Britain's shittest negotiating team have been given the job instead


----------



## Sparkle Motion (Mar 26, 2018)

I recall the polls were generally in favour of Remain before the referendum campaign. Add in an assumption that Project Fear would work in the same way as Scotland, then you can see why Cameron would think it a safe bet. Maybe Scots could see and experience more direct cultural and economic links with rUK than England could with the EU.


----------



## editor (Mar 26, 2018)

Anti-Brexit rally in Leeds attracted a fair sized crowd: 













In photos: thousands take to the streets at Leeds anti-Brexit protest, Sat 24th March 2018


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 26, 2018)

Great to see that champion of the workers Lord Adonis giving a speech.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Great to see that champion of the workers Lord Adonis giving a speech.


in the great tradition of viscount stansgate


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 26, 2018)

It's weird that whoever made that statue thought it would be cool for Theresa May to have 3 tits.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> It's weird that whoever made that statue thought it would be cool for Theresa May to have 3 tits.


and of course more than the usual complement of breasts


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Great to see that champion of the workers Lord Adonis giving a speech.


Bible Gateway passage: Luke 10:25-37 - New International Version


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Bible Gateway passage: Luke 10:25-37 - New International Version


Are you calling him a jew?


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Great to see that champion of the workers Lord Adonis giving a speech.



Why are you sneering at him?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 26, 2018)

I don't know, maybe it's his pushing such a strong neo-liberal, pro-privatisation agenda in education that even filth like Ruth Kelly found too extreme, his pushing of HE fees, his support for Iraq, his support for policies that increased inequality and reduced social mobility.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Why are you sneering at him?


Why shouldn't you sneer at lord adonis?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't know, maybe it's his pushing such a strong neo-liberal, pro-privatisation agenda in education that even filth like Ruth Kelly found too extreme, his pushing of HE fees, his support for Iraq, his support for policies that increased inequality and reduced social mobility.


No, you miss this idiots point - you're not allowed sneer. It's only for the likes of him and the powerful to sneer at pretty powerless leave voters.

As ever, it's not the behaviour but whose doing it that's the problem for these _standards_ types.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Why shouldn't you sneer at lord adonis?



Because it makes you look kind of dumb.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Because it makes you look kind of dumb.



Are you defending anti-socialist politics again?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

Lefties so blinded by their desire to overturn brexit that they end up lending their support to the likes of Adonis, Major, Blair.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Mar 26, 2018)

Everyone knows that the correct thing to do when a LORD is speaking is to curtsey, doff your cap and agree.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 26, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Lefties so blinded by their desire to overturn brexit that they end up lending their support to the likes of Adonis, Major, Blair.



Lefties so blinded by their support for Brexit that they end up lending their support to Nigel Farage, Tommy Robinson, Lord Rothermere, Rupert Murdoch, John Redwood, Daniel Hannan, Douglas Carswell, Michael Gove, Boris Johnston, The Queen (reportedly), The British National Party, Ian Duncan Smith, The Weatherspoons Bloke, Lord Ashcroft, Lord Lawson, Lord Tebbit... 

You can agree with someone on one issue without granting them Papal infallibility and joining their armed group to force them through them as next Supreme Leader for life. 

ADONIS FOR EVER! ALL HAIL EMPEROR ANDREW!


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Lefties so blinded by their support for Brexit that they end up lending their support to Nigel Farage, Tommy Robinson, Lord Rothermere, Rupert Murdoch, John Redwood, Daniel Hannan, Douglas Carswell, Michael Gove, Boris Johnston, The Queen (reportedly), The British National Party, Ian Duncan Smith, The Weatherspoons Bloke, Lord Ashcroft, Lord Lawson, Lord Tebbit...
> 
> You can agree with someone on one issue without granting them Papal infallibility and joining their armed group to force them through them as next Supreme Leader for life.
> 
> ADONIS FOR EVER! ALL HAIL EMPEROR ANDREW!



If people still seriously don't get the difference between a yes/no referendum where people voted remain or leave for different reasons, including those of us on the left who argued reasons to leave whilst attacking the right, and dreadful liberal positions after the event where they actively side with the right to argue overturning the result then I really lose the will to live.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 26, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Lefties so blinded by their support for Brexit that they end up lending their support to Nigel Farage, Tommy Robinson, Lord Rothermere, Rupert Murdoch, John Redwood, Daniel Hannan, Douglas Carswell, Michael Gove, Boris Johnston, The Queen (reportedly), The British National Party, Ian Duncan Smith, The Weatherspoons Bloke, Lord Ashcroft, Lord Lawson, Lord Tebbit...
> 
> You can agree with someone on one issue without granting them Papal infallibility and joining their armed group to force them through them as next Supreme Leader for life.
> 
> ADONIS FOR EVER! ALL HAIL EMPEROR ANDREW!


I was gonna say...people who support rees-mogg, kilroy-silk and johnson...fucking nerve.

always perfect in their own eyes 

I mean...literally...always perfect in their own eyes, everyone else is always wrong, they're always right, the rules don't apply.  Everyone else has to answer questions, they don't.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Lefties so blinded by their support for Brexit that they end up lending their support to Nigel Farage, Tommy Robinson, Lord Rothermere, Rupert Murdoch, John Redwood, Daniel Hannan, Douglas Carswell, Michael Gove, Boris Johnston, The Queen (reportedly), The British National Party, Ian Duncan Smith, The Weatherspoons Bloke, Lord Ashcroft, Lord Lawson, Lord Tebbit...
> 
> You can agree with someone on one issue without granting them Papal infallibility and joining their armed group to force them through them as next Supreme Leader for life.
> 
> ADONIS FOR EVER! ALL HAIL EMPEROR ANDREW!


You had the whole global establishment. So we will win this battle.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 26, 2018)

How you can seriously say "the whole global establishment" when you had the bloke from Weatherspoons.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

I mean, if you're seriously going to argue overturning brexit or to have a 2nd referendum, at least do it on the grounds of socialist/left arguments too, but not this terrible 'Blair/Adonis/Major/Osborne is SO right on this' shite.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> How you can seriously say "the whole global establishment" when you had the bloke from Weatherspoons.


There's no a. Likewise border.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 26, 2018)

No-one even mentioned Adonis until someone had a snipe at him for being a Lord!


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> No-one even mentioned Adonis until someone had a snipe at him for being a Lord!



You forgot 'neo-liberal shitcunt'.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 26, 2018)

How could I forget "neo-liberal shitcunt"!


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

Grief. I'll have philosophical back at this rate.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 26, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Are you defending anti-socialist politics again?



So anybody whose politics you don't like is not allowed to express a view on Brexit without being sneered at.  That's going to narrow the electorate down quite drastically. You are so sour-minded. Stop being so miserable!


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> So anybody whose politics you don't like is not allowed to express a view on Brexit without being sneered at.  That's going to narrow the electorate down quite drastically. Stop being so miserable!


Express a view then.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 26, 2018)

I'm with the PM.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Why are you sneering at him?


Because he's a politician and a public figure and politics is a big boys game, you stick your head above the parapet you accept the risk of it getting shot off.
I imagine Adonis himself knows that.
redsquirrel is entitled to be as dumb and/or sneery as he wants and you are entitled to disagree as much as you want, if you think Adomis is a great chap then say so and list your reasons.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 26, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Express a view then.



Preferably something more than Blair and Adonis should be listened to, or left leavers are fools or suchlike.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Because he's a politician and a public figure and politics is a big boys game, you stick your head above the parapet you accept the risk of it getting shot off.
> I imagine Adonis himself knows that.
> redsquirrel is entitled to be as dumb and/or sneery as he wants and you are entitled to disagree as much as you want, if you think Adomis is a great chap then say so and list your reasons.



Urban75 isn't politics though we are trying to have a debate here not kill each other. So tired of all the sneering.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Urban75 isn't politics though we are trying to have a debate here not kill each other. So tired of all the sneering.


Review your recent contributions to the thread.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 26, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Preferably something more than Blair and Adonis should be listened to, or left leavers are fools or suchlike.



I've expressed a view agreeing with the latter part of your sentence several times. There's little point in repeating it ad nauseum. But I'm still here listening to your views and watching events as they unfold.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 26, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Everyone knows that the correct thing to do when a LORD is speaking is to curtsey, doff your cap and agree.



So doff so doff so doff your hat I pray...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2018)

He an EXPERT too so...


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 26, 2018)

Theresa May stands by adviser who outed Brexit whistleblower



> “How is it remotely acceptable that when a young whistleblower exposes compelling evidence of law-breaking by the leave campaign, implicating staff at No 10, one of those named instead of addressing the allegations issues an officially sanctioned statement outing the whistleblower as gay and thereby putting his family in Pakistan in danger?”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

Did he not very publicly blow the whistle on his former lover’s activities? That kind of thing will tend to bring in to the open that the person you are blowing the whistle on is a former lover. 

And to suggest that the family could be placed in danger seems to be playing very much in to a racist trope, which is classy.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did he not very publicly blow the whistle on his former lover’s activities? That kind of thing will tend to bring in to the open that the person you are blowing the whistle on is a former lover.
> 
> And to suggest that the family could be placed in danger seems to be playing very much in to a racist trope, which is classy.




Why do you think he outed him?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why do you think he outed him?



To bring context to the allegations.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why do you think he outed him?



Why do you think these people are stating that his family in Pakistan _will_ be in danger?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He an EXPERT too so...


He was a wanker as a labour minister and he remains a wanker


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think these people are stating that his family in Pakistan _will_ be in danger?



He's said that himself.


----------



## Winot (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did he not very publicly blow the whistle on his former lover’s activities? That kind of thing will tend to bring in to the open that the person you are blowing the whistle on is a former lover.
> 
> And to suggest that the family could be placed in danger seems to be playing very much in to a racist trope, which is classy.



I can’t believe you’re defending an outing, whatever your politics.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

Winot said:


> I can’t believe you’re defending an outing, whatever your politics.



If an allegation of serious criminality is made by someone against an ex-lover, do you not think that the relationship becomes public knowledge at that point? If that information is not disclosed it would rather affect the nature of the allegation. The man has chosen to out himself.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> He's said that himself.



And others have gleefully run with it. In spite of it being demonstrably untrue and incredibly offensive to many Pakistanis. Why do you think they have chosen to do that?


----------



## andysays (Mar 27, 2018)

Winot said:


> I can’t believe you’re defending an outing, whatever your politics.



Really not that simple. It looks to me like he's contributed to outing himself, especially if the only way he had this information is through his previous relationship with the person he's making the allegations against. 

As for his family in Pakistan, by mentioning them, he's effectively increased any danger they might be in by reacting in this way.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2018)

Pakistan is extremely intolerant of homosexuality compared to Western nations - it's illegal, for a start. I don't think most Pakistanis would find it incredibly offensive for this outing to be considered a cunt's trick likely to cause difficulties for Sanni and his family.


----------



## Winot (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If an allegation of serious criminality is made by someone against an ex-lover, do you not think that the relationship becomes public knowledge at that point? If that information is not disclosed it would rather affect the nature of the allegation. The man has chosen to out himself.



Right, so people shouldn't make allegations of criminality if they are gay. And if they do it's their own fault.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

Winot said:


> Right, so people shouldn't make allegations of criminality if they are gay. And if they do it's their own fault.



Yes. That's exactly what I said there. Well done for outing me as a rabid homophobe. You disingenuous prick.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Pakistan is extremely intolerant of homosexuality compared to Western nations - it's illegal, for a start. I don't think most Pakistanis would find it incredibly offensive for this outing to be considered a cunt's trick likely to cause difficulties for Sanni and his family.



It is illegal, but the law is not enforced, same as many countries with a strong religious element to the government. To suggest that a gay man's family needs to take special security measures is a blatant lie though. FFS under daesh who's scumbag followers executed gay men by throwing them from buildings the man's family weren't 'blamed' for his 'lifestyle'.


----------



## Winot (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yes. That's exactly what I said there. Well done for outing me as a rabid homophobe. You disingenuous prick.



Yes, that's exactly what I said there...

I'm sure you're *not* a homophobe, which is why I'm sure you've made the wrong call here fwiw.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2018)

The claims about Sanni's family possibly being in danger are coming from Sanni himself through his lawyer - and they're being reported in the Pakistani press with no sign that they're seen as some kind of slur on the country.



> “My client is now having to come out to his mother and family tonight, and members of his family in Pakistan are being forced to take urgent protective measures to ensure their safety,'” it adds.



Downing Street outs British-Pakistani whistleblower as gay to sabotage Brexit claims - The Express Tribune


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

So that's untrue and Banhoffe Strasse can demonstrate that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> View attachment 131120
> 
> So that's untrue and Banhoffe Strasse can demonstrate that.



Oh right, you're resorting to disingenuous bullshit now. Bravo. He could say the moon is made of your fetid nob-cheese, don't make it so. 

Find me some instances of a Pakistani man in the west having his family in danger as a result of his being openly gay. I dare you.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

No I'm not. 

You said his claims were demonstrably untrue. 

That's his claim. Demonstrate that it is untrue.


----------



## sealion (Mar 27, 2018)

This person who wants to overturn a democratic vote is now concerned that democracy is under threat 
BeLeave revelations taint the Brexit result. There must be another vote | Gina Miller


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> This person who wants to overturn a democratic vote is now concerned that democracy is under threat
> BeLeave revelations taint the Brexit result. There must be another vote | Gina Miller


tbh we're fucked if we leave. we're fucked if we stay. we're fucked if there's another vote. we're fucked if there isn't. being as about half the country wants to bugger off and about half the country wants to stay and we've the most incompetent government in living memory (and that's up against some stiff opposition) there's no obvious way to make everyone or even most people happy.

theresa may and her cabinet going over beachy head on scooters like in quadrophenia might bring a smile to a lot of people's faces tho.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> This person who wants to overturn a democratic vote is now concerned that democracy is under threat
> BeLeave revelations taint the Brexit result. There must be another vote | Gina Miller


thats the hedge fund manager who the guardian refer to more humbly as 'activist' in most covergage. She's part of this coterie of circle-jerk astroturf groups of bourgoise wankers getting free boosting regularly from the guardian.
the youth wing of the campaign are the gas the elderly sorts


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> No I'm not.
> 
> You said his claims were demonstrably untrue.
> 
> That's his claim. Demonstrate that it is untrue.



You are asking me to show you examples of gay people's families not being placed in danger in Pakistan?

How about you try this and report back: LMGTFY


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

No thanks.


----------



## sealion (Mar 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thats the hedge fund manager


Transparency campaigner too!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> To bring context to the allegations.


Are you that naive?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did he not very publicly blow the whistle on his former lover’s activities? That kind of thing will tend to bring in to the open that the person you are blowing the whistle on is a former lover.


You are fucking kidding? He worked for the leave campaign and has made specific allegations about it. His affair with one of the people he is accusing is irrelevant to his allegations. Said former lover will have known full well that he wasn't out. Fucking cunt's trick to out him, and fucking shitty of you to offer any kind of defence of it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Are you that naive?



You haven't answered why do you think he's told porkies about his family in Pakistan being put in danger by the revelation of his relationship?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You are fucking kidding? He worked for the leave campaign and has made specific allegations about it. His affair with one of the people he is accusing is irrelevant to his allegations. Said former lover will have known full well that he wasn't out. Fucking cunt's trick to out him, and fucking shitty of you to offer any kind of defence of it.



I'm saying by blowing the whistle in the way he has his relationship history could only ever end up in the public domain. Typical bullshit twisting from you to state that as a defense of outing someone though, so no great surprise.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And to suggest that the family could be placed in danger seems to be playing very much in to a racist trope, which is classy.



Sanni stated this himself. Is he racist against his own family then?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Sanni stated this himself. Is he racist against his own family then?



No, he's using massive hyperbole though, employing a trope that is being lapped up by people for whom the words homosexual and Pakistan (and/or Islam) are a dog-whistle.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

sealion said:


> This person who wants to overturn a democratic vote is now concerned that democracy is under threat
> BeLeave revelations taint the Brexit result. There must be another vote | Gina Miller



Lets not pretend democracy is even on the table here. The powers that be are currently getting in a big ethical tangle over about_ how much _you are allowed to spend buying votes and how you should go about it. It's like a football match where someone gets sent off for headbutting the opposition keeper eleven times instead of the maximum permissable ten times.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, he's using massive hyperbole though, employing a trope that is being lapped up by people for whom the words homosexual and Pakistan (and/or Islam) are a dog-whistle.



Lucky there's nothing racist about denying people's understanding and experience of their own culture eh?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lucky there's nothing racist about denying people's understanding and experience of their own culture eh?



OK Frank, off you go and bring me back some examples of gay people's family's security in Pakistan being threatened by them being openly gay in a western country. If it is such a thing I'm sure you'll have no trouble in bringing back a plethora of examples.

or maybe he was gilding the lily to get the reaction that he has got as he's fully aware of the way the liberal mindset works.


----------



## andysays (Mar 27, 2018)

Anyway, back to the subject of Brexit...
Brexit: UK firms 'fearful' for future migration system


> UK employers are "fearful" about what a future migration system will be like after Britain leaves the European Union, according to a new report.





> Many employers expressed the view that migrants from the European Economic Area are more reliable and *more willing to work long and anti-social hours than UK born workers*, the report said.





> The report found while EU migrants from the original EU countries are paid 12% more than comparable UK workers, *those from newer member states are paid 27% less*. But it added that the claim by employers that they would not attract more UK workers even if they raised wages, was "not credible".


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You haven't answered why do you think he's told porkies about his family in Pakistan being put in danger by the revelation of his relationship?


I never argued either way on that.

I disagree with the government outing people - you don't, as long as it helps brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I never argued either way on that.



No, which is why I asked you why you think he lied about the implications of his sexual orientation being public knowledge in Pakistan.


But you won't answer, same as the others, cos you'd rather keep up with the abusive lies:



> I disagree with the government outing people - you don't, as long as it helps brexit.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, which is why I asked you why you think he lied about the implications of his sexual orientation being public knowledge in Pakistan.
> 
> 
> But you won't answer, same as the others, cos you'd rather keep up with the abusive lies:


I have no idea if he lied or not, as do you, but you pretend he has to cast him as unreliable and to deflect on what the govt did.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I have no idea if he lied or not, as do you, but you pretend he has to cast him as unreliable and to deflect on what the govt did.



I know that his family are not in danger from these revelations and that telling lies about that does mark him down as unreliable in relation to that claim.

With regards to his claims, Frank Field is calling for the full force of the law to be thrown at anyone found culpable of any offence, as it should and as such speculation here and elsewhere must be muted as if anyone is found culpable it will of course be sub judice.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2018)

If Mr. Sanni's fears are unfounded and his family in Pakistan is totally unlikely to face potentially violent repercussions from having an openly gay son - and the possibility of recriminations doesn't sound all that far-fetched to me, especially not if they live in a very traditional rural area - then that's a good thing, though it really doesn't sound like the May government gave much of a fuck either way.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I know that his family are not in danger from these revelations and that telling lies about that does mark him down as unreliable in relation to that claim.


How do you _know_ this?   Because I can't from a quick google find any allegation or speculation that he is lying.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

Is this one of your demonstrable things again?


----------



## Winot (Mar 27, 2018)

It’s out of order to out someone as part of a political row full stop.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

teqniq said:


> How do you _know_ this?   Because I can't from a quick google find any allegation or speculation that he is lying.



Have a longer google and find instances of gay people's family's security being threatened due to them having an openly gay family member in the west, (or in Pakistan). My best mate from school Rashad married his partner in London and went to Karachi for the family wedding. No issues for them at all, let alone for their fucking families. This is fairly common, Pakistan is not the medieval backwater nation that certain sections of the media want you to believe and that bullshit like this feeds on.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 27, 2018)

My best friend is a gay Pakistani...


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2018)

There's enough violent homophobia in Pakistan for some gay Pakistanis to be granted refugee status in the West. There are also hundreds, probably thousands, of "honour killings" every year of people thought to have besmirched family honour in some way. It's also far from unheard of for police to persecute gay people or for extremists to target them, put all that together and it doesn't sound unreasonable for Sanni to be a little concerned. 

We don't know what kind of community his family live in, they may be middle-class Karachi residents or they could be out on the sticks somewhere, either way I'm more inclined to take him at his word than dismiss him as somebody telling lies and smearing his own culture to tug at liberal heart-strings.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Have a longer google and find instances of gay people's family's security being threatened due to them having an openly gay family member in the west, (or in Pakistan). My best mate from school Rashad married his partner in London and went to Karachi for the family wedding. No issues for them at all, let alone for their fucking families. This is fairly common, Pakistan is not the medieval backwater nation that certain sections of the media want you to believe and that bullshit like this feeds on.


Haha no, that's not how it works. You made the claim, please provide some links and not 'my best friend....etc'.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Haha no, that's not how it works. You made the claim, please provide some links and not 'my best friend....etc'.



I can’t provide links to shit that hasn’t happened you dolt


----------



## teqniq (Mar 27, 2018)

So  that's a 'no' then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I can’t provide links to shit that hasn’t happened you dolt


Let's wait and see if there's any need to provide links at all, being as everyone's agreed no shit's been reported in this instance.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 27, 2018)

teqniq said:


> So  that's a 'no' then.



Jesus.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Jesus.


Now that will land you in trouble in parts of Pakistan


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 27, 2018)

My brother in law is Jesus and he holidays in Pakistan every year without trouble, you racist bastard.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> My brother in law is Jesus and he holidays in Pakistan every year without trouble, you racist bastard.


Yeh but he's armed with the wrath of god


----------



## NoXion (Mar 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Anyway, back to the subject of Brexit...
> Brexit: UK firms 'fearful' for future migration system



So they prefer EU migrants as employees because they're more willing to take it up the arse than UK nationals. Fucking slave-driving cunts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So they prefer EU migrants as employees because they're more willing to take it up the arse than UK nationals. Fucking slave-driving cunts. :angry:


Was that ever news?


----------



## NoXion (Mar 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Was that ever news?



Given how this kind of thing is portrayed as EU workers being "more conscientious" rather than being "more exploited", it's the kind of news that more people need to hear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Given how this kind of thing is portrayed as EU workers being "more conscientious" rather than being "more exploited", it's the kind of news that more people need to hear.


If it isn't eu migrants it's west indians etc 'just off the boat'


----------



## teqniq (Mar 27, 2018)

Ok I just had a chat with a Pakistani friend of mine and she says pretty much what Yossarian says; it depends on where his family are from unless you know that you can't really know if there's a real risk of harm coming to them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Ok I just had a chat with a Pakistani friend of mine and she says pretty much what Yossarian says; it pretty much depends on where his family are from unless you know that you can't really know if there's a real risk of harm coming to them.


Grand. So let's all hope it turns out fine for as many people as possible


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 27, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Given how this kind of thing is portrayed as EU workers being "more conscientious" rather than being "more exploited", it's the kind of news that more people need to hear.


remember this?
Tory MPs criticise 'idle workers'

the idea of the worker as lazy and entitled as code for 'its better in other places  where we can work people 10 hours a day seven days a week for peanuts'. Thats their supposed 'internationalism' writ explicit


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> remember this?
> Tory MPs criticise 'idle workers'
> 
> the idea of the worker as lazy and entitled as code for 'its better in other places  where we can work people 10 hours a day seven days a week for peanuts'. Thats their supposed 'internationalism' writ explicit


It's amazing that the British economy ever rose above that of less prosperous countries when you consider the appalling management workers have to contend with


----------



## killer b (Mar 27, 2018)

Just reading this big academic article about the political economy of brexit by Helen Thompson - free to read until 24th April cause it's won a prize. She's usually very insightful, and this looks up to scratch. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research


----------



## Artaxerxes (Mar 27, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> remember this?
> Tory MPs criticise 'idle workers'
> 
> the idea of the worker as lazy and entitled as code for 'its better in other places  where we can work people 10 hours a day seven days a week for peanuts'. Thats their supposed 'internationalism' writ explicit



He's right, just the lazy bastards are all the fuckers at the top end of the food chain getting paid a mint for doing fuck all. 

Sorry... "strategising and maximising shareholder value"

Cunts.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 27, 2018)

killer b said:


> Just reading this big academic article about the political economy of brexit by Helen Thompson - free to read until 24th April cause it's won a prize. She's usually very insightful, and this looks up to scratch. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research


Ta


----------



## killer b (Mar 27, 2018)

She makes a good case for Brexit as a political inevitability rather than the shock result most people experienced it as.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 28, 2018)

Labour's six tests are (from a quick Google):

1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?

2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?

3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?

4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?

5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?

6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

I'm not sure how something "without any proper decisions made" can passs those tests, but I haven't heard what Emily Thornberry has actually said, so maybe there's more on that.


----------



## Winot (Mar 28, 2018)

Test 2 is impossible to meet and Starmer knew it. It’s reminiscent of Brown’s Euro tests. 

The clever bit though is that it is quoting David Davis himself. 

Despite this I doubt Labour will folllow through and vote against Brexit, for all the reasons discussed up thread.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 28, 2018)

Why do you think Thornberry is (reportedly - Tweet is from Guardian Diplomatic Editor) saying that it will "probably" meet the tests?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Why do you think Thornberry is (reportedly - Tweet is from Guardian Diplomatic Editor) saying that it will "probably" meet the tests?


because that's her job (reportedly)

next


----------



## Winot (Mar 28, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Why do you think Thornberry is (reportedly - Tweet is from Guardian Diplomatic Editor) saying that it will "probably" meet the tests?



Dunno - because she's trying to bounce Labour into not rocking the boat for political reasons I guess.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 28, 2018)

Fair enough... seems an odd plan when everyone's going to immediately say, "hold on...!" 

And I just remembered that the default position of a deal being voted down is leaving with no deal so there is that too. . .


----------



## Winot (Mar 28, 2018)

More here. Doesn’t sound like anyone knows what’s going on. 

Emily Thornberry: Labour will “probably” vote for the Conservatives’ Brexit deal


----------



## philosophical (Mar 28, 2018)

Return of anti-Irish prejudice in Britain? | Generation Emigration


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 28, 2018)

Thanks ever so much for that piece from 6 years ago.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 28, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> Grief. I'll have philosophical back at this rate.



I take this back btw.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Return of anti-Irish prejudice in Britain? | Generation Emigration


News of Leicester's league championship has yet to penetrate one part of South London


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Return of anti-Irish prejudice in Britain? | Generation Emigration


Nobody -literally nobobdy-voted brexit because they hated the irish, as well you know, Weeeeesht ffs.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 28, 2018)

I could say English voted leave to punish us Scots.... if I was a fuckwit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 28, 2018)

killer b said:


> Just reading this big academic article about the political economy of brexit by Helen Thompson - free to read until 24th April cause it's won a prize. She's usually very insightful, and this looks up to scratch. SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class journal research


Thanks very much, most useful read on this thread for a wee while


----------



## Winot (Mar 29, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Why do you think Thornberry is (reportedly - Tweet is from Guardian Diplomatic Editor) saying that it will "probably" meet the tests?



John McDonnell rowing back from this now on R4 Today. Apparently Thornberry was being ‘sarcastic’.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

So far no suggested workable solution to the question of the land border on the island of Ireland from those who voted brexit to 'take back control' of the UK borders.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So far no suggested workable solution to the question of the land border on the island of Ireland from those who voted brexit to 'take back control' of the UK borders.


I KNEW THATS WHAT YOU WERE GONNA WRITE WHEN I SEEN THE ALERT


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)




----------



## JimW (Mar 29, 2018)

What about herbaceous? Mix of hardy perennials can make a lovely border.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So far no suggested workable solution to the question of the land border on the island of Ireland from those who voted brexit to 'take back control' of the UK borders.



As has been pointed out previously, you're really on the wrong forum if you think that most of us who voted leave was to 'take back control of the UK borders' 


(I also have no idea why I'm bothering tbh  )


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> As has been pointed out previously, you're really on the wrong forum if you think that most of us who voted leave was to 'take back control of the UK borders'
> 
> 
> (I also have no idea why I'm bothering tbh  )



My post said that those who voted brexit for border control have no practical suggestions, and today brexit is one year away.
If brexiters had a range of reasons for voting that is their business, but the outcome of their vote is that they have to face up to the border issue, which may be an unintended consequence that surprises them, and my experience is that brexiters are struggling to face up to the consequence of what they have done. The most common reaction from brexiters is to say it is somebody else's problem to solve, that is something I disagree with, it is down to all those on the winning brexit side to suggest a workable and practical solution to the border.
I would like to see brexiters take responsibility rather than continue to demonstrate distain towards the Irish.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> As has been pointed out previously, you're really on the wrong forum if you think that most of us who voted leave was to 'take back control of the UK borders'


Did you vote for a Brexit where there was no change to the level or type of control of the UK border? If your vote was against being part of a neoliberal superstate, then to become separate from that neoliberal superstate necessarily means increased control over what happens at the border. You might not want to use the wording "taking back control" because of its associations but the fact is you voted for something that, without increased control of borders, would be meaningless. And what happens at the Irish border is part of that.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Did you vote for a Brexit where there was no change to the level or type of control of the UK border? If your vote was against being part of a neoliberal superstate, then to become separate from that neoliberal superstate necessarily means increased control over what happens at the border. You might not want to use the wording "taking back control" because of its associations but the fact is you voted for something that, without increased control of borders, would be meaningless. And what happens at the Irish border is part of that.


I think you know fine she used the phrase with intended connotations implied, because captain philosophy is accusing us of being racist. So pretty much a waste of a post that, stating the obvious.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Did you vote for a Brexit where there was no change to the level or type of control of the UK border? If your vote was against being part of a neoliberal superstate, then to become separate from that neoliberal superstate necessarily means increased control over what happens at the border. You might not want to use the wording "taking back control" because of its associations but the fact is you voted for something that, without increased control of borders, would be meaningless. And what happens at the Irish border is part of that.


I am being generous and assuming you know increased control doesn’t necessarily mean someone is in favour of a more racist immigration policy.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I think you know fine she used the phrase with intended connotations implied, because captain philosophy is accusing us of being racist. So pretty much a waste of a post that, stating the obvious.



Distortion, my posts today contain no accusations of racism, and they are the ones being quoted above.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I am being generous and assuming you know increased control doesn’t necessarily mean someone is in favour of a more racist immigration policy.


To be absolutely clear, I don't think any lexiteers posting here have any racist motivations whatsoever behind their support for Brexit. I also don't think it's fair to assume that Brexiteers generally, regardless of political persuasion, were motivated by racism, and I don't think it's helpful when people imply that they were.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Distortion, my posts today contain no accusations of racism, and they are the ones being quoted above.


“Continued disdain towards Irish people”

Cach! Utter cach!


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> “Continued disdain towards Irish people”
> 
> Cach! Utter cach!



You picture of a gunman is what I mean by continued distain.
One day you might realise how distainful and offensive that is without moaning that others are not second guessing your supposed real intentions.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Distortion, my posts today contain no accusations of racism, and they are the ones being quoted above.


You don't get to disassociate yourself from all your prior posts unless you choose to state that you disassociate yourself from all your prior posts.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You picture of a gunman is what I mean by continued distain.
> One day you might realise how distainful and offensive that is without moaning that others are not second guessing your supposed real intentions.


So where did I first dishonour the Irish then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You picture of a gunman is what I mean by continued distain.
> One day you might realise how distainful and offensive that is without moaning that others are not second guessing your supposed real intentions.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 29, 2018)

You have to stop looking for offence in.
every.
single.
post.
ever


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> You have to stop looking for offence in.
> every.
> single.
> post.
> ever


i did stop, in 2004.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 29, 2018)

Not you , him


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 29, 2018)

Winot said:


> More here. Doesn’t sound like anyone knows what’s going on.
> 
> Emily Thornberry: Labour will “probably” vote for the Conservatives’ Brexit deal


If it's BINO, it would be difficult to vote against it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Not you , him


oh! him? he'll never stop


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i did stop, in 2004.


Did you notice he used DISTAIN as well like IRISH BLOOD STAINED HANDS the archaic racist!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

WE’RE ALL SAYING BINO NOW


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 29, 2018)

preffered it to the Dandy anyway


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Did you noticed he used DISTAIN as well like IRISH BLOOD STAINED HANDS the archaic racist!


take away the blood-stained bandage from off an irish brow


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You picture of a gunman is what I mean by continued distain.
> One day you might realise how distainful and offensive that is without moaning that others are not second guessing your supposed real intentions.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 29, 2018)

Blair lends May some support 
May could stay on and call referendum if Brexit bill defeated, says Tony Blair


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You don't get to disassociate yourself from all your prior posts unless you choose to state that you disassociate yourself from all your prior posts.



I have not disassociated myself from previous posts.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So where did I first dishonour the Irish then?


You tell me.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not disassociated myself from previous posts.



That's precisely kabbes point


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Did you notice he used DISTAIN as well like IRISH BLOOD STAINED HANDS the archaic racist!


If you are referring to me you're wrong.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> That's precisely kabbes point


What?
A pointless point do you mean?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 29, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> You have to stop looking for offence in.
> every.
> single.
> post.
> ...




ftfy


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

sadly the mincer wasn't working the day theresa may visited the farm


----------



## not-bono-ever (Mar 29, 2018)

what the fuck is she wearing ?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What?
> A pointless point do you mean?


The point that when you use a phrase like "take back control of the UK borders" we know damn fine well what you are implying by it.


----------



## andysays (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The point that when you use a phrase like "take back control of the UK borders" we know damn fine well what you are implying by it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The point that when you use a phrase like "take back control of the UK borders" we know damn fine well what you are implying by it.


Well that won't win you a prize. For clarity when brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders the implication is simple to follow, take back control of the land border in Ireland. I didn't use a phrase 'like' it, I used the actual phrase.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well that won't win you a prize. For clarity when brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders the implication is simple to follow, take back control of the land border in Ireland. I didn't use a phrase 'like' it, I used the actual phrase.


in this instance kabbes' like meant 'such as'. have a pedant point.


----------



## Supine (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well that won't win you a prize. For clarity when brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders the implication is simple to follow, take back control of the land border in Ireland. I didn't use a phrase 'like' it, I used the actual phrase.



Are you a bit thick? People who voted to leave did so for a whole host of individual reasons. They only had one vote and there is a very good chance borders wasn't their reason.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

Supine said:


> Are you a bit thick? People who voted to leave did so for a whole host of individual reasons. They only had one vote and there is a very good chance borders wasn't their reason.


There could be a myriad of reasons, but to 'leave' implies a separation, no longer connected as it were, and if anybody doesn't think that means a border, then they are the ones who are a bit thick. Voting to leave does not mean voting to stay, ergo a point of separation or division between the two entities. I mean did anybody seriously vote leave expecting the borders to remain the same?
Whatever reasons people may have told themselves and others they had, the result has happened and the nature of the borders have changed or will change. The next question now that brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders, is how do they intend to do it.
One measly year to go.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There could be a myriad of reasons, but to 'leave' implies a separation, no longer connected as it were, and if anybody doesn't think that means a border, then they are the ones who are a bit thick. Voting to leave does not mean voting to stay, ergo a point of separation or division between the two entities. I mean did anybody seriously vote leave expecting the borders to remain the same?
> Whatever reasons people may have told themselves and others they had, the result has happened and the nature of the borders have changed or will change. The next question now that brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders, is how do they intend to do it.
> One measly year to go.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There could be a myriad of reasons, but to 'leave' implies a separation, no longer connected as it were, and if anybody doesn't think that means a border, then they are the ones who are a bit thick. Voting to leave does not mean voting to stay, ergo a point of separation or division between the two entities. I mean did anybody seriously vote leave expecting the borders to remain the same?
> Whatever reasons people may have told themselves and others they had, the result has happened and the nature of the borders have changed or will change. The next question now that brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders, is how do they intend to do it.
> One measly year to go.


And then you'll stop?

Or is that a threat?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

Round and round and round we go.

He’s been given three perfectly workable solutions already.  He just doesn’t like any of them.  What a shame, add it to the list.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Round and round and round we go.
> 
> He’s been given three perfectly workable solutions already.  He just doesn’t like any of them.  What a shame, add it to the list.


Perfectly workable solutions?
No that hasn't happened or been suggested.
There are things that might happen but to call them 'solutions' is a bit ambitious, like the extreme example of a 310 mile razor wire fence with armed patrols...that would be workable, but probably falls down on the 'perfect' bit.
A united land mass might happen, well the express statement of the brexiteers leader, Theresa May, is that she would refuse to break up the Union, so the 'perfect' bit is tested quite a lot there. Especially as brexit voters are in hock to the DUP.
Electronic monitoring, like with drones, random checks, microchips and such like means the 'hard border' that nearly everybody, and also the Belfast Agreement, says wouldn't return. Not only would any kind of technological approach fail within half an hour so that doesn't count as a 'solution', but the imperfections (for example the prohibitive costs) rule out the 'perfect' bit too.
A 'trade agreement' implies the exact same conditions on either side of the border with no checks needed, but not having a single market or customs union rules that out, or it means not leaving the EU at all. Any differences on either side of a trade, or political border would mean some kind of control of said border.
So you are right to suggest there are 'solutions' but they would come at a very heavy price, the heaviest of which would be bloodshed. However as yet, with all the time that has passed, and the short time to come, no practical or 'perfectly workable' solutions have either been suggested or accepted. This is the reality that brexiters face now that they have won the battle to take back control, but brexiters seem unable and unwilling to face that reality.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There could be a myriad of reasons, but to 'leave' implies a separation, no longer connected as it were, and if anybody doesn't think that means a border, then they are the ones who are a bit thick. Voting to leave does not mean voting to stay, ergo a point of separation or division between the two entities. I mean did anybody seriously vote leave expecting the borders to remain the same?
> Whatever reasons people may have told themselves and others they had, the result has happened and the nature of the borders have changed or will change. The next question now that brexiters voted to take back control of the UK borders, is how do they intend to do it.
> One measly year to go



We are not getting anything interesting from these posts. If you go on Twitter and put #FBPE on your Twitter handle you'll get loads of followers who will love you forever.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 131340
> sadly the mincer wasn't working the day theresa may visited the farm


Cows to the left of us, cows to the right, here we are stuck in the middle with mum


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Perfectly workable solutions?
> No that hasn't happened or been suggested.
> There are things that might happen but to call them 'solutions' is a bit ambitious, like the extreme example of a 310 mile razor wire fence with armed patrols...that would be workable, but probably falls down on the 'perfect' bit.
> A united land mass might happen, well the express statement of the brexiteers leader, Theresa May, is that she would refuse to break up the Union, so the 'perfect' bit is tested quite a lot there. Especially as brexit voters are in hock to the DUP.
> ...


Jesus, the 325 mile barbed wire fence is from Bahnhoffstrasse's post about the fence that already exists in the EU,  on the  eastern side!! Liar!!!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Perfectly workable solutions?
> No that hasn't happened or been suggested.
> There are things that might happen but to call them 'solutions' is a bit ambitious, like the extreme example of a 310 mile razor wire fence with armed patrols...that would be workable, but probably falls down on the 'perfect' bit.
> A united land mass might happen, well the express statement of the brexiteers leader, Theresa May, is that she would refuse to break up the Union, so the 'perfect' bit is tested quite a lot there. Especially as brexit voters are in hock to the DUP.
> ...


I don't think you understand what "perfectly workable" means.  Nor, for that matter, what the solutions were.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Jesus, the 325 mile barbed wire fence is from Bahnhoffstrasse's post about the fence that already exists in the EU,  on the  eastern side!! Liar!!!


You are mistaken. I suggested the fence (with machine gun nests) on here weeks ago.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don't think you understand what "perfectly workable" means.  Nor, for that matter, what the solutions were.


My post suggests reasons why solutions mooted so far are not perfectly workable.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don't think you understand what "perfectly workable" means.  Nor, for that matter, what the solutions were.


Can you remind us what the three perfectly workable solutions were (and more importantly what they were a solution to)?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My post suggests reasons why solutions mooted so far are not perfectly workable.


No, it suggests reasons why they aren't perfect.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Can you remind us what the three perfectly workable solutions were (and more importantly what they were a solution to)?


1) United Ireland
2) Hard border in Irish sea, NI remains part of EU
3) Hard border between RoI and NI.

They are all solutions to the problem that if the UK and the EU do not have a suitable trade deal, there needs to be a border between the UK and the RoI.

Of course, a 4th solution would be:
4) Trade deal that prevents the need for a hard border at all.

All of these things can be made to work in practice, which makes them perfectly workable.  Yes, there will be implementation difficulties and yes, there will be losers and antagonistic parties resulting from any of the solution.  Welcome to the world.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 29, 2018)

Solution 1: Whole UK stays in the customs union the problem with this it means that the whole point of Brexit pretty much ceases to be a point and the Tory Brexit backbenchers won't not like it and the Govt possibly falls 
Soluton  2: NI stays in the custom union on its tod, the problems with this is the Scots will demand (and probably eventually get) the same deal, not soon but long term, the integrity of the UK may be threatened.
The Tory brexit backbenchers AND the DUP will like it even less than 1) and the Govt will probably definitely fall.
Solution 3: Some kind of border which may very well be largely virtual rather than physical, the NI nationalists won't like, the ROI government definitely won't like it and they have the power to stall talks as long as they want. 
Whatever solution is picked will also affect the other land border we have with the EU (Spain/Gibraltar)
Whether the Govt falls is an upside or a downside depends on who you are, It's no skin off my nose but the people making or more accurately avoiding making the decision care about that a lot.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> 1) United Ireland
> 2) Hard border in Irish sea, NI remains part of EU
> 3) Hard border between RoI and NI.
> 
> ...


These solutions rely on quite a broad definition of "perfectly workable". One that would also include abandoning Brexit. It would antagonise a bunch of people but whatevs. Welcome to the world. It would save everyone a load of hassle.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> These solutions rely on quite a broad definition of "perfectly workable". One that would also include abandoning Brexit. It would antagonise a bunch of people but whatevs. Welcome to the world. It would save everyone a load of hassle.


I don't think I have ever suggested that abandoning Brexit wouldn't solve the border problem.  However, the ridiculous notion being put forward by philosophical is that there is no workable solution even possible in the event that Brexit goes ahead.  So I have provided three (well, now four)

To be honest, I'm pretty neutral as to whether Brexit happens or not.  Although the country has gone fucking bonkers over it, I don't honestly think the question of whether or not we are in the EU ranks even in the top 20 things we actually need to worry about.  The world moves on either way, and it can do so under a range of political philosophies either way.  Exit the EU, don't exit the EU -- it's not the deciding factor in how we will treat inequality, health, care or any other aspect of human dignity.  We can make those decisions whether in or out of the EU.


----------



## gosub (Mar 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> These solutions rely on quite a broad definition of "perfectly workable". One that would also include abandoning Brexit. It would antagonise a bunch of people but whatevs. Welcome to the world. It would save everyone a load of hassle.



Fair Point.	NEXT UP   Can we get rid of elections?  Having to go down the community centre and tick a box every 4/5 years can be a right pain in the arse especially if its raining.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don't think I have ever suggested that abandoning Brexit wouldn't solve the border problem.  However, the ridiculous notion being put forward by philosophical is that there is no workable solution even possible in the event that Brexit goes ahead.  So I have provided three (well, now four)
> 
> To be honest, I'm pretty neutral as to whether Brexit happens or not.  Although the country has gone fucking bonkers over it, I don't honestly think the question of whether or not we are in the EU ranks even in the top 20 things we actually need to worry about.  The world moves on either way, and it can do so under a range of political philosophies either way.  Exit the EU, don't exit the EU -- it's not the deciding factor in how we will treat inequality, health, care or any other aspect of human dignity.  We can make those decisions whether in or out of the EU.


Except the ones the eu won't let us make.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Except the ones the eu won't let us make.


In practice, could the EU really stop a determined UK renationalising its rail or finding a way of giving state aid, for example?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In practice, could the EU really stop a determined UK renationalising its rail or finding a way of giving state aid, for example?


Yes.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

Could the EU really impose it's shit on Greece/Spain/Ireland/Portugal/all new entrants? Yes.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In practice, could the EU really stop a determined UK renationalising its rail or finding a way of giving state aid, for example?


Aye, if the commission complains that the UK is hampering free movement of capital with an unfair/non-competitive state monopoly, ECJ has ruled against such things in the past. It's all outlined in the fourth railway package.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Could the EU really impose it's shit on Greece/Spain/Ireland/Portugal/all new entrants? Yes.


Of course, because they had those countries over a barrel.  But what are they going to do to the UK if we nationalised and just told the EU to get to fuck?  Throw us out?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In practice, could the EU really stop a determined UK renationalising its rail or finding a way of giving state aid, for example?


If you mean would a left-led govt give in to them - maybe not - but as is built into the plans, each crisis - which this would kick off - is designed to prepare for a move to further integration as a solution to this temporary crisis vs the final aim.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> If you mean would a left-led govt give in to them - maybe not - but as is built into the plans, each crisis - which this would kick off - is designed to prepare for a move to further integration as a solution to this temporary crisis vs the final aim.


Oh yeah, for sure.  It’s a capitalist club built to buttress capitalist governments.  But there’s nothing insurmountable if we had the kind of determined socialist government that we’d need to have anyway to implement proper change.

I dunno.  The EU is a barrier to socialism.  I’m not convinced it’s anywhere near the top of the list, though.  I’ve no love for it and happy enough for us to leave.  But I’m not going to go crazy over it either way.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Of course, because they had those countries over a barrel.  But what are they going to do to the UK if we nationalised and just told the EU to get to fuck?  Throw us out?


Bit late now but they would use the full existing ecj judgements against us and if we didn't back down the penalties this entails would kick in. That would cause a crisis - one welcomed by the eu as it would represent the option to move further with its not yet fully functioning plans of further liberalisation etc  - the meeting of which would iron out any merely political problems like this.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Oh yeah, for sure.  It’s a capitalist club built to buttress capitalist governments.  But there’s nothing insurmountable if we had the kind of determined socialist government that we’d need to have anyway to implement proper change.
> 
> I dunno.  The EU is a barrier to socialism.  I’m not convinced it’s anywhere near the top of the list, though.  I’ve no love for it and happy enough for us to leave.  But I’m not going to go crazy over it either way.


The EU showed it exists in Greece - it shows it exists in ireland, spain and Portugal - it spends millions every day making sure those on the frontiers of fortress europe knows that it exists - a challenge to the very foundations of its existence, that is, neoliberalism  - you can be damn sure they'll fight tooth and nail by every means to stop it. Check the voluminous record of court cases they have fought over every single step of anything like this over country to country (edit: with your money btw)


----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Bit late now but they would use the full existing ecj judgements against us and if we didn't back down the penalties this entails would kick in. That would cause a crisis - one welcomed by the eu as it would represent the option to move further with its not yet fully functioning plans of further liberalisation etc  - the meeting of which would iron out any merely political problems like this.


Well, that does sound pretty heavy.  But I have to weigh that scenario on the one hand with philosophical thinking we’re all racists on the other.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

Surely what the EU can or can't do now is irrelevant to the UK, that ship has sailed and brexiteers won. There are more pressing matters for the UK to deal with as a result, especially what happens on the land border in Ireland, and of course Gibraltar in one year or two and a half years time.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

He's remembered little brave gib now. This will take some time.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

This has a clip from the boss of the World Trade Organisation talking about the Irish border.

Damon Evans : "WTO boss on #HardTalk: Irish border.  …" - Tweet


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Surely what the EU can or can't do now is irrelevant to the UK, that ship has sailed and brexiteers won. There are more pressing matters for the UK to deal with as a result, especially what happens on the land border in Ireland, and of course Gibraltar in one year or two and a half years time.


You don't give a fuck what happens on the land border with Ireland. It's a performance. Do you think anyone is buying it?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This has a clip from the boss of the World Trade Organisation talking about the Irish border.
> 
> Damon Evans : "WTO boss on #HardTalk: Irish border.  …" - Tweet


Marv. Is it from at least 6 years ago?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You don't give a fuck what happens on the land border with Ireland. It's a performance. Do you think anyone is buying it?



I have no idea who is or isn't buying whatever.
I am intrigued as to how you know what I 'give a fuck' about seeing as how we've never met, I suggest it is pure guesswork on your part, and you are wrong anyway.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Marv. Is it from at least 6 years ago?


No.
Within the last week.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 29, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Could the EU really impose it's shit on Greece/Spain/Ireland/Portugal/all new entrants? Yes.



The four named countries are in the Eurozone though. I doubt the UK is constrained in the same way.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The four named countries are in the Eurozone though. I doubt the UK is constrained in the same way.


Have a look on the link i put up - nothing to do with eurozone - all to do with stuff we signed up and now part of the constitution.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 29, 2018)

Didn't we nationalise banks during the banking crisis?

That's a genuine question, because I'm looking at stuff now - including Butcher's link - and finding support for both sides of the argument, including one supposed "legal test" of the Labour 2017 manifesto that said it was all fine. (I'm sure you can find a legal opinion saying the opposite.) 

And, back to the Irish border. Those are all workable plans, and they're exactly what Mrs May has ruled out on a "red-line" basis as THINGS SHE WILL NOT ALLOW! It's that more than anything - and there are lots of other things - that make me think this government isn't really negotiating in good faith.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 29, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> Didn't we nationalise banks during the banking crisis?



I think we may have moved on from trying to make out that EU rules prevent nationalisations, to arguing that they would prevent the creation of something identical to British Rail. I'm not sure if this is true, or how much is the right amount in terms of caring about it, but it's a much less ridiculous proposition.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 29, 2018)

Ah, OK, sorry.


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 29, 2018)

Surely if the EU wouldn't try to stop a rail natuonalisation, you'd need be asking yourself why the fuck the citizens of europe have been paying a fortune for an army of Eurocrats in Brussels to develop tomes of ineffective directives and legislation to do exactly that.
All while their colleagues have been enforcing austerity in the poorest parts of the continent.

if there's an EU version of the Trade Descriptions Act they need to have themselves nicked for using the word union in their name.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> if there's an EU version of the Trade Descriptions Act they we need to have themselves ourselves nicked for using the word union in their our name.


----------



## Raheem (Mar 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Surely if the EU wouldn't try to stop a rail natuonalisation, you'd need be asking yourself why the fuck the citizens of europe have been paying a fortune for an army of Eurocrats in Brussels to develop tomes of ineffective directives and legislation to do exactly that.



Before we ask why, we should probably ask if.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Surely if the EU wouldn't try to stop a rail natuonalisation, you'd need be asking yourself why the fuck the citizens of europe have been paying a fortune for an army of Eurocrats in Brussels to develop tomes of ineffective directives and legislation to do exactly that.
> All while their colleagues have been enforcing austerity in the poorest parts of the continent.
> 
> if there's an EU version of the Trade Descriptions Act they need to have themselves nicked for using the word union in their name.


The whole job is a lie. They're open about it. I'll add them things i said on the eu reading list and also Europe Didn't Work Why We Left and How to Get the Best from Brexit tmw (first and last chapters need to read)

(i'll add a link to the book in a bit)


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> To be honest, I'm pretty neutral as to whether Brexit happens or not.  Although the country has gone fucking bonkers over it, I don't honestly think the question of whether or not we are in the EU ranks even in the top 20 things we actually need to worry about.  The world moves on either way, and it can do so under a range of political philosophies either way.  Exit the EU, don't exit the EU -- it's not the deciding factor in how we will treat inequality, health, care or any other aspect of human dignity.  We can make those decisions whether in or out of the EU.


To some extent, or perhaps to an increasing extent, I agree. Whether we're in or out isn't a deciding factor in those things. But if you're neutral in that way - the benefits of being in or out aren't clear one way or the other - then the cost of making the change surely becomes the significant factor in deciding whether we should leave. There's going to be a big cost in terms of general hassle, and time spent doing, basically admin type stuff that could be spent doing more useful stuff. And all the "perfectly workable" solutions you describe have a cost for at least some people in Ireland. The Irish border thing can't be solved without creating a mess of some kind. So that's why I can't dismiss it as a triviality. Of course, for people who believe there's a great benefit for the people of Britain in leaving the EU, then it can be dismissed as just an unfortunate but necessary side effect.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Before we ask why, we should probably ask if.


yes.


----------



## WJ90 (Mar 30, 2018)

Yes. 

Article 50 has been triggered, we're half way into the process; both main parties support the concept of leaving the European Union; there's no overwhelming public desire to reverse the Brexit etc; etc.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> To some extent, or perhaps to an increasing extent, I agree. Whether we're in or out isn't a deciding factor in those things. But if you're neutral in that way - the benefits of being in or out aren't clear one way or the other - then the cost of making the change surely becomes the significant factor in deciding whether we should leave. There's going to be a big cost in terms of general hassle, and time spent doing, basically admin type stuff that could be spent doing more useful stuff. And all the "perfectly workable" solutions you describe have a cost for at least some people in Ireland. The Irish border thing can't be solved without creating a mess of some kind. So that's why I can't dismiss it as a triviality. Of course, for people who believe there's a great benefit for the people of Britain in leaving the EU, then it can be dismissed as just an unfortunate but necessary side effect.


Does it matter whether I agree or not?  The vote was to leave.  Subverting directly asked democratic decisions is something with downstream consequences at least as great as losing a few points of GDP.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Does it matter whether I agree or not?  The vote was to leave.  Subverting directly asked democratic decisions is something with downstream consequences at least as great as losing a few points of GDP.


This x 1000. Of course many are David-Cameron-confident that a further year of project fear bullying and screaming about doomsday scenarios has been sufficient and that most of us are ready to #thinkagain. They've not learned much from all this it seems.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Does it matter whether I agree or not?  The vote was to leave.  Subverting directly asked democratic decisions is something with downstream consequences at least as great as losing a few points of GDP.



“Subverting” is a bit loaded, isn’t it? There are perfectly democratic pathways to change the direction of travel of the UK. We don’t talk about a later election result “subverting” the result of the earlier one. 

FWIW I am not in favour of a second referendum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2018)

WJ90 said:


> Yes.
> 
> Article 50 has been triggered, we're half way into the process; both main parties support the concept of leaving the European Union; there's no overwhelming public desire to reverse the Brexit etc; etc.


TBH there's no overwhelming desire to leave, unless you think 52:48 is a massive majority


----------



## pocketscience (Mar 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Before we ask why, we should probably ask if.





teuchter said:


> yes.


The sentence makes no sense if i replace the word why with if. 
Are you saying that it's quesionable if EU citizens pay for Eurocrats making laws or, it's questionable if the EU has made directives and law that stifles (re)-nationalisation (in this case rail)?


----------



## Raheem (Mar 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The sentence makes no sense if i replace the word why with if.



I double checked and it absolutely does, provided you can live with a sentence containing the phrase "if the fuck".


----------



## gosub (Mar 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Before we ask why, we should probably ask if.


At the very least you are showing how opaque their systems are.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2018)

Wells has a piece on a year-on polling - precis here with links to more detailed piece - upshot seems to be be little has changed, leavers still want to leave and enough remainers think we should leave on the basis of democratic process to produce a majority for leave and against 2nd referendum. Bad polling for Corbyn as well.

Nary a mention of ireland either - for shame.


----------



## Hollis (Mar 30, 2018)

Whatever the opposite of Lexit is... that's where we're heading.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Does it matter whether I agree or not?  The vote was to leave.  Subverting directly asked democratic decisions is something with downstream consequences at least as great as losing a few points of GDP.



But most of the "workable solutions" seem to subvert the Good Friday Agreement, which was also the result of a democratic referendum decided with a much larger majority (and a much clearer statement of the consequences and details of practical implementation) than the Brexit one.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 30, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Whatever the opposite of Lexit is... that's where we're heading.



Rexit. WreckShit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 30, 2018)

*rēxit*

third-person singular perfect activeindicative of _regō_
*regō* (_present infinitive_ *regere*, _perfect active _*rēxī*, _supine_ *rēctum*); _third conjugation_

I rule, govern
I guide, steer
I oversee, manage
Not a great term for the current fiasco-in-progress. Little guidance, oversight or management in evidence, tragically.

Though the supine form may have some input on the matter.


----------



## MickiQ (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> But most of the "workable solutions" seem to subvert the Good Friday Agreement, which was also the result of a democratic referendum decided with a much larger majority (and a much clearer statement of the consequences and details of practical implementation) than the Brexit one.


Well yes but that wasn't mentioned during the campaign, the Leave argument was all Take Back Control, More Money for the NHS and Schools (with a nasty subtext about immigrants) the Remain campaign was almost entirely scaremongering about the negative consequences of leaving. 
I was expecting Remain to win but I wasn't all that surprised by the Leave Vote, The Remain campaign was promising a better world whilst the Leave campaign was keep the status quo or else.
If someone is struggling to get by under the status quo they can hardly be expected to vote to keep things the same, something the likes of Cable and Blair just can't grasp. 
I think if the Good Friday Agreement had been brought up in the campaign it would have made little to no difference because to most people in the mainland UK it is just not that relevant an issue. 
It has the possibility of becoming a massive issue if Mayhem and her bunch of clowns can't come up with something that satifies the ROI Govt since they will able to stall any trade negotiations (which the Tories do care about) until they are happy with the solution.


----------



## andysays (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> But most of the "workable solutions" seem to subvert the Good Friday Agreement, which was also the result of a democratic referendum decided with a much larger majority (and a much clearer statement of the consequences and details of practical implementation) than the Brexit one.



So the people of Britain are simply not allowed to leave the EU, even though they voted to do so, because the people of Ireland voted for something else which might be difficult (though certainly not impossible) to continue if Britain were to leave.

Sounds legit...


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> “Subverting” is a bit loaded, isn’t it? There are perfectly democratic pathways to change the direction of travel of the UK. We don’t talk about a later election result “subverting” the result of the earlier one.
> 
> FWIW I am not in favour of a second referendum.



I’m not in principle averse to a second referendum and if such a thing were to indicate a remain vote, that should become the default position.

But you are not in favour of a second referendum, and neither am I.  So what other route us there that does not subvert democracy?



teuchter said:


> But most of the "workable solutions" seem to subvert the Good Friday Agreement, which was also the result of a democratic referendum decided with a much larger majority (and a much clearer statement of the consequences and details of practical implementation) than the Brexit one.


it doesn’t subvert the GFA at all.  That’s a non-starter if an argument.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m not in principle averse to a second referendum and if such a thing were to indicate a remain vote, that should become the default position.
> 
> But you are not in favour of a second referendum, and neither am I.  So what other route us there that does not subvert democracy.



A General Election won by a party or coalition running on a ticket of reversing/diluting Brexit. Doesn’t look very likely, but perfectly democratic.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 30, 2018)

given may explicitly made her snap election about brexit? That went well.

Although that reaming-the-poor and robbing-the-old manifesto can't have helped either


----------



## Supine (Mar 30, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Though the supine form may have some input on the matter.



Nope!


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> A General Election won by a party or coalition running on a ticket of reversing/diluting Brexit. Doesn’t look very likely, but perfectly democratic.


Only if that were the only dividing line between parties.  Which it never will be.  Otherwise, how can it override a directly asked question?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> it doesn’t subvert the GFA at all.  That’s a non-starter if an argument.



One of your perfectly workable solutions was a united Ireland. That can't come about without subverting the GFA unless enough people vote for it.

I'm less clear about whether a hard land border technically subverts the GFA. It seems at least to subvert the spirit of it though.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> So the people of Britain are simply not allowed to leave the EU, even though they voted to do so, because the people of Ireland voted for something else which might be difficult (though certainly not impossible) to continue if Britain were to leave.
> 
> Sounds legit...


NI is part of the UK and this will affect them the most, not Ireland.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Only if that were the only dividing line between parties.  Which it never will be.  Otherwise, how can it override a directly asked question?



Do you mean politically or constitutionally? The constitutional position is quite clear. The referendum was advisory only.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> One of your perfectly workable solutions was a united Ireland. That can't come about without subverting the GFA unless enough people vote for it.


Im not suggesting it happens without people voting for it.



> I'm less clear about whether a hard land border technically subverts the GFA. It seems at least to subvert the spirit of it though.


Well, come back to me when you are clear on it.

The notion you seem to be putting forward is that it is literally impossible for the UK to leave the EU simply because of the Irish border.  But if you take a step back from the detail of how it will end up being done in practice, that as a notion clearly has to be ridiculous.  Borders exist all over the world in all kinds of forms.  Its not beyond the British and Irish governments to have the same.

So from this point, it’s up to the democratic governments of the U.K. and ROI and their people to decide which are their priorities and then go from there.  Starting with the notion that an open border is the one sacrosanct item in the whole decision making process really is letting the tail wag the dog.  Instead, people will have to start by accepting that the EU will not allow a no border to exist in the absence of a trade deal and then work out from there which of the three options is their most preferred.  Either that or agree a trade deal that allows the border to stay open.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 30, 2018)

the only people to oppose the GFA are now in a confidence and supply arrangement with the Tory party, the british state. The 'spirit' of the agreement eh

I see theres a vast network of old military tunnels in the rock of gibraltar. I know where I make my lst stand then.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> Do you mean politically or constitutionally? The constitutional position is quite clear. The referendum was advisory only.


Constitutionally, those in power can pretty much always find a way to do whatever the fuck they want.  When I talked about a step back from Brexit subverting the democratic process, do you think I meant constitutionally?


----------



## Riklet (Mar 30, 2018)

Arguably hard border with the UK combined with losing a next door EU trading partner will be far worse for the ROI. And they know it. Why else is this charade over the border still going on?

The Irish gov dont have the balls to push the issue in terms of a united Ireland, clearly. This is the ace in the British government's hand, but which they cant play cos of.... the DUP. 

Just been hanging out with a mate from the North. He is worried about Brexit impact and the lack of government and current mess. The Good Friday Agreement has been shafted far more by the dodgy DUP deal than by Brexit, as things stand in 2018.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Constitutionally, those in power can pretty much always find a way to do whatever the fuck they want.  When I talked about a step back from Brexit subverting the democratic process, do you think I meant constitutionally?



I doubt if I can craft an argument which convinces you that those in power aren't cynical and I won't even try. It's a pretty barren cul de sac to go down.

However when you said:



kabbes said:


> Only if that were the only dividing line between parties.  Which it never will be.  Otherwise, how can it override a directly asked question?



You seemed to be saying that the referendum result was binding in perpetuity until there was another referendum asking the same question. This article has some interesting thoughts on that:

A mandate can be either democratic or irreversible, but it cannot be both – an argument


----------



## andysays (Mar 30, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> NI is part of the UK and this will affect them the most, not Ireland.



And the people of NI voted to remain in the EU; if they choose to leave the UK and become part of Eire, as there is provision for under the GFA, then both those wishes could be met simultaneously. I've already said that would be my preferred solution but that ultimately it's not for me to decide.

But my post referred deliberately to the people of Britain, who have voted to leave the EU but weren't consulted about the GFA, and who, I suggest, cannot and should not be prevented from doing so because of the GFA.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

In principle, given time, the U.K. government can reasonably diverge from a referendum result based on their electoral mandates.  But not so soon after the result of direct question.  It’d create a massive democratic crisis.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Im not suggesting it happens without people voting for it.



Then that has implications for its "workability".






kabbes said:


> The notion you seem to be putting forward is that it is literally impossible for the UK to leave the EU simply because of the Irish border.


No, I don't think it's impossible. I think that people are being unrealistic in dismissing it as a significant issue though.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> But my post referred deliberately to the people of Britain, who have voted to leave the EU but weren't consulted about the GFA, and who, I suggest, cannot and should not be prevented from doing so because of the GFA.



So does, in principle, _any_ potential consequence of leaving the EU have to be tolerated simply because people "weren't consulted about it"?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> And the people of NI voted to remain in the EU; if they choose to leave the UK and become part of Eire, as there is provision for under the GFA, then both those wishes could be met simultaneously. I've already said that would be my preferred solution but that ultimately it's not for me to decide.
> 
> But my post referred deliberately to the people of Britain, who have voted to leave the EU but weren't consulted about the GFA, and who, I suggest, cannot and should not be prevented from doing so because of the GFA.


Put it this way: the people of NI should have a referendum about joining ROI before we even DREAM of talking about letting the Irish border issue driving the need for a second Brexit referendum.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Then that has implications for its "workability".


No, it simply has implications regarding which of the three possibilities should be preferred in the absence of a trade deal.  If it is the most preferred, it is perfectly workable.


----------



## andysays (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So does, in principle, _any_ potential consequence of leaving the EU have to be tolerated simply because people "weren't consulted about it"?



As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.

In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, it simply has implications regarding which of the three possibilities should be preferred in the absence of a trade deal.  If it is the most preferred, it is perfectly workable.


Preferred by who?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.
> 
> In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.


I've not said your aims are sinister, and I don't believe they are sinister. I don't think that a hard land border, or a sea border, would necessarily threaten "peace". I do think they might have unhappy consequences for people living in Ireland, and I don't think you can ignore that.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> I doubt if I can craft an argument which convinces you that those in power aren't cynical and I won't even try. It's a pretty barren cul de sac to go down.
> 
> However when you said:
> 
> ...


I think that what kabbes was trying to get across is that your idea of a party being elected to simply reverse or dilute brexit is a bit of fantasy given that elections are always fought on multiple issues - the last election demonstrated that beyond any reasonable doubt. In fact the only democratic mechanism that allows single issues to be voted on is a referendum - and leave won that - also beyond any reasonable doubt. So the reality would be  party with a pledge to reverse brexit winning but not elected on that basis then reversing the actual only democratic political mandate on the issue. And if you want to go down that road the last election resulted in parties committed to honouring the democratic referendum results winning 85% of the vote. So allied with the referendum results i think its pretty clear what democracy says - and the anti-democratic potential of your preferred scenario.

As for this guff about a united ireland 'subverting the gfa' - no it doesn't. The gfa put in place a mechanism for moving towards a democratically agreed consensual united ireland. It is not an agreement that is designed to set the current situation in stone. I wonder if those so _suddenly _concerned with the gfa have given the thing more than cursory glance as they boot it down the road as the latest transparent anti-brexit political football.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> And the people of NI voted to remain in the EU; if they choose to leave the UK and become part of Eire, as there is provision for under the GFA, then both those wishes could be met simultaneously. I've already said that would be my preferred solution but that ultimately it's not for me to decide.
> 
> But my post referred deliberately to the people of Britain, who have voted to leave the EU but weren't consulted about the GFA, and who, I suggest, cannot and should not be prevented from doing so because of the GFA.


That's just your construct though, the UK is leaving the EU so it has to come up with a solution for NI, which is a part of the UK.

It wasn't all of Britain either, Scotland was remain.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The gfa put in place a mechanism for moving towards a democratically agreed consensual united ireland.


At a pace determined by the people living there, not at a pace determined by what's convenient for the majority of UK residents.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> As far as I'm concerned, the way various people here (including you) and elsewhere have brought up and pursued the Irish border question in relation to Brexit is basically dishonest.
> 
> In the guise of 'simply asking questions' like your latest one, you've attempted to smear those of us who voted for Brexit as being prepared to sacrifice peace in Ireland in order to achieve our sinister aims, whatever the consequences. You can fuck right off with that, frankly.



What’s extraordinary is how sensitive Leavers like you are about your victory. Lots of straw men about being smeared as racist or in favour of restarting the Troubles. If anyone accuses you of that then by all means call them out - but don’t use it as a way of evading the difficulties of implementing the decision you’ve made.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> At a pace determined by the people living there, not at a pace determined by what's convenient for the majority of UK residents.


There is no mechanism for hurrying people into a united ireland via the gfa as result of brexit or anything else.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Constitutionally, those in power can pretty much always find a way to do whatever the fuck they want.  When I talked about a step back from Brexit subverting the democratic process, do you think I meant constitutionally?



Democratic process. You've not been reading the papers lately have you?


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Preferred by who?


By whom

By whomsoever is relevant to the decision making process.


----------



## Winot (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In principle, given time, the U.K. government can reasonably diverge from a referendum result based on their electoral mandates.  But not so soon after the result of direct question.  It’d create a massive democratic crisis.



That’s not what you said though. You said



kabbes said:


> Only if that were the only dividing line between parties.  Which it never will be.  Otherwise, how can it override a directly asked question?



So the question is how long after the referendum is long enough. And that depends on what has happened since and how big the mandate is at the GE.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 30, 2018)

only the lib dems would go for such madness at this time. And I'm sure I can guess who'd vote for them again


----------



## WJ90 (Mar 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> TBH there's no overwhelming desire to leave, unless you think 52:48 is a massive majority



Correct; but the legal process of leaving has already been started, thus you need an overwhelming desire to remain to overturn that.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> So the people of Britain are simply not allowed to leave the EU, even though they voted to do so, because the people of Ireland voted for something else which might be difficult (though certainly not impossible) to continue if Britain were to leave.
> 
> Sounds legit...


The UK can leave the EU, all they need to do is come up with a credible plan as to how to do it. It shouldn't be at all a problem because many many brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, it would be nice if they told the rest of the population mind you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> One of your perfectly workable solutions was a united Ireland. That can't come about without subverting the GFA unless enough people vote for it.
> 
> I'm less clear about whether a hard land border technically subverts the GFA. It seems at least to subvert the spirit of it though.



Whatever it subverts, the practicality of doing it is either impossible, or impossibly draining on resources.


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 30, 2018)

I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made


100% it's my responsibility to consider the consequences of whoever I vote for getting into power.


----------



## Hollis (Mar 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The UK can leave the EU, all they need to do is come up with a credible plan as to how to do it. It shouldn't be at all a problem because many many brexit voters continually say they knew what they were voting for, it would be nice if they told the rest of the population mind you.



Immigrants.

I wonder if May went back to the EU and said, if we can stop/limit this free-flow of immigrants, then we'll stay part of the gang?


----------



## stethoscope (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> 100% it's my responsibility to consider the consequences of whoever I vote for getting into power.



No vote from you next time then


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

stethoscope said:


> I presume on the basis of some of the line of argument here people voting Labour locally in London will also provide a credible plan to prevent people in social housing losing the roofs over their heads to said councils interpretation of implementing the decision you have made


It would be a good idea for voters to think up credible plans for what they are voting for, it might focus the minds of some before they vote.
For me the crucial difference between local elections and general elections, and the referendum, is that the referendum is now for all time (I certainly don't want another one) and other election happenings can be re visited, including the credibility and practicality of plans regarding housing.
Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> There is no mechanism for hurrying people into a united ireland via the gfa as result of brexit or anything else.


If a united Ireland is one of the "workable solutions" and the GFA is not to be subverted, then it has to happen via the GFA, and it has to happen in, what, the next two years or something. Maybe some people think that's something that's in some way likely to happen. As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.



And you'll keep reacting ad nauseam like a broken record.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.


I don’t think you understand what “workable” means either.


----------



## Santino (Mar 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It would be a good idea for voters to think up credible plans for what they are voting for, it might focus the minds of some before they vote.
> For me the crucial difference between local elections and general elections, and the referendum, is that the referendum is now for all time (I certainly don't want another one) and other election happenings can be re visited, including the credibility and practicality of plans regarding housing.
> Brexiters have voted for this current situation and it is entirely down to them to manage it in my view, I didn't vote for it so I feel it isn't my problem to solve, all I need to do is react to the impact of the brexiteers decision...they won.


That's not very democratic. In a democracy you should respect the outcome of the process and work together to implement it.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If a united Ireland is one of the "workable solutions" and the GFA is not to be subverted, then it has to happen via the GFA, and it has to happen in, what, the next two years or something. Maybe some people think that's something that's in some way likely to happen. As far as I can see you'd have to see it as likely to happen in order to consider a united Ireland a workable solution to the border issue arising from Brexit.


So the operation of  the gfa leading to  a united ireland subverts the gfa?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

eatmorecheese said:


> And you'll keep reacting ad nauseam like a broken record.


Yep. The broken record is an excellent technique.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

Santino said:


> That's not very democratic. In a democracy you should respect the outcome of the process and work together to implement it.


I suppose that is your personal definition of what democracy means, you won't be surprised to know I disagree.
If there was a 'democratic' decision to haul off people without generations of proof that their ancestors were born in the UK and force them on transport to somewhere else I would not 'respect' that at all but fight against it as best I could.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So the operation of  the gfa leading to  a united ireland subverts the gfa?


huh?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 30, 2018)

Clause six of the GFA sets out how a United Ireland might come about.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I don’t think you understand what “workable” means either.


I think I understand that to you it means "something that could happen were all the conditions right for it to happen".


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So the operation of  the gfa leading to  a united ireland subverts the gfa?


it's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 30, 2018)

I'm repeating myself too, but all the "workable" solutions for the Irish border have been ruled out by May's Red Lines.

And those Red Lines mean your workable solution must include:

No "hard border" - and that seems to mean leaving the border exactly as it is now so you can just stroll across, no cameras no nothing.

No difference in laws, regulations, status and so on between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK - so no "Irish Sea border".

It's madness! I honestly don't get what they're doing. 

(Just to state my position, I voted Remain, I can't see any justification for a 2nd referendum and can't imagine that changing unless something hugely dramatic happens (Russians release Farage and Trump pee tape perhaps - sleep well!) I hope we get a good deal and think "no deal" could be a disaster.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2018)

StigoftheDig said:


> I'm repeating myself too, but all the "workable" solutions for the Irish border have been ruled out by May's Red Lines.
> 
> And those Red Lines mean your workable solution must include:
> 
> ...


should be white lines


----------



## kabbes (Mar 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think I understand that to you it means "something that could happen were all the conditions right for it to happen".


nope


----------



## StigoftheDig (Mar 30, 2018)

Maybe so if the solutions they seem to have ended up with are either some super-high-tech thing that no-one knows about yet, or the Rees Mogg solution of Ireland also leaving the EU and essentially rejoining the UK!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2018)




----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> only the lib dems would go for such madness at this time. And I'm sure I can guess who'd vote for them again



What, besides trevhagl ?


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 5, 2018)

Load of Bullocks


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 5, 2018)

It's a different Steve Bullock! 

He might be lots of things, but he's not the Millwall bloke. 

Steve Bullock (@GuitarMoog) on Twitter


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 5, 2018)

D'oh


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 5, 2018)

All Bullocks are equal, but some are more equal than others. . .


----------



## philosophical (Apr 6, 2018)

BBC Radio 4 - Davy Crockett and the Irish Frontiersmen


----------



## David Clapson (Apr 8, 2018)

Gina Miller has tweeted a link to an interesting Times story about the NI border. But I can't read it - seems I need a promo code to read 2 articles per week. Or something. Here's the link Brexit and the Irish border Can anyone paste the story or give me a code pls??


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 10, 2018)

Hillary Clinton: Brexit must not undermine peace in Northern Ireland

used prison/slave labour, husbands a rapist and you helped to cover it. Something else. Oh yeah,lost to trump.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Hillary Clinton: Brexit must not undermine peace in Northern Ireland
> 
> used prison/slave labour, husbands a rapist and you helped to cover it. Something else. Oh yeah,lost to trump.


yeh but won the popular vote


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but won the popular vote


bernie would have won the college, the pop vote and the world cup for england tho


----------



## mather (Apr 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Hillary Clinton: Brexit must not undermine peace in Northern Ireland
> 
> used prison/slave labour, husbands a rapist and you helped to cover it. Something else. Oh yeah,lost to trump.



Not to mention American support for Irish terrorism, NORAID etc...


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 10, 2018)

Interesting poll, not on the "whether" but on the "what". 

Quite encouraging for the Labour view: 

https://www.ippr.org/files/2018-03/1521809277_leaving-the-eu-briefing-part2.pdf 

There's an article here that sort of summarises it: 

Public attitudes to Brexit: the referendum was more a vote for re-regulation than for de-regulation | British Politics and Policy at LSE 

Though, I'm not sure they do so entirely fairly - they've decided not to talk about the immigration "tradeoff" (50% of people, largest group, favour immigration controls over freer trade in services). 

The polling method is slightly different too, so you may want to look at the questions before you take a particularly strong view. 

The headline that's been thrown around has been the massive public opposition (85%) to lowering food standards to get a trade deal with the US of Trump.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 10, 2018)

Ahern: People would 'pull down' Irish border


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 10, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ahern: People would 'pull down' Irish border



Do you have any views or opinions or interests in anything else at all?  You're coming across as a weirdo obsessive.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 10, 2018)

You are applying your personal filter when sitting in judgement over me. You are not necessarily correct.
Today is the anniversary of the Belfast agreement, hence me posting that link. It suits your personal psychology to respond with a put down. You have the problem regarding your interaction.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 10, 2018)

Search Results | urban75 forums
Consider other hobbies


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 11, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Apr 11, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Search Results | urban75 forums
> Consider other hobbies


I have investigated groupthink and no platforming but they didn't appeal.


----------



## sealion (Apr 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ahern: People would 'pull down' Irish border


That's an edited version of a much longer interview. He also said he could not envisage any of the past troubles happening again.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> That's an edited version of a much longer interview. He also said he could not envisage any of the past troubles happening again.



Because he can't see a border happening. 

That's good. 

He even came up with an answer: the UK in a customs union with the EU. That the UK Government seems to have ruled out...


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 11, 2018)

Major Tom said:
			
		

> With less than one year until Britain leaves the EU, the future shape of the UK’s relations with the bloc and its member countries remains extremely unclear. For international businesses making investment decisions that go far beyond Brexit, this situation is damaging and hard to bear.


Enders can do one. He's been divesting Airbus work away from Europe since he took over. Final Assembly Lines to Alabama and Tianjing, Composite centers in China, Engineering work to India & China, outsourcing the A320 wing production work done in Broughton to South Korea... Not a single job created in Europe just an organic reduction strategy during his tenure.
Well Tom, the situation for Airbus Employees and the multitude of sub-contractors is also hard to bear!

Ex member of Bavaria's center right CSU party. Bilderburg regular.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 13, 2018)

EFTA Parliamentary Committee members discuss Brexit with counterparts in the UK | European Free Trade Association


----------



## andysays (Apr 15, 2018)

Another day, another campaign to impose a second referendum

Brexit: 'People's vote' campaign group launched


> A new campaign has been launched for a "people's vote" on the final Brexit deal between the UK and the EU. Pro-EU MPs, celebrities and business leaders are attempting to persuade people to back another referendum before the UK leaves. Actor Sir Patrick Stewart, who is backing the campaign, said that if voters rejected the deal, the UK would "simply stay" in the EU.



Shouldn't someone remind Captain Picard about the Prime Directive?


----------



## mather (Apr 15, 2018)

> Pro-EU MPs, celebrities and business leaders



So much for the people's vote, more like that of the elite.


----------



## sealion (Apr 15, 2018)

Unless Timmy Mallet jumps on board , these people will be laughed at.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Enders can do one. He's been divesting Airbus work away from Europe since he took over. Final Assembly Lines to Alabama and Tianjing, Composite centers in China, Engineering work to India & China, outsourcing the A320 wing production work done in Broughton to South Korea... Not a single job created in Europe just an organic reduction strategy during his tenure.
> Well Tom, the situation for Airbus Employees and the multitude of sub-contractors is also hard to bear!
> 
> Ex member of Bavaria's center right CSU party. Bilderburg regular.


OK...so this guy specializes in giving Euro jobs to non-Euro countries and you're telling him to fuck off, aye?  

btw India just ditched 1000 Jaguar jobs in the UK.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> OK...so this guy specializes in giving Euro jobs to non-Euro countries and you're telling him to fuck off, aye?
> 
> btw India just ditched 1000 Jaguar jobs in the UK.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> OK...so this guy specializes in giving Euro jobs to non-Euro countries and you're telling him to fuck off, aye?


He specialises in maximising profits for shareholders. Lost "Euro jobs" are the collateral damage.
So yes, I am.


DexterTCN said:


> btw India just ditched 1000 Jaguar jobs in the UK.


 They can fuck off as well as far as I'm concerned
(Diesel cars not selling after massive scandals and increased regulations shocker - but lets try and blame it on brexit)


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> He specialises in maximising profits for shareholders. Lost "Euro jobs" are the collateral damage.
> So yes, I am...


um...but you're not going to be in Europe...and he gives Euro jobs to non Euros.   So you're telling someone who can give you jobs to fuck off?


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

India's not in Europe either you know...they're part of that Empire 2.0 thing.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> um...but you're not going to be in Europe...and he gives Euro jobs to non Euros.   So you're telling someone who can give you jobs to fuck off?


Yes. In his tenure the amount of positions at Airbus have decreased while the rate of production has increased (for example the A320 family deliveries per year have doubled since 2005). The extra work for delivering twice as many aircraft is done by low paid, shit contract workers in china and a southern US right-to-work state where unions are basically prohibited.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yes. In his tenure the amount of positions at Airbus have decreased while the rate of production has increased (for example the A320 family deliveries per year have doubled since 2005). The extra work for delivering twice as many aircraft is done by low paid, shit contract workers in china and a southern US right-to-work state where unions are basically prohibited.


You understand there is a finite amount of work, yeah?

You know what that means...in real terms.

A finite amount of work.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You understand there is a finite amount of work, yeah?
> 
> You know what that means...in real terms.
> 
> A finite amount of work.


Real terms? No I don't know what you mean. Sounds negotiable to me. Please explain.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> um...but you're not going to be in Europe...



You do realise that just because the UK has chosen to leave a political union with some European countries we are not actually leaving Europe? Sadly we are not being towed off to the Caribbean.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You do realise that just because the UK has chosen to leave a political union with some European countries we are not actually leaving Europe? Sadly we are not being towed off to the Caribbean.


You want jobs though, yeah?


----------



## mauvais (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Enders can do one. He's been divesting Airbus work away from Europe since he took over. Final Assembly Lines to Alabama and Tianjing, Composite centers in China, Engineering work to India & China, outsourcing the A320 wing production work done in Broughton to South Korea... Not a single job created in Europe just an organic reduction strategy during his tenure.
> Well Tom, the situation for Airbus Employees and the multitude of sub-contractors is also hard to bear!
> 
> Ex member of Bavaria's center right CSU party. Bilderburg regular.


Airbus needs, in particular, American production facilities with American jobs in play to deal with American protectionism, which in turn is (amongst other things) a major barrier to sales. Hardly surprising then that they've set up in Alabama. In theory it has rewards for its European staff through competitiveness and scale, and is a better version of BAES' American strategy which was to try and fuck off over there entirely.

I can't comment on the rest of it as I haven't followed the industry so much of late.


----------



## Supine (Apr 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sadly we are not being towed off to the Caribbean.



Oh FFS. I've already bought my Bermuda shorts!


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Airbus needs, in particular, American production facilities with American jobs in play to deal with American protectionism, which in turn is (amongst other things) a major barrier to sales. Hardly surprising then that they've set up in Alabama. In theory it has rewards for its European staff through competitiveness and scale, and is a better version of BAES' American strategy which was to try and fuck off over there entirely.
> 
> I can't comment on the rest of it as I haven't followed the industry so much of late.


The reason given at the time was to hedge the Euro/ Dollar fluctuation. Now the Alabama FAL is up and running it's being used as leverage against the unions across Europe (yes, that includes the UK dexter) in the latest contract negotiations.
Look how Filton went. First sold off to GKN, now GKN is being fucked over while the work is being primed for Asia. Airbus never _had_ to sell it in the first place.
Give it another 15 years and airbus will just be a bunch of suits in Toulouse running various remote outsourced production lines full of the cheapest zero hours contractors.
To think it was once a flag ship of european unity. The closest thing you'd get to an EUropean nationalised industry. Days long gone.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You want jobs though, yeah?



Is money the main thing in life for you?


----------



## mauvais (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The reason given at the time was to hedge the Euro/ Dollar fluctuation. Now the Alabama FAL is up and running it's being used as leverage against the unions across Europe (yes, that includes the UK dexter) in the latest contract negotiations.
> Look how Filton went. First sold off to GKN, now GKN is being fucked over while the work is being primed for Asia. Airbus never _had_ to sell it in the first place.
> Give it another 15 years and airbus will just be a bunch of suits in Toulouse running various remote outsourced production lines full of the cheapest zero hours contractors.
> To think it was once a flag ship of european unity. The closest thing you'd get to an EUropean nationalised industry. Days long gone.


Personally I doubt it, and I think you misdescribe some of this stuff, although at this rate the mainstream British aerospace industry will be toast in about that time, independently of what happens to Airbus. Not necessarily Brexit per se but because the government lacks the various qualities - and now the priorities - necessary to protect it. I think elsewhere in Europe the situation is far brighter, but no guarantees.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is money the main thing in life for you?


I talk about work...you see it as talk about money.

You're a twat obviously but both points are relevant.   They are intertwined.   Where will they come from?

Of the many issues involved in brexit I think maybe those who profess to speak for the working class start to tell everyone about how the working class continues to work.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I talk about work...you see it as talk about money.
> 
> You're a twat obviously but both points are relevant.   They are intertwined.   Where will they come from?
> 
> Of the many issues involved in brexit I think maybe those who profess to speak for the working class start to tell everyone about how the working class continues to work.


Maybe you could help us. Explain it in real terms, like.
Does it mean working at the same rates and in the same conditions as the chinese?


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Maybe you could help us. Explain it in real terms, like.
> Does it mean working at the same rates and in the same conditions as the chinese?


You're not good enough to go up against the Chinese.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

That's it, in real terms.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're not good enough to go up against the Chinese.


That's it then. Forget brexit. Forget the UK. Forget Europe. The chinese are better. 

This is almost as good as your "Britain doesn't export anything so give up" bollocks.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 15, 2018)

The Chinese are better at what you will bring to the table, yes.   Would you like to see the stats?   Let's agree not to bother.

It's not you v the chinese, you v europe, you v the world...it's perfectly reasonable to ask what you bring to the table when you want to go it alone.

A parent would ask a teenager having a tantrum what they're going to live on, wouldn't they?   (and could see terrible things)

The easiest way to answer is just to answer...what are you bringing to the global table that people will want/buy/trade/gamble/invest?   Cause it's not the fucking workers as they currently are...the workers get fucking fucked in that scenario.


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Personally I doubt it, and I think you misdescribe some of this stuff, although at this rate the mainstream British aerospace industry will be toast in about that time, independently of what happens to Airbus. Not necessarily Brexit per se but because the government lacks the various qualities - and now the priorities - necessary to protect it. I think elsewhere in Europe the situation is far brighter, but no guarantees.


What do you think is misdescribed?
(Considering I'm calling bullshit on Enders' claim that brexit may cause a risk of double cerification for UK parts, when in fact he's been responsible for  extending the Airbus supply chain way beyond the contries that host either the EASA or FAA.)


----------



## pocketscience (Apr 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The Chinese are better at what you will bring to the table, yes.   Would you like to see the stats?   Let's agree not to bother.
> 
> It's not you v the chinese, you v europe, you v the world...it's perfectly reasonable to ask what you bring to the table when you want to go it alone.
> 
> ...


Yeah that's why they don't even make their own Aero Engines for the Comac C919.
Now let me think, who exports Aero Engines?


----------



## NoXion (Apr 16, 2018)

Plenty of jobs in the UK were being outsourced to countries with poorer conditions and worse wages, like China, before the Brexit vote happened. If you say otherwise then you don't understand how capitalism works.


----------



## mauvais (Apr 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What do you think is misdescribed?
> (Considering I'm calling bullshit on Enders' claim that brexit may cause a risk of double cerification for UK parts, when in fact he's been responsible for  extending the Airbus supply chain way beyond the contries that host either the EASA or FAA.)


It came off as looking like FALs had been moved to US & China whereas they are additional sites although perhaps redistributive in terms of capacity.

Airbus has or would have serious problems on a few counts - the A380 being the most obvious, but also things like the US tanker saga, Trump and his tariffs, etc etc, so it's not exactly like all this takes place against the happiest of backgrounds.

I agree that the certification issue is mostly political bollocks.


----------



## Winot (Apr 17, 2018)

Looks like HMG are going to have trouble fitting in all the necessary legislation:

Brexit legislation caught in parliamentary logjam


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Looks like HMG are going to have trouble fitting in all the necessary legislation:
> 
> Brexit legislation caught in parliamentary logjam



Unpaid o/t for them all then, no breaks. OK one break every 2 hours and its only 10 mins.


----------



## bemused (Apr 17, 2018)

Leave.EU figure praised Nazi tactics

Leave.eu seem a rather unpleasant bunch. I've never understood why people insist on using Hitler and nazi's as an analogy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 17, 2018)

bemused said:


> Leave.EU figure praised Nazi tactics
> 
> Leave.eu seem a rather unpleasant bunch. I've never understood why people insist on using Hitler and nazi's as an analogy.


as an analogy for what? give an example.

i suspect you're getting confused between comparison and analogy.


----------



## bemused (Apr 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i suspect you're getting confused between comparison and analogy.





> The propaganda machine of the Nazis, for instance - you take away all the hideous horror and that kind of stuff, it was very clever, the way they managed to do what they did.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Looks like HMG are going to have trouble fitting in all the necessary legislation:
> 
> Brexit legislation caught in parliamentary logjam


Can't be done imo.


----------



## toblerone3 (Apr 17, 2018)

I found this comment particularly insightful about the dangers of Brexit fatigue and the way that the transition deal is potentially a very dangerous trap.

"Hardline leavers don’t like this smudging of Brexit boundaries, but they haven’t kicked up a fuss because they recognise that transition is a lethal trap for the remain cause. It kills EU membership right on time next March, while deferring any painful impact until 2021, well beyond current political attention spans."

The zealots will sleepwalk us into Brexit if we let them | Rafael Behr


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Looks like HMG are going to have trouble fitting in all the necessary legislation:
> 
> Brexit legislation caught in parliamentary logjam



Lucky they haven't got a country to run in the meantime eh?


----------



## toblerone3 (Apr 19, 2018)

Ministers suffer first Lords Brexit defeat
Brexit bill: May under pressure after two big defeats in Lords

Just putting these reports of the government's defeats in the House of Lords last night as they have disappeared from the front pages of the newspapers pdq


----------



## philosophical (Apr 19, 2018)

Britain must show signs of definitive Border progress by June


----------



## Santino (Apr 19, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Britain must show signs of definitive Border progress by June


Or what?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 19, 2018)

The timescale goes. or there is a no deal scenario.


Santino said:


> Or what?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Britain must show signs of definitive Border progress by June


but what do you think?


----------



## Santino (Apr 19, 2018)

There's a real risk that the UK might get kicked out of the EU over this.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 19, 2018)

I think those who voted brexit have to come up with the solution.
They knew what they were voting for after all.


----------



## Santino (Apr 19, 2018)

It's time for some new material.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 19, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Lucky they haven't got a country to run in the meantime eh?


Which is very fortunate because they're not actually doing so


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 20, 2018)

Choc horror: four-fingered KitKat set to lose protected EU status


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 20, 2018)

Its like a bot only even less interesting and worthwhile.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think those who voted brexit have to come up with the solution.
> They knew what they were voting for after all.


yes, it was all about the irish border


----------



## Supine (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think those who voted brexit have to come up with the solution



They're generally a bunch of small minded misguided idiots, so I'd suggest they are the last people who are suitable to come up with a solution.


----------



## andysays (Apr 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> They're generally a bunch of small minded misguided idiots, so I'd suggest they are the last people who are suitable to come up with a solution.


And racist, don't forget racist


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

Only British passport holders can apply for Brexit border force jobs in Belfast - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

Belfast Border Force jobs reported to watchdog for 'chilling' ban on Irish passport holders - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

The Border Force row exposes differences between British and Irish citizenship that have to be settled


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

UK Border Force reviewing 'British-only' policy on jobs in Northern Ireland


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

I have posted the links above because they are part of the brexit discussion.


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 20, 2018)

The Irish border is a big fucking deal in whether or not Brexit will happen, though probably more, I reckon, in what sort of Brexit it is. 

I keep saying it, but I'll be like philosophical and repeat myself: 

Theresa May's "red lines" on Ireland are self-contradictory. They cannot all be met - no part of UK in Single Market or Customs Union, no hard border/border remains as it is, no "border" between Northern Ireland and rest of UK. 

If the Irish border isn't sorted out, they don't go on to trade talks. 

It's fucking madness and no-one seems to be prepared to write the front page headline - THERESA MAY IS EITHER MAD OR DISHONEST - that it deserves.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

You say I repeat myself, yet the links I post above relate to fresh stuff that hadn't been aired previously. 
On the island of Ireland, including Northern Ireland people have the agreed right to have an Irish passport.
So if the reports are to be believed, you can be living legitimately in Northern Ireland, hold an Irish Passport and as a result you can be discriminated against getting a job on the Border Force in the place where you have lived and grown up all your life.
Discriminated against because of your passport, because you're not 'British' in a documented sense.
Maybe it would turn out to be those jobs initially, and once the precedent has been set other jobs would be included.
One example would be holding political office.
I feel certain that there are members of the Northern Irish Assembly (when it is up and running) who would have an Irish passport and not a British one.
What with the Windrush scandal bringing these questions of nationality and rights back on to the agenda, and fuelling the unease felt by EU nationals (including citizens of the Republic of Ireland), and most especially when these issues are translated into practical realities of job losses, and denial of treatment for example, then it becomes yet another way of viewing the impact wrought upon us all by those who voted for brexit. I see the details regarding the Irish border as one of practical realities.
The obvious common denominator is the 'otherness' of mainland EU nationals, the Windrush people and the Irish. It is possible that the definition of racism is a moving feast, but these issues seem to me to be heavily associated with matters of racial discrimination whatever 'technical' arguments are assembled to say otherwise.
Those who voted for brexit ushered in some of this stuff, and for some brexit voters the response to my continual raising of it is to put me down in a myriad of ways, to wash their hands of their responsibility for what is happening, or assemble an agenda where certainly something like the Irish border is at the bottom.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Apr 20, 2018)

I am shocked there is UKG sponsored discrimination in the north, Shocked I tell you


----------



## StigoftheDig (Apr 20, 2018)

It was a joke on my part, philosophical, I don't mind how many times you say things or if you do repeat yourself, because I kind of agree that the Irish border is a huge roadblock to either Brexit happening or any decent sort of deal with the EU post Brexit and is a huge issue that everyone seems happy to just go hum de hum, ho de ho about, sort of assuming that "something will turn up". 

May's demands don't appear to be negotiating positions. If they're not then there can be no Brexit deal, and god knows what will happen on the island of Ireland.


----------



## billbond (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think those who voted brexit have to come up with the solution.
> They knew what they were voting for after all.



Yawn
Have a day off for once


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

billbond said:


> Yawn
> Have a day off for once


I have not posted here every day. So when you say 'for once' what is that supposed to mean?


----------



## Santino (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not posted here every day. So when you say 'for once' what is that supposed to mean?


It's supposed to mean 'fuck off'. HTH.


----------



## Santino (Apr 20, 2018)

P.S. Put on ignore for the afternoon just so you can't reply to me.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

Ah. Santino is billbond's interpreter. Must be a nuance of groupthink and no platforming. How fashionably left wing that appears to be.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ah. Santino is billbond's interpreter. Must be a nuance of groupthink and no platforming. How fashionably left wing that appears to be.



It's classic groupthink. From a collective of people who voted for Brexit in order to cause civil war in Ireland, a cunt-collective, one could say.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ah. Santino is billbond's interpreter. Must be a nuance of groupthink and no platforming. How fashionably left wing that appears to be.



With 456 posts on this thread you can't really claim to be being no-platformed, tbf.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> With 456 posts on this thread you can't really claim to be being no-platformed, tbf.


I am not claiming that, I am observing how when I make a perfectly reasonable contribution today we have the playing the man instead of the ball scenario when the response from some here is to (apparently) tell me to fuck off. In a way it is a form of no platforming, when simply ignoring me would be sufficient, and the groupthink happens when people join in to gain favour from the fucker offers.
I am beginning to assume that if those demonstrating antipathy towards me were brexit voters, their reaction is a way of deflecting personal responsibility for what they have done.
The effective way to respond from brexiters is to reveal the workable solution to the Irish Border issue that they had either thought up before they voted, or if it was an oversight, then to suggest the workable solutions they have thought up since.
That would be something to chew on, and my response to anybody who cares to make that kind of effort would be to engage rather than indulge in rather uncreative fuck offery.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 20, 2018)

You need to take this cunt-collective and throw a few fucks in to them, that’d make them think twice.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 20, 2018)

Need?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Need?



Yeah, show ‘em you mean business.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 20, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ah. Santino is billbond's interpreter. Must be a nuance of groupthink and no platforming. How fashionably left wing that appears to be.


Bollocks. Vacuous bollocks. Surprised even you would come out with guff like that.


----------



## billbond (Apr 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's classic groupthink. From a collective of people who voted for Brexit in order to cause civil war in Ireland, a cunt-collective, one could say.


Another bore , a cunt-collective, one could say.


----------



## billbond (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not posted here every day. So when you say 'for once' what is that supposed to mean?


Tbh not keen on chatting to Nazis
That for me is what anti Democrats are, understand that old boy
Anyway off for a toot and a rum, life can be so good at times
Happy days


----------



## billbond (Apr 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You need to take this cunt-collective and throw a few fucks in to them, that’d make them think twice.


I would stick to making placards and lighting candles mate, more your type of thing
chill, life is good


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 21, 2018)

billbond said:


> Tbh not keen on chatting to Nazis
> That for me is what anti Democrats are, understand that old boy
> Anyway off for a toot and a rum, life can be so good at times
> Happy days



Nazis? You're a fucking idiot, old boy.

Do you know what a Nazi is? Do you know what they did? And that's like people who disagree with the Brexit referendum outcome because ... you're stupid?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

billbond said:


> Tbh not keen on chatting to Nazis
> That for me is what anti Democrats are, understand that old boy
> Anyway off for a toot and a rum, life can be so good at times
> Happy days


Your version of democracy is probably a version of National Socialism, you know the type, marginalize, criticize and attack.
There is a panoply of versions of democracy and your National Socialist one has already been tried with disastrous results.


----------



## Santino (Apr 21, 2018)

Can we go back to the old material now?


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your version of democracy is probably a version of National Socialism, you know the type, marginalize, criticize and attack.
> There is a panoply of versions of democracy and your National Socialist one has already been tried with disastrous results.



No, he's not a Nazi either. Fuck's sake, get some perspective - a prosperous Western democracy has narrowly voted against being part of a union with neighboring wealthy countries and slightly poorer ones to the south and east. There are likely to be some issues regarding tariffs, residency requirements, and border enforcement. 

The outcome might be something that slightly favours those who want a clean break from the EU, or something that slightly favours those who want to stay in. There aren't going to be piles of millions of dead bodies either way, not unless everybody reading about the negotiations suddenly dies of boredom.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

The material that interests me on an is brexit actually going to happen thread is hugely connected to the issue about the Irish border, with associated issues of actual practicalities, and the attitude towards 'foreigners' and the festering sore of Nationalism, a recent history of 30000 injured and 3000 deaths, and the enduring anti Irish racism.
This is why I post here trying to challenge brexiters to come up with a workable solution for what they voted for.
Old material maybe, but some tunes are classics.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> No, he's not a Nazi either. Fuck's sake, get some perspective - a prosperous Western democracy has narrowly voted against being part of a union with neighboring wealthy countries and slightly poorer ones to the south and east. There are likely to be some issues regarding tariffs, residency requirements, and border enforcement.
> 
> The outcome might be something that slightly favours those who want a clean break from the EU, or something that slightly favours those who want to stay in. There aren't going to be piles of millions of dead bodies either way, not unless everybody reading about the negotiations suddenly dies of boredom.


If he calls me a Nazi to start off with then a response is to be expected.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 21, 2018)

Can we keep the Nazi name calling off this thread, it's fucking ridiculous & childish.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 21, 2018)

32 UK companies have registered in France since January this year.  Around 12000 jobs so far.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 21, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can we keep the Nazi name calling off this thread, it's fucking ridiculous & childish.


and there was me all ready to do my Herr Flick impression


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> 32 UK companies have registered in France since January this year.  Around 12000 jobs so far.


Explain how this and these works please. It's obviously very important and exactly as you say. And that  the EU doesn't facilitate job-robbery such as you suggest at all - isn't, in fact, a vehicle for doing so. Explain that too please.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This is why I post here trying to challenge brexiters to come up with a workable solution for what they voted for.



And if they do, what should they do with the plans after receiving approval from yourself? A polite letter to Theresa May? People's Brexit March to Strasbourg via Brussels? Full page ad in the Guardian? Where do you see things going, after you get what you want? Because obviously you're posting in good faith, right?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> And if they do, what should they do with the plans after receiving approval from yourself? A polite letter to Theresa May? People's Brexit March to Strasbourg via Brussels? Full page ad in the Guardian? Where do you see things going, after you get what you want? Because obviously you're posting in good faith, right?



If brexiters come up with what they think is a workable solution their next step is to implement it and find out how workable it is.
I have my doubts that they can do that.
If they can't, one implication is that brexit collapses into chaos and doesn't happen at all. It won't need second votes or agreements or deals, the chaos will be manifest.
Do I need to assert that I post in good faith? Is that the rule for everybody here?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If brexiters come up with what they think is a workable solution their next step is to implement it and find out how workable it is.
> I have my doubts that they can do that.
> If they can't, one implication is that brexit collapses into chaos and doesn't happen at all. It won't need second votes or agreements or deals, the chaos will be manifest.
> Do I need to assert that I lost in good faith? Is that the rule for everybody here?



How many people have you killed?


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Do I need to assert that I post in good faith? Is that the rule for everybody here?



I'm not interested in "everybody here"; everybody here hasn't accused half the posters on the thread of being racist.

On that note, how's the child porn collection coming along?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm not interested in "everybody here"; everybody here hasn't accused half the posters on the thread of being racist.
> 
> On that note, how's the child porn collection coming along?



Interesting post.
I have not accused half the posters on here of being racist.
Neither do I have knowledge of  child porn, but it seems from your post that you do.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> How many people have you killed?


None.


----------



## rekil (Apr 21, 2018)

Lines like "chaos will be manifest" prove that Brexit Metal should be a genre.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not accused half the posters on here of being racist.





philosophical said:


> I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate.


why lie? its all there in your own words


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Neither do I have knowledge of  child porn, but it seems from your post that you do.



Nah I was _just asking a question._ It's easy to do isn't it?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> why lie? its all there in your own words





DotCommunist said:


> why lie? its all there in your own words





DotCommunist said:


> why lie? its all there in your own words



But what you quote is not me accusing half the posters here of being racist is it? There is no lie involved.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If brexiters come up with what they think is a workable solution their next step is to implement it and find out how workable it is.


is not an answer to



mojo pixy said:


> And if they do, what should they do with the plans after receiving approval from yourself? A polite letter to Theresa May? People's Brexit March to Strasbourg via Brussels? Full page ad in the Guardian? Where do you see things going, after you get what you want?


Mojo is asking how the posters are supposed to implement a solution.  You’ve answered that by just repeating that they should implement it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> But what you quote is not me accusing half the posters here of being racist is it? There is no lie involved.



True, you’re not accusing, you’re stating.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Nah I was _just asking a question._ It's easy to do isn't it?


When posting on a thread about brexit there may be a lot of thoughts that occur, but for me stuff about child porn would not float into my head as it does yours.
It wouldn't occur to me personally to conflate the two, worse than tasteless in my opinion.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> But what you quote is not me accusing half the posters here of being racist is it? There is no lie involved.


In the colloquial sense of the phrase at least, it is true that half the posters here believe in Brexit.  The fact that you think half the posters here are racist then follows as a syllogism from your statement that you see Brexit voters as racist.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> True, you’re not accusing, you’re stating.


Read it again. It starts with the two words 'I see'. That is not a statement of fact but opinion.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Read it again. It starts with the two words 'I see'. That is not a statement of fact but opinion.


Yes.  Your opinion is that the half of posters here that want Brexit are racist.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> When posting on a thread about credit there may be a lot of thoughts that occur, but for me stuff about child porn would not float into my head as it does yours.
> It wouldn't occur to me personally to conflate the two, worse than tasteless in my opinion.


As the child porner it's up to you to come up with and then implement a rigorous anti-child porn policy. You've made your bed and now it's time to come up with a  reason to stop that.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> is not an answer to
> 
> 
> Mojo is asking how the posters are supposed to implement a solution.  You’ve answered that by just repeating that they should implement it.


I don't know how I didn't vote for it.


----------



## sealion (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't know how I didn't vote for it.


What did you vote for ?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Yes.  Your opinion is that the half of posters here that want Brexit are racist.


Not precisely, but yes you're close.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> As the child porner it's up to you to come up with and then implement a rigorous anti-child porn policy. You've made your bed and now it's time to come up with a  reason to stop that.



I am not a child porner.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't know how I didn't vote for it.


That’s the very definition of arguing in bad faith.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not a child porner.


Hey man, it was just an _opinion_.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

sealion said:


> What did you vote for ?


I voted remain.
But lost.
So we are now in a new scenario.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not precisely, but yes you're close.


So why say that the statement was a lie?  It was true by your own admission here.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 21, 2018)

pornographer please.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s the very definition of arguing in bad faith.


I don't agree.
How can it be down to remainers to suggest a solution?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So why say that the statement was a lie?  It was true by your own admission here.


which particular statement do you mean?


----------



## sealion (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I voted remain.


For what reasons ?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> and there was me all ready to do my Herr Flick impression



don't mention the war, basil


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

sealion said:


> For what reasons ?


Hew must have had a plan. He's got one for how to stop brexit - which means he must - by his own lights - have a fully worked out plan and means to implement it.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Hey man, it was just an _opinion_.


Then I am glad to have set the record straight.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Then I am glad to have set the record straight.


But it's lie isn't it? A malicious slur. A public accusation.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> which particular statement do you mean?


Are you not capable of following a simple line of argument for 20 minutes?  Jesus Christ.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

_During the war_


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm not interested in "everybody here"; everybody here hasn't accused half the posters on the thread of being racist.





philosophical said:


> I have not accused half the posters on here of being racist.





kabbes said:


> Your opinion is that the half of posters here that want Brexit are racist.





philosophical said:


> Not precisely, but yes you're close.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

sealion said:


> For what reasons ?


One reason was because I prefer proportional representation as a chance to avoid perpetual rule by Tories.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> But it's lie isn't it? A malicious slur. A public accusation.


Which bit are you referring to?


----------



## sealion (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One reason was because I prefer proportional representation as a chance to avoid perpetual rule by Tories.


What are the other reasons ?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Are you not capable of following a simple line of argument for 20 minutes?  Jesus Christ.


Fully capable if a simple line of argument is being presented.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Which bit are you referring to?


Your opening post. One know which one.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

sealion said:


> What are the other reasons ?


Another is because I believe collaboration with close neighbours is better than isolation.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Mojo is asking how the posters are supposed to implement a solution.  You’ve answered that by just repeating that they should implement it.





philosophical said:


> I don't know how I didn't vote for it.





kabbes said:


> That’s the very definition of arguing in bad faith.





philosophical said:


> I don't agree.
> How can it be down to remainers to suggest a solution?



Bad faith - Wikipedia



> bad faith was equated with being double hearted, "of two hearts", or "a sustained form of deception which consists in entertaining or pretending to entertain one set of feelings, and acting as if influenced by another"





> Some examples of bad faith include: a company representative who negotiates with union workers while having no intent of compromising


By your own admission, you are not interested in how ideas can be implemented.  You are thus pretending to want an answer to a question that in practice you have no interest in.  You have no intent on compromising, you are acting as if you want to know how something can be done whilst then denying any stake in that something.

This is textbook bad faith.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Another is because I believe collaboration with close neighbours is better than isolation.


And that has to happen on a neo-liberal platform based on increasing exploitation of the internal workforce by setting them at each others throat, taking the profits and using them to super-exploit those outside the platform. Doesn't sound like internationalism to me.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Your opening post. One know which one.


My opening post yesterday after a while away was about only British Passport holders getting jobs in Northern Ireland, well ,I posted links to articles about it.
The reaction since has not been about the issue, but various posters here indulging in fuck offery and introducing the notion of child pornography.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My opening post yesterday after a while away was about only British Passport holders getting jobs in Northern Ireland, well ,I posted links to articles about it.
> The reaction since has not been about the issue, but various posters here indulging in fuck offery and introducing the notion of child pornography.


You really are the man with no past -  but who insists everyone else must live in your fear of it, bit with no consequences for yourself for your own past behaviour. Sten guns in...er hammersmith palais.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My opening post yesterday after a while away was about only British Passport holders getting jobs in Northern Ireland, well ,I posted links to articles about it.
> The reaction since has not been about the issue, but various posters here indulging in fuck offery and introducing the notion of child pornography.


When you post in bad faith, others rapidly lose interest in treating your offerings at face value.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Bad faith - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You are on to something, but then again not quite. I am interested in what workable solutions brexiters can come up with whilst doubting it can be done. I have an Irish passport, and a brother living in Ballycasey, so if a brexit suggested 'solution' is a barbed wire frontier then I do have a stake in it.
if you wish to define that position as arguing in bad faith that is up to you.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> And that has to happen on a neo-liberal platform based on increasing exploitation of the internal workforce by setting them at each others throat, taking the profits and using them to super-exploit those outside the platform. Doesn't sound like internationalism to me.


Isolation with eternal rule by Tories sounds worse.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You really are the man with no past -  but who insists everyone else must live in your fear of it, bit with no consequences for yourself for your own past behaviour. Sten guns in...er hammersmith palais.


I have a past. You're mistaken.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Isolation with eternal rule by Tories sounds worse.


That's a very accurate picture of UK electoral politics - backed up by the massive and growing tory majority in the only election post brexit referendum. Isn't it?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have a past. You're mistaken.


You just think that it doesn't matter - that you don't have to take any responsibility for your own actions whilst spending interminable hours demanding that others do so in every single minute detail. You two faced cunt.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That's a very accurate picture of UK electoral politics - backed up by the massive and growing tory majority in the only election post brexit referendum. Isn't it?


Yes internal politics ebbs and flows but over my 65 years it has generally been Tory or Tory-lite. The EU has diluted it a bit and I see that as a good thing on balance.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You just think that it doesn't matter - that you don't have to take any responsibility for your own actions whilst spending interminable hours demanding that others do so in every single minute detail. You two faced cunt.[/QUOTE
> 
> Isn't it revealing when a post starts by telling another person what they must think?
> I will take full responsibility for my own actions. Where would you like me to start?
> The old adage is that cunts like me make pricks like you stand to attention.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes internal politics ebbs and flows but over my 65 years it has generally been Tory or Tory-lite. The EU has diluted it a bit and I see that as a good thing on balance.


So brexit didn't deliver what you just claimed that it did. keep the story straight for a few posts at least. The EU actually accelerated tory policies and wrote them into the constitution across europe rather than diluting them by the way. Don't you care about your european brothers and sisters now?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I will take full responsibility for my own actions. Where would you like me to start?
> The old adage is that cunts like me make pricks like you stand to attention.




Start with your first post on this thread.

Excellent, i hear national service was a right laugh. Rationing not so much.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So brexit didn't deliver what you just claimed that it did. keep the story straight for a few posts at least. The EU actually accelerated tory policies and wrote them into the constitution across europe rather than diluting them by the way. Don't you care about your european brothers and sisters now?


I don't agree with your analysis regarding what the EU has done.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't agree with your analysis regarding what the EU has done.


Can you in anyway argue your position? You don't remember Thatcher's victory over the common market in the mid 80s, when the EU was definitively and irrevocably tory-ised. Of course not, because you have no past. None that you will own anyway.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Start with your first post on this thread.
> 
> Excellent, i hear national service was a right laugh. Rationing not so much.



My first post on this thread has been revisited many times. It starts with a question.
There has subsequently been a development in my thinking due to some exchanges I have had here. However I feel no shame of discomfort in what I posted then or subsequently.
If I continually abuse individual posters then I would feel shame.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My first post on this thread has been revisited many times. It starts with a question.
> There has subsequently been a development in my thinking due to some excuse I have had here. However I feel no shame of discomfort in what I posted then or subsequently.
> If I continually abuse individual posters then I would feel shame.


That's that bad faith again priest.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Can you in anyway argue your position? You don't remember Thatcher's victory over the common market in the mid 80s, when the EU was definitively and irrevocably tory-ised. Of course not, because you have no past. None that you will own anyway.


You have asked me a question and then answered it in the same post. Well played.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You have asked me a question and then answered it in the same post. Well played.


I asked you a question that you didn't answer - can't/won't answer - and provided some clues as to what you might need to think about to offer a substantive answer. Which can't/won't come. Because the past doesn't exist for you. The present seems to be a faint memory to be honest.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That's that bad faith again priest.


My predictive text changed exchanges into excuse and I have edited it. It also changed brexit into 'credit' for some reason.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My predictive text changed exchanges into excuse and I have edited it. It also changed brexit into 'credit' for some reason.


That changes nothing.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I asked you a question that you didn't answer - can't/won't answer - and provided some clues as to what you might need to think about to offer a substantive answer. Which can't/won't come. Because the past doesn't exist for you. The present seems to be a faint memory to be honest.


Let's see if I get this right.
Whilst writing a post you ask a question, then berate  me for not having the magical powers to interrupt the post you're writing with an answer.
Well played indeed.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That changes nothing.


Fair enough. Just posted for clarity.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Let's see if I get this right.
> Whilst writing a post you ask a question, then berate  me for not having the magical powers to interrupt the post you're writing with an answer.
> Well played indeed.


No, i ask you a question - give you some tips as to what your answer would need to cover to be substantive. You don''t answer it. That's how it goes and how it went down.


----------



## andysays (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If he calls me a Nazi to start off with then a response is to be expected.



There's a huge irony in you having called many here racists right from your very first post and then whining about the response you got, but I doubt you're capable of recognising it.

Anyway, what gems of wisdom regarding Brexit has the Irish Times published today that you'd like to share with us?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> There's a huge irony in you having called many here racists right from your very first post and then whining about the response you got, but I doubt you're capable of recognising it.
> 
> Anyway, what gems of wisdom regarding Brexit has the Irish Times published today that you'd like to share with us?


 Interesting post. Shame the first part isn't actually true.
In terms of the Irish Times and words of wisdom I am not up to speed today. It seems to be following the pattern established so far in that the UK acts (or doesn't, yet time ticks on) and the Irish react.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> No, i ask you a question - give you some tips as to what your answer would need to cover to be substantive. You don''t answer it. That's how it goes and how it went down.



There are a number of places where you can search 'what has the EU ever done for us?'. Fill your boots if you want. 
My knowledge is not, and would probably never be comprehensive enough for you and if you think that invalidates my position go ahead and think that.
Two further thought occur to me. Is a post ages ago somebody described it as 'the migrant drowning EU', and indeed the deaths in Mediterranean waters were and are shocking, yet when it comes to accepting refugees principally from Syria the wider EU has responded more substantially than the UK.
The other issue is that whatever the rights and wrongs of the EU are, it is now over because of the brexit vote. Analyzing the past may be diverting, but dealing with the new reality is more pressing, including the practical workable solution to the Irish border issue.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 21, 2018)

No answer. Surprising.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are on to something, but then again not quite. I am interested in what workable solutions brexiters can come up with whilst doubting it can be done. I have an Irish passport, and a brother living in Ballycasey, so if a brexit suggested 'solution' is a barbed wire frontier then I do have a stake in it.
> if you wish to define that position as arguing in bad faith that is up to you.


I’m sorry — in what way, exactly, are you “interested” in these solutions?  You’ve already said they’re nothing to do with you, you have no stake in how they could be implemented and you’ve no interest in feeding into any process to make them better.  You’ve washed your hands of it, which is the exact opposite of being “interested”.  It’s bad faith all the way down.


----------



## andysays (Apr 21, 2018)

The authors of the Good Friday Agreement obviously saw a re-united Ireland as a potentially workable option, otherwise they wouldn't have included a means by which it could happen, but philosophical has dismissed it out of hand as a solution to the post-Brexit border issue.

I wonder how he can justify this dismissal of the very Agreement which he is claiming is now threatened by all those racist Brexit voters callously and deliberately voting to return Ireland to sectarian violence.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m sorry — in what way, exactly, are you “interested” in these solutions?  You’ve already said they’re nothing to do with you, you have no stake in how they could be implemented and you’ve no interest in feeding into any process to make them better.  You’ve washed your hands of it, which is the exact opposite of being “interested”.  It’s bad faith all the way down.


Stretching your bad faith angle out of shape I think. I am interested in the 'solutions' because they may well have a practical impact on me, I don't have any solutions to suggest because I can't think of one that will work and still be called brexit, and I also have no solutions to suggest because I didn't vote for it in the first place and I would love the process to disintegrate not through my doing, but ironically through the actions of those brexit voters who thought they could manage the process, yet they are tying themselves in knots.
Somebody likened brexit to unscrambling the omelette which is something I can't manage, but brexiters seem to think they can.
If my position is one of 'bad faith' (whatever that quite means) then I accept that. If you voted brexit it is now your country and your problem, not mine anymore to have either good or bad faith in.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> The authors of the Good Friday Agreement obviously saw a re-united Ireland as a potentially workable option, otherwise they wouldn't have included a means by which it could happen, but philosophical has dismissed it out of hand as a solution to the post-Brexit border issue.
> 
> I wonder how he can justify this dismissal of the very Agreement which he is claiming is now threatened by all those racist Brexit voters callously and deliberately voting to return Ireland to sectarian violence.


I have not dismissed that 'solution' out of hand, indeed I quoted the part of the GFA (clause six I think) earlier for clarity. I have repeatedly suggested a _workable _solution needs to be found, and I don't think a United Ireland will sell to the Tory mates the DUP.
The GFA United Ireland clause was not written in to the agreement in anticipation of brexit by the way.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> worse than tasteless



I may use this as a tag line, ta!


----------



## billbond (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If he calls me a Nazi to start off with then a response is to be expected.



so i got out of you what you was thinking deep down
You can call me one but i cant do the same
righto, Stop with the labels and we might all get on
By the way i did not vote for Brexit
off now to enjoy the sun up in whitehall


----------



## billbond (Apr 21, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can we keep the Nazi name calling off this thread, it's fucking ridiculous & childish.



Agree , and apologies
Also maybe the R  word as well should be the same
its so old hat and Lazy
Enjoy the sun and may your god be with you
#Peace


----------



## kabbes (Apr 21, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not dismissed that 'solution' out of hand, indeed I quoted the part of the GFA (clause six I think) earlier for clarity. I have repeatedly suggested a _workable _solution needs to be found, and I don't think a United Ireland will sell to the Tory mates the DUP.
> The GFA United Ireland clause was not written in to the agreement in anticipation of brexit by the way.


By your logic, those who did not vote for the Tories or DUP also don’t have to present solutions.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> By your logic, those who did not vote for the Tories or DUP also don’t have to present solutions.



I believe the solutions have to come from those who 'knowing what they were voting for,' voted brexit.
There is logic and there is logic. Ionesco pointed out that at one level if you say a dog is an animal with four legs, then by some kind of logic a cat is a dog.
If those who voted brexit are not supposed to solve the brexit problems then who is?


----------



## teqniq (Apr 22, 2018)

You arguments are frankly laughable. You constantly return to this notion that Brexiters voted for it therefore they should come up with a solution. We all live here and much as much as many people are unhappy with the way the vote turned out, it's not _somebody else's problem_ it's everyones.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Ionesco pointed out that at one level if you say a dog is an animal with four legs, then by some kind of logic a cat is a dog.



Ionesco also said, "It is not the answer that enlightens, but the question."

He never read your posts, clearly.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Ionesco also said, "It is not the answer that enlightens, but the question."
> 
> He never read your posts, clearly.


My opening part of my first post on this thread was in the form of a question.
Logic suggests Eugene wouldn't know it having died in 1994.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My opening part of my first post on this thread was in the form of a question.
> Logic suggests Eugene wouldn't know it having died in 1994.


And very enlightening for the rest of us as regards what you really think it was too.

What disingenuous crap - it was a smear and generalised insult in the guise of a genuine question that you thought you would clearly get away with. It seems clear that you do this as matter of habit without getting called on it - hence your embarrassing  responses to being found out.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

teqniq said:


> You arguments are frankly laughable. You constantly return to this notion that Brexiters voted for it therefore they should come up with a solution. We all live here and much as much as many people are unhappy with the way the vote turned out, it's not _somebody else's problem_ it's everyones.


I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
> Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?


because if you don't you look like a muppet


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> And very enlightening for the rest of us as regards what you think.



'The rest of us', nah no groupthink here!
Isn't it safer to assert that you think you know what I think, rather than call on the cavalry to agree with you?
Even a whole troop of cavalry isn't telepathic anyway.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> because if you don't you look like a muppet


Don't what?
Solve brexit?


----------



## teqniq (Apr 22, 2018)

destiny? 

It sounds like you nicked that from somewhere.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'The rest of us', nah no groupthink here!
> Isn't it safer to assert that you think you know what I think, rather than call on the cavalry to agree with you?
> Even a whole troop of cavalry isn't telepathic anyway.


Of course there's a collective consensus that you're being utterly dishonest when you seek to pretend that your question was genuine and not a juvenile attempt at a smear job - one that you clearly are used to using unchallenged.

Odd that you seem to think the medium of writing is incapable of communicating meaning. Does that apply to all writing or merely your own?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Don't what?
> Solve brexit?


Read your question in the post quoted starting why you daft apathetic twat


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

'Of course there is a collective consensus'.
What next? Invoke survey monkey to prove your point in some way?
I post on here as an individual voice using the medium of writing, if I thirst for validation as many here seem to, then I am clearly failing, but I can live with that.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Read your question in the post quoted starting why you daft apathetic twat


There were two questions, which one do you mean?


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Logic suggests Eugene wouldn't know it having died in 1994.



I am aware of when he died, having had brief correspondence with him during 1993 while living in France and being a new fan of his work at the time. I did notice when he passed.

But the reason I mention this (other than the blatant but cool name drop) is because pulling your _Logic Dictates_ card just there exemplifies your problem in this thread. You seem to be posting from a position where _other_ people's _other_ attitudes and experiences and knowledges and understandings are irrelevant or just non existent. Like there, you assumed I wasn't aware of when someone died, _whom I had just quoted_. Just as you apparently aren't aware or don't care that people voted Leave for more and better reasons than the ones _you_ insist must have motivated them. You don't even seem interested in hearing about that, as in you didn't even read this thread before jumping in with both feet, insults and implicit accusations.

Absurd.

(See? I'm reduced to literary puns now  )


----------



## kabbes (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I believe the solutions have to come from those who 'knowing what they were voting for,' voted brexit.
> There is logic and there is logic. Ionesco pointed out that at one level if you say a dog is an animal with four legs, then by some kind of logic a cat is a dog.
> If those who voted brexit are not supposed to solve the brexit problems then who is?


This is absolute claptrap.  The inevitable end to the argument is that the only people ever responsible for anything -- even to the extent of _suggesting ideas _-- are those who voted for absolutely every stage of the process.

Nobody alive voted for the huge historical trends that got us to where we are.  Nobody in this country voted for the US, Russian, Chinese, French, German or any other administrations that created the global context within which decisions have to be made.  Nobody voted for the Irish government who are on the other side of the border you care so much about.  A tiny minority were alive to have voted to take us into the EEC in the first place.  A larger minority were of an age to have voted for the Thatcher governments that created the immediate political landscape that defined the context within the vote is had.  A minority, even, voted for the Cameron government that created the referendum itself. 

Who is there left who is not able to wash his hands of any responsibility for anything?

Furthermore, this is all _besides the point_.  If you declare your lack of interest in being part of solutions, you also lose your right to have a stake in those solutions.  This is the essence of why everything you have said is in bad faith.  You are demanding answers whilst also demanding that you have nothing to do with any answers.  Well make a fucking choice.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> but finding a solution is down to the brexiters


No it's not you fool. How can the electorate find or for that matter impliment solutions that only mps have the power to do so.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I am aware of when he died, having had brief correspondence with him during 1993 while living in France and being a new fan of his work at the time. I did notice when he passed.
> 
> But the reason I mention this (other than the blatant but cool name drop) is because pulling your _Logic Dictates_ card just there exemplifies your problem in this thread. You seem to be posting from a position where _other_ people's _other_ attitudes and experiences and knowledges and understandings are irrelevant or just non existent. Like there, you assumed I wasn't aware of when someone died, _whom I had just quoted_. Just as you apparently aren't aware or don't care that people voted Leave for more and better reasons than the ones _you_ insist must have motivated them. You don't even seem interested in hearing about that, as in you didn't even read this thread before jumping in with both feet, insults and implicit accusations.
> 
> ...


You are mistaken. If you read back I said two things. That there is logic and logic, and that logic suggests, not dictates. My mentioning of 1994 was not a comment regarding your knowledge of Ionesco, but one about the logic of his knowing what was written in 2018, 24 years after he had died.
I accept that when posting on this thread I didn't read back two years and hundreds of comments, and agree I jumped in with both feet with my original question, and you quoted Ionesco that it is questions rather than answers that enlighten.
You lecture me on the contemplation of the stance of others, yet my stance has largely been received with abuse as in all the varieties of fuck offery.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> yet my stance has largely been received with abuse as in all the varieties of tuck offery


It's how all trolls are treated on here.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is absolute claptrap.  The inevitable end to the argument is that the only people ever responsible for anything -- even to the extent of _suggesting ideas _-- are those who voted for absolutely every stage of the process.
> 
> Nobody alive voted for the huge historical trends that got us to where we are.  Nobody in this country voted for the US, Russian, Chinese, French, German or any other administrations that created the global context within which decisions have to be made.  Nobody voted for the Irish government who are on the other side of the border you care so much about.  A tiny minority were alive to have voted to take us into the EEC in the first place.  A larger minority were of an age to have voted for the Thatcher governments that created the immediate political landscape that defined the context within the vote is had.  A minority, even, voted for the Cameron government that created the referendum itself.
> 
> ...


How can I lose the 'right' to have a stake in the solutions when I will be subject to the consequences of those solutions?
So I do have 'something to do' with the answers (if they ever appear).
Something about your post puts me in mind of the Orwellian thing about being required to love Big Brother even when Big Brother is the oppressor


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> It's how all trolls are treated on here.


Does your label come with a bar code?
Yet another poster who appears to speak for others.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Does your label come with a bar code?
> Yet another poster who appears to speak for others.


It's an open discussion board. I'm free to post here just as you are.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> No it's not you fool. How can the electorate find or for that matter impliment solutions that only mps have the power to do so.[/Q
> 
> Because the electorate elevate MP's to power, and they should be held to account rather than an electorate washing their ha rd of responsibility for who they elect.
> Brexit  won and it is a forever situation, MP's are re elected every five years of so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There were two questions, which one do you mean?


I just told you you numpty


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

Go and lobby your mp then. Ask him/her for the solutions you demand.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are mistaken. If you read back I said two things. That there is logic and logic, and that logic suggests, not dictates. My mentioning of 1994 was not a comment regarding your knowledge of Ionesco, but one about the logic of his knowing what was written in 2018, 24 years after he had died.
> I accept that when posting on this thread I didn't read back two years and hundreds of comments, and agree I jumped in with both feet with my original question, and you quoted Ionesco that it is questions rather than answers that enlighten.
> You lecture me on the contemplation of the stance of others, yet my stance has largely been received with abuse as in all the varieties of tuck offery.


Fuck offery I think you'll find


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I just told you you numpty


Errr, no you didn't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Errr, no you didn't.


err yes I did. The question starting why.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
> Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?


How many questions starting with 'why' are there in this post?


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You lecture me on the contemplation of the stance of others, yet my stance has largely been received with abuse as in all the varieties of fuck offery.



Not your _stance_; there are many flavours of Remainer on this forum, on this very thread in fact .. it's your _approach_ that's got backs up. Wind your neck in and stop making sweeping judgements. You really aren't the cleverest person in this room.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Not your _stance_; there are many flavours of Remainer on this forum, on this very thread in fact .. it's your _approach_ that's got backs up. Wind your neck in and stop making sweeping judgements. You really aren't the cleverest person in this room.


he could be alone in the smallest room and there'd be more intelligent things in the chamber


----------



## kabbes (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How can I lose the 'right' to have a stake in the solutions when I will be subject to the consequences of those solutions?
> So I do have 'something to do' with the answers (if they ever appear).
> Something about your post puts me in mind of the Orwellian thing about being required to love Big Brother even when Big Brother is the oppressor


If you have a stake in the solution, you are part of it.  You've denied having any part of it, so you have no stake in it.

It's not me saying you have no stake, it's you.  If you don't want any input, you can't object to the result.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Fuck offery I think you'll find


You're right. predictive text is a pain.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

Game over.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> Go and lobby your mp then. Ask him/her for the solutions you demand.


 Funnily enough I have written to my MP, Heidi Alexander, a couple of times about brexit.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> How many questions starting with 'why' are there in this post?


One.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Funnily enough I have written to my MP, Heidi Alexander, a couple of times about brexit.


did you call her a racist as well?


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Funnily enough I have written to my MP, Heidi Alexander, a couple of times about brexit.


Did you start the letter by calling her a racist ?


----------



## andysays (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Funnily enough I have written to my MP, Heidi Alexander, a couple of times about brexit.



I hope your letters were at least a bit better than your woeful contributions here, though I doubt it.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> did you call her a racist as well?


beat me to it


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Not your _stance_; there are many flavours of Remainer on this forum, on this very thread in fact .. it's your _approach_ that's got backs up. Wind your neck in and stop making sweeping judgements. You really aren't the cleverest person in this room.


I am not attempting to be clever however that may be defined.
If my judgements are sweeping then so be it, I don't see it the same way.
Anyway this discussion should not be about me anyway should it? I posted a couple of days ago about the Irish Border, isn't it better to discuss that?


----------



## andysays (Apr 22, 2018)




----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

Hi Heidi,
You are a racist, can i have some solutions please
Yours, 
The troll.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If you have a stake in the solution, you are part of it.  You've denied having any part of it, so you have no stake in it.
> 
> It's not me saying you have no stake, it's you.  If you don't want any input, you can't object to the result.


My input is to ask the victors for their solutions, my stake is that it will effect me.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Anyway this discussion should not be about me


----------



## teqniq (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not attempting to be clever however that may be defined.
> If my judgements are sweeping then so be it, I don't see it the same way.
> Anyway this discussion should not be about me anyway should it? I posted a couple of days ago about the Irish Border, isn't it better to discuss that?


Trans: _please talk about somebody/thing else_


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Funnily enough I have written to my MP, Heidi Alexander, a couple of times about brexit.


Did she respond ?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> I hope your letters were at least a bit better than your woeful contributions here, though I doubt it.


I wouldn't know. Her stance was to focus on the impact of EU agreements regarding medicines which is what she wrote to me, whilst saying that she suspects we agree on most things about brexit, but maybe she was being nice.
I also asked her and the other candidates at the hustings in Catford before the last election for their solutions to the Irish Border question, as I have been asking people since before the referendum.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> Hi Heidi,
> You are a racist, can i have some solutions please
> Yours,
> The troll.


She voted remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> She voted remain.


So why the hell are you asking her then as it's only people who voted leave who matter or can answer your probing questions?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Brexit: Theresa May ‘may surrender over customs union’


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So why the hell are you asking her then as it's only people who voted leave who matter or can answer your probing questions?


Because she is my MP and as such has a tiny modicum of influence, and may feel like asking brexiters in Parliament to suggest solutions.
Not a lot of faith in how well that might work because the Labour Party position over brexit as far as I can tell is useless.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> She voted remain.


So did Jezza but we know what he really thinks.

Anyway Phil, i'm off down the beach now, gonna smoke some non eu weed with some Italian mates. Have fun


----------



## rekil (Apr 22, 2018)

_"If my judgements are sweeping then so be it"_

Keep 'em coming. #BrexitMetal


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> So did Jezza but we know what he really thinks.
> 
> Anyway Phil, i'm off down the beach now, gonna smoke some non eu weed with some Italian mates. Have fun



Enjoy the beach in this lovely weather, and try to avoid getting caught with the weed (although you might be posting from Portugal or somewhere dope tolerant in which case you could roll one up as big as a baby's forearm).


----------



## kabbes (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My input is to ask the victors for their solutions, my stake is that it will effect me.


Affect.

The people that voted for Brexit never voted to join the EU so why should they be the ones providing solutions as to how to leave it?  The solutions should be provided by the victors in the original EEC referendum.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Affect.
> 
> The people that voted for Brexit never voted to join the EU so why should they be the ones providing solutions as to how to leave it?  The solutions should be provided by the victors in the original EEC referendum.


Yeah my spelling is poor.
There were people who voted to join who then voted brexit, but many of course died in the interim.
Your point is interesting in saying that victors should provide solutions which is what i have been saying, the difference here is about which victors in which referendum.


----------



## Supine (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I posted a couple of days ago about the Irish Border, isn't it better to discuss that?



No. Why don't you start a thread dedicated to it and leave this one alone.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> No. Why don't you start a thread dedicated to it and leave this one alone.


Because this is a brexit thread.
Why don't you put me on ignore?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One.


Yeh. why were you so confused by that great number before?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yeah my spelling is poor.
> There were people who voted to join who then voted brexit, but many of course died in the interim.
> Your point is interesting in saying that victors should provide solutions which is what i have been saying, the difference here is about which victors in which referendum.


No one voted to join apart from 356 MPs. There was no referendum on joining. Heath decided to join and that was that.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> No one voted to join apart from 356 MPs. There was no referendum on joining. Heath decided to join and that was that.


You are right, but it wasn't quite finished due to the referendum in 1975 to validate the MP's decision.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. why where you so confused by that great number before?


Because I believe there were two questions in the post you referred to.
I asked which one you meant.
Remind me which one and I will try to answer you.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are right, but it wasn't quite finished due to the referendum in 1975 to validate the MP's decision.


The referendum wasn't to validate the MPs decision. They had already self-validated and acted on that validation. It took place because Wilson saw a political opportunity to swing the very close october 74 election after the feb hung parliament . You really are quite naive.

Incidentally, that was the single instance of democratic input or participation in the EC (as was) in it's whole 25 year existence up to that point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because I believe there were two questions in the post you referred to.
> I asked which one you meant.
> Remind me which one and I will try to answer you.


I have reminded you about five fucking times now. For the terminally stupid it's the one starting why.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If you have a stake in the solution, you are part of it. You've denied having any part of it, so you have no stake in it.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I have reminded you about five fucking times now. For the terminally stupid it's the one starting why.



Is this the post with two questions that you keep referring to?

'I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?'

Which one do you want me to explain?


----------



## Supine (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because this is a brexit thread.
> Why don't you put me on ignore?



Oh don't worry about that. Your on ignore because your boring as fuck. You only seem to want to discuss one small piece of brexit so why not make a thread specifically about it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is this the post with two questions that you keep referring to?
> 
> 'I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
> Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?'
> ...


I neither desire nor have asked you to explain either question


----------



## billbond (Apr 22, 2018)

"Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution"

ok on that if you want to be silly
I dont want to pay towards student fees out of my taxes, if Labour get in next time and this happens and you voted them in, Labour voters should pay my share as they voted them in !
Yeah You made a problem for me leaving me with less money, thats not fair

Of course im being absurd , doing it to make a point
Why should people who think voting Labour/Tory/Lib Dems is absurd  have to be part of the problem
I want the Green Party in NONE of those others , why cant i have what i want ?
You dont really get this Democracy lark do you.
If any of them  partys get in and their are problems , You should be made to sort it out
You voted for them ALL the problems they have you should be made to pay for
After all you caused the problem voting them in !
Or maybe lets not have any Mps, that would save a massive amount of money.
Maybe we could import some to do their jobs and pay minimum wage.
If you voted for Blair you have blood on your hands, another example
Some might be even harsher saying you should be charged voting in that piece of shit, read this same Thatcher
see how silly you sound
Change the record or maybe consider moving to another country
Maybe a EU one might be good, you seem to hero worship them.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Enjoy the beach in this lovely weather, and try to avoid getting caught with the weed (although you might be posting from Portugal or somewhere dope tolerant in which case you could roll one up as big as a baby's forearm).


Thanks phil


----------



## billbond (Apr 22, 2018)

Sealion, friday c..t of a ref
what a run


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I neither desire nor have asked you to explain either question


Then you have lost me. Quite genuinely, but I don't expect you to believe that.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> Thanks phil
> View attachment 133407





Your next mission, if you accept it, is to spell out - Fuck you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Then you have lost me. Quite genuinely, but I don't expect you to believe that.


Oh but I do. I answered one of your questions and it's evidently flummoxed you.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

billbond said:


> "Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution"
> 
> ok on that if you want to be silly
> I dont want to pay towards student fees out of my taxes, if Labour get in next time and this happens and you voted them in, Labour voters should pay my share as they voted them in !
> ...



If a party gets in, I am obliged to obey the laws or face the consequences even when on the losing side, but not obliged to make or shape the laws.

brexit was the winning side.

Your analysis makes no sense to me. You can't have what you want if your favoured party (the Greens?) don't get in, yet you are forced to live under the laws and rules unless you leave the country, which was something you suggest I ought to consider.

At least you put it more graciously than the usual 'if you don't like it fuck off'.

I don't like it, but hanging around does not mean to me that I ought to 'hero worship' big brother as it were.

At no point have I remotely suggested I hero worship the EU, that is stretching things a lot. I oppose brexit for a number of reasons, a lot of them because I am concerned about the drawbridge up little Englander aspect of things. As a preference I would prefer to be in a greater Europe (or indeed world as we manifestly are) than a little England, how that preference suggests EU worship is, as I say, stretching things a lot.


----------



## andysays (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ...your favoured party (the Greens?)...



He's got you there, Pickman's model


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> He's got you there, Pickman's model


I was replying to billbond, not Pickman's model.


----------



## andysays (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I was replying to billbond, not Pickman's model.



My mistake, just the idea of PM supporting the Greens amused me...


----------



## kabbes (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is this the post with two questions that you keep referring to?
> 
> 'I accept it is a problem for everybody living here, but finding a solution is down to the brexiters.
> Why should people who think brexit is absurd have to be part of a solution, especially if they don't have one? Isn't their destiny to endure what they must, yet react if they can?'
> ...


You're really missing the point.  If your role in this is genuinely to do nothing but endure whatever fate has for you, on what grounds do you think anybody owes you an answer for what happens next?  What are you going to do with that answer?  This is bad faith questioning -- you are asking a question that in reality you have no intention of adapting to the answer for.

The answer to "What about the Irish border", for the umpteenth time, is to do one of the following:

1) Stay in the customs union
2) Impose a hard border between the north and south of Ireland
3) Impose a hard border between the island of Ireland and Britain by keeping NI alone in the customs union 
4) Impose a hard border between the island of Ireland and Britain by unifying Ireland

All these options can be made to work in practice and you will need to endure one of those options as your fate.  If you don't like any of them, now's the time to come up with something better.  If you favour one of them, now's the time to make your case for making it happen.  If you don't do any of this then tough shit when one of them happens in spite of your opinions on it.  You don't get a veto just because you didn't vote for it.


----------



## billbond (Apr 22, 2018)

little Englander aspect of thing

See this is what annoys people, these little digs and silly labels
I think Dianne Abbott is THEE worst Mp ever, not because shes black or a women or Labour, its because she is a awful human being and  incompetent .
And many many people i talk to think the same.
But your type just lazily shout out sexist,Racist and all the other crap lazy labels
You can still go to italy and eat pizza, go to france and eat frogs legs and all the other lovely food they have.
Visit Germany and see the sites and eat sausage.
Visit Holland and the "delights" it has to offer. Spain for the sun  etc etc etc
Nothing has changed, you are not banned from going to these places, they wont shoot you or take your Passport away
Its just all bollox, tbh ive traveled all over and ive never thought of myself as European anyway
im English-British. Not something ive ever thought deep about in my life tbh
All this flag waving and fake love for the EU i find cringey and embarrasing .
I will say this thou, this country will never ever be the same again imho, as i always felt deep down there was a section of people in this country who with this vote have shown they think they are better than others
And this vote has brought all this out.
I was correct in thinking this 100% it seems.
All this nasty aggressive stuff "gammon heads", "Thick northerners", Wishing death on their elders, all these celebs coming out with their crap and winding people up, its been awful


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You're really missing the point.  If your role in this is genuinely to do nothing but endure whatever fate has for you, on what grounds do you think anybody owes you an answer for what happens next?  What are you going to do with that answer?  This is bad faith questioning -- you are asking a question that in reality you have no intention of adapting to the answer for.
> 
> The answer to "What about the Irish border", for the umpteenth time, is to do one of the following:
> 
> ...



I have not said I am 'owed' an answer, but I do seek to know what the answer is. It is a bit like the weather forecast, you can't do anything about what is to come, but you can be prepared for it. Ultimately you have to endure it.

You say these options can be made to 'work' in practice, but I wonder how the concept of it 'working' will be measured.

For the sake of what I say about them I am assuming that there are four main planks of what brexit is supposed to be, but feel free to tell me that brexit wasn't or isn't about any of them.

The four bits as I understand it are:

1. For the UK to be unrestricted in sorting out deals with anybody it likes.
2. To control and reduce immigration.
3. To control it's borders in terms of both people and goods.
4. To have some kind of 'in house' sovereignty and democracy, with particular emphasis on laws, rules and regulations. 

I recognise the four things you have suggested could be done somehow, but I see them as either conflicting with the aims of what brexit is supposed to be, or carrying a huge financial and political cost. In addition all the mood music so far suggests that none of them are likely because of the various strands of opposition they would have, and because of the present timeframe.

So.

Stay in the customs union suggests that what can be done is not to have brexit after all. The political fall out from that would be immense, but if this is not an option to abandon at least one strand of brexit altogether then what would it be?
A customs union implies free movement of people and goods between the UK and the EU, with all of the attendant laws, rules, costs and whatever. Much as exists now. It is surely a no change no brexit option. I can't see that working when brexiters continually repeat that brexit must happen because it is the will of the people.

Impose a hard border. This goes against what everybody has been saying they will do, and goes against the Belfast Agreement. because of that there would be political fall out of a fundamental kind. Indeed you use the word 'impose'. The resource requirements of practically monitoring the border would be huge, and the imposition would probably mean the border would leak like a sieve anyway. There are more crossing points on the Irish border than between the whole of the EU and it's neighbouring countries to the East. The resource infrastructure needed to keep the Irish Border hard would be eye watering, but you are right that it could be done nevertheless. I don't think it will happen and anyway the brexit victors keep telling us it won't.

Impose a hard border between the island of Ireland and Britain by keeping NI alone in the customs union, is also something that could be 'done', but again at what cost? The subsequent break up of the UK would mean that the UK brexit voters wanted couldn't even happen. democracy would be ignored and sovereignty lost. Constituent countries, Scotland and Wales, may want the same deal as Northern Ireland in the unlikely event of a sea border happening, which might leave brexit only applying to England, therefore no brexit. 
I need not go into the political costs, where the DUP and others want the same arrangements as England and the rest, and where Theresa May says she wouldn't ever do it. Some of the social costs risk being quite sinister ones, like they would in your fourth option. I don't see it happening because it wouldn't be the brexit the whole of the UK voted for.

Impose a hard border between the island of Ireland and Britain by unifying Ireland. Interesting that this is your third use of the word 'impose' which I don't mention as a criticism, but because the questions arising from the word 'impose' are ones about 'how' and 'by whom', and the nature of the word 'impose' suggests to me that there is assumed resistance to impositions. 
It would probably need a comprehensive knowledge of the history of Ireland in order to come to terms with some force somewhere somehow imposing a united Ireland, and creating one state on that one land mass and making it a workable reality. In doability terms it would take a majority on both sides of the border to vote for it if the Belfast Agreement is to be respected, and imposition wasn't to happen. The timeframe would be impossible before brexit, and the run up to such an imposition or offering would be seriously fraught with rather cosmic vituperation flying around. Then there is the sinister aspect where people of violence could not be persuaded to accept such a situation if it were imposed.

One option you didn't mention is doing nothing and after brexit everybody makes it all up as they go along, and any restrictions are haphazard or informal. In this kind of scenario I imagine the EU might step in and manage the border somehow, but manage it in a WTO sense, and the people would have to live with the political fall out. Incidentally, people sometimes talk of an unelected and undemocratic EU, but the World Trade Organisation is not an elected body as far as I can tell.

Lined up alongside everything I have said above is what we have at the moment. Rapprochement, and peaceful co existence where the border is more a quaint curiosity than a line of division, and that is what brexit seems to be prepared to sacrifice.

Of the 'doable' options you have listed, have any of them been put forward by brexiters as their solution?

Finally I have not asked for any kind of veto. In an ideal world brexiters would have thought all this stuff through before the vote, and would be now telling us what will happen in order to maintain the peaceful and untroubled situation we have enjoyed on the Irish border for several decades.

So far, despite options you or I or others might suggest, brexiters have come up with nothing. I don't apologise for asking the questions because like those interested in the weather forecast, I want to know which way the wind is blowing.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

billbond said:


> little Englander aspect of thing
> 
> See this is what annoys people, these little digs and silly labels
> I think Dianne Abbott is THEE worst Mp ever, not because shes black or a women or Labour, its because she is a awful human being and  incompetent .
> ...



When you say 'your type' are you saying that this diatribe is a description of me?
If you are, you're wrong.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> brexiters have come up with nothing.


Which brexiters ?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> Which brexiters ?


Any of them as far as I know.
Do you have news of some that have?


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Any of them


Who is them ? On here ? the real world ? You must know people that voted leave, ask them.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> Who is them ? On here ? the real world ? You must know people that voted leave, ask them.


Ask them for a solution to the Irish Border? I have asked and I do ask, and even with the help of suggestions like those provided by kabbes none of them have come up with an answer.


----------



## sealion (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> none of them have come up with an answer.


None the would ever satisfy you. So you win Yeeeeeeeah  you claim the ' i told you so ' cup. Perhaps you should go elsewhere and ask the question you so desperatly want answering, good luck with that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You are a massive wanker though, given multiple opportunities to engage but don’t. So fuck you.




M’kay.


----------



## xenon (Apr 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not said I am 'owed' an answer, but I do seek to know what the answer is. It is a bit like the weather forecast, you can't do anything about what is to come, but you can be prepared for it. Ultimately you have to endure it.
> 
> You say these options can be made to 'work' in practice, but I wonder how the concept of it 'working' will be measured.
> 
> ...



Is it fun, what are you getting out of this?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> M’kay.





xenon said:


> Is it fun, what are you getting out of this?


How do you define fun?
I responded to a post.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Apr 30, 2018)

EU and Mexico strike duty-free deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I responded to a post.


good for you


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 30, 2018)

Just popped in to see if this thread has stopped being shit.

I'll give it another week shall I?


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 30, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just popped in to see if this thread has stopped being shit.
> 
> I'll give it another week shall I?


I dunno we could talk about the picture the guardian used of arlene foster in todays paper. they've captured a shot that seems to define gloaty glee. And the gist is the DUP recon they're absolutely prepared to tank the government over the border issue, I believe it as well. Still, we'll see what happens. All remains in flux.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2018)

'No Brexit deal' without border fallback


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2018)

I post the above link because it is about the current happenstances today.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I post the above link because it is about the current happenstances today.



You post it, because you're a boring cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I post the above link because it is about the current happenstances today.


happenstances?

i don't believe you know what that agglomeration of letters even means.


----------



## sealion (Apr 30, 2018)

I still believe that brexit won't happen, it was never supposed to. The unelected house of lords will veto every proposal put in front of them.


----------



## sealion (Apr 30, 2018)

I wonder if the 80k a year eu pension that the lords get, impact on the decision making and vetos.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> I still believe that brexit won't happen, it was never supposed to. The unelected house of lords will veto every proposal put in front of them.


Ive never quite understood the powers of the Lords, but I dont think they really have a veto in any meaningful way. Hard to keep up but last I remember the House of Commons now will have a final vote (basically veto) over the final deal.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> I wonder if the 80k a year eu pension that the lords get, impact on the decision making and vetos.



The what now?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Ive never quite understood the powers of the Lords, but I dont think they really have a veto in any meaningful way. Hard to keep up but last I remember the House of Commons now will have a final vote (basically veto) over the final deal.



They've not had a veto since the Parliament Act in 1911, but they can make the passage of a Bill troublesome for the government. This is a bit uncharted territory though - the Tories have pretty much always had a majority in the Lords, but that's not the case at the moment, and quite a lot of Tory peers have serious misgivings about the Brexit process anyway. One of the major amendments passed today was initiated by Viscount Hogg, of taxpayer-funded moat-cleaning fame, for example.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Ive never quite understood the powers of the Lords, but I dont think they really have a veto in any meaningful way. Hard to keep up but last I remember the House of Commons now will have a final vote (basically veto) over the final deal.



Although with the amount of brexit-related stuff that needs to be hammered out before next March it's looking likely that parliament's 'meaningful vote' will happen before anyone knows what it is they're voting on.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

To add: the Lords won't oppose a Bill of Supply (the Budget, basically), or something that was a clear mandated manifesto commitment by the government of the day. Thing is, the government did not really secure a mandate for its manifesto in 2017, and lots of the stuff in the EU Withdrawal Bill didn't appear in it anyway, so their Lordships seem to feel that their role as a revising chamber is relatively unconstrained here.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Ive never quite understood the powers of the Lords, but I dont think they really have a veto in any meaningful way. Hard to keep up but last I remember the House of Commons now will have a final vote (basically veto) over the final deal.


I think I read somewhere that although the commons can use the Parliament Act to override the lords, they don't actually have enough time before Brexit Day to go through the motions.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Ive never quite understood the powers of the Lords, but I dont think they really have a veto in any meaningful way. Hard to keep up but last I remember the House of Commons now will have a final vote (basically veto) over the final deal.



The current agreed position is that the Commons gets a vote to approve the negotiated deal - no matter what cobbled together load of shite it is -or "No deal", as in crashing out in the hardest Brexity way possible. Today's Lords activity is attempting to give the Commons a bit more flexibility than that. (I think, this stuff makes my head hurt after a while)


----------



## sealion (Apr 30, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Although with the amount of brexit-related stuff that needs to be hammered out before next March it's looking likely that parliament's 'meaningful vote' will happen before anyone knows what it is they're voting on.


Just been defeated 
Government defeated on Brexit deal vote


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

Crispy said:


> I think I read somewhere that although the commons can use the Parliament Act to override the lords, they don't actually have enough time before Brexit Day to go through the motions.



The government made the current parliamentary session two years long instead of the usual one to try and avoid this, but it's still not going to be long enough, looks like.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 30, 2018)

As previously stated, Brexit will happen, the UK will leave the EU.

What that looks like when it’s done is anyone’s guess, but we need to remember why the referendum was called in the first place. Having come this far the vermin will see it through and it will have to be done in such as way as to placate both sides of their stinking party. That is their overriding concern.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 30, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The current agreed position is that the Commons gets a vote to approve the negotiated deal - no matter what cobbled together load of shite it is -or "No deal", as in crashing out in the hardest Brexity way possible. Today's Lords activity is attempting to give the Commons a bit more flexibility than that. (I think, this stuff makes my head hurt after a while)


I thought the crash out no deal is off the cards...if Commons votes no then negotiations must continue.

W
(Whatever)


----------



## bemused (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I thought the crash out no deal is off the cards...if Commons votes no then negotiations must continue.



I'm not sure that is true. Isn't the EU's position that we're out at the end of the article 50 term unless we decide it's all be a terrible mistake.

I wouldn't be surprised if the deal doesn't go to another referendum.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I thought the crash out no deal is off the cards...if Commons votes no then negotiations must continue.



No, I don't think that's the case. The Commons -as it stands right now - gets to approve the negotiated deal, or literally no deal at all with the EU. One of today's Lords amendments is attempting to give back more flexibility to the Commons so that that isn't the only choice.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

bemused said:


> I'm not sure that is true. Isn't the EU's position that we're out at the end of the article 50 term unless we decide it's all be a terrible mistake.



It's not the "EU's position" - it's the necessary operation of the law once May invoked article 50, which was the approved by both the Tories and Labour.


----------



## bemused (Apr 30, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's not the "EU's position" - it's the necessary operation of the law once May invoked article 50, which was the approved by both the Tories and Labour.



The European Council can extend the term.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

bemused said:


> The European Council can extend the term.



Yes, that's an option, but it would need the British government to initiate that. It seems likely it's also possible to withdraw the A50 invocation altogether, or to indefinitely extend a transition agreement which means membership in all but name. 

What's politically possible, I dunno really. It does seem however that the govt still has ministers in charge of the process who don't have any kind of handle on the complexities of the situation. What, it's nearly two years since the referendum and there's no clear end-state agreed? Fuck them all, and fuck Labour too.


----------



## bemused (Apr 30, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> YWhat's politically possible, I dunno really. It does seem however that the govt still has ministers in charge of the process who don't have any kind of handle on the complexities of the situation. What, it's nearly two years since the referendum and there's no clear end-state agreed? Fuck them all, and fuck Labour too.



In hindsight would any government of any party be able to unpick the relationship with the EU, determine a viable exit plan and pull it off - I doubt it. I use to think the ghost of UKIP was stopping the Labour Party suggesting a final out vote, but I think it's more likely that no one wants to run another referendum.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 30, 2018)

bemused said:


> I wouldn't be surprised if the deal doesn't go to another referendum.


They'd need to decide that well in advance. You can't just run a nation-wide vote on a whim. Takes time to organise.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2018)

bemused said:


> In hindsight would any government of any party be able to unpick the relationship with the EU, determine a viable exit plan and pull it off - I doubt it.



I doubt it too. The only way to have done it would have been a massive scoping exercise prior to A50 invocation, with a consensus view of what the future relationship would look like, but that's not what happened.


----------



## Slo-mo (Apr 30, 2018)

Crispy said:


> They'd need to decide that well in advance. You can't just run a nation-wide vote on a whim. Takes time to organise.


I'd have no problem with a second referendum on the deal provided it was clearly agreed with Remainers in advance that that is it. 

Final and binding.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 30, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> I'd have no problem with a second referendum on the deal provided it was clearly agreed with Remainers in advance that that is it.



I still don't quite see how a second referendum would work.  The views could be any one of 

a) no, deal is not 'hard brexit' enough, do a different deal

b) yes, it's fine, get on with it (or yes, get on with it and shut the heck up)

c) no, deal is not 'soft brexit' enough, do a different deal

d) no, we should not leave EU, do not accept any deal

not sure it would be easy to get that on a ballot paper


----------



## Slo-mo (May 1, 2018)

Fair point. Potentially you could do a multi way vote with AV but that would be confusing..


----------



## toblerone3 (May 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> As previously stated, Brexit will happen, the UK will leave the EU.
> 
> What that looks like when it’s done is anyone’s guess, but we need to remember why the referendum was called in the first place. Having come this far the vermin will see it through and it will have to be done in such as way as to placate both sides of their stinking party. That is their overriding concern.



Just as you believe that Brexit will happen, I believe that it is possible that it will unravel. Just as you have only a vague notion of how Brexit can be pushed through, I have little idea of exactly how it will run out steam.   But I think it possible that it might.  Even if the Irish border issue is sorted out (and that is a very big issue) there is the vexed issues of London and Scotland.  Popular opposition to Brexit is more powerful than ever.


----------



## Raheem (May 1, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I still don't quite see how a second referendum would work.  The views could be any one of
> 
> a) no, deal is not 'hard brexit' enough, do a different deal
> 
> ...



If there's a second referendum, the wording is going to depend on the context. It will probably be along the lines "Do you accept the proposal put forward by the Government/the EU, or would you rather not given that, let's face it, it's shit and everyone agrees it's shit." You could also have a referendum where the result makes Brexit impossible for practical purposes (e.g. "Do you support the creation of a customs border along the Irish Sea?").

The referendum that got us here could also conceivably have been done with a long list of options, but it wasn't just because it didn't have to be.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 1, 2018)

We are on page 250 so this may well have already been mentioned but there is an EU election due in May 2019. We really need to be in or out by then....


----------



## Raheem (May 1, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> We are on page 250 so this may well have already been mentioned but there is an EU election due in May 2019. We really need to be in or out by then....



We'll be in or out by then. I feel sure of it.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 1, 2018)

Raheem said:


> We'll be in or out by then. I feel sure of it.


I think we need to be. And if we are having a second referendum it really needs to be before that.


----------



## andysays (May 1, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> We are on page 250 so this may well have already been mentioned but there is an EU election due in May 2019. We really need to be in or out by then....


No "shake it all about" option?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 1, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You could also have a referendum where the result makes Brexit impossible for practical purposes



From where I'm standing we've already got one of those.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 6, 2018)

might as well go here altough its mainly for the blokes name, Lord Cashman. nominative etc



> His fellow Labour peer Lord Cashman said it was essential to look at a solution that would allow membership of the EEA, as it would not only be good for UK business but also solve the Irish problem which is now threatening to torpedo a Brexit deal. “Why the frontbench will not accept that as a negotiating position I completely fail to understand.”



I'd have changed it by deed poll


----------



## butchersapron (May 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> might as well go here altough its mainly for the blokes name, Lord Cashman. nominative etc
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have changed it by deed poll


Oh the youth.


----------



## The39thStep (May 6, 2018)

Remainers should be wearing these sun glasses in solidarity ,also available in rose tint


----------



## Raheem (May 8, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> View attachment 134586 Remainers should be wearing these sun glasses in solidarity ,also available in rose tint



And a Union Jack monocle version for leavers.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (May 8, 2018)

The Foreign Secretary is on the front page of the Daily Heil today calling May’s Customs Union like arrangement plan “crazy”. How does he get away with it? (He may or may not be right on the craziness or otherwise of Theresa May’s plans, but how can the Cabinet work when some members think others ideas on their key work of the moment are “crazy”?)


----------



## pocketscience (May 8, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> The Foreign Secretary is on the front page of the Daily Heil today calling May’s Customs Union like arrangement plan “crazy”. How does he get away with it? (He may or may not be right on the craziness or otherwise of Theresa May’s plans, but how can the Cabinet work when some members think others ideas on their key work of the moment are “crazy”?)


Good cop - bad cop vs the Eu innit


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Good cop - bad cop vs the Eu innit



That and perhaps he's considered less dangerous inside the cabinet rather than outside.


----------



## danny la rouge (May 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> might as well go here altough its mainly for the blokes name, Lord Cashman. nominative etc
> 
> 
> 
> I'd have changed it by deed poll


Do Colin and Barry mean nothing to anyone any more?


----------



## steeplejack (May 8, 2018)

Still think the likeliest outcome is EU membership in all but name. 

I've never known a UK government in such total disarray. I'm too young to remember 78-79 clearly. This is considerably worse than then I think.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 8, 2018)

It’s OK, they’ll fix it all with ‘new technology’ apparently.

(Whenever this is mooted as a ‘solution’ for the NI border I always picture ED-209 rampaging along some rural lane in border country)


----------



## alex_ (May 8, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s OK, they’ll fix it all with ‘new technology’ apparently.



Something the government are legendary at organising, especially on tight timelines.


----------



## MickiQ (May 8, 2018)

steeplejack said:


> Still think the likeliest outcome is EU membership in all but name.
> 
> I've never known a UK government in such total disarray. I'm too young to remember 78-79 clearly. This is considerably worse than then I think.


Things were pretty chaotic back in 78-79 though it was over different issues, it pretty much boiled down to "who ran the country" with it rapidly becoming obvious it wasn't the government, there are some similariies between Callaghan and May, they are/were both weak leaders who couldn't control their own parties.The 1979 General Election was the first one I ever voted in and the one that brought Thatcher to power, a truly dark day that hangs over the history of the country.


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 8, 2018)

'Ireland has undermined the British government for over 100 years' - ITV presenter receives backlash after controversial comments | The Irish Post

"Ireland has undermined, the issue of Ireland in so many different ways has undermined, British governments, you know, going back well over 100 years now.”

Mr Rees-Mogg responded by reinforcing the claim, saying that the issue of Ireland had undermined British politics for “much more than 100 years. It’s a very long and complex history.”

Lolz, do these cunts know about history ?


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

I saw somebody on the telly (discussing Windrush) wearing a top with the slogan 'no blacks no dogs, no Irish'.
This might be a poetic truth in regards to racism but I looked into it. Apparently the Centre for Irish Studies at London Metropolitan University has one single example of this slogan used by a landlady in Blackpool.
There were a number of 'no Irish' additions in turn of the 19/20'th century newspaper adverts for domestic service, ironically many of them in Dublin!
Those who say they well remember these slogans are to an extent perpetuating an Urban Myth.
However for the representatives of the UK media or Parliament to now try to somehow blame the Irish for their own brexit impasse, a group who had no say in the matter, and to suggest that somehow the Irish have been doing it and been belligerent for years against the 'English', is manna for the new wave anti Irish racists.
Brexiters updated slogan might read 'we want no Irish, because we have no ideas and take no responsibility'.


----------



## teqniq (May 9, 2018)

What.


----------



## teqniq (May 9, 2018)

Labour needs to wage war on EU neoliberalism to prevent a Brussels sabotage


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Those who say they well remember these slogans are to an extent perpetuating an Urban Myth.


More bullshit from you. From memory, i can recall at least four pubs in 1970's Peckham with those shitty signs in the windows. My father and his mates took regular kickings from the old bill cause they were either black or irish. The scots and welsh didn't get any easy ride either.


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 9, 2018)

even in the 90s, I knew S London pubs with No Travellers signs on the doors


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> even in the 90s, I knew S London pubs with No Travellers signs on the doors


N London too, eg the Duke of York on Downham Road

Sign might have been there even in the early 00s


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> even in the 90s, I knew S London pubs with No Travellers signs on the doors


I'd forgotten about that. Peckham again and many in Deptford, New cross.


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> More bullshit from you. From memory, i can recall at least four pubs in 1970's Peckham with those shitty signs in the windows. My father and his mates took regular kickings from the old bill cause they were either black or irish. The scots and welsh didn't get any easy ride either.



I was going by the Centre for Irish studies.
As a child kids gathered outside our council flat yelling 'go back to Ireland you Irish scum'
Yeah that is 'from memory' too.
No bullshit on my part in my post, simply unnecessary antagonism from you.


----------



## Poi E (May 9, 2018)

Bugger the past. I've heard the most awful things about travellers from people of all walks of life. It's a knee-jerk or cheap crack about travellers and tarmac and light fingeredness or worse. Fucking abhorrent.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I was going by the Centre for Irish studies.


No reason to doubt No Irish, no blacks signs


philosophical said:


> No bullshit on my part in my post,


Apart from it being wide of the truth


philosophical said:


> simply unnecessary antagonism from you.


Every post you fling up here is antagonistic and looking for a reaction.


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

Your Guardian link does not go against my first post today.
Errr, saying my post is bullshit, yet I am the antagonistic one?
Have you considered that you might be hypocritical?


----------



## Teaboy (May 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> even in the 90s, I knew S London pubs with No Travellers signs on the doors



Yeah I remember one in Oxford which would have been early 90's. I remember it sticking in my mind because they spelled 'sorry' wrong, it was like that on a chalkboard for years.  It's weird and unnerving that the reason I remember it rather than the message it conveyed, mind my parents probably agreed with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I saw somebody on the telly (discussing Windrush) wearing a top with the slogan 'no blacks no dogs, no Irish'.
> This might be a poetic truth in regards to racism but I looked into it. Apparently the Centre for Irish Studies at London Metropolitan University has one single example of this slogan used by a landlady in Blackpool.
> There were a number of 'no Irish' additions in turn of the 19/20'th century newspaper adverts for domestic service, ironically many of them in Dublin!
> Those who say they well remember these slogans are to an extent perpetuating an Urban Myth.
> ...


I have worked in a local authority archives and have no difficulty believing that these signs could exist without people taking and retaining photos of them. Archives only possess what photos people donate, and it would not to my mind be surprising if no one had taken pictures of these signs in the 60s and 70s or had kept them to donate


----------



## Poi E (May 9, 2018)

How kindly would the landlord take to a punter whipping out the camera to take a photo of it? A certain kind of pub.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

Most households still had an outside toilet and tin bath in the seventies, fuck all money no car ,no telly, hiding from the landlord on rent day, never mind the luxury of a camera.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

i suppose philosophical that lenny henry was making it all up on stage at the hackney empire in 1989 when he talked about the signs in his set there.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Most households still had an outside toilet and tin bath in the seventies, fuck all money no car ,no telly, hiding from the landlord on rent day, never mind the luxury of a camera.


yeh, it shouldn't surprise that people who had cameras would use them to record family trips or occasions and not places which had refused them housing or service.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, it shouldn't surprise that people who had cameras would use them to record family trips or occasions and not places which had refused them housing or service.


Internet- modern world , if you don't have pics it never happened


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Internet- modern world , if you don't have pics it never happened


i went to hackney archives some time ago to find out what they had about the riot outside the town hall in 1990. they have no pictures. i have 28.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Internet- modern world , if you don't have pics it never happened


with these signs you have a number of people independently mentioning them, not least lenny henry and john lydon. there is a play, no blacks no irish, which was produced around 1987. it's not like the 'ira = i ran away' graffiti, for which there was only one very dubious source.


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I have worked in a local authority archives and have no difficulty believing that these signs could exist without people taking and retaining photos of them. Archives only possess what photos people donate, and it would not to my mind be surprising if no one had taken pictures of these signs in the 60s and 70s or had kept them to donate


I agree with you, especially the people probably wouldn't have wanted to waste film and the cost of developing on pictures of such signs.
In my post I accepted that if such signs did or didn't exist as preserved archive, there is a poetic truth in the racism such a phenomena expresses.
My post was following on from the latest stuff expressed about the history of so called troublesome Irish. 
I am not disputing that racist signs exist, but a lot of people say they remember the specific wording I mentioned in signs, but there is some doubt about how widespread signs with that particular wording might have been.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

The revenue are continuing along with the assumption that no agreement will be reached and resources are being applied to that end.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

philosophical said:


> but there is some doubt about how widespread signs with that particular wording might have been.


You are moving the goalposts again. Doubt by who ? Some fucking troll on the internet ? How rife did it have to be ? You can't doubt personal testimony.


----------



## Raheem (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> You can't doubt personal testimony.



Yes you can. I've seen it happen with my own eyes.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes you can. I've seen it happen with my own eyes.


I should have phrased it better but trolly boy still won't have it.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> I should have phrased it better but trolly boy still won't have it.


He's not trolling.  You lot just can't handle him and are getting found out/owned.

The level of discussion here compared to 10 years or so ago is embarrassing.  No wonder new people don't stay and those that _are_ still here don't bother.  A credit to your creed.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> He's not trolling





DexterTCN said:


> You lot just can't handle him and are getting found out/owned.





DexterTCN said:


> The level of discussion here compared to 10 years or so ago is embarrassing.


Is that so ?


DexterTCN said:


> A credit to your creed.


Yep it's all my fault. What about the pissed up cunts that shout a lot ?


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

sealion you are mistaken, I am not moving any goalposts at all, but I think you are playing the man not the ball on this.


----------



## philosophical (May 9, 2018)

Personally I thought this was an entertaining read:

Brexit is like quantum mechanics, nobody understands it


----------



## emanymton (May 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> even in the 90s, I knew S London pubs with No Travellers signs on the doors


I have been told that the travellers rest in Manchester once had a no travellers sign up.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 9, 2018)

I've definitely seen 'No Travellers' signs in the past on a few pubs  -- not ones I ever went into or ever wanted to go into.

To be slightly fair to philosophical , he's specifically *not* dismissing that there was anti-Irish discrimination, or signs.

And there probably is room** for a proper/better discussion about how widespread _that particular_ 'No Irish No Blacks No Dogs' sign was -- that can surely be done here without people denying its existence point blank. And without asking the question ("how widespread?") being seen as the same as denying it existed.

**Elsewhere than on this Brexit thread though  -- it's being derailed at the moment, and I've just contributed to that


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

Iain Duncan Smith lays into 'ABUSIVELY RUDE' House of Lords after Brexit BETRAYAL


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Iain Duncan Smith lays into 'ABUSIVELY RUDE' House of Lords after Brexit BETRAYAL


That's an express link.  No way, sorry.  What does it boil down to?


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That's an express link.


So what. Why are you responding to my posts anyway ?


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> So what. Why are you responding to my posts anyway ?


Why are you posting links to a racist site?  Explain the content you're linking to.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Why are you posting links to a racist site?


Is it ? Are you going to imply i'm a racist now ? you fool.


DexterTCN said:


> Explain the content you're linking to.


Read it. It's available elsewhere.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Is it ? Are you going to imply i'm a racist now ? you fool.
> 
> Read it. It's available elsewhere.


Better idea...go and fuck yourself.

You posted the fucking link...you post a summary of it, fuckin twat.  Forum rules.   Don't just post links.


----------



## sealion (May 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> .go and fuck yourself


Likewise. Forum rules also suggest not being a cunt. Give it a go.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 9, 2018)

sealion said:


> Likewise. Forum rules also suggest not being a cunt. Give it a go.


One rule for the rich...


----------



## steeplejack (May 10, 2018)

In the short video, Iain Duncan Smith, son of Wing Commander WGG "Smithy" Duncan Smith, Sandhurst alumni, ex-Scots Guards, _aide-de-campe_ to a General, tours in Northern Ireland and "Rhodesia", MP since 1987 and former leader of the Conservative Party and coalition cabinet minister, current member of the Privy Council, posits that the "British Establishment" (of which he of course, definitely, is not only not a member but excluded quite viciously from) are wedded to the EU on the basis that they used to have sinecures there as civil servants and advisers. Moreover, they have been quite rude about Brexiteers. Oh, and no one elected them.

IDS not only understands but stands shoulder to shoulder with those branded "thick" and "not knowing what they voted for" by the House of Lords.

all seems kosher to me. who knows how he will react when he finds out how much Rees-Mogg's asset management fund stands to make on the day of Brexit. I am sure he definitely absolutely and in no way stands to benefit from it himself, either.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

Nice to see sealion giving room for poor old IDS there.

Anyway...Car News: Jaguar Lay-offs


----------



## mojo pixy (May 10, 2018)

The people who conceived and promoted brexit will obviously be gaining a fucksight more from it, than will the millions who did them the favour of actually voting for it. This was always part of the calculation, for me.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nice to see sealion giving room for poor old IDS there.
> 
> Anyway...Car News: Jaguar Lay-offs



Your article says 1000 agency staff will not be re-hired due to Brexit/Austerity/Diesel sales falling off a cliff. Article written by a staunch remainer. Can be safely filed under 'Yet another steaming pile of bollocks from Dexter'


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The people who conceived and promoted brexit will obviously be gaining a fucksight more from it, than will the millions who did them the favour of actually voting for it. This was always part of the calculation, for me.


What was your general calculation?


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Your article says 1000 agency staff will not be re-hired due to Brexit/Austerity/Diesel sales falling off a cliff. Article written by a staunch remainer. Can be safely filed under 'Yet another steaming pile of bollocks from Dexter'


It's not my article, is it?  I notice you've no problem with IDS propaganda being posted but attack me for posting about job losses.

1000 highly skilled people from communities lose their jobs even though sales increased, you mean.  Fuck the workers, eh.  Go you.

I'm not sure GB is a 'staunch remainer' but even if so it would have nothing to do with the fact of people becoming unemployed because of tory policies...that you support.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's not my article, is it?  I notice you've no problem with IDS propaganda being posted but attack me for posting about job losses.
> 
> 1000 highly skilled people from communities lose their jobs even though sales increased, you mean.  Fuck the workers, eh.  Go you.
> 
> *I'm not sure GB is a 'staunch remainer' *b






			
				Your fucking link said:
			
		

> As a Scot and a natural born European I dug my ‘X’ hard into the ‘Remain’ box on the voting paper in the booth with the dedication of a surgeon



JLR's woes are that 90% of their sales are diesel. Has the diesel news floated through your planet yet?

And yeah, I'm fuck the workers. From an EU fanboy 


Swap Guardian for Dexter. Again.


----------



## mojo pixy (May 10, 2018)

DP


----------



## mojo pixy (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What was your general calculation?



My calculation went something like, _I will vote for just about anything to stop Farage, Gove, Johnson and their scummy cohorts from getting what they want_. As it stands those fuckers now appear to have actual moral high ground (_nothing must thwart The Will of The People!_) Unbelievable really but there we are.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

You missed a bit.


DexterTCN said:


> ...I'm not sure GB is a 'staunch remainer' but even if so it would have nothing to do with the fact of people becoming unemployed because of tory policies...that you support.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You missed a bit.



Because I don't support your wooly nonsense does not follow that I support the vermin's policies either. The world has far more hues than black and white.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Because I don't support your wooly nonsense does not follow that I support the vermin's policies either. The world has far more hues than black and white.


Except where you dismiss the views of anyone who is a remainer, obviously.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

This is interesting.

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-true-reason-britain-cannot-call-europes-bluff


----------



## andysays (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/the-true-reason-britain-cannot-call-europes-bluff





DexterTCN said:


> Better idea...go and fuck yourself.
> 
> You posted the fucking link...you post a summary of it, fuckin twat.  Forum rules.   Don't just post links.



"This is interesting" doesn't qualify as a summary...


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> "This is interesting" doesn't qualify as a summary...


I know...I was only really posting it for people genuinely interested in discussion so didn't want to qualify it straight off the bat.  You can ignore it.


----------



## NoXion (May 10, 2018)

Any decision to lay off workers post-Brexit is as much a political decision as those which lead to the referendum in the first place.

So when liberal tools like DexterTCN hold up such layoffs as some kind of natural, unavoidable outcome of Brexit, rather than a conscious decision by capital, they are playing exactly the role that capital wants them to; misdirecting the blame.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Because I don't support your wooly nonsense does not follow that I support the vermin's policies either. The world has far more hues than black and white.


As tj hooker said there are a million shades of grey


----------



## DexterTCN (May 10, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Any decision to lay off workers post-Brexit is as much a political decision as those which lead to the referendum in the first place.
> 
> So when liberal tools like DexterTCN hold up such layoffs as some kind of natural, unavoidable outcome of Brexit, rather than a conscious decision by capital, they are playing exactly the role that capital wants them to; misdirecting the blame.


Right then...what do we have?

'workers'?  tick
'liberal tool'?  tick
'capital'?  tick tick

well done you.  and extra points for saying (paraphrase) 'people like me'.

Brexit's so simple, eh.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Right then...what do we have?
> 
> 'workers'?  tick
> 'liberal tool'?  tick
> ...


Yeh. Read the words, don't count them


----------



## William of Walworth (May 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> The true reason Britain cannot call Europe’s bluff






			
				andysays said:
			
		

> "This is interesting" doesn't qualify as a summary...



I agree, but I'll attempt a 2-line-only summary :

However little you like Prospect magazine, and I'm no fan at all either, that article _really does_ list a fair few real-world and practical problems for Brexit**.

***If* implemented in the hardest, most Rees-Moggian form of "complete exit or no deal, no compromise"


----------



## Streathamite (May 10, 2018)

steeplejack said:


> In the short video, Iain Duncan Smith, son of Wing Commander WGG "Smithy" Duncan Smith, Sandhurst alumni, ex-Scots Guards, _aide-de-campe_ to a General, tours in Northern Ireland and "Rhodesia", MP since 1987 and former leader of the Conservative Party and coalition cabinet minister, current member of the Privy Council, posits that the "British Establishment" (of which he of course, definitely, is not only not a member but excluded quite viciously from) are wedded to the EU on the basis that they used to have sinecures there as civil servants and advisers. Moreover, they have been quite rude about Brexiteers. Oh, and no one elected them.
> 
> IDS not only understands but stands shoulder to shoulder with those branded "thick" and "not knowing what they voted for" by the House of Lords.
> 
> all seems kosher to me. who knows how he will react when he finds out how much Rees-Mogg's asset management fund stands to make on the day of Brexit. I am sure he definitely absolutely and in no way stands to benefit from it himself, either.


tsk! you forgot to mention his father-in - law, Lord Cottesloe, in whose extensive country estate lies the elegant and palatial period residence of Mr & Mrs Duncan Smith.
You're slipping...


----------



## Raheem (May 11, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Any decision to lay off workers post-Brexit is as much a political decision as those which lead to the referendum in the first place.



Any decision to lay off workers is, in some sense, a political decision. But are you really supposing that businesses post-Brexit are giving up the habit of doing what generates most profit and instead chucking away money to provide fodder for an MSM narrative? I'm not accusing you of supposing that, but what are you supposing exactly?


----------



## gosub (May 11, 2018)

That old man Tarta would have done this anyways... He wasnt exactly slow in shutting Port Talbot


----------



## gosub (May 11, 2018)

dp


----------



## DexterTCN (May 11, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



that's grand. what's happened in the interim? i'd be more interested in seeing the 3 may 2018 figures compared to the 10 may 2018 figures.


----------



## Supine (May 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Perhaps anti-Semitism isn't the vote winner Labour thought it was.


----------



## NoXion (May 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Any decision to lay off workers is, in some sense, a political decision. But are you really supposing that businesses post-Brexit are giving up the habit of doing what generates most profit and instead chucking away money to provide fodder for an MSM narrative? I'm not accusing you of supposing that, but what are you supposing exactly?



I'm only supposing that the "See what you've done, you thick racist Brexiters? You've forced the invisible hand!" narrative that underlies the posting of such stories is not one of working class empowerment, but instead of passive surrender to conscious business decisions as if they were immutable forces of nature.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 11, 2018)

Supine said:


> Perhaps anti-Semitism isn't the vote winner Labour thought it was.


The working class are moving to the right, that poll suggests.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> That old man Tarta would have done this anyways... *He wasnt exactly slow in shutting Port Talbot*



What, that still very operative plant? 

We still see the smoke from its operations every day, here in Swansea. Do feel free to explain your point. 

Apologies, however, if you were taking the piss


----------



## William of Walworth (May 12, 2018)

Supine said:


> Perhaps anti-Semitism isn't the vote winner Labour thought it was.



Perhaps talking *utter shit* isn't as politically incisive for analysis as you thought it was either?


----------



## William of Walworth (May 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> "See what you've done, you thick racist Brexiters? You've forced the invisible hand!"



Loving your politically incisive analysis here too ....


----------



## butchersapron (May 12, 2018)

Supine said:


> Perhaps anti-Semitism isn't the vote winner Labour thought it was.


You are an utter time waster.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 12, 2018)

Depressing figures from the TUC this morning

Wage squeeze 'worst in modern history'

But why won't the TUC come out and say high levels of net economic migration is a factor? Not the only factor, but a factor. Why are we letting the right dominate?


----------



## butchersapron (May 12, 2018)

You are the right.


----------



## butchersapron (May 12, 2018)

Of course the tuc is more concerned with the real reasons for wage squeeze rather than a minor component of that, and a wage squeeze that effects ununionised individual workers, people that they don't represent isn't going to show up in their stuff.

Is today the day you cast the mask off oswald? You missed Hillsborough memorial day this year so you must be chomping at the bit.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 12, 2018)

WTF has Hillsborough got to do with this?


----------



## gosub (May 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> What, that still very operative plant?
> 
> We still see the smoke from its operations every day, here in Swansea. Do feel free to explain your point.
> 
> Apologies, however, if you were taking the piss


The plant is open with employees having been strong armed into taking pension cut else face closure... HMG were unable to help due to EU rules on state subsides.. But feel free to carry on like a goldfish


----------



## philosophical (May 13, 2018)

On the TV this morning we have an Irish politician challenging the UK to stand by it's own suggestions and what it has agreed so far.
Kier Starmer is trying to dilute shameful equivocation into something palatable.
Obviously the vile Tory/brexit lot are princes of darkness, Labour however lurks in shadows.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 13, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Depressing figures from the TUC this morning
> 
> Wage squeeze 'worst in modern history'
> 
> But why won't the TUC come out and say high levels of net economic migration is a factor? Not the only factor, but a factor. Why are we letting the right dominate?



Go and look up the difference between 'factor' and 'pretext'.


----------



## Badgers (May 13, 2018)

Brexit: UK government to host summit on why other countries should join the EU


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Go and look up the difference between 'factor' and 'pretext'.


I don't think it is a pretext. It is one of a number of reasons that has led us to a world with stagnating real wages and high rents. 

I'm sorry, but it is. I wish it wasn't so, but it is.


----------



## Winot (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> I don't think it is a pretext. It is one of a number of reasons that has led us to a world with stagnating real wages and high rents.
> 
> I'm sorry, but it is. I wish it wasn't so, but it is.



It’s not straightforward. There are some links to studies here:

How immigrants affect jobs and wages


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

Winot said:


> It’s not straightforward. There are some links to studies here:
> 
> How immigrants affect jobs and wages


Very few things are straightforward. That study appears to have found the lowest paid workers lose the most, which surely isn't good?

Interestingly there is hardly ever any research on the impact of high net migration on rents. Certainly a ready market of new tenants has made it much easier for landlords to turn their backs on groups like DSS and people with pets or children.


----------



## William of Walworth (May 14, 2018)

gosub said:


> The plant is open with employees having been strong armed into taking pension cut else face closure


We're aware of this locally, one of my CAMRA gang works in Port Talbot and said they hated being held over a barrel like that with the pension cuts.
But that earlier post of yours appeared to say that they'd shut the plant down. All I was doing was contradicting that really. 



> HMG were unable to help due to EU rules on state subsides


Not doubting you, but is this definite? The Government showed no sign at any point of wanting to do anything anyway.



> But feel free to carry on like a goldfish


The cat ate me


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Very few things are straightforward. That study appears to have found the lowest paid workers lose the most, which surely isn't good?
> 
> Interestingly there is hardly ever any research on the impact of high net migration on rents. Certainly a ready market of new tenants has made it much easier for landlords to turn their backs on groups like DSS and people with pets or children.



Employers set wage levels, landlords set rent levels.

Just in case you're deliberately ignoring those two facts to make a point or something.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Employers set wage levels, landlords set rent levels.


Of course they do. But they don't set market levels . An employer who pays less than the market rate will struggle to fill his job. A landlord who charges more than the market rent will struggle to let his property.

Some people talk as though landlords and employers have only just suddenly become greedy and interested in making maximum profit. They've always been fucking greedy. It's just in the last twenty years market conditions have been ideal for maximum greediness.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Of course they do. But they don't set market levels . An employer who pays less than the market rate will struggle to fill his job. A landlord who charges more than the market rent will struggle to let his property.



But there's nothing stopping an employer paying above the going the rate, or a landlord charging below it. Their hand is not forced by the presence of immigrants.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> But there's nothing stopping an employer paying above the going the rate, or a landlord charging below it. Their hand is not forced by the presence of immigrants.


Well I certainly agree that employers could pay more and landlords charge less. If you  expect them suddenly rise up as a block and choose to do so en masse, I think you might be waiting a long time.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Some people talk as though landlords and employers have only just suddenly become greedy and interested in making maximum profit. They've always been fucking greedy. It's just in the last twenty years market conditions have been ideal for maximum greediness.



i can think of times in history where greed was less constricted than it is now. For example, unless you're the state of Qatar, you're not really allowed to own slaves any more.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Well I certainly agree that employers could pay more and landlords charge less. If you  expect them suddenly rise up as a block and choose to do so en masse, I think you might be waiting a long time.



Granted, but its not immigration stopping them from being nice it's their own self-interest and only that.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Granted, but its not immigration stopping them from being nice it's their own self-interest and only that.


Sure. But ultimately you become a landlord out of self interest. That is pretty much a given unfortunately. I don't see that changing, do you?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Sure. But ultimately you become a landlord out of self interest. That is pretty much a given unfortunately. I don't see that changing, do you?



Not unless we start shooting them all.

But 'landlords will never change' is a vastly different statement from 'landlords are cunts because immigrants'.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not unless we start shooting them all.
> 
> But 'landlords will never change' is a vastly different statement from 'landlords are cunts because immigrants'.


"Landlords find it easier to be cunts because of high net migration" would be how I would actually phrase it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> "Landlords find it easier to be cunts because of high net migration" would be how I would actually phrase it.



That's why I would call immigration a pretext, not a cause of low pay and high rents. Landlords are the only cause of rent levels, employers the only cause of wage levels.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> That's why I would call immigration a pretext, not a cause of low pay and high rents. Landlords are the only cause of rent levels, employers the only cause of wage levels.


I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. But then you are into the usual left wing ideas for replacing capitalism and I just don't see that happening.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> I wouldn't necessarily disagree with that. But then you are into the usual left wing ideas for replacing capitalism and I just don't see that happening.



I'm not into any ideas for replacing anything. I'm simply saying that, here and now, it is false to state that immigrants are repsonsible for increasing rents and reducing wages.


----------



## Supine (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm not into any ideas for replacing anything. I'm simply saying that, here and now, it is false to state that immigrants are repsonsible for increasing rents and reducing wages.



Rents and wages are both subject to supply and demand so surely immigrants have an impact. As do many other factors.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm not into any ideas for replacing anything. I'm simply saying that, here and now, it is false to state that immigrants are repsonsible for increasing rents and reducing wages.


Let's just be clear. High net migration is what I'm saying is the problem. Immi*gration* not immi*grants *


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Let's just be clear. High net migration is what I'm saying is the problem. Immi*gration* not immi*grants *



So you're not opposed to immigrants, so long as they stay put and don't come over here putting guns to landlords' heads and demanding rent increases?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (May 14, 2018)

Immigrants are as likely to contribute to infrastructure and the tax-take as anyone else.

The "failure"* of government to manage resources, leading to homelessness and strained services is thus down to government not immigration. Blaming immigration lets government off the hook. It is a pro-elite ruse spooned out for dupes.

* The idea that it's a failure is naive and typically liberal. There's scant evidence that increased homelessness and disintegration of services etc. is anything other than deliberate.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 14, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Immigrants are as likely to contribute to infrastructure and the tax-take as anyone else.
> 
> The "failure"* of government to manage resources, leading to homelessness and strained services is thus down to government not immigration. Blaming immigration lets government off the hook. It is a pro-elite ruse spooned out for dupes.
> 
> * The idea that it's a failure is naive and typically liberal. There's scant evidence that increased homelessness and disintegration of services etc. is anything other than deliberate.


at least there's one policy area in which this abysmal administration could, if they desired, claim a success.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Let's just be clear. High net migration is what I'm saying is the problem. Immi*gration* not immi*grants *


i'll tell you what the problem is, people like you who try to weasel out of their xenophobia in facile ways like this ^^

in the auld days we could have shipped you halfway round the world so you'd have been someone else's problem.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll tell you what the problem is, people like you who try to weasel out of their xenophobia in facile ways like this ^^
> 
> in the auld days we could have shipped you halfway round the world so you'd have been someone else's problem.


Trust me, if Australia had an open door immigration policy I'd be off like a shot.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 14, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Trust me, if Australia had an open door immigration policy I'd be off like a shot.


they do, they will assist you in moving to nauru.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> So you're not opposed to immigrants, so long as they stay put and don't come over here putting guns to landlords' heads and demanding rent increases?


My point is that immigrants don't set immigration policy. The people that do, governments, seem only too willing to listen to the employers and landlords who want high net migration.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (May 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> at least there's one policy area in which this abysmal administration could, if they desired, claim a success.



There's far more than one tbh. Forced repatriation of black people legally here; Sale of infrastructure to friends and donors; Sale of policy influence; Support for terrorism and covering up report on who funds it; Increased homeless, penury and general poverty; Disabled people killing themselves; desperate situation in public health and many areas of education, especially for the poor; Election fraud; Increased race-hate attacks...

The idea that this government is a failure is bizarre.


----------



## steeplejack (May 14, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> tsk! you forgot to mention his father-in - law, Lord Cottesloe, in whose extensive country estate lies the elegant and palatial period residence of Mr & Mrs Duncan Smith.
> You're slipping...



You're obviously more up on your Debrett's than most realise


----------



## Badgers (May 14, 2018)

YouGov


----------



## The39thStep (May 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> Rents and wages are both subject to supply and demand so surely immigrants have an impact. As do many other factors.


Over supply of labour will have an effect on wages


----------



## andysays (May 14, 2018)

Brexit: Jeremy Hunt warns Boris Johnson over customs comments



> Jeremy Hunt has warned Boris Johnson his public criticism could undermine the UK's Brexit negotiating position. The health secretary told BBC Radio 4's Today he thought "it's important that we have these debates in private". The UK government is currently deciding which form of future trade relations it wants with the EU before the detailed negotiations take place in Brussels.



More divisions within the Cabinet over the Brexit approach...


----------



## MickiQ (May 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Over supply of labour will have an effect on wages


Yes and No, there is a tendency to treat workers as totally interchangeable which simply isn't realistic, an influx of unskilled workers won't depress the wages for skilled ones, only for competing unskilled workers, One of the biggest issues in this country is the abject failure of both government and employers to invest in education and training. 
Immigration is a complex issue, a shortage of skilled workers at the same time there is a glut of unskilled ones is also a complex issue, Trying to find something simple to pin the blame on is however human nature.


----------



## MickiQ (May 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> Brexit: Jeremy Hunt warns Boris Johnson over customs comments
> 
> 
> 
> More divisions within the Cabinet over the Brexit approach...


I'm really coming round to the conclusion that the only solution to this for them to fight to the death.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 14, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I'm really coming round to the conclusion that the only solution to this for them to fight to the death.



I would pay to see that.


----------



## andysays (May 14, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I'm really coming round to the conclusion that the only solution to this for them to fight to the death.



Hunt and Johnson in particular or the whole cabinet?

My personal preference would be for a full-scale last-Cabinet-member-standing Battle Royale


----------



## sealion (May 14, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I'm really coming round to the conclusion that the only solution to this for them to fight to the death.


None of them have any guts for a fight, they would put it out to tender.


----------



## bemused (May 14, 2018)

I get that Miliband, Clegg and Morgan are trying to make an important point that MPs should start asserting some influence over the Brexit single market/customs union malarky. But why on earth to politicians insist on having these speeches in factories? It doesn't make you look serious and down to earth, just too tight to hire a room in some airport hotel.

This photoshoot from a Tilda rice warehouse is comical.


----------



## Hollis (May 14, 2018)

In this case I think it's kind of justified, if it brings home that Brexit isn't just some "jolly wheeze" or some theoretical abstraction ...or its all just going to 'come good' under Jeremy or Jacob.  (etc. etc.)


----------



## The39thStep (May 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I get that Miliband, Clegg and Morgan are trying to make an important point that MPs should start asserting some influence over the Brexit single market/customs union malarky. But why on earth to politicians insist on having these speeches in factories? It doesn't make you look serious and down to earth, just too tight to hire a room in some airport hotel.
> 
> This photoshoot from a Tilda rice warehouse is comical.


It is and even more comical that these people think that they are speaking to anyone but the pro EU middle class liberal left. What have they got to offer to engage with anyone working class that voted leave, which is the constituency they would have to engage with to have any effect.


----------



## The39thStep (May 14, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Yes and No, there is a tendency to treat workers as totally interchangeable which simply isn't realistic, an influx of unskilled workers won't depress the wages for skilled ones, only for competing unskilled workers, One of the biggest issues in this country is the abject failure of both government and employers to invest in education and training.
> Immigration is a complex issue, a shortage of skilled workers at the same time there is a glut of unskilled ones is also a complex issue, Trying to find something simple to pin the blame on is however human nature.


Ok I'll go and find something simple .


----------



## Hollis (May 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> It is and even more comical that these people think that they are speaking to anyone but the pro EU middle class liberal left. What have they got to offer to engage with anyone working class that voted leave, which is the constituency they would have to engage with to have any effect.



I think it's an open door.  Also it isn't just the pro-leave 'working class' that's a constituency here.


----------



## MickiQ (May 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> It is and even more comical that these people think that they are speaking to anyone but the pro EU middle class liberal left. What have they got to offer to engage with anyone working class that voted leave, which is the constituency they would have to engage with to have any effect.


The biggest problem with the pro-Remain establishment is that a lot of them can't grasp that ordinary people have a different set of priorities to them, it's all very well banging on about the importance of free trade (and it is) when they can't translate it to things that concern ordinary working class voters. Which is a vast pity of course since the lives of those people are going to be seriously affected by the consequences of what is happening.
It's easy to ridicule the swivel eyed loons like Mogg but the likes of Kinnock and Clegg don't exactly fill me with confidence either.


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)

Hollis said:


> I think it's an open door.  Also it isn't just the pro-leave 'working class' that's a constituency here.


open door for whom? and what are the other constituences?


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 15, 2018)

It's the 2% who think it's going well that gets me.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 15, 2018)

And what conclusions are you drawing from this?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> I get that Miliband, Clegg and Morgan are trying to make an important point that MPs should start asserting some influence over the Brexit single market/customs union malarky. But why on earth to politicians insist on having these speeches in factories? It doesn't make you look serious and down to earth, just too tight to hire a room in some airport hotel.
> 
> This photoshoot from a Tilda rice warehouse is comical.




Two thirds of those in the photo are not MPs.


----------



## Badgers (May 15, 2018)

Brexit: Falkland Islands government sounds alarm on leaving single market


----------



## Yossarian (May 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's the 2% who think it's going well that gets me.



It works out to 7% of Remain voters and 22% of Leavers who think it's going well - so more than just a weird statistical blip, like the 1% of UKIP voters who chose Remain.


----------



## bemused (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> It is and even more comical that these people think that they are speaking to anyone but the pro EU middle class liberal left. What have they got to offer to engage with anyone working class that voted leave, which is the constituency they would have to engage with to have any effect.



My observation of brexit is how many people have stepped forward to be the voice of the silent majority of brexit voters, I guess because it's easy to the be the voice of the silent when you have a huge platform.


----------



## bemused (May 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's the 2% who think it's going well that gets me.



I still think we'll end up in some sort of EEA type deal, I look forward to Tories screaming into the night when that happens.


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's the 2% who think it's going well that gets me.


I wasn't polled, but as someone who voted Leave primarily to fuck up the Tories, I think it's going pretty well so far.


----------



## Supine (May 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> I wasn't polled, but as someone who voted Leave primarily to fuck up the Tories, I think it's going pretty well so far.



Shame it'll fuck up the country as well as the tories


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> My observation of brexit is how many people have stepped forward to be the voice of the silent majority of brexit voters, I guess because it's easy to the be the voice of the silent when you have a huge platform.


The huge coprorations and media that support Remain must be envious


----------



## bemused (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> The huge coprorations and media that support Remain must be envious



Not sure it's going to affect them in the end anyway.


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Brexit: Falkland Islands government sounds alarm on leaving single market


They are not part of the EU and didnt get a vote in the referendum


----------



## Pickman's model (May 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Brexit: Falkland Islands government sounds alarm on leaving single market


yes, the result of the referendum has only just reached them.


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)




----------



## Raheem (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


>



Tbf, fairly meaningless unless put side by side with a map for "my voice counts".


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Tbf, fairly meaningless unless put side by side with a map for "my voice counts".


That is a map for 'my voice counts'


----------



## 2hats (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> That is a map for 'my voice counts'


Would be interesting to see alongside a map of ‘my voice counts’ for each country in relation to national government…

Lo and behold:

Source: ‘Europeans in 2017’ (European Parliament publication)

e2a: The survey would seem to suggest that it is the UK, Slovakia where voices are more likely to be perceived to count less in the EU than nationally whereas for Romania, Bulgaria the situation is reversed.


----------



## Raheem (May 15, 2018)

2hats said:


> e2a: The survey would seem to suggest that it is the UK, Slovakia where voices are more likely to be perceived to count less in the EU than nationally whereas for Romania, Bulgaria the situation is reversed.



That's not what the comparison shows. It's my voice within in the EU versus my country's voice within the EU.


----------



## billbond (May 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> Shame it'll fuck up the country as well as the tories



Do you have this weeks winning Lottery numbers ?
seems you can see into the future


----------



## bemused (May 15, 2018)

i wonder if France would vote to leave, casually Googling seems to suggest it isn't unlikely they would


----------



## Pickman's model (May 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> i wonder if France would vote to leave, casually Googling seems to suggest it isn't unlikely they would


they'd have to call a referendum first of course


----------



## Pickman's model (May 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> i wonder if France would vote to leave, casually Googling seems to suggest it isn't unlikely they would


given what they can see happening on this side of the channel i'd imagine that in any referendum the french electorate would consider carefully who might be negotiating a frexit before marking their ballot paper.


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And what conclusions are you drawing from this?


That they want any kind of brexit. Even the mess that's being made at the moment.


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> Shame it'll fuck up the country as well as the tories


Next you'll be telling us it isn't in the national interest


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> They are not part of the EU and didnt get a vote in the referendum



Falklanders are currently EU citizens though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 15, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Falklanders are currently EU citizens though.



Only by default, because they are British citizens.


----------



## 2hats (May 15, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's not what the comparison shows. It's my voice within in the EU versus my country's voice within the EU.


Mea culpa.


----------



## agricola (May 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> given what they can see happening on this side of the channel i'd imagine that in any referendum the french electorate would consider carefully who might be negotiating a frexit before marking their ballot paper.



pas Macron mais macarons, as they might say about the British negotiation team*.

* if they got a B in GCSE French


----------



## The39thStep (May 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> i wonder if France would vote to leave, casually Googling seems to suggest it isn't unlikely they would


Italy's new govt is prob the most euro sceptic .


----------



## Pickman's model (May 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> pas Macron mais macarons, as they might say about the British negotiation team*.
> 
> * if they got a B in GCSE French


il aurait mieux valu que boris johnson soit étranglé à la naissance
(i don't think google's got it quite right but the meaning should be clear)


----------



## Pickman's model (May 15, 2018)

agricola 
i don't think google translate's fully trustworthy...


----------



## agricola (May 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> agricola
> i don't think google translate's fully trustworthy...
> 
> View attachment 135409



Certainly not - if you keep translating it between the two languages you end up with "_for better race_" via "_class is better_".


----------



## Supine (May 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Next you'll be telling us it isn't in the national interest



More than happy to do that


----------



## philosophical (May 15, 2018)

This democracy lark is becoming complicated. The Scottish parliament has for the first time rejected a piece of Westminster legislation in the EU Withdrawal Bill.
One irony that can be expected is that the Bill will be imposed on Scotland anyway, by the same brexiteers that decry the (false) notion that the EU imposes stuff on the UK.
So we have a fair few 'will of the people' issues swirling about fighting for precedence. The will of the Scottish people expressed by their parliament is wiped out by the so called will of the UK population in voting for brexit.
It might be worth asking why there are regional powers anyway, except it has been recognised by the UK generally that certain regions ought to have a degree of autonomy, but it turns out that autonomy can be sidelined.
As a population Scotland voted against brexit, as a regional democratically elected parliament Hollyrood votes against the EU withdrawal bill.
What will the right wing media make of that, the Lords being the enemy of the people, and Scotland being the enemy of, well the English I suppose.
Is anybody tasked with drawing the country together post brexit? I don't envy them their job.


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> More than happy to do that



"We're all in this together"


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 15, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This democracy lark is becoming complicated. The Scottish parliament has for the first time rejected a piece of Westminster legislation in the EU Withdrawal Bill.
> One irony that can be expected is that the Bill will be imposed on Scotland anyway, by the same brexiteers that decry the (false) notion that the EU imposes stuff on the UK.
> So we have a fair few 'will of the people' issues swirling about fighting for precedence. The will of the Scottish people expressed by their parliament is wiped out by the so called will of the UK population in voting for brexit.
> It might be worth asking why there are regional powers anyway, except it has been recognised by the UK generally that certain regions ought to have a degree of autonomy, but it turns out that autonomy can be sidelined.
> ...



They also voted to remain part of the UK, so they have to accept the UK wide vote for brexit.


----------



## Supine (May 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> "We're all in this together"



Which translates as Boris & Mogg will throw us in the dodgy life raft and then stand on our heads to ensure they drown last. The cunts.


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> They also voted to remain part of the UK, so they have to accept the UK wide vote for brexit.



Looks like everyone who voted for Brexit is anti-Scots, as well as anti-Irish and racist


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Looks like everyone who voted for Brexit is anti-Scots, as well as anti-Irish and racist



If you're attempting to have a go at me, you fail on so many levels.


----------



## philosophical (May 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> They also voted to remain part of the UK, so they have to accept the UK wide vote for brexit.


Interesting that you (and I suppose others) use the word 'they' in the second part of your reply in this context, rather than the word 'we'.
The Scottish independence referendum was indeed one where the Scottish population voted to be part of the UK, and as I said earlier, on one level the question arises about the point of regional assemblies, parliaments or whatever, if ultimately the regional differences of political opinion will always be trumped by Westminster.
In this thread above there is reference to 'the national interest', but we inhabit a nation which does not completely want to be homogenous with itself, and to me begs the question as to what is 'the nation' anyway. Is it that regional cultural differences are acceptable and can be recognised and celebrated, but when it comes to the UK as a nation political differences are not always that acceptable?
When I read the term above 'the national interest' I don't think it is an easy definition to define what the UK as a nation actually is. In what is supposed to be a unified nation there is a lot of us and them going on.


----------



## philosophical (May 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> If you're attempting to have a go at me, you fail on so many levels.


I think the dig was aimed at me.


----------



## Hollis (May 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> open door for whom? and what are the other constituences?



Open door - to argue for a remain, soft Brexit position
Other constituencies - well for starters just about everyone who doesn't fit into either your 'pro-EU middle-class liberal left' or 'pro-leave working class' - which in my book leaves a lot to play for..


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

Thomson Reuters is moving one of its businesses from London to Dublin because of Brexit

I'm sure that's not worth much anyway.   Easily replaced.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (May 16, 2018)

This Wikipedia entry for "gammon" vanished rather quickly.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DdPaaR_W4AAL-HU.jpg


----------



## Supine (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Thomson Reuters is moving one of its businesses from London to Dublin because of Brexit
> 
> I'm sure that's not worth much anyway.   Easily replaced.



Do you have a number in mind for when companies leaving does become a problem? 10? 50? 500?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2018)

Supine said:


> Do you have a number in mind for when companies leaving does become a problem? 10? 50? 500?


020 7930 4433


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

Supine said:


> Do you have a number in mind for when companies leaving does become a problem? 10? 50? 500?


I was being sarcastic.

More than 500 have already gone, as well as hundreds of thousands of workers, it appears.  We won't see the damage for a while but it's already happening.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I was being sarcastic.
> 
> More than 500 have already gone, as well as hundreds of thousands of workers, it appears.  We won't see the damage for a while but it's already happening.


presumably these hundreds of thousands of workers who have gone will be replaced by the incoming migrants.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I was being sarcastic.starting to go up too.
> 
> More than 500 have already gone, as well as hundreds of thousands of workers, it appears.  We won't see the damage for a while but it's already happening.



And, yet employment is at record levels, with some impressive increases, considering uncertainty.



> Despite the slowest growth in more than five years, the Office for National Statistics said there were 32.34 million people in work in the first quarter of the year, an increase of 197,000 on the previous quarter and up by 396,000 on the first three months of 2017.
> 
> The UK’s employment rate rose by 0.4 points to 75.6% in the latest quarter, the highest since modern records began in 1971. A majority of jobs created were full-time posts.



UK record employment increases likelihood of interest rate hike


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, yet employment is at record levels, with some impressive increases, considering uncertainty.
> 
> 
> 
> UK record employment increases likelihood of interest rate hike


em...pay's up by nearly 3% is it?


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> em...pay's up by nearly 3% is it?



On average, yes.

Although my team got a 5% increase last month.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 16, 2018)

National minimum wage went up 4.4% in April.

Whilst it's still way too low, the % increases under the Tories haven't been as bad as they might have been.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 16, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> National minimum wage went up 4.4% in April.



That's why I pushed myself to give them a 5% increase, I want to keep them on well above the 'living wage', they are a cracking team, who have been with me for years, I don't want to see them drift off. Despite them engaged in what could be considered 'minimum wage work', the living wage went up to £7.38 ph, my team went up to £10.50 ph, and I am hoping to increase that to £11.00 ph next year.

Partly paid by increased rates to new clients, partly by increasing volume of business.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's why I pushed myself to give them a 5% increase, I want to keep them on well above the 'living wage', they are a cracking team, who have been with me for years, I don't want to see them drift off. Despite them engaged in what could be considered 'minimum wage work', the living wage went up to £7.38 ph, my team went up to £10.50 ph, and I am hoping to increase that to £11.00 ph next year.
> 
> Partly paid by increased rates to new clients, partly by increasing volume of business.



Good for you.

If only the world was full of Cupid Stunts


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's why I pushed myself to give them a 5% increase, I want to keep them on well above the 'living wage', they are a cracking team, who have been with me for years, I don't want to see them drift off. Despite them engaged in what could be considered 'minimum wage work', the living wage went up to £7.38 ph, my team went up to £10.50 ph, and I am hoping to increase that to £11.00 ph next year.
> 
> Partly paid by increased rates to new clients, partly by increasing volume of business.


That would take them to £21,200 per annum.  The national average is £27k.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That would take them to £21,200 per annum.  The national average is £27k.


median. not mean, not mode.

i'd expect modal pay to be significantly below £27k


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That would take them to £21,200 per annum.  The national average is £27k.



And, your point is?


----------



## Slo-mo (May 16, 2018)

The national average is massively loaded by people in London, by high end professionals etc etc.
Cupid Stunt is paying a very fair rate for anywhere outside the M25.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, yet employment is at record levels, with some impressive increases, considering uncertainty.
> UK record employment increases likelihood of interest rate hike


This illustrates the problem with economics. This was exactly the same claim the Terese May (after before her Cameron/Osborne/etc) made today about why everything is a-ok. It's the argument that successive governments have used to excuse their attacks on the welfare state and increasing inequality and/or poverty. You're playing on their terms.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This illustrates the problem with economics. This was exactly the same claim the Terese May (after before her Cameron/Osborne/etc) made today about why everything is a-ok. It's the argument that successive governments have used to excuse their attacks on the welfare state and increasing inequality and/or poverty. You're playing on their terms.




To some extent, yes, we don't have a choice. These are the stats and we have to go with them to some extent, or provide evidence of lies, which short of commissioning our own survey it's a struggle to do.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This illustrates the problem with economics. This was exactly the same claim the Terese May (after before her Cameron/Osborne/etc) made today about why everything is a-ok. It's the argument that successive governments have used to excuse their attacks on the welfare state and increasing inequality and/or poverty. You're playing on their terms.



I am not playing on their terms, everything is far from OK, there's still a long way to go, in particular in respect of inequality, which seriously bugs me.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 16, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> To some extent, yes, we don't have a choice. These are the stats and we have to go with them to some extent, or provide evidence of lies, which short of commissioning our own survey it's a struggle to do.


Again an excellent illustration of what economics actually is - there are "the stats", lovely neutral apolitical stats.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 16, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> To some extent, yes, we don't have a choice. These are the stats and we have to go with them to some extent, or provide evidence of lies, which short of commissioning our own survey it's a struggle to do.


stats are two steps beyond lies, aren't they


----------



## Slo-mo (May 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Again an excellent illustration of what economics actually is - there are "the stats", lovely neutral apolitical stats.


There is no such thing as neutral stats and I accept that. But they are all we have.

FWIW I've long thought the official inflation figures a bit whiffy. I'm not alleging deliberate deception, I just don't think the accurately reflect the things poorer people spend their money on.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am not playing on their terms, everything is far from OK, there's still a long way to go, in particular in respect of inequality, which seriously bugs me.





cupid_stunt said:


> I am not playing on their terms, everything is far from OK, there's still a long way to go, in particular in respect of inequality, which seriously bugs me.


You've made the same argument as May did this lunchtime 


> May said she wanted to correct him: almost two-thirds of the rise in employment has been from full-time work, and 70% of the rise in employment from 2010 has been from high-skilled work.


the same argument Hammond made to excuse doing anything to tackle job insecurity. By using such an argument of course you're playing on their terms.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, your point is?


That the figures, obviously, are a load of shite.

No-one is better off just now.  Certainly _on average_.

You know how many people didn't file their tax returns on time this year?  It's record breaking.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2018)

You're making room for those 2 million pensioners that are coming back from Europe shortly, right?


----------



## teuchter (May 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's why I pushed myself to give them a 5% increase, I want to keep them on well above the 'living wage', they are a cracking team, who have been with me for years, I don't want to see them drift off. Despite them engaged in what could be considered 'minimum wage work', the living wage went up to £7.38 ph, my team went up to £10.50 ph, and I am hoping to increase that to £11.00 ph next year.
> 
> Partly paid by increased rates to new clients, partly by increasing volume of business.


How much do you pay yourself?


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> How much do you pay yourself?



A lot less than I could do, if I was a greedy capitalist pig.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> How much do you pay yourself?


Surely that is, quite literally, Cupid Stunt's business?


----------



## teuchter (May 17, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> A lot less than I could do, if I was a greedy capitalist pig.


I'm fairly sure you're a greedy capitalist pig if you pay yourself any more than the other workers in the company aren't you?


----------



## teuchter (May 17, 2018)

Slo-mo said:


> Surely that is, quite literally, Cupid Stunt's business?


Not if he is seeking approval on u75 as a benevolent member of the boss class.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm fairly sure you're a greedy capitalist pig if you pay yourself any more than the other workers in the company aren't you?



My role in the business is totally different, and requires a far higher skill set, not that it's any of your bloody business, but I earn only slightly more than I did in my last job, which was a lot easier role to fulfill.


----------



## teuchter (May 17, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> My role in the business is totally different, and requires a far higher skill set, not that it's any of your bloody business, but I earn only slightly more than I did in my last job, which was a lot easier role to fulfill.


Essentially you have decided that you and your workers' pay is related to the value of your time according to the market, rather than hours of labour put in. That's fine, it's what any capitalist would do. You pay the workers slightly more than the minimum necessary for them to live off, and you pay yourself a little bit less than what you think you are worth. Naturally you don't want to divulge the actual difference in pay; I'd take a stab that it will be at least 2 or 3 times as much. But I'm confident these small gestures will keep the anti-capitalists of U75 off your back, and indeed your benevolence will be noted.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You pay the workers slightly more than the minimum necessary for them to live off..



Slightly? It's a third more than the national living wage. 



teuchter said:


> I'd take a stab that it will be at least 2 or 3 times as much.



Fucking wish it was.


----------



## Poi E (May 17, 2018)

I bet you don't even know how to chomp a cigar properly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're making room for those 2 million pensioners that are coming back from Europe shortly, right?



I assume we'll be bribing the EU to hang on to them. Trading a couple of million useful working age europeans for a couple of million pensioners who are shit even compared to normal British pensioners would be a very bad deal for us.


----------



## Slo-mo (May 17, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I assume we'll be bribing the EU to hang on to them. Trading a couple of million useful working age europeans for a couple of million pensioners who are shit even compared to normal British pensioners would be a very bad deal for us.


Yes , the final deal should definitely allow people already in the UK to stay, and UK citizens in the EU to stay also. 

Ideally this should have been established even before the referendum was called.


----------



## editor (May 31, 2018)

Look at this cunt 

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/nigel-lawson-brexit-french-residency-vote-leave/


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 31, 2018)

editor said:


> Look at this cunt
> 
> https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/nigel-lawson-brexit-french-residency-vote-leave/



Would rather not, had to spend two hours staring at his ugly mug already this month...


----------



## Supine (May 31, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Would rather not, had to spend two hours staring at his ugly mug already this month...
> 
> View attachment 136834



He looks sad. Maybe he's finally realised he's a massive cunt.


----------



## philosophical (May 31, 2018)

I have learned that it is out of order to post links here without a summary of some kind.
This first link is to a story about how the Irish Republic Guardai wanting not only extra police for the post brexit Irish border, but automatic weapons as well with armed response units equipped with such weapons.

Border gardaí seek automatic weapons amid hard Brexit fears

The second link is about how the police service of Northern Ireland want more money and up to 500 more officers to protect the border, and there is some interesting figures about the resources actually needed pre the Belfast Agreement. (yes I know it is a Guardian link and all that that implies for some people here).

Brexit: Northern Irish police ask for more funds to protect border

The third link is about how a high up in the Guarda is complaining that his government as yet has no plan in place for policing the Irish/UK post brexit border.

No plan in place for policing a hard border, warns Garda chief

There are some on this thread who may believe the concern about the Irish border post brexit is somehow shallow and a faux concern from some posters, but the links are demonstrating that the concerns are not a pose by a mouthy few, but more widespread, and dare I say, genuine.

Part of the mood music is that those voting brexit knew what they were voting for, but that music is played on the very down low when brexiters are invited to supply a _workable _solution to the Irish border issue.
Perhaps those voting brexit didn't have a clue, or that their attitude to the Irish situation was one of distain.


----------



## Santino (May 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have learned that it is out of order to post links here without a summary of some kind.
> This first link is to a story about how the Irish Republic Guardai wanting not only extra police for the post brexit Irish border, but automatic weapons as well with armed response units equipped with such weapons.
> 
> Border gardaí seek automatic weapons amid hard Brexit fears
> ...


What do you think about those links?


----------



## teuchter (May 31, 2018)

Santino said:


> What do you think about those links?


How do you feel about your contributions to this thread, as a body of work?


----------



## philosophical (May 31, 2018)

Go for it chaps, play the man not the ball.


----------



## kabbes (May 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Go for it chaps, play the man not the ball.


Asking you what you think of them IS playing the ball.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have learned that it is out of order to post links here without a summary of some kind.
> This first link is to a story about how the Irish Republic Guardai wanting not only extra police for the post brexit Irish border, but automatic weapons as well with armed response units equipped with such weapons.
> 
> Border gardaí seek automatic weapons amid hard Brexit fears
> ...



Filth wanting more money, guns and filth, shokka.


----------



## philosophical (May 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Asking you what you think of them IS playing the ball.



I disagree. 
I have posted the links to indicate that the issue is still bubbling away. Asking me what I think of them is irrelevant.


----------



## Supine (May 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree.
> I have posted the links to indicate that the issue is still bubbling away. Asking me what I think of them is irrelevant.



Still banging on about the same thing I see


----------



## philosophical (May 31, 2018)

Supine said:


> Still banging on about the same thing I see



20 20 vision then.


----------



## kabbes (May 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree.
> I have posted the links to indicate that the issue is still bubbling away. Asking me what I think of them is irrelevant.


Ok.  Well then I have nothing to say about them either.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 1, 2018)

Oh dear, the founder of Renew, the Macronist party launched with a large fan fare ( but very few members  in the Guardian), has just resigned.However  Remainers can look forward to the tour of Left Against Brexit including speakers from  Manuel Cortes, the general secretary of the transport union TSSA, Michael Chessum an  ex student activist who quit Momentum, former shadow minister Catherine West, Caroline Lucas,  Labour MEPs Seb Dance and Julie Ward, journalist Gary Younge, and economist Ann Petifor.


----------



## Santino (Jun 1, 2018)

teuchter said:


> How do you feel about your contributions to this thread, as a body of work?


I think it stands up quite well as a body of work, although it's difficult to divorce it from the context in which many of the individual posts were written.


----------



## gosub (Jun 1, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree.
> I have posted the links to indicate that the issue is still bubbling away. Asking me what I think of them is irrelevant.


It's not irrelevant but I think you could get away with inconciquential


----------



## philosophical (Jun 1, 2018)

gosub said:


> It's not irrelevant but I think you could get away with inconciquential


Do you mean inconsequential?


----------



## mather (Jun 1, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Oh dear, the founder of Renew, the Macronist party launched with a large fan fare ( but very few members  in the Guardian), has just resigned.However  Remainers can look forward to the tour of Left Against Brexit including speakers from  Manuel Cortes, the general secretary of the transport union TSSA, Michael Chessum an  ex student activist who quit Momentum, former shadow minister Catherine West, Caroline Lucas,  Labour MEPs Seb Dance and Julie Ward, journalist Gary Younge, and economist Ann Petifor.



No thanks, I'll pass. Why is the British left so shit?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 2, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Slightly? It's a third more than the national living wage.


It isn’t though is it? Regardless of what the government says Ten quid an hour is about the living wage, though in private accommodation you would still be struggling. It would be entirely feasible for someone on that to still end up at a foodbank if it’s a bad month/depending where they live, kids etc. On the “national living wage” it must happen all the time.


----------



## gosub (Jun 3, 2018)

Brexit preparedness


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 3, 2018)

Tory doner and leave campaigner Crispin Odey, a hedge fund manager :

“We should say, ‘we’ve got to have life after this, so we’re creating that life. We are creating trade agreements which are in breach of everything, because we won’t be in breach by the time you come to take us to court’. That’s how Elizabeth I would have been leading with this.”


----------



## gosub (Jun 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Tory doner and leave campaigner Crispin Odey, a hedge fund manager :
> 
> “We should say, ‘we’ve got to have life after this, so we’re creating that life. We are creating trade agreements which are in breach of everything, because we won’t be in breach by the time you come to take us to court’. That’s how Elizabeth I would have been leading with this.”


Nah she'd have lead with piracy... Not sure the modern equivalent of Spanish treasure gallions are though


----------



## Raheem (Jun 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Tory doner and leave campaigner Crispin Odey, a hedge fund manager :
> 
> “We should say, ‘we’ve got to have life after this, so we’re creating that life. We are creating trade agreements which are in breach of everything, because we won’t be in breach by the time you come to take us to court’. That’s how Elizabeth I would have been leading with this.”



I'm pretty sure he's right that the reason the government is not able to negotiate amazing trade deals is that it is too frightened of being taken to court for being in breach of something or other.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 6, 2018)




----------



## Winot (Jun 6, 2018)

And also farmers:

Farmers worried over 'lack of detail' in post-Brexit plans

The Tories are losing the confidence of their natural constituency. It’s going to be crunch time soon.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 6, 2018)

The farmers were one of the biggest pro-Brexit blocs. What exactly were they expecting to happen, I wonder?


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 6, 2018)

I'm hoping for a lengthy period of CRAP, a Customs and Regulatory Alignment Protocol, which kicks brexit into the long grass and keeps the UK in the EU to all intents and purposes, if not in name.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> I'm hoping for a lengthy period of CRAP, a Customs and Regulatory Alignment Protocol which kicks brexit into the long grass and keeps the UK in the EU to all intents and purposes, if not in name.


yeh not in name and without representation in the european parliament or council of ministers etc.


----------



## Winot (Jun 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The farmers were one of the biggest pro-Brexit blocs. What exactly were they expecting to happen, I wonder?



They were basically bought off with the promise of funding to match EU subsidies. Doesn’t sound like that’s enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> I'm hoping for a lengthy period of CRAP, a Customs and Regulatory Alignment Protocol which kicks brexit into the long grass and keeps the UK in the EU to all intents and purposes, if not in name.


further to my previous reply, you can rely on a long period of crap in the future whatever happens.


----------



## Winot (Jun 6, 2018)

Oh and the Dutch government have told their carmakers not to include British parts in their cars after Brexit. The boss of Unipart isn’t happy.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 6, 2018)

still think its a process of the government going through the motions trying to find the political space to call the whole thing off. absolutely nothing has been resolved in two years - they are paralysed by the political impossibility of the delivering the referendum result. Its just a case of waiting for the inevitable crunch.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> still think its a process of the government going through the motions trying to find the political space to call the whole thing off. absolutely nothing has been resolved in two years - they are paralysed by the political impossibility of the delivering the referendum result. Its just a case of waiting for the inevitable crunch.


yeh but that's more likely to be a crash out than a remain within because of the previously unheard of degree of buffoonery of the may administration.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 6, 2018)

A government that damages the country just so they don't lose face?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

Badgers said:


> A government that damages the country just so they don't lose face?


they've damaged the country with less reason


----------



## Badgers (Jun 6, 2018)

European businesses advised to avoid using British parts ahead of Brexit - Sky News

Sorry for the Murdoch link 

Good new trade deals


----------



## Poi E (Jun 6, 2018)

Ahh, that's just the Dutch government. Bunch of romantics with their heads in the clouds.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but that's more likely to be a crash out than a remain within because of the previously unheard of degree of buffoonery of the may administration.



well - that's when it gets very interesting - the pressures against them doing that from a wide range of powerful interests - civil service, much of the media, the entire public sector, the education and research sector,  big business, big finance, the house of lords, their own funders,  factions within their own party, a big chunk of popular opinion, trade unions and opposition parties - will be severe - possibly irresistible.
If they cave in to that pressure it will split the party and there will be a ferocious backlash from the rabid end of the brexit bloc.
If they crash out it will split the party and there will be a ferocious backlash from everyone else.

May is a fucking dim wit not to have realised this straight away but instead she painted herself into a corner pretty much on day 1 and has been kicking the can down the road, hoping something will turn up ever since.
But nothing has turned up. the clown car of her government is still trundling remorselessly towards the oncoming juggernaut of reality.

(and of course - its jeremy corbyn's fault)


----------



## Supine (Jun 6, 2018)

Badgers said:


> European businesses advised to avoid using British parts ahead of Brexit - Sky News
> 
> Sorry for the Murdoch link
> 
> Good new trade deals



The serious impacts are now starting


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> well - that's when it gets very interesting - the pressures against them doing that from a wide range of powerful interests - civil service, much of the media, the entire public sector, the education and research sector,  big business, big finance, the house of lords, their own funders,  factions within their own party, a big chunk of popular opinion, trade unions and opposition parties - will be severe - possibly irresistible.
> If they cave in to that pressure it will split the party and there will be a ferocious backlash from the rabid end of the brexit bloc.
> If they crash out it will split the party and there will be a ferocious backlash from everyone else.
> 
> ...


much was made in the run-up to 23/06/2016 about the importance of sovereignty. but may fuck it up from the off when she went to court to prevent the british legislature voting on the british departure from the eu. obvious how much importance can really be attached to the democratick will of the people and the supremacy of the commons. and then the judges who ruled on the issue were vilified as enemies of the people!  either parliament is sovereign or it isn't and for may it's clearly not her first choice.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 6, 2018)

her first choice is and has always been her party ( or _the_ party - she has always been an awkward unimaginative grammar school girl to lifestyle and lifetime tories)- the same party that is quite happy to let her commit political suicide at every opportunity and shoulder the blame for what she has willingly inherited (set up could be another perspective). if the party comes through this (whatever may happen) and survives with enough of a presence to get another stab at office, then brexit will have been considered a success.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> her first choice is and has always been her party ( or _the_ party - she has always been an awkward unimaginative grammar school girl to lifestyle and lifetime tories)- the same party that is quite happy to let her commit political suicide at every opportunity and shoulder the blame for what she has willingly inherited (set up could be another perspective). if the party comes through this (whatever may happen) and survives with enough of a presence to get another stab at office, then brexit will have been considered a success.


i daresay there'll be sufficient stabs for each of them


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 6, 2018)

Et tu Boris ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Et tu Boris ?


it'd be more 'infamy! infamy! they've all got it in for me!'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 6, 2018)

tbh kenneth williams would have been a far better prime minister than the miserable may


----------



## elbows (Jun 7, 2018)

There seems to be a lot of talk on twitter that David Davis may resign on Thursday. Dexit!


----------



## Raheem (Jun 7, 2018)

elbows said:


> There seems to be a lot of talk on twitter that David Davis may resign on Thursday. Dexit!



Dickedsodus.


----------



## Supine (Jun 7, 2018)

elbows said:


> There seems to be a lot of talk on twitter that David Davis may resign on Thursday. Dexit!



Please let that be true


----------



## Badgers (Jun 7, 2018)

YouGov today  

 
Will be interesting to see the results


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 7, 2018)

Talking about a revolution ...

Weep for Brexit: the British dash for independence has failed



> * Weep for Brexit: the British dash for independence has failed*
> 
> Ambrose Evans-Pritchard
> 7 June 2018 • 11:06am
> ...


----------



## elbows (Jun 7, 2018)

Supine said:


> Please let that be true



Sounds like it was a strong-arm tactic and he has got some of what he wanted.

PM and Davis hammer out customs deal


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 7, 2018)

Theresa isn't sleeping well of late.

Good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 7, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Theresa isn't sleeping well of late.
> 
> Good.


will anyone join me for a regular noise demonstration outside downing street to let her know people are thinking of her?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 7, 2018)

Subscribe to read

anther bit of UK leverage sidestepped. Williamson will be planning a tactical nuclear strike of the EU HQ in response to this loss of face


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 7, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Subscribe to read
> 
> anther bit of UK leverage sidestepped. Williamson will be planning a tactical nuclear strike of the EU HQ in response to this loss of face


he'll certainly go ballistic


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 7, 2018)

elbows said:


> Sounds like it was a strong-arm tactic and he has got some of what he wanted.
> 
> PM and Davis hammer out customs deal



Summary of the new plan: look there's some even longer grass over there, try kicking it a bit harder this time.


----------



## oryx (Jun 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


> YouGov today
> 
> View attachment 137482
> Will be interesting to see the results



Only 10% of people think it is going well!


----------



## Raheem (Jun 8, 2018)

oryx said:


> Only 10% of people think it is going well!



Are you using "only" in a way I've not come across before?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 8, 2018)

All under control it seems 

Johnson calls for 'guts' in Brexit talks


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2018)

It’s all gone a bit macho hasn’t it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


> All under control it seems
> 
> Johnson calls for 'guts' in Brexit talks


what actually happened was johnson called for yurts - ruddy yurts, who had some training as a trade negotiator - to join the brexit team. but when he found out ry was dead he made out he'd been misunderstood.

Libertad existentialist


----------



## Supine (Jun 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


> All under control it seems
> 
> Johnson calls for 'guts' in Brexit talks



Johnson thinks Trump would be good at leading it. Say no more!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 8, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s all gone a bit macho hasn’t it?


unbidden image of david davis oiling his pectorals


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 8, 2018)

Boris Johnson said:
			
		

> You've got to face the fact there may now be a meltdown. OK? I don't want anybody to panic during the meltdown. No panic. Pro bono publico, no bloody panic. It's going to be all right in the end


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

pro bono publico - to bone the public 

don't like the way johnson's thinking


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2018)

I am usually a bit wary when wealthy people who have never faced bodily peril or physical endangerment at any point on their pampered lives begin with the fight them on the beaches/ hold me back lads stuff. it is usually the last resort after everything else has failed


----------



## Winot (Jun 8, 2018)

Presumably Lexiteers agree with Boris though - that if there’s meltdown then it’s worth it in the long run.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 8, 2018)

Winot said:


> Presumably Lexiteers agree with Boris though - that if there’s meltdown then it’s worth it in the long run.


 
*opportunities*


----------



## Badgers (Jun 8, 2018)




----------



## Badgers (Jun 8, 2018)

Winot said:


> Presumably Lexiteers agree with Boris though - that if there’s meltdown then it’s worth it in the long run.


In the 'long run' most of the Brexit voters will be dead. Or in privately run nursing homes paid for with the dementia tax


----------



## sealion (Jun 8, 2018)

oh dear.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 8, 2018)




----------



## sealion (Jun 8, 2018)

Your turn Badgers


----------



## Crispy (Jun 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 137584



New DM editor is a remainer

New Daily Mail editor to be Geordie Greig


----------



## philosophical (Jun 8, 2018)

Boris is reported to have said, with regard to the Irish border, that it is the tail wagging the dog. A view held by many.
OK then Boris, suggest a solution you cunt.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Summary of the new plan: look there's some even longer grass over there, try kicking it a bit harder this time.


all the way to just before an election year as well.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Jun 8, 2018)

Crispy said:


> New DM editor is a remainer
> 
> New Daily Mail editor to be Geordie Greig


I thought "Geordie" was just an adjective, and wondered why all the papers were referring to this Greg guy that way.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 8, 2018)

Badgers said:


>




I think I'm going to swoon.

Or is it just that thing where a bit of puke pops up to say hello?


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

Best for Britain recruits MPs to back second Brexit referendum

As long as they also back the right to recall  thing as well... Or are they going to say that's different


----------



## Raheem (Jun 8, 2018)

Seems like maybe Michel Barnier is now officially more in favour of Brexit than the UK government.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

What a fecking mess.
Let's hope that's the last major constitutional vote a UK government is daft enough to consider for a very long time (apart from Scottish independance - I don't blame their wanting shot of the rest of the UK in these circumstances)



> Support for death penalty drops below 50% for the first time
> 
> 
> 
> 26 March 2015


Support for death penalty below 50%

Not making an association here.. apparently support for hanging is roughly the same amongst the Faragistes.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Support for death penalty below 50%
> 
> Not making an association here.. apparently support for hanging is roughly the same amongst the Faragistes.


What's this twaddle supposed to mean? And what's a Faragist when it's at home.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What's this twaddle supposed to mean?



I think he means that the public can't be trusted to make the right decision so its a bad idea to consult them.   Hmmmm.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What's this twaddle supposed to mean? And what's a Faragist when it's at home.


Oh yes I sort of accidentally forgot the left / anarcho types also see the EU as the worst thing since Hitler.


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Oh yes I sort of accidentally forgot the left / anarcho types also see the EU as the worst thing since Hitler.



Its not that. You seem to be suggesting that democracy is a bad thing because you disagree with some of the outcomes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its not that. You seem to be suggesting that democracy is a bad thing because you disagree with some of the outcomes.


They could at least have insisted on a decent margin for a "win" ...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

I suppose if we end up with a decent outcome, at least we've walked the "no" camp through the reasons why it was a bonkers idea to try to un-entangle us from the machinery (however imperfect) of the continent we are so obviously and naturally a part of.


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I suppose if we end up with a decent outcome, at least we've walked the "no" camp through the reasons why it was a bonkers idea to try to un-entangle us from the machinery (however imperfect) of the continent we are so obviously and naturally a part of.


A 'decent' outcome would be  the disregard of a democratic decision would it?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> A 'decent' outcome would the disregard for a democratically decided issue would it?


Do we have any stats for the main reason for the "no" vote by the 37.5 percent of eligible voters ?


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Do we have any stats for the main reason for the "no" vote by the 37.5 percent of eligible voters ?


I'm not the cunt trying to explain away democracy


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> A 'decent' outcome would be  the disregard of a democratic decision would it?


We don't have a democracy tho do we.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> A 'decent' outcome would be  the disregard of a democratic decision would it?


There's no way to paint any of this as democratic when the debate from the leavers and remainers was so heavily influenced by vested interests and characterised by lies, in addition to which the devolved nature of the uk means votes on the periphery, in Scotland and the six counties, are worth much less than in the English core. In addition, no matter which way you paint it at least half of the country will be disgruntled. You may rejoice in the referendum result or you may abhor it but one thing you can't call it is democratic.


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> We don't have a democracy tho do we.


Had a mate remainer who got some resonance with some 20 somethings when he said people who hadn't researched and voted on a lie of 350 million for the NHS should have their vote discounted.. Yet when I suggested that could be be extended to anyone who voted for Corbyn to get rid of their student loan seemed to think I was the fascist..  I also think as entertaining as it would be watching May's facial tick for a bit... the idea of Tories staying in power til an absolute majority of the country can agree a replacement would be more than a dull move.


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

It was a 20 year struggle to get a referendum... The very people calling for another one now were the same ones explaining away the need for one for those 20 years..  They can fuck right off


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> It was a 20 year struggle to get a referendum... The very people calling for another one now were the same ones explaining away the need for one for those 20 years..  They can fuck right off


That would be no more democratic than the last effort


----------



## philosophical (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> A 'decent' outcome would be  the disregard of a democratic decision would it?


Well you call it a democratic decision, not the democratic decision. There may be other ones yet to come. Brexit was a form of democracy I suppose, but a crap one. In the UK democracy there may be other forces like 'democratically' elected members of Parliament to come in to play.
All that brexiteers need to do is make their victory happen, but they don't seem to know how.


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well you call it a democratic decision, not the democratic decision. There may be other ones yet to come. Brexit was a form of democracy I suppose, but a crap one. In the UK democracy there may be other forces like 'democratically' elected members of Parliament to come in to play.
> All that brexiteers need to do is make their victory happen, but they don't seem to know how.



Brexit IS exposing how clueless our MP's are (and how shit our media is)... But that could only get worse as things got more hollowed out by EU membership.. An EU where an unreformed EUrozone will increasing call the shots (and would have done if the result had gone the other way.

Personally had banked on democratically elected members making it EFTA... Fuck knows what they think they doing now


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> A 'decent' outcome would be  the disregard of a democratic decision would it?



Democratic decision. You've not been following the whole dark money/ psyops angle then?


----------



## gosub (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Democratic decision. You've not been following the whole dark money/ psyops angle then?


Older people, in my experience don't base their political opinions on Facebook). And the dark money stuff... I'm appalled at the lack of scrutiny the remain camp got.  Barak flying in wasn't cheap nor was Mr Cameron s pamphlet for starters


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Oh yes I sort of accidentally forgot the left / anarcho types also see the EU as the worst thing since Hitler.


Yeah, whereas LibDem pricks like you are wilfully blind to the concentration camps, the murderous economic policies. But how about you answer the questions, or are they a bit hard for you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> Older people, in my experience don't base their political opinions on Facebook). And the dark money stuff... I'm appalled at the lack of scrutiny the remain camp got.  Barak flying in wasn't cheap nor was Mr Cameron s pamphlet for starters



Both sides cheating does not make it a fair fight.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> wilfully blind to the concentration camps


WTF ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

And I voted for Corbyn last time - though it was dead easy with the vile crap the Tories infested Yotube with.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> WTF ?


The refugee camps set by various authoritarian regimes with the connivance of the EU, to maintain fortress Europe. As has been mentioned repeatedly on this thread and others.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

That's way too off the wall for someone my age ...


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

As I said wilful blindness.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> That's way too off the wall for someone my age ...


What has age got to do with anything? The fact remains that it's true.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

I thought the USA called most of the tunes ?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 8, 2018)

What? No the EU has entered in to questionable deals with countries such as Turkey and Libya which pretty much go along the lines (when you have removed the window-dressing) of 'You keep the refugees there and we'll turn a blind eye to your unsavoury activities'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

teqniq said:


> What? No the EU has entered in to questionable deals with countries such as Turkey and Libya which pretty much go along the lines (when you have removed the window-dressing) of 'You keep the refugees there and we'll turn a blind eye to your unsavoury activities'.


Or in the case of Libya you keep the refugees or we'll smash your country into smaller bits of rubble


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 8, 2018)

So the EU isn't doing enough to change things ?
And how are things going to be better with a bunch of separate, smaller countries ? (which is I assume the intention)
Or, in the first instance just the UK outside of it with some fantasy government of a shade that doesn't exist ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I thought the USA called most of the tunes ?


Yeh the great satan has the best tunes


----------



## teqniq (Jun 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or in the case of Libya you keep the refugees or we'll smash your country into smaller bits of rubble


Yes. I wasn't being very precise with the earlier post what with Libya not actually having a functioning government.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Yes. I wasn't being very precise with the earlier post what with Libya not actually having a functioning government.


Or rather several functioning governments. Like in fistful of dollars, the rojos at that end and the baxters at the other - the auld fool was right, there's money to be made in a town like this


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh the great satan has the best tunes



You are right General Booth.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> So the EU isn't doing enough to change things ?


Are you actually reading what people are posting. The EU isn't some sort of bystander, it's using these countries to advance it's own anti-immigration agenda. 


gentlegreen said:


> And how are things going to be better with a bunch of separate, smaller countries ? (which is I assume the intention)
> Or, in the first instance just the UK outside of it with some fantasy government of a shade that doesn't exist ?


The "intention" is irrelevant, whether you believe that the UK should have remained in the EU or not is irrelevant - the point is to not pretend this isn't happening.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2018)

It is beginning to look as if minds are finally focused.

There seems to be a bit of political stirring that suggests a realisation that yes, it is real, and if we don't do something sharpish, we are out.

I prophesy a parliamentary vote on the 'deal' being lost, and this being used as the basis for a second referendum.


----------



## magneze (Jun 8, 2018)

What'd be the question?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jun 8, 2018)

magneze said:


> What'd be the question?



'Are we really going to be so fucking stupid?'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

Looks like Davis and May's foolproof backstop customs plan has already been sent back covered in red ink with 'see me' at the bottom.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> 'Are we really going to be so fucking stupid?'.



Doesn't a referendum require a non-rhetorical question though?


----------



## agricola (Jun 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or rather several functioning governments. Like in fistful of dollars, the rojos at that end and the baxters at the other - the auld fool was right, there's money to be made in a town like this



Or as the samurai says in _Yojimbo _"I'll get paid for killing, and this town is full of people who deserve to die."


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The refugee camps set by various authoritarian regimes with the connivance of the EU, to maintain fortress Europe. As has been mentioned repeatedly on this thread and others.



What utter twaddle!  As if to suggest that Britain outside Europe would be more generous in its treatment of refugees that EU countries.   Almost certainly the reverse.  Some would say that one of the core EU countries (Germany) has been more open to taking in refugees that Britain has been.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> What utter twaddle!  As if to suggest that Britain outside Europe would be more generous in its treatment of refugees that EU countries.   Almost certain the reverse.  Some would say that one of the core EU countries (Germany) has been more open to taking in refugees that Britain has been.



Indeed if the refugees were coming south from Iceland, we’d be behaving like the Bulgarians.

Alex


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> What utter twaddle!


Are you claiming that the EU hasn't given money to Turkey, Libya, etc to set up camps? 


toblerone3 said:


> As if to suggest that Britain outside Europe would be more generous in its treatment of refugees that EU countries.


Good job no one has made any such suggestion then.

Again, wilful blindness.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> What utter twaddle!  As if to suggest that Britain outside Europe would be more generous in its treatment of refugees that EU countries.   Almost certainly the reverse.  Some would say that one of the core EU countries (Germany) has been more open to taking in refugees that Britain has been.



I think it's fair to say the main reason people voted for brexit was not a desire to let more foreign folk into the UK.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Doesn't a referendum require a non-rhetorical question though?



☐ YES

☐ NO


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

I do at least sympathise with redsquirrel on the general point that the EU in its current state is morally indefensible and if it was purely a matter of principle I would want to leave based on that. I don't want to be in any club that has Viktor Orban as a member.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you claiming that the EU hasn't given money to Turkey, Libya, etc to set up camps?



There have been many refugee camps set up around the world since the 1950s some funded by aid agencies and the United Nations, some funded by nations.



redsquirrel said:


> Good job no one has made any such suggestion then.
> Again, wilful blindness.



What suggestion are you suggesting that I made ??


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> There have been many refugee camps set up around the world since the 1950s some funded by aid agencies and the United Nations, some funded by nations.


the EU is neither an aid agency nor the un nor a nation.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I do at least sympathise with redsquirrel on the general point that the EU in its current state is morally indefensible and if it was purely a matter of principle I would want to leave based on that. I don't want to be in any club that has Viktor Orban as a member.



Ironic then that many right wing Brexiteers are big admirers of Viktor Orban. Look at the comments on this article for example.

Orbán's ‘barbed wire' policy was VICTORY in ‘fight for soul of Europe’ - and Merkel DEFEAT


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I think it's fair to say the main reason people voted for brexit was not a desire to let more foreign folk into the UK.



Indeed.


----------



## magneze (Jun 8, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> 'Are we really going to be so fucking stupid?'.


How about

Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya punk?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> There have been many refugee camps set up around the world since the 1950s some funded by aid agencies and the United Nations, some funded by nations.


And again, deliberate blindness. I don't want the EU to be anti-immigrant so it can't be. Just like Obama talking money from wall street can't be wrong because he's Obama.


toblerone3 said:


> What suggestion are you suggesting that I made ??


The one made in #7822.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Doesn't a referendum require a non-rhetorical question though?



EU Referendum 2

Britain is prepared to exit the European Union under the terms and conditions listed above.

1) Well, we're just going to have to make the best of it, aren't we?
2) Honestly, what in heaven's name where they thinking?
3) Typical.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Ironic then that many right wing Brexiteers are big admirers of Viktor Orban. Look at the comments on this article for example.
> 
> Orbán's ‘barbed wire' policy was VICTORY in ‘fight for soul of Europe’ - and Merkel DEFEAT



Well that's the problem with trying to act on principle. Cunts to the left of me, arseholes to the right.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And again, I don't want the EU to be anti-immigrant so it can't be. Just like Obama talking money from wall street can't be wrong because he's Obama.
> 
> The one made in #7822.



If you are arguing that a reason to leave the EU is that organisation's hostile immigration policy, but you believe that Britain would have a more hostile immigration policy outside the EU (a hope/belief that most people who voted for Brexit held), then your argument doesn't make sense.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 8, 2018)

Raheem said:


> ☐ YES
> 
> ☐ NO



Whatever it is, I'm against it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> If you are arguing that a reason to leave the EU is that organisation's hostile immigration policy, but you believe that Britain would have a more hostile immigration policy outside the EU (a hope/belief that most people who voted for Brexit held), then your argument doesn't make sense.


Don't you ever get tired of being so dishonest, no body has made any such argument.

You can have voted Leave, Remain or neither without overlooking the vile actions of the EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> There have been many refugee camps set up around the world since the 1950s some funded by aid agencies and the United Nations, some funded by nations.
> 
> 
> 
> What suggestion are you suggesting that I made ??


You made a blatant non sequitur. Choosing not to be in a union of nations that make decisions you disagree with has nothing to do with the fact that the government of your own nation _could _independently make similar decisions.
The difference is, in a time when the far(-ish) left has once again become relevant in the UK, nations across the Eu are making a massive swing to the far right - so from a left wing point of view, those UK decisions are far more likely to become favourable for your average U75 bear,than any Viktor supporting kipper.
it's a once in a century chance and the stars are aligned. It just takes some bottle. The shower of shit doing the negotiations are irrelevant.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> the far(-ish) left has once again become relevant in the UK



Are you sure about that?


----------



## MrSpikey (Jun 9, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Cunts to the left of me, arseholes to the right.



Here I am, stuck in the middle with EU...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 9, 2018)

MrSpikey said:


> Here I am, stuck in the middle with EU...


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)




----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)

Poll records new high in number of voters saying Brexit is wrong


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 9, 2018)

> it's a once in a century chance and the stars are aligned. It just takes some bottle.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)




----------



## gosub (Jun 9, 2018)

Badgers said:


>




I'm one of their 70%, but it doesn't mean I've changed my mind.  Who I don't understand are the 5% Remainers who think its going well..what were they expecting when they voted, End of Days?


----------



## paolo (Jun 9, 2018)

The good thing is that this is benefitting Greece.

Apparently

Fuck the Irish, go Greece. Who are getting exactly what out of this?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> The good thing is that this is benefitting Greece.
> 
> Apparently
> 
> Fuck the Irish, go Greece. Who are getting exactly what out of this?


we actually did this one, you and me, some time ago (6 months maybe). Like most on the remain left you pin all sorts of your own 'I want them to think this' onto left leaver- and we did discuss this, you politely discussed this so why is it getting a second airing? Are you hoping for a bite from different fish?

My fave 'left leavers think x so I shall tilt at that' so far has been one where lexiters were motivated to vote out in order to get the housing market crashing. Because house prices are first and foremost in my mind I can tell you lol


----------



## paolo (Jun 9, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> we actually did this one, you and me, some time ago (6 months maybe). Like most on the remain left you pin all sorts of your own 'I want them to think this' onto left leaver- and we did discuss this, you politely discussed this so why is it getting a second airing? Are you hoping for a bite from different fish?
> 
> My fave 'left leavers think x so I shall tilt at that' so far has been one where lexiters were motivated to vote out in order to get the housing market crashing. Because house prices are first and foremost in my mind I can tell you lol



We did indeed, fair shout, and - well the discussion be me and you, always civilised - I guess I’m feeling exasperated.

:-/


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)

David Davis – International Man of Mystery


----------



## Badgers (Jun 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


>


Tory-owned YouGov gives theTories a 7-point lead in their latest poll, while Survation has an entirely different result: 

CON 41% (nc)
LAB 40% (nc)
LDEM 9% (+1)
GRN 2% (nc)
UKIP 2% (-1)

YouGov on Twitter


----------



## billbond (Jun 9, 2018)

Are these the same Polls that said 
Clinton would win
more people would vote to remain in EU vote
Corbyn would be in No 10

I bet they even say England will win the world cup
Ive never been asked or met anybody who has been asked by these so called people who run these polls
All propaganda depending on what your Politics are
Ie Fake and biased
Not sure why people bother putting them up means nothing


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 9, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Tory-owned YouGov gives theTories a 7-point lead in their latest poll, while Survation has an entirely different result


I'm not sure that it is owned by a Tory anymore. But regardless the implication that YouGov are biased is nonsense, it's shown Con leads and Lab leads. Whether the Con lead it's currently predicting is correct or not is not down to some conscious Tory bias.


billbond said:


> Are these the same Polls that said
> Clinton would win
> more people would vote to remain in EU vote
> Corbyn would be in No 10


Wrong, partly wrong and wrong.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> Are these the same Polls that said
> Clinton would win
> more people would vote to remain in EU vote
> Corbyn would be in No 10



Do you sometimes have dreams about reading poll data?


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 9, 2018)

Apparantly there's another au pair shortage . Aside from these positions not being eligible for the minimum wage or holidays , record low unemployment in the Eastern European economies , large expansion in au pairs in China , recent high publicity murder of an au pair in London , The Guardians put it down to Brexit .


----------



## gosub (Jun 9, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Apparantly there's another au pair shortage . Aside from these positions not being eligible for the minimum wage or holidays , record low unemployment in the Eastern European economies , large expansion in au pairs in China , recent high publicity murder of an au pair in London , The Guardians put it down to Brexit .


My mistake... It is end of days


----------



## billbond (Jun 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Do you sometimes have dreams about reading poll data?


No
Never been a dreamer tbh unlike some


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> No
> Never been a dreamer tbh unlike some


You should consult a doctor then


----------



## billbond (Jun 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You should consult a doctor then



Have not seen one for over two decades
Doctors are for wimps, some say


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> Have not seen one for over two decades
> Doctors are for wimps, some say


yeh in that case surprised you're not a constant presence in your gp's surgery

On Monday you should check you're still registered with a doctor


----------



## billbond (Jun 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh in that case surprised you're not a constant presence in your gp's surgery
> 
> On Monday you should check you're still registered with a doctor



Actually you have a point now i think about it
I will take that on board, good advice
I moved 9 years ago and have not changed my Doctor.
Only typing this now has made me think i need to act, which i will.
I salute you


----------



## agricola (Jun 9, 2018)

If anyone still has any tiny violins left after the events of this week:



> Arron Banks, the millionaire businessman who bankrolled Nigel Farage’s campaign to quit the EU, had multiple meetings with Russian embassy officials in the run-up to the Brexit referendum, documents seen by the _Observer_ suggest.
> 
> Banks, who gave £12m of services to the campaign, becoming the biggest donor in UK history, has repeatedly denied any involvement with Russian officials, or that Russian money played any part in the Brexit campaign. The _Observer_ has seen documents which a senior Tory MP says, if correct, raise urgent and troubling questions about his relationship with the Russian government.
> 
> ...



from here (and also in the Sunday Times, apparently)


----------



## Badgers (Jun 10, 2018)




----------



## Badgers (Jun 10, 2018)




----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> ...


And? What point are you making? You think he's lying? You think the Russians stole the election? What?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And? What point are you making? You think he's lying? You think the Russians stole the election? What?


Just that I think he is a cunt


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 10, 2018)

Farmer pays for migrant workers’ flights to Britain Farmer pays for migrant workers’ flights to Britain
Cheaper than paying the going rate to recruit  workers in the UK  or relocating abroad to take advanatge of cheap labour


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 10, 2018)

earlier some in the thread were taking time out of bemoaning how thick the general public are to express suprise at fortress europe's camps, but here's a piece from Malik in todays observer which talks about where the camps are located now.

The Sunday Essay: how we all colluded in Fortress Europe | Kenan Malik


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 10, 2018)

How does a farm relocate abroad?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 10, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> How does a farm relocate abroad?


Move the border


----------



## Badgers (Jun 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Move the border


The fishing industry will suffer


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Move the border



Tbf if we simply move the UK border to Russia in the east and the Med in the south I reckon we
could crack this whole Brexit business in one stylish move.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> The fishing industry will suffer



the hanseatic league was based on herring- maybe this is the way forward.


----------



## Riklet (Jun 11, 2018)

To Brexit and Beyond | Novara Media

Recent Novara radio show dedicated to Brexit, well worth a listen, as is their Quitaly episode about Brexit, the far right and failure of the left.

I cant stand this argument that no one knew what they were voting for, what kind of Brexit was never discussed etc. Just embarrassing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

Riklet said:


> To Brexit and Beyond | Novara Media
> 
> Recent Novara radio show dedicated to Brexit, well worth a listen, as is their Quitaly episode about Brexit, the far right and failure of the left.
> 
> I cant stand this argument that no one knew what they were voting for, what kind of Brexit was never discussed etc. Just embarrassing.


No one voted for the shower of shit brexit we're getting, that's for sure

Unless you can point me toward someone who voted for a brexit negotiated by the numptiest numpties in all of numptyland


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jun 11, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> the hanseatic league was based on herring- maybe this is the way forward.



vote ukipper


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No one voted for the shower of shit brexit we're getting, that's for sure
> 
> Unless you can point me toward someone who voted for a brexit negotiated by the numptiest numpties in all of numptyland


I don't go along with this incompetence line... How do you imagine "negotiations" having gone better?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 11, 2018)

If people knew what they were voting for, as in control of the borders, how come none of them have told us their workable solution to the border on the island of Ireland?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I don't go along with this incompetence line... How do you imagine "negotiations" having gone better?


 
coming out of the corner fighting and making exaggerated (public) proclamations at the off didn't exactly set the stage for a subsequent constructive dialogue - entirely avoidable and displaying a complete lack of tact and diplomacy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I don't go along with this incompetence line... How do you imagine "negotiations" having gone better?


*putting a constitutional hat on*

before we get to the negotiations, let's consider the constitution of the house of commons. the paper-thin majority theresa may enjoys has been supplied by probably the most reactionary party in parliament. the brexit majority was itself fairly narrow - hardly a resounding declaration for sundering all ties with europe. if i'd been theresa may i would have convened a constitutional conference to establish a negotiating position and vision for the future involving the labour party, lib dems, snp etc in the process, for the purposes of i) incorporating them into the decision-making process and easing its passage through parliament; ii) gaining the benefits of other people's ideas and outnumbering 'the bastards' within her own party, iii) this being a statesmanlike act which would hopefully lead on to g.e. success. it would be a clear example of putting country before party.

i wouldn't have put britain's most prominent liar in charge of foreign relations. i wouldn't have put david davis in charge of the negotiations. i would have found someone with the right qualifications, who had been involved in negotiations before, ennobled them and drawn on their expertise. i would have put article 50 through parliament after summoning the convention i mentioned, trumpeting it as an example of the westminster parliament exercising sovereignty, something we'd see a lot more of in future.

what we have is a brexit where the government doesn't have a negotiating position, where they've been repeatedly humiliated by the eu negotiators, where they've been embarrassed by repeated defeats in the lords, and where the tory party still has great divisions over europe which this entire pitiful exercise, if was intended to achieve anything, was expected to put to bed.

the narrowness of the brexit vote should have allowed a range of now-discarded options to be tabled, e.g. membership of efta, retaining membership of the eea or customs union etc. there was the possibility of arranging things so that the membership of the european union lapsed but that at least part of the hostile environment we're now familiar with was avoided. what we have is a position in which many of the worst aspects of this country have profited from the brexit process and many of the best have been sidelined. the way in which may has said 'no no no' has at every turn stoked support not for the conservative party but for reactionary racist and radical right groups: it is impossible to me to think that the current furore about stephen yaxley-lennon could have occurred without the atmosphere may has played such a role in creating.

if may was in any way competent she wouldn't have discarded so early options which could have played a role in healing differences over brexit, where the european union was itself left but ties to some of its programmes e.g. cultural and educational ones remained. she wouldn't have put some of britain's most mediocre minds in charge of our relationships with the eu and foreign powers. she wouldn't have created such great divisions within parliament, but worked to minimise them.

but then of course if she'd done anything competent that would have been out of keeping with her past career.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> *putting a constitutional hat on*
> 
> before we get to the negotiations, let's consider the constitution of the house of commons. the paper-thin majority theresa may enjoys has been supplied by probably the most reactionary party in parliament. the brexit majority was itself fairly narrow - hardly a resounding declaration for sundering all ties with europe. if i'd been theresa may i would have convened a constitutional conference to establish a negotiating position and vision for the future involving the labour party, lib dems, snp etc in the process, for the purposes of i) incorporating them into the decision-making process and easing its passage through parliament; ii) gaining the benefits of other people's ideas and outnumbering 'the bastards' within her own party, iii) this being a statesmanlike act which would hopefully lead on to g.e. success. it would be a clear example of putting country before party.
> 
> ...



You and I disagree about nearly everything, but I want to say this is a very good post indeed.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> *putting a constitutional hat on*
> 
> before we get to the negotiations, let's consider the constitution of the house of commons. the paper-thin majority theresa may enjoys has been supplied by probably the most reactionary party in parliament. the brexit majority was itself fairly narrow - hardly a resounding declaration for sundering all ties with europe. if i'd been theresa may i would have convened a constitutional conference to establish a negotiating position and vision for the future involving the labour party, lib dems, snp etc in the process, for the purposes of i) incorporating them into the decision-making process and easing its passage through parliament; ii) gaining the benefits of other people's ideas and outnumbering 'the bastards' within her own party, iii) this being a statesmanlike act which would hopefully lead on to g.e. success. it would be a clear example of putting country before party.
> 
> ...


your account misses the key and central sticking point of brexit, which i dont think you've addressed and which the government *is* addressing: to a majority of people vote Leave meant above all end of free movement, it meant control of borders - it means points based immigration. It was at the heart of the campaign and public perception. The tories recognise that and are attempting to at least pretend that that is what they want to happen. To not do so would be a betrayal to Tory voters and vast majority of Leavers in general.

A cross-party whatnot that you suggest would've quickly resulted in a retain free-movement agreement position. Cue civil war/betrayal of the people. Even Labour are on the same page as the Tories on that. That was always going be hanging over the negotiations and is the ultimate stumbling block.


----------



## gosub (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I don't go along with this incompetence line... How do you imagine "negotiations" having gone better?



Shock resignation of EU ambassador a 'wilful destruction' of expertise  <avoid this


----------



## teuchter (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> *putting a constitutional hat on*
> 
> before we get to the negotiations, let's consider the constitution of the house of commons. the paper-thin majority theresa may enjoys has been supplied by probably the most reactionary party in parliament. the brexit majority was itself fairly narrow - hardly a resounding declaration for sundering all ties with europe. if i'd been theresa may i would have convened a constitutional conference to establish a negotiating position and vision for the future involving the labour party, lib dems, snp etc in the process, for the purposes of i) incorporating them into the decision-making process and easing its passage through parliament; ii) gaining the benefits of other people's ideas and outnumbering 'the bastards' within her own party, iii) this being a statesmanlike act which would hopefully lead on to g.e. success. it would be a clear example of putting country before party.
> 
> ...


Is something like you describe above what you think most people were expecting to happen when they voted leave?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> your account misses the key and central sticking point of brexit, which i dont think you've addressed and which the government *is* addressing: to a majority of people vote Leave meant above all end of free movement, it meant control of borders - it means points based immigration. It was at the heart of the campaign and public perception. The tories recognise that and are attempting to at least pretend that that is what they want to happen. To not do so would be a betrayal to Tory voters and vast majority of Leavers in general.
> 
> A cross-party whatnot that you suggest would've quickly resulted in a retain free-movement agreement position. Cue civil war/betrayal of the people. Even Labour are on the same page as the Tories on that. That was always going be hanging over the negotiations and is the ultimate stumbling block.


as a result of leaving the eu there would of course be changes in immigration: it's implicit in no longer being a member. the extent of that change and the actual policy any administration comes up with, that's up for debate. i don't think it necessarily means points based immigration, other policies are available. you asked me to imagine how the negotiations could have gone better and i answered that question, i didn't realise you wanted a different question answered too.


----------



## gosub (Jun 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is something like you describe above what you think most people were expecting to happen when they voted leave?


I was.  And the pamplet the government sent out said it would be one of three options...presumably to be decided by Parliament-all binned now pretty much


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is something like you describe above what you think most people were expecting to happen when they voted leave?


yes, i think most people expected there to be a form of negotiation before any departure occurred.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> as a result of leaving the eu there would of course be changes in immigration: it's implicit in no longer being a member. the extent of that change and the actual policy any administration comes up with, that's up for debate. i don't think it necessarily means points based immigration, other policies are available. you asked me to imagine how the negotiations could have gone better and i answered that question, i didn't realise you wanted a different question answered too.


Forget about the points based bit (although that's what it will have to be if free movement ends), my point is your version would quickly lead to keeping free movement and that's why it was never going to happen in a right-lead (in campaign and government) brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Forget about the points based bit (although that's what it will have to be if free movement ends), my point is your version would quickly lead to keeping free movement and that's why it was never going to happen in a right-lead (in campaign and government) brexit.


my point is that my version wouldn't have been tried because theresa may's an incompetent fuckwit. 

as it is, immigration shows no signs of declining to the levels promised by the cameron administration and quite frankly i don't think any brexit is going to reduce net immigration to the levels suggested by brexit campaigners. apparently 285,000 non-eu citizens arrived in the uk last year (https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-migration-non-eu-net-migration-to-uk-overtakes-from-eu/) - it's just another page of the false prospectus brexit was sold on.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> your account misses the key and central sticking point of brexit, which i dont think you've addressed and which the government *is* addressing: to a majority of people vote Leave meant above all end of free movement, it meant control of borders - it means points based immigration. It was at the heart of the campaign and public perception. The tories recognise that and are attempting to at least pretend that that is what they want to happen. To not do so would be a betrayal to Tory voters and vast majority of Leavers in general.
> 
> A cross-party whatnot that you suggest would've quickly resulted in a retain free-movement agreement position. Cue civil war/betrayal of the people. Even Labour are on the same page as the Tories on that. That was always going be hanging over the negotiations and is the ultimate stumbling block.



There are a lot of interpretations of what brexit means and I think your interpretation is one of many. The 'key' factor you suggest, free movement, is one of many opinions. Others mention 'democracy', own trade deals, control of laws amongst the reasons they voted.
Which factor is supposed to take precedent is part of this godawful shit show.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> your account misses the key and central sticking point of brexit, which i dont think you've addressed and which the government *is* addressing: to a majority of people vote Leave meant above all end of free movement, it meant control of borders - it means points based immigration. It was at the heart of the campaign and public perception. The tories recognise that and are attempting to at least pretend that that is what they want to happen. To not do so would be a betrayal to Tory voters and vast majority of Leavers in general.
> 
> A cross-party whatnot that you suggest would've quickly resulted in a retain free-movement agreement position. Cue civil war/betrayal of the people. Even Labour are on the same page as the Tories on that. That was always going be hanging over the negotiations and is the ultimate stumbling block.


sure, weren't we told that the result was a massive 'fuck you' to the political classes? the result's a lot of different things to different people and even the people who declare brexit means brexit don't know what it means.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> my point is that my version wouldn't have been tried because theresa may's an incompetent fuckwit.


my point is that it *couldnt* be tried as it would lead to keeping freedom of movement, too soon and too explicitly. If the Tories want to keep freedom of movement it'll have to be done by the back door and the kick to long grass option.  They know that and labour knows that too. Only game in town and both playing it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 11, 2018)

> Nearly half (49%) of leave voters said the biggest single reason for wanting to leave the EU was “the principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK”. One third (33%) said the main reason was that leaving “offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.” Just over one in eight (13%) said remaining would mean having no choice “about how the EU expanded its membership or its powers in the years ahead.





> For remain voters, the single most important reason for their decision was that “the risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices” (43%). Just over three in ten (31%) reasoned that remaining would mean the UK having “the best of both worlds”, having access to the EU single market without Schengen or the euro


#


this was exit poll data


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> my point is that it *couldnt* be tried as it would lead to keeping freedom of movement, too soon and too explicitly. If the Tories want to keep freedom of movement it'll have to be done by the back door and the kick to long grass option.  They know that and labour knows that too. Only game in town and both playing it.


do you recognise this question?





ska invita said:


> I don't go along with this incompetence line... How do you imagine "negotiations" having gone better?


no mention i can see of immigration in there. perhaps you could point it out. which is why i answered that question and not the one you're harping on about now. "my point is"? your point is you don't actually know how it would have gone. because a negotiation is a dynamic debate to arrive at a compromise. you're wittering on and on and on about "it's all immigration": but it isn't! so many different reasons have been adduced for the referendum ending the way it did that they can't all be true. pls tell me why i should believe your immigration thesis more than any of the other theses which have been advanced.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> sure, weren't we told that the result was a massive 'fuck you' to the political classes? the result's a lot of different things to different people and even the people who declare brexit means brexit don't know what it means.


No, in realpolitik terms brexit means no more freedom of movement.. 
Brexit didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened in an openly xenophobic atmosphere and that cat is out the bag now... there are wider political forces at work here. 

If May said we're keeping freedom of movement today the Tory party would implode,  racist and xenophobic attacks would go through the roof and negotiations would collapse completely while Britain goes into some form of civil war. Its not an option. That civil war might still yet come tbh. 


I was talking with someone yesterday (a leaver as it happens) who was saying that in the break up of Yugoslavia all the ethno national wars started after a yes no referendum. Czechoslovakia split without a referendum held... And did so peacefully. We weren't talking about brexit but I think it's an interesting dynamic to be conscious of.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> #
> 
> 
> this was exit poll data


I'm aware of that... Three things, that poll shows wether immigration was first priority or not, not whether it's important at all, say in second place.

Secondly those who want an end to freedom of movement have a lot of power, both in the political parties , ballot box and in the streets

Thirdly realpolitik agrees it's about freedom of movement, that's why both Tories and labour are getting in such convoluted positions to eat cake and have it... The eat cake stuff is all about freedom of movement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> No, in realpolitik terms brexit means no more freedom of movement..
> Brexit didn't happen in a vacuum, it happened in an openly xenophobic atmosphere and that cat is out the bag now... there are wider political forces at work here.
> 
> If May said we're keeping freedom of movement today the Tory party would implode,  racist and xenophobic attacks would go through the roof and negotiations would collapse completely while Britain goes into some form of civil war. Its not an option. That civil war might still yet come tbh.
> ...


don't talk such rot. "in realpolitik terms brexit means no more freedom of movement". but elements of freedom of movement will continue. "brexit didn't happen in a vacuum". brexit hasn't happened yet. "there are wider political forces at work here". are there? and what are those pray tell? the tory party may well yet implode without any mention of freedom of movement, because there is no endgame here which will allow its mps to remain within one party without a great deal of intellectual gymnastics.

unlike yugoslavia the uk has been a polity for hundreds of years. unlike yugoslavia there isn't a great history of weapons training in british schools, indeed very few people in the uk have ready access to a firearm. even though successive conservative and labour governments have peeled back some of the strands holding british society together it's shrill and alarmist to say there may well be a civil war. perhaps you could delineate the sides for us.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

anyway a thread about potential civil war here a new british civil war? complete with poll


----------



## Riklet (Jun 11, 2018)

Yugoslavia broke up for a lot of complex reasons not related to a yes no referendum. There was no divisive vote which led to the SF breakaways and subsequent war (and only in some parts anyway).

1.3 million majority on a yes no referedum seems like a big difference to me. A clear majority for leaving _all_ key parts of the EU. It's shit we are stuck with the Tories mishandling it but let's not kid ourselves - it would be a complex mess with anyone else in charge. This fantasy of a multi party well organised happy tea-drinking sit down to sort things out well before 2019 is a very naive British fantasy.

That is the nature of negotiations with the EU, especially now that the big hitters in the EU have got Italy, Trump and new government in Spain to worry about too, on top of the naughty boys in Poland and Hungary. And a rising populist far right is now making moves across the continent. Does anyone think fudging Brexit will change any of that?

I'm not going to line up with dead wood business leaders and politicians who have been fucking it all up for 10 years. People who want another referendum until they get a different result. People who think it meant we shouldnt leave the customs union, should keep full EU freedom of movement (oh but not for the thousands of poor fuckers turning up daily on Europe's shores) because otherwise it'll be _the end of the world. _Oh and we should basically keep paying in billions without getting any political say and without getting anything positive in return.

Im not opposed to more referendums in theory, or a vote on the final deal in theory, but considering who's pushing for it, it seems like shooting ourselves in the foot to be doing the EU leaders' dirty work for them. Making everything apart from the status quo seem like such a nightmare that nothing changes - now we've never seen that before!


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

I don't think there were ever going to be any negotiations, at least not between us and the EU. It was always going to be a shopping trip with very limited and limiting choices for the UK. Basically an EU meal deal.

We certainly did need to negotiate our own position but any chance of that  is long gone as nobody was prepared to admit that what was offered by the leave campaign was not achievable. Even with the considerable time Pickmans Model has spent dreaming of being TM he has only come up with May++. Just adding more voices to the debate is never going to lead to a more focused outcome and then you still have the we told you what to do out means out of everything people, the ones flocking to Tommy Robinson now. The ones who aren't racist and the ones who prefer to say they want decisions about the UK made in the UK or control of our own laws rather than control of immigration because it sounds better but it's the same thing at the  end of the day. 

It's not incompetence that's the problem. It's just a willingness to fuck up everything in order to stay in government. I suppose we will see how strong that desire is when Tory remain MPs have their chance to vote against their party.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I don't think there were ever going to be any negotiations, at least not between us and the EU. It was always going to be a shopping trip with very limited and limiting choices for the UK. Basically an EU meal deal.
> 
> We certainly did need to negotiate our own position but any chance of that  is long gone as nobody was prepared to admit that what was offered by the leave campaign was not achievable. Even with the considerable time Pickmans Model has spent dreaming of being TM he has only come up with May++. Just adding more voices to the debate is never going to lead to a more focused outcome and then you still have the we told you what to do out means out of everything people, the ones flocking to Tommy Robinson now. The ones who aren't racist and the ones who prefer to say they want decisions about the UK made in the UK or control of our own laws rather than control of immigration because it sounds better but it's the same thing at the  end of the day.
> 
> It's not incompetence that's the problem. It's just a willingness to fuck up everything in order to stay in government. I suppose we will see how strong that desire is when Tory remain MPs have their chance to vote against their party.


yeh you think it was considerable time, in fact it was 30 seconds.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> The ones who aren't racist and the ones who prefer to say they want decisions about the UK made in the UK or control of our own laws rather than control of immigration because it sounds better but it's the same thing at the end of the day.


ah the secret racists who lied on the exit polls.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Yugoslavia broke up for a lot of complex reasons not related to a yes no referendum. There was no divisive vote which led to the SF breakaways and subsequent war (and only in some parts anyway).
> 
> 1.3 million majority on a yes no referedum seems like a big difference to me. A clear majority for leaving _all_ key parts of the EU. It's shit we are stuck with the Tories mishandling it but let's not kid ourselves - it would be a complex mess with anyone else in charge. This fantasy of a multi party well organised happy tea-drinking sit down to sort things out well before 2019 is a very naive British fantasy.


1.3m sounds like a big difference to you. but in percentage terms it's not all that great. you'd be a rubbish pm because you'd go, ok let's ignore the 48% of the country who wanted to remain and go full speed ahead with the 52%. you do that, as theresa may's doing, and a very large proportion of the country will be very unhappy. if any constitutional convention or whatnot had gone ahead, and it had turned into a clusterfuck the obvious thing for may to do would have been to say 'we approached colleagues in other parties in a spirit of bipartisanship to deliver the best deal for the british people. this has not happened as the parties wish to refight the brexit campaign instead of moving on and so i have asked the queen to dissolve parliament for a general election in six weeks time which i expect will return an increased mandate for my negotiating position' or words to that effect. the snp, labour, lib dems portrayed as wreckers, and may might have pulled it off.



> That is the nature of negotiations with the EU, especially now that the big hitters in the EU have got Italy, Trump and new government in Spain to worry about too, on top of the naughty boys in Poland and Hungary. And a rising populist far right is now making moves across the continent. Does anyone think fudging Brexit will change any of that?
> 
> I'm not going to line up with dead wood business leaders and politicians who have been fucking it all up for 10 years. People who want another referendum until they get a different result. People who think it meant we shouldnt leave the customs union, should keep full EU freedom of movement (oh but not for the thousands of poor fuckers turning up daily on Europe's shores) because otherwise it'll be _the end of the world. _Oh and we should basically keep paying in billions without getting any political say and without getting anything positive in return.
> 
> Im not opposed to more referendums in theory, or a vote on the final deal in theory, but considering who's pushing for it, it seems like shooting ourselves in the foot to be doing the EU leaders' dirty work for them. Making everything apart from the status quo seem like such a nightmare that nothing changes - now we've never seen that before!


i don't think any referendum's going to return a democratic mandate for reasons i've explained upthread. so leave me out of the deadwood business leaders etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> earlier some in the thread were taking time out of bemoaning how thick the general public are to express suprise at fortress europe's camps, but here's a piece from Malik in todays observer which talks about where the camps are located now.
> 
> The Sunday Essay: how we all colluded in Fortress Europe | Kenan Malik


Malik barely scratches the surface there tbh - even though it's probably all news to the pro-eu types, easily passed over and forgotten news at that. Stathis Kouvelakis has a blisteringly angry  piece in the latest New Left Review that takes an in-depth look with special attention on Greece and the role of it at both external border and internal border as a laboratory for the 'radicalised neo-liberalism' of the EU.

Borderland: Greece and the EU’s Southern Question



> European integration since the 1980s has led to the construction and expansion of a specific institutional entity, the EU, which confiscates the name of ‘Europe’ to conceal at the symbolic level the operation of exclusion that lies at its core. The extent to which this hybrid construct, partly inter-governmental, partly supra-national, is based upon sheer coercion is, for the most part, barely visible to the populations living ‘inside’ it.





> Greece stands at the intersection of at least three regions of broader significance: the Balkans, Southern Europe and the Eastern Mediterranean. All three share a common status of ‘in-betweenness’, sometimes considered as an advantage—as suggested by the metaphor of ‘the bridge’ or ‘the crossroads’—but more often as a predicament. [2] European, but not quite Western; Christian, but neither Catholic nor Protestant; the alleged original site of European culture, but also, for many centuries, part of an Islamic multi-ethnic empire; peripheral and ‘backward’, but economically inextricable from the Western core of the continent; dependent and dominated, but never part of the modern colonized world—Greece appears as a true embodiment of those tensions. Exploding after decades of seemingly successful European integration, the recent double ‘crisis’ of which it has been the epicentre—the debt crisis and the migrant crisis—confirmed its identity as Europe’s ‘Other within’. [3] Both marginal and central, its singularity thus revealed the cracks multiplying through the European edifice, as well as the latter’s role in the increasing instability and disruption affecting the broader region.





> It was thus not by chance that the ‘refugee crisis’ exploded with spectacular violence in Greece, bringing it to the centre of public attention throughout Europe. I put the term in inverted commas to emphasize that there is nothing neutral about its adoption. Why was it that the arrival of around a million ‘refugees’ or ‘migrants’—again, the choice is significant—in a polity of 510 million, should have been, in and of itself, a ‘crisis’? In reality, its representation as such, above all by the EU authorities and member states, powerfully seconded by media commentary, was fully a part of the problem. The spectacle of humanitarian disaster—images from the summer of 2015 of a child’s body washed up on the beach, the mass arrivals on the Greek islands, the crowds at Budapest Station—briefly brought into the light of day a long-repressed reality. Its matrix lay in the lethal character of the liberal-capital ‘Fortress Europe’ regime which the EU has been building for decades, and its relation to the neighbouring zones of North Africa and the Middle East, where the EU powers have been major protagonists in the wave of wars and civil disruption that drove such numbers to flee.



Liz Fekete's new book Europe’s Fault Line: Racism and the Rise of the Right has an extremely detailed and in-depth chapter (Chapter 7 - The Market in Asylum and the Outsourcing of Force) that really demonstrates the EU's extension and militarisation (not to mention profit making) of borders. I really think there would be outrage on the well meaning liberal left if they ever really were told what the EU was up to - or made the effort to find out for themselves. Or at least there would have to be if they were to remain consistent in their oft declared principles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I really think there would be outrage on the well meaning liberal left is they ever really were told what the EU was up to. Or at least there would have to be if they were to remain consisten in their oft declared principles.


i think a lot of the liberal left turn a nelsonian blind eye to this sort of thing, as they don't want to make a choice of outrage or acquiesence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Malik barely scratches the surface there tbh - even though it's probably all news to the pro-eu types, easily passed over and forgotten news at that. Stathis Kouvelakis has a blisteringly angry  piece in the latest New Left Review that takes an in-depth look with special attention on Greece and the role of it at both external border and internal border as a laboratory for the 'radicalised neo-liberalism' of the EU.
> 
> Borderland: Greece and the EU’s Southern Question
> 
> ...


do you have a pdf of europe's fault line?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> do you have a pdf of europe's fault line?


Will pm in a minute


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> the ones who prefer to say they want decisions about the UK made in the UK


Or the ones who would have preferred the Council of Ministers to quietly keep on enforcing its border regime in North Africa, Pakistan, and elsewhere.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh you think it was considerable time, in fact it was 30 seconds.



That's still a long time to be her.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> ah the secret racists who lied on the exit polls.



Not necessarily lying just taking the easy on the conscience and self image road to keeping foreigners out.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Or the ones who would have preferred the Council of Ministers to quietly keep on enforcing its border regime in North Africa, Pakistan, and elsewhere.



I didn't realise that would all collapse if we left. Maybe next year we will change our mind on taking in some of the refugees stuck in Italy rather than our current policy of taking none.

It's not exactly quiet either.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I didn't realise that would all collapse if we left. Maybe next year we will change our mind on taking in some of the refugees stuck in Italy rather than our current policy of taking none.
> 
> It's not exactly quiet either.


Perfect example of what i meant above by "easily passed over and forgotten news". Exquisite idiotic timing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> Not necessarily lying just taking the easy on the conscience and self image road to keeping foreigners out.


racism so secret its secret from themselves, I see.

So the number one stated reason from leavers both tory and labour and non of the above is false, they were lying to themselves and just wanted forrins out? This isn't far off philosophical's 'distain' _sic _for all brexit voters who are to him axiomatically racist.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> racism so secret its secret from themselves, I see.
> 
> So the number one stated reason from leavers both tory and labour and non of the above is false, they were lying to themselves and just wanted forrins out? This isn't far off philosophical's 'distain' _sic _for all brexit voters who are to him axiomatically racist.


When the remainers  voted in favour of the EU's aggressive expansion extension and militarisation of murderous border regimes they finessed it in their minds into support of _internationalism? _ They couldn't handle their own racism and so had to convert it into something _lovely_.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I didn't realise that would all collapse if we left. Maybe next year we will change our mind on taking in some of the refugees stuck in Italy rather than our current policy of taking none.
> 
> It's not exactly quiet either.


Can you really not see the double standards you're applying?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Can you really not see the double standards you're applying?


if it wasn't for double standards he'd have no standards at all


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Can you really not see the double standards you're applying?



No. I'm just applying my limited understanding of the situation to my views on the EU.  Some posters here seem to see the EU interference and funding of non EU border security as a sinister plot to create 'fortress Europe'. Sort of the exact opposite of the Kalergi plan, fave conspiracy of the anti EU right. 

I understand that a large part, maybe all, of the motivation is to keep access to resources and stop the flow of refugees to Europe for political reasons. I just don't see what the alternative is. Do we wait for people to reach the EU and then put them in camps? Do we just let anyone who makes it here stay. We could monitor all the free Tommy demos and deport his supporters whilst giving the same number of refugees citizenship. 

I just believe that at least part of the EUs approach to refugees and non EU migration in general is well intentioned. They are not just funding camps and maybe over time some of the other initiatives will work to reduce the number of people who are forced from their homes.

What's your preferred option?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> No. I'm just applying my limited understanding of the situation to my views on the EU.  Some posters here seem to see the EU interference and funding of non EU border security as a sinister plot to create 'fortress Europe'. Sort of the exact opposite of the Kalergi plan, fave conspiracy of the anti EU right.
> 
> I understand that a large part, maybe all, of the motivation is to keep access to resources and stop the flow of refugees to Europe for political reasons. I just don't see what the alternative is. Do we wait for people to reach the EU and then put them in camps? Do we just let anyone who makes it here stay. We could monitor all the free Tommy demos and deport his supporters whilst giving the same number of refugees citizenship.
> 
> ...


The alternative right now on here is for you to put some effort into finding out _what is actually happening _and how and why. Rather than this vacuous ill-informed waste of everyone's time.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I just believe that at least part of the EUs approach to refugees and non EU migration in general is well intentioned


Like I said, double standards. Stuff the EU does = "well intentioned" and not racist. Even when the effects are appalling and miles from the stated intentions of liberal democracy.  

Stuff people who voted Leave say (no matter what it is) = Not well intentioned and racist. Even when they think it isn't.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The alternative right now on here is for you to put some effort into finding out _what is actually happening _and how and why. Rather than this vacuous ill-informed waste of everyone's time.



I'm not the one posting quotes from writers who don't think millions of people having to flee their homes qualifies as a crisis.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I'm not the one posting quotes from writers who don't think millions of people having to flee their homes qualifies as a crisis.


You've utterly misunderstood the point that the author is making about the promotion of the idea of a 'refugee crisis' to meet certain agendas:



> It was thus not by chance that the ‘refugee crisis’ exploded with spectacular violence in Greece, bringing it to the centre of public attention throughout Europe. I put the term in inverted commas to emphasize that there is nothing neutral about its adoption. Why was it that the arrival of around a million ‘refugees’ or ‘migrants’—again, the choice is significant—in a polity of 510 million, should have been, in and of itself, a ‘crisis’? In reality, its representation as such, above all by the EU authorities and member states, powerfully seconded by media commentary, was fully a part of the problem. The spectacle of humanitarian disaster—images from the summer of 2015 of a child’s body washed up on the beach, the mass arrivals on the Greek islands, the crowds at Budapest Station—briefly brought into the light of day a long-repressed reality. Its matrix lay in the lethal character of the liberal-capital ‘Fortress Europe’ regime which the EU has been building for decades, and its relation to the neighbouring zones of North Africa and the Middle East, where the EU powers have been major protagonists in the wave of wars and civil disruption that drove such numbers to flee.



Well, at least you tried i suppose. But to pretend that the author is callously disregarding the plight of refugees in a piece largely spent attacking the EU for turning the Mediterranean into a graveyard for refugees is pretty fucking appalling.



> The Mediterranean has become a mass grave, one attracting little attention or particular feeling, at least until the surge of refugees and migrants in these last years, following the intensification of warfare in the Middle East. It’s understandable that the Babels team should see the Mediterranean as ‘the theatre of a new kind of war, the one the European Union is waging against migrants’.
> 
> ...Again, the Europeanization of borders, the construction of Fortress Europe, is a major factor in this callous waste of tens of thousands of lives, a mass mortality without precedent in European history in time of ‘peace’.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> anyway a thread about potential civil war here a new british civil war? complete with poll


I think I may have been understood by you...I don't expect the UK to go Balkan, nor roundhead, I meant a civil war in cultural terms. Though the potential for things to get gnarly on the streets is there too.

Nor was I being as simplistic as to say a yes no referendum lead to war...I was painting a more impressionistic picture that referendum such as this create deeply divisive social situations. Of course the Czechoslovakian and Yugoslavian examples could just be pure coincidence...I thought it interesting nonetheless.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> But to pretend that the author is callously disregarding the plight of refugees in a piece largely spent attacking the EU for turning the Mediterranean into graveyard for refugees is pretty fucking appalling


If the obverse is the halo effect, so that everything the EU does is cast in a good light, then it follows that the other side of the coin is the reverse: everything that critics of the actions (actions, no matter what they are, remember, that are evidence of goodness) of the EU say _has to be_ cast in a bad light.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Like I said, double standards. Stuff the EU does = "well intentioned" and not racist. Even when the effects are appalling and miles from the stated intentions of liberal democracy.
> 
> Stuff people who voted Leave say (no matter what it is) = Not well intentioned and racist. Even when they think it isn't.



I don't see any rhetoric from the EU demonising or dehumanising migrants or refugees, though yes there is plenty of that from some member states and the media. I did see plenty of that during the referendum campaign. So that's my problem. Everything from the EU is public and framed as an attempt to help the situation and while some of it is clearly not working I don't see the evidence that it is a racist conspiracy. What I see is most EU countries having more non EU born migrants than EU born migrants, Germany putting a lot of resources into settling all the asylum seekers they have given a home to, the EU closing camps in Libya.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I don't see any rhetoric from the EU demonising or dehumanising migrants or refugees, though yes there is plenty of that from some member states and the media. I did see plenty of that during the referendum campaign. So that's my problem. Everything from the EU is public and framed as an attempt to help the situation and while some of it is clearly not working I don't see the evidence that it is a racist conspiracy. What I see is most EU countries having more non EU born migrants than EU born migrants, Germany putting a lot of resources into settling all the asylum seekers they have given a home to, the EU closing camps in Libya.



Read note #21 in the article and the Streeck piece i link to within on this merkel the merciful myth:



> [21] Germany restricted its border with Austria within a fortnight of Merkel’s announcement that the country would ‘show a friendly face’ and allow all the refugees into Germany. See ‘Mother Angela: Merkel’s Refugee Policy Divides Europe’, _Der Spiegel_, 21 September 2015. By January 2016, Merkel was warning Syrian refugees that their protection under the Geneva Convention only lasted three years, after which they would be expected to return to their homeland: Wolfgang Streeck, ‘Scenario for a Wonderful Tomorrow: Merkel Changes Her Mind Again’, _London Review of Books_, 31 March 2016.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You've utterly misunderstood the point that the author is making about the promotion of the idea of a 'refugee crisis' to meet certain agendas:
> 
> 
> 
> Well, at least you tried i suppose. But to pretend that the author is callously disregarding the plight of refugees in a piece largely spent attacking the EU for turning the Mediterranean into a graveyard for refugees is pretty fucking appalling.



Crisis is normally used as part of a call to action and more likely to illicit a positive response from people. Also he makes a point about the difference between using refugee and migrant but just leaves it there with no examples of which was used when or where. Poor examples sloppily used.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> some of it is clearly not working


You really should re-read the articles linked to.  The EU is at best turning a blind eye to horrific abuses, and at worst actually paying for them to take place.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> Crisis is normally used as part of a call to action and more likely to illicit a positive response from people. Also he makes a point about the difference between using refugee and migrant but just leaves it there with no examples of which was used when or where. Poor examples sloppily used.


You genuinely have no idea what you just tried to read do you?

I feel the same after reading your oddly un-argued disconnected unsupported (evidentially or logically) series of posts today.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You really should re-read the articles linked to.  The EU is at best turning a blind eye to horrific abuses, and at worst actually paying for them to take place.


He never read it - note 'refugee crisis' appears 3 short paragraphs in.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He never read it


No need to.  The EU = well intentioned and not racist.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Read note #21 in the article and the Streeck piece i link to within on this merkel the merciful myth:



No time to read it now but I will do.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He never read it - note 'refugee crisis' appears 3 short paragraphs in.



I just read the parts you posted.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> I just read the parts you posted.


Then you have no right to make such an ill-informed series of posts about the content or intentions of the article.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> No. I'm just applying my limited understanding of the situation to my views on the EU.  Some posters here seem to see the EU interference and funding of non EU border security as a sinister plot to create 'fortress Europe'. Sort of the exact opposite of the Kalergi plan, fave conspiracy of the anti EU right.
> 
> I understand that a large part, maybe all, of the motivation is to keep access to resources and stop the flow of refugees to Europe for political reasons. I just don't see what the alternative is. Do we wait for people to reach the EU and then put them in camps? Do we just let anyone who makes it here stay. We could monitor all the free Tommy demos and deport his supporters whilst giving the same number of refugees citizenship.
> 
> ...



Good post. The concept of an international border porous to the transit of goods but impermeable to the movement of people is immoral in the context of massive inequalities of wealth and long term in unsustainable. But Open Borders are the death of the Nation State/welfare state. This is a global issue, and while the EU does not have an answer to it, it is streets ahead of Britain and the type of nation envisaged by Brexiteers. Britain should have been engaging with the "fortress Europe" issue far more, but instead it chose to hide (not having an immediate borderland) and now is thinking that it can run away completely. Its myopic to bring "fortress Europe" into the Brexit debate, because in or out of the EU the immigration issue will not go away.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Perfect example of what i meant above by "easily passed over and forgotten news". Exquisite idiotic timing.


Yep, this deliberate blindness is disgusting. Pricks calling people racist and then refusing to see the actions of the EU even when they are shown them directly.

EDIT: BTW cheers for the links butchersapron


----------



## Santino (Jun 11, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Its myopic to bring "fortress Europe" into the Brexit debate, because in or out of the EU the immigration issue will not go away.


The more I read this sentence, the less sense it makes.


----------



## Anju (Jun 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Then you have no right to make such an ill-informed series of posts about the content or intentions of the article.



Actually I do.

I don't get the aggressive condescending approach from you and various other posters towards many people here. On the one hand you write that Liberals would be outraged if they knew what the EU was up to but then you act as if anyone who hasn't dedicated huge amounts of time to researching the subject, and agrees with you, is stupid. It makes no sense unless it's something to do with enjoying the possession of special knowledge. Why not just explain things as you see them so that the liberals can be outraged about the EU rather than just you and a few others. 

The only EU intervention that I was aware of was in Libya and that was in the context of the EU working to improve conditions. Before that I had seen stories about slave markets, sexual abuse and organ harvesting all with no mention of the EU. For the vast majority of people the whole EU is racist idea makes no sense and for a lot of people it is the exact opposite, an organisation forcing multiculturalism on people.  Basically the impression left from mostly MSM is that the camps/prisons already existed and EU efforts were aimed at improving conditions.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 11, 2018)

No you don't. You don't get to make claims dismissing the contents of an article that you haven't read.

Why do you think i posted it? For you not to bother reading it before commenting - or to help people like you find out what's going on in an easy manner?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 11, 2018)

Anju said:


> Basically the impression left from mostly MSM is that the camps/prisons already existed and EU efforts were aimed at improving conditions.


True, but no one has a problem with ignorance. People do have a problem, rightly, with deliberate blindness that involves dismissing a link someone has posted without even having read it. You've been given information about why the above impression is wrong, if you don't want/can't be bothered reading it ok, but then don't expect people to give you any respect.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There are a lot of interpretations of what brexit means and I think your interpretation is one of many. The 'key' factor you suggest, free movement, is one of many opinions. Others mention 'democracy', own trade deals, control of laws amongst the reasons they voted.
> Which factor is supposed to take precedent is part of this godawful shit show.


Of course its about free movement...because free movement is the sticking point. May wouldve jumped on a norwegian or swiss model long ago if it werent for the free movement bit. Same with Labours fence sitting.
Look at this today from Labour...its gettting nearer crunch time and theyre going to have to come down on a side:
Pro-Brexit Labour MPs expose rift over EEA membership

Gloria De Piero, the MP for Ashfield in Nottinghamshire, told the Guardian:...

“My constituents aren’t against all immigration, which is how they are sometimes portrayed – they want control of immigration.”

Gareth Snell, who defeated then Ukip leader Paul Nuttall in Stoke-on-Trent Central, used a post for the blog Labour List, to send a similar message. “Most Labour MPs are in seats that voted leave. My constituents could rightly ask whether we have really left the EU if we are still subject to all the rules, regulations and obligations that come from membership,” he wrote. “What message are we, as a Labour party, sending to voters in these seats if we simply turn away from the spirit of the referendum result? What hope can we have to win back those traditional seats we need to win in order to form the next government if we tell the voters in those communities that we know better than they do?”

The MP for Warley, John Spellar, said he was still considering how to vote on the EEA amendment. “It involves free movement – that’s the crucial issue,” he said. “The views of the public were very clear: even among many of those who voted remain, they had major concerns about it.”

etc

im genuinely surprised this is contentious to anyone


----------



## philosophical (Jun 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Of course its about free movement...because free movement is the sticking point. May wouldve jumped on a norwegian or swiss model long ago if it werent for the free movement bit. Same with Labours fence sitting.
> Look at this today from Labour...its gettting nearer crunch time and theyre going to have to come down on a side:
> Pro-Brexit Labour MPs expose rift over EEA membership
> 
> ...



I see it as there might be a hierarchy of priorities that concern people who voted brexit. It may be true that in the areas you have mentioned immigration control was the number one concern, but leave voters in other areas might have been more concerned about whatever they might describe as sovereignty. It has been suggested many times that in a time of austerity people voted leave because they couldn't inagine their lives could be more miserable, but did not attribute that misery to immigration.
People can say that something was 'very clear' or that a certain issue was a 'major concern', but isn't that suggesting a narrative that suits rather than one that is necessarily true?
Whatever the reason brexit won and the reasons why people voted the way they did matters very little now. What is occurring is a total farce with no 'with one bound he was free' option.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Whatever the reason brexit won and the reasons why people voted the way they did matters very little now.



It matters a great deal. From a leave perspective it matters because it is important not to simply ignore the 52% who voted. From a remain perspective it matters because it is important not to exceed the mandate provided by the referendum.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It matters a great deal. From a leave perspective it matters because it is important not to simply ignore the 52% who voted. From a remain perspective it matters because it is important not to exceed the mandate provided by the referendum.



Isn't the problem that the so called mandate is open to wide interpretation?
Isn't it also a problem that some interpretations of what that mandate is conflict with practical reality, and can usher in huge problems?
The Irish border had been mandated to be strictly enforced (which is one way of looking at brexit) but that clashes with the GFA.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Isn't the problem that the so called mandate is open to wide interpretation?



Yes, but how wide is legitimate is up for debate, and to do the interpretation you need to think about what, beyond the wording of the referendum question, people were voting for. Which is why it remains (/leaves) relevant and not just a historical curiosity.


----------



## Winot (Jun 12, 2018)

This is a good summary of the options on the table. 

Theresa May is circling the Brussels sky and low on fuel. Time to buckle up | Rafael Behr


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes, but how wide is legitimate is up for debate, and to do the interpretation you need to think about what, beyond the wording of the referendum question, people were voting for. Which is why it remains (/leaves) relevant and not just a historical curiosity.



I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 12, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> earlier some in the thread were taking time out of bemoaning how thick the general public are to express suprise at fortress europe's camps, but here's a piece from Malik in todays observer which talks about where the camps are located now.
> 
> The Sunday Essay: how we all colluded in Fortress Europe | Kenan Malik


The full piece that the Observer bit was taken from is now here. Worth posting again as it may get some additional readers _eager _to find out what's actually happening.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2018)

And worth quoting this bit of it for people (Anju) who aren't going to read it anyway:

"Second, we need to recognize that creating Fortress Europe as a quid pro quo for freedom of movement within the EU will not work. The policies of Fortress Europe are both immoral and unworkable. *Immoral because their aim is to treat migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen.* And unworkable, because the lesson of the past 25 years is that however vicious EU migration policies become, they will be insufficient to wall off Europe from migrants."

AKA "not racist" and "well-intentioned".


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

There is an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.


----------



## gosub (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.


It's the narrative that seems to have won out, much to the chagrin of the likes of me for whom it wasn't even an issue. But I stopped banging my head against the wall a while ago.   Headbangers from both sides still dominate. Too late to change things now


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> And worth quoting this bit of it for people (Anju) who aren't going to read it anyway:
> 
> "Second, we need to recognize that creating Fortress Europe as a quid pro quo for freedom of movement within the EU will not work. The policies of Fortress Europe are both immoral and unworkable. *Immoral because their aim is to treat migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen.* And unworkable, because the lesson of the past 25 years is that however vicious EU migration policies become, they will be insufficient to wall off Europe from migrants."
> 
> AKA "not racist" and "well-intentioned".


i would have thought that enlightened self-interest would lead the eu to do as much as possible to make north africa a pleasant place to live, as you stop more potential migrants with kindness than with potential drowning.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There is an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.


Who has done that?


----------



## ska invita (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.


im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient (eta: limits set in large part by the tone and message of the leave campaign).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient.


if it was about recognising the realities of the process etc then you'd have thought they'd be honest and say around 300,000 NON-eu people came here last year and regardless of what we do with our european cousins people from outside the eu ON THEIR OWN add more than the population of york to the country every year


----------



## teuchter (Jun 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i would have thought that enlightened self-interest would lead the eu to do as much as possible to make north africa a pleasant place to live, as you stop more potential migrants with kindness than with potential drowning.


Do you have proposed measures as to what the EU could do to make N Africa a pleasant place to live?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Do you have proposed measures as to what the EU could do to make N Africa a pleasant place to live?


no, i do not have proposed measures as to what the eu could do to make n africa a pleasant place to live. whatever proposed measures are i do not have them.

what are proposed measures?


----------



## gosub (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> im going to stop going on about this now, but last thing just in case i wasnt being clear: im not saying the vote "was principally about immigration", but keeping freedom of movement or not is the first decision from which all subsequent post-brexit options and negotiations stem from and develop. Labour and Tories both recognise that they cant be seen to want to keep Freedom of Movement - thats the realpolitik bit. This is why freedom of movement becomes primary. Its not about "opinion", its about recognising the realities of the process, electoral and party political forces, and limits of what is politically expedient (eta: limits set in large part by the tone and message of the leave campaign).



Largely agree BUT remain didn't help by conflating the Single Market and EU membership during the referendum


----------



## kabbes (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I, and many others have thought about it. It is up for debate. To say it was principally about immigration is simply one opinion.


Opinion based on anecdata from your little corner of the world.  Meanwhile, in my own corner of well-off middle-England country life, I heard a lot of pro-Brexit sentiment but none of it was anti-immigration.  If anything, people were worried about the loss of their exploitative cheap labour.  The pro-Brexit sentiment was all related to sovereignty.  It really isn’t the case that you can just extrapolate your own experience to the country as a whole.  That’s why we have polling and other nationwide statistics.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 12, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Who has done that?



Errrm....brexit voters.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Errrm....brexit voters.


All of them?  Personally?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

Banks and Wigmore playing the committee like they are running a market stall. They 'led people up the garden path' 

Shame that a parliamentary committee is dealing with them. They were fucked over by the Murdoch's and Green so will waffle and do nothing here as well one thinks.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Opinion based on anecdata from your little corner of the world.  Meanwhile, in my own corner of well-off middle-England country life, I heard a lot of pro-Brexit sentiment but none of it was anti-immigration.  If anything, people were worried about the loss of their exploitative cheap labour.  The pro-Brexit sentiment was all related to sovereignty.  It really isn’t the case that you can just extrapolate your own experience to the country as a whole.  That’s why we have polling and other nationwide statistics.



I think you might have misunderstood me. I was replying to another poster. I was suggesting that immigration was not necessarily the main reason for voting brexit, as you have also done.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> All of them?  Personally?



Isn't it the result of brexit voters going in person to the voting booth and voting leave, to create fortress UK?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Errrm....brexit voters.


Maybe you could outline why the extension and militarisation of borders and border regimes is an unironical pro-free movement position?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Isn't it the result of brexit voters going in person to the voting booth and voting leave, to create fortress UK?


First, your contention was "an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.".  You seem to be ignoring the first clauses now.  The irony.  The criticism of "fortress Europe".  And, regarding the final clause, you're confusing what voters intend with what politicians do.

However, answer me this: what of the irony of thinking you're voting for free movement but actually supporting [the treatment of]* "migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen."*

Why is it that only the effects of UK policy is the fault of voters, and not the effects of EU policy?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe you could outline why the extension and militarisation of borders and border regimes is an unironical pro-free movement position?



I absolutely don't believe that the establishment extension and militarization of the UK/EU border with the enforcement regimes that come with it on the island of Ireland is a pro free movement position.
At the moment crossing that border is no more difficult than going from Lewisham to Greenwich where within London there is free movement.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> First, your contention was "an irony in criticizing (with justification) 'fortress Europe' and as a result creating fortress UK.".  You seem to be ignoring the first clauses now.  The irony.  The criticism of "fortress Europe".  And, regarding the final clause, you're confusing what voters intend with what politicians do.
> 
> However, answer me this: what of the irony of thinking you're voting for free movement but actually supporting [the treatment of]* "migrants as noxious objects that must be kept away from Europe at whatever cost, and which has led the EU to destabilize large areas of North Africa, collude with brutal leaders and regimes, transfer responsibility for the issue to some of the poorest countries in the world, and adopt the very policies that are condemned when they come from the mouths of Viktor Orbán or Marine Le Pen."*
> 
> Why is it that only the effects of UK policy is the fault of voters, and not the effects of EU policy?



I am not saying the EU policy is good. I am saying that brexit is bad.
Is that ironic?
Up until whenever (sometime post the referendum) the UK were participants in shaping EU policy, and cumbersome and remote that it might seem there was a chance of influencing EU policy for the better.
That is now over as brexit brings in a domestic control of the borders  by the UK. 
By voting remain it seemed to me to be much the better of the binary choice presented.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> By voting remain it seemed to me to be much the better of the binary choice presented.


But you only see irony in voting Leave?  No irony in voting Remain, given the above?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I absolutely don't believe that the establishment extension and militarization of the UK/EU border with the enforcement regimes that come with it on the island of Ireland is a pro free movement position.
> At the moment crossing that border is no more difficult than going from Lewisham to Greenwich where within London there is free movement.


No, i should have known better.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i do not have proposed measures as to what the eu could do to make n africa a pleasant place to live. whatever proposed measures are i do not have them.
> 
> what are proposed measures?


Just wonderin' if your 'make things nicer' platitude was backed up with any suggestions as to how it might be achieved. The answer, it seems, is "not really".


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Just wonderin' if your 'make things nicer' platitude was backed up with any suggestions as to how it might be achieved. The answer, it seems, is "not really".


the answer is if you use a stupid phrase like 'proposed measures' then as i have no 'proposed measures', no measures which have previously been proposed, of course i'm going to say no.

it's your inability to phrase a decent question which lets you down.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But you only see irony in voting Leave?  No irony in voting Remain, given the above?



I don't much shortage of irony here. Plenty for everyone.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the answer is if you use a stupid phrase like 'proposed measures' then as i have no 'proposed measures', no measures which have previously been proposed, of course i'm going to say no.
> 
> it's your inability to phrase a decent question which lets you down.


Your previous answer implied that you did not know what 'proposed measures' are. Now you state categorically that you have none. If you want to dodge questions by utilising pedantry then you need to get better at it. I'm sure we've been here before.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Your previous answer implied that you did not know what 'proposed measures' are. Now you state categorically that you have none. If you want to dodge questions by utilising pedantry then you need to get better at it. I'm sure we've been here before.


i said what i understood by 'proposed measures'; your understanding of the term might be different. you are held back  by your inability to phrase a decent question.

 next


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm sure we've been here before.


i'm sure you'll lead us back here again


----------



## bimble (Jun 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Just wonderin' if your 'make things nicer' platitude was backed up with any suggestions as to how it might be achieved. The answer, it seems, is "not really".


The main bulk of funding from uk gov agencies goes toward programs that aim to 'encourage young entrepreneurs' / diversify and reform economies .  eg main expenditures last year here. Fair bit of it clearly states the aim of reducing migration from these countries.


----------



## andysays (Jun 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> All of them?  Personally?


As a Leave voter, I'm kept pretty busy with generalised racism and sabotaging the GFA, but what little free time I do have is devoted to constructing Fortress UK in my basement out of recycled building materials. 

I assume my fellow Leave voters are all doing the same...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> As a Leave voter, I'm kept pretty busy with generalised racism and sabotaging the GFA, but what little free time I do have is devoted to constructing Fortress UK in my basement out of recycled building materials.
> 
> I assume my fellow Leave voters are all doing the same...


you should have got the airfix fortress uk.


----------



## bemused (Jun 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> It's the narrative that seems to have won out, much to the chagrin of the likes of me for whom it wasn't even an issue.



I watched the Sunday politics last weekend and Caroline Flint essentially say that she wouldn't support and EEA deal because it wouldn't inhibit free movement. MPs seemed to have condensed the entire Brexit process down to the free movement issue. 

I suspect if the EU offered an EEA type deal without freedom of movement the UK would pull their arm off - and all the noise about 'rule taker, not maker' would fly out the window.

That interview is well worth watching because about three quarters in Chris Leslie suggests she talks like Rees-Mogg which made me chuckle.


----------



## Winot (Jun 12, 2018)

As I understand it there is an emergency brake on immigration available within the EEA.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

Land of Hope & Glory...


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

Do it for your country, not your party or yourselves...


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

It all seems a bit rushed?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

> Don't let Lords undermine Brexit, Davis says



That is taking back sovereignty right there ^ those pesky Lord's EU types telling us what to do 

Would 'sovereignty' not sort of mean allowing our own parliament to vote?


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

> Speaker John Bercow says MPs should ignore threats and vote on the Brexit bill with their consciences, in the interests of their constituents and the country.


Just ignore the threats eh?


----------



## sealion (Jun 12, 2018)

Pensions and pay offs need to be protected


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> Pensions and pay offs need to be protected


Putting their country first always


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2018)

they'll all fall meekly into line


----------



## sealion (Jun 12, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Putting their countryside stately home first always


Ffy


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

Fucking shambles as always... 

Decisions born from career threats, promises and whips rather than facts.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

UP THE LORDS


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

A solid promise


----------



## sealion (Jun 12, 2018)

*Government wins first vote to overturn Lords defeat on EU withdrawal bill by majority of 22*
The government has won the first vote. It has voted down the Lords amendment on the sifting committee by 324 votes to 302 - a majority of 22.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Decisions born from career threats, promises and whips rather than facts.





sealion said:


> *Government wins first vote to overturn Lords defeat on EU withdrawal bill by majority of 22*
> The government has won the first vote. It has voted down the Lords amendment on the sifting committee by 324 votes to 302 - a majority of 22.


Cunts


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 12, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Cunts


Of all the countless words written on the subject of Brexit never have I seen the situation so accurately and concisely summed up.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 12, 2018)




----------



## ska invita (Jun 12, 2018)

Sounds right to me....debate on free movement will be entertaining  never will there have been so much squirming by so few


----------



## Winot (Jun 12, 2018)

Long article on ways in which FoM could be tempered within the EEA:

Brexit: free movement and the Single Market


----------



## ska invita (Jun 12, 2018)

Winot said:


> Long article on ways in which FoM could be tempered within the EEA:
> 
> Brexit: free movement and the Single Market


Key bit is
"Therefore, there is no legal bar to variations being negotiated, *given the political will*. "

The EU need show zero political will. The only card the UK really has to play is No Deal drop out, and its only going to get increasingly impossibile to bluff that, nor to actually do it with parliaments approval.

All the EU need do is stick to their position and the UK will come crawling in the end. That's how it looks anyhow.

The exceptions they made to the likes of Lichtenstein were in the interest of a functioning union. To let the UK eat closed borders cake and have it is against the Unions interest, so seems very unlikely to me.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Key bit is
> "Therefore, there is no legal bar to variations being negotiated, *given the political will*. "
> 
> The EU need show zero political will. The only card the UK really has to play is No Deal drop out, and its only going to get increasingly impossibile to bluff that, nor to actually do it with parliaments approval.
> ...


I'm not seeing why Lichtenstein having limits on FoM is "in the interest of a functioning union". Or at least not in the context of why the UK having limits would be against the unions interest.*

*Just woke from a nap - maybe i'm missing the obvious.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 12, 2018)

I am not sure this is allowed, but the article I have copied and pasted below is from behind the Irish Times paywall. It is by 
Fintan O'Toole. He mashes up The Italian Job and The Wicker man to inspire him with this article. Those interested might like to read it.

*Brexit traps the DUP inside the Wicker Man*

Boris Johnson’s outburst reminds us that Brexit is an English nationalist project – it cannot allow the English bulldog to be wagged by an Irish tail.

What’s the best cinematic version of Brexit? I’ve previously suggested the final sequence of The Italian Job, where the truck is suspended half way over a ravine and the crew can’t get at their great pile of gold bars without tipping themselves into the abyss. But from an Irish point of view, we probably need a double bill in which it is shown alongside another British classic from the same era, The Wicker Man. Some horror fans have already noted the prescience of Summerisle, where most of the film is set. It is an Atlantic island that has cut itself off from the mainland and adopted a crazy cult. The cult is led by Lord Summerisle, a man with a self-consciously orotund vocabulary, mad hair and a great line in sacrificing the young generation for his bonkers beliefs – Christopher Lee as Boris Johnson, in other words. 

But the most interesting parallel is the arrival on Summerisle of Edward Woodward’s Sergeant Neil Howie, innocently intent on doing his duty of investigating a suspected murder. He thinks of himself as embodying the majesty of the British state. He is upright. He is judgmental. He is righteous. And he is very devoutly Presbyterian, possibly even of the Wee Free variety. He is, of course, the Democratic Unionist Party. Howie becomes increasingly aware that he has no idea where he really is, that he has taken a one-way trip to a place with its own fatal laws. Lord Summerisle eventually summons him to his horrible death: “We confer upon you a rare gift, these days – a martyr’s death. You will not only have life eternal, but you will sit with the saints among the elect. Come!” 

A 500km-long border barrier with turnstiles that open when we brush our passports against the 'gizmo'?

It is true that Lord Boris did not say these words in that private dinner with Tory diehards last week. But what he says on the recording leaked to Buzzfeed places Irish unionism right inside the giant Wicker Man with the torches just about to touch the kindling. It is not so much the idiocy of Johnson’s repeated belief that an international border is just like moving around London, though having previously compared the Irish frontier to passing from one London borough to another, he now compared it to travelling on the Tube: “You know, when I was mayor of London … I could tell where you all were just when you swiped your Oyster card over a Tube terminal, a Tube gizmo. The idea that we can’t track movement of goods, it’s just nonsense.”

‘This folly’
Fatuous as these comparisons are (a 500km-long border barrier with turnstiles that open when we brush our passports against the “gizmo”?), the real point is what came next, the hissy fit about this whole bloody Irish border business: “It’s so small and there are so few firms that actually use that Border regularly, it’s just beyond belief that we’re allowing the tail to wag the dog in this way. We’re allowing the whole of our agenda to be dictated by this folly.” Infantile as this is, it expresses a kind of truth – one that is not yet spoken in public but soon will be. The truth is that the Brexiteers don’t give a flying frig for Ireland, North or South – and that includes Irish unionism and the DUP.

The DUP has gone one further than poor Sergeant Howie and helped to construct the wicker cage in which unionism will be torched.

Johnson and his chums ignored Northern Ireland in their Brexit campaign. That seemed to be the ultimate height of irresponsibility but they have now gone further – they are exploiting it. Their current strategy is to use the EU’s offer of a special deal for Northern Ireland, preserving many of the advantages of the single market even while leaving it, as an opening through which they can force the EU to concede the same have cake/eat cake privileges to Britain. They are trying to turn the sympathy that comes from a horrible conflict, in which nearly 2 per cent of the population was killed or injured, into a way of getting one over on Michel Barnier. This is political depravity.

The Brexit balloon
But it won’t work and when it doesn’t, the rage that Johnson uttered in private will become more open and explicit. The Brexit balloon is supposed to soar into the skies when it cuts the ropes that bind it to Brussels. But its occupants are realising that there is another rope that keeps them earthbound – the one that ties them to Newry and Strabane. To salvage their fantasies, they will cut that rope too. Brexit is an English nationalist project – it cannot allow the English bulldog to be wagged by an Irish tail. If the tail has to be cut off – sorry but pass the shears old man.

The DUP thinks it’s the dog of course, but it’s not. To the Brexit believers, we are all part of the same Irish “folly”. The DUP has gone one further than poor Sergeant Howie and helped to construct the wicker cage in which unionism will be torched to appease the gods of Brexit. It could still save itself by voting with the opposition when the EU Withdrawal Bill returns to the House of Commons today. Or it can murmur ecstatically Kipling’s Ulster 1912: “We are the sacrifice.”


----------



## Raheem (Jun 12, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm not seeing why Lichtenstein having limits on FoM is "in the interest of a functioning union". Or at least not in the context of why the UK having limits would be against the unions interest.*
> 
> *Just woke from a nap - maybe i'm missing the obvious.



Limiting fom for Lichtenstein (I thought it was Luxembourg - maybe it's both) is negligible in terms of overall EU migration. That's probably the main difference.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Limiting fom for Lichtenstein (I thought it was Luxembourg - maybe it's both) is negligible in terms of overall EU migration. That's probably the main difference.


The article from Winot states why Liechetenstein got a concession on FoM:


> Prior to the principality of Liechtenstein joining the EEA on 1 May 1995, the EEA Council – one of the formal structures set up under the agreement – on 10 March 1995 looked at its vulnerability to excessive migration.
> 
> It concluded that this microstate could easily be swamped by immigrants if unrestricted free movement of workers was permitted. A territory with a population of 37,000 spread over an area of 61 square miles – less than half the area of the Isle of Wight – would not be able to absorb unlimited numbers.
> 
> The Council recognised that Liechtenstein had "a very small inhabitable area of rural character with an unusually high percentage of non-national residents and employees. Moreover, it acknowledged the vital interest of Liechtenstein to maintain its own national identity". It thus concluded that the situation "might justify the taking of safeguard measures by Liechtenstein as provided for in Article 112 of the EEA Agreement".


I'm just wondering why that reason (Liechtenstein potentially being overwhelmed by immigrants) is "in the interest of a functioning union". Yet here we have a huge trading partner potentially breaking away from the union and suddenly the FoM is a non negotiable principle - one that's taking negotiations to a brink that could lead to a crash-out - therefore a bigger threat to "the interest of a functioning union" imo.
All seems a bit arbitrary.
Maybe the fact that Liechtenstein was a rich-as-fuck tax-haven had something to do with the decision makers in Brussels letting them have their way (Junker the tax dodger doing the negs instead of Barnier?)


----------



## ska invita (Jun 12, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm not seeing why Lichtenstein having limits on FoM is "in the interest of a functioning union". Or at least not in the context of why the UK having limits would be against the unions interest.*
> 
> *Just woke from a nap - maybe i'm missing the obvious.


because they recognised the particular limitations of LIchenstein's size and status and needed to find a work around to make it work *as part of* the Union. UK wants to leave the Union. The EU doesn't need to find a work around as the UK is *leaving* the Union. The only onus on the EU is to get some kind of workable trade agreement for EU members. There is no political will or imperative to make sure that includes bypassing any of the four freedoms for the UK - hte opposite - it is a threat to the future of the Union if they let that happen.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> because they recognised the particular limitations of LIchenstein's size and status and needed to find a work around to make it work *as part of the Union*. UK wants to leave the Union. The EU doesn't need to find a work around as the UK is *leaving* the Union. The only onus on the EU is to get some kind of workable trade agreement for EU members. There is no political will or imperative to make sure that includes bypassing any of the four freedoms for the UK - hte opposite - it is a threat to the future of the Union if they let that happen.


but it wasn't applying to be part of the Union. it was applying to eea/ efta - the middle ground where the UK's heading.. therefore equal impacts (or better said non-impacts) on the "functioning Union" surely?


----------



## Supine (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> because they recognised the particular limitations of LIchenstein's size and status and needed to find a work around to make it work *as part of* the Union. UK wants to leave the Union. The EU doesn't need to find a work around as the UK is *leaving* the Union. The only onus on the EU is to get some kind of workable trade agreement for EU members. There is no political will or imperative to make sure that includes bypassing any of the four freedoms for the UK - hte opposite - it is a threat to the future of the Union if they let that happen.



Good post. It cuts to the heart of the matter,  we are leaving the EU 

Words like 'minimum friction' are great but they actually mean friction and that means jobs lost.


----------



## ska invita (Jun 12, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> but it wasn't applying to be part of the Union. it was applying to eea/ efta - the middle ground where the UK's heading.. therefore equal impacts (or better said non-impacts) on the "functioning Union" surely?


thats a good point  
 i think knowing where Lichtenstein was geographically got me thinking of it as embedded in the Union in some way...

still, for reasons i cant really articulate it would be massively hopeful to expect the same for the UK. Of course its possible if the political will is there, but i see no reason for them to open that door when they can see the UK falling in on itself at home over this.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> because they recognised the particular limitations of LIchenstein's size and status and needed to find a work around to make it work *as part of the Union*. UK wants to leave the Union. The EU doesn't need to find a work around as the *UK is leaving the Union*. The only onus on the EU is to get some kind of workable trade agreement for EU members. There is no political will or imperative to make sure that includes bypassing any of the four freedoms for the UK - hte opposite - it is a threat to the *future of the Union* if they let that happen.


I've colour coded the "union" contexts to make it clear:
*Liechtenstein and the UK* would be one of the same - and the future of the *(European) Union* union (i.e the functioning union you talked about) are 2 entirely different entities.
I'm not trying to be condescending - it's just important to make that clear - you seem to be talking about one of the same Union that Liechtenstein is joining and we are leaving. That is not happening.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> thats a good point
> i think knowing where Lichtenstein was geographically got me thinking of it as embedded in the Union in some way...
> 
> still, for reasons i cant really articulate it would be massively hopeful to expect the same for the UK. Of course its possible if the political will is there, but i see no reason for them to open that door when they can see the UK falling in on itself at home over this.


ok, no worries.. ignore my post above then .


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 12, 2018)

When you call a pass law freedom of movement something dang gon wrung.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> When you call a pass law freedom of movement something dang gon wrung.


tru dat


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not sure this is allowed, but the article I have copied and pasted below is from behind the Irish Times paywall. It is by
> Fintan O'Toole. He mashes up The Italian Job and The Wicker man to inspire him with this article. Those interested might like to read it.
> 
> *Brexit traps the DUP inside the Wicker Man*
> ...


Thanks for dropping that in


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> When you call a pass law freedom of movement something dang gon wrung.


This, a thousand times this.


----------



## Winot (Jun 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> still, for reasons i cant really articulate it would be massively hopeful to expect the same for the UK. Of course its possible if the political will is there, but i see no reason for them to open that door when they can see the UK falling in on itself at home over this.



It’s been suggested that present EFTA* members would be happy to have the UK become a member because it would beef up their bargaining power within the EEA. Don’t know how true that is but it’s worth bearing in mind. 

Also I’m not sure how the balance of power and decision making works in the EEA Council ie would the EU have a  veto on giving the UK FoM concessions? I just don’t know. 

(*the UK is presently an EEA member by virtue of being in the EU. The issue is whether it will become an EFTA member to stay in the EEA after Brexit)


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> still, for reasons i cant really articulate it would be massively hopeful to expect the same for the UK. Of course its possible if the political will is there, but i see no reason for them to open that door when they can see the UK falling in on itself at home over this.


I don't think the UK is falling in on itself over immigration as such (at least, not to meaningful levels). It is falling in on itself about the dogmatic threat from the EU that there can be no access to the single market without allowing "FoM". But as the Liechtenstein case proves, that threat is a bluff. The EU do make concessions when they see fit.
So, all that's happened in Realpolitik is that the UKs negotiating leverage has been eradicated due to a large segment of the UK not wanting to run the risk of challenging these dogmatic threats.


----------



## Winot (Jun 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I don't think the UK is falling in on itself over immigration as such (at least, not to meaningful levels). It is falling in on itself about the dogmatic threat from the EU that there can be no access to the single market without allowing "FoM". But as the Liechtenstein case proves, that threat is a bluff. *The EU do make concessions when they see fit.*



To a state that is outside the EU.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 13, 2018)

Winot said:


> To a state that is outside the EU.


er, that's what the negotiations are all about - a state outside the Eu - i.e the UK


----------



## Winot (Jun 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> er, that's what the negotiations are all about - a state outside the Eu - i.e the UK



Yeah sorry am losing my marbles


----------



## ska invita (Jun 13, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yeah sorry am losing my marbles


its fun this isnt it


----------



## teuchter (Jun 13, 2018)

It's relevant though is it not that the negotiations are with a state outside the EU but previously within. Because they will be mindful of setting precedents for what happens when a state leaves the EU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> er, that's what the negotiations are all about - a state outside the Eu - i.e the UK


not really. this is about a state which is a member but which will be leaving, a state which is transitioning from one state to another state and negotiating its way out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's relevant though is it not that the negotiations are with a state outside the EU but previously within. Because they will be mindful of setting precedents for what happens when a state leaves the EU.


i am astonished that this has only been mentioned about fifteen times on the thread.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> When you call a pass law freedom of movement something dang gon wrung.



Are you saying that 'Freedom of Movement' is a misleading phrase?

Why do you say this?

Who is being misled?
What are they being misled to think?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Are you saying that 'Freedom of Movement' is a misleading phrase?
> 
> Why do you say this?
> 
> ...


at a rough guess everyone who thinks it's freedom of movement is being misled and they are being misled to think there is freedom of movement.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> at a rough guess everyone who thinks it's freedom of movement is being misled and they are being misled to think there is freedom of movement.



How are you defining "Freedom of movement" ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> How are you defining "Freedom of movement" ?


using the dictionary

what idiosyncratic construction are you placing on the phrase?


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> using the dictionary
> 
> what idiosyncratic construction are you placing on the phrase?



What does your dictionary say?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> What does your dictionary say?


in this context essentially the ability of citizens of a member state to travel and settle throughout the territory of the european union without facing the hurdles someone from a non-member state might: but recognising that that not all non-member states' citizens face the same hurdles, so - for example - things might quite possibly be easier for a swiss or norwegian citizen than someone from niger or turkmenistan.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 13, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Are you saying that 'Freedom of Movement' is a misleading phrase?
> 
> Why do you say this?
> 
> ...


This has been discussed on this thread many times.
My opinion:


pocketscience said:


> IMO, if the EU was serious about FOM, they'd do well to look at expanding the UK model across the continent. No ID, No Registration, NHS for all.


I also pointed out that the law in many countries of the Eu is that within 12 weeks you need a job and obligatory private health insurance (which isnt cheap) otherwise face deportation.
So not free.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> not really. this is about a state which is a member but which will be leaving, a state which is transitioning from one state to another state and negotiating its way out.


This fact is having an impact on the negotiations, I agree. But also the fact applies that that the Eu has continued to make concessions on their "principles" when negotiating the relationship between the Union and the external partner.

Looking at the various models of those relationships (e.g comparing Turkey & Switzerlands relationship with the EU) i cant see any reason why the UK shouldn't want it's cake and eat it, and I don't think many individual countries of the Eu would deny the UK that. But it's the Eu alone that needs to set the precident so others dont follow - that's telling enough of the dysfunctionality of the Union.
I think the UK's dimplomatic sensitivity hasnt done itsself many favours on this point by not massivly rubbing salt in that particular wound, to put pressure on the Eu from their own quaters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> This fact is having an impact on the negotiations, I agree. But also the fact applies that that the Eu has continued to make concessions on their "principles" when negotiating the relationship between the Union and the external partner.
> 
> Looking at the various models of those relationships (e.g comparing Turkey & Switzerlands relationship with the EU) i cant see any reason why the UK shouldn't want it's cake and eat it, and I don't think many individual countries of the Eu would deny the UK that. But it's the Eu alone that needs to set the precident so others dont follow that's telling enough of the dysfunctionality of the Union.
> I think the UK's dimplomatic sensitivity hasnt done itsself many favours on this point by not massivly rubbing salt in that particular wound, to put pressure on the Eu from their own quaters.


i think the utter incompetence of the uk government has played more than a minor role in this clusterfuck

i wouldn't give concessions to may, she hasn't had the wherewithal to work out a proper negotiating position yet and we're a mite short of two years past the referendum.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the utter incompetence of the uk government has played more than a minor role in this clusterfuck
> 
> i wouldn't give concessions to may, she hasn't had the wherewithal to work out a proper negotiating position yet and we're a mite short of two years past the referendum.


Absolutely agree.


----------



## bemused (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the utter incompetence of the uk government has played more than a minor role in this clusterfuck
> 
> I wouldn't give concessions to may, she hasn't had the wherewithal to work out a proper negotiating position yet and we're a mite short of two years past the referendum.



To be fair to her she's being fucked over at every turn by members of her own party who campaigned for Brexit who seemed to have spent the last two years not helping but sitting at the back throwing bottles. I remember the likes of Gove, Boris etc droning on about the magical power of German car makers to EU control trade policy who all know seem rather bemused that the EU doesn't give a fuck about BMWs balance sheet.

For example, Daniel Hanna who prior to the vote was waxing lyrical about how awesome the Norway model is, but now seems horrified we're heading that way.

It's comical to me that the May's biggest threat to her own party is that she'll happily fuck off and live in the countryside in peace and leave them with Boris as the leader.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

bemused said:


> To be fair to her she's being fucked over at every turn by members of her own party who campaigned for Brexit who seemed to have spent the last two years not helping but sitting at the back throwing bottles.


to be fair to her she's a chronic incompetent who has played the hand she was dealt so poorly that she deserves whatever brickbats come her way


----------



## gosub (Jun 13, 2018)

bemused said:


> To be fair to her she's being fucked over at every turn by members of her own party who campaigned for Brexit who seemed to have spent the last two years not helping but sitting at the back throwing bottles. I remember the likes of Gove, Boris etc droning on about the magical power of German car makers to EU control trade policy who all know seem rather bemused that the EU doesn't give a fuck about BMWs balance sheet.
> 
> For example, Daniel Hanna who prior to the vote was waxing lyrical about how awesome the Norway model is, but now seems horrified we're heading that way.
> 
> It's comical to me that the May's biggest threat to her own party is that she'll happily fuck off and live in the countryside in peace and leave them with Boris as the leader.



TBF Hannan, I don't think would have a problem STILL with the Norway model, its Boris, Gove et al who aren't on top of their brief. To compare the NI border with Boroughs of London shows a complete failure of understanding by these sceptic late comers the have hijacked the issue.   YOU CAN ONLY HAVE A BORDERLESS BORDER IF BOTH SIDES EXIST IN THE SAME REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the utter incompetence of the uk government has played more than a minor role in this clusterfuck
> 
> i wouldn't give concessions to may, she hasn't had the wherewithal to work out a proper negotiating position yet and we're a mite short of two years past the referendum.


 Well, she has to deliver a brexit while still a) keeping Rees-Mogg and the other loons onside b) not destroying the economy. She's trying to string a) along until it's too late.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Well, she has to deliver a brexit while still a) keeping Rees-Mogg and the other loons onside b) not destroying the economy. She's trying to string a) along until it's too late.


you're too kind


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 13, 2018)

On that note....(thug life meme needed)


----------



## sealion (Jun 14, 2018)

More division
Jeremy Corbyn hit by revolt as dozens defy whip in Brexit vote


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 14, 2018)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2018)

Brexit warning from investment firm co-founded by Rees-Mogg

Lolz.

The UK is a servile shithole of a country


----------



## Poi E (Jun 14, 2018)

Ironically named country though.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 14, 2018)

£14k a month for a few hours board work

Mogg has certainly embraced the gig culture


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> £14k a month for a few hours board work



Tbf it's a whole 30 hours, provided he's actually expected to do it. It's more time than he spends on Newsnight.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


>



Got any comment on the links butchers posted? Or are you going to pretend that they just don't exist.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Got any comment on the links butchers posted? Or are you going to pretend that they just don't exist.


Are you still on about the EU extermination camps ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Are you still on about the EU extermination camps ?


Nice misquoting there. But yes, butchers posted some links discussing the full impact the EU's racist border policies, the camps you claim don't exist.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

The EU doesn't actually have primacy on refugee policy though, does it?


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 14, 2018)

What do you think the two most important issues facing the EU are?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 14, 2018)

Those were presumably questions asked of the *citizens* of the EU ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The EU doesn't actually have primacy on refugee policy though, does it?


And another one. You've not bothered to read the link BA posted have you. I guess the deal the EU made with Turkey doesn't exist, that the EU border guards are imaginary.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And another one. You've not bothered to read the link BA posted have you. I guess the deal the EU made with Turkey doesn't exist, that the EU border guards are imaginary.



I only asked a question.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

A leading question designed to defend the EU, to sweep away any responsibility it has for the deaths of hundreds of thousands (or even millions).

The piece butchers posted is clear, in depth and incisive. It totally dismantles the notion of the EU as the migrants friend, and yet not one of those that care so much about the racism of Brexit have bothered to engage with it. 

I'm going to quote from the last paragraph because it provides an explanation of what is happening here.


> the Greek case discloses the impotence and the illusions of the ‘radical’ European left. ...This incomprehension is not the result of simple intellectual oversight. It is at bottom political, arising from the refusal of real confrontation with the dominant forces, which in turn derives from the left’s internalization of its historic defeat. Europeanist blindness has made a damaging contribution here: the rallying cries of the dominant discourse, which represents EU membership as a commitment to ‘internationalism’ and the ‘values of openness’, forestalled thinking about the need for a ‘plan B’—exit from the Eurozone as an indispensable measure of resistance to the Troika’s blackmail.



Again cheers' for posting that butchersapron. Excellent piece.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> A leading question designed to defend the EU, to sweep away any responsibility it has for the deaths of hundreds of thousands (or even millions).



I'm not going to bother arguing about that. But what do you propose the EU should have done instead? Or alternatively, how do you think things might have been better had the EU not existed?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Well for a start how about not paying huge sums of money to Turkey and Libya so that they can set up concentration camps. But I forgot those camps don't exist. They're nothing to do with the EU.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Well for a start how about not paying huge sums of money to Turkey and Libya so that they can set up concentration camps. But I forgot those camps don't exist. They're nothing to do with the EU.



It's already clear what you think the EU shouldn't have done. What do you think it should have done?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> the notion of the EU as the migrants friend,



Where's this notion been expressed? And are we talking about internal EU economic migration or the migration of refugees from outside of the EU?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Where's this notion been expressed?


Two posters have explicitly denied the racism and anti-immigration nature of the EU's border policies, others have disregarded it with empty words about how things 'could/will be worse'. Time and again in U75 the EU has been posited, in contrast to the UK, as non-racist, as progressive, the champion of 'freedom of movement' and the removal/weakening of borders.


Raheem said:


> It's already clear what you think the EU shouldn't have done. What do you think it should have done?


How about you read the piece. But that would involve you actually having to challenge your blindness.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Those were presumably questions asked of the *citizens* of the EU ?


Yes.  And only in 3 of 27 of those countries do the citizens care less about immigration than in the UK


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> What do you think the two most important issues facing the EU are?


Can someone enlighten me as to why Estonians are so worried about immigration and terrorism?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 14, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> What do you think the two most important issues facing the EU are?


It’s good to see the Portuguese taking a hard line with terrorism whilst  apparently being the least racist nation in Europe. Particularly given not much terrorism seems to even happen there. Selfless comrades!


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Yes.  And only in 3 of 27 of those countries do the citizens care less about immigration than in the UK


Yes, I had to look at it several times to confirm.

Who conducted the survey ?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 14, 2018)

I though it was usually the case that anti immigration sentiment in the U.K. tended to be comparitively lower than many parts of Europe. Not news?


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Two posters have explicitly denied the racism and anti-immigration nature of the EU's border policies, others have disregarded it with empty words about how things 'could/will be worse'. Time and again in U75 the EU has been posited, in contrast to the UK, as non-racist, as progressive, the champion of 'freedom of movement' and the removal/weakening of borders.
> How about you read the piece. But that would involve you actually having to challenge your blindness.



I don't think it's about blindness. It's about focus. You're concentrating on the easy and emotive part of a much bigger picture, and not, or so it would seem, thinking about the structures and politics involved. Fundamentally, decisions about accepting or not accepting refugee flows are made by individual governments. The EU institutions can try, with varying degrees of success and failure, to coordinate and act as a forum for discussion. But they are not really able to formulate or drive policy, only to respond to and act as an agent of national governments. So, the story doesn't start with Junker or whoever watching columns of migrants on banks of screens and stroking a white cat.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Fundamentally, decisions about accepting or not accepting refugee flows are made by individual governments. The EU institutions can try, with varying degrees of success and failure, to coordinate and act as a forum for discussion. But they are not really able to formulate or drive policy, only to respond to and act as an agent of national governments.


Absolute rubbish, as you'd know if you'd read the Kouvelakis piece.


----------



## Supine (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Well for a start how about not paying huge sums of money to Turkey and Libya so that they can set up concentration camps. But I forgot those camps don't exist. They're nothing to do with the EU.



I really don't think you should be using the term concentration camp in this way.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2018)

Shall we just call them 'not-prisons but you can't leave funtime centres' then?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> I really don't think you should be using the term concentration camp in this way.


What are they if they are not concentration camps? How are they not analogous to the concentration camps Britain and other European powers used in their colonies? Their specific purpose is to concentrate migrants into camps.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Absolute rubbish, as you'd know if you'd read the Kouvelakis piece.



Of course I've read it, it's just that I'm not content to make do with that and engage no further.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Of course I've read it, it's just that I'm not content to make do with that and engage no further.


Really then why make that claim that


> The EU institutions can try, with varying degrees of success and failure, to coordinate and act as a forum for discussion. But they are not really able to formulate or drive policy, only to respond to and act as an agent of national governments.


which Kouvelakis shows is quite clearly false. The piece emphasises that while there are competing factions the EU is a political entity with it's own policies.

EDIT: As Kouvelakis discusses one of the major purposes of the EU has been to remove political power from nation states, where parliamentary democracy can interfere with capital, to technocratic institutions that are not burdened with having to respond to voters.


> Humiliating as it is, the procedure is not merely symbolic. What was at stake was the dismantling of any appearance of national and popular sovereignty. The two qualifiers matter: in order to impose a course of ‘shock therapy’, overwhelmingly and consistently rejected by the Greek public, it was necessary to destroy democratic accountability, even in its limited, class-loaded and highly problematic representative form.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Really then why make that claim that
> which Kouvelakis shows is quite clearly false. The piece emphasises that while there are competing factions the EU is a political entity with it's own policies.



You're quoting me out of context. Obviously, the EU is a political entity, but it is not able, broadly, to create policy on refugees, or to override the policies of national governments on the same.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 14, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Can someone enlighten me as to why Estonians are so worried about immigration and terrorism?



Their thoughts perhaps turn east.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You're quoting me out of context. Obviously, the EU is a political entity, but it is not able, broadly, to create policy on refugees, or to override the policies of national governments on the same.


Why does it need to when it usually shares the same anti-migrant politics as the national governments. But you're wrong anyway, see the examples of the Mare Nostrum operation and the relocation of migrants within the EU, Italy and Greece quickly told where they stand. There has been a outsourcing of migration policies to the EU



			
				Kouvelakis said:
			
		

> The episode illuminates a characteristic aspect of the European scheme of ‘live or let die’, of which ‘humanity and security’ are the two complementary faces, with coercive functions transferred from the nation states to the supranational bodies of the eu.


(while at the same time national governments are still happy to blame immigration on the 'weak' EU, leading to the EU expropriating more powers so that it can adopt even harsher measures).


----------



## Supine (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What are they if they are not concentration camps? How are they not analogous to the concentration camps Britain and other European powers used in their colonies? Their specific purpose is to concentrate migrants into camps.



There is a big difference between camps that are used to imprison / confine / exterminate and camps that are used to give aid and to help process people regarding their right to enter Europe.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> There is a big difference between camps that are used to imprison / confine / exterminate and camps that are *used to give aid and to help process people regarding their right to enter Europe*.


Fucking amazing. You think that's what these camps are for.



			
				Kouvlakis said:
			
		

> The situation in the islands, particularly in the Moria camp in Lesbos, widely known as an ‘open-air prison’, deteriorated to such an extent that some of the ngos left as an expression of protest,






			
				Kouvlakis said:
			
		

> Amnesty International would issue a devastating report of conditions inside these centres, where officials regularly beat and tortured captive migrants to extort ransoms from their families, securing release from arbitrary, indefinite deten- tion.14 Funding for the ‘authorities’ managing the dcim centres, as well as generous support for the Libyan Coast Guard’s efforts to ram or scare off migrants’ boats and deals with the warlords presiding over Libya’s southern borders, were agreed at the eu’s Valletta Summit on Migration in 2015, which aimed at preventing refugees and migrants crossing the central Mediterranean and arriving in Europe at any cost.


Not a single one willing to read even the short Mailk piece DC and BA linked to, instead deliberate blindness to the actions of the EU. And it's the Brexit voters that are the racists. Sickening.


----------



## NoXion (Jun 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> There is a big difference between camps that are used to imprison / confine / exterminate and camps that are used to give aid and to help process people regarding their right to enter Europe.



Are they allowed to leave the camps whenever they wish? Otherwise that sounds like confinement to me.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jun 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> There is a big difference between camps that are used to imprison / confine / exterminate and camps that are used to give aid and to help process people regarding their right to enter Europe.



And the torture, rape and murder?


----------



## Supine (Jun 14, 2018)

So redsquirrel - what would you do? Have no borders at all?


----------



## seventh bullet (Jun 14, 2018)

Well?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> So redsquirrel - what would you do? Have no borders at all?


First, how about you tells us whether you admit you were talking crap (and nasty crap at that) or are still insisting that these camps are 





> used to give aid and to help process people regarding their right to enter Europe.


----------



## Supine (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> First, how about you tells us whether you admit you were talking crap (and nasty crap at that) or are still insisting that these camps are



You seem to insinuate the EU is some evil that is raining terror on others. I'm of the opinion they are trying their best to deal with a real difficult situation, where people in great need are being helped. I'm not saying what is done is perfect in any way shape or form but I have faith the intention is good.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 14, 2018)

> One man from Gambia, who was detained for three months, told Amnesty how he was starved and beaten in a detention centre. “They beat me with a rubber hose because they want money to release me,” he said. “They call the family while beating [you] so the family send money.”





Supine said:


> what would you do? Have no borders at all?



dark


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 14, 2018)

I'm not sure how standing with the Tories and Farage and voting for Brexit will lead to things being better for immigrants.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Mailk said:
			
		

> The dreadful stench of urine and garbage greets visitors and the ground is covered with hundreds of plastic bags. It is raining, and filthy water has collected ankle-deep on the road. The migrants who come out of the camp are covered with thin plastic capes and many of them are wearing only flipflops on their feet as they walk through the soup… Welcome to one of the most shameful sites in all of Europe.


(here)


Supine said:


> I'm not saying what is done is perfect in any way shape or form but I have faith the intention is good.


Like I said wilful blindness - 'I don't want to believe that the EU might be intentionally implementing horrific policies so it can't be'. Never mind all the evidence you've been presented with, it destroys your beliefs so it must not exist. 

Priests refusing to look through telescopes so that they won't find the proof that their beliefs are false. It would be pathetic without the 100,000s of deaths. With them it's just revolting.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 14, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I though it was usually the case that anti immigration sentiment in the U.K. tended to be comparitively lower than many parts of Europe. Not news?



The survey doesn't seem to have asked people if they were "anti-immigration". It seems to have asked what they think are important issues in the EU at the moment, which is not the same thing at all.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Why does it need to when it usually shares the same anti-migrant politics as the national governments.


Not usually, but always, because it has no politics or powers to call its own in this policy area. So, once you arrive at a situation where national governments decide to turn away refugees, it becomes realistically inevitable that they will end up in camps, and there is nothing the EU as an entity can possibly do to prevent that from happening. Place the blame where it belongs.



redsquirrel said:


> But you're wrong anyway, see the examples of the Mare Nostrum operation and the relocation of migrants within the EU, Italy and Greece quickly told where they stand. There has been a outsourcing of migration policies to the EU


This is a good example of what I was talking about above in terms of the EU being able to coordinate with regard to refugee policy, but not to dictate to member states. The EU provided funding for Mare Nostrum, but it didn't force any country to take part, because it did not have any power to do that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 14, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Not usually, but always, because it has no politics or powers to call its own in this policy area.


Again rubbish, as evidenced the Kouvlakis article 


Raheem said:


> So, once you arrive at a situation where national governments decide to turn away refugees, it becomes realistically inevitable that they will end up in camps, and there is nothing the EU as an entity can possibly do to prevent that from happening. Place the blame where it belongs.


I do, I'm not the one refusing to accept the evidence that is in front of his face. I guess the murderous neo-liberal economics forced on Greece is nothing to do with the EU either. 



Raheem said:


> This is a good example of what I was talking about above in terms of the EU being able to coordinate with regard to refugee policy, but not to dictate to member states. The EU provided funding for Mare Nostrum, but it didn't force any country to take part, because it did not have any power to do that.


You claim to have head the Kouvlakis piece but you get basic facts mentioned in there wrong


> However, after the eu refused to make a significant contribution to the high cost of the operation, some €9m per month,


----------



## Raheem (Jun 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Again rubbish, as evidenced the Kouvlakis article



Please elaborate.



redsquirrel said:


> You claim to have head the Kouvlakis piece but you get basic facts mentioned in there wrong



No, I have no facts wrong, or at least not that one. I said the EU provided funding, which it did, although it is also true that the EU funding was dwarfed by the Italian funding. It's also worth noting that Mare Nostrum wasn't even under the auspices of the EU.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm not sure how standing with the Tories and Farage and voting for Brexit will lead to things being better for immigrants.


In the 2016 referendum you mean? The one that Tory prime ministers past and present campaigned on the Remain side during?

Which ever way you voted, you voted with Tories.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> In the 2016 referendum you mean? The one that Tory prime ministers past and present campaigned on the Remain side during?



There's only certain Tories who really know the score.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

I look forward to arguments against Trump’s wall being subject to the same level of non-emotive scrutiny.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> In the 2016 referendum you mean? The one that Tory prime ministers past and present campaigned on the Remain side during?
> 
> Which ever way you voted, you voted with Tories.


True, I should have said the right wing of the Tory party.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> True, I should have said the right wing of the Tory party.


Don't think that works either, unless you redefine "right wing".


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 15, 2018)

_Fingers crossed for a left-wing tory remain!_


----------



## Raheem (Jun 15, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I look forward to arguments against Trump’s wall being subject to the same level of non-emotive scrutiny.



Is the EU responsible for that too?


----------



## kabbes (Jun 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Yes, I had to look at it several times to confirm.
> 
> Who conducted the survey ?


That’s because you have a rose-tinted view of other member states of the EU


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 15, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Fingers crossed for a left-wing tory remain!_



tbf at the minute it looks like this is exactly what we'll be getting.


----------



## Santino (Jun 15, 2018)

A left-wing Tory Remain followed by a haemorrhaging of support to UKIP leading to a 150 majority for Corbyn?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Is the EU responsible for that too?


What a strange response.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 15, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What a strange response.



Come on, there's no need to be rude. Your comment was pretty odd too.


----------



## killer b (Jun 15, 2018)

FBPE the movie is out next month.

Home

_A documentary film made by and featuring those who voted Remain, the 48%, to show the other 27 EU Member States that it was far from a landslide victory and just why we are fighting to stay part of the EU._


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Fucking amazing. You think that's what these camps are for.
> 
> 
> Not a single one willing to read even the short Mailk piece DC and BA linked to, instead deliberate blindness to the actions of the EU. And it's the Brexit voters that are the racists. Sickening.



You are quite right that no one should ignore those shameful abuses. 

But as usual you overplay it. This is not information that sheds a comparatively benign light on leave voters, because their obsession with ‘reclaiming our borders’ leaves no one in any doubt that many felt the EU has not been anything like savage enough.


----------



## gosub (Jun 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> You are quite right that no one should ignore those shameful abuses.
> 
> But as usual you overplay it. This is not information that sheds a comparatively benign light on leave voters, because their obsession with ‘reclaiming our borders’ leaves no one in any doubt that many felt the EU has not been anything like savage enough.


For some maybe... For me it's not an obsession about reclaiming borders, more an acknowledgement that as you move away from common systems there has to be one.


And we really do have to move away from common systems cos our political class, media and by knock on, the general public demonstrably can't get their heads round them... Else we wouldn't be where we are.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> You are quite right that no one should ignore those shameful abuses.
> 
> But as usual you overplay it. This is not information that sheds a comparatively benign light on leave voters, because their obsession with ‘reclaiming our borders’ leaves no one in any doubt that many felt the EU has not been anything like savage enough.


Completely disingenuous of you, and pretty sick that you think all attempts to raise awareness of these deaths and the horrifying conditions in camp Moria are all just part of a childish bunfight over which team is better. Fuck you.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

..... and this is why I scrambled my password the other day :-/


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s because you have a rose-tinted view of other member states of the EU


I'm fully aware of the dodgyness at the eastern edge ... and the fuckup with Greece was shameful.

The Bretons seem a nice crowd from that point of view


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> FBPE the movie is out next month.
> 
> Home
> 
> _A documentary film made by and featuring those who voted Remain, the 48%, to show the other 27 EU Member States that it was far from a landslide victory and just why we are fighting to stay part of the EU._



Featuring Joan Bakewell,Vince Cable,Alastair Campbell, Nick Clegg, , Bob Geldof, AC Grayling, Bonnie Greer, Will Hutton,  Helena 	Kennedy


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Featuring Joan Bakewell,Vince Cable,Alastair Campbell, Nick Clegg, , Bob Geldof, AC Grayling, Bonnie Greer, Will Hutton,  Helena	 Kennedy


They made a movie to grovel to the other 27 states  Lol I think they heard you on twitter


----------



## killer b (Jun 15, 2018)

The multiplexes of Berlin, Paris and Milan will have queues out the door.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

Let’s roll out this embarrassing speech from yon bodach after Brexit again,  mo naire! Please, I beg you, please please


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The multiplexes of Berlin, Paris and Milan will have queues out the door.


They'll be hanging off the rafters


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 15, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Completely disingenuous of you, and pretty sick that you think all attempts to raise awareness of these deaths and the horrifying conditions in camp Moria are all just part of a childish bunfight over which team is better. Fuck you.



I wrote nothing of other posts, I responded to one. Pick up your buns and feed them to your high horse.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Completely disingenuous of you, and pretty sick that you think all attempts to raise awareness of these deaths and the horrifying conditions in camp Moria are all just part of a childish bunfight over which team is better. Fuck you.


'ok so the camps are bad but leave voters are still massive xenophobes' is the short of it, with an added implication that leave voters would have gone further still. Pogroms no doubt.

still its better than supines going branch geldofian and deciding his sense of belief is what makes the eu good


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> 'ok so the camps are bad but leave voters are still massive xenophobes' is the short of it, with an added implication that leave voters would have gone further still. Pogroms no doubt.
> 
> still its better than supines going branch geldofian and deciding his sense of belief is what makes the eu good



The point I’m trying to make is that the demands of nationalism constrain the response from the EU. It must be more brutal, it must not allow refugees and migrants to threaten the member states. That doesn’t excuse the response, but more nationalism is no solution as you well know. That’s my objection to Leave, more nationalist oxygen.

A big ‘threat’ of the Leave vote was that Turkey might join the EU with the obvious implication that we would be murdered in our beds due to the EU’s weakness.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> The point I’m trying to make is that the demands of nationalism constrain the response from the EU. It must be more brutal, it must not allow refugees and migrants to threaten the member states. That doesn’t excuse the response, but more nationalism is no solution as you well know. That’s my objection to Leave, more nationalist oxygen.
> 
> A big ‘threat’ of the Leave vote was that Turkey might join the EU with the obvious implication that we would be murdered in our beds due to the EU’s weakness.


so the best way to combat nationalisms would have been to stay in the eu, an eu which you claim is _forced_ into bankrolling the activities of the anti immigrant member states? I see.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> The point I’m trying to make is that the demands of nationalism constrain the response from the EU. It must be more brutal, it must not allow refugees and migrants to threaten the member states. That doesn’t excuse the response, but more nationalism is no solution as you well know. That’s my objection to Leave, more nationalist oxygen.
> 
> A big ‘threat’ of the Leave vote was that Turkey might join the EU with the obvious implication that we would be murdered in our beds due to the EU’s weakness.


I don’t think I’ve ever met a leave voter that stated Turkey joining the EU was their top reason for leaving. 

Often the public have been more liberal than the govt, in 2015 the govt were kinda forced to respond when people were organising aid efforts and protests etc re refugee crisis and obvs in Kenan’s piece there’s reference to the same with the Windrush scandal and in Greece too, so it’s a poor excuse. Similarly, the nationalist sentiment within the leave vote is being overplayed and used as an excuse for what they are doing now. Yes a lot of people voted because they wanted to shut our borders, but I’ve seen little evidence that the majority of leave voters voted for that reason.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

So it doesn’t help if you amplify that side of it and ignore what the rest of us are saying. I saw this when we started doing refugee stuff where I live, the UKIP guy and a couple of others expressed very racist sentiment and the usual lefties amplified it and made out the whole place had behaved like that when actually they couldn’t have been more supportive and involved. The left NEEDS to stop doing this.


I hope some of that made sense, head not screwed on today.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 15, 2018)

I didn't hear the turkey one or the NHS bus pledge one that apparently gulled the leave masses


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

We always hear about the promises leave made but seldom “my friend voted leave because she saw something on a bus”


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> so the best way to combat nationalisms would have been to stay in the eu, an eu which you claim is _forced_ into bankrolling the activities of the anti immigrant member states? I see.


Honestly we will hit that sea change eventually if we hang in there. Maybe austerity will be smashed once the U.K. is The Biggest Economy In The World.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> so the best way to combat nationalisms would have been to stay in the eu, an eu which you claim is _forced_ into bankrolling the activities of the anti immigrant member states? I see.



Why would I say it’s the best way? Anything bourgeois is hardly going to be the best way. Sure, staying in the EU doesn’t combat nationalism, but leaving gave it an easy win. Nationalism and the protection of our borders = liberation.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Why would I say it’s the best way? Anything bourgeois is hardly going to be the best way. Sure, staying in the EU doesn’t combat nationalism, but leaving gave it an easy win. Nationalism and the protection of our borders = liberation.


We haven’t left yet, and the last year shows it’s not the best idea to make predictions.

Do you think continuing to ignore rising anti- EU sentiment throughout Europe - and deny people the chance to answer a question on the subject- will eventually just cause it to peter out?


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Is the EU responsible for that too?


No
The Russians


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Fingers crossed for a left-wing tory remain!_


Could name them the Nazi Party then- Anti Democratic


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 15, 2018)

billbond said:


> Could name them the Nazi Party then- *Ant Democratic*



For the queen!


----------



## billbond (Jun 15, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Let’s roll out this embarrassing speech from yon bodach after Brexit again,  mo naire! Please, I beg you, please please




Blimey what a Gammon


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

billbond said:


> Blimey what a Gammon


Still not getting this gammon stuff but aye, he thinks this weird wanking and crying over the EU flag is what drove the remain vote in Scotland when probably it was about keeping yer heid below the parapet as it was in 2014. “Scotland did not let you down” honestly.


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Still not getting this gammon stuff but aye, he thinks this weird wanking and crying over the EU flag is what drove the remain vote in Scotland when probably it was about keeping yer heid below the parapet as it was in 2014. “Scotland did not let you down” honestly.



Nah man.  I enjoyed the 2014 referendum.... It was the handling of the EU aspect ...hiding the letter on the Parliament sever that told 'em how it would be, informed me don't do this when working out who to believe on the £ question...If they'd have gone THEN for EFTA I'd have voted YES, and, I think we would have been in a fair saner world


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

gosub said:


> Nah man.  I enjoyed the 2014 referendum.... It was the handling of the EU aspect ...hiding the letter on the Parliament sever that told 'em how it would be, informed me don't do this when working out who to believe on the £ question...If they'd have gone THEN for EFTA I'd have voted YES, and, I think we would have been in a fair saner world


Sure, fair enough.  what I meant was for the most part I think Scots are a bit feart to break with the status quo (rather than this stuff about more tolerance, I think there’s a lot of anti immigration  sentiment in Scotland too but I think it’s far less overt?) whilst the English were just biting their thumbs at project fear - when the Indy movement types make a thing of it they seem to forget Scotland didn’t actually go for independence either... and they thought there was far less of a crossover with Yes and Brexit votes than there turned out to be.  I mind libcom going on about how there was less militant action happening in Scotland whilst it was on the rise in England and they pinned this all on the Yes ref because libcom are a bit tunnel vision on that, but I think both are just examples of Scots -again- keeping their head below the parapet a phrase I thought was actually peculiar to rural Scotland for years cause it’s so apt.

It’s a massive generalisation of course but I think it might fit better than RACIST ENGLAND LOVELY SCOTLAND.

Maybe. It’s 3 am


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

gosub said:


> Nah man.  I enjoyed the 2014 referendum.... It was the handling of the EU aspect ...hiding the letter on the Parliament sever that told 'em how it would be, informed me don't do this when working out who to believe on the £ question...If they'd have gone THEN for EFTA I'd have voted YES, and, I think we would have been in a fair saner world


You were streets ahead of me, I’ve gone backwards, I was sort of idly thinking surely we need to go the whole hog with the Norway model but mostly I voted Yes to break the lockjam as auld John Aberdein put it, so this carried through to the EU ref but I hadn’t considered the EU question as much until then, now I am at the opposite end ,not 100 per cent sure what I would vote if it came up again, it’s all going to depend on which way everything falls.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

——————DERAIL ENDS—————


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2018)

I'm not sure it is that much of a derail.  The letter is still on the sever: http://www.parliament.scot/S4_Europ...opean_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf  More than happy if some more techy geek than me can find links to it from the site, certainly weren't during the campaign proper.  The that's just your opinion...the counter is that would be absurd and they are just saying that as an opening gambit.....But we now have Catalonia as a worked example. (though the game is now different for Scotland)

Am equally in a depends how this thing falls state of mind, coz there are some big  Scylla and Charybdis ahead and to navigate past them, well, I wouldn't start from here


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2018)

gosub said:


> I'm not sure it is that much of a derail.  The letter is still on the sever: http://www.parliament.scot/S4_Europ...opean_Commission_dated_20_March_2014__pdf.pdf  More than happy if some more techy geek than me can find links to it from the site, certainly weren't during the campaign proper.  The that's just your opinion...the counter is that would be absurd and they are just saying that as an opening gambit.....But we now have Catalonia as a worked example. (though the game is now different for Scotland)
> 
> Am equally in a depends how this thing falls state of mind, coz there are some big  Scylla and Charybdis ahead and to navigate past them, well, I wouldn't start from here


i wouldn't have started from back there either


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 16, 2018)

Envoyé des chiottes en utilisant Crapatalk


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 16, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> This is not information that sheds a comparatively benign light on leave voters, because their obsession with ‘reclaiming our borders’ leaves no one in any doubt that many felt the EU has not been anything like savage enough.


Exactly what HoratioCuthbert said. The fact that you are only able to see this from the Remain/Leave prism shows up the vapidity of your politics. Whether people voted leave or remain is irrelevant, the point is that the EU is a brutal neo-liberal entity.


Raheem said:


> Please elaborate.





Mr Moose said:


> The point I’m trying to make is that the demands of nationalism constrain the response from the EU.


Oh those nasty national governments forcing that poor EU to behave in this way. I suppose the EU is also been "constrained" to murder the Greeks too? What rot. Kouvelakis and Mailk outline how the EU is violently enforcing it's borders, both internal and external, in line with it's politics.



> When a journalist from Germany’s Der Spiegel magazine visited the control room of Frontex, the EU’s border agency, he observed that the language used was that of ‘defending Europe against an enemy’.


Must have been a secret leave infiltrator.


> the European Commission has signed migration deals with Niger, Mali, Nigeria, Senegal and Ethiopia. These migration ‘compacts’ tie development aid, trade and other EU policies to the agenda of returning unwanted migrants from Europe. The EU, in other words, hands over huge sums of money for would-be or thought-to-be migrants to Europe to be apprehended and locked up before they reach the Mediterranean shores.


 Must be FAKE NEWS, it can't be that the EU is doing this because such deals advance it's political aims. No it must just be those racists leave voters forcing them to behave in this way.


----------



## treelover (Jun 16, 2018)

> * Leftwing group at odds with Corbyn pushes for UK to stay in EU *
> Student organisation NCAFC says it will join anti-Brexit demonstrations this summer
> 
> Leftwing group at odds with Corbyn pushes for UK to stay in EU



Workers Liberty and the NUS are going to go all out for open borders, not sure how sucessful student demos are going to be in the Summer.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

treelover said:


> Workers Liberty and the NUS are going to go all out for open borders, not sure how sucessful student demos are going to be in the Summer.


I wouldn’t call that going all out for open borders.


----------



## treelover (Jun 16, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I wouldn’t call that going all out for open borders.



read the rest of it.

btw, WL are tiny, the NUS isn't


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 16, 2018)

treelover said:


> read the rest of it.
> 
> btw, WL are tiny, the NUS isn't


what do you mean by 'going all out for open borders'?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 16, 2018)

treelover said:


> Workers Liberty and the NUS are going to go all out for open borders, not sure how sucessful student demos are going to be in the Summer.


Are they usually great successes? 


Pickman's model said:


> what do you mean by 'going all out for open borders'?


Marching with some signs it seems.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

Correct me if I’m wrong, and I see different figures quoted but at 700 km plus does this not make the wall built in Turkey actually the second longest wall in the world?


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 16, 2018)

treelover said:


> Workers Liberty and the NUS are *going to go all out for open borders*, not sure how sucessful student demos are going to be in the Summer.


all out Kent, Med or World?


----------



## gosub (Jun 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> all out Kent, Med or World?


I think they're more with don't fuck with the status quo....





 But now Francis Rossi is dead the vultures are circling


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> all out Kent, Med or World?


It’s a mindset for goodness sake don’t muddy the waters with actual details.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 16, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s a mindset for goodness sake don’t muddy the waters with actual details.


fair enough, it's still only summer. I'll ask again an autumn.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 16, 2018)

gosub said:


> I think they're more with don't fuck with the status quo....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is he?
he (and _the band_) are part of my most rubbish claim to fame - don't rock my claim to fame status quo


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 16, 2018)

My post Indy ref Status Quo profile pic now not so funny. “Now remember 45 per cent of the population have had it up to here with these guys”


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Is he?
> he (and _the band_) are part of my most rubbish claim to fame - don't rock my claim to fame status quo



my mistake its the otherfella Rick Parfet thats dead


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2018)

Can of worms ahoy.


----------



## billbond (Jun 17, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Can of worms ahoy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




A rabid anti leaver and the Guardian , must be true then ha
Nothing to see here
Desperate stuff


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 17, 2018)

billbond said:


> A rabid anti leaver and the Guardian , must be true then ha
> Nothing to see here
> Desperate stuff



Might be true, might not. It's generally worth looking at things on their own merits and not accepting or discounting them according to whether or not the people involved are on your side.


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Might be true, might not. It's generally worth looking at things on their own merits and not accepting or discounting them according to whether or not the people involved are on your side.


Fair enough.  Next question :why would they have had documents about the FBI investigation?


----------



## billbond (Jun 17, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Might be true, might not. It's generally worth looking at things on their own merits and not accepting or discounting them according to whether or not the people involved are on your side.



which is exactly what the poster has done
I see a few law suits ahead

Seems the Russians are controlling everything according to the papers and media and on here
Im off to put a bet on Russia for the World cup, surely they cant fail, after all they got Brexit and Trump in.
Got to be worth a few quid


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2018)

gosub said:


> Fair enough.  Next question :why would they have had documents about the FBI investigation?


The Guardian/Observer suggestion is that Wigmore had them through his position as trade envoy to Belize.

EDIT: It is a terrible piece. There might be substance to these allegations but the reds under the beds crap below means that Cadwalladr's claims need careful study.


> A leader of the Leave.EU campaign suggested sending a “message of support” to the Russian ambassador after the then foreign secretary made a speech that was critical of Russia, documents seen by the _Observer_ suggest.





> Damian Collins, chair of the culture, media and sport select committee, said that Banks and Wigmore appeared to have misled parliament and “what we really need to know is why”. He added: “It makes you question whose side they are on.”


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2018)

billbond If by poster you mean me, you are making an assumption. I actually spoiled my ballot paper in the referendum by writing 'Abstain' on it. I was persuaded by arguments, mainly read on here that there was and is a left-wing case for brexit but at the end of the day I couldn't in all conscience vote for leave as I felt the whole thing had been hijacked the the xenophobes, racists and bigots. Purely a personal decision I know and one that had absolutely no effect for the outcome of the vote in my area as the result was overwhelmingly for remain. But back to the content of my post above. If the allegations are true then there should be arrests, not lawsuits.


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The Guardian/Observer suggestion is that Wigmore had them through his position as trade envoy to Belize.
> 
> EDIT: It is a terrible piece. There might be substance to these allegations but the reds under the beds crap below means that Cadwalladr's claims need careful study.


Nope why would a trade envoy to Belize have the documents


----------



## billbond (Jun 17, 2018)

teqniq said:


> billbond If by poster you mean me, you are making an assumption. I actually spoiled my ballot paper in the referendum by writing 'Abstain' on it. I was persuaded by arguments, mainly read on here that there was and is a left-wing case for brexit but at the end of the day I couldn't in all conscience vote for leave as I felt the whole thing had been hijacked the the xenophobes, racists and bigots. Purely a personal decision I know and one that had absolutely no effect for the outcome of the vote in my area as the result was overwhelmingly for remain. But back to the content of my post above. If the allegations are true then there should be arrests, not lawsuits.



Fair enough, and i have never voted apart from the EU ref.
Yes and from that ref allegations i take it you agree if not true should/will be lawsuits.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2018)

I would prefer to wait and see what happens actually.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2018)

I mean this is the type of crap that undermines Cadwalladr's credibility and shows her politics


> The foreign secretary of Britain had made critical remarks about a hostile foreign power. And, so these documents appear to suggest, prompted the Leave.EU team to swing into action in support of the *hostile foreign power*. And, astonishingly, to write a personal note of support to the country’s ambassador.


(my emphasis). I wasn't aware we were at war on Russia in 2016.

You've got this garbage sitting alongside stuff that really does look dodgy.

And regardless of what the truth actually is Cadwalladr is a prick. Russia posting Leave crap is 'stealing an election', the president of the US telling people to vote Remain is democracy in action.


> In 2016, Brexit and Trump were the first fake news elections. Though by “fake news”, one means sophisticated information operations, developed out of hybrid warfare techniques – pioneered by Russia and now aped across the world


Yes before 2016 political groups didn't engage in propaganda, there wasn't PR departments and spin doctors, stories and scandals were hushed up by those in power. These latest claims she is making may be true but the rock her politics lies upon is dodgy as hell. At heart her position is that that those thick proles were duped into voting for Leave by the baddies. It can't be that based on 30+ years of experience many people felt that Leave was a better option (except for the racists).


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2018)

gosub said:


> Nope why would a trade envoy to Belize have the documents


What do you mean nope? That's what the Observer is suggesting/implying here surely.


> According to material seen by the _Observer_, Wigmore, who was Belize’s trade envoy to Britain at the time, forwarded an email to a Russian diplomat marked “Fw Cottrell docs – Eyes Only”


----------



## gosub (Jun 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What do you mean nope? That's what the Observer is suggesting/implying here.



Logged on on laptop.   When they said FBI investigation,  I was thinking of a different FBI investigation,   this stuff is UKIP related of course he would have access to documents on it....an odd thing to do but not criminal.   In fact she's not even saying that, IS LYING TO PARLIAMENT CRIMINAL? You have to resign if you're a minister  BUT for it to be criminal then turkey would have voted for Xmas to get that enshirned in law


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2018)

All eyes towards Ze Fatherland as Merkel will tomorrow try to offload the refugees she took in on to fellow EU states that don’t want them. Schengen is at stake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> All eyes towards Ze Fatherland as Merkel will tomorrow try to offload the refugees she took in on to fellow EU states that don’t want them. Schengen is at stake.


((((schengen))))


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2018)

*US Wise Example: Le Pen Invites French Gov't to Slap Duties on Germany's Exports*
						©					 REUTERS / Charles Platiau

Addressing French radio Europe 1’s audience, France’s National Front party (FN) leader Marine Le Pen has suggested that France introduce taxes on German-manufactured goods, thereby referring to Donald Trump’s recently announced economic measures vis-à-vis China.

According to the French politician, the US economic policies should set an example for France, whose external trade deficit with Germany is estimated at over 17 billion euros.


US Wise Example: Le Pen Invites French Gov't to Slap Duties on Germany's Exports


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 18, 2018)

It is not news that marine LP wants to see these protections in place - it was pretty clear in the FN manifesto- the idea that France is fighting wars on two fronts is standard FN thinking


----------



## billbond (Jun 19, 2018)

And regardless of what the truth actually is Cadwalladr is a prick. Russia posting Leave crap is 'stealing an election', the president of the US telling people to vote Remain is democracy in action.

Will be interesting to see if/when it all comes out how much her masters have paid her.
You could see she was lying when she was  interviewed.
Looked on some sites and they are digging the dirt on her already.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Addressing French radio Europe 1’s audience, France’s National Front party (FN) leader Marine Le Pen has suggested that France introduce taxes on German-manufactured goods, thereby referring to Donald Trump’s recently announced economic measures vis-à-vis China.


How does this relate to Britain leaving the UK? What point are you trying to make?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Exactly what HoratioCuthbert said. The fact that you are only able to see this from the Remain/Leave prism shows up the vapidity of your politics. Whether people voted leave or remain is irrelevant, the point is that the EU is a brutal neo-liberal entity.
> 
> Oh those nasty national governments forcing that poor EU to behave in this way. I suppose the EU is also been "constrained" to murder the Greeks too? What rot. Kouvelakis and Mailk outline how the EU is violently enforcing it's borders, both internal and external, in line with it's politics.
> 
> ...



My frustration with your argument is that you don’t compare it with any likely outcome of leaving or even the unlikely collapse of the EU. A populist, very largely right wing movement won the vote in the UK. We can see with Trump what kind of migration policies work for populists. You make very valid criticisms of the EU, but I suspect things could be even worse in this and many other political arenas.

Were it possible to get a Corbyn Govt, then maybe we could have an independent policy that was kinder. Equally had that happened within the EU a kinder policy could prevail more widely. The principle of investing to stop people having the need to leave their homes is not wrong after all. But we may not get Corbyn, because many Leavers must protect their triumph above all other considerations and will continue to vote for the Tories for this reason alone.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 20, 2018)

Why the assumption that Labour would be easier on immigration? That would be a vote loser, surely.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Why the assumption that Labour would be easier on immigration? That would be a vote loser, surely.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Why the assumption that Labour would be easier on immigration? That would be a vote loser, surely.



I’m assuming that would be an ambition of a Corbyn Govt. I agree that it has not been evidenced recently by Labour. 

It would surely be a major disappointment if Corbyn got in and they were still churning out those mugs and the policies that went with them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m assuming that would be an ambition of a Corbyn Govt. I agree that it has not been evidenced recently by Labour.
> 
> It would surely be a major disappointment if Corbyn got in and they were still churning out those mugs and the policies that went with them?


specially as those mugs have the date of the 2015 general election on them


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> specially as those mugs have the date of the 2015 general election on them



Jezza’s more ardent nutters will firmly believe he can travel back and win it this time.


----------



## gosub (Jun 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Jezza’s more ardent nutters will firmly believe he can travel back and win it this time.



Had to google to check (so much shit has happened since then) but 2015 was Milliband...the one with the stone tablet


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 20, 2018)

the menhir of pledges, way before the famous Doubting of Corbyn (many thomas' abounded yea, and many mr. mooses, who demanded to see the hole in his side)


----------



## Poi E (Jun 20, 2018)

Mr Moose, the best you can hope for is "we will watch the borders, too, and won't kick out Windrush folk..."


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> My frustration with your argument is that you don’t compare it with any likely outcome of leaving or even the unlikely collapse of the EU.
> ....
> You make very valid criticisms of the EU, but I suspect things could be even worse in this and many other political arenas.


Why is any comparison needed? Does that fact that things could be worse justify the EUs treatment of the refugees? That line of argument justifies any behaviour, including Trumps.

You still can't see beyond Leave or Remain. But that's irrelevant, the point is that the EU is currently constructing a border policy that is attacking the working class both internally or externally. Whether people voted Leave or Remain, whether they think the UK will be better off in the EU or outside is beside the point.


----------



## Supine (Jun 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You still can't see beyond Leave or Remain. But that's irrelevant, the point is that the EU is currently constructing a border policy that is attacking the working class both internally or externally.



You can't see beyond the prism of class. But that's irrelevant. The point is the EU countries are individually trying to deal with an influx of people from a multitude of countries. Some are eligible to enter the EU and some are not. I'm sure it isn't easy to determine which are which?

What is your real politik solution? No borders, no sovereign states?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Why is any comparison needed? Does that fact that things could be worse justify the EUs treatment of the refugees? That line of argument justifies any behaviour, including Trumps.
> 
> You still can't see beyond Leave or Remain. But that's irrelevant, the point is that the EU is currently constructing a border policy that is attacking the working class both internally or externally. Whether people voted Leave or Remain, whether they think the UK will be better off in the EU or outside is beside the point.


Tbh doesn't matter if it's the member states or the eu super-state, the state as we all know is the tool by which one class oppresses another. I would be more than a little startled if the eu did not hold true to that iron rule


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> You can't see beyond the prism of class.


I can but certainly class is the basis of my politics, that's why I'm a socialist.



Supine said:


> But that's irrelevant. The point is the EU countries are individually trying to deal with an influx of people from a multitude of countries. Some are eligible to enter the EU and some are not. I'm sure it isn't easy to determine which are which?


What does this mean? The because individual EU countries have their own immigration policies the EU as a body doesn't? That because it's hard to determine whether some people are eligible to enter the EU it's fine to put people into concentration camps and/or pay authoritarian regimes to administer such camps?



Supine said:


> What is your real politik solution? No borders, no sovereign states?


Ultimately yes. But on the day-to-day level to take actions that advance the solidarity and power of the working class. What's your "solution"?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> But on the day-to-day level to take actions that advance the solidarity and power of the working class.



What day-to-day actions are you taking that will protect, say, skilled manufacturing jobs that rely on complex just-in-time supply chains?


----------



## JimW (Jun 20, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What day-to-day actions are you taking that will protect, say, skilled manufacturing jobs that rely on complex just-in-time supply chains?


Surely be better to be taking actions that render those supply chains obsolete.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 20, 2018)

JimW said:


> Surely be better to be taking actions that render those supply chains obsolete.



What would those look like?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What day-to-day actions are you taking that will protect, say, skilled manufacturing jobs that rely on complex just-in-time supply chains?


I'm not going to get into a silly pissing contest about what I have or haven't done (how the hell are you going to know the truth anyway) but there are plenty of actions that people can, and do, take to fight for working class power in their communities and workplaces. Taking strike action, being active in a union, getting involved in a residents association, trying to organise to keep local services open etc etc


----------



## JimW (Jun 20, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What would those look like?


Have a flick through any number of history books to see the many and varied ways working class people have organised to improve their material circumstances and resist the impositions of capital.
I realise you're hammering a 'realpolitik' point but it's almost never your best interest, certainly not as a goal.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not going to get into a silly pissing contest about what I have or haven't done (how the hell are you going to know the truth anyway) but their are plenty of actions that people can, and do, take to fight for working class power in their communities and workplaces. Taking strike action, being active in a union, getting involved in a residents association, trying to organise to keep local services open etc etc



My main gig these days is helping run a community centre. In my previous life I was involved in unionising a large financial services workplace, just so you know where I'm coming from.  I'm not the enemy here.

Much of the energy of left activists I see is wasted energy - there's so much internal infighting at all levels - battles about ideological purity and ego. I'm sure you know this. The trouble is there's a rough beast slouching towards Bethlehem right now, and we're going to need the centrist dads and the melts and god knows who else onside to try and stop it. 

Yes, I've had a drink.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 20, 2018)

This.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 21, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The trouble is there's a rough beast slouching towards Bethlehem right now, and we're going to need the centrist dads and the melts and god knows who else onside to try and stop it.


But what is that rough beast? It's not ideological purity to point out that the rough beast is not Britain leaving the UK but capitalism (in particular neo-liberalism), that the 'right now' goes back the last 30+ years nor that the EU is a key component of this 'rough beast'.

Nor is it ideological purity to recognise the fundamental political differences between socialism, social democracy and liberalism. That doesn't preclude one from working with 'centrist dads' on specific actions but it is both foolish and ahistorical not to see the break between the politics of liberal(-left) and the socialist left.


----------



## Supine (Jun 21, 2018)

JimW said:


> Surely be better to be taking actions that render those supply chains obsolete.



Yeah, let's all drive Austin allegro's or walk to work. New phone? Nah, the revolution got rid of those things


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> Yeah, let's all drive Austin allegro's or walk to work. New phone? Nah, the revolution got rid of those things


Operative word was just-in-time supply. Christ knows why you think that's the sole supplier of innovation.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Why is any comparison needed? Does that fact that things could be worse justify the EUs treatment of the refugees? That line of argument justifies any behaviour, including Trumps.
> 
> You still can't see beyond Leave or Remain. But that's irrelevant, the point is that the EU is currently constructing a border policy that is attacking the working class both internally or externally. Whether people voted Leave or Remain, whether they think the UK will be better off in the EU or outside is beside the point.



I don’t think making a comparison does justify those policies or those attacks. I think that’s what the Leave vote does. It says make it a fortress or this thing falls apart.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I mean this is the type of crap that undermines Cadwalladr's credibility and shows her politics
> 
> (my emphasis). I wasn't aware we were at war on Russia in 2016.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 21, 2018)

Have we moved on to the imminent revolution now?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 21, 2018)

This thread is boring. But then mainstream political discourse these days is boring. It's all stuck in a loop that didn't reflect any real world reality in the first place.

The Brexit referendum presented what was on paper a binary choice as the solution to a debate that wasn't a binary debate. In the end people didn't really vote on the questions that were on the ballot paper, because that's not really what the debate was about.

Now, according to liberal remainers, if you voted leave it was about racism or in aid of racism, completely ignoring the EU policy towards migrants from outwith its borders.

I can't get onboard with that kind of wilful blinkeredness. The more these people chunter on the further removed I feel from their concerns and their objectives. Their world is not relevant to mine. Their interests are not mine.

Neither, of course, is the worldview the Tory leavers in my interests.

So the polarisation of this debate into two camps that mean nothing to me leaves me and countless others on the sidelines watching two teams who don't represent me slap each other with floppy hands. And we're told there's only two teams and we have to pick one. Fuck them both.

It wasn't long after the vote that I began to wish I'd abstained. But I'm coming to the conclusion that I wish I'd actively campaigned for an abstentionist position. Maybe a vocal abstentionist campaign then would have reminded the public discourse now that there's another world out here beyond the Telegraph or the Guardian.

But it's too late now, and public discourse is stuck in a referendum debate that passed me by in the first place.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 21, 2018)

Short thread. “Inaction at this point would be an improvement.” Quite. 




[Q


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 21, 2018)

Not going to click onto Twitter to read a Twitter thread, but I approve of the sentiment I can see in the embedded tweet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> (my emphasis). I wasn't aware we were at war on Russia in 2016.


we have always been at war with eurasia


----------



## teqniq (Jun 21, 2018)

danny la rouge As I said upthread, I abstained by spoiling my ballot paper. I would be interested to know how many people did the same, rather than not actually bothering to turn up at the polling station.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Not going to click onto Twitter to read a Twitter thread, but I approve of the sentiment I can see in the embedded tweet.


It links directly to the letter in the Graun.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 21, 2018)

teqniq said:


> It links directly to the letter in the Graun.


Cheers.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 21, 2018)

teqniq said:


> It links directly to the letter in the Graun.


Depends which bit of the box you press, avoid that shit rag by desperately prodding Ayoub’s text


----------



## teqniq (Jun 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Depends which bit of the box you press, avoid that shit rag by desperately prodding Ayoub’s text


Their 'coverage' of the Labour live event was so transparent as to be laughable so I take your point, but the letter is worth a read.


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

I can never read embedded tweets but can't be arsed to get a VPN so I can. Always appreciate a screenshot instead but realise not everyone is set up to do that easily


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 21, 2018)

JimW said:


> I can never read embedded tweets but can't be arsed to get a VPN so I can. Always appreciate a screenshot instead but realise not everyone is set up to do that easily


----------



## teqniq (Jun 21, 2018)

JimW said:


> I can never read embedded tweets but can't be arsed to get a VPN so I can. Always appreciate a screenshot instead but realise not everyone is set up to do that easily


direct linky to letter

EU inaction over Mediterranean migrants is criminal | Letters


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

Cheers folks!


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

Is Penard the letter-writer being circumspect due to having to collaborate with EU agencies rather than really thinking it's mere inaction?


----------



## teqniq (Jun 21, 2018)

JimW said:


> Is Penard the letter-writer being circumspect due to having to collaborate with EU agencies rather than really thinking it's mere inaction?



Possibly circumspect I think. As you will have seen he touches on the issue of Libya but has nothing to say about Turkey or the situation in Greece. I would think it nigh on impossible though that someone in his position would be unaware, in any event Joey Ayoub is not having any truck with 'inaction'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I mean this is the type of crap that undermines Cadwalladr's credibility and shows her politics
> (my emphasis). I wasn't aware we were at war on Russia in 2016.



There's a difference between 'hostile nation' and 'nation we're at war with'. Russia being hostile in general terms doesn't seem that controversial to me.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2018)

I am going to wager that we are going for a hard acrimonious brexit here. the moral and intellectual failings of our government will manifest in a fuck up of huge proportions. As Danny said, the path we are heading  is a drawn out  scuffle between sides I have no connection with. Wish I had abstained or whatevs.


----------



## Supine (Jun 21, 2018)

JimW said:


> Operative word was just-in-time supply. Christ knows why you think that's the sole supplier of innovation.



I don't see it that way - and didn't say I did. JIT supply is just a way to manage inventory levels. Genuinely interested to know why you think that is a bad thing. 

It's an important point as leaving EU means all manufacturing companies that rely on a global supply chain will look to leave the UK. And this will result in job losses which can't be a good thing.


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> I don't see it that way - and didn't say I did. JIT supply is just a way to manage inventory levels. Genuinely interested to know why you think that is a bad thing.
> 
> It's an important point as leaving EU means all manufacturing companies that rely on a global supply chain will look to leave the UK. And this will result in job losses which can't be a good thing.


Well from my point of view you shouldn't start out with what best suits transnational capital on your mind or your politics will never leave the current framework. There will always be negative consequences to a genuine attempt to redress the social order; either you say the game's not worth the candle and accept what an increasingly remote technocracy gives you or you try to set your own agenda.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 21, 2018)

read something the other day talking about the ability of the state to deliver a (however very!)limited set of democratic representation to it voters is eroding faster and faster. I mean, its only been around for 100 years in its current form (the vote) but still. Made me think of the EU and the reff's getting repeated, italy told how to vote , technocrats not democrats etc etc.

rambling


----------



## JimW (Jun 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> read something the other day talking about the ability of the state to deliver a (however very!)limited set of democratic representation to it voters is eroding faster and faster. I mean, its only been around for 100 years in its current form (the vote) but still. Made me think of the EU and the reff's getting repeated, italy told how to vote , technocrats not democrats etc etc.
> 
> rambling


Seen this put in various ways, one saying just because popular democracy and industrial capitalism developed in broadly the same time and place theyve been assumed to be inextricable but if places like China show you can have latter without former then we can guess where we're headed.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> You can't see beyond the prism of class. But that's irrelevant.



Ban/bullet surely? Comrade is showing some liberal tendencies.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 21, 2018)

hmm

i have heard that we are now heading for a face off and hardish brexit- source is usually right and very well connected ( saddam husseins WMD weapons stash briefing excluded - and i do bring that up at every opportunity)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 21, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> hmm
> 
> i have heard that we are now heading for a face off and hardish brexit- source is usually right and very well connected ( saddam husseins WMD weapons stash briefing excluded - and i do bring that up at every opportunity)



Of course we are, there really can’t be any other option, Mayhem should just tell ‘em to do one and get on with it. 

There will be no deal from the EU.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 21, 2018)

I don't think Fortress Europe is a valid reason for leaving the EU because the Fortress Britain that comes as part of the package of Brexit is likely to be worse than Fortress Europe. The right-wingers who voted for Brexit were not voting as a protest against Fortress Europe.  They were voting as a protest that EU border area policies were not not strong enough.  Add onto this a layer of xenophobia over Eastern Europeans. I believe that any border that attempts to be porous to a trade in goods and capital but tries to block the flow of people is immoral both in a human rights context but also in the way that it preserves the whip hand for Capital over workers.

I understand the short term reasons for these policies in terms of protecting welfare states in developed countries, and also, to an extent, the very concept of a nation state.

But in the long run the incoherent policies of Free trade in goods and capital, but no free flow of labour, will fail and there is no transition plan to Open Borders. The EU hasn't got a coherent policy on this and Britain on its own wont have one. If there is a path to a solution of these problems, I believe that is likely to be a multilateral one.  Britain turning its back on Europe is not likely to lead to any good solutions on this.

I am very much influenced by Sorious Samura in this.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 22, 2018)

All you need to add in there is something about a Seat at the Table and it’s perfect.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 22, 2018)

If the Remain campaign had tried to scare people with fake front pages supposedly from 2 years after the Brexit vote, they might have looked something like this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If the Remain campaign had tried to scare people with fake front pages supposedly from 2 years after the Brexit vote, they might have looked something like this.
> 
> View attachment 138657


I find the fun fruit picking thing terrifying


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> All you need to add in there is something about a Seat at the Table and it’s perfect.


It's a short step from a seat to an arse


----------



## andysays (Jun 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I find the fun fruit picking thing terrifying


Picking fruit in the hot sun,
I fought the Job Centre and the Job Centre won...

*Awaits avalanche of fruit-related puns*


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 22, 2018)

Orange you glad to be working 12-hour days six days a week? lolnot


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 22, 2018)

.


----------



## 2hats (Jun 22, 2018)

Apropos of which...

Brexit Head Aviation Negotiator Job Only Just Advertised By Government


> As soon as the EU referendum result was announced almost two years ago, Britain’s airlines urged immediate action to safeguard the “open skies” agreement in Europe. However, the key role of “head of aviation EU exit negotiations” has only just been advertised. No experience of the airline business is necessary.
> 
> Air tickets typically go on sale almost a year ahead of departure. With no certainty about whether the current liberal aviation rules will continue after Brexit, airlines are selling flights from the UK to European Union airports which they may not be able to operate from 30 March 2019 onwards.
> 
> In addition, the UK has yet to negotiate a post-Brexit deal on transatlantic flights – which are presently governed by an EU-US treaty.



Looking like climate emissions targets are going to be easier to meet next year.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

2hats said:


> Apropos of which...
> 
> Brexit Head Aviation Negotiator Job Only Just Advertised By Government
> 
> ...


Paris airports will be busier


----------



## Supine (Jun 22, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If the Remain campaign had tried to scare people with fake front pages supposedly from 2 years after the Brexit vote, they might have looked something like this.
> 
> View attachment 138657



124,000 jobs going. So much for Labour and their jobs first brexit


----------



## andysays (Jun 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Orange you glad to be working 12-hour days six days a week? lolnot


Not planning to appley for a fruit picking job then?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 22, 2018)

My hazy memories of fruit picking seem to be entirely fun free


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> All you need to add in there is something about a Seat at the Table and it’s perfect.



Its not about control and the apocryphal smoke-filled rooms its about looking at a positive  freer vision for the people movement around the world and a fairer world economy and not thinking we need to lock ourselves away in a dark Brexit hellhole to get there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I don't think Fortress Europe is a valid reason for leaving the EU because the Fortress Britain that comes as part of the package of Brexit is likely to be worse than Fortress Europe.


This is what I was talking about. This is what bores me.

The criticism of the EU you are responding to is that it is "funding border countries, made a notorious deal with Turkey trading humans, keeps many migrants in defacto prisons and even provides boats for border countries. That's not inaction. That's criminal activity." And your response is "the EU isn't as bad as the non-EU UK might become".  Sorry, but that's not a response. 

The criticism is "the EU itself has done nothing but strengthen human smugglers and traffickers in the name of 'fighting human trafficking' which is Orwellian code for 'let them drown in the sea or die in border countries'". And your response is "that's not a reason to leave the EU".

Well, here's the thing. The UK _is_ leaving the EU. That debate ended two years ago. You thinking that the reply to every criticism of the EU is still "that's still not a reason to leave the EU" is entirely missing the point. It's not all about you. You and the Tory Brexiteers standing face to face with floppy slapping hands is not the entirety of politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This is what I was talking about. This is what bores me.
> 
> The criticism of the EU you are responding to is that it is "funding border countries, made a notorious deal with Turkey trading humans, keeps many migrants in defacto prisons and even provides boats for border countries. That's not inaction. That's criminal activity." And your response is "the EU isn't as bad as the non-EU UK might become".  Sorry, but that's not a response.
> 
> ...


You say floppy slapping hands, I say effete and ineffectual


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2018)

Thread can be closed now then


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Its not about control and the apocryphal smoke-filled rooms its about looking at a positive  freer vision for the people movement around the world and a fairer world economy and not thinking we need to lock ourselves away in a dark Brexit hellhole to get there.


The smoke filled rooms proverbial not apocryphal. Say what you like about the eu or hmg but pls don't so mutilate the English language.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You say floppy slapping hands, I say effete and ineffectual


Either way, the picture is of people drowning and shouting for help and those on the shore replying "but Boris and Farage" *flop, flop, slap*.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 22, 2018)

We can be certain that in the 21st century, there are no smoke-filled rooms in the EU.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Thread can be closed now then


What, you think May's game plan is to get to March next year and say, "we tried but it can't be done"? 

Don't be daft.


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Either way, the picture is of people drowning and shouting for help and those on the shore replying "but Boris and Farage" *flop, flop, slap*.



Danny - do you think the UK will be better placed to help those people from outside the EU or is it mainly a point of (understandable) principle that you simply do not want to be part of a club that has those policies?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Winot said:


> Danny - do you think the UK will be better placed to help those people from outside the EU or is it mainly a point of (understandable) principle that you simply do not want to be part of a club that has those policies?


What has happened is that everything is now being seen through that polarising prism I was bemoaning on the last page. That you are asking this question two years on, honestly and sincerely I have no doubt, is evidence of that. 

However, for the record, I voted Remain.


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What has happened is that everything is now being seen through that polarising prism I was bemoaning on the last page. That you are asking this question two years on, honestly and sincerely I have no doubt, is evidence of that.
> 
> However, for the record, I voted Remain.



It’s being seen through that prism on this thread because this is the Brexit thread...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Winot said:


> It’s being seen through that prism on this thread because this is the Brexit thread...


Brexit is being discussed because it's a current affairs issue. But rerunning the referendum every time a Brexit item comes up isn't useful. Replying to every criticism of the EU with "but Farage" isn't useful. Thinking that the only two possible camps are liberal remainers or Tory Brexiters isn't useful or true. People are stuck. And that's a void of politics. And it's stopping some people from actually seeing the real world out there.

I mean _look_ at toblerone3's response to those criticisms that Joey Ayoub levies. FFS.


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Brexit is being discussed because it's a current affairs issue. But rerunning the referendum every time a Brexit item comes up isn't useful. Replying to every criticism of the EU with "but Farage" isn't useful. Thinking that the only two possible camps are liberal remainers or Tory Brexiters isn't useful or true. People are stuck. And that's a void of politics. And it's stopping some people from actually seeing the real world out there.



Yes I take your point. It's understandable though that on a thread specifically about Brexit, people with strong views about Brexit make posts which are based on their views about Brexit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yes I take your point. It's understandable though that on a thread specifically about Brexit, people with strong views about Brexit make posts which are based on their views about Brexit.


But they're going round in circles.  That's why the thread's boring.  OK, they wanted Remain to win.  Fine.  But now what?  That's going to be their response to every criticism of the EU?  And even if we're merely narrowly discussing the Brexit process, that's still a pretty boring response 275 pages on, no?


----------



## Supine (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But they're going round in circles.  That's why the thread's boring.  OK, they wanted Remain to win.  Fine.  But now what?



Maybe not a thread you should keep reading then. For a lot of remainers the battle isn't over. It's too important to just ignore and hope it all goes away.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> Maybe not a thread you should keep reading then. For a lot of remainers the battle isn't over. It's too important to just ignore and hope it all goes away.


If it was only this thread that might be a solution. Sadly, it's the entire level of mainstream political discourse.


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But they're going round in circles.  That's why the thread's boring.  OK, they wanted Remain to win.  Fine.  But now what?  That's going to be their response to every criticism of the EU?  And even if we're merely narrowly discussing the Brexit process, that's still a pretty boring response 275 pages on, no?



Even if one accepts that the UK is leaving the EU, there's a huge amount to discuss in terms of the 'how'. I think Supine is right, you need to put the thread on ignore.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But they're going round in circles.  That's why the thread's boring.  OK, they wanted Remain to win.  Fine.  But now what?  That's going to be their response to every criticism of the EU?  And even if we're merely narrowly discussing the Brexit process, that's still a pretty boring response 275 pages on, no?



If the responses to the criticisms of the EU are boring, maybe the criticisms of the EU are boring too. Both sides of the discussion can stop going on about the EU border policies because that's now irrelevant to discussions about how the UK actually 'does' Brexit.

We could talk about the details of how we do the Brexit, how to resolve the tricky problems like the Irish border and so on. But, those who voted remain don't have many solutions for problems they voted to not have in the first place, and most of the Brexit representatives on this thread say it's not Brexiters' problem to solve the problems. Proposed courses of action in response to Brexit include joining residents' associations.

Given the above, what is there left to discuss on this thread?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If the responses to the criticisms of the EU are boring, maybe the criticisms of the EU are boring too.


Christ.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> 124,000 jobs going. So much for Labour and their jobs first brexit



Yes, the jobs go first.

Alex


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Christ.



_I don't like some of the EU's border policies. I see the UK leaving the EU as a positive move in light of this._ = not boring

_I don't like some of the EU's border policies. I do not see the UK leaving the EU as a positive move in light of this._ = boring


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> _I don't like some of the EU's border policies. I see the UK leaving the EU as a positive move in light of this._ = not boring
> 
> _I don't like some of the EU's border policies. I do not see the UK leaving the EU as a positive move in light of this._ = boring


I'm sorry you're bored that people are dying. What can we do to rid you of this troublesome ennui?


----------



## Raheem (Jun 22, 2018)

So, Danny, it seems like you are declining to take sides over Brexit.

Is that what people mean when they talk about the Swiss model?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> So, Danny, it seems like you are declining to take sides over Brexit


What does that even mean? That's such a meaningless thing to say.

Did you see where I told you how I'd voted?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm sorry you're bored that people are dying. What can we do to rid you of this troublesome ennui?


remove the lock from a toilet door


----------



## Raheem (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What does that even mean? That's such a meaningless thing to say.
> 
> Did you see where I told you how I'd voted?



I only saw the part where you went on and on about how you wish you'd abstained and how everyone but you doesn't understand anything. Apologies if I'm misinterpreting any of it, though. I'll confess to skim-reading a bit.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm sorry you're bored that people are dying.



Christ.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I only saw the part where you went on and on about how you wish you'd abstained and how everyone but you doesn't understand anything. Apologies if I'm misinterpreting any of it, though. I'll confess to skim-reading a bit.


Yes. I wish I'd abstained. Liberal remainers in 2018 make me wish I'd abstained.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Christ.


You're the one who said the criticisms of EU migrant policy were boring.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Christ.


I'm sure brexit will help them.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 22, 2018)

As a liberal remainer, the choice for me was between the EU and a brexit with the likes of Farage, Dacre, Gove coupled with an economic crash, I'm not sure criticising the EU has an effect, the alternative is worse.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I only saw the part where you went on and on about how you wish you'd abstained and how everyone but you doesn't understand anything. Apologies if I'm misinterpreting any of it, though. I'll confess to skim-reading a bit.


Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm not sure criticising the EU has an effect, the alternative is worse.


So no point in any criticism of the EU. Keep them all to ourselves. Zip it. Because Farage.  Got it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So no point in any criticism of the EU. Keep them all to ourselves. Zip it. Because Farage.  Got it.


You can criticise it all you like but you also have to deal with what the alternative is.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You can criticise it all you like but you also have to deal with what the alternative is.


Why are you framing it that way?

What else does that work with? If I criticise the Israeli State's actions against Palestinians do I have to think about the states that are worse than Israel? If I criticise the Assad regime in Syria do I have to answer "whataboutery" questions on other dispicable regimes? If I dislike something the UK government does after Brexit will I have to first deal with whether North Korea is worse?

Criticism of these states or regimes does not imply support for someone else that you want to say is worse. This is basic stuff people.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Criticism of these states or regimes does not imply support for someone else that you want to say is worse. This is basic stuff people.


It does, because it was, and still is, a binary choice.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It does, because it was, and still is, a binary choice.


And so no criticism of the EU is possible. Pick a team.

OK. Neither.


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 22, 2018)

JimW said:


> Seen this put in various ways, one saying just because popular democracy and industrial capitalism developed in broadly the same time and place theyve been assumed to be inextricable but if places like China show you can have latter without former then we can guess where we're headed.



Centrists are more hostile to democracy than others

I think this isn't even hidden in some of the loudest Remainer voices.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 22, 2018)

A binary question but an apparent plurality of outcomes, soft hard, second reff, lexit EFTA grieves non rebellion etc etc

Good bit from Larry Elliot yesterday on liberal defeatism lol


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm not sure criticising the EU has an effect, the alternative is worse.


Fuck me that's poor. Are you really that short sighted?
The alternative(s) will be developing over time, as will the EU.
As I've said here numerous times, there is no status quo. The UK always had one foot outside the EU (no euro, no schengen, rebates etc) and post brexit we may end up with only a couple of toes still in the Eu. Maybe none.
The EU can't stand still. They'll be driving policies that are largely built on a federalisation of the Euro block. The UK aren't at that table and was told in no uncertain terms (whilst still in the EU - referendum not even announced) that its opinion there is worthless.
So 3, maybe 5 years down the line it's just a matter of how many toes of that one foot you want to have in or out of the Eu.
Just because you voted remain, doesent absolve you from airing any opinions to criticisms of the Eu. Quite the contrary.
You should quite easily be able to sell me the idea that the UK should adopt the Euro as its prime currency.
Or suggest how the UKs sterling economy benefits from not being aligned to the Euro economy's decision making process, dispite being inextricably bound to it in a political union.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> Centrists are more hostile to democracy than others
> 
> I think this isn't even hidden in some of the loudest Remainer voices.


ah - but hostile to what democracy?

a limited selection of fat pig representative in parliament is not imo democracy, not when you have no real say over, precious little way to select or hold accountable, the people who exert a more immediate authority over your life like bosses or landlords.

it is not 'democracy' that has led us to the pretty pass we find ourselves in, but an absence of democracy, even in the stunted version so proudly held up by politicians of all stripes.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> Picking fruit in the hot sun,
> I fought the Job Centre and the Job Centre won...
> 
> *Awaits avalanche of fruit-related puns*



Strawberry Fields forever unpicked.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> 124,000 jobs going. So much for Labour and their jobs first brexit



This. 

Emily Thornberry sparks Labour row after accusing Brexit rebels of 'dishonesty'

She may be right about Mr Umunna's motives BUT  for those who have, over the last decade actually looked at how to do Brexit, the Norway route (even as a transition) was the job friendly  way of doing it.  If we had a political class worth anything, the last two years would have been work towards that and manage expectations accordingly.  Instead those views have been marginalised, and we are stuck with working out which of the two groups close minded cunts are the lesser of the two evils, - the ones who would undermine democracy or the ones who would undermine the economy....


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If the responses to the criticisms of the EU are boring, maybe the criticisms of the EU are boring too. Both sides of the discussion can stop going on about the EU border policies because that's now irrelevant to discussions about how the UK actually 'does' Brexit.
> 
> We could talk about the details of how we do the Brexit, how to resolve the tricky problems like the Irish border and so on. But, those who voted remain don't have many solutions for problems they voted to not have in the first place, and most of the Brexit representatives on this thread say it's not Brexiters' problem to solve the problems. Proposed courses of action in response to Brexit include joining residents' associations.
> 
> Given the above, what is there left to discuss on this thread?



Only real way to do the Irish border was to renege on GFA, acknowledge we have, and call for UN arbitration.  Instead we've just put on the statute book  no infastructure ...which is nuts if you have beyond a superfical grasp of what gets checked, (either that or Brexit don't mean Brexit).


In terms of how the UK actually does Brexit, I had hoped people might have responded when I linked to Brexit preparedness -  coz chances are one of the click throughs WILL impact on you


----------



## philosophical (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> Only real way to do the Irish border was to renege on GFA, acknowledge we have, and call for UN arbitration.  Instead we've just put on the statute book  no infastructure ...which is nuts if you have beyond a superfical grasp of what gets checked, (either that or Brexit don't mean Brexit).
> 
> 
> In terms of how the UK actually does Brexit, I had hoped people might have responded when I linked to Brexit preparedness -  coz chances are one of the click throughs WILL impact on you



Are you suggesting UN military to manage the physical border?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 22, 2018)

Mathew and the son the works never done were always picking fruit! The flies round your head you itch in your bed it’s never ever through!

Midges, you know. I was never good at puns.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 22, 2018)

Grapes of wrath


----------



## Winot (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> In terms of how the UK actually does Brexit, I had hoped people might have responded when I linked to Brexit preparedness -  coz chances are one of the click throughs WILL impact on you



Hadn't seen that before as a complete list. Had seen the one that is relevant to my area. We are all horribly aware of the impact - as for the solution, that is up for negotiation, as is the case I imagine for every sector. Trouble is the minutiae of the sector-by-sector negotiation is awaiting the big picture negotiation. And on that we wait.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

more likely to be a jackson pollock than a detailed illustration


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you suggesting UN military to manage the physical border?



No.  But as you move apart, there is a need for border checks and that is a breach of GFA.  Arbitration should be done by UN, it was/is an Internationally recognised treaty.
And the venom could have been removed by pointing out this wasn't over concerns about AK47s and Semtex but the bureaucratic necessity over things like horse meat and non CE and kite marked goods


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> kite marked goods


my planned smuggling operation involves flying kites laden with contraband over the border


----------



## philosophical (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> No.  But as you move apart, there is a need for border checks and that is a breach of GFA.  Arbitration should be done by UN, it was/is an Internationally recognised treaty.
> And the venom could have been removed by pointing out this wasn't over concerns about AK47s and Semtex but the bureaucratic necessity over things like horse meat and non CE and kite marked goods



How do you envisage those border checks in practical terms?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Fuck me that's poor. Are you really that short sighted?
> The alternative(s) will be developing over time, as will the EU.


For sure, and I don't want the alternative that the Tories are planning.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> the Tories are planning


They are?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> my planned smuggling operation involves flying kites laden with contraband over the border


 
Kites didn't work out too well in Gaza the other week


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 22, 2018)

You know what - the idea of the blue helmets parachuting in to take control this country is becoming increasingly attractive. without the sex and abuse scandals obviously.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't want the alternative that the Tories are planning.


Right.  But why does that preclude seeing what's wrong with the EU?  And is your whole opposition to what the Tories are planning rooted in re-running in your head a vote that took place 2 years ago?  Can't you think of ways you can, I don't know, oppose Tory policies?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Right.  But why does that preclude seeing what's wrong with the EU?  And is your whole opposition to what the Tories are planning rooted in re-running in your head a vote that took place 2 years ago?  Can't you think of ways you can, I don't know, oppose Tory policies?



A) This is the Brexit thread.
B) Brexit hasn't started yet, they are in fact struggling to deliver anything like the things promised and it could well bring them down, so in that sense it is still a live issue.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How do you envisage those border checks in practical terms?



weighbridges under each lane and gantries for cameras (number plate/facial re-cog) and transponder readers  - so your average experience is straight through an automated system having emailed manifest in advance.  Inspection facilities with holding pound for things gone off for testing to be used on suspicious loads and the agreed number of third nation agreed random inspections.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Right.  But why does that preclude seeing what's wrong with the EU?  And is your whole opposition to what the Tories are planning rooted in re-running in your head a vote that took place 2 years ago?  Can't you think of ways you can, I don't know, oppose Tory policies?


It's perfectly easy to despise the eu, despise the British government, and still feel remaining a better bet all round than the alternative while opposing a second referendum


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> weighbridges under each lane and gantries for cameras (number plate/facial re-cog) and transponder readers  - so your average experience is straight through an automated system having emailed manifest in advance.  Inspection facilities with holding pound for things gone off for testing to be used on suspicious loads and the agreed number of third nation agreed random inspections.



Facial recognition is the modern version of TV licence detector vans. It would lovely for the state if such a thing were possible so they just pretend that it actually is.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's perfectly easy to despise the eu, despise the British government, and still feel remaining a better bet all round than the alternative while opposing a second referendum



I mostly just don't want to sit through the intolerable hullabaloo both sides would create between them during a second referendum.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Facial recognition is the modern version of TV licence detector vans. It would lovely for the state if such a thing were possible so they just pretend that it actually is.



It is, its just far from perfect but will only get better


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> A) This is the Brexit thread.


I'm sorry to repeat myself, but once again: I don't support the Tory Brexiteers either.  I don't support them, their world view, their plans, their class function, their function in the polity of the state.  And that includes the way they are conducting Brexit, and their vision of the shape of a post Brexit UK.  That does not preclude me from being critical of the EU.  (And to those who think it is still possible to stay in the EU, I say this: regardless of your preference on belonging or not belonging, refusing to brook any criticism of the EU on the grounds that you don't like the Tories is hypocrisy and cowardice at best, and complicity in criminal and anti-human action at worst).



> B) Brexit hasn't started yet, they are in fact struggling to deliver anything like the things promised and it could well bring them down, so in that sense it is still a live issue.


Yes, it's a live issue.  It's a current affairs issue.  And it's perfectly possible to discuss its progress and the Tory handling of it and their vision without wanting to be in one of the two narrowly defined camps the mainstream media wants to pop everyone into.  I don't feel I belong to either of the camps, nor do I share their interests.  Nor they mine.  But I still take an interest in what's going on.  (And by the way, regardless of whether or not May in particular, or the Tories in general, are brought down over their handling of Brexit, that doesn't mean Brexit itself will be halted.  Who is going to do that?  A May replacement isn't going to back out of Brexit. Labour aren't going to back out of Brexit.  The Lib Dems aren't going to have and power in the matter. A referendum was held.  Remain lost. Brexit is going ahead).


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's perfectly easy to despise the eu, despise the British government, and still feel remaining a better bet all round than the alternative while opposing a second referendum


All manner of positions are possible that aren't the polarisation the media (including opinion pollsters, having taken part in many a YouGov poll on the matter) seem to want to portray.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> weighbridges under each lane and gantries for cameras (number plate/facial re-cog) and transponder readers  - so your average experience is straight through an automated system having emailed manifest in advance.  Inspection facilities with holding pound for things gone off for testing to be used on suspicious loads and the agreed number of third nation agreed random inspections.


There are over 200 crossing points so your idea will cost a fortune, will it deal with the movement of individual people, and how about properties that span the border?


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There are over 200 crossing points so your idea will cost a fortune, will it deal with the movement of individual people, and how about properties that span the border?



No, we have a free movement of people treaty with Eire that pre dates EU, and they ain't in Schengen, so why bother.  Cross border property? - You don't get this do you? (possibly willfully) You cant sell jack shit into EUrope that doesn't meet its standards.  And the EU can't even start process of saying UK spec is still at EU spec until AFTER we have left....AT which point Mutual Recongnition Agreements (such as Australia did with the EU most likely/sensible path but even that takes time say 18months - the only work around to that was down the EEA EFTA route.	During this period UK becomes dumping ground for every shonky and counterfeit good that you can legally sell in EU.   This is why Airbus is going mental and Dutch have car industry not to use UK supply - Quality isn't proven to meet EU standards so it can't be used


----------



## philosophical (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> No, we have a free movement of people treaty with Eire that pre dates EU, and they ain't in Schengen, so why bother.  Cross border property? - You don't get this do you? (possibly willfully) You cant sell jack shit into EUrope that doesn't meet its standards.  And the EU can't even start process of saying UK spec is still at EU spec until AFTER we have left....AT which point Mutual Recongnition Agreements (such as Australia did with the EU most likely/sensible path but even that takes time say 18months - the only work around to that was down the EEA EFTA route.	During this period UK becomes dumping ground for every shonky and counterfeit good that you can legally sell in EU.   This is why Airbus is going mental and Dutch have car industry not to use UK supply - Quality isn't proven to meet EU standards so it can't be used



 When I said cross border property, I meant properties that span the border.
The thing you describe as a pre EU free movement of people treaty stopped, or was overtaken when both countries joined the EU. Are you suggesting that the ROI somehow revives that old treaty whilst the UK 'renages' on it's own international treaty the GFA?
You also mention above the notion of facial recognition which indicates that you wish to see some kind of restriction of the free movement of people anyway, and there remains the sheer practicalities of implementing your suggestion to take in the length of the border and the crossing points.
The devil is in the practical details and I am sorry but I don't believe the scenario you suggest should play out is practicable.


----------



## gosub (Jun 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> When I said cross border property, I meant properties that span the border.
> The thing you describe as a pre EU free movement of people treaty stopped, or was overtaken when both countries joined the EU. Are you suggesting that the ROI somehow revives that old treaty whilst the UK 'renages' on it's own international treaty the GFA?
> You also mention above the notion of facial recognition which indicates that you wish to see some kind of restriction of the free movement of people anyway, and there remains the sheer practicalities of implementing your suggestion to take in the length of the border and the crossing points.
> The devil is in the practical details and I am sorry but I don't believe the scenario you suggest should play out is practicable.



Properties IS STILL IRELLIVANT.

Common Travel Area - Wikipedia

Facial recog is for POI's and watchlist. Of your 400 crossing points - use the bribe the DUP got to chicane 350 of them, increase police patrols on 40 of them and actually make 10 fit for HGV purpose.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> It is, its just far from perfect but will only get better



And the better it gets the more grief it will cause for each person wrongly identified.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> <snip>.


Bang on the money as usual danny.


danny la rouge said:


> Criticism of these states or regimes does not imply support for someone else that you want to say is worse. This is basic stuff people.


Yep.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 22, 2018)

gosub said:


> Properties IS STILL IRELLIVANT.
> 
> Common Travel Area - Wikipedia
> 
> Facial recog is for POI's and watchlist. Of your 400 crossing points - use the bribe the DUP got to chicane 350 of them, increase police patrols on 40 of them and actually make 10 fit for HGV purpose.


em...on a scale of 1 to 10...1 being good and bad being 10...that's about a 58.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 22, 2018)

Anyway, Airbus. Pro Remainer multi international threatening to move abroad . Nationalise them IMO .


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 22, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Anyway, Airbus. Pro Remainer multi international threatening to move abroad . Nationalise them IMO .



Eh? You could nationalise the local factories, I guess, and then you'd have to figure out what to do with a whole bunch of aircraft wings with nothing to attach them to.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 22, 2018)

Not sure you can nationalise a foreign company.  I mean...at least wait until after brexit.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If the Remain campaign had tried to scare people with fake front pages supposedly from 2 years after the Brexit vote, they might have looked something like this.
> 
> View attachment 138657



Oh look, BMW have joined in.



pocketscience said:


> Personally, I can see them getting vindictive, instigating symbolic UK job losses at Airbus, BMW, Thales etc all completly overblown in the media (whilst the same companies are opening factories no end in the US and China currently).
> The UK electorate will be left with a blunt choice between accepting democracy or short term financial security and_ that's_ where a brexit result would most likely be ignored - by the public bottling it post brexit referendum.


Next week's EuroMillions predictions avalable here at £5 a shot.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jun 23, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Eh? You could nationalise the local factories, I guess, and then you'd have to figure out what to do with a whole bunch of aircraft wings with nothing to attach them to.



We could glue them to submarines so that they look like giant fuck off sharks.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jun 23, 2018)

Anti Brexit protest today at 12pm on Pall Mall. 

Lovely weather for it


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Eh? You could nationalise the local factories, I guess, and then you'd have to figure out what to do with a whole bunch of aircraft wings with nothing to attach them to.


Well even if repurposing the factory to produce something else and/or selling those wings are off the cards, what's wrong with the above?

Aren't you a social democrat? Don't you see the value in paying one person to dig a hole and another to fill it in?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Well even if repurposing the factory to produce something else and/or selling those wings are off the cards, what's wrong with the above?
> 
> Aren't you a social democrat? Don't you see the value in paying one person to dig a hole and another to fill it in?



Wut?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Wut?


Which bit are you confused by?

Even if all this nationalised factory does is produce airplane wings that are then dismantled what would be so bad about that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Which bit are you confused by?
> 
> Even if all this nationalised factory does is produce airplane wings that are then dismantled that would not be a bad things.


Perhaps the dismantled wings could then be taken to a second location and reassembled as submarine shark fins like Nine Bob Note suggested, where former bae workers could be employed


----------



## Supine (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Even if all this nationalised factory does is produce airplane wings that are then dismantled what would be so bad about that?



Your not being serious are you?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

I am entirely serious. I mean it would be better if this factory was repurposed so that it produced something that was of more use (and it would be an even better thing if the factory workers declared a soviet and took control of the means of production), but yes I don't think it would be a bad thing for the workers in the factory to be paid


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2018)

I'm calling "Poe" on comrade squirrel.

Envoyé des chiottes en utilisant Crapatalk


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm calling "Poe" on comrade squirrel.
> 
> Envoyé des chiottes en utilisant Crapatalk


Once upon a midnight dreary do you mean? You sound like you've been at the amontillado


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Even if all this nationalised factory does is produce airplane wings that are then dismantled what would be so bad about that?



Not sure that idea's gonna fly.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2018)

Submarines with shark fins'd be cool.
Since I'm hoping to be neighbours with the French navy in a few years' time, perhaps I'll suggest it to some matelots over a glass of red and a game of boules.


----------



## Winot (Jun 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Submarines with shark fins'd be cool.
> Since I'm hoping to be neighbours with the French navy in a few years' time, perhaps I'll suggest it to some matelots over a glass of red and a game of boules.



They could attach the wings to Corbyn’s nuke-less subs.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Not sure that idea's gonna fly.


Boom, boom.


gentlegreen said:


> I'm calling "Poe" on comrade squirrel.
> 
> Envoyé des chiottes en utilisant Crapatalk


Meaning?


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 23, 2018)

I'm not sure to what extent redsquirrel is trying to be satirical here, but I know people who work in that Airbus plant - like any highly skilled workers, they take a lot of pride in what they do, and they do it well, hard to imagine anything more demeaning than having them make wings that will never go on planes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Once upon a midnight dreary do you mean? You sound like you've been at the amontillado


Being illiterate, for me that conjures up  up Orson Welles rather than Vincent Price


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

Supine said:


> Your not being serious are you?


Capitalism claims to be efficient, but it pays lots of people to do things that don't need to be done. From business consultants to lobbyist to people paid to fix problems that don't exist or needn't exist. All manner of work that isn't really work is paid for by capitalism. It's not just in the public sector bureaucracies, like local government, that there is empire building and work creation in management. Businesses do it all the time. Meetings for the sake of meetings. People who think meetings are their work. And so on.

It's obviously better that useful things are done. But many people are paid to do things of no intrinsic worth.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Which bit are you confused by?
> 
> Even if all this nationalised factory does is produce airplane wings that are then dismantled what would be so bad about that?



A story that skilled workers could relate with pride to their grandchildren of how they worked on mighty flying craft and of how not a single life was lost in air travel from then on.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

People seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that capitalism exists to produce useful things. It doesn't; it exists to generate profit. 

Lots of useless stuff is produced.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> People seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that capitalism exists to produce useful things. It doesn't; it exists to generate profit.
> 
> Lots of useless stuff is produced.



No they are not, they are simply saying it’s neither right nor sustainable to add to that. Better to ensure people have the means to live and let them get on with living creative lives rather than create a state controlled nightmare.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 23, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Anti Brexit protest today at 12pm on Pall Mall.
> 
> Lovely weather for it



Anti-UK march in Stirling this afternoon. Lovely weather for it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not sure to what extent redsquirrel is trying to be satirical here, but I know people who work in that Airbus plant - like any highly skilled workers, they take a lot of pride in what they do, and they do it well, hard to imagine anything more demeaning than having them make wings that will never go on planes.


I'm not being satirical at all.
The position that there are benefits to person A to dig a hole and person B to fill that hole in (to use the classic example) is not radical, it's bog standard Keynesism. It was accepted by the majority of the political class in the West for decades, including Conservatives. 

That it now seems so out there to some people now just shows how success neo-liberalism has had in


> economics are the method, the object is to change the soul


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> No they are not, they are simply saying it’s neither right nor sustainable to add to that. Better to ensure people have the means to live and let them get on with living creative lives rather than create a state controlled nightmare.


I'm not proposing this be done.  I'm just saying there's much already done that is utterly bonkers but at least pays wages.


----------



## Supine (Jun 23, 2018)

It may not be radical but it is idiotic and environmentally unfriendly to dig a hole for no purpose. Why not just pay the workers to have a day off, at least they wouldn't be wasting their time.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not being satirical at all.
> The position that there are benefits to person A to dig a hole and person B to fill that hole in (to use the classic example) is not radical, it's bog standard Keynesism. It was accepted by the majority of the political class in the West for decades, including Conservatives.
> 
> That it now seems so out there to some people now just shows how success neo-liberalism has had in



You are a Viz character and I claim my £5. Nobody likes busywork.


----------



## billbond (Jun 23, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Anti Brexit protest today at 12pm on Pall Mall.
> 
> Lovely weather for it



was hoping for snow 

Too hot for me personally this weather, prefer it a bit cooler


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> You are a Viz character and I claim my £5. Nobody likes busywork.


Are you really unaware that this type of Keynesian social democracy was the political consensus for decades? That employing people for "useless" tasks was actually a good thing because it created employment, generated taxes etc? I'm genuinely surprised that you seem to disagree with this.


Mr Moose said:


> Better to ensure people have the means to live and let them get on with living creative lives rather *than create a state controlled nightmare.*


You think that was what the post-war consensus was?


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> No they are not, they are simply saying it’s neither right nor sustainable to add to that. Better to ensure people have the means to live and let them get on with living creative lives rather than create a state controlled nightmare.


Airbus would have problems surviving without state subsidies or state contracts


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 23, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Anti Brexit protest today at 12pm on Pall Mall.
> 
> Lovely weather for it


Just spotted a Periscope from a #freetommytard - seems like there's some sort of counter protest happening.



Spoiler: periscope stream



BasedWelshman @BasedWelshman1


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Just spotted a Periscope from a #freetommytard - seems like there's some sort of counter protest happening.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There are two marches , one for a second vote ( on first) and one for Brexit( a little later) . I suspect some members of the pro Brexit one probably blame the second vote supporters for TR jailing.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 23, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Airbus would have problems surviving without state subsidies or state contracts



Which is what airbus are shopping for.

Alex


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not being satirical at all.
> The position that there are benefits to person A to dig a hole and person B to fill that hole in (to use the classic example) is not radical, it's bog standard Keynesism. It was accepted by the majority of the political class in the West for decades, including Conservatives.



The idea that paying people to do meaningless work is a now-extinct midcentury centrist idea is pretty clearly nonsense. Neoliberalism has taken the dig-a-hole-and-fill-it-in model and run with it, so that now we have three consultants telling every digger how to hold his shovel and a dozen marketing people selling the newly filled-in hole as an exciting new digging opportunity. Only now the aim isn't to provide everyone with a decent standard of living, but to create endless new ways for one cunt to get rich off of someone else's digging.


----------



## JimW (Jun 23, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Which is what airbus are shopping for.
> 
> Alex


You can't scoff at people buying promises to the NHS on the side of a bus if you swallow this off Airbus hook line and sinker


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> re you really unaware that this type of Keynesian social democracy was the political consensus for decades? That employing people for "useless" tasks was actually a good thing because it created employment, generated taxes etc?


It's called the multiplier effect, and was applied openly by Labour and Tory governments alike. It's still applied less openly by the EU when it subsidises farming, for example, and by the UK and US when they subsidise arms manufacture and all manner of things that are no different in effect to public ownership of the "heights of the economy". Remember banks that were "too large to fail"? This isn't Milton Friedman, it's covert Keynes.

It'd be nice to have some infrastructure or useful equipment as a result of government-created demand, but for the economics of the multiplier effect to work it is not necessary.

This was the way things were openly done in the West, including the US, for many years. This is still the way neoliberalism subsidises the wealthy. It only applies the cold logic of the free market to the poor.

Given the choice, I'm with Keynes on this. To quote the man himself "we're all dead in the long run". (In other words, let's not wait for the market to create demand and let people suffer poverty for what might be generations until the upturn).

Governments prior to Thatcher agreed.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 23, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> There are two marches , one for a second vote ( on first) and one for Brexit( a little later) . I suspect some members of the pro Brexit one probably blame the second vote supporters for TR jailing.








What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The idea that paying people to do meaningless work is a now-extinct midcentury centrist idea is pretty clearly nonsense. Neoliberalism has taken the dig-a-hole-and-fill-it-in model and run with it, so that now we have three consultants telling every digger how to hold his shovel and a dozen marketing people selling the newly filled-in hole as an exciting new digging opportunity. Only now the aim isn't to provide everyone with a decent standard of living, but to create endless new ways for one cunt to get rich off of someone else's digging.


Indeed, and with the digger now on zero-hour contract


----------



## andysays (Jun 23, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> What could possibly go wrong?



It's Tommy vs Tony, the battle of the Robinsons


----------



## andysays (Jun 23, 2018)

And here's a report from the frontlines...

Brexit: Marchers demand final Brexit deal vote


----------



## J Ed (Jun 23, 2018)

This should be the last word on Brexit.


----------



## Santino (Jun 23, 2018)

J Ed said:


> This should be the last word on Brexit.


It might mean that to you. To me it doesn't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

Santino said:


> It might mean that to you. To me it doesn't.


This deserves a fraction of a like.  

Can we not have ratings likes? A stars system.  1 - 5 would be ample.


----------



## gosub (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This deserves a fraction of a like.
> 
> Can we not have ratings likes? A stars system.  1 - 5 would be ample.


This can only lead to like mining which is even drafter than bitcoin


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> This can only lead to like mining which is even drafter than bitcoin


We wouldn't want that. Nobody ever fishes for likes at the moment.

*waits for likes to pile up*


----------



## J Ed (Jun 23, 2018)

Just looking at vids, seeing comments from people who are at the march today and it just strikes me how parochial and directionless these people are. They seem to want to simultaneously demonise the Labour leadership and also put Corbyn forward as some sort of superman figure that with enough hectoring will put on a cape and save them from Brexit. 

I think that to say they have learned nothing since the referendum would be far too generous.


----------



## JimW (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> We wouldn't want that. Nobody ever fishes for likes at the moment.
> 
> *waits for likes to pile up*


Oh, go on then


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> We wouldn't want that. Nobody ever fishes for likes at the moment.
> 
> *waits for likes to pile up*


Have a pity like


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Just looking at vids, seeing comments from people who are at the march today and it just strikes me how parochial and directionless these people are. They seem to want to simultaneously demonise the Labour leadership and also put Corbyn forward as some sort of superman figure that with enough hectoring will put on a cape and save them from Brexit.
> 
> I think that to say they have learned nothing since the referendum would be far too generous.


They have like the bourbons learned nothing and forgotten nothing


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> They have like the bourbons learned nothing and forgotten nothing


The custard creams, on the other hand, are swats.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The custard creams, on the other hand, are swats.


Killed many a fly with a thrown custard cream


----------



## alex_ (Jun 23, 2018)

JimW said:


> You can't scoff at people buying promises to the NHS on the side of a bus if you swallow this off Airbus hook line and sinker



The only reason that Airbus has production all across Europe is historic political reasons - from the days when it was a conglomerate of state owned business and every nation had to get their share.

There is no way it is commercially sensible to make wings hundreds of miles away from fuselages. 

Look at this map Comment Airbus livre ses avions ? remorques ?

It sounds pretty sensible to consolidate some of this if someone was telling you they were going to try to make this even harder to run.

Alex


----------



## teqniq (Jun 23, 2018)

Whilst that may well be partly true I was having a conversation with a friend earlier today and he told me one of the main drivers to having the manufacturing split over a number of countries was to avoid trade tariffs with the U.S.


----------



## gosub (Jun 23, 2018)

alex_ said:


> The only reason that Airbus has production all across Europe is historic political reasons - from the days when it was a conglomerate of state owned business and every nation had to get their share.
> 
> There is no way it is commercially sensible to make wings hundreds of miles away from fuselages.
> 
> ...



All true.  Wing is the most complex bit though and UK ended up with it due having a world class aerospace sector , that has been trashed over the last 60 years - at one point the Head of British *Aerospace * actually publicly stated "we are going to concentrate on our core business of making nuclear *submarines*", and the other was geology ; wings were carved out of a single piece of aluminium - Wales lack of earth quakes gave them an advantage and they still wrecked a couple, composites have changed that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 23, 2018)

alex_ said:


> The only reason that Airbus has production all across Europe is historic political reasons - from the days when it was a conglomerate of state owned business and every nation had to get their share.
> 
> There is no way it is commercially sensible to make wings hundreds of miles away from fuselages.
> 
> ...




Boeing aircraft are made all over the place and sent to Washington for final assembly, it is a model that does work.


----------



## alex_ (Jun 23, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Boeing aircraft are made all over the place and sent to Washington for final assembly, it is a model that does work.



It’ll be done for political reasons there too.

Alex


----------



## billbond (Jun 23, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This deserves a fraction of a like.
> 
> Can we not have ratings likes? A stars system.  1 - 5 would be





J Ed said:


> Just looking at vids, seeing comments from people who are at the march today and it just strikes me how parochial and directionless these people are. They seem to want to simultaneously demonise the Labour leadership and also put Corbyn forward as some sort of superman figure that with enough hectoring will put on a cape and save them from Brexit.
> 
> I think that to say they have learned nothing since the referendum would be far too generous.



Corbyn gets a lot of stick from all types, but for me i think he deserves a lot of credit for not going against a DEMOCRATIC vote.
If he would just get rid of some of his backroom staff he might have a chance.


----------



## Wilf (Jun 23, 2018)

I know this was organised by the People's Vote, but wonder _how_ they get the word out - I've not seen a single advert for it. Is it a whispered word of mouth thing at farmer's markets? Pick up a flyer at the aga store? People radicalised by Vince Cable videos?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 23, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I know this was organised by the People's Vote, but wonder _how_ they get the word out - I've not seen a single advert for it. Is it a whispered word of mouth thing at farmer's markets? Pick up a flyer at the aga store? People radicalised by Vince Cable videos?


The #FBPE hashtags on twitter? Why do you think they all sound the way they do


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 23, 2018)

oh _those _twats on twitter. I'm not even sure what FPBE stands for or PCP (thought that was angel dust. Which seems to have gone away since 2003, but i digress)


----------



## Beermoth (Jun 23, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Just looking at vids, seeing comments from people who are at the march today and it just strikes me how parochial and directionless these people are. They seem to want to simultaneously demonise the Labour leadership and also put Corbyn forward as some sort of superman figure that with enough hectoring will put on a cape and save them from Brexit.



That's because their politics centre around Strong Leaders Doing Important Things and Corbyn doesn't really fulfil that role.


----------



## Beermoth (Jun 23, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh _those _twats on twitter. I'm not even sure what FPBE stands for



Fucking
Pricks
Boring on about
Europe


----------



## seventh bullet (Jun 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Indeed, and with the digger now on zero-hour contract



And expected to do it without providing a shovel.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 23, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh _those _twats on twitter. I'm not even sure what FPBE stands for or PCP (thought that was angel dust. Which seems to have gone away since 2003, but i digress)


I never had the belly for PCP   It’s Pro Corbyn Pro Europe. Prior to the last election these guys all believed the idea that Corbyn opposed the EU was fake news, now it’s as J Ed said they think he’s just going to come to “the light side” as they are calling TwitterRemain


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 23, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> That's because their politics centre around Strong Leaders Doing Important Things and Corbyn doesn't really fulfil that role.


Endless photos of them at their day job, which is basically the same photo of suits looking at a presentation on a projector. As every working class person who has been to a training course knows, nothing of any use happens in a conference room in front of a projector. You dicks!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 23, 2018)

*as I type that I realise lots of worthy learning has happened in lecture halls but just work with me. It’s saturday night.


----------



## Combustible (Jun 23, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Just looking at vids, seeing comments from people who are at the march today and it just strikes me how parochial and directionless these people are. They seem to want to simultaneously demonise the Labour leadership and also put Corbyn forward as some sort of superman figure that with enough hectoring will put on a cape and save them from Brexit.



Given that there is a sizeable minority who are very anti Brexit, I am actually surprised about how ineffective they have been. One reason must be that many of the new anti Brexit initiatives are just as much if not more about being anti Corbyn. 

The line seems to be that Corbyn could stop Brexit if he wanted to, but he doesn't. Not many people seem to elaborate how exactly he could do that. Someone on Twitter did give it a go, with the first step being he should bring down the government with a vote of no confidence. I guess if you feel like you can ignore the majority of voters in the referendum, ignoring the combined Tory + DUP majority in parliament should be no problem.


----------



## Supine (Jun 23, 2018)

I think a lot of people are annoyed with Labour whipping to abstain from votes in the house. Plus 70% of Labour supporters want to remain, so there is bound to be disappointment now the influx of Corbyn's supporters realise that on this issue he is going against the flow of the party.


----------



## Combustible (Jun 23, 2018)

Supine said:


> I think a lot of people are annoyed with Labour whipping to abstain from votes in the house. Plus 70% of Labour supporters want to remain, so there is bound to be disappointment now the influx of Corbyn's supporters realise that on this issue he is going against the flow of the party.




Well the line has been that Corbyn could prevent Brexit but he chooses not to, rather than Corbyn could make an ineffective political gesture, but he chooses not to. But Corbyn's ability to stop Brexit is constantly bigged up to sell the idea that getting rid of him or voting Lib Dem  or a hypothetical new centrist party will stop Brexit. And given the stunning lack of success of  all three of those options, most remainers aren't buying it.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not sure to what extent redsquirrel is trying to be satirical here, but I know people who work in that Airbus plant - like any highly skilled workers, they take a lot of pride in what they do, and they do it well, hard to imagine anything more demeaning than having them make wings that will never go on planes.


Those sites did much better in the past. A very proud history where complete aircraft were produced. If anything, under BAe/Airbus they've regressed to be bit part players.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jun 23, 2018)

morning star piece last week on who's bankrolling bits of the 'stop brexit' campaign

hmm.


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 23, 2018)

alex_ said:


> It’ll be done for political reasons there too.
> 
> Alex


no, economic


----------



## Raheem (Jun 24, 2018)

Combustible said:


> Well the line has been that Corbyn could prevent Brexit but he chooses not to, rather than Corbyn could make an ineffective political gesture, but he chooses not to. But Corbyn's ability to stop Brexit is constantly bigged up to sell the idea that getting rid of him or voting Lib Dem  or a hypothetical new centrist party will stop Brexit. And given the stunning lack of success of  all three of those options, most remainers aren't buying it.



Liked, even though I'm not sure how it is you know what most remainers are buying. Do you work for Shopacheck?


----------



## J Ed (Jun 24, 2018)

Only just thought of this comparison but wonder whether it has occurred to anyone else?

The tone deafness, the flambuoyant protests, the super hero costumes... FBPE is just like Fathers for Justice.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 24, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Only just thought of this comparison but wonder whether it has occurred to anyone else?
> 
> The tone deafness, the flambuoyant protests, the super hero costumes... FBPE is just like Fathers for Justice.


On the other hand:


----------



## alex_ (Jun 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> no, economic



Depends upon your viewpoint - I think we are agreeing - from Boeing’s perspective it’s economic to keep the politicians happy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 24, 2018)

Combustible said:


> Well the line has been that Corbyn could prevent Brexit but he chooses not to, rather than Corbyn could make an ineffective political gesture, but he chooses not to. But Corbyn's ability to stop Brexit is constantly bigged up to sell the idea that getting rid of him or voting Lib Dem  or a hypothetical new centrist party will stop Brexit. And given the stunning lack of success of  all three of those options, most remainers aren't buying it.



I do think Corbyn could allow his MPs a free vote. For one thing, he's going to get plenty of people voting against the whip anyway. For another, it doesn't really change the parliamentary arithmetic either way.


----------



## Chz (Jun 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> no, economic


Well, I suppose it's economic for _them_ to take advantage of all the political pork on offer to do so. But I think that's being a bit obtuse about where the incentive is really coming from. Despite what some think, the US and the EU aren't very different when it comes to political subsidies.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 24, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:



_This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
 This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,_
_ This other Eden, demi-paradise, ..._


----------



## agricola (Jun 24, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:




they have to be crisis actors, surely


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 24, 2018)

[/QUOTE]

fuck me - right said fred have really let themselves go haven't they?


----------



## 2hats (Jun 24, 2018)

agricola said:


> they have to be crisis actors, surely


Mid-life crisis actors?


----------



## treelover (Jun 24, 2018)

Er, there are/have been a fair few posters on here who resemble these blokes, especially the ones at the back, shades of 'ill fitting suits', getting to be expected on here.


----------



## Supine (Jun 24, 2018)

We now know where all the pies went.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 24, 2018)

Same far right that are on every demo as I recall


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 24, 2018)

treelover said:


> Er, there are/have been a fair few posters on here who resemble these blokes, especially the ones at the back, shades of 'ill fitting suits', getting to be expected on here.


That's a couple of women at the back, one a cop, time to go to specsavers treelover.


----------



## Hollis (Jun 24, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Only just thought of this comparison but wonder whether it has occurred to anyone else?
> 
> The tone deafness, the flambuoyant protests, the super hero costumes... FBPE is just like Fathers for Justice.



I think that's stretching it.


----------



## The39thStep (Jun 24, 2018)

Caroline Lucas  2006 


> The phenomenal projected growth of the aviation industry - the number of flights in the EU is set to double by 2020 and triple by 2030 - represents the fastest-growing contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.


The stratospheric cost of cheap flights

Caroline Lucas 2018 :  





Join the camapign for low emission shagging


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 24, 2018)

2hats said:


> Mid-life crisis actors?



10/10


----------



## cantsin (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> I think a lot of people are annoyed with Labour whipping to abstain from votes in the house. Plus 70% of Labour supporters want to remain, so there is bound to be disappointment now the influx of Corbyn's supporters realise that on this issue he is going against the flow of the party.



60% +  Lab held  constits voted Leave, + if you strip out the ( obviously v Remain ) London seats , that figure increases a fair bit I believe


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

cantsin said:


> 60% +  Lab held  constits voted Leave, + if you strip out the ( obviously v Remain ) London seats , that figure increases a fair bit I believe


I wonder what it would look like if you just counted those that closed the gap between Labour and Tory. New voters seemed to form a large part of both the brexit vote and the (increased) labour vote iirc? Let’s make Labour shit again!


----------



## Supine (Jun 24, 2018)

cantsin said:


> 60% +  Lab held  constits voted Leave, + if you strip out the ( obviously v Remain ) London seats , that figure increases a fair bit I believe



I know and realise it's a problem. The biggest problem though is nobody is educating these people (by a principled data driven opposition to brexit). Brexit will damage a lot of these constituencies disproportionately and imo labour are letting them down by not fighting for them. 

Having no party, with a potential to govern, representing the anti brexit position is a failure of democracy.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> I know and realise it's a problem. The biggest problem though is nobody is educating these people (by a principled data driven opposition to brexit). Brexit will damage a lot of these constituencies disproportionately and imo labour are letting them down by not fighting for them.
> 
> Having no party, with a potential to govern, representing the anti brexit position is a failure of democracy.


Expand on “principled data driven”. Cheers.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 24, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Caroline Lucas  2006
> 
> The stratospheric cost of cheap flights
> 
> ...



Did you know that you can get to those 27 countries without flying?


----------



## Supine (Jun 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Expand on “principled data driven”. Cheers.



The negative effects. Like UK growth dropping from top to bottom of the league table. Like lost jobs (EMA is about 900 highly paid technical roles currently being moved to Amsterdam). That kind of stuff, which is going to really start kicking in over the next year or so.


----------



## Supine (Jun 24, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Did you know that you can get to those 27 countries without flying?



If you need a quick shag flying is the way to go


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> The negative effects. Like UK growth dropping from top to bottom of the league table. Like lost jobs (EMA is about 900 highly paid technical roles currently being moved to Amsterdam). That kind of stuff, which is going to really start kicking in over the next year or so.


When at top of league table inequality seemed to be worse than ever. Could you explain to me where that sweet spot is when U.K. growth starts to benefit us low education voters, and when in the next 5 years we are likely to hit it if we stay in the EU as you recommend , I would like some principled data as evidence , I am good with numbers so don’t be frightened to fire them at me.

Cheers.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> The negative effects. Like UK growth dropping from top to bottom of the league table. Like lost jobs (EMA is about 900 highly paid technical roles currently being moved to Amsterdam). That kind of stuff, which is going to really start kicking in over the next year or so.


Bonus question- if economic growth is your primary concern, are you sure you should be looking to a Corbyn led Labour Party to represent people like yersel(that’s me being very optimistic about the capabilities of Corbyn led Labour!)


----------



## Supine (Jun 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I would like some principled data as evidence , I am good with numbers so don’t be frightened to fire them at me.
> 
> Cheers.



Could you try and sound any more condescending please?

I said growth had dropped. I commented nothing on a conservative government that has been inflicting austerity on poorer people while lining the pockets of billionaires. That's a whole separate discussion point.

Brexit will lose money for the country and a tory government if still in power will only ratchet up austerity while dismantling the state further.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> Could you try and sound any more condescending please?
> 
> I said growth had dropped. I commented nothing on a conservative government that has been inflicting austerity on poorer people while lining the pockets of billionaires. That's a whole separate discussion point.
> 
> Brexit will lose money for the country and a tory government if still in power will only ratchet up austerity while dismantling the state further.



You said there was nobody educating us. Take what you dish out.

ETA- You have just said that austerity has nothing to do with growth but it was the fault of Tories in power. Good, if we vote Labour in and Labour leads Brexit it needn’t necessarily result in more austerity. 

I’m playing devils advocate here, I don’t have much faith in Labour either.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> Could you try and sound any more condescending please?
> 
> I said growth had dropped. I commented nothing on a conservative government that has been inflicting austerity on poorer people while lining the pockets of billionaires. That's a whole separate discussion point.
> 
> Brexit will lose money for the country and a tory government if still in power will only ratchet up austerity while dismantling the state further.


And this might sound mental but, isn’t a Labour Manifesto meant to tell us what *Labour* will do if we vote them in? Why the fuck do people keep saying  Corbyn is supporting a Tory hard brexit?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 24, 2018)

Seriously though I really want to see this principled data that we need to be shown. You said it, come wi it boy. This should be easy work for you, no?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 25, 2018)

this made me laugh mind:


----------



## Badgers (Jun 25, 2018)

Interesting stuff from Bloomberg coming out.

How Pollsters Helped Hedge Funds Beat the Pound's Brexit Crash


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 25, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Interesting stuff from Bloomberg coming out.
> 
> How Pollsters Helped Hedge Funds Beat the Pound's Brexit Crash


Surely you are not suggesting that these companies are run by fraudsters, shysters and dodgy dealers?


----------



## billbond (Jun 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> Could you try and sound any more condescending please?
> 
> I said growth had dropped. I commented nothing on a conservative government that has been inflicting austerity on poorer people while lining the pockets of billionaires. That's a whole separate discussion point.
> 
> Brexit will lose money for the country and a tory government if still in power will only ratchet up austerity while dismantling the state further.



You seem to know the future
Can you put next weeks lottery numbers up please


----------



## Badgers (Jun 25, 2018)

'I work in Brussels alongside EU Brexit negotiators and it makes me feel ashamed'


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 25, 2018)

Badgers said:


> 'I work in Brussels alongside EU Brexit negotiators and it makes me feel ashamed'


Hey badgers, will you ever say something for yourself? There are loads of boring liberal remainers aggregating sewage - do we need you to act as a channel to that on here. What makes you special? Of course, the like underneath will follow. But fucking hell.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 25, 2018)

Badgers said:


> 'I work in Brussels alongside EU Brexit negotiators and it makes me feel ashamed'




She should be used to being ashamed - she is a Liberal Democrat


----------



## Badgers (Jun 25, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Hey badgers, will you ever say something for yourself? There are loads of boring liberal remainers aggregating sewage - do we need you to act as a channel to that on here. What makes you special? Of course, the like underneath will follow. But fucking hell.


Good one


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 25, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> She should be used to being ashamed - she is a Liberal Democrat


She's neutral.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 25, 2018)

Sorry Supine I had the most unreal shite weekend at work and could have come across a bit better. 

Anyway, eat the rich, etc. Taste just like chicken apparently.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 25, 2018)

God Danny is right this stuff is boring it is probably best not to engage


----------



## Badgers (Jun 25, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Hey badgers, will you ever say something for yourself? There are loads of boring liberal remainers aggregating sewage - do we need you to act as a channel to that on here. What makes you special? Of course, the like underneath will follow. But fucking hell.


It was going to expand on several things. Mainly because I think I know much more than journalists and really want my voice heard 

But then realised I might need to engage with you and be sneered at plus ridiculed for my views. So (like many decent posters on here) I just can't be bothered to try anymore.

So hopefully whatever happens politically and with these fantastic Brexit negotiations I look forward to seeing your sneering tone more and will hope that you are happier in life than you are online.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 25, 2018)

Badgers said:


> It was going to expand on several things.


Yep.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 25, 2018)

But now i can't.


----------



## Badgers (Jun 25, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Yep.





butchersapron said:


> But now i can't.


There it is


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> Could you try and sound any more condescending please?
> 
> I said growth had dropped. I commented nothing on a conservative government that has been inflicting austerity on poorer people while lining the pockets of billionaires. That's a whole separate discussion point.
> 
> Brexit will lose money for the country and a tory government if still in power will only ratchet up austerity while dismantling the state further.


Austerity is happening for one reason, the Government wants to reduce the deficit since the Government takes in less money than it spends. There are 3 ways to deal with this, cut spending, raise taxes or do nothing (or nearly nothing) and rely on economic growth to fix the problem (i.e. more taxes and less spending since more people have jobs and better ones at that). Economic growth has been largely flat for a decade now so that can't really be relied on to help.
The current Govt has put the emphasis on cutting spending and since social welfare and healthcare are two of the big three items (third is pensions. with the 3 of them being over half) of what the Govt spends, they've obviously borne the brunt of cuts.
Since the Govt knows that the voting public for the most part would rather have money spent on the NHS than welfare payments, the cuts have been even more skewed towards welfare cutbacks making austerity even worse.
Being in the EU isn't to blame for austerity but certainly doesn't earn any credit for mitigation either.
Virtually every analysis of how the UK economy will fare in the short term (5-10 yrs) are that it will reduce growth by 2-10% depending on the final deal, this will reduce the freedom any future UK government has to act not least because the growth option isruled out for even longer. Any future Tory Govt will find itself having  to impose greater austerity measures to meet its target and any future Labour Govt will have to raise taxes even further or accept some austerity.
There are limits to how far you can go in either direction before people start stocking up on pitchforks or the best and brightest individuals and companies start fleeing abroad
(which the EU would be only to happy to encourage, it's already happening to a smallish degree)
In the long run no-one really knows  what will happen (despite claims to the contrary), many leading Brexiteers are claiming that freeing us from the UK will lead to greater growth long term though given their record on predictions so far I'm rather cynical.
Of course people voted Leave or Remain for many reasons not just economic ones, the reason I still believe that the Remain campaign lost is that a campaign that basically came down to "Things can only get worst" was never going to be a winning strategy. When Brexit happens (and it will happen) and no matter what form it takes, whichever party is running the country at the time (and for a decade after) will find itself with hard choices to make.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Austerity is happening for one reason, the Government wants to reduce the deficit since the Government takes in less money than it spends. There are 3 ways to deal with this, cut spending, raise taxes or do nothing (or nearly nothing) and rely on economic growth to fix the problem (i.e. more taxes and less spending since more people have jobs and better ones at that). Economic growth has been largely flat for a decade now so that can't really be relied on to help.
> The current Govt has put the emphasis on cutting spending and since social welfare and healthcare are two of the big three items (third is pensions. with the 3 of them being over half) of what the Govt spends, they've obviously borne the brunt of cuts.
> Since the Govt knows that the voting public for the most part would rather have money spent on the NHS than welfare payments, the cuts have been even more skewed towards welfare cutbacks making austerity even worse.
> Being in the EU isn't to blame for austerity but certainly doesn't earn any credit for mitigation either.
> ...


So how high in the league tables would we need to be before choices weren’t so tough? Third, second or first?


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So how high in the league tables would we need to be before choices weren’t so tough? Third, second or first?


Sorry but I don't understand your question what is you are asking me?


----------



## Santino (Jun 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Austerity is happening for one reason, the Government wants to reduce the deficit


I'm going to have to stop you right there.


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 25, 2018)

Santino said:


> I'm going to have to stop you right there.


OK  please elaborate why do you think it is happening?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 25, 2018)

i am sure you have already seen this today

The Brexit Short: How Hedge Funds Used Private Polls to Make Millions


----------



## teuchter (Jun 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> please elaborate


That's not really Santino's thing.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The smoke filled rooms proverbial not apocryphal. Say what you like about the eu or hmg but pls don't so mutilate the English language.



Oh... I thought apocryphal and proverbial meant the same thing. What is the difference?


----------



## toblerone3 (Jun 25, 2018)

Seems to be a shift on Brexit going in Momentum Corbynites launch pro-EU Labour for a People's Vote campaign | LabourList


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 25, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Oh... I thought apocryphal and proverbial meant the same thing. What is the difference?


heh, proverbs are in the bible where apocrypha very much aren't. In  metaphorical use to say something is apocryphal would mean has the appearance of a truism but is not whereas to call proverbial shades differently. Dependent on context cos people will often use proverbially with a wry emphasis to mean apocryphal anyway. Cos who really says apocryphal in direct speech except people on 'In our Time' podcasts.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jun 25, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> heh, proverbs are in the bible where apocrypha very much aren't. In  metaphorical use to say something is apocryphal would mean has the appearance of a truism but is not whereas to call proverbial shades differently. Dependent on context cos people will often use proverbially with a wry emphasis to mean apocryphal anyway. Cos who really says apocryphal in direct speech except people on 'In our Time' podcasts.


I always take apocryphal to mean "a story you may be familiar with but which isn't true", whereas proverbial is just "as in the well known story".


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Seems to be a shift on Brexit going in Momentum Corbynites launch pro-EU Labour for a People's Vote campaign | LabourList


I see they are rejecting EEA as well. And naturally, a second ref will go in their favour. It sounds like another tone deaf remain campaign to me.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I see they are rejecting EEA as well. And naturally, a second ref will go in their favour. It sounds like another tone deaf remain campaign to me.


Tone deaf as in the people want a hard brexit?


----------



## Supine (Jun 26, 2018)

Fascinating programme about the new us embassy on TV last night. They showed the US embassador getting political advise on brexit from his advisors. Some of them were smirking or laughing when talking about how the British people don't realise how bad it will be and the fact we think we are in a negotiation but we aren't.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 26, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Tone deaf as in the people want a hard brexit?


JUST KEEP SAYING HARD BREXIT


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 26, 2018)

Supine said:


> Fascinating programme about the new us embassy on TV last night. They showed the US embassador getting political advise on brexit from his advisors. Some of them were smirking or laughing when talking about how the British people don't realise how bad it will be and the fact we think we are in a negotiation but we aren't.


You’re not selling it. Was the smirking and laughing in a different tone to what it usually is?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2018)

Or Tory Brexit. Same shitty trick.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> OK  please elaborate why do you think it is happening?



Oh FFS. Reduce funding for the state, shrink the state...same old tired ideology.


----------



## gosub (Jun 26, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Tone deaf as in the people want a hard brexit?



Thats what we'd get if politicians and or public voted down any deal the government came with.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

I am past adding to this debate on whether Br is going to happen. Zzzzzz

 FT link above. brexit attitudes hardening in the leave areas seems to fall in with my experience on this. The steadfast belief in a major employer Nissan (directly/ indirectly) is worrying , as is "I will be alright" take on the proceedings.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

it may be that a second referendum is the only real way to sort this out, since as matters stand about 50% are one way inclined and about 50% the other way. but i can't see any way that a 60/40 or 70/30 vote could be achieved, and it's this split which is going to bedevil british politics for many many years to come regardless of the final deal, regardless of the success or otherwise of the brexit


----------



## philosophical (Jun 26, 2018)

Perhaps brexit can be solved if a solution to the Irish border situation can be found that everybody agrees with, because in my view the Irish border issue encapsulates so much about this nightmare.
A people's vote or second referendum is not desirable or needed, brexiters of every shade need to outline the solutions to every problem, and it is about time they pissed or got off the pot.


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2018)

Oh my fucking god. Is this some Michael stone style performance art?


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 26, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Oh FFS. Reduce funding for the state, shrink the state...same old tired ideology.


There is certainly some merit in that argument yes, the Tory party has always been eager to reduce what the state does, However I would suggest it is a secondary one to reducing the deficit.
You can hardly shrink the state when the state has to borrow money to even function


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> There is certainly some merit in that argument yes, the Tory party has always been eager to reduce what the state does, However I would suggest it is a secondary one to reducing the deficit.
> You can hardly shrink the state when the state has to borrow money to even function


The state is one of the means to 'reducing the deficit'. If we must think in those terms.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Perhaps brexit can be solved if a solution to the Irish border situation can be found that everybody agrees with, because in my view the Irish border issue encapsulates so much about this nightmare.
> A people's vote or second referendum is not desirable or needed, brexiters of every shade need to outline the solutions to every problem, and it is about time they pissed or got off the pot.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 26, 2018)

Not that it matters, but I am neither an Irish Republican or nationalist. 
I am gripped by the Irish border problem though because it is fascinating watching people trying to turn base metal into gold and insisting they can.
Even more fascinating is observing how those people lash out at others to deflect from their failure.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not that it matters, but I am neither an Irish Republican or nationalist.
> I am gripped by the Irish border problem though because it is fascinating watching people trying to turn base metal into gold and insisting they can.
> Even more fascinating is observing how those people lash out at others to deflect from their failure.


it's like one of those times people are out on their own in the wild and find their arm trapped by a rock. do they stay put and whole and starve or do they gnaw their arm off to escape alive?


----------



## butchersapron (Jun 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not that it matters, but I am neither an Irish Republican or nationalist.
> I am gripped by the Irish border problem though because it is fascinating watching people trying to turn base metal into gold and insisting they can.
> Even more fascinating is observing how those people lash out at others to deflect from their failure.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

I was told at school that when I grew up , my biggest problem would be how to fill my leisure time after I had done my handful of hours a week token work. Robots would do  everything else. maybe the robots can fix Ireland and let us get on with our tennis


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I was told at school that when I grew up , my biggest problem would be how to fill my leisure time after I had done my handful of hours a week token work. Robots would do  everything else. maybe the robots can fix Ireland and let us get on with our tennis


maybe the robots can fix ireland.  but they'll find it impossible to fix the uk.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Subscribe to read | Financial Times
> 
> I am past adding to this debate on whether Br is going to happen. Zzzzzz
> 
> FT link above. brexit attitudes hardening in the leave areas seems to fall in with my experience on this. The steadfast belief in a major employer Nissan (directly/ indirectly) is worrying , as is "I will be alright" take on the proceedings.


paywall, can you c+p?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

"
Two years ago, in the wake of the country’s most momentous vote for at least a generation, two men shook hands on a factory floor in northeast England.
It was the day after the UK’s June 23, 2016 referendum decision to leave the EU and emotions were riding high after a divisive campaign and a result that came as a surprise to many.
The handshake between Richard Swart, the managing director of the Berger Group industrial products plant in Peterlee, County Durham, and Chris Mellor, a toolmaker, was a gesture of courtesy
Mr Swart fervently backed the Remain campaign. Mr Mellor voted Leave. Two years later they are united in dismay at how Britain’s politicians are handling Brexit.
“Appallingly,” said Mr Swart, speaking on a business trip to Istanbul this week. “A farce”, said Mr Mellor, during a break from the sparks and clatter of the factory, which makes metal rings to seal industrial drums.
Divisions over Brexit have become even more entrenched in British society since 2016 and in a straw poll of industrial workers in Peterlee no one said they would change their vote. Neither Mr Swart nor Mr Mellor would do so.
But both have been discouraged by the failure of Theresa May’s government to set out more clearly what it wants from Brexit.
“The people who are supposed to be running our country are making a mess of it because they can’t agree with each other,” said Mr Mellor, who voted Leave in the hope of lower immigration and more support for Britain’s cash-strapped National Health Service.
The clock is ticking and nothing has been resolved — people are worried for the future
Richard Swart
Mrs May has made a handful of set piece speeches on her vision for the future — in venues ranging from Birmingham to Florence — and has concluded deals in principle with Brussels on divorce arrangements and a transition regime to last until the end of 2020.
But, riven by divisions between hard and soft Brexiters, the cabinet has yet to agree a detailed blueprint for future ties with the EU and is at odds with the European Commission over the biggest political obstacle to a deal: how to avoid a hard border in Ireland.
An EU summit next week is expected to make scant progress, and final agreement may be reached with little time to spare ahead of Britain’s scheduled departure on March 29, 2019. EU leaders are now preparing a call for preparations to be intensified for a no-deal Brexit.
Mr Swart maintained that Brexit is on track to be “the greatest act of self-harm a top nation has done to itself in recent years”.
The North-East was one of the regions that most strongly backed Brexit in the referendum, delivering a 58 per cent vote in favour of Leave.
But, according to government impact assessments, the region could be one of the worst affected by leaving the EU. If the UK were to trade with the bloc on World Trade Organisation terms — one of the hardest of Brexits — the hit to growth would be as much as 16 per cent over 15 years.
But the size of the region’s manufacturing base makes some locals confident.
“It won’t affect me,” said Leave voter Graham Peart, who works for a subcontractor to Nissan, the carmaker that has been given assurances by Mrs May’s government. “It’s one of the main sites they’ve got.”

Some workers in the Berger plant also recalled blood-curdling — and swiftly disproved — warnings, including from the Treasury, that growth would grind to a halt in the months after a vote to leave.
“It’s not as bad as what people first said it would be,” said Kevin Howe, a maintenance man at the factory who voted Leave after initial hesitation. But he worried the EU is calling the shots in the negotiations: “No matter what they offer us, we’ll have to accept it.”
Before the referendum, Mark Scollins, the plant’s production manager, was torn before finally voting Remain. His theory why so many people in the region voted the other way is a relatively simple one: “They wanted to give the government a kick in the nuts.”
At the time, Mr Scollins also thought that Brexit would create a brief “bumpy” patch for the UK. Now, he said: “I think we will struggle for two to three years” — a period of turbulence he says that he can accept “if the outcome is beneficial”.
Meanwhile, the fortunes of the 20-employee factory, which is owned by a German multinational, have largely tracked the British economy’s: 2017 was very strong but recent months have seen some drop-off. To align output with demand, production now stops at noon on Fridays instead of at two in the afternoon.
As the March 29, 2019 Brexit date approaches, uncertainty is making businesses deeply uneasy. Mr Swart is particularly unnerved by news this week that Airbus, the aircraft manufacturer, could leave the country if there is no deal with the EU. He said: “The clock is ticking and nothing has been resolved — people are worried for the future.”


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Oh FFS. Reduce funding for the state, shrink the state...same old tired ideology.


you've had the IMF bods even say that austerity doesn't work, the deficit fetishism was always a political choice sold on the back of 'the nations credit' card nonsense and a vague moral guilt about some mythical good times where 'we' gorged on cheap credit. Its amazing how well the tory version of post-2008 bedded in, repeated near verbatim by big brains.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

Peterlee was named after a miners organiser IIRC


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 26, 2018)

The reason that the negotiations are a shambles is that the most important consideration for the Govt is to protect the integrity of the Tory Party, the effect good or bad on everyone is secondary.
The guy who works for Nissan may not realise that Nissan's biggest shareholder is Renault (45% I think) he might be in for a nasty shock one day.
As for the Berger Group how hard does anyone think it would be to uproot a factory employing 20 people to the continent?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

berger are not unique in what they do I am afraid - they are niche but not unique.


----------



## flypanam (Jun 26, 2018)

It's a bit shit seeing all these references to the border, and knowing it's just a fucking game for some people to get what they want in a situation that isn't going their way. Once again proving that Ireland is only ever a secondary issue/smokescreen.


----------



## Winot (Jun 26, 2018)

flypanam said:


> It's a bit shit seeing all these references to the border, and knowing it's just a fucking game for some people to get what they want in a situation that isn't going their way. Once again proving that Ireland is only ever a secondary issue/smokescreen.



Remain concerns were there before the referendum. Blair and Major made a speech from NI.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2018)

Yesterday's shites.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 26, 2018)

flypanam said:


> It's a bit shit seeing all these references to the border, and knowing it's just a fucking game for some people to get what they want in a situation that isn't going their way. Once again proving that Ireland is only ever a secondary issue/smokescreen.



How is Ireland a secondary issue?
The ROI is in the EU, the UK is leaving the EU.
Therefore there will be a border.
It is not a game but a practical reality isn't it?
If you're suggesting the border is an issue seized on by remainers to thwart brexit I disagree.
It is with the brexiteers to come up with a solution or they may find they thwart themselves whatever the position of remainers.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 26, 2018)

robots. brexit robots. the peoples robots


----------



## andysays (Jun 26, 2018)

Come on Brexiteers!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The reason that the negotiations are a shambles is that the most important consideration for the Govt is to protect the integrity of the Tory Party, the effect good or bad on everyone is secondary.
> The guy who works for Nissan may not realise that Nissan's biggest shareholder is Renault (45% I think) he might be in for a nasty shock one day.
> As for the Berger Group how hard does anyone think it would be to uproot a factory employing 20 people to the continent?


Yeh the soviet union was able to move much larger factories much further in the 1940s


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 26, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> robots. brexit robots. the peoples robots


Yeh they're in as good a state as the people's princess


----------



## elbows (Jun 26, 2018)

Boris 'Fuck Business' Johnson contains language that some may find offensive.

Johnson challenged over 'Brexit expletive'


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 26, 2018)

elbows said:


> Boris 'Fuck Business' Johnson contains language that some may find offensive.
> 
> Johnson challenged over 'Brexit expletive'



They were not happy in the mighty City AM newspaper, but I imagine every one has already read that on their way into Canary Wharf this morning.

Editions

Editorial saying he must be sacked immediately.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 26, 2018)

Supine said:


> The biggest problem though is nobody is educating these people


In the last ten days or so you've shown yourself to be ignorant of the consequences of the EU immigration policy (even when links have been supplied to you), ignorant of what a concentration camp is and ignorant of the basics of economic philosophy that formed a central part of the post-war consensus. And it's leave voters that need to be educated.



Supine said:


> The negative effects. Like UK growth dropping from top to bottom of the league table.


So when you say "educated" you mean the priests need to preach to the heathen once more (never mind they made the same comments during the referendum campaign - see Mark Carney). Though it's good to know that you are opposed to both nationalisations and higher taxes.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jun 26, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> robots. brexit robots. the peoples robots



The Will of the Robots!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 26, 2018)

From the US embassy:


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 26, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> From the US embassy:



Tbf that clip wouldn’t even make the Handwringo TM thread, there wasn’t nearly enough drama. You’re slacking!


----------



## agricola (Jun 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh the soviet union was able to move much larger factories much further in the 1940s



Yes, but of course they were building superior things like the T-34, IL-2, the katyusha and whatnot.  I doubt the likes of Grayling could organize a move in order to make tea, never mind the rest.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 26, 2018)

the video says that leavers are terrified of having leave snatched away from them wheras the summary has 'leavers are terrified'

thats a bit of a twist isn't it. Never mind, I'm sure the chortles of our cousins will make sensible politics happen again. Like it always has


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 26, 2018)

brexit more or less give the green light to the third runway


not surprised Boris fucked off


----------



## billbond (Jun 26, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> The Will of the Robots!



The moaning remainer robots


----------



## hot air baboon (Jun 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If you're suggesting the border is an issue seized on by remainers to thwart brexit I disagree.



I think that's pretty much what happened isn't it ?

'Virtual border' between Northern Ireland and Republic a possibility - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

_July 27 2016

A virtual border using technology could be the solution to maintaining an open flow of people between Northern Ireland and the Republic, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has said.
After his first meeting with new Prime Minister Theresa May, Mr Kenny ruled out the possibility of a hard border in the strongest terms yet.
“I would not agree to a hard border with a whole range of customs posts and neither does the prime minister,” he said outside Downing Street.
“There are other ways of dealing with modern technology in terms of checking trade,” the Taoiseach added._


The Irish Border and Brexit: is Varadkar playing with fire? - Policy Exchange

_Aug 6, 2017

A new cold wind has been blowing from Dublin this week on the vexed issue of the Irish land border. The previous Irish position of preparing for a technological solution to minimise border disruption has been overturned.  Enda Kenny, Taoiseach until June, had implicitly accepted that a border would be necessary, and had begun preparations, along with the British, to minimise disruption. Quiet contacts had been taking place between officials north and south of the border. As the new Fine Gael government team led by Leo Varadkar has found its feet all of that has begun to change.

First the Irish Foreign Minister, Simon Coveney, said that no border is acceptable. Another government spokesman said that no technological solutions could make a border acceptable. Then in Brussels last week, Leo Varadkar said that the border was Britain’s not Ireland’s problem and that Irish work on technological solutions would cease. Most strikingly he also said that the border should be moved to the Irish Sea. What this implied was that no customs checks should be done at the land border, which would remain largely as invisible as it does today. Instead customs checks would occur at seaports and airports.

This idea apparently came as a surprise to officials in Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs, and does not seem to have been based on much thought or analysis. Such ideas are incoherent and unhelpful. The EU27’s negotiating position on the border explicitly states that the integrity of the EU’s Legal Order must be maintained. This means a tightly managed border around the Single Market. The May Government’s position is that Northern Ireland, as part of the UK, will almost certainly be outside the Single Market. Border checks will thus have to take place at the land border, not at Belfast, Larne or Warrenpoint. Indeed, it is difficult to imagine what ‘a border at the Irish Sea’ would actually mean._

The Irish Border and Brexit: is Varadkar playing with fire? - Policy Exchange


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

The Irish government are neither leavers or remainers, so their interventions such as they may be, are not the actions of remainers trying to thwart brexit.


----------



## gosub (Jun 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> From the US embassy:


I'd call that grounded analysis


----------



## gosub (Jun 27, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> brexit more or less give the green light to the third runway
> 
> 
> not surprised Boris fucked off


Brexit is the biggest challenge to needing a third runway.. By the time its delivered border problems at Dover should be ironed out and the whole hub spoke dynamic will have changed


----------



## yield (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish government are neither leavers or remainers, so their interventions such as they may be, are not the actions of remainers trying to thwart brexit.


Ireland were forced to vote twice on the Lisbon treaty in 2008. The Irish establishment is very much remain. _Vote_ early and _vote often_


----------



## Ax^ (Jun 27, 2018)

have you told the government 
-


----------



## gosub (Jun 27, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> The Will of the Robots!


The algorithms that inform our increasing bubbled media shares can only be a growing concern... LONG LIVE URBAN!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 27, 2018)

Postinf u


hot air baboon said:


> I think that's pretty much what happened isn't it ?



I'm surprised a right-wing tory think tank has problems with it.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

yield said:


> Ireland were forced to vote twice on the Lisbon treaty in 2008. The Irish establishment is very much remain. _Vote_ early and _vote often_


The Irish establishment may wish to remain in the EU, but that question has never been put to the people there so how that relates I don't know.


----------



## flypanam (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish government are neither leavers or remainers, so their interventions such as they may be, are not the actions of remainers trying to thwart brexit.



Not quite true, the Irish establishment wants the UK to stay. They are happy to be used by the EU to sure up their own position within the EU and get the pats on the head that they crave, but also the blueshirts get the chance to wrap a green flag around themselves, and present their faces to an Irish public that is sick of austerity, and angry that 3.5bn euros will be given to German banks instead of being spent on the HSE which FG is trying to privatise bit by bit in true liberal style.

As for my earlier post I do think that sections of the remainers have seized on the border issue in the hope that it will stop Brexit. Ultimately its just a game for them, none have ever expressed anything other than disdain for the border region and the people of the 9 counties. And I say that as someone who grew up on the border.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

Well OK then.
However the practical operation of the border has to be sorted, and the technological solution, so called, will not lead to the brexit aspiration of border control.
How do they stop people strolling across?
If it is a Trumpesque barrier, in a now beautiful and peaceful place, such an abomination will lead to aggro.
A brexit under WTO rules would demand a border despite May saying she won't have one.
I know I am repetitive on this, but the UK is two years on from the referendum and the UK brexit establishment still hasn't suggested a workable and practical solution, and there are not infinite solutions to choose from.
If brexit means brexit means control of the UK borders it simply isn't going to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish government are neither leavers or remainers, so their interventions such as they may be, are not the actions of remainers trying to thwart brexit.


i see no sign of the irish government seeking to alter their relationship with brussels, which suggests they are remainers.


----------



## gosub (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish establishment may wish to remain in the EU, but that question has never been put to the people there so how that relates I don't know.


More than 90% of Irish people want to stay in EU, poll reveals


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

The Irish may wish that the UK remains for practical reasons, so might the Belgians or Portuguese for all I know.
However this whole malarkey is down to the UK as the driver of it. Whatever the preferences of other EU countries may be is secondary to the brexit victory. First and foremost it is surely down to the UK to come up with the ideas isn't it, and not blame others if it is unable to do so?
I see the position of the EU and particularly Ireland as reactive, not as institutions who change to suit the UK.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 27, 2018)

Oh dear, not reacting well to facts again. Fake news


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish may wish that the UK remains for practical reasons, so might the Belgians or Portuguese for all I know.
> However this whole malarkey is down to the UK as the driver of it. Whatever the preferences of other EU countries may be is secondary to the brexit victory. First and foremost it is surely down to the UK to come up with the ideas isn't it, and not blame others if it is unable to do so?
> I see the position of the EU and particularly Ireland as reactive, not as institutions who change to suit the UK.


i have given no indication of the dublin government's attitude to the uk's position vis a vis the eu. i have said that they are remainers as the dublin government shows no indication of desiring an alteration of the irish relationship to the eu. i hope that makes the position clear.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i have given no indication of the dublin government's attitude to the uk's position vis a vis the eu. i have said that they are remainers as the dublin government shows no indication of desiring an alteration of the irish relationship to the eu. i hope that makes the position clear.


Yes it makes your position clear.
There are other countries that have given no indication too.
Is that relevant?
I thought the suggestion made by others is that somehow the ROI  is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote rather than simply being the ROI reacting to this UK initiative.
Nobody has 'seized on' the Irish border to make it an anti brexit issue as far as I can tell. Rather the border is a phenomena that exists, and that brexiters say they want to take control of. In order to do that they need ideas how to make that happen in a practical and workable way.


----------



## flypanam (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I thought the suggestion made by others is that somehow the ROI  is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote rather than simply being the ROI reacting to this UK initiative.



Who said that? That's your reading.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

flypanam said:


> Who said that? That's your reading.


I started by saying 'I thought'. Perhaps you missed that.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 27, 2018)

Max fac is just a Tory libertarian dream, it wouldn't work in reality at all.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 27, 2018)

Fuck business indeed. Now the SNP are the only bastion of good old neo liberalism.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 27, 2018)

3 takes on this


1) he is a twat of the highest order
or
2) he truly believes in the ethos of brexit so much and is so enthusiastic about the future of this glorious nation  that he is willing to brush the capitalist handwringers aside in order to achieve this noble aim 
or
3) he is a twat of the highest order


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes it makes your position clear.
> There are other countries that have given no indication too.
> Is that relevant?
> I thought the suggestion made by others is that somehow the ROI  is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote rather than simply being the ROI reacting to this UK initiative.
> Nobody has 'seized on' the Irish border to make it an anti brexit issue as far as I can tell. Rather the border is a phenomena that exists, and that brexiters say they want to take control of. In order to do that they need ideas how to make that happen in a practical and workable way.


So what’s your thoughts on the Irish Border situation?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So what’s your thoughts on the Irish Border situation?



Either it will have a huge cost politically, socially and financially, and be a divisive issue for the foreseeable, or it will cause brexit not to happen at all.


----------



## andysays (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes it makes your position clear.
> There are other countries that have given no indication too.
> Is that relevant?
> I thought the suggestion made by others is that somehow the ROI  is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote rather than simply being the ROI reacting to this UK initiative.
> Nobody has 'seized on' the Irish border to make it an anti brexit issue as far as I can tell. Rather the border is a phenomena that exists, and that brexiters say they want to take control of. In order to do that they need ideas how to make that happen in a practical and workable way.



Who are these 'others' you thought the suggestion is/was being made by that somehow the ROI is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote?

The suggestion I've seen put forward, here and elsewhere, is that it's (principally) British Remainers (including you) putting forward the issue of the Irish border as a way of undermining the UK Brexit vote being put into practice.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Who are these 'others' you thought the suggestion is/was being made by that somehow the ROI is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote?
> 
> The suggestion I've seen put forward, here and elsewhere, is that it's (principally) British Remainers (including you) putting forward the issue of the Irish border as a way of undermining the UK Brexit vote being put into practice.



You are wrong about my motivation, but it doesn't matter if anybody is putting forward the issue of the Irish border as a way of undermining brexit or not. The Irish border is an issue per se.
Perhaps brexit will not be 'undermined' if everybody pretends the border doesn't exist.
It is down to the UK after the brexit vote to either gain control of it's borders, or accept that if control of the border is a defining plank of brexit, and the UK can't manage to do that, then the UK can't have the brexit defined in those terms.
I kind of think you have partially answered the question posed in your first paragraph in your second paragraph.


----------



## andysays (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are wrong about my motivation, but it doesn't matter if anybody is putting forward the issue of the Irish border as a way of undermining brexit or not. The Irish border is an issue per se.
> Perhaps brexit will not be 'undermined' if everybody pretends the border doesn't exist.
> It is down to the UK after the brexit vote to either gain control of it's borders, or accept that if control of the border is a defining plank of brexit, and the UK can't manage to do that, then the UK can't have the brexit defined in those terms.
> I kind of think you have partially answered the question posed in your first paragraph in your second paragraph.


No, it doesn't answer it at all. You specifically said


> I thought the suggestion made by others is that somehow the ROI is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote rather than simply being the ROI reacting to this UK initiative.


So who are these 'others' you thought the suggestion is being made by that somehow the ROI is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote?
It's a simple question which you should be able to give a simple answer to.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, it doesn't answer it at all. You specifically said
> 
> So who are these 'others' you thought the suggestion is being made by that somehow the ROI is deliberately trying to undermine the UK brexit vote?
> It's a simple question which you should be able to give a simple answer to.


I took post 8462 to be resonant of the notion that the ROI is trying to undermine brexit. I have heard it said elsewhere (although I can't provide a link) that in some way the ROI is compelling Barnier and the EU to slow the progress of brexit 'negotiations'.
That is my answer, even if it isn't satisfactory to you.
Whatever has been said about the motivations of anybody, the Irish border remains at this time a problem without a workable practical solution.
I will answer your simple question with a difficult one of my own, do you have any idea how to solve the problem?
I would understand perfectly if you don't, whether you voted brexit, remain, or didn't vote at all.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ..The Irish border is an issue per se...



for who?

for voters in Tiverton, or Kidderminster, or Blackburn, or Hull, or Hexham, or Swaffham, or Merthyr, or Peebles its simply not an issue - the proportion of trade from mainland GB that is exported to the Republic isn't enough to make anyone faint in the street should it be lost. 

voters in NI might be exercised about about a hard border, but very few constituancies in GB are going to be swayed by the issue.

the Irish government is concerned about a hard trade border because 13% of its exports go to the UK, and a large wedge of the rest transit through the UK. it also knows that if there were to be some kind of resurgent IRA (of whatever flavour) campaign, it doesn't have anything like the police, intelligence and military resources to cope, because, as all observers of the various reublican groups well know, republicanism is just as ideologically opposed to the Irish state as they are to the British one...


----------



## andysays (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I took post 8462 to be resonant of the notion that the ROI is trying to undermine brexit...


This is post 8462


flypanam said:


> It's a bit shit seeing all these references to the border, and knowing it's just a fucking game for some people to get what they want in a situation that isn't going their way. Once again proving that Ireland is only ever a secondary issue/smokescreen.



There's no reference there to R.O.I.

Maybe flypanam will be kind enough to comment, but it doesn't read to me that they're suggesting anything remotely like what you've understood.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

kebabking said:


> for who?
> 
> for voters in Tiverton, or Kidderminster, or Blackburn, or Hull, or Hexham, or Swaffham, or Merthyr, or Peebles its simply not an issue - the proportion of trade from mainland GB that is exported to the Republic isn't enough to make anyone faint in the street should it be lost.
> 
> ...


It is an issue for brexiters who voted to regain control of the UK borders outside the EU. That is for who.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> This is post 8462
> 
> 
> There's no reference there to R.O.I.
> ...


I accept what you say, I may have misunderstood the post.
If you don't believe that in some quarters the attitude of some brexiters is that the Irish Government is trying to undermine brexit fair enough. Right now I can't provide specific word for word links.
As I said I think there is a resonance, for example Boris Johnson talking about the tail wagging the dog.
We can to and fro if you like, but the UK will be outside the EU, the ROI will be inside the EU.
That suggests to me there is a border between the two entities.
The problem is how does that work in practice.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> It is an issue for brexiters who voted to regain control of the UK borders outside the EU. That is for who.



no, its not - one of the central contructs of the EU is the absence of internal borders, in deciding to leave that construct the implication could only ever be that there would be a hard border between the UK and EU. you might then decide to have some other construct that mitigated that border, but the central truth of leaving the EU is there will be a border between the UK and EU. its not really the job of those who vote and campaign for something to come up with a plan to mitigate its effects.


----------



## andysays (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I accept what you say, I may have misunderstood the post.
> If you don't believe that in some quarters the attitude of some brexiters is that the Irish Government is trying to undermine brexit fair enough. Right now I can't provide specific word for word links.
> As I said I think there is a resonance, for example Boris Johnson talking about the tail wagging the dog.
> We can to and fro if you like, but the UK will be outside the EU, the ROI will be inside the EU.
> ...


OK, we agree that the issue of how the border works in practice is the important one.

I've already given you my favoured solution, which you have dismissed as being unworkable. 

I've also said all along that the main reason I took the opportunity to vote for Brexit was that I hoped the Conservative party would be damaged by a Leave vote, so I'm happy to leave the problem of the Irish border, along with all the other problems, to them to sort out or not.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

kebabking said:


> no, its not - one of the central contructs of the EU is the absence of internal borders, in deciding to leave that construct the implication could only ever be that there would be a hard border between the UK and EU. you might then decide to have some other construct that mitigated that border, but the central truth of leaving the EU is there will be a border between the UK and EU. its not really the job of those who vote and campaign for something to come up with a plan to mitigate its effects.


You are right.
I am not enquiring about a plan to mitigate the effects of the hard border, although I anticipate very negative effects if it is somehow established, I am enquiring about how that hard border is established in the first place.
You probably know already that the border is 310 miles long, with close to 300 official and unofficial crossing points, and people own properties that span both sides of the border.
Perhaps you have an idea that addresses the practicalities of that.
Beyond that there is another 'central truth' that the UK has signed up to an international treaty in the form of the Good Friday Agreement.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> OK, we agree that the issue of how the border works in practice is the important one.
> 
> I've already given you my favoured solution, which you have dismissed as being unworkable.
> 
> I've also said all along that the main reason I took the opportunity to vote for Brexit was that I hoped the Conservative party would be damaged by a Leave vote, so I'm happy to leave the problem of the Irish border, along with all the other problems, to them to sort out or not.



The Conservative Party is damaged by being the Conservative Party, the trouble is not enough voters have cottoned on to that enough to vote them out.
Why would you help the Conservative Party out by suggesting a favoured solution?
And yes, I certainly believe a technological solution wouldn't work in practice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Conservative Party is damaged by being the Conservative Party, the trouble is not enough voters have cottoned on to that enough to vote them out.
> Why would you help the Conservative Party out by suggesting a favoured solution?
> And yes, I certainly believe a technological solution wouldn't work in practice.


Yes. I think the tory party should distribute poisoned ribena to the delegates at tory conference. They could call the resulting deaths maytown


----------



## Poi E (Jun 27, 2018)

Interesting times when the Daily Mail criticises members of the cabinet for being pro-business. The normally reserved FT laid into Johnson, old school tie be damned. May can't have a fucking clue which way to go as her party knows not what it stands for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 27, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Interesting times when the Daily Mail criticises members of the cabinet for being pro-business. The normally reserved FT laid into Johnson, old school tie be damned. May can't have a fucking clue which way to go as her party knows not what it stands for.


Privilege. It stands for privilege.


----------



## andysays (Jun 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Conservative Party is damaged by being the Conservative Party, the trouble is not enough voters have cottoned on to that enough to vote them out.
> Why would you help the Conservative Party out by suggesting a favoured solution?
> And yes, I certainly believe a technological solution wouldn't work in practice.


I've already mentioned the solution I favour. It isn't one which would find favour with the Conservative government or their supporters so suggesting it doesn't help them one bit.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 27, 2018)

Neo lib panic over Rees Mogg in Institutional InvestorJacob Rees-Mogg Is Waging Political War

The poor fuckers. They thought they were the only interest group that mattered.


----------



## yield (Jun 27, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Interesting times when the Daily Mail criticises members of the cabinet for being pro-business. The normally reserved FT laid into Johnson, old school tie be damned. May can't have a fucking clue which way to go as her party knows not what it stands for.


Was it these two articles? Crazy. It's good though that what was implicit is now explicit.

Boris Johnson’s Brexit explosion ruins Tory business credentials
FT June 25, 2018 (paywalled can c&p the whole article if people want)


> For now the realists are in control, but this fissure goes beyond Brexit. One need only listen to leavers raging at the chancellor or the Bank of England to know a Tory Rubicon has been crossed.
> 
> This then is the state of British politics. A Labour party which has fallen to anti-capitalists and a Conservative party, infected by a strain of economic denialism and with a core — though not yet a majority — who place little store in business-friendly policies.
> 
> For the first time in 40 years business cannot be sure that either major party cares about its interests. The nation must hope that global businesses making investment decisions and hearing of Mr Johnson’s remark do not plump for the obvious reply.



'F*** business': Boris Johnson is accused of dismissing concerns of UK job losses in foul mouthed comment to EU diplomats
23 June 2018


> Mr Johnson’s four-letter outburst was reportedly overheard by two diplomats when he was talking to Belgium’s EU envoy Rudolf Huygelen.
> 
> He also said he did not want a ‘bog-roll Brexit’ that was ‘soft, yielding and indefinitely long’.
> 
> His coarse comments were criticised by business leaders and MPs as ‘insulting’ and ‘demeaning’.





> Quizzed over the Prime Minister’s support for a so-called ‘soft Brexit’ deal, rather than the ‘hard Brexit’ he favours, Mr Johnson said he would force her to back down, vowing: ‘We will fight it [soft Brexit] and we will win.’
> 
> Sowing further confusion, moments after telling guests in his formal speech that Brexit was ‘wonderful’, he confided privately that the UK was more divided now than since the English Civil War.


One for the civil war thread.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 27, 2018)

This is an example of how (un)prepared the UK is with regard to the Irish border.
The top police chief in Northern Ireland is questioned by the Northern Ireland Affairs select committee.

PSNI 'in the dark' over Brexit plans

I doubt his position is of a remainer trying to undermine brexit, but he might be accused by some of doing so.


----------



## magneze (Jun 28, 2018)

The Irish border is an issue? Why haven't you mentioned it before?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

magneze said:


> The Irish border is an issue? Why haven't you mentioned it before?



It appears that if the Eu doesn't give the UK a decent deal then the EU will wish to impose a border between the Six Counties and the Republic. I'm still waiting for philosophical and other remainers to explain why they support this shit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It appears that if the Eu doesn't give the UK a decent deal then the EU will wish to impose a border between the Six Counties and the Republic. I'm still waiting for philosophical and other remainers to explain why they support this shit.


If the EU doesn't give the UK a good deal then the EU will impose a border?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> If the EU doesn't give the UK a good deal then the EU will impose a border?



Yeah. Bunch o'cunts, ain't they.


----------



## mod (Jun 28, 2018)

Is there any realistic chance of a Peoples Vote?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah. Bunch o'cunts, ain't they.


No.  The cunts are the people that caused this but now refuse to take responsibility for it or attempt to come up with a viable solution, sitting on their arses demanding everyone else fix their shit.

And no-one ever mentioned a border between NI/ROI.  That's not where a border would be.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

mod said:


> Is there any realistic chance of a Peoples Vote?



We had one two years ago and many people are still losing their shit over the result today, a second one will probably send 'em right over the edge!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> We had one two years ago and many people are still losing their shit over the result today, a second one will probably send 'em right over the edge!


all the more reason to have one


----------



## andysays (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No.  The cunts are the people that caused this but now refuse to take responsibility for it or attempt to come up with a viable solution, sitting on their arses demanding everyone else fix their shit.
> 
> And no-one ever mentioned a border between NI/ROI.  That's not where a border would be.


No one ever mentioned a border between NI/ROI

No one. 

Ever.

OK...


----------



## andysays (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No.  The cunts are the people that caused this but now refuse to take responsibility for it or attempt to come up with a viable solution, sitting on their arses demanding everyone else fix their shit...



At first I thought you were referring to those of us who voted for Brexit as cunts, but I've just realised that you actually mean the Conservative government.

Don't you?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 28, 2018)

Yawn.


----------



## Supine (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> We had one two years ago and many people are still losing their shit over the result today, a second one will probably send 'em right over the edge!



True dat!


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> If the EU doesn't give the UK a good deal then the EU will impose a border?


I my view you are looking at it from the opposite direction to me.
The UK voted brexit, so it is the UK who is imposing a border by leaving.
The question remains how does the UK intend to do that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I my view you are looking at it from the opposite direction to me.
> The UK voted brexit, so it is the UK who is imposing a border by leaving.
> The question remains how does the UK intend to do that.


I agree...I was quoting someone else.

btw has anyone said "welcome to Urban" yet?

Welcome


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I agree...I was quoting someone else.
> 
> btw has anyone said "welcome to Urban" yet?
> 
> Welcome



Thank you for your welcome, but judging by the number of times I have been called a c*nt here, my perception is that you are very much in a minority on this site.
Thank you all the same.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I my view you are looking at it from the opposite direction to me.
> The UK voted brexit, so it is the UK who is imposing a border by leaving.
> The question remains how does the UK intend to do that.



It is the EU that imposes the borders, the massive fence between the EU and Serbia was built against the wishes of non-EU Serbia by the EU state of Hungry, using forced prison labour, (We♥EU).

And it is the EU that is insisting on dividing the island of Ireland unless the UK submits to the EU's will.

The UK has stated explicitly that they will not impose a hard border.

So it is up to those who support the EU to come up with a workable solution to this issue.


----------



## agricola (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So it is up to those who support the EU to come up with a workable solution to this issue.



It should be, but thanks to the division and incompetence of the British Government it isn't.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So it is up to those who support the EU to come up with a workable solution to this issue.



Stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union, or a _very_ close approximation thereof. There, done.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Stay in the Single Market and the Customs Union, or a _very_ close approximation thereof. There, done.



Sounds like a winner, just exempt the Uk from the bits they don’t like and I think we have an accord


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is the EU that imposes the borders, the massive fence between the EU and Serbia was built against the wishes of non-EU Serbia by the EU state of Hungry, using forced prison labour, (We♥EU).
> 
> And it is the EU that is insisting on dividing the island of Ireland unless the UK submits to the EU's will.
> 
> ...


To be fair the UK did divide Ireland in the first place


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Thank you for your welcome, but judging by the number of times I have been called a c*nt here, my perception is that you are very much in a minority on this site.
> Thank you all the same.


By using an asterisk you undermine any claim not to be what you refuse to spell


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> To be fair the UK did divide Ireland in the first place



You can’t keep dragging up history though, that’d be like having a pop at the Germans cos of the war...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You can’t keep dragging up history though, that’d be like having a pop at the Germans cos of the war...


I was reading this afternoon how in 1898 the UK made an alliance with Germany. How different things might have been.


----------



## Mrs D (Jun 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I my view you are looking at it from the opposite direction to me.
> The UK voted brexit, so it is the UK who is imposing a border by leaving.
> The question remains how does the UK intend to do that.



There was already a border before the Brexit vote. Those who are in favour of no border have had many years in which to extinguish the border by arranging for NI to become part of Ireland, but they have failed. Perhaps now they can seek to remove Ireland from the EU so it can join a customs union with the UK.


----------



## treelover (Jun 28, 2018)

The Left Against Brexit | Another Europe is Possible




> In today's Britain, the dice is still firmly loaded in favour of the rich and powerful. Tory Brexit will only exacerbate inequality.
> 
> But project reality is now firmly here. The nine-month countdown to 29 March, 2019 divorce day is underway. Our movement is upping its game.
> 
> ...






TESSA Union Boss Launches 'Left Against Brexit', going nationwide soon.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 28, 2018)

treelover said:


> The Left Against Brexit | Another Europe is Possible
> 
> 
> 
> ...



is this not 3 years too late?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is the EU that imposes the borders, the massive fence between the EU and Serbia was built against the wishes of non-EU Serbia by the EU state of Hungry, using forced prison labour, (We♥EU).
> 
> And it is the EU that is insisting on dividing the island of Ireland unless the UK submits to the EU's will.
> 
> ...



I simply disagree. It is the 'will' of the UK to leave the EU isn't it? So I can't see how any submission by the UK is being demanded.

Incidentally I realise their are different currencies, and some demand by the whole island to regulate for health and hygiene purposes agricultural related imports from the rest of the UK and elsewhere, but I wouldn't describe that as a soft border particularly. Would you not agree that any border beyond that which exists is a 'hard' border. I don't see what difference there is between a 'soft', a 'hard' or a 'frictionless as possible' border. A border is a border.

The repeated explicit declaration of the UK is what exactly? That brexit means that all kinds of everything can flow into the UK unchecked in any way?


----------



## treelover (Jun 28, 2018)

kebabking said:


> is this not 3 years too late?



Not a fan of some its leading lights, they live in an another world.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> By using an asterisk you undermine any claim not to be what you refuse to spell


I see it as being polite, you see it differently.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

Mrs D said:


> There was already a border before the Brexit vote. Those who are in favour of no border have had many years in which to extinguish the border by arranging for NI to become part of Ireland, but they have failed. Perhaps now they can seek to remove Ireland from the EU so it can join a customs union with the UK.


I doubt that the ROI would dance to the UK tune and leave the EU because of the UK brexit in which they were simply observers.
The nature of the border changed when both countries joined the EU at the same time, and it further changed because of the GFA


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 28, 2018)

treelover said:


> Not a fan of some its leading lights, they live in an another world.


That's the thing with this second referendum bit, regardless of the pros and cons the people fronting the demand are clueless wankers who have no real answer to the simple question 'why?'


----------



## kebabking (Jun 28, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ...Would you not agree that any border beyond that which exists is a 'hard' border. I don't see what difference there is between a 'soft', a 'hard' or a 'frictionless as possible' border. A border is a border.



are you completely witless?

have you not travelled between England and Scotland? same currency, but different tax rates, differing legal system, different laws - but the very definition of a soft border.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 28, 2018)

kebabking said:


> are you completely witless?
> 
> have you not travelled between England and Scotland? same currency, but different tax rates, differing legal system, different laws - but the very definition of a soft border.



What point are you making? That there is something called a soft border between England and Scotland because of tax rates and laws (there has always been different legal systems). 
So using that analogy you might as well say there exists a 'soft border' between Lewisham and Bromley because of different council tax rates and local by-laws.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 28, 2018)

Sums up the devolved powers pretty well.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 28, 2018)

kebabking said:


> are you completely witless?
> 
> have you not travelled between England and Scotland? same currency, but different tax rates, differing legal system, different laws - but the very definition of a soft border.


They're both in the EU.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 28, 2018)

kebabking said:


> are you completely witless?
> 
> have you not travelled between England and Scotland? same currency, but different tax rates, differing legal system, different laws - but the very definition of a soft border.


With free movement though.


----------



## yield (Jun 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They're both in the EU.





sleaterkinney said:


> With free movement though.


The Act of Union between England and Scotland predates the EU by quite some time.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I simply disagree. It is the 'will' of the UK to leave the EU isn't it? So I can't see how any submission by the UK is being demanded.
> 
> Incidentally I realise their are different currencies, and some demand by the whole island to regulate for health and hygiene purposes agricultural related imports from the rest of the UK and elsewhere, but I wouldn't describe that as a soft border particularly. Would you not agree that any border beyond that which exists is a 'hard' border. I don't see what difference there is between a 'soft', a 'hard' or a 'frictionless as possible' border. A border is a border.
> 
> The repeated explicit declaration of the UK is what exactly? That brexit means that all kinds of everything can flow into the UK unchecked in any way?





DexterTCN said:


> No.  The cunts are the people that caused this but now refuse to take responsibility for it or attempt to come up with a viable solution, sitting on their arses demanding everyone else fix their shit.
> 
> And no-one ever mentioned a border between NI/ROI.  That's not where a border would be.



So basically you guys are saying no one is ever allowed to leave an institution that is younger than a lot of people alive today, and if they do the institution can’t be held responsible for anything it does after.
And this is why we should never leave, and anyone that wants to leave is a cunt? Oh Dexter, I hope you aren’t too prominent within the Yes movement because we don’t need folk like you leading this stuff, fucking hell.


----------



## treelover (Jun 29, 2018)

Apparently one FBPE supporter on Twitter, 'Brexit Bin' had this to say, ffs.

"Leavers falls into 7 categories: “Racist, xenophobes, the economically illiterate, the generally illiterate, the criminally gullible, those who don’t know who the EU works, billionaires with offshore tax havens to protect."


----------



## teuchter (Jun 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So basically you guys are saying no one is ever allowed to leave an institution that is younger than a lot of people alive today, and if they do the institution can’t be held responsible for anything it does after.
> And this is why we should never leave, and anyone that wants to leave is a cunt? Oh Dexter, I hope you aren’t too prominent within the Yes movement because we don’t need folk like you leading this stuff, fucking hell.


Is it your view that when people voted for Brexit, they generally only wanted to leave the institution, rather than to see anything change in terms of who and what was allowed to pass across the UK's borders?


----------



## pocketscience (Jun 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is it your view that when people voted for Brexit, they generally only wanted to leave the institution, rather than to see anything change in terms of who and what was allowed to pass across the UK's borders?


I reckon it was _the_ exclusive factor, seeing as that was the only question on the ballot.
I don't recall any campaign for a referendum to change the UKs borders pre 2016.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So basically you guys are saying no one is ever allowed to leave an institution that is younger than a lot of people alive today, and if they do the institution can’t be held responsible for anything it does after.
> And this is why we should never leave, and anyone that wants to leave is a cunt? Oh Dexter, I hope you aren’t too prominent within the Yes movement because we don’t need folk like you leading this stuff, fucking hell.


How are any of my posts saying no one is ever allowed to leave an institution?
What I have been asking is what happens in Ireland after departure.


----------



## yield (Jun 29, 2018)

treelover said:


> Apparently one FBPE supporter on Twitter, 'Brexit Bin' had this to say, ffs.
> 
> "Leavers falls into 7 categories: “Racist, xenophobes, the economically illiterate, the generally illiterate, the criminally gullible, those who don’t know who the EU works, billionaires with offshore tax havens to protect."


Or maybe they believe that a supranational EU elite pursuing neoliberal policies aren't better for the majority of people.

The financial crisis happened ten effing years ago. What have we seen? Falling incomes in real terms. Rising costs of rent, food, fuel and other essentials.

Not understanding what is going on is just willful ignorance.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I don't recall any campaign for a referendum to change the UKs borders pre 2016.



2014?


----------



## Supine (Jun 29, 2018)

treelover said:


> Apparently one FBPE supporter on Twitter, 'Brexit Bin' had this to say, ffs.
> 
> "Leavers falls into 7 categories: “Racist, xenophobes, the economically illiterate, the generally illiterate, the criminally gullible, those who don’t know who the EU works, billionaires with offshore tax havens to protect."



#8 lexiteers who believe leaving will somehow overthrow the state and lead to a downfall in capitalism
#9 fishermen who want to catch more fish

The list would be massive.


----------



## andysays (Jun 29, 2018)

treelover said:


> Apparently one FBPE supporter on Twitter, 'Brexit Bin' had this to say, ffs.
> 
> "Leavers falls into 7 categories: “Racist, xenophobes, the economically illiterate, the generally illiterate, the criminally gullible, those who don’t know who the EU works, billionaires with offshore tax havens to protect."


Personally, I come into all seven


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 29, 2018)

Champion of the EU and leader of ALDE arguing in favour of concentration camps set up in developing countries. 


> One suggestion is “regional disembarkation platforms” in north Africa, under the auspices of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) and the International Organisation for Migration. These platforms could allow rapid processing to distinguish between economic migrants and those in need of international protection, while reducing the incentive to embark on perilous journeys in the hands of people-traffickers.
> 
> These proposals have already been met with scepticism, but if combined with a revision of the Dublin regime and a system of “burden-sharing” between EU countries, they could go some way to ensuring asylum seekers can apply directly to EU countries for asylum, rather than paying traffickers to risk their lives at sea, which surely must be one of our objectives.


Truly the migrants friend.


----------



## Supine (Jun 29, 2018)

Interesting article about the way referendums should be held.

Take it from the Swiss: the Brexit referendum wasn't legitimate


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

I know it’s twitter but brief run down of what Merkel has had to say post EU summit:


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

I think that’s in order but if it isn’t f all I can do about it, school run!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

Supine said:


> #8 lexiteers who believe leaving will somehow overthrow the state and lead to a downfall in capitalism
> #9 fishermen who want to catch more fish
> 
> The list would be massive.


I don’t anyone really ever said number 8, but the dent it’s put in the Tories etc surpass my wildest dreams


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is it your view that when people voted for Brexit, they generally only wanted to leave the institution, rather than to see anything change in terms of who and what was allowed to pass across the UK's borders?


You want me to speak for all of us?

In fact I’m ignoring that question, it’s just another wee dig really. Next....


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How are any of my posts saying no one is ever allowed to leave an institution?
> What I have been asking is what happens in Ireland after departure.


You refuse to acknowledge. that it’s the EU, not the U.K. who are insisting on a hard border. Why must it necessarily be so because the U.K. voted to leave? WAnd in order to fight this, you seem to think spending all day on here asking us to come up with solutions is going to help.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 29, 2018)

treelover said:


> Apparently one FBPE supporter on Twitter, 'Brexit Bin' had this to say, ffs.
> 
> "Leavers falls into 7 categories: “Racist, xenophobes, the economically illiterate, the generally illiterate, the criminally gullible, those who don’t know who the EU works, billionaires with offshore tax havens to protect."



Economically illiterate people standing side by side with billionaire tax haven bods. Remainers are somewhere in between presumably, reasonably economically literate?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You want me to speak for all of us?



Nope, I just asked for your view.

It seems perfectly possible to leave the institution, if that's all that matters, and maintain a soft border. I don't see that the EU is 'imposing' a hard border simply because we are leaving the institution.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 29, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You refuse to acknowledge. that it’s the EU, not the U.K. who are insisting on a hard border. Why must it necessarily be so because the U.K. voted to leave? WAnd in order to fight this, you seem to think spending all day on here asking us to come up with solutions is going to help.



No, it is the UK that is insisting on a hard border by leaving.

What are you suggesting, that the UK leaves but stays?

You seem to refuse to acknowledge that by leaving something that previously it was part of, there would be a border between the UK and everywhere else, certainly the EU (which as I said the UK is leaving) and by dint of that the ROI (which is not leaving).
Maybe you believe the EU will unilaterally set up a hard border, but if it didn't the UK wouldn't bother, and therefore would not have regained control of (all of) it's borders.

So for example if the UK established strict standards on livestock, much stricter than the EU, the UK would still allow 'lesser' livestock to be either transported, or wander, across the border from the EU to the UK unchecked?

I don't know why you complain that I mention the border, the issue of the land border in Ireland encapsulates so much of brexit, even if it as stark as leaving/staying as on the voting slip, or even if it is part of the melee and nuances of so called negotiations.

Incidentally I have no desire to help, I voted remain and that battle was lost, I don't want a peoples vote, I don't want another referendum. I am waiting for those who voted brexit to demonstrate they know what they're doing and how to do it.

if I am castigated for asking the question it is a convenient diversion from coming up with answers.

You may also have voted remain for all I know, but the 52% who voted leave are still, more than two years on, with probably only a limited number of options to choose from, still unable to solve the 'take back control' issue of the Irish border.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Champion of the EU and leader of ALDE arguing in favour of concentration camps set up in developing countries.
> 
> Truly the migrants friend.


I'm sure the tories and their recent injection of ukip voters will be a great friend to them.  I'm sure brexit will be just great for migrants.

You didn't vote in the referendum though, did you?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 29, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm sure the tories and their recent injection of ukip voters will be a great friend to them.  I'm sure brexit will be just great for migrants.


No one has made any such claim. But it has been claimed that (1) to have voted Leave is anti-immigrant and (2) that the EU is progressive regarding immigration.



DexterTCN said:


> You didn't vote in the referendum though, did you?


The lateness with which I received my postal vote probably means that my vote wasn't counted but I returned it with a Leave vote.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No one has made any such claim. But it has been claimed that (1) to have voted Leave is anti-immigrant and (2) that the EU is progressive regarding immigration.
> 
> The lateness with which I received my postal vote probably means that my vote wasn't counted but I returned it with a Leave vote.


But you keep going on about migrants.  How does brexit help them?  Or how do you think it may help them in the longer term?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> How does brexit help them?  Or how do you think it may help them in the longer term?


You might as easily ask the same question about remaining in the EU. How would not leaving the EU help migrants? 

But as myself, danny (here) and others have pointed out the question is at best useless and at worst politically regressive. Both the UK and EU governments (and the Scottish one for that matter) are the enemies for those of us with class politics, that won't change with Britain being in or out of the EU.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You might as easily ask the same question about remaining in the EU. How would not leaving the EU help migrants?
> 
> But as myself, danny (here) and others have pointed out the question is at best useless and at worst politically regressive. Both the UK and EU governments *(and the Scottish one for that matter) are the enemies for those of us with class politics, that won't change with Britain being in or out of the EU*.


This. And neither will it change if Scotland leaves the union, which we all talked about in 2014, but discussion on that level seems to have been forgotten now.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 30, 2018)

Glory days, the end of the Union. Imagine the good done to the world to shrink this bastard militarist state of fantasists and murderers.

edit: first coffee of the morning rant post.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jun 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But you keep going on about migrants.  How does brexit help them?  Or how do you think it may help them in the longer term?


At worst it will have no effect whatsoever, however if the EU ends up having to revert to old trade style agreement- something which has become more likely since we voted leave- then I can’t see how they would be shelling out as much money to beef up the border in Turkey and elsewhere. Pre 1990 there was a relatively lower number of migrant deaths for those trying to reach Europe. Since 2000 there’s been around 30,000 deaths. As an example from 2015 to 2016 migrant deaths in the Mediterranean Sea increased by 35 per cent. This is largely due to the money EU is shelling out on beefing up borders and boats intercepting people traffickers and IIRC even rescuers. How can the answer to this problem be a stronger EU? Weaken the fuck out of it. I’m thinking decades down the line,


Poi E said:


> Glory days, the end of the Union. Imagine the good done to the world to shrink this bastard militarist state of fantasists and murderers.


Wellllll even  Mhairi Black has been boasting that the SNP has a nice grown up defence policy these days just like the other parties.

Post nightshift, I’ve gone hardline. Bedtime I think


----------



## Poi E (Jun 30, 2018)

I hope the SNP do have a credible defence policy designed around Scotland. Shit load of resources up there and a grasping state on your edge.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> I hope the SNP do have a credible defence policy designed around Scotland. Shit load of resources up there and a grasping state on your edge.


They'll just station their forces on the north side of what will become known as sturgeon's wall


----------



## Poi E (Jun 30, 2018)

Not much a threat from rump UK's navy, I suppose. 

I want to see armed peace activists rise up and take Faslane.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 30, 2018)

Ranting on some more, I see May was hailing BAE providing know-how so the Aussies can build some Type 28 Frigates in their yards. I suppose it shows the ultimate service economy, where industry is seen as a success even if it is (i) a global company (ii) not doing much of the work in the UK and (iii) really just doing an IP-licensing deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Ranting on some more, I see May was hailing BAE providing know-how so the Aussies can build some Type 28 Frigates in their yards. I suppose it shows the ultimate service economy, where industry is seen as a success even if it is (i) a global company (ii) not doing much of the work in the UK and (iii) really just doing an IP-licensing deal.


What happened to types 1 through 27?


----------



## Poi E (Jun 30, 2018)

It's like the motorways. Some just never went anywhere and the numbers got lost. I probably got the number wrong.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You might as easily ask the same question about remaining in the EU. How would not leaving the EU help migrants?
> 
> But as myself, danny (here) and others have pointed out the question is at best useless and at worst politically regressive. Both the UK and EU governments (and the Scottish one for that matter) are the enemies for those of us with class politics, that won't change with Britain being in or out of the EU.


How would not leaving the EU help migrants?  Because it stops the fucking tories from not having to take a share of them most likely.

There's an utter denial of a distinct underlying racism in a large part of the brexit movement whether you and your mates like it or not.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> What happened to types 1 through 27?



Most were prototypes or not built at all. The one before type 26 (the one Poi E probably means) was/is type 23. And as far as I recall, the ones actually built before 23, 22 and 21 were the type 12s.

Ah nerdery. Lovely.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But you keep going on about migrants.  How does brexit help them?  Or how do you think it may help them in the longer term?


It will encourage liberals to leave the uk


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> How would not leaving the EU help migrants?  Because it stops the fucking tories from not having to take a share of them most likely.


How? The recent conference has just re-affimired the opposition within large sections of the EU to any "quota sharing", while re-emphasising support for more offshore detention camps. And you're assuming the quote sharing idea is necessarily progressive.



DexterTCN said:


> There's an utter denial of a distinct underlying racism in a large part of the brexit movement whether you and your mates like it or not.


Where? What do you mean by "brexit movement"?

Myself, butchers, danny, J Ed etc have not denied the racism of the UK goverments' and political parties immigration policies, indeed we've been at pains to extend such an analysis. There have been numerous people, both on this thread and in general, denying the racism of the EU's policies though.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jun 30, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Who is James O'brien and why should I give a flying fuck about his opinion?


----------



## kebabking (Jun 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Ranting on some more, I see May was hailing BAE providing know-how so the Aussies can build some Type 28 Frigates in their yards. I suppose it shows the ultimate service economy, where industry is seen as a success even if it is (i) a global company (ii) not doing much of the work in the UK and (iii) really just doing an IP-licensing deal.



the MOD, for it is the MOD who owns the T26 design, will get a rather nice cut, the engines and power systems are Rolls Royce, and hundreds of UK companies who have designed componants to fit the T26 design will get additional orders to put their gadgets in the Australian ships - the Australians will build them, the hull and superstructure will be built of Australian steel, but most of the rest of the ship will come from the UK. the Australians have opted for a US radar and fire control system, as well as missile and gun systems - the Aegis System - however thats quite reasonable given that they want to use the T26 for the Anti-Air Warfare role, rather than the Anti-Submarine Warfare/GP role that the T26 will fullfil in the Royal Navy.

its also quite possible that the T26 will win the current Canadian Navy procurement competition - if it does, and its assumed by the other bidders - it may well mean that the T26 build for the RN will be extended: the original requirement was for 13 ships, but in 2015 the government reduced that to 8, with the gap made up by a new class of cheaper, less capable general purpose frigates called the Type 31E, the E being for export, however its looking like the T26 will be a better export success than the T31E, and with the free money coming to the MOD from the Australian and Canadian (possibly) licences, the money might be there to go back to the original 13 T26.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jun 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Who is James O'brien and why should I give a flying fuck about his opinion?



Pompous windbag off some local radio station. Loves berating leave voters, without ever providing any sort of rationale for how this is likely to help.


----------



## billbond (Jul 1, 2018)

oboring , a complete and utter wanker

smug slimy piece of shit


----------



## billbond (Jul 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> How would not leaving the EU help migrants?  Because it stops the fucking tories from not having to take a share of them most likely.
> 
> There's an utter denial of a distinct underlying racism in a large part of the brexit movement whether you and your mates like it or not.



Rubbish


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Who is James O'brien and why should I give a flying fuck about his opinion?


Do you mind on the guy that kept shouting I THOUGHT YOU WANTED PARLIAMENT TO BE SOVEREIGN over and over  at a leave voter on a talk show because of that one time Parliament was gonna vote on whether to trigger article 50 or not.  No James, he wanted to leave the EU primarily.


----------



## billbond (Jul 1, 2018)

I think he is heading for a breakdown if he carries on like he does.
One of my relatives worked on the show for a while and she said near all the people on their hate him with a passion.
Got the sack from Newsnight, another champagne socialist.
Always used to be slagging Corbyn off as well.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> some local radio station


this is a good burn


----------



## DownwardDog (Jul 1, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Ranting on some more, I see May was hailing BAE providing know-how so the Aussies can build some Type 28 Frigates in their yards. I suppose it shows the ultimate service economy, where industry is seen as a success even if it is (i) a global company (ii) not doing much of the work in the UK and (iii) really just doing an IP-licensing deal.



It's less than that because the Australian Hunter class will use Australian radar (CEAFAR) and American/Australian combat control system (AEGIS/9LV) making them very different to the British Type 26s and meaning they have much less BAE content.


----------



## xenon (Jul 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> this is a good burn



 Except that it’s a national station. O’Brien does go on a bit though granted.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Except that it’s a national station


thats the point


----------



## andysays (Jul 1, 2018)

NHS plan in case of no-deal Brexit, Simon Stevens says



> "Extensive" planning is under way to prepare the health service for a no-deal Brexit scenario, the NHS England chief executive says. Simon Stevens said immediate planning was taking place around the supply of medicines and equipment. "Nobody's pretending this is a desirable situation, but if that's where we get to it will not have been unforeseen," he said.



As far as I'm aware, this is the first time anyone responsible for a public body like the NHS has admitted to making plans for a no-deal Brexit


----------



## Poi E (Jul 1, 2018)

Thanks fuck the civil servants have a clue.


----------



## Smangus (Jul 1, 2018)

Le Crunch cometh . Brexit gonna fuck up Tories


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 1, 2018)

andysays said:


> NHS plan in case of no-deal Brexit, Simon Stevens says
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I'm aware, this is the first time anyone responsible for a public body like the NHS has admitted to making plans for a no-deal Brexit


I already said HMRC is.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 2, 2018)

This can usefully go here, I think.  A CRISIS THAT HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH MIGRATION

"Another migration crisis, another EU summit, another banal resolution. Last week’s gathering of EU leaders was dominated by the migration issue, and shaped by the different needs of two nations: the desire of Italy’s new hardline coalition government to assert its authority on the European stage and the political crisis facing Germany’s Angela Merkel at home.

The final resolution was full of pious hope and little detail. It talked of a ‘shared effort’ by EU countries to alleviate the burden on Italy and Greece, without defining what would be shared. It proposed the building of detention centres in Europe, and of offshore facilities in Africa, euphemistically dubbed ‘regional disembarkation centres’. The irony of European countries demanding the right to maintain sovereignty over their borders while also trying to strong-arm African nations into accepting responsibility for a European issue seems to have passed everyone by."

"What shapes hostility is not the presence of migrants, but perceptions of trust and cohesion. ‘People in countries… with a high level of general and institutional trust, low level of corruption, a stable, well-performing economy and high level of social cohesion and inclusion (including migrants) fear migration the least,’ the authors note. On the other hand: ‘People are fearful in countries where people don’t trust each other or the state’s institutions, and where social cohesion and solidarity are weak.’ They conclude: ‘Anti-migrant attitudes have little to do with migrants.’"

"All this begins to explain why the migration crisis seems so irresolvable. The dominant political consensus is that the crisis can only be solved by even tighter controls on immigration. A handful of voices argue for liberalising controls. There are good political and moral arguments for liberalisation, bad ones for still more brutal restrictions. Neither approach, however, will resolve the migrant crisis, because the crisis is rooted in factors unrelated to migration – questions of trust, social disengagement and political disaffection. To solve any crisis, a good place to start is by defining the real questions for which we need answers."

I agree.  And it's a useful pointer to what "the left" should usefully be doing.  And it's certainly not the virtue signalling/vacuous polarising tribalism/vilification dead end of the liberal remain camp.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 139673


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)

And there 's this too

Brexit's biggest campaign donor 'investigated by National Crime Agency over links to Russia'



> In the US, Democrats in Congress recently obtained a trove of Mr Banks’s communications and are exploring whether he, Nigel Farage and other senior members of Leave.EU served as a bridge between Moscow and the Trump campaign.
> 
> Appearing on the BBC’s _Sunday Politics_, Mr Farage said there was “no evidence” Mr Banks had done anything wrong.
> 
> ...



Says the cunt who may have deliberately shorted the pound just prior to the referendum results being announced. Why is this scumbag not rotting in a cell someplace instead of being regularly given slots on the BBC?


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

teqniq said:


> And there 's this too
> 
> Brexit's biggest campaign donor 'investigated by National Crime Agency over links to Russia'
> 
> ...



Soros the scum bag needs to be charged as well and Gina Miller(how many times was she on the tv), would love to see her dodgy bank balance.
You dont believe in evidence then, sod being on trial wIth you on the Jury


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


>



Where was that from the Guardian 
Nothing to see here
Loads about Soros being investigated , why not put them up


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> ..You dont believe in evidence then, sod being on trial wIth you on the Jury


Wherever did you get that idea? He could easily be on remand awaiting trial rather than regularly appearing on the BBC. In a parallel universe of course.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain&obOrigUrl=true
https://www.express.co.uk/celebrity...&utm_campaign=traffic.outbrain&obOrigUrl=true


*'That's the investigation we need!' Farage calls for formal inquiry into billionaire Soros*
*NIGEL Farage called for an investigation into the political influence of George Soros after the billionaire donated £400,000 to pro-EU group Best for Britain.*


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> Where was that from the Guardian
> Nothing to see here
> Loads about Soros being investigated , why not put them up


it was from twitter you daft fuck


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> *'That's the investigation we need!' Farage calls for formal inquiry into billionaire Soros*
> *NIGEL Farage called for an investigation into the political influence of George Soros after the billionaire donated £400,000 to pro-EU group Best for Britain.*


who is this nigel farage of whom you witter?


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

oh the know alls on
Yawn


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it was from twitter you daft fuck


Too busy sensing an opportunity to froth about Soros and Miller I surmise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> oh the know alls on
> Yawn


if you do insist on quoting me you should expect a reply from me.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it was from twitter you daft fuck



Twatter ha ha must be true then
Daft twit


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> Twatter ha ha must be true then
> Daft twit




you know what's daft? asking someone where something they didn't post is from.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Too busy sensing an opportunity to froth about Soros and Miller I surmise.



Bit like you then with Banks  

I liked his brother better Gordon


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)

Not really, no. Something smells decidedly fishy about both Banks and Farage which is perhaps why the former is being investigated by the National Crime Agency and now the Electoral Commission. Unlike Soros. Incidentally I see your quote from Farage is from the Daily Express. Oh well.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 2, 2018)

Soros pays expensive lawyers to read the rules, and he probably listens to them. Farage and Banks are squalid used car salesmen who would sell this country off in a flash (to guys like Soros.)


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Soros pays expensive lawyers to read the rules, and he probably listens to them. Farage and Banks are squalid used car salesmen who would sell this country off in a flash (to guys like Soros.)


Yawn
what do you do for a living , i thought Farage was a banker
Jealousy is a awful thing
Yeah if you say so blah blah


----------



## Poi E (Jul 2, 2018)

I'm unemployed. Why?


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Not really, no. Something smells decidedly fishy about both Banks and Farage which is perhaps why the former is being investigated by the National Crime Agency and now the Electoral Commission. Unlike Soros. Incidentally I see your quote from Farage is from the Daily Express. Oh well.



Something massively fishy about Soros and Miller as well,plus many many others
Seems you get all your news from The Guardian - oh well must be true
And i got it from Twitter actually- everything is true on there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> Yawn
> what do you do for a living , i thought Farage was a banker
> Jealousy is a awful thing
> Yeah if you say so blah blah


according to his wiki page he has only ever been a banker in the rhyming slang sense of the word.


yet another subject on which you're ignorant.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> I'm unemployed. Why?



Me too Just do a bit when i can
well done


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> according to his wiki page he has only ever been a banker in the rhyming slang sense of the word.
> View attachment 139691
> 
> yet another subject on which you're ignorant.



No books to sort out today
Fake news
Good Dulwich boy thou, Wikipedia and Twitter you are on fire ha
I might go and change a few details


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Ready for the football now, off i go

Its Russia to win it, they control the  whole world dontcha know, Inc VAR it seems
Must be true i read it online


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

Nicked this off Twitter

"JRMogg after he left oxford worked in the city where he set up a hedge fund that made shedloads of money for him, his investors and the taxpayer.
Corbyn after private education and university where he was fucking useless, has gone on to be a union rep, glc member and mp where he has contributed less to the exchequer than the square root of naff all."

its mad on there,(took swear words out) who knows might join up myself
On second thoughts


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond, what was the point of that splatter of postings?  This isn't your private doodle pad.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> billbond, what was the point of that splatter of postings?  This isn't your private doodle pad.



Possibly just showing what rubbish is put on Twatter, like others have on here was one.
Do i have to go through you before posting anything then.
off to the sport
Good to know


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 2, 2018)

Vacuous twat.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Vacuous twat.



Right back at you


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> Right back at you


It's not just an insult; it's an assessment. Your run of posts appears to mean nothing, relate to nothing, and be of value to no one.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 2, 2018)

It's prats like him that made the vote so close in the end i feel.


----------



## billbond (Jul 2, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> It's prats like him that made the vote so close in the end i feel.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 2, 2018)

billbond said:


> Something massively fishy about Soros and Miller as well,plus many many others


Evidence?


> Seems you get all your news from The Guardian - oh well must be true


Not true, sometimes I post links to stories in the Graun but I am well aware that they have an agenda, just like everybody else.


> And i got it from Twitter actually- everything is true on there.


Judging by the size of the text and the formatting I would hazard a guess that this is a lie and that actually it came word for word from where I linked to in the first place, that well-known paragon of integrity, the Daily Express.

Oh look



> *'That's the investigation we need!' Farage calls for formal inquiry into billionaire Soros*
> *NIGEL Farage called for an investigation into the political influence of George Soros after the billionaire donated £400,000 to pro-EU group Best for Britain.*



e2a And I see I was right and those tiny icons in your post are actually links to:
How to speed up weight loss: The easy hacks to shed pounds and belly fast FAST


----------



## The39thStep (Jul 2, 2018)

Since 2004 most employment growth in the EU has been part time jobs  and the highest growth rate within that category has been temporary part time jobs


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 2, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Evidence?
> Not true, sometimes I post links to stories in the Graun but I am well aware that they have an agenda, just like everybody else.
> Judging by the size of the text and the formatting I would hazard a guess that this is a lie and that actually it came word for word from where I linked to in the first place, that well-known paragon of integrity, the Daily Express.
> 
> ...


What...this Express?


----------



## andysays (Jul 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I already said HMRC is.



You said back in May


DexterTCN said:


> The revenue are continuing along with the assumption that no agreement will be reached and resources are being applied to that end.


but as far as I can see you haven't provided any source for that, and I don't remember any such news being reported, so my point that


andysays said:


> As far as I'm aware, this is the first time anyone responsible for a public body like the NHS has admitted to making plans for a no-deal Brexit


still stands


----------



## Poi E (Jul 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What...this Express?
> 
> View attachment 139725



All on discount.Do you think they put the worst headlines in the discounted papers?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 3, 2018)

Poi E said:


> All on discount.Do you think they put the worst headlines in the discounted papers?


I don't understand people who buy it, whatever the price.  

Or go to their website.


----------



## gosub (Jul 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't understand people who buy it, whatever the price.
> 
> Or go to their website.


somebody, somewhere must like rupert the bear


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 3, 2018)

gosub said:


> somebody, somewhere must like rupert the bear


probably someone called rupert


----------



## Raheem (Jul 4, 2018)

Poi E said:


> All on discount.Do you think they put the worst headlines in the discounted papers?


I guess they need something that the discount can sit next to and not seem like the worst news you've read all week.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jul 4, 2018)

May and her nest of snakes off to Chequers to come up with yet another fudge for the EU to tell her shove up her arse. 

It does feel like things are at last coming to a head though. It might be an interesting weekend.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 4, 2018)

Yes, fudge...


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 4, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> May and her nest of snakes off to Chequers to come up with yet another fudge for the EU to tell her shove up her arse.
> 
> It does feel like things are at last coming to a head though. It might be an interesting weekend.


Quick! Push the Tickell button!


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 5, 2018)

David Davis says May's new Brexit customs plan is unworkable

Tomorrows just going to be more bollocks init?


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> David Davis says May's new Brexit customs plan is unworkable
> 
> Tomorrows just going to be more bollocks init?


Be honest though, David Davis is such an incompetent muppet I'd question him if he told me his name was David Davis


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Be honest though, David Davis is such an incompetent muppet I'd question him if he told me his name was David Davis



you'd question him. right. and what would you expect to gain from that?


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you'd question him. right. and what would you expect to gain from that?


You get that I was making a joke, right?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> You get that I was making a joke, right?


oh right, you were saying he's a liar and you're stupid.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> oh right, you were saying he's a liar and you're stupid.


No, I was saying that he's stupid. Through the medium of humour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> No, I was saying that he's stupid. Through the medium of humour.


humour's generally amusing. you're more funny peculiar than funny haha


----------



## Poi E (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Be honest though, David Davis is such an incompetent muppet I'd question him if he told me his name was David Davis



Yeah, but DD got skills.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Be honest though, David Davis is such an incompetent muppet I'd question him if he told me his name was David Davis



But it is unworkable init.

we can't have our cake and eat it, we have always know that.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> But it is unworkable init.
> 
> we can't have our cake and eat it, we have always know that.


The whole thing is a giant shit show. That's my considered analysis. Are we headed for a general election?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> The whole thing is a giant shit show. That's my considered analysis. Are we headed for a general election?



At some point yes.


----------



## gosub (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> The whole thing is a giant shit show. That's my considered analysis. Are we headed for a general election?


Probably but not sure how it helps


----------



## agricola (Jul 5, 2018)

A good laugh from the Brexiteers today, where they are insisting that May's proposed deal is awful because it recognizes shared standards with the EU - and therefore would rule out a UK/US trade deal (where we would have been told that one of the conditions was "shared standards"* with the US).



* ie: US standards


----------



## Supine (Jul 5, 2018)

If we make the cake out of shit we can eat it


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 5, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> It does feel like things are at last coming to a head though. It might be an interesting weekend.



Current odds at PaddyPower:
_Next Prime Minister After Theresa May
Emily Thornbury 14/1
Ranil Jayawardena 25/1
Esther McVey 60/1
Alex Chalk 275/1_

Rather an odd field of candidates. Have the other 645 already declined?


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 5, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Current odds at PaddyPower:
> _Next Prime Minister After Theresa May
> Emily Thornbury 14/1
> Ranil Jayawardena 25/1
> ...



Maybe I'm being naive, but no...Jezza?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Maybe I'm being naive, but no...Jezza?


Well spotted


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2018)

I am quite looking forward to being vassal state now- the only question is to whom?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Alex Chalk 275/1


Who the fuck is Alex Chalk? I mean I've done a search and read his wiki page. But I'm still thinking "who the fuck is Alex Chalk?"


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 5, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Ranil Jayawardena


See Alex Chalk.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Who the fuck is Alex Chalk? I mean I've done a search and read his wiki page. But I'm still thinking "who the fuck is Alex Chalk?"



_Alex Chalk, Alex Chalk
Has a funny way of walking
And a wacky way of chalking,
Alex Chalk, oh Alex Chalk

Alex Chalk, Alex Chalk
He can get you out of trouble,
He can teach you how to juggle
That's Alex Chalk, yeah Alex Chalk,
He rowed a boat to sea one day
To do some sleeping and some fishing,
When he awoke he saw an island,
Was he dreaming or just wishing?

Alex Chalk, Alex Chalk
Has a funny way of walking
And a wacky way of chalking,
Alex Chalk, oh Alex Chalk
Alex Chalk, Alex Chalk_


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 5, 2018)

these people will tread on anyone and anything to retain their grasp


----------



## Borp (Jul 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Who the fuck is Alex Chalk? I mean I've done a search and read his wiki page. But I'm still thinking "who the fuck is Alex Chalk?"



Just the average grandson of Sir Gervase Ralph Edmund Blois 10th Baronet


----------



## Winot (Jul 5, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Maybe I'm being naive, but no...Jezza?



Jeremy Hunt perhaps.


----------



## gosub (Jul 5, 2018)

Ranil is my MP, that list is obviously  all the bets placed... I'd have given longer odds than that on him ex councillor whose been in Parliament 3years and hasn't made bag holding  placement yet.  Most likely he's placed it himself as a brand awareness exercise... Either that or he's been exaggerating how well things are going to his mum





danny la rouge said:


> See Alex Chalk.


----------



## billbond (Jul 6, 2018)

_Esther McVey 60/1

ha ha surely a joke.
I dont even think she will be in a party with a job let alone be PM._


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 6, 2018)

Well, to hell with you naysayers, I'm getting behind Alex Chalk


----------



## Raheem (Jul 6, 2018)

I have to be honest,I think Chalk will be wiped out.


----------



## andysays (Jul 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I have to be honest,I think Chalk will be wiped out.


Is anyone else board with the way these threads descend into desperate punnage at the slightest opportunity?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

Brexit means Brexshit -


----------



## teqniq (Jul 6, 2018)

Concerning the Chequers summit today, what the actual fuck?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> Is anyone else board with the way these threads descend into desperate punnage at the slightest opportunity?



Not by a long chalk


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> Is anyone else board with the way these threads descend into desperate punnage at the slightest opportunity?


Hell no, it's the best bit of the whole thread


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 6, 2018)

A military mind might think all together in one gaff... Decapitation strike. But they have probably thought of that. Force field rou d chequers maybe


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

So what time will the leaks start to flood out?

after dinner?


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 6, 2018)

Today is a good day to salute the political skill of David Cameron who held the referendum to finally resolve the split in the Tory party.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 6, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> So what time will the leaks start to flood out?
> 
> after dinner?



lunchtime - it started at 10, they'll need lunch and a piss by 12.30. resignations/sackings around 5/6pm...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 6, 2018)

Theresa May at Chequers this afternoon GENUINE PICS !!11!


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

Cabinet starts day-long Chequers summit to finalise Brexit plan with May hoping to avoid split -  Politics live

Yes I'm that bored in work today.....


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

*Full list of cabinet ministers, and how they voted in the EU referendum*
The Press Association has filed a helpful list of how cabinet ministers voted in the EU referendum (including those who attend cabinet, as well as full members).

*Remain*

Theresa May (Prime Minister) 
Philip Hammond (Chancellor of the Exchequer) 
Sajid Javid (Home Secretary) 
Gavin Williamson (Defence Secretary) 
David Gauke (Justice Secretary) 
Jeremy Hunt (Health Secretary) 
Greg Clark (Business Secretary) 
James Brokenshire (Housing Secretary) 
Damian Hinds (Education Secretary) 
David Mundell (Scottish Secretary) 
Alun Cairns (Welsh Secretary) 
Karen Bradley (Northern Ireland Secretary) 
Matt Hancock (Culture Secretary) 
Brandon Lewis (Minister without portfolio) 
Liz Truss (Chief Secretary to the Treasury) 
Julian Smith (Chief Whip) 
Jeremy Wright (Attorney General) 
Claire Perry (Minister for Energy and Clean Growth) 
Caroline Nokes (Minister for Immigration) 
David Lidington (Minister for the Cabinet Office) 


*Leave*

Boris Johnson (Foreign Secretary) 
David Davis (Brexit Secretary) 
Liam Fox (International Trade Secretary) 
Michael Gove (Environment Secretary) 
Chris Grayling (Transport Secretary) 
Esther McVey (Work and Pensions Secretary) 
Penny Mordaunt (International Development Secretary) 
Andrea Leadsom (Leader of the House of Commons)


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 6, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> list of how cabinet ministers voted


How do they know?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> How do they know?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Concerning the Chequers summit today, what the actual fuck?
> View attachment 140186
> View attachment 140187




So on Twatter it says that taxi firm stopped operating in 2013... that's on Twatter tho so might be wrong.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 6, 2018)

_A talented new generation of MPs who will sweep them away
_
Reading this nearly gave me a thrombo I was laughing that hard.


----------



## Jon-of-arc (Jul 6, 2018)

This must have already been said, but how the fuck did they trigger article 50 without actually having anything even vaguely resembling a unified position?  Like, what was the point in that big waiting period before triggering it, if they weren't going to actually decide on a sensible negotiation strategy, which presumably starts with actually deciding what kind of Brexit they would push for?  I literally cannot understand this level of incompetence.  There's some naive, trusting part of me that thinks maybe all this bullshit is a cunning game of brinkmanship, let the EU see how close we'll go to a no-deal brexit, through sheer bickering, and give us more than they otherwise might have because otherwise it's too late.  The idea that someone, somewhere knows what the fuck they're doing is alluring.  But clearly they don't.  This is worse than pathetic.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 6, 2018)

May secures cabinet backing for Brexit plan

Yeah! it's all sorted and the EU will let us shit out cake and eat it!

Maybe


----------



## rubbershoes (Jul 6, 2018)

Jon-of-arc said:


> This must have already been said, but how the fuck did they trigger article 50 without actually having anything even vaguely resembling a unified position?  Like, what was the point in that big waiting period before triggering it, if they weren't going to actually decide on a sensible negotiation strategy, which presumably starts with actually deciding what kind of Brexit they would push for?




That's politics, dude


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 6, 2018)

Jon-of-arc said:


> This must have already been said, but how the fuck did they trigger article 50 without actually having anything even vaguely resembling a unified position?  Like, what was the point in that big waiting period before triggering it, if they weren't going to actually decide on a sensible negotiation strategy, which presumably starts with actually deciding what kind of Brexit they would push for?  I literally cannot understand this level of incompetence.  There's some naive, trusting part of me that thinks maybe all this bullshit is a cunning game of brinkmanship, let the EU see how close we'll go to a no-deal brexit, through sheer bickering, and give us more than they otherwise might have because otherwise it's too late.  The idea that someone, somewhere knows what the fuck they're doing is alluring.  But clearly they don't.  This is worse than pathetic.


it seems resoundingly clear that none of them expected brexit to win. Not only that, they were so assured of it no planning for failure would be done. You know posh cunts are arrogant and winging it on some level anyway, but this is fairly amazing.


----------



## billbond (Jul 6, 2018)

I wonder what David Cameron is up to .
I know our Danny said the other day "his got his trotters up" 
But where i wonder
Im sure his following all thats going on.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 6, 2018)

Why was Cameron even involved in this behind the scenes charade ? 

Its not even comical, its just utterly shambolic


----------



## teqniq (Jul 6, 2018)

This sums things up pretty succinctly for me.

Rudderless and riven by Brexit, the Tories have only one ambition left | Gary Younge


----------



## 2hats (Jul 6, 2018)

billbond said:


> I wonder what David Cameron is up to … "his got his trotters up"


Sex tourism then?


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 6, 2018)

Jon-of-arc said:


> This must have already been said, but how the fuck did they trigger article 50 without actually having anything even vaguely resembling a unified position?  Like, what was the point in that big waiting period before triggering it, if they weren't going to actually decide on a sensible negotiation strategy, which presumably starts with actually deciding what kind of Brexit they would push for?  I literally cannot understand this level of incompetence.  There's some naive, trusting part of me that thinks maybe all this bullshit is a cunning game of brinkmanship, let the EU see how close we'll go to a no-deal brexit, through sheer bickering, and give us more than they otherwise might have because otherwise it's too late.  The idea that someone, somewhere knows what the fuck they're doing is alluring.  But clearly they don't.  This is worse than pathetic.



Years ago I spent a lot of time around central government with my then job. One thing that became really clear is just how little clue some of these people have. You can see why. Either you do public school, oxbridge, a well paid graduate job to become financially independent then find yourself a winnable seat, or you become a local councillor, chair of a council committee, leader of the council then find a winnable seat. Neither of those things mean you know how to run a country. 

Some MPs are brilliant. Some Peers are likewise, and there are some really great people in the civil service. However, to be brilliant at running a country isn't necessarily the same set of skills you need to be brilliant at achieving high political office.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 6, 2018)

The writing's on the blackboard wall for Maybot. We all know with whom the conservatives' best hope lies


----------



## agricola (Jul 6, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Years ago I spent a lot of time around central government with my then job. One thing that became really clear is just how little clue some of these people have. You can see why. Either you do public school, oxbridge, a well paid graduate job to become financially independent then find yourself a winnable seat, or you become a local councillor, chair of a council committee, leader of the council then find a winnable seat. Neither of those things mean you know how to run a country.
> 
> Some MPs are brilliant. Some Peers are likewise, and there are some really great people in the civil service. However, to be brilliant at running a country isn't necessarily the same set of skills you need to be brilliant at achieving high political office.



The thing is that there are very few of them that are brilliant at achieving high political office, or indeed anything that isn't getting on in that incestous little bubble of theirs.  They aren't even that good at politics, as the repeated shoeings Corbyn has handed out to the lifelong political obsessives of the PLP has shown.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 7, 2018)

Yet they will govern.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 7, 2018)

agricola said:


> They aren't even that good at politics, as the repeated shoeings Corbyn has handed out to the lifelong political obsessives of the PLP has shown.



I wouldn't call them political obsessives. IMO most Blairites aren't even political. They're obsessed with the game, but it's a game of getting elected not a game of actual politics. I bet even back when they were writing their PPE essays at Oxbridge they were thinking not 'what makes sense' or  'what do I believe' but simply 'what should I write here to get me to the next step in my plan to be a backbench MP?'


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 8, 2018)

So is it all sorted now or what?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 8, 2018)

Hahahaha hardly, I think. I see there are rumblings of a backbench rebellion in the Graun but I suppose these may come to nothing in the end. But then they've got to sell the whole shitshow to the EU.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 8, 2018)

they've gone for "damage limitation" AKA soft brexit. Or "brexit in name only". Its a bit worse than staying in the EU (the UK will have no say over future EU decision making - but have to accept all the rules) but avoids the serious penalties of reinstating trade barriers, borders etc - and of course whatever the benefits of leaving might be.... 






Its utterly pointless but its the least  impossible brexit politically. 
The cabinet brexiteers have folded/been bribed (i wonder what johnson was promised?) - and will now be traitors and backstabbers. 
So now its all eyes on Rees Moggs and his cohort of brexity headbangers. Will they trigger a leadership election to save their brexit from the great betrayal?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> they've gone for "damage limitation" AKA soft brexit. Or "brexit in name only". Its a bit worse than staying in the EU (the UK will have no say over future EU decision making - but have to accept all the rules) but avoids the serious penalties of reinstating trade barriers, borders etc - and of course whatever the benefits of leaving might be....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If Rees mogg doesn't act it might be all up for any political ambitions he may have


----------



## not a trot (Jul 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If Rees mogg doesn't act it might be all up for any political ambitions he may have



The only ambition that cunt ever had was to be stinking rich.


----------



## not a trot (Jul 8, 2018)

We've recently returned from a three week stay with my sister in law and family in Colorado. Brexit wasn't ever mentioned. It was fucking bliss.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 8, 2018)

not a trot said:


> The only ambition that cunt ever had was to be stinking rich.


He was born stinking rich. He wore a monocle as a child. There are only two circumstances that can happen: child abuse or born tory


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 8, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Neither of those things mean you know how to run a country.



the process of EU-isation was surely that national politicians gradually ceased to be national leaders or runners of countrys in the traditional sense but more actors & permanant coalition partners in a highly bureaucratic process of unaccountable horse trading within "the institutions" - with general elections relegated to background fridge noise barely disrupting the smooth functioning of the machinery . The consequent atrophying of the knowledge & institutional memory is all part of the plan & imho a not insubstantial element of the collective pants-shitting the establishment have  been undergoing since the referendum result dropped.


Kaka Tim said:


> they've gone for "damage limitation" AKA soft brexit. Or "brexit in name only". Its a bit worse than staying in the EU ...





Jon-of-arc said:


> There's some naive, trusting part of me that thinks maybe all this bullshit is a cunning game of brinkmanship, let the EU see how close we'll go to a no-deal brexit, through sheer bickering, and give us more than they otherwise might have because otherwise it's too late.



ironically some on the EU side do seem to think this is all a cunning plan to get "all the benefits of the single market" without the costs wheras the pro-brexit opinion seems to be totally agin the SM on principle whilst the remainers seem to love all the freedom of movement, EU regulation & obligations


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 8, 2018)

not a trot said:


> We've recently returned from a three week stay with my sister in law and family in Colorado. Brexit wasn't ever mentioned. It was fucking bliss.


But did you hear any gunfire or were you beaten up by the police ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 8, 2018)

I'd never given Ireland much attention before - assumed there would be at least some kind of border ...just been over on Google Earth and there's nothing except warnings that speed limits would be displayed in KM/H or MPH.

If that means we're still in the EU or some Norway-style EU, what is the pound likely to do against the Euro ?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> ... what is the pound likely to do against the Euro ?



Fuck alone knows', and anyone who tells you they know is either a crook or a loon.

However... If the parliamentary Tory party go for May's plan then the Pound should at the very least hold its value - the lack of serious rebellion should see off the chances of a GE, and the nature of the plan should see the chances of a no-deal BREXIT reduce substantially. However, thats a prediction for the next few weeks, not something to plan your retirement on...


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 8, 2018)

Can we have single market access without free movement? 

Is that a thing?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Can we have single market access without free movement?
> 
> Is that a thing?



We might be able to get rid of free movement and accept unrestricted shifting about instead.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 8, 2018)

David Davies has resigned. Oh jolly good because I couldn't really see the point of him anyway.


----------



## agricola (Jul 8, 2018)

teqniq said:


> David Davies has resigned. Oh jolly good because I couldn't really see the point of him anyway.



At least he's got a full days worth out of his ministerial car.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 8, 2018)

perfidious albion.

what a shithole of a country


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 8, 2018)

make sure you get your 8 hours sleep Tessa. You have a busy week ahead,


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 8, 2018)

agricola said:


> At least he's got a full days worth out of his ministerial car.


Probably too tight to pay for a taxi


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 8, 2018)

is this what he was taught to do in the SAS - fuck off when it gets messy ?


----------



## Grandma Death (Jul 9, 2018)

David Davis resigned!


----------



## ska invita (Jul 9, 2018)

...as Brexit secretary. Which makes sense, as he doesnt want to negotiate this new cabinet approved deal. On his own this isnt going to make much difference- there are plenty other Tories to fill his shoes.
But if he's the first domino to fall of many.... pure speculation but I don't think others will follow just yet. A bit more neysaying from the EU and the full carcrash will come in due course. Unavoidable surely.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> is this what he was taught to do in the SAS - fuck off when it gets messy ?


Who dares whines.


----------



## oryx (Jul 9, 2018)

Mmmmmm...I wonder who she'll appoint as next Brexit Secretary...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 9, 2018)

oryx said:


> Mmmmmm...I wonder who she'll appoint as next Brexit Secretary...









understood to have firm views on fisheries policy and free movement of mice


----------



## oryx (Jul 9, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> understood to have firm views on fisheries policy and free movement of mice



 Probably do a better job.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 9, 2018)

shit hitting fan? talk of leadership challengers.  knives will be out. plotters will be plotting. Brexit secretary David Davis steps down in blow to PM – live updates

Rees Mogg is not happy - 





> “This is very important. It raises the most serious questions about the PM’s ideas. If the Brexit Secretary cannot support them they cannot be very good proposals. It was an attempt to bounce the cabinet. It was a seriously mistake.”


----------



## Raheem (Jul 9, 2018)

oryx said:


> Probably do a better job.



More likely to read briefing papers, less likely to demand a private jet, about the same likelihood of coughing up a hairball.


----------



## agricola (Jul 9, 2018)

Will there even be a government for Trump to meet?


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> At least he's got a full days worth out of his ministerial car.


A full day? 8 hours? Double the time he spent in negotiations with the EU this year then.

Waiting for the inevitable youtube mashup of his resignation speech over that fast show character who always said 'but of course I was veh veh drunk'


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 9, 2018)

So May had the cabinet united behind her Brexit plan for what? ..... 24 hours?


----------



## 2hats (Jul 9, 2018)

Third one gone. Suella Braverman, a brexit minister.


----------



## elbows (Jul 9, 2018)

Dexits Midnight Runner


----------



## CRI (Jul 9, 2018)

Well then.

Why David Davis resigned | Coffee House


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 9, 2018)

When the going gets tough, the tough get gone


----------



## Raheem (Jul 9, 2018)

2hats said:


> Third one gone. Suella Braverman, a brexit minister.


I've never heard of a Braverman.


----------



## andysays (Jul 9, 2018)

More here...

Brexit: Davis' resignation letter and May's reply in full

David Davis 'felt he had no choice but resignation'


----------



## marty21 (Jul 9, 2018)

oryx said:


> Mmmmmm...I wonder who she'll appoint as next Brexit Secretary...


If she really wants to stir things up , Dominic Grieve


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 9, 2018)

2hats said:


> Third one gone. Suella Braverman, a brexit minister.


Only resigned to relieve anonymity


----------



## Cloo (Jul 9, 2018)

Davis seemed to be one of the relatively few True Believers in Brexit, so his step-down does seem to bring the whole project nearer to not happening.


----------



## alex_ (Jul 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> is this what he was taught to do in the SAS - fuck off when it gets messy ?



[ deleted in favour of better gag ]


----------



## Winot (Jul 9, 2018)

Who dares whines. 

(nicked from Twitter)


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 9, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Who dares whines.





Winot said:


> Who dares whines.
> 
> (nicked from Twitter)


A poor second to raheem.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 9, 2018)

Who Dares Wines (and Dines at the taxpayer's expense)


----------



## Wilf (Jul 9, 2018)

This all leaves rees-mogg unambiguously leading the swivel eyed presumably?  Johnson and govething are tainted by actually agreeing the cabinet stance and davis left it too late to play this card.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 9, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This all leaves rees-mogg unambiguously leading the swivel eyed presumably?  Johnson and govething are tainted by actually agreeing the cabinet stance and davis left it too late to play this card.



it does, but Johnson has shot his own fox by his performance as FS and his general attitude in Cabinet - he was never that popular amongst the PCP anyway, but he's probably down to the low 20's of supporters by now. Rees-Mogg is also not nearly as popular amongst the PCP as he'd have you believe, and the more scutiny his financial affairs have had have lessened the willingness of people to take a punt on him - he looks like a scandal waiting to happen, and the backlass against Johnson has also washed over him - the 'great on HIGNFY' thing has been somewhat devalued by Johnson, and it is a large part of the Moggs act...

Sajid Javid, Gavin Williamson, Gove (still), and doubtless people i've never heard of. but not yet....


----------



## agricola (Jul 9, 2018)

kebabking said:


> it does, but Johnson has shot his own fox by his performance as FS and his general attitude in Cabinet - he was never that popular amongst the PCP anyway, but he's probably down to the low 20's of supporters by now. Rees-Mogg is also not nearly as popular amongst the PCP as he'd have you believe, and the more scutiny his financial affairs have had have lessened the willingness of people to take a punt on him - he looks like a scandal waiting to happen, and the backlass against Johnson has also washed over him - the 'great on HIGNFY' thing has been somewhat devalued by Johnson, and it is a large part of the Moggs act...
> 
> Sajid Javid, Gavin Williamson, Gove (still), and doubtless people i've never heard of. but not yet....



May was never that popular among the PCP (  ) either though, and with them its always the one they are told to rally around that wins.  If Boris goes now he will have to stand for leader, it is his last chance.


----------



## cybershot (Jul 9, 2018)

Whilst I don't want to take away from the joy that is all these resignations, in the back of my mind this does seem like it will boil down to a leadership battle, and the hardcore brexiteers will suddenly get all shirty. A soft brexit was something I could possibly deal with, but now all these baboon's clearly want to try and stop that. Mail etc will no doubt get behind them as well meaning the majority of the can't think for themselves public will too.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 9, 2018)

cybershot said:


> Whilst I don't want to take away from the joy that is all these resignations, in the back of my mind this does seem like it will boil down to a leadership battle, and the hardcore brexiteers will suddenly get all shirty. A soft brexit was something I could possibly deal with, but now all these baboon's clearly want to try and stop that. Mail etc will no doubt get behind them as well meaning the majority of the can't think for themselves public will too.



The hard brexit types look to have gone for a scorched earth approach. Their way or chaos and ruination. It's all incredibly childish.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 9, 2018)

It was necessary to destroy the party in order to save it mentality


----------



## gosub (Jul 9, 2018)

UK Plan C


----------



## alex_ (Jul 9, 2018)

Jon-of-arc said:


> There's some naive, trusting part of me that thinks maybe all this bullshit is a cunning game of brinkmanship, let the EU see how close we'll go to a no-deal brexit, through sheer bickering, and give us more than they otherwise might have because otherwise it's too late.



I’m not sure that putting a gun to your head and say “I’ll pull the trigger unless you give me what I want” is that strong a tactic ?

Alex


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 9, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I’m not sure that putting a gun to your head and say “I’ll pull the trigger unless you give me what I want” is that strong a tactic ?
> 
> Alex


exactly why the 'no deal is better than a bad deal' thing is obvious bullshit, and hasn't worked.


----------



## agricola (Jul 9, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I’m not sure that putting a gun to your head and say “I’ll pull the trigger unless you give me what I want” is that strong a tactic ?
> 
> Alex



Not with this government, as the gun isn't loaded and is a banana anyway.


----------



## gosub (Jul 9, 2018)

agricola said:


> Not with this government, as the gun isn't loaded and is a banana anyway.



different Foreign Secretary


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 9, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Jul 9, 2018)




----------



## SovietArmy (Jul 9, 2018)

Freedom of movement will be end next year, scary and worry but what is that mean?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 10, 2018)

Somen guy on the radio said the deal they stuck up last Friday is bollocks becuase they want one of the four pillars and not all four.

So they EU will tell them to stuff it anyways.

They will never give us single market access without fre movement of people.


----------



## Crispy (Jul 10, 2018)

Exactly that. EU are offering status quo, Norway, Canada, or Crash Out. Pick one.


----------



## gosub (Jul 10, 2018)

Paul and Barry Chuckle appointed as joint Brexit Secretaries


----------



## philosophical (Jul 10, 2018)

In this article Fintan O'Toole argues that the best possible outcome for the UK is to get the worst of both worlds.
Not being a nationalist or patriotic kind of person myself it simply seems surreal what has happened.
The dark side of it is the maggoty underbelly of prejudice that the brexit process has revealed.
I suppose it has always been there, and maybe I ought to be grateful that the brexit process has brought the conscious or unconscious or axiomatic racists out from their hiding places.

Fintan O’Toole: Britain has gone to huge trouble to humiliate itself


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 10, 2018)

gosub said:


> Paul and Barry Chuckle appointed as joint Brexit Secretaries


I thought they were running Syria?


----------



## bemused (Jul 10, 2018)

If the UK government only wants free trade for non-services goods, what does that mean for the Irish border problem?


----------



## Winot (Jul 10, 2018)

bemused said:


> If the UK government only wants free trade for non-services goods, what does that mean for the Irish border problem?



Services are intangible - you don’t  check for them at borders.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 10, 2018)

bemused said:


> If the UK government only wants free trade for non-services goods, what does that mean for the Irish border problem?



From what i read, we can't have free trade without free movment, and if we go back to WTO then we need a hard boarder..... which we can't do.

So....


----------



## AnandLeo (Jul 10, 2018)

The results of the Brexit referendum cannot be taken literally as a democratic will of the people of the nation. It is not even legally binding. 48 per cent voted to remain, not necessarily because they all are happy with the status quo and the evolving trend of the EU regime. Because there was no choice in the referendum other than to remain or leave. The leave voters wanted UK out of Brussel’s bureaucratic clutches, incited by propaganda like, UK pays EU £350 million a week. This is obviously a well-known disingenuous fact. The truth is the UK receives about half of that money in return from EU as grants and subsidies. Funding the NHS from the money saved from BREXIT is another fallacy. The leave vote was largely a populist vote without any verification of assumptions, facts and figures. However, the ever-growing bureaucratic rules and regulations the EU is imposing on UK, and its political consolidation, are common issues of momentum for leaving EU. The populist leave voters neither considered nor were informed of the implications of Brexit on the UK industry, business, trade, financial and banking services, and cross-border issues like in Northern Ireland, now transpired after the referendum. Result of a referendum incited by fake information and ignorance should not be deemed as immutable outcome precluding mitigating adjustments.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The results of the Brexit referendum cannot be taken literally as a democratic will of the people of the nation. It is not even legally binding. 48 per cent voted to remain, not necessarily because they all are happy with the status quo and the evolving trend of the EU regime. Because there was no choice in the referendum other than to remain or leave. The leave voters wanted UK out of Brussel’s bureaucratic clutches, incited by propaganda like, UK pays EU £350 million a week. This is obviously a well-known disingenuous fact. The truth is the UK receives about half of that money in return from EU as grants and subsidies. Funding the NHS from the money saved from BREXIT is another fallacy. The leave vote was largely a populist vote without any verification of assumptions, facts and figures. However, the ever-growing bureaucratic rules and regulations the EU is imposing on UK, and its political consolidation, are common issues of momentum for leaving EU. The populist leave voters neither considered nor were informed of the implications of Brexit on the UK industry, business, trade, financial and banking services, and cross-border issues like in Northern Ireland, now transpired after the referendum. Result of a referendum incited by fake information and ignorance should not be deemed as immutable outcome precluding mitigating adjustments.


How do you know what people thought in the polling booth?


----------



## Doppelgänger (Jul 10, 2018)

David Davis: In the end, there was nothing behind the swagger

I think this is a fair commentary on Davis and how he fitted into the scheme of it all


----------



## Combustible (Jul 10, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The results of the Brexit referendum cannot be taken literally as a democratic will of the people of the nation. It is not even legally binding. 48 per cent voted to remain, not necessarily because they all are happy with the status quo and the evolving trend of the EU regime. Because there was no choice in the referendum other than to remain or leave. The leave voters wanted UK out of Brussel’s bureaucratic clutches, incited by propaganda like, UK pays EU £350 million a week. This is obviously a well-known disingenuous fact. The truth is the UK receives about half of that money in return from EU as grants and subsidies. Funding the NHS from the money saved from BREXIT is another fallacy. The leave vote was largely a populist vote without any verification of assumptions, facts and figures. However, the ever-growing bureaucratic rules and regulations the EU is imposing on UK, and its political consolidation, are common issues of momentum for leaving EU. The populist leave voters neither considered nor were informed of the implications of Brexit on the UK industry, business, trade, financial and banking services, and cross-border issues like in Northern Ireland, now transpired after the referendum. Result of a referendum incited by fake information and ignorance should not be deemed as immutable outcome precluding mitigating adjustments.



tl;dr referendum should be ignored because I don't like the result


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2018)

Combustible said:


> tl;dr referendum should be ignored because I don't like the result


And what's worse that post isn't even interesting


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The results of the Brexit referendum cannot be taken literally as a democratic will of the people of the nation. It is not even legally binding. 48 per cent voted to remain, not necessarily because they all are happy with the status quo and the evolving trend of the EU regime. Because there was no choice in the referendum other than to remain or leave. The leave voters wanted UK out of Brussel’s bureaucratic clutches, incited by propaganda like, UK pays EU £350 million a week. This is obviously a well-known disingenuous fact. The truth is the UK receives about half of that money in return from EU as grants and subsidies. Funding the NHS from the money saved from BREXIT is another fallacy. The leave vote was largely a populist vote without any verification of assumptions, facts and figures. However, the ever-growing bureaucratic rules and regulations the EU is imposing on UK, and its political consolidation, are common issues of momentum for leaving EU. The populist leave voters neither considered nor were informed of the implications of Brexit on the UK industry, business, trade, financial and banking services, and cross-border issues like in Northern Ireland, now transpired after the referendum. Result of a referendum incited by fake information and ignorance should not be deemed as immutable outcome precluding mitigating adjustments.


2016 wants its auld worn out arguments back


----------



## AnandLeo (Jul 10, 2018)

My perception is, people who voted to leave thought hunky-dory when UK leaves the EU. Others who voted to remain thought of the current problems the negotiators are groping about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 10, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> My perception is, people who voted to leave thought hunky-dory when UK leaves the EU. Others who voted to remain thought of the current problems the negotiators are groping about.


Ah, telepathy


----------



## kebabking (Jul 10, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> My perception is, people who voted to leave thought hunky-dory when UK leaves the EU. Others who voted to remain thought of the current problems the negotiators are groping about.



or, people who voted leave thought about where they wanted to be in 20 or 30 years and ignored the probability/nature of a rough patch between now and then, while people who voted remain focused on the probability/nature of that rough patch while being completely and willfully blind as to what the EU will probably look like in 20 or 30 years.

see, this stuff is easy...


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

So with labour saying they'd vote against the current tory plan, and quite a few tories too, at the moment there's no type of brexit that can get through parliament. Unless there were a lot of labour rebels. Odd situation.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 11, 2018)

kebabking said:


> or, people who voted leave thought about where they wanted to be in 20 or 30 years



In their 80s and 90s?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> In their 80s and 90s?



So only the middle aged voted to leave, or have leave tendancies?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2018)

kebabking said:


> So only the middle aged voted to leave, or have leave tendancies?


...and that 80s+90s = around 4% of population at best.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> ...and that 80s+90s = around 4% of population at best.



Wasn't there some research that showed that older, older people (80 plus) were more likely to vote remain? Or less likely than the 60 - 80s anyway.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2018)

I know someone who voted to leave becuase his wife voted to stay.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> ...and that 80s+90s = around 4% of population at best.


Would be in their 50s/60s/70s at time of referendum, thus representing over 32% of the population then (dwindling to just over 8% 20-30 years subsequently).

Source: ONS


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 11, 2018)

2hats said:


> Would be in their 50s/60s/70s at time of referendum, thus representing over 32% of the population then (dwindling to just over 8% 20-30 years subsequently).
> 
> Source: ONS


Of course it would be perfectly reasonable for people of that age to think about where they would like to be in 30 years. But teuchter was expressing incredulity at whatever age group he was thinking of thinking 30 years ahead, which leads me to think his 80s and 90s pretty clearly meant people of that age during the referendum. That, of course, may not stop him trying to grasp the potential get out you've offered.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2018)

From a vile Murdoch rag and apparently not in the print edition.
Doubtlessly it will be spun into "EU blackmail".

"fake news" according to comments.



> GRUB STASH PLAN
> *Ministers draw up secret plans to stockpile processed food in case of a ‘no deal’ Brexit*
> 
> The Government could unveil some of the 300 contingency measures, including a bid to keep Britain’s food and drinks industry afloat



Ministers draw up secret plans to stockpile processed food in case of a 'no deal' Brexit


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 11, 2018)

Pot-Noodle Brexit


----------



## 2hats (Jul 11, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> Pot-Noodle Brexit


Minus the electricity for the kettle so ‘Dry Pot-Noodle Brexit’.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 11, 2018)

Seems like a regular kind of arsehole.

Dominic Raab: is he the IEA’s man in government?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2018)




----------



## philosophical (Jul 11, 2018)

Why is the plan to stockpile processed food against a no deal brexit a 'secret' as reported.
I thought the idea was for the UK to tell the EU they're not afraid to have everything collapse.
Also revealing such a plan would reassure anybody who is fearful of a no deal brexit that the UK would have enough baked beans in storage to last a year, and a new fart/methane collection system would be devised to counteract any post brexit shortages of fuel.


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

As far as I can work out it now all becomes about how labour mp's will vote once this deal turns up. Either they vote for the deal or we get a no deal brexit. (Or possibly second ref/GE) The stakes are getting higher.


----------



## Chz (Jul 11, 2018)

Borp said:


> As far as I can work out it now all becomes about how labour mp's will vote once this deal turns up. Either they vote for the deal or we get a no deal brexit. (Or possibly second ref/GE) The stakes are getting higher.


_Surely_ something of this magnitude, that's a part of the government's manifesto, has to seen as a confidence vote?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2018)

Borp said:


> As far as I can work out it now all becomes about how labour mp's will vote once this deal turns up. Either they vote for the deal or we get a no deal brexit. (Or possibly second ref/GE) The stakes are getting higher.



Wont the EU have the first say? as in LOLZ fucking jog on etc.


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Wont the EU have the first say? as in LOLZ fucking jog on etc.



Yeah I was jumping a few steps ahead and assuming some deal will come to parliament that isn't a million miles away from what it is now. Big assumption I guess and possibly not warranted.


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

Chz said:


> _Surely_ something of this magnitude, that's a part of the government's manifesto, has to seen as a confidence vote?



Which Theresa May would win so back to square one.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 11, 2018)

EU negotiator Michel Barnier says 80% of Brexit deal is agreed 



> Speaking in New York on Tuesday, Michel Barnier said: “After 12 months of negotiations we have agreed on 80% of the negotiations.” He added that he was determined to negotiate a deal on the remaining 20%.



Almost done


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2018)

Borp said:


> As far as I can work out it now all becomes about how labour mp's will vote once this deal turns up. Either they vote for the deal or we get a no deal brexit. (Or possibly second ref/GE) The stakes are getting higher.


It sounds like Labour will definitely vote against...and by the time the EU negotiators have had a go even more Tory support will peel off.

I'm tying to guess what will happen next - curious what others think of this:
...there wont be a vote on it because it will be dead in the water before it ever gets to that point, the inability to pass it will mean May has  officially lost authority and will have to stand down. Or the vote will take place for the sake of it and it will get voted down and the effect will be the same.

An internal Tory election solves nothing, and will be done to the ticking of the Brexit Day clock.
A general election may likely take place before March 2019, but even if it doesnt, in terms of Brexit Day itself I think there are only two realistic options: crash out in WTO rules or some kind of process, which would have the backing of the majority of the commons, would stop Brexit happening completely. Cue a cultural civil war + constitutional crisis.

??

The only other option is that the negotiated Brexit bill passes the vote in the house of commons somehow (cant see how though). That would still do for May and see a Tory implosion I'd expect  

No wonder Labour were all smiles at not winning the last election - dodged a bomb here, even if they get hit by the shrapnell


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> It sounds like Labour will definitely vote against...and by the time the EU negotiators have had a go even more Tory support will peel off.
> 
> I'm tying to guess what will happen next - curious what others think of this:
> ...there wont be a vote on it because it will be dead in the water before it ever gets to that point, the inability to pass it will mean May has  officially lost authority and will have to stand down. Or the vote will take place for the sake of it and it will get voted down and the effect will be the same.



If Corbyn torpedoes May's deal out of a desire to fuck over the Tories at any cost, and we end up with no deal at all and some form of catastrophe as a result, I fail to see how that is going to play well for Labour. All the tories have to say is 'we had a deal but labour sabotaged it and now we're all screwed' and thus undermine any acquired political capital.

What Corbyn is well placed to do is to dictate the agenda, get some major headline-friendly concession towards his version of Brexit (which is what again?) and take the credit for saving the brexit deal and thus civilisation as we know it despite an incompetent, divided tory government.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> If Corbyn torpedoes May's deal out of a desire to fuck over the Tories at any cost, and we end up with no deal at all and some form of catastrophe as a result, I fail to see how that is going to play well for Labour. All the tories have to say is 'we had a deal but labour sabotaged it and now we're all screwed' and thus undermine any acquired political capital.
> 
> What Corbyn is well placed to do is to dictate the agenda, get some major headline-friendly concession towards his version of Brexit (which is what again?) and take the credit for saving the brexit deal and thus civilisation as we know it despite an incompetent, divided tory government.


Labour wont say thats why they're voting against it though - there are plenty other excuses out there....and the argument from the Torys would fall down when a considerable part of her own party will vote against it too, especially once the EU negotiators have secured more concessions. 

The Labour version of Brexit is heading towards the ultimate soft Breixt IMO, including 4 freedoms, though they dare not say that out loud at this point - though they may do, feigning reluctance, once doom is impending < my impression, because as you rightly say, who knows. Weaselish legalistic explanations from Starmer don't help.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 11, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> leads me to think his 80s and 90s pretty clearly meant people of that age during the referendum



You thought wrong.


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> It sounds like Labour will definitely vote against...and by the time the EU negotiators have had a go even more Tory support will peel off.
> 
> I'm tying to guess what will happen next - curious what others think of this:
> ...there wont be a vote on it because it will be dead in the water before it ever gets to that point, the inability to pass it will mean May has  officially lost authority and will have to stand down. Or the vote will take place for the sake of it and it will get voted down and the effect will be the same.
> ...



Just looking at the brexit timeline again. It's not really a complete disaster if no deal gets agreed now. There is still the transition period. I'd kind of forgotten about that. Could it not easily be a no deal now, or between now and march anyway, and the UK and EU pick up discussions again during the transition period. If there's no legal reason why that couldn't happen, I can't see why it wouldn't.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2018)

At least they dont have like 7 weeks off or anyting coming up..... oh wait!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 11, 2018)

if labour plus tory brexit rebels torpedo may's deal and we are heading for a crash out - i imagine she will have to revoke or suspend article 50 - which would probably mean her resigning, a general election and/or 2nd ref. no way will a "no deal" crash out be allowed to happen.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> if labour plus tory brexit rebels torpedo may's deal and we are heading for a crash out - i imagine she will have to revoke or suspend article 50 - which would probably mean her resigning, a general election and/or 2nd ref. no way will a "no deal" crash out be allowed to happen.



I see it the other way - I think May would prefer a crash out than a reversal, she can then, at the very least, say that she has taken the UK out of the EU in accordance with the referendum and despite the interference of Parliament.

She will get political credit for that, regardless of whatever else happens on the day after - Corbyn _et al _who are very obviously trying to be both leave and remain, I don't think will get any credit from anyone, they didn't stop it, and they didn't push for it.


----------



## Borp (Jul 11, 2018)

Borp said:


> Just looking at the brexit timeline again. It's not really a complete disaster if no deal gets agreed now. There is still the transition period. I'd kind of forgotten about that. Could it not easily be a no deal now, or between now and march anyway, and the UK and EU pick up discussions again during the transition period. If there's no legal reason why that couldn't happen, I can't see why it wouldn't.



Ok just looked up the conditions of the transition period. Basically if we don't agree on a deal now, there is no transition period. 
I'm a bit behind on all this stuff again.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 11, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I see it the other way - I think May would prefer a crash out than a reversal, she can then, at the very least, say that she has taken the UK out of the EU in accordance with the referendum and despite the interference of Parliament.
> 
> She will get political credit for that, regardless of whatever else happens on the day after - Corbyn _et al _who are very obviously trying to be both leave and remain, I don't think will get any credit from anyone, they didn't stop it, and they didn't push for it.



the effect of "no deal" are so damaging i just dont think it will be allowed to happen.The Eu dont want it either. But who knows?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2018)

I don't know if the terms of the Chequers cunning plan has been posted ...



David Davis Has Resigned As Brexit Secretary In Major Blow For Theresa May


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 11, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I don't know if the terms of the Chequers cunning plan has been posted ...
> 
> View attachment 140914
> 
> David Davis Has Resigned As Brexit Secretary In Major Blow For Theresa May



That's not 'aving yer cake and eating it at all, more avoir notre gâteau et le manger...


----------



## Poi E (Jul 11, 2018)

"A Parliamentary locks on all new rules and regulations". One for the nut job free marketeers there. If anything, there's going to be a shit load more regulation required.

I think only 1 will happen. Being in the EU never stopped number 12.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2018)




----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 11, 2018)

the DUP have gone very quiet


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2018)

I know Thunderf00t can be an arse sometimes when he strays into manosphere areas, but I find him good at explaining things.

The EU administration seems to compare very favourably with the UK civil service.
It will be interesting to see how many more staff will be needed in the UK to duplicate all the work that is currently done in Brussels.



Starts at 9:13


----------



## kebabking (Jul 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> the effect of "no deal" are so damaging i just dont think it will be allowed to happen.The Eu dont want it either. But who knows?



Damaging in the immediate term certainly, but - to be distressingly frank - this is not some shit arse makey-uppy country who's only resource is sand - this is a (in relative terms) stable democracy with a well established legal and political system, an economy that even the most rabid remainers worst nightmare is not going to dip out of the 10 largest economics of the world, the dead will not pave the streets, nor with the sky crumble.

The EU doesn't want a no-deal BREXIT because it will suddenly find itself some £40billion poorer - it is not some benevolent organisation only looking out for the best results for everyone, it's as self interested as the UK government is.

(I voted remain by the way).


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2018)

Literally seeing people on the twitterbox proposing national gov of unity. historicslly a shit idea, cant tell if serious or trolls...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Literally seeing people on the twitterbox proposing national gov of unity. historicslly a shit idea, cant tell if serious or trolls...



vince cable thinks it's a good idea (vote in the house earlier this week did not seem to be reported by much of the press - a search finds this)

suppose there's a possibility of some remainer tories / blairites (if you can tell the difference) who might think it's preferable to either a rees-mogg or corbyn led government...


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2018)

.


DotCommunist said:


> Literally seeing people on the twitterbox proposing national gov of unity. historicslly a shit idea, cant tell if serious or trolls...


Wasnt this Pickman Models idea the other day? Lots of people on urban supported that too.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 11, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I know Thunderf00t can be an arse sometimes when he strays into manosphere areas, but I find him good at explaining things.


Lovely, lets just completely ignore the alt-right politics. 


ska invita said:


> Wasnt this Pickman Models idea the other day? Lots of people on urban supported that too.


Where?


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Lovely, lets just completely ignore the alt-right politics.
> Where?


Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Lovely, lets just completely ignore the alt-right politics.


Alt-right by your standards - but then I guess I'm probably alt-right on your scale.

The political compass had me in the far left / far "liberal" corner - roughly the Dalai Lama.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?


Ta. Those likes may be as much/more for the analysis than a belief that a government of national unity would be a positive thing.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 11, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Alt-right by your standards - but then I guess I'm probably alt-right on your scale.


Nope alt-right by the standards of anyone who's got even a modicum of sense. 1. 2.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 11, 2018)

I only know anything about this alt-right / manosphere crap thanks to noticing a few "off" comments here and there ... "gamergate" _per se_ was somewhat outside my exerience.
Kevin Logan has educated me of late.

I've never watched any of thunderfoot's "feminism" videos because I know I will be at the least dismayed, but he comes across as relatively "liberal".
I like his science and engineering videos.

I find such things rather "icky" - just as I've never seen more than tiny bits of video of Trump ... (never seen Star Wars, never will).

Come election time I generally choose the least icky bunch of politicians and I see Europe as spreading the risk a bit.
I'm nearly 60 and retired, so I lack revolutionary fervour.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> .
> 
> Wasnt this Pickman Models idea the other day? Lots of people on urban supported that too.


didn't read that, the twitter stuff was talking about the labour right and some brexit unity stuff..this is from a month ago but this sort of idea


----------



## sealion (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> No wonder Labour were all smiles at not winning the last election


Really ? They put a lot of effort into losing. Corbyn would walk into numbet 10 tomorrow given the chance.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 11, 2018)

sealion said:


> Really ? They put a lot of effort into losing. Corbyn would walk into numbet 10 tomorrow given the chance.


tomorrow yes - but he was grinning ear to ear on election night


----------



## sealion (Jul 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> tomorrow yes - but he was grinning ear to ear on election night


I very much doubt it.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> didn't read that, the twitter stuff was talking about the labour right and some brexit unity stuff..this is from a month ago but this sort of idea



So it's just been revealed that Pickman's model is in fact A.C. Grayling.


----------



## equationgirl (Jul 12, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I only know anything about this alt-right / manosphere crap thanks to noticing a few "off" comments here and there ... "gamergate" _per se_ was somewhat outside my exerience.
> Kevin Logan has educated me of late.
> 
> I've never watched any of thunderfoot's "feminism" videos because I know I will be at the least dismayed, but he comes across as relatively "liberal".
> ...


Please don't post any more thunderf00t videos, regardless of the topic. He believes rape threats made online aren't an issue and that 'feminism poisons everything'. Oh, and milo yannapoulis is a big hero of his. 

There are a lot of engineering and science videos out there made by people with proper ethics and who aren't anti-feminist. Your arguments would be better listened to if you stopped linking to thunderf00t, quite frankly.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So it's just been revealed that Pickman's model is in fact A.C. Grayling.



He's cleverer than AC Grayling. And stupider. Anyway, he's not AC Grayling.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2018)

equationgirl said:


> Oh, and milo yannapoulis is a big hero of his.





Spoiler: TF's anti-milo video


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 12, 2018)

I'm glad that I've just read a post from Pickman's model as linked to by gentlegreen above.
[ETA : I mean as linked to by ska invita  ].


I'd never seen that (Pickmans) post, and it seemed like a pretty sound analysis 

I know even more fuck-all about "Thunderf**t" though -- please don't bother to explain


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I know even more fuck-all about "Thunderf**t" though -- please don't bother to explain


Jesus Christ William I hope you were just being dozy/half-asleep when you wrote this post (which might explain why you got the identity of the linker wrong it was ska invita not GG). You've complained for years about the right wing press but now you don't think it's an issue that GG is willing to use a misogynistic MRA alt-right affiliated scumbag like thunderf00t.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 12, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> vince cable thinks it's a good idea (vote in the house earlier this week did not seem to be reported by much of the press - a search finds this)
> 
> suppose there's a possibility of some remainer tories / blairites (if you can tell the difference) who might think it's preferable to either a rees-mogg or corbyn led government...



If the perpetual stream of mediocrity that is Vince "Laying" Cable approves of the idea, then it's best ignored for all our sakes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm glad that I've just read a post from Pickman's model as linked to by gentlegreen above.
> I'd never seen that post, and it seemed like a pretty sound analysis
> 
> I know even more fuck-all about "Thunderf**t" though -- please don't bother to explain


Thunderf**t will win the Derby next year and only missed this year's race through confusion over dates


----------



## NoXion (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Thunderf**t will win the Derby next year and only missed this year's race through confusion over dates



Because dating is a feminist conspiracy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Because dating is a feminist conspiracy.


Yeh that's what the trainer said at the time but there's a new trainer now with a wall chart and everything


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

The marching/bonfire season is upon us in Northern Ireland.
For whatever right or wrong reason it has associated casual violence and destruction which possibly the GFA has helped to 'contain'. The present unrest has upped a few notches this year.
Unless I have missed something those who voted brexit which apparently means taking back control of the borders, have also voted for a situation that risks a return to a time when 2% of the NI population were killed or injured by sectarian violence.


----------



## JimW (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The marching/bonfire season is upon us in Northern Ireland.
> For whatever right or wrong reason it has associated casual violence and destruction which possibly the GFA has helped to 'contain'. The present unrest has upped a few notches this year.
> Unless I have missed something those who voted brexit which apparently means taking back control of the borders, have also voted for a situation that risks a return to a time when 2% of the NI population were killed or injured by sectarian violence.


Actually I voted for the slaughter of the first born and I can't believe we're still waiting.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The marching/bonfire season is upon us in Northern Ireland.
> For whatever right or wrong reason it has associated casual violence and destruction which possibly the GFA has helped to 'contain'. The present unrest has upped a few notches this year.
> Unless I have missed something those who voted brexit which apparently means taking back control of the borders, have also voted for a situation that risks a return to a time when 2% of the NI population were killed or injured by sectarian violence.



The Orange idiots don't need Brexit as an excuse for being dickheads.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

No, but brexit means a hard border which ups the ante considerably.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I'm glad that I've just read a post from @Pickman's model as linked to by @gentlegreen above
> [ETA : I mean as linked to by @ska invita  ].
> I'd never seen that (Pickmans) post, and it seemed like a pretty sound analysis
> 
> I know even more fuck-all about "Thunderf**t" though -- please don't bother to explain





redsquirrel said:


> Jesus Christ William I hope you were just being dozy/half-asleep when you wrote this post (which might explain why you got the identity of the linker wrong it was ska invita not GG). You've complained for years about the right wing press but now you don't think it's an issue that GG is willing to use a misogynistic MRA alt-right affiliated scumbag like thunderf00t.



OK, I had missed everything about that, apologies.
It was also post-football  when I posted last night, as if it's any excuse 
My substantive point still stands though, I thought PM's original post (also new to me) was good.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jul 12, 2018)

And having now looked properly at some of the recent exchanges on this thread [previous page], I thoroughly agree with equationgirl 's post (#8840)  ...


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The marching/bonfire season is upon us in Northern Ireland.
> For whatever right or wrong reason it has associated casual violence and destruction which possibly the GFA has helped to 'contain'. The present unrest has upped a few notches this year.
> Unless I have missed something those who voted brexit which apparently means taking back control of the borders, have also voted for a situation that risks a return to a time when 2% of the NI population were killed or injured by sectarian violence.


This is pretty desperate stuff. Is there anything else you'd like to blame on Leave voters while you're at it?

'England lost the semi-finals against Croatia because the young team were disheartened by the prospect of not being able to play anywhere other than the UK after Britain leaves the EU and no-one is ever allowed to enter or leave the country again'


----------



## 2hats (Jul 12, 2018)

Hard Brexit: the eye-catching contingency plans to stop NI power blackouts


> Thousands of electricity generators would have to be requisitioned at short notice and put on barges in the Irish Sea to help keep the lights on in Northern Ireland in the event of the hardest no-deal Brexit, according to one paper drawn up by Whitehall officials.
> 
> The situation could come about because Northern Ireland has shared a single energy market with the Irish republic for over a decade, in one of the consequences of the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. Northern Ireland relies on imports from south of the border because it does not have enough generating capacity itself.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> This is pretty desperate stuff. Is there anything else you'd like to blame on Leave voters while you're at it?
> 
> 'England lost the semi-finals against Croatia because the young team were disheartened by the prospect of not being able to play anywhere other than the UK after Britain leaves the EU and no-one is ever allowed to enter or leave the country again'



I don't think England lost the football because of brexit.

However you say my describing the looming threat of the hard border as 'desperate stuff', when I described it as a 'risk'.

There are other things to blame on leave voters in my view, but news from NI last night prompted my post today.

Your urge to diss my post is a good smokescreen for you if you voted leave.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 12, 2018)

dominac raab channels the purest sir humphrey over weather the UK will be subject to EU regulations - 



> “…in terms of as those rules are formulated, or any changes to those rules – we’ve signed up to them so far through the normal democratic process – we’ll have deep and enhanced dialogue and consultation, so we’ll have a chance to influence it. And ultimately parliament has that lock. So it’s not right to say we’ll be a rule-taker in the sense that that’s normally used.”


----------



## ska invita (Jul 12, 2018)

Either civil service ingenious scare mongering and crash out avoiding propaganda...or....it's could be a fun new decade


2hats said:


> Hard Brexit: the eye-catching contingency plans to stop NI power blackouts


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

What time we getting this white paper then?

Bored as fuck in work today.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Thunderf**t will win the Derby next year and only missed this year's race through confusion over dates


No he'll make a video about horse racing and then somehow shoehorn in how feminism - which is to say Anita Sarkeesian - poisons everything. As he has done for the last five years.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2018)

JimW said:


> Actually I voted for the slaughter of the first born and I can't believe we're still waiting.


I voted for the restoration of the house of orange, but now I'll settle for slightly shop soiled Terry's chocolate orange


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

I'm playing squash at 5 ffs


----------



## agricola (Jul 12, 2018)

Amazingly, things are going to kick off even more:



> Businesses should be able to move “their talented people” from the UK to the European Union – and vice versa – after Brexit, according to the government’s much anticipated strategy white paper.
> 
> The document, published on Thursday, also says the government is prepared to allow EU citizens to travel freely without a visa in the UK for tourism and temporary work and allow EU students to study in the UK.
> 
> Although the white paper is emphatic that there will be an end to the free movement of people at the end of the transition period in December 2020, the document says it will be necessary to recognise the “depth of the relationship and close ties between the peoples of the UK and the EU”.



This is the right decision, but its free movement and it makes the decision to leave the EU utterly inexplicable.


----------



## agricola (Jul 12, 2018)

the Commons has been suspended as - according to Laura Kuenssberg - MPs werent given the white paper ahead of the debate on it


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

agricola said:


> Amazingly, things are going to kick off even more:
> 
> 
> 
> This is the right decision, but its free movement and it makes the decision to leave the EU utterly inexplicable.


If the stuff in the tabloids about the Chequers meeting being unable to amend anything coz it was pre agreed with Merkel then things really will kick off.  I know this is supposed to be the last time our government can carry on it's EUropean affairs like this but that's just bullshit even previous treaty arrangements at least the cabinet got a look in


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

FFS





agricola said:


> the Commons has been suspended as - according to Laura Kuenssberg - MPs werent given the white paper ahead of the debate on it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

agricola said:


> the Commons has been suspended as - according to Laura Kuenssberg - MPs werent given the white paper ahead of the debate on it


fucking delboy would have made a better prime minister than theresa may. and he's a fictional character.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Unless I have missed something those who voted brexit which apparently means taking back control of the borders, have also voted for a situation that risks a return to a time when 2% of the NI population were killed or injured by sectarian violence


I must have missed that option on the ballot paper. Damn.


----------



## agricola (Jul 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> If the stuff in the tabloids about the Chequers meeting being unable to amend anything coz it was pre agreed with Merkel then things really will kick off.  I know this is supposed to be the last time our government can carry on it's EUropean affairs like this but that's just bullshit even previous treaty arrangements at least the cabinet got a look in



The only thing I can think of as to why they've done it is to try and get it passed by attracting the likes of Gapes, Woodcock, Umunna etc to cancel out the ERG (who presumably will go after her now).  Even for them I'd have assumed they weren't that stupid, but then again they were talking about National Governments on Monday so nothing should be ruled out.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

agricola said:


> The only thing I can think of as to why they've done it is to try and get it passed by attracting the likes of Gapes, Woodcock, Umunna etc to cancel out the ERG (who presumably will go after her now).  Even for them I'd have assumed they weren't that stupid, but then again they were talking about National Governments on Monday so nothing should be ruled out.


It would be easier to unify the nation around the idea that our political "class' aren't fit for purpose


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I must have missed that option on the ballot paper. Damn.


British people are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people decide to kill each other in petulance.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 12, 2018)

agricola said:


> ...This is the right decision, but its free movement and it makes the decision to leave the EU utterly inexplicable.


New tax regulations come into effect over the next year or so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> It would be easier to unify the nation around the idea that our political "class' aren't fit for purpose


tbh if we knew then what we know now about who'd actually be dealing with brexit there'd have been a resounding victory for remain


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> British people are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people decide to kill each other in petulance.



The decision has been made.
If Irish people kill people for whatever reason, you say in petulance, then a changed border situation might be a contributory factor.
However if you see the brexit vote as British people making decisions about their future, how do you see the British people taking back control of the land border between Britain and the EU in the future?
I don't criticise you if you have no practical and realistic suggestions to make, nobody else seems to.
I suppose ignoring it is an option.
However if British people living upstream vote to decide to pollute the water travelling downstream to somewhere else it could well be that the reaction is not down to 'petulance'.
The Irish border is now a live issue as a consequence of the British people voting for brexit, not because the Irish have suddenly decided to be petulant. If you don't want to see that as the present reality fine, for others it matters a lot.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish border is now a live issue as a consequence of the British people voting for brexit,


Maybe the EU should make us vote again, and again, and again until we get it right, just like they did in Ireland.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh if we knew then what we know now about who'd actually be dealing with brexit there'd have been a resounding victory for remain


Bollocks Just shows up how clueless they are. And probably were on the previous treaties... Most definitely NOT an argument for the status quo especially if that now means airbrushing away the largest plebiscite in UK history.

If this shit is beyond them (and it really seems to be) then get government and representive democracy back to something they can handle (though will this shower that probably means fuzzy felts)


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The decision has been made.
> If Irish people kill people for whatever reason, you say in petulance, then a changed border situation might be a contributory factor.
> However if you see the brexit vote as British people making decisions about their future, how do you see the British people taking back control of the land border between Britain and the EU in the future?
> I don't criticise you if you have no practical and realistic suggestions to make, nobody else seems to.
> ...


If your only practical and realistic suggestion is that the UK has to stay in the EU for ever and ever amen, that's actually neither practical nor realistic.  It's just as practical and realistic to say that Ireland should reunite.  There's about as much political appetite for both options and both options would solve the problem.  Put it in the hands of the Irish people to decide how they want to resolve their Irish disagreements -- either reunite or accept the border that the EU will now impose.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If your only practical and realistic suggestion is that the UK has to stay in the EU for ever and ever amen, that's actually neither practical nor realistic.  It's just as practical and realistic to say that Ireland should reunite.  There's about as much political appetite for both options and both options would solve the problem.  Put it in the hands of the Irish people to decide how they want to resolve their Irish disagreements -- either reunite or accept the border that the EU will now impose.



Think you'd need 2 referendums maybe 3..What NI want, what UK want AND what Eire wants.  Met a fair few Irish who recognise 6 counties is a sink hole


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> Maybe the EU should make us vote again, and again, and again until we get it right, just like they did in Ireland.


No.
Brexiters and lexiters and anybody else won.
They need to own it and come up with practical solutions to the issues they have brought on, not leave it to others, not blame others, not mock people who ask legitimate question, but get on with it and make their victory manifest.
A second referendum is not needed, because we are told the result was the will of the people, all those people have to do is make it happen, no biggie is it?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

It IS happening.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> all those people have to do is make it happen


All those people have done there bit by turning up and voting, you know that. It's the politicions that have the task of making it happen, as well you know.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No.
> Brexiters and lexiters and anybody else won.
> They need to own it and come up with practical solutions to the issues they have brought on, not leave it to others, not blame others, not mock people who ask legitimate question, but get on with it and make their victory manifest.
> A second referendum is not needed, because we are told the result was the will of the people, all those people have to do is make it happen, no biggie is it?


Why did the Irish have to vote more than once after rejecting the Lisbon treaty ?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 12, 2018)

Rees-Mogg: 

"This is the greatest vassalage since King John paid homage to Phillip II at Le Goulet in 1200."

And he would probably know a lot about vassals tbf.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If your only practical and realistic suggestion is that the UK has to stay in the EU for ever and ever amen, that's actually neither practical nor realistic.  It's just as practical and realistic to say that Ireland should reunite.  There's about as much political appetite for both options and both options would solve the problem.  Put it in the hands of the Irish people to decide how they want to resolve their Irish disagreements -- either reunite or accept the border that the EU will now impose.



You mention reunification, but the nation has never been united as an independent entity, it was a British colony.
So new unification might be a more accurate term.
Any border will not be imposed by the EU, it will be a manifestation of the brexit vote, before the vote there wasn't a border worth calling a border. The impetus is because the UK voted leave.
Maybe leave voters didn't really mean they actually wanted to leave the EU after all and 'regain control' of it's borders, if they are leaving the practicalities to somebody else.
Fine as far as I am concerned.
If stuff moves back and forth freely then presumably that is what brexit means, and if a million EU citizens stroll across an open border to the UK fine also, that is what brexit actually means so it seems.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

In what way is it not happening.  We leave the EU on 19 March.  This isn’t a theoretical exercise.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You mention reunification, but the nation has never been united as an independent entity, it was a British colony.
> So new unification might be a more accurate term.
> Any border will not be imposed by the EU, it will be a manifestation of the brexit vote, before the vote there wasn't a border worth calling a border. The impetus is because the UK voted leave.
> Maybe leave voters didn't really mean they actually wanted to leave the EU after all and 'regain control' of it's borders, if they are leaving the practicalities to somebody else.
> ...


It’s imposed by the EU.  If it were up to the British and Irish governments alone — the sovereign governments of the relevant sovereign states  — there would be no border.  The EU are the ones insisting it be there.  They are imposing it.  To insist otherwise is to really twist reality to suit your ideology.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> Why did the Irish have to vote more than once after rejecting the Lisbon treaty ?



I don't know, probably political shenanigans and manipulation.
It doesn't matter now does it, brexit won, the arguments about the nature of the EU in the past present and future are not as important as those who voted brexit making it happen.
I read here endless stuff about the deficiencies of the EU, and personally I agree with a lot of them, but the UK has voted to leave the EU with all the baggage that goes with that vote, it is now left to the leave voters to sort it out, because they won.
Or maybe some people think that those who didn't vote for it should be the ones to sort out the issues.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

They've dropped the idea of MRA from the white paper.. Fucking idiots.

They aren't going for a workable Brexit at all


----------



## teqniq (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s imposed by the EU.  If it were up to the British and Irish governments alone — the sovereign governments of the relevant sovereign states  — there would be no border.  The EU are the ones insisting it be there.  They are imposing it.  To insist otherwise is to really twist reality to suit your ideology.


He keeps saying the same things over and over again, things which are as you have just demonstrated with one example, not true. We are well into broken record territory here.


----------



## Winot (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s imposed by the EU.  If it were up to the British and Irish governments alone — the sovereign governments of the relevant sovereign states  — there would be no border.  The EU are the ones insisting it be there.  They are imposing it.  To insist otherwise is to really twist reality to suit your ideology.



So RoI can leave the EU and all will be fine.

Why do you think they're not doing that?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s imposed by the EU.  If it were up to the British and Irish governments alone — the sovereign governments of the relevant sovereign states  — there would be no border.  The EU are the ones insisting it be there.  They are imposing it.  To insist otherwise is to really twist reality to suit your ideology.



I disagree.
The reality is that the UK want to be separate from the EU.
It is the UK that has voted in effect for a border, not the EU and not the ROI.
To insist otherwise is to twist reality to suit your ideology.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> it is now left to the leave voters to sort it out,


Is it? Has anyone told them? Because I think everyone is expecting the government to do the sorting.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't know, probably political shenanigans and manipulation.
> It doesn't matter now does it, brexit won, the arguments about the nature of the EU in the past present and future are not as important as those who voted brexit making it happen.
> I read here endless stuff about the deficiencies of the EU, and personally I agree with a lot of them, but the UK has voted to leave the EU with all the baggage that goes with that vote, it is now left to the leave voters to sort it out, because they won.
> Or maybe some people think that those who didn't vote for it should be the ones to sort out the issues.


Can we have a dislike button please


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> it is now left to the leave voters to sort it out


You keep saying this. Do you not understand how it works ? What power does the voter have in this to be able to make policies ?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 12, 2018)

I might block this thread. It’s going
Nowhere and there is nothing original apart from the piss taking. Someone drop me a PM when something noteworthy kick starts it. I am fucking sick of it.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Is it? Has anyone told them? Because I think everyone is expecting the government to do the sorting.



Not everyone.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Not everyone.


OK, to be more precise, I think most people think the government _is responsible_ for the sorting.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> You keep saying this. Do you not understand how it works ? What power does the voter have in this to be able to make policies ?



Are you suggesting that people shouldn't vote for things then?
I fail to see your point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> Bollocks Just shows up how clueless they are. And probably were on the previous treaties... Most definitely NOT an argument for the status quo especially if that now means airbrushing away the largest plebiscite in UK history.
> 
> If this shit is beyond them (and it really seems to be) then get government and representive democracy back to something they can handle (though will this shower that probably means fuzzy felts)


there are no arguments for the status quo as the status quo is a provisional position which cannot last beyond a year


----------



## JimW (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ...
> It doesn't matter now does it, brexit won, the arguments about the nature of the EU in the past present and future are not as important as those who voted brexit making it happen.
> ...


I can't get my head round this - the nature of the EU has no relevance to whether or not we should leave it? Or am I misunderstanding?


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

If I chip in towards paying a local contractor 72 grand a year and he finally has the decency to ask me 'what colour you want gov? If I said turquoise and it was agreed by the majority it is not down to me to do the fucking painting


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you suggesting that people shouldn't vote for things then?


Nope. We vote and the people in power make the decisions. How difficult is that for you to understand ?


philosophical said:


> I fail to see your point.


The feeling is mutual.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

JimW said:


> I can't get my head round this - the nature of the EU has no relevance to whether or not we should leave it? Or am I misunderstanding?



No, not a misunderstanding. The UK has left, the question regarding 'whether or not' has been answered. The nature of the EU is not what the UK has voted to be part of any more.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> Nope. We vote and the people in power make the decisions. How difficult is that for you to understand ?
> 
> The feeling is mutual.



We vote for those people who wield the power, how difficult is that for you to understand?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No, not a misunderstanding. The UK has left, the question regarding 'whether or not' has been answered. The nature of the EU is not what the UK has voted to be part of any more.


whoa there my lovely. the uk HAS NOT left. the decision has been made but the train has not yet departed. as any fule kno the uk does not leave the eu until next year.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree.
> The reality is that the UK want to be separate from the EU.
> It is the UK that has voted in effect for a border, not the EU and not the ROI.
> To insist otherwise is to twist reality to suit your ideology.


Absolutely mental.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

The Irish people have voted for a border by not choosing to leave the EU


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> We vote for those people who wield the power, how difficult is that for you to understand?


So why the hell are demanding the voters come up with solutions then ?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 12, 2018)

If this does indeed piss off the hardcore Brexiters, then it's all to the good imo.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree.
> The reality is that the UK want to be separate from the EU.
> It is the UK that has voted in effect for a border, not the EU and not the ROI.
> To insist otherwise is to twist reality to suit your ideology.


soz, the 26 counties voted to remove articles 2 & 3 from the constitution, and if that doesn't recognise the border on the island of ireland i don't know what does. there has never (outside the six counties) been a vote on the border between the two polities in ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> whoa there my lovely. the uk HAS NOT left. the decision has been made but the train has not yet departed. as any fule kno the uk does not leave the eu until next year.


Absolutely right, the final leaving has not happened yet technically.
I apologise to you and others for not acknowledging that today the largest plebiscite in British History has not yet been made manifest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Absolutely right, the final leaving has not happened yet technically.
> I apologise to you and others for not acknowledging that today, the largest plebiscite in British History has not yet been made manifest.


the largest plebiscite in british history was made manifest on 23 june 2016. so you're wrong again.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

Where is it! i want to read it!


----------



## teqniq (Jul 12, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Where is it! i want to read it!


Do you mean the white paper?

Here (pdf)


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> soz, the 26 counties voted to remove articles 2 & 3 from the constitution, and if that doesn't recognise the border on the island of ireland i don't know what does. there has never (outside the six counties) been a vote on the border between the two polities in ireland.



Yes, indeed the recognition of a border is also wrapped up in the Belfast agreement, and that agreement describes circumstances where sometime in the future the people living in Ireland might vote for unification.
The removal of articles 2 and 3 from the constitution was made, I believe, in the context of both the ROI and the UK being in the EU.
The brexit vote has changed that context.
The argument here that somehow it is the ROI and the EU who want to usher in the hard border because the UK voted to be a separate entity from the ROI and the EU seems to me to be an argument that wants to alter practical reality in order to avoid the consequence of what brexiters voted for.
I will be criticised for holding that position, but I think none of this present border malarkey would be in play if the UK had not voted for brexit.


----------



## magneze (Jul 12, 2018)

teqniq said:


> He keeps saying the same things over and over again, things which are as you have just demonstrated with one example, not true. We are well into broken record territory here.


He's failed the Turing test.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Do you mean the white paper?
> 
> Here (pdf)



Thanks!


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes, indeed the recognition of a border is also wrapped up in the Belfast agreement, and that agreement describes circumstances where sometime in the future the people living in Ireland might vote for unification.
> The removal of articles 2 and 3 from the constitution was made, I believe, in the context of both the ROI and the UK being in the EU.
> The brexit vote has changed that context.
> The argument here that somehow it is the ROI and the EU who want to usher in the hard border because the UK voted to be a separate entity from the ROI and the EU seems to me to be an argument that wants to alter practical reality in order to avoid the consequence of what brexiters voted for.
> I will be criticised for holding that position, but I think none of this present border malarkey would be in play if the UK had not voted for brexit.


It's true that there wouldn't currently be an issue if the UK hadn't voted for Leave, but that's quite different from saying, as you have done repeatedly, that Leave voters are responsible for sorting out the issue, or from suggesting, as you have appeared to do, that Leave voters are to blame for problems which may arise after some sort of more substantial border is reestablished.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

it's a bit long!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> it's a bit long!


have a packet of hobnobs to sustain you while you read it


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The Irish people have voted for a border by not choosing to leave the EU



The people in the ROI didn't have a vote.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> So why the hell are demanding the voters come up with solutions then ?


Because we are told that the voters knew what they were voting for, but it appears to be a secret.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the largest plebiscite in british history was made manifest on 23 june 2016. so you're wrong again.



OK, we differ as to what 'made manifest' means.
I was agreeing with you that it (leaving) hasn't happened yet, if the term 'made manifest' is not to your taste I will search for a different one next time.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> have a packet of hobnobs to sustain you while you read it



Before Squash? you mad man.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's true that there wouldn't currently be an issue if the UK hadn't voted for Leave, but that's quite different from saying, as you have done repeatedly, that Leave voters are responsible for sorting out the issue, or from suggesting, as you have appeared to do, that Leave voters are to blame for problems which may arise after some sort of more substantial border is reestablished.


I agree that this is what I am saying.
If it is not the leave voters, or the politicians the leave voters voted in who have to sort out the problems, then who is it down to?
The remain voters, the EU, the ROI?


----------



## Winot (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The Irish people have voted for a border by not choosing to leave the EU



Kind of. The EU is a single country (in trade terms). They have chosen to be in it. That means a trade border with any country not in it. The UK has left that country. So if the RoI/UK don’t want a trade border then either the RoI leaves the EU or the UK pretends it’s still in by mirroring trade rules. Looks like the latter is pretty likely to happen.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2018)

magneze said:


> He's failed the Turing test.


And the voight kampffe


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I agree that this is what I am saying.
> If it is not the leave voters, or the politicians the leave voters voted in who have to sort out the problems, then who is it down to?
> The remain voters, the EU, the ROI?



It's the responsibility of the UK government to come to some sort of agreement with the EU over the details of how the UK leaves the EU.

I, who am a Leave voter, didn't vote in or for any of the politicians who make up the UK government, so my influence on or responsibility for how they conduct themselves is non-existent. I suspect this is true for a significant % of Leave voters, whereas there is also a significant % of Remain voters who *did* vote for the current UK government (I don't know what the actual figures are, perhaps someone can enlighten both of us). 

If you're really seeking to apportion blame or responsibility to individual voters, I suggest you focus on those whose votes at the 2017 GE left us with the incompetent Conservative government led by Theresa May, though TBH this is a fairly pointless exercise.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's the responsibility of the UK government to come to some sort of agreement with the EU over the details of how the UK leaves the EU.
> 
> I, who am a Leave voter, didn't vote in or for any of the politicians who make up the UK government, so my influence on or responsibility for how they conduct themselves is non-existent. I suspect this is true for a significant % of Leave voters, whereas there is also a significant % of Remain voters who *did* vote for the current UK government (I don't know what the actual figures are, perhaps someone can enlighten both of us).
> 
> If you're really seeking to apportion blame or responsibility to individual voters, I suggest you focus on those whose votes at the 2017 GE left us with the incompetent Conservative government led by Theresa May, though TBH this is a fairly pointless exercise.



Are you saying that as a brexit voter you didn't consider how it might happen, or what the consequences might be, you would leave those details up to the government?
Would you then accept the suggestion that you didn't know what you were voting for, but hoped that somebody else did?


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you saying that as a brexit voter you didn't consider how it might happen, or what the consequences might be, you would leave those details up to the government?
> Would you then accept the suggestion that you didn't know what you were voting for, but hoped that somebody else did?


No, I'm not saying that.

But I will say now, in case there's any doubt, that I think you're behaving like a silly twit who is desperate to apportion some sort of blame for something which you don't like on millions of people here on this thread and elsewhere who had the effontary to vote for something they wanted.

You're going to ever more ridiculous lengths and making yourself look like a greater and greater prick, even to many who voted to Remain, but if you want to carry on in this way, be my guest.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because we are told that the voters knew what they were voting for, but it appears to be a secret.


What are your solutions for getting rid of the Eu migrant camps that you voted for ?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The people in the ROI didn't have a vote.


They have a vote every 4 or 5 years.

You’re the one talking about “political will” for unification and the ROI staying in the EU.  Political will implies people have a vote.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> You're going to ever more ridiculous lengths and making yourself look like a greater and greater prick, even to many who voted to Remain, but if you want to carry on in this way, be my guest.


Word.

I voted remain basically because I couldn’t face the short-medium term quagmire that was inevitable from Brexit — the very thing he is harping on about — but I still think philosophical is the biggest prick on this issue I’ve yet come across.  Facing up to practical problems doesn’t mean things are impossible and the problems don’t mean things shouldn’t be done if people want them done.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 12, 2018)

He doesn't give a shit about the issues anyway, this is literally a fallback position. 'All leavers are racist' having mysteriously lacked any legs as a valid opinion to share for discussion


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2018)

Six out of seven MPs voted to hold the referendum.
What the feck were they snorting ?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, I'm not saying that.
> 
> But I will say now, in case there's any doubt, that I think you're behaving like a silly twit who is desperate to apportion some sort of blame for something which you don't like on millions of people here on this thread and elsewhere who had the effontary to vote for something they wanted.
> 
> You're going to ever more ridiculous lengths and making yourself look like a greater and greater prick, even to many who voted to Remain, but if you want to carry on in this way, be my guest.



It is easier to insult a poster than to sustain an argument, I understand that, it is a feature of the internet.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> What are your solutions for getting rid of the Eu migrant camps that you voted for ?



If I could I would have wanted to have open borders everywhere. However isn't that an academic question now that the UK is leaving?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> They have a vote every 4 or 5 years.
> 
> You’re the one talking about “political will” for unification and the ROI staying in the EU.  Political will implies people have a vote.



I am saying that article six in the Belfast Agreement alludes to political will for unification. It needs the OK from communities both sides of the 'border'. Such an issue has not (yet) been voted on. 
Brexit is an issue that has been voted on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am saying that article six in the Belfast Agreement alludes to political will for unification. It needs the OK from communities both sides of the 'border'. Such an issue has not (yet) been voted on.
> Brexit is an issue that has been voted on.


Was there a referendum on the gfa?


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> However isn't that an academic question now that the UK is leaving?


You voted to remain, you voted for migrant camps, where are your solutions for this mess ?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Word.
> 
> I voted remain basically because I couldn’t face the short-medium term quagmire that was inevitable from Brexit — the very thing he is harping on about — but I still think philosophical is the biggest prick on this issue I’ve yet come across.  Facing up to practical problems doesn’t mean things are impossible and the problems don’t mean things shouldn’t be done if people want them done.


Fine, you can call me a prick for harping on about the practical problems. You say those practical problems aren't impossible, fine too. So do you have any workable and practical suggestions for sorting the Irish border? Something you want done?
The way I see it, any declaration that somehow it needs to be a united country sometimes in the future is all very well, but the practical problems are in the here and now staring people in the face.
It irritates you and many that I constantly pose the question perhaps it is less because I am a prick and so on, but maybe what is going on is that people are frustrated with themselves because they simply can't answer.
It is not even supposed to be some kind of internet point scoring exercise, I find it interesting because to me the discussion is about the nature of democracy, in that voting is linked to something, and in brexit it is linked in such a stark way.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> He doesn't give a shit about the issues anyway, this is literally a fallback position. 'All leavers are racist' having mysteriously lacked any legs as a valid opinion to share for discussion


If you are referring to me, then you are wrong in your opinion about what I do or do not give a shit about.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Was there a referendum on the gfa?


20 years ago I believe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 20 years ago I believe.


Yeh. So this issue, the border issue, has been consulted on. There was a simultaneous vote in the 26 cos which removed the former articles 2 & 3. There may not have been subsequent votes in the light of the 23.6.16 referendum. But nonetheless the issue has been voted on.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> You voted to remain, you voted for migrant camps, where are your solutions for this mess ?


You might have missed the last couple of years, but I can no longer influence the political solutions within the EU, what is left to me is to try to influence my MP and to support charity work where I can.
How about you?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. So this issue, the border issue, has been consulted on.



Depends what you mean by consulted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Depends what you mean by consulted.


Not at all. It depends what the British and free state governments meant when they held the votes. What I mean matters by contrast not a jot.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> but I can no longer influence the political solutions within the EU


It may come as a surprise to you, but you never could. Now, what are your solutions for these migrant camps you voted for ? It's up to you as a remain voter to forward some solutions, according to your logic.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. So this issue, the border issue, has been consulted on. There was a simultaneous vote in the 26 cos which removed the former articles 2 & 3. There may not have been subsequent votes in the light of the 23.6.16 referendum. But nonetheless the issue has been voted on.


Great.
Errm
Are you making a point of some kind?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> It may come as a surprise to you, but you never could. Now, what are your solutions for these migrant camps you voted for ? It's up to you as a remain voter to forward some solutions, according to your logic.



I think you're wrong on your first point, and I have already answered you second one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Great.
> Errm
> Are you making a point of some kind?


Yes, you're wrong to say the border issue has not been voted on


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> and I have already answered you second one.


Not good enough. I want solutions and i want them now. Come on old wise one, you've come here with demands and got replies. What's your solution ?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Fine, you can call me a prick for harping on about the practical problems. You say those practical problems aren't impossible, fine too. So do you have any workable and practical suggestions for sorting the Irish border? Something you want done?
> The way I see it, any declaration that somehow it needs to be a united country sometimes in the future is all very well, but the practical problems are in the here and now staring people in the face.
> It irritates you and many that I constantly pose the question perhaps it is less because I am a prick and so on, but maybe what is going on is that people are frustrated with themselves because they simply can't answer.
> It is not even supposed to be some kind of internet point scoring exercise, I find it interesting because to me the discussion is about the nature of democracy, in that voting is linked to something, and in brexit it is linked in such a stark way.


If a hard border is imposed, the world will keep turning.  The default is therefore a workable solution.  Or a customs union may be agreed, which is also workable. If you prefer an alternative solution, now’s the time to make it happen.  Otherwise one of those defaults will come about.

But we’ve said all this at least half a dozen times already.  You don’t actually care about anything but the chance to play Chicken Little.  Hence prick.

The way I see it, a few years of hard border may also yet change a few minds in Ireland about what is workable and what isn’t.  Decisions are never writ in stone.  Solutions emerge.  Only a prick would say nothing is allowed to change unless perfection is achieved from day 1.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes, you're wrong to say the border issue has not been voted on


I should have been more precise. The post brexit border has not been voted on by the people of the ROI.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

sealion said:


> Not good enough. I want solutions and i want them now. Come on old wise one, you've come here with demands and got replies. What's your solution ?


I have replied. Open borders.
As a practical solution now we try to gather resources to help the emergency.
Your solution is...?


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have replied. Open borders.
> As a practical solution now we try to gather resources to help the emergency.
> Your solution is...?


I'm sure I'm not the only one to have noticed that despite dismissing out of hand the solution of a united Ireland as impossible, your suggested solution to the imposition of Fortress Europe and the  EU sponsored migrant camps is open borders, presumably meaning between the EU and the rest of the world or at least a substantial part of it.

Whether or not this is a desirable aim, in terms of its practical achievability it seems considerably less likely as a political reality than a united Ireland.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> He doesn't give a shit about the issues anyway, this is literally a fallback position. 'All leavers are racist' having mysteriously lacked any legs as a valid opinion to share for discussion


Why mysteriously.?  Urban is hardly a hotbed of racism} So when a sizeable contingent here supported Brexit it would at least 'curtious' to consider that other motivations are available


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If a hard border is imposed, the world will keep turning.  The default is therefore a workable solution.  Or a customs union may be agreed, which is also workable. If you prefer an alternative solution, now’s the time to make it happen.  Otherwise one of those defaults will come about.
> 
> But we’ve said all this at least half a dozen times already.  You don’t actually care about anything but the chance to play Chicken Little.  Hence prick.
> 
> The way I see it, a few years of hard border may also yet change a few minds in Ireland about what is workable and what isn’t.  Decisions are never writ in stone.  Solutions emerge.  Only a prick would say nothing is allowed to change unless perfection is achieved from day 1.



I had to look up Chicken Little, a story I'm not familiar with, but it seems to involve somebody who tells others the sky is falling in.
I have said that a hard border is a 'risk', if you see that as scaremongering paranoia then I think you are wrong. I can also assure you that you are wrong in your assessment in what I care or don't care about.

The hard Irish border you allude to will indeed not stop the world from turning, indeed I would hope that it doesn't stop the world turning for any individual as a result of any new sectarian trouble.

However seeing as you allude to a hard border, even if for only a few years, would you care to outline what form that might take in practical terms, or is that something you would prefer to leave to others?

When you say decisions are never writ in stone, solutions emerge, are you saying in that that decisions are therefore reversed? In relation to brexit are we not still waiting for solutions to emerge, yet are up against the clock? If solutions are not reached in time do you see that as a 'not writ in stone' moment, when brexit is abandoned because of the practicalities?

Perhaps the brexit decision is so writ in stone that one of the default positions you suggest, a hard border or a customs union of sorts, must happen.
Great if there remains complete free movement of people and goods on the island as now, not great if there is as yet an undescribed hard border.
I would suggest that a customs union means no brexit, and these years of argument will have been for nothing, and those who voted leave will not have been betrayed by anybody, but will simply have to default to reality.

You season your responses with insults which is quite entertaining, but isn't 'prick' getting a little repetitive? Perhaps you could be a little more creative and colourful in your insults.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only one to have noticed that despite dismissing out of hand the solution of a united Ireland as impossible, your suggested solution to the imposition of Fortress Europe and the  EU sponsored migrant camps is open borders, presumably meaning between the EU and the rest of the world or at least a substantial part of it.
> 
> Whether or not this is a desirable aim, in terms of its practical achievability it seems considerably less likely as a political reality than a united Ireland.


 You are probably right, but the EU is a more distant problem right now, but brexit is more close at hand.
Errm, can you quote me where I dismissed out of hand that a united Ireland would be impossible?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I should have been more precise. The post brexit border has not been voted on by the people of the ROI.


It will be just where the current border, the border that's been there since the 1920s, is


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It will be just where the current border, the border that's been there since the 1920s, is


All 275 of them


----------



## andysays (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are probably right, but *the EU is a more distant problem right now, but brexit is more close at hand*.
> Errm, can you quote me where I dismissed out of hand that a united Ireland would be impossible?


Not for those in the migrant camps or drowning in the Mediterranean it isn't.

I don't need to go back and find the quote, there are plenty of others here who I'm sure will have no trouble remembering what you said, even if you've conveniently forgotten.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> Not for those in the migrant camps or drowning in the Mediterranean it isn't.
> 
> I don't need to go back and find the quote, there are plenty of others here who I'm sure will have no trouble remembering what you said, even if you've conveniently forgotten.



What I said about what?

Sorry, edit, I think you mean that I actually said that a United Ireland was an impossibility. Which I did not.
If I am right good luck to you and your acolytes in trawling back, it will not be a very fruitful search.


----------



## sealion (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have replied. Open borders.


What are you as a remainer doing about this to find solutions ? Open borders doesn't seem to be an option for the Eu, so i can't understand why you voted remain.


philosophical said:


> Your solution is...?


Don't vote for migrant camps!


----------



## kabbes (Jul 12, 2018)

Are you seriously asking how a hard border works in practice?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Are you seriously asking how a hard border works in practice?



Well yes I suppose I am. How do you envisage the hard land border in Ireland working in practice? You suggested it might be a good idea for a few years.


----------



## gosub (Jul 12, 2018)

Anyone see the itn footage of Juncker?  Trump's already beaten him.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I agree that this is what I am saying.
> If it is not the leave voters, or the politicians the leave voters voted in who have to sort out the problems, then who is it down to?
> The remain voters, the EU, the ROI?


You appear to believe we have a direct democracy. Voters, whether remain or leave, will by and large not be "sorting out the problems" of the process.

(Unless they belong to the tiny minority of voters who are members of the government benches, or perhaps opposition members who are members of relevant select committees).


----------



## philosophical (Jul 12, 2018)

If brexit voters knew what they were voting for would that not include knowing how the process would be carried out, or at least if it is possible to do it at all?
Voters wouldn't vote for the country to introduce personal teleportation because they know it can't be delivered. If voters voted for brexit my assumption is they had an idea how it would be done and how it can be delivered.
Hence my enquiry of brexit voters about a solid practical issue, the Irish border.
What seems to have happened is a collective washing of hands by saying we don't need to know how to get what we voted for, that it is up to the government. Then there is a frenzy of looking for somewhere to place the blame when government fails and they can't get something that they don't know if it is possible to get at all.
Does this not appear to be rather absurd?
Urban may have spent the last two years discussing how bad the EU is, now we have reached the time when the discussion should be about how the UK solves brexit, but that discussion seems elusive here.


----------



## JimW (Jul 12, 2018)

It's like having a song on repeat.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Voters wouldn't vote for the country to introduce personal teleportation because they know it can't be delivered


can anyone tell me what the crucial difference between teleportation devices and borders between nation states is?


----------



## 2hats (Jul 13, 2018)

The man-child vents… "Trump lets rip":


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 13, 2018)

^ lol. may needed that like a hole in the head.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 13, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> ^ lol. may needed that like a hole in the head.


Not so sure. It wouldn't make things easier for her if the Brexit faithful were telling each other fairy tales about a Trump rescue.


----------



## agricola (Jul 13, 2018)

2hats said:


> The man-child vents… "Trump lets rip":



... and the day after he's been deemed a fit and proper person to try to bid for the rest of Sky.  That front page is an absolute disgrace, the worst one they have come out with for at least the last twenty years.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> British people are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people decide to kill each other in petulance.


I think this should be printed on a t-shirt, which kabbes then wears during a tour of Ireland, perhaps on a penny-farthing, stopping in at pubs and suchlike to chat to locals. This is made into a light hearted film or TV series, a bit like the one with that guy who hitch hiked around the island with a fridge.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think this should be printed on a t-shirt, which kabbes then wears during a tour of Ireland, perhaps on a penny-farthing, stopping in at pubs and suchlike to chat to locals. This is made into a light hearted film or TV series, a bit like the one with that guy who hitch hiked around the island with a fridge.


Have you gone Irish-Border-happy n all?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What seems to have happened is a collective washing of hands by saying we don't need to know how to get what we voted for, that it is up to the government.


Interesting that you should take what I said and then claim it was in reply to a different set of circumstances. That's really quite dishonest of you. I wonder if you know you did it.

I did _not_ say people "don't need to know how to get what they voted for". Nor did I imply any "washing of hands". 

I was replying to your repeated demand that voters "sort it out". This is where the absurdity lies. Your constant refrain that voters get involved in delivering the negotiations.  You know very well that your demand is absurd.

You are absolutely entitled to criticise the performance of the government on these matters. But their dismal performance does not mean that leave voters are able to get involved in the negotiations. 

I take it you've voted before? You're aware that politicians then go off and do their own thing, aren't you?




> Does this not appear to be rather absurd?


_Something that nobody has said interpreted in a way nobody implied. Look absurdity!_


----------



## andysays (Jul 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think this should be printed on a t-shirt, which kabbes then wears during a tour of Ireland, perhaps on a penny-farthing, stopping in at pubs and suchlike to chat to locals. This is made into a light hearted film or TV series, a bit like the one with that guy who hitch hiked around the island with a fridge.


It's an interesting idea, but I think it would work better with philosophical wearing the t-shirt, given that it's essentially his position. 

I don't really care where he goes, though a tour of the areas of Britain with the highest support for Brexit would probably make for the most entertaining TV.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> British people are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people decide to kill each other in petulance.



Just out of interest, in the 2011 census the areas with the highest amount of self identifying "British" people were all London boroughs:

Harrow 41.6
Tower Hamlets 40.6
Brent 40.5
Redbridge 39.7
Newham 39.4


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Interesting that you should take what I said and then claim it was in reply to a different set of circumstances. That's really quite dishonest of you. I wonder if you know you did it.
> 
> I did _not_ say people "don't need to know how to get what they voted for". Nor did I imply any "washing of hands".
> 
> ...



I have not made the claim you attribute to me in my reply.
I took the thrust of your point to be about whether we live in a 'direct democracy' (whatever that quite means), and I attempted to suggest that when voters vote for something they should have an idea whether that something is possible and how.
I don't think voters vote without context, in a vacuum as it were, yay or naying a series of random propositions with no consideration of how they might happen. 
In the context of brexit now that the practical issues are at the forefront (some Tory on question time last night talked about contingency regarding mobile  power stations in Northern Ireland to deal with a practical possibility) the brexitors who claim they knew what they were voting for might like to suggest some ideas, reveal the secrets of you like.
My washing of hands comment is because brexit voters are frequently saying the detail is down to the government and nothing to do with me guv. The government many voters elected as well as 'electing brexit'. This stuff is everything to do with voters in my view, whether it is a 'direct democracy' or some kind of round the houses democracy.
I am aware that when elected politicians go off and do their own thing, but general elections come around regularly and politicians can be voted out. Brexit wasn't an election of politicians, it was the election of a practical process which is supposed to be forever in its consequences and I believe that makes it different.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's an interesting idea, but I think it would work better with philosophical wearing the t-shirt, given that it's essentially his position.
> 
> I don't really care where he goes, though a tour of the areas of Britain with the highest support for Brexit would probably make for the most entertaining TV.



It is not my position though is it?
I have not said that British voters are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people kill each other out of petulance at any point.
If you interpret that to be my position you're wrong.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's an interesting idea, but I think it would work better with philosophical wearing the t-shirt, given that it's essentially his position.
> 
> I don't really care where he goes, though a tour of the areas of Britain with the highest support for Brexit would probably make for the most entertaining TV.



It is not my position though is it?
I have not said that 'British voters are not allowed to make decisions about their future in case Irish people kill each other out of petulance' at any point.
If you interpret that to be my position you're wrong.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

Sorry it posted twice for some reason.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2018)

2hats said:


> The man-child vents… "Trump lets rip":


Is he wearing a guards tie? kebabking Sasaferrato Mr.Bishie


----------



## kabbes (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well yes I suppose I am. How do you envisage the hard land border in Ireland working in practice?


The same way it works everywhere else in the world, of course.



> You suggested it might be a good idea for a few years.


No I didn’t.  Not even close.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not made the claim you attribute to me in my reply.


You have repeatedly said that leave voters should sort it out.  I can quote the posts if you wish. If you say that this does not mean getting involved in the negotiations (which is what needs to be sorted, since that is where we're at with Brexit), then you need to explain i) precisely _what_ you think needs to be sorted by voters and ii) _how_ they should sort it.



> I took the thrust of your point to be about whether we live in a 'direct democracy' (whatever that quite means),


It was a response to your repeated demand for voters to sort it.  Direct democracy is when the electorate is directly involved in the "sorting".  The usual example is ancient Athens (although obviously slaves, women, etc were not counted).  You seemed to imagine we had this instead of a representative democracy, which if you have read Edmund Burke you'll know does not allow for MPs to be seen even as delegates, but as people we empower to get on with it.



> and I attempted to suggest that when voters vote for something they should have an idea whether that something is possible and how.


What is the point of this observation, though? Is it a version of the new liberal orthodoxy that only experts should be allowed to vote?  That the electorate was not competent?  That they did not read up on constitutional law before voting?  If that's not what you're implying, then be specific.  What does your observation mean in practical terms, since you seem to be demanding practicality.

Surely this is not the "sorting"?  Are you expecting people to jump in a time machine and point out to the Leave Campaign the various governmental mishaps since the referendum?  Of course you're not.  So what?



> I don't think voters vote without context


Please enlighten us as to what you think the context in 2016 was.



> I am aware that when elected politicians go off and do their own thing, but general elections come around regularly and politicians can be voted out.


Yes, but there is no general election on the horizon.  So now what?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 13, 2018)

2hats said:


> The man-child vents… "Trump lets rip":


Was Trump going to buy all our shit then ?
(Apart from dodgy financial services)
And sell us wallowing gas-guzzler cars and fattening snack foods in return ?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Is he wearing a guards tie? kebabking Sasaferrato Mr.Bishie



it looks like a Household Division tie (Guards and posh Cav), but its a design you can buy in Primark - one imagines...

awful man.


----------



## andysays (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Sorry it posted twice for some reason.


You can post it as many times as you like, for all the good it will do. You haven't used those exact words,  but that is the clear implication of your posts, taken as a whole.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> You can post it as many times as you like, for all the good it will do. You haven't used those exact words,  but that is the clear implication of your posts, taken as a whole.


Exactly so.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> You can post it as many times as you like, for all the good it will do. You haven't used those exact words,  but that is the clear implication of your posts, taken as a whole.


You are simply wrong. It is not the clear implication of my posts taken as a whole.
The British can vote on whatever future they like with no regard to the 'petulant' Irish, what the British people would then have to come to terms with is the consequences of their vote.
My posts taken individually or as a whole do not state of imply what you say they do, you are wrong.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The same way it works everywhere else in the world, of course.
> 
> 
> No I didn’t.  Not even close.


My apologies, you said a few years of a hard border may focus thinking, you did not say it was a good idea, you were suggesting soething. I read you srong.
The hard border you seem to suggest works in the same way globally but I am not sure if does.
There are 'Beijing's wall type scenarios, there are geographical features, there are heavy fortification indeed quite a variety of hard borders.
Given the length of the Irish border, and the number of crossing points, how would the hard border you envisage work?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My apologies, you said a few years of a hard border may focus thinking, you did not say it was a good idea, you were suggesting soething. I read you srong.
> The hard border you seem to suggest works in the same way globally but I am not sure if does.
> There are 'Beijing's wall type scenarios, there are geographical features, there are heavy fortification indeed quite a variety of hard borders.
> Given the length of the Irish border, and the number of crossing points, how would the hard border you envisage work?


Badly


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ...how would the hard border you envisage work?



probably with a fencing contractor feeling like he's won the lottery?

you do, because i want be certain, understand that if there is no agreement over how a 'frictionless' border might operate between the UK and EU on the island of Ireland, that it will be the Irish government, at the behest of EU rules, that will be enforcing that border, not the UK - don't you?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> My apologies, you said a few years of a hard border may focus thinking, you did not say it was a good idea, you were suggesting soething. I read you srong.
> The hard border you seem to suggest works in the same way globally but I am not sure if does.
> There are 'Beijing's wall type scenarios, there are geographical features, there are heavy fortification indeed quite a variety of hard borders.
> Given the length of the Irish border, and the number of crossing points, how would the hard border you envisage work?


Do I need to be a border expert to believe that across the hundreds of hard borders in the world, there is an example of just one that can serve as an adequate model?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You have repeatedly said that leave voters should sort it out.  I can quote the posts if you wish. If you say that this does not mean getting involved in the negotiations (which is what needs to be sorted, since that is where we're at with Brexit), then you need to explain i) precisely _what_ you think needs to be sorted by voters and ii) _how_ they should sort it.
> 
> My reply to this is that the Irish border needs to be sorted out by brexit voters and the how is by suggesting a range of workabld and practical suggestions to choose from.
> 
> ...


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> probably with a fencing contractor feeling like he's won the lottery?
> 
> you do, because i want be certain, understand that if there is no agreement over how a 'frictionless' border might operate between the UK and EU on the island of Ireland, that it will be the Irish government, at the behest of EU rules, that will be enforcing that border, not the UK - don't you?


I am not sure if will work that way.
Are you suggesting that the land border will simply be left open by the UK and anybody and anything will be allowed to cross it?
Would that even be brexit? (I am aware that there are many interpretations as to what brexit is, but taking back control of the borders is repeated frequently.)


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> .


I'm on a phone too (in the hospital). You'll need to sort out the tags before I can make sense of that.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not sure if will work that way.
> Are you suggesting that the land border will simply be left open by the UK and anybody and anything will be allowed to cross it?
> Would that even be brexit? (I am aware that there are many interpretations as to what brexit is, but taking back control of the borders is repeated frequently.)



the UK doesn't have a problem with an open border with the Republic - the Republic doesn't have an open border with the rest of the world for migration (by dint of being in the misddle of the sea), which is the UK governments problem with more open borders, stuff manufactured or grown in the Republic is done so to established EU standards which the UK government is happy with - and of course the CTA is well established. so no, the UK won't be putting up a border with the Republic, it will be the Republic, as a requirement of EU law, putting up a border on the Ireland of Ireland and claiming its everyone elses fault.

please don't tell me that with all your research and knowledge into this issue that thats a surprise to you....


----------



## Poi E (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am not sure if will work that way.
> Are you suggesting that the land border will simply be left open by the UK and anybody and anything will be allowed to cross it?
> Would that even be brexit? (I am aware that there are many interpretations as to what brexit is, but taking back control of the borders is repeated frequently.)



England has a fine tradition of smuggling.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the UK doesn't have a problem with an open border with the Republic - the Republic doesn't have an open border with the rest of the world for migration (by dint of being in the misddle of the sea), which is the UK governments problem with more open borders, stuff manufactured or grown in the Republic is done so to established EU standards which the UK government is happy with - and of course the CTA is well established. so no, the UK won't be putting up a border with the Republic, it will be the Republic, as a requirement of EU law, putting up a border on the Ireland of Ireland and claiming its everyone elses fault.
> 
> please don't tell me that with all your research and knowledge into this issue that thats a surprise to you....



Actually under WTO rules you cannot just throw open the border for one country without throwing it open for every country.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 13, 2018)

agricola said:


> That front page is an absolute disgrace, the worst one they have come out with for at least the last twenty years.


Why? Its true isn't it? The brexit choice was remain in the EU or leave and make new deals, primarily with the US. Murdoch, like all hard Brexiters on the right supports that option....what trump has said is basically correct: Mays proposal does not allow for the US ± deals that Right Leavers want. May is now clearly not going to open the door to that possibility, so Johnson would be a better PM for US business if he got the hard brexit he's standing for.

Trumps lack of tact is helpful in showing what Brexit really means, what options are on the table. 
The timing is hilarious.


----------



## agricola (Jul 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Why? Its true isn't it? The brexit choice was remain in the EU or leave and make new deals, primarily with the US. Murdoch, like all hard Brexiters on the right supports that option....what trump has said is basically correct: Mays proposal does not allow for the US ± deals that Right Leavers want. May is now clearly not going to open the door to that possibility, so Johnson would be a better PM for US business if he got the hard brexit he's standing for.
> 
> Trumps lack of tact is helpful in showing what Brexit really means, what options are on the table.
> The timing is hilarious.



_"Terror is Khan's fault"_ and "_Migration is killing Europe_"?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Actually under WTO rules you cannot just throw open the border for one country without throwing it open for every country.



its the optics that matter - on day 1 the UK might receive notice that some other state has complained to the WTO about the open nature of the Irish border, but what will be on TV is pictures of Irish Customs and AGS creating a hard border under an EU flag.

Sir Humphrey called it _YP_ - your problem...


----------



## Winot (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the UK doesn't have a problem with an open border with the Republic - the Republic doesn't have an open border with the rest of the world for migration (by dint of being in the misddle of the sea), which is the UK governments problem with more open borders, stuff manufactured or grown in the Republic is done so to established EU standards which the UK government is happy with - and of course the CTA is well established. so no, the UK won't be putting up a border with the Republic, it will be the Republic, as a requirement of EU law, putting up a border on the Ireland of Ireland and claiming its everyone elses fault.



Anyone from the EU can travel to RoI under freedom of movement. How does the UK stop them coming into the UK via NI and maintain that 'freedom of movement stops at 11pm on 29 March 2019'?


----------



## gosub (Jul 13, 2018)

gosub said:


> Anyone see the itn footage of Juncker?  Trump's already beaten him.


Now claiming its sciatica

Junker al vertice Nato non era ubriaco: barcollava per un problema di salute


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

Winot said:


> Anyone from the EU can travel to RoI under freedom of movement. How does the UK stop them coming into the UK via NI and maintain that 'freedom of movement stops at 11pm on 29 March 2019'?



unless they can swim, like, _really_ well, then they will have valid EU travel documents, or valid visas if they from outside the EU, in order to get to Ireland. the UK judges that the number of EU citizens who will want to go to the newly-exited-the EU-UK, hop over the border, while still needing some form of UK visa to get on get a plane or ferry to the mainland GB is going to be limited - and moreover, the (UK's) open border doesn't need to be indefinite, it just needs to last about 5 minutes more than the Irish/EU border, and once they've put up their border - as mandated by EU law - the UK can put one up in response.

thats whats important, that the EU puts the border up first.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 13, 2018)

Winot said:


> Anyone from the EU can travel to RoI under freedom of movement. How does the UK stop them coming into the UK via NI and maintain that 'freedom of movement stops at 11pm on 29 March 2019'?


GFA means it can't be between Ireland and NI, NI won't have it on their west coast....Liverpool?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the UK doesn't have a problem with an open border with the Republic - the Republic doesn't have an open border with the rest of the world for migration (by dint of being in the misddle of the sea), which is the UK governments problem with more open borders, stuff manufactured or grown in the Republic is done so to established EU standards which the UK government is happy with - and of course the CTA is well established. so no, the UK won't be putting up a border with the Republic, it will be the Republic, as a requirement of EU law, putting up a border on the Ireland of Ireland and claiming its everyone elses fault.
> 
> please don't tell me that with all your research and knowledge into this issue that thats a surprise to you....



What about if the UK has a problem with people strolling across the border from the EU to the UK?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What about if the UK has a problem with people strolling across the border from the EU to the UK?



the UK government, perhaps somewhat cynically, thinks that the number of EU citizens who will wish to live as 'illegals' in NI will be somewhat limited...


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm on a phone too (in the hospital). You'll need to sort out the tags before I can make sense of that.



I am struggling with the tags, so have tried to be helpful by starting my bits by saying my reply.
I hope if you're in hospital because you're unwell that you feel better soon.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 13, 2018)

agricola said:


> _"Terror is Khan's fault"_ and "_Migration is killing Europe_"?


These are trump quotes, all papers are running it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> its the optics that matter - on day 1 the UK might receive notice that some other state has complained to the WTO about the open nature of the Irish border, but what will be on TV is pictures of Irish Customs and AGS creating a hard border under an EU flag.
> 
> Sir Humphrey called it _YP_ - your problem...



And that goes for the whole of the UK?. Or are you separating off NI?. Because that will need legislation .

Who is bothered about these optics btw, everyone knows that in order to stop free movement,  have your own tariffs and laws etc you need a border, it's a bizarre argument.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> unless they can swim, like, _really_ well, then they will have valid EU travel documents, or valid visas if they from outside the EU, in order to get to Ireland. the UK judges that the number of EU citizens who will want to go to the newly-exited-the EU-UK, hop over the border, while still needing some form of UK visa to get on get a plane or ferry to the mainland GB is going to be limited - and moreover, the (UK's) open border doesn't need to be indefinite, it just needs to last about 5 minutes more than the Irish/EU border, and once they've put up their border - as mandated by EU law - the UK can put one up in response.
> 
> thats whats important, that the EU puts the border up first.


Northern Ireland is the UK isn't it?
Northern Ireland people don't need a visa to get on a ferry from Larne to Stranraer.
There is at the moment (this is theoretical and unlikely to happen) nothing to stop a whole bunch of EU citizens simply walking in to the UK.
Would that be the UK regaining control of it's borders post brexit?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the UK government, perhaps somewhat cynically, thinks that the number of EU citizens who will wish to live as 'illegals' in NI will be somewhat limited...



A few years ago not many people would have anticipated the migrant crisis and the steps people would take to move from place to place. It is not at all difficult to imagine EU citizens wanting to move to the post brexit UK across the Irish border.


----------



## agricola (Jul 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> These are trump quotes, all papers are running it.



Admittedly I haven't checked the print version - but on the online account of Trump's interview on the rags website, and on every other account of it I have seen, he did _not_ say "Terror is Khan's fault".  He didn't even imply that it was.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> And that goes for the whole of the UK?. Or are you separating off NI?. Because that will need legislation .
> that
> Who is bothered about these optics btw, everyone knows that in order to stop free movement,  have your own tariffs and laws etc you need a border, it's a bizarre argument.



you have, i trust, noticed the big blue wobbly thing that seperates the UK from the European continent? that serves quite well as a border, 


philosophical said:


> ..There is at the moment (this is theoretical and unlikely to happen) nothing to stop a whole bunch of EU citizens simply walking in to the UK...



there is already an identity check at the ferry ports - you can no more just 'walk on' than you can walk on an Easyjet flight from Bristol to Glasgow  -and non-EU passport holders have to show their visas (assuming their nationality needs one) to enter the UK (obviously they are already in the UK, but given the absence of a border on on the border, that is where the check is done).


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you have, i trust, noticed the big blue wobbly thing that seperates the UK from the European continent? that serves quite well as a border,
> 
> 
> there is already an identity check at the ferry ports - you can no more just 'walk on' than you can walk on an Easyjet flight from Bristol to Glasgow  -and non-EU passport holders have to show their visas (assuming their nationality needs one) to enter the UK (obviously they are already in the UK, but given the absence of a border on on the border, that is where the check is done).



I think from this you're saying there will be no border controls set up by the UK on it's land border (in Ireland) with the EU.
You might also be implying that there will be a (stricter) border between part of the UK and the rest of the UK.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think from this you're saying there will be no border controls set up by the UK on it's land border (in Ireland) with the EU.
> You might also be implying that there will be a (stricter) border between part of the UK and the rest of the UK.



no, i'm saying that the UK will set up land border control on the NI-Irish border only after the EU-Ireland does. the original UK proposal was that the Irish Authorities at the Irish ports of entry could, on the UK's behalf, use UK immigration/customs rules (in addition to their own) to remove the neccessity of a UK/Irish border on the, err.. border - not dissimilar in practice to the current arrangement in Ireland where those travelling to the US go through US customs and Immigration in Ireland before they get on the plane. Ireland and the EU said no...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am struggling with the tags, so have tried to be helpful by starting my bits by saying my reply.
> I hope if you're in hospital because you're unwell that you feel better soon.


Picking up my daughter.  But thanks.  

I'll take a look in a moment.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> DLR: You have repeatedly said that leave voters should sort it out. I can quote the posts if you wish. If you say that this does not mean getting involved in the negotiations (which is what needs to be sorted, since that is where we're at with Brexit), then you need to explain i) precisely _what_ you think needs to be sorted by voters and ii) _how_they should sort it.
> 
> P: My reply to this is that the Irish border needs to be sorted out by brexit voters and the how is by suggesting a range of workabld and practical suggestions to choose from.
> 
> ...


"_the Irish border needs to be sorted out by brexit voters and the how is by suggesting a range of workabld and practical suggestions to choose from._"

But this is almost exactly what you said you _weren't_ suggesting!  Do you imagine symposia of registered voters submitting position papers to government and the government being obliged to pick one?  It's also entirely counter to what Burke had to say.  Can you show me the procedure for that in Erskine May which would allow that process to take place?  People can write to MPs all they like, but MPs will pass it on to the Brexit minister, who'll eventually send back a bland reply, at best enclosing a photocopied bullet point summary of what they were going to do anyway.  (I have direct experience of this).

"_the brexit vote was not for MP's but for, I dunno a concept and a practical process so the Burke principle is not the case in terms of the brexit referendum._"

No, the Burkean principle of representative democracy still stands.  It was not suspended by the terms of the wording on the referendum ballot paper.

We were asked: Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

The options were:

Remain a member of the European Union
Leave the European Union

Nothing here suggests either outcome would be carried out any way but by government, supported by the civil service.  So you're in the realms of fantasy, and frankly you sound like you don't know what you're talking about.

"_I think everybody should get a vote. I also think voters should take ownership of what they voted for. In the case of an MP if following experience of that MP they don't want them any more, then don't vote for them next time, in the case of brexit voters are (seemingly) stuck with their decision so they have a responsibility to follow it through_."

What does "taking ownership" in this instance mean?  Specifically.  In what way do voters have a responsibility to "follow it through"?  Specifically.  You've said my understanding of what you're implying is incorrect.  So you have to tell me exactly what you mean here, because it still sounds like you're calling for a suspension of representative democracy (and if so, great.  But how do we achieve that?).

"_I think the context of 2016 was a hatred of 'foreigners' largely. I also think voters might have been swayed by the allure of Farage, Boris and Gove so voted brexit in order to associate themselves with those people, that is what seems to have happened in 2016, brexit voters became allies of Boris Johnson because of what happened_."

So we're back to "leave voters are racists".  Where is your evidence for this?  And even if you have evidence (which you don't), is that in itself context free?  Was there a vacuum that this alleged xenophobia occurred in?

The allure of Farage and others.  So, you mean an election campaign?  Those dastardly politicians did a presentation job.  Yes.  That's what they do.  The last bit about "brexit voters became allies of Boris Johnson".  What does that even mean?  But more to the point, what then?  Especially since he's resigned.  At time of writing he is not in government.  The ballot paper does not say he had to be.

"'_now what' is that the country suffers under the malign influence of right wing Tories_."

Yes it does. That was decided in 2015, just before the referendum, and in 2017, just after it.  Next scheduled one is 2022.  Three years and a couple of months after the Brexit date.  Now what?


----------



## Winot (Jul 13, 2018)

So when you said 



kebabking said:


> the UK won't be putting up a border with the Republic



you actually meant



kebabking said:


> the UK can put one up


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2018)

sealion said:


> there is already an identity check at the ferry ports - you can no more just 'walk on' than you can walk on an Easyjet flight from Bristol to Glasgow  -and non-EU passport holders have to show their visas (assuming their nationality needs one) to enter the UK (obviously they are already in the UK, but given the absence of a border on on the border, that is where the check is done).



Current situation is one I come across frequently; Russian has UK visa, wants to go to Eire, would need an Eire visa for that. I recommend going London-Belfast and then train to Dublin. However on the train from Belfast to Dublin there are often checks and anyone without the correct paperwork will be detained to prove they are eligible to enter Eire. And vice versa.

Why would that situation need to change?

The UK government is not fussed about EU passport holders walking in to the UK, they'll be waived in anyway. What they are concerned about is EU passport holders coming to the UK and  settling down with a job here, with no checks to the numbers doing so. That's what they mean when they talk of ending free movement of people.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> no, i'm saying that the UK will set up land border control on the NI-Irish border only after the EU-Ireland does. the original UK proposal was that the Irish Authorities at the Irish ports of entry could, on the UK's behalf, use UK immigration/customs rules (in addition to their own) to remove the neccessity of a UK/Irish border on the, err.. border - not dissimilar in practice to the current arrangement in Ireland where those travelling to the US go through US customs and Immigration in Ireland before they get on the plane. Ireland and the EU said no...



Yes I have heard about that.

My brother lives in Ballycasey near Shannon Airport, and even thought I have only been to the USA for a short NYC four day city break, the immigration queue in New York was appalling. If I go again it will definitely be a trip to Shannon, and do all the checks before the flight in order to stroll off at the other end. So you're right, except that in Shannon I believe it is American people who do the checks rather than Irish people doing it for them (not 100% certain about that).

I am also aware that one proposal was that the Irish authorities did the immigration checks for the UK authorities post brexit, presumably at a cost. However if an EU citizen passed all the checks the ROI demands to enter Ireland, there would be an assumption that the UK would be cool with those people too, but I can't see what there is in place under that system for loads of EU citizens to arrive in Ireland, then walk or travel to the UK and survive in the gig economy or something like that.

I can only see that being stopped by a shedload of workplace checks where employees have to do the job of the immigration service or get a huge fine.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you have, i trust, noticed the big blue wobbly thing that seperates the UK from the European continent? that serves quite well as a border,
> 
> 
> there is already an identity check at the ferry ports - you can no more just 'walk on' than you can walk on an Easyjet flight from Bristol to Glasgow  -and non-EU passport holders have to show their visas (assuming their nationality needs one) to enter the UK (obviously they are already in the UK, but given the absence of a border on on the border, that is where the check is done).


But you are missing the point, if they are in NI, then they are already in the UK.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ..I can only see that being stopped by a shedload of workplace checks where employees have to do the job of the immigration service or get a huge fine.



you mean in exactly the same was as happens now for non-EU citizens?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you mean in exactly the same was as happens now for non-EU citizens?


You are proposing a border in the Irish sea, no?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> But you are missing the point, if they are in NI, then they are already in the UK.



its what happens now for non-EU citizens, and what happened before the UK and Ireland joined the EU for non-UK and non-Irish citizens. it may look, and be, a bit odd, having the border checks at not-the-border, but it is a workable template that doesn't involve having immigration officers standing in fields on the border/hedge between Fermanagh and Cavan.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> its what happens now for non-EU citizens, and what happened before the UK and Ireland joined the EU for non-UK and non-Irish citizens. it may look, and be, a bit odd, having the border checks at not-the-border, but it is a workable template that doesn't involve having immigration officers standing in fields on the border/hedge between Fermanagh and Cavan.


Ok, but it is still leaving NI open to free movement.


----------



## andysays (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> its what happens now for non-EU citizens, and what happened before the UK and Ireland joined the EU for non-UK and non-Irish citizens. it may look, and be, a bit odd, having the border checks at not-the-border, but it is a workable template that doesn't involve having immigration officers standing in fields on the border/hedge between Fermanagh and Cavan.


Don't let the DUP know


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

How do you stop NI and the UK being flooded with cheap goods if there's no border?.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ok, but it is still leaving NI open to free movement.






> The UK government is not fussed about EU passport holders walking in to the UK, they'll be waived in anyway. What they are concerned about is EU passport holders coming to the UK and settling down with a job here, with no checks to the numbers doing so. That's what they mean when they talk of ending free movement of people.



Why would this be an issue just cos people can flow freely between Eire and UK?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> How do you stop NI and the UK being flooded with cheap goods if there's no border?.



Coming from where? The EU?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You are proposing a border in the Irish sea, no?



no, the border is where the border is - its rather that the enforcement of that border takes place wherever someone wishes to get on a plane or ferry, or wishes to hire a car, or take up employment, or see a Doctor. in a very similar way to how immigration/border control is managed in GB, the coastline is quite porous, you could employ a million immigration officers and they'd still not be able to cover every mile of coastline, so you move the enforcement to the choke points.



sleaterkinney said:


> Ok, but it is still leaving NI open to free movement.



free movement is a silly term - the UK has never suggested that the ability to come and go should be restricted, its the ability to come and settle that will ended/be limited.

Dieter and Angela will still be able to hop on a flight from Dusselldorf, hire a car and be tourists, all without a visa, what they won't be able to do is hop on a plane, buy a house and get a job, all without a visa.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Coming from where? The EU?


Yep, they can dump all their surpluses into NI and from there into the rest of the UK.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> "_the Irish border needs to be sorted out by brexit voters and the how is by suggesting a range of workabld and practical suggestions to choose from._"
> 
> But this is almost exactly what you said you _weren't_ suggesting!  Do you imagine symposia of registered voters submitting position papers to government and the government being obliged to pick one?  It's also entirely counter to what Burke had to say.  Can you show me the procedure for that in Erskine May which would allow that process to take place?  People can write to MPs all they like, but MPs will pass it on to the Brexit minister, who'll eventually send back a bland reply, at best enclosing a photocopied bullet point summary of what they were going to do anyway.  (I have direct experience of this).
> 
> ...



I think we diverge when comparing the vote in a referendum to voting for your MP in a general Election.
You seem to be saying that the same democratic (?) principles apply in both instances, and are both examples of the procedure of a democratic process. I am saying there is a difference between those two democratic processes because one vote is for a (temporary) MP, and one vote is for a permanent brexit. If that places me in the realms of fantasy I will live with it, but I really think there is a difference.

I follow that up by asking, 'OK, if you voted brexit and you knew what you were voting for, tell us. Especially tell us about a fundamental like 'taking back control of the borders'' The most common response had been 'I don't know, I leave that stuff to the politicians'.  Maybe brexit voters can't tell us specifics beyond 'I voted brexit because I hate foreigners/want a blue passport/ the daily Express told me to/the EU drowns migrants/Farage thinks we should leave so it's good enough for me', these examples explain the vote, but the tricky bit is along the lines of 'OK you got us here, explain what happens from now on'.
I think you're saying voters don't need to explain what happens next because they want to leave that sort of devilish detail to politicians and civil servants (hence my 'washing hands' comment earlier). We diverge when you seem to say it was ever thus, but I am saying no, this was a binary choice referendum and the circumstances are different. As they appear to be turning out to be anyway given the mess the UK is in. My challenge to brexit voters (a challenge many here take to be unreasonable) is that as they have now taken control of the process then come up with the solutions, or if they have no solutions maybe work to abandon the process.

My evidence for my hatred of foreigners is (apart from personal experiences) something like this which has been posted before:







You ask what I mean by the allure of Farage and co, and I mean just that. They have the power to trade in hatred, and I make no apologies saying that I certainly didn't want to be associated with that in any way when voting.

At least we seem to agree that the Tories are a malign influence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Yep, they can dump all their surpluses into NI and from there into the rest of the UK.



It's the EU scared the UK will do just that which is why the EU wants a hard border between NI and the EU.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> no, the border is where the border is - its rather that the enforcement of that border takes place wherever someone wishes to get on a plane or ferry, or wishes to hire a car, or take up employment, or see a Doctor. in a very similar way to how immigration/border control is managed in GB, the coastline is quite porous, you could employ a million immigration officers and they'd still not be able to cover every mile of coastline, so you move the enforcement to the choke points.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The issue is not Dieter and Angela, they would be able to get a visa whatever, the issue is with people who do not go through the official channels, they would still be able to go into NI.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's the EU scared the UK will do just that which is why the EU wants a hard border between NI and the EU.


I don't think the EU is scared, the UK chief negotiator just quit...


----------



## 2hats (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> free movement is a silly term


Apparently called mobility arrangements now, so that’s free movement solved.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The issue is not Dieter and Angela, they would be able to get a visa whatever, the issue is with people who do not go through the official channels, they would still be able to go into NI.



they can get into Dorset, but life isn't much fun for an illegal, and the rump EU will be a much more attactive destination.

you've somewhat ignored the 'how do they get to Ireland in the first place?' thing - if they wouldn't get into the UK legally they probably wouldn't get into Ireland either...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> they can get into Dorset, but life isn't much fun for an illegal, and the rump EU will be a much more attactive destination.
> 
> you've somewhat ignored the 'how do they get to Ireland in the first place?' thing - if they wouldn't get into the UK legally they probably wouldn't get into Ireland either...


But still, you have a situation where anyone in the EU can get into the UK, without a visa.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> But still, you have a situation where anyone in the EU can get into the UK, without a visa.



we've always had that. did you think that Brexit meant building a 12,000 mile fence?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you mean in exactly the same was as happens now for non-EU citizens?



Yes indeed.
And it might be horrendously expensive and divisive, and also undermine people working to get by.
However if the solution to the UK borders is to leave them open, and deal with individuals by catching them scattered around the country by hoiking them away from their workplaces and sticking them in detention centres, then forcing them on to transport then that is perhaps your suggested solution.
I can see quite a lot of downsides to that system beyond the massively increased expense of it all when EU citizens have the same status of non EU citizens, and I can see it also having an impact on UK citizens in the EU.
I am aware that there is a suggestion of some kind of status for UK and EU people everywhere depending when a person arrived somewhere, but beyond that, with open borders, there will be a forceful state apparatus of repression to go after 'foreigners' who people are suspicious of.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes indeed.
> And it might be horrendously expensive and divisive, and also undermine people working to get by.
> However if the solution to the UK borders is to leave them open, and deal with individuals by catching them scattered around the country by hoiking them away from their workplaces and sticking them in detention centres, then forcing them on to transport then that is perhaps your suggested solution.
> I can see quite a lot of downsides to that system beyond the massively increased expense of it all when EU citizens have the same status of non EU citizens, and I can see it also having an impact on UK citizens in the EU.
> I am aware that there is a suggestion of some kind of status for UK and EU people everywhere depending when a person arrived somewhere, but beyond that, with open borders, there will be a forceful state apparatus of repression to go after 'foreigners' who people are suspicious of.



resend key, over...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> we've always had that. did you think that Brexit meant building a 12,000 mile fence?


I thought there would be border controls, yes.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I thought there would be border controls, yes.



there will be - at ports and airports we'll have 'normal' border/customs/immigration controls, and while EU passport holders are very likely to be waved through as they currently are, they may have to have return tickets (i've no idea..), or have time limits stamped in their passports (again, no idea...), the only real difference will be that the current 'at depth' immigration controls that apply to non-EU citizens will apply to EU citizens as well, so buying/renting a house, opening a bank account, applying for a job etc..


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 13, 2018)

kebabking said:


> we've always had that. did you think that Brexit meant building a 12,000 mile fence?


I mean, the UK govt has has two years to come up with a load of having your cake crap so what's this "brexit means this" bullshit??


----------



## Raheem (Jul 13, 2018)

2hats said:


> Apparently called mobility arrangements now, so that’s free movement solved.


I really hope they're not calling it that. People will be picturing refugees getting free scooters.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think we diverge when comparing the vote in a referendum to voting for your MP in a general Election.


God you're slippery. We aren't comparing those.  You're saying that because the Brexit referendum was a referendum that somehow this means it is not the responsibility of government to conduct the Brexit process. I'm disagreeing. And frankly, you _are_ wrong about this.



> You seem to be saying that the same democratic (?) principles apply in both instances, and are both examples of the procedure of a democratic process. I am saying there is a difference between those two democratic processes because one vote is for a (temporary) MP, and one vote is for a permanent brexit.


It's quite straightforward.  A referendum was put before the people by the government, asking one question (see my previous post).  The referendum took place.  The decision the people came to (the UK should Leave the European Union) is now being carried out by the government.  That's how it works. 



> If that places me in the realms of fantasy I will live with it, but I really think there is a difference.


You said that "_the Burke principle is not the case in terms of the brexit referendum".  _This is incorrect.  This is where you are in the realms of fantasy.  The referendum did not say "in the event of a decision to Leave the EU, government shall not being carrying out this wish, because Burkean principles shall in this regard not apply".  You are tying yourself in knots here. 



> I follow that up by asking, 'OK, if you voted brexit and you knew what you were voting for, tell us.


The ballot paper said "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?".  Whatever people _may_ have thought they were voting for on either side, the only thing actually being decided was whether the United Kingdom would remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union.  The latter was decided.



> Especially tell us about a fundamental like 'taking back control of the borders''


That's just a question you might ask of someone. But that's not what you were saying.  You were saying far more than that.  You were saying that because this was a referendum that in some way voters had to become directly involved in "sorting" the negotiation process.  But then you said no, you didn't mean that. That's not what "sorting" meant.  I asked what it did mean. You said "_the Irish border needs to be sorted out by brexit voters and the how is by suggesting a range of workabld and practical suggestions to choose from."_  Leave voters had to _directly sort the Irish border out_. That's not how the UK's form of democracy works.  It'd give Walter Bagehot palpitations.  It would be met by bemusement by the Speaker of the Commons.  It doesn't even compute.



> Maybe brexit voters can't tell us specifics beyond 'I voted brexit because I hate foreigners/want a blue passport/ the daily Express told me to/the EU drowns migrants/Farage thinks we should leave so it's good enough for me',


This is a straw man, so it's not something to which I can respond. 



> I think you're saying voters don't need to explain what happens next


Then you think wrong.



> We diverge when you seem to say it was ever thus,


We diverge on quite a lot, including your characterisation of what I've said.



> My challenge to brexit voters (a challenge many here take to be unreasonable) is that as they have now taken control of the process then come up with the solutions


I'm banging my head off a brick wall here.  How have Leave voters "taken control of the process"?  How? 



> My evidence for my hatred of foreigners is (apart from personal experiences) something like this which has been posted before:


You seem confused about how evidence works.  That's evidence of a bunch of Daily Express front pages.  That's not what I asked for.



> You ask what I mean by the allure of Farage and co, and I mean just that.


That's not even a sentence.  "The allure of Farage and co."  Where is the verb?  ("Allure" as used here is a noun). Where is the complete idea that is being expressed?  At best that's a clause.  It needs more work before it makes enough sense on its own for us to know what "just that" means at all.



> They have the power to trade in hatred, and I make no apologies saying that I certainly didn't want to be associated with that in any way when voting.


That's nice.  But what on earth has that got to do with your bizarre pronouncements on "Burke principles" not applying?

You are unhappy with the outcome of the referendum.  OK, fine.  But you're then going on to make things follow from that which just don't follow from that.  Sorry, but they don't.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> God you're slippery. We aren't comparing those.  You're saying that because the Brexit referendum was a referendum that somehow this means it is not the responsibility of government to conduct the Brexit process. I'm disagreeing. And frankly, you _are_ wrong about this.
> 
> It's quite straightforward.  A referendum was put before the people by the government, asking one question (see my previous post).  The referendum took place.  The decision the people came to (the UK should Leave the European Union) is now being carried out by the government.  That's how it works.
> 
> ...



You have more precise knowledge regarding elections, and past politics than me.
I respect that.
However a referendum, to me, is different to a general election even though you boil both down to a vote and the government takes over. I accept that.
You are also better at English grammar than I am, I will have to live with that.
I will await the government solution to the Irish border question, however I don't believe it is possible to solve without huge expense and political cost.
I am pretty sure I have a grip on how evidence works, although you may suggest some kind of subtle nuance I haven't thought of.
When it comes to the evidence before my eyes regarding what brexit voters have ushered in I am pretty sure I can get a handle on that as well.
Glee and incompetence from the winners, and bewilderment for the losers.
Hope your hospital visit wasn't too stressful.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 13, 2018)

Aka “I don’t know what I’m talking about lol”


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 13, 2018)

Tell you what, they should reinstate the Irish border as it stood on 1/1/1919. Or 24/4/1916. Either suits me


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I will await the government solution to the Irish border question, however I don't believe it is possible to solve without huge expense and political cost.


I'm certain it'll be a challenge to say the least.


> I am pretty sure I have a grip on how evidence works, although you may suggest some kind of subtle nuance I haven't thought of.


Well, the question I asked was whether there was evidence that Leave voters are racist. Or voted the way they did for racist reasons. What you presented was not evidence of that. It was evidence of the editorial policy of a right wing newspaper.



> Glee and incompetence from the winners, and bewilderment for the losers.


It's worth remembering that those leading the Brexit process include many who were Remain campaigners. 



> Hope your hospital visit wasn't too stressful.


Thanks. It's good to have her home. Though she's still very weak.


----------



## David Clapson (Jul 13, 2018)

From today's FT. You can read it on the FT site without a subscription if you go via @ftwestminster on Twitter. I've pasted it here without any para breaks. Sorry.




> Brexit chaos puts Conservatives on the edge of a breakdown. Following a week of upheaval in Westminster, it is not clear if May’s government will survive — or if any exit deal can pass parliament
> 
> Boris Johnson, Britain’s foreign secretary, posed portentously for the photographer — hastily summoned on Monday to his Georgian residence overlooking St James’s Park — his jaw set in Churchillian pose. The frontman of Brexit had promised Britain a confident future outside the EU. Now looking purposefully into the middle distance, he signed his resignation letter to Theresa May declaring: “That dream is dying.” By the end of a tumultuous week in British politics, the Brexit “dream” was lying bloodied in the gutter. Mr Johnson, who fronted the 2016 Vote Leave campaign, had quit; David Davis, the cabinet’s chief Brexit negotiator, had gone too, refusing to stomach the prime minister’s long-awaited white paper, setting out a vision that Mr Johnson claimed would leave Britain loitering in the EU’s “dingy ante room”. The Brexiters had promised that Britain would break free from the EU’s regulatory orbit; instead Mrs May proposed applying all EU rules for goods and agriculture and remaining in a quasi customs union. Services, including Britain’s financial services sector, would have to make do with less EU market access. They could at least cling to the hope that Britain would in future be able to forge its own trade deals, reaching out to global markets and to the “Anglosphere” of “kith and kin” countries across the oceans. The biggest prize of all would be a US free-trade deal.  But on Friday, Donald Trump arrived in London having laid waste to those hopes. The US president said he had “told” Mrs May how to deliver Brexit, but she had gone the “opposite way”, embracing EU rules that prohibit the import of American hormone-treated beef and chlorine-dipped chicken, for example. “If they do a deal like that, we would be dealing with the European Union instead of dealing with the UK,” Mr Trump said in an interview with The Sun newspaper. “So it will probably kill the deal.” Kicking off with the cabinet summit held last Friday at Mrs May’s Chequers country residence, the prime minister had hoped to be able to finally present a coherent path towards Brexit this week that was broadly supported by her party. Instead, after several days of chaos at Westminster, almost everything in British politics is up in the air. Even if she survives a potential leadership challenge, it is not guaranteed that Mrs May’s government will be able to hold together through a number of key parliamentary votes in the autumn. And it is also unclear whether there is a majority in parliament for any of the potential paths to Brexit — her proposed deal or a more abrupt exit. Jeremy Hunt, who replaced Mr Johnson as foreign secretary, warned this week of potential “Brexit paralysis, which would be immensely damaging”. Mrs May’s 98-page white paper on Britain’s future relationship with the EU — a document produced almost two years after the Brexit vote — now forms the basis for the deal that she hopes to conclude with the 27 other EU member states before the end of the year. The prime minister had pleaded with EU leaders not to reject it out of hand — she told them she could not simultaneously take on Tory Brexiters and European governments — and the document was given a polite but muted reception. Simon Coveney, Ireland’s deputy prime minister, called it a “step towards a much softer Brexit”. The white paper was crafted in Number 10 by Olly Robbins, Mrs May’s chief Brexit official, and calls for a supercharged “association agreement” — of the kind recently agreed between the EU and Ukraine — to give privileged access to Britain to the world’s most lucrative single market. But to the eyes of many in Brussels, it still looks like Britain wants many of the benefits of EU membership without its obligations — including free movement and budget contributions. One EU diplomat joked that Mrs May’s paper looked “more like a membership application” than an exit. The prime minister’s problem, alluded to in Mr Johnson’s florid resignation letter, is that the white paper is only the start of the Brexit climbdown: Mrs May will have to go much further if she is to secure a good trade deal with Brussels. Given that the Tory Eurosceptic Jacob Rees-Mogg has already described the white paper as representing “the greatest vassalage since King John paid homage to Philip II at Le Goulet in 1200”, it is hard to see how pro-Brexit Tory MPs will support Mrs May’s deal. Tory Brexiters claim that 60 or so MPs who support the European Research Group, chaired by Mr Rees-Mogg, would vote against what Mr Johnson calls a “semi Brexit” deal, wiping out the prime minister’s majority. “They have faces like thunder,” says one Tory MP. “They will vote against whatever deal she comes up with. They don’t seem to care if that meant the government fell.” Dominic Raab, a Eurosceptic who replaced Mr Davis as Brexit secretary, pleaded with his colleagues to avoid “parliamentary riots and sabotage”. Mrs May this week dispatched officials to brief opposition MPs on her “softer Brexit” white paper in the hope that some might come to her aid when she presents her final deal to parliament in the autumn. But privately Downing Street admits it would be reckless to rely on Labour votes to secure a Brexit deal. Ben Bradshaw, a pro-European Labour MP, agrees: “It’s inconceivable that the Labour party would ride to the government’s rescue and miss the opportunity of bringing it down or — possibly — forcing a ‘people’s vote’ on any deal.”  Mrs May will try to use this unyielding parliamentary arithmetic to persuade Brussels to cut her a good deal she can sell to her party. And she has another strategy: she hopes to convince EU leaders that if they push her too far — for example, demanding free movement and billions of pounds for EU projects — she would walk away and Britain would leave in disorderly fashion without a deal next March. At this week’s cabinet meeting, Mrs May instructed ministers to “step up preparations” for a no-deal scenario, although early indications are that this desperate project might simply convince Brussels that no rational prime minister would ever inflict such an outcome on their people. Thousands of electricity generators would have to be requisitioned at short notice and put on barges in the Irish Sea to help keep the lights on in Northern Ireland in the event of the hardest no-deal Brexit, according to one paper drawn up by Whitehall officials. Plans are being drawn up to stockpile medicines and processed foods.  “It has been said that it’s a bit like standing on the top floor of an eight-storey building and threatening to jump off if we don’t get what we want,” says Hilary Benn, Labour chairman of the House of Commons Brexit committee. There is another problem: moderate Conservatives say at least 50 Tory MPs would join forces with the Labour opposition and other parties to vote in the Commons to stop Mrs May taking Britain over the cliff-edge. “Whatever the legal status of that vote, no prime minister could ignore the will of parliament,” says one pro-European Tory. So the possibility arises that in the autumn Mrs May will be unable to secure a Commons majority for either a deal or no deal. In that scenario, she may have no other choice but to appeal to the EU to extend the two-year Article 50 exit process while she tries to resolve the political stalemate. The only way out of such an impasse might be to hold a general election, or for Mrs May to put her deal to a second referendum.  Tory Brexiters now face the moment of truth of whether to press ahead with their project, or to try to stop Mrs May “capitulating” to Brussels with a deal they view to be too soft. Talk continues to circulate at Westminster that Conservative MPs are close to assembling the 48 names needed to trigger a vote of confidence in the prime minister. “The whips are crapping themselves,” says one senior Brexiter. But the Eurosceptics are split. Some, like environment secretary Michael Gove and trade secretary Liam Fox, are backing Mrs May’s plan, believing they can fix Brexit’s flaws after the UK leaves. On private message groups, hardline Brexiters lambast the “careerists” who do not have the guts to fight. If they challenge Mrs May in a leadership contest, they would probably lose. They might be able to assemble the 48 names to trigger a vote of confidence, but have nowhere near the 159 names needed to bring her down. If they vote against a Brexit deal, they run the risk of Brexit not happening at all. What is becoming ever clearer is that many Brexiters have no Plan B, as Chris Wilkins, Mrs May’s former speech writer, illustrated this week. He recalled how, on a tense flight home from the UN in New York last year, he and the prime minister’s team were grappling with a complicated section of what became Mrs May’s Florence speech last September, which tried to devise a new regulatory relationship. “As we did so, the former foreign secretary pulled me to one side,” he recalled. “I awaited his words of wisdom. ‘You know Chris,’ Mr Johnson said. ‘We’ve just got to get out. We can worry about all this other stuff later.’ “Stunned that this was all one of the main architects of Brexit had to offer, all I could say was: ‘You know what Boris, I’d noticed.’”


----------



## A380 (Jul 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Tell you what, they should reinstate the Irish border as it stood on 1/1/1919. Or 24/4/1916. Either suits me


You know, I think that probably was Theresa May’s originally plan....

Till someone noticed.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It's quite straightforward.  A referendum was put before the people by the government, asking one question (see my previous post).  The referendum took place.  The decision the people came to (the UK should Leave the European Union) is now being carried out by the government.  That's how it works.
> 
> The ballot paper said "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?".  Whatever people _may_ have thought they were voting for on either side, the only thing actually being decided was whether the United Kingdom would remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union.  The latter was decided.


This is the crux of the problem - we were asked about leaving the EU, and only the EU, but the government has taken the result to mean that we voted to leave the EU and the Single Market and the Customs Union.

We can't be in the EU while also not being in the EU, so obviously the referendum result means the government have a mandate to negotiate on that, but we can be in the customs union and / or the single market while also not being in the EU, so the referendum gives them no mandate for taking us out of them.

At the moment the politicians and everyone else are using their own interpretation of what the Brexit vote meant, which is fine while conducting the negotiations, but when it comes to the final decision the only people who can actually determine for certain whether or not the government's interpretation of it is actually the will of the people is the British people. 

That's why we need a referendum on the final deal, especially so if that final deal involves us leaving the only existing Europe wide (well virtually all of Europe) free trade area and customs union. If this truly is the will of the British people then so be it, off the economic cliff we go, but not without us specifically voting for it, and especially not when every recent poll shows a big majority in favour of staying in the Single Market and customs union.


----------



## paolo (Jul 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s imposed by the EU.  If it were up to the British and Irish governments alone — the sovereign governments of the relevant sovereign states  — there would be no border.  The EU are the ones insisting it be there.  They are imposing it.  To insist otherwise is to really twist reality to suit your ideology.



Aren’t you simply stating that the EU has borders, generally, and the incoming new one internally in Ireland will be part of those?


----------



## paolo (Jul 14, 2018)

I’m currently thinking border in the sea is the least worst option. It’ll fuck off the unionists, but border in Ireland... ouch.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 14, 2018)

Draw a line between the present situation and when in the future you think we will achieve open borders.  Find the intersect between that line and the vertical axis five years in the future.   Use that as a guideline to policy.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Aren’t you simply stating that the EU has borders, generally, and the incoming new one internally in Ireland will be part of those?


No.  I’m saying that a border has to be created by a party that wants it.  They are not some natural work of God.  If neither ROI nor UK want this border, who is the party that is creating it?


----------



## Winot (Jul 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No.  I’m saying that a border has to be created by a party that wants it.  They are not some natural work of God.  If neither ROI nor UK want this border, who is the party that is creating it?



They do not have to create a border. It is a choice. But they do have to deal with the consequences of that choice. 

You are trying to set up the EU as the big bad wolf here, but really it is about geopolitical choice of which rules to follow.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 14, 2018)

Winot said:


> They do not have to create a border. It is a choice. But they do have to deal with the consequences of that choice.
> 
> You are trying to set up the EU as the big bad wolf here, but really it is about geopolitical choice of which rules to follow.


Which rules specify how a border must be policed?


----------



## Winot (Jul 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Which rules specify how a border must be policed?



Don’t know. Doubt any do. Trade rules are more about setting/collecting tariffs aren’t they? It’s just that the particular history of the Irish border leads many to think that any checks will risk escalating tension. I don’t know enough about Ireland to know if that’s true.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 14, 2018)

Winot said:


> Don’t know. Doubt any do. Trade rules are more about setting/collecting tariffs aren’t they? It’s just that the particular history of the Irish border leads many to think that any checks will risk escalating tension. I don’t know enough about Ireland to know if that’s true.



i am certain that any kind of border infrastructure will attract can Republican violence, i doubt enormously that it will either stoke real tension or that the violence will be on anything like the scale of 'the troubles', but the unsavoury truth is that there is violence now, without any kind of border infrastructure: there are something like 100 Republican attacks on the NI state, its security forces and its economy (and a good number in the Republic) every year. we are fortunate that those attacks are overwelmingly small scale and unsuccsessfull, and that the plethora of 'IRA's' - some of them literally two men and a dog - that have grown up in the 20 years of PIRA ceacefire and GFA are both heavily compromised and manage to attract very much the bottom third of the talent pool.

rather like kabbes however i don't believe that 65, or 70 if you include the Republic, million people should pander to perhaps three to five hundred - the difficult truth for political Republicanism is that there is a strain of Republicanism that is simply unable to accept any form of derivation from what they (and there are perhaps 15-20 different groups/ideologies within 'dissident' Republicanism) see as _The One True Path of Republicanism, _and they are quite prepared to kill for it, indeed they are quite prepared to kill to not even achieve it, but just to keep the struggle for it alive in a political sense. you could genuinely have a 32 county state designed entirely by the perhaps 300-500 individuals involved in dissident Republican violence, that 75% of them thought was a genuine reflection of Republican Truth, and the other 25% would scream treason and sellout, and they'd be attacking it and killing its adherants within 3 years. there is little point trying to place people who cannot be placated.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2018)

kebabking said:


> i am certain that any kind of border infrastructure will attract can Republican violence, i doubt enormously that it will either stoke real tension or that the violence will be on anything like the scale of 'the troubles', but the unsavoury truth is that there is violence now, without any kind of border infrastructure: there are something like 100 Republican attacks on the NI state, its security forces and its economy (and a good number in the Republic) every year. we are fortunate that those attacks are overwelmingly small scale and unsuccsessfull, and that the plethora of 'IRA's' - some of them literally two men and a dog - that have grown up in the 20 years of PIRA ceacefire and GFA are both heavily compromised and manage to attract very much the bottom third of the talent pool.
> 
> rather like kabbes however i don't believe that 65, or 70 if you include the Republic, million people should pander to perhaps three to five hundred - the difficult truth for political Republicanism is that there is a strain of Republicanism that is simply unable to accept any form of derivation from what they (and there are perhaps 15-20 different groups/ideologies within 'dissident' Republicanism) see as _The One True Path of Republicanism, _and they are quite prepared to kill for it, indeed they are quite prepared to kill to not even achieve it, but just to keep the struggle for it alive in a political sense. you could genuinely have a 32 county state designed entirely by the perhaps 300-500 individuals involved in dissident Republican violence, that 75% of them thought was a genuine reflection of Republican Truth, and the other 25% would scream treason and sellout, and they'd be attacking it and killing its adherants within 3 years. there is little point trying to place people who cannot be placated.



its not a "few hundred people" the overwhelming majority of people in both the north and the republic would hate any re-establishment of the border. . There is no border now - people freely travel and work on both sides. A joiner, an electrician or a landscape gardener might cross the border several times a day during their workday. On top of that is a hugely emotive issue for republicans because - ITS THE SAME FUCKING COUNTRY. The dissolving of the border is an absolutely key part of the peace process. 
That sort of resentment would see widespread sabotage of any border infrastructure and a high potential of attacks on any personal enforcing border controls - and this violence and sabotage would be supported - or tacitly accepted -  by a large proportion of the population (and not just republicans). 
That threat would likely see  a return of ever more stringent security measures which in turn could easily provoke a cycle of violence that would be an absolute boon to the assorted headbangers on both sides.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its not a "few hundred people" the overwhelming majority of people in both the north and the republic would hate any re-establishment of the border. . There is no border now - people freely travel and work on both sides. A joiner, an electrician or a landscape gardener might cross the border several times a day during their workday. On top of that is a hugely emotive issue for republicans because - ITS THE SAME FUCKING COUNTRY. The dissolving of the border is an absolutely key part of the peace process.
> That sort of resentment would see widespread sabotage of any border infrastructure and a high potential of attacks on any personal enforcing border controls - and this violence and sabotage would be supported - or tacitly accepted -  by a large proportion of the population (and not just republicans).
> That threat would likely see  a return of ever more stringent security measures which in turn could easily provoke a cycle of violence that would be an absolute boon to the assorted headbangers on both sides.



This is just not true though, there is a border and it is policed. See the example of a Russian with a UK visa wishing to travel to Eire. Just cos UK and Eire (and latterly EU) citizens share a common travel area, does not mean that there is no border. 

Same within the Schengen area, see France closing it’s borders after the Bataclan attack.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is just not true though, there is a border and it is policed. See the example of a Russian with a UK visa wishing to travel to Eire. Just cos UK and Eire (and latterly EU) citizens share a common travel area, does not mean that there is no border.
> 
> Same within the Schengen area, see France closing it’s borders after the Bataclan attack.



I have been to norn iron several times - my other half is from there - there is no border that anyone notices - all you have is a change from miles to kilometres on the road signs. And - for many  people (and not just republicans) - there is no real sense that its a different country.  Far less so than between england and scotland. A hard border would be seen as an act of violence - and would be met with the same.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I have been to norn iron several times - my other half is from there - there is no border that anyone notices - all you have is a change from miles to kilometres on the road signs. And - for many  people (and not just republicans) - there is no real sense that its a different country.  Far less so than between england and scotland. A hard border would be seen as an act of violence - and would be met with the same.



I have had two customers detained and sent back to NI when trying to cross to Eire. How did that happen if all there is is a speed sign change? You don't notice it cos you are entitled to use the common travel area.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I have had two customers detained and sent back to NI when trying to cross to Eire. How did that happen if all there is is a speed sign change? You don't notice it cos you are entitled to use the common travel area.



and one individual anecdote trumps the experience and perception of 99.9% of the people what live there does it? People who mostly grew up with a militarised border and a long and bloody conflict over its existence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> and one individual anecdote trumps the experience and perception of 99.9% of the people what live there does it? People who mostly grew up with a militarised border and a long and bloody conflict over its existence.



It is not an anecdote, it is the law. If you need a visa to enter the UK and one to enter Eire, you can not cross from the UK to Eire without a visa, or you will be deported as an illegal immigrant. Yet you say there is no border, that is not true, in spite of the fact that persons with access to the common travel area being able to travel freely.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It is not an anecdote, it is the law. If you need a visa to enter the UK and one to enter Eire, you can not cross from the UK to Eire without a visa, or you will be deported as an illegal immigrant. Yet you say there is no border, that is not true, in spite of the fact that persons with access to the common travel area being able to travel freely.



but the border does not exist in any meaningful way - in that has no affect on the vast majority of people crossing it or living near it -  and certainly does not exist in the minds of the people who live there. the technicalities - or how it is used (very very rarely i would guess)  to police illegal immigration - are utterly irrelevant to the brexit irish border debate


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> but the border does not exist in any meaningful way - in that has no affect on the vast majority of people crossing it or living near it -  and certainly does not exist in the minds of the people who live there. the technicalities - or how it is used (very very rarely i would guess)  to police illegal immigration - are utterly irrelevant to the brexit irish border debate



Is there a border or not?

You say not, yet there is one, it is known as a soft border and UK and EU citizens can cross freely as it is part of the common travel area, (non-Irish or British EU citizens must pass a hard border to enter the common travel area from the rest of the EU or non-EU areas.  

The EU wishes to impose a hard border in the event of crash-out. The UK has stated that it will not impose a hard border under any circumstances, it will keep the soft border that currently exists. Remainers like that philosophical berk keep harping on about the border as if it will be the end of days. Perhaps it will lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence if the EU erects a hard border, go lobby Brussels about it. The UK is leaving the EU is all, the UK will not impose a hard border between it and Eire.


----------



## Nylock (Jul 14, 2018)

> Brexit chaos puts Conservatives on the edge of a breakdown. Following a week of upheaval in Westminster, it is not clear if May’s government will survive — or if any exit deal can pass parliament
> 
> Boris Johnson, Britain’s foreign secretary, posed portentously for the photographer — hastily summoned on Monday to his Georgian residence overlooking St James’s Park — his jaw set in Churchillian pose. The frontman of Brexit had promised Britain a confident future outside the EU. Now looking purposefully into the middle distance, he signed his resignation letter to Theresa May declaring: “That dream is dying.” By the end of a tumultuous week in British politics, the Brexit “dream” was lying bloodied in the gutter. Mr Johnson, who fronted the 2016 Vote Leave campaign, had quit; David Davis, the cabinet’s chief Brexit negotiator, had gone too, refusing to stomach the prime minister’s long-awaited white paper, setting out a vision that Mr Johnson claimed would leave Britain loitering in the EU’s “dingy ante room”.
> 
> ...



Made that wall of text slightly more readable....


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is there a border or not?
> 
> You say not, yet there is one....


Can you post a link on google maps or street view?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can you post a link on google maps or street view?



Google Maps


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 14, 2018)

This type of thing, where you can drill down and actually see building, cars...borders.

CRAIGSHILL STREET - streets of Livingston, West Lothian, Scotland, United Kingdom


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> This type of thing, where you can drill down and actually see building, cars...borders.
> 
> CRAIGSHILL STREET - streets of Livingston, West Lothian, Scotland, United Kingdom



Well, click on the link provided, switch to streetview, and zoom in, it's not rocket science.

Not that you are going to see much, as it's a soft border, and even when it was a so-called hard border, it leaked like fuck.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU wishes to impose a hard border in the event of crash-out. The UK has stated that it will not impose a hard border under any circumstances, it will keep the soft border that currently exists.



Where and when has the UK stated this?. It is against international law.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 14, 2018)

Borders have 2 sides.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Where and when has the UK stated this?


.

Theresa May: No hard border after Brexit



> BRITISH Prime Minster Theresa May has used a major speech on Brexit to restate that there will be no hard border in Ireland after Brexit.





sleaterkinney said:


> It is against international law.



Show me the bit of international law that prohibits a soft border between the UK and Eire. Or admit you're making stuff up to boost your position.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Borders have 2 sides.



Like between the north & the republic in Ireland?

Like between my front garden & the next-door's front garden?

Two sides, but no hard border-lines.


----------



## gosub (Jul 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Like between the north & the republic in Ireland?
> 
> Like between my front garden & the next-door's front garden?
> 
> Two sides, but no hard border-lines.


That's an idea.   A shrubbery, or maybe some pampas grass


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 14, 2018)

If one is hard then it is a hard border effectively


----------



## gosub (Jul 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> If one is hard then it is a hard border effectively


You can get some nasty paper cuts from pampas grass I grant you


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> If one is hard then it is a hard border effectively



Does it get you that excited?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 14, 2018)

I am trying to add something constructive to the worst thread since that one about people you didn’t sleep with got bumped from the grave


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 14, 2018)

I vowed I would not confirm back to this thread but I am drawn to it like a Labrador back  to its own sick


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am trying to add something constructive to the worst thread since that one about people you didn’t sleep with got bumped from the grave



Fair enough. As I keep repeating, the UK will not impose a hard border. The EU says that they might impose one, philosophical and his moronic ilk say this is what leave voters wanted and must sort out. If Junker states that if the UK leaves the EU he’ll reform his dad’s army unit and take up where they left off, would that be leave voters fault too?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is just not true though, there is a border and it is policed...


Can you prove this by showing it on street view, cheers.

It would be handy to see what you're talking about.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can you prove this by showing it on street view, cheers.
> 
> It would be handy to see what you're talking about.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


>


Any time you're ready.  It would be informative to =see what you mean.

Just post a photo-link to a policed border, as you claimed in #9069, on street view.  Here's a link to a home page to help.

mapstreetview.com


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Any time you're ready.  It would be informative to =see what you mean.
> 
> Just post a photo-link to a policed border, as you claimed in #9069, on street view.  Here's a link to a home page to help.
> 
> mapstreetview.com



Can you fucking read???

Soft border.

What are you expecting, gun towers?


I can’t see it on Streetview, so it’s not a thing.

What a shit level of thought you have.

Embarrassing even by your standards.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 14, 2018)

Trump's visit marks the start of shock doctrine Brexit


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Which rules specify how a border must be policed?


WTO rules on trading without discrimination / most favoured nation status would require the EU to impose the same border controls on the UK as they impose on every non Single Market / Customs Union country. Failure to do so would result in every other none EU country being able to demand the exact same treatment.

The same rules would require the UK to impose the same level of external border controls on EU countries as they would on any other country they're not in a free trade area with.

The ultra neoliberal right may argue that the UK isn't required to impose any form of a border, because we can opt to have zero border checks or tariffs for everyone, which is true, but as no country would be required to reciprocate that arrangement it would mean we lost all bargaining rights for trade agreements and just became a country that can be flooded with cheap low quality imports with no say on anything, and the rapid end of our manufacturing base.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

free spirit said:


> WTO rules on trading without discrimination / most favoured nation status would require the EU to impose the same border controls on the UK as they impose on every non Single Market / Customs Union country. Failure to do so would result in every other none EU country being able to demand the exact same treatment.
> 
> The same rules would require the UK to impose the same level of external border controls on EU countries as they would on any other country they're not in a free trade area with.
> 
> The ultra neoliberal right may argue that the UK isn't required to impose any form of a border, because we can opt to have zero border checks or tariffs for everyone, which is true, but as no country would be required to reciprocate that arrangement it would mean we lost all bargaining rights for trade agreements and just became a country that can be flooded with cheap low quality imports with no say on anything, and the rapid end of our manufacturing base.



You have been misled.

WTO favoured nation rules apply where there is no specific deal/treaty, not necessarily free trade. The UK and Eire have a deal that is feck all to do with the EU.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You have been misled.
> 
> WTO favoured nation rules apply where there is no specific deal/treaty.


yes, is that not the situation being discussed?

Clearly if we stayed in the Single Market or Customs Union then there'd be no requirement for a border any harder than applies to other members, but if we leave those agreements as well as the EU* then the border would need to be the same as applies to all other non-members.


*unless we're able to negotiate and agree an entirely new WTO approved FTA or Customs Union arrangement in the next 9 months, which would be an incredible diplomatic achievement.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is there a border or not?
> 
> You say not, yet there is one, it is known as a soft border and UK and EU citizens can cross freely as it is part of the common travel area, (non-Irish or British EU citizens must pass a hard border to enter the common travel area from the rest of the EU or non-EU areas.
> 
> The EU wishes to impose a hard border in the event of crash-out. The UK has stated that it will not impose a hard border under any circumstances, it will keep the soft border that currently exists. Remainers like that philosophical berk keep harping on about the border as if it will be the end of days. Perhaps it will lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence if the EU erects a hard border, go lobby Brussels about it. The UK is leaving the EU is all, the UK will not impose a hard border between it and Eire.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is there a border or not?
> 
> You say not, yet there is one, it is known as a soft border and UK and EU citizens can cross freely as it is part of the common travel area, (non-Irish or British EU citizens must pass a hard border to enter the common travel area from the rest of the EU or non-EU areas.
> 
> The EU wishes to impose a hard border in the event of crash-out. The UK has stated that it will not impose a hard border under any circumstances, it will keep the soft border that currently exists. Remainers like that philosophical berk keep harping on about the border as if it will be the end of days. Perhaps it will lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence if the EU erects a hard border, go lobby Brussels about it. The UK is leaving the EU is all, the UK will not impose a hard border between it and Eire.



Berk here, you're wrong. I keep harping on about how the border is going to operate in a practical sense.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

free spirit said:


> *unless we're able to negotiate and agree an entirely new WTO approved FTA or Customs Union arrangement in the next 9 months, which would be an incredible diplomatic achievement.



That is what is proposed, after the transition that stretches to 2020, so surely not beyond the wit of even the dolts running tings.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Berk here, you're wrong. I keep harping on about how the border is going to operate in a practical sense.



Tell us how it will work. You voted remain, for the EU, the only people talking about imposing a hard border, so it is up to you to sort it. You have done so at the eastern edge of the EU to keep out brown people, will you take the same racist line here? Answers please.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Can you fucking read???



Don't bother, mate, he's a complete dickhead, devoid of any critical thinking skills.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That is what is proposed, after the transition that stretches to 2020, so surely not beyond the wit of even the dolts running tings.


hmm, well I'm now up to page 30 of the government's new document. Saturday's used to be more fun than this.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Tell us how it will work. You voted remain, for the EU, the only people talking about imposing a hard border, so it is up to you to sort it. You have done so at the eastern edge of the EU to keep out brown people, will you take the same racist line here? Answers please.



One reason for voting remain was not to be a leave voter and an ally to racists like Boris (picanninies with watermelon smiles) Johnson. I voted against Farage, Gove, Redwood, the racist media, the Tory establishment, the anti immigrants/foreigners in the UK. I don't want their kind of racism here.

I don't know if you were a leave voter, but that is the company you keep if you were.

A consequence of voting remain was that I lost.

Whatever my views and tiny influence I might have had on EU policy was wiped out by the leave vote. The EU problems are now their problems the brexit victory saw to that.

The brexit victory has also seen to a separation from the EU by the UK. The UK has by the brexit vote chosen to be over here, and the EU over there, and by dint of that choice (you know, the choice to separate) it is the UK that has ushered in the inevitable hard border that comes with one lot being over there, and another lot being over here. The clue is in the word 'over', with two different entities there is something in between to distinguish 'there and here'. Something that people and things cross over.

You say the EU are the only people talking about a hard border, I say the brexit vote itself shouted about it, whatever politicians say they do or don't want.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One reason for voting remain was not to be a leave voter and an ally to racists like Boris (picanninies with watermelon smiles) Johnson. I voted against Farage, Gove, Redwood, the racist media, the Tory establishment, the anti immigrants/foreigners in the UK. I don't want their kind of racism here.
> 
> I don't know if you were a leave voter, but that is the company you keep if you were.



Jesus. Back to all leave voters are racists, how did that pan out for you last time?

I am glad you acknowledge that you are a berk. You understand the etymology of the word, yeah? Cos it really is very fitting for you.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Jesus. Back to all leave voters are racists, how did that pan out for you last time?
> 
> I am glad you acknowledge that you are a berk. You understand the etymology of the word, yeah? Cos it really is very fitting for you.



No. Read back, I responded to your post, your post when you resurrected racism.
It is a flag YOU waved about in your post today at 4.55.
Maybe you played the race card because understanding that the UK ushered in a border by voting brexit is beyond you. So you try to change the conversation.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That is what is proposed, after the transition that stretches to 2020, so surely not beyond the wit of even the dolts running tings.


So, as far as I can make out the Government position now is that they basically want to leave the single market, but negotiate a free trade agreement that basically is the single market, but without freedom of movement.

Except that this is a sleight of hand, as elsewhere in the document it talks about companies being able to move staff in and out of the UK. This means that possibly the worst element of EU arrangement could be retained - the posted agency worker situation (where we apply the Swedish derogation) where agencies from one country can supply staff into the UK to work but be paid at the wage of their host country not the UK rates they should be paid.

So basically we're going to be leaving the single market in order to negotiate a new FTA that's almost identical to the single market, with the sole motivation that freedom of movement will end, except it won't actually end, it will just be something that only multinational companies can facilitate (other than professionals who it wants to also have freedom of movement for work).

So it's Brexit in Name Only, making the entire exercise a pointless con. Best case scenario little changes but everything gets more complicated, and we end up with even more gangs of EU agency workers undercutting local pay levels while the agencies cream even more profit off the top as it will be their only way of getting to work in the UK.

WTF is the point in all of this?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 14, 2018)

free spirit said:


> WTF is the point in all of this?



Bringing harmony and unity to the Conservative Party.

Going well so far


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

ps the section I'm referring to that I think will allow the posted agency workers situation to continue is this one...



> As is the case with non-EU countries with whom the UK has a trading agreement, the UK also wants to agree reciprocal provisions on intra-corporate transfers that allow UK and EU-based companies to train staff, move them between offices and plants and to deploy expertise where it is needed, based on existing arrangements with non-EU countries. The UK will also discuss how to facilitate temporary mobility of scientists and researchers, self-employed professionals, employees providing services, as well as investors.



I wasn't entirely sure if this did mean what I think it means, so here's the relevant section from the EU-South Korea FTA...



> (d) contractual service suppliers means natural persons employed by a juridical person of a Party which has no establishment in the territory of the other Party and which has concluded a bona fide contract to supply services with a final consumer in the latter Party requiring the presence on a temporary basis of its employees in that Party in order to fulfil the contract to provide services (24); and


https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2011:127:FULL&from=EN

So yes, it does allow for companies to win a contract to supply services within another country to then bring in their workers to undertake that contract.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 14, 2018)

why the fuck are we leaving the EU rather than simply cancelling the Swedish Derogation opt out from the posted agency workers directive - the opt out that specifically allows agency workers to be paid at the going rate in the country of origin rather than having to be paid at the local rate?

That's the main thing that the big farming and industrial areas that have been impacted by this type of EU migration voted to leave to stop, but it is something the UK government has had the power to prevent for a decade, but has opted not to implement (an opt out the Labour specifically negotiated and voted for and implemented).

So we'll end up leaving the EU, but they'll still be getting fucked over as will the EU workers.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 14, 2018)

free spirit said:


> but as no country would be required to reciprocate that arrangement it would mean we lost all bargaining rights for trade agreements and just became a country that can be flooded with cheap low quality imports with no say on anything, and the rapid end of our manufacturing base.



Otherwise known as the New Zealand model.


----------



## agricola (Jul 14, 2018)

THE CENTRE BURSTS FORTH:



> Britain’s former trade commissioner in Brussels, Lord Mandelson, is making common cause with hardline anti-EU Tories, saying that Theresa May’s latest Brexit blueprint would lead to “national humiliation” and leave the country in a worse position than if it turned its back on the entire European economic system.
> 
> In an extraordinary intervention that shows that even the most ardent Remainers in parliament find the plans unacceptable, Labour peer Mandelson says they would deliver “the polar opposite of taking back control”, and would mean “the EU would ultimately call the shots, not just now but indefinitely”.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> .
> 
> Theresa May: No hard border after Brexit
> 
> Show me the bit of international law that prohibits a soft border between the UK and Eire. Or admit you're making stuff up to boost your position.


Ok, they did, but that's just more cakeism.

It's WTO rules:
Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 15, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ok, they did, but that's just more cakeism.
> 
> It's WTO rules:
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times



I don’t subscribe to the FT, perhaps you would be kind enough to quote the bit of WTO regulation that states it is illegal to have a soft border between the UK and Eire? Ta.


----------



## Chz (Jul 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don’t subscribe to the FT, perhaps you would be kind enough to quote the bit of WTO regulation that states it is illegal to have a soft border between the UK and Eire? Ta.


It isn't. But unless the UK is in the EU FTA, it then has to have an open border with *everyone*. Not sure that's particularly desirable.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2018)

What?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 15, 2018)

This thread's a tragic mess.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 15, 2018)

So what would happen if the UK government told the WTO to go eat shit?


----------



## 2hats (Jul 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> So what would happen if the UK government told the WTO to go eat shit?


I think Trump might get there first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This thread's a tragic mess.


TM 
Theresa May
Tragic Mess


----------



## andysays (Jul 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This thread's a tragic mess.



I like to think that's a deliberate reflection from the collective Urban subconsciousness/mono-thought clique to the government's handling of the whole Brexit business.

I'd like to think that...


----------



## Mr Moose (Jul 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Jesus. Back to all leave voters are racists, how did that pan out for you last time?
> 
> I am glad you acknowledge that you are a berk. You understand the etymology of the word, yeah? Cos it really is very fitting for you.



As opposed to your implication that all pro-remain voters approve of exclusionist migration policies. Any chance of any nuance in the debate?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I don’t subscribe to the FT, perhaps you would be kind enough to quote the bit of WTO regulation that states it is illegal to have a soft border between the UK and Eire? Ta.



From the article:

As the weeks pass, so the ideas get sillier. One circulating among certain Brexiters at the moment is that the UK could gain the upper hand over the Ireland issue by simply leaving the Irish border open after Brexit, charging no tariffs and making no inspections, and dare the EU to be the first to put up customs posts. Would this actually work in the real world? No, for many reasons. At the most it is likely to be a crude blame-shifting exercise aimed at getting the British public to point the finger at the Irish when the border inevitably goes up.

 For a post-Brexit UK to charge no tariffs on imports from the EU would be a massive breach of the rules of the World Trade Organization, which operates on a “most-favoured nation” (MFN) principle of equal treatment. This can be overridden if two or more members sign a formal bilateral or regional trade agreement among themselves. But it will take years for the UK to agree a trade deal with the EU: Britain cannot simply pre-empt it by holding tariffs at zero from the off. If the UK discriminates in this way, it will be vulnerable to widespread litigation in the WTO. This will come at a time when the UK is attempting to regularise its position in the organisation, in which it has hitherto been represented by the EU. The UK is dependent on the goodwill of other WTO members in the tricky question of splitting the EU’s existing commitments on food import quotas. It must also establish its position in the WTO’s government procurement agreement which gives its companies the right to bid for public tenders abroad. *Arriving on the scene while creating one of the biggest breaches of WTO law in the organisation’s existence probably isn’t the way to get other countries on side.*


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 15, 2018)

WTO law. Right. That makes it illegal.

I see where a lot of your problems on this thread come from now.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 15, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> WTO law. Right. That makes it illegal.
> 
> I see where a lot of your problems on this thread come from now.


I bet you do.


----------



## A380 (Jul 15, 2018)

Now might be the time to buy shares in Stenna and P&O Ferries. 

This could make the old booze cruise Dover/Calais Dover/Boulougne crossings look like the Isle of Wight Ferry.


----------



## AnandLeo (Jul 15, 2018)

Brexit is “a very complex problem”, because there is too much disagreement between different factions of the Conservative party and Labour party about what they should negotiate for with EU, and primary agents of the British economy, they should defend. Some of the functional instruments like Customs Union, single market, and free movement are mutually exclusive with free global trade, and are inalienable in the current relationship. Therefore, UK have to negotiate alternative flexible agreements in these important areas. I think the last item in the agenda the government can ignore is the uncertain future plight of the British industry and chaos in trade barriers in the Brexit negotiations under the pressure of dissenters. There is no difference between, hard Brexit, Brexit, and No deal, as propounded by the many factions opposing the current proposal, which is yet to be perused by and negotiated with the EU.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 15, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Brexit is “a very complex problem”, because there is too much disagreement between different factions of the Conservative party and Labour party about what they should negotiate for with EU, and primary agents of the British economy, they should defend. Some of the functional instruments like Customs Union, single market, and free movement are mutually exclusive with free global trade, and are inalienable in the current relationship. Therefore, UK have to negotiate alternative flexible agreements in these important areas. I think the last item in the agenda the government can ignore is the uncertain future plight of the British industry and chaos in trade barriers in the Brexit negotiations under the pressure of dissenters. There is no difference between, hard Brexit, Brexit, and No deal, as propounded by the many factions opposing the current proposal, which is yet to be perused by and negotiated with the EU.


Did you post up an answer to your politics homework by mistake?


----------



## teqniq (Jul 16, 2018)

Theresa May ready to cave in to hardline Brexiters' demands


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 16, 2018)

I had felt sure it was Heath who was PM when the EEC referendum happened - but it was Wilson - and it was 1975 - and I went to France on a visitor's passport in 74 and 75 - but then the school exchange had been happening for decades by then ... and the Anglo-French Concord project had started in the late 60s ..





*Yes 17,378,581 67.23%*



*No* 8,470,073 32.77%
Valid votes 25,848,654 99.79%
Invalid or blank votes 54,540 0.21%
*Total votes* *25,903,194* *100.00%*
Registered voters/turnout 40,086,677 64.62%

United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum, 1975 - Wikipedia


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 16, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Theresa May ready to cave in to hardline Brexiters' demands



Party preservation will always take priority over everything else

Laughable shite


----------



## bemused (Jul 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Party preservation will always take priority over everything else
> 
> Laughable shite



I'm past caring about Brexit now, we'll either end up in EFTA or have another vote. I can't see any vote making through Parliment because they'll never get a majority to vote for it.


----------



## AnandLeo (Jul 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Did you post up an answer to your politics homework by mistake?


Homework, what homework?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 16, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Homework, what homework?


The A -level question you were apparently answering with your non-sequitur post.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The A -level question you were apparently answering with your non-sequitur post.


National 5 at best.


----------



## agricola (Jul 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Party preservation will always take priority over everything else
> 
> Laughable shite



I think the problem is that they see themselves as Conservatives first and humans second; that is certainly how they breed anyway.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 16, 2018)

we seem to so embrioled in the petty to me/ to you aspect of brexit jostling, we lose sight that the same awful cunts are still pulling the strings


----------



## agricola (Jul 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> we seem to so embrioled in the petty to me/ to you aspect of brexit jostling, we lose sight that the same awful cunts are still pulling the strings



I dont know, the Parliamentary debate over this is pretty funny.  Sir Bernard Jenkin just got heckled by Dominic Grieve whilst Grieve was about four foot away from him.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 16, 2018)

38 degrees (I must have done one of their online things once) has e-mailed me today to ask me to e-mail my MP to ask him to vote a particular way on whatever the heck tomorrow's vote in the commons is.

My (in the sense that I live in the constituency) MP is john redwood.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 16, 2018)




----------



## agricola (Jul 16, 2018)

305-302 in the first of the ERG divisions.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> 38 degrees (I must have done one of their online things once) has e-mailed me today to ask me to e-mail my MP to ask him to vote a particular way on whatever the heck tomorrow's vote in the commons is.
> 
> My (in the sense that I live in the constituency) MP is john redwood.



They once asked me to ask my MP to tell Hunt not to be a shithead with the NHS. Hunt’s my MP.


----------



## agricola (Jul 16, 2018)

305 - 302 becomes 303 - 300.


----------



## agricola (Jul 16, 2018)

Hoey, Field and Stringer again.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jul 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They once asked me to ask my MP to tell Hunt not to be a shithead with the NHS. Hunt’s my MP.





and


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> [<snip>


That would be Anna Sounbry Minister under the coalition government whose austerity policies increased poverty and defender of the privatisation of the Royal Mail and the marketisation of the NHS. 

And nothing ideological about her politics of course, like the assumption that "frictionless trade" is a good thing for "the economy".


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That would be Anna Sounbry Minister under the coalition government whose austerity policies increased poverty and defender of the privatisation of the Royal Mail and the marketisation of the NHS.
> 
> And nothing ideological about her politics of course, like the assumption that "frictionless trade" is a good thing for "the economy".


And even with such an ideology she shows more  concern about the jobs that will be lost, the damage created, than you do.  You're siding with the far right of her party, it seems.  Brexit is a right-wing tory cause, isn't it?  

What do you think about what she said?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 17, 2018)

As I said her position is right wing - that "frictionless trade" is a good thing, i.e standard position of (neo-)liberalism. That you would align yourself with that shows where your politics are. You're the one siding with a Tory.

Good to know that you think the RMT, Tony Benn and the majority of the UK's socialist/communist/anarchist groups are far-right though.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> As I said her position is right wing - that "frictionless trade" is a good thing, i.e standard position of (neo-)liberalism. That you would align yourself with that shows where your politics are. You're the one siding with a Tory.
> 
> Good to know that you think the RMT, Tony Benn and the majority of the UK's socialist/communist/anarchist groups are far-right though.


You don't half talk a load of shite, eh.  You're siding with Rees-mogg, Johnson, Farage, Kilroy-Silk, Murdoch, the express, the mail and the rest _of the worst_.

She's talking about people losing their jobs.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You don't half talk a load of shite, eh.  You're siding with Rees-mogg, Johnson, Farage, Kilroy-Silk, Murdoch, the express, the mail and the rest _of the worst_.
> 
> She's talking about people losing their jobs.


Imagine being 50+ and doing this 'siding with' nonsense.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You don't half talk a load of shite, eh.  You're siding with Rees-mogg, Johnson, Farage, Kilroy-Silk, Murdoch, the express, the mail and the rest _of the worst_.


Am I? Where have I done that?



DexterTCN said:


> She's talking about people losing their jobs.


Because "free" trade may be interrupted. Just as when she argued how the privatisation of the Royal Mail, or the marketisation of the NHS, or raising of VAT would be _good for the economy. _

Personally I agree with Danny that rerunning the referendum debate is not useful, but if you want to oppose Brexit for God's sake don't do it on the basis of the politics of a Neo-liberal Tory shit like Soubry.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> ...That you would align yourself with that shows where your politics are. You're the one siding with a Tory...


Imagine being over 50...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You don't half talk a load of shite, eh.  You're siding with Rees-mogg, Johnson, Farage, Kilroy-Silk, Murdoch, the express, the mail and the rest _of the worst_.


What a daft tack to take. By that logic, you're 'siding with' David Cameron, Karren Brady, Damian Green, George Osbourn, Lord Rose, Goldman Sachs, the CBI, the Ulster Unionist Party. Etc etc. 

It's not going to help anyone in any way to take that line.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 17, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What a daft tack to take. By that logic, you're 'siding with' David Cameron, Karren Brady, Damian Green, George Osbourn, Lord Rose, Goldman Sachs, the CBI, the Ulster Unionist Party. Etc etc.
> 
> It's not going to help anyone in any way to take that line.



Everyday occurrence in these parts.  Bonus points if you can get to a fascist group in less than 3 steps.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Imagine being over 50...


You _approvingly quoted_ a Tory by posting her speech on this thread. 

If you can't see the difference, there's really no hope for you.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> She's talking about people losing their jobs.


Like she was when she said this, you mean?

"Scotland would have been in the most atrocious economic place if it had voted for independence and, as I say, thank goodness the good people of Scotland took the wise decision that we were undoubtedly better together."

You'd think with that experience you'd know better than to use her words _in defence of jobs_.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 17, 2018)

"the good people of Scotland". Do as yer telt


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> ...Personally I agree with Danny...


Oh...right.

I don't give a fuck what danny says and find him to be untrustworthy, mercurial and unreliable.  

Different strokes, eh.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 17, 2018)

Yeah, he still owes me that fiver, the knave.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Oh...right.
> 
> I don't give a fuck what danny says and find him to be untrustworthy, mercurial and unreliable.
> 
> Different strokes, eh.


 You don't have to give a fuck what I say, but "untrustworthy and unreliable"?  Charming.

"Mercurial" I'm pretty chuffed with.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Oh...right.
> 
> I don't give a fuck what danny says and find him to be untrustworthy, mercurial and unreliable.
> 
> Different strokes, eh.


I've always found people called dexter to be mendacious in the extreme, I'm sure we all recall the dexter who claimed to have shagged his boss over a desk


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 17, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You don't have to give a fuck what I say, but "untrustworthy and unreliable"?  Charming.
> 
> "Mercurial" I'm pretty chuffed with.


Capricious minstrel


----------



## andysays (Jul 17, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You don't have to give a fuck what I say, but "untrustworthy and unreliable"?  Charming.
> 
> "Mercurial" I'm pretty chuffed with.


If a twat like Dexter finds it necessary to call you untrustworthy, mercurial and unreliable, you must be doing SOMETHING right


----------



## JimW (Jul 17, 2018)

Saturnine pecksniff


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 17, 2018)

Rascal pig


----------



## kabbes (Jul 17, 2018)

Normally, it’s only elfin wingers in football who go on frequent mazy runs that lead nowhere that get called mercurial.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Normally, it’s only elfin wingers in football who go on frequent mazy runs that lead nowhere that get called mercurial.


None of that foreign muck after brexit. Four four two.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Normally, it’s only elfin wingers in football who go on frequent mazy runs that lead nowhere that get called mercurial.


They do tend to be scottish as well though. I'm looking at you Eddie Gray.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 17, 2018)

brooding anti heroes. Captain Nemo's


----------



## kabbes (Jul 17, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> They do tend to be scottish as well though. I'm looking at you Eddie Gray.


Archie Gemmill
On the other hand, Steve McManaman


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Archie Gemmill
> On the other hand, Steve McManaman


Don't say that, imposs will be on with that goal now you've conjured him.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 17, 2018)

read it... that was a long white paper.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Normally, it’s only elfin wingers in football who go on frequent mazy runs that lead nowhere that get called mercurial.


I've no idea what any of this means.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> brooding anti heroes. Captain Nemo's


Various Dr Who incarnations. Troughton, Capaldi. 

I'm OK with that.


----------



## The39thStep (Jul 17, 2018)

Interesting discussion this although why we have to rely on RT do host something like  this rather than do it ourselves is beyond me 
Grandparents of Brexit


----------



## Wilf (Jul 17, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Capricious minstrel


Inconstant M&M


----------



## Raheem (Jul 17, 2018)

Careless Wispa


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Inconstant M&M


Rascally revels


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 17, 2018)

Scallywag Snicker.


----------



## andysays (Jul 17, 2018)

Brexit: Ministers face fresh test in Commons


> Ministers have warned pro-European Tory MPs not to "refight the referendum" as the government faces a further test of its Brexit authority in the Commons. MPs are expected to vote later on calls by pro-European Tories for the UK to stay in a customs union if there is no trade agreement by 21 January 2019. The motion is being backed by Labour, making the risk of defeat more likely.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 18, 2018)

agricola said:


> That front page is an absolute disgrace, the worst one they have come out with for at least the last twenty years.


having thought about it I take back my comments completely - you're right, its a new UK press low. My barometer got out of whack for a minute there....all becoming too normalised. Yes the Sun are 'just reporting what was being said', but its a complicit and goading reporting which revels in Trumps poison and actively wants the poison to spread.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 18, 2018)

Three short clips on this twitter thread and May's not answering questions.  She either doesn't know or knows but won't say the truth.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 18, 2018)

^ christ - that's  painful. at one point i was sure may was going to throw her papers  in the air,  stand up and scream "for fucks sake! yes - i know! - its utter bollocks! - but what the fuck else am i supposed to do?"


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 19, 2018)

Hard brexit/no deal now looking extremely likely.  Not one thing has been agreed and both the main british parties are split on the subject.  Labour MPs voted to help the tories this week (as they do in Scotland regularly).  Incredible scenes every week.

Hopefully it's the final spur for Scottish indy.  No doubt we can expect strong support from all brexiters


----------



## bemused (Jul 19, 2018)

I've yet to see any practical suggestions what Brexit looks like other than an EFTA type deal. For all the howling from the likes of Mogg and Boris none of them have forwarded a plan, apart from the random halfwit suggesting WTO rules. I'm convinced this is why none of these people are looking to take May's job, they all know deep down it's going to be a shitshow whatever happens.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jul 19, 2018)

bemused said:


> I've yet to see any practical suggestions what Brexit looks like other than an EFTA type deal. For all the howling from the likes of Mogg and Boris none of them have forwarded a plan, apart from the random halfwit suggesting WTO rules. I'm convinced this is why none of these people are looking to take May's job, they all know deep down it's going to be a shitshow whatever happens.



Pretty much, nobody wants to be responsible for the clusterfuck and everyone's getting ready for post Brexit cleanup .


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 19, 2018)

this seems like a fairly clear headed assessment of what might unfold brexit-wise over the next 6 months from "the federal trust" (who i have never heard of but have been around since 1945 and was founded by william beveridge).
Their conclusion to the question of whats going to happen is - essentially - choose your clusterfuck from a range of options. 

Brexit: Heading to a Deal or No Deal while UK politics implodes? | The Federal Trust


----------



## ska invita (Jul 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Hard brexit/no deal now looking extremely likely.  Not one thing has been agreed and both the main british parties are split on the subject.  Labour MPs voted to help the tories this week (as they do in Scotland regularly).  Incredible scenes every week.
> 
> Hopefully it's the final spur for Scottish indy.  No doubt we can expect strong support from all brexiters


Any links for what SNP figures are currently saying about No Deal?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 19, 2018)

bemused said:


> I've yet to see any practical suggestions what Brexit looks like other than an EFTA type deal...


So the EFTA people look at the UK's relationship with Europe...constant demands, constant complaints and then fuck the rest of them over by leaving when it suits them.

Then the EFTA people say...oh yeah, they can join us now, that'll work out fine.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> this seems like a fairly clear headed assessment of what might unfold brexit-wise over the next 6 months from "the federal trust" (who i have never heard of but have been around since 1945 and was founded by william beveridge).
> Their conclusion to the question of whats going to happen is - essentially - choose your clusterfuck from a range of options.
> 
> Brexit: Heading to a Deal or No Deal while UK politics implodes? | The Federal Trust


this looks quite useful to Parliament and the Brexit deal


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Any links for what SNP figures are currently saying about No Deal?


They've bent over backwards to facilitate the softest possible brexit (a brave move that seems to be paying off indy-wise).  

It's a different world up here ska invita and most indies are strongly against brexit (Scotland voted over 60% to remain and has had very different relationships with Euro countries).  Brexit is being used to steal more powers from the Scottish parliament.  Huge up here, not mentioned down south.  Like I said it's a different world. 

You can check out their twitter feeds by googling snp twitter or some such.  I'm going out but can link some later if you like.


----------



## gosub (Jul 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So the EFTA people look at the UK's relationship with Europe...constant demands, constant complaints and then fuck the rest of them over by leaving when it suits them.
> 
> Then the EFTA people say...oh yeah, they can join us now, that'll work out fine.


The problem with EFTA is the size of the UK in relation to the other members even England on its own will be a difficult fit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 19, 2018)

EFTA could be the ideal base from which a stabilised UK could start to rebuild its reputation and once again be the big fish in a small pond

That however is far too sensible for us to seriously consider


----------



## 2hats (Jul 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> The problem with EFTA is the size of the UK in relation to the other members England on its own will be a difficult fit





not-bono-ever said:


> EFTA could be the ideal base from which a stabilised UK could start to rebuild its reputation and once again be the big fish in a small pond
> 
> That however is far too sensible for us to seriously consider


Will be a lot easier to accommodate after several years of economic erosion and Scottish independence.


----------



## bemused (Jul 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So the EFTA people look at the UK's relationship with Europe...constant demands, constant complaints and then fuck the rest of them over by leaving when it suits them.
> 
> Then the EFTA people say...oh yeah, they can join us now, that'll work out fine.



I won't pretend to understand international trade, although if I say that too much I'll probably end up offered a gig in the government policy unit, but - I assume any free trade agreement between the EU and UK will have some sort of common standards; the so-called rule book. I guess EFTA have this type of agreement?

The only other thing that seems to be missing is the free movement problem. 

However, I doubt the headbangers are going to vote for any simple solution.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2018)

EFTA mandates free movement of people, the reddest of red lines, so...


----------



## magneze (Jul 19, 2018)

Don’t worry, a no-deal Brexit won’t be allowed to happen | Simon Jenkins

Pretty reasonable article.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2018)

magneze said:


> Don’t worry, a no-deal Brexit won’t be allowed to happen | Simon Jenkins
> 
> Pretty reasonable article.



That prick couldn’t approve his kids’ school reports without writing a load of snide, liberal bollocks.


----------



## magneze (Jul 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That prick couldn’t approve his kids’ school reports without writing a load of snide, liberal bollocks.


That's as maybe, did you read it?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 19, 2018)

magneze said:


> That's as maybe, did you read it?



I have now. Would you care to change “pretty reasonable article” to “batshit lunatic rant”, or do you truly agree with that dick’s analysis of the present situation?


----------



## Winot (Jul 19, 2018)

magneze said:


> Don’t worry, a no-deal Brexit won’t be allowed to happen | Simon Jenkins
> 
> Pretty reasonable article.



“In reality, everyone knowledgeable about Brexit agrees on what will really happen if there is no deal in March. Nothing will change.”

That’s simply not true. 

It’s wishful thinking with no evidence. Essentially he is saying that the inevitable outcome of ‘no deal’ is so chaotic that for that reason alone it won’t happen. However he offers no mechanism of how we are going to move from one state to the other.


----------



## magneze (Jul 19, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I have now. Would you care to change “pretty reasonable article” to “batshit lunatic rant”, or do you truly agree with that dick’s analysis of the present situation?


Seems possible. Norway option will come into focus. Mostly thing will carry on as normal. The sky won't fall in. 

Made a change from all the rest of the articles promising chaos, no medicine, food etc.


----------



## a_chap (Jul 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> “In reality, everyone knowledgeable about Brexit agrees on...”



No-one is "knowledgeable about Brexit". No-one.


----------



## Winot (Jul 19, 2018)

magneze said:


> Seems possible. Norway option will come into focus. Mostly thing will carry on as normal. The sky won't fall in.



Fine if the Norway option is adopted before end of March 2019. But then that’s not no deal is it?


----------



## magneze (Jul 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> Fine if the Norway option is adopted before end of March 2019. But then that’s not no deal is it?


Clearly.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 19, 2018)

magneze said:


> Seems possible. Norway option will come into focus. Mostly thing will carry on as normal. The sky won't fall in.
> 
> Made a change from all the rest of the articles promising chas, no medicine, food etc.


Its definitely one of the only 3 options still possible:
1. Crash out WWF Rules (no holds barred)
2. Mass capitulation and compromise into some kind of Eurovision Style Model
3. Not leave the EU at all/reverse article 50

I can imagine circumstances that would lead to all 3 of those, but each carries a massive party political and social price.
I dont think anyone can say with much confidence which will happen. Some sort of #2 Simon Jenkins Norway Model is probably just about in the lead but i wouldn't bet the farm on it, especially as it will be the Tories most 'betraying' their key supporters by so doing. Which could most easily translate into election losing for them.

Kaka Tim's link above has 4 options, but its much the same in practice


> _Scenario One: Brexit Goes Ahead_
> 
> If Theresa May strikes a deal with the EU and it passes at Westminster – and at the European Parliament and European Council – then the UK will be set to leave the EU on 29th March 2019. This would mean an Irish backstop has been agreed as part of the overarching withdrawal agreement and a political declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship was also agreed. In such a scenario, either the Tory Brexiters and remainers have all stayed on board and voted for May’s deal or, much less likely, some opposition party votes have helped May through. The extent of economic damage to the UK and the extent of democratic damage through becoming a ‘rule-taker’ will depend on the deal – but there is no harmless deal to be had either economically or politically.
> 
> ...



Theres going to be a lot of punditry and overconfident guessing between now and the vote thats for sure


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 19, 2018)

What will the T be in EFTA (even though it's not happening it's just another desperate rumour)?

What will the UK be bringing to the table, what is going to open the trade doors with Norway or any other place...what are the assets, the goods, the high or low value reason/s for trade?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 19, 2018)

like most things jenkins writes - he's pulled that out of his arse for reasons of click bait.


----------



## Crispy (Jul 19, 2018)

I consider Simon Jenkins to be a pretty reliable weather vane for the exact opposite of my own views.


----------



## 2hats (Jul 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> WWF


Pandas take control. Tariffs on everything except bamboo.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 19, 2018)

2hats said:


> Pandas take control. Tariffs on everything except bamboo.


 WWF?


----------



## teuchter (Jul 20, 2018)

I hope everyone enjoyed the Tony Blair interview on Newsnight tonight.


----------



## Riklet (Jul 20, 2018)

Went and made tea rather than listen to the cunt blathering on.

If hes so concerned about Brexit maybe he shouldnt have (continued to) fuck Britain up so much that the necessary conditions were created.

I reckon he will launch a new political party by the end of the Autumn and this is his firdt step in plugging it.


----------



## paolo (Jul 20, 2018)

It now seems to drift back and forth. Day by now. At some points hour by hour.

“Taking back control”


----------



## Raheem (Jul 20, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Went and made tea rather than listen to the cunt blathering on.
> 
> If hes so concerned about Brexit maybe he shouldnt have (continued to) fuck Britain up so much that the necessary conditions were created.
> 
> I reckon he will launch a new political party by the end of the Autumn and this is his firdt step in plugging it.



New book is much more likely.

If he really cared, he could always offer to have "...and Tony Blair will self-castrate in a special broadcast just after Antiques Roadshow" tagged onto the end of the remain option in the second referendum. That really would stop everyone bickering.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> WWF?


This is the correct WWF. Pandas


----------



## rutabowa (Jul 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> This is the correct WWF. Pandas


I will never forgive the WoWiFu for stealing the real wwf's name.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 20, 2018)

WoTnoW?


----------



## ska invita (Jul 20, 2018)

Theresa Mays duck and cover no deal announced bundles today are surely an attempt to play chicken with the EU, right?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Theresa Mays duck and cover no deal announced bundles today are surely an attempt to play chicken with the EU, right?



Not really - she thinks, with good reason, that the Irish Government has taken leave of its senses, and given the priority the EU has given to the views of the Irish Government, and that it will simply be impossible to arrive at any kind of sensible deal while either of those two situations remain in place.


----------



## agricola (Jul 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Theresa Mays duck and cover no deal announced bundles today are surely an attempt to play chicken with the EU, right?



I can understand the wish for her to play chicken but where would she get a roasting pan big enough?


----------



## gosub (Jul 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> Fine if the Norway option is adopted before end of March 2019. But then that’s not no deal is it?


If by say November things haven't moved forward then the position will change to push for extension of article 50 period


Not bothered reading Jenkins


----------



## 2hats (Jul 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> WWF?


----------



## hash tag (Jul 20, 2018)

^^^ ViolentPanda ^^^


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 20, 2018)

magneze said:


> Don’t worry, a no-deal Brexit won’t be allowed to happen | Simon Jenkins
> 
> Pretty reasonable article.



Simon Jenkins is obviously a complete prick but he *may* have a point there. If Britain leaves the EU on a 'no deal' basis then we won't know what is or isn't supposed to change with regards to trade, immigration or whatever else. Therefore arguably if workers at the borders are not given new instructions, they're not going to do anything differently. In theory we will be trading under WTO rules and presumably migration rules for EU migrants will in theory be the same as for non-EU migrants. But EU states will not instruct their border officials to begin collecting tariffs or restricting British immigration, because its in the EU's interest for Brexit to mean very little and leave Britain looking stupid with an unchanged relationship. Whatever government is then put in place, it will have to either choose to begin imposing tariffs on goods coming in from Europe and imposing controls on migrants, or to do nothing. If they choose to act they will face action in kind from the EU, as well as a massive public backlash domestically. If they don't, then actually Jenkins scenario isn't impossible. 

Can anyone think of a free trade area in history that has been dismantled successfully? Perhaps if we can that would serve as a useful guide!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 20, 2018)

Companies that trade across borders need a bit more legal certainty than that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Companies that trade across borders need a bit more legal certainty than that.



I think you think business cares rather more about legality than business actually does.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But EU states will not instruct their border officials to begin collecting tariffs or restricting British immigration, because its in the EU's interest for Brexit to mean very little and leave Britain looking stupid with an unchanged relationship.


Not a chance. There would probably be a very chaotic initial period which might involve a lot of blind-eye-turning, grace periods, confused officialdom etc, but at the end of the day, if there's literally no agreement and the UK leaves the EU, the way things are done now will lose its legal underpinning. EU countries will just settle down into following the law. It wouldn't be sustainable to just ignore WTO rules and the EU's own rules and other trade agreements.

We're not going to get there though, so it's a bit like discussing what it's like in heaven.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you think business cares rather more about legality than business actually does.


yes and no they may not feel any sense of wrong doing about not following the rules but they don't want to be stuck with a massive bill for unpaid duty 6 months down the line, doesn't look good on the balance sheet.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 20, 2018)

*I*


MickiQ said:


> yes and no they may not feel any sense of wrong doing about not following the rules but they don't want to be stuck with a massive bill for unpaid duty 6 months down the line, doesn't look good on the balance sheet.



Trade will involve a huge increase in indemnities sought by parties to cover transactions occuring in a legal vacuum. Good for lawyers and insurers.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> what it's like in heaven.


they've got bendy bananas


----------



## Raheem (Jul 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> they've got bendy bananas


They also ask quite a lot of questions at passport control, from what I understand.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 20, 2018)

So...the UK will just smuggle everything in and out?

And nothing's really going to happen anyway?


----------



## ska invita (Jul 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> They also ask quite a lot of questions at passport control, from what I understand.


Hell requires some personal sacrifice but at least there's no red tape.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> *I*
> 
> 
> Trade will involve a huge increase in indemnities sought by parties to cover transactions occuring in a legal vacuum. Good for lawyers and insurers.


I don't think there's anything that lawyers seem to do badly out off.


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Jul 20, 2018)

Can't remember the name of the dickhead being interviewed on c4 but he reckons we won't crash out but have a no deal deal - what the fuck


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 20, 2018)

.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 20, 2018)




----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 21, 2018)

The RW press seem to be ramping up the criticism of the EU, angling to blame them for any kind of no deal chaos situation. I guess that’s their tack - a way of not owning the clusterfuck they championed for decades, plus increase anti-EU sentiment to keep people on-side in case any further votes happens or in case of a general election. Expect this to get more shrill and panicked.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 21, 2018)

It'll be interesting to see what happens when the Government release their official advice on "no deal" preparations, including to households, which is due to happen in August and September. 

First of all interesting to see what that advice is. Is it going to be some sort of Protect and Survive thing about stocking up on tinned food?! 

Interesting to see how people and the media react to whatever that advice is and what it does to public opinion on: No Deal, second ref, accepting a deal. 

And interesting to see how politicians react. 

I think we can expect that the ERGers will scream about another Project Fear pretty much whatever is said. And Remain/2nd Ref people will say, "I told you so". And their committed backers will remain committed backers. 

Wider public opinion seems more up for grabs though, as are - I reckon - a fairly large number of MPs. 

At the moment, Theresa May seems to be following the "No Deal: it's the unreasonable EU's fault" plan. I don't quite get that beyond the fact that it currently keeps the Conservative party from splitting. I do sometimes wonder if her hope is that the reality of No Deal preparations (barges of generators off Northern Ireland?!?!?!) will scare together some sort of cross party coalition of Labour, Tory and others to vote through whatever it is that the EU offer, which will be a long way short of the Chequers proposal I believe. But, as - more than two years down the line - they haven't agreed the Irish border backstop yet, I just don't know what to expect. 

Plus, Raab is a committed Hard Brexiter. 

I reckon we must have a Barnier pee tape.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 21, 2018)

No deal Brexit would be an economic disaster for the UK, obviously, and therefore for the Conservative party. Or will the hardcore tory support base just continue to blame everything that goes wrong economically on the EU for decades after brexit? Possible.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 21, 2018)

There are those in the Conservative Party (and UKIP) for whom No Deal will be the cash bonanza of a lifetime! Coincidentally, Rees Mogg is now selling No Deal on his radio show. The argument that they're selling is that short-term cost will be offset by long-term prosperity...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 21, 2018)

I wonder how the desire of Brexiters to buy cheap farm produce from the USA instead of Europe, correlates with GM-phobia ...


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 21, 2018)

It’ll be like the Berlin Airlift all over again, but with chlorinated chicken, GM soya and root beer. Our golden future.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 21, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> There are those in the Conservative Party (and UKIP) for whom No Deal will be the cash bonanza of a lifetime! Coincidentally, Rees Mogg is now selling No Deal on his radio show. The argument that they're selling is that short-term cost will be offset by long-term prosperity...



Selling on UK media to a disinterested or crank home audience. To outsiders it just looks like another monied English lunatic spinning bullshit.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 21, 2018)

the tory party - and the rest of them - are prioritising their own survival - anyone suggesting that there will be long term gain is talking out of their shitty hypothetical arse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 21, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> It’ll be like the Berlin Airlift all over again, but with chlorinated chicken, GM soya and root beer. Our golden future.


Golden showers future, and it's not us doing the pissing


----------



## gosub (Jul 21, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> It'll be interesting to see what happens when the Government release their official advice on "no deal" preparations, including to households, which is due to happen in August and September.
> 
> First of all interesting to see what that advice is. Is it going to be some sort of Protect and Survive thing about stocking up on tinned food?!
> 
> ...



I was going to point you at https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/toilet-rumor/  and say that actually saying hoard tins would be a fucking stupid thing to do, of corse they won't do that, then I remembered the calibre of our government, so I'll just leave it at SAYING hoard  tins is a fucking stupid thing to do


----------



## Cloo (Jul 21, 2018)

Thought this tweet was quite good - there probably wouldn't be enough people who really give a shit to cause large scale ructions in the event of dumping Brexit. Not that there wouldn't be consequences.... sadly either result seems likely to either embolden or boost far-right populism.  

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If Brexit were cancelled...<br><br>5% of the population would be apoplectic with rage at the betrayal <br>25% would be pretty pissed off at the waste of everyone&#39;s time <br>70% would be extremely relieved <br><br>And after a few weeks of national debate we&#39;d all move on apart from the 5%</p>&mdash; Barnier Balls ❄️ (@davemacladd) <a href="">July 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## pesh (Jul 21, 2018)

I’m loving the barges full of requisitioned generators plan... it’s... just...
Well you know


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 21, 2018)

politics of hope and love right here people


----------



## pesh (Jul 21, 2018)

Surely 100% would?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 21, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Thought this tweet was quite good - there probably wouldn't be enough people who really give a shit to cause large scale ructions in the event of dumping Brexit. Not that there wouldn't be consequences.... sadly either result seems likely to either embolden or boost far-right populism.
> 
> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">If Brexit were cancelled...<br><br>5% of the population would be apoplectic with rage at the betrayal <br>25% would be pretty pissed off at the waste of everyone&#39;s time <br>70% would be extremely relieved <br><br>And after a few weeks of national debate we&#39;d all move on apart from the 5%</p>&mdash; Barnier Balls ❄️ (@davemacladd) <a href="">July 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>





I think a lot more than 5% of people would go absolutely apeshit. And it could definitely get ugly.  Have you read the comments sections on non-liberal forums whenever brexit is being discussed? -  the numbers of proper spittle flecked  posts along the lines of  "WE HAD A VOTE. YOU LOST. ITS DEMOCRACY. NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP - END OF!" - is genuinely disturbing. They will not go quietly and peacefully - and they will have a significant chunk of mps and the media encouraging them.

tbh - part of me thinks that - in the long run - crashing out with no deal may be the best outcome - as it would prove just how fucking stupid an idea it was to all but the most deluded headbangers. other wise you are going to have a "the elites sold us out/stab in the back" narrative that  will fester and toxify society and politics for generations.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think a lot more than 5% of people would go absolutely apeshit. And it could definitely get ugly.  Have you read the comments sections on non-liberal forums whenever brexit is being discussed? -  the numbers of proper spittle flecked  posts along the lines of  "WE HAD A VOTE. YOU LOST. ITS DEMOCRACY. NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP - END OF!" - is genuinely disturbing. They will not go quietly and peacefully - and they will have a significant chunk of mps and the media encouraging them.
> 
> tbh - part of me thinks that - in the long run - crashing out with no deal may be the best outcome - as it would prove just how fucking stupid an idea it was to all but the most deluded headbangers. other wise you are going to have a "the elites sold us out/stab in the back" narrative that  will fester and toxify society and politics for generations.



There's a big difference between forum-spouting and rioting though.


----------



## gosub (Jul 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> politics of hope and love right here people




As much as I think they are fucking up Brexit, I do wish some effort was put into explaining how much of a disaster a reverse ferret on Brexit would be


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 21, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> There's a big difference between forum-spouting and rioting though.



Obviously. But that sentiment is definitely out there and it is a widely held one - i would say its odds on that a "brexit betrayal" would be seized on by ukip (and the rest of the even further right , the tory ultras and the brexit media and that would be expressed politically and on the streets. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw big aggro demos, direct action like road blockades and an upsurge in right wing terror attacks.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 21, 2018)

Don’t reckon they have it in them myself. Look at all the other shit that’s been done over the last couple of decades, we’ve had one decent politically motivated riot out of it that led to a change of policy. The online gobshites bark louder than they bite. It’s not like people would immediately suffer or lose out as a consequence of it being cancelled.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 21, 2018)

If people were that fired up about it there would have been massive demonstrations calling for the referendum in the first place, there weren’t.


----------



## agricola (Jul 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Obviously. But that sentiment is definitely out there and it is a widely held one - i would say its odds on that a "brexit betrayal" would be seized on by ukip (and the rest of the even further right , the tory ultras and the brexit media and that would be expressed politically and on the streets. I wouldn't be at all surprised if we saw big aggro demos, direct action like road blockades and an upsurge in right wing terror attacks.



Demos perhaps, certainly direct action - but if anything the scale of support they have access to would make some kind of intervention, after a plea to protect democracy, from the US far more likely than right-wing terror attacks (at least mass-casualty attacks on civilians).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 21, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> If people were that fired up about it there would have been massive demonstrations calling for the referendum in the first place, there weren’t.



nobody was calling for them. if ukip, the moggites and the daily mail were calling for it cos "stab in the back" they'd be out in numbers. 200,000 turned out for the countryside alliance wank - this is much bigger. and we've already had 30K turn out for the "freedom of speech" bollocks - they have the numbers, the funding and the anger - id say its odds on. 
I think there is a very real danger of the betrayed brexiters joining with the anti-muslim/immigrant far right - it plays into all whole narrative of an entitled elite trampling democracy in the name of liberal, multi cultural, immigranty, euro, NWO evilness.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 21, 2018)

agricola said:


> Demos perhaps, certainly direct action - but if anything the scale of support they have access to would make some kind of intervention, after a plea to protect democracy, from the US far more likely than right-wing terror attacks (at least mass-casualty attacks on civilians).



could def see more joe cox type attacks. not sure they would be able to organise themselves into an effective armed struggle group - they'd might try but the spooks would be on them pretty quick  - more thomas mair and brevik type nut job attacks could def happen.


----------



## agricola (Jul 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> could def see more joe cox type attacks. not sure they would be able to organise themselves into an effective armed struggle group - they'd might try but the spooks would be on them pretty quick  - more thomas mann and brevik type nut job attacks could def happen.



Attacks by individuals can never be ruled out, but that movement as a whole has no need for a terror campaign - they would have a significant number of MPs (probably enough to mean they had the support of the Tory Party once it had been purged of the traitors responsible for the betrayal), most of the tabloid press and the current US regime.  If the alternative government was Corbyn they'd probably have the support of the financial sector and establishment as well.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 21, 2018)

For all this, I don't even see much pressure from the left. Even to the extent that no one wants to fuck with the right (not necessarily on here). Instead of say, talking about pro left issues post brexit. e.g. not flogging the NHS to private interests (which is underway and being attempted), not allowing the right and far right to dominate the discourse in terms of shouting down anyone who doesn't collect photographs of royal weddings/christenings/births/birthdays/jubilees with dogmatic 'Brexit means Brexit' shite, when most people know that we are not governed by what is in the interests of the majority, and that this will affect the outcomes. Not sure where that ramble leads myself.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 21, 2018)

pesh said:


> Surely 100% would?


Would be nice, but no.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Have you read the comments sections on non-liberal forums whenever brexit is being discussed? -  the numbers of proper spittle flecked  posts along the lines of  "WE HAD A VOTE. YOU LOST. ITS DEMOCRACY. NOW SHUT THE FUCK UP - END OF!" - is genuinely disturbing. They will not go quietly and peacefully - and they will have a significant chunk of mps and the media encouraging them.



You're assuming those people are British voters, or indeed real people. Chances are many of them will be paid posters given lines to post. For all everyone gets upset over targetted Facebook ads, astro turfing is a professional industry too now. The idea that governments, both ours and those hostile to us, aren't using it is implausible.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 22, 2018)

this is going to be a slightly jaded, I told you So


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 22, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> You're assuming those people are British voters, or indeed real people. Chances are many of them will be paid posters given lines to post. For all everyone gets upset over targetted Facebook ads, astro turfing is a professional industry too now. The idea that governments, both ours and those hostile to us, aren't using it is implausible.



much of it is too spittle flecked and/or poorly written to be astroturfers. and ive met enough people IRL expressing the same stuff.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> much of it is too spittle flecked and/or poorly written to be astroturfers. and ive met enough people IRL expressing the same stuff.



I think you're right, though the "Russian" stuff isn't just a conspiracy theory, it's true, so some bad use of language is from overseas posters - whether paid or not, who knows? 

You're right though, I can see more Thomas Mairs, and I can see more Tommy Robinson-style stuff. Bannon is now organising a big European effort, and it would undoubtedly use a Brexit "betrayal" as fodder. I suppose the big danger lies in an alliance between the "street" parts of that and the more "establishment" parts - Robinson and Rees Mogg, the dream ticket! - to form a sort of fascist/authoritarian nationalist party.


----------



## agricola (Jul 22, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I think you're right, though the "Russian" stuff isn't just a conspiracy theory, it's true, so some bad use of language is from overseas posters - whether paid or not, who knows?
> 
> You're right though, I can see more Thomas Mairs, and I can see more Tommy Robinson-style stuff. Bannon is now organising a big European effort, and it would undoubtedly use a Brexit "betrayal" as fodder. I suppose the big danger lies in an alliance between the "street" parts of that and the more "establishment" parts - Robinson and Rees Mogg, the dream ticket! - to form a sort of fascist/authoritarian nationalist party.



TBF that alliance probably already exists, given how fond they all are of Rees-Mogg.  Robinson has zero chance of being any kind of significant part in it, mind.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 22, 2018)

Rees Mogg says the UK would need to wait 50 (fifty) years for the benefit of brexit.
He would not need to wait that long for his £23 millions though.
Yet again May has no practical solution to the Irish border issue, like all brexiters, and now demands the EU 'evolve' a solution regarding the border.
The UK voted leave, the UK has to tell everybody what it is doing regarding the border.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 22, 2018)

Sunday Times speaking about 38 percent of the public being ready to vote for a UKIP / far right BREXIT party.
Apparently roughly the same level of enthusiasm for a pro-EU alternative ...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> demands the EU 'evolve' a solution regarding the border.


Has the EU considered paying paramilitaries to police the border as it does in the horn of africa? I mean, one size fits all approach for the good ship EU right?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 22, 2018)

Blue helmets by Christmas


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Has the EU considered paying paramilitaries to police the border as it does in the horn of africa? I mean, one size fits all approach for the good ship EU right?


What's your solution to the Irish border situation?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What's your solution to the Irish border situation?


united ireland would be nice. Whats yours?


----------



## manji (Jul 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Blue helmets by Christmas


White Helmets are available 
Israel evacuates 800 White Helmets in face of Syria advance


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> united ireland would be nice. Whats yours?


You're aware the DUP are propping up the tories, yeah?


----------



## billbond (Jul 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're aware the DUP are propping up the tories, yeah?


Really
Dont get mentioned much on here that


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 22, 2018)

billbond said:


> Really
> Dont get mentioned much on here that


No-one yapping about a united Ireland (as a solution to the border problem) seems to have read it.


----------



## andysays (Jul 22, 2018)

The new Brexit Secretary seems optimistic that it can all be sorted fairly quickly

Dominic Raab: We can get Brexit deal done by October


> A deal with the EU can be reached by October but the UK is preparing for the possibility of no deal, the new Brexit secretary Dominic Raab has said. He said he would return to Brussels for talks on Thursday and strain "every sinew" to get "the best deal". But a responsible government puts plans in place in case talks do not end well, he told the BBC.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2018)

Sending the MPs out to European capitals during a summer break to push whatever is left of the current plan. I love the whole colonial approach; divide and conquer.

Something that strikes me as odd is the view that Brexit is somehow an uncharacteristically rash act, as if the British state was a consistent and measured body, not prone to fucking things up grandly.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 22, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Sunday Times speaking about 38 percent of the public being ready to vote for a UKIP / far right BREXIT party.
> Apparently roughly the same level of enthusiasm for a pro-EU alternative ...


Actual text 

-----
Theresa May is facing an unprecedented political crisis, according to a new poll that reveals voters are implacably opposed to her Brexit plan and are prepared to turn to Ukip or parties of the far right.

In a survey that will spark unease in Downing Street, the YouGov poll found that the public believes Boris Johnson, the former foreign secretary, is better placed to negotiate with Brussels and lead the Conservatives into the next election.

It highlights how voters are polarising, with growing numbers alienated from the two main parties. About 38% would vote for a new party on the right that was committed to Brexit, while 24% are prepared to support an explicitly far-right anti-immigrant, anti-Islam party.

One in three voters are prepared to back a new anti-Brexit centrist party.

Tory donors and allies of Nigel Farage, the former Ukip leader, are now plotting to raise £10m to set up a new hard-Brexit party — a move that could make it impossible for the Tories to win the next election.

A close ally of Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s former chief strategist, told The Sunday Times he aimed to raise £1m from British and US sources to create a right-wing “mass movement” to rival Momentum on the left.

It can also be revealed that Sir Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat leader, was holding talks on the creation of a new centrist party when he failed to turn up for a crunch vote last week.

The poll will prompt Tory MPs to demand changes to May’s Brexit proposal thrashed out at Chequers earlier this month. Just one in nine voters (11%) would support her plan in a new referendum and only 12% think it would be good for Britain, while 43% disagree.

By more than two to one, voters do not believe her plan keeps faith with the referendum result.

May’s position will be further eroded by public support for Johnson, who resigned to oppose the Chequers deal, which would lead to the UK permanently accepting EU rules on the sale of goods. Just 16% of voters think the prime minister is handling Brexit well; more than twice as many (34%) think Johnson would do a better job.

With the Tories on 38%, a point behind Labour, a Conservative party led by Johnson would be neck and neck with Labour, while his main leadership rivals — Sajid Javid, Michael Gove and Jeremy Hunt — would all be trailing Jeremy Corbyn’s party by between 10 and 12 percentage points.






Johnson’s support is likely to grow if he is seen by MPs as someone who could prevent votes leaching to populist parties.

Bannon said yesterday he was setting up a foundation called the Movement, to lead a right-wing revolt at next spring’s European elections. He held meetings in a Mayfair hotel last week with senior figures on the European hard right and far right, including Farage and the vice-president of the French National Rally, formerly the National Front.

Raheem Kassam, a former adviser to Farage and employee of Bannon’s, said the post-Chequers chaos was “massively an opening for the right”.

Hardline Eurosceptics warned Tory whips last week that they would vote to bring down the government in a confidence vote if May watered down Brexit.

The only good news for May in the poll is that, while voters as a whole would like to see her resign, Tory voters still think she should fight on by a margin of 58% to 32%.

The prime minister has ruled out a new EU referendum on the grounds that it would be undemocratic to revisit the 2016 vote. The poll shows that if voters were offered a new vote they would overturn the referendum result, with remaining in the EU beating leaving with no deal by 54% to 46%.
-------

So no link to the actual poll (and YouGov haven't put anything up yet) nor is the wording of the questions given.


----------



## Cloo (Jul 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think there is a very real danger of the betrayed brexiters joining with the anti-muslim/immigrant far right - it plays into all whole narrative of an entitled elite trampling democracy in the name of liberal, multi cultural, immigranty, euro, NWO evilness.


 Absolutely it's a risk.

And if we do have Brexit, the far right will rally around the idea that it's not Brexit that's flushed the country down the toilet, it's all the immigrants, and liberal lefty Remainers who somehow spoiled the magic, fab Brexit that we should have had where we didn't have to give anything to the EU and still got all the benefits of membership. They get their day either way.

I so fucking hate Cameron for this.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 22, 2018)

Spoiler: Cameron recently with his mum


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2018)

DC will go down as the worst post ww2 PM with ease.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> DC will go down as the worst post ww2 PM with ease.


TM giving him a run for his money


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 22, 2018)

Anthony Eden must be chuffed to be treated by history better than dc or tm can hope for


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2018)

Hang on, what about the case of TB the country caught? Killed mainly foreigners I guess.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> DC will go down as the worst post ww2 PM with ease.


It will be post ww2 for quite a while yet, though.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> DC will go down as the worst post ww2 PM with ease.


Nah Mayhem has got him beat I think, DC was an estate agent who got lucky but Mayhem is just totally fucking useless and has less control over her party than the Downing street cat.
The one thing she has done which I never ever ever EVER imagined was possible is that she  has made me miss Maggie.
I hated that woman with a burning passion but not for one second did I doubt either her strength or her conviction, she would have eaten the likes of BoJo and Mogg alive.


----------



## sealion (Jul 22, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It will be post ww2 for quite a while yet,


Do you write for the guardian?


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The one thing she has done which I never ever ever EVER imagined was possible is that she  has made me miss Maggie.
> I hated that woman with a burning passion but not for one second did I doubt either her strength or her conviction, she would have eaten the likes of BoJo and Mogg alive.



Maggie was an ideologue. May's a technocrat. Maggie burns in hell. May idles eternity away in purgatory.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 22, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The one thing she has done which I never ever ever EVER imagined was possible is that she  has made me miss Maggie.
> I hated that woman with a burning passion but not for one second did I doubt either her strength or her conviction, she would have eaten the likes of BoJo and Mogg alive.



She would also, in the current context, be a remainer. Indeed, given the current positions of the main parties, she'd probably be most closely aligned to the Lib Dems. 

Jesus we're fucked.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 22, 2018)

I think its an interesting question this one of who will get the opprobrium if after leaving (which as things stand we are) things get bleaker. The referendum was handled badly and has polarised large groups. Others may say people are sabotaging Brexit by not 'making it a success', or in other words, complaining. I'd like to think we will be OK whatever happens. I do however think the most likely scenario is that neoliberalism will be accelerated. So more London bubble, less investment in the other regions, slashing regulations and the mantra of the free market. People on here and elsewhere said that before the ref tbf, so not an original analysis. Hope I'm wrong.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 22, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Nah Mayhem has got him beat I think, DC was an estate agent who got lucky but Mayhem is just totally fucking useless and has less control over her party than the Downing street cat.



she is sacrificial lamb of the Tory Party

we spent more than 30 years pushing for this

But the fucking mess that is going to result from it is all at the feet of May

tbf its the base of the push of both  Boris and Moggs mantras for control of the Tory Party


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2018)

Power will be more concentrated at Westminster. So yeah, more of the same, but worse.

Trying to fix the UK's ongoing constitutional crisis is going to take more than another referendum or some other tired old party taking the reigns.


----------



## billbond (Jul 22, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Spoiler: Cameron recently with his mum
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 141891



Tbf he looks well, as does seb
Being away from politics seems to agree with him.
The good life a


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 23, 2018)

First stop BREXIT-ville ...

Theresa May to take her Brexit roadshow to the north-east


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 23, 2018)

Are you also against nationalisation? What about higher taxes? Rolling back anti-strike laws?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you also against nationalisation? What about higher taxes? Rolling back anti-strike laws?


Does the EU make labour laws better or worse than the Tories left to their own devices ?


----------



## Winot (Jul 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Does the EU make labour laws better or worse than the Tories left to their own devices ?



I sometimes think the entirety of political debate on Urban can be summed up by asking “do you want something that is half good that can actually happen or something that is completely good that will never happen?”.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 23, 2018)

Winot said:


> I sometimes think the entirety of political debate on Urban can be summed up by asking “do you want something that is half good that can actually happen or something that is completely good that will never happen?”.



The half good thing is usually bolted on to a 100% bad thing though. Like a second-hand life jacket that comes with a free anchor.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 23, 2018)

Pinched from mason

Here’s the future of the U.K. in a simple flowcharts


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 23, 2018)

British reject May's Brexit plan, some turn to Boris and far right...


It takes a handful of cunts to hold us back


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 23, 2018)

Winot said:


> I sometimes think the entirety of political debate on Urban can be summed up by asking “do you want something that is half good that can actually happen or something that is completely good that will never happen?”.


list the good things, the milk and the honey. Say word to me like working time directive. 
Paint me like one of your french girls

I like masons flowcharts though, at least he's not exhorting the war machine onwards today


----------



## Mr Moose (Jul 23, 2018)

Winot said:


> I sometimes think the entirety of political debate on Urban can be summed up by asking “do you want something that is half good that can actually happen or something that is completely good that will never happen?”.



You forgot, ‘because if you want the former you are a war mongering racist with no politics’.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 23, 2018)




----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 24, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Does the EU make labour laws better or worse than the Tories left to their own devices ?


How is that relevant to the questions I asked? 

I'm not the one pimping an ideology that calls for attacks on workers, that's you. The same people who are screaming about the negative effects of Brexit on UK GDP are also the people that insist that nationalising utilities, raising taxes, making it easier for people to strike will also "damage the economy". By following them you are parroting a neo-liberal pro-market line.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 24, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Pinched from mason
> 
> Here’s the future of the U.K. in a simple flowcharts<snip>


That is absolutely fucking garbage. Are these things he thinks will happen? That could happen? Are "Blairites Split" and "Votes Down May Deal" mutually incompatible options? If so why?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 24, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Pinched from mason
> 
> Here’s the future of the U.K. in a simple flowcharts
> 
> ...





If an independent Scotland and a united Ireland come out of it, I might find myself warming to this Brexit lark.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 24, 2018)

Symptomatic of rather than a cause of the dissolution of the British state. The seeds were sown decades ago. Labour's Unionist obsession, founded in raw electoral politics, leaves them as reactionary as the Tories when it comes to constitutional matters.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 24, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Symptomatic of rather than a cause of the dissolution of the British state. The seeds were sown decades ago. Labour's Unionist obsession, founded in raw electoral politics, leaves them as reactionary as the Tories when it comes to constitutional matters.



Symptom or cause... either way, it's (hopefully) good news for Ireland and Scotland. Obviously, that's going to leave many working class unionists upset but they've had their day.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 24, 2018)

Such working class unionists perhaps remember the days of some sort of solidarity established through the many departed British institutions of state.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Does the EU make labour laws better or worse than the Tories left to their own devices ?



This is like, a perfect summing up of what the world looks like if you are completely myopic and only able to understand the world through a series of multiple choice binaries. Perfect, well done


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> yes and no they may not feel any sense of wrong doing about not following the rules but they don't want to be stuck with a massive bill for unpaid duty 6 months down the line, doesn't look good on the balance sheet.



Until someone determines what duty needs to be paid, it won't affect their balance sheet. Probably still won't make any difference. Theoretically they're supposed to pay taxes too but you won't see that on many balance sheets while they're getting away with it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Not a chance. There would probably be a very chaotic initial period which might involve a lot of blind-eye-turning, grace periods, confused officialdom etc, but at the end of the day, if there's literally no agreement and the UK leaves the EU, the way things are done now will lose its legal underpinning. EU countries will just settle down into following the law. It wouldn't be sustainable to just ignore WTO rules and the EU's own rules and other trade agreements.
> 
> We're not going to get there though, so it's a bit like discussing what it's like in heaven.



And of course nothing can exist without a legal underpinning. 

Not that any of this could happen anyway. It's just not _possible. 


_


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> And of course nothing can exist without a legal underpinning.


Well, no. Not nothing. But French customs and immigration staff are not going to be told to just ignore the law from Brexit onwards. It's pointless believing in a fantasy.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 24, 2018)

What exactly is the likely consequence of a hard brexit? are the scare stories legit?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> What exactly is the likely consequence of a hard brexit? are the scare stories legit?



in the event of no deal i would imagine the uk and eu would hastily cobble together arrangements that prevent some of the worst aspects happening (like planes being able to land, the worst effects of border hold ups, norn iron and security stuff)  - but the rest - well its partly a self fulfilling prophecy - trade tariffs and uncertainty would probably spook the markets, you'd see a run on the pound and some manufacturers would start planning to move out. I think their would be a gathering sense of crises which would lead to panic buying, shortages and shit.

in the short to medium term - i cant see how it wouldn't tip the economy into recession - its not like the UK has a huge manufacturing industry ready and primed to ship stuff over seas and the sudden imposition of tarrifs on trade would be very painful. 
Given all this - i think the pressure form the industry, business, the public and the media in the run up to a "no deal" would force the government try and prevent it happening  - i.e. negotiate an extension of A50 and/or 2nd ref - and the EU may play  hardball.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 24, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> What exactly is the likely consequence of a hard brexit? are the scare stories legit?



Some may be - the nuclear stuff is a genuine issue for all concerned, as is medicines, and the financial stuff like pensions and health insurance, but will the sky fall in if we can't get Feta or melons for 3 months?

Rather like the indyref in Scotland, ignore the fluff on either side and ask yourself if the 6th largest economy in the world, with world leading industries in medicines, aerospace, IT etc.. is suddenly going to turn into South Sudan with famine and pestilence stalking the land - the answer, just as in Scotland, is no...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

NO FETA!?!?


----------



## JimW (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> NO FETA!?!?


Calm down, not a feta compli just yet.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 24, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> in the event of no deal i would imagine the uk and eu would hastily cobble together arrangements that prevent some of the worst aspects happening (like planes being able to land, the worst effects of border hold ups, norn iron and security stuff)  - but the rest - well its partly a self fulfilling prophecy - trade tariffs and uncertainty would probably spook the markets, you'd see a run on the pound and some manufacturers would start planning to move out. I think their would be a gathering sense of crises which would lead to panic buying, shortages and shit.
> 
> in the short to medium term - i cant see how it wouldn't tip the economy into recession - its not like the UK has a huge manufacturing industry ready and primed to ship stuff over seas and the sudden imposition of tarrifs on trade would be very painful.
> Given all this - i think the pressure form the industry, business, the public and the media in the run up to a "no deal" would force the government try and prevent it happening  - i.e. negotiate an extension of A50 and/or 2nd ref - and the EU may play  hardball.


What about all the talk of food shortages and price rises and stockpiling, surely a bit apocalyptic?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Some may be - the nuclear stuff is a genuine issue for all concerned, as is medicines, and the financial stuff like pensions and health insurance, but will the sky fall in if we can't get Feta or melons for 3 months?
> 
> .



but loads of our trade is intricately linked with the EU - which is _why_ the UK is the 6th largest economy. Loads of manufacturers produce stuff which is part of an EU wide manufacturing process (cars especially - but also loads of the uk's light engineering) - how the fuck do you unpick that ? Manufacturers would have either have to pay more for the stuff they trade to the EU or find other suppliers. And food prices would surely go up - its not just feta - its flour and yeast for bread, vegetable oil, huge amounts of fruit and veg, fertiliser,  pesticides, animal feed - this is all stuff we import in huge quantities from the EU. 
I really dont  think its a scare story to predict a crashing out with not deal will see higher prices, job losses and a fuck load of unforeseen problems because 45 years of an increasingly integrated, mind boggling complex economic relationship has just been torched without anything being put in its place.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

JimW said:


> Calm down, not a feta compli just yet.


Gouda thing too.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

Won't prices go up - as they have done already - because the pound will (almost certainly) go down and import prices will go up and we import the majority of our food. 

The Governemnt says itself that it's taking measures that could be fairly construed as food stockpiling (or facilitating it, at least). 

I can't see shortages other than on a local scale: my local shop runs out of bread and milk in about an hour if heavy snow is forecast! Not everyone can drive to a supermarket or walk to the next store...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> What about all the talk of food shortages and price rises and stockpiling, surely a bit apocalyptic?



like i say - enough panic and that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Although price rises is a nailed on certainty.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

JimW said:


> Calm down, not a feta compli just yet.



dont you Brie-leave it ...


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 24, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> like i say - enough panic and that becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Although price rises is a nailed on certainty.



what sort of increased do we think are likely?


----------



## JimW (Jul 24, 2018)

I wish to apologise for any cheese-based punning I may have quite deliberately started and tender my resignation forthwith.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> NO FETA!?!?



I agree, it is a bit salty.
Oh cheesy puns. It was ne ferment to be this way.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

I suppose amounts will depend on the drop in the pound and the extent of disruptions at borders, and maybe how well the government has filled warehouses full of tinned pilchards. I might watch one of those war-time cooking programmes to see how to get by on rations.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

Has anyone done a "we were healthier and happier then" article anywhere yet? If not, they will.


----------



## gosub (Jul 24, 2018)

I predict a riot: Amazon UK chief foresees 'civil unrest' for no-deal Brexit • The Register Forums

He's wrong, as it currently stands the unrest will be EUrope wide.

Stop the clock.   We have learned what you don't know and don't know how to find out.

New  balls please.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 24, 2018)

Brexit department downgraded as May says Cabinet Office now in charge of negotiations - Politics live


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

JimW said:


> I wish to apologise for any cheese-based punning I may have quite deliberately started and tender my resignation forthwith.


Halloumi to be the first to wish you well for the future.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 24, 2018)

I mentioned this somewhere upthread, one of the foodstuffs we're nationally self-sufficient in is cheese. Reckon we can just swap some Wensleydale or Cheshire for all the Feta we want.

Plus they make Feta in ten thousand places outside the EU so on reflection, one way or another we'll be fine for salty milk curds.

And cider.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 24, 2018)

Hope the price of cheese doesn't rise


----------



## Ted Striker (Jul 24, 2018)




----------



## kebabking (Jul 24, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> What about all the talk of food shortages and price rises and stockpiling, surely a bit apocalyptic?



Walk into your local supermarket and see where all the fruit comes from, and ask yourself if Spain and Portugal, already with crippling unemployment, are going to be happy to see their farm produce rot in the fields in order to punish the UK for deciding it no longer wishes to be part of the club..

The UK is 1/7th of all economic activity in the EU, and lots of that is food.


----------



## agricola (Jul 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Walk into your local supermarket and see where all the fruit comes from, and ask yourself if Spain and Portugal, already with crippling unemployment, are going to be happy to see their farm produce rot in the fields in order to punish the UK for deciding it no longer wishes to be part of the club..
> 
> The UK is 1/7th of all economic activity in the EU, and lots of that is food.



Indeed, but then again our government is involved.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 24, 2018)

It's OK, we're fully paid up members of the International Red Cross. They won't let us starve


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's OK, we're fully paid up members of the International Red Cross. They won't let us starve


Sure, but what happens if the first feta drop takes more than a few days to organise?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Sure, but what happens if the first feta drop takes more than a few days to organise?



Don't worry, we'll just shoot all the Londoners and render their fatuous corpses down to make British Feta...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 24, 2018)

Capital Brawn, ltd.


----------



## JimW (Jul 24, 2018)

No shortage of gammon


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

economics prof jonathan portes' take on likely outcomes - seems a fairly sobre assessment - 

Deal, no deal, or extension? - UK in a changing Europe


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Don't worry, we'll just shoot all the Londoners and render their fatuous corpses down to make British Feta...


Wouldn't be proper feta, though, whatever they put on the label. At best, it would be Greek-style cheese substitute. It would just lie unopened in the streets.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Walk into your local supermarket and see where all the fruit comes from, and ask yourself if Spain and Portugal, already with crippling unemployment, are going to be happy to see their farm produce rot in the fields in order to punish the UK for deciding it no longer wishes to be part of the club..
> 
> The UK is 1/7th of all economic activity in the EU, and lots of that is food.



like the german car industry wont allow it either? The EU will be hurt by hard brexit - but not nearly as much as the UK. The EU27 see  political cost of allowing the UK to have cake as  far greater than the economic disruption - they would much rather bale out spanish farmers (and greek feta producers) than give the uk a deal which would undermine the fundamental principles of the EU.
please point me to any hint of any pressure from any of the EU27 to climb down on this. Plus - their own voters will be very much in the "the brits can go fuck themselves" camp.


----------



## Smangus (Jul 24, 2018)

Dig for victory folks!


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

Smangus said:


> Dig for victory folks!


And be sure to fork everything up by mid-autumn.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Well, no. Not nothing. But French customs and immigration staff are not going to be told to just ignore the law from Brexit onwards. It's pointless believing in a fantasy.



If you go back and read my post, instead of being a tool, you'll see I was talking about a scenario in which customs and immigration staff receive no instructions to do their jobs differently.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

More weird political things today:

Raab saying that there'll be no payment without a trade deal. I thought we'd agreed the payment in any case and signed up to an agreement with that in. 

The May taking over the negotiations directly. Weird intra-Tory stuff - a snub to Rees Mogg camp? I dunno. . . 

Legislation that includes (I don't fully understand the mechanisms of this) automatically (?) putting back into law all that EU law... seeming to confirm the existence of a transition phase.   
Subscribe to read | Financial Times

I'm a bit mystified by it all now. Still hoping for free access to European cheeses of all sorts for all people at all times.


----------



## JimW (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> More weird political things today:
> 
> Raab saying that there'll be no payment without a trade deal. I thought we'd agreed the payment in any case and signed up to an agreement with that in.
> 
> ...


That last bit about legislation always seemed the obvious and simple solution to all the moaning about the need to draft so many new laws; clearly could just start from where we are and then legislate anew as and when.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you go back and read my post, instead of being a tool, you'll see I was talking about a scenario in which customs and immigration staff receive no instructions to do their jobs differently.


I don't think there's any point to me giving this a proper reply.


----------



## Supine (Jul 24, 2018)

Details of current cheese import tarrifs and rules. I'd imagine the non EU into EU rules would be something like we'd get after brexit 

Cheese and curd - Trade Tariff - GOV.UK


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

I've found a link to that that works: 

Theresa May announces she will keep UK under EU laws for another 21 months, risking Brexiteer fury 

Which... I dunno... is it a backstop thing... May trying to be responsble and making a literal cliff-edge of a one day switch from EU law applying to no EU law applying. . .


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

"According to the Council Regulation (EU) No 692/2014 (OJ L183, p. 9) it shall be prohibited to import into European Union goods originating in Crimea or Sevastopol." 

Do they make much cheese in Crimea I wonder?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I've found a link to that that works:
> 
> Theresa May announces she will keep UK under EU laws for another 21 months, risking Brexiteer fury
> 
> Which... I dunno... is it a backstop thing... May trying to be responsble and making a literal cliff-edge of a one day switch from EU law applying to no EU law applying. . .



That has been the plan from day one - make all EU law UK domestic law, then amend at leisure. The difference between now and then being that it'll be UK law, implemented by the UK, not EU law implemented by the EU.

Everyone knew there would never be enough to time to go through the whole pantheon of EU law to decide which bits we kept before we left, so this was the only option.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> That has been the plan from day one - make all EU law UK domestic law, then amend at leisure. The difference between now and then being that it'll be UK law, implemented by the UK, not EU law implemented by the EU.


That was the plan, but it seems like the plan is changing to not repealing the 1972 act, so that we remain subject to EU law implemented by the EU and, presumably, not at complete liberty to amend it as and when.


----------



## Supine (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That was the plan, but it seems like the plan is changing to not repealing the 1972 act, so that we remain subject to EU law implemented by the EU and, presumably, not at complete liberty to amend it as and when.



That's us the plan for a transition period. The EU couldn't accept the same conditions while allowing the UK to change its rules. It just gives more time to sort this shit out.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I don't think there's any point to me giving this a proper reply.



There isn't any point in you replying, there isn't any point in you posting.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

And that's the change, I think. 

No transition period is agreed yet. But Theresa May is legislating as if one has been - she is creating one without it being (quite) agreed in negotiation (the Irish backstop, the "divorce payment", the next steps...) 

No Deal Brexit - as actually beloved of Rees Mogg's gang requires an actual crashing out: No Deal, no nothing, fuck you, "intransigent EU," the "Remoaner stab in the back...". And this has legislated that out of existence (has it been passed by everyone who needs to pass it...?)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> "According to the Council Regulation (EU) No 692/2014 (OJ L183, p. 9) it shall be prohibited to import into European Union goods originating in Crimea or Sevastopol."
> 
> Do they make much cheese in Crimea I wonder?



Oddly enough, not traditionally- the Cheese stuffed Burek favoured by most of the Slavic peoples isnt too common there- the tartar influence meant that meat was always the favoured filling for this staple foodstuff in the region . Most non white cheeses were importeed from europe or the Ukraine. After the Crimea invasion and the resultant cheese embargo, the Russians began to fill the cheeese deficit by producing their own ersatz variations of established imported cheeses- to varying degrees of success. The whole cheese embargo issue is a story in itself. 
/


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> And this has legislated that out of existence (has it been passed by everyone who needs to pass it...?)



Today's thing? That's only a White Paper at this stage.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Today's thing? That's only a White Paper at this stage.



To be honest, it's this level of parliamentary ignorance that probably lost me those 17 by elections.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> To be honest, it's this level of parliamentary ignorance that probably lost me those 17 by elections.



Is...is that you Lord Buckethead, sir?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 24, 2018)

Busted!


----------



## Winot (Jul 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That was the plan, but it seems like the plan is changing to not repealing the 1972 act, so that we remain subject to EU law implemented by the EU and, presumably, not at complete liberty to amend it as and when.



Yeah this is a pretty big change, explained nicely by the FT. It was never *simple* to scrap all EU law and magically make it become UK law. Seems like they have finally woken up to that (I mean politicians - no doubt the Government Legal Service have been saying it from day one).


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 24, 2018)

and according to the Chequers deal, still subject to EU State regulation.  In which case how, exactly, are we "leaving the EU"?  leaves us fighting with one hand behind our back.  either leave or don't.  

I voted remain, and remain of the opinion that we shouldn't leave, but if we are going to leave the EU we should leave properly.  Hard Brexit is better than half Brexit.  Late night drunken rant, but what I think.  EU State aid regulation is a pile of feckin shit, designed to protect big business and nothing else.  Fuck em.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 24, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> And that's the change, I think.
> 
> No transition period is agreed yet. But Theresa May is legislating as if one has been - she is creating one without it being (quite) agreed in negotiation (the Irish backstop, the "divorce payment", the next steps...)
> 
> No Deal Brexit - as actually beloved of Rees Mogg's gang requires an actual crashing out: No Deal, no nothing, fuck you, "intransigent EU," the "Remoaner stab in the back...". And this has legislated that out of existence (has it been passed by everyone who needs to pass it...?)



I think the legislation now in place basically delegates the power to repeal or not to repeal to the Prime Minister. So she still has to (a) remain in power and (b) not have her mind changed for her. However, I think it's an exaggeration to say that she has legislated no deal out of existence. Retaining the ECA is meaningless unless the UK has some special status after March which is recognised by the EU.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 25, 2018)

I can't see this going down well with remainers


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2018)

Massively important. Glad brought to our attention.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 25, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I can't see this going down well with remainers
> 
> View attachment 142139



Undemocratic eh? Well I hope for their sakes Vote Leave haven't just been caught cheating in any referendums...


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 25, 2018)

At least we haven’t started stockpiling food and medicine yet....





Oh....


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

Darren Grimes is now appealing his fine from the Electoral Commission. Crowd funded, of course! 

All the rights and wrongs of the arguments in the referendum aside it feels like Leave (and Banks) are desperately deflecting and dodging to get Brexit past that March date from which - realistically - there is no turning back. 

I'm not a lawyer, but I reckon the report of Grimes' appeal in the Sun is libellous.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 25, 2018)

Tories now wanting treason charges for EU supporters?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

In looking up that story I had the exciting experience of a very rare visit to the Conservative Home website where the comments are great!: 

"Just another sign of our Institutions declining to 3rd world levels of conduct.
Happy to donate (despite my own financial challenges) I would not miss helping you young man for anything.
Well at least we no longer have to listen to any International moralising from the Leftwing Remoaner idiots in Westminster whose political skills and abilities were clearly gleaned from great role-models such as Mugabe....
It's embarrassing when you consider these commies actually mock Trump. For all his faults he still stands taller than this tawdry toilet trash. Sigh its not even emotive - their lower evolutionary end behaviour is just to be expected now lol."

"The Electoral Commission is stuffed with remainers, when it should be politically neutral. Another biased organisation of the deep state. I will certainly be making a donation."

"The Electoral Commission is a totally unfit body, a kangaroo court worthy of a tin pot dictatorship.

We no longer have any independent institutions - police, civil service, judiciary are all stuffed with people bent on pursuing partisan agendas, and overwhelmingly one kind of partisan agenda."

"What sort of country has this become? Entire system a joke. Politicos at highest level lying to our face and expect us to lap it up. Tower Hamlets not an aberration, a harbinger.
Needs torn down and rebuilt. Cue Cromwell's great speech. I despise these people, and idiots like Raab only slightly less for acquiescing. Chipped in and good luck." 

Poor oppressed conservative party.


----------



## andysays (Jul 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Tories now wanting treason charges for EU supporters?


Is Bannerman's tweet a statement of Conservative party policy then?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

Well, it was in response to news that a couple of Tory MPs (in the UK Parliament) are agitating to update the treason laws, mainly so that they can do ISIS fighters for treason.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

I am not exactly a fan of IS, but how can you do someone for treason if you have removed their citizenship ?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

Theresa May urged to 'reinstate the Treason Act' and put terrorists away for life in UK

A Labour MP too! 

As to legal technicalities. . . Pleading ignorance here. . .


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Is Bannerman's tweet a statement of Conservative party policy then?


I have no idea, I'm not a tory supporter.

Try asking your brexiteer mates, maybe.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 25, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am not exactly a fan of IS, but how can you do someone for treason if you have removed their citizenship ?



Because I'm not every case would you, or could you, remove their citizenship - particularly if the offences are committed in the UK. So, for example, if someone were agitating for an IS 'victory' in or over the UK, but they were in the UK, and not a citizen, or entitled to be a citizen, of another country, then their offences would easily fall within the 1351 Treason Act.

Personally I think that most of the Guardians' output falls within the 1351 act as well, but that's just me...


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jul 25, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> I can't see this going down well with remainers
> 
> View attachment 142139



Loyalty to an organisation that he literally works for?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Because I'm not every case would you, or could you, remove their citizenship - particularly if the offences are committed in the UK. So, for example, if someone were agitating for an IS 'victory' in or over the UK, but they were in the UK, and not a citizen, or entitled to be a citizen, of another country, then their offences would easily fall within the 1351 Treason Act.
> 
> Personally I think that most of the Guardians' output falls within the 1351 act as well, but that's just me...



IS are not at war with the UK though. At best you could say they are at war with Syria and Iraq, so helping them out cannot be treason against the UK, even if the UK has some troops on the ground (do they?), the UK is not at war with a non-existent state, so treason doesn't really apply.


----------



## andysays (Jul 25, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Well, it was in response to news that a couple of Tory MPs (in the UK Parliament) are agitating to update the treason laws, mainly so that they can do ISIS fighters for treason.



A couple of random Tory MPs don't speak for the whole party anymore than a random Urban poster like DexterTCN speaks for Urban.

It's just him being his usual self, I guess...


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> IS are not at war with the UK though.


Would IS not consider themselves to be at war with all western countries?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

Wouldn't we have to recognise them as a legitimate state to accept that we're at war with them...? 

(Again, technicalities. . . )


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Wouldn't we have to recognise them as a legitimate state to accept that we're at war with them...?
> 
> (Again, technicalities. . . )



No, a state can't commit treason, only an individual can, they must be UK citizens. However...



Raheem said:


> Would IS not consider themselves to be at war with all western countries?



IS may proclaim they are at war against the west, but not being a legitimate state their proclamation is no more real than if you or I made it. So assisting IS in itself cannot be treasonous, (as would have been assisting Germany during WW2, for example).


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> IS may proclaim they are at war against the west, but not being a legitimate state their proclamation is no more real than if you or I made it. So assisting IS in itself cannot be treasonous,



It's got to be at least a little bit more real than if you or I made it, surely?

In all seriousness, what makes you think that a declaration of war needs to be made by a state in order to be real. Not saying I know any different, just wondering.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> IS are not at war with the UK though. At best you could say they are at war with Syria and Iraq, so helping them out cannot be treason against the UK, even if the UK has some troops on the ground (do they?), the UK is not at war with a non-existent state, so treason doesn't really apply.



The 1351 act says very little about states of war, or other states, merely _The Kings Enemies, _which is as elegant a catch-all terms you could wish for.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It's got to be at least a little bit more real than if you or I made it, surely?
> 
> In all seriousness, what makes you think that a declaration of war needs to be made by a state in order to be real. Not saying I know any different, just wondering.



Treason is disloyalty to the crown. Acting for a state against which the UK is at war would clearly be treason. Acting for or as part of a bunch of murderous thugs rampaging around Syria, even if they murder some UK citizens, is not being disloyal to the crown. Of course some people in the UK who have gone on rampages claim to be acting for IS, (mostly they say they are influenced by IS though), and IS claims that dead players in UK atrocities are 'IS soldiers', but there is no way to verify that and they have been shown to claim that everything that happens is down to them, so wouldn't stand up in court.

Hence why some people are talking about revamping treason laws to include IS, that would mean re-writing the definition of treason in the UK, and still couldn't apply to non-UK citizens, including those who have had their citizenship removed from them.

What this MEP is doing saying it should include those who big up the EU is anyone's guess, but the clue is that he is a tory politico, so probably his syphilis addled brain doesn't work very well.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> The 1351 act says very little about states of war, or other states, merely _The Kings Enemies, _which is as elegant a catch-all terms you could wish for.



It also talks of those who bone the heir's wife, but James Hewitt remains free.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It also talks of those who bone the heir's wife, but James Hewitt remains free.



Hence my views on the CPS...


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Treason is disloyalty to the crown. Acting for a state against which the UK is at war would clearly be treason.


Agreed. But there were executions for treason following the Easter Rising, I think, which wouldn't fit that case.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It also talks of those who bone the heir's wife, but James Hewitt remains free.


Might have caused a bit of a constitutional issue to execute Hewitt and not Charles. Although I would have personally advocated a glass half full attitude.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Agreed. But there were executions for treason following the Easter Rising, I think, which wouldn't fit that case.



Not for treason, murder. Dubious as fuck of course, but not treason. (I think?)

edit, Casement was for treason, so maybe all? Dunno.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 25, 2018)

Government no longer objecting to the death penalty seems a pretty big shift.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

I think it was only Roger Casement who was executed for "treason" for conspiring with Germany? 

The others were court martialled, so no real proper trial or charges I don't think, though it seems "aiding the enemy" (being Germany) in one case, "armed rebellion" I've found in another, and talk of the Defence of the Realm Act being used in another. 

I'm sure there are people who here who know more than Wikipedia is telling me.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No, a state can't commit treason, only an individual can, they must be UK citizens. However...
> 
> 
> 
> IS may proclaim they are at war against the west, but not being a legitimate state their proclamation is no more real than if you or I made it. So assisting IS in itself cannot be treasonous, (as would have been assisting Germany during WW2, for example).



Haw Haw was Yank born ( then german though IIRC) but was hanged for treason cos he falsely applied for and got a brit passport . useless twat

he was going to be topped anyway whatever but treason is a a bit juicier for the headlines


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Government no longer objecting to the death penalty seems a pretty big shift.


 
its the will of the people obvs


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

bear in mind also the short lived treachery stuff enacted during WW2- you didnt have to be a Brit to be hanged for treachery, just being in britian and being a bit shifty was enough. semantics and shit obvs, but was meant to be a catch all for spies and stuff IIRC


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Government no longer objecting to the death penalty seems a pretty big shift.


So is the lack of noticeable outcry.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Government no longer objecting to the death penalty seems a pretty big shift.


Course, it's the judges inevitably kow-towing to Brussels and deciding that anyone who was in IS should not stand trial in the States after all, but instead go to the top of the housing list where you live. Those are the real traitors.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 25, 2018)

Gallows humour aside, stopping objections on one side and having a couple of backbench Tories float treason stuff seems more than coincidence. One loud dog whistle.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Gallows humour aside, stopping objections on one side and having a couple of backbench Tories float treason stuff seems more than coincidence. One loud dog whistle.



agree - this stuff isn't going away either- there seems to a rising pressure that requires some blood public letting. worrying


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not for treason, murder. Dubious as fuck of course, but not treason. (I think?)
> 
> edit, Casement was for treason, so maybe all? Dunno.



Ireland was martial law at the time, so court martial was the process innit.made things an awful lot easier to prosecute the republicans.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

sorrry/ diversion - i find Treason & History a much more interesting subject than bloody brexit

carry on

etc


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Gallows humour aside, stopping objections on one side and having a couple of backbench Tories float treason stuff seems more than coincidence. One loud dog whistle.



Two stateless cunts who were in 'the Beatles', who are not in the UK (so the UK would have no say in their extradition regardless of their citizenship), never gonna attract papal-audience-on-Copacabana-Beach style crowds calling for it to be stopped, tbf.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So is the lack of noticeable outcry.



I suspect the ‘leak’ of Javid’s message might have been done deliberately to try and flush out vocal injections from opposition parties, so that they could be portrayed as being on the side of the bad guys. Doesn’t look like anyone has waded into that trap. A few sober objections but nobody’s making a meal of it.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I suspect the ‘leak’ of Javid’s message might have been done deliberately to try and flush out vocal injections from opposition parties, so that they could be portrayed as being on the side of the bad guys. Doesn’t look like anyone has waded into that trap. A few sober objections but nobody’s making a meal of it.


Corbyn's gonna need to avoid the BBC for the rest of time, though.


----------



## billbond (Jul 25, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> its the will of the people obvs



It most certainly is


----------



## billbond (Jul 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Undemocratic eh? Well I hope for their sakes Vote Leave haven't just been caught cheating in any referendums...



You mean like the remain did as well
well said Mr Bannerman


----------



## 8115 (Jul 25, 2018)

Can anybody explain exactly why hedge funds would benefit from a no deal Brexit? I've seen it written and it sounds like a very plausible explanation for the current state of affairs but I just wondered exactly why.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 25, 2018)

I'll add the usual, "I'm not an expert..." disclaimer, but it's based on gambling on what happens next - betting on the direction that the pound will go for example. 

(Farage is accused of doing that - though not all that seriously - on referendum night by coming out and saying that Remain had won, which sent the pound soaring, when it's been said that the polling that his side commissioned showed that Leave should win....) 

More credibly, Crispin Odey, one of the major funders of the Leave side, was said to have made "hundreds of millions of pounds" on the referendum. 

Crispin Odey 

And continues to bet against the UK economy, reportedly: 

Brexit-backing fund manager bets against UK assets 

There's also a suspicion that the EU is going to be more proactive on tax avoidance and possibly other financial regulation in the near future. Of course, if there's an election and a Corbyn government nationalises the City...


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2018)

8115 said:


> Can anybody explain exactly why hedge funds would benefit from a no deal Brexit? I've seen it written and it sounds like a very plausible explanation for the current state of affairs but I just wondered exactly why.


Hedge funds offer to invest your money so that it will grow whichever way a given event pans out. So Brexit means customers.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 25, 2018)

8115 said:


> Can anybody explain exactly why hedge funds would benefit from a no deal Brexit? I've seen it written and it sounds like a very plausible explanation for the current state of affairs but I just wondered exactly why.



take a stance to exploit market moves should a hard brexit ensue- eg shorting securities where their income flow is EU/UK based rather than US based. Ditto leveraging on currencies ( and by default their rates). many different ways to do this.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 25, 2018)

> There's also a suspicion that the EU is going to be more proactive on tax avoidance and possibly other financial regulation in the near future. Of course, if there's an election and a Corbyn government nationalises the City...



There's this coming into effect for EU members in 2019. Probably one Rees Mogg and co will be keen on not implementing.

The Anti Tax Avoidance Directive  - Taxation and Customs Union - European Commission


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 25, 2018)




----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 26, 2018)

Hedge funders etc - Some short term speculative gains to be made, but longer term it’s definitely about avoiding regulation/oversight, plus a smaller country is easier to buy than a multi-nation organisation. Most of the brexit funders seem to be on the fringes of the finance industry, opaque offshore bastards, egoists.


----------



## krtek a houby (Jul 26, 2018)

billbond said:


> You mean like the remain did as well
> well said Mr Bannerman


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 26, 2018)

Cool headed assessment of how difficult stockpiling food would be in the event of a crash out. 

Stockpile food in the event of a no-deal Brexit? Dream on | James Ball

Basically - there is no way the UKs food supply chain will be able to cope and government stuff about ensuring "adequate food" are just part of a bluff. In reality there is no way a government will allow this sort of chaos to happen and no deal will not happen. Im sure the EU know this is as well. 

I think some sort of extension to the A50 process is inevitable - and it will probably cost May her job.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 26, 2018)

/


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 26, 2018)

"You cannot see Barnier's mouth move when Raab speaks. Impressive." 

Ho ho. From not-very-popular centrist legal person.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 26, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> /


Saw it.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 26, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Saw it.


 
As did most of I5 probably


----------



## billbond (Jul 26, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> Hedge funders etc - Some short term speculative gains to be made, but longer term it’s definitely about avoiding regulation/oversight, plus a smaller country is easier to buy than a multi-nation organisation. Most of the brexit funders seem to be on the fringes of the finance industry, opaque offshore bastards, egoists.



 Yep Must be hard battling against soroses ill gotten billions backing remain


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

Back in the real world...



Question...if shortages (of any magnitude) happen...who will they effect?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

billbond said:


> Yep Must be hard battling against soroses ill gotten billions backing remain


The dirty money went to brexit though, yeah?  The untraced stuff...'dark money'.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 26, 2018)

"substances of human origin"


----------



## J Ed (Jul 26, 2018)

Raheem said:


> "substances of human origin"



When I see that phrase I cannot help but think of shit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

Raheem said:


> "substances of human origin"


It's bollocks.  They don't have the type of storage facilities required.  It has to be population size, yeah?

They're basically announcing a massive budget overspend and giving the money to private companies in the soon-to-be-defined sector.

(did someone mention hedge funds earlier?)


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 26, 2018)

Some targetted Leave ads have been released by Facebook (with the campaigners' permission I gather as they say one group Veterans for Brexit refused to allow theirs to be seen): 

Targeted pro-Brexit Facebook ads revealed 

It's a bit off topic here. Sorry. . . Interesting. I use an adblocker so I don't know if I'd have seen these (I don't use Facebook any more but I did at the time of the referendum) even if I'd have been targetted. I have a vague recollection of the "polar bears" one being shared as a WTF jokey thing maybe. . . 

The cuppa one...?!?! 

The football one, well, that's quite well known. Interesting how few of them are explicitly branded - perhaps that is made clear when you click the button and presumably go to a Leave website or Facebook page? 

I haven't seen any Remain ones. . . 

Shared for interest really.


----------



## andysays (Jul 26, 2018)

Brexit: Barnier rules out key UK customs proposal


> The EU's chief negotiator has ruled out allowing the UK to collect customs duties on its behalf, a key UK proposal for post-Brexit trade. Michel Barnier said the UK wanted to "take back control" of its money, law and borders - but so did the EU. The EU would not delegate "excises duty collection to a non-member", he said.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

jeez that's the Irish and now the EU refusing to sort out brexit?  ffs


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 26, 2018)

It says he "tore them up" in the report I read. How rude!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 26, 2018)

A comment on a BBC story on the negotiations:

"Here’s the best negotiating strategy:

UK: “We’re leaving. No payments, no rights, no obligations, period. But we’d like free mutual trade, if you want it. Win-win, or nothing.”

EU: “But that’s not acceptable, blah blah blah...”

Click. Beeeeeee...

EU: “Hello? Hello? Sorry, we meant ... hello?”

... beeeee ...

EU: “Oh no, we’ve blown it. Quick, call them back.”

Beep, beep..." 

And that seems quite a common belief - thanks I think to Julia Hartley Brewer, who said pretty much exactly that on a video a while ago.


----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> jeez that's the Irish and now the EU refusing to sort out brexit?  ffs



It's almost like our shower are required to sort out the thing they wanted!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

Does anyone remember a year or so ago when the tories were saying _of course_ they were doing trade negotiations they just couldn't tell anyone about them or it would weaken their position?

Probably were...just not for the UK.

Someone mentioned hedge funds?

Some people are going to get very rich if this continues...and  that _capital_ has to come from someplace.


----------



## Balbi (Jul 26, 2018)

They're utterly fucking mad, all of this is utter fucking lunacy. 

May's spent weeks fighting her own party, lost her Brexit Secretary and Foreign Secretary, over an agreement she managed to strike with her own party which was instantly dismissed by the E.U. And this is like the fifth time it's happened, where the Tories spend more time shifting their negotiating strategy and finally agreeing on something - but forgetting the E.U isn't interested in the division within the party, they're trying to negotiate the fucking thing the fucking referendum was about.

In the two years since the referendum, they've achieved almost precisely fuck all on the important issues of trade, borders etc and are still clinging desperately, like nuggets of shite to arse hair, to the hope that the UK public will blame the European Union for, er, patiently waiting for us to sort our shit out and engage in negotiations.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 26, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> A comment on a BBC story on the negotiations:
> 
> "Here’s the best negotiating strategy:
> 
> ...



utterly delusional. Haven't they noticed that no a single member of the EU27 has tried to put any pressure on Barnier to soften the EU's stance?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 26, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> utterly delusional. Haven't they noticed that no a single member of the EU27 has tried to put any pressure on Barnier to soften the EU's stance?


Well they'll soon be wondering where their Japanese cars will come from when we leave!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Well they'll soon be wondering where their Japanese cars will come from when we leave!



they'll probably cope


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 26, 2018)

There are loads of perfectly good reasons to want Brexit. 

But the Brexit that voters might quite reasonably think that they have been promised is that one: free trade, but no deeper relationship. And they've been promised that it will make everyone better off because things'll be cheaper, and there'll be loads of money to spend on public services, and there'll be less competition for work/school places/hospital beds/housing because there'll be less immigration, and we'll be cruising to prosperity on smashing new trade deals. 

And they're not going to get that Brexit. And no-one in the Tory party or the Leave campaign has got the guts to do anything more than try to blame it on a stab in the back or EU unreasonableness.


----------



## CRI (Jul 26, 2018)




----------



## billbond (Jul 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The dirty money went to brexit though, yeah?  The untraced stuff...'dark money'.



No fake news
Remain that would be
"Dark money" and soros untraced go together
still got my flyer from Cameron


----------



## agricola (Jul 27, 2018)

billbond said:


> No fake news
> Remain that would be
> "Dark money" and soros untraced go together
> still got my flyer from Cameron



I think the fact that you know their names would tend to mean that "dark money" is not involved.


----------



## billbond (Jul 27, 2018)

agricola said:


> I think the fact that you know their names would tend to mean that "dark money" is not involved.


oh i think it is 
sleep well


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

"Fake news" and "Soros" in one post. Well done.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

https://www.parliament.uk/documents...upplied-by-Facebook-to-the-DCMS-Committee.pdf

That's all that Facebook stuff if you like that sort of thing! 

Lots of allegations now being thrown about - adverts without proper imprints on, adverts from non-approved campaign bodies, adverts during the pause in campaigning after Jo Cox's murder. . .


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 27, 2018)

Thing is, and i have asked a few people....

they don't give a fuck, they want Brexit at any cost!


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

No doubt there are loads of committed Brexiters and UKIPpers. 

No doubt there are loads of floating voters too. That's why I think some of these ads are so vague: "support the steel industry", "support animal rights", "support education", "vote to be free!"... 

They didn't vote for No Deal and all that entails. 

I reckon that's the big battle now in the Tory party. The committed libertarian loons (Exclusive: Liam Fox warns Theresa May that extending Brexit talks would be a 'complete betrayal') desperately trying to get over the line so they can do their tax haven, no regulation, free trade bollocks, against the May faction who want to keep the party together but recognise that No Deal will be an economic disaster, at least immediately. 

Hence these rather apocalyptic warnings on food stockpiling and the like to voters who were told: more jobs, more money, more services, fewer people... just tick the Leave box.


----------



## Balbi (Jul 27, 2018)

Balbi said:


> They're utterly fucking mad, all of this is utter fucking lunacy.
> 
> May's spent weeks fighting her own party, lost her Brexit Secretary and Foreign Secretary, over an agreement she managed to strike with her own party which was instantly dismissed by the E.U. And this is like the fifth time it's happened, where the Tories spend more time shifting their negotiating strategy and finally agreeing on something - but forgetting the E.U isn't interested in the division within the party, they're trying to negotiate the fucking thing the fucking referendum was about.
> 
> In the two years since the referendum, they've achieved almost precisely fuck all on the important issues of trade, borders etc and are still clinging desperately, like nuggets of shite to arse hair, to the hope that the UK public will blame the European Union for, er, patiently waiting for us to sort our shit out and engage in negotiations.



And here it comes: A humiliating Brexit deal risks a descent into Weimar Britain | Timothy Garton Ash

Grasping attempt at comparing Versailles to the Brexit negotiations here folks.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 27, 2018)

they've all, specially at the guardian been using the 'seen as a stab in the back' line, knowingly and for ages.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

It's odd that he should allow that to go out with the headline about Weimar - in fact it sounds like he wrote it - and then early in the article say, "of course, I'm completely exagerrating when I say it's analogous..."!?!?!?!?!?!

There is plenty of genuine betrayal stuff going round: 

Theresa May presiding over ‘cloak and dagger’ plot by ‘establishment elite’ to sink Brexit, ex-minister claims.. as PM demands rebels’ backing 

 
They have to. They can't deliver what they promised and someone has to be to blame, even if it's only for the sake of Farage's future career on Fox News. . .


----------



## mod (Jul 27, 2018)

I reckon we are going to have a second referendum with 60% or more voting to remain. And all this will go down as one of the most costly and embarrassing periods in our history. 

The far right and extreme Brexiteers wont take it well and i suspect we are going to have years or civil unrest instigated by them. Terrorism and agitation.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 27, 2018)

Duplicate post


----------



## Raheem (Jul 27, 2018)

mod said:


> The far right and extreme Brexiteers wont take it well and i suspect we are going to have years or civil unrest instigated by them. Terrorism and agitation.


Might depend on what's covered by civil unrest, but I think a lot of them are quite keen on their armchairs.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

I think a general election as a sort of proxy referendum on a deal that can't get through Parliament is more likely. I can't see an actual second referendum happening. 

I can see loads of other scenarios too!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 27, 2018)

Weimar comparisons are hyperbolic wank . There is no Luxemburg or liebknecht waiting on the sidelines in this farce - amidst the handwringing and oh Noeing from  the commentators , this is still a game being played by those who already hold the reins of control 

/


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

As argued in this economist's blog. . . 

mainly macro: Brexit Endgame: second stage (which is unlikely to end with no deal)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 27, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> they don't give a fuck, they want Brexit at any cost!



I bet they don't really. What they want is brexit at no cost.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jul 27, 2018)

If slightly over half the country voted out, and slightly under voted in, then you’d have thought some kind of soft brexit half-in, half-out compromise would actually be the most representative outcome. How come it seems to please pretty much nobody?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 27, 2018)

if we were following the Weimar model, then the next step would be to kill off all livestock to stop them  eating our precious stockpiles of hoarded foodstuffs


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

Do we get a Berlin Cabaret phase of decadence too? 

Asking for a friend.


----------



## billbond (Jul 27, 2018)

... beeee[/QUOTE]


Balbi said:


> And here it comes: A humiliating Brexit deal risks a descent into Weimar Britain | Timothy Garton Ash
> 
> Grasping attempt at comparing Versailles to the Brexit negotiations here folks.



"The Guardian" ha ha
Must be true then 
shit rag full of lies and made up shit


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 27, 2018)

Soros funds it too.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 27, 2018)

billbond said:


> "The Guardian" ha ha
> Must be true then
> shit rag full of lies and made up shit


How's the weight loss going?


----------



## billbond (Jul 27, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Soros funds it too.



Would not surprise me in the least
or maybe the Russians or Trump


----------



## billbond (Jul 27, 2018)

How's the weight loss going? 

With this weather not going  bad actually
Thanks for asking
(warning for anybody do not do the Atkins one)


----------



## andysays (Jul 27, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Do we get a Berlin Cabaret phase of decadence too?
> 
> Asking for a friend.



With Theresa May playing Sally Bowles...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 27, 2018)

billbond said:


> How's the weight loss going?
> 
> With this weather not going  bad actually
> Thanks for asking
> (warning for anybody do not do the Atkins one)



How are you managing to fail to quote properly ?


----------



## billbond (Jul 27, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> How are you managing to fail to quote properly ?


its a gift ha
Yes my mistake


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 27, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> As argued in this economist's blog. . .
> 
> mainly macro: Brexit Endgame: second stage (which is unlikely to end with no deal)


Lovely, friendly economists.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 27, 2018)

Balbi said:


> And here it comes: A humiliating Brexit deal risks a descent into Weimar Britain | Timothy Garton Ash
> 
> Grasping attempt at comparing Versailles to the Brexit negotiations here folks.


Do you have any idea about Garton Ash's politics? He's utterly committed to the EU and liberalism, the suggestion that he's a "brexiteer" is ludicrous.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> With Theresa May playing Sally Bowles...




Tomorrow belongs to Mogg


----------



## isvicthere? (Jul 27, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I bet they don't really. What they want is brexit at no cost.



Well, that WAS what the leave campaign promised them.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 27, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> Well, that WAS what the leave campaign promised them.


Indeed

"Outside the EU we could have prosperity on a level that we can't even imagine now"


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 27, 2018)

mod said:


> I reckon we are going to have a second referendum with 60% or more voting to remain. And all this will go down as one of the most costly and embarrassing periods in our history.
> 
> The far right and extreme Brexiteers wont take it well and i suspect we are going to have years or civil unrest instigated by them. Terrorism and agitation.



If we have another referendum, which we might, the result will be virtually the same. Perhaps with a slight increase in the Leave vote, say from 52% to 53 or 54%. Any idea that Remain would get a huge swing is just magical thinking. Large numbers of people have not changed their mind on the issue and some remain voters will see it as an attempt to reverse a democratic decision.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 27, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> If slightly over half the country voted out, and slightly under voted in, then you’d have thought some kind of soft brexit half-in, half-out compromise would actually be the most representative outcome. How come it seems to please pretty much nobody?



Probably would please most actual people but you can't get a majority for it in the commons.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> If we have another referendum, which we might, the result will be virtually the same. Perhaps with a slight increase in the Leave vote, say from 52% to 53 or 54%. Any idea that Remain would get a huge swing is just magical thinking. Large numbers of people have not changed their mind on the issue and some remain voters will see it as an attempt to reverse a democratic decision.


I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.



Same here - I voted remain not out of love for the EU, but because of concern about how it would pan out on a geo-strategic level - however now I'd vote to leave. I still have the same concerns, but nothing about how the EU has behaved, and how other EU members behave as members of NATO, has persuaded me that I want to be in their club.

I think one of the IFS studies reckoned that with a bad Brexit we'd end up being 9% poorer than we'd otherwise be in 2030 - well, when I got divorced I was a damn sight more than 9% poorer than I would have been had I stayed married for another 10 years, and I regard every lost penny as being a bargain at 10 times the price.

I'm aware of the dangers of Brexit, big fat political and strategic dangers, not piss arse economics - but I'm also aware of the dangers of remaining in the EU given the directions it's moving in, and of doing anything that undermines the already fragile (and under attack) commitment to democracy in the UK.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.


How are they fucks?. Bear in mind they've had to deal with people who've taken years to come to a position which would never actually work.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> How are they fucks?. Bear in mind they've had to deal with people who've taken years to come to a position which would never actually work.


See the last 316 pages


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.


Easy thing for a rich person to say. Losing 'precious GDP points' translates into unemployment and the poor being squeezed even more, especially as we currently have a tory govt.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Easy thing for a rich person to say. Losing 'precious GDP points' translates into unemployment and the poor being squeezed even more, especially as we currently have a tory govt.


GDP was half in real terms in the 1970s than it is now.  Are the poor now twice as well off as they were in the the 1970s?  Or is it that GDP is a lousy way of measuring wellbeing for a country?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> GDP was half in real terms in the 1970s.  Are the poor now twice as well off as they were in the the 1970s?  Or is it that GDP is a lousy way of measuring wellbeing for a country?


yeah, the rich were far less rich back then. If this country 'loses a few precious gdp points' under this current economic system, a system that is no better exemplified than by the people currently negotiating brexit, what does that actually mean? Does it mean the rich get a little less rich while the rest carry on the same? No. And you must know that.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> yeah, the rich were far less rich back then. If this country 'loses a few precious gdp points' under this current economic system, a system that is no better exemplified than by the people currently negotiating brexit, what does that actually mean? Does it mean the rich get a little less rich while the rest carry on the same? No. And you must know that.


It shows that the well-being of the nation is not dependent on maximising GDP.  The rest is strategy for removing the wrong people from power.  And the current strategy of Brexit is doing a better job of exploding the Tories than the previous strategy ever was.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It shows that the well-being of the nation is not dependent on maximising GDP.  The rest is strategy for removing the wrong people from power.  And the current strategy of Brexit is doing a better job of exploding the Tories than the previous strategy ever was.


Like fuck it is. Who's still in power? What kinds of cunty fucking policies are they continuing to implement? Who continues to get even richer? Who continues to be ever more fucked?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like fuck it is. Who's still in power?


A minority government after the last Tory government lost power post-Brexit.



> What kinds of cunty fucking policies are they continuing to implement? Who continues to get even richer?


Fuck all really because they have so little bandwidth with no majority and Brexit to focus on.



> Who continues to be ever more fucked?


As compared with the pre-Brexit Tory majority, you mean?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> As compared with the pre-Brexit Tory majority, you mean?


Two years. A lot can happen in two years. In these last two years the tories have continued in power and continue with their vicious, murderous cuts. To somehow claim  victory for the brexit vote when we are still being fucked is bizarre. Who knows what would have happened with a narrow remain vote? Not like Cameron was secure in his position. We don't know. What we do know is that with a narrow leave vote the tories renewed themselves and clung to power.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Fuck all really because they have so little bandwidth with no majority and Brexit to focus on.


This is bullshit. The continuing cuts to councils are real. The continuing cuts to the NHS are real. The continuing widening of the gap between rich and poor is real.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like fuck it is. Who's still in power? What kinds of cunty fucking policies are they continuing to implement? Who continues to get even richer? Who continues to be ever more fucked?


I want my lolly right now mum.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is bullshit. The continuing cuts to councils are real. The continuing cuts to the NHS are real. The continuing widening of the gap between rich and poor is real.


Friday night LBJ? Literally using opposition to inequality to attack you. The private school twat. _Just happened.

_
Just ended up editing that famous mag.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 28, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.



Many of the people who voted leave the first time and would be running policy post-Brexit are even worse fucks and many more people are seeing that. You are swimming against the tide. Many more people will switch the other way I believe. To blame the EU for what has happened over the past two years in the negotiations is myopic in the extreme.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 28, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Many of the people who voted leave the first time and would be running policy post-Brexit are even worse fucks and many more people are seeing that. You are swimming against the tide. Many more people will switch the other way I believe. To blame the EU for what has happened over the past two years in the negotiations is myopic in the extreme.


Name them.

Evidence this tide-turning swimming shit metaphor.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Name them.
> 
> Evidence this tide-turning swimming shit metaphor.



Yawn...I'm going to bed.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 28, 2018)

kabbes said:


> GDP was half in real terms in the 1970s than it is now.  Are the poor now twice as well off as they were in the the 1970s?  Or is it that GDP is a lousy way of measuring wellbeing for a country?


I wouldn't be at all surprised if both of those things are true. But I'm pretty sure you will have done thorough research, so perhaps you could share it with us.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I wouldn't be at all surprised if both of those things are true. But I'm pretty sure you will have done thorough research, so perhaps you could share it with us.


It's hardly a controversial point, just do a quick search on GDP as a measure of well-being for hundreds of articles.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> It's hardly a controversial point, just do a quick search on GDP as a measure of well-being for hundreds of articles.


No, the second part is not all that controversial, I was more interested in the first.

The premise is silly in any case. Few people are specifically worried about a drop in gdp. They are worried about continued rises in living costs, decreases in wages, increased unemployment and sustained reductions in public spending, inter alia.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No, the second part is not all that controversial, I was more interested in the first.
> 
> The premise is silly in any case. Few people are specifically worried about a drop in gdp. They are worried about continued rises in living costs, decreases in wages, increased unemployment and sustained reductions in public spending, inter alia.


Fair enough; there's definitely studies showing that more people on low incomes reported greater happiness and security in the 1970s; less housing stress etc. 
As for those latter issues, they've all been worsening over decades in large part thanks to the neoliberal policies pursued while we were part of the EU so while the disruption of transition might well make contribute to further declines its not like those policies wouldn't have been pursued in any case and IMO we have more chance of doing something to reverse them outside the EU.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 28, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No, the second part is not all that controversial, I was more interested in the first.


What exactly is it you are questioning?  That GDP is twice as high in real terms now as in the 70s?  I’ve posted the evidence on that before — it’s not hard to find, given that it’s a statistic published by the government itself.



> The premise is silly in any case. Few people are specifically worried about a drop in gdp. They are worried about continued rises in living costs, decreases in wages, increased unemployment and sustained reductions in public spending, inter alia.


The percentage drop in GDP is the figure always quoted as what we should be worried about.  And existing drops in wages over time (look up statistics for real wage growth since the 70s whilst you’re at it) are exactly why so many people voted for Brexit in the first place.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 28, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Same here - I voted remain not out of love for the EU, but because of concern about how it would pan out on a geo-strategic level - however now I'd vote to leave. I still have the same concerns, but nothing about how the EU has behaved, and how other EU members behave as members of NATO, has persuaded me that I want to be in their club.
> 
> I think one of the IFS studies reckoned that with a bad Brexit we'd end up being 9% poorer than we'd otherwise be in 2030 - well, when I got divorced I was a damn sight more than 9% poorer than I would have been had I stayed married for another 10 years, and I regard every lost penny as being a bargain at 10 times the price.
> 
> I'm aware of the dangers of Brexit, big fat political and strategic dangers, not piss arse economics - but I'm also aware of the dangers of remaining in the EU given the directions it's moving in, and of doing anything that undermines the already fragile (and under attack) commitment to democracy in the UK.



Not relevant but pretty much the same reasons I support Scottish independence. Just swap EU for the British state. One has has a much more bloodthirsty history, though.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

"Socialists" for economics! Save our GDP! 


littlebabyjesus said:


> This is bullshit. The continuing cuts to councils are real. The continuing cuts to the NHS are real. The continuing widening of the gap between rich and poor is real.





Raheem said:


> The premise is silly in any case. Few people are specifically worried about a drop in gdp. They are worried about continued rises in living costs, decreases in wages, increased unemployment and sustained reductions in public spending, inter alia.


Thank goodness those cuts, the attacks on the welfare state, the rise in VAT didn't occur when the UK was part of the EU. Just think where we would be then!


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 28, 2018)

Brexit recriminations spilling over into candidate selection:

Vauxhall Labour prepares to deselect Kate Hoey | LabourList


----------



## teqniq (Jul 28, 2018)

And Frank Field.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2018)

Could someone please summarise Hoey's and Field's motivations for supporting Brexit ?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is bullshit. The continuing cuts to councils are real. The continuing cuts to the NHS are real. The continuing widening of the gap between rich and poor is real.



These are government policies though, not immutable economic facts. Don't forget that even at its current dire level of funding the NHS would be running a lot smoother without the ideology-driven privatisations of the last decade.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 28, 2018)

teqniq said:


> And Frank Field.


good


----------



## DownwardDog (Jul 28, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I would switch from remain to leave because the EU are fucks and I don’t want to be part of their club on principle, even if it does cost us precious GDP points.



They are negotiating in the interests of and at the direction of the 27 countries who will be staying. They don't owe the UK any favours or mercy.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> These are government policies though, not immutable economic facts. Don't forget that even at its current dire level of funding the NHS would be running a lot smoother without the ideology-driven privatisations of the last decade.


Do you think that will get better or worse with brexit?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 28, 2018)

DownwardDog said:


> They are negotiating in the interests of and at the direction of the 27 countries who will be staying. They don't owe the UK any favours or mercy.


Doesn’t explain the rest of the rightward march of politics across Europe, though.

Also, the EU’s attitude towards a number of Brexit items goes way beyond enlightened self-interest and deep into the uncomfortably ideological.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Do you think that will get better or worse with brexit?



I think it was going to get worse either way.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DownwardDog said:


> They are negotiating in the interests of and at the direction of the 27 countries who will be staying. They don't owe the UK any favours or mercy.



Favours and mercy one thing, basic respect quite another. I understand the EU's frustration with the UK's political class (so far removed from the unimpeachable standards of politicians in the rest of Europe ) but there are 70-odd million people in this country that deserve better than to be put through the wringer just in order to teach a handful of incompetent tory buffoons a lesson.

Whatever deal we get it will be the result of a small group of people with one set of agendas quibbling with another small group of people with a different set of agendas. There is nothing at all to indicate that any of the agendas involved relate in any way to the welfare of the general public, in the UK or elsewhere in Europe. That is a problem regardless of whatever the actual deal is.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Favours and mercy one thing, basic respect quite another. I understand the EU's frustration with the UK's political class (so far removed from the unimpeachable standards of politicians in the rest of Europe ) but there are 70-odd million people in this country that deserve better than to be put through the wringer just in order to teach a handful of incompetent tory buffoons a lesson.



Not to mention the THREE MILLION non-UK EU citizens who are making their lives in the UK.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

Strikes me they're negotiating in the interests of the EU as an institution (punishment for want-aways etc) rather than those of 27 member states, many of whom probably want to keep fairly matey and trading with us.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> Strikes me they're negotiating in the interests of the EU as an institution (punishment for want-aways etc) rather than those of 27 member states, many of whom probably want to keep fairly matey and trading with us.


And which states does the UK have as mates in the EU?

And what will be traded?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> Strikes me they're negotiating in the interests of the EU as an institution (punishment for want-aways etc) rather than those of 27 member states, many of whom probably want to keep fairly matey and trading with us.



Everything they do is for the EU as an institution rather than the people in it. Anything they do that might actually benefit people is only a bribe. Same as politics at any scale, everyone's first priority is to keep themselves on the gravy train and everything else follows from that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And what will be traded?



Someone's got to drink all that Polish beer.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Someone's got to drink all that Polish beer.


No...what will the UK trade to have equity to conduct business?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No...what will the UK trade to have equity to conduct business?



There's this new thing called 'money'.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No...what will the UK trade to have equity to conduct business?


HM Revenue & Customs uktradeinfo - Commodities

ETA and particularly where we have a balance of trade deficit they'll be keen to keep selling to us


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> There's this new thing called 'money'.


Are you being deliberately disingenuous?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Are you being deliberately disingenuous?



Are you? You are aware that even while we're still in the EU we have to trade stuff with other people? We don't just get piles of free stuff?


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

I wonder how long all of this will go on.

My current feeling: Forever, in my lifetime at least.

There’ll be an outcome sure. A deal or no deal.

But whatever happens will divide the nation. Too soft, too hard, or “shouldn’t have happened”. And we’ll be picking through the detail for years and years and years.

This is the shit show train that departed... and will never arrive. Welcome aboard (The buffet has run out of drinks).


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> HM Revenue & Customs uktradeinfo - Commodities
> 
> ETA and particularly where we have a balance of trade deficit they'll be keen to keep selling to us


Are we back at BMW taking over negotiations now?.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> Strikes me they're negotiating in the interests of the EU as an institution (punishment for want-aways etc) rather than those of 27 member states, many of whom probably want to keep fairly matey and trading with us.


Not really. The 27 member states have a shared concern in not having their social and environmental chapters undermined through letting in cheap goods from the rest of the world via a leaky UK soft border. Likewise, given the UK is already being taken to court for not collecting customs duties, why should the EU have faith that it would diligently collect and pass on duties for EU-bound goods passing its borders?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> HM Revenue & Customs uktradeinfo - Commodities
> 
> ETA and particularly where we have a balance of trade deficit they'll be keen to keep selling to us


OK let's start with that Jim...and I should point out that that's my employer you're quoting there...(and I've had this conversation before in this thread)...

Precious metals, jewels and cars are not UK products...the UK is a conduit for them primarily because of the attractiveness of its connections and pre-established (EU) trading contracts around the world.  

What does the UK create/produce/generate independently that can be used to strengthen the pound and make the currency trade-able and attractive in order to sustain the internal economy and ensure a reasonable standard of living for the citizens?

A balance of trade deficit means you get fucked over, you don't improve your situation, you're not at the big table you just feed off the scraps.

What does the UK have to trade that originates in the UK so that the UK has control over supply/price and can demand returned equity?  And it has to be on an international scale so as to keep an economy buoyant and adaptable, protected against bubbles/depressions/unknowns?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> *These are government policies though, not immutable economic facts.* Don't forget that even at its current dire level of funding the NHS would be running a lot smoother without the ideology-driven privatisations of the last decade.


Yes, of course. And they are continuing, more than two years after the brexit vote. Certain aspects of the basketcase 'austerity' policies are being softened a little, but I'd argue that that's not really anything to do with brexit. Thatcher had to abandon some of her loony monetarist policies too when it became clear that they didn't work. Other aspects of it are still working their way through onto the streets - literally onto the streets in the case of the explosion of homelessness over the last couple of years. 

I have yet to see any explanation, with workings, of how brexit helps any of this shit, of how it does anything other than just make everything even worse.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> OK let's start with that Jim...and I should point out that that's my employer you're quoting there...(and I've had this conversation before in this thread)...
> 
> Precious metals, jewels and cars are not UK products...the UK is a conduit for them primarily because of the attractiveness of its connections and pre-established (EU) trading contracts around the world.
> 
> ...


Those issues exist as we stand, long term turn against EDIT manufacturing and towards financial services etc. While we remain in the EU that will be propped up and continue to hollow out any real economy.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 28, 2018)

mod said:


> I reckon we are going to have a second referendum with 60% or more voting to remain. And all this will go down as one of the most costly and embarrassing periods in our history..


Doesn't make the top 50 things Britannia  has good reason to be embarrassed about.


littlebabyjesus said:


> Easy thing for a rich person to say. Losing 'precious GDP points' translates into unemployment and the poor being squeezed even more, especially as we currently have a tory govt.


Let them eat high return investment portfolios


redsquirrel said:


> "Socialists" for economics! Save our GDP!


Trade union/Labour movement right there.

Whats the name of that marxist tradition that actively seeks/hopes the economy will completely collapse so as to usher in the revolution? Its a shit plan that, whatever its called.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have yet to see any explanation, with workings, of how brexit helps any of this shit, of how it does anything other than just make everything even worse.



At the risk of sounding like a flimsy “oh yeah what he said”

Yes.

The shit show is all consuming. Even if the current government wanted to sort out housing, healthcare... they’re a bit busy right now. And it would be the same under Labour (or any other party).

We’ve talked ourselves - no matter what leaning - into a box.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I have yet to see any explanation, with workings, of how brexit helps any of this shit, of how it does anything other than just make everything even worse.



Without access to a parallel universe where the vote was 52-48 the other way I fear quantitative analysis of this question will remain elusive. But remember, in that parallel universe Cameron is still the PM and he still has a majority in parliament. Corbyn has no electoral gains to wave under the noses of his detractors, and has quite possibly already been replaced by a less charismatic verson of Ed fucking Miliband. Boris Johnson, having been exposed to rather less scrutiny than he has in our universe, still has enough of a veneer of legitimacy to be positioning himself to stand for the tory leadership and a likely 2020 general election victory.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 28, 2018)

JimW said:


> Those issues exist as we stand, long term turn against EDIT manufacturing and towards financial services etc. While we remain in the EU that will be propped up and continue to hollow out any real economy.


I'm asking what the UK will bring to the table after brexit.

It's a perfectly sane, reasonable and _required_ question to ask.

As a general comment, not towards you, the talk on this thread has been garbage.   Fantasy economics, stoner solutions, claimed moral superiority.   Absolute garbage.  Just like brexit itself.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm asking what the UK will bring to the table after brexit.
> 
> It's a perfectly sane, reasonable and _required_ question to ask.



It's also perfectly sane and reasonable to point out that the structure of our economy has been a problem since long before brexit.

If you think addressing the trade deficit is a priority then you should be over the moon, as brexit will force the government to address it as a matter of urgency rather than blindly allow finance and services to grow at the expense of everything else.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Without access to a parallel universe where the vote was 52-48 the other way I fear quantitative analysis of this question will remain elusive. But remember, in that parallel universe Cameron is still the PM and he still has a majority in parliament. Corbyn has no electoral gains to wave under the noses of his detractors, and has quite possibly already been replaced by a less charismatic verson of Ed fucking Miliband. Boris Johnson, having been explosed to rather less scrutiny than he has in our universe, still has enough of a veneer of legitimacy to be positioning himself to stand for the tory leadership and a likely 2020 general election victory.



You’ve painted the worst outcome.

Tip of the hat though on your analysis... that could have indeed happened.

Would it have been worth it, to avoid this shit show?

Open question.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm asking what the UK will bring to the table after brexit.
> 
> It's a perfectly sane, reasonable and _required_ question to ask.
> 
> As a general comment, not towards you, the talk on this thread has been garbage.   Fantasy economics, stoner solutions, claimed moral superiority.   Absolute garbage.  Just like brexit itself.


And I'm saying pretty much the same as it does now with problems arising from that factor you point out, a fair amount of it as currently set up is predicated on our access to the EU market. But while there'll be a hit i think the general inertia of things means it won't be as severe as worst case scenarios - city will remain the bloated heart of a largely service economy etc.
It's not fantasy economics, it's prioritising things other than headline GDP figures and seeing this as an opportunity to turn away from the sort of finance capitalism that will only get more deeply embedded if we stay in the EU.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Trade union/Labour movement right there.


Yes, exactly _Labour._ After all socialism is what Labour does isn't it? Just best ignore that troublesome beast labour.


ska invita said:


> Whats the name of that marxist tradition that actively seeks/hopes the economy will completely collapse so as to usher in the revolution? Its a shit plan that, whatever its called.


Who has argued for any such thing. Christ you used to be better than this.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> You’ve painted the worst outcome.
> 
> Tip of the hat though on your analysis... that could have indeed happened.
> 
> ...



I haven't painted the worst outcome at all, only what seems most likely to me. But in general it's not that helpful to spend too much time thinking about the world we don't have and whether we would go there if we could. That world doesn't exist, only this one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 28, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Without access to a parallel universe where the vote was 52-48 the other way I fear quantitative analysis of this question will remain elusive. But remember, in that parallel universe Cameron is still the PM and he still has a majority in parliament. Corbyn has no electoral gains to wave under the noses of his detractors, and has quite possibly already been replaced by a less charismatic verson of Ed fucking Miliband. Boris Johnson, having been explosed to rather less scrutiny than he has in our universe, still has enough of a veneer of legitimacy to be positioning himself to stand for the tory leadership and a likely 2020 general election victory.


A narrow remain vote would have left Cameron in power with a majority, yes, but the tories still leaking votes to UKIP, still in all kinds of crises. Would he have clung to power? Probably - that's what tories do - while lurching from one disaster to the next. Would Corbyn have survived in such a situation? He was elected on a massive landslide, remember, and it would not have been easy to get rid of him. The tories might still have been in a situation of perpetual crisis and meltdown over Europe, leaving the real possibility of a Corbyn-led govt in 2020. 

You're right that we can't know, but the idea that what we can know - ie what has happened over the last two years - is in any way a positive thing is, imo, bonkers wishful thinking.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Y
> 
> Who has argued for any such thing. Christ you used to be better than this.


You misrepresented what I said, though, tbf. Within the current system, without any kind of plan to change it, the idea that we shouldn't worry about GDP going down is crazy - recession, which is what we're talking about, hits the poor first and deepest. It's schoolboy politics to pretend otherwise.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who has argued for any such thing. Christ you used to be better than this.



It’s been done on here before (very quickly shouted down). One or two posters argued that the banking collapse was all win.

Most - if I remember the threads, ten years now - knew that it was a horror show, no big win.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s been done on here before (very quickly shouted down). One or two posters argued that the banking collapse was all win.


Bullshit. Evidence.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Bullshit. Evidence.



The urban 75 thread on the 2008 banking collapse is here. Inside this very forum. The editor hasn’t deleted opinions.

(Find the the thread yourself. We all posted on it. Not my job to prove that we did.)


----------



## Poi E (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> But whatever happens will divide the nation.



The UK is already divided many ways. Brexit is not only the cause of division but also a symptom.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You misrepresented what I said, though, tbf. Within the current system, without any kind of plan to change it, the idea that we shouldn't worry about GDP going down is crazy - recession, which is what we're talking about, hits the poor first and deepest. It's schoolboy politics to pretend otherwise.


Neither I, BA or kabbes misrepresented anything. You're asserting that GDP is a measure or prosperity that "economic growth" is good. Nevermind that inequality has grown as GDP has increased, that the welfare state has been dismantled, that anti-strike legislation has been passed in the name of growth.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> Not my job to prove that we did.


If you're going to make such claims it is. There are no, and haven't been any (barring perhaps the odd troll or two) proponents of immiseration on U75.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Neither I, BA or kabbes misrepresented anything. You're asserting that GDP is a measure or prosperity that "economic growth" is good. Nevermind that inequality has grown as GDP has increased, that the welfare state has been dismantled, that anti-strike legislation has been passed in the name of growth.


No I'm not asserting that. I responded to a point about not worrying about losing a few points of GDP due to brexit. That was not me asserting that GDP as a measure of prosperity is good. It was me pointing out that what is being not worried about here is recession, and recessions hit the poor first and hardest. 

You have a plan for a socialist future in which a smaller pot is divided far more equitably? I'm all ears. But for the current discussion, you need to link that to a Tory-led brexit - you know, the thing that's actually happening right now.


----------



## JimW (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No I'm not asserting that. I responded to a point about not worrying about losing a few points of GDP due to brexit. That was not me asserting that GDP as a measure of prosperity is good. It was me pointing out that what is being not worried about here is recession, and recessions hit the poor first and hardest.
> 
> You have a plan for a socialist future in which a smaller pot is divided far more equitably? I'm all ears. But for the current discussion, you need to link that to a Tory-led brexit - you know, the thing that's actually happening right now.


C'mon, LBJ, even some mildly reformist labour government would face capital flight and all the rest of the tricks but surely you'd not give that as a reason never to try to change anything? Same with the EU to my mind.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The UK is already divided many ways. Brexit is not only the cause of division but also a symptom.



It’s certainly a symptom of something. Maybe it’s complicated - not just the disentangling - because there’s many different reasonings.

I voted remain. When I talk to people who voted leave... there is no consistent answer. It’s a conversation about understanding not point scoring.

I hear people who have genuine views, and they always different. I can barely remember one if any I’d chuck under the tedious “you’re all racists”

I’m waffling now. 




redsquirrel said:


> If you're going to make such claims it is. There are no, and haven't been any (barring perhaps the odd troll or two) proponents of immiseration on U75.



There ARE threads about the 2008 collapse.

Read them

(fair to say this is a tangent... ignore)


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> There ARE threads about the 2008 collapse.
> 
> Read them!


You made the claim you provide evidence of it.

You don't seem to understand that an attack on the ideology of economics is not the same as arguing in favour of immiseration*. Despite the fact that I previously outlined the ideology that you were implicitly accepting was what was used to justify the increase in inequality that has occurred over the lat 40 years.



littlebabyjesus said:


> You have a plan for a socialist future in which a smaller pot is divided far more equitably? I'm all ears. But for the current discussion, you need to link that to a Tory-led brexit - you know, the thing that's actually happening right now.


The assertion that there must be a smaller pot is (yet again) an acceptance of GDP being related to prosperity. You are arguing that a recession (i.e. a decrease in GDP) is related to prosperity, so by definition defending the ideology of economics. As for the above point what JimW said. You used to claim to be a socialist, so are you giving up on that now? Wet liberalism is all that is possible so we all better climb into that boat?

EDIT: * I should have said "what is commonly described as immiseration".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But for the current discussion, you need to link that to a Tory-led brexit - you know, the thing that's actually happening right now.



...not actually happening though is it?


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...not actually happening though is it?



A Tory led Brexit isn’t happening?

Say that again, and repeat each word slowly.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

Although to be fair, the current results of the negotiation could have been dreamt up over London and foyr pints in the Albert.

We’d pat outselves, six stallas - yeah this would work. And then stagger home. It’s Johnson style win!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 28, 2018)

GDP is a measure of nothing except GDP- this is pretty mainsream thought now both indside and outside the trade


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> A Tory led Brexit isn’t happening?
> 
> Say that again, and repeat each word slowly.



Well it's not, is it?


----------



## CRI (Jul 28, 2018)

Good old Steve, coming over to lend a hand.  

Ex-Trump strategist Bannon targets Britain in anti-EU campaign


> Bannon, a former chairman of the right-wing Breitbart.com website and an architect of Trump’s 2016 election win, has launched a project to coordinate and bolster the anti-EU vote across the European Union.
> 
> He held a series of meetings in London this month after launching a Brussels-based political organization he says is intended to undermine, and ultimately paralyse, the EU.





> Bannon said he had been in direct contact with Johnson and two other potential challengers to May: Michael Gove, who is still a member of May’s cabinet, and Jacob Rees-Mogg, a leader of an anti-EU Conservative Party faction.
> 
> “Boris Johnson is one of the most important persons on the world stage today,” Bannon said. He described Johnson as “his own guy” and said he had “texted a lot” with him and spoken by phone with him during this month’s London trip.
> 
> Bannon said he had been in contact some time ago with Gove and had also been in touch with Rees-Mogg. The three represented a “deep talent bench” of potential anti-EU leaders for the Conservative Party, Bannon said.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well it's not, is it?



Go word by word.

Is this Tory led?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> Go word by word.
> 
> Is this Tory led?



Is what Tory led? 

Why don't you think about what you're saying before you try and fail to be amusing?


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is what Tory led?
> 
> Why don't you think about what you're saying before you try and fail to be amusing?



This is a thread about Brexit.

I’m not not trying to be amusing, just give context.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> A Tory led Brexit isn’t happening?
> 
> Say that again, and repeat each word slowly.


Tories - check, Leave - check, Remain - check, Labour - check.

capital, labour, the working class - cue tumbleweeds and whistling of wind.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Tories - check, Leave - check, Remain - check, Labour - check.
> 
> capital, labour, the working class - cue tumbleweeds and whistling of wind.



I don’t know the point you’re making.

I might agree with it, but I need to know what it is.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> I don’t know the point you’re making.
> 
> I might agree with it, but I need to know what it is.


That you, and many others on this thread/board despite calling themselves socialists, are only capable of seeing politics in terms of the Tories, Leave, Remain etc. You blank over the most important actors.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That you, and many others on this thread/board despite calling themselves socialists, are only capable of seeing politics in terms of the Tories, Leave, Remain etc. You blank over the most important actors.



I’m barely on this thread.

Who are your most important actors?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> This is a thread about Brexit.
> 
> I’m not not trying to be amusing, just give context.



And what is this Brexit that you say is happening? 

Clearly you think a Tory led Brexit is taking place. Presumably you can tell us a little about what that entails.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> capital, labour, the working class - cue tumbleweeds and whistling of wind.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 28, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 142463


 Is that what socialist politics is for you? Some sort of joke or caricature?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 28, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Is that what socialist politics is for you? Some sort of joke or caricature?


It was mr. squirrel who was patronising us with Marxism 101.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Is that what socialist politics is for you? Some sort of joke or caricature?


TBF to fair the GG he's never pretended to be anything other than a grade A liberal mug so that's entirely how he does see socialism.

What's more mad is those that call themselves socialists that are coming out with the same stuff.


----------



## paolo (Jul 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What's more mad if those that call themselves socialists that are coming out with the same stuff.



Who are “those” ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> Who are “those” ?


LBJ certainly used to call himself a socialist. Ska has done at some points too, and has certainly claimed to be influenced by socialist thinking.


----------



## CRI (Jul 28, 2018)

NHS to stockpile drugs for no deal Brexit

From the chair of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA):

'Patients could be seriously disadvantaged by Brexit, if we don’t get our act together'



> Here’s just one example why: we make no insulin in the UK. We import every drop of it. You can’t transport insulin around ordinarily because it must be temperature-controlled. And there are 3.5 million people [with diabetes, some of whom] rely on insulin, not least the prime minister. So it’s in our interests to make sure that this sort of thing doesn’t happen.
> 
> One of the things that [then health and social care secretary] Jeremy Hunt and [business secretary] Greg Clark said last summer was that patients should not be disadvantaged by us leaving the EU. And disruption to the supply chain is one of the ways that patients could be seriously disadvantaged. It could be a reality if we don’t get our act together. We can’t suddenly start manufacturing insulin — it’s got to be sorted, no question.



I'm sure everything will be fine.  No one here has Type 1 Diabetes, or uses inhalers for asthma, or anything like that, right?


----------



## kebabking (Jul 28, 2018)

CRI said:


> NHS to stockpile drugs for no deal Brexit
> 
> From the chair of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA):
> 
> ...



You perhaps ought to ask why an EU member states would refuse to sell a non-member state insulin? 

I can well imagine that there could be issues with mutual recognition of certification in the longer term without some agreement, but on day one of Brexit? No, the only reason there would be shortages of things that have been happily traded for years on end in a single regulatory regime is if the EU _wants _there to be shortages of crucial medicines.

That sounds like an ace club of jolly decent chaps - where do I sign up?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 28, 2018)

paolo said:


> Who are “those” ?



Oi. You haven't answered my question sunshine. C'mon.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

kebabking said:


> You perhaps ought to ask why an EU member states would refuse to sell a non-member state insulin?
> 
> I can well imagine that there could be issues with mutual recognition of certification in the longer term without some agreement, but on day one of Brexit? No, the only reason there would be shortages of things that have been happily traded for years on end in a single regulatory regime is if the EU _wants _there to be shortages of crucial medicines.
> 
> That sounds like an ace club of jolly decent chaps - where do I sign up?


No, it doesn't work like that.  The PM chose to invoke Article 50, to begin the process of leaving the EU.  Other EU nations had no part in that whatsoever.  So, the onus is on the UK Government to find a solution.  Other EU nations have no obligation to make allowances for the incompetence of UK politicians. 

I am sure countries in the EU, and elsewhere in the world, would be happy to sell insulin and other medicines to the UK, once appropriate trade agreements are in place, including measures to ensure clinical safety.  

Are you genuinely suggesting it's fine for insulin and other medicines to be bought and sold without any regulations in place?  

Perhaps the politicians who insist "Brexit means Brexit" should have got a finger out and started working on a solution over a year ago instead of just whining and stomping their feet like spoilt children.  It's not like everyone didn't see this coming from the start.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

kebabking said:


> You perhaps ought to ask why an EU member states would refuse to sell a non-member state insulin?
> 
> I can well imagine that there could be issues with mutual recognition of certification in the longer term without some agreement, but on day one of Brexit? No, the only reason there would be shortages of things that have been happily traded for years on end in a single regulatory regime is if the EU _wants _there to be shortages of crucial medicines.
> 
> That sounds like an ace club of jolly decent chaps - where do I sign up?


Oh, and just noticed your post sounds remarkably similar to this one from Tory politician Bernard Jenkin.  

Funny that.


----------



## Balbi (Jul 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Do you have any idea about Garton Ash's politics? He's utterly committed to the EU and liberalism, the suggestion that he's a "brexiteer" is ludicrous.



I didn't say he was a Brexiteer


----------



## JimW (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Oh, and just noticed your post sounds remarkably similar to this one from Tory politician Bernard Jenkin.
> 
> Funny that.
> 
> View attachment 142511


Maybe because it's an obvious point to anyone not hoping it all goes to shit for partisan reasons.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 29, 2018)

Odd that the UK makes no insulin whatsoever. World's largest exported of medical marijuana but no insulin. WTF?


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Oh, and just noticed your post sounds remarkably similar to this one from Tory politician Bernard Jenkin.
> 
> Funny that.
> 
> View attachment 142511


This would be the same Tory government who withhold income from the sick and the unemployed... Dark irony indeed


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 29, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Could someone please summarise Hoey's and Field's motivations for supporting Brexit ?


The Wirral, within which Field's constituency (Birkenhead) lies voted leave. So I guess that's one reason. Vauxhall (Hoey's) constituency voted Remain solidly. I have so far only been able to find bog-standard excuses from her to explain why she didn't respect their views: respecting the Referendum vote (thought the question was leave yes/no, not how), and the Labour manifesto (though that explicitly talks about trying to retain the benefits of the Custom Union and Single Market). 

She is cosy with Arron Banks though - so maybe that explains it: TheyWorkForYou


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Odd that the UK makes no insulin whatsoever. World's largest exported of medical marijuana but no insulin. WTF?


Well, I suppose there hasn't been any reason for each nation in the EU to produce their own supplies of everything they could possibly require since the idea is you can make X over here and Y over there and then move them to wherever they are needed.  The Government should have prepared for what would happen when that was no longer possible, long before considering a referendum, but no, they pouted, twiddled their thumbs, pouted some more and did fuck all.  And here we are now.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

JimW said:


> Maybe because it's an obvious point to anyone not hoping it all goes to shit for partisan reasons.


No mate, it's trying to blame someone else for shit that you have caused.  It's like that guy who gets drunk and acts like a complete asshole at a party then gets pissy the next morning when no one will talk to him or help him clean up the mess he caused.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> This would be the same Tory government who withhold income from the sick and the unemployed... Dark irony indeed



Honestly, it baffles me why some people who claim to be ardent Labour supporters have so much faith in the Tories to do the right thing.  Like when have the Tories EVER done the right fucking thing?


----------



## sealion (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Honestly, it baffles me why some people who claim to be ardent Labour supporters have so much faith in the Tories to do the right thing.  Like when have the Tories EVER done the right fucking thing?


What is labours stance this week on Bexit ? Do you think Corbyn and co could get a deal out of a mob that will fuck over anyone that wants out?


----------



## billbond (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Honestly, it baffles me why some people who claim to be ardent Labour supporters have so much faith in the Tories to do the right thing.  Like when have the Tories EVER done the right fucking thing?



Many more say the same thing thing about Labour, hence why they(torys) are in power.


----------



## agricola (Jul 29, 2018)

sealion said:


> What is labours stance this week on Bexit ? Do you think Corbyn and co could get a deal out of a mob that will fuck over anyone that wants out?



They'd get a better deal than this current shower would.  In fact if you had the choice of sending Labour or the May Government down the shops to get a pint of milk, would anyone be that surprised if the Cabinet returned with a set of udders ripped from a cow and then charged you ten grand to borrow them?


----------



## billbond (Jul 29, 2018)

agricola said:


> They'd get a better deal than this current shower would.  In fact if you had the choice of sending Labour or the May Government down the shops to get a pint of milk, would anyone be that surprised if the Cabinet returned with a set of udders ripped from a cow and then charged you ten grand to borrow them?



Looking at some of them and how they act, i very much doubt that tbh.


----------



## sealion (Jul 29, 2018)

agricola said:


> They'd get a better deal than this current shower would.


They seem as split on leaving as the tories do, and like i said, the eu will make it hard for whoever is negotiating.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

sealion said:


> They seem as split on leaving as the tories do, and like i said, the eu will make it hard for whoever is negotiating.


Well yes, there's no reason for other EU nations to "go easy" on the UK.  I haven't seen anything from the EU negotiating side that's been terribly unreasonable, if you look at it from the perspective of the EU and EU nations, which of course they do.  May's Government has been one shower of shit after another in their efforts to "negotiate," so it is on their heads.  I'm also still baffled why the Labour leadership at least (if not Labour voters) are standing by May, and "Brexit means Brexit."  If they came out tomorrow and said, "Y'know, this has all been a mistake.  We were all mislead.  We want to call it all off.  Who's with us?" there would be a stampede to back them.  But no.


----------



## agricola (Jul 29, 2018)

sealion said:


> They seem as split on leaving as the tories do, and like i said, the eu will make it hard for whoever is negotiating.



They will - but the EU would find it a lot more difficult to make it difficult for a Labour negotiaing team.  For a start, the most plausible, reasonable and least damaging outcome isn't something that a Labour Government would have ruled out before the negotiations started.


----------



## Toast Rider (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Honestly, it baffles me why some people who claim to be ardent Labour supporters have so much faith in the Tories to do the right thing.  Like when have the Tories EVER done the right fucking thing?


indeed.

I have no idea whether the EU would - bureacracy notwithstanding - withhold insulin, but I'm not entirely sure what these tories think is going to happen? Witholding medicine is inexcusable and I do not support the EU but we are here and this airy fairy nonsense from people who are themselves just as hardline as those they criticise is laughable


----------



## ska invita (Jul 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes, exactly _Labour._ After all socialism is what Labour does isn't it? Just best ignore that troublesome beast labour.
> Who has argued for any such thing. Christ you used to be better than this.


You and others above seem to be belittling those on this thread that don't want to see the economy tank/jobs get lost, dismissing it as "Socialists for GDP"! To me it comes across as flippant considering the times we live in.

We are on the verge of recession: last quarter had 0.1% growth...household debt is deeper than any time on record...high street chains are preparing for more job cuts in 2019....obviously we don't know what Brexit will really bring yet, but *if* it happens it will likely have a sizeable negative impact on the economy=on jobs and living standards, at a time that the economy is already teetering on the brink.

This stat is eye watering


> According to ONS figures, the poorest 10% of households spent two and a half times their disposable income, on average, in the financial year ending 2017



yes we've had recessions before, you may feel its a price worth paying, but im genuinely worried...I dont think the full impact of 2008 crash has been faced up to yet...a little recession might be the best we have to look forward too...it could get a lot worse than that.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> indeed.
> 
> I have no idea whether the EU would - bureacracy notwithstanding - withhold insulin, but I'm not entirely sure what these tories think is going to happen? Witholding medicine is inexcusable and I do not support the EU but we are here and this airy fairy nonsense from people who are themselves just as hardline as those they criticise is laughable


It wouldn't be withholding or delaying medicines out of spite, as some seem to be suggesting.  There is a current system in place to regulate the distribution of medicines quickly that ensures quality and safety.  It is the UK that have said, "we don't want that anymore," so there needs to be something to replace it.  That will take time to set up and will inevitably cost, and this cost should be borne by the UK.  Having to maintain a "special arrangement" with the UK even after it's set up will have an ongoing cost for the supplying countries, so it's a no brainer that they will be charging an extra premium to the UK.  Why do some people seem to be surprised about this, or in a huff about it being unfair?  Fucksake.


----------



## andysays (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> It wouldn't be withholding or delaying medicines out of spite, as some seem to be suggesting.  There is a current system in place to regulate the distribution of medicines quickly that ensures quality and safety.  It is the UK that have said, "we don't want that anymore," so there needs to be something to replace it.  That will take time to set up and will inevitably cost, and this cost should be borne by the UK.  Having to maintain a "special arrangement" with the UK even after it's set up will have an ongoing cost for the supplying countries, so it's a no brainer that they will be charging an extra premium to the UK.  Why do some people seem to be surprised about this, or in a huff about it being unfair?  Fucksake.


There's no inherent reason why anything need to change immediately.

If the NHS currently gets all its insulin from suppliers in the EU, they can continue to get all their insulin from the same suppliers after March 2019, unless the EU make it illegal or impractical for those suppliers to continue to sell their goods to Britain by imposing some sort of ban on exporting insulin, but why should they do that?

A problem which might occur would be once Britain has established its own insulin production industry, it wants to export some of it to the EU, and the EU argue either that it has to impose a tariff or that British insulin doesn't meet the standards required by EU law. But that doesn't mean British diabetics are suddenly going to find it impossible to get insulin when we leave the EU.


----------



## xenon (Jul 29, 2018)

This withholding medicines thing. Has anyone in writing explained that it will happen and why? Of course certification and standards agreements have to be in place, like they are now. Are the respective EU and UK companies / regulators proposing that on day 1 of Brexit all existing standards no longer apply, certificates revoked? Why would they not remain in place until an alternative is agreed. Are EU border authorities going to stop shipments and fine companies for continuing to service existing contracts?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Honestly, it baffles me why some people who claim to be ardent Labour supporters have so much faith in the Tories to do the right thing.


Who are these "ardent Labour supporters"?



ska invita said:


> You and others above seem to be belittling those on this thread that don't want to see the economy tank/jobs get lost, dismissing it as "Socialists for GDP"! To me it comes across as flippant considering the times we live in.


You're the one making the false claim that people are rooting for recession. You're the one pushing for "free trade" while claiming to be a socialist.



ska invita said:


> yes we've had recessions before, you may feel its a price worth paying,


Again this is a smear. Attacking the ideology of economics is not hoping for recession. Not buying into the liberal political construct of GDP does not mean you want to see people lose their jobs. I can't believe that I need to spell this out. You are accepting and furthering the political system that is responsible for the attacks on labour.

EDIT: Re-read this thread, think about the question kabbes asked here, about the points I made to paolo back in January (which they seem to have forgotten). This 


ska invita said:


> but *if* it happens it will likely have a sizeable negative impact on the economy=on jobs and living standards


is not a neutral statement, it's a deeply ideologically political one.


----------



## Supine (Jul 29, 2018)

xenon said:


> This withholding medicines thing. Has anyone in writing explained that it will happen and why? Of course certification and standards agreements have to be in place, like they are now. Are the respective EU and UK companies / regulators proposing that on day 1 of Brexit all existing standards no longer apply, certificates revoked? Why would they not remain in place until an alternative is agreed. Are EU border authorities going to stop shipments and fine companies for continuing to service existing contracts?



The UK have requested that they leave the current legal arrangement for the transfer of pharmaceutical products. This is what brexit is, the stupidity of tearing up effective current agreements. 

The latest government white paper has backed off to some kind of proposal for mutual recognition but the red line on legal jursidiction and oversight makes this difficult for an agreement to be made.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

andysays said:


> There's no inherent reason why anything need to change immediately.
> 
> If the NHS currently gets all its insulin from suppliers in the EU, they can continue to get all their insulin from the same suppliers after March 2019, unless the EU make it illegal or impractical for those suppliers to continue to sell their goods to Britain by imposing some sort of ban on exporting insulin, but why should they do that?
> 
> A problem which might occur would be once Britain has established its own insulin production industry, it wants to export some of it to the EU, and the EU argue either that it has to impose a tariff or that British insulin doesn't meet the standards required by EU law. But that doesn't mean British diabetics are suddenly going to find it impossible to get insulin when we leave the EU.


Under what laws and regulations are these supplies going to come into the UK?

Which regulatory body is going to be responsible for them when they enter the UK?   

Who's going to negotiate this trade, what is their budget and their remit, will the standards be the same and if not who is going to define the new ones?

What about all the other medicines?  

Who is legally responsible if something bad happens, if anyone?

This should have been sorted out a long time ago, _nothing_ has been done.


----------



## xenon (Jul 29, 2018)

Lawyers will inevitably make a killing, is there any situation in which they don't. But the whole transition period thing is supposed to deal with switching over to new arrangements. This government are venal and fucking useless of course but I still don't think come 20/03/2019 all bilateral trade between the EU and UK will cease until such new arrangements are signed off.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

You only have a transition period if you have a deal.

Longer it goes on like this with fuck all happening...the bigger a hand the EU will have.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You're the one making the false claim that people are rooting for recession. You're the one pushing for "free trade" while claiming to be a socialist.


Im not saying anyone is rooting for recession (although there is a real radition of that in the left), im saying some arent interested in the negative impact.

i note you didnt engage with that Protectionism thread - no one on the boards did in fact. I found that strange considering how much shit gets chatted on these boards...I put it down to the fact that its a difficult thing to take a position on.  Feel free to mischaracterise me as a GDP-loving free-trade guru....my position seems to be the same as Militant/Socialist Party and others mentioned in the thread - who also went through the thought process and decided that in most cases free trade was better than protectionism for the advancement of socialism.

That's taking a position on the world as we find it - just like Lexiters who were prepared to vote for a position despite it being led by the openly racist right.  Just as voting Lexit doesnt mean you support UKIP or Bannon, so thinking that free trade is better than protectionism doesn't mean you are a neoliberal. Its engaging with political reality as it exists and going from there.



redsquirrel said:


> Not buying into the liberal political construct of GDP does not mean you want to see people lose their jobs. I can't believe that I need to spell this out. You are accepting and furthering the political system that is responsible for the attacks on labour.



It sounds like you are in an ivory tower of ideological purity not wishing to engage with the world as it is...Deciding what conditions are most fertile for social change and improving the lives of the majority doesnt mean "furthering the political system", it means being strategic within it, and for me its about keeping peoples survival at the forefront.

An example: Im for Scottish independence on principle - always was. But if it meant a deepening of poverty in Scotland I wouldn't have supported it. I needed convincing that Scotland could go independent without it deepening what is already serious poverty in the country. 

When people say "my life is shit, how much worse can it get", I don't think they realise how much worse it can get.Who feels it knows it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 29, 2018)

andysays said:


> There's no inherent reason why anything need to change immediately.
> 
> If the NHS currently gets all its insulin from suppliers in the EU, they can continue to get all their insulin from the same suppliers after March 2019, unless the EU make it illegal or impractical for those suppliers to continue to sell their goods to Britain by imposing some sort of ban on exporting insulin, but why should they do that?.


EU suppliers will have to have tariffs paid, so it will change.

If no deal occurs, it will mean increased checks at the ports, this will disrupt the flow into the UK.


----------



## NoXion (Jul 29, 2018)

What would the point of tariffs be? If we don't produce our own insulin then there's no reason for such protectionist measures.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> If they came out tomorrow and said, "Y'know, this has all been a mistake.  We were all mislead.  We want to call it all off.  Who's with us?" there would be a stampede to back them.



Fuck sakes, are you still this deluded?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Im not saying anyone is rooting for recession (although there is a real radition of that in the left), im saying some arent interested in the negative impact.


Yes you are


ska invita said:


> Whats the name of that marxist tradition that actively seeks/hopes the economy will completely collapse so as to usher in the revolution? Its a shit plan that, whatever its called.





ska invita said:


> yes we've had recessions before, you may feel its a price worth paying, but im genuinely worried...I dont think the full impact of 2008 crash has been faced up to yet...a little recession might be the best we have to look forward too...it could get a lot worse than that.



---


ska invita said:


> i note you didnt engage with that Protectionism thread - no one on the boards did in fact. I found that strange considering how much shit gets chatted on these boards...I put it down to the fact that its a difficult thing to take a position on.  Feel free to mischaracterise me as a GDP-loving free-trade guru....my position seems to be the same as Militant/Socialist Party and others mentioned in the thread - who also went through the thought process and decided that in most cases free trade was better than protectionism for the advancement of socialism.


No it's not. Tressell and Engles (as quoted by Roberts) both specifically point out the nonsense for socialist to "take a side" on the debate you try create. Your insistence that people must chose either protectionism or free trade (and your defence of the latter) just shows far from any socialist politics you have ended up.



ska invita said:


> It sounds like you are in an ivory tower of ideological purity not wishing to engage with the world as it is...


You're the one bound by ideology, the very ideology you claim to be opposed to. Read butchers posts on the thread I linked to. Think about whether the economy is now better than in the 70s? What about in the 90s? What does "good/bad for the economy" even mean?


----------



## andysays (Jul 29, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> EU suppliers will have to have tariffs paid, so it will change.
> 
> If no deal occurs, it will mean increased checks at the ports, this will disrupt the flow into the UK.



Who will be imposing these tariffs?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 29, 2018)

andysays said:


> Who will be imposing these tariffs?


When something is imported from the EU it will incur tariffs, paid by the UK. It's what happens under trade rules, in this case WTO rules.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

2 years ago brexiters were being told this about trade and tariffs.

How would we spend all the tariff money if the EU wants to damage their trade with us?


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fuck sakes, are you still this deluded?


Kindly fuck off.


----------



## Yogibear (Jul 29, 2018)

Not before the Tories implode and a new general election.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

Ah....looks like we don't have any rights under WTO either.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 29, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Ah....looks like we don't have any rights under WTO either.




The Alex Jones of Remain


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Kindly fuck off.



Yes sir, sorry for not knowing my place, sir.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

Here's a jolly explanation of what will happen regarding the import and export of food from 30th March of next year if there is "no deal."  

This is what no-deal Brexit actually looks like



> Downing Street could decide to unilaterally give up all these tests and procedures for goods coming into the UK. After all, it is now unbound from EU law. It can do what it likes.





> Transport secretary Chris Grayling told the BBC categorically in March that "we will not impose checks" at the port of Dover.





> Opening the border in this way would provide an open invitation for fraudsters. They could send anything to the UK they like - any food product, any drink, with any ingredient - knowing there would be no checks. The spot check system operating under EU law would vanish. There would be no documentation, no safeguards, no court oversight, and no supervision.





> The other solution would be to turn away from the continent and start importing our food from across the Atlantic.





> The problem with this idea is the existence of geography. The EU is not our main food supplier because of some metropolitan conspiracy by people who like brie. It's our main food supplier because it is close to us.





> For America to replace this volume of trade flow in nine months is simply not realistic.





> The EU rejects US standards on the levels of pesticides residue in fruit, for instance, hormone injections in beef and chlorine wash for poultry. It has strict and very welcome requirements on the excess and routine use of antimicrobials in agriculture.





> We're a medium-sized country surrounded on both sides by massive trading entities. The reality is we'll either snuggle into the EU ecosystem or the US ecosystem - it's as simple as that.



So stick your fingers in your ears and sing La La La and keep on believing the magical Brexit Unicorn will ride in to make it all better, but it's going to be shit with no deal, pure unmitigated shit, and it will be all of the UK's making.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Y
> 
> You're the one bound by ideology, the very ideology you claim to be opposed to. Read butchers posts on the thread I linked to. Think about whether the economy is now better than in the 70s? What about in the 90s? What does "good/bad for the economy" even mean?


What does recession mean? Here and now, without political change or redistribution of wealth, with the patterns of ownership and power as we have them now, who gets hit in a recession? Looking forwards to what happens if the British economy starts to shrink post-tory-brexit, who suffers?

There have been a lot of 'you're not a socialist' accusations flying around on this thread at various points. Lots of false inferences, such as that you cheer on neoliberalism because you only see further destruction when one neoliberal construct disengages from another  on the terms being offered, for instance. The ability to see something even fucking worse than what we have now, and not wanting that to happen. 

And now this - people are not real socialists or whatever because they are concerned by the answer to the question of recessions, who they hit in this system, in this world as it is set up right now, and do not see that answer as anything other than just more shit for those least capable of coping with more shit. 

I note that you haven't really addressed this. So tell me, who gets hit first in a recession in a capitalist economy such as the one we live in?


----------



## a_chap (Jul 29, 2018)

Yogibear said:


> Not before the Tories implode and a new general election.



I'm getting a little confused.

The Tories are imploding. Labour's exploding. The LibDems are never coming back. UKIP's down the drain. The Monster Raving Loony Party never recovered from the death of Screaming Lord Sutch.

Is it safe to assume that, in England, no-one will win any seats?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 29, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What does recession mean?



To my friends David and Sarah?

Already their house is at risk as their middle child died two years ago this month and they’ve been battling to stay in a three bed place as they still have one boy and one girl alive. Sarah gets money from the state. Dave doesn’t, he’s sanctioned to shit, so the only way he can earn anything is illegally. He is now trapped in that situation, there really is no way out. His eldest boy has just left school with nothing. He has a job doing the night shift at the BP. That covers the costs of his smokes. The girl is now 16, so the council will soon chuck them out of their house.

You tell me what recession will mean to Dave & Sarah. And why they should give a flying fuck about it.


----------



## Yogibear (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> I'm getting a little confused.
> 
> The Tories are imploding. Labour's exploding. The LibDems are never coming back. UKIP's down the drain. The Monster Raving Loony Party never recovered from the death of Screaming Lord Sutch.
> 
> Is it safe to assume that, in England, no-one will win any seats?



In times like these I wouldn't assume anything. Just concentrate on what you would like to really happen.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 29, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What does recession mean? Here and now, without political change or redistribution of wealth, with the patterns of ownership and power as we have them now, who gets hit in a recession? Looking forwards to what happens if the British economy starts to shrink post-tory-brexit, who suffers?
> 
> I note that you haven't really addressed this. So tell me, who gets hit first in a recession in a capitalist economy such as the one we live in?


So you want me to define and defend your political construct? Amazing.

You're the one talking about the UK leaving the EU will "harm the economy"*, will cause a recession. BTW the UK was out of recession by 84 so I guess the 80s were a time of plenty? Unlike in the mid-70s when the UK was the sick man of Europe.

(*like rolling back anti-strike legislation, increasing taxes, nationalising industries will also do - I guess those all should be off the table too)


----------



## a_chap (Jul 29, 2018)

Yogibear said:


> Just concentrate on what you would like to really happen.



I spent *years* doing that.

Bo Derek has yet to appear....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> I spent *years* doing that.
> 
> Bo Derek has yet to appear....



Bo Derek


----------



## Yogibear (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> I spent *years* doing that.
> 
> Bo Derek has yet to appear....



Maybe you didn't recognise her...


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> I spent *years* doing that.
> 
> Bo Derek has yet to appear....



Yer dating yourself there, fella


----------



## a_chap (Jul 29, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bo Derek





TheHoodedClaw said:


> Yer dating yourself there, fella



Oi!

Bo Derek was - and I am sure still is - utterly gorgeous. So please leave us old folk to our happy senile memories.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> Here's a jolly explanation of what will happen regarding the import and export of food from 30th March of next year if there is "no deal."
> 
> This is what no-deal Brexit actually looks like
> 
> ...



Not content with making the Trump thread shit, you've decided to ruin the rest of the forum. A real pity.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> Oi!
> 
> Bo Derek was - and I am sure still is - utterly gorgeous. So please leave us old folk to our happy senile memories.


If it's any consolation, she didn't show up at my house either


----------



## agricola (Jul 29, 2018)

It seems that Greenpeace have managed to get the IEA on tape, boasting of their access to ministers as reasons why US businessmen should give them money.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> No, it doesn't work like that.  The PM chose to invoke Article 50, to begin the process of leaving the EU.  Other EU nations had no part in that whatsoever.  So, the onus is on the UK Government to find a solution.  Other EU nations have no obligation to make allowances for the incompetence of UK politicians.



That's a fascinating conception of responsibility you have there. A bit like witnessing somebody get stabbed, and then loudly saying "The onus is not on ME to call an ambulance, the responsibility for this lies with the assailant, they are the reason an innocent person is bleeding out, they must call for medical help!"



CRI said:


> I'm also still baffled why the Labour leadership at least (if not Labour voters) are standing by May, and "Brexit means Brexit."  If they came out tomorrow and said, "Y'know, this has all been a mistake.  We were all mislead.  We want to call it all off.  Who's with us?" there would be a stampede to back them.  But no.



Totally. Utterly. Delusional. A stampede? Amazing stuff. Did the GE last year just not happen in your mind? 

For the record, the only effect on insulin supply is it might become more expensive.


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

a_chap said:


> Oi!
> 
> Bo Derek was - and I am sure still is - utterly gorgeous. So please leave us old folk to our happy senile memories.


Still hawt!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...For the record, the only effect on insulin supply is it might become more expensive.


What record is that?  Got a link ta?


----------



## CRI (Jul 29, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's a fascinating conception of responsibility you have there. A bit like witnessing somebody get stabbed, and then loudly saying "The onus is not on ME to call an ambulance, the responsibility for this lies with the assailant, they are the reason an innocent person is bleeding out, they must call for medical help!"
> 
> 
> 
> ...



- That only works if the UK is just a bystander and it's not, it's the one wielding the knife here, so . . .

- It was Hobsons choice at the GE, in England at least, as both of the two main parties supported Brexit.  So, no.

- So you think it's fine that people with diabetes who require insulin should have to pay more for their prescriptions?  Same with other medicines we import as well?  How much more?  What if they can't afford it?  How about in Scotland - prescriptions are free here.  I don't want that to change because the UK Government couldn't get its arse in gear.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> - It was Hobsons choice at the GE, in England at least, as both of the two main parties supported Brexit.  So, no.


And between them took 82+% of the vote on a 68.8% turnout - a total of 56.5% of the electorate, the highest combined share of the electorate since 1992 - so rather undermining your claim that  


CRI said:


> I'm also still baffled why the Labour leadership at least (if not Labour voters) are standing by May, and "Brexit means Brexit."  If they came out tomorrow and said, "Y'know, this has all been a mistake.  We were all mislead.  We want to call it all off.  Who's with us?" there would be a stampede to back them.  But no.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 29, 2018)

agricola said:


> It seems that Greenpeace have managed to get the IEA on tape, boasting of their access to ministers as reasons why US businessmen should give them money.



Amusingly, Mark Littlewood used to be head of press for the Lib Dems, at the time the right were trying to take over the party.


----------



## Supine (Jul 29, 2018)

If your interested in insulin...

Fact checking Sir Michael Rawlins statements in relation to Insulin and #Brexit. Should we be worried?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 29, 2018)

Supine said:


> If your interested in insulin...
> 
> Fact checking Sir Michael Rawlins statements in relation to Insulin and #Brexit. Should we be worried?


People using animal medicines?

Well...there is a hint of Animal Farm about the thread I suppose.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 29, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> People using animal medicines?
> 
> Well...there is a hint of Animal Farm about the thread I suppose.


It's a slightly silly thing to say in that fact check given that nearly all diabetics switched from pig insulin decades ago. Iirc there were a few deaths during the switch - remember my bro and sis both saying it was harder to sense a hypo coming on with the new stuff. Would certainly be a few more deaths with a switch back. That won't be allowed to happen so it's a bit silly even touting it as a possibility. It's just another thing to add to the thousands on the list of 'details the fuckwits didn't even think about'.


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> ...So you think it's fine that people with diabetes who require insulin should have to pay more for their prescriptions?...


If you are a diabetic on meds, then all your prescriptions are free in England.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> The PM chose to invoke Article 50, to begin the process of leaving the EU.  Other EU nations had no part in that whatsoever.  So, the onus is on the UK Government to find a solution.  Other EU nations have no obligation to make allowances for the incompetence of UK politicians.



Article 8
1. The Union shall develop a special relationship with neighbouring countries, aiming to establish an area of prosperity and good neighbourliness, founded on the values of the Union and characterised by close and peaceful relations based on cooperation.

2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, the Union may conclude specific agreements with the countries concerned. These agreements may contain reciprocal rights and obligations as well as the possibility of undertaking activities jointly. Their implementation shall be the subject of periodic consultation.

Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union/Title I: Common Provisions - Wikisource, the free online library


Barnier has failed to fulfill this article to date - in particular the frankly absurd contention that the only possible trade deals must be the Norway or Canada options. There was no such thing as a "Norway" option before Norway reached its deal & likewise with Canada.


----------



## Weller (Jul 29, 2018)

CRI said:


> NHS to stockpile drugs for no deal Brexit
> 
> From the chair of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA):
> 
> 'Patients could be seriously disadvantaged by Brexit, if we don’t get our act together'





> The EU is not our main food supplier because of some metropolitan conspiracy by people who like brie. It's our main food supplier because it is close to us


----------



## agricola (Jul 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> Barnier has failed to fulfill this article to date - in particular the frankly absurd contention that the only possible trade deals must be the Norway or Canada options. There was no such thing as a "Norway" option before Norway reached its deal & likewise with Canada.



I am no fan of Barnier or the EU negotiators, but that is a bit of a wilful misrepresentation of what their position is.  

For a start, we are not a "neighbouring country", at least not until we leave.  Secondly nowhere does Article 8 say what type of deals should or should not be offered; if the EU want to offer Norway or Canada options (both of which would satisfy the vague aims of Article 8), or indeed an option where Boris has to go to Brussels and apologise to them every April 1st, to the exclusion of all other options then they are perfectly within their rights to do so.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> Barnier has failed to fulfill this article to date - in particular the frankly absurd contention that the only possible trade deals must be the Norway or Canada options.



Yes, given the wording of Article 8, it's very hard to understand why the Morocco option seems to have hardly been discussed at all.


----------



## CRI (Jul 30, 2018)

fishfinger said:


> If you are a diabetic on meds, then all your prescriptions are free in England.


Maybe they won't be after 30th March next year.  Money's got to come from somewhere.


----------



## CRI (Jul 30, 2018)

Army on standby for no-deal Brexit emergency



> Blueprints for the armed forces to assist the civilian authorities, usually used only in civil emergencies, have been dusted down as part of the “no deal” planning.
> 
> Helicopters and army trucks would be used to ferry supplies to vulnerable people outside the southeast who were struggling to obtain the medicines they needed.





> The NHS would go on a year-round “winter crisis footing”, with drugs bought from outside the EU and stockpiled in hospitals.





> An investigation of no-deal planning found that Steve Baker, the minister then in charge of the issue, threatened to resign in March because Downing Street was refusing to publicise the preparations being made.





> A minister said the military would be called in if blockages at ports led to shortages of food, fuel and medicines, warning: “There is a lot of civil contingency planning around the prospect of no deal. That’s not frightening the horses, that’s just being utterly realistic.”





> Plans to publish reports throughout the summer on no-deal planning have been ditched because of fears they would alarm the public. They will be released on the same day in late August.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 30, 2018)

It’s like the people who ran the Better Together Campaign have teamed up to give us Scottish Urbs for Remain


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Amusingly, Mark Littlewood used to be head of press for the Lib Dems, at the time the right were trying to take over the party.


Trying?


----------



## fishfinger (Jul 30, 2018)

CRI said:


> Maybe they won't be after 30th March next year.  Money's got to come from somewhere.


I'll be sure to let you know if they stop my meds


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Trying?



Only Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne really stayed, people like Mark Littlewood walked out, as did a number of the other genuinely Conservative types. As far to the right as Clegg and Huhne took them, there were others who would have taken it far, far further.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 30, 2018)

agricola said:


> if the EU want to offer Norway or Canada options (both of which would satisfy the vague aims of Article 8), or indeed an option where Boris has to go to Brussels and apologise to them every April 1st, to the exclusion of all other options then they are perfectly within their rights to do so.



the EU's aim is to ensure that Britain cannot "win" the negotiation - not to conclude a trade deal. When Donald Trump takes this position we are invited by the likes of the Guardian & the FT to boo & hiss the pantomime villain trying to undermine the global order. Its noticeable that even such grovellingly pro-EU mouthpieces such as them are starting to buckle under the strain of trying to cheerlead for their side e.g the above Garton-Ash piece or 

Europe should offer Theresa May’s Brexit plan a helping hand
Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Only Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne really stayed, people like Mark Littlewood walked out, as did a number of the other genuinely Conservative types. As far to the right as Clegg and Huhne took them, there were others who would have taken it far, far further.


Not a single MP left over their parties formation of a coalition with the Tories. In fact they were ready and willing to go into coalition again. The orange bookers won


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> the EU's aim is to ensure that Britain cannot "win" the negotiation


There is a fair amount of truth in this but the UK's aim is to screw over the EU, the idea of negotiations is for both sides to settle on something neither wants but will at least accept, the biggest problem for the UK is our negotiators are totally useless whilst the EU ones seem to be at least moderately competent.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Not a single MP left over their parties formation of a coalition with the Tories. In fact they were ready and willing to go into coalition again. The orange bookers won



Not a single MP no, but a shed load of activitists and leaflet deliverers did. It's the less mentioned part of what fucked them over in the 2015 election. I suspect MPs didn't leave as they generally weren't the sharpest tools in the box. It was a parliamentary party not formed from those successful in the world of business or the world of trade unionism (or Oxbridge PPE for New Labour), but people who had a career path of neighbourhood watch - local council - leader of local council - accidental MP. It's part of why some of the Orange Bookers found it so easy to get to senior positions, many of the MPs were only really interested in local issues in their constituencies.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 30, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s like the people who ran the Better Together Campaign have teamed up to give us Scottish Urbs for Remain



Interesting one for Scotland. Non deal and chaos and independence looks a reasonable option. Special deal between the EU and the UK and there's the argument that on independence there is a good chance Scotland will get a deal with the EU and with rump UK. There is simply no way that anything going forward can strengthen the Union.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> the EU's aim is to ensure that Britain cannot "win" the negotiation - not to conclude a trade deal. When Donald Trump takes this position we are invited by the likes of the Guardian & the FT to boo & hiss the pantomime villain trying to undermine the global order. Its noticeable that even such grovellingly pro-EU mouthpieces such as them are starting to buckle under the strain of trying to cheerlead for their side e.g the above Garton-Ash piece or
> 
> Europe should offer Theresa May’s Brexit plan a helping hand
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times



political entities look to secure their own interests shock.
Trump isn't doing that - hes feeding his own fucked up narcissism in a way that is damaging his own country. You could make the same argument about brexit - its indulging in a post imperial delusion about britian's place in the world - and being pursued by people whose real agenda is driven a by a  self serving freidmanite dogma of deregulation.
The EUs position is entirely logical, utterly predictable and the only politically realistic option available to them - allowing the UK to have cake would be immediately  rejected by the individual members of the EU27 - and their own populations.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 30, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> the EU's aim is to ensure that Britain cannot "win" the negotiation - not to conclude a trade deal.


Where has this win stuff come from?. The UK has taken two years to come up with its negotiating position,  which is just a fudge, and the reason it's a fudge is because it's trying to limit the damage of brexit. There is no winning they can do.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 30, 2018)

Sky Data poll: 78% think the government is doing a bad job on Brexit


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

Army 'on standby' to handle food and medicines shortages in event of 'no deal' Brexit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Where has this win stuff come from?. The UK has taken two years to come up with its negotiating position,  which is just a fudge, and the reason it's a fudge is because it's trying to limit the damage of brexit. There is no winning they can do.


Exactly. What has the EU been asked to negotiate? What has the UK offered up as a plan? When the UK goes into negotiations demonstrating clearly, as Davis did for instance, that they haven't even thought of problems such as the NI border, what would you expect from the EU negotiators, to go away and come up with a plan for them?


----------



## teuchter (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Exactly. What has the EU been asked to negotiate? What has the UK offered up as a plan? When the UK goes into negotiations demonstrating clearly, as Davis did for instance, that they haven't even thought of problems such as the NI border, what would you expect from the EU negotiators, to go away and come up with a plan for them?


As the Lexiteers of this thread have explained - it's not Britain's problem what happens at the border, because it's the EU that wants to enforce controls. So the EU has to think up a solution, and it shouldn't be one that prioritises the interests of its members because that just wouldn't be a nice thing to do.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> As the Lexiteers of this thread have explained - it's not Britain's problem what happens at the border, because it's the EU that wants to enforce controls. So the EU has to think up a solution, and it shouldn't be one that prioritises the interests of its members because that just wouldn't be a nice thing to do.


Has the UK's position on NI changed at all? Last I heard, they planned both to maintain the common travel area with Ireland that existed long before EU membership and to enforce immigration controls from the EU. Riiiight.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> the UK's aim is to screw over the EU,


In what way?


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> In what way?


Wishy washy shit that it may actually be, the Chequers agreement is still underpinned by the belief that the UK government can get to pick and choose what bits of EU membership it wants, being able to have free trade without free movement, being able to ignore the ECJ and so forth, having free movement across the UK/ROI border without accepting the associated conditions. 
The EU on the other hand isn't willing to do or accept anything that it sees as undermining its basic principles.
There's a bit of a game of chicken going on at the moment with both sides expecting the other to blink first and neither doing it.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> being able to have free trade without free movement,


The usa and Japan have done deals with the eu, freedom of movement didn't apply to these.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

interesting overlap between those who thought it was ok for the EU to fuck greece and the people who now claim that the EU now acts soley with members interests at heart in this case. No other considerations at all. they didn't pay their taxes/you voted out. Lol.
Interesting also to note the same sudden concerns for the poorest (thats me btw) being most likely to bear the brunt of a crash out. Yet nary a word to be said about the greek working classes being on the end of a waterboarding. Did you not see the writing on the wall then? Kaka tim did


Kaka Tim said:


> My point was that greece rejected the EUs austerity with a threat to leave the union. The EU called their bluff and they had to crawl back and eat up their gruel.
> The UK is not in the same state as Greece economically and is not having to take ECB terms to stay solvent - but on the issue of trying to gain concessions in the event of leaving the union, the position is the same -as is the EUs response.
> *Its Hotel California - Brussels style*.


 Crocodile tears. Still I suppose we are to have this from now until at least conference season...


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> The usa and Japan have done deals with the eu, freedom of movement didn't apply to these.


Indeed they have and we will do one as well eventually but the current bunch of fuckwits in power are still clinging to their rose tinted brexit glasses.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Indeed they have and we will do one as well eventually but the current bunch of fuckwits in power are still clinging to their rose tinted brexit glasses.


You make it sound easy. The eu have stated- no cherry picking- must abide by the rules, yet they do the opposite with Japan and America. Wheres the consistency there? Or are they making it up as they go along?


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> You make it sound easy. The eu have stated- no cherry picking- must abide by the rules, yet they do the opposite with Japan and America. Wheres the consistency there? Or are they making it up as they go along?


I think it's obvious to everyone by now that it most certainly isn't easy, As for making it up as they go along, you're asking that question? of course they fucking do both the EU Commission and Mayhem and her bunch of clowns


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> As for making it up as they go along, you're asking that question? of course they fucking do


So impossible to deal with them., Ta.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> So impossible to deal with them., Ta.


Of course it is possible to deal with them, they are acting in what they view as a rational manner just because it differs from your or my viewpoint doesn't mean it isn't. 
This is a trade deal it has nothing to do with fair or right or just it is about what each side wants and finding something that gives both as much as possible whilst making them give up as little as possible.
Currently it seems to me that the EU has it act together a lot more than the UK does in this regard.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 30, 2018)

Sunday times fact free filler - it’s a jolly doom laden read and shit but there’s nothing to it really. 

Do we actually have any enough army left to achieve this consumables supply  bridge for eg ?

I have to think about stuff like this all the time - if this level of contingency is in progress and is a real thing , then it leads me to think that either 

A) we are utterly fucked beyond comprehension and have not yet realised it / and I really don’t even want to go there 

Or

B) This administration is unable to think logically and professionally about outcomes and risk and prioritise accordingly 


I am going for b) on this / no reason to think that there may be a nugget of logic amongst the slag heaps of incompetence on display here

/


----------



## teuchter (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> people who now claim that the EU now acts soley with members interests at heart in this case.



I get it that it's possible for the EU to act in its interests as an institution rather than the interests of its members. If that's what's happening as far as its Brexit dealings are concerned, though, why aren't we seeing any objections from other member states? Or are we?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I get it that it's possible for the EU to act in its interests as an institution rather than the interests of its members. If that's what's happening as far as its Brexit dealings are concerned, though, why aren't we seeing any objections from other member states? Or are we?


I only remembered this lone mep . But I'm not so sure they would raise any objections, why? Its not them leaving.  Did they object with any force when greece was shafted?

e2a, obviously the lions share of this non negotiations blame goes to the incompetents in charge, who've had 2 years to do even the basics and have not but I don't see the EU as ideologically neutral in all of this as some do.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> You make it sound easy. The eu have stated- no cherry picking- must abide by the rules, yet they do the opposite with Japan and America. Wheres the consistency there? Or are they making it up as they go along?


Japan and the US still have to pay tariffs.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Army 'on standby' to handle food and medicines shortages in event of 'no deal' Brexit


Isn't the army always on standby for that sort of thing?


----------



## J Ed (Jul 30, 2018)

The new Sky News polling being pushed by hard remainers as justification for another vote. The title of this thread is very much relevant again.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> The usa and Japan have done deals with the eu, freedom of movement didn't apply to these.


Both of them still pay tariffs and have different regulatory regimes.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> You make it sound easy. The eu have stated- no cherry picking- must abide by the rules, yet they do the opposite with Japan and America. Wheres the consistency there? Or are they making it up as they go along?




have they? the trade deals with Japan and the US are not universal free trade agreements - they still include tariffs and dont include all areas of trade. Some tariffs have been reduced or removed on certian products. That sort of deal is entirely feasible for the uk - but would take years to negotiate and would still be considerably worse then what its in place already - and would still necessitate a hard border in norn iron. 
 The deal the UK is looking is comprehensive and tariff free - whilst not being tied to the EUs rules. Its utterly delusional that the EU wont  agree to it in a million years. 
If the UK signs comprehensive free trade deals with the USA or China it will have to sign up to their regulations instead. If the UK signs comprehensive  deals with india - they will want their citizens to be able to come and work here. The uks postion would only make sense if it had a monopoloy on large swathes of global trade backed up a massive navy - i.e the position it was in in 1890 and was completely eroded by 1950.


----------



## Winot (Jul 30, 2018)

J Ed said:


> The new Sky News polling being pushed by hard remainers as justification for another vote. The title of this thread is very much relevant again.



We need to run the OP’s poll again with an additional option for “Barricaded in behind insulin stockpile surviving in adequate food”.


----------



## J Ed (Jul 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> We need to run the OP’s poll again with an additional option for “Barricaded in behind insulin stockpile surviving in adequate food”.



Project Fear seems to be working better in its current incarnation, but I'm sure that remain would manage to lose a second referendum as well.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Army 'on standby' to handle food and medicines shortages in event of 'no deal' Brexit


Fire brigade 'on standby' in event of fires.

Local authority 'has plan' in event of flood.

Hospital 'has practised' major disaster response.


----------



## agricola (Jul 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Fire brigade 'on standby' in event of fires.
> 
> Local authority 'has plan' in event of flood.
> 
> Hospital 'has practised' major disaster response.



The Government doesn't generally negotiate and organize fires, floods or major disasters - though admittedly this one does come very close to that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Fire brigade 'on standby' in event of fires.
> 
> Local authority 'has plan' in event of flood.
> 
> Hospital 'has practised' major disaster response.



its a uniquely awkward poistion the uk gov is in - they have to make out they are serious about "no deal" by preparing for it (although not very seriously) - in order have some sort of card to play with Brussels. but this has the effect of creating growing panic about what no deal might entail (stockpiling food ffs!) - and creates ever greater pressure for them to abandon it. But the only deal the EU would accept will be rejected by parliament. 
Fucked at every turn they are. 

I dont think its pure "project fear" - crashing out would be hugely disruptive. Sure the dangers may well be exaggerated - but equally nobody knows exactly how things will pan out - there so many interrelated, complex factors that a wide range  unexpected consequences are pretty much nailed on. As is the element of Self fulfilling prophecy. As a potential crash out approaches, you will likely see a run on the pound and shortages in the shops due to panic buying.


----------



## agricola (Jul 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its a uniquely awkward poistion the uk gov is in - they have to make out they are serious about "no deal" by preparing for it (although not very seriously) - in order have some sort of card to play with Brussels. but this has the effect of creating growing panic about what no deal might entail (stockpiling food ffs!) - and creates ever greater pressure for them to abandon it. But the only deal the EU would accept will be rejected by parliament.
> Fucked at every turn they are.
> 
> I dont think its pure "project fear" - crashing out would be hugely disruptive. Sure the dangers may well be exaggerated - but equally nobody knows exactly how things will pan out - there so many interrelated, complex factors that a wide range  unexpected consequences are pretty much nailed on. As is the element of Self fulfilling prophecy. As a potential crash out approaches, you will likely see a run on the pound and shortages in the shops due to panic buying.



The seriousness by which they are preparing for no deal can be seen by how many extra customs officers they've recruited.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 30, 2018)

agricola said:


> The seriousness by which they are preparing for no deal can be seen by how many extra customs officers they've recruited.



	 ?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

I'm sure G4s will cover it


----------



## pesh (Jul 30, 2018)

thats why the army are on standby


----------



## agricola (Jul 30, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 142628	 ?



Well in 2017 they said they wanted 5000 more, Rudd said earlier this year that they were planning for 1000 more, and as of earlier this month they'd hired an extra* 300 who were still being trained.

* extra in the usual Government sense of the word, in that they represent 300 more officers than the 7670 Border Force staff they had in 2016-17, but not extra to the 8332 staff they had in 2014-15.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 30, 2018)

agricola said:


> The Government doesn't generally negotiate and organize fires, floods or major disasters - though admittedly this one does come very close to that.


Sky news "puts sensational spin" on mundane fact. 

Says arboreal pooper, Mr Ursine.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Project Fear seems to be working better in its current incarnation, but I'm sure that remain would manage to lose a second referendum as well.


Having 3 options might skew things :-

1. Do a runner / trade war

2. May-style fudge with civil war in NI

3. Stick with what worked before.

Or they set a threshold of 70 percent ....


----------



## Winot (Jul 30, 2018)

agricola said:


> Well in 2017 they said they wanted 5000 more, Rudd said earlier this year that they were planning for 1000 more, and as of earlier this month they'd hired an extra* 300 who were still being trained.
> 
> * extra in the usual Government sense of the word, in that they represent 300 more officers than the 7670 Border Force staff they had in 2016-17, but not extra to the 8332 staff they had in 2014-15.



So less than the Dutch then.

https://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-netherlands-to-hire-750-extra-customs-officials-to-tackle/


----------



## Crispy (Jul 30, 2018)

17m Dutch : 750 Extra Dutch Customs Officials
That's 22,666 Dutch people per CO
For 65m Britons, the same ratio gives 2,867 Extra British Customs Officers


----------



## agricola (Jul 30, 2018)

Crispy said:


> 17m Dutch : 750 Extra Dutch Customs Officials
> That's 22,666 Dutch people per CO
> For 65m Britons, the same ratio gives 2,867 Extra British Customs Officers



Even that is a bit misleading - the biggest criteria affecting how many customs officers are needed will be how many ports of entry there are, and we have many more of those than the Dutch do.


----------



## Crispy (Jul 30, 2018)

agricola said:


> Even that is a bit misleading - the biggest criteria affecting how many customs officers are needed will be how many ports of entry there are, and we have many more of those than the Dutch do.


I believe I've already done more homework on the topic than the government has.


----------



## Fez909 (Jul 30, 2018)

I wouldn't panic about the food shortages guff - that only happens in socialist countries


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I get it that it's possible for the EU to act in its interests as an institution rather than the interests of its members. If that's what's happening as far as its Brexit dealings are concerned, though, why aren't we seeing any objections from other member states? Or are we?




Far right Italian leader Salvini warns EU could 'swindle' UK on Brexit



> Italy's Deputy Prime Minister and leader of far right party The League has warned the EU may try to “swindle” the UK out of Brexit.
> 
> Former Member of the European Parliament Matteo Salvini said Theresa May should take a hardline stance in her Brexit negotiations, saying: “My experience in the European parliament tells me you either impose yourself or they swindle you.”
> 
> Salvini said the UK should be prepared to walk away from talks.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

Mussolini-quoting, racist, rabid anti-immigrant Matteo Salvini. There's lovely.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Far right Italian leader Salvini warns EU could 'swindle' UK on Brexit


It's pretty much what's already been said by a range of people in politics. A weak leader and remainer was never going to get any joy from the cabal.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

Cabal?


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jul 30, 2018)

Nothing really to add, I just wanted to share this graphic from yesterday on the Daily Star website.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Cabal?


What is it then?


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Nothing really to add, I just wanted to share this graphic from yesterday on the Daily Star website.


You missed this cracker,Brexit STD WARNING: Super-gonorrhoea to spread more easily when UK leaves EU.  Good to see such a serious newspaper not going down the clickbait root


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

Bring back Dacre now!!!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jul 30, 2018)

sealion said:


> You make it sound easy. The eu have stated- no cherry picking- must abide by the rules, yet they do the opposite with Japan and America. Wheres the consistency there? Or are they making it up as they go along?



I think (someone will sure point out if this is wrong) that what the EU is doing is legal somersaults so that...
a) If you are a member who wants to leave you must negotiate around every item from which your membership is made (including eg FoM)
b) If you are not a member you negotiate from the proverbial Blank Slate.

I may even have heard this said out loud by an EU rep but basically, if we want a Blank Slate deal we need to crash out with no deal, _then_ negotiate a deal from a non-member's position.

Something like that. It's all about the wriggling but then legal somersaults _are _wriggling - backed up by force of law.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> 3. Stick with what worked before.


What like this? 1, 2, 3, 4


























EDIT: Better figure for level of poverty here.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

yeah but,,


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

That'd all be UK poverty and not EU-wide ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Yes. Does that make a difference?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes. Does that make a difference?



How does the UK compare to the other EU members over the same period ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> How does the UK compare to the other EU members over the same period ?


How about you answer my questions first. Do you stand by your claim that the system was working for most people? You want a continuation of the above?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> How about you answer my questions first. Do you stand by your claim that the system was working for most people? You want a continuation of the above?


I think we need to adjust for individual countries and their particular local political effects.


----------



## Supine (Jul 30, 2018)

What have those graphs for to do with brexit? 

Nothing - apart from they'll look worse afterwards.


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> That'd all be UK poverty and not EU-wide ?


It's the uk that voted leave, what more do you want?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Supine said:


> What have those graphs for to do with brexit?


They help explain why Leave won. Especially when you have people insisting that is "what worked before".
Even if you desperately want the UK to remain in the EU you have to be a grade A liberal cunt to want more of the last 30 years.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 30, 2018)




----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Supine said:


> What have those graphs for to do with brexit?
> 
> Nothing - apart from they'll look worse afterwards.


The possibility of changing the trajectory becomes much greater outside the EU.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> What like this? 1, 2, 3, 4
> 
> 
> 
> ...



do you have any projections for how  inequality and poverty will look after brexit?

or how non-EU neo-liberal economies have fared on that front over the past 30 years?

As a non-brexiteer im certainly not arguing that the EU is some great champion of workers rights or egalitarianism - and thank fuck the uk is not bound to the euro and the ECB. 
We are where we are -  and choice looks very much like a deregulated   bending over to the likes of china and the USA (plus probable hard border in NI and all the fun that would entail) , keeping all the EU rules and having no input or cancelling the whole thing altogether.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> The possibility of changing the trajectory becomes much greater outside the EU.



does it really? how so? im all ears.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> The possibility of changing the trajectory becomes much greater outside the EU.


How?


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> does it really? how so? im all ears.


Any reformist Labour government will have to listen more to internal pressures and worry less about breaking treaty commitments. Stay inside and anything bar out and out revolution can be batted away as we're not allowed.
A larger and more equal share of even a smaller pie means a better quality of life for more people.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Any reformist Labour government will have to listen more to internal pressures and worry less about breaking treaty commitments. Stay inside and anything bar out and out revolution can be batted away as we're not allowed.
> A larger and more equal share of even a smaller pie means a better quality of life for more people.



brexit means a major economic hit - however you slice it. that will mean yet more slashing of public spending, pensions, pay. reformist labour gov or not - it will not mean a bigger slice of a smaller pie - they will be in weak positon trying to plug gaps in public finances with the forces of capital ripping into them on multiple fronts.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> We are where we are -


So we have to argue for more of the same?

Come on, this is myopia of incredible proportions. I'm not arguing that the picture those graphs show is all down to the EU, I'm arguing that "what worked before" didn't remotely work for millions. Hardly a controversial opinion for anyone who's even slightly on "the left", I'd have thought. You might want to remain in the EU but I can't seriously believe you want more Neo-liberalism?

And If you really do want to convince people to oppose leaving the EU then the last thing you want to be doing is arguing for is to turn the the clock back "to when things worked". If all you can offer them is to be continue to see their future, their kids futures getting shat on then you've absolutely no chance.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> brexit means a major economic hit - however you slice it. that will mean yet more slashing of public spending, pensions, pay. reformist labour gov or not - it will not mean a bigger slice of a smaller pie - they will be in weak positon trying to plug gaps in public finances with the forces of capital ripping into them on multiple fronts.


I expect it not to be as major as made out and the opportunity to reverse corporation tax cuts etc give us a chance to sustain and grow a decent public sector, particularly if we start getting away from PFI and the rest.
Of course I might be wrong but to remain in the EU only embeds us deeper in a situation were "there is no alternative" and the onward march of technocracy and democracy-lite where any but the slightest deviation from remote policy is above your pay grade, citizen.


----------



## CRI (Jul 30, 2018)

Why did "leave" win?  Well, this for starters . . .

An £8.4m donation to the Leave campaign may have changed UK history | The Canary



> On 29 July, a report [pdf] entitled _Disinformation and ‘fake news’_ emerged following a cross-party parliamentary inquiry. It examines “issues concerning the very future of democracy” in the UK following the EU referendum. Its findings are damning. But it also revealed [pdf, p51] that a Leave group received the “largest donation to a political campaign in British history”.





> The report [pdf, p5] is unequivocal about the “deliberate distortion of facts” and “political manipulation” during the referendum. As a result, it states: “our democracy is at risk”.  One detail also emerged that shakes the process of the referendum to its core. It states [pdf, p52] that Arron Banks, the founder of Leave.EU, donated a vast sum:
> 
> Arron Banks is believed to have donated £8.4 million to the Leave campaign, the largest political donation in British politics, but it is unclear from where he obtained that amount of money.
> 
> Leave.EU claims to have “played a decisive role” in winning the Brexit vote. The other key Leave.EU player was Nigel Farage.



and

MPs to dig deeper into online political ads



> The Commons digital, culture, media and sports committee backed stricter electoral laws, new taxes on social media companies and limits on voter profiling, in an interim report leaked on Friday. Its full report, expected in the autumn, will include an analysis of a large quantity of data belonging to Aggregate IQ, a Canadian digital advertising company which carried out work for Vote Leave, the official pro-Brexit group.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> brexit means a major economic hit - however you slice it. that will mean yet more slashing of public spending, pensions, pay. reformist labour gov or not -* it will not mean a bigger slice of a smaller pie - *they will be in weak positon trying to plug gaps in public finances with the forces of capital ripping into them on multiple fronts.


“Internal pressure” the key phrase here, no one said brexit will automatically bring socialism.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> 3. Stick with what worked before.


Whatever your views on the EU if you're on the left and unable to see the above for nasty I'm alright Jack shite that it is then you're a mug (at best).


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> I expect it not to be as major as made out and the opportunity to reverse corporation tax cuts etc give us a chance to sustain and grow a decent public sector


Could you explain this a bit more? How is it you feel Brexit provides an opportunity to reverse corporation tax cuts etc?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> I expect it not to be as major as made out and the opportunity to reverse corporation tax cuts etc give us a chance to sustain and grow a decent public sector, particularly if we start getting away from PFI and the rest...



That is the exact opposite of what will happen.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Could you explain this a bit more? How is it you feel Brexit provides an opportunity to reverse corporation tax cuts etc?


As part of an overall opportunity to set a completely different sort of economic policy not tied to a set of free market rules.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That is the exact opposite of what will happen.


well, exactly.  Tories will argue lower Corporation taxes are needed to attract external investment etc.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That is the exact opposite of what will happen.


Because there'll be a permanent Tory majority for ever? They won't last a year.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> As part of an overall opportunity to set a completely different sort of economic policy not tied to a set of free market rules.


That needs a Corbyn government, not brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Because there'll be a permanent Tory majority for ever? They won't last a year.


It doesn't matter who is in government.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

No it needs a strong, empowered working class. To mx wcfc


----------



## mx wcfc (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Because there'll be a permanent Tory majority for ever? They won't last a year.


Ok, I've got your argument now.

Brexit leads to fall of Tories, and a labour government.  Seems reasonable, but tbf you missed a step in your first post, which threw a couple of us!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

its like the snap election literally never happened and there isn't a party proposing to raise corporation tax.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Ok, I've got your argument now.
> 
> Brexit leads to fall of Tories, and a labour government.  Seems reasonable, but tbf you missed a step in your first post, which threw a couple of us!


Well, my view is more there's no hope of ever reversing that trend redsquirrel set out if we stay in the EU rather than it's nailed on if we do leave. Just that more possibilties open up.


----------



## Supine (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> As part of an overall opportunity to set a completely different sort of economic policy not tied to a set of free market rules.



Sounds like pie in the sky to me. Being in the EU hasn't tied us to free market rules and leaving isn't going to make any politicians stop following them. Do you have an example of what this new kind of economic policy would be?


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Supine said:


> Sounds like pie in the sky to me. Being in the EU hasn't tied us to free market rules and leaving isn't going to make any politicians stop following them. Do you have an example of what this new kind of economic policy would be?


Yes, send me an SAE and I'll post you my detailed costings.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Yes, send me an SAE and I'll post you my detailed costings.


Any example will do.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Is this seriously what this place has come to - we can't challenge neo-liberalism so we might as well just give up and accept the increasing poverty, the contraction of wages, the transfer of wealth from the poor to rich. There's no alternative that can be offered. Isn't socialism supposed to turn the world upside down?

Taking a realistic view of the future surely doesn't mean giving up on articulating something better, something that will really change people's lives for the better.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 30, 2018)

We’ve to weesht and eat up our gruel.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> That needs a Corbyn government, not brexit.


An 'economic policy not tied to a set of free market rules' would require something a lot further from the centre than a Corbyn government. Fwiw, I'd agree with Jim that it would require a Brexit, and a hard one at that, but thinking that Brexit can make it even vaguely likely (in a leftward direction,certainly) would be backwards logic.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> An 'economic policy not tied to a set of free market rules' would require something a lot further from the centre than a Corbyn government. Fwiw, I'd agree with Jim that it would require a Brexit, and a hard one at that, but thinking that Brexit can make it more likely (in a leftward direction,certainly) would be backwards logic.


It requires Brexit but brexit won’t make it more likely?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 30, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It requires Brexit but brexit won’t make it more likely?


Yes. For me to be Harry Potter would require me to own a wand, but the fact that I own a wand does not make it more likely that I am Harry Potter.


----------



## Supine (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Taking a realistic view of the future surely doesn't mean giving up on articulating something better, something that will really change people's lives for the better.



People like you don't seem to ever articulate something better though. And your conflating eu membership with domestic policy, the two are not related. Tbh any kind of lexit reason to leave is at best a very nieve view of where we are and where we are heading. 

It looks to me like a rush to the bottom with a low tax / high austerity Tory government for the foreseeable future, and that's not what any of us want I'm sure.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes. For me to be Harry Potter would require me to own a wand, but the fact that I own a wand does not make it more likely that I am Harry Potter.


 I get that it's far from given and slim hopes at best, just genuinely see remaining as continuing the slow slide into a post-democratic technocracy where people far more clever than you and I set policy to help spreadsheets look better. read a bit by whatsisface ex-greek minister and their campaign for a better Eu but that seems even more unlikely as the forces that would push any change would be too scattered.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

how do we explain then that we were told by the same voices scoffing now that brexit meant tory government forever, yet the snap election delivered an increased labour vote on a left manifesto? A left manifesto of the sort we were told is electoral poison?

I love how you have to completely ignore that to keep wailing and calling others naive


----------



## CRI (Jul 30, 2018)

CRI said:


> Why did "leave" win?  Well, this for starters . . .
> 
> An £8.4m donation to the Leave campaign may have changed UK history | The Canary
> 
> ...



And don't forget this old favourite:



and oddly enough this one


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

Supine said:


> People like you don't seem to ever articulate something better though.


JimW just has.


Supine said:


> And your conflating eu membership with domestic policy, the two are not related. Tbh any kind of lexit reason to leave is at best a very nieve view of where we are and where we are heading.


I'm not conflating anything. FFS you're so bound up by fucking Brexit that it is literally inconceivable to you that there is a politics beyond it. The points I'm making apply every socialist whether they voted leave, remain or abstained.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

Supine said:


> People like you don't seem to ever articulate something better though. And your conflating eu membership with domestic policy, the two are not related. Tbh any kind of lexit reason to leave is at best a very nieve view of where we are and where we are heading.
> 
> It looks to me like a rush to the bottom with a low tax / high austerity Tory government for the foreseeable future, and that's not what any of us want I'm sure.


Strikes me as quite naive to think domestic policy over governments of successive stripes over the past decades and EU membership _aren't _related, insofar at least as it helped enable the neoliberal turn.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> how do we explain then that we were told by the same voices scoffing now that brexit meant tory government forever, yet the snap election delivered an increased labour vote on a left manifesto? A left manifesto of the sort we were told is electoral poison?
> 
> I love how you have to completely ignore that to keep wailing and calling others naive


The Tories also increased their share of the vote and remained in power.


----------



## Supine (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> how do we explain then that we were told by the same voices scoffing now that brexit meant tory government forever, yet the snap election delivered an increased labour vote on a left manifesto? A left manifesto of the sort we were told is electoral poison?



I was cool with the manifesto but thought it was embarrassing that the left didn't win by a landslide. How bad do the Tories need to be before the left can win! I took no joy from almost winning.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The Tories also increased their share of the vote and remained in power.



in an election where the the tories lost thier majority and had to bribe the DUP to maintain a government. This, according to all wise sages was not going to happen. The point being the assumption was made that brexit meant a lurch rightwards electorally forever. And that turned out to be false, so you'll forgive me if I just laugh at the half weight prognostications


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yes. For me to be Harry Potter would require me to own a wand, but the fact that I own a wand does not make it more likely that I am Harry Potter.


I understand what you said, but moving away from Harry Potter is it necessary to repeat a statement (again) that no one has made aaaaah


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Strikes me as quite naive to think domestic policy over governments of successive stripes over the past decades and EU membership _aren't _related, insofar at least as it helped enable the neoliberal turn.


The UK was at the vanguard of that neoliberal turn. Right from Thatcher onwards (some would no doubt argue from Callaghan onwards). This is the bit I still don't really see an explanation of - how does brexit change that? At the moment, the real danger is that it will merely accelerate it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> in an election where the the tories lost thier majority and had to bribe the DUP to maintain a government. This, according to all wise sages was not going to happen. The point being the assumption was made that brexit meant a lurch rightwards electorally forever. And that turned out to be false, so you'll forgive me if I just laugh at the half weight prognostications


Who said these things though? Pretty sure I didn't. Corbyn won a landslide election as labour leader long before the brexit referendum - these forces were already in play, not somehow magicked into existence by brexit.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The UK was at the vanguard of that neoliberal turn. Right from Thatcher onwards (some would no doubt argue from Callaghan onwards). This is the bit I still don't really see an explanation of - how does brexit change that? At the moment, the real danger is that it will merely accelerate it.


True and why she was keen on being in a free trade entity. Mostly I think it removes one of the enabling props and brings politics back closer to home. As a nation we certainly helped shape the way it is but you look at the imposed governments in Italy etc and you can see where it's headed IMO.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> True and why she was keen on being in a free trade entity. Mostly I think it removes one of the enabling props and brings politics back closer to home. As a nation we certainly helped shape the way it is but you look at the imposed governments in Italy etc and you can see where it's headed IMO.


The brexit wet dream of most leave-supporting tories is to be allowed to strip away social and environmental protections, to asset-strip even more, and to move the UK towards a US-style hire-and-fire economy. For them the EU isn't neoliberal enough. 

I bore myself repeating this shit, but David Davis was explicit about his wishes for brexit right from the start - his 'vision' (for which, read 'delusion' really, as he badly underestimated the level of EU resistance towards it) was of a differential system in which different standards are applied depending on which market a good is being prepared for. That's a race to the bottom. Now Davis is gone now, but the other shites still there want much the same thing.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 30, 2018)

Folks, stop squabbling. The path to socialism revealed by galaxy-brain redsquirrel isn't about jobs or anything as mundane as that, it's about *checks notes* joining a residents's association!?


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The brexit wet dream of most leave-supporting tories is to be allowed to strip away social and environmental protections, to asset-strip even more, and to move the UK towards a US-style hire-and-fire economy. For them the EU isn't neoliberal enough.
> 
> I bore myself repeating this shit, but David Davis was explicit about his wishes for brexit right from the start - his 'vision' (for which, read 'delusion' really, as he badly underestimated the level of EU resistance towards it) was of a differential system in which different standards are applied depending on which market a good is being prepared for. That's a race to the bottom. Now Davis is gone now, but the other shites still there want much the same thing.


Well, yes, we know the right wingers are right wingers. Point is surely to defeat them here not rely on a veneer of social and environmental legislation from the same institution that is enabling the sort of free market that will never really be controlled by social demands in that framework.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Who said these things though? Pretty sure I didn't. Corbyn won a landslide election as labour leader long before the brexit referendum - these forces were already in play, not somehow magicked into existence by brexit.


do you think these same forces have any bearing on the brexit vote? At all?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> Well, yes, we know the right wingers are right wingers. Point is surely to defeat them here not rely on a veneer of social and environmental legislation from the same institution that is enabling the sort of free market that will never really be controlled by social demands in that framework.


But this is where I see confusion. Mysterious talk of the EU 'cabal' and the like. They're negotiating with the Tories. We are not no the tories' side here. This isn't us, Britain, battling against them, the EU. Not accusing you particularly here, but I see some comments that seem to forget this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> do you think these same forces have any bearing on the brexit vote? At all?


Those forces can also be taken advantage of by the populist right. Disaffection with a failing system can and does take many forms, not all of them positive.


----------



## JimW (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But this is where I see confusion. Mysterious talk of the EU 'cabal' and the like. They're negotiating with the Tories. We are not no the tories' side here. This isn't us, Britain, battling against them, the EU. Not accusing you particularly here, but I see some comments that seem to forget this.


Yeah, I don't think it's some cabal so much as an institution with a set dynamic that is technocratic and pro-market and won't be turned from by us. We will leave under a shambolic but dangerous Tory government but that situation is more amenable to change.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The brexit wet dream of most leave-supporting tories is to be allowed to strip away social and environmental protections, to asset-strip even more, and to move the UK towards a US-style hire-and-fire economy. For them the EU isn't neoliberal enough.


And the dream of Cable, Cameron, Merkel, Verhofstadt, Carney, Selmayr, etc is also for increasing exploitation, technocracy the imposition of free trade. Shits want shit stuff.


TheHoodedClaw said:


> Folks, stop squabbling. The path to socialism revealed by galaxy-brain redsquirrel isn't about jobs or anything as mundane as that, it's about *checks notes* joining a residents's association!?


If you're so contemptuous of my vision of socialism how about you outline yours. Are Labour councils in coalition with Tories socialism? Were the attacks on the working class by New Labour socialism? Is it ideological purity to see shits like Mandelson as the enemy? What is socialism to you? Is it about jobs, and if so how? Do you see yourself as a socialist?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Those forces can also be taken advantage of by the populist right. Disaffection with a failing system can and does take many forms, not all of them positive.


As it was insisted they would certainly be in the event of a brexit vote. Yet that proved otherwise at snap election. Circular arguing lbj.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 30, 2018)

brexit fucks the economy - every single study shows that. many leading brexiteers have admitted the same.  left wing labour government or not - they will be seriously hobbled by that in terms of delivering anything progressive - far more likely that they spend a few years fire fighting and borrowing just to keep public services afloat. and then what? we get the tories back in and they use the situation to turn the uk into a deregulated, privatised shit hole. 
Stay in the EU and you at least have more room to do some positive stuff - primarily because you a stronger economy and you are less under pressure from predatory capital. In that scenario you at least have some potential to push against the EU neo-liberalism - esp if you have other leftist governments in - say - spain or portugal. 
I just don't get the lexit argument at all - brexit provides no credible route to a more socialist, egalitarian society - instead it carries a far greater risk of things going in the exact opposite direction.


----------



## Winot (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The brexit wet dream of most leave-supporting tories is to be allowed to strip away social and environmental protections, to asset-strip even more, and to move the UK towards a US-style hire-and-fire economy. For them the EU isn't neoliberal enough.
> 
> I bore myself repeating this shit, but David Davis was explicit about his wishes for brexit right from the start - his 'vision' (for which, read 'delusion' really, as he badly underestimated the level of EU resistance towards it) was of a differential system in which different standards are applied depending on which market a good is being prepared for. That's a race to the bottom. Now Davis is gone now, but the other shites still there want much the same thing.



Yes and Daniel Hannan - in What Next he explicitly says that once the EU has gone the UK state is next.


----------



## magneze (Jul 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


>


Are you feeling OK?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> As it was insisted they would certainly be in the event of a brexit vote. Yet that proved otherwise at snap election. Circular arguing lbj.


Nasty forces were emboldened by the brexit vote. We are still yet to see where that will lead. As for the snap election, I didn't see that coming - I assumed May would limp on to 2020. I was one of those positive voices saying it might not all be lost in the lead up to that election, btw. But it was an election that Labour lost. And another of my predictions - that there would be another election within six months - was wrong. As a general rule, we must never forget the depths to which the tories will debase themselves in order to cling to power.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> If you're so contemptuous of my vision of socialism how about you outline yours. Are Labour councils in coalition with Tories socialism? Were the attacks on the working class by New Labour socialism? Is it ideological purity to see shits like Mandelson as the enemy? What is socialism to you? Are you even a socialist?



Have you quite finished editing this post?


----------



## sealion (Jul 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


>


Don't forget to return it when you go back to school.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Have you quite finished editing this post?


yes


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nasty forces were emboldened by the brexit vote. We are still yet to see where that will lead. As for the snap election, I didn't see that coming - I assumed May would limp on to 2020. I was one of those positive voices saying it might not all be lost in the lead up to that election, btw. But it was an election that Labour lost. And another of my predictions - that there would be another election within six months - was wrong. As a general rule, we must never forget the depths to which the tories will debase themselves in order to cling to power.


a grasp that seems more precarious than ever and a labour left government nipping at the heels. Lets not get giddy here, its fucking labour still, left or otherwise, but that is where we are at.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 30, 2018)

JimW said:


> social and environmental legislation from the same institution


That remit doesn't appear to cover legislating against fracking and the persecution of minority groups by member states but STILL. At least the thought was there


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> yes



Good, glad you got it shaped into the perfection that it is. I'm probably not a socialist, at least not one that'd be acceptable to you. I think the best that can be hoped for is some highly-moderated form of capitalism, so I dunno a social democrat of some sort? 

I do agree with you about local organisation though - that is never the wrong thing to do - even just on a community-scale support network basis.

I also think there are venerable old structures like mutuals and co-operatives that probably could do with a bit of a revival. I'm pretty sure that that's something a couple of the Co-Op Party MPs have been working on for Labour


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I think the best that can be hoped for is some highly-moderated form of capitalism, so I dunno a social democrat of some sort?


Right, so you see a distinction between socialism and social democracy. What about Mandelson, Blair, Progress? You don't seen any conflict between their politics and yours? 

And considering that any attempt by the UK (or another other country) to nationalise industries, increase taxes, roll back anti-strike legislation - in short to make any serious moves towards social democracy will be met with the same threats to "the economy" as the UK leaving the EU how do you support such measures?


----------



## Raheem (Jul 31, 2018)

JimW said:


> I get that it's far from given and slim hopes at best, just genuinely see remaining as continuing the slow slide into a post-democratic technocracy where people far more clever than you and I set policy to help spreadsheets look better.


I'm not by any means saying this argument is a big fat nothing, but I think that in order for it to be really compelling you need to greatly exaggerate how open, responsive and transparent the UK political system is, at the same time as greatly exaggerating the scope of EU legislation. The reality is that pretty much everything that gets openly debated in the EU parliament, though I am not suggesting for a moment that it is just trivial stuff, is stuff that, were it not being decided in the EU parliament (distant, hollow and deathly dull as it is, I will agree) would otherwise be done at best by UK statutory instrument with little or no public debate, or else by some civil servant at some level, who may or may not get the opportunity to mention it to the relevant minister between their massage and their interview with John Humphries. Which is not to say it doesn't matter, but that the difference is not really about how wonderful things are in the UK compared to the secretive bureaucracy of the EU.


----------



## The39thStep (Jul 31, 2018)

????


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Right, so you see a distinction between socialism and social democracy. What about Mandelson, Blair, Progress? You don't seen any conflict between their politics and yours?



What the fuck is this witless shit? MANDELSON!!!!!


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And considering that any attempt by the UK (or another other country) to nationalise industries, increase taxes, roll back anti-strike legislation - in short to make any serious moves towards social democracy will be met with the same threats to "the economy" as the UK leaving the EU how do you support such measures?



Being in the Single Market - and it really is all about the SM - doesn't prevent any of that?


----------



## J Ed (Jul 31, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Being in the Single Market - and it really is all about the SM - doesn't prevent any of that?



Yes it does. The EU single market is incompatible with Labour’s manifesto


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 31, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Yes it does. The EU single market is incompatible with Labour’s manifesto



Others disagree. Renewal  | EU law is no barrier to Labour’s economic programme

Where does that leave us?


----------



## J Ed (Jul 31, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Others disagree. Renewal  | EU law is no barrier to Labour’s economic programme
> 
> Where does that leave us?



The reality is that, while in the EU, at the very least _interpretations of_ EU law can be used as an additional stick to beat a Labour government with and there will be no shortage of sticks anyway so frankly a Labour government wanting to implement the social democratic reforms outlined in the manifesto would find it easier to do so outside of the EU.


----------



## The39thStep (Jul 31, 2018)

Interest comment


> A senior EU official involved in the Brexit negotiations is quoted as saying:
> 
> “The idea that Conservatives would legislate a race to the bottom is a myth and no one really believes it, even if some Tories have helped create it. The real fear is state subsidies under a Jeremy Corbyn government. British policy has remained unchanged for generations but now there is a real chance of a left-wing government reversing it. We have to protect ourselves and the single market.”
> 
> ...


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Others disagree. Renewal  | EU law is no barrier to Labour’s economic programme
> 
> Where does that leave us?


Not that eu competition lawyer Tarrent again. His arguements were trashed in the article BA linked to back in march:


butchersapron said:


> This, if you pretend the fields endorsement at the top doesn't exist, is very good - and it has the E.P Thompson anti-EEC line that i was groping for during the campaign and just couldn't find:
> 
> “For when an altruistic glint gets into the bourgeois eye one can be sure that someone is about to catch it"
> 
> ...


----------



## Raheem (Jul 31, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Yes it does. The EU single market is incompatible with Labour’s manifesto


That's far from the worst lexiter article I've read on the subject. Most of it is perfectly correct. But there's a key assertion it makes, that the Fourth Railway Package makes competitive tendering compulsory, that isn't entirely true, and it changes everything. To be clear, I'm of the opinion that the FRP is a work of complete shit, and I do not blame the author for opposing it. But it allows loopholes in its competitive tendering rules. Firstly, the government can exempt all local and regional rail. For national services, it can exempt them if this "would result in an improvement in quality of services or cost-efficiency", in its opinion. Lastly, the FRB allows "vertical integration" of rail services, meaning it is permissible to create one state-owned national rail provider, which probably no private company would bid for even if it were put out to competitive tendering.


----------



## JimW (Jul 31, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I'm not by any means saying this argument is a big fat nothing, but I think that in order for it to be really compelling you need to greatly exaggerate how open, responsive and transparent the UK political system is, at the same time as greatly exaggerating the scope of EU legislation. The reality is that pretty much everything that gets openly debated in the EU parliament, though I am not suggesting for a moment that it is just trivial stuff, is stuff that, were it not being decided in the EU parliament (distant, hollow and deathly dull as it is, I will agree) would otherwise be done at best by UK statutory instrument with little or no public debate, or else by some civil servant at some level, who may or may not get the opportunity to mention it to the relevant minister between their massage and their interview with John Humphries. Which is not to say it doesn't matter, but that the difference is not really about how wonderful things are in the UK compared to the secretive bureaucracy of the EU.


I'm not making an argument that our system is better, only that we have more chance of changing it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 31, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> What the fuck is this witless shit? MANDELSON!!!!!


You've specifically said that you want a broad based coalition, I'm asking how you how far this coalition extends. Not sure what is witless about that.



TheHoodedClaw said:


> Being in the Single Market - and it really is all about the SM - doesn't prevent any of that?


I never said it did, that's irrelevant to what I asked. Moves to social democracy will also be opposed because of the damage they will do to "the economy" so are you opposed to them or not?


----------



## kabbes (Jul 31, 2018)

The point redsquirrel has repeatedly made and had ignored is that socialist bedrocks such as nationalisation of an industry and wealth redistribution via high taxation would also undoubtedly harm “the economy” because of the way “the economy” is defined and measured.  So, he wants to know, are you against _all_ things that harm “the economy” or only _this specific_ thing that harms “the economy”?

I think it’s an entirely fair question for anyone arguing Brexit is bad because it harms “the economy”

As to whether Brexit results in fewer secure jobs or wage deflation in real terms — well, the evidence for that is much scantier.  Because when all these think tanks talk about “the economy” and how much Brexit will hurt it, they aren’t measuring or even referencing security of wage or labour power. They’re simply projecting national output.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

Some internal Labour Party stuff going on: 

Corbyn's Brexit policy likely to be challenged at Labour conference


----------



## philosophical (Jul 31, 2018)

sealion said:


> Don't forget to return it when you go back to school.



Is there some kind of point you're trying to make?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 31, 2018)

magneze said:


> Are you feeling OK?



What does it matter to you?


----------



## teuchter (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The point redsquirrel has repeatedly made and had ignored is that socialist bedrocks such as nationalisation of an industry and wealth redistribution via high taxation would also undoubtedly harm “the economy” because of the way “the economy” is defined and measured.  So, he wants to know, are you against _all_ things that harm “the economy” or only _this specific_ thing that harms “the economy”?
> 
> I think it’s an entirely fair question for anyone arguing Brexit is bad because it harms “the economy”



The answer to that question is not very complicated, for me.

I'm against things that are likely to 'harm the economy' unless they provide something of benefit in return.

I'd support higher taxation because it seems plausible that it would allow a reduction in inequality even if it might have a negative effect on some measure like GDP.

I don't see any plausible benefits of Brexit that are likely to outweigh the negative effects.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's far from the worst lexiter article I've read on the subject. Most of it is perfectly correct. But there's a key assertion it makes, that the Fourth Railway Package makes competitive tendering compulsory, that isn't entirely true, and it changes everything [...]


Sorry, but it is entirely true.
Even Tarrent doesn't contest the fact that tendering is a mandatory requirement in his 'myth busting' paper:




			
				Tarrent - 'Busting the Lexit Myths said:
			
		

> Bidding rules for rail passenger franchises do not prevent state ownership:  *The EU’s Fourth Rail package requires companies to competitively tender* for rail passenger services. This does not prevent a bidder from being state owned...





Raheem said:


> But it allows loopholes in its competitive tendering rules.


So your first assertion that compulsory tendering isn't entirly true is wrong. What you're saying is that there's a loophole in the (entirely true) compulsory tendering process ---> i.e  Tarrent's line.
We discussed this up-thread. It's a ridiculous strategy to think that you can skew the tendering process to enable a state operator to win, or simply make the assumption the state operator will win due to their economy of scale advantage.
The tendering process will open up the possibility of private companies underbidding and driving the prices down to uneconomical levels just to win contracts in order to break up the state operator and/or bankrupt it. That's the system we have now. we want away from that. Right?



Raheem said:


> Firstly, the government can exempt all local and regional rail. For national services, it can exempt them if this "would result in an improvement in quality of services or cost-efficiency", in its opinion. Lastly, the FRB allows "vertical integration" of rail services, meaning it is permissible to create one state-owned national rail provider, which probably no *private company *would bid for even if it were put out to competitive tendering.


What if that 'private company' were a local UK based subsidiary of Deutsche Bahn or SNCF. Do you think a new British Rail could get it's foot in the door of competitive tendering against either of those?

Why do you think the EU went to all the effort to create four iterations of a regulation package, solely intended to privatise 'its' internal rail markets, if they wanted to allow nationalisation to prosper.


> - Its overarching goal is to revitalise the rail sector and make it more competitive vis-à-vis other modes of transport.
> - Directive 2016/2370/EU amending Directive 2012/34/EU, which deals with the opening of the market of domestic passenger transport services by rail and the governance of the railway infrastructure ('Governance Directive')
> -The market pillar will complete the process of gradual market opening started with the 1st railway package. It establishes the general right for railway undertakings established in one Member State to operate all types of passenger services everywhere in the EU, lays down rules aimed at improving impartiality in the governance of railway infrastructure and preventing discrimination and introduces the principle of* mandatory tendering for public service contracts in rail*.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

there's a difference between polices which have wider benefits other than (short term) maximisation of economic growth as their overriding goal (i.e building council houses, investing in education  and higher wages vs deregulated finance, tax cuts and privatisation) - and ones which hobble the overall economy.
Brexit is very much in the latter camp - every time there has been that sort of blow to the economy - from the 70s oil crisis to the 2008 financial crash - it has resulted in slashing of public spending, lower wages and unemployment.
The  EU rules and their impact on labours policies is unclear.
However, whilst the neo-liberal dogmatists are have clearly been dominant within the EU, i see the potential for that agenda being pushed back by the a labour led uk plus other members states as greater than the potential for progressive polices being enacted outside the EU with a much weaker economy.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> As to whether Brexit results in fewer secure jobs or wage deflation in real terms — well, the evidence for that is much scantier.  Because when all these think tanks talk about “the economy” and how much Brexit will hurt it, they aren’t measuring or even referencing security of wage or labour power. They’re simply projecting national output.



So a "few precious GDP points" knocked off the 0.1% growth/record household debt position we're in isn't really about jobs and wages but "simply" about output? Yeah right. Good on pedantry, not so good on reality.

A crash out exit will be a big shock, theres no escaping it, whatever the technical definition of GDP. That's the one im worried about from a poverty-increasing point of view.

Depending on the deal on the table a rule taking Norwegian soft exit would be a much smaller short term negative impact on the real economy id expect but carries a potentially higher reactionary political price.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> However, whilst the neo-liberal dogmatists are have clearly been dominant within the EU, i see the potential for that agenda being pushed back by the a labour led uk plus other members states as greater than the potential for progressive polices being enacted outside the EU with a much weaker economy.


But there's a massive surge towards right wing politics in the EU. For all the "Tory Brexit" soundbites here, the arguement also needs to be balanced in that it would have been a "Right Wing EU Remain"
A Corbyn led UK would be eaten for breakfast in the EU by the current mob.
I see no reason to believe that the trend rightwards in the EU will revere in the foreseeable future.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> there's a difference between polices which have wider benefits other than (short term) maximisation of economic growth as their overriding goal (i.e building council houses, investing in education  and higher wages vs deregulated finance, tax cuts and privatisation) - and ones which hobble the overall economy.
> Brexit is very much in the latter camp - every time there has been that sort of blow to the economy - from the 70s oil crisis to the 2008 financial crash - it has resulted in slashing of public spending, lower wages and unemployment.
> The  EU rules and their impact on labours policies is unclear.
> However, whilst the neo-liberal dogmatists are have clearly been dominant within the EU, i see the potential for that agenda being pushed back by the a labour led uk plus other members states as greater than the potential for progressive polices being enacted outside the EU with a much weaker economy.


Brexit is only in the “no wider benefits” camp if the nation decides it should be that way.  It isn’t inherent to leaving the EU that the U.K. necessarily continues on its same path.  That’s the point, indeed — options for wider benefits open up that were previously unavailable.  Like socialist policies that would be all but impossible whilst remaining in the EU.  There’s your wider benefits.

It’s an entirely plausible path for Brexit to cause a few points of drop to GDP whilst also decreasing inequality and increasing wage security, if the nation elects to go that way.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> A Corbyn led UK would be eaten for breakfast in the EU by the current mob.



And a Boris Johson-led UK will be served for breakfast to the US...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Brexit is only in the “no wider benefits” camp if the nation decides it should be that way.  It isn’t inherent to leaving the EU that the U.K. necessarily continues on its same path.  That’s the point, indeed — options for wider benefits open up that were previously unavailable.  Like socialist policies that would be all but impossible whilst remaining in the EU.  There’s your wider benefits.
> 
> It’s an entirely plausible path for Brexit to cause a few points of drop to GDP whilst also decreasing inequality and increasing wage security, if the nation elects to go that way.


What is this fantasy world? If the nation elects? Even assuming a l/w govt could get elected, how do you think wider international capitalist interests will respond to attempts at l/w policy decisions. The idea that an independent UK might have greater freedom of action than a UK working to change things within the EU is not a given by any stretch. Not to mention the nationalist as opposed to internationalist assumptions and aspirations in this post.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What is this fantasy world? If the nation elects? Even assuming a l/w govt could get elected, how do you think wider international capitalist interests will respond to attempts at l/w policy decisions. The idea that an independent UK might have greater freedom of action than a UK working to change things within the EU is not a given by any stretch. Not to mention the nationalist as opposed to internationalist assumptions and aspirations in this post.


Why is a democratically elected national government influencing its own national policies any more of a fantasy world than a given national government (lets say a l/w Labour UK gov) influencing 27 other nations to change their national policies?


----------



## sealion (Jul 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is there some kind of point you're trying to make?


What point were you making with this shit?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 31, 2018)

sealion said:


> What point were you making with this shit?



Earlier in this thread there was another mock 'Ladybird' cover. It was post 9448.
It acted as a form of commentary on the debate, as do other images such as the 'There Will be Adequate Food' wording mocked up on the '350 million bus".
So if I was making a point it was the same or similar to the other points made by other posters who put up images.
You have selected me to dig out which seems to be a bit uneven handed and even rather nasty on your part, but maybe that's your general modus operandi.


----------



## sealion (Jul 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You have selected me to dig out which seems to be a bit uneven handed and even rather nasty on your part, but maybe that's your general modus operandi.


Playing the victim again! 


philosophical said:


> So if I was making a point it was the same or similar to the other points made by other posters who put up images.


It's not just me miss the whole class did it too


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Brexit is only in the “no wider benefits” camp if the nation decides it should be that way.  It isn’t inherent to leaving the EU that the U.K. necessarily continues on its same path.  That’s the point, indeed — options for wider benefits open up that were previously unavailable.  Like socialist policies that would be all but impossible whilst remaining in the EU.  There’s your wider benefits.
> 
> It’s an entirely plausible path for Brexit to cause a few points of drop to GDP whilst also decreasing inequality and increasing wage security, if the nation elects to go that way.



"a few points off GDP" would mean even greater poverty and a existential crises for the NHS. To salvage some sort of socialist policies out of that you would have to have an old school, centrist, authoritarian regime - imposition of capital controls, seizing assess - basically an isolationist model that nobody is going to vote for.  More likely its crises management and then a real danger of the tories getting back in with their eager axe. And a more isolationist UK will also be a further boon for the ugly naitonalism that brexit has released.  
The here and now is not about building socialism through some convoluted set of circumstance post brexit (seriously - what are the chance of that? its fucking delusional)  - its about keeping the NHS, reducing poverty and giving people decent homes and jobs - brexit will fuck the chances of that big time. precisely because of " a few points of GDP" (i.e. a major recession)  followed by reduced economic growth and higher prices.  
Yes - the EU as it is currently set up is still pushing for greater neo-liberalsim, but their is also greater resistance to that across the member states - especially post 2008. And those neo-liberal forces will be even harder to resist outside the EU - because the UK will be in a much weaker position and coronations and major economic powers like the USA  and china  will be pushing for much greater "liberalisation" in return for market access. 

Scrap brexit. Stay in for now, do whats possible, see what happens.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "a few points off GDP" would mean even greater poverty and a existential crises for the NHS.


Why?

Did doubling real GDP from the 70s to the present day mean less poverty and a robust, healthy NHS?

What is the actual relationship between GDP and poverty?  What is the actual relationship between GDP and public services?  Why assume such a direct link when history shows this not to be the case?


----------



## philosophical (Jul 31, 2018)

sealion said:


> Playing the victim again!
> 
> It's not just me miss the whole class did it too



Can't you be a bit more original in your defence of your snideness? The 'playing the victim again' line is hackneyed to say the least.
You decided to ask about me posting 'this shit', but not ask others. 
I replied. 
That you want to compound your snide behaviour by bouncing things back to me strengthens my view that as an individual your modus operandi is to be disrespectful and insulting.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Why is a democratically elected national government influencing its own national policies any more of a fantasy world than a given national government (lets say a l/w Labour UK gov) influencing 27 other nations to change their national policies?


That's not particularly what I'm referring to. Working to change the direction of travel within the EU by, among other things, proposing and pushing through policies that EU treaties might be read as prohibiting by, for instance, invoking national interest exceptions. Lots of this stuff has not been tested, and the idea that a UK govt would be slapped down by an all-powerful EU isn't really borne out by recent history. As an example, France simply ignored various rules regarding the euro and borrowing. They were in violation of eurozone rules and the EU did absolutely nothing about it. The EU would not be in a strong position to block clear manifesto commitments. I think some here overstate the EU's power over national  govts. They can horsewhip the likes of Greece, but not the likes of France or the UK.


----------



## sealion (Jul 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> disrespectful and insulting.


Fuck off


----------



## philosophical (Jul 31, 2018)

sealion said:


> Fuck off



Laugh out loud time.
After a while away I simply post a ladybird cover mock up.
You have then manipulated a rather mild thing into 'fuck off' in just a few short steps.
Do you have a box of tissues, or the remains of a toilet roll by your side whilst you do this stuff?


----------



## sealion (Jul 31, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Laugh out loud time.
> After a while away I simply post a ladybird cover mock up.
> You have then manipulated a rather mild thing into 'fuck off' in just a few short steps.
> Do you have a box of tissues, or the remains of a toilet roll by your side whilst you do this stuff?


Fuck off


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 31, 2018)

He actually posted "laugh out loud".


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not particularly what I'm referring to. Working to change the direction of travel within the EU by, among other things, proposing and pushing through policies that EU treaties might be read as prohibiting by, for instance, invoking national interest exceptions. Lots of this stuff has not been tested, and the idea that a UK govt would be slapped down by an all-powerful EU isn't really borne out by recent history. As an example, France simply ignored various rules regarding the euro and borrowing. They were in violation of eurozone rules and the EU did absolutely nothing about it. The EU would not be in a strong position to block clear manifesto commitments. I think some here overstate the EU's power over national  govts. They can horsewhip the likes of Greece, but not the likes of France or the UK.



In this video: Grace Blakeley, who is a pro-Brexit economist from the IPPR, says sort of the same thing: ie, that "it's not massively the state aid rules" because there's a debate about the extent to which EU "law" is actually law. 

Her argument is that the most important positive (and potentially left-wing) effect of Brexit (she wants a "hard but managed Brexit") is that in leaving the single market we would be able to control the movement of capital within the UK economy and in and out of the UK economy. 

 

If sharing Novara Media stuff makes me non-grata in some way, well, there you go. . . I had this on this morning and that question turned up fairly concurrently with its discussion here.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The point redsquirrel has repeatedly made and had ignored is that socialist bedrocks such as nationalisation of an industry and wealth redistribution via high taxation would also undoubtedly harm “the economy” because of the way “the economy” is defined and measured.  So, he wants to know, are you against _all_ things that harm “the economy” or only _this specific_ thing that harms “the economy”?
> 
> I think it’s an entirely fair question for anyone arguing Brexit is bad because it harms “the economy”
> 
> As to whether Brexit results in fewer secure jobs or wage deflation in real terms — well, the evidence for that is much scantier.  Because when all these think tanks talk about “the economy” and how much Brexit will hurt it, they aren’t measuring or even referencing security of wage or labour power. They’re simply projecting national output.


why would either of those measures harm the economy?

IMO they'd do the opposite, and the argument that they would harm the economy is just a neoliberal myth that's pretty simple to disprove - neither measure harmed the post war economy in the UK that performed far better than the neoliberal version of the last few decades.

Personally I'm against measures / policies that would cause significant reductions in the standard of living for the majority of people in this country, particularly those in the most precarious of circumstances. 

If a measure such as imposing a much higher level of corporation tax or anti-taxavoidance measures were to significantly reduce the disposable income / net wealth of the richest few percent of the country and that also led in some way to a temporary reduction in GDP then I'd still be in favour of it despite the notional reduction in GDP, as long as it was implemented in a way that didn't result in mass capital flight from the UK that led to a big negative impacts for people's jobs or something similar (which I'd view as being entirely possible to do).


----------



## kabbes (Jul 31, 2018)

To avoid getting sidetracked into an economic debate about the impact of political decisions on measures of output, can we just agree that socialist policies are preferred by socialists _even if_ they are expected reduce measures of national output, and that this is not a bad thing?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Why?
> 
> Did doubling real GDP from the 70s to the present day mean less poverty and a robust, healthy NHS?
> 
> What is the actual relationship between GDP and poverty?  What is the actual relationship between GDP and public services?  Why assume such a direct link when history shows this not to be the case?



history very clearly shows that every recession and economic hit since forever - and certainly over the last 50 years -  has resulted in slashing of public spending, unemployment and wage squeezes. The NHS needs above inflation increases in funding year on year due to changes in demographics and in advances medical technology, new treatments etc. NHS spending as a share of GDP is - i think - slightly lower than in the 70s - but still consumes a lot more resources than then in real terms. Post brexit trade deals will make the uk very vulnerable to the NHS being privatised.

"Make the rich pay" - for sure, but getting their wealth is not just a case of issuing a dictat - it will involve a fierce political battle and involves time and political strength - i.e a decent majority in parliament, a strong trade union movement, widespread popular support. 

 A (hypothetical) labour government will not be in the same position as in 1945 where it had a landslide majority and inherited a very centralised, government controlled economy and a much higher degree of self sufficiency than today. It will be weak and attacked on all sides.

I just think its magical thinking that brexit will open up opportunities for a more leftist economy - it will lead to an increasingly isolated UK, with a weaker economy, with a resurgent far right and far less able to resist the raptors of capital especially if there further economic shocks (another banking crash, climate shit, energy crises who knows?)   And even if labour take control, they could very easily be turfed out by the tories within a few years.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not particularly what I'm referring to. Working to change the direction of travel within the EU by, among other things, proposing and pushing through policies that EU treaties might be read as prohibiting by, for instance, invoking national interest exceptions. Lots of this stuff has not been tested, and the idea that a UK govt would be slapped down by an all-powerful EU isn't really borne out by recent history. As an example, France simply ignored various rules regarding the euro and borrowing. They were in violation of eurozone rules and the EU did absolutely nothing about it. The EU would not be in a strong position to block clear manifesto commitments. I think some here overstate the EU's power over national  govts. They can horsewhip the likes of Greece, but not the likes of France or the UK.


Wow. This is a new turn in the discussion. Stay in and simply ignore EU law. Let me think how that will work. Where do we draw the line?

Actually, now you mention it, it is quite appealing: Ignore ECJ rulings, ignore the commision. So fuck paying any contributions as well as they don't have any power over us. Genius


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Wow. This is a new turn in the discussion. Stay in and simply ignore EU law. Let me think how that will work. Where do we draw the line?
> 
> Actually, now you mention it, it is quite appealing: Ignore ECJ rulings, ignore the commision. So fuck paying any contributions as well as they don't have any power over us. Genius


Have you read the relevant bits relating to, for instance, nationalisation? They include various 'get-outs' regarding national interest. As I said, many of these boundaries have not been tested as there isn't currently an EU govt wishing to test them.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2018)

Um.


Edit/ fuck it


----------



## agricola (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Wow. This is a new turn in the discussion. Stay in and simply ignore EU law. Let me think how that will work. Where do we draw the line?
> 
> Actually, now you mention it, it is quite appealing: Ignore ECJ rulings, ignore the commision. So fuck paying any contributions as well as they don't have any power over us. Genius



It is a perfectly valid point; the vast majority of this idea that the EU tells us what to do (over immigration, privatization, marketization etc) is actually down to our Government seeking to avoid the blame for its own policy decisions.  You only have to look at the railways for the truth of that.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

So what's stopping the UK squatting the single market?
i.e: paying no contributions and regulating however we like?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> So what's stopping the UK squatting the single market?
> i.e: paying no contributions and regulating however we like?


Because no-one will buy or sell with us.  They have a thing called solidarity.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because no-one will buy or sell with us.  They have a thing called solidarity.


You can bet your bottom dollor they'll sell. They have this thing called greed.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 31, 2018)

The 4th railway package was actually watered down from its original proposals, following objections from Germany and France. I believe this is where some of the 'get out clauses' came from. It seems quite plausible to me that a UK government who, say, wanted to pursue nationalisation of the railways, could have successfully pushed for a further watering-down. But the UK didn't because that's not what our government wanted; indeed a lot of the 4RP seems to be inspired by the UK's rail privatisation model which is pretty much the most comprehensive in Europe.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> You can bet your bottom dollor they'll sell. They have this thing called greed.


You're an absolute moron, aren't you.  

Are you aware of the UK (aka English) history with many of these countries...Ireland, Germany, France and so on?

btw on that point...what do you think is going to happen to 'the jungle' at Calais after brexit?   You think the French are going to waste their time keeping immigrants away from the UK when we're not trading partners?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

It was a Eurosceptic argument for years that the UK was the only country that actually followed EU regulations while the French were drinking leaded petrol and unpasteurising their coffee before breakfast.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> btw on that point...what do you think is going to happen to 'the jungle' at Calais after brexit?   You think the French are going to waste their time keeping immigrants away from the UK when we're not trading partners?



What's your angle here? Do you actually want those people to be trapped in those appalling shanty towns getting gassed and beaten by our trading partners?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What's your angle here? Do you actually want those people to be trapped in those appalling shanty towns getting gassed and beaten by our trading partners?


There's no angle...the French will not continue to keep them there after brexit, why should they?


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're an absolute moron, aren't you.
> 
> Are you aware of the UK (aka English) history with many of these countries...Ireland, Germany, France and so on?
> 
> btw on that point...what do you think is going to happen to 'the jungle' at Calais after brexit?   You think the French are going to waste their time keeping immigrants away from the UK when we're not trading partners?


ffs, i wasn't being entirely serious about squatting the market.
But then I wouldnt expect you to have picked up on that.
The irony that her majesty employs abusive people like you with the observation skills of a house brick to work her borders, lecturing away about solidarity, calais and shit.
We really are fucked either way.


----------



## Santino (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> btw on that point...what do you think is going to happen to 'the jungle' at Calais after brexit?   You think the French are going to waste their time keeping immigrants away from the UK when we're not trading partners?





DexterTCN said:


> There's no angle...the French will not continue to keep them there after brexit, why should they?



This is pretty revolting.


----------



## Chz (Jul 31, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> It was a Eurosceptic argument for years that the UK was the only country that actually followed EU regulations while the French were drinking leaded petrol and unpasteurising their coffee before breakfast.


I'm a europhile and I say that all the time. There's more than a nugget of truth to it.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I just think its magical thinking that brexit will open up opportunities for a more leftist economy - it will lead to an increasingly isolated UK, with a weaker economy, with *a resurgent far right* and far *less able to resist the raptors of capital* especially if there further economic shocks And even if labour take control, they could *very easily be turfed out by the tories* within a few years.



I really can't see anything in the experience of austerity, the rise of the far right & the replacement of popularly mandated government with centrally appointed technocrats - as experienced by the EU member states - still more those enjoying the "even more Europe" version obtaining in the eurozone to see exactly what upside we are going to be missing out on post-Brexit in those particular areas




DexterTCN said:


> There's no angle...the French will not continue to keep them there after brexit, why should they?



the Le Touquet agreement on the Calais border is now governed by a bi-lateral treaty signed by May & Macron in January  - & doesn't seem to have any particular tie-up or conditionality with the Brexit process

May and Macron to sign new Calais border treaty


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There's no angle...the French will not continue to keep them there after brexit, why should they?



Most likely there will be some bilateral deal with France which looks a lot like the current shit state of affairs. What I meant by angle though, is whether you think France no longer policing our border would be a good thing or a bad thing. Because you seemed to be using the prospect of people being able to escape the hellish conditions inflicted on them by the French authorities and come to the UK instead as some kind of threat, or an example of how bad it's all going to get.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

[QUOTE="hot air baboon, post: 15671762, member: 64025"...the Le Touquet agreement on the Calais border is now governed by a bi-lateral treaty signed by May & Macron in January  - & doesn't seem to have any particular tie-up or conditionality with the Brexit process

May and Macron to sign new Calais border treaty[/QUOTE]
Yes but the UK border was being defined as in France for this.  That will change with brexit as the UK border will be in the UK...there will be huge pressure on (any) French leader on this after brexit.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

Are we finally getting Calais back then?


----------



## killer b (Jul 31, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> In this video: Grace Blakeley, who is a pro-Brexit economist from the IPPR, says sort of the same thing: ie, that "it's not massively the state aid rules" because there's a debate about the extent to which EU "law" is actually law.
> 
> Her argument is that the most important positive (and potentially left-wing) effect of Brexit (she wants a "hard but managed Brexit") is that in leaving the single market we would be able to control the movement of capital within the UK economy and in and out of the UK economy.
> 
> ...



I didn't notice Grace Blakely was on this, and was avoiding because a) it's novara, and b) george eaton. I'll give it a listen later though, she was on the politics/theory/other podcast the other day and is very good.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

The UK border in France thing is a convenient legal fudge, not a meaningfully real state of affairs. It allows our border control people to operate at their port, and vice versa. That suits both parties and will most likely continue to be the case after Brexit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Are we finally getting Calais back then?



Have you been there? Trust me, we don't want it.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

She's always on Novara...


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

EU negotiators arrive to pay their first tributes to Jeremy Hunt and begin discussions for the relocation of Paris to Kent.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The UK border in France thing is a convenient legal fudge, not a meaningfully real state of affairs. It allows our border control people to operate at their port, and vice versa. That suits both parties and will most likely continue to be the case after Brexit.


I don't think that's realistic.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I don't think that's realistic.



But do you think it's desirable?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> But do you think it's desirable?


The UK would desire it, the UK will not get it.  If it gets any deal the price will be exorbitant and won't last because of French politics.


----------



## pocketscience (Jul 31, 2018)

I'm I right in thinking that Dexter is predicting millions of Asylum seekers camping out in a Dover jungle camp trying to get to the EU promised land once all our food and medicine stockpiles are depleted?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

As right as you are about anything on this thread.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The UK border in France thing is a convenient legal fudge, not a meaningfully real state of affairs. It allows our border control people to operate at their port, and vice versa. That suits both parties and will most likely continue to be the case after Brexit.



It will for France as their booths seem unoccupied or have only one uninterested uniform on show whenever I get the tunnel at Folkestone - they dont seem to give a shit


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

It'll be interesting as more of this reality of Brexit - however exactly it turns out - bumps up against the promises of the Leave campaign. 

Happy days. . .


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

Government's 'no deal' Brexit plans lost on M20 motorway

This is more to do with conditions at the upcoming border than the headline.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2018)

Do you want to Be hit over the head with a bat or stabbed in the arse with a kitchen devil is the L vs R  take for me now. When I take my pragmatic work hat off , I can only see disruption being a good thing for the longer term as long as we don’t fall back into letting the usual suspects retake the wheel of SS United Kingdom afterwards. That is more of a fear than the departure itself


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

What is this "long term" of which you speak?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "a few points off GDP" would mean even greater poverty and a existential crises for the NHS. To salvage some sort of socialist policies out of that you would have to have an old school, centrist, authoritarian regime - imposition of capital controls, seizing assess - basically an isolationist model that nobody is going to vote for.  More likely its crises management and then a real danger of the tories getting back in with their eager axe. And a more isolationist UK will also be a further boon for the ugly naitonalism that brexit has released.
> The here and now is not about building socialism through some convoluted set of circumstance post brexit (seriously - what are the chance of that? its fucking delusional)  - its about keeping the NHS, reducing poverty and giving people decent homes and jobs - brexit will fuck the chances of that big time. precisely because of " a few points of GDP" (i.e. a major recession)  followed by reduced economic growth and higher prices.
> Yes - the EU as it is currently set up is still pushing for greater neo-liberalsim, but their is also greater resistance to that across the member states - especially post 2008. And those neo-liberal forces will be even harder to resist outside the EU - because the UK will be in a much weaker position and coronations and major economic powers like the USA  and china  will be pushing for much greater "liberalisation" in return for market access.
> 
> Scrap brexit. Stay in for now, do whats possible, see what happens.



Hopelessly illiterate


----------



## agricola (Jul 31, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Do you want to Be hit over the head with a bat or stabbed in the arse with a kitchen devil is the L vs R  take for me now. When I take my pragmatic work hat off , I can only see disruption being a good thing for the longer term as long as we don’t fall back into letting the usual suspects retake the wheel of SS United Kingdom afterwards. That is more of a fear than the departure itself



SS United Kingdom?  Bannon's influence must run deeper than anyone has realised.


----------



## bemused (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Government's 'no deal' Brexit plans lost on M20 motorway
> 
> This is more to do with conditions at the upcoming border than the headline.



I still don't think we'll have a no deal. Economics will win out, the EU and UK will come up with some fudge that annoys everyone but keeps most of the cash flowing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because no-one will buy or sell with us.  They have a thing called solidarity.




Best post in the whole thread. 

"We can't take on the bourgeois lads, they have a weapon called solidarity!" 

Say what you like about Dexter he's great value.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hopelessly illiterate



how so?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 31, 2018)

agricola said:


> SS United Kingdom?  Bannon's influence must run deeper than anyone has realised.


MV sceptered isles?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

By Theresa May showing Tory MPs in marginal seats videos of a Corbyn government taking their houses off them after Stalinist show trials after she publishes the advice on No Deal by playing the War Game on BBC1 at 9pm with "IN THE EVENT OF BREXIT" subtitles. 

That's it, isn't it? That's the plan. She's going to scare as much of the Tory party and DUP as she can into voting for what she can get out of the EU - Chequers Minus Minus - and hope that Labour will abstain or back it on the basis that it's better than No Deal. There's no obligation for them to call an election if they go out with No Deal. It might be what the public call for - and I think it would probably happen - but they don't have to call an election until 2022 and Corbyn terrifies them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> how so?



Your entire post - from your belief that the level of GDP is the primary reason for NHS cuts to your idea that stopping Brexit and seeing what happens will resolve the contradictions highlighted by the referendum - rests on a perspective based on delusion.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Your entire post - from your belief that the level of GDP is the primary reason for NHS cuts to your idea that stopping Brexit and seeing what happens will resolve the contradictions highlighted by the referendum - rests on a perspective based on delusion.



i didn't say either of those things. i pointed out that economic shocks - the sort that takes of chunk out of GDP - always result in slashing of public services and the NHS is dependant on a certain level of economic growth. economic growth = greater government income and vise versa. 
And no "staying on and seeing what happens" is not going to solve problems or contradictions - its just somewhat less shit than the alternative  - an outcome where a neo-liberal shit hole under the likes of rees mogg is a far more likely  than a move towards greater equality and less poverty. 
Brexit fucks the economy - the only debate is by how much. How that leads to better pay, less poverty or a well funded NHS is a total fucking mystery to me. please enlighten.


----------



## mauvais (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> economic growth = greater government income and vise versa.


This isn't true, for a start. Correlation at best. What if growth is stimulated by tax cuts?

For clarity, I don't disagree with the thrust of your argument, but direct ties to GDP don't do you any favours.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

mauvais said:


> ... What if growth is stimulated by tax cuts?...


What?  Trickle-down?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i didn't say either of those things. i pointed out that economic shocks - the sort that takes of chunk out of GDP - always result in slashing of public services and the NHS is dependant on a certain level of economic growth. economic growth = greater government income and vise versa.
> And no "staying on and seeing what happens" is not going to solve problems or contradictions - its just somewhat less shit than the alternative  - an outcome where a neo-liberal shit hole under the likes of rees mogg is a far more likely  than a move towards greater equality and less poverty.
> Brexit fucks the economy - the only debate is by how much. How that leads to better pay, less poverty or a well funded NHS is a total fucking mystery to me. please enlighten.



Why aim for the least-worst outcome when you can be ideologically pure instead?

You _can _eat ideology right?


----------



## mauvais (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What?  Trickle-down?


I'm not suggesting it's a _good_ idea. But you can certainly increase GDP whilst simultaneously reducing treasury revenues, or indeed vice versa.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Brexit fucks the economy - the only debate is by how much.



Another issue is how bad the trade deals we make with the US and others will be. This is likely to relate directly to what kind of relationship with the EU. If we have no deal with the EU and everyone knows we're in a position where we'll sign any old shit just to stay in business, any old shit is what we will get.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 31, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Why aim for the least-worst outcome when you can be ideologically pure instead?
> 
> You _can _eat ideology right?


Hey, come on. Take the economics TED Talk on tour, do the food banks. They will tell you what the value of the pound tastes like


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jul 31, 2018)

Regardless of what you think of strategy right now I think it needs saying that we are currently standing here looking at people all over the world making a decision that they have had as much as “least worst” as they are prepared to take. That horse has bolted.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i didn't say either of those things. i pointed out that economic shocks - the sort that takes of chunk out of GDP - always result in slashing of public services and the NHS is dependant on a certain level of economic growth. economic growth = greater government income and vise versa.
> And no "staying on and seeing what happens" is not going to solve problems or contradictions - its just somewhat less shit than the alternative  - an outcome where a neo-liberal shit hole under the likes of rees mogg is a far more likely  than a move towards greater equality and less poverty.
> Brexit fucks the economy - the only debate is by how much. How that leads to better pay, less poverty or a well funded NHS is a total fucking mystery to me. please enlighten.



You've missed the point mate. Don't worry though, you're not the only one.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

So, I've been having a think about what Corbyn's strategy is on Brexit and his thinking about a potential upside to it.

In my view Brexit with the tories in charge of it will be an absolute disaster for the UK both economically and in many other ways, particularly if they respond to the inevitable chaos and recession with further budget cuts and austerity. I suspect that most Brexit supporters on here would agree on that.

But it probably actually is possible to do Brexit in a way that doesn't cause that economic damage / offsets that damage even if we were to take a relatively hard brexit option.

This could be possible if Labour were in control of it, and they recognised the inevitable economic shock of Brexit and were prepared to make a massive state investment in infrastructure projects and social projects across the country, particularly the hardest hit areas of it, with a full buy British policy on procurement for it, and upfront investment in the manufacturing capacity that's needed to replace vital goods / components that currently aren't made in the UK.

Essentially a massive keynsian (possibly stepping over into state capitalism) type response to the economic shock of Brexit, to temporarily replace the lost GDP from trade with government spending to replace the lost markets and to make 'buying british' an actual possibility in the many areas where we have negligible or not capacity.

I'm usually a critic of the MMT approach (printing money to pay for government spending), but at this specific point when there'd otherwise be a big economic shock occurring, it probably would be possible to actually run a quantitative easing for infrastructure type recession busting scheme to create £billions of new money to fund part or all of this without that causing the problems of high inflation etc that could be caused by it at other points in an economic cycle. Or it could just be funded from borrowing (or I guess if they wanted to do the QE side of things on the sly, then borrowing followed by QE to buy the gilts back).

Corbyn and McDonnell have discussed this sort of approach in the past under the term 'people's quantitative easing', and it fits reasonably with the main thrust of their economic policy, even their 'fiscal credibility rule' on balancing the books allows them to borrow to invest, just not borrow to fund day to day spending.

At the last election Corbyn / McDonnell were able to spring a well worked out manifesto on the country at short notice because they'd been working on it in the background. I'd be surprised if they weren't doing the same thing with Brexit, and the lack of anything substantial from them on Brexit at the moment is because they're keeping their powder dry for a possible pre-Brexit election.

As Green / environmentalist I'd hope that this investment was largely on Green infrastructure so that we'd also end up with a rapid transition to a low carbon economy as a happy byproduct of Brexit

Were there to end up being a general election before Brexit, and were something along these lines to turn out to be Corbyn's masterplan for it, then that would give me and probably a lot of remain supporters from the left / green side of things something significant to think about.

I also suspect he'd win that general election by a significant margin with that sort of approach, or at least to the point where he could form a government, particularly if the right wing brexiteers split the recent tory vote between the tories and UKIP.

Anyway that's what I've been pondering on lately. Does this sound plausible / likely scenario for what Labour's version of dealing with the Brexit economic fall out could look like / could it work / are Labour preparing for a possible pre-brexit election etc... thoughts?


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

ps I just remembered that post is essentially a continuation of a post I made 15 months ago suggesting a big Green New Deal style investment in Green infrastructure as a method of offsetting the economic impact of Brexit.

I'd probably miss elements of being in the EU, but if the government spending to offset the economic shock of Brexit resulted in Leeds getting an underground rail system, integrated cycle network, not having to sit in massive traffic jams every day, and a rapid transition to a low carbon energy system in the next few years then I could probably live with the not being in the EU thing a lot better than under current proposals.

The bit about there being lots of well paid UK construction, engineering and manufacturing jobs secured by it as well would also be a big plus.


----------



## kebabking (Jul 31, 2018)

The only potential issue would be at what kind of rate the UK would be able to borrow at - I'm not some apocalyptic fool who thinks that the dead will pave the streets, but Brexit, in whatever form, will be an uncertain process/event, and uncertainty means higher interest rates...

Personally I think the above is both the right thing to do and a good electoral plan - I rather take the view that the reason Corbyn did so well in the 2017 GE was that after the electorate took the big, scary step of voting for brexit, they decided they wanted to grasp at something ambitious and hopeful rather the cautiousness of May...


----------



## teuchter (Jul 31, 2018)

free spirit said:


> So, I've been having a think about what Corbyn's strategy is on Brexit and his thinking about a potential upside to it.
> 
> In my view Brexit with the tories in charge of it will be an absolute disaster for the UK both economically and in many other ways, particularly if they respond to the inevitable chaos and recession with further budget cuts and austerity. I suspect that most Brexit supporters on here would agree on that.
> 
> ...



Is there a reason that Brexit has to happen for them to do all that stuff? Couldn't they just do it anyway? Or do you think a post-Brexit Britain will make such an administration more electable?


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Is there a reason that Brexit has to happen for them to do all that stuff? Couldn't they just do it anyway? Or do you think a post-Brexit Britain will make such an administration more electable?


The post brexit economic crash that would almost certainly happen without something like that sort of stimulus package would create a justification for that stimulus package to happen that wouldn't be there with out it.

Tbf Labour's manifesto already included policies along these lines, but Brexit would create an economic imperative to bring those plans forward and boost them significantly. Assuming they can win the argument about the wrongheadedness of austerity (particularly slashing infrastructure spending) as a response to an economic crisis.

Without the backdrop of an economic downturn as well, printing any significant level of money to spend on infrastructure could cause problems with inflation, value of the GBP etc. as the financial system would be able to take that money and use it as reserves to back up many multiples of those reserves in lending. At a time of economic crisis this isn't as likely to be a major issue / could well actually be a significant benefit in terms of preventing runs on the banks / ensuring there was enough liquidity in the financial system etc. The same benefits they used as justification for QE mark 1, but done this way we get to build lots of useful things as a useful byproduct rather than just causing a stock market  / housing market bubble and inflation for the rest of us.

Basically investment that occurs during a down turn in the economic cycle has much bigger positive impacts on the economy than investment that happens at other points in the cycle, so it makes the more sense to do it to stave off an economic crash than it does to do it during better economic times. In crude terms, if done with borrowing, then when it's done to offset a recession it can / should result in several multiples of that borrowing in GDP increases, so the actual debt to GDP ratio improves as a result of that borrowing rather than getting worse... which ultimately is the bare faced lie at the heart of austerity economics nonsense about household budgets etc.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I just think its magical thinking that brexit will open up opportunities for a more* leftist economy* - it will lead to an increasingly isolated UK, with a *weaker economy,*


(my emphasis) What do these terms mean? Is today's economy weaker /more leftist than the one in the 90s? What about the one in the 70s?



Kaka Tim said:


> i didn't say either of those things. i pointed out that economic shocks - the sort that takes of chunk out of GDP - always result in slashing of public services and the NHS is dependant on a certain level of economic growth. economic growth = greater government income and vise versa.


 Do you realise that your insistence on constant growth puts you to the right of the Observer's economics editor? By going down the rabbit hole of economics you have ended up alongside Mark Carney.



Kaka Tim said:


> history very clearly shows that every recession and economic hit since forever - and certainly over the last 50 years -  has resulted in slashing of public spending, unemployment and wage squeezes.


Has it?










(from here) There's no decrease in spending in 73/74, 80/81 or 08. I hesitate to go down this route because by even engaging in this argument the political ideology that is economics is being reinforced. But you are (like economists always do) claiming an ideological position as an inviolate truth, yet one after another of these "truths" has been proven to be nonsense.

EDIT: You think of yourself as a socialist right? And you are now building castles who's foundations rest on the very ideology that you oppose don't you see the problem in that?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

Can you put some comparative charts from other EU countries on it or it means nothing, cheers.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

but I also support doing it regardless of Brexit, just without such an immediate urgency to do as much as quickly. Apart from anything else, we've not really recovered from the last recession in many ways (eg household disposable income), and the country is massively in need of significant investment in a wide range of areas from housing to energy to public transport after nearly a decade of austerity.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

What you've outlined there isn't far off what Grace Blakeley spoke about in the video I posted earlier today - massive redirection of the economy towards green industries with investment in the "left behind" areas which are struggling after the death of heavy industries. She's talking about keeping capital in the UK and directing it within the UK as a means of financing this.


----------



## free spirit (Jul 31, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> What you've outlined there isn't far off what Grace Blakeley spoke about in the video I posted earlier today - massive redirection of the economy towards green industries with investment in the "left behind" areas which are struggling after the death of heavy industries. She's talking about keeping capital in the UK and directing it within the UK as a means of financing this.


I'd prefer to keep a good proportion of capital in the UK by taxing it with an enforcement regime to prevent it from escaping from that tax - basically to make up for the massive levels of lost tax revenue from the last decade or more combined with getting back the bulk of the QE money that went into the stock market bubble that caused the ultra rich to become massively more ultra rich.

Then spending the proceeds in the areas with the greatest need of economic stimulus and infrastructure investment.

ps My view is that higher levels of corporation tax combined with higher levels of capital tax allowances are the best way of stimulating business owners to invest significantly into their business. Low corporation tax rates merely encourage them to take the profits out from the business and spend it on well whatever it is that rich people spend their wads of cash on / hoard it / invest it in the stock market.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

I should have added an:

I'M NOT EXACTLY AN ECONOMIC GENIUS AND I DIDN'T TAKE NOTES ON THE DISCUSSION 

disclaimer to what I said, which is very brief. I'm sure she would recommend lots of taxing too. . . Her original exposition will be much better than my paraphrasing in any case. . . If you have the time. . .


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

quick note on those graphs - government spending goes up after economic shocks because they have to pay more in things like dole and housing benefit. But spending on other stuff gets squeezed. And yeah - you can take the approach of borrowing and investing to boost the economy - but its still better not to have the economic shock in the first place.

And yes - i take the point that the economy does not have to be tied to the constant search for growth - but that is not how our economy is set up. Maybe after some serious investment in social good and useful manufacturing (i.e. renewables) , reducing the strangle hold that the financial sector has over the economy - then brexit potentially  becomes a viable option - but do it now is going to ruin lives, imporversish people and fuck public services and leaves us open to a bleak  future as a privatised, low wage, tax haven playground for cunts.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 31, 2018)

So we've already gone from 


Kaka Tim said:


> every time there has been that sort of blow to the economy - from the 70s oil crisis to the 2008 financial crash - it has resulted in slashing of public spending,





Kaka Tim said:


> history very clearly shows that every recession and economic hit since forever - and certainly over the last 50 years -  has resulted in slashing of public spending,


To


Kaka Tim said:


> quick note on those graphs - government spending goes up after economic shocks because they have to pay more in things like dole and housing benefit.





Kaka Tim said:


> And yes - i take the point that the economy does not have to be tied to the constant search for growth - but that is not how our economy is set up. Maybe after some serious investment in social good and useful manufacturing (i.e. renewables) , reducing the strangle hold that the financial sector has over the economy - then brexit potentially  becomes a viable option - but do it now is going to ruin lives, imporversish people and fuck public services and leaves us open to a bleak  future as a privatised, low wage, tax haven playground for cunts.


You couldn't have a better example of where economics leads to, the only option is neo-liberalism - _economics are the method, the object is to change the soul._


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

He's going full jehovah's witness now.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So we've already gone from
> 
> 
> To
> ...



nope - im seeing neither the inconsistency nor how whats written leads to that conclusion. Gov spending can go up after economic shocks - to deal with the effect of the shock - and it also results in  cut backs to services.


Remember - Callaghans labour  government ended up introducing monetarist policies at the behest of the IMF in response to the economy struggling post oil shock. Corbyn would be under exactly the same pressure - and he would have the counter push of a strong union movement that 70s labour did


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

You mean wouldn't?

Don't go Trump on me.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2018)

kebabking said:


> The only potential issue would be at what kind of rate the UK would be able to borrow at - I'm not some apocalyptic fool who thinks that the dead will pave the streets, but Brexit, in whatever form, will be an uncertain process/event, and uncertainty means higher interest rates...
> 
> Personally I think the above is both the right thing to do and a good electoral plan - I rather take the view that the reason Corbyn did so well in the 2017 GE was that after the electorate took the big, scary step of voting for brexit, they decided they wanted to grasp at something ambitious and hopeful rather the cautiousness of May...



May's not been cautious. State borrowing has continued to rise on her watch, with little to show for it in terms of services or infrastructure. She has continued to unravel the NHS and has presided over the effective collapse of other privatised services such as social care and probation. She pissed an even billion up the wall to keep hold of power. 

As home secretary May spent eye-watering sums of money on charter deportation flights, sometimes to remove a single individual. She pursued mass detention of migrants at vast cost and with no discernible benefit to anyone but Serco and G4S.

I'm not trying to paint you as a May supporter here, it just pisses me off how we get fed this idea of sensible, rational, frugal Tories so often that we forget what's in front of our eyes: namely a shower of nasty, incompetent clowns who would sell the whole country down the river in a heartbeat.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 31, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> nope - im seeing neither the inconsistency nor how whats written leads to that conclusion. Gov spending can go up after economic shocks


Yet your original claim was the opposite. 
And your insistence on a growth in GDP puts you in the same basket as the BoE, Carney, Obsourne, the IMF, etc, the only option allowed to you is more of the same of the last 30 years.



Kaka Tim said:


> Remember - Callaghans labour  government ended up introducing monetarist policies at the behest of the IMF in response to the economy struggling post oil shock. Corbyn would be under exactly the same pressure - and he would have the counter push of a strong union movement that 70s labour did


I'm sorry I don't see the relevance.
But was the economy struggling in the 70s? Do you, like paolo, think the economy in the 90s/00s was "better" than the economy of the 70s?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yet your original claim was the opposite.
> And your insistence on a growth in GDP puts you in the same basket as the BoE, Carney, Obsourne, the IMF, etc, the only option allowed to you is more of the same of the last 30 years.



No it wasn't. Are you being deliberately obtuse?  i said economic shocks result in spending on services being slashed - that doesn't mean overall gov spending goes down - because of increased spending on welfare payments. And how the fuck does noting that - historically -  sudden declines in GDP over the past 50s years always  result in said cut backs put me in that basket - its a factual observation.



> I'm sorry I don't see the relevance.
> But was the economy struggling in the 70s? Do you, like paolo, think the economy in the 90s/00s was "better" than the economy of the 70s?



the relevance is that having labour in charge does not mean they will deal with an economic shock any differently to the tories.
Is the economy "better" now? Well its different - the 70s economy was a more heavily industrialised, there was relatively higher pay, less inequality, there wasn't a housing crises. the economy of the 90/00s was bigger, but had become more service based, more based on property prices and debt - so less sustainable - as we saw in 2008. But what does that tell us? That reducing GDP to 1970s levels will bring back coal mining and lots of council houses?

You're arguing that growing GDP is a blunt measure and does not dictate better conditions for the population overall etc - . Well yes - absolutely - and their are plenty of examples of this.

But you also seem to be arguing that therefore a sudden drop in GDP will equally not cause an increase in poverty, inequality and cut backs. Which it absolutely does.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

New Zealand opposes UK’s WTO quota plan


----------



## MightyTibberton (Jul 31, 2018)

The extent to which Brexit has become an exercise in the future of the Conservative Party and the personal political careers of some of its most prominet - and allegedly brilliant - members has been completely disgusting to witness. You would hope that it make them unelectable for generations. . .

I can't see anything other than a general election because I can't see May getting a deal that the ERG and Labour will vote through, and if there's a danger of genuine No Deal "crash out" I think enough Tories will jump ship to allow Labour to get a no-confidence vote through.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> The extent to which Brexit has become an exercise in the future of the Conservative Party and the personal political careers of some of its most prominet - and allegedly brilliant - members has been completely disgusting to witness. You would hope that it make them unelectable for generations. . .
> 
> I can't see anything other than a general election because I can't see May getting a deal that the ERG and Labour will vote through, and if there's a danger of genuine No Deal "crash out" I think enough Tories will jump ship to allow Labour to get a no-confidence vote through.



yeah - i think thats a plausible scenario.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jul 31, 2018)

And leave labour to negotiate trade deals?


----------



## Balbi (Jul 31, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> New Zealand opposes UK’s WTO quota plan



To be fair we offered Britain trade negotiators last year but got turned down, despite us having the experience the fucking muppets in charge desperately need.

Not a big fan of re-opening the old colonial style trade favour stuff either, although some ageing crypt haunting Tories here hope for it.

Republic time, innit.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

There is a New Zealand guy, Crawford Falconer, involved. He made some stupid gaffe about the EU or WTO or something, and has been meeting with the shadowy Legatum people.


----------



## Whagwan (Aug 1, 2018)

Leave voters would rather we leave the EU than peace in NI:

politicalbetting.com  » Blog Archive   » Leave voters rate leaving the EU as more important than peace in Northern Ireland


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 1, 2018)

Whagwan said:


> Leave voters would rather we leave the EU than peace in NI:
> 
> politicalbetting.com  » Blog Archive   » Leave voters rate leaving the EU as more important than peace in Northern Ireland


Shit question:
1. Age old sales trick to start sentence with the word 'image'
2. Trying to imply that peace in NI can only be possible if UK remains in EU

Project Fear, full steam ahead!


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Project Fear, full steam ahead!



I'll take it - every little helps.
(note how I used a slogan from Satan's supermarket)


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Shit question:
> 1. Age old sales trick to start sentence with the word 'image'
> 2. Trying to imply that peace in NI can only be possible if UK remains in EU
> 
> Project Fear, full steam ahead!


They also said they'd rather leave the EU than keep Scotland in the UK.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Shit question:
> 1. Age old sales trick to start sentence with the word 'image'
> 2. Trying to imply that peace in NI can only be possible if UK remains in EU
> 
> Project Fear, full steam ahead!


While I agree about the methods here, is it Project Fear to be concerned for the GFA? Was Martin McGuinness part of this Project Fear in the run-up to the referendum when he voiced his concerns over this issue?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

I can't find that actual poll anywhere other than on that Tweet, though the company - for which Simon Kellner works - has recently done stuff for the Sun on Sunday. 

You'll find similar results - thought not that question - on the union in a Lord Ashcroft poll: Brexit, the Border and the Union - Lord Ashcroft Polls 

I think this sort of polling is becoming more popular because it's said to be more realistic: ie, you don't give people a menu of choices, but you make them choose between two things, both of which they might think are shit, because that's the reality of political choice.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And leave labour to negotiate trade deals?



Better a sack full of monkeys than this current lot. They made Boris Johnson the foreign secretary for fuck's sake.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Better a sack full of monkeys than this current lot. They made Boris Johnson the foreign secretary for fuck's sake.


No.  I meant the tories won't want to leave (trade negotiations) to labour so there's little chance of a snap election and less chance of labour winning it.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

They'll be calling an election on the basis that they can win it. 

You can expect a full-on assault on "communist spy" Corbyn and loads of flag waving. It also looks like - from the behaviour of some top Tories - that the Conservative Party is preparing to go fully down the truth-free smear line of the GOP, with whom they have plenty of links. Gove, Rees Mogg and Johnson have all spoken with Bannon now, who ran Cambridge Analytica among his many other talents. . . 

All very speculative I know. . .


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

* Brussels willing to accept ‘fudge’ on Brexit pact *


----------



## Santino (Aug 1, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I can't find that actual poll anywhere other than on that Tweet, though the company - for which Simon Kellner works - has recently done stuff for the Sun on Sunday.
> 
> You'll find similar results - thought not that question - on the union in a Lord Ashcroft poll: Brexit, the Border and the Union - Lord Ashcroft Polls
> 
> I think this sort of polling is becoming more popular because it's said to be more realistic: ie, you don't give people a menu of choices, but you make them choose between two things, both of which they might think are shit, because that's the reality of political choice.


Would you rather have a socialist government or secure peace in Northern Ireland?

Would you rather the NHS be dismantled or terrorist attacks in the UK?

Would you rather 100 years of Tory rule or have to strangle a baby to death?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 1, 2018)

Santino said:


> Would you rather have a socialist government or secure peace in Northern Ireland?
> 
> Would you rather the NHS be dismantled or terrorist attacks in the UK?
> 
> Would you rather 100 years of Tory rule or have to strangle a baby to death?


That particular question was a silly one. A better one might have been something along the lines of 'would you like to keep the common travel area with the Republic of Ireland or leave the EU customs union'. I still haven't seen anyone propose a system by which the UK leaves the customs union without imposing some kind of hard border in Ireland. In the absence of a working proposition to have both, it would seem reasonable to ask which of the two is more important to someone who voted 'leave', given that they probably weren't aware of the problem at the time they cast their vote. Also, of course, necessary to remember that this is only a poll of 52 per cent of the people who voted in that referendum (and so slightly fewer than 52 per cent of who would vote today due to natural wastage). Even if 90 per cent of them think something, that still doesn't make a majority in the country.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 1, 2018)

or  'would you prefer 1. to stay in the EU or 2. give the 6 counties to the RoI and leave the EU'. I'm guessing high 80's to mid 90's % for option 2.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> or 2. give the 6 counties to the RoI and leave the EU'. I'm guessing high 80's to mid 90's % for option 2.


I'm sure the DUP would love that ...


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> or  'would you prefer 1. to stay in the EU or 2. give the 6 counties to the RoI and leave the EU'. I'm guessing high 80's to mid 90's % for option 2.


There was a poll a little while ago.

A funny kind of Unionism


----------



## Combustible (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They also said they'd rather leave the EU than keep Scotland in the UK.


What's wrong with holding such a position?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2018)

I backed scots indy the first time round and would do again, no love the union here. I remember at the time there was uncertainty over how post indy scots eu membership would go, would they need re-apply or would there be another mechanism for it etc.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

That was the Original (and the best!) Project Fear wasn't it? 

"If you leave the UK you'll leave the EU!"


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

Combustible said:


> What's wrong with holding such a position?


Because during indyref1 they said if we voted to remain in the UK it would guarantee keeping our EU membership.  In the EU ref both NI and Scotland voted to remain.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> That was the Original (and the best!) Project Fear wasn't it?
> 
> "If you leave the UK you'll leave the EU!"


Yes.  And lots of other stuff as well.  We're quite confident about our next indyref.


----------



## Santino (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yes.  And lots of other stuff as well.  We're quite confident about our next indyref.


What are you going to trade?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because during indyref1 they said if we voted to remain in the UK it would guarantee keeping our EU membership.  In the EU ref both NI and Scotland voted to remain.


I would lay good money that in the event of a No Deal Brexit and subsequent Scottish independence that EU membership for Scotland would be fast tracked and the objections of countries like Spain will just get bought off.
Irish re-unification, I'm  less sure of, All the Irish that I know seem to  view the Northern Irish as backward rubes that could be more trouble than they're worth.
I don't know how prevalent that opinion is in Eire itself but the UK can't force the ROI to take NI any more than it can force it to leave the EU as well.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

Santino said:


> What are you going to trade?


Oil, agriculture, fishing, alcohols, technology, renewable energy, water, ships, computer software, textiles, tourism and such.


----------



## Combustible (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because during indyref1 they said if we voted to remain in the UK it would guarantee keeping our EU membership.  In the EU ref both NI and Scotland voted to remain.



Who is "they" in this case? How do you know what those leave voters who were polled were saying during the indyref?


----------



## Santino (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No...what will the UK trade to have equity to conduct business?





DexterTCN said:


> Oil, agriculture, fishing, alcohols, technology, renewable energy, water, ships, computer software, textiles, tourism and such.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

Santino you asked what Scotland had to trade, not the UK.  

Combustible...tories, labour and libdems...the yoon parties.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 1, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> or  'would you prefer 1. to stay in the EU or 2. give the 6 counties to the RoI and leave the EU'. I'm guessing high 80's to mid 90's % for option 2.


And how is that done? The UK has committed to keeping NI in the UK for as long as a majority of people in NI wish this to be the case. Whatever you think about that, and I could say a lot about it, practically and politically, how do they change that stance? Specifically, how does the _Conservative and Unionist Party c_hange that stance?


----------



## Combustible (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Combustible...tories, labour and libdems...the yoon parties.


So what's your point exactly? Three parties all led by remainers said something in the referendum campaign. Why shouldn't leave voters take a different position?


----------



## Santino (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Santino you asked what Scotland had to trade, not the UK.
> 
> Combustible...tories, labour and libdems...the yoon parties.


Is Scotland in the UK?


----------



## J Ed (Aug 1, 2018)

Anyone else noticed an uptick in prominent people and also just random social media comments about Russian interference in Brexit? Has some new evidence of it come to light which I have missed?


----------



## free spirit (Aug 1, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Anyone else noticed an uptick in prominent people and also just random social media comments about Russian interference in Brexit? Has some new evidence of it come to light which I have missed?


yes, the parliamentary committee report


> There are many potential threats to our democracy and our values. One such threat arises from what has been coined ‘fake news’, created for profit or other gain, disseminated through *state-sponsored programmes*, or spread through the deliberate distortion of facts, by groups with a particular agenda, including the desire to affect political elections.
> 
> Such has been the impact of this agenda, the focus of our inquiry moved from understanding the phenomenon of ‘fake news’, distributed largely through social media, to issues concerning the very future of democracy. Arguably, more invasive than obviously false information is the relentless targeting of hyper-partisan views, which play to the fears and prejudices of people, in order to influence their voting plans and their behaviour. We are faced with a crisis concerning the use of data, the manipulation of our data, and the targeting of pernicious views. In particular, *we heard evidence of Russian state-sponsored attempts to influence elections in the US and the UK through social media, of the efforts of private companies to do the same, and of law-breaking by certain Leave campaign groups in the UK’s EU Referendum in their use of social media.*
> 
> In this rapidly changing digital world, our existing legal framework is no longer fit for purpose. This is very much an interim Report, following an extensive inquiry. A further, substantive Report will follow in the autumn of 2018. We have highlighted significant concerns, following recent revelations regarding, in particular, political manipulation and set we out areas where urgent action needs to be taken by the Government and other regulatory agencies to build resilience against misinformation and disinformation into our democratic system. Our democracy is at risk, and now is the time to act, to protect our shared values and the integrity of our democratic institutions.



IIRC they have also called for an FBI style investigation of the Russian links and source of Arron Banks £8million+ donations to the leave campaign.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> No it wasn't. Are you being deliberately obtuse?  i said economic shocks result in spending on services being slashed - that doesn't mean overall gov spending goes down - because of increased spending on welfare payments.


 I don’t want to get bogged down in dead ally but you really didn’t. I’ve quoted you, your original claim was 


Kaka Tim said:


> history very clearly shows that every recession and economic hit since forever - and certainly over the last 50 years -  has resulted in slashing of public spending,


And it’s worth noting that even on this point ideology is creeping in, the government supporting the disadvantaged is not a public service. 



Kaka Tim said:


> And how the fuck does noting that - historically -  sudden declines in GDP over the past 50s years always  *result* in said cut backs put me in that basket - its a factual observation.


(my emphasis) No it’s an ideological claim. 



Kaka Tim said:


> the relevance is that having labour in charge does not mean they will deal with an economic shock any differently to the tories.


But I’ve not made any such claim so this is an irrelevance. 



Kaka Tim said:


> Is the economy "better" now? Well its different - the 70s economy was a more heavily industrialised, there was relatively higher pay, less inequality, there wasn't a housing crises. the economy of the 90/00s was bigger, but had become more service based, more based on property prices and debt - so less sustainable - as we saw in 2008. *But what does that tell us?* That reducing GDP to 1970s levels will bring back coal mining and lots of council houses?


(my emphasis) I don’t know, that’s the point, you’re the one subscribing to the religion. 

But I do note you’ve now got “bigger/smaller” economies as well as “weaker” and more “leftist” ones. So _how_ is the present economy larger than the one in the 70s? 



Kaka Tim said:


> You're arguing that growing GDP is a blunt measure and does not dictate better conditions for the population overall etc - . Well yes - absolutely - and their are plenty of examples of this.
> 
> But you also seem to be arguing that therefore a sudden drop in GDP will equally not cause an increase in poverty, inequality and cut backs. Which it absolutely does.


No I’m arguing the purpose of economics is the justification and extension of the exploitation of labour. And that by making an economic argument you are supporting the very system you claim to oppose. Thatchers’s quote is absolutely spot on, she understood what economics was. 

Read butchersapron posts on this thread, read kabbes posts here. As kabbes said


> …can we just agree that socialist policies are preferred by socialists _even if_ they are expected reduce measures of national output, and that this is not a bad thing?



Or as stethoscope more pithily put it.



stethoscope said:


> _Won't somebody think of our economy?_
> 
> Well, actually I'm a libertarian communist, so no.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

Santino said:


> Is Scotland in the UK?


That's the question isn't it.   Seems like, for many brexiters, it's not a problem to sell out Scots needs or Northern Ireland's needs so long as it suits England.  

So I'm not sure if anyone is in the UK apart from England because everyone else is expendable, everyone else's needs are irrelevant. 

That seem about right?  You tell me what the UK is made up of.   Because for most others 'the UK' is just a codeword for England.  None of you give a fuck about the component parts of the UK.  

But for an actual answer Scotland is an equal partner in the UK as defined by the Act of the Union 1707, it is not a part of the UK.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> big wodge of picky pedantry and deliberate obtuseness



ffs - whatever. 

but the point still stands - brexit - particularly one that results in trade barriers going up - will result in spending on education, health, investment, infrastructure, wages, sundry LA services etc etc - being slashed which will mean more poverty, more hardship, more unemployment, less life chances for millions of people - especially people at the bottom. Cos that's what always happens - without fail - or has the last 10 years of austerity passed you by? 

That's true whether you believe in conventional concepts of what constitutes "the economy" or not.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2018)

That's a pretty pathetic response. Even if you don't want to engage with what I've written, the posts of butchers and kabbes are clear and deserve better than a 30s dismissal.


Kaka Tim said:


> That's true whether you believe in conventional concepts of what constitutes "the economy" or not.


And this just shows that you aren't actually reading what people are posting. It's not about "conventional concepts" it's the whole bloody shebang.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That's a pretty pathetic response.
> And this just shows that you aren't actually reading what people are posting. It's not about "conventional concepts" it's the whole bloody shebang.


It's not that people aren't reading what you post, I assure you.


----------



## andysays (Aug 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That's the question isn't it.   Seems like, for many brexiters, it's not a problem to sell out Scots needs or Northern Ireland's needs so long as it suits England.
> 
> So I'm not sure if anyone is in the UK apart from England because everyone else is expendable, everyone else's needs are irrelevant.
> 
> ...



A lot of this reads like chip-on-shoulder nonsense to me, and misses Santino's point that your list of potential Scottish exports also count, at least at the moment, as potential UK exports.

But on the legal constitutional issue which your reference to the Act of the Union 1707 suggests: Did Scotland have to give permission as an equal partner for the UK to join the EEC?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 1, 2018)

free spirit said:


> why would either of those measures harm the economy?
> 
> IMO they'd do the opposite, and the argument that they would harm the economy is just a neoliberal myth that's pretty simple to disprove - neither measure harmed the post war economy in the UK that performed far better than the neoliberal version of the last few decades.
> 
> ...


I forgot I meant to come back to this.

Impacts to “the economy” chiefly get reported on the basis of “growth”.   Growth is measured as change in GDP.  GDP is measured in practice as NDI (net domestic income) with adjustment.  NDI is wages plus corporate profit plus loan and rent income plus some other private sector things. Nationalisation reduces corporate income with no compensatory increase in private income and so appears in the figures as a contraction in GDP and hence damage to “the economy”.

Thus is how and why economics is ideological. The metrics get reported as if they are neutral facts but they are not.  Contractions can be socially good.  Whilst growth (such when it comes from privatisation) can be socially bad.  An increase in corporate profit that outweighs wage reduction counts as growth.  And all these things are how we’ve managed real growth for 40 years whilst average wages have dropped.  

What’s the relevance to the EU?  Well, the EU is a factor in this antisocial “growth”.  Yes, Brexit will contract GDP but since in reality this is unwinding the antisocial growth it is far from clear that this means more inequality or less government income.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I backed scots indy the first time round and would do again, no love the union here. I remember at the time there was uncertainty over how post indy scots eu membership would go, would they need re-apply or would there be another mechanism for it etc.


I’m still waiting to see how everything pans out. Big Yes supporter before, but  I think- and Johnathon Shafi has pointed this out too... I know I know Bastani’s pal- say if Corbyn gets in Yes could be hijacked by blairites. I think that’s already happening cause all we are hearing from Yes groups at the moment is “just stay in the EU.” Original themes like social justice and making a break from the status quo  abandoned for shite like Progressive Scotland Vs Racist England. And a lot of people aren’t comfortable with it- working class remain voters as well as all the leave voters(a third of Yes voters!) in my limited experience, but very much ignored conversations since Scotland voted remain and that’s all we need to know. This is a very much Highland perspective though, I think the view in glasgow might be different. Highland voted 47 Yes, 45 leave btw.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That's a pretty pathetic response. Even if you don't want to engage with what I've written, the posts of butchers and kabbes are clear and deserve better than a 30s dismissal.
> And this just shows that you aren't actually reading what people are posting. It's not about "conventional concepts" it's the whole bloody shebang.



Look - the lexit argument makes no sense to me - and circular arguments and mutual point scoring are really not doing it for me. 

Serious suggestion - can we start a new thread exploring the left argument for brexit? - cos all im getting is unicorns. I just dont see how brexit will do anything other than make life shitter for most people. Id love to be even vaguely convinced otherwise.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 1, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I forgot I meant to come back to this.
> 
> Impacts to “the economy” chiefly get reported on the basis of “growth”.   Growth is measured as change in GDP.  GDP is measured in practice as NDI (net domestic income) with adjustment.  NDI is wages plus corporate profit plus loan and rent income plus some other private sector things. Nationalisation reduces corporate income with no compensatory increase in private income and so appears in the figures as a contraction in GDP and hence damage to “the economy”.
> 
> ...


You say above that wages make up part of GDP , so what's to say the shrinkage won't happen there?. Hardly unwinding antisocial growth.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 1, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You say above that wages make up part of GDP , so what's to say the shrinkage won't happen there?. Hardly unwinding antisocial growth.


They haven’t grown there, so why should they shrink there?  People are already paid the least companies can get away with.  

In fact, some of the arguments for Brexit have surrounded the wage reductions that mobility of labour brings with it.  Unwind that and things could go the other way.

But the truth is that none of this has really been modelled or spoken if because economists are so desperately keen to focus on GDP, growth in which is increasingly driven by corporate superprofits, not wages.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 1, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I forgot I meant to come back to this.
> 
> Impacts to “the economy” chiefly get reported on the basis of “growth”.   Growth is measured as change in GDP.  GDP is measured in practice as NDI (net domestic income) with adjustment.  NDI is wages plus corporate profit plus loan and rent income plus some other private sector things. Nationalisation reduces corporate income with no compensatory increase in private income and so appears in the figures as a contraction in GDP and hence damage to “the economy”.
> 
> ...


According to the ONS that's only one way they measure GDP, they also use "all the money spent on goods and services, minus the value of imports (money spent on goods and services produced outside the UK), plus exports (money spent on UK goods and services in other countries)".

As nationalised rail / electricity or whatever would still be charging for their service I don't see why this would be excluded from the GDP calculation. And in your original version of how it's measured - people working for those industries would still be being paid and included that way.

That aside, Brexit will not just impact statistically on GDP, it will do so because of it's very real impact on the real world economy of wages, profits, sales of goods, the entire shebang. How much of an impact is yet to be seen, and really depends on what sort of a deal they come up with, but it will be a real impact not just a statistical anomaly and that's what people are concerned about.

So yes GDP is a bit of a shit way of measuring the economy, and the real impact that has on people's lives, but it's also useful to have a comparative timeseries such as GDP that goes a long way back in time to get a snapshot of what's happening even if other variables need to be taken into account to really get a fuller picture of it. I'd need some more convincing though that what you say about nationalisation and GDP is actually correct, as it flies in the face of my understanding of it (not that it matters to the substance of whether nationalisation is a positive thing or not, but it's good to understand how the metrics work).

As an example of why I'm thinking that nationalised industry is counted as part of GDP, here's a quote from the IEA about the pre-thatcher economy.

"“By the late 1970s, the nationalised industries accounted for 10pc of Britain’s GDP, 14pc of investment and 8pc of employment,”


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Look - the lexit argument makes no sense to me - and circular arguments and mutual point scoring are really not doing it for me.
> 
> Serious suggestion - can we start a new thread exploring the left argument for brexit? - cos all im getting is unicorns. I just dont see how brexit will do anything other than make life shitter for most people. Id love to be even vaguely convinced otherwise.


Sorry but this comment shows that you aren't understanding my posts (which may be my fault) -_ I'm not making a "lexit" argument!_ In fact I think I've hardly made any arguments in favour of Leave on the whole of this thread.

The point I'm making (or at least trying to make) is that the _basis_ on which you are arguing, an economic one, is one that is necessarily in favour of capital. That's the what's the capitalism is, the *economic* exploitation of labour as opposed to the extra-economic (i.e. force) exploitation. Understanding this, approaching the question of Brexit from this position doesn't necessarily mean that you cannot think that the UK remaining in the EU would be (or have been) better.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 1, 2018)

kabbes said:


> They haven’t grown there, so why should they shrink there?  People are already paid the least companies can get away with.
> 
> In fact, some of the arguments for Brexit have surrounded the wage reductions that mobility of labour brings with it.  Unwind that and things could go the other way.
> 
> But the truth is that none of this has really been modelled or spoken if because economists are so desperately keen to focus on GDP, growth in which is increasingly driven by corporate superprofits, not wages.


Or the current government could strip more conditions away from workers, or there could be less jobs as exports suffer.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 1, 2018)

andysays said:


> A lot of this reads like chip-on-shoulder nonsense to me...


We're going off topic but no, not promoting grievance and don't have a grudge.  Wanting out of a relationship doesn't have to be acrimonious.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

Keep at it anyway RS/Kabbes I’m learning a lot from your arguments


----------



## CRI (Aug 1, 2018)

Nothing to worry about I'm sure.  

Councils preparing for social unrest amid Brexit uncertainty





> Nearly 30 councils have responded to a freedom of information request for their Brexit plans, with some expressing mounting incredulity and exasperation at having to plan to deliver local public services against a backdrop of highly uncertain Brexit negotiations with Europe and within government





> Yesterday, Sky News revealed that Dover District Council and Kent County Council have both independently suggested that *a plan for a 13-mile Brexit lorry park* on the southbound M20 motorway could be needed for four years or more.





> Pembrokeshire County Council, meanwhile, has released to Sky News its internal Brexit risk register detailing 19 ways it thinks Brexit will have an impact. All but one of them is listed as negative, with seven coded red - "likely to have a high impact" - including "the imposition of border controls" and the "ready availability of vital supplies - foodstuff and medicines". There is one "positive" listed: that people might move away so there will be less demand on council services.





> Almost all councils expressed significant concerns about how the treasury will replace crucial EU structural and regional funds - particularly now the PM has promised any money that might materialise after Brexit to the NHS.




Dithering incompetent fuckwits. 


> The government is pondering when to release its own preparedness notices for Brexit. Some MPs want the reports released sooner rather than later to help the country prepare for a possible no deal scenario in eight months' time.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but this comment shows that you aren't understanding my posts (which may be my fault) -_ I'm not making a "lexit" argument!_ In fact I think I've hardly made any arguments in favour of Leave on the whole of this thread.
> 
> The point I'm making (or at least trying to make) is that the _basis_ on which you are arguing, an economic one, is one that is necessarily in favour of capital. That's the what's the capitalism is, the *economic* exploitation of labour as opposed to the extra-economic (i.e. force) exploitation. Understanding this, approaching the question of Brexit from this position doesn't necessarily mean that you cannot think that the UK remaining in the EU would be (or have been) better.



right yes ok - there is an valid argument that conventional economic discourses are inherently ideological - that they exclude and constrain other, counter or alternative discourses - and yes talking about GDP as the only measure of value does exactly that - and leads to the almost invisible hegemony of capitalist discourses. 
But - this stuff has real world consequences - because decisions are taken based on world views rooted in those discourses and on the reality of how resources are allocated and utilised. So rather than going back to first principles im trying to cut to the chase by saying brexit will shrink the economy - and that will result in shitter conditions and less resources for the mass of the population  - especially those at the bottom of the pile - because that is what has always happened in similar situations in the past.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 1, 2018)

No more GDP plz


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> right yes ok - there is an valid argument that conventional economic discourses are inherently ideological - that they exclude and constrain other, counter or alternative discourses - and yes talking about GDP as the only measure of value does exactly that - and leads to the almost invisible hegemony of capitalist discourses.
> But - this stuff has real world consequences - because decisions are taken based on world views rooted in those discourses and on the reality of how resources are allocated and utilised. So rather than going back to first principles im trying to cut to the chase by saying brexit will shrink the economy - and that will result in shitter conditions and less resources for the mass of the population  - especially those at the bottom of the pile - because that is what has always happened in similar situations in the past.


And when a person takes on a bully there are predictable consequences because they’ve been bullied for years, but that doesn’t mean they should never make a break for it, ever. 
Simplistic analogy, I know but I’m using it because it’s not just “lexiters”  you are trying to convince, on a europewide scale it’s the poorest you bang on about. They know what’s coming but they try and make a run for it anyway. Because if in the short term the status quo will very likely  kill them, why the fuck should they worry about relatively  short term punishment from business if there’s a chance -even a slight glimmer of hope- of long term gain- (involving other means of fighting besides just the vote of course- don’t kid yourself it’s only a few on urban that have thought this through) 
A lot of the argument around remain is “now is not the time”. That only makes sense  if you are comfortable right now, it means fuck all to those who are anything but.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

You can also add in a Leave campaign that said repeatedly that everyone would be better off immediately.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> You can also add in a Leave campaign that said repeatedly that everyone would be better off immediately.


Thing is I remember often trying to tell remain voters the EU didn’t actually gift us our workers rights and that the EU ref wasn’t a vote to elect those behind the Vote Leave Campaign. I’m not saying many leave voters weren’t similarly clueless but I’m still waiting to talk to one person who voted leave because they saw something on a bus. Just one IRL! And then I’ll know of... one! Haha


----------



## teuchter (Aug 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> And when a person takes on a bully there are predictable consequences because they’ve been bullied for years, but that doesn’t mean they should never make a break for it, ever.
> Simplistic analogy, I know but I’m using it because it’s not just “lexiters”  you are trying to convince, on a europewide scale it’s the poorest you bang on about. They know what’s coming but they try and make a run for it anyway. Because if in the short term the status quo will very likely  kill them, why the fuck should they worry about relatively  short term punishment from business if there’s a chance -even a slight glimmer of hope- of long term gain- (involving other means of fighting besides just the vote of course- don’t kid yourself it’s only a few on urban that have thought this through)
> A lot of the argument around remain is “now is not the time”. That only makes sense  if you are comfortable right now, it means fuck all to those who are anything but.



This kind of argument simply ignores all the people who are not in a 'the status quo will very likely kill them' category. People who are currently borderline ok but might not be post-Brexit. I don't claim to know what will happen post Brexit but it seems like a big gamble, all in return for the 'slight glimmer of hope'. For people really with nothing to lose - sure, a big gamble with slim chances of success might be worth it. But that's not all or most people in the UK.

There are all sorts of things you could justify with that kind of argument.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Thing is I remember often trying to tell remain voters the EU didn’t actually gift us our workers rights and that the EU ref wasn’t a vote to elect those behind the Vote Leave Campaign. I’m not saying many leave voters weren’t similarly clueless but I’m still waiting to talk to one person who voted leave because they saw something on a bus. Just one IRL! And then I’ll know of... one! Haha



Have you spoken to a lot of leave voters?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Thing is I remember often trying to tell remain voters the EU didn’t actually gift us our workers rights and that the EU ref wasn’t a vote to elect those behind the Vote Leave Campaign. I’m not saying many leave voters weren’t similarly clueless but I’m still waiting to talk to one person who voted leave because they saw something on a bus. Just one IRL! And then I’ll know of... one! Haha


And yet Johnson, Fox and eventually Gove ended up in power after!. Haha.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

i did start some convos when I went home cause my whole family voted leave apart from my mum, all tabloid reading folks for gross generalisation heh. I asked questions that I made sure weren’t leading and let them speak and got a lot of interesting answers - they generally centred around the issue of sovereignty. One said “I don’t understand how Nicola Sturgeon can be pro independence but still wants to remain in the EU” I waited for immigration to come up, expected it!  but it didn’t. And they aren’t shy about stuff like that, they go quite nuts about the Burkha but then so do a lot of secular Muslims.  I would really like to make a good short film out of it or something similar to what that northern English social worker did or some Lisa McKenzie style stuff, but I never have the time, maybe I will one day . If only just for my benefit because up until recently I was really bad for writing people off on the basis of a statement probably, I was a bit of a snobby wanker I expect. For now, here’s my snapshot 

Teuchter, there’s your answer. Of course I’ve spoken to a lot of leave voters- I voted fucking leave ! Leave voters will be more likely to speak to another leave voter than a remainer who has already decided they are thick or racist!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

I should clarify - one auntie has an issue with the burkha, I think all us MacGregors were telling her to STFU on that score- my point is if they had an issue with immigration it would have come out fucking richt awa. Nae filters


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> And yet Johnson, Fox and eventually Gove ended up in power after!. Haha.


I hate to be simplistic and say NUANCES but yeah fuck load of nuances missing from that statement


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

The division of the country into two warring camps shouting stereotyped insults at each other is yet another massive plus of the referendum. . . I know it's a bit of a media invention, but you do see - and hear it, irl - a fair amount now. 

I wonder how much it was revealing a binary country rather than creating one? It sometimes feels very like American culture-wars stuff...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> The division of the country into two warring camps shouting stereotyped insults at each other is yet another massive plus of the referendum. . . I know it's a bit of a media invention, but you do see - and hear it, irl - a fair amount now.
> 
> I wonder how much it was revealing a binary country rather than creating one? It sometimes feels very like American culture-wars stuff...


Are you witnessing these warring factions in the workplace etc or is this perhaps just on twitter?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 1, 2018)

More online, though there were several dozen casualties in the Remain v Leave street battles down the road from me last weekend. . .  

(Online is my workplace.... I don't really buy the "just on Twitter" "it's only Facebook" thing... Lots of people spend a lot of time online and it's just as valid a part of their lives as the bricks-and-mortar world...) 

I have to go to bed now, but thank you for talking... (Just don't want to look like I've stormed off or something...)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 1, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> More online, though there were several dozen casualties in the Remain v Leave street battles down the road from me last weekend. . .
> 
> (Online is my workplace.... I don't really buy the "just on Twitter" "it's only Facebook" thing... Lots of people spend a lot of time online and it's just as valid a part of their lives as the bricks-and-mortar world...)
> 
> I have to go to bed now, but thank you for talking... (Just don't want to look like I've stormed off or something...)


I work as a carer so regular contact with the awful racist elderly and also immigrants in close proximity with the uneducated local voters for over a decade in urban and rural areas, to me there’s so much (I’m laughing writing this word after the trans debacle) SOLIDARITY being built in our ranks, but it will never make the internet though I have noticed last year or so talk of unions is becoming a norm- I hope it’s a sign of a wider thing, people just seem to be getting confident and recognising ranks and the need to stick together more?  . So I’m working towards unplugging, urban will be the last to go twitter and FB gone already! . If you are up for chatting at any time feel free to PM you seem amiable and open to arguments, I bet I don’t! M 

For now, I’ve been a drunk HC signing off


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> And when a person takes on a bully there are predictable consequences because they’ve been bullied for years, but that doesn’t mean they should never make a break for it, ever.
> Simplistic analogy, I know but I’m using it because it’s not just “lexiters”  you are trying to convince, on a europewide scale it’s the poorest you bang on about. They know what’s coming but they try and make a run for it anyway. Because if in the short term the status quo will very likely  kill them, why the fuck should they worry about relatively  short term punishment from business if there’s a chance -even a slight glimmer of hope- of long term gain- (involving other means of fighting besides just the vote of course- don’t kid yourself it’s only a few on urban that have thought this through)
> A lot of the argument around remain is “now is not the time”. That only makes sense  if you are comfortable right now, it means fuck all to those who are anything but.



No it doesn't. People at the bottom will be hardest hit - and there is no "glimmer of hope of long term gain".
It will be even harder for people to pay their bills, feed their kids, find decent employment or housing. 
Services will be worse - longer waits for hospital treatment, community programs in the poorest areas will be cut and severely reduced, schools will be more crowded and under resourced, disabled people will have to wait longer for things like a replacement wheelchair or hearing aid or home modifications. 
Support workers, community midwives, mental health workers and debt advisors will have bigger caseloads. Adult education programs will be slashed.  Their will be less support for poorer kids to do things like music or sports or day trips. Local authorities will have to sell assets in order to stay solvent - and will stay have to make people redundant.	
And the number of people tipped into the bottom tier will grow. 

That's what happens. Its what happened after 2008, its still happening and brexit will make it worse.

And no im not "comfortable" - i work in a  community centre in one of  the most deprived areas of leeds - I know exactly what the poorest have to deal with cos i see it every day - (and ive been there myself) - and i don't want to see that community even more fucked than it already is.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 2, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> No it doesn't. People at the bottom will be hardest hit - and there is no "glimmer of hope of long term gain".
> It will be even harder for people to pay their bills, feed their kids, find decent employment or housing.
> Services will be worse - longer waits for hospital treatment, community programs in the poorest areas will be cut and severely reduced, schools will be more crowded and under resourced, disabled people will have to wait longer for things like a replacement wheelchair or hearing aid or home modifications.
> Support workers, community midwives, mental health workers and debt advisors will have bigger caseloads. Adult education programs will be slashed.  Their will be less support for poorer kids to do things like music or sports or day trips. Local authorities will have to sell assets in order to stay solvent - and will stay have to make people redundant.
> ...


You’ve just given a more detailed example of what I simplistically named “the bullies” are going to do. I don’t suppose it’s a great idea for me to explain myself a second time, I think I was clear enough the first time. 
When I speak about poorer people voting against the wishes of capital, I do realise many poor people also vote in a way capital is comfortable with, that is in a way that won’t harm the economy as you put it. But that doesn’t mean those giving a big fuck you to economic growth don’t have valid reasons for doing so- I’m not talking about lexiters, I’m talking about the millions of poor people that voted leave. What I’m trying to say is at this time we are seeing a huge number of people saying FUCK ECONOMIC GROWTH(or in less articulate language, they might just be saying I’m sick of experts ken?) and at some point socialists are going to have to realise they need a better response than “come on guys, keep sticking with this and let’s see what happens” because frankly people have given up on this. You don’t like it, but this is where we are.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 2, 2018)

I’m not very articulate either, as you may have noticed!


----------



## Raheem (Aug 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You’ve just given a more detailed example of what I simplistically named “the bullies” are going to do. I don’t suppose it’s a great idea for me to explain myself a second time, I think I was clear enough the first time.
> When I speak about poorer people voting against the wishes of capital, I do realise many poor people also vote in a way capital is comfortable with, that is in a way that won’t harm the economy as you put it. But that doesn’t mean those giving a big fuck you to economic growth don’t have valid reasons for doing so- I’m not talking about lexiters, I’m talking about the millions of poor people that voted leave. What I’m trying to say is at this time we are seeing a huge number of people saying FUCK ECONOMIC GROWTH(or in less articulate language, they might just be saying I’m sick of experts ken?) and at some point socialists are going to have to realise they need a better response than “come on guys, keep sticking with this and let’s see what happens” because frankly people have given up on this. You don’t like it, but this is where we are.


On the one hand, this is right. I think the left (wherever you stand on the left, and whether you agree or not) is faced with a problem that can't be resolved simply by appealing to people to be rational. But recession is not the enemy of capitalism. It's build in to the design. I don't actually believe that FUCK ECONOMIC GROWTH is anything to do with the mainstream leave vote, but if it were, that would not be a meaningful act of rebellion against capital. Some bourgeois capitalists are likely to suffer at least a tenth as badly as the poor. But capital more generally is mobile and it will survive and prosper.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 2, 2018)

Raheem said:


> On the one hand, this is right. I think the left (wherever you stand on the left, and whether you agree or not) is faced with a problem that can't be resolved simply by appealing to people to be rational. But recession is not the enemy of capitalism. It's build in to the design. I don't actually believe that FUCK ECONOMIC GROWTH is anything to do with the mainstream leave vote, but if it were, that would not be a meaningful act of rebellion against capital. Some bourgeois capitalists are likely to suffer at least a tenth as badly as the poor. But capital more generally is mobile and it will survive and prosper.


I tried to broaden it, fuck this shit. Whatever, the fact is people are sick of THIS SHIT. You can’t expect everyone living with absolute shite to have read Marx ken.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I tried to broaden it, fuck this shit. Whatever, the fact is people are sick of THIS SHIT. You can’t expect everyone living with absolute shite to have read Marx ken.


No, that's right. But, on balance, an aimless rebellion is useless.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 2, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No, that's right. But, on balance, an aimless rebellion is useless.


If you think it’s aimless it might be best to side with the rebellion and help rather than going OMG GDP ken

Again simplistic statement but you know what I mean?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 2, 2018)

I’m just saying people are trying to claw their way back to before the brexit vote. Fucking forget it. It’s not happening. If you are the sensible heavyweights you claim to be, all balls deep in logic rather than ideology, then FFS try and make sense of what’s actually happening now.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

free spirit said:


> According to the ONS that's only one way they measure GDP, they also use "all the money spent on goods and services, minus the value of imports (money spent on goods and services produced outside the UK), plus exports (money spent on UK goods and services in other countries)".


 There’s only one definition of GDP but it’s hard to measure and theoretically equal to other formulations that are easier to measure, such as GDI.  The fact it is theoretically equal to GDI, however, is also a useful instruction in what can and cannot affect it.

What this means is that the production approach to GDP produces the same number as the income approach.  Government services are included, yes, but on the same basis as they would be under income, namely the cost of labour and materials (plus things like depreciation).  And, indeed, the ONS spells this out — see page 11 of their guild to the national accounts:

http://webarchive.nationalarchives....k-national-accounts---a-short-guide--2014.pdf



> As nationalised rail / electricity or whatever would still be charging for their service I don't see why this would be excluded from the GDP calculation.


If we pay directly for it, this is a point that it gets fuzzy “even” to me (with a certain level of self-deprecation, because I am really not an expert this stuff either).  But if we pay for it or it is subsidised through taxation, that tax is not included.  That’s why it is ideological.  Socialised services show up as a drag on growth whereas private services show up as more output the more people have to pay for them.



> And in your original version of how it's measured - people working for those industries would still be being paid and included that way.


As noted.  But this is less than the value created by private profit.  Is this what we want?  As much private profit as possible?  That’s what growth really is — the accumulation of profit and forget about who gets to enjoy it.

Profit repatriated to foreign shores still counts for GDP, by the way.  When services have head offices based in Dublin where corporation tax is below 10% and then cede all UK profit back to head office to avoid tax, that U.K. profit still shows up in GDP.

Look what the ONS themselves say about it in my link above:




			
				ONS said:
			
		

> It is also useful to describe the limitations of GDP. It is often described as a measure of wealth, welfare or well-being. It is none of these and has not been designed to be an all-encompassing indicator for these concepts. GDP is a measure of economic activity and, whilst there may be a link between this and wealth and welfare, such a link is complex. For example, there may be a huge amount of economic activity in a country, but this may be due to foreign companies building factories in a poor country to make use of liberal tax, environmental and employment regimes and then repatriating the profits back to parent companies in richer countries – this repatriation of profits has no effect on GDP, but the fact that it happens, along with low wages in the factory, will mean that the growth in GDP may well not be reflected in domestic wealth and social welfare. The ONS is currently developing ways of measuring national well-being, but these fall outside the scope of the national accounts and are thus excluded from this guide, although a link to a recent paper on the subject can be found in the further reference section towards the end of the guide.






			
				free spirit said:
			
		

> That aside, Brexit will not just impact statistically on GDP, it will do so because of it's very real impact on the real world economy of wages, profits, sales of goods, the entire shebang. How much of an impact is yet to be seen, and really depends on what sort of a deal they come up with, but it will be a real impact not just a statistical anomaly and that's what people are concerned about.


It’s also what Brexit voters were concerned about.  They saw that the impact on them in the real world economy of the last 30 years of neoliberalism had fucked them up and they see Brexit as the first step to try to unwind that.  And who’s to say it won’t?  Free movement of labour is a great way to increase corporate profit and depress wages.  Moving profit overseas is a great way to improve profit but not pay tax.  These things are possible in the EU and don’t reduce GDP but do impact lives of citizens here.



> So yes GDP is a bit of a shit way of measuring the economy, and the real impact that has on people's lives, but it's also useful to have a comparative timeseries such as GDP that goes a long way back in time to get a snapshot of what's happening even if other variables need to be taken into account to really get a fuller picture of it. I'd need some more convincing though that what you say about nationalisation and GDP is actually correct, as it flies in the face of my understanding of it (not that it matters to the substance of whether nationalisation is a positive thing or not, but it's good to understand how the metrics work).
> 
> As an example of why I'm thinking that nationalised industry is counted as part of GDP, here's a quote from the IEA about the pre-thatcher economy.
> 
> "“By the late 1970s, the nationalised industries accounted for 10pc of Britain’s GDP, 14pc of investment and 8pc of employment,”


Well I hope that I have now convinced you, since it comes from the ONS themselves.  When they say that nationalised industries account for 10%, they are talking about the cost of wages and the spend on materials. This is true whichever method you use to calculate GDP.  It’s right there in the ONS document.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 2, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> right yes ok - there is an valid argument that conventional economic discourses are inherently ideological - that they exclude and constrain other, counter or alternative discourses - and yes talking about GDP as the only measure of value does exactly that - and leads to the almost invisible hegemony of capitalist discourses.
> But - this stuff has real world consequences - because decisions are taken based on world views rooted in those discourses and on the reality of how resources are allocated and utilised. So rather than going back to first principles im trying to cut to the chase by saying brexit will shrink the economy - and that will result in shitter conditions and less resources for the mass of the population  - especially those at the bottom of the pile - because that is what has always happened in similar situations in the past.


But you are constricting yourself to the demands of capital. You've defined the economy as GDP, you've defining benefits as NOT a public service.

Let's accept a minute that over the last 50 years decreases in GDP do correlate with decreases in government spending on what you are calling public services (although you've not actually provided any evidence of this), surely the question to ask is _why_? Is this some economic law, like the Philips curve? Or is it because capital has used, or at least tried to use, recessions to grab a bigger slice of the cake? (hint it's the second)

But there's no law that this has to be the case, you've already accepted some measures that would shrink the economy would be good. I'll admit I've not checked the data but I'd have a guess that the Russian Revolution gave a downfall in GDP, but are you going to argue that it didn't immeasurably improve the lives of millions?

Moreover, GDP has been increasing since ~2010 (and in over the longer term since the 60s as kabbes has pointed out), have people's lives got better since 2008? Government spending on public services has been going down (in real terms) even though GDP has been increasing.*


You talk about real world consequences but what are you actually trying to argue? That you think Brexit is a shit idea? Well that debates been done, and like danny la rouge I personally am bored of it. The arguments have been made and I don't think people are going to change their minds now. Or are you arguing that the results of the referendum should be overturned? That there should be another referendum? If so you need to read HoratioCuthbert posts because if all you can give is "let's go back to what worked" then you're screwed.

*EDIT: and you talk about unemployment increasing. But unemployment is at a low, so  why are so many people struggling at this moment?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> And yet Johnson, Fox and eventually Gove ended up in power after!. Haha.



Whereas they weren’t before?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Whereas they weren’t before?


Fox certainly wasn't, Johnson was doing nothing important.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Fox certainly wasn't, Johnson was doing nothing important.


So you want the "right" Tories in power? 

This is exactly what HoratioCuthbert is talking, if the best the Remain camp can offer is Hammond over Fox then no one with an ounce of sense should be touching it with a barge pole.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

I heard a Paul Mason talk on YouTube a while back and he told an anecdote about a referendum campaign event in Sunderland, where some politician or economist was speaking to a group of car workers and telling them how bad Brexit would be for them and for the economy, and when he said GDP would go down X% someone shouted out: "Your GDP!"


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

And thank you, HoratioCuthbert. . . For what it's worth, since Brexit I've joined a union and a political party. . .


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 2, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So you want the "right" Tories in power?
> 
> This is exactly what HoratioCuthbert is talking, if the best the Remain camp can offer is Hammond over Fox then no one with an ounce of sense should be touching it with a barge pole.


I don't want the Tories in power at all, or Jacob rees-mogg dictating things, but that's where we ended up.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 2, 2018)

I am sitting in bed Far away from the U.K. reading a 2016 Pre-brexit vote special issue of the new statesman edited by Gordon Broon that has a sticker on the front saying Servisair Lounge copy - do not remove. Full of the usual commentators handwringing over the loss of Tuscany access

whay a bunch if self centred selfish cunts with no understanding of why people might actually be tucked off with what they have had to live with - Not just the EU either


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What I’m trying to say is at this time we are seeing a huge number of people saying FUCK ECONOMIC GROWTH





kabbes said:


> It’s also what Brexit voters were concerned about.  They saw that the impact on them in the real world economy of the last 30 years of neoliberalism had fucked them up and they see Brexit as the first step to try to unwind that.



You both simply state this as if it's a given that this was the/a main motivation behind the mainstream brexit vote. But I don't buy it at all. What's your evidence?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You both simply state this as if it's a given that this was the/a main motivation behind the mainstream brexit vote. But I don't buy it at all. What's your evidence?


You don’t buy that the motivation was a general dissatisfaction with society as it currently is?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You don’t buy that the motivation was a general dissatisfaction with society as it currently is?


A 'general dissatisfaction with society as it currently is' is not the same as seeing brexit as 'a first step to unwinding neoliberalism'.

And anyway - since when has an electorate ever been 'generally satisfied with society as it currently is"?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> A 'general dissatisfaction with society as it currently is' is not the same as seeing brexit as 'a first step to unwinding neoliberalism'.


The latter is my interpretation of the underlying reason for the former.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The latter is my interpretation of the underlying reason for the former.



You weren't talking about your interpretations though, you were talking about the mainstream Brexit vote, and what motivated it. What's the evidence that a significant proportion of voters saw it as a first step to 'unwinding neoliberalism'?

HoratioCuthbert described their family members' reasons as:



> they generally centred around the issue of sovereignty



That seems more plausible to me. I don't speak to many leave voters in real life and I don't claim to have a representative sample but that seems more representative of the views that I hear, or see in writing online. I never see anyone talking about 'unwinding neoliberalism' except on here or in wordy articles linked to from here. More likely there'll be complaints about lefty liberal types in London, which is not the same thing. I think it's a complete Lexit fantasy that the mainstream leave vote had any desire for unravelling capitalism behind it.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

Brexit is whatever the person speaking wants it to be...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2018)

Two nations eh. I think this last little exchange has been very very revealing.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 2, 2018)

this tone deafness especially I'd say:


teuchter said:


> And anyway - since when has an electorate ever been 'generally satisfied with society as it currently is"?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

It’s not that difficult, teuchter 

People are dissatisfied and this dissatisfaction led to them voting for Brexit.

Why are they dissatisfied?  My contention is that this is rather related to the facts that their wages have been suppressed for 30 years, their public services have been underfunded, privatised and scaled back, their security of employment has been ripped up and their social cohesion has been undermined.

The direct cause of all those things is neoliberalism.

Hence it is a desire to unwind neoliberalism that led to the Brexit vote, regardless of whether or not individual voters articulate it like that or not.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2018)

Do you think the 75% remain in Lambeth, Hackney and Haringey was aimed at neo-liberalism?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Do you think the 75% remain in Lambeth, Hackney and Haringey was aimed at neo-liberalism?


I think the 25% vote for Brexit in those areas probably was.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2018)

Poorly phrased. How is the Scottish remain/poorer London borough remain vote explained?


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> *I don't speak to many leave voters in real life* and I don't claim to have a representative sample but that seems more representative of the views that I hear, or see in writing online. I never see anyone talking about 'unwinding neoliberalism' except on here or in wordy articles linked to from here.



Maybe you just live a sheltered life?

Try this:


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Do you think the 75% remain in Lambeth, Hackney and Haringey was aimed at neo-liberalism?


Is anyone arguing that the remain vote was a vote against neo-liberalism? 

edit: actually don't bother, not getting dragged back into this on this particular thread


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Poorly phrased. How is the ... poorer London borough remain vote explained?



I have nothing to say about the Scottish ref., but I'd say there's no way to know in those London boroughs exactly _who_ voted for _what_ in the EU ref. They are poor boroughs, but they also have a great many _extremely_ wealthy residents due to the last ~20 years of gentrification and massively rising house prices. So who was it in Hackney, Lambeth and Southwark that voted Remain? Who voted Leave?

Who didn't bother to vote at all?

Fact is there's no way to know - but judging by the national picture I'd say it's a mistake to assume that in those three boroughs it was the _poorest_ who voted Remain.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Poorly phrased. How is the Scottish remain/poorer London borough remain vote explained?



Other factors were more important to them?
They are doing alright out of neoliberalism?
They were fearful of the potential effects of change? (Rightly or wrongly, of course.  As this thread demonstrates, there is a lot of confusion out there regarding what the predictions of economists actually mean).
They are staunch Europhiles?

Take your pick.


----------



## bimble (Aug 2, 2018)

I don’t know how to link from phone but there’s an interesting new study, showing really tight correlation between people & areas most impacted by specific austerity welfare cuts since 2010 and people voting for ukip. It’s called ‘did austerity cause brexit?’.


----------



## Crispy (Aug 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> I don’t know how to link from phone but there’s an interesting new study, showing really tight correlation between people & areas most impacted by specific austerity welfare cuts since 2010 and people voting for ukip. It’s called ‘did austerity cause brexit?’.



I just came sprinting to the thread to post it 

https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/econo.../cage/manage/publications/381-2018_fetzer.pdf


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> since when has an electorate ever been 'generally satisfied with society as it currently is"?



YEAH. Fucking moaning proles.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> I don’t know how to link from phone but there’s an interesting new study, showing really tight correlation between people & areas most impacted by specific austerity welfare cuts since 2010 and people voting for ukip. It’s called ‘did austerity cause brexit?’.


hold your thumb on the hyperlink until it comes up with options, select 'copy'.  go to urban and hold your thumb in the reply box until it gives you options again and select 'paste'.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

Oof, that’s a hell of a 100 page read.  One for the commute or the weekend, I think.  Thanks for posting it.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

Austerity and cuts like bedroom tax directly led to Brexit, academic research suggests - Politics live

There's a brief write-up in the Guardian, but it's on the live blog so you'll have to scroll to find it. . .


----------



## Crispy (Aug 2, 2018)

It's not too bad kabbes. Only 50 pages is the actual paper. The rest is diagrams, data and appendices.

I'll paste in some of the diagrams:



_(figure 2 shows the same data by colouring in maps)_



So what you're seeing here is that socioeconomic status didn't particularly make you a UKIP voter, until 2010-2013, when Austerity started to bite. Fig. 4 shows that inflection very clearly. Except for pensions of course.



Here's correlation between the impact of specific cuts to benefits and the correlating rise in UKIP votes:







Conclusion: Piss people off by taking away their benefits and services, and they'll vote Leave.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

I like their approach.  Look for the step change and ask what the prevailing influences might have been, then test them.


----------



## Crispy (Aug 2, 2018)

Step 1: Austerity
Step 2: .....
Step 3: Brexit

Whether they go into depth on Step 2 will mean reading the whole thing...


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s not that difficult, teuchter
> 
> People are dissatisfied and this dissatisfaction led to them voting for Brexit.
> 
> ...



A reaction in response to things which you or I might say are the direct results of neoliberalism is not the same thing as a desire to unwind neoliberalism. It's not a matter of 'articulation'. It's a matter of what causes individual voters ascribe to the things that they are dissatisfied with.

It's an important distinction because what happens politically after Brexit completely depends on what people think are the causes of their dissatisfaction. If people see underfunded public services as a result of 'neoliberalism' then yes they may vote for a government that actively unwinds neoliberal policies. If people see underfunded public services as a result of immigration stretching the system, or money disappearing to Brussels, or Brussels making up rules that stop us funding our public services properly, then things are different. The latter is not an 'articulation' of the former, it's fundamentally different thinking.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

What they subsequently blame doesn’t change the fundamental actual root cause of their dissatisfaction, though.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 2, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Step 1: Austerity
> Step 2: .....
> Step 3: Brexit
> 
> Whether they go into depth on Step 2 will mean reading the whole thing...



Step 4: Profit


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> If people see underfunded public services as a result of 'neoliberalism' then yes they may vote for a government that actively unwinds neoliberal policies. If people see underfunded public services as a result of immigration stretching the system, or money disappearing to Brussels, or Brussels making up rules that stop us funding our public services properly, then things are different.



What if they think both of these things?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 2, 2018)

Travelling atm so cannot download this  just yet - Warwick are usually pretty good - does this stand up ?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Maybe you just live a sheltered life?
> 
> Try this:




There's no doubt I'm 'sheltered' from Leave voters. I'm a middle class scot with a professional job living in London in the country's most 'remain' borough. 

What am I supposed to take away from that video, made by a London-based film company following one Lexiter driving around asking people why they voted Leave, several of whom quite clearly had different reasons from her? One guy mentions immigration as the first issue, another wants Britain to be Britain again. Someone thinks austerity has been imposed by the EU.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What they subsequently blame doesn’t change the fundamental actual root cause of their dissatisfaction, though.



I'm not saying that it does.


----------



## Santino (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I'm not saying that it does.


What are you saying?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What if they think both of these things?


Then maybe someone can provide convincing evidence that they do.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Then maybe someone can provide convincing evidence that they do.


Like Warwick seem to have done, you mean?

(Adding an interpretation of what caused austerity, of course)

Well, they seem to have provided evidence that links austerity directly to the Brexit vote, anyway.  So then it comes down to the causes of austerity to find the root cause of the Brexit vote


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Then maybe someone can provide convincing evidence that they do.



I wasn't saying they do (I do think they do but how can you show evidence for people thinking two potentially contradictory things?) I just asked what it would mean to you if a lot of people held both beliefs simultaneously.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wasn't saying they do (I do think they do but how can you show evidence for people thinking two potentially contradictory things?) I just asked what it would mean to you if a lot of people held both beliefs simultaneously.


What it means to me? My main interest here is whether Brexit really opens a possibility for political change in the UK - which seems one of the main Lexit arguments. An indicator of the plausibility of that happening would be evidence that people voted for Brexit as a conscious first step towards unwinding many years of neoliberal policy. Because that would make it seem realistic to hope that the second step would be voting for an administration that did that unwinding. Anyone who thinks those two (potentially but not necessarily contradictory) things, by definition, is someone who believes that neoliberal policy is at the root of the problems they face, and if there are a lot of those people then there would be hope that a government could be elected on a manifesto of doing the unwinding.

Evidence that the Brexit vote is linked directly to consequences of austerity is not the same thing. I don't doubt that link. But it doesn't tell us much about what those same voters are going to vote for post-Brexit. Because that entirely depends on what they see the causes as. Not what some internet forum eggheads say the causes are.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

My analogy. Someone feels unwell. Their doctor prescribes some medication. They go to a pharmacist which sells homepathic remedies as well as the medication.

If they take the medication they'll probably see some improvement and if they take the homeopathic stuff they probably won't.

So, how do we predict what they're going to do in the pharmacy? The doctor might have stacks of evidence about the root cause of their ailment and the effectiveness of the medication, but that's irrelevant. The only information that's useful is information about what the patient believes. That's what determines what happens when they get to the pharmacy counter.

I don't want the doctor's evidence. I want the evidence that shows me what the patient believes, and this is the evidence that's harder to come by.

Who knows what people will willfully misinterpret from this analogy but that's the fun of urban.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

Back on whether or not it'll happen and in what form. 

From the Guardian:

"ITV’s Robert Peston has written an interesting post on his Facebook page about Brexit. Picking up on the FT story (see 11.44am), he says Michael Gove, the environment secretary, is now backing a “blind Brexit”. Here’s an extract.
"My understanding is that one of the Brexit campaign’s two big beasts, the environment secretary Michael Gove, has arrived at the perhaps startling view that the least worst option now is what some are styling “a blind Brexit”.
"This would be to recognise that parliament is too divided and too much time has already been wasted for a detailed plan for our future relationship with the EU to be negotiated and agreed in time for the summits in October or December.
"Instead the withdrawal agreement - which formalises a default plan to keep open the Northern Ireland border and around £40bn of divorce payments by the UK - would be ratified by EU leaders, together with the highest level guiding principles for the UK’s future relationship with the EU.
"In other words, we would leave the EU not having a clue whether Brexit would ultimately involve membership of the single market like Norway, or the customs union like Turkey, or associate status like Ukraine or having a Canadian style free trade agreement.
"To repeat, Brexit on 29 March 2019 would be blind."

I don't really understand what "highest level guiding principles for the UK's future relationship with the EU" quite means, and exactly how this differs from agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period and then going on to negotiate some sort of trading arrangement during that time. Or how "big" a "beast" - yoiks! - Michael Gove actually is when it comes to deciding this sort of stuff.


----------



## Santino (Aug 2, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Back on whether or not it'll happen and in what form.
> 
> From the Guardian:
> 
> ...


Surrender and declare victory.


----------



## free spirit (Aug 2, 2018)

> nationalisation of an industry and wealth redistribution via high taxation would also undoubtedly harm “the economy” because of the way “the economy” is defined and measured. So, he wants to know, are you against _all_ things that harm “the economy” or only _this specific_ thing that harms “the economy”?





> Nationalisation reduces corporate income with no compensatory increase in private income and so appears in the figures as a contraction in GDP and hence damage to “the economy”.





kabbes said:


> Well I hope that I have now convinced you, since it comes from the ONS themselves.  When they say that nationalised industries account for 10%, they are talking about the cost of wages and the spend on materials. This is true whichever method you use to calculate GDP.  It’s right there in the ONS document.



The ONS quotes in this latest post are unsurprisingly saying the same thing as I was given that I was referencing them in my previous post.

What I think you're now saying is that nationalisation removes corporate profit from the GDP, which is a very different thing to corporate income - income being turnover in business terms.

In which case, yes at a very simplistic level nationalised industry may be viewed as resulting in a very minor reduction in GDP due to the loss of the profit element of the calculation, but with the proviso that nationalised industries tend to pay higher wages at least in part because they don't have to distribute part of their revenue into corporate profits, and those wages mostly go to people who then spend them in the real economy much faster than shareholders tend to do with their dividend payments - ie the velocity of the circulation of that money is likely to be significantly higher and therefore have a greater impact on GDP than the corporate profits they've replaced.

Basically I disagree with your original statement as well as your later revised explanation of what you meant, because it's another false simplification of what's actually a relatively complex economic situation with multiple variables meaning that it won't necessarily have the impact you're assigning to it.

I also disagree with your point about wealth redistribution via higher taxation harming the economy / reducing GDP for similar reasons.

I appreciate that you were merely attempting to illustrate a point about how the economy is defined, but these simplistic statements have a very bad recent history of ending up becoming the basis for policy / these and similar misunderstandings underpin much of neoliberal thinking from the last 40 years despite being demonstrably wrong.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 2, 2018)

seems sensible if it can be pulled off bearing in mind "leaving" was always going to be a process rather than an event & the whole Article 50 procedure / timetable was in no way designed to be advantageous to the leaving country ( or even ever used come to that ) or took much account of any of the actual practicalities - to that extent its a contrived cliff-edge.



MightyTibberton said:


> and exactly how this differs from agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Transition Period



I presume it was initially envisaged that the end point towards which we are "transitioing" would actually be known when we embarked on it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What it means to me? My main interest here is whether Brexit really opens a possibility for political change in the UK - which seems one of the main Lexit arguments. An indicator of the plausibility of that happening would be evidence that people voted for Brexit as a conscious first step towards unwinding many years of neoliberal policy. Because that would make it seem realistic to hope that the second step would be voting for an administration that did that unwinding. Anyone who thinks those two (potentially but not necessarily contradictory) things, by definition, is someone who believes that neoliberal policy is at the root of the problems they face, and if there are a lot of those people then there would be hope that a government could be elected on a manifesto of doing the unwinding.
> 
> Evidence that the Brexit vote is linked directly to consequences of austerity is not the same thing. I don't doubt that link. But it doesn't tell us much about what those same voters are going to vote for post-Brexit. Because that entirely depends on what they see the causes as. Not what some internet forum eggheads say the causes are.



I think you want something that is complicated to be simple


----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2018)

Crispy said:


> I just came sprinting to the thread to post it
> 
> https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/econo.../cage/manage/publications/381-2018_fetzer.pdf



Pity the author did not put any time into regional analysis. The UKIP vote at the last GE being ten times higher per capita in E&W than in Scotland surely should have shown a risk of analysis on a UK-wide basis (despite certain adjustments for local conditions.)


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 2, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Back on whether or not it'll happen and in what form.
> 
> From the Guardian:
> 
> ...


----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2018)

Michael Gove, a "big beast." Jesus, Peston, stop doffing the cap. Gove has no more clue or ability than any of them.


----------



## agricola (Aug 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Michael Gove, a "big beast." Jesus, Peston, stop doffing the cap. Gove has no more clue or ability than any of them.



I think he does, though admittedly it is a very low bar to get over.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

Maybe he meant “big breast”, ie a tit.


----------



## mod (Aug 2, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> If we have another referendum, which we might, the result will be virtually the same. Perhaps with a slight increase in the Leave vote, say from 52% to 53 or 54%. Any idea that Remain would get a huge swing is just magical thinking. Large numbers of people have not changed their mind on the issue and some remain voters will see it as an attempt to reverse a democratic decision.



Couldn't disagree more. remain would win easily. Many of the people who voted leave are dead for a start. Many who 'wanted' to vote remain are now eligible to vote. I know several leave voters who regret their decision.


----------



## Supine (Aug 2, 2018)

So work at the European Medicines Agency slows down as staff leave rather than move from London to Amsterdam.

https://www.fiercebiotech.com/biotech/brexit-forces-ema-to-suspend-tasks-as-job-loss-forecast-jumps


----------



## kebabking (Aug 2, 2018)

mod said:


> Couldn't disagree more. remain would win easily. Many of the people who voted leave are dead for a start. Many who 'wanted' to vote remain are now eligible to vote. I know several leave voters who regret their decision.



likewise I know several - quite a few actually, including me - remain voters who would now vote leave. there are different reasons for their change of vote, but all of them would include the democratic issue. the political class asked for an instruction, it was given very clearly, they don't get to just keep on asking until they get an answer they find more acceptable or easier to implement.

in management terms - and they do work for us, not we for them - its JFDI (Just Fucking Do It).


----------



## JimW (Aug 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> they don't get to just keep on asking until they get an answer they find more acceptable or easier to implement


Unless it's Ireland and the Lisbon Treaty


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2018)

mod said:


> Couldn't disagree more. remain would win easily. Many of the people who voted leave are dead for a start. Many who 'wanted' to vote remain are now eligible to vote. I know several leave voters who regret their decision.


Life in the bubble is getting crazier by the day. Each morning  a new horror.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> likewise I know several - quite a few actually, including me - remain voters who would now vote leave. there are different reasons for their change of vote, but all of them would include the democratic issue. the political class asked for an instruction, it was given very clearly, they don't get to just keep on asking until they get an answer they find more acceptable or easier to implement.
> 
> in management terms - and they do work for us, not we for them - its JFDI (Just Fucking Do It).



In my close of ten houses I have spoken with four neighbours who all voted remain. All four have said they would now vote leave. This was a remain area, but even the MP has moved from remain to leave now. 
So not sure what world mod is living in, but it’s far removed from round ‘ere.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

It must be all that good news that keeps coming out about brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It must be all that good news that keeps coming out about brexit.



Yeah, it’s almost as if people are bored shitless with the never ending whinging and they just want to get on with it. Weird, huh.


----------



## JimW (Aug 2, 2018)

It's like the attacks on Corbyn, put any song on repeat and eventually everyone stops listening.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 2, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Two nations eh. I think this last little exchange has been very very revealing.


Indeed. You =can have politics you want so long as it's Remain or Leave.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, it’s almost as if people are bored shitless with the never ending whinging and they just want to get on with it. Weird, huh.


Yeah...that's not happening.  

Anymore than swathes of people across the land are turning from remain to leave.

Does anyone have any data on that one?


----------



## kebabking (Aug 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It must be all that good news that keeps coming out about brexit.



if you wish to know why you just don't grasp this, the only bad news about brexit for a leave voter is that it doesn't happen - the rest is just fluff and the price they are willing to pay to get what they want.

its very much like getting divorced - no one decides to not get divorced because their solicitor tells them its going to be a nightmare and cost them an arm and a leg, they accept it as the temporary price of getting out of an otherwise lifelong relationship that makes them fundamentally unhappy and that they no longer wish to be in.

that's it. begining, middle, end.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yeah...that's not happening.
> 
> Anymore than swathes of people across the land are turning from remain to leave.
> 
> Does anyone have any data on that one?



My MP has switched, many people here have said they’d switch. Why do you doubt that?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My MP has switched, many people here have said they’d switch. Why do you doubt that?


The polls are lying (like they did during the Scottish independence referendum)


----------



## Yogibear (Aug 2, 2018)

The british people voted for it so of course it has to happen. Unless of course you want to suspend your democracy when all bets are off!


----------



## sealion (Aug 2, 2018)

mod said:


> Many of the people who voted leave are dead for a start.


Do old remainers not die? That posh wine must be good.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 2, 2018)

If I'd had a crystal ball to see how things would turn out I would have voted Remain instead of abstaining. 

I won't qualify to vote in another one because I'll have been out of Britain for more than 10 years, and I don't think it'd be a good idea before about 2026 anyway, but I think the outcome would depend on getting some of the 28% who abstained to vote, not on getting many who voted on either side to change their minds.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 2, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If I'd had a crystal ball to see how things would turn out I would have voted Remain instead of abstaining.
> 
> I won't qualify to vote in another one because I'll have been out of Britain for more than 10 years, and I don't think it'd be a good idea before about 2026 anyway, but I think the outcome would depend on getting some of the 28% who abstained to vote, not on getting many who voted on either side to change their minds.


I voted Remain but not  for anything to do with the EU but because I believed Chuckles only cared about uniting the Tory backbenches and hadn't thought it through, I pretty much feared what has actually happened.
I would vote Remain again for much the same reason to try and contain the damage, it's too late to avoid any at all but maybe it can be minimised, don't think there will be another public vote though both the Leave and Remain camps would fear the outcome.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 2, 2018)

I'm fairly confident that remain would win a vote now.  Interesting radio show with Giesla Stewart who chaired Vote Leave.  She said she was angry with Cameron in the first place for calling a referundum, given that it was cynically offered for internal party politics, and this wasn't really the way to decide big issues in a representative democracy.


----------



## mod (Aug 2, 2018)

sealion said:


> Do old remainers not die? That posh wine must be good.



The vast majority of remainers were younger people.

Source. How did different demographic groups vote in the EU referendum?



What a lovely fucking legacy they have left us with.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 2, 2018)

yeah one of the things Leave were successful in, and Cameron fucked up on, was not having a lower voting age of 16 - unlike the Scottish referendum..  Again due to Westminster politics.


----------



## Yogibear (Aug 2, 2018)

Hollis said:


> I'm fairly confident that remain would win a vote now.  Interesting radio show with Giesla Stewart who chaired Vote Leave.  She said she was angry with Cameron in the first place for calling a referundum, given that it was cynically offered for internal party politics, and this wasn't really the way to decide big issues in a representative democracy.



Hi Hollis perhaps you could find some interesting ways of getting us to where we are able to decide what we grow and what we produce as a small group of islands now...


----------



## sealion (Aug 2, 2018)

mod said:


> What a lovely fucking legacy they have left us with.


Blame the eu and government.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2018)

Notoriously, people are now dying younger and remain voters are not aging or dying not in fact changing in any way whatsoever.

What a nasty post. You might as well say luckily the poor will be dying sooner than the better off remain voters.


----------



## sealion (Aug 2, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What a nasty post.


Indeed, Spittle everywhere.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My MP has switched, many people here have said they’d switch. Why do you doubt that?


Because your example was literally 4 out of 10 (5 including yourself) had crossed to leave.  A 40-50% swing.

Is your MP important?  Who is it?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because your example was literally 4 out of 10 (5 including yourself) had crossed to leave.  A 40-50% swing.
> 
> Is your MP important?  Who is it?



I have not spoken to the others, so it is a 100% swing.

My MP is the Foreign Secretary.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> likewise I know several - quite a few actually, including me - remain voters who would now vote leave. there are different reasons for their change of vote, but all of them would include the democratic issue. the political class asked for an instruction, it was given very clearly, they don't get to just keep on asking until they get an answer they find more acceptable or easier to implement.
> 
> in management terms - and they do work for us, not we for them - its JFDI (Just Fucking Do It).


If it was by a bigger majority I would agree with you, but it wasn't a clear enough decision imo. If it has gone the other way there is no way it would be taken as the end of the matter, we'd be talking about re-runs now.

The reasons I voted remain still haven't changed and the difficulty the political class have in implementing leave just proves what a shit idea it is.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

Right...100% and a tory MP.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Right...100% and a tory MP.



Yes. A wealthy area of Surrey, (no choice of party here so bound to be a Tory) voted remain, yet person after person I speak with says the same thing, “Just get on with it.”

You seem to be in some Guardian deluded land that	 ignores the fact that the millions of people whose lives have stagnated under austerity have not seen any improvement whilst Peston et al have been wailing over accessibility to fresh hand rolled kale and would vote again to stick the boot in.


----------



## bimble (Aug 2, 2018)

‘Just get on with it’ isn’t really the same thing as crossing from remain to leave is it. It’s just accepting that remain lost the vote.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> ‘Just get on with it’ isn’t really the same thing as crossing from remain to leave is it. It’s just accepting that remain lost the vote.



It isn't even that... it could just mean can't be arsed anymore/don't care/bored of it all.. wanna talk about something else..


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

bimble said:


> ‘Just get on with it’ isn’t really the same thing as crossing from remain to leave is it. It’s just accepting that remain lost the vote.



Quite, and I’m not a massively sociable person, but my neigbours that I speak with and parents at BB2’s school, they don’t want another vote and say that if there was one they’d vote out to get it done with. Which is the same thing.

And Jeremy Cunt very much had switched over, publicly. And for all his myriad faults he was born a brought up here, still lives here and weekly holds a surgery. Has he listened to his constituents and acted? Fuck knows, probably not. But he has changed his mind and I don’t see why it is so hard for people to understand that many others have done likewise.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 2, 2018)

I think the sentiment "Fucking figure out what the fuck a fucking Brexit is and get the fuck on with it already so people can talk about something else for five fucking minutes, you useless Tory cunts" is one that most people would agree with at this point, without necessarily being strongly in favour of Brexit itself.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2018)

Hollis said:


> It isn't even that... it could just mean can't be arsed anymore/don't care/bored of it all.. wanna talk about something else..



Seriously, you see attitudes displayed on this very thread glorifying low life expectancy of the poor and you think people aren’t disgusted by that? It’s a vicious, nasty vibe running through the liberal establishment along with “thick, racist proles”.

It’s a nasty streak that’s been exposed in society.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> ...You seem to be in some Guardian deluded land that	 ignores the fact that the millions of people whose lives have stagnated under austerity have not seen any improvement whilst Peston et al have been wailing over accessibility to fresh hand rolled kale and would vote again to stick the boot in.


Your insight is as good as your polling.


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> likewise I know several - quite a few actually, including me - remain voters who would now vote leave. there are different reasons for their change of vote, but all of them would include the democratic issue. the political class asked for an instruction, it was given very clearly, they don't get to just keep on asking until they get an answer they find more acceptable or easier to implement.
> 
> in management terms - and they do work for us, not we for them - its JFDI (Just Fucking Do It).


Genuinely, you re the first person I have ever heard say this.


----------



## Yogibear (Aug 2, 2018)

.


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)

The people I've talked to who are "meh" about Brexit seem either to people who voted leave who don't want to be associated with the racist UKIP / EDL contingent (even if when in the next breath they make some comment about controlling Emma Grayshun ), or they're wealthy enough (and white British enough) to believe that when the Brexit shit hits the fan, other people will get the full force of it while they'll be spared the worst privations.  They might wince about the absence of avocado toast, but otherwise will probably be fine.  Some are both of course.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

CRI said:


> Genuinely, you re the first person I have ever heard say this.


Apart from me who said it earlier in thread.  On multiple occasions.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 2, 2018)

CRI said:


> The people I've talked to who are "meh" about Brexit seem either to people who voted leave who don't want to be associated with the racist UKIP / EDL contingent (even if when in the next breath they make some comment about controlling Emma Grayshun ), or they're wealthy enough (and white British enough) to believe that when the Brexit shit hits the fan, other people will get the full force of it while they'll be spared the worst privations.  They might wince about the absence of avocado toast, but otherwise will probably be fine.  Some are both of course.


How perfectly handy for you!


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Apart from me who said it earlier in thread.  On multiple occasions.


I haven't read every post on the thread, but here you go, you can be a Number Two then!


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)

Have talked to some colleagues also living in island communities doing the same thing.   Why the fuck do people think this is just tickity boo?

Thread by @howardhardiman: "I live on a remote Scottish island and we are starting to plan food stores and increased food production because of a Brexit which Scotland […]"


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

To add to the anecdotal totalling, I know one Leave to Remain switch... 

"Hardening of attitudes" though seems to sum up a lot of the stuff I've seen online, in both directions. There has been looooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddddddddsssssssssss of polling on it. The biggest change that I can recall seeing is that there was quite a big jump in support for Remain in Northern Ireland. 

I can't see there being another referendum though. For a start, it takes about a year to set one up I think, and you'd have to get a bill through parliament to do it and I don't think anyone will. Unless there's some massive revelation or change in circumstances I still think a general election is more likely and that might turn into a proxy referendum or the offer of a second vote might become an issue... 

Who fucking knows though.


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> To add to the anecdotal totalling, I know one Leave to Remain switch...
> 
> "Hardening of attitudes" though seems to sum up a lot of the stuff I've seen online, in both directions. There has been looooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaddddddddddsssssssssss of polling on it. The biggest change that I can recall seeing is that there was quite a big jump in support for Remain in Northern Ireland.
> 
> ...


Hell, it was an advisory referendum.  There doesn't actually need to be another vote to stop the speeding train that is Brexit crashing into the sea.   

But the Tories are determined to get out before the EU Anti Tax Avoidance Directive kicks in, else they and their rich knob chums won't be able to keep the money they've screwed out of the rest of us away from the taxman's eyes.  The Labour opposition's lockstep with the Tories is more puzzling, but either way, most of us are still going to be fucked.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 2, 2018)

CRI said:


> I haven't read every post on the thread, but here you go, you can be a Number Two then!


And the other people who said it on this thread.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> attitudes displayed on this very thread glorifying low life expectancy of the poor



where was that again?


----------



## CRI (Aug 2, 2018)




----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

The polls I have seen say that around 2/3 of Labour voters (at the last election) voted Remain and about 1/3 Leave. The Tories are the roughly a mirror image. 

I presume the Labour Party has access to more accurate stuff than that, breaking things down by constituency and the like, and I think they believe they will not win an election if they become the "Remain" or "second vote" party. Even if they threw aside a purely cynical electoral-maths argument, there would have to be agreement at the top of the party that challenging a referendum result that was trailed (dishonestly) as being decisive on the matter would be the right thing to do. 

I think they should do what they can to support the best deal that can be got and to absolutely make sure there isn't a No Deal crash out and that seems to be what is happening. 

However, Labour's Six Tests, which they say must be passed by any deal that they vote for in Parliament can't be passed because they include getting "the exact same benefits" as we have from being in the Single Market and the Customs Union, so I don't know what that means other than I think they will whip to vote against May's deal and hope that that means a general election. . .


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 2, 2018)

Looking at that poll - it's a bit out of date, and things seem to move quickly in these febrile times 

How Britain's views have changed – full Brexit poll results

I love how there's always a small percentage of UKIP Remain voters.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 2, 2018)

teuchter said:


> One guy mentions immigration as the first issue,


He say's it's one factor. Oh and he's an Asian/British fella.


teuchter said:


> another wants Britain to be Britain again.


Yeah that's all there was... An Asian fella mentioning immigration and another saying he wants Britain to be Britain again.
There's me thinking I could help you open your sheltered eyes. There really are none so blind than those who don't want to see.


teuchter said:


> Someone thinks austerity has been imposed by the EU.


And you disagree with her?


----------



## Hollis (Aug 2, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> Unless there's some massive revelation or change in circumstances I still think a general election is more likely and that might turn into a proxy referendum or the offer of a second vote might become an issue...
> 
> Who fucking knows though.



I also think a General Election is most likely, with Corbyn keen to enact 'the will of the people', or at least those he thinks will get him elected.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> The people I've talked to who are "meh" about Brexit seem either to people who voted leave who don't want to be associated with the racist UKIP / EDL contingent (even if when in the next breath they make some comment about controlling Emma Grayshun ), or they're wealthy enough (and white British enough) to believe that when the Brexit shit hits the fan, other people will get the full force of it while they'll be spared the worst privations.  They might wince about the absence of avocado toast, but otherwise will probably be fine.  Some are both of course.


If Brexit is the major issue dominating everyones politics why was it almost absent from the general election last year?


----------



## mod (Aug 3, 2018)

sealion said:


> Blame the eu and government.



Over 70 years of peace in Europe risked thanks to a vote based on lies and ignorance spouted by cunts more interested in their own political futures. The EU is far from perfect and needs reformed but compare life in Europe during the 70 years before its formation. We were constantly at war with each other.

How much money has this cost to date? How many friendships ruined. This country is a fucking laughing stock.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> Over 70 years of peace in Europe risked thanks to a vote based on lies and ignorance spouted by cunts more interested in their own political futures. The EU is far from perfect and needs reformed but compare life in Europe during the 70 years before its formation. We were constantly at war with each other.
> 
> How much money has this cost to date? How many friendships ruined. This country is a fucking laughing stock.



Crap - the EU is no more the reason that western European states haven't gone to war with each other in the last 70 years than Channel 4 showing the Muppets Christmas Carol is the reason my children enjoy Christmas.


----------



## mod (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Crap - the EU is no more the reason that western European states haven't gone to war with each other in the last 70 years than Channel 4 showing the Muppets Christmas Carol is the reason my children enjoy Christmas.



I firmly believe it is. So we will disagree.

“
Why was the EU created?

After the Second World War there was a new movement to create unity between Germany and France, which would ultimately lay the foundations for the European Union four decades later.

When was the EU formed?

The EU can trace its origins from the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) and the European Economic Community (EEC), formed in 1951 and 1958 respectively by the Inner Six countries of Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands.”


----------



## mod (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Crap - the EU is no more the reason that western European states haven't gone to war with each other in the last 70 years than Channel 4 showing the Muppets Christmas Carol is the reason my children enjoy Christmas.



This is an interesting article on the subject.

How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe?


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> I firmly believe it is. So we will disagree.
> 
> “
> Why was the EU created?
> ...



The reason that western European states haven't gone to war with each other in the last 70 years is called 'the Red Army' - the argument that it is economic ties that prevent war is the somewhat inconvenient fact that the day before Germany invaded France in 1940 it's largest trading partner was, err... France, and that the day before Germany invaded Russia in 1941 it's largest trading partner was, err... Russia.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

Who exactly in the EU would have gone to war with each other if the EU didn’t exist?  France and Germany again?  How and why?


----------



## Poi E (Aug 3, 2018)

Hmm, which is the most militarist country in the EU that has a recent history of attacking other countries?


----------



## mod (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Who exactly in the EU would have gone to war with each other if the EU didn’t exist?  France and Germany again?  How and why?



European countries have been at war with each other for many reasons for literally centuries. Yugoslavia aside, is it a coincidence european wars have all but stopped since 1951?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> European countries have been at war with each other for many reasons for literally centuries. Yugoslavia aside, is it a coincidence european wars have all but stopped since 1951?


Nope, not a coincidence.  Obviously.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nope, not a coincidence.  Obviously.



England and Scotland were at war from before they became political identities to the dual monarchy of the Stewarts, yet you want independence - do you want war with England?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> England and Scotland were at war from before they became political identities to the dual monarchy of the Stewarts, yet you want independence - do you want war with England?


Yes.  As soon as we get indy we're going to invade England.  It's our secret plan, how did you find out?


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 3, 2018)

If not preventing WW3, I see the EU as a "liberalising" force with countries having to abide by EU standards (esp human rights - the sort of thing the Brexiters hate)  in order to join.
I still don't understand what happened to Greece - presumably problems in evaluating their fiscal enforcement...


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> . The EU is far from perfect and needs _to be_ [sic] reformed
> .


Brexiters have been constantly challenged to provide working solutions to the problems inherent with leaving the EU on this thread, yet the above statement gets constantly repeated along with: 'its better to change the EU from within'.
So how the fuck do remainers propose to change the EU from within?
Its been it's top strategic agenda point since the 2008 crisis and has progressed by the grand sum of fuck all in that time.
Macron was sold as the latest gallant knight on the quest for EU reform yet as soon as Merkel got her coalition up and running she kicked him back into in the long grass, as other reformers have been over the years.
Streeck does a good job detailing the impending car crash in this article, arguing that with the Merkel IV German government the EU is entering a period of impotency due to a slow implosion of relations between Germany, France and Italy. With all likelihood of the later bailing out in an Italexit.


> Italy, meanwhile, now resembles Greece, in that it can neither hope to recover on its own nor to be saved by others. While Germany, in particular, but also France, cannot let Italy exit from the EMU in peace—just as they cannot let Britain exit from the EU in peace—Italy will not heal as long as it remains locked into the eurozone. There is no politically feasible institutional reform either at the European level or in Italy itself that could get the country back on its feet.



So how do these reforms look?
How can they get done?
What chance is there of the European left wing steering reforms as it's the far right making all the gains in the countries that matter?

To paraphrase Kaka Tim, I'd love to see it but it just ain't happening. I'm seeing unicorns.


----------



## RD2003 (Aug 3, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> If not preventing WW3, I see the EU as a "liberalising" force with countries having to abide by EU standards (esp human rights - the sort of thing the Brexiters hate)  in order to join.
> I still don't understand what happened to Greece - presumably problems in evaluating their fiscal enforcement...


This is the crucial point for those of us who are just about old enough to remember the dark days before the EU forced 'human rights' upon the UK.

One of the most depressing aspects of the Leave campaign was the constant insistence that 'human rights' must be abolished.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yes.  As soon as we get indy we're going to invade England.  It's our secret plan, how did you find out?



it was easy - you've got shit taste, so we'll let you see us hollow out the defences on the Western March and you'll attack decisively to Carlisle (it was owned by David I of Scotland in the 12th century), while we concentrate our forces in the Eastern March, and while you're hitting the victory celebrations in Carlisle we'll race up the A1 from Berwick-upon-Tweed and take North Berwick.

which is much nicer than Carlisle.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 3, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> If not preventing WW3, I see the EU as a "liberalising" force with countries having to abide by EU standards (esp human rights - the sort of thing the Brexiters hate)  in order to join.
> I still don't understand what happened to Greece - presumably problems in evaluating their fiscal enforcement...



You've put your finger on the crux of the problem there. EU countries have to abide by (some) human rights standards but the EU itself can override those same rights if it's deemed necessary for economic reasons.

Just the other day a major piece of research linking austerity policies to the brexit vote was published. Well Greece is basically the same thing gone into overdrive; externally enforced austerity has coincided with an increase in fascist activity at street level and in mainstream politics.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> European countries have been at war with each other for many reasons for literally centuries. Yugoslavia aside, is it a coincidence european wars have all but stopped since 1951?


Do you think the political situation of France and Germany 1951 to present is reflective of the circumstances that led to the proto-France and proto-Germany’s wars from 1500 to 1945?

If so, that’s some serious lack of understanding of historical context you’ve got going on there.  If not, what the fuck have their historical wars got to do with anything?

We don’t have a lack of wars because of the EU.  We have an EU because of the lack of (geopolitical context that creates) wars.  There’s your lack of coincidence.  You just have the cause and effect the wrong way round.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

I mean, China and Japan were in hundreds of years worth of wars before 1951 too, frequently with EU countries.  EU countries also colonised most of Africa and America in the hundreds of years before 1951.  Has the EU prevented repeats of these things as well?


----------



## bimble (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ..We don’t have a lack of wars because of the EU.  We have an EU because of the lack of (geopolitical context that creates) wars.  There’s your lack of coincidence.  You just have the cause and effect the wrong way round.


Can you explain a bit more what you mean, like what is it about the geopolitical context that you think has changed which has caused there to be no wars?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 3, 2018)

it also led to the rise of a left wing government did it not? one that was brought to heel by the EU institutions. 
funny how they are a-ok with member states having far right leanings isn't it. Taking names for halal meat now, lists.


SpookyFrank said:


> You've put your finger on the crux of the problem there. EU countries have to abide by (some) human rights standards but the EU itself can override those same rights if it's deemed necessary for economic reasons.
> 
> Just the other day a major piece of research linking austerity policies to the brexit vote was published. Well Greece is basically the same thing gone into overdrive; externally enforced austerity has coincided with an increase in fascist activity at street level and in mainstream politics.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

bimble said:


> Can you explain a bit more what you mean, like what is it about the geopolitical context that you think has changed which has caused there to be no wars?


What advantage is there in this stage of capitalism for e.g. Germany to invade another country?  What would they get out of it?  Who would make the decision to do it?  How would they fund the ongoing war?  How would the population react?  

How much of any of that is because Germany have a customs union and shared currency?


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 3, 2018)

It's just as arguable, if not more so, that NATO is what's prevented a large-scale european war for the last 70 years.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

That's an excellent article in pocketscience's post by the way, fascinating, and one of the most beautifully written (on a superficial level, it's full of memorable lines) political essays I think I've ever read!


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's just as arguable, if not more so, that NATO is what's prevented a large-scale european war for the last 70 years.



right, lets just ignore the armoured elephant in the room, its the technocrats who buy us peace lol


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

Arguing historical counterfactuals is impossible in my opinion. You'll never be able to "prove" convincingly to those who don't want to agree with your argument that the EU is or is not a major reason why Europe stopped having regular (and particularly regular Franco-German) wars. It happened... the wars stopped happenening (for now! ). Stopping those conflicts was one of its stated founding principles... the wars stopped happening (for now!). NATO happened. Nuclear deterrence happened (Le Bomb!). A million other things happened. You can probably trade links with equally credible people making equally credible arguments in either direction for days. 

The First World War ended with a whole world swearing it would never happen again and within living memory it did, on an even more massive and disastrous scale. History is too chaotic to make too much sense of in a strictly logical sense I think.


----------



## CRI (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> And the other people who said it on this thread.


Receipts please.  Ta.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> Receipts please.  Ta.


Go through 337 pages so you can ignore them again?  I’ll pass, thanks.  You can choose to believe I’m a liar if you want.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 3, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> it also led to the rise of a left wing government did it not? one that was brought to heel by the EU institutions.
> funny how they are a-ok with member states having far right leanings isn't it. Taking names for halal meat now, lists.



Quite so. You can have all the democracy you like as long as you choose between centre-right and far-right.

Of course the monstering of Corbyn shows that the British establishment is of a mind with the EU brass on this point.


----------



## RD2003 (Aug 3, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's just as arguable, if not more so, that NATO is what's prevented a large-scale european war for the last 70 years.


And the Warsaw Pact: stalemate. Since then NATO has been needlessly expanding eastwards, arguably sparking at least one war on European soil.

Yugoslavia was pretty large-scale and neither NATO nor the EU lifted a finger until it was too late.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> Couldn't disagree more. remain would win easily. Many of the people who voted leave are dead for a start. Many who 'wanted' to vote remain are now eligible to vote. I know several leave voters who regret their decision.



Oh well, if you know several people that would vote differently then that must equal a gargantuan percentage swing...

Tool.


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> The EU is far from perfect and needs reformed


What are your solutions for this? Where do see the EU in five, ten years from now?



mod said:


> How many friendships ruined.


None here, how many you?


mod said:


> This country is a fucking laughing stock.


It was before June 2016.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Crap - the EU is no more the reason that western European states haven't gone to war with each other in the last 70 years than Channel 4 showing the Muppets Christmas Carol is the reason my children enjoy Christmas.



Are you sure about that?

It's like the best Christmas film.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you sure about that?
> 
> It's like the best Christmas film.



 they don't get to see it - I lock them in their rooms for the two weeks so i can enjoy Christmas.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> I firmly believe it is. So we will disagree.
> 
> “
> Why was the EU created?
> ...





Why was the EU created? To act as a bulwark against the Soviet Union and to preserve failing European economic power as the old colonies gained independence. 



mod said:


> This is an interesting article on the subject.
> 
> How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe?



No, it's a shit article.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> they don't get to see it - I lock them in their rooms for the two weeks so i can enjoy Christmas.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

mod said:


> This is an interesting article on the subject.
> 
> How valid is the claim that the EU has delivered peace in Europe?



as has been said, its a shit article - how would you evaluate an idea about why western European states had not gone to war with each other that failed to mention the nuclear armed superpower on the eastern border with 10,000 tanks, as many Artillery pieces, 3 million men, 5,000 fast jets and 10,000 nukes?

its a bit like pontificating about why Mercia and Wessex engaged in mutual non-aggression and joint economic stimulus and failing to mention the Vikings and the Danelaw.

utter fucking bilge.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

What a load of shite coming from brexiters on this thread now, honestly.

Unable to answer _any_ questions they resort to demanding solutions from remainers and spouting nonsense about history.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What a load of shite coming from brexiters on this thread now, honestly.
> 
> Unable to answer _any_ questions they resort to demanding solutions from remainers and spouting nonsense about history.


lol. the remainers were doing so well 'til you turned up.
I'm starting to think you're a brexiter stooge.


----------



## Winot (Aug 3, 2018)

(probably futile attempt to summarise recent bit of thread)

1. Brexit may/is likely to see a reduction in GDP. 

2. GDP is an ideological measure. Ordinary people can have better lives on a lower GDP if different political choices are made. 

3. A government prepared to make those political choices with a higher GDP at its disposal is likely to have more chance of making ordinary people’s lives better. 

4. So if you want to make ordinary people’s lives better, the gamble depends on (a) the extent to which whether Brexit makes it more likely to get a government of the right persuasion against (b) the downside of possible/likely GDP reduction.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What a load of shite coming from brexiters on this thread now, honestly.
> 
> Unable to answer _any_ questions they resort to demanding solutions from remainers and spouting nonsense about history.



i'm afraid i'd say the same about remainers - absolutely nothing about how the EU might be reformed while endlessly saying it should be, and holding up the most transparent nonsense as _lessons from history._


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What a load of shite coming from brexiters on this thread now, honestly.


As opposed to the scaremongering shit from remainers. Fucking starvation, world wars, poisoned chicken  etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> lol. the remainers were doing so well 'til you turned up.
> I'm starting to think you're a brexiter stooge.



I reckon he's a Putin Bot


----------



## billbond (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What a load of shite coming from brexiters on this thread now, honestly.
> 
> Unable to answer _any_ questions they resort to demanding solutions from remainers and spouting nonsense about history.


Bit like the bad losers from the remain side on here, its non stop
They just dont stop with drivel and bitterness
Well said above post sealion


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

Winot said:


> (probably futile attempt to summarise recent bit of thread)
> 
> 1. Brexit may/is likely to see a reduction in GDP.
> 
> ...


3 simply isn’t true.  It assumes that GDP is synonymous with tax revenue but it’s not.  Reducing corporation tax to 5% would probably raise GDP but reduce tax intake.  Leaving the EU damages the ability of companies to offshore their profits, which could well reduce GDP but raise tax intake.

When we say a focus on GDP is ideological, we don’t just mean this as a technicality.  The fact is that even GDP and fiscal income are partially correlated at best.

Even the ONS explicitly acknowledge this awkward relationship between GDP and welfare in their note I linked to earlier.


----------



## Winot (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> 3 simply isn’t true.  It assumes that GDP is synonymous with tax revenue but it’s not.  Reducing corporation tax to 5% would probably raise GDP but reduce tax intake.  Leaving the EU damages the ability of companies to offshore their profits, which could well reduce GDP but raise tax intake.
> 
> When we say a focus on GDP is ideological, we don’t just mean this as a technicality.  The fact is that even GDP and fiscal income are partially correlated at best.
> 
> Even the ONS explicitly acknowledge this awkward relationship between GDP and welfare in their note I linked to earlier.



Noted. Not an economics expert so happy to listen and learn. 

So do you think leaving the EU will raise tax revenue?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

Winot said:


> Noted. Not an economics expert so happy to listen and learn.
> 
> So do you think leaving the EU will raise tax revenue?


It could reduce or raise it depending on government policy.  Sorry it’s s fudge answer but it’s true.  It’s not Brexit that matters, it’s government policy, same as it always is.  Brexit is a massive red herring.

One last point about GDP — it’s best really to think of changes in GDP as changes in pre-taxe corporate income.  That’s what drives its movements, after all.  But if you say “I’m worried that pre-tax corporate income will drop 5%!” it doesn’t sound quite so scary, does it?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you sure about that?
> 
> It's like the best Christmas film.


FInally something we can all agree on


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

I'm not an economics expert either, but doesn't GDP include government spending? 

So, if Corbyn comes in and spends £300 billion on a gold statue of Chavez standing on top of the Angel of the North then GDP goes up by £300 billion?


----------



## ska invita (Aug 3, 2018)

sealion said:


> As opposed to the scaremongering shit from remainers. Fucking starvation, world wars, poisoned chicken  etc.


Some people out there in the world may be using these issues blindly as part of Project Fear bias, but post-Breixt (if it happens) as Lexiters the next step will be to stop
mass deregulation/
becoming the 51st state/
the rise of a violent nationalist right across Europe (who are successfully using anti-EU-sentiment as a rallying call)
...all real concerns

No Deal crash out has real consequences too but not much we can do about that


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It could reduce or raise it depending on government policy.  Sorry it’s s fudge answer but it’s true.  It’s not Brexit that matters, it’s government policy, same as it always is.  Brexit is a massive red herring.
> 
> One last point about GDP — it’s best really to think of changes in GDP as changes in pre-taxe corporate income.  That’s what drives its movements, after all.  But if you say “I’m worried that pre-tax corporate income will drop 5%!” it doesn’t sound quite so scary, does it?


Shut up you moron.  brexit happens in 6 months.  You've not got one trade deal in place, not one...you need thousands.

The latest brainiac scheme was that the UK would just take a share of the EU's WTO quotas and you've been told to fuck off.  You don't even have WTO.

There's not one fucking business in the UK that knows what is going to happen...how the fuck are they supposed to prepare?  6 months!  You think they're hiring?  Investing?

Fucking nonsense about a 5% drop in pre-tax profits.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Shut up you moron.  brexit happens in 6 months.  You've not got one trade deal in place, not one...you need thousands.
> 
> The latest brainiac scheme was that the UK would just take a share of the EU's WTO quotas and you've been told to fuck off.  You don't even have WTO.
> 
> ...



Temper temper


----------



## billbond (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Temper temper



Get nasty these remoaners dont they. No class


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

billbond said:


> Get nasty these remoaners dont they. No class


You can fuck off and all if you think the rest of us share anything with you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seriously, you see attitudes displayed on this very thread glorifying low life expectancy of the poor and you think people aren’t disgusted by that? It’s a vicious, nasty vibe running through the liberal establishment along with “thick, racist proles”.
> 
> It’s a nasty streak that’s been exposed in society.





CRI said:


> they make some comment about controlling Emma Grayshun )



Oh look a HILARIOUS joke about regional accents


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You can fuck off and all if you think the rest of share anything with you.



indeed - he name checked me earlier, now I know how Corbyn feels about getting the thumbs up from David Duke.


----------



## Winot (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It could reduce or raise it depending on government policy.  Sorry it’s s fudge answer but it’s true.  It’s not Brexit that matters, it’s government policy, same as it always is.  Brexit is a massive red herring.
> 
> One last point about GDP — it’s best really to think of changes in GDP as changes in pre-taxe corporate income.  That’s what drives its movements, after all.  But if you say “I’m worried that pre-tax corporate income will drop 5%!” it doesn’t sound quite so scary, does it?



OK, but if the notional left wing government has £100 in the pre-tax income pot and has corporation tax at 30% then it brings in less tax revenue than that tax does with £110 in the pot, no?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 3, 2018)

I came across this video, which is long, and may already be familiar.
It is not a discussion about political ideology, nor re-running the brexit debate, nor is it about EU reform, it is about the actual practicalities of the UK leaving (mainly leaving with a no deal).
There will be plenty of opportunity to judge and/or scoff but the discussion is interesting in terms of the detail talked about.
It was recorded the same evening Boris resigned...the Monday after Chequers I believe.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

This throwing of insults between Leavers and Remainers is what I meant earlier when I talked about "two warring camps" and I think it's terrible for politics.

There's a danger of them becoming two identity groups who won't speak to each other, and I think it has a terrible possible consequence for left-wing politics and for people who do have economic, class, and political interests in common. That's what I mean when I see us becoming more of a binary American culture-wars political culture, where miners turn out to cheer for a multimillionaire plutocrat whose main aim in life is cutting taxes for his mates and taking the healthcare away from people like them because he slags off "coastal elites". 

I really hope that doesn't happen, but there's too much "Remainers say..." "Leavers are all..." going around. (I accept I move in particular online circles where this might be over-represented. I'm also aware I've been sometimes guilty of it myself - not here, I don't think, but where one encounters actual UKIP nationalists and Hannon fans and the like... well, there you go.)  

That's why I think there's something to be said for the Labour Party taking the cautious approach they are - accepting the result of the referendum and trying to back the best deal that they see in front of them. I think it's bad politics to get identified as either a Leave or Remain party, whereas they could be in the position of sweeping in like Batman to rescue the nation from the Tory's failure to deliver any deal and can start to repair the country's infrastructure, and, you know, stop people having to rely on foodbanks and zero hours crap and endless debt and hopelessness.  

I voted Remain. I still think that was probably the right decision, but I've had my position moved a bit (and I'm grateful to some of the stuff at Urban - like that article up the thread - that has informed me more about the Lexit position). 

I think you have to accept the result and start to move on. That's because I can't see a way to justify a re-run of the referendum: I think the Leave campaign was disgustingly dishonest, particularly in the recently revealed social media dark ads, and I think they cheated on spending, and I think there was foreign interference via social media propoganda. But I don't think any of that matters - unless some particularly startling smoking gun shows up or there is a massive move in public opinion for some reason - because it's a political thing and it (like Trumpism) needs a political solution. So unless there's a general election and someone stands on the basis of promising another vote and wins then I think you have to accept it and try to make the country better - including lots of reform of our democracy and the way social media companies operate and are regulated and politics is funded. 

However, I am genuinely worried that there is a part of the Tory party (Rees Mogg and pals and to be honest more and more of them) who really are disaster capitalists who really do want us to crash out with No Deal in order to profit on the chaos by privatising what remains of our public services, including the NHS in some horrific trade deal with the US, and there are those further to the right who have even more sinister plans. I find that very frightening and because of the fact that this whole thing is to some extent a Tory party internal drama I think it's possible it might actually happen.  

There you go, that was long and self-serving wasn't it?! I needed to get it off my chest.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I came across this video, which is long, and may already be familiar.
> It is not a discussion about political ideology, nor re-running the brexit debate, nor is it about EU reform, it is about the actual practicalities of the UK leaving (mainly leaving with a no deal).
> There will be plenty of opportunity to judge and/or scoff but the discussion is interesting in terms of the detail talked about.
> It was recorded the same evening Boris resigned...the Monday after Chequers I believe.



Graham Hughes is the first (and so far only) person to visit every country in the world without flying. He knows his Aarhus from his El Salvador. Jason Hunter is an international trade negotiator who has made deals around the world worth billions. His knowledge of the sector is as comprehensive as it is informed. Ciaran Donovan is LBC's famous "White Van man", the guy who took on Jacob Rees-Mogg live on air.


----------



## Supine (Aug 3, 2018)

sealion said:


> As opposed to the scaremongering shit from remainers. Fucking starvation, world wars, poisoned chicken  etc.



Call it scare mongering if you want, I'm starting to see most investment in my industry moving to Ireland and mainland Europe. That's real jobs not being positioned in the UK. I even saw my first job advert entitled 'Brexit Related - Transfer of production'. 
GDP or whatever metric you fancy affects real people and to support brexit on a vague hope of some change in UK politics is pie in the sky thinking. It'll damage us all.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> Call it scare mongering if you want






Supine said:


> It'll damage us all.


----------



## Supine (Aug 3, 2018)

Miss out all the factual information in the middle if you want...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> Miss out all the factual information in the middle if you want...



You made your point redundant with your faith in your ability to predict the future.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

I have similar views, generally, I think that the _certainty_ of the 'debate' is damaging for our democracy - and we have to be mindful not just about a GE in 2023 but about GE's in 2030's and beyond, I don't want a political climate like that in the US and I doubt many do. i'm firmly of the opinion, and was during the referendum campaign, that the question regarding EU membership is so complex, so multi-faceted, and with such uncertainty (including, to be fair, what the EU is going to look like in 20 years and whether those who might decide to remain now will be quite so keen in 2040..), that anyone who can come out with a simple yes/no answer without some caveats and misgivings is simply an idiot who fails to grasp white how complex and unknowable some of this stuff is.

that doesn't mean you can't have an 'on balance, I go for X' view, but to think that everything is perfect on one side and abhorrent on the other is both myopic and deeply foolish - I voted for one side, with misgivings and regrets, and now i'd vote for another side with misgivings and regrets. my main one being that it has come to this...



MightyTibberton said:


> However, I am genuinely worried that there is a part of the Tory party (Rees Mogg and pals and to be honest more and more of them) who really are disaster capitalists who really do want us to crash out with No Deal in order to profit on the chaos by privatising what remains of our public services, including the NHS in some horrific trade deal with the US...



to be fair, there's a non-loon viewpoint that crashing out in a no-deal brexit will be better for all concerned in the long run, that it will enable the EU and UK to negotiate like normal trading blocks rather than like a bickering, resentful divorcing couple. there's no denying that it would pose difficulties in the immediate term, but that those difficulties and the political aftertaste would be quicker removed than if we continue with this endless dragged out procedure that's built on a bedrock that neither the EU nor UK wants to stand on anymore


----------



## bimble (Aug 3, 2018)

You think “crashing out” and then starting negotiations would make it like a fresh slate no hard feelings ?


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> It'll damage us all.


I'll wait and see.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

bimble said:


> You think “crashing out” and then starting negotiations would make it like a fresh slate no hard feelings ?



not _no hard feelings_, but on balance that's it easier to thread new laces into shoes when the old pair have been removed.

as I have written many times on this subject, the whole of the Article 50 process was designed - from the first time pen was put to paper in the devising of the Lisbon Treaty - to fail. to be so damaging to the leaving state that no state would ever go through with leaving. we should not, therefore, be surprised when it does exactly what it was designed to do - bar the actual leaving bit.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

Winot said:


> OK, but if the notional left wing government has £100 in the pre-tax income pot and has corporation tax at 30% then it brings in less tax revenue than that tax does with £110 in the pot, no?


This is tautologous indeed.  And tells us nothing about the likelihood of that left wing government being in power, nor what they will have the freedom to do once they get there.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

sealion said:


> I'll wait and see.


Stockpile sorted out.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Shut up you moron.  brexit happens in 6 months.  You've not got one trade deal in place, not one...you need thousands.
> 
> The latest brainiac scheme was that the UK would just take a share of the EU's WTO quotas and you've been told to fuck off.  You don't even have WTO.
> 
> ...


Goosnargh


----------



## bimble (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> not _no hard feelings_, but on balance that's it easier to thread new laces into shoes when the old pair have been removed.
> 
> as I have written many times on this subject, the whole of the Article 50 process was designed - from the first time pen was put to paper in the devising of the Lisbon Treaty - to fail. to be so damaging to the leaving state that no state would ever go through with leaving. we should not, therefore, be surprised when it does exactly what it was designed to do - bar the actual leaving bit.



I like the shoelaces metaphor but the bickering divorcing couple one does seem more apt. And in that one its not a new spouse you're talking about starting a new relationship with its the same one that you've just dumped after years of annoying eachother and neither of you being happy etc.


----------



## Winot (Aug 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> This is tautologous indeed.  And tells us nothing about the likelihood of that left wing government being in power, nor what they will have the freedom to do once they get there.



I don’t understand why it’s tautologous. You don’t seem to admit of the possibility that, all things being equal, a smaller pot to draw from will affect tax revenue. 

I’ll admit that there are other factors that matter, such as those you mention, which may be affected by leaving the EU. But in selling the ‘GDP is idealogical’ trope I think you are overcompensating, and failing to account honestly for the effect on tax revenue that supression of GDP could have.


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Stockpile sorted out.


A load of horrible old people are going to die soon (as stated up thread) so there should be plenty of spare provisions to go round.
Out of interest, what will you be stockpilling and have you started yet?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

sealion said:


> A load of horrible old people are going to die soon (as stated up thread) so there should be plenty of spare provisions to go round.
> Out of interest, what will you be stockpilling and have you started yet?


30% of our food comes from the EU, so that's a lot of people you are counting on dying off. Didn't see that on the side of the bus.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

bimble said:


> I like the shoelaces metaphor but the bickering divorcing couple one does seem more apt. And in that one its not a new spouse you're talking about starting a new relationship with its the same one that you've just dumped after years of annoying eachother and neither of you being happy etc.



more the idea that its easier to discuss the childrens arrangements for the summer holidays when the paperwork has been signed off and you're both living new lives than it is when one of you is living in a house you can't afford to support and the other is living in a dingy bedsit, and both sides are scared shitless about money.

its a divorce, and the simpler it is the quicker, cheaper and less stressful it is for both sides. personally I think the UK and EU should have discussed only the things that relate to the safety and wellbeing of their citizens - so air travel, medicines, citizens reciprocal rights etc.. and then talked about trade and the future once we'd left the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> 30% of our food comes from the EU, so that's a lot of people you are counting on dying off. Didn't see that on the side of the bus.


All going to stop in March. And all those european producers going to burn it. No interest in further trade. Want to harm themselves.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> All going to stop in March. And all those european producers going to burn it. No interest in further trade. Want to harm themselves.


I don't think this will happen, rather they won't be able to compete with the gm beef and swimming pool chicken from the US.


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> 30% of our food comes from the EU,


That's a big hit for them then. Maybe they might keep selling us some hey!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't think this will happen, rather they won't be able to compete with the gm beef and swimming pool chicken from the US.


And gonorrhoea etc


----------



## sealion (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't think this will happen, rather they won't be able to compete with the gm beef and swimming pool chicken from the US.


And there you have it


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> 30% of our food comes from the EU, so that's a lot of people you are counting on dying off. Didn't see that on the side of the bus.



are you actually suggesting that the EU will refuse to sell food to UK while it rots in warehouses in Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands and France and stands in fields eating feed that the farmers haven't budgeted for?



sleaterkinney said:


> I don't think this will happen, rather they won't be able to compete with the gm beef and swimming pool chicken from the US.



you mean you don't know that its currently - and no one is talking about changing it - a criminal offence to bring such produce into the UK, let alone sell it?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> are you actually suggesting that the EU will refuse to sell food to UK while it rots in warehouses in Ireland, Germany, the Netherlands and France and stands in fields eating feed that the farmers haven't budgeted for?


 What's the point of regaining control of the borders if you just let stuff through?. 

There is no infrastructure to cope with checks of anything.




> you mean you don't know that its currently - and no one is talking about changing it - a criminal offence to bring such produce into the UK, let alone sell it?


Apart for the international trade secretary you mean?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

All that spare produce lying around, eh.

overshoot day - Google Search


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> All that spare produce lying around, eh.
> 
> overshoot day - Google Search



you are suggesting that European suppliers with large contracts with Tesco's or whatever have decided not to plant anything this autumn, and to not inseminate their livestock so there's nothing to sent to the abattoir next year?

please tell me you think they'll sell it to China instead of the UK?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> All that spare produce lying around, eh.
> 
> overshoot day - Google Search


wtf has happened to you?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you mean you don't know that its currently - and no one is talking about changing it - a criminal offence to bring such produce into the UK, let alone sell it?


It's currently illegal to import GM modified beef and chicken into the UK because it is a EU rule included in UK law, once we leave the customs union, the UK govt is free to abandon that rule and there is real concern in some quarters that the US would make that a condition of a trade agreement, agriculture is big business in the US and particularly in Trump voting states.
No-one makes a trade agreement out of a desire to do good they do it to make as much money as possible and the US govt is going to respond to the concerns of big business and lobbyists (maybe a little to the voters as well) 
The negotiations will have to cover such things as whether or not we are prepared to accept GM foods and giving US Health companies the right to invest in the NHS (another Trump hobby horse) in return for our right to sell
them insurance, banking, jet engines or computer software.
This will make problems for the EU as well since they will then have to decide how they are going to stop us further exporting this stuff onwards to them which makes problems for UK farmers who will have to comply with 
these new EU rules if they want to sell to Europe which brings us back to that much flogged horse the Irish border.
These are the sort of things that will end up causing real problems (for everyone) not scaremongering like gun towers on the Irish border or food shortages.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you are suggesting that European suppliers with large contracts with Tesco's or whatever have decided not to plant anything this autumn, and to not inseminate their livestock so there's nothing to sent to the abattoir next year?
> 
> please tell me you think they'll sell it to China instead of the UK?



It's the legalistic and technical stuff though isn't it in the case of there being literally no deal? 

Can planes fly exactly the same on Brexit Day +1 as on Brexit Day -1? Yes, of course. But they won't - officially - be in the EU regulations any more, so what if one crashes? What does that do to insurance, to the airline's liability? 

The withdrawal agreement with a 21 month (?) transition, then fine. But those guys on the pub video, who people seemed to think knew their stuff are saying "chaos" if there's No Deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> .


But Spacklefrog don't you know - _*we're all in it together!*_ Like my boss said the other after making 160 people redundant (while taking his £150,000+ salary of course)


----------



## yield (Aug 3, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> It's currently illegal to import GM modified beef and chicken into the UK because it is a EU rule included in UK law, once we leave the customs union, the UK govt is free to abandon that rule and there is real concern in some quarters that the US would make that a condition of a trade agreement, agriculture is big business in the US and particularly in Trump voting states.
> No-one makes a trade agreement out of a desire to do good they do it to make as much money as possible and the US govt is going to respond to the concerns of big business and lobbyists (maybe a little to the voters as well)
> The negotiations will have to cover such things as whether or not we are prepared to accept GM foods and giving US Health companies the right to invest in the NHS (another Trump hobby horse) in return for our right to sell
> them insurance, banking, jet engines or computer software.
> ...


What about the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership EU-US trade deal?

NHS could be 'carved open' by US healthcare profiteers warns Labour


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 3, 2018)

yield said:


> What about the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership EU-US trade deal?
> 
> NHS could be 'carved open' by US healthcare profiteers warns Labour


Trump has already canned this I believe but these are the sort of things that might very well come up again in bilateral UK-US talks, the US is going to negotiate on will make the most money for US companies not what is best for UK citizens. My big concern is that the UK govt probably won't negotiate on the basis of what is good for UK citizens either.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 3, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Trump has already canned this I believe but these are the sort of things that might very well come up again in bilateral UK-US talks, the US is going to negotiate on will make the most money for US companies not what is best for UK citizens. My big concern is that the UK govt probably won't negotiate on the basis of what is good for UK citizens either.



assuming such a deal was attempted to be negotiated in the current parliament i'm not convinced much would get through - trade with the US under current rules doesn't appear to be particularly difficult, and I just don't see the kind of marginal wins that a trade deal with the US would bring are worth the aggro that would accompany them. i'm not convinced that the current government would see the game as being worth the candle - I think they'd kick it into the long grass and concentrate on dealing with the EU.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

I don't think they get a vote. I got one of those petition emails about it recently. 

https://inews.co.uk/news/exclusive-uk-demands-secrecy-brexit-trade-talks-us/


----------



## Santino (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> And gonorrhoea etc


Don't forget dirty immigrants from Calais.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Santino said:


> Don't forget dirty immigrants from Calais.


Probably with various 3rd world stds.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 3, 2018)

Liberty Ships ?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> There is no infrastructure to cope with checks of anything.



Have you ever entered the UK from the Schengen zone? Did you notice the border guards who checked your passport? Did you notice the blue customs lane you walked through? Perhaps we could enact these people to check passports and do the customs shizz?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

"Brexit will change everything! We will be free!" 

"Oh, what about the Irish border/trade/food security?" 

"Stop making a fuss. Nothing will change."


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> assuming such a deal was attempted to be negotiated in the current parliament i'm not convinced much would get through - trade with the US under current rules doesn't appear to be particularly difficult, and I just don't see the kind of marginal wins that a trade deal with the US would bring are worth the aggro that would accompany them. i'm not convinced that the current government would see the game as being worth the candle - I think they'd kick it into the long grass and concentrate on dealing with the EU.


Absolutely but trade under the current rules only applies up to the end of March if No Deal or Dec 2020 if we go into the transition period, a deal needs sealing by whichever date is the relevant one or it's back to WTO rules for dealing with them as well as the EU and that applies to every country with which we trade under EU agreements.
I would hope that sense will prevail and that all the countries we deal with (or at least the important ones) will carry on as before while deals are thrashed out but we're dealing with politicians here whose agenda's here is going to be what is best for my country (and what is best for me personally in the case of one particular loon) so who knows what will happen next?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 3, 2018)

What's wrong with GM food again? I mean stuff that's actually wrong, not scaremongering based on scientific illiteracy.

Also not clear on why chlorinated chicken is bad either. It sure *sounds* scary, but then again there's plenty of nasty-sounding stuff used in food preparation in this country already.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 3, 2018)

It's interesting that before Brexit there were debates on here about whether immigration reduced wages and living standards for the poor. Now, post-Brexit it seems the argument is focused on whether total economic meltdown occurs rather than the real impacts on prices and growth that probably impact those people. Safer ground..


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Hollis said:


> It's interesting that before Brexit there were debates on here about whether immigration reduced wages and living standards for the poor. Now, post-Brexit it seems the argument is focused on whether total economic meltdown occurs rather than the real impacts on prices and growth that probably impact those people. Safer ground..


Who is suggesting 'total economic meltdown' - no one but you and the whole of the mass media/middle class/ruling class. I wonder why that whiff is in  the air eh hollis?

RUN RUN RUN


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

The hollowed out liberals that used to get  a pass as being _on our side _ that's gone, that's one immediate benefit.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Who is suggesting 'total economic meltdown' - no one but you and *the whole of the mass media/middle class/ruling class*. I wonder why that whiff is in  the air eh hollis?
> 
> RUN RUN RUN



Good to see you aren't getting dragged into the hyperbole.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Certainly not because of  people like  a "middle class scot with a professional job living in London in the country's most 'remain' borough." and the social weight they carry managing to in some totally unexplainable way, to have their opinions and interest presented day after day by middle class people with professional jobs living in London in the country's most 'remain' boroughs as that of _the country._


----------



## Hollis (Aug 3, 2018)

Lol. The Voice of the working class has spoken...


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> you are suggesting that European suppliers with large contracts with Tesco's or whatever have decided not to plant anything this autumn, and to not inseminate their livestock so there's nothing to sent to the abattoir next year?
> 
> please tell me you think they'll sell it to China instead of the UK?


Um no...I expect they'll sell it to wherever they can have the biggest profit/lowest costs.

But my repeated point still stands...6 months to go...not one trade deal.  Food, medicine, fuel, airline tickets...all over the world not one contract openly agreed.  So they haven't done it or they don't want to tell us about it.  I'll bet the fuckin arms deals are getting sorted.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Lol. The Voice of the working class has spoken...


Good post holls.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um no...I expect they'll sell it to wherever they can have the biggest profit/lowest costs.
> 
> But my repeated point still stands...6 months to go...not one trade deal.  Food, medicine, fuel, airline tickets...all over the world not one contract openly agreed.  So they haven't done it or they don't want to tell us about it.  I'll bet the fuckin arms deals are getting sorted.


ALL GOING DIE


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um no...I expect they'll sell it to wherever they can have the biggest profit/lowest costs.
> 
> But my repeated point still stands...6 months to go...not one trade deal.  Food, medicine, fuel, airline tickets...all over the world not one contract openly agreed.  So they haven't done it or they don't want to tell us about it.  I'll bet the fuckin arms deals are getting sorted.


The lack of reality about how the world works, what drives it, and what states/institutions/etc need to do to make it happen is mad.

You can't scare people with this ignorance anymore. Capitalism - neo-liberalism - is stronger than you. You will get whatever you live in your petainst cave.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Good post holls.



Well compared to the endless drivel you spout?  Do you still keep a blog about your posts on here?  About how you "take people out".  Heroic stuff


----------



## bimble (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You can't scare people with this ignorance anymore. Capitalism - neo-liberalism - is stronger than you. You will get whatever you live in your petainst cave.



what?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Well compared to the endless drivel you spout?  Do you still keep a blog about your posts on here?  About how you "take people out".  Heroic stuff


I never did. What an odd thing to say. I reckon you got done by the various fake accounts all sorts of social media that a group of people set up to trick people like you.
I've never had a blog.


----------



## CRI (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Oh look a HILARIOUS joke about regional accents


FFS, it's no more a joke about regional accents than Hugh Jarse, Seymour Butz or Jack Hoff are.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um no...I expect they'll sell it to wherever they can have the biggest profit/lowest costs.
> 
> But my repeated point still stands...6 months to go...not one trade deal.  Food, medicine, fuel, airline tickets...all over the world not one contract openly agreed.  So they haven't done it or they don't want to tell us about it.  I'll bet the fuckin arms deals are getting sorted.



Either you are aware that the UK can’t enact any trade deal whilst a member of the EU and as such your post is hysterical scaremongering or you don’t know that.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> FFS, it's no more a joke about regional accents than Hugh Jarse, Seymour Butz or Jack Hoff are.


Give us some more conspiracy theory about it all being about personal tax dodging vs the virtuous EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

I really do not know what world some of you live in.

60/40. It's just the tories/phh


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 3, 2018)

Step 1: Do a Brexit in my potty
Step 2: Don magic underpants
Step 3: Socialist Utopia!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Give us some more conspiracy theory about it all being about personal tax dodging vs the virtuous EU.



Hey, the EU is well virtuous dude, that geeza in charge, he was the boss of Luxembourg for donks, a fine, upstanding example that place is.


----------



## CRI (Aug 3, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Step 1: Do a Brexit in my potty
> Step 2: Don magic underpants
> Step 3: Socialist Utopia!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> FFS, it's no more a joke about regional accents than Hugh Jarse, Seymour Butz or Jack Hoff are.



Bullshit and you know it. It's a joke about how you pronounce words.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Bullshit and you know it. It's a joke about how you pronounce words.


And about _who _pronounces words like that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Step 1: Do a Brexit in my potty
> Step 2: Don magic underpants
> Step 3: Socialist Utopia!



Can you name even one poster on this massive thread which this childish nursery rhyme could even vaguely be associated with?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Can you name even one poster on this massive thread which this childish nursery rhyme could even vaguely be associated with?


You.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

sleater, teuchcter  - CRI, wolveryeti


----------



## CRI (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Bullshit and you know it. It's a joke about how you pronounce words.


You are right - it is about how _I_ pronounce "immigration", with my unique transatlantic dialect. So, piss away off with trying to make this about regional accents.

Good day.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> You are right - it is about how _I_ pronounce "immigration", with my unique transatlantic dialect. So, piss away off with trying to make this about regional accents.
> 
> Good day.


No. Your original post was about how THEY pronounce things.

Good night.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You.



Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one. 

So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> You are right - it is about how _I_ pronounce "immigration", with my unique transatlantic dialect. So, piss away off with trying to make this about regional accents.
> 
> Good day.



Nah. You weasel. We know what you meant. 

Fucking middle class bigoted prick.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one.
> 
> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.


124 Tommy sheridan hole.
No, he's moved now because the landlord was brexit.
345 
Generic hatey racist nationalism


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fucking middle class bigoted prick.


Irony.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one.
> 
> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.


At yer maw's house.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 3, 2018)

CRI said:


> my unique transatlantic dialect.



Seven billion souls on earth, your accent is unique. Get yer head out of yer arse and you might stand a chance of seeing what the fuck is going on all around you.

Unique


----------



## bimble (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.



 I’m really scared of you now too.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 3, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> My big concern is that the UK govt probably won't negotiate on the basis of what is good for UK citizens either.


Of course it won't. But it never has, and neither has the EU (which of course just recently pushed for CETA).


----------



## editor (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one.
> 
> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.


Wooargh. You're asking other members to hand over personal information about another poster? That's WAY out of line. Take a warning. Don't ever do that again.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> sleater, teuchcter  - CRI, wolveryeti


Ouch.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 3, 2018)

editor said:


> Wooargh. You're asking other members to hand over personal information about another poster? That's WAY out of line. Take a warning. Don't ever do that again.


I'm sure someone has a List with that sort of info.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm sure someone has a List with that sort of info.


Name them


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one.
> 
> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.


Too much mate. Stop now please.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm sure someone has a List with that sort of info.


Do you have a list of them?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> What's wrong with GM food again? I mean stuff that's actually wrong, not scaremongering based on scientific illiteracy.
> 
> Also not clear on why chlorinated chicken is bad either. It sure *sounds* scary, but then again there's plenty of nasty-sounding stuff used in food preparation in this country already.



I think the problem with chlorine-washed chicken, isn't so much the chlorine itself it's that they raise chickens in such conditions that they need to be washed in chlorine to be safe.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 3, 2018)

MightyTibberton said:


> I think the problem with chlorine-washed chicken, isn't so much the chlorine itself it's that they raise chickens in such conditions that they need to be washed in chlorine to be safe.



Unlike the way they are raised in the glorious EU. #animallovers4remain dot com


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Unlike the way they are raised in the glorious EU. #animallovers4remain


That's the multi-million pro eu propaganda program that you didn't vote on  or know about?


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

Every chicken in France has an acre of land, a two-storey house and a person in the pot. #leaverscan'tfacemychickentruths


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 3, 2018)

Chlorinated chicken explained: why do the Americans treat their poultry with chlorine? 

Chlorine-chicken facts straight from the Grocer's mouth.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 3, 2018)

This is where the liberal left remain opposition i 'i'm better than you'. Morally.

All the things you have are because of our actions and our support. We built this. At some cost.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But my repeated point still stands...6 months to go...not one trade deal.  Food, medicine, fuel, airline tickets...all over the world not one contract openly agreed.  So they haven't done it or they don't want to tell us about it.  I'll bet the fuckin arms deals are getting sorted.



A transition period was agreed in March this year. The 6 month deadline you're banging on about was extended to December 2020, to enable the completion of a deal, which according to Barnier is already 80% complete.

I realise that nothing's agreed until everything's agreed - and they're a bunch of tory cunts but ffs stop the faux dramatics and try acting with some fucking dignity when engaging

For someone who works for HMRC to be so blatently subjective for the EU on a discussion centering around the effects on the UK of a customs union negotiation is comical.
Hopefully after brexit you'll be outsourced to the Calais border to make you happy again.


----------



## Honey Sundial (Aug 4, 2018)

mod said:


> European countries have been at war with each other for many reasons for literally centuries. Yugoslavia aside, is it a coincidence european wars have all but stopped since 1951?



Oh _fuck off_ you benzo-addled wannabe smackhead-but-not-quite-got-the-bottle-to-let-go-of-the-side-of-the-pool _wanker. _And when you've fucked off, fuck off again, just to make sure. _Dickhead_ though.


----------



## mod (Aug 4, 2018)

Honey Sundial said:


> Oh _fuck off_ you benzo-addled wannabe smackhead-but-not-quite-got-the-bottle-to-let-go-of-the-side-of-the-pool _wanker. _And when you've fucked off, fuck off again, just to make sure. _Dickhead_ though.



Valid point.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 4, 2018)

Not quite sure I grasped the argument, myself.


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 4, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> A transition period was agreed in March this year. The 6 month deadline you're banging on about was extended to December 2020, to enable the completion of a deal, which according to Barnier is already 80% complete.
> 
> I realise that nothing's agreed until everything's agreed - and they're a bunch of tory cunts but ffs stop the faux dramatics and try acting with some fucking dignity when engaging
> 
> ...



I actually agree with parts of this -- my best guess (??) is that crashing out with No Deal' is far less likely than some of the brinkmanship merchants, on all sides, are pushing at the moment.


----------



## Maltin (Aug 4, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> A transition period was agreed in March this year. The 6 month deadline you're banging on about was extended to December 2020, to enable the completion of a deal, which according to Barnier is already 80% complete.


They don’t have until December 2020 to agree a deal that is 80% complete. 

The transition period is dependent on the withdrawal deal being agreed. It is this withdrawal deal where 80% of the text is agreed.  While 80% of the text may be agreed, I don’t think that measure is a good indicator of how far they are to getting an agreement.


----------



## MightyTibberton (Aug 4, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> and they're a bunch of tory cunts



That's the problem isn't it? And they keep saying that they haven't agreed to stuff that they have agreed to. And they're sticking to their red-lines on the Irish border which can't all be delivered at once. Does the withdrawal agreement itself have to get through Parliament? I'm not sure about that, but that's no given if May has to give up too much for the ERGers...

I hope you're right, but you might not be. That's not alarmist.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> At yer maw's house.



Played


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You.



In all seriousness, nobody has made that argument that I've seen. I certainly haven't. In or out of the EU we have to fight for Socialism. That's a given and there's no point trying to twist that anyone is saying otherwise.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hi. That's complete bullshit. Don't make statement's about me that are completely incorrect please. Dishonesty helps no one.
> 
> So I've twigged Dexter lives in Scotland - anyone know a name? Even better an address.



Why the fuck are you asking for his or her name and address - you planning to turn up at their doorstep and berate them about their opinion on Brexit? 

I don't know exactly what the law is but I'm pretty sure they'd legally be allowed to kill you with a crossbow if that ever happened.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Why the fuck are you asking for his or her name and address - you planning to turn up at their doorstep and berate them about their opinion on Brexit?
> 
> I don't know exactly what the law is but I'm pretty sure they'd legally be allowed to kill you with a crossbow if that ever happened.



Only if spackle is Welsh and it’s after nine thirty on a Tuesday.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Why the fuck are you asking for his or her name and address - you planning to turn up at their doorstep and berate them about their opinion on Brexit?
> 
> I don't know exactly what the law is but I'm pretty sure they'd legally be allowed to kill you with a crossbow if that ever happened.


Every now and then you see what they're really like under that facade of moral superiority


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 4, 2018)

Google trends for 'stockpile' in the UK by partners.  Note the difference between remain ones and leave ones, obviously.

https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=stockpile


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Google trends for 'stockpile' in the UK by partners.  Note the difference between remain ones and leave ones, obviously.
> 
> https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?geo=GB&q=stockpile



So what?  since 6th of August 2017 the word 'Stockpile' was searched beween 1 - 4 times a day. Then there was a spike on the 10th June 2018 when 16  people searched for the word 'Stockpile'.
I take it you was one of the 12 idiots.
Or do you have any absolute data?


----------



## Raheem (Aug 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> So what?  since 6th of August 2017 the word 'Stockpile' was searched beween 1 - 4 times a day.


No interest in this, but that's not what the link shows.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 5, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No interest in this, but that's not what the link shows.


_What does it show_?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> _What does it show_?




https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?q=dexter&geo=US

Shocking stuff in March...


----------



## kabbes (Aug 5, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> _What does it show_?


It showed that some people searching for stockpile were also searching for Brexit but lots of other people were searching for China (country), Scramble (video game), Battlefield (video game) and The Stockpile (restaurant).

The graph is interest relative to peak search, which is always set to 100.  On late July, there was a spike of 4x previous interest, which is hardly a surprise — any topic currently in the news always garners more searches.  The searches seem to be trailing off now.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 5, 2018)

Liam Fox now pushing the line that a no-deal brexit is more likely than not and will be the EU's fault.

Little Englanders have been toeing that line for some time.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Liam Fox now pushing the line that a no-deal brexit is more likely than not and will be the EU's fault.
> 
> Little Englanders have been toeing that line for some time.


Fox wants a no deal IIRC...pretty sure hes one of the most vocal tories who wants us to basically replace the EU with the US in terms of trade
Liam Fox launches bid for US trade deal and to join Pacific trade group even before Brexit is completed


----------



## Hollis (Aug 5, 2018)

You have to ask as well how much of this is down to a failing of our electoral system and first past the post.  If UKIP votes had been translated into  seats in parliament or at least higher representation, then I imagine the dynamics within the Tory party could have acted out differently, and less binary positions taken.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 5, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Only if spackle is Welsh and it’s after nine thirty on a Tuesday.



 Cymru am byth!


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 5, 2018)

An educational hour if you have the time.  I'd encourage brexiters to list to any 5 or 10 minutes from any part of the video.


----------



## sealion (Aug 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> An educational hour if you have the time.  I'd encourage brexiters to list to any 5 or 10 minutes from any part of the video.



Been done already  Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 5, 2018)

sealion said:


> Been done already  Is Brexit actually going to happen?


cheers, never saw it


----------



## Borp (Aug 5, 2018)

I'm still not entirely sure what the exact concerns over food import delays are. I'm probably missing something important, but we import loads of perishable food from non EU countries we don't have trade deals with, so why exactly will there be delays from EU imports post brexit. Did a quick scan of some of the stories but they don't specify why.

E: I'm guessing it's just a general, "the ports will be gummed up"


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 6, 2018)

Presumably the pound would be expected to nosedive in the event of no deal making imports of anything more expensive too.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 6, 2018)

Borp said:


> I'm still not entirely sure what the exact concerns over food import delays are. I'm probably missing something important, but we import loads of perishable food from non EU countries we don't have trade deals with, so why exactly will there be delays from EU imports post brexit. Did a quick scan of some of the stories but they don't specify why.
> 
> E: I'm guessing it's just a general, "the ports will be gummed up"




Yes, there was a guy who makes sandwiches saying that they will still make them, but you wont have hlaf the stuff you can have now as it's all fresh in from the EU, once you add 1-3 days with delays it won't be fresh. (or i guess they use fridge trucks and a sandwich is now £19.99 or more)


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 6, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Yes, there was a guy who makes sandwiches saying that they will still make them, but you wont have hlaf the stuff you can have now as it's all fresh in from the EU, once you add 1-3 days with delays it won't be fresh. (or i guess they use fridge trucks and a sandwich is now £19.99 or more)



People will have to make their own sandwich then, fucking lazy liberals.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2018)

'A HUGE surrender is coming' Farage predicts shock UK-EU campaign to SUSPEND Article 50


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> An educational hour if you have the time.  I'd encourage brexiters to list to any 5 or 10 minutes from any part of the video.




I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering .


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2018)

_Blokes blokes all blokes._

Just _blokes_. No history, no interest.


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Blokes blokes all blokes._
> 
> Just _blokes_. No history, no interest.


I read your post explaining their backgrounds. Didn't seem to be saying they had a particular axe to grind?
Just haven't seen anyone comment on the content of the video so far though its been posted here twice.


----------



## sealion (Aug 6, 2018)

bimble said:


> I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering .


What makes you think they are right and not fear mongering? Pirates in somalia,40 days on a ship to new zealand, carbon footprints, High tariffs, the Suez canal. No fear mongering at all.


----------



## sealion (Aug 6, 2018)

Hot cross bun mix is as dangerous as petrol, Non eu Vanilla will kill us all. Food rations, one or two loaves of bread a week. No, not abit of scare mongering at all. Worst of all one posho had to wait at dover for 45 minutes.


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> What makes you think they are right and not fear mongering? Pirates in somalia,40 days on a ship to new zealand, carbon footprints, High tariffs, the Suez canal. No fear mongering at all.


I have no idea if what they say is right or not!


----------



## sealion (Aug 6, 2018)

bimble said:


> I have no idea if what they say is right or not!


I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering . Is what you said


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 6, 2018)

bimble said:


> I have no idea if what they say is right or not!


They're pretty much right.  People have been asking these and many other questions about the challenges of brexit since day one and never get any answers.

Just google stuff.

how long does a cargo ship take from UK to new zealand - Google Search


----------



## sealion (Aug 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They're pretty much right


Apart fron Norway being landlocked.


----------



## J Ed (Aug 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> They're pretty much right.  People have been asking these and many other questions about the challenges of brexit since day one and never get any answers.
> 
> Just google stuff.
> 
> how long does a cargo ship take from UK to new zealand - Google Search



'People' have been talking about how the EU is all that stands between us and WW3 since before the referendum campaign, doesn't make it right or particularly relevant.


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

tbh i didn't watch the whole thing so don't know what relevance there is to the new zealand cargo ships info or the geography of Norway.
Even if you enthusiastically support leaving the EU surely that doesn't mean you have to also think that leaving with no deal would not cause any issues and anyone who says otherwise is lying?


----------



## sealion (Aug 6, 2018)

bimble said:


> tbh i didn't watch the whole thing


Yet you said this,,,,I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering .


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

I've read a few comments / letters to papers from people involved in trade that the problem isn't what they would have to do under WTO arrangements but that they still don't know whether they will have to do it or not


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 6, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> I've read a few comments / letters to papers from people involved in trade that the problem isn't what they would have to do under WTO arrangements but that they still don't know whether they will have to do it or not


Partly yes.  Not knowing what is going to happen at the end of winter is hurting UK-based businesses obviously.

But I have to stress we don't have any WTO arrangements.  Just tried to get a sneaky one with New Zealand and they (and some others) told us to fuck off.

The UK doesn't have many friends.


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Yet you said this,,,,I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering .


yes. And.. ? Its quite long, I watched about the first half the other day. It seems impossible that it could all be true but i don't know otherwise. Do you get that regardless of how i voted 2 years ago I obviously hope what they are saying isn't right? They obvs know a lot more about international trade agreements than i do though. Anyway can't really get my head round the idea that a no deal is really going to happen as don't see anyone apart from maybe a couple of currency traders or whatever benefitting from it.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 6, 2018)

Seemed a bit long to watch to be fair.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> But I have to stress we don't have any WTO arrangements.



on-going afaics - can be followed on here - e.g. Jun-29 2018 posting

John Alty (@JohnAlty1) on Twitter


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 6, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> 'A HUGE surrender is coming' Farage predicts shock UK-EU campaign to SUSPEND Article 50
> 
> View attachment 143269


You know, he's basically a conspiracy theorist. Just a polite version of Alex Jones. One who wears driving gloves, drives a Lexus (probably Dan), and doesn't piss his pants over guns


----------



## J Ed (Aug 6, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> You know, he's basically a conspiracy theorist. Just a polite version of Alex Jones. One who wears driving gloves, drives a Lexus (probably Dan), and doesn't piss his pants over guns



Is this just conspiracy theory or have we had months and months of high level interventions by leading members of the public sector, politics, the media and so on calling for exactly what he is saying?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 6, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Is this just conspiracy theory or have we had months and months of high level interventions by leading members of the public sector, politics, the media and so on calling for exactly what he is saying?



Why yes J Ed I believe we have! 

It's not the language I would choose but you'd be hard pressed to claim it wasn't true that a very significant section of the establishment want to delay or prevent Brexit. In fact a few posters here have confidently predicted exactly that.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

their whole script / schtick is so creepily reminiscent of an abusive relationship : 

_leave me & no-one else will want you as you're so ugly & useless - won't be able to cut it on your own etc etc _


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Apart fron Norway being landlocked.



Second longest coastline of any country, Norway has.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 6, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Second longest coastline of any country, Norway has.



Lovely crinkly edges


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 6, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> their whole script / schtick is so creepily reminiscent of an abusive relationship :
> 
> _leave me & no-one else will want you as you're so ugly & useless - won't be able to cut it on your own etc etc _


Do you have any evidence of this because it genuinely appears to be the UK fucking everything up. _Do what we say or we'll leave and it will hurt you more than it hurts us_.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 6, 2018)

its the same damn lyrics from the better together hymn-sheet man! Somalia within weeks, or if corbyn gets in, venezuala


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 6, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Do you have any evidence of this because it genuinely appears to be the UK fucking everything up. _Do what we say or we'll leave and it will hurt you more than it hurts us_.



Do you have any evidence for your claim? 

hey maybe all these relationship metaphors don't really work for complex neoliberal trade blocs


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

I was more referring to over wrought Remainers like Emma Thompson - rather than the EU itself tbh


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> their whole script / schtick is so creepily reminiscent of an abusive relationship :
> 
> _leave me & no-one else will want you as you're so ugly & useless - won't be able to cut it on your own etc etc _


Our government is ugly and useless and won't be able to cut it on its own as it can't cut it atm


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Our government is ugly and useless



I think you've got me there


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 6, 2018)

bimble said:


> I'd like to hear anyone reassuringly say that these blokes are wrong and fearmongering .


Yes why in the world should we not listen to an international trade negotiator who's negotiated deals worth billions. Who could be against _trade_.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2018)

LOL


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes why in the world should we not listen to an international trade negotiator who's negotiated deals worth billions. Who could be against _trade_.


Who admits he might do well from BREXIT ...


----------



## bimble (Aug 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes why in the world should we not listen to an international trade negotiator who's negotiated deals worth billions. Who could be against _trade_.


Can you just break that down a bit for me please?
Do you mean
1) That man is probably right about the whole international trade thing
but also
2) the doomsday scenario he paints for a no deal brexit that would actually be good news in your opinion

?
or am i misunderstanding your post (srs question)


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 6, 2018)

Incidentally Hunter has numerous links to getthebrexitfacts.wordpress.com on his twitter feed. Whether he's the actual author of these pieces or just concurs with them isn't clear, but one post he enthusiastically endorses is this crap on TTIP.


> It is basically a trade agreement that allows European companies and business access to 320 million new consumers in the USA, and allows European consumers access to new products, cheaper and more efficiently from North America.


Lovely.

EDIT: From stuff he's posted on his facebook getthebrexitfacts is/was his blog. So directly bigging up TTIP.

EDIT: Some more crap from this prick


> Today, the all hallowed Jeremy Corbyn will make a very Trump-esque speech to the UK manufacturers association EEF.
> 
> "Build in Britain" he will cheer along the lines of 'America First'. I do not joke with you. He will today be making a speech in Birmingham where he will speak with a bunch of expert manufacturers and show his total and utter ignorance of geology and geography. His plan is to stop using cheap foreign Labour and instead use cheap British Labour for manufacturing.
> 
> ...





> The four pillars of the EU that are essentially bound together. The freedom to.move Goods, Services, Capital and Workers.
> 
> Take a lorry travelling to England carrying a truckload of car parts. It picks up some parts from Spain and then travels through France picking up some more. It then heads to England where it heads to Sunderland to build Nissan Qashqai 4x4s.
> 
> ...





> I always did like Justine Greening...





> I don't care who you vote for in the next General Election, if it's a LibDem like Tom Brake, a Tory like Anna Soubry, a Green like Caroline Lucas or Labour like David Lammy..... if they are backing remain in your constituency then back them right back! If your MP is supporting Brexit then sack them.





> Great. A General Election where our two main parties are giving us exactly the same option for the country? It's gotta be time to consider the LibDems? No?





> THIS, this is why the Liberal Democrats exist.... to better people's lives..... not just for self serving short term political gain but to make everyones lives better, it's what sets us apart from the other main political parties who are simply in it for themselves. When was the last time you saw either of the Labservatives parties act in the National interest above any political cost to their own party?
> 
> LibDem thru and thru.





> Can anyone think of a single positive policy that's come out of Westminster since the LibDems left Government in 2015?
> 
> I can name dozens of positive ones from 2010-2015.
> 
> UK Government. Better WITH LibDems in it than without.





> Firstly we have to accept the fact that 50% of the world and our country are of below average intelligence, this is plain and unarguable.
> 
> Traditionally the lower educated and less intelligent have lower interest in politics and are less likely to vote. Credit where credit is due tho folks, we may not like it but the extremist right and the extremist left have found a way to activate the less intelligent and get them out to vote and shout from the rooftops on social media for their cause.
> .....
> ...


So not just a pro-TTIP, LibDem cunt but also a supporter of eugenics.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 6, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> on-going afaics - can be followed on here - e.g. Jun-29 2018 posting
> 
> John Alty (@JohnAlty1) on Twitter


The thing that says the balance of trade got better by £7.7 billion and things improved with Canada and China?  Have you seen the graph?  Look at the graph on this link.

United Kingdom Balance of Trade | 1955-2018 | Data | Chart | Calendar



> In the three months to May 2018, the trade deficit widened GBP 5.0 billion to GBP 8.3 billion. This was due to a GBP 5.0 billion widening of the trade in goods deficit, resulting from a combination of falling goods exports (GBP 3.1 billion) and rising goods imports (GBP 1.9 billion). Services imports and exports mostly offset each other as both increased by around GBP 0.5 billion, resulting in a relatively small decline in the trade in services surplus.



Your exports need to go up by more than your imports for it to mean anything.  You can't just say things are good in these 3 places and not mention the other 50 places.

They're saying it is a good thing but they are lying.

And I already mentioned much earlier in the thread that exports would increase for a period because of the £'s drop in value (which is a double fuck because your imports cost more...and you're importing more).   

You think those countries are helping us out?


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 6, 2018)

I meant July


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 6, 2018)

Just blokes being blokes. Look how genuine they ate vein and


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 7, 2018)

Graham Hughes was born in Liverpool in 1979. He attended Blackmoor Park School and the Blue Coat School Liverpool



			
				Blue Coat School Liverpool said:
			
		

> Founded originally as a refuge for the city’s poor, The Blue Coat School has blossomed into a school that achieves the highest academic standards for which it is renowned across the city, the North West and nationally. Today, as Liverpool’s only grammar school we are rich in diversity. Our students come from all backgrounds and they enjoy, value and celebrate their differences and individuality. At Blue Coat, it is not just OK to be different, it’s great to be different.





> The Blue Coat School is a mixed selective school for students aged 11 – 18, which converted to Academy status on 1st March 2012





> The main facilities we have available for hire are:
> 
> Sports Hall
> Dance Studio
> ...


So just your average school then.



> Since then, Hughes has been a vocal advocate of remaining in the European Union, leading and emceeing the "People's March For Europe" in September 2017.[21] He stood as a candidate for the Liberal Democrats in the 2018 local government elections for his home ward of Knotty Ash, Liverpool and came third with just over 6% of the vote.[22]


A huge 329 people voting for the wanker. Still at least he managed to get his mum and mates to vote for him in the 2017 GE.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

.....or you could just watch the video (or even a bit of it )


----------



## bimble (Aug 7, 2018)




----------



## bimble (Aug 7, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Just blokes being blokes. Look how genuine they ate vein and


Did you pass out mid scorn?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 7, 2018)

bimble said:


> Did you pass out mid scorn?


Lost interest. Couldn't believe how easy it is to etc


----------



## Poi E (Aug 7, 2018)

I suppose the inevitable VAT increase will come after the next election, whichever party leads the country.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 7, 2018)

You're not going to encourage foreign investment with VAT or CoTax increases though.

Or worker's rights etc.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> .....or you could just watch the video (or even a bit of it )


I did, just sneering rich liberals with more doom and gloom threats for us to ponder. The guardian does youtube if you like.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 7, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Incidentally Hunter has numerous links to getthebrexitfacts.wordpress.com on his twitter feed. Whether he's the actual author of these pieces or just concurs with them isn't clear, but one post he enthusiastically endorses is this crap on TTIP.
> Lovely.
> 
> EDIT: From stuff he's posted on his facebook getthebrexitfacts is/was his blog. So directly bigging up TTIP.
> ...



Ornary bloke right, dahn the pub, few beers with the lads like (#LadzLadzLadz) gotta gas the thickos innit, just common sense, they're too _stupid _to understand Brexit


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 7, 2018)

authentocracy rears its ugly head once more lol


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 7, 2018)

Poi E said:


> I suppose the inevitable VAT increase will come after the next election, whichever party leads the country.


You mean like the increase in VAT the coalition introduced? The one backed by LibDem pricks like the ones the video or gentlegreen?


----------



## Poi E (Aug 7, 2018)

Yup, time for another round.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2018)

Theresa May announces she will keep UK under EU laws for another 21 months, risking Brexiteer fury

A littler later now... or something


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 7, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Theresa May announces she will keep UK under EU laws for another 21 months, risking Brexiteer fury
> 
> A littler later now... or something


The articles only mildy interesting but the comments are great, my monitor is starting to smoke with the incandescent rage coming through it.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 7, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Theresa May announces she will keep UK under EU laws for another 21 months, risking Brexiteer fury
> 
> A littler later now... or something


"I looked at brexit, from both sides now
from left and right and still somehow
it's a fucking shitshow"


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 7, 2018)

Has she cleared this with the EU?


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

sealion said:


> [irrelevant stuff....snip] more doom and gloom threats



You sound like a certain right wing hedge fund manager with a poorly developed social conscience.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> You sound like a certain right wing hedge fund manager with a poorly developed social conscience.


Oh yeah, who's that then?


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

Boris Johnson


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Boris Johnson


Is this the height of a liberals insults? There has been nothing but doom and gloom from liberals in the media, condescending crap at that. You know- were rich and you are poor and it's going to be worse for you poor uneducated upstarts, you've ruined our money streams etc,-  do you expect people to sit back and listen to the same old shit, day in and day out? If you think i sound like a right wing head fund manager or Boris Johnson because of my post, then you are a fucking idiot. You shouldn't be allowed out of your bedroom you fool.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Boris Johnson


You poor ignorant twat. Bj not a fund manager but a journo turned politician who has been sacked at least twice for lying.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> with a poorly developed social conscience.


Hows the eu migrant camps going?
Close the camps > English - Mapping of migrant camps


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

sealion said:


> Is this the height of a liberals insults? There has been nothing but doom and gloom from liberals in the media, condescending crap at that. You know- were rich and you are poor and it's going to be worse for you poor uneducated upstarts, you've ruined our money streams etc,-  do you expect people to shit back and listen to the same old shit, day in and day out? If you think i sound like a right wing head fund manager or Boris Johnson because of my post, then you are a fucking idiot. You shouldn't be allowed out of your bedroom you fool.



So you're basically refusing to listen.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You poor ignorant twat. Bj not a fund manager but a journo turned politician who has been sacked at least twice for lying.



OK then Jacob Rees-Mogg.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

By saying its just "doom and gloom" you are echoing tory Brexiteer politicians such as Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

It's getting real nasty now  a couple more glass of chateau du fuckwit and he'll be going for the jugular and calling me Thatcher.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> By saying its just "doom and gloom" you are echoing tory Brexiteer politicians such as Jacob Rees-Mogg and Boris Johnson.


Are you joking  don't you read the guardian or listen to that smarmy liberal tosspot James o'brien? All the doom i hear and read is from seething remainers.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

Saying its all "doom and gloom" is a rubbish critique of people who have made what appear to me some quite valid points about the potential pretty serious potential impacts of a no deal Brexit.

Its not really a critique at all. Its refusing to listen.  That is a shame because there quite number of interesting arguments made in that video which could have taken issue with or argued against with specific counter points. But you probably don't have the expertise to do that so just refuse to listen and resort to ad hominem strategies to justify why you don't want to engage.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

What patronizing shit. I should listen to 3 rich remainers saying what i've already learnt over the last two years. You must live with your head in the sand if you think all the doom and gloom is coming from the leave camp. Look at your post- refusing to listen, how do you know how much of that video i watched? more than some on here if you read yesterdays posts. I listened but happen not agree nor care for there predictions if that's okay with you.


toblerone3 said:


> But you probably don't have the expertise to do that


See you have already made your mind up with a fucking weak insult fit for a liberal snob.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> OK then Jacob Rees-Mogg.


You clueless twat


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 7, 2018)

sealion said:


> ... I listened but happen not agree nor care for there predictions if that's okay with you...


Which ones?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> You sound like a certain right wing hedge fund manager with a poorly developed social conscience.





toblerone3 said:


> Boris Johnson



The cunt’s a hedge fund manager? Or is that bullshit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The cunt’s a hedge fund manager? Or is that bullshit?


Toblerone3 doesn't know what he's talking about


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

No the leave camp is all about the 'bright new dawn' and 'sunlit uplands'.  But as we learn more about the types of deal (or no deal) that may be possible people are increasingly questioning this.  

And while many Brexiteers like sealion refused to engage with the arguments, these anti 'No Deal Brexit' sentiments are gaining traction with the public.  

I believe there was one recent poll which found that given a choice between a 'No Deal Brexit' and remaining in the EU, 59%  would choose to remain in the EU versus 41% for 'No Deal' Given a three way choice between Remain, No Deal and Chequers-type Deal, Remain wins out by 21 percentage points on 48% with 27% for No Deal and 13% for the Government Deal. 

Sky Data poll: 78% think the government is doing a bad job on Brexit


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Which ones?


You can do one as well.


----------



## xenon (Aug 7, 2018)

How do customer / supplier contracts become void on march 29tjjh. Is that explained by our pub denisens? GQ etc


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The cunt’s a hedge fund manager? Or is that bullshit?



I wouldn't be surprised if he had a cut. You might want to look at this

Boris Johnson bankrolled by hedge fund managers set to gain £250m a year from Brexit


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You clueless twat



You smell.


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> And while many Brexiteers like sealion refused to engage with the arguments



Do you have Saturdays lotto numbers as well? There was a remainer here yesterday commenting, then admitted to not watching the thing properly, you need to have a word with your cohort about not engaging. Tut tut.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

xenon said:


> How do customer / supplier contracts become void on march 29tjjh. Is that explained by our pub denisens? GQ etc



At what timepoint in the video do they say this?


----------



## sealion (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> At what timepoint in the video do they say this?


You should know, i mean, you did engage yourself didn't you?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I believe there was one recent poll which found that given a choice between a 'No Deal Brexit' and remaining in the EU, 59% would choose to remain in the EU versus 41% for 'No Deal' Given a three way choice between Remain, No Deal and Chequers-type Deal, Remain wins out by 21 percentage points on 48% with 27% for No Deal and 13% for the Government Deal.


thats simply splitting the exit vote. Remain has one option here, but exit is offered two. I personally think a second reff could scrape a win for remain, but then I thought remain would scrape it first time around. So what do I know.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

sealion said:


> Do you have Saturdays lotto numbers as well? There was a remainer here yesterday commenting, then admitted to not watching the thing properly, you need to have a word with your cohort about not engaging. Tut tut.



I think democratically speaking it must be possible for the UK to leave the EU and many of the problems raised in that video could, in time, be resolved with short term workarounds and medium term resolutions.  But the point is that the problems and the long-term costs of implementing them are not even being addressed and time is short before March 2019.  When it comes to trade the devil can really be in the detail. How good are each of the workaround solutions?


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

sealion said:


> You should know, i mean, you did engage yourself didn't you?



Haha I saw that one coming. , but seriously a timecode would be useful.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thats simply splitting the exit vote. Remain has one option here, but exit is offered two. I personally think a second reff could scrape a win for remain, but then I thought remain would scrape it first time around. So what do I know.



I take your point and its only one poll.  But the 48% is greater than the two leave options put together (27% + 13% = 40%)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> I take your point and its only one poll.  But the 48% is greater than the two leave options put together (27% + 13% = 40%)



But there are more oprions than that. If you gave people a choice between a GE and a 2nd ref what would they say do you think?


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Saying its all "doom and gloom" is a rubbish critique of people who have made what appear to me some quite valid points about the *potential pretty serious potential impacts* of a no deal Brexit.
> 
> Its not really a critique at all. Its refusing to listen.  That is a shame because there quite number of specific points made in that video which could have taken issue with or argued against with specific counter points. But you probably don't have the expertise to do that so just refuse to listen and resort to ad hominem strategies to justify why you don't want to engage.


It's OK. There's enough doom and gloom to go round and remaining in the EU has its fair share of 'potential pretty serious potential impacts' too.
I didn't see anyone jumping to answer my questions earlier in the thread about how a _remain _UK should position itself within and EU. Maybe you'd like to try?

Concerning the 3 'blokes' in a pub video:
I won't try to counter their points because they're condescending wankers, but I did notice that the discussion was based entirely on a scenario of a very hard brexit that *only* covered the impacts on the UK in that very specific outcome.
So in this no deal outcome they discuss, a scenario where there's an immediate blockade on any movement of goods and services between the UK & EU on the night of 30th March 2019, which causes some kind of instant Armageddon to the British Isles _only, w_hy do they neglect to counterbalance it with any of the myriad of negative impacts for the EU?

To name one of the impacts on the Eu in such a scenario, and given that all things are equal, the EU wouldn't then allow the UK to do any Euro clearing services for the Euro states as of the 30th March either (Well they probably would but the UK would rightly tell them to do one). That's basically the entire foreign income of 18 nations of the EU wiped out immediately - apart form what they may be able to handle in Frankfurt in very very short notice (I'll be generous here and say it'll be chaos). The Eu would be fucked within a week.
It's a way shorter fuse to a much bigger explosive than what these 'blokes' are on about, but they don't mention it. Why?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> You smell.


That is strangely your most acute political analysis for months


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 7, 2018)

The EU seems to be doing thinking about Euro clearing. Probably going to be a cost for both sides. I would guess, however, that the financial impacts on the UK would be considerably bigger.

The EU is trying to take control of London’s euro clearing market

I would like there to be more discussion about reforming the EU, but most people find it very boring.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 7, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> The EU seems to be doing thinking about Euro clearing. Probably going to be a cost for both sides. I would guess, however, that the financial impacts on the UK would be considerably bigger.
> 
> The EU is trying to take control of London’s euro clearing market
> 
> I would like there to be more discussion about reforming the EU, but most people find it very boring.


This strikes me as  from their point of view a sensible thing to do, The UK govt has taken an overly tolerant approach to a bunch of shyster bankers and it has been grudgingly accepted by the rest of the EU in the name of European Unity, Once the UK is out of the EU then the shysters will deal with huge amounts of Euro dosh with no oversight at all as opposed to minimal oversight now.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 8, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> The EU seems to be doing thinking about Euro clearing. Probably going to be a cost for both sides. I would guess, however, that the financial impacts on the UK would be considerably bigger.
> 
> The EU is trying to take control of London’s euro clearing market
> 
> I would like there to be more discussion about reforming the EU, but most people find it very boring.


It's not so easy that they can set it up in 6 months. 6 years would be ambitious. Like what LibDem 'Bloke' said with trade deals, it's taken years to set up. London has ongoing deals with banks all over the world for clearing Euros. On top of that, the UK has a ton of FinTech IP that keeps it running. Not sure the Eu even has that tech & know how.


MickiQ said:


> This strikes me as  from their point of view a sensible thing to do, The UK govt has taken an overly tolerant approach to a bunch of shyster bankers and it has been grudgingly accepted by the rest of the EU in the name of European Unity, Once the UK is out of the EU then the shysters will deal with huge amounts of Euro dosh with no oversight at all as opposed to minimal oversight now.


I think most of the forex clearing is contractual/ agreement stuff and a lot of tech - less the shyster end of banking you're on about i.e  commercial investment/ hedge funds/ loan sales etc... and if the Eu wants to take that lot off our hands, then as far as I'm concerned they can have them*

*not that the EU has a shortage in that department... as witnessed when greece's dealings with them went pair-shaped


----------



## CRI (Aug 8, 2018)

Just something to think about for the folks who think a trade deal to import food from the US will be a fine substitute for EU produce.

Food safety regulations in the US have been watered down and clawed back under the Trump administration, so surprise, surprise, there's now a rash of food contamination outbreaks in the US, particularly affecting people in the heartland.

Avoid these foods due to outbreaks and recalls  - CNN

Intestinal parasites in salads and other uncooked vegetables, salmonella in pasta salad, turkey, swiss rolls, ritz crackers and even children's breakfast cereal and listeria in prepacked sandwiches.

Yum yum!


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> 3. Stick with what worked before.


This is what these pricks really believe. 

The idea they care about poverty, inequality etc is ludicrous when they back the policies of the fucking coalition government. They support the EU, support TTIP because they want more of the same neo-liberalism that we've had since the 70s. And when those that have been at the sharp end complain, well they're just uneducated, racist thickos.


> Traditionally the lower educated and less intelligent have lower interest in politics and are less likely to vote. Credit where credit is due tho folks, we may not like it but the extremist right and the extremist left have found a way to activate the less intelligent and get them out to vote and shout from the rooftops on social media for their cause.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

The video interested me because instead of re-running the debate, or fretting about the precision of the labels to be applied, or looking at the history of things, or being a critique of the EU, or the UK, or nationalism, or internationalism, or social class, or how chite any particular party is, or the political prospects of individuals or parties, or a debate about democracy, or a discussion of another nationwide vote, it is an attempt to look at the actual practical nitty gritty detail of the day to day impact of a no deal brexit.
I suppose many would say it is an exercise in operation fear which may or not be the case (I don't think it is), and there are bound to be things to criticize or pick holes in, but as I say it is an attempt to look at practicalities.
I am obsessed with the practical reality of life on the Irish land border post brexit, the fact that after so long no practical or realistic solution to that impasse has been put forward suggests that brexit will not happen because you simply can't take back control of a border by not having control of a border.
If the practical solution on the border is a heavily controlled situation along the whole 300 miles then the debate changes.
If it is true that brexiters knew what they were voting for, it is a very well kept secret.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The video interested me because instead of re-running the debate, or fretting about the precision of the labels to be applied, or looking at the history of things, or being a critique of the EU, or the UK, or nationalism, or internationalism, or social class, or how chite any particular party is, or the political prospects of individuals or parties, or a debate about democracy, or a discussion of another nationwide vote, it is an attempt to look at the actual practical nitty gritty detail of the day to day impact of a no deal brexit.
> I suppose many would say it is an exercise in operation fear which may or not be the case (I don't think it is), and there are bound to be things to criticize or pick holes in, but as I say it is an attempt to look at practicalities.
> I am obsessed with the practical reality of life on the Irish land border post brexit, the fact that after so long no practical or realistic solution to that impasse has been put forward suggests that brexit will not happen because you simply can't take back control of a border by not having control of a border.
> If the practical solution on the border is a heavily controlled situation along the whole 300 miles then the debate changes.
> If it is true that brexiters knew what they were voting for, it is a very well kept secret.


contact one Tom 'Slab' Murphy, who will - i am sure - be happy to satisfy your curiosity. write to him in Ballybinaby, Hackballscross, Co Louth.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

The bloke exploits the border such as it is now in order to break the law and make money from it. I doubt he has a practical solution to the aspirations of brexiters to 'take back control' of the border.
I am thinking along the lines of how do brexiters propose to take back control that would stop people strolling across the border at more or less any point.

Inside Slab Murphy's multi-million euro, cross-border smuggling empire

There were people convicted yesterday of using some kind of craft in order to smuggle people across the English Channel, so there seems to be a demand for people to enter the UK. The smugglers were convicted following a lot of security measures, including surveillance and the like. If the idea is to roll that out across the land border in Ireland nobody has suggested it so far, nobody has estimated how much that would cost, and of course there is the issue of the Belfast Agreement to take into account too.

Somehow I doubt contacting Mr Murphy would satisfy curiosity on these matters.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The video interested me because instead of re-running the debate, or fretting about the precision of the labels to be applied, or looking at the history of things, or being a critique of the EU, or the UK, or nationalism, or internationalism, or social class, or how chite any particular party is, or the political prospects of individuals or parties, or a debate about democracy, or a discussion of another nationwide vote, it is an attempt to look at the actual practical nitty gritty detail of the day to day impact of a no deal brexit.
> I suppose many would say it is an exercise in operation fear which may or not be the case (I don't think it is), and there are bound to be things to criticize or pick holes in, but as I say it is an attempt to look at practicalities.



Thing is mate - and I understand this is difficult - the people in that video and their assessment of the practicalities of what will happen is *entirely* conditioned by their understanding of the EU and its history and their interests and worries and beliefs. And at least one of them is a horrible reactionary tool. They don't want Brexit to happen; they (unlike most of the population) care significantly more about Brexit than austerity or the NHS or the Tories or the attacks on the Windrush generation or global warming or Grenfell or whatever. Consequently their assessment of the practicalities is based on their deep aversion to Brexit and desire to stop it. You can't seperate what you term 'practicalities' from politics. 



philosophical said:


> If it is true that brexiters knew what they were voting for, it is a very well kept secret.



If you're talking about what all Leave voters knew they were voting for, it's not a secret at all, you just keep missing the point. They voted for Something Different To This Horrible Shit. Oh, and for Cameron to resign - we all knew we'd get that. 

Sure, within that, some of them may have thought they were voting for border control or against austerity or to lock up immigrants or for a Global Britain. But there are a couple of key things everyone knew they were voting for and and they were right. 

One of the problems for some Remain voters is that they haven't quite understood that Leave voters wanted Something Different, or why they did. So every contribution to the debate is along the lines of "oh but things will be so awful when things change" which gets zero echo or response because enough people have reached a point where anything different will do, nobody cares particularly, people just want to force any kind of change in society they can. Which is why people voted for Leave in huge numbers, but also for Corbyn, despite what the establishment had to say about Corbyn.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

There's a difference between understanding why people voted for something and actually supporting that thing they voted for. 

As ever, got to be careful about simplistic representations of the leave vote, though. The vote split down many different ways - you can tell many different stories about it by splitting the vote up by age, ethnicity, region, GE voting intentions, personal debt levels, number of immigrants in an area, etc, as well as by socio-economic class.

_Here_'s an analysis challenging some of the assumptions that this was at least in part a revolt of the working class. More a revolt of the so-called 'squeezed middle' - not people reaching a point of desperation, but people perceiving that their own status is in a process of decline from a level well above the bottom.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Thing is mate - and I understand this is difficult - the people in that video and their assessment of the practicalities of what will happen is *entirely* conditioned by their understanding of the EU and its history and their interests and worries and beliefs. And at least one of them is a horrible reactionary tool. They don't want Brexit to happen; they (unlike most of the population) care significantly more about Brexit than austerity or the NHS or the Tories or the attacks on the Windrush generation or global warming or Grenfell or whatever. Consequently their assessment of the practicalities is based on their deep aversion to Brexit and desire to stop it. You can't seperate what you term 'practicalities' from politics.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thank you for this reply.

I have come to realise that a lot of people voted for something different to this horrible shit. 
I also take your point that the people in the film have an agenda. They will have a bias certainly.
Then again is there anybody in this whole malarkey that does not have a bias and can see things in a crystal clear way?
My point is that the film is about the 'something' in the 'something different to this horrible shit', it is about discussing the practicalities that will impact to a greater or lesser degree on everybody with a no deal brexit.
You may take the view that such a discussion has no relevance, get to tomorrow as it were and worry about how to deal with it then, or as each issue arises bit by bit.
Either way, brexit is the fatberg in the sewer of British politics and ignoring it won't make it go away.
Yeah 'something different to all this horrible shit' is understandable, but what that something different is going to be has to be faced sometime or other.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 8, 2018)

Cometh the hour, cometh the man:


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

You can be against both Austerity and Brexit.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> enough people have reached a point where anything different will do, nobody cares particularly, people just want to force any kind of change in society they can. Which is why people voted for Leave in huge numbers,



Yes, that's the story you want to tell, but I don't think there's enough evidence just to state it as fact.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Then again is there anybody in this whole malarkey that does not have a bias and can see things in a crystal clear way?



Bias doesn't neccessarily cloud judgement or clarity of perspective. I'm heavily biased towards the working and exploited classes of the world but my judgement/perspective remains crystal clear 




philosophical said:


> My point is that the film is about the 'something' in the 'something different to this horrible shit', it is about discussing the practicalities that will impact to a greater or lesser degree on everybody with a no deal brexit.
> You may take the view that such a discussion has no relevance, get to tomorrow as it were and worry about how to deal with it then, or as each issue arises bit by bit..



I'm not saying it's not relevant. More that the referendum throws up the opportunity to talk about what kind of society we want to live in, and to fight for a vision of society which we prefer. But if you spend all your time talking about how awful change will be, especially when we don't really know for sure what any of these changes will mean or even if the bourgeois will allow any significant change to take place as a result of the referendum, then you cut yourself off from others who are willing to talk about how society could be different, and you don't put any perspective across other than a position of generally being against change - small c conservatism if you will.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Yes, that's the story you want to tell, but I don't think there's enough evidence just to state it as fact.


I could tell another story, consistent with the facts about the vote: 

In these times of increasing difficulties and pay cuts, but generally rather low unemployment, those working (often next to immigrants) in minimum wage jobs don't see their immigrant colleagues as a threat. Why would they? But those who see the wage they can command for the skill they have dropping, say, from £20 an hour to £12-15 per hour, and see that this drop has coincided with a large influx of immigrants selling that same skill, make the link between the two and see immigrant colleagues as unwelcome rivals.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You can be against both Austerity and Brexit.



You can but people will ask you awkward questions about Greece. Do you mean you can be against austerity in Britain and against Brexit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Yes, that's the story you want to tell, but I don't think there's enough evidence just to state it as fact.



You're so wrong it hurts. I'm off for a lie down.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Bias doesn't neccessarily cloud judgement or clarity of perspective. I'm heavily biased towards the working and exploited classes of the world but my judgement/perspective remains crystal clear
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am all for change.
I have to go out now.
My brief comment is that it is good to discuss the potential of society, but brexit is happening in the blink of an eye by comparison to fundamental societal change, and that is my focus right now.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You can but people will ask you awkward questions about Greece. Do you mean you can be against austerity in Britain and against Brexit?


I mean the Austerity done by the Tories that will still be there after Brexit.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

The people who voted leave were more likely to have voted tory in the 2015 election wasn't it.
'Conservatives voted to Leave, 61% to 39%' ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> The people who voted leave were more likely to have voted tory in the 2015 election wasn't it.
> 'Conservatives voted to Leave, 61% to 39%' ?


so where do you suggest the other c.11m leave votes came from? (11334920*0.61=6914301)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> The people who voted leave were more likely to have voted tory in the 2015 election wasn't it.
> 'Conservatives voted to Leave, 61% to 39%' ?



I didn't vote at all in the 2015 election.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

I get that. Just think its not as simple as some people are trying to paint it, and that the caricatures from both 'sides' are just shit .


----------



## kebabking (Aug 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am all for change.
> I have to go out now.
> My brief comment is that it is good to discuss the potential of society, but brexit is happening in the blink of an eye by comparison to fundamental societal change, and that is my focus right now.



See, even you can begin to discern the difference between _immediate _and _important.
_
If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives - look at it, for good or ill, as one of the events that changes they way we are governed and how the state works - look at it in the same way as you look at the introduction of Jury Trials, or the Great Reform Act, or Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford 50 years later, or the Trial of Charles I and the end of Rule by Divine right - or WW1 and the rise of the Labour Movement and the Emancipation of Women.

Brexit is, or will lead to, fundamental changes in our country that will make the country my great, great grandchildren live in very different to the country they would have lived in without Brexit - again, for good or ill - what no one writing then will care about is a shortage of Spanish Strawberries or the tradegy of buying non-EU insulin during 2019.

They won't even care if no aircraft carrying holiday makers or business people were able to fly to Europe for a month.

Put yourself on the side of history and not on the side of some whining cretins who believes that their personal convenience lies at the centre of the universe.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> I get that. Just think its not as simple as some people are trying to paint it, and that the caricatures from both 'sides' are just shit .



Yeah, people voted out for loads of reasons. The fact is the majority who voted wanted the UK to leave the EU. So let's just do it.


----------



## MikeMcc (Aug 8, 2018)

It definitely wasn't that simple, there were many Labour strongholds that voted heavily for Brexit at the time. I'll try and dig out a link to an article I was reading this morning that Goole appears to be still heavily in favour of Brexit, despite Siemens aiming to build a train carriage manufacturing facility there.

Found it: In England's forgotten 'rust belt', voters show little sign of...

I believe that areas that are suffering deprivation in the UK look at the possibility of funds freed up helping development in their area.  As a net contributor to the EU, they have a point, but the difference between what's paid out to what we recieve back in development funding I think is pretty small.Even more so if that money is going to be soaked up by the increases in NHS, Defence, Border Security, Customs, etc.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

kebabking said:


> If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives - look at it, for good or ill, as one of the events that changes they way we are governed and how the state works - look at it in the same way as you look at the introduction of Jury Trials, or the Great Reform Act, or Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford 50 years later, or the Trial of Charles I and the end of Rule by Divine right - or WW1 and the rise of the Labour Movement and the Emancipation of Women.


Indeed. Looked at like that, ignoring the short-term inconveniences, it seems an immeasurably worse idea. A necessary precondition for something really fucking ugly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 8, 2018)

MikeMcc said:


> there were many Labour strongholds that voted heavily for Brexit at the time.


yep, which is why the idea that brexit signaled a trumpian turn to the right doesn't bear scrutiny 

here, re-post but its still interesting:
Tom Hazeldine: Revolt of the Rustbelt. New Left Review 105, May-June 2017.

the denial of this angle from annoyed libs who had othered the leave voter into his racist shell suit bears striking similarity to the rush to analyse what trump voters drive


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

I just hope that 'in 50 to 300 years' we won't still be shouting brexiteer/ remoaner at eachother, and wearing special hats or something to mark what side we're on.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> yep, which is why the idea that brexit signaled a trumpian turn to the right doesn't bear scrutiny
> 
> here, re-post but its still interesting:
> Tom Hazeldine: Revolt of the Rustbelt. New Left Review 105, May-June 2017.
> ...


On the other hand:







The majority of Labour voters voted remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143511


What about pickle?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2018)

The EU has to die if neoliberalism is to be defeated. The UK is arguably in the best position of all the EU nations to jump ship first, and to destabilise the rest of the bloc by doing so. If I'm thinking long term, 50-100 years, then I'm 100% pro-brexit. As someone who has to live in the UK in the meantime and who needs a job and food and healthcare and stuff, I'm less enthusiastic.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What about pickle?


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 8, 2018)

kebabking said:


> If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives



"Wait, so in August of 2018, they were in the middle of a massive heatwave, there were droughts and disasters and record-breaking temperatures happening all over the place, they knew emissions targets had to be met to stop things getting much worse and they were freaking out over ... some trade deal with Belgium?"

"Well, it was with the 27 countries that were in what used to be called the European Union, but you're broadly correct."

"Bellends."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Allowing for the usual caveats regarding polling questions like these, that is a pretty horrible set of results. Ironic given the present conversation that the only issue there with no predictive value at all is capitalism.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)

Anyone up for this?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143511



philosophical should be more concerned with Ireland's looming dairy products crisis.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143513
> 
> 
> Anyone up for this?



The job description & who they think are looking for is just . And there's several of these 'senior policy advisor ' positions empty .  "Please give an example of a time when you supported colleagues through a difficult or challenging period at work..'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Not going to dig too deep into this one but that's presented in a potentially very misleading way. We have no idea what the relative sizes of the 'thinks multiculturalism is bad' and 'thinks multiculturalism is good' groups are for example. In any case, 'multiculturalism' is a term so loaded, vague and widely abused as to be effectively meaningless anyway.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> The job description & who they think are looking for is just . And there's several of these 'senior policy advisor ' positions empty .  "Please give an example of a time when you supported colleagues through a difficult or challenging period at work..'




£48,480 - £60,484 That's a bit shit is it not?

Also


1.	 _*Please give an example of a time when you were under pressure to meet a challenging deadline in the face of other conflicting priorities.*_ Explain why it was challenging, and any actions you took to prioritise time and effort or be flexible in your approach.

MEGALOLZ


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143513
> 
> 
> Anyone up for this?


What about pickle?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What about pickle?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not going to dig too deep into this one but that's presented in a potentially very misleading way. We have no idea the relative sizes of the 'thinks multiculturalism is bad' and 'thinks multiculturalism is good' groups are for example. In any case, 'multiculturalism' is a term so loaded, vague and widely abused as to be effectively meaningless anyway.



The piece of information that is missing is how many people plumped for the 'mixed blessing' option. But where the figure is as striking as an 81-19 split as it is for multiculturalism, unless they are being dishonest in the way they're measuring that, it must mean that very few people went for the mixed blessing option (which surprises me a bit). I've not read up on this particular poll, but afaik, despicable cunt that he is, Ashcroft's polling isn't generally considered to be badly done.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143514


You don't know why but this is perfect.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You don't know why but this is perfect.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The presentation of these results has got Simpson’s Paradox written all over it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 8, 2018)

My (non-) BREXIT PR strategy would be very short and sweet


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> My (non-) BREXIT PR strategy would be very short and sweet
> 
> View attachment 143517


I thought all you old people don't count/dying ?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I mean the Austerity done by the Tories that will still be there after Brexit.



That's an interesting assumption given that Brexit could potentially split the Tories permanently. 

But re my question, does your answer mean you are not against austerity measures in the Eurozone, just the ones in Britain?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> philosophical should be more concerned with Ireland's looming dairy products crisis.



It is fascinating that somehow this logic has emerged that an economy which is a net importer of goods will be punished for leaving the free trade bloc with high trade barriers. Would make complete sense if Britain was an export led economy, but it's not - why would countries that sell us tons of stuff want to stop selling us tons of stuff?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting assumption given that Brexit could potentially split the Tories permanently.
> 
> But re my question, does your answer mean you are not against austerity measures in the Eurozone, just the ones in Britain?


I'm against austerity full stop and Brexit will not stop it here or in Greece.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The presentation of these results has got Simpson’s Paradox written all over it.


Can you explain further? One factor not accounted for is the difference in the age demographics of leave/remain, which is presumably reflected in the samples. So, more people are socially conservative, broadly, cos they're older, and that's also reflected within the two samples, not just between them.

That wouldn't alter the fact that the results show a marked socially conservative trend in the leave vote, whether that's cos they're older or not. Those with more socially conservative views form a majority within the leave vote and a minority within the remain vote. Brexit is, among many other things, very broadly a victory to those with socially conservative viewpoints within the UK.

Lots of things not really related to the decision in the vote can be correlated with the vote, of course, some of them strongly. I would wager that there would be a strong correlation between voting brexit and being in favour of the death penalty, for instance. As a broad-brush indicator of the kinds of reasons people have for voting brexit, and the kinds of things they want to see as a result of it (hint: not lexit) such correlations can still be informative.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm against austerity full stop and Brexit will not stop it here or in Greece.



I didn't say it would. What's your point?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I didn't say it would. What's your point?


Why mention it then?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

kebabking said:


> See, even you can begin to discern the difference between _immediate _and _important.
> _
> If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives - look at it, for good or ill, as one of the events that changes they way we are governed and how the state works - look at it in the same way as you look at the introduction of Jury Trials, or the Great Reform Act, or Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford 50 years later, or the Trial of Charles I and the end of Rule by Divine right - or WW1 and the rise of the Labour Movement and the Emancipation of Women.
> 
> ...



Mucked up the reply, which now appears on the next page. apologies.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why mention it then?



Mention what?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Mention what?


Brexit having an effect on austerity.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Brexit having an effect on austerity.



I didn't. You did. 



sleaterkinney said:


> I'm against austerity full stop and Brexit will not stop it here or in Greece.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm against austerity full stop and Brexit will not stop it here or in Greece.



With respect, Grexit would stop EU mandated austerity in Greece.

We can argue about what might be the immediate, short, medium and long term impacts on Greece of it leaving either the Eurozone or the EU, but Grexit would certainly stop it being a direct consequence of instructions from _The Centre..._


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I didn't. You did.


Yes, a few pages ago, do you agree with me or what?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

kebabking said:


> With respect, Grexit would stop EU mandated austerity in Greece.


That's nice, not what I was answering though.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It is fascinating that somehow this logic has emerged that an economy which is a net importer of goods will be punished for leaving the free trade bloc with high trade barriers. Would make complete sense if Britain was an export led economy, but it's not - why would countries that sell us tons of stuff want to stop selling us tons of stuff?



It's not a case of punishment. WTO rules require the EU (and ourselves, for that matter) to apply a common external tariff to all other member entities that have not concluded a bespoke FTA.

Moreover, we are net importers of goods to the EU (£302bn), but net exporters of services (£242bn). The problem is that lots of regulations stop or make it much harder for non-EU providers to sell services into the EU. Instead they typically require EU-based subsidiaries to be set up. This means jobs being transferred from the UK to the EU, if companies want to continue to service their EU clients.

We could agree an FTA - allowing for lower tariffs and more trade in services. Here's how long that has taken in the past:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Yes, a few pages ago, do you agree with me or what?



Go back, read the thread properly and quote me if you can. You won't find me saying that Brexit will stop austerity.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, people voted out for loads of reasons. The fact is the majority who voted wanted the UK to leave the EU. So let's just do it.


Don't know if its any good or not but this survey reckons basically most people just don't care about the how anymore just want to 'get it over with', including most of those who voted remain. 
I don't think that's good news tbh, just looks like a license for the current government to do whatever and everyone will be too apathetic and sick of the whole mess to care.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> It's not a case of punishment. WTO rules require the EU (and ourselves, for that matter) to apply a common external tariff to all other member entities that have not concluded a bespoke FTA.
> 
> Moreover, we are net importers of goods to the EU (£302bn), but net exporters of services (£242bn). The problem is that lots of regulations stop or make it much harder for non-EU providers to sell services into the EU. Instead they typically require EU-based subsidiaries to be set up. This means jobs being transferred from the UK to the EU, if companies want to continue to service their EU clients.
> 
> Or, we could agree an FTA - allowing for lower tariffs and more trade in services. Here's how long that has taken in the past:


You're assuming that a transformation in trade practices will take place and that WTO rules will be enforced/implemented. I don't think that's very likely and have seen no evidence to suggest it is.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Go back, read the thread properly and quote me if you can. You won't find me saying that Brexit will stop austerity.


Good, we agree then.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting assumption given that Brexit could potentially split the Tories permanently.


I believe the appropriate adjective here would be "pyrrhic".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Don't know if its any good or not but this survey reckons basically most people just don't care about the how anymore just want to 'get on with it', including most of those who voted remain.
> I don't think that's good news tbh, just looks like a license for the current government to do whatever and everyone will be too apathetic and sick of the whole mess to care.
> View attachment 143526



People might be fairly apathetic about Brexit but that doesn't mean they're apathetic about other more important issues. Additionally it's not really a license for the current government to do whatever they want because what most of the current govt want to do is just forget the referendum ever happened.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Good, we agree then.



Hang on - you've wasted quite a lot of my time here because you assumed (wrongly) that I was arguing Brexit would stop austerity. Aren't you going to apologise for not reading my posts? It's really tiresome when you clog up the thread because you can't be bothered to read or engage with what people are saying.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 8, 2018)

kebabking said:


> See, even you can begin to discern the difference between _immediate _and _important.
> _
> If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives - look at it, for good or ill, as one of the events that changes they way we are governed and how the state works - look at it in the same way as you look at the introduction of Jury Trials, or the Great Reform Act, or Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford 50 years later, or the Trial of Charles I and the end of Rule by Divine right - or WW1 and the rise of the Labour Movement and the Emancipation of Women.
> 
> ...



This reminds me of the Tony Blair exhortation when trying to put the details of the Belfast Agreement that we should be aware of the 'heavy hand of history on our shoulders'. Ironically an _immediate _move on an _important _issue. There is a further degree of irony that the practical details of brexit risks the stability of that important agreement. 

Indeed you mention great leaps forward from the past, but of course most of those haven't been reversed, votes have not been taken away from women as times change. Brexit is a threat to what I believe was a leap forward (the Belfast Agreement) towards establishing a more peaceful time throughout the British isles. I grant you that there might be something better and more peaceful to come out of all this sometime hence, but there is also an immediate risk of strife. 

There is a downside in waiting for jam tomorrow whilst enduring bread and water today, in that people are generally people and they want to overcome immediate problems in front of them now. No one in the future will care about those problems, but for good or ill people in the here and now will. 

There was a great leap forward when Jenner discovered vaccinations but few parents would have been keen of their own kids being part of the risky 'variolation' experiments that were a forerunner to vaccinations, even if they were asked to consider the bigger picture and the hand of history.

Incidentally on a personal level some of the problems you outline such as avocados, queues at ports, and air travel disruption don't bother me. However distancing the UK from some of the benefits of collaboration do bother me, and I don't really mean materially.

The line you take also puts me in mind of the suggestion a week or so ago by Jacob Rees Mogg that the impact of brexit won't fully be felt for 50 years, in his case I believe he was talking about the benefits (!) of brexit. 

If my perspective and thought process is part of some flawed Guardian remainiac process OK, but I am afraid I am still interested in the practical details that start to take shape in the near future.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I believe the appropriate adjective here would be "pyrrhic".



I'm sure that was dead funny but it went over my head sorry mon!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Don't know if its any good or not but this survey reckons basically most people just don't care about the how anymore just want to 'get it over with', including most of those who voted remain.
> I don't think that's good news tbh, just looks like a license for the current government to do whatever and everyone will be too apathetic and sick of the whole mess to care.
> View attachment 143526


Source pls


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Source pls



Says 'Deltapoll' tbf - Deltapoll | Polling


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hang on - you've wasted quite a lot of my time here because you assumed (wrongly) that I was arguing Brexit would stop austerity. Aren't you going to apologise for not reading my posts? It's really tiresome when you clog up the thread because you can't be bothered to read or engage with what people are saying.


You've wasted my time with your drivel, why ask this if you agreed with me.



SpackleFrog said:


> Do you mean you can be against austerity in Britain and against Brexit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Says 'Deltapoll' tbf - Deltapoll | Polling


Tbf it doesn't say who commissioned the poll, which is the information I seek.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbf it doesn't say who commissioned the poll, which is the information I seek.


I can’t remember where It came from sorry I got it 2nd hand off twitter.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> You've wasted my time with your drivel, why ask this if you agreed with me.



You're against Brexit and in favour of the EU. You also say you're against austerity. But if you're against the Tories and in favour of the EU, it's quite possible you're not against the austerity measures imposed on peripheral Eurozone economies, isn't it? So I was seeking clarity from you. A forlorn hope I suppose. 

Just so we're clear, I'm pretty sure I don't agree with you on very much, I'm a Socialist and I'm against austerity, so I voted to leave the EU and I'm satisfied with the results of that. You are correct that you can be against Brexit and against austerity, my point is that if you oppose Brexit you can't oppose austerity _coherently. _


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 8, 2018)

I'm pretty sure I don't agree with you on much either.


----------



## Supine (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm against austerity, so I voted to leave the EU and I'm satisfied with the results of that.



I just don't get why people think the two things are related. Austerity was the Tories squeezing the middle and working classes. You've voted to leave something unrelated to austerity on some vague idea that the EU made them do it. It's just stupidity and if it causes the economy to tank you can look forward to austerity mark 2. Well done.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 8, 2018)

philosophical said:


> This reminds me of the Tony Blair exhortation when trying to put the details of the Belfast Agreement that we should be aware of the 'heavy hand of history on our shoulders'. Ironically an _immediate _move
> 
> Indeed you mention great leaps forward from the past, but of course most of those haven't been reversed, votes have not been taken away from women as times change. Brexit is a threat to what I believe was a leap forward (the Belfast Agreement) towards establishing a more peaceful time throughout the British isles. I grant you that there might be something better and more peaceful to come out of all this sometime hence, but there is also an immediate risk of strife.
> 
> ...


thread ends


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

It's quite possible to disdain the eu and the government and austerity and still see remaining as the better option, not because of any confidence or illusion in the eu but because any hope of a decent positive outcome now seems so remote as to be chimerical


----------



## JimW (Aug 8, 2018)

Supine said:


> I just don't get why people think the two things are related. Austerity was the Tories squeezing the middle and working classes. You've voted to leave something unrelated to austerity on some vague idea that the EU made them do it. It's just stupidity and if it causes the economy to tank you can look forward to austerity mark 2. Well done.


Clearly related, both projects of capital since the mid-Seventies post oil crisis turn to create a new kind of economic consensus.


----------



## J Ed (Aug 8, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 143511



Couldn't they have picked a type of food which is actually dependent on imports from EU member states? Looking at this just made me think that a cheese sandwich would be fine even in FBPE dystopian-wank-fantasy land.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Supine said:


> I just don't get why people think the two things are related. Austerity was the Tories squeezing the middle and working classes. You've voted to leave something unrelated to austerity on some vague idea that the EU made them do it. It's just stupidity and if it causes the economy to tank you can look forward to austerity mark 2. Well done.



It's fascinating that you can write this and accuse others of stupidity, but I'll have a go for you mon. 

There are two key points. The first is that because of austerity people in Britain were deeply angry and dissatisfied at the establishment and so they voted for change. That one should be easy to grasp even if you think people are stupid for doing this. The second point is that both the Tory government and the EU are committed to a neoliberal economic model and to austerity measures as a response to the 2007-08 economic crisis. Does that help?


----------



## andysays (Aug 8, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What about pickle?



We'll all be in the pickle come 29th March 2019, apparently...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's quite possible to disdain the eu and the government and austerity and still see remaining as the better option, not because of any confidence or illusion in the eu but because any hope of a decent positive outcome now seems so remote as to be chimerical



Yeah, you're right, that is quite possible, but my point was I didn't think it was coherent. Although to be fair I still think the outcome of the referendum result is pretty decent  Perhaps if I thought the referendum result was a disaster _now, _I would find that position far more coherent than I do.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's fascinating that you can write this and accuse others of stupidity, but I'll have a go for you mon.
> 
> There are two key points. The first is that because of austerity people in Britain were deeply angry and dissatisfied at the establishment and so they voted for change. That one should be easy to grasp even if you think people are stupid for doing this. The second point is that both the Tory government and the EU are committed to a neoliberal economic model and to austerity measures as a response to the 2007-08 economic crisis. Does that help?


This tory govt instituted austerity without any coercion from the rest of the EU. In fact, you could say that they were leaders of the idea of austerity as a reaction to the 2007–08 crisis.

Other reactions to that crisis were possible. Japan has tried various reactions to its credit crunch, including lavish Keynesian public spending. The idea that the modern world permits only one neoliberal-mandated response to economic crisis is simply wrong, particularly for a country that prints its own money.  

So the EU did not force austerity on Britain, and Britain will not be freed from any constraints on pulling out of austerity by leaving the EU. In fact, there are likely to be more restraints on a post-Brexit UK if it withdraws from the common market. 

So yes, the referendum went the way of brexit probably in large part because it was called following several years of 'austerity'. And no, it does not then follow that brexit will help to put an end to that austerity, any more than it follows that a vote for Trump in the deprived areas of the so-called 'rust belt' will help to restore the US coal industry.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This tory govt instituted austerity without any coercion from the rest of the EU. In fact, you could say that they were leaders of the idea of austerity as a reaction to the 2007–08 crisis.
> 
> Other reactions to that crisis were possible. Japan has tried various reactions to its credit crunch, including lavish Keynesian public spending. The idea that the modern world permits only one neoliberal-mandated response to economic crisis is simply wrong, particularly for a country that prints its own money.
> 
> ...



Again, for clarity, I haven't suggested that the EU coerced the Tories into carrying out austerity policies or that Brexit will end austerity.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I mean the Austerity done by the Tories that will still be there after Brexit.


You think that that "austerity" began in 2010 with the Tories*? The attacks on the welfare state began long before 2010.

*LibDems, the party the pricks in the video are members of, written out I see. As are Labour.


sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:
> 
> The majority of Labour voters voted remain.


What do you think that graphic shows?



littlebabyjesus said:


> This tory govt instituted austerity


LibDems weren't in power in 2010 then? And I think you'll find it was there was Labour government in 08/09, and a Labour Party supporting austerity in 2015.

This reduction of neo-liberalism to "Tory austerity" is weak as hell. The policies of the last decade are part and parcel of the same structural attacks on labour that have been happening since the 70s. And as Jim said the EU was one way capital carried out those attacks.


----------



## JimW (Aug 8, 2018)

Transnational trading block, not post-war federation for peace and prosperity.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're assuming that a transformation in trade practices will take place and that WTO rules will be enforced/implemented. I don't think that's very likely and have seen no evidence to suggest it is.



That's a new one on me. What evidence do you have that the EU breaks WTO rules when it suits them? That it can move quickly without securing a consensus from its members on something like a trade deal that will affect each member state differently?

Goods (which is what WTO is about) are a sideshow anyway. EU is not going to make any kind of special effort to protect UK service imports into its territory - particularly where it can (and is already) attracting businesses to relocate. That will cost us jobs and is a much bigger deal.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The second point is that both the Tory government and the EU are committed to a neoliberal economic model and to austerity measures as a response to the 2007-08 economic crisis.


The EU didn't impose austerity measures on us - our own elected government did that, uncoerced. Indeed, the EU had no basis on which to so so, as we are not part of the eurozone.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> That's a new one on me. What evidence do you have that the EU breaks WTO rules when it suits them? That it can move quickly without securing a consensus from its members on something like a trade deal that will affect each member state differently?



Lots of Western/US ally states break WTO rules when it suits them, the votes are weighted in favour of the US aren't they if I remember rightly? The US breaks the rules all the time. As I've said previously though it's not that I think they will break the rules neccessarily, just I'm not sure where the instruction to _implement _a swtich to WTO rules would come from.



Wolveryeti said:


> Goods (which is what WTO is about) are a sideshow anyway. EU is not going to make any kind of special effort to protect UK service imports into its territory - particularly where it can (and is already) attracting businesses to relocate. That will cost us jobs and is a much bigger deal.



Interesting, care to expand? What kind of UK service exports did you have in mind?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> The EU didn't impose austerity measures on us - our own elected government did that, uncoerced. Indeed, the EU had no basis on which to so so, as we are not part of the eurozone.





SpackleFrog said:


> Go back, read the thread properly and quote me if you can. You won't find me saying that Brexit will stop austerity.





SpackleFrog said:


> Again, for clarity, I haven't suggested that the EU coerced the Tories into carrying out austerity policies or that Brexit will end austerity.



Getting a bit fucking bored here guys tbh


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Interesting, care to expand? What kind of UK service exports did you have in mind?


ONS pink book has tge breakdown by sector if you are genuinely interested.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Getting a bit fucking bored here guys tbh


Yeah so am I. You did a protest vote against austerity that has helped make everyone in the UK poorer (now and in future). You don't get the irony but that's ok.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Yeah so am I. You did a protest vote against austerity that has helped make everyone in the UK poorer (now and in future). You don't get the irony but that's ok.



It wasn't a protest vote. I'm a Socialist - I don't like hyper-disciplinary neoliberal trade blocs. I would never vote to be a member of one. And it hasn't made anyone poorer. Austerity has made the working class poorer and the ruling class richer, but Brexit hasn't happened yet. 



Wolveryeti said:


> ONS pink book has tge breakdown by sector if you are genuinely interested.



I'm well aware of what statistics are available on the ONS website. What I'm genuinely interested in is what you meant. You've got time to be snide so you've definitely got time to explain the following: 



Wolveryeti said:


> Goods (which is what WTO is about) are a sideshow anyway. EU is not going to make any kind of special effort to protect UK service imports into its territory - particularly where it can (and is already) attracting businesses to relocate. That will cost us jobs and is a much bigger deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> I voted Lib Dem and I'm not ashamed of it. If a few more Labour/Lib Dem constituencies had won the picture would have looked completely different. The state we're in is 90% due to Labour/Brown being shit rather than any other reason.


.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Wolveryeti I liked you potty post but was too shy to 'like' it.
If you actually have some understanding of what is likely to happen next in practical terms I hope you'll not give up and stop posting.
My brain freezes over when i try to learn about international trade deals and what the wto actually is and how it all works etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Wolveryeti I liked you potty post but was too shy to 'like' it.
> If you actually have some understanding of what is likely to happen next in practical terms I hope you'll not give up and stop posting.
> My brain freezes over when i try to learn about international trade deals and what the wto actually is and how it all works etc.



Wait your turn. Wolveryeti is going to explain why goods trade is a sideshow and why the EU wants to limit British service industry exports to me first!




Wolveryeti said:


> Goods (which is what WTO is about) are a sideshow anyway.



Actually while I remember the WTO regulations cover goods *and *services.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It wasn't a protest vote. I'm a Socialist - I don't like hyper-disciplinary neoliberal trade blocs. I would never vote to be a member of one. And it hasn't made anyone poorer. Austerity has made the working class poorer and the ruling class richer, but Brexit hasn't happened yet.


You said:
"I'm against austerity, so I voted to leave the EU and I'm satisfied with the results of that."
How will leaving the EU help, per the reasons you are against austerity?



SpackleFrog said:


> I'm well aware of what statistics are available on the ONS website. What I'm genuinely interested in is what you meant. You've got time to be snide so you've definitely got time to explain the following:


So we establish you are not really interested and just want to shout FINANCIAL SERVICES BAD 

Go on then! FINANCIAL SERVICES


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Its not just financial services which are bad & should be done abroad somewhere its also trade. Brexit might help reduce trade happening so thats good.


redsquirrel said:


> Yes why in the world should we not listen to an international trade negotiator who's negotiated deals worth billions. Who could be against _trade_.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

On unions


Wolveryeti said:


> They are just cartels. Why would you expect a cartel to act according to the social good?





Wolveryeti said:


> Left wing does not equal kowtowing to every greedy union's demand for more cash, you know.





Wolveryeti said:


> I'm fed up with the RMT trying to play us for fools with their lies regarding safety and their disgraceful covering up for some of the incompetent shitbags within their ranks. Why they're looking for letters of support from the public is beyond me. They do whatever the fuck they like anyway and chuck their toys out the pram the moment they don't get what they want. Fuck 'em.





Wolveryeti said:


> Unions can be a progressive force. But not if they throw their toys out of the pram every time they fail to negotiate a pay rise, as was the case under Callaghan.



I wonder why this anti-union prick might support the EU.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> On unions
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Selective quoting. Lame. I am not anti unions.

Still, I suppose a slight improvement over your last, pisspoor unfunny edit of my post.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

redsquirrel can i ask you about your post that i quoted above?
Do you think that reducing the amount of trade that this country does with other countries would be a good thing for anybody that you care about?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> redsquirrel can i ask you about your post that i quoted above?
> Do you think that reducing the amount of trade that this country does with other countries would be a good thing for anybody that you care about?


When did you stop hitting your wife? 



Wolveryeti said:


> Still, I suppose a slight improvement over your last, pisspoor unfunny edit of my post.


I didn't edit any of those posts. They are direct quotes, as can been seen by clicking on the arrows.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> On unions
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow. Had no idea, hadn't noticed this specimen on the boards before. Thanks for heads up redsquirrel. 




Wolveryeti said:


> You said:
> "I'm against austerity, so I voted to leave the EU and I'm satisfied with the results of that."
> How will leaving the EU help, per the reasons you are against austerity?
> 
> ...



That's not what I would have said - what I would have said is that French, Germand and British investment firms and finance houses are so interlinked that the realites are much more complex than domestic balance of payments type situations and with goods. 

Anyway, given what redsquirrel has just pointed out, done engaging with you you fucking scab. When you say things like that about a union like the RMT, I've kept really quiet, but I'll tell you something, you went down in my estimation when you said that.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> When did you stop hitting your wife?


seriously?

You wrote "who could be against _trade?_
I am asking you about what you wrote. (I've never had a wife).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> redsquirrel can i ask you about your post that i quoted above?
> Do you think that reducing the amount of trade that this country does with other countries would be a good thing for anybody that you care about?



You didn't ask a question though did you? There's just this: 



bimble said:


> Its not just financial services which are bad & should be done abroad somewhere its also trade. Brexit might help reduce trade happening so thats good.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

my question is above.
it says:

 Do you think that reducing the amount of trade that this country does with other countries would be a good thing for anybody that you care about?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> seriously?
> 
> You wrote "who could be against _trade?_
> I am asking you about what you wrote. (I've never had a wife).



He's saying you've asked a question you can't give a truthful/logical/valid answer to. Your question doesn't make sense. We're not talking about whether to trade or not, we're talking about how trade is done. Do you see?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> my question is above.
> it says Do you think that reducing the amount of trade that this country does with other countries would be a good thing for anybody that you care about?



And as redsquirrel just said, have you stopped hitting your wife? 

What kind of trade? On what terms? What are you on about?


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

To be honest SpackleFrog when you asked for the name & address of a 'remoaner" the other day presumably to continue the conversation on their doorstep i kind of lost interest in your arguments.

Squirrel said "who could be against _trade_?"
So when i read that I thought.. me. I think trade is kind of what people do.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> When you say things like that about a union like the RMT, I've kept really quiet, but I'll tell you something, you went down in my estimation when you said that.


I'm in floods of tears here. How could you be so mean?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> seriously?
> 
> You wrote "who could be against _trade?_
> I am asking you about what you wrote. (I've never had a wife).


No you're asking a loaded question based on a misrepresentation of what I said.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> To be honest SpackleFrog when you asked for the name & address of a 'remoaner" the other day  i kind of lost interest in your 'arguments'.



*shrug* I said something daft on a Friday night around my fifth pint. it's nowhere near as daft as some of the stuff others regularly post here (to say nothing of the bigotry and anti-working class bile from the usual liberal elements) and at least I had the excuse I'd been drinking. Didn't call anyone a Remoaner though that's your addition! 



bimble said:


> To be honest SpackleFrog
> 
> Squirrel said "who could be against _trade_?"
> So when i read that I thought.. me. I think trade is kind of what people do.



Eh? You read that and thought you were against trade? What do people do?


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No you're asking a loaded question based on a misrepresentation of what I said.


How did i misrepresent you?

you said



redsquirrel said:


> Yes why in the world should we not listen to an international trade negotiator who's negotiated deals worth billions. Who could be against _trade_.


 (with trade in italics)

Can you explain what you meant please & how i misrepresented you?


----------



## sealion (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> Wolveryeti I liked you potty post but was too shy to 'like' it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> So when i read that I thought.. me. I think trade is kind of what people do.


And there's no political context to "trade"? Especially not when talked about by people that have ~"done millions of pounds worth of International deals "? When being discussed in the context of the EU, the WTO, TTIP, CETA, NAFTA, etc? Trade is just _done_?


----------



## sealion (Aug 8, 2018)

bimble said:


> To be honest SpackleFrog when you asked for the name & address of a 'remoaner" the other day presumably to continue the conversation on their doorstep i kind of lost interest in your arguments.


Oooh nasty.


----------



## bimble (Aug 8, 2018)

Do you think that on the balance of probability anybody you care about will benefit from brexit? 
That their lives will be made in some meaningful way less shit by it?

If so please say how.
If you are thinking of your next door neighbour's great great grandchildren that's fine too. How, and why did brexit lead the way to this future sunny upland?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> *shrug* I said something daft on a Friday night around my fifth pint...


And haven't been man enough to apologise since.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And haven't been man enough to apologise since.



Fair enough mate. I'm sorry.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fair enough mate. I'm sorry.


No insults for a month then, and I'll know you mean it


----------



## billbond (Aug 8, 2018)

Even good old Tony was not always a fan


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

Squirrel!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No insults for a month then, and I'll know you mean it


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2018)

billbond said:


> Even good old Tony was not always a fan


Or he was lying on at least one occasion


----------



## agricola (Aug 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or he was lying on at least one occasion



The really insincere beard in 1983 gives that away; he looks like someone the Royalist cavalry have conscripted.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or he was lying on at least one occasion



I think he was lying both times


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


>



Don't watch Friends.  Bit too middle class for me.

Rather watch it than listen to your shite though


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Don't watch Friends.  Bit too middle class for me.
> 
> Rather watch it than listen to your shite though



Ahhh, c'mon, if I'm not insulting you you can't insult me. 

How is Friends middle class?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ahhh, c'mon, if I'm not insulting you you can't insult me...


It's off then? 

Nearly made a whole hour too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's off then?
> 
> Nearly made a whole hour too.



Hey, I haven't insulted you yet! Typical remainer eh, always claiming the worst has happened before it actually has


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hey, I haven't insulted you yet! Typical remainer eh, always claiming the worst has happened before it actually has


I can assure you your threat was an insult and won't be forgotten, I've been here 14 years and it was a first.

And you call me a remainer but I'm all for Scottish independence and brexit would be the best thing for us.   Why would I want my friends down south to commit an act of self harm?   

Like others I voice strong concerns about the effects of brexit and the lack of any coherent target or strategy.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 8, 2018)

Gunther is the only working class character in Friends, and I suspect he is petty bourgeoisie anyway.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's not what I would have said - what I would have said is that French, Germand and British investment firms and finance houses are so interlinked that the realites are much more complex than domestic balance of payments type situations and with goods.


Please explain the realities to us, professor. If not for us unworthy scab types, but the lay reader who may be convinced by your erudite arguments.

It's complex. OK.

DO indulge us.



SpackleFrog said:


> Anyway, given what redsquirrel has just pointed out, done engaging with you you fucking scab. When you say things like that about a union like the RMT, I've kept really quiet, but I'll tell you something, you went down in my estimation when you said that.


I do enjoy when people do the whole ad hom thing... quoting years old posts etc. - it just proves they have fuck all interesting to say on the matter at hand and know it full well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

bimble said:


> Do you think that on the balance of probability anybody you care about will benefit from brexit?
> That their lives will be made in some meaningful way less shit by it?
> 
> If so please say how.
> If you are thinking of your next door neighbour's great great grandchildren that's fine too. How, and why did brexit lead the way to this future sunny upland?


I'd like to hear an answer to this too. And I'd also like to hear why,  if people can't answer this, they still think brexit is worth all this shit.  What is brexit for?


----------



## paolo (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd like to hear an answer to this too. And I'd also like to hear why,  if people can't answer this, they still think brexit is worth all this shit.  What is brexit for?



For some here, it was retribution for Greece/ECB austerity.

Will Greece benefit from Brexit?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> For some here, it was retribution for Greece/ECB austerity.
> 
> Will Greece benefit from Brexit?


Well one thing we can know quite confidently is that Greece was not a factor in the vote of the vast majority of people who voted for brexit. I would go further and wager that a majority of those who paid attention to and were disgusted by what was done to Greece by the EU voted remain.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Poorly phrased. How is the Scottish remain/poorer London borough remain vote explained?


Well it turned out when someone made an effort to break up one of the most densely populated parts of Scotland up that the vote was very close indeed in poorer parts of Glasgow. The highland region of Scotland was 45 leave, you can’t make anything of that really cause the highlands is a massive area of small towns separated by lots of land, who knows which were toffs and which were working class folks, we all live on top of each other generally, it doesn’t work the way London does.  But in my experience the leave voters were WC. I am from the capital of the highlands Invershnekie. Orkney(where I now live)  was heavily remain, of course it was middle class haven it is! Then there’s the fact Scotland already had an anti status quo bus and that was Yes and after the ref they all backed SNP as they saw it as their strongest hand for Indy 2. Which had a similar effect to Corbynism probs, a lot of agro if you happened to vote SNP but questioned any part of their policies, that sort of thing. 
 Yes was pro remain really, a lot of people thought voting remain would trigger Indy 2 before the ref even. And Nicola said after brexit “come all you English remain voters, move to Scotland! Your progressiveness is very welcome here” etc. But as I outlined in another post what you aren’t hearing is that there aren’t as many Scottish remain voters waving the EU flag as it may appear, it will be interesting to see what comes out if Indy 2 is called, I do hope the original spirit of Yes will prevail but it’s not looking hopeful!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

I would think poorer boroughs in places like London and Glasgow more likely to be in regular contact with a lot of lefty groups, movements etc. I would think it would just be harder to be pro leave in that environment, more kind of remain nose holding stuff. I’m just throwing that out there, I don’t know. I’m rural as fuck as I said! I did wonder if in Scotland given it’s small population it was kind of central belt leading the vote, but to be honest I haven’t counted it all up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well it turned out when someone made an effort to break up one of the most densely populated parts of Scotland up that the vote was very close indeed in poorer parts of Glasgow. The highland region of Scotland was 45 leave, you can’t make anything of that really cause the highlands is a massive area of small towns separated by lots of land, who knows which were toffs and which were working class folks, we all live on top of each other generally, it doesn’t work the way London does.  But in my experience the leave voters were WC. I am from the capital of the highlands Invershnekie. Orkney(where I now live)  was heavily remain, of course it was middle class haven it is! Then there’s the fact Scotland already had an anti status quo bus and that was Yes and after the ref they all backed SNP as they saw it as their strongest hand for Indy 2. Which had a similar effect to Corbynism probs, a lot of agro if you happened to vote SNP but questioned any part of their policies, that sort of thing.
> Yes was pro remain really, a lot of people thought voting remain would trigger Indy 2 before the ref even. And Nicola said after brexit “come all you English remain voters, move to Scotland! Your progressiveness is very welcome here” etc. But as I outlined in another post what you aren’t hearing is that there aren’t as many Scottish remain voters waving the EU flag as it may appear, it will be interesting to see what comes out if Indy 2 is called, I do hope the original spirit of Yes will prevail but it’s not looking hopeful!



Most of London had a big majority remain across social classes. Ethnic minorities massively remain as well. Not cos they are pro-European, but far more because they are anti-anti-immigrant types. 

All the polls suggest very strongly that anti-immigration sentiment was the single most important issue in leave voting. It was certainly the one single issue that UKIP wanted people focused on. That matters because, while immigration wasn't on the ballot paper, the result has been interpreted as one that is demanding a reduction of net immigration into the UK. This matters because anyone wishing to navigate from here towards a socialist, or even a socialistish, future needs to show how they think we can get from here to there. I see only the other direction - brexit simply mirroring the drift towards vile, racist r/w populism as is seen in other parts of the EU and outside the EU: brexit is just how that trend has manifested itself here, cos we had a referendum, basically, out of the folly of the arrogant govt that didn't even dream that it might lose.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most of London had a big majority remain across social classes. Ethnic minorities massively remain as well. Not cos they are pro-European, but far more because they are anti-anti-immigrant types.
> 
> All the polls suggest very strongly that anti-immigration sentiment was the single most important issue in leave voting. It was certainly the one single issue that UKIP wanted people focused on. That matters because, while immigration wasn't on the ballot paper, the result has been interpreted as one that is demanding a reduction of net immigration into the UK. This matters because anyone wishing to navigate from here towards a socialist, or even a socialistish, future needs to show how they think we can get from here to there. I see only the other direction - brexit simply mirroring the drift towards vile, racist r/w populism as is seen in other parts of the EU and outside the EU: brexit is just how that trend has manifested itself here, cos we had a referendum, basically, out of the folly of the arrogant govt that didn't even dream that it might lose.


The polls don’t strongly suggest that and UKIP only ever had 15 per cent of the vote, which collapsed after brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I can assure you your threat was an insult and won't be forgotten, I've been here 14 years and it was a first.
> 
> And you call me a remainer but I'm all for Scottish independence and brexit would be the best thing for us.   Why would I want my friends down south to commit an act of self harm?
> 
> Like others I voice strong concerns about the effects of brexit and the lack of any coherent target or strategy.



I meant since then! Look, I'm sorry. I felt you were pretty rude the other night but it was a very silly thing to say in response. 

We can agree on Scottish independence at least - although I doubt any British govt is gonna give another referendum any time soon.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Please explain the realities to us, professor. If not for us unworthy scab types, but the lay reader who may be convinced by your erudite arguments.
> 
> It's complex. OK.
> 
> ...



Tell you what, I'll indulge you when you decide to be polite.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The polls don’t strongly suggest that and UKIP only ever had 15 per cent of the vote, which collapsed after brexit.


To be clearer, lord Ashcroft poll said immigration top concern for one third of leave voters and that other large  poll which was widely shared here-  which summed up its results in an odd selective way- said immigration was top reason for ALL voters. It then went on to say all those older working class voters where a bit racist but I couldn’t find the data they actually printed to back that up.
Guess what, I’ve no idea what poll that was now though


----------



## billbond (Aug 9, 2018)

Usual nonsense from a deluded remainiac, "vile, racist"  blah blah blah
Most of the vileness has come from the remain side from what ive seen
You only have to look at some of the comments on here to see that.
The one thing this vote has shown is that a section of this country seem to think they are special and know it all and think they know what is best for everybody.
This vote has shaken them to the core and they cant handle it.
The one thing im sure of the country will never be the same again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The polls don’t strongly suggest that and UKIP only ever had 15 per cent of the vote, which collapsed after brexit.


Enough influence to tip the vote. Way more than 15 per cent of leave voters cited immigration as a top concern in polls afterwards. And the media was saturated with little but in the lead up to the vote. It's naive to think that didn't have a significant effect - the Express with immigration as its front-page news for years before the vote. The Mail obsessing over it, the Sun also. The TV news allowing itself to be taken over by Farage and his hateful bile, appearing here there and everywhere. Fucker was ubiquitous in the lead-up to the vote. People didn't need to vote UKIP to be swayed by these arguments into voting leave. 

Problem is, as soon as this kind of thing is mentioned, you are jumped on on here for criticising the 'racist thickoes', but is anyone seriously suggesting that the media and the propaganda of political parties and pressure groups has no effect?


----------



## Raheem (Aug 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> The one thing this vote has shown is that a section of this country seem to think they are special and know it all and think they know what is best for everybody.


But we know it's not them that are special and know what's best for everybody, don't we?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Enough influence to tip the vote. Way more than 15 per cent of leave voters cited immigration as a top concern in polls afterwards. And the media was saturated with little but in the lead up to the vote. It's naive to think that didn't have a significant effect - the Express with immigration as its front-page news for years before the vote. The Mail obsessing over it, the Sun also. The TV news allowing itself to be taken over by Farage and his hateful bile, appearing here there and everywhere. Fucker was ubiquitous in the lead-up to the vote. People didn't need to vote UKIP to be swayed by these arguments into voting leave.
> 
> Problem is, as soon as this kind of thing is mentioned, you are jumped on on here for criticising the 'racist thickoes', but is anyone seriously suggesting that the media and the propaganda of political parties and pressure groups has no effect?


A third of leave voters amounts to about 15 per cent of the electorate. Of course UKIP voters were gonna vote leave. Meanwhile EU builds a wall near enough 7 times longer than the third longest wall in the world(Berlin wall) to keep Europe white and what? Can I count all pro EU voters as racist? They built an actual fucking wall.
I’ve called out UKIP most of my adult life, call out UKIP then. Don’t fucking lump the rest of us in with UKIP.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Ive even tried to turn Robert Smith into an anarchist, he did once say drunk SO I GUESS WE ALL HAVE THE SAME POLITICS THEN and I was like mate, nah. But maybe one day. And then Orkney will be UKIP free haha


#pipedreams


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> A third of leave voters amounts to about 15 per cent of the electorate. Of course UKIP voters were gonna vote leave. Meanwhile EU builds a wall near enough 7 times longer than the third longest wall in the world(Berlin wall) to keep European white and what? Can I count all pro EU voters as racist? They built an actual fucking wall.
> I’ve called out UKIP most of my adult life, call out UKIP then. Don’t fucking lump the rest of us in with UKIP.


I'm not lumping you in with anyone. But if fewer people had been concerned about immigration, leave would have lost, whatever your reasons for voting leave were. Take out the racists, as judged conservatively at around the 5-6 percent that the BNP got at its peak, and leave doesn't get a majority. To be in a majority, those that voted leave for non-racist reasons need the racist vote to be counted with theirs.

I personally don't give much of a shit about one percentage point or two either way in a vote, but I am sick of hearing (not from you necessarily) about a majority voting leave so we should shut up about it. Well to those who say that, you need the racist vote to be in a majority. You happy to make that statement? That ought to be a non-starter of an argument.

And where did the majority of the racist attacks in the aftermath of the vote happen? They happened in majority remain areas, ethnically diverse areas that have always had racist cunts living in them, and where those racist cunts were, even if only briefly perhaps, empowered by that fucking vote. People on here often try to dismiss London perspectives. But I would suggest that you should consider here a London perspective on this shitfest a bit, think about why it is that so few poor black people voted leave. A section of the population probably least likely to think of itself as 'European'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd like to hear an answer to this too. And I'd also like to hear why,  if people can't answer this, they still think brexit is worth all this shit.  What is brexit for?



It's split the Tory government and completely paralysed them. Was more effective at getting rid of Cameron than Ed Milliband. 



littlebabyjesus said:


> Well one thing we can know quite confidently is that Greece was not a factor in the vote of the vast majority of people who voted for brexit. I would go further and wager that a majority of those who paid attention to and were disgusted by what was done to Greece by the EU voted remain.



I don't think you can know that confidently at all. I don't think it would be one of the most prominent factors for anyone except people on the radical left or people who have some personal connection to Greece. But why wouldn't it be a factor? Apart from the constant connection to immigration and refugees, the main thing that comes up in the media involving the EU is the Eurozone crisis and the austerity measures forced on the peripheral Eurozone economies. Just to be really clear, being in the EU has not brought about prosperity for Greece or Spain or Ireland post-2008. And most of the EU member states are in the Euro. What does that tell people who aren't particularly engaged in the bureaucratic machinery of a supranational neoliberal trade bloc about how it treats economically weaker members? 

I was canvassing in 2016 for the local elections (for TUSC). Fruitless fucking task obviously was not a good time for talking about council cutbacks cos of the referendum. I had a really long chat with a woman (who still wouldn't tell me she would definitely vote for us even after she bought a paper) and I was fascinated by something she said to me:

"I have thought about voting Leave even though I know that's racist, but then the NHS can't cope can it? I'll probably vote Remain, cos if we leave it might make things worse. But it's not right what they're doing to them poor Greeks. The kids don't have enough food."

That's not a simple response to process. I honestly don't know which way she would have voted in the end. But there's a lot of stuff in there - yes, immigration but that's because people have been told immigration is linked to resources for decades, and that the country is broke. But also what people know or have seen and feel about the EU is in there, and since we're always told the EU has brought economic prosperity then people look at their own prosperity or lack thereof and make judgements from there. We need to recognise that if we want to understand the vote and what it means.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not lumping you in with anyone. But if fewer people had been concerned about immigration, leave would have lost, whatever your reasons for voting leave were. Take out the racists, as judged conservatively at around the 5-6 percent that the BNP got at its peak, and leave doesn't get a majority. To be in a majority, those that voted leave for non-racist reasons need the racist vote to be counted with theirs.
> 
> I personally don't give much of a shit about one percentage point or two either way in a vote, but I am sick of hearing (not from you necessarily) about a majority voting leave so we should shut up about it. Well to those who say that, you need the racist vote to be in a majority. You happy to make that statement? That ought to be a non-starter of an argument.


Please, tell me how many of “the racists” I can take out of the remain vote for balance. The pro Miliband racist mug crowd? Soft Tories? How many racist points do you get for waving an EU flag?

Or maybe this argument is actually bullshit from either side, given the current circumstances.

Build that wall....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I would think poorer boroughs in places like London and Glasgow more likely to be in regular contact with a lot of lefty groups, movements etc. I would think it would just be harder to be pro leave in that environment, more kind of remain nose holding stuff. I’m just throwing that out there, I don’t know. I’m rural as fuck as I said! I did wonder if in Scotland given it’s small population it was kind of central belt leading the vote, but to be honest I haven’t counted it all up.



A lot of left groups and unions campaigned to leave.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Please, tell me how many of “the racists” I can take out of the remain vote for balance. The pro Miliband racist mug crowd? Soft Tories? How many racist points do you get for waving an EU flag?
> 
> Or maybe this argument is actually bullshit from either side, given the current circumstances.
> 
> Build that wall....


People voting leave for racist reasons ? You have a think about it - 5 percent is a pretty conservative estimate. By contrast, few people will have voted remain for racist reasons. 

You try to draw equivalences where they don't exist. You know full well that racist cunts voted overwhelmingly to leave, cos they're racist cunts. The only question is how many.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> A lot of left groups and unions campaigned to leave.


I know they did, but it did seem the left was predominantly remain.
Anyway point was this whole Scotland and London less racist than rest of country is obvs shite. I’ve live in both places and half my family is from north of England. All places have their own issues with racism and London certainly doesn’t stand out as cleaner than the others really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not lumping you in with anyone. But if fewer people had been concerned about immigration, leave would have lost, whatever your reasons for voting leave were. Take out the racists, as judged conservatively at around the 5-6 percent that the BNP got at its peak, and leave doesn't get a majority. To be in a majority, those that voted leave for non-racist reasons need the racist vote to be counted with theirs.



Eh? What on earth does this mean? 

I'm really sorry to break this to you mate but a lot of very bigoted people vote all the time in elections. Are you suggesting that makes the results invalid? Since to win an election you're gonna need to win over some of the bigot vote? 

There were racist bigots who voted Remain to you know. There's even a couple of bizarre little fash grouplets who called for a vote to Remain if memory serves.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I know they did, but it did seem the left was predominantly leave.
> Anyway point was this whole Scotland and London less racist than rest of country is obvs shite. I’ve l


More people in London are concerned about racism, though. Because it's a lived everyday reality for them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Eh? What on earth does this mean?
> 
> I'm really sorry to break this to you mate but a lot of very bigoted people vote all the time in elections. Are you suggesting that makes the results invalid? Since to win an election you're gonna need to win over some of the bigot vote?
> 
> There were racist bigots who voted Remain to you know. There's even a couple of bizarre little fash grouplets who called for a vote to Remain if memory serves.


Yeah, little being the operative word. 

I don't give much of a fuck about election results, I've already said that. I'm not a very good democrat in that sense.  The bigot vote can go fuck itself.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> People voting leave for racist reasons ? You have a think about it - 5 percent is a pretty conservative estimate. By contrast, few people will have voted remain for racist reasons.
> 
> You try to draw equivalences where they don't exist. You know full well that racist cunts voted overwhelmingly to leave, cos they're racist cunts. The only question is how many.


Anything to say about the wall?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Anything to say about the wall?


So a border is being put up. I know. We'll put one up as well.

Anything to say about how brexit helps?

It's this false equivalence yet again. I fucking detest what the UK is doing in Northern Ireland. Wales must become independent!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

We only oppose theoretical walls! Fuck it’s completely about rhetoric now. People are irrelevant. Syria, etc too. The left is misanthropic at its core.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So a border is being put up. I know. We'll put one up as well.
> 
> Anything to say about how brexit helps?
> 
> It's this false equivalence yet again. I fucking detest what the UK is doing in Northern Ireland. Wales must become independent!


So a border is being put up.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Night night guys, I need to relax  

X


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, little being the operative word.
> 
> I don't give much of a fuck about election results, I've already said that. I'm not a very good democrat in that sense.  The bigot vote can go fuck itself.



If you're saying you don't give a fuck what the vote was fine, but don't claim it doesn't matter cos you believe there were more bigots on the other side.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So a border is being put up.


Is the UK going to take in more refugees from the terrible situations its wars helped to create? REally, is that why we're doing brexit?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you're saying you don't give a fuck what the vote was fine, but don't claim it doesn't matter cos you believe there were more bigots on the other side.


I didn't say that. Be precise ffs. I said that if you are claiming a majority, you need to be welcoming the racists into your camp in order to do so.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the UK going to take in more refugees from the terrible situations its wars helped to create? REally, is that why we're doing brexit?


You’re talking to yourself now, probs carry on


----------



## billbond (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Is the UK going to take in more refugees from the terrible situations its wars helped to create? REally, is that why we're doing brexit?



if you feel so bad about it, why not take some in yourself


----------



## Raheem (Aug 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> if you feel so bad about it, why not take some in yourself


Maybe because that never grows less stupid-sounding no matter how many knobheads say it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well one thing we can know quite confidently is that Greece was not a factor in the vote of the vast majority of people who voted for brexit. I would go further and wager that a majority of those who paid attention to and were disgusted by what was done to Greece by the EU voted remain.





littlebabyjesus said:


> All the polls suggest very strongly that anti-immigration sentiment was the single most important issue in leave voting.


Do you have any evidence of any of these claims? I'd contest them all.



littlebabyjesus said:


> This matters because anyone wishing to navigate from here towards a socialist, or even a socialistish, future needs to show how they think we can get from here to there.


Why are you restricting this criteria to those that voted Leave in one referendum? Is it not to be applied to those that voted Remain? What about voters/non-voters at other elections? Indeed why should it be limited to behaviour at elections? Surely if you are being consistent you should apply it to all actions?

But what if I say that I think that the only way to socialism is via the path the working class constructs for itself (equally true whether the UK is part of the EU or not), or even that the changes to society that I would like to see can only come about through the power of the working class? Would that satisfy you? I'm guessing not.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 9, 2018)

Violent revolution for fuck's sake. Anyone who thinks the British state can be changed by anything else is in la-la land. It's an aggressive, militaristic body armed to the teeth and experienced at killing and maiming civilian populations.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Eh? What on earth does this mean?
> 
> I'm really sorry to break this to you mate but a lot of very bigoted people vote all the time in elections. Are you suggesting that makes the results invalid? Since to win an election you're gonna need to win over some of the bigot vote?
> 
> There were racist bigots who voted Remain to you know. There's even a couple of bizarre little fash grouplets who called for a vote to Remain if memory serves.



there's a letter to the Daily Telegraph from Lady Diana Mosley during the whole Maastricht Treaty upheavals with John Major cunting-off the Tory Eurosceptics for being anti-EU


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Violent revolution for fuck's sake. Anyone who thinks the British state can be changed by anything else is in la-la land. It's an aggressive, militaristic body armed to the teeth and experienced at killing and maiming civilian populations.


GO TO BED POI E, YOU’RE DRUNK


----------



## Poi E (Aug 9, 2018)

Sorry, that was too much coffee too early this morning.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you explain further?


Look at the data again:



sleaterkinney said:


> On the other hand:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Suppose that 5% of people think multiculturalism is a force for ill.  Then this data would mean 13% of Brexit voters think it’s a force for ill and 87% mean it’s a force for good.  The data looks as if it is suggesting one thing (ie Brexit voters don’t like multiculturalism) but in that case it’s actually saying the exact opposite (ie Brexit voters like multiculturalism, albeit to a small degree less than Remain voters).

Incidentally, if we go the other way and 80% of people think multiculturalism is a force for ill, that would mean more Remain voters think it is a force for ill than think it is a force for good.

This is the heart of Simpson’s paradox, where the full picture says something different to the surface granular result.

So what proportion of the population does actually think multiculturalism is a force for ill?  How can we interpret those statistics without this?  And so what agenda is served by quoting them without this key info?

Why, in short, is it being presented as “multiculturalism attitude implies voting pattern” rather than “voting pattern implies culticulturalism attitude”?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Look at the data again:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


More tables here: http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/How-the-UK-voted-Full-tables-1.pdf

I mean I presumed the poll had a good cross section of the population, otherwise the whole thing is worthless, right?


----------



## Hollis (Aug 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Thing is mate - and I understand this is difficult - the people in that video and their assessment of the practicalities of what will happen is *entirely* conditioned by their understanding of the EU and its history and their interests and worries and beliefs. And at least one of them is a horrible reactionary tool. They don't want Brexit to happen; they (unlike most of the population) care significantly more about Brexit than austerity or the NHS or the Tories or the attacks on the Windrush generation or global warming or Grenfell or whatever. Consequently their assessment of the practicalities is based on their deep aversion to Brexit and desire to stop it. You can't seperate what you term 'practicalities' from politics.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Err yes. I agree with most of that.  However what you've pinpointed is the "Something different" protest element of the Brexit vote, which probably some Brexiteers don't want to acknowledge either.

What annoys me most about Brexit is that I think it's resulted from scapegoating and clever leveraging by the Leave campaign of people's fears, and I don't think its going to deliver.  In some ways it's a massive distraction from things like erosion of employment rights, casualisation of labour, housing.  One day post-Brexit people will wake up to the same shitty job terms..

(Which is also why I'd like to see Labour/Corbyn actively promoting remain, rather than fence sitting.)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Err yes. I agree with most of that.  However what you've pinpointed is the "Something different" protest element of the Brexit vote, which probably some Brexiteers don't want to acknowledge either.
> 
> What annoys me most about Brexit is that I think it's resulted from scapegoating and clever leveraging by the Leave campaign of people's fears, and I don't think its going to deliver.  In some ways it's a massive distraction from things like erosion of employment rights, casualisation of labour, housing.  One day post-Brexit people will wake up to the same shitty job terms..
> 
> (Which is also why I'd like to see Labour/Corbyn actively promoting remain, rather than fence sitting.)


How would you say Corbyn actively promoting remain helps to protect employment rights etc. Bearing in mind Corbyn’s ability to deliver his manifesto promises is somewhat dependant on Labour being in power, not the Tories?


----------



## Hollis (Aug 9, 2018)

kebabking said:


> See, even you can begin to discern the difference between _immediate _and _important.
> _
> If you want to see things from outside the Guardians' remainiac bubble, stop fussing about the price of Avacados and the life-ending nightmare of being delayed at the ferry port for an extra hour, and think about how Brexit will be written up in 50 or 300 years by people looking for at how it affects _their _lives - look at it, for good or ill, as one of the events that changes they way we are governed and how the state works - look at it in the same way as you look at the introduction of Jury Trials, or the Great Reform Act, or Magna Carta and the Provisions of Oxford 50 years later, or the Trial of Charles I and the end of Rule by Divine right - or WW1 and the rise of the Labour Movement and the Emancipation of Women.
> 
> ...



If you're going to play the historical long-game, then you could also argue that the EU in its expanded form is still an infant institution, having some 'teething problems', and give it another 50/100 years...

You talk about Brexiteers being 'on the side of history' but what's the evidence for that? Some of the sentiments Brexit has evoke dont themselves have a great history..

Personally I see little evidence for a post- Brexit Britain being some force for progression.  Look for example at the endless carping by the Tories on human rights..etc.


----------



## Hollis (Aug 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> How would you say Corbyn actively promoting remain helps to protect employment rights etc. Bearing in mind Corbyn’s ability to deliver his manifesto promises is somewhat dependant on Labour being in power, not the Tories?



I would see it as part of an overall strategy...and trying to lead and shape sentiment rather than just following it (i.e. Ed Miliband mugs..)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

Hollis said:


> I would see it as part of an overall strategy...and trying to lead and shape sentiment rather than just following it (i.e. Ed Miliband mugs..)


I see that, could you explain even just briefly how remaining in the EU would help-let’s get all the bells on  here for a minute- a socialist Corbyn govt to strengthen labour rights? Would it help? Would it make no difference either way? Outline how...etc.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> More tables here: http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/How-the-UK-voted-Full-tables-1.pdf
> 
> I mean I presumed the poll had a good cross section of the population, otherwise the whole thing is worthless, right?


48 per cent of leave voters think multiculturalism is a force for ill. 
For anyone who can’t be arsed counting!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 9, 2018)

I’m not sure good vs evil tables help. I think the answer to these numbers is to argue in favour of immigration but I would do things the other way about to how the left normally does it. The right to find employment and affordable housing where you live should be central, not an afterthought to a “stop being so racist” stance, then work pro immigration in from there. Would you Horatio, what have you done? Fuck all really, sorry, I waved refugee welcome banners around basically!
 But I fail to see why any of that would necessarily involve stopping Brexit. I would think stopping Brexit would worsen the situation
Plus last two years I’ve seen many of  our plucky non racists push some pretty heinous stuff. Prejudice, just their own brand of it. WHO EVEN ARE THE GOODIES


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I mean I presumed the poll had a good cross section of the population, otherwise the whole thing is worthless, right?


That doesn't address kabbes point.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> 48 per cent of leave voters think multiculturalism is a force for ill.
> For anyone who can’t be arsed counting!


Thanks, because I couldn’t be arsed counting.

So for at _least_ 52% of Brexit voters, a reason other than “don’t like multiculturalism” needs to be found for their vote.  For the other 48%, it may or may not have played a part in their vote — the survey doesn’t ask that question to find out.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 10, 2018)

We also don’t know how many happen to be big fans of yer man Kenan

Multiculturalism undermines diversity | Kenan Malik


----------



## Hollis (Aug 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I see that, could you explain even just briefly how remaining in the EU would help-let’s get all the bells on  here for a minute- a socialist Corbyn govt to strengthen labour rights? Would it help? Would it make no difference either way? Outline how...etc.



I think my point was that Brexit is at best a red herring/distraction when it comes to these issues... of "Wanting Something Different" (per SpakleFrog's post).  If you see the vote as a protest vote, then better to address the underlying issues, rather than leave the EU for dubious reasons and probable harm?

Of course, with the right govt. employment rights could be improved inside or outside Brexit.  Though, as an aside, the TU movement were strongly Remain, and I believe the EU have contributed towards employment rights.

Labour/ Corbyn could be promoting improved employment rights/ housing etc a long with arguing a positive case for staying within the EU....or in politician's speak "We've heard your unhappy with XYZ, we believe the vote arose from .... We want to offer you.. this is best done while remaining part of the EU because we believe the EU offers...", (Corbyn won't...).


----------



## kebabking (Aug 10, 2018)

Hollis said:


> If you're going to play the historical long-game, then you could also argue that the EU in its expanded form is still an infant institution, having some 'teething problems', and give it another 50/100 years...
> 
> You talk about Brexiteers being 'on the side of history' but what's the evidence for that? Some of the sentiments Brexit has evoke dont themselves have a great history..
> 
> Personally I see little evidence for a post- Brexit Britain being some force for progression.  Look for example at the endless carping by the Tories on human rights..etc.



I'm not arguing that brexiteers are 'on the side of history' - I did after all vote remain, albeit reluctantly - I'm arguing that Brexit is going to have a fundamental impact on our country to a similar degree to other huge, seismic events like the 17th Century civil war, the Norman invasion, the Vikings and the end of the Heptarchy and the creation of England, and the loss of France.

Imv, Brexit should be discussed in those terms - as should non-brexit and it's consequences for democratic involvement and legitimacy, and what the EU is going to look like in 2100, not fucking about with not-even-trifles like the availability of Avacadoes and whether you'll have to queue for 3 hours to get on the ferry.

It's also worth noting that pretty much everyone who doesn't like Brexit says that the EU needs to reform - and then blithely skates over the likelihood of that happening: David Cameron tried it (regardless of what you think of his requirements) as one of the EU's most powerful members, with the EU structures knowing that a membership referendum was coming, and yet he got absolutely nowhere.

Also skated over is the issue of democratic legitimacy - what do 'remainiacs' think will happen if BREXIT gets kicked into the 'too hard' bin, do they think there will be no negative consequences of holding a referendum in which 40 million people vote and then ignoring the result? Do they have similar views about GE's, that they are consultative only and that if, for example, in 2023 Labour win a million more votes than the Tories the _deep state _should make a more informed decision about the desirability of a Corbyn government than the public are able to make and perhaps install a centerist government for the good of the country?

Or would their views about the sovereignty of the electorate - however inconvenient or foolish - suddenly take a more principled turn?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> 48 per cent of leave voters think multiculturalism is a force for ill.
> For anyone who can’t be arsed counting!


I'm confused now, in Q2, Table 2 on page 8 it's 19% ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'm confused now, in Q2, Table 2 on page 8 it's 19% ?


No it's not. This survey has been posted at least three times on U75 and every time it's been read wrong. 

HoratioCuthbert is correct. 
According to the survey results the % of leave voters that think multiculturalism is a force for ill = 3052/6420 *100 = 48%


----------



## bimble (Aug 10, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I'm not arguing that brexiteers are 'on the side of history' - I did after all vote remain, albeit reluctantly - I'm arguing that Brexit is going to have a fundamental impact on our country to a similar degree to other huge, seismic events like the 17th Century civil war, the Norman invasion, the Vikings and the end of the Heptarchy and the creation of England, and the loss of France..


Why do you think its so huge as all that? (Doesn't seem to me like joining the eu in the first place had anything like that of sort impact).


----------



## Wolveryeti (Aug 10, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Also skated over is the issue of democratic legitimacy - what do 'remainiacs' think will happen if BREXIT gets kicked into the 'too hard' bin, do they think there will be no negative consequences of holding a referendum in which 40 million people vote and then ignoring the result? Do they have similar views about GE's, that they are consultative only and that if, for example, in 2023 Labour win a million more votes than the Tories the _deep state _should make a more informed decision about the desirability of a Corbyn government than the public are able to make and perhaps install a centerist government for the good of the country?
> 
> Or would their views about the sovereignty of the electorate - however inconvenient or foolish - suddenly take a more principled turn?



1) The referendum was deemed advisory - not by Remainers, but by the Supreme Court. This puts it in a totally different category than, say, a GE.
2) There would be absolutely nothing wrong with having another referendum to secure consensus around which model of Brexit we choose, and nothing wrong with one option being to remain. Democracy is not taking a narrow result - influenced by breaches of electoral law, and the peddling of mendacious racist shite - and assuming a mandate for one of the most extreme models of Brexit which was not in the question wording. Democracy means being able to change your mind.
2) To Leavers who think the above is 'disrespecting the will of the people' or similar,the correct time to be heard about this was before the result, when Farage and Rees Mogg were publicly talking about having further referenda and how this one would be 'unfinished business' if it narrowly went against them.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No it's not. This survey has been posted at least three times on U75 and every time it's been read wrong.
> 
> HoratioCuthbert is correct.
> According to the survey results the % of leave voters that think multiculturalism is a force for ill = 3052/6420 *100 = 48%


Ok, it's the other way around, 81% of the people who think multiculturalism is bad voted leave.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Suppose that 5% of people think multiculturalism is a force for ill.  Then this data would mean 13% of Brexit voters think it’s a force for ill and 87% mean it’s a force for good.  The data looks as if it is suggesting one thing (ie Brexit voters don’t like multiculturalism) but in that case it’s actually saying the exact opposite (ie Brexit voters like multiculturalism, albeit to a small degree less than Remain voters).
> 
> Incidentally, if we go the other way and 80% of people think multiculturalism is a force for ill, that would mean more Remain voters think it is a force for ill than think it is a force for good.



It wouldn't be possible for it to come out at 80%. The most it can be is about 60%, in which case only 20% of Remainers would see it as a force for ill. And we wouldn't know if they outnumbered 'force for good' remainers without knowing how the rest of the answers were split between 'good' and 'mixed blessing'. Or have I got my maths wrong?

Anyway the real numbers as far as I can make out, from all respondents:

48% - Force for good
22% - Mixed Blessing
30% - Force for ill.

It looks like the question asked for a rating on a 1-10 scale, people who answered 5 are taken as 'mixed blessing' and the rest either 'good' or 'ill'.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ok, it's the other way around, 81% of the people who think multiculturalism is bad voted leave.



I think that Kabbes' point was that this doesn't tell us in absolute numbers what proportion of leave voters think multiculturalism is bad. If it was small then the significance of the 81/19 split would be diminished.

But the full figures show that 48% of leave voters think it's bad, compared to 21% of remain voters.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

tbh whatever the problems with multiculturalism we discuss on here - with analysis from the likes of Kenan Malik - I think we can be pretty confident that a large majority of those responding to that poll weren't thinking in those terms when they were asked about it, and were responding very generally to the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another. Given that, I think the results are very clear-cut.

I also don't like the way the results were presented, btw. But the raw data is clear enough.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Suppose that 5% of people think multiculturalism is a force for ill.


I'm late to this discussion, so forgive me if it's been posted, but did the survey include a definition of "multiculturalism" for the respondents to see before asking the questions?  Because there's a range of things it could mean, so we also need to know what people were answering about.

If there was no definition given, then it's not reasonable to impose a definition after the fact. Indeed we may all be talking about different things on this thread.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh whatever the problems with multiculturalism we discuss on here - with analysis from the likes of Kenan Malik - I think we can be pretty confident that a large majority of those responding to that poll weren't thinking in those terms when they were asked about it, and were responding very generally to the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another.


Maybe not, but what _were_ they thinking about? How do you define what you think they were thinking about?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 10, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I'm not arguing that brexiteers are 'on the side of history' - I did after all vote remain, albeit reluctantly - I'm arguing that Brexit is going to have a fundamental impact on our country to a similar degree to other huge, seismic events like the 17th Century civil war, the Norman invasion, the Vikings and the end of the Heptarchy and the creation of England, and the loss of France.
> 
> Imv, Brexit should be discussed in those terms - as should non-brexit and it's consequences for democratic involvement and legitimacy, and what the EU is going to look like in 2100, not fucking about with not-even-trifles like the availability of Avacadoes and whether you'll have to queue for 3 hours to get on the ferry.
> 
> ...



By moving the debate to pondering the historical impact, isn't that a way of skating over the immediate practical issues that are real for many, and arguably more serious than the plight of avocado?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh whatever the problems with multiculturalism we discuss on here - with analysis from the likes of Kenan Malik - I think we can be pretty confident that a large majority of those responding to that poll weren't thinking in those terms when they were asked about it, and were responding very generally to the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another. Given that, I think the results are very clear-cut.
> 
> I also don't like the way the results were presented, btw. But the raw data is clear enough.


jesus mary and joseph 

the raw data is never clear. it has not been analysed. it has not been checked for biases, either conscious or unconscious. you're supposed to be intelligent. can you please show you are?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Maybe not, but what _were_ they thinking about? How do you define what you think they were thinking about?


Well you could get a clue by comparing this result with the same question asked about immigration and seeing how each individual's response matches up. I would expect there to be a very strong match-up - those saying multiculturalism, whatever it might be, is a good thing also saying immigration is a good thing.

Out of all the questions on that poll, I would think this one is probably the most problematic but given the results down the range of topics, it's hard to deny a pattern emerging, even with caveats about vague definitions and rather misleading presentation of results.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well you could get a clue by comparing this result with the same question asked about immigration and seeing how each individual's response matches up. I would expect there to be a very strong match-up - those saying multiculturalism, whatever it might be, is a good thing also saying immigration is a good thing.


So one thing multiculturalism could mean to respondents is that it's just another way of asking about immigration levels.  And whether or not the current level is a good thing.

That's not what you said in your previous post.  You then said it was "the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another". So even you - in successive posts - have given it two different interpretations.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So one thing multiculturalism could mean to respondents is that it's just another way of asking about immigration levels.  And whether or not the current level is a good thing.
> 
> That's not what you said in your previous post.  You then said it was "the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another". So even you - in successive posts - have given it two different interpretations.


I think the two are interconnected in such a way that being opposed (in very general terms) to one is very likely to mean being opposed to the other. And I do think such a marked split in the responses leave/remain is significant, despite all the problems.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think the two are interconnected in such a way that being opposed (in very general terms) to one is very likely to mean being opposed to the other. And I do think such a marked split in the responses leave/remain is significant, despite all the problems.


There may be connections, but what are they?

For example, it's quite easy to imagine people who think that it's great to have lots of cultures living together, but that there's not enough room for more immigrants.  Or someone who thinks it's terrible having lots of different cultures living together but more of "the right kind" of immigrant should be welcomed.  And so on.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> There may be connections, but what are they?
> 
> For example, it's quite easy to imagine people who think that it's great to have lots of cultures living together, but that there's not enough room for more immigrants.  Or someone who thinks it's terrible having lots of different cultures living together but more of "the right kind" of immigrant should be welcomed.  And so on.


Yes of course, but that's where a large sample comes in. You can't say anything in particular about any one individual in the sample, but you can say something about patterns in a large set of results.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

Also, how are people defining "culture"?  Is it skin colour, language, religion, cuisine?  If I'm black, was born in Chelsmford, speak English with an Essex accent, attend Anglican services every Sunday, and enjoy a roast beef dinner at my local pub afterwards, am I an example of "the lots of different cultures", in the view of the respondent, or not?


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes of course, but that's where a large sample comes in. You can't say anything in particular about any one individual in the sample, but you can say something about patterns in a large set of results.


It's much harder to do so if you haven't defined the terms, though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Also, how are people defining "culture"?  Is it skin colour, language, religion, cuisine?  If I'm black, was born in Chelsmford, speak English with an Essex accent, attend Anglican services every Sunday, and enjoy a roast beef dinner at my local pub afterwards, am I an example of "the lots of different cultures", in the view of the respondent, or not?


I think you may be asking too much of this survey. I also don't like that question, fwiw.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you may be asking too much of this survey. I also don't like that question, fwiw.


What I'm asking of the survey is clarity about what they're asking.  Did they define the term to prompt respondents or not?  That's all.

The reason they need to is the lack of clarity you have yourself displayed on what the term means. (Not a jibe: I'm with you.  I don't know what the question is asking either).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What I'm asking of the survey is clarity about what they're asking.  Did they define the term to prompt respondents or not?  That's all.
> 
> The reason they need to is the lack of clarity you have yourself displayed on what the term means. (Not a jibe: I'm with you.  I don't know what the question is asking either).


My guess is that they almost certainly did not prompt respondents, for this or any other question. As I'm sure you also suspect, truth is that the person/people who devised the survey probably didn't think about these problems at all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My guess is that they almost certainly did not prompt respondents, for this or any other question. As I'm sure you also suspect, truth is that the person/people who devised the survey probably didn't think about these problems at all.


Precisely, so how can they interpret the findings?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

This doesn't deal with any of the stuff about what the question actually meant to people. But if I wanted to visualise the response to that multiculturalism question, then this is how I would do it, rather than the bar charts posted earlier. It's based on peoples' responses on the 0-10 scale. 5 being the one taken as 'mixed blessing'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This doesn't deal with any of the stuff about what the question actually meant to people. But if I wanted to visualise the response to that multiculturalism question, then this is how I would do it, rather than the bar charts posted earlier. It's based on peoples' responses on the 0-10 scale. 5 being the one taken as 'mixed blessing'.
> 
> View attachment 143651


I agree. That is a good way of showing it.


----------



## andysays (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think the two are interconnected in such a way that being opposed (in very general terms) to one is very likely to mean being opposed to the other. And I do think such a marked split in the responses leave/remain is significant, despite all the problems.


I'm at work ATM and can't be bothered to point out all the assumptions and stereotypes in your thinking, but this is really just a dressed up way of suggesting that Leave voters are basically racist.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm at work ATM and can't be bothered to point out all the assumptions and stereotypes in your thinking, but this is really just a dressed up way of suggesting that Leave voters are basically racist.



I wouldn't suggest all Leave voters are racist, just every single one of the dozens I've spoken to, who without exception have cited immigration (more often than not from non-EU countries) as their primary reason for voting.


----------



## andysays (Aug 10, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> I wouldn't suggest all Leave voters are racist, just every single one of the dozens I've spoken to, who without exception have cited immigration (more often than not from non-EU countries) as their primary reason for voting.


At least you're not attempting to dress up your assumption that being concerned about immigration necessarily means being racist


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm at work ATM and can't be bothered to point out all the assumptions and stereotypes in your thinking, but this is really just a dressed up way of suggesting that Leave voters are basically racist.


This comment suggests that you equate concern about immigration and/or multiculturalism with racism. Not LBJ.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm at work ATM and can't be bothered to point out all the assumptions and stereotypes in your thinking, but this is really just a dressed up way of suggesting that Leave voters are basically racist.


You think I'm wrong? you think there wouldn't be a marked correlation between those responding that they don't like multiculturalism, whatever it is they take it to mean, and those who don't like immigration? I haven't mentioned racism when discussing this survey, btw. That's all your own invention.

It is extremely tiresome, btw, to have to point out again and again and again, that even if I am saying (and I do say this) that a significant number of people voting leave did so for racist reasons, I'm not saying that 'leave voters are basically racist'. 

All crows are birds; this is a bird; therefore this is a crow.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You think I'm wrong? you think there wouldn't be a marked correlation between those responding that they don't like multiculturalism, whatever it is they take it to mean, and those who don't like immigration? I haven't mentioned racism when discussing this survey, btw. That's all your own invention.



I think the question is answered here



Of people who see multiculturism as 'good', 13% of them see immigration as 'bad' and 65% see immigration as 'good'.

Of people who see multiculturism as 'bad', 82% of them see immigration as 'bad' and 6% see immigration as 'good'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think the question is answered here
> 
> View attachment 143667
> 
> ...


ah. but what do they mean by 'immigration'? it's not like all immigrants are equal, is it. if they were asked about immigrants from e.g. canada, ireland, australia and new zealand do you think the results would be the same as they might for cameroon, indonesia, angola and zimbabwe?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

This table should be relevant for anyone who hopes the leave vote marks a rejection of capitalism.

There's pretty much zero difference between remain and leave voters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This table should be relevant for anyone who hopes the leave vote marks a rejection of capitalism.
> 
> There's pretty much zero difference between remain and leave voters.
> 
> View attachment 143669


has anyone outside your imagination claimed that the referendum in any indicated people's feelings on capitalism?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> ah. but what do they mean by 'immigration'? it's not like all immigrants are equal, is it. if they were asked about immigrants from e.g. canada, ireland, australia and new zealand do you think the results would be the same as they might for cameroon, indonesia, angola and zimbabwe?


No.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> has anyone outside your imagination claimed that the referendum in any indicated people's feelings on capitalism?


Yes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Yes.


please expand


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 10, 2018)

its been established that the questions are subjectively defined enough to be meaningless and the resultant data deliberately misleadingly displayed. Lets move on unless anyone has any more shonky tailored for audience liegraphs to share?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> please expand



Y e s.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Y e s.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> At least you're not attempting to dress up your assumption that being concerned about immigration necessarily means being racist



I said "immigration" because to quote most of the conversations I've had verbatim would be, shall we say, unedifying.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its been established that the questions are subjectively defined enough to be meaningless and the resultant data deliberately misleadingly displayed. Lets move on unless anyone has any more shonky tailored for audience liegraphs to share?


I agree that they are subjectively defined enough that you need to be very conservative in interpreting the results. I don't agree that they are meaningless, though. But I'll leave it.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 10, 2018)

The Ashcroft questions fall short on explaining people's main motivations for voting leave, because in the bit where people are asked to rank their reasons for voting leave, they are only given three statements to choose from, and its entirely possible that their primary reasons weren't covered by those questions. So I agree that bit's somewhat meaningless; it only tells us about the relative importance of the factors the survey asked about. It still contains lots of useful information as long as you understand that there are areas where it doesn't provide information. It tells us that there is very strong belief amongst Leave voters that certain things will be improved after Brexit - job prospects, economic security, border controls and more - even if it doesn't tell us which of those things (or other things not asked about) were most important in their decision.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its been established that the questions are subjectively defined enough to be meaningless and the resultant data deliberately misleadingly displayed. Lets move on unless anyone has any more shonky tailored for audience liegraphs to share?


Shonky


----------



## Poi E (Aug 10, 2018)

Australia/NZ informal, apparently. The Neighbours effect. Like people saying no worries. More to come with trade deals with Oz.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh whatever the problems with multiculturalism we discuss on here - with analysis from the likes of Kenan Malik - I think we can be pretty confident that a large majority of those responding to that poll weren't thinking in those terms when they were asked about it, and were responding very generally to the idea of people with lots of different cultures living next to one another. Given that, I think the results are very clear-cut.
> 
> I also don't like the way the results were presented, btw. But the raw data is clear enough.


They are clear cut but not in the way you mean.  It shows that the majority of Brexit voters are in favour of or neutral to multiculturalism.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 10, 2018)

I think it's generally accepted that there was a racist element to the brexit vote.

Some here may not like it...or wrap themselves in contortions to disprove it.

I'm not sure I understand why.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 10, 2018)

Like I said, Dexters gotta be a Brexit stooge.
Steve Bannon operative, nailed on.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2018)

I think it's generally accepted that there was a racist element to the remain vote.

Some here may not like it...or wrap themselves in contortions to disprove it.

I'm not sure I understand why.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> They are clear cut but not in the way you mean.  It shows that the majority of Brexit voters are in favour of or neutral to multiculturalism.


Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.


Does the U75 bubble get to remove the neoliberalists from the remain vote too?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Does the U75 bubble get to remove the neoliberalists from the remain vot too?


The Jim Crow enthusiasts, the people that think saying they looooove multiculturalism gives them an excuse to throw minority groups under the bus when suits....


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.


Take out all those people that voted to remain part of an institution that built a 700 km wall to keep Europe white and we lose like the entire remain vote 
Or, eh, maybe this is a silly argument.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.



You better remove the 11% of remain voters who also thought multiculturalism is a force for ill.

Also all the remain voters that broadly view white Europeans as being of the same culture as them (or at least acceptably close to employ as builders and plumbers) but are highly dubious of those with skin of a darker hue.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't give much of a fuck about election results, I've already said that. I'm not a very good democrat in that sense.  The bigot vote can go fuck itself.





littlebabyjesus said:


> The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.


How is this bigot/racist vote defined? And how large is it?
Anyone who think's multiculturalism is a force for ill? Anyone who has voted UKIP? Anyone who has voted BNP? Anyone who is concerned about immigration? Are those that didn't vote to keep UKIP/BNP out bigots?

And what does "go fuck itself" mean? Are the bigots consigned to the naughty step? They and their votes not counted until they behave as you want them to?


----------



## kebabking (Aug 11, 2018)

So, does the vote ignoring ticklist littlebabyjesus puts forward mean that, come the 2023 GE, the returning officers should ignore the votes of anti-Semitic conspiraloons who vote happen to vote Labour?

Should the referendum vote be recounted to exclude remain votes that were cast on the basis of 'better a Pole than a Pakistani'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Take out all those people that voted to remain part of an institution that built a 700 km wall to keep Europe white and we lose like the entire remain vote
> Or, eh, maybe this is a silly argument.


Lbj like Hans Christian Anderson's emperor


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.


What about removing the racists from the Remain vote? Did that notion ever occur to you?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 11, 2018)

. edit


----------



## andysays (Aug 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but a very different pattern of distribution, with the vast majority of those who see multiculturalism as an ill voting leave. That is what I meant by 'clear-cut'. The results are consistent with the idea that there exists a racist minority in Britain that voted overwhelmingly leave. Many on this thread have invoked the majority vote as justification for brexit. Well, take that hard core of racists who largely voted leave for racist reasons out of the count and that majority disappears. The idea that this is some grand exercise in democracy is a pretty sick joke.



Liberal democracy is too precious and too fragile to be tarnished by those who might vote for racist reasons. Better off making sure they aren't able to vote, TBH.


----------



## billbond (Aug 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I think it's generally accepted that there was a racist element to the brexit vote.
> 
> Some here may not like it...or wrap themselves in contortions to disprove it.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand why.



Plenty of racists voted on the remain side as well.
I know some on here will not like this.
Buts its true never the less.
I understand why


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 11, 2018)

Has anyone done the figures on the homophobic vote on the remain and leave sides?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 11, 2018)

billbond said:


> Plenty of racists voted on the remain side as well.
> I know some on here will not like this.
> Buts its true never the less.
> I understand why


 

Your turn.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 11, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Has anyone done the figures on the homophobic vote on the remain and leave sides?


Yes.

Attacks on LGBT people surge almost 80% in UK over last four years

Homophobic attacks in UK rose 147% in three months after Brexit vote

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2017/10/...ophobic-hate-crime-reports-since-brexit-vote/


----------



## billbond (Aug 11, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Has anyone done the figures on the homophobic vote on the remain and leave sides?



Yeah i was wondering about that and what about sexist voters ? Bald voters, Tall to small in height voters,
Disabled Voters, etc etc
Im sure Deters has all these  ha
ok look his now put up a load of FAKE "news"
Nothing to see here, move along


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 11, 2018)

You should be ashamed of yourselves.


----------



## billbond (Aug 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You should be ashamed of yourselves.


 so should you
Fake


----------



## paolo (Aug 11, 2018)

I remember on urban a few years back.

Someone asked about the best route to a port. She had to be there for a Friday ferry.

By Saturday, people here were still arguing about the route.

Oh Brexit, you utter utter...


----------



## andysays (Aug 12, 2018)

Interesting story here, not sure if it's entirely as presented

More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU


> More than 100 Westminster constituencies that voted to leave the EU have now switched their support to Remain, according to a stark new analysis seen by the _Observer_.





> In findings that could have a significant impact on the parliamentary battle of Brexit later this year, the study concludes that most seats in Britain now contain a majority of voters who want to stay in the EU.





> The analysis, one of the most comprehensive assessments of Brexit sentiment since the referendum, suggests the shift has been driven by doubts among Labour voters who backed Leave.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> Interesting story here, not sure if it's entirely as presented
> 
> More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU


How unusual for the guardian to give prominence to this sort of thing


----------



## Poi E (Aug 12, 2018)

Let's have another referendum to watch Labour and the Tories finally both implode as they don't know which way to go.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> Interesting story here, not sure if it's entirely as presented
> 
> More than 100 seats that backed Brexit now want to remain in EU


Why do they break it down by westminster seats when the referendum was a straight number of votes each way?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do they break it down by westminster seats when the referendum was a straight number of votes each way?


Have a think and the answer will occur to you


----------



## Winot (Aug 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do they break it down by westminster seats when the referendum was a straight number of votes each way?



Speculation as to pressure on sitting MPs I guess.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do they break it down by westminster seats when the referendum was a straight number of votes each way?


Because they imagine it’s as important to everyone else as it is to them and think this means constuency MPs will have pressure on them to vote to remain in the EU in some way, out of worry for their seat.

It won’t, of course.  Even a lot of remainers still want the referendum to be respected and Brexit to be got on with.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ...Even a lot of remainers still want the referendum to be respected and Brexit to be got on with.


Any proof of this?


----------



## billbond (Aug 12, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Any proof of this?



It wont be in the Guardian for sure 
Plenty of other news outlets have reported this


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 12, 2018)

Didn't think so.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 12, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Any proof of this?



I'm one. Do you think it's likely that I'm the only one?


----------



## billbond (Aug 12, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I'm one. Do you think it's likely that I'm the only one?


I know a few as well
 workmates and   people i know thats 21 at least
(Awaits  "Pink news" and Guardian articles/polls)
I still blame them damned Russians


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It won’t, of course.  Even a lot of remainers still want the referendum to be respected and Brexit to be got on with.



I voted remain, would vote leave if there was another referendum and do not in any way shape or form respect the referendum result because the whole thing was conducted in bad faith by hapless idiots.


----------



## gosub (Aug 12, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I voted remain, would vote leave if there was another referendum and do not in any way shape or form respect the referendum result because the whole thing was conducted in bad faith by hapless idiots.



Leave crew that knew what it was talking about got mugged off completely by Johnny Comelately's. But the result was the result.   Forwards not backwards. 


Politics is supposed to be the art of the possible, and a whole lot of politicos have and are acting in bad faith.  Public HAVE decided.  Now, the politicians should be managing the expectations on what is deliverable...


----------



## not a trot (Aug 12, 2018)

billbond said:


> Yeah i was wondering about that and what about sexist voters ? Bald voters, Tall to small in height voters,
> Disabled Voters, etc etc
> Im sure Deters has all these  ha
> ok look his now put up a load of FAKE "news"
> Nothing to see here, move along



I'm 5'4" and voted remain. Wife is disabled and voted remain. We both have our own hair.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> Forwards not backwards.



What does that actually mean though? Forwards is only a valid concept if you know where you're going, just as 'down' has no meaning in the absence of gravity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What does that actually mean though? Forwards is only a valid concept if you know where you're going, just as 'down' has no meaning in the absence of gravity.


You don't need to know where you're going to go forwards.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do they break it down by westminster seats when the referendum was a straight number of votes each way?



Because that's how you gerrymander the data to create the impression of clear public support for remain. If polling showed 65% support for remain nationwide they'd have led with that, but it doesn't so they came up with this fudge instead.


----------



## gosub (Aug 12, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What does that actually mean though? Forwards is only a valid concept if you know where you're going, just as 'down' has no meaning in the absence of gravity.



All that realistically be achieved achieve in the current time frame is an extension to the Art 50 period.  
Then say, I don't know, maybe start going about things properly.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> Then say, I don't know, maybe start going about things properly.



If they were going to stop fucking about and do this properly they'd have done so two years ago.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 13, 2018)

Well, 10 years ago creating new markets for the UK.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 14, 2018)

Had to post this amazing piece of crap. 


> In our reality, it is primarily the older generations who are driven by 'all the rage of the world', running amok, smashing up the established order, while their bewildered younger counterparts try to devise ways to understand and combat the mayhem. The older generations seem most vulnerable to manipulation by merciless external forces.





> Brexit leaders are reaping the bitter harvest of a long-running propaganda campaign assisted by previously unimaginable levels of technologically-enhanced psychological manipulation.





> If many could not conceive of the extent (and viral effectiveness) of the assault from disinformation and shadowy dark money that delivered Brexit, they were even less well equipped to imagine the gleefully irrationalist, fact-averse fury that animates so many of the hardcore that I call The Brexit People.





> What a thrill it must be to be _invited_ to metaphorically run riot, trashing the old order and taking revenge upon those who oppress them with facts and the necessity of thought.





> To paraphrase the Planet People slogan, unless a way is found to understand and break the archetypal, almost pre- (or post-) rational, components of the spell the Brexit People are under, then "Brexit will Rule". They desire a (for now) metaphorical future in which the unconverted young are forced to live underground, cowering in scrapyards, while they are liberated to run riot above ground, attacking expertise and the symbols of knowledge wherever they find them, while they wait to go to the Brexit that they know will transport them "out of all the bleakness of this world."


The level of patronising stupidity is insane


----------



## Poi E (Aug 14, 2018)

_..the music's played by the, the madman..._


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 14, 2018)

Two riders were approaching and the wind began to howl - brexit is silly and i'm not saying they're all racist but...

The new liberal _but_.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Had to post this amazing piece of crap.



If it's pompous drivel you're after the Quietus will never let you down.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Had to post this amazing piece of crap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I dunno - the idea of brexit framed against an obscure half century + old bit of science fiction is and interesting if utterly pointless exercise - I am sure the writer has been trying to shoehorn his Quatermass knowledge into a paid for article for years. 

Sci-fi enthusiasts aside, the only people actually familiar with the film and it’s references will be of the age that he seems be be railing against.not really sure who this is aimed at...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 14, 2018)

If he's so great why can't he recognise that Charlie Krafft is a nazi? Doesn't say much for his analytical powers does it? The op-ed the quiteus did at the time of the referendum was hilarious.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 14, 2018)

Ah yes,the infamous nazi ceramicist who got fucked off from brick lane a couple of years ago . Odd NSK links and stuff with Monroe- had forgotten about that


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 14, 2018)

One phrase from that hysterical _omg dystopia!!11!_ article I did like:

_The sheer tautological, anti-intellectual violence of 'Brexit Means Brexit'..._

It bothers me that the ''mainstream'' debate on Brexit has been and is still being conducted at a pre-teen level of articulacy and insight. But that's British politics in 2018.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> One phrase from that hysterical _omg dystopia!!11!_ article I did like:
> 
> _The sheer tautological, anti-intellectual violence of 'Brexit Means Brexit'..._
> 
> It bothers me that the ''mainstream'' debate on Brexit has been and is still being conducted at a pre-teen level of articulacy and insight. But that's British politics in 2018.


Anti intellectual violence! Similar to people just shouting “FACTS” over and over, but the similarities  never occur to some people.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 14, 2018)

Everyone's at it because everyone else is at it, that's the problem. Voices get louder, sentences get shorter. Brexit means Brexit .. racist thickos .. bourgeois elitists .. EU death camps .. Take Back Control.

No content, no hope, just wailing and gnashing of teeth.

EtA, apologies, having a bad day. I'll fuck off now.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 15, 2018)

Pah, my wife is going to lose her .eu domain name which is her first name. Poop.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> One phrase from that hysterical _omg dystopia!!11!_ article I did like:
> 
> _The sheer tautological, anti-intellectual violence of 'Brexit Means Brexit'..._
> 
> It bothers me that the ''mainstream'' debate on Brexit has been and is still being conducted at a pre-teen level of articulacy and insight. But that's British politics in 2018.


Children have more articulacy and insight than our abject politicians


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 15, 2018)

Not to mention more empathy. Mind you, plenty of adults rationalise away empathy just fine, no need to go into politics for that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 15, 2018)

children have to be taught empathy man, have you seen what they can do to flies


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> children have to be taught empathy man, have you seen what they can do to flies


have you seen the chemicals adults develop to do unto millions of flies and other insects what children can only dream of?


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

This is entirely anecdotal, and as such proves nothing. It’s waffley enough to immediately file as “Cool Story Bro”. Click next or something.


But it starts to become personal for me.

My mum collapsed last weekend. All being good the NHS will have her out today. Speaking to my Dad, obviously all relieved, things turn to immediate plans. (Duck now for the priveleged oldies, they are what they are eh.)

They had holiday booked, outside the EU. Hadn’t already booked health insurance. Now thinking they have to cancel, because to disclose the condition would me no insurance, or bonkers price. To risk being uninsured... well jeez. In the US (not where they had planned) a ride in an ambulance is $1500

I suggested they bin the non EU holiday, and go somewhere like Spain.

My Dad, insurance man all his life, immediately piped up... “oh yes, that’s a good idea”. Fill in a form, all covered. By those horrible EU bastards. Them and their neo liberal suprastate - erm, healthcare. 

9 months after now, they’d be back in a Cornwall guest house, for fear of an insurance policy, or simply “no deal”.

That Cornwall guest house where we started as family holidays, and I got my parents banned from when I was just five years old.


(Told you it was inconsequential, ‘Cool Story Bro’  )


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> This is entirely anecdotal, and as such proves nothing. It’s waffley enough to immediately file as “Cool Story Bro”. Click next or something.
> 
> 
> But it starts to become personal for me.
> ...



They should go to Australia or New Zealand instead.


----------



## J Ed (Aug 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Had to post this amazing piece of crap.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Good people believe in _our _conspiracies, not _their _conspiracies.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They should go to Australia or New Zealand instead.



Not flying they shouldn’t.

Somebody in Urban just tried to kill my parents. FFS.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Not flying they shouldn’t.
> 
> Somebody in Urban just tried to kill my parents. FFS.



Seems the UK also has reciprocal healthcare arrangements with Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Serbia, BVI, Montserrat and Turks & Caicos too


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems the UK also has reciprocal healthcare arrangements with Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Serbia, BVI, Montserrat and Turks & Caicos too


Links?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Links?


Ze w/c love the eu. Links? Oh.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Links?



LMGTFY


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Seems the UK also has reciprocal healthcare arrangements with Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia, Serbia, BVI, Montserrat and Turks & Caicos too



Oh my joke was about you sending my parents on an 18 hour flight. You of all people.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Oh my joke was about you sending my parents on an 18 hour flight. You of all people.



I think your ma and pa would be very grateful to their son for stumping up for them to go in https://www.etihad.com/en-gb/experience-etihad/flying-reimagined/the-residence/

They might die of overindulgence...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Links?


Yes there are golf courses in all those places


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think your ma and pa would be very grateful to their son for stumping up for them to go in https://www.etihad.com/en-gb/experience-etihad/flying-reimagined/the-residence/
> 
> They might die of overindulgence...



I think, at her age, my mum could be needing access to medical staff, not a shag pad (shudders).


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> LMGTFY


I'll get it myself it'll be more trustworthy.

Health - Australia travel advice



> British citizens resident in the UK and travelling on a British passport are entitled to limited subsidised health services from Medicare for medically necessary treatment while visiting Australia. This does not cover pre-existing conditions, or treatment that does not require prompt attention.





> Other exclusions under the reciprocal agreement include pharmaceuticals when not a hospital in-patient, use of ambulance services and medical evacuations, which are very expensive.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think your ma and pa would be very grateful to their son for stumping up for them to go in https://www.etihad.com/en-gb/experience-etihad/flying-reimagined/the-residence/
> 
> They might die of overindulgence...


That’s proper nuts.  How much does it cost?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s proper nuts.  How much does it cost?



Round trip to Sydney, £14,217.91 per person for two people sharing, or £22,437.91 for a single traveller.

Compare to BA first class at £10,882.91 for the same journey.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I'll get it myself it'll be more trustworthy.
> 
> Health - Australia travel advice



Serbia and Montenegro are more generous to be fair.

What’s the two up with bags cost to either of those? Got to be cheap, flights with a stag or hen do, bang on really. Give it a few years, and we’ll have all the Brit facilities my parents would love. Couple of bars with Sky screens, and somewhere round the back to have a slash.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Serbia and Montenegro are more generous to be fair.





> There is a reciprocal healthcare agreement for British nationals visiting Serbia, which entitles you to free treatment for genuine emergencies.





> The health system in all parts of Serbia is suffering from widespread shortage of medicines and other essentials. For non-emergency treatment, or treatment that isn’t covered under reciprocal arrangements, payment in cash is normally required.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes Sorry, going to be boring and back on topic, but something you said a month back has had me pondering. “The Irish border is for the EU to fix”.

I’ve been agonising over this.

I wonder... if we did cliff edge... what would happen if:

UK then says we’ll, erm, not turn up. No UK officials, no border force, no signs.

It could be dressed up as some bollocks. “Temporary non enforcement policy”

With no set end date. Just sit it out. Mental brexiteers would have little capital (who wants a border in Ireland). The EU wouldn’t dare make the first move on a blockade.

Thinking out loud here. (I voted remain, like nobody guessed that already  )


----------



## kabbes (Aug 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Round trip to Sydney, £14,217.91 per person for two people sharing, or £22,437.91 for a single traveller.
> 
> Compare to BA first class at £10,882.91 for the same journey.


Is that all?  Pfft, pay the man and be done with it.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

That’s the end of my parents “lads” holiday. You’ve ruined their dreams.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> kabbes Sorry, going to be boring and back on topic, but something you said a month back has had me pondering. “The Irish border is for the EU to fix”.
> 
> I’ve been agonising over this.
> 
> ...


Well, quite.  You have to think outside the paradigm that has been set by somebody else.  Who says we have to man and patrol a border?  Somebody else?  What makes them the setter of our rules?


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, quite.  You have to think outside the paradigm that has been set by somebody else.  Who says we have to man and patrol a border?  Somebody else?  What makes them the setter of our rules?



I’m beginning to think that, if we do fall off the cliff, that’s the option.

Stand back.

You enforce it if you want. We won’t. The DUP will moan like fuck, but even propping up the Government, I can’t see the gov deciding to placate them with a border enforced Ireland.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

“Temporary Non Enforcement”

no set end date, just let it run.


----------



## paolo (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, quite.  You have to think outside the paradigm that has been set by somebody else.  Who says we have to man and patrol a border?  Somebody else?  What makes them the setter of our rules?



Arguably we set the paradigm with the Good Friday Agreement, but overall yes. The UK can technically just fail to turn up. Oops, sorry, we were busy. Oh *that* border? Yeah erm, maybe next Thursday or something?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> ...UK then says we’ll, erm, not turn up. No UK officials, no border force, no signs...


No trade.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No trade.


Why?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Why?


No insurance.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 15, 2018)

It wouldn't be a stable situation because if it went on for any length of time would it not lead to smugglers moving in.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 15, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> It wouldn't be a stable situation because if it went on for any length of time would it not lead to smugglers moving in.


They are smugglers.

Cross border trade with no tax, no insurance, no guarantees on the products.

100% illegal trade.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 15, 2018)

Would EU workers also take advantage of the unenforced hard border possibly?


----------



## Raheem (Aug 15, 2018)

Bottom line is Lord Nelson has been dead over 200 years. Team GB is not under any circumstances going to enter into a war of nerves with the EU and come out smiling.

FWIW, I think in a no deal scenario, neither the UK or the EU would enforce the border, but only because the situation would not be regarded as sustainable by either side and so it would not be considered worth the infrastructure investment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> It wouldn't be a stable situation because if it went on for any length of time would it not lead to smugglers moving in.


You've finally caught up


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Would EU workers also take advantage of the unenforced hard border possibly?



might be the other way arround


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> might be the other way arround


Shakes fist at juncker


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You've finally caught up



Caught up with what?  Go on then, don't hold back, tell what is likely to happen. Unstable situation so it reverts to what in practice?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, quite.  You have to think outside the paradigm that has been set by somebody else.  Who says we have to man and patrol a border?  Somebody else?  What makes them the setter of our rules?


Who is the 'our' in this situation? Who is 'we'?


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well, quite.  You have to think outside the paradigm that has been set by somebody else.  Who says we have to man and patrol a border?  Somebody else?  What makes them the setter of our rules?



you know we will still (we* being the republic of Ireland) be part of the Schengen Agreement

does Eire have to pat to patrol the border


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Caught up with what?  Go on then, don't hold back, tell what is likely to happen. Unstable situation so it reverts to what in practice?


With what has been said a while back


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 15, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> you know we will still (we* being the republic of Ireland) be part of the Schengen Agreement
> 
> does Eire have to pat to patrol the border



does eire exist ?

/pedant


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

it's stamped on my passport


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 15, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> you know we will still (we* being the republic of Ireland) be part of the Schengen Agreement
> 
> does Eire have to pat to patrol the border


RoI isn't in the Schengen Area


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

depending on the exit it might be..


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 15, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> it's stamped on my passport



Eire?


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

hmm







without the hat


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 15, 2018)

Hmmmmm... I though you meant as a stamp. oops. 

Its just the Eire thing is a debate . 

anyway


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 15, 2018)

Saying that if you talking about classical Irish my niece is called Eirinn


but Eamon himself called it Eire..


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 16, 2018)




----------



## Ax^ (Aug 16, 2018)

its off the thread topic but slight related if their is no hard border between the eu and England

who is responsible for policing it in the 2 state policy of Ireland

agriculture businesses are already seeing shortages in the UK..


----------



## teuchter (Aug 16, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> England


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 16, 2018)

9 minutes  to spot a spelling mistake


ffs press F5 before replying


----------



## teuchter (Aug 16, 2018)

It is not just England that is leaving the EU.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 16, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It is not just England that is leaving the EU.


Remains to be seen, tbf.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 16, 2018)

New topic.

The two key social structures that seem to most grant prosperity to the people of a nation are (1) as democratic a political structure as possible; and (2) the ability for individuals to directly prosper as a result of their own labour rather than their labour being abstracted by rent seekers.  It seems to me that both these structures are undermined for Britain by her being within the EU.  The first is hopefully clear enough not to need much justification.  The second is because the EU smooths the path for multinationals to trample the little guy.


----------



## Winot (Aug 16, 2018)

Topic rejected for discussion due to use of female pronoun for country. Next.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 16, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> its off the thread topic but slight related if their is no hard border between the eu and England
> 
> who is responsible for policing it in the 2 state policy of Ireland
> 
> agriculture businesses are already seeing shortages in the UK..



Just being honest, really in that UK pretty much does mean England. Trump's recent gaff is not unusual.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> you know we will still (we* being the republic of Ireland) be part of the Schengen Agreement
> 
> does Eire have to pat to patrol the border


No

Obviously

What a curious question


----------



## philosophical (Aug 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> New topic.
> 
> The two key social structures that seem to most grant prosperity to the people of a nation are (1) as democratic a political structure as possible; and (2) the ability for individuals to directly prosper as a result of their own labour rather than their labour being abstracted by rent seekers.  It seems to me that both these structures are undermined for Britain by her being within the EU.  The first is hopefully clear enough not to need much justification.  The second is because the EU smooths the path for multinationals to trample the little guy.



Possibly the EU democratic structures are a step up from the Democratic structures within the UK. At least there is a debate to be had, or concepts and practices to contemplate.
It is of course reasonable to point out deficiencies in the EU system, but the UK system is in my personal opinion worse.
In terms of the democracy issue, and probably the sovereignty one too, taken by itself it seems to me that the EU system is preferable.
However the result of the referendum suggests that issue is irrelevant now, and the UK will still be in the grip of the established order, which hasn't fundamentally changed during my lifetime, for the foreseeable.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 16, 2018)

Democracy means transparency, accountability, the ability for representation to translate into action, direct access to the levers of change.  These could be a fuckton better in the UK but I’m surprised that anybody could suggest they are better within the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Democracy means transparency, accountability, the ability for representation to translate into action, direct access to the levers of change.  These could be a fuckton better in the UK but I’m surprised that anybody could suggest they are better within the EU.


Do you have a wider framework in mind here? In a world of limited resources, international governance is also necessary. Regarding climate change, various other environmental issues, scientific research, etc, etc, international cooperation is the only thing that can save us, and that requires international institutions. You may not think the EU is the right international institution but something like it needs to be there, for things ranging far more widely than just trade. 

More generally, devolved democratic accountability is good, mostly better, but only with something above it to avoid tyranny at the local level. I'm not really a good anarchist any more as I can see the need for local street committees to have their powers limited (and guaranteed) by a local council, which has its powers limited by a national government, which has its powers limited by international institutions. As you go up the levels, democratic accountability can become harder. Is that a reason for withdrawal? Does the UK become more democratic with fewer international limits on it? Or does the danger of tyranny at a national level increase? For many countries with living memory of national tyranny - Portugal, Spain, Greece, former Warsaw-pact - joining the EU was seen as, and does genuinely act as, a means of limiting the possibilities of national tyranny. I think people in the UK  can be rather complacent in this regard.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do you have a wider framework in mind here? In a world of limited resources, international governance is also necessary. Regarding climate change, various other environmental issues, scientific research, etc, etc, international cooperation is the only thing that can save us, and that requires international institutions. You may not think the EU is the right international institution but something like it needs to be there, for things ranging far more widely than just trade.
> 
> More generally, devolved democratic accountability is good, mostly better, but only with something above it to avoid tyranny at the local level. I'm not really a good anarchist any more as I can see the need for local street committees to have their powers limited (and guaranteed) by a local council, which has its powers limited by a national government, which has its powers limited by international institutions. As you go up the levels, democratic accountability can become harder. Is that a reason for withdrawal? Does the UK become more democratic with fewer international limits on it? Or does the danger of tyranny at a national level increase? For many countries with living memory of national tyranny - Portugal, Spain, Greece, former Warsaw-pact - joining the EU was seen as, and does genuinely act as, a means of limiting the possibilities of national tyranny. I think people in the UK  can be rather complacent in this regard.



Theres merit in the principle of your argument, but for it to be convincing with regards to EU membership we have to look at the EU's record in this area - would you regard how the EU structures have handled governments in Poland and Hungary with some very anti-democratic tendancies, or the situation in Spain with the Catalan referendum, as any kind of indication that the EU and it's laws and structures are the international body to keep member states in check?

No, me neither...


----------



## free spirit (Aug 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Democracy means transparency, accountability, the ability for representation to translate into action, direct access to the levers of change.  These could be a fuckton better in the UK but I’m surprised that anybody could suggest they are better within the EU.


Really?

The democratic function of the EU in the UK is less than it should be because of an outright refusal from the UK press to actually cover EU politics in any significant way, combined with our insistence on our Prime Minister being the sole arbiter of our agreements via the Council of Ministers.

Other countries in the EU require either their parliament to vote on the issue, or a referendum on it before their president / leader has the right to sign them up to different EU treaties.

That's a democratic deficit of our making not the EUs.

As it is though all policies are subject to significant scrutiny and revision via the democratically elected MEPs, and then the Council of Ministers - ministers or heads of state of each country.

Here we get the Minister decides something, then batters it through parliament using political bribes and bullying, the house of lords occasionally delays it for a bit before backing down, then it becomes law.

So please do explain how it's the EU that has the democratic deficit?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> New topic.
> 
> The two key social structures that seem to most grant prosperity to the people of a nation are (1) as democratic a political structure as possible; and (2) the ability for individuals to directly prosper as a result of their own labour rather than their labour being abstracted by rent seekers.  It seems to me that both these structures are undermined for Britain by her being within the EU.  The first is hopefully clear enough not to need much justification.  The second is because the EU smooths the path for multinationals to trample the little guy.



false logic - its not specifically being part of the EU that leads to this situation - its being part of a system of global capitalism. Leaving the EU still leaves you in that system. Those forces would still apply - but to an even greater degree. frying pan - fire. 

Yes - leaving the EU is a prerequisite for Leaving the system of global capitalism  - but the latter would take significantly  more to achieve (certainly in any way that actually improved people's lives) than a dodgy referendum and/or a left wing labour government - and be considerably more unlikely to happen.


----------



## gosub (Aug 17, 2018)

Seen a few articles in the last 12 hours saying HMG will be ready for no deal Brexit by early next week. FFS. You only gave Deloitte a contract this morning... Mrs May it's almost a text book case of how not to do Brexit (though glad you realise you are doing Brexit). Art 50 extension please


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 17, 2018)

gosub said:


> ...Art 50 extension please


For what?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 17, 2018)

In fact let's ask the brexiteers.

Should we speed on to a no deal brexit* or ask for an extension?  And if you want an extension what would you like to see established from it?

*which may lead to a capitulation


----------



## billbond (Aug 18, 2018)

His back										   







It is now beyond doubt that the political class in Westminster and many of their media allies do not accept the EU referendum result. They refuse to acknowledge the wishes of the majority of those who took part in that historic plebiscite of 2016 by voting to leave the European Union. As far as I’m concerned, this is the worst case of Stockholm syndrome ever recorded.
It is equally clear to me that, unless challenged, these anti-democrats will succeed in frustrating the result. Whatever they may claim publicly, this is their ultimate objective. They think nothing of betraying the citizens of Britain.
For months now we have heard the same argument from this bunch: “Leave voters did not know what blah blah.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> His back
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's not always easy to distinguish the opinion of an urbanite from an extended quote from Nigel Farage. Which is this?


----------



## billbond (Aug 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It's not always easy to distinguish the opinion of an urbanite from an extended quote from Nigel Farage. Which is this?



It was taken from another site.
I think its the actual columnists comments
But he has near enough said the same via radio today.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> In fact let's ask the brexiteers.
> 
> Should we speed on to a no deal brexit* or ask for an extension?  And if you want an extension what would you like to see established from it?
> 
> *which may lead to a capitulation



i see no point in an extention: firstly because i've not yet seen the EU discuss/negotiate in good faith, so don't see the point in continuing negotiations that aren't going anywhere, and secondly - regardless of what the EU says publicly - i'm pretty certain that the EU will want something in return for extending the negotiations.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> In fact let's ask the brexiteers.


Who are these brexiteers? Are they posting on U75?

On the democracy point - it's good to know that Selmayr's actions were intended to stop local tyranny. I thought they were a power grab by unelected bereaucrats  to control an unelected neo-libeal body.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 18, 2018)

Comparing a free trade bloc and the shyster British state is a bit pointless. The EU has some direction.


billbond said:


> His back
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm glad to hear you calling for an end to Westminster rule.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> His back
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Perhaps you should remind yourself what Stockholm syndrome in fact is


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2018)

gosub said:


> Seen a few articles in the last 12 hours saying HMG will be ready for no deal Brexit by early next week. FFS. You only gave Deloitte a contract this morning... Mrs May it's almost a text book case of how not to do Brexit (though glad you realise you are doing Brexit). Art 50 extension please



Ready in what sense? As in prepared for every possible eventuality including food shortages, blackouts, civil unrest etc etc; or prepared as in we've had a PR drone write half a side of A4 about it to send to the papers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2018)

billbond said:


> His back
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Anti-democrats. Remind me who the fuck ever voted for Aaron Banks?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 18, 2018)

I'm not so sure anymore that it's going to happen. Maybe the London crowd will get their way after all. All this talk of preparing for no-deal... I'm not so certain they'll go through with it. May is fucked either way.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 18, 2018)

the talk on no deal strategies  and plans are wishful thinking and i would suggest bollocks in practical terms - but they are no meant to be a practical solution, but an easily telegraphed message to the EU that we are taking this seriously.

meh


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> the talk on no deal strategies  and plans are wishful thinking and i would suggest bollocks in practical terms - but they are no meant to be a practical solution, but an easily telegraphed message to the EU that we are taking this seriously.
> 
> meh



Seems like the message to the EU is more along the lines of 'no deal fucks us both'.


----------



## Winot (Aug 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Seems like the message to the EU is more along the lines of 'no deal fucks us both'.



Which points to an Art. 50 extension.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Seems like the message to the EU is more along the lines of 'no deal fucks us both'.


No...the EU still has all of its established deals with the rest of the world and internally.  The UK has nothing established.  If the UK wants a deal it has to offer one that is acceptable (or negotiable) to both sides...that's how deals work. 

Brexit was meant to be about doing better on your own...not about trying to hurt other economies and self harm.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> the talk on no deal strategies  and plans are wishful thinking and i would suggest bollocks in practical terms - but they are no meant to be a practical solution, but an easily telegraphed message to the EU that we are taking this seriously.


Seems like they're not fooling you. They're not fooling me either. So there's obviously zero chance they're fooling the EU, which they must know very well. Not so much an easily telegraphed message as an easily Telegraphed message, I think.


----------



## billbond (Aug 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Anti-democrats. Remind me who the fuck ever voted for Aaron Banks?



Ditto Soros, Miller and many others


----------



## hash tag (Aug 19, 2018)

New Brexit vote campaign gets £1m donation


----------



## NoXion (Aug 19, 2018)

The EU doesn't give a shit about democracy. This should be common knowledge after the people of Ireland were made to vote on the Lisbon treaty until they got it "right".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The EU doesn't give a shit about democracy. This should be common knowledge after the people of Ireland were made to vote on the Lisbon treaty until they got it "right".


Successive British governments don't give a shit about democracy, as should be clear from the attempt to take the article 50 thing at governmental rather than parliamentary level

So it's unclear why a body largely composed of governments who don't give a shit about democracy, the eu, should differ from the UK, Italy, France, Germany etc


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The EU doesn't give a shit about democracy. This should be common knowledge after the people of Ireland were made to vote on the Lisbon treaty until they got it "right".


And how do you think the UK's version of democracy has looked to the Irish experience?

If you were to ask them who has been the biggest bunch of cunts...would they say the EU or the UK?


----------



## sealion (Aug 19, 2018)

Their cunts are worse than your cunts, great arguement. Ask all the young unemplyed in Dublin what they think of the eu and their tax dodging corporate mates.
http://www.eurodad.org/files/pdf/15...in-supporting-an-unjust-global-tax-system.pdf


----------



## tim (Aug 19, 2018)

billbond said:


> Ditto Soros, Miller and many others



You clearly have very acute hearing.

A secret plot to stop Brexit, or an antisemitic dog whistle? | Rafael Behr

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/05/29/brexit-gina-miller-hate-speech-lgbt/

Not too sure of Beth's link with Brexit, but you have to admire her method of dealing with bigots

Beth Ditto pukes on homophobes | !! omg blog !! [the original, since 2003]


----------



## NoXion (Aug 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And how do you think the UK's version of democracy has looked to the Irish experience?
> 
> If you were to ask them who has been the biggest bunch of cunts...would they say the EU or the UK?



I never said that the UK is a paragon of democracy, now did I?

You can point at the UK all you like, that doesn't change the fact that for all their rhetoric, the EU has demonstrated a willingness to run roughshod over the will of its member-states' populations.


----------



## paolo (Aug 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The EU doesn't give a shit about democracy. This should be common knowledge after the people of Ireland were made to vote on the Lisbon treaty until they got it "right".



I’m sure you’re just venting, as I have done here too... but the 2nd vote was instigated by Ireland, with locally proposed amendments. Not unanimously supported, sure, but the EU couldn’t force anything even if they wanted to. They just don’t have the jurisdiction.


----------



## Santino (Aug 19, 2018)

The Irish workers downed tools and mounted a spontaneous demonstration of support for the EU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m sure you’re just venting, as I have done here too... but the 2nd vote was instigated by Ireland, with locally proposed amendments. Not unanimously supported, sure, but the EU couldn’t force anything even if they wanted to. They just don’t have the jurisdiction.


And plucky little denmark?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And how do you think the UK's version of democracy has looked to the Irish experience?
> 
> If you were to ask them who has been the biggest bunch of cunts...would they say the EU or the UK?


I think I can say without fear of contradiction that more Irish people would point to the UK as the bigger bunch of cunts being as the eu very recent, the eu never invaded Ireland, the eu never bribed their way to an act of union removing the Irish parliament to a foreign capital, the eu never grabbed all the land and presided over evictions, the eu never inflicted a famine on Ireland etc etc etc


----------



## kebabking (Aug 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I think I can say without fear of contradiction that more Irish people would point to the UK as the bigger bunch of cunts being as the eu very recent, the eu never invaded Ireland, the eu never bribed their way to an act of union removing the Irish parliament to a foreign capital, the eu never grabbed all the land and presided over evictions, the eu never inflicted a famine on Ireland etc etc etc



Give it 800 years and we'll do a fair comparison...


----------



## NoXion (Aug 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m sure you’re just venting, as I have done here too... but the 2nd vote was instigated by Ireland, with locally proposed amendments. Not unanimously supported, sure, but the EU couldn’t force anything even if they wanted to. They just don’t have the jurisdiction.



The EU doesn't need to force anything. They can get the local ruling class to do it for them, as you just pointed out.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The EU doesn't need to force anything. They can get the local ruling class to do it for them, as you just pointed out.


So what exactly was your point about democracy at EU level vs democracy at member-state level?


----------



## NoXion (Aug 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So what exactly was your point about democracy at EU level vs democracy at member-state level?



I didn't say anything about democracy at the member-state level.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 19, 2018)

hash tag said:


> New Brexit vote campaign gets £1m donation



U75 trivial fact of the day - I was at secondary school with this guy for a few years before they decamped to Gloucester- his elder brother modelled himself on Billy idol


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 19, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The EU doesn't need to force anything. They can get the local ruling class to do it for them, as you just pointed out.


Yes, a major attraction of the EU to both nation states and capital is that it is a means of removing/reducing the challenges to them that may occur through representative democratic processes, out-sourcing decisions and control to technocrats.

Of course the EU is not the only means of doing this, national governments are perfectly capable of doing it on their own (see the creation of independent banks), nor do it mean that won't be occasional conflicts between nation states, capital and the EU. But the EU, like the IMF, WTO etc, certainly facilitates such out-sourcing of political decisions, the increasing imposition of technocracy. That is why the CBI, the UK government, the Bank of England were in favour of remaining.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 19, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m sure you’re just venting, as I have done here too... but the 2nd vote was instigated by Ireland, with locally proposed amendments. Not unanimously supported, sure, but the EU couldn’t force anything even if they wanted to. They just don’t have the jurisdiction.


Do you also think that Greece wasn't forced to implement a series of political reforms that increased poverty? That the IMF doesn't force privatisations/the opening up of markets on countries? 

For god's sake are you really this naive/silly to make legal jurisdiction a necessity of political force? Read a book, watch a documentary, look out the bloody window.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 19, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> For god's sake are you really this naive/silly to make legal jurisdiction a necessity of political force?


That would be absurd. But it is a necessity of what passes for democracy.


----------



## hot air baboon (Aug 19, 2018)

the trick is that its outsourcing where you still get to actually keep your job / salary / social position & other perquisites - unlike the sort they impose on the regular workforce -  or even with the possibility of a nice lucrative sinecure in a lovely glass plated palace in Brussels as a reward for failure & / or faithful service ( "Lord" Kinnock & his various family members ). The widening & ever more perilous chasm between governed & those doing the governing & their payroll / patronage network is surely paved with generous pension provisions


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 19, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That would be absurd. But it is a necessity of what passes for democracy.


Only if you limit democracy to what is permitted by the state.

Wildcat strikes may be illegal but are rarely undemocratic.

EDIT: And NoXion's whole point was that the EU's use of force to push for a second referendum was an example of it's anti-democratic politics


----------



## Raheem (Aug 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Only if you limit democracy to what is permitted by the state.
> 
> Wildcat strikes may be illegal but are rarely undemocratic.
> 
> EDIT: And NoXion's whole point was that the EU's use of force to push for a second referendum was an example of it's anti-democratic politics



So the question is what force you or Noxion thinks the EU exerted to push for a second referendum. My point would be that, whatever it was, they needn't have bothered because the Irish government had decided to have one in any case. But where member states have decided to stand by the results of a referendum (France and the Netherlands in the noughties, plus, so far, the UK) the EU has not used any sort of force against them, AFAIK. What sort of force are we imagining?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 20, 2018)

The result of the referendum's on the constitution on France and the Netherlands weren't "stood by", they were circumvented by Lisbon Treaty, in what is an excellent example of both the anti-democratic nature of the EU and the soft force it uses. 

In the case of Ireland the fact that the significant proportion of the Irish establishment and capital were aligned with the EU doesn't mean that there wasn't force. Holding a referendum repeatedly until you get the "right" result and linking the passage of treaty to "financial support" is a pretty good example of force.


----------



## mauvais (Aug 20, 2018)

Not that I think this is really relevant in this instance, but minority self-determination is not an automatic feature of democracy. If the exit of any member of a union is a threat to the larger body, then 'democracy' would probably entail action to try and prevent that. For instance that you can't establish a breakaway state in your garden is not a sign that the UK is anti-democratic.

It's easy to frame secession in terms of the leaver's right to choose but it has far broader impact. Now obviously I don't actually think the people of the EU have been consulted in what to do about Ireland/NL/Brexit, but if they were, what do you think democratically derived terms would look like?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 20, 2018)

You do realise that you've just made the actions of the French state in Algeria etc, the British State in India (and plenty of other points), Turkish/Iraqi government in Kurdistan, etc "democratic".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Not that I think this is really relevant in this instance, but minority self-determination is not an automatic feature of democracy. If the exit of any member of a union is a threat to the larger body, then 'democracy' would probably entail action to try and prevent that. For instance that you can't establish a breakaway state in your garden is not a sign that the UK is anti-democratic.
> 
> It's easy to frame secession in terms of the leaver's right to choose but it has far broader impact. Now obviously I don't actually think the people of the EU have been consulted in what to do about Ireland/NL/Brexit, but if they were, what do you think democratically derived terms would look like?


What about the corrupt creation of a union? Democratic??


----------



## mauvais (Aug 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You do realise that you've just made the actions of the French state in Algeria etc, the British State in India (and plenty of other points), Turkish/Iraqi government in Kurdistan, etc "democratic".


Sure - at least, potentially. I've never said it was a good thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Sure - at least, potentially. I've never said it was a good thing.


Soz do you actually know anything about India under British rule?


----------



## Raheem (Aug 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In the case of Ireland the fact that the significant proportion of the Irish establishment and capital were aligned with the EU doesn't mean that there wasn't force.


Well, no, but that's missing the point. What it means is that the narrative under which the Irish government was compelled by Brussels to hold a second referendum under duress is a false one.

This IMO is a central problem with the rump left leave case. It relies massively on ascribing the general failings and limitations of Western democracy to the EU. Of course, the EU isn't simply a spectator in the world, but it also isn't the font of all its dark power.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> This IMO is a central problem with the rump left leave case. It relies massively on ascribing the general failings and limitations of Western democracy to the EU. Of course, the EU isn't simply a spectator in the world, but it also isn't the font of all its dark power.


It isn’t the source but it is a considerable enabler.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Well, no, but that's missing the point. What it means is that the narrative under which the Irish government was compelled by Brussels to hold a second referendum under duress is a false one.
> 
> This IMO is a central problem with the rump left leave case. It relies massively on ascribing the general failings and limitations of Western democracy to the EU. Of course, the EU isn't simply a spectator in the world, but it also isn't the font of all its dark power.


It doesn’t rely on that  at all but this suggestion, imagined or otherwise seems central to your own arguments on here as it often comes up in your posts.  Just because I want to ditch the EU doesn’t mean I want to keep the House of Lords. 

Cheers, The Rump Left


----------



## Raheem (Aug 20, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It doesn’t rely on that  at all but this suggestion, imagined or otherwise seems central to your own arguments on here as it often comes up in your posts.  Just because I want to ditch the EU doesn’t mean I want to keep the House of Lords.


There's some sort of misunderstanding here. I haven't accused anyone of hypocrisy and I don't think anyone's opinion about the House of Lords is immediately relevant. What I am saying is that if you can't formulate a case for leave without resorting to a cartoonish distortion of reality where the EU is Mordor, then you're not treating the question with due seriousness.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> There's some sort of misunderstanding here. I haven't accused anyone of hypocrisy and I don't think anyone's opinion about the House of Lords is immediately relevant. What I am saying is that if you can't formulate a case for leave without resorting to a cartoonish distortion of reality where the EU is Mordor, then you're not treating the question with due seriousness.


So stop doing that then!


----------



## Raheem (Aug 20, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So stop doing that then!


Listen, if you've got something else I'm all ears. But don't just make out there's a broad and sophisticated case being made that I'm simply refusing to hear. Indulge me.


----------



## NoXion (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> There's some sort of misunderstanding here. I haven't accused anyone of hypocrisy and I don't think anyone's opinion about the House of Lords is immediately relevant. What I am saying is that if you can't formulate a case for leave without resorting to a cartoonish distortion of reality where the EU is Mordor, then you're not treating the question with due seriousness.



Do you deny that the EU is an instrument of the ruling classes?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 20, 2018)

If anywhere will be Mordor it's gonna be a post-brexit Britain with a Tory government


----------



## Humirax (Aug 20, 2018)

Many of her majesty's loyal subjects already have something of the ork about them if you ask me, which is why we are in this mess in the first place.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Listen, if you've got something else I'm all ears. But don't just make out there's a broad and sophisticated case being made that I'm simply refusing to hear. Indulge me.


You’ve gone through several versions of your argument that the Fourth Railway Package isn’t in place to enable privatisation of rail services and make renationalistion of said services near enough impossible at a time that even the NHS is under threat from every angle , you seem to think suggesting an institution in the western world is neoliberal = verging on conspiracy theory. Except, you probably wouldn’t spend an entire year defending the Tories from similar accusations. 
You’ve been indulged for quite some time now, I can’t be arsed. Sorry.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Having written that tense reply, I’ve now minded on myself and Raheem always seem to chat during the wee hours. I remember being sat reading the FRP during a nightshift. Maybe that’s the real reason for lack of solidarity eh Raheem?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 20, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Well, no, but that's missing the point. What it means is that the narrative under which the Irish government was compelled by Brussels to hold a second referendum under duress is a false one


The fact that you seem to only be able to conceive of force being used against a government rather than labour gives an accurate picture of your politics. In the case of Ireland both the EU, Irish capital and the Irish state used force to get their way. At other times there will be conflicting aims between states, capital and the EU, each attempting to use force to achieve those aims.



Raheem said:


> This IMO is a central problem with the rump left leave case. It relies massively on ascribing the general failings and limitations of Western democracy to the EU. Of course, the EU isn't simply a spectator in the world, but it also isn't the font of all its dark power.


No one has made any such claim, what has happened has been a refusal indulge wet liberals in their collective blindness of the violence of the EU.


----------



## Supine (Aug 20, 2018)

Redsquirrel discussing the EU earlier


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> View attachment 144592
> 
> Redsquirrel discussing the EU earlier


Your post here both suggests you probably shouldn’t be getting into meme craic and that you don’t really understand a single thing Redsquirrel has posted last month or so.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> View attachment 144592
> 
> Redsquirrel discussing the EU earlier


Plus it’s like you are trying to rip off Pickmans Model and who even attempts such a thing honestly


----------



## xarmian (Aug 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m beginning to think that, if we do fall off the cliff, that’s the option.
> 
> Stand back.
> 
> You enforce it if you want. We won’t. The DUP will moan like fuck, but even propping up the Government, I can’t see the gov deciding to placate them with a border enforced Ireland.



Sorry to go back to an older question but it hasn't been answered.

If the UK didn't police its side of the border the WTO 'most favoured nation' rule would require the same treatment for all WTO members at all UK borders. If the EU didn't police the Irish side of the border they would have to open all their borders to all WTO members. No tariffs. No VAT. No regulatory checks. A smugglers' charter. It's inconceivable that the EU would not police the border if necessary.

Jacob Rees-Mogg and Patrick Minford have proposed the UK unilaterally throwing open the borders to solve customs delays at UK ports but Minford admits that it would destroy manufacturing. It would also destroy agriculture. They want to hand even more power to the financial sector but it's not what most Leavers voted for. It is very unlikely to happen because it would make it impossible to negotiate any trade deals. The UK would be negotiating with countries that already have everything they want and no reason to concede anything in return.

The only ways to keep the Irish border open are 1) a very soft Brexit or 2) moving the border to the Irish Sea with a very soft Brexit for Northern Ireland only.


----------



## billbond (Aug 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> View attachment 144592
> 
> Redsquirrel discussing the EU earlier




Looks more like Danny Baker


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Ofcourse really I'm referring to most of the English as the majority of the rest of Britain knew what what they were doing. Serious lack of critical thinking in England, which is why we not only still have capitalism but a Tory government. I know most of the electorate doesn't vote Tory, but far too many people do and I'll never understand it. The only explanation is a lack of critical thinking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Ofcourse really I'm referring to most of the English as the majority of the rest of Britain knew what what they were doing. Serious lack of critical thinking in England, which is why we not only still have capitalism but a Tory government. I know most of the electorate doesn't vote Tory, but far too many people do and I'll never understand it. The only explanation is a lack of critical thinking.


No it isn't

Have a look at eg brinton


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No it isn't
> 
> Have a look at eg brinton


What is it then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Plus it’s like you are trying to rip off Pickmans Model and who even attempts such a thing honestly


Supine never posts honestly


----------



## Poi E (Aug 21, 2018)

Bounce back for the Tories in Scotland last election. Fewer Scots thinking critically?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

People were conned, causing them to vote the wrong way- if they had adequate critical thinking abilities that wouldn't have happened.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> What is it then?


Information
(ir)rationality
Power
Education


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> People were conned, causing them to vote the wrong way- if they had adequate critical thinking abilities that wouldn't have happened.


Er no

You're very confused herr


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Still waiting for your answer . . .


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Information
> (ir)rationality
> Power
> Education


Seems to amount to the same thing to me


----------



## Poi E (Aug 21, 2018)

If you credit your countryfolk with so little insight why seek to empower them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Seems to amount to the same thing to me


You can't critical think your way out of something if you have insufficient or irrelevant information and in any case no matter who you vote for the government gets in


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> If you credit your countryfolk with so little insight why seek to empower them?


Good question


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You can't critical think your way out of something if you have insufficient or irrelevant information and in any case no matter who you vote for the government gets in


So how come  we got where we are now, even though we were denied the information?


----------



## Poi E (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> So how come  we got where we are now, even though we were denied the information?



Which is where, exactly? Unrepresentative government?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Why can't they do the same? Seems to be a lack of critical thinking to me, it's the only real explanation I can come up with. I'm aware of how people are manipulated from an early age but I was, and I broke out of it, why can't they?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Which is where, exactly? Unrepresentative government?


I see what you mean, but are they really unrepresentative considering that the majority of the electorate votes for them time after time?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Which is where, exactly? Unrepresentative government?


What I mean is- people like us managed to suss the system out- we found an alternative- why can't most people?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Why do they insist on keep propping up the system?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Which is where, exactly? Unrepresentative government?


We had to seek out the information, which is what we did- but most people don't bother.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

It's as if theres somethign wrong with people themselves, if they are going to insist on trying a system that doesn't work over and over again and not seek out the information we found- it could be said that they don't deserve their emancipation. Or that trying to 'empower them' (which can only really be done by themselves) is a waste of time.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Anyway, you guys have stopped replying to me and I have probably gone off topic so I guess I'll leave it there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> So how come  we got where we are now, even though we were denied the information?


Once upon a time a long long time ago...


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

I can only speak from experience aswell. Where I live there is no anarchist movement and most people firmly believe in capitalism, most of them vote tory and support brexit and have no time for anti-capitalist politics let alone anarchism. They rely on the mainstream media for their 'info' and if any of them seem to agree with me they are supporters of UKIP or, even on a couple of  occasions- the BNP!


----------



## Poi E (Aug 21, 2018)

post-capitalist politics.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Many of her majesty's loyal subjects already have something of the ork about them if you ask me



Classy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> People were conned, causing them to vote the wrong way- if they had adequate critical thinking abilities that wouldn't have happened.



Orks 

Now thickos


Add racists for a double bonus.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Why can't they do the same? Seems to be a lack of critical thinking to me, it's the only real explanation I can come up with. I'm aware of how people are manipulated from an early age but I was, and I broke out of it, why can't they?



Why are you not in Parliament? You alone seem to know the fucking score, so get in there and solve the ills of our nation.

Get on with it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> It's as if theres somethign wrong with people themselves, if they are going to insist on trying a system that doesn't work over and over again and not seek out the information we found- it could be said that they don't deserve their emancipation. Or that trying to 'empower them' (which can only really be done by themselves) is a waste of time.


Is this 21st century anarchism then?

 And is that you shevek?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> View attachment 144592
> 
> Redsquirrel discussing the EU earlier


Congratulations. 10 000 posts on this thread and you have managed to offer the top two stupidist most worthless posts.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Orks
> 
> Now thickos
> 
> ...



orkers of the world unite


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> orkers of the world unite


Orcas of the world unite


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I can only speak from experience aswell. Where I live there is no anarchist movement and most people firmly believe in capitalism, most of them vote tory and support brexit and have no time for anti-capitalist politics let alone anarchism. They rely on the mainstream media for their 'info' and if any of them seem to agree with me they end being supporters of UKIP or, even on a couple of  occasions- the BNP!


Wake up sheeple etc


----------



## kebabking (Aug 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why are you not in Parliament? You alone seem to know the fucking score, so get in there and solve the ills of our nation.
> 
> Get on with it.



With a campaign message that the electorate are thick, racist Orcs/Sheeple, I for one predict a thumping majority.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 21, 2018)

the electorate, recently.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the electorate, recently.


Well Boris Johnson's dad anyway


----------



## Flavour (Aug 21, 2018)

I don't know what would be worse: the smugness of "i told you so" liberals every time people dare to make a complaint in post-Brexit Britains ("shouldn't have voted leave then, should you, thicko racist?") or the smugness of "i told you so" liberals if somehow the tories end up not properly exiting, bending over for the EU etc, accepting the conditions imposed by Brussels for eventual reassimiliation ... "see, shouldn't have voted _wrongly _in the first place and all this mess could have been avoided! "


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I can only speak from experience aswell. Where I live there is no anarchist movement and most people firmly believe in capitalism, most of them vote tory and support brexit and have no time for anti-capitalist politics let alone anarchism. They rely on the mainstream media for their 'info' and if any of them seem to agree with me they end being supporters of UKIP or, even on a couple of  occasions- the BNP!


You manage to turn anarchist friendly people into ukip or bnp supporters with the strength of your argument. Good stuff.

Does have some relevance to this thread in that it mirrors the way a lot of remain supporters (and the pro-av voters in the previous referendum ) managed to operate - both before and after the vote - and the high handed manner in which the EU and a range of assorted _betters _(socially, intellectually, financially, culturally  educationally) have carried on after - with similar results.


----------



## rekil (Aug 21, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the electorate, recently.


Tolkien's crude caricature of the industrial working class. #Morxit ftw


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You manage to turn anarchist friendly people into ukip or bnp supporters with the strength of your argument. Good stuff.


What I meant was that I talk to them and we agree on things and then I find out they are Ukippers later on in the conversation.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

copliker said:


> Tolkien's crude caricature of the industrial working class. #Morxit ftw


Looks about right if you ask me


----------



## kebabking (Aug 21, 2018)

this will go well...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Flavour said:


> I don't know what would be worse: the smugness of "i told you so" liberals every time people dare to make a complaint in post-Brexit Britains ("shouldn't have voted leave then, should you, thicko racist?") or the smugness of "i told you so" liberals if somehow the tories end up not properly exiting, bending over for the EU etc, accepting the conditions imposed by Brussels for eventual reassimiliation ... "see, shouldn't have voted _wrongly _in the first place and all this mess could have been avoided! "


the extent of our departure is yet to be determined. which is fucking ridiculous more than two years after the vote.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

kebabking said:


> this will go well...


use my line carefully


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> People were conned, causing them to vote the wrong way- if they had adequate critical thinking abilities that wouldn't have happened.


this is very basic sociology. how can you have a free vote while there are large corporations, while there is an imbalance of power within society? if people working at humirax ltd are told that if labour win then their jobs might be at risk, do you not think a few of them might vote tory? then there's the role of information, knowledge famously being power. most people do not seek out information, whether because they don't know they're ill informed or because they haven't the time or the knowledge of how to or 1001 other reasons. you can't make an informed electorate, you can only give people the opportunity to become informed.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this is very basic sociology. how can you have a free vote while there are large corporations, while there is an imbalance of power within society? if people working at humirax ltd are told that if labour win then their jobs might be at risk, do you not think a few of them might vote tory? then there's the role of information, knowledge famously being power. most people do not seek out information, whether because they don't know they're ill informed or because they haven't the time or the knowledge of how to or 1001 other reasons. you can't make an informed electorate, you can only give people the opportunity to become informed.


You have a point but I still get frustrated with people. I and those I care about have to suffer the consequences of lazy thinking (or uninformed thinking) and I have never once in my life thought about voting Tory and will never understand why people do. I am surrounded by people where I live who think and behave in a totally alien way to me and it seems alot of the time to be hopeless trying to offer them the opportunity to become informed, they can be very stubborn and think they know best even when I can see that everything around them is a mess.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2018)

Are you sure you're not a leninist rather than an anarchist? Or a _priest_?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Also being open about being an anarchist sometimes seems risky in these times and is something so alien to alot of people so I go about trying to spread anarchist ideas in a discreet way.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

Or, shall we say, in not an obvious, so visible way.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You have a point but I still get frustrated with people. I and those I care about have to suffer the consequences of lazy thinking (or uninformed thinking) and I have never once in my life thought about voting Tory and will never understand why people do. I am surrounded by people where I live who think and behave in a totally alien way to me and it seems alot of the time to be hopeless trying to offer them the opportunity to become informed, they can be very stubborn and think they know best even when I can see that everything around them is a mess.


how can you hope to influence people you don't/won't/can't understand?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Are you sure you're not a leninist rather than an anarchist? Or a _priest_?


I'm just honest and open about how I feel (which is clearly a mistake). Don't tell me you never get frustrated with people,  you must be  the better, superior anarchist than me, which is why the anarchist movement is no doubt doing so well- oh, wait a minute!!


----------



## Flavour (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Or, shall we say, in not an obvious, so visible way.



by being anti-working class thickos?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Aug 21, 2018)

Gardiner triangulates wildly: 
Labour MP says second Brexit referendum may lead to social unrest


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Aug 21, 2018)

Interesting how the assumed response to the “will of the people being thwarted” seems to miss the point that pissed off and disconnected is how most people feel about most politics - most of the time - these days, anyway. The UK political “mainstream” are in a lose-lose situation.  They can only seek damage limitation.


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 21, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You have a point but I still get frustrated with people. I and those I care about have to suffer the consequences of lazy thinking (or uninformed thinking) and I have never once in my life thought about voting Tory and will never understand why people do. I am surrounded by people where I live who think and behave in a totally alien way to me and it seems alot of the time to be hopeless trying to offer them the opportunity to become informed, they can be very stubborn and think they know best even when I can see that everything around them is a mess.


you may find it interesting to Google "changing people's opinions" or something like that. It's virtually possible to change an established point of view (though they have found a trick to do it which is beyond the scope of the average person in a one-to-one debate) without cataclysmic social events.
Best wishes, Tremulous Tetra. 

ETA this isn't the one I was reading, but it gives an outline. Facts Don't Change People's Minds. Here's What Does


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

TremulousTetra said:


> you may find it interesting to Google "changing people's opinions" or something like that. It's virtually possible to change an established point of view (though they have found a trick to do it which is beyond the scope of the average person in a one-to-one debate) without cataclysmic social events.
> Best wishes, Tremulous Tetra.
> 
> ETA this isn't the one I was reading, but it gives an outline. Facts Don't Change People's Minds. Here's What Does


it took my mum around 25 years to start seeing the cops as predominantly rotten apples, i've given up on getting her to full acab tho


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Are you sure you're not a leninist rather than an anarchist? Or a _priest_?


doesn't have the learning of a priest


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 21, 2018)

maybe a goblin priest


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 21, 2018)

This "People's Vote" thing isn't going down too well up here in Scotland...and to make matters worse Corbyn just came up for his latest colonial visit.

Remainers looking for a 2nd vote may just be about to lose Scotland's help.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> This "People's Vote" thing isn't going down too well up here in Scotland...and to make matters worse Corbyn just came up for his latest colonial visit.
> 
> Remainers looking for a 2nd vote may just be about to lose Scotland's help.



Because there's a perception that reversing Brexit makes independence less likely?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it took my mum around 25 years to start seeing the cops as predominantly rotten apples, i've given up on getting her to full acab tho



"Yes dear. Yes. Uh huh. Rotten apples. Yes. Ok. I know dear, that's right. Silly old me. What time is your train again?"


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

teuchter said:


> "Yes dear. Yes. Uh huh. Rotten apples. Yes. Ok. I know dear, that's right. Silly old me. What time is your train again?"


chez teuchter the art of conversation is dead


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Because there's a perception that reversing Brexit makes independence less likely?


Partly.  But that's another subject.

Indy guarantees EU membership if we want it.   Staying in the UK doesn't.  Rory Bremner's twitter feed over the last week may enlighten but I can't link to it at work.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Partly.  But that's another subject.
> 
> Indy guarantees EU membership if we want it.   Staying in the UK doesn't.  Rory Bremner's twitter feed over the last week may enlighten but I can't link to it at work.



Is it another subject?

Sure it's not possible lots of Scottish people support Brexit cos they want independence and don't really care about the EU?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is it another subject?
> 
> Sure it's not possible lots of Scottish people support Brexit cos they want independence and don't really care about the EU?


Scotland voted 62% to remain in the EU during the referendum. 

Politics is different up here just now.  We're pretty much at the stage where we don't give a shit what England does.  Not long to go 

It's doubtful we'd support a second vote - which is different from wanting a different result.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Scotland voted 62% to remain in the EU during the referendum.



But why? 

Because Scottish people are passionate about the European Central Bank?


----------



## billbond (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said: ↑
Scotland voted 62% to remain in the EU during the referendum.

Are the ones who voted leave asking for another referendum like here ?
And did the remain voters really know what they were voting for ?
Surely now with all the new information and "facts" that are now known there should be another vote.
Maybe many of them were not very bright and never understood the implications of voting to stay. Surely it should have been at least 75%, so should be ignored
#Peoplesvoteinscotlandmark2


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Supine never posts honestly


Haha it reminded me of your “three terfs earlier” and similar ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Haha it reminded me of your “three terfs earlier” and similar ...


sadly i don't recall the post to which you allude


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 21, 2018)

Call me naive but I find it really hard to believe most people in any given area “firmly believe in capitalism”. Where do people who say stuff like that work, where do they socialise? Ach.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> sadly i don't recall the post to which you allude


No way it was a belter, someone was pure greeting about lies and damned lies and then you posted a picture of Daleks saying “three terfs earlier”

Ok you had to be there.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But why?
> 
> Because Scottish people are passionate about the European Central Bank?


Scotland considered itself European before there was a UK mate.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Scotland considered itself European before there was a UK mate.



Europeans considered themselves European before there was an EU mate, what's your point? Do you think the Swiss or the Norwegians don't consider themselves European?


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Scotland considered itself European before there was a UK mate.


Now I understand that if Salmond had gone for the bawbee the EU wouldn't have let Scotland join, but why did he opt for the pound and not the euro when Osborne put the squeeze on him just before the referendum?


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I didn't say anything about democracy at the member-state level.



This is the nub of many issues.

The EU is seen as trans national super power. It is. But it’s not Westminster, concocting policies to the dictate.

It’s a muddle of opinions, that gets forged (very slowly, if at all) into an idea, an ideology at times.

The idea that nations have no say in this, that it all happens from nationless beaurocrats doesn’t hold up. The EU isn’t an overarching super power. It’s a club.

We stuck our fingers up at a club.


----------



## mauvais (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> The EU isn’t an overarching super power. It’s a club.


These aren't mutually exclusive things. It can absolutely be the former propped up by the latter - a centrally run superpower whose continued existence is, on balance, to the benefit of its members.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 22, 2018)

innit... Can't have it both ways. One minute we're being told how the EU keeps national governments in check on things like workers rights and environmental issues but when you mention the neo-liberal stuff like the fourth railway package or the handling of greece then suddenly it's powerless and only an innocent little club with nothing to say.
Bingo on saturday night, raffle sundays. Lovely fishing and gardening groups too.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> The idea that nations have no say in this, that it all happens from nationless beaurocrats doesn’t hold up.


No it doesn't, which is why no one has proposed any such idea. 



paolo said:


> The EU isn’t an overarching super power. It’s a club.


Are the WTO, IMF, World Bank, etc "just" clubs too?


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No it doesn't, which is why no one has proposed any such idea.
> 
> Are the WTO, IMF, World Bank, etc "just" clubs too?



Yes.

The Brexit proposal is that the WTO is a better club to join.

Is it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yes.
> 
> The Brexit proposal is that the WTO is a better club to join.
> 
> Is it?


the uk has been in the wto since 1/1/1995 so the question of joining does not arise.
WTO | The United Kingdom - Member information


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

Even in all this seemingly unremitting shit, this, in the Economist, caught my eye, and reminded me why (even though I disagree) some fellow posters are lexit,

“
Other governments regularly promised Greece jam tomorrow...[my snip]...It was the most ruinous way imaginable to make a point. Now Greece, left with threadbare public services, eye-watering tax rates, weak institutions and appalling demographics, is supposed to run large primary surpluses (ie, before interest payments) for the next four decades.

This is magical thinking masquerading as policy.”

Worth repeating. That’s The Economist.

Tagging DotCommunist - as a nod of respect. I know where you’re coming from.


----------



## killer b (Aug 22, 2018)

Anyone played Bloomberg's brexit choose your own adventure yet? I finished in 15 moves with a Labour soft brexit...


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

killer b said:


> Anyone played Bloomberg's brexit choose your own adventure yet? I finished in 15 moves with a Labour soft brexit...



I got same.


----------



## andysays (Aug 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No it doesn't, which is why no one has proposed any such idea.
> 
> Are the WTO, IMF, World Bank, etc "just" clubs too?


Clubs the ruling class uses to beat the rest of us.

We won't disarm them completely by leaving, but at least it will be one weapon less in their armoury.


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> Clubs the ruling class uses to beat the rest of us.
> 
> We won't disarm them completely by leaving, but at least it will be one weapon less in their armoury.



The WTO is better?

Beyond trade and capitalism, what does the WTO offer? Or is that it?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> I got same.


So did I but i suspect that says more about the typical mindset of posters on these boards rather than being a prediction of the future


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> So did I but i suspect that says more about the typical mindset of posters on these boards rather than being a prediction of the future



Oh for sure.

I made money on the referendum. Despite the wind seemingly blowing all my way, I did a chunky “compensation bet”, that we’d go out. I made a grand, and had one of the saddest days of my life. Three in the morning round a campfire at Glastonbury (knee deep in mud, the “elite”), and sudden silence after we’d all been hitting refresh on our phones.

Still, it’s not turned out too bad eh  (can anyone explain what it means yet?)


----------



## mauvais (Aug 22, 2018)

killer b said:


> Anyone played Bloomberg's brexit choose your own adventure yet? I finished in 15 moves with a Labour soft brexit...





> What will the answer be? Those are problems for another day. Brexit has been postponed. Cheers! You made it through in 14 steps


Everything is solved


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> Even in all this seemingly unremitting shit, this, in the Economist, caught my eye, and reminded me why (even though I disagree) some fellow posters are lexit,
> 
> “
> Other governments regularly promised Greece jam tomorrow...[my snip]...It was the most ruinous way imaginable to make a point. Now Greece, left with threadbare public services, eye-watering tax rates, weak institutions and appalling demographics, is supposed to run large primary surpluses (ie, before interest payments) for the next four decades.
> ...


'welcome, you have completed your time in solitary, welcome back to gen pop. You've lost weight, haven't you'



I can't read that ar4ticle in full, the economist claims i have used my 3 free articles this month when I manifestly have not, but there you have it.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 22, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Aug 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I can't read that ar4ticle in full, the economist claims i have used my 3 free articles this month when I manifestly have not, but there you have it.


try opening the article in an incognito window


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

killer b said:


> try opening the article in an incognito window


ta, that worked


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

For those with less time, this says it all:

Martin Rowson on Greece exiting austerity – cartoon


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 22, 2018)

killer b said:


> Anyone played Bloomberg's brexit choose your own adventure yet? I finished in 15 moves with a Labour soft brexit...



I got that the second time but the first time I couldn't get to a GE despite having 3 Tory leadership elections. Bloody Blairites


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

Another snip from the same Economist piece. They are very pro remain. It makes it more poignant, I think.

Even if this is becoming tldr on my (remainer) part, the point is that it’s not a simplistic issue. Just as much “brexiteers are racist” or “remainers are the elite”. (Hopefully we’ve succeeded, here at least, in shooting those both down).

——- cut and paste odyssey 

“A good case to be made for the tedious procedures of the European Union is that they transmute inflammatory political arguments into technical matters to be smoothed away by anonymous, apolitical bureaucrats. Where countries once fought over resources or territory, their membership of a club with a common rulebook channels disputes into lengthy negotiations that result in communiqués nobody reads. Deathly dull, and perhaps a trifle undemocratic. But better than what came before.

Yet there is something self-serving about this narrative. Greece created its own problems, but was largely a bystander while “solutions” were imposed by others.”


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 22, 2018)

Is Lexit still a thing?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 22, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Is Lexit still a thing?



what do you mean?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 22, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Is Lexit still a thing?


still ??


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> 'welcome, you have completed your time in solitary, welcome back to gen pop. You've lost weight, haven't you'



Jesus Christ


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

It’s usually infuriating when those guys use the word “solidarity” as often happens at those conferences and summits and shit  but that tweet is really something else. 


“They have this thing called solidarity”
-Dexter.


----------



## paolo (Aug 22, 2018)

I’ve just recorded me and a non UK national talking in the pub. (Agreed before I hit the button).

Transcript to follow.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2018)

At the press conference yesterday Barnier and Rabb said they were not near a solution to the Irish Border.
I would've thought that might mean that the UK is not near a suggestion in reality.
How long do the brexiters need?
Or maybe the solution costs way too much for everybody even them.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s usually infuriating when those guys use the word “solidarity” as often happens at those conferences and summits and shit  but that tweet is really something else.
> 
> 
> “They have this thing called solidarity”
> -Dexter.


Yeah I experienced urban's solidarity during the first indyref.  We're racists, misogynists and cultists, don't you know...a horrible little country.  So get off your holier-than-thou high horse.  

And don't try and kid anyone you give a shit about Greece either. 

"Solidarity!" came the outraged cries from brexiters.  lol.  As long as they live in the same state obviously.  Otherwise you'll cut them loose and look out for yourselves only.  Fuck off.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yeah I experienced urban's solidarity during the first indyref.  We're racists, misogynists and cultists, don't you know...a horrible little country.  So get off your holier-than-thou high horse.
> 
> And don't try and kid anyone you give a shit about Greece either.
> 
> "Solidarity!" came the outraged cries from brexiters.  lol.  As long as they live in the same state obviously.  Otherwise you'll cut them loose and look out for yourselves only.  Fuck off.


I’m really confused here, which state am I in and who am I cutting loose?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

most of the people here you demand with a shaking bottom lip s_hould be ashamed of themselves _were broadly supportive of scots indy. I recall you personally coming under some stick, was it for your unthinking support for dodgepot WoS? I think it was.


DexterTCN said:


> And don't try and kid anyone you give a shit about Greece either.


first order projection. Unfortunately you are talking to people who care about other people rather than nation states so concern for greece's working classes is unfeigned. You don't think like that, its indivisible 'we' 'us' you' 'them' . All wrapped up in the label name for a country. You reason like a child dexter.

in any case despite your whining its pretty clear even to 'hard headed realists' at the Economist that greece has been treated very shabbily indeed. The misuse of the idea of solidarity was probably quite deliberate on the part of Tusk, you however are just thick enough to imagine that debt slavery for the working classes and high fives for the banks is a form of solidarity
On top of this, Horatio lives in scotland. So you tilt once more at the imaginary foe, only to fall off your horse.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m really confused here, which state am I in and who am I cutting loose?


You're in the UK...you understand the difference between states and countries, yes?

I'm perfectly aware of where you come from.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're in the UK...you understand the difference between states and countries, yes?
> 
> I'm perfectly aware of where you come from.


So this tirade of yours about me wanting to cut loose everyone that’s not in the same state as me, did you get this from something i actually said or is it simply true because I voted leave? And if it’s the latter, does the same apply to everyone that voted to break up the union? If not, why not?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> ... a shaking bottom lip...your unthinking support for dodgepot WoS? I think it was...first order projection.... You reason like a child...your whining...you however are just thick enough...


yawn


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So this tirade of yours about me wanting to cut loose everyone that’s not in the same state as me, did you get this from something i actually said or is it simply true because I voted leave? And if it’s the latter, does the same apply to everyone that voted to break up the union? If not, why not?


You called me out.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You called me out.


Correct


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> yawn


That that WoS cunt is even tolerated by the Yes movement is a fucking disgrace, after his Hillsborough comments.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That that WoS cunt is even tolerated by the Yes movement is a fucking disgrace, after his Hillsborough comments.


He's worth 10 of your lot


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So this tirade of yours about me wanting to cut loose everyone that’s not in the same state as me, did you get this from something i actually said or is it simply true because I voted leave? And if it’s the latter, does the same apply to everyone that voted to break up the union? If not, why not?


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> Another snip from the same Economist piece. They are very pro remain. It makes it more poignant, I think.
> 
> Even if this is becoming tldr on my (remainer) part, the point is that it’s not a simplistic issue. Just as much “brexiteers are racist” or “remainers are the elite”. (Hopefully we’ve succeeded, here at least, in shooting those both down).
> 
> ...



Good attempt to bridge the divide and fair play to you but the sentence "Greece created its own problems" gives the game away a bit - this is still a fiercely elitist and bigoted analysis.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yes.
> 
> The Brexit proposal is that the WTO is a better club to join.
> 
> Is it?


As Pickman's model has pointed out this is factually wrong, but it's also dangerously naive. The EU, IMF, WTO etc are both tools which capital and governments have used to help enforce neo-liberalism. They are mechanisms for capital and states to remove power from labour by devolving power to technocratic institutions. Sometimes there will be squabbles between capital, national governments and these technocratic multi-national institutions over the size of their space at the table - as in Greece where the mechanisms of the EU (and IMF) were used to disciple and bring the Greek government into line - sometimes they will all line up together - as in austerity implemented in Ireland.

To see the EU, IMF, World Bank etc as apolitical is absurd. These institutions are the allies of capital. The World Bank just recently called for a roll back of employment rights under the same principle that is being used to defend the EU - because it would be good for the economy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yeah I experienced urban's solidarity during the first indyref.  We're racists, misogynists and cultists, don't you know...a horrible little country.  So get off your holier-than-thou high horse.
> 
> And don't try and kid anyone you give a shit about Greece either.
> 
> "Solidarity!" came the outraged cries from brexiters.  lol.  As long as they live in the same state obviously.  Otherwise you'll cut them loose and look out for yourselves only.  Fuck off.



You could just acknowledge that you said something very daft and that tweet has reminded everyone how daft it was, and it would probably all be over now. 

Lots of the people here who care about Greece also care about Scotland's right to self determination. Don't you care about Britain's right to self determination?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You called me out.


So anyway, you’re not going to answer my question obviously so I’m going to try and explain to you the general reasons that Indy voters(a third of them, as far as we can tell from polling) voted leave- People who took comparisons to Norway further than just “they are cool and Scandinavian” and thought about Norway’s relationship with the EU, the benefits of EFTA as opposed to full membership etc. People  that argued we weren’t voting for independence because we think Scottish politicians are better than English ones, but rather because the whole country needs a break from the status quo or to “break the lockjam” as put by the one SSP candidate that got his deposit back in the Highlands,  John Aberdein(who like Carmichael after him really fucking utilised the power of the Weel Kent Face!!- /a very Scottish derail). The idea that vote Yes wasn’t just for the Scottish working class, but that it would trigger real change for working class people all over Britain- indeed many of us welcomed the news that English folks were asking for more devolution after the Indy ref- though we were in fairness drowned out by Yes voters slagging off the English for the same, I guess that schism just became more prominent after brexit. People that really got into thinking critically about our relationship with local and national government and the value of making sure the people we need to challenge are a bit closer to home during Indy- people who took the idea of civic nationalism and ran with it,  and applied it to our relationship with the EU as well as Westminster.

I heard stuff like  “the status quo is crumbling” again and again from fellow leave voters.  Aidan Moffat for example suggested he couldn’t understand the logic of voting remain if you were pro Indy in the week prior to the vote, though it appears he bottled it since then and has been mostly saying we need to stop Brexit.
So this is what the character of Yes/Leave was as far as I can tell, drawn from every Yes voter that’s ever spoken to me about it and a few remain- with- nose- held types as well.   it’s not about cutting people loose any more than Yes was about hating the English. I was as honest as possible about my family members that voted leave- , this is what I’ve heard from Yes voters that voted leave, I honestly don’t have another story to tell at present anyway! 
I’m not intelligent enough to really say how relevant all of the above is, but that’s where people seemed to be going and I’ll always say it was the Yes campaign that ultimate led me to vote Leave, if Indy hadn’t had happened I probably wouldn’t have even given the Brexit vote much of a thought- that and helping house refugees here in Orkney  and being a one person aid effort on this wee isle, I can’t put an X next to a statement suggesting I support the EU given the responsibility they have  for the refugee crisis and deaths in the med- this minor responsibility is pretty much the one thing I’ve been able to do politically in years being a care worker and a single mum, time constraints etc so while we are on the subject of me not giving a shit about anyone outside of the U.K.  I was “giving a shit” about that long before I considered the Brexit question so I’m pretty fucking sure I’m not being dishonest here at all. I’ve put a fair amount of energy into giving a shit about what happens in the med, if I’m not doing enough it’s cause I’m not really sure how to do any better, without contributing to stuff that’s probably ultimately harmful like those Trump picnics- in fact carework is also what I’ve been doing in the event of not being sure how to be of use politically  cause the left always gave me the dry heaves from a young age- though I could never confidently critique it. How to be practically of use, in some way? That’s pretty much my motivation behind anything, so again going back to the “break the lockjam” argument. And I don’t think that’s niche, you only have to look at the increased turnout for both refs to see that a lot of people might be a fair bit more interested in actually answering questions than they are in choosing between different representatives  of the same shite.  And for comparison look at the US, Trump won when the turnout was 50 per cent or thereabouts. Yet Trump/Brexit are so often mentioned in the same breath- Yes, I know  there’s a rump section of the leave vote you can compare to the Trump phenomenon, and we’ve seen how much trouble they can cause after the sickening rise in racist attacks post Brexit. But where did all these “new voters” come from? If they were so enamoured by the promises of Nigel Farage, why did they not back UKIP before? And why was UKIP not the next logical step at the subsequent GE to ensure THE DEMANDS OF VOTE LEAVE were met? Why the fuck did the one party that stuck doggedly to the Vote Leave manifesto see a massive crash in their polling after Brexit? Your simplistic analysis of recent events just doesn’t add up.



And I’m calling you out cause I think your shite is harmful for the Yes movement too. Wonderful Scots trying to get away from racist English? Why would you do this? Line up behind project fear like that, like you don’t care how low you sink. Is the Yes movement really so fucking fragile that we have to get behind soft remain voting Tories now? It’s not just you though, it’s everywhere I look up here. I am fucking sick of it, and the Scottish left in general. Don’t trust them. If I seem particularly angry at you, it’s unfortunate as the Scottish Left isn’t massive on urban! 
I could have just as easily abstained from the Brexit vote, I didn’t know until the day what I would do- I’ve never felt strongly affiliated to any party or movement, or “Lexit” so... “my lot”- it’s just fucking people. That’s about as specific as I can get. The working class, whether they agree with me or not, that old cliche, aye.


I’m a bit nervous about posting this illiterate shite but here goes


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> ...And I’m calling you out cause I think your shite is harmful for the Yes movement too. Wonderful Scots trying to get away from racist English? Why would you do this?...


There you go.

I'm a racist again.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There you go.
> 
> I'm a racist again.


I didn’t say that, but you can’t expect to post stuff and not ever have anyone comment on the content of your posts.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

I did try and respond in good faith but I suppose it was difficult as so much of what you have said has really pissed me off. This is coming from a fellow Yes voter, do you really not take any of it in? Or is it just me wanting to Brand you a racist?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I didn’t say that, but you can’t expect to post stuff and not ever have anyone comment on the content of your posts.


I misread your post, I'll reply in a while.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2018)

Today I visited a country that is not in The customs union with the EU, yet has an open border with the EU.


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Today I visited a country that is not in The customs union with the EU, yet has an open border with the EU.



Oohhh. I do like a good quiz


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Today I visited a country that is not in The customs union with the EU, yet has an open border with the EU.



your mistress in Lichtenstein?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Today I visited a country that is not in The customs union with the EU, yet has an open border with the EU.



Switzerland?


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> your mistress in Lichtenstein?



I just googled that option


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2018)

Isle Of Man?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Today I visited a country that is not in The customs union with the EU, yet has an open border with the EU.


Hahahaa 
Minds are exploding


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2018)

It also does not permit freedom of movement of people.


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2018)

Andorra?


----------



## sealion (Aug 22, 2018)

The Vatican?


----------



## Supine (Aug 22, 2018)

I'm not finding the answer but reading about small place like andorra, leictenstein (sic) etc is interesting in terms of our potential future relationship with Europe. Makes a change from the bog standard Norway / Canada models that are normally discussed.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m a bit nervous about posting this illiterate shite but here goes


pearls before swine etc


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2018)

sealion said:


> The Vatican?



Yep.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

don't lean on him man cos he only bought a ticket, right to Vatican city. Bet it looks amazing tho

I'm told they have raised the age of consent from 12 now, which is progress. Forwards comrades.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> I'm not finding the answer but reading about small place like andorra, leictenstein (sic) etc is interesting in terms of our potential future relationship with Europe. Makes a change from the bog standard Norway / Canada models that are normally discussed.



See also, San Marino. Not in the EU, no free movement, no customs union, yet open borders.

Witchcraft.


----------



## sealion (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yep.


Did you nick any pope on a rope from the hotel?


----------



## sealion (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Witchcraft.


Strange isn't it!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 22, 2018)

Or it could be that they're insignificant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> See also, San Marino. Not in the EU, no free movement, no customs union, yet open borders.
> 
> Witchcraft.


That's because if they closed the borders the border zone would consume all of San Marino


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Or it could be that they're insignificant.



So the fundamentals of the EU can be ignored, if the country is deemed insignificant?

And in sleaterkinney’s world the Holy See lacks significance.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 22, 2018)

Supine said:


> I'm not finding the answer but reading about small place like andorra, leictenstein (sic) etc is interesting in terms of our potential future relationship with Europe. Makes a change from the bog standard Norway / Canada models that are normally discussed.


microstates are fascinating. Still more so no-spaces, non states. The existence in the interstices. This one always interested me Kowloon Walled City - Wikipedia


well off topic here but anyway.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert 

I appreciate your frankness and the way you intertwine brexit and indy and the complex local politics/family politics et al that go along with divisive issues.  And your personal efforts with refugees are to be lauded.

I didn't make any simplistic analyses though...and UKIP all went back to the tories where they were hatched...job done.  And Greece suffers to be in the EU because it's worth it for Greece.

The established left in Scotland have been found out to be largely a bunch of self serving and untrustworthy cunts, worse than the right because people trusted them.  You can't trust the established left or the established right.  I stopped watching tv some time ago, lots of people are either turning their tvs off (or just on thursdays) or are recording everything then examining it, posting it, challenging it. (but I still bought a 4k tv...go figure)

It's wonderful, people are engaged and positive.  Remember that girl in England that got caught shoplifting mars bars and was fined £100 when she was starving and penniless?   The crowdfunder up at your bit against Carmichael? Trying to stop the ozzie Brain family being deported? The Spanish government trying to take Carla back to face sedition charges?  Remember when trump was here and Nicola headed a Pride march in Glasgow a month or so ago when he arrived?  May getting booed last week...arrived in secret, went into a building...100s waiting to boo her when she exited and lurched to her car?  The rolls-royce affair in Glasgow?  The sly little announcement the other week that the Scots government has had over 200 meetings with other countries on trade recently?  Baby boxes?  NHS pay rise?  Renewables.  Bedroom tax?  Carer's Allowance? Are you aware of any of it?  1000s of things, non-stop.

Sending the (cough) Lockerbie bomber home to die with his family?  You think the UK government would ever do that? Ever?

I don't think you're involved in any of the indy communications networks and should check twitter or google or facebook or websites and blogs, look for a local meet-up group and have a chat, throw some questions and see what people are like.  We are doing shit that isn't being done anyplace else in the UK and in very few places outside of it.

If there was a second brexit vote...if everyone in Scotland voted the way you wanted them to it wouldn't make any difference to the result.

Zero.

And that's the same for every decision after that, forever, in the union.  The amount of powers that the EU has over the UK in comparison to the amount of powers the UK has over us is laughable.

Remember this...the UK government just gave Young's a £1.3 million grant to move their factory from Scotland to England...400 jobs lost here...400 gained there...aye cheers for that seems fair.   £168 million given by the EU to Scots farmers...Gove says it's gone to England and that's that.  (tells you what they think about our chances though )

Hey...all you parents out there...did you know in Scotland you get a box that has an electronic baby ear thermometer in it and other stuff too?  Free meals and care for young ones, free care for the old, free university, prescriptions.  A scheme to make sure all poorer women get free period products?  btw yes I said free care for the old.

Free crossing of bridges and free parking at (non-pfi) hospitals?

Of the (I think) 315 murders in the last 7 years (not a typo...no zeros missing) 315 were solved.  Rapes and sexual crimes, violent crimes, knife crimes...down.

Imagine what we'll do with all the powers.

So join the indy club and never mind that other stuff...it's easy here are the rules.

1:  You will talk about indy 
2:  You will talk about indy 
3:  If you join...you gotta indy

You made an honest post HoratioCuthbert , so did I.

I know brexit is the best thing for Scotland's independence but it's a bad thing imo so I'll say it.  I'm not sleekit.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So the fundamentals of the EU can be ignored, if the country is deemed insignificant?
> 
> And in sleaterkinney’s world the Holy See lacks significance.


Is the Vatican going to swamp us with cheap exports?.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m a bit nervous about posting this illiterate shite but here goes


Not illiterate at all mate. Really good post.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I didn't make any simplistic analyses though...and UKIP all went back to the tories where they were hatched...job done.


This is overly simplistic on both sides of the equation. A large %, possibly a majority, of the UKIP vote went to the Tories in 2017 but certainly not all of it. ~Likewise while the pre-2015 UKIP vote was drawn strongly former Con voters there was a significant proportion, ~50%, that wasn't. 1,2.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this is very basic sociology. how can you have a free vote while there are large corporations, while there is an imbalance of power within society? if people working at humirax ltd are told that if labour win then their jobs might be at risk, do you not think a few of them might vote tory? then there's the role of information, knowledge famously being power. most people do not seek out information, whether because they don't know they're ill informed or because they haven't the time or the knowledge of how to or 1001 other reasons. you can't make an informed electorate, you can only give people the opportunity to become informed.


So basically people don't tend to be exposed to critical thinking or are'nt encouraged/taught to think critically, so they don't. Unless they are people like us.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

Humirax said:


> So basically people don't tend to be exposed to critical thinking or are'nt encouraged/taught to think critically, so they don't. Unless they are people like us.


I take it you've been exposed to thinking. Yet you don't engage critically with what's said to you. If you can't or won't engage critically with things here, I am not sure why you think you'll be able to elsewhere.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

I know it's bad manners posting links to twitter but, would be interested to hear what people here think of the reasoning in this thread. Lots of what he says (and is arguing against) reminds me of things i've read on here since the referendum.
  (you have to click on it to read the whole thing obvs)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I know it's bad manners posting links to twitter but, would be interested to hear what people here think of the reasoning in this thread. Lots of what he says (and is arguing against) reminds me of things i've read on here since the referendum.
> (you have to click on it to read the whole thing obvs)



House built on sand imo


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2018)

sealion said:


> Did you nick any pope on a rope from the hotel?



No pope on a rope, nor pope’s dope. But did see the tomb of Pope Urban


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No pope on a rope, nor pope’s dope. But did see the tomb of Pope Urban


Which one?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Which one?



6th. 

69 to go


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> 6th.
> 
> 69 to go


ah, i thought it might be the urban who preached the crusade at clermont.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I know it's bad manners posting links to twitter but, would be interested to hear what people here think of the reasoning in this thread. Lots of what he says (and is arguing against) reminds me of things i've read on here since the referendum.
> (you have to click on it to read the whole thing obvs)



Was there a "left" consensus on "freedom of movement"? What do you mean by left, by freedom of movement?


----------



## andysays (Aug 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Was there a "left" consensus on "freedom of movement"? What do you mean by left, by freedom of movement?


Rather than ask what bimble means by those terms, it might be more productive to examine what Adler means by them and why. 

I'm posting on my phone during a rain break at work ATM, but maybe I'll read the Twitter thread later.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Was there a "left" consensus on "freedom of movement"? What do you mean by left, by freedom of movement?


tbh before we get onto this left consensus and what is meant by that we might consider why we would wish to discuss something someone claims to have 'felt' in 'pubs and parties': are we to move forwards on the basis of what one person claims to have felt when drink's been taken? and that's before we wonder which pubs, which parties, in what company and so on. house built on sand.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

I can't see a fault in his arguments against the 'socialism in one country' anti freedom of movement type lexit case that i think I've seen put forward by people on this thread. That's what I was asking about. But never mind.


----------



## sealion (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I know it's bad manners posting links to twitter but, would be interested to hear what people here think of the reasoning in this thread. Lots of what he says (and is arguing against) reminds me of things i've read on here since the referendum.
> (you have to click on it to read the whole thing obvs)




'Living in London, I could feel — at every pub & party — the left consensus turning against Freedom of Movement'


He sounds like a barrel of laughs.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

i get the feeling maybe people don't know how to read twitter links, as all replies so far are just to laugh at the first bit, about him going to pubs. 
Here's the whole thing, just in case anyone's interested in engaging with the content of it.

"Sometimes, the turn was imperceptible: my peers make the case for Brexit as a "break with neoliberalism" with the implicit sacrifice of Freedom of Mov't. In other words, migrants are sacrificed at the altar of British socialism. Eg) Why the Left Should Embrace Brexit

Other times, this turn was manifest & vocal: the Freedom of Mov't, they claim, was a ploy to pursue cheap labour from abroad — simply cloaked in EU rhetoric of solidarity of cosmopolitan progress.

Eg) 


Of course, they are not alone. Across Europe, left parties — and associate intellectuals like Wolfgang Streeck — have become skeptical, if not hostile, to the freedom of movement of workers across the continent.

The turn away from 'open borders' dismays me in many ways.
The first is moral: at a time when a changing climate will rapidly increase migration, restricting the freedom of movement seems like an obvious step in the wrong direction
The second is cultural: at a time when the far right is resurgent — promoting blood & soil ethno-nationalism — the left should be making the case for cosmopolitanism. Instead, many on the left reject it wholesale as just another neoliberal bromide.
The third is logical: as @n_srnck has pointed out, concern for domestic wages could — just as easily — imply that women should stay out of the workforce, as well. Why, exactly, must be pick on migrants — the most vulnerable population?

But perhaps most dismaying is the shallow view of history. Critics of FoM argue that — b/c it benefits capital — it must be stopped. But this betrays a fundamental misreading of capitalism — and a simplistic "enemy of my enemy is my friend" style of reasoning
Capitalism is not "all bad." It propels us into the future — raising standards of living, destroying feudal arrangements, driving tech progress — while trapping us in immiseration.
In a word, it creates the conditions for its own demise — such was Marx's contention.
Freedom of Movement is perhaps the best example. It helps capital to pursue cheap labour, for sure — but it also unites working populations, build ties across the int'l proletariat, and creates the conditions for their challenge to an int'l class of capitalists

The challenge, then, is not to move backward — toward harder borders. But to move forward: to regulate labour markets in order to strengthen that int'l proletariat and deepen int'l solidarity. In short, restriction migration is not only short-sighted — blind to the nationalism & xenophobia that flourish in a hard-border world — it is also reactionary: it moves us further away from a socialist future than closer to it.

Some observers, like @ryanlcooper, have argued that — despite these econ. benefits — mass migration may strengthen the hand of the right, promoting more nativism, not less.
But this is a massive abdication of responsibility. Since when did we, on the left, take 'nativism' as an exogenous variable — and not something that, through a campaign of consciousness-raising, we transform into solidarity?
Such is the challenge ahead. For a left nationalism — that attacks foreign workers in the name of protecting them, that closes borders in the name of international solidarity — is not a left that I recognize at all."


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2018)

An oxbridge boy and a a leading member of Vanis Varoufakis' pro-eu party. Worthless from second tweet onwards: " migrants are sacrificed at the altar of British socialism".


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I can't see a fault in his arguments


I can.
He links to the jacobin article about lexit that doesn't even mention FoM or immigration
He mentions the Germen left group Aufstehen that aren't eurosceptic or against the EU
He links to shock horror articles in the Graun about climate migration and Tommy Robinson folk who can hardly be discribed aa the left

So we're left with (as Pickman's model rightly points out) the left consensus he gets from down the pub.


bimble said:


> against the 'socialism in one country' anti freedom of movement type lexit case that i think I've seen put forward by people on this thread. That's what I was asking about. But never mind.


Where was that?
I can recall people in favour of leaving the EU challenging the EU's definition of freedom of movement, the practicalities of FoM within the EU for those people unfortunate enough to have it forced on them  - but not challenging freedom of movement par se.
here for example


----------



## sealion (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> i get the feeling maybe people don't know how to read twitter links,


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I can't see a fault in his arguments against the 'socialism in one country' anti freedom of movement type lexit case that i think I've seen put forward by people on this thread. That's what I was asking about. But never mind.


You haven't seen that argument put forward on here at all. Therein lies a huge part of your problems. Are you oxbridge too?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I can't see a fault in his arguments against the 'socialism in one country' anti freedom of movement type lexit case that i think I've seen put forward by people on this thread. That's what I was asking about. But never mind.


yeh. i have pointed out his arguments are founded on something the reality of which is questionable. this undermines anything built on this base.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You haven't seen that argument put forward on here at all. Therein lies a huge part of your problems. Are you oxbridge too?


I'm not oxbridge no. I'm sure there were plenty of posts about how brexit's an opportunity for this country to turn away from neoliberalism and also how reduced migration would be good as it will push up pay for british workers? Maybe thats different, I don't get how.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> i get the feeling maybe people don't know how to read twitter links, as all replies so far are just to laugh at the first bit, about him going to pubs.
> Here's the whole thing, just in case anyone's interested in engaging with the content of it.


i am not laughing. you asked what people thought about the reasoning. i get the feeling maybe you don't know how to reason.


----------



## sealion (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> as all replies so far are just to laugh at the first bit, about him going to pubs


Have you ever been in a pub, cafe or anywhere else where you have felt the left consensus turning against Freedom of Movement ?
Genuine question bimble


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2018)

The arrogance to assume that what you and your mates represent is 'the left consensus' And as if we don't know who his post-oxbridge mates are. Many remainers were surprised post-refereundum that they were not and didn't represent the entirety of society. _But i thought, i thought_...they stuttered.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

sealion said:


> Have you ever been in a pub, cafe or anywhere else where you have felt the left consensus turning against Freedom of Movement ?
> Genuine question bimble


I don't really go to pubs or parties much recently tbh. Anything else personal about me,  like what primary school i went to etc that's important here?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I don't really go to pubs or parties much recently tbh. Anything else personal about me,  like what primary school i went to etc that's important here?


cafes, do you do to cafes? sealion didn't ask about parties, btw


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> i get the feeling maybe people don't know how to read twitter links, as all replies so far are just to laugh at the first bit, about him going to pubs.
> Here's the whole thing, just in case anyone's interested in engaging with the content of it.


the reason people are focussing on the first post is because

you can't have a consensus change if the consensus doesn't in fact exist. 

so if that doesn't exist the rest of the thread's not worth bothering with. and the basis for the belief in the reality of this consensus is yer man's feelings in pubs and parties. not articles in papers. not videos on youtube. not anything you can touch or watch. just his feelings. 

whole thing's cobblers.


----------



## mx wcfc (Aug 23, 2018)

sealion said:


> Have you ever been in a pub, cafe or anywhere else where you have felt the left consensus turning against Freedom of Movement ?
> Genuine question bimble


I have been at meetings where self declared communists have expressed views to the effect that FoM should be stopped completely as it is simply a ploy by capital to keep wages down. They didn’t hold the consensus though.


----------



## bimble (Aug 23, 2018)

ok. I posted it because it seemed to reflect my impression from reading this here thread, maybe i'm wrong but i thought the 'consensus' (sort of if you can call it that) on here was tending to match up with what he said he's noticed. But, I get stuff wrong all the time and not important anyway, forget it.


----------



## sealion (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I don't really go to pubs or parties much recently tbh.


I'm not surprised if that's what silly bollox on twitter and his mates get up to


bimble said:


> Anything else personal about me, like what primary school i went to etc that's important here?


Nice try. You post allsorts on here about yourself and personal life etc, which i have no interest in and is of no importance to me.


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it took my mum around 25 years to start seeing the cops as predominantly rotten apples, i've given up on getting her to full acab tho


are they though? Or is it the system? I lean to a systemic analysis which I thought you did.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

TremulousTetra said:


> are they though? Or is it the system? I lean to a systemic analysis which I thought you did.


yes


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yes


1 demerit :-p


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2018)

TremulousTetra said:


> are they though? Or is it the system? I lean to a systemic analysis which I thought you did.


ACAB _is_ a systemic analysis - it's the system that produces these people, it can do nothing but. There can be no substantive fightback by individual coppers because a) that's not what the system is for or produces b) the wider system relies on the sub-system of policing to operate as it does. Therefore, despite any personal niceness  - and there are plenty of nice coppers - the system must prevail and they must take up and play their role in it. Therefore ACAB. Until the social functions that state policing have enclosed from wider society are returned by popular collective action and the specialised skills they have developed are democratised then ACAB.

Will that do?

(God what boring crap)


----------



## gosub (Aug 23, 2018)

How to prepare if the UK leaves the EU with no deal
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Govt lays bare consequences of 'no deal' to people of UK 

Credit card warning in UK's 'no-deal' plans
__________________________________________________________________________________________

 
  24/ 25 documents.

 "Stockpiles of at least six weeks' supply of medicines will be held, with urgent medicines airlifted in to the UK to avoid lengthy delays at road, rail and sea borders"   -  Cabotage  isn't a Commission thing - its an industry thing


_______________________________________________________________________________________

ARTICLE 50 EXTENSION !  PLEASE


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2018)

Project fear extends unto our cabbages now eh?. Not going to work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> How to prepare if the UK leaves the EU with no deal
> _________________________________________________________________________________________
> Govt lays bare consequences of 'no deal' to people of UK
> 
> ...


i think it might be a little more radical than an article 50 extension.


----------



## gosub (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it might be a little more radical than an article 50 extension.




I hope not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> I hope not.


i think it might be. as we press ever nearer to the denoument of these cack-handed negotiations the utter bankruptcy of the government becomes more and more apparent, and the difficulty of extricating the uk from the embrace of the eu similarly becomes clearer. the eu has not covered itself in glory these past two years. neither has the uk administration. the way the government's been saying one thing and thinking another, which culminated in the resignation of david davis after the chequers debacle, i wouldn't in the slightest be surprised if the withdrawal of article 50 - and without a second confirmatory referendum - returned to the agenda in the next few months.


----------



## gosub (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it might be. as we press ever nearer to the denoument of these cack-handed negotiations the utter bankruptcy of the government becomes more and more apparent, and the difficulty of extricating the uk from the embrace of the eu similarly becomes clearer. the eu has not covered itself in glory these past two years. neither has the uk administration. the way the government's been saying one thing and thinking another, which culminated in the resignation of david davis after the chequers debacle, i wouldn't in the slightest be surprised if the withdrawal of article 50 - and without a second confirmatory referendum - returned to the agenda in the next few months.




Please don't make me cite Barry Gardiner


----------



## JHE (Aug 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> 24/ 25 documents.



A few days ago there was a leak saying that the government was going to announce that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the British govt would guarantee the rights of EU27 citizens resident in the UK, as under the provisional agreement on citizens' rights. The leak was not denied. However, that seems to be the one paper that has not been published. Don't know why.

Meanwhile, in Spain - a country with about 300,000 British residents, according to official figures - the British Embassy continues to ignore the risk of a no-deal Brexit. Of course some people think the Embassy should be pressing the new Spanish govt to say what its policy will be if there's no deal, but the ambassador and his staff are stubbornly silent. Don't know why that is either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> Please don't make me cite Barry Gardiner


please don't make me sight barry gardiner


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 23, 2018)

Farrago is apparently going to be touring the country on a battle bus.

Nigel Farage back in politics to challenge Theresa May's Brexit


----------



## kabbes (Aug 23, 2018)

JHE said:


> A few days ago there was a leak


First they came for our cabbages, now they come for our leeks??


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 23, 2018)

kabbes said:


> First they came for our cabbages, now they come for our leeks??


But I did not speak out because I was not a brassica.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 23, 2018)

JHE said:


> A few days ago there was a leak saying that the government was going to announce that, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, the British govt would guarantee the rights of EU27 citizens resident in the UK, as under the provisional agreement on citizens' rights. The leak was not denied. However, that seems to be the one paper that has not been published. Don't know why.
> 
> Meanwhile, in Spain - a country with about 300,000 British residents, according to official figures - the British Embassy continues to ignore the risk of a no-deal Brexit. Of course some people think the Embassy should be pressing the new Spanish govt to say what its policy will be if there's no deal, but the ambassador and his staff are stubbornly silent. Don't know why that is either.




Manley is a career FCO bod and well smart - smart enough to keep quiet until this wretched government gives him some hard policy to work with. 

What he says in private over some vino collapso with his Spanish counterparts will be another matter.  At the minute intra diplomat chatter is all like “ what the fuck is going on Your government ?” 

Usually the response is a shrug. A discreet diplomatic shrug


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I know it's bad manners posting links to twitter but, would be interested to hear what people here think of the reasoning in this thread. Lots of what he says (and is arguing against) reminds me of things i've read on here since the referendum.
> (you have to click on it to read the whole thing obvs)






OK firstly capitalism doesn't 'propel us into the future', we move towards the future at just the same speed regardless of the prevailing political system because that's the very nature of the concept of time. Secondly make your fucking mind up about whether our lives are getting better or worse thanks to capitalism. Thirdly what about 'tech' that's a potential threat to established commercial enterprises, which is often actvely repressed under capitalism?

Fourthly whatever it is you think you're on about it's pretty low to try and blame it on Charlie, who is far too dead to defend himself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> View attachment 144800
> 
> OK firstly capitalism doesn't 'propel us into the future', we move towards the future at just the same speed regardless of the prevailing political system because that's the very nature of the concept of time. Secondly make your fucking mind up about whether our lives are getting better or worse thanks to capitalism. Thirdly what about 'tech' that's a potential threat to established commercial enterprises, which is often actvely repressed under capitalism?
> 
> Fourthly whatever it is you think you're on about it's pretty low to try and blame it on Charlie, who is far too dead to defend himself.


glad i didn't read beyond the pile of steaming shite which was the first tweet in the series.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> glad i didn't read beyond the pile of steaming shite which was the first tweet in the series.



I thought I'd ignore his opening salvo about doing his research by getting drunk with other bougie twats and give him the benefit of the doubt. I was wrong to do so, dead fucking wrong.


----------



## andysays (Aug 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> View attachment 144800
> 
> OK firstly capitalism doesn't 'propel us into the future', we move towards the future at just the same speed regardless of the prevailing political system because that's the very nature of the concept of time. Secondly make your fucking mind up about whether our lives are getting better or worse thanks to capitalism. Thirdly what about 'tech' that's a potential threat to established commercial enterprises, which is often actvely repressed under capitalism?
> 
> Fourthly whatever it is you think you're on about it's pretty low to try and blame it on Charlie, who is far too dead to defend himself.


Have you ever read any Marx?

What Adler's saying in that tweet (haven't read any of the rest of it, which may all be nonsense) does actually have some basis in Marx's writing.

Someone more familiar with it than me may even be able to point to the specific quote or quotes.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 23, 2018)

bimble said:


> I can't see a fault in his arguments against the 'socialism in one country' anti freedom of movement type lexit case that i think I've seen put forward by people on this thread. That's what I was asking about. But never mind.


What butchersapron and pocketscience said. Who on U75 has put forward any such argument? This is, yet again, another one of your inventions.


----------



## JimW (Aug 23, 2018)

Agree with andysays, while making it a good/bad dichotomy makes Marx sound as dim as Adler there's plenty in the former's writing about the transformative nature of capital/the bourgeoisie that highlights "progressive" aspects, like the classic bit from the manifesto:


> The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. Conservation of the old modes of production in unaltered form, was, on the contrary, the first condition of existence for all earlier industrial classes. Constant revolutionising of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned, and man is at last compelled to face with sober senses his real conditions of life, and his relations with his kind.
> 
> The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere.
> 
> ...


----------



## JimW (Aug 23, 2018)

Mind, I personally quite like the idiocy of rural life.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if people working at humirax ltd are told that if labour win then their jobs might be at risk, do you not think a few of them might vote tory?


Working class people voting Tory is a good example of what I mean.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Working class people voting Tory is a good example of what I mean.


i wait until you find yourself able to critically engage with what i've posted.


----------



## sealion (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I have never once in my life thought about voting Tory and will never understand why people do.


If you are one of those decanted from the community you lived and worked in you might think and feel differently. Fucked over by the same people you've voted for most of your life.

London’s Local Elections 2018: The Consequences of Voting
Secure Homes for All? The Labour Party Manifesto on Housing


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)




----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)




----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

sealion said:


> If you are one of those decanted from the community you lived and worked in you might think and feel differently. Fucked over by the same people you've voted for most of your life.
> 
> London’s Local Elections 2018: The Consequences of Voting
> Secure Homes for All? The Labour Party Manifesto on Housing


I don't see how voting Tory will bring about any kind of solution


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i wait until you find yourself able to critically engage with what i've posted.


I already have, you just don't seem top have noticed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I probably already have, you just don't seem top have noticed.


i think you'll find you haven't.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 24, 2018)

Voting for anything is always a bit of an anti climax. Eurovision aside


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find you haven't.


How so?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> How so?


i thought you'd been exposed to critical thought. if you have been then go back and critically engage. and if you haven't then have a look here


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

whatevz


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> whatevz


yeh i didn't believe you had a critical thought in your head.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Ofcourse really I'm referring to most of the English as the majority of the rest of Britain knew what what they were doing. Serious lack of critical thinking in England, which is why we not only still have capitalism but a Tory government. I know most of the electorate doesn't vote Tory, but far too many people do and I'll never understand it. The only explanation is a lack of critical thinking.





Humirax said:


> What is it then?





Humirax said:


> People were conned, causing them to vote the wrong way- if they had adequate critical thinking abilities that wouldn't have happened.





Humirax said:


> Still waiting for your answer . . .





Humirax said:


> Seems to amount to the same thing to me





Humirax said:


> Good question





Humirax said:


> So how come  we got where we are now, even though we were denied the information?





Humirax said:


> Why can't they do the same? Seems to be a lack of critical thinking to me, it's the only real explanation I can come up with. I'm aware of how people are manipulated from an early age but I was, and I broke out of it, why can't they?





Humirax said:


> I see what you mean, but are they really unrepresentative considering that the majority of the electorate votes for them time after time?





Humirax said:


> What I mean is- people like us managed to suss the system out- we found an alternative- why can't most people?





Humirax said:


> Why do they insist on keep propping up the system?





Humirax said:


> We had to seek out the information, which is what we did- but most people don't bother.





Humirax said:


> It's as if theres somethign wrong with people themselves, if they are going to insist on trying a system that doesn't work over and over again and not seek out the information we found- it could be said that they don't deserve their emancipation. Or that trying to 'empower them' (which can only really be done by themselves) is a waste of time.





Humirax said:


> Anyway, you guys have stopped replying to me and I have probably gone off topic so I guess I'll leave it there.





Humirax said:


> I can only speak from experience aswell. Where I live there is no anarchist movement and most people firmly believe in capitalism, most of them vote tory and support brexit and have no time for anti-capitalist politics let alone anarchism. They rely on the mainstream media for their 'info' and if any of them seem to agree with me they are supporters of UKIP or, even on a couple of  occasions- the BNP!





Humirax said:


> What I meant was that I talk to them and we agree on things and then I find out they are Ukippers later on in the conversation.





Humirax said:


> Looks about right if you ask me





Humirax said:


> You have a point but I still get frustrated with people. I and those I care about have to suffer the consequences of lazy thinking (or uninformed thinking) and I have never once in my life thought about voting Tory and will never understand why people do. I am surrounded by people where I live who think and behave in a totally alien way to me and it seems alot of the time to be hopeless trying to offer them the opportunity to become informed, they can be very stubborn and think they know best even when I can see that everything around them is a mess.





Humirax said:


> Also being open about being an anarchist sometimes seems risky in these times and is something so alien to alot of people so I go about trying to spread anarchist ideas in a discreet way.





Humirax said:


> Or, shall we say, in not an obvious, so visible way.





Humirax said:


> I'm just honest and open about how I feel (which is clearly a mistake). Don't tell me you never get frustrated with people,  you must be  the better, superior anarchist than me, which is why the anarchist movement is no doubt doing so well- oh, wait a minute!!





Humirax said:


> So basically people don't tend to be exposed to critical thinking or are'nt encouraged/taught to think critically, so they don't. Unless they are people like us.





Humirax said:


> Working class people voting Tory is a good example of what I mean.





Humirax said:


> I don't see how voting Tory will bring about any kind of solution





Humirax said:


> I already have, you just don't seem top have noticed.


none of these posts looks in any detail or with any critical thinking at why people continue to vote, and continue to vote tory. 

there are a number of reasons why people continue to do the thing you deplore, for example the way people are educated. people are taught that people died for the right to vote, therefore we have to exercise the right to vote. never mind that people die for all manner of causes, that death in itself isn't evidence a cause is right. people vote because it offers them some small measure of control over their lives, where so much is wholly out of their control. the way people vote has never been free, even though now it is ostensibly secret. people's friends, family and employers, their class, all play a part in who they might vote for. the media, too. the class they might like to be - people who are working class but aspire to be middle class might vote tory. 

there's more thought - aye, and more critical thought - in what it's taken me 90 seconds to think about and type than in all your 20 or more messages quote. whereas in all your guff you've said people are uneducated, perhaps uneducable...


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> people are taught that people died for the right to vote, therefore we have to exercise the right to vote. never mind that people die for all manner of causes, that death in itself isn't evidence a cause is right.


A clear example of a lack of critical thinking by people who vote.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> A clear example of a lack of critical thinking by people who vote.


yeh. and there is as clear an absence of critical thought from all of your posts in this thread, despite your claim to the contrary in post 10967


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> none of these posts looks in any detail or with any critical thinking at why people continue to vote, and continue to vote tory.


I never claimed to be some kind of ultimate genius or perfect thinker who utilises critical thinking non-stop. I simply shared my impression that there is a great lack of critical thinking amongst people and you have yet to convince me otherwise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I never claimed to be some kind of ultimate genius or perfect thinker who utilises critical thinking non-stop. I simply shared my impression that there is a great lack of critical thinking amongst people and you have yet to convince me otherwise.


you declare (post 10967) that you've engaged critically with what i've posted. i dispute that, because if you had then you wouldn't have posted such bollocks about my inability thus far to persuade you there is no lack of critical thinking amongst people. i have not tried to persuade you that there isn't.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 24, 2018)




----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> none of these posts looks in any detail or with any critical thinking at why people continue to vote, and continue to vote tory.


I can't be arsed in all honesty but atleast I can see through the bullshit that is conservative and reformist politics and capitalism and the shit the MSM wants to sell me and want  a real anti-capitalist revolution- which isn't the case for the vast majority of people who insist on lapping up their crap and propping up the system in an endless list of ways.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 24, 2018)

Who needs WTO rules anyway?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I can't be arsed in all honesty but atleast I can see through the bullshit that is conservative and reformist politics and capitalism and the shit the MSM wants to sell me and want  a real anti-capitalist revolution- which isn't the case for the vast majority of people who insist on lapping up their crap and propping up the system in an endless list of ways.


no you can't. or you wouldn't fart on and on about tory voters. i don't know if you can recall the years 1997 to 2010. but the labour government then was every bit as venal and as vile as the conservative government you abominate. the labour councils in london demolishing housing estates safe in the knowledge they won't be themselves turfed out: they do not seem to attract your ire as much as the tory voters. simply voting means agreeing to take part in the system, whereas refusing to vote is taking a step outside, really saying 'not in my name'. it is not voting tory which is the vilest act, it is voting for any party and legitimating the whole. and if you can not understand that, and if you cannot understand why people vote, then you're not going to be able to change their habits. you make out they're a load of sheeple, which really isn't a triumph of thought - critical or otherwise. your moaning about the msm - a term i first saw some years ago on the bnp website, incidentally, is simple frothing - what would you propose to do to change people's minds and to supply them with the accurate information they would need to make up their minds?


----------



## mx wcfc (Aug 24, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 144895



Links don't work.


----------



## andysays (Aug 24, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Who needs WTO rules anyway?




So the head of the WTO is essentially saying that if Britain leaves the EU without a deal, it will then be illegal under existing rules for anyone in this country to export or import any goods or services to or from any EU country. Have I got that right?


----------



## Kesher (Aug 24, 2018)

Jason Hunter (former international trade negotiator) destroys Jonathon Isaby of Brexit Central.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 24, 2018)

That would be Jason Hunter the libdem cunt and defender of austerity.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

Is he one of the 'just a blokes"?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

Thanks though kesher. For the vid.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i have not tried to persuade you that there isn't.


You stated that a lack of critical thinking did not explain people's voting choices or the fact that people are not rising up against capitalism. That is how this conversation started.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> what would you propose to do to change people's minds and to supply them with the accurate information they would need to make up their minds?


I doubt I have anything original to contribute and I'm not sure theres anything that can actually be done about it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You stated that a lack of critical thinking did not explain people's voting choices or the fact that people are not rising up against capitalism. That is how this conversation started.


No I didn't


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no you can't. or you wouldn't fart on and on about tory voters. i don't know if you can recall the years 1997 to 2010. but the labour government then was every bit as venal and as vile as the conservative government you abominate. the labour councils in london demolishing housing estates safe in the knowledge they won't be themselves turfed out: they do not seem to attract your ire as much as the tory voters. simply voting means agreeing to take part in the system, whereas refusing to vote is taking a step outside, really saying 'not in my name'. it is not voting tory which is the vilest act, it is voting for any party and legitimating the whole. and if you can not understand that, and if you cannot understand why people vote, then you're not going to be able to change their habits. you make out they're a load of sheeple, which really isn't a triumph of thought - critical or otherwise. your moaning about the msm - a term i first saw some years ago on the bnp website, incidentally, is simple frothing - what would you propose to do to change people's minds and to supply them with the accurate information they would need to make up their minds?


I'm aware that Labour are not the ultimate answer but I can understand why working class people vote for them and get involved in the party, people are under the impression that they will be better off with a Labour government and think they are more moral, or atleast have their interests in mind- I kinda get that, not that I would be saying that if the neo-liberals were still in control of the party. But atleast Labour came out of the trade union movement and can be said to be pro-working class, or atleast can easily be seen to be by alot of working class voters, they come across as genuine about introducing a proper living wage, taxing the rich etc and I can understand why people think they would be more competent as a government. The tories have robbed people of their infrastructure and Labour want to offer people that vital infrastructure they have been denied, atleast they claim to. I understand that it's socialsed capitalism we are talking about but theres no real pretense of that with the tories, they have really fucked over the working class and I therefore don't get why people, working class people, insist on voting them in again and again. It's frustrating. And it is equally frustrating and sad that there is no genuine anti-capitalist movement to speak of and I guess it gives me a dim view of people. A lack of critial thinking though does seem to be a reason for this, and a good one, a good explanation. And a lack of critical thinking seems to be what I regularly encounter from people who don't think the same way as me and don't get my politics.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

So, were you shevek or not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I'm aware that Labour are not the ultimate answer but I can understand why working class people vote for them and get involved in the party, people are under the impression that they will be better off with a Labour government and think they are more moral, or atleast have their interests in mind- I kinda get that, not that I would be saying that if the neo-liberals were still in control of the party. But atleast Labour came out of the trade union movement and can be said to be pro-working class, or atleast can easily be seen to be by alot of working class voters, they come across as genuine about introducing a proper living wage, taxing the rich etc and I can understand why people think they would be more competent as a government. The tories have robbed people of their infrastructure and Labour want to offer people that vital infrastructure they have been denied, atleast they claim to. I understand that it's socialsed capitalism we are talking about but theres no real pretense of that with the tories, they have really fucked over the working class and I therefore don't get why people, working class people, insist on voting them in again and again. It's frustrating. And it is equally frustrating and sad that there is no genuine anti-capitalist movement to speak of and I guess it gives me a dim view of people. A lack of critial thinking though does seem to be a reason for this, and a good one, a good explanation.


Labour can be said to be pro-working class. Can they really?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Labour can be said to be pro-working class. Can they really?


They can easily be viewed that way by working class people, especially when you compare their manifesto to what we know about how the tories have fucked over entire working class communities up and down the country.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No I didn't


You fucking did!


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

I mean, what the fuck would you possibly think you were going to gain by voting Tory?! Atleast, on the face of it, with Labour you've got more money in your wallet, more social housing, a properly resourced and funded NHS, more hospitals, more accessible and better education system etc etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> They can easily be viewed that way by working class people, especially when you compare their manifesto to what we know about how the tories have fucked over entire working class communities up and down the country.


Yeh? How many actual working class MPs do they have? Dennis skinner and...? You know nothing if you think the last Labour government was in any way pro-working class. Did you see what they did to Liverpool? Did the Labour government get rid of anti-union laws?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh? How many actual working class MPs do they have? Dennis skinner and...? You know nothing if you think the last Labour government was in any way pro-working class. Did you see what they did to Liverpool? Did the Labour government get rid of anti-union laws?


Why would people think Corbyn is anti-union? He might be in practice but I don't see why you'd think most people would think so.

I'll repeat it again, for the last time- I don't think Labour are genuinely pro-working class, but I can understand why working class people think they are. Atleast, I get why alot of working class people think they'll be better off with Labour in power.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You stated that a lack of critical thinking did not explain people's voting choices or the fact that people are not rising up against capitalism. That is how this conversation started.


no it isn't.

this is how the conversation started:


a lack of critical thinking is not the only explanation.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh? How many actual working class MPs do they have? Dennis skinner and...? You know nothing if you think the last Labour government was in any way pro-working class. Did you see what they did to Liverpool? Did the Labour government get rid of anti-union laws?


You are trying to set up a straw man anyway, I wasn't referring to the last Labour government. I was referring to the current Labour Party.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Why would people think Corbyn is anti-union? He might be in practice but I don't see why you'd think most people would think so.
> 
> I'll repeat it again, for the last time- I don't think Labour are genuinely pro-working class, but I can understand why working class people think they are. Atleast, I get why alot of working class people think they'll be better off with Labour in power.


given the breath-taking display of reasoning and prejudice you've displayed on this thread i don't think you understand any of that.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

OK, fair enough, it's not the ONLY explanation. But it's certainly a big part of it in my opinion. I thought you were dissmissing it completely, my mistake. Sorry.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You are trying to set up a straw man anyway, I wasn't referring to the last Labour government. I was referring to the current Labour Party.


yeh. how many working class labour mps are there now. this minute. 5:30pm on 24 august 2018. and how many of those labour mps now serving who were also there when gordon brown doubled - DOUBLED! - tax for low earners, how many of them voted against the measure?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> OK, fair enough, it's not the ONLY explanation. But it's certainly a big part of it in my opinion. I thought you were dissmissing it completely, my mistake. Sorry.


i think there's no need to continue this conversation now you say you were wrong all along.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> given the breath-taking display of reasoning and prejudice you've displayed on this thread i don't think you understand any of that.





Pickman's model said:


> You really can be a grade A cock-ring at times, frequently infact- someone needs to let you know.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

It must come from the fact that you are the sort of sad individual who spends pretty much 24/7 on these forums. Ciao.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Shevek said:


> I must be one of the ignorant, unenlightened sheeple. And you must be the better anarchist, supreme arbiter of


yeh when in doubt resort to ad hom bullshit. i know your sort, shevek.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> It must come from the fact that you are the sort of sad individual who spends pretty much 24/7 on these forums. Ciao.


do you think there's something wrong with posting here? if you don't like posting here, no one's making you. 

you're the sort of sad individual who, to understand a very simple point, needs it ramming down their throat 15 or 20 times before comprehension sinks in.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

I love how you'll accept that Labour are anti-working class whereas on the other hand, trying to get you to admit the same about the IRA would be much more of a job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I love how you'll accept that Labour are anti-working class whereas on the other hand, trying to get you to admit the same about the IRA would be much more of a job.


a job you wouldn't be up to anyway. incidentally, i didn't 'accept' labour were anti-working class, i said it to you. you said you didn't see them as the ultimate solution; you didn't like them being criticised: i see them as an integral part of the problem.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 24, 2018)

You really are sad, I would pity you if you weren't such an arrogant, petty, vindictive prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You really are sad, I would pity you if you weren't such an arrogant, petty, vindictive prick.


jesus, you can't even throw a hurtful insult.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

anyway, back to brexit.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> So the head of the WTO is essentially saying that if Britain leaves the EU without a deal, it will then be illegal under existing rules for anyone in this country to export or import any goods or services to or from any EU country. Have I got that right?


More here:


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 24, 2018)

wtf is brexit central?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> wtf is brexit central?


It's where me and ye and that hang out get our ideas. Have you not been? Oh it's fab.


----------



## JimW (Aug 24, 2018)

We pledge to closely follow Brexit Central with Xi Jinping Boris Johnson at its core.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> More here:



Ian Dunt who does remaniacs. 

All aboard for tory remain!


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> It's where me and ye and that hang out get our ideas. Have you not been? Oh it's fab.


Not yet. Do they accept blokes?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Not yet. Do they accept blokes?


Yeah, but not bloke blokes.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, but not bloke blokes.


Ah bummer, so not like them pub and party things all them remain blokes go to. Sounds well naff.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Is he one of the 'just a blokes"?



Don't have good arguments. Why not try "Project Sneer"


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 24, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Don't have good arguments. Why not try "Project Sneer"


The 'bloke' was discussed upthread.
Arguments were made.


----------



## sealion (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I don't see how voting Tory will bring about any kind of solution


Ditto for the lot of them.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

I think _the betters_ campaign is bearing fruit. Now a second referendum is what they talk about. The window has shifted to this. A PR washed democratised denial of democracy. 

Any change in tone from the _ha ha you'll die soon as you're poor and old _into this_ let the people speak_ crap gratefully received.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> It's where me and ye and that hang out get our ideas. Have you not been? Oh it's fab.


Yeah our motto is Go Hard or Go Home


DexterTCN said:


> HoratioCuthbert
> 
> I appreciate your frankness and the way you intertwine brexit and indy and the complex local politics/family politics et al that go along with divisive issues.  And your personal efforts with refugees are to be lauded.
> 
> ...


hello, late in.
I’m really shit at picking out quotes on this fucking phone as it takes ages and do not have another device.

In brief-
“Greece” hasn’t been given an option on whether to remain in the EU or not. A lot of people hear Varoufakis talking and think that’s the voice of Greece. The British establishment thought remain had it in the bag, I wouldn’t make the same bet with Greece tbh.

I mind the crowdfunder against Carmichael and personally know  2 of  the people who took him to court. At least two of the Orkney four voted remain with nose held, btw.
 I protested against Carmichael with these people, and they in turn were involved with refugee stuff with me.  Of course I was involved in Indy groups!  Similar people
to me voted leave.
A Yes vote does not automatically lead to a remain, and leave vote certainly doesn’t signal a lack of involvement in Yes. I even made my own “Aye” logo and series of photos using same font as “Yes” so fuck you


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 24, 2018)

Ooops, wrong thread


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 24, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Here's Corbyn's statement on the matter, conveniently timed for sunset on a Friday


Think you might have posted the wrong thread.


----------



## sealion (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> more social housing,


Not in London, did you not read the link i put up earlier. Lambeth (labour) are in the process of building a shiney new town hall, whilst socially cleansing the working classes from there homes to make way for the middle classes and buy to let landlords, as are southwark, Lewisham, Tower hamlets, all labour run. The amount of affordable housing and social rents on the new builds are minimal and tokenism at best.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 24, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Think you might have posted the wrong thread.



Damn multiple tabs! Damn them to hell!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

sealion said:


> Not in London, did you not read the link i put up earlier. Lambeth (labour) are in the process of building a shiney new town hall, whilst socially cleansing the working classes from there homes to make way for the middle classes and buy to let landlords, as are southwark, Lewisham, Tower hamlets, all labour run. The amount of affordable housing and social rents on the new builds are minimal and tokenism at best.


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Damn multiple tabs! Damn them to hell!


Leave it here anyway spread Corbyns belated attack on anti-semitism far and wide


----------



## sealion (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> with Labour you've got more money in your wallet, more social housing, a properly resourced and funded NHS, more hospitals, more accessible and better education system etc etc


Are you a second hand car salesman?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

sealion said:


> Are you a second hand car salesman?


MORE MONEY IN YOUR WALLET


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

The problem was with identifying a group of people as anti-english ironically in front of a crowd of anti-semites.

Look, the talk that night, it was comedy. The people it appeared with? Fuck that.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

God damn, i'm on wrong thread too, Sorry.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The problem was with identifying a group of people as anti-english ironically in front of a crowd of anti-semites.
> 
> Look, the talk that night, it was comedy. The people it appeared with? Fuck that.


Totally lost, which strands are you replying to? I can’t keep up with Labours adventures


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> God damn, i'm on wrong thread too, Sorry.


Maybe there’s a good god, damn

Nah fuck it now I’m drunk


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Totally lost, which strands are you replying to? I can’t keep up with Labours adventures



Sos, back on the corbyn thread


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I mean, what the fuck would you possibly think you were going to gain by voting Tory?! Atleast, on the face of it, with Labour you've got more money in your wallet, more social housing, a properly resourced and funded NHS, more hospitals, more accessible and better education system etc etc




Who *introduced* uni tuition fees?

Who pfi'd all the hospitals?

Who is knocking down social housing more than the tories?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Sos, back on the corbyn thread


I thought you were being triple sarcastic


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Who *introduced* uni tuition fees?
> 
> Who pfi'd all the hospitals?
> 
> Who is knocking down social housing more than the tories?


On the face of it thought


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah our motto is Go Hard or Go Home
> 
> hello, late in.
> I’m really shit at picking out quotes on this fucking phone as it takes ages and do not have another device.
> ...


No-one, whether Greece or any other country, is forced to stay in the EU...this is a brexit thread after all.  You say you're leaving, there's a period of negotiation, you're gone.

Indy and brexit are separate...brexit won't lead to less pfi (banned up here) or free tuition (available in Scotland) or building social housing (guess what). We have those things and want to keep them.

No one knows what comes from brexit but it's not any of those things.  There's been too much of a swing to the right in the UK and I doubt it will change.

And if you're involved in yes you can tell me about merida or marles, no doubt?


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The 'bloke' was discussed upthread.
> Arguments were made.



Not really there was just more brain dead sneering.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Don't have good arguments.


Never mind, maybe some will occur to you later


----------



## billbond (Aug 24, 2018)

Big Demo in Deptford(south London) this week as well , Labour Council(spit) behind it.
Planning on building on a small park and knocking down some flats to make way for flats for the rich.
Labour the party for  ordinary folk 
Tell that to the people in that area of London
#social-cleansing


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Never mind, maybe some will occur to you later



Your in the box Mr P. Its up to you to come up with arguments. Unless your're a braindead Tumpist deflectionist.  You should go to bed.


----------



## pocketscience (Aug 24, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Not really there was just more brain dead sneering.


I don't recall you replying (or anyone come to that) to the point I made that the 'bloke' bases his argument entirely on a hard brexit scenario where the UK is the sole recipient of any negative impacts.
Does he mention In this new video what will happen at midnight on 29th march 2019 to the EU if they refuse to have a reciprocal agreement for services? more specifically who will do the €1.2Tn a day of Euroclearing transactions of euro currency based trading that's currently done in London? 90% of euro based trade! I'd genuinely be interested to know.
From what I can gather it's the one service that if the EU were to block, it will leave them penniless within days... likely unable to pay for oil, gas, cheddar cheese and other foreign shit.
Does he explain how Airbus will get their wings, engines, flight deck equipment to the assembly plants in Touluse and Hamburg? BMW it's Minis?

But whatever. enough brain dead sneering. we need to focus on Armageddon!


----------



## sealion (Aug 24, 2018)

It's becoming to much for some remainers
https://inews.co.uk/news/health/brexit-effect-remain-supporters-psychological-disorder/


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> No-one, whether Greece or any other country, is forced to stay in the EU...this is a brexit thread after all.  You say you're leaving, there's a period of negotiation, you're gone.
> 
> Indy and brexit are separate...brexit won't lead to less pfi (banned up here) or free tuition (available in Scotland) or building social housing (guess what). We have those things and want to keep them.
> 
> ...



No I’ve no idea what you are on about but I googled Merida and it appears to refer to some American memes ridiculing Scots language on twitter? Twitter isn’t massively used in Orkney in my experience where I live- even by the councillors etc:..  but they do actually still speak a derivative of Scots here, unlike many places. Say Inverness, where I grew up.
First twitter result linked to Harry Josephine talking about it, strangely a trans Orcadian, now in Glasgow of the punk band Fit To Work.
Why would poor knowledge of “MERIDA” prove I’ve never been involved with Yes Orkney?


ETA: Fit To Work are an amazing live band. 
/plug


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Your in the box Mr P. Its up to you to come up with arguments. Unless your're a braindead Tumpist deflectionist.  You should go to bed.


Maybe some actual arguments will occur to you later. But then again maybe not.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Maybe some actual arguments will occur to you later. But then again maybe not.


Typical Tump defelction


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Typical Tump defelction


Defelction? I'll not hear that sort of language used


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> ..Why would poor knowledge of “MERIDA” prove I’ve never been involved with Yes Orkney?...


I didn't say that, I said you would be aware of these things if you were involved in the indy movement.  That means you miss out on a lot of information.

Here's a marles.

Good Morning Scotland presenter comes under fire after ‘car crash’ interview

And here's your local twitter group that will introduce you to large parts of the networking via posts, discussions, links and searchable hashtags.  No-one has to be alone and no-one cares about your political persuasion.

Yes Orkney (@AyeOrkney) on Twitter

The best best site, of course, is Wings Over Scotland


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

Dexter, Yes Orkney isn’t a twitter group, it’s a group that uses twitter, as well as Facebook and email. Why are you trying to introduce me to my friends(and enemies... !)


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Dexter, Yes Orkney isn’t a twitter group, it’s a group that uses twitter, as well as Facebook and email. Why are you trying to introduce me to my friends(and enemies... !)


Because your previous comments imply you, and DotCommunist,  don't know what you're talking about and I was posting links in case you wanted to engage positively in indy.

The Scotsman pays out to Wings Over Scotland over accusations against founder Rev. Stuart Campbell



> Campbell also denied a claim in the Scotsman article that he had once blamed the 96 victims of the Hillsborough disaster for the crush that killed them, and said he had in fact said that other Liverpool fans there on the day “were partly culpable for the deaths of the 96”, not the victims themselves.
> 
> The article was subsequently removed from the Scotsman website the same day, and a correction published. However, Campbell pursued the case further and a financial compensation settlement was reached out of court.
> 
> ...



Stuart Campbell (game journalist) - Wikipedia



> Comments made by Campbell on his personal blog Wings Over Sealand in 2012 relating to the Hillsborough disaster caused controversy[61]by suggesting that "[Liverpool] fans were to blame because they, alone, were the ones who pushed and thereby caused the crush". Later Campbell said: "I stand absolutely by the stuff that I've written about Hillsborough".[1] On 13 June 2014, _The Scotsman_ published an article which represented Campbell's views on the tragedy as "blaming the 96 victims of the Hillsborough disaster for the crush that killed them"[62](but admitted falsely accusing him of using the site "to call on nationalist campaigners to photograph their opponents so that they can be publicly identified"). The paper removed the allegations on the same day and published a correction.[63] Later that year, an out-of-court settlement was reached, with the paper paying Campbell over £6,000 in damages and costs.[64]



False accusations that are still repeated here.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because your previous comments imply you, and DotCommunist,  don't know what you're talking about and I was posting links in case you wanted to engage positively in indy.
> 
> The Scotsman pays out to Wings Over Scotland over accusations against founder Rev. Stuart Campbell
> 
> ...



He sounds like a Rt Rev'd cunt.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> your moaning about the msm - a term i first saw some years ago on the bnp website


LOL! You dumb twat!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

Anyway, is nobody else freaking out right now? It's gonna be CHAOS maaaaaaaaaaan

Terms of Service Violation


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Because your previous comments imply you, and DotCommunist,  don't know what you're talking about and I was posting links in case you wanted to engage positively in indy.
> 
> The Scotsman pays out to Wings Over Scotland over accusations against founder Rev. Stuart Campbell
> 
> ...


He said, as it quotes him saying again in the fucking bit you’ve quoted *the fans* were responsible for the victims deaths. Just as The Sun did years ago. 
I saw the tweets.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

Not only are we gonna run out of spunk but it's giving people anxiety disorders! 

"Dr Stuart said that there was a “loss of behavioural control” for many Remainers now we’ve taken the decision to leave the EU, which was causing them to act differently. He said for the traditional liberal elite, leaving the EU was “incredibly anxiety-provoking”. He added: “Human beings hate uncertainty… this is something that people living in poverty know only too well. And now, all of a sudden, the professional, liberal, educated middle class is getting a taste of this. It feels horrible — literally ‘feels,’ because we’re experiencing a physical stress response.”

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/brexit-effect-remain-supporters-psychological-disorder/


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

Engaging positively in Indy is refreshing Wings Over Scotland website to see new content. Here’s me thinking it was bringing a bottle of whisky around to the Green Yes House in Stromness after the pubs shut


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

Where Stalin stands up, in his trademark wooly jumper, proclaiming YER DOIN A HASHTAG:MARLES


ok urban sorry, derail ends. This is just literally the weirdest chat I’ve had on here !


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> LOL! You dumb twat!


Yeh. That's as incisive a political argument as you're able to construct.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh when in doubt resort to ad hom bullshit. i know your sort, shevek.


The difference is, you insult people in an arrogant way without flaming and you make sure you get in there first with the insults, presumably because it makes you feel all clever. I simply responded to that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> The difference is, you insult people in an arrogant way without flaming and you make sure you get in there first with the insults, presumably because it makes you feel all clever. I simply responded to that.


The difference is i can put together an argument which stands up to examination and you can't.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

In your opinion


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> He said, as it quotes him saying again in the fucking bit you’ve quoted *the fans* were responsible for the victims deaths. Just as The Sun did years ago.
> I saw the tweets.


Of course your memory of some tweets (feel free to quote them) will be much better than documented legal action and subsequent retraction, apology and payment.  You'll be right and the links will be wrong. (otherwise you'd be putting editor in a position where you are repeating allegations that have been confirmed as false against a heavily-funded individual that loves to sue people)

You should contact The Scotsman and explain how they can get their money back - you could get a nice little fee.  Urban does remind me of their comments sections sometimes tbh.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Of course your memory of some tweets (feel free to quote them) will be much better than documented legal action and subsequent retraction, apology and payment.  You'll be right and the links will be wrong. (otherwise you'd be putting editor in a position where you are repeating allegations that have been confirmed as false against a heavily-funded individual that loves to sue people)
> 
> You should contact The Scotsman and explain how they can get their money back - you could get a nice little fee.  Urban does remind me of their comments sections sometimes tbh.


“and said he had in fact said that other Liverpool fans there on the day “were partly culpable for the deaths of the 96”, not the victims themselves.”

 

In full from CommonSpace Scotland: 


Jonathan Rimmer: We need to talk about Wings Over Scotland


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> In your opinion


You haven't managed this far on this thread. You say you've been exposed to critical thinking but I see no evidence of that. None of your replies to my posts are more than facile. If you'd listened to and thought about Martin's videos you'd not come out with the utter shite you do. Martin did seven or eight videos during last year's general election and if you'd taken on board the points he made you'd not make such a prat of yourself as you have on this thread. The problem isn't the relatively small number of working class tories but the far larger number of working class labour voters, who are the people upon who you should concentrate your persuasive efforts, such as they are. I would suggest you go away and think about things but I'm reluctantly coming to the conclusion that's not really on the cards.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You haven't managed this far on this thread. You say you've been exposed to critical thinking but I see no evidence of that. None of your replies to my posts are more than facile. If you'd listened to and thought about Martin's videos you'd not come out with the utter shite you do. Martin did seven or eight videos during last year's general election and if you'd taken on board the points he made you'd not make such a prat of yourself as you have on this thread. The problem isn't the relatively small number of working class tories but the far larger number of working class labour voters, who are the people upon who you should concentrate your persuasive efforts, such as they are. I would suggest you go away and think about things but I'm reluctantly coming to the conclusion that's not really on the cards.


I think about things alot,and I experience life as a poor, working class person. But according to you I'm just thick, then you wonder why people insult you.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

I've got better things to do with my time than be insulted by someone who is supposed to be on the same side and who thinks I should justify myself to them with evidence of critical thinking as if they are some kind of supreme judge of politics or anarchism or whatever.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

It really makes me wonder what the point of being on these forums is and also whether theres any point bothering with the (pretty much non-existent) anarchist scene.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Another reason people will turn to Labour because the anarchists aren't coming to the rescue any time soon, if ever at all, the 'movement' is pretty much dead and full of dogmatism. It comes across as an 'elite' clique. Labour is the only conceivable alternative for a hell of alot of working class people.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You haven't managed this far on this thread. You say you've been exposed to critical thinking but I see no evidence of that. None of your replies to my posts are more than facile. If you'd listened to and thought about Martin's videos you'd not come out with the utter shite you do. Martin did seven or eight videos during last year's general election and if you'd taken on board the points he made you'd not make such a prat of yourself as you have on this thread. The problem isn't the relatively small number of working class tories but the far larger number of working class labour voters, who are the people upon who you should concentrate your persuasive efforts, such as they are. I would suggest you go away and think about things but I'm reluctantly coming to the conclusion that's not really on the cards.


But according to Martin, from what I recall of a past video, he can understand why working class people vote UKIP and states that we shouldn't judge them too harshly for it. But somehow voting Labour is incomprehensible? That doesn't make sense as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I think about things alot,and I experience life as a poor, working class person. But according to you I'm just thick, then you wonder why people insult you.


If time after time someone no matter their background says things which do not follow then yes I will conclude sooner or later that maybe they're not that bright. This has no bearing on their wealth or class as anyone who has seen my posts on the current administration will agree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> But according to Martin, from what I recall of a past video, he can understand why working class people vote UKIP and states that we shouldn't judge them too harshly for it. But somehow voting Labour is incomprehensible? That doesn't make sense as far as I'm concerned.


I never said people's voting Labour was incomprehensible.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Who *introduced* uni tuition fees?
> 
> Who pfi'd all the hospitals?
> 
> Who is knocking down social housing more than the tories?


Isn't that the neo-liberals in the party though?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Isn't that the neo-liberals in the party though?


Right not the real labour party, I see


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I never said people's voting Labour was incomprehensible.


You implied it and Martin doesn't seem to understand it either


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Right not the real labour party, I see


Well that's my understanding of it, I could well be wrong. I don't think I've seen anyone on the left in the party supporting it though, or doing it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You implied it and Martin doesn't seem to understand it either


Jesus Mary and Joseph  where did I imply it?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

This is a waste of my time


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If time after time someone no matter their background says things which do not follow then yes I will conclude sooner or later that maybe they're not that bright. This has no bearing on their wealth or class as anyone who has seen my posts on the current administration will agree.


Get fucked you condescending arsehole!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

Yup


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Well that's my understanding of it, I could well be wrong. I don't think I've seen anyone on the left in the party supporting it though, or doing it.


Have you seen anyone like John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else out of the campaign group saying Labour councils should stop knocking down estates to make way for yuppie flats?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

Damn you fucked up my timely reply


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Cunt!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Get fucked you condescending arsehole!


If you can explain in any other way why time after time you say I've said something I haven't, I'd be interested to hear it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> This is a waste of my time


Yes, yes it is.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> But according to Martin, from what I recall of a past video, he can understand why working class people vote UKIP and states that we shouldn't judge them too harshly for it. But somehow voting Labour is incomprehensible? That doesn't make sense as far as I'm concerned.



I broadly like Martin's content and I don't vote Labour, but you have a fair point here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Cunt!


Do you think that in real life your ascending to insults will influence people in the way you desire?


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

I know you think yourself uber intelligent and all but's really not intelligent to look down on those who are on the same side as you.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

That's all I'll say for now, shame I've wasted so much time 'communicating' with you.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> I broadly like Martin's content and I don't vote Labour, but you have a fair point here.


Fuzzy duck


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I know you think yourself uber intelligent and all but's really not intelligent to look down on those who are on the same side as you.


I don't think I'm uber intelligent, there's lots of people here cleverer than me. And more erudite, for that matter.

I don't think it's at all clever to call people names as a substitute for engaging with what they're saying.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> “and said he had in fact said that other Liverpool fans there on the day “were partly culpable for the deaths of the 96”, not the victims themselves.”
> 
> View attachment 144965
> 
> ...


lol!

You're posting allegations from a RISE member opinion piece?  Engineered by Haggerty? On CS?  (Haggerty stopped people from commenting on articles to cover the outrage at what was happening on the left/indy site and was later ejected, she was also commended by an editor of The Times in Scotland).

She outed Mhari Black's partner as gay.  

Former Common Space Editor slammed over twitter ‘outing’ of gay SNP MP’s partner

She attacked iScot as well.

iScot magazine targeted by rivals in social media attack

She sided with Dugdale.

My turn to be offended

nah

Haggerty tried to act like the voice of indy, her true colours shone through quite quickly.

I'm going to leave this now.	I suggest you try to get your info from a wider variety of sources than that lot because I can guess where it's coming from.  It's not education, it's indoctrination.   And it makes you look stupid.

Rimmer!  LOL


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

I can't believe I've given you lot links about No Deal sperm shortages and Remoaner anxiety disorders on a lovely owd Saturday and all I'm getting is some rather bizarre beef tbqhwy. 

It's not really much better to say that other Liverpool fans present that day were responsible for the deaths of the 96 than the 96 themselves is it really? And I don't think anyone who purports to put forward any kind of class politics should be writing off millions of working class voters as morally reprehensible really do you? 

Ok good stuff lets move on.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I can't believe I've given you lot links about No Deal sperm shortages and Remoaner anxiety disorders on a lovely owd Saturday and all I'm getting is some rather bizarre beef tbqhwy.
> 
> It's not really much better to say that other Liverpool fans present that day were responsible for the deaths of the 96 than the 96 themselves is it really? And I don't think anyone who purports to put forward any kind of class politics should be writing off millions of working class voters as morally reprehensible really do you?
> 
> Ok good stuff lets move on.



I was dyeing my hair socialist red anyway


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you seen anyone like John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn or anyone else out of the campaign group saying Labour councils should stop knocking down estates to make way for yuppie flats?


Jeremy Corbyn has declared war on Labour councils over housing | Aditya Chakrabortty


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think it's at all clever to call people names as a substitute for engaging with what they're saying.


Neither do I but it's what you drive people to.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think I'm uber intelligent, there's lots of people here cleverer than me. And more erudite, for that matter.


You come across as smug and condescending


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 25, 2018)

Thanks 



Pickman's model said:


> I don't think I'm uber intelligent, there's lots of people here cleverer than me. And more erudite, for that matter.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 25, 2018)

Hang on, what's erudite mean?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Hang on, what's erudite mean?


Well-read


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Jeremy Corbyn has declared war on Labour councils over housing | Aditya Chakrabortty


How goes the war?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Well-read



"Pickaman's could turn any conversation into an erudite discussion"


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> You come across as smug and condescending


Yeh. It's all my fault you can't cobble an argument together. Carry on wasting your time, chief.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)




----------



## MickiQ (Aug 25, 2018)

The man's a loon, I can imagine the ROI goverment just vetoing any UK-EU deal than includes any such suggestion.


----------



## Ax^ (Aug 25, 2018)

he a loon but not stupid the guys set to make a fortune 
when the UK leaves the single market


----------



## Humirax (Aug 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh. It's all my fault you can't cobble an argument together. Carry on wasting your time, chief.


Blow it outta your arse cuntchops!


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Blow it outta your arse cuntchops!


Could you not just put him on ignore like other people do?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




So he will have people inspected.
The border is some 400km long.
That's a great big jobbie he's suggesting.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So he will have people inspected.
> The border is some 400km long.
> That's a great big jobbie he's suggesting.


I have a concern about the way such stuff is becoming normalised in discourse...like history didn't happen.

He'll probably be the next chancellor.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I have a concern about the way such stuff is becoming normalised in discourse...like history didn't happen.
> 
> He'll probably be the next chancellor.



Will he fuck


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Will he fuck


he'd like to emulate previous chancellors


----------



## sealion (Aug 25, 2018)

He never said he will have people inspected. Listen to it again.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Will he fuck


You'll accept that a large part of brexit was internal tory power-play politics yeah?

The far-right have won...he's one of them.  

But on the other hand...would you have him as Home Secretary?  In charge of the police and justice?  Imagine him in charge of that.

They'll take their rewards.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2018)

'There would be our ability to have people inspected' is what he says.
Well there wouldn't be the ability to have people inspected on such a long border without it being a massive job.


----------



## sealion (Aug 25, 2018)

As they already do, but don't do it constantly, they have the ability to but, not everyone does get checked, slightly different to what you wrote.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You'll accept that a large part of brexit was internal tory power-play politics yeah?
> 
> The far-right have won...he's one of them.
> 
> ...



Yes, a large part of the referendum was about Tory internal politics - I agree with you that far.

But the far right haven't won - what have they won? They don't have the numbers to leave the Single Market, they're just cursing from the sidelines.

As for Rees-Mogg getting near one of the top two positions in British politics, wind yer neck in.

I can guarantee you were convinced BoJo would take over when Cameron resigned, I don't even need to ask you. So were a lot of people who don't understand internal Tory party politics. Meanwhile I was making bank - I had May to take over at 5/1 before the odds collapsed


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 25, 2018)

It's top 3 jobs...PM, Chancellor and HS.

When Cameron resigned I, everybody else and the tories no doubt, had little idea which 'cream' if you like, would rise to the top.  Typically it seems like the worst options are to the fore.

And telling me about winning a bet would carry more weight if you tell me about 100 other bets you made and what happened


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's top 3 jobs...PM, Chancellor and HS.
> 
> When Cameron resigned I, everybody else and the tories no doubt, had little idea which 'cream' if you like, would rise to the top.  Typically it seems like the worst options are to the fore.
> 
> And telling me about winning a bet would carry more weight if you tell me about 100 other bets you made and what happened



Oh give over May was quiet during ref despite being Remain therefore was the only viable unity candidate wasn't that difficult! But because everyone was insisting that Johnson would be PM the odds on May were ludicrous. 

I can tell you that Wolves Hand of God tribute act cost me a lot today, that handball must have ruined a record number of accumulators


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> 'There would be our ability to have people inspected' is what he says.
> Well there wouldn't be the ability to have people inspected on such a long border without it being a massive job.



It’s alright, with no minimum wage it’ll be fairly cheap to hire G4S/Serco goons to police the border.


----------



## xarmian (Aug 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The man's a loon, I can imagine the ROI goverment just vetoing any UK-EU deal than includes any such suggestion.


Already vetoed in the Joint Report.

_49. The United Kingdom remains committed to protecting North-South cooperation and to its guarantee of avoiding a hard border. Any future arrangements must be compatible with these overarching requirements. The United Kingdom's intention is to achieve these objectives through the overall EU-UK relationship. Should this not be possible, the United Kingdom will propose specific solutions to address the unique circumstances of the island of Ireland. In the absence of agreed solutions, the United Kingdom will maintain full alignment with those rules of the Internal Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the allisland economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.

50. In the absence of agreed solutions, as set out in the previous paragraph, the United Kingdom will ensure that no new regulatory barriers develop between Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Kingdom, unless, consistent with the 1998 Agreement, the Northern Ireland Executive and Assembly agree that distinct arrangements are appropriate for Northern Ireland. In all circumstances, the United Kingdom will continue to ensure the same unfettered access for Northern Ireland's businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market._​
That's already impossible without a very soft UK-wide Brexit. Chequers was inching towards that.  Rees-Mogg is raising the temperature talking about people crossing the border. That puts the Common Travel Agreement under threat when it was only goods transit being discussed before. He's trying to use anti-immigrant sentiment to push for a hard border, no withdrawal deal and no transition period.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

With no minimum wage it would be fairly cheap to bribe those goons.


----------



## Humirax (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Could you not just put him on ignore like other people do?


Ignoring the tragic attention whore makes sense, thankyou for the advice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2018)

Humirax said:


> Ignoring the tragic attention whore makes sense, thankyou for the advice.


Yeh that will help the coherence of your arguments in future


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.

Are they legit?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.
> 
> Are they legit?


Yes.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yes.


So Brexit's fucked then


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> So Brexit's fucked then


It's all fucked.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> So Brexit's fucked then


Well that depends on who you ask!  

Their points and concerns seem 'forensic' enough.  I know it's not proper use of forensic but I refuse to engage my brain too much on a sunday morning to think of a better word.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> So I keep getting videos show up on my YouTubes feed from the 'three brexit blokes' or someone called 'Jason J Hunter'. They give the appearance of being well informed, though anti-brexit.
> 
> Are they legit?



They are legit authentic blokes they have pints and pay per click advertising and everything.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> So Brexit's fucked then



It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...

The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place. 

If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier? 

To me, as one who voted remain, it seems that the whole of the remain campaign has completely lost its mind and is - effectively - screaming that an unhappy marriage can't be allowed to end because it would mean smaller houses and less expensive cars and holidays for the parties involved, that happiness can only be derived from material wealth and that identity and what a party in that failing marriage wants out of their life is far less important, indeed irrelevant, compared to the difference between the joint and separate earning power of the couple - however unhappy.

It's lunacy, utterly myopic lunacy.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Are they legit?


At what?


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> At what?



Are they credible sources.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...
> 
> The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place.
> 
> ...


Not sure that analogy holds given that, if the claims of the likes of the people I mentioned are true, there are significant consequences to leaving such that leaving at this time would simply leave us economically bereft.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Are they credible sources.


Depends what side of the fence you're on i suppose. A few pro eu millionaires that have done very well for themselves are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> It depends what you mean by 'fucked' and what you think the intention of Brexit was in the first place...
> 
> The 'remain' opposition to Brexit, it seems to me, focuses entirely on economics and trade, somewhat ignoring the fact that both the overwhelming majority of the Brexit vote, and the 20+ years of Tory opposition to EU membership wasn't about economics and trade in the first place.
> 
> ...


Irrespective of the nationalist guff fed to their base/electorate, tory notions of Brexit have only ever been based upon accelerating capital's withdrawal from the supposed post-war consensus and transition from welfare state to consolidator/oligarchic state.

It's all about the base.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Not sure that analogy holds given that, if the claims of the likes of the people I mentioned are true, there are significant consequences to leaving such that leaving at this time would simply leave us economically bereft.



I'm assuming you've never got divorced...


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 26, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> ACAB _is_ a systemic analysis - it's the system that produces these people, it can do nothing but. There can be no substantive fightback by individual coppers because a) that's not what the system is for or produces b) the wider system relies on the sub-system of policing to operate as it does. Therefore, despite any personal niceness  - and there are plenty of nice coppers - the system must prevail and they must take up and play their role in it. Therefore ACAB. Until the social functions that state policing have enclosed from wider society are returned by popular collective action and the specialised skills they have developed are democratised then ACAB.
> 
> Will that do?
> 
> (God what boring crap)


yes  most people I come across would be more greatly affected in a democratic way by that argument, than a simple all coppers are bastards, which is a statement you have proven is incorrect.  Perhaps all coppers have to be bastards


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I'm assuming you've never got divorced...


I'd rather people speak plainly, I find metaphors difficult to parse sometimes


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Depends what side of the fence you're on i suppose. A few pro eu millionaires that have done very well for themselves are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.


I don't see how. Either what they say is true or it isn't. Same with anyone on either side. I've no idea if they are millionaires or how. I'm trying to discern whether what they are saying is correct or not.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Either what they say is true or it isn't.


That’s very pre-Trumpian logic.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

pseudonarcissus said:


> That’s very pre-Trumpian logic.



Not sure what that means, but having to explain this over the course of several posts is certainly bizarre.

Again, either their claims are true or false. They are empirical claims, for example if we leave the EU certain other nations, Japan and Canada to name two that they have mentioned explicitly, will have to ask the EU's permission/negotiate with them before doing a deal with us because of stipulations in their treaties with the EU. Now, either that is true or it is false.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> If you were fundamentally, deeply unhappy in a marriage, would you make your decision about whether to leave or stay based on whether you would be richer or poorer in or out of the marriage, or would you decide on whether to leave or stay based on where you were going to feel happier?


I suspect most of our “friends” are going to blame us and side with the ex...particularly is they’ll get to keep the BMW and the house in the sun. It’s going to get very lonely once the UK is out in the world. Of course everyone says they like us both, but we will see who does actually pop a trade deal in with the Christmas card.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I'd rather people speak plainly, I find metaphors difficult to parse sometimes



When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.

Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.
> 
> Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.


But there are many people involved in this marriage and some of them say they are happy being part of it.

Happiness is one thing, fucking up the economy is something else.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.
> 
> Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.


Either staying within the 'loveless marriage' to the neoliberal supra-state or leaving and 'living in sin' with other 'free-trade' oligarchies/kleptocracies, we're not divorcing ourselves from the thing that makes us unhappy.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Either staying within the 'loveless marriage' to the neoliberal supra-state or leaving and 'living in sin' with other 'free-trade' oligarchies/kleptocracies, we're not divorcing ourselves from the thing that makes us unhappy.


In fact we'd be moving back home to live with the abusive racist parents


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> In fact we'd be moving back home to live with the abusive racist parents


My leave voting (working class) parents are neither abusive or racist, pal.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> My leave voting (working class) parents are neither abusive or racist, pal.


I'm referring to the government not your actual parents


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> I'm referring to the government not your actual parents





Spoiler: OIC



Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Either staying within the 'loveless marriage' to the neoliberal supra-state or leaving and 'living in sin' with other 'free-trade' oligarchies/kleptocracies, we're not divorcing ourselves from the thing that makes us unhappy.



not much of a choice at all


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

The divorce analogy are interesting, and there is reference to living with parents.
However the analogy could be developed in terms of what about the kids that came about as a result of the marriage.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The divorce analogy are interesting, and there is reference to living with parents.
> However the analogy could be developed in terms of what about the kids that came about as a result of the marriage.



If you wish to continue the analogy, you probably have friends who's parents hated the sight of each other, but who stayed to together 'for the sake of the children' - they (based on my small sample) almost certainly wish their parents had divorced long ago as living in a house where the two main parties loathed each other wasn't fun.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The divorce analogy are interesting, and there is reference to living with parents.
> However the analogy could be developed in terms of what about the kids that came about as a result of the marriage.


Or indeed the other family members that were staying in the house such as NI, Scotland and Gibraltar who've all been quite happy in the house and insisted they wanted to stay but are now being forced out of the house because of one troublemaker who says they all have to leave as well.

The troublemaker hasn't bothered to arrange a new place or confirm financial arrangements for the rest of us.  The troublemaker has also been running up shit loads of debt, causing fights all over, making up stories and refuses to talk to anyone else currently in the house who is asking for an explanation.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

This really is a pointless analogy; all the time with live in 'patriarchy' the legal or 'religious' status of the (presumed heterosexual?) relationship' is irrelevant.
Will remain an unhappy relationship.


----------



## Santino (Aug 26, 2018)

The house is also built on the site of a Native American graveyard.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> If you wish to continue the analogy, you probably have friends who's parents hated the sight of each other, but who stayed to together 'for the sake of the children' - they (based on my small sample) almost certainly wish their parents had divorced long ago as living in a house where the two main parties loathed each other wasn't fun.



Yeah but where do the children live? Who does the parents evenings? Who pays for what? how about what the children want or if they can't have what they want how are their options presented? What if one divorced parent wants to move away or abroad? What about grandparents and children's rights to remain in contact?
Many of these details are not simply about the financials.

Isn't it sorting the details that is the brexit issue, like what happens on the land border in Ireland?


----------



## fishfinger (Aug 26, 2018)

Santino said:


> The house is also built on the site of a Native American graveyard.


St George's church in Gravesend?


----------



## Santino (Aug 26, 2018)

And at Christmas there are three sets of relatives who expect to be invited over, none of whom can stand the others.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> *If you wish to continue the analogy*, you probably have friends who's parents hated the sight of each other, but who stayed to together 'for the sake of the children' - they (based on my small sample) almost certainly wish their parents had divorced long ago as living in a house where the two main parties loathed each other wasn't fun.


Nope


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Nope



As you can see from the letters at the top of my post, I wasn't talking to you...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yeah but where do the children live? Who does the parents evenings? Who pays for what? how about what the children want or if they can't have what they want how are their options presented? What if one divorced parent wants to move away or abroad? What about grandparents and children's rights to remain in contact?
> Many of these details are not simply about the financials.
> 
> Isn't it sorting the details that is the brexit issue, like what happens on the land border in Ireland?


What’s your point? People co-parent separately all the time, I’ve been doing it successfully for 7 years. You start by breathing into a fucking paper bag first. 
Same goes for Brexit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Or indeed the other family members that were staying in the house such as NI, Scotland and Gibraltar who've all been quite happy in the house and insisted they wanted to stay but are now being forced out of the house because of one troublemaker who says they all have to leave as well.
> 
> The troublemaker hasn't bothered to arrange a new place or confirm financial arrangements for the rest of us.  The troublemaker has also been running up shit loads of debt, causing fights all over, making up stories and refuses to talk to anyone else currently in the house who is asking for an explanation.


Is there something you want to get off your chest?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 26, 2018)

fishfinger said:


> St George's church in Gravesend?


One person doesn't make a graveyard!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> One person doesn't make a graveyard!


They’ve missed an e out !


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Irrespective of the nationalist guff fed to their base/electorate, tory notions of Brexit have only ever been based upon accelerating capital's withdrawal from the supposed post-war consensus and transition from welfare state to consolidator/oligarchic state.
> 
> It's all about the base.


Long time no see. Good to have you posting again


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> The troublemaker has also been running up shit loads of debt,


DebtClocks.eu - Select an EU Member State's debt clock


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> like what happens on the land border in Ireland?


Just keep making them vote until they get it right eh. How many irish people were worried about the border when they stuck there fingers up to the eu?


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You haven't managed this far on this thread. You say you've been exposed to critical thinking but I see no evidence of that. None of your replies to my posts are more than facile. If you'd listened to and thought about Martin's videos you'd not come out with the utter shite you do. Martin did seven or eight videos during last year's general election and if you'd taken on board the points he made you'd not make such a prat of yourself as you have on this thread. The problem isn't the relatively small number of working class tories but the far larger number of working class labour voters, who are the people upon who you should concentrate your persuasive efforts, such as they are. I would suggest you go away and think about things but I'm reluctantly coming to the conclusion that's not really on the cards.


as with "all police are bastards" discussion, it's not that you are factually incorrect, but possibly that your presentation is somewhat alienating people we need to ingratiate towards our common goal?


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Labour can be said to be pro-working class. Can they really?





Pickman's model said:


> no you can't. or you wouldn't fart on and on about tory voters. i don't know if you can recall the years 1997 to 2010. but the labour government then was every bit as venal and as vile as the conservative government you abominate. the labour councils in london demolishing housing estates safe in the knowledge they won't be themselves turfed out: they do not seem to attract your ire as much as the tory voters. simply voting means agreeing to take part in the system, whereas refusing to vote is taking a step outside, really saying 'not in my name'. it is not voting tory which is the vilest act, it is voting for any party and legitimating the whole. and if you can not understand that, and if you cannot understand why people vote, then you're not going to be able to change their habits. you make out they're a load of sheeple, which really isn't a triumph of thought - critical or otherwise. your moaning about the msm - a term i first saw some years ago on the bnp website, incidentally, is simple frothing - what would you propose to do to change people's minds and to supply them with the accurate information they would need to make up their minds?


agree with you massively, but how do we get from where we are to people "refusing to vote (…) Taking a step outside"?


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Just keep making them vote until they get it right eh. How many irish people were worried about the border when they stuck there fingers up to the eu?


What about the 56% of Northern Irish that voted to remain?


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What about the 56% of Northern Irish that voted to remain?


I'm talking about Eire and the second vote.


----------



## TremulousTetra (Aug 26, 2018)

Humirax said:


> I'm aware that Labour are not the ultimate answer but I can understand why working class people vote for them and get involved in the party, people are under the impression that they will be better off with a Labour government and think they are more moral, or atleast have their interests in mind- I kinda get that, not that I would be saying that if the neo-liberals were still in control of the party. But atleast Labour came out of the trade union movement and can be said to be pro-working class, or atleast can easily be seen to be by alot of working class voters, they come across as genuine about introducing a proper living wage, taxing the rich etc and I can understand why people think they would be more competent as a government. The tories have robbed people of their infrastructure and Labour want to offer people that vital infrastructure they have been denied, atleast they claim to. I understand that it's socialsed capitalism we are talking about but theres no real pretense of that with the tories, they have really fucked over the working class and I therefore don't get why people, working class people, insist on voting them in again and again. It's frustrating. And it is equally frustrating and sad that there is no genuine anti-capitalist movement to speak of and I guess it gives me a dim view of people. A lack of critial thinking though does seem to be a reason for this, and a good one, a good explanation. And a lack of critical thinking seems to be what I regularly encounter from people who don't think the same way as me and don't get my politics.


whilst I agree with Pickabout Labour and especially his point about sheeple not being an adequate explanation, I do think your point is muchh more salient at this point in history. The distinction between old Labour and new Labour. The distinction between neo-economic liberalism and reformism is relevant to why "the dominant ideas in society" are moving towards the right (antidemocratic) and the way from the left (democratic).

you may find this interesting.this uses facts and figures to illustrate how reformism is actually better for capitalism than the religion of Thatcherism/Reaganomics.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Just keep making them vote until they get it right eh. How many irish people were worried about the border when they stuck there fingers up to the eu?


That finger sticking was never an existential threat to their (or our) membership of the union, merely an inconvenient rejection of proposed constitutional reforms.
Ironically it was effectively the Irish acceptance of Lisbon in the second plebesite that paved the way for Brexit; the agreed reforms included Article 50!


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

Humirax said:


> But according to Martin, from what I recall of a past video, he can understand why working class people vote UKIP and states that we shouldn't judge them too harshly for it. But somehow voting Labour is incomprehensible? That doesn't make sense as far as I'm concerned.


Are you referring to the Red and Black Youtube guy/from Class War?


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That finger sticking was never an existential threat to their (or our) membership of the union, merely an inconvenient rejection of proposed constitutional reforms.


If they had stuck to voting no wouldn't that have messed up the eu's future progress?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> If they had stuck to voting no wouldn't that have messed up the eu's future progress?


It would have delayed the reform process, and inconvenienced the supra-state, but it didn't really pose any threat to the Union or Irish/British membership...so the border was not a relevant consideration during the 2 referenda.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What’s your point? People co-parent separately all the time, I’ve been doing it successfully for 7 years. You start by breathing into a fucking paper bag first.
> Same goes for Brexit



I imagine you co-parent brilliantly, but didn't you and your co-parent have to suss out the details regarding the children, or even suss out the details on an ongoing basis?
My point is that if brexit is like a divorce, and any financials are worth paying for the sweet air of freedom, then the other details of the divorce have to be considered because there are two parents (usually) and there are children involved.
I am likening that task to the details that have to be sorted because of brexit, like sorting the land border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Just keep making them vote until they get it right eh. How many irish people were worried about the border when they stuck there fingers up to the eu?


No further votes are needed, all the brexiters need to do is to tell the rest of us how the border will work in detailed, practical, realistic terms.
If they really knew what they were voting for, and given the time since the vote, I imagine telling us would be a doddle for them, as easy as putting a cross on a bit of paper.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If they really knew what they were voting for,


Where will the eu be and what new tricks have they got in store for us in ten years time?


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> all the brexiters need to do is to tell the rest of us how


Back to this crap!


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Where will the eu be and what new tricks have they got in store for us in ten years time?


The Union will be able to ensure that things are bad enough for them to do nothing else; they'll factor in that another decade of austerity will see a spontaneous groundswell of support for re-joining


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Where will the eu be and what new tricks have they got in store for us in ten years time?


That ship has sailed. it's a brexit world now so I understand.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Back to this crap!



Yeah all the excited anticipation waiting for the solution has become crap because it is taking so long.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The Union will be able to ensure that things are bad enough for them to do nothing else; they'll factor in that another decade of austerity will see a spontaneous groundswell of support for re-joining


I doubt that leaving will ever happen, i thought that before the vote and probably even more now. I was asking philosophical what he voted for and where he see's the eu as political entity in the future. He keeps saying we knew what we were voting for, but does he?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

It's all about Article 49 from now on; Brejoin.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> That ship has sailed. it's a brexit world now so I understand.


Thought as much and a shit swerve of the question, yet you demand solutions and answers yourself.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Brejoin.


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 26, 2018)

Going back to the three brexit blokes I mentioned above, if they aren't good analysts then I'd be grateful to hear who is a good source for Brexit analysis


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> I doubt that leaving will ever happen, i thought that before the vote and probably even more now. I was asking philosophical what he voted for and where he see's the eu as political entity in the future. He keeps saying we knew what we were voting for, but does he?


I was voting against what I perceived to be what Boris and Rees Mogg and Farage and others were promoting, very especially the nasty anti foreigner under and overtones. And as special dressing (you can believe me or not) I was voting against the restoration of any more of a border in Ireland than there is now.
I was banging on about it plenty before the vote, but not on this website.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I imagine you co-parent brilliantly, but didn't you and your co-parent have to suss out the details regarding the children, or even suss out the details on an ongoing basis?
> My point is that if brexit is like a divorce, and any financials are worth paying for the sweet air of freedom, then the other details of the divorce have to be considered because there are two parents (usually) and there are children involved.
> I am likening that task to the details that have to be sorted because of brexit, like sorting the land border on the island of Ireland.


You’ll need to get a notepad and write down all the ways you can say Irish land border so your posts stay as fresh as they’ve been.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> Thought as much and a shit swerve of the question, yet you demand solutions and answers yourself.



No, asking me about the future of the EU is the swerve.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Going back to the three brexit blokes I mentioned above, if they aren't good analysts then I'd be grateful to hear who is a good source for Brexit analysis


There's queue to join, philosophical is still demanding answers for the irish border.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You’ll need to get a notepad and write down all the ways you can say Irish land border so your posts stay as fresh as they’ve been.


What has that got to do with the divorce analogy (which was introduced by other posters)?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I was voting against what I perceived to be what Boris and Rees Mogg and Farage and others were promoting, very especially the nasty anti foreigner under and overtones. And as special dressing (you can believe me or not) I was voting against the restoration of any more of a border in Ireland than there is now.
> I was banging on about it plenty before the vote, but not on this website.


Exit impact on Northern Ireland


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I was voting against what I perceived


So you voted because of what you perceived might happen? Okay.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> So you voted because of what you perceived might happen? Okay.


That applies to everyone, doesn't it?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> So you voted because of what you perceived might happen? Okay.


Good try, but that isn't what I wrote.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> No, asking me about the future of the EU is the swerve


How? You voted to remain, what does that mean for the future? You voted for it so you must have known whats in store for us?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

Fucking hell; is this what's happened to P&P.


----------



## Santino (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That applies to everyone, doesn't it?


Perhaps some people voted strictly on the wording of the question.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

Santino said:


> Perhaps some people voted strictly on the wording of the question.


Indeed...with a perception of what that might entail.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That applies to everyone, doesn't it?


It does, but a few newspaper scare stories doesn't or wont define how i vote.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> How? You voted to remain, what does that mean for the future? You voted for it so you must have known whats in store for us?


Do you know what the result of the vote was?
This might help you:
Results of the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 - Wikipedia
The future is not remain but leave.
If you voted for it, own it. I didn't, I lost. I don't have to explain the future of something that isn't going to happen.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> It does, but a few newspaper scare stories doesn't or wont define how i vote.


Eh?

That's happened.


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Eh?
> 
> That's happened.


In response to this #11197
I shouldn't bite or respond to him.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

sealion said:


> In response to this #11197
> I shouldn't bite or respond to him.


You're a leave voter, then?


----------



## sealion (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> You're a leave voter, then?


yes


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Fucking hell; is this what's happened to P&P.


Basically, Philosophical has been asking the same question for maybe a half a year or more and now we all sound as bad as him


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 26, 2018)




----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Basically, Philosophical has been asking the same question for maybe a half a year or more and now we all sound as bad as him


Not really.  He came in, set out his position, showed concern at the apparent racist undertones of brexit...and then asked brexiters about the solution to the upcoming clusterfuck in northern ireland.

The answers have been 

1: remainers need to fix that as they're so concerned about it
2: EU bad
3: Greece
4: non-EU immigrants


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> When I got divorced it cost me a fortune - as part of the process I enriched several solicitors and I bought someone I can't stand the sight of a house, and (perhaps rather obviously) went from living in a two income household to living in a one income household. Not only was I materially poorer at the end of the divorce than I was at the beginning, but it appeared that I was then always going to be poorer than had I stayed married - but I considered that concrete cost, and the opportunity cost in the future, to be money very well spent. I still do - in fact I would consider no longer being married to my first wife such a valuable prize that it would have been fantastic value at 5 times the price.
> 
> Leaving the EU isn't about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to be part of something that makes you unhappy.



Why does it make you unhappy? Many of the reasons given by leave voters are based upon ignorance.

Euromyths are hardly ever challenged on this thread. European Commission in the UK - European Commission

I voted to remain and not just for economic reasons. Staying in the EU isn't just about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to leave a broader political and cultural entity that (on balance) makes you happier.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Why does it make you unhappy? Many of the reasons given by leave voters are based upon ignorance.
> 
> Euromyths are hardly ever challenged on this thread. European Commission in the UK - European Commission
> 
> I voted to remain and not just for economic reasons. Staying in the EU isn't just about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to leave a broader political and cultural entity that (on balance) makes you happier.




I'm a reluctant remainer on the basis this government couldn't negotiate its way out of a wet paper bag, and because the eu's existence delays the onset of the major war/s I believe will arise in the next ten years.  The eu is riddled with shortcomings and the good things about it, mainly the cultural things, are a thin icing on a rotten cake.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Or indeed the other family members that were staying in the house such as NI, Scotland and Gibraltar who've all been quite happy in the house and insisted they wanted to stay but are now being forced out of the house because of one troublemaker who says they all have to leave as well.
> 
> The troublemaker hasn't bothered to arrange a new place or confirm financial arrangements for the rest of us.  The troublemaker has also been running up shit loads of debt, causing fights all over, making up stories and refuses to talk to anyone else currently in the house who is asking for an explanation.



Why do people talk about Scotland voting leave?

Scotland did no such thing, Scotland wasn't given a vote. Cos, Scotland's a country and as such is incapable of voting. A majority of people who reside in Scotland voted remain, including two colleagues who are from Sussex, yet my Scottish sister and Weedgie mates' votes were cast in England. The United Kingdom was given a vote, one eligable person, one vote, not within any constituency, be it a parliamentary one, a European Parliament one, or an English, Scotland etc. one.

But if you will insist on blethering on about how 'Scotland voted remain', try to remember that by that token, 'Wales voted leave'.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 26, 2018)

Weedgie?

Nobody's pulling on underpants mate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Not really.  He came in, set out his position, showed concern at the apparent racist undertones of brexit...and then asked brexiters about the solution to the upcoming clusterfuck in northern ireland.
> 
> The answers have been
> 
> ...


As well as several solutions to the land border in that place they call Ireland.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do people talk about Scotland voting leave?
> 
> Scotland did no such thing, Scotland wasn't given a vote. Cos, Scotland's a country and as such is incapable of voting. A majority of people who reside in Scotland voted remain, including two colleagues who are from Sussex, yet my Scottish sister and Weedgie mates' votes were cast in England. The United Kingdom was given a vote, one eligable person, one vote, not within any constituency, be it a parliamentary one, a European Parliament one, or an English, Scotland etc. one.
> 
> But if you will insist on blethering on about how 'Scotland voted remain', try to remember that by that token, 'Wales voted leave'.


Thanks Bahnhof,  I keep greeting about the fact that no one told me the Vote was U.K. wide “except for voters in Scotland” like what they do with our telly.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Weedgie?
> 
> Nobody's pulling on underpants mate.


Ha
edit: in fairness it took me three attempts to spell Bahnhof right and it’s there in front of me.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm a reluctant remainer on the basis this government couldn't negotiate its way out of a wet paper bag, and because its existence delays the onset of the major war/s I believe will arise in the next ten years.  The eu is riddled with shortcomings and the good things about it, mainly the cultural things, are a thin icing on a rotten cake.


Does it really delay the onset of The War? I have no idea to be honest but would be interested to know your thoughts on how it does so. 
First point certainly taken though!


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> As well as several solutions to the land border in that place they call Ireland.


The concept of 'solutions' might be open to dispute.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The concept of 'solutions' might be open to dispute.


No more rides on your merry go round sir we might all be sick on your shirt


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Does it really delay the onset of The War? I have no idea to be honest but would be interested to know your thoughts on how it does so.
> First point certainly taken though!


Yes, yes it does but there is a tension with the trump administration which is hellbent on creating the conditions for war earlier than might be desirable


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes, yes it does but there is a tension with the trump administration which is hellbent on creating the conditions for war earlier than might be desirable


I wondered whether all the tension within the Eurozone might cause a Stramash anyway, but who would ken in these turbulent times.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Why does it make you unhappy? Many of the reasons given by leave voters are based upon ignorance.
> 
> Euromyths are hardly ever challenged on this thread. European Commission in the UK - European Commission
> 
> I voted to remain and not just for economic reasons. Staying in the EU isn't just about being richer or poorer, it's about not wanting to leave a broader political and cultural entity that (on balance) makes you happier.



I've worked within an EU structure, I _really _didn't like what I saw, I now work within a NATO structure and the attitudes I see from both the governments and the 'deep states' of the overwhelming majority of European states make me want to vommit.

I need no lessons from the EU in what it's about, and telling people they are ignorant isn't a path to political success....


----------



## billbond (Aug 26, 2018)

toblerone3 said: ↑
Why does it make you unhappy? Many of the reasons given by leave voters are based upon ignorance.

Same can be said for the remain voters
Only have to look on you tube to see how many idiots voted to stay. Most of the reasons they give are lies and wrong


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

All this shite about degrees of political 'sovereignty' relating to happiness.
tbh I actually think the technocratic, de-democratised bureaucracy of the supra-state is almost a more honest response to the actual sovereignty of globalised capital compared to the morbid, impotent nostalgia of nationalism.


----------



## billbond (Aug 26, 2018)




----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

billbond said:


>


An example of incoherent twaddle from a multi-millionaire tory supporter?


----------



## billbond (Aug 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> An example of incoherent twaddle from a multi-millionaire tory supporter?



oh forgot  the multi millionaire Labour and remain voters are so few in numbers (cough)

 Lilly Allen, Lineker, Bragg,izzard etc and the other millionaire  champagne socialists
I forgot its only Millionaires that follow Jezza and are anti brexit that can be mentioned, and their twaddle shown.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> No more rides on your merry go round sir we might all be sick on your shirt


Don't blame you, maybe bumper cars are more your thing.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2018)

billbond said:


> oh forgot  the multi millionaire Labour and remainer voters are so few in numbers (cough)
> 
> Lilly Allen, Lineker, Bragg,izzard etc and the other millionaire  champagne socialists
> I forgot its only Millionaires that follow Jezza that can be mentioned, and their twaddle shown.


What?
You just posted up some utter bollox.
Presumably you don't agree with that stuff?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 27, 2018)

.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Weedgie?
> 
> Nobody's pulling on underpants mate.





Wedgie is pulling on pants.

Mate.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The Union will be able to ensure that things are bad enough for them to do nothing else; they'll factor in that another decade of austerity will see a spontaneous groundswell of support for re-joining



Thought you were speaking of what would happen after Scottish independence.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Wedgie is pulling on pants.
> 
> Mate.


And weegie is someone from Glasgow mate, not weedgie.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And weegie is someone from Glasgow mate, not weedgie.



Can spell it either way, mate.

My scumbag mate from Govan spells it as I do, or rather, I spell it as he does.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Thought you were speaking of what would happen after Scottish independence.


Can't see anything in the content or context of the post that would suggest I was commenting on Scottish independence from the UK.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Can't see anything in the content or context of the post that would suggest I was commenting on Scottish independence from the UK.



Skim read it and all the Scottish stuff. Anyway, any chance to have a go at another ghastly fucking union, eh?


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> All this shite about degrees of political 'sovereignty' relating to happiness.
> tbh I actually think the technocratic, de-democratised bureaucracy of the supra-state is almost a more honest response to the actual sovereignty of globalised capital compared to the morbid, impotent nostalgia of nationalism.



Fair point of view I suppose 


Can you fill this out please?  Apply to vote by proxy

Since you're giving up on democracy, at least give the opportunity for someone who hasn't to double down on their position.


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2018)

Emmanuel Macron rejects Theresa May's plea for help to rescue her Brexit plan


As I understood it the 'Chequers deal' was hammered out between Number 10 and Merkel, then presented to everyone else Cabinet,... Businesses... the EU.. as a fait a complete.  Why should Macron prop it up? It guarantees German hegemony.


It that sort of shit I voted to get away from.	 Mrs May, you fucked up, but there isn't time to rearrange deck chairs.  Art 50 extension period is the only logical way forward


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2018)

gosub said:


> Fair point of view I suppose
> 
> 
> Can you fill this out please?  Apply to vote by proxy
> ...


Sorry, but I don't qualify according to the state's criteria.
So, I'm afraid that's a no from me.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 27, 2018)

billbond said:


> oh forgot  the multi millionaire Labour and remain voters are so few in numbers (cough)
> 
> Lilly Allen, Lineker, Bragg,izzard etc and the other millionaire  champagne socialists
> I forgot its only Millionaires that follow Jezza and are anti brexit that can be mentioned, and their twaddle shown.



Has anybody here shared assainine facebook wank from any of these people? (and you forgot nick clegg and andrew adonis by the way)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 27, 2018)

gosub said:


> Emmanuel Macron rejects Theresa May's plea for help to rescue her Brexit plan
> 
> 
> As I understood it the 'Chequers deal' was hammered out between Number 10 and Merkel, then presented to everyone else Cabinet,... Businesses... the EU.. as a fait a complete.  Why should Macron prop it up? It guarantees German hegemony.
> ...



Why does it guarantee German hegemony sorry? I think I've missed something - not clear from article what it is that Merkel is fine with but Macron isn't. Why is Germany more disposed to allowing flexibility on services than France?


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why does it guarantee German hegemony sorry? I think I've missed something - not clear from article what it is that Merkel is fine with but Macron isn't. Why is Germany more disposed to allowing flexibility on services than France?



leaving on German terms may suit some especially Germany, it does n't really help pull German in the direction EUrozone needs....Macron has his own problems (not sure how aware of some of them he is).


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 27, 2018)

Mega lolz


----------



## Toast Rider (Aug 27, 2018)

Tories strip 'right to equality' from EU withdrawal Bill

Welcome my son, welcome to the machine


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2018)

Toast Rider said:


> Tories strip 'right to equality' from EU withdrawal Bill
> 
> Welcome my son, welcome to the machine


The story about animal sentience there really shit too


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Mega lolz View attachment 145238



To be fair while Grimes is a dick and I hope they fine him more, the ECHR was drafted in 1950 by the Council of Europe, an organisation totally seperate from the EU which includes Turkey, Iceland and possibly in the future Kazakhstan. So not a great spot from the Eye really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> leaving on German terms may suit some especially Germany, it does n't really help pull German in the direction EUrozone needs....Macron has his own problems (not sure how aware of some of them he is).



Well, obviously leaving on German terms would suit Germany, no disagreement there. Why would a rigid approach to services pull Germany in the direction the Eurozone needs though and what are the structural reasons that this would advantage Germany but disadvantage France?


----------



## xarmian (Aug 28, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Irrespective of the nationalist guff fed to their base/electorate, tory notions of Brexit have only ever been based upon accelerating capital's withdrawal from the supposed post-war consensus and transition from welfare state to consolidator/oligarchic state.
> 
> It's all about the base.


Less like a divorce than leaving a party because it's boring and they won't let you play your tunes and some cokeheads said they could get you into a VIP lounge. They drop by their dealer on the way and get you to spot them the cash. They take the coke to get it past security and then tell security to throw you out. And you're left in a strange town with no money, no drugs and nowhere to play your tunes.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

xarmian said:


> Less like a divorce than leaving a party because it's boring and they won't let you play your tunes and some cokeheads said they could get you into a VIP lounge. They drop by their dealer on the way and get you to spot them the cash. They take the coke to get it past security and then tell security to throw you out. And you're left in a strange town with no money, no drugs and nowhere to play your tunes.



Had a bad night mon?

I feel like there's a lot of personal projection going on with some of these analogies...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Had a bad night mon?
> 
> I feel like there's a lot of personal projection going on with some of these analogies...


Yeah I wouldn’t have liked to have been married to some of these people. 

WELL IT WAS YOU THAT WANTED A DIVORCE TROUBLEMAKER


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah I wouldn’t have liked to have been married to some of these people.
> 
> WELL IT WAS YOU THAT WANTED A DIVORCE TROUBLEMAKER



Woman 'trapped in loveless marriage' after judges refuse divorce


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well, obviously leaving on German terms would suit Germany, no disagreement there. Why would a rigid approach to services pull Germany in the direction the Eurozone needs though and what are the structural reasons that this would advantage Germany but disadvantage France?



Rigid approach to services - leads to the collapse of EUropean logistics in quite a short order.   {Cabotage got all the physical stuff to where it is; unpicking the UK transport fleet from that requires FAR GREATER THOUGHT than has yet happened] , pulling Germany in the direction the EUrozone doesn't advantage Germany; quite the opposite -but needs to be handled carefully as to not to further destabilise German politics.	

All a bit complicated, but can't be sensibly resolved in the existing Art 50 window.  - So extend the window and take the lessons on board


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2018)

xarmian said:


> Less like a divorce than leaving a party because it's boring and they won't let you play your tunes and some cokeheads said they could get you into a VIP lounge. They drop by their dealer on the way and get you to spot them the cash. They take the coke to get it past security and then tell security to throw you out. And you're left in a strange town with no money, no drugs and nowhere to play your tunes.


Less like a night out than factions of the right party of capital dividing over the most effective manner to accelerate withdrawing from the concessions made to labour under the era of 'system competition'.
Some oligarchs fund a pressure group/party to effect withdrawal from the supra-state with its inconvenient, inertia legacy of concessions, devise a populist (super-structural) strategy appealing to the opposition's base and promote notions of nationalism, anti-immigration sentiment. Dodgy funding of these themes helps to overturn 30 years of majority pro-EU polling on 23/06/16 and delivers the result.
And you're left in a strange country with Atlanticist loons, 'free-market' fundamentalists and the super-rich having an absolute ball.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> Rigid approach to services - leads to the collapse of EUropean logistics in quite a short order.   {Cabotage got all the physical stuff to where it is; unpicking the UK transport fleet from that requires FAR GREATER THOUGHT than has yet happened] , pulling Germany in the direction the EUrozone doesn't advantage Germany; quite the opposite -but needs to be handled carefully as to not to further destabilise German politics.
> 
> All a bit complicated, but can't be sensibly resolved in the existing Art 50 window.  - So extend the window and take the lessons on board



Why would it lead to the collapse of European logistics? Perhaps it is complicated - please try me. The article you linked to made no attempt to explain the point, so would be grateful if you can. Not asking if you think there should be an A50 extension, just asking you to explain your claim re France, Germany and services.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why would it lead to the collapse of European logistics? Perhaps it is complicated - please try me. The article you linked to made no attempt to explain the point, so would be grateful if you can. Not asking if you think there should be an A50 extension, just asking you to explain your claim re France, Germany and services.



Sounds like a Thursday question.  Today is Tuesday.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> Sounds like a Thursday question.  Today is Tuesday.


the day after tomorrow is thursday, so perhaps SpackleFrog prescient rather than tardy


----------



## Chz (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair while Grimes is a dick and I hope they fine him more, the ECHR was drafted in 1950 by the Council of Europe, an organisation totally seperate from the EU which includes Turkey, Iceland and possibly in the future Kazakhstan. So not a great spot from the Eye really.


Yes, but there's also nothing on Earth that Theresa May hates more, as it stops her going for the full fascist treatment that she'd like to subject the country to. Her number one priority in Brexit isn't trade deals, the Irish border, customs arrangements or even immigration. It's leaving the ECHR. And ECHR membership is a mandatory part of EU membership. So they are tied quite closely.

Granted, like most jokes, it's not quite as funny when you explain it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> Sounds like a Thursday question.  Today is Tuesday.



I probably should have realised you had no idea what you were talking about and were just trying to feel involved. This one is on me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

Chz said:


> Yes, but there's also nothing on Earth that Theresa May hates more, as it stops her going for the full fascist treatment that she'd like to subject the country to. Her number one priority in Brexit isn't trade deals, the Irish border, customs arrangements or even immigration. It's leaving the ECHR. And ECHR membership is a mandatory part of EU membership. So they are tied quite closely.
> 
> Granted, like most jokes, it's not quite as funny when you explain it.



This is complete nonsense. You think May is motivated by visions of torture and death camps? Go and have a glass of water and a lie down. 

The thing May wants most out of Brexit is for it to not happen and everyone to forget about it. That's very unlikely but if you want to understand her motivations, there they are. 

These endless conspiracy theories about what the Tories *really* want are extremely boring at this point.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is complete nonsense. You think May is motivated by visions of torture and death camps? Go and have a glass of water and a lie down.
> 
> The thing May wants most out of Brexit is for it to not happen and everyone to forget about it. That's very unlikely but if you want to understand her motivations, there they are.
> 
> These endless conspiracy theories about what the Tories *really* want are extremely boring at this point.


wrt to Brexit there is no entity that can be termed "the Tories".


----------



## Chz (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is complete nonsense. You think May is motivated by visions of torture and death camps? Go and have a glass of water and a lie down.
> 
> The thing May wants most out of Brexit is for it to not happen and everyone to forget about it. That's very unlikely but if you want to understand her motivations, there they are.
> 
> These endless conspiracy theories about what the Tories *really* want are extremely boring at this point.


May has always wanted out of the ECHR, and has publicly said so enough times in her history. You're correct that she'd rather not have brexit, but since _that isn't going to happen_ she's at least going to try and get what _she_ wants out of it. I don't recall having any visions of torture or death camps - morning drinking again, perhaps? Or just your usual pure bullshit hyperbole?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2018)

If this was always her overriding pre-occupation and endgame you'd think the last thing she would have done then is to campaign to stay in the EU wouldn't you? Yet she did.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2018)

I think allocating May any hard held principles apart from the survival of her party is a bit hopeful tbh


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2018)

Chz said:


> May has always wanted out of the ECHR, and has publicly said so enough times in her history. You're correct that she'd rather not have brexit, but since _that isn't going to happen_ she's at least going to try and get what _she_ wants out of it. I don't recall having any visions of torture or death camps - morning drinking again, perhaps? Or just your usual pure bullshit hyperbole?



yeh she's always wanted out of the echr


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

brogdale said:


> wrt to Brexit there is no entity that can be termed "the Tories".



You're absolutely right, they are completely split on the issue between the Remain and Leave camps. But my comment was directed at those on these boards who regularly insist that they know the 'secret Brexit agenda' of Remain Tories like May. I'm just sick of reading comments like "This is secretly what they wanted all along" etc.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're absolutely right, they are completely split on the issue between the Remain and Leave camps. But my comment was directed at those on these boards who regularly insist that they know the 'secret Brexit agenda' of Remain Tories like May. I'm just sick of reading comments like "This is secretly what they wanted all along" etc.


Tend to agree with that; I don't think that the tory-Remain position was essentially 'secret' at all. IMO they were motivated first & foremost by party political considerations and (arrogantly) convinced that they'd prevail. How they've subsequently squared the Brexit reality with their own 'pro-business' priorities have perhaps been more nuanced/variable, but they appear to have in common an enduring belief in the positive role that the political superstructure can play for the base.
The fundamentalist Brexiteers, on the other hand, seem to be comfortable with 'shock doctrine' scenarios that will quickly see the demise of the remaining welfare state. Rather than seeing the party of capital needing to be pro-business, they seem content with (oligarchic) capital being pro-tory.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2018)

Chz said:


> May has always wanted out of the ECHR, and has publicly said so enough times in her history. You're correct that she'd rather not have brexit, but since _that isn't going to happen_ she's at least going to try and get what _she_ wants out of it. I don't recall having any visions of torture or death camps - morning drinking again, perhaps? Or just your usual pure bullshit hyperbole?



Bit rude. Who are you anyway? Morning drinking? 



Chz said:


> Yes, but there's also nothing on Earth that Theresa May hates more, as it stops her going for the full fascist treatment that she'd like to subject the country to.



I took your "full fascist treatment" comment at face value - are you sure you're not the one engaging in hyperbole?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2018)

It all going to be ok though- we are marching back to Africa with 4bn ( in vouchers and money off tokens) to woo the continent. But not the top bit where is a bit rough. And maybe not the horn either. Possibly giving DRC a body swerve as well. But don’t worry / we may not be hoying hundreds of billions around like the Chinese but it will be better quality.

I am sure we will be welcomed with open arms

PM seeks new jobs partnership with Africa


----------



## eatmorecheese (Aug 28, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> It all going to be ok though- we are marching back to Africa with 4bn ( in vouchers and money off tokens) to woo the continent. But not the top bit where is a bit rough. And maybe not the horn either. Possibly giving DRC a body swerve as well. But don’t worry / we may not be hoying hundreds of billions around like the Chinese but it will be better quality.
> 
> I am sure we will be welcomed with open arms
> 
> PM seeks new jobs partnership with Africa


It's all supreme bollocks, really. Asia-Pacific is the pivot Africa leans towards, rather than the UK's loose change. As well she knows.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2018)

She's gonna give a wedge of cash to Nigeria, which will be a Brexit boost for Mercedes Benz.


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She's gonna give a wedge of cash to Nigeria, which will be a Brexit boost for Mercedes Benz.



She had one of those emails, didn’t she? The four billion is just a fee to release the THREE HUNDRED AND SIXTY SEVEN BILLION DOLLARS that some kidnapped prince has trapped in a bank account. It’ll certainly help sort the deficit out.


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 28, 2018)

So the only deal announced so far is giving away £4 billion in aid?

If I was a cynic I'd be worried that people in the background are feathering nests.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> It all going to be ok though- we are marching back to Africa with 4bn ( in vouchers and money off tokens) to woo the continent. But not the top bit where is a bit rough. And maybe not the horn either. Possibly giving DRC a body swerve as well. But don’t worry / we may not be hoying hundreds of billions around like the Chinese but it will be better quality.
> 
> I am sure we will be welcomed with open arms
> 
> PM seeks new jobs partnership with Africa


The bbc hate theresa may. You can tell as any reasonable broadcaster would have suppressed the video of her dancing


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2018)

she looked fuckin terrible on CH4 news tonight- theres not much sleep going on on the May household and it aint all night lovemakin' that keep them awake


----------



## xarmian (Aug 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> If this was always her overriding pre-occupation and endgame you'd think the last thing she would have done then is to campaign to stay in the EU wouldn't you? Yet she did.


I don't understand this part of the narrative about May. Desperate Remainers seem to push it a lot. She campaigned for Remain for the same reason Johnson campaigned for Leave. They didn't expect Leave to win. They were lining themselves up for the leadership knowing that Cameron was going to resign in 2018. She was already popular with the right for her anti-immigration stuff. Go home vans, hostile environment, deporting foreign students, dissing the ECtHR. She was courting the sensibles. Johnson was doing the opposite. The result turned everything upside down for both of them.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The bbc hate theresa may. You can tell as any reasonable broadcaster would have suppressed the video of her dancing



The dancing was not even remotely as awkward as the curtsey.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> she looked fuckin terrible on CH4 news tonight- theres not much sleep going on on the May household and it aint all night lovemakin' that keep them awake



Thanks for that image


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2018)

Every paper seems to have had something along the lines of this story on Macron wanting a close relationship with Britain but not at expense of EU integrity (example: Macron: EU more important than relationship with post-Brexit Britain). What does this actually mean? Is there something which May is asking for that France doesn't want?

Or is it just filler to make it seem like stuff is happening?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Thanks for that image


have some  mind bleach


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 29, 2018)




----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 29, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Every paper seems to have had something along the lines of this story on Macron wanting a close relationship with Britain but not at expense of EU integrity (example: Macron: EU more important than relationship with post-Brexit Britain). What does this actually mean? Is there something which May is asking for that France doesn't want?
> 
> Or is it just filler to make it seem like stuff is happening?


It means the UK is going to get fucked by the French after brexit.

"Sure we will help you with some trade (or more likely border charges and Calais)...but you have to understand, it will be quite difficult.  You may have to pay a little more, yes?"


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 29, 2018)




----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 29, 2018)

Gove managed to shoe-horn a bit of pro-brexit propaganda into this story about the guy who just swam 330 miles in the Channel :-

Michael Gove: Lewis Pugh 'has shown inspirational leadership and grit'



> And when we leave the European Union, we take back control of our seas.
> 
> As an independent coastal state we can create a profitable fishing industry that is also sustainable, and minimise its impact on non-commercial species.
> 
> Our annual reckoning of the health of fish stocks means we can intervene if they are struggling.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 29, 2018)

We have no history of taking adult responsibility for our own fisheries, so give will be breaking new ground if this is to work out. More likely is the final eradication of white fish mass within a decade.

Would love to be proved wrong


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> We have no history of taking adult responsibility for our own fisheries, so give will be breaking new ground if this is to work out. More likely is the final eradication of white fish mass within a decade.
> 
> Would love to be proved wrong


maybe one day they'll fish michael gove out of the sea


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



So what's your suggested alternative?

And how would it work as a precident? Say for a future Scotland that votes narrowly for independence but has a grumbling large minority clamouring to rerun the referendum while independence is being negotiated?

The Leave vote won. Like it or not, that's what happening.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> maybe one day they'll fish michael gove out of the sea



I fear he, the cockroaches and the jellyfish shall see the end of days together. Good company, really.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> maybe one day they'll fish michael gove out of the sea



 at toxic marine pollution


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So what's your suggested alternative?
> 
> And how would it work as a precident? Say for a future Scotland that votes narrowly for independence but has a grumbling large minority clamouring to rerun the referendum while independence is being negotiated?
> 
> The Leave vote won. Like it or not, that's what happening.



The leave vote certainly won.
However to say that's what's happening is standing on flimsy ground in my opinion.
Leave have (for example) no ideas for taking back control of the borders that they have shared, and I suspect when those ideas are eventually shared many will think the cost is way too high, unaffordable even.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The leave vote certainly won.
> However to say that's what's happening is standing on flimsy ground in my opinion.
> Leave have (for example) no ideas for taking back control of the borders that they have shared, and I suspect when those ideas are eventually shared many will think the cost is way too high, unaffordable even.


"Leave" don't exist any more.  The process is being presided over by the _government_.  I'd agree that the government is in a shambles on the borders issue.  But where are you getting the evidence that people will reverse their view on Brexit based on the eventual costs?  And (separate step) that they'd favour a second referendum because of that?  It sounds like wishful thinking to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> "Leave" don't exist any more.  The process is being presided over by the _government_.  I'd agree that the government is in a shambles on the borders issue.  But where are you getting the evidence that people will reverse their view on Brexit based on the eventual costs?  And (separate step) that they'd favour a second referendum because of that?  It sounds like wishful thinking to me.


Magical thinking


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> "Leave" don't exist any more.  The process is being presided over by the _government_.  I'd agree that the government is in a shambles on the borders issue.  But where are you getting the evidence that people will reverse their view on Brexit based on the eventual costs?  And (separate step) that they'd favour a second referendum because of that?  It sounds like wishful thinking to me.



I have no evidence to that effect whatsoever.
I am trying to use some kind of reason (which I suspect many here will quickly try to shoot down).
My reasoning is that if the UK leaves the EU there is a separation.
Something will be in place to indicate that separation, for the sake of ease I will call it a border.
If there isn't a border, then that suggests to me that leaving hasn't happened...certainly in what I understand to be 'taking back control of the borders after brexit' terms.
So if there is a border, on the island of Ireland, the costs could be incurred reputationally because the UK goes back on it's international treaty.
Socially because (as the PSNI has warned) there could be a return to the kind of violence of the past.
Financially, because the border is some 400km long, and patrolling, monitoring, reacting to events on such a border will cost a lot of money and effort.
At no time have I said there ought to be another referendum, and I don't even think people will reverse their view on brexit either, but I think that when the border bill is presented people will simply not be prepared to pay it whatever their vote was.
Unless you're Jacob Rees Mogg I suppose, who seems to be favouring the heavily militarised option presumably paid for out of taxes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> At no time have I said there ought to be another referendum, and I don't even think people will reverse their view on brexit either, but I think that when the border bill is presented people will simply not be prepared to pay it whatever their vote was.


And then what?  What are you suggesting?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> And then what?  What are you suggesting?



I am suggesting that there will be unstructured chaos, and a vacuum to be filled by who knows what as yet unknown horrors.
Maybe the ultra right wing will muscle in to try to sort it, or violent nationalists will exploit the situation. I certainly don't see the outcome as all pink and fluffy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am suggesting that there will be unstructured chaos, and a vacuum to be filled by who knows what as yet unknown horrors.
> Maybe the ultra right wing will muscle in to try to sort it, or violent nationalists will exploit the situation. I certainly don't see the outcome as all pink and fluffy.


Ah, I thought for a moment you were suggesting "what if they called a Brexit and nobody came?"

Tell me more about this "unstructured chaos".  Are you suggesting there will be no agreed border?  What?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am suggesting that there will be unstructured chaos, and a vacuum to be filled by who knows what as yet unknown horrors.
> Maybe the ultra right wing will muscle in to try to sort it, or violent nationalists will exploit the situation. I certainly don't see the outcome as all pink and fluffy.


I can imagine food shortages/price-hikes leading to unrest, but I can't see that large numbers of Leave voters would be too bothered about the NI/RoI border issue.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah, I thought for a moment you were suggesting "what if they called a Brexit and nobody came?"
> 
> Tell me more about this "unstructured chaos".  Are you suggesting there will be no agreed border?  What?



Yes I am suggesting there will be no agreed border. of course I might be wrong, but I am struggling to envisage what form such an agreement would take. Judging by the past two plus years I think no agreed border is a very likely situation.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes I am suggesting there will be no agreed border. of course I might be wrong, but I am struggling to envisage what form such an agreement would take. Judging by the past two plus years I think no agreed border is a very likely situation.


I'm sorry, I'm still not seeing how the ultra right will capitalise on disagreement over the Irish border.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm sorry, I'm still not seeing how the ultra right will capitalise on disagreement over the Irish border.


Because the border 'failure' might make the ultra right feel they have somehow been betrayed over brexit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Because the border 'failure' might make the ultra right feel they have somehow been betrayed over brexit.


I think you're overstating the type of cock up that'll ensue. It'll be boring, unfathomable and soporific rather than polarising.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think you're overstating the type of cock up that'll ensue. It'll be boring, unfathomable and soporific rather than polarising.



Your guess is as good as mine I suppose. However a lot of my life had the spectre of and reality of very nasty terrorism emanating from Ireland, some of it very close to home indeed.
I would not want a return to that kind of stuff because of a renewed schism being created by brexit on the island of Ireland. For better or worse, both countries having the Belfast agreement, and both countries sharing the common procedures of the EU (and I am not saying here that the EU is in any way a perfect institution) has led to an extended period of peace which at one time in my teens, twenties, thirties and forties I didn't think would come about.
Maybe it will be a Whisky Galore Ealing Comedy type of scenario that will happen in Ireland, but as I have said, given my experience of the past, I have my doubts about that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Your guess is as good as mine I suppose. However a lot of my life had the spectre of and reality of very nasty terrorism emanating from Ireland, some of it very close to home indeed.
> I would not want a return to that kind of stuff because of a renewed schism being created by brexit on the island of Ireland. For better or worse, both countries having the Belfast agreement, and both countries sharing the common procedures of the EU (and I am not saying here that the EU is in any way a perfect institution) has led to an extended period of peace which at one time in my teens, twenties, thirties and forties I didn't think would come about.
> Maybe it will be a Whisky Galore Ealing Comedy type of scenario that will happen in Ireland, but as I have said, given my experience of the past, I have my doubts about that.


So you've revised your prediction from the rise of the ultra right in the UK to the reignition of the Troubles in Northern Ireland?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So you've revised your prediction from the rise of the ultra right in the UK to the reignition of the Troubles in Northern Ireland?



Have I? Read 11308 and tell me how that squares with what you have written.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Have I? Read 11308 and tell me how that squares with what you have written.


CBA, TBF.


----------



## mojo pixy (Aug 29, 2018)

FWIW and IMO, I think food prices will be the main thing that causes whatever street-level trouble that comes along over Brexit. UK / Eire border issue maybe in a few streets in Belfast, but nobody else cares, not enough to riot over it.

Hunger, shortages, empty shelves and black marketeers though? Shit yeah there'll be trouble if things go that way.


----------



## Cloo (Aug 30, 2018)

I think the noises now suggest there will be a dea. It will be a shit one, but the government has deliberately been giving out ‘prepare for No Deal’ messages so that people will be relieved with any deal at all. The government will find a few things that they will spin in a way to please Brexiteers and hush up all the other stuff they know those voters will never bother to look up. If negatives are mentioned to the Leavers, they will stick their fingers in their ears and go ‘Lalalala! We don’t care as long as we’ve left the EU!’


----------



## philosophical (Aug 30, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I think the noises now suggest there will be a dea. It will be a shit one, but the government has deliberately been giving out ‘prepare for No Deal’ messages so that people will be relieved with any deal at all. The government will find a few things that they will spin in a way to please Brexiteers and hush up all the other stuff they know those voters will never bother to look up. If negatives are mentioned to the Leavers, they will stick their fingers in their ears and go ‘Lalalala! We don’t care as long as we’ve left the EU!’



I think you may be right, it looks like the Emperors New Clothes option, which tons of people being expected to operate some kind of Orwellian doublethink.


----------



## gosub (Aug 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the day after tomorrow is thursday, so perhaps SpackleFrog prescient rather than tardy



Give me a break, its not like I haven't got enough on my plate as it is, let alone dealing with the Thursday's .  Like fuck am I going to cave in to impatient Tuesday's  in search of instant gratification



SpackleFrog said:


> Why would it lead to the collapse of European logistics? Perhaps it is complicated - please try me. The article you linked to made no attempt to explain the point, so would be grateful if you can. Not asking if you think there should be an A50 extension, just asking you to explain your claim re France, Germany and services.



Its the cabotage problem, which as late as last month wasn't on anybodies radar.  Which was a bit surprising, its an obscure word BUT vital, in the end put it down to lack of civil service expertise and poor interact-action with industry -talking to managers that manage manager's rather than the managers that actually manage getting shit done.   Cabotage is the verb for allowing a person or company to run a transport company - be it James Onedine with his fleet of tall ships, Eddie Stobart's haulage fleet or Freddie Laker's fleet of aircraft  (other more current examples it equally applies). 

Cabotage WITHIN the Single Market means the transport in question can charge for transporting a load  of people/freight/mail to say Madrid and then pick up more freight/people/mail and carry on to say Marsaille and drop off there.   NO DEAL BREXIT, or a DEAL that does n't cover cabotage. And that stops .....You'd be able to pick up a return load from Spain and bring it back to UK, but not the onward leg to say France and beyond....

The unenlightened will probably think ho ho that's the UK shooting itself in the foot D'oh.  But it would equally be the EU.  The UK transport and logistic fleets are not insignificant, and their withdrawal from the EU has to be managed carefully, there certainly ISN'T the spare capacity to absorb it readily  - its not just log jams at Dover Calais - the Berlin Heathrow flight may well have turned up at Berlin from Athens - so thats non UK bound passengers and freight stuck at Athens airport because of a change to cabotage. 

As Chris Grayling found with trains, retimetabling ain't easy, getting every transport company to do it in under 200 days from a standing start is completely unrealistic - hence the need for an extension.   Do your own digging on Merkel and May's Chequers deal, from a German perspective, that the French one is not quite the same ....a gut reaction to the nice couple I met on Hanwell locks a couple of weeks back who thought I should have a shave.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It means the UK is going to get fucked by the French after brexit.
> 
> "Sure we will help you with some trade (or more likely border charges and Calais)...but you have to understand, it will be quite difficult.  You may have to pay a little more, yes?"



How would the French do that? They can't negotiate trade terms unilaterally - whatever terms of trade are established between Britain and the EU will be the terms of trade between Britain and France.

And how does this answer my question? I'm asking what it is specifically that the papers say May is asking for that the French do not want to agree to?


----------



## gosub (Aug 30, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How would the French do that? They can't negotiate trade terms unilaterally - whatever terms of trade are established between Britain and the EU will be the terms of trade between Britain and France.
> 
> And how does this answer my question? I'm asking what it is specifically that the papers say May is asking for that the French do not want to agree to?



I think it more about the French wanting the Germans to wind their necks in a bit


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2018)

gosub said:


> Do your own digging on Merkel and May's Chequers deal, from a German perspective, that the French one is not quite the same ....a gut reaction to the nice couple I met on Hanwell locks a couple of weeks back who thought I should have a shave.



Cannot make head or tail of this. Are you saying that your confident assertion that the Chequers deal is acceptable to Merkel but not to Macron because it "guarantees German hegemony" is actually just what some couple you met said and you decided to repeat it here? 



gosub said:


> Emmanuel Macron rejects Theresa May's plea for help to rescue her Brexit plan
> 
> 
> As I understood it the 'Chequers deal' was hammered out between Number 10 and Merkel, then presented to everyone else Cabinet,... Businesses... the EU.. as a fait a complete.  Why should Macron prop it up? It guarantees German hegemony.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2018)

gosub said:


> I think it more about the French wanting the Germans to wind their necks in a bit



About what???


----------



## gosub (Aug 30, 2018)

My understanding of what went down at Chequers was, 'ignore all the stuff the Brexit dept has come up with its a red herring, this of what we at Number 10, having talked it through with Berlin have come up with, but it can't be changed without upsetting Mrs Merkel".   Got rather a lot to do at mo so not going to go back and redig up[ my sourcing on that (but its out there and I'm comfortable that's the way it went down.......And you don't think the Germans need to wind their neck in a bit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2018)

gosub said:


> My understanding of what went down at Chequers was, 'ignore all the stuff the Brexit dept has come up with its a red herring, this of what we at Number 10, having talked it through with Berlin have come up with, but it can't be changed without upsetting Mrs Merkel".   Got rather a lot to do at mo so not going to go back and redig up[ my sourcing on that (but its out there and I'm comfortable that's the way it went down.......And you don't think the Germans need to wind their neck in a bit?



You don't need to go back to any sources, you just need to tell me what it is in this deal that is acceptable to Germany but not to France. Or just admit you don't really know and we can leave it there. 

What do you mean the Germans need to "wind their neck in a bit"? 

There are obviously tensions between France and Germnay over the direction of the EU and always have been, we know this, the question is how this is manifesting itself in relation to Brexit, if at all.


----------



## gosub (Aug 30, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You don't need to go back to any sources, you just need to tell me what it is in this deal that is acceptable to Germany but not to France. Or just admit you don't really know and we can leave it there.
> 
> What do you mean the Germans need to "wind their neck in a bit"?
> 
> There are obviously tensions between France and Germnay over the direction of the EU and always have been, we know this, the question is how this is manifesting itself in relation to Brexit, if at all.



HOW IS IT EVER GOING TO BE IN FRANCE'S INTERESTS FOR  GERMANY TO DICTATE TERMS?  Be it over Brexit or sorting out the shit that needs doing over the EUrozone


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2018)

gosub said:


> HOW IS IT EVER GOING TO BE IN FRANCE'S INTERESTS FOR  GERMANY TO DICTATE TERMS?  Be it over Brexit or sorting out the shit that needs doing over the EUrozone



What specifically about the Chequers deal is in Germany's favour but against the interests of France?


----------



## billbond (Aug 30, 2018)

Express: BREXIT BREAKTHROUGH: Barnier concedes EU prepared to give Britain unique Brexit deal.
BREXIT BREAKTHROUGH: Barnier concedes EU prepared to give Britain unique Brexit deal


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 30, 2018)

I'll wait till its confirmed in the Dandy


----------



## Supine (Aug 30, 2018)

And here is pretty much the opposite story 

Germany and EU tell UK: No Brexit cherry-picking | DW | 29.08.2018


----------



## billbond (Aug 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I'll wait till its confirmed in the Dandy



or the Guardian


----------



## teqniq (Aug 30, 2018)

Your main problem here is the mistaken belief that nearly everyone on here blindly agrees with everything that is published in the Graun. It, like every major news outlet has an agenda which in it's case could be broadly categorised as establishment liberal centrist. They run some good articles but many that are imo not. So yeah it has an agenda just not as blatantly dogwhistle as the Express.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 30, 2018)

billbond said:


> or the Guardian


You've been here three years and yet you still think people like Dotty are Guardian lovers?  FFS.


----------



## Humirax (Sep 4, 2018)

Lol! Ukip says don't join the army until after Brexit because it's under 'foreign military command'


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You've been here three years and yet you still think people like Dotty are Guardian lovers?  FFS.


he's not the sharpest tool in the box


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2018)

I noticed that on Newsnight last night Rees Mogg said the Irish Border can be managed remotely.
No details provided by him.
I believe he is wrong.


----------



## Santino (Sep 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I noticed that on Newsnight last night Rees Mogg said the Irish Border can be managed remotely.
> No details provided by him.
> I believe he is wrong.


What's the issue with the Irish border?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I noticed that on Newsnight last night Rees Mogg said the Irish Border can be managed remotely.
> No details provided by him.
> I believe he is wrong.


...on the basis that...


----------



## pk (Sep 4, 2018)

Santino said:


> What's the issue with the Irish border?


There aren’t enough tories swinging from the top of its fence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

pk said:


> There aren’t enough tories swinging from the top of its fence.


this would be the fence that famously doesn't exist.


----------



## Supine (Sep 4, 2018)

Santino said:


> What's the issue with the Irish border?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> ...on the basis that...


There aren't enough drones, and they're too expensive.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There aren't enough drones, and they're too expensive.


Enough drones *for what*? 

Too expensive *for what*?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Enough drones *for what*?
> 
> Too expensive *for what*?



To remotely control the land border in Ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> To remotely control the land border in Ireland.


Yeh cos that really connects with the discussion


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh cos that really connects with the discussion



Well I commented on what Rees Mogg said, no particular discussion about it has followed.
Hope that helps.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Well I commented on what Rees Mogg said, no particular discussion about it has followed.
> Hope that helps.


Not really, no


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not really, no


Oh well, too bad.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 5, 2018)

Any flounces on this thread so far?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Any flounces on this thread so far?


philosophical's flounce is eagerly anticipated


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2018)

very disappointed that my patent (and indeed trademarked) salt water solution, brino, has now been dragged into the brexit argument.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical's flounce is eagerly anticipated


I don't have enough hair for a flounce, or even a quiff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't have enough hair for a flounce, or even a quiff.


Not even a furbelow


----------



## Kesher (Sep 5, 2018)

UK would vote 59-41 in favour of staying in EU, new poll shows


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2018)

Kesher said:


> UK would vote 59-41 in favour of staying in EU, new poll shows


Fieldwork done in June on a skewed sample.


----------



## billbond (Sep 6, 2018)

Kesher said:


> UK would vote 59-41 in favour of staying in EU, new poll shows



Ive seen one poll where it is 58-42 in favour of LEAVE
All a waste of time anyway has the vote has already taken place


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 6, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Any flounces on this thread so far?



Does Brexit count as a flounce?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 6, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Does Brexit count as a flounce?



Will the UK just wander back in as if nothing has happened, or reappear under a different name?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2018)

billbond said:


> Ive seen one poll where it is 58-42 in favour of LEAVE
> All a waste of time anyway has the vote has already taken place


a vote...

tbh the most likely outcome's brino, for all your saline needs.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 6, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Will the UK just wander back in as if nothing has happened, or reappear under a different name?


"awesome britain" instead of 'Great'?


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 6, 2018)

brogdale said:


> "awesome britain" instead of 'Great'?


little.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 6, 2018)

06/09/18; Yellowhammer day


----------



## brogdale (Sep 6, 2018)

Priorities, eh?

"...help maintain confidence in the event of contingency plans being triggered - particularly important for financial services."


----------



## teuchter (Sep 6, 2018)

That there HM Treasury. It's like they are obsessed with thinking about money


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 7, 2018)

Big conference with Barnier up here: Oral evidence - The progress of the UK’s negotiations on EU withdrawal - 3 Sep 2018


----------



## CRI (Sep 8, 2018)




----------



## hash tag (Sep 8, 2018)

Anyone watching last night of the proms and seen how many eu flags being waved?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Anyone watching last night of the proms and seen how many eu flags being waved?


About 46.


----------



## hash tag (Sep 8, 2018)

Well I made it at least 47 in comparison to 23 union flags.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Well I made it at least 47 in comparison to 23 union flags.


It’s all over, then?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 8, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Anyone watching last night of the proms and seen how many eu flags being waved?



I like Ode to Joy as a tune. Worked beautifully with Die Hard.


----------



## billbond (Sep 9, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Anyone watching last night of the proms and seen how many eu flags being waved?



They were given away free.
Same last year
i wonder how much that cost Soros and his goons


----------



## Wookey (Sep 9, 2018)

billbond said:


> Ive seen one poll where it is 58-42 in favour of LEAVE
> All a waste of time anyway has the vote has already taken place



Source please?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2018)

hash tag said:


> Well I made it at least 47 in comparison to 23 union flags.



Wave the Union flag and you're clearly an imperialist cunt who touts the theft of land and destruction of peoples as a good thing. IMHO. So not many takers, apart from the British state, oddly enough.


----------



## mango5 (Sep 9, 2018)

My Norwegian mates have suggested a good way out is to declare war on the EU and surrender immediately, leaving the victors to clean up the mess in their new vassal state and giving the Brexiteers plentiful moaning material for the next few centuries.


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2018)

mango5 said:


> My Norwegian mates have suggested a good way out is to declare war on the EU and surrender immediately, leaving the victors to clean up the mess in their new vassal state and giving the Brexiteers plentiful moaning material for the next few centuries.


Are they just trying to get a word to take over from Quizling?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 9, 2018)

s


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2018)

Boris Johnson, using his legendary tact (and fucking idiocy), says the EU has the UK constitution in a 'suicide vest':
Tories condemn Boris Johnson for Brexit 'suicide vest' remarks
Wonder if there's a chance of the wingnut wing of the Tory Party ending up supporting a 2nd vote? That would be on 'chequers v swivelling version', not 'chequers vs stay in' of course *. But with unions edging Labour towards supporting something akin to '2nd vote if there isn't a meaningful parliamentary vote'... interesting times.

Fwiw, I don't think either of those things will actually happen, we'll end up leaving with May getting a parliamentary vote on some soggy compromise. I've always thought that would happen and that May would survive, but there do seem like signs of _something_ different emerging about the whole process.

* Which they would lose of course, but threatening it and the turmoil it would cause could be used to increase pressure on may.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 9, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Wave the Union flag and you're clearly an imperialist cunt who touts the theft of land and destruction of peoples as a good thing. IMHO. So not many takers, apart from the British state, oddly enough.


I heard that one flag was banned.


----------



## paolo (Sep 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Boris Johnson, using his legendary tact (and fucking idiocy), says the EU has the UK constitution in a 'suicide vest':
> Tories condemn Boris Johnson for Brexit 'suicide vest' remarks
> Wonder if there's a chance of the wingnut wing of the Tory Party ending up supporting a 2nd vote? That would be on 'chequers v swivelling version', not 'chequers vs stay in' of course *. But with unions edging Labour towards supporting something akin to '2nd vote if there isn't a meaningful parliamentary vote'... interesting times.
> 
> ...



I’d guess that Johnson was never a big factor in the urban75 constituency, whichever way they leant.

That aside, your point about him doing an about turn is interesting.

I’d say it’s unlikely, way too much of a reversal, he’s in a very dreep trench of his own unprincipled ambition.

But he’s a weasingly fucker. I could imagine him working a several year plan of turning his Brexit tanker ship around. Only, of course, it was self serving.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Boris Johnson, using his legendary tact (and fucking idiocy), says the EU has the UK constitution in a 'suicide vest':
> Tories condemn Boris Johnson for Brexit 'suicide vest' remarks
> Wonder if there's a chance of the wingnut wing of the Tory Party ending up supporting a 2nd vote? That would be on 'chequers v swivelling version', not 'chequers vs stay in' of course *. But with unions edging Labour towards supporting something akin to '2nd vote if there isn't a meaningful parliamentary vote'... interesting times.
> 
> ...


A soggy compromise needs the DUP to agree to a possible border in the Irish Sea. They're not best known for comprising.

No deal or no Brexit. Or a general election to bypass the DUP, fought on who has the best soggy compromise.


----------



## gosub (Sep 11, 2018)

xarmian said:


> A soggy compromise needs the DUP to agree to a possible border in the Irish Sea. They're not best known for comprising.



Could always threaten to rename it the Welsh Channel.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 11, 2018)




----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 11, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 146673



Reminiscent of the time the house master had us up in front of the whole house for oiling the school cormorant. We were red-cheeked that day, what. Even the creepy boy with the hitler hairdo got an earful.


----------



## Supine (Sep 11, 2018)

Tesco value. Bet they didn't have a clue what their lefty graphic designer was doing


----------



## Voley (Sep 12, 2018)

Shift of emphasis from today's Daily Mail. The "My God! My European holiday is at risk!" headline more their usual style. New editor I think?


----------



## gosub (Sep 12, 2018)

Voley said:


> Shift of emphasis from today's Daily Mail. The "My God! My European holiday is at risk!" headline more their usual style. New editor I think?
> 
> View attachment 146703



I have insufficient faith in the papers journalism to bother digging out the story to check its veracity, but yes there is a new Editor whom replaced Dacre.  Is the old Mail on Sunday editor.  Mail on Sunday was on remain side during the referendum


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

So the ERG group of Tories say a 'maxfax' technological solution will work on the land border with the EU on the island of Ireland.
It does not deal with the movement of people.
It has an unknown cost.
At the very least follow up infrastructure is needed for checks and transgressions.
Any similar technological border is not in existence elsewhere as far as I can tell,  Norway and Sweden have been cited yet there are getting on for a quarter of a million vehicle checks per year between those two countries as well as patrols.
Hardly frictionless.
What has been proposed today won't work in my view.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So the ERG group of Tories say a 'maxfax' technological solution will work on the land border with the EU on the island of Ireland.
> It does not deal with the movement of people.
> It has an unknown cost.
> At the very least follow up infrastructure is needed for checks and transgressions.
> ...


Contact the Prime Minister - Great Britain and Northern Ireland


----------



## kebabking (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> ...It does not deal with the movement of people...



Ending 'free movement' has nothing to do with people crossing this or that border, that's not what 'free movement' is, 'free movement' is the ability to move to any member state, rent/buy a house, apply for jobs, access the welfare state etc..

When you end free movement, the border isn't at the road, or a line across a field, or at the beach, it's at the employment agency, the DWP office, the estate agent, the HR Department and the Dr's surgery - none of which require a barrier and a man in a hat.

I don't doubt that there are huge flaws in anything produced by the ERG, but this isn't one of them.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

She hasn't proposed anything yet.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 12, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Ending 'free movement' has nothing to do with people crossing this or that border, that's not what 'free movement' is, 'free movement' is the ability to move to any member state, rent/buy a house, apply for jobs, access the welfare state etc..
> 
> When you end free movement, the border isn't at the road, or a line across a field, or at the beach, it's at the employment agency, the DWP office, the estate agent, the HR Department and the Dr's surgery - none of which require a barrier and a man in a hat.
> 
> I don't doubt that there are huge flaws in anything produced by the ERG, but this isn't one of them.


It doesn’t matter how many times you say this to philosophical , he still doesn’t seem to understand it.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Ending 'free movement' has nothing to do with people crossing this or that border, that's not what 'free movement' is, 'free movement' is the ability to move to any member state, rent/buy a house, apply for jobs, access the welfare state etc..
> 
> When you end free movement, the border isn't at the road, or a line across a field, or at the beach, it's at the employment agency, the DWP office, the estate agent, the HR Department and the Dr's surgery - none of which require a barrier and a man in a hat.
> 
> I don't doubt that there are huge flaws in anything produced by the ERG, but this isn't one of them.



Yes I get that. Personal checks and controls (are supposed to) exist elsewhere to try to catch people out.
I am aware of the detention centres and forced deportations that are the end result of formal and random checking.
Such stuff requires resources, and there is the casual off grid sort of economy out there that people gravitate to.
The notion of taking back control of the borders is not particularly in operation of those personal 'borders' can be almost anywhere.
In my example above, notwithstanding similar homeland infrastructures in Norway and Sweden, they still feel the need to do hundreds of thousands of vehicle checks per year on their land border.
In the sensitive circumstances in Ireland that could become troublesome, let alone the provisions of the Belfast Agreement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes I get that. Personal checks and controls (are supposed to) exist elsewhere to try to catch people out.
> I am aware of the detention centres and forced deportations that are the end result of formal and random checking.
> Such stuff requires resources, and there is the casual off grid sort of economy out there that people gravitate to.
> The notion of taking back control of the borders is not particularly in operation of those personal 'borders' can be almost anywhere.
> ...


i believe theresa may will afford your views, if communicated to her, more time than the short shrift they receive here. now you've an easy way to send them to the prime minister please do so forthwith.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i believe theresa may will afford your views, if communicated to her, more time than the short shrift they receive here. now you've an easy way to send them to the prime minister please do so forthwith.



Are you the moderator of this site?
That my viewpoint is treated with distain by many here, seem to be not much different from the variety of reactions to the viewpoint of others.
I have not seen similar 'take it up with the man' advice issued to others.
Or is it an unspoken standing site rule to always contact the authorities rather than posting a viewpoint here?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 12, 2018)

If everyone knew about the bringing back only 200 fags and 1Lt of vodka then we wouldn't be where we are today.

If you ask me.

looking forward to doing booze and fags run over the border in 2019


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Are you the moderator of this site?
> That my viewpoint is treated with distain by many here, seem to be not much different from the variety of reactions to the viewpoint of others.
> I have not seen similar 'take it up with the man' advice issued to others.
> Or is it an unspoken standing site rule to always contact the authorities rather than posting a viewpoint here?


i am not a moderator. i don't need to be a moderator of this site to see your concerns are treated with disdain. i am simply offering you an avenue by which to channel them to a more appropriate person's attention.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> If everyone knew about the bringing back only 200 fags and 1Lt of vodka then we wouldn't be where we are today.
> 
> If you ask me.
> 
> looking forward to doing booze and fags run over the border in 2019


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i am not a moderator. i don't need to be a moderator of this site to see your concerns are treated with disdain. i am simply offering you an avenue by which to channel them to a more appropriate person's attention.



Thanks for the offer, and there's me thinking you were just being snide.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Thanks for the offer, and there's me thinking you were just being snide.


i bet you think everyone who goes out of their way to help you is just being snide.

no one here can take your concerns into account and use them to change inform policy. theresa may may.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Yes I get that. Personal checks and controls (are supposed to) exist elsewhere to try to catch people out.
> I am aware of the detention centres and forced deportations that are the end result of formal and random checking.
> Such stuff requires resources, and there is the casual off grid sort of economy out there that people gravitate to.
> The notion of taking back control of the borders is not particularly in operation of those personal 'borders' can be almost anywhere.
> ...



I'm interested in - very roughly - what number of people from within the EU you think will cross into NI so they can work/live in the grey economy, knowing that they will have great difficulty getting into mainland UK?

I'm also interested in what kind of number - very roughly - of people from outside the EU who you think will cross the Med or the Balkans, make their way through Italy, France, cross the channel to Ireland, then go over the border to NI so they can live and work in the grey/black economy?

Why do you think NI will be such a popular destination for aspiring migrants?


----------



## skyscraper101 (Sep 12, 2018)

For the crack?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I'm interested in - very roughly - what number of people from within the EU you think will cross into NI so they can work/live in the grey economy, knowing that they will have great difficulty getting into mainland UK?
> 
> I'm also interested in what kind of number - very roughly - of people from outside the EU who you think will cross the Med or the Balkans, make their way through Italy, France, cross the channel to Ireland, then go over the border to NI so they can live and work in the grey/black economy?
> 
> Why do you think NI will be such a popular destination for aspiring migrants?


Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK. 
Given the effort people have made to migrate to a variety of places it is not unreasonable to assume that people will get in to the UK via the Irish border, how many I don't know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK.


and the locals let you know...


----------



## Poi E (Sep 12, 2018)

Provo and loyalist set aside differences and come together for the sake of human trafficking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Provo and loyalist set aside differences and come together for the sake of human trafficking.


Not sure that's the road in 'on the one road'


----------



## kebabking (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK.
> Given the effort people have made to migrate to a variety of places it is not unreasonable to assume that people will get in to the UK via the Irish border, how many I don't know.



Except, or course, that it's pretty difficult to get from NI to GB without travel documents, and NI isn't high on the list of places migrants coming from the ME and North and Sub-Saharan Africa want to go to.

So, again, why do you think numbers that Brexiteers would get excited about will choose to go to NI, particularly when it means travelling through several EU countries to get there?


----------



## kabbes (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK.
> Given the effort people have made to migrate to a variety of places it is not unreasonable to assume that people will get in to the UK via the Irish border, how many I don't know.


Still misunderstanding what is meant by “freedom of movement”, I see.



What is so great about “getting in” to the U.K. when you can do nothing once you get there?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

What would be the number to get excited about? One? One million?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> What would be the number to get excited about? One? One million?



Probably somewhere between the two, yes...


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK.
> Given the effort people have made to migrate to a variety of places it is not unreasonable to assume that people will get in to the UK via the Irish border, how many I don't know.


Probably not many but if you're the kind of person with the smarts and the get up and go to sneak yourself from sub-Saharan Africa/Middle East via Ireland into NI and then into the UK you're probably actually the kind of person we might want.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 12, 2018)

Anyway, the border will go down the Irish sea, right? Saves time come reunification.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 12, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Anyway, the border will go down the Irish sea, right? Saves time come reunification.


DUP have entirely ruled that out and the tories need them.

A snap election might fix that problem.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 12, 2018)

DUP won't bring down May.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 12, 2018)

Poi E said:


> DUP won't bring down May.


No they would not, it would destroy their influence.  

Other tories would though...and if they can bring down May and get rid of the DUP's influence at the same time with a majority of seats?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 12, 2018)

If they give a shit about NI. Which they don't. Nothing but a liability to the Union (unlike Scotland.)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 12, 2018)

Getting in to Ireland from the Schengen area is as hard as getting in to the UK. So why would a migrant place an extra obstacle in their way if having made it to the Schengen zone if they wanted to get to the UK? Non starter.


----------



## Combustible (Sep 12, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Once in Northern Ireland you're in the UK.
> Given the effort people have made to migrate to a variety of places it is not unreasonable to assume that people will get in to the UK via the Irish border, how many I don't know.



But there is nothing stopping them doing that at the moment, Brexit doesn't make it any more likely that people will sneak in via NI.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 12, 2018)

Combustible said:


> But there is nothing stopping them doing that at the moment, Brexit doesn't make it any more likely that people will sneak in via NI.



I agree with this, however one apparent aim of brexit was to 'take back control' of the borders. It (sneaking in) will remain just as likely, but with the added frisson of brexiters showing somehow that control has been taken back, and failing most likely, but pissing off a lot of people as they try to do so.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2018)

“Take back control” doesn’t mean what you think it means.  For the millionth time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Getting in to Ireland from the Schengen area is as hard as getting in to the UK. So why would a migrant place an extra obstacle in their way if having made it to the Schengen zone if they wanted to get to the UK? Non starter.


our generous benefits. they're all after our generous benefits.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

Poi E said:


> DUP won't bring down May.


yeh they're bought and they'll stay bought.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> “Take back control” doesn’t mean what you think it means.  For the millionth time.


Taking back control means not having control?
Is that what you're getting at?
Maybe it is a concept with as many meanings and interpretations as brexit itself.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Taking back control means not having control?
> Is that what you're getting at?
> Maybe it is a concept with as many meanings and interpretations as brexit itself.


It means not having freedom of movement.  Do you understand yet what “freedom of movement” actually means? Or do you still think it means being able to sneak into a country and have no rights or ability to work legally?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

Freedom of movement, or as I like to think of it, no restrictions on movement is a good thing in my view.
Taking back control is not exactly the same thing, to me it suggests checks and monitoring.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Freedom of movement, or as I like to think of it, no restrictions on movement


These aren’t synonymous either.  Freedom of movement still comes with restrictions.

“Freedom of movement” is a defined thing.  At least know what you’re fighting for.



> Taking back control is not exactly the same thing, to me it suggests checks and monitoring.


It’s not, though, about worrying about an inconsequential flow of people who are subsequently restricted to the grey economy.

And besides, this “taking back control” thing only exists in your imagination, which is exactly why it’s so ill-defined.  The rest of the population has been discussing freedom of movement — you know, the actual thing the EU insists on — not “taking back control”.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Freedom of movement, or as I like to think of it, no restrictions on movement is a good thing in my view.
> Taking back control is not exactly the same thing, to me it suggests checks and monitoring.


you might like to think of it as no restrictions on movement but it isn't really is it. can you think of a couple of restrictions placed on freedom of movement between say the uk and france now?


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 13, 2018)

tbf, as an EU citizen you do have freedom of movement in the EU countries. But the freedom stops when the EU citizen stops his or her "movement".
So, great for hobos or nomads but crap if you want to actually stop moving and take up residence anywhere. Most EU nations are full of restrictions when it comes to "freedom of residence". Way more than the UK.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Freedom of movement, or as I like to think of it, no restrictions on movement is a good thing in my view.



Do you really think that there should be no restrictions on people from Africa, India, Asia and South America moving to UK and setting up shop here? A couple of billion immigrants may increase the waiting times at your local GP.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> tbf, as an EU citizen you do have freedom of movement in the EU countries. But the freedom stops when the EU citizen stops his or her "movement".
> So, great for hobos or nomads but crap if you want to actually stop moving and take up residence anywhere. Most EU nations are full of restrictions when it comes to "freedom of residence". Way more than the UK.


You have freedom of movement but this doesn’t mean no restrictions.  For example, you generally can’t claim various types of government services (eg unemployment benefit) on immediate arrival as well as your noted restrictions in residence. 

Then there are the practical restrictions, such as needing to show (and thus own) a passport. 

Philosophical is arguing in favour of something that doesn’t exist but also ring-fenced in any case to a small proportion of the world’s population.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> tbf, as an EU citizen you do have freedom of movement in the EU countries. But the freedom stops when the EU citizen stops his or her "movement".
> So, great for hobos or nomads but crap if you want to actually stop moving and take up residence anywhere. Most EU nations are full of restrictions when it comes to "freedom of residence". Way more than the UK.


not to mention that you can't just up and off, to get from here to france or germany you have to show a passport at least once.


----------



## newbie (Sep 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> tbf, as an EU citizen you do have freedom of movement in the EU countries. But the freedom stops when the EU citizen stops his or her "movement".
> So, great for hobos or nomads but crap if you want to actually stop moving and take up residence anywhere. Most EU nations are full of restrictions when it comes to "freedom of residence". Way more than the UK.


Residence is tied to economic activity, isn't it?  The richest can do what they want, but for the rest, those with FoM are entitled to get a job and with that comes qualification for residence. Those without can't. Neither can expect to live off the fat of the land without restriction, although some places allow more access to eg benefits, health or education provision than others, but only for those with FoM.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 13, 2018)

Abstract appeals to or demands for _freedom of movement_ without the same for the concrete foundation which would make it possible, that is, economic equality  - is just so much guff.  A simple rhetorical stick with which to beat supporters of a situation you don't support and to hang them with the whiff of racism. It's pretty disgusting actually.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> These aren’t synonymous either.  Freedom of movement still comes with restrictions.
> 
> “Freedom of movement” is a defined thing.  At least know what you’re fighting for.
> 
> ...



I disagree. Taking back control is used frequently by brexiters


Pickman's model said:


> you might like to think of it as no restrictions on movement but it isn't really is it. can you think of a couple of restrictions placed on freedom of movement between say the uk and france now?



who have no access to my imagination. One extension put out there is 'taking back control' of UK law making.

Finally enough I went to Paris on Eurostar last week. We were checked, and paperwork monitored.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Do you really think that there should be no restrictions on people from Africa, India, Asia and South America moving to UK and setting up shop here? A couple of billion immigrants may increase the waiting times at your local GP.



I am afraid I do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree. Taking back control is used frequently by brexiters
> 
> 
> who have no access to my imagination. One extension put out there is 'taking back control' of UK law making.
> ...


when i say i'm a reluctant remainer i mean i'm a reluctant remainer. a brexiter is different. do you read my posts before making things up?


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You have freedom of movement but this doesn’t mean no restrictions.  For example, you generally can’t claim various types of government services (eg unemployment benefit) on immediate arrival as well as your noted restrictions in residence.
> 
> Then there are the practical restrictions, such as needing to show (and thus own) a passport.
> 
> Philosophical is arguing in favour of something that doesn’t exist but also ring-fenced in any case to a small proportion of the world’s population.





Pickman's model said:


> not to mention that you can't just up and off, to get from here to france or germany you have to show a passport at least once.


indeed... I should have mentioned the prerequisite of owning a passport to be a hobo/ nomad enjoying the wonders of FoM in the EU. 
So the reality is, that living an unrestricted life under "Freedom of Movement"  generally means no home, no job, no health insurance and none of the other shit that Renton mentions at the start of Trainspotting


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I am afraid I do.



If you genuinely think the UK would be better for an additional 2 billion inhabitants then you are more moronic that even the previous six months or so posts have shown you to be.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

Apologies for messing up my quoting and suchlike on here.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you genuinely think the UK would be better for an additional 2 billion inhabitants then you are more moronic that even the previous six months or so posts have shown you to be.


Did I say the UK would be 'better'?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you genuinely think the UK would be better for an additional 2 billion inhabitants then you are more moronic that even the previous six months or so posts have shown you to be.


There are quite a few other posters on here you are going to have to label as moronic too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There are quite a few other posters on here you are going to have to label as moronic too.


oh teuchter  ((((teuchter))))

i'm so sorry to hear that


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Apologies for messing up my quoting and suchlike on here.


that's the least of the things you should apologise for.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There are quite a few other posters on here you are going to have to label as moronic too.



Open borders people are moronic, happy to label them as such.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Open borders people are moronic, happy to label them as such.


there is no way those bookshops will ever reopen


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There are quite a few other posters on here you are going to have to label as moronic too.



Calling other people moronic is the primary purpose of this website. You moron.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 13, 2018)

Must be quite a few posters here who wouldn't be around if Britain hadn't had open borders until 1905 - and open borders within the Empire/Commonwealth until 1968.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Must be quite a few posters here who wouldn't be around if Britain hadn't had open borders until 1905 - and open borders within the Empire/Commonwealth until 1968.



None of whose antecedents could have got here without either a small fortune of personal cash or state aid from the UK, of course.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I disagree. Taking back control is used frequently by brexiters
> 
> 
> who have no access to my imagination. One extension put out there is 'taking back control' of UK law making.
> ...


Do you have the first clue how to follow the thread of what you are arguing?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 13, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Must be quite a few posters here who wouldn't be around if Britain hadn't had open borders until 1905 - and open borders within the Empire/Commonwealth until 1968.


1962, not 68, but yes, the idea that having an open border with a large chunk of the world would lead to millions (or billions as suggested) coming here (flooding here, perhaps?) is idiotic. There was net emigration from Britain in much of that time.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Open borders people are moronic, happy to label them as such.


They will say that you are racist because you support the EU's racist border policies and that you are a fan of death camps, you don't care about people drowning in the Med, etc. etc.


----------



## Supine (Sep 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> They will say that you are racist because you support the EU's racist border policies and that you are a fan of death camps, you don't care about people drowning in the Med, etc. etc.



Don't forget Greece. You must always mention Greece!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 1962, not 68, but yes, the idea that having an open border with a large chunk of the world would lead to millions (or billions as suggested) coming here (flooding here, perhaps?) is idiotic. There was net emigration from Britain in much of that time.





Yossarian said:


> Must be quite a few posters here who wouldn't be around if Britain hadn't had open borders until 1905 - and open borders within the Empire/Commonwealth until 1968.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> None of whose antecedents could have got here without either a small fortune of personal cash or state aid from the UK, of course.



Cost of Tunis to London today:

 


Can you see what may have changed in the past 70 years?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

Supine said:


> Don't forget Greece. You must always mention Greece!


tell me more


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Cost of Tunis to London today:
> 
> View attachment 146836
> 
> Can you see what may have changed in the past 70 years?



What did it cost to go from Riga to Grimsby in steerage in 1890?


----------



## sealion (Sep 13, 2018)

Supine said:


> Don't forget Greece. You must always mention Greece!


Greece! Not something the remainers shout about, is it.
Greece was never bailed out – it remains a debtor’s prison and the EU still holds the keys | Yanis Varoufakis


----------



## philosophical (Sep 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> that's the least of the things you should apologise for.


Here come de judge


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> What did it cost to go from Riga to Grimsby in steerage in 1890?



£4 - that included onward travel to America, which what what the vast majority of people fleeing Russia at that time did.


----------



## binka (Sep 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 1962, not 68, but yes, the idea that having an open border with a large chunk of the world would lead to millions (or billions as suggested) coming here (flooding here, perhaps?) is idiotic. There was net emigration from Britain in much of that time.


I don't find it at all difficult to imagine millions of people wanting to move to the UK if it were possible


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Sep 13, 2018)

The elephant in the room is that with climate change of catastrophic proportions nailed on without significant social and economic change - revolution even - then mass migration of a scale never seen before is also nailed on. The only questions at the moment are the size, extent, speed and culpability for the genocides we are staring down the barrel of.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 13, 2018)

What an absolute joke: the same sort of people who were fighting for Remain (ergo FoM within the EU) talking about the absurdity of open borders with the rest of the world. Selfish nationalist interests again and again.


----------



## Supine (Sep 13, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What an absolute joke: the same sort of people who were fighting for Remain (ergo FoM within the EU) talking about the absurdity of open borders with the rest of the world. Selfish nationalist interests again and again.



As opposed to what? A Tory hard Brexit that creates an island prison state that nobody can enter unless they have two million quid to invest ?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 13, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What an absolute joke: the same sort of people who were fighting for Remain (ergo FoM within the EU) talking about the absurdity of open borders with the rest of the world. Selfish nationalist interests again and again.


Yes, it is self interest to reject truly open borders but it is not inconsistent with preferring to remain in the EU.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 13, 2018)




----------



## Teaboy (Sep 13, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What an absolute joke: the same sort of people who were fighting for Remain (ergo FoM within the EU) talking about the absurdity of open borders with the rest of the world. Selfish nationalist interests again and again.



Who's doing that?


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 13, 2018)

sealion said:


> Greece! Not something the remainers shout about, is it.
> Greece was never bailed out – it remains a debtor’s prison and the EU still holds the keys | Yanis Varoufakis


It's generally you and your mates who shout about Greece.

But you never say how brexit helps Greece...or what brexiteers plans are to help Greece after brexit.  I've never heard anything about helping Greece or Greeks.

Are Greek immigrants welcome, for instance?


----------



## sealion (Sep 13, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's generally you and your mates who shout about Greece.


I don't expect you, a remainer to be highlighting the shit they've been served up.


DexterTCN said:


> But you never say how brexit helps Greece


Here comes the predictable guilt trip shit again 


DexterTCN said:


> or what brexiteers plans are to help Greece after brexit. I've never heard anything about helping Greece or Greeks.


What the fuck are you on about now ??


DexterTCN said:


> Are Greek immigrants welcome, for instance?


Are you asking me personally or do you think i'm the spokesman for government ?


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 13, 2018)

Didn't think so.


----------



## sealion (Sep 13, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Didn't think so.


Yay! you win, fuck all. Whats you and your mates view on Greece? It's swerved and met with stoney silence when mentioned here. Its generally you and your sneering mate/s that ignore this. How will voting remain help Greece ?


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 13, 2018)

Open borders is almost certainly where we're heading we just don't know the path we will take to get there.  I cant imagine a world where the most dynamic economic sectors are knowledge industries and service sectors, where information flows freely across via the internet and where international travel is increasingly easy and cheap ever really being able to put up strong borders if it is to prosper. Of course i accept that many things could slow or even temporarily reverse the tide of history and war or environmental catastrophe are threats as always, but these are just temporary wobbles. The direction of travel is clear IMHO.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2018)

Yeh we're on the highway to hell


----------



## 8115 (Sep 13, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Open borders is almost certainly where we're heading we just don't know the path we will take to get there.  I cant imagine a world where the most dynamic economic sectors are knowledge industries and service sectors, where information flows freely across via the internet and where international travel is increasingly easy and cheap ever really being able to put up strong borders if it is to prosper. Of course i accept that many things could slow or even temporarily reverse the tide of history and war or environmental catastrophe are threats as always, but these are just temporary wobbles. The direction of travel is clear IMHO.


Borders are big business I think. Hence their importance. Sorry I lack sources for this.


----------



## 8115 (Sep 13, 2018)

Not that huge actually if this article is right.

What the 2014 Border Security Expo Can Teach Us About Our Securitized Nation


----------



## NoXion (Sep 13, 2018)

8115 said:


> Borders are big business I think. Hence their importance. Sorry I lack sources for this.



Isn't globalisation still increasing?


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh we're on the highway to hell



Trotskyist hell maybe.


----------



## 8115 (Sep 14, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Isn't globalisation still increasing?


Yeah but globalisation depend on borders. Ie a worker in a low paid country can't leave.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 16, 2018)

8115 said:


> Yeah but globalisation depend on borders. Ie a worker in a low paid country can't leave.


Borders exist for two reasons in the case of repressive regimes they exist to keep the population in, there aren't all that many countries left in the world now that use them for that purpose, the other reason is to keep rhe riff-raff out. Who the riff-raff are varies from country to country, In the case of places like Saudi or Iran it's to keep out people with ideas the regime finds dangerous, In the case of the USA it's largely to keep out non-Americans.
In the case of Western Europe it's largely to keep out people from places whose average living standards are lower than ours like Africa, the Middle East or South America, mostly because we're selfish bastards and don't want to share. It's not that people from low paid countries can't leave it's that they have nowhere to go. 
I use to work for a large American company that had loads of staff in 3rd world coutnries and use to deal with colleagues from India, the Philippines, Romania and Mexico on a regular basis, they didn't consider themselves exploited they may have been paid less than me but they were paid much better than the people around them and thought globalisation was great.
The people in places like that who might went to leave are the peasant farmers and their ilk and the global economy hasn't really touched those people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 16, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Borders exist for two reasons in the case of repressive regimes they exist to keep the population in, there aren't all that many countries left in the world now that use them for that purpose, the other reason is to keep rhe riff-raff out. Who the riff-raff are varies from country to country, In the case of places like Saudi or Iran it's to keep out people with ideas the regime finds dangerous, In the case of the USA it's largely to keep out non-Americans.
> In the case of Western Europe it's largely to keep out people from places whose average living standards are lower than ours like Africa, the Middle East or South America, mostly because we're selfish bastards and don't want to share. It's not that people from low paid countries can't leave it's that they have nowhere to go.
> I use to work for a large American company that had loads of staff in 3rd world coutnries and use to deal with colleagues from India, the Philippines, Romania and Mexico on a regular basis, they didn't consider themselves exploited they may have been paid less than me but they were paid much better than the people around them and thought globalisation was great.
> The people in places like that who might went to leave are the peasant farmers and their ilk and the global economy hasn't really touched those people.


All regimes are repressive


----------



## NoXion (Sep 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All regimes are repressive



Including anarchist ones.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 16, 2018)

Not really


----------



## xarmian (Sep 17, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> mostly because we're selfish bastards and don't want to share


This is a bad argument. The category of illegal immigrant enables exploitation in rich countries as well as poor. People forced to live in the shadows easily exploitable by criminal gangs and criminal employers with no recourse to the law. Legal but precarious immigrants at risk of expulsion if convicted of a crime or their paperwork gets messed up. People who look or sound like they don't belong penalised daily by jobsworths and haters in ways large and small. Low income families split up if they fail the wrong tests. The nativist rhetoric feeds scrounger rhetoric and a surveillance imperative which penalises low income citizens too.

Workers are undermined by borders whether they want to move across them or not. In a state where workers are easily exploited open borders undermine them too. I don't know all the answers but a strong labour movement is the place to start.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 17, 2018)

I think I read today that it is proposed to move Marmite production to Holland.
People will either love or hate that news I suppose.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 17, 2018)

Perhaps post Brexit UK will strike a free trade deal with Australia for Vegemite.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 17, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Perhaps post Brexit UK will strike a free trade deal with Australia for Vegemite.



We sell them Marmite they sell us Vegemite.... i like it.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2018)

8115 said:


> Yeah but globalisation depend on borders. Ie a worker in a low paid country can't leave.




a point that disucssions of globalism often miss- it isnt free movement for everyone,it cannot be, otherwise globalism begins to get all ouroboros


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 17, 2018)

Apparently they sell one jar of marmite every 3 seconds.
I was going to say the unique taste relies on specific beer dregs from a brewery across the road, but it seems they have to buy it in from all over these days ...

Google Maps


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh we're on the highway to hell



dirty deeds done dirt cheap


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> dirty deeds done dirt cheap


ironically phil rudd was charged with hiring a hitman in 2014. The puns were good that day.


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I think I read today that it is proposed to move Marmite production to Holland.
> *People will either love or hate that news I suppose*.


Nice joke, but the story isn't so simple and the move isn't quite decided yet

Unilever relocation plan rejected by major shareholder


> One of the top shareholders in Unilever has said it will vote against the firm's plan to move its headquarters to the Netherlands, amid growing investor concern about the plan. Aviva Investors told the BBC the move could force UK shareholders to sell their shares and offered "no upside". Unilever, which makes Marmite and Dove soap, is relocating to simplify its corporate structure.


The reason given for the resistance to moving may be relevant to the general panic that many multi-nationals will 'abandon Britain' post Brexit


> The company is one of the biggest firms in the UK's FTSE 100 share index with a market value of about £124bn. However, under UK rules it would no longer be eligible for inclusion in the FTSE 100 in London after the proposed change. Shareholders fear this would cause a rush for the exits to sell the stock, leading to losses.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2018)

unliver is also under hostile TO pressure- Holland can offer greater comfort for them. fuck knows what the UK regime will be like after brexit- wild west is not unimaginablke


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> unliver is also under hostile TO pressure- Holland can offer greater comfort for them. fuck knows what the UK regime will be like after brexit- wild west is not unimaginablke


I'm counting on it as I'm opening a dozen of my saloons next April with slatted swing doors and card games and player pianos


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm counting on it as I'm opening a dozen of my saloons next April with slatted swing doors and card games and player pianos



I wouldn't do that if I were you, pardner. I'm also fixin' to open up a dozen high class saloon bars, and this here post-Brexit wasteland ain't big enough for the both of us.


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> unliver is also under hostile TO pressure- Holland can offer greater comfort for them. *fuck knows what the UK regime will be like after brexit- wild west is not unimaginablke*


Whether or not it's unimaginable, the idea that the UK regime will suddenly turn into the wild west after the civilizing hand of the EU is removed is nonsensical panic based on nothing.

I hope Pickman's model isn't putting all his post-Brexit investment eggs in the wild west basket...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2018)

hang 'em high


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wouldn't do that if I were you, pardner. I'm also fixin' to open up a dozen high class saloon bars, and this here post-Brexit wasteland ain't big enough for the both of us.


That's OK, I'm after business from the card sharps etc, high class trade not my thing


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> hang 'em high



ALL OF EM


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2018)

an economic free for all is one option - in the absence of everything, anything is possible


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Whether or not it's unimaginable, the idea that the UK regime will suddenly turn into the wild west after the civilizing hand of the EU is removed is nonsensical panic based on nothing.
> 
> I hope Pickman's model isn't putting all his post-Brexit investment eggs in the wild west basket...


By no means. I have branding irons in a range of pies


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Whether or not it's unimaginable, the idea that the UK regime will suddenly turn into the wild west after the civilizing hand of the EU is removed is nonsensical panic based on nothing.



Yeah, everyone just calm down and retain your faith in the incorruptible British state.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> That's OK, I'm after business from the card sharps etc, high class trade not my thing



I don't want to step on anyone's toes in what sounds like it will be a very competitive hospitality industry, so I guess I'll stick to shooting people and stealing cows.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I don't want to step on anyone's toes in what sounds like it will be a very competitive hospitality industry, so I guess I'll stick to shooting people and stealing cows.


Can I interest you in a crate of Winchesters?


----------



## paolo (Sep 17, 2018)

sealion said:


> How will voting remain help Greece ?



I can’t remember anyone here - or elsewhere for that matter - saying they were voting remain because of what happened to Greece.

One could level an accusation that they are, because of that, callously indifferent, but nonetheless the Greece justification is not one they’ve ever laid claim to.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> I can’t remember anyone here - or elsewhere for that matter - saying they were voting remain because of what happened to Greece.
> 
> One could level an accusation that they are, because of that, callously indifferent, but nonetheless the Greece justification is not one they’ve ever laid claim to.


I've yet to see anyone explain how the UK leaving the EU helps Greece.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 17, 2018)

this is interesting on ireland and the lisbon vote
They'll always have Lisbon | Richard Seymour on Patreon


----------



## kebabking (Sep 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain how the UK leaving the EU helps Greece.



I think there's a reasonable argument to be made that reducing the EU's total economic clout by around 1/7th, halving its number of UNSC P5 seats, and reducing its military expeditionary capability by about 35% could hardly be described is an insignificant dent in its power and influence - however the truth for Greece is that the EU has a great deal of power over Greece because Greece says it does.

Greece _could _leave the Euro, it _could _leave the EU - though they would not be painless options - but Greece chooses not to exercise them, nor to threaten to use them.


----------



## paolo (Sep 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> this is interesting on ireland and the lisbon vote
> They'll always have Lisbon | Richard Seymour on Patreon



Rare to see such depth in ‘blog’ analysis.

I don’t have the knowledge to make a call on it, but it’s a powerful read for sure.


----------



## paolo (Sep 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain how the UK leaving the EU helps Greece.



It’s never been stated. Maybe that was never the motivation.

My assumption, in good faith, is that it’s voting leave on principal because of what happened with Greece.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 17, 2018)

Can't we just tell everyone we done a Brexit and be over with it? not that many people would check if you ask me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 17, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Can't we just tell everyone we done a Brexit and be over with it? not that many people would check if you ask me.


I expect a salty brino


----------



## gosub (Sep 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s never been stated. Maybe that was never the motivation.
> 
> My assumption, in good faith, is that it’s voting leave on principal because of what happened with Greece.



Actually did spend quite a bit of time explaining how an EFTA style leave would lead to more targeted money to Greece at the expense of subsidising French agricultue


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 17, 2018)

gosub said:


> Actually did spend quite a bit of time explaining how an EFTA style leave would lead to more targeted money to Greece at the expense of subsidising French agricultue



Missed that sorry - what page roughly?


----------



## paolo (Sep 17, 2018)

gosub said:


> Actually did spend quite a bit of time explaining how an EFTA style leave would lead to more targeted money to Greece at the expense of subsidising French agricultue



I’d be interested to read the link, if you can do it.


----------



## gosub (Sep 18, 2018)

Brexit or Bremain - Urban votes

can find 5 posts from me just searching Norway Grants could search harder, but it was said, and said at a time it needed to be  [still think its the right move - shame losing side went down the route of insult people and demand they change their mind.]


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain how the UK leaving the EU helps Greece.


I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.


I've yet to see you explain _anything at all_ on this thread.


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I've yet to see you explain _anything at all_ on this thread.


I am a sort of gadfly, given to the boards by God; and the boards are like a great and noble steed who is tardy in his motions owing to his very size, and requires to be stirred into life. I am that gadfly which God has given the thread and all day long and in all places am always fastening upon you, arousing and persuading and reproaching you. And as you will not easily find another like me, I would advise you to spare me. I dare say that you may feel irritated at being suddenly awakened when you are caught napping; and you may think that if you were to ban me, as teuchter advises, which you easily might, then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless God in his care of you gives you another gadfly.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.



So i can bring back more than 200 Fags and 1L of Cheap Vodka next time i go to Spain.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> So i can bring back more than 200 Fags and 1L of Cheap Vodka next time i go to Spain.


It'll be on your visa's terms and conditions once they're agreed between UK and Spain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.


Perhaps you could bring this back home and explain why anyone should desire to remain part of a national institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries through sanctions to such an extent that child mortality soars


----------



## Poi E (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.



..


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.


What do you mean by 'in principle' here? Why did you add that phrase? The UK was still a member of the IMF and World Bank last I looked. The EU contains many elements of nasty neoliberal thinking and practice (as does the UK), but Brexit as it is being done is also a neoliberal project. And the UK instituted so-called 'austerity', causing a rise in suicides, all on its own accord - no need for encouragement from wider EU institutions, the UK was a pioneer in 'austerity'.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I've yet to see anyone explain why they in principle want to remain a part of a supranational institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries financially to such an extent that the suicide rate soars.





Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps you could bring this back home and explain why anyone should desire to remain part of a national institution that as a matter of policy punishes countries through sanctions to such an extent that child mortality soars



We simply don't need foreign help, do we, in order to bully people into suicide? We'll do just fine with that after brexit. Maybe even better.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

And let's not kid ourselves. A UK outside the EU that elects a left-leaning govt and attempts reforms that threaten the interests of international capital can still be horsewhipped into submission by those interests. It may well be more vulnerable to such pressures and have less room to manoeuvre than it might have had inside the EU.


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What do you mean by 'in principle' here? Why did you add that phrase?


Because I can understand why many people in practice may prefer to hold their nose and Remain - because their work would suffer, because of family reasons.


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

_I've noticed that you've criticised a political entity for its bad policies, yet you also live in a political entity with bad policies. Hypocrite much?_


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2018)

Still hearing the idea that the EU might have been kinder to a left leaning government than the big bad scary world will be, tell it to syriza voters.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 18, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Still hearing the idea that the EU might have been kinder to a left leaning government than the big bad scary world will be, tell it to syriza voters.


The conditions imposed on Greece have got nothing to do with whether the Greeks had a left or a right leaning government they were about making sure the banks got their money back, they would have been the same if Golden Dawn had won not Syriza.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Still hearing the idea that the EU might have been kinder to a left leaning government than the big bad scary world will be, tell it to syriza voters.


The UK is not in the euro.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> _I've noticed that you've criticised a political entity for its bad policies, yet you also live in a political entity with bad policies. Hypocrite much?_


I'm not accusing you of hypocrisy, simply asking how you think this particular action helps any. Pointing out bad things the EU has done isn't enough. 

Wales should have left the UK in protest at the action of the British army in Northern Ireland. That's the same logic.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The conditions imposed on Greece have got nothing to do with whether the Greeks had a left or a right leaning government they were about making sure the banks got their money back, they would have been the same if Golden Dawn had won not Syriza.


So your saying they were not given any room for maneuver? Astonishing.


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not accusing you of hypocrisy, simply asking how you think this particular action helps any. Pointing out bad things the EU has done isn't enough.
> 
> Wales should have left the UK in protest at the action of the British army in Northern Ireland. That's the same logic.


I'm suggesting that it's a specious argument. What does remaining in Europe do for Greece?

The EU's treatment of Greece is evidence of the nature of the EU. How did this evidence affect your decision to vote Remain?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 18, 2018)

greece was on its back and the ECB could butt fuck it to its hearts content - and that was very much done to ensure that other countries got the message of what happens if you try to reject their austerity policies. 
The Uk is much stronger economically then greece and is more influential ( a comparatively large armed forces and a seat on the UN security council)  and - crucially - is not in the Euro. A left leaning government would not be well liked by the EU - but they would have to live with it. 
A leftist government outside the Eu would be economically weaker, more isolated and easier to fuck over by the likes of big corporate players and big economies like china, the US and - most significantly -  the EU itself.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> I'm suggesting that it's a specious argument. What does remaining in Europe do for Greece?
> 
> The EU's treatment of Greece is evidence of the nature of the EU. How did this evidence affect your decision to vote Remain?


It's part of why I was in favour of remain despite wanting drastic reform of the EU. Same, really, as how I feel about the UK. You don't solve these problems through fragmentation itself - the fragmentation needs to be _for_ something. Currently, Brexit is _for_ what?


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's part of why I was in favour of remain despite wanting drastic reform of the EU. Same, really, as how I feel about the UK. You don't solve these problems through fragmentation itself - the fragmentation needs to be _for_ something. Currently, Brexit is _for_ what?


Are you saying that the EU's treatment of Greece was part of the reason you voted Remain?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 18, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> So your saying they were not given any room for maneuver? Astonishing.


Who wasn't given much room to maneuver the EU or the Greek govt? The EU had some wiggle room yes and did indeed vary the terms of the deal some but at the end of the day, it still prioritised paying back debt over any social/political effect on Greece, (I don't think they made the best call there but don't know about you, they certainly didn't ask me).
The Greek government (and by extension the Greek people) were pretty much fucked and were faced with a choice of the devil or the deep blue sea so they had very little room to maneuver and pretty much had to take what was offered.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> The EU's treatment of Greece is evidence of the nature of the EU. How did this evidence affect your decision to vote Remain?



You and others seem obsessed with this question, but it's been answered over and over again. It's also a pointless question to ask remainers because the answer is self evident. 

Of course, it's not a question in good faith, it's just a way of establishing a claim that your decision making was superior 'in principle' whilst avoiding discussion of how a leave vote is beneficial in practice.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 18, 2018)

I would prefer no deal to the Chequers plan: Bridgen

This is fucking mental.


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You and others seem obsessed with this question, but it's been answered over and over again. It's also a pointless question to ask remainers because the answer is self evident.
> 
> Of course, it's not a question in good faith, it's just a way of establishing a claim that your decision making was superior 'in principle' whilst avoiding discussion of how a leave vote is beneficial in practice.


How much good faith is there in the repeated demands to show how a Leave vote helps Greece? How obsessed are you and others with this question?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> How much good faith is there in the repeated demands to show how a Leave vote helps Greece? How obsessed are you and others with this question?


What? This comes as a response to people repeatedly bringing up the plight of Greece as a reason for the UK to leave the EU. It is a fair question to ask those giving this as a reason to ask them how that helps Greece. 

My straight answer to you for why I oppose brexit is that it solves none of the problems I want solved (including the plight of Greece, as it happens: withdrawing UK money from the EU pot if anything is likely to hurt Greece even more), while making many of those problems even worse. It has plenty of downside and no upside.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What? This comes as a response to people repeatedly bringing up the plight of Greece as a reason for the UK to leave the EU. It is a fair question to ask those giving this as a reason to ask them how that helps Greece.
> 
> My straight answer to you for why I oppose brexit is that it solves none of the problems I want solved (including the plight of Greece, as it happens: withdrawing UK money from the EU pot if anything is likely to hurt Greece even more), while making many of those problems even worse. It has plenty of downside and no upside.



The point has been made before several times that the EU is virtually impossible to reform but that weakening the EU could make way for a new kind of unity across Europe. If you think having 'less' in the EU pot would hurt Greece I'm not sure you've understood how the conditional lending schemes work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not kid ourselves. A UK outside the EU that elects a left-leaning govt and attempts reforms that threaten the interests of international capital can still be horsewhipped into submission by those interests. It may well be more vulnerable to such pressures and have less room to manoeuvre than it might have had inside the EU.


Tosh. Stupid liberal tosh. Give me one occasion when a UK government of any persuasion has attempted such reforms - but you won't cos you can't. Arse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The point has been made before several times that the EU is virtually impossible to reform but that weakening the EU could make way for a new kind of unity across Europe. If you think having 'less' in the EU pot would hurt Greece I'm not sure you've understood how the conditional lending schemes work.


I said 'if anything'. I'm not talking about lending. I'm talking about direct EU grants. I'm not convinced the UK leaving or staying in the EU makes much difference either way to Greece, but 'if anything' it could slightly impact on the size of those grants in future.

As for reform of the EU being 'virtually impossible', I reject that, in the sense that the EU is some uniquely unreformable thing as opposed to ther things. .


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What? This comes as a response to people repeatedly bringing up the plight of Greece as a reason for the UK to leave the EU. It is a fair question to ask those giving this as a reason to ask them how that helps Greece.


One doesn't necessarily follow from the other. The treatment of Greece by the EU can be a reason to vote Leave, without there being any need to argue that leaving helps Greece.

'I can no longer vote Labour because of the Iraq war.'

'Well how does letting the Tories in help Iraqis?'

That's why it's a specious argument and a cheap rhetorical trick.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I said 'if anything'. I'm not talking about lending. I'm talking about direct EU grants. I'm not convinced the UK leaving or staying in the EU makes much difference either way to Greece, but 'if anything' it could slightly impact on the size of those grants in future.
> 
> As for reform of the EU being 'virtually impossible', I reject that, in the sense that the EU is some uniquely unreformable thing as opposed to ther things. .



What direct EU grants do you think Greece is getting? And what scale do you think those grants are likely to be on?

The EU is not unique; institutions, particularly institutions with little in the way of democratic structures, are unreformable.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 18, 2018)

I love the idea that the EU can be reformed from within. Pig-Fucker asked for the teensiest little splodge of reform to appease the UK away from Brexit. 

"Allez vous en."


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I love the idea that the EU can be reformed from within. Pig-Fucker asked for the teensiest little splodge of reform to appease the UK away from Brexit.
> 
> "Allez vous en."


Bold Macron outlined ideas for reform recently, but the champion of centrism was snubbed


----------



## teuchter (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> 'I can no longer vote Labour because of the Iraq war.'
> 
> 'Well how does letting the Tories in help Iraqis?'



What's this example supposed to demonstrate?


----------



## Santino (Sep 18, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What's this example supposed to demonstrate?


The fallacy in a specious argument.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 18, 2018)

I (marginally) voted Remain because all the reasons I was hearing for voting Leave (eg unelected bureaucrats making unaccountable decisions that fuck the poor and favour the rich) applied equally to the UK as the EU, so I asked myself how life was going to be different for us after Brexit. Couldn't see anything. Wake me up when we stop having neoliberalist arseholes in charge etc.

Greece never played a part in my decision. Nor immigration, mainly because I can see "my" govt doing the same anti-poor, anti-immigration shit as the EU. I don't see any difference between those policies coming from London or Brussels.

I also don't think Brexit is going to hurt the EU, and it reminds me of old-fashioned British chauvinism to think it will.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 18, 2018)

Santino said:


> One doesn't necessarily follow from the other. The treatment of Greece by the EU can be a reason to vote Leave, without there being any need to argue that leaving helps Greece.



You don't even need to give a tinker's toss about the Greeks. 'If they did this to Greece, they could do it to us' is reason enough to be anti-EU, it doesn't require any moral judgement.


----------



## gosub (Sep 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I love the idea that the EU can be reformed from within. Pig-Fucker asked for the teensiest little splodge of reform to appease the UK away from Brexit.
> 
> "Allez vous en."



I agree on reformed from within....very much inline with Albert Einstein's definition of insanity.  But 'teenisest little spolodge': his earlier "veto" had led to a fuck youi work around, and he was prepared to formalise this, handing the whole shebang to the EUrozone as part of his final, final we really mean it offer


----------



## gosub (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's part of why I was in favour of remain despite wanting drastic reform of the EU. Same, really, as how I feel about the UK. You don't solve these problems through fragmentation itself - the fragmentation needs to be _for_ something. Currently, Brexit is _for_ what?


Id lay the blame for that on remainers, who never got past stage 2 of grief.  And the stage 1 period has been pretty nasty. Had they got to stage 3 in non snowflake time, there was bargaining to be done prior to the referendum EVERY household was sent literature saying Leave could be one of three things.  Mind you that what have meant a bit of sunlight on how much the remain establishment bent the rules itself.


----------



## andysays (Sep 18, 2018)

gosub said:


> *Id lay the blame for that on remainers, who never got past stage 2 of grief*.  And the stage 1 period has been pretty nasty. Had they got to stage 3 in non snowflake time, there was bargaining to be done rior to the referendum EVERY household was sent literature saying Leave could be one of three things.  Mind you that what have meant a bit of sunlight on how much the remain estlushment bent the rules itself.


And as if to demonstrate the point...

Sir Vince Cable: Brexit not inevitable and must be stopped


> "Brexit is not inevitable - it can and it must be stopped," Sir Vince Cable has told his party's annual conference. The Lib Dem leader said 29 March next year - the date the UK is set to leave the EU - was "only a maybe".


----------



## agricola (Sep 18, 2018)

gosub said:


> I agree on reformed from within....very much inline with Albert Einstein's definition of insanity.  But 'teenisest little spolodge': his earlier "veto" had led to a fuck youi work around, and he was prepared to formalise this, handing the whole shebang to the EUrozone as part of his final, final we really mean it offer



TBH the question of whether the EU can be reformed from within never really came up, given that Cameron was awful anyway and was working to an awful plan with the end goal being awfulness.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 18, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the question of whether the EU can be reformed from within never really came up, given that Cameron was awful anyway and was working to an awful plan with the end goal being awfulness.


Sure. We're a very long way from reform of the EU. It would require a lot of work, although I reject the portrayal of the EU as a monolith of evil that some would like to make it out to be. And from a narrow UK perspective, rather a moot point for as long as there is a tory govt. 

But can things get worse for the UK outside the EU wrt jobs, housing, worker rights, percentage of wealth held by the richest, etc, etc? Of course they can, and those that support brexit on the tory right want brexit so that they can bring that to pass. And my view that things probably will get worse remains unchanged from two years ago. That's the bottom line here, in the absence of any coherent plan for anything better, either within the EU or outside it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 18, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the question of whether the EU can be reformed from within never really came up, given that Cameron was awful anyway and was working to an awful plan with the end goal being awfulness.


Bring as so much of the the eu's senior bodies are composed of delegates from national governments, eg council of ministers the chances of the eu ever being nicer than the national governments are zero


----------



## gosub (Sep 18, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the question of whether the EU can be reformed from within never really came up, given that Cameron was awful anyway and was working to an awful plan with the end goal being awfulness.



It did, about every 5 minutes for the last 20 years, and to be fair reforms did happen ....just in a direction our politicians won elections by giving assurances wouldn't happen.  But at the time, the issue of EU dry and complex as it is,was very much niche and largely dismissed as of little interest to anyone but nutters.   Quite a large plank of significant politics swept away from public scrutiny - just the way the powers that be like it. 

 To be honest with you, if we'd have had the level of discourse we've had in the last 2 years: specialist papers now in circulation (not that I've actually read the European), wider coverage on the News (though its all through the prism of the personal rather than policy), and actual discussion down the pub (however heated)....then I might have been more comfortable staying in, but no, at the time EUro was being discussed that was just 'xenophobia'  rather than the real technical difficulties such a currency causes (as well as solves); a constitution that isn't a constitution anymore coz we'vre removed mention of a flag and anthem;  'its just about the shape of bananas' nonsense, right up to Juncker claiming a democratic mandate when no one in the UK could have voted for him and the only one of the debates he took part in to get the job was shown on UK tv, and even then that was on the Parliamentary Channel. 


I get that politics isn't everyone's cup of tea, and we have busy lives to get on with; but the system we were under, we were sleepwalking away from democratic involvement (maybe we still are). But it was alarming enough that it needed a stick in the spokes.


----------



## CRI (Sep 18, 2018)

Oh, goody goody gumdrops!  

Rightwing thinktanks unveil radical plan for US-UK Brexit trade deal



> A radical blueprint for a free trade deal between the UK and the US that would see the NHS opened to foreign competition, a bonfire of consumer and environmental regulations and freedom of movement between the two countries for workers, is to be launched by prominent Brexiters.
> 
> The blueprint will be seen as significant because of the close links between the organisations behind it and the UK secretary for international trade, Liam Fox, and the US president, Donald Trump.





> The “ideal UK-US free trade deal” was due to be launched later on Tuesday in both London and Washington but the Cato Institute appears to have accidentally posted it online early.





> The same US thinktanks have been behind developing off-the-shelf policies favoured by big business that were adopted by the Trump administration when it took office. Several policies and staff from the Heritage Foundation were taken into the Trump transition team.
> 
> In the UK, the researchers behind the blueprint have had exceptional access to ministers in both the Department for International Trade and the Department for Exiting the European Union, with IEA staff and its head of trade policy, Shanker Singham, meeting Liam Fox, David Davis, Steve Baker and other ministers and special advisers on numerous occasions . . .


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The UK is not in the euro.



Why do you think that would alter the EU's attitude to a left government in Britain? The UK _*is *_in the EU.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The Greek government (and by extension the Greek people) were pretty much fucked and were faced with a choice of the devil or the deep blue sea so they had very little room to maneuver and pretty much had to take what was offered.



This isn't true, just by the way. Thatcher was wrong - *there is an alternative.*


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2018)

*PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT *I have had a few and discovered the bold text function.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why do you think that would alter the EU's attitude to a left government in Britain? The UK _*is *_in the EU.



cos it means that the uk controls its own monetary policy - interest rates and wot not - not the ECB. It means the EU cant force on the uk the austerity they forced on ireland, portugal, greece, spain etc (but - it being the tories - they chose to have the austerity anyway) .


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> cos it means that the uk controls its own monetary policy - interest rates and wot not - not the ECB. It means the EU cant force on the uk the austerity they forced on ireland, portugal, greece, spain etc (but - it being the tories - they chose to have the austerity anyway) .



So, you're correct that because the UK is not in the Eurozone the EU would not have the structural power to dictate the terms of austerity, absolutely. But - depending on how you define monetary policy I am not able to guess what you include in your "wot not" - membership of the single market means you cannot control capital flows which call me old fashioned I think is part of monetary policy.

My point wasn't that we would be in the same situation as Greece but it was suggested a left leaning government would have more autonomy within the EU than outside it - it would not.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 19, 2018)

a left leaning government would likely have less freedom of action outside the EU because it would be more isolated, weaker and forced to take worse conditions on things like trade deals and international investment.
the uk economy is meshed into the system of international capitalism weather we are inside or outside the EU. Without a much stronger manufacturing base and/or a much higher degree of self sufficiency in things like energy and food the uk will be very vulnerable. And the EU would likely be at the front of the queue to fuck us over.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...My point wasn't that we would be in the same situation as Greece but it was suggested a left leaning government would have more autonomy within the EU than outside it - it would not.



It would depend on how 'muscular' that government, parliament and its judiciary was with regards to EU punishments - because the EU structures only really have the ability to punish a member state when the structure of that member state agrees to be punished - and what you mean by 'left leaning'.

A Corbynite government - for example - that was prepared to tell the EU to fuck off out of its business would suffer no real world adverse consequences from the EU, the EU structures simply don't have a great deal of leaverage over a large member state that isn't dependant on EU money or is a member of the Eurozone. Having a big blue wobbly thing between that country and the rest of the EU would help, as would having a political culture that isn't overly fussed about being seen as being 'good Europeans'...


----------



## philosophical (Sep 19, 2018)

From what I can gather Barnier will suggest the backstop/Irish Sea suggestion will be the solution to the Irish land border issue, but that that solution can be technological.
A step forward for those who seek to want a United Ireland, I doubt it will be a runner for the Tories and Unionists if that really is Barnier's suggestion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The UK is not in the euro.


Yeh. Well spotted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not kid ourselves. A UK outside the EU that elects a left-leaning govt and attempts reforms that threaten the interests of international capital can still be horsewhipped into submission by those interests. It may well be more vulnerable to such pressures and have less room to manoeuvre than it might have had inside the EU.


How would you suggest the eu horsewhip a left-leaning UK government which threatens the interests of international capital?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This isn't true, just by the way. Thatcher was wrong - *there is an alternative.*


What do you believe the alternative was and why do you believe the Greek goverment didn't take it?


----------



## Mrs D (Sep 19, 2018)

So when will the UK see a government that is more left-wing than the most left-wing countries currently in the EU?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2018)

Mrs D said:


> So when will the UK see a government that is more left-wing than the most left-wing countries currently in the EU?



Given the way a lot of European countries are heading, not that long.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> My point wasn't that we would be in the same situation as Greece but it was suggested a left leaning government would have more autonomy within the EU than outside it - it would not.


More freedom of action from within the EU, practically rather than in some abstract notion that 'well we could do this, but we won't because various powerful interests would make life very difficult for us if we did'. (And what are bilateral trade deals, those things that nobody gave a fuck about but that are now all the rage? They are a series of agreements between nations in which they agree to certain sets of rules. A trade deal with the US, for instance, would necessarily involve giving US businesses additional legal rights: rights to buy up UK interests and to have those investments protected. Our hypothetical l/w govt, by the time it gets into power, might in such a situation be up against US investors, backed by a US trade deal, who would oppose nationalisation.)

It isn't necessarily a good reflection on the EU, btw, if the larger countries can get away with things that smaller countries probably can't, but France flouted the eurozone's borrowing rules for years and nobody said a thing, cos it's France. Some specific ideas have been floated here such as that the EU would block any UK govt attempt to privatise the railway network that did not follow very specific, restrictive EU rules regarding tenders. It wouldn't. The UK could invoke national interest in taking control of infrastructure and just do it.


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

I'd be interested to know what people think is most likely to happen out of the 3 options in the original poll, which broadly speaking equate to hard Brexit/no deal, soft Brexit and no Brexit.

I still think the ultimate position will be a Norway-style deal, dressed up to look like it's something bespoke and different, but the chances of a hard or no deal Brexit have risen since 2016 I think.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wouldn't.


much like 'I refute the unreformability of the EU' this is an assertion- at no point during the several and long discussions on the rail issue was the matter settled.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> I'd be interested to know what people think is most likely to happen out of the 3 options in the original poll, which broadly speaking equate to hard Brexit/no deal, soft Brexit and no Brexit.
> 
> I still think the ultimate position will be a Norway-style deal, dressed up to look like it's something bespoke and different, but the chances of a hard or no deal Brexit have risen since 2016 I think.


Now?

No deal.  I've no faith at all in those dealing with the negotiations on the UK side either in ability or purpose.  The whole thing is a galactic fuck up.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> I'd be interested to know what people think is most likely to happen out of the 3 options in the original poll, which broadly speaking equate to hard Brexit/no deal, soft Brexit and no Brexit.
> 
> I still think the ultimate position will be a Norway-style deal, dressed up to look like it's something bespoke and different, but the chances of a hard or no deal Brexit have risen since 2016 I think.



£20 on delaying it till end of 2019 and then a deal of some sort, i'm not conviced no deal will happen.

IMO ( which means we will crash out with no deal in March as i'm always wrong)


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 19, 2018)

I think this has been put out unannounced to the public.


> On 23 August 2018 HMRC published three Technical Notices (TNs) on Gov.UK, about what will happen in the event of no deal on:
> 
> 
> Customs and Excise Procedures.
> ...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 19, 2018)

I cant see crashing out  happening - its too destructive socially, economically and politically. In the run up to no deal their will be growing panic from every direction (with the FTSE and the value of the pound taking a dive will adding to  the sense of crises) and the pressure on the government will be intolerable. I think the likeliest option is some sort of fudge that prolongs the whole miserable process for another couple of years - after which - dunno - labour might win a GE backing a 2nd ref.


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I cant see crashing out  happening - its too destructive socially, economically and politically. In the run up to no deal their will be growing panic from every direction (with the FTSE and the value of the pound taking a dive will adding to  the sense of crises) and the pressure on the government will be intolerable. I think the likeliest option is some sort of fudge that prolongs the whole miserable process for another couple of years - after which - dunno - labour might win a GE backing a 2nd ref.



I sort of agree. Accept that would say crashing out will be equally socially, economically and politically destructive to the rest of Europe too, whilst I think they think their contingency planning is better, it won't be up to the job... If the whole thing wasn't SO serious the absurdity of the way things have gone down would be funny. - Two immovable objects demanding the impossible before breakfast of each other whilst all the time an 'unstoppable' clock ticks down.


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

Interesting analysis here which seems to make as much sense as anything does right now:

mainly macro: Why Brexiters look defeated


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> £20 on delaying it till end of 2019



with or without a GE taking place during that period? Dunno. I'm not taking the bet tho.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> with or without a GE taking place during that period? Dunno. I'm not taking the bet tho.



I think the EU would let us delay it in a no deal situation, but also it's such a cluster fuck who would want to be PM and have to manage/deliver it? so maybe


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

An Article 50 extension is the most rational choice if you want to leave the EU and have time to do so smoothly. But it would be politically unacceptable to a huge proportion of the UK public, who are already incredulous that Brexit hasn’t happened yet. 

Also I suspect there are quite a few EU member states who are fed up with the whole thing and just want the certainty of it being done.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> An Article 50 extension is the most rational choice if you want to leave the EU and have time to do so smoothly. But it would be politically unacceptable to a huge proportion of the UK public, who are already incredulous that Brexit hasn’t happened yet..


Would it, or would it merely be politically unacceptable to a particularly vocal section of the r/w press? I would think that a decent proportion of the 48 per cent who voted remain would find an extension acceptable, while a fair proportion of the 52 per cent who voted leave would find the idea of crashing out without a deal unacceptable.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 19, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> £20 on delaying it till end of 2019 and then a deal of some sort, i'm not conviced no deal will happen.
> 
> IMO ( which means we will crash out with no deal in March as i'm always wrong)


Isn't that what the transition period is?


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Would it, or would it merely be politically unacceptable to a particularly vocal section of the r/w press? I would think that a decent proportion of the 48 per cent who voted remain would find an extension acceptable, while a fair proportion of the 52 per cent who voted leave would find the idea of crashing out without a deal unacceptable.



No idea. But I think it’d be the end of May, which is why I don’t think she’ll risk it.


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> No idea. But I think it’d be the end of May, which is why I don’t think she’ll risk it.



And bear in mind the Tories have backed down on pretty much everything so far.


----------



## andysays (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> An Article 50 extension is the most rational choice if you want to leave the EU and have time to do so smoothly. But it would be politically unacceptable to a huge proportion of the UK public, who are already incredulous that Brexit hasn’t happened yet.
> 
> Also I suspect there are quite a few EU member states who are fed up with the whole thing and just want the certainty of it being done.


I think the political unacceptability would be mostly down to the complete failure of the govt to sort out reasonable terms on which to leave in a timely fashion, rather than with the idea of leaving itself, except among those Remain supporters who still haven't accepted that the result went against them and who come out with stuff like this


littlebabyjesus said:


> Would it, or would it merely be politically unacceptable to a particularly vocal section of the r/w press? I would think that a decent proportion of the 48 per cent who voted remain would find an extension acceptable, while a fair proportion of the 52 per cent who voted leave would find the idea of crashing out without a deal unacceptable.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Isn't that what the transition period is?



I duno, i mean delaying the 29th March thingy to end of the year, so we can make a plan..

kinda like a homework extension yeah?


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> with or without a GE taking place during that period? Dunno. I'm not taking the bet tho.


Need to be better worded than that, as is if a deal is reached it wouldn't kick in til 1/1/2020 anyway


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> a left leaning government would likely have less freedom of action outside the EU because it would be more isolated, weaker and forced to take worse conditions on things like trade deals and international investment.
> the uk economy is meshed into the system of international capitalism weather we are inside or outside the EU. Without a much stronger manufacturing base and/or a much higher degree of self sufficiency in things like energy and food the uk will be very vulnerable. And the EU would likely be at the front of the queue to fuck us over.



Haven't really acknowledged what I've said there but fine.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> More freedom of action from within the EU, practically rather than in some abstract notion that 'well we could do this, but we won't because various powerful interests would make life very difficult for us if we did'. (And what are bilateral trade deals, those things that nobody gave a fuck about but that are now all the rage? They are a series of agreements between nations in which they agree to certain sets of rules. A trade deal with the US, for instance, would necessarily involve giving US businesses additional legal rights: rights to buy up UK interests and to have those investments protected. Our hypothetical l/w govt, by the time it gets into power, might in such a situation be up against US investors, backed by a US trade deal, who would oppose nationalisation.)
> 
> It isn't necessarily a good reflection on the EU, btw, if the larger countries can get away with things that smaller countries probably can't, but France flouted the eurozone's borrowing rules for years and nobody said a thing, cos it's France. Some specific ideas have been floated here such as that the EU would block any UK govt attempt to privatise the railway network that did not follow very specific, restrictive EU rules regarding tenders. It wouldn't. The UK could invoke national interest in taking control of infrastructure and just do it.



Again kind of ignoring my point.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think the political unacceptability would be mostly down to the complete failure of the govt to sort out reasonable terms on which to leave in a timely fashion, rather than with the idea of leaving itself, except among those Remain supporters who still haven't accepted that the result went against them and who come out with stuff like this


Bizarre how this gets trotted out so regularly. You sound like the Daily Express with this guff.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> What do you believe the alternative was and why do you believe the Greek goverment didn't take it?



(Apologies for thread derail)

Obviously the alternative, refusing to agree the memorandum, would have meant the risk of Greece being ejected from the EU and the currency union. In addition it's likely that international markets and the Troika would want to make an example of Greece and its likely that would result in significant economic pain short term and medium term with no prospect of recovery. 

In that situation, there is a way forward which would allow you to meet the needs of the population. But it would in effect require radical Socialist policies - a monopoly on all foreign trade and currency flows for example to ensure there was enough food and prevent mass capital flight, immediate nationalisation of all major industry and infrastructure, as well as banks, financial institutions and communications. You would in a very real sense need to be able to wheel out a basic command economy that would protect people from the instability of markets and some form of new currency would have to be introduced, even if only for use within Greece itself to allow transactions. Xekinima the Greek section of the CWI have raised the idea of a dual currency for some time now - repudiating the debt and using the Euro reserves for international trade while bringing back the drachma to allow people to buy food and neccessities. 

Quite frankly it wouldn't be pretty and would require the active support and mobilisation of the Greek working class, something Syriza never took steps towards because they believed they could 'debate' austerity measures with the Troika. Costas Lapavitsas did warn about this and resigned from Syriza following the sell out but unfortunately did not do much to actively raise the alternative. 

But the point is, there was an alternative to staying in the EU and accepting more austerity measures - it would just have required a pretty radical break with the current economic model.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> (Apologies for thread derail)
> 
> Obviously the alternative, refusing to agree the memorandum, would have meant the risk of Greece being ejected from the EU and the currency union. In addition it's likely that international markets and the Troika would want to make an example of Greece and its likely that would result in significant economic pain short term and medium term with no prospect of recovery.
> 
> ...


Likelihood of another civil war had this happened?


----------



## andysays (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Bizarre how this gets trotted out so regularly. You sound like the Daily Express with this guff.


You do actually sound like a Remain supporter who still hasn't accepted that the result went against them. What is your evidence for this claim


littlebabyjesus said:


> Would it, or would it merely be politically unacceptable to a particularly vocal section of the r/w press? I would think that a decent proportion of the 48 per cent who voted remain would find an extension acceptable, while a fair proportion of the 52 per cent who voted leave would find the idea of crashing out without a deal unacceptable.


----------



## treelover (Sep 19, 2018)

Madeleina Kay  #EUsupergirl (@albawhitewolf) on Twitter

Apparently remainers now have their own EU Supergirl, Madeleinea Kay, from Sheffield


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Likelihood of another civil war had this happened?



In Greece? No, I don't think so. Do you have a reason for raising that or are you just attempting to justufy the There Is No Alternative line.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> (Apologies for thread derail)
> 
> Obviously the alternative, refusing to agree the memorandum, would have meant the risk of Greece being ejected from the EU and the currency union. In addition it's likely that international markets and the Troika would want to make an example of Greece and its likely that would result in significant economic pain short term and medium term with no prospect of recovery.
> 
> ...


That's actually a very good answer, it might even have worked but there are lots of reasons why it might have failed, If the outside world wasn't willing to accept Greece's Euros for trade, if Greece couldn't produce enough basic necessities on its own,
Even if it worked it would mean at least a generation of subsistence  living with the ever present chance of revolution.
You're right though it is an alternative, potentially far more disastrous than accepting what they were given but potentially with the chance it might have worked given enough time and sacrifice.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 19, 2018)

Anywsy


treelover said:


> Madeleina Kay  #EUsupergirl (@albawhitewolf) on Twitter
> 
> Apparently remainers now have their own EU Supergirl, Madeleinea Kay, from Sheffield



All I see is the red, white and blue of another shady union.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> That's actually a very good answer, it might even have worked but there are lots of reasons why it might have failed, If the outside world wasn't willing to accept Greece's Euros for trade, if Greece couldn't produce enough basic necessities on its own,
> Even if it worked it would mean at least a generation of subsistence  living with the ever present chance of revolution.
> You're right though it is an alternative, potentially far more disastrous than accepting what they were given but potentially with the chance it might have worked given enough time and sacrifice.



I mean, I think that would potentially be the beginnings of a revolution rather than a solution which held the risk of a revolution. 

I absolutely agree it is a strategy that could easily be derailed or go wrong. But I think we have to recognise the scale of the disaster that accepting the memorandum has created and the decades long effects it will have, as well as the fact that following the election of Syriza to government there was a genuine window of opportunity for a radical transformation, particularly after the 'Oxi' vote.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> In Greece? No, I don't think so. Do you have a reason for raising that or are you just attempting to justufy the There Is No Alternative line.


There was a civil war in Greece 60 years or so ago followed by a period of military rule. Given that there would be opposition to such moves within Greece, which would receive backing from outside, I see reasons to fear civil war in such a situation (and a return to military rule). What kinds of internal opposition would you see to such moves? How would those be dealt with?

You misjudge me here, btw, quite badly, because you and others seem to think that anyone who can mention anything good about the EU must be some kind of neoliberal cheerleader. I'm nothing of the kind.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 19, 2018)

treelover said:


> Madeleina Kay  #EUsupergirl (@albawhitewolf) on Twitter
> 
> Apparently remainers now have their own EU Supergirl, Madeleinea Kay, from Sheffield


Whilst I am fundamentally in favour of young women in skimpy outfits it really isn't a sound basis for serious political debate.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There was a civil war in Greece 60 years or so ago followed by a period of military rule. Given that there would be opposition to such moves within Greece, which would receive backing from outside, I see reasons to fear civil war in such a situation. What kinds of internal opposition would you see to such moves? How would those be dealt with?
> 
> You misjudge me here, btw, quite badly, because you and others seem to think that anyone who can mention anything good about the EU must be some kind of neoliberal cheerleader. I'm nothing of the kind.



I mean, in any situation where a radical left government comes to power and enact measures which fundamentally transform the economy, there is a danger of huge destabilisation, including from outside that country. But it's not a good reason not to it is it? 

Where would be if the Bolsheviks had said "lets not seize power the world will go to war with Russia and flood the country with agents and spies?"

I don't see the fact that there is civil war in the past means it would be particularly likely again - countries that have gone through civil war tend not to be keen on a repeat of the process. Sure, this strategy would be met with opposition but it's still better than accepting the austerity measures and consigning generations to crippling poverty.


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2018)

treelover said:


> Madeleina Kay  #EUsupergirl (@albawhitewolf) on Twitter
> 
> Apparently remainers now have their own EU Supergirl, Madeleinea Kay, from Sheffield



Not the first
Captain Euro | Europe's superhero!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I mean, in any situation where a radical left government comes to power and enact measures which fundamentally transform the economy, there is a danger of huge destabilisation, including from outside that country. But it's not a good reason not to it is it?
> 
> Where would be if the Bolsheviks had said "lets not seize power the world will go to war with Russia and flood the country with agents and spies?"
> 
> I don't see the fact that there is civil war in the past means it would be particularly likely again - countries that have gone through civil war tend not to be keen on a repeat of the process. Sure, this strategy would be met with opposition but it's still better than accepting the austerity measures and consigning generations to crippling poverty.


The world was already at war when the Bolsheviks seized power.


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2018)

Um.  She doesn't know what she's talking about.  Norway can do independent trade deals because it isn't in the Customs Union, and it payment for involvement in the Single  Market is a far cheaper and more transparent system .  As she later explains most of the rules are global (and Norway has its own seat at the table).   Yes it has freedom of movement but NOT ALL Leave voters worried about that, besides is expecting the EU to undermine one of its central pillars "credible"?


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The world was already at war when the Bolsheviks seized power.



In fact the Germans laid on a special train to get Lenin back in....it was in their interest.  Mind you it was in ours to put a Webley bullet between Rasputin's eyes.   Spies bloody get everywhere war or no war


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> Um.  She doesn't know what she's talking about.  Norway can do independent trade deals because it isn't in the Customs Union, and it payment for involvement in the Single is a far cheaper and more transparent system .  As she later explains most of the rules are global (and Norway has its own seat at the table).   Yes it has freedom of movement but NOT ALL Leave voters worried about that, besides is expecting the EU to undermine one of its central pillars "credible"?



That's what it boils down to really, this entire mess. The Tories have decided that the tautologous platitude 'Brexit means Brexit' means, if nothing else, the end of freedom of movement of people from the EU into the UK. They state repeatedly that this is what the majority of leave voters want, which is probably true (although it wasn't on the ballot paper), but that doesn't make such a view a majority view in the country, and delivering some kind of brexit that maintains freedom of movement wholly or very largely intact would be very possible, but delivering one without it, well, nobody has come up with anything like an idea of how to do that.


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's what it boils down to really, this entire mess. The Tories have decided that the tautologous platitude 'Brexit means Brexit' means, if nothing else, the end of freedom of movement of people from the EU into the UK. They state repeatedly that this is what the majority of leave voters want, which is probably true (although it wasn't on the ballot paper), but that doesn't make such a view a majority view in the country, and delivering some kind of brexit that maintains freedom of movement wholly or very largely intact would be very possible, but delivering one without it, well, nobody has come up with anything like an idea of how to do that.



And when/if they end FoM they still won't be able to meet their ridiculous immigration target.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2018)

Winot said:


> And when/if they end FoM they still won't be able to meet their ridiculous immigration target.


They may do, tbf. Easiest way to reduce immigration is to have a recession in which loads of people lose their jobs.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 20, 2018)

Theresa May to accept checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland after Brexit in major concession to avoid no-deal

Will the DUP agree to this? If not the Tories need 5 votes from other parties if no Tories rebel. Hoey won't be one of them.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2018)

treelover said:


> Madeleina Kay  #EUsupergirl (@albawhitewolf) on Twitter
> 
> Apparently remainers now have their own EU Supergirl, Madeleinea Kay, from Sheffield


Jesus Christ if you are going to hop on the latest remaintwitter vomit inducing craze at least be relevant, Galsworthy has been tweeting about her and her merchandise since 2016


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2018)

APPARENTLY REMAINERS HAVE THEIR OWN FLEGS NOO, IT’S AN EU FLEG IN BLACK AND WHITE WITH A SINGLE BREXITTEAR


----------



## Poi E (Sep 20, 2018)

xarmian said:


> Theresa May to accept checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland after Brexit in major concession to avoid no-deal
> 
> Will the DUP agree to this? If not the Tories need 5 votes from other parties if no Tories rebel. Hoey won't be one of them.



The DUP are fucked, though, aren't they? Can't risk a vote of no confidence and usher in Labour. I think they'll do what they're told (after another bung to NI.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Jesus Christ if you are going to hop on the latest remaintwitter vomit inducing craze at least be relevant, Galsworthy has been tweeting about her and her merchandise since 2016


Have you met treelover before? That's one of his better posts.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Czech and Maltese PMs Call For Second Referendum -  (sorry for Stainesing the boards)

  Respecting Sovereignty / democracy not particularly high on their agenda then


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

wouldn't even give that one a trial


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Czech and Maltese PMs Call For Second Referendum -  (sorry for Stainesing the boards)
> 
> Respecting Sovereignty / democracy not particularly high on their agenda then


Whereas the UK has a proud record of respecting democracy and sovereignty?



Catch yourself on


----------



## andysays (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> wouldn't even give that one a trial


You're having a falcon laugh...


----------



## Chz (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Czech and Maltese PMs Call For Second Referendum -  (sorry for Stainesing the boards)
> 
> Respecting Sovereignty / democracy not particularly high on their agenda then


The first, sure. Anti-diplomatic, don't meddle in the internal affairs of another country, especially when you're no angels. 
But the second? Calling for a free and fair vote on something is hardly fascist. The electorate changes its mind all the time, or we wouldn't bother with elections in the first place. Where does this notion that another referendum is anti-democratic come from? A lot has changed - particularly in the information available to the public - since then. Not to say that it's worth the time and effort, or that the outcome would be any different, but really? Anti-democratic?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Chz said:


> The first, sure. Anti-diplomatic, don't meddle in the internal affairs of another country, especially when you're no angels.
> But the second? Calling for a free and fair vote on something is hardly fascist. The electorate changes its mind all the time, or we wouldn't bother with elections in the first place. Where does this notion that another referendum is anti-democratic come from? A lot has changed - particularly in the information available to the public - since then. Not to say that it's worth the time and effort, or that the outcome would be any different, but really? Anti-democratic?



I'm fucked off with the way UK political establishment has gone about things, but this is not the first plebiscite EU has gone: 'didn't like that result, we'll do fuck all and wait for you to come back into line.....Kinda undermines any notion that the EU can be reformed from within.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 20, 2018)

^^I actually agree with both those positions, confusingly.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 20, 2018)

to be strictly fair, having heard the interviews, both FM's were talking in that regretful, wistful manner - both those countries are deeply saddened to see the UK leave the EU, and both think they will have a harder time of it without the UK holding the EU structures and the larger, much more 'project' orientated member states back.

it was much more 'i wish it hadn't come to this, wouldn't it be nice if someone waved a magic wand' stuff than the 'wrong answer, try again' stuff the commission and the Macron/Merkel club come out with.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

kebabking said:


> it was much more* 'i wish it hadn't come to this, *wouldn't it be nice if someone waved a magic wand' stuff than the 'wrong answer, try again' stuff the commission and the Macron/Merkel club come out with.



Roughly what the bailiffs said when they seized ownership of the Greek airports......Its come to this because of the mantra of Ever Closer Union has steam rollered belittled and smeared everything that has stood in its way for the last 30 years.


----------



## billbond (Sep 20, 2018)

Chz said:


> The first, sure. Anti-diplomatic, don't meddle in the internal affairs of another country, especially when you're no angels.
> But the second? Calling for a free and fair vote on something is hardly fascist. The electorate changes its mind all the time, or we wouldn't bother with elections in the first place. Where does this notion that another referendum is anti-democratic come from? A lot has changed - particularly in the information available to the public - since then. Not to say that it's worth the time and effort, or that the outcome would be any different, but really? Anti-democratic?



Yes 100% anti democratic


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 20, 2018)

Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?



What if remain had won by a gnat's bollock and then been caught cheating?

Still probably no tbf. But I do love this stuff about a second referendum being 100% anti-democratic as if everything up to this point has been entirely unproblematic and above board. The whole entire shitshow is anti-democratic. Another vote would just be an opportunity for yet more fuckery from all concerned. It would be an excercise in throwing good votes after bad.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?


As a consequence of no-one being able to agree what 'remain' means, and massive complications arising from implementing it?

No I don't think we'd be discussing another vote.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 20, 2018)

teuchter said:


> As a consequence of no-one being able to agree what 'remain' means, and massive complications arising from implementing it?
> 
> No I don't think we'd be discussing another vote.



As a consequence of the fact that apparently nobody knew what they were voting for and that there is now lots of new information.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?


Does anybody believe we wouldn’t?

Farage and co weren’t going to just shut up, were they?  Particularly at 48/52


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?


I doubt it, although all the issues that were being agitated pre-vote would still be being agitated, so who knows? People are discussing a second referendum in Scotland despite the fact that 'no change' won last time, and by a larger margin than Brexit. 

Thing about this referendum (and Scottish 'independence' would have suffered from exactly the same problem) is that 'how you do it', and even what 'it' might be exactly, wasn't on the ballot paper.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?



Sort of.  In the alternative time stream: around about now the next treaty would be being signed, that we now, by law, would have a referendum on....One of the reasons why we had the referendum, if the referendum on that had been the first then it would have been an uphill struggle from the proEU lot to have won it, and they would have had to repeat what they did when France voted down the Constitution


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 20, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Does anybody believe we wouldn’t?
> 
> Farage and co weren’t going to just shut up, were they?  Particularly at 48/52



I'm sure people would be _pushing _for it, as they have since we joined the common market.

The only reason the referendum happened was so that Cameron could resolve some in-fighting in the Tories. 

If Remain had won everyone would just be told to get back in their box and accept the result.


----------



## Winot (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?



Third vote. Remain won fair and square in 1975.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> I'm sure people would be _pushing _for it, as they have since we joined the common market.
> 
> The only reason the referendum happened was so that Cameron could resolve some in-fighting in the Tories.
> 
> If Remain had won everyone would just be told to get back in their box and accept the result.


You think the pro-brexit tories would have done that? He might have told them to do it, but what authority did he have/would he have had if the vote had gone narrowly the other way?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I doubt it, although all the issues that were being agitated pre-vote would still be being agitated, so who knows? People are discussing a second referendum in Scotland despite the fact that 'no change' won last time, and by a larger margin than Brexit.
> 
> Thing about this referendum (and Scottish 'independence' would have suffered from exactly the same problem) is that 'how you do it', and even what 'it' might be exactly, wasn't on the ballot paper.



Actually, Scottish one, YES did make what it would do reasonably clear.  And most of the discussions I heard tended to be built round who you thought was bluffing....  Same as EUro one there were a lot of lies and distortions, on both sides, and inreality  probably was just as risky game of dice for the UK and the rest of the worlds economy.....But it actually felt enjoyable...the EUro one just left an unpleasant taste in the mouth


----------



## billbond (Sep 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> What if remain had won by a gnat's bollock and then been caught cheating?
> 
> Still probably no tbf. But I do love this stuff about a second referendum being 100% anti-democratic as if everything up to this point has been entirely unproblematic and above board. The whole entire shitshow is anti-democratic. Another vote would just be an opportunity for yet more fuckery from all concerned. It would be an excercise in throwing good votes after bad.



Remain were caught cheating


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> Third vote. Remain won fair and square in 1975.



The Common Market and the EU are not the same thing.  That it evolved as far as it did without public consultation was part of the problem


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Actually, Scottish one, YES did make what it would do reasonably clear.


Well there was an organised group planning for the future, for sure, but it was far from clear what independence meant. 'Independence means Independence' may have been the cry, as those negotiating to leave the UK attempted to divvy up powers/armed forces/public resources/debt/control of the money supply/immigration controls, etc, etc. No 'independent' Scotland would have been fully independent of the UK, so what degree of separation would have constituted 'true' independence would have been a very tangled point.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You think the pro-brexit tories would have done that? He might have told them to do it, but what authority did he have/would he have had if the vote had gone narrowly the other way?



The authority of the party whip.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> The authority of the party whip.


Didn't help John Major much with his 'bastards'. Cameron had a similarly sized majority to work with.

We can't know because it didn't happen, but I think we can be pretty confident that the problems that led to the referendum in the first place would not have gone away with a narrow remain majority.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well there was an organised group planning for the future, for sure, but it was far from clear what independence meant. 'Independence means Independence' may have been the cry, as those negotiating to leave the UK attempted to divvy up powers/armed forces/public resources/debt/control of the money supply/immigration controls, etc, etc. No 'independent' Scotland would have been fully independent of the UK, so what degree of separation would have constituted 'true' independence would have been a very tangled point.



Well was more Holyrood covered up the letter telling them they'd be out of the EU, but was more about the £ and associated debts and bonds  - split would have pushed everything off a cliff and it was down to whether you thought that that would lead to one, two or no parachutes being deployed


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Didn't help John Major much with his 'bastards'. Cameron had a similarly sized majority to work with.



Major's legacy doesn't include a massive split in the Tory party. This is partly because there wasn't a sizeable anti-EU party to its right.

Cameron gambled on the referendum keeping the party together, which it just about has. But he also assumed (as most people did) that Remain would win.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Well was more Holyrood covered up the letter telling them they'd be out of the EU, but was more about the £ and associated debts and bonds  - split would have pushed everything off a cliff and it was down to whether you thought that that would lead to one, two or no parachutes being deployed


Certainly there was at least as much bullshit from both sides during that referendum as there was during Brexit. I don't believe for one second that an independent Scotland would have been forced out of the EU, btw, but there were plenty in the EU who didn't want to see it happen.


----------



## Winot (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> The Common Market and the EU are not the same thing.  That it evolved as far as it did without public consultation was part of the problem



And yet a proposal which would basically take us back to the Common Market (the Norway model)) is suddenly anathema to Brexiteers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 20, 2018)

billbond said:


> Remain were caught cheating



Leave were caught cheating more. And more importantly, they won. The winning side broke the law, but the result stands. You can't accept that state of affairs and then moan about some other thing being anti-democratic.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> And yet a proposal which would basically take us back to the Common Market (the Norway model)) is suddenly anathema to Brexiteers.



Not to me.  Its more, Leave / Remain and everything since has felt like it was  pretty much no platformed.  Whilst the  'actual' debate....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Winot said:


> And yet a proposal which would basically take us back to the Common Market (the Norway model)) is suddenly anathema to Brexiteers.


It's not so surprising - the Norway model isn't really leaving. It's more like an associate membership. Kind of much like the UK's membership now, but without the voting privileges. It's a pretty stupid thing to want to happen in many ways - any country joining the EU now doesn't get given the option of the kind of associate membership with full voting rights that the UK currently has. That said, I'm sure it's a thing that most of the 48 per cent of people who voted remain would prefer over other 'hard' options. Add in a fair few who voted leave who would prefer this option to staying in fully, and you may have some kind of a democratic compromise, but it would be a wholly pointless exercise, just highlighting the absurdity of the whole thing.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Leave were caught cheating more. And more importantly, they won. The winning side broke the law, but the result stands. You can't accept that state of affairs and then moan about some other thing being anti-democratic.




Not 'more'.  Its just that's where the attention has been focused (understandably).  It a bit like the US Presidential's, I damn sure the Democrat's did n't play fair and square, but Trump won so it's his activities that get the stronger forensic analysis


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not so surprising - the Norway model isn't really leaving. It's more like an associate membership. Kind of much like the UK's membership now, but without the voting privileges. It's a pretty stupid thing to want to happen in many ways - any country joining the EU now doesn't get given the option of the kind of associate membership with full voting rights that the UK currently has. That said, I'm sure it's a thing that most of the 48 per cent of people who voted remain would prefer over other 'hard' options. Add in a fair few who voted leave who would prefer this option to staying in fully, and you may have some kind of a democratic compromise, but it would be a wholly pointless exercise, just highlighting the absurdity of the whole thing.



Not really, if you look at that god awful video I posted a little bit upthread that May has come up with, she is having to lie her arse off about what Norway would mean.  Though was nice to finally hear acknowledgement of the existence of Global Bodies (even though that apparently is only relevant to her utterly fucked Chequers plan for some reason.   AND the difference between Norway and the Associate Membership we were being lined up be cul-de-sac'd with was the ability to do our own trade deals...But doesn't cover freedom of movement.


Smart Leave, was to Norway, regroup and build separate international ties - then Canada (after another referendum)

As it is what we've had is just a mess where the only real option is an Art 50 extension, which arch remainers unfortunately are also calling for as part of their plan to overturn the whole thing


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

All this discussion of trade deals is a bit of a strange one. I really could not give one flying fuck over whether or not the UK is allowed to negotiate trade deals separately from the EU. From the very little I know about such things, it sounds like it would be better being part of that bigger group when negotiating. I also have no illusions that tory types want to negotiate separate deals because the EU _doesn't demand sufficiently high standards_. In fact, various of them, including David Davis, have been explicit that they seek a race to the bottom in such affairs. This comes directly back to the question 'What exactly is Brexit _for_?'


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Didn't help John Major much with his 'bastards'. Cameron had a similarly sized majority to work with.
> 
> We can't know because it didn't happen, but I think we can be pretty confident that the problems that led to the referendum in the first place would not have gone away with a narrow remain majority.



On that we can definitely agree.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> All this discussion of trade deals is a bit of a strange one. I really could not give one flying fuck over whether or not the UK is allowed to negotiate trade deals separately from the EU. From the very little I know about such things, it sounds like it would be better being part of that bigger group when negotiating. I also have no illusions that tory types want to negotiate separate deals because the EU _doesn't demand sufficiently high standards_. In fact, various of them, including David Davis, have been explicit that they seek a race to the bottom in such affairs. This comes directly back to the question 'What exactly is Brexit _for_?'



Who said it was 'for' anything? It's the result of the mounting contradictions within the British ruling class and political establishment but that doesn't make it 'for' something.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 20, 2018)

Macron: "Brexit is the choice of the British people... pushed by those who predicted easy solutions... Those people are liars. They left the next day so they didn’t have to manage it."

Boris stayed a bit longer than that...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who said it was 'for' anything? It's the result of the mounting contradictions within the British ruling class and political establishment but that doesn't make it 'for' something.


Plenty of people think it is for things, I would say. Quite a few people think it is for 'control' of borders and keeping foreigners out, and more to the point, the likes of the Mail, Express, Murdoch's lot, the Telegraph, are all pushing this line hard, hence the Norway model has not been an option thus far. Rightwingers even have a name for it now: 'Brino', mirroring r/w Republicans' 'Rino'. 

That matters, and it is something that needs to be challenged, regardless of how you voted in the referendum.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> All this discussion of trade deals is a bit of a strange one. I really could not give one flying fuck over whether or not the UK is allowed to negotiate trade deals separately from the EU. From the very little I know about such things, it sounds like it would be better being part of that bigger group when negotiating. I also have no illusions that tory types want to negotiate separate deals because the EU _doesn't demand sufficiently high standards_. In fact, various of them, including David Davis, have been explicit that they seek a race to the bottom in such affairs. This comes directly back to the question 'What exactly is Brexit _for_?'



What isn't understood properly is the cold water shock part of leaving. And the chaos it may very well cause,  probably to the whole of EUrope.   Mrs May says no deal Brexit isn't the end of the world...MI5's maxim is "we are 4 meals from anarchy' (that's the negative anarchy rather than people helping each other out that is already stretched to its limit).  A No deal Brexit definitely endangers those 4 meals, not just for UK but most likely the rest of EUrope.   Who knows, maybe MI5 could change their Maxim to ''It's not the end of the world" but that might impact on their funding and shit they can get away with in the name of 'National Security.


Brexit should have been about calmly detaching ourselves from a continent headed in a direction that would have been a bad fit for non Euro /non Schengen UK


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?



Considering farage said that would happen on the night - before winning - I suspect the answer is yes.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This comes directly back to the question 'What exactly is Brexit _for_?'


A means for disaster capitalists to earn $$$.
A project to preserve unity on the political right - and hence power.
An opportunity for those who feel the liberalised free-market model has failed them to make themselves poorer.
A fun historical experiment to demonstrate to future students why dull things like common standards, regulations and trading in blocs are useful.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> What isn't understood properly is the cold water shock part of leaving. And the chaos it may very well cause,  probably to the whole of EUrope.   Mrs May says no deal Brexit isn't the end of the world...MI5's maxim is "we are 4 meals from anarchy' (that's the negative anarchy rather than people helping each other out that is already stretched to its limit).  A No deal Brexit definitely endangers those 4 meals, not just for UK but most likely the rest of EUrope.   Who knows, maybe MI5 could change their Maxim to ''It's not the end of the world" but that might impact on their funding and shit they can get away with in the name of 'National Security.
> 
> 
> Brexit should have been about calmly detaching ourselves from a continent headed in a direction that would have been a bad fit for non Euro /non Schengen UK


In 1906 Alfred Henry Lewis said we were nine meals away from anarchy. What happened to the other five meals?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If he'd been the smart cookie he thought he was he'd
> 
> In 1906 Alfred Henry Lewis said we were nine meals away from anarchy. What happened to the other five meals?



Government efficency savings, and/or you are are using real time when you put patches in place.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> In 1906 Alfred Henry Lewis said we were nine meals away from anarchy. What happened to the other five meals?


Adjusted for annual inflation


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Does anyone believe that we'd be discussing a second vote if Remain had won?



Well no, because staying in is workable. Neither no deal nor Chequers are.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Government efficency savings, and/or you are are using real time when you put patches in place.


Damn you gosub beating me to it with the jokes


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Plenty of people think it is for things, I would say. Quite a few people think it is for 'control' of borders and keeping foreigners out, and more to the point, the likes of the Mail, Express, Murdoch's lot, the Telegraph, are all pushing this line hard, hence the Norway model has not been an option thus far. Rightwingers even have a name for it now: 'Brino', mirroring r/w Republicans' 'Rino'.
> 
> That matters, and it is something that needs to be challenged, regardless of how you voted in the referendum.



Ok sure but among people who understand what has happened, who said Brexit was 'for' anything?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 20, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> An opportunity for those who feel the liberalised free-market model has failed them to make themselves poorer.
> A fun historical experiment to demonstrate to future students why dull things like common standards, regulations and trading in blocs are useful.



Which thing is it you think the EU embodies sorry? Liberalisation or regulation?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> In 1906 Alfred Henry Lewis said we were nine meals away from anarchy. What happened to the other five meals?



Boris eat then


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 20, 2018)

in the 50’s people were a bit more used to and willing take on hardship for the king with the war and postwar rationing and stuff. I think One missed meal would be enough now. Maybe even one missed macchiato would start low level grumbling on the commuter routes


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> In 1906 Alfred Henry Lewis said we were nine meals away from anarchy. What happened to the other five meals?



To be fair they did well to last us 112 years.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ok sure but among people who understand what has happened, who said Brexit was 'for' anything?


Are you saying that leave supporters who see brexit as an opportunity to reduce immigration into the UK, voting for it largely with this motivation in mind, and seek such a reduction in immigration because they at least in part blame problems such as the suppression of wages and the housing crisis on increased immigration, don't understand what has happened?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Are you saying that leave supporters who see brexit as an opportunity to reduce immigration into the UK, voting for it largely with this motivation in mind, and seek such a reduction in immigration because they at least in part blame problems such as the suppression of wages and the housing crisis on increased immigration, don't understand what has happened?


Tl;dr? Are you saying leave voters primarily motivated by immigration don't understand what's happened?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> in the 50’s people were a bit more used to and willing take on hardship for the king with the war and postwar rationing and stuff. I think One missed meal would be enough now. Maybe even one missed macchiato would start low level grumbling on the commuter routes



Have you ever explained early closing Wednesday to a Millennial? or pubs shutting between 3-7


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 20, 2018)

My kids do not believe people had to go to parks and crap shopping centre s to continue drinking with a draught pack in the old days


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> My kids do not believe people had to go to parks and crap shopping centre s to continue drinking with a draught pack in the old days


Ah you've told them what a draught horse was for


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Have you ever explained early closing Wednesday to a Millennial? or pubs shutting between 3-7


Yes, those were the days when shop staff and bar workers were allowed a modicum of time off


----------



## andysays (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes, those were the days when shop staff and bar workers were allowed a modicum of time off


Lucky that we had the EU to protect terms and conditions for exploited workers back then...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

andysays said:


> Lucky that we had the EU to protect terms and conditions for exploited workers back then...


All workers are exploited


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All workers are exploited



True, but not all workers are the Exploited.



I wonder how Wattie voted?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Macron: "Brexit is the choice of the British people... pushed by those who predicted easy solutions... Those people are liars. They left the next day so they didn’t have to manage it."
> 
> Boris stayed a bit longer than that...


That would be the Macron who's launched an attack on the trade unions, who's in ideology is ever more neo-liberalism, who's security beat up protestors? 

Nice to see that you are being clear where your politics lie though.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 20, 2018)

So its Chequers or jumping off the cliff.  Looks like from today's proceedings that the Chequers deal is a non-starter.  So are we all going to jump off the cliff?

Chequers plan is dead, says Tusk as Macron calls Brexiters liars


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That would be the Macron who's launched an attack on the trade unions, who's in ideology is ever more neo-liberalism, who's security beat up protestors?
> 
> Nice to see that you are being clear where your politics lie though.


Yes, because copying a quote means I agree with him on everything. 

Nice to see that you are being clear where your politics lie though.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 20, 2018)

Always have been. I'm a communist. 

And it's not just one quote him is it - it's a long history of shitty liberal crap that you're willing to cosy up to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> So its Chequers or jumping off the cliff.  Looks like from today's proceedings that the Chequers deal is a non-starter.  So are we all going to jump off the cliff?
> 
> Chequers plan is dead, says Tusk as Macron calls Brexiters liars


There is as ever a third way, by which tory cabinet ministers, their junior ministers and all the pps's are lined up along beachy head and pushed off one by one. Until they admit my canal network plan has some positive aspects they wish to explore.

That is at least as likely as their being able to negotiate something halfway decent with the eu


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That would be the Macron who's launched an attack on the trade unions, who's in ideology is ever more neo-liberalism, who's security beat up protestors?
> 
> Nice to see that you are being clear where your politics lie though.



thats a terrible assumption


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Always have been. I'm a communist.
> 
> And it's not just one quote him is it - it's a long history of shitty liberal crap that you're willing to cosy up to.


That's the poisonous nature of this particular debate. Politics is stripped away and one is branded either a remainer or an exiter.  Like that is the important division here.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Always have been. I'm a communist.
> 
> And it's not just one quote him is it - it's a long history of shitty liberal crap that you're willing to cosy up to.



What’s the plan then, no deal and it’s rough enough to lurch the country towards communism?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's the poisonous nature of this particular debate. Politics is stripped away and one is branded either a remainer or an exiter.  Like that is the important division here.


Quite right, it should be liberals in our sights


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 20, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> So its Chequers or jumping off the cliff.  Looks like from today's proceedings that the Chequers deal is a non-starter.  So are we all going to jump off the cliff?
> 
> Chequers plan is dead, says Tusk as Macron calls Brexiters liars




Tusk has a proper punchable face.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The DUP are fucked, though, aren't they? Can't risk a vote of no confidence and usher in Labour. I think they'll do what they're told (after another bung to NI.)


They'd choose Labour if it came down to that choice. But if they force a hard border with the south, Ireland will reunify. _That_ is why they are fucked.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Quite right, it should be liberals in our sights



For you personally, how many work colleagues would you need to off?


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> What’s the plan then, no deal and it’s rough enough to lurch the country towards communism?



I don't think communists have that much of a plan


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> For you personally, how many work colleagues would you need to off?


Need to? None.


----------



## Startovernow (Sep 20, 2018)

I don't think may has one either


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Quite right, it should be liberals in our sights


Serious answer to that? If you want one which you probably don't. No those that would intentionally profit from the misery of others should be in our sights.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Need to? None.



'should' in your earlier post implies necessity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Serious answer to that? If you want one which you probably don't. No those that would intentionally profit from the misery of others should be in our sights.


And so very many of those are liberals.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> And so very many of those are liberals.



Very true, but swapping masters at your own cost doesn't help anyone but the masters.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 20, 2018)

Looks like the options are now walk off a cliff or wait til we're pushed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Looks like the options are now walk off a cliff or wait til we're pushed.


Or push the pushers before they push us

When push comes to shove you know I'm right


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Looks like the options are now walk off a cliff or wait til we're pushed.



May have been a mistake for Leavers to argue that a Brexit deal would be 'easy'. Had they argued that it would be utterly impossible 18 months of work may have kept the supply routes open. The EU said from the off there was no cherry picking. 

Mind you had they honestly said it was impossible there may not have been a leave vote.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or push the pushers before they push us
> 
> When push comes to shove you know I'm right



You are, but with one teeny problem, which is it isn't going to happen. I don't see much sign of the people about to throw Rees-Mogg or Duncan Smith off a cliff. More like some softer target such as the neighbours.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Quite right, it should be liberals in our sights



We're soooooo scared.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> May have been a mistake for Leavers to argue that a Brexit deal would be 'easy'. Had they argued that it would be utterly impossible 18 months of work may have kept the supply routes open. The EU said from the off there was no cherry picking.
> 
> Mind you had they honestly said it was impossible there may not have been a leave vote.



Whole thing is mental, we've had years of intergration whilst powers that be saying EU is a trivial issue,  then come the referendum remainers saying its so important we'll be in melt down without it.  A bunch of people who spent ages getting worked up about it now down playing its significance.  Leavers sidelining people with plans coz they don't like them yet unable to come with workable alternatives.   Technical experts dismissed for explaining the limits of possibility.  Whilst the EU looks on not quite sure whether to take things seriously.


Its a classic Sales lead approach.  Bullshit then see what the engineers can approximate.  (never pleases anyone).   Workout whats possible first then try and sell it is always a better approach, AND I believe could have delivered a leave vote with a better informed population and little of the polarisation -majority of UK would be as uncomfortable with being in a United States of EUrope as they are with nutters at the other end want


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> You are, but with one teeny problem, which is it isn't going to happen. I don't see much sign of the people about to throw Rees-Mogg or Duncan Smith off a cliff. More like some softer target such as the neighbours.


They're behind you, as they say at the panto


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> They're behind you, as they say at the panto



You need to get them behind you. It's a crude sort of strategy this one. You simply don't know where it will lead.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> You are, but with one teeny problem, which is it isn't going to happen. I don't see much sign of the people about to throw Rees-Mogg or Duncan Smith off a cliff. More like some softer target such as the neighbours.



BBC iPlayer - Politics Live - 20/09/2018   about 20 mins in.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 20, 2018)

They're stuck. No Chequers. No border anywhere in or with Ireland. No solution for either Irish border. No withdrawal deal.

May can't survive and no other Tory leader can do any better with this parliament.

GE 2018?


----------



## mx wcfc (Sep 20, 2018)

xarmian said:


> They're stuck. No Chequers. No border anywhere in or with Ireland. No solution for either Irish border. No withdrawal deal.
> 
> May can't survive and no other Tory leader can do any better with this parliament.
> 
> GE 2018?



Offering to continue to abide by EU State aid regulation is suicidal.  It is pathetic,  it is sort "oh please, we are leaving the EU, but please whip us with your crap regulation".  I am embaressed to say I agree with the twats like Johnson and Mogg on this.  we either leave or we don't.   

I am dammed glad it is the tories who are taking us into this.  let them do it, fall apart and take the grief.


----------



## agricola (Sep 20, 2018)

gosub said:


> Its a classic Sales lead approach.  Bullshit then see what the engineers can approximate.  (never pleases anyone).   Workout whats possible first then try and sell it is always a better approach, AND I believe could have delivered a leave vote with a better informed population and little of the polarisation -*majority of UK would be as uncomfortable with being in a United States of EUrope as they are with nutters at the other end want*



... and they'd be right to, at least certainly in the case of the United States of Europe that is currently on offer.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

xarmian said:


> They're stuck. No Chequers. No border anywhere in or with Ireland. No solution for either Irish border. No withdrawal deal.
> 
> May can't survive and no other Tory leader can do any better with this parliament.
> 
> GE 2018?




3 within the space of 5 years would have to be some sort of record.


e2a maybe not: 1950, 51 and 55


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2018)

agricola said:


> ... and they'd be right to, at least certainly in the case of the United States of Europe that is currently on offer.



But there's supposed to be another reforming treaty on the way....which would have seen us marginalised


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

The UK position is shambolic. The most shameful thing is no leadership from the left on how they'd get us out of this mess.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> The UK position is shambolic. The most shameful thing is no leadership from the left on how they'd get us out of this mess.



Why should Corbyn say anything? May will not listen to him, so it can only be turned against him. All thy can do is be there to pick up the pieces of whatever is left when the Tories have finished uniting their party.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

at this point the supines of the country would vote for a petain if he was pro EU


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why should Corbyn say anything? May will not listen to him, so it can only be turned against him. All thy can do is be there to pick up the pieces of whatever is left when the Tories have finished uniting their party.



I disagree. The tories are in such a state labour have a rare opportunity to influence the direction taken. Even if it's only to apply pressure for a second referendum. 

Doing nothing because jez is a brexiter and his party is majority remain is a cowards way to handle matters. Waiting for the country to fall apart is a very lame way to deal with this. IMHO obviously.


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> at this point the supines of the country would vote for a petain if he was pro EU



Now now. No need for that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

if they'd backed remain they'd now be looking like the rest of europes 'social democrats', scraping by. Pasokified.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why should Corbyn say anything? May will not listen to him, so it can only be turned against him. All thy can do is be there to pick up the pieces of whatever is left when the Tories have finished uniting their party.


I dunno. Leadership?  It's not about may listening to him. Of course she won't.  It's about the rest of us. Silence is becoming an increasingly untenable position.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 20, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Offering to continue to abide by EU State aid regulation is suicidal.  It is pathetic,  it is sort "oh please, we are leaving the EU, but please whip us with your crap regulation".  I am embaressed to say I agree with the twats like Johnson and Mogg on this.  we either leave or we don't.
> 
> I am dammed glad it is the tories who are taking us into this.  let them do it, fall apart and take the grief.


They're not taking us into it. They don't have a way out. They can't get a withdrawal deal and parliament won't let them have no deal. The government would fall if they tried it.

They have to replace May now or risk another general election with her as leader. None of them want the job with this parliament. None of them want an election.

They are completely stuck with no way out.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I dunno. Leadership?  It's not about may listening to him. Of course she won't.  It's about the rest of us. Silence is becoming an increasingly untenable position.


last I heard the line was not silence but more 'we aren't in power, if we were..well nothing is off the table. Lets have a GE'

what you mean by silence is of course what supine means by lack of leadership. They won't unequivocally back a second reff which is what you both want. Its fine to say 'this party is not doing what I want' but to frame it as silence or a lack of leadership (from the party OUT of power no less) isn't right either imo.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> last I heard the line was not silence but more 'we aren't in power, if we were..well nothing is off the table. Lets have a GE'
> 
> what you mean by silence is of course what supine means by lack of leadership. They won't unequivocally back a second reff which is what you both want. Its fine to say 'this party is not doing what I want' but to frame it as silence or a lack of leadership (from the party OUT of power no less) isn't right either imo.


What I mean is what I say dc  you can do better than that


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you met treelover before? That's one of his better posts.


it was one of my worst ones though, I’m not Scottish enough to handle whisky I’ll stick to rum in future sorry guys


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2018)

And ban the native hipsters. Apparently.


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

To clarify I'm not actually a massive fan of a second referendum. I would have liked labour to fight for a tory government only triggering article 50 when a framework for any new agreement was already decided. Instead jez said it should be triggered the day after the vote 

I haven't a scooby doo what the best road is at this point


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> if they'd backed remain they'd now be looking like the rest of europes 'social democrats', scraping by. Pasokified.


Here just to complete a hattrick of shitposting Sisters Are Doing It For Themselves came on in the car during the school run, well I was giving it CIS TERFS etc. See what you done ?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I dunno. Leadership?  It's not about may listening to him. Of course she won't.  It's about the rest of us. Silence is becoming an increasingly untenable position.



Ha, just you wait until conference slightly adjusts the thresholds for reselection. Then you'll see the full power of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Ha, just you wait until conference slightly adjusts the thresholds for reselection. Then you'll see the full power of zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz




Over 150 Brexit-related motions submitted to Labour ahead of annual conference


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> last I heard the line was not silence but more 'we aren't in power, if we were..well nothing is off the table. Lets have a GE'
> 
> what you mean by silence is of course what supine means by lack of leadership. They won't unequivocally back a second reff which is what you both want. Its fine to say 'this party is not doing what I want' but to frame it as silence or a lack of leadership (from the party OUT of power no less) isn't right either imo.


I'll give you a concrete example. Northern Ireland. Martin McGuinness warned as soon as the referendum was announced that exactly the problem that is the problem now would be a problem. What is Corbyn's response to this? What is his opinion of this question? It's not like he hasn't had time to come up with an answer - McGuinesss detailed the question back in 2015.


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Over 150 Brexit-related motions submitted to Labour ahead of annual conference



 emu position can only last so long! Could be an interesting conference


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Over 150 Brexit-related motions submitted to Labour ahead of annual conference



Let's see what makes it to a substantive vote


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 20, 2018)

Supine said:


> I don't think communists have that much of a plan



Well actually...


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

I never thought I'd say it but the labour party conference this year will be fascinating.


I'll just fetch my anorak....


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> if they'd backed remain they'd now be looking like the rest of europes 'social democrats', scraping by. Pasokified.



Only a few people give a shit about the EU. Stop playing that ball and play the one about how stuff moves around after next April, when no agreements are in place for the transport of goods, let alone how every other regulated thing works, not just with the EU, but with every other country we trade with under its auspices.

We know the EU is bad, but what’s going to keep wheels turning? There is a whiff of ‘let them eat cake’ about the arguments which just end in a reminder of the EU’s ills.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Only a few people give a shit about the EU. Stop playing that ball and play the one about how stuff moves around after next April, when no agreements are in place for the transport of goods, let alone how every other regulated thing works, not just with the EU, but with every other country we trade with under its auspices.
> 
> We know the EU is bad, but what’s going to keep wheels turning? There is a whiff of ‘let them eat cake’ about the arguments which just end in a reminder of the EU’s ills.


sorry, whats that have to do with what you quoted? I made the observation that had labour backed remain they'd have seen a vote collapse similar to that of the other european post war social democratic parties. Of course you can't prove a counterfactual etc but look what cost them scotland...


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> sorry, whats that have to do with what you quoted? I made the observation that had labour backed remain they'd have seen a vote collapse similar to that of the other european post war social democratic parties. Of course you can't prove a counterfactual etc but look what cost them scotland...



I don’t disagree about Labour. They could not back Remain. 

It’s the ending of any argument about the substance of what to do with a reminder of the EU’s evil rather than a proposal that I’m referring to. Maybe wrongly in the case of your post, but the question is there anyway.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Only a few people give a shit about the EU.



I agree. Europe, the EU, Brexit v Remain are all *insanely* boring subjects 

That's around 89.6%** of the problem with all this 

**made-up but plausible statistic ... 

Not sure why I've been on this thread at all really  , except out of a wish for the Tories to collapse in violent splits and electoral disaster for ever


----------



## paolo (Sep 20, 2018)

Before Cameron made the referendum pledge, the EU was not on the British public’s radar. It was dwarfed by issues including housing and the NHS. The economist had a timeline graph, showing how it only became an issue for people after the Tory’s had declared it so.

*sigh*


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 20, 2018)

May has driven the whole brexit process into a ditch. Everybody knew her chequers proposals would be rejected by the EU - in fact its been clear that what would happen since she outlined the governments position two years ago. They have achieved absolutely nothing in that time. 
Its bizarre - shes fucked, she has no authority but her party wont ditch her because nobody wants to take over the titanic. 
I think 2nd referendum will happen - its that or crashing out - and nobody with any influence bar a few tory lunatics want that.


----------



## paolo (Sep 20, 2018)

Will May call it? No sign yet.

And if she gets booted, strong chance the replacement will be happy to drive over the cliff.

Chance of an election *and* Labour offering a vote? Time is running out for those two things to happen.

The picture could, of course, be completely different in a few weeks. Fuck knows where all this will end up.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 21, 2018)

After today, one thing must at last be clear to May: it really is BINO, or no deal
The former would cause WW3 to break out in the Tory party, the latter would cause utter catastrophe
e2a: But so many people were trying to tell her this, two whole years ago, The past 2 years have been utterly insane


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why should Corbyn say anything? May will not listen to him, so it can only be turned against him. All thy can do is be there to pick up the pieces of whatever is left when the Tories have finished uniting their party.


tbf He is staying stuff and its honourable. (as of tonight still respecting the plebicite.) His problem is most of the Unions, which came out for remain, are now pushing for a second referendum....Possibly the most politically charged conference season in living memory.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

I think may will fail to get any sort of deal through the commons and will then resign leaving the commons to vote for a suspension of A50 and a second referendum rather than allow a no deal crash out to happen. 
Labour could back it on the basis of "the tories fucked this up so badly this is now the only way to avoid a disaster". I mean - who the fuck wants BINO? Its the same as where we were pre referendum but more shit. 
Post imperial hubris meets inevitable humiliation as limits of the UK's power and influence are cruelly exposed - Suez redux.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> ^^I actually agree with both those positions, confusingly.



Same same, I don’t think it’s all that confusing it’s the perils of trying your damndest to be a “non-affiliated radical”
Unfortunately though much of the establishment who have been  banging  on about “facts” now being out there when they weren’t previously- seriously which new FACTS  have been unveiled since 2016, it’s just ramped up threats right? - and  a “people’s vote” are really just covering up the fact they’ve tried to terrify people into changing their minds cause they didn’t accept the result *The People* gave  the first time around. Which is why many people view a second ref as not being  democratic. #peoplesvote always reads to me like a total fucking pisstake, it’s like they don’t care how patronising they are being, we are monkeys, thick as fuck and we will never notice the face slapping irony of that hashtag.  Respect out the window entirely. Oh just forget the last two years - LOL! SOZ!- we accept that the second vote will be a #peoplesvote. They’ll never tell you the second ref will be fucking advisory as well(the cornerstone of their argument, it was advisory and didn’t count) , heavily implying it won’t be suits them just fine. 
So yeah, complicated situation. Of course any  clear vote is by definition. democratic but if you offer it 4 times til you get your desired result then that adds a bit more context and it’s not so simple to argue either way . Bah!


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Same same, I don’t think it’s all that confusing it’s the perils of trying your damndest to be a “non-affiliated radical”
> Unfortunately though much of the establishment who have been  banging  on about “facts” now being out there when they weren’t previously- seriously which new FACTS  have been unveiled since 2016, it’s just ramped up threats right? - and  a “people’s vote” are really just covering up the fact they’ve tried to terrify people into changing their minds cause they didn’t accept the result *The People* gave  the first time around. Which is why many people view a second ref as not being  democratic. #peoplesvote always reads to me like a total fucking pisstake, it’s like they don’t care how patronising they are being, we are monkeys, thick as fuck and we will never notice the face slapping irony of that hashtag.  Respect out the window entirely. Oh just forget the last two years - LOL! SOZ!- we accept that the second vote will be a #peoplesvote. They’ll never tell you the second ref will be fucking advisory as well(the cornerstone of their argument, it was advisory and didn’t count) , heavily implying it won’t be suits them just fine.
> So yeah, complicated situation. Of course any  clear vote is by definition. democratic but if you offer it 4 times til you get your desired result then that adds a bit more context and it’s not so simple to argue either way . Bah!



If I could double like for saying its a complicated situation I would.  Can you imagine this level discussion on facebook?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which thing is it you think the EU embodies sorry? Liberalisation or regulation?


I don't think it embodies either - but they are not necessarily opposed concepts. A good example being the common external tariffs of the customs union (a set of regs) which has liberalised trade within the bloc by being able to do away with most of its internal customs checks.


----------



## binka (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> May has driven the whole brexit process into a ditch. Everybody knew her chequers proposals would be rejected by the EU - in fact its been clear that what would happen since she outlined the governments position two years ago. They have achieved absolutely nothing in that time.
> Its bizarre - shes fucked, she has no authority but her party wont ditch her because nobody wants to take over the titanic.
> I think 2nd referendum will happen - its that or crashing out - and nobody with any influence bar a few tory lunatics want that.


Well I suppose if your plan all along was to have a second referendum... This theory does of course mean that May would have to be one of the shrewdest, most Machiavellian operators in British political history...


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 21, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I agree. Europe, the EU, Brexit v Remain are all *insanely* boring subjects
> 
> That's around 89.6%** of the problem with all this
> 
> ...



What I mean is and in response to the constant refrain that those who don’t want to leave must love the evil EU/tolerate its crimes, only a few really do. It’s Government after all.

The trouble is we leave, we still have Government and we still have elites and they are poised to clean up even further if we are pushed into a recession. If the Tories stay in they will open Britain up to every piece of scum with cash to invest who hasn’t already bought 10 flats. 

Even worse, our own Govt thinks it is necessary to stockpile medicines. No deal would reduce the capacity to move goods in and out severely. It is exceptionalism to not worry about it. It’s let them eat cake. 

We haven’t weakened the EU, we just appear to be about to up the dial on precarcity.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> a “people’s vote” [is] really just covering up the fact they’ve tried to terrify people into changing their minds cause they didn’t accept the result *The People* gave  the first time around.


Right.  This is it really — why I feel queasy about it. If they’d done a good job to date then I’d have no problem — or little problem — with a second vote.  But it feels like a stitch up.  Do the worst job possible and then claim it can’t be done.  That’s not reasonable.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

various members of the government blustering today - the EU has to do this, the EU has to understand ... when the EU doesn't have to do anything apart from role its eyes. THe government is sticking to its plan - the one that has just been comprehensively rejected by every single other member of the EU. 
 They have all the cards, preservation of the central tenants is more important to them than keeping the UK in the EU. None of this is a revelation and was entirely predictable. WTF did they think was going to happen? Was this self delusion? Or the result of May continually kicking the can down the road hoping that something would come up before the road ran out?


----------



## Supine (Sep 21, 2018)

I can see the end of that road for her. Think Thelma & Louise cliff scene


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> I can see the end of that road for her. Think Thelma & Louise cliff scene


I'm thinking more of the end of the young ones as you can get more people in a double-decker


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Right.  This is it really — why I feel queasy about it. If they’d done a good job to date then I’d have no problem — or little problem — with a second vote.  But it feels like a stitch up.  Do the worst job possible and then claim it can’t be done.  That’s not reasonable.



its not the terrify bit, there are some real concerns, it was the abusive contempt and zero effort to move to a compromise in light of the result


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> various members of the government blustering today - the EU has to do this, the EU has to understand ... when the EU doesn't have to do anything apart from role its eyes. THe government is sticking to its plan - the one that has just been comprehensively rejected by every single other member of the EU.
> They have all the cards, preservation of the central tenants is more important to them than keeping the UK in the EU. None of this is a revelation and was entirely predictable. WTF did they think was going to happen? Was this self delusion? Or the result of May continually kicking the can down the road hoping that something would come up before the road ran out?


She couldn't kick a can down the road without fucking it up


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 21, 2018)

Chequers goes pop.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Right.  This is it really — why I feel queasy about it. If they’d done a good job to date then I’d have no problem — or little problem — with a second vote.  But it feels like a stitch up.  Do the worst job possible and then claim it can’t be done.  That’s not reasonable.


Indeed. I actually don’t think having a referendum on the deal - ie “right, you asked us to do a deal, is this the sort of deal you had in mind?” - is an unreasonable proposition in theory.

I just think it is in the circumstances.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Right.  This is it really — why I feel queasy about it. If they’d done a good job to date then I’d have no problem — or little problem — with a second vote.  But it feels like a stitch up.  Do the worst job possible and then claim it can’t be done.  That’s not reasonable.


Malice or stupidity though?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2018)

column a/column b


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Malice or stupidity though?


Tories intit.  Both.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> WTF did they think was going to happen? Was this self delusion? Or the result of May continually kicking the can down the road hoping that something would come up before the road ran out?



It's possible they really do believe that the UK is special and important and that the rest of the world recognises this. I'd always assumed they just used national pride as a bullshit pretext for doing the things they love to do, most of which involve dismantling everything that British people might actually be proud of, but maybe they're dense enough to genuinely buy into it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

I think the pressure for a 2nd ref will ramp up now - especially if it looks like "no deal" is the only other option. Will labour "reluctantly" come round to supporting it? easier for them then the tories.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 21, 2018)

Its the negotiating style of someone who has every advantage, just sit and wait for the other fellow to blink, he has more to lose. But thats not the case. Even if it was thats a twats way to go about negotiating a withdrawal. Its just a 'my way or the highway' approach.


Kaka Tim said:


> I think the pressure for a 2nd ref will ramp up now - especially if it looks like "no deal" is the only other option. Will labour "reluctantly" come round to supporting it? easier for them then the tories.


groan recons yougov polls indicate it could net them 1.5 mill extra votes. I'm not so sure about that but, eh. Conference first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think the pressure for a 2nd ref will ramp up now - especially if it looks like "no deal" is the only other option. Will labour "reluctantly" come round to supporting it? easier for them then the tories.


What if ref II returns the same result as ref I? Wouldn't risk it if I was tm, either call ge or fudge return to eu through parliament


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think the pressure for a 2nd ref will ramp up now - especially if it looks like "no deal" is the only other option. Will labour "reluctantly" come round to supporting it? easier for them then the tories.


Well, there's two types of "second referendum".  There's asking the public "did you really mean it?"  And there's asking the public "what do you think of this deal?"

I'm theoretically predisposed to approving of that second type.  But as time goes on I'm more and more opposed to it in these circumstances.  And this morning, more than ever.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think may will fail to get any sort of deal through the commons and will then resign leaving the commons to vote for a suspension of A50 and a second referendum rather than allow a no deal crash out to happen.
> Labour could back it on the basis of "the tories fucked this up so badly this is now the only way to avoid a disaster". I mean - who the fuck wants BINO? Its the same as where we were pre referendum but more shit.
> Post imperial hubris meets inevitable humiliation as limits of the UK's power and influence are cruelly exposed - Suez redux.




The above look like some reasonable predictions in circumstances where any predictions are guesswork essentially.

I share other posters' queasiness about a second referendum, it can so easily look like, and even be, taking the piss out of some of the electorate -- "Get it right this time, you twats!" -- as no remainer would be stupid enough to say out loud/too obviously   in any new campaign 

OTOH, Brexit as currently being royally fucked up by the Tories, would IMO be disastrous.  As I said before, Brexit and related stuff are, to most normal people,  intrinsically dull-as-ditchwater subjects that the Tories have been banging on about for far to long and to zero positive effect.

There was a Guardian op-ed piece the other day, I may find link some other time, where Rafael Baer (yes, I know!) summed up how bored most are by now quite well : Brexut minded people just want to get on with it, Remain minded people just wish it would all go away. I agree with him there actually, however contentious most of his other political stuff is.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Same same, I don’t think it’s all that confusing it’s the perils of trying your damndest to be a “non-affiliated radical”
> Unfortunately though much of the establishment who have been  banging  on about “facts” now being out there when they weren’t previously- seriously which new FACTS  have been unveiled since 2016, it’s just ramped up threats right? - and  a “people’s vote” are really just covering up the fact they’ve tried to terrify people into changing their minds cause they didn’t accept the result *The People* gave  the first time around. Which is why many people view a second ref as not being  democratic. #peoplesvote always reads to me like a total fucking pisstake, it’s like they don’t care how patronising they are being, we are monkeys, thick as fuck and we will never notice the face slapping irony of that hashtag.  Respect out the window entirely. Oh just forget the last two years - LOL! SOZ!- we accept that the second vote will be a #peoplesvote. They’ll never tell you the second ref will be fucking advisory as well(the cornerstone of their argument, it was advisory and didn’t count) , heavily implying it won’t be suits them just fine.
> So yeah, complicated situation. Of course any  clear vote is by definition. democratic but if you offer it 4 times til you get your desired result then that adds a bit more context and it’s not so simple to argue either way . Bah!



Can you think of anything with 'people's...' in front of it that isn't patronising as fuck? If it was really the people as a whole doing something, then everyone would know this already and you wouldn't need 'people' in the title of the thing. It's like putting 'water' in the name of a boating event, if you're doing it properly then the presence of water should at the very least be strongly implied.

Come out and say 'the people fucked up' if that's what you believe. If the problem first time round was people lying, twisting facts, presenting opinion as fact, lying about their motivations and generally communicating with the public in a disrespectful way, then the solution is unlikely to require more of the same.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Right.  This is it really — why I feel queasy about it. If they’d done a good job to date then I’d have no problem — or little problem — with a second vote.  But it feels like a stitch up.  Do the worst job possible and then claim it can’t be done.  That’s not reasonable.


What would a 'good job' have looked like? Simply that we'd have got to this point within a few weeks instead of 2 years?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> 3 within the space of 5 years would have to be some sort of record.
> 
> 
> e2a maybe not: 1950, 51 and 55



It'd be three in just over three years.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 21, 2018)

tbf it was Cameron who fucked up by offering to hold a referendum due to pressure from the r/w of the tory party, then the whole thing was a meaningless shit show from start to finish.

''The people'' didn't fuck up; we engaged with the process we were given in the only way was could - voting. The people who fucked it up are the people who planned it and executed the fiasco happening around us to this day.

It's completely out of order for anyone to blame ''the people'' for any of this.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why should Corbyn say anything?



Because it's his fucking job?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Because it's his fucking job?



It’s his job to get it tactically correct, not speak for the sake of it.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 21, 2018)

The Tories would prefer to crash out with no deal and use the EU and May as eternal scapegoats for any and all problems resulting thereof. GE would be madness.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

It _could_ turn out as a political masterstroke for labour if they call for a 2nd ref at the right time  - half the political establishment would be grovelling in gratitude for and it could potentially give labour some political cover to do evil corbynite things like build some more council houses. Meanwhile the tory would be royally fucked - brexiteers would hate them for blowing it, remainers would want a 2nd ref, everyone else would see them as utterly incompetent. Death spiral etc

But - 

1. Could make it happen?  - would enough remainer tory mps vote for it? (and there would also be hoeys and fileds who would vote against) again pressure of impending "no deal" could push them into it.

2. Would the country vote for remain? not a sure thing - but im  people are utterly fucking sick of brexit and just want the whole thing to go away - and if it was framed as "make it all go away" (even though it won't)  vs "yet more of this interminable bollocks " i think remain would win fairly easily. I can see remainers lining up the "we need to get back to sorting out the NHS/housing/crime" arguments - far more compelling than talking about fucking trade tariffs. 

2nd referendum would - of course - be a piss take. but so was the first one and its probably the least toxic and most politically achievable route out of the whole cluster fuck.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> tbf it was Cameron who fucked up by offering to hold a referendum due to pressure from the r/w of the tory party, then the whole thing was a meaningless shit show from start to finish.
> 
> ''The people'' didn't fuck up; we engaged with the process we were given in the only way was could - voting. The people who fucked it up are the people who planned it and executed the fiasco happening around us to this day.
> 
> It's completely out of order for anyone to blame ''the people'' for any of this.



I quite agree. But it's not me out there pounding pavements handing out people's vote flyers. Presumably their position _is_ that 'the people fucked up'.

Whatever ultimately happens will be some form of establishment stitch-up. No voting will be permitted unless the result is a foregone conclusion. At no point will genuine democracy be on the table as a means of resolving this clusterfuck.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

Flavour said:


> The Tories would prefer to crash out with no deal and use the EU and May as eternal scapegoats for any and all problems resulting thereof. GE would be madness.



I think only a few tories would genuinely opt for crashing out. A combination of "we need to put the good of the country above party interests" and the CBI/city of london/BofE shitting itself over the prospect of no deal would focus their minds.


----------



## andysays (Sep 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, there's two types of "second referendum".  There's asking the public "did you really mean it?"  And there's asking the public "what do you think of this deal?"
> 
> I'm theoretically predisposed to approving of that second type.  But as time goes on I'm more and more opposed to it in these circumstances.  And this morning, more than ever.


And the choice on the hypothetical referendum would have to reflect that.

If it was genuinely about approving the terms the options would have to be either 'I accept the terms negotiated or 'I don't accept, go back and sort out a better deal'.

But that doesn't seem to be the sort of choice the main advocates of another referendum are suggesting.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think the pressure for a 2nd ref will ramp up now - especially if it looks like "no deal" is the only other option. Will labour "reluctantly" come round to supporting it? easier for them then the tories.


Whose pressure is it though? Is it from the street? Or is it basically a large section of the capital/state and their media/cultural fronts? I can't see any street level pressure - only desperate transparent PR guff about _the people. _I mean, what are the liberal-lefties supportive of this doing to apply pressure - how and where are they organising. Are they doing _anything_ at all.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> It _could_ turn out as a political masterstroke for labour if they call for a 2nd ref at the right time  - half the political establishment would be grovelling in gratitude for and it could potentially give labour some political cover to do evil corbynite things like build some more council houses. Meanwhile the tory would be royally fucked - brexiteers would hate them for blowing it, remainers would want a 2nd ref, everyone else would see them as utterly incompetent. Death spiral etc
> 
> But -
> 
> ...



1. Possibly. there were only, what four Labour MP's supporting brexit at the last big vote. I'm sure they're more than cancelled out by remainer tories. That's _could _Corbyn do it though, not would he actually want to.

2. Probably. Whether the leave option on the ticket was BINO or Beachy Head I suspect remain would win. But you've got to take into account the Murdoch press kicking back into overdrive. Dacre's departure from the Mail and his replacement by remainer Geordie Grieg could be a key factor.

I'm not calling anything at this point though. My instinct is that whichever is the stupidest possible course of events, that is the one which will come to pass.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> whichever is the stupidest possible course of events, that is the one which will come to pass.



This is the image that came to mind when I read that phrase.


----------



## Winot (Sep 21, 2018)

Whatever the theoretical rights/wrongs, there isn't legislative time to have a second referendum before March 2019.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I quite agree. But it's not me out there pounding pavements handing out people's vote flyers. Presumably their position _is_ that 'the people fucked up'.
> 
> Whatever ultimately happens will be some form of establishment stitch-up. No voting will be permitted unless the result is a foregone conclusion. At no point will genuine democracy be on the table as a means of resolving this clusterfuck.



It feels like ''The People'' (eg The People have spoken!) are already getting the blame. Farage is still lording it all over the TV going ''Get on with it!'', Johnson has lurched from fuck up to fuck up and will continue to do so till he becomes prime fucking minster no doubt, Davis was so shit at the job _he wanted_ that he quit, the list is endless .. idiots who brought this upon us for their own reasons fucking it up and blaming ''The People'' - less than 37% of whom actually wanted this to happen. And less than that I'm sure are actually happy with it as it's going.

No, there's nothing democratic about this and there was never meant to be. But ''The People have spoken!''


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> And the choice on the hypothetical referendum would have to reflect that.
> 
> If it was genuinely about approving the terms the options would have to be either 'I accept the terms negotiated or 'I don't accept, go back and sort out a better deal'.
> 
> But that doesn't seem to be the sort of choice the main advocates of another referendum are suggesting.


Indeed. And that’s why I harden more and more against the notion as time goes on.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Whose pressure is it though? Is it from the street? Or is it basically a large section of the capital/state and their media/cultural fronts? I can't see any street level pressure - only desperate transparent PR guff about _the people. _I mean, what are the liberal-lefties supportive of this doing to apply pressure - how and where are they organising. Are they doing _anything_ at all.



oh i think most people are utterly sick of the whole thing and their opinions are a combination of "jsut get on with it for fucks sake!" and "why are we wasting our time with this bollocks?". 
So yeah - it is  "the capital/state and their media/cultural fronts" - but that has a lot of heft. I think powder has been kept dry in order to see what might transpire - but the if no deal if the only option they will get very noisy. also there seems to be a lot of grassroots pressure within labour for a 2nd ref - lots of conf motions apparently (dunno all the details - not involved). So its not a great popular cause (but then - nor was brexit) - but the range of people and groups pushing it have considerable influence


----------



## Winot (Sep 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> Whatever the theoretical rights/wrongs, there isn't legislative time to have a second referendum before March 2019.



More here for anyone interested:
How long would it take to hold a second referendum on Brexit?

TLDR - it theoretically _could_ be done, but realistically would need an extension to Art. 50


----------



## Winot (Sep 21, 2018)

(FWIW I am a staunch Remainer but am not in favour of a 2nd ref)


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> oh i think most people are utterly sick of the whole thing and their opinions are a combination of "jsut get on with it for fucks sake!" and "why are we wasting our time with this bollocks?".
> So yeah - it is  "the capital/state and their media/cultural fronts" - but that has a lot of heft. I think powder has been kept dry in order to see what might transpire - but the if no deal if the only option they will get very noisy. also there seems to be a lot of grassroots pressure within labour for a 2nd ref - lots of conf motions apparently (dunno all the details - not involved). So its not a great popular cause (but then - nor was brexit) - but the range of people and groups pushing it have considerable influence


Yes it has a lot of heft - so much so that many leftie-liberals are falling into line behind them without bothering to ask serious questions about a whole range of things - simply because it may get the result that they want. That's a total abandonment of political responsibility. To flop sleater's insistent whining on here about a tory brexit, this is to argue for a _tory remain. _

The labour stuff i think is 150 motions, which can represent as little as 150 very busy people.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 21, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What would a 'good job' have looked like? Simply that we'd have got to this point within a few weeks instead of 2 years?


No.

Negotiating a proper and orderly withdrawal from the EU was not an impossible task.  Impossible within a two year time-frame, yes, but who said it had to be done in two years?


----------



## Supine (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No.
> 
> Negotiating a proper and orderly withdrawal from the EU was not an impossible task.  Impossible within a two year time-frame, yes, but who said it had to be done in two years?



The British guy who wrote article 50


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> The British guy who wrote article 50


The one who wrote it in order to make sure that no one could ever really imagine leaving due to the shitty nature of the process. And who has since been going around urging a stop to brexit. Yes, this is how the EU operates.


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> The above look like some reasonable predictions in circumstances where any predictions are guesswork essentially.
> 
> I share other posters' queasiness about a second referendum, it can so easily look like, and even be, taking the piss out of some of the electorate -- "Get it right this time, you twats!" -- as no remainer would be stupid enough to say out loud/too obviously   in any new campaign
> 
> ...



As much as things like common defence and foreign policy may be dull to some people.  I would point out that quite a few 'normal' people up to their shins in ditch water a hundred years ago, did end up quite quizzical as to how they ended up there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> The British guy who wrote article 50


This way of thinking fucks me right off. It really does.

The “British guy”? Why is that relevant?  His title and CV tells us more: Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, formerly one of the directors of Royal Dutch Shell, currently deputy chairman of Scottish Power.

So let’s try that again:

_The privately educated, Oxbridge Lord and company director who wrote article 50._ Yes, him.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> The British guy who wrote article 50


What, he insisted that May invoke article 50 before Britain had worked out its own negotiating positions?


----------



## Supine (Sep 21, 2018)

kabbes said:


> What, he insisted that May invoke article 50 before Britain had worked out its own negotiating positions?



I answered what you wrote which is not this question...

On this question I think it was idiotic to trigger it without having a clue what the end point and strategy were.


----------



## Kesher (Sep 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> (FWIW I am a staunch Remainer but am not in favour of a 2nd ref)



I would have thought  a staunch Remainer would be in favour of a 2nd Referendum


----------



## Winot (Sep 21, 2018)

Kesher said:


> I would have thought  a staunch Remainer would be in favour of a 2nd Referendum



I should have said I’m not in favour of a 3rd referendum. I wasn’t in favour of the 2nd either.


----------



## Maltin (Sep 21, 2018)

The FT have published a video, which at a minimum features some of the beautiful country of Ireland and the chance to see and hear Stephen Rea, giving someone’s view (not necessarily Rea’s as it is scripted) of the Irish border. Whether you agree with what he says or not, I think it’s beautifully done.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> I answered what you wrote which is not this question...
> 
> On this question I think it was idiotic to trigger it without having a clue what the end point and strategy were.


What I wrote is that nobody said we had to do it all in two years.  You were the one that interpreted that as meaning wholly post article 50.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Yes it has a lot of heft - so much so that many leftie-liberals are falling into line behind them without bothering to ask serious questions about a whole range of things - simply because it may get the result that they want. That's a total abandonment of political responsibility. To flop sleater's insistent whining on here about a tory brexit, this is to argue for a _tory remain. _
> 
> The labour stuff i think is 150 motions, which can represent as little as 150 very busy people.


The Tories are committed to brexit, there's no way they can offer up a 2nd ref.

Labour on the other hand could, and would get a few concessions from the EU on stuff like public ownership etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The Tories are committed to brexit, there's no way they can offer up a 2nd ref.
> 
> Labour on the other hand could, and would get a few concessions from the EU on stuff like public ownership etc.


So what about a labour brexit? Because it ain't labour or tories you really care about is it? It's brexit. You'd happily swallow a tory remain. Do you remember the official tory govt remain position before the referendum? Why are you insisting that they are now believe in leave?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The Tories are committed to brexit, there's no way they can offer up a 2nd ref.
> 
> Labour on the other hand could, and would get a few concessions from the EU on stuff like public ownership etc.


What would the question be?


----------



## Crispy (Sep 21, 2018)

Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So what about a labour brexit? Because it ain't labour or tories you really care about is it? It's brexit. You'd happily swallow a tory remain. Do you remember the official tory govt remain position before the referendum? Why are you insisting that they are now believe in leave?


I care about both, but I see brexit as damaging whoever is in charge.

May has had lots of trouble getting chequers through, never mind remain.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?



Larry the Cat being appointed chief negotiator


----------



## Crispy (Sep 21, 2018)

Finally some competence


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?


Extension?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 21, 2018)

The question isn’t to remain or not, ship has sailed. It’s whether folk want ‘no deal’ or membership of the economic area to allow us to keep trading and not live off canned food next year.

Future elections could be fought by parties wishing to show how proper leaving or proper rejoining could be done.

The public decided to leave, certainly, but they were told a deal would be easy. It’s not. It’s maybe a decade of work to replicate the arrangements, not just with the EU, but with the rest of the world.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I care about both, but I see brexit as damaging whoever is in charge.
> 
> May has had lots of trouble getting chequers through, never mind remain.


Seriously, the historical party of british capital - british capital which is massively behind remain and pulling all sorts of strings under the rubric of _the people - _ could never fall in line with that groups understanding of its self-interest?


----------



## sealion (Sep 21, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Larry the Cat being appointed chief negotiator


 of the E meow


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?



Resignation and a massive ‘fuck you’ to you all, pulling faces and making rude gestures as she does it.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?



Shock announcement that actually everything is fine, she has it all in hand, and nanananana she can't hear you say anything else so there.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What would the question be?


Choose between 

A) Leave with no deal
B) Stay


----------



## Crispy (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?


Face-saving bullshit is the favourite


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 21, 2018)

Power failure in the room she's due to make the speech in. A vision of post-Brexit Britain?


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 21, 2018)

let me be clear
In good faith
the will of the british people

blah blah fucking blah


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 21, 2018)

Unless she is there to commit hara-kiri I won't be watching


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> let me be clear
> In good faith
> the will of the british people
> 
> blah blah fucking blah



nothing has changed

strong and stable - oh bugger, who turned the lights out?


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

Supine said:


> I answered what you wrote which is not this question...
> 
> On this question I think it was idiotic to trigger it without having a clue what the end point and strategy were.


Pah where is your spirit of adventure... Heading off into the great unknown with just a colour scheme to guide you...


I bet you're one of people responsible for the deforestation if South America, just so you can clog up your kitchen drawers with instruction manuals


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Choose between
> 
> A) Leave with no deal
> B) Stay


It’s hard to tell when people are joking. Is that a serious answer?


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

neonwilderness said:


> Power failure in the room she's due to make the speech in. A vision of post-Brexit Britain?


On top of flying into Stansted.. Civil service can be very subtle


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Unless she is there to commit hara-kiri I won't be watching


Would you settle for her against a wall and a firing squad?


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 21, 2018)

She's said fuck all.  Insists the EU must adapt or come up with something that suits the UK better.

No deal here we come.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 21, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Lectern's out in Downing St. for a May statement in 25m. BBC cameras only. Anyone taking bets? Chequers blinkers on? No Deal? GE?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

A defiant Mrs May added: "I will not overturn the result of the referendum nor will I break up my country."

...OK great, but how exactly is that gonna work? Because no deal will cost you Scotland and quite possibly Northern Ireland and the only deal currently on the table is, um, no deal.

Maybe she's priming us for accepting whatever deal the EU offers however galling to the brexiteers or just plain crap for everyone. More likely she's just completely delusional.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2018)

Make the right noises before accepting a border, er inspection zone down the Irish sea.


----------



## tommers (Sep 21, 2018)

Can you get crossbows off of Amazon?

I've already got the leather stuff.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Make the right noises before accepting a border, er inspection zone down the Irish sea.



Love to see her get that past the DUP.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> A defiant Mrs May added: "I will not overturn the result of the referendum nor will I break up my country."
> 
> ...OK great, but how exactly is that gonna work? Because no deal will cost you Scotland and quite possibly Northern Ireland and the only deal currently on the table is, um, no deal.
> 
> Maybe she's priming us for accepting whatever deal the EU offers however galling to the brexiteers or just plan crap for everyone. More likely she's just completely delusional.



There's no strategy is there? She makes winnie the pooh look like machiavelli.  Its just short term can kicking all the way with her - and yeah - to the point of delusion. Shes like a David Brent - just comes out with whatever crap will get her out of her immediate mess - with no thought to the consequences. 
So we've just had a load of bluster cos tory party conference. But there is no way she can go for no deal - the entire political, business, administrative and media establishment will be screaming "NO!" - the pound has already taken a tumble. She will have to fold or resign or both.


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Make the right noises before accepting a border, er inspection zone down the Irish sea.


That type of Brexit sees Scotland follow NI out of the the UK in under 10 years...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

tommers said:


> Can you get crossbows off of Amazon?



You could, but they mysteriously sold out earlier today. Razor wire supplies are also looking perilous.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> She makes winnie the pooh look like machiavelli.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

gosub said:


> That type of Brexit sees Scotland follow NI out of the the UK in under 10 years...


Good.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 21, 2018)

Sterling is wrecked


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Sterling is wrecked



Should've got my holiday euros last week


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Make the right noises before accepting a border, er inspection zone down the Irish sea.



It's going to be in Holyhead. The island I live on is going to become one huge fucking car park for lorries.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Should've got my holiday euros last week


If you're serious the pound will rally next week as they'll (uk govt) buy up as much as they can to increase the value.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> If you're serious the pound will rally next week as they'll (uk govt) buy up as much as they can to increase the value.



Suits me as I get paid next week.

Although at this rate I might as well get paid in seashells.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 21, 2018)

Corbyn calling on EU to stop their political games.

"The political games from both the EU and our Government need to end"

Is he just fucking stupid? Can't he see this open goal? Why is he backing up Tory spin?


----------



## andysays (Sep 21, 2018)

gosub said:


> That type of Brexit sees Scotland follow NI out of the the UK in under 10 years...


I'd be interested in seeing the thought behind both of those. They may be possibilities, but neither are automatic consequences, IMO. 
And neither are necessarily a bad thing, TBH...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Corbyn calling on EU to stop their political games.
> 
> "The political games from both the EU and our Government need to end"
> 
> Is he just fucking stupid? Can't he see this open goal? Why is he backing up Tory spin?


Is he not right?


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'd be interested in seeing the thought behind both of those. They may be possibilities, but neither are automatic consequences, IMO.
> And neither are necessarily a bad thing, TBH...


Queen will do her nut.

Cheery picking bits of the UK that have a stronger tie to EU, especially NI which has stronger affinity with Scotland than other bits of the UK, and Sturgeon will be calling for the same deal ...England then doesn't oblige giving indy Scot the boost it needed to get over the line, in the referendum SNP would call claiming situation was now substantially different than when last one was had


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 21, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Should've got my holiday euros last week


I wish I could have bought my retirement Euros in early 2016 ...


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Is he not right?



No.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> No.


Ok. No EU shenanigans. OK.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2018)

gosub said:


> Queen will do her nut.
> 
> Cheery picking bits of the UK that have a stronger tie to EU, especially NI which has stronger affinity with Scotland than other bits of the UK, and Sturgeon will be calling for the same deal ...England then doesn't oblige giving indy Scot the boost it needed to get over the line, in the referendum SNP would call claiming situation was now substantially different than when last one was had



And then Blighty is encircled! I see what the Hun is up to.


----------



## andysays (Sep 21, 2018)

gosub said:


> Queen will do her nut.
> 
> Cheery picking bits of the UK that have a stronger tie to EU, especially NI which has stronger affinity with Scotland than other bits of the UK, and Sturgeon will be calling for the same deal ...England then doesn't oblige giving indy Scot the boost it needed to get over the line, in the referendum SNP would call claiming situation was now substantially different than when last one was had


Not very convincing


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I wish I could have bought my retirement Euros in early 2016 ...



My mum bought a shitload before the referendum. Canny old bat that one.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Is he just fucking stupid? Can't he see this open goal? Why is he backing up Tory spin?



He's calling out both sides as far as I can see.

 Tusk is being a right cunt here, that much is beyond doubt. Look at the policies of his own government and you'll see that 'cunt' is his one and only setting.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Jesus - just fucking swallow it:







ugh beyond ugh


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Do you remember the official tory govt remain position before the referendum?






not-bono-ever said:


> Sterling is wrecked


Standard, we like our drink up here.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> Not very convincing


Scotland found out this week that those WM pricks had told the EU that any deal for NI had to be one that *couldn't* also apply to Scotland.

Scotland's just about ready to go, we're just waiting on the signal.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


>




Fantastic (need to stop watching, getting hooked) 

(i hear his role in mandy is quite up there with this)


----------



## Winot (Sep 21, 2018)

mwgdrwg said:


> Corbyn calling on EU to stop their political games.
> 
> "The political games from both the EU and our Government need to end"
> 
> Is he just fucking stupid? Can't he see this open goal? Why is he backing up Tory spin?



I've just seen this described as the 'second mouse gets the cheese' theory, which seems about right as descriptions go.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> I've just seen this described as the 'second mouse gets the cheese' theory, which seems about right as descriptions go.


What's the cheese in your view?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Scotland found out this week that those WM pricks had told the EU that any deal for NI had to be one that *couldn't* also apply to Scotland.
> 
> Scotland's just about ready to go, we're just waiting on the signal.



I'd be careful about UDI. The British Army conducted exercises this year centered around a breakaway region.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> I'd be careful about UDI. The British Army conducted exercises this year centered around a breakaway region.


#indyref2 #Dissolvetheunion


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

This anti-somerset stuff has to end. I'm sick of it. We're all sick of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Chequers goes pop.


Oh very good


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> It _could_ turn out as a political masterstroke for labour if they call for a 2nd ref at the right time  - half the political establishment would be grovelling in gratitude for and it could potentially give labour some political cover to do evil corbynite things like build some more council houses. Meanwhile the tory would be royally fucked - brexiteers would hate them for blowing it, remainers would want a 2nd ref, everyone else would see them as utterly incompetent. Death spiral etc



Just picking up on this logic, are there not some flaws in the argument that Corbyn could maybe persuade the establishment that a little bit of "Socialism" might be ok in exchange for retaining EU membership, how likely is it that the ruling class would be both mollified and grateful and could it potentially cause Labour some issues in Leave constituencies that voted Labour last year in massive numbers?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh very good


He def made it up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He def made it up.




Didn't know it'd been all over the place yesterday


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This anti-somerset stuff has to end. I'm sick of it. We're all sick of it.


No blood for cheddar!


----------



## rekil (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What's the cheese in your view?


Briemain?


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2018)

Hers's a thought.

So we crash out of the EU and then Scotland have an indy referendum which they win and then re-join the EU.

As we are all British passport holders, could I as an English person get a Scottish, and so EU passport?

What's the view?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 21, 2018)

copliker said:


> Briemain?


Used to like you. Looked up to you.


----------



## andysays (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Hers's a thought.
> 
> So we crash out of the EU and then Scotland have an indy referendum which they win and then re-join the EU.
> 
> ...


Despite what DexterTCN might want to believe, Scotland won't be having an Indy ref on 30 March 2019, and if they eventually do leave the UK, it will take the new country some time to negotiate admission to the EU.

In the run-up to the previous Indy ref, I think I remember that the SNP were suggesting that anyone with one grandparent born in Scotland could claim citizenship. I would qualify under those rules, don't know about you...


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He def made it up.


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> Despite what DexterTCN might want to believe, Scotland won't be having an Indy ref on 30 March 2019, and if they eventually do leave the UK, it will take the new country some time to negotiate admission to the EU.
> 
> In the run-up to the previous Indy ref, I think I remember that the SNP were suggesting that anyone with one grandparent born in Scotland could claim citizenship. I would qualify under those rules, don't know about you...


It'll do EFTA in half the time


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> Despite what DexterTCN might want to believe, Scotland won't be having an Indy ref on 30 March 2019, and if they eventually do leave the UK, it will take the new country some time to negotiate admission to the EU.
> 
> In the run-up to the previous Indy ref, I think I remember that the SNP were suggesting that anyone with one grandparent born in Scotland could claim citizenship. I would qualify under those rules, don't know about you...


It's a 300 page form written in Gaelic.

That's what we've been working on these last 4 years


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Hers's a thought.
> 
> So we crash out of the EU and then Scotland have an indy referendum which they win and then re-join the EU.
> 
> ...


Move to Scotland. This makes you a Scot.

Unless you have some other claim, like Scottish parents, grandparents etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Move to Scotland. This makes you a Scot.
> 
> Unless you have some other claim, like Scottish parents, grandparents etc.


... A tartan named after you...


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> ... A tartan named after you...


The Ancient Danny, in my case.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Hers's a thought.
> 
> So we crash out of the EU and then Scotland have an indy referendum which they win and then re-join the EU.
> 
> ...


If Scotland breaks away from the UK then I imagine some deal will have to be agreed, I would suspect people born there would automatically  be Scottish citizens and people living there but not born there would get a choice.
I suspect Scotland will be covered by the same rules as Ireland now, Irish citizens can come here, work and vote as if they were British.
Part of the GFA was that anyone born in NI could apply for Irish citizenship if they wanted it, it was meant to be a sop to Sinn Fein but now its actually worth something and loads of Northern Irish are applying for Irish citizenship.
After the Brexit vote, my daughters boyfriend who is from Eire but has lived here for almost 7 years checked up on British citizenship for him and Irish citizenship for her. 
They did neither even though getting British citizenship for him was straightforward it was ridiculously expensive something like £1400 so he isn't bothering. Irish citizenship for her would mean them getting married (which would please my wife) and going and living in Ireland for 3 years (which wouldn't) 
I would imagine Scotland would be the same kind of deal so no Scots citizenship for you pal sorry.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2018)

My sister is Scottish, has no one thought about siblings? No. Fucking scum.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My sister is Scottish, has no one thought about siblings? No. Fucking scum.


How can your sister be Scottish and you not?


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My sister is Scottish, has no one thought about siblings? No. Fucking scum.


How does that work then?


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Move to Scotland. This makes you a Scot.
> 
> Unless you have some other claim, like Scottish parents, grandparents etc.


I like shortbread, will that be enough?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 21, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's a 300 page form written in Gaelic.
> 
> That's what we've been working on these last 4 years


Picts speaking the language of the Celtic oppressor disgust me!


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 21, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> How can your sister be Scottish and you not?





A380 said:


> How does that work then?


At a guess, his sister was born in Scotland.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> How does that work then?





MickiQ said:


> How can your sister be Scottish and you not?



Born in Glasgow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> My sister is Scottish, has no one thought about siblings? No. Fucking scum.


what are you after, compo?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2018)

I may well have been conceived in Glasgow, as a god fearing Catholic surely life begins at the moment of conception?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> I like shortbread, will that be enough?


. Not on its own.

Scroll down to citizenship: Scotland's Future


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I may well have been conceived in Glasgow, as a god fearing Catholic surely life begins at the moment of conception?


Is your real name Gorbals?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Is your real name Gorbals?


As long as it's not ibrox


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Is your real name Gorbals?



Milngavie


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 21, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> . Not on its own.
> 
> Scroll down to citizenship: Scotland's Future


Other than the first two rules which are obviously a special time limited case those are the same rules the UK operates


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 21, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Other than the first two rules which are obviously a special time limited case those are the same rules the UK operates


Wouldn’t surprise me.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 21, 2018)

Knowledge and appreciation of the following tune obvs mandatory:


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Milngavie


Paradise parkhead strasse


----------



## gosub (Sep 21, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I may well have been conceived in Glasgow, as a god fearing Catholic surely life begins at the moment of conception?


Remember being done for littering dropped fag butt outside flat. Not been done before and was around time of indy ref.  2as a bit freaked out when they asked town of birth... Conception would have sent me off my nut


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2018)

.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 21, 2018)

A380 said:


> Hers's a thought.
> 
> So we crash out of the EU and then Scotland have an indy referendum which they win and then re-join the EU.
> 
> ...



That only works if Scotland becomes 'rump uk', ie. England & Wales and whatever other bits are left leave the UK.

I think it would be good for the Scotland to have a referendum on whether England&Wales get thrown out of the UK.

Then you can have your Euro-UK passport.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 21, 2018)

teuchter said:


> That only works if Scotland becomes 'rump uk', ie. England & Wales and whatever other bits are left leave the UK.
> 
> I think it would be good for the Scotland to have a referendum on whether England&Wales get thrown out of the UK.
> 
> Then you can have your Euro-UK passport.


All this fuss over a passport


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> , I think I remember that the SNP were suggesting that anyone with one grandparent born in Scotland could claim citizenship.


Nah, I think your confusing that with their rule for eligible goalkeepers in the 70's.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 21, 2018)

I'm neither Irish, Scottish or Welsh. 

Can all this *ultra-tedious* Brexit/Remain bollocks just leave me alone soon please?  

It's all so fucking boring


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 22, 2018)

Bad luck William m, you have AT LEAST 6 more months of it - and that is remarkable optimism on my part.
Basically, this is such an unholy clusterfuck it will probably be the only issue in British politics for the next 2 years


----------



## paolo (Sep 22, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> tbf it was Cameron who fucked up by offering to hold a referendum due to pressure from the r/w of the tory party, then the whole thing was a meaningless shit show from start to finish.
> 
> ''The people'' didn't fuck up; we engaged with the process we were given in the only way was could - voting. The people who fucked it up are the people who planned it and executed the fiasco happening around us to this day.
> 
> It's completely out of order for anyone to blame ''the people'' for any of this.



Probably the best summary I've read on here for ages.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 22, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's the poisonous nature of this particular debate. Politics is stripped away and one is branded either a remainer or an exiter.  Like that is the important division here.


Never done any such thing. In fact I've specifically said that I consider the brexiteer/remainer nonsense liberal garbage at it worst. 

I've said time and again that I can understand why some socialists voted remain and I consider them comrades. But there has been virtually no arguments on this thread backing remain from a socialist perspective, it's been a continually vomit forth of liberalism. The same liberalism that has done so much damage to people in the UK, in the EU and in the world at large. "Leftists" that are willing to push liberalism in order to stop the UK leaving the EU, that are willing to cosy up to Macron, Merkel, Cable, Soubrey aren't my comrades, they are part of the problem.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 22, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> Bad luck William m, you have AT LEAST 6 more months of it - and that is remarkable optimism on my part.
> Basically, this is such an unholy clusterfuck it will probably be the only issue in British politics for the next 2 years


Very optimistic; I’d say that many Remainians appear still only at the third stage of grief (“anger & bargaining”), with at least one more temporal stage until they fully alight on the “upward turn” of the fully fledged process of campaigning for _*Brejoin*_!
Reckon the political recriminations will see many of us out tbh...looks like William is going to find matters political *ultra-tedious* for some considerable time to come


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> But there has been virtually no arguments on this thread backing remain from a socialist perspective, it's


And I have seen no good arguments from so-called socialists on this thread why proceeding with something which will  result in higher prices, less money for the welfare state, and pressure for convergence in workplace and environmental standards towards those of the developing world, helps the working class.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 22, 2018)

Then you've not being looking very hard. People have made such arguments - for example that leaving the EU provides greater opportunity for nationalisation of industries (you might disagree with that argument but it's been made).

Though why an anti-union fuckwit like you would be interested in socialist arguments I'm not sure.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Then you've not being looking very hard. People have made such arguments - for example that leaving the EU provides greater opportunity for nationalisation of industries (you might disagree with that argument but it's been made).
> 
> Though why an anti-union fuckwit like you would be interested in socialist arguments I'm not sure.


It's always the higher prices that these private school types seem to think is the killer point isn't it. That's pretty telling.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 22, 2018)

Nationalisation is not prohibited in the EU. Even Macron nationalised a shipyard last year.

There is particular legislation about railways, but it does not prevent the state running the railways. The railways have to be open to the bids of private companies. As they are all shit at it, they could be ignored. A Tory Govt could tear that up, but then they could tear up a nationalisation.

Nationalisations are hardly a key objective if all else remains the same, i.e. shares are respected. To nationalise profit making areas means making Lord Fat Cunt and all the other investors very rich. Better to regulate the living daylights out of their profits and use those to nationalise ‘failing’ areas and offer lower prices.

Set beside risking an extension to austerity due to recession due to leaving in a hurry is a gamble.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

Every thing has to be open to market competition within a set of legal conditions that favours markets. Nationalisation and operating as a non profit merit good is dead in the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Nationalisation is not prohibited in the EU. Even Macron nationalised a shipyard last year.
> 
> There is particular legislation about railways, but it does not prevent the state running the railways. The railways have to be open to the bids of private companies. As they are all shit at it, they could be ignored. A Tory Govt could tear that up, but then they could tear up a nationalisation.
> 
> ...


This  of course, was Tony Blair's vision  of how the future would work. Thanks.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This  of course, was Tony Blair's vision  of how the future would work. Thanks.



Sure. I could simply say your vision was similar to so and so discredited person. It’s a good game of ping pong, but not a discussion.


----------



## Chz (Sep 22, 2018)

Exactly. No-one can realistically argue that SNCF isn't state run. You have to jump through a hoop or two to nationalise your railway, but it isn't difficult.

You have a state owned "private" company, and then rig the bidding process such that only that company can realistically meet the contract requirements.

Though as someone pointed out yesterday, the state run railways were shit, and the private railways are shit. So maybe the problem isn't the railways. It's us.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Sure. I could simply say your vision was similar to so and so discredited person. It’s a good game of ping pong, but not a discussion.


Go on then.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

Chz said:


> Exactly. No-one can realistically argue that SNCF isn't state run. You have to jump through a hoop or two to nationalise your railway, but it isn't difficult.
> 
> You have a state owned "private" company, and then rig the bidding process such that only that company can realistically meet the contract requirements.
> 
> Though as someone pointed out yesterday, the state run railways were shit, and the private railways are shit. So maybe the problem isn't the railways. It's us.


Highlight a state run utility that has been nationalised in the EU and ran on a non-profit basis please.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Sure. I could simply say your vision was similar to so and so discredited person. It’s a good game of ping pong, but not a discussion.


Is this a serious reply? You outline how something should work, i point out this situation is exactly how it works or doesn't now - openly said at the time, we let you run and use the profits for good. You say shut up. In effect it's a demand to ignore reality.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 22, 2018)

This is a good example of the liberalism that has been prevalent on this thread.


Mr Moose said:


> Nationalisation is not prohibited in the EU. Even Macron nationalised a shipyard last year.
> 
> There is particular legislation about railways, but it does not prevent the state running the railways. The railways have to be open to the bids of private companies. As they are all shit at it, they could be ignored. A Tory Govt could tear that up, but then they could tear up a nationalisation.


The EUs long standing _political_ opposition to publicly owned industries is reduced to a _legal_ debate.*



Mr Moose said:


> Nationalisations are hardly a key objective if all else remains the same, i.e. shares are respected. To nationalise profit making areas means making Lord Fat Cunt and all the other investors very rich


Nonsense, returning control of industries to the state (or ideally the workers) doesn't have to mean paying off the thieves. Of course "Lord Fat Cunt and all the other investors" are among the the loudest voices arguing for remain, I wonder why that could be.



Mr Moose said:


> Set beside risking an extension to austerity due to recession due to leaving in a hurry is a gamble.


And we're back to "don't upset the markets", great. "Austerity" wasn't, and won't be, imposed because of a recession, it was imposed because of political choices. By (implicitly) making the attacks of capital the "natural" consequence of a crisis you are accepting liberalism. 


*Even if we do restrict the debate to the legal/regularly framework it's the EU opposition to anti-marketisation is clear. They might not strictly ban nationalisation but the laws/regulation/policies are specifically designed to restrict the running of public services as public services.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> People have made such arguments - for example that leaving the EU provides greater opportunity for nationalisation of industries (you might disagree with that argument but it's been made)



Hmm... an island. With nationalised industries. And huge obstacles to trading with its largest natural trading partner. Sounds a bit like Cuba. Good luck selling that vision on the doorstep.


----------



## Santino (Sep 22, 2018)

If you like Russia so much why don't you go and live there?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 22, 2018)

Oh no, nationalised industries! 
Not that keen on Cuba personally but if it gives us the opportunity to send pricks like you to do hard labour, well that's a point in it's favour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Hmm... an island. With nationalised industries. And huge obstacles to trading with its largest natural trading partner. Sounds a bit like Cuba. Good luck selling that vision on the doorstep.


Where's the British revolution preceding the imposition of the eu's blockade? Don't see may going "history will absolve me" after a failed raid on the cops' arsenal at kentish town. The cuba thing's nothing like our situation. Not least because fidel castro and ché guevara competent in comparison with our miserable government


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Oh no, nationalised industries!
> Not that keen on Cuba personally but if it gives us the opportunity to send pricks like you to do hard labour, well that's a point in it's favour.


South georgia will be the venice of the antarctic


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Where's the British revolution preceding the imposition of the eu's blockade?


Give it time. Nothing would come as a surprise these days.


Pickman's model said:


> The cuba thing's nothing like our situation.


The 'socialist' lexit vision proposed by Redsquirrel and others certainly is - or at least a move in that direction.

Wherein I ask, why is Cuba so poor, with thousands of people risking death in rickety rafts each year to leave it?

They did everything right, according to Redsquirrel - nationalised all industries, banged the liberals up in jail, fucked off their main trading partner...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Give it time. Nothing would come as a surprise these days.
> 
> The 'socialist' lexit vision proposed by Redsquirrel and others certainly is - or at least a move in that direction.
> 
> ...


Yeh right


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

On the scale of hysterical nonsense I'll score him a seven or so. For a higher score next time try citing North Korea or Venezuela.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Highlight a state run utility that has been nationalised in the EU and ran on a non-profit basis please.


Network Rail.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

. Do you know the actual story behind the Railtrack collapse Wolveryeti? Y'know, the bit where it went into administration to dodge liabilities after years of (eventually fatal) monopoly piss-taking, followed by the government trying and failing to find another buyer before eventually founding Network Rail to fill the void? As in, every effort was made to keep it private with government intervention being the last possible option considered?

Cos I'll be honest, it's not really a good example for the point you're trying to make, being less about "nationalisation" than "picking up after the rich scumbags who'd ripped everyone off then legged it".


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Nationalisation is not prohibited in the EU.


It pretty much is. Unless there's a strategic threat to a nation-state. The passport printing office in Germany is the only real precedent where the eu have allowed re-nationalisation.


Mr Moose said:


> Even Macron nationalised a shipyard last year.


He didn't. The Italians are on board and private capital still runs STX.
Question for written answer to the Commission Rule 130


> Subject:  Nationalisation of the Saint-Nazaire shipyard in France
> President Emmanuel Macron’s government has recently decided to nationalise the STX France shipyard to avoid it being bought and controlled by the Italian company, Fincantieri. France has defended its actions, indicating that the nationalisation process is a temporary move designed to protect the strategic interests of France and to safeguard jobs.
> Since the European single market is vital to the EU, it comes as a surprise that a protectionist and nationalist operation such as the one which has taken place in France has not been challenged by the Commission or ruled to be in breach of EU competition rules.
> In this case, the Commission’s failure to react is in stark contrast with the decision it made a few years ago when it deemed certain tax measures to be unlawful state aid. This decision (later repealed by the CJEU) undoubtedly contributed to the failure of several Spanish shipyards and to the fact that they are still going under today.
> ...


Answer given by Ms Vestager on behalf of the Commission


> As the Honourable Members may well know from public sources, the French and Italian authorities announced a shared ownership agreement on 27 September 2017.
> 
> The Treaty rules on neutrality of public or private ownership allow ultimate ownership and control by Italy or by France through the acquisition of existing shares owned by STX Korea in liquidation, without this being subject to review under state aid law since the purchase of existing shares held by a third party does not as such provide any fresh State resources to the company.
> 
> ...


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Afaik it "is" possible to nationalise an industry in the EU, under a loophole related to national security, but the idea that this would hold over time or apply to anything but a tiny percentage of industries in any circumstances other than emergencies is ludicrous. The evidence is entirely in the other direction.


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Chz said:


> Exactly. No-one can realistically argue that SNCF isn't state run. You have to jump through a hoop or two to nationalise your railway, but it isn't difficult.
> 
> You have a state owned "private" company, and then rig the bidding process such that only that company can realistically meet the contract requirements.
> 
> Though as someone pointed out yesterday, the state run railways were shit, and the private railways are shit. So maybe the problem isn't the railways. It's us.


There are still a couple of nationalised industries across Europes.. _Re-nationalising_ is the tricky bit.
The EU is _opening up _industries for the markets (capital). They don't like that door being closed again


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Chz said:


> You have a state owned "private" company, and then rig the bidding process such that only that company can realistically meet the contract requirements.


Why would you even hold a bidding process ffs if your only intention is to hand all the contracts to the national company. bit of a waste of resources no?


----------



## JHE (Sep 22, 2018)

Even Theresa May sometimes does something good.



It would have been better to have said this a long time ago, but better late than never.

I hope that Simon Manley, the Ambassador in Madrid, and British diplomats in other EU countries finally stop pretending there is no significant risk of a no-deal Brexit and make it their top priority to push EU govts to make similar commitments to resident Britons.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> . Do you know the actual story behind the Railtrack collapse Wolveryeti? Y'know, the bit where it went into administration to dodge liabilities after years of (eventually fatal) monopoly piss-taking, followed by the government trying and failing to find another buyer before eventually founding Network Rail to fill the void? As in, every effort was made to keep it private with government intervention being the last possible option considered?
> 
> Cos I'll be honest, it's not really a good example for the point you're trying to make, being less about "nationalisation" than "picking up after the rich scumbags who'd ripped everyone off then legged it".


You've managed to miss the point quite spectacularly.

It was a private sector company.

It was nationalised.

It is now run on a not for profit basis - and indeed gets an indirect subsidy worth billions from the state in the form of subsidised fares.

All of which BA reckons we are banned from doing because of umm... the evil EU neoliberalism or something.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

No, you missed mine. It was a private company which collapsed and could not be replaced like for like_._ The idea that the government stepping can be some sort of pro-active power move endorsed by the EU is meaningless in this context.

The real question is what has happened over the course of the last few decades? How many industries have been nationalised by the many left-wing governments that have been in charge over that time? The movement of direction, as I said earlier, is all the other way. You can cant and squirm as much as you like. And I should note btw that I'm no cheerleader for nationalisation per se, it comes with myriad problems of its own, but pretending that nationalisation is hunky dory within the EU is total rubbish.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> How many industries have been nationalised by the many left-wing governments that have been in charge over that time?


Parties do and do not do lots of things out of political expedience. My question is: What is the link to the EU? Where does it say in EU law that you can't nationalise?


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Naive sort of chap aren't you. Or possibly just deliberately obtuse, who knows.

As I understand it, EU law can be interpreted one of two ways. Article 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU requires that markets be liberalised (this essentially means privatisation) wherever possible. It is arguable that States technically can nationalise specific arenas on the grounds of national security etc so in theory nationalisation could happen if you draw on that possibility. But the _reality_ is that this does not happen and has not for the last three decades. There is no example of a sustained policy of nationalisation happening, regardless of how left wing a particular government gets, anywhere in the EU and in fact the opposite is true, expanding privatisation has been a consistent norm regardless of nominal ruling parties for most of that time.

Now I imagine a dreary argumentative type could drone on for days about the ins and outs of the relevant legal documents and "prove" almost anything is possible within EU law if they went full into the details, but this does not change what _actually happens_. That is down to systemic issues of how the EU exists as a political and trading entity, which are in turn what drive the way in which the law gets implemented/enforced in practice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Chz said:


> Exactly. No-one can realistically argue that SNCF isn't state run. You have to jump through a hoop or two to nationalise your railway, but it isn't difficult.
> 
> You have a state owned "private" company, and then rig the bidding process such that only that company can realistically meet the contract requirements.


M'learned friends would love that


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> You've managed to miss the point quite spectacularly.
> 
> It was a private sector company.
> 
> ...



You're presumably allowed to nationalise anything the private sector doesn't want, as in that situation there's nobody who is going to sue you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

JHE said:


> Even Theresa May sometimes does something good.
> 
> 
> 
> It would have been better to have said this a long time ago, but better late than never.




I'm sure I'm not the only person who knows many people with EU nationalities who are shitting bricks about their future and wouldn't trust a word out of Theresa May's mouth. She could have taken steps to enshrine in law the rights of those currently resident in the UK, she hasn't done that. She was personally responsible for the hostile environment, the windrush deportations and numerous other crimes against UK residents based solely on their background or nationality.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only person who knows many people with EU nationalities who are shitting bricks about their future and wouldn't trust a word out of Theresa May's mouth. She could have taken steps to enshrine in law the rights of those currently resident in the UK, she hasn't done that. She was responsible, personally responsible, for the hostile environment, the windrush deportations and numerous other crimes against UK residents based solely on their background or nationality.


Absolutely this. The idea that anybody on these boards would be siding with May in a 'we' or 'us' or 'our' sort of way is absurd and very depressing.


----------



## andysays (Sep 22, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Absolutely this. The idea that anybody on these boards would be siding with May in a 'we' or 'us' or 'our' sort of way is absurd and very depressing.


It's also quite ridiculous. 

Who do you think is 'siding with May'?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's also quite ridiculous.
> 
> Who do you think is 'siding with May'?


Those people who agreed with her remain vote I think


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Those people who agreed with her remain vote I think



Do you actually think that or do you merely have an axe that's gone unground for a whole 45 seconds?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> It's also quite ridiculous.
> 
> Who do you think is 'siding with May'?


All the posters, and if you track back through this thread you'll find plenty, who speak of 'we' and 'us' and 'our' when talking about the negotiations for brexit. I've pulled up one or two, but no point in pulling up all of them. On other subjects on here, such things are pulled up rather sharply. On this subject not so much.


----------



## andysays (Sep 22, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> All the posters, and if you track back through this thread you'll find plenty, who speak of 'we' and 'us' and 'our' when talking about the negotiations for brexit. I've pulled up one or two, but no point in pulling up all of them. On other subjects on here, such things are pulled up rather sharply. On this subject not so much.


Can you just cut to the chase and name some/any, because believe it or not I have better things to do with my evening than read through every post on the thread containing the words 'we', 'us' or 'our' in the hope that someone is actually using one of them in the sense you suggest?


----------



## JHE (Sep 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only person who knows many people with EU nationalities who are shitting bricks about their future and wouldn't trust a word out of Theresa May's mouth. She could have taken steps to enshrine in law the rights of those currently resident in the UK, she hasn't done that. She was personally responsible for the hostile environment, the windrush deportations and numerous other crimes against UK residents based solely on their background or nationality.



The policy announced by May (leaked some weeks ago, but now officially stated) should be put into law as soon as possible.

The other thing that must be done urgently is to get policies from EU27 govts about the situation of British people living in those countries if there is a no-deal Brexit.

For Britons in the EU27, statements like the one May has finally made would be a welcome step forward.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2018)

JHE said:


> Even Theresa May sometimes does something good.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




"Your rights will be protected." My fucking arse. Fuck her.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 22, 2018)

May being "perfectly clear" on EU citizen rights? Def time to get very worried.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> "Your rights will be protected." My fucking arse. Fuck her.


Yeh cos she's done so much for people's rights in the uk


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2018)

The EU issues threatening language about maintaining the integrity of the UK so she counters with this veiled threat.


----------



## JHE (Sep 22, 2018)

What veiled threat?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> "Your rights will be protected." My fucking arse. Fuck her.



This from the woman who wanted to scrap the human rights act because it made it too difficult to deport people.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

JHE said:


> What veiled threat?



She's reminding everyone that she still has three million cards in her hand.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2018)

Each side raises what they see to be the greatest leverage over the other. Ignore the guarantee talk; this is from a person not disposed to human rights protections.


----------



## JHE (Sep 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> She's reminding everyone that she still has three million cards in her hand.



Ah, I see. Promising that people will retain their rights is really a threat to remove those rights.

I wish the Spanish govt would 'threaten' the 250,000 Britons in Spain in the same way.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Article 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU requires that markets be liberalised (this essentially means privatisation)


Article 176 is about the European Regional Development Fund (link), so I don't see the relevance. I think you are talking about the state aid articles (107 and 108) but I disagree that liberalisation = privatisation or that these articles are about imposing privatisation. What I think they prevent is publicly owned companies distorting competition through their behaviour. So basically it is meant to prevent governments from abusing market power to impose their own monopolies where competition is otherwise possible rather than nationalising per se. This wouldn't really apply to most of the industries Labour wants to nationalise (like water and energy networks) - there is no competition to distort.



Rob Ray said:


> But the _reality_ is that this does not happen and has not for the last three decades. There is no example of a sustained policy of nationalisation happening, regardless of how left wing a particular government gets, anywhere in the EU


Perhaps because it isn't a very popular policy, or because the governments say they are left wing, but actually aren't? Can you at least point to a court case or something in which the EU has thwarted a planned nationalisation?

I have pointed to Railtrack / National Rail, which did not raise any issues from the EU over nationalisation, despite a very controversial (at the time) process in which Railtrack was put into special administration by the government acting over the head of the rail regulator at the time, and there being other interested private sector bidders apart from Network Rail.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> industries Labour wants to nationalise (like water and energy networks) - there is no competition to distort.



The wonders of coupon clipping financial capitalism create markets in production, distribution and retail. All a load of fucking shit, but "markets".


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> *Where does it say in EU law that you can't nationalise?*


Article 120


> Member States shall conduct their economic policies with a view to contributing to the achievement of the objectives of the Union, as defined in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, and in the context of the broad guidelines referred to in Article 121(2). *The Member States and the Union shall act in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition, favouring an efficient allocation of resources, and in compliance with the principles set out in Article 119.*


Article 119


> 1. For the purposes set out in Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, the activities of the Member States and the Union shall include, as provided in the Treaties, the adoption of an economic policy which is based on the close coordination of Member States’ economic policies, on the internal market and on the definition of common objectives, and conducted in accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition.
> 
> 2. Concurrently with the foregoing, and as provided in the Treaties and in accordance with the procedures set out therein, these activities shall include a single currency, the euro, and the definition and conduct of a single monetary policy and exchange-rate policy the primary objective of both of which shall be to maintain price stability and, without prejudice to this objective, to support the general economic policies in the Union, i*n accordance with the principle of an open market economy with free competition*.
> 
> 3. These activities of the Member States and the Union shall entail compliance with the following guiding principles: stable prices, sound public finances and monetary conditions and a sustainable balance of payments.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Article 120


What's your point? Is there anything in that snippet which talks about banning nationalisation?

Or is it national monopolies which you're advocating for? And if so - can you explain why, which ones, and to what end (and why the EU would prevent them)?


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> So basically it is meant to prevent governments from abusing market power to impose their own monopolies where competition is otherwise possible rather than nationalising per se. This wouldn't really apply to most of the industries Labour wants to nationalise (like water and energy networks) - there is no competition to distort.



Apologies, 106:



> Undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest or having the character of a revenue-producing monopoly shall be subject to the rules contained in the Treaties, in particular to the rules on competition, in so far as the application of such rules does not obstruct the performance, in law or in fact, of the particular tasks assigned to them. The development of trade must not be affected to such an extent as would be contrary to the interests of the Union.



And yes, as I already noted, you can make a great deal of legal conjecture look very much like the go-ahead to nationalise away, if the thing you're most interested in is winning interminable legal arguments. But as I say, the fact is that in practice privatisation has been standardised and enforced as practice throughout the EU, even though it is deeply unpopular and there is overwhelming evidence that doing so "distorts" (significantly increases) the amounts we actually pay.



Wolveryeti said:


> I have pointed to Railtrack / National Rail, which did not raise any issues over nationalisation, despite a very controversial (at the time) process in which Railtrack was put into special administration by the government acting over the head of the rail regulator at the time, and which also made it quite clear that no private bids for the company were welcome.



WTF are you talking about? Railtrack ran down its service to the point of causing a fatal accident, paid its shareholders hundreds of millions of quid, declared half a billion in losses, demanded £4bn to fill the funding gap they'd blown in their own company and fucked off when they didn't get it, the only "controversy" about going into administration (other than their own shareholders' self-serving whining) was how on Earth they were allowed to get away with that shit. As for "no bids being welcome", the only bid from Swiftrail having dropped out fund investors were quite clear that they wouldn't take on a dysfunctional company with massive debts. It wasn't a matter of welcomes, it was a matter of profit, as always.



Wolveryeti said:


> Perhaps because it isn't a very popular policy, or because the governments say they are left wing, but actually aren't? Can you at least point to a court case or something in which the EU has thwarted a planned nationalisation?



I can go two better. Royal Mail, NHS and British Rail privatisations have all been initiated because of EU laws and regulations. Tbh I'm not sure why you even asked, it's not like there's a shortage of examples. As for whether it's a popular policy or not, nationalisation has consistently been the preferred public option for most of the last two decades. The question of whether governments say they are left but aren't meanwhile is a red herring - what governments always are is _pragmatic_. Tory governments will nationalise and Labour governments will privatise, it depends on the balance of forces. The EU is a force pushing a particular outcome, which is pro-privatisation (as European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker has previously been very clear about for example).


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> What's your point? Is there anything in that snippet which talks about banning nationalisation?
> 
> Or is it national monopolies which you're advocating for? And if so - can you explain why, which ones, and to what end (and why the EU would prevent them)?


Maybe you should explain how a government can lawfully operate a nationalised industry in accordance with the principles of open markets & free competition without making themselves liable to lawsuits from privately owned industrial superpowers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Apologies, 106:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> But as I say, the fact is that in practice privatisation has been standardised and enforced as practice throughout the EU.


You've totally failed to provide any evidence of this. Energy/Post in France - state owned. Rail in Germany - state owned. Water in Paris - remunicipalised in 2008. The real target of your ire should be the UK political parties of our country that enacted and accepted these privatisations - not the EU.



Rob Ray said:


> I can go two better. Royal Mail, NHS and British Rail privatisations have all been initiated because of EU laws and regulations.


The NHS is privatised? What are you smoking, bro?

And La Poste, Deutsche Bahn - both owned by the French and German governments. Same EU regulations. Different outcome.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> You've totally failed to provide any evidence of this. Energy/Post in France - state owned. Rail in Germany - state owned. Water in Paris - remunicipalised in 2008. The real target of your ire should be the UK political parties of our country that enacted and accepted these privatisations - not the EU.
> 
> 
> The NHS is privatised? What are you smoking, bro?
> ...


Yeh. If something is initiated it may not yet be complete. Remunicipalisation is by definition not the same as nationalisation. State monopolies may not have to be privatised, but try doing things the other way round and obstacles start appearing.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> You've totally failed to provide any evidence of this.



LMGTFY



Wolveryeti said:


> The NHS is privatised? What are you smoking, bro?



Jesus. You really don't know anything huh. I even provided you a direct link with an overview of the situation ffs.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Maybe you should explain how a government can lawfully operate a nationalised industry in accordance with the principles of open markets & free competition without making themselves liable to lawsuits from privately owned industrial superpowers.


Dunno - ask Network Rail. Or La Poste. Or Deutsche Bahn.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Jesus. You really don't know anything huh. I even provided you a direct link with an overview of the situation ffs.


Your shitty old TTIP NS story? TTIP is dead - keep up.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Is it. More to the point though, I can't imagine being so behind the times as to think privatisation isn't an issue in the NHS. John Lister and Keep Our NHS Public have been banging on about this for years.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Remunicipalisation is by definition not the same as nationalisation.


To the most hair-splitting of pedants, maybe. The service is provided by the public sector.



Pickman's model said:


> State monopolies may not have to be privatised, but try doing things the other way round and obstacles start appearing.


What's the evidence?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> Is it. More to the point though, I can't imagine being so behind the times as to think privatisation isn't an issue in the NHS. John Lister and Keep Our NHS Public have been banging on about this for years.


Not saying it isn't an issue. But you were arguing the NHS is privatised because of the EU. Your link did not substantiate tgat claim.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

JHE said:


> Ah, I see. Promising that people will retain their rights is really a threat to remove those rights.



A tory promise is worth less than the steam off my piss.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Article 120
> 
> Article 119



Part three of article 119 also encourages shit like PFI as a bookkeeping fudge.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

I was arguing that EU legal measures are initiating privatisations in the NHS (and Royal Mail, and British Rail, both of which you ignored presumably because they don't really fit your arguments that well). Which they were and still are. It was you who suggested that I meant the "NHS was privatised".


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> A tory promise is worth less than the steam off my piss.



Well said Archbishop!


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Dunno - ask Network Rail. Or La Poste. Or Deutsche Bahn.


DB is operating in a franchised market and their "market share" is being eradicated. The gov were about to float the company and only stopped because of the GFC. It's a slow death. .
I have no idea about La Poste.. but guess it's similar... 
eta: I googled it - here's what wiki says in  the first paragraph:


> However, because of EU directives requiring member states to introduce competition in their postal service, the French government allowed private postal service companies in 2005 and transformed La Poste into a public-owned company limited by shares in 2010.


See a pattern here?


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Tbh I think Wolveryeti would struggle to see patterns in a tartan shop.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> I was arguing that EU legal measures are initiating privatisations in the NHS (and Royal Mail, and British Rail, both of which you ignored presumably because they don't really fit your arguments that well). Which they were and still are. It was you who suggested that I meant the "NHS was privatised".


Do you not think it undermines your theory that all this privatisation is EU-driven that some member states still have state owned utilities after all these years? Indeed, for utilities like water it is the overwhelming norm across Europe.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 22, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> DB is operating in a franchised market and their "market share" is being eradicated. The gov were about to float the company and only stopped because of the GFC. It's a slow death. .
> I have no idea about La Poste.. but guess it's similar...
> eta: I googled it - here's what wiki says in  the first paragraph:
> 
> See a pattern here?


So what is happening is not really forced privatisation, but greater competition in some (but not all) former areas of state monopoly. 

Is this necessarily a bad thing? If the services being offered by the new competitors are crap / too expensive, how come the public-owned company is losing market share?


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Do you not think it undermines your theory that all this privatisation is EU-driven that some member states* still* have state owned utilities after all these years? Indeed, for utilities like water it is the overwhelming norm across Europe.


Seen another way, your opinion that nationalised monopolies can exist in the EU contrary to the principles of the EU, somewhat undermines the whole EU negotiating strategy against the UK in the brexit process, that their principles cannot be negotiated.

So, by remaining in the EU, you reckon the principle of free, liberalised markets with open competition should simply be ignored, right?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> To the most hair-splitting of pedants, maybe. The service is provided by the public sector.


Yeh right

Nationalisation - the transfer of a major branch of industry or commerce from private to state ownership

The Paris water supply, is that a major branch of industry or commerce? And from what you say it's controlled by local and not central govt...


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

If I'm understanding this right, after paying this institution Billions to deploy its thousands of bureaucrats to set certain principles into law, the UK should ignore said laws if it were to remain. Yet, if the UK don't like the idea of that kind of set-up and chooses to leave then it can't just expect to negotiate a relationship that might not entirely conform to the EUs principles.


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> So what is happening is not really forced privatisation, but greater competition in some (but not all) former areas of state monopoly.


Not forced? Maybe just coerced then?
Have look at this
after all that, the gfc arived and those german schysters fucked off from the company sharpish. The greek gov stepped in to save jobs with some aid then in 2016, as Greece was on its knees bleeding to death, what did the EU do?
gave them a good kicking obviously


> The Commission has decided to refer Greece to the European Court of Justice because it failed to comply with a 2008 Commission decision ordering the recovery of unlawful aid to Hellenic Shipyards. This follows a 2012 ruling by the Court condemning Greece for its failure to implement the decision.
> 
> More than seven years after its adoption, Greece still has not implemented the Commission decision of June 2008, ordering the recovery of over €250 million of unlawful state aid to Hellenic Shipyards. The Commission has now requested the Court of Justice to impose on Greece a lump sum penalty of about €6 million. The Commission has also requested that the Court impose a daily penalty of €34,974 from the day of its judgment until the date Greece brings the infringement to an end. The implementation of the 2008 decision will remove the unfair advantage received by Hellenic Shipyards, in breach of EU state aid rules, and aims to restore the level playing field in the market.


Tyssen Krupp must have pissed themselves laughing - just at the time when Schaeuble enforcably handed over all the state-run greek shipping and Airports to Fraport - a privatly run german company



Wolveryeti said:


> *Is this necessarily a bad thing?* If the services being offered by the new competitors are crap / too expensive, how come the public-owned company is losing market share?


Think about the above case and decide for yourself.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 22, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Do you not think it undermines your theory that all this privatisation is EU-driven that some member states still have state owned utilities after all these years? Indeed, for utilities like water it is the overwhelming norm across Europe.



Not really no. In the same way as I don't think that the existence of continuing pockets of feudalism undermine the reality of capitalism as an economic hegemony, or the existence of remnants of the post-war consensus undermine the tightening grip of the post-Reagan consensus.


----------



## paolo (Sep 23, 2018)

For rail at least, the EU fourth railway package dictates that operation must be open to tender. Publicly owned companies can bid. It’s not forced privatisation, but it does force the possibility.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 23, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Seen another way, your opinion that nationalised monopolies can exist in the EU contrary to the principles of the EU, somewhat undermines the whole EU negotiating strategy against the UK in the brexit process, that their principles cannot be negotiated.
> 
> So, by remaining in the EU, you reckon the principle of free, liberalised markets with open competition should simply be ignored, right?


No - you are twisting what I said. EU law is about freedom to compete where there are contestable markets. The whole lexit 'freedom to nationalise' thing was I thought to do with nationalising the utilities - which are in large part natural monopolies, where the state aid provisions do not apply (there is largely no contestability). 

If you are arguing that EU law is meant to prevent governments setting up state monopolies in contestable sectors and using their legislative and financial power to prevent any competition to those, then yeh - I agreee - it is set up to do that (albeit with get out clauses and challengeability). But it isn't at all obvious to me that it would impede Labour's manifesto commitment to renationalisation - which is what was originally argued earlier in the thread.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This is a good example of the liberalism that has been prevalent on this thread.
> The EUs long standing _political_ opposition to publicly owned industries is reduced to a _legal_ debate.*
> 
> Nonsense, returning control of industries to the state (or ideally the workers) doesn't have to mean paying off the thieves. Of course "Lord Fat Cunt and all the other investors" are among the the loudest voices arguing for remain, I wonder why that could be.
> ...



I agree with a lot of what you write and respect your consistent opposition to capitalist structures. Staying within the EU or single market accepts those, that is true. My concern is that leaving esp into a recession means the acceptance, by whichever Government, of those rules or much worse with the utmost zeal. 

Nationalisations, unlikely as they would be by a Government which according to ‘the rules’ is broke, and struggling to even maintain its small welfare state, would be fiercely opposed by worldwide and domestic elites. You certainly would have to pay off Lord Fat Cunt unless you think the Parliamentary Labour Party can deliver an actual revolution. At the moment it’s barely popular enough to get elected. 

Given all that, the Labour Party would be just as likely to deliver nationalisations within the EEA. Let the EU, grateful to the Labour Party for avoiding a crisis, sue if it cares enough or even modify this rule for the UK as the price of stability. Plenty of member countries have restrictions on things like who can buy property. The UK is at the forefront of marketisation within it, could equally drive the reverse gear.

Of course that kind of relationship ties us to market rules, an anathema, but really, leaving sets us outside of those globally? A leap. 

Anyway, I thank you for giving your views. As much as you probably consider me an utter cunt I don’t simply dismiss them.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> So what is happening is not really forced privatisation, but greater competition in some (but not all) former areas of state monopoly.
> 
> Is this necessarily a bad thing? If the services being offered by the new competitors are crap / too expensive, how come the public-owned company is losing market share?



All sorts of ways of loading the dice against the public sector. Private providers may provide a more limited service, or use staff trained by the public sector, or use publically-owned infrastructure without paying for it, or use lower paid staff with less training and poorer conditions. The prison service is a good example of the latter, notice how the public sector still has to come in and clean up every time they fail.

 Where the private sector still can't compete the public competitor is simply eradicated, like British Rail was, or sold off cheap like BT or indeed Royal Mail was.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

Corbyn says he will accept conference decision on a 2nd ref - which sounds likely to happen. hmm - big stuff i think - Corbyn says he will accept any Labour conference decision on second Brexit referendum - Politics live


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2018)

"What comes out of conference I will adhere to". That's it. That's not the manifesto. Don't buy the Guardian's peformative spin.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> No - you are twisting what I said. EU law is about freedom to compete where there are contestable markets. The whole lexit 'freedom to nationalise' thing was I thought to do with nationalising the utilities - which are in large part natural monopolies, where the state aid provisions do not apply (there is largely no contestability).



Contestable in this context means nothing more or less than 'what the private sector wants access to'. And they want access to anything they can make money from. Next thing under the gavel is the fire service.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> "What comes out of conference I will adhere to". That's it. That's not the manifesto. Don't buy the Guardian's peformative spin.


Guardian’s reporting of Corbyn’s interview with Marr:
_Corbyn says his preference is for a general election, not a second referendum. But he will see what the conference decides.

Q: Will you be bound by it?

Yes, says Corbyn.

Q: Will there be votes on a second referendum.

Corbyn says there will be clear votes. But he does not know what will come out of the compositing process.

Q: How would you vote in a referendum?

Corbyn says he does not know what the choices would be.

He voted to remain in the EU. But he wanted reform. He says *no one voted to lose their job.
*_​Careful triangulation in those last 7 words; talk about hedging.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 23, 2018)

So his position is I want X but if everybody else wants Y, I'll go along with it.  That's not an unreasonable position to take. He's always said that  policy is decided at conference, at least he's being consistent.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

but - if they vote for it - then it goes in the manifesto? is that right?

which also presumes they would vote for it in parliament if it come to it - without a prior general election?  

I take the point about guardian spin - but the closer we get to "no deal" the greater the pressure for 2nd ref - and labour will be held to that by a the political/corporate/media establishment desperate to reverse brexit as well as their own members and the unions. I cant see how they could possibly slide out of it - and would they want to _*if*_ it gives them a polling boost - as well as defanging one of the main attack lines of Chuka-ites.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> So his position is I want X but if everybody else wants Y, I'll go along with it.  That's not an unreasonable position to take. He's always said that  policy is decided at conference, at least he's being consistent.


Not convinced of the consistency you’re seeing tbh; a committed life-long anti-EU politician who campaigned for ‘remain’ wanting ? ...but knowing his members want ‘exit-from-Brexit’ but his core vote want out.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Not convinced of the consistency you’re seeing tbh; a committed life-long anti-EU politician who campaigned for ‘remain’ wanting ? ...but knowing his members want ‘exit-from-Brexit’ but his core vote want out.


Do his core vote want out? Ashcroft polling gave a figure of 62 percent people identifying as labour voters voting remain. About the same percentage as SNP voters. 

There is no core in this issue. young labour supporters are strongly remain. Labour supporters in certain parts of the country are strongly leave. In others strongly remain. Given that last election it appears there was very little upturn in the dismal numbers of under 25s voting, you could argue that this remains a group corbyn could reach to turn a narrow defeat into a victory. A huge number of that particular constituency are anti-brexit


----------



## Winot (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> but his core vote want out.



Do you really think so? Genuine question as I don’t know the stats but doesn’t a big part of his core vote come from the “Oh, Jeremy Corbyn” millenial crowd?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do his core vote want out? Ashcroft polling gave a figure of 62 percent people identifying as labour voters voting remain. About the same percentage as SNP voters.
> 
> There is no core in this issue. young labour supporters are strongly remain. Labour supporters in certain parts of the country are strongly leave. In others strongly remain. Given that last election it appears there was very little upturn in the dismal numbers of under 25s voting, you could argue that this remains a group corbyn could reach to turn a narrow defeat into a victory. A huge number of that particular constituency are anti-brexit


Yeah, prob should have prefixed the term core with ‘extra-metrpolitan’, tbf.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

also - how solid is the potentially pro-labour vote wrt brexit? For some nothing short of flag waving hard brexit will do - so no point going after them - they will vote tory or UKIP- for others policies on the NHS, housing and wages may be more important.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> also - how solid is the potentially pro-labour vote wrt brexit? For some nothing short of flag waving hard brexit will do - so no point going after them - they will vote tory or UKIP- for others policies on the NHS, housing and wages may be more important.


I suppose actually killing off the LibDems for good must also be quite a tempting prospect.


----------



## Voley (Sep 23, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Do his core vote want out? Ashcroft polling gave a figure of 62 percent people identifying as labour voters voting remain. About the same percentage as SNP voters.
> 
> There is no core in this issue. young labour supporters are strongly remain. Labour supporters in certain parts of the country are strongly leave. In others strongly remain. Given that last election it appears there was very little upturn in the dismal numbers of under 25s voting, you could argue that this remains a group corbyn could reach to turn a narrow defeat into a victory. A huge number of that particular constituency are anti-brexit


Latest YouGov poll at the bottom of this article about Tom Watson is 86% pro- a public vote. Sample of 1000+ Labour members - don't know much about polling, is that enough to be representative?

Tom Watson tells Corbyn: ‘We must back members on new Brexit vote’


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

Voley said:


> Latest YouGov poll at the bottom of this article about Tom Watson is 86% pro- a public vote. Sample of 1000+ Labour members - don't know much about polling, is that enough to be representative?
> 
> Tom Watson tells Corbyn: ‘We must back members on new Brexit vote’


National Pollsters often gravitate around 1k sample; so for a membership ( population) of 500k that’s reasonable, but tells us nothing new about the ‘core’ vote.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

McCluskey gets it...

_He said:

The referendum shouldn’t be on do ‘we want to go back into the European Union’.

So staying in the EU shouldn’t even be an option, he was asked. McCluskey replied:

No, because the people have already decided on that. We very rarely have referendums in this country. The people have decided, against my wishes and my union’s wishes, but they’ve decided ...

Here’s one of the problems Labour have; there are significant numbers of traditional Labour supporters who are saying we’re going to vote Conservative because we don’t trust Labour to take us out of the European Union despite the fact that Jeremy has said repeatedly, ‘Of course we recognise the result of course we respect the result, we’re coming out of the European Union.’ For us to now enter some kind of campaign that opens up that issue again I think would be wrong._​


----------



## Duncan2 (Sep 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> also - how solid is the potentially pro-labour vote wrt brexit? For some nothing short of flag waving hard brexit will do - so no point going after them - they will vote tory or UKIP- for others policies on the NHS, housing and wages may be more important.


It seems to me that Brogdale's extra-metropolitan core vote are likely to see the other issues i.e nhs,housing and wages as an integral part of hard Brexit.


----------



## Chz (Sep 23, 2018)

Edit: Nah.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2018)

Chz said:


> Edit: Nah.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> McCluskey gets it...
> 
> _He said:
> 
> ...



It doesn’t really answer the dilemma tho. If Len thinks Brexit will cost jobs and cause suffering to the membership ultimately there is a choice between principles. It’s the nub of this whole shebang.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> It doesn’t really answer the dilemma tho. If Len thinks Brexit will cost jobs and cause suffering to the membership ultimately there is a choice between principles. It’s the nub of this whole shebang.


Which particular/ whose dilemma is that you’re referring to?


----------



## gosub (Sep 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> It doesn’t really answer the dilemma tho. If Len thinks Brexit will cost jobs and cause suffering to the membership ultimately there is a choice between principles. It’s the nub of this whole shebang.



Its a step forward - vast majority of the Unions came out for remain, without that statement its more of the what part of democracy don't you get?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 23, 2018)

mainly macro: Theresa May has qualities, but negotiation skill is not one of them

This blog can be a good read. If you cannot be arsed, here is a summary of the link - May is a fucking imbecile


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> mainly macro: Theresa May has qualities, but negotiation skill is not one of them
> 
> This blog can be a good read. If you cannot be arsed, here is a summary of the link - May is a fucking imbecile






> “May didn’t do negotiation; in the words of Eric Pickles, one of her cabinet colleagues, she is not a ‘transactional’ politician. She takes a position and then she sticks to it, seeing it as a matter of principle that she delivers on what she has committed to. This doesn’t mean that she is a conviction politician. Often she arrives at a position reluctantly after much agonising – as home secretary she became notorious for being painfully slow to decide on matters over which she had personal authority. Many of the positions she adopts are ones she has inherited, seeing no option but to make good on other people’s promises. This has frequently brought her into conflict with the politicians from whom she inherited these commitments. By making fixed what her colleagues regarded as lines in the sand, she drove some of them mad.”



im not an expert - but doesn't that suggest some kind of  aspergers type behaviour? the literalism, unable to deal with ambiguity and nuance and rigidity of thinking -  its been said about her before.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 23, 2018)

Her background is adminstration - middle mangement at the BoE iirc- not somehere where there is much need to come up with ideas, just to implement and monitor.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> im not an expert - but doesn't that suggest some kind of  aspergers type behaviour? the literalism, unable to deal with ambiguity and nuance and rigidity of thinking -  its been said about her before.


Once saw an interview with May’s friend Alicia Collinson (spouse to Damian ‘left-hand typing’ Green) who described her student time with May at Auuuksfud and related how, as a Geogo under-grad the young wheat-field runner thoroughly enjoyed collecting and graphing rainfall data.

Now when my eldest was in top year at primary she enjoyed that; May is a bit limited IMO.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Once saw an interview with May’s friend Alicia Collinson (spouse to Damian ‘left-hand typing’ Green) who described her student time with May at Auuuksfud and related how, as a Geogo under-grad the young wheat-field runner thoroughly enjoyed collecting and graphing rainfall data.
> 
> Now when my eldest was in top year at primary she enjoyed that; May is a bit limited IMO.



made me think of this -


----------



## Winot (Sep 23, 2018)

I find myself this morning in the unusual position of agreeing with not only Corbyn but also McCluskey.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Once saw an interview with May’s friend Alicia Collinson (spouse to Damian ‘left-hand typing’ Green) who described her student time with May at Auuuksfud and related how, as a Geogo under-grad the young wheat-field runner thoroughly enjoyed collecting and graphing rainfall data.
> 
> Now when my eldest was in top year at primary she enjoyed that; May is a bit limited IMO.



physical geographers are often like that


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Which particular/ whose dilemma is that you’re referring to?



Sorry, I don’t mean to Remain, but a choice between a Brexit of a hard or soft variety, the latter which may not be much of one.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Sorry, I don’t mean to Remain, but a choice between a Brexit of a hard or soft variety, the latter which may not be much of one.


But McCluskey’s point is that it should be for the electorate to make that decision to ‘cut & run’ or send the Govt. back until they can strike a deal or go to the country.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 23, 2018)

Somewhere on this thread, I used the line that there wouldn't be a 2nd ref because it wasn't in the _immediate political self interest_ of any party to take the risk of calling/pushing for one. I don't think Labour at that point yet, may well never actively pursue it, but it's at least coming into focus.  At that level of venal/political calculation they (Corbyn, McDonnell) are concerned about alienating core Labour voters and/or being seen to be part of an establishment stitch up (even in just calling for a 2nd ref on terms of departure only). Corbyn's line seems to be 'we went a gen election on the final terms... and if not, _may_ call for a 2nd ref'. Suppose the key point after the conference is whether that becomes an _active aggressive strategy_. In particular, whether they are load up the amendments in the final parliamentary vote with those outcomes in mind.

My guess though is that ultimately, Labour (+nats, libs etc) just won't have the numbers. Ultimately, there  will be a fudged deal with the EU and a fudged deal between May and swivel eyed lot.


----------



## NoXion (Sep 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> So what is happening is not really forced privatisation, but greater competition in some (but not all) former areas of state monopoly.
> 
> Is this necessarily a bad thing? If the services being offered by the new competitors are crap / too expensive, how come the public-owned company is losing market share?



Yes it is a bad thing, it's the thin end of the fucking wedge. Once competition is allowed that opens up the possibility of shitty spiv companies suing the government, because they can't compete with bodies that actually have to provide a service rather than ripping off the little guy.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 23, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Yes it is a bad thing, it's the thin end of the fucking wedge.



also, companies will often put 'loss leader' bids in the first time something is open to competition, accepting a loss first time round, knowing that if the public sector provider disappears, they can firstly name their own price for any changes / additions in the course of the first contract, and then the prices can be higher second time round.

although that won't stop them trying to cut costs (i.e. provide as little service as they can get away with, and put more pressure on staff to do more work with less equipment for less money)

the public sector provider - if allowed to bid - is often stitched up by a requirement to bid based on accounting that means it stands little chance of winning.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 23, 2018)

Wilf said:


> My guess though is that ultimately, Labour (+nats, libs etc) just won't have the numbers. Ultimately, there  will be a fudged deal with the EU and a fudged deal between May and swivel eyed lot.



...and a fudge on the Northern Ireland border. Na there isn't enough fudge for all of that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2018)

i cant see a deal happening - in fact both remainers and leavers may see it in their interests to end up with "no deal" - the leavers because at the very least it allows them to be ideologically pure  and the remainers because it makes the pressure for a 2nd ref and/or a suspension of A50 all the greater. Also nobody wants any remotely plausible deal because it will be demonstrably worse than what the UK has already.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> All sorts of ways of loading the dice against the public sector. Private providers may provide a more limited service, or use staff trained by the public sector, or use publically-owned infrastructure without paying for it, or use lower paid staff with less training and poorer conditions. The prison service is a good example of the latter, notice how the public sector still has to come in and clean up every time they fail.


But bids can be assessed on cost and quality... The IFG's report on competition in prisons is a bit more nuanced than your take - plenty of evidence that the public sector can (and has) outbid the private on cost and quality terms on prison management contracts: Competition in prisons

And irrespective of whether it is a slippery slope, good/bad idea - the EU didn't hold a gun to our heads and make us marketise prison provision. Our politicians did it willingly, out of choice.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 23, 2018)

The refusal to use firearms in these matters has been duly noted, again.  The language, flow, and poetry gods also suggest holding back on the use of the word FUDGE for the next 7 days, cheers.


----------



## Favelado (Sep 23, 2018)

It's so much fun sitting here in Europe waiting to find out if I'll have to renounce my nationality or not. Brilliant.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 23, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It's so much fun sitting here in Europe waiting to find out if I'll have to renounce my nationality or not. Brilliant.


You won’t. 

Cheers!


----------



## Favelado (Sep 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You won’t.
> 
> Cheers!



I could end up losing my right to unemployment benefit here, which I need every summer. I will probably lose my right to move around Europe to live and work. Spain will not let me have dual nationality, so I'd have to renounce British passport. Why would I have a post-Brexit British passport if I could have a useful one?

So, I probably will.

Cheers!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 23, 2018)

Favelado said:


> Why would I have a post-Brexit British passport if I could have a useful one?



you don't want a blue passport?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 23, 2018)

Favelado said:


> I could end up losing my right to unemployment benefit here, which I need every summer. I will probably lose my right to move around Europe to live and work. Spain will not let me have dual nationality, so I'd have to renounce British passport. Why would I have a post-Brexit British passport if I could have a useful one?
> 
> So, I probably will.
> 
> Cheers!


Get whatever passport you need, but the suggestion you must renounce your nationality in order to do so can only make things worse for the non-European immigrants that want to live here, why the fuck should it be about renouncing anything?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 23, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> you don't want a blue passport?


I don’t care what colour the passport is it’s just bloody admin at the end of the day.


----------



## Favelado (Sep 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Get whatever passport you need, but the suggestion you must renounce your nationality in order to do so can only make things worse for the non-European immigrants that want to live here, why the fuck should it be about renouncing anything?



It may not be the case for many. It is the case for Britons in Spain.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 23, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It may not be the case for many. It is the case for Britons in Spain.


Just pretend to renounce it for the paperwork or whatever. I still call myself Scottish with a British passport, there’s harder cheeses to deal with.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 23, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Just pretend to renounce it for the paperwork or whatever. I still call myself Scottish with a British passport, there’s harder cheeses to deal with.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Get whatever passport you need, but the suggestion you must renounce your nationality in order to do so can only make things worse for the non-European immigrants that want to live here, why the fuck should it be about renouncing anything?


Spain only allows dual citizenship with a limited number of countries and the UK isn't one of them, Germany only allows dual citizenship with other EU nations which currently includes the UK but won''t after Brexit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 24, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> View attachment 147792


Thanks for the no nonsense face palm, where did I go wrong?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Spain only allows dual citizenship with a limited number of countries and the UK isn't one of them, Germany only allows dual citizenship with other EU nations which currently includes the UK but won''t after Brexit


That’s pretty clear from Faveldos posts , to me renouncing your nationality is a bit different from applying for citizenship, and it’s important that it’s also regarded as different  since nobody should really be expected to renounce their nationality.
But feel free to facepalm away.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That’s pretty clear from Faveldos posts , to me renouncing your nationality is a bit different from applying for citizenship, and it’s important that it’s also regarded as different  since nobody should really be expected to renounce their nationality.
> But feel free to facepalm away.


He can claim to be British for as long as he wants but under Spanish law he can't have a spanish citizenship and/or a passport without giving up his British citizenship and passport. Spain isn't unique there are plenty of other countries than will a) not let you be a citizen of that country and b) will strip you of your original one if you apply for another country, The UK doesn't you can have as many others as you want and still be a UK citizen.
I have a mate whose wife has British, Australian and Filipino citizenship.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> He can claim to be British for as long as he wants but under Spanish law he can't have a spanish citizenship and/or a passport without giving up his British citizenship and passport. Spain isn't unique there are plenty of other countries than will a) not let you be a citizen of that country and b) will strip you of your original one if you apply for another country, The UK doesn't you can have as many others as you want and still be a UK citizen.
> I have a mate whose wife has British, Australian and Filipino citizenship.


I didn’t challenge your initial statement that Spain doesn’t allow dual citizenship for brits. Let’s leave it at that!


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It may not be the case for many. It is the case for Britons in Spain.


That's an issue to take up with the Spanish authorities, surely?


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It may not be the case for many. It is the case for Britons in Spain.





MickiQ said:


> Spain only allows dual citizenship with a limited number of countries and the UK isn't one of them, Germany only allows dual citizenship with other EU nations which currently includes the UK but won''t after Brexit


this is not true.
no country has the right to damand you relenquish your citizenship (or even hand over your original passport) when you apply citizenship with them, unless that country has a bilateral agreement with the country from where the applicant is from.
as far as i'm aware the UK has no such bilateral agreement. Therefore no country can demand you hand over your passport - and even if they did, you could just apply for a new UK passport and they could do fuck all about it. Passports and citizenship are 2 different things
As far as Germany not allowing dual citizenship with non EU nations goes- there
are tens of thousands of Germans with US citizenship - from  parents who are/ were US services stationed in Germany or germans that were born in the US .


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> this is not true.
> no country has the right to damand you relenquish your citizenship (or even hand over your original passport) when you apply citizenship with them, unless that country has a bilateral agreement with the country from where the applicant is from.
> as far as i'm aware the UK has no such bilateral agreement. Therefore no country can demand you hand over your passport - and even if they did, you could just apply for a new UK passport and they could do fuck all about it. P



You need to do more than just turn in your passport to get citizenship in countries that ban dual nationality, you need to formally renounce your citizenship of other nations.

Looks like it is a pretty straightforward process, as long as you cough up £372.

Give up (renounce) British citizenship or nationality


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> You need to do more than just turn in your passport to get citizenship in countries that ban dual nationality, you need to formally renounce your citizenship of other nations.
> 
> Looks like it is a pretty straightforward process, as long as you cough up £372.
> 
> Give up (renounce) British citizenship or nationality


fair enough, on further research it seems spain is unique in demanding a renouncement (in cases where the applicant doesn't have spainish birth right). certainly not the case in Germany though.

i'd research the possibility of re appling afterwards though. i know this works with irish citizenship if you were born on the island
eta e.g here:
https://www.quora.com/How-easy-is-i...ter-renouncing-it-in-2007-what-is-the-process


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> this is not true.
> no country has the right to damand you relenquish your citizenship (or even hand over your original passport) when you apply citizenship with them, unless that country has a bilateral agreement with the country from where the applicant is from.
> as far as i'm aware the UK has no such bilateral agreement. Therefore no country can demand you hand over your passport - and even if they did, you could just apply for a new UK passport and they could do fuck all about it. Passports and citizenship are 2 different things
> As far as Germany not allowing dual citizenship with non EU nations goes- there
> are tens of thousands of Germans with US citizenship - from  parents who are/ were US services stationed in Germany or germans that were born in the US .


The (admittedly rather complex) rules on dual citizenship in Germany
*Dual citizenship*
Allowed under following circumstances:


If the other citizenship is that of another EU country or of Switzerland. _Non-EU and non-Swiss citizens must usually renounce their old citizenship if they want to become German citizens._ There are _exceptions_ made for citizens of countries that do not allow their citizens to renounce their citizenship (e.g., Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica; the following _jus-soli_ countries allow renunciation only if the citizenship was acquired involuntarily by birth there to non-citizen parents: Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Uruguay), or if the renunciation process is too difficult, humiliating or expensive (e.g., Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, USA), or, rarely, in individual cases if the renunciation of the old citizenship means enormous disadvantages for the concerned person.
If a German citizen acquires a non-EU or non-Swiss citizenship with the permission ("_Beibehaltungsgenehmigung (de)_") of the German Government (e.g., existing relative ties or property in Germany or in the other country or if the occupation abroad requires domestic citizenship for execution). The voluntary acquisition of a non-EU or non-Swiss citizenship without permission usually means the automatic loss of the German citizenship (but see Point 4). _The permission is not necessary if the other citizenship is of another EU country or of Switzerland or if dual citizenship was obtained at birth._
If the person is a refugee and holds a refugee travel document during naturalization.
If a child born to German parents acquires another citizenship at birth (e.g., based on place of birth [birth in _jus-soli_ countries mostly of the Americas], or descent from one parent [one German parent and one foreign parent]).
Children born on or after 1 January 2000 to non-German parents acquire German citizenship at birth if at least one parent has a permanent residence permit (and had this status for _at least three years_) and the parent was residing in Germany for _at least eight years_. The children must have lived in Germany for _at least eight years_ or attended school _for six years until their 21st birthday._ Non-EU- and non-Swiss-citizen parents born and grown up abroad _usually cannot have dual citizenship themselves (but see Point 1)._


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> If the other citizenship is that of another EU country or of Switzerland. _Non-EU and non-Swiss citizens must usually renounce their old citizenship if they want to become German citizens._ There are _exceptions_ made for citizens of countries that do not allow their citizens to renounce their citizenship (e.g., Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica; the following _jus-soli_ countries allow renunciation only if the citizenship was acquired involuntarily by birth there to non-citizen parents: Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Uruguay), or if the renunciation process is too difficult, *humiliating* or expensive (e.g., Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Cuba, Eritrea, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Morocco, Nigeria, Syria, Thailand, Tunisia, USA), or, rarely, in individual cases if the renunciation of the old citizenship means enormous disadvantages for the concerned person.




humiliating?


----------



## Favelado (Sep 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> That's an issue to take up with the Spanish authorities, surely?


In practical terms, no.


pocketscience said:


> this is not true.
> no country has the right to damand you relenquish your citizenship (or even hand over your original passport) when you apply citizenship with them, unless that country has a bilateral agreement with the country from where the applicant is from.
> as far as i'm aware the UK has no such bilateral agreement. Therefore no country can demand you hand over your passport - and even if they did, you could just apply for a new UK passport and they could do fuck all about it. Passports and citizenship are 2 different things
> As far as Germany not allowing dual citizenship with non EU nations goes- there
> are tens of thousands of Germans with US citizenship - from  parents who are/ were US services stationed in Germany or germans that were born in the US .


They won't give you the Spanish passport unless you give them the UK one. Standing in a Spanish police station shouting about bilateral agreements won't work.


----------



## DownwardDog (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> It's so much fun sitting here in Europe waiting to find out if I'll have to renounce my nationality or not. Brilliant.



The cunts ask for 400 quid when you do renounce. It takes about 12 weeks.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> humiliating?


Eritrea has a very bad rep on the dual citizenship front, it does not allow Eritreans to be dual citizens but also bans them from renouncing Eritrean so applying for foreign citizenship is treason.


----------



## Favelado (Sep 24, 2018)

DownwardDog said:


> The cunts ask for 400 quid when you do renounce. It takes about 12 weeks.



Which cunts? British cunts or Spanish cunts?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> Which cunts? British cunts or Spanish cunts?


British cunts, it costs £372 to renounce it, to add insult to injury if you change your mind (I presume you're British by birth?) you get one chance to ask for it back and that costs £1163 
If you're not British-born it's a case of so long sucker.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 24, 2018)

You can also apparently have your citizenship revoked for free, although it would involve becoming a fighter for ISIS.


----------



## Favelado (Sep 24, 2018)

Ha!


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 24, 2018)

Barring any substantial concessions from either side that make Chequers workable I think there will be great pressure to plump for Canada (which the EU said they will accept, and the ultras want), to avoid No Deal. I reckon the ultras will move against May soon or oblige her to hara kiri with a no-confidence vote on Chequers. A no confidence vote doesn't carry the threat to the rebels it once did, given the Fixed Terms Parliament Act (which allows 14 days to form a new government in event of no confidence vote, rather than immediate GE) - hard to see Canada being a splitting issue for either DUP or Tory MPs, who I'm sure would rather not risk their seats for an early GE. The main risks for them is they shoot their bolt with the 1922 Committee too soon and end up without one of their preferred candidates on the members' ballot (and potentially a soft Brexiter who has a year's immunity from challenge to negotiate something softer) - or that they get timed out into No Deal and the political shit from that lands on their heads.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> In practical terms, no.
> 
> They won't give you the Spanish passport unless you give them the UK one. Standing in a Spanish police station shouting about bilateral agreements won't work.


So what, in practical terms,  are you suggesting? It's clearly a pain for you and many others not to be able to work and pay taxes on one country, and then to claim benefits in another, but what does or should this mean in terms of whether Britain leaves the EU?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> You can also apparently have your citizenship revoked for free, although it would involve becoming a fighter for ISIS.


That only applies if you've already got dual citizenship, you can't be left stateless even if you're the sort that no-one wants


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Eritrea has a very bad rep on the dual citizenship front, it does not allow Eritreans to be dual citizens but also bans them from renouncing Eritrean so applying for foreign citizenship is treason.


not sure that's particularly humiliating


----------



## Favelado (Sep 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> So what, in practical terms,  are you suggesting? It's clearly a pain for you and many others not to be able to work and pay taxes on one country, and then to claim benefits in another, but what does or should this mean in terms of whether Britain leaves the EU?



Okay. My personal situation is that without a good deal, I could lose the right to a Spanish pension, or possibly the unemployment benefits I get in the summer after my annual sacking (before my annual rehiring). So that is of concern to me. I'll be staying here and need life to be as stable as possible.

I found it difficult to make a decision in the referendum. I accept and agree with the left-wing arguments on here regarding the EU's inherently capitalist nature, its treatment of Greece, its lack of transparency and democracy. I also fear for a Britain with no EU influence, left to be stripped bare by regular periods of Conservative government. I have seen some EU policies and attitudes as a counterweight to the agenda of the Tories. My life has been transformed by easy freedom of movement too, so I am grateful for that.

With the pros and cons taken into account, I voted Remain - very unenthusiastically.

My contribution to the thread was fuelled by 3 cans of lager, and a feeling of frustration at the never-ending limbo of "What's going to happen to me?"

So, not the most profound post you'll read on the matter. However, there are plenty of us who have had 2 years of this shit now, and would like to know a bit more about our futures.


----------



## Winot (Sep 24, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Barring any substantial concessions from either side that make Chequers workable I think there will be great pressure to plump for Canada (which the EU said they will accept, and the ultras want), to avoid No Deal. I reckon the ultras will move against May soon or oblige her to hara kiri with a no-confidence vote on Chequers. A no confidence vote doesn't carry the threat to the rebels it once did, given the Fixed Terms Parliament Act (which allows 14 days to form a new government in event of no confidence vote, rather than immediate GE) - hard to see Canada being a splitting issue for either DUP or Tory MPs, who I'm sure would rather not risk their seats for an early GE. The main risks for them is they shoot their bolt with the 1922 Committee too soon and end up without one of their preferred candidates on the members' ballot (and potentially a soft Brexiter who has a year's immunity from challenge to negotiate something softer) - or that they get timed out into No Deal and the political shit from that lands on their heads.



Canada FTA doesn’t solve RoI/NI border issue. 

Logical outcome of Brexit is either border between RoI/NI or united Ireland.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 24, 2018)

Winot said:


> Canada FTA doesn’t solve RoI/NI border issue.


True dat. But no deal will mean a border between RoI and NI too - if the EU is serious about maintaining the integrity of the single market, that is. So if it's a choice between the two, Canada looks more likely from the perspective of being more in everyone's interests - unless the EU think they can bounce the UK into an Irish Sea border (unlikely, due to the Parliamentary maths and statements by TM), or Norway (even more unlikely , given how hardcore the ultras' opposition to it is).


----------



## DownwardDog (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> Which cunts? British cunts or Spanish cunts?



British. I became Belgian.


----------



## JHE (Sep 24, 2018)

Favelado said:


> They won't give you the Spanish passport unless you give them the UK one. Standing in a Spanish police station shouting about bilateral agreements won't work.



I think at the moment this doesn't happen, but maybe it could.

Many months ago at a public meeting, I listened to the British Consul talking about this subject. She was very careful in what she said, because she definitely can't be seen to encourage anyone to break the law, but she made it very clear that:

British people (and people of most other nationalities) who get Spanish citizenship are obliged in Spanish law to give up their other nationality but...
In practice nothing is ever done to check that you have given up British (or whatever it may be) citizenship
You cannot lose British citizenship by accident. If you haven't successfully applied (and paid) to stop being British, you remain British
I was left with the very clear impression that quite a few Britons who have gained Spanish citizenship probably keep their British passports safely stored at the bottom of their sock drawer or wherever.

There are two obvious problems with this. Some people don't like breaking the law and might feel very uncomfortable taking an oath to abide by the Spanish constitution and law and then, as their first act as a Spanish citizen, deliberately breaking the law. The other problem is that the practice of not checking that the new citizen has given up their other citizenship could easily change.

I read somewhere - maybe on the parainmigrantes website, I'm not sure - that there had been a suggestion to tighten up the procedures on this. Even if this comes to nothing for the moment, it seems to me that if relations between the Spanish govt and the British govt worsen, as they could for various reasons (including Gibraltar), and the Spanish government gets wind of tens of thousands of Britanoguiris taking the piss by deliberately breaking the law in this way, they might do something about it.

There are grounds for optimism.

Sánchez spoke some time before becoming PM about ending what he saw a anomalies and anachronisms in Spanish law about nationality. He doesn't agree with one law for people from some countries and another for the rest. If the residency requirement were equalised (generally it's either two years or ten years depending on where you're from) and dual citizenship were generally accepted, instead of just being allowed with some other countries, things would be easier for many people. Some reforms were in PSOE's last election manifesto, I think, though I haven't got time to look that up now. Unfortunately, we can't expect any of these reforms soon, because it would be difficult or impossible to cobble together a parliamentary majority and these questions are not a very high priority for the government.

I am more optimistic about the government adopting a generous policy towards resident Britanoguiris in the event of a no-deal Brexit, but I do wish they would get on and announce (or decide and then announce) what their policy is. After all, there's little more than six months to go. I wish the ambassador, Simon Manley, and the British Embassy would make this their top priority now, instead of farting on about what a wonderful display the Red Arrows put on above Menorca!

Personally, I have no particular intention of applying for Spanish citizenship when I clock up 10 years in Spain. I am lucky enough to be Maltese and so I will continue to be an EU citizen. There are other British people in a similar situation, of course. There will be a lot more Irish Britons than Maltese Britons, but most British people don't have this option. Also, many people who have applied for Spanish citizenship have their applications stuck in an enormous backlog.

People are worried. A decent policy announcement from the Spanish government would be very welcome. Even something as non-specific but generous as the comments the then Foreign Minister, Alfonso Dastis, made late last year on the Andrew Marr Show would be a big step forward. The Sánchez government has chosen to say nothing about it, but unfortunately a no-deal Brexit is a definite risk.

In fact, it's the default outcome (if there's no deal and no cancellation of Brexit) and, since "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed", the provisional agreement over citizens' rights will not become a treaty.

I would prefer the agreement over citizens' rights to be 'ring-fenced' and made a treaty ASAP, but I have seen no indication that the EU agrees with that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 24, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> True dat. But no deal will mean a border between RoI and NI too - if the EU is serious about maintaining the integrity of the single market, that is. So if it's a choice between the two, Canada looks more likely from the perspective of being more in everyone's interests - unless the EU think they can bounce the UK into an Irish Sea border (unlikely, due to the Parliamentary maths and statements by TM), or Norway (even more unlikely , given how hardcore the ultras' opposition to it is).



THe EU will only agree to a "canada" deal if NI is remains in the customs union - that means a sea border between NI and the rest of UK. DUP will never ever agree to that and it would be anathema to the british state generally becasue it would seriously undermines the union. 

The EU will only accept a norway type deal - BINO essentaially - and the brexiteers wont accept that. 

The opposition would vote down either proposal. 

The only brexit deal that would get through the HofC is one where the UK gets free trade  but limited obligations on free movement and EU law - and the EU is never going to accept that. 

None of this is new - its the same proposals going back and forth with the same answers for two years. No Deal or Cancelling Brexit are the only logical and realistic  outcomes.


----------



## Chz (Sep 24, 2018)

JHE said:


> Too long to quote


This basically fits in with my understanding of it. If no steps are taken at the granting of citizenship to ensure that you give up the old one (and giving it up before then is impossible, as you can't be a citizen of nowhere), you can basically keep the old one so long as you're not a moron and travel into your new home on your old passport. Even then you're unlikely to be caught out, but that's the _only_ way they could ever find out about it. Countries don't share out their data on this sort of thing.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Sep 24, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> THe EU will only agree to a "canada" deal if NI is remains in the customs union - that means a sea border between NI and the rest of UK.


I'm not sure I buy that, if the alternative presented is No Deal - i.e. a hard border from day 1 in March next year, WTO tariffs and checks etc... (because no transition agreement would exist - what has been provisionally agreed is conditional on negotiating a terms of exit).

That would really fuck Ireland over economically - it's hard to see who would be pushing for that from the EU side, and I imagine the optics would be very damaging for them, as it would be seen to be their 'fault' - most people would surely think it total overreach to crash negotiations by demanding a customs border within the territory of another sovereign country, especially if the issue isn't about preserving the integrity of the single market.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 24, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Thanks for the no nonsense face palm, where did I go wrong?



somewhere around here



HoratioCuthbert said:


> Just pretend to renounce it for the paperwork or whatever. I still call myself Scottish with a British passport, there’s harder cheeses to deal with.



assuming this wasn't meant in jest (my comment about blue passports was) then there's something of a difference

without wanting to go in to the merits or otherwise of scottish independence, as things currently stand, you can't get a legally recognisable scottish passport.

if you could, but were living in england, and the choice was to have a scottish passport and restrictions on living / working in england, or having to renounce scottish citizenship in order to live and work freely in england, and facing possible restrictions on living and working in scotland again, it might be a more difficult choice...

obviously it's not yet entirely clear what's on offer to UK citizens currently living / working elsewhere in the EU (or for that matter vice versa - i'm not sure that the PM's words are worth the paper they are printed on)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 24, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> I'm not sure I buy that, if the alternative presented is No Deal - i.e. a hard border from day 1 in March next year, WTO tariffs and checks etc... (because no transition agreement would exist - what has been provisionally agreed is conditional on negotiating a terms of exit).
> 
> That would really fuck Ireland over economically - it's hard to see who would be pushing for that from the EU side, and I imagine the optics would be very damaging for them, as it would be seen to be their 'fault' - most people would surely think it total overreach to crash negotiations by demanding a customs border within the territory of another sovereign country, especially if the issue isn't about preserving the integrity of the single market.



They have stated explicitly and repeatedly from day one that any deal must result in a "frictionless" border between NI and the Republic. A canadian style trade deal excludes that.


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> That only applies if you've already got dual citizenship, you can't be left stateless even if you're the sort that no-one wants


What happens if you renounce your UK citizenship for a Spainish citizenship and the Spainish reject your application?
Even if they accept the application, for the waiting period you'd be stateless no?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

Any thoughts on McDonnell's "vote on the deal, but not include an option to remain" gambit?

I'm undecided.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Any thoughts on McDonnell's "vote on the deal, but not include an option to remain" gambit?
> 
> I'm undecided.


I would think there's a technical problem with any vote that has more than two options - if the winner comes out with less than 50 per cent but it is at one or other 'extreme' along whichever line there is, such as hard, soft or no brexit, then that isn't really a mandate to do that thing.


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The (admittedly rather complex) rules on dual citizenship in Germany
> *Dual citizenship*
> Allowed under following circumstances:
> 
> ...


 
I know several American, Ex-Soviet block and African "germans" (including family members - admittedly they had birth-rights) who had no issues with having to hand anything up/ over when getting their german citizenship.
I guess the german authorities just don't follow it up due to the "humiliating" clause, which sounds well vague.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would think there's a technical problem with any vote that has more than two options - if the winner comes out with less than 50 per cent but it is at one or other 'extreme' along whichever line there is, such as hard, soft or no brexit, then that isn't really a mandate to do that thing.



Well, there is always the "spoiled vote / stay at home" option in any case.


----------



## pocketscience (Sep 24, 2018)

What's stopping the EU from handing out (real) EU passports: i.e ones that aren't printed & distributed by a nation state but the EU itself in Brussels - where a holder would be a proto European of full integration?


----------



## Chz (Sep 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would think there's a technical problem with any vote that has more than two options - if the winner comes out with less than 50 per cent but it is at one or other 'extreme' along whichever line there is, such as hard, soft or no brexit, then that isn't really a mandate to do that thing.


Normally the answer is a run-off with the top two responses if nothing garnered > 50% of the vote.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 24, 2018)

Q1: Deal?

Deal.
No Deal.

Q2: If Deal wins, which deal?

Norway.
Canada.

Q3: If Norway wins, do you mean it?

Yeah.
Nah fuck it, Remain.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 24, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Q1: Deal?
> 
> Deal.
> No Deal.
> ...


It does re-emphasise what a tremendous fuck up the whole thing has been, from Cameron failing to build in any kind of clarity on how the final terms would be agreed, to the Tories fucking everything up in the negotiations (to the point where it's not even clear whether 'chequers' still exists), to Labour having no way of relating the leadership to what the members/unions wanted... only thing that's clear is we won't be in the EU... at some point.. under some kind of conditions.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

Wilf said:


> ...only thing that's clear is we won't be in the EU... at some point.. under some kind of conditions.



I don't think even that is clear.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't think even that is clear.


I agree. Nothing at all is clear at the moment and it can't be until someone changes their 'red lines' over acceptable terms. I would have thought a sensible approach to brexit, even for those who want the UK to eventually separate entirely, would be an initial 'Norway-style' deal that leaves most structures in place, with some kind of outline of an option for further separation at a later date. Given the complexities of 40-plus years of harmonisation (and also given that just under half the country doesn't want brexit to happen at all), I would have thought that anything else is just foolish (and undemocratic) - certainly stampeding towards an arbitrary cut-off date without any agreed idea of what target you're even supposed to be aiming at, which is what the current stated strategy still amounts to six months off and counting, is absurd. It's currently a case of how long the absurd strategy can continue running on air, wile coyote style, before it realises where it is and plummets to the ground. Then what? Who knows?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

o 





pocketscience said:


> What happens if you renounce your UK citizenship for a Spainish citizenship and the Spainish reject your application?
> Even if they accept the application, for the waiting period you'd be stateless no?


I believe you can't renounce your British citizenship until your application for a foreign one has been accepted, ISIS is a very special case, the government originally wanted to strip all UK based ISIS fighters of UK citizenship but is only able to strip those with dual citizenship (mostly Pakistani I believe). UK citizens born here it can't and has to accept them back from being deported.  
As a general rule of thumb Germany allows dual nationality if both German and the other are acquired by birth (would cover children of a US soldier and a German spouse) but if you choose to be German you give up the other unless you're from the EU or one of the 'special' cases.  A few other EU countries are the same especially Austria and the Netherlands though the Dutch government has comitted to change this. Most EU countries allow dual cittizenship though. As things stand now  a UK citizen can go and work in Germany and apply for German citizenship and keep his UK one. Post-Brexit he (and I actually know someone in this position) would have to give up one or the other unless Germany (not the UK) changes its laws accordingly.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't think even that is clear.


I agree that nothing is clear, but so many things would have to line up in the same direction for there to be another in/out referendum that I think we will leave.  There's a lot of political economy that can and should be hurled at brexit, but the question of whether there is a 2nd full ref is coming down to narrow political self interest. Corbyn could push it, but almost certainly won't, at least with any enthusiasm. May could deliver it but certainly won't as it would split the Tory party.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> not sure that's particularly humiliating


I suspect Eritrean prisons make Pontins look like a holiday camp


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I suspect Eritrean prisons make Pontins look like a holiday camp


yeh but i suspect eritrean prisons look nicer the further you're away from them and someone renouncing their eritrean citizenship while in somewhere like italy or even ethiopia might enjoy the view from such a distance.


----------



## Idris2002 (Sep 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but i suspect eritrean prisons look nicer the further you're away from them and someone renouncing their eritrean citizenship while in somewhere like italy or even ethiopia might enjoy the view from such a distance.


No. The present peace deal between Eritrea and Ethiopia is almost certainly going to lead to "send 'em back" where Eritrean refugees are concerned, but believe you me, those refugees are not viewing the old country through rose-tinted glasses. A big factor is the generational split between the present wave of Eritrean refugees, and the older folk who came over during the liberation war of 1961 - 1991. The latter group are still loyal to the present Eritrean government. . . the younger generation are almost invariably not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2018)

Idris2002 said:


> No. The present peace deal between Eritrea and Ethiopia is almost certainly going to lead to "send 'em back" where Eritrean refugees are concerned, but believe you me, those refugees are not viewing the old country through rose-tinted glasses. A big factor is the generational split between the present wave of Eritrean refugees, and the older folk who came over during the liberation war of 1961 - 1991. The latter group are still loyal to the present Eritrean government. . . the younger generation are almost invariably not.


i'm by no means saying people view eritrea through rose-tinted spectacles but i am saying that the further away from an eritrean prison, and consequently with a diminished chance of ending up in one, the walls of the prison take on a less appalling hue.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I would think there's a technical problem with any vote that has more than two options - if the winner comes out with less than 50 per cent but it is at one or other 'extreme' along whichever line there is, such as hard, soft or no brexit, then that isn't really a mandate to do that thing.


What does that have to do with McDonnell's suggestion?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What's stopping the EU from handing out (real) EU passports: i.e ones that aren't printed & distributed by a nation state but the EU itself in Brussels - where a holder would be a proto European of full integration?


The EU isn't a state, it doesn't have any territory under its exclusive control so the holder of such a passport would have to live in a member state thus making themselves subject to that countries rules


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Any thoughts on McDonnell's "vote on the deal, but not include an option to remain" gambit?
> 
> I'm undecided.



I quite like that to be honest - I mean repeating the same referendum again will be disastrous for a multitude of reasons not least reducing the likelihood of a Labour government. But we had a referendum (which we all agree was mad, not really #ProperDemocracy and didn't really tell us what people wanted). Saying that the Tories have to come up with something that matches what people wanted, offering people the chance to say "nah this is rubbish try again" and then presumably have an election where both parties explain how they will deal with the referendum has a certain appeal.

Having said that, if that is what happens Labour would have to be clear about what they would do differently so I hope McDonnell has an answer ready. Despite the motion at LP conference, I don't think arguing for full participation in the Single Market is likely to play well in a GE.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Despite the motion at LP conference, I don't think arguing for full participation in the Single Market is likely to play well in a GE.



Which is another bizarre thing, at least going by my own estimation of how many leavers I expect had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which is another bizarre thing, at least going by my own estimation of how many leavers I expect had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting.



How many leavers do you think had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How many leavers do you think had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting?



I mean, it's a rough estimate, but it could have been anything up to 12.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which is another bizarre thing, at least going by my own estimation of how many leavers I expect had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting.


'Continued access to the single market alongside freedom for the UK to strike bilateral trade deals with countries outside the EU'

That was the cry.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Continued access to the single market alongside freedom for the UK to strike bilateral trade deals with countries outside the EU'
> 
> That was the cry.



"... and the freedom to have bendy bananas".


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How many leavers do you think had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting?



But few of them really had leaving it at the forefront either, because they were told continued access to it would be ‘easy’.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> But few of them really had leaving it at the forefront either, because they were told continued access to it would be ‘easy’.



I never accessed the thing before, so I don't see why anyone's worrying about it now!


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What's stopping the EU from handing out (real) EU passports: i.e ones that aren't printed & distributed by a nation state but the EU itself in Brussels - where a holder would be a proto European of full integration?


Biggest heach rEU thinks it faces is Med migration issue (what the majority of the discussion in Salzburg was actually about) .. States away from the Med would be wary of those passports being issued in say Italy or Greece to get them out of there.


Last NGO shop operating in the Med got de flagged today


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Q1: Deal?
> 
> Deal.
> No Deal.
> ...


Can we have £72K each for doing it as well?  (warning writing What the fuck is the point of politicians? on your ballot paper would spoil it)


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

Wilf said:


> It does re-emphasise what a tremendous fuck up the whole thing has been, from Cameron failing to build in any kind of clarity on how the final terms would be agreed, to the Tories fucking everything up in the negotiations (to the point where it's not even clear whether 'chequers' still exists), to Labour having no way of relating the leadership to what the members/unions wanted... only thing that's clear is we won't be in the EU... at some point.. under some kind of conditions.


To be fair he did. Spent a lot of money on that leaflet that went out at taxpayers expense... Shame Mrs May didn't read it


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> Which is another bizarre thing, at least going by my own estimation of how many leavers I expect had the single market at the forefront of their mind when voting.


Hard to say a lot of effort was expended by both referendum campaigns to say the EU and the Single Market were the same thing


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> "... and the freedom to have bendy bananas".


Don't drag the WTO acquis into this


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2018)

Well, if this doesn't concentrate minds to get a proper Brexit deal sorted then nothing will 

Brexit: Pet travel warning in no-deal planning papers


----------



## paolo (Sep 24, 2018)

I don’t quite follow McDonnels referendum proposal, in terms of what happens if the vote is to reject the deal.

If I understand it rightly, in that case, he’s saying government is sent back to renegotiate. But what then?

Referendum No.3, on deal v2?
Or deal v2 then happens regardless?
Or (a variation) deal v2 is not meaningfully different than v1, and happens regardless?

Or maybe he means only have referendum No. 2, if there’s no deal? Choices being accept no deal, or send govt back to get any deal other than crash out?

Anyone know?


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> Well, if this doesn't concentrate minds to get a proper Brexit deal sorted then nothing will
> 
> Brexit: Pet travel warning in no-deal planning papers



State media will be under instruction not to play into the hands of 'project fear'.  The actual papers  Department for Transport publishes no deal planning information, actually have some more serious concerns....However, whilst the concerns raised, are real, grave and need to be sorted its assembled from a paper experts point of view, actual headaches from a real logistics point of view aren't taken into account....


Anyway, off shopping ...number of tins I'm buying is going to go up


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> Well, if this doesn't concentrate minds to get a proper Brexit deal sorted then nothing will
> 
> Brexit: Pet travel warning in no-deal planning papers



Oh noes, can’t take em to the EU, but can continue to take them to most of the Caribbean, the US and so on...


----------



## mauvais (Sep 24, 2018)

paolo said:


> I don’t quite follow McDonnels referendum proposal, in terms of what happens if the vote is to reject the deal.
> 
> If I understand it rightly, in that case, he’s saying government is sent back to renegotiate. But what then?
> 
> ...


It's a hedge isn't it. By the time there's been a referendum, a rejection, another process of negotiation, all that need happen is the wind blow the wrong way for a second and suddenly there's something more important to do than figure out Brexit, well, we tried, etcetera. Lord knows we're due plenty of such events - second debt crisis anyone?

The whole thing kicks the can down the road and on balance that's probably a better electoral approach than openly offering the possibility of Remain.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 24, 2018)

gosub said:


> State media will be under instruction not to play into the hands of 'project fear'.  The actual papers  Department for Transport publishes no deal planning information, actually have some more serious concerns....However, whilst the concerns raised, are real, grave and need to be sorted its assembled from a paper experts point of view, actual headaches from a real logistics point of view aren't taken into account....
> 
> 
> *Anyway, off shopping ...number of tins I'm buying is going to go up*



Well it's a nice bit of nostalgia for those folk who vaguely remember rationing.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2018)

mauvais said:


> It's a hedge isn't it. By the time there's been a referendum, a rejection, another process of negotiation, all that need happen is the wind blow the wrong way for a second and suddenly there's something more important to do than figure out Brexit, well, we tried, etcetera. Lord knows we're due plenty of such events - second debt crisis anyone?
> 
> The whole thing kicks the can down the road and on balance that's probably a better electoral approach than openly offering the possibility of Remain.



That was prettt much my thinking


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 24, 2018)

paolo said:


> I don’t quite follow McDonnels referendum proposal, in terms of what happens if the vote is to reject the deal.
> 
> If I understand it rightly, in that case, he’s saying government is sent back to renegotiate. But what then?
> 
> ...



and of course any of the above relies on the rest of the EU agreeing to extend the article 50 period rather than saying 'piss off' or the local equivalent in a variety of languages...


----------



## mauvais (Sep 24, 2018)

8ball said:


> That was prettt much my thinking


After 52% vote in favour of _some_ form of Brexit, then 50%+ vote against against _that_ form of it, especially if it's an inherited one, I think you can start to form any narrative you like, much more freely than now. A Labour govt has far more latitude to draw a line under matters than May or most obvious successors do to blame their own party for not only initiating it all but inventing the various permutations of this mess.

GE then prompt referendum for some arbitrary reason is therefore wise from a Labour POV. For the Tories the best options must be either cooperate long enough to force some wonky shit through or three-option referendum where oh dear the people can't decide we'll have to be very clear that the UK deserves a fairer deal for allonewordhardworkingfamilies and whilst we are still in the EU we're going to be very clear very clear very clear OutOfMemoryException line 1127.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2018)

mauvais said:


> It's a hedge isn't it. By the time there's been a referendum, a rejection, another process of negotiation, all that need happen is the wind blow the wrong way for a second and suddenly there's something more important to do than figure out Brexit, well, we tried, etcetera. Lord knows we're due plenty of such events - second debt crisis anyone?
> 
> The whole thing kicks the can down the road and on balance that's probably a better electoral approach than openly offering the possibility of Remain.



It would definitely be better to demand a General Election and promise a different kind of Brexit - dare we say it a Socialist one - but this does not seem to be something Corbyn and McDonnell are ready to do.


----------



## paolo (Sep 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It would definitely be better to demand a General Election and promise a different kind of Brexit - dare we say it a Socialist one - but this does not seem to be something Corbyn and McDonnell are ready to do.



Sounds stretchy... What’s the minimum run time for a GE? I.e. what time left after to negotiate a different deal before march 29?

Or are you thinking, after a GE win, Labour then go for an extension to exit?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 24, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It would definitely be better to demand a General Election and promise a different kind of Brexit - dare we say it a Socialist one - but this does not seem to be something Corbyn and McDonnell are ready to do.



Labour have been demanding an election all weekend.


----------



## paolo (Sep 24, 2018)

How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?

I feel like a fuckwit for asking, please help.

Footnote: Yes, I'd like one. How do I "demand" it?


----------



## gosub (Sep 25, 2018)

paolo said:


> How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?
> 
> I feel like a fuckwit for asking, please help.
> 
> Footnote: Yes, I'd like one. How do I "demand" it?




That was a vox pops from 2years ago


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2018)

paolo said:


> How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?
> 
> I feel like a fuckwit for asking, please help.
> 
> Footnote: Yes, I'd like one. How do I "demand" it?


There won't be an election and Corbyn knows it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 25, 2018)

Corbyn is pissing me off with all this stuff. He's game-playing when he doesn't really hold any cards, calculating what best to say to shore up his own public support, whether to demand elections or referendums he has no way to bring about. I'd be more inclined to vote for him and his shower if he just came out and told us what he actually thinks about brexit and the tory handling of it, which is a massive open goal.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 25, 2018)

At least Labour have put indyref2 to bed. No more trouble from Scotland.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 25, 2018)

paolo said:


> How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?



It doesn't, but when everything goes down the cludgie Corbyn gets to say 'you should've called an election'.

How this actually helps anyone or anything remains unclear. Might get Labour an extra 2% in the polls, at the low low price of economic catastrophe.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2018)

paolo said:


> How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?
> 
> I feel like a fuckwit for asking, please help.
> 
> Footnote: Yes, I'd like one. How do I "demand" it?


How have those opposed to leaving the EU demanded the process is stopped? It'll be similar to that I imagine.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> At least Labour have put indyref2 to bed. No more trouble from Scotland.


That's us told then.


----------



## nuffsaid (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Corbyn is pissing me off with all this stuff. He's game-playing when he doesn't really hold any cards, calculating what best to say to shore up his own public support, whether to demand elections or referendums he has no way to bring about. I'd be more inclined to vote for him and his shower if he just came out and told us what he actually thinks about brexit and the tory handling of it, which is a massive open goal.



Yes, he's hedging his bets. If he comes out as definite remain he'll lose the leave vote and vice-versa. He'd rather just fight the tories on NHS, jobs, wages etc. and hope the tories implode over Brexit. But to be a viable alternative he needs a Brexit plan and Labour seem as split as the Tories do on Brexit and he doesn't want the spotlight on that. How can you have a vote on the terms of leaving for goodness sake. If that's a No then we have to re-negotiate all over again, while the deadline for Article 50 passes and we end up with no deal. The country can't vote on every flipping detail of a deal, over and over again, that's nonsense.


----------



## sealion (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Corbyn is pissing me off with all this stuff. He's game-playing when he doesn't really hold any cards, calculating what best to say to shore up his own public support, whether to demand elections or referendums he has no way to bring about. I'd be more inclined to vote for him and his shower if he just came out and told us what he actually thinks about brexit and the tory handling of it, which is a massive open goal.


He knows he will alienate either the brexiters that voted for him or the corbynista remainers that shout loudest for him. Ambiguity will only buy him so much time.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 25, 2018)

twitterbox is full of people screaming that brexit is the only political reality ever and whoever offers a second reff gets thier vote. Still others are insisting that without endorsing a second reff labour are fucked. A hell of a lot utterly convinced that the labour surge was down to an anti brexit vote, while the polls remain near as dammit neck and neck as they have done for ages. No change. Its almost like brexit might not be the be all and end all for some voters eh.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 25, 2018)

Labour don't really need to present a plan for Brexit, and to try at this stage can only lose them support from somewhere or other. They know for the time being they just need to wait for the tories to eviscerate themselves over it. There are ten thousand ways to hedge and while Labour aren't in control of Brexit, all they really need to do is keep banging on about everything else that matters; jobs, wages, utilities, housing, education, social care...

Also, yesterday's announced plan to appropriate 10% of profits from companies with over 250 employees seems like the kind of thing the EU might not ultimately like too much; so a plan like that may end up wedding them to some form of Brexit anyway.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 25, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Also, yesterday's announced plan to appropriate 10% of profits from companies with over 250 employees seems like the kind of thing the EU might not ultimately like too much; so a plan like that may end up wedding them to some form of Brexit anyway.



I can already see the loopholes in that plan. One word: agencies.


----------



## Chz (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can already see the loopholes in that plan. One word: agencies.


Actually thinking things through is not a strong point of any politician. Corbyn is no different to any other in that regard. It sounds like one of those ideas that will struggle to fund itself due to the costs of actually chasing down the revenue. Any true giant of the marketplace will just make sure not to have any profits (on paper) in the meantime.


----------



## mojo pixy (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can already see the loopholes in that plan. One word: agencies.



But if the agency has more than X (250?) staff on its books, they have to give up their 10% as well. I don't know, I like the idea so I'd tend to argue for it to some logical conclusion, given available alternatives. Certainly the CBI's response yesterday was a bit of vague bluster about _discouraging investors_ and _wages will fall_. No details obvs, just the scary buzzphrases.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can already see the loopholes in that plan. One word: agencies.



A company like BT would have trouble with that.

What I'm not sure was focused on which very much should be is bogus self-employment, needs to be totally stamped out, that would wipe out a lot of these employment agency parasites too.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 25, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> twitterbox is full of people screaming that brexit is the only political reality ever and whoever offers a second reff gets thier vote. Still others are insisting that without endorsing a second reff labour are fucked. A hell of a lot utterly convinced that the labour surge was down to an anti brexit vote, while the polls remain near as dammit neck and neck as they have done for ages. No change. Its almost like brexit might not be the be all and end all for some voters eh.



Labour are slightly slipping in the polls despite the Tories horror show. Why that should be isn’t clear, maybe Jezza and AS, maybe Brexit fudge.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 25, 2018)

Kier Starmer just told conference that if it comes to a 2nd ref "nobody is ruling out remain" - to wild applause. The leadership and Unite are trying to drag things back to rule out remain on any hypothetical 2nd ref - so interesting upping of the brexit ante their. 

In terms of cynical politics labours position is cautious but probably quite astute - but if we get closer no deal the pressure for a 2nd ref will only increase. 

If may fails to come back with a deal she has to choose between crashing out or finding some way of extending A50. The EU have said this is possible - but would probably only agree if there was going to be GE or 2nd ref. Leaving May - and the tories - with a choice of political suicides.
I seriously doubt "no deal" will happen - enough tory mps will rebel because the political pressure will be irresistible - and i would think they are more likely to go for a 2nd ref than a GE.  
In that situation there is no "final deal" to vote on - and labour have probably enough political cover to go for a 2nd ref with a choice of leave and renegotiating under an A50 extension - or cancel the whole thing.  

Im not sure the EU actually want a deal - even if there is one that the commons will agree to - they may very well be happy to allow a "no deal" situation to develop so as to create the political crisis which leads to brexit being abandoned and the UK - and the tories in particular - being humiliated.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour have been demanding an election all weekend.



Yes but they should have been doing it for months. 



paolo said:


> How does "demanding an election" actually end up in there being an election?
> 
> I feel like a fuckwit for asking, please help.
> 
> Footnote: Yes, I'd like one. How do I "demand" it?



I mean, with the fixed term parliament act, it's a bit trickier sure. But it's easy enough for Corbyn to just say every time he's interviewed "The Tories are a mess, they're not fit to govern, we need an election so that a Labour govt can fix the NHS, reverse austerity and sort out Brexit" or similar. He can add "They won't call an election because they know they'll lose but we have to have one now". I honestly don't understand why he didn't say this when David Davis resigned. Eventually May will have to respond and of course she can't say "We just had an election and the Tories won" because they didn't. If they won't call one Corbyn could call a Tories Out demo in London, which lets face it would probably be better than the last TUC "new deal" effort. The Tories would look like a joke, desperately clinging to power with the Brexit mess in the papers every day. It would be hard for them to avoid an election then, as oppose to now where there's zero pressure for one and they're surviving.



paolo said:


> Sounds stretchy... What’s the minimum run time for a GE? I.e. what time left after to negotiate a different deal before march 29?
> 
> Or are you thinking, after a GE win, Labour then go for an extension to exit?



I mean, all this would depend on Corbyn having something to say about Brexit.  But if it were me, I would say that the last 8 years show we need the Tories out, and in the event of a no deal Brexit Labour would take radical Socialist measures to protect jobs and living standards. EU can offer an extension if they want to (reckon they would) but don't beg for it, frame it as sorting out the mess the Tories made. Which is probably as good a narrative as any to justify nationalising stuff. 

But hey what do I know I'm not even allowed to join the LP?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im not sure the EU actually want a deal



They don't. Yanis Varoufakis said that from the off. 

Today Barnier is in genial mood, Tusk is in a bad mood, Junker is drunk. Tomorrow Tusk will be amenable, Barnier with the hump and Junker drunk. And so on until March comes and goes...

As much as the scare stories sound scary, the choice is stay or go. The EU has been very clear that the UK cannot pick and choose which bits it wants.

The current talks are after all just the terms of our departure, not our future relationship. Makes sense to just do the off and start from there, unless we stay in that's what will happen anyway, but possibly with a hefty bill attached to it and a break up of the UK thrown in for lolz too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> At least Labour have put indyref2 to bed. No more trouble from Scotland.



So stupid. Why doesn't he go to Scotland and say "Look, I want you to stay, but you deserve the choice - try 3 years of a Socialist Labour government and then you can have another ref and I won't interfere." He'd probably get a better vote than Cameron did for staying in the UK.

He won't though cos he's a nobber.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So stupid. Why doesn't he go to Scotland and say "Look, I want you to stay, but you deserve the choice - try 3 years of a Socialist Labour government and then you can have another ref and I won't interfere." He'd probably get a better vote than Cameron did for staying in the UK.
> 
> He won't though cos he's a nobber.



Have you seen the state of Scottish Labour?  Why would anyone want to vote for that lot?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So stupid. Why doesn't he go to Scotland and say "Look, I want you to stay, but you deserve the choice - try 3 years of a Socialist Labour government and then you can have another ref and I won't interfere." He'd probably get a better vote than Cameron did for staying in the UK.
> 
> He won't though cos he's a nobber.


Realistically, any Labour govt in the near future is only going to get into power in coalition with the SNP. Many of the things Corbyn would be seeking to implement at first would be things Scotland already has within its devolved powers, so I'm not sure what this kind of approach would be aimed at achieving.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 25, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They don't. Yanis Varoufakis said that from the off.
> 
> The current talks are after all just the terms of our departure, not our future relationship. Makes sense to just do the off and start from there, unless we stay in that's what will happen anyway, but possibly with a hefty bill attached to it and a break up of the UK thrown in for lolz too.



"Just doing the off" means no deal, WTO trade rules and hard border in norn ireland - plus loads of other hugely disruptive shit. The closer we get to that happen the louder the screaming will be from the everyone from the CBI to the trade unions to the NHS to the universities plus most of the media, you could see share price crash and stirling devaluing.
It doesn't even matter weather it will be as bad as is being made out - if becomes a self fulfilling prophecy - i wouldn't be at all surprised if there was panic buying of food and fuel and mass demonstrations. The pressure on the government will be phenomenal. 
Something will have to give. 

This maybe labour's calculation - dont campaign for Breverse (is that a thing yet?) - pretend to respect the referendum and blame the tories for cocking the whole thing up so spectacularly that a 2nd ref or general election) is the only way out to avoid the crunch. 

The EU have already indicated that A50 can be extended if their is going to be a GE or 2nd ref - as they dont want a no deal either - and this way gives  them a major political victory rather than conceding anything to the UK. 

The legacy of all this is likely to quite toxic thought - simmering resentment from a big chunk of the population at the EU and the "brexit betrayers" - I guess Labour is trying to minimise how much of that sticks to them and hoping to capitalise on disaster it will bring down on the tories. 

I think remainers seriously underestimate the level of swivel eyed hatred a large number of people have for the EU - and i dont think its likely that labour will escape their ire whatever political dancing they do around the issue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "Just doing the off" means no deal, WTO trade rules and hard border in norn ireland - plus loads of other hugely disruptive shit. The closer we get to that happen the louder the screaming will be from the everyone from the CBI to the trade unions to the NHS to the universities plus most of the media, you could see share price crash and stirling devaluing.
> It doesn't even matter weather it will be as bad as is being made out - if becomes a self fulfilling prophecy - i wouldn't be at all surprised if there was panic buying of food and fuel and mass demonstrations. The pressure on the government will be phenomenal.
> Something will have to give.
> 
> ...


as has been said above there is no happy way out of this


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Realistically, any Labour govt in the near future is only going to get into power in coalition with the SNP. Many of the things Corbyn would be seeking to implement at first would be things Scotland already has within its devolved powers, so I'm not sure what this kind of approach would be aimed at achieving.


quoted for posterity


----------



## Poi E (Sep 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Many of the things Corbyn would be seeking to implement at first would be things Scotland already has within its devolved powers



Such as?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Such as?


Such as education and social care.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Have you seen the state of Scottish Labour?  Why would anyone want to vote for that lot?



Good time to sort it out then innit? What can they say - leave us alone we're doing so well as an electoral force?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Realistically, any Labour govt in the near future is only going to get into power in coalition with the SNP. Many of the things Corbyn would be seeking to implement at first would be things Scotland already has within its devolved powers, so I'm not sure what this kind of approach would be aimed at achieving.



SNP aren't offering that could even vaguely be described as Socialist. You're revealing a lack of ambition comrade.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think remainers seriously underestimate the level of swivel eyed hatred a large number of people have for the EU



What's with the swivel eyed? I hate the EU and my mam says I've got lovely eyes.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> SNP aren't offering that could even vaguely be described as Socialist. You're revealing a lack of ambition comrade.


And you're revealing a lack of knowledge.  You may want to check on that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What's with the swivel eyed? I hate the EU and my mam says I've got lovely eyes.



Im sure your eyes dont swivel very much at all - but in the readers comments section of any non-guardian newspaper - "were leaving - end of" "remainers = traitors" "we're britain - the eu can fuck off" + shed loads of barely disguised racism  is the pretty much the overwhelming tone. I dont agree the lexit views here - but those arguments are actually based on facts on logic - these are people who are fuelled by what seems like unrelenting rage and and are not up discussing anything.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can already see the loopholes in that plan. One word: agencies.


There's a much better loophole which the Govt can't close which is foreign ownership, since it obviously can't impose these rules on non-British companies where the shares are held abroad, expect to see companies moving their HQ's and their stock market listing abroad.
It's going to have a similar problem when it comes to renationalising things like water and energy, a lot of these companies are foreign and may very well fight it in both their home country courts as well as the UK ones (or the ECJ depending on the Brexit deal) It can still be done but it will take longer and cost a lot more.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> And you're revealing a lack of knowledge.  You may want to check on that.



Please do enlighten me


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im sure your eyes dont swivel very much at all - but in the readers comments section of any non-guardian newspaper - "were leaving - end of" "remainers = traitors" "we're britain - the eu can fuck off" + shed loads of barely disguised racism  is the pretty much the overwhelming tone. I dont agree the lexit views here - but those arguments are actually based on facts on logic - these are people who are fuelled by what seems like unrelenting rage and and are not up discussing anything.


You really need to stop reading the Express or Mail readers comments, it reveals the very worse side of the human race and it is very depressing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im sure your eyes dont swivel very much at all - but in the readers comments section of any non-guardian newspaper - "were leaving - end of" "remainers = traitors" "we're britain - the eu can fuck off" + shed loads of barely disguised racism  is the pretty much the overwhelming tone. I dont agree the lexit views here - but those arguments are actually based on facts on logic - these are people who are fuelled by what seems like unrelenting rage and and are not up discussing anything.



I mean I do logic and facts but I hope my unrelenting rage is not in question?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> There's a much better loophole which the Govt can't close which is foreign ownership, since it obviously can't impose these rules on non-British companies where the shares are held abroad, expect to see companies moving their HQ's and their stock market listing abroad.
> It's going to have a similar problem when it comes to renationalising things like water and energy, a lot of these companies are foreign and may very well fight it in both their home country courts as well as the UK ones (or the ECJ depending on the Brexit deal) It can still be done but it will take longer and cost a lot more.



I think the original point was that this policy would conflict with Single Market membership.


----------



## andysays (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> There's a much better loophole which the Govt can't close which is foreign ownership, since it obviously can't impose these rules on non-British companies where the shares are held abroad, expect to see companies moving their HQ's and their stock market listing abroad.
> It's going to have a similar problem when it comes to renationalising things like water and energy, a lot of these companies are foreign and may very well fight it in both their home country courts as well as the UK ones (or the ECJ depending on the Brexit deal) It can still be done but it will take longer and cost a lot more.


British employment law applys in all cases where people are employed in Britain, regardless of the ultimate 'nationality' of the employing company


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> British employment law apply to all cases where people are employed in Britain, regardless of the ultimate 'nationality' of the employing company


Employment and criminal law yes, corporate law no, the British government can't change the legal structure of an American company, McDonnell knows this which is why he said British companies in his speech.
There is no way that a Labour Govt is going  to be able to force Amazon whose shares are traded on the New York stock exchange to put 1% of them a year in a fund to benefit UK workers.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> You really need to stop reading the Express or Mail readers comments, it reveals the very worse side of the human race and it is very depressing.



try the yorkshire evening post or any local newspaper outside of london. or bbc comments. or talk radio. or quite a few people ive met IRL. They are not a majority - but its not a fringe view at all.


----------



## Chz (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> You really need to stop reading the Express or Mail readers comments, it reveals the very worse side of the human race and it is very depressing.


Given that the paper itself is generally well-written, the state of the Telegraph's comments section is really quite astounding. Barely literate lunatics, for the most part. Or at least it was that way the last time I looked a few years back. I can't imagine it's actually improved.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> try the yorkshire evening post or any local newspaper outside of london. or bbc comments. or talk radio. or quite a few people ive met IRL. They are not a majority - but its not a fringe view at all.



It's worth bearing in mind that for a long time UKIP staffers have targeted comments sections in the press. Or at least this is what a journalist friend tells me - she claimed that sometimes 80% of comments on a story would be from the same group of IP addresses which matched with people sending out UKIP press statements.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Please do enlighten me


Check for yourself.

Our record


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's worth bearing in mind that for a long time UKIP staffers have targeted comments sections in the press. Or at least this is what a journalist friend tells me - she claimed that sometimes 80% of comments on a story would be from the same group of IP addresses which matched with people sending out UKIP press statements.



Im sure that's part of it  - but its still a real and widespread POV


----------



## kebabking (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Employment and criminal law yes, corporate law no, the British government can't change the legal structure of an American company, McDonnell knows this which is why he said British companies in his speech.
> There is no way that a Labour Govt is going  to be able to force Amazon whose shares are traded on the New York stock exchange to put 1% of them a year in a fund to benefit UK workers.



i disagree - UK employment law can force companies, even if owned overseas, to pay employer contributions for pensions, so we've already crossed the salary+ rubicon. if the legislation was framed so that shares were a mandated part of any renumeration/pension package, as they are for many senior staff in commercial organisations, then you get around any problem.

the clever thing would then be for a union or other organisation to form a stakeholder vehicle whereby individual shareholders could pool their votes into one large block, as the commercial managers do in the private sector.

it would, imv, be unhelpful to get to specific/fussed about in exactly what way shares should come into the hands of the employees of a company - all that matters is that they do, and that they are used, collectively, in the employees interests.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Check for yourself.
> 
> Our record



Now who's revealing a lack of knowledge? 

On what basis can you honestly and with a straight face call this anaemic take on extremely limited social democracy socialism?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im sure that's part of it  - but its still a real and widespread POV



And always will be while we remain in the EU.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> i disagree - UK employment law can force companies, even if owned overseas, to pay employer contributions for pensions, so we've already crossed the salary+ rubicon. if the legislation was framed so that shares were a mandated part of any renumeration/pension package, as they are for many senior staff in commercial organisations, then you get around any problem.
> 
> the clever thing would then be for a union or other organisation to form a stakeholder vehicle whereby individual shareholders could pool their votes into one large block, as the commercial managers do in the private sector.
> 
> it would, imv, be unhelpful to get to specific/fussed about in exactly what way shares should come into the hands of the employees of a company - all that matters is that they do, and that they are used, collectively, in the employees interests.


I actually think staff owning shares is a good idea and am all in favour of it,my previous employee had a share save scheme, I never used it because it was an American company and folks had to deal with US brokers since the shares were held on the New York exchange, any UK scheme that involves the shares of foreign companies is going to hit these problems, Pension contributions are just money, shares aren't.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2018)

Where we are now, I've got a tendency to think about it in terms of agency rather than the structural context, maybe too much so.  But I see May's position being the core of the issue: she (and those around her) have no rationale other than to do a deal, almost regardless of what it is. That's the only way to put right her fuck up in calling the 2017 election. It's a kind of pragmatic shitting desperation that the swivellers know they can humiliate and disrupt, but won't be able to displace. If anything Labour are in a worse position, because they offer very little threat in terms of a vote of no confidence. The only vote of no confidence/gen election scenario would be Lab + all opposition parties + swivellers - most unlikely (Lab and opposition parties plus Soubry et al doesn't work mathematically because of Field etc).

I don't personally agree with the 'Corbyn has played a blinder, leaving the Tories to fuck up' line, with this 5 tests or whatever (though I think many on here do).  A result is that Labour are unable to really get across to voters that they are on the side of the coalition of voters they need* (working class/working class brexiteers/middle class young/precarious etc.).  Don't think Labour knows how to pull that together and is failing to do so in the context of brexit.

* Pedantic bit of anarcho-distancing: _I'm_ not a fan of cross class alliances, but surely Corbyn is in his brand of politics.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Now who's revealing a lack of knowledge?
> 
> On what basis can you honestly and with a straight face call this anaemic take on extremely limited social democracy socialism?


Well...I would be comparing it to the UK governments over the past few decades and the cultural and social differences between Scotland and the UK.  I take it you're comparing it to some non-existent utopia you've imagined.

And as to 'anaemic'...mind yourself...it's better than you lot have managed, don't forget.   You've achieved fuck all.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 25, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour are slightly slipping in the polls despite the Tories horror show.



yougov had them down against con the other day opinium up. oddly it seems the lib dems are gaining in some polls, not much but a bounce.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Well...I would be comparing it to the UK governments over the past few decades and the cultural and social differences between Scotland and the UK.  I take it you're comparing it to some non-existent utopia you've imagined.
> 
> And as to 'anaemic'...mind yourself...it's better than you lot have managed, don't forget.   You've achieved fuck all.



Your use of 'you' and 'we' merely serves to highlight your class treachery.

What have you achieved?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Where we are now, I've got a tendency to think about it in terms of agency rather than the structural context, maybe too much so.  But I see May's position being the core of the issue: she (and those around her) have no rationale other than to do a deal, almost regardless of what it is. That's the only way to put right her fuck up in calling the 2017 election. It's a kind of pragmatic shitting desperation that the swivellers know they can humiliate and disrupt, but won't be able to displace. If anything Labour are in a worse position, because they offer very little threat in terms of a vote of no confidence. The only vote of no confidence/gen election scenario would be Lab + all opposition parties + swivellers - most unlikely (Lab and opposition parties plus Soubry et al doesn't work mathematically because of Field etc).
> 
> I don't personally agree with the 'Corbyn has played a blinder, leaving the Tories to fuck up' line, with this 5 tests or whatever (though I think many on here do).  A result is that Labour are unable to really get across to voters that they are on the side of the coalition of voters they need* (working class/working class brexiteers/middle class young/precarious etc.).  Don't think Labour knows how to pull that together and is failing to do so in the context of brexit.
> 
> * Pedantic bit of anarcho-distancing: _I'm_ not a fan of cross class alliances, but surely Corbyn is in his brand of politics.


The swivellers aren't going to bring down May unless they can be sure of replacing her with one of their own, no matter how much they hate her for not believing in their one True Cause, bringing her down is too risky,
Labour have at least a fighting chance of winning a GE, and isn't going to deliver a Brexit that Mogg wants, if they delay it, it will be almost as bad as cancelling it since if you can delay for 6 months you can delay for a year, if you can delay for 2 years, The longer it gets delayed the more likely it just gets canned. A Labour that depends on the SNP for power (which is as serious possibility) might just can it up front.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Your use of 'you' and 'we' merely serves to highlight your class treachery.
> 
> What have you achieved?


Nope...you said our achievements were anaemic...I asked what your movement has done.  That's entirely fair.  

Take away accusation and insult, your answer was empty.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> The swivellers aren't going to bring down May unless they can be sure of replacing her with one of their own, no matter how much they hate her for not believing in their one True Cause, bringing her down is too risky,
> Labour have at least a fighting chance of winning a GE, and isn't going to deliver a Brexit that Mogg wants, if they delay it, it will be almost as bad as cancelling it since if you can delay for 6 months you can delay for a year, if you can delay for 2 years, The longer it gets delayed the more likely it just gets canned. A Labour that depends on the SNP for power (which is as serious possibility) might just can it up front.


To be honest, I can't see any route to a general election _pre_-brexit. Only scenario _afterwards_ is May resigning or being kicked out and a new Tory Leader calling one (via fixed term parliament shenanigans). Be daft predicting what would happen in a GE now or next year, given the disparity between polls and result in 2017. But really, Labour should be miles ahead now. Personally, I don't think Corbyn will ever be PM.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nope...you said our achievements were anaemic...I asked what your movement has done.  That's entirely fair.
> 
> Take away accusation and insult, your answer was empty.



The SNP isn't a movement. My movement, the labour movement, has achieved quite a lot mate


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Your use of 'you' and 'we' merely serves to highlight your class treachery.
> 
> What have you achieved?


wasting your time


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 25, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> yougov had them down against con the other day opinium up. oddly it seems the lib dems are gaining in some polls, not much but a bounce.



Labour are consistently down across most polls from where they were a few months back. It was neck a neck and has become mostly a Tory lead, which is astounding really. Maybe the conferences will change all that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour are consistently down across most polls from where they were a few months back. It was neck a neck and has become mostly a Tory lead, which is astounding really. Maybe the conferences will change all that.


Any politician will tell you there's only one poll that really matters. Who can forget last year's polls supporting May when she called the election, and the rather different figures which emerged on the night of the ge


----------



## kebabking (Sep 25, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour are consistently down across most polls from where they were a few months back. It was neck a neck and has become mostly a Tory lead, which is astounding really. Maybe the conferences will change all that.



there'll be a bounce, simply because there'll be publicity about things that have widespread, settled public support - rail nationalisation etc.. whereas the tory conference is pretty unlikely, even if it doesn't decend into actual violence, to offer much in the way of jam, because thats not what tories offer.

Labours problem - and there are worse problems to have - is that as the brexit date looms ever larger its options for fudging and using language to try and please as many possible and offending as few as possible are going to hit the sand. its going to wake up on 28th March with just three options, none of them attractive - help May push whatever basic deal she's got (air worthiness certification, security certification, Europol, that kind of stuff..) through, team up with the the remainiest Tories to force her to ask for an A50 extention, or sit back (while going on tv and saying how badly its all been done), and watch as no deal/crash out comes to pass.

all are going to look crap - coz they are - and all are going to lose votes by the barrowload.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 25, 2018)

to who, the new centrist party lol. Which is threatened once every two months now.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> there'll be a bounce, simply because there'll be publicity about things that have widespread, settled public support - rail nationalisation etc.. *whereas the tory conference is pretty unlikely, even if it doesn't decend into actual violence*, to offer much in the way of jam, because thats not what tories offer.


Now you're trying to get my hopes up now aren't you?, I am hoping for a repeat of last year's classic but I suspect someone will go round with a screwdriver and make sure everything is tightly fixed to the wall


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Any politician will tell you there's only one poll that really matters. Who can forget last year's polls supporting May when she called the election, and the rather different figures which emerged on the night of the ge



Very good point. Who could forget Ed’s sizeable lead either?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 25, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> to who, the new centrist party lol



no, the leavers will get the hump, as will the remainers. i think upsetting the remainers will effect Labour more as they _tend_ to be younger, _tend _to live in less 'weigh the Labour vote, don't bother counting it' constituancies and more marginals, _tend _to be more Corbynista, _tend_ to be more likely to be local activists at election time - and as they've (to some degree) emerged from nowhere, i think they may return there.


----------



## gosub (Sep 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Any politician will tell you there's only one poll that really matters. Who can forget last year's polls supporting May when she called the election, and the rather different figures which emerged on the night of the ge



except when its an election...where they seem to now think the results are only valid for 2 years or a referendum where you have another one coz you didn't like the result of the last one


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

gosub said:


> except when its an election...where they seem to now think the results are only valid for 2 years or a referendum where you have another one coz you didn't like the result of the last one


Does tm have a mandate for what she's doing? And do we yet know a) if there'll be a second ref and b) what any question in such an exercise will be? It's by no means certain any second vote would do other than repeat the previous result


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> no, the leavers will get the hump, as will the remainers. i think upsetting the remainers will effect Labour more as they _tend_ to be younger, _tend _to live in less 'weigh the Labour vote, don't bother counting it' constituancies and more marginals, _tend _to be more Corbynista, _tend_ to be more likely to be local activists at election time - and as they've (to some degree) emerged from nowhere, i think they may return there.


mild version of the youthquake/entryists line there tbf kebab, although you put a massive hedge of tends around it. I'd have thought pissing off the labour leave votes in the North/north east was the worry.


----------



## Duncan2 (Sep 25, 2018)

It seems to me actually inconceivable that a second referendum could take place reversing the result of the first referendum even before its implementation.I have been surprised before however.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 25, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> ..I'd have thought pissing off the labour leave votes in the North/north east was the worry.



dunno, massively stereotypical of course, but i think they are less likely to abandon Labour than people who are relatively new to Labour. in lots of the Northern and safe seats you could afford to drop 20% of the labour vote and still win comfortably, try that in the marginals in the Midlands and South and you'd go from first or close second to fucking miles away.


----------



## Winot (Sep 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> dunno, massively stereotypical of course, but i think they are less likely to abandon Labour than people who are relatively new to Labour. in lots of the Northern and safe seats you could afford to drop 20% of the labour vote and still win comfortably, try that in the marginals in the Midlands and South and you'd go from first or close second to fucking miles away.



Didn’t Labour’s vote in the NE go massively to UKIP in 2015?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 25, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> It seems to me actually inconceivable that a second referendum could take place reversing the result of the first referendum even before its implementation.I have been surprised before however.



This is kind of where I'm at, at the moment.  This being said though I'm not sure what happens if Parliament votes down May's shit deal, assuming she can even come back with one.  I presume she's resign, but what then?  Would the tory remainers bring down a government if it was headed by a no deal / crash out leaver?

Fuck knows, frankly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> This is kind of where I'm at, at the moment.  This being said though I'm not sure what happens if Parliament votes down May's shit deal, assuming she can even come back with one.  I presume she's resign, but what then?  Would the tory remainers bring down a government if it was headed by a no deal / crash out leaver?
> 
> Fuck knows, frankly.


It is the party before country conundrum


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It is the party before country conundrum



Not a conundrum for vermin; self first, then party. Fuck the country.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 25, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Now you're trying to get my hopes up now aren't you?, I am hoping for a repeat of last year's classic but I suspect someone will go round with a screwdriver and make sure everything is tightly fixed to the wall


There was a real air of decay last year that is likely to be repeated next week.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 26, 2018)

TopCat said:


> There was a real air of decay last year that is likely to be repeated next week.



Only if the ambulances are on strike.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 26, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> This is kind of where I'm at, at the moment.  This being said though I'm not sure what happens if Parliament votes down May's shit deal, assuming she can even come back with one.  I presume she's resign, but what then?  Would the tory remainers bring down a government if it was headed by a no deal / crash out leaver?
> 
> Fuck knows, frankly.


The timescales for doing anything about anything - leadership challenges, 2nd refs - are also very tight.  I'm not even sure, without checking, who takes over in the short term if May resigns. Don't think they have a deputy PM or party leader. Might be wrong, must check>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The timescales for doing anything about anything - leadership challenges, 2nd refs - are also very tight.  I'm not even sure, without checking, who takes over in the short term if May resigns. Don't think they have a deputy PM or party leader. Might be wrong, must check>>>>>>>>>>>


david lidington


----------



## Wilf (Sep 26, 2018)

Ah, yes:



> In May 2009, _The Daily Telegraph_ revealed Lidington had claimed nearly £1,300 for his dry cleaning and had also claimed for toothpaste, shower gel, body spray and vitamin supplements on his second home allowance.[11] Lidington decided to repay the claims for the toiletries, saying: "I accept that many people would see them as over-generous."
> 
> Lidington was also criticised by local newspaper the _Bucks Herald_ for claiming £115,891 in expenses in one year, almost double his salary.[12]


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 26, 2018)

Maybe he's really sweaty


----------



## Poi E (Sep 26, 2018)

Frequent showers.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 26, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Maybe he's really sweaty


I for one wouldn't want to deny our elected representatives getting a steady supply of Echinacea and Cranberry Concentrate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I for one wouldn't want to deny our elected representatives getting a steady supply of Echinacea and Cranberry Concentrate.


perhaps a single dose of hemlock for each would save money in the short-, medium-and long-term


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2018)

I see Boris has made another helpful contribution to the on-going Brexit discussion.

(we should Chuck Chequers and go for Super Canada, apparently)


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> I see Boris has made another helpful contribution to the on-going Brexit discussion.
> 
> (we should Chuck Chequers and go for Super Canada, apparently)



A major problem with all these sorts of proposals is that they seem to fundamentally rest on the concept of 'I'm a better negotiator'.  It should be very apparent to everyone now that the EU don't really do negotiation in any meaningful way, they certainly won't in this scenario.  

It may well be possible and indeed probable that some sort of 'Super Canada' deal can be achieved but it it seems to me that a crash out (no deal) would have to occur first.  Johnson should at least be honest about that, not that he would know honesty even if it kicked him square in the cock.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> A major problem with all these sorts of proposals is that they seem to fundamentally rest on the concept of 'I'm a better negotiator'.  It should be very apparent to everyone now that the EU don't really do negotiation in any meaningful way, they certainly won't in this scenario.
> 
> It may well be possible and indeed probable that some sort of 'Super Canada' deal can be achieved but it it seems to me that a crash out (no deal) would have to occur first.  Johnson should at least be honest about that, not that he would know honesty even if it kicked him square in the cock.


All negotiations involve not just argument and compromise but power

There is a clear power disparity here which the eu has and the UK doesn't.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 28, 2018)

Like it or not the EU is being the EU.
For the UK to be surprised or outraged by this is laughable.
The UK voted to leave the institution it helped to shape, so the initiative is with the UK.
Indeed some parts of the UK system is showing some initiative with it's 'technical notices'. Portaloos lined up in reserve for the M2 M20 which is supposed to be part of the UK plan is part of facing practicalities.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 28, 2018)

As a fucking huge political bloc by the UK it will continue to have influence over the UK. The UK will find trade deal negotiations changing along the way as the EU has words in back rooms with potential trading partners of the UK. Smaller fish in a bigger pond etc.


----------



## agricola (Sep 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All negotiations involve not just argument and compromise but power
> 
> There is a clear power disparity here which the eu has and the UK doesn't.



TBH the power disparity between the EU and the UK is nowhere near as significant as the competence disparity between the EU and UK, which is remarkable given that the EU is incompetent by design wheras we have somehow managed to generate a higher level of incompetence by accident.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the power disparity between the EU and the UK is nowhere near as significant as the competence disparity between the EU and UK, which is remarkable given that the EU is incompetent by design wheras we have somehow managed to generate a higher level of incompetence by accident.


True


----------



## gosub (Sep 28, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the power disparity between the EU and the UK is nowhere near as significant as the competence disparity between the EU and UK, which is remarkable given that the EU is incompetent by design wheras we have somehow managed to generate a higher level of incompetence by accident.


Not really, membership of the EU has hollowed out both our democracy and civil service


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 28, 2018)

gosub said:


> Not really, membership of the EU has hollowed out both our democracy and civil service


To be fair we've never had much democracy here anyway


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> To be fair we've never had much democracy here anyway



Yeah this.



gosub said:


> Not really, membership of the EU has hollowed out both our democracy and civil service



Please tell me about this golden age of democracy I missed.


----------



## andysays (Sep 28, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the power disparity between the EU and the UK is nowhere near as significant as the competence disparity between the EU and UK, which is remarkable given that the EU is incompetent by design wheras we have somehow managed to generate a higher level of incompetence by accident.


It might all have been different if the Conservatives had been able to agree amongst themselves what they wanted from Brexit, and were therefore able to present a coherent and united position in the leave negotiations.

But if the Conservatives HAD been able to agree amongst themselves, we would never have had a referendum in the first place...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2018)

Why do people pay any attention to Johnson? It’s not like he’s an economics whizz, a reknowned business guru or a financial Jedi - he s fucking classics toff with some journalism in his background .

I wish he would fuck off


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 28, 2018)

the tele politics shows and supposedly serious newspapers are all over shite like him and liddle and toby young etc and then have te gall to wail about toxic political discourse because joe ordinary called them a bellend on the internet


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 28, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Why do people pay any attention to Johnson? It’s not like he’s an economics whizz, a reknowned business guru or a financial Jedi - he s fucking classics toff with some journalism in his background .
> 
> I wish he would fuck off



His economics are well shit, I mean everything about him is well shit but his economics are particularly shit.  I read recently somewhere it was described as classic Laffer Curve, I'm not convinced its even that advanced.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 28, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH the power disparity between the EU and the UK is nowhere near as significant as the competence disparity between the EU and UK, which is remarkable given that the EU is incompetent by design wheras we have somehow managed to generate a higher level of incompetence by accident.



Not quite an accident; rich tax dodging parents, public school, PPE @ Oxford (nearly always Oxford so unfair to bring the other place in with Oxbridge), parliament. What could go wrong?


Ffs Cunthead Johnson is forever claiming he’s not posh or from a rich background, cos apparently he got some kind of bursary to Eton. His name is de Piffel something, he went to Eton, his sister works for The Lady, yet people buy his lies.



And


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 28, 2018)

It’s his current defence of such shit-stirring that he’s just standing up for what he strongly believes in, the same guy who sat on the fence about Brexit for a long time and wrote two articles to back up each position before plumping for leave. 

Believes in fucking nothing other than himself.


----------



## xarmian (Sep 29, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> A major problem with all these sorts of proposals is that they seem to fundamentally rest on the concept of 'I'm a better negotiator'.  It should be very apparent to everyone now that the EU don't really do negotiation in any meaningful way, they certainly won't in this scenario.
> 
> It may well be possible and indeed probable that some sort of 'Super Canada' deal can be achieved but it it seems to me that a crash out (no deal) would have to occur first.  Johnson should at least be honest about that, not that he would know honesty even if it kicked him square in the cock.



Any kind of Canada means agreeing to a border in the Irish Sea. That can't get through parliament.


----------



## flypanam (Sep 29, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s his current defence of such shit-stirring that he’s just standing up for what he strongly believes in, the same guy who sat on the fence about Brexit for a long time and wrote two articles to back up each position before plumping for leave.
> 
> Believes in fucking nothing other than himself.



True, he's so fucking mediocre. Privilege and it's preservation is his life blood without a system to prop him and his ilk up, he'd be nothing.


----------



## Winot (Sep 29, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> PPE @ Oxford



Classics. 

Excellent way to offend him though, suggesting that he did ‘Modern Greats’.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 29, 2018)

Yes - got a second in classics iirc -  utterly mortified & devastated at the result for months  - possibly explains a lot wrt to the party dynamics when Cameron was around


----------



## philosophical (Sep 29, 2018)

xarmian said:


> Any kind of Canada means agreeing to a border in the Irish Sea. That can't get through parliament.


Boris is reported as being irritated by the Irish issue, and has described it as the tail wagging the (Brexit) dog.
He should have thought of that before then.
He really is a nasty racist bastard and I am amazed anybody voted for him ever.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 29, 2018)

People I used to know voted for him as London mayor because "that Boris, he's a bit of a card". At least it filtered out a few cunts in my circle.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 29, 2018)

I should think a lot of the 'hah, boris, he's a lad' shine will have worn off in recent months. Except amongst the terminally cretinous of course.


----------



## paolo (Sep 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I should think a lot of the 'hah, boris, he's a lad' shine will have worn off in recent months. Except amongst the terminally cretinous of course.



I had been under that impression, then a week or so ago read that he’s still no.1 popular for Tory voters, even if his fellow MPs largely hate him.

Worrying if there’s a leadership challenge.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Except amongst the terminally cretinous of course.





paolo said:


> he’s still no.1 popular for Tory voters


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 30, 2018)

Theresa May proposes £120m Brexit festival to take place in 2022


----------



## 2hats (Sep 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Theresa May proposes £120m Brexit festival to take place in 2022


Peanuts! FWIW the Centre for European Reform calculates that Brexit is costing £500m per week and rising. Meanwhile Boris has proposed building a bridge to "Ireland".


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2018)

2hats said:


> Peanuts! FWIW the Centre for European Reform calculates that Brexit is costing £500m per week and rising. Meanwhile Boris has proposed building a bridge to "Ireland".


He will enjoy the greater task of building the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Theresa May proposes £120m Brexit festival to take place in 2022



What does she care what's going to be happening in 2022?


----------



## paolo (Sep 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Theresa May proposes £120m Brexit festival to take place in 2022



Wow. I mean just wow.

The single most divisive thing in living memory, for the UK.

Let’s have a big party.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 30, 2018)

2hats said:


> Peanuts! FWIW the Centre for European Reform calculates that Brexit is costing £500m per week and rising. Meanwhile Boris has proposed building a bridge to "Ireland".


He can build a customs post in the middle of it


----------



## paolo (Sep 30, 2018)

2hats said:


> Peanuts! FWIW the Centre for European Reform calculates that Brexit is costing £500m per week and rising. Meanwhile Boris has proposed building a bridge to "Ireland".



In the article, lying bus wanker is quoted “not what people were promised in 2016”

Oh my.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 30, 2018)

paolo said:


> Wow. I mean just wow.
> 
> The single most divisive thing in living memory, for the UK.
> 
> Let’s have a big party.


deffo no chance of a 'we've all had a drink' moment there eh


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 30, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Why do people pay any attention to Johnson? It’s not like he’s an economics whizz, a reknowned business guru or a financial Jedi - he s fucking classics toff with some journalism in his background .
> 
> I wish he would fuck off



His "journalism" is often so lacking erudition that his copy has to be sub-edited to death, even for the Speccytater. Apparently "so what were you trying to say, Boris?" is a frequent question in e-mails between the man himself and the copy desk.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 30, 2018)

Winot said:


> Classics.
> 
> Excellent way to offend him though, suggesting that he did ‘Modern Greats’.



"Oi, Johnson, I hear you studied Modern Greats. What's that when it's at home? That sort of stuff is all Greek to me!"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Boris is reported as being irritated by the Irish issue, and has described it as the tail wagging the (Brexit) dog.
> He should have thought of that before then.
> He really is a nasty racist bastard and I am amazed anybody voted for him ever.



What's more disturbing is that he's descended from a Circassian (part of modern-day Syria, renowned for blondeness), so should be the opposite of racist. Instead, he grabs hold of any shit-stick available. He has no honour.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> deffo no chance of a 'we've all had a drink' moment there eh



where boris johnson is involved, it's pretty hard to tell...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> He will enjoy the greater task of building the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge



Is this before or after he's lent his labour to constructing the Ducloz Head to Stromness shipping canal?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Is this before or after he's lent his labour to constructing the Ducloz Head to Stromness shipping canal?


His labour is required in the mountains of south georgia where he will hew stone for the great grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge. Meanwhile our argentine comrades are engaging politicians and former military personnel to begin their end of the project, which when completed will demonstrate the amity and goodwill the proletariats of our two countries have for each other.

We anticipate breaking stone within hours of johnson's arrival


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> He will enjoy the greater task of building the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge



dunno - isn't the bit of the irish sea where they are proposing the bridge will go full of dumped bombs and so on?  

in which case, quite happy for him to go and dig the foundations...


----------



## Voley (Sep 30, 2018)

Brexitfest sounds wonderful doesn't it?

Scarfolk bloke has already helpfully done a poster for it:


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno - isn't the bit of the irish sea where they are proposing the bridge will go full of dumped bombs and so on?
> 
> in which case, quite happy for him to go and dig the foundations...


Why would you deprive the DUP and TUV of the chance to do something for the environment?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2018)

Voley said:


> Brexitfest sounds wonderful doesn't it?
> 
> Scarfolk bloke has already helpfully done a poster for it:
> 
> View attachment 148456


It will offer great scope for Badgers winter festival fail thread


----------



## Voley (Sep 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It will offer great scope for Badgers winter festival fail thread


I have been discussing this with him and marty21 this very morning.


----------



## Voley (Sep 30, 2018)

I might go, actually. Morrissey headlining I expect.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 30, 2018)

Voley said:


> I might go, actually. Morrissey headlining I expect.


Dance choreography by T May.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## ska invita (Sep 30, 2018)

2hats said:


> Meanwhile Boris has proposed building a bridge to "Ireland".



A train/car tunnel to Ireland would be great tbf. Seems a bit far for a bridge, but there are bigger bridges.


----------



## Supine (Sep 30, 2018)

Voley said:


> I might go, actually. Morrissey headlining I expect.



DJ Boris B2B DJ Trump military music set
Angry Lexiteers dance ensemble 
Cupcake making with Hoey
Etiquette for a distopian future with Overlord Reese Mogg


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 30, 2018)

Voley said:


> I might go, actually. Morrissey headlining I expect.



Morrissey second on the bill after Mandy Boylett.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 30, 2018)

oh - and mike reid of course! shaping up to be a stella line up.


----------



## andysays (Sep 30, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> oh - and mike reid of course! shaping up to be a *stella* line up



None of that foreign stuff, only proper British beer to be served at a Brexit Festival, shirley?


----------



## andysays (Sep 30, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> What does she care what's going to be happening in 2022?


It might just be a coincidence, but the next General Election is scheduled for 2022, always assuming there isn't an early election for some reason...


----------



## Voley (Sep 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> It might just be a coincidence, but the next General Election is scheduled for 2022, always assuming there isn't an early election for some reason...


So just a load more flag-flying bollocks that's never going to happen but appeases the right of her party then? That figures.


----------



## Kesher (Sep 30, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Morrissey second on the bill after Mandy Boylett.




Is this a parody?


----------



## J Ed (Sep 30, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Is this a parody?



No, they have some other songs, they are in UKIP IIRC.


----------



## J Ed (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## mauvais (Sep 30, 2018)

I was sat on my own in a bar in Prague not talking the other day and two people, probably not British but I don't know where from, were having a chat in English.

'I don't understand the Brexit at all. It's like, it's a nice summer, and you're having a good time, and oh, I've got a gun, I'll shoot myself in the leg'


----------



## J Ed (Sep 30, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I was sat on my own in a bar in Prague not talking the other day and two people, probably not British but I don't know where from, were having a chat in English.
> 
> 'I don't understand the Brexit at all. It's like, it's a nice summer, and you're having a good time, and oh, I've got a gun, I'll shoot myself in the leg'



Sounds like a very ignorant pair of individuals.


----------



## mauvais (Sep 30, 2018)

J Ed said:


> Sounds like a very ignorant pair of individuals.


Well, I can't say I'm up on Slovenian (maybe) current affairs myself TBH. Still, I laughed.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Sep 30, 2018)




----------



## Kesher (Sep 30, 2018)

Well worth watching


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Well worth watching



Because...?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because...?


LibDems stick together like flies on shit


----------



## Kesher (Sep 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because...?



Find out why by watching it


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 30, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Find out why by watching it



managed about 30secs. The Eu is a marvelous humanitarian project that has guaranteed peace .... oh ... have you gone already?


----------



## sealion (Sep 30, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Well worth watching



I stopped listening after 21 seconds, did he mention anything about that rabid remainer Blair blowing Iraq to pieces?


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> LibDems stick together like flies on shit


As do you and your mates.

Your point?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Find out why by watching it



I don't know who you are but you're another one who doesn't answer simple questions so I'm gonna go out on a limb and say you're a gurning wanker. 

Gonna watch it any way though. I love listening to #ProperBlokez telling it like it is in the pub with a pint. #Ladz


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> As do you and your mates.
> 
> Your point?



I think the point is we're not Lib Dems Chuckles.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 1, 2018)

Seems to be lots of _shut up listen to this from your betters then fuck off_ posts going up on here right now. Is it a surprise that this better from above is an actual lib-dem member and being groomed for some leadership role i suspect.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 1, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Seems to be lots of _shut up listen to this from your betters then fuck off_ posts going up on here right now.



I'm gonna have this one framed.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 1, 2018)

That Johnson fellow is not a recommendation for an Eton education. Mind you, they've been on the slide for years, especially as regards science and maths.


----------



## Winot (Oct 1, 2018)

Hammond admits that the UK would enforce Irish hard border in event of no deal:

https://www.politico.eu/article/phi...border-in-ireland-if-there-is-no-brexit-deal/


----------



## paolo (Oct 1, 2018)

Looks like the idea of not enforcing the border for goods, would mean - for WTO compliance - not enforcing any UK border.

Otherwise it’s giving the EU a leg up, which would be against the WTO most favoured nation rule.

Turns out this was already identified in a parliament publication six months ago.

Snippety...

“62.Several stakeholders told us that, in a no deal scenario, the UK would be in violation of WTO rules if it declined to enforce a border.152 We were told that MFN rules mean that if the UK chose not to enforce a border with the EU in Northern Ireland, it would have to not enforce a border with “the entirety of the WTO membership.”153 Similarly, if an EU member state such as Ireland did not impose tariffs on exports from the UK, it could be in breach of WTO obligations, as well as the rules of the EU customs union.154”

The land border between Northern Ireland and Ireland - Northern Ireland Affairs Committee - House of Commons


----------



## mauvais (Oct 1, 2018)

Just don't call it a border. A 'defacilitated customs arrangement'. You know, we need to inspect this ship to umm audit barnacles. And then you'll need to pay barnacle tax. Not because you're French or whatever though. Because of how many barnacles you've got.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 1, 2018)

Anyone at the Tory party conference floated the DPRK trade model yet?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2018)

2hats said:


> Anyone at the Tory party conference floated the DPRK trade model yet?


TM has an anti-aircraft gun on hand for anyone who dares mention such


----------



## Cheesepig3 (Oct 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I should think a lot of the 'hah, boris, he's a lad' shine will have worn off in recent months. Except amongst the terminally cretinous of course.




As demonstrated in the Referendum, marginally over 1/3 of us are terminally cretinous.


----------



## Cheesepig3 (Oct 1, 2018)

paolo said:


> I had been under that impression, then a week or so ago read that he’s still no.1 popular for Tory voters, even if his fellow MPs largely hate him.
> 
> Worrying if there’s a leadership challenge.




I lurk/troll on Conservative Home. They poll monthly. He is most popular but not in a landslide kinda way.


----------



## Santino (Oct 1, 2018)

cheesepig said:


> As demonstrated in the Referendum, marginally over 1/3 of us are terminally cretinous.


And racist, don't forget.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

cheesepig said:


> As demonstrated in the Referendum, marginally over 1/3 of us are terminally cretinous.



Yeah you don't understand the conversation despite lurking/trolling, so please do so quietly.


----------



## Supine (Oct 1, 2018)

Santino said:


> And racist, don't forget.



Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.


Not necessarily racist but certainly racist.

Star.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.



Like you're not necessarily an authoritarian neoliberal but you are certainly in bed with authoritarian neoliberals?

You know what this thread has got a bit better lately but some people just want it to descend into name calling again


----------



## gosub (Oct 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.


Cool so do we get to call you fascist warmongers with no respec for democracy now


----------



## The Fornicator (Oct 1, 2018)

Peoples vote off-conference event experiences an awkward silence - excellent question well put :

From 2-minutes :   Westmonster questions Remoaners at Tory conference - Westmonster


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 1, 2018)

Great, just shut up vids. Inexpertly linked to.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 1, 2018)

Fill yer boots with this 

No idea to accuracy or veracity obvs


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 1, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Fill yer boots with this
> 
> No idea to accuracy or veracity obvs



Who is he and why should i give a shit?


----------



## sealion (Oct 1, 2018)

Ex copper!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Peoples vote off-conference event experiences an awkward silence - excellent question well put :
> 
> From 2-minutes :   Westmonster questions Remoaners at Tory conference - Westmonster



In case anyone feels like behaving as stupidly as I did and thinks they should click on the clickbait, don't. The question was not interesting and there was no awkward silence in response.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 1, 2018)

Can we get rid the twitter and YT and make people argue what they think ffs


----------



## brogdale (Oct 1, 2018)

Reckon he's read (some) of the Wiki page on game theory.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2018)

sealion said:


> Ex copper!



Ex-copper/current conspiraloon, why should we care?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 1, 2018)

I have no idea who he is.The idea that this is *open source* and has been given a join the dots treatment is a conspiracy too far

ETA I dont usually post twitter stuuf as is invaribaly bollocks.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 1, 2018)

Meanwhile...10 months after agreeing to Barnier's 'Irish backstop' the tories start to ask the DUP to give a little. Some chance.

Brexit: DUP 'pushing back hard' on new Northern Ireland backstop proposal


----------



## sealion (Oct 1, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ex-copper/current conspiraloon, why should we care?


Quite


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile...10 months after agreeing to Barnier's 'Irish backstop' the tories start to ask the DUP to give a little. Some chance.
> 
> Brexit: DUP 'pushing back hard' on new Northern Ireland backstop proposal


No, no, no!


----------



## The Fornicator (Oct 2, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> In case anyone feels like behaving as stupidly as I did and thinks they should click on the clickbait, don't. The question was not interesting and there was no awkward silence in response.


It's a link to a - shock, horror - web page with a video, as described in my post i.e. "from 2 minutes".

Your stupidity is your business but the question posed in the link and the awkwardness that followed is legit and valid - probably just best to assume you are another Brexit remainer who can't handle difficult questions.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 2, 2018)

Supine said:


> Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.


Says the bloke that voted for a austerity backing homophobe. Fool


----------



## andysays (Oct 2, 2018)

Supine said:


> Not necessarily racist but certainly in bed with the racists.



Leave voters in 17,410,742-in-a-bed sex romps with Farage and Griffin shocker!!


----------



## Flavour (Oct 2, 2018)

What is to stop there being an open border with Ireland in the event of no deal? If the UK don't enforce and the Irish republic government don't enforce it, how can the EU enforce it. Legit question


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What is to stop there being an open border with Ireland in the event of no deal? If the UK don't enforce and the Irish republic government don't enforce it, how can the EU enforce it. Legit question



The EU will compel Eire to enforce it.


----------



## Winot (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What is to stop there being an open border with Ireland in the event of no deal? If the UK don't enforce and the Irish republic government don't enforce it, how can the EU enforce it. Legit question



Checks for goods not people (because there will be two different customs regimes). 

More here The Irish border and Brexit


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What is to stop there being an open border with Ireland in the event of no deal? If the UK don't enforce and the Irish republic government don't enforce it, how can the EU enforce it. Legit question


WTO rules mean the UK will have to open every border to everyone.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU will compel Eire to enforce it.



How? By fining them if they don't?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> How? By fining them if they don't?



That and threatening to chuck them out of the single market.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> WTO rules mean the UK will have to open every border to everyone.



Unless May and Barnier write on a napkin, “the EU/UK have an open border between each other”

Then the Irish issue is solved.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 2, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile...10 months after agreeing to Barnier's 'Irish backstop' the tories start to ask the DUP to give a little. Some chance.
> 
> Brexit: DUP 'pushing back hard' on new Northern Ireland backstop proposal



But what can the DUP do? The DUP face compromise or risk being blamed for bringing down a government. There's no functioning government in NI, just direct rule from Westminster. Combine that with a shrinking potential electorate for the DUP and it's not looking that rosy for them.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That and threatening to chuck them out of the single market.



Is there any precedent for this? Has anyone been forcibly removed from the single market by the EU before?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 2, 2018)

I think the problem/ fear on the part of the EU is that once the Tory disaster capitalists have torched UK regulations following Brexit, then an open Irish border would become an open door into Europe for a multitude of sub-standard and hazardous shit from the US and further afield.....


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 2, 2018)

Plus, whilst there is not a huge amount of migration into the rest of the EU from the UK or vice-versa over the Irish border at the moment, will that be the case once the whole world knows the border is an open means of entry to either the UK or the EU, depending on which is most attractive destination at the time?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> Is there any precedent for this? Has anyone been forcibly removed from the single market by the EU before?



No one has ever left before (Greenland doesn’t count). No member has ever opened a border to  a ‘third country’ before.

But just as people sneer that the big bad WTO rules will be imposed on the UK, equally they would apply to the EU, of course. So unless the EU and UK come to an agreement then there must be a border. The UK has repeatedly stated it wants an open border for goods and services, it is the EU that Is not happy with that.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Plus, whilst there is not a huge amount of migration into the rest of the EU from the UK over the Irish border at the moment, will that be the case once the whole world knows the border is an open means of entry to either the UK or the EU, depending on which is most attractive destination at the time?



No.

You sneak in to the EU across the Med, decline to claim asylum in Italy or Spain, but instead you wish to head for the UK. You can choose to try and sneak across the Channel, by train or any one of the hundreds of boats crossing daily, or you can try to sneak across hundreds of miles if sea to Eire on one of the few boats making that crossing, then sneak past their border control (Republic is Ireland is not in Schengen), head north and try to sneak across the border in to the UK.

What route would you choose?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

Given the history of cross border “trade” between the two, I cannot envisage an open border working very well for goods as well as people


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 2, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> I think the problem/ fear on the part of the EU is that once the Tory disaster capitalists have torched UK regulations following Brexit, then an open Irish border would become an open door into Europe for a multitude of sub-standard and hazardous shit from the US and further afield.....


Like the EU doesn't peddle sub-standard hazardous shit. Try telling that to the 11 million owners of those poisonous VW engines.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Like the EU doesn't peddle sub-standard hazardous shit. Try telling that to the 11 million owners of those poisonous VW engines.


All internal combustion engines are poisonous


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Unless May and Barnier write on a napkin, “the EU/UK have an open border between each other”
> 
> Then the Irish issue is solved.



To satisfy the WTO, the napkin would probably also have to state - “and are in the same trade bloc”. That would definitely solve it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> But what can the DUP do? The DUP face compromise or risk being blamed for bringing down a government. There's no functioning government in NI, just direct rule from Westminster. Combine that with a shrinking potential electorate for the DUP and it's not looking that rosy for them.



yes the DUP would bring down the government. Preventing a united ireland is the whole of their being - and that of their supporters. They will never agree to a sea border because is fundamentally undermines the union (and they are correct - it would). And cut your nose off to spite your face intransigence is what they do.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> But what can the DUP do? The DUP face compromise or risk being blamed for bringing down a government. There's no functioning government in NI, just direct rule from Westminster. Combine that with a shrinking potential electorate for the DUP and it's not looking that rosy for them.


They only propped up May to effect the hardest of hard borders.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

less than 6 months to go! woot


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

Less than six months to go till panic buying and civil unrest

w00t w00t


----------



## Supine (Oct 2, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> less than 6 months to go! woot



It's going to be quite a ride!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 2, 2018)

Will there be power cuts like in the good auld days?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 2, 2018)

The twats have made Brexit day a Friday so there might not even be a day off to be had.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 2, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The twats have made Brexit day a Friday so there might not even be a day off to be had.


At least there’ll be no confusion over when the three day week kicks in.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 2, 2018)

There'd better be free bunting in the Royal Mail.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

My new business idea is doing booze and fag runs to ROI from fishgaurd.... can probably pick up some people on the way back also.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 2, 2018)

Smuggling is a respectable occupation. It'll revive lots of small ports around Britain.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Smuggling is a respectable occupation. It'll revive lots of small ports around Britain.


How will it be smuggling if all the borders are open?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No one has ever left before (Greenland doesn’t count). No member has ever opened a border to  a ‘third country’ before.
> 
> But just as people sneer that the big bad WTO rules will be imposed on the UK, equally they would apply to the EU, of course. So unless the EU and UK come to an agreement then there must be a border. The UK has repeatedly stated it wants an open border for goods and services, it is the EU that Is not happy with that.


Because that's cherry picking the single market,  why would they agree to it?.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

Yahoo is now part of Oath

WHat takes six months to do?


Poi E said:


> Smuggling is a respectable occupation. It'll revive lots of small ports around Britain.



The real money is in the booze and fags tho, once the 200 fags limit kicks in.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Will there be power cuts like in the good auld days?


Interesting point.
The UK presently has four operational interconnectors (cables) with the rest of the EU: (one each with France and the Netherlands and two with the island of Ireland) to freely trade surplus generating capacity of up to 4 gigawatts or 7 per cent of peak UK domestic demand. 

On average the UK is usually a net importer from the rest of the EU of up to the equivalent of all existing UK nuclear power capacity...so...if things were to go really badly...?


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

we burn all the old people?

and eat the rich?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 2, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> we burn all the old people?
> 
> and eat the rich?



So does that mean we BBQ rich old people?


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All internal combustion engines are poisonous


but not sub standard


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> So does that mean we BBQ rich old people?


I need to stop playing the Euro Millions just in case.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 2, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> but not sub standard



Pah! I have a twenty year old Toyota and it's started burning oil. They're all shit.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 2, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Pah! I have a twenty year old Toyota and it's started burning oil. They're all shit.


To your standards or the EU's?
Jeremiah was referencing the latter as if it were the gold standard of quality. 
Ironic it was the land of bleached chickens that busted the myth.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Less than six months to go till panic buying and civil unrest
> 
> w00t w00t


Remember to be selective, people! We produce enough mushy peas and HP sauce. We need to stock up on things like coffee and grapefruit marmalade!


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Remember to be selective, people! We produce enough mushy peas and HP sauce. We need to stock up on things like coffee and grapefruit marmalade!



I have bought a chest freeze and filled is with Calamari..... True story


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Remember to be selective, people! We produce enough mushy peas and HP sauce. We need to stock up on things like coffee and grapefruit marmalade!


HP sauce made in the Netherlands since 2006


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 2, 2018)

brogdale said:


> HP sauce made in the Netherlands since 2006


Damnit. We need a verified list.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Damnit. We need a verified list.


UK cheeses designated under PGI or PDO by the ...err...EU


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 2, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> I have bought a chest freeze and filled is with Calamari..... True story



I guess you'll be squids in when there's seafood shortages.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 2, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> I have bought a chest freeze and filled is with Calamari..... True story


These islands are replete with coastal waters tbf.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Damnit. We need a verified list.


Could pop over to Larne and get Chef sauce. A superior sauce.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I guess you'll be squids in when there's seafood shortages.


Perhaps best if Ranbay gives us a ring if they can't get through them all?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 2, 2018)

Worcester Sauce still made here, so post-brexit diet of cheese and potatoes (and calamari) not so bad. Plus the cider. We'll need a drink what with the power cuts, zombies, nuclear meltdowns and having to walk everywhere.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Worcester Sauce still made here, so post-brexit diet of cheese and potatoes (and calamari) not so bad. Plus the cider. We'll need a drink what with the power cuts, zombies, nuclear meltdowns and having to walk everywhere.


Yeah but...Lea & Perrins owned by Kraft Heinz...so the fucking stuff will be chlorinated before we know it


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 2, 2018)

Speaking of chlorinated, we also produce excellent chlorinated sodium. So we can take it all with a (British) pinch of salt *ahem*


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Speaking of chlorinated, we also produce excellent chlorinated sodium. So we can take it all with a pinch of salt


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Because that's cherry picking the single market,  why would they agree to it?.



So they don't impose this on their citizens...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

Can we not just give NI back?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Can we not just give NI back?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Can we not just give NI back?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Can we not just give NI back?


Unification was my suggested solution a year and about 300 pages ago


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 2, 2018)

re-unification.

who now would demand an ulster covenant?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 2, 2018)

If the UK starts enforcing tough immigration rules for EU citizens I wonder if there will be a wild disparity between how the EU countries treat UK citizens. Surely Spain - with its half a million British pensioners -  will want them to continue spending along the coast. But perhaps others will be a bit harsher about it.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 2, 2018)

The Indy today says NI would vote 56% in favour of joining the ROI post Brexit


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So they don't impose this on their citizens...
> 
> View attachment 148610


That's the brexit argument now?. Where art the sunny uplands?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Worcester Sauce still made here, so post-brexit diet of cheese and potatoes (and calamari) not so bad.



Let's hope Lea & Perrins are busy stockpiling tamarind extract...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> That's the brexit argument now?. Where art the sunny uplands?



Unless you've been asleep during philosophical's endless warbling, and it's fair enough if you have, you would have noticed that a threat of a return to The Troubles is a stick that has been used to beat leavers. No sunny uplands when dealing with the EU.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

Stupid question- given the old agreement wrt Irish nationals in the UK - would this change?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Stupid question- given the old agreement wrt Irish nationals in the UK - would this change?


You think anybody knows the answer to that question? No, if the UK agrees to a Norway-style deal that maintains free movement of people from the EU. If the UK doesn't agree to that kind of arrangement, it's hard to see how it can't change.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 2, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Remember to be selective, people! We produce enough mushy peas and HP sauce. We need to stock up on things like coffee and grapefruit marmalade!



Just remember to stock up on gold and precious stones as these will be the only viable currencies with which to purchase mushy peas.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Can we not just give NI back?



The rest of Ireland, for some strange reason, doesn't want it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Stupid question- given the old agreement wrt Irish nationals in the UK - would this change?



There is no reason it should, it pre-dates the EU and the single market, so fuck all to do with Brexit really.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> There is no reason it should, it pre-dates the EU and the single market, so fuck all to do with Brexit really.


Every reason it should. It predates the EU and the single market. In other words, Ireland was not in the EU or the single market at the time. Ireland and the UK joined the EU at the same time, not coincidentally.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The rest of Ireland, for some strange reason, doesn't want it.


Then they can come out and state that on record and deal with the fallout. If the NI people want to join the ROI, it’s up to the ROI to explain why that can’t happen.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 2, 2018)

Foster came out and said the GFA isn't sacrosant. DUP only party to vote against the GFA back then. She's wrong anyway.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Foster came out and said the GFA isn't sacrosant. DUP only party to vote against the GFA back then. She's wrong anyway.


One of the few rays of sunshine in all this has been the slow-motion self-wrecking of the DUP ever since it decided to back brexit. It has even come with a moment of self-deluding triumph to make it all the sweeter.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Every reason it should. It predates the EU and the single market. In other words, Ireland was not in the EU or the single market at the time. Ireland and the UK joined the EU at the same time, not coincidentally.



So why should an agreement between the UK and ROI made prior to joining the EU have any bearing on the UK leaving the EU? Any more than the Le Touquet agreement has anything to do with the EU (another one of remains scare-lies).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So why should an agreement between the UK and ROI made prior to joining the EU have any bearing on the UK leaving the EU? Any more than the Le Touquet agreement has anything to do with the EU (another one of remains scare-lies).


The reason is obvious. ROI is in a common market with tariff-free borders open to goods and people from within that market. UK is also currently in that market. Once the UK leaves that common market, it cannot make its own common market with just a bit of the old one while excluding the rest of it without issue.

You sound like Boris Johnson. Nothing to see here, no problems, no contradictions.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Unless you've been asleep during philosophical's endless warbling, and it's fair enough if you have, you would have noticed that a threat of a return to The Troubles is a stick that has been used to beat leavers. No sunny uplands when dealing with the EU.


I have him on mute, after a few pages.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The reason is obvious. ROI is in a common market with tariff-free borders open to goods and people from within that market. UK is also currently in that market. Once the UK leaves that common market, it cannot make its own common market with just a bit of the old one while excluding the rest of it without issue.
> 
> You sound like Boris Johnson. Nothing to see here, no problems, no contradictions.


  This was my line of thought - the EU stuff kinda overrode the existing Irish agreement - not sure how the post brexit environment would handle this without legislation


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> This was my line of thought - the EU stuff kinda overrode the existing Irish agreement - not sure how the post brexit environment would handle this without legislation


And given that Ireland has a constitution, it formally overrode it. 

Not saying there can't be a solution, but the idea put forward that it's a non-problem is rubbish. This exact problem was being predicted by Martin McGuinnness three years ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

this *will* end well


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The reason is obvious. ROI is in a common market with tariff-free borders open to goods and people from within that market. UK is also currently in that market. Once the UK leaves that common market, it cannot make its own common market with just a bit of the old one while excluding the rest of it without issue.
> 
> You sound like Boris Johnson. Nothing to see here, no problems, no contradictions.




Bit rough to accuse me of that 


The UK and ROI has free movement of people of Irish and British citizenship. Before the single market we did not have free movement of goods and services. Why should that change?


----------



## Kesher (Oct 2, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Worcester Sauce still made here, so post-brexit diet of cheese and potatoes (and calamari) not so bad. Plus the cider. We'll need a drink what with the power cuts, zombies, nuclear meltdowns and having to walk everywhere.



As well as maggots, rodent hairs and animal feces (to name some) if we adopt U.S food standards


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

Half of the UKs maggot output goes to the EU. True fact


----------



## JimW (Oct 2, 2018)

Pretty sure the early usage of the term "free trade" was as a euphemism for smuggling.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 2, 2018)

Flavour said:


> What is to stop there being an open border with Ireland in the event of no deal? If the UK don't enforce and the Irish republic government don't enforce it, how can the EU enforce it. Legit question



One take is that in your described scenario the UK government wouldn't have enacted Brexit and presumably therefore  would have betrayed the 'will of the people'.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One take is that in your described scenario the UK government wouldn't have enacted Brexit and presumably therefore  would have betrayed the 'will of the people'.



yet thats not an interpretation i've heard from any leave voter...

no one cares if the Irish border is left open - its simply not a problem for anyone except foaming remainers who make shit up and claim its what leave voters think.

leaving the border open is simply not a political problem, and its not a legal problem with the WTO because the British government can happily point to the physical difficulty of actually controlling the border.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One take is that in your described scenario the UK government wouldn't have enacted Brexit and presumably therefore  would have betrayed the 'will of the people'.


the government will always betray narodnaya volya


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

Kesher said:


> As well as maggots, rodent hairs and animal feces (to name some) if we adopt U.S food standards



average consumption of 1-2lbs a year


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So they don't impose this on their citizens...
> 
> View attachment 148610


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)




----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

fuck Glasto off and go to that instead init.


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2018)

Coming round to Chequers preposal and the need to focus on people with skills...
Wanted somebody capable of running the country


----------



## xenon (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> yet thats not an interpretation i've heard from any leave voter...
> 
> no one cares if the Irish border is left open - its simply not a problem for anyone except foaming remainers who make shit up and claim its what leave voters think.
> 
> leaving the border open is simply not a political problem, and its not a legal problem with the WTO because the British government can happily point to the physical difficulty of actually controlling the border.



The last bit. Really, you think the WTO would accept something like that? Seems... Unlikely.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2018)

Thinking about it, i wonder what the impact on Glasto will be?

The possibality of some acts not gettgin in...
Less falafel stalls...
No Magic mushroom kits...
What about the skunk weed stella beer guys?


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> leaving the border open is simply not a political problem, and its not a legal problem with the WTO because the British government can happily point to the physical difficulty of actually controlling the border.



Even Hammond has conceded that it *is* an issue with the WTO.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 2, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The rest of Ireland, for some strange reason, doesn't want it.


Only if the rest of Ireland was the opinion pages of the Irish Times.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

xenon said:


> The last bit. Really, you think the WTO would accept something like that? Seems... Unlikely.



i assume the WTO has the the word _reasonable_ within its arbitration procedures...

its entirely _possible_ to close the border, you'd dig a 10ft deep, 10ft wide ditch along a 300 mile route, and then put a 20ft concrete wall behind it - but it would be somewhat disruptive to people who's land crosses the border, and there would be very obvious political risks involved. the UK would also point to the, previous to the single market/EU membership, trade relationship with the RoI and the long established 'non' nature of the border and therefore the communities on either side of it.

the crux of this isn't really eventual outcome, its time. the rules of the EU customs union and single market will require the member state to secure its border with a non-EU member state, which obviously it doesn't want to do - it faces the same threat of political violence if it enforces a border with NI, and it is far less capable of withstanding that political violence by dint of the limited size and lack of capability of its police, security and defence forces (as an example, in the 1980's the Army and RAF deployed some 75 helicopters and 15,000 troops to NI, while the RUC had around 13,000 full and part time officers, currently the Irish Defence Forces and AGS have a total of _ten_ helicopters, 8,000 soldiers and 13,000 police) - so the game is about the UK fending off pressure to secure its border only marginally longer than RoI can fend off pressure from the EU to secure its border. the Government of Ireland will not, can not, be the one seen to put a fence along the border, and will (probably) scream blue murder if the EU really puts the screws on -  so the EU won't put the screws on, and will support (in practice, if not in words) the UK's efforts within the WTO to have the issue put on the back-burner.

it is simply in no ones interest for the border to be, err.. borderfied, and in everyones interest for it to be shoved in the cupboard and ignored. well, everyone except loons who claim to be worried about the border issue and yet seemed determined to bring one about...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> it is simply in no ones interest for the border to be, err.. borderfied, and in everyones interest for it to be shoved in the cupboard and ignored. well, everyone except loons who claim to be worried about the border issue and yet seemed determined to bring one about...



I'll be surprised if loons like the Daily Express don't bang on about people 'coming over here' via Ireland. Especially the first time one of them gets done by the police for something or other. 

However, we probably shouldn't overestimate the numbers of EU people so desperate to come to the UK post-brexit that they will try to sneak in. Why would they? I would have thought the difficult issue here would be if the UK leaves the customs union. A complete absence of customs controls between the ROI and post-brexit EU where there are supposed to be tariffs in place would be harder to ignore.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

British flights 'won't be allowed to land in Europe' if Brexit goes wrong, Juncker warns | Metro News

My granddad coordinated loads of British flights to Europe which didn't land. Is that what this scion of the SS wants a return to, huh?


----------



## Supine (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> British flights 'won't be allowed to land in Europe' if Brexit goes wrong, Juncker warns | Metro News
> 
> My granddad coordinated loads of British flights to Europe which didn't land. Is that what this scion of the SS wants a return to, huh?



I shouldn't have laughed at that but I did 

My Polish grandfather came to the UK and engineered for the RAF so they could fly. How times change.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> British flights 'won't be allowed to land in Europe' if Brexit goes wrong, Juncker warns | Metro News
> 
> My granddad coordinated loads of British flights to Europe which didn't land. Is that what this scion of the SS wants a return to, huh?



Getting a bit Billy Britain aren’t you? No wonder the theme of this week’s conference is blame the forriners.

Things like air travel run on agreements and regulations. We have to have those in place when we leave. We therefore better ask for a deal we can get.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

Supine said:


> I shouldn't have laughed at that but I did
> 
> My Polish grandfather came to the UK and engineered for the RAF so they could fly. How times change.



Coming over here, fixing things...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Things like air travel run on agreements and regulations. We have to have those in place when we leave. We therefore better ask for a deal we can get.



What, or else the EU airlines won't be able to cross the Atlantic? Boo-fucking-hoo. Junker's a prat.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What, or else the EU airlines won't be able to cross the Atlantic? Boo-fucking-hoo. Junker's a prat.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

More amusing that he seems to think British people take the cat on holiday to Brittany.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Getting a bit Billy Britain aren’t you? No wonder the theme of this week’s conference is blame the forriners.
> 
> Things like air travel run on agreements and regulations. We have to have those in place when we leave. We therefore better ask for a deal we can get.



do you not think that the EU should consider its own interests in this? do you think that if the EU refuses to recognise the UK's competancy, the UK will not recognise the EU's competancy and ban EU flights from UK air space?

the UK is perfectly happy to recognise the EU's regulatory framework, yet the EU seems unwilling to do likewise. 'lets stay in the EU' is not the message i'm getting here...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


>



Did Jean-Claude not mention, NATS controls roughly this area:

 

Better tell Lufthansa to amend their schedules.


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

The reciprocal landing rights thing should be relatively trivial to resolve. Way less complicated, way less contentious than stuff like goods.

It’s true that airlines based here could lose the right for intra-EU flights, but again there’s ways round that with establishing EU based operations companies.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s true that airlines based here could lose the right for intra-EU flights, but again there’s ways round that with establishing EU based operations companies.



Such as all UK airlines that operate intra-European flights already have in place, and had done since way before June 2016...


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did Jean-Claude not mention, NATS controls roughly this area:
> 
> View attachment 148625
> 
> Better tell Lufthansa to amend their schedules.



Getting daft now.

ATC has no political dimension, just fee structures for passing through.

The European body that does the charging, and then distributes the fees to members, covers a fair of non EU countries.

Juncker is indeed being a dick on this.


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Such as all UK airlines that operate intra-European flights already have in place, and had done since way before June 2016...



Quite. Maybe some will have to do some tweaks, but yeah - aviation will be very resistant to getting sucked into the shitshow.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> Getting daft now.
> 
> ATC has no political dimension, just fee structures for passing through.
> 
> ...



Quite.

If the worst thing he can come up with is this nonsense, it seems quite clear that the only real obstacle to Brexit is the EU.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It's a link to a - shock, horror - web page with a video, as described in my post i.e. "from 2 minutes".
> 
> Your stupidity is your business but the question posed in the link and the awkwardness that followed is legit and valid - probably just best to assume you are another Brexit remainer who can't handle difficult questions.



I voted Leave you muppet. And you're lying - there's no awkward silence, the question is fielded and answered. The answers aren't great but then neither was the question and to be honest I don't expect much from Tories.


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Quite.
> 
> If the worst thing he can come up with is this nonsense, it seems quite clear that the only real obstacle to Brexit is the EU.



There’s some things that are EU related that are challenging, and some things that aren’t - because they’re not really much to do with the EU.

Conflating both, to then say *everything* will disaster is just as bad as conflating both, to then say *everything* will be easy.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did Jean-Claude not mention, NATS controls roughly this area:
> 
> View attachment 148625
> 
> Better tell Lufthansa to amend their schedules.



What there is a prospect we would stop the traffic?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> What there is a prospect we would stop the traffic?



We have not suggested that, cos we're not petty minded pillocks trying to whip up some kind of panic over nothing.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> We have not suggested that, cos we're not petty minded pillocks trying to whip up some kind of panic over nothing.



It would help if our Govt proposed a workable deal then and all the daftness could be dispensed with.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> What there is a prospect we would stop the traffic?



theres been some EU briefing that the EU would be 'forced' to de-recognise UK competancy in enforcing EU wide (which the UK mostly wrote) directives on airport security (stuff like who gets airside, luggage screening etc..), and that as a tragic consequence flights originating from the UK could not cross EU controlled airspace because they might blow up.

the very obvious flaw being that if they decide that they can't trust the UK procedures because the EU and UK don't have a joint regulatary framework, we'll probably decide that we can't trust EU procedures because the UK and EU don't have a joint regulatory framework - which means flights originating in Ireland are going to a take a reeeeeaaaaally long time to get to the European manland, and trans-atlantic flights from the European mainland are going to use a lot more fuel than they do now.



Mr Moose said:


> It would help if our Govt proposed a workable deal then and all the daftness could be dispensed with.



they did. the EU replied with its standard 'nothing is agreed until everything is agreed'. you know, like they did on citizens rights...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> It would help if our Govt proposed a workable deal then and all the daftness could be dispensed with.



You would think so, but as has been shown repeatedly, the EU is not interested in any kind of deal, regardless of the fact that May is making a complete dog's dinner of it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the very obvious flaw being that if they decide that they can't trust the UK procedures because the EU and UK don't have a joint regulatary framework



Yet Romania, fucking tip-top


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Half of the UKs maggot output goes to the EU. True fact


True - and you can't have bendy ones.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yet Romania, fucking tip-top



well indeed... 

i'm reminded of the wailing over the whether the EU would be able to _sell_ Insulin to the UK post-Brexit, because of a lack of a joint regulatory framework. its fine to sell it to some shit-arse tip of a place like fucking Venezeula of course, but not the UK, because, you know, thicky racists...


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Did Jean-Claude not mention, NATS controls roughly this area:
> 
> View attachment 148625
> 
> Better tell Lufthansa to amend their schedules.


Why,? they are covered by Chicago convention


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> Why,? they are covered by Chicago convention




And..?


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And..?



We'd be breaking International Law if we stopped them over flying


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

SpackleFrog There’s no such thing as EU controlled airspace.

EuroControl isn’t in any material sense an EU body, and it doesn’t do ATC.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> SpackleFrog There’s no such thing as EU controlled airspace.
> 
> EuroControl isn’t in any material sense an EU body, and it doesn’t do ATC.



Did I say there was? Or anything about airspace? 

I'm terrified of flying so I endeavour to know as little as possible about it and to fly as little as possible!


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> SpackleFrog There’s no such thing as EU controlled airspace.
> 
> EuroControl isn’t in any material sense an EU body, and it doesn’t do ATC.



EASA is a EUropean body, and all our certification and therefore insurance would be invalid


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> EASA is a EUropean body, and all our certification and therefore insurance would be invalid



I was specifically addressing the control of airspace.

EuroControl has 41 members. We don’t leave it by leaving the EU.

On EASA, fair enough, I’ll take your word for it. I don’t have knowledge on that.


----------



## Supine (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> its fine to sell it to some shit-arse tip of a place like fucking Venezeula of course, but not the UK, because, you know, thicky racists...


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Supine said:


>



are you planning to move there?


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> The reciprocal landing rights thing should be relatively trivial to resolve. Way less complicated, way less contentious than stuff like goods.
> 
> It’s true that airlines based here could lose the right for intra-EU flights, but again there’s ways round that with establishing EU based operations companies.


Actually that won't work under ICAO law.. And not having that right of Cabotage means redoing All the time tables...

Unfortunately the man who did the aviation no deal paper his background 2as telecoms, and he got a lot of his stuff from a man whose background was environmental health


Today, I have mostly been buying soup.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> We'd be breaking International Law if we stopped them over flying



Not if we demonstrate that EU aircraft fall below our standards, which they will by virtue of not having a regulatory agreement.

i.e. tit-for-tat.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> We'd be breaking International Law if we stopped them over flying



But imagine the imagery if we went after them in Spitfires.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> But imagine the imagery if we went after them in Spitfires.


Yeh utter humiliation


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> But imagine the imagery if we went after them in Spitfires.



oh no, the Germans get much more excited by the UK calling our Eurofighters _Typhoons_ (of straffing German troop trains fame) than they do about seeing a Spitfire.






Hawker Typhoon, being beastly to the Germans.






Eurofighter _Typhoon_. just called 'Eurofighter' by the Continentals...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> I was specifically addressing the control of airspace.
> 
> EuroControl has 41 members. We don’t leave it by leaving the EU.
> 
> On EASA, fair enough, I’ll take your word for it. I don’t have knowledge on that.



Oi! Why did you tag me I don't care about things in the sky?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> oh no, the Germans get much more excited by the UK calling our Eurofighters _Typhoons_ (of straffing German troop trains fame) than they do about seeing a Spitfire.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What is this,‘hate the hun day’? Did I miss a memo?


----------



## kebabking (Oct 2, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> What is this,‘hate the hun day’? Did I miss a memo?



No, it's mild, gentle piss-taking between friends that ridicules petulant drunks who find themselves senior officials within the EU, and witless remainiacs who think that there'll be a war because some flights are delayed and that having to fill in some paperwork before enjoying a weekend in Barcelona genuinely is worse than the Black Death, the 1919 Influenza pandemic, and the end of Waitrose's free coffee offer all rolled into one...


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> No, it's mild, gentle piss-taking between friends that ridicules petulant drunks who find themselves senior officials within the EU, and witless remainiacs who think that there'll be a war because some flights are delayed and that having to fill in some paperwork before enjoying a weekend in Barcelona genuinely is worse than the Black Death, the 1919 Influenza pandemic, and the end of Waitrose's free coffee offer all rolled into one...



I thank you for your enlightening post. I honestly hadn’t considered that anyone could spend an enjoyable weekend in Barcelona.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 2, 2018)

kebabking said:


> No, it's mild, gentle piss-taking between friends that ridicules petulant drunks who find themselves senior officials within the EU, and witless remainiacs who think that there'll be a war because some flights are delayed and that having to fill in some paperwork before enjoying a weekend in Barcelona genuinely is worse than the Black Death, the 1919 Influenza pandemic, and the end of Waitrose's free coffee offer all rolled into one...


The inhabitants of Barcelona would probably breathe a sigh of relief if most brits stopped pissing it up every weekend


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 2, 2018)

Arlene is sticking her neck out again....dissing the Good Friday agreement....it's now not sacrosanct according to her.
She's really about as thick as you can get...or she is asking to start the Troubles again. Either way she is a disaster waiting to happen.

Mary Lou McDonald: Arlene Foster’s comments on Good Friday Agreement are ‘reckless’


----------



## paolo (Oct 2, 2018)

I was about to say the DUP should get in the sea. Maybe that turn of phrase is too cruel.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2018)

paolo said:


> I was about to say the DUP should get in the sea. Maybe that turn of phrase is too cruel.


They'll have to get in the sea to help Boris Johnson with the Grytviken - Buenos Aires Friendship Bridge


----------



## paolo (Oct 3, 2018)

If I had to bet on it right now, I’d say it’s kick the can down the road.

The U.K. will ask for an extension. The EU will agree (but be grumbly).


----------



## Flavour (Oct 3, 2018)

would be funny - but not really - if, as some predicted, article 50 ended up being extended indefinitely


----------



## mauvais (Oct 3, 2018)

kebabking said:


> oh no, the Germans get much more excited by the UK calling our Eurofighters _Typhoons_ (of straffing German troop trains fame) than they do about seeing a Spitfire.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It's only got the name Typhoon at all for export reasons beyond Europe. BAES then went further with that and tried to make it the primary name, because they aspire to being global or at least American.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 3, 2018)

paolo said:


> If I had to bet on it right now, I’d say it’s kick the can down the road.
> 
> The U.K. will ask for an extension. The EU will agree (but be grumbly).



Just seen a video on the internets where they say they will NEVER extend the process...


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just seen a video on the internets where they say they will NEVER extend the process...


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Yeah, that's the one... Thanks


----------



## paolo (Oct 3, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just seen a video on the internets where they say they will NEVER extend the process...



There goes that hunch then.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 3, 2018)

paolo said:


> There goes that hunch then.



i thought the same few pages back....


----------



## Cheesepig3 (Oct 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah you don't understand the conversation despite lurking/trolling, so please do so quietly.



What on Earth are you talking about you quarter-wit?


----------



## ElizabethofYork (Oct 3, 2018)

cheesepig said:


> What on Earth are you talking about you quarter-wit?



quarter-wit!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 3, 2018)

ElizabethofYork said:


> quarter-wit!








cheesepig said:


> What on Earth are you talking about you quarter-wit?



Novel. Back to yer lurking!


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 3, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just seen a video on the internets where they say they will NEVER extend the process...


Who is _they_ here? Do you know what Verhofstadt's role is?


----------



## Mrs D (Oct 3, 2018)

The way some people talk about a no deal Brexit, you'd think the UK would be in total darkness from sunrise until some point in the afternoon when the sun is over the Atlantic and the photons no longer needs to travel through European airspace.


kebabking said:


> well indeed...
> 
> i'm reminded of the wailing over the whether the EU would be able to _sell_ Insulin to the UK post-Brexit, because of a lack of a joint regulatory framework. its fine to sell it to some shit-arse tip of a place like fucking Venezeula of course, but not the UK, because, you know, thicky racists...



The way some people talk about a no deal Brexit, you'd think the UK would be in total darkness from sunrise until some point in the afternoon when the sun is over the Atlantic and the photons no longer needs to travel over European countries.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who is _they_ here? Do you know what Verhofstadt's role is?


Making videos to explain to brexiters where the EU stands after he hears them talking so much shite?


----------



## Supine (Oct 3, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who is _they_ here? Do you know what Verhofstadt's role is?



Do you? He is representing the EU on matters regarding brexit so worth listening to. Unless your stupid enough not to care what the EU think about brexit.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 3, 2018)

Would love to see a second referendum but can't see it happening.

A General Election is even more unlikely in my mind.

Most probable outcome is May comes out with some form of 'deal' that isn't really a deal and kicks the can down the road for everything to be sorted after Britain leaves the EU in March 2019.

Meanwhile the rest of us suffer. Standard.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> Do you? He is representing the EU on matters regarding brexit so worth listening to.


No he's not. He's the European Parliament's representative on Brexit matters. 

(As well as being the leader of the ALDE group of neo-liberal shits)


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> Do you? He is representing the EU on matters regarding brexit so worth listening to. Unless your stupid enough not to care what the EU think about brexit.





redsquirrel said:


> No he's not. He's the European Parliament's representative on Brexit matters...



Are you correcting his grammar?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 3, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Are you correcting his grammar?


No, his understanding of the structure. The Parliament, Council and Commission are different entities with different roles. Verhofstadt is an MEP. Not a representative of the Council.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 3, 2018)

And frankly, I'd expect pro-EU folks to at least know that there is a difference, even if they don't know what it is.


----------



## Supine (Oct 3, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> And frankly, I'd expect pro-EU folks to at least know the difference.



Maybe he can do both at the same time. Check it out.


----------



## Supine (Oct 3, 2018)

You might find something like this

The EU's chief negotiator is on the record calling Cameron, Farage and Boris 'rats'


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 3, 2018)

Supine said:


> Maybe he can do both at the same time. Check it out.


Cop out.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 3, 2018)

What Danny said. Course it was the leave voters that were ignorant and didn't understand the first things about the EU.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 4, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who is _they_ here? Do you know what Verhofstadt's role is?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2018)

No shit.


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who is _they_ here? Do you know what Verhofstadt's role is?


In this instance spokesman for the EUropean Parliament. One of the Parliaments that has to pass Brexit legislation

Was surprised the pound went up


----------



## Sasaferrato (Oct 4, 2018)

Can anyone explain why the Irish border issue is such a big deal, and why reinstatement of the border could lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence?


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 4, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Can anyone explain why the Irish border issue is such a big deal, and why reinstatement of the border could lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence?



We don't want a border in our country, Sas. A return to policed borders between the 26 counties and the occupied 6 would not be a good thing.

Despite what Johnson says about comparing it to Westminster and Camden, it's nothing of the sort. Nobody died because of congestion charges.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 4, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Can anyone explain why the Irish border issue is such a big deal, and why reinstatement of the border could lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence?


The DUP want it back and Sinn Fein would walk away from the peace process, leaving others to take their place.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 4, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Can anyone explain why the Irish border issue is such a big deal, and why reinstatement of the border could lead to a resurgence of sectarian violence?



Well some of the Tory talk is that within a mile of the border the pissknees or HM customs will be able to stop and search anyone within that zone. Problem with that is their actions will take place in areas where their authority is not wanted or indeed needed. For Instance if I travel from my home town to Dundalk I travel through Cullaville, I can't imagine that the assertion of British authority will go down to well with either the residents or those travelling.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 4, 2018)

People voted for a border in Northern Ireland, surely they have to respect that decision?


----------



## andysays (Oct 4, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> People voted for a border in Northern Ireland, surely they have to respect that decision?



But they're the wrong people, apparently.

I still think that if so many people in Northern Ireland *really* don't want a border between them and Eire, the solution is obvious...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> People voted for a border in Northern Ireland, surely they have to respect that decision?


Whoa no one voted for a border in Ireland. You need to remind yourself about the boundary commission which delineated it. The vote I think you're thinking of was to maintain it rather than to install it


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> But they're the wrong people, apparently.
> 
> I still think that if so many people in Northern Ireland *really* don't want a border between them and Eire, the solution is obvious...


What's that then?  They should fuck off and join Ireland?

They're not NI mate...they're UK.  United Kingdom, remember?

Not much UK solidarity in that idea, is there. I thought the UK was the most important thing in brexit, doing what's best for the UK?  It seems more like little englanderism from here these days.

NI can choose to rejoin Ireland any time it likes, I doubt the timing of it would be for the convenience of people ready to sell them out though.


----------



## andysays (Oct 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> What's that then?  They should fuck off and join Ireland?
> 
> They're not NI mate...they're UK.  United Kingdom, remember?
> 
> ...


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2018)

Nissan becomes latest manufacturer to warn against hard Brexit

We had this discussion 2 years ago though.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 4, 2018)

Mercedes-Benz abandoned plans to move production to UK plant after Brexit vote


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Mercedes-Benz abandoned plans to move production to UK plant after Brexit vote


That makes me think.  A lot of companies may also use brexit not just to move away, but (excuse the metaphor) to 'trim the fat'....only hire 50 workers someplace else for each 70 workers sacked here.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> That makes me think.  A lot of companies may also use brexit not just to move away, but (excuse the metaphor) to 'trim the fat'....only hire 50 workers someplace else for each 70 workers sacked here.


Good to see you apportioning blame where it’s due for a change.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 4, 2018)

If there was a serious proposal for another referendum - for the negotiated deal or for remain - would there be riots?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2018)

weltweit said:


> If there was a serious proposal for another referendum - for the negotiated deal or for remain - would there be riots?


There'll be riots whatever happens


----------



## Supine (Oct 4, 2018)

weltweit said:


> If there was a serious proposal for another referendum - for the negotiated deal or for remain - would there be riots?



No. But if hummus runs out in Crouch End there'll be trouble...


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Good to see you apportioning blame where it’s due for a change.


How about you fuck off and stop following me around the threads.  Once more and you're on ignore.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> How about you fuck off and stop following me around the threads.  Once more and you're on ignore.


Ha! I posted in the Netflix one much earlier today *before* you rocked up and implied I was being racist, I mainline the Brexit one all the time, when I’m here. 
I’d have absolutely no qualms with you putting me ignore


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Ha! I posted in the Netflix one much earlier today *before* you rocked up and implied I was being racist, I mainline the Brexit one all the time, when I’m here.
> I’d have absolutely no qualms with you putting me ignore


I didn't imply anything...you jumped into a conversation that was fuck all to do with you and started throwin shit at me...like you just did here.  

I called you racist?  You're a liar.  

Anyway back on topic...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I didn't imply anything...you jumped into a conversation that was fuck all to do with you and started throwin shit at me...like you just did here.
> 
> I called you racist?  You're a liar.
> 
> Anyway back on topic...


What sport is this


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 4, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> People voted for a border in Northern Ireland, surely they have to respect that decision?



are you serious?


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Nissan becomes latest manufacturer to warn against hard Brexit



Very much *despite* DexterTCN posting this link, and *despite* its Guardian origin, and *despite* the high proportion of capitalists being quoted (locals too, TBF), this article _really is_ worth a read ... IMO like 

Contains facts and analysis and stuff. David Conn really does do research. You don't have to agree with the article's perspective, or like what he leaves out, but there's facts in there worth chatting about.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> are you serious?



No.

But it’s as true as anything else people claim was voted for in a poll that actually only asked one question with a yes or no answer.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 5, 2018)

How many days until Brexit?

175 days to go...  how will you celebrate?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 5, 2018)

Unilever backs down on HQ move to Netherlands | Reuters


Will no one think of the narrative!??!?!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> How many days until Brexit?
> 
> 175 days to go...  how will you celebrate?


I'm planning to be on a short break trip in the belly of the beast on the day...Belgium/Brussels 

We're figuring that travelling on Brexshit-eve will be the last chance to cross into the supra-state with full rights of a citizen. Maybe getting back will be trickier? Maybe we'll even be detained as aliens for not having a visa!


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> How many days until Brexit?
> 
> 175 days to go...  how will you celebrate?



Living, as I do, in probably the most pro-remain part of the country I shall be donning my water wings and going for a paddle in all the tears that I assume will be flooding the high street.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 5, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I'm planning to be on a short break trip in the belly of the beast on the day...Belgium/Brussels



You might be able to get some free champagne at the UKIP celebration.


> A Ukip spokesman revealed that on Brexit Day, the party’s MEPs planned to march out of the European Parliament “in formation” led by Nigel Farage "with their heads held high proud to have freed the Union Jack".



Revealed: Ukip's Brussels Brexit Day party plans - at taxpayers' expense


----------



## Poi E (Oct 5, 2018)

Should be a good march.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> You might be able to get some free champagne at the UKIP celebration.
> 
> 
> Revealed: Ukip's Brussels Brexit Day party plans - at taxpayers' expense


I may take some fruitcake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Should be a good march.


this is how i'd like to see the ukip meps with their heads held high


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 6, 2018)

Now, all of the journos and assorted hacks and twats who compared corbyn/labour rhetoric on the media as 'trumpian' and the plans for media reform etc 'terrifying' will of course bring the same pearl clutching horror to bear on Juncker. Except they won't will they? 
Juncker criticises British media and urges limits to press freedom


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Now, all of the journos and assorted hacks and twats who compared corbyn/labour rhetoric on the media as 'trumpian' and the plans for media reform etc 'terrifying' will of course bring the same pearl clutching horror to bear on Juncker. Except they won't will they?
> Juncker criticises British media and urges limits to press freedom





> In an outspoken interview at a crunch point in the Brexit negotiations, the European commission president also lamented that the former prime minister, David Cameron, had blocked him from campaigning during the 2016 referendum.
> 
> “If the commission intervened, perhaps the right questions would have entered the debate,” Juncker told a group of Austrian newspapers.



If they had you would be looking at a 60-40 vote to leave.


----------



## The Fornicator (Oct 6, 2018)

They had [the then] President Obama do it instead, inc somehow adding the word 'queue' to his US lexicon (as in 'back of ..').

It's sometimes difficult to not see Juncker as one of Leave's best assets.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> They had [the then] President Obama do it instead, inc somehow adding the word 'queue' to his US lexicon (as in 'back of ..').
> 
> It's sometimes difficult to not see Juncker as one of Leave's best assets.


Obama had no need to add the word queue to American dictionaries, it's been there for many many years


----------



## The Fornicator (Oct 6, 2018)

You really are the most unnecessary fool.


----------



## sealion (Oct 6, 2018)

Those horrible hacks are picking on me 
Jean-Claude Juncker blocked EU curbs on tax avoidance, cables show
Jean-Claude Juncker's real scandal is his tax-haven homeland of Luxembourg


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this is how i'd like to see the ukip meps with their heads held high
> 
> View attachment 148867



I see that the priest is doing the usual "In nomine patris et...ah fuck it, just kill the bugger, I've said enough of the Paternoster for G-d to collect his soul". Lazy bastards, are priests. More fodder for South Atlantic construction projects, methinks.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> Those horrible hacks are picking on me
> Jean-Claude Juncker blocked EU curbs on tax avoidance, cables show
> Jean-Claude Juncker's real scandal is his tax-haven homeland of Luxembourg



TBF, this sort of stuff about Juncker has been doing the rounds for a decade at least. It's just that it's become (again) handy ammo now.


----------



## sealion (Oct 6, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> It's just that it's become (again) handy ammo now.


It also shows what a dodgy hypocritical cunt he is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 6, 2018)

sealion said:


> It also shows what a dodgy hypocritical cunt he is.



Well sure, but any fucker reading any politically-inclined newspaper outside of Luxembourg already knew that!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 6, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I may take some fruitcake.



Might as well bring a bag of sand to a beach party.


----------



## treelover (Oct 6, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Should be a good march.



I wonder if they ever realised those Jodphurs looked ridiculous!

btw, is that pre war?


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 6, 2018)

The small number of onlookers and the unsmiling faces on many suggests wartime, and _not _inside Germany. I'd have a stab at France (if the guys in the photo weren't already doing that)


----------



## teqniq (Oct 6, 2018)

Yeah I kinda assumed France too.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 6, 2018)

It's all come a long way since then and that's for sure. Just looking at that photo and thinking about how international politics in Europe has changed since 1940... And perhaps how it hasn't.

Makes me wonder too how Brexit is going to be seen eighty-odd years from now, and how Europe is going to look by then.

/reflections, no point to make.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The small number of onlookers and the unsmiling faces on many suggests wartime, and _not _inside Germany. I'd have a stab at France (if the guys in the photo weren't already doing that)


Italy I suspect, looks like an Italian fascist uniform above third from left with his palm up. Also a few er roman salutes going on, doubt you'd see that in france


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It's all come a long way since then and that's for sure. Just looking at that photo and thinking about how international politics in Europe has changed since 1940... And perhaps how it hasn't.
> 
> Makes me wonder too how Brexit is going to be seen eighty-odd years from now, and how Europe is going to look by then.
> 
> /reflections, no point to make.


It'll all end in tears


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Italy I suspect, looks like an Italian fascist uniform above third from left with his palm up. Also a few er roman salutes going on, doubt you'd see that in france



There were French nazis, not a huge number but they definitely existed (till 1945 anyway) and of course the Petainists who were happy enough to put up with nazis if it meant no communists. But it could be Italy, I think I'd expect a bigger crowd but there are clearly more people out of shot. Otherwise we can split the difference and say Austria


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 6, 2018)

I've just bothered to look up the Parti Populaire (main French fascists of the day) and Wikipedia says their membership in 1937 was 120 000 .. so no, not a huge number but not insignificant either. Certainly fewer than 120 000 people saluting in that photo (assuming France).


----------



## spitfire (Oct 6, 2018)

.


----------



## spitfire (Oct 6, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Should be a good march.





treelover said:


> I wonder if they ever realised those Jodphurs looked ridiculous!
> 
> btw, is that pre war?





Pickman's model said:


> Italy I suspect, looks like an Italian fascist uniform above third from left with his palm up. Also a few er roman salutes going on, doubt you'd see that in france



If anyone can identify this uniform then you'll have it. looks similar to one of the few photo's I found of Dutch police but I reckon Pickmans is right.


----------



## spitfire (Oct 6, 2018)

I cheated and did a google image search. Pickmans wins a virtual prize.

3rd Reich Hitler Jugend HJ in Italy Photo Album @ GermanPostalHistory.com

"The first is of the Hitler Youth troop arriving in Turin, with the Italian crowd giving the hitler salute."


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 6, 2018)

Italy then, though that chap at the front isn't Carabineri, the hat badge is wrong. It _looks _like a Dutch police hat...

The plot thickens.


----------



## paolo (Oct 7, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Unilever backs down on HQ move to Netherlands | Reuters
> 
> 
> Will no one think of the narrative!??!?!



Ongoing, you’ve tossed these things into the mix.

I think you said that the German car industry wouldn’t let all of this happen.

I’ll try not to be so pedantic as to quote what you claimed,but I think it’s safe to say the shit show we now have is exactly that.

It *is* a shit show.

Nobody gets good of this. Nobody.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 7, 2018)

Young mum battered and left needing stitches - 'for being a Labour supporter'


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Italy then, though that chap at the front isn't Carabineri, the hat badge is wrong. It _looks _like a Dutch police hat...
> 
> The plot thickens.


The chap above yer man in the front with his palm up, the man clearly wearing an italian fascist uniform black shirt and all, gives it away


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 7, 2018)

Fair enough, I'll take yer word for it. I can't seem to see any uniforms but German, but I'm on a tiny screen just now 

The question was though, is the picture pre war? France was a wild guess by me, but wrong or right I think it's clear this isn't Germany so probably not pre-war.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Fair enough, I'll take yer word for it. I can't seem to see any uniforms but German, but I'm on a tiny screen just now
> 
> The question was though, is the picture pre war? France was a wild guess by me, but wrong or right I think it's clear this isn't Germany so probably not pre-war.


School trip I reckon


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> You really are the most unnecessary fool.


You're always getting caught out looking like a twat


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You're always getting caught out looking like a twat


Why are all these johnny come latelys picking on you, we need a clause in the TOS or whatever it’s called on urban


----------



## xarmian (Oct 7, 2018)

paolo said:


> To satisfy the WTO, the napkin would probably also have to state - “and are in the same trade bloc”. That would definitely solve it.



It would solve the WTO problem but the EU wouldn't sign the napkin. It would let the UK pocket tariffs before re-exporting duty and VAT-free to the EU. Or import cheap American food and re-export it to the EU. Brexit would be easy if the EU was happy with that.

Open borders need a customs union and VAT cooperation and regulatory alignment and shared trade deals.



kebabking said:


> do you not think that the EU should consider its own interests in this? do you think that if the EU refuses to recognise the UK's competancy, the UK will not recognise the EU's competancy and ban EU flights from UK air space?
> 
> the UK is perfectly happy to recognise the EU's regulatory framework, yet the EU seems unwilling to do likewise. 'lets stay in the EU' is not the message i'm getting here...



It's not just EU flights. EASA has mutual recognition agreements with airspaces worldwide. UK planes can fly worldwide because of the mutual recognition of standards. Outside EASA the UK can say it will recognise everyone else's standards, no questions asked, but other airspaces don't have to reciprocate. As it stands no deal means the UK has a choice of no non-domestic flights at all or only non-UK planes flying non-domestic routes. It can't demand that UK planes be allowed to fly without negotiating and signing mutual recognition with a few dozen other airspaces. The government has done nothing to prepare for putting those agreements in place.

This is a good twitter thread about it


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 8, 2018)

I don't think the 'Dogs Against Brexit' march Sunday is going to get their owners the second 'Wooferendum' they were asking for, though I can't fault their choice of pee station photo.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 8, 2018)

Interesting few stats here:


----------



## TopCat (Oct 8, 2018)

xarmian said:


> It would solve the WTO problem but the EU wouldn't sign the napkin. It would let the UK pocket tariffs before re-exporting duty and VAT-free to the EU. Or import cheap American food and re-export it to the EU. Brexit would be easy if the EU was happy with that.
> 
> Open borders need a customs union and VAT cooperation and regulatory alignment and shared trade deals.
> 
> ...



The sheer number of obvious tasks and issues that have not been addressed is huge. 
This weakens May asserting that no deal is better than a bad deal. She will have to accept her EU shit sandwich but can't as Parliament won't eat it. 
She is fucked. The tory party infighting will get worse. 
Great stuff.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Italy then, though that chap at the front isn't Carabineri, the hat badge is wrong. It _looks _like a Dutch police hat...
> 
> The plot thickens.



Pfft. London Transport bus inspector, blates.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Interesting few stats here:
> 
> View attachment 149200
> 
> View attachment 149201



Cheers. Yeah, the Union is history. Not even the Unionists give a fuck about it.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Interesting few stats here:
> 
> View attachment 149200
> 
> View attachment 149201


Where's this from?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 9, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Where's this from?


https://t.co/zBAP0B1AeX


----------



## nuffsaid (Oct 9, 2018)

Climate catastrophe to halt Brexit -

At Brexit's current rate of expansion, Theresa May will be rescued by the end of the world


----------



## Poi E (Oct 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> https://t.co/zBAP0B1AeX



I see 49% of Scottish Tories would accept independence as a price of Brexit. Mass migration of arseholes south.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 9, 2018)

It’s all a bit of a statement of the obvious in some ways.  Leave voters have already demonstrated that they think the price of Brexit is worth paying — they demonstrated it by voting leave.  The only reason it should come as a surprise is if you think leave voters didn’t understand these things were possibilities when they voted leave.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 9, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Mass migration of arseholes south.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 9, 2018)

hadrians?


----------



## kebabking (Oct 9, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> hadrians?



We won't be giving them Northumberland...

I always liked the 7th century Northumbrian border - north from Carlisle up (roughly) the M74 and then cutting north east from Moffat (ish) to the Forth...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 9, 2018)

kebabking said:


> We won't be giving them Northumberland...
> 
> I always liked the 7th century Northumbrian border - north from Carlisle up (roughly) the M74 and then cutting north east from Moffat (ish) to the Forth...


I went to the Newcastle City Council to claim the fog on the Tyne, piece by piece...
They all speak a variant of Scots there anyway. Probably.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I went to the Newcastle City Council to claim the fog on the Tyne, piece by piece...
> They all speak a variant of Scots there anyway. Probably.


Fog on the Tyne? It's all mine, all mine


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s all a bit of a statement of the obvious in some ways.  Leave voters have already demonstrated that they think the price of Brexit is worth paying — they demonstrated it by voting leave.  The only reason it should come as a surprise is if you think leave voters didn’t understand these things were possibilities when they voted leave.


I am a bit surprised they would see losing the union as a price worth paying, not about NI though, I know they don't give a stuff about that.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I am a bit surprised they would see losing the union as a price worth paying, not about NI though, I know they don't give a stuff about that.


If you’re in some shithole of a town living a life that’s been fucked over by relentless consumer-capitalism and you want to give the system a shake, why do you give a fuck whether or not England and Scotland remain a single political entity? 

Look at the general apathy in England at the time of the Scotch referendum.  People aren’t that bothered either way, for the main.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Scotch referendum


----------



## kabbes (Oct 9, 2018)

8ball said:


>


That’s how I believe they like to be called.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2018)

8ball said:


>


When people thought it was a vote about scotch interest rose through the roof. It subsided when they found out it was about scottish independence


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s how I believe they like to be called.


Scots.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Scots.


Well I never.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Well I never.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s how I believe they like to be called.


SO RAGIN RITE NOW


----------



## rubbershoes (Oct 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s all a bit of a statement of the obvious in some ways.  Leave voters have already demonstrated that they think the price of Brexit is worth paying — they demonstrated it by voting leave.  The only reason it should come as a surprise is if you think leave voters didn’t understand these things were possibilities when they voted leave.




Some did , some didn't.  My MIL voted leave because she wanted everything to be like it was when she was young


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 9, 2018)

I voted Remain largely for the same reason.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 9, 2018)

I voted remain out fear of the future, not love of the present.


----------



## Winot (Oct 9, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> Some did , some didn't.  My MIL voted leave because she wanted everything to be like it was when she was young



Food hoarding and existential threats from the Germans?


----------



## paolo (Oct 10, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s all a bit of a statement of the obvious in some ways.  Leave voters have already demonstrated that they think the price of Brexit is worth paying — they demonstrated it by voting leave.  The only reason it should come as a surprise is if you think leave voters didn’t understand these things were possibilities when they voted leave.



With recent polls becoming ever more convergent - the ones assessing the appetite for another referendum - the idea that no one will change their mind doesn’t stand up.

It doesn’t, yet, look compelling - another vote.

But the trend lines are worth a watch.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

Another referendum is a great idea. Just leave out the "European" and ask "do you want to leave the Union?". Resounding accord for disposing of the UK.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 10, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> Some did , some didn't.  My MIL voted leave because she wanted everything to be like it was when she was young





Winot said:


> Food hoarding and existential threats from the Germans?



An England with full employment and the gratitude and respect of the entire world, for its pluck and tenacity .. and half an empire still left.

Not the smug financial toilet it's become that we think is anyone's fault but our own. We've been bought off for generations and we only kicked back against it when the lie that it was _for us_ became too obviously a lie to even disguise any more.

_'I am free', you say. But a struggling dog may break its chain and escape with a length still attached to its collar_.

_Take back control_ they say, hoping we'll let them have the control once we take it back from Brussels. Same fuckers who sent our grandfathers and great grandfathers off to die in the mud with the lie it was for their own good. _Just go with it, it'll all be over by Christmas_. They went with it, and so will we.

Fuck is it only Wednesday?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> An England with full employment and the gratitude and respect of the entire world, for its pluck and tenacity .. and half an empire still left.



Huh, yeah, plucky old England saving the world from the Hun


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Huh, yeah, plucky old England saving the world from the Hun


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 10, 2018)




----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

Sane people don't make for good TV.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 10, 2018)

The DUP are a bunch of cunts, but you've got to hand it to them...they're world class cunts and capable of making complete cunts out of anyone trying to deal with their cuntishness.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 10, 2018)

who could have predicted getting into bed with professional stonewallers and intransigent cunts would come back to bite. lol.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

Piss and wind from the DUP.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 10, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Piss and wind from the DUP.


after another bit of fruit from the magic money tree


----------



## brogdale (Oct 10, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Piss and wind from the DUP.


They know that the swivel-eyed loons behind her will kill their fox anyway.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

We'll see Irish reunification before the DUP bring down the Tories.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 10, 2018)

TBF their 'red line' is to prevent a border between NI & the rest of the UK, which I don't want to see, just like I don't want to see a hard border between NI & ROI.



> *The DUP has threatened to vote down the budget if Theresa May breaches its “red line” on the Irish backstop in the Brexit talks. *It issued the threat in the form of a background briefing to broadcasters, who have quoted unnamed sources. DUP leaders have been more reticent in public about saying what they would do if their “red line” (no new checks on goods crossing the Irish Sea from Great Britain to Northern Ireland) gets breached - the party leader Arlene Foster refused to discuss this at a press conference yesterday - but the party has always said anything that breaks up the UK single market would be unacceptable.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 10, 2018)

Yeah they want everting the same as us over here... well mostly, none of that gay marrige and abortion stuff...


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

Oh, I thought you said a border, not enhanced cross channel checks. And thanks for the extra billion. Love, Arlene.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 10, 2018)

Poi E said:


> We'll see Irish reunification before the DUP bring down the Tories.



then you dont understand the DUP. no way in hell that the DUP will allow any sort of border in the irish sea. bloody minded instansgence is what they do - they love it - its their comfort zone. Especially  if its taking a stand against any weakening of the union in favour of dublin. 

These are the sorts of people whose supporters throw nail bombs at primary school kids because their route to school went through a god fearing protestant residential area.

A corbyn government is neither here nor there - governments come and go - small beer when you have been committed to preserving the protestant ascendancy under the blue skies of ulster since 1690


----------



## Poi E (Oct 10, 2018)

No trough to feed at in Stormont so they'll carry on doing May's bidding. Never believed a thing that issued forth from Fosters mouth. Can't see them getting cosy with the philanderer Johnson or the Catholic Rees Mogg.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 11, 2018)

Now why would they do such a thing...?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2018)

Poi E said:


> No trough to feed at in Stormont so they'll carry on doing May's bidding. Never believed a thing that issued forth from Fosters mouth. Can't see them getting cosy with the philanderer Johnson or the Catholic Rees Mogg.



did you not read what i put? The DUP will never accept n.ireland having a different arrangement with the EU to the rest of the uk because it will make the north more aligned with the republic. The union is an article of faith with them (there's a clue in the name). They will not budge on this.


----------



## andysays (Oct 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> did you not read what i put? The DUP will never accept n.ireland having a different arrangement with the EU to the rest of the uk because it will make the north more aligned with the republic. The union is an article of faith with them (there's a clue in the name). They will not budge on this.


The irony here is that NI already has different arrangements to the rest of the UK, so the DUP are effectively seeking to pick and choose which special arrangements they like and which they don't...


----------



## flypanam (Oct 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> did you not read what i put? The DUP will never accept n.ireland having a different arrangement with the EU to the rest of the uk because it will make the north more aligned with the republic. The union is an article of faith with them (there's a clue in the name). They will not budge on this.



They  can not budge all they want but if the Westminster billions dried up, they would soon fall into line.
The one ace they have is May who is craven.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2018)

flypanam said:


> They  can not budge all they want but if the Westminster billions dried up, they would soon fall into line.
> The one ace they have is May who is craven.



they absolutely wont fall into line. there is nothing they like better then taking a "cut nose to spite face" stand on principle. and their own supporters would crucify them. possibly literally.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 11, 2018)

G7 Resilience Advisers: EU Exit Readiness and Response Support to Local Preparedness (up to three roles) - Civil Service Jobs - GOV.UK

not only is it going to happen, but it is going to be fucking carnage

*resiliance advisors* for civil emergencies wanted asap


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> G7 Resilience Advisers: EU Exit Readiness and Response Support to Local Preparedness (up to three roles) - Civil Service Jobs - GOV.UK
> 
> not only is it going to happen, but it is going to be fucking carnage
> 
> *resiliance advisors* for civil emergencies wanted asap


there's a thread in employment and education for jobs


----------



## flypanam (Oct 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> they absolutely wont fall into line. there is nothing they like better then taking a "cut nose to spite face" stand on principle. and their own supporters would crucify them. possibly literally.


Maybe it's me but I seem to remember their No at the Anglo Irish agreement in the 80's when God's own Rev spoke to a huge crowd in Belfast. Yet Thatcher ignored them. The DUP were quite 'no' to the GFA, yet a few years later they sat in Stormont, milking their position for their own interest bring down said Stormont with bullshit about the Irish language.

I certainly wouldn't view all DUP supporters as the same. I suspect their rural base views a border with the south with some dread.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 11, 2018)

It's what the people want:


Insect-filled chocolates, rat hair-infested noodles, and orange juice containing maggots are just some of the “horrors” UK consumers could be forced to accept if post-Brexit Britain signs a wide-ranging trade deal with the USA.

UK consumers could be forced to accept insects, mould and rat hair in food as part of post-Brexit trade deal


----------



## Poi E (Oct 11, 2018)

I've eaten a scorpion in candy, so I guess that's a start.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 11, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's what the people want:
> 
> 
> Insect-filled chocolates, rat hair-infested noodles, and orange juice containing maggots are just some of the “horrors” UK consumers could be forced to accept if post-Brexit Britain signs a wide-ranging trade deal with the USA.
> ...



It's fine

Here's what you need to know about the ground-up insects that Starbucks puts in your Frappuccino


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 11, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> It's fine
> 
> Here's what you need to know about the ground-up insects that Starbucks puts in your Frappuccino


We'll need the extra protein anyway.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 11, 2018)

Any plant-based food is probably going to have insect fragments in it, it sounds like the US FDA just does more to regulate them than EU authorities. 

According to one study, coffee drinkers consume 140,000 insect fragments a year - sounds a little high to me, but I guess they're not talking about big chunks of insect like entire wings or heads.

You could be accidentally eating 140,000 pieces of insect a year


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2018)

flypanam said:


> Maybe it's me but I seem to remember their No at the Anglo Irish agreement in the 80's when God's own Rev spoke to a huge crowd in Belfast. Yet Thatcher ignored them. The DUP were quite 'no' to the GFA, yet a few years later they sat in Stormont, milking their position for their own interest bring down said Stormont with bullshit about the Irish language.
> 
> I certainly would view all DUP supporters as the same. I suspect their rural base views a border with the south with some dread.



they didn't have the veto on the Anglo-Irish agreement or the GFA - but it was a fati-compli - so they could claim to have stuck to their guns. But they absolutely have a veto over a sea border - and even if they weren't propping up the government, such a move would be met with ferocious resistance by loyalists ultras - riots, boycotts, strikes, sabotage. Its pretty fundamental - n.ireland in the customs unions along side the republic and rest of the UK outside would be seen - accurately - as a fundamental weakening of the union. basically - they'd go fucking apeshit.  

And a hard border in n.ireland would have the same outcome. 

This has been absolutely clear from day one of the brexit process and the government's approach has been to try and ignore in the hope it goes away - but now its crunch time and the only possible outcomes are customs union (i.e BINO) or no deal. one is a pointless pile of  shit and the other is a clusterfuck.


----------



## 2hats (Oct 11, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Any plant-based food is probably going to have insect fragments in it


I’ve watched Ribena being made. Lots of earwigs.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 11, 2018)

Funny how when the EU was negotiating TTIP, people across Europe were (rightly) up in arms about the prospect of Monsanto products poisoning us to death for corporate profit, yet when Beyer (a European company) bought Monsanto outright this year, nobody seemed to bat an eyelid.
Funny old world.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 11, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Funny how when the EU was negotiating TTIP, people across Europe were (rightly) up in arms about the prospect of Monsanto products poisoning us to death for corporate profit, yet when Beyer (a European company) bought Monsanto outright this year, nobody seemed to bat an eyelid.
> Funny old world.


Luckily brexit will mean the UK avoiding all the GM foodstuffs that the Germans are now going to introduce, and we will be able to insist on higher standards in future trade deals.
Funny old world.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 11, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Luckily brexit will mean the UK avoiding all the GM foodstuffs that the Germans are now going to introduce, and we will be able to insist on higher standards in future trade deals.
> Funny old world.


Would make an interesting 2nd referendum question:
Deal: Cancer by Glyphosates
No deal: Starve to death


----------



## Whagwan (Oct 11, 2018)

* Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’ *


Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’


----------



## flypanam (Oct 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> they didn't have the veto on the Anglo-Irish agreement or the GFA - but it was a fati-compli - so they could claim to have stuck to their guns. But they absolutely have a veto over a sea border - and even if they weren't propping up the government, such a move would be met with ferocious resistance by loyalists ultras - riots, boycotts, strikes, sabotage. Its pretty fundamental - n.ireland in the customs unions along side the republic and rest of the UK outside would be seen - accurately - as a fundamental weakening of the union. basically - they'd go fucking apeshit.
> 
> And a hard border in n.ireland would have the same outcome.
> 
> This has been absolutely clear from day one of the brexit process and the government's approach has been to try and ignore in the hope it goes away - but now its crunch time and the only possible outcomes are customs union (i.e BINO) or no deal. one is a pointless pile of  shit and the other is a clusterfuck.


If sorry I don’t think loyalists will be up in arms against the British state, when have they? The strike in the seventies was more of a lockout. They can’t even muster a piss at Drumcree these days. The fleg protest was impressive then just quickly went out. Loyalism is more divided than ever. 

The traditional response of unionism when confronted with problems is to kill catholics. I could certainly see some of that occurring. 

Given their preference is for a Tory government I suspect this is all bluster. I suspect that what they want is a change to the GFA that Arlene was banging on about last week.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 11, 2018)

Whagwan said:


> * Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’ *
> 
> 
> Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’


Well yes, is it fairly politically sensitive than a political campaign might have broken the rules to achieve its aims, causing potential massive economic and social damage to the country


----------



## kebabking (Oct 11, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Well yes, is it fairly politically sensitive than a political campaign might have broken the rules to achieve its aims, causing potential massive economic and social damage to the country



conversely, what exactly do you think might be achieved by investigating and prosecuting those involved?

do you think there might be some legitimate political sensitivity about _criminalising_ a referendum result that was, at least in large part, a result of public disengagement with, and anger towards, a professionalised political class? 

you think their might be dangers, perhaps greater dangers than brexit presents, in telling 17 million people that because they are thicky racists who fall for any old shite, their votes don't matter as much as the 16 million votes of the brighter, better educated people who don't get taken in by populist nonsense?

are you _entirely_ sure that you want the spending of the 'remain' campaigns gone through in a forensic manner - what value would you put having the Govenor of the Bank of England standing up and telling the electorate that if they vote to leave they can expect the dead to pile up in the streets and for whats left of the living to be chewing raw potatoes in the snow?


----------



## Cloo (Oct 11, 2018)

As it happens, no, I'm not sure much would be achieved by investigating it, so I'm sorry to put you to the effort of debunking a viewpoint I don't actually hold. Just thought the headline was a tad ironic.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 11, 2018)

Cloo said:


> As it happens, no, I'm not sure much would be achieved by investigating it, so I'm sorry to put you to the effort of debunking a viewpoint I don't actually hold. Just thought the headline was a tad ironic.



disappointing, i was well up for a bunfight...


----------



## Cloo (Oct 11, 2018)

Ultimately, I'm just not convinced one can 'prove' the vote would have gone differently if Leave hadn't spent more than they were supposed to. Though does make you wonder what the point of spending rules is then!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2018)

flypanam said:


> If sorry I don’t think loyalists will be up in arms against the British state, when have they? The strike in the seventies was more of a lockout. They can’t even muster a piss at Drumcree these days. The fleg protest was impressive then just quickly went out. Loyalism is more divided than ever.
> .



Well arguably the examples you state make my point - If they caused that amount of aggro over purely  symbolic - and brain bashingly petty -  issues such as drumcree, holy cross and flegs - how much more aggro will they create over something as fundamental as separating norn iron from GB via a sea border? An act that has a united Ireland as its logical - and possibly inevitable - outcome?  
And what better way to unite unionists then an existential threat to the union?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 11, 2018)

the stagger's stephen bush's take on it  - 





> the “U” in DUP doesn’t stand for “Don’t let Jeremy Corbyn become Prime Minister”; it stands for “Unionist”. And a deal that could unify the Conservative Party – Great Britain out of the customs union and single market while Northern Ireland remains aligned with the European Union – would put a stick of dynamite under the union between Great Britain and Northern Ireland



To survive the Budget, Theresa May must realise where the DUP’s priorities lie


----------



## RedStag (Oct 12, 2018)

Arlene Foster should be made deputy PM - PM could be someone like Ian Duncan Smith

how about that?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster should be made deputy PM - PM could be someone like Ian Duncan Smith
> 
> how about that?




I think we have a troll.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think we have a troll.



I think you might be right...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster should be made deputy PM - PM could be someone like Ian Duncan Smith
> 
> how about that?


Stop taking the tablets


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 12, 2018)




----------



## Whagwan (Oct 12, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Ultimately, I'm just not convinced one can 'prove' the vote would have gone differently if Leave hadn't spent more than they were supposed to. Though does make you wonder what the point of spending rules is then!



I'm firmly in this camp.  Yes the vote might not have gone differently, yes concentrating on the vote is a bit like the Dems in the US focussing on Russia, "You guys made a mistake can we go back to the neo-liberal status quo now please?"

However at what point do we get concerned about bought influence in our supposed democratic votes?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster should be made deputy PM - PM could be someone like Ian Duncan Smith
> 
> how about that?


Two posts in. At least lull us a bit.

Poor effort.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 12, 2018)

Whagwan said:


> I'm firmly in this camp.  Yes the vote might not have gone differently, yes concentrating on the vote is a bit like the Dems in the US focussing on Russia, "You guys made a mistake can we go back to the neo-liberal status quo now please?"
> 
> However at what point do we get concerned about bought influence in our supposed democratic votes?



Yes, but the ‘neo-liberal status quo’ will survive this perfectly well, in fact this kind of disruption is just a ding dong between different groups within it.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 12, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Well arguably the examples you state make my point - If they caused that amount of aggro over purely  symbolic - and brain bashingly petty -  issues such as drumcree, holy cross and flegs - how much more aggro will they create over something as fundamental as separating norn iron from GB via a sea border? An act that has a united Ireland as its logical - and possibly inevitable - outcome?
> And what better way to unite unionists then an existential threat to the union?



Maybe I do, maybe I don't. My point is that certainly loyalism can cause strife, but for everytime in the last decade that they've talked about shutting down the province, they've failed to do so. There might be some violence but no strikes, no mass demonstrations, instead some Catholics get attacked but on the whole life just goes on.

Harryville was localised. As I've said before the flags protests were small scale and went out quickly. Their 'Civil right camp' in July 2013 on Twaddle Ave was an eyesore but moved no-one but the loyalist ultras. Their attempt to close down three catholic schools a few years back was an empty threat.

The OO has only 30,000 members, down from 100,000 in it's glory days. Loyalism/Unionism is riven with division. Their armed wing in the British Army has 5000 troops. The PSNI is over a third Catholic.

As I said before the DUP backing of Brexit was murky and dodgy, however their present stance is imo not so much about a border (alignment or otherwise) but more probably aimed at the GFA notion of consent: 50% + 1. Arlene has said that the GFA must be renegotiated, that is their long term goal and their price for supporting May's Brexit.

After all even with a customs border down the Irish sea, the occupied six counties are still occupied.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2018)

flypanam said:


> Maybe I do, maybe I don't. My point is that certainly loyalism can cause strife, but for everytime in the last decade that they've talked about shutting down the province, they've failed to do so. There might be some violence but no strikes, no mass demonstrations, instead some Catholics get attacked but on the whole life just goes on.
> 
> Harryville was localised. As I've said before the flags protests were small scale and went out quickly. Their 'Civil right camp' in July 2013 on Twaddle Ave was an eyesore but moved no-one but the loyalist ultras. Their attempt to close down three catholic schools a few years back was an empty threat.
> 
> ...



Yes - militant unionism has been looking increasingly like an embarrassing anachronism kept going by a dwindling bunch of headbangers. But an Irish sea border is just the thing to give it a massive shot in the arm - surely that is obvious? 

Do they have the strength to defeat  the British state on this? no. but nor did the republicans during the troubles. still created a huge amount of aggro and pain.


----------



## RedStag (Oct 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Two posts in. At least lull us a bit.
> 
> Poor effort.


Arlene Foster was the one that saved the country from the idiot babies aka. Labour

for that she should be given far highter status

IDS talks a lot of sense


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> IDS talks a lot of sense


Pity you don’t.


----------



## Supine (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster was the one that saved the country from the idiot babies aka. Labour
> 
> for that she should be given far highter status
> 
> IDS talks a lot of sense


----------



## flypanam (Oct 12, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yes - militant unionism has been looking increasingly like an embarrassing anachronism kept going by a dwindling bunch of headbangers. But an Irish sea border is just the thing to give it a massive shot in the arm - surely that is obvious?



I'm just not sure that it will.


----------



## RedStag (Oct 12, 2018)

there's no reason why we should be lopping off a section of our country just to appease the liberals


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> there's no reason why we should be lopping off a section of our country just to appease the liberals


it's not 'our country' - give ireland back to the irish.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> IDS talks a lot of shite


c4u


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> there's no reason why we should be lopping off a section of our country just to appease the liberals



What part of England are we lopping off?  I've always felt we could do without Cornwall and I think they'd be happier on their own.


----------



## RedStag (Oct 12, 2018)

I@m referring to the attempted lopping off of NI, by the liberals.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> I@m referring to the attempted lopping off of NI, by the liberals.








a liberal recently


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> there's no reason why we should be lopping off a section of our country just to appease the liberals



It's not "your" country. Never has been, never will.

And it wasn't _liberals_ who fought and died for Irish freedoms.


----------



## andysays (Oct 12, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Pity you don’t.


He gave you an open goal, but you tapped it in nicely


----------



## RedStag (Oct 12, 2018)

Liberals on the British side are who I'm refering to


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Liberals on the British side are who I'm refering to


yeh but they're utterly irrelevant, they have nothing to say which anyone's listening to.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> I@m referring to the attempted lopping off of NI, by the liberals.



'Our' country is England, well mine is anyway and you sound like a cunt so I'm going to guess you're English as well.  Northern Ireland is a country in its own right.  You been sniffing the petrol again?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> there's no reason why we should be lopping off a section of our country just to appease the liberals



It's not your country. 
It never was your country to plunder and rape. 
It was never your country. 

Ireland has always been Ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> 'Our' country is England, well mine is anyway and you sound like a cunt so I'm going to guess you're English as well.  Northern Ireland is a country in its own right.  You been sniffing the petrol again?


if only he'd pour it over himself and offer up a burnt sacrifice


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It's not your country.
> It never was your country to plunder and rape.
> It was never your country.
> 
> Ireland has always been Ireland.



I've liked the post but if I was to be hypercritical it was a missed opportunity for a full force 'Erin go Bragh' in block capitals.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It's not your country.
> It never was your country to plunder and rape.
> It was never your country.
> 
> Ireland has always been Ireland.


Don't rise to his bait, you eejit.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It's not your country.
> It never was your country to plunder and rape.
> It was never your country.
> 
> Ireland has always been Ireland.


What about when it wasn't?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What about when it wasn't?



It still didn't belong to England.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

Idris2002 said:


> Don't rise to his bait, you eejit.



Don't call me an eejit.
And I'll reply to whoever I want.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It still didn't belong to England.


So what?  Your claim was "Ireland has always been Ireland."  That's as fucking stupid as this idiot you're  wasting time replying to.


----------



## Idris2002 (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So what?  Your claim was "Ireland has always been Ireland."  That's as fucking stupid as this idiot you're  wasting time replying to.


Now look here, old chap, there'll always be an Ireland, and may God strike me dead if that isn't true.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So what?  Your claim was "Ireland has always been Ireland."  That's as fucking stupid as this idiot you're  wasting time replying to.




The island of Ireland has always been it's own island....(up to the invasion and colonisation and rule of the English)
If you want to call it Eire or Hibernia or Ogygia call it that.
If you're being a bit obtuse about that that's your problem not mine.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> The island of Ireland has always been it's own island....(up to the invasion and colonisation and rule of the English)
> If you want to call it Eire or Hibernia or Ogygia call it that.
> If you're being a bit obtuse about that that's your problem not mine.


You're the prat hiding behind Island and Ireland.  Time waster.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 12, 2018)

For me, none of the options for a future deal put forward by all sides of the Brexit debate will actually gain a majority in parliament, other than the Norway type deal.

Sadly, I can't see May giving her backing to this or to a second referendum. She has listened to the Brexit fanatics on the Tory right from the start of this process and won't shy away from them now.

My preferred option is Norway or failing that a second referendum with the option of remaining in the EU.

I think Brexit will probably happen but it doesn't have to. In a democracy, we should have the right to change our minds when we see we we're lied to and can see that disaster is upon us. Why should future generations who did not vote for this have to live with the consequences of it?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You're the prat hiding behind Island and Ireland.  Time waster.



Poor response from someone who decides Ireland isn't Ireland


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> For me, none of the options for a future deal put forward by all sides of the Brexit debate will actually gain a majority in parliament, other than the Norway type deal.
> 
> Sadly, I can't see May giving her backing to this or to a second referendum. She has listened to the Brexit fanatics on the Tory right from the start of this process and won't shy away from them now.
> 
> ...



Norway has free movement of people with the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Poor response from someone who decides Ireland isn't Ireland


I said no such thing. Why lie when the record is there - a few posts above. Do you know how close your ideas of destiny are to clown red whatever his name is? No, you don't do you?_ Ireland is destiny, it is our blood and our soil. Ireland. Even when there was no such thing._


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

And you can stick your thumb up back up your racial history where it came from.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> I
> 
> I said no such thing. Why lie when the record is there - a few posts above. Do you know how close your ideas of destiny are to clown red whatever his name is? No, you don't do you?_ Ireland is destiny, it is our blood and our soil. Ireland. Even when there was no such thing._




Look fuckwit.....I know my history.
My family goes right back to Brian Boru and further.
You quoting Padraig Pearce to me is a joke. .... with your butchers apron hanging out.

Eta you're calling me a racist? Get over yourself.
Ireland is full of people from hundreds of nations...going back thousands of years...
But...they integrated. 
They didn't dominate...the way the English did. The English decided they wanted ownership...just like they did in India and elsewhere. 
Go learn your own history. Sir.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Look fuckwit.....I know my history.
> My family goes right back to Brian Boru and further.
> You quoting Padraig Pearce to me is a joke. .... with your butchers apron hanging out.


Point proven. And the giants and that no doubt. Mythic history actually influencing someone today here and now.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 12, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Norway has free movement of people with the EU.


I'm all for free movement of people. Open borders is better than a world of hard borders. 

Immigration is of massive net benefit to Britain's economy and the many industries/sectors that rely on it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 12, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> 'Our' country is England, well mine is anyway and you sound like a cunt so I'm going to guess you're English as well.  Northern Ireland is a country in its own right.  You been sniffing the petrol again?


Hmmm. The UK is a weird one as I can't think of any other country whose constituent states are granted in some senses 'country' status in their own right. Wales, for instance, in a practical sense has less independence from the rest of the UK than the states of many federal countries. And NI is doubly weird in that half the people who live there really would like it not to be a 'country' at all. Its making into a country in the first place was a grubby political fix-up. Bit like the old East Germany in that regard.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> I'm all for free movement of people. Open borders is better than a world of hard borders.
> 
> Immigration is of massive net benefit to Britain's economy and the many industries/sectors that rely on it.



Yeah, but to imagine Mayhem and her merry men accepting that is a stretch.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Point proven. And the giants and that no doubt. Mythic history actually influencing someone today here and now.



Ha...Brian Boru existed.
Dear oh dear....so adamant you know what you're talking about but really you know very little of Irish history. How could you? Its not your fault that the history books in England forgot to mention what was done to the Irish.
So... I'll forgive you for not knowing the truth about Irish history at the hands of the English and the Empire.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 12, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. The UK is a weird one as I can't think of any other country whose constituent states are granted in some senses 'country' status in their own right. Wales, for instance, in a practical sense has less independence from the rest of the UK than the states of many federal countries. And NI is doubly weird in that half the people who live there really would like it not to be a 'country' at all. Its making into a country in the first place was a grubby political fix-up. Bit like the old East Germany in that regard.



No wonder so many people drink so much.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Ha...Brian Boru existed.
> Dear oh dear....so adamant you know what you're talking about but really you know very little of Irish history. How could you? Its not your fault that the history books in England forgot to mention what was done to the Irish.
> So... I'll forgive you for not knowing the truth about Irish history at the hands of the English and the Empire.


The giants are the myths you prat - your forefathers no doubt in in this mad racial history.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 12, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yeah, but to imagine Mayhem and her merry men accepting that is a stretch.


 I agree sadly.

May will go with whichever direction the Tory right takes her.

She would jump off a cliff for them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 12, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Look fuckwit.....I know my history.
> My family goes right back to Brian Boru and further.
> You quoting Padraig Pearce to me is a joke. .... with your butchers apron hanging out.
> 
> ...



Now you're just fantasising!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The giants are the myths you prat - your forefathers no doubt in in this mad racial history.



I didn't mention giants. 
And there is no racism in my posts. 
Ireland was ruled by your Monarchy for too long. Me pointing out that fact is not me being racist.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 12, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> I agree sadly.
> 
> May will go with whichever direction the Tory right takes her.
> 
> She would jump off a cliff for them.



What a useful statement. No evidence I see.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 12, 2018)

I just want the people who live in the North and travel across the border to shop or visit their neighbours and family to have those rights remain without the horror of a border.
The NI border as manned by the British Army was a horrible thing for Catholics and anyone Catholic travelling up to the North. I can remember as a kid being in the car terrified as British soldiers with their guns pointed at the car and them insisting on all of us getting out as they checked the boot.
We went up North to visit family maybe 4 or 5 times a year. Once they saw the southern reg they decided we were to be searched.
Unless you have experienced what it was like then you can't fully understand why the nationalists in the North are very much afraid that their rights could well be trampled on....history has a horrible habit of repeating itself...What is unfair is that the majority in NI voted to remain in the EU but their voice isn't heard or heeded in Westminster and the DUP  led by Arlene Foster seem to want to alter the only agreement that has brought peace in NI.
I'm not racist butchersapron.
There are unionists in the North who want to remain in the EU.
There are even unionists in NI who want a united Ireland believe it or not.
What everyone wants here is peace and anyone deciding to mess with the only thing that has worked here is foolish to put it mildly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Norway has free movement of people with the EU.


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Poi E (Oct 12, 2018)

Brexit Bond. Very funny, Moneypenny


----------



## sealion (Oct 12, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster was the one that saved the country from the idiot babies aka. Labour
> 
> for that she should be given far highter status
> 
> IDS talks a lot of sense


Any chance of your dealers number please?


----------



## sealion (Oct 12, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> In a democracy, we should have the right to change our minds when we see we we're lied to and can see that disaster is upon us.


Like after every general election then?


----------



## sealion (Oct 12, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> Why should future generations who did not vote for this have to live with the consequences of it?


Agreed, i want a re run of the original vote when my parents were conned.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> I just want the people who live in the North and travel across the border to shop or visit their neighbours and family to have those rights remain without *the horror of a border*.


The Horror... THE HORROR


----------



## RedStag (Oct 13, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> For me, none of the options for a future deal put forward by all sides of the Brexit debate will actually gain a majority in parliament, other than the Norway type deal.
> 
> Sadly, I can't see May giving her backing to this or to a second referendum. She has listened to the Brexit fanatics on the Tory right from the start of this process and won't shy away from them now.
> 
> ...


that's rather a classical Orwelllian double-speak post!


----------



## RedStag (Oct 13, 2018)

sealion said:


> Agreed, i want a re run of the original vote when my parents were conned.


nice to see you have such disregard for your parents'  intellect and wisdom (add sarcasm icon)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The Horror... THE HORROR



It’s the same between France and Italy. Free movement is sacrosanct, my arse.


----------



## RedStag (Oct 13, 2018)

it's not sacrosanct because other than the elite of Brussels, and the wishful thinking ideologues amongst the citezenry, it is neither desired nor sensible


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The Horror... THE HORROR



The border between NI and the Republic was horrendous. It was nothing like a customs border. The British army searched people at gunpoint. Intimidation was rife. And what was really shit was that people travelled every day across that border for work and family. But if you had a Republican registration number you were treated as if you were a potential terrorist.
Stopped....searched....bit of intimidation....shoved around...made fun of for your name..... You'd be locked up at the drop of a hat if you dared say a word or ask why they were treating you like shit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 13, 2018)

RedStag said:


> Arlene Foster was the one that saved the country from the idiot babies aka. Labour



And yet by propping up a May government she will quite likely bring ruin on her country, her party and the unionist cause. Hatred of Arlene Foster may one day become the strongest unifying force the protestants and catholics of the six counties have had since Danny Boy.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> The border between NI and the Republic was horrendous. It was nothing like a customs border. The British army searched people at gunpoint. Intimidation was rife. And what was really shit was that people travelled every day across that border for work and family. But if you had a Republican registration number you were treated as if you were a potential terrorist.
> Stopped....searched....bit of intimidation....shoved around...made fun of for your name..... You'd be locked up at the drop of a hat if you dared say a word or ask why they were treating you like shit.


What's a republican registration number?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What's a republican registration number?



At the time...it was the registration number of a car registered in the Republic of Ireland.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

So Ireland was always Ireland and all Irish are republicans. OK.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So Ireland was always Ireland and all Irish are republicans. OK.



Yep.
Ireland will always be Ireland.
And no...Not all Irish are republicans.
Most people of all backgrounds here just want to get along peacefully.

I'll just say it again..anything other than an open border will damage what was the beginnings of a peaceful and relatively easy coexistence of people on the island of Ireland...people of all faiths and none living in both the area north of the border and south of that border.

Eta...And by border...I mean geographical border. There is no border in reality here now.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Yep.
> Ireland will always be Ireland.
> And no...Not all Irish are republicans.
> Most people of all backgrounds here just want to get along peacefully.
> ...


So your mad series of replies to me - including the one where i invented a racist parody of your sort of thinking that explicitly quoted nazi policy and that you then approvingly took as a quote from the central person of your sort of political tradition - is where in this nice sounding guff?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> My preferred option is Norway or failing that a second referendum with the option of


pior auld norway 

can you speak norwegian?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Ireland will always be Ireland


It might sound obvious. But it does need to be interrogated.


In what way will “Ireland always be Ireland”? As a unified nation state? While I think that’s a reasonable goal now, it might not always be.

You also said “Ireland has always been Ireland”. Meaning what? There have been other kingdoms on the island, not always contiguous with its shoreline. Dal Riada is a case in point.

The idea that culture is (or should “naturally” be) homogenous within and contiguous with the borders of a state is a dangerous one.

Geography, statehood, culture. These are not synonyms.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What's a republican registration number?



A registration number from the Republic of Ireland, as is abundantly clear from context?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> So your mad series of replies to me - including the one where i invented a racist parody of your sort of thinking that explicitly quoted nazi policy and that you then approvingly took as a quote from the central person of your sort of political tradition - is where in this nice sounding guff?




Look....until you've lived here you'll never fully understand what has been done to the Irish.
You'll also never fully understand that the vast majority of people want to maintain peace.

You probably don't have much of an understanding of what people went through to get to this stage.

I do. Every family in this country whose grandparents grew up here and ended up fighting each other in a brutal civil war knows what can happen when a country is cut up and a piece of it is given to one dominant group who then dominate and control the people who were unfortunate enough to be in a minority. They ensured that this minority....from the same country...often neighbours and people whose ancestors had been neighbours and friends for years..generations.. .this minority was then told they couldn't do certain jobs...couldn't vote...sectarianism grew.

So...to answer again your question.Ireland has always been Ireland. And the Irish of all faiths colours creeds whatever got on. But the deliberate policy of division if the country into 6 counties in NI was crazy and it drove people apart.

As for Pearse? He was a dreamer...And flawed. But he is considered by many to be quite the hero and the Rising albeit very much a failure, did set things in motion that led to an eventual independence from the UK.
So...yes...as a nation celebrate our independence. Maybe if the Rising had not happened and we were now voting on Brexit as part of the UK...the vote would have been to remain in the EU. 

Either way...you're only trying to score points and you've no vested interest or even passing interest in peace in Ireland. I would say that from your posting style and comments and your name that you quite possibly detest Irish people. You've certainly never once made me feel welcome here.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> A registration number from the Republic of Ireland, as is abundantly clear from context?


Oh how cute, frank is doing ireland again. What sort of reg was Pat Finucane's car then?


----------



## rekil (Oct 13, 2018)

Someone on here once claimed to be a descendent of Diarmuid MacMurrough. Was it _you_ butchersapron?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Look....until you've lived here you'll never fully understand what has been done to the Irish.
> You'll also never fully understand that the vast majority of people want to maintain peace.
> 
> You probably don't have much of an understanding of what people went through to get to this stage.



Butchers understands everything better than everyone. It's why we put up with him being such a godawful dickhead, apparently.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Look....until you've lived here you'll never fully understand what has been done to the Irish.
> You'll also never fully understand that the vast majority of people want to maintain peace.
> 
> You probably don't have much of an understanding of what people went through to get to this stage.
> ...


I'm the son of irish immigrants to england. I have had and still have family members involved in every aspect of republican struggle - from the OIRA to PIRA and the INLA, to the british army and to victims of all of these groups. I have lived in Ireland for extended periods and have had all of the above live with me in england. Your mythopoeic guff is really not suited to dealing with contemporary problems.

As for pearse? I invented an openly racist quote and didn't attribute it to anyone - you pinned it on him and approved. Yours is a dangerous unity.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It might sound obvious. But it does need to be interrogated.
> 
> 
> In what way will “Ireland always be Ireland”? As a unified nation state? While I think that’s a reasonable goal now, it might not always be.
> ...




It's not even that though.

For generations people here got on with their neighbours. Religious differences did not cause problems. People just worked and tried to she out a decent living.
There was always a desire to be independent from England though. This desire was not limited to Catholics. There were many protestants who wanted Ireland to govern itself. And politically there was a chance that could have happened.

But civil war and sectarianism really drove people apart. And the British government really drove that. Troops coming over killing Irish people. The Black and Tans...Jesus...nobody will forget the horrors they committed.
The country was subjected to a divide and conquer policy. And resistance to that became habitual.

Roll on to the 70s and human rights marches and people being shot up by the British Army for marching for their rights .... And you see how so many people were disillusioned with government. Ignored.. And treated like dirt. 

So for us to get over all that and reach a stage where we are living peacefully...that's something nobody should try to take from us. Especially not the British government.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

copliker said:


> Someone on here once claimed to be a descendent of Diarmuid MacMurrough. Was it _you_ butchersapron?


I am. But you know...don't let pip hear


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It's not even that though.
> 
> For generations people here got on with their neighbours. Religious differences did not cause problems. People just worked and tried to she out a decent living.
> There was always a desire to be independent from England though. This desire was not limited to Catholics. There were many protestants who wanted Ireland to govern itself. And politically there was a chance that could have happened.
> ...


Pic of rea here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> So...to answer again your question.Ireland has always been Ireland. And the Irish of all faiths colours creeds whatever got on


I think you need to pluck up the big book of Irish history or perhaps Andrew Boyd's "holy war in belfast" as a corrective to your peculiar view of the past. Have you ever heard of the defenders or whiteboys? Do you know what happened to Quakers in Wexford in 1798?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you need to pluck up the big book of Irish history or perhaps Andrew Boyd's "holy war in belfast" as a corrective to your peculiar view of the past. Have you ever heard of the defenders or whiteboys? Do you know what happened to Quakers in Wexford in 1798?



Centuries of fighting if you want to go through each and every battle.

Do you think any of it would have happened if England had not invaded?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> It's not even that though.
> 
> For generations people here got on with their neighbours. Religious differences did not cause problems. People just worked and tried to she out a decent living.
> There was always a desire to be independent from England though. This desire was not limited to Catholics. There were many protestants who wanted Ireland to govern itself. And politically there was a chance that could have happened.
> ...


That doesn’t address the point I made. It’s a bunch of different points.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Centuries of fighting if you want to go through each and every battle.
> 
> Do you think any of it would have happened if England had not invaded?


Centuries of fighting really rather at odds with your Irish people of all creeds always got on.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> That doesn’t address the point I made. It’s a bunch of different points.



Ok. So what should Ireland be called then? 
I don't know anymore. To me..Ireland was an island I live on that has some stability and has worked on peace between the 6 counties and the rest of the island. Everything that happens in the 6 counties has an impact on the 26 counties. So in that sense we are one. 

To be honest...I think Ireland is heading for a resurgence of the troubles and that terrifies me.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Centuries of fighting really rather at odds with your Irish people of all creeds always got on.



Yeah probably 
But I was comparing with what happened during the civil war. Maybe not clearly.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Centuries of fighting if you want to go through each and every battle.
> 
> Do you think any of it would have happened if England had not invaded?


I think the question Pickmans is nudging you toward is when did this period occur:

“For generations people here got on with their neighbours. Religious differences did not cause problems. People just worked and tried to she out a decent living.”

Before Edward Bruce? Between Bruce and Henry VIII? Between Henry and Cromwell.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Ok. So what should Ireland be called then?
> I don't know anymore. To me..Ireland was an island I live on that has some stability and has worked on peace between the 6 counties and the rest of the island. Everything that happens in the 6 counties has an impact on the 26 counties. So in that sense we are one.
> 
> To be honest...I think Ireland is heading for a resurgence of the troubles and that terrifies me.


Density


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think the question Pickmans is nudging you toward is when did this period occur:
> 
> “For generations people here got on with their neighbours. Religious differences did not cause problems. People just worked and tried to she out a decent living.”
> 
> Before Edward Bruce? Between Bruce and Henry VIII? Between Henry and Cromwell.


Before 8am - when the kids programs are on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

Just yesterday I was reading about orangemen attacking catholics in the 1860s


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Ok. So what should Ireland be called then?


I think your issue here is that you are confusing several different concepts as one. That’s precisely the point I was making. Culture, polity, statehood, geography. And so on. These are all different things.

To be clear: I support the reunification of Ireland.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think your issue here is that you are confusing several different concepts as one. That’s precisely the point I was making. Culture, polity, statehood, geography. And so on. These are all different things.
> 
> To be clear: I support the reunification of Ireland.


That makes you a proper irish.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That makes you a proper irish.


That’s certainly what kids and teachers at school used to tell me.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think your issue here is that you are confusing several different concepts as one. That’s precisely the point I was making. Culture, polity, statehood, geography. And so on. These are all different things.
> 
> To be clear: I support the reunification of Ireland.



I know and I think I was probably very emotional about stuff yesterday on here. Sorry about that. Family history going back too long in the mess that was the civil war and the horrors of the troubles. And I know that ordinary  people don't want a return to violence or sectarianism.
Apologies to butchersapron I assumed you were anti Irish with your butchers apron title here and "blood on the walls"....to me that is what was waved in the faces of family up north...in a way that was mocking and sectarian. And areas that flew the butchersapron were to be avoided if you didn't want to be beaten up.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> pior auld norway
> 
> can you speak norwegian?



No.
Does that language use capital letters?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> No.
> Does that language use capital letters?


you're nothing but a sad obsessive


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 13, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> No.
> Does that language use capital letters?


Yes. And it spaces its paragraphs.


----------



## Deej92 (Oct 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you're nothing but a sad obsessive


My pleasure dear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 13, 2018)

Deej92 said:


> My pleasure dear.


yeh like a constant wanker you're only interested in your own pleasure


----------



## paolo (Oct 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It’s the same between France and Italy. Free movement is sacrosanct, my arse.



Shengen is a separate thing than freedom of movement.

Whilst in the EU, the U.K. maintains border control, whist allowing freedom of movement
for EU nationals.

They are different things.

You can’t not know this, in your profession.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2018)

paolo said:


> Shengen is a separate thing than freedom of movement.
> 
> Whilst in the EU, the U.K. maintains border control, whist allowing freedom of movement
> for EU nationals.
> ...



That is not what is being talked about though. There are border checks between Garmany and Austria and France and Italy, EU citizens are being turned back at these borders. Which is against Schengen and makes free movement impossible. Yet Macron and his fellow scumbags repeat that free movement must be a part of any single market type deal. The Four Freedoms are fake.


----------



## paolo (Oct 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That is not what is being talked about though. There are border checks between Garmany and Austria and France and Italy, EU citizens are being turned back at these borders. Which is against Schengen and makes free movement impossible. Yet Macron and his fellow scumbags repeat that free movement must be a part of any single market type deal. The Four Freedoms are fake.



EU citizens are being turned back internally?

Saying “got a link for that” sounds confrontational. It’s not meant to be. But I’m surprised and want to read more before commenting.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 13, 2018)

paolo said:


> EU citizens are being turned back internally?
> 
> Saying “got a link for that” sounds confrontational. It’s not meant to be. But I’m surprised and want to read more before commenting.



Brown EU citizens. If you are black and drive from Italy to France with no ID, as is your right, you will currently be turned back. If you are white you are waved through.

As to my profession, a group of Senegalese government officials I was booking had just this problem when travelling from Nice to Milan last week. The fact that two of them did have their (diplomatic) passports on them didn’t stop the rest of the group suffering a two hour delay at the border.

Schengen and as a result, free movement, has been fucked cos of the refugee influx and the racist response to it. That is another matter, but to hear Europhiles wibbling on that the four freedoms are holy is just shite, cos they are the first folk to abandon them once scary forrins roll up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Brown EU citizens. If you are black and drive from Italy to France with no ID, as is your right, you will currently be turned back. If you are white you are waved through.
> 
> As to my profession, a group of Senegalese government officials I was booking had just this problem when travelling from Nice to Milan last week. The fact that two of them did have their (diplomatic) passports on them didn’t stop the rest of the group suffering a two hour delay at the border.
> 
> Schengen and as a result, free movement, has been fucked cos if the refugee influx and the racist response to it. That is another matter, but to hear Europhiles wibbling on that the four freedoms are holy is just shite, cos they are the first folk to abandon them one scary forrins roll up.



So how does one address problems such as these?


----------



## paolo (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse 

You're wiggling your story.

Proveable EU citizens aren't being stopped from freedom of movement, are they?

If they are, please please do post the link.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Brown EU citizens. If you are black and drive from Italy to France with no ID, as is your right, you will currently be turned back. If you are white you are waved through.
> 
> As to my profession, a group of Senegalese government officials I was booking had just this problem when travelling from Nice to Milan last week. The fact that two of them did have their (diplomatic) passports on them didn’t stop the rest of the group suffering a two hour delay at the border.
> 
> Schengen and as a result, free movement, has been fucked cos of the refugee influx and the racist response to it. That is another matter, but to hear Europhiles wibbling on that the four freedoms are holy is just shite, cos they are the first folk to abandon them once scary forrins roll up.


Have you ever noticed the number of self-styled xians (and for that matter jews) who pay no heed to all of the ten commandments? And they're proper holy


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So how does one address problems such as these?



Stop pretending that free movement (as in right to settle and work) and Schengen (right to roam) are somehow linked with a deal on the trade in goods and services?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you ever noticed the number of self-styled xians (and for that matter jews) who pay no heed to all of the ten commandments? And they're proper holy



I find that the more pious one seems to be, the further removed from the teachings of Christ one tends to be.

I am atheist yet would probably have been a shoo-in for a seat at the last supper, sister-in-law is a big noise in Westminster Diocese and is one of the most selfish motherfuckers I have ever met.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Bahnhof Strasse
> 
> You're wiggling your story.
> 
> ...



On a phone and don’t know how to copy links; google Border checks France Italy and fill yer boots.


----------



## paolo (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> On a phone and don’t know how to copy links; google Border checks France Italy and fill yer boots.



Internal EU passport holders are being refused inside the EU.

This is a major news story.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Internal EU passport holders are being refused inside the EU.
> 
> *This is a major news story*.



It’s not.


----------



## paolo (Oct 14, 2018)

This is an ostensibly bizarre claim.

This would be a massive story. A mean *massive*.

Way beyond the lens of the UK Brexit issue.

Let's repeat this (and nobody else is. Nobody in the press, nobody else here)

You're saying that EU passport holders are now being refused movement inside the EU?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> This is an ostensibly bizarre claim.
> 
> This would be a massive story. A mean *massive*.
> 
> ...



If you turn up at the Austro-German or Franco-Italian border without papers you will now be turned back. Is this news to you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you turn up at the Austro-German or Franco-Italian border without papers you will now be turned back. Is this news to you?


Just tó make it utterly explicit for poor paolo, if I, currently an eu passport holder, presented at the border between France and Italy without passport I'd be prevented from passing through?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> You're saying that EU passport holders are now being refused movement inside the EU?



I was also surprised to hear it, but apparently it's been going on for some time.

France to extend internal EU border checks over security fears


----------



## andysays (Oct 14, 2018)

More dissent within the Tory ranks

Brexit: David Davis calls for cabinet rebellion over PM's plan


> Cabinet ministers should "exert their collective authority" and rebel against Theresa May's proposed Brexit deal, ex-Brexit Secretary David Davis has said. The PM has suggested a temporary customs arrangement for the whole UK to remain in the customs union while the Irish border issue is resolved. Brexiteers suspect this could turn into a permanent situation, restricting the freedom to strike trade deals. Writing in the Sunday Times, Mr Davis said the plan was unacceptable.


And further doubts about whether the DUP will back May

Arlene Foster warns Theresa May over 'dodgy' Brexit deal

Revealed: leaked emails show DUP ready for no-deal Brexit


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Just tó make it utterly explicit for poor paolo, if I, currently an eu passport holder, presented at the border between France and Italy without passport I'd be prevented from passing through?



You will also be permitted to proceed if you have an ID card in lieu of a passport.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 14, 2018)

They mean the UVF are ready for a no-deal, the vile cunts.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You will also be permitted to proceed if you have an ID card in lieu of a passport.



There hasn't as far as I know ever been a time when EU citizens didn't need to show ID at internal border checks. British (and Irish?) citizens need a passport because we don't carry ID cards, but this isn't a specifically anti-offshorers thing.


----------



## paolo (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You will also be permitted to proceed if you have an ID card in lieu of a passport.



This isn't - as you you initially suggested - anything to do with Freedom of movement?

An ugly fracture in Schengen. But not freedom of movement.

I'll ask again: Do you, in your job, understand the difference?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> More dissent within the Tory ranks
> 
> Brexit: David Davis calls for cabinet rebellion over PM's plan
> 
> ...


Time for Yeat's 'Second Coming' quote "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;"?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Time for Yeat's 'Second Coming' quote "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;"?



Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere 
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst  UKIP
Are full of passionate intensity.

Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming Brexit is at hand.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
> Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
> The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
> The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
> ...


C4u


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> This isn't - as you you initially suggested - anything to do with Freedom of movement?
> 
> An ugly fracture in Schengen. But not freedom of movement.
> 
> I'll ask again: Do you, in your job, understand the difference?



Yes, freedom of movement is the right to settle and work, vs. Schengen which is the right to roam. Bit tricky to work and settle if you can’t cross the border though.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> There hasn't as far as I know ever been a time when EU citizens didn't need to show ID at internal border checks. British (and Irish?) citizens need a passport because we don't carry ID cards, but this isn't a specifically anti-offshorers thing.



Supposedly you can cross the Schengen zone without any checks, UK and Ireland not in that zone so checks to enter either from that zone.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 14, 2018)

plenty of checks across road borders in the EU - states still have the ability to impose these for whatever reason they pull out of the hat


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

May's double bluff being double bluffed.





> EU leaders are set to hold an extraordinary “no deal” Brexit summit in November to deal with the potential disaster of the UK crashing out of the bloc should Theresa May fail to deliver decisive progress on the Irish border issue this week, the Guardian can reveal.
> 
> *A special meeting of heads of state and government at which the EU had hoped to finally sign off on the Brexit negotiations next month will instead be turned into a emergency summit to discuss the bloc’s response to a cliff-edge Brexit.*
> 
> *The plan is set to pile further pressure on the prime minister by illustrating the EU’s seriousness about allowing the UK to crash out if the alternative is a deal that would undermine the integrity of the single market, or prove to be unacceptable to the Republic of Ireland*.


She's fucked unless the PLP's class traitors save her skin.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> ...She's fucked unless the PLP's class traitors save her skin.



Which is looking like a distinct possibility according to this


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Which is looking like a distinct possibility according to this


Yeah, but that is from the _Daily Clickbait (oncewerejournalists) _and contains a good many 'ifs'...


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2018)

is it that john  rentaghoul again


----------



## teqniq (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale  Yeah fair enough, that why I said 'according'


----------



## teqniq (Oct 14, 2018)

No not Rentboy, somebody by the name of Benjamin Kentish.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> is it that john  rentaghoul again


Someone called Benjamin Cuntish, apparently.


----------



## RedStag (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but that is from the _Daily Clickbait (oncewerejournalists) _and contains a good many 'ifs'...




well, you couldn't expect anything less from the spineless Labour party these days - they are a national disgrace


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

RedStag said:


> well, you couldn't expect anything less from the spineless Labour party these days - they are a national disgrace


Oh yes, there are plenty of spineless class traitors within the ranks of the PLP that are, and have been, a national disgrace.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 14, 2018)

ummuna, philips, dirty danczuk the borderline nonce, williamson 'my gob is more important than the party' . Truly my cup runneth over. Owen 'I know where NI s on the map' Smith.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 14, 2018)

Still, there's the Festival of Bits of Britain.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Looks like Raab has been summoned to Brussels to finalise the deal that will produce the desired fudge that will best support the _Brejoin_ process


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Reports that today's talks have broken down over NI.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Somebody on twitter asked if the final Brexit result will be resolved using the Duckworth Lewis method!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2018)

cant see any deal that will have both the DUP and the labour traitors voting for it. EU will only agree to all of uk in customs union or just norn iron with sea border.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Reports that today's talks have broken down over NI.


Sure Ireland would be better off without the bloody crown


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Looks like Raab has been summoned to Brussels to finalise the deal that will produce the desired fudge that will best support the _Brejoin_ process


Chocolate fudge or nothing


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Chocolate fudge or nothing



and if the talks are happening in belgium, lots of waffle


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 14, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> and if the talks are happening in belgium, lots of waffle


And mayo on chips


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> cant see any deal that will have both the DUP and the labour traitors voting for it. EU will only agree to all of uk in customs union or just norn iron with sea border.



With Corbyn now on record saying he'll support a customs union deal, labour traitors may not be required. I wouldn't want to be May trying to get the DUP back onside after such a deal was made, but she's the one who shat that particular bed in the first place.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> cant see any deal that will have both the DUP and the labour traitors voting for it. EU will only agree to all of uk in customs union or just norn iron with sea border.


Agreed; you've got to wonder if she's all but given up on the Unionists and put all her eggs in the Lab basket to neutralise her swivel-eyed loons?
Wonder if that was the strategy all along, just using the DUP for immediate survival...to be ditched when the SHTF?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2018)

Labour are not going to vote for any deal may comes back with - they've said that. Why on earth would they save her? She's fucked.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Labour are not going to vote for any deal may comes back with - they've said that. Why on earth would they save her? She's fucked.


Depends to what extent it's possible to talk of Labour as one disciplined unit. There will be some from Leave constituencies who are none to keen to see a Corbyn govt. and have more of an eye on their own majority.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Depends to what extent it's possible to talk of Labour as one disciplined unit. There will be some from Leave constituencies who are none to keen to see a Corbyn govt. and have more of an eye on their own majority.



how many labour mp are going to go agasint the whip and vote to save a tory government? they'd be crucified.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> how many labour mp are going to go agasint the whip and vote to save a tory government? they'd be crucified.


Would be sold as the will of the people...their people...the ones that elect them...not the metropolitan elite...nation before party..blah..

Can't you see some of the fucking weasels coming out with that sort of stuff?


----------



## tommers (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> how many labour mp are going to go agasint the whip and vote to save a tory government? they'd be crucified.



Didn't they do that just recently?


----------



## teqniq (Oct 14, 2018)

Yup, I can especially as it would for them have the added bonus of fucking the Corbyn/Momentum project over.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Would be sold as the will of the people...their people...the ones that elect them...not the metropolitan elite...nation before party..blah..
> 
> Can't you see some of the fucking weasels coming out with that sort of stuff?



but the only deal that EU will agree to will be anathema to tory brexiteers - may needs labour remainers to to break ranks. its either that or no deal.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> but the only deal that EU will agree to will be anathema to tory brexiteers - may needs labour remainers to to break ranks. its either that or no deal.


Oh yeah, it'll be extremely diff for her to get the numbers but her whips think when push comes to shove the whips will be able to wear down most of the ERG lot. Word is they think they'll be able to whittle the hard-core wreckers down to sub 20 (remember there's actually no such thing as a tory rebel). Notice how much appears to resting on the extent of the transition period; some of them are signalling they're ripe for taking.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 14, 2018)

"word is" from where? May has already explicitly ruled out customs union (aka "norway") because its shit - uk would be still under EU rules but have no say. If may agreed to that, it would be denounced by the brexit media, farage et al as a total betrayal - even more so than chequers - i can't see many of tory brexit hardcore folding on that - it would make a mockery of everything they have campaigned for. 
Thats why may is trying to fudge the irish sea border issue so that the UK can leave the customs union, but norn iron sort of stay in - but with enough ambiguity to keep the DUP from voting it down - but they are not going to budge. Shes just going round in circles repeatedly asking for the same things in different ways and is getting exactly nowhere.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "word is" from where? May has already explicitly ruled out customs union (aka "norway") because its shit - uk would be still under EU rules but have no say. If may agreed to that, it would be denounced by the brexit media, farage et al as a total betrayal - even more so than chequers - i can't see many of tory brexit hardcore folding on that - it would make a mockery of everything they have campaigned for.
> Thats why may is trying to fudge the irish sea border issue so that the UK can leave the customs union, but norn iron sort of stay in - but with enough ambiguity to keep the DUP from voting it down - but they are not going to budge. Shes just going round in circles repeatedly asking for the same things in different ways and is getting exactly nowhere.


Yeah, "word is" is rubbish...should have said I heard it from some commentator on telly but the truth is I cam't remember who/where/when; sorry. That's the beauty of the so-called 'blind' option where she'd be able to persuade the rock & the hard place that things would only be worst of all worlds for a short time until they have the techo in place etc.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2018)

Apols for a) another tweet & b)the source...but this re-confirmed my perception of Raab as an Armando Iannucci character.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2018)

I wish the Tory Disorganisedment would collapse next week, or at least before Xmas?

The phrase 'those Tory cunts'  is a blatant tautology


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> The phrase 'those Tory cunts'  is a blatant tautology



not necessarily.

not all cunts are tories


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:
			
		

> not necessarily.
> 
> not all cunts are tories



Annoying correct post there 

Full-on Puddy-pedant wins  

But also : fair dos for that


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 14, 2018)

I wonder if what happens in the US regarding the fate of Trump (in the mid terms for example) will have any bearing on what happens with Brexit.


----------



## paolo (Oct 14, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> That is not what is being talked about though. There are border checks between Garmany and Austria and France and Italy, EU citizens are being turned back at these borders. Which is against Schengen and makes free movement impossible. Yet Macron and his fellow scumbags repeat that free movement must be a part of any single market type deal. The Four Freedoms are fake.



Stop waffling.

Is there border enforcement of EU nationals?

It’s a yes or no.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 14, 2018)

Yes.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 15, 2018)

The only conclusion I can make is that Labour are letting the Tories take the fall. Unoriginal but it is so obvious. The Tories are fucking it up but there is no opposition.

Not sure how I feel about this.


----------



## xarmian (Oct 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Stop pretending that free movement (as in right to settle and work) and Schengen (right to roam) are somehow linked with a deal on the trade in goods and services?



It's not. But that isn't the problem.

To keep a border open all goods on both sides need to meet regulations on both sides (single market, no 3rd party trade deals) and have no taxes owing if they cross (customs union, VAT area, no 3rd party trade deals).

There will be no withdrawal deal without an agreed backstop to keep the Irish border open whatever happens in the trade negotiations. No withdrawal deal means no transition period and no trade deal for the foreseeable.

The backstop means agreeing that NI stays in CU and SM if there's no other way to keep the border open. That can be done with a border in the Irish Sea or by the whole of the UK staying in CU and SM or the whole of the UK staying in the CU and NI staying in SM with a lesser border in the Irish Sea.

The DUP and other unionists in Westminster won't allow a border in the Irish Sea. The Tory Brexiters won't allow the UK to stay in CU but Labour might whip CU and SM through. May would destroy her party if she strikes a deal that relies on the Labour whip. There's no deal she can make and she can't get no deal through parliament either.

Freedom of movement does come into it if the single market is part of the solution but it's not the cause of the problem. No one has suggested that the common travel area would end because of Brexit. The border problem is about goods and services not people.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 15, 2018)

So let me see if I've got this straight...

No deal: Remainer tories won't wear it. Would spell certain doom for May.

No CU except NI, sea border: DUP won't wear it, nor enough labour rebels to make up the numbers.

No CU, land border in NI: EU won't wear it, ends up as no deal. Probably enough tories would rebel to shitcan it in parliament anyway.

Chequers compromise: EU won't wear it, nor the Rees-Mobb, nor Corbyn. Already dead.

Customs union, Norway-esque deal: DUP won't wear it, nor tory leavers. Would need a Corbyn whip, which won't be got without enough concessions to ruin May. Also abandons May's last red line.

Delayed leaving: Kicks it all down the road until either Corbyn gets in and accepts Norway deal, or a moderate tory leader does likewise, or a tory leaver takes charge and goes for the Thelma-and-Louise option. May most likely finished. Equation only changes if tories get a majority in a GE and can fuck off the DUP.

Have I missed anything?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Have I missed anything?


The amusing fact that May is only in this position because she called an unnecessary general election and lost her majority.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The amusing fact that May is only in this position because she called an unnecessary general election and lost her majority.



A development so comedically perfect I still can't entirely believe it.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 15, 2018)

“I’m calling a general election to gain a clear mandate to do what I want to do”

Didn’t work out so well, eh, Theresa?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 15, 2018)

Which servant of the ruling class fucked up the most do you think? From their point of view?

Was it David Cameron when he offered the referendum, thinking either that he wouldn't win a majority so it wouldn't matter or he would win the referendum so it wouldn't matter?

Was it Margaret Beckett and the 'fools' who nominated Corbyn and got him on the ballot paper? 

Or Theresa May when she called the snap GE?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which servant of the ruling class fucked up the most do you think? From their point of view?
> 
> Was it David Cameron when he offered the referendum, thinking either that he wouldn't win a majority so it wouldn't matter or he would win the referendum so it wouldn't matter?
> 
> ...


cameron, who got us into this unholy mess


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which servant of the ruling class fucked up the most do you think? From their point of view?


DC, for sure. Those other options are large, but Brexit is a once-in-a-generation kind of thing. Will one day be listed in a one-paragraph history of 21st Century Britain.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> cameron, who got us into this unholy mess



I mean, imagine if he hadn't and Corbyn was long gone and Cameron and Osborne were still in charge, with a majority...

But yeah they probably would see it that way.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2018)

Something something May 3:30 something....


----------



## xenon (Oct 15, 2018)

kabbes said:


> “I’m calling a general election to gain a clear mandate to do what I want to do”
> 
> Didn’t work out so well, eh, Theresa?



She voluntarily took the poison challece in stepping up to lead the Tories after the referendum.
Out of hubris calls an unnecessary GE .
Fights the campaign with all the charisma, chalm and projected confidence of a broken bog brush.
As a result of losing her majority, is forced to do a deal with the DUP lunes, paying them off with the non existent "money tree." 
Appoints Borris Johnson as foreign secretary.

This is not someone who has a strong record on wise and strategic decision making.

But ready to replace her are the trustworthy likeable and competent Johnson, Mogg and Davis.


Who's writing this season?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2018)

xenon said:


> She voluntarily took the poison challece in stepping up to lead the Tories after the referendum.
> Out of hubris calls an unnecessary GE .
> Fights the campaign with all the charisma, chalm and projected confidence of a broken bog brush.
> As a result of losing her majority, is forced to do a deal with the DUP lunes, paying them off with the non existent "money tree."
> ...


kurt sutter out of sons of anarchy


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> kurt sutter out of sons of anarchy


Someone should get stabbed in the crotch with a pool cue soon then


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which servant of the ruling class fucked up the most do you think? From their point of view?
> 
> Was it David Cameron when he offered the referendum, thinking either that he wouldn't win a majority so it wouldn't matter or he would win the referendum so it wouldn't matter?
> 
> ...



May definitely. Despite the shitstorm Cameron left, the tories and the interests they serve could've got through the whole thing relatively unscathed, and quite possibly with some exciting new opporunities in the field of treating the British public like shit, had there only been a halfway competent politician at the helm. May's one and only decisive action as PM has been to shoot herself and her party in the foot with a snap election.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> So let me see if I've got this straight...
> 
> No deal: Remainer tories won't wear it. Would spell certain doom for May.
> 
> ...


Nope that about covers it, she's playing Russian roulette with a bullet in every chamber.


----------



## tommers (Oct 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> some exciting new opporunities in the field of treating the British public like shit,



Those haven't gone anywhere.

"A necessary relaxation of red tape to enable Great British business to compete with the rest of the world on an equal footing in these difficult times"

I reckon within 6 months.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Nope that about covers it, she's playing Russian roulette with a bullet in every chamber.


that's not true 

tm knows how it's played. she only uses one bullet in the gun.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> May definitely. Despite the shitstorm Cameron left, the tories and the interests they serve could've got through the whole thing relatively unscathed, and quite possibly with some exciting new opporunities in the field of treating the British public like shit, had there only been a halfway competent politician at the helm. May's one and only decisive action as PM has been to shoot herself and her party in the foot with a snap election.



Hmmmm. Maybe! If it wasn't for Corbyn though the bourgeois could simply turn to their reliable second 11 and solve Brexit with a New Labour govt though.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 15, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Annoying correct post there
> 
> Full-on Puddy-pedant wins
> 
> But also : fair dos for that



Not necessarily so: two words can be tautological without meaning  the exact same thing. For example, a dead corpse (tautological): all corpses by definition are dead; but not everything dead is a corpse. Even so, saying a   dead corpse is tautological because the use of the word dead would not be missed one iota if you just said a corpse


----------



## Crispy (Oct 15, 2018)

Zombies are undead corpses

(waits for punchline)


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2018)

watching live now, something about fisherman.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2018)

Seems nobody knows what they want.... or something


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2018)

Who thought doing a Brexit would be so hard?

Anyway here’s Brexit as a photo


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 15, 2018)

What a fucking shithole of a country. I would set fire to my citizenship if I could find anywhere that would take me


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 15, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Not necessarily so: two words can be tautological without meaning  the exact same thing. For example, a dead corpse (tautological): all corpses by definition are dead; but not everything dead is a corpse. Even so, saying a   dead corpse is tautological because the use of the word dead would not be missed one iota if you just said a corpse


This is an example of a pleonasm not tautology.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> What a fucking shithole of a country. I would set fire to my citizenship if I could find anywhere that would take me



Got any Irish Grandparents?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 15, 2018)

I am hanging on for Scots independence and then I am
Sorted 

Mrs NBE has the option of invoking the of return to Israel loophole  - that is a horror I cannot yet take on board


----------



## TopCat (Oct 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> What a fucking shithole of a country. I would set fire to my citizenship if I could find anywhere that would take me


We could marry and you then get dual nationality with Ireland. Let me know soon.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 15, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This is an example of a pleonasm not tautology.


Eh?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 15, 2018)

TopCat said:


> We could marry and you then get dual nationality with Ireland. Let me know soon.


 
Ha

This has given me an idea!


----------



## TopCat (Oct 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Ha
> 
> This has given me an idea!


Scorned am I?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 15, 2018)

It’s not you , it’s me


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 15, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Got any Irish Grandparents?


My great-great-grandfather was Irish, he was a known Fenian sympathiser and was booted out of Manchester back to Dublin during the Fenian dynamite campaign, there was no indication he was one of the bombers just regarded as a general wrong'un on count of being Irish. Ended up in Kilmainham (which I've visited).
My daughter's boyfriend is from Galway, first time he took my daughter back to Ireland to meet his parents, the first thing his Dad said to her was
"You're so pretty there has to be some Irish in you somewhere"
Apparently pleased as punch to discover there was a tiny tiny bit.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s not you , it’s me



You could forge a union, but eventually one of you would want to leave.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 15, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Eh?



Types of dinosaur.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 15, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> This is an example of a pleonasm not tautology.



Tautology and pleonasm overlap in the sense of needless repetition


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 15, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Tautology and pleonasm overlap in the sense of needless repetition



This thread demands less of the Greek and Latinate of ‘experts’.


----------



## mx wcfc (Oct 15, 2018)

Attila's input to the debate.  Top as usual


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 16, 2018)

I have had a big long think. I blame this Fuck up directly in the resurgence of the house of Windsor.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 16, 2018)

William of Orange, meself.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have had a big long think. I blame this Fuck up directly in the resurgence of the house of Windsor.


I'd go saxe-coburg-gotha myself


----------



## Poot (Oct 16, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Got any Irish Grandparents?


He's really, really not Bono. Ever.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 16, 2018)

EU leaders won’t even consider trade deal with UK at Brexit summit this week because of talks collapse

Oh how the mood music over the weekend has changed


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2018)

Thought you agin the 'People's Vote'?

Now you're on board, right?



Brexit: Blair, Clegg and Heseltine: We need another EU-Referendum - WELT


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2018)

Michel Barnier ‘open to extending Brexit transition period by a year’

FFS, another year possible?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thought you agin the 'People's Vote'?
> 
> Now you're on board, right?
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Michel Barnier ‘open to extending Brexit transition period by a year’
> 
> FFS, another year possible?


more than possible
more than a year


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2018)

not sure i can cope, would rather no deal now TBH


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2018)

just for the lolz obvs


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 149837


Classic CW 

So...not persuaded, then?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2018)

every time blair opens his mouth a little piece of the EU project dies


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> every time blair opens his mouth a little piece of the EU project dies


each of them would be doing the eu cause a load of good if they just said 'we've been persuaded brexit is in the uk's best interests'


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thought you agin the 'People's Vote'?
> 
> Now you're on board, right?
> 
> ...



They should be offered a deal - there can be a second referendum, but it has to include a supplementary question about which one of them will be executed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> They should be offered a deal - there can be a second referendum, but it has to include a supplementary question about which one of them will be executed.


and a subsidiary about how


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> They should be offered a deal - there can be a second referendum, but it has to include a supplementary question about which one of them will be executed.


At least a transitionary period of incarceration for all 3 until we're had time to decide upon which....


----------



## Supine (Oct 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> At least a transitionary period of incarceration for all 3 until we're had time to decide upon which....



Do we have to choose just one?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2018)

Supine said:


> Do we have to choose just one?


might be a rollover


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Michel Barnier ‘open to extending Brexit transition period by a year’
> 
> FFS, another year possible?


----------



## Crispy (Oct 17, 2018)

Another year of transition though right? March 2019 still applies.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2018)

Oh good, thought it was another year for the deal, I did just wake up when i read it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Oh good, thought it was another year for the deal, I did just wake up when i read it.


----------



## klang (Oct 17, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> another year for the deal


May's worst nightmare.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2018)

Bone has just tweeted excitedly that he's taken receipt of his latest banners for next Saturday!


----------



## Kesher (Oct 17, 2018)

French government warns UK citizens will need visas after no-deal Brexit without emergency action

Thanks to the Brexit loons


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2018)

Kesher said:


> French government warns UK citizens will need visas after no-deal Brexit without emergency action
> 
> Thanks to the Brexit loons



This is a nonsense non-story, click-bait bollocks, visas will not be required to visit France, nor any EU country.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 17, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is a nonsense non-story, click-bait bollocks, visas will not be required to visit France, nor any EU country.



Hopefully


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 17, 2018)

Aren't the Italian Prosecco producers about to weigh in any time now?.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2018)

in hindsight, the choices offered in the OP poll were a bit optimistic i think,


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Aren't the Italian Prosecco producers about to weigh in any time now?.


As explained here...


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 18, 2018)

This Brexit sounds like a breeze - where can I sign up ?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 18, 2018)

that clip is quite something isn't it? Davies and all the other cunts should have this shit thrown back in their faces everytime that appear in public.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

when i was half awake and listening to the toady programme this morning there was some mp on saying how the best way out was joining efta and thus remaining in the eea, as opposed to what *he* thought was going to happen, which was a no-deal brexit as theresa may (he said) runs down the clock.

only i think he has it arse over tit, as i suspect what's going to happen as we approach bidet is that may's european beliefs will become more apparent. we've already seen her row right back from david davis's plans, when she ambushed him at chequers. i think she is more likely to go oh my god noes we cannot crash out of the eu and utterly fuck the economy and it's in the national interest to remain within the eu, rather than quit on a poll from the best part of three years ago (this i9s how she may present it). the running down of the clock more in my opinion to do with 'do you really want to redo this and go through another three fucking years of nonsense', to reinforce her position (or rather the position of remainers), rather than to crash out. if a great u-turn was done after giving people a chance to peer over the brink of no-deal chaos i am not so sure that the noisy brexiters in the tory party would find their support quite so secure.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2018)

Of course the logical post vote scenario would have been to form a national government of all colours to oversee the whole process and leave the politiking until after a schedule had been agreed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Of course the logical post vote scenario would have been to form a national government of all colours to oversee the whole process and leave the politiking until after a schedule had been agreed.


yeh to associate others in the thing so that if it's fucked up no party can say they weren't part of it


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2018)

The biggest unanswered transition question yet to answer is should piano wire be used to facilitate the smooth transfer of the political classes to the south Atlantic development zone-or should we use the tried and conflict  tested cable tie solution ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> bidet


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> The biggest unanswered transition question yet to answer is should piano wire be used to facilitate the smooth transfer of the political classes to the south Atlantic development zone-or should we use the tried and conflict  tested cable tie solution ?


the atlantic conveyor is being raised and, following refurbishment, will transport the former people to the site of the sacn works.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2018)

Raise the Atlantic conveyor !

Sounds like a Clive cussler buke


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> The biggest unanswered transition question yet to answer is should piano wire be used to facilitate the smooth transfer of the political classes to the south Atlantic development zone-or should we use the tried and conflict  tested cable tie solution ?



Cable ties for hands, piano wire for necks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Cable ties for hands, piano wire for necks.


yes, the security staff at the sacn have already been nicknamed piano tuners.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> The biggest unanswered transition question yet to answer is should piano wire be used to facilitate the smooth transfer of the political classes to the south Atlantic development zone-or should we use the tried and conflict  tested cable tie solution ?


seriously tho in the sacn environmental impact discussion document it's stated that 





> 7.2.4. It is, therefore, a firm resolution of the SACN Environment Board that use of plastic throughout the works, from the despatch of the work force to final completion, should be minimised. Use of wood and other renewable or recyclable material will be made wherever possible. Regular audits will be made to monitor adherence to this decision.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> seriously tho in the sacn environmental impact discussion document it's stated that


Quite right; think of the turtles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Cable ties for hands, piano wire for necks.


the cangue ftw


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> The biggest unanswered transition question yet to answer is should piano wire be used to facilitate the smooth transfer of the political classes to the south Atlantic development zone-or should we use the tried and conflict  tested cable tie solution ?



Piano wire is reusable.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 18, 2018)

Apologies if already posted. Truly vile man.

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/stanley-johnson-irish-will-shoot-each-other-brexit-news-gmb/


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Piano wire is reusable.


the cangue can last much longer


----------



## flypanam (Oct 18, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Apologies if already posted. Truly vile man.
> 
> https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/stanley-johnson-irish-will-shoot-each-other-brexit-news-gmb/



The last words he should hear are "To keep you is no gain, to lose you is no loss"


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 18, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Replies to that tweet:


Does Newsnight have audience members? If so, do they contribute to the programme?? Serious question, haven't watched it in years.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Replies to that tweet:
> View attachment 149921
> 
> Does Newsnight have audience members? If so, do they contribute to the programme?? Serious question, haven't watched it in years.


I boycott the BBC so no idea


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Replies to that tweet:
> View attachment 149921
> 
> Does Newsnight have audience members? If so, do they contribute to the programme?? Serious question, haven't watched it in years.


neither only connect nor newsnight have a studio audience


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Cable ties for hands, piano wire for necks.


the cangue ftw


----------



## rekil (Oct 18, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Does Newsnight have audience members? If so, do they contribute to the programme?? Serious question, haven't watched it in years.


It's from a roadtrip segment in the 6 counties.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2018)

At least good to hear that the impending Brexaggedon will not impact adversely on the local economies of Verbier, Courchevel, Klosters or Zermatt.


----------



## AnandLeo (Oct 18, 2018)

Brexit is going to happen; the concern is in what state it will happen. After talks of many redlines by the EU negotiators, now it has reached a crunch point of solving the issue of Northern Ireland border with the Ireland. The Republic of Ireland does not concede to a hard international border between NI and the Republic. NI and even PM May do not accept a border between NI and GB. The negotiators of EU and UK seem to have resolved other issues except the NI border, which is the current impasse.	   

The main goals of a smooth Brexit are continuing trade, business, and industry as they are now, without disruption. There are other issues such as tourism, and cross border employment without the recognition of free movement of people. Evidently, EU has conceded to extend the time limits to solve remaining problems. I do not have much faith in solving the NI border issue by mere extended time limit, by the latest performance. UK is in a crisis point with Brexit because of Irish border. What UK now need is solving this problem without postponing for the future. UK has failed to find a solution to Irish border problem with free movement of goods and services. This is a task of problem solving; not a decision making by an impetuous people’s vote or showdown by the infighting MPs of the parliament. UK government with its civil service has failed to propose a feasible solution to the NI border issue compatible with smooth Brexit associated with customs union and single market. The state has run out of ideas to save the nation from economic chaos. The civil society of UK should propound solutions to the problem of Irish border with regard to Brexit. Schools, universities, business and industrial organisations, and public institutions should propose solutions for the Irish border crisis, without yielding to an ill-informed people’s vote or frenzied confrontational vote in the Westminster parliament.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Brexit is going to happen; the concern is in what state it will happen. After talks of many redlines by the EU negotiators, now it has reached a crunch point of solving the issue of Northern Ireland border with the Ireland. The Republic of Ireland does not concede to a hard international border between NI and the Republic. NI and even PM May do not accept a border between NI and GB. The negotiators of EU and UK seem to have resolved other issues except the NI border, which is the current impasse.
> 
> The main goals of a smooth Brexit are continuing trade, business, and industry as they are now, without disruption. There are other issues such as tourism, and cross border employment without the recognition of free movement of people. Evidently, EU has conceded to extend the time limits to solve remaining problems. I do not have much faith in solving the NI border issue by mere extended time limit, by the latest performance. UK is in a crisis point with Brexit because of Irish border. What UK now need is solving this problem without postponing for the future. UK has failed to find a solution to Irish border problem with free movement of goods and services. This is a task of problem solving; not a decision making by an impetuous people’s vote or showdown by the infighting MPs of the parliament. UK government with its civil service has failed to propose a feasible solution to the NI border issue compatible with smooth Brexit associated with customs union and single market. The state has run out of ideas to save the nation from economic chaos. The civil society of UK should propound solutions to the problem of Irish border with regard to Brexit. Schools, universities, business and industrial organisations, and public institutions should propose solutions for the Irish border crisis, without yielding to an ill-informed people’s vote or frenzied confrontational vote in the Westminster parliament.



That’s nice dear. Thank you.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 18, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> The civil society of UK should propound solutions to the problem of Irish border



Imperialist.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 18, 2018)




----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


>



Not sure how this helps.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


>



The second point is not far off asking people if they believe in unicorns.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 18, 2018)

Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?

Not had one before so not sure what to do?


----------



## 2hats (Oct 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?
> 
> Not had one before so not sure what to do?


Step 1: first determine if you are a roundhead or a cavalier.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2018)

2hats said:


> Step 1: first determine if you are a roundhead or a cavalier.



Nice. Will Boris and JRM be pretending to bat for the roundheads?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?
> 
> Not had one before so not sure what to do?



I know what I'm going to do, stay out of the way for a bit then start looting corpses.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Nice. Will Boris and JRM be pretending to bat for the roundheads?



Boris maybe, but Rees-Mogg could never pass as a roundhead because his head looks like a fucking pencil.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?
> 
> Not had one before so not sure what to do?



Carry a range of disguises to move freely amongst the warring tribes e.g. bowler hat for London, peg leg for Penzance etc etc


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Boris maybe, but Rees-Mogg could never pass as a roundhead because his head looks like a fucking pencil.



Double lol.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Carry a range of disguises to move freely amongst the warring tribes e.g. bowler hat for London, peg leg for Penzance etc etc



To blend in among Yorkshiremen, simply place a large chip upon your shoulder.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?
> 
> Not had one before so not sure what to do?


D'reckon it's just around the corner?


----------



## Mrs D (Oct 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone hype for the impending civil war I keep reading about?
> 
> Not had one before so not sure what to do?



There was one in Northern Ireland except being a modest people in this part of Europe we called it "the troubles".


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2018)

So...the Remainian rally on Saturday...any Urbz going along?


----------



## kenny g (Oct 18, 2018)

Question two shows a large proportion of the UK don't leave their villages/towns/ and read shit newspapers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Boris maybe, but Rees-Mogg could never pass as a roundhead because his head looks like a fucking pencil.


Have to knock it into shape


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Have to knock it into shape


Only one way to go with his sort, REMOVE the head or DESTROY the brain


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Only one way to go with his sort, REMOVE the head or DESTROY the brain



Remove head and destroy brain


----------



## mauvais (Oct 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I know what I'm going to do, stay out of the way for a bit then start looting corpses.


Very short termist, this. I'm going to wait for about four years until the Americans declare the smoking ruins a success for democracy & depart leaving all their flytipped Main Battle Tanks with easily-disappeared parish councillors, and then form my own kind of heavily armed, entirely unforeseeable Islamic State of Randomly Allocated English Lands. I don't necessarily know where its caliphate historically belongs but if we start off at M62 J18 I reckon we should be able to fuck up an abandoned Moto services or two before the is-it-ironic-now giant dildo flag gets properly tangled up in the treads.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 18, 2018)

brogdale said:


> D'reckon it's just around the corner?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2018)

brogdale said:


> D'reckon it's just around the corner?



Still at the stage of clubs and fists.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 18, 2018)

That poll, I don't see its relevance to the leave or remain vote. The questions seem bollocks. Leading, developing a theme, pushing in one direction.

If those opinions are widespread, why are they widespread? Its been said often but only a fraction of those eligible to vote, voted leave. If the poll is supposed to show leave voters have racist beliefs in statistically substantial numbers then I say, no, I'm not having it. The answers aren't provided by sneering liberal condescension, but rather by leftist solutions and arguments to a society fed to the dogs.

Its a class problem, from several angles:

Firstly. There are the great majority; impoverished and ripped off. The discourse is set. England is sold because it is threatened. 'Outside threats' unite. When in fact the ones that are harming you are a protected and privileged minority. They have their interests, they are selfish. It's cold but it's real and you can see it in other countries and polities too.

Secondly, taking it in context, there is precious little comfort or optimism. For example, we HAD food banks, austerity, privileged politicians and media commentators preaching to us that we were a burden. Mean-spirited ideology has come alongside an enormous increase in 'national debt/deficit'. Which would tend to show that austerity, libertarianism, neoliberalism and all this shit that gets foisted on us by oxbridge graduates and hedge-fund managers is shit for the majority. Your libertarian doesn't much care if there is an economic crash if they personally profit.  In other words (and again its oft-repeated) if the majority suffer then people will vote for change; even if (and I'm not getting into that right now one way or the other) it is actually counter to their interests, or might actually to some extent make things worse.

Thirdly, politics is a sham in this country. There is a class divide. There is a distance between the politicians and the rest of us. And they make sure of it. Odious as it is, it's their bread and butter. They are basically hacks and jobsworths. This is probably an unpopular sentiment, but I don't so much blame or resent the individuals so much as hate the direction of travel. Some are capable, some are well-intentioned. Others are mediocrities (or deluded perhaps), but the class division is enforced through this situation. It controls the country, its direction of travel and the fortunes of its people.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2018)

On yersel Humberto!


I’m on holiday, that’s the best I can do


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2018)

Humberto said:


> That poll, I don't see its relevance to the leave or remain vote. The questions seem bollocks. Leading, developing a theme, pushing in one direction.
> 
> If those opinions are widespread, why are they widespread? Its been said often but only a fraction of those eligible to vote, voted leave. If the poll is supposed to show leave voters have racist beliefs in statistically substantial numbers then I say, no, I'm not having it. The answers aren't provided by sneering liberal condescension, but rather by leftist solutions and arguments to a society fed to the dogs.
> 
> ...



Yes you need dialogue and reason rather than sneering and but Brexit has been a massive win for nationalism and its attitudes. 

It’s also not simply horrible liberals v the/a portion of the working class. The comfortable Tory shires and their broad middle classes voted to Leave in droves. They pretend to favour the downtrodden ‘native’ working classes. Their attitudes are down to them and they can own them with no apologies. 

Plenty of working class people including from black and ethnic minority groups voted Remain and they had equally valid hopes/fears/reasons to the ones that voted to Leave. While we shouldn’t sneer we can be concerned about those attitudes.


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 19, 2018)

The decision makers, bless their well paid cotton socks. Set themselves an impossible task after making what they thought was a clever token of handing down a big choice to the masses. It was never thought through right from the start, never any plan. Still... they get their paycheck, pension and perks. I don't suppose there's any real incentive, other than gaining personal wealth and power. Politics, it's a wasteland of poor decisions with very little consequence for those involved.


ed fr sp!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2018)

Chilli.s said:


> The decision makers, bless their well paid cotton socks. Set themselves an impossible task after making what they thought was a cleaver token of handing down a big choice to the masses. It was never thought through right from the start, never any plan. Still... they get their paycheck, pension and perks. I don't suppose there's any real incentive, other than gaining personal wealth and power. Politics, it's a wasteland of poor decisions with very little consequence for those involved.


"shitshow", innit?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2018)

From the people that brought you EUref I...


----------



## Beermoth (Oct 19, 2018)

brogdale said:


> So...the Remainian rally on Saturday...any Urbz going along?



I imagine the "it'll be chockablock with Lib Dems" factor is putting people off.


----------



## Mrs D (Oct 19, 2018)

Chilli.s said:


> The decision makers, bless their well paid cotton socks. Set themselves an impossible task after making what they thought was a cleaver token of handing down a big choice to the masses. It was never thought through right from the start, never any plan. Still... they get their paycheck, pension and perks. I don't suppose there's any real incentive, other than gaining personal wealth and power. Politics, it's a wasteland of poor decisions with very little consequence for those involved.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 19, 2018)

This will be the last time any incumbent will chuck a public vote out there for the masses to  have their say on an issue of this magnitude - it threatens their own legitimacy


----------



## 8ball (Oct 19, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> This will be the last time any incumbent will chuck a public vote out there for the masses to  have their say on an issue of this magnitude - it threatens their own legitimacy



For a couple of decades, perhaps.


----------



## mrs quoad (Oct 19, 2018)

Mrs D said:


> View attachment 150013


See you next time!


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> I imagine the "it'll be chockablock with Lib Dems" factor is putting people off.



Austerity merchants like Soubry, their Lib Dem enablers, Chukka and professional wasp chewer Debra Meaden. What’s not to like?

Remain don’t seem to get any problem with this to this day. Had they gone with my dream team of Danny Dyer, Clare Balding and the bloke with the rottweilers off ‘gogglebox’ this thing would be over.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 19, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The second point is not far off asking people if they believe in unicorns.


If you are saying it is amazing there exist people credulous enough to answer 'yes', then I agree.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 19, 2018)

Humberto said:


> That poll, I don't see its relevance to the leave or remain vote.


Then let me spell it out to you: If you support Brexit, people who are happy to openly spout this racist shit to total strangers are your political bedfellows. And if you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you get fleas!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> I imagine the "it'll be chockablock with Lib Dems" factor is putting people off.


Yeah, but i wasn't suggesting that Urbz should be considering it.
Mind you, I think I may just visit the route at some point with my camera.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Then let me spell it out to you: If you support Brexit, people who are happy to openly spout this racist shit to total strangers are your political bedfellows. And if you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you get fleas!



That gun points two ways.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 19, 2018)

Plus a large amount of remainers agreed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Then let me spell it out to you: If you support Brexit, people who are happy to openly spout this racist shit to total strangers are your political bedfellows. And if you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you get fleas!


Who are your political bedfellows?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Then let me spell it out to you: If you support Brexit, people who are happy to openly spout this racist shit to total strangers are your political bedfellows. And if you lie down with dogs, don't be surprised if you get fleas!


Your team built a wall man. 

Aaaagh this debate will be the death of me honestly.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Your team built a wall man.
> 
> Aaaagh this debate will be the death of me honestly.



Like the other team doesn’t want to. What’s the latest promise, zero immigration or each one personally sponsored by the captains of industry?


----------



## Riklet (Oct 20, 2018)

so what will be the impact of tomorrow's decisive wibbling?


----------



## grit (Oct 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> visas will not be required to visit France, nor any EU country.



Good luck with that.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2018)

grit said:


> Good luck with that.



Any evidence to suggest otherwise?

Considering the linked article says the French would bring in emergency legislation to avoid the need of visas, should a no-deal Brexit occur.



> EU is generally generous with visa exemptions: granting them to countries ranging from Venezuela, through the United Arab Emirates, to Ukraine



So, it's not going to happen to the UK.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 20, 2018)

mrs NBE  and the kinder are off to the march. I cannot face it - too many libdems for my liking - at least they are now in the habit of marching - my suggestions of just in case balaclavas in their packpacks was disregarded


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 20, 2018)

Not seen much online of said March....

Will keep looking,


----------



## grit (Oct 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Any evidence to suggest otherwise?
> 
> Considering the linked article says the French would bring in emergency legislation to avoid the need of visas, should a no-deal Brexit occur.
> 
> ...



I admire your confidence on what all member states will agree.

Xavier Bettel: Visas for Brits post-Brexit need to be discussed https://www-express-co-uk.cdn.amppr...macron/amp?amp_js_v=0.1&usqp=mq331AQGCAEoAVgB


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2018)

grit said:


> I admire your confidence on what all member states will agree.
> 
> Xavier Bettel: Visas for Brits post-Brexit need to be discussed https://www-express-co-uk.cdn.amppr...macron/amp?amp_js_v=0.1&usqp=mq331AQGCAEoAVgB



Luxembourg Prime Minister 'warns' - massive LOL. 

As if he wouldn't fall inline behind Germany & France.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Luxembourg Prime Minister 'warns' - massive LOL.
> 
> As if he wouldn't fall inline behind Germany & France.


if even luxembourg is thinking of imposing visas - thus meaning that their entire population would be working for one department of their government - then things are far worse than you suggest


----------



## grit (Oct 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Luxembourg Prime Minister 'warns' - massive LOL.
> 
> As if he wouldn't fall inline behind Germany & France.



What is your guess on the UK  reciprocating a no visa deal with member states?


----------



## ska invita (Oct 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> This will be the last time any incumbent will chuck a public vote out there for the masses to  have their say on an issue of this magnitude - it threatens their own legitimacy


Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it).  Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have.  Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.

That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 20, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Not seen much online of said March....



guardian has live updates


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

Tricky Skills


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

a new picture of the brexit bus has surfaced which appears to address some of the concerns about the claim being a big pile of shit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it).  Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have.  Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.


The Swiss model sounds good in theory, but it's pretty problematic in practice. Despite making voting as easy as it can possibly be, the referendums regularly get miserable turnouts of 40 per cent or less, and it is very possible for well-organised minority groups to get the 100,000 signatures needed to put questions to referendum in which they energetically mobilise their core to vote, while the apathetic majority offers no opinions.

The Swiss system also isn't immune to its Brexit moments. They voted to impose quotas on immigration in 2014, which would mean ending free movement of people from the EU, which would also mean ending all kinds of trade deals with the EU. Still hasn't been resolved, despite the fact that Swiss referendum results are in theory legally binding. As with brexit, some issues can't be boiled down to such simple questions because you also have to ask 'which of these other things are you prepared to give up in order to do this thing?' for the answer to the question to be meaningful.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 20, 2018)

Not to mention this magnificent expression of _the people's will_...

Democracy eh?


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it).  Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have.  Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.
> 
> That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.


Can't help thinking it would be more democratic to at least wait until we have actually left.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Not to mention this magnificent expression of _the people's will_...
> 
> Democracy eh?


Doesn't give it there, but from memory, the turnout in that particular ref was 38%.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The Swiss system also isn't immune to its Brexit moments.


Fair points - I'm not trying to avoid Brexit moments though, thats not why to support it. Without deeper social changes it can be dangerous, i appreciate that. Support for the death penalty is the classic UK example. Hitler ran some infamous referendums. Referendum are particularly complex in terms of when to call them, on what issues etc. I've not read up on it, I'm sure theres much work and examples out there, but my point is a more general support of deepening democratic power (as part of wider social change).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Fair points - I'm not trying to avoid Brexit moments though, thats not why to support it. Without deeper social changes it can be dangerous, i appreciate that. Support for the death penalty is the classic UK example. Hitler ran some infamous referendums. Referendum are particularly complex in terms of when to call them, on what issues etc. I've not read up on it, I'm sure theres much work and examples out there, but my point is a more general support of deepening democratic power (as part of wider social change).


Yeah, I used to think the Swiss system was a good idea and something that could be learned from, but I'm not so sure now. Also, it does build on a peculiarly Swiss political history, in which 'direct democracy' has very deep roots. But despite that, it still has to confront massive voter apathy and the system is most definitely played by powerful interest groups. 

There are two separate ideas here aren't there? First there is representative democracy in which you elect a representative who makes decisions on your behalf and is held to account for those decisions at the next election. Second you have direct democracy in which decisions are taken by asking questions in a referendum. Personally, I see huge limits to the second of these. In theory at least, the first means that those making the decisions are held to account for the consequences of those decisions. That's the main problem with direct democracy - who is accountable when the decision leads to dire consequences?

To extend democracy within the UK system, I would favour some kind of second chamber and/or regional assemblies elected by random ballot. Bit like jury service, but I don't like compulsion, so I'd allow for people to opt out of it.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 20, 2018)

good point about accountability


littlebabyjesus said:


> To extend democracy within the UK system, I would favour some kind of second chamber and/or regional assemblies elected by random ballot. Bit like jury service, but I don't like compulsion, so I'd allow for people to opt out of it.


im vaguely aware of this www.sortitionfoundation.org/


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> good point about accountability
> 
> im vaguely aware of this www.sortitionfoundation.org/


Yes, that basically. I think even that has limits - better suited to a second chamber than a first, perhaps - but I think it has legs. I never knew it had a name.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2018)

The temptation of the Swiss system is that for every narrow-minded question to do with minarets or immigration, there is a question to do with abolishing the army or introducing a universal citizen's wage (both real examples, both, sadly, defeated). But on balance, I don't think it would work here as well as it does there, and I don't think it works too well there tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The temptation of the Swiss system is that for every narrow-minded question to do with minarets or immigration, there is a question to do with abolishing the army or introducing a universal citizen's wage (both real examples, both, sadly, defeated). But on balance, I don't think it would work here as well as it does there, and I don't think it works too well there tbh.


tl;dr? the swiss system is full of holes


----------



## ska invita (Oct 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, that basically. I think even that has limits - better suited to a second chamber than a first, perhaps - but I think it has legs. I never knew it had a name.


the director of that wrote this book
The End Of Politicians


Pickman's model said:


> tl;dr? the swiss system is full of holes


boo


----------



## Kesher (Oct 20, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Very likely...though I'd like to see more referendums...the more democracy the better....Swiss model at the least. The brexit referendum campaign made me physically sick but the fact there was a referendum with real power felt good (even though i abstained from it).  Rather than just bodging random referendums it needs the proper infrastructure and rules that other countries have.  Having a referendum on such a nebulous question (or rather a nebulous outcome) as we did has proven to be a farce, but the solution is more democracy not less.
> 
> That said I'm ambivalent about another referendum over brexit, mainly because it smacks of making it up as you go along and of trying to overturn the result. If it had all been set up in advance then that would've been fine. However the argument "it would be undemocratic to have another referendum" is a contradiction in terms.



I'm not ambivalent as to whether a   2nd ref smacks of making it up as you go along. The process is so dynamic and   far more difficult than a number of Brexiters claimed  despite the warnings,  that  I think a 2nd ref is needed on the deal (whatever that is) or staying in the EU.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 20, 2018)

I think a second / approval referendum wasn't considered because on both sides of the debate most people with a strong view had this idea their side was bound to win decisively. Nobody expected this 52/48 shit (in reality 37/35/28 shit) and nobody thought we'd need some kind of tie breaker later.

I say take it to penalties, balls fired from a nice big cannon.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Not seen much online of said March....
> 
> Will keep looking,



My dad sent me a link to some drone footage of the centrist dads march and, apparently without irony, challenged me to 'spot the dad'


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 20, 2018)

The march was enormous by the way - spilled out around the entire area because so many people couldn't fit in, hundreds of thousands.


----------



## billbond (Oct 20, 2018)

Piss poor turnout really and a complete  waste of time.
Over 1million marched against the IRAQ war, umm how did that turn out.
Lots of oldies(remainers say they dont count) and kids dragged along by parents who did not vote and have no thoughts on the issue just to get the numbers up.
And poor unknown speakers on show
Many saying nothing to see here
Brexit full steam ahead


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 20, 2018)

Another worthwhile post of yours.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 20, 2018)




----------



## billbond (Oct 20, 2018)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Another worthwhile post of yours.



And i bet 99% from London
The poor Northern people
Why cos it goes against yours


----------



## teqniq (Oct 20, 2018)

I saw a few pix early this morning of people getting on coaches at sunrise in Cornwall so I call 99% bullshit on that.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 20, 2018)

billbond said:


> And i bet 99% from London
> The poor Northern people
> Why cos it goes against yours


Seriously, though, does it not bother you that you've been doing this for ages now and nobody has ever given a shit? It's not exactly _hard_ to troll Urban yet you've not managed at all. I don't think there's been a single report, even.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tl;dr? the swiss system is full of holes



Like their cheese.


----------



## Beermoth (Oct 20, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 150173



That's the major problem with Remain - it's a safe haven for the biggest bunch of wankers on earth.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tl;dr? the swiss system is full of holes



i suppose people might be cheesed off with it


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 150173


Looks like george h w bush in the background


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 20, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> i suppose people might be cheesed off with it


----------



## Tricky Skills (Oct 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 150157
> Tricky Skills



I have no children. I am teetotal. I have been nowhere near the bloody march today.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> mrs NBE  and the kinder are off to the march. I cannot face it - too many libdems for my liking - at least they are now in the habit of marching - my suggestions of just in case balaclavas in their packpacks was disregarded


Was in London today and witnessed a fair chunk of the march pass as I stood outside the 'spoons in Whitehall.
I was a) genuinely impressed by the numbers...compared with many recent demos I've been on this felt huge
but...
b) genuinely unimpressed with quite how homogenous the demographics were (very, very white, MC and not from round here
c) the silence 

Honestly...fucking depressing all round.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

What's not to like here?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Was in London today and witnessed a fair chunk of the march pass as I stood outside the 'spoons in Whitehall.
> I was a) genuinely impressed by the numbers...compared with many recent demos I've been on this felt huge
> but...
> b) genuinely unimpressed with quite how homogenous the demographics were (very, very white, MC and not from round here
> ...



Not from round here? National demonstrations should be Londoners only then should they? It's a fucking capital city, you will get people 'not from round here' showing up now and then


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not from round here? National demonstrations should be Londoners only then should they? It's a fucking capital city, you will get people 'not from round here' showing up now and then


Fair dos...it's just that I'm comparing with the usual that obviously have a fair share of the London radical population on board. This was very Cheltenham, Auksfud and Surrey.


----------



## paolo (Oct 20, 2018)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The march was enormous by the way - spilled out around the entire area because so many people couldn't fit in, hundreds of thousands.



Media reports of 500 - 700k.

Far bigger than previous.

The trend line - if it continues - could mean a million plus by the time we’re about to head out.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

As the LibDemmery passed before us, Mrs B kelp saying quite loudly that they all looked like "fucking christians'. 
Hard to argue with tbh.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

paolo said:


> Media reports of 500 - 700k.
> 
> Far bigger than previous.
> 
> The trend line - if it continues - could mean a million plus by the time we’re about to head out.


Too late then?


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> So...the Remainian rally on Saturday...any Urbz going along?



Yes I went along. Very enjoyable. Seemed quite a lot bigger than the last one. We joined the back of March at 3pm and it still hadn't left the start. Music in our area was mainly drum and bass.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Yes I went along. Very enjoyable. Seemed quite a lot bigger than the last one. We joined the back of March at 3pm and it still hadn't left the start. Music in our area was mainly drum and bass.



There was music?
That was another thing missing I noticed; no mobile sound systems.

Didn't stop some feeling the lurve, though


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> What's not to like here?
> 
> View attachment 150194


Whose Railway Cuttings , East Cheam our Railway Cuttings East Cheam. Hancock of course would have been pro Brexit


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> As the LibDemmery passed before us, Mrs B kelp saying quite loudly that they all looked like "fucking christians'.
> Hard to argue with tbh.


Let's see how they'd take crucifixion


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> What's not to like here?
> 
> View attachment 150194


Just the people


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Fair dos...it's just that I'm comparing with the usual that obviously have a fair share of the London radical population on board. This was very Cheltenham, Auksfud and Surrey.


IYCWIM...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

The39thStep said:


> Whose Railway Cuttings , East Cheam our Railway Cuttings East Cheam. Hancock of course would have been pro Brexit


These people were posher than Cheam. 
Cheam was part of the 57% Leave LBSutton


----------



## Beermoth (Oct 20, 2018)

Can't believe Brexit hasn't stopped already with gut-wrenchingly powerful messages like this on show
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dp-ZzynXQAA0chY.jpg:large


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 20, 2018)

link doesn't work for me.


----------



## T & P (Oct 20, 2018)

I don’t think dissing the Remain camp on the basis of what their supporters look like or what their demographic is made out of is a particularly wise move by the Leave supporters...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

T & P said:


> I don’t think dissing the Remain camp on the basis of what their supporters look like or what their demographic is made out of is a particularly wise move by the Leave supporters...


Are they doing that, then?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

One of the first things I saw today at Parliament Sq....



Today left me feeling that politically Corbyn has played a blinder on this; he'd get fuck all credit from this mob even if he said EURefII tomorrow.


----------



## T & P (Oct 20, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Are they doing that, then?


Plenty of it ITT.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 20, 2018)

T & P said:


> I don’t think dissing the Remain camp on the basis of what their supporters look like or what their demographic is made out of is a particularly wise move by the Leave supporters...


what else do you expect from uneducated ignorant racist bigots


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

T & P said:


> Plenty of it ITT.


Evidence?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 20, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> Can't believe Brexit hasn't stopped already with gut-wrenchingly powerful messages like this on show



That is fuckin mint


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 20, 2018)

barf - what of smugarama of utter tossers heading up the 2nd ref campaign. I think brexit is an utter cluster fuck on stilts but no way can I fall in behind those cunts.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

This is a corker.


----------



## cantsin (Oct 20, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> what else do you expect from uneducated ignorant racist bigots



spoken like a proper #FBPE pr*ck


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 20, 2018)

cantsin said:


> spoken like a proper #FBPE pr*ck


or a sarcastic cunt


----------



## cantsin (Oct 20, 2018)

lolz / apols, slighly too subtle for this fuzzed out sat night keyboard hero


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2018)

One very odd thing about today's protest was watching such a MC, family oriented demo singing "Bollocks to Brexit" (those words were also seen on the only ubiquitous (yellow) sticker of the day.
Felt very ill-fitting and affected.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 20, 2018)

cantsin said:


> lolz / apols, slightly too subtle for this slighly fuzzed out sat night keyboard hero


no worries, you drove the point home succinctly .


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 20, 2018)

high praise from creepy niel


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 20, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Like the other team doesn’t want to. What’s the latest promise, zero immigration or each one personally sponsored by the captains of industry?


As I thought would have been obvious from my other posts on here, I don’t actually believe voting remain necessarily means you support everything the EU does. However if you then accuse leave voters of being in bed with Farage or whatever, it raises some questions


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 20, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> high praise from creepy niel



YOBBERY


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 20, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> YOBBERY


makes me want to go to the next march and do a few bank windows just to keep things correct


----------



## paolo (Oct 20, 2018)

The vibe on the ground today, for Corbyn, was disappointment. They want an opposition to Tory exit, not a shade variant.

It’s not politico geek noodling, neo this, etc etc.

700k in central London. 

I was at Glastonbury for the big crowd. “Oh Jeremy Corbyn”. I genuinely wept a tear. He had something to say.

Today, the crowd were chanting, with the same riff:

“Where’s... Jeremy Corbyn”

Show your face. It’s an open goal.

700k.

This won’t stop.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 20, 2018)

Didn’t mean to hit send


----------



## Beermoth (Oct 20, 2018)

paolo said:


> The vibe on the ground today, for Corbyn, was disappointment. They want an opposition to Tory exit, not a shade variant.
> 
> It’s not politico geek noodling, neo this, etc etc.
> 
> ...



Haikus are only 17 syllables btw.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 20, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> Haikus are only 17 syllables btw.


Tried to type a few responses to this- and we are seeing the same type of  touring MC liberals in Scotland lately co-opting Yes- but I’ll go with that


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 20, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> Haikus are only 17 syllables btw.


Oh there’s more added! Jeremy Corbyn has been anti EU his whole
Career man, that’s where he is. I mean he did a flip flop but he’s at least tried to be honest. A bit. I mean he just looks like an honest man struggling in the swamp of shite to me, I’ll spare him come the revolution.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

Who is listening though?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

distance


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 21, 2018)

Humberto said:


> distance


Distance from what?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

Distance between the political establishment and whatever is acknowledged as being worthy of comment/response/attention by the interests they protect. Its embarrassing really.


----------



## billbond (Oct 21, 2018)

I say fair play to Corbyn, his acted completely the right way imho to a DEMOCRATIC vote.
Dignified and his not got involved in the slanging matches that have gone on.
He also knows many of the people who voted for brexit are also Labour supporters.
Upset these and they might just turn their back on him and Labour.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 21, 2018)

What is embarrassing? Sorry but you aren’t being entirely clear, I’m a single mother and lifelong careworker and can’t quite tell whether or not you are raging at me


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 21, 2018)

Humberto said:


> Distance between the political establishment and whatever is acknowledged as being worthy of comment/response/attention by the interests they protect. Its embarrassing really.


Do you mean we have to have letters after our name to comment? If not, what is your beef?


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

Sorry I didn't mean my post at you, more of a general comment. 

My bad etc


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

billbond said:


> I say fair play to Corbyn, his acted completely the right way imho to a DEMOCRATIC vote.
> Dignified and his not got involved in the slanging matches that have gone on.
> He also knows many of the people who voted for brexit are also Labour supporters.
> Upset these and they might just turn their back on him and Labour.



EU are stupid fucks


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 21, 2018)

Humberto said:


> Sorry I didn't mean my post at you, more of a general comment.
> 
> My bad etc


Coool,but like what were you saying man? I’d like to ken


----------



## Humberto (Oct 21, 2018)

not that much in it, several hundred thousand march, where are the party leader's arguments? There aren't any. They keep distance and people accept it. Class system there.



Humberto said:


> Distance between the political establishment and whatever is acknowledged as being worthy of comment/response/attention by the interests they protect. Its embarrassing really.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> As I thought would have been obvious from my other posts on here, I don’t actually believe voting remain necessarily means you support everything the EU does. However if you then accuse leave voters of being in bed with Farage or whatever, it raises some questions



Not sure how you got to that. I’m merely quoting Tory policy at you, the most popular party with Brexit voters. 

It’s a bit absurd to accuse one side of building a wall when one of the main appeals of the other side was that they would build a bigger better one.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Was in London today and witnessed a fair chunk of the march pass as I stood outside the 'spoons in Whitehall.
> I was a) genuinely impressed by the numbers...compared with many recent demos I've been on this felt huge
> but...
> b) genuinely unimpressed with quite how homogenous the demographics were (very, very white, MC and not from round here
> ...



‘Very, very white’. Probably not inaccurate, but set against the Leave vote demographic?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 21, 2018)

Two sides - Leave or Remain. That's all the politics that exists. Great.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> barf - what of smugarama of utter tossers heading up the 2nd ref campaign. I think brexit is an utter cluster fuck on stilts but no way can I fall in behind those cunts.



Can’t argue with that. Remain’s big failing is that it has no voice able to articulate how it could address what was wrong before.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Two sides - Leave or Remain. That's all the politics that exists. Great.



Agree with that. It’s not the main course.


----------



## paolo (Oct 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Two sides - Leave or Remain. That's all the politics that exists. Great.



Before the referendum was announced, it barely registered as a topic of concern for the public overall. Far higher up were things like housing and healthcare.

Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> Before the referendum was announced, it barely registered as a topic of concern. Far higher up were things like housing and healthcare.
> 
> Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


Because it's there


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

billbond said:


> I say fair play to Corbyn, his acted completely the right way imho to a DEMOCRATIC vote.
> Dignified and his not got involved in the slanging matches that have gone on.
> He also knows many of the people who voted for brexit are also Labour supporters.
> Upset these and they might just turn their back on him and Labour.


You never did tell us more about your claim that the great majority of remain voters have died since 2016, I'm still interested in hearing more about this unknown slaughter


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Oh there’s more added! Jeremy Corbyn has been anti EU his whole
> Career man, that’s where he is. I mean he did a flip flop but he’s at least tried to be honest. A bit. I mean he just looks like an honest man struggling in the swamp of shite to me, I’ll spare him come the revolution.


No one else will


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 21, 2018)

paolo said:


> Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


Is it? To who? Not to me. Not to the majority of the people in this country at the last general election. 

The fact that it's "all consuming" to the 650 pricks that inhabit the HoC (and ~850 even bigger wankers that constitute the HoL), media luvvies and the CBI, DoI etc and maybe to you, doesn't mean that it's major issue for most the people in this country.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Is it? To who? Not to me. Not to the majority of the people in this country at the last general election.
> 
> The fact that it's "all consuming" to the 650 pricks that inhabit the HoC (and ~850 even bigger wankers that constitute the HoL), media luvvies and the CBI, DoI etc and maybe to you, doesn't mean that it's major issue for most the people in this country.



It's a major issue whether people think about it or ignore it


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

It pales into insignificance beside the burning issue of the day, will rangers manage to beat celtic


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

billbond said:


> Piss poor turnout really and a complete  waste of time.
> Over 1million marched against the IRAQ war, umm how did that turn out.
> Lots of oldies(remainers say they dont count) and kids dragged along by parents who did not vote and have no thoughts on the issue just to get the numbers up.
> And poor unknown speakers on show
> ...


700,000 will turn out at your funeral to ensure life is extinct


----------



## tommers (Oct 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Is it? To who? Not to me. Not to the majority of the people in this country at the last general election.
> 
> The fact that it's "all consuming" to the 650 pricks that inhabit the HoC (and ~850 even bigger wankers that constitute the HoL), media luvvies and the CBI, DoI etc and maybe to you, doesn't mean that it's major issue for most the people in this country.




700 thousand people marched about it yesterday!


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 21, 2018)

corbyn would have been booed and heckled if he'd turned up, thats obvious. The fubby crowd just demanded he be there so they can berate him in person.


----------



## billbond (Oct 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It pales into insignificance beside the burning issue of the day, will rangers manage to beat celtic



I do hope so


----------



## JHE (Oct 21, 2018)

That very obviously would depend on what he said. It Corbyn had turned up to declare that he supports the demand for another referendum with the option to remain in the EU, he would have been cheered more than any other speaker and would have been hailed as the hero of the hour. It would have been the main news from the march. People rightly infer from his absence that he does not support the demand (though he hasn't entirely ruled out a referendum either).


----------



## grit (Oct 21, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Is it? To who? Not to me. Not to the majority of the people in this country at the last general election.
> 
> The fact that it's "all consuming" to the 650 pricks that inhabit the HoC (and ~850 even bigger wankers that constitute the HoL), media luvvies and the CBI, DoI etc and maybe to you, doesn't mean that it's major issue for most the people in this country.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 21, 2018)

In the event of a re-run of the farce, would Theresa May campaign on the Remainer side ?


----------



## JHE (Oct 21, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> In the event of a re-run of the farce, would Theresa May campaign on the Remainer side ?



For there to be a referendum, May would first have to be ousted and, once ousted, I guess she will retire to lick her wounds and write her memoirs. I doubt she's a good writer and, like all the worst political memoirs, hers will show she was right all along.

(I don't see why a referendum would be a farce, with or without May's involvement.)


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 21, 2018)

To me, it seems a bit like Chamberlain asking "should we go to war with Germany ? " ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> To me, it seems a bit like Chamberlain asking "should we go to war with Germany ? " ...


We have always been at war with eurasia


----------



## T & P (Oct 21, 2018)

JHE said:


> (I don't see why a referendum would be a farce, with or without May's involvement.)


 The first one certainly was, all the way from its conception. A second referendum on the other hand would quite the opposite of a farce.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> We have always been at war with eurasia


Ourselves?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Ourselves?


Eastasia


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 21, 2018)

Kesher said:


> It's a major issue whether people think about it or ignore it


Maybe it is maybe it isn't but that's irrelevant to paolo's claim that it's "all consuming" to people in the UK. For many, many people other issues are more important. 


paolo said:


> Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


And you do realise that by arguing that the EU is (and should be?) "all consuming", that all of politics can be reduced to Leave or Remain you are arguing for an alliance with filth like Umunna, Soubry, the CBI etc? That you think these people are your comrades?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 21, 2018)

JHE said:


> That very obviously would depend on what he said. It Corbyn had turned up to declare that he supports the demand for another referendum with the option to remain in the EU, he would have been cheered more than any other speaker and would have been hailed as the hero of the hour. It would have been the main news from the march


of course, but everyone knew that was not going to happen. So what else is the 'wheres corbyn?' stuff except remain tory opportunism


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

Corbyn ruined Christmas


----------



## JHE (Oct 21, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> of course, but everyone knew that was not going to happen. So what else is the 'wheres corbyn?' stuff except remain tory opportunism


It is very obviously a complaint that Corbyn does not support the demand for a referendum, though much of his party does.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

JHE said:


> It is very obviously a complaint that Corbyn does not support the demand for a referendum, though much of his party does.


Yeh bloody Corbyn following his party's policy


----------



## Santino (Oct 21, 2018)

JHE said:


> That very obviously would depend on what he said. It Corbyn had turned up to declare that he supports the demand for another referendum with the option to remain in the EU, he would have been cheered more than any other speaker and would have been hailed as the hero of the hour. It would have been the main news from the march. People rightly infer from his absence that he does not support the demand (though he hasn't entirely ruled out a referendum either).


If Corbyn offered to cut off his right arm to secure a second referendum, the liberal press would eviscerate him for not offering up both arms.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2018)

Santino said:


> If Corbyn offered to cut off his right arm to secure a second referendum, the liberal press would eviscerate him for not offering up both arms.


Not to mention legs


----------



## andysays (Oct 21, 2018)

T & P said:


> The first one certainly was, all the way from its conception. A second referendum on the other hand would quite the opposite of a farce.


A tragedy?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> A tragedy?


Eighteenth Brexmare?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2018)

_A coup d'état is sanctioned as it were in the opinion of the people if it is repeated
_
Sure i saw that on one the lib-dem/tory/labour didn't bother demonstrating about anything for 47 years as society collapsed around me types holding hands with the types responsible for that very collapse as they spoke to the guardian  yesterday.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2018)

There were some types out there yesterday...


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2018)

Holy fuck.


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 21, 2018)

What do we want?
Sshh!


----------



## Santino (Oct 21, 2018)

Fucking hell


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2018)

Complemented by...


----------



## xenon (Oct 21, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _A coup d'état is sanctioned as it were in the opinion of the people if it is repeated
> _
> Sure i saw that on one the lib-dem/tory/labour didn't bother demonstrating about anything for 47 years as society collapsed around me types holding hands with the types responsible for that very collapse as they spoke to the guardian  yesterday.



 I must admit, I am having a little dark chuckle at the  media liberals  recent crying they have no political representation now. There is no party for them.  It’s so unfair.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2018)

xenon said:


> I must admit, I am having a little dark chuckle at the  media liberals  recent crying they have no political representation now. There is no party for them.  It’s so unfair.


The PEOPLE'S TANTRUM is a joy to behold i must say.


----------



## billbond (Oct 21, 2018)

T & P said:


> The first one certainly was, all the way from its conception. A second referendum on the other hand would be quite the opposite of a farce.



Dont agree, it would be a farce
Not a fan of Democracy a
oh well


----------



## Humberto (Oct 22, 2018)

Could be that these idiots haven't got a clue? What then?


----------



## likesfish (Oct 22, 2018)

Brexit, unfortunately, will affect everything


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 22, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

The39thStep said:


>



Yeh cos at all other times it's a free for all scrum at prey  fucking entitled wanker

If it was chaos it was because of people off the march you dull cunt (dm not 39s)


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Sounds like moseley.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Complemented by...
> 
> View attachment 150310


Hitler would at least be able to draw a swastika the right way round


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Hitler would at least be able to draw a swastika the right way round


...and i like the way the guy was happy to show everyone that (after someone pointed out to him that he might sound just a little arrogant?) he added the word "this" after the placard was initially completed.


----------



## cantsin (Oct 22, 2018)

dble post


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

cantsin said:


> "  Because decent. Because cooperative. Because positive. Because properly British."



Look about five posts up


----------



## cantsin (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Look about five posts up



ah , apols...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> There were some types out there yesterday...
> 
> View attachment 150304



it must have seemed like a good idea at the time


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Complemented by...
> 
> View attachment 150310


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2018)

The39thStep said:


>



Great how remain was/is the pro-immigrant, anti-racist vote isn't it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

The39thStep said:


>



Let them serve cake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

the remainers are their own worst enemies


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

_Hey guys, we can form a party with this_


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Hey guys, we can form a party with this_


it'd be the sort of party which ends in acrimony about half past two in the morning and results in the police being called by neighbours.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

I wonder what reforms of the EU these people are campaigning for. Or even have a rudimentary idea of.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> _Hey guys, we can form a party with this_


Constant reminders of why I 'spoilt' my referendum ballot paper.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

_Errol shit on his_


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2018)

The39thStep said:


>




ye gods - is it possible to be anymore smug and lacking in self awareness? - "genteel"  ?!?! FUCK OFF YOU CUNTS!!!


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> ye gods - is it possible to be anymore smug and lacking in self awareness? - "genteel"  ?!?! FUCK OFF YOU CUNTS!!!


What could be more genteel and properly british than private school and a PPE at at oxford? Oh yeah and the BBC of course.

This _thing _on saturday has turned the tide i think.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Not properly british rants Tommy Robinson


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> What could be more genteel and properly british than private school and a PPE at at oxford? Oh yeah and the BBC of course.
> 
> This _thing _on saturday has turned the tide i think.



normal people.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

"from being a campaign of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment, they’re now styling themselves as a populist insurgency. Or what a PR agency might think a populist insurgency looks like..."

Worth it just to see superior seymour writing for...VICE. A piece really worth reading though. Cuts right through the bullshit.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> normal people.


Now these people have shown their true faces it's over.


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Now these people have shown their true faces it's over.


It never really began (but in their minds it was so real)


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Remember that Bright's Club? This was their March on Rome.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron you need to stop sitting on the fence mate. Stop equivocating and tell us what you really think about the character and motivation of these half-million-odd people.


----------



## AnandLeo (Oct 22, 2018)

A large gathering marched in London to revert the current negotiations to remain in the EU. To remain in the EU after the current negotiations is a folly. Majority of people and the politicians of UK want to remain in the EU for the benefit of free trade, business and industrial relations, and tourism. They want to leave EU because of the large annual financial contributions UK pays to the EU, and the political subordination the EU regime is entrenching.

Brexit as declared by the Brexit proponents is not viable with the geopolitics of UK and Ireland. Brexit without negotiated customs union or free trade area is not viable because the Ireland does not accept a hard border with customs control with Northern Ireland. Both UK and EU desire an amicable, efficient solution. Why is the government insensitive to a compromised deal with negotiated customs union or free trade area that will resolve the current impasse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Majority of people and the politicians of UK want to remain in the EU for the benefit of free trade, business and industrial relations, and tourism. They want to leave EU because of the large annual financial contributions UK pays to the EU, and the political subordination the EU regime is entrenching.


this majority of people seem somewhat confused.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> this majority of people seem somewhat confused.


Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...



Fill yer boots.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...
> 
> View attachment 150325
> 
> Fill yer boots.


rather piss in his


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> rather piss in his


_Wealth creators_


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...
> 
> View attachment 150325
> 
> Fill yer boots.


How _lucky _to find that chap. So, they're saying that a 2010 cameron/clegg/osborne style anti-scrounger program with a nationalist (sorry, _properly british_) tint is going to form the base of their latest guardian endorsed billionaire and celeb astroturfed centrist party.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> _Wealth creators_



a load of auld shite.


----------



## klang (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...
> 
> View attachment 150325
> 
> Fill yer boots.


parties to take note of the squeezed middle, the tax payers, the wealth creators. ignore the left behinds.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> "from being a campaign of the establishment, by the establishment and for the establishment, they’re now styling themselves as a populist insurgency. Or what a PR agency might think a populist insurgency looks like..."
> 
> Worth it just to see superior seymour writing for...VICE. A piece really worth reading though. Cuts right through the bullshit.


The last paragraph is worth quoting here.

"The main reason the Remainers would lose again, however, is that they’ve learned nothing. They still talk in generic terms about "the economy", as though everyone benefits from it in exactly the same way. As though most people might not have slightly different interests, say, to the boss of pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca. They still have shockingly little to say about the institution that they say Britain must remain a part of. And nothing at all to say to the large number of people who don’t worship the triumvirate of Blair, Heseltine and Clegg. And they deserve to lose, repeatedly, until they get the point."


----------



## rekil (Oct 22, 2018)

I don't look at guardian comments partly because whenever I see something like the above, I assume it's one of you fuckers having a laugh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

tbh it really wouldn't be that hard to design materials for a remain campaign which wasn't based around the notion that leave voters were stupid feckless racist working class people, which is how they were portrayed in e.g. the guardian during the referendum campaign. it wouldn't be hard to say 'yes, there are problems with the eu, some of them quite serious problems. but we believe the way to deal with this is to respond from within the tent rather than stand in the rain. leaving - no matter the deal - will leave us all worse off, and likely hit areas with heavy leave results much worse off than areas which voted remain. we understand the range of reasons why people wished to leave in june 2016: but we now know a lot more about things than we did then, and it's important to confirm that rather narrow result, to ensure that the greater certainty of what brexit means is what people want to go along with. 52/48's no way to decide a matter which will leave recriminations for decades and a more certain result could - should - allow us to recombine as a nation regardless of which way it goes. if it's leave, fine. if it's remain, fine. nonetheless as matters stand now, with the 2016 result, about half the country will be pissed off whichever way we jump and this will cause ructions in the future.' but i don't believe politicians of any stripe have the bollocks to say anything like that.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The last paragraph is worth quoting here.
> 
> "The main reason the Remainers would lose again, however, is that they’ve learned nothing. *They still talk in generic terms about "the economy", as though everyone benefits from it in exactly the same way.* As though most people might not have slightly different interests, say, to the boss of pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca. They still have shockingly little to say about the institution that they say Britain must remain a part of. And nothing at all to say to the large number of people who don’t worship the triumvirate of Blair, Heseltine and Clegg. And they deserve to lose, repeatedly, until they get the point."



Both sides completely guilty of infantilising with such simplistic drivel denying the socio-economic reality of the neoliberal _base._


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh it really wouldn't be that hard to design materials for a remain campaign which wasn't based around the notion that leave voters were stupid feckless racist working class people, which is how they were portrayed in e.g. the guardian during the referendum campaign. it wouldn't be hard to say 'yes, there are problems with the eu, some of them quite serious problems. but we believe the way to deal with this is to respond from within the tent rather than stand in the rain. leaving - no matter the deal - will leave us all worse off, and likely hit areas with heavy leave results much worse off than areas which voted remain. we understand the range of reasons why people wished to leave in june 2016: but we now know a lot more about things than we did then, and it's important to confirm that rather narrow result, to ensure that the greater certainty of what brexit means is what people want to go along with. 52/48's no way to decide a matter which will leave recriminations for decades and a more certain result could - should - allow us to recombine as a nation regardless of which way it goes. if it's leave, fine. if it's remain, fine. nonetheless as matters stand now, with the 2016 result, about half the country will be pissed off whichever way we jump and this will cause ructions in the future.' but i don't believe politicians of any stripe have the bollocks to say anything like that.


I think that was pretty much what corbyn was saying pre-referendum. Or was forced to say.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 22, 2018)

i am fucking sick of witty banners. I am as middle class as most of the attendees nowadays but like fucking hell.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

It ain't broke:


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Even Paul Gadd went:


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2018)

fun response to that dominic minghella tweet - "im a passionate remainer and i had to phone in sick after reading this"


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 22, 2018)

nothing I saw from the march would convince anybody outside London /up north to change their minds.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> nothing I saw from the march would convince anybody outside London /up north to change their minds.


oh i think it would

thousands of former remainers will now be fervent leavers


----------



## rekil (Oct 22, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> i am fucking sick of witty banners. I am as middle class as most of the attendees nowadays but like fucking hell.


Paradoxically, this would work as a banner if you're not careful.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 150331


Fucking hell - 4real ?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

He must have done some song about jail breaking or something.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 22, 2018)

copliker said:


> Paradoxically, this would work as a banner if you're not careful.


Give it another couple of years and you could probably stick another layer of meta-irony on top of *that*


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Fucking hell - 4real ?



He's in clink for 16 years, so seems unlikely. Still, having a personal aesthetic that is firmly in "easily mistaken for notorious paedo" territory is brave.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 22, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> He must have done some song about jail breaking or something.


That’s what I thought - cannot see him on a weekend pass this early into his sentence


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 22, 2018)

95% sorted now, and 158 days left to sort the last 5% thats ages.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> 95% sorted now, and 158 days left to sort the last 5% thats ages.


yeh they'll still manage to fuck it up


----------



## rekil (Oct 22, 2018)

Customize with teapots, harry potter and whatnot.



Spoiler


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh they'll still manage to fuck it up



I took 847 days to get 95% done
so it should only take about 42 days to do the last 5%

That leaves us 116 days to arrange the party and have two weeks off for winterfest.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

Rich.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Better and betterer.

Remember, as paulo warned us, _this will continue!_


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 22, 2018)

Best for Britain, the horror



watch this with the mingella tweet as a companion piece


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Best for Britain, the horror
> 
> 
> 
> watch this with the mingella tweet as a companion piece



minging mingella


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Though some appear to have great clarity; the Guardian picked this particular participant's views on their fellow marchers...
> 
> View attachment 150325
> 
> Fill yer boots.


'For we are the people of England, that never have spoken yet'. Well, in fact we've never _had to_ speak before, its all been sorted for us...


----------



## paolo (Oct 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> of course, but everyone knew that was not going to happen. So what else is the 'wheres corbyn?' stuff except remain tory opportunism



From the banners and placards I saw, I’d say say it wasn’t a Tory dominated march, and the chants similarly so.

But let’s say it *was* tories leading that particular charge, protesting for another vote. If so, then things really *have* changed in two years.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> From the banners and placards I saw, I’d say say it wasn’t a Tory dominated march, and the chants similarly so.
> 
> But let’s say it *was* tories leading that particular charge, protesting for another vote. If so, then things really *have* changed in two years.



I was thinking of soubry tbf, I'm sure the march also included plenty of well meaning sound people marching for what they believe is correct and righteous, I think they are wrong but its their saturday afternoon and a-b feels good sometimes, however futile it may be it can feel like energy and thats fine. But it was helmed by absolute twats.


----------



## Hollis (Oct 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh it really wouldn't be that hard to design materials for a remain campaign which wasn't based around the notion that leave voters were stupid feckless racist working class people, which is how they were portrayed in e.g. the guardian during the referendum campaign. it wouldn't be hard to say 'yes, there are problems with the eu, some of them quite serious problems. but we believe the way to deal with this is to respond from within the tent rather than stand in the rain. leaving - no matter the deal - will leave us all worse off, and likely hit areas with heavy leave results much worse off than areas which voted remain. we understand the range of reasons why people wished to leave in june 2016: but we now know a lot more about things than we did then, and it's important to confirm that rather narrow result, to ensure that the greater certainty of what brexit means is what people want to go along with. 52/48's no way to decide a matter which will leave recriminations for decades and a more certain result could - should - allow us to recombine as a nation regardless of which way it goes. if it's leave, fine. if it's remain, fine. nonetheless as matters stand now, with the 2016 result, about half the country will be pissed off whichever way we jump and this will cause ructions in the future.' but i don't believe politicians of any stripe have the bollocks to say anything like that.



Well you'd think so. I think it was largely down to Cameron and his advisers that a largely negative campaign was run. Ditto you'd think that If Corbyn, Gardiner and the rest of them were ever genuinely remain they'd be arguing a strong pro-Europe case, while also addressing things like wages, employment conditions, housing as the real long term issues...


----------



## Santino (Oct 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> From the banners and placards I saw, I’d say say it wasn’t a Tory dominated march, and the chants similarly so.
> 
> But let’s say it *was* tories leading that particular charge, protesting for another vote. If so, then things really *have* changed in two years.


I'm not in bed with Tories, but if I was that would be good.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

Hollis said:


> Well you'd think so. I think it was largely down to Cameron and his advisers that a largely negative campaign was run. Ditto you'd think that If Corbyn, Gardiner and the rest of them were ever genuinely remain they'd be arguing a strong pro-Europe case, while also addressing things like wages, employment conditions, housing as the real long term issues...


60-40 eh? Where you living now?

This pro-business march on sat made no mention of these things.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 22, 2018)

paolo said:


> From the banners and placards I saw, I’d say say it wasn’t a Tory dominated march, and the chants similarly so.
> 
> But let’s say it *was* tories leading that particular charge, protesting for another vote. If so, then things really *have* changed in two years.


They certainly have. Hello _anarchist_.


----------



## LDC (Oct 22, 2018)

The U75 commando on top of Westminster as the march passed at the weekend...


----------



## paolo (Oct 22, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I was thinking of soubry tbf



Fair shout, I did wonder if I’d read you out of context.


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2018)

Were any of the people sneering here actually at the march?  It was actually quite an impressive march and, if the reports are to be believed, it was one of the biggest marches in British history. (600-700,00) First was the Stop the War March (2 million February 2003) and the level third was March for the Alternative 400,000 (March 2011) and CND 400,000 (October 1983).  

In terms of political colours most of the marchers were probably Labour voters but there was also a fair smattering from across the political spectrum.  Not sure what the political effect will be, but I'm relieved that the March was a big success.  I would have been concerned, for instance, if only 40,000 had turned up and I think that the proponents of Brexit would have attempted to make political capital out of it. I think its possible that politically the tide has turned against Brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 22, 2018)




----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> First was the Stop the War March (2 million February 2003)



That's up to 2 million now? 3% of the entire population of the UK. Impressive number!


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> That's up to 2 million now? 3% of the entire population of the UK. Impressive number!



750,000 according to the police.

Major UK demonstrations and protests listed: which one was biggest?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> 750,000 according to the police.



I've seen 1.5 million mentioned before. These tales tend to grow in the telling, understandably.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 22, 2018)

It stops meaning anything after a while. People wander off because they can't join the main march, or organise their own mini-demos in the surrounding area. It becomes impossible to count once it gets too large, and tbh it doesn't matter anyway. "Super fucking huge" will do.


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2018)

Just how do they estimate the size of these marches? My family arrived at Hyde Park Corner to join the March at about 3.30pm when the back of the March back up in Park Lane had not even left the starting point.  By that time probably many people had already reached Parliament Square and left. How many people can fit into Parliament Square at one time?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Were any of the people sneering here actually at the march?  It was actually quite an impressive march and, if the reports are to be believed, it was one of the biggest marches in British history. (600-700,00) First was the Stop the War March (2 million February 2003) and the level third was March for the Alternative 400,000 (March 2011) and CND 400,000 (October 1983).
> 
> In terms of political colours most of the marchers were probably Labour voters but there was also a fair smattering from across the political spectrum.  Not sure what the political effect will be, but I'm relieved that the March was a big success.  I would have been concerned, for instance, if only 40,000 had turned up and I think that the proponents of Brexit would have attempted to make political capital out of it. I think its possible that politically the tide has turned against Brexit.


That photo which includes the drumming band is, IME, not wholly representative of the demographics of the march. The parts of the march that passed where I was taking pics (1/3rd of it?) was:
a)older
b)whiter
c)quieter
d)posher
etc.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Just how do they estimate the size of these marches?



It's very difficult. If everyone would only just stand still for a bit


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That photo which includes the drumming band is, IME, not wholly representative of the demographics of the march. The parts of the march that passed where I was taking pics (1/3rd of it?) was:
> a)older
> b)whiter
> c)quieter
> ...



You may be right. It just so happened that the bit of March were I was wasn't. You stood still in one place and observed and had a better technical statistical view of things. I did talk to people though and walked with them. But I did feel that some of the posts earlier were exaggerating certain aspects.  There were certainly plenty of really sound people there. Don't scoff at them!


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2018)

These people seem to be having a blast.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That photo which includes the drumming band is, IME, not wholly representative of the demographics of the march. The parts of the march that passed where I was taking pics (1/3rd of it?) was:
> a)older
> b)whiter
> c)quieter
> ...



Older, whiter, posher? Arguably the core shire counties vote for Leave.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Were any of the people sneering here actually at the march?  It was actually quite an impressive march and, if the reports are to be believed, it was one of the biggest marches in British history. (600-700,00) First was the Stop the War March (2 million February 2003) and the level third was March for the Alternative 400,000 (March 2011) and CND 400,000 (October 1983).
> 
> In terms of political colours most of the marchers were probably Labour voters but there was also a fair smattering from across the political spectrum.  Not sure what the political effect will be, but I'm relieved that the March was a big success.  I would have been concerned, for instance, if only 40,000 had turned up and I think that the proponents of Brexit would have attempted to make political capital out of it. I think its possible that politically the tide has turned against Brexit.



I don’t see how the march demonstrates the ‘tide has turned’ at all. It’s been largely dismissed. There were a lot of Remain voters. There still is. No way of reckoning anything other than there are still more of the others.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 23, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Just how do they estimate the size of these marches? My family arrived at Hyde Park Corner to join the March at about 3.30pm when the back of the March back up in Park Lane had not even left the starting point.  By that time probably many people had already reached Parliament Square and left. How many people can fit into Parliament Square at one time?


It's known how many people can fit into any of the major roads/squares/parks/etc around there, and helicopters can see the degree to which they're full. Crowds have different densities though and when people spill into the surrounding areas it gets a lot harder to tell so it will always be a bit imprecise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Just how do they estimate the size of these marches? My family arrived at Hyde Park Corner to join the March at about 3.30pm when the back of the March back up in Park Lane had not even left the starting point.  By that time probably many people had already reached Parliament Square and left. How many people can fit into Parliament Square at one time?


they guess, tbh. the only march i'm aware of where they tried to actually count the number of people attending was the big countryside alliance one of c.400,000 in (iirc) 2002. there are measures of how many people can fit into x amount of space: but no one actually counts, neither the police nor the organisers. the police have often said 'due to our experience in policing demonstrations our informed opinion is' or words to that affect. but it's guesswork it really is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Were any of the people sneering here actually at the march?  It was actually quite an impressive march and, if the reports are to be believed, it was one of the biggest marches in British history. (600-700,00) First was the Stop the War March (2 million February 2003) and the level third was March for the Alternative 400,000 (March 2011) and CND 400,000 (October 1983).


how soon the countryside alliance are forgotten
BBC NEWS | UK | Huge turnout for countryside march


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 23, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> I don’t see how the march demonstrates the ‘tide has turned’ at all. It’s been largely dismissed. There were a lot of Remain voters. There still is. No way of reckoning anything other than there are still more of the others.



I think its possible that politically the tide has turned against Brexit.  There are growing demands for a People's Vote on the deal (whatever that turns out to be) and many polls are now showing support for Brexit falling so that it is now less that support for Remain.


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Slightly misleading.

Moldova aren't actually blocking Britain's re-entry into the WTO (whatever that would mean). They, along with a few other countries, are attempting to block


> the U.K.’s re-entry to the World Trade Organization’s Government Procurement Agreement, an accord that smooths the bidding process on public contracts, including in the $837 billion U.S. market


Not quite so scary when you read the real story rather than the twitter spin


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> Slightly misleading.
> 
> Moldova aren't actually blocking Britain's re-entry into the WTO (whatever that would mean). They, along with a few other countries, are attempting to block
> 
> Not quite so scary when you read the real story rather than the twitter spin


Bit like the diplomatic/geopolitical version of _be nice to folk on the way up; you'll meet them again on the way down  _


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> how soon the countryside alliance are forgotten
> BBC NEWS | UK | Huge turnout for countryside march



Yes that was mentioned in the source but I somehow skipped past it. The organisers had very precise figure for the number of attendees (407,791)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Yes that was mentioned in the source but I somehow skipped past it. The organisers had very precise figure for the number of attendees (407,791)


Very precise indeed but doubts linger as to its accuracy


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> Slightly misleading.
> 
> Moldova aren't actually blocking Britain's re-entry into the WTO (whatever that would mean). They, along with a few other countries, are attempting to block
> 
> Not quite so scary when you read the real story rather than the twitter spin


The tweet headline is a bit misleading, yup.

Did you get to the bit where it was payback?

And how those 'few other countries' include the US and Japan?

Or the bit where they're wanting access to public procurement, HS2, Heathrow and govt IT contracts?

Not quite so scary at all?


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2018)

Elsewhere in the EU...

Italy budget: European Commission demands changes


> The European Commission has told Italy to revise its budget, an unprecedented move with regard to an EU member state. The Commission is worried about the impact of higher spending on already high levels of debt in Italy, the eurozone's third-biggest economy. Italy's governing populist parties have vowed to push ahead with campaign promises including a minimum income for the unemployed. The country now has three weeks to submit a new, draft budget to Brussels. The Commission said the first draft represented a "particularly serious non-compliance" with its recommendations.


----------



## Supine (Oct 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> Elsewhere in the EU...
> 
> Italy budget: European Commission demands changes



Being in monetary union is not an issue for the UK though...


----------



## kebabking (Oct 23, 2018)

Supine said:


> Being in monetary union is not an issue for the UK though...



Depends on the price of re-admission, and even the price of withdrawing A50 in the last few days of march...


----------



## Supine (Oct 23, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Depends on the price of re-admission, and even the price of withdrawing A50 in the last few days of march...



I hate everything about Brexit but if we re-apply in a couple of years time the mental image of European facepalms brings a rye smile to my face


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 23, 2018)

Supine said:


> I hate everything about Brexit but if we re-apply in a couple of years time the mental image of European facepalms brings a rye smile to my face


Schadenfreude surely?


----------



## Supine (Oct 23, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Schadenfreude surely?



Nah, it's my own misfortune unfortunately


----------



## CRI (Oct 23, 2018)

So much winning!

UK readies flotilla plan for supplies in no-deal Brexit



> Britain is drawing up plans to charter ships to bring in emergency food and medicines in the event of a “no-deal” Brexit next March, in a move greeted with disbelief at a stormy meeting of Theresa May’s cabinet on Tuesday.
> The cabinet was told that the heavily used Dover-Calais route could quickly become blocked by new customs controls on the French side, forcing Britain to seek alternative ways of bringing in “critical supplies”.
> The warnings about the consequences of a disorderly British exit from the EU came at a cabinet meeting which saw ministers divided into two camps over how to unlock a deal in Brussels. One witness said there was “an almighty row”.





> One person briefed on the plans said: “The idea of the government running ferry services is slightly farcical.”
> Government officials say the idea would be to charter ships to use less congested sea routes. “We’re talking about bringing in critical supplies like food, medicines, maybe car parts,” said one official briefed on the plan.





> Government officials say they do not expect to have to use legal powers to requisition ships, although with only five months to go until Brexit on March 29th, there is little time to charter ships on the open market.
> Pauline Bastidon, head of European policy at the Freight Transport Association, said: “We are open to all kinds of ideas about how to keep supplies flowing in a no deal Brexit. But it’s hard to see where the extra ships would quickly be found. Nor can I see how other UK ports could possibly handle the huge volumes currently going through the Dover strait.”


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 24, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Not sure how you got to that. I’m merely quoting Tory policy at you, the most popular party with Brexit voters.
> 
> It’s a bit absurd to accuse one side of building a wall when one of the main appeals of the other side was that they would build a bigger better one.


Me neither I think I was in a pub that day.... 


ETA- I didn’t read your comment properly. It’s a bit absurd to accuse the institution actually referred in the question we answered on the day of the ref  of building a very long wall when they did ....precisely.... this?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 24, 2018)

Humberto said:


> Sorry I didn't mean my post at you, more of a general comment.
> 
> My bad etc


Its not your fault I have no recollection  of my responses on that evening. Ooops!


----------



## Humberto (Oct 24, 2018)

No worries, I'm often the same. 

I probably deserved a bollocking for something or other anyway!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 24, 2018)

Humberto said:


> No worries, I'm often the same.
> 
> I probably deserved a bollocking for something or other anyway!


((((Radge Bastards United)))))


----------



## Humberto (Oct 24, 2018)




----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 24, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> These people seem to be having a blast.



If you’re not being sarcastic this is a hilarious post. Should have added Aussie


toblerone3 said:


> These people seem to be having a blast.



YOU’RE NOT WRONG


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> Being in monetary union is not an issue for the UK though...


Do you think the Italian electorate, whose democratically expressed wishes are being deemed unacceptable by the non-elected EU commission, will draw much comfort from the fact that it's not an issue for the UK?

I thought it was Brexit voters who were Little Englanders and all the remain supporters were supposed to be internationalist...


----------



## Supine (Oct 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> Do you think the Italian electorate, whose democratically expressed wishes are being deemed unacceptable by the non-elected EU commission, will draw much comfort from the fact that it's not an issue for the UK?
> 
> I thought it was Brexit voters who were Little Englanders and all the remain supporters were supposed to be internationalist...



No I don't to the first point and you can be an internationalist without thinking monetary union is a good thing.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Very precise indeed but doubts linger as to its accuracy



The counting method was simply to take the total population of provincial towns/villages and subtract from that the number of cunts that were absent from those places on that particular day.


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> No I don't to the first point and you can be an internationalist without thinking monetary union is a good thing.


Makes your original response a bit odd then. It's as if you're seeking to dismiss the news of the EU attempting to overrule the Italian govt as 'nothing to do with us' because it doesn't directly affect the UK. 

What it clearly does do is provide another example of how the EU seeks to enforce its rules regarding austerity etc over the wishes of national electorates. The tensions within the EU which have brought us to Brexit are by no means confined to the UK.


----------



## Doppelgänger (Oct 24, 2018)

andysays said:


> Makes your original response a bit odd then. It's as if you're seeking to dismiss the news of the EU attempting to overrule the Italian govt as 'nothing to do with us' because it doesn't directly affect the UK.
> 
> What it clearly does do is provide another example of how the EU seeks to enforce its rules regarding austerity etc over the wishes of national electorates. The tensions within the EU which have brought us to Brexit are by no means confined to the UK.



But Italy is part of the Eurozone and so there has to be extra scrutiny and checks put in place.

The EU would not do this to a non-Eurozone country.

The comparison is like Scotland going on a splurge and Westminster telling them that yes they have devolved powers, but they can't spend more than they actually have or can afford.


----------



## Kesher (Oct 24, 2018)

Brexit deal progress is 0% until Irish border solved, Guy Verhofstadt warns

Just goes to show the pointlessness of Mayhem putting a percentage on how far a deal is done


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 24, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Brexit deal progress is 0% until Irish border solved, Guy Verhofstadt warns
> 
> Just goes to show the pointlessness of Mayhem putting a percentage on how far a deal is done



Yeah, but, Guy Verhofstadt is a no-mark in this game.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 24, 2018)

Kesher said:


> Brexit deal progress is 0% until Irish border solved, Guy Verhofstadt warns
> 
> Just goes to show the pointlessness of Mayhem putting a percentage on how far a deal is done


From the very first day the EU have said the border issue must be settled firstly, yup.

Nothing happens without it.  There is no deal without it.  A no deal brexit, you could say.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2018)

From the latest 'Ladybird' "The story of Brexit"



Helen was there with the 699,999 others.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Do you think the Italian electorate, whose democratically expressed wishes are being deemed unacceptable by the non-elected EU commission, will draw much comfort from the fact that it's not an issue for the UK?
> 
> I thought it was Brexit voters who were Little Englanders and all the remain supporters were supposed to be internationalist...



Gets a bit more complicated when you look at exactly who the Italian electorate elected, and at some other aspects of their legislative platform.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2018)

Doppelgänger said:


> But Italy is part of the Eurozone and so there has to be extra scrutiny and checks put in place.
> 
> The EU would not do this to a non-Eurozone country.



For sure but agreement to join the Euro is a pre-requisite for membership of the EU so the point andysays made still stands. 

I know there are several EU countries that still have their own currency (historical financial situations) but they are still in agreement that they will have to switch at some point.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 25, 2018)

it just sort of looks to me like the EU is a-ok with the creeping fascism but god forbid a spending rule should b broken eh. priorities m8


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 25, 2018)

"Easiest deal in the world "


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> For sure but agreement to join the Euro is a pre-requisite fro membership of the EU so the point andysays made still stands.
> 
> I know there are several EU countries that still have their own currency (historical financial situations) but they are still in agreement that they will have to switch at some point.


Just want to clarify that my point wasn't specifically about the Euro, more about the unelected EU Commission using any means at their disposal (in this particular case Italy's membership of the Euro) to subvert the democratic wishes of national governments and electorates if those wishes don't comply with the overall EU economic project.

Anyone who says 'oh, we don't need to worry because we're not in the Euro' is naive at best...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 25, 2018)

Doppelgänger said:


> The comparison is like Scotland going on a splurge and Westminster telling them that yes they have devolved powers, but they can't spend more than they actually have or can afford.



Are you happy that the EU can and does enforce this? The EU is enforcing austerity. It's not technical question on whether they are living within their means, it's profoundly political. 

If Westminster tried to pull that shit with Scotland I'd be 100 percent behind the Scottish people. 

And it does still kind of look like you're saying that doesn't affect the UK so what's the problem?


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Just want to clarify that my point wasn't specifically about the Euro, more about the unelected EU Commission using any means at their disposal (in this particular case Italy's membership of the Euro) to subvert the democratic wishes of national governments and electorates if those wishes don't comply with the overall EU economic project.
> 
> Anyone who says 'oh, we don't need to worry because we're not in the Euro' is naive at best...


I think this is by no means demonstrated not to be the case, but using a monetary union-based example to illustrate it doesn't work particularly well does it. Direction over a member's spending is probably inevitable in any kind of fiscal union, from to the EU all the way down to two people's marriage. If my democratic wish is to spend all my income on wine instead of our mortgage, I can envisage my missus 'subverting' it in very short order...


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are you happy that the EU can and does enforce this? The EU is enforcing austerity. It's not technical question on whether they are living within their means, it's profoundly political.
> 
> If Westminster tried to pull that shit with Scotland I'd be 100 percent behind the Scottish people.


Why 'if'? It absolutely does do this, and not just to Scotland. The question for Scots, or perhaps 1980s Liverpudlians or whoever else, is whether they can either successfully fight it within that union or ultimately survive & thrive outside of that union on their own terms. So far the answer has been no, except for Brexiteers.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 25, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I know there are several EU countries that still have their own currency (historical financial situations) but they are still in agreement that they will have to switch at some point.



Sweden has been balls-to-the-wall in preparation for joining the Euro for the past 16 years!


----------



## Doppelgänger (Oct 25, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are you happy that the EU can and does enforce this? The EU is enforcing austerity. It's not technical question on whether they are living within their means, it's profoundly political.
> 
> If Westminster tried to pull that shit with Scotland I'd be 100 percent behind the Scottish people.
> 
> And it does still kind of look like you're saying that doesn't affect the UK so what's the problem?




The thing is Italy agreed to those conditions and so are being scrutinised accordingly.

The EU probably won't really do much beyond be vocal about it.

This article explains it pretty well:

How EU's budget rules sparked showdown with Italy - Independent.ie

Only Brexiters are making a thing of this as they believe Italy is ceding sovereignty, but in reality all countries do to a degree when they are part of a group or have an agreement in place.

The UK will have to make concessions when it comes to any bi-lateral or multi-lateral agreements post-Brexit. To think otherwise is just pandering to those politicians who have convinced some Britain can be some sort of leading utopia executing amazing trade deals left right and centre.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2018)

Doppelgänger said:


> But Italy is part of the Eurozone and so there has to be extra scrutiny and checks put in place.
> 
> The EU would not do this to a non-Eurozone country.
> 
> The comparison is like Scotland going on a splurge and Westminster telling them that yes they have devolved powers, but they can't spend more than they actually have or can afford.



Love how you've translated the EU "enforcing it's will" into "extra scrutiny and checks".


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 25, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Why 'if'? It absolutely does do this, and not just to Scotland. The question for Scots, or perhaps 1980s Liverpudlians or whoever else, is whether they can either successfully fight it within that union or ultimately survive & thrive outside of that union on their own terms. So far the answer has been no, except for Brexiteers.



Until the Scottish parliament attempts to defy them there's not a lot anyone can do though.

I certainly wouldn't try to deflect criticism of the British state over the Liverpool council by saying they're just enforcing checks and balances.

We're talking about the EU here anyway.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 25, 2018)

I once took a kind of neither king nor keiser position on brexit. Always known the EU was a bag of shite but without knowing the alternative I wasn't going to vote for brexit. 

Now I'm firmly in the pro brexit camp. I think it's the elitism and trust your superiors bollocks that remainers come out with that's swung me. I still don't know what the alternative is and it's probably shite but I don't care if it keeps those entitled cunts crying into their cornflakes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I once took a kind of neither king nor keiser position on brexit.









> Always known the EU was a bag of shite but without knowing the alternative I wasn't going to vote for brexit.
> 
> Now I'm firmly in the pro brexit camp. I think it's the elitism and trust your superiors bollocks that remainers come out with that's swung me. I still don't know what the alternative is and it's probably shite but I don't care if it keeps those entitled cunts crying into their cornflakes.


the trouble is, remain or depart, you still have entitled cunts on the same side.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the trouble is, remain or depart, you still have entitled cunts on the same side.



"The historical crisis of the proletariat..." etc


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2018)

Some of the responses here are quite shocking in their willingness to overlook the reality of the unelected European Commission telling the recently elected government of Italy to revise its budget, including campaign promises guaranteeing a minimum income for the unemployed, and giving them a deadline of three weeks to submit a new, draft budget to Brussels, because they said the first draft represented a "particularly serious non-compliance" with its recommendations.

This is, apparently, a previously unprecedented move with regard to an EU member state, but let's not concern ourselves with that, rules are rules after all.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the trouble is, remain or depart, you still have entitled cunts on the same side.


You are correct of course but that won't stop me taking joy in watching them chuck out their teddies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> You are correct of course but that won't stop me taking joy in watching them chuck out their teddies.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 150642



Shiteheads Revisted: Referendum II - The Final Ablution


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 25, 2018)

Psst, interest you in a watch, mate?



Spoiler: Brexit watch













Spoiler: A deal, a steal, it's sale of the fucking century...


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Some of the responses here are quite shocking in their willingness to overlook the reality of the unelected European Commission telling the recently elected government of Italy to revise its budget, including campaign promises guaranteeing a minimum income for the unemployed, and giving them a deadline of three weeks to submit a new, draft budget to Brussels, because they said the first draft represented a "particularly serious non-compliance" with its recommendations.



And its not really recommendations if they enforce non-compliance.  That's instructions.


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> And its not really recommendations if they enforce non-compliance.  That's instructions.



<insert meme of Hector Barbarossa from _Pirates of the Caribbean_ saying "the EU budgetary rules are more what you'd call instructions than genuine recommendations" here>


----------



## tommers (Oct 25, 2018)

Chronofighter.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Some of the responses here are quite shocking in their willingness to overlook the reality of the unelected European Commission telling the recently elected government of Italy to revise its budget...



Conversely, the EU can only _intervene _with the Italian budget because Italy has given them permission to do so - by joining the Euro and signing up to its rules. If Italy feels that the rules of the club its democratically elected government chose to join are no longer appropriate, then it has the right to seek to change the rules of that club, and that doesn't produce the result it wants, it can decide to leave.

You are suggesting that Italy should have the right to ignore the rules it signed up to, and to remain a member of the club.

Would you take the same view about members of a trade union?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 25, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are you happy that the EU can and does enforce this? The EU is enforcing austerity. It's not technical question on whether they are living within their means, it's profoundly political.
> 
> If Westminster tried to pull that shit with Scotland I'd be 100 percent behind the Scottish people.
> 
> And it does still kind of look like you're saying that doesn't affect the UK so what's the problem?


Just wanted to say good to see you around here again SN 
(and hope you and your partner are doing ok)


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Conversely, the EU can only _intervene _with the Italian budget because Italy has given them permission to do so - by joining the Euro and signing up to its rules. If Italy feels that the rules of the club its democratically elected government chose to join are no longer appropriate, then it has the right to seek to change the rules of that club, and that doesn't produce the result it wants, it can decide to leave.
> 
> You are suggesting that Italy should have the right to ignore the rules it signed up to, and to remain a member of the club.
> 
> Would you take the same view about members of a trade union?


Did the Italian people give their explicit consent to joining the Euro?

And even if they did, should that decision made some years ago bind them in perpetuity to a system of rules the full implications of which are only becoming clear now?

It seems to me to be a fundamental principle of democracy that electorates are able to change their minds if they want to, so if the Italian electorate have voted to guarantee a minimum income for the unemployed, it's not right for the EU to deny them that choice. 

I said in an earlier post that the tensions within the EU which have brought us to Brexit are not confined to the UK, and this latest development in Italy is an example of that. It's likely that we'll see further examples  of national electorates voting for policies the EU wishes to deny them, which may lead to more countries than Britain leaving in future.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> Did the Italian people give their explicit consent to joining the Euro?
> 
> And even if they did, should that decision made some years ago bind them in perpetuity to a system of rules the full implications of which are only becoming clear now?
> 
> ...


We share the same view of the primacy of democratic legitimacy - but the club, which has other democratically elected members, has the right to set, and enforce its rules.

Italy has the right to leave that club if it doesn't like the rules, it doesn't have the right to sign up to the rules, then ignore then and remain a member.


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> We share the same view of the primacy of democratic legitimacy - but the club, which has other democratically elected members, has the right to set, and enforce its rules.
> 
> Italy has the right to leave that club if it doesn't like the rules, it doesn't have the right to sign up to the rules, then ignore then and remain a member.


I'm not suggesting it does, I'm suggesting that this sort of high-handed behaviour by the EU commission may lead many Italians to think they don't want to be part of the club anymore.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> I said in an earlier post that the tensions within the EU which have brought us to Brexit are not confined to the UK, and this latest development in Italy is an example of that. It's likely that we'll see further examples  of national electorates voting for policies the EU wishes to deny them, which may lead to more countries than Britain leaving in future.


Not until they've seen how Brexit pans out.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 25, 2018)

andysays said:


> I'm not suggesting it does, I'm suggesting that this sort of high-handed behaviour by the EU commission may lead many Italians to think they don't want to be part of the club anymore.



So do I - I also take the view that the single currency is a foolish idea that only has one logical destination, and that there are a good number of countries that would be better off outside it. 

However, until Italy decides to leave it, I don't think it's fair on the other member states for Italy to ignore the rules.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 25, 2018)

kebabking said:


> So do I - I also take the view that the single currency is a foolish idea that only has one logical destination, and that there are a good number of countries that would be better off outside it.
> 
> However, until Italy decides to leave it, I don't think it's fair on the other member states for Italy to ignore the rules.



Your notion of fairness is quite strange.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 25, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Not until they've seen how Brexit pans out.


“May”. From Europe to the Middle East and beyond, this idea that *everyone* in the world looks to the U.K. or US before deciding anything needs to die


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> “May”. From Europe to the Middle East and beyond, this idea that *everyone* in the world looks to the U.K. or US before deciding anything needs to die


A strange conflation. Noone else will leave of their own volition until they see what happens to the first one to do so, and so far it's not exactly an encouraging example. Nothing to do with being the UK per se.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 25, 2018)

mauvais said:


> A strange conflation. Noone else will leave of their own volition until they see what happens to the first one to do so, and so far it's not exactly an encouraging example. Nothing to do with being the UK per se.


I just meant that it’s odd to think *all* italians  would place the same weight on Brexit as you do- if we weren’t in the U.K. then same concept applies.  Some might, just as Andysays-says some may be swayed by the EU’s actions re Italy. It would be just as odd to say everyone in the U.K. definitely voted leave due to what happened with Greece.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I just meant that it’s odd to think *all* italians  would place the same weight on Brexit as you do- if we weren’t in the U.K. then same concept applies.  Some might, just as Andysays-says some may be swayed by the EU’s actions re Italy. It would be just as odd to say everyone in the U.K. definitely voted leave due to what happened with Greece.


Noone's saying any of this. Since we're talking representative democracies, not direct ones, it's highly unlikely any government - even an anti EU one - will offer up an exit referendum until Brexit has played out and they've seen what the possibilities for a deal are. The only benefit would be to Brexiteers.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 25, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Noone's saying any of this. Since we're talking representative democracies, not direct ones, it's highly unlikely any government - even an anti EU one - will offer up an exit referendum until Brexit has played out and they've seen what the possibilities for a deal are. The only benefit would be to Brexiteers.


 Thanks for insuring your goalposts are more clearly defined, no they probably won’t. . Re “the only benefit would be to brexiteers” The only benefit of what? Define “brexiteers”.  What benefits Rees Mogg isn’t of any use to me, for example.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 25, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Thanks for insuring your goalposts are more clearly defined, no they probably won’t. . Re “the only benefit would be to brexiteers” The only benefit of what? Define “brexiteers”.  What benefits Rees Mogg isn’t of any use to me, for example.


The only clear benefit of another country entering into the grand old exit shitshow would be to proponents of Brexit, in terms of public support, as it would show that they weren't alone in their folly. The effect on negotiations would be more complicated but if it were another major economy it might be the catalyst for splitting the EU into a well defined two-tier membership model and this might help soft Brexiteers get a deal that was more than nominal but much less than being out in the cold. None of this helps the other imaginary country very much, as they would inevitably be better served by waiting rather than belatedly wading into our badly organised mess.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 25, 2018)

mauvais said:


> The only clear benefit of another country entering into the grand old exit shitshow would be to proponents of Brexit, in terms of public support, as it would show that they weren't alone in their folly. The effect on negotiations would be more complicated but if it were another major economy it might be the catalyst for splitting the EU into a well defined two-tier membership model and this might help soft Brexiteers get a deal that was more than nominal but much less than being out in the cold. None of this helps the other imaginary country very much, as they would inevitably be better served by waiting rather than belatedly wading into our badly organised mess.


If a country that’s actually in the Eurozone leaves it it will only benefit brexiteers? Has rum been taken? 
I’m out for tonight ALREADY, I must learn to keep away from this thread for the foreseeable!


----------



## xarmian (Oct 26, 2018)

kebabking said:


> So do I - I also take the view that the single currency is a foolish idea that only has one logical destination, and that there are a good number of countries that would be better off outside it.
> 
> However, until Italy decides to leave it, I don't think it's fair on the other member states for Italy to ignore the rules.


It's not the Eurozone. It's Maastricht and the fiscal pact. The EU is trying to write the fiscal pact into law. National Fiscal Flexibility: EU Parliament Plans a Big Step Backwards • Social Europe

_I and many others have argued that the basic EU treaties have flexibility to accommodate most social democratic policies such as those in the 2017 Manifesto of the UK Labour Party. Our argument may soon suffer a decisive blow from the EU parliament.

In March 2012 twenty-five EU national governments signed the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance(TSCG), the “fiscal pact”. By signing national governments “contracted” (the treaty term) to obey its detailed fiscal rules. The TSCG did not achieve unanimous approval, thus could not become part of the de facto EU constitution; i.e., contrary to the intention of the fiscally reactionary governments, it was not incorporated into the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)._​
_This is not a distinction without difference. In practice the status of the TSCG and the two basic and unanimously adopted treaties are fundamentally different (the other is the Treaty on European Union, TEU). Because of the lack of unanimity, the TSCG is not a condition of membership, while the two basic treaties are.

If sufficiently annoyed by the application of the TSCG a government could withdraw from it and remain an EU member. That option does not apply to the basic treaties (TFEU and TEU). Of more immediate importance, the European Commission is not legally empowered to enforce the TSCG (see statement by the vice-president of the European Commission). *To eliminate the flexibility and legal ambiguity of the TSCG the European Commission proposes that its provisions become European law by act of the European Parliament (EP).*_

_As I explained in a previous Social Europe article, the TSCG/Fiscal Pact is very bad, enforcing upon member governments dysfunctional macroeconomic polices whose basic concepts are technically flawed (explained here), and whose enforcement procedure would be anti-democratic. The first clause of Article 3 removes ambiguity from the Maastricht convergence criteria that it seeks to codify: “The budgetary position of the general government shall be balanced or in surplus”, and governments may “deviate” from this rule only under very restrictive conditions (specified in Paragraph 3 of Article 3)._​
and

_With the EP dominated by parties of the centre-right, passage of this austerity-enshrining legislation is highly likely if not a certainty. According to Agence Europe, in the initial parliamentary debate after formal statement of the intent to make the fiscal pact EU law the response from MEPs was overwhelmingly in favour, including support from mainstream social democrats. MEP Marco Valli of the Five Star Movement accurately summarized the proposed legislation as “institutionalization of the troika”, referring to the infamous coalition of debt collectors that ravaged Greece._​Progress on making it law Legislative train schedule | European Parliament

The EU believes it is possible for all member states to simultaneously be in surplus and they intend to keep punishing the poor until it happens.
​


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 26, 2018)

we must be like 96% done by now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> we must be like 96% done by now?


they'll never find 96% of theresa may


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 26, 2018)

andysays said:


> Some of the responses here are quite shocking in their willingness to overlook the reality of the unelected European Commission telling the recently elected government of Italy to revise its budget, including campaign promises guaranteeing a minimum income for the unemployed, and giving them a deadline of three weeks to submit a new, draft budget to Brussels, because they said the first draft represented a "particularly serious non-compliance" with its recommendations.
> 
> This is, apparently, a previously unprecedented move with regard to an EU member state, but let's not concern ourselves with that, rules are rules after all...


It is unprecedented because the EU let them get away with it the last 3 years without applying sanctions, whilst they continued to increase their debts without any reasonable plan to deal with it. Increasing the debt and increasing its percentage.  The EU understands that the debt will increase but wants the percentage to reduce.

Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order.  Look at Germany for example.  Italy's debt is the second highest in the EU (way over 100% of output) and needs to be addressed.

But those unelected EU officials are a law unto themselves.

Especially the Central Bank President Draghi, the Foreign Policy President Mogherini and Parliament President Tajani.  Who are all Italian, of course.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2018)

Wow, the perfect mix of ex-socialist and new ongoing nationalist analysis from Dexter there. Disgusting.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order.  Look at Germany for example.  Italy's debt is the second highest in the EU (way over 100% of output)



Just going full on pro austerity now then? 

Your vision of an independent Scotland doesn't sound much fun


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order. Look at Germany for example


Wow. Just wow.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 26, 2018)

“There is a hierarchy of states within the eurozone and close calculation of national interest. Legitimacy for each state derives from its own history, but also from the structures of power and popular assent, including democratic elections. There is no prospect of a single European state, and hence no prospect of unified fiscal policy. The reforms that could take place would occur within an existing hierarchy of power, dominated by the core countries and Germany”.  
Crisis in the Eurozone - C. Lapavitsas et al (2012) p65


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 26, 2018)

“However, the institutional malfunctioning of the eurozone was not merely the result of poor design, and nor of bad economic theory. It was, rather, the outcome of political and social relations that have underpinned the creation of a new international reserve currency. At the root of the turmoil in the eurozone lie class and imperial interests, not the ‘technical’ errors of monetary union.” p167


----------



## andysays (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It is unprecedented because the EU let them get away with it the last 3 years without applying sanctions, whilst they continued to increase their debts without any reasonable plan to deal with it. Increasing the debt and increasing its percentage.  The EU understands that the debt will increase but wants the percentage to reduce.
> 
> Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order.  Look at Germany for example.  Italy's debt is the second highest in the EU (way over 100% of output) and needs to be addressed.
> 
> ...


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Wow. Just wow.


I'm reading a book by an academic marxist and his mate (Corbynism: A Critical Approach by Frederick Harry Pitts and Matt Bolton) and have literally just came across this passage:



(The book is a hilarious bad-tempered 400 page quasi-theoretical rant about brexit that claims to come from the value-theory tradition of marxism (Postone etc) but literally just calls Corbyn a future hitler enabling stalino-nazi and urges people to support a guardian style progressive neo-liberalism as the necessary grounding and safeguard for future socialist developments - so stagist left-liberalism hiding behind marxist phrasing. And to think i nearly bothered with Pitts books on New Ways to Read Marx. Not now).


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 26, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just going full on pro austerity now then?
> 
> Your vision of an independent Scotland doesn't sound much fun


I didn't mention Scotland. 

I was talking about Italy.  I mentioned how 3 of the 6 major EU positions are held by Italians, I pointed out that Italy is now proposing breaking the rules for a fourth consecutive year and has not proposed dealing with it's debt *in any way* when it's in a monetary union with other countries who would be negatively affected by this ridiculous budget proposal based on increased borrowing and debt.

As to why you and your hateful cunt of a mate thought it was relevant to bring up my nationality I'll keep my counsel.


----------



## andysays (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I didn't mention Scotland.
> 
> I was talking about Italy.  I mentioned how 3 of the 6 major EU positions are held by Italians, I pointed out that Italy is now proposing breaking the rules for a fourth consecutive year and has not proposed dealing with it's debt *in any way* when it's in a monetary union with other countries who would be negatively affected by this ridiculous budget proposal based on increased borrowing and debt.
> 
> As to why you and your hateful cunt of a mate thought it was relevant to bring up my nationality I'll keep my counsel.


If you really think that the fact that 3 members of the unelected EU Commission are Italian excuses overruling the manifesto commitments of the newly elected Italian government, as voted for by the actual Italian electorate, that just demonstrates how hollow and undemocratic your version of nationalism really is.

The same logic would suggest that if the head of the BofE and the judiciary were Scottish,  they could overrule the elected Scottish government, though I doubt you be quite so easy going in that case


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order.  Look at Germany for example.  Italy's debt is the second highest in the EU (way over 100% of output) and needs to be addressed.


So do you agree with the Coalition government's, and Labour opposition at the time, line that the cuts they introduced (are introducing) were necessary because of the financial crisis?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 26, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> we must be like 96% done for by now?



FTFY.


----------



## paolo (Oct 26, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> it just sort of looks to me like the EU is a-ok with the creeping fascism



The EU - Poland situation suggests not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2018)

Could be dirty bum time Brexit Panic as Brits Run Out of Toilet Paper


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It is unprecedented because the EU let them get away with it the last 3 years without applying sanctions, whilst they continued to increase their debts without any reasonable plan to deal with it. Increasing the debt and increasing its percentage.  The EU understands that the debt will increase but wants the percentage to reduce.
> 
> Cutting tax and increasing public spending is great when your house is in order.  Look at Germany for example.  Italy's debt is the second highest in the EU (way over 100% of output) and needs to be addressed.
> 
> ...


You have to be careful when talking about national debts. Debts have two aspects to them - the amount owed and the time frame within which it must be paid: in the case of govt gilts, the maturity date. Ignoring interest for a second, you can essentially divide the one by the other to work out what kind of hole (if any kind) you are in. Whom you owe is also crucial. Without national debt, people's pensions would be in deep shit. So Japan topples along with a national debt of around 200% output, most of it owed to Japanese people. It still functions. Meanwhile, the UK's national debt has a really long average maturity of somewhere around 15 years, again large chunks of it owed to British people. In Italy, a whopping 70 per cent is owed to Italians, one of the highest rates.

Also, if the private sector isn't borrowing, the public sector has to. Otherwise you end up with deflationary pressures and things tend to grind to a halt as the incentive to invest disappears.

In the case of Italy, it has refinanced its debt and extended maturity over the last few years. It isn't in danger of bankruptcy as its interest payments are going down, not up. Increasing public debt at this time of poor economic performance is perfectly reasonable, not irresponsible. Some would say that it would be stupid not to.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

ETA:

There are also a lot of smoke and mirrors around public/private debt. A govt can borrow money to build houses, for instance, paying it back over the decades with the rents it takes. Or it can get a private company to borrow the money and build the houses. In the first case, the debt is added to the 'national debt', but the state owns an asset at the end of it. In the second case, there is no public debt, only private, and the state owns nothing at the end of it. Headline figures of x% gdp national debt are meaningless without a lot more context. And looking only at public debt while ignoring private debt is also meaningless.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 26, 2018)

....


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 26, 2018)

Poi E said:


> ....



Four solid points there


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 26, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ...
> 
> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


This says that it was the unelected EU official who put in policies to help Italy.

Italy's position just now, according to the article, is strengthened by being in the EU.

My biggest concern (apart from the banks dumping bonds, QE and no mention of inflation) would be the fact that 70% of the debt is held internally, that's a lot of eggs in one basket.  

But like I said, they're part of a bigger bloc.

Just makes brexit look worse tbh.


----------



## Chz (Oct 26, 2018)

Agreed that public debt is nonsense (within reason), especially as the smokescreen for austerity. The oversimplification that some give as a reason for cutting public spending is inane. The Germans do have some sort of pathological thing about it, and they keep being trotted out as an example to follow. No-one seems to mention Japan. Damn them for their high living standards and long lifespans - it must be _in spite of_ that crippling debt. Yes, that's it.

Thankfully for the countries in the Eurozone, the French will only put up with so much of that bullshit before they tell Germany to keep their opinions to themselves.

There's nothing wrong with internal debt. _Particularly_ in the case of pensions and Brexit. They can't leave with the money, they have to spend it back into the economy. There, I've said something positive about leaving the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 26, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> My biggest concern (apart from the banks dumping bonds, QE and no mention of inflation) would be the fact that 70% of the debt is held internally, that's a lot of eggs in one basket.


Nah, that's a strength not a weakness. It's a country writing an iou to itself essentially. A trick of accounting.  A lot of the debate around debt has things the wrong way around. First you look at what it is you want to do. Then you look for the mechanism to finance it - the system of obligations you need to set up to make these things happen. You don't look at the mechanism and think what you might or might not be able to do. That isn't even coherent really - finance exists for us; we don't exist for finance.

Hence some of the tensions in the eurozone. Who is the 'us' that finance exists for within the eurozone? Without political and fiscal union, it appears to be more some countries than others.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 26, 2018)

Sunny uplands...

https://www.politico.eu/article/arg...nds-claim-says-foreign-minister-jorge-faurie/


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

Liam Fox: “This will be one of the easiest in human history” ... “there will be no downside to Brexit”.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I didn't mention Scotland.
> 
> I was talking about Italy.  I mentioned how 3 of the 6 major EU positions are held by Italians, I pointed out that Italy is now proposing breaking the rules for a fourth consecutive year and has not proposed dealing with it's debt *in any way* when it's in a monetary union with other countries who would be negatively affected by this ridiculous budget proposal based on increased borrowing and debt.
> 
> As to why you and your hateful cunt of a mate thought it was relevant to bring up my nationality I'll keep my counsel.



No one brought up your nationality!

I didnt say you mentioned Scotland. But it's interesting, isn't it, how you think countries which _live beyond their means _must assume spending controls. It does raise questions about what you think good economic model looks like.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

Working through the promises and basis of Brexit.

Does anyone believe that the British border - inside Ireland - is like the London boroughs of Camden and Islignton?

That’s a Brexit view. He’s said it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

Who? What are you talking about?


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who? What are you talking about?


Everyone who supports Brexit has to agree with every word that has come out of Boris Johnson's mouth, ever.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Could be dirty bum time Brexit Panic as Brits Run Out of Toilet Paper



The dock leaf growing industry will have never had it so good. Who said there would be no winners?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Liam Fox: “This will be one of the easiest in human history” ... “there will be no downside to Brexit”.


Yeh that's cos we'll already be at the bottom


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> No one brought up your nationality!
> 
> I didnt say you mentioned Scotland. But it's interesting, isn't it, how you think countries which _live beyond their means _must assume spending controls. It does raise questions about what you think good economic model looks like.


Someone _did _bring up nationality - but it wasn't you or i. It was Dexter himself. Another masterpiece of close reading from him.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Who? What are you talking about?



Boris Johnson mocked for saying Irish border like Camden and Westminster


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Everyone who supports Brexit has to agree with every word that has come out of Boris Johnson's mouth, ever.



Liam Fox: A UK-EU free trade deal will be 'one of the easiest in human history' to negotiate


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Liam Fox: A UK-EU free trade deal will be 'one of the easiest in human history' to negotiate


...And Liam Fox, and every other right wing bogie man who gets trotted out ad infinitum, obviously


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

Getting out of the EU can be quick and easy – the UK holds most of the cards in


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 27, 2018)

Choose your own Brexit: An interactive fantasy for all ages


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> ...And Liam Fox, and every other right wing bogie man who gets trotted out ad infinitum, obviously



The tories are the party that proposed this, and are running the negotiations.

All of it. It’s *all* theirs right now, with a small dash of DUP which will get rightfully trampled on shortly.

“Oh yeah, but that’s just them. It’s not about them”.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

This was never proposed by a wide socialist movement.

It’s not a socialist initiative.

Even with the brutal gruel Greece got to eat, the outcome, when that happened - from socialists - was not “Britain should walk”.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> The tories are the party that proposed this, and are running the negotiations.
> 
> All of it. It’s *all* theirs right now, with a small dash of DUP which will get rightfully trampled on shortly.
> 
> “Oh yeah, but that’s just them. It’s not about them”.


Neither Johnson or Fox are involved in negotiations any more, so posting shit they came out with a year or more ago is hardly insightful or useful at this stage. 

Do you have anything to contribute which is actually relevant?


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

Someone is going to come along and say the referendum was actually socialiast led, and Cameron was just reflecting the will of the socialist movement.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 27, 2018)

This ''Brexit'' thing is and always was, since the early '90s at least, (unless we're re-writing history already) a tory / UKIP bandwagon that some lefties have jumped on because they think it's leading where they want to go. (There's a Lexit bandwagon too, but that's not moving, so people have jumped on UKIP's wagon because it is moving). They may be right - but the problem with jumping on a bandwagon is people forget to distinguish between the people pushing it, and the people just riding it to its destination.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Neither Johnson or Fox are involved in negotiations any more...


True, but the disgraced former defence secretary has his work cut out just getting a foothold in negotiations to establish the UK's entry into WTO terms of trade.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Neither Johnson or Fox are involved in negotiations any more, so posting shit they came out with a year or more ago is hardly insightful or useful at this stage.
> 
> Do you have anything to contribute which is actually relevant?



Are you saying that the other sideline snipers - Davis, Rees Mogg et al are irrelevant?

Happy to go with that, and move on to the current Tory negotiation team.

But first, we should ignore Rees Mogg? Nothing to see there, no danger?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 27, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> This ''Brexit'' thing is and always was, since the early '90s at least, (unless we're re-writing history already) a tory / UKIP bandwagon that some lefties have jumped on because they think it's leading where they want to go. (There's a Lexit bandwagon too, but that's not moving, so people have jumped on UKIP's wagon because it is moving). They may be right - but the problem with jumping on a bandwagon is people forget to distinguish between the people pushing it, and the people just riding it to its destination.



The left has been opposed to the EU (or previous bodies) for decades. There was criticisms of the project itself from the 60s onwards, initial membership was opposed and then leaving urged when we were finally given a vote on the top-down undemocratic decision on entry and leaving was written into previous labour party manifestos. It has been at the worst a large part of the left view and more commonly the majority view. Whilst the right were firmly in support of the joining, staying in and shaping the EU to their own tastes (which thatcher finally managed in 85-86 leading to the constitutional grounding of a form of democratically untouchable neoliberalism) - and still were right up until the referendum, and still are now. 

If it's an anti-EU bandwagon it was set rolling and manned by the left for the overwhelming majority of its existence.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

There’s no getting away from it.

It’s a Tory-shires led move.

It’s being run by the tories.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> There’s no getting away from it.
> 
> It’s a Tory-shires led move.
> 
> It’s being run by the tories.


your powers of observation are keen indeed


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The left has been opposed to the EU (or previous bodies) for decades. There was criticisms of the project itself from the 60s onwards, initial membership was opposed and then leaving urged when we were finally given a vote on the top-down undemocratic decision on entry and leaving was written into previous labour party manifestos. It has been at the worst a large part of the left view and more commonly the majority view. Whilst the right were firmly in support of the joining, staying in and shaping the EU to their own tastes (which thatcher finally managed in 85-86 leading to the constitutional grounding of a form of democratically untouchable neoliberalism) - and still were right up until the referendum, and still are now.
> 
> If it's an anti-EU bandwagon it was set rolling and manned by the left for the overwhelming majority of its existence.


True enough, as context, but the right have organised (officially) around anti-European positions since the early 1960's with the Anti Common Market League.

I assume paolo 's points relate to contemporary 'ownership' of the debate. Let's face it 'Lexit' positions were not front and centre through the campaign preceeding the referendum.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Are you saying that the other sideline snipers - Davis, Rees Mogg et al are irrelevant?
> 
> Happy to go with that, and move on to the current Tory negotiation team.
> 
> But first, we should ignore Rees Mogg? Nothing to see there, no danger?


No, I'm talking about your contributions to this thread, trotting out tired old shit that Johnson and Fox said over a year ago and which was widely mocked at the time, even by those of us who voted to Leave, that's what's irrelevant.


----------



## mojo pixy (Oct 27, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> The left has been opposed to the EU (or previous bodies) for decades. There was criticisms of the project itself from the 60s onwards, initial membership was opposed and then leaving urged when we were finally given a vote on the top-down undemocratic decision on entry and leaving was written into previous labour party manifestos. It has been at the worst a large part of the left view and more commonly the majority view. Whilst the right were firmly in support of the joining, staying in and shaping the EU to their own tastes (which thatcher finally managed in 85-86 leading to the constitutional grounding of a form of democratically untouchable neoliberalism) - and still were right up until the referendum, and still are now.
> 
> If it's an anti-EU bandwagon it was set rolling and manned by the left for the overwhelming majority of its existence.



That's not the EU departure road we're on though. I wish it were. The best we can manage at this stage is to appropriate what's happening and try to push it our way.

There's always been pressure to push us out, from both sides - the socialist left and the nationalist right - but it's clear which is in control now. The only question is, how do we reclaim this? I'm not seeing much of that, albeit I accept I'm chiefly watching the mainstream debate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Are you saying that the other sideline snipers - Davis, Rees Mogg et al are irrelevant?
> 
> Happy to go with that, and move on to the current Tory negotiation team.
> 
> But first, we should ignore Rees Mogg? Nothing to see there, no danger?


no, let's continue discussing the former tory negotiation team


----------



## teqniq (Oct 27, 2018)

May’s Brexit disaster unreported by UK press: Britain BLOCKED from $1.7 Trillion in WTO projects


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, I'm talking about your contributions to this thread, trotting out tired old shit that Johnson and Fox said over a year ago and which was widely mocked at the time, even by those of us who voted to Leave, that's what's irrelevant.



Yeah, but comparing what politicians promise with what they deliver is the most basic way in which we hold to account those that presume to govern us. No?


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> True enough, as context, but the right have organised (officially) around anti-European positions since the early 1960's with the Anti Common Market League.
> 
> I assume paolo 's points relate to contemporary 'ownership' of the debate. Let's face it 'Lexit' positions were not front and centre through the campaign preceeding the referendum.



(brogdale I'm not disagreeing with your post, more using it as a jump off.)

Socialism, generally, has an internationalist flavour. Reaching out and building bridges, unions, comrades.

Nationalism is, generally, is a right wing led thing. Protect what is mine.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Boris Johnson mocked for saying Irish border like Camden and Westminster


Right so one Tory scumbag is saying shit, so? 
You're the one arguing that people should ally with Tories, right wing Labour Party cunts and LibDems.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> True enough, as context, but the right have organised (officially) around anti-European positions since the early 1960's with the Anti Common Market League.
> 
> I assume paolo 's points relate to contemporary 'ownership' of the debate. Let's face it 'Lexit' positions were not front and centre through the campaign preceeding the referendum.


That depends if you reduce - as most people on the remain side and some (not as many) on the leave side here have done - the whole debate and related issues down to the positions of various MPs or factions of parties positions mediated via other . That's what's both allowed and guaranteed these types 'ownership of the debate'.

The ACML league never achieved intellectual or political  influence across the right comparbale to anti-EU positions on the left beyond  a tiny elite and certainly never achieved the position of getting their positions writ into the tory party manifesto.

btw i wasn't replying to paulo. I am assuming his posts are a parody of some sort.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

teqniq said:


> May’s Brexit disaster unreported by UK press: Britain BLOCKED from $1.7 Trillion in WTO projects




grand to see the special relationship working so well too


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You're the one arguing that people should ally with Tories



I'm a snidey Tory? Are you actually saying this?

WT actual Fuck 

I'm going to namecheck my reasoned oppo, DotCommunist

He or she should be able to vouch for my stance. Grumbly remainer. Never, ever, Tory.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> That depends if you reduce - as most people on the remain side and some (not as many) on the leave side here have done - the whole debate and related issues down to the positions of various MPs or factions of parties positions mediated via other . That's what's both allowed and guaranteed these types 'ownership of the debate'.
> 
> The ACML league never achieved intellectual or political  influence across the right comparbale to anti-EU positions on the left beyond  a tiny elite and certainly never achieved the position of getting their positions writ into the tory party manifesto.
> 
> btw i wasn't replying to paulo. I am assuming his posts are a parody of some sort.


Agreed.
I think many would identify the 'height of Thatcherism'/run up to Maastricht (late 80's - early 90's) as the period in which anti-EEC/EU sentiment gained significant traction within the right/tories and there was 'ideological cross-over' on the issue.

e2a...when the right began to consistently identify the post-war legacy of 'consensus' concessions of the  super-state as a potential barrier to some of their small-state, neoliberal agenda (particulalrly on the Labour supply side)


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> I'm a snidey Tory? Are you actually saying this?


I'm not calling you a Tory I'm saying that the logic of your position is an alliance with pro-EU tories.
You specifically argued that


paolo said:


> Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


If this issue is "all consuming", if it is more important than anything else then logically you must be arguing for an alliance of "Remainers", regardless of what other politics those people have.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but comparing what politicians promise with what they deliver is the most basic way in which we hold to account those that presume to govern us. No?


I agree with that, but neither of the articles paolo linked to relate to things which politicians have promised. 

Did Johnson actually promise that there would be a border in Ireland the same as that between two London boroughs as a matter of official government policy,  or was it just the random ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> I agree with that, but neither of the articles paolo linked to relate to things which politicians have promised.
> 
> Did Johnson actually promise that there would be a border in Ireland the same as that between two London boroughs as a matter of official government policy,  or was it just the random ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon?


yes


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> I agree with that, but neither of the articles paolo linked to relate to things which politicians have promised.
> 
> Did Johnson actually promise that there would be a border in Ireland the same as that between two London boroughs as a matter of official government policy,  or was it just the random ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon?



Both, I expect.
He deserves the piano wire, whatever.


----------



## Winot (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Did Johnson actually promise that there would be a border in Ireland the same as that between two London boroughs as a matter of official government policy,  or was it just the random ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon?



He has made a career out of eliding the two.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Both, I expect.
> He deserves the piano wire, whatever.


he deserves to play a part in the construction of the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not calling you a Tory I'm saying that the logic of your position is an alliance with pro-EU tories.
> You specifically argued that
> 
> If this issue is "all consuming", if it is more important than anything else then logically you must be arguing for an alliance of "Remainers", regardless of what other politics those people have.



Eek. You're extrapolating a previous comment a long way.

I'll try to explain why I said that.

It was a frustration that at the moment, it feels like we're focused on one thing. Not housing any more, nor the NHS, it's all about Brexit. (I think it's a waste of time, but I know that's not a unanimous view).

In a way I was trying to riff off your comment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> In a way I was trying to riff off your comment.


(((paolo)))  

have a pity like


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> big snip



Boris Johnson - The Foreign Secretary, as was.

Our representative to the world.

Saying he's just "a baffoon", for his statements in his official role, is "nothing to see here".

He's been recognised both on the left and the right, as an absolute nightmare for foreign relationships.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Boris Johnson - The Foreign Secretary, as was.
> 
> Our representative to the world.
> 
> ...


it's not a very good parody


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 27, 2018)

Costas Lapavitsas: Socialism starts at home

some good points in here re: internationalism. Not sure I like the title, but have a read


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 27, 2018)

Pity about the interviewer.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> I agree with that, but neither of the articles paolo linked to relate to things which politicians have promised.
> 
> Did Johnson actually promise that there would be a border in Ireland the same as that between two London boroughs as a matter of official government policy,  or was it just the random ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon?


There isn't an official government policy on the border in Ireland. Never has been. That's one of the very many problems with this rubbish, so the ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon who also happens to have been one of the most prominent advocates of brexit pre-vote (and we shouldn't underestimate the influence he had on tory voters to choose brexit - he is very popular among a certain kind of tory) and was Foreign Secretary of this government until very very recently are far from random. They're as close as anybody has got to a policy.

I also wouldn't underestimate the calculation in his buffoonery. As an example, he was deliberately misleading in the run-up to the vote over the £8 billion a year the UK gives to the EU. Dissappears 'god knows where' was his phrase, irrc. Well, god may very well know, but so too does anyone with fingers to type and access to google - EU spending is laid out in excruciating detail on easy-to-find pages on the internet. But Johnson knew that his intended audience didn't know where the money went and were not likely to be googling it any time soon, so he played on their ignorance. That's not accidental.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There isn't an official government policy on the border in Ireland. Never has been. That's one of the very many problems with this rubbish, so the ramblings of an ill-informed buffoon who also happens to have been one of the most prominent advocates of brexit pre-vote (and we shouldn't underestimate the influence he had on tory voters to choose brexit - he is very popular among a certain kind of tory) and was Foreign Secretary of this government until very very recently are far from random. They're as close as anybody has got to a policy.
> 
> I also wouldn't underestimate the calculation in his buffoonery. As an example, he was deliberately misleading in the run-up to the vote over the £8 billion a year the UK gives to the EU. Dissappears 'god knows where' was his phrase, irrc. Well, god may very well know, but so too does anyone with fingers to type and access to google - EU spending is laid out in excruciating detail on easy-to-find pages on the internet. But Johnson knew that his audience didn't know where the money went and were not likely to be googling it any time soon, so he played on their ignorance. That's not accidental.


woah there

there's always been an official policy on the border - to keep it

all the london borough borders are adminstrative in the same polity - the border in ireland of course a mite different


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> Neither Johnson or Fox are involved in negotiations any more, so posting shit they came out with a year or more ago is hardly insightful or useful at this stage.
> 
> Do you have anything to contribute which is actually relevant?


Fox is, and the consultation on the trade deal with the US has just closed:

Consultation on trade negotiations with the United States              - Department for International Trade             - Citizen Space


> Boosting economic growth in the UK by encouraging more competition, investment and innovation.



It's what you voted for, right?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> It was a frustration that at the moment, it feels like we're focused on one thing. Not housing any more, nor the NHS, it's all about Brexit. (I think it's a waste of time, but I know that's not a unanimous view).


Then don't get stuck into the establishment narrative that it's all about Brexit, don't discuss things in terms of _leavers_ and _remainers_, don't make Johnson "our" representative (as you do in a subsequent post), he's sure as hell not mine. For many, many people the UK leaving the UK isn't all encompassing so why buy the view of the wankers in parliament, media, etc that it is?

When you've been framing the debate this way, you can't complain when the logic of your position is taken to it's end point.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Then don't get stuck into the media narrative that it's all about Brexit, don't discuss things in terms of _leavers_ and _remainers_, don't make Johnson "our" representative (as you do in a subsequent post), he's sure as hell not mine.
> 
> When you've been framing the debate this way, you can't complain when the logic of your position is taken to it's end point.



Ok, I’ll take that on the chin.

Do you have a representative?


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

OMG I’ve just re read.

Boris Johnson’s involvement in brexit is “media narrative”.

He didn’t want to be involved, but “the media” made him.

Really?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> OMG I’ve just re read.
> 
> Boris Johnson’s involvement in brexit is “media narrative”.
> 
> ...


Well you need to re-read again.
The establishment and you made him "our" representative. EDIT: What is the "we" here?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Then don't get stuck into the establishment narrative that it's all about Brexit, don't discuss things in terms of _leavers_ and _remainers_, don't make Johnson "our" representative (as you do in a subsequent post), he's sure as hell not mine. For many, many people the UK leaving the UK isn't all encompassing so why buy the view of the wankers in parliament, media, etc that it is?.


For many, many people, leaving the EU is the biggest political question and choice at this moment. Hence 700,000 on the streets of London. If you are friends or partners with an EU citizen here in the UK it is also a very very prominent question for your everyday life and wtf you are going to do if things get ugly. And it will remain the overriding obsession of the wankers in parliament, media etc for many months, probably years to come. At worst, there won't be a general election until 2022 and by then all the terms of brexit will be in place and the UK will either have just left or be coming to the end of a transition period. Whichever government comes in then it will be locked in to a series of international agreements and treaties. That does matter for all the other stuff we want to talk about and that is and will continue to be ignored in current mainstream debate and policy making. This is why 'lexit' is such a crazy joke. There is no lexit. Never has been a lexit. It is a tory brexit, a rexit, that we have on our hands.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

So "socialists" better throw away all their politics and clamber into bed with Soubry, Clarke, Umunna and the LibDems. Lovely.

_Bremain for socialism_!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So "socialists" better throw away all their politics and clamber into bed with Soubry, Clarke, Umunna and the LibDems. Lovely.


I didn't say that. Doesn't work that argument. Does brexit matter? Yes, it does. You are no more clambering into bed with rightwingers by opposing brexit than you are by supporting it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> _Bremain for socialism_!


You get cross with other posters for twisting what you say into bullshit like this. Sort yourself out.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> There’s no getting away from it.
> 
> It’s a Tory-shires led move.
> 
> It’s being run by the tories.



What control do you think the Tories have in this process?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> (brogdale I'm not disagreeing with your post, more using it as a jump off.)
> 
> Socialism, generally, has an internationalist flavour. Reaching out and building bridges, unions, comrades.
> 
> Nationalism is, generally, is a right wing led thing. Protect what is mine.



You mean like this? Anti-austerity strikes sweep Europe | Reuters


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> I'm a snidey Tory? Are you actually saying this?
> 
> WT actual Fuck
> 
> ...



That's not at all what they said.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> ...It's what you voted for, right?





andysays said:


> Everyone who supports Brexit has to agree with every word that has come out of Boris Johnson's mouth, ever.





andysays said:


> ...And Liam Fox, and every other right wing bogie man who gets trotted out ad infinitum, obviously


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> For many, many people, leaving the EU is the biggest political question and choice at this moment. Hence 700,000 on the streets of London. If you are friends or partners with an EU citizen here in the UK it is also a very very prominent question for your everyday life and wtf you are going to do if things get ugly. And it will remain the overriding obsession of the wankers in parliament, media etc for many months, probably years to come. At worst, there won't be a general election until 2022 and by then all the terms of brexit will be in place and the UK will either have just left or be coming to the end of a transition period. Whichever government comes in then it will be locked in to a series of international agreements and treaties. That does matter for all the other stuff we want to talk about and that is and will continue to be ignored in current mainstream debate and policy making. This is why 'lexit' is such a crazy joke. There is no lexit. Never has been a lexit. It is a tory brexit, a rexit, that we have on our hands.



I think Lexit is a bloody daft term. But I only ever really saw it used by CPB and SWP types. Is 'lexit' relevant to the debate?


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

At some point I. This


SpackleFrog said:


> What control do you think the Tories have in this process?



We’re leaving the EU.

The Tories are in power.

Have I missed something? Unicorns?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

andysays said:


> .


So who do you support in this process? Whose 'vision' of brexit do you support? Who, in the negotiations, is putting forward things that you want to happen? 

If the answer is 'nobody', you have a problem, no? You support a process in which you do not support those negotiating on behalf of 'your' side: you neither support their politics broadly nor their 'vision' of brexit narrowly.  

For me, it matters that people like Fox are still very much involved in shaping this, and it is very relevant to quote what he says. He's still business secretary, remember. He's one of the half-wits entrusted with sorting out trade deals. What shape do you think those trade deals are likely to take with people like Fox negotiating them? What kinds of thing do people like Fox and other tories want from brexit? If you pay attention to what the long-standing tory brexit right wants, you will know that they don't want to leave the EU because it is too neoliberal. They're naked in their admiration of a US economic and social model. What direct consequences will this have for British workers?

What good do you see coming from this process? Please be specific.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think Lexit is a bloody daft term. But I only ever really saw it used by CPB and SWP types. Is 'lexit' relevant to the debate?



Relevant here in our micro world. Bah.

For me, I try to respect it. None of us are making policy, we’re all venting at the end of day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’re leaving the EU.
> 
> The Tories are in power.
> 
> Have I missed something? Unicorns?


you say that. but let's see what happens between now and 29/3/19


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I didn't say that. Doesn't work that argument. Does brexit matter? Yes, it does. You are no more clambering into bed with rightwingers by opposing brexit than you are by supporting it.


Yes you are. This whole conversation arose from paolo's insistence (and the insistence of those at the head of the march) that Brexit is "all consuming". And you've followed that insistence by repeatedly placing Remain as the starting point rather than socialism. I may not agree with socialists that come to the conclusion that a second vote is the best tactic but at least their reasoning is staring from the right point. You start from the position of Remain as the aim and attempt to shoehorn it into something you want to call socialism.


littlebabyjesus said:


> You get cross with other posters for twisting what you say into bullshit like this. Sort yourself out.


Back at you, you were always wet but at least you had some pretence of class politics. Now you're arguing for economics, for the EU, against democracy, for reducing politics to what the red and blue side of capital say it is.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

For the record - I commented on a post that said Brexit was all consuming. I didn’t lead that. It was someone elses’s observation, that I bolstered, not lead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Back at you, you were always wet but at least you had some pretence of class politics. Now you're arguing for economics, for the EU, against democracy, for reducing politics to what the red and blue side of capital say it is.


no, he's always been an effete and ineffectual handwringing liberal of the worst sort


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> If this issue is "all consuming", if it is more important than anything else then logically you must be arguing for an alliance of "Remainers", regardless of what other politics those people have.


This doesn't make sense, at least not in my interpretation of the argument. It's seen to be all-consuming in that the government, establishment and mainstream political powers apparently have no capacity to deal with anything but Brexit, to the exclusion of almost everything else that mattered prior to this whole debacle beginning. You can argue the focus is not shared by the public but unless the public are well served by other political movements I don't know where that gets you.

So what this prioritisation has to do with an alliance of Remainers, let alone a blind one, I've no idea. You could equally complain that it's all-consuming and that we should just take no-deal and move on to other things.


----------



## paolo (Oct 27, 2018)

Can anybody help spacklfrog?

He or she wants to know how the tories are involved in the negotiations.

How, I know it’s a stretch, can anyone do some investigative reporting.

Just *how* are the tories talking to the EU?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Can anybody help spacklfrog?
> 
> He or she wants to know how the tories are involved in the negotiations.
> 
> ...


slowly and loudly


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> This doesn't make sense, at least not in my interpretation of the argument. It's seen to be all-consuming in that the government,


But paolo, and others, aren't just arguing that it's _seen_ to be all consuming to the government, they are arguing that it _is_, and that it _should be_, all consuming. That it is an issue of such overriding importance that it takes precedence over other political concerns. And that does lead to the conclusion that people should ally with LibDems, Soubry, Blair, Verhofstadt etc in order to stop the UK leaving the EU.

EDIT: If socialists want to argue that the UK would be better remaining in the EU, or for a second referendum or even for Parliament to just reject leaving - ok I don't agree but that's life. But for gods sake make such arguments from a starting point of how such outcomes strengthen the working class, do it from the starting point that capital, the state and the EU are the enemy, do it from the starting point that we don't just go back to the same politics that, according to one poster, "just worked".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> At some point I. This
> 
> 
> We’re leaving the EU.
> ...



Answer the question. The Tories are in government. What control are they able to exercise over the Brexit process?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So who do you support in this process? Whose 'vision' of brexit do you support? Who, in the negotiations, is putting forward things that you want to happen?
> 
> If the answer is 'nobody', you have a problem, no? You support a process in which you do not support those negotiating on behalf of 'your' side: you neither support their politics broadly nor their 'vision' of brexit narrowly.
> 
> ...



Who do we support in any political process? Not the political elite on either side.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Relevant here in our micro world. Bah.
> 
> For me, I try to respect it. None of us are making policy, we’re all venting at the end of day.



No, I don't think it is - I don't know of anyone on this thread who has used the phrase Lexit in a positive way.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Answer the question. The Tories are in government. What control are they able to exercise over the Brexit process?


they had control, they relinquished it.

they could have said, ok, we'll go for efta, after all it's not the eu
they could have said, ok, we'll chat to moldova - not a big country but we need all the friends we can get
but at every step along the way they've ceded control of the process to the european union and have so alienated significant countries in the wto that a no deal brexit will plummet everything into chaos


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who do we support in any political process? Not the political elite on either side.


Exactly. The idea that we have to play the game by the terms the state or capital set us is crazy. That's how they win.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> Can anybody help spacklfrog?
> 
> He or she wants to know how the tories are involved in the negotiations.
> 
> ...



You're backsliding now. You said the Tories were controlling the process, I asked what you meant by that. Now you've shifted and you're saying the Tories are in the negotiations. 

And you're trying to be funny. Don't do that. Even your own mother wouldn't laugh at your jokes.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

paolo said:


> At some point I. This
> 
> 
> We’re leaving the EU.
> ...


Follow your own logic.  Had Remain won (led by Cameron and Osborne, remember), and the Tories had stayed in power (the next general election was not due until May 2020), would that have been a "Tory Remain"?  Would you and others have been going on about the "Tory Remain"?  And if not, why not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're backsliding now. You said the Tories were controlling the process, I asked what you meant by that. Now you've shifted and you're saying the Tories are in the negotiations.
> 
> And you're trying to be funny. Don't do that. Even your own mother wouldn't laugh at your jokes.


he's funny peculiar and not funny haha


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they had control, they relinquished it.
> 
> they could have said, ok, we'll go for efta, after all it's not the eu
> they could have said, ok, we'll chat to moldova - not a big country but we need all the friends we can get
> but at every step along the way they've ceded control of the process to the european union and have so alienated significant countries in the wto that a no deal brexit will plummet everything into chaos



Sums it up nicely. Fucking great, innit


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sums it up nicely. Fucking great, innit


the natural party of government


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the natural party of government



Strong and stable.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Strong and stable.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Follow your own logic.  Had Remain won (led by Cameron and Osborne, remember), and the Tories had stayed in power (the next general election was not due until May 2020), would that have been a "Tory Remain"?  Would you and others have been going on about the "Tory Remain"?  And if not, why not?


It was also supported by Labour, indeed they still want to remain some sort of union. Cameron would never have called a referendum were it not for pressure from within his own party.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It was also supported by Labour, indeed they still want to remain some sort of union. Cameron would never have called a referendum were it not for pressure from within his own party.


The Tories were and are in power. It would be a Tory Remain.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Follow your own logic.  Had Remain won (led by Cameron and Osborne, remember), and the Tories had stayed in power (the next general election was not due until May 2020), would that have been a "Tory Remain"?  Would you and others have been going on about the "Tory Remain"?  And if not, why not?


I can answer that for me. No. Because 'leave' is an active thing, involving concrete changes that are either damaging or not. Tory cuts, tory 'austerity', these are also active things. A left leave, an actual 'lexit', if it were happening, would receive a very different response from me.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The Tories were and are in power. It would be a Tory Remain.


And?. Brexit is going to be shit whoever is in charge. More shit with the tories.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> And?. Brexit is going to be shit whoever is in charge. More shit with the tories.


So you’d apply double standards. Fine. But at least admit that’s what you’re doing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2018)

Doubles all round


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So you’d apply double standards. Fine. But at least admit that’s what you’re doing.


The choice was between a Tory brexit and a Tory remain, (Corbyn was nowhere at that stage remember) and I choose the Tory remain. Not sure what you mean by double standards.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The Tories were and are in power. It would be a Tory Remain.


Yes it would. I'm not sure what the issue is with this?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> So you’d apply double standards. Fine. But at least admit that’s what you’re doing.


I've been of the relatively unpopular opinion on here right from the start of this debate that a tory govt in the EU is not the worst of all possible worlds. A tory govt outside the EU is even worse. I've not changed that opinion at all - events have simply strengthened it. There has been way too much crap on here that somehow if you oppose brexit in general, or this brexit in particular, or both, you're a cheerleader for the EU. That's bollocks.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A left leave, an actual 'lexit', if it were happening, would receive a very different response from me.



How could there be a "left leave" without people building support for it?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Yes it would. I'm not sure what the issue is with this?


The issue is when people insist on painting Leave as the Tory outcome. Both outcomes were Tory outcomes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How could there be a "left leave" without people building support for it?


I don't know. It isn't happening and was never going to happen. I'm talking of parallel universes here, not this one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The choice was between a Tory brexit and a Tory remain, (Corbyn was nowhere at that stage remember) and I choose the Tory remain. Not sure what you mean by double standards.


See above.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The issue is when people insist on painting Leave as the Tory outcome. Both outcomes were Tory outcomes.


Indeed. But I think this is natural description; the disruptive is attributed to its initiator more than the conservative is to its overseers. And I suspect that's not unreasonable; were there a change of government that for the sake of argument wished to bring about 'Lexit', would it be easier to carry out one's ambitions from a position of inheriting the norm or from inheriting the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Indeed. But I think this is natural description; the disruptive is attributed to its initiator more than the conservative is to its overseers. And I suspect that's not unreasonable; were there a change of government that for the sake of argument wished to bring about 'Lexit', would it be easier to carry out one's ambitions from a position of inheriting the norm or from inheriting the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage?


If I follow the clauses there correctly, you’re asking if I approve of the way the Tory government is conducting Brexit. Indeed I do not.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Indeed. But I think this is natural description; the disruptive is attributed to its initiator more than the conservative is to its overseers. And I suspect that's not unreasonable; were there a change of government that for the sake of argument wished to bring about 'Lexit', would it be easier to carry out one's ambitions from a position of inheriting the norm or from inheriting the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage?


Reminds me of the instructions of how to build a computer from scratch. First, create a universe...

A popular movement elected on a platform of policies that come into conflict with EU rules, followed by confrontation with the EU in which attempts to change those rules are defeated, followed by a referendum on leaving the EU in order to carry out those policies. That would be some form of 'lexit'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't know. It isn't happening and was never going to happen. I'm talking of parallel universes here, not this one.



Bold predictions for the future there!

Ok let's try this. It's been very obvious a referendum would happen sooner or later over EU membership for the last few years; media and politicians love to rail against the EU and people basically hate it. Additionally it's been very obvious for the last few years that the EU is not a sustainable project and cannot hold itself together. Only a simpleton could have failed to notice these facts.

From the point of view of the left then there have been two options, for years:

1) Whenever the issue comes up tell people leaving the EU would be even worse. _Polish that turd and sell it to people. Badly. _

2) Accept material reality and build support for a left wing vision of Britain outside the EU. 

Hence my point. You say you would feel differently about a left vision of Britain outside the EU. I'm saying Britain outside the EU is inevitable and therefore either the left can put forward a vision for that _or _the right will. At the moment from my perspective, you are surrendering to the right in the battle of ideas. 

When I read your posts, I see no coherence to them. But lets say I'm wrong and you're right about everything. What does it matter? You won't change anything - you're not going to stop Brexit or the break up of the EU by saying how awful it will be afterwards.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Indeed. But I think this is natural description; the disruptive is attributed to its initiator more than the conservative is to its overseers. And I suspect that's not unreasonable; were there a change of government that for the sake of argument wished to bring about 'Lexit', would it be easier to carry out one's ambitions from a position of inheriting the norm or from inheriting the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage?



the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> If I follow the clauses there correctly, you’re asking if I approve of the way the Tory government is conducting Brexit. Indeed I do not.


Not asking that, no. If there's a non-rhetorical question in there then it's whether it's better for Lexit to begin from 'Tory Remain' or 'Tory Brexit', or indeed whether it matters. Me, I suspect the answer is Tory Remain in which case Tory Brexit is the more remarkable of the pair.

But if you were to say:


SpackleFrog said:


> the Tories' particular version of Brexit wreckage


OK - why? Second guessing, I realise it might be founded entirely on their internal self-destruction but is the Brexit flavour of Tory implosion really different from the Remain one? Aren't they in similar shit as a party whichever way you slice it? If there's no good answer to that then we inevitably have to bring in all the external stuff and that suggests they're working towards some practical common good. What is it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Not asking that, no. If there's a non-rhetorical question in there then it's whether it's better for Lexit to begin from 'Tory Remain' or 'Tory Brexit', or indeed whether it matters. Me, I suspect the answer is Tory Remain in which case Tory Brexit is the more remarkable of the pair.
> 
> But if you were to say:
> OK - why? Second guessing, I realise it might be founded entirely on their internal self-destruction but is the Brexit flavour of Tory implosion really different from the Remain one? Aren't they in similar shit as a party whichever way you slice it? If there's no good answer to that then we inevitably have to bring in all the external stuff and that suggests they're working towards some practical common good. What is it?



I think the key difference is the Leave vote has completely paralysed and split the ruling class and their political representatives whereas a vote to Remain would have united them.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think the key difference is the Leave vote has completely paralysed and split the ruling class and their political representatives whereas a vote to Remain would have united them.


A remain vote would not have united the tory party. Far from it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A remain vote would not have united the tory party. Far from it.



I think you're wrong - they've been split on the issue of Europe for 20 years but they've got on with smashing us fine. Now they have to "do a Brexit" they're at each others throats.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think the key difference is the Leave vote has completely paralysed and split the ruling class and their political representatives whereas a vote to Remain would have united them.


Fair. Does it outweigh the direction & momentum that Tory Brexiteers will manage to establish before there's any chance to repurpose the situation?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Fair. Does it outweigh the direction & momentum that Tory Brexiteers will manage to establish before there's any chance to repurpose the situation?



What direction and momentum?

I refer you to my earlier questions to Paulo!


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What direction and momentum?
> 
> I refer you to my earlier questions to Paulo!


Opaque & ambiguous as it may be, everything that the present government sets in motion with regards to Brexit, and the interests it serves & enriches, both as we go and in the long term.

Some of it can be easily unpicked, some of it not so much.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Opaque & ambiguous as it may be, everything that the present government sets in motion with regards to Brexit, and the interests it serves & enriches, both as we go and in the long term.
> 
> Some of it can be easily unpicked, some of it not so much.



Such as? 

You guys must see your answers to all these questions are vague at best!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Such as?
> 
> You guys must see your answers to all these questions are vague at best!


He's been dispatched for the moment of course, but David Davis's pamphlet on brexit, produced just after the referendum as he glowed in its outcome and a major reason why he was appointed brexit minister, outlines some of the ideas. Trade deals around the world, each specifically tailored, with varying standards applied. A race to the bottom, in other words, undercutting of the EU wherever possible to gain an edge with the US, China and elsewhere. Liam Fox, who still lingers, has very similar ambitions. That is the vision of a particular faction of 'transatlantic' Tory Brexiteers, those actually ideologically wedded to the idea. Such sets of bilateral or multilateral agreements may or may not be easy to unpick.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Such as?
> 
> You guys must see your answers to all these questions are vague at best!


Well, we don't really know yet, do we - the black comedy of trying to dissect the inscrutable. We could wait for something to crystallise, probably some distance into the retrospective, or we could guess. If I had to gamble then I suspect I wouldn't go too far wrong looking at a few areas; enabling the general erosion of protections against capital, and the enrichment of specific, prepared individuals most likely acting against national interests, kind of like a modern organised equivalent of Soros shorting the pound.

It certainly is vague, but that cuts both ways.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He's been dispatched for the moment of course, but David Davis's pamphlet on brexit, produced just after the referendum as he glowed in its outcome and a major reason why he was appointed brexit minister, outlines some of the ideas. Trade deals around the world, each specifically tailored, with varying standards applied. A race to the bottom, in other words, undercutting of the EU wherever possible to gain an edge with the US, China and elsewhere. Liam Fox, who still lingers, has very similar ambitions. That is the vision of a particular faction of 'transatlantic' Tory Brexiteers, those actually ideologically wedded to the idea. Such sets of bilateral or multilateral agreements may or may not be easy to unpick.



1) His pamphlet is just fantasy land nonsense.

2) I don't know if you've noticed but I'm quite happy to have voted leave because I'm not interested in unpicking things - I'm quite happy to rip them apart - from EU treaties to trade deals.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Well, we don't really know yet, do we - the black comedy of trying to dissect the inscrutable. We could wait for something to crystallise, probably some distance into the retrospective, or we could guess. If I had to gamble then I suspect I wouldn't go too far wrong looking at a few areas; enabling the general erosion of protections against capital, and the enrichment of specific, prepared individuals most likely acting against national interests, kind of like a modern organised equivalent of Soros shorting the pound.
> 
> It certainly is vague, but that cuts both ways.



You don't really know. I don't see any great uncertainties


----------



## Humberto (Oct 28, 2018)

Who is arguing in good faith or otherwise? Since both blocs are shit I would say the onus is on 'her majesty's' lot to provide some politics. Miserable failing mediocraties that they are. Lets be honest the country is fucked if we rely on goodwill, friendship. In other words they say, lets extend this or that instead of being left out in the cold, except when a solution is never proposed, being left out in the cold is the result.

There's a complacency, that it will filter down, won't be that bad. The thing is, the only outcome of that that I can see is a 'worse off' economy. Nevertheless a more equal society with the key to their own future. More equal but less well off.

Now I know and understand this is a 'Tory Brexit', that caricature crooks like Rees-Mogg want us to get back in 'our place'. However, if we keep our politics and don't get sucked into their money making schemes we should be alright. By which I mean: a lot of things were better off economically yet somehow your venal Tory always profits. Because the upper middle class doff their bowler hats.

Which leads us to the bollocks idea that we have to go backwards. For whose benefit? BP, Tescos and banking merchants. Sorry, that is simply a case of handing your wages over to pay some unconscionable wanker. In other words the type who will wipe his shoes on your kids face if it puffs him up, puts him against you and makes him feel good.

So equality is very important.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> 1) His pamphlet is just fantasy land nonsense.
> 
> 2) I don't know if you've noticed but I'm quite happy to have voted leave because I'm not interested in unpicking things - I'm quite happy to rip them apart - from EU treaties to trade deals.


It may be fantasy land nonsense but these are the wishlists of those now in power. 

As for your point 2) that's fantasy land nonsense from someone not in power and with no prospect of achieving power. No plan. No idea of how to get from here to there. Head in the sand about the populist r/w nationalism that brexit actually represents and is enabling.  Rotten empty politics that is prepared to see other people suffer in the name of vague abstraction  and slogans. The left as useful idiots for the right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2018)

Humberto said:


> Who is arguing in good faith or otherwise? Since both blocs are shit I would say the onus is on 'her majesty's' lot to provide some politics. Miserable failing mediocraties that they are. Lets be honest the country is fucked if we rely on goodwill, friendship. In other words they say, lets extend this or that instead of being left out in the cold, except when a solution is never proposed, being left out in the cold is the result.
> 
> There's a complacency, that it will filter down, won't be that bad. The thing is, the only outcome of that that I can see is a 'worse off' economy. Nevertheless a more equal society with the key to their own future. More equal but less well off.
> 
> ...


When you say her majesty's lot do you mean her majesty's government or her majesty's loyal opposition?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> When you say her majesty's lot do you mean her majesty's government or her majesty's loyal opposition?


Or corgis (RIP)?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Or corgis (RIP)?


We should be told


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Or corgis (RIP)?


Only the dorgis left.


----------



## pocketscience (Oct 28, 2018)

There seems to be a strange assumption here that whoever is in power at the time of negotiating brexit, gets to define the course of UK economic policy forever in eternity.

and it's not like the UK couldn't have been (a Junckeresque) corporate tax haven under the tories all the while _in_ the EU.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 28, 2018)

Humberto said:


> The thing is, the only outcome of that that I can see is a 'worse off' economy. Nevertheless a more equal society with the key to their own future. More equal but less well off.


Is the plan that people become more equal because the good jobs leave these shores and we are left with shit ones?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 28, 2018)

_Shit jobs_ like what? Working in coffee shops? I thought we needed immigrants for those jobs. 

Lovely progressive politics. These _shit jobs_ just exist because that's the way it is, not because of any political choices.


----------



## Winot (Oct 28, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Is the plan that people become more equal because the good jobs leave these shores and we are left with shit ones?



Immigrants are still going to be allowed in to do the good jobs. We are keeping the shit ones for ourselves.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2018)

Two posts in a few minutes that demonstrate just how far removed or insulated from the life of shit jobs that so many millions of people are forced to lead  some remain types are. And that, in fact, this was one of the main drivers of the leave vote.


----------



## Favelado (Oct 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Two posts in a few minutes that demonstrate just how far removed or insulated from the life of shit jobs that so many millions of people are forced to lead  some remain types are. And that, in fact, this was one of the main drivers of the leave vote.



Isn't having future Tory governments free from the (admittedly fairly flimsy) restraints of EU employment law only going to make this worse?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2018)

For people like the two above? I doubt it  For those already in the shit job life? Again, I doubt it even more strongly.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 28, 2018)

Would you conversely say that a labour government free of the EU mandate restrictions on state aid and so on make life better for those in that position


----------



## Favelado (Oct 28, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Would you conversely say that a labour government free of the EU mandate restrictions on state aid and so on make life better for those in that position



I feel that every time the Tories get in they raze areas of ground that are difficult to reclaim. I'm worried that future Tory governments will be able to dismantle whatever they want. It's harder to rebuild consensus for laws (and institutions such as the NHS) than it is to attack them. If we look at post-1979 Britain, that's the direction things have moved in.

I take your point though. I know, for example, that it's the EU that stands in the way of rail nationalisation. I'm just scared of the Tories. More so than I am hopeful of the possibilities of future Labour Governments.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Oct 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> _Shit jobs_ like what? Working in coffee shops? I thought we needed immigrants for those jobs.
> 
> Lovely progressive politics. These _shit jobs_ just exist because that's the way it is, not because of any political choices.


Low productivity / low pay jobs. Of course policy plays a role. But I don't see how you fix things by making supply chains less efficient, and choking off investment (e.g. Japanese carmakers) which is predicated on our access to the Single Market. In fact it seems pretty clear that will make things worse...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 28, 2018)

Favelado said:


> I take your point though. I know, for example, that it's the EU that stands in the way of rail nationalisation. s.


The first thing that stands in the way of rail nationalisation is not having a government that wants to do it. Get that government and opinions vary as to what EU rules would or would not allow, and what could or could not be done in the name of national interest. Then there is the political angle to this quite aside from EU rules, in which countries that already have nationalised railways would find it difficult to insist on rules blocking it for the UK. The UK would not be in a powerless political position. But the whole thing is moot until you have a government that wants to do it.


----------



## Favelado (Oct 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The first thing that stands in the way of rail nationalisation is not having a government that wants to do it. Get that government and opinions vary as to what EU rules would or would not allow, and what could or could not be done in the name of national interest. Then there is the political angle to this quite aside from EU rules, in which countries that already have nationalised railways would find it difficult to insist on rules blocking it for the UK. The UK would not be in a powerless political position. But the whole thing is moot until you have a government that wants to do it.



Okay. You make a moot point. In the old British sense of the word.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 28, 2018)

I could imagine the UK actually doing OK out of trade deals post-brexit because countries that have a geopolitical opposition to the EU (Russia/the USA) and their many client states will offer favourable trade terms precisely to undermine the rump of the EU.


----------



## yield (Oct 28, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Low productivity / low pay jobs.


That isn't true. There are loads of other factors involved. Cartels & monopolies, non-compete clauses in contracts etc. Even the Economist disagrees

If wages are to rise, workers need more bargaining power 
May 31st 2018


> Stronger unions, better training and more housing in expensive cities might all help


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It may be fantasy land nonsense but these are the wishlists of those now in power.
> 
> As for your point 2) that's fantasy land nonsense from someone not in power and with no prospect of achieving power. No plan. No idea of how to get from here to there. Head in the sand about the populist r/w nationalism that brexit actually represents and is enabling.  Rotten empty politics that is prepared to see other people suffer in the name of vague abstraction  and slogans. The left as useful idiots for the right.



My entire point was your lack of plan, lack of perspective and lack of politics. 

Some of us were ready for this. We've got experience of providing practical solidarity to migrants and refugees threatened with deportation. We've got experience of fighting to defend our terms and conditions. We've got experience of fighting to defend our services. 

Nothing is gonna happen with Brexit - that's pretty clear. But it doesn't really matter because we have to do this stuff *anyway.*


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The first thing that stands in the way of rail nationalisation is not having a government that wants to do it. Get that government and opinions vary as to what EU rules would or would not allow, and what could or could not be done in the name of national interest. Then there is the political angle to this quite aside from EU rules, in which countries that already have nationalised railways would find it difficult to insist on rules blocking it for the UK. The UK would not be in a powerless political position. But the whole thing is moot until you have a government that wants to do it.



This I completely agree with. But given that what you've said is correct, why don't you focus on getting a left govt into power instead of standing on the side lines and - let's face it - whining like a child who has had their sweets taken away.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 28, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I could imagine the UK actually doing OK out of trade deals post-brexit because countries that have a geopolitical opposition to the EU (Russia/the USA) and their many client states will offer favourable trade terms precisely to undermine the rump of the EU.



That's a bit of a tricky one - with China and the US in particular the rhetoric might often be geopolitical opposition to the EU but it's not necessarily reflected in foreign policy and economic strategy. 

Might change if they think this potentially signals the end of the EU as a global economic power of course.


----------



## xarmian (Oct 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The first thing that stands in the way of rail nationalisation is not having a government that wants to do it. Get that government and opinions vary as to what EU rules would or would not allow, and what could or could not be done in the name of national interest. Then there is the political angle to this quite aside from EU rules, in which countries that already have nationalised railways would find it difficult to insist on rules blocking it for the UK. The UK would not be in a powerless political position. But the whole thing is moot until you have a government that wants to do it.


Some still have nationalised railways because the EU deadline to open up access to private competition is 2020. The Fourth Railway Package explained


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 29, 2018)

50p brexit coin anyone? make your jokes about its actual post brexit value better than the twitter ones pls

e2a no budget thread yet, this could have gone in that thread


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 29, 2018)




----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 151042 View attachment 151043


Mmmm... that bagel in the middle is making me hungry.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> 50p brexit coin anyone? make your jokes about its actual post brexit value better than the twitter ones pls
> 
> e2a no budget thread yet, this could have gone in that thread



"Friendship with all nations" on the coin. No-one quite does hypocrisy like the British state. Hundreds of years at it, the murdering thieving cunts.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 29, 2018)

Poi E said:


> "Friendship with all nations" on the coin. No-one quite does hypocrisy like the British state. Hundreds of years at it, the murdering thieving cunts.



Masters of doublethink.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 29, 2018)

Looks like they took the line from Thomas Jefferson's promise at his inauguration in 1801: "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none." 

I'm surprised they're celebrating Brexit with a quote from the author of the Declaration of Independence (from Britain)....


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2018)

you won't believe what the government did next


----------



## Poi E (Oct 29, 2018)

That coin has especially sharp edges. Great at football matches.


----------



## billbond (Oct 30, 2018)

Celebs on the turn


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 30, 2018)

billbond said:


> Celebs on the turn



I feel so sorry for the way he's been treated by the elite and I hope he can survive the crisis.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 30, 2018)

Tarrant is the key to this whole damn thing.  Why didn’t I see it before?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 30, 2018)

Is that his final answer?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 30, 2018)

billbond said:


> Celebs on the turn



"...carry on very nicely because we're British". So much bullshit in such a few words. The self-deception of identity, the self-deception of historical rectitude.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 30, 2018)

I can't make a decision until I have heard what Noel Edmunds has to say on the matter.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I can't make a decision until I have heard what Noel Edmunds has to say on the matter.


----------



## andysays (Oct 30, 2018)

Ranbay said:


>



Clearly supporting a Deal or No Deal Brexit


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> Clearly supporting a Deal or No Deal Brexit


----------



## Poi E (Oct 30, 2018)

Aw cmon, that was good.


----------



## andysays (Oct 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Aw cmon, that was good.


If a little obvious...


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 30, 2018)

I re-read it now... not awake yet.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 30, 2018)

Bet he phones the Banker before doing anything these days. Just not lloyds


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 30, 2018)

So we've got Edmonds, Reid and Tarrant all firmly leave. Any other 80s breakfast radio DJs we haven't heard from? Has anyone called Bruno Brookes or Pat Sharpe?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 30, 2018)

Pantheon of pricks on all sides. WTF did we do to deserve this shower of shits?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 30, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> So we've got Edmonds, Reid and Tarrant all firmly leave. Any other 80s breakfast radio DJs we haven't heard from? Has anyone called Bruno Brookes or Pat Sharpe?



I think most of them are either dead, in jail or keeping a low profile.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 30, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I think most of them are either dead, in jail or keeping a low profile.



I just did a quick scan of Mark Goodier's twitter account and he is definitely a Remainer.


----------



## Supine (Oct 30, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> So we've got Edmonds, Reid and Tarrant all firmly leave.



Clear evidence that we should remain


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 31, 2018)

Whagwan said:


> * Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’ *
> 
> 
> Police still not investigating Leave campaigns, citing ‘political sensitivities’


Police respond that only politicians who've even contacted them (it couldn't be to pressure them could it?)  about the files they have only recently received - despite the claims of the remain groups of politicians in the article - is... the same group of remain fanatic politicians.



> The response to this letter, from specialist crime commander Stuart Cundy, is devastating. He says the police only received the 2,000 documents relating to the case from the Electoral Commission last month and so they haven’t had nearly enough time to determine whether a criminal case can be brought against Vote Leave. What’s more, in response to the accusation of meddling, Cundy says ‘there has been no contact from any government representative’. He goes on to say that: ‘the only approach from any elected politician, political party, official or representative has been your correspondence, or similar correspondence from others seeking the MPS undertakes a wide ranging investigation into the EU referendum’.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 31, 2018)

Just read everything is fine and deal will be sorted by 21st November 

So panic over


----------



## Winot (Oct 31, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just read everything is fine and deal will be sorted by 21st November
> 
> So panic over



Later rescinded by DexEU


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 31, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> So we've got Edmonds, Reid and Tarrant all firmly leave. Any other 80s breakfast radio DJs we haven't heard from? Has anyone called Bruno Brookes or Pat Sharpe?



Dr Fox always it would be the easiest deal in history...


----------



## skyscraper101 (Oct 31, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Dr Fox always it would be the easiest deal in history...



I always forget there are two Dr Fox’s.

Neil has been suspiciously quiet on Brexit


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 1, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Looks like they took the line from Thomas Jefferson's promise at his inauguration in 1801: "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
> 
> I'm surprised they're celebrating Brexit with a quote from the author of the Declaration of Independence (from Britain)....





Yossarian said:


> Looks like they took the line from Thomas Jefferson's promise at his inauguration in 1801: "Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."
> 
> I'm surprised they're celebrating Brexit with a quote from the author of the Declaration of Independence (from Britain)....


The new 50p has echoes of the first, disastrous Brexit | Charlotte Higgins


----------



## Wolveryeti (Nov 1, 2018)

Borrowing forecast to be about £30bn/yr higher - or £580 million per week. I wonder what could have caused that


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 1, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Costas Lapavitsas: Socialism starts at home
> 
> some good points in here re: internationalism. Not sure I like the title, but have a read


Just got around to reading this, and the below immediately jumped out at me. 


> *Lapavitsas*  Do we believe in our own strength or not? Do we believe in the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society? If we don’t, we might as well pack up and go home. If the magnitude of the task scares us, there is no point talking about socialism and what the left should do. We can confront these people and defeat them – of course we can. We can oppose the EU and big business and we can defeat them. We should rely on the strength of working-class hostility towards the current regime in Britain and the current state of social affairs – which is very deep. And we can rely on the yearning of ordinary people for popular sovereignty.


Absolutely bang on target.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 1, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Borrowing forecast to be about £30bn/yr higher - or £580 million per week. I wonder what could have caused that


The throttling of demand due to the squeeze on public finances?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Nov 1, 2018)

Arron Banks, Leave.eu’s money man, now under Police investigation - his first blustering response is to try to muddy the waters and indulge in some anti-Semitic dog whistling about Soros:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/01


----------



## billbond (Nov 1, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Arron Banks, Leave.eu’s money man, now under Police investigation - his first blustering response is to try to muddy the waters and indulge in some anti-Semitic dog whistling about Soros:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/01



More desperate tactics from the  elite and remainers
Cameron's 9mill and Soros (cough)  - sweep under carpet/ignore
Guardian link Yuck, no thanks


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2018)

billbond said:


> More desperate tactics from the  elite and remainers
> Cameron's 9mill and Soros (cough)  - sweep under carpet/ignore
> Guardian link Yuck, no thanks


from the few surviving elite and remainers, you mean. please tell me more about the deaths of the great majority of remainers since june 2016. this silent slaughter should be revealed and not swept under the carpet


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Arron Banks, Leave.eu’s money man, now under Police investigation - his first blustering response is to try to muddy the waters and indulge in some anti-Semitic dog whistling about Soros:
> https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2018/nov/01



What's anti-Semitic about Banks' statement


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What's anti-Semitic about Banks' statement


it's *dog whistling*


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> What's anti-Semitic about Banks' statement


think this is what he's getting at


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> think this is what he's getting at
> View attachment 151394



Is mentioning the name of a Jewish person anti-Semitic now? 

Jesus. 

Oh shit, that's just made me worse than Corbyn!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is mentioning the name of a Jewish person anti-Semitic now?
> 
> Jesus.
> 
> Oh shit, that's just made me worse than Corbyn!


he's far to the right of auld 'red' jim callaghan


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is mentioning the name of a Jewish person anti-Semitic now?
> 
> Jesus.
> 
> Oh shit, that's just made me worse than Corbyn!



George Soros as the figurehead of a liberal conspiracy to undermine democracy is a well known conspiraloon/alt right trope. It's a modern version of the classic jews running the world conspiracy.


----------



## billbond (Nov 1, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> George Soros as the figurehead of a liberal conspiracy to undermine democracy is a well known conspiraloon/alt right trope. It's a modern version of the classic jews running the world conspiracy.



Who decides if its true thou or a conspiracy
That is the question


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 1, 2018)

billbond said:


> Who decides if its true thou or a conspiracy
> That is the question



I'm sick of this. Can we have this fucker banned please? At this point he is actively defending anti semetic conspiraloonery


----------



## billbond (Nov 1, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm sick of this. Can we have this fucker banned please? At this point he is actively defending anti semetic conspiraloonery



No im not dont be silly
Why not you for accusing me of this, and it was directed at soros, nothing in ref to Jews
Dont put words in my mouth


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 1, 2018)

billbond said:


> No im not dont be silly
> Why not you for accusing me of this, and it was directed at soros, nothing in ref to Jews
> Dont put words in my mouth



Couldn't put words in your mouth if I wanted to, what with all the shit spouting from it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 1, 2018)

billbond said:


> No im not dont be silly
> Why not you for accusing me of this, and it was directed at soros, nothing in ref to Jews
> Dont put words in my mouth



You know what you said. Fuck off. 

And stop liking my posts - they're nothing to do with you or your dodgy racist views.


----------



## andysays (Nov 1, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is mentioning the name of a Jewish person anti-Semitic now?
> 
> Jesus.
> 
> Oh shit, that's just made me worse than Corbyn!


It's not just mentioning his name, it's also pointing out that he's a foreign national, although as potential antisemitic dog whistling this example, in isolation,  seems relatively mild.

Arron Banks is still a cunt though...


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 1, 2018)

''Soros'' is conspiraloon-code for Jooz though. Even when it's a mention of _the actual individual_ commonly known as George Soros and what _he personally_ did.

EtA, Banks posted this last week so who knows what games he's playing. I think this is being called ''muddying the waters''.



EtA, nuff edits now.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 1, 2018)

pseudonarcissus said:


> The new 50p has echoes of the first, disastrous Brexit | Charlotte Higgins



This is an excellent read -- purely from a historical POV


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 1, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> This is an excellent read -- purely from a historical POV



Yeah. Britain leaves the empire, empire gets the raging hump about it, empire collapses soon after


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 1, 2018)

You failed to mention the subsequent rejoining-the-not-yet-collapsed-empire-again  bit though 

Historians know how to notice both sides of a story  

Not being 100% serious here ....


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 2, 2018)

"Britain leaves empire, rejoins empire after 10 years, and remains a part of corrupt, collapsing empire for another 130 years" doesn't sound like too unlikely an outcome to the current state of affairs...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 2, 2018)

Daily mail claiming that Mayhem had refused security services request to investigate Aaron banks.

This would not surprise me. ETA in the run up to the vote


----------



## Poi E (Nov 2, 2018)

Britain consumed by other empires.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 2, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> "Britain leaves empire, rejoins empire after 10 years, and remains a part of corrupt, collapsing empire for another 130 years" doesn't sound like too unlikely an outcome to the current state of affairs...


There aren't another 130 years of states as we know them


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 2, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is mentioning the name of a Jewish person anti-Semitic now?
> 
> Jesus.
> 
> Oh shit, that's just made me worse than Corbyn!



In the context of British politics, where billionaires from all around the globe do this but only the liberal Jew gets the finger pointed at them, yes. Clearly. And Soros's name specicially has been shorthand for Evil Socialist Jews Conspiring Against The White Race for years among the far right in Hungary and the US. Anyone who cites him as a particular malign influence is dipping into anti-semitic tin foil hat territory.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> There aren't another 130 years of states as we know them



I see that your crystal ball is in better working order than mine. What's your secret?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> I see that your crystal ball is in better working order than mine. What's your secret?


Like many creatures states as we know them are not able to evolve as rapidly as they need to to survive climate change


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Like many creatures states as we know them are not able to evolve as rapidly as they need to to survive climate change



How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.


That's OK then, business as usual.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> That's OK then, business as usual.



Those aren't the only possibilities, and you should know that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2018)

one of the causes of the fall of rome was climate change. Not a nation state in the modern way tho.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.


the migrant crisis of a couple of years ago is likely to be as nothing to the movement of people in the future, as people in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia - and East Asia - all try to find somewhere to live. Not to mention the threats to food supplies, both natural like crop failure, or caused by capitalists making a quick buck like the widespread food riots in North Africa a decade ago, or ug99 reaching the rice of China and India. We are on the cusp of an age of catastrophe which will make the seventeenth century age of crisis ably described by geoffrey parker look like a tea party.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 3, 2018)

Worrying piece about experiences of EU citizens in the UK right now - people already being denied jobs and accommodation -  C&Ping as some people cant see NS articles


> This week has been a perfect demonstration of what it’s like for EU citizens to live in the UK.
> 
> A few months before the big Brexit bang on 29 March 2019, while they are still waiting to apply to the British government’s “settled status” (the app for which still doesn’t fully work on Apple devices, meaning more than half the UK’s adult population can’t use it on their phone), EU nationals have once again been misled about their future in the country.
> 
> ...


----------



## yield (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.


Not modern states and their collapse can't be directly linked to climate change but there are lost civilisations. The Anasazi in America, Vikings in Greenland, the Khmer at Angkor Wat, the Mayans and the Mesopotamians I'm sure there's more.



DotCommunist said:


> one of the causes of the fall of rome was climate change. Not a nation state in the modern way tho.


Lasted till 1453. And the Ottomans thought they were the heirs of Rome



Pickman's model said:


> the migrant crisis of a couple of years ago is likely to be as nothing to the movement of people in the future, as people in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia - and East Asia - all try to find somewhere to live. Not to mention the threats to food supplies, both natural like crop failure, or caused by capitalists making a quick buck like the widespread food riots in North Africa a decade ago, or ug99 reaching the rice of China and India. We are on the cusp of an age of catastrophe which will make the seventeenth century age of crisis ably described by geoffrey parker look like a tea party.


Ug99 is wheat stem rust. Otherwise horribly right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2018)

yield said:


> Ug99 is wheat stem rust. Otherwise horribly right.


Yeh, I know. But if it mutates?


----------



## isvicthere? (Nov 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the migrant crisis of a couple of years ago is likely to be as nothing to the movement of people in the future, as people in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia - and East Asia - all try to find somewhere to live. Not to mention the threats to food supplies, both natural like crop failure, or caused by capitalists making a quick buck like the widespread food riots in North Africa a decade ago, or ug99 reaching the rice of China and India. We are on the cusp of an age of catastrophe which will make the seventeenth century age of crisis ably described by geoffrey parker look like a tea party.



It's already being described in some quarters as the long emergency.


----------



## paolo (Nov 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How could there be a "left leave" without people building support for it?



Majority in all Labour seats back second referendum, study says


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 3, 2018)

paolo said:


> Majority in all Labour seats back second referendum, study says


Labour's not really all that far to the left


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 3, 2018)

paolo said:


> Majority in all Labour seats back second referendum, study says


Thanks for the link to people not wanting something to happen not  wanting that something to happen.


----------



## agricola (Nov 3, 2018)

Apparently the deal is that we will be staying in the customs union after all.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 3, 2018)

lots of pressure at high levels from the city for ersatz passporting i hear- like serious pressure- FCA have come down to regulatory equivalence regime as a minimum. BoE are not taking a position on hard fallout too seriously( but are working on scenarios for good order). it a bit of a mess isnt it ?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.



Some argue that drought caused by climate change was what finally pushed Syria over the edge.

Climate Change Hastened Syria's Civil War


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 3, 2018)

Jared Diamond has been on this for years- it is fascinating , if grim, reading


----------



## agricola (Nov 3, 2018)

NoXion said:


> How many states have fallen due to climate change? None to my recollection.



Historically?  Loads.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 3, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Some argue that drought caused by climate change was what finally pushed Syria over the edge.
> 
> Climate Change Hastened Syria's Civil War



It's the sort of thing we'll see more of.

Front page headline: "Millions flee war in [equatorial country]"
Go a year or two back, and inside the newpaper: "Food riots threaten to topple regime in [equatorial country]"
Back again and relegated to a 1 paragraph sidebar: "Record heatwave devastates wheat harvest in [equatorial country]"


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 3, 2018)

agricola said:


> Apparently the deal is that we will be staying in the customs union after all.


Thing is weren’t really asked whether or not we wanted a  customs union/EFTA etc so it would be interesting to know who the endless, endless facepalming is actually aimed at *cheesy grin* everytime the suggestion of staying in the single market/customs union is even floated. 
And if people are arguing a vote to leave the EU MUST INVOLVE leaving the single market and that then maybe it’s not us that needs to brush up on key facts. How do you spell Norway?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 3, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Worrying piece about experiences of EU citizens in the UK right now - people already being denied jobs and accommodation -  C&Ping as some people cant see NS articles


Case in point- a pro immigrant movement can’t possibly be centered around staying in the EU. And yet....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 4, 2018)

paolo said:


> Majority in all Labour seats back second referendum, study says



Does this answer my question?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the migrant crisis of a couple of years ago is likely to be as nothing to the movement of people in the future, as people in Africa, the Middle East, South Asia - and East Asia - all try to find somewhere to live. Not to mention the threats to food supplies, both natural like crop failure, or caused by capitalists making a quick buck like the widespread food riots in North Africa a decade ago, or ug99 reaching the rice of China and India. We are on the cusp of an age of catastrophe which will make the seventeenth century age of crisis ably described by geoffrey parker look like a tea party.




Apart from all that, world prospects are still looking pretty peachy


----------



## paolo (Nov 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Does this answer my question?



Your question was a presupposition:

“How could there be a "left leave" without people building support for it?”

It’s akin (I know I’m pushing this a tad)... to “when did you stop beating your wife”

There are definitely people on the left who are pro Brexit. That’s without doubt.

Are they broadly represantive of the left, right now?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> Your question was a presupposition:
> 
> “How could there be a "left leave" without people building support for it?”
> 
> ...



No...no its not akin to that.

I don't think you understood what I said. 

I was saying that in order for a more left/progressive/socialist Britain to be built outside of the EU, a movement will need to be built that is committed to doing that. 

Whether people on the left who voted to Leave are representative of the left depends on what you mean by the left. If by left you mean Guardian reading liberals, then probably not. But if that's what you mean by the left then I don't think it's a very useful concept.


----------



## paolo (Nov 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I was saying that in order for a more left/progressive/socialist Britain to be built outside of the EU, a movement will need to be built that is committed to doing that.



I can’t argue with that, at all. But it sounds hypothetical.

Is there any appetite?

(To be fair, there was little appetite to reject the leave verdict a few years ago. Stuff changes.)


----------



## Riklet (Nov 5, 2018)

Saint Tony Blair has waded in now.

I look forward to his misrable tears as the people's vote miserably fails.


----------



## andysays (Nov 5, 2018)

News this morning that 1400 'top lawyers', including Baroness Kennedy no less, are calling in an open letter for ANOTHER referendum on Brexit.

This comes after the previous open letter from 70 business leaders, who argue that their interests, whoops, I mean the NATIONAL interest, would be damaged by a hard Brexit and so the people must be given another chance to make the correct decision.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Saint Tony Blair has waded in now.
> 
> I look forward to his misrable tears as the people's vote miserably fails.


The scales will fall from his eyes and his throwing his weight behind a hard brexit will lead to the result he desires


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Saint Tony Blair has waded in now.
> 
> I look forward to his miserable tears as the people's vote miserably fails.



Blair has this phenomenal ability to not understand  the words "FUCK OFF!"


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Saint Tony Blair has waded in now.



That story was in The Observer yesterday. He was arguing that Labour MPs should in no circumstances back any 'deal' May manages to bring back. That's more or less going to be Starmer's policy anyway, but I was quite surprised, I'd have guessed Blair would urge MPs to back some sort of deal in preference to no deal. He's telling Labour MPs not to back the Government. That's you told, Chukka  

Far less surprisingly though, he also wants a second referendum.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Blair has this phenomenal ability to not understand  the words "FUCK OFF!"



To be clear though, I also completely agree with this comment!
*
Any* intervention he makes is interference, and even remainers (if they have any sense) will see it as counterproductive.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> That story was in The Observer yesterday. He was arguing that Labour MPs should in no circumstances back any 'deal' May manages to bring back. That's more or less going to be Starmer's policy anyway, but I was quite surprised, I'd have guessed Blair would urge MPs to back some sort of deal in preference to no deal. He's telling Labour MPs not to back the Government. That's you told, Chukka
> 
> Far less surprisingly though, he also wants a second referendum.



that cos the route to a second ref is through parliament rejecting may's deal. Has chuka indicated he would back the government? I think May is hoping to get some labour remainers to back her by making out its "this deal or crashing out" - but my understanding is that everyone knows this is bollocks. 
Parliament will vote to suspend A50 before allowing a crash out - and nobody bar the most loony brexiteers will want them to do anything else.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> To clear though, I also completely agree with this comment!
> *
> Any* intervention he makes is interference, and even remainers (if they have any sense) will see it as counterproductive.


I am writing to him to tell him the only way to achieve his goal is to campaign with might and main for a johnsonian brexit


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 5, 2018)

> "Anthony Lynton Blair back in the frontline of British politics imagining, I think, that he is as popular as he was back in 1997. He needs to get a proper reality check. He is not particularly popular and I, personally, don’t think he contributes anything to the Remain campaign at all.” When asked if he could give one key message to Mr Blair, he said: “Stay in retirement."



Tony Blair is so crap he's actually made me agree with things Nigel Farage is saying.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> I can’t argue with that, at all. But it sounds hypothetical.
> 
> Is there any appetite?
> 
> (To be fair, there was little appetite to reject the leave verdict a few years ago. Stuff changes.)



Absolutely there is an appetite - that's what RMT, Aslef, Bakers Union, PCS, Socialist Party and others are trying to do. Even my own union UCU for the most part hasn't taken a position on Brexit itself but is taking a position on what happens after re migration, workers rights and education sector. What I'm saying is, are you gonna help us?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Tony Blair is so crap he's actually made me agree with things Nigel Farage is saying.



It's impressive isn't it?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 5, 2018)

Unfortunately, Blair is smarter and most astute  than most of the present cabinet combined. He is still a detestable fucker though


----------



## andysays (Nov 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> that cos the route to a second ref is through parliament rejecting may's deal. Has chuka indicated he would back the government? I think May is hoping to get some labour remainers to back her by making out its "this deal or crashing out" - but my understanding is that everyone knows this is bollocks.
> Parliament will vote to suspend A50 before allowing a crash out - and nobody bar the most loony brexiteers will want them to do anything else.


How do you think parliament voting to suspend A50 would go down with the 17 million plus who voted to Leave?

(Asking for a loony brexiteer friend)


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> News this morning that 1400 'top lawyers', including Baroness Kennedy no less, are calling in an open letter for ANOTHER referendum on Brexit.


a peoples vote, as requested by people with peerages and mansions


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> How do you think parliament voting to suspend A50 would go down with the 17 million plus who voted to Leave?
> 
> (Asking for a loony brexiteer friend)



Cival War, AK47s etc,,... going by people on facecbook


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> How do you think parliament voting to suspend A50 would go down with the 17 million plus who voted to Leave?
> 
> (Asking for a loony brexiteer friend)


I don't get it why people trot out this 17 million figure all the time. In a country with 65 million people in it, that's not really such an impressive figure. And did these 17 million (about a third of adults in Britain) all tick a box to say that they wanted brexit to happen _whatever the consequences_, and that they wanted this referendum's result to override all and any other democratic process or judgement in perpetuity? No, they didn't.


----------



## andysays (Nov 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't get it...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> .


So you don't really have an answer. You're just parrotting what you have been hearing from politicians on the telly, the front pages of the Mail and the Express and the Sun and the Times, constantly banging on about how angry _17 million people_ will be. As if that were some killer point. It's not. 16 million people expressed the opposite view and about another 17 million expressed no view at all. It's a really poor rhetorical device.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Cival War, AK47s etc,,... going by people on facecbook


Hope springs eternal


----------



## andysays (Nov 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So you don't really have an answer. You're just parrotting what you have been hearing from politicians on the telly, the front pages of the Mail and the Express and the Sun and the Times, constantly banging on about how angry _17 million people_ will be. As if that were some killer point. It's not. 16 million people expressed the opposite view and about another 17 million expressed no view at all. It's a really poor rhetorical device.


It was a genuine question, a question which you made no attempt to actually address.

You can have another go if you want though - what do you think would be the reaction if, after a hypothetical referendum in which there was a clear result, however close, which the government then pledged to honour, and followed a process which at least appeared to be intending to honour the result, parliament then voted at the eleventh hour to abandon that process?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> It was a question, a q


Never mind lbj, he likes his little froth


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Nov 5, 2018)

Torygraph now reporting that Raab might resign over Irish backdrop issue. Happy days....


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)

At this rate, everyone will have a go at the job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> At this rate, everyone will have a go at the job.


have you received the letter from theresa may offering you the post and a peerage, if you'll take the post?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> have you received the letter from theresa may offering you the post and a peerage, if you'll take the post?



yes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 5, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Torygraph now reporting that Raab might resign over Irish backdrop issue. Happy days....







> Dominic Raab has denied speculation that he might resign in protest if there is no time limit or satisfactory exit clause on the Irish backstop.
> 
> Brexit latest: Dominic Raab insists he will not quit in Irish backstop battle - live updates



Published at 1.13pm.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> How do you think parliament voting to suspend A50 would go down with the 17 million plus who voted to Leave?
> 
> (Asking for a loony brexiteer friend)


I'd say a grudging acceptance that it wasn't a good idea anyway before turning on the people that had sold it to them.


----------



## Winot (Nov 5, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I'd say a grudging acceptance that it wasn't a good idea anyway before turning on the people that had sold it to them.



I doubt the anger will be reserved for the Brexiteers. There will be a continuation in anger with the political class generally, a continuation of cynicism about politics in general, and an increased propensity to vote (if they vote at all) for populists with easy answers.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 5, 2018)

andysays said:


> How do you think parliament voting to suspend A50 would go down with the 17 million plus who voted to Leave?
> 
> (Asking for a loony brexiteer friend)



yes - its a good question. But i suspect that most people will accept that the UK crashing out from the EU on march 29th will be so damaging they will accept that it cant be allowed to happen - i cant see anyone other then the most loony brexiteers pushing for it.  
Imagine a situation where the pound and the FTSE are tanking, pretty much every media outlet and senior person in business, politics, policy, the trade union movement, the entire public sector etc etc bar  screaming "NO!", where every day big companies are talking about disinvesting and you have people panic buying food and fuel, plus people taking to the streets in huge numbers.   
Rather than arguing "yes - lets jump!" most of the brexiteers will instead turn their fire on the government for fucking it up so comprehensively.  
Of course there will be then lots of "stab in the back" narratives afterwards and attempt to re-write history - but that's probably dependant on what happens afterwards - 2nd ref (and whatever the result of that is) , general election with a another deal agreed etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Saint Tony Blair has waded in now.
> 
> I look forward to his misrable tears as the people's vote miserably fails.


those miserable tears will be as nothing to the deluge which will flood from his eyes when he discovers he will end his life toiling on the thatcher peninsula alongside nigel farage and boris de pfeffel johnson


----------



## likesfish (Nov 5, 2018)

a cruel and unusual punishment I approve.

I think a lot of people who voted for Brexit are happy for the UK to crash out being poor and or old their used to being in the shit its not like they think the EU did anything for them even if they were Cornish or Welsh who got a lot of cash from the EU


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 5, 2018)

likesfish said:


> a cruel and unusual punishment I approve.
> 
> I think a lot of people who voted for Brexit are happy for the UK to crash out being poor and or old their used to being in the shit its not like they think the EU did anything for them even if they were Cornish or Welsh who got a lot of cash from the EU


In addition to the hard-core nationalist vote who seem determined to do a brexit next year whatever the circumstances out of principle, there is a sizeable chunk of people who voted for Brexit who are older and own their own homes or are in secure-tenancy housing. They're either nearly or already retired, and in the short term they're unlikely to see much of an effect from any kind of brexit. In the medium term, they would be hit by rising inflation but not much else. In the long term, they're dead. It is notable that there appears to be a strong pattern in the vote that people with less at stake tended to vote leave, and they're still the people less likely to be bothered by negative consequences. Where those people feel they've been shat on so have nothing to lose, I have sympathy. Where they feel secure in their own situations so have nothing to lose, I don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In addition to the hard-core nationalist vote who seem determined to do a brexit next year whatever the circumstances out of principle, there is a sizeable chunk of people who voted for Brexit who are older and own their own homes or are in secure-tenancy housing. They're either nearly or already retired, and in the short term they're unlikely to see much of an effect from any kind of brexit. In the medium term, they would be hit by rising inflation but not much else. In the long term, they're dead. It is notable that there appears to be a strong pattern in the vote that people with less at stake tended to vote leave, and they're still the people less likely to be bothered by negative consequences. Where those people feel they've been shat on so have nothing to lose, I have sympathy. Where they feel secure in their own situations so have nothing to lose, I don't.


in the long term we're all dead

in the short term, if we go out without a deal, i think it's fair to say everyone will notice through immediately higher prices, the country going into recession, a dearth of care workers etc.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In addition to the hard-core nationalist vote who seem determined to do a brexit next year whatever the circumstances out of principle, there is a sizeable chunk of people who voted for Brexit who are older and own their own homes or are in secure-tenancy housing. They're either nearly or already retired, and in the short term they're unlikely to see much of an effect from any kind of brexit. In the medium term, they would be hit by rising inflation but not much else. In the long term, they're dead. It is notable that there appears to be a strong pattern in the vote that people with less at stake tended to vote leave, and they're still the people less likely to be bothered by negative consequences. Where those people feel they've been shat on so have nothing to lose, I have sympathy. Where they feel secure in their own situations so have nothing to lose, I don't.



wine will go up.....


----------



## Winot (Nov 5, 2018)

Some confusing results in this poll.




			
				The poll said:
			
		

> the public is so set against “no deal” it would prefer to remain in the EU than leave without a divorce agreement. By 53 percent to 47 percent, voters say they would prefer Britain stayed in the EU than leave without a deal.






			
				The poll also said:
			
		

> When asked whether they would prefer to be in control of immigration or keep close economic ties with Europe, immigration wins by 60 percent to 40 percent.
> 
> Some 65 percent of voters value “more flexibility” for the U.K. to set its own laws and regulations over 35 percent who prefer “more investment and trade with the European Union.”
> 
> Even starker, British voters would prefer (by 59 percent to 41 percent) to have the power to strike independent trade deals even if doing so means a hard border in Ireland


----------



## Winot (Nov 5, 2018)

I suppose that's pretty much in line with HMG's position - we want to do a deal but at the same time we want to leave the SM and the CU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> wine will go up.....


whine's been on the up since the spring of 2016


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> whine's been on the up since the spring of 2016



Red white and Blue Whine?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Red white and Blue Whine?


all sorts of whine


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 5, 2018)

My local Tesco hasn't stocked drinkable French wine for yonks now, and Aldi's range has shrunk considerably.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In addition to the hard-core nationalist vote who seem determined to do a brexit next year whatever the circumstances out of principle, there is a sizeable chunk of people who voted for Brexit who are older and own their own homes or are in secure-tenancy housing. They're either nearly or already retired, and in the short term they're unlikely to see much of an effect from any kind of brexit. In the medium term, they would be hit by rising inflation but not much else. In the long term, they're dead. It is notable that there appears to be a strong pattern in the vote that people with less at stake tended to vote leave, and they're still the people less likely to be bothered by negative consequences. Where those people feel they've been shat on so have nothing to lose, I have sympathy. *Where they feel secure in their own situations so have nothing to lose, I don't.*


errr, aint that what all democratic votes are for?
The remainers using the "threat to their secure situation" as a justification for a 2nd ref get a free pass, do they? Why does it apply to one group and not the other


----------



## brogdale (Nov 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> whine's been on the up since the spring of 2016



Sure has


----------



## Riklet (Nov 5, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> My local Tesco hasn't stocked drinkable French wine for yonks now, and Aldi's range has shrunk considerably.



 That's bullshit (I am not denying this might become true in the medium term, however).  Supermarket wine is about as good as it's ever been in the UK.  Unless you've been to 5 different stores it's hardly a fair comparison either.

Go for the Tesco finest own brand ones, anything over 6-7 quid is generally going to be decent. Especially cotes du rhone, languedoc, baujelais, pais d'oc.... and Finest Médoc is a very good bordeaux too for 8 quid.  All the wine stuff happens 1 year behind current  events anyway, the contracts and deals were already agreed last year.  What is affecting wine perhaps now is not Brexit, exactly, but the currency fluctuations between GBP/Euro.  And while some will maintain this is purely to do with Brexit.... clearly there are plenty of other reasons the UK's currency might not be turning heads as much as 10 years ago.  The sheer volume of wine still being shipped to Britain from the EU is absolutely enormous, in any case, and I don't see that changing drastically quite yet.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 6, 2018)

Give up drinking and confound the fuckers.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 6, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Unfortunately, Blair is smarter and most astute  than most of the present cabinet combined. He is still a detestable fucker though



I would say there are numerous U75 posters who could comfortably outsmart the entire cabinet tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I would say there are numerous U75 posters who could comfortably outsmart the entire cabinet tbh.


it is hard to think of anyone not in paid politics, in fact, who could not outsmart the entire cabinet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2018)

Riklet said:


> That's bullshit (I am not denying this might become true in the medium term, however).  Supermarket wine is about as good as it's ever been in the UK.  Unless you've been to 5 different stores it's hardly a fair comparison either.
> 
> Go for the Tesco finest own brand ones, anything over 6-7 quid is generally going to be decent. Especially cotes du rhone, languedoc, baujelais, pais d'oc.... and Finest Médoc is a very good bordeaux too for 8 quid.  All the wine stuff happens 1 year behind current  events anyway, the contracts and deals were already agreed last year.  What is affecting wine perhaps now is not Brexit, exactly, but the currency fluctuations between GBP/Euro.  And while some will maintain this is purely to do with Brexit.... clearly there are plenty of other reasons the UK's currency might not be turning heads as much as 10 years ago.  The sheer volume of wine still being shipped to Britain from the EU is absolutely enormous, in any case, and I don't see that changing drastically quite yet.


i wouldn't buy wine from tescos if it was the last offie in the uk


----------



## paolo (Nov 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> a peoples vote, as requested by people with peerages and mansions



What would be undecromatic about getting people to vote?

If they feel the same way, same outcome, double confirmation - job done, end of.


----------



## paolo (Nov 7, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Sure has
> 
> View attachment 151773



Lib Dem’s are invisible and irrelevant. The idea this all about them is moronic. Nobody gives a shit about them.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 7, 2018)

paolo said:


> What would be undecromatic about getting people to vote?
> 
> If they feel the same way, same outcome, double confirmation - job done, end of.


one of the reasons the EU is often criticized from the left is for its democratic deficit so to see its chief supporters in the uk asking for a re-run to get a result they are happier with, well, you can see how it looks can't you.

that said I do understand the reasons another vote seems completely correct from the other side. The leave campaign(s) were shady. The full threat of a dry bumming from the EU hadn't been made quite as plain as it is being made now. etc.

But thats it, the hope of remain getting a win on a second reff is the idea that people will have been cowed into acquiescence on the grounds that leaving the EU is to terrible a cost. Remain_ or else.
_
At this point tho I just don't think a second vote is coming. Well, not before March anyway, after that who can say.


----------



## paolo (Nov 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> one of the reasons the EU is often criticized from the left is for its democratic deficit so to see its chief supporters in the uk asking for a re-run to get a result they are happier with, well, you can see how it looks can't you.
> 
> that said I do understand the reasons another vote seems completely correct from the other side. The leave campaign(s) were shady. The full threat of a dry bumming from the EU hadn't been made quite as plain as it is being made now. etc.
> 
> ...



I don't think a second vote is coming either.

The numbers have drifted a little towards remain, but it's tiny points.

I'd argue that it's not asking the same question again (we know more now)  but the case for doing it - in terms of people asking - isn't compelling (yet, and indeed may never be).

If you accept that the chances of a second referendum are thin (most seem to) then there's no being cowed. It's going to run it's course.

We don't know what people's rights will be - being able to live and work in each other's countries. The original Brexit promise was that would be stopped. I hope that part fails.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 7, 2018)

England just declaring independence and sorting all this bullshit out would be a fresh start.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 7, 2018)

paolo said:


> Lib Dem’s are invisible and irrelevant. The idea this all about them is moronic. Nobody gives a shit about them.


You have a point.
This pic was, of course, intended to lighten proceedings, but may reflect my own personal circumstances that diverge from the generality you describe. (I'm one of the few Urbz who have the misfortune of living in a LD controlled LA and in a constituency with a LD MP...and not any LD MP but the high priest of the remainians himself; Tom Brake).


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

brogdale said:


> You have a point.
> This pic was, of course, intended to lighten proceedings, but may reflect my own personal circumstances that diverge from the generality you describe. (I'm one of the few Urbz who have the misfortune of living in a LD controlled LA and in a constituency with a LD MP...and not any LD MP but the high priest of the remainians himself; Tom Brake).


Have a pity like


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

Poi E said:


> England just declaring independence and sorting all this bullshit out would be a fresh start.


A whole new clusterfuck


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> one of the reasons the EU is often criticized from the left is for its democratic deficit so to see its chief supporters in the uk asking for a re-run to get a result they are happier with, well, you can see how it looks can't you.
> 
> that said I do understand the reasons another vote seems completely correct from the other side. The leave campaign(s) were shady. The full threat of a dry bumming from the EU hadn't been made quite as plain as it is being made now. etc.
> 
> ...


Referenda take six months in this country so that little way out is off the cards. Plus there is no guarantee the remainers would win. It would be to me no surprise if come march may addresses the nation to say that having peered over the cliff into the abyss of no deal, in the national interest the UK will remain in the eu since there is now no more time for negotiations and she will not utterly tank the economy for a difference of four percentage points


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> A whole new clusterfuck



At least all those 'Take Back Control' signs could be recycled.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> A whole new clusterfuck



There'll be those who say that little old England is too poor and too stupid to make it on its own, but just ignore the Unionists.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> one of the reasons the EU is often criticized from the left is for its democratic deficit so to see its chief supporters in the uk asking for a re-run to get a result they are happier with, well, you can see how it looks can't you.
> 
> that said I do understand the reasons another vote seems completely correct from the other side. The leave campaign(s) were shady. The full threat of a dry bumming from the EU hadn't been made quite as plain as it is being made now. etc.
> 
> ...


In addition, although I have absolutely no objection in principle to a referendum on a supplementary question (specifically in this case, on a choice between ‘accept the eventual deal’ on the table or ‘reject the deal’ [resulting in a no deal Brexit]), I don’t think the campaign to have a second referendum is being run with that as its honest objective.  I therefore am sceptical to the point of opposing a second referendum.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

Any plausible brexit deal that may manages to cobble together and get accepted by the EU will clearly offer no benefits whatsoever over the UK's previous position - and in many ways will be worse. 
The other option is crashing out with no deal - which would be very damaging all round.
As this becomes clear i think the whatever moral/democratic mandate that the referendum had will be put under severe stress. Because nobody - bar a handful of brexit headbangers who want to jump off a cliff edge - want either of those options.
I still think that a 2nd ref is where we will end up within a year - via all sorts of meltdowns and breakdowns and constitutional crises.


----------



## gosub (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Any plausible brexit deal that may manages to cobble together and get accepted by the EU will clearly offer no benefits whatsoever over the UK's previous position - and in many ways will be worse.
> The other option is crashing out with no deal - which would be very damaging all round.
> As this becomes clear i think the whatever moral/democratic mandate that the referendum had will be put under severe stress. Because nobody - bar a handful of brexit headbangers who want to jump off a cliff edge - want either of those options.
> I still think that a 2nd ref is where we will end up within a year - via all sorts of meltdowns and breakdowns and constitutional crises.



I suggest the the odds of you being wrong are roughly 52/48


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Any plausible brexit deal that may manages to cobble together and get accepted by the EU will clearly offer no benefits whatsoever over the UK's previous position - and in many ways will be worse.
> The other option is crashing out with no deal - which would be very damaging all round.
> As this becomes clear i think the whatever moral/democratic mandate that the referendum had will be put under severe stress. Because nobody - bar a handful of brexit headbangers who want to jump off a cliff edge - want either of those options.
> I still think that a 2nd ref is where we will end up within a year - via all sorts of meltdowns and breakdowns and constitutional crises.



To get to a position where a second ref is on the cards would need a revocation or extension of Art. 50. 

Could either of those happen without the Government falling?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 7, 2018)

So there was a woman on the TV rolling her eyes at Farage but it turns out she voted leave...

that's all i know this week.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

Winot said:


> To get to a position where a second ref is on the cards would need a revocation or extension of Art. 50.
> 
> Could either of those happen without the Government falling?



no. but the government will fall before parliament allows the uk to crash out. 

this is why may is trying the make the choice between "no deal crash out" or "my shitty deal" . but its a bluff and everyone knows it. fun times ahead.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> In addition, although I have absolutely no objection in principle to a referendum on a supplementary question (specifically in this case, on a choice between ‘accept the eventual deal’ on the table or ‘reject the deal’ [resulting in a no deal Brexit]), I don’t think the campaign to have a second referendum is being run with that as its honest objective.  I therefore am sceptical to the point of opposing a second referendum.


You are right of course that the main motivation of calls for a 2nd ref is to stop brexit.

I'm not so sure we are particularly obliged to adopt a position either way tbh. I didn't support the first referendum. The decision to hold one was nothing to do with me, and right from the start I questioned the idea of a govt calling for a vote on a change that it and the opposition party both formally opposed.

I don't really agree with your first bit, though. Why would the 2nd ref only be for a supplementary question. If you reject the deal, why should 'no deal' brexit be the only alternative on offer. The logic of offering 'remain' would be that the first vote didn't offer a specific idea of what brexit would look like. Now we have a specific brexit to offer - this is what it means - is that what you want? If not, 'scrap the idea' is a logical thing to offer as an alternative.


----------



## Winot (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> no. but the government will fall before parliament allows the uk to crash out.
> 
> this is why may is trying the make the choice between "no deal crash out" or "my shitty deal" . but its a bluff and everyone knows it. fun times ahead.



I agree. This is why Labour has to become clear on its position. Because sometime soon we might have a GE with Brexit as a key issue.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> A whole new clusterfuck



UDI 

Breakup of the union 

Lovely


----------



## brogdale (Nov 7, 2018)

Winot said:


> I agree. This is why Labour has to become clear on its position. Because sometime soon we might have a GE with Brexit as a key issue.


May's way out of this will revolve around a certain number of the PLP making their position very clear...irrespective of what the party leadership says.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 7, 2018)

Winot said:


> I agree. This is why Labour has to become clear on its position. Because sometime soon we might have a GE with Brexit as a key issue.


I do think Lab should have been clear - for a long time. However, my guess is there will be a deal and it will pass through Parliament. If for no other reason, that's what usually happens.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I do think Lab should have been clear - for a long time. However, my guess is there will be a deal and it will pass through Parliament. If for no other reason, that's what usually happens.


didn't happen with house of lords reform. and there's no reason to suppose this will be any different, imo.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not so sure we are particularly obliged to adopt a position either way tbh


My post wasn't calling on any "we" to adopt any position.  It was me expressing my opinion, as it stands today.  I don't require anyone else to stand by it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't really agree with your first bit, though. Why would the 2nd ref only be for a supplementary question. If you reject the deal, why should 'no deal' brexit be the only alternative on offer.


The question Leave or Remain has already been asked.  Leave won.  A second referendum might reasonably be held on the details of the deal, but to make it into Leave or Remain again two years on is like saying "do you really mean it?" repeatedly to someone who has already expressed their opinion.  It is saying to the electorate "we asked, but we didn't really think you'd say that, so try again and this time say what we wanted".  I voted Remain, but frankly in those circumstances I'd not only vote Leave, I'd actively campaign for it.

You've admitted "the main motivation of calls for a 2nd ref is to stop brexit".  Your final paragraph is merely rationalising that goal.

None of this is to say you, or anyone else, must now support Brexit and desist from campaigning against it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I do think Lab should have been clear - for a long time. However, my guess is there will be a deal and it will pass through Parliament. If for no other reason, that's what usually happens.



thing is nobody anywhere is going to want the any deal that may comes up with. As well as the brexiteers opposing it on the basis that its even worse then staying in the EU (cos it will mean the Uk is tied to their regs and paying into the pot whilst not having any decision making power) there is significant pressure from many different areas of power and influence  to scrap brexit altogether and a 2nd ref as a result of mays faliure to get a deal through will be the way to do it.
Mays only chance of getting a deal through is by plp members rebelling agasint the whip - but labour brexiteers who would do that are few in number and labour leavers will rather see a 2nd ref.
I dont see any great popular or political support for Mays final deal outside of tory loyalists - its only purpose would be to keep her in power.
Those opposing it can feasibly  argue that Mays deal is shit and is not what people voted for. MAy then takes the political hit for fucking up brexit.
What people voted for was a brexit that left the uk in a better position than in the EU. Thats was never ever going to happen no matter who was in charge. The uk might have got a less shit deal if the combined talents of may, daives and johnson had not been doing the negotiating - but it would still have been shit.

Lets remind ourselves again what people were promised-


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The question Leave or Remain has already been asked.  Leave won.  A second referendum might reasonably be held on the details of the deal, but to make it into Leave or Remain again two years on is like saying "do you really mean it?" repeatedly to someone who has already expressed their opinion.  It is saying to the electorate "we asked, but we didn't really think you'd say that, so try again and this time say what we wanted".  I voted Remain, but frankly in those circumstances I'd not only vote Leave, I'd actively campaign for it.
> 
> You've admitted "the main motivation of calls for a 2nd ref is to stop brexit".  Your final paragraph is merely rationalising that goal.
> 
> None of this is to say you, or anyone else, must now support Brexit and desist from campaigning against it.


I don't think that's particularly coherent. So how do I vote, when I think brexit is a stupid idea and whatever deal there is I will object to parts of it while I can see that 'no deal' would probably be even worse?

See how polarising this shit is, how destructive it is? You'd actively campaign for leave in a second ref in my scenario. I'd be tempted to campaign for 'no deal' in yours. If the 'deal' involved new border controls, I probably would do so. I'm not voting for that. There certainly wouldn't be anything on the ballot paper that I would think is remotely the right thing to do. My answer, as is so often the case in votes, would be 'neither of the above, thankyou', so I would effectively be disenfranchised.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> thing is nobody anywhere is going to want the any deal that may comes up with. As well as the brexiteers opposing it on the basis that its even worse then staying in the EU (cos it will mean the Uk is tied to their regs and paying into the pot whilst not having any decision making power) there is significant pressure from many different areas of power and influence  to scrap brexit altogether and a 2nd ref as a result of mays faliure to get a deal through will be the way to do it.
> Mays only chance of getting a deal through is by plp members rebelling agasint the whip - but labour brexiteers who would do that are few in number and labour leavers will rather see a 2nd ref.
> I dont see any great popular or political support for Mays final deal outside of tory loyalists - its only purpose would be to keep her in power.
> Those opposing it can feasibly  argue that Mays deal is shit and is not what people voted for. MAy then takes the political hit for fucking up brexit.
> ...



I agree with all of that in terms of it being a shit deal, worst possible position and the rest. But I'm coming at it with regard to how does a 2nd ref _actually come about_. earlier in the thread I've argued the only way for that to come about is if somebody sees it in their interest to push it through (leadership group or a party). May certainly isn't going to go for a 2nd ref, even though she never wanted brexit. Her only rationale now, esp. after fucking up the 2017 election, is to deliver brexit. Nothing else, doesn't matter how bad it is, she just doesn't want to add another (and bigger) fuck up to her CV. Labour aren't pushing for a 2nd ref, they are just calling for the general election they know they won't get. Even in the multiple fuck ups of brexit, I can't see a scenario where one of the major parties makes active moves towards abandoning breixt or calling for a 2nd ref. And in the absence of that, brexit will go through.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The question Leave or Remain has already been asked.  Leave won.  A second referendum might reasonably be held on the details of the deal, but to make it into Leave or Remain again two years on is like saying "do you really mean it?" repeatedly to someone who has already expressed their opinion.  It is saying to the electorate "we asked, but we didn't really think you'd say that, so try again and this time say what we wanted".  I voted Remain, but frankly in those circumstances I'd not only vote Leave, I'd actively campaign for it.
> 
> You've admitted "the main motivation of calls for a 2nd ref is to stop brexit".  Your final paragraph is merely rationalising that goal.
> 
> None of this is to say you, or anyone else, must now support Brexit and desist from campaigning against it.


i think "remain" faces three great difficulties: 1) an inability to realise that people have been closely observing the eu for two years, and it has not always shown its best face; 2) an inability to present the eu as a flawed but still valuable body; 3) an inability to consider that having won one referendum a second referendum might also result in a leave vote. the most prominent remain arguments do not engage with these points at all. it is for them a manichean dichotomy, the light of remain versus the dark of brexit. the only people attracted by this voted remain in the first place. the more yesteryears' politicians call for a second referendum, the more they harm the cause they believe they are promoting. i think there is a very reasonable case to be made for a second referendum, but i don't believe the people demanding a second referendum have the nous or the wit to make it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> thing is nobody anywhere is going to want the any deal that may comes up with. As well as the brexiteers opposing it on the basis that its even worse then staying in the EU (cos it will mean the Uk is tied to their regs and paying into the pot whilst not having any decision making power) there is significant pressure from many different areas of power and influence  to scrap brexit altogether and a 2nd ref as a result of mays faliure to get a deal through will be the way to do it.
> Mays only chance of getting a deal through is by plp members rebelling agasint the whip - but labour brexiteers who would do that are few in number and labour leavers will rather see a 2nd ref.
> I dont see any great popular or political support for Mays final deal outside of tory loyalists - its only purpose would be to keep her in power.
> Those opposing it can feasibly  argue that Mays deal is shit and is not what people voted for. MAy then takes the political hit for fucking up brexit.
> ...



That interview is an early example of a later theme: millions voting leave will be doing so to control migration, and they could not be ignored, but by implication the millions voting remain or leave who do not want those migration controls should be ignored. 'what a majority of the 52% want' is what must happen is a recurring theme. Even dlr's objection to having 'remain' on the ballot paper in a 2nd ref is an extension of that. It's a funny kind of democracy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That interview is an early example of a later theme: millions voting leave will be doing so to control migration, and they could not be ignored, but the millions voting remain or leave who do not want those migration controls should be ignored. 'what a majority of the 52% want' is what must happen is a recurring theme. Even dlr's objection to having 'leave' on the ballot paper in a 2nd ref is an extension of that. It's a funny kind of democracy.


 it is at best a constitutional monarchy with no constitution, and with barely a fig-leaf of democracy.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I agree with all of that in terms of it being a shit deal, worst possible position and the rest. But I'm coming at it with regard to how does a 2nd ref _actually come about_. earlier in the thread I've argued the only way for that to come about is if somebody sees it in their interest to push it through (leadership group or a party). May certainly isn't going to go for a 2nd ref, even though she never wanted brexit. Her only rationale now, esp. after fucking up the 2017 election, is to deliver brexit. Nothing else, doesn't matter how bad it is, she just doesn't want to add another (and bigger) fuck up to her CV. Labour aren't pushing for a 2nd ref, they are just calling for the general election they know they won't get. Even in the multiple fuck ups of brexit, I can't see a scenario where one of the major parties makes active moves towards abandoning breixt or calling for a 2nd ref. And in the absence of that, brexit will go through.


A shorter way of saying all that is that I've not seen any major players or party factions putting in place the kind of moves that would lead to a second ref. Has anyone else?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> because nobody - bar a handful of brexit headbangers who want to jump off a cliff edge - want either of those options.


According to this public  poll
Brexit: Hard or Soft - Poll
25 urbanites want a hard or crash out Brexit.

They may have changed their minds since then


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I agree with all of that in terms of it being a shit deal, worst possible position and the rest. But I'm coming at it with regard to how does a 2nd ref _actually come about_. earlier in the thread I've argued the only way for that to come about is if somebody sees it in their interest to push it through (leadership group or a party). May certainly isn't going to go for a 2nd ref, even though she never wanted brexit. Her only rationale now, esp. after fucking up the 2017 election, is to deliver brexit. Nothing else, doesn't matter how bad it is, she just doesn't want to add another (and bigger) fuck up to her CV. Labour aren't pushing for a 2nd ref, they are just calling for the general election they know they won't get. Even in the multiple fuck ups of brexit, I can't see a scenario where one of the major parties makes active moves towards abandoning breixt or calling for a 2nd ref. And in the absence of that, brexit will go through.



i guess something like

May fails to get a deal through.
This means Uk will crash out with no deal on march 29th  2019 unless A50 is revoked, suspended whatever.
EU27 says ok - we will pause A50  -cos uk crashing out is quite shit for us too - but you need to either have a general election or 2nd ref to resolve this.
House of commons then has to choose between 2nd ref or general election. Or take uk off a cliff.

Gets messy from here on - not sure how the mechanism for a 2nf ref or GE will play out - but there is no way parliament will allow the uk to crash out. 2nd ref or ge will be very damaging for the tories - but crashing the uk out with no deal would destroy them. It will not be allowed to happen.

ETA - its all pretty unprecedented/uncharted waters if/when may fails to get a deal through. I wouldn't even be surprised if we see a "national unity" government that takes over to negotiate suspension of A50 and delivery of 2nd ref and/or GE (as crashing out could be termed as a national emergency on a par with a war or massive disaster)
Tories will almost certainly have to choose a new leader before a GE as well.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The question Leave or Remain has already been asked.  Leave won.  A second referendum might reasonably be held on the details of the deal, but to make it into Leave or Remain again two years on is like saying "do you really mean it?" repeatedly to someone who has already expressed their opinion.  It is saying to the electorate "we asked, but we didn't really think you'd say that, so try again and this time say what we wanted".  I voted Remain, but frankly in those circumstances I'd not only vote Leave, I'd actively campaign for it.
> 
> You've admitted "the main motivation of calls for a 2nd ref is to stop brexit".  Your final paragraph is merely rationalising that goal.
> 
> None of this is to say you, or anyone else, must now support Brexit and desist from campaigning against it.


At what point would you feel that IndyRef2 would be a legitimate exercise? Is it merely a question of time, or interim change to the important factors (e.g. a particular version of Brexit having played out)?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> A shorter way of saying all that is that I've not seen any major players or party factions putting in place the kind of moves that would lead to a second ref. Has anyone else?


loads of frantic astroturfing best for britain, the gina miller axis of business and libdemmery etc. 

but its not very good at it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> there is a sizeable chunk of people who voted for Brexit who are older and own their own homes or are in secure-tenancy housing. They're either nearly or already retired, and in the short term they're unlikely to see much of an effect from any kind of brexit. In the medium term, they would be hit by rising inflation but not much else. In the long term, they're dead. It is notable that there appears to be a strong pattern in the vote that people with less at stake tended to vote leave, and they're still the people less likely to be bothered by negative consequences



Can you provide evidence for this claim?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think that's particularly coherent. So how do I vote, when I think brexit is a stupid idea and whatever deal there is I will object to parts of it while I can see that 'no deal' would probably be even worse?
> 
> See how polarising this shit is, how destructive it is? You'd actively campaign for leave in a second ref in my scenario. I'd be tempted to campaign for 'no deal' in yours. If the 'deal' involved new border controls, I probably would do so. I'm not voting for that. There certainly wouldn't be anything on the ballot paper that I would think is remotely the right thing to do. My answer, as is so often the case in votes, would be 'neither of the above, thankyou', so I would effectively be disenfranchised.


I don’t see any incoherence in my position.  You are, by your own admission, conflating process and outcome.  This is something that Remainers are doing all over the shop.  Because they want to Remain in the EU they are willing to overlook process.

I don’t see myself as a Remainer or a Leaver.  For me, the whole referendum campaign was a surreal experience.  I felt entirely disconnected from two positions, neither of which I cared for.   This idea that there are two polar camps that every belongs to one of other of is wrong in my experience.  I’m not.  My partner is not.   Many of my friends are not.  We’re in the “oh, shut up and get on with it” camp.  The “oh, is this still going on?” camp. 

But look at this dispassionately.  If you ask someone to take a decision, then you abide by their decision even if you think it the wrong one.  To do otherwise is to admit that all they were doing was exercising the illusion of determination. 

It is that admission that many people will react against.  That I will react against.  I’m like that.  If people push me to give the answer they want, re-asking, re-asking, I’ll give them the other answer.  Even if my initial answer is “I’m not bothered”.  (I was going to give you real life examples of when I’ve done this, but I’ll keep it brief).

The choice to leave the EU has been taken.  The choice now facing us is the manner of that leaving.  We either leave that to the government, or we let them take it so far and then return to us to say “OK, we have negotiated a deal.  Do you approve it or not?”  In effect, the deal or no deal.  If such a referendum were to take place, I probably wouldn’t vote.  (Although I’d need to see the deal before deciding).

You may think it’s a choice between two bad scenarios.  If you are unable to determine which is the better of two bad options, then you are in the position I am in at almost every general election.  Is there a tactical reason I should vote a particular way?  If not, then I abstain.

No matter how much I’d like it, the option of “full communism now” is not on the ballot paper.  The option for you of “Remain, actually” is not on the ballot paper.  Sorry, but it isn’t.  I know it doesn’t stop you supporting it, but there you go.  Life’s tough.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think "remain" faces three great difficulties: 1) an inability to realise that people have been closely observing the eu for two years, and it has not always shown its best face; 2) an inability to present the eu as a flawed but still valuable body; 3) an inability to consider that having won one referendum a second referendum might also result in a leave vote. the most prominent remain arguments do not engage with these points at all. it is for them a manichean dichotomy, the light of remain versus the dark of brexit. the only people attracted by this voted remain in the first place. the more yesteryears' politicians call for a second referendum, the more they harm the cause they believe they are promoting. i think there is a very reasonable case to be made for a second referendum, but i don't believe the people demanding a second referendum have the nous or the wit to make it.


I broadly agree with this.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

mauvais said:


> At what point would you feel that IndyRef2 would be a legitimate exercise? Is it merely a question of time, or interim change to the important factors (e.g. a particular version of Brexit having played out)?


I’ve given my opinion on this several times, as I’m sure you know.  It’s probably why you’re asking.

I think there’s a reasonable case to be made for a second independence referendum on the grounds that there have been material changes to circumstances.  The Union people agreed to stay in will shortly no longer be in existence.  Those of us who lived through the independence referendum know that a huge plank of the Better Together campaign was “EU membership is only guaranteed with a No vote”.  This was repeated time and again.  David Cameron.  Ruth Davidson.  Gordon Brown.  Jim Murphy.  All can be found repeating this.

The leaflets they put out repeatedly said “The UK is one of the most influential members of the European Union. This means that we don’t just sit at the top table, we help make the decisions that affect so many parts of our life here in Scotland.”  Voting No delivers that.  (This is a direct quote from Better Together material, by the way).

It is reasonable to assume that this formed part of the expectation of No voters.


However, I think more than that is required.  People were misled during the campaign.  What’s new?  What is required is that a majority thinks that given these new circumstances another referendum is required.  That people say, “hold on, we were asked about being Better Together _in the EU_” .  Not necessarily that a majority want to vote Yes to independence this time, but that a majority think another vote is required because of the changed circumstances.

(Of course, tactically, I don’t think the ScotGov should call it until polling is consistently delivering pro Yes majorities, but that’s a separate matter).


----------



## Chz (Nov 7, 2018)

> Can you provide evidence for this claim?


There's plenty of evidence that Leave voting corresponded very strongly with age (much moreso than education or ethnicity, which were all over the place), but I haven't seen any record of the economic status of the older voters. It could very well be the case that the older Leave vote owns no property and relies heavily on the winter fuel allowance. Or not. I haven't seen any statistics that show it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve given my opinion on this several times, as I’m sure you know.  It’s probably why you’re asking.
> 
> I think there’s a reasonable case to be made for a second independence referendum on the grounds that there have been material changes to circumstances.  The Union people agreed to stay in will shortly no longer be in existence.  Those of us who lived through the independence referendum know that a huge plank of the Better Together campaign was “EU membership is only guaranteed with a No vote”.  This was repeated time and again.  David Cameron.  Ruth Davidson.  Gordon Brown.  Jim Murphy.  All can be found repeating this.
> 
> ...



Surely exactly the same argument can be made regarding campaigning for brexit. It's not even those who campaigned for brexit who are now doing brexit, largely, and a bunch of 'these are the things that brexit will bring' promises are very clearly now not going to happen.

tbh I think you're in danger of doing exactly what you think I'm doing - rationalising your position, which in this case is 'don't really care about brexit but want Scottish independence'.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Surely exactly the same argument can be made regarding campaigning for brexit.


Go on then, make it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Go on then, make it.


I just did. You can fill in the gaps with all the crap that was promised by Johnson, Davis etc. One to get you going, from David Davis in the clip above: 'of course we can stay in the single market while restricting EU immigration'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> (Of course, tactically, I don’t think the ScotGov should call it until polling is consistently delivering pro Yes majorities, but that’s a separate matter).


Also, this really isn't a separate matter. You here are also conflating process with outcome.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Also, this really isn't a separate matter. You here are also conflating process with outcome.


It absolutely is. It’s a tactical decision. I think it’d be daft to call another referendum you’re going to lose, regardless of whether there’s a legitimate case for calling it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It absolutely is. It’s a tactical decision. I think it’d be daft to call another referendum you’re going to lose, regardless of whether there’s a legitimate case for calling it.


So there are tactics involved in calling referendums. It's not just all about correct process and principle. Of course Cameron fucked it up royally in that regard, but still, he was probably considering it. 

I still find your positioning on this very strange, given that you stress the process element. I was asked in a referendum a question I didn't particularly want to be asked. And now, due to process, any second referendum cannot have an answer on it that I even remotely agree with. And that's a democratic process?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I just did


No, you didn’t.

There are two steps to my argument for another Indy ref:

1. There is a constitutional difference in what people were asked to agree to and what they’ll end up with. 

2. A majority of people need to think a second referendum is justified.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> No, you didn’t.
> 
> There are two steps to my argument for another Indy ref:
> 
> ...


Nope. As with the brexit referendum, there was just a simple one-line question with no caveats or provisos on it. Continued membership of the EU was no more on the Scottish ref ballot paper than immigration was on the brexit ballot paper. That various people campaigned, and now act, as if they were is a separate matter.

As for your point 2., without having a poll to ask, you cannot know whether a majority think it is justified. With brexit, you can at least now know that a chunk of people think it justified strongly enough to march for it.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve given my opinion on this several times, as I’m sure you know.  It’s probably why you’re asking.


I'm not surprised it's come up before, but I don't remember seeing it, so no. I'm interested in the parity (or lack of) between the two.



danny la rouge said:


> I think there’s a reasonable case to be made for a second independence referendum on the grounds that there have been material changes to circumstances. ... People were misled during the campaign ...


_This_ is why I ask, because by any measure (a) the implementation and likely outcomes of Brexit have materially changed since it was proposed, and (b) people have clearly been misled. Whether that has happened to an extent that it passes your tests on the same basis, I don't know, and it's inherently difficult to judge because of the intangibility of both the 'what is Brexit?' question and the developing answer. That's not to say a second referendum is wise, or easy to frame, or should be carried out now, which is all problematic, but it does seem like you might have a different approach to one than the other.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I'm not surprised it's come up before, but I don't remember seeing it, so no. I'm interested in the parity (or lack of) between the two.
> 
> _This_ is why I ask, because by any measure (a) the implementation and likely outcomes of Brexit have materially changed since it was proposed, and (b) people have clearly been misled. Whether that has happened to an extent that it passes your tests on the same basis, I don't know, and it's inherently difficult to judge because of the intangibility of both the 'what is Brexit?' question and the developing answer. That's not to say a second referendum is wise, or easy to frame, or should be carried out now, which is all problematic, but *it does seem like you might have a different approach to one than the other*.


Yep. Sorry danny, but I think you've blinded yourself a little bit here with your own rationalisations.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So there are tactics involved in calling referendums.


Of course there are.

I may be justified in punching your nose. But if I think you’ll beat me up I may be wise not to. 



> It's not just all about correct process and principle.


Excuse me? Are you saying that this therefore means you can just keep asking until you get the “right” answer?  Don’t be surprised if people take exception to that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. Sorry danny, but I think you've blinded yourself a little bit here with your own rationalisations.


How so?

To be clear: I don’t think the time is right now for an indyref2. I don’t think it is currently either a) justified or b) winnable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Of course there are.
> 
> I may be justified in punching your nose. But if I think you’ll beat me up I may be wise not to.
> 
> ...


No. I'm saying that your own argument is nowhere near as clear-cut as you think it is. And I haven't asked anyone anything. As I said before, a bunch of people want to be asked again. How many wanting to be asked again justifies asking again?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How many wanting to be asked again justifies asking again?


A majority. I’m surprised you don’t know that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> A majority. I’m surprised you don’t know that.


Really? You should need a majority wanting a question to be asked for the question to be put?
So before a referendum, you first have a referendum asking people if they want a referendum. And presumably before that, you need a referendum asking people if they want a referendum asking if they want a referendum... 

I really don't think there was a majority in the UK demanding a referendum on EU membership before Cameron brought it up. I see precious little evidence of one. And even if there were, how would you tell?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

mauvais said:


> people have clearly been misled


People are misled in every election by every campaigner. 

If you can put a reasonable case that the constitutional arrangements  people believed they were voting for are now not what they’re getting, then you have a parallel with Scottish independence.

If in either case a majority of people says this warrants a re-run, then it is justifiable to do so.

If, that being met, in either case the organisation/s who want the rerun think it is winnable, then they should try to win it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I really don't think there was a majority in the UK demanding a referendum on EU membership before Cameron brought it up.


Indeed. Nevertheless one was called. Neither you nor I have a Tardis. So we are where we are.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So before a referendum, you first have a referendum asking people if they want a referendum


That’s not what I said.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> If you can put a reasonable case that the constitutional arrangements  people believed they were voting for are now not what they’re getting, then you have a parallel with Scottish independence.


This is one of my big criticisms of both referendums. There was a simple (simplistic) one-line question that contained no detail whatever of any constitutional arrangement. What does Scottish 'independence' really mean? It's as vague as brexit in that regard.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not what I said.


No other way to find out if a majority want it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No other way to find out if a majority want it.


You asked 


littlebabyjesus said:


> How many wanting to be asked again justifies asking again?



I answered _that_ question, not the one you changed it to.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is one of my big criticisms of both referendums. There was a simple (simplistic) one-line question that contained no detail whatever of any constitutional arrangement. What does Scottish 'independence' really mean? It's as vague as brexit in that regard.


A very, very large document was issued by the ScotGov. I have a copy of it. People can reasonably assume this is what the majority rejected in 2014.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You asked
> 
> 
> I answered _that_ question, not the one you changed it to.


But you don't really mean that, I'm guessing. What you really mean, given that you can't judge a majority without a vote, is that you think there should be sufficient clamour for something. So what constitutes sufficient clamour?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> A very, very large document was issued by the ScotGov. I have a copy of it. People can reasonably assume this is what the majority rejected in 2014.


FAir enough. At least in that vote there was one side with a plan for how to do it. With brexit there wasn't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But you don't really mean that, I'm guessing.


This could be your T Shirt.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> FAir enough. At least in that vote there was one side with a plan for how to do it. With brexit there wasn't.


I agree. So it’s going to be hard to make a case that people aren’t getting what they voted for.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This could be your T Shirt.


So you dodge that. 

Ok how about this: Given that the UK isn't a direct democracy, but a representative one, if parliament votes to have a second ref, then that's what there is, just as with the first one. They can then be lambasted or not for doing so. Truth is that they lose either way.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2018)

Chz said:


> There's plenty of evidence that Leave voting corresponded very strongly with age (much moreso than education or ethnicity, which were all over the place), but I haven't seen any record of the economic status of the older voters. It could very well be the case that the older Leave vote owns no property and relies heavily on the winter fuel allowance. Or not. I haven't seen any statistics that show it.



Wasn't your claim though, it was LBJ's.

According to How Britain voted in the 2016 EU referendum huge majorities of C2, D and E voters opted for Leave so I very much doubt LBJ's claim can be justified.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I agree. So it’s going to be hard to make a case that people aren’t getting what they voted for.


Cos they voted for a vague thing.

So we have the contradictions and the lies and misinformation. If someone believed Davis, say, and voted accordingly, then they're not getting what they voted for. Or maybe they believed someone else's lie. And maybe without a plan in place, the question itself is pretty meaningless - what exactly do you want brexit for? Would need to be there, because not all this stuff is up to the UK government.

Switzerland has a similar, and as yet unresolved, pickle in that it voted in a referendum to end free movement of people from the EU. But that, the EU insists, means leaving the free market. But we don't want to do that, says the Swiss government. And so they're stuck. And the simple (simplistic) question on the ballot paper made no reference to this or any other complication - it just said 'free movement of people from the EU, yes or no?'

There's a basic issue of accountability here, and the lack of it for policies decided by referendum when 'it's not quite that simple' is the real answer.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Wasn't your claim though, it was LBJ's.
> 
> According to How Britain voted in the 2016 EU referendum huge majorities of C2, D and E voters opted for Leave so I very much doubt LBJ's claim can be justified.


More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So you dodge that.


No. You made up what I really meant. Shall I answer your question again?



littlebabyjesus said:


> But you don't really mean that, I'm guessing. What you really mean, given that you can't judge a majority without a vote, is that you think there should be sufficient clamour for something.


No. I said, in response to your question  that used the word “again” twice, that before asking *again*, there needs to be a majority of opinion who think asking *again* is justified. In other words: we were just asked this: why do we need to be asked *again*?



> So what constitutes sufficient clamour?


I think if there are consistent opinion polls over a sustained period saying a majority thinks asking *again* is justified, then it is reasonable to make the case that there is demand for being asked *again *the question they’ve recently answered.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 7, 2018)

You think government should be run partly by opinion polls? Really? I must say I disagree.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Cos they voted for a vague thing


They voted Leave.

What evidence will you bring that they aren’t getting “Leave”?

ETA.  Actually, don’t bother.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You think government should be run partly by opinion polls? Really? I must say I disagree.


You are making everything up.

From now on leave me out of it and argue with imaginary people. Seriously you are utterly dishonest.

Goodbye.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Cos they voted for a vague thing.



Like Obama and New Labour! 

Re-run the 1997 GE and the 2008 Presidential Election NOW!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.



Yes I know. More people in social housing voted Leave too. What's your point? Can you back up your claim?


----------



## andysays (Nov 7, 2018)

It seems to me that the question of whether there should be a second referendum isn't primarily a constitutional question but a political one.

What would be the political consequences of an attempt to overrule the original decision to leave the EU by calling another referendum asking essentially the same question (and it would be essentially the same question) simply because the decision went the wrong way according to the majority of the political establishment?

I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.

This post sums it up pretty well


Winot said:


> I doubt the anger will be reserved for the Brexiteers. There will be a continuation in anger with the political class generally, a continuation of cynicism about politics in general, and an increased propensity to vote (if they vote at all) for populists with easy answers.



Those posters arguing for another ref to attempt to overrule the first one because they claim that conditions are totally different now (although I haven't seen anyone really back up the claim in a substantive way) really need to think about whether this is a reasonable or acceptable price to pay, because that is where we'll be going


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

Winot said:


> I doubt the anger will be reserved for the Brexiteers. There will be a continuation in anger with the political class generally, a continuation of cynicism about politics in general, and an increased propensity to vote (if they vote at all) for populists with easy answers.





andysays said:


> I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.


Indeed.


----------



## stuff_it (Nov 7, 2018)

They won't back off, we're all screwed, so does anyone want a dog for 6-8 months? (not joking about the dog)


----------



## billbond (Nov 7, 2018)

paolo said:


> What would be undecromatic about getting people to vote?
> 
> If they feel the same way, same outcome, double confirmation - job done, end of.



weve already had one
Maybe you missed it, it was all over the news
#notoanothervote


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> I suggest that one of the consequences would be to further increase the sense of disenchantment among large numbers of those who feel that they have been abandoned, economically, socially, politically, the very unrecognised (by the political class) disenchantment which contributed to the unexpected (ditto) Leave vote in the first place.


Whereas the short-to-medium term consequences of Brexit will be what exactly, an outbreak of sweetness and light?

I don't disagree with you as such, it's simply that every option at this point has massive problems, so why feel overly constrained by a particular one?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 7, 2018)

Also, what do you actually _want_ to happen? Because if you've no plan to somehow reform post-EU Britain, and your Brexit is more about blowing up institutions - fair, perhaps - then what's wrong with mass disenchantment? Isn't that ideal?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is one of my big criticisms of both referendums. There was a simple (simplistic) one-line question that contained no detail whatever of any constitutional arrangement. What does Scottish 'independence' really mean? It's as vague as brexit in that regard.


And of course governments never renege on their election promises, parties never use slick soundbites to obscure what they really mean. 

As danny la rouge 's pointed out numerous times this is no different to any election.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.


So they do have a stake then. What if those people believe remaining in the EU would be a threat to thier secure situation?
and I'll ask again about the flipside:
Do those on or vering towards the poverty line that voted remain deserve your sympathy?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> More people who own outright without a mortgage voted leave than remain. One of the many ways to cut this particular pie. It's in your link.



That’s likely to be a correlation with age, older voters more likely to have finished paying mortgage, older voters voted leave more strongly.

I seem to recall seeing some graph that showed likelyhood to vote leave against class, and there were spikes at both ends, the lower end (I guess nothing to lose) and the higher end (I guess golf club bigots, small business owners frustrated by red tape etc., well off and able to ride out a loss). This data doesn’t really match that and I can’t remember where I saw it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Are you saying that this therefore means you can just keep asking until you get the “right” answer?  Don’t be surprised if people take exception to that.



Thing is - what if a clear majority  of people now think that the brexit they are getting is actually quite shit and would prefer to stay? How beholden should the UK be to the referendum result? 
Its not like a general election where you get to enjoy the results of the majority vote immediately - its 2 and half years - or more -  down the line. 
I think there are solid philosophical and democratic arguments for both "respecting the result" and a 2nd ref and whatever outcome we get is going to be bitterly resented by a significant chunk of the population. 
And it is reasonable to argue that seeing as what people voted for - a  UK  that would be better off out of the EU then in - is very clearly not going to be delivered - then the referendum result loses a degree  validity.
I dont think there is any sort of right answer - the referendum should never have been held in the first place - but at some point (i.e. crashing out into a ruinous no deal situation)  adhering to the referendum result out of principle becomes almost a fetishisation of the democratic will to the point of self harming absurdity


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> what if a clear majority of people now think that the brexit they are getting is actually quite shit and would prefer to stay?


I’ve no intention of repeating yet again what’s already been said about asking again and again until you get the answer you want. So let’s put that to one side.

OK, let’s assume it’s OK to rerun the in-out referendum (it isn’t, but let’s pretend). Is there any evidence people want a rerun of the in-out choice? Sustained evidence?

And how would you see it working? A three-way ballot: deal, no deal, remain? I don’t think that’s tenable, because it gives two leave options but one remain option. In practical terms it’s a problem. In legitimacy terms it’s a problem. And I just think people will be irritated by it at best. It’ll look like a stitch-up by the dodgy elite. And frankly that’s exactly what it would be.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> And it is reasonable to argue that seeing as what people voted for - a  UK  that would be better off out of the EU then in - is very clearly not going to be delivered - then the referendum result loses a degree  validity.


You can't know whether the people of the UK will be 'better off' or not. 'Better Off' means completely different things to different people.
For some, the meaning of it will be based on purchasing power but for others it may simply be having a roof over your head. The attitude of the former is exactly the reason why the UK doesn't vote for socialist governments.
Were you advising voters in the last GE that there's a serious risk they'd not be 'better off' if Corbyn were to win?

and even in the neo-liberal consumer 'better off' world of purchasing power there's the scenario that if the EU (or more precisely the Euro) was to drive living standards down to the point of being 'ruinous' for its citizens you'd still be able to argue that the UK would be better off inside the union and that any democratic decision to leave is "self harming".
What's the point of democracy if all we do is obsessively worry about the negative effects of change?


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 7, 2018)

better off dead


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve no intention of repeating yet again what’s already been said about asking again and again until you get the answer you want. So let’s put that to one side.
> 
> OK, let’s assume it’s OK to rerun the in-out referendum (it isn’t, but let’s pretend). Is there any evidence people want a rerun of the in-out choice? Sustained evidence?
> 
> And how would you see it working? A three-way ballot: deal, no deal, remain? I don’t think that’s tenable, because it gives two leave options but one remain option. In practical terms it’s a problem. In legitimacy terms it’s a problem. And I just think people will be irritated by it at best. It’ll look like a stitch-up by the dodgy elite. And frankly that’s exactly what it would be.



I wasn't saying this _should _ happen - i was putting forward a hypothetical scenario. 
Is there evidence that people want a re-run? some people do clearly. the majority are more likely just want the whole thing out of the way. 
There's evidence that people going more remain - but not by huge margins. But _if_ they do? At what point does that tip the scale of democracy towards a re-run?  
And yes - there are problems with it. yes it would - in part -  be a stitch up by a ruling class that dont want brexit.  
But all the other options are fucking shit and divisive as well. And as far as i see it there are only two - a BINO brexit where the UK is still under EU rules and regulations but has no say. 
Or  a no deal crash out that fucks up millions of lives and fatally undermines the likes of NHS.
There is nothing "fair" or "legitimate" in any of the outcomes - its  a cluster fuck.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> You can't know whether the people of the UK will be 'better off' or not. 'Better Off' means completely different things to different people.



There are no tangible benefits to anyone in Mays likely final deal. its just damage limitation.

A no deal crash out has some potential upside for some people in time -  but its hugely disruptive and will clearly and demonstrably cause a lot of shit for a lot of people straight away - and most of those people will be the poor and working class.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 7, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> better off dead


maybe so, whwn you consider where all this 'better off' stuff started:


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> There are no tangible benefits to anyone in Mays likely final deal. its just damage limitation.
> 
> A no deal crash out has some potential upside for some people in time -  but its hugely disruptive and will clearly and demonstrably cause a lot of shit for a lot of people straight away - and most of those people will be the poor and working class.


I think for a lot of working class have weighed it up and decided it's better to end it ruinously than to live with endless ruin.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I think for a lot of working class have weighed it up and decided it's better to end it ruinously than to live with endless ruin.



i think most people haven't weighed anything up. the in and outs of brexit are for political spods only. and a lot of working class people didn't vote or voted leave.


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> There's evidence that people going more remain - but not by huge margins. But _if_ they do? At what point does that tip the scale of democracy towards a re-run?



I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.

Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.

A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population.  Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 8, 2018)

England doesn't know what the fuck it is or where its going and will drag all other countries down during its reactionary voyage of discovery. Another Brexit vote won't change a thing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I wasn't saying this _should _ happen - i was putting forward a hypothetical scenario.


OK, fair enough. But my points still stand.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.
> 
> Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.
> 
> A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population.  Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.



id pretty much agree with that.


----------



## Celyn (Nov 8, 2018)

Poi E said:


> England just declaring independence and sorting all this bullshit out would be a fresh start.


Then Scotland can remain in the EU.   Could England take the Trident submarines, please? ktxbai


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 8, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.
> 
> Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.
> 
> A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population.  Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.


That’s a fair assessment.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I dont think there is any sort of right answer - the referendum should never have been held in the first place - but at some point (i.e. crashing out into a ruinous no deal situation)  adhering to the referendum result out of principle becomes almost a fetishisation of the democratic will to the point of self harming absurdity


Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.
I don't think there shouldn't have been a referendum, but the way it was done was a sick joke.

There should have been what Scotland had in Indyref, a big document that spelled out in detail what Brexit would mean, what the negotiation would hope to achieve, and that document should have formed the basis of the Brexit debate ahead of a referendum. Any serious deviation from that document would then be accountable and resulting processes clear. Its not hindsight this - referendum happen around the world and there's precedent for good practice.

instead we got nebulous mood boards, and brexit colour pallettes


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.
> I don't think there shouldn't have been a referendum, but the way it was done was a sick joke.
> 
> There should have been what Scotland had in Indyref, a big document that spelled out in detail what Brexit would mean, what the negotiation would hope to achieve, and that document should have formed the basis of the Brexit debate ahead of a referendum. Any serious deviation from that document would then be accountable and resulting processes clear. Its not hindsight this - referendum happen around the world and there's precedent for good practice.
> ...


If we're going by what should have happened, the referendum should have been on the question, do you want to remain in an unreformed eu, been purely and simply advisory, and undertaken before Cameron went to Brussels to beg for crumbs. At a stroke he'd have got rid of the referendum bugbear, had a democratic mandate to seek genuine reforms of the eu, and managed to look like an intelligent human being instead of a thick as pigshit pig fucker


----------



## andysays (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.
> I don't think there shouldn't have been a referendum, but the way it was done was a sick joke.
> 
> There should have been what Scotland had in Indyref, a big document that spelled out in detail what Brexit would mean, what the negotiation would hope to achieve, and that document should have formed the basis of the Brexit debate ahead of a referendum. Any serious deviation from that document would then be accountable and resulting processes clear. Its not hindsight this - referendum happen around the world and there's precedent for good practice.
> ...


The two problems with that idea are that, first, Cameron expected to win and what exactly leaving meant would then have been an academic issue and, second, without a declaration of A50 and the subsequent negotiations, there wasn't and couldn't be anything clear about the sort of Brexit we would end up with.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

andysays said:


> The two problems with that idea are that, first, Cameron expected to win and what exactly leaving meant would then have been an academic issue and, second, without a declaration of A50 and the subsequent negotiations, there wasn't and couldn't be anything clear about the sort of Brexit we would end up with.


Not sure its that worth getting into this as its too late now, but it would've been written by a group tory Brexiters (obvs not Cameron). Disagree about the A50 point. Obviously the negotiations would still have to take place but you can begin to set out the terrain and if the negotiations create a result that would have been substantially different from what people voted for in the original paper then it would clearly need to be revisited, with another referendum or other democratic process (within the commons).


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> > Costas Lapavitsas: Socialism starts at home
> > some good points in here re: internationalism. Not sure I like the title, but have a read
> 
> 
> ...


 "We should rely on the strength of working-class hostility towards the current regime in Britain and the current state of social affairs – which is very deep."

That there's real hostility out there is undeniable, and its good to see so much more open hostility and scepticism, to politicians, to mainstream media, to power institutions.
It doesn't feel reliable though. Around the world that hostility has not for the most part gone into a constructive, socialist, mutual aid, direction. Its been successfully channelled into a selfish, inward and hateful direction.

We've just experienced a major earthquake to the global order by way of the bankers casino crash of 2008. It was perfectly clear to the whole world what had happened and who was at fault. It was and remains a massive open goal for the global left to win the arguments and force through significant changes. Where was "the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society" this last decade? As a populace we're supporting austerity, keeping calm and carrying on and voting for continuity, on the back of 40 years of the same direction.

No I don't feel ready to rely on the strength of that hostility, I wish I could. I've already felt the sting of having it turn on me and mine.
The one truly reliable force out there are the disaster capitalists and their agents, and they're ready at any moment to exploit any vulnerability. Just as they did so successfully over the financial crash.

Doesn't mean we should "pack up and go home" though.
I'm reluctant to make a military analogy but like any army fighting rearguard you have to be strategic in your moves....blind belief in your strength is charge of the light brigade stuff.*

(supposedly light brigade was a miscommunication rather than a blind charge, but you know what i mean)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Why do you think there shouldn't have been a referendum? The role of the press aside it was in the tory manifesto and people (in theory) voted for it.



cos its a very complex issue which was always vulnerable to be highjacked by simplistic, emotive populist arguments fueled by xenophobia and deluded nationalism - alongside a desire by many people just to give the governing elite a solid kick in the bollocks.
I believe in direct democracy - but in the sense people getting involved in the nitty gritty detail of policy - i.e local schools policy being decided in open forums by councilors, teachers, parents and self selecting "communities of interest" with access to expert advice. 
Someone voting "yeah fuck the EU" based on the fact that they feel the EU is part of some vague over power thats meant their local pub has shut, that their wages are shit and there's no council houses cos immigrants - is not going to give any thought to how it impacts everything form northern ireland, to NHS staffing or the price of food.
The issues fucking up society are rooted, not in the fact that the uk is wedded to the EU, but that it is wedded to an all pervasive system of international capitalism. Leaving the EU does not change that fact - and actually leaves the UK more vulnerable to capital's predations (which is exactly the attraction for the people leading the push for brexit) .


----------



## Poi E (Nov 8, 2018)

0pp


Celyn said:


> Then Scotland can remain in the EU.   Could England take the Trident submarines, please? ktxbai



Bloody hell, after going through all that I'm not sure Scotland would want back in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I'm reluctant to make a military analogy but like any army fighting rearguard you have to be strategic in your moves....blind belief in your strength is charge of the light brigade stuff.*
> 
> (supposedly light brigade was a miscommunication rather than a blind charge, but you know what i mean)


 your simile all over the place


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 8, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> your simile all over the place


I’m taking from it that we need a fighting army that wears balaclavas.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> As a populace we're supporting austerity, keeping calm and carrying on and voting for continuity, on the back of 40 years of the same direction.


literally no mention of the labour left rise and anti austerity opinion within and without it. Yes the labour left is what it is, let us list the flaws. I'm not here to hold them up, I'm pointing out that the monolithic 'we' you conjure doesn't exist. There is a successful party in the country opposed to austerity. This is a massive blind spot for every 'brexit is like trump' analyses I've read, just goes unmentioned. I mean, not even slagged off and dismissed as hopeless. Just not mentioned.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> literally no mention of the labour left rise and anti austerity opinion within and without it. Yes the labour left is what it is, let us list the flaws. I'm not here to hold them up, I'm pointing out that the monolithic 'we' you conjure doesn't exist. There is a successful party in the country opposed to austerity. This is a massive blind spot for every 'brexit is like trump' analyses I've read, just goes unmentioned. I mean, not even slagged off and dismissed as hopeless. Just not mentioned.


I support whats happening within the labour party. In fact im even - shoot me now - hopeful about it. To me its not about the party per se but a grassroots takeover of the party and I hope it comes to something. I'm not saying there is no resistance, of course there is. Its still a minority position though with massive weaknesses, and that needs to be recognised.

I'm not saying Brexit = Trump. In a way my post isn't about Brexit at all, but a wider point. But on Brexit if we have a shock doctrine - crash out Brexit in March 2019 and it becomes a question of whose force will be dominant, the hostility of the working class over the efficiency and greed of the business class my money is firmly on the latter. They already have their plans drawn up. Liam Fox and co have done their homework and are waiting for the starting whistle.

ETA: Costas wants us to crash out Im pretty sure Im right in saying.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

What do you reckon DotCommunist , are you up for crashing out in March?
I'm a fairly cautious person, I admit that. Im up for taking risks but I want better odds.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2018)

[


ska invita said:


> What do you reckon DotCommunist , are you up for crashing out in March?
> I'm a fairly cautious person, I admit that. Im up for taking risks but I want better odds.


If there were to be a crash out and it were to cause some degree of chaos, who would benefit politically from that? My fear is that it would be the right that would benefit. An authoritarian right at that. And potentially not just in the UK but across Europe.

So it would be lose-lose. The poorest would suffer the most in any situation of economic chaos, and the authoritarian/populist right would gain politically.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If there were to be a crash out and it were to cause some degree of chaos, who would benefit politically from that? My fear is that it would be the right that would benefit. An authoritarian right at that. And potentially not just in the UK but across Europe.
> 
> So it would be lose-lose. The poorest would suffer the most in any situation of economic chaos, and the authoritarian/populist right would gain politically.


an authoritarian right? is there any other sort? as for the right doing well across europe, well, i can only assume you've not paid any attention to the right doing very nice in certain parts of europe for a number of years now.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 8, 2018)

Since we don't have a 'stupid shit Dominic Raab has said today' thread, here's his little epiphany after looking at a map for the very first time:


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2018)

Resisting the urge to facepalm, that's yet another example of the lack of any reason to do a brexit, even from the minister for doing a brexit. He stresses the importance of a 'frictionless border'. Right, you mean like the border is right now, then? So the arrangement there is right now is actually the one you want? But you're going to change it? And that's going to be a good thing? How?

It is also a tacit admission that 'no deal' brexit is not an option.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Since we don't have a 'stupid shit Dominic Raab has said today' thread, here's his little epiphany after looking at a map for the very first time:



i get from that that what he's let slip and "didn't realise"  was not how close France was but just how utterly reliant we are on that pinch point of the Dover crossing. I expect they've been sitting around saying, yeah but what about this or what about that, and now finally realised, oh we're totally reliant on this one thing.

Remember the hauliers petrol price strike? Made me realise just how easy it is to bring the whole system to a standstill.  If you could close down Dover for a couple of days you'd have mass looting by the third day.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> i get from that that what he's let slip and "didn't realise"  was not how close France was but just how utterly reliant we are on that pinch point of the Dover crossing. I expect they've been sitting around saying, yeah but what about this or what about that, and now finally realised, oh we're totally reliant on this one thing.


I think this is charitable in the extreme - 'peculiar geography', indeed - but who the fuck _didn't_ know this? It's the sort of thing you'd get for junior school homework - how do goods come into the UK?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I think this is charitable in the extreme - 'peculiar geography', indeed - but who the fuck _didn't_ know this? It's the sort of thing you'd get for junior school homework - how do goods come into the UK?


...well there's been loads of blue sky thinking about trade deals with other countries being done in seconds and those new goods appearing magically, using other ports than Dover (which cant handle the capacity) etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i think most people haven't weighed anything up. the in and outs of brexit are for political spods only. and a lot of working class people didn't vote or voted leave.



What bothers me about this is that you probably think you're a "political spod" (dunno what that is hope I'm not one) and I don't think you understand the ins and outs of Brexit. But you think it's other people who haven't weighed anything up - not you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not certain there is much of a change - polling before the referendum indicated a lead for remain, probably even stronger than current polling, and may have been a genuine measure of public opinion at that time despite the result. Democracy’s problem is that people are always more motivated to vote against something than for it, so leave was always going to fire people up more. Hence the result probably wasn't an exact picture of public mood.
> 
> Not many people are that enthusiastic about the EU, it’s a bureaucratic thing in the background of most people’s lives, voting for it for many would have felt a bit like voting in support of your gas and electricity supplier or something like that, hence why ‘project fear’ became necessary to get people out (which seemed to work to some extent given the turnout), backed up by those who felt the anti-immigrant nature of some of the forces behind brexit was something to take a stand against.
> 
> A re-run would have people fired up on both sides, remain would now have something to fight against, and the backing of more of industry/establishment which didn’t expect the result first time round and sat on the fence so as not to piss off at least 40% of the population.  Leave would be angry about potentially having victory taken from their hands, and the also have the recent arrogance of the EU in negotiations to point at. I think it would be hugely more divisive and dirtier than first time around, and not much good would come of it whatever result.



Agree with all of this - but just thinking aloud: 

Would the debate on immigration at least be a lot less unpleasant, or at least a better debate?

For years the standard tactic of the politicians and the media has been to blame immigrants, and keep a constant anti migrant narrative going. 

Now that's led to a rejection of their systems and their institutions and they're worried about where they're gonna get cheap labour from. The narrative isn't nearly as poisonous as it used to be. 

Would it be different - at least on immigration - now?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> ...well there's been loads of blue sky thinking about trade deals with other countries being done in seconds and those new goods appearing magically, using other ports than Dover (which cant handle the capacity) etc.


I think you may need to have a quick check of the other ports currently operating in the UK.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I'm not saying there is no resistance, of course there is. Its still a minority position though with massive weaknesses, and that needs to be recognised.


if its a minority position why did so many millions vote for labours manifesto? Enough to get a hung parliament. We know the C-byn himself polls badly and his unlovely labour right cohorts can't be that inspiring. So weaknesses, yes, but stronger than its been in the last 30 years imo. So I disagree about the idea that 'we' are all full steam ahead supporting austerity. You mentioned 'voting for continuity, on the back of 40 years of the same direction.' so I wonder what direction of travel you saw britain with the EU continuing. More of the same, but labour supported austerity.


ska invita said:


> I'm not saying Brexit = Trump. In a way my post isn't about Brexit at all, but a wider point.


yeah fair enough, but its startling how often the labour party has to be ignored, or its voters downplayed numbers wise, for these arguments to work though. It actually goes hand in hand with not mentioning the rise of an electorally successful  fascist right in the EU. And of course right back to the old one, sections of the left just giving up on the idea of a working class movement after thatcher and instead looking to the EU to be protector of liberties and all that nice stuff it doesn't actually do.

I understand the position, I just obviously don't agree and find it defeatist. Keeping your powder dry for a day that never comes, voting eu in the hope that technocrats will keep the wolves from the door. Of course you could say that my position is mad and reckless and foolish. A lot of people do.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I understand the position, I just obviously don't agree and find it defeatist. Keeping your powder dry for a day that never comes, voting eu in the hope that technocrats will keep the wolves from the door. Of course you could say that my position is mad and reckless and foolish. A lot of people do.


So are you up for Crash Out in March?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> So are you up for Crash Out in March?


I'm not convinced the sky will fall if we do. Of course I may be wrong and PIRA would be leading the food riots, but I don't think crash out will happen. I may eat my words in march but I think we are headed for some muddled deal that pleases nobody


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm not convinced the sky will fall if we do. Of course I may be wrong and PIRA would be leading the food riots, but I don't think crash out will happen. I may eat my words in march but I think we are headed for some muddled deal that pleases nobody


given the way the country's split that would be quite an achievement


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What bothers me about this is that you probably think you're a "political spod" (dunno what that is hope I'm not one) and I don't think you understand the ins and outs of Brexit. But you think it's other people who haven't weighed anything up - not you.



"Political spod" = people who follow politics closely. Which by definition is everyone posting on this board - and especially this thread. So yes - everyone following this thread is better informed about the ins and out of brexit then most of the population. Thats not a judgement its just a statement of the obvious.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "Political spod" = people who follow politics closely. Which by definition is everyone posting on this board - and especially this thread. So yes - everyone following this thread is better informed about the ins and out of brexit then most of the population. Thats not a judgement its just a statement of the obvious.



I totally disagree. Quite a lot of people on this thread are frankly clueless about politics in general and about the EU. I don't think you should assume that because you spend more time doing something, you neccessarily have it mastered.

I just finished playing football, play every week, always have since I stopped playing competitive sport (rugby). I'm still fucking shit tho


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I totally disagree. Quite a lot of people on this thread are frankly clueless about politics in general and about the EU. I don't think you should assume that because you spend more time doing something, you neccessarily have it mastered.
> 
> I just finished playing football, play every week, always have since I stopped playing competitive sport (rugby). I'm still fucking shit tho


Yep, that's definitely how to do politics. Tell everyone else how clueless they are about it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's definitely how to do politics. Tell everyone else how clueless they are about it.



Isn't that your basic approach? Tell everyone they _just don't understand _how bad Brexit will be and if they had any sense they'd be just as panicked as you are?


----------



## andysays (Nov 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's definitely how to do politics. Tell everyone else how clueless they are about it.


Proper fucking LOL


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Isn't that your basic approach? Tell everyone they _just don't understand _how bad Brexit will be and if they had any sense they'd be just as panicked as you are?


No. I tell people how bad I think brexit may be, and the process already has been. And I give the reasons why I think that, and also challenge ideas put forward by others regarding good things they may think come from it. That's not telling people they're clueless.

You and others read into that other things that are not there. The clown andysays above, for instance, who rarely bothers to read what people actually say before launching into an angry rant against what he thinks they probably have said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No. I tell people how bad I think brexit may be, and the process already has been. And I give the reasons why I think that, and also challenge ideas put forward by others regarding good things they may think come from it. That's not telling people they're clueless.
> 
> You and others read into that other things that are not there. The clown andysays above, for instance, who rarely bothers to read what people actually say before launching into an angry rant against what he thinks they probably have said.


I note you tell, not you discuss. Suggests patronising to me


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Isn't that your basic approach? Tell everyone they _just don't understand _how bad Brexit will be and if they had any sense they'd be just as panicked as you are?


Yeh he *tells* people rather than conversing with them. Poor buggers


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No. I tell people how bad I think brexit may be, and the process already has been. And I give the reasons why I think that, and also challenge ideas put forward by others regarding good things they may think come from it. That's not telling people they're clueless.
> 
> You and others read into that other things that are not there. The clown andysays above, for instance, who rarely bothers to read what people actually say before launching into an angry rant against what he thinks they probably have said.



Yeah thats not what you do at all mate soz.

Anyway the central point was that nobody should assume they have a greater understanding of the complexities of Brexit just cos they read the papers every day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah thats not what you do at all mate soz.
> 
> Anyway the central point was that nobody should assume they have a greater understanding of the complexities of Brexit just cos they read the papers every day.


Quite possibly a worse one given the constant stream of shite in the papers


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with all of this - but just thinking aloud:
> 
> Would the debate on immigration at least be a lot less unpleasant, or at least a better debate?
> 
> ...



I think you’re right on this - one thing to note is that the vote in 2016 took place with the ‘migrant crisis’ in the background and some sections of the leave campaign played on that, stirring up fear about a mass invasion. That has (at least in the media) quietened down a lot now so the fears won’t be so easy to weaponise. EU migration has also slowed, less Polish shops will be opening and there may be more acceptance of them now (in the area I was living in this was something in particular that bellends would grumble about on local Facebook groups, even though they were mainly filling empty shop units not displacing ‘native’ businesses).


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 8, 2018)

ska invita said:


> That there's real hostility out there is undeniable, and its good to see so much more open hostility and scepticism, to politicians, to mainstream media, to power institutions.
> It doesn't feel reliable though. Around the world that hostility has not for the most part gone into a constructive, socialist, mutual aid, direction. Its been successfully channelled into a selfish, inward and hateful direction.
> 
> We've just experienced a major earthquake to the global order by way of the bankers casino crash of 2008. It was perfectly clear to the whole world what had happened and who was at fault. It was and remains a massive open goal for the global left to win the arguments and force through significant changes. Where was "the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society" this last decade? As a populace we're supporting austerity, keeping calm and carrying on and voting for continuity, on the back of 40 years of the same direction.






			
				Engels (on the Fabians) said:
			
		

> A clique united only by their fear of the threatening rule of the workers and doing all in their power to avert this danger


The old, old story. _Why won't those heathens listen and convert! _

That dammed annoying working class with it's own ideas, cares and ways of acting. If only it would do as it was told by the Bolsheviks/Fabians/Labour Party/PASOK/Democrats/etc then all the problems would be over.

I could deconstruct your post post, highlighting the contradictions/errors contained within it*, but the fundamental gap in understanding would remain. You've missed the most important part of Lapavitsas quote


> Do we believe in our own strength or not? Do we believe in the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society? If we don’t, we might as well pack up and go home.


I do believe in that strength, and I know that is the only force capable of changing our lives for the better. You don't seem to and that's why you have to fall back onto "the left".

The working class has generated, is generating and will generate new methods of fighting. Adapting and changing its forms of self-organisation as older directions become atrophied and co-opted by capital. The gains the working class have made (are making and will make) have not come about because "the left" have won any argument rather the left** have won arguments on the back of working class power, solidarity and struggle. And those gains have been/will be made despite many of the working class having the "wrong" opinions.

If you truly see the working class as such a reactionary force then I'm puzzled as to why you'd call yourself a communist.

------

*For example the idea that the populace of the UK (or most other countries) support austerity or continuity is frankly bonkers. First, neo-liberalism has never been a popular doctrine - there have been strong majorities in favour of (re)nationalisation for many many years. Second, the last UK general elections was more explicitly fought on the basis of deep dissatisfaction with the extortions of the market than any for decades (even if the "alternative" provided by the LP was little more than some milk and water social democracy). And the UK is hardly alone, such sentiments have been present throughout much of the west.

It's also rather hypocritical for someone who has argued for a "vote to keep the fascists out" to now argue that such a vote somehow represents support for neo-liberalism.

**and of course the term is not defined here. From your posts on other threads I presume you would place the German Greens in "the left" but I certainly wouldn't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 8, 2018)

Is this a joke?



littlebabyjesus said:


> You and others read into that other things that are not there.



You literally did that to me repeatedly yesterday.  "Repeating" back to me what I'd said, when I'd said nothing of the sort.  Over the course of the exchange, you did it several times.  In fact you literally said to me:



littlebabyjesus said:


> But you don't really mean that, I'm guessing.



It's not often I lose my temper on here.  Very, very rarely.  But your crap yesterday annoyed me more than anything on here has annoyed me.  Read it back.


----------



## paolo (Nov 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with all of this - but just thinking aloud:
> 
> Would the debate on immigration at least be a lot less unpleasant, or at least a better debate?
> 
> ...



It’s an interesting question, and - I think - very pertinent.

The recent poll commissioned by Channel Four News is positive in this respect.

Since the referendum, there’s been a marked increase in the number of people who see immigration as beneficial.

Wherever we end up, I hope that mood prevails in the years ahead.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I totally disagree. Quite a lot of people on this thread are frankly clueless about politics in general and about the EU. I don't think you should assume that because you spend more time doing something, you neccessarily have it mastered.
> 
> I just finished playing football, play every week, always have since I stopped playing competitive sport (rugby). I'm still fucking shit tho



its not about having it "mastered" its just that people who follow the details of politics  - i.e the ins and outs of brexit - tend to more about the those details then those who dont. 
A bit like people who follow football know who is doing well in the league, who is banging in the goals, whos been injured for the rest of the season - whilst those who dont follow football wouldn't have a scooby.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its not about having it "mastered" its just that people who follow the details of politics  - i.e the ins and outs of brexit - tend to more about the those details then those who dont.
> A bit like people who follow football know who is doing well in the league, who is banging in the goals, whos been injured for the rest of the season - whilst those who dont follow football wouldn't have a scooby.


Brexit is by definition out, there are no ins in it


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2018)

Or inns


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 9, 2018)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Brexit is by definition out, there are no ins in it



its shaking it all about


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 9, 2018)

I still think brexit is economic self harm on a massive scale ( the tiresomely pragmatic me side) but in scrabbling around for positives out of this fuck up, I am happy to see the Tory filth being publicly eviscerated at every juncture. Like turds in a sewer, they have a habit of rising to the surface again eventually


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I still think brexit is economic self harm on a massive scale ( the tiresomely pragmatic me side) but in scrabbling around for positives out of this fuck up, I am happy to see the Tory filth being publicly eviscerated at every juncture. Like turds in a sewer, they have a habit of rising to the surface again eventually


Yeh but soon they will be bobbing in the south atlantic, re-entering the food chain


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 9, 2018)

Krill substitute for the mighty south Atlantic cetaceans. 

A worthy contribution for once in their lives


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 9, 2018)




----------



## splash (Nov 9, 2018)

T


DexterTCN said:


>




Talk about punching yourself in the face


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 9, 2018)

Last one 



For now


----------



## Poi E (Nov 9, 2018)

splash said:


> T
> 
> 
> Talk about punching yourself in the face



Hur yeah stupid people.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 9, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am happy to see the Tory filth being publicly eviscerated at every juncture. Like turds in a sewer, they have a habit of rising to the surface again eventually


They continue to lead in the polls.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s an interesting question, and - I think - very pertinent.
> 
> The recent poll commissioned by Channel Four News is positive in this respect.
> 
> ...



Broadly agree, including the hope bit  Although I wish that polling companies wouldn't always ask whether immigration is beneficial or not beneficial. I always wonder what it must be like for people fleeing the devastation in the Middle East, making their way through Europe, arriving in Britain and discovering that people are debating whether their involuntary displacement from their homes is good or bad for our GDP.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its not about having it "mastered" its just that people who follow the details of politics  - i.e the ins and outs of brexit - tend to more about the those details then those who dont.
> A bit like people who follow football know who is doing well in the league, who is banging in the goals, whos been injured for the rest of the season - whilst those who dont follow football wouldn't have a scooby.



Totally disagree again - I know quite a few people who follow football very closely without having a clue about what's going on 

As Pickman's has already pointed out, following all the details means very little when most of what is reported is complete nonsense. Just as you're gonna get much better analysis of the football in some papers or media sources than others, so too Brexit.

Imagine if someone told you they read all of the Express, Daily Heil and S*n coverage of Brexit every single day. You wouldn't accept that as evidence they knew the "ins and outs" of Brexit would you?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Good to see a Remoaner showing compassion for those whose livelihoods are threatened by the laws of capitalist development and making an impassioned call to nationalise these two car plants under democratic workers control, in order that both jobs and productive capacity can be kept within the community for generations to come...

Oh no wait it's just someone being a cunt on Twitter.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Nothing to do with VW being cheating liars causing the arse the fall out of their market share then?
Audi sales down 53%!
WLTP hits sales and profits in Germany
VW deliveries fall on emissions tests and tariffs


> Later that month, German automotive industry association the VDA also cited the WLTP as a factor in a 31% fall in year-on-year new passenger car registrations in Germany


No, it's because of those nasty racists.


----------



## paolo (Nov 9, 2018)

The two issues are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Downturn in business - yep.
Which plants to close? The ones that could end up being problematic with shipping.

If there’s further downturns with the German manufacturers, more of this could happen.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> No, it's because of those nasty racists.


Your WLTP quote refers to September sales, which have fallen significantly compared with those a year ago. You present it as if annual sales are down by a third. WLTP introduction has generated a big delay/hold on automotive delivery whilst manufacturers revise their cars, but it's temporary.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Your WLTP quote refers to September sales, which have fallen significantly compared with those a year ago. You present it as if annual sales are down by a third. WLTP introduction has generated a big delay/hold on automotive delivery whilst manufacturers revise their cars, but it's temporary.


Revise their cars


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2018)

As we're just dropping this stuff here:

U.K. Worker Shortage Intensifies as Starting Salaries Climb



> Britain’s labor shortage intensified at the start of the fourth quarter as the waning supply of workers from the European Union forced firms to pay more.
> 
> Overall candidate availability fell at the quickest pace in nine months in October, according to survey data collected by KPMG and the Recruitment and Employment Confederation. That helped keep starting salary inflation near the fastest in more than three years.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Revise their cars


If they fail the exam they're literally done for


----------



## mauvais (Nov 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Revise their cars


It is a revision. Normally this happens incrementally but Dieselgate has introduced a more rapid change requirement.

VW Group hit hard by new WLTP emissions test | Autocar

Most manufacturers have had to do something, e.g. introduce a GPF, but this stuff isn't some fatal downturn. If you were a supplier with cash flow issues it might put you further into the shit, but it doesn't seem to explain why Schaeffler are pulling out.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If they fail the exam they're literally done for


nah, a slight revision to their PR strategy, job done. _Temporary_ corporate image damage restored, just in time supply chain back to full capacity.
Those diesels will be flying out of the showroons in no time. Nothing to see here.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> nah, a slight revision to their PR strategy, job done. Temporary corporate image damage restored, just in time supply chain back to full capacity.
> Those diesels will be flying out of the showroons in no time. Nothing to see here.


You wouldn't be suggesting that all the above is PRO-EU signal boosting naivety/ignorance would you? Or that this is all the poster concerns seems to ever do.

I hope that he likes the way the EU are going to _Make Ireland Pay For The Wall._


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 9, 2018)

Breaking news from BBC, which could belong more in the 'Tory Death Spiral' thread  but anyway :

Minister Jo Johnson quits over Brexit

"calling for public to have fresh say on Brexit" apparantly 

I offer no comment, but I just thought Brexit-thread people might be mildly interested ....


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Breaking news from BBC, which could belong more in the 'Tory Death Spiral' thread  but anyway :
> 
> Minister Jo Johnson quits over Brexit
> 
> ...


Blimey - pro eu elitist demands situation to suit what they want.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 9, 2018)

Not Boris, the other one 



> To those who say that is an affront to democracy given the 2016 result, I ask this. Is it more democratic to rely on a three year old vote based on what an idealised Brexit might offer, or to have a vote based on what we know it does actually entail?



Why I cannot support the Government’s proposed Brexit deal


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 9, 2018)

Minister Jo Johnson quits over Brexit


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 9, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Blimey - pro eu elitist demands situation to suit what they want.



True. I'm not claiming it's a major story or big shock or anything ....


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2018)

Going to do the_ lining up with_ argument this time you lot?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 9, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why I cannot support the Government’s proposed Brexit deal



Not sure why his statement appears on that site , but worth a look, because it shows what Jo Johnson actually says.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 9, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Going to do the_ lining up with_ argument this time you lot?




Nah -- can't be arsed  and the pub's more important anyway ... got to go out


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

mauvais said:


> It is a revision. Normally this happens incrementally but Dieselgate has introduced a more rapid change requirement.
> 
> VW Group hit hard by new WLTP emissions test | Autocar
> 
> Most manufacturers have had to do something, e.g. introduce a GPF, but this stuff isn't some fatal downturn. If you were a supplier with cash flow issues it might put you further into the shit, but it doesn't seem to explain why Schaeffler are pulling out.


you're having a laugh. Most SME's in the german automotive supply chain are shitting their pants right now. The first wave of insolvency is underway from parts suppliers to leasing companies.
The only upside is development engineering for new EVs, where german manufacturers are woefully behind their main competators and find themselves to panic mode playing catch-up. 
Lets face it, their image is in tatters and whether they manage to claw back their reputation for premium quality products is doubtful at best.
Would you buy a new VW?


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

mauvais said:


> You present it as if annual sales are down by a third. .


Did I? How so?


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 9, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> You wouldn't be suggesting that all the above is PRO-EU signal boosting naivety/ignorance would you? Or that this is all the poster concerns seems to ever do.
> 
> I hope that he likes the way the EU are going to _Make Ireland Pay For The Wall._


Would love to have seen the EU affording the same blind optimism to those tax cheating greeks (thanks for cooking the books Helmut) that may have hurt a couple of german banks that mauvais is giving those german car manufacturers who's cheating is literally poisoning us.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Minister Jo Johnson quits over Brexit


I'm still thinking a deal will be agreed and the deal will be voted through Parliament, largely on the grounds that enough tories will vote for it (on grounds of self interest, May's desperation to get it through etc.). However the house of cards is certainly wobbling.  ONe big resignation or a couple of middle ranking ministers and it really does look precarious.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 9, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you're having a laugh. Most SME's in the german automotive supply chain are shitting their pants right now. The first wave of insolvency is underway from parts suppliers to leasing companies.
> The only upside is development engineering for new EVs, where german manufacturers are woefully behind their main competators and find themselves to panic mode playing catch-up.
> Lets face it, their image is in tatters and whether they manage to claw back their reputation for premium quality products is doubtful at best.
> Would you buy a new VW?


I wouldn't have bought one of the group's cars before any of this, I think they're best described as cynical. Doesn't seem to have put anyone else off at all really, except maybe Americans where VW has always meant something different & distinctly less premium.

I've not much love at all for German automotive manufacturers, quite the opposite, but I think you're overstating the case significantly. Unfortunately in a predictable absence of punishment, VW profits recovered entirely (11bn EUR pa) since Dieselgate and only now are slipping somewhat because of WLTP. If anything there's bigger timebomb stuff going on like their long-established European discounting in order to turn the screw on their competitors.

All of this is obviously a particularly dull tangent, but the point is the British automotive industry is making loads of noise about Brexit not because of one manufacturer's supposed troubles but because global manufacturers primarily bothered to set up in foreign regions (e.g. Japanese factories in the EU) to avoid paying import charges, and if that condition ceases to be true, they'll need to move again unless Britain is somehow that important a market (spoiler alert: it ain't). So it is fairly predictable that uncertainty means they'll all fuck off if forced to make commitments.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 9, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I'm still thinking a deal will be agreed and the deal will be voted through Parliament, largely on the grounds that enough tories will vote for it (on grounds of self interest, May's desperation to get it through etc.). However the house of cards is certainly wobbling.  ONe big resignation or a couple of middle ranking ministers and it really does look precarious.


I don't know anywhere near enough to comment on this thread. I, like William of Walworth wasn't sure whether or not to put it here or the tory death spiral thread. All I do know is any sort of wobble with that lot makes me smile.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Hur yeah stupid people.


They deserve it the idiots. Probably old and racist too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> They deserve it the idiots. Probably old and racist too.



YEAH.

Fucking scum 

How dare they live and work somewhere that voted Leave?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> They deserve it the idiots. Probably old and racist too.


Nor did they have the nous to benefit from  modern conditions as set by the eu. Bye. I'm off on my erasmus. _Whatever that is._


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 9, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I'm still thinking a deal will be agreed and the deal will be voted through Parliament, largely on the grounds that enough tories will vote for it (on grounds of self interest, May's desperation to get it through etc.). However the house of cards is certainly wobbling.  ONe big resignation or a couple of middle ranking ministers and it really does look precarious.



the fact she is _still_  trying to bounce the DUP into accepting a deal which could end up with an Irish sea border is telling (it wont -  apparently -  because she wont let that happen. honest ) indicates that she cant get a deal past her own mps. Shes just keeps going round in circles.
I cant think how she will get a deal through parliament.
The only deal the EU will accept - her own mps wont.
The only deal her mps will accept  - the EU wont.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 9, 2018)

mauvais post up there has more actual interest than the above 3 posts**? Maybe? 

**13662 to 13664


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 10, 2018)

Jo Johnson has helpfully crystalised the framing of the debate.
Its "vassalage or chaos" vs 2nd ref (or GE)

May survival is dependant on enough mps buying her threat that its her deal or crashing out. Johnson (J) is certainly not alone in rejecting that as a false choice.

As has been pointed out above - any deal that the EU agree to will be shit, demonstrably shitter than what the uk has already and nobody but May loyalists is going to be defending it.
The remain supporting media will take Johnson's position.
The brexit media  will call may deal  a betrayal.
Labour will vote against. The tory brexiteers will vote against. The tory arch remainers will vote against.

May will resign. A50 will be suspended.

A 2nd ref gives parliament a bit more democratic defence that just calling the whole thing off 

The tory brexiteers can blame May and the establishment for sabotaging brexit from the start. they can call for a no deal crash out, knowing that it wont happen but leaving them with the ideological purity intact.
the labour party can blame May for making an utter fuck up of it leaving no option but to suspend A50 or face armageddon whilst arguing that they did their best to respect the ref result but weren't in power.

2nd ref may be bitterly resented by a big chunk of the brexit voting population - but id argue that the toxic legacy of brexit goes back to having a referendum on the first place which allowed people to vote for something that was impossible to deliver.

But then we have the very real possibility that leave wins a 2nd referendum - and oh the joys that will bring.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 10, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Jo Johnson has helpfully crystalised the framing of the debate.
> Its "vassalage or chaos" vs 2nd ref (or GE)
> 
> May survival is dependant on enough mps buying her threat that its her deal or crashing out. Johnson (J) is certainly not alone in rejecting that as a false choice.
> ...


Worth remembering that for all their opposition Corbyns position is also Vassal 2.0. I think at this stage id rather Vassal than second ref. Meaningful Brexit has to be chaos crash out and I'm sceptical that will be anything other than a round of disaster capitalism. Might be wrong though.

I expect general election rather than second ref, that seems to be what is being prepared for (corbyn meeting MI6 yesterday, the budget etc)


----------



## chilango (Nov 10, 2018)

ska invita said:


> They continue to lead in the polls.



They continue to be ahead of the other parties in the game sure.

That's not saying as much as sometimes people say it is.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Worth remembering that for all their opposition Corbyns position is also Vassal 2.0. I think at this stage id rather Vassal than second ref. Meaningful Brexit has to be chaos crash out and I'm sceptical that will be anything other than a round of disaster capitalism. Might be wrong though.
> 
> I expect general election rather than second ref, that seems to be what is being prepared for (corbyn meeting MI6 yesterday, the budget etc)


Hang on - remainers like you are now anti-vassalage? The whole point of remaining is vasselage. _A people's vassalage._


----------



## Wolveryeti (Nov 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Good to see a Remoaner showing compassion for those whose livelihoods are threatened by the laws of capitalist development and making an impassioned call to nationalise these two car plants under democratic workers control, in order that both jobs and productive capacity can be kept within the community for generations to come...
> 
> Oh no wait it's just someone being a cunt on Twitter.


Astonishing intellectual dishonesty on show here. The 'laws of capitalist development' *created* the jobs. The decision to leave the SM is destroying them - as the CEO's statement made clear. You also havent explained how nationalisation and democratic ownership is going to help with the problem of parts that have a collapsing export market, because nobody on the continent in their right mind will want to pay a tariff surcharge for parts stuck in a lorry park with unknown ETA...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2018)

Astonishing intellectual honesty on show here. _The market decides and the market is right._


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 10, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Astonishing intellectual dishonesty on show here. The 'laws of capitalist development' *created* the jobs. The decision to leave the SM is destroying them - as the CEO's statement made clear. You also havent explained how nationalisation and democratic ownership is going to help with the problem of parts that have a collapsing export market, because nobody on the continent in their right mind will want to pay a tariff surcharge for parts stuck in a lorry park with unknown ETA...



It's not my dishonesty so much as your stupidity comrade.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 10, 2018)

So you can create jobs without workers. The wonders of capitalism never cease.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Nov 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not my dishonesty so much as your stupidity comrade.


Yeah - that'll probably be it. Your plan to solve the problems of Brexit by nationalising everything was too genius - totally bamboozled me.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> literally no mention of the labour left rise and anti austerity opinion within and without it. Yes the labour left is what it is, let us list the flaws. I'm not here to hold them up, I'm pointing out that the monolithic 'we' you conjure doesn't exist. There is a successful party in the country opposed to austerity. This is a massive blind spot for every 'brexit is like trump' analyses I've read, just goes unmentioned. I mean, not even slagged off and dismissed as hopeless. Just not mentioned.


Yes, this and the fact that nearly half the US couldn’t stomach turning out for the vote whilst turnout for brexit(and Indy) was up.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 10, 2018)

Poi E said:


> its reactionary voyage of discovery


Are you sure you have the mettle for breaking up the union ?  

And also, wales voted leave. Diolch!


----------



## Poi E (Nov 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Are you sure you have the mettle for breaking up the union ?



It'll dissipate like a smelly fart.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Nov 10, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> They deserve it the idiots. Probably old and racist too.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 11, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> but id argue that the toxic legacy of brexit goes back to having a referendum on the first place which allowed people to vote for something that was impossible to deliver.


I'm not going to claim the EU referendum was some huge democratic victory but this statement has some very dangerous implications.

Why is leaving the EU (which was what was on the ballot paper) impossible? Who gets to decide what's impossible?

The impossibility/dangerousness of ideas is the argument has been used to justify attacks socialist and social democrat governments in the past, whether it's outright coups (e.g. Chile), security service meddling (e.g. UK) the imposition of economic controls (e.g. Ireland, Greece, etc) or something else.

You really can't see how things like councils setting illegal budgets, closed shops, secondary picketing, nationalisations etc (let alone workers control of the means of production) don't get declared "impossible" and thus off limits with your proposal?



Wolveryeti said:


> Astonishing intellectual dishonesty on show here. The 'laws of capitalist development' *created* the jobs. The decision to leave the SM is destroying them - as the CEO's statement made clear. You also havent explained how nationalisation and democratic ownership is going to help with the problem of parts that have a collapsing export market, because nobody on the continent in their right mind will want to pay a tariff surcharge for parts stuck in a lorry park with unknown ETA...


You couldn't have a better example of why the Remainer/Leaver stuff is such nonsense. Anyone who thinks this prick is on the same side as them isn't my comrade.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 11, 2018)

Can of worms here. Conceded everything rather than disclose who their funders are.

TaxPayers’ Alliance concedes it launched smears against Brexit whistleblower


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Yeah - that'll probably be it. Your plan to solve the problems of Brexit by nationalising everything was too genius - totally bamboozled me.



See you've misunderstood again - my plan isn't about solving Brexit it's about solving the issue of who owns and controls production. Which is a lot more important than Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


>



What is this no context offering?


----------



## alex_ (Nov 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> See you've misunderstood again - my plan isn't about solving Brexit it's about solving the issue of who owns and controls production. Which is a lot more important than Brexit.



I think if you are going to “own and control production” you should probably think about where what you are producing is used.

Because if is on the otherwise of a tariff border - you are probably producing the wrong thing.

Alex


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What is this no context offering?


Is this better?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I think if you are going to “own and control production” you should probably think about where what you are producing is used.
> 
> Because if is on the otherwise of a tariff border - you are probably producing the wrong thing.
> 
> Alex



Ahhh right yeah cos what we produce must be determined by profit not by need, right? If market conditions aren't favourable then it's the workers that are wrong for being manufacturing workers!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Is this better?




That's certainly a lot more self explanatory than the previous offering but it doesn't help me understand the previous offering.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ahhh right yeah cos what we produce must be determined by profit not by need, right? If market conditions aren't favourable then it's the workers that are wrong for being manufacturing workers!



It’s a factory which makes bearings for car manufacturers across Europe, the consumers are car manufacturers.

Alex


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 11, 2018)

Poi E said:


> It'll dissipate like a smelly fart.


Ha! But thing is it won’t and we will get the same shit, freak outs, THE CHAOS OF DISRUPTION etc. I mind people warning even about the dangers of nationalism last time around- flags, one party state all manner of mad shit. If Yessers wholeheartedly embrace  similar arguments as applied to brexit, it’s only going to make it more difficult for them to challenge project fear should Indy 2 happen.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What is this no context offering?


Bloody Turkey voting for Christmas!


----------



## paolo (Nov 11, 2018)

‘Some of the marchers chanted, “away with the EU”

Polish leaders march with far-right to mark century of independence


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 11, 2018)

And? What point are you trying to make? 

I'm not sure how the EU's willingness to turn a bling eye to crap like this or the stuff happening in Hungary is an argument in it's favour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Ha! But thing is it won’t and we will get the same shit, freak outs, THE CHAOS OF DISRUPTION etc. I mind people warning even about the dangers of nationalism last time around- flags, one party state all manner of mad shit. If Yessers wholeheartedly embrace  similar arguments as applied to brexit, it’s only going to make it more difficult for them to challenge project fear should Indy 2 happen.


Never mind Indy 2, wait for Indy 500


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Never mind Indy 2, wait for Indy 500


Fair enough there’s probably no point in trying to rationalise now, we are in “A STATE OF FLUX”
We’re all going to be proven wankers
Is that what you meant Pickers


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Fair enough there’s probably no point in trying to rationalise now, we are in “A STATE OF FLUX”
> We’re all going to be proven wankers
> Is that what you meant Pickers


I am not Pickers


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I am not Pickers


How do you know? By all accounts Brexit has been so heinous that it has surely punched a hole in time, meet your cavalier and  jovial alternate self. 

(Sorry, the brexit thread has broken me)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> How do you know? By all accounts Brexit has been so heinous that it has surely punched a hole in time, meet your cavalier and  jovial alternate self.
> 
> (Sorry, the brexit thread has broken me)


I know because I don't give a shit about Dulwich hamlet but pickers does


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I know because I don't give a shit about Dulwich hamlet but pickers does


Haha


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 12, 2018)

Fucking clowns, now we seem to be amidst a rush for the exits now that someone had shouted “fire” 

Self serving gutless careerist wankers the lot of them. May can fuck off obvs - she is being lynched by the party she lives for.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 12, 2018)

137 days till we do a Brexit

650 MP's

That's 4.7 MP's to resing each day.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 12, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Fucking clowns, now we seem to be amidst a rush for the exits now that someone had shouted “fire”
> 
> Self serving gutless careerist wankers the lot of them. May can fuck off obvs - she is being lynched by the party she lives for.


It’s been a prolific 2  years for metaphors and similes and that eh


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> 137 days till we do a Brexit
> 
> 650 MP's
> 
> That's 4.7 MP's to resing each day.


Yeh but the Sinn féin mps don't take their seats. Is resing a euphemism for guillotine?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Fucking clowns, now we seem to be amidst a rush for the exits now that someone had shouted “fire”
> 
> Self serving gutless careerist wankers the lot of them. May can fuck off obvs - she is being lynched by the party she lives for.


Let's see if that's the case


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 12, 2018)

The 'May has got a deal sorted and is just pushing it to the wire to make sure her party supports it' theory is looking increasingly far-fetched. I think she's genuinely just a fucking idiot, incapable of comprehending the basic facts of the situation. If she really has engineered the present clusterfuck deliberately she'd better hope the endgame is worth abandoning all her credibility and most of her allies for.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 12, 2018)

Many more will quit once they know how much work there will be to do


----------



## paolo (Nov 12, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The 'May has got a deal sorted and is just pushing it to the wire to make sure her party supports it' theory is looking increasingly far-fetched. I think she's genuinely just a fucking idiot, incapable of comprehending the basic facts of the situation. If she really has engineered the present clusterfuck deliberately she'd better hope the endgame is worth abandoning all her credibility and most of her allies for.



I don’t think she’s doing gamesmanship. Seems like she’s just trying to muddle through a mess, which she’s failing at completely. I’m not sure Corbyn would be fairing much better, but the again Labour doesn’t have full on nutters like Rees Mogg, or a whole kitchen of knife sharpeners like Johnson, Davis and Gove.

She seems equally out of her depth, and at the same time a enduring masochist. Who would, by now, actively *want* to lead this shit show?

To unwind, I think she must spend an evening stabbing herself in the arm with a fork.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 13, 2018)

I'll just dump this here without any context or discussion


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

* Brexit talks 'in the endgame', Theresa May declares *
*


Sounds like will all be sorted by tea time.*


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> * Brexit talks 'in the endgame', Theresa May declares *
> *
> 
> 
> Sounds like will all be sorted by tea time.*



We'll all be home for Christmas


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

Hang on, Endgame or End Game 

could mean the end of a deal, or they will do a deal soon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> * Brexit talks 'in the endgame', Theresa May declares *
> *
> 
> 
> Sounds like will all be sorted by tea time.*


this will be the endgame where the eu declares victory


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> * Brexit talks 'in the endgame', Theresa May declares *
> *
> 
> 
> Sounds like will all be sorted by tea time.*


tm confused between end times and endgame


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

So it wont all be sorted today then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> So it wont all be sorted today then?


it will never be sorted the way theresa may wants it sorted. this time next year we'll be discussing this on the 'political  crises which have disappeared' thread while we hum 'ode to joy'.


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 13, 2018)

I think she’s secretly praying for a massive asteroid strike. We’ve all been there when we’ve not done our homework for the next day and it’s 11pm.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I think she’s secretly praying for a massive asteroid strike. We’ve all been there when we’ve not done our homework for the next day and it’s 11pm.


word is that she's been binge watching salvation on netflix, praying for a british darius tanz


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 13, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I think she’s secretly praying for a massive asteroid strike. We’ve all been there when we’ve not done our homework for the next day and it’s 11pm.


walking extra slowly across the road...just a leg injury would do, please god...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 13, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I think she’s secretly praying for a massive asteroid strike. We’ve all been there when we’ve not done our homework for the next day and it’s 11pm.



In 2010 I royally fucked up a group booking, whilst trying to work out how to resolve it/break the news to the client, the Icelandic volcano blew up and caused the worst disruption to European aviation since WW2. Hundreds of thousands of people had their travel plans thrown in to disarray as airspace was closed for five full days, including the outward date of my (non)group. Many people lost lots of money, failed to get to weddings, funerals and all sorts. I for one couldn't have been happier


----------



## Supine (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> So it wont all be sorted today then?



The dog is currently eating the homework


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

*Brexit secretary accused of urging cabinet to vote against his own plan

The government’s Brexit secretary is reportedly planning to push senior cabinet members to rebel against the Brexit deal he’s working on.

*
Which when you think about it makes total sense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> *Brexit secretary accused of urging cabinet to vote against his own plan
> 
> The government’s Brexit secretary is reportedly planning to push senior cabinet members to rebel against the Brexit deal he’s working on.
> 
> ...


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

Brexit is just awesome


----------



## Poi E (Nov 13, 2018)

Good shake-down for the body politic.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

Anyone else now want to just crash out with no deal just to see what happens?

or is that just me?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 13, 2018)

From a BBC article "On Monday night, some cabinet ministers met for drinks in Mr Fox's office to discuss Brexit, including no-deal plans and the Irish "backstop"."

Wouldn't be too much to ask if you cunts could do this sober?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone else now want to just crash out with no deal just to see what happens?
> 
> or is that just me?


"Do Not Press This Button"


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 152396


There was a period after he got the job when most tv journos had clearly never said his name outloud before and for that first view days he was Dominic R_ab_.  Then he soon became Dominc R_aaab_ - whereas now he's just a plain old N_ob_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Wilf said:


> There was a period after he got the job when most tv journos had clearly never said his name outloud before and for that first view days he was Dominic R_ab_.  Then he soon became Dominc R_aaab_ - whereas now he's just a plain old N_ob_.


draab


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

I have we reached the point where Remoanery has been fully medicalised yet?  I'm hoping to set up an expensive counselling service to cater to the traumas that Guardian readers are currently feeling.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 13, 2018)

Mrs S says the one thing that winds her up about the whole Brexit calamity, is how many people pronounce it Bregsit!
Where is the G she asks?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

I'm also pitching a Dr Who script where young professionals and hipsters feel themselves drawn to the fields of Armagh and encounter a strange forcefield.  The Dr is played by the Continuity Jodie Whittaker.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 13, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Mrs S says the one thing that winds her up about the whole Brexit calamity, is how many people pronounce it Bregsit!
> Where is the G she asks?



She's not wrong. May is among the worst offenders for this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Mrs S says the one thing that winds her up about the whole Brexit calamity, is how many people pronounce it Bregsit!
> Where is the G she asks?


that's the bregsit calamity, only tangentially to do with the brexit calamity


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> She's not wrong. May is among the worst offenders for this.


may is due a trip to azkaban, the new port facility taking shape on the outskirts of grytviken


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

Don’t think anyone will realise how bad the whole idea really was until the try and bring back more than 200 fags from Benidorm.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Where is the G she asks?


 Stuck at Dover, it didn't have the necessary frictionless trade papers.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

*Will Brexit mean I have to pay duty on goods I bring back from holidays in the EU?*
*
One of the big changes will be you won't be able to bring as many cigarettes back. *

*But you will be able to access duty free shopping within the EU.*

*So what you can bring home will be cheaper.*

*The restrictions will be similar to the rules imposed on British travellers returning from non-EU nations.*

*In other words you must not take in more than 200 cigarette - otherwise you will have to pay duty.*




I never saw that on the side of a fuckign bus?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> *Will Brexit mean I have to pay duty on goods I bring back from holidays in the EU?*
> *
> One of the big changes will be you won't be able to bring as many cigarettes back. *
> 
> ...


it was on the roof. in little letters.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 13, 2018)

I have noticed the breggsit saying myself, everyone with RP or whatever approggsimation of it they have pronounce it that way, the news heads and commentating bods. The real people I meet who use the portmanteau sound the x. Brex-it


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> *Will Brexit mean I have to pay duty on goods I bring back from holidays in the EU?*
> *
> One of the big changes will be you won't be able to bring as many cigarettes back. *
> 
> ...


Ah, I've got it now! _That's_ why Brexit will save the NHS £350m - expensive tabs.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 13, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> *So what you can bring home will be cheaper.*



Assuming pound / euro doesn’t change


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 13, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Mrs S says the one thing that winds her up about the whole Brexit calamity, is how many people pronounce it Bregsit!
> Where is the G she asks?



Bloke I work with calls it Brit-Ex


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bloke I work with calls it Brit-Ex



So does my hapless line manager


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bloke I work with calls it Brit-Ex


Like Tippex, but even whiter? M'kay.

Hang on, the guardian just hacked by account!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2018)

So NI gets special status within a wider customs agreement?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> So NI gets special status within a wider customs agreement?


Would now be about the right moment to make Arlene Foster pay back all that heating scheme money?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2018)

Cabinet members called in to sign off May's Brexit deal



> Ministers have been summoned to an emergency cabinet meeting on Wednesday where they will be asked to sign off Theresa May’s final Brexit deal with Brussels.
> 
> The critical meeting will review the final text of the withdrawal agreement, which was reached on Tuesday by British and European Union negotiators as the first step in the long process of ratifying the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2018)

DUP say no


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> DUP say no



Of course they haven't, they haven't seen the deal yet.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2018)

Unless it is massively different to whatever they are aware of, then they are not likely to go for it. Unless they get a huge bung obvs. They do have principles you know


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

"We want another £10 billion - and you've got to do the dance".


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

It'll end up no deal or (referendum or rescinding article 50)


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It'll end up no deal or (referendum or rescinding article 50)


I'm certainly looking forward to the smirk on Jean-Claude Junker's face when Raaaaaab has to get into that.

- Ah, I hear you want another referendum?
'Well, er... yes, we... erm, might have to...'
- Splendid, splendid, well, just get back to me when you've decided. Oh, but do remember the terms have changed now the old deal has expired. For starters, you and Mrs May have to turn up the next summit dressed as Smurfs with a baguette up your brexits. That's okay isn't it?
'Well, yes - but could we talk about the backstop?'


----------



## 8ball (Nov 13, 2018)

Brexit deal fails - People's Vote more likely than ever!!!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2018)

According to BBC coverage, the Irish government isn't happy about the text, which would suggest there's something in it to keep the DUP onside.


----------



## agricola (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> According to BBC coverage, the Irish government isn't happy about the text, which would suggest there's something in it to keep the DUP onside.



Given the standard of this Government's negotiations so far, they are probably miffed that owning a bowler hat and sash will only result in a fine rather than an immediate custodial sentence.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Brexit deal fails - People's Vote more likely than ever!!!


Arrrggggh...and there I was busyily arranging our "text of proposed withdrawal agreement has been stabilised" street party this evening.


----------



## andysays (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> According to BBC coverage, the Irish government isn't happy about the text, which would suggest there's something in it to keep the DUP onside.



Given that the agreement is apparently between UK and EU negotiators, and it hasn't even been seen by the British government yet, I'm not sure how the Irish government are in a position to be happy or not happy about it


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2018)




----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Brexit deal fails - People's Vote more likely than ever!!!



Part of the no deal Brexit plan involves trying to get a clause in all future trade agreements that entitles UK plc to special treatment, proportionate to the number of memes and related internet phenomenon its cultural and political products have helped foster over the years. Rickrolling alone is believed to potentially be worth as much as the present trade in fossilised grape snarlings between the UK and its european partners.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 13, 2018)

Someone I know is in the negotiation team (civil service) and said to me last week that the UK govt had more or less given up trying to appease the DUP.

I've made that deliberately vague so they can't be identified, that's all I've got on the subject. Will be interesting to see if it's true.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 13, 2018)

spitfire said:


> Someone I know is in the negotiation team (civil service) and said to me last week that the UK govt had more or less given up trying to appease the DUP.
> 
> I've made that deliberately vague so they can't be identified, that's all I've got on the subject. Will be interesting to see if it's true.


May doesn't need them now; she's got >10 anti-Corbyn PLPers who will fill the gap.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 13, 2018)

brogdale said:


> May doesn't need them now; she's got >10 anti-Corbyn PLPers who will fill the gap.



Exactly. That seemed to be the gist of it.


----------



## elbows (Nov 13, 2018)

spitfire said:


> Someone I know is in the negotiation team (civil service) and said to me last week that the UK govt had more or less given up trying to appease the DUP.
> 
> I've made that deliberately vague so they can't be identified, that's all I've got on the subject. Will be interesting to see if it's true.



Well I bet it wouldn't be the first time negotiations in this world have had to ignore some of the DUPs blowhard red lines in order to get anywhere. Whether they are quite so hard to please and appease in private as they make out to be in public is another question that may factor into this equation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> According to BBC coverage, the Irish government isn't happy about the text, which would suggest there's something in it to keep the DUP onside.


Everything in it is in scots-irish


----------



## spitfire (Nov 13, 2018)

elbows said:


> Well I bet it wouldn't be the first time negotiations in this world have had to ignore some of the DUPs blowhard red lines in order to get anywhere. Whether they are quite so hard to please and appease in private as they make out to be in public is another question that may factor into this equation.



Apparently they are just as difficult. Headbangers. Not a surprise to those of us from over the water but a massive surprise to the Tories who have slightly more flexible beliefs.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 13, 2018)

brogdale said:


> May doesn't need them now; she's got >10 anti-Corbyn PLPers who will fill the gap.


She doesn't need them because Corbyn and his followers will vote for it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> Given that the agreement is apparently between UK and EU negotiators, and it hasn't even been seen by the British government yet, I'm not sure how the Irish government are in a position to be happy or not happy about it



Well, Rees-Mogg being interviewed was very upset that's been leaked to RTE, before even the cabinet has been briefed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

8ball said:


> Brexit deal fails - People's Vote more likely than ever!!!



Quality Rick Roll there.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> She doesn't need them because Corbyn and his followers will vote for it.


Really?
I thought their plan was to bring her down?


----------



## andysays (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well, Rees-Mogg being interviewed was very upset that's been leaked to RTE, before even the cabinet has been briefed.



Is this on the radio? I didn't see anything on the website...

...but there's something here now
Brexit: UK and EU 'agree text' of draft withdrawal agreement


> Jacob Rees-Mogg on draft #Brexit agreement: "It is a failure of the government's negotiating position and a failure to deliver on Brexit"


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> She doesn't need them because Corbyn and his followers will vote for it.


So that's the campaign group then


----------



## Poi E (Nov 13, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Really?
> I thought their plan was to bring her down?



So did I. But they don't seem interested.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 13, 2018)

Poi E said:


> So did I. But they don't seem interested.


Bit soon to tell?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Bit soon to tell?



To be fair, Corbyn should be baying red-faced for a GE, and he should have been doing it basically since the last one.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> She doesn't need them because Corbyn and his followers will vote for it.



where do you get that from? Labour has been strongly indicating for months that it will vote against the deal may is likely to get. Why would they pass up a golden opportunity to kick the government in the bollocks?
The labour reminaer rebels will vote it down cos they see it as a path a to a 2nd ref.
The small band of labour brexiteer rebels  may well decide - like the tory brexiteers - that is its a sell out to the EU and vote against (i think hoey was already said as much).
May cant get this deal through because -unless the EU has performed a massive about turn in the past 48 hours) - the only people who will vote for it are May loyalists. Shes probably 50 votes short at least.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

Not much detail about what the deal is in the news yet, just that everybody hates it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

Although I'm assuming it's "kick the can down the road for 3 years"


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well, Rees-Mogg being interviewed was very upset that's been leaked to RTE, before even the cabinet has been briefed.


Mogg the Merciless beinng pissed off is a postive no matter what's in the deal


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 13, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well, Rees-Mogg being interviewed was very upset that's been leaked to RTE, before even the cabinet has been briefed.


Rees Mogg and the DUP unhappy?

How soon can it be signed?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 13, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Rees Mogg and the DUP unhappy?
> 
> How soon can it be signed?



The devout and the staunch united.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 13, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> DUP say no



did they also say never?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 13, 2018)

fucking told you it would all be sorted by tea time


----------



## belboid (Nov 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Although I'm assuming it's "kick the can down the road for 3 years"


Or nine months. Whichever comes sooner. 

At which point some unknown EU bureaucrats can sign us up to another two years of de facto membership


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 13, 2018)

belboid said:


> Or nine months. Whichever comes sooner.
> 
> At which point some unknown EU bureaucrats can sign us up to another two years of de facto membership



Yeah I reckon either way we'll be in same place in 3 years...

Substituting Permanent War for Permanent Brexit


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not much detail about what the deal is in the news yet, just that everybody hates it.



the art of compromise...


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 14, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the art of compromise...



Well, they say that when both sides strongly criticise a deal, it could be a sign that it's fair. Or it could be a sign that it's utter shit and whoever came up with it should be ashamed of themselves.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 14, 2018)

The Guardian have Loathesome second after Maybot in their headline gif in a way that scares me


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> The Guardian have Loathesome second after Maybot in their headline gif in a way that scares me



I went looking for that to see what you meant, but it must have changed since you saw it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I went looking for that to see what you meant, but it must have changed since you saw it.
> 
> View attachment 152452


No, on the Web page not the front page


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> fucking told you it would all be sorted by tea time


You've just been holding off from having tea so you could say that


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Well, they say that when both sides strongly criticise a deal, it could be a sign that it's fair. Or it could be a sign that it's utter shit and whoever came up with it should be ashamed of themselves.



Unfortunately, I don’t have the ability to critique and opine on something I haven’t actually read. This doesn’t seem to apply to others however.

Given the hysterically pompous reaction of the hard core EU Neo Lib fanclub and the deranged fury from the loyalists and Tory loons we can guess that the deal doesn’t go far enough for either side. What a shock eh


----------



## Supine (Nov 14, 2018)

I reckon first resignation by 5pm. In time for the six o'clock news but after the 2pm meeting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Unfortunately, I don’t have the ability to critique and opine on something I haven’t actually read


That's a pity. Everyone else does. An example: it is a truth universally acknowledged that I cannot stand Jane austen and will never read her despite never having actually opened one of her books.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> I reckon first resignation by 5pm. In time for the six o'clock news but after the 2pm meeting.


Hope something happens before my elevenses


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No, on the Web page not the front page


It’s my age. When someone says “newspaper” I still immediately think “paper edition”, even though I haven’t  read a physical paper in ages.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You've just been holding off from having tea so you could say that



Was playing Squash init.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

I was hoping we could stop talking about Brexit now. But no, Radio Scotland is having a Brexit Phone In. 

I’m having a Radio Turn Off.


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him



Would we? I tell you what, having money in brixton certainly does _do stuff_ to you. Stuff critical to you maybe.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him


He probably should and will stay on brexit. But now wouldn't be a bad time to do a 'meanwhile in Britain... food banks... bedroom tax... sanctions' question.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

I’m just back from Tesco. No looting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him


Quoted for posterity so we can laugh at you


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m just back from Tesco. No looting.



Stockpiling?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

theres a reaction that sums up priorities. I saw it a few weeks ago on the twitterbox 'well Brexit is happening but Corbyn seems to care more about sue from basingstokes bus fares' . This mute incomprehension and political narcissism why you lost lads.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Would we? I tell you what, having money in brixton certainly does _do stuff_ to you. Stuff critical to you maybe.


Woman on radio the other day...10 weeks of no UC meant that she couldn't afford bus fares for her kids to get to school...worried about being done for truancy etc.
Bet she voted Leave, the bigot.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


> Stockpiling?


A loaf and a dozen eggs.


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> He probably should and will stay on brexit. But now wouldn't be a bad time to do a 'meanwhile in Britain... food banks... bedroom tax... sanctions' question.


He should stay on Brexit but as usual will lob up nice easy to bat back, unanswered questions. He won’t manage to pin May down and make her squirm. Unfortunately.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> A loaf and a dozen eggs.


Anything but a Lion on them eggs and you ain't coming back through customs matey. 
#_keepalbionsalmonellafree_


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> A loaf and a dozen eggs.



Topical French toast I surmise?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Topical French toast I surmise?


cheese sarnies and a dozen egged politicians


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Anything but a Lion on them eggs and you ain't coming back through customs matey.
> #_keepalbionsalmonellafree_


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Topical French toast I surmise?


My two daughters and the eldest’s boyfriend are staying. When they eventually get up (at the crack of noon, no doubt), I’ll probably do scrambled eggs and toast.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

I see blair has issued forth words again, not as one might think to condemn the labour parties enemies but rather to slag off corbyn. Big tone. lol.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I see blair has issued forth words again, not as one might think to condemn the labour parties enemies but rather to slag off corbyn. Big tone. lol.


it's not too late for him to sway the british publick by announcing a hard brexit is in the country's best interests


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I see blair has issued forth words again, not as one might think to condemn the labour parties enemies but rather to slag off corbyn. Big tone. lol.


If only we'd had a dodgy dossier, this whole brexit thing would have been gone in a flash.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> If only we'd had a dodgy dossier, this whole brexit thing would have been gone in a flash.


if only he'd said the eu can chuck us out at 45 minutes notice


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

A bad deal is better than no deal then i guess?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> My two daughters and the eldest’s boyfriend are staying. When they eventually get up (at the crack of noon, no doubt), I’ll probably do scrambled eggs and toast.



Just in time for the first Tory resignations.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

Honestly though this could be a tense day for me.
Given the state of my prostate I may well piss my pants.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

So, cabinet meets at 2.00, conscription introduced by 5.00. I'm 57 and have a bad back, so I hope I'll miss it. If not I'll pretend I'm in a reserved occupation, like webdesigner or wellness guru.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> So, cabinet meets at 2.00, conscription introduced by 5.00. I'm 57 and have a bad back, so I hope I'll miss it. If not I'll pretend I'm in a reserved occupation, like webdesigner or wellness guru.


perhaps each cabinet member could be given a pistol with one bullet in it, and a glass of whisky

corbyn and co can clean up the bodies when they move in this evening


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

I hear the EU wants an army now. As one wag put it 'nothing makes me more confident about europe than german re-armament'


Wilf said:


> So, cabinet meets at 2.00, conscription introduced by 5.00. I'm 57 and have a bad back, so I hope I'll miss it. If not I'll pretend I'm in a reserved occupation, like webdesigner or wellness guru.


I get a sweet gig in psyops and command of my own troll farm. All the pringles I can eat.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps each cabinet member could be given a pistol with one bullet in it, and a glass of whisky
> 
> corbyn and co can clean up the bodies when they move in this evening



Or a AK47 ‘’for when you need to kill everyone in the mother fucking room’’


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Or a AK47 ‘’for when you need to kill everyone in the mother fucking room’’


or someone could just throw in a grenade and lock the door


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps each cabinet member could be given a pistol with one bullet in it, and a glass of whisky
> 
> corbyn and co can clean up the bodies when they move in this evening


_I'm sorry Prime Minister, but now we can't import Lugers, you'll all have to beat each other to death round the cabinet table._


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

rumours may has ordered kool-aid be served at the cabinet meeting are false, the prime minister's spokesman told the press this morning


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I hear the EU wants an army now. As one wag put it 'nothing makes me more confident about europe than german re-armament'
> 
> I get a sweet gig in psyops and command of my own troll farm. All the pringles I can eat.


_'Wilson! Where's Private Walker_?
- He was delayed at the Fake News factory Sir.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> _'Wilson! Where's Private Walker_?
> - He was delayed at the Fake News factory Sir.


don't tell them your name, raab


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> don't tell them your name, raab


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> rumours may has ordered kool-aid be served at the cabinet meeting are false, the prime minister's spokesman told the press this morning



She _May_ change here mind.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> rumours may has ordered kool-aid be served at the cabinet meeting are false, the prime minister's spokesman told the press this morning



No, but Adaptil calm diffusers have been plugged in to placate the nervous dogs.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I went looking for that to see what you meant, but it must have changed since you saw it.
> 
> View attachment 152452


Those are not flattering photos, Hammond looks like he has been caught shoplifting and is trying to act nonchalant, Fox looks like someone has stuck a pole up his bum.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

Loved all that "Vassal state" stuff from Johnson & the swivel-eyed fraternity yesterday...like giving a lesson in how to present the notion that the 'shared sovereignty' in the supra-state amounts to...er...some sovereignty...and now there'll be none.

#takebackcontrol


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Loved all that "Vassal state" stuff from Johnson & the swivel-eyed fraternity yesterday...like giving a lesson in how to present the notion that the 'shared sovereignty' in the supra-state amounts to...er...some sovereignty...and now there'll be none.
> 
> #takebackcontrol



I was thinking that - positioning himself for a subtle Damascene conversion?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

JRM and Alistair Campbell suddenly very buddy buddy over this "vassalage" question which is the tack Jo Johnson has taken to - could we yet see unity between Brexiteers and Remoaners as they discover what they really care about is getting rid of May without Corbyn coming to power?


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

As a remainer I thought it was a good thing for that side that parliament would have the final say. As what May is apparently going to put to parliament is more or less remain I feel now I was wrong as she’s probably going to be defeated.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I was hoping we could stop talking about Brexit now. But no, Radio Scotland is having a Brexit Phone In.
> 
> I’m having a Radio Turn Off.


The first rule of Brexit Club is to talk endlessly about Brexit...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> As a remainer I thought it was a good thing for that side that parliament would have the final say. As what May is apparently going to put to parliament is more or less remain I feel now I was wrong as she’s probably going to be defeated.


It's not really more of less remain is it


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> The first rule of Brexit Club is to talk endlessly about Brexit...


The mad thing is, the nerd in me is lapping up the coverage today.  Even while I’m fed up with it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

Labour MP's that will vote with the government:

frank fields
jess philips


more?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The mad thing is, the nerd in me is lapping up the coverage today.  Even while I’m fed up with it.



same. 

"ooh - update on the guardian live feed - maybe someone has resigned?? - oh no - its a procedural question from PMQs - ooh.. another update !! "  heroin for newsnerds.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The mad thing is, the nerd in me is lapping up the coverage today.  Even while I’m fed up with it.


Stockholm syndrome Danny!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Labour MP's that will vote with the government:
> 
> frank fields
> jess philips
> ...


La Flint.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> same.
> 
> "ooh - update on the guardian live feed - maybe someone has resigned?? - oh no - its a procedural question from PMQs - ooh.. another update !! "  heroin for newsnerds.



All today needs is for Robert Mueller to indict some Trump family members...


----------



## ska invita (Nov 14, 2018)

This is interesting



> The leaders of the four main opposition parties in Westminster – *Jeremy Corbyn* for Labour, *Vince Cable* for the Lib Dems, *Ian Blackford* for the SNP and *Liz Saville Roberts* for Plaid Cymru – have written to the prime minister demanding a “truly meaningful vote”. Here’s the full text of their letter:
> 
> We are writing to you with regard to an issue of the utmost importance: That is to ensure that Parliament has a truly meaningful vote on any Brexit withdrawal agreement.
> 
> ...



Sounds like they're a bit nervous about just how meaningful their "meaningful" vote is.

---

I know we don't know the full details but its hard to see how this deal (what we know if it) would be much different from a Labour brokered deal...I expect it passes Labours 6 tests too (though some of those tests are pretty vague..."Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?"). Any thoughts on that?

Those 6 tests

Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
 Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?

Also talking of front pages notable that the Express seem to back the deal - no BRETRAYAL!!! headline there....will be interesting to see who else falls in behind May from the harder brexit camp.







DotCommunist said:


> Labour MP's that will vote with the government:
> 
> frank fields
> jess philips
> ...


yes 
eventually...

i reckon this is going to pass 
eventually...


----------



## philosophical (Nov 14, 2018)

Judging by Kate Hoey's question in PMQ's she can envisage some kind of sanctions in place to prevent Republic of Ireland fishing fleets in the waters for six miles around the UK coast in Northern Ireland.
I wonder if she has any idea how such a thing might happen in practice.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> La Flint.



Only if cameras are present to witness her doing so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

ska invita said:


> i reckon this is going to pass
> eventually...


Like any shit


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Signs of Remainiac Tories moving in May's direction.
Tory remainers 'getting cold feet' about Brexit deal rebellion

This reporting is all fluff at the moment, but my hunch is that today is the big hurdle. If she gets cabinet support the drift is likely to be in her direction afterwards. There's a logic that the more the deal looks like a customs union, the more it alienates the swivellers, but I suspect attrition and the logic of ultimately being a political party will take over.

Same time, she really is making a fist of fucking the whole thing up.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Like any shit


i know it looks unlikely but....


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

What a birthday present for HRH. He will remember this day for many many years to come


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> What a birthday present for HRH. He will remember this day for many many years to come


In all probability for 32 years. Though for how many of those he’ll remember anything is open to debate. And maybe bets. I’ll check.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> What a birthday present for HRH. He will remember this day for many many years to come


the toady programme surpassed itself earlier, when at 6:59 they went 'it's the parasite charles philip arthur george windsor's birthday today' and inflicted on the listening publick that awful dirge the national anthem.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Labour MP's that will vote with the government:
> 
> frank fields
> jess philips
> ...



Field is now an independent. 

Chris Leslie maybe.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> fist of fucking


Porno parody of bruce lee classic


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> What a birthday present for HRH. He will remember this day for many many years to come



The day the government flopped around like a subjugated trout.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

He is inheriting a vassal state it seems - fits well with the vapid status of the monarchy in the U.K.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> The day the government flopped around like a subjugated trout.


hopefully the day the government flopped about like a subjugated trout and popped their clogs.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> The day the government flopped around like a subjugated trout.



Kilgore trout

So it goes


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> He is inheriting a vassal state it seems - fits well with the vapid status of the monarchy in the U.K.


a vassal state for an asshole prince
ok its should be arsehole but it would rhyme even less with vassal than asshole does


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him


1

2

3

you really are full to be brim with excrement.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

I know we don't know the details yet, and the DUP is talking about voting against it, together with some Tory MPs, yet the Tory Chief Whip reckons parliament will support it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I know we don't know the details yet, and the DUP is talking about voting against it, together with some Tory MPs, yet the Tory Chief Whip reckons parliament will support it.


drink had been taken, the whips office confirm


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> 1
> View attachment 152477
> 2
> View attachment 152479
> ...


Was only able to half watch (unlike you when I’m at work I need to actually do a little bit) but thought he did well but not brilliant. In the past few weeks and months he’s been absolutely terrible so it was easy for him to show a bit better. 

Will try to download and look properly on the plane while I’m flying back home later on


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 14, 2018)

Don't forget your top end business laptop. Twat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Was only able to half watch (unlike you when I’m at work I need to actually do a little bit) but thought he did well but not brilliant. In the past few weeks and months he’s been absolutely terrible so it was easy for him to show a bit better.
> 
> Will try to download and look properly on the plane while I’m flying back home later on


i wasn't able to watch at all, as anyone but a shitferbrains twat would have inferred from the snips clearly indicating they weren't taken live.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

Appears that may called trump to crawly bum lick on the mid terms according to the standard but in response got a shouty hot earful from the prez about Iran.

Not really her week is it ?


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i wasn't able to watch at all, as anyone but a shitferbrains twat would have inferred from the snips clearly indicating they weren't taken live.


Well you’ll be glad of my report then. Which I feel you can’t judge from reading an online report. As I say he did ok when measured against his previous performances. But not brilliant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Well you’ll be glad of my report then. Which I feel you can’t judge from reading an online report. As I say he did ok when measured against his previous performances. But not brilliant.


which avoids the main point i was making which is that your claim that





Mr Retro said:


> In normal times we’d be looking forward to PMQ’s today. But Corbyn will probably let her off by asking about bus routes or something else currently critical to him


was er shit. you can witter on and on and no doubt you will, but nothing you can say will erase the fact that once again when put to the test what you have to say turns out to be drivel.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> a vassal state for an asshole prince
> ok its should be arsehole but it would rhyme even less with vassal than asshole does


all I've got is tassel and wassail.


vessel is close but no 


not-bono-ever said:


> Appears that may called trump to crawly bum lick on the mid terms according to the standard but in response got a shouty hot earful from the prez about Iran.
> 
> Not really her week is it ?


o/t but it looks like Iran which halted its nuclear program is now getting fucked over because of Pence's deep seated hatred of islam, whereas over in NK the evidence for halting the programs is zero yet free pass because that grandstand meeting made trump feel like a political fucking titan


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Well you’ll be glad of my report then. Which I feel you can’t judge from reading an online report. As I say he did ok when measured against his previous performances. But not brilliant.



I think the point is you said he would ask about bus routes and not talk about Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's not really more of less remain is it



It's not leaving though is it? So if we were in the EU, and we're not leaving...


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> all I've got is tassel and wassail.
> 
> 
> vessel is close but no


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think the point is you said he would ask about bus routes and not talk about Brexit.


Yes. Just being sarcastic like. Pickmans knows this but he’s pissing his pants because he thinks really really showing me up. He’s not too bright. ((Pickmans))


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Appears that may called trump to crawly bum lick on the mid terms according to the standard but in response got a shouty hot earful from the prez about Iran.
> 
> Not really her week is it ?


*Pained Pause*
'I would like to make it clear that I am focusing all my energies on securing the best possible... drone... drone'
*Does dance*
*Unlike the right honourable member's party the Conservatives are... drone.... drone'
*Chokes on chip*


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Yes. Just being sarcastic like. Pickmans knows this but he’s pissing his pants because he thinks really really showing me up. He’s not too bright. ((Pickmans))



If he's not too bright, what does it say about you that he's showing you up?


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The mad thing is, the nerd in me is lapping up the coverage today.  Even while I’m fed up with it.


I haven't been able to keep up with it today as I've been at work, but now I'm on my way home and will be catching up with it all ASAP...


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I hear the EU wants an army now.



Noises from France, not much appetite elsewhere.

The biggest opposers historically has been the UK. That particular impediment has effectively ended, but I doubt it will happen.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

ska invita said:


> This is interesting
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In purely practical terms,  I can't really see how any amendments at this point are going to work. 

Is May going to go back to the negotiations and say "I know we finally had an agreement  but here are a bunch of amendments the British parliament has passed. Any chance of a quick rewrite?"


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Yes. Just being sarcastic like. Pickmans knows this but he’s pissing his pants because he thinks really really showing me up. He’s not too bright. ((Pickmans))


i'm not pissing my pants
i don't think i'm really showing you up because you've always been like this, every one knows it, but no one ever calls you out on it: misplaced kindness perhaps
this is just one time i decided to pull you up on your diarrhetick ways
as for people being none too bright, your wattage is below even treelover's


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> as for people being none too bright, your wattage is below even treelover's



That's harsh


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's harsh


but true


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

The whole brexit story could be summed up by referencing one single page episode of Drunken Bakers from Viz


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 152490


----------



## Winot (Nov 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Stockholm syndrome Danny!



Slough Syndrome after Brexit.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> all I've got is tassel and wassail.
> vessel is close but no



Hassle / Vassal.
That's all.

I love how we're about to become a ''vassal state'' implying we aren't currently.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Noises from France, not much appetite elsewhere.
> 
> The biggest opposers historically has been the UK. That particular impediment has effectively ended, but I doubt it will happen.



Dunno, while it's normally given short shrift it's also never been mooted while US and Europe have been so divergent on foreign and defence policy (and relations so toxic on a personal level between the various governments).

The French are looking for a mechanism to get everyone else to pay for and contribute to their assorted wars in Saharan Africa, the Germans are looking for a way to get out of defence spending altogether, and the EU structures are looking for a way to centralise political power - the other side of this however is that the eastern states have absolutely no faith in German promises of military support, the northern EU states have no interest in the Brussels power grab, and the Irish are petrified that they'll be asked to actually have a defence budget.

My own view is that - assuming the € zone doesn't collapse - that this is very much the direction of travel for the EU: the EU is already attempting to set immigration policy, it already has a foreign policy structure, economic policy is being set by the ECB, and there's a nacent defence structure around the EDA.

European military in 5 years? No chance. European military in 30 years? Not an even chance, but heading that way....


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> In all probability for 32 years. Though for how many of those he’ll remember anything is open to debate. And maybe bets. I’ll check.


not-bono-ever So my local bookie is not accepting bets on whether Prince Charles has Alzheimer's.

Which I’m assuming means he does.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Hassle / Vassal.
> That's all.
> 
> I love how we're about to become a ''vassal state'' implying we aren't currently.


even vassals
can wassail


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> not-bono-ever So my local bookie is not accepting bets on whether Prince Charles has Alzheimer's.
> 
> Which I’m assuming means he does.


yeh, what do you give the prince who has everything? alzheimers


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Dunno, while it's normally given short shrift it's also never been mooted while US and Europe have been so divergent on foreign and defence policy (and relations so toxic on a personal level between the various governments).
> 
> The French are looking for a mechanism to get everyone else to pay for and contribute to their assorted wars in Saharan Africa, the Germans are looking for a way to get out of defence spending altogether, and the EU structures are looking for a way to centralise political power - the other side of this however is that the eastern states have absolutely no faith in German promises of military support, the northern EU states have no interest in the Brussels power grab, and the Irish are petrified that they'll be asked to actually have a defence budget.
> 
> ...



“EU AND WHOSE ARMY?” - sometimes Brexit headlines write themselves. 

Seriously though, I largely agree with your analysis.

One idea is that by having a consolidated European force, the member states will be less on the hook to America, expecting quid pro quo for interventions.

That idea is, for now, running in glue. 27 member states with a range of views, makes things like this incredibly difficult to pass.

So yeah, I think your timeframe verdict and likelihood sound about right.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

“unleash the dancing tramp of brexit”

ordered prime minister Cameron 

A weak metaphor too far and too obscure for most


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I love how we're about to become a ''vassal state'' implying we aren't currently.


aye and the *we* here is problematic isn't it? I know what it means for jonson et al, but the we I know never owned one lousy handful of earth (as the song has it)


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 14, 2018)

Since this began each time I see ''sovereignty'' it's never made clear for whom exactly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> aye and the *we* here is problematic isn't it? I know what it means for jonson et al, but the we I know never owned one lousy handful of earth (as the song has it)


never did have land reform in this country...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Since this began each time I see ''sovereignty'' it's never made clear for whom exactly.


sovereign t


----------



## Winot (Nov 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Since this began each time I see ''sovereignty'' it's never made clear for whom exactly.



The Queen.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> never did have land reform in this country...


I blame the 'Lord Protector'


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I blame the 'Lord Protector'


no time like the present, dc, no time like the present


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

friedaweed said:


>


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 152496


"Nasty Brexitses stole my precious"


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 14, 2018)

Winot said:


> The Queen.



Exactly. Not for me, not for you. Not for anyone I know. Literally fuck all is going to change, but for the worse. ''Sovereignty'' ffs. ''Take back control'', well I'd sure like some control over my life.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> "Nasty Brexitses stole my precious"



Man with zero credibility, and as such adds nothing to the debate. I’d be quite happy if he completely shut up about this. And most everything.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> One idea is that by having a consolidated European force, the member states will be less on the hook to America, expecting quid pro quo for interventions.



Yeah! We can be way less reliant on US imperialism if we go back to good old fashioned European imperialism and THIS TIME we can all work together!




paolo said:


> “EU AND WHOSE ARMY?” - sometimes Brexit headlines write themselves.



Srsly tho great headline


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Just read that may will be making a statement at 5.00 (sky feed I think). Not, I imagine that agreement has been reached, more about getting her version in first.  Time for a Bingo Card:


In the weeks and months ahead
Working hard
Seeking solutions
Difficult issues remain
National interest
Junker is a pisshead


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah! We can be way less reliant on US imperialism if we go back to good old fashioned European imperialism and THIS TIME we can all work together!



The idea doesn’t have much traction.

Germany isn’t too keen on wars 



> Srsly tho great headline



First day at the Express tomorrow!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Since this began each time I see ''sovereignty'' it's never made clear for whom exactly.


Prob best to assume that the person using the word is referring to that of finance capital, whether they did so intentionally or not.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Just read that may will be making a statement at 5.00 (sky feed I think). Not, I imagine that agreement has been reached, more about getting her version in first.  Time for a Bingo Card:
> 
> 
> In the weeks and months ahead
> ...



Acshually, 6.00 or even 7 (grauniad):



> *May's Brexit cabinet meeting now expected to run at least until 6pm*
> The cabinet meeting is overrunning, we’ve been told. Theresa May had been expected to make a statement when it finished at around 5pm, but apparently it is now due to run at least until 6pm (ie, for four hours) and perhaps until 7pm (ie, for five hours).


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Just read that may will be making a statement at 5.00 (sky feed I think). Not, I imagine that agreement has been reached, more about getting her version in first.  Time for a Bingo Card:
> 
> 
> In the weeks and months ahead
> ...



BBC reporting the cabinet meeting is going to over run 5 pm, could go onto 6 pm or later, so, don't expect any statement from May at 5 pm.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BBC reporting the cabinet meeting is going to over run 5 pm, could go onto 6 pm or later, so, don't expect any statement from May at 5 pm.


Wonder if they've gone back to beer and sandwiches? If there's owt forrin in the buffet there'll be hell to pay.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Man with zero credibility, and as such adds nothing to the debate. I’d be quite happy if he completely shut up about this. And most everything.


Oh he adds to the debate with every pronouncement he makes. Only he doesn't realise all his efforts reinforce the brexit side.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Wonder if they've gone back to beer and sandwiches? If there's owt forrin in the buffet there'll be hell to pay.


Even by your high standards that is funny, damn near choked on my cuppa.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Wonder if they've gone back to beer and sandwiches? If there's owt forrin in the buffet there'll be hell to pay.


Heineken and baguettes


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

We’ve now entered that zone of “continuous news about no actual news”.

Like election night specials in the hours before the exit polls. Wall to wall coverage of *nothing material*.

“Sarah, you’re in Swindon. What are people saying there?”
“Well, David, here in Swindon the mood everywhere seems to be: We’ll have to wait and see.”
“Thanks Sarah, and now back to London”


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BBC reporting the cabinet meeting is going to over run 5 pm, could go onto 6 pm or later, so, don't expect any statement from May at 5 pm.



We could do a couple of hours of speculation about what the reasons for the delay might be...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’ve now entered that zone of “continuous news about no actual news”.
> 
> Like election night specials in the hours before the exit polls. Wall to wall coverage of *nothing material*.
> 
> ...


We've got the right to an input on the end date of a bi-lateral backstop agreement, with modest implications for our shadow membership of the single market! * Britain is Great Again*, *UP YOUR'S DELORS*!


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> We could do a couple of hours of speculation about what the reasons for the delay might be...



Gove was sulking because Dominos don't have a foie gras topping.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We've got the right to an input on the end date of a bi-lateral backstop agreement, with modest implications for our shadow membership of the single market! * Britain is Great Again*, *UP YOUR'S DELORS*!


We are indeed a nation of grocers


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> We are indeed a nation of grocers


Grammar is surely something we can reinvent in the absence of the EU 'rulebook'. And metric can fuck off as well.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Arlene Foster STILL hasn't seen the text of the deal


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

The cabinet haven't even seen it yet!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Arlene Foster STILL hasn't seen the text of the deal



Of course not, she's not in the cabinet, she's due to be briefed later this evening.



SpackleFrog said:


> The cabinet haven't even seen it yet!



They have & are now discussing it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Arlene Foster STILL hasn't seen the text of the deal


she's been retweeting things like 'politics is the art of the possible, but it is also votes' today apparently lol


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Of course not, she's not in the cabinet, she's due to be briefed later this evening.



Sigh. 

What does it tell you if the DUP haven't seen the deal and are going on telly saying they haven't seen it and there will be consequences if they don't like it?


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Heineken and baguettes



Peroni and foccacia


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Just read that may will be making a statement at 5.00 (sky feed I think). Not, I imagine that agreement has been reached, more about getting her version in first.  Time for a Bingo Card:
> 
> 
> In the weeks and months ahead
> ...


NOTHING HAS CHANGED


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Arlene Foster STILL hasn't seen the text of the deal



Northern Ireland not being entirely aligned to the rest of the United Kingdom is a red line for the DUP; unless is reproductive rights for women.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> Gove was sulking because Dominos don't have a foie gras topping.



I was thinking more in terms of speculation about the possible political significance, but don't let me stop you


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

I like the idea there's somebody called _Mordaunt_ is in on the discussions. It's as if the cast of Gormenghast is deciding our future. Oh, hang on, that's _exactly_ what it is.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

Theresa May negotiates paying full price for a DFS sofa - The Rochdale Herald


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Farridge must be pissed off. As the original campaigner, he’ll only get told the state of ‘his’ project when we do.


----------



## tommers (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I like the idea there's somebody called _Mordaunt_ is in on the discussions. It's as if the cast of Gormenghast is deciding our future. Oh, hang on, that's _exactly_ what it is.


She's one of the bad professors from Harry Potter.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The cabinet haven't even seen it yet!



Well they're gonna have do an illustrated version in fuzzy felt for Dominic Raab.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

tommers said:


> She's one of the bad professors from Harry Potter.


I was thinking along the same lines. Gove is clearly Golum as noted upthread, but the rest of it is Slithering House taking us through to the sunlit uplands.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well they're gonna have do an illustrated version in fuzzy felt for Dominic Raab.



I bet he's got friends who can help him read it, no man is an island.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> no man is an island.


I don’t think that’s true.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

I'm not sure but I'm watching bbc news and I *think* May might have cancelled her statement.


----------



## tommers (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sigh.
> 
> What does it tell you if the DUP haven't seen the deal and are going on telly saying they haven't seen it and there will be consequences if they don't like it?



Nothing, right from the off they have been saying if they don't like, they'll vote against it. 

OTOH, if reports are right about there being different arrangements in the agreement for NI, which the DUP are highly unlikely to accept, I wonder what trick May thinks she has got to get this agreed by Parliament, secret talks with Labour MPs? 

Anyway, it was always going to be a briefing of the cabinet first, I suspect the DUP next, followed by the leaders in Scotland & Wales.  

I assume someone will also be briefing the Manx, Jersey & Guernsey governments, because whilst the island states are not EU members, their current special relationship is dependant on UK membership, and will therefore change, assuming we leave.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure but I'm watching bbc news and I *think* May might have cancelled her statement.


First it's put back, now it's (apparently) cancelled

It sounds increasingly like she can't get Cabinet agreement, or is that wishful thinking on my part?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> First it's put back, now it's (apparently) cancelled
> 
> It sounds increasingly like she can't get Cabinet agreement, or is that wishful thinking on my part?



I think that's a pretty safe bet tbh.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> OTOH, if reports are right about there being different arrangements in the agreement for NI, which the DUP are highly unlikely to accept, I wonder what trick May thinks she has got to get this agreed by Parliament, secret talks with Labour MPs? ...


Something along the lines of 'LOOK! OVER THERE!' I would imagine.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

If anyone hasn't watched Lisa Nandy on politics live today - worth checking it out on iPlayer. She made the Tory she was sitting next look a absolute tool.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Nothing, right from the off they have been saying if they don't like, they'll vote against it.
> 
> OTOH, if reports are right about there being different arrangements in the agreement for NI, which the DUP are highly unlikely to accept, I wonder what trick May thinks she has got to get this agreed by Parliament, secret talks with Labour MPs?
> 
> ...



I actually think it's more likely that there will be no different arrangement, because May doesn't seem too worried about them, but who knows?


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


>


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 14, 2018)

Fiona Bruce:

_We are live in Downing Street because it’d take too long to get back to the studio now. _


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


>




Lol - when will this be?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

PM's short statement - 'We're fucked, I resign'.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 14, 2018)

She's just keeping them in the Cab meet to stop them resigning.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> She's just keeping them in the Cab meet to stop them resigning.



Gove with a gag-ball in his mouth, strapped down, whilst May is plunging in, saying “want me to Brexit You Harder?”

(In the absence of news, the mind wanders.)


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> She's just keeping them in the Cab meet to stop them resigning.



The live tweeting from the Beeb is suggesting she's going to face a vote of no confidence from the Party. That would be awesome! She brings a deal home, gets the sack from her own party .... Jeeza ends up looking the model of stability and certainty as they elect the living Spitting Image puppet PM.


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> The live tweeting from the Beeb is suggesting she's going to face a vote of no confidence from the Party. That would be awesome! She brings a deal home, gets the sack from her own party .... Jeeza ends up looking the model of stability and certainty as they elect the living Spitting Image puppet PM.



having Cosmonautics Day off is going to be great


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> having Cosmonautics Day off is going to be great



I can't see how the Tory Party can change PM at this moment without calling for an election.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Anyone know what the technicalities of that would be?

I mean, theoretically could they just put a new leader in?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 14, 2018)

Yes. That's what happened with Brown and May.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I can't see how the Tory Party can change PM at this moment without calling for an election.



Perhaps not but the point is, they will try


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Anyone know what the technicalities of that would be?
> 
> I mean, theoretically could they just put a new leader in?



Yes.

May was appointed leader without a vote.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yes.
> 
> May was appointed leader without a vote.



 Of course. Thought I’d missed something for a moment.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes. That's what happened with Brown and May.


And with Major and Callaghan and just about everyone else you could mention.

Providing the new leader of the party can command a majority in the HoC, they become the PM.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

..


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> And with Major and Callaghan and just about everyone else you could mention.
> 
> Providing the new leader of the party can command a majority in the HoC, they become the PM.



They don't even have to be a leader of any party. They just need to command a majority in the HOC.  #ThoughtYouGNU


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> The live tweeting from the Beeb is suggesting she's going to face a vote of no confidence from the Party. That would be awesome! She brings a deal home, gets the sack from her own party .... Jeeza ends up looking the model of stability and certainty as they elect the living Spitting Image puppet PM.



Got any links for live sources?

Mine have dried up. Cheers.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> ..



Brexit negotiations latest

Brexit deal: May in crunch cabinet meeting to decide fate of agreement – Politics live


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Got any links for live sources?
> 
> Mine have dried up. Cheers.


See Guardian live feed.

bemused is rather overstating it. There are some rumours that the ERG is making a move to try and force a VoNC. Even if the requisite number of letters are sent in that doesn't mean May would lose any vote.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 14, 2018)

But I thought they hadn't got anyone??


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They don't even have to be a leader of any party. They just need to command a majority in the HOC.  #ThoughtYouGNU



This is true, but not immediately relevant.

If the Tories kick out May and choose a new leader, that new leader will get first go at forming a government, though them being able to command a majority isn't a certainty...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

BREAKING NEWS - Dominic Raab has cancelled his planned trip to Brussels tonight.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 14, 2018)

Or has had it cancelled


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

andysays said:


> This is true, but not immediately relevant.
> 
> If the Tories kick out May and choose a new leader, that new leader will get first go at forming a government, though them being able to command a majority isn't a certainty...



We're probably in very uncertain territory here but couldn't anyone who can form a majority come forward and have a go? It's all just convention anyway.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Anyone know what the technicalities of that would be?
> 
> I mean, theoretically could they just put a new leader in?



1. The MPs put names in the hat
2. MPs vote in a series of rounds until two are left
3. The membership vote on the two

If only one candidate is put forward, skip step three.


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

18:45
*Is 'a leadership contest by accident' on the cards?*
The BBC's Laura Kuenssberg says she understands there has not yet been an official decision by the ERG - the European Research Group of influential Brexiteers - to push the button on letters calling for a vote of no confidence to be sent.

But, she adds, levels of anger so high that some are doing it anyway - this might be the start of crashing into a leadership contest by accident. It's impossible to tell yet.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

The party elects a leader from its parliamentary members. If the party are already in government the winner of the leadership contest becomes Prime Minister. Until a general election.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

How many letters in Brady’s locked drawer?


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> We're probably in very uncertain territory here but couldn't anyone who can form a majority come forward and have a go? It's all just convention anyway.



I dunno. The only way in a really close and complex situation to actually discover who can form a majority is to put it to the test. 

There are, as I understand it, conventions about who gets to have first go, but none of that is immediately relevant so I'm more interested in the current drama...


----------



## Santino (Nov 14, 2018)

How many Tory 'moderates'  and Lib Dems would Corbyn need to form an emergency minority government, in the national interest?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> The party elects a leader from its parliamentary members. If the party are already in government the winner of the leadership contest becomes Prime Minister. Until a general election.


In practice that's how it works these days. 

But technically SpackleFrog is right, the PM can be anyone who commands the confidence of the HoC.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

If the ERG managed a power grab, I’d guess all manner of shit would kick off.

I have, of course, now entered the full extrapolated black hole of no news.

Speculating about speculation.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Santino said:


> How many Tory 'moderates'  and Lib Dems would Corbyn need to form an emergency minority government, in the national interest?



The Lib Dem’s fit in a minibus.

SNP would be the way to turn.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In practice that's how it works these days.
> 
> But technically SpackleFrog is right, the PM can be anyone who commands the confidence of the HoC.



I suppose for instance in war time or national emergency, some form of coalition?


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> See Guardian live feed.
> 
> bemused is rather overstating it. There are some rumours that the ERG is making a move to try and force a VoNC. Even if the requisite number of letters are sent in that doesn't mean May would lose any vote.



I'm just repeating Laura K


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

BBC saying May is going to make a statement very soon.


----------



## Santino (Nov 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I suppose for instance in war time or national emergency, some form of coalition?


Some kind of ''national" government.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

C-4 News - Will it be May's finest hour or final hour?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 14, 2018)

Has anyone actually seen the Cabinet members since the meeting began? I'm starting to suspect May has killed them all and will address the press wearing a necklace of ears.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> The Lib Dem’s fit in a minibus.
> 
> SNP would be the way to turn.



Doh. Scrub that. They’re wholly remain.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> If the ERG managed a power grab, I’d guess all manner of shit would kick off.
> 
> I have, of course, now entered the full extrapolated black hole of no news.
> 
> Speculating about speculation.


Do you know what % of Tory MPs are members of the ERG? Less than 20%.

They can make things very uncomfortable for May, they can probably mean that May will require Labour support to get this deal through parliament but they don't have the numbers to make a power grab, if the rest of the party oppose it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Has anyone actually seen the Cabinet members since the meeting began? I'm starting to suspect May has killed them all and will address the press wearing a necklace of ears.



Nice idea but I just can't see May ever doing something that made me respect her.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Has anyone actually seen the Cabinet members since the meeting began? I'm starting to suspect May has killed them all and will address the press wearing a necklace of ears.



They went to the Saudi Embassy by 'mistake'


----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

19:05


> *Five-hour cabinet meeting ends*
> After five hours, the cabinet meeting has concluded, says Laura Kuenssberg, the BBC's political editor.
> 
> Prime Minister Theresa May is expected to make a statement shortly. The microphone outside Number 10 awaits.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - Dominic Raab has cancelled his planned trip to Brussels tonight.



I’m assuming that the *intended* schedule then, was that Raab would go to Brussels to say, yep, we’ve got cabinet backing, let’s now timetable U.K/EU announcements for tomorrow.

With nothing yet coming out, this is sounding like there’s a fight back in London. If so I’d guess that’ll go the distance. Both (UK) sides will be wanting to say *something* tomorrow, so they’ll go on all night if need be, even if it ends up with contradictory claims of victory.

(E2a: Oh hold on!)


----------



## mauvais (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - Dominic Raab has cancelled his planned trip to Brussels tonight.


After learning that it's in Belgium, presumably.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

mauvais said:


> After learning that it's in Belgium, presumably.


He's terrified of sprouts


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Has anyone actually seen the Cabinet members since the meeting began? I'm starting to suspect May has killed them all and will address the press wearing a necklace of ears.


That would be totally awesome, it would certainly make the swivellers think twice about backstabbing her.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 14, 2018)

I'm watching footage of her front door, and the Beeb are airing the director's audio feed bizarrely


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

My guess is that this statement is going to waffly and lacking any significant detail.

The next real churn will come when the MPs have at it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

Fucking hell, she's pulled off getting cabinet support. 

Well for now, resignations tomorrow?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 14, 2018)

Noisy protestors


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## andysays (Nov 14, 2018)

Is the delay because she's going to premiere a new dance routine and there's some last minute choreography changes?


----------



## Supine (Nov 14, 2018)

Voice sync problems and shouty protesters. Poor theresa


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 14, 2018)

What a fucking waste of time that was.


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

Statement over, not even a sniff of what it contains but at least six mentions of "national interest".  It must be absolutely horrifying.


----------



## editor (Nov 14, 2018)

This government will be remembered as the biggest fuck up in modern times, but you can guarantee all the cunts responsible will still do very nicely for themselves when the country goes tits up.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

The voice sync problems made it look like the Maybot had a serious malfunction.


----------



## editor (Nov 14, 2018)

And fuck those fucking non-entity opportunist backward fuckers the DUP.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> Statement over, not even a sniff of what it contains but at least six mentions of "national interest".  It must be absolutely horrifying.


A rancid steaming turd I surmise


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 152510



I like to give these clowns job titles.

The bloke on the right the Regional Head of Photocopying Supplies?


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> Statement over, not even a sniff of what it contains but at least six mentions of "national interest".  It must be absolutely horrifying.



As predicted.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> Statement over, not even a sniff of what it contains but at least six mentions of "national interest".  It must be absolutely horrifying.



She's sold the whole country to the Chinese for the price of a cab fare to the airport.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 14, 2018)

Fuck them all. I am drunk. FUCK THEM ALL


----------



## tommers (Nov 14, 2018)

Vaguely disappointed. Was hoping for some dramatic flouncing and May crying.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> Statement over, not even a sniff of what it contains but at least six mentions of "national interest".  It must be absolutely horrifying.



There was never going to be a 'sniff of what it contains' tonight, the DUP needs briefing first, then the leaders in Scotland & Wales, and MPs in parliament tomorrow.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

Everyone is fucked... Everyone


----------



## Poot (Nov 14, 2018)

I don't know what just happened but I didn't like it.


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> There was never going to be a 'sniff of what it contains' tonight, the DUP needs briefing first, then the leaders in Scotland & Wales, and MPs in parliament tomorrow.



According to the BBC the EU is going to release the text tonight.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> According to the BBC the EU is going to release the text tonight.



Yep, just heard that, I am guessing May will be talking to the DUP right now.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

The Tories are pleased to announce that the Tories have come to an agreement, and the agreement, which we will tell you about in due course, is the best agreement you could have hoped for.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)

I’m kind of enjoying the unfolding clusterfuck.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

Linky to draft agreement for anyone who might be inclined to lose the will to live.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement_0.pdf


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

Mogg is fairly predictably unimpressed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

editor said:


> This government will be remembered as the biggest fuck up in modern times, but you can guarantee all the cunts responsible will still do very nicely for themselves when the country goes tits up.


Yes, they will be very pleased with themselves to be acting deputy team leaders on the south atlantic canal network


----------



## CRI (Nov 14, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Linky to draft agreement for anyone who might be inclined to lose the will to live.
> 
> https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement_0.pdf


Let us know what it says when you've read it, okay?  Don't fancy reading 285 pages of dogshit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, just heard that, I am guessing May will be talking to the DUP right now.


Rumours Arlene Foster has reactivated auld paisley's vanguard and sent them after tm can be poo-pooed number ten says


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

CRI said:


> Let us know what it says when you've read it, okay?  Don't fancy reading 285 pages of dogshit.


585 I think you'll find


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Linky to draft agreement for anyone who might be inclined to lose the will to live.
> 
> https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/draft_withdrawal_agreement_0.pdf



the bit on state aid (Articles 9 and 10, page 366) is astonishing:



> ARTICLE 9
> 
> Independent authority
> 
> ...


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> the bit on state aid (Articles 9 and 10, page 366) is astonishing:



Tl;dr


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> the bit on state aid (Articles 9 and 10, page 366) is astonishing:



blimey how did you spot that so quickly?


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> Tl;dr



You ought to read it, horribly legalise as it is.

It's very significant vs Corbyn's views.


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> blimey how did you spot that so quickly?



I didn't, just thought that was a likely area where they would roll over.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> You ought to read it, horribly legalise as it is.
> 
> It's very significant vs Corbyn's views.


What’s it saying? I’m knackered and can’t be arsed to translate the legalise


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 14, 2018)

Here's the bit about extending the "temporary" transition period. There's provision there for "temporary" to be until the end of 2099


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> What’s it saying? I’m knackered and can’t be arsed to translate the legalise


It's saying may's cocked it up


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's saying may's cocked it up


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> You ought to read it, horribly legalise as it is.
> 
> It's very significant vs Corbyn's views.



<kicks at the ground in sullen manner and looks at post...>


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 14, 2018)

Also, from her statement:



> When you strip away the detail, the choice before us is clear. This deal which delivers on the vote of the referendum, which brings back control of our money, laws and borders; ends free movement; protects jobs, security and our union; or leave with no deal; or no Brexit at all



3 choices now eh?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's saying may's cocked it up



Yup.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Being a masochist, I'm reading through.

If I've got the first section right, it sounds like freedom of movement stays until the end of the transition period?


----------



## agricola (Nov 14, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> What’s it saying? I’m knackered and can’t be arsed to translate the legalise



Basically HMG will establish, fund and staff a politically independent body that will take on all the powers of the European Commission with regards to state aid and will examine on a case by case basis whether something potentially affecting cross-border trade is state aid and whether it would be illegal state aid under EU law.  They will then tell the EU.  The only exception is for agriculture, and even then its up to an agreed amount.  

The potential for mischief is absolutely immense; such a body could concievably interfere in anything the Government wants to do.


----------



## tommers (Nov 14, 2018)

Also sounds independent of HMG and not very independent of the EU


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 14, 2018)

They weren't kidding about the vassal-state then?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Oh man I hope I'm misreading this. If you've not got five years under your belt, goodbye? (This is all reciprocal, obvs)

"1. Union citizens and United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who have resided legally in the host State in accordance with Union law for *a continuous period of 5 years* or for the period specified in Article 17 of Directive 2004/38/EC, shall have the right to reside permanently in the host State under the conditions set out in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of Directive 2004/38/EC. Periods of legal residence or work in accordance with Union law before and after the end of the transition period shall be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right of permanent residence.
"

Hmmm. Now thinking this through.

I think an earlier clause says you can't be chucked out if you arrive before the end of the transition period. But at the same time you don't get permanent rights until after five years.

This isn't as bad as I thought. My European mates who've arrived in the last few years will have to stick it out for a bit, but they will eventually allowed to stay properly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

agricola said:


> Basically HMG will establish, fund and staff a politically independent body that will take on all the powers of the European Commission with regards to state aid and will examine on a case by case basis whether something potentially affecting cross-border trade is state aid and whether it would be illegal state aid under EU law.  They will then tell the EU.  The only exception is for agriculture, and even then its up to an agreed amount.
> 
> The potential for mischief is absolutely immense; such a body could concievably interfere in anything the Government wants to do.


oh look, exactly the sort of thing left out voters were told _isn't on the EU's radar _with a suggestion that perhaps if we feared thus we didn't understand what the EU is for. Now, to business: how is this the fault of Corbyn, 500 wrds pls


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh look, exactly the sort of thing left out voters were told _isn't on the EU's radar _with a suggestion that perhaps if we feared thus we didn't understand what the EU is for. Now, to business: how is this the fault of Corbyn, 500 wrds pls


Everything is the fault of corbyn


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 14, 2018)

editor said:


> And fuck those fucking non-entity opportunist backward fuckers the DUP.



Do I have to? My back is playing up!


----------



## 8ball (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh look, exactly the sort of thing left out voters were told _isn't on the EU's radar _with a suggestion that perhaps if we feared thus we didn't understand what the EU is for. Now, to business: how is this the fault of Corbyn, 500 wrds pls



Anorak.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh look, exactly the sort of thing left out voters were told _isn't on the EU's radar _with a suggestion that perhaps if we feared thus we didn't understand what the EU is for. Now, to business: how is this the fault of Corbyn, 500 wrds pls



State aid has always been an EU no no.

They've been very clear about this.

Corbyn has been very clear about his objection.


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 14, 2018)

According to this Nationalisation is not against EU law.  Let’s be clear, nationalisation is NOT against EU law


----------



## teqniq (Nov 14, 2018)

Seems that:

Civil servants told to stop including DUP in Brexit emails as partnership with Conservatives crumbles

Oops.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> State aid has always been an EU no no.
> 
> They've been very clear about this.
> 
> Corbyn has been very clear about his objection.



Amazing how the French get away with all sorts, related to defence, power etc.

There are national security exemptions for all this stuff, that the brits have never taken advantage of.

Alex


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> According to this Nationalisation is not against EU law.  Let’s be clear, nationalisation is NOT against EU law



You can have government owned stuff. But the general rule is you have to put it out to tender, and the state can pitch alongside private enterprise.

The UK put loads of railways out to tender, and European governments snapped several up. Government owned, by EU governments, completely legal in EU terms.

The UK has, so far, banned *only* the UK government from the railways, not the EU governments.

(Corbyn, we know, wants to reverse this).


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Amazing how the French get away with all sorts, related to defence, power etc.
> 
> There are national security exemptions for all this stuff, that the brits have never taken advantage of.
> 
> Alex



The French have wriggled to stay in position (they're good at wriggling), meanwhile the British charged into privatisation obsession, with *nobody* in the EU following. How many rail companies do we have?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 14, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Amazing how the French get away with all sorts, related to defence, power etc.
> 
> There are national security exemptions for all this stuff, that the brits have never taken advantage of.
> 
> Alex



National interest included bribing Ryanair to fly to a regional airport, when it went sour and Ryanair pulled out France grasses Ryanair and impounds a plane to cover the cost of the fallout. 

Viva Le EU!


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

No end date for transition period.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 14, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> According to this Nationalisation is not against EU law.  Let’s be clear, nationalisation is NOT against EU law


If I read correctly it'll be down to the ECJ to decide on disputes over state aid rules. So forget it basically. I'm slightly baffled by the EU proposal to have us set up an independent watch on these matters being greeted with 'hey this blog reading of the rules says'

this caught my eye today.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 14, 2018)

> Any more leaks and we will know how many Rich Tea biccies were eaten.




Quite enjoying that twatter stuff tonight


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> No end date for transition period.



Sorry to be geeky pedant... if you're referencing the published text... any chance of a page number or article number? (I suffer from insomnia  )


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Quite enjoying that twatter stuff tonight



This shit show has been filling satirical comedy for months now.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 14, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Seems that:
> 
> Civil servants told to stop including DUP in Brexit emails as partnership with Conservatives crumbles
> 
> Oops.


Tomorrow promises to be an interesting day


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Sorry to be geeky pedant... if you're referencing the published text... any chance of a page number or article number? (I suffer from insomnia  )




 

Was on spazzbook


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> Oh man I hope I'm misreading this. If you've not got five years under your belt, goodbye? (This is all reciprocal, obvs)
> 
> "1. Union citizens and United Kingdom nationals, and their respective family members, who have resided legally in the host State in accordance with Union law for *a continuous period of 5 years* or for the period specified in Article 17 of Directive 2004/38/EC, shall have the right to reside permanently in the host State under the conditions set out in Articles 16, 17 and 18 of Directive 2004/38/EC. Periods of legal residence or work in accordance with Union law before and after the end of the transition period shall be included in the calculation of the qualifying period necessary for acquisition of the right of permanent residence.
> "
> ...



Why would they? Who in their right mind wants to come here at the moment? What a fucking shambles.

Remember also, the Commons hasn't 'had at it' yet.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 152523
> 
> Was on spazzbook



For the benefit of the audience - yep, that's in the actual published text. 

Rees Mogg / Davis / Johnson / Gove etc etc are going to *hate* this.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 14, 2018)

Someone outside is letting off fireworks. They must be delighted


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Someone outside is letting off fireworks. They must be delighted



Speed readers!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 14, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Someone outside is letting off fireworks. They must be delighted



Is brexit all over now then?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 14, 2018)

Oh fuck, the fireworks just reminded me, Independence Day is gonna be a thing, isn't it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> No end date for transition period.



I think you'll find it says in the year of Our Lord 20XX


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you'll find it says in the year of Our Lord 20XX



20XX = 2020 Obviously. As part of the deal the uk has  agreed to use a numerical system that combines standard form with roman numerals._ (page 23VI  paragraph V) _


----------



## 1%er (Nov 14, 2018)

Did I really hear on the radio what I thought I heard, did Theresa May really just say "When you strip away the detail, the choice before us is clear, this deal, or leave with no deal, or no Brexit at all”? What happened to Brexit means Brexit? It could have been miss-translated I guess but that is how her speech was voiced-over here. Looks like someone is laying the ground for something 

I also heard someone claiming that if the reports of the details of the deal are true the UK will be in a worse position than Albania with the EU. Well done the civil servants and politicians of the UK, you appear to have negotiated the worse possible deal.

I guess it easy to laugh from the other-side of the world, but laughing I am  

You've only got May and the EU to worry about, we have Bolsonaro and he doesn't look like he will be a laugh a minute, but hay-ho life goes on


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

Those who voted for the Norway type deal must feel smug.


----------



## CRI (Nov 14, 2018)

How about this version, from the Lemon Press.  Makes about as much sense!

Alphabetical Draft Withdrawal Agreement


----------



## bellaozzydog (Nov 14, 2018)

Have we taken back control yet?



Sorry been on planes all day. Tell me it’s all good


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> Those who voted for the Norway type deal must feel smug.



Yup


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 14, 2018)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> Those who voted for the Norway type deal must feel smug.



If this deal gets through the commons. which it absolutely wont.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> If this deal gets through the commons. which it absolutely wont.



I dunno if we're right and this really is Norway until 20XX I think a lot of Labour MP's will vote for it. 

So I'll be  but  at the same time


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> If this deal gets through the commons. which it absolutely wont.



 I can't see the Tory party getting around with changing leader, getting a new deal or being allowed to push through a no deal - excellent shitshow for the next few days.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I can't see the Tory party getting around with changing leader, getting a new deal or being allowed to push through a no deal - excellent shitshow for the next few days.



See? Isn't Brexit great? We told you you'd love it.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> [..] I think a lot of Labour MP's will vote for it.



If I was a Labour MP I'd vote the sucker through in a heartbeat to watch the other lot tear themselves to pieces in the hope Rees-Mogg as PM. Win-win.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 14, 2018)

1%er said:


> Did I really hear on the radio what I thought I heard, did Theresa May really just say "When you strip away the detail, the choice before us is clear, this deal, or leave with no deal, or no Brexit at all”? What happened to Brexit means Brexit? It could have been miss-translated I guess but that is how her speech was voiced-over here. Looks like someone is laying the ground for something


You heard correctly - that’s what she said outside no.10. Probably dropped it in as a way of saying to Brexiteers that if they don’t back her deal then it’s possible their gamble will backfire, though it won’t change any of their minds obvs.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> If I was a Labour MP I'd vote the sucker through in a heartbeat to watch the other lot tear themselves to pieces in the hope Rees-Mogg as PM. Win-win.



It's a good job you're not a Labour MP then! Wouldn't a Labour govt be better?


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I dunno if we're right and this really is Norway until 20XX I think a lot of Labour MP's will vote for it.
> 
> So I'll be  but  at the same time



It’s possible we’ll drag on, and on, and on, until we - either “side” - lose all fight whatsoever and the British default demeanour kicks in.

We look at the overcast skies, and mentally shrug. “Not happy about it... but what can you do?”


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


>



The majority of union members in the top three unions, supporting remain.

The recent Survation poll with the country being 56 - 44 remain.

In the same poll, Wales turning remain, leaving, largely, only England non metro areas as leave.

In the same poll again, the most common demographic for leave was a 75 year old white male. The most common demographic for a remain supporter was a young black female.

Corbyn, had he wanted, would have had a massive open goal on this, I believe.

He’d have had to wind back some of his principles, and I guess that’s the thing about principles. You don’t wind them back for political expediency.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 14, 2018)

1%er said:


> Did I really hear on the radio what I thought I heard, did Theresa May really just say "When you strip away the detail, the choice before us is clear, this deal, or leave with no deal, or no Brexit at all”? What happened to Brexit means Brexit? It could have been miss-translated I guess but that is how her speech was voiced-over here. Looks like someone is laying the ground for something
> 
> I also heard someone claiming that if the reports of the details of the deal are true the UK will be in a worse position than Albania with the EU. Well done the civil servants and politicians of the UK, you appear to have negotiated the worse possible deal.
> 
> ...



Yep, that's exactly what she said. And I'm with Dr. Furface on the analysis.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

paolo said:


> The majority of union members in the top three unions, supporting remain.
> 
> The recent Survation poll with the country being 56 - 44 remain.
> 
> ...



Yeahhhhhh it's good he didn't do that.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's a good job you're not a Labour MP then! Wouldn't a Labour govt be better?



I doubt they'd get the vote for election through parliament.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I doubt they'd get the vote for election through parliament.



They won't need to if the VoNC goes in.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They won't need to if the VoNC goes in.



I think the DUP will vote with her at that point. Although I'm sure May would like to be put out of her misery.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> I think the DUP will vote with her at that point. Although I'm sure May would like to be put out of her misery.



They're saying on Newsnight it's pretty tight even if they do.


----------



## bemused (Nov 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They're saying on Newsnight it's pretty tight even if they do.



If it goes to a GE I think Labour could win, because bizarrely they are more united than the Tories.


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

I can see this song getting adopted, by some.

Five years. If you don't make it, you're out and you're banished. You can't work here. Nor there. People living in other places - it's going to be stopped.

"All the nobody people"


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> If it goes to a GE I think Labour could win, because bizarrely they are more united than the Tories.



I think they would win, but in government they might prove you wrong!


----------



## paolo (Nov 14, 2018)

bemused said:


> If it goes to a GE I think Labour could win



I'd bet as far as *will* win. Jam tomorrow.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Fuck up as every bit of this is, surely May's chances of getting to the March next year got stronger tonight?  No major challenges in cabinet, cabinet members for the moment inside pissing out etc. The maths still isn't good for Tories who want to challenge her for the leadership and she just takes all those defeatist, weary fucking MPs one step closer to the end of the process. Having said all that, the agreement is _very_ remain-y and should be annoying the fuck out of the swivellers. However I don't see a million people turning out for a demo to support them any time soon.

In the end it will (obviously) be about the choices put before parliament, whether substantive amendments are accepted, whether turning 'the deal' down automatically means 'no deal' etc. Must admit I haven't even bothered looking at the snp and libdem potential stances. They are obviously remainiacs*, but will presumably vote with may if the choice is her shit show vs No Deal. I still think I can see an easier path to May getting her deal through than the grand coalition of swivellers, labour and dup.

* I do know the snp want a 2nd ref, but that's unlikely to be on offer from _either_ may or Corbyn.


----------



## A380 (Nov 14, 2018)

I must say that the comments section on Conservative Home tonight might make me die of   Schadenfreude...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Fuck up as every bit of this is, surely May's chances of getting to the March next year got stronger tonight?  No major challenges in cabinet, cabinet members for the moment inside pissing out etc. The maths still isn't good for Tories who want to challenge her for the leadership and she just takes all those defeatist, weary fucking MPs one step closer to the end of the process. Having said all that, the agreement is _very_ remain-y and should be annoying the fuck out of the swivellers. However I don't see a million people turning out for a demo to support them any time soon.
> 
> In the end it will (obviously) be about the choices put before parliament, whether substantive amendments are accepted, whether turning 'the deal' down automatically means 'no deal' etc. Must admit I haven't even bothered looking at the snp and libdem potential stances. They are obviously remainiacs*, but will presumably vote with may if the choice is her shit show vs No Deal. I still think I can see an easier path to May getting her deal through than the grand coalition of swivellers, labour and dup.
> 
> * I do know the snp want a 2nd ref, but that's unlikely to be on offer from _either_ may or Corbyn.



An interesting point being discussed on the telly was that May would have hoped that what people were talking about was the possibility of No Deal, and what they're actually talking about is how bad the deal is and whether she can hang on. 

I think one of the reasons for that could be that this agreement signifies that the EU is quite happy for this to drag on forever. They're not gonna be enforcing a hard deadline on leaving. If May makes it until March, what then? Still got the clock ticking on the actual Brexit deal and if time runs out it's the Single Market until 20XX or the EU says so.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 14, 2018)

Turns out they may well be allowing substantive amendments


> EXCL: Understand No 10 has told opposition parties they are likely to allow amendments to be voted on BEFORE meaningful vote. Potential game-changer.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

rumours that there are likely to be enough letters to the 1922 committee to bring about a leadership vote. Brexiteer tories are having a meltdown. 
Still time for cabinet resignations. 
Government collapses in time for christmas? 
who knows? although i think the tory phoney war is over and a lot of shit is going to hit the fan over the next few weeks.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 15, 2018)

The bloke who screamed NO BREXIT all over May's TV statement gives me the heeby-jeebies, it's apocolyptic this shit.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> An interesting point being discussed on the telly was that May would have hoped that what people were talking about was the possibility of No Deal, and what they're actually talking about is how bad the deal is and whether she can hang on.
> 
> I think one of the reasons for that could be that this agreement signifies that the EU is quite happy for this to drag on forever. They're not gonna be enforcing a hard deadline on leaving. If May makes it until March, what then? Still got the clock ticking on the actual Brexit deal and if time runs out it's the Single Market until 20XX or the EU says so.



Now we have the deal in detail, I'm hoping that its detractors bring forward some alternatives beyond walking away. I don't expect to see any, but I live in hope.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The bloke who screamed NO BREXIT all over May's TV statement gives me the heeby-jeebies, it's apocolyptic this shit.



I was waiting for her to turn around and tell Ken Clark to fuck off.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

If you are a Tory Brexiteer who is unhappy about the deal, what options do you have now?
I reckon the options are limited to:

1. Decide its better to stay in the EU than take this deal and manoeuvre for that eventuality. Doubt there's anyone on this path but its logically possible
2. The Michael Gove position (supposedly), recognise that the deal leaves room for future changes, recognise that at least with this deal Brexit happens, and play a long game to push it further. Better to at least get Brexit to happen than for the door to close.
3. Vote of No Confidence and try to replace May. This cant end well. There's not even time to have a full leadership election and unless the new leader is someone who promises to torpedo the whole thing and crash out its hard to see the outcome changing. And its unlikely such a candidate would win. Even Leadsom is on board with this May deal now. ...maybe a crash out brexit candidate could win, as its the party membership with the final vote, but still a massive gamble and extra season of shit show, most likely to end in failure and embarrassment .
4. Hold tight for three weeks, vote against the deal, and then....no one knows what might happen - the vote might not even be binding in legal terms, and the crisis could result in an election or even the whole Brexit process could be halted. Massive gamble, which could lose Brexit for a generation. Hard to see a commons vote against the deal quickly equalling a harder brexit.

Cant think of any other options. Top themselves maybe.
Right now they might be fuming but I reckon in the cold light of the days ahead they'll calculate #2 is their best bet and less tory 'rebels' will vote against it than might be expected.


Kaka Tim said:


> rumours that there are likely to be enough letters to the 1922 committee to bring about a leadership vote. Brexiteer tories are having a meltdown.
> Still time for cabinet resignations.
> Government collapses in time for christmas?
> who knows? although i think the tory phoney war is over and a lot of shit is going to hit the fan over the next few weeks.


Though even if they get the 48 letters supposedly everyone gets a "are you sure you mean it" call back....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> Now we have the deal in detail, I'm hoping that its detractors bring forward some alternatives beyond walking away. I don't expect to see any, but I live in hope.



GE, Corbyn win, Socialist plan of production, tell the EU to swivel. Jobs a good un 

Not gonna happen like but there's your answer. The public _voted _to end increasingly predatory neoliberal capitalism comrade, _we must respect the referendum result. _


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> 1. Decide its better to stay in the EU than take this deal and manoeuvre for that eventuality. Doubt there's anyone on this path but its logically possible



Think this is probably what Boris has decided. I am sceptical Jo Johnson's resignation had nothing to do with fraternal solidarity and the possibility of future cabinet nepotism.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> GE, Corbyn win, [..]



Jeez over thrown by Lisa Nandy.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

dont underestimate the appeal for the brexiteers of going down fighting - they can then feel all virtuous and principled and it doesn't actually cost them anything. It also enhances their careers within whatever "brexit was betrayed!" political movement  emerges from the rubble.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Right now they might be fuming but I reckon in the cold light of the days ahead they'll calculate #2 is their best bet and less tory 'rebels' will vote against it than might be expected.



No deal won't get through, a Canada whatever whatever deal won't either - this is most likely the best they get. 

If they try to kick her out and she hangs on they are stuck with her for a year.

There is a long list of stuff I dislike May for, but, when it comes to the ERG headbangers queuing up against her I hope she wins.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> Jeez over thrown by Lisa Nandy.



Yes that's possible. But in itself that would be a huge new political development if it happened.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> If you are a Tory Brexiteer who is unhappy about the deal, what options do you have now?
> I reckon the options are limited to:
> 
> 1. Decide its better to stay in the EU than take this deal and manoeuvre for that eventuality. Doubt there's anyone on this path but its logically possible
> ...


This really. The hard brexitists will be splentic tonight and full of piss and vinegar, but their actual choices are closing down. They should have gone for May straight after the 2017 election. She may well have resigned if they had. Doesn't mean they'd have got a hard Brexit with one of their own balmpots in charge, but they could have left it too late now.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> dont underestimate the appeal for the brexiteers of going down fighting - they can then feel all virtuous and principled and it doesn't actually cost them anything. It also enhances their careers within whatever "brexit was betrayed!" political movement  emerges from the rubble.



Yep. Farage for example is not wrong to say that many people make good careers off the EU - he's one of them.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 15, 2018)

A380 said:


> I must say that the comments section on Conservative Home tonight might make me die of   Schadenfreude...



Ha, it's great innit! Never looked on a site like that before! Ew.

"Anyone wishing May to go should remember this: 

The electorate decided in 2016. To have a rerun of this election now would be a betrayal of democracy. May hasn't even been given the chance to finish the job, 

To decide to have a rerun of the 2016 election would damage the public's faith in democracy."



They're quite witty, some of them.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> I was waiting for her to turn around and tell Ken Clark to fuck off.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> dont underestimate the appeal for the brexiteers of going down fighting - they can then feel all virtuous and principled and it doesn't actually cost them anything. It also enhances their careers within whatever "brexit was betrayed!" political movement  emerges from the rubble.


...however what would that go down fighting really look like? to do it properly it would get really ugly, it would mean ignoring the will of the commons, it would mean sticking their arses in the face of remainers, it would mean fucking over capitalist mates etc - supposedly the City has got a good deal here and are happy enough with it. Its proper kamikaze stuff....theyve probably had a few drinks at this time of night and reckon they're hard enough, but when it comes to it I dont think they'll follow through.

There would be a cost to them i think...

a crash out was never going to be pretty, but it needs a semblance of order to it...this lot grabbing the steering wheel and driving it over the cliff at the last turn would make it even more chaotic than it would already have been.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

It really is a _terrible_ deal.  That's the irony, by my logic at least, that the most likely outcome will be something like the thing agreed today - an outcome that not one single voter thinks is a good idea.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> ...however what would that go down fighting really look like? to do it properly it would get really ugly, it would mean ignoring the will of the commons, it would mean sticking their arses in the face of remainers, it would mean fucking over capitalist mates etc - supposedly the City has got a good deal here and are happy enough with it. Its proper kamikaze stuff....theyve probably had a few drinks at this time of night and reckon they're hard enough, but when it comes to it I dont think they'll follow through.
> 
> There would be a cost i think


Maybe Michael Gove will set himself on fire as a political protest - but at the last minute decide to set Boris Johnson on fire instead.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> balmpots


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> ...however what would that go down fighting really look like? to do it properly it would get really ugly, it would mean ignoring the will of the commons, it would mean sticking their arses in the face of remainers, it would mean fucking over capitalist mates etc - supposedly the City has got a good deal here and are happy enough with it. Its proper kamikaze stuff....theyve probably had a few drinks at this time of night and reckon they're hard enough, but when it comes to it I dont think they'll follow through.
> 
> There would be a cost to them i think...
> 
> a crash out was never going to be pretty, but it needs a semblance of order to it...this lot grabbing the steering wheel and driving it over the cliff at the last turn would make it even more chaotic than it would already have been.



we're talking about tory mps here - so sadly there wont be any actual fighting. They vote against mays deal, they vote to being may down, they vote against whatever comes out of the constitutional meltdown that follows the deal being rejected, they vote against a 2nd ref or a50 extension or whatever. Its costs them nothing and they keep their "integrity".


----------



## philosophical (Nov 15, 2018)

People might not be inclined or persuaded to vote in a particular way in Parliament, so the place to hide could be in abstentions. A bit like citing courts in Scotland who allow a not proven verdict.
The Parliamentary arithmetic may not be as easy to call as it seems.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

First resignation is in, the Northern Ireland minister.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

A Norn minister, not The 



First of many today


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> First resignation is in, the Northern Ireland minister.


And so begins the unravelling


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A Norn minister, not The
> 
> 
> 
> First of many today


The cabinet this evening will be able to into a wardrobe. And they will, as raging mps search the commons for them


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> If you are a Tory Brexiteer who is unhappy about the deal, what options do you have now?
> I reckon the options are limited to:
> 
> 1. Decide its better to stay in the EU than take this deal and manoeuvre for that eventuality. Doubt there's anyone on this path but its logically possible
> ...






2, Gove.

Brexit happens and the finer details can be amended as the years roll on.


Vote of no confidence may be called, I reckon May will survive it.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> Irish border kicked into long grass. If UK can’t find a solution then it would seem to in effect be staying in SM/CU.
> MView attachment 122368



This deal was predictable as soon as the December 2017 accord was signed.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> First resignation is in, the Northern Ireland minister.


Not _the_ Northern Ireland minister, _a_ Northern Ireland minister. 

Ie a junior minister to the Secretary of State, Karen Bradley.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 15, 2018)

Labour says ‘no’ or even ‘non’. We can’t be sure.

Labour will vote against Theresa May's Brexit deal, Keir Starmer says


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour says ‘no’ or even ‘non’. We can’t be sure.
> 
> Labour will vote against Theresa May's Brexit deal, Keir Starmer says



May’s deal is pretty close to what Labour were calling for.  It’s probably the best option realistically that May could have achieved. It’s still worse than staying in the EU imo.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

I posted an FT link yesterday or two days ago about TARP Brexit....heard that mentioned a few time since...don't know if the link worked or just went to a subscribe page, but its the idea that "Brexit vote could follow the same pattern as TARP, the 2008 bailout in the United States: “voted down, markets puke, passes second time with small changes" <<<sounds very imaginable.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A Norn minister, not The





danny la rouge said:


> Not _the_ Northern Ireland minister, _a_ Northern Ireland minister.
> 
> Ie a junior minister to the Secretary of State, Karen Bradley.



Sky News keeps saying 'Northern Ireland Minister', rather than '*a* Northern Ireland Minister', the bastards. 

But, yeah, you two are correct.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The bloke who screamed NO BREXIT all over May's TV statement gives me the heeby-jeebies, it's apocolyptic this shit.



I couldn't stop laughing at it


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> This deal was predictable as soon as the December 2017 accord was signed.



Did you predict it?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I posted an FT link yesterday or two days ago about TARP Brexit....heard that mentioned a few time since...don't know if the link worked or just went to a subscribe page, but its the idea that "Brexit vote could follow the same pattern as TARP, the 2008 bailout in the United States: “voted down, markets puke, passes second time with small changes" <<<sounds very imaginable.


For once I agree with you. 

I suspect that something like this will happen. The government will struggle to get it through parliament but with a lot of arm-twisting and theatrics and some very minor tweaking it will ultimately pass.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Sky News keeps saying 'Northern Ireland Minister', rather than '*a* Northern Ireland Minister', the bastards.
> 
> But, yeah, you two are correct.


But just for clarity's sake, this is not a cabinet post.  It's a junior governmental role, assistant to the Secretary of State.  There are around 100 non cabinet junior ministers.  It's not a particular loss for May, in all honesty.  For resignations of this level of members of government to be significant, they have to come in droves.  (Which may yet happen, of course).


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I posted an FT link yesterday or two days ago about TARP Brexit....heard that mentioned a few time since...don't know if the link worked or just went to a subscribe page, but its the idea that "Brexit vote could follow the same pattern as TARP, the 2008 bailout in the United States: “voted down, markets puke, passes second time with small changes" <<<sounds very imaginable.


It does indeed sound imaginable.

ETA.  But maybe not now.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)

Raab's resigned.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Raab’s resigned!


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Raab's resigned.


Now, _that's_ a significant resignation.


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 15, 2018)

Raab's gone.
(Can't find a link yet, but no doubt by the time I post this, someone has found one.)


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 15, 2018)

Dominic Raab (@DominicRaab) on Twitter


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

steveo87 said:


> Raab's gone.
> (Can't find a link yet, but no doubt by the time I post this, someone has found one.)



Brexit Secretary Raab resigns


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Did you predict it?



See date of post that I quoted.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

steveo87 said:


> Raab's gone.
> (Can't find a link yet, but no doubt by the time I post this, someone has found one.)


Brexit Secretary Raab resigns


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 15, 2018)

Just because I have it now:
Brexit Secretary Raab resigns


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It does indeed sound imaginable.


the only thing i dont get on Tarp Brexit is is there a procedural difference between the uk and us
there'll be amendments tabled before the first vote, the "little changes", if they vote that down then whats the mechanism  to have a second vote? it also leaves no room for *more "*little changes" which could appear to swing the second vote? 
Anyhow, back to the popcorn and deckchair till December


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

... beaten to it


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> back to the popcorn and deckchair


Indeed.  Looks like it's all unravelling now.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Chuka Umunna		

*✔*			 @ChukaUmunna	

 


Er...you negotiated it, you promised the earth as part of Vote Leave and now you walk off and leave others to clear up the mess? Seriously? These people are shameless.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Raab D Exits


----------



## steveo87 (Nov 15, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Raab D Exits


Tabloid gold!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

I can honestly see May being kicked out now.


----------



## splash (Nov 15, 2018)

Probably  Mcvey and Mordant next


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I can honestly see May being kicked out now.



With any luck before the 25th so nobody has to go to that EU thingy


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 152544


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

how quickly the tides of power shift


----------



## Poi E (Nov 15, 2018)

Wow, never seen that one. Happy days!


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Chuka Umunna
> 
> *✔*			 @ChukaUmunna
> 
> ...



Chuckles was supporting brexit five minutes ago. What do you call a thing that just bends with the wind? like a reed but thats not the word....anyway....


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

anyway Raabs off to spend more time with his geography books


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

splash said:


> Probably  Mcvey and Mordant next


last one out turn off the lights


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> anyway Raabs off to spend more time with his geography books



He only found out his job title today, etc etc


----------



## Poi E (Nov 15, 2018)

At least his letter was better drafted than RM's.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> anyway Raabs off to spend more time with his geography books


he'll have to find the library first, so it may be some time


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> With any luck before the 25th so nobody has to go to that EU thingy


SNP have another 'EU thingy' coming up on the 27th to see if A50 can be unilaterally cancelled.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Poi E said:


> At least his letter was better drafted than RM's.


he had better civil servants


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

raabnarok


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

Poi E said:


> At least his letter was better drafted than RM's.



He almost certainly started drafting it as soon as he was appointed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> raabnarok


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

whos next then?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I can honestly see May being kicked out now.



Failing to negotiate a Brexit deal with her own Brexit secretary does seem like a fitting move for her to go out on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> whos next then?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

^ she'll tenaciously cling on until the last possible moment. Which is probably sunday teatime.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

These people are shameless, Rabb's letter state his first reason for quitting as:



> First I believe that the regulatory regime proposed for Northern Ireland presents a very real threat to the integrity of the United Kingdom.



Which was precisely one of the problems with Brexit raised during the campaign by his own party leader and dismissed at 'project fear'


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

This is better.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 15, 2018)

I hope someone's greased the rumour mill recently. It's spinning hard.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Premature ejaculation


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> There should be 650 revolvers issued to Westminster -each containing  a single bullet and a printed paragraph of instructions
> 
> Only then can we say there has been progress


we can only say there has been progress when they have removed the corpses to london zoo


----------



## spitfire (Nov 15, 2018)

As long as you have enough ex people left for the SACN. I suppose councillors will fill the gaps.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

spitfire said:


> As long as you have enough ex people left for the SACN. I suppose councillors will fill the gaps.


we will have sufficient former people for the canal network

we have the register and will call the roll


----------



## spitfire (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> we will have sufficient former people for the canal network
> 
> we have the register and will call the roll
> 
> View attachment 152546


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> we can only say there has been progress when they have removed the corpses to london zoo



Not sure there's any need to waste bullets when so many predators prefer live prey.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

David Cameron is probably enjoying this.

For he is a heinous cunt.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)

Updates are fast so not sure if it's been mentioned, Gove looks like resigning today as well.


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 15, 2018)

Raab: "My respect for you and the fortitude you have shown in difficult times, remains undimmed."

Definitely preparing his leadership bid then


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Raab: "My respect for you and the fortitude you have shown in difficult times, remains undimmed."
> 
> Definitely preparing his leadership bid then


we've seen how accurate your political prognostications are


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

mcvey and mourdant possible but I recon Gove is going nowhere. I am betting on nothing at this point, but I think he'll stay


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

All going as expected then 


> The pound is now down 1.25% against the dollar at $1.2828 following Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab's resignation.
> 
> Sterling is down 1.34% against the euro at €1.1337
> 
> ...


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 15, 2018)

Supposed to have a constituency meeting tomorrow afternoon with my local (Tory) MP. I wonder what the chances of that still going ahead are?


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

Next.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Mc Vey’s gone now.

Fuck knows what might happen if we ever get to the point of negotiating the actual deal.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 15, 2018)

An earlier time, a simpler time...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Patteran said:


> Next.



by the time the fifth resignation comes in it'll be 3 people are talking about this


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Supposed to have a constituency meeting tomorrow afternoon with my local (Tory) MP. I wonder what the chances of that still going ahead are?



Somewhere between Bob Hope & No Hope?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Mc Vey’s gone now.
> 
> Fuck knows what might happen if we ever get to the point of negotiating the actual deal.


there will be no deal.

there will be no no deal.

we will remain within the european union.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> An earlier time, a simpler time...



aged like single malt


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there will be no deal.
> 
> there will be no no deal.
> 
> we will remain within the european union.


Surprised that I’ve heard no-one yet refer to it as the Hotel California deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Surprised that I’ve heard no-one yet refer to it as the Hotel California deal.


the eagles of westminster


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

McVile gone too


----------



## Mr Retro (Nov 15, 2018)

Good to see Corbyn taking the opportunity of this Tory chaos by getting his allotment ready for the colder months.


----------



## splash (Nov 15, 2018)

Strong and Stable


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> by the time the fifth resignation comes it it'll be 3 people are talking about this



Elbows out in the Green Rooms & Parliament Square as a growing queue of quitters squabbles & competes for Laura K's spotlight of attention.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

When the hell is that Man of Principle Dr Liam Fox going to resign?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

is it the rule that biggest beast resigns last or something


----------



## bellaozzydog (Nov 15, 2018)

It’s like watching a particularly bad episode of bargain hunt


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Good to see Corbyn taking the opportunity of this Tory chaos by getting his allotment ready for the colder months.



Urgh don't remind me, I'd planned to go out and dig mine but this is happening so it's refresh everything and eat as many crisps as I can find time.


----------



## colacubes (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Surprised that I’ve heard no-one yet refer to it as the Hotel California deal.



Sorry to disappoint but they were discussing exactly that around 8.30am on 5 Live.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> mcvey and mourdant possible but I recon Gove is going nowhere. I am betting on nothing at this point, but I think he'll stay



Gove must think he's got a good shot at PM.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> When the hell is that Man of Principle Dr Liam Fox going to resign?


four thirty to dominate the evening's news agenda


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim nailed it as Hotel California brexit several hundred pages ago. Jonny come latelies (theres a new kid in town) at the beeb


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Good to see Corbyn taking the opportunity of this Tory chaos by getting his allotment ready for the colder months.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 15, 2018)

This is bigger than hip hop


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## colacubes (Nov 15, 2018)

Suella Braverman gone now apparently (junior minister at DexEU)


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

Next.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> This is bigger than hip hop


corbs can dress for that too:


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Two more gone, total five now, and counting.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Retro said:


> Good to see Corbyn taking the opportunity of this Tory chaos by getting his allotment ready for the colder months.


Exactly the right thing to do, tactically. Let the spotlight shine on the Tory shambles. Don’t do anything to steal any of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Two more gone, total five now, and counting.


name names


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> name names



I didn't catch them, I just switched on Sky & they mentioned two more gone, making five, before heading into a an ad break.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Nov 15, 2018)

One of them is Suella Braverman, a junior minister at the Department for Exiting the EU


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

I've just logged on and nobody has resigned in the last 90 seconds!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I didn't catch them, I just switched on Sky & they mentioned two more gone, before heading into a an ad break.


think it's raab and mcvey, we know about those


----------



## Lucy Fur (Nov 15, 2018)

The other:
 
 	 		Anne-Marie Trevelyan


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've just logged on and nobody has resigned in the last 90 seconds!


complain to the parliamentary ombudsman

Welcome to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman | Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO)


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I didn't catch them, I just switched on Sky & they mentioned two more gone, before heading into a an ad break.


 they'll just have a number at the bottom of the screen soon.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Lucy Fur said:


> The other:
> 
> Anne-Marie Trevelyan


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

Now the prison ship lies waiting in the bay...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> think it's raab and mcvey, we know about those



See my edit, they said it's five now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've just logged on and nobody has resigned in the last 90 seconds!


You spoke too soon.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Patteran said:


> Now the prison ship lies waiting in the bay...


Excellent.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Patteran said:


> Now the prison ship lies waiting in the bay...


yeh but it's not bound for botany bay


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 15, 2018)

Does Braverman make it six??


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

She's addressing the commons, with much laughter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Excellent.


you can hold off the email to the ombudsman


----------



## paul russell999 (Nov 15, 2018)

I can't remember a day like this since DLT resigned live on air in 1993


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Grauniad mentioning gove as the next Brexit secretary. Thus earning him a further level of hatred from the swivel eyed.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> 137 days till we do a Brexit
> 
> 650 MP's
> 
> That's 4.7 MP's to resing each day.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


>




Fish!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Getting a bit congested in the check out aisle. Maybe they should move with the times and set a Brexit Self Checkout.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Brexit has become a bit desperado


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

they should take it easy


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> they should take it easy


They’re running down the road trying to loosen their load.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Brexit has become a bit desperado


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

dont let the sound of resignations weigh you down


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Out of interest, how many Brexiteers left in cabinet? Aren’t they just leaving Remainers to run Brexit?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

'our' NHS ya cah. BUPA for certain over there


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

It's coming to something when a strike-breaker is the least unpleasant branch of your family tree. Slán abhaile, Anne-Marie.  



Also, possibly a noteworthy line in her letter - 'some would say well just agree the treaty as it is now & bin it later'. This Michael Collins approach has been suggested in the press as a possible Gove line - her reference seems to confirm it has been discussed (& her syntax suggests she couldn't get her speechwriter to answer the phone this morning).


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

The fucking state of the British public  


> BBC Radio 5 Live listeners have been texting 85058 with their reaction to today's developments:
> 
> Alan said: "I’m with Mr Raab – we need to get out now and then start talking terms. I want to see the European negotiators do the panicking for a change."
> 
> And another texter said: "Well done Theresa May for actually getting an outline agreement with the EU. Keep up the good work, thanks for being one of the few people in parliament who’s actually doing her job."



European negotiators 'panicking' my fucking arse


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

who could this be at the despatch box?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Patteran said:


> It's coming to something when a strike-breaker is the least unpleasant branch of your family tree. Slán abhaile, Anne-Marie.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, possibly a noteworthy line in her letter - 'some would say well just agree the treaty as it is now & bin it later'. This Michael Collins approach has been suggested in the press as a possible Gove line - her reference seems to confirm it has been discussed (& her syntax suggests she couldn't get her speechwriter to answer the phone this morning).



fast forward to a latter-day béal na bláth


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> fast forward to a latter-day béal na bláth



That's the crucial difference with this mob - there are no consequences. They just walk away, retire wealthy, die comfortably.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

I'm watching Corbyn's statement - could someone tell Emily Thornberry to shut the fuck up.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Ian Blackford ..... boring git.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 15, 2018)

colacubes said:


> Suella Braverman gone now apparently (junior minister at DexEU)



next Tory leader will be...



Nine Bob Note said:


> I've lost all faith in Alex Chalk, so I'm throwing my weight behind Suella Braverman



Expect her name on that ballot, folks


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


>




As someone posted on twitter in reply to that tweet...


----------



## existentialist (Nov 15, 2018)

You can't hide/Your lying eyes


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

she just refused to talk about that Arron Banks fella.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

hammond in the background looking absolutely done in lol.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 15, 2018)

> 'I will bring it to Parliament and ask MPs to consider it in the national interest,' May said. 'The choice is clear. We can choose to leave with no deal. We can have no Brexit at all. Or we can choose to unite and support the best deal that can be negotiated.'



29 months on and she's just listing the same options as the "Is Brexit actually going to happen?" poll.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

I guess further resignations are on hold, until after the Commons debate.

Should be interesting late afternoon & early evening.


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

Can someone explain why May gets so much stick about this whole Brexit thing (without burning me to a crisp), when...

1. it was Cameron's idea, and when he didn't get the result he was expecting he slithered off to guffaw whith his chums in a wood paneled room somewhere.

2. She voted remain.

3. She's following the democratically chosen route against her own opinion.

This isn't all about negotiations, I started to wonder why people were giving her, personally, such a hard time right from the start.

Now don't get me wrong, she's clearly a cunt of the highest order, she's a tory politician, nuff said, but the "May, how dare you spoil everything" thing just makes no sense to me.

Be kind, I'm genuinely a bit


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

playing Candy Crush no doubt... on my tax monies


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Can someone explain why May gets so much stick about this whole Brexit thing (without burning me to a crisp), when...
> 
> 1. it was Cameron's idea, and when he didn't get the result he was expecting he slithered off to guffaw whith his chums in a wood paneled room somewhere.
> 
> ...




she changes her mind more than i change my pants.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

well, the buck stops there. Nobody forced her to take on Camerons mess. She wanted the poison chalice. And so people are going to vent at the person who chose to be in charge here. Liberals pretending that they would ever vote labour left have been giving corbyn, who is not in charge, loads of shit rather than attack May as well.  motivations


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

She's gone full Upminster now, Radio Rental, Chicken Oriental...



> Tory MP Mark Francois, a Brexiteer, says "I agree that the whole house accepts that you have done your best."
> 
> "The Labour Party have made plain that they will vote against you, the SNP will vote against you, the Liberal Democrats will vote against you, the DUP, our main ally, will vote against you, the 80 Tory rebels will vote against you - and the number of those is going up in the hour," he adds.
> 
> ...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Can someone explain why May gets so much stick about this whole Brexit thing (without burning me to a crisp), when...
> 
> 1. it was Cameron's idea, and when he didn't get the result he was expecting he slithered off to guffaw whith his chums in a wood paneled room somewhere.
> 
> ...



Her party is full of bitter, ranting lunatics. Maybe her behaviour seems relatively sane and reasonable, but remember that she clawed her way to the top of the shitheap that is the tory party, so she's only got herself to blame if her attempts at being reasonable and realistic fail utterly.

Also she's not reasonable at all. Her obsession with deportations is not reasonable, her devotion to austerity is not reasonable. There's no rational case to be made for that stuff, it's all just driven by a combination of hatred and bloody-mindedness.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Her party is full of bitter, ranting lunatics. Maybe her behaviour seems relatively sane and reasonable, but remember that she clawed her way to the top of the shitheap that is the tory party, so she's only got herself to blame if her attempts at being reasonable and realistic fail utterly.



And let us never forget what an utterly vicious shit-cunt she was as Home Sec.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She's gone full Upminster now, Radio Rental, Chicken Oriental...


That is gold


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Out of interest, how many Brexiteers left in cabinet? Aren’t they just leaving Remainers to run Brexit?



But they keep their Brexiteer credentials!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And let us never forget what an utterly vicious shit-cunt she was as Home Sec.



Indeed, see the edit to my previous post.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Can someone explain why May gets so much stick about this whole Brexit thing (without burning me to a crisp), when...
> 
> 1. it was Cameron's idea, and when he didn't get the result he was expecting he slithered off to guffaw whith his chums in a wood paneled room somewhere.
> 
> ...


She didn’t exactly do herself any favours or make any friends by calling a general election (which she’d previously ruled out) to try and bolster her position, then run a disastrous campaign that resulted in her losing the majority she had and then having to rely on the support of the loathsome DUP. Also, she then unnecessarily set out her ‘red lines’ for the negotiation in a vain attempt to try to appear resolute to the Brexiteers, which because she was never going to be able to stick to them, has led to their further dissatisfaction with her leadership. Fundamentally, nothing she could have done would satisfy the Brexit hardliners, but by trying to keep as many people onside as possible (in an admittedly impossible situation) she’s only managed to piss more people off.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

She now says we will leave the EU on the 29th March 2019


So that's us staying in now then


----------



## treelover (Nov 15, 2018)

Sky News reporting that EU citizens in UK will need five years consecutive residence to be eligible for UK citizenship with their families, that's a fair few left out.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 15, 2018)

That's the time everyone else has to do. Why should it be different for EU citizens?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And let us never forget what an utterly vicious shit-cunt she was as Home Sec.


an exercise in how spineless our media is. They know she was the architect of the hostile environment, we all know. Yet Rudd was an acceptable scalp, that was enough to get them to pipe down.


----------



## editor (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## treelover (Nov 15, 2018)

None about Scotland either, to think they went crawling there before the Indyref with all sorts of promises, if i was there I would be incandescent.


----------



## Supine (Nov 15, 2018)

editor said:


> View attachment 152559



Probably best left out of this shit show


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

I like how they all ask one question and then fuck off down the bar.


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

Haha, she's offered the Brexit job to Gove.

That's funny.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

tommers said:


> Haha, she's offered the Brexit job to Gove.
> 
> That's funny.


Where is he in the barrel ?


----------



## ffsear (Nov 15, 2018)

I'm thinking its been the plan all along.. . Negotiate a terrible agreement that no one wants then put that next to no deal and no brexit. Let the public pick no brexit and you can pretend you did your best.


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 15, 2018)

So can anyone tell me what this deal is? I haven't even seen a summary that makes sense yet.

Tried to watch corbyn in parliament but his speech was so dull that I was grateful when it accidentally switched off.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> I like how they all ask one question and then fuck off down the bar.


shaky hands by 1030 that lot


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Poi E said:


> That's the time everyone else has to do. Why should it be different for EU citizens?


Because they came here on an understanding that there were no restrictions on coming here?

If anyone thinks this is a non-issue, I would remind them of the Windrush shitshow, orchestrated by the very same T May, with its roots in a legal change away from a very similar automatic right to live and work here for people from the Commonwealth.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 15, 2018)

treelover said:


> Sky News reporting that EU citizens in UK will need five years consecutive residence to be eligible for UK citizenship with their families, that's a fair few left out.


Same as I'm looking forward to in France FWIW - and currently over-60s don't even have to pass a language test ... but I'm already thinking up the vocab for my visa interview.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Because they came here on an understanding that there were no restrictions on coming here?
> 
> If anyone thinks this is a non-issue, I would remind them of the Windrush shitshow, orchestrated by the very same T May, with its roots in a legal change away from a very similar automatic right to live and work here for people from the Commonwealth.


The reason there weren't any restrictions on them coming (or perhaps we should say living and working) here is because Britain was part of the EU.

If/when Britain ceases to be part of the EU, it's difficult to justify why the rules for EU citizens should be more favourable than those for anyone else.


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Chuckles was supporting brexit five minutes ago.



Was he? I must have missed that.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Right, I've been to the hospital and just logged on again *AND NOBODY ELSE HAS RESIGNED!* I don't not pay my TV licence for that kind of thing, it's a diabolical liberty!


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Same as I'm looking forward to in France FWIW - and currently over-60s don't even have to pass a language test ... but I'm already thinking up the vocab for my visa interview.


bon chance mon ami


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

elbows said:


>



it's a pair with the one that was posted earlier


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

treelover said:


> Sky News reporting that EU citizens in UK will need five years consecutive residence to be eligible for UK citizenship with their families, that's a fair few left out.



Someone was explaining this earlier - no EU citizen already here will be required to leave, and once they reach the 5-year point, they can apply for permanent rights to stay.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> The reason there weren't any restrictions on them coming (or perhaps we should say living and working) here is because Britain was part of the EU.
> 
> If/when Britain ceases to be part of the EU, it's difficult to justify why the rules for EU citizens should be more favourable than those for anyone else.


to be honest, no it isn't. it isn't difficult at all.

when countries stopped being governed by britain it didn't over night become vastly more difficult for people from india, jamaica, canada to live and work here.

e2a: also we all know that whatever the uk imposes it imposes on uk citizens in the eu because all these things will end up being adopted by eu countries


----------



## xenon (Nov 15, 2018)

All these Tory Brexit cunts, still have no alternative deal.  If they bring May down and replace her, then what. What’s the plan?    Ah yes the No deal  corporatist   Disaster capitalism Wonderland  they have hankerd four.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

another albeit minor resignation

Wilf


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

you can see how the numbers of people talking about this have declined significantly over the course of the morning


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

xenon said:


> All these Tory Brexit cunts, still have no alternative deal.  If they bring May down and replace her, then what. What’s the plan?	Ah yes the No deal  corporatist   Disaster capitalism Wonderland  they have hankerd four.



No deal won't get through Parliament.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> No deal won't get through Parliament.


quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss



On the 27th November the ECJ rule if article 50 can be revoked. If they rule it can, I'm hoping to see the delicious moment when the Tory hordes who vote against this deal sit in the Commons watching a50 reversed.


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Someone was explaining this earlier - no EU citizen already here will be required to leave, and once they reach the 5-year point, they can apply for permanent rights to stay.



That was my reading of the text.

What I now can’t remember is what happens if you’ve not yet got to five years, by the end of the transition period.

Can you stay? If you can, what happens if you leave to go on holiday? Can you get back in and legally carry on working? Is there a maximum time for that holiday, after which you are deemed to have left and broken the continuous period you’ve been accruing?

I’m off to re-read.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss


I'll take that.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss



And I can imagine it'll go down very well with the others when we clear our throats and pipe up with, 'Er, anyway ... about our rebate...'


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> And I can imagine it'll go down very well with the others when we clear our throats and pipe up with, 'Er, anyway ... about our rebate...'


it will be a small price for the eu to pay to know the uk will never rock the boat again


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

and if you've just joined us here's a list of today's resignations


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you can see how the numbers of people talking about this have declined significantly over the course of the morning


We want to see the rats leaving the shitting ship


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> We want to see the rats leaving the shitting ship


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

So May will have to resign if this isn't voted through parliament? Listening a bit to her this morning, she has stuck herself to a few things: 1. Brexit has to happen, 2. Brexit will happen next year on the agreed date, 3. This is a good deal and is the way brexit should happen. She should be getting quotes from a few removals firms, I reckon. Still, she's lasted more than a year longer than I thought she would.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

May, today


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Seems '_this_' is '_on_' apparently


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss



Best just to turn up and act like nothing happened. If they get shitty about it just say the whole thing was a joke and they don't understand the British sense of humour.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

ffsear said:


> I'm thinking its been the plan all along.. . Negotiate a terrible agreement that no one wants then put that next to no deal and no brexit. Let the public pick no brexit and you can pretend you did your best.



I am increasingly wondering if May hasn't basically made the supreme sacrifice on behalf of her class, knowing it would make remaining in the EU or at least the Single Market the most likely outcome.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Seems '_this_' is '_on_' apparently



boris 'billy bunter' johnson


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I am increasingly wondering if May hasn't basically made the supreme sacrifice on behalf of her class, knowing it would make remaining in the EU or at least the Single Market the most likely outcome.


she'll be on strictly next year


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Same as I'm looking forward to in France FWIW - and currently over-60s don't even have to pass a language test ... but I'm already thinking up the vocab for my visa interview.




Donnez-moi mon visa, vous mangeant du fromage singe se rendre.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Has _Our Nigel_ said anything yet?


----------



## weepiper (Nov 15, 2018)

Rees-Mogg has put his letter in.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss



Theresa will be pictured coming out of a shower and the whole thing will be forgotten ‘Dallas’ style.


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Her party is full of bitter, ranting lunatics. Maybe her behaviour seems relatively sane and reasonable, but remember that she clawed her way to the top of the shitheap that is the tory party, so she's only got herself to blame if her attempts at being reasonable and realistic fail utterly.
> 
> Also she's not reasonable at all. Her obsession with deportations is not reasonable, her devotion to austerity is not reasonable. There's no rational case to be made for that stuff, it's all just driven by a combination of hatred and bloody-mindedness.



I didn't say she was reasonable, I would never say that of a Tory. I was just saying I don't understand why the fury about the whole thing is on her (a remainer) like I said in my post I'm not talking about the way the negotiations have gone, this has been the case right from the start.



Ranbay said:


> she changes her mind more than i change my pants.



Which is the whole point of Parliamentary debate and democracy, isn't it? 

Digging your heels in and not listening to reason or understanding that you can change your mind when the errors in your thinking is pointed out to you is what toddlers do.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> quite. there will be no no deal. the uk will end up remaining within the eu, rather chastened and very embarrassed by all the fuss



Will claim it was all just bantz.


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And let us never forget what an utterly vicious shit-cunt she was as Home Sec.



Yes,like a said a total cunt but how does that make Brexit her fault


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> I didn't say she was reasonable, I would never say that of a Tory. I was just saying I don't understand why the fury about the whole thing is on her (a remainer) like I said in my post I'm not talking about the way the negotiations have gone, this has been the case right from the start.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Yes,like a said a total cunt but how does that make Brexit her fault



Who cares? Never pass up a chance to fuck up a cunt.


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 15, 2018)

I must say this is turning an awful, purgatorial day (for other reasons) into something approaching enjoyable


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I am increasingly wondering if May hasn't basically made the supreme sacrifice on behalf of her class, knowing it would make remaining in the EU or at least the Single Market the most likely outcome.


I don't think so. It went wrong for her brexit-wise last year at the election. Giving her perhaps more credit for foresight and tactical awareness than she merits, the calculation behind that election may have been that a majority of 12, or whatever it was, wasn't enough to push a messy compromise deal through parliament, knowing that a messy compromise deal was all she was ever going to get. But a majority of 50+ may have been enough. Since the election, she's been more or less in constant panic mode ever since that premature pre-agreement announcement of an agreement with the DUP. I suspect she may be as surprised as anyone that she's still in a job.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Yes,like a said a total cunt but how does that make Brexit her fault



It depends who you are talking about when you say she is being attacked. The hardline Brexiteers are attacking her because she isn't delivering unicorns. Remainers are attacking her because she has screwed up the softer options (e.g. triggering Art 50 too early and insisting on red lines like no single market option and no ECJ oversight).

My view fwiw (as a staunch Remainer) is that she has ended up with a deal which is probably the best available given the corner she painted herself into.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

And remember that May ruthlessly manoeuvred herself into the top job through brexit. She deserves every ounce of the blame she is getting.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 15, 2018)

weepiper said:


> Rees-Mogg has put his letter in.


All going strictly to plan, then


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

existentialist said:


> All going strictly to plan, then


strictly come backstabbing


----------



## existentialist (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> strictly come backstabbing


Couldn't happen to a lovelier bunch of cunts.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Will claim it was all just bantz.


Oh those wacky Brits


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Where is he in the barrel ?



Under it.


----------



## rubbershoes (Nov 15, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Couldn't happen to a lovelier bunch of cunts.




If May goes and a headbanger becomes PM, we may rue the loss of these calm and stable times


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Couldn't happen to a lovelier bunch of cunts.



I would agree, and would wholeheartedly support a general election, if I thought that Labour had a scintilla of a chance of doing better. I don't though.

We need a second referendum, now we have an idea of the outcome from leaving the EU. I declare my bias, I voted to remain.


----------



## dessiato (Nov 15, 2018)

From Facebook


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> If May goes and a headbanger becomes PM, we may rue the loss of these calm and stable times


i for one would like to see a famous headbanger installed, step forward lord ozzie osbourne


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Ax^ (Nov 15, 2018)

Tory party eating itself alive as normal


I see

Brexit was such a good idea


----------



## strung out (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## colacubes (Nov 15, 2018)

Front-page of The Standard reporting that Gove's turned down the Brexit Secretary job


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

colacubes said:


> Front-page of The Standard reporting that Give's turned down the Brexit Secretary job



He's too busy with his leadership bid.


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

So, residency rights... here’s the main points based on my re-read of the draft text.

Everything is reciprocal, EU - UK citizens have same rules for rights in the host nation.

Continuous residency of five years gets you permanent rights.

The period can include post transition period, as well as before.

Continuous can be broken... here’s the specifics, which are part of a previous EU directive on freedom of movement:

“Continuity of residence shall not be affected by temporary absences not exceeding a total of six months a year, or by absences of a longer duration for compulsory military service, or by one absence of a maximum of twelve consecutive months for important reasons such as pregnancy and childbirth, serious illness, study or vocational training, or a posting in another Member State or a third country.”

Also:

If you leave for five consecutive years, you can lose your acquired permanent rights.



There’s more detail about admin processes, e.g. not invoking extra charges for applicants etc, but the above are the key points I’d say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> So, residency rights... here’s the main points based on my re-read of the draft text.
> 
> Everything is reciprocal, EU - UK citizens have same rules for rights in the host nation.


yeh which is what i said


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

The above leaves some vulnerable edge cases, but I think in practice they will be very rare. E.g. you’ve been clocking up time in the UK, working for a multinational. They then want to move you to an EU office for longer than a year. You may then not be able to come back.

I expect most employers won’t force that on staff, but if one wanted to be nasty, they *could* do it.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)

Bizarro Nostradamus has weighed in, she can't have more than a day left if his previous is anything to go by:


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 152575



Odd that Gidiot's so smug when it was (one of his many) failings that got us to this point in the first place.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 15, 2018)

NO BREXIT man is gatecrashing Rees Mogg on live telly right now - it's fucking great direct action, he's live to millions!


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And remember that May ruthlessly manoeuvred herself into the top job through brexit. She deserves every ounce of the blame she is getting.



A-ha. That makes sense


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

> The second edition of the Evening Standard is reporting that Michael Gove has turned down an offer to be the new Brexit secretary.


Shame


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> View attachment 152574



That made me laugh so hard I worried my dog.


----------



## Patteran (Nov 15, 2018)

weepiper said:


> Rees-Mogg has put his letter in.



And made it public -


----------



## Chz (Nov 15, 2018)

> Rees-Mogg says all the negative predictions about Brexit have not come to pass.
> 
> It is hard to hear Rees-Mogg because a protestor is shouting in the background.
> 
> He says there are “streams of talent” in the Conservative party, and plenty of people who could be leader. He names a series of Brexiters, including Boris Johnson and David Davis.


Those streams, they aren't talent. Can you guess what they really are?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Odd that Gidiot's so smug when it was (one of his many) failings that got us to this point in the first place.



Well, he and Cameron are no longer MPs, so let them shout from the sidelines. (And stay there.)


----------



## lizzieloo (Nov 15, 2018)

Isn't she gonna be proper chuffed if she gets her P45 at this point? I bloody would be.

"Bye then..."


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 15, 2018)

Seriously, is there actually new info about what a post-Brexit deal would be in all this? The media and politicians are obsessed with the backstop arrangement, but that's not a Brexit deal, it's a brexit non-deal. I still have no idea what the proposal on the table is or what the substantive points of it are, if any. Perhaps it's because I'm only half paying attention, but any help appropriate to my attention span would be appreciated.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Patteran said:


> And made it public -




To whom do I submit my letter of no confidence in Rees-Mogg?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Isn't she gonna be proper chuffed if she gets her P45 at this point? I bloody would be.
> 
> "Bye then"



I do feel for Theresa May (yes, I know she asked for the job), the last three months must have taken years off her life. TBH, were I her, I would quit, take my pension, and retire to the Outer Hebrides for a few years. It's like herding cats, an impossible task.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> For once I agree with you.
> 
> I suspect that something like this will happen. The government will struggle to get it through parliament but with a lot of arm-twisting and theatrics and some very minor tweaking it will ultimately pass.



And Hs4 to link Belfast and Derry.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

So JRM is in the 'stalking horse' role then? Historically you would favour someone who publicly backs the sitting PM to end up winning. Perhaps we should be keeping note of all those giving public statements of support for May over the next few days.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I do feel for Theresa May (yes, I know she asked for the job), the last three months must have taken years off her life. TBH, were I her, I would quit, take my pension, and retire to the Outer Hebrides for a few years. It's like herding cats, an impossible task.


I feel exactly the same amount of compassion for Theresa May as she showed to the people she summarily deported from the UK in order to meet some quota target she had made up.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Seriously, is there actually new info about what a post-Brexit deal would be in all this? The media and politicians are obsessed with the backstop arrangement, but that's not a Brexit deal, it's a brexit non-deal. I still have no idea what the proposal on the table is or what the substantive points of it are, if any. Perhaps it's because I'm only half paying attention, but any help appropriate to my attention span would be appreciated.



The fear is that it will take perhaps 10 years to negotiate an FTA with the EU and therefore that we will be in transition until that happens with the power on their side. Also that the terms of the WA will basically end up being in the FTA.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I feel exactly the same amount of compassion for Theresa May as she showed to the people she summarily deported from the UK in order to meet some quota target she had made up.



I see. A government minister must not do that which is a manifesto pledge? Surely by your scenario she is fucked either way?


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I do feel for Theresa May (yes, I know she asked for the job), the last three months must have taken years off her life. TBH, were I her, I would quit, take my pension, and retire to the Outer Hebrides for a few years. It's like herding cats, an impossible task.



I feel for her too. Loathing, contempt, disgust, schadenfreude...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I see. A government minister must not do that which is a manifesto pledge? Surely by your scenario she is fucked either way?


This is an attempt at parody, yes?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and if you've just joined us here's a list of today's resignations
> View attachment 152565


6 resignations - one for each of Jacob Rees Mogg's children.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I feel exactly the same amount of compassion for Theresa May as she showed to the people she summarily deported from the UK in order to meet some quota target she had made up.



She has taken years off peoples lives during her time in the house - best  get her into the oily hold of that south Atlantic bound tramp steamer to enjoy her deserved retirement


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is an attempt at parody, yes?



No. Whereas I did not agree with the immigration policy, it was policy, and was a manifesto pledge. As Home Secretary, it was her duty to carry this out.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Wow.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> No. Whereas I did not agree with the immigration policy, it was policy, and was a manifesto pledge. As Home Secretary, it was her duty to carry this out.



Are you mad? One of the most senior jobs in government and you think 'just following orders, guv' is an acceptable excuse?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Fuckibg duty. Duty.

For  fucks sake


----------



## Brainaddict (Nov 15, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Seriously, is there actually new info about what a post-Brexit deal would be in all this? The media and politicians are obsessed with the backstop arrangement, but that's not a Brexit deal, it's a brexit non-deal. I still have no idea what the proposal on the table is or what the substantive points of it are, if any. Perhaps it's because I'm only half paying attention, but any help appropriate to my attention span would be appreciated.


I'M SERIOUS WHAT IS THE DEAL???!!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> The fear is that it will take perhaps 10 years to negotiate an FTA with the EU and therefore that we will be in transition until that happens with the power on their side. Also that the terms of the WA will basically end up being in the FTA.



So, effectively we will be under EU 'rules', but with no voice?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

_I take my orders from the people of Britain_. 

_Except those people of Britain. Those people of Britain I take from their homes and shove on a plane. _


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So JRM is in the 'stalking horse' role then? Historically you would favour someone who publicly backs the sitting PM to end up winning. Perhaps we should be keeping note of all those giving public statements of support for May over the next few days.


----------



## belboid (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I see. A government minister must not do that which is a manifesto pledge? Surely by your scenario she is fucked either way?


Manifesto pledges are more important than the law? Or the right to life?? And she didn't keep the bloody pledge anyway!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> I'M SERIOUS WHAT IS THE DEAL???!!


asking yourself a question like this is the second sign of madness


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I do feel for Theresa May (yes, I know she asked for the job), the last three months must have taken years off her life. TBH, were I her, I would quit, take my pension, and retire to the Outer Hebrides for a few years. It's like herding cats, an impossible task.



Her government has taken years off many lives.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Wow.



I really don't understand you here. A government minister has an obligation to carry out the function of that office. The Home Office is in charge of immigration. If a party has made a manifesto promise to reduce immigration, and is elected, then the have at least a moral obligation to fulfill their manifesto promise.

Other than being deliberately argumentative, which seems to be your default position on most things, do you actually have a point to make?


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Her government has taken years off many lives.


If not taken lives.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

belboid said:


> Manifesto pledges are more important than the law? Or the right to life?? And she didn't keep the bloody pledge anyway!



<Sigh>


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Are you mad? One of the most senior jobs in government and you think 'just following orders, guv' is an acceptable excuse?



She even called repeatedly for the abolition of human rights protections to make her 'duty' easier to carry out. I wouldn't follow any order that violated human rights but that's just me.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> _I take my orders from the people of Britain_.
> 
> _Except those people of Britain. Those people of Britain I take from their homes and shove on a plane. _



You have made no point. Conversation closed.


----------



## belboid (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> <Sigh>


Is that cos you've just realised what a daft load of old bollocks you've come out with?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You have made no point. Conversation closed.


No point? I have made a very specific point about the disgusting actions May ordered while Home Secretary. She was the head of that department. She was not following orders (not that that's an excuse). She was giving the orders.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I really don't understand you here. A government minister has an obligation to carry out the function of that office. The Home Office is in charge of immigration. If a party has made a manifesto promise to reduce immigration, and is elected, then the have at least a moral obligation to fulfill their manifesto promise.



What about the manifesto pledge to not reorganise the NHS? That went out the window on day one of Cameron's government.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> A government minister has an obligation to carry out the function of that office.


Only if they agree with it (which makes her a cunt) if they don't agree with it they're an even bigger cunt for staying in that role.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> I'M SERIOUS WHAT IS THE DEAL???!!



Well, there is the short version, which appears to show things carrying on much as before, at least in the short/medium term, or the 500 odd page version that I haven't read.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Only if they agree with it (which makes her a cunt) if they don't agree with it they're an even bigger cunt for staying in that role.



Every person has their price.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Cameron, today: _'oops_!'


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

I'm loving MPs trolling the Tories


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

ledsom has said she is not resigning. So we may relax knowing that we will still enjoy her talents within government.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Every person has their price.


That's some fucking price. 
Ive never been bought incase you're wondering.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Every person has their price.



What are you on about? What was May's price for _reluctantly_ deporting all those people?


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Oh and the Remain wing of the Tory party showing some balls


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> That's some fucking price.
> Ive never been bought incase you're wondering.



You are unemployed? Never been employed?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

May is certainly resilient, in the face of unrelenting pressure - as was John Major with 'the bastards'. But that doesn't give me one iota of sympathy for her, even without her Home Office crimes. She's a fucking remainer but was willing to carry brexit through if it gave her a chance to be PM.  Trapped by her own dishonesty and ambition. Fuck her.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You are unemployed? Never been employed?


Taking a salary isn't being bought (it's called a need to eat) Telling you're employer to fuck off when you see injustice is probably why I'm often unemployed. Hth


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

ETA - already posted above


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> So, effectively we will be under EU 'rules', but with no voice?



Correct


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> Oh and the Remain wing of the Tory party showing some balls




Well, going by the figures quoted in an unmentionable scion of the press today, there is not a cat in hell's chance of this going through. Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, DUP, Green and about 80 Tories will vote against. If the opposition hold together, the DUP on their own would bring it down.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> May is certainly resilient, in the face of unrelenting pressure - as was John Major with 'the bastards'. But that doesn't give me one iota of sympathy for her, even without her Home Office crimes. She's a fucking remainer but was willing to carry brexit through if it gave her a chance to be PM.  Trapped by her own dishonesty and ambition. Fuck her.


And I think some people are fooled into thinking she isn't a ruthless political operator. She seems to carry some kind of 'decent' tag due to her manner. Surely the way she threw Rudd under the bus over Windrush should disabuse everyone of that notion.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

I personally thought it was impossible we'd get to a 2nd (in/out) ref, as in which group of politicians would find it in their self interest to push that through? But the way to a 2nd re is opening up, though not yet.  Could well be about channels of communication opening up between a couple of tory wets and labour shadow cabinet members (not Corbyn, he looks well short of committing himself to a 2nd ref).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

bemused said:


> Oh and the Remain wing of the Tory party showing some balls





I was listening to the debate and when may warned about rejecting her deal resulting in "no brexit at all" there was a loud cheer from mps. 
i cant see how her tactic of trying to scare people with the prospect of something want is going to work. 
She steadfastly refused to address the question of what was going to happen when her deal is rejected.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 15, 2018)

overnight yougov: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...cument/wywx6pr4gx/PVResults_181115_Snap_w.pdf

Key figures (excluding _won't vote_ and _don't know_):

Would you vote Remain/Leave if referendum today? *54/46 *
Would you Support/Oppose a public vote on The Deal?  *59/42* (rounding error?)
Should MPs vote Against/For The Deal? *63/37*
And if they vote Against, would you Support/Oppose a public vote on the next step? *64/36*
In that vote, would you vote Remain/Hard Brexit? *56/44*


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

it s bit shocking to think that some still consider these sludge eels to have any kind of honour or duty in heir nasty fucking lives 


Next up -people join the police to make a difference shocker


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 15, 2018)

Next Conservative Leader

Dominic Raab 9/2
Sajid Javid 11/2
Boris Johnson 6/1
Michael Gove 6/1
David Davis 6/1
Jeremy Hunt 7/1

Happy days


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Well, going by the figures quoted in an unmentionable scion of the press today, there is not a cat in hell's chance of this going through. Labour, SNP, Lib Dems, DUP, Green and about 80 Tories will vote against. If the opposition hold together, the DUP on their own would bring it down.



If it comes down to a  choice between 2nd ref and a crashing out though?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I personally thought it was impossible we'd get to a 2nd (in/out) ref, as in which group of politicians would find it in their self interest to push that through? But the way to a 2nd re is opening up, though not yet.  Could well be about channels of communication opening up between a couple of tory wets and labour shadow cabinet members (not Corbyn, he looks well short of committing himself to a 2nd ref).



One can but hope. 

There has been speculation that if a re-run came up with a narrow 'remain', then the 'leavers' would try and force a General Election.

It truly is a fucking shambles. There are no winners here. The £ has dropped against the € and the $ already.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I was listening to the debate and when may warned about rejecting her deal resulting in "no brexit at all" there was a loud cheer from mps.
> i cant see how her tactic of trying to scare people with the prospect of something want is going to work.
> She steadfastly refused to address the question of what was going to happen when her deal is rejected.



Her tactic is clear - my brexit or no brexit.

If Labour can't get a GE  but can get enough votes for a 2nd vote they'll break the Tory party.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Politicians are quite silly people aren't they?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Next Conservative Leader
> 
> Dominic Raab 9/2
> Sajid Javid 11/2
> ...



Fuck. That is like 'would you rather be shot or hanged?'.

I tipped JRM a long time back, and still feel that that is likely (God help us.)


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Fwiw, I still don't see Labour in power any time soon.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Politicians are quite silly people aren't they?



Cameron should be hanged.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Fwiw, I still don't see Labour in power any time soon.



No, and would not like to see it under Corbyn. Under a more balanced Labour leader, then yes. Every party runs out of steam in government, and this lot have had their day.

I honestly think that if Labour had had a more moderate person in charge, they would have won the last one, they came very very close.


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> No, and would not like to see it under Corbyn. Under a more balanced Labour leader, then yes. Every party runs out of steam in government, and this lot have had their day.
> 
> I honestly think that if Labour had had a more moderate person in charge, they would have won the last one, they came very very close.



"moderate"


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Next Conservative Leader
> 
> Dominic Raab 9/2
> Sajid Javid 11/2
> ...



I think it's a great moment to let Raab have a go, the last lot clearly weren't up to it


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Now would be a good time for Labour to pull out a lead in the polls.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> a more moderate person in charge



You mean "right wing." Corbyn is a standard-model social democrat, there's nothing immoderate about him. 

Also:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> No, and would not like to see it under Corbyn. Under a more balanced Labour leader, then yes. Every party runs out of steam in government, and this lot have had their day.
> 
> I honestly think that if Labour had had a more moderate person in charge, they would have won the last one, they came very very close.



As we've just established you're ok with the Nazi prison guard defence so I think we'll be alright without your views on what constitutes a moderate thanks.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> If it comes down to a  choice between 2nd ref and a crashing out though?


 God knows. 

I find the whole thing Kafkaesque. 

Anyone with two connected neurons should realise that leaving the EU isn't shooting ourselves in the foot, it is cutting our throats.

Did you see the projection on NHS staffing shortages? 350,000 by 2030. We are already dependent on people from the EU, a lot of whom are doing the low end jobs that Brits don't want to do. Under the proposals in the Brexit agreement, those people wouldn't even be in the country. A fine way to say 'thank you' to those who have done so much.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

I wonder how cameron is feeling right now? Its him who pulled the lever that said "do not pull this lever!" . 

From any sort of establishment POV the damage from the brexit referendum is huge - apart from the economic pain, its toxified politics (to the point of an mp getting murdered) , looks like it could break the tory party, seriously undermined the union with scotland and northern ireland, made the UK a global laughing stock has the potential for cause the mother of all constitutional crises.

All because he thought it would be a clever little weaze to win over some UKIP voters in 2010.  "doh!" doesn't begin to cover it. At least chamberlin was aware of the gravity of the situation when he sold out  to Hitler - cameron planned this disaster  on the back a beer mat one evening down the local inbetween babyshams.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> low end jobs that Brits don't want to do



NHS work isn't "low-end jobs that Brits don't want to do", it's a spectrum of highly-skilled to precarious labour which has been routinely lacking in training and resources and has historically relied on brain-draining weaker nations to make up for it. Leaving Europe will impact on this strategy, but the whole situation has been shameful for decades.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> You mean "right wing." Corbyn is a standard-model social democrat, there's nothing immoderate about him.
> 
> Also:
> 
> View attachment 152579



When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.

Corbyn should have romped home last time, but didn't. 

You have your view, but I would say that the actuality is that it is not shared by everyone, not even all of those on the left of the political spectrum.

Merkel is a Social Democrat, Corbyn is not.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)

WFT are you talking about, nationalising railways is one of the most popular policies you can offer and was fully costed — unlike the Tory manifesto.

I mean God knows I have my problems with Corbyn (the fetishising of nationalisation as a surrogate for dealing with much larger economic issues being one of them) but at least go after him for real life inadequacies rather than just parroting this bollocks.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 15, 2018)

lizzieloo said:


> Isn't she gonna be proper chuffed if she gets her P45 at this point? I bloody would be.
> 
> "Bye then..."


Hmm. I see no wheat. If ever there was a wheatfield repeat moment for May, it'd have to be finally being unshackled from the zombie government she's part of...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.


did you know that in 1945 the labour party didn't have a big section on 'how we're going to pay for this' in their manifesto?
British Labour Party election manifesto, 1945 [Archive]


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.
> 
> Corbyn should have romped home last time, but didn't.
> 
> ...


I seem to remember the likes of the imf or similar giving a big thumbs up to peoples quantative easing. Generally well received spending plan by the establishment


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Hmm. I see no wheat. If ever there was a wheatfield repeat moment for May, it'd have to be finally being unshackled from the zombie government she's part of...


she will wake up and smell the remnants of the whaling industry at grytviken, there being no coffee to mask the scent


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Rob Ray said:


> NHS work isn't "low-end jobs that Brits don't want to do", it's a spectrum of highly-skilled to precarious labour which has been routinely lacking in training and resources and has historically relied on brain-draining weaker nations to make up for it. Leaving Europe will impact on this strategy, but the whole situation has been shameful for decades.



It has. I've spoken before on here about the disgrace of sucking in doctors from countries who struggle to train them. The big train wreck hurtling down the tracks is the diminishing number of young doctors who want to be GPs, that is going to be a real crisis, in fact in some areas it already is. Our local surgery has been advertising for three years, with no joy.

I was thinking specifically of the care assistants that look after mainly the infirm elderly. I occasionally speak to one woman who calls in on an old lady in our square, she is from Poland, the other girl who comes is from Bulgaria.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I seem to remember the likes of the imf or similar giving a big thumbs up to peoples quantative easing. Generally well received spending plan by the establishment


 Indeed, but not something that can be done on a never ending basis.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.
> 
> Corbyn should have romped home last time, but didn't.
> 
> ...



We already pay for the railways, in fares and subsidies. Countries with nationalised railways spend less for a better service.


----------



## belboid (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.
> 
> Corbyn should have romped home last time, but didn't.
> 
> ...


For someone who has 'followed politics for 50 years' you seem to have an issue with some pretty basic terms. Merkel is as much of a 'social democrat' as Ken Clarke is. Liberal toryism is not the same as social democracy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> When people start talking about nationalising the railways etc, but with no concrete plans as to how to pay, other than more borrowing, it spooks voters.
> 
> Corbyn should have romped home last time, but didn't.
> 
> ...


corbyn's far to the right of auld 'red' jim callaghan


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Been in a meeting for an hour, have I missed much?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Been in a meeting for an hour, have I missed much?



It’s all been fixed. Panic over.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> did you know that in 1945 the labour party didn't have a big section on 'how we're going to pay for this' in their manifesto?
> British Labour Party election manifesto, 1945 [Archive]



Did you know that there was no option? The government commandeered the railways during the war, and so much damage was done to the permanent way that there was no money for repairs, prior to handing the track back to the owners.

It was not only railways nationalised, and the owners were paid out in British Transport Stock. I know this because my grandfather's haulage company was nationalised, and on his death, my mother and her sisters received the stock. I can remember my mother getting the dividend. Don't know what the final outcome was, whether the dividend eventually redeemed the stock, or whether it was paid out. It certainly didn't filter down to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Did you know that there was no option? The government commandeered the railways during the war, and so much damage was done to the permanent way that there was no money for repairs, prior to handing the track back to the owners.
> 
> It was not only railways nationalised, and the owners were paid out in British Transport Stock. I know this because my grandfather's haulage company was nationalised, and on his death, my mother and her sisters received the stock on his death. I can remember my mother getting the dividend. Don't know what the final outcome was, whether the dividend eventually redeemed the stock, or whether it was paid out. It certainly didn't filter down to me.


the point being, you didn't see people quibbling about oh noes how will they pay for nationalising the coal? and what's all this about the nhs? remind me pls, who won the 1945 election?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s all been fixed. Panic over.


the doctors are no longer sure that theresa may can be fixed - humpty-dumpty being mentioned across the palace of westminster


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Rehman Chishti resigned
Sheryll Murray another no confidence


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Nipped out to buy a freezer, 4 pages... FFS


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Rehman Chishti resigned
> Sheryll Murray another no confidence


storm downing street under the slogan 'one out - all out'


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Nipped out to buy a freezer, 4 pages... FFS


pleased to hear that the manual's so much shorter than you expected.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the point being, you didn't see people quibbling about oh noes how will they pay for nationalising the coal? and what's all this about the nhs? remind me pls, who won the 1945 election?



Which party sent reps out to the disgruntled troops awaiting demob in Germany and Austria, promising that if they were elected the process would be accelerated? Answer, the same party that lost the next election, thereby proving that you can fool some of the people...


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Rehman Chishti resigned
> Sheryll Murray another no confidence



And so it begins...


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> And so it begins...


I think it began a while ago.

Do keep up...


----------



## belboid (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Rehman Chishti resigned
> Sheryll Murray another no confidence


who and who?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Which party sent reps out to the disgruntled troops awaiting demob in Germany and Austria, promising that if they were elected the process would be accelerated? Answer, the same party that lost the next election, thereby proving that you can fool some of the people...


let me give you a little lesson in counting

1: 1945

2: 1950

do you see how the labour party's vote did not decline, as you suggested, but rather went up by more than 1.2 million? perhaps you could also explain how a party with a majority of five seats lost the election


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

> EXCLUSIVE:
> 
> Michael Gove will ONLY become Theresa May's Brexit Secretary if he can renegotiate her deal and the November 25 EU summit is scrapped.
> 
> And he is STILL weighing up whether to quit Cabinet...https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/11/15/michael-gove-offered-brexit-secretary-job/ …


----------



## Poi E (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Fuck. That is like 'would you rather be shot or hanged?'.
> 
> I tipped JRM a long time back, and still feel that that is likely (God help us.)



Just watched him on the steps of Parliament. I think you may be right.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

belboid said:


> who and who?


I don't care. Just happy to see the overall numbers creeping up


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


>


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Which party sent reps out to the disgruntled troops awaiting demob in Germany and Austria, promising that if they were elected the process would be accelerated? Answer, the same party that lost the next election, thereby proving that you can fool some of the people...



Doesn't really prove anything though does it. Proves that not all of the UK electorate was in the army at the time, but we already knew that.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think it began a while ago.
> 
> Do keep up...



I think he only just got the telegram about the death of Franz Ferdinand.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> let me give you a little lesson in counting
> 
> 1: 1945
> View attachment 152586
> ...



Apologies, it was the election after, in 1951. Churchill was PM in 1952 when I was born.

United Kingdom general election, 1951





← 1950 *25 October 1951* 1955 →
← outgoing members
elected members →
*All 625 seats in the House of Commons
313 seats needed for a majority*
Opinion polls
*Turnout* 82.6%, 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




1.3%


 

 


*Leader* Winston Churchill Clement Attlee Clement Davies
*Party* Conservative Labour Liberal
*Leader since* 9 October 1940 25 October 1935 2 August 1945
*Leader's seat* Woodford Walthamstow West Montgomeryshire
*Last election* 298 seats, 43.4% 315 seats, 46.1% 9 seats, 9.1%
*Seats won* *321* 295 6
*Seat change*





23 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




20 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




3
*Popular vote* 13,717,851 *13,948,385* 730,546
*Percentage* 48.0% *48.8%* 2.5%
*Swing*





4.6% 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




2.7% 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




6.6%



Colours denote the winning party—as shown in § Results
*Prime Minister before election*
Clement Attlee
Labour

*Appointed Prime Minister* 
Winston Churchill
Conservative

The *1951 United Kingdom general election* was held twenty months after the 1950 general election, which the Labour Party had won with a slim majority of just five seats. The Labour government called a snap election for Thursday 25 October 1951 hoping to increase their parliamentary majority. However, despite winning the popular vote, Labour were defeated by the Conservative Party who had won the most seats. This election marked the beginning of the Labour Party's thirteen-year spell in opposition, and the return of Winston Churchill as Prime Minister. Also, this was the final general election to be held with George VI as monarch; as he died the following year on 6 February, and was succeeded by his daughter, Elizabeth II.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

The new strategy:


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Doesn't really prove anything though does it. Proves that not all of the UK electorate was in the army at the time, but we already knew that.


not to mention that research reveals the labour party won the 1950 general election. sasaferrato's claim holed below the waterline


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

> A new referendum on Brexit should be held if Theresa May is replaced as prime minister and no general election is called, says Wales's First Minister. Carwyn Jones has so far said he would only support a new Brexit vote if a general election were held and the result failed to break the deadlock.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Apologies, it was the election after, in 1951. Churchill was PM in 1952 when I was born.


you're not blaming that on the troops formerly in austria and germany are you?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Can you think of anything with 'people's...' in front of it that isn't patronising as fuck? If it was really the people as a whole doing something, then everyone would know this already and you wouldn't need 'people' in the title of the thing. It's like putting 'water' in the name of a boating event, if you're doing it properly then the presence of water should at the very least be strongly implied.
> 
> Come out and say 'the people fucked up' if that's what you believe. If the problem first time round was people lying, twisting facts, presenting opinion as fact, lying about their motivations and generally communicating with the public in a disrespectful way, then the solution is unlikely to require more of the same.




The "People's Will" didn't patronise the Tsarist elites. They assasinated them.

Narodnaya Volya - Wikipedia


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



if the tories had got their act together they'd have timed one of the resignations to go live while may was speaking

#brokentories


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Can you think of anything with 'people's...' in front of it that isn't patronising as fuck? If it was really the people as a whole doing something, then everyone would know this already and you wouldn't need 'people' in the title of the thing. It's like putting 'water' in the name of a boating event, if you're doing it properly then the presence of water should at the very least be strongly implied.
> 
> Come out and say 'the people fucked up' if that's what you believe. If the problem first time round was people lying, twisting facts, presenting opinion as fact, lying about their motivations and generally communicating with the public in a disrespectful way, then the solution is unlikely to require more of the same.


people's palace
people's front page


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you're not blaming that on the troops formerly in austria and germany are you?



Even Sas wouldn't slag off his own grandkids.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 15, 2018)

Press conference 5pm


----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> This way of thinking fucks me right off. It really does.
> 
> The “British guy”? Why is that relevant?  His title and CV tells us more: Lord Kerr of Kinlochard, formerly one of the directors of Royal Dutch Shell, currently deputy chairman of Scottish Power.
> 
> ...




Or more succinctly:

T_he perfidious Scot who wrote Article 50_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Press conference 5pm


ritual suicide 1705


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Press conference 5pm



 Coffee or Café? Chips of Pommes frites? Which way will she go? A national holds its breath:


----------



## xenon (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Cameron should be hanged.



 He was only doing his duty, manifesto...

 Though I agree, but why stop there.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> TBH, were I her, I would quit, take my pension, and retire to the Outer Hebrides for a few years. It's like herding cats, an impossible task.



That's called, doing a cameron.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Good stuff


----------



## gosub (Nov 15, 2018)

This top down deal which has had very little collective democratic input.. Anyone pointed out yet is breach of constitution?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> This top down deal which has had very little collective democratic input.. Anyone pointed out yet is breach of constitution?


Can you point to which page of the UK constitution it is in breach of?


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Here we Gove again


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> This top down deal which has had very little collective democratic input.. Anyone pointed out yet is breach of constitution?


Which constitution and in what way is it in breach?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Anyone here actually read the damn thing?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

We are a bit short of constitutions here in the U.K. - we have the magma carta though - will that do ?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> We are a bit short of constitutions here in the U.K. - we have the *magma carta* though - will that do ?


Bit of an explosive issue, that one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Here we Gove again




desperate [ˈdɛsp(ə)rət]
ADJECTIVE
Someone who puts their future in the hands of Michael Gove

SYNONYM
Fucking idiot


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Anyone here actually read the damn thing?


I've had a flick and really tried to find it interesting but it's not easy reading on opiates  Some more learned posters were having a bash at it last night


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Here we Gove again



How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

Why do all the female Tory leaders over seem to have bigger balls than their male counterparts?


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?


I've no idea mate. Maybe Mr Gove already has a little plan that him and his friends have favoured all along.


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?


Only with an article 50 extension I think. TBH if this doesn't pass (it won't) then there'll need to be a A50 extension either way.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?


there isn't. and brussels have said this is the best that there is. so it's basically a choice between no deal and stay in the european union.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?



New Tory Leader "can I renegotiate the deal?"

EU " get fucked"

Plenty of time.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 15, 2018)

It seems bizarre that there are people out there who still think the EU will negotiate.  Where have they been for the last decade or so?

There really only has ever been 3 choices: Remain, hard Brexit or totally shit and one sided fudge.  Its amazing that some people still want to pretend it was about the quality of the negotiators.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> Only with an article 50 extension I think. TBH if this doesn't pass (it won't) then there'll need to be a A50 extension either way.


or for it to be rescinded, which is tbh more likely. there is no way 27 countries plus the ec are going to agree to an extension.


----------



## gosub (Nov 15, 2018)

Having a written constitution would be, as I understand it, a breach of our constitution, or rather a waste of time... No Parliament may bind its successors. Yet the PM wants to sign up to a deal that no future Parliament would be able to rescind


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Nipped out to buy a freezer, 4 pages... FFS



You planning on stockpiling food?


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there is no way 27 countries plus the ec are going to agree to an extension.


Why? No-one but the full on ERG headbangers want no deal, here and in Europe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> Why? No-one but the full on ERG headbangers want no deal, here and in Europe.


there will be no no deal
we will remain within the european union


----------



## gosub (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> or for it to be rescinded, which is tbh more likely. there is no way 27 countries plus the ec are going to agree to an extension.


I suggest they might,  they are ill prepared for a no deal Brexit


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> I suggest they might,  they are ill prepared for a no deal Brexit


there will be no no deal

we will remain within the european union


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there will be no no deal
> we will remain within the european union


I'm not making any confident predictions right now! other than if the UK government asks for a A50 extension they'll get one.


----------



## gosub (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there will be no no deal
> we will remain within the european union


Is that with free movement that would allow us to 'demonstrate' in Brussels?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not making any confident predictions right now! other than if the UK government asks for a A50 extension they'll get one.





gosub said:


> Is that with free movement that would allow us to 'demonstrate' in Brussels?


the european union has said the deal which has been rubbished all day long is the best on offer.

there is therefore little point starting over being as we now know what the best looks like.

the choice is therefore stay or go into the outer darkness.

we will not be going into the outer darkness.

we will wait until the ecj reports back on whether we can rescind article 50.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not making any confident predictions right now! other than if the UK government asks for a A50 extension they'll get one.


The other thing is, whilst they'd want the UK back, they'll be _mightily_ pissed off about wasting the last 2 years.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> Having a written constitution would be, as I understand it, a breach of our constitution, or rather a waste of time... No Parliament may bind its successors. Yet the PM wants to sign up to a deal that no future Parliament would be able to rescind


A future parliament clearly *could *rescind the current deal (or any other) if it so chose, provided they could stomach the consequences


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The other thing is, whilst they'd want the UK back, they'll be _mightily_ pissed off about wasting the last 2 years.


so what?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> so what?


so what? I just think it's funny.  No idea whether we will slink back, but the weary smile on Junker's face will be pure meme gold.


----------



## gosub (Nov 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> A future parliament clearly *could *rescind the current deal (or any other) if it so chose, provided they could stomach the consequences


Not on its own it couldn't.  Haven't caught much of today's twattary, more important things to do but I caught that bit


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> so what? I just think it's funny.  No idea whether we will slink back, but the weary smile on Junker's face will be pure meme gold.


Sorry, a bit brusque. I was wondering what you thought the political results of the EU being pissed off at the UK might be? I'd guess nothing much really.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> Not on its own it couldn't.  Haven't caught much of today's twattary, more important things to do but I caught that bit


You really need to explain this properly.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 152592


You fucking pussy!


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

gosub said:


> Not on its own it couldn't.  Haven't caught much of today's twattary, more important things to do but I caught that bit



Yes it can. 

Parliament can withdraw from any agreement at any time. The point they are making is that would require walking away from the treaty not trigger a process within the treaty.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Boris has been a bit quiet today.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

> Nigel Farage admits to BBC News that he has not read the full withdrawal agreement.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 15, 2018)

BJ's blustering, but has been a bit buried under skinny Hitler's "I don't want to be in charge but maybe David Davis should be ha ha" shtick.

May faces Brexiteer fury as cabinet prepares to consider Brexit deal


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The other thing is, whilst they'd want the UK back, they'll be _mightily_ pissed off about wasting the last 2 years.


I was just wondering about that. If somehow Brexit were averted, what would relations be like between Britain and the rest of the EU going forward. Would we just quietly try and sweep it all under the carpet, or would there be _consequences_?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

What's the time? Ooh five minutes till the next live episode of shit show


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

this is interesting.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

I've got to leave for work at 5:15 so I won't get to watch the shitstorm unfold


----------



## alex_ (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> So, effectively we will be under EU 'rules', but with no voice?



Only if you want to sell them stuff.


----------



## klang (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> What's the time? Ooh five minutes till the next live episode of shit show


where can we watch it?


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> I was just wondering about that. If somehow Brexit were averted, what would relations be like between Britain and the rest of the EU going forward. Would we just quietly try and sweep it all under the carpet, or would there be _consequences_?


How can there not be consequences,whatever the outcome? That’s been the case since the day after the referendum. I doubt we can say any more than that at this point - other than its not going to be any better for us - it all depends where we end up in a few months time and who’s in power.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

littleseb said:


> where can we watch it?


Brexit latest - Rees-Mogg adds to pressure on May


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> this is interesting.


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

the crest is there apparently. false alarm!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The other thing is, whilst they'd want the UK back, they'll be _mightily_ pissed off about wasting the last 2 years.



The EU will be fucking chuffed if we slink back in; if the UK can't leave no other country will even think about it ---> full steam ahead Federal States of Europe.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> the crest is there apparently. false alarm!


unlike!


----------



## elbows (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> unlike!


I'm betting she'll say something that accounts to fuck all, and carry on.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU will be fucking chuffed if we slink back; if the UK can't leave no other country will even think about it ---> full steam ahead Federal States of Europe.



Most countries don't have a Northern Ireland situation though. Any country that was willing and able to leave with a hard border would probably have less trouble.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> I was just wondering about that. If somehow Brexit were averted, what would relations be like between Britain and the rest of the EU going forward. Would we just quietly try and sweep it all under the carpet, or would there be _consequences_?


There have already been consequences with agencies and companies moving or registering outside of the UK and announcements of many job losses.

It certainly wouldn't be unreasonable for the EU to get rid of some of the UK's current opt-outs.  UK opt-outs from EU legislation

(and notice "The UK is not a member of the Schengen border-free area, retaining control overs its own borders. (Protocol 19)")


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

She’s going to say I’m off Pickman's model is in charge!


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most countries don't have a Northern Ireland situation though. Any country that was willing and able to leave with a hard border would probably have less trouble.



They all have borders though, yes there is no GFA but all the rest of the same problems would still exist.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm betting she'll say something that accounts to fuck all, and carry on.



I'm betting she'll walk on swigging from bottle of JD, flick the V's and say, "Fuck it, I'm off down the pub, you shove yer fucking job, cunts!"


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> She’s going to say I’m off Pickman's model is in charge!



in that case warm up the flighttracker and keep an eye on the London - Dakar - MPA - South Georgia route


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

I see Peston is getting his kite on the BBC coverage!


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Big turn out so far


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most countries don't have a Northern Ireland situation though. Any country that was willing and able to leave with a hard border would probably have less trouble.



Quite, if we returned NI to the Irish we could have Brexit sorted by the 9 o'clock news.


----------



## klang (Nov 15, 2018)

if we are very unlucky we'll see her dancing.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> They all have borders though, yes there is no GFA but all the rest of the same problems would still exist.


Was talking to an Italian friend last night who said she accidentally wandered into Austria when she was back home walking in the mountains, and that most in the area are fluent in both Italian and Austrian/German. Certainly think there are plenty of borders on the continent that would cause problems.


----------



## klang (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 152597
> 
> Big turn out so far


lol, imagine no journo would bother


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I'm betting she'll walk on swigging from bottle of JD, flick the V's and say, "Fuck it, I'm off down the pub, you shove yer fucking job, cunts!"



That's what I would be doing.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 152597
> 
> Big turn out so far


At this point I wouldn't be surprised if no-one can find the key.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> in that case warm up the flighttracker and keep an eye on the London - Dakar - MPA - South Georgia route


Former people will assemble at Plymouth to board the ships taking them to grytviken. It is advisable to pack a change of clothes and bring bank cards and share certificates etc which will be kept in the vaults of the bank of England in the national interest. Bring a bucket and spade.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 152597
> 
> Big turn out so far


Cabinet meeting?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Former people will assemble at Plymouth to board the ships taking them to grytviken. It is advisable to pack a change of clothes and bring bank cards and share certificates etc which will be kept in the vaults of the bank of England in the national interest. Bring a bucket and spade.


Digging their own graves; fair.


----------



## Chz (Nov 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> There have already been consequences with agencies and companies moving or registering outside of the UK and announcements of many job losses.
> 
> It certainly wouldn't be unreasonable for the EU to get rid of some of the UK's current opt-outs.  UK opt-outs from EU legislation
> 
> (and notice "The UK is not a member of the Schengen border-free area, retaining control overs its own borders. (Protocol 19)")


I doubt some of the more sceptical countries would get behind anything punitive. They don't like the idea of it, when several of them are already mucking about and flouting EU regulations. Also, it would very likely re-ignite the entire thing which I have to assume almost no-one wants.

Won't happen in the short term. There was always talk of the rebate going away in the long term.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

May is probably in her changing room with her team having a pre gig huddle and prayer, like Beyoncé.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



"trigger"?
She should be pulling one...live...at the lectern.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How is there time to renegotiate before March 19?



I don't think March 19th matters much, EU happy to have Britain in Single Market indefinitely.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Quite, if we returned NI to the Irish we could have Brexit sorted by the 9 o'clock news.


That would be the most fair and proper thing to do.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

She's learning a last-minute change to the choreography.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> She's learning a last-minute change to the choreography.


Or blowing Boris and Gove


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> She's learning a last-minute change to the choreography.


I made that joke yesterday evening (seems like much longer ago now)


----------



## Poi E (Nov 15, 2018)

Christ she's late. I need to get dinner on.


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

I'd laugh my moobs off if she announced she was withdrawing the Article 50 request.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Christ she's late. I need to get dinner on.



I've just ordered a takeaway for delivery, to avoid missing anything whilst cooking.


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't think March 19th matters much, EU happy to have Britain in Single Market indefinitely.



Customs union definitely.

Single market no.

(Several countries today saying the deal is too soft, and might allow the U.K. to sneak back into the Single Market.)


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

She’s on the phone asking Frankie Boyle for an opener.


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

she is going to resign


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> she is going to resign


Yep


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Here we go...


----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've just ordered a takeaway for delivery, to avoid missing anything whilst cooking.


You'll be disappointed


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Sounds very valedictory


----------



## oryx (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> she is going to resign


Tone suggests you're right.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Maybe not


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 15, 2018)

A nice man will put a bag over her head and lead her away to retire in a wheatfield somewhere


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

I wish she'd make up her mind


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

Nah. Not yet...


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Do. The. Dance.

Do. The. Dance.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Wavering voice suggests the 'however' bit is coming...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Customs union definitely.
> 
> Single market no.
> 
> (Several countries today saying the deal is too soft, and might allow the U.K. to sneak back into the Single Market.)



The  backstop is SM or if it isn't I don't know what the difference is. I have seen it suggested what we have is basically SM Membership with an opt out on fishing


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Or...not.


wtf


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Wavering voice suggests the 'however' bit is coming...


Nah, firming up now...


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

That was bizarre.


----------



## oryx (Nov 15, 2018)

She's a fucking wind up merchant.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Wavering voice suggests the 'however' bit is coming...


She's never been the most confident of speakers.

That gap after finishing suggests the journos thought something more was coming too, though


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 15, 2018)

Ooooh. Big talk from LK.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> That was bizarre.


It really was nothing, wasn't it?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

Pointless!



Is on BBC1


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Yep


Nope.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

"Mrs Prime Minister, do you just want to check there wasn't a second page to your statement?"


----------



## agricola (Nov 15, 2018)

"Surely now even you must see this is not strong or stable"


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Do. The. Dance.
> 
> Do. The. Dance.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Or blowing Boris and Gove



Thanks for that. Was having quite a fun day, until you planted that image in my noggin.


----------



## Looby (Nov 15, 2018)

FFS, I’ve got a bet on May and could do with that fiver this weekend.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Just got a breaking news alert.  

BREAKING Theresa May said some more stuff.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

agricola said:


> she is going to resign



Was sure of this too at the start.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Looby said:


> FFS, I’ve got a bet on May and could do with that fiver this weekend.


At this rate, so could the British economy.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Boring episode whens pointless on?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> She's never been the most confident of speakers.
> 
> That gap after finishing suggests the journos thought something more was coming too, though



She kind of just stopped. She's really not a speaker which you'd think would be a job requirement for a politco.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Is there time for another resignation before the news. This is rubbish, she's really shit at standup.


----------



## Voley (Nov 15, 2018)

Arse. All that 'honour to serve' bit at the beginning got my hopes up.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Nothing has changed 

Someone put her out of her fucking misery please


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just got a breaking news alert.
> 
> BREAKING Theresa May said some more stuff.


Did she announce that Stormzy will be headlining Glasto?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

I can’t believe I waited for that.  I’m clearly in need of help.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Voley said:


> Arse. All that 'honour to serve' bit at the beginning got my hopes up.


I've a mild suspicion she did that on purpose.

Whether it was for the grim lols or if it was calculated for some reason, I dunno.


----------



## Looby (Nov 15, 2018)

I think she’s going to cry in a minute.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

I know that there have been jibes about her being a masochist lol / rofl etc but there is probably more to that than we think .


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I can’t believe I waited for that.  I’m clearly in need of help.


You're fine. cupid_stunt forked out for a takeaway


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Do. The. Dance.
> 
> Do. The. Dance.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 15, 2018)

I stuck around at work to watch this 

She was doing her wavering voice thing so I was waiting for "however, I'm fucking off" 

Or for those flags to fall over or something at least.


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm betting she'll say something that accounts to fuck all, and carry on.


Call me nostrofuckingdamus


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Send in the Clowns Goves, this is shit telly.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 15, 2018)

I am enjoying her fucking up half of the reporter's names though


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Thanks for that. Was having quite a fun day, until you planted that image in my noggin.


She came out wiping her chin and took a very large swig on that glass of water


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Looby said:


> I think she’s going to cry in a minute.


She like one of those talkie toys that have a pull chord in their backs.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 15, 2018)

Not water, vodka


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

neonwilderness said:


> I am enjoying her fucking up half of the reporter's names though


Me too, George.


----------



## neonwilderness (Nov 15, 2018)

"There will not be a second referendum" 

She'll be calling a second referendum soon then?


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Fucking hell liking herself to Geoff Boycott


----------



## Threshers_Flail (Nov 15, 2018)

She not taking questions from Channel 4 news?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Ffffffffffffuck me, that was a tortured analogy


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

He's a wife beater?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Fucking hell liking herself to Geoff Boycott


Nowt like having somebody convicted of domestic violence as your hero.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> He's a wife beater?


Who always gets the runs


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Threshers_Flail said:


> She not taking questions from Channel 4 news?


Fake news


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I know that there have been jibes about her being a masochist lol / rofl etc but there is probably more to that than we think .



She's almost certainly being backed by the seniors behind the scenes to ensure its only her blamed for anything going wrong. She's the scapegoat for Brexit.

Plus nobody particularly wants to be PM before we hit Brexit day.


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 15, 2018)

Page err


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> She's almost certainly being backed by the seniors behind the scenes to ensure its only her blamed for anything going wrong. She's the scapegoat for Brexit.
> 
> Plus nobody particularly wants to be PM before we hit Brexit day.


David Moyes Syndrome.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

She seemed near to tears at times.

Oh, and the takeaway was lovely.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> She seemed near to tears at times.
> 
> Oh, and the takeaway was lovely.


If there are any chips left, she doesn't want one.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Who always gets the runs


Famous for running their teammates out...


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

The cricket question was both really weird, and an obvious set up.


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The cricket question was both really weird, and an obvious set up.



She didn't quite knock it out the park though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Threshers_Flail said:


> She not taking questions from Channel 4 news?


CNN didn't turn up, you see


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Been trying to make out what's being shouted in the background on the BBC. All I've been able to make out so far is "it's not going very well!"


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

32 Facts about Geoffrey Boycott: A Complex Individual

Dennis Lille, the menacing pacer once said about Boycott – “Geoff fell in love with himself at an early age and remained faithful.”


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Who always gets the runs


The remainers revenge


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Also, more this happens, the more we (remainers), in years to come, will all be cheering Agent Theresa: The double agent that saved Brexit and the Union.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

So she took qs from the Express, Mail, Sun, BBC, Sky, CNN, Channel 5, Buzzfeed. Nothing from the Times, FT, Torygraph, Grauniad, Mirror, Independent, Channel 4. Definitely nothing from the Evening Standard. It was a very friendly audience, and I'm not convinced any of the questioners had actually read the report, or even been briefed by someone who had. Surely if you're doing your job properly, you reference the report: on page 147, para 2, it says XYZ...

Whole room full of clowns.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Been trying to make out what's being shouted in the background on the BBC. All I've been able to make out so far is "it's not going very well!"


They've been shouting out their takeaway orders to cupid_stunt


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 15, 2018)

Some prominent conservative MPs are polemic about a Brexit deal involving the customs union which indeed involves tying UK with EU rules and regulations regarding environment, health and safety etc. These politicians are jingoistic without responsibility for striking a better deal amid not just the geopolitical impasse of Irish border issue, but resolving a quagmire involving a raft of trade and industrial transactions between UK and EU. These hawks are pursuing an idealist campaign to satiate their passion. They don’t take responsibility for a more prudent solution. Labour party and their leader Corbyn are also contesting, because it is their prerogative and opportunity for power. They don’t have a better Brexit deal that is good for the jobs and trade of the nation let alone the impasse of Irish border. It is a campaign of unscrupulous opportunism not in the best interest of the nation. The current deal is not the end of the world. There is room for negotiation in the future, without the prospect of an imminent turmoil for the nation.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The cricket question was both really weird, and an obvious set up.


So appropriate for any tory politician, though...Boycott was and is a malevolent narcissistic sociopath.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Just booked Brexit day off


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> So appropriate for any tory politician, though...Boycott was and is a malevolent narcissistic sociopath.


Knows his cricket tho

She should have compared herself to Graham Swann but he can dance and she can't


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Also, more this happens, the more we (remainers), in years to come, will all be cheering Agent Theresa: The double agent that saved Brexit and the Union.


Mother-fucker Theresa


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

Surely it's time for more resignations?

Breaking news for the 6 o'clock bulletin.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

R4 saying they've heard that Gove will resign next.

Lols


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Mother-fucker Theresa


She's got the morals of the sainted beast


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Just booked Brexit day off


Which one?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Knows his cricket tho
> 
> She should have compared herself to Graham Swann but he can dance and she can't


She can dance if she wants to.

She can leave her friends behind.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Which one?


The official one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> She can dance if she want to.
> 
> She can leave her friends behind.


It's her party she can dance badly if she wants to


----------



## Ted Striker (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Mother-fucker Theresa



Say what you like about her...But, to her credit, she does have a name that is 10/10 for pisstake nicknames.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Nov 15, 2018)

She's going down on her ship, isn't she? Loonily dutiful to the end. Feeds the chaos, so all good


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Say what you like about her...But, to her credit, she does have a name that is 10/10 for pisstake nicknames.


Nope, even that's down to her parents, not her.

She gets no credit


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

eatmorecheese said:


> She's going down on her ship, isn't she? Loonily dutiful to the end. Feeds the chaos, so all good


More dido than dodi then, even tho she's making a car crash out of brexit


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Say what you like about her...But, to her credit, she does have a name that is 10/10 for pisstake nicknames.


Wait til its Gove then!


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

She looks more Warnie than Boycott. She's certainly a spinner.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> The official one.


That'll be cancelled now mate. You'll get a day off all by yourself though


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Philosophical has gone all quiet


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Tweet from Kuenssberg

I'm told Gove has had a meeting with the PM - if he had accepted the job as Brexit sec I think we would know by now - if he hasn’t ... can’t help thinking that means he might v well be off


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Philosophical has gone all quiet



Be thankful for small mercies...


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

Must still be time for a couple more resignations surely


----------



## Supine (Nov 15, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Which one?



Everyday is brexit day. The shitstorm that keeps on giving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Must still be time for a couple more resignations surely


Not sure how many more ministers I can name


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Must still be time for a couple more resignations surely


They usually time them for the news cycles, don't they? Hence Raab this morning.

One before 9/10pm?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Must still be time for a couple more resignations surely


Those 10 o'clock news scripts have to be written at some point soon


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure how many more ministers I can name


Well...there's cunt, cunt, cunt and cunt...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Well...there's cunt, cunt, cunt and cunt...


And cuntingdon-cunt


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Thought for the day.

Every snivelling shit of a tory you've ever had the misfortune to know will be fucking well pissed off atm


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thought for the day.
> 
> Every snivelling shit of a tory you've ever had the misfortune to know will be fucking well pissed off atm


I reckon Ken Clarke will be jovially downing a pint or two.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Just booked Brexit day off




Nobody will have a job by then anyways....


----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> She's almost certainly being backed by the seniors behind the scenes to ensure its only her blamed for anything going wrong. She's the scapegoat for Brexit.
> 
> Plus nobody particularly wants to be PM before we hit Brexit day.




Who are these Seniors? The Tories are obnoxious, but there are clearly no puppet masters behind the scenes; Sooty, Sweep, Sue and Ramsbottom could form a more effective government.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I reckon Ken Clarke will be jovially downing a pint or two.


Don't know the big farmy faced cunt tbh


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 15, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Donnez-moi mon visa, vous mangeant du fromage singe se rendre.


Hugely embarrassingly, I hadn't spotted the etymology of "surrender" before


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Don't know the big farmy faced cunt tbh


Go up and introduce yourself then, he's famous for his expansive generosity


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Go up and introduce yourself then, he's famous for his expansive generosity


Not in Ronnie's tonight.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

tim said:


> Who are these Seniors? The Tories are obnoxious, but there are clearly no puppet masters behind the scenes; Sooty, Sweep, Sue and Ramsbottom could form a more effective government.


The seniors are like the theosophical secret chiefs, no one has ever actually encountered them


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Not in Ronnie's tonight.


Might be later


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

BBC is reporting that Penny Mordaunt is in no. 10, and expected to come out announcing her resignation.


----------



## tommers (Nov 15, 2018)

Wish she'd hurry up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BBC is reporting that Penny Mordaunt is in no. 10, and expected to come out announcing her resignation.


Penny mordaunt come on down

Where's Leslie crowther when you need him?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

tim said:


> Who are these Seniors? The Tories are obnoxious, but there are clearly no puppet masters behind the scenes; Sooty, Sweep, Sue and Ramsbottom could form a more effective government.



Whose sponsoring them this month?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

tommers said:


> Wish she'd hurry up.


And die?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

Is it possible that all these resigning after her press conference were hanging on in case she jumped?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

I thought her likening herself to Boycott was because he didn’t know when to pack in too!
I’m a proud Yorkshire lad and I cannot stomach the bloke.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 15, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Where's Leslie crowther when you need him?



On the piss with his son in law Phil?


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 15, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I thought her likening herself to Boycott was because he didn’t know when to pack in too!
> I’m a proud Yorkshire lad and I cannot stomach the bloke.


Is the ball is safely in the dog poo now ?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 152604


What happened to the other 10%


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> What happened to the other 10%


Voted Dignitas.


----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I reckon Ken Clarke will be jovially downing a pint or two.



As on everyone's evening, I would imagine.

 I went to a talk he gave at the LSE a few months ago. There was a reception afterwards and was plonked in an armchair surrounded by the curious. Every 5 minutes someone would come along with a bottle of wine and say "Top up, Ken?" He never refused. I was struck by his rolly little eyes, just like his spitting image puppet.

Appalling security for someone so prominent, and so disliked. I turned up with an  huge bag and there wasn't even a cursory search. Anyone so inclined could have blown him to that great EEC winelake in the sky.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> What happened to the other 10%


That sort of talk will see you joining them.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 15, 2018)

I still can't believe May has pissed-off the DUP. 

That's £1bn well spent.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Famous for running their teammates out...


*May's minister turnover*
A Times reporter points out that Theresa May has lost more ministers in her first two years as prime minister than any leader since the 1980s - half because of Brexit

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/ratcheting-up-20-ministers-quit-under-may-and-counting-v2lcsk9nq …


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 15, 2018)

tim said:


> As on everyone's evening, I would imagine.
> 
> I went to a talk he gave at the LSE a few months ago. There was a reception afterwards and was plonked in an armchair surrounded by the curious. Every 5 minutes someone would come along with a bottle of wine and say "Top up, Ken?" He never refused. I was struck by his rolly little eyes, just like his spitting image puppet.
> 
> Appalling security for someone so prominent, and so disliked. I turned up with an  huge bag and there wasn't even a cursory search. Anyone so inclined could have blown him to that great EEC winelake in the sky.


I am strangely comforted by the fact there was zero security. Not so long ago, that would just have been standard.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

tim said:


> As on everyone's evening, I would imagine.
> 
> I went to a talk he gave at the LSE a few months ago. There was a reception afterwards and was plonked in an armchair surrounded by the curious. Every 5 minutes someone would come along with a bottle of wine and say "Top up, Ken?" He never refused. I was struck by his rolly little eyes, just like his spitting image puppet.
> 
> Appalling security for someone so prominent, and so disliked. I turned up with an  huge bag and there wasn't even a cursory search. Anyone so inclined could have blown him to that great EEC winelake in the sky.


Anything relevant to add?


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 15, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I still can't believe May has pissed-off the DUP.
> 
> That's £1bn well spent.


Perhaps she will demand a refund


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

19:48
*The FT gives its view*
Sebastian Payne, the Financial Times' political leader writer, tweets an extract from the paper's editorial board's view on Brexit. A no-deal Brexit "remains emphatically the worst option", the board writes.


----------



## tim (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Anything relevant to add?



About as much as a Theresa May press conference. Treat me as if I'm Channel Four News, if you find me irksome.


----------



## Winot (Nov 15, 2018)

Idea for Labour Party Brexit strategy: in the event of a GE they should run on the ticket of an immediate 2nd Brexit referendum (including Remain as an option). 

Advantage - doesn’t nail colours to mast on Leave/Remain; holds out option to both camps. 2nd ref gains legitimacy as it has been chosen by electorate in GE.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Perhaps she will demand a refund


It's all been pissed against the wall


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> Idea for Labour Party Brexit strategy: in the event of a GE they should run on the ticket of an immediate 2nd Brexit referendum (including Remain as an option).
> 
> Advantage - doesn’t nail colours to mast on Leave/Remain; holds out option to both camps. 2nd ref gains legitimacy as it has been chosen by electorate in GE.


And what do you suggest happens should leave win again, now we know the best the eu will agree to?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Sebastian Payne


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


>



Who is that scary looking fucker?


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 15, 2018)

Winot said:


> Idea for Labour Party Brexit strategy: in the event of a GE they should run on the ticket of an immediate 2nd Brexit referendum (including Remain as an option).
> 
> Advantage - doesn’t nail colours to mast on Leave/Remain; holds out option to both camps. 2nd ref gains legitimacy as it has been chosen by electorate in GE.


Those calling it a loser's vote i.e mainly Mogg do have a point.There would likely be 16m votes for Remain and something close to zero for Leave but it would prove nothing.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> And what do you suggest happens should leave win again, now we know the best the eu will agree to?


negotiate a completely different deal
there'll be a customs contract instead of a customs arrangement
the irish border will run up from st georges channel instead of the irish sea
unlike mays rule taker deal, labours will be a rule receptor
we really need an election immediately so the choice can be put to the people


----------



## Badgers (Nov 15, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Perhaps she will demand a refund


I think they care little of wasted taxpayers money.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> And what do you suggest happens should leave win again, now we know the best the eu will agree to?



Clearly the idea being proposed is to rerun the referendum with 'remain' as the only option. 

Still probably lose.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Who is that scary looking fucker?



The kid who was bullied at school but now drives a rolls and cries into his love pillow at night.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Artaxerxes said:


> The kid who was bullied at school but now drives a rolls and cries into his love pillow at night.



Sebastian Payne?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Sebastian Payne?


Tipped to stand on the first pylon of the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge and guide in the first joists


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Sebastian Payne?


----------



## SovietArmy (Nov 15, 2018)

I can't find more clarify about Freedom of movements finish for all.  I that mean for all including British people.  Is alarming if it is.


----------



## andysays (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> View attachment 152607



or alternately, just read post #14702


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> View attachment 152607



I did. It suggested Sebastian Payne. 

And mind your blood pressure. 

I've got a 24 hour BP monitor running at the moment, so have put several people on ignore.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I did. It suggested Sebastian Payne.
> 
> And mind your blood pressure.
> 
> I've got a 24 hour BP monitor running at the moment, so have put several people on ignore.


one is FT journo Seb PAyne, the other is a character from Inbetweeners, the archetypal 'briefcase wanker'.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I did. It suggested Sebastian Payne.
> 
> And mind your blood pressure.
> 
> I've got a 24 hour BP monitor running at the moment, so have put several people on ignore.




Surely you want it to be a realistic reading?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

i do hope these 48 letters kick in asap. its going to be a long three weeks waiting for the commons vote otherwise


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 15, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I did. It suggested Sebastian Payne.
> 
> And mind your blood pressure.
> 
> I've got a 24 hour BP monitor running at the moment, so have put several people on ignore.


Wondered why I hadn't seen you, hope all is well


----------



## Wookey (Nov 15, 2018)

Leave Voter Breaks Into Tears As He Apologises For Backing Brexit - LBC

Amazing call on LBC's O'Brien show, a fella bursts into tears for voting to leave. The emotional damage this is doing to some people is untold.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Have we had fevered speculation about this yet? Is he carrying 48 letters?

Or pizza?

Theresa May defends Brexit deal


----------



## David Clapson (Nov 15, 2018)

Theresa May's deathbed confession will be that, as a remainer and a patriot, she was secretly sabotaging Brexit the whole time. I don't know how else to explain her resolve.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Grauniad just reporting govething has turned down being Brexit sec, which poses the question of whether he stays in the cabinet.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 15, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Leave Voter Breaks Into Tears As He Apologises For Backing Brexit - LBC
> 
> Amazing call on LBC's O'Brien show, a fella bursts into tears for voting to leave. The emotional damage this is doing to some people is untold.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

I'm not sure she was a remainer.  As I remember things, she kept her head well under the parapet during the whole sorry mess.

At this point I think she should carry on.  The tories have fecked us over so much that a new tory leadership campaign now is only going to make things worse.  The country is so fucked by Brexit that (hopefully) the tories will be unelectable for a generation.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Grauniad just reporting govething has turned down being Brexit sec, which poses the question of whether he stays in the cabinet.


Yeah, BBC was quoting Sam Coates saying the same about 25 mins ago.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

England beating USA 2-0 at the moment by the way. Just saying.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

At?


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Tory brexit and the bastards cant even find a brexit secretary.  Make Cameron do the job


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> At?


Doesn't matter.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Doesn't matter.


I completely agree.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> At?


Voter suppression.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Voter suppression.


My money was on water polo.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> My money was on water polo.


Fake News... whatever went on in that Moscow hotel room.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Tory brexit and the bastards cant even find a brexit secretary.  Make Cameron do the job


I think one thing we've learnt is that there really is no need whatsoever for a 'Brexit Secretary'.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I think one thing we've learnt is that there really is no need whatsoever for a 'Brexit Secretary'.


 I think you mean _Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, But Just a Bit._


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The  backstop is SM or if it isn't I don't know what the difference is. I have seen it suggested what we have is basically SM Membership with an opt out on fishing



Customs Union excludes services (one of the differences.)


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> i do hope these 48 letters kick in asap. its going to be a long three weeks waiting for the commons vote otherwise


I'm going to stick my neck out and say there isn't going to be 48 letters anytime soon. It's just the press being played, and played, and played again by the ERG who shout a lot but just don't have the numbers. No-one's got the numbers.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm going to stick my neck out and say there isn't going to be 48 letters anytime soon. It's just the press being played, and played, and played again by the ERG who shout a lot but just don't have the numbers. No-one's got the numbers.


… or if they have, it wouldn't work out well for them if they 'activated' the letters.


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 152604



Farridge must be apoplectic.

The people are not respecting the will of themselves


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 15, 2018)

at TM claiming similarity to the great inspirational captain that was geoffrey boycott.

wonder who will take the ian botham role?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I think you mean _Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, But Just a Bit._


… supported by the _Minister for Hokey Cokey Affairs,_ Mr Schrodinger's-Cat.

coat.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

This morning I was reading my paper on the train.  there were pages and pages about the political manoeverings going on.  who would resign and so on.  But bugger all about the actual terms of whatever agreement we are signing up to.  Not sure why. Either a) its not as much fun for journalists to write about or, b) they just don't understand it.  answers on a postcard.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Farridge must be apoplectic.
> 
> The people are not respecting the will of themselves


Enemies of the people.


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> … or if they have, it wouldn't work out well for them if they 'activated' the letters.


No-one's got the numbers for _anything_. I honestly can't see how this can change this side of a general election (which, incidentally, no-one has the numbers to force before 2022).


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

Wilf said:


> England beating USA 2-0 at the moment by the way. Just saying.


3-0 now - just shows what a nation can do, unfettered from all that European regulation. Oh, hang on...


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> at TM claiming similarity to the great inspirational captain that was geoffrey boycott.
> 
> wonder who will take the ian botham role?


Ahhhh. andysays reply to my post makes sense now 


andysays said:


> Famous for running their teammates out...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Farridge must be apoplectic.
> 
> The people are not respecting the will of themselves


It was all hanging chads last time.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> This morning I was reading my paper on the train.  there were pages and pages about the political manoeverings going on.  who would resign and so on.  But bugger all about the actual terms of whatever agreement we are signing up to.  Not sure why. Either a) its not as much fun for journalists to write about or, b) they just don't understand it.  answers on a postcard.


or C) you read The Sun


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2018)

May shows endurance that's remarkable. 
She is still fucked though.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> or C) you read The Sun


Bugger, rumbled.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

TopCat said:


> May shows endurance that's remarkable.
> She is still fucked though.


Tbf, we are all fucked.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 15, 2018)

6/4 May gone in 2018 available today. 

Looks better value than the horses I like for the King George on Boxing day.


----------



## David Clapson (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> I'm not sure she was a remainer.  .



She voted remain. How can anyone not know that?


----------



## T & P (Nov 15, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Clearly the idea being proposed is to rerun the referendum with 'remain' as the only option.
> 
> Still probably lose.


I think the opposite would be true. I think both the turnout of a second referendum would very high, and the result would be a very clear victory for Remain. Perhaps the margin i’m thinking of might not turn out to be as large as I reckon, but i can’t see anything other than a Remain victory.

There are few developments since the first vote I can think of that would have caused a remainer to vote to leave in a second referendum. I can however think of many developments that would cause many a Leave voter to change their minds, from the false £300m a week bribes to the lies concerning how easy it would be to strike a highly advantageous deal to the realisation of what a devastating clusterfuck a No Deal Brexit might turnout to be.

Add to that the number of new young voters now able to vote for the first time, and how narrow the Leave victory was, and I’d be amazed if Remain would win by anything less than ten points.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

TopCat said:


> 6/4 May gone in 2018 available today.
> 
> Looks better value than the horses I like for the King George on Boxing day.




She's booked to be on LBC doing a phone in Friday morning.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Nov 15, 2018)

Danny Dyer for Brexit secretary.


----------



## killer b (Nov 15, 2018)

T & P said:


> There are few developments since the first vote I can think of that would have caused a remainer to vote to leave in a second referendum.


The polling stats don't support this - they're showing around 9% of leavers changing to remain, and 8% of remainers changing to leave. The remain lead is made up of previous abstainers.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

David Clapson said:


> She voted remain. How can anyone not know that?


No one knows how she or anyone else voted,  - but much like JC, I don't think she was exactly out there fervently campaigning to remain - that's what I was getting at.


----------



## Santino (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> No one knows how she or anyone else voted,  - but much like JC, I don't think she was exactly out there fervently campaigning to remain - that's what I was getting at.


How many Remain campaign events did Corbyn speak at?


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> No one knows how she or anyone else voted,  - but much like JC, I don't think she was exactly out there fervently campaigning to remain - that's what I was getting at.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Santino said:


> How many Remain campaign events did Corbyn speak at?


No idea.  and don't care.  Is Brexit Corbyn's fault?


----------



## Santino (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> No idea.  and don't care.  Is Brexit Corbyn's fault?


You seemed to accuse Corbyn of not really campaigning for Remain.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> View attachment 152617 View attachment 152618


Fair play.  There is turning up to follow the party line and actually being committed to the cause.  her constituency did vote leave though.  Maidenhead has always been a fecking right wing shithole though..


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Santino said:


> You seemed to accuse Corbyn of not really campaigning for Remain.


Tory cunt


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Wondered why I hadn't seen you, hope all is well



It has been a bit up and down, the 24 hour monitoring gives an average, if the average is above the line... Ca++ channel blocker.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 15, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Surely you want it to be a realistic reading?



I have a horrible feeling that it will be bad enough.

They'll be back on tomorrow.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 15, 2018)

killer b said:


> The polling stats don't support this - they're showing around 9% of leavers changing to remain, and 8% of remainers changing to leave. The remain lead is made up of previous abstainers.



This from just last night


----------



## Santino (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Tory cunt


You what?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> I'm not sure she was a remainer. As I remember things, she kept her head well under the parapet during the whole sorry mess.



Theresa May wants you to stay in the EU. Has she blown her chances of ever being Tory leader?


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Santino said:


> You what?


Mate, a bit pissed and fucked off due to stuff, so apologies,  I just don't like to see JC being blamed in any way for this whole  feckin tory clusterfuck,


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 15, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Theresa May wants you to stay in the EU. Has she blown her chances of ever being Tory leader?


As I said earlier, I think she toed the party line and went with her constituency rather than being fervently pro anything.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 15, 2018)

Santino said:


> How many Remain campaign events did Corbyn speak at?



Is this the grovelling we've been reduced to? a totally irrelevant vote on both sides that will change absolutely nothing and empower the left nationalists either way.


----------



## Santino (Nov 15, 2018)

dialectician said:


> Is this the grovelling we've been reduced to? a totally irrelevant vote on both sides that will change absolutely nothing and empower the left nationalists either way.


Now what?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 15, 2018)

I never recognised the legitmacy of this referendum.


----------



## Santino (Nov 15, 2018)

And what's that got to do with my question?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 15, 2018)

ffs can' edit.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 15, 2018)

Hhahhahhahhhaa


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 15, 2018)

The turmoil,,,,,


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 15, 2018)

this is what happens when you have 600 tabs open sorry santino forum slows to a crawl.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 15, 2018)

dialectician said:


> I never recognised the legitmacy of this referendum.


Grand


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> Mate, a bit pissed and fucked off due to stuff, so apologies,  I just don't like to see JC being blamed in any way for this whole  feckin tory clusterfuck,



Nobody can pin this one on Corbyn.

That means the Daily Express will definitely try.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 15, 2018)

from Larry the Cat (@Number10cat) on Twitter


----------



## paolo (Nov 15, 2018)

Does anyone here think the hard Brexit thing is a live prospect, given the issue of the British border in Ireland?

My take is that it’s now dead before it’s even left the traps.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Does anyone here think the hard Brexit thing is a live prospect, given the issue of the British border in Ireland?



dunno really.

if TM (or any new PM following either a leader election or general election) can't get some sort of deal through parliament pretty damn quick, then the alternatives are either a hard brexit or asking the EU if we can either have a bit more time to think about it all, or change our minds completely.  

and is there any guarantee that the rest of the EU won't say 'piss off' in a variety of languages to either of those options?  (isn't it something where the other countries would all have to agree not just a majority?)


----------



## Raheem (Nov 15, 2018)

It's not over until Theresa May gets the runs.


----------



## bemused (Nov 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Does anyone here think the hard Brexit thing is a live prospect, given the issue of the British border in Ireland?



They don't have the votes.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 15, 2018)

The Suns Political editor has tweeted 



> _Tom Newton Dunn
> @tnewtondunn
> Tory ministers initiate secret talks with moderate Labour MPs for a Government of National Unity if May falls behind No10’s back;
> thesun.co.uk/news/brexit/77…_



Any labour mp contemplating any such thing is committing Political suicide surely?


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> The Suns Political editor has tweeted
> 
> 
> 
> Any labour mp contemplating any such thing is committing Political suicide surely?



Wowza.

What would the trans-party party be supporting? The proposed deal?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I think you mean _Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, But Just a Bit._



I think they should have additionally had a ‘_Secretary of State for *Exciting* the European Union’ _whose job it was to go round rubbing off Junkers et al. Maybe that would have been a more successful strategy to win concessions.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 16, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> I think they should have additionally had a ‘_Secretary of State for *Exciting* the European Union’ _whose job it was to go round rubbing off Junkers et al. Maybe that would have been a more successful strategy to win concessions.


----------



## Plumdaff (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Any labour mp contemplating any such thing is committing Political suicide surely?



Well, yes, but when has that ever stopped a certain stripe of Labour MP? Umunna, Kinnock, Phillips and Cooper are probably queuing up for the opportunity.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

paolo said:


> Wowza.
> 
> What would the trans-party party be supporting? The proposed deal?



presumably a 2nd ref.


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> presumably a 2nd ref.



The phrase “moderate Labour MPs” made me think not that, instead a “back the deal” collective.

But there’s so little to go on with that short tweet... I dunno.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

labour ultra remainers dont want to back the deal though. they want a 2nd ref. TBH- its more likely to be kite flying - something cooked up over a few drinks with tom newton dunn in a bar near westminster.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 16, 2018)

DUP not winning any friends in the Unionist business community. Hopefully they've over reached and one side benefit of this shit show is they've peaked in support.

And fucking LOL at tansplain. 

Sorry for twatter links, will screen grab tomorrow if necessary. It's late and I've been at work since 9am. *tiny violins*


----------



## isvicthere? (Nov 16, 2018)

Poll options need an update, to include: catastrophic no-deal crash-out, serious social unrest and rats for dinner.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 16, 2018)

The DUP will hopefully get fucking hammered now that the depths of how bigoted and shit they are have been made fully public.

Though everyone in Norn is aware of that and votes for em anyway so not likely to lose power. 

It's to be hoped the various parties have long memories and slowly shaft the bastards once they stop caring about Brexit.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> The Suns Political editor has tweeted
> 
> 
> 
> Any labour mp contemplating any such thing is committing Political suicide surely?


This isn't going to happen because - you guessed it - they don't have the numbers.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> Poll options need an update, to include: catastrophic no-deal crash-out, serious social unrest and rats for dinner.



Hmm - could edit it to  "fully independent britain making its own way in the world (bring your own rat)"


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

Fuck me David Davies is a delusional tool - just on radio 4 - "we should tear up this deal and re-open negotiations" "but the EU have said that that wont happen- the negotiations are over and they have signed an agreement" "oh flip flap and foodle doodle - thats just bluster" then falling back on "and no deal is nothing to be scared of". Then he accused the EU of deliberately spinning out the process in order to force the UK into accepting gruel - when they have been drumming their fingers on the table waiting for the uk government to sort its shit out and come up with something for the past 2 and a half years. 

What world does he live in where the leaders of the EU27 tell the commision that they need to reopen negotiations because the tory party has spat the dummy? How could their response be anything other than - "pffft - they can go fuck themselves"? 

Apparently there is a move in cabinet (presumably with gove at the heart of it?)  to threaten mass resignation unless may goes back to re-negotiate the deal. Which she cant and wont. What planet are these people on? 
Im guessing a planet where the EU would quail before the UKs BMW and prosecco buying leverage and serve up cake.

If this story is true - well May will walk. She cant go back from "im seeing this through - its a good deal" to "Right - Barnier - im still in the 12 day cooling off period - show me the unicorns or the deal is off".


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

May’s deal will not go through. No deal will go through. Unlike Pickman's model I feel that a no-deal will get through parliament. Of course the narrative around no deal is ‘crash-out’, ‘cliff-edge’, ‘headbangers’ and so on. Whilst it won’t be a bed of roses, the sky will not fall in. If they declare now that is what will happen then preparations can be made on both sides to make sure ports remain open and Lufthansa can still fly to the US and so on. We were told two years ago that the EU would not offer an advantageous deal, by the EU themselves, so instead of fucking them off and preparing for life outside the EU we have been fannying around trying to get a cake and eat it deal. That is the biggest failure of this whole process.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Then he accused the EU of deliberately spinning out the process in order to force the UK into accepting gruel - when they have been drumming their fingers on the table waiting for the uk government to sort its shit out and come up with something for the past 2 and a half years.


You really believe that? I mean Davies is a tool but the EUs political intentions from the start have been to illustrate the "danger" of leaving it, to make sure that any other countries that might be thinking of leaving are scared off.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You really believe that? I mean Davies is a tool but the EUs political intentions from the start have been to illustrate the "danger" of leaving it, to make sure that any other countries that might be thinking of leaving are scared off.



well yes - but that's not spinning out the process though- its position has barely changed since day one. the UK government has spun the process out by waiting till the last minute to accept the reality of the EUs position. Davies and co were breezily expecting them to climb down. But they were never ever going to for exactly the reasons you stated.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

This Twitter thread on the events of yesterday, written as events happened is an absolute masterpiece of the form. Click through for the whole thing


----------



## Winot (Nov 16, 2018)

I heard the same interview as you Kaka Tim. The former perm sec at the FCO tweeted this in response:


----------



## 2hats (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Fuck me David Davies is a delusional tool - just on radio 4 - "we should tear up this deal and re-open negotiations" "but the EU have said that that wont happen- the negotiations are over and they have signed an agreement" "oh flip flap and foodle doodle - thats just bluster" then falling back on "and no deal is nothing to be scared of". Then he accused the EU of deliberately spinning out the process in order to force the UK into accepting gruel - when they have been drumming their fingers on the table waiting for the uk government to sort its shit out and come up with something for the past 2 and a half years.


Bit rich coming from the charlatan who hardly bothered turning up to any of the meetings to perform his job, I thought.


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

I'm watching here on the LBC phone in - none of the callers has any of the concerns that the ERG loons are talking about. Most of them care about their jobs and being able to buy stuff from the EU.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 16, 2018)

bemused said:


> I'm watching here on the LBC phone in - none of the callers has any of the concerns that the ERG loons are talking about.



That’s because people who run hedge funds don’t call into radio shows.

Alex


----------



## ska invita (Nov 16, 2018)

alex_ said:


> That’s because people who run hedge funds don’t call into radio shows.
> 
> Alex


you've obviously never heard LBC before. Fuck me theyve got Farage and Katie Hopkins on there, and the rest. Its a cesspit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

Business will not allow a no deal-ultimately, they run the political show


----------



## alex_ (Nov 16, 2018)

ska invita said:


> you've obviously never heard LBC before. Fuck me theyve got Farage and Katie Hopkins on there, and the rest. Its a cesspit



They don’t run hedge funds, they are gobshites.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

alex_ said:


> They don’t run hedge funds, they are gobshites.


Nigel farage couldn't run a hundred yards


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> This Twitter thread on the events of yesterday, written as events happened is an absolute masterpiece of the form. Click through for the whole thing



That's good.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That's good.


he's also worth following for his informative posts on railway policy.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2018)

Nailed Gove, I think.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2018)

Anyone resigned yet?


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

I knew him from his (very dry and detailed) writing about trains but had no idea he was a comic genius in his spare time


----------



## ska invita (Nov 16, 2018)

Theresa May should keep up the 8am Phone ins...Toast with Theresa


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

ska invita said:


> you've obviously never heard LBC before. Fuck me theyve got Farage and Katie Hopkins on there, and the rest. Its a cesspit



Hopkins was sacked by LBC, something about a final solution for Muslims 

(you are right that it is a toilet of a station tho)



not-bono-ever said:


> Business will not allow a no deal-ultimately, they run the political show



No deal will be very good for a large number of businesses.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> I knew him from his (very dry and detailed) writing about trains but had no idea he was a comic genius in his spare time


did you read his baked potato thread last week? Probably one for Badgers actually.



He's on fire atm


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 16, 2018)

She was shit on LBC


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

Surely they don't have the 50%+ votes to actually get the no confidence vote over the line?


----------



## philosophical (Nov 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You really believe that? I mean Davies is a tool but the EUs political intentions from the start have been to illustrate the "danger" of leaving it, to make sure that any other countries that might be thinking of leaving are scared off.



When was 'the start'?
I disagree about the EU political intentions, surely it is largely an action and reaction situation where the EU has been consistently itself.
The UK 'started' this nightmare, it wasn't engineered by the EU


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

Oh and gove is staying put


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Surely they don't have the 50%+ votes to actually get the no confidence vote over the line?



Does this mean no confidence vote in parliament, or as Tory leader?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Oh and gove is staying put


Shame but it might be more ruinous for the Tories if he is still in the thick of it


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Surely they don't have the 50%+ votes to actually get the no confidence vote over the line?



It'd be fun.  But I'm betting it's either not true, or it's a move by the whips to create the support May doesn't have.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 16, 2018)

fleetminster is very excitable atm. HISTORY IS BEING MADE. Twats.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> Does this mean no confidence vote in parliament, or as Tory leader?


Tory leader. But I don't believe that yet.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 16, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> She was shit on LBC



Ferrari was (is) shit too. Such a Thatcherite sycophant. No wonder she opted to go there.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.


He is a cunt?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.


That's his 'feelers' told him to stay put, I'm guessing.  To use your phrase, "nobody has the numbers for anything".


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 16, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Ferrari was (is) shit too. Such a Thatherite sycophant. No wonder she opted to go there.




She should have gone on at 10:00 am


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> That's his 'feelers'



(shudders)


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.



The ERG don't have the numbers?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hopkins was sacked by LBC, something about a final solution for Muslims
> 
> (you are right that it is a toilet of a station tho)
> 
> ...


 
This isn’t the consensus of those that actually are considered heavyweights and heft their influence well from my experience. Kinda hypothetical discussion really though 

That cunt with the vineyard in Kent doesnt count


----------



## strung out (Nov 16, 2018)

Wouldn't it make more sense for the no confidence letters to go in after May loses any commons vote? If they go in now and she wins (as is likely), they can't get rid for a year unless she walks.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> This isn’t the consensus of those that actually are considered heavyweights and heft their influence well from my experience. Kinda hypothetical discussion really though
> 
> That cunt with the vineyard in Kent doesnt count



Why do you think scum like Mogg are so for it, will it damage their business?


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

bemused said:


> The ERG don't have the numbers?


ah yes. 

I was actually wondering if there was some Machiavellian plotting going on and it meant they did have the numbers, and he was staying put to give him more currency in the upcoming leadership battle, but actually I was right in the fist place. 

You see though? Reading too many political correspondents breathless tweets gives you brainworms.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> She should have gone on at 10:00 am



Should've gone on a 6, with Nige.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

seems they have the numbers to force a confidence vote - but not to win it. 

I think gove was never going to resign - his "serious consideration" was just virtue signalling to the tory membership for when the leadership balloon goes up.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> seems they have the numbers to force a confidence vote


it doesn't, yet.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> it doesn't, yet.



well lots of commentators saying they do. We'll see later today i guess


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.


That he's no Gove Face Killah?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 16, 2018)

If there's a no confidence vote and May survives there can't be another one for a year IIRC. 

So if I was a backstabbing tory I'd wait until May's deal had been officially shitcanned by the EU27 or by parliament and then try and get rid of her.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Lots of commentators are full of shit. It ain't over till the fat Brady sings.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

strung out said:


> Wouldn't it make more sense for the no confidence letters to go in after May loses any commons vote? If they go in now and she wins (as is likely), they can't get rid for a year unless she walks.



Maybe they don't want to get rid of her, just show they put up a fight.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> well lots of commentators saying they do. We'll see later today i guess


My pure guess is that they do have the numbers, actual letters or people willing to write them, but that they are watching events. It's so fucked up and even unprecedented that even tiny shifts in the balance of things are affecting their actions. Another cabinet minister going yesterday might have kicked things off, but in the end May did okay-ish (by her standards) and gove hasn't gone. They wait, they wander round, they haven't got a clue what to do*.

* as the Sweet so memorably put it.


----------



## Combustible (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Gove staying put should probably tell us something, but I'm not sure what.



Perhaps that being the reluctant loyalist best positions you for a future leadership contest. It worked for May last time.


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> ah yes.
> 
> I was actually wondering if there was some Machiavellian plotting going on and it meant they did have the numbers, and he was staying put to give him more currency in the upcoming leadership battle, but actually I was right in the fist place.
> 
> You see though? Reading too many political correspondents breathless tweets gives you brainworms.



Gove isn't dumb if he's staying put he's taken the pulse of his chums. 

Seeing Rees-Mogg failing to boot May out would make my week.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> This Twitter thread on the events of yesterday, written as events happened is an absolute masterpiece of the form. Click through for the whole thing




That's funny af.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think scum like Mogg are so for it, will it damage their business?


 
B


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

bemused said:


> Gove isn't dumb if he's staying put he's taken the pulse of his chums.
> 
> Seeing Rees-Mogg failing to boot May out would make my week.


Consider your week made.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Maybe they don't want to get rid of her, just show they put up a fight.


Accidentally winning something you didn't mean to seems to be on trend at the moment, though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 16, 2018)

The draft Brexit deal has lost the favour of many conservative MPs including the Brexit minister who delivered it, and majority of MPs are against it. The last minute disaster avoiding strategy for The Theresa May’s government is to collaborate with the labour party to explore and negotiate some of their proposals with the EU, including some representatives from the other parties like SNP and DUP. It is never too late, and not impossible, stands to reason in the national interest, and a fresh democratic approach for a united solution serving both the UK and EU. Such a Brexit deal will never be defeated in the UK parliament, will take the country out of the current turmoil, and demonstrate its merits. Labour’s proposal is a negotiated new customs union, a modified version of the current customs union, which I am of course harping on.


----------



## Supine (Nov 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Business will not allow a no deal-ultimately, they run the political show



I'm starting to wish that was true!


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

ha.


----------



## spitfire (Nov 16, 2018)

715 likes and no fucker turned up. Social media politics in a nutshell. Hahahahaha.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Rumour has it that numbers briefly swelled to four.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.


Can you provide a link to that, cheers.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.



Continuous, maybe they moved about a bit as people do?


----------



## belboid (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.


And no one ever gets refused it based on some nonsense? Tell that to the Windrush folks.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can you provide a link to that, cheers.





> As a *European citizen*, you are deemed to automatically acquire Permanent Residence after completing 5 lawful years in the *UK* under the*European* Regulations; the pre-requisite to applying for *British Citizenship*.
> 
> eu citizens rights to uk citzenship - Google Search



I've know a couple of people from the EU that has gone the whole hog & got a UK passport, which isn't cheap, the cheaper option is just to acquire 'Permanent Residence', and/or this new 'Settled Status', which is coming in. 



Ranbay said:


> Continuous, maybe they moved about a bit as people do?



They state they have lived here for 20 years.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've know a couple of people from the EU that has gone the whole hog & got a UK passport, which isn't cheap, the cheaper option is just to acquire 'Permanent Residence', and/or this new 'Settled Status', which is coming in.
> 
> 
> 
> They state they have lived here for 20 years.



Good point.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.



tbh its just a meaningless isolated tweet.  Is she actually from an EU country?  Whats her criminal record background etc?  Standing alone its just plain odd.


----------



## belboid (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've know a couple of people from the EU that has gone the whole hog & got a UK passport, which isn't cheap, the cheaper option is just to acquire 'Permanent Residence', and/or this new 'Settled Status', which is coming in.
> 
> 
> 
> They state they have lived here for 20 years.


But does the UK government _accept _that they have lived here twenty years?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

belboid said:


> And no one ever gets refused it based on some nonsense? Tell that to the Windrush folks.



The Windrush situation was a fucking disgrace, but the main problem was not being able to provide documents to prove their rights to stay here. It's a little easier for EU folks to prove they have been here for 5 years, not least because of access to computer records to prove their case.


----------



## belboid (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Windrush situation was a fucking disgrace, but the main problem was not being able to provide documents to prove their rights to stay here. It's a little easier for EU folks to prove they have been here for 5 years, not least because of access to computer records to prove their case.


Not really. Computer records wont necesarily prove continued residence, especially as EU citizens travel without visas.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> tbh its just a meaningless isolated tweet.  Is she actually from an EU country?  Whats her criminal record background etc?  Standing alone its just plain odd.



That was my thought after my first reply, they may not even be a EU citizen, in which case it's nonsense to post it on this thread.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

belboid said:


> Not really. Computer records wont necesarily prove continued residence, especially as EU citizens travel without visas.



There will be records of employment, bank records, HMRC and/or benefit records.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Windrush situation was a fucking disgrace, but the main problem was not being able to provide documents to prove their rights to stay here. It's a little easier for EU folks to prove they have been here for 5 years, not least because of access to computer records to prove their case.


I don't agree with you about the main problem. The main problem was a home office, run by May, aggressively seeking to fulfill quotas for deportations so going for anyone they could get to do so, regardless of the disgusting injustice they were perpetrating and the lives they were ruining. That kind of thing can very easily happen again. The precise mechanism they use to go after people may change, but the central main problem will be the same. last time it was paper records that went missing. Next time it could be digital records that go missing.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't agree with you about the main problem. The main problem was a home office, run by May, aggressively seeking to fulfill quotas for deportations so going for anyone they could get to do so, regardless of the disgusting injustice they were perpetrating and the lives they were ruining. That kind of thing can very easily happen again. The precise mechanism they use to go after people may change, but the central main problem will be the same. last time it was paper records that went missing. Next time it could be digital records that go missing.



OK, I agree, the main problem was the H.O., followed by lack of ability to provide documents from decades ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> There will be records of employment, bank records, HMRC and/or benefit records.


Right. Let's hope they don't go the way of the censuses that are gone or the school records that have been destroyed or the business records chucked in skips when they close.


----------



## belboid (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> There will be records of employment, bank records, HMRC and/or benefit records.


Christ, you're naive.


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Rumour has it that numbers briefly swelled to four.



I laughed my balls off listening to James O'Brien on LBC when he went to a field report

JB: I hear there at least four people
FR: James, I'm here at the picket and the numbers have swelled to three people


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well that's nonsense, EU citizens that have been here 5 or more years have the right to UK citizenship.


Yeh right. Like the government never pisses on people's rights


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

All gone a bit quiet on the whole 48 letters front. 

I wonder if, in fact, they just don't have the fucking numbers and the excitement last night / this morning was all just political correspondents being duped (again) by ERG members?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

belboid said:


> Christ, you're naive.



No, speaking from the knowledge of the experiences of people that have done it, providing the likes of employment and tax records for a period of 5 years, considering they are retained for even longer, in the modern world is hardly rocket science.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> All gone a bit quiet on the whole 48 letters front.
> 
> I wonder if, in fact, they just don't have the fucking numbers and the excitement last night / this morning was all just political correspondents being duped (again) by ERG members?



The reports I've heard this morning is they think only around 20 letters have gone in, which seems surprising.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> All gone a bit quiet on the whole 48 letters front.


*shelling continues*


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The reports I've heard this morning is they think only around 20 letters have gone in, which seems surprising.


I'm not surprised.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 16, 2018)

Apparently some EU citizens are having their permanent residency applications rejected because they didn't buy comprehensive sickness insurance for periods when they weren't working, including time studying or taking years off work to bring up children.

EU citizens 'denied residency documents'

 
This kind of shit does seem a lot more characteristic of the Immigration Department than handing out automatic residency after 5 years.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

So, both the BBC & Sky are way out with their claims. 

* assuming that tweet is true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, speaking from the knowledge of the experiences of people that have done it, providing the likes of employment and tax records for a period of 5 years, considering they are retained for even longer, in the modern world is hardly rocket science.


Until it isn't. Until something goes wrong with those records. People probably thought similar about all their paper records in the past. They'll be safely tucked up somewhere, surely. Remember that with Windrush, it was incumbent on people to prove things with particular records. The fact they could prove those same things with other records was irrelevant. The fact the officials deporting them knew full well what had happened was irrelevant. There was a basic bad faith involved in the whole process from the Home Office pov, which is why May's head should have rolled over it, and with similar bad faith in the future, following some digital problem whereby records are wiped perhaps, is far from inconceivable. Complacent in the extreme to say 'ah couldn't happen now cos technology'. Technology can and does go wrong in various unforeseen ways - rotten to pin your hopes for protecting rights and social justice on technology.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

I thought they kept letters 'on file' and they had been steadily coming in over the course of Brexit negotiations. Which would be sort of mad, to be fair.

Maybe they have a shelf life?


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> I thought they kept letters 'on file' and they had been steadily coming in over the course of Brexit negotiations. Which would be sort of mad, to be fair.
> 
> Maybe they have a shelf life?


They ring round to confirm them before making the formal announcement I think


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

this from Stephen Bush is good btw

https://inews.co.uk/opinion/columnists/brexit-chaos-theresa-may-prime-minister-dethroning/


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

Liam Fox (*spits) is sticking with her as well. Looks like low-carb Boris has fucked up.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> They ring round to confirm them before making the formal announcement I think


Ah, that makes sense, I guess. But if that is the case I was under the impression they've been close to the 48 threshold for a while.

I have not, it's fair to say, been paying close attention to this...


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

Steve Baker Brady (1922 chair) is a May supporter, so will double-triple check just to be sure


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Ah, that makes sense, I guess. But if that is the case I was under the impression they've been close to the 48 threshold for a while.
> 
> I have not, it's fair to say, been paying close attention to this...



I saw an MP poo poo that idea, his point that the first call would leak in seconds.


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Steve Baker [..]



Is it me or is he the creepiest of all JRM hangers on?


----------



## Crispy (Nov 16, 2018)

bemused said:


> Is it me or is he the creepiest of all JRM hangers on?


Not baker. Brady. 1922 chair.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, speaking from the knowledge of the experiences of people that have done it, providing the likes of employment and tax records for a period of 5 years, considering they are retained for even longer, in the modern world is hardly rocket science.


Having worked in the wonderful world of archives I can tell you you're living in cloud-cuckoo land


----------



## belboid (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, speaking from the knowledge of the experiences of people that have done it, providing the likes of employment and tax records for a period of 5 years, considering they are retained for even longer, in the modern world is hardly rocket science.


As I say, naive as hell. 

Yes, lots of people can find the evidence quite easily. But 'a lot of people' isn't everyone. And the attitude of 'it's easy and anyone can do it' is precisely on of the stumbling blocks people face if their claim isn't as 100% straightforward as you seem to be assuming everyones is.  Maybe she went back to whatever country her family as from for a while, to look after a sick relative or something. Maybe she was unemployed for a while, but living with a partner with a good job, so had no reason to claim. Maybe she went travelling for a bit. Maybe she is a massive drug dealer who avoided registering with the authorities. There are hundreds of reasons why people may not have full electronic records. The assumption that everyone does is a big problem.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> That was my thought after my first reply, they may not even be a EU citizen, in which case it's nonsense to post it on this thread.


Perhaps you should read the twitter thread then.

The google link you quoted (and the proper ones I checked) only seem to say you are entitled to *apply*.   She applied and was refused.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2018)

The Express is not frothing at the mouth as much as I expected. The Mail seems to backing May. I know that Dacre left the Mail, but why is the Express going soft on Brexit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The Express is not frothing at the mouth as much as I expected. The Mail seems to backing May. I know that Dacre left the Mail, but why is the Express going soft on Brexit?


Why not ask them?


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Perhaps you should read the twitter thread then.
> 
> The google link you quoted (and the proper ones I checked) only seem to say you are entitled to *apply*.   She applied and was refused.


Does she say *why* she was refused?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Why do you think scum like Mogg are so for it, will it damage their business?



It’s the poking their nose in his business the likes of him don’t like. There is a (admittedly not particularly strong) push within the EU to apply more scrutiny to tax havens due to the drain on public finances etc. The likes of Mogg, Banks etc. don’t want a light shining in some of the places they keep their cash.  Some of the ‘web giants’ are also not too keen on EU policy on monopolies and taxation that could affect their business.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> Does she say *why* she was refused?


Have you asked her?


----------



## gosub (Nov 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> fleetminster is very excitable atm. HISTORY IS BEING MADE. Twats.


Can't be. A vote for leave was a vote to end history or something or other I vaguely remember a load of remainer telly historians saying so during the referendum


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Have you asked her?


No, nor have I read the Twitter thread. 

As you apparently have, I thought perhaps you might answer my specific question, but if it's too much trouble I'll just have to cope somehow


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> No, nor have I read the Twitter thread.
> 
> As you apparently have, I thought perhaps you might answer my specific question, but if it's too much trouble I'll just have to cope somehow


Remember the days when people came to P&P and were told to get their finger out and do something themselves?   

Anyway she was refused because she put a wrong digit from her credit card on her application, they didn't contact her they just denied the application.  (if it's the one I remember, there are loads of them)

Here's something else from cupid's link.

EEA Permanent Residence Refused? - DavidsonMorris Solicitors


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

WRT records and evidence ( cannot comment on windrysh specifically) the mandate given to department was to reject everything at the first stage for basically any reason whatsoever to keep the numbers going through to consideration at s bare minimum. There was no time-allowed to take a holistic view of each bundle of info - this is directly from the desk of May. Senior civil servants were tasked with reducing the through traffic to a criminal level


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> WRT records and evidence ( cannot comment on windrysh specifically) the mandate given to department was to reject everything at the first stage for basically any reason whatsoever to keep the numbers going through to consideration at s bare minimum. There was no time-allowed to take a holistic view of each bundle of info - this is directly from the desk of May. Senior civil servants were tasked with reducing the through traffic to a criminal level


And anyone feeling any kind of twinge of sympathy for May over anything should remember this. Fuck her. Nasty piece of shit.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2018)

The Westminster drinks bill at the end of this is going to be enormous. Bet they do a runner


----------



## ska invita (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't agree with you about the main problem. The main problem was a home office, run by May, aggressively seeking to fulfill quotas for deportations so going for anyone they could get to do so, regardless of the disgusting injustice they were perpetrating and the lives they were ruining. That kind of thing can very easily happen again. The precise mechanism they use to go after people may change, but the central main problem will be the same. last time it was paper records that went missing. Next time it could be digital records that go missing.


Definitely. A lot of people had some paperwork and other supporting evidence but it was willfully ignored.


not-bono-ever said:


> WRT records and evidence ( cannot comment on windrysh specifically) the mandate given to department was to reject everything at the first stage for basically any reason whatsoever to keep the numbers going through to consideration at s bare minimum. There was no time-allowed to take a holistic view of each bundle of info - this is directly from the desk of May. Senior civil servants were tasked with reducing the through traffic to a criminal level


talking of "criminal level"
Windrush victims classed as criminals in government blunder


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 16, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The Westminster drinks bill at the end of this is going to be enormous. Bet they do a runner



Don't we pay for their booze?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2018)

We'll pay for the clean up, that's for sure.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

A 'remainer' Brexit secretary! that would be properly LOL...and May's final nail I'd imagine.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

apparently they haven't got enough names for a no-confidence vote. So ERG lot tipping winks to journos who eagerly lapped it  up - and now they look a bit fucking stupid.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 16, 2018)

no such thing as tory rebels etc


----------



## 8ball (Nov 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> A 'remainer' Brexit secretary! that would be properly LOL...and May's final nail I'd imagine.



I don't see the problem - would fit right in with our 'remainer' PM.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> A 'remainer' Brexit secretary! that would be properly LOL...and May's final nail I'd imagine.
> 
> View attachment 152663




 You forget they our elected representatives have service, honour and duty as motivators above all - they will work diligently and without pause or distraction to complete whatever task they have been given


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> apparently they haven't got enough names for a no-confidence vote.


no wai.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

Seriously though. The ERG don't have the numbers. The westminster lobby are so desperate for rolling content they're repeat any old shit that steve baker whatsapps them. 

If discussion of ongoing political stories here and elsewhere is just repeating uncritically the bollocks lobby journalists repeat uncritically from the ERG, even when it's been shown time and time again to be bollocks, then there's no reason for it to stop.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> Seriously though. The ERG don't have the numbers. The westminster lobby are so desperate for rolling content they're repeat any old shit that steve baker whatsapps them.
> 
> If discussion of ongoing political stories here and elsewhere is just repeating uncritically the bollocks lobby journalists repeat uncritically from the ERG, even when it's been shown time and time again to be bollocks, then there's no reason for it to stop.


One of the very, very many reasons I stopped looking at Twitter is that it’s just more reliable to wait and see what actually happens than trying to get the “early dirt” that turns out to have been utter nonsense.


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> One of the very, very many reasons I stopped looking at Twitter is that it’s just more reliable to wait and see what actually happens than trying to get the “early dirt” that turns out to have been utter nonsense.


you can see all the nonsense here anyway. 

it's easy enough to filter anyway, just ignore any tweet from a journalist that starts with 'I'm Hearing...' or 'Senior backbench sources say...'


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 16, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

you know that's a parody account right?


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

A parody account that imagines Clarke as some kind of lovable bluff truth-telling grandad figure and not the gross tory cunt he actually is.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> apparently they haven't got enough names for a no-confidence vote. So ERG lot tipping winks to journos who eagerly lapped it  up - and now they look a bit fucking stupid.


That sounds about right - this should have happened by now after their spiritual leader, the Dalai Mogger, made the call yesterday. My pure guess is that there would have been 48 by now if there had been more momentum yesterday, particularly if gove and morduant had resigned. Basically, tory mps are self interested sheep.  Suppose it goes to the weekend now and the mythical 'soundings' with their Association Chairs.  But yeah, it hasn't happened now and we are probably in a process whereby pure inertia leads to a situation where the majority of tories along with a few Labour brexiteers get the deal through.  May's chief task is to keep it a 'take it or leave it' thing. Being forced to go back and get a bit more from the EU is her nightmare scenario - and also one in which she is dancing to gove's tune.


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2018)

BBC website has a list of 21 Tory MPs who have said they have sent the letter of no confidence, ie less than half what's needed


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

her deal will not go through. theres 50 or so tories are going to vote against as are the DUP and all the  opposition parties. The Labour brexiteers have (apparently) all indicated they will vote agasint. Its dead. And so is she.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Nov 16, 2018)

andysays said:


> BBC website has a list of 21 Tory MPs who have said they have sent the letter of no confidence, ie less than half what's needed



No need to out themselves if they ain't sure the numbers are in


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 16, 2018)

I know the BBC is economising, but surely they could afford to rent a smallish studio in westminster, rather than have some poor sod stood out on college green and interviewing politicians with ambulances / noisy drunks etc in the background?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I know the BBC is economising, but surely they could afford to rent a smallish studio in westminster, rather than have some poor sod stood out on college green and interviewing politicians with ambulances / noisy drunks etc in the background?


Those noisy drunks are mps


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I know the BBC is economising, but surely they could afford to rent a smallish studio in westminster, rather than have some poor sod stood out on college green and interviewing politicians with ambulances / noisy drunks etc in the background?



They put tents up there to protect all the gear. I like the fact random loons stand behind them as they are chatting - the guy today with the 'believe in Jesus' signs was a classic.

If I wasn't lazy and untalented I'd make a 'I can't believe it's not butter' sandwich board and go up there.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I know the BBC is economising, but surely they could afford to rent a smallish studio in westminster, rather than have some poor sod stood out on college green and interviewing politicians with ambulances / noisy drunks etc in the background?


Couldn't disagree more; there's been some top quality hollering out there...a real highlight of the last 48 hrs news coverage. More media 'stars' and politicians should face the public...although I did notice that the Gove seems to accompanied by a couple of hefty bodyguards these days. Then again, he does have the most punchable face in modern politics. (Fair?)


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Those noisy drunks are mps


No just drunks,  making too much sense to be MP's


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

Toughie from the Guardian 'live' feed....


----------



## killer b (Nov 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Then again, he does have the most punchable face in modern politics. (Fair?)


it's a crowded field.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> it's a crowded field.


Yeah...but....go on then....


----------



## andysays (Nov 16, 2018)

Nine Bob Note said:


> No need to out themselves if they ain't sure the numbers are in


Sure, there are presumably some who have done it without saying so publicly


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

I would have thought all these letters would have been in by now. I bet there is some top-notch arm twisting going on.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 16, 2018)

one suggestion on telly that some MPs will want to talk to local party members over the weekend before they do anything


----------



## Poi E (Nov 16, 2018)

Quaint idea.


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> one suggestion on telly that some MPs will want to talk to local party members over the weekend before they do anything



Explains why May is having a conference call with all the chairs of the association.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I know the BBC is economising, but surely they could afford to rent a smallish studio in westminster, rather than have some poor sod stood out on college green and interviewing politicians with ambulances / noisy drunks etc in the background?


They do have a studio in Westminster but College Green is just over the road from Parliament so it’s a lot easier for MPs etc to just nip over there for a quick interview, where there’s also other news media just dying to fill up some airtime with them as well. Here was the scene at lunchtime today...


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2018)

bemused said:


> I would have thought all these letters would have been in by now.


Yup all 21 of them. Some way short of the 48 needed.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

She's found some mug to be the new Brexit Secretary, some no-mark called Stephen Barclay.

Poor sod.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> She's found some mug to be the new Brexit Secretary, some no-mark called Stephen Barclay.
> 
> Poor sod.


I’ve just been looking him up. Wikipedia knows fuck all about him either.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve just been looking him up. Wikipedia knows fuck all about him either.


Is he from Sark?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> She's found some mug to be the new Brexit Secretary, some no-mark called Stephen Barclay.



and a chorus of voices says "who?"


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve just been looking him up. Wikipedia knows fuck all about him either.



He's on wiki - Stephen Barclay - Wikipedia



> He is most notable for everyone on twitter asking who he was when made Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve just been looking him up. Wikipedia knows fuck all about him either.


 He is most notable for everyone on twitter asking who he was when made Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> She's found some mug to be the new Brexit Secretary, some no-mark called Stephen Barclay.
> 
> Poor sod.



Bit of a card, I'd say...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

His appointment is probably a tribute to Stan Lee - _'NobodyhasheardofhimMan'_


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 16, 2018)

killer b said:


> you can see all the nonsense here anyway.
> 
> it's easy enough to filter anyway, just ignore any tweet from a journalist that starts with 'I'm Hearing...' or 'Senior backbench sources say...'



Or '@bbclaurak'


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 16, 2018)

It’s a nothing job now so he’s ideal for it


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> It’s a nothing job now so he’s ideal for it


yeah exactly. It's all done!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

You have got to wonder just how far down the list he was to be 'chosen', around 20-30 I reckon.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

'So, what do I have to do in the job?'
- go to Brussels and do what Michael Gove tells you


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Nov 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> He is most notable for everyone on twitter asking who he was when made Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.




Wouldn't bank on him...

Sorry...I'll get my coat..


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

PippinTook said:


> Wouldn't bank on him...
> 
> Sorry...I'll get my coat..


Maybe he's been chosen entirely on rhyming grounds: _Barclay's Bank... _In fact he only got the job after _The Rt Hon.Tommy Tank_ turned it down.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's on wiki - Stephen Barclay - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> > He is most notable for everyone on twitter asking who he was when made Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union.



Bollocks, that quote has already been removed from wiki. 

I should have done a screen-grab.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> You have got to wonder just how far down the list he was to be 'chosen', around 20-30 I reckon.


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Snipped from some Graun analysis:

“Some EU governments are under pressure from populist parties to get the UK out of the EU as soon as possible.”

Any suggestion which parties might be being referred to there?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> You have got to wonder just how far down the list he was to be 'chosen', around 20-30 I reckon.


It's sort of like the 'designated survivor' in US politics, who doesn't go to the State of the Union so that someone from government survives if there's a catastrophe that wipes out everyone there.

Only in this case he just walked into the catastrophe


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

Rudds back apparently. Thought she was a second ref type now?  Is this all making the cabinet a bit more remainey?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

tbh how many people had heard of Raab before he was appointed? I hadn't. They've been scraping away at that barrel for so long it's starting to splinter.


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Rudds back apparently. Thought she was a second ref type now?  Is this all making the cabinet a bit more remainey?


Like it wasn't already


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbh how many people had heard of Raab before he was appointed? I hadn't. They've been scraping away at that barrel for so long it's starting to splinter.


They're through the barrel and into the dirt.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 16, 2018)

Does May have anything to lose by bringing No Deal types on board at this stage? And would any of them say yes in any case? It's endgame time for the ERG, no point at all for any of them to keep pretending there's a semblance of unity left.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

friedaweed said:


> Like it wasn't already


Yeah, but there's now no attempt to maintain the 'balance' of remain weirdos and brexit weirdos in the cabinet. This Barclay feller is there to just do whatever the fuck he is told presumably. I'm truly shocked to reach the conclusion this is a shambles!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

Perhaps he was the first one on the list that promised to tear up his letter?


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 16, 2018)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 16, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Bollocks, that quote has already been removed from wiki.
> 
> I should have done a screen-grab.



Found it in the 'edit history'.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 16, 2018)

Maybe Barclay is scared of flying so if the ERG lot demand re-negotiations he'll just say 'can't, got a doctor's note'.


----------



## agricola (Nov 16, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve just been looking him up. Wikipedia knows fuck all about him either.



The Guardian used an FT quote which described him as "a former banker and regulator", which if nothing else is a sentence that tells one all one needs to know about why financial crashes keep happening.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 16, 2018)

Yep


----------



## bemused (Nov 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 152678
> 
> Yep



No one else wanted the gig.


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Maybe Barclay is scared of flying so if the ERG lot demand re-negotiations he'll just say 'can't, got a doctor's note'.



I suspect he won’t need to worry about any Brussels trips any time soon.

Brexit deal: take it or leave it, EU tells Britain

Which, if you believe David Davis, is just brinkmanship. That’s the man who turned up to negotiations three months late, photographed without any notes or even a pen.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 16, 2018)

I have never heard of this bloke but I know he is a cunt

Its  a special gift I have


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 16, 2018)

When Armando Iannucci said UK politics is now too silly for satire, oh how we laughed!


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Somewhere in the news commentary, there’s a claim that he’ll only be tasked with no deal preparations stuff. Any more discussion* with the EU will be May / Robbins.

“Bonjour Michel”
“Ah Theresa, Ca va?”
“Well, erm, I was wondering if we could schedule some time to discuss some changes...”

CLICK

“Michel?...”

(Turns to Robbins)

“...That’s odd. I’ve got four bars. Have you got four bars?”


----------



## friedaweed (Nov 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, but there's now no attempt to maintain the 'balance' of remain weirdos and brexit weirdos in the cabinet. This Barclay feller is there to just do whatever the fuck he is told presumably. I'm truly shocked to reach the conclusion this is a shambles!


Judging by the way Fraulein May has been carrying on lately it's pretty clear they're all expected to do as they're told. She's actually cracking on ok with it too. She's a lot more strong and stable than we give her credit for I think. She's the new ...










We'll be stuck with her forever now


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Marina Hyde’s latest on the shit show is just out. A few wry smiles to be had. Unless you like the Tory players in all this. Which you don’t, and hardly anyone else does either, so tuck in:

In this Westminster battle of the bastards, we’re all going down with the ship | Marina Hyde


----------



## isvicthere? (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> The Suns Political editor has tweeted
> 
> 
> 
> Any labour mp contemplating any such thing is committing Political suicide surely?



I don't know. Getting in bed with the tories did the LibDems a world of good.


----------



## Winot (Nov 16, 2018)

paolo said:


> Marina Hyde’s latest on the shit show is just out. A few wry smiles to be had. Unless you like the Tory players in all this. Which you don’t, and hardly anyone else does either, so tuck in:
> 
> In this Westminster battle of the bastards, we’re all going down with the ship | Marina Hyde



I generally think she’s overrated, but that is superb.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 16, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Or '@bbclaurak'


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

So May is obviously gonna try and get this deal through and it doesn't look like anyone is gonna act against her *for now.
*
I'm wracking my brain trying to think about how this goes and I can only think of 3 options:

1) May is talking to arch Remoaner Labour types and believes she can get enough of them to back her and get it through

2) May actually doesn't want to get it through and is sabotaging Brexit 

3) May is far, far more deluded than any of us give her credit for. 

Am I missing something? What's going on here?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So May is obviously gonna try and get this deal through and it doesn't look like anyone is gonna act against her *for now.
> *
> I'm wracking my brain trying to think about how this goes and I can only think of 3 options:
> 
> ...


We are running down the clock so there are three alternatives, efta, no deal, remain. There will be no no deal. There will be no Norway now Canada later. There will be no may deal so it is efta or as you were. My money on as you were.


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So May is obviously gonna try and get this deal through and it doesn't look like anyone is gonna act against her *for now.
> *
> I'm wracking my brain trying to think about how this goes and I can only think of 3 options:
> 
> ...



Likely to be trying to get some support from a few Labour MPs. Or anyone. Might not be phoning the SNP or Plaid Cymru quite yet though.

I think her mentality is, I’ve got this far, might as well have a crack at the last month or so.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So May is obviously gonna try and get this deal through and it doesn't look like anyone is gonna act against her *for now.
> ...*
> 
> Am I missing something? What's going on here?


She thinks that as the deadline approaches many of the spineless pricks that inhabit the HoC will back this deal (or something very like) because the whips will twist arms, and a number of MPs will either don't want no deal or don't want a continuation of A50. As a tactic it's not unreasonable (from her perspective).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> She thinks that as the deadline approaches many of the spineless pricks that inhabit the HoC will back this deal (or something very like) because the whips will twist arms, and a number of MPs will either don't want no deal or don't want a continuation of A50. As a tactic it's not unreasonable (from her perspective).


I agree that it's not a bad tactic from her. Only tactic available to her. But she has to get this through parliament. The day there is a vote against this deal (or as you say something very like) is the day May resigns. I think we can know that much. But no date has been set for that vote, and if there is a vonc in May and a leadership contest, would, could or should that delay the commons vote? I don't know - you could argue that such internal party affairs shouldn't affect important time-sensitive commons business, or you could argue that this commons business needs a pm who is not in the process of being dethroned. 

There isn't actually a deadline for any commons vote, as I understand it, which is a bit odd. Delaying it as long as possible would seem May's best (only) strategy, and then as you say relying on spinelessness. Whatever happens, she'll need a fair few labour defectors, so she'll also need some discontent to be forming there. I'm not sure there has been much more to her strategy since the last election than 'just cling on'. 

If this deal is voted down by the commons, I think a second referendum becomes a very likely thing. For all the posturing, nobody wants to be in charge on the date of a 'no deal' deadline.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I agree that it's not a bad tactic from her. Only tactic available to her. But she has to get this through parliament. The day there is a vote against this deal (or as you say something very like) is the day May resigns.


I don't agree with that. So long as it's reasonably close the government, the HoC and the EU can maintain the pantomime make some last minute "changes" and try again. In fact I think there's a decent chance of something like that happening, and government (and EU) have probably factored it in. Allows some MP face-saving ("look what I got") bullshit before their about face.



littlebabyjesus said:


> IThere isn't actually a deadline for any commons vote, as I understand it, which is a bit odd. Delaying it as long as possible would seem May's best (only) strategy,


Again I think its in the interest of all the wankers involved in this to continue the fiction of a deadline, whether there "really" is one or not. I suspect a deadline before Xmas is pencilled in.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't agree with that. So long as it's reasonably close the government, the HoC and the EU can maintain the pantomime make some last minute "changes" and try again. In fact I think there's a decent chance of something like that happening


After what she said yesterday, I don't see how she could survive a vote against this deal. This is the best deal and the only deal and the only way to avoid catastrophe. That's her line. She's nailed herself to it, and she sinks with it.

We'll see, and clearly I may be proved wrong, but I think even a one-vote defeat of this deal in parliament could very well see the fall of this government. It's effectively a vonc in the government, like losing a vote on the budget. That's one reason why any labour mp voting with this deal can only be doing so to wreck Corbyn, because they hate Corbyn more than they hate the tories.

I'm rather expecting the DUP headbangers to change their minds on the deal, so that would help May. But there are at least 20 tory headbangers who will vote against the deal no matter what. Won't take many Labour defectors to swing it, but it will take some.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 16, 2018)

Given Corbyn's record on ignoring the whip and with a referendum advisory behind it, he has next to no chance of this not being effectively a free vote when it gets to the HoC. The maj of the PLP has little or no regard for him as leader. Plus, Arlene Foster hasn't walked yet.

More than we have seen in history, next time around the voting public will scrutinise closely what the sitting MP did from now until the conclusion.

If this doesn't get through the HoC, I'm Oprah.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> More than we have seen in history, next time around the voting public will scrutinise closely what the sitting MP did from now until the conclusion..


You reckon? What percentage of 'the voting public' knows anything about their sitting MP beyond their party and perhaps also their name? Some do, sure, and the occasional MP builds up a personal base. But I think you overstate the interest people have in that. 

Thing is, the above reasoning works both ways. Any Labour mp voting for this deal will have to take that to their constituency - it's a shit deal and we stood a chance of bringing down the govt, but I voted for the deal and kept the govt in power. And as I said above, there are tory headbangers who will vote against, and to hell with the consequences. They have in many cases decades of form - right back to Major's 'bastards'. So there will need to be some labour support for this to be voted through. And a labour mp voting for this is basically acting as a tory mp. That is what they take back to the voters who follow and care about such things. Maybe they're in safe labour seats so know they will get back in anyway. Chuka Umunna, for instance, falls into that category.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I have never heard of this bloke but I know he is a cunt
> 
> Its  a special gift I have


He is a close friend of Gavin Barwell.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

How much gold will the DUP want stuffed in their mouths?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

How much _more_ gold, you mean. Dangerous game for a blackmailer to keep coming back demanding more.

They seem to be coming under pressure from their own supporters. I know it's difficult to predict with the DUP as they are genuine fundamentalists, but they'll cave.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

you're oprah. there is nobody bar may loyalists supporting this deal. loads have publicly denounced it - they cant possibly vote for it. all the opposition parties are against it, the dup hate it, the tory brexiteer plus some of their remainers. Its a legal document thats been signed off by the EU commission - they are not going to change it and have said as much.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

TopCat said:


> How much gold will the DUP want stuffed in their mouths?


Three ounces molten per person should do the trick

It can be recovered after their death


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How much _more_ gold, you mean. Dangerous game for a blackmailer to keep coming back demanding more.
> 
> They seem to be coming under pressure from their own supporters. I know it's difficult to predict with the DUP as they are genuine fundamentalists, but they'll cave.


Sell out maybe but won't cave.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> you're oprah. there is nobody bar may loyalists supporting this deal. loads have publicly denounced it - they cant possibly vote for it. all the opposition parties are against it, the dup hate it, the tory brexiteer plus some of their remainers. Its a legal document thats been signed off by the EU commission - they are not going to change it and have said as much.


They've _said_ they're not going to change it. But rs is right that this is a big game of chicken. Nobody wants to be responsible for no deal chaos - an extension of A50 as a minimum could happen and we all get up and dance again. 

DUP may hate it but it is their job to ratify it. They've already been paid for that, although they may demand more of course. The tories must know that defeat for this bill in the commons is effectively a vonc in the govt. I would expect a large majority of tories to vote with May, with only the hard core headbangers - the 20-odd who put in their letters today basically - voting against. Add in a few of the labour cunts, and I reckon it could be pretty close. 

Labour sticks together, and this government falls within a couple of months tops, I reckon. Labour doesn't stick together, and maybe not.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

Im thinking May has confidence vote next week and wins. The vote will then be lost in Parliament. May resigns. New leader goes to the country and loses to Labour.The EU make a load of concessions including big cash for leave areas. We stay in. 
I won't be happy!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> We are running down the clock so there are three alternatives, efta, no deal, remain. There will be no no deal. There will be no Norway now Canada later. There will be no may deal so it is efta or as you were. My money on as you were.



I completely agree, one way or another that's where we're going - but what is May's plan or strategy? Or is that a redundant question at this point?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Im thinking May has confidence vote next week and wins. The vote will then be lost in Parliament. May resigns. New leader goes to the country and loses to Labour.The EU make a load of concessions including big cash for leave areas. We stay in.
> I won't be happy!


I think each stage of that scenario is entirely plausible. We get rid of the Tories! Result. 

I'm starting to doubt that there'll be a vonc May next week, though. 21 letters today is a pretty miserable return given that people were touting 60. Gove and Fox declaring loyalty. Boris Johnson and David Davis nowhere to be seen. It may have lost all momentum by Monday morning.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

Vonc had me confused!


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 16, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Im thinking May has confidence vote next week and wins. The vote will then be lost in Parliament. May resigns. New leader goes to the country and loses to Labour.The EU make a load of concessions including big cash for leave areas. We stay in.
> I won't be happy!



Agree with the first two, but I'm not sure May would resign. She's very academically intelligent, but also quite stupid. Her sense of duty may well prevail over her common sense. Also doubt the EU will make concessions. They didn't for Greece despite huge human consequences. They don't care. They want us gone, and for our act of going to serve as a lesson to others.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think each stage of that scenario is entirely plausible. We get rid of the Tories! Result.
> 
> I'm starting to doubt that there'll be a vonc May next week, though. 21 letters today is a pretty miserable return given that people were touting 60. Gove and Fox declaring loyalty. Boris Johnson and David Davis nowhere to be seen. It may have lost all momentum by Monday morning.


It can't lose momentum though as there is no more road to kick the can down. They can't ignore it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

If this deal is rejected by parliament, May will resign that same day. I think there's tons of uncertainty about everything else, but not that.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Agree with the first two, but I'm not sure May would resign. She's very academically intelligent, but also quite stupid. Her sense of duty may well prevail over her common sense. Also doubt the EU will make concessions. They didn't for Greece despite huge human consequences. They don't care. They want us gone, and for our act of going to serve as a lesson to others.


We mean more to Money and the EU than Greece. Us leaving could fuck the Euro. They will do anything to protect their project.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

TopCat said:


> We mean more to Money and the EU than Greece. Us leaving could fuck the Euro. They will do anything to protect their project.



Yes - and in order to protect that project - they would rather the UK crash out then allow it a deal that leaves the UK better off than it was in the EU. They have conceded pretty much fuck all beyond small details - all the climbing down has been done by the uk.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yes - and in order to protect that project - they would rather the UK crash out then allow it a deal that leaves the UK better off than it was in the EU. They have conceded pretty much fuck all beyond small details - all the climbing down has been done by the uk.


Allowing the UK to crash out and all the chaos that would ensue would place the whole of the EU at risk. There are already nascent anti-EU movements in various places around Europe. There may be bods in the EU bureaucracy who see things like that, but the national governments, who are still the ultimate decision-makers, will not. They will see their own governments to be at risk of falling. 

I agree with TC. If this were a small, weak country like Greece, they'd probably say 'fuck em'. But it's not.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> they would rather the UK crash out then allow it a deal that leaves the UK better off than it was in the EU. They have conceded pretty much fuck all beyond small details - all the climbing down has been done by the uk.


That's something else I've been wondering in my ignorance - even if it hadn't been such a clusterfuck on the home front, just how strong would the UK's negotiating position have been anyway?

The EU have no interest in making it easy or conceding anything, could anyone have got a deal that would leave the UK in a decent state?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 16, 2018)

WRT crashing out, the EU is banking - correctly IMO - that the UK will blink first and call a 2nd ref, general election or "unity Government" whilst asking for a suspension of A50.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Allowing the UK to crash out and all the chaos that would ensue would place the whole of the EU at risk. There are already nascent anti-EU movements in various places around Europe. There may be bods in the EU bureaucracy who see things like that, but the national governments, who are still the ultimate decision-makers, will not. They will see their own governments to be at risk of falling.
> 
> I agree with TC. If this were a small, weak country like Greece, they'd probably say 'fuck em'. But it's not.




Ffs, please stop being conned in to crash out, chaos, headbangers and so on. It makes you sound as divvy as the fucking Guardian columnists.

The UK is leaving a trading and political block. Both sides wish to keep the trading side alive, yet obviously something has to give.

End of times it is not.

Makes you sound right fucking stupid if you think it is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 16, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ffs, please stop being conned in to crash out, chaos, headbangers and so on. It makes you sound as divvy as the fucking Guardian columnists.
> 
> The UK is leaving a trading and political block. Both sides wish to keep the trading side alive, yet obviously something has to give.
> 
> ...


A no deal exit from the EU, in the short-term, would cause chaos. I don't for one second think it will happen, for that reason, whatever happens to this current deal or indeed this current government. Those using it as a threat, like May and others, are being disingenuous, and that needs calling out.

As for calling the eurosceptic wing of the Tory party (specifically the ERG) and the DUP 'headbangers', what the fuck do you want me to call them? They're total cunts, every single one of them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A no deal exit from the EU, in the short-term, would cause chaos. I don't for one second think it will happen, for that reason, whatever happens to this current deal or indeed this current government. Those using it as a threat, like May and others, are being disingenuous, and that needs calling out.
> 
> As for calling the eurosceptic wing of the Tory party (specifically the ERG) and the DUP 'headbangers', what the fuck do you want me to call them? They're total cunts, every single one of them.



Why would leaving a political union cause chaos?

If managed reasonably it really is not an issue. Yet there are screamers all over and MayTwat is listening. 

We keep being told by the EU that this is a divorce. If we are leaving then it should be a genuine split, like a divorce. Anything else is bound to cause more  long term pain. The narrative seems to be liberal led, stay close for the kids.

Everyone loses.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Allowing the UK to crash out and all the chaos that would ensue would place the whole of the EU at risk. There are already nascent anti-EU movements in various places around Europe. There may be bods in the EU bureaucracy who see things like that, but the national governments, who are still the ultimate decision-makers, will not. They will see their own governments to be at risk of falling.
> 
> I agree with TC. If this were a small, weak country like Greece, they'd probably say 'fuck em'. But it's not.






Lord Camomile said:


> That's something else I've been wondering in my ignorance - even if it hadn't been such a clusterfuck on the home front, just how strong would the UK's negotiating position have been anyway?
> 
> The EU have no interest in making it easy or conceding anything, could anyone have got a deal that would leave the UK in a decent state?



I think what Greece and Britain both demonstrate is that if you think you can have a vote and just leave, or even attempt to renegotiate things, you can get to fuck, there will be no compromises and if you think you can break away then you will be threatened with economic catastrophe as punishment. 

There are deep crises in the EU. The concept of 'free movement', always somewhat euphemistic, is breaking down, the debt crisis is causing conflict with Italy (who've already had a govt *forced* on them lets not forget), and the whole bloc is totally exposed to any shockwaves in the Chinese economy. They're not letting anyone break rank, big or small. And the rest of the global capitalist class overwhelmingly don't want any disruption to trade with Europe. "The markets" will be used to punish any wayward state that relies on global markets. Actually leaving the EU and not being destroyed would require a pretty radical program for any govt. 

Varoufakis always gives the quote from the German Finance Minister when he met with him - "Elections cannot be allowed to change economic policy." That pretty much sums it up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You reckon? What percentage of 'the voting public' knows anything about their sitting MP beyond their party and perhaps also their name? Some do, sure, and the occasional MP builds up a personal base. But I think you overstate the interest people have in that.
> 
> Thing is, the above reasoning works both ways. Any Labour mp voting for this deal will have to take that to their constituency - it's a shit deal and we stood a chance of bringing down the govt, but I voted for the deal and kept the govt in power...there will need to be some labour support for this to be voted through. And a labour mp voting for this is basically acting as a tory mp. That is what they take back to the voters who follow and care about such things. Maybe they're in safe labour seats so know they will get back in anyway. Chuka Umunna, for instance, falls into that category.



This is what I'm wondering about - I can see a lot of grandstanding and 'in the national interest' and it will work with some people. "We pushed through May's not really Brexit deal that Rees-Mogg hated we basically stopped Brexit and a No Deal Brexit would have been just awful." On the other hand, perhaps if it deepened rifts between the likes of Chuka and the rest of the Party that could be positive.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It may have lost all momentum by Monday morning.



I'm hoping it does, I've been sitting on a press release for work since yesterday, can't send it out to the papers while this fuckstorm is going on, it'll drown. Makes you wonder how much other news is being held onto or biffed because of the all-consuming attention-vortex that is Brexit. I hope it all goes a bit quiet and I can get my story out! 

I must say it seems weird to me that something of this magnitude and complexity has a single, solitary thread on Urban, there are so many aspects I would love to read discussion on that we're not touching because (I feel) we're all in this crowded room, no conjunctive arguments or layered debate, I suggest the restricted medium stifles quality, much as I love you all.  . I don't know if that was editor's decision or a community call, but thought I'd mention it.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

And I have read all 500 pages, just saying.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I'm hoping it does, I've been sitting on a press release for work since yesterday, can't send it out to the papers while this fuckstorm is going on, it'll drown. Makes you wonder how much other news is being held onto or biffed because of the all-consuming attention-vortex that is Brexit. I hope it all goes a bit quiet and I can get my story out!


Or, t'other way round, what's being thrown unto the sea to drown? What're we missing while we're all shitstorm-watching?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Or, t'other way round, what's being thrown unto the sea to drown? What're we missing while we're all shitstorm-watching?



That too! It's quite incredible the things we might and seen and done if Brexit could be retrospectively erased, the time, effort and attention it has absorbed is frightening, the way it has mashed other agendas and dominated conversation.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I must say it seems weird to me that something of this magnitude and complexity has a single, solitary thread on Urban, there are so many aspects I would love to read discussion on that we're not touching because (I feel) we're all in this crowded room, no conjunctive arguments or layered debate, I suggest the restricted medium stifles quality, much as I love you all.  . I don't know if that was editor's decision or a community call, but thought I'd mention it.



Plenty of room to start new threads - or bump old ones, there were so many at one point that there was a separate Brexit forum, before it all got condensed down to one mega-thread. 

Although "Is Brexit actually going to happen" is still a relevant question and probably will be until some time in the 2020s...


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> That too! It's quite incredible the things we might and seen and done if Brexit could be retrospectively erased, the time, effort and attention it has absorbed is frightening, the way it has mashed other agendas and dominated conversation.


That's what always frustrates me about so much. All the effort that goes into propping communities up at the ground level, protesting bullshit, stopping people from basically being dicks; if we didn't have to do that, that could all be channeled into so much amazing stuff.

And yet...


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I must say it seems weird to me that something of this magnitude and complexity has a single, solitary thread on Urban, there are so many aspects I would love to read discussion on that we're not touching because (I feel) we're all in this crowded room, no conjunctive arguments or layered debate, I suggest the restricted medium stifles quality, much as I love you all.  . I don't know if that was editor's decision or a community call, but thought I'd mention it.



Yeah I'd agree with that. There's so many dimensions to this, and none of them really gets a good delve. We could probably have a whole thread on rail policy, for example - and bring in a bigger audience of our peers here - but for any one subject that washes in, on this thread, it washes away again in about an hour.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Plenty of room to start new threads - or bump old ones, there were so many at one point that there was a separate Brexit forum, before it all got condensed down to one mega-thread.



Thanks Yoss, appreciated the backstory and advice! You know, I could't start a thread on Brexit, that would be to admit it's obsessing me...

A Brexit forum...my memory is shockin.


----------



## paolo (Nov 16, 2018)

I can vaguely remember the forum. I'd be up for it reappearing. Would need more than just the ten of us participating though


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> That's what always frustrates me about so much. All the effort that goes into propping communities up at the ground level, protesting bullshit, stopping people from basically being dicks; if we didn't have to do that, that could all be channeled into so much amazing stuff.
> 
> And yet...



Hearing you. What could we achieve without having to fuck about with fracking and homelessness, and foreign wars and pointless self-immoliation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> And I have read all 500 pages, just saying.


How's your insomnia now?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 16, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yeah I'd agree with that. There's so many dimensions to this, and none of them really gets a good delve. We could probably have a whole thread on rail policy, for example - and bring in a bigger audience of our peers here - but for any one subject that washes in, on this thread, it washes away again in about an hour.



Yep. I just keep coming back here for a "steer from the peers" and it ain't happening. Saying that, it's a fractured subject (horribly inevitable, and yet still dotted with events that just seemed to fall into place against chance and luck, until the path was laid) and I vacillate between dismay, embarrassment and bemusement, but I'd like some kinda handle on this shit I suppose.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

Brexiteers in plan to shift May on EU deal


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yep. I just keep coming back here for a "steer from the peers" and it ain't happening. Saying that, it's a fractured subject (horribly inevitable, and yet still dotted with events that just seemed to fall into place against chance and luck, until the path was laid) and I vacillate between dismay, embarrassment and bemusement, but I'd like some kinda handle on this shit I suppose.


Truth is, I don't think many have a real handle on this shit, and that includes the people who are supposed to be in charge of it.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Brexiteers in plan to shift May on EU deal



How can that be possible when the gravy train driver has said that’s ya lot?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yes - and in order to protect that project - they would rather the UK crash out then allow it a deal that leaves the UK better off than it was in the EU. They have conceded pretty much fuck all beyond small details - all the climbing down has been done by the uk.


Not at the brink yet. The EU arse will flutter when May is gone and a GE is called.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

When May resigns after the lost vote, the new leader will have to call a GE to have any chance of passing legislation (given the numbers).


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

I think the no confidence letters are in. The holder can dither though in counting them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

Mr.Bishie said:


> How can that be possible when the gravy train driver has said that’s ya lot?



Does that matter?


----------



## T & P (Nov 16, 2018)

And if one worries about how much energy and attention Brexit has monopolised in places like here, think of the effect it will have had at a national/ government level. It has overwhelmingly dominated policy, public discussion, and parliamentary time including policy making for the last three fucking years.

Fuck education; fuck health; fuck welfare; fuck infrastructure: fuck housing; fuck everything. Just Brexit Brexit Brexit.

Considering how long it usually takes for a new law or bill to clear parliament in quieter times, how many will have been passed since this shambles started? How many vital issues affecting people’s everyday lives far more greatly than Britain’s EU membership status is ever likely to have been neglected in the last three years? The damage from that alone might end up being very significant.

Not to mention society being at its most fractured and polarised it has been in living memory, or the contribution it has made towards the normalisation of deeply disturbing, sometimes openly prejudiced views into the mainstream media by individuals and public figures alike, something that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. No wonder the likes of Putin were so keen on a Leave result

Fuck the very day a referendum on the issue was ever proposed, and the cunt who made it happen to further improve his election prospects. This is the very worst and most fucking destructive peacetime event that has happened to this country in many decades, regardless of the eventual outcome.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I think the no confidence letters are in. The holder can dither though in counting them.


Word is none of the whips can count up to 48


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Does that matter?



I couldn’t give a fuck tbh mate


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

T & P said:


> And if one worries about how much energy and attention Brexit has monopolised in places like here, think of the effect it will have had at a national/ government level. It has overwhelmingly dominated policy, public discussion, and parliamentary time including policy making for the last three fucking years.
> 
> Fuck education; fuck health; fuck welfare; fuck infrastructure: fuck housing; fuck everything. Just Brexit Brexit Brexit.
> 
> ...



Alright, chill out.

Given the fact we've got a bunch of Tory bastards in govt I'm in favour of anything that distracts them from our schools and hospitals to be honest as long as it's not bombing other countries. 

Still very pleased to have voted Leave.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 16, 2018)

I have always speculated that rotten to the core ambitious types are recognised and promoted to the high offices of state. 
The evidence will be much waved by whips this weekend.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Alright, chill out.
> 
> Given the fact we've got a bunch of Tory bastards in govt I'm in favour of anything that distracts them from our schools and hospitals to be honest as long as it's not bombing other countries.
> 
> Still very pleased to have voted Leave.


You won't be so pleased when you see what they do next


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You won't be so pleased when you see what they do next



I'm applying the tactic of revolutionary defeatism comrade!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm applying the tactic of revolutionary defeatism comrade!


Aye well you'll see a proper defeat tovarich


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Aye well you'll see a proper defeat tovarich



Several proper defeats I suspect!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Several proper defeats I suspect!


Yeh when you're voting in the 2024 European Parliament elections you can reflect on them


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh when you're voting in the 2024 European Parliament elections you can reflect on them



We might not get representation in the Parliament any more! #GiveUpControl

Flint offering May a Grand Coalition and basically coming out to support the deal:

"The most frequent comments from voters now are: “Caroline, why haven’t we left yet?” And “Can’t you work together to sort this out?” I have been honest with remain voters about honouring the 2016 result, and my general election pledges. Equally, I have insisted to leave voters that a deal is the best outcome for jobs. Jeremy Corbyn is right when he argues we must bring leave and remain voters together. That’s why I called on the government to adopt a cross-party approach and invite Labour into their negotiating team. The government can never please the Tory hardline European Research Group faction. It’s not too late for the government to reach out to Jeremy Corbyn on aspects of an agreement. I have no idea what is going to happen next. The Government is imploding. While chaos reigns, few are focusing on the details. MPs promote agendas that have little to do with the agreement. Debate remains polarised.

But if parliament rejects Theresa May’s deal, I want assurances from my frontbench that we won’t become the accomplices of the hard Brexiters, leaving the UK crashing out on 29 March. On this crucial question, I have a right to know how we guarantee toavoid the worst of all outcomes."

As a Labour MP, if it’s a deal or no-deal Brexit I know where my duty lies | Caroline Flint


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> We might not get representation in the Parliament any more! #GiveUpControl
> 
> Flint offering May a Grand Coalition and basically coming out to support the deal:
> 
> ...


Not like we have representation on parliament now


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> We might not get representation in the Parliament any more! #GiveUpControl
> 
> Flint offering May a Grand Coalition and basically coming out to support the deal:
> 
> ...


Fucking hell, where to start on that? Clever touch to use praising Corbyn's own words to stab him in the back. Use the scare threat of crashing out as the excuse to prop up the government and stop Corbyn from getting into power. And my pet hate from politicians, 'the public is saying to me x,y,z', shuffling responsibility for decisions and actions off her shoulders. She takes exactly the same line as Theresa May - 'it's my deal or no deal, you want to be responsible for no deal?' She is acting like the most obedient, loyal Tory mp. Extraordinary.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:
			
		

> She is acting like the most obedient, loyal Tory mp. Extraordinary.



She's a self-serving ideology-free zone of very limited intelligence with the added downside of that worst of MP delusions, being 'one of the people'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> She's a self-serving ideology-free zone of very limited intelligence with the added downside of that worst of MP delusions, being 'one of the people'.


Well the other way to see that is that she just really fucking hates Corbyn, so much so that she would prefer a tory government until such a time as the Blairites have recaptured the leadership of the labour party. So she'll vote for a shit brexit deal and enable a shit brexit to further that end. Long-term, that's her chance of getting another government job.

If that is her motivation, this is far from a stupid thing to do.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well the other way to see that is that she just really fucking hates Corbyn, so much so that she would prefer a tory government until such a time as the Blairites have recaptured the leadership of the labour party. So she'll vote for a shit brexit deal and enable a shit brexit to further that end. Long-term, that's her chance of getting another government job.
> 
> If that is her motivation, this is far from a stupid thing to do.



I'm sure she'll vote for whatever seems most likely to give her a govt job. I think, unlike some who really fucking hate him on a more fundamental level, she'd change her tune about Corbyn if that ever looked like the horse to back, though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 17, 2018)

You have got to laugh when the opening words of the 1 am Sky News bulletin is, shocking news, 'Theresa May is still Prime Minister'.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 17, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> I'm sure she'll vote for whatever seems most likely to give her a govt job. I think, unlike some who really fucking hate him on a more fundamental level, she'd change her tune about Corbyn if that ever looked like the horse to back, though.


With a majority of only just over 5000 I think her main concern is holding onto her seat at the next election, in a constituency which voted Leave


----------



## Wookey (Nov 17, 2018)

T & P said:


> And if one worries about how much energy and attention Brexit has monopolised in places like here, think of the effect it will have had at a national/ government level. It has overwhelmingly dominated policy, public discussion, and parliamentary time including policy making for the last three fucking years.
> 
> Fuck education; fuck health; fuck welfare; fuck infrastructure: fuck housing; fuck everything. Just Brexit Brexit Brexit.
> 
> ...



There it is.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

For anyone wanting to see where it may go from here, there's this diagram from the Graun:

https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2018/11/flow-zip/giv-3902kLTVBmuxT0nK/


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> For anyone wanting to see where it may go from here, there's this diagram from the Graun:
> 
> https://interactive.guim.co.uk/uploader/embed/2018/11/flow-zip/giv-3902kLTVBmuxT0nK/


simplified:


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

I was going to link to rate my poo but have, thus far, resisted.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2018)

Labour right, in the form of Flint, having their turn on stage. 


> I too want a Labour government and if Jeremy Corbyn tabled a no-confidence motion I’d back it. Since the Fixed-term Parliament Act, not one motion of no confidence has been tabled in six years. Some Labour MPs pretend that defeating May’s deal will lead to an election. It won’t. They don’t even believe it, yet raise false expectations among Labour supporters. This moment calls for honesty, not posturing. If after all the bluster, confusion, and parliamentary procedures, the Commons reaches a stage where MPs are left with no more options on the table – just one agreement or leaving with no deal – I know where my duty lies. Not to help May, not to help the government, but to do what I believe is in the best interests of my constituents and the country.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 17, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


>



or the british where 'we' set about building a new empire.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


>



Note the slippage from i to we in this posh girl and the implication that society is simply her and her lit-establishment mates.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I was going to link to rate my poo but have, thus far, resisted.



Christ that's an early 2000s flashback.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

T & P said:


> And if one worries about how much energy and attention Brexit has monopolised in places like here, think of the effect it will have had at a national/ government level. It has overwhelmingly dominated policy, public discussion, and parliamentary time including policy making for the last three fucking years.
> 
> Fuck education; fuck health; fuck welfare; fuck infrastructure: fuck housing; fuck everything. Just Brexit Brexit Brexit.
> 
> ...


There's an unstated assumption here that all the parliamentary activity that hasn't happened would have been positive or at least neutral, which I and many others would dispute. 

Even of the only consequence of my vote to leave is the amount of government time which has been taken up with this shit show (and it won't be just that), that would be a worthwhile result in my eyes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

T & P said:


> And if one worries about how much energy and attention Brexit has monopolised in places like here, think of the effect it will have had at a national/ government level. It has overwhelmingly dominated policy, public discussion, and parliamentary time including policy making for the last three fucking years.
> 
> Fuck education; fuck health; fuck welfare; fuck infrastructure: fuck housing; fuck everything. Just Brexit Brexit Brexit.
> 
> ...


quite, think how many shitty laws we've swerved through the simple act of voting to leave the eu


----------



## ska invita (Nov 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Labour right, in the form of Flint, having their turn on stage.


she is right on a lot though: labour policy right now is
-vote down the deal
-call for an election (far from certain to happen, but its the motivating rally call)
- give false hope about a Labour renegotiation (which appears to be off the table in terms of time/A50/EU will, and even if it did happen would lead to an even softer brexit than the one on the table so far)

...Labours successful voting down the deal will more than likely NOT lead to a crash out Brexit, otherwise the Labour front bench wouldn't be pushing for it. Most likely it will lead to a second referendum and a stay in result. To my mind Labour policy right now, if they successfully vote down the deal, is leading to either No Brexit or a softer Brexit than currently on the table.

Very curious what conviction-Lexiters would rather at this stage:
1. that May's deal goes through, 2. a some-what mythical, softer, EU-tied Labour-negotiated Brexit, or 3. No Brexit at all. That would appear to be the options as it looks like the crash out Tories are a busted flush, and though crash out is still technically possible there would be too much cross-party agreement in the commons to stop it happening.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


>



You've posted this without comment, so I'm not sure If you actually agree with it or if it's a kind of 'look what this idiot is saying. It neatly demonstrates everything wrong with the entitled political class which has led to this cluster fuck' post.

If it's the latter I agree 100%, but given your posting history I suspect it's the former...


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

It's not a question of Labour calling for a GE. More that when May goes, her replacement will have to call and win the GE in order to get the deal through.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 17, 2018)

if the crash out option really has been politicked into against the national interest and therefor impossible I'd view whatever fudge comes as a stitch up. Because it will be. Wager I wouldn't be on my own there.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> You've posted this without comment, so I'm not sure If you actually agree with it or if it's a kind of 'look what this idiot is saying. It neatly demonstrates everything wrong with the entitled political class which has led to this cluster fuck' post.
> 
> If it's the latter I agree 100%, but given your posting history I suspect it's the former...


Not sure myself which is the bleakest prospect as between crashing out and the consequences of a second referendum being,as it inevitably would be,a Remain "win".


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> she is right on a lot though: labour policy right now is
> -vote down the deal
> -call for an election (far from certain to happen, but its the motivating rally call)
> - give false hope about a Labour renegotiation (which appears to be off the table in terms of time/A50/EU will, and even if it did happen would lead to an even softer brexit than the one on the table so far)
> ...


I think she's wrong on pretty much every point, and disingenuously so. It is not the opposition's responsibility to ensure that key government business passes through the Commons. And she is translating 'we must honour the referendum result' into 'we must vote through whichever rubbish we are presented with'. That's bonkers. No, this is a tory brexit, engineered by the tories, and done by the tories (although labour must be regretting voting in favour of a referendum now - big mistake that). It's up to the tories to vote it through if that's what they want, and if the tories wish to present their deal as the only option, the opposition should call bullshit. Whatever your position, it is not 'honouring the referendum' to vote through this deal just because it's the only deal on offer. If you're playing the democracy card, that is anti-democratic and an abdication of the 'duty' of elected representatives to scrutinise legislation, because no deal of any kind was presented for consideration at the referendum - this has all been worked out since then. 

If the deal is voted down, May will resign. I can't see how any new tory leader could not call an immediate general election in that circumstance. And in any case, labour mps should be happy that the government is in chaos, not bemoaning the fact. Good grief. You're there to _oppose_ ffs. And again, if you want to play the democracy card, you were elected by your voters to oppose. If this deal gets through because of the support of labour mps, _that_ will be a betrayal of democracy.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Not sure myself which is the bleakest prospect as between crashing out and the consequences of a second referendum being,as it inevitably would be,a Remain "win".



Well, it has always been my experience that maintenance of the status quo is easier than trying to reverse something.

A second referendum with a 'remain' outcome effectively means nothing changes. I dare say we would lose our current rebate as punishment for farting in church, but that would be about it. The EU hierarchy would be content that what is happening here would likely be an object lesson for any other country rocking the boat.

The 'leave' camp wouldn't be happy, but there is little that they could do. None of the major parties would endorse a third referendum, eventually the protest would die.


----------



## krink (Nov 17, 2018)

Have we done a caption competition on this cosy meeting yesterday?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Well, it has always been my experience that maintenance of the status quo is easier than trying to reverse something.
> 
> A second referendum with a 'remain' outcome effectively means nothing changes. I dare say we would lose our current rebate as punishment for farting in church, but that would be about it. The EU hierarchy would be content that what is happening here would likely be an object lesson for any other country rocking the boat.
> 
> The 'leave' camp wouldn't be happy, but there is little that they could do. None of the major parties would endorse a third referendum, eventually the protest would die.


yeh about 30 years down the line.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It's not a question of Labour calling for a GE. More that when May goes, her replacement will have to call and win the GE in order to get the deal through.


tbh the deal's as dead as a dodo
it's a three-way toss between efta, no deal and remain.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Very curious what conviction-Lexiters would rather at this stage:
> 1. that May's deal goes through, 2. a some-what mythical, softer, EU-tied Labour-negotiated Brexit, or 3. No Brexit at all. That would appear to be the options as it looks like the crash out Tories are a busted flush, and though crash out is still technically possible there would be too much cross-party agreement in the commons to stop it happening.


Tell me where do these "conviction-Lexiters" (_sic_) exist?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think she's wrong on pretty much every point, and disingenuously so. It is not the opposition's responsibility to ensure that key government business passes through the Commons. And she is translating 'we must honour the referendum result' into 'we must vote through whichever rubbish we are presented with'. That's bonkers. No, this is a tory brexit, engineered by the tories, and done by the tories (although labour must be regretting voting in favour of a referendum now - big mistake that). It's up to the tories to vote it through if that's what they want, and if the tories wish to present their deal as the only option, the opposition should call bullshit. Whatever your position, it is not 'honouring the referendum' to vote through this deal just because it's the only deal on offer. If you're playing the democracy card, that is anti-democratic and an abdication of the 'duty' of elected representatives to scrutinise legislation, because no deal of any kind was presented for consideration at the referendum - this has all been worked out since then.
> 
> If the deal is voted down, May will resign. I can't see how any new tory leader could not call an immediate general election in that circumstance. And in any case, labour mps should be happy that the government is in chaos, not bemoaning the fact. Good grief. You're there to _oppose_ ffs. And again, if you want to play the democracy card, you were elected by your voters to oppose. If this deal gets through because of the support of labour mps, _that_ will be a betrayal of democracy.



I agree with you 100% that this shit is the fault of the Conservatives, specifically Cameron.

The trouble is though, the eventual outcome doesn't just affect the Conservatives, it affects everyone.

May's repeated mantra that there will not be a second referendum is not helpful. She's like a rabbit in the headlights, unable to function and have a look at this.

It must be argued that if the outcome of a vote begins to show that the consequences are not those initially envisaged, common sense decrees that a second vote may be mandated as a result of new information. We do this in everyday life, something doesn't turn out as we expect, so we change tack.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Well, it has always been my experience that maintenance of the status quo is easier than trying to reverse something.
> 
> A second referendum with a 'remain' outcome effectively means nothing changes. I dare say we would lose our current rebate as punishment for farting in church, but that would be about it. The EU hierarchy would be content that what is happening here would likely be an object lesson for any other country rocking the boat.
> 
> The 'leave' camp wouldn't be happy, but there is little that they could do. None of the major parties would endorse a third referendum, eventually the protest would die.


Have to say I suspect that the word "eventually" is doing a lot of work in this sentence.In some quarters people already feel that they have waited patiently for something to follow from their 2016 leave vote.If they now find that they were in fact waiting for nothing to happen they will be incandescent with a possibility of violence.Or so I think.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh about 30 years down the line.



Well, better that than what is happening.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> she is right on a lot though: labour policy right now is
> -vote down the deal
> -call for an election (far from certain to happen, but its the motivating rally call)
> - give false hope about a Labour renegotiation (which appears to be off the table in terms of time/A50/EU will, and even if it did happen would lead to an even softer brexit than the one on the table so far)
> ...



Not a Lexiter. Hate that term! Coined by remain voting Owen Jones and suggests being out of the EU will somehow make the struggle for socialism easier. 

Having said that, if you want to know what I think, I think getting an anti austerity Corbyn-led govt to power is more important than Brexit. If it's a left wing govt worth having it'll come into conflict with the EU soon enough. 

That doesn't mean you can just say forget Brexit though - Corbyn needs to be able to put forward something that could legitimately be called Brexit and which is compatible with his program. 

If you're talking about what I'd like to see, Id like to see Corbyn make the Socialist case against the EU and talk about a program of nationalisation of banks and big business, which is the only way of making 'no deal' work if it came to it and is also the only thing that might concievably get concessions on anything from the EU but that won't happen. 

My fondest hope at this point is that he withdraws the whip from Labour MP's who vote to prop up May right at this moment if I'm honest.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> I agree with you 100% that this shit is the fault of the Conservatives, specifically Cameron.
> 
> The trouble is though, the eventual outcome doesn't just affect the Conservatives, it affects everyone.
> 
> ...


These are EXACTLY the sort of consequences I was hoping for when I voted to leave, though I'll admit they appear to be actually exceeding my expectations of how much the Tories would fuck themselves up.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Have to say I suspect that the word "eventually" is doing a lot of work in this sentence.In some quarters people already feel that they have waited patiently for something to follow from their 2016 leave vote.If they now find that they were in fact waiting for nothing to happen they will be incandescent with a possibility of violence.Or so I think.



You could be right, but we don't have a huge history of violence on the streets by 'the ordinary man'.

Every poll shows a wish to remain, with a decent margin. I suspect that there are a fair number of people who didn't bother to vote, because leaving was unlikely, who would vote to remain now.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> These are EXACTLY the sort of consequences I was hoping for when I voted to leave, though I'll admit they appear to be actually exceeding my expectations of how much the Tories would fuck themselves up.



So you favour knocking a hole in the bottom of the boat carrying you across a deep lake?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not a Lexiter. Hate that term! Coined by remain voting Owen Jones and suggests being out of the EU will somehow make the struggle for socialism easier.
> 
> Having said that, if you want to know what I think, I think getting an anti austerity Corbyn-led govt to power is more important than Brexit. If it's a left wing govt worth having it'll come into conflict with the EU soon enough.
> 
> ...



How old are you?


----------



## rubbershoes (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If the deal is voted down, May will resign. I can't see how any new tory leader could not call an immediate general election in that circumstance. And in any case, labour mps should be happy that the government is in chaos, not bemoaning the fact. Good grief. You're there to _oppose_ ffs. And again, if you want to play the democracy card, you were elected by your voters to oppose. If this deal gets through because of the support of labour mps, _that_ will be a betrayal of democracy.



Labour is just as divided as the tories on brexit. If labour won a general election, it would be their turn for a public civil war


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2018)

Anyone seen a concise, trustworthy analysis of the 500 page document?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Anyone seen a concise, trustworthy analysis of the 500 page document?


Hohoho


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Anyone seen a concise, trustworthy analysis of the 500 page document?



Nope, and I'm not reading it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Hohoho


Anyone other than Santa?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

As this is discussed, round and round, a second referendum is slowly looking possible.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

If as I expect we get a confidence vote announcement next week, it's going to be popcorn time for the run up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> Labour is just as divided as the tories on brexit. If labour won a general election, it would be their turn for a public civil war


I don't think that's true at all. Europe has been a festering issue for the tories for decades in a way that it really isn't for labour. For the hardcore ERG tories, it is _the_ defining political issue, and has been for a long time. Labour is divided (the PLP at least) over _Corbyn_, so much so that some labour mps would rather a continuation of tory rule over a Corbyn government.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

When's the parliament vote? Early December no?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Idiot on the news talking about the historic opportunity for Labour to act in the national interest.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Idiot on the news talking about the historic opportunity for Labour to act in the national interest.


last time that happened we got the work camps


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Idiot on the news talking about the historic opportunity for Labour to act in the national interest.


Red idiot or blue idiot?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Red idiot or blue idiot?


I don't who it was. Rolling bbc news. I could not tell for sure if red or blue Tory. I guess at blue Tory.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> When's the parliament vote? Early December no?



The entire EU has to agree to it before then.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> So you favour knocking a hole in the bottom of the boat carrying you across a deep lake?


You might need to explain what the various items in this picture are intended to represent if you want me to answer your question...


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

That's due on the 21st November I recollect.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

There is some summit with Trump and Putin in this period too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> How old are you?



How much of a prick are you?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think she's wrong on pretty much every point, and disingenuously so. It is not the opposition's responsibility to ensure that key government business passes through the Commons. And she is translating 'we must honour the referendum result' into 'we must vote through whichever rubbish we are presented with'. That's bonkers. No, this is a tory brexit, engineered by the tories, and done by the tories (although labour must be regretting voting in favour of a referendum now - big mistake that). It's up to the tories to vote it through if that's what they want, and if the tories wish to present their deal as the only option, the opposition should call bullshit. Whatever your position, it is not 'honouring the referendum' to vote through this deal just because it's the only deal on offer. If you're playing the democracy card, that is anti-democratic and an abdication of the 'duty' of elected representatives to scrutinise legislation, because no deal of any kind was presented for consideration at the referendum - this has all been worked out since then.
> 
> If the deal is voted down, May will resign. I can't see how any new tory leader could not call an immediate general election in that circumstance. And in any case, labour mps should be happy that the government is in chaos, not bemoaning the fact. Good grief. You're there to _oppose_ ffs. And again, if you want to play the democracy card, you were elected by your voters to oppose. If this deal gets through because of the support of labour mps, _that_ will be a betrayal of democracy.


Brexit is not just "key government business", its the result of a national referendum, which puts the onus on all parties to engage, and which up until now Labour have acknowledged must happen and actively voted to make happen. And their job is not just to oppose blindly...they said repeatedly they would support the deal presented if it matched the 6 tests. This deal could pass their vague 6 tests, if they wanted it to, but lets say it objectively doesn't for sake of argument and leave that aside.

I'd be more comfortable supporting the current Labour (op)position if they openly said what they would do and how they would achieve it. "we must have an election" just doesn't cut it - its meaningless and ignoring several realities (including that they could lose the election!).  I'm getting pretty sick of their vagueness on Brexit tbh. Having to do a speculative logic puzzle to try and work out their course of action. Which as I say by my workings would lead to a small chance of an even softer brexit or much more likely 2nd ref, which most likely will mean staying in the EU. Not that they're openly saying that but that has to be the conclusion. If thats wrong please say what else it could be. I'm done deciphering them.



SpackleFrog said:


> I think getting an anti austerity Corbyn-led govt to power is more important than Brexit. If it's a left wing govt worth having it'll come into conflict with the EU soon enough.That doesn't mean you can just say forget Brexit though - Corbyn needs to be able to put forward something that could legitimately be called Brexit and which is compatible with his program.


exactly, but what is Corbyn putting forward? He's pretty shtum on it. See points above. 

Ultimately its not like any of us have any real power over any of  this - its theatre and out of our hands. But this is meant to be a representative democracy, and parties have a duty to be representative and transparent about their position and plans, especially so at a time when they're calling for an election. 

Labours "keep vague and let the tories fuck it up" policy has run out of road at the juncture of the upcoming vote, and the vote also means what positively happens after the vote. At least say what would they would like to happen after the vote against. In the absence of that I can see why some Labour MPs might vote for the deal - at least it will be a brexit. Fuck only knows what voting against it is voting For - its not illogical to conclude it will most likely mean staying in the EU. Until Labour front bench make it clear thats the reasoning people are forced to go through.

*its the weekend, time to get a life >>>> ttfn


----------



## belboid (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> That's due on the 21st November I recollect.


25th for the EU summit, parliamentary debate 5 days from December 10th


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> last time that happened we got the work camps


this time the work camps will be for the mps


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

belboid said:


> 25th for the EU summit, parliamentary debate 5 days from December 10th


Thanks. 
It's some timetable.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Brexit is not just "key government business", its the result of a national referendum, which puts the onus on all parties to engage, and which up until now Labour have acknowledged must happen and actively voted to make happen. And their job is not just to oppose blindly...they said repeatedly they would support the deal presented if it matched the 6 tests. This deal could pass their vague 6 tests, if they wanted it to, but lets say it objectively doesn't for sake of argument and leave that aside.
> 
> I'd be more comfortable supporting the current Labour (op)position if they openly said what they would do and how they would achieve it. "we must have an election" just doesn't cut it - its meaningless and ignoring several realities (including that they could lose the election!).  I'm getting pretty sick of their vagueness on Brexit tbh. Having to do a speculative logic puzzle to try and work out their course of action. Which as I say by my workings would lead to a small chance of an even softer brexit or much more likely 2nd ref, which most likely will mean staying in the EU. Not that they're openly saying that but that has to be the conclusion. If thats wrong please say what else it could be. I'm done deciphering them.
> 
> ...



I agree with a lot of this but it's not out of our hands. The unions should be mobilising, demanding a GE and putting demands on Corbyn. The Remoaners have been clear about what they want from Corbyn, the Labour movement must do the same.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

So the 15th Dec then for the parliament vote?


----------



## belboid (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Thanks.
> It's some timetable.


God knows why there is so long between the EU and parliamentary dates


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree with a lot of this but it's not out of our hands. The unions should be mobilising, demanding a GE and putting demands on Corbyn. The Remoaners have been clear about what they want from Corbyn, the Labour movement must do the same.


shifting him as far left as auld 'red' jim callaghan would be a start


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> So the 15th Dec then for the parliament vote?


15th is a Saturday,  so I'm guessing vote on 14th, then a quick bit of last minute shopping and back to constituencies for Xmas...


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> 15th is a Saturday,  so I'm guessing vote on 14th, then a quick bit of last minute shopping and back to constituencies for Xmas...


They can't just lose the vote then fuck off home for Christmas.  It will look so bad for them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> They can't just lose the vote then fuck off home for Christmas.  It will look so bad for them.


politicians lack the shame gene


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> You might need to explain what the various items in this picture are intended to represent if you want me to answer your question...



Unless you live abroad, you are in the boat that is in jeopardy. 

This isn't simply a Conservative party matter, it affects us all. If there is no deal, then for the foreseeable, we're fucked. It takes time to set up trading relations with other countries. 

There is also the problem with the financial services industry, which is a huge tax payer, and would up sticks and move to Frankfurt.

We are all in this boat, and I would rather it didn't sink. I can appreciate that you are enjoying the discomfiture of the Conservative party, I think we all are to an extent, but not to the point where we crash out of the EU.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> politicians lack the shame gene



You are a master of the understatement.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree with a lot of this but it's not out of our hands. The unions should be mobilising, demanding a GE and putting demands on Corbyn. The Remoaners have been clear about what they want from Corbyn, the Labour movement must do the same.



Labour, unions and the Brexit vote issue


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> politicians lack the shame gene


Yeah but. 
May will likely resign on that day following the vote. To leave everything all over the floor over Christmas just doesn't seem credible. The vacuum would eat them all.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How much of a prick are you?



What do you think that achieved? Be civil.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Yeah but.
> May will likely resign on that day following the vote. To leave everything all over the floor over Christmas just doesn't seem credible. The vacuum would eat them all.


the state may keeps number ten in is one of the things maintaining her in power - the place is a bloody tip and no one wants to clean up her mess. she makes julian assange look houseproud


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> What do you think that achieved? Be civil.


You should have added , young man.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

How quickly can they do a leadership election?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> You should have added , young man.


strangely SpackleFrog is the spitting image of harry h corbett and Sasaferrato could pass for wilfrid brambell


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> You should have added , young man.



I suppose I should really. Every bugger is younger than me.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> strangely SpackleFrog is the spitting image of harry h corbett and Sasaferrato could pass for wilfrid bramble



Cheeky sod!


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

So we could be facing a caretaker PM over Christmas.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> So we could be facing a caretaker PM over Christmas.



That does sound like a possibility.

The Guardian flow chart thing also shows a branch to have a *second* parliament vote 21 days later. I'm not thinking that's likely, just mentioning it here as one of hypothetical steps.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> What do you think that achieved? Be civil.



How is it civil to no context ask someone their age in the middle of a discussion? Be normal.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Yeah but.
> May will likely resign on that day following the vote. To leave everything all over the floor over Christmas just doesn't seem credible. The vacuum would eat them all.



Seems to me that many of the events around the Leave referendum and its aftermath might have seemed not to be credible before this all began.

Whoever's eating Xmas dinner in No 10 this year, festive cheer will be in pretty short supply


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Unless you live abroad, you are in the boat that is in jeopardy.
> 
> This isn't simply a Conservative party matter, it affects us all. If there is no deal, then for the foreseeable, we're fucked. It takes time to set up trading relations with other countries.
> 
> ...


_This deal or crash out_ is a false choice, though. Just because May says this is so doesn't make it so.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> _This deal or crash out_ is a false choice, though. Just because May says this is so doesn't make it so.



On the other hand - to the ERG et al, the whips will be saying "This deal or remain".

It's come to something where the message, coming from the same root, can be almost wholly contradictory.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Seems to me that many of the events around the Leave referendum and its aftermath might have seemed not to be credible before this all began.
> 
> Whoever's eating Xmas dinner in No 10 this year, festive cheer will be in pretty short supply


It will indeed as their travel papers for the sacn should reach them around 20/12


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Sacn?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> On the other hand - to the ERG et al, the whips will be saying "This deal or remain".
> 
> It's come to something where the message, coming from the same root, can be almost wholly contradictory.


The reason I described the ERG lot as 'headbangers' is precisely because they are very unlikely to vote for this deal even if the alternative is remain. They'd choose heroic failure over partial success. I think this deal's only hope of being passed through parliament is getting enough labour defectors to vote for it. And here we have the great charade - the public reasons given by labour mps for voting with the deal (national interest above party interest, honouring the referendum, averting the disaster of no deal, _duty_) will of course be nothing at all to do with the real reasons.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> So we could be facing a caretaker PM over Christmas.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

I'm hoping that when May is replaced, Stephen Barclay is retained as Brexit Secretary and that he demands as his price the retention of his old and close friend Gavin Barwell in the top team.
The loss of Barwell would truly be a tragedy of epic proportions.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Idiot on the news talking about the historic opportunity for Labour to act in the national interest.


Tim Montgomery is the name.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Tim Montgomery is the name.


Creator of the Conservative Home website, and staunchly pro-brexit. Revealing that a key tory strategist fears brexit won't happen if this deal is voted down.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How is it civil to no context ask someone their age in the middle of a discussion? Be normal.



Your age is relevant.

I'm retired, my pensions are pretty bomb proof, were the providers to fail the whole economy would have failed. Other than an inflation hit, which would not be terribly relevant, a Labour government would have little effect on us. Our house is paid for, and our modest needs are well met.

On the assumption that you are of working age, then the outlook is a bit different, the swinging tax hikes needed to pay for Corbyn's opium dreams will hit you hard.

It is your choice of course, I favour small government and low taxation, you favour the opposite.

The other reason I ask your age was that I was around in the 70s, when the high tax rates of a Labour government caused a measure of capital flight, with a reduction in tax take. Moving capital now is simply the press of a button. The question asked back then as to why people should be expected to pay 80% of their salary in tax is just as valid today, as is the answer, they shouldn't. Callaghan introduced a tax rate on 'unearned income' that was over 100%* IIRC.

*Not quite.

In 1971 the top rate of income tax on earned income was cut to 75%. A surcharge of 15% kept the top rate on investment income at 90%.[18] In 1974 the cut was partly reversed and the top rate on earned income was raised to 83%. With the investment income surcharge this raised the top rate on investment income to 98%, the highest permanent rate since the war. This applied to incomes over £20,000 (£191,279 as of 2016),[7].


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And here we have the great charade - the public reasons given by labour mps for voting with the deal (national interest above party interest, honouring the referendum, averting the disaster of no deal, _duty_) will of course be nothing at all to do with the real reasons.


It's going be nauseating.  A bizarre succession of organisations and individuals will be queuing up to demand the Labour Party change direction.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Creator of the Conservative Home website, and staunchly pro-brexit. Revealing that a key tory strategist fears brexit won't happen if this deal is voted down.


What's the betting Prince Charles and the Archbishop of Canterbury join the list over Christmas?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> _This deal or crash out_ is a false choice, though. Just because May says this is so doesn't make it so.



Perhaps. I say perhaps, because like us all, I don't have a crystal ball. What a mess.

I really don't see this getting through parliament (and don't want it to), but then what?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Bookies showing 1/3 on May winning her confidence vote.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

21/10 against.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Bookies showing 1/3 on May winning her confidence vote.



Ouchie. 

And do the morons of the Conservative Party really think that anyone else can do better?


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The reason I described the ERG lot as 'headbangers' is precisely because they are very unlikely to vote for this deal even if the alternative is remain. They'd choose heroic failure over partial success. I think this deal's only hope of being passed through parliament is getting enough labour defectors to vote for it. And here we have the great charade - the public reasons given by labour mps for voting with the deal (national interest above party interest, honouring the referendum, averting the disaster of no deal, _duty_) will of course be nothing at all to do with the real reasons.



Yeah John Redwood on Any Questions was absolutely explicit that what he wants - and what he has always wanted - is no deal. 

I’m not sure any more that May will resign if/when she loses the parliamentary vote. It might tip the balance in favour of a vonc, but even then she might win. And under the Fixed Term Parliament Act, a GE is by no means certain as an outcome.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Ouchie.
> 
> And do the morons of the Conservative Party really think that anyone else can do better?


A VONC win for May could give her breathing space. Until the parliament vote on Dec 14th that is.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yeah John Redwood on Any Questions was absolutely explicit that what he wants - and what he has always wanted - is no deal.
> 
> I’m not sure any more that May will resign if/when she loses the parliamentary vote. It might tip the balance in favour of a vonc, but even then she might win. And under the Fixed Term Parliament Act, a GE is by no means certain as an outcome.


But to try and stay, after defeat in Parliament would be farcical. She would then be left with no power, heading for the exit day rocks.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> But to try and stay, after defeat in Parliament would be farcical. She would then be left with no power, heading for the exit day rocks.


May doing this would likely provoke civil disorder from remainers.


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> But to try and stay, after defeat in Parliament would be farcical. She would then be left with no power, heading for the exit day rocks.



Agreed, which is why I've assumed up to now she’d do the reasonable thing and go. But she seems determined to stay until removed.


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> May doing this would likely provoke civil disorder from remainers.



Nah. Spluttering into our Guardians maybe. 

I could totally see her saying “OK we lost - I’ll go back to Brussels and try to get something better”.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Im hugely enjoying this.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Nah. Spluttering into our Guardians maybe.
> 
> I could totally see her saying “OK we lost - I’ll go back to Brussels and try to get something better”.


What could that better be? I just cant see it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Agreed, which is why I've assumed up to now she’d do the reasonable thing and go. But she seems determined to stay until removed.


Losing this vote will be a removal, effectively. She's all but said so herself - it's this deal or nothing. She'll go on the day of the vote if she loses it. I'm not entirely convinced she will lose it, although she may not be prime minister by the time there is a vote, and if that's the case, who would be presenting this deal as 'theirs' given how many people have run away from it? Could they even present this deal to parliament with May gone? They're in a pickle alright.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> What could that better be? I just cant see it.


Not only that, but May has said explicitly that this is it. This is the best deal.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> Nah. Spluttering into our Guardians maybe.
> 
> I could totally see her saying “OK we lost - I’ll go back to Brussels and try to get something better”.



My guess is that she knows that’s a non starter with the EU.

Then again, she does manage to do delusional repeatedly.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not only that, but May has said explicitly that this is it. This is the best deal.


They have all climbed up a tree and mummy can't hear their cries.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It's going be nauseating.  A bizarre succession of organisations and individuals will be queuing up to demand the Labour Party change direction.



On Brexit, they’ll need to have a direction first, before that queue can form.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

I'll do a Guardian watch for people demanding Corbyn goes in A Tory direction.


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> What could that better be? I just cant see it.



You are right. There isn’t a better deal, and she knows it. But you’re missing my point - which is that she is showing signs of such obstinacy and delusion as to stay on until pushed _even if rationally she should go. _

I don’t think she’s going to resign. She might be deposed, but that could have happened at any point since the GE, and no one’s had the balls/numbers.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

It's going to be weird. It was surreal for me during the referendum watching self proclaimed revolutionaries urging support for the EU. 
Now we will see and hear urging to vote Tory in Parliament to support the EU. 
Vote Tory...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It's going to be weird. It was surreal for me during the referendum watching self proclaimed revolutionaries urging support for the EU.
> Now we will see and hear urging to vote Tory in Parliament to support the EU.
> Vote Tory...


without illusions


----------



## Winot (Nov 17, 2018)

Winot said:


> I don’t think she’s going to resign. She might be deposed, but that could have happened at any point since the GE, and no one’s had the balls/numbers.



Also, she’s arguably in a stronger position politically now than a week ago. She’s pulled off a deal which a lot of business are prepared to support (avoiding no deal) and Rees-Mogg has shot his bolt and might have missed.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> without illusions


Oh mate...


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I'll do a Guardian watch for people demanding Corbyn goes in A Tory direction.



On Brexit, the Tories will need to have a direction first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> On Brexit, the Tories will need to have a direction first.


one direction


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It's going to be weird. It was surreal for me during the referendum watching self proclaimed revolutionaries urging support for the EU.
> Now we will see and hear urging to vote Tory in Parliament to support the EU.
> Vote Tory...



I don’t follow. Which vote do you mean, a GE?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> I don’t follow. Which vote do you mean, a GE?


No I mean people, supposedly of a left bent, urging Labour mps to vote yes to May's bill on Dec 14th.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Unless you live abroad, you are in the boat that is in jeopardy.
> 
> This isn't simply a Conservative party matter, it affects us all. If there is no deal, then for the foreseeable, we're fucked. It takes time to set up trading relations with other countries.
> 
> ...


I don't accept your analogy. We are most definitely *not* all in the same boat, or if we are, most of us are in the position of galley slaves whose interests would best be served by rising up, throwing the ship's officers overboard and then scuttling the ship rather than continuing on our current course.

And that includes you, whether you recognise it or not.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> I don't accept your analogy. We are most definitely *not* all in the same boat, or if we are, many of us are in the position of galley slaves whose interests would best be served by rising up, throwing the ship's officers overboard and then scuttling the ship rather than continuing on our current course.


I voted to burn down the masters house, not caring I live in the attic.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> You've posted this without comment, so I'm not sure If you actually agree with it or if it's a kind of 'look what this idiot is saying. It neatly demonstrates everything wrong with the entitled political class which has led to this cluster fuck' post.
> 
> If it's the latter I agree 100%, but given your posting history I suspect it's the former...


It was a jokey post and you're right,  I didn't vote for this shitshow and I'm taking delight in the brexiteers having to face up for what they've lied about.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It was a jokey post and you're right,  I didn't vote for this shitshow and I'm taking delight in the brexiteers having to face up for what they've lied about.


Thank you for clarifying. I definitely did vote for this shit show.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> No I mean people, supposedly of a left bent, urging Labour mps to vote yes to May's bill on Dec 14th.



Ah ok.

I’m not expecting see much of that at all, but could be wrong of course.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Thank you for clarifying. I definitely did vote for this shit show.



Why? Other than a load of jingoistic bollocks about 'taking back control, which was based on outright lies by the illegally overspending 'Leave' campaign, why vote to leave?

Unless you are advocating a complete trade ban with the EU, we will have to match their laws with regard to every single item we sell, but will have no influence on those laws.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I voted to burn down the masters house, not caring I live in the attic.



That sums up those who voted to leave quite well really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Your age is relevant.
> 
> I'm retired, my pensions are pretty bomb proof, were the providers to fail the whole economy would have failed. Other than an inflation hit, which would not be terribly relevant, a Labour government would have little effect on us. Our house is paid for, and our modest needs are well met.
> 
> ...



My age is not relevant. It is relevant that you're a boring Tory cunt but it's not cos you're old.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> My age is not relevant. It is relevant that you're a boring Tory cunt but it's not cos you're old.



You are blocked, I refuse to converse with rude children.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You are blocked, I refuse to converse with rude children.


If I call you a boring Tory cunt, will you block me too (or at least stop replying to me with such craven nonsense)?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2018)

Sas used to draw his coin from HMG so he can't want too small a state.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays  Your wish is my command. Bye bye.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Sas used to draw his coin from HMG so he can't want too small a state.



Still do. All you daily toilers are paying my State Pension. Which is disgraceful BTW, pensions should have been funded by investment of contributions, not from current income.

It is a huge commitment, circa 11m OAPs, at even £100.00 pw is £57.2 Bn a year.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> If I call you a boring Tory cunt, will you block me too (or at least stop replying to me with such craven nonsense)?



It's not that great unfortunately you can still see his posts


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You are blocked, I refuse to converse with rude children.


don't know what you're doing on urban then


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> don't know what you're doing on urban then


 Some are one, some are the other, rarely both. 

There is no need for the level of rudeness displayed by that pair. Agree or disagree, respond to a post or not, but ad hom is completely unnecessary. Neither would have said that to me face to face, but keyboard warriors are very brave of course.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Some are one, some are the other, rarely both.


bet you'll be rude when you're in your second childhood, i know i will be


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

I'd quite happily tell anyone on Urban my age provided I didn't think they were going to use it as evidence for me being wrong. I get enough of older people who don't know what they're talking about telling me I don't know what I'm talking about in my union ta


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Some are one, some are the other, rarely both.
> 
> There is no need for the level of rudeness displayed by that pair. Agree or disagree, respond to a post or not, but ad hom is completely unnecessary. Neither would have said that to me face to face, but keyboard warriors are very brave of course.



Just like to confirm I would be very happy to say this to Sas's face.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> bet you'll be rude when you're in your second childhood, i know i will be



I think he already is.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> bet you'll be rude when you're in your second childhood, i know i will be



Mrs Sas reckons I'm heading there without having left my first. She may be right.

Can't be bothered with uncivil crap these days. If either had had anything new or interesting to say, I might not have blocked them. There are some on the boards that infuriate me, but they do have something to say that is worth reading.

Attack my view as much as you like, not a problem. Start being an abusive knob end, gone.


----------



## andysays (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not that great unfortunately you can still see his posts


I haven't really thought this through, have I?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2018)

Right, we've had an internecine bunfight. Back to Brexit!


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Right, we've had an internecine bunfight. Back to Brexit!



Quite, and although I didn't start it, sorry for the derail.


----------



## paolo (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> Ah ok.
> 
> I’m not expecting see much of that at all, but could be wrong of course.



I’ll take that back... slightly... I’ve just rechecked the polling numbers from two days ago.

Of the people who’d voted Labour in 2017, 28% would vote leave if there was a referendum now.

Of that 28%, there will be portion that will want to go with May’s deal, rather than risk remain.

It’s not huge, but it will be there.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Quite, and although I didn't start it, sorry for the derail.



You did start it. And I'm not sorry for the derail


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

paolo said:


> Labour, unions and the Brexit vote issue



Slightly outdated now. There is very much a divide between those who think stopping Brexit is the key issue and those who think getting rid of the Tories is the key issue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Slightly outdated now. There is very much a divide between those who think stopping Brexit is the key issue and those who think getting rid of the Tories is the key issue.


not to mention those who favour getting rid of the tories through getting rid of brexit


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> not to mention those who favour getting rid of the tories through getting rid of brexit



I'm not sure there's a particularly large layer who see that as a coherent strategy. I certainly _hope _there isn't.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2018)

Please please please can the queen die now for lolz


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Please please please can the queen die now for lolz


I think it would be more fun if Prince William died. The Queen is expected but it would be a Diana style grief fest if one of the young cunts died out the blue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure there's a particularly large layer who see that as a coherent strategy. I certainly _hope _there isn't.


it's all a bit cheese and beans to me, you get rid of one then you get rid of the other. or maybe the tories get rid of brexit and then we get rid of the tories. or we drown them all in fudge


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Badgers said:


> I think it would be more fun if Prince William died. The Queen is expected but it would be a Diana style grief fest if one of the young cunts died out the blue.


i like your thinking


----------



## TopCat (Nov 17, 2018)

Badgers said:


> I think it would be more fun if Prince William died. The Queen is expected but it would be a Diana style grief fest if one of the young cunts died out the blue.


Maybe Edward? If his Catherine the Great style antics finally collapsed him?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Maybe Edward? If his Catherine the Great style antics finally collapsed him?


when you say catherine the great you mean he gets shagged by horses?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure there's a particularly large layer who see that as a coherent strategy. I certainly _hope _there isn't.


I think that's a very coherent strategy. It's already been laid out more or less how it would work: defeat this deal, get rid of May, get an general election, win the general election, get rid of brexit, with a second ref or something.

There is a certain incoherence to many of the whines from keen brexit types over holding a second referendum. If you're after some kind of 'hard' brexit, surely you should be all for it. A clear plan for what brexit will mean is presented with the promise to implement it or something similar with a second leave vote, tying the country to your vision if you win. So the only reason they can have for not wanting a second referendum must be because they think they would lose it. Why this new referendum would somehow be an affront to democracy, while the 2016 one was more or less the last word on democracy, I've yet to hear explained.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i like your thinking


I have my best people working on this.

Suggested to them that the Duchess of Yorks children dying might work but they (rightly) said nobody cared or even knew who they are.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2018)

The funny thing is you and I have exactly as much knowledge of what the fuck is happening as TM.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The funny thing is you and I have exactly as much knowledge of what the fuck is happening as TM.


i think we know more of what is going on than theresa may as she seems to think she can get this pile of shite through parliament


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's all a bit cheese and beans to me, you get rid of one then you get rid of the other. or maybe the tories get rid of brexit and then we get rid of the tories. or we drown them all in fudge



I'm not sure I agree - I think it's definitely possible to get rid of Brexit and be stuck with the Tories and I am pretty sure the likes of Francis O'Grady would be fine with that. 




littlebabyjesus said:


> I think that's a very coherent strategy. It's already been laid out more or less how it would work: defeat this deal, get rid of May, get an general election, win the general election, get rid of brexit, with a second ref or something.
> 
> There is a certain incoherence to many of the whines from keen brexit types over holding a second referendum. If you're after some kind of 'hard' brexit, surely you should be all for it. A clear plan for what brexit will mean is presented with the promise to implement it or something similar with a second leave vote, tying the country to your vision if you win. So the only reason they can have for not wanting a second referendum must be because they think they would lose it. Why this new referendum would somehow be an affront to democracy, while the 2016 one was more or less the last word on democracy, I've yet to hear explained.



What you've outlined there though is getting rid of the Tories and then stopping Brexit afterwards. I don't have a problem with that neccessarily although I think there are huge risks if Corbyn goes into a GE calling for 2nd Ref/Remain. 

What some people are saying in the unions, implicitly and explicitly, is let's have a referendum so we can stop Brexit (by no means a certainty) and then after that who cares. 

I absolutely think it's possible, if the Brexit crisis is taken off the table, particularly through a 2nd ref, that the Tories could replace May, patch up their differences for now and carry on making our lives miserable without a GE. Perhaps not easy but possible. The only thing that would make a GE certain is mobilising on the streets to demand one and it's the unions that should be organising that mobilisation. Not that it has to be them - but it should be - Corbyn and the Labour Left could also call a demo for a GE.


----------



## klang (Nov 17, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Please please please can the queen die now for lolz


Meghan copping off would put an interesting twist to things.


----------



## agricola (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think we know more of what is going on than theresa may as she seems to think she can get this pile of shite through parliament



I think she thinks she can Corbyn the hell out of this, having realized that her opponents are the same sort of useless over-entitled shower as his opponents are.  

In fact, I think the moment she realises that she can threaten them with this or no Brexit at all (rather than this or no deal at all) is the moment she will put them back in their box completely.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

littleseb said:


> Meghan copping off would put an interesting twist to things.



Copping it, surely? Although her copping off could be fun too!


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 17, 2018)

littleseb said:


> Meghan copping off would put an interesting twist to things.



With the queen? This is starting to have a last days of Rome feel to it... probably appropriate, then...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

Leadsom thinks there is "still the potential to improve" May's deal. 

Brexit plan can be improved - Leadsom


----------



## existentialist (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Leadsom thinks there is "still the potential to improve" May's deal.
> 
> Brexit plan can be improved - Leadsom


Leadsom's delusional.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2018)

I really cant see where the cabinet brexit gang  are going to go with this "lets renegotiate the deal" stuff. May cant and wont. The EU have said "no fucking way". 
So that leaves them where? 
Maybe its just to give them a bit more political cover for when they resign (next week?) -  surely taking May down with them.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I really cant see where the cabinet brexit gang  are going to go with this "lets renegotiate the deal" stuff. May cant and wont. The EU have said "no fucking way".
> So that leaves them where?
> Maybe its just to give them a bit more political cover for when they resign (next week?) -  surely taking May down with them.


I think we are certainly in the moment where political psychology and the bonkers endpoints of their respective positions and careers have temporarily displaced political economy in terms of what's driving this. Their trouble is that a whole world of political economy awaits the 'victors' who finally emerge.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 17, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> With the queen? This is starting to have a last days of Rome feel to it... probably appropriate, then...



120 Days of Leadsom


----------



## philosophical (Nov 17, 2018)

There has been a fair bit of discussion here about referendums.
Whether there is a second or third referendum, the nature of what is democratic, and interestingly the notion of one result overturning a previous result.
The issue is not so cut and dried that the concept of another referendum can be dismissed with a wave of the hand or a soundbite.
I did a bit of research and I have come up with 13 that have taken place somewhere in the United Kingdom. The Scottish and Welsh votes of 1997 reversed the votes of 1979. The national vote of 2016 arguably reversed the national vote of 1975.
Of course wording and other factors make each referendum hard to directly compare. So does margins of victory, and information in the hands of the voters.
Whether this kind of carry on is democratic or not I would suggest is up for debate and as I said not cut and dried. 
The two that seem to be the most conflicting are the ones in Northern Ireland in 1998 and the UK in 2016.

*Northern Ireland sovereignty referendum, 1973*
*United Kingdom European Communities membership referendum, 1975*
*Scottish devolution referendum, 1979*
*Welsh devolution referendum, 1979*
*Scottish devolution referendum, 1997*
*Welsh devolution referendum, 1997*
*Northern Ireland Belfast Agreement referendum, 1998*
*Greater London Authority referendum, 1998*
*North East England devolution referendum, 2004*
*United Kingdom Alternative Vote referendum, 2011 *
*Welsh devolution referendum, 2011*
*Scottish Independence referendum, 2014
United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016 *


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Leadsom thinks there is "still the potential to improve" May's deal.
> 
> Brexit plan can be improved - Leadsom



Of all the important questions people have asked since the referendum, there are none to which the answer is 'Leadsom'...


----------



## Wilf (Nov 17, 2018)

This gang of 5 nonsense might at least feature in seeing whether there really are enough letters for a vonc. Part of it will be about how tory mps come back from having met their associations this weekend, but then May or the EU saying there will be no more renegotiations. At that point it's put up or shut up for all concerned. My pure guess is she will get the deal through but on the '21 days later' re-vote.


----------



## Supine (Nov 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> 120 Days of Leadsom



127 Hours of Leadsom


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Supine said:


> 127 Hours of Leadsom


120 days of sod her


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This gang of 5 nonsense might at least feature in seeing whether there really are enough letters for a vonc. Part of it will be about how tory mps come back from having met their associations this weekend, but then May or the EU saying there will be no more renegotiations. At that point it's put up or shut up for all concerned. My pure guess is she will get the deal through but on the '21 days later' re-vote.


If only what happened to the Chinese gang of four would happen to these trite tories


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Leadsom's delusional.





Kaka Tim said:


> I really cant see where the cabinet brexit gang  are going to go with this "lets renegotiate the deal" stuff. May cant and wont. The EU have said "no fucking way".
> So that leaves them where?
> Maybe its just to give them a bit more political cover for when they resign (next week?) -  surely taking May down with them.



Hardly delusional. If you take the view that they really want no deal, then their best bet is to run down the clock as they'll never get no deal through Parliament. Obviously this assumes there's a clock to run down but they may believe that.

On the other hand if you take the view that they're preserving themselves and their careers then what they're doing is twofold; distancing themselves from an awful deal and ensuring their portrayal as loyal to May and the Party.

If they really think they can negotiate a better deal based on the stiffness of their stiff upper lips or whatever then yeah they are delusional!


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> On the other hand if you take the view that they're preserving themselves and their careers


Got it in one, they're covering their bets trying to make sure that whomever comes out on top they can make it seem that was the side they were on all along


----------



## existentialist (Nov 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hardly delusional. If you take the view that they really want no deal, then their best bet is to run down the clock as they'll never get no deal through Parliament. Obviously this assumes there's a clock to run down but they may believe that.
> 
> On the other hand if you take the view that they're preserving themselves and their careers then what they're doing is twofold; distancing themselves from an awful deal and ensuring their portrayal as loyal to May and the Party.
> 
> If they really think they can negotiate a better deal based on the stiffness of their stiff upper lips or whatever then yeah they are delusional!


No, I just meant that Leadsom's delusional, generally. Space cadet. Away with the fairies. On a different planet. Several chips short of a Happy Meal. Etc.


----------



## quiet guy (Nov 17, 2018)

If Leadsom ever becomes the answer then we really are truly fucked


----------



## existentialist (Nov 17, 2018)

quiet guy said:


> If Leadsom ever becomes the answer then we really are truly fucked


The only question she should ever be the answer to is "Who's that batshit nutcase wandering around the place grinning like an idiot?"


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

existentialist said:


> The only question she should ever be the answer to is "Who's that batshit nutcase wandering around the place grinning like an idiot?"


Or who was the first person to descend to the bottom of the south sandwich trench


----------



## agricola (Nov 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Or who was the first person to descend to the bottom of the south sandwich trench



Soames?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

agricola said:


> Soames?


Leadsom, in lead boots


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 17, 2018)

So what are the chances of Arlene and her Beastie Boys risking a GE and the prospect of a republican-friendly Labour gov?

2nd q: what are the chances of JSM and the frothing posh boys risking John MacDonall in Number 11?

3rd q: with Corbyn's personal record on respecting the whip and the maj of the PLP having little regard for him, how many will back this deal, and with constituency pressures - several, dozens?


----------



## Poi E (Nov 17, 2018)

All talk. Ulster says a lot but does fuck all.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 17, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> So what are the chances of Arlene and her Beastie Boys risking a GE and the prospect of a republican-friendly Labour gov?
> 
> 2nd q: what are the chances of JSM and the frothing posh boys risking John MacDonald in Number 11?


a) Quite low, I would think

b) Pretty much a certainty


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 17, 2018)

You saw his recent call for some collective land ownership, and the conference statement about a new version of clause 4?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 17, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> You saw his recent call for some collective land ownership, and the conference statement about a new version of clause 4?



Did you see him talking about a "unity Brexit"?


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 17, 2018)

I'm talking about what the posh boys say, and what the posh boys will do when push comes to shove. And they will march in to support May right behind the DUP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

Only because the dup have a big band


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There has been a fair bit of discussion here about referendums.
> Whether there is a second or third referendum, the nature of what is democratic, and interestingly the notion of one result overturning a previous result.
> The issue is not so cut and dried that the concept of another referendum can be dismissed with a wave of the hand or a soundbite.
> I did a bit of research and I have come up with 13 that have taken place somewhere in the United Kingdom. The Scottish and Welsh votes of 1997 reversed the votes of 1979. The national vote of 2016 arguably reversed the national vote of 1975.
> ...



The 1979 Scottish devolution referendum was scuppered by one man, an MP, he also brought down his own party's government.

The people’s vote: why didn’t we heed the lesson of 1979? | Ian Jack


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 17, 2018)

quiet guy said:


> If Leadsom ever becomes the answer then we really are truly fucked



I don't think even the current Conservative party are that stupid.


----------



## oryx (Nov 17, 2018)

rubbershoes said:


> Labour is just as divided as the tories on brexit. If labour won a general election, it would be their turn for a public civil war



To go back a few pages... I think Labour's trump cards on Brexit are Starmer and Thornberry, who seem to work in a much more intelligent and collaborative style than the clownish likes of Johnson, Davis, Raab et al.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Nov 17, 2018)

krink said:


> Have we done a caption competition on this cosy meeting yesterday? View attachment 152747


"Leave it, mate, neither of you are worth it."


----------



## T & P (Nov 17, 2018)

Brussels tells Theresa May - delaying Brexit will cost UK £10bn

That’ll go down well


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 17, 2018)

T & P said:


> Brussels tells Theresa May - delaying Brexit will cost UK £10bn
> 
> That’ll go down well


Like a big spoon of sick


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 17, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> 3rd q: with Corbyn's personal record on respecting the whip and the maj of the PLP having little regard for him, how many will back this deal, and with constituency pressures - several, dozens?



Why do people keep assuming that their is big cohort of anti-corbyn - and presumably reaminer - labour mps who are going to rescue may's deal against the wishes of the labour whip? 
As far as im aware caroline flint is the only labour mp who has indicated she might do this. please show me any other labour mps who are arguing for mays deal. 
The labour remainers are pushing for a 2nd ref - and that means rejecting mays deal. 
The labour brexiteers are small in number and several - skinner, hoey and others - have already said they are going to vote against it. 
plus the journos who have daily contact with these people - are predicting the number labour mps who will vote with may as likely to be single figures.

And yes - there is push from business for mps to accept the deal - but not from voters, not from the pro-labour media either. 

And i dont think the brexiteers are going to be won over either - they have publicly  nailed their colours to the mast. And they are mostly ideologues - far less likely to be bought off - and who the fuck wants to join team may right now. in fact. 
In fact who in their right mind wants to be anywhere near being in a  government charged with navigating the whirling shit pool of brexit right now?


----------



## Old Spark (Nov 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Why do people keep assuming that their is big cohort of anti-corbyn - and presumably reaminer - labour mps who are going to rescue may's deal against the wishes of the labour whip?
> As far as im aware caroline flint is the only labour mp who has indicated she might do this. please show me any other labour mps who are arguing for mays deal.
> The labour remainers are pushing for a 2nd ref - and that means rejecting mays deal.
> The labour brexiteers are small in number and several - skinner, hoey and others - have already said they are going to vote against it.
> ...



Gareth Snell and Ruth Smeeth also say they are considering it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

Old Spark said:


> Gareth Snell and Ruth Smeeth also say they are considering it.



Cheers.

So three mps. (and also -  "who?")

May needs at least 30 labour scabs to save her bacon. 

And its not like corbyn's critics are generally reluctant to make their views known.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Cheers.
> 
> So three mps. (and also -  "who?")
> 
> ...



We don't know obviously, but I doubt Flint wrote that article for a laugh - remember potential Labour rebels don't know if May or the deal will survive until the vote yet.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

I am fairly certain you can rely on today's dreadful Labour Party to let the working man down, yet again!

Enough 'Lab' MP's will go along with the Tory's, pehaps even just to keep Jezza out


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

oryx said:


> To go back a few pages... I think Labour's trump cards on Brexit are Starmer and Thornberry, who seem to work in a much more intelligent and collaborative style than the clownish likes of Johnson, Davis, Raab et al.



Those are some shite trump cards. We're definitely talking K7 and not pocket Queens.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

hey,thanks for the like, must be some kind of record, just signed up about 1 minute ago


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> I am fairly certain you can rely on today's dreadful Labour Party to let the working man down, yet again!
> 
> Enough 'Lab' MP's will go along with the Tory's, pehaps even just to keep Jezza out


You cannot hope to bribe or twist
(thank god!) the labour 'socialist' 
But seeing what they'll do
Unbribed, there's no occasion to


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

by the way, I don't see any credibility whatsoever in Emily Thornberry, she's kind of a joke figure like Dianne Abbot - Keir Starmer has potential of course, and will quite possibly be next Labour leader


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> I am fairly certain you can rely on today's dreadful Labour Party to let the working man down, yet again!
> 
> Enough 'Lab' MP's will go along with the Tory's, pehaps even just to keep Jezza out



evidence for this? Who among corbyns leading critics within the PLP are arguing in favour of mays deal? Their cheerleaders in the media are solidly against it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> by the way, I don't see any credibility whatsoever in Emily Thornberry, she's kind of a joke figure like Dianne Abbot - Keir Starmer has potential of course, and will quite possibly be next Labour leader


Tbh I don't see any credibility in the Labour Party but it's rather telling you single out Labour women as devoid of credibility


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

if it comes to a choice between May's 'deal' and 'no-deal' , they'll surely side with May


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbh I don't see any credibility in the Labour Party but it's rather telling you single out Labour women as devoid of credibility



hardly 'telling' at all - it just happens that these two people are awful and are two of the most prominent Labour spokespeople


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> hardly 'telling' at all - it just happens that these two people are awful and are two of the most prominent Labour spokespeople


Yeh they are awful  have you any actual political objection to them? 

Whereas sir Keir Starmer, attorney General in a tory administration, has all manner of credibility


----------



## Humberto (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> hey,thanks for the like, must be some kind of record, just signed up about 1 minute ago



We are indeed honoured. We like the Sun.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

Emily Thornberry and her mocking of 'White Van Man' destroyed her 'Labour' credentials in an instant

Dianne Abbot is virtue signaller extraodinaire and nothing else

Keir Starmer ought to join the Lib-Dems or left side of Tory Party.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> Emily Thornberry and her mocking of 'White Van Man' destroyed her 'Labour' credentials in an instant
> 
> Dianne Abbot is virtue signaller extraodinaire and nothing else
> 
> Keir Starmer ought to join the Lib-Dems or left side of Tory Party.


That's sír Keir Starmer to you sonny jim


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

do you mean like 'Sir' Nick Clegg?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> by the way, I don't see any credibility whatsoever in Emily Thornberry, she's kind of a joke figure like Dianne Abbot - Keir Starmer has potential of course, and will quite possibly be next Labour leader



I'm rescinding your like.


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Slightly outdated now.



Indeed. And if there was going to be hardening of views, it'll have been since the proposed deal. So in trajectory, quite outdated.

Where the trajectory is with union members... don't yet have numbers on that.

The general trend seems to be toward remain, albeit nothing like a landslide.

Interesting times.




			
				SpackleFrog said:
			
		

> There is very much a divide between those who think stopping Brexit is the key issue and those who think getting rid of the Tories is the key issue.



Noted. I'm the former, but I know the latter is a big thing.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm rescinding your like.



LOL , that's a bit harsh, I can't take it..

but this idea of 'stopping Brexit = getting rid of the Tories' is also seriously mistaken

what would likely happen would be Remain Tories winning out, with someone like Amber Rudd PM

and Labour are just as divided as Cons, worse in fact because large chunks of Lab voters voted Leave


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

T & P said:


> Brussels tells Theresa May - delaying Brexit will cost UK £10bn
> 
> That’ll go down well



The cab has turned up, but the person that booked it hasn’t left their house.

The meter is now running, for being at standstill.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

if brexit gets stopped the die hard leavers will blame the tories for ever. they will be the great betrayers of brexit. It will lose them maybe 10% of their vote share at a stroke and quite possibly split the party. and the membership will not vote for a remainer tory as leader in a million years.

and labour are nowhere near as divided on this as the tories. There are maybe a few dozen brexit supporting labour mps, and the membership is overwhelmingly remain. And it is not anything like as central an issue.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

many Lab voters are Leave though , the membership is tiny in  comparison to those who vote Labour for one reason or the other

My bet is a Remain Tory would prob win a GE if Brexit is stopped


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> many Lab voters are Leave though



28%

YouGov poll three days ago.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> many Lab voters are Leave though , the membership is tiny in  comparison to those who vote Labour for one reason or the other
> 
> My bet is a Remain Tory would prob win a GE if Brexit is stopped



they would have to become leader of a party whose membership are rapbilly pro-brexit. 
they would have to somehow make up for losing a big chunk of their voters to UKIP or similar. Im not saying it wont happen - but i think its far more likely that the tories are severly fucked for many years to come.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> Emily Thornberry and her mocking of 'White Van Man' destroyed her 'Labour' credentials in an instant
> 
> Dianne Abbot is virtue signaller extraodinaire and nothing else
> 
> Keir Starmer ought to join the Lib-Dems or left side of Tory Party.


The stupidity of this post reminds why these threads aren't often worth the bother.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Why do people keep assuming that their is big cohort of anti-corbyn - and presumably reaminer - labour mps who are going to rescue may's deal against the wishes of the labour whip?
> As far as im aware caroline flint is the only labour mp who has indicated she might do this. please show me any other labour mps who are arguing for mays deal.


It's been three days. Get back to me in three weeks.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

May's 'deal' surely is the most supine, abjectly spineless sell-out since Pussy Riot appeared on House of Cards Season 3


please get her out of the house, let her join Vince Cable down in Devon


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> The stupidity of this post reminds why these threads aren't often worth the bother.


you needn't bother if you feel like that then, but can you in all honesty defend Lady Nugee after her elitist attack on Labour's core voters?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think that's a very coherent strategy. It's already been laid out more or less how it would work: defeat this deal, get rid of May, get an general election, win the general election, get rid of brexit, with a second ref or something.
> 
> There is a certain incoherence to many of the whines from keen brexit types over holding a second referendum. If you're after some kind of 'hard' brexit, surely you should be all for it. A clear plan for what brexit will mean is presented with the promise to implement it or something similar with a second leave vote, tying the country to your vision if you win. So the only reason they can have for not wanting a second referendum must be because they think they would lose it. Why this new referendum would somehow be an affront to democracy, while the 2016 one was more or less the last word on democracy, I've yet to hear explained.



Well that is the conundrum of democracy isn't it, it is never about getting your voice heard, it is an adhesive to glue together divergent interests cloaked in the mystification of majoritarian inteest. Of course this democratism is enforced by the state's monopoly on the deep penetrative networks of virtual violence (which are ideally less kinetic than when we are in times of crisis proceeding proletarian uprisings or containment.)

This is why, whatever the eventual result, the victory will be won by the good cops of capital, and a poster on this thread is in favour of as much.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

this is also why all the labour campaigns for remain, left against brexit, another europe is possible, are the worst kind of Stalinoid opportunism and will make the rightward shift of UK politics even more pronounced, and its even worse that we're in relative peacetime and it is claimed that we should line up for the support of bourgeois dictatorship. all this ever shows is the utmost contempt for the proletariat more generally, as long as they can keep it boxed in.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 18, 2018)

agricola said:


> Soames?


Soames might be better rendered down to soap. Canal digging is dirty work, and we don't want the workforce looking unkempt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Soames might be better rendered down to soap. Canal digging is dirty work, and we don't want the workforce looking unkempt.


Soames will come in very useful to plug any leaks in the tramp steamer taking former people to grytviken


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Soames might be better rendered down to soap. Canal digging is dirty work, and we don't want the workforce looking unkempt.


The workforce will remain unkempt as Arthur Kemp late of the BNP will not survive the trip to the south atlantic


----------



## Badgers (Nov 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The workforce will remain unkempt as Arthur Kemp late of the BNP will not survive the trip to the south atlantic


Kemp?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Kemp?
> 
> View attachment 152901


Arthur Kemp allegedly late of South African intelligence and part of the conspiracy - allegedly - to kill Chris hani


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

so what would Lenin or Trotsky have done here, can you see them really being in favour of the neo-liberal free-market EU agenda?

I don't get it why far leftists support Remain, actually the SPEW go for Lexit so why not back them up


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> so what would Lenin or Trotsky have done here, can you see them really being in favour of the neo-liberal free-market EU agenda?
> 
> I don't get it why far leftists support Remain, actually the SPEW go for Lexit so why not back them up


what would Lenin do? What would trotsky do? Seriously? Yeh let's ask people from Russia what we should do here. Let's get the beneficiaries of German capitalist largesse to tell us what to do. Pitiful.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

I thought you guys were fans of Trotsky, so why the harsh words about him?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh they are awful  have you any actual political objection to them?
> 
> Whereas sir Keir Starmer, attorney General in a tory administration, has all manner of credibility



He was CPS, which is not a political position. He was never Attorney General.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> they would have to become leader of a party whose membership are rapbilly pro-brexit.
> they would have to somehow make up for losing a big chunk of their voters to UKIP or similar. Im not saying it wont happen - but i think its far more likely that the tories are severly fucked for many years to come.


Rapbilly? Name some rapbilly bands


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> He was CPS, which is not a political position. He was never Attorney General.


Near as dammit anyway


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

Can we all just take a moment to laugh at Nadine Dorries?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> I thought you guys were fans of Trotsky, so why the harsh words about him?


Is it harsh to tell the truth?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Can we all just take a moment to laugh at Nadine Dorries?


No. I've been chortling away all morning at her, so a moment's too brief


----------



## Sasaferrato (Nov 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Near as dammit anyway



He was the cunt who took the decision not to prosecute the copper who killed Ian Tomlinson.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> I thought you guys were fans of Trotsky, so why the harsh words about him?



-4,063/10 

Fuck off.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Rapbilly? Name some rapbilly bands





if you can conceive it - it exists on the internet


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> He was the count who took the decision not to prosecute the copper who killed Ian Tomlinson.


No surprise there then


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> if you can conceive it - it exists on the internet




That's a bit shit. Beck and Buck 65 did it better.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

why laugh at Nadine Doris?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> why laugh at Nadine Doris?



Why not?


----------



## agricola (Nov 18, 2018)




----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 18, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> why laugh at Nadine Doris?


You have to _ask_?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> Indeed. And if there was going to be hardening of views, it'll have been since the proposed deal. So in trajectory, quite outdated.
> 
> Where the trajectory is with union members... don't yet have numbers on that.
> 
> ...



I'm telling you how it is - don't need numbers.

Would you be happy then if we had a 2nd referendum, Brexit was stopped and May stayed in power?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> so what would Lenin or Trotsky have done here, can you see them really being in favour of the neo-liberal free-market EU agenda?
> 
> I don't get it why far leftists support Remain, actually the SPEW go for Lexit so why not back them up



No, we don't, it's a stupid term.


----------



## Winot (Nov 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would you be happy then if we had a 2nd referendum, Brexit was stopped and May stayed in power?



Ideally the Tories lose power. However, we have elections every 5 years so they can be turfed out next time. Brexit is potentially permanent.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> so what would Lenin or Trotsky have done here


Betrayed the workers.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Betrayed the workers.


 and accurate


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

Winot said:


> Ideally the Tories lose power. However, we have elections every 5 years so they can be turfed out next time. Brexit is potentially permanent.



It *clearly* isn't. The privatisation of our NHS will be a lot harder to reverse.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

are you a Lexit supporter then SpackleFrog?


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Can we all just take a moment to laugh at Nadine Dorries?



It's just staggering that somebody can devote three years of their life to this issue and... I'm just speechless...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> are you a Lexit supporter then SpackleFrog?



No.


----------



## existentialist (Nov 18, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Can we all just take a moment to laugh at Nadine Dorries?


I found it pitiable.

Then I laughed. Like a fucking drain


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

it's not that big a deal, she just meant no influence yet still a rule taker

best bet would be no-deal for sure


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> it's not that big a deal, she just meant no influence yet still a rule taker
> 
> best bet would be no-deal for sure


Under no-deal we’ll have no influence and be a shit-taker.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

actually we have a fair bit of leverage - for example we must employ at least 10million EU migrants - doubt their own countries would want all those unemployed back home - therefore deals can be made if the will is there


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> actually we have a fair bit of leverage - for example we must employ at least 10million EU migrants - doubt their own countries would want all those unemployed back home - therefore deals can be made if the will is there


So your solution is to round up EU nationals who are here legally and contributing to our economy, and threaten to repatriate them en mass if other countries don’t play ball with the UK? That’ll go well!


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

not all of them , but the bar can be set at say min salary of 20K

if not, then no more work permit, unless....the EU plays ball


----------



## Poot (Nov 18, 2018)

Using the lower earners as pawns whilst the ruling classes decide the future you say? No, I can't see any problem with that at all.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

the pawns will only be the EU migrants,  so the local lower earners will have no real problem with that


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> it's not that big a deal, she just meant no influence yet still a rule taker



I know it's not, that's why I suggested taking only a moment out of the important aspects of this. She's like the deliberately shit magician sent on to keep the most easily bored kids entertained during the interval - 'Look, all she had to do was parrot something about wanting to take back control and whoops, she's gone and said almost the opposite!'


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 18, 2018)

Oh just go away you tiresome prick.


----------



## Poot (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> the pawns will only be the EU migrants,  so the local lower earners will have no real problem with that


Phew. As long as they're not real people, that's the main thing.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

Lack of further leadership letters today is telling, though there may be more after the gang of five's inevitable failure in getting her to re-negotiate. I still have an inkling May gets her deal through, probably within the 21 day period after first failing to get it through. I know the figures don't seem to fit that, at the moment but she's had a couple of days where she's winning the psychodrama (yeah, I know ). Her route to success is probably the EU bods making some further minor tweaks around backstops and the rest, to hand a fig leaf over to her to dish out amongst the wavering. If she can get to the point where it really does come down to 'vote for the deal, or it's no deal and/or Corbyn', she _might_ do it. Another way of thinking about all that is that the ERG/headbanger position and powerbase has weakened in the last 48 hours. It's just a little bit less attractive mast for the career minded mp to nail their colours to.

Realise my/her maths doesn't look good at the moment though.


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

Winot said:


> Ideally the Tories lose power. However, we have elections every 5 years so they can be turfed out next time. Brexit is potentially permanent.



That.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Oh just go away you tiresome prick.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

Poot said:


> Phew. As long as they're not real people, that's the main thing.


it may seem non virtuous to someone like yourself, but alas, this is how reality is

I for one, if stuck right at the bottom in my own country, wouldn't want massive extra competition, and it's a common sentiment to be heard in those parts


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

Starmer is working with Tory MPs.

So TopCat, looks like your prediction came true in only 24 hours.

Labour to force amendments that would block a no-deal Brexit


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> it may seem non virtuous to someone like yourself, but alas, this is how reality is
> 
> I for one, if stuck right at the bottom in my own country, wouldn't want massive extra competition, and it's a common sentiment to be heard in those parts



Interesting how you're positioning yourself outside of the group of people who you claim actually think like that. If it's true that you're not yourself trapped 'at the bottom', inescapably prey to your own ill-informed prejudices, perhaps you could do something more constructive than presume to tell us all about the 'reality' of people who are.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> Starmer is working with Tory MPs.
> 
> So TopCat, looks like your prediction came true in only 24 hours.
> 
> Labour to force amendments that would block a no-deal Brexit



Our nascent coalition government in the national interest.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 18, 2018)

Poot said:


> Using the lower earners as pawns whilst the ruling classes decide the future you say? No, I can't see any problem with that at all.


Nope me neither.


Friedrich986 said:


> not all of them , but the bar can be set at say min salary of 20K
> 
> if not, then no more work permit, unless....the EU plays ball


You realize the reason these people came here because there was work for them to do right? Who will do this work if they don't? Do you suggest a massive expansion of workfare?
As for the folks earning £20K+, (which includes a huge number of skilled NHS stfaff) I'm sure this will have no effect on their motivation or desire to stay in and conribute to the UK, none at all.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Interesting how you're positioning yourself outside of the group of people who you claim actually think like that. If it's true that you're not yourself trapped 'at the bottom', inescapably prey to your own ill-informed prejudices, perhaps you could do something more constructive than presume to tell us all about the 'reality' of people who are.


I've said nothing about my current or past predicament(s)


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 18, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Nope me neither.
> 
> 
> As for the folks earning £20K+, (which includes a huge number of skilled NHS stfaff) I'm sure this will have no effect on their motivation or desire to stay in and conribute to the UK, none at all.



It will actually be better for those people as their spending power will increase - lower rents etc etc..

Who will do the work? Local people and those immigrants with work permits


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> That.


I thought you'd decided that you weren't arguing for a Remainers coalition?


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 18, 2018)

BBC headline: 'Brexit Turmoil'

I've seen zero turmoil over the weekend except for BBC news reports telling us there is no leadership challenge. All seems quiet and reflective.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Our nascent coalition government in the national interest.



to what end? pushing through a 2nd ref? or trying to renegotiate? very little mileage in the latter.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 18, 2018)

to ensure that whatever happens neoliberal discipline is maintained


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I thought you'd decided that you weren't arguing for a Remainers coalition?



??

Remind me of the post.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Our nascent coalition government in the national interest.


Politics in this country pretty much seems to have degenerated into a high stakes poker game.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> the pawns will only be the EU migrants,  so the local lower earners will have no real problem with that





billy_bob said:


>


Was a reply to the above, not you!


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> ??
> 
> Remind me of the post.


The one(s) where you are against an alliance or the one(s) where you argue for such a thing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> not all of them , but the bar can be set at say min salary of 20K
> 
> if not, then no more work permit, unless....the EU plays ball


Well, don't you sound delightful.

As someone who earns less than that bar, I'm delighted to see that my worth as a human being is only redeemed because I'm "local".  I have a huge problem with governments or anyone else deciding that people on lower incomes should have fewer rights.  

I don't support the current calls for a second referendum.  That's just people who didn't like the outcome of the first blindly believing that people will vote differently if asked again.  I can imagine circumstances in which the public might be asked whether or not they back whatever version of the deal is on the table, but I don't think "remain" should be an option if such a vote is held.  

But frankly, I don't want anything to do with people like you.  And I think we can all tell what sort of person you are from the way you disparage those of us on incomes below the level that you think earns us human rights.


----------



## paolo (Nov 18, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The one(s) where you are against an alliance or the one(s) where you argue for such a thing.



I genuinely have no idea what posts you are talking about.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> the pawns will only be the EU migrants,  so the local lower earners will have no real problem with that


Wrong.  I've got a huge problem with that.  See above.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> I've said nothing about my current or past predicament(s)



Second rate returning troll seems to be the current predicament


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> It will actually be better for those people as their spending power will increase - lower rents etc etc..
> 
> Who will do the work? Local people and those immigrants with work permits


Let the masters serve


----------



## ska invita (Nov 18, 2018)

‘People’s vote’ more likely than election, says John McDonnell as Labour stance shifts


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 18, 2018)

ska invita said:


> ‘People’s vote’ more likely than election, says John McDonnell as Labour stance shifts



Fuck. Me.

Never mind the Blairite betrayals. Social Democracy can fuck itself up, all on its own.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Was a reply to the above, not you!



I know that  For some reason it amuses me to appear to find myself the target of completely unjustified rage. (It's one of the things that's kept me on this site so long...)


----------



## not a trot (Nov 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Leadsom thinks there is "still the potential to improve" May's deal.
> 
> Brexit plan can be improved - Leadsom



The only improvement required is to set fire to it.


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 18, 2018)

not a trot said:


> The only improvement required is to set fire to it.



Leadsom's a waste of space alright, but immolation's a tad harsh...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 18, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Leadsom's a waste of space alright, but immolation's a tad harsh...


Especially when there are fish in the south sandwich trench already salivating at word of her impending arrival


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> I genuinely have no idea what posts you are talking about.


You have previously argued that leaving the EU was more important than anything else.


paolo said:


> Now, leaving the EU is all consuming. It's more important than anything else. We don't even know why we're doing it anymore, because we still don't know what it means yet.


When I pointed out the logic of this position means you are arguing for a coalition with Tory Remainers you stated


paolo said:


> Grumbly remainer. Never, ever, Tory.


Now in response to SpackleFrog 's question


SpackleFrog said:


> Would you be happy then if we had a 2nd referendum, Brexit was stopped and May stayed in power?


You agreed with the proposition that stopping the EU leaving the UK was the priority.


Winot said:


> Ideally the Tories lose power. However, we have elections every 5 years so they can be turfed out next time. Brexit is potentially permanent.





paolo said:


> That.


You jump from one position to another not actually thinking about the actually consequences of that position so long as it superficially supports the UK staying the EU somehow. What actually are your politics beyond staying in the UK? Or is that all they amount to?

If you want to make a argument for a 2nd referendum or for parliament to ignore the results of the 2016 referendum then please do so but follow the logic of your positions through.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 18, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> it may seem non virtuous to someone like yourself, but alas, this is how reality is
> 
> I for one, if stuck right at the bottom in my own country, wouldn't want massive extra competition, and it's a common sentiment to be heard in those parts


Not anymore common than it is to hear it from well off right wing types, and in “those parts” such a sentiment wouldn’t often go unchallenged in my experience.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fuck. Me.
> 
> Never mind the Blairite betrayals. Social Democracy can fuck itself up, all on its own.



Yeh. it's been doing that since 1914 to be fair.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

Labour have been coiled, ready to strike for 18 months. Silent, unmoving, but _ready_:

'The time has come'... hang on, I'm nearly ready... 'strike you fool!'... nearly there... 'it must be now!'... but we have the 6 tests... 'NOW!'...today is not the day...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Labour have been coiled, ready to strike for 18 months. Silent, unmoving, but _ready_:
> 
> 'The time has come'... hang on, I'm nearly ready... 'strike you fool!'... nearly there... 'it must be now!'... but we have the 6 tests... 'NOW!'...today is not the day...


Can Corbyn be decisive about anything?. Look at how anti-Semitism dragged out.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Can Corbyn be decisive about anything?. Look at how anti-Semitism dragged out.


Despite the way I presented it, I don't think the biggest problem is _decisiveness_. It's the failure to get out there and build something after the Brexit, to try and even construct some kind of lexit agenda - but by actually getting out into communities and making it a class issues.  Not by repeating mantras about the 6 tests in tv interviews. In the absence of that spade work, all they are left with is something _strategic_, just a decision as to when they can get the most tories to peel off and somehow deliver a labour government by default.  It's part of the reason that even in this week of all weeks, Labour are only 3% ahead.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Despite the way I presented it, I don't think the biggest problem is _decisiveness_. It's the failure to get out there and build something after the Brexit, to try and even construct some kind of lexit agenda - but by actually getting out into communities and making it a class issues.  Not by repeating mantras about the 6 tests in tv interviews. In the absence of that spade work, all they are left with is something _strategic_, just a decision as to when they can get the most tories to peel off and somehow deliver a labour government by default.  It's part of the reason that even in this week of all weeks, Labour are only 3% ahead.


They made two tactical errors, which leave them limited in options now. 

First was to agree to support the referendum in the first place. There was no reason they had to vote for it. Up to the tories to push through their manifesto commitments - labour's manifesto had no such commitment at all. And they could easily have made the case that there shouldn't be a referendum until such a time as there is some kind of plan on the table for how it might be done and who might be doing it (a big point of difference from the Scottish indy ref, for example, a contrast that could have been drawn). 

And second, there was no reason why they had to vote through the activation of A50. The reason would have been pretty much the same - you don't set the clock ticking until it is agreed what it is you're seeking and the issues around that (eg NI) have been debated. If the Tories want to do it, let them vote it through. No need to help them. You can make a reasoned argument that you think the process is in haste. But there was a collective rush to be the first and loudest to state that 'the referendum must be honoured', and that is a large part of what has led to now. And those who actually want brexit to happen should also now be regretting this haste. But no, first trigger A50 and bask in the glow of your democratic righteousness, then sit down and try to work out what it is you want and whether you can get it. Aside from anything else, the lack of a plan at the start of the process left the UK negotiators with few cards to play.  

If Labour had taken a stand on either of those points, they would have a much freer hand in what they can now say. Leave the humiliating backtracking to the government, who after all created every single aspect of this mess.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They made two tactical errors, which leave them limited in options now.
> 
> First was to agree to support the referendum in the first place. There was no reason they had to vote for it. Up to the tories to push through their manifesto commitments - labour's manifesto had no such commitment at all. And they could easily have made the case that there shouldn't be a referendum until such a time as there is some kind of plan on the table for how it might be done and who might be doing it (a big point of difference from the Scottish indy ref, for example, a contrast that could have been drawn).
> 
> ...


Not sure I agree about the first point (literally, I'm not sure). But certainly not diving in with article 50 would have given labour more ammo about things like the North and the rest. But I just think Labour should have been more active - not so much saying more and doing more, but giving voice to people who are still pissed off and bemused by the whole thing. Neither Labour or Tory are in contact with the working class in all its forms and neither have they learned the lessons of the Brexit vote itself.  As it plays out over the next month or so it will still be another inter/intra-elite game.


----------



## Winot (Nov 18, 2018)

Corbyn wanted Art. 50 triggered the morning after the referendum result.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 18, 2018)

Winot said:


> Corbyn wanted Art. 50 triggered the morning after the referendum result.


Which could be interpreted as consistent with his historical antipathy towards the supra-state...or a tactically astute move to highlight the impossibility of the right party of capital delivering a 'people's will' that damages capital.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Which could be interpreted as consistent with his historical antipathy towards the supra-state...or a tactically astute move to highlight the impossibility of the right party of capital delivering a 'people's will' that damages capital.



Or his total lack of understanding real world politics


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

Supine said:


> Or his total lack of understanding real world politics



oh he totally understands real world politics. I don't understand what opposition to the supra-state means either.


----------



## Winot (Nov 18, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Which could be interpreted as consistent with his historical antipathy towards the supra-state...or a tactically astute move to highlight the impossibility of the right party of capital delivering a 'people's will' that damages capital.



Corbyn doesnt have a strategic bone in his body.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

Winot said:


> Corbyn doesnt have a strategic bone in his body.



we cast down all geniuses and exalted idiots, and that's that!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

Supine said:


> Or his total lack of understanding real world politics


Don't think its that at all. The leadership are no doubt aware of their remain membership and different leave/remain areas in the country. Their solution to this conundrum has been to play it safe and not take risks - all the way through. For me it goes back to both Corbyn and the left's preference for mild social democratic activism over class politics. Its the Grand Old Duke of York rise in membership and all that. All those revivalist meetings when Corbyn was elected and now... not much. No engagement.*

*Edit: treelover usually puts me right when I get into one of these rants about Labour not doing or understanding the idea of communities, class and engagement. I'd be (genuinely) interested to know if anything like this has been done by Labour at the local level (on Brexit specifically).


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

dialectician said:


> oh he totally understands real world politics. I don't understand what opposition to the supra-state means either.



By calling to trigger article 50 immediately he proved beyond reasonable doubt that he understands nothing about negotiation, timing  or politics. If he'd said OK the country has spoken - is up to the conservatives to go away and do the detailed analysis of what leaving entrails and the relevant cost /benefit analysis for each decision we'd be in a very different place.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Don't think its that at all. The leadership are no doubt aware of their remain membership and different leave/remain areas in the country. Their solution to this conundrum has been to play it safe and not take risks - all the way through. For me it goes back to both Corbyn and the left's preference for mild social democratic activism over class politics. Its the Grand Old Duke of York rise in membership and all that. All those revivalist meetings when Corbyn was elected and now... not much. No engagement.



I'm not a fan of class based politics but generally agree with you on this.

A big problem with politics at the moment is parties don't try to influence peoples ideas on subjects. They just go with opinion polls and try to pander to those people they think can potentially vote for them.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 18, 2018)

The biggest problem is still Corbyn as a leader, and also the clueless Russ Abbott at Home Office. Should surely be 10-15 points ahead.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

Supine said:


> By calling to trigger article 50 immediately he proved beyond reasonable doubt that he understands nothing about negotiation, timing  or politics. If he'd said OK the country has spoken - is up to the conservatives to go away and do the detailed analysis of what leaving entrails and the relevant cost /benefit analysis for each decision we'd be in a very different place.



politics has nothing to do with negotiation. the time wasting was determined as an option before the 25th of June (because parliamentary politics is always about creating predeterminations.) it was all boxed from the outset. read my post on virtual violence on page 510. this is virtual state violence. it's gonna get much worse when they start using real violence against us and the left aren't prepared.

Edit: I don't mean determination in rubbing together ur hands and cackling evily. I mean the inherent constraints in the parliamentary system determine the choices long before its foot soldiers are even aware of what they are doing, and even then they will use all kinds of wacko ideologies to justify what they are doing in a confused and muddled way.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

Supine said:


> I'm not a fan of class based politics but generally agree with you on this.
> 
> A big problem with politics at the moment is parties don't try to influence peoples ideas on subjects. They just go with opinion polls and try to pander to those people they think can potentially vote for them.



There is no such thing as a non-class-based politics. it is scientifically impossible unless you believe in God. but even then it's a stretch to defend such a position. anything that presents itself as such is class based, just more than not it is based on the reproduction of the opposing class.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2018)

aside/

from a senior civil servant the other night- at least this car crash has reached the kinetic stage

I though that was quite witty


----------



## Poi E (Nov 18, 2018)

The car hasn't crashed yet. We're still sliding.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

dialectician said:


> There is no such thing as a non-class-based politics. it is scientifically impossible unless you believe in God. but even then it's a stretch to defend such a position. anything that presents itself as such is class based, just more than not it is based on the reproduction of the opposing class.



Class is irrelevant. Brexit is a shit idea for everyone in the UK apart from a small number of disaster capitalists who will use financial market moves to make money.


----------



## Supine (Nov 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> The car hasn't crashed yet. We're still sliding.



Tune in for season 2 of Breaking Brexit...


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

youve got that back to front. whatever the result, even if remain loses, remainers will win. neither lexit nor lemain exists.


----------



## agricola (Nov 18, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> The biggest problem is still Corbyn as a leader, and also the clueless Russ Abbott at Home Office. Should surely be 10-15 points ahead.



By the way, the most Labour have ever got in an election is 47% of the vote, with the next biggest 43%.  The polls have them around 40% at present.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 18, 2018)

dialectician said:


> neither lexit nor lemain exists.


Yes, this has defined the whole thing. Remainy liberals have had the greatest delusion about this... neoliberalism as 'progressivism', certainly. But that's a fixed point, business as usual. The absence of any kind of lexit has allowed the whole process to be reduced down to parliamentary manoeuvres, the lack of 48 letters, John McDonnell deciding Labour might do something or other at some point etc.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 18, 2018)

paolo said:


> The cab has turned up, but the person that booked it hasn’t left their house.
> 
> The meter is now running, for being at standstill.





not-bono-ever said:


> aside/
> 
> from a senior civil servant the other night- at least this car crash has reached the kinetic stage
> 
> I though that was quite witty





Poi E said:


> The car hasn't crashed yet. We're still sliding.



JESUS FUCKING CHRIST 



dialectician said:


> youve got that back to front. whatever the result, even if remain loses, remainers will win. neither lexit nor lemain exists.


Seen from one of those Labour types earlier  earlier “Lexit not a possiblity  but lemain just might be”

In this fantasy world the untakeonable Tories who decide all policy ( the EU is a distant finger wagging wizard that simultaneously saves us but has no effect on govt policy whatsoever) are magically bypassed-or are these guys still thinking a second ref will  eliminate the Tories or what? - and this time, THIS time social democrats will rise up and change the EU from within.


Alternatively , the Tories must also be a force we can also challenge, in order for “lemain” to be a real possibility in which case how the fuck isn’t “Lexit” possible?!
Also something along the lines of  : 
“It’s time to make the case for changing the EU from within, I bet there’s a real appetite for this amongst the left  in France, Italy and beyond.” Hmm yum yum.
It’s all about the left of course, and if they have to deny working class people basic rights like being able to vote and seeing their vote being honoured, it’s all good. 



Supine said:


> I'm not a fan of class based politics but generally agree with you on this.
> 
> A big problem with politics at the moment is parties don't try to influence peoples ideas on subjects. They just go with opinion polls and try to pander to those people they think can potentially vote for them.


Huh wow. Well, honest at least. But yeah, it’s a big  problem that the likes of May and they red Tories and fucking Farage haven’t managed to leave a footprint on my thoughts the pandering cunts.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Seen from one of those Labour types earlier  earlier “Lexit not a possiblity  but lemain just might be”



Well you know what they say don't you, some people are more intelligent in primary school than when they've gained a doctorate.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 19, 2018)

agricola said:


> By the way, the most Labour have ever got in an election is 47% of the vote, with the next biggest 43%.  The polls have them around 40% at present.


The polls reflect the Tories being seen as a credible option, and that's only because Corbyn is seen as not.


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 19, 2018)

I guess the tories will remain in power because (like Brexit) it's actually what the people want. No matter how much May is moaned about and she may well be out on her ear soon enough - the choice of JC leading your country through Brexit is not a choice people can trust him with. IMHO, obvs.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> Class is irrelevant. Brexit is a shit idea for everyone in the UK apart from a small number of disaster capitalists who will use financial market moves to make money.


Do you realise the second sentence directly contradicts the first?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> The polls reflect the Tories being seen as a credible option, and that's only because Corbyn is seen as not.


No they don't


----------



## Supine (Nov 19, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Do you realise the second sentence directly contradicts the first?



It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.


For working people all capitalists are a disaster; fuck 'sub-sets'.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.




That's not even relevant tho like capital doesn't need the investment genius or the risk taker it can easily deligate (and does) these to salaried state functionaries. that's not how class functions it's not like this grid u can plot on.

it's not the bloody 19th century is it.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 19, 2018)

where ever generalised commodity production prevails etc...


----------



## A380 (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.


A subset of something that doesn’t exist, or a subset of something that does exist?


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

funny how so many of you think it's funny to laugh at your own country


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> funny how so many of you think it's funny to laugh at your own country



Probably because we are a laughing stock!


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

ahh, but it's people of the left-leaning mindset that WANT their country to be a laughing stock, you know, the classical sado-masochistic tendency you guys have


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Nov 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> a laughing stock



Like a hyena who ate an Oxo cube


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> ahh, but it's people of the left-leaning mindset that WANT their country to be a laughing stock, you know, the classical sado-masochistic tendency you guys have


Wilhelm discovers 'disaster socialists'.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> ahh, but it's people of the left-leaning mindset that WANT their country to be a laughing stock, you know, the classical sado-masochistic tendency you guys have



You are Trevor Kavanagh and I claim my bottle of Chateauneuf-du-Pap!


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Wilhelm discovers 'disaster socialists'.


what and you mean to say you actually believe in the merit of that naiive as fuck ideology? that's hilarious


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.


If the only people who benefit belong to one class is class really irrelevant?

Class is always relevant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> It doesn't. Disaster capitalists are a small subset of a class.


all capitalists are a disaster


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> ahh, but it's people of the left-leaning mindset that WANT their country to be a laughing stock, you know, the classical sado-masochistic tendency you guys have


I would argue against this but I'm too busy applying the nipple clamps.

This is a pretty poor, squalid attempt at trolling.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> You are Trevor Kavanagh and I claim my bottle of Chateauneuf-du-Pap!


trevor kavanagh has better politics than Friedrich986


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> what and you mean to say you actually believe in the merit of that naiive as fuck ideology? that's hilarious


What ideology?


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

the 'positives' of disaster socialism, you know, when it's all peace and love for a while after a bad event


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> the 'positives' of disaster socialism, you know, when it's all peace and love for a while after a bad event


There is no ideology of 'disaster socialism'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> Class is irrelevant. Brexit is a shit idea for everyone in the UK apart from a small number of disaster capitalists who will use financial market moves to make money.



You're irrelevant.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 19, 2018)

tbf im pro ruthless red terror if it means petty bourgeois shopkeeper eejits like yourself cease to exist.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Nov 19, 2018)

so like, no disaster for me sunshine.


----------



## Supine (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're irrelevant.



Are you not long out of the school yard?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> Are you not long out of the school yard?



Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with my age?  

Just pointing out #Factz


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why is everyone suddenly so obsessed with my age?
> 
> Just pointing out #Factz


i'm not obsessed with or indeed at all interested in your age.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Interesting piece on BBC Website. Basically urges May to allow a free vote, so that Labour MP's will support the bill in sufficient numbers to get it through.

Can May learn from Ted Heath's tactics?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2018)

No idea whether the erg divs will get to 48 - looking less likely perhaps? But here's a little story to put the spleen back into splenetic:
Greg Clark backs idea of longer Brexit transition period

Captures (one of) May's dilemmas: talking stability to business whilst boosting the ravings of her back wooedsmen. Good.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not obsessed with or indeed at all interested in your age.



In true contrarian Pickers fashion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> In true contrarian Pickers fashion.


i have nothing to do with Pickers


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i have nothing to do with Pickers



Stop hiding your light under a bushell Pickers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Stop hiding your light under a bushell Pickers.


i am not Pickers.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Interesting piece on BBC Website. Basically urges May to allow a free vote, so that Labour MP's will support the bill in sufficient numbers to get it through.
> 
> Can May learn from Ted Heath's tactics?


I guess it's better have May's Brexit than no-Brexit - wouldn't it be ironic if it were Labour that 'saved' the day here.....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i am not Pickers.



Sure. You're Clark Kent and you don't know who Superman is


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 19, 2018)

Brexit is like a biblical story, referring to the parable of Irish border. It is like an episode from an Indiana Jones movie. When UK joined the European Economic Community coincidentally with Ireland in 1973, the motive was, anticipated economic growth in UK at a time economy in UK was declining, and trade with the commonwealth was not prosperous. Since the UK joined the EU, the continued growth of political and economic union of the EU and its expansion with Eastern Europe leading to borderless migration, and billions of membership fee have disenchanted the British society, calling to reinstate the sovereignty and take back control. However, the membership of EU benefitted the UK trade and industry thrive, it has grown inside the single market of Europe, it is inseparable from the single market without serious repercussions. Staying in the single market also favourable for the inward investment in UK by global manufacturers and financiers. Aside, the Irish border with Northern Ireland has become a geopolitical impasse without some agreement of customs and single market with EU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sure. You're Clark Kent and you don't know who Superman is


don't think anyone who posts in the dulwich hamlet forum can be thought of as superman.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 19, 2018)

Yeah, you're right it is just like the plot of Temple of Doom, gove is the KALI-MAH heart eating bloke


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Brexit is like a biblical story, referring to the parable of Irish border. It is like an episode from an Indiana Jones movie. When UK joined the European Economic Community coincidentally with Ireland in 1973, the motive was, anticipated economic growth in UK at a time economy in UK was declining, and trade with the commonwealth was not prosperous. Since the UK joined the EU, the continued growth of political and economic union of the EU and its expansion with Eastern Europe leading to borderless migration have disenchanted the British society, calling to reinstate the sovereignty and take back control. However, the membership of EU benefitted the UK trade and industry thrive, it has grown inside the single market of Europe, it is inseparable from the single market without serious repercussions. Staying in the single market also favourable for the inward investment in UK by global manufacturers and financiers. Aside, the Irish border with Northern Ireland has become a geopolitical impasse without some agreement of customs and single market with EU.


you could write it in bigger letters still but it still wouldn't make much sense.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 19, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> When UK joined the European Economic Community coincidentally with Ireland in 1973, the motive was, anticipated economic growth in UK at a time economy in UK was declining, and trade with the commonwealth was not prosperous. Since the UK joined the EU, the continued growth of political and economic union of the EU and its expansion with Eastern Europe leading to borderless migration have disenchanted the British society, calling to reinstate the sovereignty and take back control. However, the membership of EU benefitted the UK trade and industry thrive, it has grown inside the single market of Europe, it is inseparable from the single market without serious repercussions. Staying in the single market also favourable for the inward investment in UK by global manufacturers and financiers. Aside, the Irish border with Northern Ireland has become a geopolitical impasse without some agreement of customs and single market with EU.



Isn't this the opening crawl to Star Wars Episode 1: The Phantom Menace?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> don't think anyone who posts in the dulwich hamlet forum can be thought of as superman.



Not all heroes wear capes.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## NoXion (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> funny how so many of you think it's funny to laugh at your own country



One must have a sense of humour about these things, lest one end up like you. And nobody wants that.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



oh this will end well


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 19, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



There's a reason Gib voted 95% remain.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 19, 2018)

Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?


----------



## tommers (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?



Taking Back Control.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?


so we can become a buccaneering nation once again, like somalia


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?


Blue passports, mainly.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2018)

Blue rat


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?


because an extension will not make one crap of difference, it's done nothing in 2 and a half yrs, so just get the F on with it or bail out


----------



## billy_bob (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> funny how so many of you think it's funny to laugh at your own country



Er... not finding it funny to laugh at your own country is pretty much a prerequisite of fascism.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> because an extension will not make one crap of difference, it's done nothing in 2 and a half yrs, so just get the F on with it or bail out



Yeah


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

billy_bob said:


> Er... not finding it funny to laugh at your own country is pretty much a prerequisite of fascism.


he's definitely that way inclined.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Possibly a dumb question but what's the main argument for settling for a no deal, rather than seek an extension to negotiating time if this is all not signed off in good time?



I mean it depends who you're talking about, but basically, the EU will only offer a deal that isn't really Brexit so if you don't want that you could go no deal and say to global markets "come and have a go if you think you're hard enough".


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

and the EU will just keep extending indefinitely, it's a dead end going down that road


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> because an extension will not make one crap of difference, it's done nothing in 2 and a half yrs, so just get the F on with it or bail out



The Brexitiers opposing May right now seem convinced a better deal can still be done, ok.

So their position is no extensions, no more negotiations, no deal but ours etc. And they think the EU's hand will be forced by March? Is that correct?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> and the EU will just keep extending indefinitely, it's a dead end going down that road



Yeah


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Yeah


Yeah


----------



## tommers (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> The Brexitiers opposing May right now seem convinced a better deal can still be done, ok.
> 
> So their position is no extensions, no more negotiations, no deal but ours etc. And they think the EU's hand will be forced by March? Is that correct?



Oh they want "no Deal" so that they can get everybody scared and then rip up loads of employment laws without any meaningful resistance (and probably lots of support)


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

sure,  a No-Deal is by far the best outcome

Let's get what we voted for.

fuck the EU


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> sure,  a No-Deal is by far the best outcome
> 
> Let's get what we voted for.
> 
> fuck the EU



Yeah


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> sure,  a No-Deal is by far the best outcome
> 
> Let's get what we voted for.
> 
> fuck the EU



nothing there about shitting on the economy and leaving without a deal.


----------



## Friedrich986 (Nov 19, 2018)

nothing there either about sparrows' gestation cycles....


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> nothing there either about sparrows' gestation cycles either....


i'm glad you agree with me


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> nothing there either about sparrows' gestation cycles either....



What is a sparrows gestation cycle then?


----------



## Crispy (Nov 19, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> What is a sparrows gestation cycle then?


African or European?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> The Brexitiers opposing May right now seem convinced a better deal can still be done, ok.
> 
> So their position is no extensions, no more negotiations, no deal but ours etc. And they think the EU's hand will be forced by March? Is that correct?



They say that, they're probably mostly concerned with keeping their seats and their career prospects.


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you could write it in bigger letters still but it still wouldn't make much sense.


*Font is not deliberate. However, it makes more sense than the inconclusive fulminated Brexit deal.  *


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> *Font is not deliberate. However, it makes more sense than the inconclusive fulminated Brexit deal.  *


about the same, tbh


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2018)

Damp Squib of the Day: wasn't this the moment when Mogg et al were due to strike? Even with all the talk of extending the transition for a couple of years they haven't managed it. Perhaps Mogg's butler added the letters up wrong.

Tomorrow's Damp Squib: The 5 Remaining Cabinet Colossuses get completely ignored.

"Across the hush of 24 centuries, this is the story of a turning point in history, of a blazing day when 300 Greek warriors Theresa May and some bloke she just made Brexit Secretary fought here to hold with their lives their freedom and ours."


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 19, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Damp Squib of the Day: wasn't this the moment when Mogg et al were due to strike? Even with all the talk of extending the transition for a couple of years they haven't managed it. Perhaps Mogg's butler added the letters up wrong.
> 
> Tomorrow's Damp Squib: The 5 Remaining Cabinet Colossuses get completely ignored.
> 
> "Across the hush of 24 centuries, this is the story of a turning point in history, of a blazing day when 300 Greek warriors Theresa May and some bloke she just made Brexit Secretary fought here to hold with their lives their freedom and ours."


As power struggles go, this one isn't really living up to my expectations


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

Just been in GP waiting room and read in the Mirror that there are troops on the streets of London to provide emergency cover for medical and fuel supplies in preparation for a sudden exit from Europe. Is this a joke?
Also inside Danny Dyer spouting about youths should be rioting! Actors inciting protests and riots, who does he think he is? Jane Fonda! 

Cannot provide link as old and daft.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Just been in GP waiting room and read in the Mirror that there are troops on the streets of London to provide emergency cover for medical and fuel supplies in preparation for a sudden exit from Europe. Is this a joke?
> Also inside Danny Dyer spouting about youths should be rioting! Actors inciting protests and riots, who does he think he is? Jane Fonda!
> 
> Cannot provide link as old and daft.



Was it this one? Army ‘on standby to help police' in case of No Deal Brexit chaos

The Daily Star were also reporting this a while back with this helpful illustrative graphic:


----------



## Wilf (Nov 19, 2018)

More from non-event universe: Laura Kuenssberg says there are 2 more letters in ... and then says there aren't:
Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Was it this one?
> 
> Army ‘on standby to help police' in case of No Deal Brexit chaos
> 
> The Daily Star were also reporting this a while back with this helpful illustrative graphic:



Yes that’s the one, ludicrous I am thinking.
Cheers.


----------



## Winot (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Winot said:


>




Oh dear...


----------



## The Boy (Nov 19, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Brexitiers



Is that French for Brexiteers?


----------



## yield (Nov 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Oh dear...


To labour under the illusion


----------



## The Boy (Nov 19, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> What is a sparrows gestation cycle then?



A bit like a penny farthing, iirc.


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 153020
> nothing there about shitting on the economy and leaving without a deal.


You call this democracy? Wreaking havoc, totally misrepresenting the objective, and means. Everyone carries on pretending this is serious democratic governance.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> You call this democracy? Wreaking havoc, totally misrepresenting the objective, and means. Everyone carries on pretending this is serious democratic governance.


No, I don't call this democracy. I have never said we live in a democracy


----------



## ricbake (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No, I don't call this democracy. I have never said we live in a democracy



Someone will say liberal democracy next. That is another delusion. One work colleague actually said to me the other day, ‘if they don’t see Bregsit through I will never vote again!’
It took me ten minutes to stop laughing, in fact a little bit of wee came out.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

ricbake said:


> View attachment 153037



No bollocks to it, smash stuff up option? It’s what Danny Dyer would want.


----------



## agricola (Nov 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> No bollocks to it, smash stuff up option? It’s what Danny Dyer would want.



the "I'm Millwall" option was on Schedule 4Q


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 19, 2018)

Wilf said:


> More from non-event universe: Laura Kuenssberg says there are 2 more letters in ... and then says there aren't:
> Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter


----------



## teqniq (Nov 19, 2018)

Who is she trying to convince, herself?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 19, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Who is she trying to convince, herself?


Sorry. That was me translating her actual tweets. (Especially “we hear” and “v happy to clarify”).

Her actual tweets:


----------



## teqniq (Nov 19, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 19, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Sorry. That was me translating her actual tweets. (Especially “we hear” and “v happy to clarify”).
> 
> Her actual tweets:
> 
> ...



Yours are much more succinct.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 19, 2018)

If this is anything to go by it might not be so hard to make a good guess at where some of the money that funds the Taxpayers alliance comes from.

Matthew and Sarah Elliott: How a UK Power Couple Links US Libertarians and Fossil Fuel Lobbyists to Brexit


----------



## existentialist (Nov 19, 2018)

Friedrich986 said:


> because an extension will not make one crap of difference, it's done nothing in 2 and a half yrs, so just get the F on with it or bail out


Says the boy who doesn't think it's funny to laugh at his own country.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2018)

existentialist said:


> Says the boy who doesn't think it's funny to laugh at his own country.


If you'd ever heard his laugh you'd think it hilarious


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Someone will say liberal democracy next. That is another delusion. One work colleague actually said to me the other day, ‘if they don’t see Bregsit through I will never vote again!’
> It took me ten minutes to stop laughing, in fact a little bit of wee came out.



You're right, it is a delusion of sorts, though it's not the kindest way to put it. A delusion, or more kindly a belief, that many people share, that we live in a democratic system where our voices matter. But I'm not sure that laughing at your fellow worker as they begin to question that belief is particularly helpful?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're right, it is a delusion of sorts, though it's not the kindest way to put it. A delusion, or more kindly a belief, that many people share, that we live in a democratic system where our voices matter. But I'm not sure that laughing at your fellow worker as they begin to question that belief is particularly helpful?


It’s hardly clear just from that statement this was the start of them questioning the belief or that they ever truly held it in the first place. Some of us are just less articulate than others. And it really just sounded like an expression of exasperation.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s hardly clear just from that statement this was the start of them questioning the belief or that they ever truly held it in the first place. Some of us are just less articulate than others. And it really just sounded like an expression of exasperation.



Fair, sorry I read it as someone becoming disillusioned with our democracy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fair, sorry I read it as someone becoming disillusioned with our democracy.


I'll wait till we have a democracy before becoming disillusioned with it


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 20, 2018)

ricbake said:


> View attachment 153037


That’s much better, if you can rephrase it briefly, such as reformed, restructured or downsized.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 20, 2018)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



So he hasn't.  Is he one of the 26 "certainties" counted?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2018)

No, he isn't.  Who has written no confidence letters?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2018)

Don't get this - his card is marked whatever. So write the damn thing. Or is this a more telling failure?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Don't get this - his card is marked whatever. So write the damn thing. Or is this a more telling failure?


It’s baffling.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 20, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Don't get this - his card is marked whatever. So write the damn thing. Or is this a more telling failure?


He's being a 'tory rebel', innit?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2018)

There is s spectre haunting the ERG...


----------



## killer b (Nov 20, 2018)

They've shot their bolt, totally fucked it. But the political lobby seem to be still lapping up each new ream of bullshit. Incredible really.


----------



## Winot (Nov 20, 2018)

It’s really really funny.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2018)

killer b said:


> They've shot their bolt, totally fucked it. But the political lobby seem to be still lapping up each new ream of bullshit. Incredible really.


Not just the lobby, it's been slopping over the sides here for near a week now too.


----------



## killer b (Nov 20, 2018)

You're right - it isn't incredible that they're breathlessly reporting it on reflection: the role of the lobby to influence rather than report on politics has been laid totally bare the last few years.  What's incredible is that anyone takes the breathless reports seriously anymore.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

The erg/hard brexit lot certainly had the _potential_ numbers, in that well over 48 have signed letters before or have claimed expenses for their meetings (they don't have anything as vulgar as _members_). A few of these are ministers, which is why they are not submitting letters but yes, what a fucking useless rebellion. Part of the story is surely how inept these people are at putting together coalitions, keeping people on side etc.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The erg/hard brexit lot certainly had the _potential_ numbers, in that well over 48 have signed letters before or have claimed expenses for their meetings (they don't have anything as vulgar as _members_). A few of these are ministers, which is why they are not submitting letters but yes, what a fucking useless rebellion. Part of the story is surely how inept these people are at putting together coalitions, keeping people on side etc.


That presupposes that we are talking about individuals with principles other than their own instinct for self-preservation and who suspend their propensity for psychopathic lying when dealing with each other.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Part of the story is surely how inept these people are at putting together coalitions, keeping people on side etc.



Not surpising really, given the 'fuck everyone who isn't me' politics of the people involved.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 20, 2018)

i think the hard core ERG lot read the widespread dismay at the mays deal and presumed that that would translate into a rebellion - so then turned around when they were halfway across no mans land to find that nobody had followed them. 
twats - they should have waited until may's deal was voted down - all they've done is shown themselves up as the incompetent, obsessive freaks that they are and actually strengthened may's position. 
I guess "this deal is utterly shit!" does not mean  "lets tell the EU go fuck themselves and charge off the cliff with Rees Mogg leading the way".  
Full on no deal brexit is very much a fringe position amongst tory MPs when it comes to the crunch - as opposed to puffed up posturing and playing to the gammon gallery.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 20, 2018)

Latest noises now seem to be backtracking to say that there will be enough letters _after_ the vote. Well no shit. If the government loses the vote, May's toast. We all know that. May knows that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The erg/hard brexit lot certainly had the _potential_ numbers, in that well over 48 have signed letters before or have claimed expenses for their meetings (they don't have anything as vulgar as _members_). A few of these are ministers, which is why they are not submitting letters but yes, what a fucking useless rebellion. Part of the story is surely how inept these people are at putting together coalitions, keeping people on side etc.


the story is that they're good at putting together coalitions but bloody awful at seizing the time. timing, as any comedian will tell you, is everything. now they've shored up the previously unshoreable.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 20, 2018)

Maybe they think May will go anyway when she doesn't get the vote and don't want to be seen sticking the knife in now.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 20, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Nov 20, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Maybe they think May will go anyway when she doesn't get the vote and don't want to be seen sticking the knife in now.


maybe they never had the fucking numbers and it's all been hot air?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i think the hard core ERG lot read the widespread dismay at the mays deal and presumed that that would translate into a rebellion - so then turned around when they were halfway across no mans land to find that nobody had followed them.
> twats - they should have waited until may's deal was voted down - all they've done is shown themselves up as the incompetent, obsessive freaks that they are and actually strengthened may's position.
> I guess "this deal is utterly shit!" does not mean  "lets tell the EU go fuck themselves and charge off the cliff with Rees Mogg leading the way".
> Full on no deal brexit is very much a fringe position amongst tory MPs when it comes to the crunch - as opposed to puffed up posturing and playing to the gammon gallery.



Maybe it was more about maximising the number of Tories who would vote against May in the Commons?



littlebabyjesus said:


> Latest noises now seem to be backtracking to say that there will be enough letters _after_ the vote. Well no shit. If the government loses the vote, May's toast. We all know that. May knows that.



They might be a bit more likely to go for her if it goes through. I mean, if it goes through with a lot of Labour support, they may see that as worse. If it fails they could send May back to the EU and they probably wouldn't mind that. I don't think they think they can lead the party or the govt.

A little bit like when you send union negotiators back after telling them the offer from the employer is wank...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll wait till we have a democracy before becoming disillusioned with it



Nobody was talking about you *Pickers. *


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

Must admit I've been expecting the '48' to be triggered, doing more than listening to the press recycling those stories. Very hard to tell the numbers but erg lot have certainly been outflanked by May - a process which has involved her doing very little. If the remaining 'cabinet 5' or whatever it is had gone at the same time as raab, the cowardly lions might have been emboldened to stick their letters in.  However aside from that pantomime, I've always thought May has a reasonable chance of getting the deal through parliament. Just as the letters haven't gone in we seem to be seeing the softening up process, leavers who end up abstaining on the deal rather than opposing it, May getting it through 2nd time round etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nobody was talking about you *Pickers. *


bored with being ignored i see, spackers


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Must admit I've been expecting the '48' to be triggered, doing more than listening to the press recycling those stories. Very hard to tell the numbers but erg lot have certainly been outflanked by May - a process which has involved her doing very little. If the remaining 'cabinet 5' or whatever it is had gone at the same time as raab, the cowardly lions might have been emboldened to stick their letters in.  However aside from that pantomime, I've always thought May has a reasonable chance of getting the deal through parliament. Just as the letters haven't gone in we seem to be seeing the softening up process, leavers who end up abstaining on the deal rather than opposing it, May getting it through 2nd time round etc.



	   This kind of thing:


> James Forsyth
> 
> *✔*			 @JGForsyth
> 
> ...





> IDS and Owen Paterson's Number 10 meeting yesterday showed that a lot of people really do want an excuse not to have to bring the whole house down


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> bored with being ignored i see, spackers



Yes but it's ok I know how to get you to reply instantly


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

By the way, on 'the letters', I want to see Michael Crick scuttling around after politicians with a microphone. That's proper fucking journalism, _*scuttling*_.  

Mind, it can be a dangerous business. Not content with Godfrey Bloom hitting him with a piece of paper...


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the way, on 'the letters', I want to see Michael Crick scuttling around after politicians with a microphone. That's proper fucking journalism, _*scuttling*_.
> 
> Mind, it can be a dangerous business. Not content with Godfrey Bloom hitting him with a piece of paper...



Eyes shut left jab extended into shitly balanced punch - take that MSMMSMSMSMSMMSMSM


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

I've just read Nadine Dorries claims 46 letters in. I'm not going to even bother linking... if you can't accept a source as unimpeachable as Nadine Dorries, it's a sad do.


----------



## andysays (Nov 20, 2018)

JRM isn't beaten yet...

Ditch May now or she will lead us into 2022 election, Rees-Mogg tells Tories


----------



## xenon (Nov 20, 2018)

Can she even count that high?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

andysays said:


> JRM isn't beaten yet...
> 
> Ditch May now or she will lead us into 2022 election, Rees-Mogg tells Tories


After his failed rebellion, something Game of Thronesish should happen to him.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've just read Nadine Dorries claims 46 letters in. I'm not going to even bother linking... if you can't accept a source as unimpeachable as Nadine Dorries, it's a sad do.


Just as a point of information, does anyone know how long the letters are good for? Can the 22 cmttee just hold onto them indefinitely, and top them up? Or do they have to be “activated” by a certain date or they fall invalid?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2018)

andysays said:


> JRM isn't beaten yet...
> 
> Ditch May now or she will lead us into 2022 election, Rees-Mogg tells Tories



Just a snivelling wretch, I bet he paid people to fight for him at school.
Jacob Re Smug. Bellend. Nice to see his Christian values being upheld.


----------



## rubbershoes (Nov 20, 2018)

andysays said:


> JRM isn't beaten yet...
> 
> Ditch May now or she will lead us into 2022 election, Rees-Mogg tells Tories



https://newsthump.com/2018/11/20/br...e-democratic-vote-that-saw-her-become-leader/


----------



## kebabking (Nov 20, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just as a point of information, does anyone know how long the letters are good for? Can the 22 cmttee just hold onto them indefinitely, and top them up? Or do they have to be “activated” by a certain date or they fall invalid?



I _think _they last as long as the leader they are whining about is in post, but get cancelled out if there is a VONC in that leader, or they are withdrawn.

I think the ERG are a busted flush, it's become very clear that they have nothing like the level of support they either thought or claimed, and that May has been strengthened by her enemies making a massive arse of themselves. 

Amusingly, having been the rent-a-gob crowd that have made the likes of Kuenessberg _et al _look like idiots by reporting a rebellion that never got off the ground, I wonder if the meejar will now turn on their former darlings..?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've just read Nadine Dorries claims 46 letters in. I'm not going to even bother linking... if you can't accept a source as unimpeachable as Nadine Dorries, it's a sad do.



I wouldn't mind a link. I promise not to question it.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wouldn't mind a link. I promise not to question it.



WATCH: ‘I don’t want to oust PM’ says MP who submitted letter of no confidence

Hang on, that can't be riight:


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This kind of thing:




mind you - this may well be spin in the opposite direction. the political commentators are willing stooges in all this aren't they? 
as pointed out above - tis pleasing to see the likes of snidy kuenessberg with egg all over her face.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 20, 2018)

Some top trolling here. 



> Spain’s foreign minister has said he expects the UK to “split apart” before his own country does


(guardian)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 20, 2018)

All hail the gammonocracy!


----------



## agricola (Nov 20, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I _think _they last as long as the leader they are whining about is in post, but get cancelled out if there is a VONC in that leader, or they are withdrawn.
> 
> I think the ERG are a busted flush, it's become very clear that they have nothing like the level of support they either thought or claimed, and that May has been strengthened by her enemies making a massive arse of themselves.
> 
> Amusingly, having been the rent-a-gob crowd that have made the likes of Kuenessberg _et al _look like idiots by reporting a rebellion that never got off the ground, I wonder if the meejar will now turn on their former darlings..?



TBF it is a bit of a mistake to think the ERG are a busted flush - even with 20-30 effectives they have more than enough to bring down this Government if they are willing to do so, and while they are probably wrong to think they could get one of them to replace May they are probably not wrong to think that very few of the Parliamentary party would be happy with May as leader for the next election.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> one direction



One direction, INSURRECTION!


----------



## alex_ (Nov 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> All hail the gammonocracy!



what is Tom conti doing there ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> One direction, INSURRECTION!


the working title for their sixth album


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

alex_ said:


> what is Tom conti doing there ?


And Norris mcwhirter


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 20, 2018)

They're all cunti


----------



## agricola (Nov 20, 2018)

alex_ said:


> what is Tom conti doing there ?



and why is one of them apparently wearing the tablecloth?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 20, 2018)

agricola said:


> Soames?



TBF, "The Wardrobe" has a lot of buoyancy.


----------



## agricola (Nov 20, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> TBF, "The Wardrobe" has a lot of buoyancy.



that is not what she said


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 20, 2018)




----------



## MickiQ (Nov 20, 2018)

They certainly look like a diverse cross-section of society


----------



## kebabking (Nov 20, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBF it is a bit of a mistake to think the ERG are a busted flush - even with 20-30 effectives they have more than enough to bring down this Government if they are willing to do so, and while they are probably wrong to think they could get one of them to replace May they are probably not wrong to think that very few of the Parliamentary party would be happy with May as leader for the next election.



I think the one thing we've learned from the last two years is the May is remarkably effective at muddling through in the face of people making her life difficult.

One of the things that made the ERG powerful was that the rest of the Tory party _thought _they were powerful, but now we see that they aren't. They can make life difficult one individual bills, but are spectacularly unlikely to vote with Labour on a VONC and to force a GE, they aren't going to provide the next leader, and any of their members or followers who fancy a ministerial career now that the bolt has been shot will now be beginning to move out of their orbit - the big mouths will stay of course, they have nowhere else to go, and the Torygraph will keep them gainfully employed, but for the foot soldiers only a life of backbench anonymity beckons...

This is the ERG's version of Mays GE. Before it they were all powerful because people thought they were all powerful, but the day after the votes just didn't come in they are lame ducks. The difference however is that May seems able to rebuild through provoking respect for her grim determination, whereas the ERG are positively disliked by their 'colleagues'.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 20, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just as a point of information, does anyone know how long the letters are good for? Can the 22 cmttee just hold onto them indefinitely, and top them up? Or do they have to be “activated” by a certain date or they fall invalid?



think i read somewhere at the weekend that if a letter is not recent, then sir twunt will contact the sender and ask something like " i say, old chap, do you still mean it or were you pissed at the time or what?"

eta - if it gets to the required number of letters that is


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 20, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've just read Nadine Dorries claims 46 letters in. I'm not going to even bother linking... if you can't accept a source as unimpeachable as Nadine Dorries, it's a sad do.



She's a lady who always reaffirms my faith in democracy, by demonstrating that literally anyone can be an MP.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 20, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 153117



Am I the only one that thinks it's odd, that Rees-Mogg looks the youngest there, despite being from the 18th century?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Am I the only one that thinks it's odd, that Rees-Mogg looks the youngest there, despite being from the 18th century?


He's got a painting of David Davis' "I'll resign over this, you know" strategy in his attic.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 20, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Am I the only one that thinks it's odd, that Rees-Mogg looks the youngest there, despite being from the 18th century?


Must have grabbed a ride in the Tardis


----------



## agricola (Nov 20, 2018)

kebabking said:


> I think the one thing we've learned from the last two years is the May is remarkably effective at muddling through in the face of people making her life difficult.
> 
> One of the things that made the ERG powerful was that the rest of the Tory party _thought _they were powerful, but now we see that they aren't. They can make life difficult one individual bills, but are spectacularly unlikely to vote with Labour on a VONC and to force a GE, they aren't going to provide the next leader, and any of their members or followers who fancy a ministerial career now that the bolt has been shot will now be beginning to move out of their orbit - the big mouths will stay of course, they have nowhere else to go, and the Torygraph will keep them gainfully employed, but for the foot soldiers only a life of backbench anonymity beckons...
> 
> This is the ERG's version of Mays GE. Before it they were all powerful because people thought they were all powerful, but the day after the votes just didn't come in they are lame ducks. The difference however is that May seems able to rebuild through provoking respect for her grim determination, whereas the ERG are positively disliked by their 'colleagues'.



I think the Parliamentary party have always recognized how powerful the Eurosceptic fundamentalists are - indeed that is probably quite a bit of the reason why May tried for the GE in 2017, so she could get enough of a buffer to make their opposition to the deal she was always likely to come up with irrelevant.   

Unfortunately for her they had a lot of influence before the election, even more now and it is almost impossible to see how they could be kept on the naughty step when they can spend all their time blocking everything the Government does; we are already seeing what ten DUP MPs can do so 20-30 ERG with nothing much to lose will be even worse.  They don't have to bring about or vote on a no confidence motion when they can basically stop everything else simply by abstaining.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 20, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Must have grabbed a ride in the Tardis



More likely The Turdis...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> All hail the gammonocracy!



Fucking hell, a whole slate of Tories with maximum cum-faces!  Bloke third from right is definitely on the vinegars!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 20, 2018)

agricola said:


> that is not what she said



I remember the comment about the wardrobe having a very small key.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> All hail the gammonocracy!



Isn’t it a meeting of the Northeast Somerset chapter of Opus Dei?


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 20, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Northeast Somerset


Fuck - it's just dawned on me how close I live to that cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Isn’t it a meeting of the Northeast Somerset chapter of Opus Dei?


It's a tory boy band


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Fuck - it's just dawned on me how close I live to that cunt.



It’s about time he was revisited by Dennis the Menace and Gnasher.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

agricola said:


> I think the Parliamentary party have always recognized how powerful the Eurosceptic fundamentalists are - indeed that is probably quite a bit of the reason why May tried for the GE in 2017, so she could get enough of a buffer to make their opposition to the deal she was always likely to come up with irrelevant.
> 
> Unfortunately for her they had a lot of influence before the election, even more now and it is almost impossible to see how they could be kept on the naughty step when they can spend all their time blocking everything the Government does; we are already seeing what ten DUP MPs can do so 20-30 ERG with nothing much to lose will be even worse.  They don't have to bring about or vote on a no confidence motion when they can basically stop everything else simply by abstaining.



Feeling this. Additionally, if they have a candidate for leader they actually think the party will stomach, then appearing to launch a coup isn't great - they'll want May to have well and truly collapsed on her own terms first and lost the vote, or had to rely on other parties to get it through. 

They may have thought they had the numbers and didn't, it's possible. But they also might have wanted the media discussion to focus on whether May can survive all week, which it has, instead of just whether the deal will pass. 

It's all conjecture obviously, but I'm sceptical that they would have gone for this properly without commitment from the requisite 48 and I'm sceptical that around 20 Tory MP's said they would do this and then all bottled it.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2018)

Is it ironic that Jacob Re Smug won’t be told what to do by Brussels yet does everything he is told to by Rome!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Is it ironic that Jacob Re Smug won’t be told what to do by Brussels yet does everything he is told to by Rome!


----------



## mauvais (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Feeling this. Additionally, if they have a candidate for leader they actually think the party will stomach, then appearing to launch a coup isn't great - they'll want May to have well and truly collapsed on her own terms first and lost the vote, or had to rely on other parties to get it through.
> 
> They may have thought they had the numbers and didn't, it's possible. But they also might have wanted the media discussion to focus on whether May can survive all week, which it has, instead of just whether the deal will pass.
> 
> It's all conjecture obviously, but I'm sceptical that they would have gone for this properly without commitment from the requisite 48 and I'm sceptical that around 20 Tory MP's said they would do this and then all bottled it.


I don't get this perspective at all really.

I could elaborate but the TLDR of it is really, who knew that a faction of right-wing Tory splitter zealots wouldn't be able to either get along cohesively or act in a joined-up Machiavellian fashion.

I thought it was immediately obvious that when push came to shove, ERG - on the sunniest of days, barely critical mass - wouldn't be able to agree on a unified approach. I was going to post as such at the time but, and my standards very demonstrably aren't that high, I thought it was too obvious.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I don't get this perspective at all really.
> 
> I could elaborate but the TLDR of it is really, who knew that a faction of right-wing Tory splitter zealots wouldn't be able to either get along cohesively or act in a joined-up Machiavellian fashion.
> 
> I thought it was immediately obvious that when push came to shove, ERG - on the sunniest of days, barely critical mass - wouldn't be able to agree on a unified approach. I was going to post as such at the time but, and my standards very demonstrably aren't that high, I thought it was too obvious.



I should probably clarify I don't think the candidate would be from the ERG - they would need someone the whole party would accept that they could back. 

I think it's too early to tell if the ERG actually wanted to get 48 letters in by now. If that's what they wanted they've definitely failed. But as is very clear succession is the key question in everyone's minds, and if they wanted to get rid of May they would also want to do it in such a way as to remain influential in govt. Agricola's original point was that they will be a massive thorn in May's side from now on, particularly as they are raising the question of a new leader before the next election.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I don't get this perspective at all really.
> 
> I could elaborate but the TLDR of it is really, who knew that a faction of right-wing Tory splitter zealots wouldn't be able to either get along cohesively or act in a joined-up Machiavellian fashion.
> 
> I thought it was immediately obvious that when push came to shove, ERG - on the sunniest of days, barely critical mass - wouldn't be able to agree on a unified approach. I was going to post as such at the time but, and my standards very demonstrably aren't that high, I thought it was too obvious.



Also no points for predictions you didn't make known


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


>




Ye can fook off wi that shite too!


----------



## mauvais (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I should probably clarify I don't think the candidate would be from the ERG - they would need someone the whole party would accept that they could back.
> 
> I think it's too early to tell if the ERG actually wanted to get 48 letters in by now. If that's what they wanted they've definitely failed. But as is very clear succession is the key question in everyone's minds, and if they wanted to get rid of May they would also want to do it in such a way as to remain influential in govt. Agricola's original point was that they will be a massive thorn in May's side from now on, particularly as they are raising the question of a new leader before the next election.


Basic numeracy or indeed the passage of time are both massive thorns in May's side, but the threshold for that isn't high either.

JRM and the ERG core clearly wanted 48 letters and it immediately became clear that they as a group were roughly 50/50 divided between rebellion and retaining May, as befits all rightists.



SpackleFrog said:


> Also no points for predictions you didn't make known


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Once-zeitgesty comments rotting on the reply text field vine in an aggressively persistent online forum system. Other stuff, possibly. All those moments will be indefinitely retained, like tears in a really well-defined database.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 20, 2018)

It was fairly clear yesterday that they weren't going to get the 48 letters.  A lot of MPs would have gone back to their constituencies over the weekend and tested the water.  and I suspect that most of them would have been told to get the fuck on with things rather mess around with politicking.  they are never going to get the 48 letters now.  

But neither are they going to get this deal through parliament.

It's going to be a no deal Brexit.  Which, as May told us some time ago, is better than a bad deal Brexit, and a bad deal Brexit is what is on offer now, imho (and as a remainer).


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 20, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Ye can fook off wi that shite too!



shite?! tis a rib ticklingly daft anti-sectarian classic!

although - going by the slide show - the irony may have been lost on whoever posted that on you tube. Dubliners version waaayyyy superior.




(sorry - lets get back to the Joy of Brexit)


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 20, 2018)

[QUOTE

(sorry - lets get back to the Joy of Brexit)[/QUOTE]

The real (only?) joy of Brexit would be a United Ireland, though I wouldn't wish the DUP on anyone.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> shite?! tis a rib ticklingly daft anti-sectarian classic!
> 
> although - going by the slide show - the irony may have been lost on whoever posted that on you tube. Dubliners version waaayyyy superior.
> 
> ...




Yeah obvs the Dubliners is the best version but that vid seemed funnier.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 20, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> [QUOTE
> 
> (sorry - lets get back to the Joy of Brexit)



The real (only?) joy of Brexit would be a United Ireland, though I wouldn't wish the DUP on anyone.[/QUOTE]

I think Brexit has been fucking brilliant to be honest, but I await conspiracy theories from yer man about how Rees Mogg is a Papal agent engineering the re-unification of the 36 counties.

Would be hilarious, and fitting, if post-imperial hubris meant Ireland finally got its independence.


----------



## mx wcfc (Nov 20, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The real (only?) joy of Brexit would be a United Ireland, though I wouldn't wish the DUP on anyone.



I think Brexit has been fucking brilliant to be honest, but I await conspiracy theories from yer man about how Rees Mogg is a Papal agent engineering the re-unification of the 36 counties.

Would be hilarious, and fitting, if post-imperial hubris meant Ireland finally got its independence.[/QUOTE]
Oh to see Arlene Foster's face when the EU decide that the only way to make this whole sorry clusterfuck work is the island of  Ireland in the EU and outside the "UK"! 

actually, that would solve a lot of problems.......


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


>




SpackleFrog and Kaka Tim, just saw paisley and the flag and a knee jerk reaction followed. Old, tired, daft and sorry for leaping in.


----------



## GreatGutsby (Nov 21, 2018)

Can't clog the Mogg? What is he? A toilet? Swallowing shit endlessly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> > I think Brexit has been fucking brilliant to be honest, but I await conspiracy theories from yer man about how Rees Mogg is a Papal agent engineering the re-unification of the 36 counties.
> >
> > Would be hilarious, and fitting, if post-imperial hubris meant Ireland finally got its independence.
> 
> ...


Rumours he's a papal nonce may be unreliable


----------



## teqniq (Nov 21, 2018)

New Evidence Emerges of Steve Bannon and Cambridge Analytica’s Role in Brexit


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2018)

Ken Clarke backing the existing May deal looks like canny politics to me.
Certain to firm up the chances of the swivel-eyed wrecking it.


----------



## Santino (Nov 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Ken Clarke backing the existing May deal looks like canny politics to me.
> Certain to firm up the chances of the swivel-eyed wrecking it.


Coincidentally it's also what a 'rebel' Tory would do when push comes to shove, i.e. not rebel.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 21, 2018)

teqniq said:


> New Evidence Emerges of Steve Bannon and Cambridge Analytica’s Role in Brexit



Banks is never even going to get a stern telling off for all this stuff is he? He's openly bought a referendum result, almost certainly using dodgy funding, stolen data and psyops dark arts to do it; and the worst he's ever going to face is a few scathing editorials.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2018)

this letters stuff is such boarding school plot bollocks. Will Rees-Mogg fix that rotter etc


SpookyFrank said:


> Banks is never even going to get a stern telling off for all this stuff is he? He's openly bought a referendum result, almost certainly using dodgy funding, stolen data and psyops dark arts to do it; and the worst he's ever going to face is a few scathing editorials.


I'm assuming he resents being pulled on it anyway as this sort of stuff is SOP and how dare anyone etc etc


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Ken Clarke backing the existing May deal looks like canny politics to me.
> Certain to firm up the chances of the swivel-eyed wrecking it.



He could just be quite happy about the deal, I think a lot of Remainers are.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> He could just be quite happy about the deal, I think a lot of Remainers are.


Yep, all the EU shit but with added less 'democracy'. This is the next best thing to openly technocratic governance. And he/they don't even have to go out and argue for it.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> He could just be quite happy about the deal, I think a lot of Remainers are.


Or just not yet ready to retire from parliamentary politics?


----------



## splash (Nov 21, 2018)

Ken Clarke backing May's deal is a strange one. Either he's gone soft, maybe he's being clever and is trying to influence Brexiteer's into voting against it or he simply wants to be in power. Such a difficult thing to call.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

splash said:


> Ken Clarke backing May's deal is a strange one. Either he's gone soft, maybe he's being clever and is trying to influence Brexiteer's into voting against it or he simply wants to be in power. Such a difficult thing to call.



Or he just likes the deal.



brogdale said:


> Or just not yet ready to retire from parliamentary politics?



Probably not they still have a subsidised bar.


----------



## splash (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Or he just likes the deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Probably not they still have a subsidised bar.



Describing the deal as a   "dog's breakfast" is not my idea of liking it


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 21, 2018)

splash said:


> Describing the deal as a   "dog's breakfast" is not my idea of liking it


There's the deal and then there's the selling of himself as the arch-european in order to sell the deal. Of course he has to be slightly disparaging in order to make the 'this is the best we can get' in argument.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


>



could you summarise for those of us at work, for whom watching a tommy robinson video might attract some managerial interest - and not in a good way?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> could you summarise for those of us at work, for whom watching a tommy robinson video might attract some managerial interest - and not in a good way?



You think i watched it? it's something about a March down in that London


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

I havent done any research....


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 21, 2018)

what Jacob Rees-Mogg's week has been like so far


----------



## Patteran (Nov 21, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> could you summarise for those of us at work, for whom watching a tommy robinson video might attract some managerial interest - and not in a good way?



December 1st, London, march against 'The Great Betrayal' of Brexit. TR & Batten.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

Patteran said:


> December 1st, London, march against 'The Great Betrayal' of Brexit. TR & Batten.


if they think this is the great betrayal they won't believe what theresa may does next.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Just seen this on the internet.
*
May threatens 'no Brexit at all' *

Theresa May today threatened "no Brexit at all" if her deal is defeated in a furious PMQs clash.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 21, 2018)

I wonder if that will produce more signatures


----------



## andysays (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just seen this on the internet.
> *
> May threatens 'no Brexit at all' *
> 
> Theresa May today threatened "no Brexit at all" if her deal is defeated in a furious PMQs clash.


'and you'll all be sent to bed without your tea...'


----------



## Bavid Dowie (Nov 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> 'and you'll all be sent to bed without your tea...'



I'll bloody Brexit you in a minute'


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

Bavid Dowie said:


> I'll bloody Brexit you in a minute'


wait till your brexit comes home


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

andysays said:


> 'and you'll all be sent to bed without your brexit...'


corrected for you


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 21, 2018)

I'm turning this country round and going back to Pangaea if you don't behave yourselves


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Just seen this on the internet.
> *
> May threatens 'no Brexit at all' *
> 
> Theresa May today threatened "no Brexit at all" if her deal is defeated in a furious PMQs clash.


'You say it best when you say no Brexit at all'


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

So, is Theresa May turning from being this haunted wraith into a confident pro-EU 5th Columnist before our very eyes?

My answer to that is no, but she's _almost_ wearing her hat at a jaunty angle.  I suspect she's just genuinely enjoying the fuck ups the swivel eyed have made in the last week.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?


Technically, yes.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Technically, yes.



*May threatens 'no Brexit at all' *


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2018)

.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Technically, yes.


Now I'm worried; my car has number-plates with this forrin stuff on them...technically will I be able to drive it after March 29th?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Now I'm worried; my car has number-plates with this forrin stuff on them...technically will I be able to drive it after March 29th?
> 
> View attachment 153185



Keep them in a safe place, you will be refitting them in 2 years!


----------



## brogdale (Nov 21, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Keep them in a safe place, you will be refitting them in 2 years!


retro-fitting!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?


Just the blue passports.


----------



## Winot (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> *May threatens 'no Brexit at all' *



It's bollocks. The default is we leave on 29 March 2019. The only way that will not happen is if (a) we ask the EU for an extension and they agree; or (b) we revoke Art. 50*.

In the absence of (b), Brexit is going to happen.

(*Amusingly, the question of whether it is revocable has just been referred to the ECJ to decide, after much resistance from HMG)


----------



## kebabking (Nov 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Now I'm worried; my car has number-plates with this forrin stuff on them...technically will I be able to drive it after March 29th?
> 
> View attachment 153185



no, because you'll be in prison, having been convicted of being French or something. the upside of this nationalistic pogrom will be that it will become social responsible to throw stones at Audi's and BMW's.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's bollocks. The default is we leave on 29 March 2019. The only way that will not happen is if (a) we ask the EU for an extension and they agree; or (b) we revoke Art. 50*.
> 
> In the absence of (b), Brexit is going to happen.
> 
> (*Amusingly, the question of whether it is revocable has just been referred to the ECJ to decide, after much resistance from HMG)



So don't trust the priminster or what she says then?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Now I'm worried; my car has number-plates with this forrin stuff on them...technically will I be able to drive it after March 29th?
> 
> View attachment 153185


Drive it, fucking hell, it'll be a target!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

I'm beginning to think some of these politician chappies don't actually know what they are doing.  I had such high hopes for young Mr Grace Rees-Mogg.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?



Nah. I reckon it might not even happen technically.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's bollocks. The default is we leave on 29 March 2019. The only way that will not happen is if (a) we ask the EU for an extension and they agree; or (b) we revoke Art. 50*.
> 
> In the absence of (b), Brexit is going to happen.
> 
> (*Amusingly, the question of whether it is revocable has just been referred to the ECJ to decide, after much resistance from HMG)



It's not bollocks is it? There is a very real possibility, in fact it's likely, that Brexit won't happen or it will technically happen but it won't really involve Britain detaching itself from the EU. 

I think we can safely assume we know what the ECJ will say.


----------



## Winot (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not bollocks is it? There is a very real possibility, in fact it's likely, that Brexit won't happen or it will technically happen but it won't really involve Britain detaching itself from the EU.
> 
> I think we can safely assume we know what the ECJ will say.



So you think Art 50 will be revoked?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> So you think Art 50 will be revoked?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 21, 2018)

kebabking said:


> the upside of this nationalistic pogrom will be that it will become social responsible to throw stones at Audi's and BMW's.


Thank the Lord, that's all I ever wanted from brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> So you think Art 50 will be revoked?


We have a) no deal, b) may's shitty compromise, c) remain as the options. If we can revoke article 50, which we find out next week, then no deal disappears, only a tiny minority of mps want that. Only a minority of mps want may's shitty compromise. And while I doubt the majority of mps want to halt article 50 once a and b are off the table c becomes the only option in town


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> So you think Art 50 will be revoked?



I guarantee that the ECJ will say it can be revoked.


----------



## Winot (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I guarantee that the ECJ will say it can be revoked.



You should be a politician, not answering the question like that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> You should be a politician, not answering the question like that.



I just asked you a question and you ignored it! I've told you I'm certain it can be revoked, I'm not certain it will be.


----------



## agricola (Nov 21, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's bollocks. The default is we leave on 29 March 2019. The only way that will not happen is if (a) we ask the EU for an extension and they agree; or (b) we revoke Art. 50*.
> 
> In the absence of (b), Brexit is going to happen.
> 
> (*Amusingly, the question of whether it is revocable has just been referred to the ECJ to decide, after much resistance from HMG)



Indeed, because of course they know that there is nothing in law to stop us rescinding Article 50.


----------



## JHE (Nov 21, 2018)

agricola said:


> Indeed, because of course they know that there is nothing in law to stop us rescinding Article 50.



In Article 50 there is nothing at all about revoking notification of leaving the EU, nothing saying you can do it, nothing saying you can't do it and of course nothing about how you could do it. This is why the question has had to go to the ECJ. They have to interpret Article 50 on this point precisely because there is absolutely nothing explicit on the question.

I suppose there are at least three possible decisions the ECJ could make:

1. No, you cannot cancel. You're leaving even if you change your minds.
2. Yes, the country that sent notification of leaving can unilaterally cancel during the two-year period. Just write and let Mr J and Co know when you change your mind.
3. Yes, you can cancel but only with the agreement of the other members. (This is the condition Article 50 applies to any extension of the two-year period. Perhaps they'll say it also applies to cancellation.)


----------



## agricola (Nov 21, 2018)

JHE said:


> In Article 50 there is nothing at all about revoking notification of leaving the EU, nothing saying you can do it, nothing saying you can't do it and of course nothing about how you could do it. This is why the question has had to go to the ECJ. They have to interpret Article 50 on this point precisely because there is absolutely nothing explicit on the question.
> 
> I suppose there are at least three possible decisions the ECJ could make:
> 
> ...



(edit) Well yes, but the absence of any specific comment would suggest that there is nothing to prevent an Article 50 request being withdrawn before it becomes effective.

I mean, there is no way any court would find that option one is valid (given that to say that an Article 50 request could never be withdrawn once made would imply that an Article 49 request to join the EU could never be withdrawn once made as well, which is patently absurd), and as you say the text does not contain anything about seeking the agreement of other members to withdraw an Article 50 request (whereas it does about extending it) so it is hard to see how they would ever reach a decision like that in option three. 

Which of course only leaves one option, which is also what the bloke who helped draft Article 50 has been saying for the past year.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 21, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fair, sorry I read it as someone becoming disillusioned with our democracy.


Sorry I was being chatty 


THIS IS WHAT I LOOK LIKE WHEN I AM BEING CHATTY


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 21, 2018)

killer b said:


> maybe they never had the fucking numbers and it's all been hot air?


I thought we established pages ago there was no numbers can someone alert me when something actually happens cause it’s all gone a bit twitter 

Just realised there’s 113 msgs after this


Wilf said:


> I'm beginning to think some of these politician chappies don't actually know what they are doing.  I had such high hopes for young Mr Grace Rees-Mogg.


It’s almost as if that shrewd character we see in all the films that can second guess everyone’s moves up to 70 moves ahead doesn’t really exist and the whole shebang might collapse at any moment cause we are at the mercy of very rich gamblers.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 21, 2018)

It's one of the better democracies for your money. Well, a square mile of it, anyway.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> It's one of the better democracies for your money. Well, a square mile of it, anyway.


The more you let them off with, the harder it will be to fight back should passive aggressive become proper aggressive.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 22, 2018)

No, I mean you get a lot of democracy for your money.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> No, I mean you get a lot of democracy for your money.


No, you spend a lot of money for fuck all democracy


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

Poi E said:


> No, I mean you get a lot of democracy for your money.


I know someone who lives in a col flat and the amount of shit he's gone through to get a problem fixed is unbelievable. And of course tho they're his landlord he's no vote for the corporation. A lot of democracy my arse


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Sorry I was being chatty
> 
> 
> THIS IS WHAT I LOOK LIKE WHEN I AM BEING CHATTY


You need to put something over your caps lock to prevent it being turned on accidentally


----------



## andysays (Nov 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I know someone who lives in a col flat and the amount of shit he's gone through to get a problem fixed is unbelievable. And of course tho they're his landlord he's no vote for the corporation. A lot of democracy my arse


I think what Poi E was suggesting is that you only really benefit from 'democracy' if you have plenty of money


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think what Poi E was suggesting is that you only really benefit from 'democracy' if you have plenty of money


if you've plenty of money you don't benefit from 'democracy', you ride roughshod over it


----------



## ffsear (Nov 22, 2018)

This is doing the rounds...

could well be fake..


----------



## TopCat (Nov 22, 2018)

ffsear said:


> This is doing the rounds...
> 
> could well be fake..


Have you read it?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 22, 2018)

ffsear said:


> This is doing the rounds...
> 
> could well be fake..



TLDR

Just give me the bit I'm supposed to be angry about.


----------



## Winot (Nov 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just give me the bit I'm supposed to be angry about.



British passports *are* going to be blue, but they're going to be half the size as before to reflect our diminished position on the world stage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> TLDR
> 
> Just give me the bit I'm supposed to be angry about.


just the words


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

On the news I heard something about a technical solution to the Irish border being on the table in some way.
Previously the mantra was something along the lines of 'we have different currencies, there is already a 'border' for a few (minor?) things, there will be a trusted trader scheme, exemptions for local businesses, paperless carnets, and 'technology'.'
All very aspirational (and unrealistic given the physical Geography), but the difficult question arises when there are transgressions.
Vehicles and people with no ID, those outside any schemes, moody stuff being transferred to and fro. What kind of infrastructure will be in place to monitor the border, and if there is any, does that not constitute a 'hard' border, and would it be at odds with the GFA?
If it was so straightforward how come there is still this 11th hour shenanigans?
Any solution presently suggested will unravel very quickly.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> On the news I heard something about a technical solution to the Irish border being on the table in some way.
> Previously the mantra was something along the lines of 'we have different currencies, there is already a 'border' for a few (minor?) things, there will be a trusted trader scheme, exemptions for local businesses, paperless carnets, and 'technology'.'
> All very aspirational (and unrealistic given the physical Geography), but the difficult question arises when there are transgressions.
> Vehicles and people with no ID, those outside any schemes, moody stuff being transferred to and fro. What kind of infrastructure will be in place to monitor the border, and if there is any, does that not constitute a 'hard' border, and would it be at odds with the GFA?
> ...



The EU agreed weeks ago to the principle of any checks being away from the border, which would cover the vast majority of transactions.

There's a long tradition of smuggling across the border, it leaks like hell, nowt would stop that, not even 'hard border checks' on the main roads.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The EU agreed weeks ago to the principle of any checks being away from the border, which would cover the vast majority of transactions.
> 
> There's a long tradition of smuggling across the border, it leaks like hell, nowt would stop that, not even 'hard border checks' on the main roads.


There may be non smugglers who are still outside schemes. How do they get checked?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There may be non smugglers who are still outside schemes. How do they get checked?


outside schemes, like outdoor relief?


----------



## hash tag (Nov 22, 2018)

There is no need to panic or worry, Tim, nice but Dim is going on tour to explain eveverthings gonna be alright
https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/wetherspoons-boss-tim-martin-pub-tour-no-deal-brexit/


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 22, 2018)

hash tag said:


> There is no need to panic or worry, Tim, nice but Dim is going on tour to explain eveverthings gonna be alright
> https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/wetherspoons-boss-tim-martin-pub-tour-no-deal-brexit/


He’s not nice and he’s not dim either. No deal Brexit is perfect for his downmarket business strategy - the economy tanks, the £ devalues again, and much of the mid-range of the leisure industry goes bust. And bad news for his employees whose salaries, rights and other employment opportunities will all be diminished. He’ll be laughing though. The cunt.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There may be non smugglers who are still outside schemes. How do they get checked?


I was talking to my dad on the weekend. He was stopped by a joint Guards, Customs, and Oglaigh na hEireann at the weekend, they were checking for agri diesel in motors.

I suspect the checks will take place in the same way they always have, at the end of a barrel of a gun in the North and by some jumped up bully with Army backing in the South.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There may be non smugglers who are still outside schemes. How do they get checked?



Outside schemes?

The suggestion is that there could be simple web-forms to complete.

I assume you have heard of the internet?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

flypanam said:


> I was talking to my dad on the weekend. He was stopped by a joint Guards, Customs, and Oglaigh na hEireann at the weekend, they were checking for agri diesel in motors.



It's fairly rare nowadays, but it still happens on the UK mainland that diesel vehicles are stopped & dipped to check they are not driving on 'red' diesel, nowt to do with any borders, just a case of checking the drivers are not illegally driving with duty-free diesel.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

flypanam said:


> I was talking to my dad on the weekend. He was stopped by a joint Guards, Customs, and Oglaigh na hEireann at the weekend, they were checking for agri diesel in motors.
> 
> I suspect the checks will take place in the same way they always have, at the end of a barrel of a gun in the North and by some jumped up bully with Army backing in the South.


the oglaigh na heireann, they were






i suppose and not


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's fairly rare nowadays, but it still happens on the UK mainland that diesel vehicles are stopped & dipped to check they are not driving on 'red' diesel, nowt to do with any borders, just a case of checking the drivers are not illegally driving with duty-free diesel.


Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.



I got stopped on the way down to Brecon in the last few months - HMRC with Police support.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.



It's Customs (HMRC) who do it, mainly in very rural areas where farms get red diesel delivered and people may be tempted to use that for their personal transportation needs.


----------



## flypanam (Nov 22, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the oglaigh na heireann, they were
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yup that’s the lads.

The diesel checks are fairly common in Monaghan. Every week there are reports in the local paper of court cases regarding agri diesel. However the lads making it on the side are getting better, my old man says it’ll no longer wreck your engine.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Outside schemes?
> 
> The suggestion is that there could be simple web-forms to complete.
> 
> I assume you have heard of the internet?



Do you think that every person and driver of every vehicle will have completed a web form, simple or not, for every time they cross the border?
What happens to those who cross without having completed such internet stuff?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.



It's normally done in rural areas, or on busier roads when there's a joint operation between police, DVLA, customs & sometimes a local authority, clamping down on potential dangerous vehicles, mainly commercial ones, but some cars get pulled in too, for all sorts of checks by the various 'partners' taking part in the operation, those checks include dipping tanks on  diesel vehicles.

I witnessed it once a couple of years ago, when they blocked off the inner lane of the A27 dual- carriageway, slowed the traffic right down, and it seemed randomly directed certain vehicles into the inner lane for checks, I know someone that had has van dipped in that operation.

ETA - just remembered, I know a taxi driver that have been stopped & dipped in town, in a joint police & customs operation, totally random checks.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Nov 22, 2018)

I've seen it twice here (rural) in a few years. They were knocking on my neighbours door who was out, they suspected she was using red diesel for her horsebox. They were particularly nasty, arrogant pricks. Said they had the right to gain entry to her house without her there? They made the police look like some sort of Mary Poppins outfit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 22, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> I've seen it twice here (rural) in a few years. They were knocking on my neighbours door who was out, they suspected she was using red diesel for her horsebox. They were particularly nasty, arrogant pricks. Said they had the right to gain entry to her house without her there? They made the police look like some sort of Mary Poppins outfit.



Customs can do what the fuck they like.

Knock, knock.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's Customs (HMRC) who do it, mainly in very rural areas where farms get red diesel delivered and people may be tempted to use that for their personal transportation needs.



Used to happen to me regularly when I worked for a plant hire company!


----------



## kebabking (Nov 22, 2018)

One of the farmers round here got done for flogging it to Taxi drivers. Taxi drivers got done as well, as did a garage that did 'flushing' services for said taxi drivers....


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Do you think that every person and driver of every vehicle will have completed a web form, simple or not, for every time they cross the border?
> What happens to those who cross without having completed such internet stuff?



It would not apply to every vehicle, they would only be looking at the major transport companies & people making regular crossings in sizeable vehicles, not Joe Public in a fucking mini or little van, which part of 'there's a long tradition of smuggling across the border, it leaks like hell, nowt would stop that, not even 'hard border checks' on the main roads', do you not understand?

I am sure I've pointed this out, to you, before - less than 10% of goods coming into the UK from non-EU countries are actually subject to physical checks. 

Are you seriously as thick as you are coming across on here?


----------



## xenon (Nov 22, 2018)

Red diesel. Does the thing of running it through a loaf of bread work?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2018)

xenon said:


> Does the thing of running it through a loaf of bread work?



No, allegedly officer.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> ...Are you seriously as thick as you are coming across on here?



Not thick perhaps - but worse: massively, and deliberately ignorant of anything that happens outside of the M25.

Perhaps he writes for the Guardian...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Customs can do what the fuck they like.
> 
> Knock, knock.



Yep, more power of entry than the police.

I think Dr. Furface will be suitably convinced that 'dipping' is not unusual, considering the various replies above.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, more power of entry than the police.
> 
> I think Dr. Furface will be suitably convinced that 'dipping' is not unusual, considering the various replies above.



I once got pulled by Humberside’s finest, for a dodgy rear light. They tried to dip my tank with a fairy liquid bottle with clear tube on it. The tube was already stained and I said that it would contaminate my tank, I requested someone from customs and excise to come along. They sent me off with a producer note and filthy looks.


----------



## killer b (Nov 22, 2018)

John Bull's latest is glorious. Click through for the thread.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 22, 2018)

Thanks for all your replies. I’m still gobsmacked, though I know I shouldn’t be surprised.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Thanks for all your replies. I’m still gobsmacked, though I know I shouldn’t be surprised.


Yeh at this point all capacity for surprise should have gone


----------



## TopCat (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.


It's not that rare.
Eta read the thread.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I once got pulled by Humberside’s finest, for a dodgy rear light. They tried to dip my tank with a fairy liquid bottle with clear tube on it. The tube was already stained and I said that it would contaminate my tank, I requested someone from customs and excise to come along. They sent me off with a producer note and filthy looks.



Blimey, I've never heard of the police being interested, normally they are just sucked in to support customs.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, I've never heard of the police being interested, normally they are just sucked in to support customs.



I think they were just trying it on, they also advised I get a sign on my van, cos I looked like a traveller! They used other words though!


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would not apply to every vehicle, they would only be looking at the major transport companies & people making regular crossings in sizeable vehicles, not Joe Public in a fucking mini or little van, which part of 'there's a long tradition of smuggling across the border, it leaks like hell, nowt would stop that, not even 'hard border checks' on the main roads', do you not understand?
> 
> I am sure I've pointed this out, to you, before - less than 10% of goods coming into the UK from non-EU countries are actually subject to physical checks.
> 
> Are you seriously as thick as you are coming across on here?



So a sizeable vehicle crosses the border, or a container lorry, and there is no internet presence from them discovered through the use of (presumably) cameras, or other devices. What do the authorities do? Check 10% of them, wave them through, ignore them, have a cross country chase, track them to wherever?
If they are not to be ignored then some kind of control (possibly sanction) system would be need to be in place linked in some way to the presence of the border?
That would be something that isn't in place at the moment.
I think you are missing the point I am making, but details of things like red diesel checks are posted on this thread, and I am trying to follow details that follow a formal border to discover if there is some kind of conclusion.
Incidentally I think it simply can't happen in practice, and as a result one of the main planks of brexit (apparently) won't happen.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Not thick perhaps - but worse: massively, and deliberately ignorant of anything that happens outside of the M25.
> 
> Perhaps he writes for the Guardian...



You are mistaken in your assumption regarding me.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> You are mistaken in your assumption regarding me.



And yet....


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> So a sizeable vehicle crosses the border, or a container lorry, and there is no internet presence from them discovered through the use of (presumably) cameras, or other devices. What do the authorities do? Check 10% of them, wave them through, ignore them, have a cross country chase, track them to wherever?
> If they are not to be ignored then some kind of control (possibly sanction) system would be need to be in place linked in some way to the presence of the border?
> That would be something that isn't in place at the moment.
> I think you are missing the point I am making, but details of things like red diesel checks are posted on this thread, and I am trying to follow details that follow a formal border to discover if there is some kind of conclusion.
> Incidentally I think it simply can't happen in practice, and as a result one of the main planks of brexit (apparently) won't happen.



The EU agreed at least a couple of months ago that “most checks [should they be required] can take place away from the border: at the company premises or in the markets”, why are you still trying to make an issue about something that can be so easily be resolved, and isn't actually a real problem?

FFS, this isn't rocket science, we can send people into space, dealing with this is a piece of piss in comparison.

Whatever happens, there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The EU agreed at least a couple of months ago that “*most* checks [should they be required] can take place away from the border: at the company premises or in the markets”, why are you still trying to make an issue about something that can be so easily be resolved, and isn't actually a real problem?
> 
> FFS, this isn't rocket science, we can send people into space, dealing with this is a piece of piss in comparison.
> 
> Whatever happens, there will be no hard border on the island of Ireland.



As you suggest 'most' as I am saying 'but not all'.
If we can send people into space and dealing with this is a piece of piss, then it ought to be possible to explain how the piece of piss would happen. I bet rocket scientists are able to explain how their rockets work.
Checks at company premises, or markets assume that stuff flowing across a border are connected to a company, a company that has premises, or heading to and from a market, but what if they're not?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> As you suggest 'most' as I am saying 'but not all'.
> If we can send people into space and dealing with this is a piece of piss, then it ought to be possible to explain how the piece of piss would happen. I bet rocket scientists are able to explain how their rockets work.
> Checks at company premises, or markets assume that stuff flowing across a border are connected to a company, a company that has premises, or heading to and from a market, but what if they're not?



The vast majority of trips back & forth across that border are by a fairly small number of operators.

Some individuals will continue with small scale smuggling, as they have since Ireland was divided, there's no way of stopping that, with about 300 roads crossing the border, nothing can stop that - not even a so-called 'hard border.

How many fucking times do I have to point this out to you?


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The vast majority of trips back & forth across that border are by a fairly small number of operators...


Link?


----------



## TopCat (Nov 22, 2018)

If prices are markedly different on either side of the border, smuggling will increase.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Link?



google is your friend.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> The vast majority of trips back & forth across that border are by a fairly small number of operators.
> 
> Some individuals will continue with small scale smuggling, as they have since Ireland was divided, there's no way of stopping that, with about 300 roads crossing the border, nothing can stop that - not even a so-called 'hard border.
> 
> How many fucking times do I have to point this out to you?



How many ways can I point out to you that if future arrangements are different from the arrangements now, then it is a border that is different to the one now?


----------



## andysays (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> How many ways can I point out to you that if future arrangements are different from the arrangements now, then it is a border that is different to the one now?


Rather than having a go at cupid_stunt (or anyone else on this thread) maybe you should take all this up with the EU negotiators who, according to today's announcement of an agreed political declaration, are quite happy with the proposal to use technology to ensure there is no need for the Northern Ireland backstop to be used.

Where on earth did you get the idea that there wouldn't be a border arrangement that was in some way different to that which exists now?


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 22, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> google is your friend.


You're made a claim, you should be able to back it up.

Perfectly reasonable request.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 22, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> they also advised I get a sign on my van, cos I looked like a traveller!



This is useful info to avoid untethered pigs on the highway.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

andysays said:


> Rather than having a go at cupid_stunt (or anyone else on this thread) maybe you should take all this up with the EU negotiators who, according to today's announcement of an agreed political declaration, are quite happy with the proposal to use technology to ensure there is no need for the Northern Ireland backstop to be used.
> 
> Where on earth did you get the idea that there wouldn't be a border arrangement that was in some way different to that which exists now?


I got the idea from the Belfast Agreement. And subsequent events following that agreement.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 22, 2018)

.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> This has all stopped making sense so I guess Philosophical is back.
> 
> Hold on a sec, there's a new brexit secretary right? Maybe 'Philosophical' is a DExEu account, and they're on here getting us to explain the basics of their job to them. I bet, I just fucking bet they started posting around the time of Raab's appoinment, then Raab gave up for a bit when he realised he wasn't actually going to have to do any work, and now the new fella has popped up on the same account and we have to go through it all again.
> 
> I'm on to you philosophical , fuck off back to fiddling your expenses or sexually harassing interns or whatever it is you government wankers do.



I do not work for the government, nor fiddle expenses. neither do I sexually harass anybody.
I would suggest a snide dig at me is a way of avoiding any engagement with the wider debate, and it may possibly be beneficial to you personally in that it gives you a bit of a thrill.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I do not work for the government, nor fiddle expenses. neither do I sexually harass anybody.
> I would suggest a snide dig at me is a way of avoiding any engagement with the wider debate, and it may possibly be beneficial to you personally in that it gives you a bit of a thrill.


SpookyFrank will suggest you try harder in future then


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 22, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> ...I'm on to you philosophical , fuck off back to fiddling your expenses or sexually harassing interns or whatever it is you government wankers do.


You're a cunt.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 22, 2018)

Yes, probably.

Post deleted because it was offensive, content-free shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You're a cunt.


Tell me something new


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 22, 2018)

Anyway...ignoring loudmouths who can't back stuff up and foulmouths...

This is a pretty devastating breakdown of where the Uk is...

May’s Brexit deal: the legal verdict | The Spectator


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 22, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Anyway...ignoring loudmouths who can't back stuff up and foulmouths...
> 
> This is a pretty devastating breakdown of where the Uk is...
> 
> May’s Brexit deal: the legal verdict | The Spectator


That's not where the UK is

It's where this temporary government is, temporarily


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.



They were doing it to people going to the Beautiful Days festival in Devon a few years back. Nothing to do with The Levellers' association with the travelling community of course.


----------



## Supine (Nov 22, 2018)

Looks like an interesting read

Austerity swung voters to Brexit – and now they are changing their minds


----------



## existentialist (Nov 22, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> Really? There’s a stop and search policy for diesel vehicles? I’m not doubting your knowledge, I’m just gobsmacked to learn of it, no matter how rare it may be.


Particularly common in rural areas - I've seen it quite regularly in these parts.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 22, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> They were doing it to people going to the Beautiful Days festival in Devon a few years back. Nothing to do with The Levellers' association with the travelling community of course.



By pure coincidence I may well have had Levelling the Land cassette on in when they tried to dip me!


----------



## hash tag (Nov 23, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> He’s not nice and he’s not dim either. No deal Brexit is perfect for his downmarket business strategy - the economy tanks, the £ devalues again, and much of the mid-range of the leisure industry goes bust. And bad news for his employees whose salaries, rights and other employment opportunities will all be diminished. He’ll be laughing though. The cunt.



To clarify, I doubt he's dim, just that he really reminds me of times, nice but dim


----------



## andysays (Nov 23, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I got the idea from the Belfast Agreement. And subsequent events following that agreement.


So is there a section in the Belfast Agreement which states that the border arrangements agreed there are to apply forever and ever, regardless of any changes in circumstances and future agreement to establish new arrangements?

I suggest you contact the British PM, the Irish Taoiseach and the EU negotiators as a matter of urgency and tell them that only you know what the GFA means and that they've all got it horribly wrong.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> So is there a section in the Belfast Agreement which states that the border arrangements agreed there are to apply forever and ever, regardless of any changes in circumstances and future agreement to establish new arrangements?
> 
> I suggest you contact the British PM, the Irish Taoiseach and the EU negotiators as a matter of urgency and tell them that only you know what the GFA means and that they've all got it horribly wrong.


During this dreadful process the Irish Taoiseach, the PM and the EU negotiators have been continually concerned about the border. As has the head of the PSNI and others. Yesterday May attempted a last minute play with regard to a so called technological solution to enable brexit, not a future discussion about the GFA. If the issue is so simple to solve then it hasn't happened yet after two and a half years.
There is a common travel area agreed.
If there is a changed border it changes the GFA (although that may be agreed at some future date).
My point is that a change makes it a hard border however much some might suggest it would hardly be noticed, because of the systems needed to deal with transgressions, systems that aren't in place now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2018)

philosophical said:


> During this dreadful process the Irish Taoiseach, the PM and the EU negotiators have been continually concerned about the border. As has the head of the PSNI and others. Yesterday May attempted a last minute play with regard to a so called technological solution to enable brexit, not a future discussion about the GFA. If the issue is so simple to solve then it hasn't happened yet after two and a half years.
> There is a common travel area agreed.
> If there is a changed border it changes the GFA (although that may be agreed at some future date).
> My point is that a change makes it a hard border however much some might suggest it would hardly be noticed, because of the systems needed to deal with transgressions, systems that aren't in place now.


By transgression you mean people crossing the line I suppose


----------



## andysays (Nov 23, 2018)

philosophical said:


> During this dreadful process the Irish Taoiseach, the PM and the EU negotiators have been continually concerned about the border. As has the head of the PSNI and others. Yesterday May attempted a last minute play with regard to a so called technological solution to enable brexit, not a future discussion about the GFA. If the issue is so simple to solve then it hasn't happened yet after two and a half years.
> There is a common travel area agreed.
> If there is a changed border it changes the GFA (although that may be agreed at some future date).
> My point is that a change makes it a hard border however much some might suggest it would hardly be noticed, because of the systems needed to deal with transgressions, systems that aren't in place now.


So you're saying that *anything* different from what exists now is a hard border...
 Have you been in touch with the various parties to the negotiations yet to point out their error? Please let us know what their response is.


----------



## philosophical (Nov 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> So you're saying that *anything* different from what exists now is a hard border...
> Have you been in touch with the various parties to the negotiations yet to point out their error? Please let us know what their response is.



Yes I am saying that.
There is no error to point out.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 23, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2018)




----------



## free spirit (Nov 23, 2018)

andysays said:


> Rather than having a go at cupid_stunt (or anyone else on this thread) maybe you should take all this up with the EU negotiators who, according to today's announcement of an agreed political declaration, are quite happy with the proposal to use technology to ensure there is no need for the Northern Ireland backstop to be used.
> 
> Where on earth did you get the idea that there wouldn't be a border arrangement that was in some way different to that which exists now?


That would be a misreading of the text.

All they have agreed to is to 'consider' any such proposals if and when they're made.

There's nothing in the text that commits them to not rejecting the proposals after giving them due consideration.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


>



Invisible ski machine?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Invisible ski machine?


if only there were


----------



## Ground Elder (Nov 23, 2018)

Cornwall Council starts negotiations with Barnier


----------



## Poi E (Nov 23, 2018)

Always thought it would be Scotland first to go.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2018)

Still, against all evidence, I have an inkling that enough Tories will be whipped into line - a mixture of not wanting to be blamed for either no deal or Corbyn and pure exhaustion. Probably after an initial failure to get the legislation through, a few irrelevant tweaks etc. My record as a pundit is _appalling_ though (brexit, trump, 2017 Gen Election - got them all wrong ). Might end up being all about abstentions in the end.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


>



Dance like nobody is watching you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 23, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Still, against all evidence, I have an inkling that enough Tories will be whipped into line - a mixture of not wanting to be blamed for either no deal or Corbyn and pure exhaustion. Probably after an initial failure to get the legislation through, a few irrelevant tweaks etc. My record as a pundit is _appalling_ though (brexit, trump, 2017 Gen Election - got them all wrong ). Might end up being all about abstentions in the end.


My record isn't much better - did get 2017 right though. But my feeling is increasingly that this won't get through. In some ways it ties the UK even closer to the EU than doing nothing. It pleases nobody and the threat that it is this or crashing out is a hollow one. It will be even more hollow when the ejc  rules that a50 can be extended.

I think the idea that instead of the Norway model or Canada model we in fact are presented with the Moldova model could gain traction.


----------



## kebabking (Nov 23, 2018)

Sorry folks, but my title as Urbans' Worst Political Forecaster is not up for debate.

At least, I don't foresee it being up for debate...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Sorry folks, but my title as Urbans' Worst Political Forecaster is not up for debate.
> 
> At least, I don't foresee it being up for debate...


Some things cannot be argued with


----------



## Wilf (Nov 23, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My record isn't much better - did get 2017 right though. But my feeling is increasingly that this won't get through. In some ways it ties the UK even closer to the EU than doing nothing. It pleases nobody and the threat that it is this or crashing out is a hollow one. It will be even more hollow when the ejc  rules that a50 can be extended.
> 
> I think the idea that instead of the Norway model or Canada model we in fact are presented with the Moldova model could gain traction.


Must admit I've lapsed into a the kind of politics free punditry you get from... pundits. The Tories want it go away, that don't want nothing, they don't want Corbyn - there's a _possibility_ it the deal will meander through as the choice of the exhausted and defeated. It will certainly be a betrayal for anybody near the erg, but I just have a feeling the rest of the Tories are silently meandering into the territory of a close vote, lots of pressure on the night, MPs in tears (hopefully).  At the very least, It's a scenario, bleary eyed MPs coming out with stuff the day after along the lines of 'it wasn't what I wanted, but in the end I... cont. p.94).


----------



## Supine (Nov 23, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Dance like nobody is watching you.



Brexit like nobody's watching us


----------



## ska invita (Nov 23, 2018)

If deal doesn't go through and May stands down it's a three month Tory election process. They might just about pick someone by the middle of March. Lol.

During that period I presume deputy prime minister takes over? One David Livington I presume.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 23, 2018)

Either that or GE. Losing a high level but of legislation like this, by as large a margin as is being threatened, is surely enough?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 23, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Either that or GE. Losing a high level but of legislation like this, by as large a margin as is being threatened, is surely enough?


Without a block/extension to A50 both elections are not neutral exercises but would lead to a no deal by default.

They don't have to call a GE, and why would they


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 23, 2018)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 23, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Without a block/extension to A50 both elections are not neutral exercises but would lead to a no deal by default.
> 
> They don't have to call a GE, and why would they


Because that would show that they can't govern.  It's not so different from losing a budget vote or queen's speech vote


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 23, 2018)

if anything - the number of mps prepared to  vote against the deal seems to growing -

Theresa May prepares to face biggest threat to date: the Tory party

i guess as more depressing details about it emerge. the brexiteers have an open goal on this - the exit deal is shit on so many levels - and the glorious sunny uplands of control being taken back and and end to free movement rest on trusting  Mays absolute determination and ability to sort it all out during the transition period.

Whats staggering is that the blocs to any sort of meaningful deal were completely clear from the start - but it has taken all that time for that reality to be accepted by the government. Why the fuck did she paint herself into a corner almost straight away by "red lining" everything but a hard brexit and then kicking the can down the road until the road ran out and she crashed into a big sign saying "complete and utterly humiliating climbdown" ?


----------



## gosub (Nov 23, 2018)

Chancellor pledges £66m for Northern Ireland schools ahead of DUP conference speech - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## alex_ (Nov 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> Chancellor pledges £66m for Northern Ireland schools ahead of DUP conference speech - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk



They might have found the magic money tree in Ulster after all.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 23, 2018)

Thar Brexit, thar mendsit!


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 23, 2018)

gosub said:


> Chancellor pledges £66m for Northern Ireland schools ahead of DUP conference speech - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


Not all of them, I'm betting.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Whats staggering is that the blocs to any sort of meaningful deal were completely clear from the start - but it has taken all that time for that reality to be accepted by the government. Why the fuck did she paint herself into a corner almost straight away by "red lining" everything but a hard brexit and then kicking the can down the road until the road ran out and she crashed into a big sign saying "complete and utterly humiliating climbdown" ?



The lady's not for learning.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 23, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Because that would show that they can't govern.  It's not so different from losing a budget vote or queen's speech vote


Fixed Term Parliament Act arguably means it needs to be in the majority self-interest. Quite how that pans out, who knows. Tory gambling hasn't necessarily been rational to date, has it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> if anything - the number of mps prepared to  vote against the deal seems to growing -
> 
> Theresa May prepares to face biggest threat to date: the Tory party
> 
> ...





Two options:

No Brexit.

Or

Hard Brexit.

Hard Brexit won’t be great, but won’t be the end of days the ‘remoaners’ make out either. It will be bad if jack shit is decided in advance, but with planning on both sides it can be smooth and orderly.

In any divorce things get shitty on both sides, then once separated they hopefully get better for each party. What we have here is one side who wants to leave for party time, but doesn’t want to lose having their dinner on the table at six and a shag every now and then, and another side who is bitter about the affrontery and wishes to fuck them up unless they can be bullied in to staying.

Unedifying, to say the least.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 23, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You need to put something over your caps lock to prevent it being turned on accidentally


I would if I was in the habit of turning on caps accidentally YA DICK


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 23, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Two options:
> 
> No Brexit.
> 
> ...


To be fair smooth and orderly from their point of view doesn’t always look the same this side of the fence.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 23, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Whats staggering is that the blocs to any sort of meaningful deal were completely clear from the start - but it has taken all that time for that reality to be accepted by the government. Why the fuck did she paint herself into a corner almost straight away by "red lining" everything but a hard brexit and then kicking the can down the road until the road ran out and she crashed into a big sign saying "complete and utterly humiliating climbdown" ?



Think she was just plain terrified of the Brexit hardliners and her strategy was to string them along and then hit them with reality as late in the game as possible. But, yeah, pretty obvious flaw in that strategy. I actually think her deal could be sailing through in a parallel universe where she had been preparing the ground for it with her party. So I'm not so sure she's done a terrible job in negotiating with the EU. But she's done a fucking excellent job of making sure it was a waste of everyone's time.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 23, 2018)

alex_ said:


> They might have found the magic money tree in Ulster after all.



Why don’t the Tories stop fucking about and just revert to their old name of Conservative and Unionist Party. They deserve each other so much.


----------



## Winot (Nov 23, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Two options:
> 
> No Brexit.
> 
> ...



Hard Brexit is the macho choice of the hard-of-understanding, the frustrated bloke in the pub who can’t be dealing with detail and wants to tell those Frenchies where to stick it. It’s the small businessman who runs his own firm and tells his staff “Just get it done OK?” when they try to get him to engage with complexity. It’s David Davies boasting that “This will be the easiest trade deal in history” because he was in the fucking SAS.

Nobody with any sense wants a hard Brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 23, 2018)

Winot said:


> Hard Brexit is the macho choice of the hard-of-understanding, the frustrated bloke in the pub who can’t be dealing with detail and wants to tell those Frenchies where to stick it. It’s the small businessman who runs his own firm and tells his staff “Just get it done OK?” when they try to get him to engage with complexity. It’s David Davies boasting that “This will be the easiest trade deal in history” because he was in the fucking SAS.
> 
> Nobody with any sense wants a hard Brexit.


Unless they're very rich and see a chance to get richer and are amoral, obviously.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 23, 2018)

Leavers are the ones who walk away from omelas and remainers are the ones who do not. 

I have more, and more torturous, analogies to bring. But what with the car crash one, the four weddings and a divorce or three stories, well I think the allegorical bantz may have reached over saturation for one lifetime


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 23, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Leavers are the ones who walk away from omelas



...only to stop just outside the gates while an argument develops among those who think keeping the child in the cellar is wrong and those who think they could have an Omelas twice as good if they had _two_ children in a cellar.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 23, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> ...only to stop just outside the gates while an argument develops among those who think keeping the child in the cellar is wrong and those who think they could have an Omelas twice as good if they had _two_ children in a cellar.


don't stretch a strained allegory! it'll snap and hit me in the eye


----------



## Badgers (Nov 23, 2018)

I thought it was all done and sorted?


----------



## gosub (Nov 24, 2018)




----------



## ska invita (Nov 24, 2018)

Good article going through procedure.. sounds like it knows what its talking about. Though as ever there's a few Ifs and Coulds.

The bit about second ref is guardian click bait sub editing, though it does consider that eventuality

We’re heading for a second referendum – and maybe a third | Vernon Bogdanor


----------



## paolo (Nov 24, 2018)

gosub said:


>




Good post, just watched it all.


----------



## Winot (Nov 24, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Good article going through procedure.. sounds like it knows what its talking about. Though as ever there's a few Ifs and Coulds.
> 
> The bit about second ref is guardian click bait sub editing, though it does consider that eventuality
> 
> We’re heading for a second referendum – and maybe a third | Vernon Bogdanor



Yes it’s very good. Summarises clearly the mess we’re in.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 24, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Hard Brexit won’t be great, but won’t be the end of days the ‘remoaners’ make out either. It will be bad if jack shit is decided in advance, but with planning on both sides it can be smooth and orderly.



So hard brexit will be ok if there is a deal?

Alex


----------



## brogdale (Nov 24, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Good article going through procedure.. sounds like it knows what its talking about. Though as ever there's a few Ifs and Coulds.
> 
> The bit about second ref is guardian click bait sub editing, though it does consider that eventuality
> 
> We’re heading for a second referendum – and maybe a third | Vernon Bogdanor


Vernon Bogdanor most certainly knows what he is talking about but he is, of course, not without his own elite, liberal agenda. Remember that this is the Brasenose professor who said of one notable former PPE undergrad..."one of the ablest" students he has taught with "moderate and sensible Conservative" political views.

Which kind of brings us to where we are.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 24, 2018)

alex_ said:


> So hard brexit will be ok if there is a deal?
> 
> Alex



If by hard Brexit you mean leaving the single market and customs union, yeah it could be fine, all the other countries in the world except those in the EU’s single market manage just fine.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 24, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If by hard Brexit you mean leaving the single market and customs union, yeah it could be fine, all the other countries in the world except those in the EU’s single market manage just fine.


On average, though, not as well as the UK currently does.


----------



## Voley (Nov 24, 2018)

'Ramoners'


----------



## kebabking (Nov 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> On average, though, not as well as the UK currently does.



Most people who get divorced aren't as well off as they were when they were married, but they are a fuck of a lot happier...


----------



## paolo (Nov 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Most people who get divorced aren't as well off as they were when they were married, but they are a fuck of a lot happier...



Divorcees are happier than people who are married?

(If you're not saying that, apologies)


----------



## brogdale (Nov 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Most people who get divorced aren't as well off as they were when they were married, but they are a fuck of a lot happier...


...but not if they re-marry instantly into another controlling relationship and realise it's the institution of 'marriage' that sucks...not merely the 'partner(s)'.


----------



## tommers (Nov 24, 2018)

Are we still talking about Brexit?


----------



## Supine (Nov 24, 2018)

kebabking said:


> Most people who get divorced aren't as well off as they were when they were married, but they are a fuck of a lot happier...



But they dont have to live next door to each other and trade with each other so it's not a great analogy.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 24, 2018)

The divorce analogy is way too simplistic to describe the myriad integrations to unpick... It's like the attempt to describe the financial crisis and austerity as how much money is in that porcelain Chicken in that old Liverpool comedy Bread. By simplifying it hides realities and truths.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 24, 2018)

tommers said:


> Are we still talking about Brexit?


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 24, 2018)

Supine said:


> But they dont have to live next door to each other and trade with each other so it's not a great analogy.



Divorced middle-aged man might not be such a bad analogy for post-Brexit Britain - not hard to see the country moaning about its ex all the time and blowing shitloads of money on a sports-car industry to try to impress countries much younger than it.


----------



## Supine (Nov 24, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Divorced middle-aged man might not be such a bad analogy for post-Brexit Britain - not hard to see the country moaning about its ex all the time and blowing shitloads of money on a sports-car industry to try to impress countries much younger than it.



Hopefully not divorced middle aged man who ends up on the streets with a drug problem begging for scraps from passing nations.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 24, 2018)

Hardly a divorce is it; customs union means - according to this analogy - we still living together.

We're going on separate holidays and staying together until the kids leave school or something is about all - daft, pointless comparison for the hard of understanding.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 24, 2018)

I think we all need to accept that the analogy has happened and it has produced a clear outcome. It may not have given everyone everything they might have hoped for, but what we should all do now is come together as a thread and make it work. I know there are some who think we could manage perfectly well without an analogy. But that would put the strength of our rhetorical style at risk. Others may favour a second analogy, but that might make some of us very grumpy. What people say to me when I meet them in the street is that they just want us to get on with it, and I've been very clear that that's what I intend to do.


----------



## paolo (Nov 24, 2018)

..


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 24, 2018)

Raheem said:


> ...but what we should all do now is come together as a thread and make it work....


ummm....nope

you broke it...you fix it


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 24, 2018)

Emphasis on the last sentence.


----------



## DexterTCN (Nov 24, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>


----------



## Supine (Nov 24, 2018)

Brilliant 

http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/11/23/may-s-brexit-deal-is-a-humiliation-for-britain?


----------



## NoXion (Nov 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> Brilliant
> 
> http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/11/23/may-s-brexit-deal-is-a-humiliation-for-britain?



Hmmm...

_"You can't blame the EU for it really. They are coming up with these short time scales and cliff edges because it gives them a negotiating advantage. There's only so cross you can get with someone for ruthlessly pursuing their interests when your own leaders are too incompetent to do the same. Be angry instead at the Brexiters who demand short transitions in an emotional fit and fail to understand that it is our own leverage they eradicate."
_
Not sure I get how the manifest and undeniable incompetence of our own negotiators is somehow supposed to let the EU off the hook. "Self-interest" makes for no defence. It's in the "self-interest" of con-men to extract money from their marks, but strangely the courts do not perceive that to be any kind of mitigating factor.


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 25, 2018)

Anna Soubry, Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon, David Lammie, Emily Thornberry, Stella Creasy, Gina Millar, Ken Clarke, Sadiq Khan, Caroline Lucas, Andy Burnham. Who else should be included in the new government of talents to reverse Brexit?


----------



## Bavid Dowie (Nov 25, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> _"You can't blame the EU for it really. They are coming up with these short time scales and cliff edges because it gives them a negotiating advantage. There's only so cross you can get with someone for ruthlessly pursuing their interests when your own leaders are too incompetent to do the same. Be angry instead at the Brexiters who demand short transitions in an emotional fit and fail to understand that it is our own leverage they eradicate."
> _
> Not sure I get how the manifest and undeniable incompetence of our own negotiators is somehow supposed to let the EU off the hook. "Self-interest" makes for no defence. It's in the "self-interest" of con-men to extract money from their marks, but strangely the courts do not perceive that to be any kind of mitigating factor.



They are trying to get the UK parliament to cancel brexit. The UK is given privileged status like France and Germany in the EU, they are still giving special allowance at this point. 
UK leaving is going to upend the EU, the British government are saying it's for their interests so of course the EU are not going to be honourable about it.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Anna Soubry, Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon, David Lammie, Emily Thornberry, Stella Creasy, Gina Millar, Ken Clarke, Sadiq Khan, Caroline Lucas, Andy Burnham. Who else should be included in the new government of talents to reverse Brexit?


Doesn't matter. Who is in the government doesn't change what the options are.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 25, 2018)

I love this idea that there is any circumstance where the EU would have done anything other than try to extract the maximum that their leverage would allow. As though "honour" has a place in major trade negotiations between competing States.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 25, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Anna Soubry, Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon, David Lammie, Emily Thornberry, Stella Creasy, Gina Millar, Ken Clarke, Sadiq Khan, Caroline Lucas, Andy Burnham....


... your boys took one helluva beating.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Anna Soubry, Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon, David Lammie, Emily Thornberry, Stella Creasy, Gina Millar, Ken Clarke, Sadiq Khan, Caroline Lucas, Andy Burnham. Who else should be included in the new government of talents to reverse Brexit?


Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and John Major.


----------



## Bavid Dowie (Nov 25, 2018)

Jennifer, Alison, Phillipa, Sue


----------



## Dr. Furface (Nov 25, 2018)

tommers said:


> Are we still talking about Brexit?


Future-proofed question


----------



## Poi E (Nov 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> Brilliant
> 
> http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/11/23/may-s-brexit-deal-is-a-humiliation-for-britain?



"The problem is not that it is badly written. Some incredibly talented and ingenious people have put this thing together. It is technically accomplished and well drafted."

i.e. Britain didn't draft it. No joke.


----------



## Poot (Nov 25, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Divorced middle-aged man might not be such a bad analogy for post-Brexit Britain - not hard to see the country moaning about its ex all the time and blowing shitloads of money on a sports-car industry to try to impress countries much younger than it.



That is clearly on the horizon. I feel like at the moment we're in the stage where we are singing 'I Will Survive' into an empty prosecco bottle and sitting outside our ex's flat at 3am while all our friends say in a kind voice 'Let's go home with our dignity, eh? Time to leave now'.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 25, 2018)

Even Scottish mates want to call it a night.


----------



## Poot (Nov 25, 2018)

Gibraltar thought she was sharing a cab with us. She's right fucked off.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 25, 2018)

So - May is going to return from the EU meeting with no further concessions and a unanimous message "negotiations are over" - interesting to see what Gove and the gang do now. 
Although the usual suspicion is that they do nothing - i have a feeling that many of the brexiteers actually want brexit to now collapse - the deal is awful and it has exposed reality of what leaving the EU would mean in practice. Raab - and several other leading brexiteers - have stated that the deal is _worse_ than staying in (and it is) 
Their dream of - basically - cake - is forever out of reach. 
If they crash the deal and this leads to the UK staying in they can blame it all on May (and the EU and the treacherous elites etc) for betraying brexit whilst they remained loyal believers. They can also fight a faux campaign for "no deal" knowing full well it wont be allowed to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> So - May is going to return from the EU meeting with no further concessions and a unanimous message "negotiations are over" - interesting to see what Gove and the gang do now.
> Although the usual suspicion is that they do nothing - i have a feeling that many of the brexiteers actually want brexit to now collapse - the deal is awful and it has exposed reality of what leaving the EU would mean in practice. Raab - and several other leading brexiteers - have stated that the deal is _worse_ than staying in (and it is)
> Their dream of - basically - cake - is forever out of reach.
> If they crash the deal and this leads to the UK staying in they can blame it all on May (and the EU and the treacherous elites etc) for betraying brexit whilst they remained loyal believers. They can also fight a faux campaign for "no deal" knowing full well it wont be allowed to happen.


We'll find out on Tues if the ecj rules a.50 can be halted unilaterally


----------



## TopCat (Nov 25, 2018)

The EU could at least add some salt and pepper to this shit sandwich.


----------



## toblerone3 (Nov 25, 2018)

Wilf said:


> ... your boys took one helluva beating.



Very good I hadn't realised that there eleven names in my list. However to take up the football analogy, it wasn't a "helleva beating" more like a match decided by a dodgy penalty decision where everyone is still waiting for a rematch.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Nov 25, 2018)

High Court ruling could declare Brexit ‘void’ as early as Christmas


----------



## TopCat (Nov 25, 2018)

Mr.Bishie said:


> High Court ruling could declare Brexit ‘void’ as early as Christmas


It would be a courageous high court judge that overturned a statute.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 25, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It would be a courageous high court judge that overturned a statute.



Are you kidding? Those bastards, if they see a chance to get their name in the history books, they fucking well take it, the cunts!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 25, 2018)

TopCat said:


> It would be a courageous high court judge that overturned a statute.


If the vote flawed Parliament might be advised by the judge they might like to reconsider I suppose


----------



## TopCat (Nov 25, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Are you kidding? Those bastards, if they see a chance to get their name in the history books, they fucking well take it, the cunts!


Has it happened much recently?


----------



## philosophical (Nov 25, 2018)

toblerone3 said:


> Anna Soubry, Keir Starmer, Nicola Sturgeon, David Lammie, Emily Thornberry, Stella Creasy, Gina Millar, Ken Clarke, Sadiq Khan, Caroline Lucas, Andy Burnham. Who else should be included in the new government of talents to reverse Brexit?



Lord Buckethead.


----------



## Ax^ (Nov 25, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> So - May is going to return from the EU meeting with no further concessions and a unanimous message "negotiations are over" - interesting to see what Gove and the gang do now.
> Although the usual suspicion is that they do nothing - i have a feeling that many of the brexiteers actually want brexit to now collapse - the deal is awful and it has exposed reality of what leaving the EU would mean in practice. Raab - and several other leading brexiteers - have stated that the deal is _worse_ than staying in (and it is)
> Their dream of - basically - cake - is forever out of reach.



If they had only played portal ahead of brexit


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 25, 2018)

lol






















they all hate each other. Was going to dump[ this on the bandwith thread but it makes no sense there


----------



## spitfire (Nov 25, 2018)

Fucking hell is that real?


----------



## teqniq (Nov 25, 2018)

Beat me to it. 

E2a oh my it is:

Tory MPs Go To War Over John Hayes 'Utter Cock' Knighthood


----------



## spitfire (Nov 25, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Beat me to it.
> 
> E2a oh my it is:
> 
> Tory MPs Go To War Over John Hayes 'Utter Cock' Knighthood



Holy shitballs. Hahahahaha


----------



## Wookey (Nov 25, 2018)

It's brilliantly written, thought it was a spoof though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 25, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Hmmm...
> 
> _"You can't blame the EU for it really. They are coming up with these short time scales and cliff edges because it gives them a negotiating advantage. There's only so cross you can get with someone for ruthlessly pursuing their interests when your own leaders are too incompetent to do the same. Be angry instead at the Brexiters who demand short transitions in an emotional fit and fail to understand that it is our own leverage they eradicate."
> _
> Not sure I get how the manifest and undeniable incompetence of our own negotiators is somehow supposed to let the EU off the hook. "Self-interest" makes for no defence. It's in the "self-interest" of con-men to extract money from their marks, but strangely the courts do not perceive that to be any kind of mitigating factor.



That's sort of true but on the other hand we're basically talking about one group of political representatives of the ruling class being surprised that another group of political representatives of the ruling class are not shy about protecting their interests.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

Separate beds it is. They only married us for our money in the first place.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 25, 2018)

Wookey said:


> It's brilliantly written, thought it was a spoof though.


Really?
Some fairly MSM sources say otherwise.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 25, 2018)

Wonder if editor has in mind some sort of celebration when, in 59 pages time, this thread exceeds the page length of the actual EU/UK 'agreement' document?


----------



## editor (Nov 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Wonder if editor has in mind some sort of celebration when, in 59 pages time, this thread exceeds the page length of the actual EU/UK 'agreement' document?


There's nothing to celebrate about the whole Brexit farrago.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 25, 2018)

I wonder whether there is a single one on this thread,be she poster or lurker, who would be content to see TM's deal go through parliament whenever parliament finally get around to having the vote?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 25, 2018)

editor said:


> There's nothing to celebrate about the whole Brexit farrago.


Could be a thread in itself!

"Reasons to celebrate Brexit"
1. Tory party split
2. 'Establishment' revealed
3. Capital worried....

could go on.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 25, 2018)

Kein McGuire's diary

Doom and gloom in a Liberal Democrat digital report found on the parliamentary estate. Zero online donations in the week covered forced the party to suspend Brexit advertising. Something of a blow, that, when remaining in the EU is Vince Cable’s only policy. Not a single voter signed up that week to the Lib Dems’ campaign on Facebook. “We are paused on email capture,” the document also revealed. Curious.

Commons Confidential: The Liberal Democrats’ Brexit blues


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Could be a thread in itself!
> 
> "Reasons to celebrate Brexit"
> 1. Tory party split
> ...


Indeed. All the options have threats and opportunities. 

And the left/liberal remain camp have not seriously analysed the threats of remain.  Which include not the just the neoliberal treaties they are blind to, as they extol the E.U. as something it isn’t by force of wishful thinking, but also, for the sake of thought experiment, the consequences of holding a second referendum which includes remain as an option. First, are they certain they’d win? How? By repeating the same campaign? Because I’m not seeing any change of strategy. And if they lose again, what then? What happens if that gives the far right new vigour? And if they win by a similar slim majority to the one they recently lost by? Is belonging to the E.U. truly worth the damage that would be done?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 25, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> I wonder whether there is a single one on this thread,be she poster or lurker, who would be content to see TM's deal go through parliament whenever parliament finally get around to having the vote?


It’s a deal for the business establishment. It’s the one, more or less, that would be done by the neoliberal forces in the elite, by means of the likes of Oliver Robbins, if they could possibly manage it whoever was in number 10.  And that includes Corbyn.


----------



## Winot (Nov 25, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a deal for the business establishment. It’s the one, more or less, that would be done by the neoliberal forces in the elite, by means if the likes of Oliver Robbins, if they could possibly manage it whoever was in number 10.  And that includes Corbyn.



Is there a different deal that could have been achieved that you would have favoured?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 25, 2018)

Winot said:


> Is there a different deal that could have been achieved that you would have favoured?


Yes.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 25, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a deal for the business establishment. It’s the one, more or less, that would be done by the neoliberal forces in the elite, by means of the likes of Oliver Robbins, if they could possibly manage it whoever was in number 10.  And that includes Corbyn.


I could see Corbyn going along with such a deal in concert with others but I very much doubt whether he would personally favour it.His mantra in so far as he has one seems to be about understanding the reasons why people voted for Brexit.On the whole those people will,i think,at best,be a bit meh about this deal.


----------



## Winot (Nov 25, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes.



Go on...

I’m particularly interested in the ‘could have been achieved’ bit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 25, 2018)

Winot said:


> Go on...
> 
> I’m particularly interested in the ‘could have been achieved’ bit.


There’s all sorts of things that could have been achieved. The question is by whom and in the interests of whom?

But if you think the deal on offer now is the only deal that could ever have been on offer, that’s not true. It’s just the only deal that there was the will for from the neoliberal elite. As things stand now, as I’ve already said, I suspect a version of this deal will limp through, with minor changes sold as important concessions.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But if you think the deal on offer now is the only deal that could ever have been on offer, that’s not true. It’s just the only deal that there was the will for from the neoliberal elite.


This is just describing the same thing in two different ways.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> This is just describing the same thing in two different ways.


No it isn’t.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> No it isn’t.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> On average, though, not as well as the UK currently does.


Is this based on economic growth aye?


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

Four months, that's all now - deal or no deal. 

I'm calling it: she loses the first vote, she survives a confidence vote (probably), and she wins the second Brexit vote. You heard it here first.


----------



## extra dry (Nov 25, 2018)

There will be a revote, and another till the correct answer is obtained, as seen in my crystal ball.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

There will. Two should be enough, assuming the Labour Brexiteers only need one range-finder.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 25, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Four months, that's all now - deal or no deal.
> 
> I'm calling it: she loses the first vote, she survives a confidence vote (probably), and she wins the second Brexit vote. You heard it here first.


Deal.
There is an extant deal agreed between the UK executive and the EU. The question is whether the power of the executive to sign off on that deal can gain authority by being legitimised by Parliament. 
You seem to be saying that between 2 Parliamentary attempts to legitimise the deal (enough) MPs will change their minds to support May.
What do you think would change their minds?


----------



## Wookey (Nov 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> What do you think would change their minds?



I've heard it suggested that the drop in the pound immediately following a Parliamentary no vote would be what drives a successful second vote through.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I've heard it suggested that the drop in the pound immediately following a Parliamentary no vote would be what drives a successful second vote through.


The pound won't drop to that extent based on a no vote, because it will be a surprise to no-one.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 25, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The pound won't drop to that extend based on a no vote, because it will be a surprise to no-one.



I tend to agree, but..."markets"...


----------



## Supine (Nov 25, 2018)

Peoples Vote. Two choices may deal or forget it all.

61% vote to stay in EU. Jez takes over.


----------



## steeplejack (Nov 25, 2018)

Supine said:


> Peoples Vote. Two choices may deal or forget it all.
> 
> 61% vote to stay in EU. Jez takes over.



Fantasy Island stuff I’m afraid.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 25, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I've heard it suggested that the drop in the pound immediately following a Parliamentary no vote would be what drives a successful second vote through.


Yes, I've also heard May Deal supporters say that would happen...but...in truth I can't see what would spook 'the markets' about a parliamentary rejection of the deal. For starters it's been called already and, just as importantly, it would signal the end of Brexit. Even May has, of late, conceded that a rejection could result in no Brexit and most MPs say they'd use their power to prevent a 'no deal' exit.

I reckon quite a few stocks would go up tbh.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

brogdale said:


> You seem to be saying that between 2 Parliamentary attempts to legitimise the deal (enough) MPs will change their minds to support May.
> What do you think would change their minds?


I do think Labour Brexiteers will want to see if the first Brexit (loss) vote causes May to quit (can't see it). With the second vote they will know how many of them need to defy the leadership - it'll be an organised revolt with a clear total in mind (assuming the Labour leadership doesn't change course in between votes).


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I do think Labour Brexiteers will want to see if the first Brexit (loss) vote causes May to quit (can't see it). With the second vote they will know how many of them need to defy the leadership - it'll be an organised revolt with a clear total in mind (assuming the Labour leadership doesn't change course in between votes).


But there's not enough of them.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

Lets see when push comes to shove. We're still waiting for the 48 letters, some of whom lied to the public about 'sending in'.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 25, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I tend to agree, but..."markets"...


It's an idea that's based on what happened in America at the start of the banking crisis. The bailout was rejected, the markets screamed blue murder, then the legislation was passed. But that was a case of genuine panic. May's problem is that everyone knows that it's no catastrophe if her deal sinks. If all else fails, there will be an art 50 extension, because it would be insane not to ask for one.


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 25, 2018)

It's the TARP argument. Trouble is it's already discounted into the system, at least as much as it will be. Markets have hedged.


----------



## Wookey (Nov 26, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It's an idea that's based on what happened in America at the start of the banking crisis. The bailout was rejected, the markets screamed blue murder, then the legislation was passed. But that was a case of genuine panic. May's problem is that everyone knows that it's no catastrophe if her deal sinks. If all else fails, there will be an art 50 extension, because it would be insane not to ask for one.



Yep, that was the context I heard it in, thanks for the explication! Makes sense.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 26, 2018)

I dont buy the "deal will go through 2nd time round argument at all"
When mays deal gets rejected there is nothing she can do than minor minor tweaks before sending it back again. The EU will offer her next to nothing on that. I cant see that many mps are going to be suddenly converted to the view that its now ok.
The push for a 2nd ref will become much stronger once mays deal fails - remainer mps in all parties will be arguing for that as a way out of the impasse. No way will they vote the deal through 2nd time when cancelling brexit is in play. 
the brexiteers are not going to change their minds. 
Public opinion is strongly against the deal - and that getting more pronounced the more the details are understood.
Because nobody believes the deal is anything other than a shitty humiliation - including theresa may.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 26, 2018)

both alistair campbell and tim timmy wetherspoon hate it and want the deal to fail so i feel obliged to support it


----------



## The Fornicator (Nov 26, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Because nobody believes the deal is anything other than a shitty humiliation - including theresa may.


Tell us all about your deal the EU is keen to accept instead.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 26, 2018)

Its an impasse. Push for leave and we leave the zone of the status quo. In other words, leaving and becoming independent instantly you are talking market effects, a closing ranks of the political establishment and probably the royal family becoming more prominent and given more attention.

In the the medium term, the whole world is fucked to some extent or other so it will become more irrelevant further down the line as increasing parts of the globe are left out in the cold to manage as best they can.

The ONLY step that matters is acting together and raising our voices.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 26, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Tell us all about your deal the EU is keen to accept instead.


The EU is very keen to accept anything that represents a closer trading relationship compared to May's deal.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 26, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Tell us all about your deal the EU is keen to accept instead.



my deal? 

the point is that any deal with the EU was going always going to be about degrees of shitness. 
I dont see parliament ever voting for a deal which so obviously weakens the UK in terms of influence, economy  and security - the mandate of the referendum result was always going to be secondary to that.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

A thought I've been having on Brexit this week is that it's a fairly unique political event in that it has a characteristic about it that means for many people, no matter what develops, they see in it what they want to see..... It's like a glittering crystalball that beautifully reflects a viewers own political philosophy and confirmation biases, and across the political spectrum. No new development or arising fact changes the overall perception, it just reinforces it.

Or maybe so it was until now. I think that's partly why Mays deal has fallen so flat. The glimmering reflecting perception has been replaced by a 500 page document(which should've been there before the referendum). Even that document seems to have tried to maintain some of that shimmering ambiguity in regards to the next stage, but it seems that for many the illusion has been broken.

I think the deal is a good one in that it's got what was asked for and campaigned for by the Leave campaign: points based immigration, legal sovereignty, a workable degree of customs/trade integration, no hard border in Ireland, EU citizens can stay and vice versa (at least on paper if not in practice) and a future option to reduce standards from EU benchmarks. That's what Brexit was all about wasnt it? That's what I thought was being promised all along. That or the WTO disaster capitalism version that lurked in the background.

The lack of support for the deal from leavers is a wind up...FFS after all this bullshit now they don't want it? After all that conviction and certainty now this angst? It's like a kid pestering for a present all year and then crying on Christmas morning they don't like it.

 Right now I just want the deal to go through, if for no other reason that I'm sick of Brexit and all the braying cunts and their mouthpieces in the press who have been poisoning us with their bullshit all this time. You wanted it? You got it, now shut the fuck up. You wanted to trigger article 50 immediately? Deal with the deadline. Eat your dinner.

Funny, all those who tried to stop a Meaningful Vote as it would get in the way of Brexit actually happening now can't wait to use it to moan even more.

Sick of it


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> A thought I've been having on Brexit this week is that it's a fairly unique political event in that it has a characteristic about it that means for many people, no matter what develops, they see in it what they want to see..... It's like a glittering crystalball that beautifully reflects a viewers own political philosophy and confirmation biases, and across the political spectrum. No new development or arising fact changes the overall perception, it just reinforces it.
> 
> Or maybe so it was until now. I think that's partly why Mays deal has fallen so flat. The glimmering reflecting perception has been replaced by a 500 page document(which should've been there before the referendum). Even that document seems to have tried to maintain some of that shimmering ambiguity in regards to the next stage, but it seems that for many the illusion has been broken.
> 
> ...


Oh you'll hate what happens next then


----------



## strung out (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Right now I just want the deal to go through


I don't. Why stop the entertainment now?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Four months, that's all now - deal or no deal.
> 
> I'm calling it: she loses the first vote, she survives a confidence vote (probably), and she wins the second Brexit vote. *You heard it here first.*


Apart from all the commentators who said it before you on TV, in the press, and on this thread 



Just had a thought, which is that by May calling her fuck up snap election she set up a five year fixed term window in which to complete Brexit, which ought to have stopped the potential for a change in government by way of losing an election within the middle of the process. That may or may not work out of course!


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

strung out said:


> I don't. Why stop the entertainment now?


Yeah there is that... It's the silver lining


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Yeah there is that... It's the silver lining


Hey ho, silver lining


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Four months, that's all now - deal or no deal.
> 
> I'm calling it: she loses the first vote, she survives a confidence vote (probably), and she wins the second Brexit vote. You heard it here first.


Aren't the first votes on any amendments?


----------



## Flavour (Nov 26, 2018)

May will quit if she loses the vote, surely? Is it possible she hasn't had enough of the poisoned chalice? Let someone else be responsible for either crashing out with no deal or extending article 50 / canceling brexit


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

Flavour said:


> May will quit if she loses the vote, surely? Is it possible she hasn't had enough of the poisoned chalice? Let someone else be responsible for either crashing out with no deal or extending article 50 / canceling brexit


May has the "Well you do it then" card to play against her party. Maybe even against Labour. It's a really strong card I think.
Article 50 extension two months max supposedly


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> May has the "Well you do it then" card to play against her party. Maybe even against Labour. It's a really strong card I think.
> Article 50 extension two months max supposedly


The biggest problem for tory party strategists is that any significant tory rebellion on May's deal damages what would be their GE line that "it was Labour that stole your Brexit".


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The biggest problem for tory party strategists is that any significant tory rebellion on May's deal damages what would be their GE line that "it was Labour that stole your Brexit".


Which is partly why I think they'll vote for it in the end, one the realities really set in.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Which is partly why I think they'll vote for it in the end, one the realities really set in.


Until relatively recently I believed that there'd be enough 'Labour' votes for May's 'Brexit' to out-weigh any tory rebellion. That was until May's deal was revealed as explicitly not Brexit and voter sentiment changed. Can't see many Lab votes for the dog's diner now...so any double figure rebellion from the swivel-eyed loons will sink her deal.


----------



## alex_ (Nov 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The biggest problem for tory party strategists is that any significant tory rebellion on May's deal damages what would be their GE line that "it was Labour that stole your Brexit".



I’m sure this will be the line literally whatever happens.

Alex


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I’m sure this will be the line literally whatever happens.
> 
> Alex


After IRA, Hammas, Hezbollah, hates the jooos....


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Aren't the first votes on any amendments?


Indeed. And it is at this point that the amendments will either be enough to save the deal or not. My feeling is still the former. And that’s based partly on what ska invita says above - the “you do it, then” card.  Because there is still not the parliamentary numbers for any one of the permutations we feverishly considered over the last fortnight: the Moog revolt; the no deal exit; the unamended deal; or even a snap GE. 

What’s perhaps surprising is that people are still trying to paint this as a two pole issue, when it quite clearly isn’t.


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 26, 2018)

Flavour said:


> May will quit if she loses the vote, surely? Is it possible she hasn't had enough of the poisoned chalice? Let someone else be responsible for either crashing out with no deal or extending article 50 / canceling brexit



David Cameron ‘looking for return to frontline politics’ - what is he up to now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

hot air baboon said:


> David Cameron ‘looking for return to frontline politics’ - what is he up to now?


if there's one man in british politics more despised than tony blair and nick griffin it's david cameron


----------



## Flavour (Nov 26, 2018)

David Cameron running for election and losing by a few hundred votes in a previously safe Tory seat would be better than when portillo lost.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Flavour said:


> David Cameron running for election and losing by a few hundred votes in a previously safe Tory seat would be better than when portillo lost.


i believe nigel farage is more likely to be adopted as a tory candidate than the nefandous cameron


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 26, 2018)

Cameron's presence might swing it for Leave in a tight second referendum, as long as they stressed that a vote for Leave is a vote for making David Cameron cry.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Article 50 extension two months max supposedly


54 days exactly, I expect. So as not to reach the MEP elections on 23rd May


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Cameron's presence might swing it for Leave in a tight second referendum, as long as they stressed that a vote for Leave is a vote for making David Cameron cry.


he could no nothing greater for the remain camp than come out as a brexiter


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 26, 2018)

I see may has challenged el corb to a debate. Or is considering it. Apparently corbyn tore his shirt off his chest an said 'bring it' or similar.

Not sure I see what the point of a debate here is.The deal itself or wider questions/issues?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

It remains to be seen how well Corbyn will do but I can't see this going well for May.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I see may has challenged el corb to a debate. Or is considering it. Apparently corbyn tore his shirt off his chest an said 'bring it' or similar.
> 
> Not sure I see what the point of a debate here is.The deal itself or wider questions/issues?


i don't think she'll do so well without serried ranks of howler monkey impersonators behind her


----------



## tommers (Nov 26, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Cameron's presence might swing it for Leave in a tight second referendum, as long as they stressed that a vote for Leave is a vote for making David Cameron cry.



Exactly why my mum voted "leave".


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

There's a truism that only the weaker party/candidate calls for a televised debate, which would certainly fit with May on this one. Dunno who would win, it _should_ be Corbyn on the attack, highlighting the multiple fuck ups that have lead us to where we are. Same time, from memory, he's never performed that well on brexit - partly because both he and Labour have quite waffly positions.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if there's one man in british politics more despised than tony blair and nick griffin it's david cameron



It’s old speculative news from the beginning of the month, he wouldn’t get on the local council the treacherous sack of shit.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> It’s old speculative news from the beginning of the month, he wouldn’t get on the local council the treacherous sack of shit.


He's too fucking hopeless to even get a multi-million pound gig with facebook. Comes to something when you get outflanked by clegg.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> It remains to be seen how well Corbyn will do but I can't see this going well for May.



May can't do this stuff. The last GE debates demonstrated that she cannot think on her feet or communicate effectively. It's a sign of her desperation that this is even being mooted. For Corbyn the task is simple - expose the severe and irreparable splits within the Tories/ruling class on the issue and set out what exit would and could look like under Labour. 

On the latter I expect him to fail. Labour's flirtation with a second vote to deliver Britain back to the crumbling neo-liberal superstate model might offer short term gain but will offer long term defeat of the project.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

Her line is going to be..."I know you're bored of Brexit...so...if your MP votes for my crock of shite...it will all go away."

As patronising and infantilising as it is desperate; smacks of Gavin "Arab Girls" Barwell.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> May can't do this stuff. The last GE debates demonstrated that she cannot think on her feet or communicate effectively. It's a sign of her desperation that this is even being mooted. For Corbyn the task is simple - expose the severe and irreparable splits within the Tories/ruling class on the issue and set out what exit would and could look like under Labour.
> 
> On the latter I expect him to fail. Labour's flirtation with a second vote to deliver Britain back to the crumbling neo-liberal superstate model might offer short term gain but will offer long term defeat of the project.


What would or could a brexit under Labour look like? Scrap ending free movement and go for a Norway-style deal? That's possible. Pointless, given that staying in would be better, but possible. What else? This is one of the big lies, isn't it? This idea that there is such a thing as a Brexit that maintains trade links without a downside. There is no such thing. Never was. So Labour would be proposing something else, something more radical that businesses wouldn't like? Not likely.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So Labour would be proposing something else, something more radical that businesses wouldn't like? Not likely.



That's precisely what Corbyn should set out. A genuine social democratic programme that would inspire popular confidence and which takes as its starting point that it is possible to plan and work for a better society than the inevitable one a future tied to a collapsing EU or the neo-con no deal model can deliver. It would transform the situation and make a GE more likely. As I have said I do not expect him to do anything of the kind.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Her line is going to be..."I know you're bored of Brexit...so...if your MP votes for my crock of shite...it will all go away."



People are bored of Brexit - because its a row between different sections of the ruling class and political class about which way best serves their interests. No debate about manufacturing, jobs, housing, youth etc etc. Corbyn could change that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> People are bored of Brexit - because its a row between different sections of the ruling class and political class about which way best serves their interests. No debate about manufacturing, jobs, housing, youth etc etc. Corbyn could change that.


people are bored of brexit because after the best part of three years hearing the same loads of auld shite bandied about does begin to pall


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 26, 2018)

I'm not bored yet, can't wait for the next episode!


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> May can't do this stuff. The last GE debates demonstrated that she cannot think on her feet or communicate effectively. It's a sign of her desperation that this is even being mooted. For Corbyn the task is simple - expose the severe and irreparable splits within the Tories/ruling class on the issue and set out what exit would and could look like under Labour.
> 
> On the latter I expect him to fail. Labour's flirtation with a second vote to deliver Britain back to the crumbling neo-liberal superstate model might offer short term gain but will offer long term defeat of the project.


Corbyn's not great at attack dog stuff and he's in a difficult position, as an enti-eu bod who ended up supporting remain and the like - right through to Labour's ambiguities today. Could be a score draw. I think the timing of a debate could be important too. The closer it gets to March, the more May's line about there being no more opportunities to re-negotiate comes to the fore.  But yeah, you wouldn't want to hang a deal on Theresa May's ability to engage with the population on a human level..


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 26, 2018)

It's better than the walking dead these days....


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> That's precisely what Corbyn should set out. A genuine social democratic programme that would inspire popular confidence and which takes as its starting point that it is possible to plan and work for a better society than the inevitable one a future tied to a collapsing EU or the neo-con no deal model can deliver. It would transform the situation and make a GE more likely. As I have said I do not expect him to do anything of the kind.


Sounds dangerously like a ... _lexit_.   Pity Corbo couldn't have thought about promoting one of those before.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Sounds dangerously like a ... _lexit_.   Pity Corbo couldn't have thought about promoting one of those before.


well, being as he's in many ways to the right of auld sir edward heath it's no great surprise he didn't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> It's better than the walking dead these days....


it IS the walking dead these days


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Sounds dangerously like a ... _lexit_.   Pity Corbo couldn't have thought about promoting one of those before.



I suspect that he hasn't because he's been advised it would re-ignite the civil war with the Blairites. Far better to sit on the fence and hope the Tories self immolate etc. But given the Blair alternative is to paddle back to the EU vessel as fast as possible and hope nobody notices the massive hole in the ship or the questions raised by the frustration of a popular vote by politicians  - and given that they would be the most aggressive opponents to an incoming Labour Government - they will have to be confronted at some point. Why not now?


----------



## Poot (Nov 26, 2018)

Friends, I can't be bothered to read through much more Brexit shit. When is this better-than-a-poke-in-the-eye-but-not-much agreement going to be run by the MPs?


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

Fuck the tory MPs...Labour voters/constituents should be furious if their spineless scum of an MP schlep along to Barwell's soiree


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I suspect that he hasn't because he's been advised it would re-ignite the civil war with the Blairites. Far better to sit on the fence and hope the Tories self immolate etc. But given the Blair alternative is to paddle back to the EU vessel as fast as possible and hope nobody notices the massive hole in the ship or the questions raised by the frustration of a popular vote by politicians  - and given that they would be the most aggressive opponents to an incoming Labour Government - they will have to be confronted at some point. Why not now?


Why not now indeed - or why was it not done after the 2017 gen election?  Labour's trouble is that we are in a highly procedural moment. Shite as it is, May has done a deal and has something to batter the wavering brexiteers with in her own ranks. Labour needs to be able to say 'no, let's stop this and do that instead - and the way we'll do it is via this amendment, extension to article 50 etc etc'. But they will end up having to make these big, desperate last minute gambits without having inspired people that a social democratic version of brexit is available. Without that spade work, all Labour are offering is 'we'll vote it down... we want a gen election... if we win we'll see if the EU lets us renegotiate'.  Not very inspiring and nothing to persuade the voters that it's worth doing it all again.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> But they will end up having to make these big, desperate last minute gambits without having inspired people that a social democratic version of brexit is available. Without that spade work, all Labour are offering is 'we'll vote it down... we want a gen election... if we win we'll see if the EU lets us renegotiate'.  Not very inspiring and nothing to persuade the voters that it's worth doing it all again.



Precisely. And a national TV debate presents a surprising opportunity for Corbyn to move beyond their flaccid efforts to date. It's the last chance he'll get to set out a thought out and planned strategy. The old maxim that 'governments lose elections, oppositions don't win them' possibly does not apply in this situation.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 26, 2018)

Useless fuckers.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Until relatively recently I believed that there'd be enough 'Labour' votes for May's 'Brexit' to out-weigh any tory rebellion. That was until May's deal was revealed as explicitly not Brexit and voter sentiment changed. Can't see many Lab votes for the dog's diner now...so any double figure rebellion from the swivel-eyed loons will sink her deal.


How is Mays deal explicitly "not Brexit"? It's Labours Norway style deal which has to deal with that attack. Which is why a debate would expose Labour and do May a lot of favours. No one is convinced by fence sitting triangulating platitudes, and as this debate would have to take place before a final vote that remains Labours stance. 

If Corbyn had some killer lyrics and a clear plan we'd have heard by now. 

The best he can do is the Blind Brexit bit, which while I share those worries of future deregulation has the counterargument that those aspects are yet to be decided.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I suspect that he hasn't because he's been advised it would re-ignite the civil war with the Blairites. Far better to sit on the fence and hope the Tories self immolate etc. But given the Blair alternative is to paddle back to the EU vessel as fast as possible and hope nobody notices the massive hole in the ship or the questions raised by the frustration of a popular vote by politicians  - and given that they would be the most aggressive opponents to an incoming Labour Government - they will have to be confronted at some point. Why not now?


Indeed.  In the Tory Party the conflict is the accommodation between neoconservativism and neoliberalism (not necessarily between neocons and neolibs), and similarly in the Labour Party (and, incidentally, the wider labour movement) they still have to work out their relationship with neoliberalism. Which is why there hasn’t been any serious analysis of the options (all of which have the potential to be bad). Had the broad labour movement including the Labour Party been able to start earlier building a consensus round an exit strategy that could see a programme of public ownership and so on, then we’d be in a different position.  There was no need to allow May to paint a portrait of there being two options only - a neoliberal virtual BINO, or a neocon no deal exit. It is even conceivable that Corbyn (well, OK, not Corbyn personally, but the broad left of centre) could have achieved leaverage for a “hard lexit”, if you want to use those terms.  But unions and the PLP have not been able to consciously uncouple from neoliberalism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Which is why a debate would expose Labour and do May a lot of favours.


it could. it could also expose the lies which have been told in the press repeatedly in the past few days that the negotiations have lasted variously since the referendum or since the article 50 declaration, whereas it is clear that substantive negotiations have only been going on since the summer - david davis's view of what was going on was so different from theresa may's that he left the government. the clock has  been run down. and it's been run down in such a way as to secure theresa may's position at the moment - no one else wants the job.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed.  In the Tory Party the conflict is the accommodation between neoconservativism and neoliberalism (not necessarily between neocons and neolibs), and similarly in the Labour Party (and, incidentally, the wider labour movement) they still have to work out their relationship with neoliberalism. Which is why there hasn’t been any serious analysis of the options (all of which have the potential to be bad). Had the broad labour movement including the Labour Party been able to start earlier building a consensus round an exit strategy that could see a programme of public ownership and so on, then we’d be in a different position.  There was no need to allow May to paint a portrait of there being two options only - a neoliberal virtual BINO, or a neocon no deal exit. It is even conceivable that Corbyn (well, OK, not Corbyn personally, but the broad left of centre) could have achieved leaverage for a “hard lexit”, if you want to use those terms.  But unions and the PLP have not been able to consciously uncouple from neoliberalism.



I think that's exactly it. Labourism, collectively, is as incapable of imagining a world without neo-liberalism as the neo-cons and liberals. There are many reasons for this some more understandable and forgivable than others. 

Whilst Corbyn and his gang have opted for critiquing the positions of the two squabbling camps (and avoiding any attempt to own or command the agenda), the unions seem to have totally intellectually collapsed into remain - and not even the 'remain to reform' position of Varoufakis etc - as the best option their members can hope for. The lack of ambition, imagination and 'leadership' is fatal.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think that's exactly it. Labourism collectively is as incapable of imagining a world without neo-liberalism as the neo-cons and liberals. There are many reasons for this some more understandable and forgivable than others.
> 
> Whilst Corbyn and his gang have opted for critiquing the positions of the two squabbling camps, the unions seem to have totally intellectually collapsed into remain - and not even the 'remain to reform' position of Varoufakis etc - as the best option their members can hope for. The lack of ambition, imagination and 'leadership' is fatal.


Yup.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Corbyn was the unexpected leader, so much so that he hadn't done any planning, didn't have a strategy etc. But alongside that - and more importantly - Labour seems to have become only nominally social democratic. As noted ^ it's largely a label to indicate not being Blairite, something without roots or a real self confidence. I always come back to the limited attempts to embed and extend the party into working class communities. It leaves labour with a free floating brexity-remainy opportunism.  Not much ballast and very few mechanisms to mobilise the working class behind this or much else. Labour don't know if they are appealing to working class voters, the under 40s or remoany guardianistas.  The Tories have turned up the Fuck Up dial to 11, but still Labour have only just nosed into the lead. quite telling.

edit: actually, scratch that, _Tories_ with a 3% lead in the very latest (yougov)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What would or could a brexit under Labour look like? Scrap ending free movement and go for a Norway-style deal? That's possible. Pointless, given that staying in would be better, but possible. What else? This is one of the big lies, isn't it? This idea that there is such a thing as a Brexit that maintains trade links without a downside. There is no such thing. Never was. So Labour would be proposing something else, something more radical that businesses wouldn't like? Not likely.



They could offer tariff free trade on goods and services and free movement for EU migrants. That would change the debate a bit wouldn't it?


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 26, 2018)

Brexit deal is negotiated and signed between the UK government and the EU. The EU asserts that’s the best deal, and there will be nothing to negotiate outside the done deal. Theresa may is moving forward optimistically assuming that is the case. However, a large number of members of the parliament consisting of all parties including the conservatives are rebelling to reject the Brexit deal in the parliament. This is the calm before the storm; the ship is heading for the rocks. Theresa May’s government or Labour alone cannot solve this crisis as I pointed earlier.


----------



## tommers (Nov 26, 2018)

> Former Brexit Secretary David Davis asks why the UK can't make the delivery of the second half of the £39bn exit payment conditional on getting a trade deal from the EU.
> 
> Theresa May says that "as the right honourable gentleman knows" the exit payment is based on "legal obligations" and that there is a "timetable" that must be adhered to.
> 
> David Davis was Brexit secretary for most of the Brexit negotiation process.




Ooof.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> Brexit deal is negotiated and signed between the UK government and the EU. The EU asserts that’s the best deal, and there will be nothing to negotiate outside the done deal. Theresa may is moving forward optimistically assuming that is the case. However, a large number of members of the parliament consisting of all parties including the conservatives are rebelling to reject the Brexit deal in the parliament. This is the calm before the storm; the ship is heading for the rocks. Theresa May’s government or Labour alone cannot solve this crisis as I pointed earlier.



You want a Government of National Unity then?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Corbyn has just hinted that Labour would support a 'softer brexit':
Jeremy Corbyn tells May softer Brexit could win Commons support - Politics live

I'm (genuinely) unsure what his game is with that.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> *Had the broad labour movement including the Labour Party been able to start earlier building a consensus round an exit strategy that could see a programme of public ownership and so on, then we’d be in a different position.*  There was no need to allow May to paint a portrait of there being two options only - a neoliberal virtual BINO, or a neocon no deal exit. It is even conceivable that Corbyn (well, OK, not Corbyn personally, but the broad left of centre) could have achieved leaverage for a “hard lexit”, if you want to use those terms.  But unions and the PLP have not been able to consciously uncouple from neoliberalism.


How long do you think it wouldve taken to build a consensus? This is as divisive an issue as there can be. From what I can tell there was no consensus on protectionism in the labour movement in the 70s either <a good parallel to these debates. Then you look at the make up of the current Labour party and I cant imagine a time ever when youd get anything resembling a consensus - maybe you could get it to 50/50, and that would be some achievement!  It was never going to happen in reality and I doubt it would ever happen even in this alternate reality with plenty of lead time.

As to Labour theoretically leveraging a Hard Lexit, they could only ever leverage a no deal WTO Brexit, but they cant leverage a Lexit. This was only ever a right wing led Brexit. Maybe they might win a future election and be able to shape whatever it is they've been left with, but that's a very different thing from a "hard lexit". 


Wilf said:


> Corbyn has just hinted that Labour would support a 'softer brexit':
> Jeremy Corbyn tells May softer Brexit could win Commons support - Politics live
> 
> I'm (genuinely) unsure what his game is with that.


the labour party consensus is around Norway


----------



## ska invita (Nov 26, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it could. it could also expose the lies which have been told in the press repeatedly in the past few days that the negotiations have lasted variously since the referendum or since the article 50 declaration, whereas it is clear that substantive negotiations have only been going on since the summer - david davis's view of what was going on was so different from theresa may's that he left the government. the clock has  been run down. and it's been run down in such a way as to secure theresa may's position at the moment - no one else wants the job.


i think the clock got run down because it took them that long to realise that the official policy of Cake And Eat It wasn't going to happen. Its been one long reality check for those leading Brexit, with fantasy after fantasy of how international trade deals work/practicalities of ports etc etc having to be binned.

 Davis had to leave because he couldn't achieve the many imagined pipe dreams and Chequers was a late in the day reset on collective understanding, once everyone had finally got a bit more up to speed on the reality of the task.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Corbyn has just hinted that Labour would support a 'softer brexit':
> Jeremy Corbyn tells May softer Brexit could win Commons support - Politics live
> 
> I'm (genuinely) unsure what his game is with that.



I think he's unsure too.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think that's exactly it. Labourism, collectively, is as incapable of imagining a world without neo-liberalism as the neo-cons and liberals. There are many reasons for this some more understandable and forgivable than others.
> 
> Whilst Corbyn and his gang have opted for critiquing the positions of the two squabbling camps (and avoiding any attempt to own or command the agenda), the unions seem to have totally intellectually collapsed into remain - and not even the 'remain to reform' position of Varoufakis etc - as the best option their members can hope for. The lack of ambition, imagination and 'leadership' is fatal.


The rational Leave argument  is the same whether it comes from the left or the right, it boils down to
"Leaving the EU will hurt the UK in the short and medium term but the pain is worth it, since in the long run being free of the contraints of the EU a better Britain can be built". (albeit with 2 very different views of what constitutes a better Britain) 
The rational Remain argument comes down to "The short term pain is too great to be worth it and any claims of jam tomorrow are wildly optimistic" 
Remain is the only possible choice for the TUC, there's no way it can take a position of being willing to accept large short term job losses in return for some distant and not very well defined future.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Remain is the only possible choice for the TUC, there's no way it can take a position of being willing to accept large short term job losses in return for some distant and not very well defined future.



Do you know what a trade union is?


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 26, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you know what a trade union is?


I am well aware of the history of the trade union movement but in the here and now to the vast majority of their members their primary role is to protect their members jobs and defend them against whatever shit is heaped on them by their employers, not bring about social or economic reform.  Any trade union that stood up and said we're willing to risk your jobs to bring about socialism is going to see it's membership crash through the floor.
Back in the days I was grade rep, the one question that I was always asked over and over again was why should I join? Furthering the cause of socialism isn't one that would be very popular.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> their primary role is to protect their members



Yes, that's right. Emphasis on *their job. *No trade unionist gets to outsource protecting members.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 26, 2018)

ska invita said:


> How long do you think it wouldve taken to build a consensus? This is as divisive an issue as there can be. From what I can tell there was no consensus on protectionism in the labour movement in the 70s either <a good parallel to these debates. Then you look at the make up of the current Labour party and I cant imagine a time ever when youd get anything resembling a consensus - maybe you could get it to 50/50, and that would be some achievement!  It was never going to happen in reality and I doubt it would ever happen even in this alternate reality with plenty of lead time.
> 
> As to Labour theoretically leveraging a Hard Lexit, they could only ever leverage a no deal WTO Brexit, but they cant leverage a Lexit. This was only ever a right wing led Brexit. Maybe they might win a future election and be able to shape whatever it is they've been left with, but that's a very different thing from a "hard lexit".


So we just say TINA (there is no alternative), and join the neoliberals?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I am well aware of the history of the trade union movement but in the here and now to the vast majority of their members their primary role is to protect their members jobs and defend them against whatever shit is heaped on them by their employers, not bring about social or economic reform.  Any trade union that stood up and said we're willing to risk your jobs to bring about socialism is going to see it's membership crash through the floor.



This is a, bad, strawman you are attempting to set up here.

Firstly some unions, for example the RMT, have a long and continuing opposition to the E.U. precisely because they want to protect their members jobs and have drawn the conclusion that the EU is _bad _for their members jobs.

Second, the issue here is precisely what type of thinking is required to protect trade union members and others jobs - given that neither option on the table offers that. And on that the TUC, Unite and the majority of the TUC bureaucracy have folded into remain without a clue as to why, what comes next or about the implications of the clear and unambiguous economic strategy of the E.U./IMF/ECB


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 26, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This is a, bad, strawman you are attempting to set up here.
> 
> Firstly some unions, for example the RMT, have a long and continuing opposition to the E.U. precisely because they want to protect their members jobs and have drawn the conclusion that the EU is _bad _for their members jobs.
> 
> Second, the issue here is precisely what type of thinking is required to protect trade union members and others jobs - given that neither option on the table offers that.


What arguments are being advanced that Brexit will protect existing jobs?, there are certainly arguments that Brexit will create new jobs further down the line but that's not really the same thing.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> What arguments are being advanced that Brexit will protect existing jobs?, there are certainly arguments that Brexit will create new jobs further down the line but that's not really the same thing.



None. And that’s precisely the problem


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 26, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You want a Government of National Unity then?


No, I am not suggesting a government of National Unity, even though in effect that is the strategy for this crisis alone.


----------



## binka (Nov 26, 2018)

I think Corbyn would lose a TV debate against May on Brexit. I don't think he's particularly good at the detail and she knows this shit inside out


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 26, 2018)

binka said:


> I think Corbyn would lose a TV debate against May on Brexit. I don't think he's particularly good at the detail and she knows this shit inside out


I think he would do okay-the deal is a hard sell by any stretch of the imagination.No one wants it -the remainers think its shit compared to remain and the leavers would prefer no deal because their patience has run out.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

binka said:


> I think Corbyn would lose a TV debate against May on Brexit. I don't think he's particularly good at the detail and she knows this shit inside out



You are Gavin Barwell and I claim my £5.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 26, 2018)

AnandLeo said:


> No, I am not suggesting a government of National Unity, even though in effect that is the strategy for this crisis alone.



What are you suggesting?


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 26, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> I think he would do okay-the deal is a hard sell by any stretch of the imagination.No one wants it -the remainers think its shit compared to remain and the leavers would prefer no deal because their patience has run out.


There isn't going to be a winner or a loser in this debate, I think May realises that the shit is finally about to land and wants to make sure that he gets hit by his fair share of it.


----------



## binka (Nov 26, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> I think he would do okay-the deal is a hard sell by any stretch of the imagination.No one wants it -the remainers think its shit compared to remain and the leavers would prefer no deal because their patience has run out.


She's managed to bat away pretty much every question she's been asked about it in the commons so far. Whatever she's asked she'll be able to quote some part of the agreement regardless of whether it really answers the question or not. Expect Corbyn to fuck up on the detail


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 26, 2018)

Corbyn has always wanted out, but much of his party doesn't, he's like a deer caught in car headlights.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 26, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn has always wanted out, but much of his party doesn't, he's like a deer caught in car headlights.


Quite agree.He recently came to speak to the local Labour Club his visit being occasioned by the anticipated re-location to France of Alstom.He managed not to mention Brexit once in a forty minute speech in which he reminded us all of public services that were abolished so comprehensively by the Tories that most of us had forgotten they ever existed.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I am well aware of the history of the trade union movement but in the here and now to the vast majority of their members their primary role is to protect their members jobs and defend them against whatever shit is heaped on them by their employers, not bring about social or economic reform.


It's this myopia that is precisely why (most) trade unions in modern times have failed in defending their members jobs and conditions. 

The dismantling of the EU would not just protect members jobs and conditions it would actually provide an opportunity to improve conditions. You've created a false binary to fit your politics.


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> It's this myopia that is precisely why (most) trade unions in modern times have failed in defending their members jobs and conditions.
> 
> The dismantling of the EU would not just protect members jobs and conditions it would actually provide an opportunity to improve conditions. You've created a false binary to fit your politics.


I don''t believe you but I'll bite, how will the UK leaving the EU protect the many jobs that depend on smooth trade with the EU?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I don''t believe you but I'll bite, how will the UK leaving the EU protect the many jobs that depend on smooth trade with the EU?


Using one weird trick Jean-Claude Juncker doesn't want you to know, I expect


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Quite agree.He recently came to speak to the local Labour Club his visit being occasioned by the anticipated re-location to France of Alstom.He managed not to mention Brexit once in a forty minute speech in which he reminded us all of public services that were abolished so comprehensively by the Tories that most of us had forgotten they ever existed.


Like an auld man in the pub forcing reminisces on you, I remember when... But them days are gone now


----------



## quiet guy (Nov 26, 2018)

Open letter from Mike Harding to the Maybot which popped up on Faceache:

Dear Mrs May

I am in France having a break having come here on the train all the way from Settle. I just read your letter to me and the rest of Britain wanting us all to unite behind the damp squib you call a deal. Unite? I laughed so much the mouthful of frogs legs I was eating ended up dancing all over the bald head of the bloke on the opposite table. 

Your party’s little civil war has divided this country irreparably. The last time this happened Cromwell discontinued the custom of kings wearing their heads on their shoulders. I had a mother who was of Irish descent, an English father who lies in a Dutch graveyard in the village where his Lancaster bomber fell in flames. I had a Polish stepfather who drove a tank for us in WW2 and I have two half Polish sisters and a half Polish brother who is married to a girl from Donegal. My two uncles of Irish descent fought for Britain in N Africa and in Burma.

So far you have called us Citizens Of Nowhere and Queue Jumpers. You have now taken away our children and grandchildren’s freedom to travel, settle, live and work in mainland Europe.

You have made this country a vicious and much diminished place. You as Home Sec sent a van round telling foreigners to go home. You said “ illegal” but that was bollocks as the legally here people of the Windrush generation soon discovered.

Your party has sold off our railways, water, electricity, gas, telecoms, Royal Mail etc until all we have left is the NHS and that is lined up for the US to have as soon as Hannon and Hunt can arrange it

You have lied to the people of this country. You voted Remain yet changed your tune when the chance to grab the job of PM came. You should have sacked those lying bastards Gove and Bojo but daren’t because you haven’t the actual power.

You have no answer to the British border on the island of Ireland nor do you know how the Gib border with Spain will work once we are out

Mrs May you have helped to divide this country to such an extent that families and friends are now no longer talking to each other, you have managed to negotiate a deal far worse than the one we had and all to keep together a party of millionaires, Eton Bullingdon boys, spivs and WI harridans. Your party conserves nothing. It has sold everything off in the name of the free market. You could have kept our industries going with investment and development - Germany managed it. But no - The Free Market won so Sunderland, Barnsley, Hamilton etc could all go to the devil

So Mrs May my answer to your plea for unity is firstly that it is ridiculous. 48% of us will never forgive you for Brexit and secondly, of the 52% that voted for it many will not forgive you for not giving them what your lying comrades like Rees Mogg and Fox promised them. There are no unicorns, there is no £350 million extra for the NHS. The economy will tank and there will be less taxes to help out the poor. We have 350,000 homeless (not rough sleepers - homeless) in one of the richest countries on Earth and you are about to increase that number with your damn fool Brexit.

The bald man has wiped the frogs legs of his head, I’ve bought him a glass of wine to say sorry; I’m typing this with one finger on my phone in France and I’m tired now and want to stop before my finger gets too tired to join the other one in a sailors salute to you and your squalid Brexit, your shabby xenophobia and Little Englander mentality. Two fingers to you and your unity from this proud citizen of nowhere. I and roughly half the country will never forgive you or your party.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I don''t believe you but I'll bite, how will the UK leaving the EU protect the many jobs that depend on smooth trade with the EU?


You've attributed to me a position that I never made. I said the "dismantling of the EU" not "the UK leaving the EU". 

The function of the EU is to attack labour, to drive down pay and conditions, it enables and participates in the attacks on workers such as the privatisation of public services. Weakening/removing a lever of capital would provide labour with new opportunities to exploit.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The dismantling of the EU would not just protect members jobs and conditions it would actually provide an opportunity to improve conditions. You've created a false binary to fit your politics.


I don't disagree with the literal statement of this, but pointing out the obvious, it having any practical meaning is based on two enormous conditions - that Brexit presages or indeed induces the dismantling of the EU, and that someone actually _will_ take positive advantage of the opportunity you describe.

What I've never really seen you articulate anywhere is also twofold: either why these outcomes are credible, or, if and when it doesn't pan out in this optimal way, how you'll excuse the consequences. In other words, what you would say to people who massively lose out when the "new opportunities to exploit" are predictably exploited by the enemy instead. Is it what, acceptable collateral damage in a longer game? Are you going to blame them for not taking advantage? Or are we just not entertaining the possibility until it happens?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 26, 2018)

mauvais said:


> What I've never really seen you articulate anywhere is also twofold: either why these outcomes are credible,


I think Smokeandsteam has outlined some "credible" (and of course that do you mean by this) outcomes over the last couple of pages. But one obvious credible outcome would be re-nationalisation of industries, at this very moment RMT members are on strike in order to ensure their jobs are safe because train companies want to remove guards. The EU is part of the attack on their jobs and leaving the EU can provide their job security.  


mauvais said:


> In other words, what you would say to people who massively lose out when the "new opportunities to exploit" are predictably exploited by the enemy instead.


Capital and labour are in constant antagonism, labour develops new ways of asserting its power only to see those structures co-opted by capital. The trade unions themselves are an excellent example of such. But as stated some pages back either you believe in the power of the working class to improve things or you might as well reject socialism entirely. 


> *Lapavitsas*  Do we believe in our own strength or not? Do we believe in the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society? If we don’t, we might as well pack up and go home. If the magnitude of the task scares us, there is no point talking about socialism and what the left should do. We can confront these people and defeat them – of course we can. We can oppose the EU and big business and we can defeat them. We should rely on the strength of working-class hostility towards the current regime in Britain and the current state of social affairs – which is very deep. And we can rely on the yearning of ordinary people for popular sovereignty.


----------



## Cheesepig3 (Nov 26, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn has always wanted out, but much of his party doesn't, he's like a deer caught in car headlights.


Why a deer?


I think he looks like some fictional hedge-dwelling creature,  probably omnivorous but with a preference for weeds, from a 1950s children's allegorical picture book.


----------



## Cheesepig3 (Nov 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You've attributed to me a position that I never made. I said the "dismantling of the EU" not "the UK leaving the EU".
> 
> The function of the EU is to attack labour, to drive down pay and conditions, it enables and participates in the attacks on workers such as the privatisation of public services. Weakening/removing a lever of capital would provide labour with new opportunities to exploit.




The function of the EU is to prevent war in Europe. 


The tool for this is economic; it has been co-opted.


The primary function is unaffected by that unwelcome fact.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 26, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I think Smokeandsteam has outlined some "credible" (and of course that do you mean by this) outcomes over the last couple of pages. But one obvious credible outcome would be re-nationalisation of industries, at this very moment RMT members are on strike in order to ensure their jobs are safe because train companies want to remove guards. The EU is part of the attack on their jobs and leaving the EU can provide their job security.
> Capital and labour are in constant antagonism, labour develops new ways of asserting its power only to see those structures co-opted by capital. The trade unions themselves are an excellent example of such. But as stated some pages back either you believe in the power of the working class to improve things or you might as well reject socialism entirely.


I believe in that in the same way that I believe in say, roses - definitely a thing, but we're probably not going to grow any in a cave. I think Brexit is a sideshow that ignores then defers having to deal with the fundamental problem: that there is no organised British WC ready to even defend itself on a substantive national basis, let alone avail itself of opportunities as they present. And no, I don't think Brexit automatically produces one any time soon, quite the opposite. In shit analogy terms, it'd be better to have figured out how to make new plants grow before blowing up the old garden.

Even in your RMT example, which is at least one of the better case studies, it's not entirely coherent. The RMT clearly is an organised entity ready to defend itself. However the immediate battle is not guards vs renationalisation, it's guards vs classic capital. Directly at least, that's local exploitation, not the EU. I understand why you introduce renationalisation into the mix as a device through which to improve their lot, and I understand why the EU is a negative factor, although I'm no international rail lawyer. However it's not a given that renationalisation produces an outcome in which their jobs are saved or their conditions are improved, e.g. austere government ownership is likely just as bad. It's even less of a given that UK rail post-Brexit is unaffected let alone improved by the whirlwind of other resultant general changes.

Now the point I'm badly making here could be mistaken for either a whataboutery-based defence of the EU or for fatalist pessimism but it's intended to be neither: it's that if the EU ends up being a sort of tertiary or later opponent to overall success, and you can't be sure that defeating it won't hand fatal advantages to your more immediate antagonists, is it all that good an idea to start there?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 26, 2018)

Trump mischief:
May's Brexit deal sounds like a 'great deal for the EU', says Trump


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 26, 2018)

_Brexit, bringing out everyone's inner wanker since 2016_


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 26, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Trump mischief:
> May's Brexit deal sounds like a 'great deal for the EU', says Trump



Trump trying to groom us away from our allies in Europe. 

His whole MO is sex pest.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> However it's not a given that renationalisation produces an outcome in which their jobs are saved or their conditions are improved, e.g. austere government ownership is likely just as bad. It's even less of a given that UK rail post-Brexit is unaffected let alone improved by the whirlwind of other resultant general changes.


Of course its not a given nothing ever is. But as I've just said if we don't trust the power of the working class to use this as an opportunity then when will we.  




mauvais said:


> I think Brexit is a sideshow that ignores then defers having to deal with the fundamental problem: that there is no organised British WC ready to even defend itself on a substantive national basis, let alone avail itself of opportunities as they present. And no, I don't think Brexit automatically produces one any time soon, quite the opposite. In shit analogy terms, it'd be better to have figured out how to make new plants grow before blowing up the old garden.
> .....
> Now the point I'm badly making here could be mistaken for either a whataboutery-based defence of the EU or for fatalist pessimism but it's intended to be neither: it's that if the EU ends up being a sort of tertiary or later opponent to overall success, and you can't be sure that defeating it won't hand fatal advantages to your more immediate antagonists, is it all that good an idea to start there?



“_Lord, grant me chastity and continence… but not yet._" 
How is any "organised British WC ready to ... defend itself on a substantive national basis" supposed to come into existence? How long are the workers expected to wait, seeing their workplaces and communities suffer, until the Labour Party/Unions/EU/whatever get around to saving them? You still some break between the EU (tertiary opponents) and capital but not such break exists.

The WC self-organises time and again and under all conditions. Where the conditions of the Russian people in 1917, Spanish workers in the 30s etc better than those of today?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> “_Lord, grant me chastity and continence… but not yet._"
> How is any "organised British WC ready to ... defend itself on a substantive national basis" supposed to come into existence? How long are the workers expected to wait, seeing their workplaces and communities suffer, until the Labour Party/Unions/EU/whatever get around to saving them?


You tell me - you're the one who believes it'll naturally develop. After a decade of disastrous austerity it's not looking great though is it?

It does beg the question again as to whether your ideal Brexit is necessarily so ruinous, a bit like WWII, that it serves as the reset button event which changes the dominant politic. I wouldn't call massive disruption inherently objectionable - the alternative is confining oneselves to the piddliest of reforms - but if that is the idea, you do have questions to answer about what the acceptable costs are in the meantime. How many people will you let suffer or die for it?

And if it's not that, and it's about pragmatically seizing upon opportunities without this great event, then again, why will it be any different? Why isn't that happening now? It's not like capital and its political supporters have been in entirely rude health for the last decade, and yet here we are as usual.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course its not a given nothing ever is. But as I've just said if we don't trust the power of the working class to use this as an opportunity then when will we.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is Brexit really the working class in action? More like being told what to do  by elites in two different directions. One of which is a rightward path. 

Nationalisations are no more likely than an indebtedness to Trump’s US and the politics to go with it which would reject nationalisations wholesale. 

If the argument for nationalisations was won it could simply roll over the EU’s rules on it. They are full of holes and contradictions. Do it and let it play out in court.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> You tell me - you're the one who believes it'll naturally develop. After a decade of disastrous austerity it's not looking great though is it?


No that was your phrase not mine. And you're the one arguing that the wc must wait (for what?). Your position is essentially that of many TU leaderships that "we can't fight now, we're not strong enough", completely missing the point that most unions are so weak because they aren't willing to put up a serious fight. 

My position is that labour is the only power to challenge capital. That the WC has and will continually self-organise itself and the process of WC action enables that self-organisation, and vice versa. Most people didn't believe that in there was an "organised WC ready to ... defend itself on a substantive national basis" in Russia in 1917 but the actions of the workers created such a situation. 



mauvais said:


> It does beg the question again as to whether your ideal Brexit is necessarily so ruinous


 I've not made any mention of my "ideal Brexit".


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2018)

Mr Moose said:


> Is Brexit really the working class in action?


Again, I'm arguing it provides _opportunities_ for working class action.  



Mr Moose said:


> More like being told what to do  by elites in two different directions. One of which is a rightward path.


And which path isn't? Remain?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Where the conditions of the Russian people in 1917, Spanish workers in the 30s etc better than those of today?


When is the revolution starting?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I don't disagree with the literal statement of this, but pointing out the obvious, it having any practical meaning is based on two enormous conditions - that Brexit presages or indeed induces the dismantling of the EU, and that someone actually _will_ take positive advantage of the opportunity you describe.
> 
> What I've never really seen you articulate anywhere is also twofold: either why these outcomes are credible, or, if and when it doesn't pan out in this optimal way, how you'll excuse the consequences. In other words, what you would say to people who massively lose out when the "new opportunities to exploit" are predictably exploited by the enemy instead. Is it what, acceptable collateral damage in a longer game? Are you going to blame them for not taking advantage? Or are we just not entertaining the possibility until it happens?



I think these questions have been raised a few times, but here's another go:

You talk about risk, and people losing out, and obviously by that you mean leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union, which you fear will mean economic pain. If that were to happen, absolutely, global markets would punish the economy, and the only way to make it work would be to delink from global markets, take infrastructure production and trade into public ownership, and plan the economy in some way. And in any case, the economic pain is already happening and getting worse, and it's the result of govt policy not the referendum.

But that isn't actually ever going to happen and it never was going to happen - there's no way we're getting out of the Single Market cos we had a vote. It would require a political struggle to leave in any meaningful sense.

Likely consequences are the humiliation of British capitalism or the diminishing of Britain's role, which has already happened. But nothing that will affect you and me. 

What is important in this is to create both an alternative politics based on the working class and the confidence in the working class in their own ability to transform society. And it's just not possible to do that if when confronted by legitimate criticisms of the EU, which is basically a club for capitalist government's designed to defend, maintain and promote the position of white European capitalism in the global economic order, your answer is to say "well yes it might not be perfect but it's the best we can hope for."


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> When is the revolution starting?


I'm coming up so you better get this rev'lution started


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Again, I'm arguing it provides _opportunities_ for working class action.
> 
> And which path isn't? Remain?


R is for right, and also for remain
L is for left, and also for leave

Neither is inherently right or inherently left


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> When is the revolution starting?



Now you're definitely on the Special Treatment list.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I understand why you introduce renationalisation into the mix as a device through which to improve their lot, and I understand why the EU is a negative factor, although I'm no international rail lawyer. However it's not a given that renationalisation produces an outcome in which their jobs are saved or their conditions are improved, e.g. austere government ownership is likely just as bad.



This is not the only reason nor the only purpose of nationisation - genuine democratic ownership of infrastructure opens up a whole world of possibilities.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think these questions have been raised a few times, but here's another go:
> 
> You talk about risk, and people losing out, and obviously by that you mean leaving the Single Market and the Customs Union, which you fear will mean economic pain.


No. Changes to the SM or CU or whatever else are intangible political acts that create a vacuum, and it's only what fills that vacuum that produces consequences. I doubt I need to enumerate what those might be, and I wouldn't say it's necessarily the externalities of global capital either; much of it is domestic politics. But, to use a small example as an illustration: we are freed from the obligations of EU food safety law -> British legislation needs to be implemented, can be made better or worse -> argument -> something happens to food safety in Britain. Is it good or bad? Well, as it stands, who is likely to argue for what, and who is likely to win?


SpackleFrog said:


> What is important in this is to create both an alternative politics based on the working class and the confidence in the working class in their own ability to transform society. And it's just not possible to do that if when confronted by legitimate criticisms of the EU, which is basically a club for capitalist government's designed to defend, maintain and promote the position of white European capitalism in the global economic order, your answer is to say "well yes it might not be perfect but it's the best we can hope for."


Not that either, although I can see why you'd think that. It's fundamentally whether the balance is such that disrupting one part of that order can currently result in a net gain. Like kicking one prison guard in the nuts.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> No. Changes to the SM or CU or whatever else are intangible political acts that create a vacuum, and it's only what fills that vacuum that produces consequences. I doubt I need to enumerate what those might be, and I wouldn't say it's necessarily the externalities of global capital either; much of it is domestic politics. But, to use a small example as an illustration: we are freed from the obligations of EU food safety law -> British legislation needs to be implemented, can be made better or worse -> argument -> something happens to food safety in Britain. Is it good or bad? Well, as it stands, who is likely to argue for what, and who is likely to win?
> Not that either, although I can see why you'd think that. It's fundamentally whether the balance is such that disrupting one part of that order can currently result in a net gain. Like kicking one prison guard in the nuts.



I don't know why I bother


----------



## mauvais (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No that was your phrase not mine. And you're the one arguing that the wc must wait (for what?). Your position is essentially that of many TU leaderships that "we can't fight now, we're not strong enough", completely missing the point that most unions are so weak because they aren't willing to put up a serious fight.


There's a fundamental difference between surrender and starting a new fight you aren't going to win. In the long term, perhaps they amount to much the same thing, but the difference is time. Time to use how, well if I knew the answer to, 'wait for what?', then I would be in a much happier place, but after a lifetime of post-Thatcher British politics I don't have it. 'Wait for ruin' seems like the most likely catalyst for anything to change, but it remains unclear to me whether you find that to be acceptable.



redsquirrel said:


> My position is that labour is the only power to challenge capital. That the WC has and will continually self-organise itself and the process of WC action enables that self-organisation, and vice versa. Most people didn't believe that in there was an "organised WC ready to ... defend itself on a substantive national basis" in Russia in 1917 but the actions of the workers created such a situation


OK. What do _you _think it will take to reach this point in contemporary Britain?



redsquirrel said:


> I've not made any mention of my "ideal Brexit".


I know. This is why I'm here trying to second guess what it is. What is it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I know. This is why I'm here trying to second guess what it is. What is it?


first guess not good enough i suppose. third time the charm.


----------



## Mr Moose (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Again, I'm arguing it provides _opportunities_ for working class action.
> 
> And which path isn't? Remain?



True, Remain isn’t it either. It’s simply not been a helpful question. 

All it appears to have done is solidify nationalism as a leading way for the working class to exert itself. Not the leading way, but not a healthy situation either.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 27, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You are Gavin Barwell and I claim my £5.



That's got to be the worst, most horrid and degenerate cuss I've ever read!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 27, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn has always wanted out, but much of his party doesn't, he's like a deer caught in car headlights.



I'm not so sure. He's enough of an old-fashioned social democrat that (unlike, for instance, Thatcher or Blair) he'll bend to the majority will as leader. I suspect (given his advisors) that he's waiting for public opinion to settle, which it should do within the next couple of days, before taking a firm position. That's what I would do anyway, keep those centrist fucks in his own party guessing, as well as May's zombies.


----------



## Arbeter Fraynd (Nov 27, 2018)

I don't agree with everything Seymour says here, especially around racism/immigration, and I don't draw the same conclusions.  But well worth a listen -


----------



## ska invita (Nov 27, 2018)

Interesting predictions from Preston, including that Labour .. Including Corbyn! ...is planning to move for second ref if the deal gets voted do down


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

i think preston is right in that the uk is heading for the biggest political and constitutional crises since ... WW2 certainly - the 17th century?  All the options - no deal, 2nd ref, tory party splintering norway option, labour and tory party splintering general election - have massive repercussions. 

Weather corbyn is going to whip out the 2nd ref card i dont know - how reliable are preston's sources? Could very well be kite flying by labour reaminers (starmer?).


----------



## ska invita (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i think preston is right in that the uk is heading for the biggest political and constitutional crises since ... WW2 certainly - the 17th century?  All the options - no deal, 2nd ref, tory party splintering norway option, labour and tory party splintering general election - have massive repercussions.
> 
> Weather corbyn is going to whip out the 2nd ref card i dont know - how reliable are preston's sources? Could very well be kite flying by labour reaminers (starmer?).


yeah it could be kite flying....ive read signs of both McDonnell and Starmer backing second ref...Corbyn till now has remained fence sitting but that has to stop at some point...after the vote fails would be the very last moment to take a position.

including this Labour’s John McDonnell in secret talks with People’s Vote


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> i think preston is right in that the uk is heading for the biggest political and constitutional crises since ... WW2 certainly - the 17th century?  All the options - no deal, 2nd ref, tory party splintering norway option, labour and tory party splintering general election - have massive repercussions.
> 
> Weather corbyn is going to whip out the 2nd ref card i dont know - how reliable are preston's sources? Could very well be kite flying by labour reaminers (starmer?).


soz where's your actual constitutional crisis?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> soz where's your actual constitutional crisis?



"peoples will" (the referendum) vs representative democracy - plus parliament unable to enact any agreement - plus potential ECJ ruling on A50 revokability - government cant command support of house but cant  be forced toe hold GE - political deadlock - parties split in all directions. Scotland and norn iron place in union post brexit. 
Cluster and Fuck.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 27, 2018)

Hallmarks of Blair here. It's her Iraq. She'll go to the grave defending it because admitting otherwise would be to admit she was wrong (read 'weak') and her ego wouldn't forgive it. Like him, she's probably convinced herself by now anyway this is the best thing on offer for the country, because it's easier to defend bullshit when you believe it's true. She'll go down fighting, but she'll never admit she was wrong. She doesn't believe she is wrong anyway. This is the pointlessness of where we're at now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "peoples will" (the referendum) vs representative democracy - plus parliament unable to enact any agreement - plus potential ECJ ruling on A50 revokability - government cant command support of house but cant  be forced toe hold GE - political deadlock - parties split in all directions. Scotland and norn iron place in union post brexit.
> Cluster and Fuck.


yeh clusterfuck. but - as yet - no one is counterposing a parliamentary solution to _narodnaya volya_. no one is saying 'let parliament overturn the referendum result without referring the matter back to the populace'. there is as yet no crisis of constitutional proportions, although that may follow in a month or two. if parliament being unable to enact an agreement constituted a constitutional crisis then we have been in a state of constitutional crisis for many years since parliament found itself unable to reach any final settlement of the constitution of the house of lords.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> Hallmarks of Blair here. It's her Iraq. She'll go to the grave defending it because admitting otherwise would be to admit she was wrong (read 'weak') and her ego wouldn't forgive it. Like him, she's probably convinced herself by now anyway this is the best thing on offer for the country, because it's easier to defend bullshit when you believe it's true. She'll go down fighting, but she'll never admit she was wrong. She doesn't believe she is wrong anyway. This is the pointlessness of where we're at now.



Its interesting how it looks like they are going to put it to the vote - even though they know that it is going to heavily defeated - some pundits are suggesting they could lose the vote by as many as 100! 
Unlike Blair i think she just utterly unflexibly - it has been suggested that she has some sort of autistic spectrum disorder and this does kind of chime with that. "I have said i will put this agreement before the house of commons therefore i will" - even though its utterly pointless and she will be totally humiliated.
Also if labour is hinting that it is going to move to support a 2nd ref - its a green light for every remainer to vote it down.


----------



## tommers (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> its utterly pointless and she will be totally humiliated.



If I was her I would be looking forwards to that glorious day.  Quick resignation and some other twat can deal with it while I shout at them from the backbenches.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Its interesting how it looks like they are going to put it to the vote - even though they know that it is going to heavily defeated - some pundits are suggesting they could lose the vote by as many as 100!
> Unlike Blair i think she just utterly unflexibly - it has been suggested that she has some sort of autistic spectrum disorder and this does kind of chime with that. "I have said i will put this agreement before the house of commons therefore i will" - even though its utterly pointless and she will be totally humiliated.
> Also if labour is hinting that it is going to move to support a 2nd ref - its a green light for every remainer to vote it down.



It's manoeuvring for the inevitable isn't it. "I have said i will put this agreement before the house of commons therefore i will" - and when it goes tits up and she leaves office she can forever defend herself in those terms "At all times I acted honourably and by the will of the people" - it's a bit of Thatch and Blair all in one here. No humility. Book deal and memoirs to follow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> it has been suggested that she has some sort of autistic spectrum disorder and this does kind of chime with that.


i always like seeing people leap to attach the rumour of some sort of medical condition to someone's inept stubborness, like you've got to have something wrong with you to do something so spectacularly stupid.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 27, 2018)

I think it's just stiff upper lip and duty etc, look at the way she grovels before the queen.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "peoples will" (the referendum) vs representative democracy - plus parliament unable to enact any agreement - plus potential ECJ ruling on A50 revokability - government cant command support of house but cant  be forced toe hold GE - political deadlock - parties split in all directions. Scotland and norn iron place in union post brexit.
> Cluster and Fuck.


I think there could certainly be institutional deadlock and possibly competing legal challenges, though I'm not sure it would technically be a constitutional crisis. It will partly be events unfolding, a lack of obvious protocol about how to cope with a rejected deal. Politicians losing control to some extent (though they rather than us are still able to reset the rules of the game). However I think the interesting issue is whether this institutional deadlock triggers anything _real_, away from Westminster. There were claims that 'brexit betrayed' will bring people onto the streets, maybe even violence, whereas the dominant emotion at the moment seems to resignation and boredom.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I think there could certainly be institutional deadlock and possibly competing legal challenges, though I'm not sure it would technically be a constitutional crisis. It will partly be events unfolding, a lack of obvious protocol about how to cope with a rejected deal. Politicians losing control to some extent (though they rather than us are still able to reset the rules of the game). However I think the interesting issue is whether this institutional deadlock triggers anything _real_, away from Westminster. There were claims that 'brexit betrayed' will bring people onto the streets, maybe even violence, whereas the dominant emotion at the moment seems to resignation and boredom.


yeh but auld kaka t's reaching for the portentous phrases so beloved of the likes of 'that awful little man' nicholas witchell.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but auld kaka t's reaching for the portentous phrases so beloved of the likes of 'that awful little man' nicholas witchell.


Witchell's either a plucky man for our times or a weirdy little masochist. He had a career built on toadying and flunky-flattery, only to find that the object of his crawling thought he was a dreadful little oik. But still, 20 years on he's _still_ a royal correspondent. Hit me again m'lord!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

Wilf said:


> There were claims that 'brexit betrayed' will bring people onto the streets, maybe even violence, whereas the dominant emotion at the moment seems to resignation and boredom.


Yep, I don't envisage a big march in London to Make Brexit Happen, with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage leading the multitudes arm in arm at the front. I think a few people have misjudged this tbh - I think there is more anger at the idea of brexit happening, especially a shit one, than there is at the idea of democracy betrayed if it doesn't.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think it's just stiff upper lip and duty etc, look at the way she grovels before the queen.



She's next level groveller.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but auld kaka t's reaching for the portentous phrases so beloved of the likes of 'that awful little man' nicholas witchell.



leaf it out. the potential constitutional crises is the conflict between the direct democracy of the referendum and the representative democracy of westminster - i dont think thats an overblown observation - its totally paralysed the political machinery for the past 2 years.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, I don't envisage a big march in London to Make Brexit Happen, with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage leading the multitudes arm in arm at the front. I think a few people have misjudged this tbh - I think there is more anger at the idea of brexit happening, especially a shit one, than there is at the idea of democracy betrayed if it doesn't.


 I'm not even sure about that. The original vote was designed by Cameron as a way of solving the tory party's own problems and, temporarily became a release valve, something owned by the voters, and expression of identity, grievance and the rest. Since then the whole thing has passed back into the ownership of the elites and the bubble. They may struggle to sort it, to play it out as inner party and intra-party advantage - there may be a 'crisis' over the next few weeks. But it has long since ceased to be connected to 'us', the people, social interests, life. The form of brexit that is or isn't achieved will no doubt make a difference to us, but it has gone back to being one of the things that created the leave vote - politicians doing politics.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

and no - i dont see great mobs taking to the streets demanding brexit now - maybe a demo with a few tens of thousands that ends up like the country side alliance dust up with the cops in parliament square back in 2003? 2004? With about the same political impact and - hopefully - entertainment value (insert pigs vs gammon joke here)


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, I don't envisage a big march in London to Make Brexit Happen, with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage leading the multitudes arm in arm at the front. I think a few people have misjudged this tbh - I think there is more anger at the idea of brexit happening, especially a shit one, than there is at the idea of democracy betrayed if it doesn't.



For all the talk of foreign involvement in the Brexit vote itself, it seems often missed that there will be tons of astro turf based online campaigning around this still going on. I'm pretty convinced that a number of the commenters on Conservative Home Brexit articles are astro-turfers, and it's been interesting to see 'new members' pop on here to post threads about Brexit too.

My guess is that things like the failed Rees-Mogg leadership challenge actually pull back the curtain on what is actually just a small but vociferous minority that has cash to spend on seeming bigger than they are, and is still invested in that mission.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> leaf it out. the potential constitutional crises is the conflict between the direct democracy of the referendum and the representative democracy of westminster - i dont think thats an overblown observation - its totally paralysed the political machinery for the past 2 years.


I think it's exactly that and the executive feel a sense of restraint on their actions following the vote from 2016. In their different ways, both corbyn and may are shitting it about being portrayed as betraying the popular will, an almost sacred cow in democratic theory. Usually democracy is about the absolute opposite of the popular will, in that it passes power to people to do the ruling. So yes, I agree this is an odd moment in that direct democracy has taken place and sits there as a huge bolder that the government are struggling to get round. However I get a sense that it won't ever become a _real_ crisis. Anyway, fuck 'em.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, I don't envisage a big march in London to Make Brexit Happen, with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage leading the multitudes arm in arm at the front. I think a few people have misjudged this tbh - I think there is more anger at the idea of brexit happening, especially a shit one, than there is at the idea of democracy betrayed if it doesn't.



The suggestion made by Burnham and others is a risk of civil disobedience and unrest rather than a march round London waving banners/placards. Given the impulses that led to the initial vote - anger, disillusionment, peripheralisation, left behindness, joblessness, wage and living standard collapse - in many working class areas your 'thoughts' seem to discount the latent anger already bubbling away on a daily basis about many things. If people who have already opted out of voting in elections perceive they are also getting stitched up on a referendum vote then bar violence what avenues would they perceive open to them to register their concerns?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 27, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> She's next level groveller.



Something about these pics make me think her tongue is about to shoot out and whip the hapless Royal into her dislocating maw.
Not sure whether to be disappointed when it doesn't happen.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 27, 2018)

Remainers willing to ignore the biggest democratic exercise in living memory in order to save capitalism are playing with fire.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I think it's exactly that and the executive feel a sense of restraint on their actions following the vote from 2016. In their different ways, both corbyn and may are shitting it about being portrayed as betraying the popular will



There wouldn't be much need to 'portray' it would there?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> leaf it out. the potential constitutional crises is the conflict between the direct democracy of the referendum and the representative democracy of westminster - i dont think thats an overblown observation - its totally paralysed the political machinery for the past 2 years.


no, what's paralysed westminster is the May administration's valiant fight to prevent a parliamentary vote on a.50, the May administration's bold decision to hold a general election when none was necessary, the may administration's inability to decide before launching a.50 what it actually wanted, the may administration's waste of time with the Davis 'negotiations' while behind the brexit secretary's back may was preparing something quite different.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Remainers willing to ignore the biggest democratic exercise in living memory in order to save capitalism are playing with fire.



The political class is clearly recovering its nerve after accidentally opening up a Pandora’s box of working-class anger and frustration but you are spot on about the potential implications and kickback. There are so many grievances and so much anger about so many things that a politico stitch up means all bets are definitely and firmly off.


----------



## chilango (Nov 27, 2018)

If either side are going to go down the route of civil disobedience and then consequent unrest they'd need some tangible, material site of resisisres linked to the issue. Like not paying the Poll Tax or something.

I can't think of anything for this though.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

chilango said:


> If either side are going to go down the route of civil disobedience and then consequent unrest they'd need some tangible, material site of resisisres linked to the issue. Like not paying the Poll Tax or something.
> 
> I can't think of anything for this though.



As we are currently seeing in France this isn't how it works. Seemingly innocuous measures, taxes, issues - anything associated with the governing class - can explode as a vessel for popular anger.


----------



## andysays (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "peoples will" (the referendum) vs representative democracy - plus parliament unable to enact any agreement - plus potential ECJ ruling on A50 revokability - government cant command support of house but cant  be forced toe hold GE - political deadlock - parties split in all directions. Scotland and norn iron place in union post brexit.
> Cluster and Fuck.



It's certainly a cluster fuck, and a potential crisis of political legitimacy, but not sure if it counts as a constitutional crisis, or if that especially matters.

On the question of whether A50 can be revoked, see here
Brexit court case 'could lead to disaster', EU lawyers warn


> Allowing the UK to unilaterally halt the Brexit process could lead to "disaster", judges at Europe's top court have been warned. The European Court of Justice is deliberating on whether the UK can call off its withdrawal from the EU without permission from member states. But lawyers acting for the EU said allowing countries to do so could create "endless uncertainty".


To be clear, they're talking about it being a disaster for the EU, as it would


> set a precedent where other countries would be able to formally notify their intention to leave and then seek better terms from the remaining EU countries, before cancelling their withdrawal





> The court has said it will aim to decide "quickly" on the case, but has not yet set a date for doing so...


----------



## skyscraper101 (Nov 27, 2018)

chilango said:


> If either side are going to go down the route of civil disobedience and then consequent unrest they'd need some tangible, material site of resisisres linked to the issue. Like not paying the Poll Tax or something.
> 
> I can't think of anything for this though.



I'd be up for some more Poll Tax Riots in Traf Sq. for old times sake.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There wouldn't be much need to 'portray' it would there?


True and in some ways, many even, I'd like to see that reaction to 'brexit betrayed'.  It's just in the absence of any kind of lexit it's likely to be a resurgent ukip lead revolt, not an active working class reaction.  My feeling ultimately though is there probably won't be much of a street reaction of any sort.


----------



## chilango (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> As we are currently seeing in France this isn't how it works. Seemingly innocuous measures, taxes, issues - anything associated with the governing class - can explode as a vessel for popular anger.



Yes. In France.

The precedents here are far more limited.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

chilango said:


> Yes. In France.
> 
> The precedents here are far more limited.



There is no precedent for the denial of a popular vote which would be the case. To predict the outcome - as has been attempted on here - is impossible.


----------



## agricola (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> As we are currently seeing in France this isn't how it works. Seemingly innocuous measures, taxes, issues - anything associated with the governing class - can explode as a vessel for popular anger.



TBF I doubt that the gilets jaune thing is that much "popular anger" as it is the same sort of mass moaning that we saw here with the fuel tax protests of the early 2000s - ie: people who have continually voted for Government to deal harshly with other people suddenly finding that the man wants them to stump up a bit more cash. 

I am not a fan of Macron at all, but at least based on the abject cowardice that every government here since has shown to that lot (and Brexit could easily be a consequence given how many people who expressed support for those protests are pro-Brexit now) since he really needs not cave into their demands.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There is no precedent for the denial of a popular vote which would be the case. To predict the outcome - as has been attempted on here - is impossible.


No, it isn't. We may not know what will happen but we can prognosticate. It's what we do here, speculate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There is no precedent for the denial of a popular vote which would be the case. To predict the outcome - as has been attempted on here - is impossible.


Tbh do you think there's the stomach, among anyone, for another three years of this shit?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There is no precedent for the denial of a popular vote which would be the case. To predict the outcome - as has been attempted on here - is impossible.


It wasn't legally binding, and if there is another vote, that makes the first one defunct. People might be pissed off if there's another vote, but they can hardly say it's a denial of democracy, especially given all the flaws of the original vote - lack of any coherent plan or set of people who would be mandated to carry out any plan. I don't see any unity or coherence to any revolt against a second referendum if that is what happens. Plus, unless they never go out anywhere or meet anyone, any brexit enthusiast will know people who sharply disagree with them, in many cases their own children. Kids won't be rioting over the failure of brexit, not when 75% of those who could be bothered to vote voted against it. 

It would help if the political classes were to collectively admit to the failures of the original process. Everyone who voted in favour of the original referendum should do some grovelling before asking for another one.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There is no precedent for the denial of a popular vote which would be the case. To predict the outcome - as has been attempted on here - is impossible.


I agree, in terms of predicting it (which is why I went with 'feeling'). Could be, might not be. Thing is, I'd love to see some resistance and anger, ideally about things that matter directly. Cameron only accidentally made the EU into a stick with which to beat the establishment. What I'm (genuinely) unsure of is whether any denial of brexit is still going to be coupled to popular anger.  The other thing, of course, is that there's every likelihood we _*will*_ leave the EU.  It certainly won't end up like the dreams of jacob rees mogg, but it will be a brexit. I can't see there being too much by way of street protests around the differences between brexit and 'brexit in name only'.  Ultimately, it will add to popular resentment, but active anger - well, as you say, we'll have to wait and see.


----------



## agricola (Nov 27, 2018)

Also have we had this yet?



That legal advice must be damning, though even that doesn't even begin to excuse the idiocy in trying to set a precedent whereby the Government can just tell the Commons to go swivel for information that the Commons has demanded.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 27, 2018)

agricola said:


> Also have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> That legal advice must be damning, though even that doesn't even begin to excuse the idiocy in trying to set a precedent whereby the Government can just tell the Commons to go swivel for information that the Commons has demanded.



Consistent with oft repeated Goebbels line favoured by tory backbench nonentities; "nothing to hide, nothing to fear".


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 27, 2018)

agricola said:


> Also have we had this yet?
> 
> 
> 
> That legal advice must be damning, though even that doesn't even begin to excuse the idiocy in trying to set a precedent whereby the Government can just tell the Commons to go swivel for information that the Commons has demanded.




They could just do what Blair did, and lie.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 27, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> For all the talk of foreign involvement in the Brexit vote itself, it seems often missed that there will be tons of astro turf based online campaigning around this still going on. I'm pretty convinced that a number of the commenters on Conservative Home Brexit articles are astro-turfers, and it's been interesting to see 'new members' pop on here to post threads about Brexit too.
> 
> My guess is that things like the failed Rees-Mogg leadership challenge actually pull back the curtain on what is actually just a small but vociferous minority that has cash to spend on seeming bigger than they are, and is still invested in that mission.


You do realise that this “vociferous minority” actually won the referendum, right?


----------



## kabbes (Nov 27, 2018)

Those saying that they can’t see that there will be pushback from a cancelled Brexit are taking an INCREDIBLY short-term view of the glorious history of rioting in this country.  It was basically a national pastime from the 13th century (at least) up until, well, 2011 (at least).  If the public feel they aren’t being heard, they riot.

ETA: And I’m not saying that like it’s a bad thing either.  Sometimes a riot is the only way to get things done.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Those saying that they can’t see that there will be pushback from a cancelled Brexit are taking an INCREDIBLY short-term view of the glorious history of rioting in this country.  It was basically a national pastime from the 13th century (at least) up until, well, 2011 (at least).  If the public feel they aren’t being heard, they riot.
> 
> ETA: And I’m not saying that like it’s a bad thing either.  Sometimes a riot is the only way to get things done.


Rioting is generally a young person's activity.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Rioting is generally a young person's activity.


There are no young people who might be pissed off with the establishment and see this as the final straw?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> There are no young people who might be pissed off with the establishment and see this as the final straw?


Approximately one person of voting age under 25 in every ten voted for Brexit.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 27, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Remainers willing to ignore the biggest democratic exercise in living memory in order to save capitalism are playing with fire.


Leaving was a shit decision then and it's even worse now knowing the deal May came back with. Capitalism isn't in danger either way.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no, what's paralysed westminster is the May administration's valiant fight to prevent a parliamentary vote on a.50, the May administration's bold decision to hold a general election when none was necessary, the may administration's inability to decide before launching a.50 what it actually wanted, the may administration's waste of time with the Davis 'negotiations' while behind the brexit secretary's back may was preparing something quite different.



May made a bad situation worse - but whoever was in charge - certainly if was a tory - we'd have ended up this position one way or another - it was inevitable from the moment the referendum went to leave (see the OP on this thread)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> May made a bad situation worse - but whoever was in charge - certainly if was a tory - we'd have ended up this position one way or another - it was inevitable from the moment the referendum went to leave (see the OP on this thread)


As I've said on one of these threads this was by no means inevitable, in addition to which you're shuffling your position somewhat

There has been little westminster ie parliament paralysis but a lot of government fuckwittery. The government's decision not to involve the other parliamentary parties and to dismiss all the obvious options led us here


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

well - tbh - the hypotheticals of what else could have happened are somewhat irrelevant. But May and the tories are going catch most of the shit if/when Brexit gets canned.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> well - tbh - the hypotheticals of what else could have happened are somewhat irrelevant. But May and the tories are going catch most of the shit if/when Brexit gets canned.


You were lucky with your guesswork in the OP, Urban's answer to nostradamus. Don't let a spot of success go to your head. You say may and the tories will catch the flak. But the great majority of the tories are leave, hard or soft. May be the Labour Party catch most of the shit as they've always been lukewarm on going


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Leaving was a shit decision then and it's even worse now knowing the deal May came back with. Capitalism isn't in danger either way.



Nobody has suggested it is as far as I can see? The debate should be about what provides the best opportunity to move - even if it’s only an inch - away from the death grip of late capitalism. Neither option on the table offers that, and the discussion on the last few pages here has been about what tactics Corbyn and the gang could apply and the inherent dangers of their current liminal position.

Staying would also be a really shit decision would it not given the economic direction of the E.U. which, as we know, cannot be amended by democracy or governments?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The debate should be about what provides the best opportunity to move - even if it’s only an inch - away from the death grip of late capitalism. Neither option on the table offers that


if only theresa may had thought of having shuffling away from the dead grip of late capitalism as one of her policy objectives maybe things would be different


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Nobody has suggested it is as far as I can see? The debate should be about what provides the best opportunity to move - even if it’s only an inch - away from the dead grip of late capitalism. Neither option on the table offers that hence the discussion on the last few pages about what tactics Corbyn and the gang could apply and the inherent dangers of their current liminal position


I can give an answer to that. Remaining in the EU and getting a reformist government elected with genuinely left policies such as nationalisations and national building programmes gives a better opportunity to move an inch or two away from late capitalism than any version of brexit realistically on the table. A government that might clash with the EU potentially (although the EU is nowhere near as omnipotent or monolithic as some here seem to think it is), but outside the EU, with any version of brexit on the table, such a government would barely be able to move a millimetre.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can give an answer to that. Remaining in the EU and getting a reformist government elected with genuinely left policies such as nationalisations and national building programmes gives a better opportunity to move an inch or two away from late capitalism than any version of brexit realistically on the table. A government that might clash with the EU potentially (although the EU is nowhere near as omnipotent or monolithic as some here seem to think it is), but outside the EU, with any version of brexit on the table, such a government would barely be able to move a millimetre.


Surely metric in the eu and imperial outside it rather than the other way round


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You were lucky with your guesswork in the OP, Urban's answer to nostradamus. Don't let a spot of success go to your head. You say may and the tories will catch the flak. But the great majority of the tories are leave, hard or soft. May be the Labour Party catch most of the shit as they've always been lukewarm on going



going by the poll results - a lot of people were lucky (mind you it hasn't not happened yet - as it were). I just could never see the bulk of the british establishment - plus other large areas of the polity - being forced into doing something it absolutely didn't want to do on the back of a 52% majority vote  - especially given the obvious difficulties and contradictions. 
And the may and tories will get the flack cos they will the government who fucked up brexit. Labour got pretty much the perfect result in the 2017 GE - hamstringing the government and then being able to sit on the sidelines whilst May staggered back and forth getting nowhere.


----------



## agricola (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can give an answer to that. Remaining in the EU and getting a reformist government elected with genuinely left policies such as nationalisations and national building programmes gives a better opportunity to move an inch or two away from late capitalism than any version of brexit realistically on the table. A government that might clash with the EU potentially (although the EU is nowhere near as omnipotent or monolithic as some here seem to think it is), but outside the EU, with any version of brexit on the table, such a government would barely be able to move a millimetre.



The impact on other reformist / leftist movements elsewhere in the EU would be considerable as well, providing a healthy alternative to the current choice of between glib technocracy and national loonism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> going by the poll results - a lot of people were lucky (mind you it hasn't not happened yet - as it were). I just could never see the bulk of the british establishment - plus other large areas of the polity - being forced into doing something it absolutely didn't want to do on the back of a 52% majority vote  - especially given the obvious difficulties and contradictions.
> And the may and tories will get the flack cos they will the government who fucked up brexit. Labour got pretty much the perfect result in the 2017 GE - hamstringing the government and then being able to sit on the sidelines whilst May staggered back and forth getting nowhere.


Let's see how it ends


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

agricola said:


> The impact on other reformist / leftist movements elsewhere in the EU would be considerable as well, providing a healthy alternative to the current choice of between glib technocracy and national loonism.


Careful now. That sounds like _internationalism_.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can give an answer to that. Remaining in the EU and getting a reformist government elected with genuinely left policies such as nationalisations and national building programmes gives a better opportunity to move an inch or two away from late capitalism than any version of brexit realistically on the table. A government that might clash with the EU potentially (although the EU is nowhere near as omnipotent or monolithic as some here seem to think it is), but outside the EU, with any version of brexit on the table, such a government would barely be able to move a millimetre.



I disagree with your first point. The institutions of the E.U. are agreed on the economic approach - and this cannot be changed. A social democratic government in the UK would be blocked by EU rules in many areas, state aid, being one. 

I agree on your second point. This is a major error by labour - there was, and maybe still is, a massive opportunity to set out an alternative to Tory Brexit  and to have built popular support for it. The lack of ambition and vision has boxed them in totally


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 27, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I know. This is why I'm here trying to second guess what it is. What is it?


My _ideal _Brexit would be for the workers to seize control of the mean of production and tell the EU to get to fuck. But I suspect what you actually want me to state is whether I want a "hard" or "soft" Brexit (whatever those words even mean), and that's part of the politics I'm criticising. You are limiting the options to those permitted by capital.



mauvais said:


> There's a fundamental difference between surrender and starting a new fight you aren't going to win....'Wait for ruin' seems like the most likely catalyst for anything to change,


You just said that you believed in the strength of the working class, now you've written it off completely.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I disagree with your first point. The institutions of the E.U. are agreed on the economic approach - and this cannot be changed. A social democratic government in the UK would be blocked by EU rules in many areas, state aid, being one.
> 
> I agree on your second point. This is a major error by labour - there was, and maybe still is, a massive opportunity to set out an alternative to Tory Brexit  and to have built popular support for it. The lack of ambition and vision has boxed them in totally


The institutions of the EU are secondary in power to national governments. That gets lost in a lot of this, and is reflected in the wording of treaties - there are 'national security' get-out clauses for most things. 

The direction of travel can be challenged, particularly by a non-euro country. The UK has never challenged anything over this direction _because it has been a main driver of it_. Butchers was right earlier when he said that the EU was made in Thatcher's image, or words to that effect. When you look at privatisations, for instance, you see that the UK was the first and deepest to have done this in the whole of the EU. No British government has had pushback from the EU because its policies weren't capitalist enough for the EU's institutions. The British version of capitalism at least since 1979 (some would say since 1976) is far more brutal than that of any other EU country. The idea that mild social democratic reforms would be blocked by an all-powerful EU is at the very least questionable. Get those things in a manifesto, get elected on that manifesto, drive the reforms through in the name of your democratic mandate. The EU doesn't have the financial leverage over the UK that it has over eurozone countries. Get treaties renegotiated if necessary - drive through reforms of the EU - and as agricola says, get others to come along with you on that drive. Help those stuck in the eurozone bind to challenge the undemocratic restraints they are under. Build better things across borders.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The institutions of the EU are secondary in power to national governments. That gets lost in a lot of this, and is reflected in the wording of treaties - there are 'national security' get-out clauses for most things.
> 
> The direction of travel can be challenged, particularly by a non-euro country. The UK has never challenged anything over this direction _because it has been a main driver of it_. Butchers was right earlier when he said that the EU was made in Thatcher's image, or words to that effect. When you look at privatisations, for instance, you see that the UK was the first and deepest to have done this in the whole of the EU. No British government has had pushback from the EU because its policies weren't capitalist enough for the EU's institutions. The British version of capitalism at least since 1979 (some would say since 1976) is far more brutal than that of any other EU country. The idea that mild social democratic reforms would be blocked by an all-powerful EU is at the very least questionable. Get those things in a manifesto, get elected on that manifesto, drive the reforms through in the name of your democratic mandate. The EU doesn't have the financial leverage over the UK that it has over eurozone countries. Get treaties renegotiated if necessary - drive through reforms of the EU - and as agricola says, get others to come along with you on that drive. Help those stuck in the eurozone bind to challenge the undemocratic restraints they are under. Build better things across borders.


You can’t just get a few others to come along with you on yer drive, you need every member state in the house or you’ll be driving nowhere.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2018)

Also, who are you? Jeremy Corbyn? It’s difficult enough to get an MP to represent your interests nationally never mind internationally.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 27, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> My _ideal _Brexit would be for the workers to seize control of the mean of production and tell the EU to get to fuck. But I suspect what you actually want me to state is whether I want a "hard" or "soft" Brexit (whatever those words even mean), and that's part of the politics I'm criticising. You are limiting the options to those permitted by capital.


I don't want you to state any particular thing, I want your idea of how something good actually comes of it in a form that's more than a pipe dream. An outline for a novel if you like. What very rough process can you imagine actually happening whereby the left is emboldened & empowered by some outcome of Brexit?


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You do realise that this “vociferous minority” actually won the referendum, right?



No they didn't. They certainly caused the referendum to happen by scaring and splitting the tories (who didn't really get Brexit voters could be Labour voters too), but the reasons for voting leave were bigger and more wide ranging than those pushed by the vociferous minority. Not everyone voting leave was an unfettered free trade idealist, which is largely what's behind the continuing vociferation.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "peoples will" (the referendum) vs representative democracy - plus parliament unable to enact any agreement - plus potential ECJ ruling on A50 revokability - government cant command support of house but cant  be forced toe hold GE - political deadlock - parties split in all directions. Scotland and norn iron place in union post brexit.
> Cluster and Fuck.



There's no constitutional crisis. The referendum was never binding they can do what they like including nothing. People might lose their shit at some point but it's not a constitutional crisis.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Nov 27, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Those saying that they can’t see that there will be pushback from a cancelled Brexit are taking an INCREDIBLY short-term view of the glorious history of rioting in this country.  It was basically a national pastime from the 13th century (at least) up until, well, 2011 (at least).  If the public feel they aren’t being heard, they riot.
> 
> ETA: And I’m not saying that like it’s a bad thing either.  Sometimes a riot is the only way to get things done.


Brexit is already cancelled. May's deal has set the future pattern:

Phase 1: Make a lot of noise about how we're going to start from a blank sheet, take back control and how it will basically be great and involve no trade-offs.
Phase 2: Realise there are some pretty epic trade-offs.
Phase 3: Shit pants and kick absolutely all the difficult decisions into the next planning cycle while effectively maintaining the status quo. Go back to Phase 1.

I hope the Dads Army rioters are getting prepped to fuck shit up...


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2018)

And so it goes


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Also, who are you? Jeremy Corbyn? It’s difficult enough to get an MP to represent your interests nationally never mind internationally.


Have to agree with this.If as LBJ says the "direction of travel" can so easily be challenged why have there been so few challenges in all the years of EU membership and why have the challenges there have been so easily crushed? It sometimes seems as though being in Europe puts the kind of solidarity that is needed even for "mild social-democratic reforms" quite out of reach.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Rioting is generally a young person's activity.



The Countryside Alliance got a little feisty when they came to town and that definitely wasn't all young people.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Have to agree with this.If as LBJ says the "direction of travel" can so easily be challenged why have there been so few challenges in all the years of EU membership and why have the challenges there have been so easily crushed? It sometimes seems as though being in Europe puts the kind of solidarity that is needed even for "mild social-democratic reforms" quite out of reach.



hmm - but has any of the more powerful EU nations ever tried to challenge it? the uk and germany have been at the forefront of pushing neo-liberalism within the EU. A labour government might get more traction - also if you have other leftists government in spain, portugal and maybe france things could shift. 
of course - its all maybes and perhaps - and nothing changing at all is a very strong possibility - but if we are talking pipe dreams -  which is more likey? - a socialist UK thriving outside the EU as argued by the lexiters or some sort  leftwards reform from within?
Without a strong manufacturing base and an significant organised working class movement the uk outside the Eu is just going to butt fucked by capital.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmm - but has any of the more powerful EU nations ever tried to challenge it? the uk and germany have been at the forefront of pushing neo-liberalism within the EU. A labour government might get more traction - also if you have other leftists government in spain, portugal and maybe france things could shift.
> of course - its all maybes and perhaps - and nothing changing at all is a very strong possibility - but if we are talking pipe dreams -  which is more likey? - a socialist UK thriving outside the EU as argued by the lexiters or some sort  leftwards reform from within?
> Without a strong manufacturing base and an significant organised working class movement the uk outside the Eu is just going to butt fucked by capital.


Not at all certain about any of this myself but it does seem to me that the longer we remain in the EU the more any idea of there being an organised working class movement in the UK recedes.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Not at all certain about any of this myself but it does seem to me that the longer we remain in the EU the more any idea of there being an organised working class movement in the UK recedes.



i think we'll be waiting a long time wherever the uk ends up.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmm - but has any of the more powerful EU nations ever tried to challenge it? the uk and germany have been at the forefront of pushing neo-liberalism within the EU. A labour government might get more traction - also if you have other leftists government in spain, portugal and maybe france things could shift.
> of course - its all maybes and perhaps - and nothing changing at all is a very strong possibility - but if we are talking pipe dreams -  which is more likey? - a socialist UK thriving outside the EU as argued by the lexiters or some sort  leftwards reform from within?
> Without a strong manufacturing base and an significant organised working class movement the uk outside the Eu is just going to butt fucked by capital.


Aside from all the legal stuff preventing that from happening why would any member state let alone several want to do this? What would be motivating them to basically go against their own class interests? Again  without pressure from the significant working class movement you speak of?
And if we agree that that pressure needs to be there in the first place, then why would this movement have more success putting pressure on the govt whilst we are in the EU? This just doesn’t make sense.

Although I expect at this time of day neither do I


----------



## Gerry1time (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The institutions of the EU are secondary in power to national governments. That gets lost in a lot of this, and is reflected in the wording of treaties - there are 'national security' get-out clauses for most things.
> 
> The direction of travel can be challenged, particularly by a non-euro country. The UK has never challenged anything over this direction _because it has been a main driver of it_. Butchers was right earlier when he said that the EU was made in Thatcher's image, or words to that effect. When you look at privatisations, for instance, you see that the UK was the first and deepest to have done this in the whole of the EU. No British government has had pushback from the EU because its policies weren't capitalist enough for the EU's institutions. The British version of capitalism at least since 1979 (some would say since 1976) is far more brutal than that of any other EU country. The idea that mild social democratic reforms would be blocked by an all-powerful EU is at the very least questionable. Get those things in a manifesto, get elected on that manifesto, drive the reforms through in the name of your democratic mandate. The EU doesn't have the financial leverage over the UK that it has over eurozone countries. Get treaties renegotiated if necessary - drive through reforms of the EU - and as agricola says, get others to come along with you on that drive. Help those stuck in the eurozone bind to challenge the undemocratic restraints they are under. Build better things across borders.



Awesome post. My dad lived in southern France in the mid 90's, and I remember having conversations with various people there who were utterly puzzled about why some people in Britain were opposed to Europe. Their attitude was take it for all the subsidy money you can get, and if it tells you to do something you don't like, just give a gallic shrug and ignore it. As far as they were concerned, those were the fairly open rules of the game, that we just didn't seem to get. 

It also one of the many reasons I'm annoyed at the Lib Dems over all of this. They were meant to be the pro-european party, but instead of being in there arguing for europe to be *better*, they just acted like the sun shone out of its arse, and everything it said had to be followed. Blair was reasonably similar. If we'd had a political party in this country who were in europe to advocate strongly for the UK within it, we might be in a very different situation now.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 27, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Approximately one person of voting age under 25 in every ten voted for Brexit.


I.e. hundreds of thousands if not millions of people under 25.

But do you think only people under 25 riot?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Aside from all the legal stuff preventing that from happening why would any member state let alone several want to do this? What would be motivating them to basically go against their own class interests? Again  without pressure from the significant working class movement you speak of?
> And if we agree that that pressure needs to be there in the first place, then why would this movement have more success putting pressure on the govt whilst we are in the EU? This just doesn’t make sense.
> 
> Although I expect at this time of day neither do I



Cos its horsetrading and negotiations and politics - the UK can bloc more right wing policies and support for progressive ones (i.e on workers rights) the opposite of it past behavior. The real bloc on the EU reforming in a progressive manner is the Euro and the ECB with it strict fiscal rules (as greece found to its cost) - happily the Uk is not in the Euro - but may be in a position to support nations (spain, italy, ireland, greece) who would like those rules loosened.
I mean - this all depends on a properly socially democratic government in power - but so does lexit. And Id fear a tory government outside the EU than one inside.  
But longer term - who knows? It make sense from a leftist point of view to leave some years down the line, or the EU may splinter - but right now?


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> Cos its horsetrading and negotiations and politics - the UK can bloc more right wing policies and support for progressive ones (i.e on workers rights) the opposite of it past behavior. The real bloc on the EU reforming in a progressive manner is the Euro and the ECB with it strict fiscal rules (as greece found to its cost) - happily the Uk is not in the Euro - but may be in a position to support nations (spain, italy, ireland, greece) who would like those rules loosened.
> I mean - this all depends on a properly socially democratic government in power - but so does lexit. And Id fear a tory government outside the EU than one inside.
> *But longer term - who knows? It make sense from a leftist point of view to leave some years down the line, or the EU may splinter - but right now?*


Its now or never realistically. As much as the mainstream referendum WAS a clusterfuck of misinformation, emotionally loaded content, racist deception and deflection, economic scaremongering, downright mistruths and over embellishments and devoid of any pragmatic discussion of all the options available.  Yet it was 20 years of swimming against the tide to get one...slink back with tail between legs and we won't get another, nor taken that seriously on reforms it badly needs, it is a very poor democratic interface as it is


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 27, 2018)

damage done. would not start from here etc...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2018)

gosub said:


> Its now or never realistically. As much as the mainstream referendum WAS a clusterfuck of misinformation, emotionally loaded content, racist deception and deflection, economic scaremongering, downright mistruths and over embellishments and devoid of any pragmatic discussion of all the options available.  Yet it was 20 years of swimming against the tide to get one...slink back with tail between legs and we won't get another, nor taken that seriously on reforms it badly needs, it is a very poor democratic interface as it is


But this is the point, no? It wasn't 20 years of swimming against the tide to get a referendum, or at least it was more than 30 years of the Tory right swimming against the tide and the rise of right-wing populist nationalism that was taking votes from the Tories that got this referendum. That matters. That shapes the brexit that happens and what happens in the years after it. And none of those things is a good thing. The disaster-capitalists are licking their lips. You don't move towards your destination by first moving away from it. All you do then is make the distance to travel even further. 

The only argument with any coherence that I can hear is one that wants the whole institutional framework of the EU and the UK to collapse to be followed by probably bloody revolution. Fascism and war are at least as likely in that scenario as socialism and peace, not just here but elsewhere in Europe, in places that have living memory of dictatorship, and also beyond Europe. I will hold my hands up and say that I do not want that. I can see no good coming from it, only a lot of bad. In a world of climate change, population pressure, environmental degradation and all the myriad challenges that face us, we need international institutions. The ones we have need changing. Do they need destroying? Not without a plan for how to replace them, and I don't see that plan. Britain isn't even close to l/w revolution. It is much closer to grubby, insular, Trump-like, Bolsonaro-like r/w nationalism. And so are lots of other parts of Europe.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 27, 2018)

Everyone is hedging their bets. There is clearly no wide spread consensus. Its ridiculous really.


----------



## A380 (Nov 27, 2018)

Worst constitutional crisis ever.


----------



## gosub (Nov 27, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> damage done. would not start from here etc...


Bollocks it will always be be just in time means be as ordered and risk managed as possible vs just in time means adapt in real time to what's going on


----------



## gosub (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But this is the point, no? It wasn't 20 years of swimming against the tide to get a referendum, or at least it was more than 30 years of the Tory right swimming against the tide and the rise of right-wing populist nationalism that was taking votes from the Tories that got this referendum. That matters. That shapes the brexit that happens and what happens in the years after it. And none of those things is a good thing. The disaster-capitalists are licking their lips. You don't move towards your destination by first moving away from it. All you do then is make the distance to travel even further.
> 
> The only argument with any coherence that I can hear is one that wants the whole institutional framework of the EU and the UK to collapse to be followed by probably bloody revolution. Fascism and war are at least as likely in that scenario as socialism and peace, not just here but elsewhere in Europe, in places that have living memory of dictatorship, and also beyond Europe. I will hold my hands up and say that I do not want that. I can see no good coming from it, only a lot of bad. In a world of climate change, population pressure, environmental degradation and all the myriad challenges that face us, we need international institutions. The ones we have need changing. Do they need destroying? Not without a plan for how to replace them, and I don't see that plan. Britain isn't even close to l/w revolution. It is much closer to grubby, insular, Trump-like, Bolsonaro-like r/w nationalism. And so are lots of other parts of Europe.



War, I potentially also see coming, and / or economic collapse, though trying level best to prevent.  Real answers come from adapt, rather than crush and shore up.  Interesting times.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I don't want you to state any particular thing, I want your idea of how something good actually comes of it in a form that's more than a pipe dream. An outline for a novel if you like. What very rough process can you imagine actually happening whereby the left is emboldened & empowered by some outcome of Brexit?


In the last few pages alone SpackleFrog and Smokeandsteam have outlined a number of possibilities of how the UK leaving the EU could provide benefits to workers. If you disagree with those analyses fine, but they are damn site less of "pipe dreams" than the idea of pretending the EU will protect workers. 

What you want is for me to provide a map for the working class to follow. But my whole point is that that is the problem, the insistence of so much the left that labour follow its plans rather than recognising that the working class will develop its own pathways is what has led to so many dead ends.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 28, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmm - but has any of the more powerful EU nations ever tried to challenge it? the uk and germany have been at the forefront of pushing neo-liberalism within the EU. A labour government might get more traction - also if you have other leftists government in spain, portugal and maybe france things could shift.


When were the governments of France, Spain and Portugal "leftist"? They have all been involved in the neo-liberal attack on the working class - even when the red shirts have been in power.



Kaka Tim said:


> of course - its all maybes and perhaps - and nothing changing at all is a very strong possibility - but if we are talking pipe dreams -  which is more likey? - *a socialist UK thriving outside the EU as argued by the lexiters *or some sort  leftwards reform from within?


Who has argued the bold? I've not seen anyone on U75 make such a silly claim. And as for reformism how can an organisation who's purpose is to facilitate the attacks of capital and governments on workers be reformed? Are you also going to argue for the reformation of the WTO, IMF, WorldBank, etc?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In the last few pages alone SpackleFrog and Smokeandsteam have outlined a number of possibilities of how the UK leaving the EU could provide benefits to workers. If you disagree with those analyses fine, but they are damn site less of "pipe dreams" than the idea of pretending the EU will protect workers.
> 
> What you want is for me to provide a map for the working class to follow. But my whole point is that that is the problem, the insistence of so much the left that labour follow its plans rather than recognising that the working class will develop its own pathways is what has led to so many dead ends.


So first of all, I don't disagree that there are opportunities presented by leaving the EU, but the whole question is not whether they exist but whether they'll be availed amongst the disruption.

As for the lack of map, this simultaneously makes sense and says nothing. Why haven't such pathways already materially developed since the economic crash? What timeframe do you think we're looking at? At what point is the hegemony of centre-right parliamentary politics - by far the single biggest influence over conditions - going to be disrupted, within or without? Why is any of this going to actually deliver positives for the left rather than capital or the far right? What if you are just plain wrong and noone fights back for however long?

'The WC will figure it out' is probably the required answer rather than top down prescription but in the current landscape it seems unlikely that this is going to happen any time soon, at least without first a very unpleasant and damaging journey that produces catalysts for change. To this you'll say it means I have no faith in the WC but again I say that it's conditional. And there's no benefit to having an inflated sense of the left's health.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> And as for reformism how can an organisation who's purpose is to facilitate the attacks of capital and governments on workers be reformed? Are you also going to argue for the reformation of the WTO, IMF, WorldBank, etc?


I think the possibility of EU reform is there - the EU is ultimately formed by its members, and those are primarily chosen through elections. The unelected layer is currently supported and given legitimacy by a conservative majority in the European parliament, but that could change.

Like many here I thought the Labour party was incapable of and beyond change - turns out that was wrong. There's still a lot that needs to happen there of course, but the wheels are in motion and many of the barriers to reform are falling. Once the wheels of history start turning things can change quickly.

Of course its foolish to put all faith in reformism, but to me grass roots and top down power are not mutually exclusive - we need them both. The problem the left has is a scarcity of people, power, and time, which makes the choice where to concentrate effort more strategic and often ineffective, as its spread too thin.

As to WTO, IMF, WorldBank, these are clearly impossible to "reform". And I guess the difference is democracy. I think Chomksy has formed my opinion on this - he's no starry-eyed reformist, but he makes the case that we fought long and hard for the vote, its an important victory, and it remains a tool which can crack power structures. Its not the only tool, but its far from an insignificant one.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

This wasn’t the #throwback...wednesday post I was looking for, he’d written a more succinct version of this. 
But it will do  



Nigel Irritable said:


> No. You are deliberately misleading people and the only appropriate response to you is to point that out bluntly.
> 
> Treaty changes require unanimity. Everything else only exists within the boundaries set by the Treaties. The Treaties are the central issue. Nothing can be fundamentally changed without changing them. You know this. You are deliberately trying to confuse people about it however.
> 
> ...


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> As to WTO, IMF, WorldBank, these are clearly impossible to "reform". And I guess the difference is democracy. I think Chomksy has formed my opinion on this - he's no starry-eyed reformist, but he makes the case that we fought long and hard for the vote, its an important victory, and it remains a tool which can crack power structures. Its not the only tool, but its far from an insignificant one.


Yet here we are, now knowing that the ref vote has clearly broken the power structure, with half the people on this thread still opposing the outcome of the democratic vote and wanting it reversed.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yet here we are, now knowing that the ref vote has clearly broken the power structure, with half the people on this thread still opposing the outcome of the democratic vote and wanting it reversed.


I don't want it reversed.
I'm also sceptical about what exactly has been broken and in who's benefit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yet here we are, now knowing that the ref vote has clearly broken the power structure, with half the people on this thread still opposing the outcome of the democratic vote and wanting it reversed.


So we can crack the power structure in a way that doesn’t effect anyone and no one gets punished for. Just WAIT.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This wasn’t the #throwback...wednesday post I was looking for, he’d written a more succinct version of this.
> But it will do


That may well be right.... I'll be honest I don't know, I may be imagining the possibilities. Would all 28 countries really have to align simultaneously? A majority socialist block in the bigger countries would swing it i expect. The fact it hasnt happened before isn't an argument though.. Things can change, and quicky... If we didn't believe that then we might as well pack up and go home, to paraphrase Costas L.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I don't want it reversed.
> I'm also sceptical about what exactly has been broken and in who's benefit


That's the point Lapivistas / redsquirrel are making. If the working class can't even see the current opportunity and unite to get a vision together to take the power (that imo is a gift horse right now), then any future democratic decision is also worthless. 
Let's face it, going by half the posts here by so-called socialists, the will isn't really there to break away from neoliberalism, is it? Democratically or not.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> That may well be right.... I'll be honest I don't know, I may be imagining the possibilities. Would all 28 countries really have to align simultaneously? A majority socialist block in the bigger countries would swing it i expect. The fact it hasnt happened before isn't an argument though.. Things can change, and quicky... If we didn't believe that then we might as well pack up and go home, to paraphrase Costas L.


Legally, they can’t. One state can block any amendments. All have to agree or the changes can’t go through.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Nov 28, 2018)

yes voting can make a difference - but it has to be allied to wider, popular movements outside of parliament - that's why the 1945 labour government was able to establish the welfare state, NHS etc - and why it was difficult for much of that be reversed for many decades. 
With brexit the difference is that only a small part of the elected politicians actually support it - and significant interest groups  outside of parliament oppose it ranging from the CBI to the labour party membership and the TUC. The pro-brexit forces have no organised mass movement behind them. 
WRT EU reform - the effects of 2008 crash is still working its way through european democracys and it has seriously weakened the traditional established parties - particularly the "centrist" one. This has seen the rise of reactionary populist movements - but also more radical leftists ones in greece, spain, the UK (!) and - to a lesser extent - in france. Basically - everything is in flux - and its now possible that parties similar to corbyns labour party could take power in other european countries  - and this was not the case 10 years ago.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I don't want it reversed.
> I'm also sceptical about what exactly has been broken and in who's benefit


Asking this means the conversation remains at a standstill though, there are opportunities. Which is the best you can hope for from one vote. Movement.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I think the possibility of EU reform is there - the EU is ultimately formed by its members, and those are primarily chosen through elections. The unelected layer is currently supported and given legitimacy by a conservative majority in the European parliament, but that could change.
> 
> Like many here I thought the Labour party was incapable of and beyond change - turns out that was wrong. There's still a lot that needs to happen there of course, but the wheels are in motion and many of the barriers to reform are falling. Once the wheels of history start turning things can change quickly.
> 
> ...


This basically. The idea that the EU is incapable of reform therefore must be destroyed well nobody's tried to reform it. Get governments that want to reform it and you might see something different. And that absolutely does not mean you only put faith in that and don't believe in bottom up reform. Point there for me is that brexit is not in any way bottom up reform. It does not represent even a challenge to austerity. The scapegoating of immigrants for problems caused by austerity represents a perverse victory to the very worst aspects of the forces that brought austerity about in the first place.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

People are forgetting a lot has happened since the days of Thatcher, Neoliberalism isn’t *just* Britain’s will, it’s been stamped like fuck into EU law as well.


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 28, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> yes voting can make a difference - but it has to be allied to wider, popular movements outside of parliament - that's why the 1945 labour government was able to establish the welfare state, NHS etc - and why it was difficult for much of that be reversed for many decades.
> With brexit the difference is that only a small part of the elected politicians actually support it - and significant interest groups  outside of parliament oppose it ranging from the CBI to the labour party membership and the TUC. The pro-brexit forces have no organised mass movement behind them.


I wouldn't even class the last 2 GEs as meaningful in that sense. History will view the 2015 GE results as an ulterior motive to get a referendum and the 2017 snap election was simply bizarre in that neither major party even mentioned the EU in the run-up. Both just go to show how out of step the (mostly remain) politicians are. 
So frankly it's bollocks that (the current batch of) MPs need to support, and even ratify Brexit. You could argue that there should be another election now with enough debate about the brexit topic to make it meaningful - but sorry, that was the 2016 ref.



Kaka Tim said:


> WRT EU reform - the effects of 2008 crash is still working its way through european democracys and it has seriously weakened the traditional established parties - particularly the "centrist" one. This has seen the rise of reactionary populist movements - but also more radical leftists ones in greece, spain, the UK (!) and - to a lesser extent - in france. *Basically - everything is in flux *- and its now possible that parties similar to corbyns labour party could take power in other european countries  - and this was not the case 10 years ago.


I disagree. There's no flux. There's a very steady progression towards a right-wing neoliberal political hegemony across Europe. One that won't loosen it's grip as easily as you think.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> In the last few pages alone SpackleFrog and Smokeandsteam have outlined a number of possibilities of how the UK leaving the EU could provide benefits to workers.



Not really. Just the usual waffly stuff. That or full on revolution.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

There’s maybe a side helping of flux though surely. 
*waves hands for teuchter’s benefit*


----------



## pocketscience (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It does not represent even a challenge to austerity. The scapegoating of immigrants...


Weird how you dismiss one aspect of the brexit vote yet use another as if fact there.
Can't be denied that austerity politics are on the back foot since brexit (across the EU too)


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Legally, they can’t. One state can block any amendments. All have to agree or the changes can’t go through.


Yeah but Blair pulled up the ladder to block reform within  Labour and that's slowly being reversed too. Laws can be changed if there's the majority to do it.

Anyhow, as poketscience said, the vote has happened...i don't want it reversed. I haven't heard anyone on here backing Mays deal though? Or berating those MPs trying to stop it. Are we doing this or not?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

Hey it’s Urban Brexit and Party- Greatest Dance Dysptopia Anthems. Worst compilation ever


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> So first of all, I don't disagree that there are opportunities presented by leaving the EU, but the whole question is not whether they exist but whether they'll be availed amongst the disruption


The thing that strikes me and others is that there has not really been an assessment of the costs and opportunities of any of the options by the broader left of centre. Anyone honestly looking at the situation must have been able to see that all the options have the potential to cause problems and that all have opportunities. And that includes left/liberal remainers who are just unwilling to countenance criticism of the EU. They have as a whole fallen into a daft position of presenting the EU as something it isn’t. That it’s democratic, that it’s the anti anti-immigration option, that it’s for workers’ rights, that the slew of neoliberal treaties just aren’t there if you wish hard enough, and so on. 

There’s also this, what appears to be, gut reaction that the UK simply has to get back in, no matter what damage is done. Does it, for example, drive people into the hands of the far right? Are we prepared for the outcome if it does? Is getting back in worth that? For what?

And how will rentry be achieved? By simply repeating what was said in 2016? It didn’t work then, why is it going to work now?

And if we decide that actually the risks of remain are too great? That we are where we are, and a cost-benefit analysis says a re-entry is not worth it? Has there been any work done on what the possible benefits are of other options?

The formal labour movement has missed an opportunity. It has largely just fallen behind the uncritical remain impulse in the case of the unions, or in the case of the Labour Party waited to see what the Tories would do.

There was no need to accept that leave means only the vision of May and the pro status quo civil service, or the vision of the neoconservative right. That this was all we could ever do. Those two options or leap back in.

Last time I said this people came back at me with a message of woe. Nothing else could ever have been achieved. Those are the only three options, and have been since 2016.

Well, OK, the clock has now been run down on the leave process. And I fully accept that no big, broad left leave vision movement has been built. But even if we accept that May’s deal can’t be improved on now, once out do we have to stay with a neocon programme or a neoliberal programme? That’s just the shape of society forever?

Well, no. People like Costas Lapavitsas have outlined alternative visions. You may not have his optimism (and frankly I do think there’s some work needed before we have the necessary organisation in place), but it’s just not true to trot out this tale of woe that once the result was known in 2016 we had two options - disaster or re-entry.

Just step back. Step back from the argument our bosses are having. We don’t need to pick one or other side of their simplistically drawn dichotomy. We need to look honestly at what opportunities there might be for us. And build on that instead.

Will that happen? Not if we don’t accept it’s possible.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Yeah but Blair pulled up the ladder to block reform and that is slowly being reversed too. Laws can be changed if there's the majority to do it.


In terms of treaty amendents, no, they really can’t. All states need to ratify it, some states hold refs before they can do so. This is why they had to ask Ireland twice re Lisbon treaty.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just step back. Step back from the argument our bosses are having. We don’t need to pick one or other side of their simplistically drawn dichotomy. We need to look honestly at what opportunities there might be for us. And build on that instead.
> .


First May's deal needs to pass or the opportunity will close, right? Or at least Norway+? Are we agreed on that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> First May's deal needs to pass or the opportunity will close, right? Or at least Norway+? Are we agreed on that?


May's deal passing represents the firm slam of a door on a whole host of opportunities.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> First May's deal needs to pass or the opportunity will close, right? Or at least Norway+? Are we agreed on that?


Not quite sure what you’re asking. 

‘May’s deal needs to pass’ (I mean it won’t In its present form), why? 

If you’re asking me to rank May’s deal and Norway+ (not that I’ve read May’s deal, only bits along with reports of what’s in it), then that’s, relatively speaking, Norway+ ahead of May’s deal by some distance. But again, not sure why that’s important to your query. 

I’m not sure what opportunity you’re saying closes unless May’s deal is passed.


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

Thersi always opportunity. 

Exactly what that looks like might depend upon circumstances - in this case what sort of Brexit, if any, happens.

But right now we're not ready to take advantage of any opportunities that appear.

We weren't ready in the run up to the referendum. That's blindingly obvious.

Are we in a better shape now?

No.

So, I'd argue from the comfort of my particular armchair that our priority is not to bicker about the merits of the different shit options over which we have no control and in which we have no stake but rather that our priority is to get on with the job of "cold accumulation of forces" of, of trying to piece together some sort of ability to respond when opportunity knocks.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> So, I'd argue from the comfort of my particular armchair that our priority is not to bicker about the merits of the different shit options over which we have no control and in which we have no stake but rather that our priority is to get on with the job of "cold accumulation of forces" of, of trying to piece together some sort of ability to respond when opportunity knocks.


The first thing is to make sure a Brexit happens. Labour look likely to stop it at the moment. How is Caroline Flint not right?


danny la rouge said:


> ‘May’s deal needs to pass’ (I mean it won’t In its present form), why?


Why? For all the endless reasons people are arguing its essential to leave the EU.


danny la rouge said:


> If you’re asking me to rank May’s deal and Norway+ (not that I’ve read May’s deal, only bits along with reports of what’s in it), then that’s, relatively speaking, Norway+ ahead of May’s deal by some distance.


So keeping 'freedom of movement'


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> The first thing is to make sure a Brexit happens.


Well, the first thing for whom?

Yes, Brexit needs to happen. But I’m not personally backing any of the deals. Not even Norway+.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, the first thing for whom?
> 
> Yes, Brexit needs to happen. But I’m not personally backing any of the deals. Not even Norway+.


Seems like a cop out to me. Back Brexit but none of the deals. Deals which were obviously the ones that Brexit was about.

Ive really got to do some work  ttfn


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

Why do we need to make sure Brexit happens?

That's not our fight (yet).


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> Why do we need to make sure Brexit happens?


There are several thousand posts arguing why its so important


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> There are several thousand posts arguing why its so important


Thered a difference between it being importanti and it being something we should be fighting for.

We don't have the capability to fight for much right now and I'm arguing that getting that capability is priority rather than getting lost in someone else's battle.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Apologies if already posted, just catching up... but here's McDonnell suggesting there could be a 2nd ref - and without No Deal as an option (so it would presumably be May's deal Vs remain):

Labour could seize option of second Brexit vote, says McDonnell

Bear in mind this is grauniad desperation to get a 2nd ref - and from something he said at a grauniad event. But still, in light of the discussion had on here yesterday about elites ignoring mandates, this is appalling. Essentially, he's saying 'we've now reached the strategic point where a 2nd ref suits our agenda, but the imagined will of parliament 'pre-trumps' the outcome of that referendum.



> “We can’t have no deal on the ballot paper,” McDonnell said. “There’s an overwhelming majority in parliament against that happening, because of the damage.”



Edit: ironically, I think this - having a 2nd ref around 'here's the agreement reached vs staying in' would have been a logical step if, crucially, it had been built into the original legislation from Cameron. However, posing those as the only alternatives as McDonnell is doing shows a shocking level of cynicism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> First May's deal needs to pass or the opportunity will close, right? Or at least Norway+? Are we agreed on that?


i think we can all agree it's already passed


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)




----------



## Raheem (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Apologies if already posted, just catching up... but here's McDonnell suggesting there could be a 2nd ref - and without No Deal as an option (so it would presumably be May's deal Vs remain):
> 
> Labour could seize option of second Brexit vote, says McDonnell
> 
> ...


It would be much worse, though, to put an option on the ballot paper that you have no intention of delivering on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Apologies if already posted, just catching up... but here's McDonnell suggesting there could be a 2nd ref - and without No Deal as an option (so it would presumably be May's deal Vs remain):
> 
> Labour could seize option of second Brexit vote, says McDonnell
> 
> ...


it seems you still have illusions in politicians


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It would be much worse, though, to put an option on the ballot paper that you have no intention of delivering on.


But, technically, this isn't about what labour would have no intention of delivering. It's a scenario with the Tories still in power having failed to secure 'the deal' in parliament. But more importantly, the whole process is - and should still be - framed by the decision to put this to the people in 2016. This is saying 'we might put it to the people again, but only giving them certain outcomes and only to get us out of a hole'. It's just about as cynical as everything done by May - more so in fact.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it seems you still have illusions in politicians


----------



## hot air baboon (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Apologies if already posted, just catching up... but here's McDonnell suggesting there could be a 2nd ref - and without No Deal as an option (so it would presumably be May's deal Vs remain):
> 
> 
> 
> > “We can’t have no deal on the ballot paper,” McDonnell said. “There’s an overwhelming majority in parliament against that happening, because of the damage.”





> Wolfgang Münchau   NOVEMBER 25, 2018
> 
> There is an infallible way to identify politicians and commentators who have not read Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty. What gives their game away is the complacent and mistaken assertion that a no-deal Brexit is impossible on the grounds there is no majority for it in the House of Commons. The reality is that a campaign to undo the 2016 referendum is virtually impossible without the explicit support of the government.
> 
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, OK, the clock has now been run down on the leave process. And I fully accept that no big, broad left leave vision movement has been built. But even if we accept that May’s deal can’t be improved on now, once out do we have to stay with a neocon programme or a neoliberal programme? That’s just the shape of society forever?



Yes. Here is the frustration and the missed opportunity.

In respect of Corbyn's Labour there has been a resounding failure to even _open up a debate_ about what might be possible. On either option. Given that both Corbyn and McDonnell come from a long left social democrat position that has always opposed the EU on democratic and policy grounds it's even more frustrating that the best they've able to come up with is the abysmally vague and limited '6 test' strategy of Starmer.

As for the unions, with a few exceptions, they've simply collapsed into repeating the threats of the CBI/IoD/multinationals and other neo con remainers about the dangers of exit. Not one union leader has even attempted to explain how remain might have to be on different terms and how that might be achieved. Their position is simply remain. This failure is understandable if you take the view, as I do, that the capture of the EU by neoliberal economics is so complete that the EU would collapse before the nexus of relations and structures that have grown up to execute the plan could be unpicked, but they clearly don't hold that view.

It is incumbent on them, or it should be, to explain how another 50 years of EU membership might be better for their members (and millions of ex members languishing on the dole or precarious work where unions are absent) than the last 50.	

As for the commentariat and thinkers around the movement there has been a deep paucity of ideas about precisely the questions and issues thrown up by the vote some of which danny la rouge has set out. In many cases they have resorted to basic lies and misrepresentations about the EU, what it is and what it does that makes their analysis barely distinguishable from Clegg and Blair.

If you wanted a better example of the collapse of the labour movement, intellectually and in terms of vision and ambition, then here it is.

From the moment the result was announced Corbyn and what's left of the labour movement _could_ have set out a vision - either remain and reform, or a post EU social democratic future - and then spent the last two years arguing for it, explaining it, campaigning for it and counterposing it to the Tory version. If the popular impulse of ''change" had been tapped into May and the Tories would either be gone or about to go. Instead, the time has been spent passively and the field clear for the two wings of the administrative cadre of the ruling class to fight it out and there is a popular view that the two shit options they are squabbling over are the best we can do alongside attendant feelings of boredom, exasperation and a growing sense of a political class stitch up.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Seems like a cop out to me. Back Brexit but none of the deals.


That’s not my position, though.

The problem with the way this has been polarised is that when people try to argue a position which rejects that polarisation as false, people can’t fit it into their model.

I tried to argue above, and throughout my contributions to the thread, as clearly as I could how I see this. But if you’re determined to have two poles, try this: I don’t back a) a neoliberal vision of the future or b) a neocon one.

Into a) goes May’s deal *and* remain, and into b) goes the ERC’s frothing Singapore model, or whatever it is they’re saying now.

I don’t back either neoliberalism or neoconservatism. That’s my “backing” out of the way.

Now, separately, to my analysis of why the government, parliament, has to honour the result of the referendum: because there is no good procedural reason not to. 

But let’s imagine we (and I’m not sure who this is) don’t care about that. Let’s imagine the ends justifies the means: the UK just needs to get back into the E.U.; well, first those supporting that need to answer why. And then they’d need to weigh that against the probable damage. And then if they decided it was worth the risk, then they’d need to demonstrate how it could be won this time. (And not by calling people thick and racist again).

So, no, I don’t think overturning, or attempting to overturn, the outcome  of the referendum can be supported.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes. Here is the frustration and the missed opportunity.
> 
> In respect of Corbyn's Labour there has been a resounding failure to even _open up a debate_ about what might be possible. On either option. Given that both Corbyn and McDonnell come from a long left social democrat position that has always opposed the EU on democratic and policy grounds it's even more frustrating that the best they've able to come up with is the abysmally vague and limited '6 test' strategy of Starmer.
> 
> ...


Exactly.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> the government, parliament, has to honour the result of the referendum


How?


----------



## Winot (Nov 28, 2018)

You've got to hand it to them - UK politicians have simultaneously failed to deliver a neoliberal outcome, failed to deliver a neocon outcome, and failed to deliver a socialist outcome. Everybody's equally happy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How?


What was the result?


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 28, 2018)

121 and a 1/2 days to go!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What was the result?


No, I'm asking how they do it. The result was 'leave'. How? The terms of leaving aren't just up to the UK government or parliament. At what cost should this be done? Any cost? Should a war be fought over it if need be? What are the limits here?

This is just another version of the simplistic 'just get on with it' nonsense May is pretending everyone is telling her.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes. Here is the frustration and the missed opportunity.
> 
> In respect of Corbyn's Labour there has been a resounding failure to even _open up a debate_ about what might be possible. On either option. Given that both Corbyn and McDonnell come from a long left social democrat position that has always opposed the EU on democratic and policy grounds it's even more frustrating that the best they've able to come up with is the abysmally vague and limited '6 test' strategy of Starmer.
> 
> ...


To me, there's no lexit to be had at the moment, regardless of whether leaving the EU opens up possibilities in the future. But equally that doesn't push me into remain or seeking to find crumbs of comfort in the EU's minimal workers rights etc. So what you say puts the focus back where it should be, the failure to develop an alternative. Corbyn/Momentum are at once less than and no more than social democrats. They feel like shades of the old Labour left, playing out things like rail nationalisation as a mere tribute act. But then there's not much else, certainly nothing about breaching the organisational boundaries of the labour party, working in communities, _organising_. It's this kind of stuff, what should be the basics of any kind of class politics, that's missing -  it shouldn't be about choosing the 'right side' in a disconnected 'eu vs brexit' debate (as you say) because there isn't one. I'm not saying that an organised and confident labour movement should have no opinion on brexit, but that most of all it should coming to that debate _as_ an organised and assertive movement. Otherwise, we end up with McDonnell and Corbyn simply plotting whether to intervene with referenda calls at one minute to midnight or one minute and 30 seconds to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> 121 and a 1/2 days to go!


jelly and ice cream on brexit day


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, I'm asking how they do it. The result was 'leave'. How? The terms of leaving aren't just up to the UK government or parliament. At what cost should this be done? Any cost? Should a war be fought over it if need be? What are the limits here?


You’re doing what ska invita did above, only more so. You’re miscategorising. 

I think my answer to ska is quite clear enough, and I’ve no intention of going down this rabbit hole.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No, I'm asking how they do it. The result was 'leave'. How? The terms of leaving aren't just up to the UK government or parliament. At what cost should this be done? Any cost? Should a war be fought over it if need be? What are the limits here?
> 
> *This is just another version of the simplistic 'just get on with it' nonsense May is pretending everyone is telling her*.


 It just isn't.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not my position, though.
> 
> The problem with the way this has been polarised is that when people try to argue a position which rejects that polarisation as false, people can’t fit it into their model.
> 
> ...


Sorry you do - by voting Leave during the referendum you vote for these deals. By arguing for Brexit during this referendum you back its implementation. You may not "back" them politically or ideologically, but you back them to be implemented by the party in government. You give authority for them to be enacted.
 The argument was clear: its worth this happening for a greater socialist good, its worth backing a right wing led and reactionary brexit because the working class are choosing their own path etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc Why the squeemishness about it now its getting to the end game?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> It just isn't.


 It has to happen. The clock's ticking. It's either whatever deal can be mustered over the next few months or crashing out. That's it, even if both of those are really shit options. Cos the referendum. Like democracy ended on 26 June 2016. 

That's pretty much exactly the line May is taking.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> jelly and ice cream on brexit day



My freezer is stocked! is yours?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Sorry you do - by voting Leave during the referendum you vote for these deals.


As a point of information, I must once again point out that I voted Remain.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

But to add to that, I'd say that the question asked was:

*Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?*

And an X to be put by either of the following options:

*Remain a member of the European Union*
*Leave the European Union
*
It did not say "Leave the European Union and become Singapore", or anything else.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It has to happen.



It doesn't. And the odds are at the moment that it won't. Once May's deal goes down a remain supporting Parliament will require an extension for whatever comes next. As this is looking more and more likely to require a 2nd referendum (or a People's vote as it's being spun as) then I suggest this will be agreed by the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But to add to that, I'd say that the question asked was:
> 
> *Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?*
> 
> ...



And there was no plan in place for how option b) would work. It isn't democracy to then say that whoever is in power at the time should have a free hand to create whatever brexit deal they want as a result of this one-line referendum. 

That is a sharp point of difference from the Scottish Indy ref, for instance: the argument for the referendum was the majority in the Scottish parliament of a party with a referendum in its manifesto and a plan for how to implement the 'change' option. I would still argue there that this is not the end of the matter because the SNP's wishlist is not just up to them. It's also up to the negotiators from the rUK. But at least there was a plan there to be voted on and a group ready and democratically mandated to take on the task of attempting to follow that plan if the 'change' option is voted for. Neither of those conditions existed with the brexit vote. That is a serious democratic deficit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It has to happen. The clock's ticking. It's either whatever deal can be mustered over the next few months or crashing out. That's it, even if both of those are really shit options. Cos the referendum. Like democracy ended on 26 June 2016.
> 
> That's pretty much exactly the line May is taking.


23/6/16


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And there was no plan in place for how option b) would work. It isn't democracy to then say that whoever is in power at the time should have a free hand to create whatever brexit deal they want as a result of this one-line referendum.
> 
> That is a sharp point of difference from the Scottish Indy ref, for instance: the argument for the referendum was the majority in the Scottish parliament of a party with a referendum in its manifesto and a plan for how to implement the 'change' option. I would still argue there that this is not the end of the matter because the SNP's wishlist is not just up to them. It's also up to the negotiators from the rUK. But at least there was a plan there to be voted on and a group ready and democratically mandated to take on the task of attempting to follow that plan if the 'change' option is voted for. Neither of those conditions existed with the brexit vote. That is a serious democratic deficit.


I think that's a tortuous argument for the result being invalid, if that's what you're arguing*.  I'm afraid you haven't made that case.

(*Apologies if that isn't what you're arguing).


----------



## mauvais (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> But to add to that, I'd say that the question asked was:
> 
> *Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?*
> 
> ...


Do you think it would be reasonable to have another referendum where the options were approval of one or more deals alongside effectively a 'reopen nominations' option that meant they had to try again?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 28, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> 121 and a 1/2 days to go!


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 153804



British Babies i hope!


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Do you think it would be reasonable to have another referendum where the options were approval of one or more deals alongside effectively a 'reopen nominations' option that meant they had to try again?


I think I've said several times that I have no objection in principle to asking for approval or disapproval of whatever deal is put on the table.  I favour more rather than fewer plebiscites in principle.  What I am suspicious of is the motivations of the "People's Vote" people: they don't want to find out if people support the deal, they want to overturn the 2016 result.  I oppose that motivation.  For the reasons I've already stated.


----------



## belboid (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And there was no plan in place for how option b) would work. It isn't democracy to then say that whoever is in power at the time should have a free hand to create whatever brexit deal they want as a result of this one-line referendum.


did you not notice the General Election that followed?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think I've said several times that I have no objection in principle to asking for approval or disapproval of whatever deal is put on the table.  I favour more rather than fewer plebiscites in principle.  What I am suspicious of is the motivations of the "People's Vote" people: they don't want to find out if people support the deal, they want to overturn the 2016 result.  I oppose that motivation.  For the reasons I've already stated.


I ask because if this is OK, we could fairly easily have a scenario where the majority repeatedly rejected any and all Brexit implementations, which (A50 questions aside) would obviously be Remain by default without ever committing to it as such. At what point down that road would it be OK to give up on a mutually acceptable Brexit?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

If there's one fixed point in this morass of shite, it's that we leave. In the free floating venn diagram of different politics, different approaches to how to do things, it's the bit in the middle, the bit that should be clear. Not sure I like where it will take us - I have a suspicion with the organised working class being so weak that things may get worse. But that was the decision. Inventing process to overturn that decision would be the ultimate reassertion of the politics that lead to brexit in the first place.


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think that's a tortuous argument for the result being invalid, if that's what you're arguing*.  I'm afraid you haven't made that case.
> 
> (*Apologies if that isn't what you're arguing).


It's what he's been arguing ever since this thread began, if not longer. 

He seems not to realise that no one in the wider world cares whether or not he thinks it's invalid, but hopes that simply repeating that it's invalid over and over again will make us all wake up, as if from a bad dream, and get on with our lives as if it never happened.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think I've said several times that I have no objection in principle to asking for approval or disapproval of whatever deal is put on the table.  I favour more rather than fewer plebiscites in principle.  What I am suspicious of is the motivations of the "People's Vote" people: they don't want to find out if people support the deal, they want to overturn the 2016 result.  *I oppose that motivation*.  For the reasons I've already stated.


yep.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> If there's one fixed point in this morass of shite, it's that we leave. In the free floating venn diagram of different politics, different approaches to how to do things, it's the bit in the middle, the bit that should be clear. Not sure I like where it will take us - I have a suspicion with the organised working class being so weak that things may get worse. But that was the decision. Inventing process to overturn that decision would be the ultimate reassertion of the politics that lead to brexit in the first place.


If there were a second referendum with a choice of a specific deal or scrap brexit, how would the result of that referendum be undemocratic?

As for the motivation behind people calling for a second referendum, who cares what that is? I opposed very strongly the motivation behind the first referendum. Should I be allowed to declare it invalid on that basis? These are incoherent arguments.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 28, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> My freezer is stocked! is yours?



Freezer's no good without electric. For which we rely on *drumroll* gas and coal brought in via Europe.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If there were a second referendum with a choice of a specific deal or scrap brexit, how would the result of that referendum be undemocratic?
> 
> As for the motivation behind people calling for a second referendum, who cares what that is? I opposed very strongly the motivation behind the first referendum. Should I be allowed to declare it invalid on that basis? These are incoherent arguments.


For the same reason I don't think we should replay football matches again till we get the 'right outcome'. Because that's what it could be.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Nov 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 153804



That Simpson's number is wildly wrong. /offtopicpedantry


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)




----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> a mutually acceptable Brexit?


I thought you were edging away from the two pole dichotomy model, but this has just placed you back in it. Like I’ve said, I don’t accept that model.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I thought you were edging away from the two pole dichotomy model, but this has just placed you back in it. Like I’ve said, I don’t accept that model.


Not sure if we're talking at cross purposes here - a Brexit implementation that the majority of the voting public chose in favour of rather than continuing to defer.

Incidentally I've got weird deja vu about these last few posts.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Incidentally I've got weird deja vu about these last few posts


Just the last few?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Nov 28, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> That Simpson's number is wildly wrong. /offtopicpedantry



This is Brexit, perfectly OK to make up numbers.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 28, 2018)

NASA receives signal from Mars saying Brexit deal is shit


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Labour now just about backing a 2nd ref (in/out? deal/no deal? Dunno):
Brexit: McDonnell says it is 'inevitable' Labour will back second referendum - Politics live
(at 15:08)


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Labour now just about backing a 2nd ref (in/out? deal/no deal? Dunno):
> Brexit: McDonnell says it is 'inevitable' Labour will back second referendum - Politics live
> (at 15:08)


no doubt someone will restate labour party policy at some point


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 28, 2018)

teqniq said:


> NASA receives signal from Mars saying Brexit deal is shit



I have often wondered what planet Westminster is on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Labour now just about backing a 2nd ref (in/out? deal/no deal? Dunno):
> Brexit: McDonnell says it is 'inevitable' Labour will back second referendum - Politics live
> (at 15:08)


use the bastard snipping tool, that's what it's there for


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Labour now just about backing a 2nd ref (in/out? deal/no deal? Dunno):
> Brexit: McDonnell says it is 'inevitable' Labour will back second referendum - Politics live
> (at 15:08)


FWIW, the BBC is reporting it slightly differently
Brexit: Referendum may be inevitable - John McDonnell


> Shadow chancellor John McDonnell has suggested it is "inevitable" another EU referendum will be called *if Labour are not able to force a general election*. An election remains Labour's preferred option if - as is widely expected - MPs vote down Theresa May's Brexit deal on 11 December. The shadow chancellor said forcing an election would be "very difficult". And if it was not possible, he told the BBC's Laura Kuenssberg, the party would push for another referendum.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> FWIW, the BBC is reporting it slightly differently
> Brexit: Referendum may be inevitable - John McDonnell


Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant. I knew they were calling for an election but am assuming it won't happen i.e. this _is_ a call for a further referendum.
I've been critical of labour all along on brexit, but think they've got it just about right on this bit. The running order probably should be 1. Election? No >>>>> 2. Call for Ref 2 as the decider.  The issue will be the question(s), if we get that far. Ref on a deal/no deal or a 'ref to overturn brexit'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant. I knew they were calling for an election but am assuming it won't happen i.e. this _is_ a call for a further referendum.
> I've been critical of labour all along on brexit, but think they've got it just about right on this bit. The running order probably should be 1. Election? No >>>>> 2. Call for Ref 2 as the decider.  The issue will be the question(s), if we get that far. Ref on a deal/no deal or a 'ref to overturn brexit'.


q: do you want the shitty agreement reached by the former person may or would you prefer, however grudgingly, to creep back into the eu so all the jobs don't disappear?


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, sorry, that's what I meant. I knew they were calling for an election but am assuming it won't happen i.e. this _is_ a call for a further referendum.
> I've been critical of labour all along on brexit, but think they've got it just about right on this bit. The running order probably should be 1. Election? No >>>>> 2. Call for Ref 2 as the decider.  The issue will be the question(s), if we get that far. Ref on a deal/no deal or a 'ref to overturn brexit'.


No need to apologise, I was just pointing out that The G seems to me to be putting a slightly different spin on McDonnell's words to the BBC.

I think it's correct that Labour will find it hard to force a GE, though whether that makes another Ref "inevitable" I don't know. 

It's by no means certain that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available. Nothing is inevitable...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> No need to apologise, I was just pointing out that The G seems to me to be putting a slightly different spin on McDonnell's words to the BBC.
> 
> I think it's correct that Labour will find it hard to force a GE, though whether that makes another Ref "inevitable" I don't know.
> 
> It's by no means certain that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available. Nothing is inevitable...


it is impossible that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available as apparently there has to be a six months campaign so everyone's pissed off at the end of it


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> No need to apologise, I was just pointing out that The G seems to me to be putting a slightly different spin on McDonnell's words to the BBC.
> 
> I think it's correct that Labour will find it hard to force a GE, though whether that makes another Ref "inevitable" I don't know.
> 
> It's by no means certain that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available. Nothing is inevitable...


Yes, I think nothing is inevitable and there are all manner of procedural barriers to many of these outcomes. However I suspect a few unimagined processes will open up at the point when the government decides it has the numbers for ... something.


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it is impossible that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available as apparently there has to be a six months campaign so everyone's pissed off at the end of it


So it would depend on an A50 extension, which is possible but not guaranteed


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> So it would depend on an A50 extension, which is possible but not guaranteed


tbh the sequence will go something like this

the former person may commends her shitty deal to the house

the house shits on her shitty deal

the ecj ruling on whether the uk can revoke its article 50 invocation is waved all round the commons

the ship of state leaves the sea of uncharted waters and enters the mapless waste ocean


----------



## andysays (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh the sequence will go something like this
> 
> the former person may commends her shitty deal to the house
> 
> ...


Yeah, but are you saying that's *inevitable*?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 28, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I have often wondered what planet Westminster is on.



If they're having to import everything via an eight-month spacecraft journey that would at least explain the price of a pint in central London.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

andysays said:


> Yeah, but are you saying that's *inevitable*?


No, the former person may may withdraw her shitty deal from consideration


----------



## Wilf (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it is impossible that such a referendum could be proposed, passed and set up in the time available as apparently there has to be a six months campaign so everyone's pissed off at the end of it


Just on the timing thing, it certainly looks like it would need an article 50 suspension/extension to get a 2nd ref in:
Reality Check: How would the UK hold a second EU referendum?
Lots of planetary alignment needed to get some sort of legislation through, perhaps starting with an opposition motion after the defeat of Plan A? Very difficult and requiring a working majority in favour of a 2nd ref (the difficult bit). I would have thought though that the length of the actual campaign was the most squeezable bit of the whole process?  They might argue they could overturn the Electoral Commission's recommendations because this is a straight 'do you want this fucking deal or not' type question.

aka I ain't got a fucking clue.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 28, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Not really. *Just the usual waffly stuff*. That or full on revolution.



You've got a fucking cheek considering what you come out with!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> Thered a difference between it being importanti and it being something we should be fighting for.
> 
> We don't have the capability to fight for much right now and I'm arguing that getting that capability is priority rather than getting lost in someone else's battle.



How do you develop that capability if you're always telling people we need to stay out of things until we have the capability?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> We weren't ready in the run up to the referendum. That's blindingly obvious.
> 
> Are we in a better shape now?
> 
> No.



I think we are. I know my union is in better shape now. I know Socialism is a far more popular word now than it was then. I know we've been through experiences and struggles. Why do you think we're not?


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How do you develop that capability if you're always telling people we need to stay out of things until we have the capability?



By picking fights you can win.

Or failing that picking fights that unite.

This fight we lose whatever happens and divides more than it unites.

It's not like there's a shortage of other stuff we could be getting in with in the meantime. I'm sure people are already.


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think we are. I know my union is in better shape now. I know Socialism is a far more popular word now than it was then. I know we've been through experiences and struggles. Why do you think we're not?



I see no sign of any oeganised capacity for a fight in my daily life.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It has to happen. The clock's ticking. It's either whatever deal can be mustered over the next few months or crashing out. That's it, even if both of those are really shit options. Cos the referendum. Like democracy ended on 26 June 2016.
> 
> That's pretty much exactly the line May is taking.



Is that your line? That it's this deal or a crash out? 

I've seen people on the left accuse each other of siding with Farage and Johnson/Blair and Cameron before but this is new to me - accusing yourself of mirroring May's line!


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

Do you think were there to be a second referendum that the Left could intervene and put a Socialist case (one way or the other) for people to vote for?

It's likely that a General Election would see a Leftish Labour campaign, which would something, perhaps. 

But even Labour have yet to really shift the discussion on Brexit into "our" territory.

Given the Left couldn't get it's act together to oppose austerity, home ground for the Left surely? I don't see any cause for optimism that it could muster any sort of coherent intervention in debates (and hypothetical struggles) around Brexit.

But, of course, I'd love to be proved wrong. 




SpackleFrog said:


> I think we are. I know my union is in better shape now. I know Socialism is a far more popular word now than it was then. I know we've been through experiences and struggles. Why do you think we're not?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> By picking fights you can win.
> 
> Or failing that picking fights that unite.
> 
> ...



Ok, great - but I didn't pick for the referendum to happen did I? 

We can't control the various crises - political, social or economic - that capitalism produces, only how we respond. Are you arguing that Socialists should have advocated some form of revolutionary abstentionalism? 

Do we lose whatever happens? I feel like the Tory Party imploding and the whole question of how our economy works being thrown up in a way it never was before is a win!

Yes, there's lots of stuff going on but it all relates back to the socio-economic model on which the country is built and that is tied inextricably to the question of the EU. 




chilango said:


> I see no sign of any oeganised capacity for a fight in my daily life.



That's a real shame. I definitely do. Just today, dinner ladies at a school not far from me won a victory, stopping threat of redundancies, through indefinite strike action. That's great. We live in a country where strikes are winning again. 

Don't you remember the misery of the New Labour years? We finally got rid of the Tories but it achieved nothing. Trade unions seemed an irrelevance. I prefer 2018 enourmously.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> Do you think were there to be a second referendum that the Left could intervene and put a Socialist case (one way or the other) for people to vote for?
> 
> It's likely that a General Election would see a Leftish Labour campaign, which would something, perhaps.
> 
> ...



Yes, I think that's possible - not saying Corbyn will do it!

You're right Labour have failed to a degree. But I think Corbyn's lines in the GE last year - jobs first Brexit, no new immigration controls etc - I think that represents something to build upon.


----------



## chilango (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ok, great - but I didn't pick for the referendum to happen did I?
> 
> We can't control the various crises - political, social or economic - that capitalism produces, only how we respond. Are you arguing that Socialists should have advocated some form of revolutionary abstentionalism?
> 
> ...



I'm (genuinely) glad to hear that you see causes for optimism.

I'd rather you were right than me, really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

chilango said:


> I'm (genuinely) glad to hear that you see causes for optimism.
> 
> I'd rather you were right than me, really.



I should stress my optimism is based on the fact that I believe we are coming out of a period where the labour movement had no organisational power to point to at all so please take this as my version of #ThingsCanOnlyGetBetter


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I should stress my optimism is based on the fact that I believe we are coming out of a period where the labour movement had no organisational power to point to at all so please take this as my version of #ThingsCanOnlyGetBetter


I'll come back to you about this and expect to hear your version of #thingscanonlygetbitter


----------



## Poi E (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the ship of state leaves the sea of uncharted waters and enters the mapless waste ocean



Well, it floats around the bath a bit more.


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 28, 2018)

.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 28, 2018)

To the point.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I should stress my optimism is based on the fact that I believe we are coming out of a period where the labour movement had no organisational power to point to at all so please take this as my version of #ThingsCanOnlyGetBetter










danny la rouge said:


> As a point of information, I must once again point out that I voted Remain.



i mind that, was about to rush to your defence.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

I seem to have upset urban there.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ok, great - but I didn't pick for the referendum to happen did I?
> 
> We can't control the various crises - political, social or economic - that capitalism produces, only how we respond.


In the sense of 'there's going to be a Euro referendum', sure, but in the broader sense this hopefully isn't true. It would mean you could only be reactive and driven by events, rather than proactively challenging the conditions before they produce those outputs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I seem to have upset urban there.


Not sure anyone noticed


----------



## Duncan2 (Nov 28, 2018)

Is Chilango right or is Spacklefrog right as to the current state of health of organised Labour in the UK.I wish I knew because like Chilango,and unlike Spacklefrog, I don't see signs of "green shoots".Perhaps in my case this is straightforwardly a function of the fact that I am in precarious employment and in the private sector.But is this not the growth area in terms of UK employment? The last place I worked where Unite were a recognisable force there was nothing cosmopolitan about the solidarity.The permanent workers were mainly Brits and they jealously guarded the wage differential between themselves and the temps, who were mainly Eastern Europeans, not least by allowing the management to disregard the Agency Worker's Directive.Unite members were not expected to break ranks in that regard.I have subsequently moved on through various similar employments each of which has been a waste-land in terms of Union presence.There is solidarity of course but its really not much more than language-based tribalism veering towards nepotism.Talk of Unions is about as well received and as common as talk of unicorns.Apologies for the scarcely relevant derail.


----------



## Dragnet (Nov 28, 2018)

This might be of interest to a few here, given that he's been mentioned a few times already: Costas Lapavitsas at Housmans on Dec 8th, to tie in with the release of his new book.

Events at Housmans


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

skyscraper101 said:


> She's next level groveller.



Looks like she's kacking her drawers. "Please excuse me, your eminences, just curling one out!".


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 28, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> View attachment 153804


Pretty sure one heart beat per Simpsons episode would be fatal


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Pretty sure one heart beat per Simpsons episode would be fatal


Should be 7260 Simpsons episodes ((121x24x60)/24)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> My _ideal _Brexit would be for the workers to seize control of the mean of production and tell the EU to get to fuck. But I suspect what you actually want me to state is whether I want a "hard" or "soft" Brexit (whatever those words even mean), and that's part of the politics I'm criticising. You are limiting the options to those permitted by capital.
> 
> You just said that you believed in the strength of the working class, now you've written it off completely.



If we're going to have a Brexit, it needs to be an Andrex Brexit: Soft, strong, and very long, because anything else and our incompetent fuck-ups of politicians will see us all - except themselves and their paymasters - in the gutter.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 153795



Looks like they spent more on the headstone, than on the actual fucking plan.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Is Chilango right or is Spacklefrog right as to the current state of health of organised Labour in the UK.I wish I knew because like Chilango,and unlike Spacklefrog, I don't see signs of "green shoots".Perhaps in my case this is straightforwardly a function of the fact that I am in precarious employment and in the private sector.But is this not the growth area in terms of UK employment? The last place I worked where Unite were a recognisable force there was nothing cosmopolitan about the solidarity.The permanent workers were mainly Brits and they jealously guarded the wage differential between themselves and the temps, who were mainly Eastern Europeans, not least by allowing the management to disregard the Agency Worker's Directive.Unite members were not expected to break ranks in that regard.I have subsequently moved on through various similar employments each of which has been a waste-land in terms of Union presence.There is solidarity of course but its really not much more than language-based tribalism veering towards nepotism.Talk of Unions is about as well received and as common as talk of unicorns.Apologies for the scarcely relevant derail.



We had a serious strike this year and won, rather than the usual token one day strike followed by a loss. The union was irrelevant, now everyone talks about whats going on and we have loads of new reps. This may make the world seem a little bit more rose tinted than it is from my perspective.

On the other hand, I've spent 5 years building that union branch, so maybe you just reap what you sow 

I'm sorry about the experience with Unite, sounds shit. But there's only one way to make things better. As much as a cliche as that sounds!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll come back to you about this and expect to hear your version of #thingscanonlygetbitter



I know you will. But I will not be bitter!

I'm in a 12 step program. It's not allowed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

mauvais said:


> In the sense of 'there's going to be a Euro referendum', sure, but in the broader sense this hopefully isn't true. It would mean you could only be reactive and driven by events, rather than proactively challenging the conditions before they produce those outputs.



I'm not saying we can't be proactive. We can, we can be proactive about what we do. But we can't control the fact that the Labour Party under Milliband was so awful Cameron got back in and called a referendum. That's not us.

Well. No one I know had any control over that anyway!


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know you will. But I will not be bitter!
> 
> I'm in a 12 step program. It's not allowed.


Wait till you're one step beyond


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not saying we can't be proactive. We can, we can be proactive about what we do. But we can't control the fact that the Labour Party under Milliband was so awful Cameron got back in and called a referendum. That's not us.
> 
> Well. No one I know had any control over that anyway!


What's the serenity prayer say again?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> What's the serenity prayer say again?



Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I cannot accept, and the wisdom to know the difference. 

I actually think this is a fantastic thing for any trade union rep to remember!


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 28, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> If we're going to have a Brexit, it needs to be an Andrex Brexit: Soft, strong, and very long, because anything else and our incompetent fuck-ups of politicians will see us all - except themselves and their paymasters - in the gutter.



I think there might be something less comfortable than Andrex on the way - "a fine _strong_ Brexit."


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I think there might be something less comfortable than Andrex on the way - "a fine _strong_ Brexit."
> 
> View attachment 153842



Do you know why Izal was medicated? Because the fucking stuff gave your ringpiece paper cuts!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Do you know why Izal was medicated? Because the fucking stuff gave your ringpiece paper cuts!



No anger in the circle please VP. Learn to accept the things you cannot change.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> No anger in the circle please VP. Learn to accept the things you cannot change.



Kiss my papercut arse, hippy!


----------



## Raheem (Nov 28, 2018)

Let's face it, we're going to end up noticing a naked bogroll middle at the edge of our vision, at precisely the wrong moment.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 28, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Kiss my papercut arse, hippy!



Happy to go with the flow comrade. As long as it's medicated.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure anyone noticed


I mean the array of you tube logos on that post but maybe it’s just my phone :-/


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 28, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> an Andrex Brexit: Soft, strong, and very long



oh will there be those puppies as well


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 28, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh will there be those puppies as well



Yes, so if we run out of Andrex, we still have something soft to wipe our arses on!


----------



## Ax^ (Nov 28, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> My _ideal _Brexit would be for the workers to seize control of the mean of production and tell the EU to get to fuck.



shame its working out as a plan for the poorest to eat chlorinated chicken..


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> oh will there be those puppies as well


In a continental puppy farm


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 29, 2018)

Ax^ said:


> shame its working out as a plan for the poorest to eat chlorinated chicken..



Yeah I think there's plenty of starving people in EU countries that would be glad of chlorinated chicken for balance. If we're talking about the poorest that's probably a weird thing to zero in on.


----------



## Humberto (Nov 29, 2018)

The EU basically smashed immigrants to fuck. Left them to drown to save money.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 29, 2018)

Or in camps. 3000 kids in Camp Moria at present in horrific conditions. Fuckers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

auf wiedersehen, pet


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

Humberto said:


> The EU basically smashed immigrants to fuck. Left them to drown to save money.



yeh by contrast the uk's got a proud record


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 29, 2018)

Humberto said:


> The EU basically smashed immigrants to fuck. Left them to drown to save money.



What? Under the 'freedom of movement' policy so beloved of liberal remainers? Surely not?


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> What? Under the 'freedom of movement' policy so beloved of liberal remainers? Surely not?



_By voting Remain during the referendum you vote for these policies. By arguing for Remain during this referendum you back its implementation. You may not "back" them politically or ideologically, but you back them to be implemented by the party in government. You give authority for them to be enacted.
The argument was clear: its worth this happening for a greater good, its worth backing a neoliberal Fortress Europe. Why the squeemishness about it now?_


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2018)

almost looks a bit like internationalism etc etc


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

To be clear: I _don’t_ think that. But the argument cuts both ways.


----------



## Rob Ray (Nov 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> auf wiedersehen, pet
> View attachment 153864


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

Just a general plea to people (not just you Rob Ray ) posting embedded social media links: those of us who don’t use Facebook or Instagram (me), this is what we see:




Can we please start to post either a screenshot or a c&p?

This has been a public service announcement.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge - the one from Rob Ray is a gif from 'imgur', I don't use that, but I can see it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just a general plea to people (not just you Rob Ray ) posting embedded social media links: those of us who don’t use Facebook or Instagram (me), this is what we see:
> 
> 
> View attachment 153872
> ...


Rob Ray you can copy gifs as here for example


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> danny la rouge - the one from Rob Ray is a gif from 'imgur', I don't use that, but I can see it.


Yeah.  Mileage may vary.

But the general point is sound.  Also, I no longer use Twitter, and although I can see embedded tweets, I'm not going to click through to read a twitter thread.  So if people want non twitter users to know what's in the thread, they need to either give a summary or provide screen shots.  (I apologise for the times in the past I did not do this).


----------



## strung out (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Just a general plea to people (not just you Rob Ray ) posting embedded social media links: those of us who don’t use Facebook or Instagram (me), this is what we see:
> 
> 
> View attachment 153872
> ...


C&P better as screenshots aren't readable by screenreaders for people with visual disabilities


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

strung out said:


> C&P better as screenshots aren't readable by screenreaders for people with visual disabilities


a screenshot is c&p: albeit the wrong sort for some people.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

strung out said:


> C&P better as screenshots aren't readable by screenreaders for people with visual disabilities


Good point.  Thanks.


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

Question for anyone with better knowledge of process...

Publishing the legal advice. Didn't parliament agree it had to happen?

Now the tories are saying they'll do some kind of summary. [Subtext: Its not good]

How does that square? Was the agreement to publish it all, enforceable... and if so, how?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> Question for anyone with better knowledge of process...
> 
> Publishing the legal advice. Didn't parliament agree it had to happen?
> 
> ...


yes

it doesn't

wait and see

next


----------



## Winot (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> Question for anyone with better knowledge of process...
> 
> Publishing the legal advice. Didn't parliament agree it had to happen?
> 
> ...



Not an expert on Parliamentary procedure, but wasn't this exactly the game the Tories played with the impact assessments? I think the Speaker can step in and force HMG to do what Parliament wanted (depending on motion wording).


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> Question for anyone with better knowledge of process...
> 
> Publishing the legal advice. Didn't parliament agree it had to happen?
> 
> ...


Good question.  Yes, parliament did agree that.  The Govt is arguing that it will comply with the spirit of that vote, but to "safeguard cabinet collective responsibility" (translation: somebody disagreed with something, but we don't want you to know who or what), they will not be complying with the letter of the vote. How does it square?  Maybe it doesn't.  Maybe the speaker will rule the govt decision is in contempt of the House.  Would they then be forced to publish?  Unless they can think of another excuse, possibly.  But they can probably delay as long as for example Blair did on the dodgy dossier.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

Winot said:


> Not an expert on Parliamentary procedure, but wasn't this exactly the game the Tories played with the impact assessments? I think the Speaker can step in and force HMG to do what Parliament wanted (depending on motion wording).


and as if by magic the speaker's feelings on the matter were reported yesterday


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

Aviation.

I used to fly very small fun planes, hung around with people who flew big boring ones.

The sky isn't falling in, because - as a physically impossible event - that flippant measure of success is so immeasurably low it's moronic.

Instead, more uncertainty. The thread over in "pilots75" is one of confusion more than ideology. Will my license be valid?

From that thread, and then a jump off to the CAA...

the tldr: If your company runs anything not UK Registered, consider your license.



----- CAA:

*"Would I be able to continue operating EU-registered aircraft with a UK Part-FCL licence?*

The European Commission has said that it would not recognise UK-issued Part-FCL licences.

To continue operating EU-registered aircraft, you may seek a licence validation from any EASA Competent Authority, which would be valid for aircraft registered in any EASA Member State. You cannot seek this until after the UK has formally withdrawn from the EU.

We recommend that you speak to the relevant NAA as soon as possible about the process for achieving a validation of your UK issued Part-FCL licence.

Alternatively, you may undertake a State of Licence Issue transfer before 29 March 2019. This means transferring your licence from the UK to another EASA member state.




*When is the latest I could apply to transfer my licence to another EASA member state to get my licence in time for 29 March 2019?*

The CAA has no control over the issuance process of other EASA Member States, we therefore recommend that you contact the proposed NAA directly on these matters.


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Good question.  Yes, parliament did agree that.  The Govt is arguing that it will comply with the spirit of that vote, but to "safeguard cabinet collective responsibility" (translation: somebody disagreed with something, but we don't want you to know who or what), they will not be complying with the letter of the vote. How does it square?  Maybe it doesn't.  Maybe the speaker will rule the govt decision is in contempt of the House.  Would they then be forced to publish?  Unless they can think of another excuse, possibly.  But they can probably delay as long as for example Blair did on the dodgy dossier.



Thanks - I know that answer could be said to be as clear as mud, but it's clearer than the mud I had earlier.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

i see that the decline in eu nationals moving to the uk has been made up by an increase in the number of non-eu nationals moving to the uk


----------



## mojo pixy (Nov 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Wait till you're one step beyond



That way lies Madness


----------



## ska invita (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> As a point of information, I must once again point out that I voted Remain.


 hah i didnt realise that! its a complicated world

Just a thought about Labours position, im starting to think that Stephen Bush has got it right here (he's on about 30 secs in - the rest doesnt need watching):


To summarise his position:
-If the deal fails to pass Labour will go for a GE but fail (they already know that it wont fly, not got the numbers)
 - next step they're going for a second ref...seems there aren't the numbers for that either...
-that leaves No Deal, which nearly no one wants, which might lead to a vote in support of Mays Deal as the only option left!
 Thats a scenario of Mays Deal passing with no need from a market shock to get through.

Someone upthread was saying they're enjoying the Tories splitting over this...there is a still a big chance, perhaps the biggest of all the possibilities, that Mays Deal will pass, that she'll deliver a brexit, and by that point the party will have had to reconcile their difference enough and whatsmore they'll win the next election.

May has already been able to call Labour the party trying to stop Brexit on a whiff of second ref talk - theres more damage for Labour to take in this process.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and as if by magic the speaker's feelings on the matter were reported yesterday
> View attachment 153875



Bercow looks like he's taking the eagle up the _cloaca_.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Nov 29, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> That way lies Madness



Crap pun.
Make amendments, you're an embarrassment.


----------



## TopCat (Nov 29, 2018)

Fuck no puns.


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> theres more damage for Labour to take in this process.


Which was why I wondered at the speed which they confirmed corbyn would be happy to debate the issues with may. Not on performances, they both have their flaws with speaking (may is worse imo), but making this a labour v cons issue. To me thats throwing may a free bonus, 'I have a shit deal here' vs 'look at this, its corbyn, boo'


----------



## ska invita (Nov 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Which was why I wondered at the speed which they confirmed corbyn would be happy to debate the issues with may. Not on performances, they both have their flaws with speaking (may is worse imo), but making this a labour v cons issue. To me thats throwing may a free bonus, 'I have a shit deal here' vs 'look at this, its corbyn, boo'


i agree...the only thing in their favour is i think Corbyn often does well in campaigning mode and when he gets time directly and unfiltered in front of audiences they usually like what he has to say, without the taint of negative spin on it that usually makes up his presence in the media.

i just think Labour have got nothing clever to say on this...partly it what's been said above that they haven't presented a positive socialist brexit vision (especially so since most Lab voters seem to be increasingly 2refers if not remainers), but partly being in opposition and having no power leaves them in a position of armchair critics, and every criticism plays into the Youre Just Brexit Stoppers position of May. And she's basically right on that - there's nothing they can really do but scupper it. Its years too late for alternative visions.

If May convinces that this is as good a deal as its possible - and I think that is the dominant narrative - then any Labour criticism is an existential criticism of Brexit itself. Its a fucked up position for them.

Ultimately its MPs that need convincing, but if the public moves a bit more behind the deal more MPs should follow, especially as it gets to the finish line.

Mays technocratic and robotic charm might not even be the hindrance it usually is on this topic - enacting a technocratic process. 10 Run Brexit, 20 Goto 10


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> i agree...the only thing in their favour is i think Corbyn often does well in campaigning mode and when he gets time directly and unfiltered in front of audiences they usually like what he has to say, without the taint of negative spin on it that usually makes up his presence in the media.
> 
> i just think Labour have got nothing clever to say on this...partly it what's been said above that they haven't presented a positive socialist brexit vision (especially so since most Lab voters seem to be increasingly 2refers if not remainers), but partly being in opposition and having no power leaves them in a position of armchair critics, and every criticism plays into the Youre Just Brexit Stoppers position of May. And she's basically right on that - there's nothing they can really do but scupper it. Its years too late for alternative visions.
> 
> ...


i do think it's a bit unfair expecting a non-socialist party to present a positive socialist vision of anything, be it brexit, bees or bananas


----------



## ska invita (Nov 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i do think it's a bit unfair expecting a non-socialist party to present a positive socialist vision of anything, be it brexit or bananas


the vision....


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Which was why I wondered at the speed which they confirmed corbyn would be happy to debate the issues with may. Not on performances, they both have their flaws with speaking (may is worse imo), but making this a labour v cons issue. To me thats throwing may a free bonus, 'I have a shit deal here' vs 'look at this, its corbyn, boo'



Blimey yes. I'll be tedious and just repeat one thing:

"making this a labour v cons issue"

That's the worst of this debate.

We know just from discussion here it's not an old school left vs right argument - IMHO.


----------



## Poi E (Nov 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> May has already been able to call Labour the party



And say "are you as scared of the SNP as I am?"


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 29, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Which was why I wondered at the speed which they confirmed corbyn would be happy to debate the issues with may. Not on performances, they both have their flaws with speaking (may is worse imo), but making this a labour v cons issue. To me thats throwing may a free bonus, 'I have a shit deal here' vs 'look at this, its corbyn, boo'


I don't think a debate is going to be good for either of them, May completely lacks charisma when it comes to public speaking. Corbyn is good at making speeches to rally the troops but he doesn't do that well at debating,  it will be made even worse by the fact that Labour doesn't really have a clear position to defend.


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> I don't think a debate is going to be good for either of them, May completely lacks charisma when it comes to public speaking. Corbyn is good at making speeches to rally the troops but he doesn't do that well at debating,  it will be made even worse by the fact that Labou doesn't really have a clear position to defend.



May has the advantage of working on detail - if Corbyn tries to work it that level I think he'll trip.

He could - and I'll admit this is my fantasising - blindside her and launch the idea of 2nd ref.

If he does that, she's floored. There's no come back. Allowing people to choose what's on offer. The will of the people blocking the will of the people?


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> May has the advantage of working on detail - if Corbyn tries to work it that level I think he'll trip.
> 
> He could - and I'll admit this is my fantasising - blindside her and launch the idea of 2nd ref.
> 
> If he does that, she's floored. There's no come back. Allowing people to choose what's on offer. The will of the people blocking the will of the people?



Couldn"t disagree more.  Liaison Committee shredded her on detail this morning, and the 2nd referendum has been the cynical play from the beginning.	The problem with Brexit is that is been done in exactly the same way the previous treaties that lead to the malcontents in the first place.


Good to see Parliament starting to wake up to the point of itself.


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

gosub said:


> Couldn"t disagree more.  Liaison Committee shredded her on detail this morning, and the 2nd referendum has been the cynical play from the beginning.	The problem with Brexit is that is been done in exactly the same way the previous treaties that lead to the malcontents in the first place.
> 
> 
> Good to see Parliament starting to wake up to the point of itself.



Your overall point is so broad , about the treaties, I don’t know how to respond succinctly.

But...

May is very easily shredded, for sure.

*We* know she’s sawn off one of her three legged stools.

Corbyn should be able to rinse this, but will he?


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> Your overall point is so broad , about the treaties, I don’t know how to respond succinctly.
> 
> But...
> 
> ...



Don't care.  Its UK Parliament's time to step up to the plate.


----------



## andysays (Nov 29, 2018)

Now May and Corbyn are disagreeing on whether BBC or ITV should broadcast the debate...


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 29, 2018)

Apparently there's some sort of "reality" TV show that has to be avoided ...


----------



## Crispy (Nov 29, 2018)

Have I missed the bit where someone stated the purpose of this "debate" ?
There is no currently scheduled election or referendum to campaign for, so what exactly is the point?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 29, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Apparently there's some sort of "reality" TV show that has to be avoided ...



That's the 'debate'.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Apparently there's some sort of "reality" TV show that has to be avoided ...


Like Corbyn, I plan to watch the I’m A Celebrity final.


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

More cut and paste from today:

May's fudging the extension question.

--------

Answering questions from Sarah Wollaston [snip]

“There’s a paradox here,” May said. “To extend article 50, actually, you’re then in the business of renegotiating the deal. This is the point. The deal is the deal at this point in time.”

Pressed on whether this was the case, May reiterated the argument: “What is clear is that any extension to article 50, anything like that, reopens the negotiations, reopens the deal. And at that point the deal can go, frankly, in any direction.”
But *asked by Wollaston whether the EU had directly told her this, May dodged the question*, saying: “What has been made clear is this is the deal that we have negotiated with the European Union.”


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Have I missed the bit where someone stated the purpose of this "debate" ?
> There is no currently scheduled election or referendum to campaign for, so what exactly is the point?


It’s so the MPs - who are voting two days after it - can record it and vote the way they were going to vote anyway.


----------



## andysays (Nov 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Like Corbyn, I plan to watch the I’m A Celebrity final.


I always thought of you as more Strictly Come Dancing, TBH


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 29, 2018)

andysays said:


> I always thought of you as more Strictly Come Dancing, TBH


The Strictly results show is on just after Dr Who, so it’ll be a busy schedule for me that night, but I’ll cope.


----------



## Sweet FA (Nov 29, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Looks like she's kacking her drawers. "Please excuse me, your eminences, just curling one out!".


"How dare you shit in front of me!"
"I'm sorry Sir, I didn't realise it was your turn"




dadgag


----------



## paolo (Nov 29, 2018)

I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.

I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"

In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.
> 
> I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"
> 
> In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.


there till certainly be an alan partridge meltdown if you don't watch it

you will hang your head in shame at missing it for the rest of your days


----------



## MickiQ (Nov 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> I think I can only watch this if there's a promise of an Alan Partridge meltdown.
> 
> I'm thinking of May running round the audience with 500 sheets of A4, saying "you want some, you want some of this? DO YOU?"
> 
> In the background, Corbyn is escorted away by minders to his still soundproofed care home.


If they can promise that they could put it on a pay-per-view channel


----------



## Wilf (Nov 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Just a thought about Labours position, im starting to think that Stephen Bush has got it right here (he's on about 30 secs in - the rest doesnt need watching):
> 
> 
> *To summarise his position:
> ...



His route map to how May might get it through (at the second time of asking) is just about my prediction as well. By that I don't mean she necessarily _will_ get it through - I'm aware of the reported numbers - but that's the plausible map as to how she _might_ do.

Haven't got time to dig out the figures at the moment, but I read her popularity figures have gone up in the last few days, as have those in favour of her actual deal. If that is the direction of travel over the next days and she then beats Corbyn in the debate *, then there's a potential for MPs to have their revolt in the first vote and then 'reluctantly' fall into line for the revote. 

* Doesn't really have to beat him performance wise, just portray his line about opening up the negotiations again as unrealistic. She can quite easily point out that it's a bit late in the day for Labour to bring _anything_ to the table.


----------



## gosub (Nov 29, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Apparently there's some sort of "reality" TV show that has to be avoided ...


S pose, Corbyn is going to use 'I'm a vegetarian' to stop there being a maggot eating round


----------



## Raheem (Nov 29, 2018)

ska invita said:


> hah i didnt realise that! its a complicated world
> 
> Just a thought about Labours position, im starting to think that Stephen Bush has got it right here (he's on about 30 secs in - the rest doesnt need watching):
> 
> ...



I saw that as well, but the trouble with his prediction is that it relies on MPs finding it plausible that the government will allow a no deal exit rather than going for an art 50 extension. It didn't work on the EU and it won't work in the HoC either.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 30, 2018)

mauvais said:


> At what point is the hegemony of centre-right parliamentary politics - by far the single biggest influence over conditions - going to be disrupted, within or without? Why is any of this going to actually deliver positives for the left rather than capital or the far right? What if you are just plain wrong and noone fights back for however long?


No the biggest influence over conditions is the interaction between capital and labour. Your insistence on reducing this to parliamentary/group politics is part of the problem. As the sentence below shows 


mauvais said:


> To this you'll say it means I have no faith in the WC but again I say that it's conditional. And there's no benefit to having an inflated sense of the left's health.


You've gone from the WC to "the left" as if they were the same thing, or at least as if "the left's" health was some pre-requirement for labour to fight. That is completely arse about face.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No the biggest influence over conditions is the interaction between capital and labour. Your insistence on reducing this to parliamentary/group politics is part of the problem. As the sentence below shows


This is like saying that the biggest influence over global warming is the sun - true but useless. As it stands, and it's not what I _want_ because it's clearly not working, PP is the biggest enabler of and biggest brake on changes to working conditions in the UK. Until the current model is disrupted or eclipsed this will continue to be the case and the range of possibilities will be strictly limited as a result.


> You've gone from the WC to "the left" as if they were the same thing, or at least as if "the left's" health was some pre-requirement for labour to fight. That is completely arse about face.


They're not the same thing, and clearly top-down directed left wing politics isn't working either. But if you expect some hypothetical WC resistance to automatically go in a leftwards direction, rather than the many other possibilities, then as I said you've got an inflated sense of the left's position. That's not necessarily tangible organisation & leadership but ideas and presence in any kind of discourse. It's not a prerequisite for a fight but it might be a prerequisite for an outcome that isn't, as just one example, factional nationalism.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 30, 2018)

What's factional nationalism and how does it differ from the regular kind of nationalism?


----------



## mauvais (Nov 30, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> What's factional nationalism and how does it differ from the regular kind of nationalism?


The opposite of solidarity.


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 30, 2018)

Sadly we have seen examples in the past how easily the WC step to the Right when democracy fails.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 30, 2018)

mauvais said:


> This is like saying that the biggest influence over global warming is the sun - true but useless. As it stands, and it's not what I _want_ because it's clearly not working, PP is the biggest enabler of and biggest brake on changes to working conditions in the UK. Until the current model is disrupted or eclipsed this will continue to be the case and the range of possibilities will be strictly limited as a result.
> They're not the same thing, and clearly top-down directed left wing politics isn't working either. But if you expect some hypothetical WC resistance to automatically go in a leftwards direction, rather than the many other possibilities, then as I said you've got an inflated sense of the left's position. That's not necessarily tangible organisation & leadership but ideas and presence in any kind of discourse. It's not a prerequisite for a fight but it might be a prerequisite for an outcome that isn't, as just one example, factional nationalism.


If he’s not arsed about the left’s health then I daresay he feels the same about the left’s position.
Collective organising, building confidence, solidarity etc is a way of living, not a position. And it’s a way of living that could feasibly be achieved whilst individual people have very conflicting stances- left and right. 
One of the things that fucks up the sort of cohesiveness that can often  be  seen in WC communities or workplaces is the left’s dogged persistence in reducing everything and everyone to what their stance is on this and that and  who they voted for. 
And I know; we all do this at times. I know I do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Sadly we have seen examples in the past how easily the WC step to the Right when democracy fails.


need i remind you we do not live in a democracy?


----------



## Sprocket. (Nov 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> need i remind you we do not live in a democracy?


Without doubt. Just clarifying for those who still believe we do.
This country has been moving to the right since 1971.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Without doubt. Just clarifying for those who still believe we do.
> This country has been moving to the right since 1971.


leaving the likes of col sir edward heath (ret) and auld 'red' lt jim callaghan (rn, ret) to the left of the likes of jeremy corbyn


----------



## flypanam (Nov 30, 2018)

Wilf said:


> His route map to how May might get it through (at the second time of asking) is just about my prediction as well. By that I don't mean she necessarily _will_ get it through - I'm aware of the reported numbers - but that's the plausible map as to how she _might_ do.
> 
> Haven't got time to dig out the figures at the moment, but I read her popularity figures have gone up in the last few days, as have those in favour of her actual deal. If that is the direction of travel over the next days and she then beats Corbyn in the debate *, then there's a potential for MPs to have their revolt in the first vote and then 'reluctantly' fall into line for the revote.
> 
> * Doesn't really have to beat him performance wise, just portray his line about opening up the negotiations again as unrealistic. She can quite easily point out that it's a bit late in the day for Labour to bring _anything_ to the table.



I'm wondering if she will get through because the Labour right will see the opportunity to be like the US Dems and actually do that bi partisan bullshit in the 'National' interest and vote with the May faction and rupturing Labour, in the hope that it either builds a new centre and /or gets rid of Corbyn?

eta, I haven't been following the parliamentary machinations much so if my question is pure horseshit please ignore.


----------



## AnandLeo (Nov 30, 2018)

Theresa May rules out Norway-style Brexit compromise with Labour 
Theresa May should deal with the UK parliament to reach a successful deal with the EU. That’s the crux of the matter. All parties have red lines. That’s the difficulty in negotiation, collaboration, and compromise. UK parliament should negotiate a Brexit deal internally, and externally with the EU.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I saw that as well, but the trouble with his prediction is that it relies on MPs finding it plausible that the government will allow a no deal exit rather than going for an art 50 extension. It didn't work on the EU and it won't work in the HoC either.


Not sure i follow Raheem - he explicitly says No Deal is IMplausible to the commons, hence bouncing off it quickly and on to the last option standing, May's Deal. 
Art 50 extension, even if it does happen, buys between 2 to maybe 4 months, going on accounts in the press, and runs into the problem of the UK getting drawn into the next wave of EU fees. It doesn't magic away having to choose one of the inevitable conclusions.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

So-called 'Norway-plus' now being advocated as a deal that could win the Commons. May continues with the line that not ending free movement from the EU means not honouring the referendum, but I didn't see immigration on the ballot paper. She really needs to be called on this line, which she's been parrotting for two years now. 

The Norway plus deal would be an 'improvement' on the current situation because EU citizens would now be required to register as residents, so could be monitored and 'removed' if they're not working. Yay, more controls and state power over us!


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I didn't see immigration on the ballot paper. She really needs to be called on this line


I think that's right.  And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.

Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think that's right.  And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.
> 
> Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.


I think Labour knows its constituency, but it knows its constituency is split on the issue, hence triangulation and lack of conviction politics


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think that's right.  And I think this is precisely one of the areas that Labour ought to be speaking on, but isn't because it doesn't really have a handle on what its constituency now is.
> 
> Labour could easily be making a case similar to the one you go on to make: that if immigration was indeed one of the concerns people had, there's more than one way to address that.


Labour are in a mess over immigration. They made some horrible pledges in 2015, and they still haven't found a way to row back on that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

fwiw, while I still don't like it, I have always thought that something like Norway-plus was realistically the only kind of deal that could possibly work. It's a lot of hassle for not very much, but it is still brexit. Those saying it's not brexit are talking out of their arses - Norway and Switzerland are not in the EU.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I think Labour knows its constituency


I don't think it does.  It seems not to know whether to mollify the swing voters in the handful of marginal seats, or whether it has a Corbyn factor, or whether the "red UKIP" vote in the North of England will come back, etc. You just have to look at Labour's approach in Scotland: they haven't a clue what their message is.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it does.  It seems not to know whether to mollify the swing voters in the handful of marginal seats, or whether it has a Corbyn factor, or whether the "red UKIP" vote in the North of England will come back, etc. You just have to look at Labour's approach in Scotland: they haven't a clue what their message is.


These are all different part of the Labour constituency no?


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

A party representing the majority of people is always going to run up against difference of opinion amongst their constituents - what we've had for years now is Labour pandering itself into oblivion. What Corbyn is meant to be is a change in that culture - conviction politics where you say what you mean and you lead by meaning it, and hopefully changing attitudes of voters in so doing. If you lose votes then tough. Brexit and immigration seem to have put that to the test and the results aren't great so far.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> These are all different part of the Labour constituency no?


Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide.  And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project.  It still hasn't worked that out.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide.  And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project.  It still hasn't worked that out.


Shifting decisively on immigration (meaning coming out strongly against the notion that housing shortages and pay cuts are the fault of immigration) has to include a decision to come out and blame the Blair/Brown years. The continuation and deepening of Thatcherism through those years is a crucial part of how we got to where we are now. They appear to have moved on somewhat from the Blair/Brown wars, but not so much from this.

I think the ambivalence is partly due to the reasons Blair/Brown showed enthusiasm. They cheered as house prices went through the roof, and there is still a chunk of people who feel they did well out of that and who vote Labour. Now those people's children are growing up, perhaps they can now be persuaded that the collective madness they think they benefited from was fundamentally wrong.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah, well. That's a slightly different point. I think it needs to decide.  And I think that's allied to the need for it to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project.  It still hasn't worked that out.


I agree. But sounds like you think freedom of movement is an acceptable part in reckoning with the neoliberal project. Some on the left, including on these boards, don't agree.
Labours relative silence leaves a vacuum for others to fill the narrative


----------



## Beermoth (Nov 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> Now May and Corbyn are disagreeing on whether BBC or ITV should broadcast the debate...



Let's have a referendum on it!


----------



## kabbes (Nov 30, 2018)

Can someone tell me what is "plus" about "Norway plus"?  I know this means I am using urban as a cheap way for me to find out stuff but hey, that's what you're all here for, right?


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 30, 2018)

> All these scenarios emphasise GDP growth, which obscures more than it explains. As Aditya Chakrabortty wrote last year, average growth figures gloss over huge regional (and therefore, class) disparities. London and the South-East grows, while elsewhere shrinks.* Relying on GDP figures, you can end up feet in the freezer and head in the fire, claiming everything is fine because your average body temperature is 37 degrees.*
> 
> Economic growth has become detached from other indices like wages. Even though the economy is larger on average than it was in 2008 (though it is a weaker recovery than in the 1930s), average wages are much lower. The lost decade in living standards began well before Brexit was a reality. Indeed, that may well have been one of the causes of the Brexit vote. So, these are projections based on a measurement of growth that the majority of people currently do not experience.


The unknowable cost of Brexit | Richard Seymour on Patreon
I think we've discussed the issues with GDP earlier in the thread but that metaphor is useful to me.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 30, 2018)

GDP is awful as a measure of success.  For example, you can get great GDP growth by making really shoddy products and services that regularly fail, but nobody's going to be happy as a result.  You can also get good GDP growth by allowing the black market to flourish or stomping down on labour costs even whilst this accumulates the wealth up to a few shareholders.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> Now May and Corbyn are disagreeing on whether BBC or ITV should broadcast the debate...


sky


----------



## belboid (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> GDP is awful as a measure of success.  For example, you can get great GDP growth by making really shoddy products and services that regularly fail, but nobody's going to be happy as a result.  You can also get good GDP growth by allowing the black market to flourish or stomping down on labour costs even whilst this accumulates the wealth up to a few shareholders.


not sure about the black market bit. I read something (somewhere...) about how including counterfeit goods, drugs and prostitution would increase the Italian GDP (iirr) by almost 10%


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Can someone tell me what is "plus" about "Norway plus"?  I know this means I am using urban as a cheap way for me to find out stuff but hey, that's what you're all here for, right?


It's loads better than Norway minus and significantly better than Norway equals.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 30, 2018)

belboid said:


> not sure about the black market bit. I read something (somewhere...) about how including counterfeit goods, drugs and prostitution would increase the Italian GDP (iirr) by almost 10%


No, GDP includes the black market.  It's because it's supposed to be an international comparitor, so you have to include everything that might ever be legal anywhere.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, GDP includes the black market.  It's because it's supposed to be an international comparitor, so you have to include everything that might ever be legal anywhere.


drivel and tosh, the babblings of a fool.

it's to comply with eu rules (see also this for confirmation)


----------



## Raheem (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Can someone tell me what is "plus" about "Norway plus"?  I know this means I am using urban as a cheap way for me to find out stuff but hey, that's what you're all here for, right?


Think it is "plus customs union".


----------



## belboid (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, GDP includes the black market.  It's because it's supposed to be an international comparitor, so you have to include everything that might ever be legal anywhere.


changed in 2014 google tells me. Added a mere £10billion to the UK economy.

I don't think everyone (in the EU) adopted it straight away, it was only best practise guidance originally.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Not sure i follow Raheem - he explicitly says No Deal is IMplausible to the commons, hence bouncing off it quickly and on to the last option standing, May's Deal.
> Art 50 extension, even if it does happen, buys between 2 to maybe 4 months, going on accounts in the press, and runs into the problem of the UK getting drawn into the next wave of EU fees. It doesn't magic away having to choose one of the inevitable conclusions.


No, but it makes conclusions other than no deal possible. Bush's scenario doesn't take account of this. MPs wouldn't be forced into backing May's deal because no deal is the only alternative. Instead, they would call the Prime Minister's bluff.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 30, 2018)

It means you can increase (UK) GDP by allowing the (UK) black market to flourish.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Think it is "plus customs union".


Yes, this seems to be right. Of course, that is 'Norway minus' to some people, depending on their point of view. Need to remain in customs union to keep the Irish border properly open to avoid problems such as those outlined here. 

Many people in Norway question the wisdom of their own Norway solution. I struggle to see any benefit over the existing arrangement for the UK of any equals, plus or minus configuration - point there to those who don't want greater EU integration, the UK already has a semi-detached, bespoke EU membership of a kind that the likes of Norway would struggle to get.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 30, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Have I missed the bit where someone stated the purpose of this "debate" ?
> There is no currently scheduled election or referendum to campaign for, so what exactly is the point?



I would guess it's a tacit admission that there's going to be an election sooner or later and an attempt to have a debate on the strongest possible ground for May (ie Brexit and her deal) rather than the respective parties plans for govt. If Corbyn does badly and gets slated he will struggle to demand a debate when there is an election.


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

Beermoth said:


> Let's have a referendum on it!


Or at least a thread


----------



## Wilf (Nov 30, 2018)

Here's Tusk ruling out further negotiations - essentially, if you vote the deal down your only choices are no deal or remain. I'm genuinely unsure what his strategy is with this: is he supporting May's deal or his he putting remain back on the agenda at, what he would see as, a strategic moment?
No deal or no Brexit if MPs vote down May plan, says Tusk
Suppose what I'm also getting at is he isn't offering much to corbyn - no sense that he might assume the reins and then have another go at making a deal.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Can someone tell me what is "plus" about "Norway plus"?  I know this means I am using urban as a cheap way for me to find out stuff but hey, that's what you're all here for, right?


Norway Plus: The pluses and minuses of a Norway plus deal.


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Here's Tusk ruling out further negotiations - essentially, if you vote the deal down your only choices are no deal or remain. I'm genuinely unsure what his strategy is with this: is he supporting May's deal or his he putting remain back on the agenda at, what he would see as, a strategic moment?
> No deal or no Brexit if MPs vote down May plan, says Tusk
> Suppose what I'm also getting at is he isn't offering much to corbyn - no sense that he might assume the reins and then have another go at making a deal.


Interesting that he's explicitly included not leaving as an option, before the ECJ ruling on whether A50 can be withdrawn.

Maybe he has some insider knowledge of how that decision will go...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 30, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Here's Tusk ruling out further negotiations - essentially, if you vote the deal down your only choices are no deal or remain. I'm genuinely unsure what his strategy is with this: is he supporting May's deal or his he putting remain back on the agenda at, what he would see as, a strategic moment?
> No deal or no Brexit if MPs vote down May plan, says Tusk
> Suppose what I'm also getting at is he isn't offering much to corbyn - no sense that he might assume the reins and then have another go at making a deal.


What actual power does Tusk have here? He's not the decision-maker in all this - if the UK goes to the important actors and asks for new negotiations, they get new negotiations, no? And Tusk isn't an important actor - people like Merkel and Macron are. All the stuff being said now about what may or may not be possible if this deal is voted down is mostly hot air.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> But sounds like you think freedom of movement is an acceptable part in reckoning with the neoliberal project


Not sure what you mean here. ‘Freedom of movement’ as we know it _is_ a policy of the neoliberal project.

To save me re-writing:

Urban v's the Commentariat


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What actual power does Tusk have here? He's not the decision-maker in all this - if the UK goes to the important actors and asks for new negotiations, they get new negotiations, no? And Tusk isn't an important actor - people like Merkel and Macron are. All the stuff being said now about what may or may not be possible if this deal is voted down is mostly hot air.


drivel. utter feeble drivel. two years ago so many people said all the countries would be trying to drive hard bargains with us, we can play off one against another - as you're saying here in fact. and it was tosh then, as the eu countries decided to have one negotiating team. and now you think they'll change that in future.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Not sure what you mean here. ‘Freedom of movement’ as we know it _is_ a policy of the neoliberal project.
> 
> To save me re-writing:
> 
> Urban v's the Commentariat


exactly - and you're supporting it by supporting Norway (over May's deal) ??


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> exactly - and you're supporting it by supporting Norway (over May's deal) ??


I’m not supporting Norway plus.

Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Here's Tusk ruling out further negotiations - essentially, if you vote the deal down your only choices are no deal or remain. I'm genuinely unsure what his strategy is with this: is he supporting May's deal or his he putting remain back on the agenda at, what he would see as, a strategic moment?
> No deal or no Brexit if MPs vote down May plan, says Tusk
> Suppose what I'm also getting at is he isn't offering much to corbyn - no sense that he might assume the reins and then have another go at making a deal.


i don't know why you or anyone else thinks he might or he should offer much to corbyn. what happened was the uk got to do its thing: if people here wanted things done differently, it makes no odds to the eu. there was a certain amount of time for chitchat and banter about the terms of the agreement, which has now passed. it's less democratic to think that the eu should reset the clock to give someone else a go than it is to propose a second referendum.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m not supporting Norway plus.


youve said it was better option than Mays deal by some distance ?


danny la rouge said:


> If you’re asking me to rank May’s deal and Norway+ (not that I’ve read May’s deal, only bits along with reports of what’s in it), then that’s, relatively speaking, Norway+ ahead of May’s deal by some distance.


Mays deal = no more free movement (points based immigration), Norway = free movement

We're having this conversation in the context of What Should The Labour Partys position be on immigration (a la Brexit).
I know you dont want to enter a two-option discussion, but thats what Labour is faced with (Norway or May) in the real world. And we're both critical about their lack of clarity on the fact that:


danny la rouge said:


> (Labour needs) to decide its relationship to the neoliberal project.  It still hasn't worked that out.


And the thorny issue they face is Free Movement...


danny la rouge said:


> _*is*_ a policy of the neoliberal project.


Im not trying to catch you out, but this is an example of the bind.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> youve said it was better option than Mays deal by some distance ?


And I think it is. I still don’t back it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> youve said it was better option than Mays deal by some distance ?
> 
> Mays deal = no more free movement (points based immigration), Norway = free movement
> 
> ...


eu migration into the uk has greatly declined, and since at least 2012 has never been as great as non-eu migration which has increased as eu migration has declined. even if you plug free movement it does not halt immigration. people coming in just come from somewhere else, is all.


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> youve said it was better option than Mays deal by some distance ?
> 
> Mays deal = no more free movement (points based immigration), Norway = free movement
> 
> ...


Norway plus or whatever it's called doesn't mean genuine free movement, it means 'free movement' as defined by the neo liberal terms of the EU within the EU and EFTA and excluding those from outside the EU


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> eu migration into the uk has greatly declined, and since at least 2012 has never been as great as non-eu migration which has increased as eu migration has declined. even if you plug free movement it does not halt immigration. people coming in just come from somewhere else, is all.


i'm happy with "free movement" personally, and would be happy with Norway over May's deal. But that may make me a lexit traitor, i don't know.


andysays said:


> Norway plus or whatever it's called doesn't mean genuine free movement, it means 'free movement' as defined by the neo liberal terms of the EU within the EU and EFTA and excluding those from outside the EU


yes, we've done this over and over, but we know what it means in terms of a Norway style deal, which is the context.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> Norway plus or whatever it's called doesn't mean genuine free movement, it means 'free movement' as defined by the neo liberal terms of the EU within the EU and EFTA and excluding those from outside the EU


yeh, which is what 'free movement' within the debate about the eu, leaving the eu and that. lots of things mean different things in different contexts. i don't know why this should surprise you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> i'm happy with "free movement" personally, and would be happy with Norway over May's deal.


may's deal is dead in the water.


----------



## ska invita (Nov 30, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> And I think it is. I still don’t back it.


Labour Party doesnt have the luxury to rise above it all like that - they have to make a choice, walk through corridors and vote (aka "back"), debate a position on TV etc, and that's what we're discussing, particularly why they aren't doing so with conviction.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Labour Party doesnt have the luxury to rise above it all like that - they have to make a choice, walk through corridors and vote (aka "back"), debate a position on TV etc, and that's what we're discussing, particularly why they aren't doing so with conviction.


don't know why you expect politicians to have principles, after all the evidence to the contrary


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> ...yes, we've done this over and over, but we know what it means in terms of a Norway style deal, which is the context.



You appeared to be pointing to some kind of distinction between Norway+ which you equated with 'free movement' and the May deal, which you equated with 'no free movement'.

I don't think it's actually meaningful or accurate to distinguish between them in that way.


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, which is what 'free movement' within the debate about the eu, leaving the eu and that. lots of things mean different things in different contexts. i don't know why this should surprise you.


And I don't know why you think it *does* surprise me, TBH


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 30, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Labour Party doesnt have the luxury to rise above it all like that - they have to make a choice, walk through corridors and vote (aka "back"), debate a position on TV etc, and that's what we're discussing, particularly why they aren't doing so with conviction.


You’re conflating several things. Can’t be bothered teasing them all out right now.

But foremost, I’m not “rising above” anything. Saying I don’t support something means exactly that. That I don’t support it. I can discuss things I don’t support. I do it all the time on here.

Secondly, you seem to have assumed that I have said Labour should support “Norway plus”.  I didn’t. I did agree that they should call Theresa May on the fact that immigration wasn’t on the referendum ballot paper. I think littlebabyjesus said she should be called on that. I agreed and suggested Labour should be doing at least some of the calling. (Which they won’t because they’re in a big mess over immigration and have been for years).

But it’s a big jump to say that necessarily means anything at all about “Norway plus”. I didn’t say it did, and it doesn’t.


----------



## andysays (Nov 30, 2018)

There still seems to be an assumption running through many of the posts on this and other threads that we are all obliged to choose between two and only two options as set out by someone else - Leave (on the terms of the most extreme Brexiteers) or Remain, Deal or No Deal, and most recently May's Deal or an imagined Norway Plus Deal.

Debate at this level is about as meaningful as a choice between I'm a Celebrity and Strictly Come Dancing - I'm not watching either and I don't see why we should accept the simplistic terms of the debate that are presented to us.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> There still seems to be an assumption running through many of the posts on this and other threads that we are all obliged to choose between two and only two options as set out by someone else - Leave (on the terms of the most extreme Brexiteers) or Remain, Deal or No Deal, and most recently May's Deal or an imagined Norway Plus Deal.
> 
> Debate at this level is about as meaningful as a choice between I'm a Celebrity and Strictly Come Dancing - I'm not watching either and I don't see why we should accept the simplistic terms of the debate that are presented to us.


Or, indeed, that the 'choice' actually represents a _meaningful _choice in the context of a late capitalist/neoliberal base.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 30, 2018)

If true, and I imagine it's all too likely, how have they have still managed to be so completely inept?

Theresa May spokesman sparks fresh suspicion of British ‘spying’ on EU officials


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 1, 2018)

Sam Gyimah resigns over Theresa May's Brexit deal


----------



## xenon (Dec 1, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Can someone tell me what is "plus" about "Norway plus"?  I know this means I am using urban as a cheap way for me to find out stuff but hey, that's what you're all here for, right?



 It is a bit like Canada plus . I.e.  irrelevant brain fart somethings  wankers like Boris Johnson can lucratively fill articles with.


----------



## xenon (Dec 1, 2018)

Let’s have Lichtenstein plus plus plus to the power of nine


----------



## ska invita (Dec 1, 2018)

andysays said:


> There still seems to be an assumption running through many of the posts on this and other threads that we are all obliged to choose between two and only two options as set out by someone else - Leave (on the terms of the most extreme Brexiteers) or Remain, Deal or No Deal, and most recently May's Deal or an imagined Norway Plus Deal.
> 
> Debate at this level is about as meaningful as a choice between I'm a Celebrity and Strictly Come Dancing - I'm not watching either and I don't see why we should accept the simplistic terms of the debate that are presented to us.


Did you feel that way when the Brexit referendum was being campaigned for? I felt similar and didn't vote. On reflection there was a degree of cop out there. I wanted to avoid the terms of the debate too. But reality went on despite me.

I heard a lot of charged arguments on here to vote, with all manner of insults and insinuations on top. At that point there was an assumption running through many of the posts that the choice was crucially important, yet now there's nothing meaningful about it? Sounds like a duck out to me at the point where it becomes a question of facing the reality.

These possible outcomes, that you now say are as important as shit TV shows were what were always on the table, what was always the subject of the vote, and each permutation will have a potentially massive impact, at least on _some_ peoples lives - sounds like not on yours, good for you.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 1, 2018)

xenon said:


> Let’s have Lichtenstein plus plus plus to the power of nine


Then take away the country you originally thought of...

It's weird, but you always end up with EU membership or something pretty much the same, whatever you do.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> PP is the biggest enabler of and biggest brake on changes to working conditions in the UK. Until the current model is disrupted or eclipsed this will continue to be the case and the range of possibilities will be strictly limited as a result.


 No it's not. The post-war consensus was not brought about because of the Labour Party but because of the strength of the workers (hence why we see the similar behaviour across the "the west" under both red and blue governments).



mauvais said:


> They're not the same thing, and clearly top-down directed left wing politics isn't working either. But if you expect some hypothetical WC resistance to automatically go in a leftwards direction, rather than the many other possibilities, then as I said you've got an inflated sense of the left's position. That's not necessarily tangible organisation & leadership but ideas and presence in any kind of discourse. It's not a prerequisite for a fight but it might be a prerequisite for an outcome that isn't, as just one example, factional nationalism.


What HoratioCuthbert said. I'm not that interested in the left (certainly not if all it means is the Labour Party), I'm interested in increasing the power of workers. And the last sentence indicates that for all your claims you don't trust in the WC. That for you, as for so many others on this thread, they need to be guided, led, taught to follow the correct path.

There is a division here but it's not between Leavers and Remainers, it's between those that see the working class as the only agent that can truly change things. And those that, following the Fabians, believe that the working class cannot be trusted, and thus shouldn't be trusted.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> No it's not. The post-war consensus was not brought about because of the Labour Party but because of the strength of the workers (hence why we see the similar behaviour across the "the west" under both red and blue governments).


You're talking about 20th century origins, I'm talking about now. I think you shouldn't underestimate the difference - not least, post-disaster vs post-Thatcher. I wouldn't assert that this is irreversible or an immovable obstacle, but it does need to be acknowledged. You're also perhaps misinterpreting my point to be one of how PP (the Labour Party) brought us to where we are now, which is not what I'm arguing at all. It's merely that PP has, after arriving at that point, become the dominant force for either change or lack of it.



redsquirrel said:


> What HoratioCuthbert said. I'm not that interested in the left (certainly not if all it means is the Labour Party), I'm interested in increasing the power of workers. And the last sentence indicates that for all your claims you don't trust in the WC. That for you, as for so many others on this thread, they need to be guided, led, taught to follow the correct path.
> 
> There is a division here but it's not between Leavers and Remainers, it's between those that trust the working class and those that fear it.


I do think that, but it's not fear as such and it's not exclusive to the WC in some patronising form, it's just people. Most people of whatever class look for leadership and lean heavily on the ideas and work of others, most people are malleable. It's just as much true of the Guardian reading stereotype as the WC one. Unless we're willing to reboot to neolithic times, it's inevitably thus. And so again when a vacuum is produced, something will fill it, and if you don't want it to be e.g. Yaxley Lennon, there had better be a workable counter. Is there one? This is what I'm on about. Now it's not a binary: you might argue that the fundamentals are already imbued in our history, and they don't need leadership to revive them, and you _might_ be right, but I'm not automatically convinced.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 1, 2018)

teqniq said:


> If true, and I imagine it's all too likely, how have they have still managed to be so completely inept?
> 
> Theresa May spokesman sparks fresh suspicion of British ‘spying’ on EU officials


If they knew all that how did they manage to still negotiate a pile of pony deal?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 1, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I think the possibility of EU reform is there - the EU is ultimately formed by its members, and those are primarily chosen through elections. The unelected layer is currently supported and given legitimacy by a conservative majority in the European parliament, but that could change.


 At my workplace we can elect people to committees are you really going to claim that that makes mine (or any other) workplace democratic or that it's workers have a real input into the decisions? Sorry but this is crazy.

National elections in representative democracies are themselves a farce, but now you're arguing that an institution that is specifically designed to remove any democrat control is reformable.



ska invita said:


> Like many here I thought the Labour party was incapable of and beyond change - turns out that was wrong. There's still a lot that needs to happen there of course, but the wheels are in motion and many of the barriers to reform are falling. Once the wheels of history start turning things can change quickly.


And again back to party politics. And while the LP may have moved back towards some milk and water social democracy it's councils are still attacking workers. If it did get into power it will still attack workers.



ska invita said:


> As to WTO, IMF, WorldBank, these are clearly impossible to "reform". And I guess the difference is democracy.


_The WTO/IMF/World Bank is ultimately formed by its members, and those are primarily chosen through elections._ You're own arguemnet for the EU applies to all these organisations too, you've literally just argued they are democratic and reformable.

The fact is that you are so keen to defend what the EU calls "freedom of movement" that over the last two years you've been willing to come out with positions which are not just regressive but actually incoherent and contradictory. Seriously just take stock of where you, someone who calls themselves a socialist, has ended up - arguing for free trade agreements, arguing at the same time that people must vote to keep fascists out and that such a vote indicates support for Neo-liberalism, arguing that the German Greens are left wing.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 1, 2018)

I'm about to go out and I'll respond to the rest in more detail but 


mauvais said:


> I do think that, but it's not fear as such and it's not exclusive to the WC in some patronising form, it's just people.


By working class I don't mean C2DE I mean those who's labour is exploited, i.e. the majority of the population.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 1, 2018)

I'm interested (genuinely) in why mauvais thinks parliamentary (or party, whatever PP stands for now) politics is now the main force for and check on change. What has changed to make this happen?

I don't think there has been such a change but I'm open to persuasion. From where I'm standing the balance of forces has shifted a fair bit but its still about class struggle. I see the main force for change at the moment as 'the markets' (so capital) and politicians as pretty much powerless to stop or alter it. Just as when labour (note the small l, it's not always about parties) had the upper hand they were forced into changes that cohered with the balance of forces back then.

Can't quote sorry, on my phone and I'm a technophobe who can't figure that shit out.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 1, 2018)




----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm interested (genuinely) in why mauvais thinks parliamentary (or party, whatever PP stands for now) politics is now the main force for and check on change. What has changed to make this happen?
> 
> I don't think there has been such a change but I'm open to persuasion. From where I'm standing the balance of forces has shifted a fair bit but its still about class struggle. I see the main force for change at the moment as 'the markets' (so capital) and politicians as pretty much powerless to stop or alter it. Just as when labour (note the small l, it's not always about parties) had the upper hand they were forced into changes that cohered with the balance of forces back then.
> 
> Can't quote sorry, on my phone and I'm a technophobe who can't figure that shit out.


In a word, Thatcher. A gross oversimplification, obviously, but that era effectively destroyed natural (e.g. monolithic industrial workplaces) and constructed (e.g. unions) sources of solidarity, ushered in fragmented individualism across our daily lives and knocked the very idea of class, both Marxist and socio-economic, out of the public discourse. I've never known any different, personally.

None of the above is an absolute and nor is it a linear path to total destruction but it's hardly the picture of good health.

So I wouldn't say that PP has become stronger as such, but that the alternatives have gone so it becomes the only recourse. There's yet to be a recovery and reforming of old, large-scale ideas of solidarity to fit the modern landscape. So we see a gov.uk petition or a food bank collection at Tesco instead of organising or a general strike.

This is happens beneath the relationship between government/state and capital, so absolutely capital is the fundamental driver of change, but the discussion has been about how that's handled, mitigated, suppressed or whatever.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 1, 2018)

The biggest crisis in PP since '73  - as real crisis of political legitimacy. The things that you mention are not examples of PP - talking endlessly about the positions of parliamentary politicians is. See this shitty thread for that particular cretinism.

And your levels are wrong - capital is driven by this 'other stuff'. It doesn't drive it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 1, 2018)

Fez909 said:


> Sam Gyimah resigns over Theresa May's Brexit deal



Cleverly timed to have the least possible impact on anything. We've got a canny one here folks.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> In a word, Thatcher. A gross oversimplification, obviously, but that era effectively destroyed natural (e.g. monolithic industrial workplaces) and constructed (e.g. unions) sources of solidarity, ushered in fragmented individualism across our daily lives and knocked the very idea of class, both Marxist and socio-economic, out of the public discourse. I've never known any different, personally.
> 
> None of the above is an absolute and nor is it a linear path to total destruction but it's hardly the picture of good health.
> 
> ...



I don't understand why you think any of that demonstrates a primacy of parliamentary politics. Its incoherent to the point that I don't really know how to respond.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't understand why you think any of that demonstrates a primacy of parliamentary politics. Its incoherent to the point that I don't really know how to respond.


If you can't manage more than that, then there's no point bothering with this, is there. You asked.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> You're talking about 20th century origins, I'm talking about now. I think you shouldn't underestimate the difference - not least, post-disaster vs post-Thatcher. I wouldn't assert that this is irreversible or an immovable obstacle, but it does need to be acknowledged. You're also perhaps misinterpreting my point to be one of how PP (the Labour Party) brought us to where we are now, which is not what I'm arguing at all. It's merely that PP has, after arriving at that point, become the dominant force for either change or lack of it.


Sorry but like butchers and Spiney I find the idea that there is some break point in the 70s/80s where parliamentary politics became the "dominant force for change" wrongheaded.



mauvais said:


> I do think that, but it's not fear as such and it's not exclusive to the WC in some patronising form, it's just people.* Most people of whatever class look for leadership and lean heavily on the ideas and work of others, most people are malleable.*It's just as much true of the Guardian reading stereotype as the WC one. Unless we're willing to reboot to neolithic times, it's inevitably thus. And so again when a vacuum is produced, something will fill it, and if you don't want it to be e.g. Yaxley Lennon, there had better be a workable counter.


(my emphasis) You've pretty much just made my argument. You *don't* trust the power of the workers, or if you prefer people. You *do* see the need for somebody to lead/guide them to the correct path.

This is the split I mentioned. I think history shows the very opposite - that the greatest gains made by labour have arisen from our own self-organisation and that the attempt of groups to guide/lead labour has at best stymied such gains, at worse resulted in attacks on the working class.

Edited to add: 


mauvais said:


> so absolutely capital is the fundamental driver of change,


What BA said, this is the wrong way around.


----------



## Winot (Dec 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> By working class I don't mean C2DE I mean those who's labour is exploited, i.e. the majority of the population.



If the majority of the population has the same interests in common then democracy is the answer.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but like butchers and Spiney I find the idea that there is some break point in the 70s/80s where parliamentary politics became the "dominant force for change" wrongheaded



I'd actually go further and say any change since then has been in the opposite direction. What's happening in the brexit negotiations shows that.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but like butchers and Spiney I find the idea that there is some break point in the 70s/80s where parliamentary politics became the "dominant force for change" wrongheaded.


It's maybe just language but I think that puts it positively, rather than negatively - the idea that PP actively gained dominance rather than everything else getting fucked, and an implication that it's a good thing or something that should now be used, neither of which is what I'm saying. Maybe we have a fundamentally different view on this, but do you not think that practical working organisation took a lot of damage that it's not recovered from in any meaningful way? To deny that is to deny the shifts in society, is it not? And maybe we're talking in different framings; maybe beneath all of that, in the longer term, you're right and the current trends are irrelevant - people will ultimately resolve matters positively for themselves. But then the question I've been asking about _that _is how long and how much interim pain to get there.


redsquirrel said:


> (my emphasis) You've pretty much just made my argument. You *don't* trust the power of the workers, or if you prefer people. You *do* see the need for somebody to lead/guide them to the correct path.


I'm cautious of trying to describe this in any detail because it ends up being a circular entanglement over specifics & particularly my loose wording, but: 'somebody' is not right, at least not in an explicit sense. If you think my idea is that some organisation or singular glorious leader is a necessary ingredient to swoop in and rescue us by enacting great change, then no, it's not that. But it is about something woolier, the presence of an idea or even ideology that comes through despite obstacles and challenges, and is propagated along the way by advocates at the very least.

I mean, to take an example, 'the American Dream' that I think the UK has adopted to a large extent, and which powers individualism, doesn't have a tangible leader, at least not now. But it is for many a credible narrative that excludes the possibility of the opposite. What's required for the opposite to take hold? You seem to think it will naturally happen; I think it probably requires a push. That push might be an active effort or it might be a destabilising event (more than just Brexit itself) but I don't see it happening by itself, even under worsening conditions. I feel like the last decade or more demonstrates that.



> What BA said, this is the wrong way around.


In this country in our system (or obvious forthcoming versions of it) at present. Not holistically.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> If you can't manage more than that, then there's no point bothering with this, is there. You asked.


I can't manage more than that because your post didn't make sense. That's not my fault.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I can't manage more than that because your post didn't make sense. That's not my fault.


What is the "main force for and check on change" outside of PP that you think demonstrably exists in Britain right now?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 1, 2018)

Winot said:


> If the majority of the population has the same interests in common then democracy is the answer.


Yes, yes it is. Which is why those who trust in workers have also been arguing for greater democratic control of communities and workplaces.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> You *don't* trust the power of the workers, or if you prefer people. You *do* see the need for somebody to lead/guide them to the correct path.



Still though "people's" movements are still _led_; usually by charismatic individuals and small groups, committees, parties. People don't spontaneously rise up en masse, they are always provoked to do so. And usually they need to be hungry and desperate before they begin.

There's no way the UK is going to see anything like this, probably not in my lifetime. We are too comfortable, even the WC here is bourgeois in aspiration, the last thing we want here is to tear down what so many of us aspire to be. Brexit as it stands is a bourgeois movement, there is no benefit in it for the working class. Actually I believe the hope of the key brexiters has always been a weakening and cheapening of labour. Dyson, Farage, Rees-Mogg, Banks etc don't want a strong, solid working class.

Brexit is not for us, it's for them.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> What is the "main force for and check on change" outside of PP that you think demonstrably exists in Britain right now?


I don't think there is a single one (there's a gaping political vacuum right now) but the working class, capital in the apparent form of markets and the EU are three. 

Brexit.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't think there is a single one (there's a gaping political vacuum right now) but the working class, capital in the apparent form of markets and the EU are three.
> 
> Brexit.


OK. I looked at this and I thought, 'that's not the question I asked', but then I went back and found that hard to back up.

I've been looking at this as a matter of what can happen - in the vacuum of Brexit - such that centre-right PP is disrupted by something that benefits people rather than capital. However, you said, and I should have picked up on this:



SpineyNorman said:


> I see the main force for change at the moment as 'the markets' (so capital) and politicians as pretty much powerless to stop or alter it. Just as when labour (note the small l, it's not always about parties) had the upper hand they were forced into changes that cohered with the balance of forces back then.


I don't agree with that. I see British politicians as not the victim or hostage of global capital or markets but an eager participant in it. I think there's a lot of latitude that comes with the starting point of one of the strongest economies, and much of what's being done is done by choice. I don't want to point to the narrow spectrum of possibilities under our current framework and say 'look how much better it could be', because shades of shit are still shit, but when it comes to, say, austerity, a lot of those choices are domestic, not externally enforced. We're not automatically Greece. There's also a wide range of open risks/opportunities relating to conditions that would be opened up by Brexit that are _not _so directly linked to strong economic forces and again are a matter of free choice for British governments.

What's the point of this?

I look at this picture and I see a hostile government that I think has a high degree of control over what happens, with no domestic resistance to it, and therefore I say parliament is in charge of what happens to the vacuum of Brexit, not the people.

You see a government and people that you think are both powerless against the external, so you say the external is in charge, and I guess you feel that removal of an element of that opens the door to the people if not the government. They're not irreconcilable positions but it's not straightforward.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 1, 2018)

well that's all right then...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Still though "people's" movements are still _led_; usually by charismatic individuals and small groups, committees, parties. People don't spontaneously rise up en masse, they are always provoked to do so. And usually they need to be hungry and desperate before they begin.
> 
> There's no way the UK is going to see anything like this, probably not in my lifetime. We are too comfortable, even the WC here is bourgeois in aspiration, the last thing we want here is to tear down what so many of us aspire to be.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

Words?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 1, 2018)

Between the lines of age.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Still though "people's" movements are still _led_; usually by charismatic individuals and small groups, committees, parties. People don't spontaneously rise up en masse, they are always provoked to do so. And usually they need to be hungry and desperate before they begin.
> 
> There's no way the UK is going to see anything like this, probably not in my lifetime. We are too comfortable, even the WC here is bourgeois in aspiration, the last thing we want here is to tear down what so many of us aspire to be. Brexit as it stands is a bourgeois movement, there is no benefit in it for the working class. Actually I believe the hope of the key brexiters has always been a weakening and cheapening of labour. Dyson, Farage, Rees-Mogg, Banks etc don't want a strong, solid working class.
> 
> Brexit is not for us, it's for them.


What a lot of shite! Are the foodbanks there for show? The one in Orkney gets a lot of trade and this is apparently a bourgeoise paradise. Fuck there really is an “underclass” isn’t there.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

I would like to post re “working class are bourgeoise in their aspirations” but it’s all coming oot angry at the moment- bit close to the bone. Saved for the morn. 
Ends—————


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 1, 2018)

Talking to a Bulgarian friend tonight, who has realised that her recent low-level depression has been in part fuelled by brexit and worries about brexit. She took out British citizenship, with all the expense and hassle that now involves, but is still worried about the way the country is going to the extent of not being sure she wants to stay here much longer. 

This shit feeds into other shit for a great many people, none of whom deserve it. Britain has already become a meaner place because of this referendum, regardless of what happens from now on. People are suffering because of that.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 1, 2018)

IEA withdraws rival Brexit report after charity watchdog's investigation


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What a lot of shite! Are the foodbanks there for show? The one in Orkney gets a lot of trade and this is apparently a bourgeoise paradise. Fuck there really is an “underclass” isn’t there.



It'll need to get worse than food banks before a revolution comes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It'll need to get worse than food banks before a revolution comes.


Food loan sharks


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

The army doling out rations to ordely queues in car parks. Brexit means Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The army doling out rations to ordely queues in car parks. Brexit means Brexit.


No, more like deaths from starvation
Rickets
Scurvy
The country's best days are in the future


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The army doling out rations to ordely queues in car parks. Brexit means Brexit.


U.K. working class are too bourgeoise.
Revolution. 
Ration queues. 

Maybe chat to you when you relinquish post of Chief Dramatist haha


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No, more like deaths from starvation




And from the army.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> No, more like deaths from starvation
> Rickets
> Scurvy
> The country's best days are in the future


We’ve got TB in high rise flats will that do for drama?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> We’ve got TB in high rise flats will that do for drama?


it was just for starters

Back in the day there were specialist TB hospitals, certainly in hackney. Now they're needed where are they?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> U.K. working class are too bourgeoise.
> Revolution.
> Ration queues.
> 
> Maybe chat to you when you relinquish post of Chief Dramatist haha



Chief dramatist is fine. I don't seriously think it'll be ration queues in car parks - but I do think revolution isn't going to happen because most people, even most of us (and I am) working class to be honest, have got more to lose that way. Revolutions come when _most people_ have _fuck all_ to lose, and we are along, long, long, long long long long way from that.

The reason _revolution _comes up at all here isn't really my doing. There's talk of a socialist version of a post-brexit UK, but little in the way of how that can happen in stages, concrete plans etc. And that's fine, but in that case _Revolution _as a means to that end just sort of hangs there like, you know, historical precedent. Hard not to look that way, in the absence of any other plan to study.

And it won't happen, not here, not now. ''Ration queues in car parks'' _is _more likely than ''A socialist revolution'' in the UK just now.

I am open to optimism btw, I just don't carry a lot around with me.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Guys you are confusing me. Which statement are you going with- everyone in the U.K. is too comfortable to move or is it rickets, rations and TB?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

The mistake is ''everyone''. That's not really a thing, politically.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> The mistake is ''everyone''. That's not really a thing, politically.


Thanks for clarifying. I’ll run that edit through your last few posts and we will say no more about it.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

I may, you don't have to.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Chief dramatist is fine. I don't seriously think it'll be ration queues in car parks - but I do think revolution isn't going to happen because most people, even most of us (and I am) working class to be honest, have got more to lose that way. Revolutions come when _most people_ have _fuck all_ to lose, and we are along, long, long, long long long long way from that.
> 
> The reason _revolution _comes up at all here isn't really my doing. There's talk of a socialist version of a post-brexit UK, but little in the way of how that can happen in stages, concrete plans etc. And that's fine, but in that case _Revolution _as a means to that end just sort of hangs there like, you know, historical precedent. Hard not to look that way, in the absence of any other plan to study.
> 
> ...


Who mentioned “a socialist revolution”
I’m not suggesting there should never be such a thing, but it’s hardly the only example of workers challenging their relationship with capital. Perhaps you have a more nuanced perspective on this subject but you seem to be encapsulating the situation in a kinda childish way, and then projecting these ideas onto people that haven’t really expressed them. At least not on this thread anyway.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

You know what, I'm not projecting anything on anyone. I'm playing out my own little dystopian post-brexit fantasy (we all have 'em, come on) and you're responding like it's way more than that. Fair enough, but it's not.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

when you point a finger, three fingers point back at you.
Trisha said that, so fuck you.

(EtA, seems like a good point to return to lurking)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> You know what, I'm not projecting anything on anyone. I'm playing out my own little dystopian post-brexit fantasy (we all have 'em, come on) and you're responding like it's way more than that. Fair enough, but it's not.


No the exchange predates the rickets and that by one post but let’s not derail much further


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> when you point a finger, three fingers point back at you.
> Trisha said that, so fuck you.
> 
> (EtA, seems like a good point to return to lurking)


Cause of me? I’m a part time poster, this is sport, real life is caring for the dying and bringing up a boy. If you leave pretty much the best place on the internet for learning it would be shit. White flag!


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

More seriously then, Brexit as it stands is pure bourgeois. There's nothing working-class in it, except some of the votes. There's no benefits in it for me or anyone I know, not that I can make out - no benefits have been talked about and none are obvious to me. And the process itself - the one that's actually happening so far - is for bourgeois aims, using bourgeois slogans, and to benefit the rich like every other fucking thing in this country.

So there's that.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 1, 2018)

Am I noticing in press and politics that there is more serious talk of a second ref happening now? Didn’t think it would come about and pretty sure it won’t help things, but now I’m less sure as it’s being presented as a possible option more frequently on BBC news and by gov and opposition politicians, on the assumption that May’s ‘deal’ is rejected.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> More seriously then, Brexit as it stands is pure bourgeois. There's nothing working-class in it, except some of the votes. There's no benefits in it for me or anyone I know, not that I can make out - no benefits have been talked about and none are obvious to me. And the process itself - the one that's actually happening so far - is for bourgeois aims, using bourgeois slogans, and to benefit the rich like every other fucking thing in this country.
> 
> So there's that.


I ken that, it was a bourgeoise Brexit and bourgeois remain. but change requires movement at least. It’s only been two years though but there’s certainly signs the tide is changing and not in the direction  everyone predicted it would. Peedie weys aye, but who on urban suggested we were working on anything shorter than a 10-20 year plan.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 1, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> Am I noticing in press and politics that there is more serious talk of a second ref happening now? Didn’t think it would come about and pretty sure it won’t help things, but now I’m less sure as it’s being presented as a possible option more frequently on BBC news and by gov and opposition politicians, on the assumption that May’s ‘deal’ is rejected.


This is how it currently seems to me also.The received wisdom seems to be that as a matter of mathematics May's deal is dead and more and more pundits are classifying no-deal as just one of those things that can't happen-which leaves the option of a second referendum.If we have a second referendum its quite possible that the result will be something like 52% remain and 48% leave.Maybe there would not then be bloody revolution but to say that things could get bitter would definitely be an under-statement in my honest opinion.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 1, 2018)

Again, as opposed to the happy cakewalk that is a Brexit of some form?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> This is how it currently seems to me also.The received wisdom seems to be that as a matter of mathematics May's deal is dead and more and more pundits are classifying no-deal as just one of those things that can't happen-which leaves the option of a second referendum.If we have a second referendum its quite possible that the result will be something like 52% remain and 48% leave.Maybe there would not then be bloody revolution but to say that things could get bitter would definitely be an under-statement in my honest opinion.


Well no it won’t because as I understand there will be two leave options and one remain- so it will go remain.


----------



## Supine (Dec 1, 2018)

GreatGutsby said:


> You are ALL a bunch of faggots!



Great input


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I ken that, it was a bourgeoise Brexit and bourgeois remain. but change requires movement at least. It’s only been two years though but there’s certainly signs the tide is changing and not in the direction  everyone predicted it would. Peedie weys aye, but who on urban suggested we were working on anything shorter than a 10-20 year plan.



It was a bourgeois Brexit because Brexit / Leave was a bourgeois project from the word go. I know there have always been left-wing opponents of EU membership but my point is _that's _not ''Brexit''. ''Brexit'' is something else, and the working class are sure as fuck not in control of it, nor were we ever meant to be by the people who are. I say guillotine the fuckers, but I appreciate I'm in a minority there.

Also, that _Remain _was a bourgeois reaction to a bourgeois phenomenon shouldn't be any surprise - but let's not forget Remain _was _a reaction. The agent of change was _Leave_, and that project was run by certain people, for certain reasons. And we know who and what they were. We hitched a ride on their bandwagon, at best. At what point do we jump off?


----------



## Supine (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well no it won’t because as I understand there will be two leave options and one remain- so it will go remain.



What you understand isn't agreed yet. Two choices is far more likely.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> Great input


I missed that one and as a female sort of faggot i rule it’s proably better than half the stuff on here


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> What you understand isn't agreed yet. Two choices is far more likely.


Given there doesn’t seem to be a precedent for this could you show me yer workings?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

Supine said:


> What you understand isn't agreed yet. Two choices is far more likely.


To clarify I’m not sure a second ref is likely either.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well no it won’t because as I understand there will be two leave options and one remain- so it will go remain.


Put like that it somehow doesn't quite seem fair?I suppose another possibility could be months of arguing about what should be on the ballot-except of course that we don't have that many months left of membership.


----------



## Winot (Dec 1, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> Put like that it somehow doesn't quite seem fair?I suppose another possibility could be months of arguing about what should be on the ballot-except of course that we don't have that many months left of membership.



It’s pretty much accepted I think that there isn’t time to have a 2nd ref before 29/3/19. It requires an extension to Art. 50 to happen.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

A second referendum will be like, when you've cunted everyone off and basically made a pig of yourself, and you storm out with a shred of dignity, but then you realise what you forgot to say and march back in to a proper shitshow.

We should have just flipped a coin.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 1, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Again, as opposed to the happy cakewalk that is a Brexit of some form?


Perfectly willing to accept that a crash-out no deal would in many ways be a national disaster-but on the other hand its difficult to argue that that is not what people voted for.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> It was a bourgeois Brexit because Brexit / Leave was a bourgeois project from the word go. I know there have always been left-wing opponents of EU membership but my point is _that's _not ''Brexit''. ''Brexit'' is something else, and the working class are sure as fuck not in control of it, nor were we ever meant to be by the people who are. I say guillotine the fuckers, but I appreciate I'm in a minority there.
> 
> Also, that _Remain _was a bourgeois reaction to a bourgeois phenomenon shouldn't be any surprise - but let's not forget Remain _was _a reaction. The agent of change was _Leave_, and that project was run by certain people, for certain reasons. And we know who and what they were. We hitched a ride on their bandwagon, at best. At what point do we jump off?


I’m not sure what you are  driving at. I could have easily abstained for this ref, but to me at this point in time it’s more important for pro working class types to concentrate their efforts on anything and everything *unrelated* to whether or not there is a people’s vote. Because we will need to do this anyway, remaining will not save us. 
If by “jumping off” you mean campaigning to reverse the vote then there is no fucking way you can do that and maintain a pro working class position because you are basically saying that only certain people should expect their vote to count, and everyone else can get to fuck. 
And for what? To remain part of an institution that actually BUILT A WALL to keep Europe white? To maintain all those laws and directives that mandate austerity and privatisation whether it’s red Tories or Tory Tories in power here? Waiting forever for a single social democrat to rise up and dismantle the fucktons of treaties that ensure a Socialist Government  is by *it’s very nature* breaking the law? But never fear proles,  the state kicked you in the face when it was the 4th largest economy in the world but if you do right by them just this once, you will be ok? Even if they did listen, what exactly would you have achieved? 
However you voted, fixation on a second ref = either capitalism or capitalism plus a new precedent where neoliberals just get to ask people again when they don’t like the result. I know ideally a ref on the final deal would be a good thing but that’s not what this vote is about. And this week we’ve seen the likes
Of COSLA actually saying “we support a #peoplesvote to remain.” No kidding, twitter search it. 
Cheers, I hope I’ve at least been as entertaining as a drunk Eric Joyce.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

PS: ok the COSLA vote write up wasn’t verbatim but only by a tiny baw hair


----------



## Supine (Dec 1, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> but on the other hand its difficult to argue that that is not what people voted for.



Brexiteers seem to have voted for a wide variety of reasons. Including:

1 sovereignty
2 fishing rights improvementd for fishermen
3 racism
4 avoidance of new EU tax regulations
5 disaster capitalists
6 career politicians
7 lexiting
8 anti immigration

Lots of those were single issue voters who didn't want or expect a total crash out.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 1, 2018)

After forty years of membership voting to leave was always going to be a leap in the dark.Nobody knew then what the full implications would turn out to be-we don't even know that now with any degree of certainty.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> We should have just flipped a coin.



The leave side would still be arguing about who would get to flip the coin, where the ceremonial flipping would take place, and whether or not it was allowable to use Nigel Farage's lucky sixpence.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> If by “jumping off” you mean campaigning to reverse the vote then there is no fucking way you can do that and maintain a pro working class position because you are basically saying that only certain people should expect their vote to count, and everyone else can get to fuck.



That's not what I mean.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> That's not what I mean.


What do you mean?


----------



## two sheds (Dec 1, 2018)

Not sure what the second referendum question would be.

1. Accept May's effort
2. ?
3?. ?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 1, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Not sure what the second referendum question would be.
> 
> 1. Accept May's effort
> 2. ?
> 3. ??


Basically I’m not entirely sure a second ref fits into EU rules right now but the campaigners are saying:
1:deal
2:no deal 
3:remain

Is it even possible to remain? I was doing a lot of reading prior to the ref but right now I’m doing full time nights and my spare time is all about the boy so this is a genuine question, is remain even an option at this point? Thanks in advance!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 1, 2018)

Remain is about 50% so would presumably win given those three choices. Don't know whether it's an option though. 

Remain now after all the shit that's gone on would seem worst of all worlds.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 1, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Food loan sharks


I supposed most loan sharking involved people's need for food.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> We’ve got TB in high rise flats will that do for drama?


Are there many high rise flats/multi-storeys where you live?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 1, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What do you mean?



I think I mean, when and how is ''leaving the EU'' going to be reclaimed for eg reason and social justice? It's not an inherently stupid thing to do, but there is zero sign of anything but idiotic plans for doing it, that benefit nobody except the people you'd expect it to benefit, that is the people who made it happen.

What _is _going to get better next year after we leave? I mean, for people like me and maybe also you. On minimum wage, paying half of it each month as rent, trying to bring up and educate children. All I'm seeing is cut off nose and not much face.


----------



## Celyn (Dec 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it was just for starters
> 
> Back in the day there were specialist TB hospitals, certainly in hackney. Now they're needed where are they?


 Not sure that specialist TB hospitals are needed. Are they? Is genuine question, honestly. Is that the best way to deal with it?


----------



## Celyn (Dec 2, 2018)

GreatGutsby said:


> Eat catshit


Oh you are so very droll.   

How can I afford to keep a cat?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 2, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Not sure what the second referendum question would be.
> 
> 1. Accept May's effort
> 2. ?
> 3?. ?



I'm sure I have posted something like this before, but think the options are

a) yes, go ahead with this deal
b) no, this deal is not 'hard brexit' enough
c) no, this deal is not 'soft brexit' enough
d) no, stay in the EU instead
e) yes, i can't face this shit for the next few years


----------



## two sheds (Dec 2, 2018)

Gives one choice for stay in EU multiple choices for leave so weighted towards stay in EU.

If choice is "yes, go ahead with deal" or "no, another referendum" that's weighted towards another referendum.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Basically I’m not entirely sure a second ref fits into EU rules right now but the campaigners are saying:
> 1:deal
> 2:no deal
> 3:remain
> ...


You can put anything you like on a ballot paper. You don't necessarily need to have a clue whether it can be achieved or not. Surely, if we have learned anything over the course of the whole Brexit soap, we've learned that.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 2, 2018)

Satellite??


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Celyn said:


> Are there many high rise flats/multi-storeys where you live?


No, what’s your point caller?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You can put anything you like on a ballot paper. You don't necessarily need to have a clue whether it can be achieved or not. Surely, if we have learned anything over the course of the whole Brexit soap, we've learned that.


Well people voted to leave the European Union, which can certainly be achieved. You don’t want to leave the European Union though,  that doesn’t mean leaving the European Union can’t be achieved. And before you start we didn’t tick “give 350 million to the NHS” on that notorious day either.


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 2, 2018)

If the EU changed its name to ‘European Federation’ or something like that, could the UK then be said to no longer be a member of the EU and therefore the referendum result has been satisfied? An easy way to resolve things with only a bit of new stationary/signage to pay for.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 2, 2018)

Dogsauce said:


> If the EU changed its name to ‘European Federation’ or something like that, could the UK then be said to no longer be a member of the EU and therefore the referendum result has been satisfied? An easy way to resolve things with only a bit of new stationary/signage to pay for.


I can see a scenario where we float that idea. The EU will then suggest that the UK change its name instead. Theresa May will loudly insist that it's out of the question, for about a fortnight, before agreeing and then insisting that the UK is, in some technical sense, not changing its name so it's actually a great victory for her. Then, constitutional crisis cos Jacob RM's not happy. After that, second referendum.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 2, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Remain is about 50% so would presumably win given those three choices. Don't know whether it's an option though.
> 
> Remain now after all the shit that's gone on would seem worst of all worlds.



I’d imagine if it was more than two options it’d be a preference vote, so you’d vote 1/2/3 in order of preference then they’d eliminate the least popular option, then reallocate it’s votes to pick a winner.

Alex


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

Celyn said:


> I supposed most loan sharking involved people's need for food.


Food BANKS


----------



## philosophical (Dec 2, 2018)

All the future options the UK now faces are chite options, including remain.
It is probably true that another national vote is the best of the worst, but it is still a crap option which will further divide.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> All the future options the UK now faces are chite options, including remain.
> It is probably true that another national vote is the best of the worst, but it is still a crap option which will further divide.


Shite. They are shite options.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 2, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I’d imagine if it was more than two options it’d be a preference vote, so you’d vote 1/2/3 in order of preference then they’d eliminate the least popular option, then reallocate it’s votes to pick a winner.
> 
> Alex


My guess is that a ref with that format would be nailed-on remain. Transferable votes of this kind make the least-hated option the winner. Most people who voted remain last time would vote remain again. A chunk of those who voted leave last time would vote remain as a second pref.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well people voted to leave the European Union, which can certainly be achieved. You don’t want to leave the European Union though,  that doesn’t mean leaving the European Union can’t be achieved. And before you start we didn’t tick “give 350 million to the NHS” on that notorious day either.


It can't be negotiated by this lacklustre government. And it's the only government we have.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Shite. They are shite options.



I purposely spelt it the way I did.
If that isn't to your taste, too bad.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I purposely spelt it the way I did.
> If that isn't to your taste, too bad.


I'd give you a chit if I gave a shit


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

I'm not sure people inside their liberal bubble appreciate the extent to which many see a second ref as a challenge to democracy itself. People used to laugh when the Irish did this - keep voting until the political establishment got the right answer. In this thread it's gliby bandied about like a sensible, almost inevitable, course of action. Liberals in action. Esp. te BBC.

There won't be just anger if this were to be proposed, the non-metropolitan *country* will be outraged. If you put together the scale of the Iraqi war protest, the outrage of the poll tax and the determination of the miners strike - I have a strong sense that is what would come to London, and not to march but to occupy: a principled stand against the manipulation of democratic process. It's difficult to understand how people think you just override a national vote ... because politicians on both sides told fibs.

Even though metropolitan, educated liberals do truly sincerely know whats best for everyone, you really can't glibly fuck around with this stuff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I'm not sure people inside their liberal bubble appreciate the extent to which many see a second ref as a challenge to democracy itself. People used to laugh when the Irish did this - keep voting until the political establishment got the right answer. In this thread it's gliby bandied about like a sensible, almost inevitable, course of action. Liberals in action. Esp. te BBC.
> 
> There won't be just anger if this were to be proposed, the non-metropolitan *country* will be outraged. If you put together the scale of the Iraqi war protest, the outrage of the poll tax and the determination of the miners strike - I have a strong sense that is what would come to London, and not to march but to occupy: a principled stand against the manipulation of democratic process. It's difficult to understand how people think you just override a national vote ... because politicians on both sides told fibs.
> 
> Even though metropolitan, educated liberals do truly sincerely know whats best for everyone, you really can't glibly fuck around with this stuff.


The Irish. Not the Danish who did it first. Your slip's showing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I'm not sure people inside their liberal bubble appreciate the extent to which many see a second ref as a challenge to democracy itself. People used to laugh when the Irish did this - keep voting until the political establishment got the right answer. In this thread it's gliby bandied about like a sensible, almost inevitable, course of action. Liberals in action. Esp. te BBC.
> 
> There won't be just anger if this were to be proposed, the non-metropolitan *country* will be outraged. If you put together the scale of the Iraqi war protest, the outrage of the poll tax and the determination of the miners strike - I have a strong sense that is what would come to London, and not to march but to occupy: a principled stand against the manipulation of democratic process. It's difficult to understand how people think you just override a national vote ... because politicians on both sides told fibs.
> 
> Even though metropolitan, educated liberals do truly sincerely know whats best for everyone, you really can't glibly fuck around with this stuff.


Diamond will become a law professor and Orang utan a BNP councillor before your fantasy of london being occupied by enraged brexiters takes place


----------



## tommers (Dec 2, 2018)

Because things have changed. At the time of the One Vote That Rules Them All I remember saying to my wife “I've voted, but I don't feel like I know what for". The govt has gone out and found out what the deal is. Why is a vote, now people are better informed, a bad idea?

How is having a vote anti-democratic?

You're assuming that remain would win. I'm not sure it would. I've become more leave since the OVTRTA. I think it's become much clearer what our relationship to the EU is really.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

I'm not assuming anything. I am asserting that if you voted in the first ref - and fwiw I abstained - you are implicitly bound to accept the outcome. No one goes into a voting booth saying to themselves 'I'll only accept the outcome if it's the one I want'.

We've all been lied too and deceived by 2nd rate politicians our entire adult lives. Nothing new here. No bogus  liberal moral highground to chest beat from.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2018)

tommers said:


> Because things have changed. At the time of the One Vote That Rules Them All I remember saying to my wife “I've voted, but I don't feel like I know what for". The govt has gone out and found out what the deal is. Why is a vote, now people are better informed, a bad idea?
> 
> How is having a vote anti-democratic?
> 
> You're assuming that remain would win. I'm not sure it would. I've become more leave since the OVTRTA. I think it's become much clearer what our relationship to the EU is really.


I think it's also clear what numpties the government is. That they cannot supply what the vote demanded. That they won't explore all options. That they're more interested in the interests of their miserable party than those of the country.


----------



## andysays (Dec 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Diamond will become a law professor and Orang utan a BNP councillor before your fantasy of london being occupied by enraged brexiters takes place



Both of them have been a bit quiet recently, I wondered what they'd been up to


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It can't be negotiated by this lacklustre government. And it's the only government we have.


Justignorethelast12hoursiwasrummedup


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 2, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Diamond will become a law professor and Orang utan a BNP councillor before your fantasy of london being occupied by enraged brexiters takes place


I can see both of those things happening before the country is out of this particular fine mess.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 2, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Justignorethelast12hoursiwasrummedup


in vino veritas


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> in vino veritas


So they say, I’m not sure though!


----------



## alex_ (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I'm not sure people inside their liberal bubble appreciate the extent to which many see a second ref as a challenge to democracy itself. People used to laugh when the Irish did this - keep voting until the political establishment got the right answer. In this thread it's gliby bandied about like a sensible, almost inevitable, course of action. Liberals in action. Esp. te BBC.
> 
> There won't be just anger if this were to be proposed, the non-metropolitan *country* will be outraged. If you put together the scale of the Iraqi war protest, the outrage of the poll tax and the determination of the miners strike - I have a strong sense that is what would come to London, and not to march but to occupy: a principled stand against the manipulation of democratic process. It's difficult to understand how people think you just override a national vote ... because politicians on both sides told fibs.
> 
> Even though metropolitan, educated liberals do truly sincerely know whats best for everyone, you really can't glibly fuck around with this stuff.



“There could be unstoppable demand for a re-run of the EU referendum if Remain wins by a narrow margin on 23 June, UKIP leader Nigel Farage has said.”

Farage raises second referendum prospect

Hypocrites, much ?

Alex


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

LOL. A Nigel Farage quote. We need more of those.


----------



## gosub (Dec 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> All the future options the UK now faces are chite options, including remain.
> It is probably true that another national vote is the best of the worst, but it is still a crap option which will further divide.



Disagree.  Best of the worst is the backbenches of UK Parliament assert themselves.  Another National vote raises questions about the point of our political classes or "elite" as they have been styling themselves in recent years


----------



## philosophical (Dec 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> Disagree.  Best of the worst is the backbenches of UK Parliament assert themselves.  Another National vote raises questions about the point of our political classes or "elite" as they have been styling themselves in recent years



I take your point.
If one driver for brexit voters was about national sovereignty, then you would think they might be cool with the 'sovereign' Parliament getting a grip on the situation, including much more assertive backbenchers.
However if the outcome was remain division will still be around writ large with loads banging on about 'democracy' and a 'democratic deficit' and probably nutty accusations about traitors and betrayal mixed in.
However Parliament getting a grip would indeed be the least worst, so I agree with you. I wrote that another vote would be the best of the worst because the signs are that the manky Politicians the UK currently have couldn't get a grip on this situation even with the help of superglue.


----------



## gosub (Dec 2, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I take your point.
> If one driver for brexit voters was about national sovereignty, then you would think they might be cool with the 'sovereign' Parliament getting a grip on the situation, including much more assertive backbenchers.
> However if the outcome was remain division will still be around writ large with loads banging on about 'democracy' and a 'democratic deficit' and probably nutty accusations about traitors and betrayal mixed in.
> However Parliament getting a grip would indeed be the least worst, so I agree with you. I wrote that another vote would be the best of the worst because the signs are that the manky Politicians the UK currently have couldn't get a grip on this situation even with the help of superglue.



I'd be more than cool with it if it didn't cause its own headaches....Tory side not hard to go do your own thing - there is an utter disconnect between the membership and party policy, and from the scrutiny you could say even from collective cabinet responsibility, May's deal has top down-ism all over it.  Problem is more Labour.  I don't think Corbyn ever had eyes on Number 10 (and if he got it would be rather similar to Blair/Brown with John McDonnell coveting his next door neighbour's residence).  More I think what Corbyn wanted to do, and in a certain extent has achieved, is give more say in the running of his party to his party membership....Only the wider party already effectively committed to 2nd referendumy remaining....Which I don't think 1 there is enough time for, and 2 is rather cynical.   
 I end up hoping that the likes of Yvette Cooper et al who, while extremely competent MP's, don't really fit with what has changed within the party under Corbyn. I end up hoping its the likes of them who party Country ahead of party and bash something sensible together...but there's mess that way too.

But think it is definitely fair to say there is more talent on the back benches these days than the here today gone tomorrow front benches of all the political parties.


----------



## gosub (Dec 2, 2018)

Fintan O’Toole: Never Mind the Bollocks, Here’s Brexit


----------



## alex_ (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> LOL. A Nigel Farage quote. We need more of those.



You are the one who has allied yourself to him.

Alex


----------



## gosub (Dec 2, 2018)

alex_ said:


> You are the one who has allied yourself to him.
> 
> Alex


Excellent, where do we send YOUR indictment for war crimes?


Grow up


----------



## Wookey (Dec 2, 2018)

gosub said:


> Fintan O’Toole: Never Mind the Bollocks, Here’s Brexit



"Why do people cut themselves? Obviously, because they are unhappy, frustrated, angry. They feel that no one cares about them, no one listens to them. But it still seems hard to understand the attractions of inflicting pain on yourself. Three things seem to make cutting addictive. One is that it gives the pain you feel a name and a location. It becomes tangible and visible – it has an immediate focus that is somehow more tolerable than the larger, deeper distress. The second is that it provides the illusion of control. You choose to do it – you are taking an action and producing a result. It is a kind of power, even if the only one you can exercise that power over is yourself and even if the only thing you can do to yourself is damage. And the third is that it can seem in an unhappy mind like an act of love.

You can hurt yourself for someone or something. “So,” sings the great balladeer of English self-pity Morrissey, “scratch my name on your arm with a fountain pen. This means you really love me.” For some, marking Leave on the ballot paper in June 2016 was a way of scratching the name of England on their arms to prove their love."

That is amazing. Properly describes a lot of what I've been thinking of the emotional reasoning behind many people's Brexit vote.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 2, 2018)

Even by the standards of The Guardian this is a new low. Not only are leave voters racists, now they are also complicit and active players in the operation of the precarious neoliberal economy.

It’s hard to know where to begin with this crap:

Let’s be honest about what’s really driving Brexit: bigotry | Matthew d’Ancona


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

Holy smoke, The Guardian really knows its market. It's like the clickbait of Stock, Aitkin and Waterman.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 2, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Even by the standards of The Guardian this is a new low. Not only are leave voters racists, now they are also complicit and active players in the operation of the precarious neoliberal economy.
> 
> It’s hard to know where to begin with this crap:
> 
> Let’s be honest about what’s really driving Brexit: bigotry | Matthew d’Ancona




I've just read this *properly*. Worth the effort, despite how much we'll agree that it contains plenty of shit points.

More later etc., but not _everything_ in it is to be dismissed IMO.

(Plus it's only d'Ancona. He's always been a fucking Tory, but however Remainiac the Guardian is, he's not the only writer in that paper)


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

I'm confused; what is it today bigotry or Morrissey style self harm. Is it bigoted self-harm?

Is there a Nigel Farage quote than can guide us ..


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

So what’s the Cleverest Man in the Room, the factmonger, the man who has ex Brexit voters crying at his feet,  THE MAN OF THE HOUR James O’Brien saying the day? 

Oh


----------



## gosub (Dec 2, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Even by the standards of The Guardian this is a new low. Not only are leave voters racists, now they are also complicit and active players in the operation of the precarious neoliberal economy.
> 
> It’s hard to know where to begin with this crap:
> 
> Let’s be honest about what’s really driving Brexit: bigotry | Matthew d’Ancona


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Even by the standards of The Guardian this is a new low. Not only are leave voters racists, now they are also complicit and active players in the operation of the precarious neoliberal economy.
> 
> It’s hard to know where to begin with this crap:
> 
> Let’s be honest about what’s really driving Brexit: bigotry | Matthew d’Ancona


Don’t begin man it’s not worth it. Save yourself!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I've just read this *properly*. Worth the effort, despite how much we'll agree that it contains plenty of shit points.
> 
> More later etc., but not _everything_ in it is to be dismissed IMO.
> 
> (Plus it's only d'Ancona. He's always been a fucking Tory, but however Remainiac the Guardian is, he's not the only writer in that paper)


Why the fuck are you drum rolling us to fuck like we are supposed to wait on tenterhooks for you to unveil the secrets hidden in an article by Tory cunt D’Acona? If you have said then and there what points we should be taking note of fine, but don’t drum roll a Tory bastard have some shame William.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

Wookey said:


> "Why do people cut themselves? Obviously, because they are unhappy, frustrated, angry. They feel that no one cares about them, no one listens to them. But it still seems hard to understand the attractions of inflicting pain on yourself. Three things seem to make cutting addictive. One is that it gives the pain you feel a name and a location. It becomes tangible and visible – it has an immediate focus that is somehow more tolerable than the larger, deeper distress. The second is that it provides the illusion of control. You choose to do it – you are taking an action and producing a result. It is a kind of power, even if the only one you can exercise that power over is yourself and even if the only thing you can do to yourself is damage. And the third is that it can seem in an unhappy mind like an act of love.
> 
> You can hurt yourself for someone or something. “So,” sings the great balladeer of English self-pity Morrissey, “scratch my name on your arm with a fountain pen. This means you really love me.” For some, marking Leave on the ballot paper in June 2016 was a way of scratching the name of England on their arms to prove their love."
> 
> That is amazing. Properly describes a lot of what I've been thinking of the emotional reasoning behind many people's Brexit vote.


Oh my GOD this thread is eating itself. 
Comrades let’s depart on my hidden ship, save yourselves, for the bigger fight lies ahead of us.


----------



## Balbi (Dec 2, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Even by the standards of The Guardian this is a new low. Not only are leave voters racists, now they are also complicit and active players in the operation of the precarious neoliberal economy.
> 
> It’s hard to know where to begin with this crap:
> 
> Let’s be honest about what’s really driving Brexit: bigotry | Matthew d’Ancona





> Beneath all the talk of “control” and “global Britain”, there is the germ of an extremely unpleasant nativism. *Again, we pesky centrists are told to be quiet and to heed the concerns of those who have been “left behind”.* But since there is not a shred of respectable evidence that immigration has had more than a marginal impact upon public service capacity, wage levels or net welfare costs, I am forced to conclude that there is now a sufficiency of Britons who just don’t much like people of foreign extraction, and certainly don’t want many more of them around the place.



This bit is incredible, given that it was the centrist cunts in Labour and the Tories who banged on and on about 'legitimate concerns' on immigration and the forgotten people of the country in their shithouse way of trying to fight UKIP by becoming aligned to UKIP ideas and language.

Sensible centrists are never to blame for the *checks notes* results of their own actions over the last decade or so.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

alex_ said:


> You are the one who has allied yourself to him.
> 
> Alex


And Alex you are just boring. Even philosopher seems to be amending his craic slightly so he doesn’t sound like a weird Irish Border Dalek or something.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

There's like this media Brexit industry now which 2nd rate *writers' earn a decent whack with specific, play-to-the-gallery posturing. Owen Jones is clearly the poo-faced king pin but there are dozens of them at it. Money for old rope, tbf.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> There's like this media Brexit industry now which 2nd rate *writers' earn a decent whack with specific, play-to-the-gallery posturing. Owen Jones is clearly the poo-faced king pin but there are dozens of them at it. Money for old rope, tbf.


Poo- faced  Tell me that’s not a typo!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 2, 2018)

Phonetically it's poe. But poo works better.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 2, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Phonetically it's poe. But poo works better.


Ah! But then a well timed typo is also good, as if gifted to us by the gods of vocabulary.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> There's like this media Brexit industry now which 2nd rate *writers' earn a decent whack with specific, play-to-the-gallery posturing. Owen Jones is clearly the poo-faced king pin but there are dozens of them at it. Money for old rope, tbf.


Fintan O'Toole may be many things, but second-rate writer is not one of them. Here he is back in February laying out exactly the problem that has led to exactly this deal from May, and that _had to_ lead to this deal.

Sometimes an outside voice is needed, and I think this is one of those instances. When he says this



> the driving force in Brexit is a specifically English nationalism for which the rest of the UK is ultimately dispensible.



I think he is very right.

He pours scorn on the leading brexiters, Johnson, Davis and Gove, for the intellectual bankruptcy of their positions. And he does so with suitable anger.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 3, 2018)

Have you seen Andalucia tonight, seen central Paris on fire today, 5 star in Italy, Orban, Merkel being forced to set a date for stepping down, etc - and the centre left still thinks it all about bigoted little Ingerlanders little Gillian Duffy, like it's still 2010. There is now shelf load of academic analysis. Recognise a snake oil salesman FFS.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Have you seen Andalucia tonight, seen central Paris on fire today, 5 star in Italy, Orban, Merkel being forced to set a date for stepping down, etc - and the centre left still thinks it all about bigoted little Ingerlanders little Gillian Duffy, like it's still 2010. There is now shelf load of academic analysis. Recognise a snake oil salesman FFS.


Recognise the snake oil salesman, yes. And recognise when people get stuff right, such as those like Fintan O'Toole who have been speaking of the Northern Ireland problem since before the referendum. And yes, the likes of Johnson, Gove and Davis are bigoted Little Englanders, whose currency is lies. That needs saying as often as possible.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 3, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Recognise the snake oil salesman, yes. And recognise when people get stuff right, such as those like Fintan O'Toole who have been speaking of the Northern Ireland problem since before the referendum. And yes, the likes of Johnson, Gove and Davis are bigoted Little Englanders, whose currency is lies. That needs saying as often as possible.


Comparing voting to leave the EU to self mutilation is just fucking obscene. So everytime a company closes a factory in the U.K. or the govt cuts funds to vital services or whatever in the next few years you and  Fintan O’Toole are gonna be saying “self mutilation.” That’s like saying a woman that gets beaten up cause she tried to leave her husband brought it on herself, since you guys are so fond of the divorce comparison. 
Self mutilation, Fintan is a cunt!


----------



## teuchter (Dec 3, 2018)

Who exactly is 'fond of the divorce comparison'?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Who exactly is 'fond of the divorce comparison'?


It’s been used several times on here, I’m not making a list or anything chill.


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 3, 2018)

I can't wait til Brexit is done so we can finally get rid of these silly analogies that commentators make in article comments and on forums etc.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 3, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s been used several times on here, I’m not making a list or anything chill.


You were replying to LBJ who I have not noticed reducing things to simplistic 'divorce comparisons'.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You were replying to LBJ who I have not noticed reducing things to simplistic 'divorce comparisons'.


I know I was, and I’m not entirely arsed about the details, LBJ can get fucked if he thinks poor people enduring more poverty are guilty of self mutilation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You were replying to LBJ who I have not noticed reducing things to simplistic 'divorce comparisons'.


Yeh but you're not the world's most observant person


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

Fez909 said:


> I can't wait til Brexit is done so we can finally get rid of these silly analogies that commentators make in article comments and on forums etc.


Wait till you see what they come out with next


----------



## prunus (Dec 3, 2018)

Fez909 said:


> I can't wait til Brexit is done so we can finally get rid of these silly analogies that commentators make in article comments and on forums etc.



Brexit is not going to be ‘done’ for a decade or more; whatever the outcome from this point, the arguments (and analogies) aren’t going to stop.  My own personal pithy metaphor: we’re fucked.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 3, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I know I was, and I’m not entirely arsed about the details, LBJ can get fucked if he thinks poor people enduring more poverty are guilty of self mutilation.


Generally, when self harm is discussed, the point is not to ascribe 'guilt' to those engaging in it.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 3, 2018)

The analogies aren't going to stop, but at this point it makes more sense to liken other things to Brexit than the other way around, as in "If you don't anchor those posts you're going to make a real Brexit of that fence."


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 3, 2018)

At dinner time, 8/10 dogs chose new, tastier _Brexit_.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 3, 2018)

This is the first polling I've seen that actually simulates a STV 2nd ref, with Remain, Maydeal, Nodeal as the options:

Deal or No Deal or Remain | Deltapoll







Remain would win 1st prefs, but not with a majority. Maydeal would win 56:44 after the 2nd round.

The numbers contain a large number of Don't Know (22%) and Won't Vote (18%) responses, so really it'd be anyone's guess.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 3, 2018)

Crispy said:


> This is the first polling I've seen that actually simulates a STV 2nd ref, with Remain, Maydeal, Nodeal as the options:
> 
> Deal or No Deal or Remain | Deltapoll
> 
> ...



Christ that's extremely unhelpful isn't it? Surprised to see remain - no deal - May deal polling so highly, as that's perhaps the daftest of all the options.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 3, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The analogies aren't going to stop, but at this point it makes more sense to liken other things to Brexit than the other way around, as in "If you don't anchor those posts you're going to make a real Brexit of that fence."



But anchoring the posts is my favourite bit.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 3, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Christ that's extremely unhelpful isn't it? Surprised to see remain - no deal - May deal polling so highly, as that's perhaps the daftest of all the options.


Perhaps the hope is that parliament will chicken out of actually doing a runner and they'll be forced to opt for remain ...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 3, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Christ that's extremely unhelpful isn't it? Surprised to see remain - no deal - May deal polling so highly, as that's perhaps the daftest of all the options.


Yeah, but this is how the poll was carried out:


----------



## kabbes (Dec 3, 2018)

No deal is way more popular as a first choice than I would have guessed.  I’d have thought about 20% not 30%


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 3, 2018)

They need to add a "Kim Deal" option.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 3, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Christ that's extremely unhelpful isn't it? Surprised to see remain - no deal - May deal polling so highly, as that's perhaps the daftest of all the options.


It’s the theory that we’re best off either in or out and that a compromise is the worst of both worlds


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 3, 2018)

Crispy said:


> This is the first polling I've seen that actually simulates a STV 2nd ref, with Remain, Maydeal, Nodeal as the options:
> 
> Deal or No Deal or Remain | Deltapoll
> 
> ...


That's very interesting - most Remainiacs are utterly convinced that a second ref would deliver a result for remain. Mind you, they are afflicted with widespread delusion. I saw a toe-curling thread on twitter last might where David Milliband made some remark about Brexit being damaging, and there were remainers responding literally begging him to come back into politics in order to solve all their problems. If you think David Milliband is the answer you are asking some very wrong questions.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 3, 2018)

A link to that thread, if you can bear it


----------



## Beermoth (Dec 3, 2018)




----------



## kabbes (Dec 3, 2018)

No matter your views, it would be pretty funny to have a second referendum that just gives the same answer as the first.


----------



## alsoknownas (Dec 3, 2018)

Hold-on, how does it work though?  Would you be compelled to have a transferable option, or could you just, say, back remain?  Not sure I'd want to endorse other options by proxy.
If 1 preference only is acceptable, then does the poll reflect that option? *confused*


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 3, 2018)

Re d'Ancona's article, link on previous page, and my rubbish  late post in response to Smokeandsteam 's :



HoratioCuthbert said:


> Why the fuck are you drum rolling us to fuck like we are supposed to wait on tenterhooks for you to unveil the secrets hidden in an article by Tory cunt D’Acona? If you have said then and there what points we should be taking note of fine, but don’t drum roll a Tory bastard have some shame William.



He's a Tory who's hardly worth defending, very true, so if I make the effort to point out one or two valid points that he did actually make, that won't get a great reaction here. I'd rather not attempt it, because most of his article was shite (I've just re-read it now, and ahem!  )

I'm not even sure now why I posted that previous post** last night 

**I won't delete it, but I'm just going to leave it.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 3, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No matter your views, it would be pretty funny to have a second referendum that just gives the same answer as the first.


I think this is one of the reasons nobody will actually call a second ref. If you are the person who put the question to the country a second time, and the answer came back the same, your career would be over. Absolutely everybody would be fucked off with you.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 3, 2018)

alsoknownas said:


> Hold-on, how does it work though?  Would you be compelled to have a transferable option, or could you just, say, back remain?  Not sure I'd want to endorse other options by proxy.
> If 1 preference only is acceptable, then does the poll reflect that option? *confused*


It wouldn't make any difference.  Your second vote only takes effect once your first vote has been knocked out.  If you voted remain first, the only way your second vote would count is once remain has already been taken off the table.


----------



## chilango (Dec 3, 2018)

An idle thought creeps into my brain.

For those who saw in Brexit a chance to "fuck shit up" - both in a cynical Leftish view and in in the more visceral "up yours" response the referendum provoked in many places, would a second referendum be an opportunity to add to this? Especially if (and it's a big if) a secise referendum were to deepen discontent and bring it to the streets?

Is this a possible reason to goad on a "people's vote" campaign?

Or am I really, really reaching here to find something in this otherwise utterly dispiriting spectacle to cling on to?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

chilango said:


> An idle thought creeps into my brain.
> 
> For those who saw in Brexit a chance to "fuck shit up" - both in a cynical Leftish view and in in the more visceral "up yours" response the referendum provoked in many places, would a second referendum be an opportunity to add to this? Especially if (and it's a big if) a secise referendum were to deepen discontent and bring it to the streets?
> 
> ...


if the ruling class have learnt anything from the previous cock-up, they will have learnt to insert a clause in the legislation for any second referendum saying remain will win unless there's something like a 60-40 vote against.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 3, 2018)

The poll posted up by Crispy should be sent to Labour supporters and MP's pushing for a 'Peoples vote''.   

As with the first referendum the political bubble and the middle class archipelago around it have wrongly convinced themselves that they speak for the majority.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 3, 2018)

I'm sceptical that there'll be a second referendum at all. I'm even more sceptical that if there was, there'd be a three-option  set of preferences with no deal included.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 3, 2018)

Trouble is the huge uncertainty in that poll.







That 22% Don't Know is easily enough to swing it in any direction.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 3, 2018)

chilango said:


> An idle thought creeps into my brain.
> 
> For those who saw in Brexit a chance to "fuck shit up" - both in a cynical Leftish view and in in the more visceral "up yours" response the referendum provoked in many places, would a second referendum be an opportunity to add to this? Especially if (and it's a big if) a secise referendum were to deepen discontent and bring it to the streets?
> 
> ...



I've been thinking precisely this.

A second referendum  - with hopefully plenty of Northern/Midlands style 'Gilet Jaunes' direct action on the bourgeois and its symbols and inevitably to be condemned by middle class left types - is definitely my preferred option


----------



## Raheem (Dec 3, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm sceptical that there'll be a second referendum at all. I'm even more sceptical that if there was, there'd be a three-option  set of preferences with no deal included.


Labour seem poised to oppose having no deal on the ballot. I guess the polling maybe gives a clue as to why. Surely the maths is that nothing will get on the ballot that Labour MPs are whipped against.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm sceptical that there'll be a second referendum at all. I'm even more sceptical that if there was, there'd be a three-option  set of preferences with no deal included.


yeh i think it's much more likely that there'll be a parliamentary withdrawal of article 50, some sort of fudge and a general acknowledgement that this matter should never be mentioned in 'polite' society again


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 3, 2018)

I wish Cameroon would do the decent thing and spell out how cynical and stupid the whole exercise was.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 3, 2018)

An American comedian used to tell a joke around the time of the first gulf war when a coalition was being put together to throw out Saddam. There was nothing anyone could do to persuade, even just in tokenistic name - to get Germany engaged. His joke was the proposed death, destruction and madness across the region wasn't on a scale significant enough to interest your average German.

I feel a little like that about No Deal. In it's way, it's impressive - the self-confidence in the nation. It's probably madness as well, but you have to note the balls of it.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 3, 2018)

Which nation?


----------



## andysays (Dec 3, 2018)

This is unlikely to help May get her deal through...

Brexit backstop plan is calculated risk - Geoffrey Cox


> The UK would be "indefinitely committed" to EU customs rules if Brexit trade talks broke down, the chief law officer has said. But Geoffrey Cox said it would not be in either side's political interests to allow that to happen. The attorney general said it was a "calculated risk" and "I do not believe we will be trapped in it permanently".


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 3, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I wish Cameroon would do the decent thing and spell out how cynical and stupid the whole exercise was.



I wish Cameron would do the decent thing and bang his head against something pointy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> An American comedian used to tell a joke around the time of the first gulf war when a coalition was being put together to throw out Saddam. There was nothing anyone could do to persuade, even just in tokenistic name - to get Germany engaged. His joke was the proposed death, destruction and madness across the region wasn't on a scale significant enough to interest your average German.
> 
> I feel a little like that about No Deal. In it's way, it's impressive - the self-confidence in the nation. It's probably madness as well, but you have to note the balls of it.


First the Irish, now the Germans, who's next?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 3, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I wish Cameron would do the decent thing and bang his head against something pointy.


I wish Cameron would do the decent thing and jump off beachy head


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> First the Irish, now the Germans, who's next?



Greenmantle has been activated.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 3, 2018)

I have been watching AG Geoffrey Cox in the House of Commons today and I am not wont to use ripe language on here, but he is plainly and utterly a c*nt of the first order, creamed off from the upper levels of Tory establishment c*nts. He is also a lawyer c*nt to boot.
Phew.
Forgive my posting please, but I had to say something somewhere.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 3, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> A second referendum  - with hopefully plenty of Northern/Midlands style 'Gilet Jaunes' direct action


So the EDL then?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 3, 2018)

Today really does feel like a day for another outing for the Yeats line "The centre cannot hold"


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 3, 2018)

mauvais said:


> So the EDL then?



That’s how the middle class left would characterise ordinary people protesting, yes.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 3, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> That’s how the middle class left would characterise ordinary people protesting, yes.


That's the equivalent of the gilet jaunes, is it not?* It's also who, in the north, we actually see protesting.

*yes I know the reality is slightly more complex


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 3, 2018)

mauvais said:


> That's the equivalent of the gilet jaunes, is it not?



No, it isn’t.

“people are in dire straits kill the bourgeoisie” 

The fact that some are itching to define Gilet Jaunes as right wing etc says more about their own  poltical degeneration to be frank


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 3, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have been watching AG Geoffrey Cox in the House of Commons today and I am not wont to use ripe language on here, but he is plainly and utterly a c*nt of the first order, creamed off from the upper levels of Tory establishment c*nts. He is also a lawyer c*nt to boot.
> Phew.
> Forgive my posting please, but I had to say something somewhere.


He's not an easy man to like.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 3, 2018)

Looks like the gilets jaunes thing has indeed crossed the channel.


----------



## agricola (Dec 3, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have been watching AG Geoffrey Cox in the House of Commons today and I am not wont to use ripe language on here, but he is plainly and utterly a c*nt of the first order, creamed off from the upper levels of Tory establishment c*nts. He is also a lawyer c*nt to boot.
> Phew.
> Forgive my posting please, but I had to say something somewhere.



Perhaps, but it is somewhat ironic that he is now in this mess because (presumably) he has given honest and competent legal advice as to the current Brexit plan of the PM which is (again presumably) so fatal to its already slim chances of success that they are willing to risk him being sanctioned solely in the hope that the amount of time it will take to deal with him will prevent the advice coming out before this meaningful vote.  Greater love hath no man than this etc etc.


----------



## gosub (Dec 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I wish Cameron would do the decent thing and jump off beachy head



Poor David, looking at his tweets seems to be mostly rememberinng dead people....what ever happened to this


 happy go lucky man


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 3, 2018)

The realisation that he and Boris's Etonian japes have now truly fucked the country.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 3, 2018)




----------



## splash (Dec 3, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have been watching AG Geoffrey Cox in the House of Commons today and I am not wont to use ripe language on here, but he is plainly and utterly a c*nt of the first order, creamed off from the upper levels of Tory establishment c*nts. He is also a lawyer c*nt to boot.
> Phew.
> Forgive my posting please, but I had to say something somewhere.




He gave  a theatrical performance


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I'm not sure people inside their liberal bubble appreciate the extent to which many see a second ref as a challenge to democracy itself. People used to laugh when the Irish did this - keep voting until the political establishment got the right answer. In this thread it's gliby bandied about like a sensible, almost inevitable, course of action. Liberals in action. Esp. te BBC.
> 
> There won't be just anger if this were to be proposed, the non-metropolitan *country* will be outraged. If you put together the scale of the Iraqi war protest, the outrage of the poll tax and the determination of the miners strike - I have a strong sense that is what would come to London, and not to march but to occupy: a principled stand against the manipulation of democratic process. It's difficult to understand how people think you just override a national vote ... because politicians on both sides told fibs.
> 
> Even though metropolitan, educated liberals do truly sincerely know whats best for everyone, you really can't glibly fuck around with this stuff.


I find these 'liberal bubble' posts quite amusing. As if this peoples vote stuff is all about butthurt liberal elites in their ivory towers getting cross about how unfair it is that democracy has happened.

What about:

A vote that excluded millions of those with a stake in its outcome: under 18s, continental ex pats, UK-based EU citizens with deep roots in their local community.
A vote that narrowly favoured leave but said nothing at all about what form this should take, being hijacked by the right wing of the Tory party and interpreted as a mandate for a hard Brexit that looks set to accelerate the offshoring of jobs and to lower household incomes (hitting those who voted most for it hardest).
A vote that happened in the context of millions of dodgy donations, probably originally from Russia, to fund the piping of pure racist shite and outright lies direct to people's personal Facebook feeds: www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-44966969 - completely outside of the usual scrutiny and accountability which typically happens in an election.
Deadlock in Parliament - no majority for any version of Brexit (but no end of shit pundits giving their take on what the vote 'really' meant)
All those EU migrants with families and friends here left unsure about their status - insulted as 'queue jumpers' by the PM and sent letters making them fear for their future - and let's not forget the well publicised effect that this signalling has had on personal abuse towards people who talk foreign, look foreign, have a foreign name etc
Numerous attempts by the government to lie and dissemble about the impacts of Brexit and frustrate any attempts by Parliament to scrutinise the process, using the excuse of negotiations (What has been achieved in 2 years? What do we know that was not clear then?)
Do you genuinely think that anger about the above is a liberal elite thing? Is your answer to the dysfunction in Parliament really to effectively screech 'will of the people', like May?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 3, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I wish Cameron would do the decent thing and jump off beachy head





marine pollution...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 3, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> I find these 'liberal bubble' posts quite amusing. As if this peoples vote stuff is all about butthurt liberal elites in their ivory towers getting cross about how unfair it is that democracy has happened.
> 
> What about:
> 
> ...



Well that certainly convinced me you're not a liberal elite in an ivory tower...


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 3, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well that certainly convinced me you're not a liberal elite in an ivory tower...


Yawn


----------



## Wookey (Dec 3, 2018)

COX OUT!!!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 3, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> I find these 'liberal bubble' posts quite amusing. As if this peoples vote stuff is all about butthurt liberal elites in their ivory towers getting cross about how unfair it is that democracy has happened.


I''ll be frank, I find it difficult to engage with people who won't stand by the democratic vote they exercised and the poll they participated in.

I know I sound like my grandfather but I never thought my generation would have to express the same principles,but here I go: As grandad would say, people died for this: Do you honestly not understand to not fuck with fully consensual national votes.

I'll engage to this extent; it now seems painfully clear the only way terribly nice middle class/professional people can justify their objection to a democratic process is to construct - out of whatever contrivances that float their way - moral high ground. They have to live with themselves - they have to feel morally valid, and that's exactly what your scatter gun list repeats here. AFTER THE FACT you have validated 'peoplesvote' from matters that were always present. It is politically and democratically delusional. Please, respect the result of the vote you participated in.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Please, respect the result of the vote you participated in.



I did respect the result of the (advisory, flawed) referendum on the day after the vote, several years ago. I thought the people had thrown a big spanner in the spokes of the country, and did so for very good reasons that were not that much to do with the EU after all it seemed. but I accepted the result.

Since then, time has passed and evidence has emerged that undermines my trust in the process, not just on my own behalf as a voter who wants to win or lose fairly, but for everyone in this country who deserved informed consent, factual information, a straight vote that wasn't nobbled, clarity of purpose and end goal, much of which wasn't apparent at all the day after the vote, but has become very obvious since.


----------



## MikeMcc (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> An American comedian used to tell a joke around the time of the first gulf war when a coalition was being put together to throw out Saddam. There was nothing anyone could do to persuade, even just in tokenistic name - to get Germany engaged. His joke was the proposed death, destruction and madness across the region wasn't on a scale significant enough to interest your average German.
> 
> I feel a little like that about No Deal. In it's way, it's impressive - the self-confidence in the nation. It's probably madness as well, but you have to note the balls of it.


Not my impression having to back up vehicles to reinforce the gates in the barracks that was in to keep out the protestors.  The general populace was very against the first Gulf War, though German troops worked hard in Afghanistan and were appreciated for their efforts.  Different times and viewpoints.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 3, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I did respect the result of the (advisory, flawed) referendum on the day after the vote, several years ago. I thought the people had thrown a big spanner in the spokes of the country, and did so for very good reasons that were not that much to do with the EU after all it seemed. but I accepted the result.
> 
> Since then, time has passed and evidence has emerged that undermines my trust in the process, not just on my own behalf as a voter who wants to win or lose fairly, but for everyone in this country who deserved informed consent, factual information, a straight vote that wasn't nobbled, clarity of purpose and end goal, much of which wasn't apparent at all the day after the vote, but has become very obvious since.


And I absolutely accept you totally believe this - nothing will divert you from your core values of integrity and moral decency. It is, though, delusional. And from the pov of democracy, it makes you very, very dangerous.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I''ll be frank, I find it difficult to engage with people who won't stand by the democratic vote they exercised and the poll they participated in.
> 
> I know I sound like my grandfather but I never thought my generation would have to express the same principles,but here I go: As grandad would say, people died for this: Do you honestly not understand to not fuck with fully consensual national votes.
> 
> I'll engage to this extent; it now seems painfully clear the only way terribly nice middle class/professional people can justify their objection to a democratic process is to construct - out of whatever contrivances that float their way - moral high ground. They have to live with themselves - they have to feel morally valid, and that's exactly what your scatter gun list repeats here. AFTER THE FACT you have validated 'peoplesvote' from matters that were always present. It is politically and democratically delusional. Please, respect the result of the vote you participated in.


It's good to see that such respect for democratic principles is alive and well. I guess we can look forward to everyone respecting the outcome of the second referendum whatever it may be.

Have to say, though, I don't really get it. I can understand the view that politicians need to respect the referendum result. Cos it's the rules of the game, if you like that sort of thing. But what I respect and don't respect has always been up to me, and no-one ever asked me to sign something that said otherwise. There are plenty of reasons not to respect it, some better than others, but at the end of the day it was no more democratic or worthy of respect than the rest of the junk democracy we live under.

I'm not sure that's either here or there now, though. We're past the point where it is possible to get a result than more than a tiny minority of the population will think respects the result of the referendum. The only choices left are about which is the best way of not respecting the result of the referendum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I''ll be frank, I find it difficult to engage with people who won't stand by the democratic vote they exercised and the poll they participated in.
> 
> I know I sound like my grandfather but I never thought my generation would have to express the same principles,but here I go: As grandad would say, people died for this: Do you honestly not understand to not fuck with fully consensual national votes.
> 
> I'll engage to this extent; it now seems painfully clear the only way terribly nice middle class/professional people can justify their objection to a democratic process is to construct - out of whatever contrivances that float their way - moral high ground. They have to live with themselves - they have to feel morally valid, and that's exactly what your scatter gun list repeats here. AFTER THE FACT you have validated 'peoplesvote' from matters that were always present. It is politically and democratically delusional. Please, respect the result of the vote you participated in.


Plenty of people were saying all of these things before the vote. Plenty of it on here, too, if you care to look back. So it's not just after the fact.

As for the idea that the democratic system of the UK is 'fully consensual', well not even close. And repeated attempts have been made since the vote to railroad a deal through in ways that were anything but democratic. The Commons had to fight to even get a vote on the deal, remember. Those attempts appear to be falling on their arses for various reasons. Good. One of the few good things to be happening at the moment is the reassertion of the Commons as the ultimate place of democratic accountability in the UK system. For long periods, it has been rendered impotent by governments with large majorities, from Thatcher through to Blair, which have exercised virtually unchecked power with disastrous results, one of the big weaknesses of the system, one of the big reasons why 'fully consensual' really doesn't apply. To fixate on this one single vote at the expense of all other processes presents, imo, a far greater danger to democratic accountability.

It's bullshit btw that it is just 'nice middle class/professional people' who are really angry about the shit brought about by brexit. Total bullshit. This stuff cuts right across class. If you don't see that, it's you that is living in a bubble.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 3, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> And I absolutely accept you totally believe this - nothing will divert you from your core values of integrity and moral decency. It is, though, delusional. And from the pov of democracy, it makes you very, very dangerous.



I do object to the undermining of my country's democracy by foreign powers, rich and unelected power-brokers, deliberate misinformation and a media complicit in the delusion that Brexit was ever our idea, and will deliver what we feel we need most.

I'm not sure why that makes me dangerous. Dangerous would be to accept what has gone on unquestioningly, focused only on the result rather than the anti-democratic tampering that we now know could at least in part have lead to the result.

We can't have a peaceful Ireland and also leave the EU, they're incompatible aims. We know this now clearly, all 500 pages of evidence in the exit agreement testify to that. Rather than shooting ourselves in the face with a deal that suits nobody, it's quite reasonable to demand clarification from the people. Who we respect, don't we?


----------



## toblerone3 (Dec 4, 2018)

Raheem said:


> It's good to see that such respect for democratic principles is alive and well. I guess we can look forward to everyone respecting the outcome of the second referendum whatever it may be.
> 
> Have to say, though, I don't really get it. I can understand the view that politicians need to respect the referendum result. Cos it's the rules of the game, if you like that sort of thing. But what I respect and don't respect has always been up to me, and no-one ever asked me to sign something that said otherwise. There are plenty of reasons not to respect it, some better than others, but at the end of the day it was no more democratic or worthy of respect than the rest of the junk democracy we live under.
> 
> I'm not sure that's either here or there now, though. We're past the point where it is possible to get a result than more than a tiny minority of the population will think respects the result of the referendum. The only choices left are about which is the best way of not respecting the result of the referendum.



Many of us didn't like the results of the 2015 and 2017 elections, but no-one is arguing about the results of those elections.  They are still arguing about the 2016 referendum and for good reason.  This is not going to go away.  And its not just about a liberal elite. Fuck that shit.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Democracy


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Democracy


Is coming, to the uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> And I absolutely accept you totally believe this - nothing will divert you from your core values of integrity and moral decency. It is, though, delusional. And from the pov of democracy, it makes you very, very dangerous.


Yeh from the pov of the corporate interests without an actual corporate vote but massive influence


----------



## Smangus (Dec 4, 2018)

luv a bit of moral decency me.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 4, 2018)

BREAKING NEWS -

European Court of Justice Advocate General's opinion - UK can unilaterally revoke article 50.

One stage short of a full judgement at present, but 80% of judgements follow the Advocate General's opinion.

ETA:


> The European Court of Justice's Advocate General said on Tuesday Britain has the right to withdraw its Brexit notice from the European Union unilaterally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Britain can end Brexit unilaterally says top EU court adviser | Devdiscourse News


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> We can't have a peaceful Ireland and also leave the EU, they're incompatible aims. We know this now clearly, all 500 pages of evidence in the exit agreement testify to that.


What did I miss?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS -
> 
> European Court of Justice Advocate General's opinion - UK can unilaterally revoke article 50.
> 
> ...


That EURefII ballot paper gets longer


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That EURefII ballot paper gets longer


Now the size of a typical 1990 yellow pages


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS -
> 
> European Court of Justice Advocate General's opinion - UK can unilaterally revoke article 50.
> 
> ...


As I anticipated


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

If the ruling is upheld then that's it - crashing out with no deal is never going to be allowed to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> If the ruling is upheld then that's it - no deal is never going to happen.


au contraire: meet the new deal, same as the auld deal


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Please, respect the result of the vote you participated in.



I can respect the people who voted without respecting the obviously farcical referendum itself.

I also respect the people who didn't get a vote, and who are therefore excluded from every subsequent tirade about the 'will of the people'. A majority of the people on my street won't have had a vote. So no, I don't respect that situation because it's fucking disrespectful.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> If the ruling is upheld then that's it - crashing out with no deal is never going to be allowed to happen.



It's not a ruling yet, but a hugely persuasive opinion followed 75% of the time.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can respect the people who voted without respecting the obviously farcical referendum itself.



...although I am finding my patience wearing very thin as some Leave voters decry the process and demand No Deal exit, despite all evidence showing this to be a colossal hari kari on a national scale.

Many have changed their minds, which must be hard to do and painful. I respect that evolution hugely. But I'm starting to see Intransigent Leave voters as sabateurs to be honest, their denial is now wilful and quite unforgiveable omo.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Democracy



Super glue.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 4, 2018)

what is a sabateur in this context? campaigning for the defeat of your own bourgeois? if so im all for that.

but remain will win even if remainers lose.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> ...although I am finding my patience wearing very thin as some Leave voters decry the process and demand No Deal exit, despite all evidence showing this to be a colossal hari kari on a national scale.
> 
> Many have changed their minds, which must be hard to do and painful. I respect that evolution hugely. But I'm starting to see Intransigent Leave voters as sabateurs to be honest, their denial is now wilful and quite unforgiveable omo.


Crush them Wookey


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 4, 2018)

I thought one of the main factors in the Leave vote was high turnout among people who don't usually vote - hard to imagine a better way to get them to turn out and vote Leave again than holding a second referendum that would be portrayed as "snooty London elites" trying to overturn the votes of people they see as toothless morons too unsophisticated to vote properly.


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> ...although I am finding my patience wearing very thin as some Leave voters decry the process and demand No Deal exit, despite all evidence showing this to be a colossal hari kari on a national scale.
> 
> Many have changed their minds, which must be hard to do and painful. I respect that evolution hugely. But I'm starting to see Intransigent Leave voters as sabateurs to be honest, their denial is now wilful and quite unforgiveable omo.


Your posts this morning are gibberish, frankly


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> Your posts this morning are gibberish, frankly



His patience is wearing thin.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 4, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Crush them Wookey


enemies of the people


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 4, 2018)

I’m sensing a lot of disrespect going on  here.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> But I'm starting to see Intransigent Leave voters as sabateurs to be honest, their denial is now wilful and quite unforgiveable omo.



I'm not. The deal on the table is a piece of shit, and would commit us to an indefinite period of EU control. As a nation we should be able to leave and it appears that, in reality, we can't. Anyone who is angry about that has a right to be. I can well understand the people who would want, on the principle that you should never allow your behaviour to be controlled by threats, to tell the EU to fuck off and leave without a deal.

May has sabotaged this whole thing. May and her entire useless party. Barry from down the pub is not the real culprit here.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 4, 2018)

The result of the referendum on the GFA is in conflict with the result of the brexit referendum.
The brexit referendum result is in conflict with the UK promises to Scotland at the time of their independence vote it seems to me.
There have been a number of referenda in the past, is there supposed to be a hierarchy of them?


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2018)

Anyway, interesting timing with this ECJ announcement what with the five days of parliamentary debate just about to kick off. A cynic might wonder if it was deliberate...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> Anyway, interesting timing with this ECJ announcement what with the five days of parliamentary debate just about to kick off. A cynic might wonder if it was deliberate...



dunno - they original petition was challenged by the uk gov in the high court, that challenge was over ruled a week or so back so it then went to ECJ. Cant see how the timing could be that precisely coordinated. And there are obvious and legitimate reasons to get the issue resolved ASAP.
still -


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 4, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I feel a little like that about No Deal. In it's way, it's impressive - the self-confidence in the nation. It's probably madness as well, but you have to note the balls of it.



Balls, or hubris. It's like the confidence of the drunk, 'hold our beer while we leave the EU .. nah fuckit, it'll be fine'


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> dunno - they original petition was challenged by the uk gov in the high court, that challenge was over ruled a week or so back so it then went to ECJ. Cant see how the timing could be that precisely coordinated. And there are obvious and legitimate reasons to get the issue resolved ASAP.
> still -


photoshopped cats are a particular bugbear for pigeons


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> their denial is now wilful and quite unforgiveable omo.


What do we do with unforgivable people?


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What do we do with unforgivable people?


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 4, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


>



Steal their babies and destroy them with laser beams fired from our hearts? Seems a little harsh...


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 4, 2018)

krtek a houby said:


>


Indeed. And that’s the terms of the debate, especially from hardline Remainers, isn’t it? That it’s a moral issue. It’s about right and wrong. Good and Evil.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. And that’s the terms of the debate, especially from hardline Remainers, isn’t it? That it’s a moral issue. It’s about right and wrong. Good and Evil.



And Jesus. Holding the baby Jesus.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Steal their babies and destroy them with laser beams fired from our hearts? Seems a little harsh...



Catholics. Nuff said.


----------



## Santino (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What do we do with unforgivable people?


I believe it was Derrida who pointed out that we don't think it necessary to forgive people who have done forgivable things, and that the only things we must forgive are the unforgivable.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What do we do with unforgivable people?


there's the sacn for people like that


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Catholics. Nuff said.



If they can explain a Holy Trinity where all three things are really the same thing but are all different from each other, maybe they're the ones to ask about the Irish border question.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If they can explain a Holy Trinity where all three things are really the same thing but are all different from each other, maybe they're the ones to ask about the Irish border question.


tbh the protestants believe in the trinity too so a binary should present neither lot with problems


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. And that’s the terms of the debate, especially from hardline Remainers, isn’t it? That it’s a moral issue. It’s about right and wrong. Good and Evil.


liverpool and everton


----------



## two sheds (Dec 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If they can explain a Holy Trinity where all three things are really the same thing but are all different from each other, maybe they're the ones to ask about the Irish border question.



Oooo me me I know this one. It's ice, steam and water isn't it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Oooo me me I know this one. It's ice, steam and water isn't it.


earth wind and fire
emerson lake and palmer
cream
jimi hendrix experience


----------



## Lucy Fur (Dec 4, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Oooo me me I know this one. It's ice, steam and water isn't it.


grape, wine and piss


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Lucy Fur said:


> grape, wine and piss


beer wine and brandy


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

Blood sweat and tears.
wine women and song.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

eat drink and be merry


----------



## steveo87 (Dec 4, 2018)

Brown
Red
No sauce at all


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

bacon lettuce and tomato


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 4, 2018)

steveo87 said:


> Brown
> Red
> No sauce at all


Welcome to the third position.


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2018)

In 
Out
Shake it all about


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If they can explain a Holy Trinity where all three things are really the same thing but are all different from each other, maybe they're the ones to ask about the Irish border question.



That would be an ecumenical matter.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> In
> Out
> Shake it all about



finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS -
> 
> European Court of Justice Advocate General's opinion - UK can unilaterally revoke article 50.
> 
> ...



That to me is telling and a mistake.   It renders Art 50 not a tool for leaving but yet another divaesque mechanism from which to grandstand, without actually being able to DO anything.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!



I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.

e2a: That's actually pretty accurate when you think about it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.



a.rock
b.hard place


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I thought we'd settled on The Devil or The Deep Blue Sea.





Kaka Tim said:


> a.rock
> b.hard place


scylla and charybdis


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> a.rock
> b.hard place


Scylla and Charybdis for those who had the benefit of an education that wasn't free



(eta oops Pickmans just pipped me to it)


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!


In with opt-outs ?
Or
Out with opt-ins ?


----------



## gosub (Dec 4, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> finally we have a workable set of questions for the 2nd referendum!



Whats the point?

Yes
Meh


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.


you auld tease


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Interesting twitter dump re a conversation truss had in public. Not going to post as it’s fuckig lazy to post twitter stuff really.



here, have a thread unroll on me

Thread by @ZackPolanski: "Politicians are entitled to have private conversations & in balance particularly those in cabinet have a responsibility to be open & […]"


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

No fun


----------



## tommers (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am sure you can use yer spidey skills and track the posts down. The first is is in corporate raider goldsmith offspring , the last is in Sex case disgraced film director


Is it like Voldemort? Can you not say their name?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

I have never read or seen any Harry potter as I am an adult so I cannot possibly respond on that 


But someone has done it anyway


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> here, have a thread unroll on me
> 
> Thread by @ZackPolanski: "Politicians are entitled to have private conversations & in balance particularly those in cabinet have a responsibility to be open & […]"



Thanks. 



not-bono-ever said:


> No fun



What's no fun is that I spent a good 30 seconds looking for that thread when I should be working!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

I am purposefully sabotaging the system - what’s the problem ?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I do object to the undermining of my country's democracy by foreign powers, rich and unelected power-brokers, deliberate misinformation and a media complicit in the delusion that Brexit was ever our idea, and will deliver what we feel we need most.
> 
> I'm not sure why that makes me dangerous. Dangerous would be to accept what has gone on unquestioningly, focused only on the result rather than the anti-democratic tampering that we now know could at least in part have lead to the result.


Votes and opinions are constantly influenced by business, media and foreign powers - at home and abroad. So why is this particular one the one that has to be singled out for outrage and re-run?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Shocked that British democracy is being undermined. Shocked I am.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Shocked that British democracy is being undermined. Shocked I am.


shocked that british democracy is believed to exist


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am purposefully sabotaging the system - what’s the problem ?


you are the anti-bob


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Votes and opinions are constantly influenced by business, media and foreign powers - at home and abroad. So why is this particular one the one that has to be singled out for outrage and re-run?


I agree that is a weak argument. imo a stronger argument is one that says the first referendum had too little content - it gave no indication of what brexit might look like. Now that there is an idea of what it looks like, now that new information is available, how valid is that first vote as a mandate for one particular deal, or indeed 'no deal'? 

Making that argument is easy for someone like me who neither asked for nor consented to the idea of a first vote. Harder to make by those, like the Labour front bench, who both voted in favour of the first vote and in favour of triggering Article50. It would be a climb-down by them to ask for a second referendum now. But that's their problem.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I agree that is a weak argument. imo a stronger argument is one that says the first referendum had too little content - it gave no indication of what brexit might look like. Now that there is an idea of what it looks like, now that new information is available, how valid is that first vote as a mandate for one particular deal, or indeed 'no deal'?
> 
> Making that argument is easy for someone like me who neither asked for nor consented to the idea of a first vote. Harder to make by those, like the Labour front bench, who both voted in favour of the first vote and in favour of triggering Article50. It would be a climb-down by them to ask for a second referendum now. But that's their problem.


As a matter of straightforward process, the whole thing was weak, with no conception the vote might go leave and no thought about what followed from that. Thing is though, as you say, that doesn't add up to a logic for running the in/out vote again. And with regard to whether there's a referendum on the terms of the deal or even 'deal vs no deal', there's a further level of fuck up (in that a second referendum has been denied as even a possibility by May, right through to now). In fact if 'the deal' doesn't get approved next week, there's every chance that 'process' will have to be put in place at the_ end of the process_ (another gen election; another Tory leader; another referendum). Its an understatement to call it a farce - even article 50, the ticking clock, now looks as floppy as a Dali painting.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

This BBC thread on Parliament today is fucking *jokes. 

*
You've literally got Tory MP's complaining that the British Parliamentary system is archaic and toothless. Isn't it bizarre how all these old custom and practice type rules are being dragged up from previous centuries? 

I've just worked out what a 'humble address' is and it's bonkers.

MPs debate contempt of Parliament


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> As a matter of straightforward process, the whole thing was weak, with no conception the vote might go leave and no thought about what followed from that. Thing is though, as you say, that doesn't add up to a logic for running the in/out vote again. And with regard to whether there's a referendum on the terms of the deal or even 'deal vs no deal', there's a further level of fuck up (in that a second referendum has been denied as even a possibility by May, right through to now). In fact if 'the deal' doesn't get approved next week, there's every chance that 'process' will have to be put in place at the_ end of the process_ (another gen election; another Tory leader; another referendum). Its an understatement to call it a farce - even article 50, the ticking clock, now looks as floppy as a Dali painting.



Thing is not to get sucked in to saying 'you're not respecting democracy' to people who object to this whole farrago, who might see a second ref as a chance to end it, and played no part whatever in creating it. Not our fault or problem that the first vote has led to this. It is a climbdown for Labour because of what they have (imo foolishly, in attempting to pander to populism) done in the past. And imo they should issue some kind of mea culpa if they call for a second ref. They no doubt won't, but again, that's neither my fault nor my responsibility.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Some beautiful Freeman  of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This BBC thread on Parliament today is fucking *jokes.
> 
> *
> You've literally got Tory MP's complaining that the British Parliamentary system is archaic and toothless. Isn't it bizarre how all these old custom and practice type rules are being dragged up from previous centuries?
> ...


_An _humble address.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Some beautiful Freeman  of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land



I love this idea that we're somehow governed with our consent. I wish I could get that far away from the evidence of my own senses, must be a right laugh.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 4, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> au contraire: meet the new deal, same as the auld deal


I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> _An _humble address.


Tories have just lost the first bit of the contempt of parliament vote. lol.

What a thoroughly bad lot, having contempt for _Parliament_. Oh, hang on a minute!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Some beautiful Freeman  of the land lite bollocks being chucked about at the minute about withdrawing consent of the people and handing ourselves over to the UN as a displaced people living in an occupied land



is that arguing that the land is being occupied by the EU, or by the current UK government?  I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense either way, but can see both arguments being made.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Tories have just lost the first bit of the contempt of parliament vote. lol.
> 
> What a thoroughly bad lot, having contempt for _Parliament_. Oh, hang on a minute!


We freely admit our contempt tho


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

Also defeated (by a larger majority) on second part including requirement to publish.

That Yeats line again.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is that arguing that the land is being occupied by the EU, or by the current UK government?  I'm not sure it makes a great deal of sense either way, but can see both arguments being made.




I think it was the EU but I didn’t bquestion any further


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

So does May get put in prison till she cooperates now?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So does May get put in prison till she cooperates now?



Leadsom has just said they will now publish in full.  Seems a bit odd to allow themselves to get held in contempt, the first time its ever happened it would seem.  Did the whips get their numbers wrong or have the wheels just totally come off?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Leadsom has just said they will now publish in full.  Seems a bit odd to allow themselves to get held in contempt, the first time its ever happened it would seem.  Did the whips get their numbers wrong or have the wheels just totally come off?


The wheels on the bus come off off off
All day long


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Leadsom has just said they will now publish in full.  Seems a bit odd to allow themselves to get held in contempt, the first time its ever happened it would seem.  Did the whips get their numbers wrong or have the wheels just totally come off?


Looking at the numbers, allowing for the speakers and Sinn Fein, 35 MPs are absent today. Are all of them ill? Rather unhealthy bunch if so.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

None of this looks good for May but, so far, the erg lot are not voting against her en masse.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Looking at the numbers, allowing for the speakers and Sinn Fein, 35 MPs are absent today. Are all of them ill? Rather unhealthy bunch if so.



Any prominent Brexiteers amongst the ill?  Wouldn't surprise me a few were happy to see their own colleagues being held in contempt.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Votes and opinions are constantly influenced by business, media and foreign powers - at home and abroad. So why is this particular one the one that has to be singled out for outrage and re-run?



Because it's permanent and irreversible, not to mention hugely damaging in every one of its iterations.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So does May get put in prison till she cooperates now?


In reality, just the infamy...cue everyone's favourite Kenneth William's gif/meme...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Because it's permanent and irreversible, not to mention hugely damaging in every one of its iterations.



Same can be said of lots of our elected govts. Make sense if you're gonna keep weighing in please.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Leadsom has just said they will now publish in full.  Seems a bit odd to allow themselves to get held in contempt, the first time its ever happened it would seem.  Did the whips get their numbers wrong or have the wheels just totally come off?



Yeah I'm thinking this, I wanna see a list of who voted how!


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

andysays said:


> Your posts this morning are gibberish, frankly



No they're not, you just need to concentrate more. I''m tired of simplifying for the hard of thinking. Work a bit.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Same can be said of lots of our elected govts. Make sense if you're gonna keep weighing in please.



Which elected government is permanent and irreversible?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What do we do with unforgivable people?



Put them in the same basket as Tories. Untouchable. Unhelpable.  Unforgivable.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Because it's permanent and irreversible, not to mention hugely damaging in every one of its iterations.


That's just you saying you don't like it - a subjective position. Nothing in terms of democratic theory or principles. Fwiw, in the absence of a lexit or even a gathering of forces, a reassertion of working class politics, I suspect things _will_ be worse after brexit (worse even than the neoliberal EU). But the vote was what it was, a vote to leave.

Edit: what I mean to say is, in the middle of all the fuck ups and procedural idiocy, right through to today and beyond, the only fixed point in brexit was _the leave vote_.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

This Grieve amendment looks interesting as well.  It looks very much like Parliament asserting its will over the government.  This is beginning to look like a bad day at the office for TM.  Then again that's pretty much everyday at the moment.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> This Grieve amendment looks interesting as well.  It looks very much like Parliament asserting its will over the government.  This is beginning to look like a bad day at the office for TM.  Then again that's pretty much everyday at the moment.


_Taking back control_


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Which elected government is permanent and irreversible?



The wars they start are permanent and irreversible. _Based on lies! They lied! It must be reversed. _


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

I have that vision of May's laughable speech a year or so back about 'a sense that the country was coming together'.  It was hilarious at the time but its even funnier now because everyone is coming together in unison to agree her deal is shit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> _Taking back control_



You nicked that off Kuenssberg. I see you.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> That's just you saying you don't like it - a subjective position. Nothing in terms of democratic theory or principles. Fwiw, in the absence of a lexit or even a gathering of forces, a reassertion of working class politics, I suspect things _will_ be worse after brexit (worse even than the neoliberal EU). But the vote was what it was, a vote to leave.
> 
> Edit: what I mean to say is, in the middle of all the fuck ups and procedural idiocy, right through to today and beyond, the only fixed point in brexit was _the leave vote_.



Saying it's permanent and irreversible isn't subjective at all, it's a statement of fact! As is the projected damage ANY form of Brexit will bring.

The question in the ref was fatally flawed, it asked if people wanted to leave, then left the expression of that vote entirely up to the Tory party.

We are leaving on March 29. Why are so many Leavers unhappy at that fact?

Because this deal doesn't represent their vote...and no deal was ever going to do that because of the inherent incompatibility between the vote and the GFA.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

More importantly...the Grieve amendment has just passed 321 : 299


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Saying it's permanent and irreversible isn't subjective at all, it's a statement of fact! As is the projected damage ANY form of Brexit will bring.



 You can't tell the difference between #factz and your own delirious ravings.




Wookey said:


> We are leaving on March 29.



Here's a good example. You think that's a fact, other people try to explain that it's not going to happen, that you've misunderstood, and you insult them.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

No no deal now.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

So this Grieve amendment thing they're voting on would be to give Parliament the right to amend any legislation on Brexit, it seems.  It appears that this is being used as a means of preventing a no deal hard Brexit from happening, a key plank in May's 'my way or the highway' strategy.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 4, 2018)

What a fucking shit show this is turning into.  

Hilariously so.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You nicked that off Kuenssberg. I see you.


I've just been looking at her twittering too. Apparently the grieve think means MP's will now have the authority to tell the government how to proceed after she loses the vote (2nd ref, Norway etc). How/whether the EU are willing to respond to that is one issue. But how we've got to this level of randomness is quite another. And even more so how the tories are still neck and neck with labour in the polls...


----------



## tommers (Dec 4, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> What a fucking shit show this is turning into.
> 
> Hilariously so.


You've got to laugh, cos otherwise...


----------



## Raheem (Dec 4, 2018)

Wilf said:


> None of this looks good for May but, so far, the erg lot are not voting against her en masse.


Think they'd be reluctant to do anything in French.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You can't tell the difference between #factz and your own delirious ravings.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oh behave.  We're legally obliged to leave so we are unless something changes that. The fact as it stands now is that we leave on the 29th.

Your argument seems rather weak and unfocused to me, contesting the definition of 'fact' isn't useful.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Saying it's permanent and irreversible isn't subjective at all, it's a statement of fact! As is the projected damage ANY form of Brexit will bring..


 I was referring to this bit - "not to mention hugely damaging in every one of its iterations" - in terms of it being subjective.



> The question in the ref was fatally flawed, it asked if people wanted to leave, then left the expression of that vote entirely up to the Tory party.


 The question wasn't flawed - maybe not building in a referendum_ on the deal_ was flawed, but not the original question, which couldn't have been clearer.



> We are leaving on March 29. Why are so many Leavers unhappy at that fact?
> 
> Because this deal doesn't represent their vote...and no deal was ever going to do that because of the inherent incompatibility between the vote and the GFA


 The shift back to remain has been fairly modest , tbh.  Also, the _in principle_ decision to leave isn't constitutionally at odds with the GFA. Or, to put it another way, all issues are to be worked through and resolved. Yes, the May government have been hopeless doing that, but that doesn't allow you to take the post hoc rationalisation route that there is valid reason to replay the original vote.


----------



## andysays (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> No they're not, you just need to concentrate more. I''m tired of simplifying for the hard of thinking. Work a bit.


I didn't say I didn't understand them, just that they're gibberish.

Your efforts this afternoon aren't any better either.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

Just thinking - The EFTA club is not one that would be massively happy about an incompetent laughing stock like the U.K. amongst its ranks.  

What a larf


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Oh behave.  We're legally obliged to leave so we are unless something changes that. The fact as it stands now is that we leave on the 29th.



No we're not. As the ECJ said today (to no one's surprise) we don't have to leave if 'we' (ie the govt) don't want to.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 4, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

brogdale said:


> No no deal now.



That's interesting actually - I think there's absolutely no chance of a no deal Brexit, just to be clear. 

BUT Parliament or the Govt would actually have to revoke A50 or ask for an extension to prevent No Deal. I don't think the Grieve amendment means No Deal simply can't happen.

Might have got that wrong though!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 4, 2018)

hate to add levity, but this whole thing is tickling me now the cannibalism of the smug political classes across the board is cheering me up.


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> No we're not. As the ECJ said today (to no one's surprise) we don't have to leave if 'we' (ie the govt) don't want to.



I think you're having trouble understanding the whole situation. The default position is that we leave with no deal at the end of March. That's what article 50 specifies and is legally factual. 

A bloke at the ECJ has offered the opinion that it can be reversed / withdrawn if that's what the UK decides. The ECJ haven't formally said the same but it's not really relevant. It's a decision about changing our mind, not about whether we currently leave with no deal automatically in four months time...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> hate to add levity, but this whole thing is tickling me now the cannibalism of the smug political classes across the board is cheering me up.



Hey, it's the best bit about this whole tortuous-but-wonderful process!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Supine said:


> I think you're having trouble understanding the whole situation. The default position is that we leave with no deal at the end of March. That's what article 50 specifies and is legally factual.
> 
> A bloke at the ECJ has offered the opinion that it can be reversed / withdrawn if that's what the UK decides. The ECJ haven't formally said the same but it's not really relevant. It's a decision about changing our mind, not about whether we currently leave with no deal automatically in four months time...



I think you're having trouble understanding the situation.



Wookey said:


> Oh behave.  We're legally obliged to leave so we are unless something changes that. The fact as it stands now is that we leave on the 29th.



Yer man thinks that we are legally obliged to leave. The relevant court (ECJ) will not enforce the idea of any legal obligation to leave. The relevant court does not want us to leave.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yer man thinks that we are legally obliged to leave. The relevant court (ECJ) will not enforce the idea of any legal obligation to leave. The relevant court does not want us to leave.



Not the case.


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2018)

Bercow is on form in tonight's debate. Must be like herding cats keeping those ruffians in check.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Winot said:


> Not the case.



How so? Go on, I'll bite


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you're having trouble understanding the situation.
> 
> 
> 
> Yer man thinks that we are legally obliged to leave. The relevant court (ECJ) will not enforce the idea of any legal obligation to leave. The relevant court does not want us to leave.


Where on earth do you get this nonsense from?


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How so? Go on, I'll bite



Just serving dinner - back in a bit.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> No we're not. As the ECJ said today (to no one's surprise) we don't have to leave if 'we' (ie the govt) don't want to.


My reading of this ruling is that it is a non-binding opinion by one EU law official.  The ECJ hasn't delivered it's final decision yet.  

Law officer says UK can cancel Brexit


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Where on earth do you get this nonsense from?



Tell me where I'm wrong. You can help Winot out!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> My reading of this ruling is that it is a non-binding opinion by one EU law official.  The ECJ hasn't delivered it's final decision yet.
> 
> Law officer says UK can cancel Brexit



Aye. And what do you think the ECJ verdict will be?


----------



## Supine (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tell me where I'm wrong. You can help Winot out!



I already told you. If you can't read and comprehend there isn't much we can do for you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Where on earth do you get this nonsense from?


How is it nonsense? I'll be very surprised if the final judgement doesn't say exactly what this bloke said today, and like Spacklefrog, I've been entirely expecting it. 'no deal' brexit has never been a real possibility. All the final words on this that and the other are nothing of the kind. Legal judgements are made in the political interests of those the courts serve, and in this case, legal judgements will continue to be made as and when necessary to stop 'no deal'. 

Where this all leaves May is for me the interesting question. It may have done her a big favour by giving her an out when this deal is voted down, which may allow her not to resign immediately.


----------



## grit (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tell me where I'm wrong. You can help Winot out!


Europe has no problem with the UK leaving.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye. And what do you think the ECJ verdict will be?


I have no idea.  If I was the EU, I'd tell us to piss off, frankly.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

grit said:


> Europe has no problem with the UK leaving.


Really? How do you judge that? Who in Europe specifically?


----------



## agricola (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How is it nonsense? I'll be very surprised if the final judgement doesn't say exactly what this bloke said today, and like Spacklefrog, I've been entirely expecting it. 'no deal' brexit has never been a real possibility. All the final words on this that and the other are nothing of the kind. Legal judgements are made in the political interests of those the courts serve, and in this case, legal judgements will continue to be made as and when necessary to stop 'no deal'.
> 
> Where this all leaves May is for me the interesting question. It may have done her a big favour by giving her an out when this deal is voted down, which may allow her not to resign immediately.



I agree with you that the ECJ will agree with this bloke and that they have form for making decisions with political interests in mind, but this decision (if it is what they come up with) is not one of those.  It is, on a reading of the text, the only decision they could ever come to without being completely absurd.


----------



## grit (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Really? How do you judge that? Who in Europe specifically?



The deal, for want of a better term, that is on the table.

Even for us in Ireland, who economically can possibly hurt as bad as the UK in Brexit are ok with it. We generally alternate between rolling our eyes and sniggering to licking our lips at the prospect of a united Ireland, we are even ok with picking up the bill for the basket case of an economy in the north.

We, the same as many others, are "enjoying the season finale of the UK".


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

grit said:


> The deal, for want of a better term, that is on the table.
> 
> Even for us in Ireland, who economically can possibly hurt as bad as the UK in Brexit are ok with it. We generally alternate between rolling our eyes and sniggering to licking our lips at the prospect of a united Ireland, we are even ok with picking up the bill for the basket case of an economy in the north.
> 
> We, the same as many others, are "enjoying the season finale of the UK".


Not my experience at all when I've travelled to Germany and Poland recently. People I've talked to have been mystified by the whole thing. They see it as an act of self-harm, and to the Poles at least, an act that they feel hurts them. As for the political classes, I don't see any reason at all for them not to be both pissed off and concerned by brexit. There's no upside for the rest of the EU that I can see.


----------



## grit (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not my experience at all when I've travelled to Germany and Poland recently. People I've talked to have been mystified by the whole thing. They see it as an act of self-harm. As for the political classes, I don't see any reason at all for them not to be both pissed off and concerned by brexit. There's no upside for the rest of the EU that I can see.



Are you proposing that anecdote supports the assertion that Europe doesn't want the UK to leave?

You said it yourself, self harm


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 4, 2018)

grit said:


> Are you proposing that anecdote supports the assertion that Europe doesn't want the UK to leave?


I'm matching your anecdote. I was really mostly talking about the political classes, but you decided to make an 'us' kind of national feel point, which is rubbish really - all depends on who your circle is.


----------



## grit (Dec 4, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm matching your anecdote. I was really mostly talking about the political classes, but you decided to make an 'us' kind of national feel point, which is rubbish really - all depends on who your circle is.



No doubt it's an inconvenience that Europe doesn't want. The only people, rightly so, who are in a panic is the UK.

It's also not inconceivable that many states could actually benefit from brexit. I have multinationals hounding myself and colleagues with large contracts to build the software systems in Dublin to prepare them for the 29th. Jobs are moving at a noticeable rate


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> How so? Go on, I'll bite



OK so caveat that I haven’t read the opinion only the commentary.

First, from what I’ve read it seems pretty likely that the ECJ will follow today’s AG Opinion. Let's assume they do.

The question the court was asked was a narrow one - having triggered Art. 50, can a state unilaterally reverse that or does it need permission from the other EU member states?

The opinion says that the state doesn’t need permission - although it needs to demonstrate (not sure how) that it has really changed its mind and isn’t just playing negotiating games. 



SpackleFrog said:


> The relevant court (ECJ) will not enforce the idea of any legal obligation to leave.



The ECJ doesn't do enforcement off its own bat afaik. It rules on cases brought before it. The default position is that the UK is leaving the EU on 29 March 2019. It *is* legally obliged to leave, because it triggered Art. 50. What the opinion says is that the UK can in principle reverse that decision.



SpackleFrog said:


> The relevant court does not want us to leave.



This is completely wrong. It doesn’t express any opinion either way as to whether the UK should stay or leave. That isn't what it was asked to look at (and it would be bizarre if it had been).


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Dec 4, 2018)

Is there any strong reason not to believe that we're heading for:

* Govt loses vote on May's deal
* May resigns and/or vote of no confidence
* Another general election
* Labour come around to the idea of a second referendum and win (although probably not a majority)
* Second referendum is a clear Remain win, Labour govt cancel Article 50 and we all go back to how things were in 2016

?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye. And what do you think the ECJ verdict will be?



The E.U. wants us to stay, if the UK chooses to stay the ECJ is hardly likely to say, no, the UK must leave and at this late hour on terms that fuck both the E.U. and the UK and could destroy this court.

Courts are political instruments, they were set up as such and nothing has changed, how could they?


----------



## mauvais (Dec 4, 2018)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Is there any strong reason not to believe that we're heading for:
> 
> * Govt loses vote on May's deal
> * May resigns and/or vote of no confidence
> ...


The Fixed Term Parliament Act may stand in the way of a GE.

The three-option, transferable vote model combined with current polling may stands in the way of straightforward Remain victory in any second ref.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tell me where I'm wrong. You can help Winot out!


Well Winot is currently owning you so I doubt he needs help.

Do you even know who pushed for this judgement?


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 4, 2018)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 4, 2018)

technically "no deal" can still happen.
politically it absolutely will not. Even if the government wanted to take the uk off a cliff edge with no deal on march 29th (which it definitely doesn't) - parliament would force them to revoke A50 before it got to that stage - and would  every single body with any power and influence  in the entire  country bar a few lunatic brexiteers like Rees Mogg - and most of them are just grandstanding.


----------



## belboid (Dec 4, 2018)

mauvais said:


> The Fixed Term Parliament Act may stand in the way of a GE.


It doesn't, really. If May loses the no confidence vote, and no one else can command a majority (do you think there is anyone who could?), the government falls.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 4, 2018)

belboid said:


> It doesn't, really. If May loses the no confidence vote, and no one else can command a majority (do you think there is anyone who could?), the government falls.


I haven't thought about this too hard so forgive any gross stupidity but ultimately the Tories would have to vote themselves out of office, or at least gamble on the same. It's not remotely in their interests to go to the polls without a leader in place, and if they have a leader that they can temporarily work with, why go to the polls at all instead of attempting to proceed (probably to no avail) with some version of Brexit?


----------



## belboid (Dec 4, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I haven't thought about this too hard so forgive any gross stupidity but ultimately the Tories would have to vote themselves out of office, or at least gamble on the same. It's not remotely in their interests to go to the polls without a leader in place, and if they have a leader that they can temporarily work with, why go to the polls at all instead of attempting to proceed (probably to no avail) with some version of Brexit?


Who would that be? And, dont forget, that several are standing down, or will do if the boundary changes go through (which they wont if there is an early election). Remember what Heseltine said - for some this (the right Brexit deal) is more important than a brief Corbyn government.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 4, 2018)

belboid said:


> Remember what Heseltine said - for some this (the right Brexit deal) is more important than a brief Corbyn government.


Really? Can you think of a modern Tory that genuinely rather than ostensibly put a long-term national strategy (I'm not going to say 'good') before their own more immediate self-interest*? Which feeds into:


belboid said:


> Who would that be?


I don't know, but again I wonder if self-interest will see them hold their noses for someone for a while. This is kind of how we got May in the first place.

I don't think and I'm not claiming that it's a solid barrier to a GE. I merely suspect it's not as simple as you think.

*a perhaps more interesting argument is that economic self-interest of the 'right Brexit' eclipses careerist self-interest


----------



## chilango (Dec 4, 2018)

Tories are almost by definition selfish fuckers. Its not too much of a stretch to believe that a Tory MP or two, sitting in what they believe to be a safe seat and enjoying their role as a backbencher to be just as happy to do this in opposition as not. Hell, there'll be a fair few more interested in settling internal scores. 

Others no doubt believe a Corbyn Government would fuck over the Labour Party in the longer term, and I suspect relish the chance of an old fashioned session of red badhing.

Point being, it's perfectly conceivable for enough (and it won't take many) Tories to not give s fuck about propping a May Government up to bring it down.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2018)

Although the FTP Act makes it possible for May to carry on I think in practice they’d have to call an election if the Government couldn’t get any of its business through.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 154445



Sublime. And so quick.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Supine said:


> I already told you. If you can't read and comprehend there isn't much we can do for you.



It speaks volumes about you that can be complimentary about Bercow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Winot said:


> OK so caveat that I haven’t read the opinion only the commentary.
> 
> First, from what I’ve read it seems pretty likely that the ECJ will follow today’s AG Opinion. Let's assume they do.
> 
> ...



If someone took a case to the court they would rule the UK could stay. Of course if you take the view that bourgeois courts are 'neutral' there's no helping you. 



DexterTCN said:


> Well Winot is currently owning you so I doubt he needs help.
> 
> Do you even know who pushed for this judgement?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

grit said:


> The deal, for want of a better term, that is on the table.
> 
> Even for us in Ireland, who economically can possibly hurt as bad as the UK in Brexit are ok with it. We generally alternate between rolling our eyes and sniggering to licking our lips at the prospect of a united Ireland, we are even ok with picking up the bill for the basket case of an economy in the north.
> 
> We, the same as many others, are "enjoying the season finale of the UK".



I'm afraid the powers that be don't care what you or I think.


----------



## Winot (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> If someone took a case to the court they would rule the UK could stay. Of course if you take the view that bourgeois courts are 'neutral' there's no helping you.



Where did I say the ECJ was neutral? Of course courts are political animals.


----------



## grit (Dec 4, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm afraid the powers that be don't care what you or I think.


Very true, thankfully this doesn't preclude our interests aligning on occasion


----------



## Cloo (Dec 4, 2018)

For the first time I am beginning to believe it _is_ possible that the wheels will come off this fucking thing. I don't think it'll be fun if/when they do in the short term, but would be much better in the long run.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 4, 2018)

Winot said:


> Where did I say the ECJ was neutral? Of course courts are political animals.



Then we agree, the ECJ will rule the UK can stay, without asking permission of EU27


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 4, 2018)

Is brexit over now then? The homeless will finally disapppear from our streets, austerity & democracy erased from the English Oxford, & we’re all better off?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 4, 2018)

Need to bus some hi vis French over


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 4, 2018)

BBC now spinning today as 'May deal looking stronger,' The Guardian leads with 'May staggers on'. It's like a shouting match in Waitrose.

Elsewhere, that legal Advice is going to be fun.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 4, 2018)

Aunty Beeb will keep us all in line!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 4, 2018)

From the DfT, good news for the commies on here:




> Chris Grayling, transport secretary, has warned the cabinet that trade on the key Dover-Calais route could be cut by up to 87 per cent in the event of a disorderly exit, as checks and customs controls are introduced in France.
> 
> The pro-Brexit Mr Grayling has written to colleagues seeking approval for the chartering of ships, or space on ships, to operate on alternative routes, bypassing likely blockages in the Strait of Dover.
> 
> Perishable goods like salads and vegetables won’t make it on to ‘DfT Seaways’,” said one official. “Some foods will run out in the supermarkets — it will be a bit like the USSR.” The UK imports 30 per cent of its food from the EU.



Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## Wookey (Dec 4, 2018)

Space ships??!



This has gone too far.


----------



## twentythreedom (Dec 4, 2018)

"It will be a bit like the USSR"


----------



## brogdale (Dec 4, 2018)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Need to bus some hi vis French over


Loads of gilets jaunes on the M20 & M26 today...unfortunately just fitting the Brexstack lorry gates.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

i have a feeling this all may unfold as follows -

mays deal cant get through. 
no alternative deal can get through.
labour cant force general election.
move for 2nd referendum - but that cant get through cos nobody can agree what questions should be. 
uk heads towards no deal.
gathering panic, stock market and pound fall, panic buying, increasingly loud cries of distress everywhere from the nhs to the cbi the tuc - all this builds to irresistible pressure on parliament to do the only thing left - pass emergency legislation to rescind a50. Brexit cancelled. may resigns (if she hasn't already)

torys get most of blame for fucking it up/sabotaging it leaving parliament no choice. having started into the abyss of no deal steam goes out of brexiteer sails. much huffing and puffing from ukip types that amounts to very little. tory party meltdown. government collapse. general election.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

That's .. something. I don't think anyone else has a clue what will happen tomorrow.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 5, 2018)

What are the UK's MEPs filling their time with, day-to-day, at the moment I wonder. Do they just sit in their offices with their feet up, watching the news? With popcorn probably wouldn't seem right.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What are the UK's MEPs filling their time with, day-to-day, at the moment I wonder. Do they just sit in their offices with their feet up, watching the news? With popcorn probably wouldn't seem right.


Same as always, most likely. Raising money for their election campaigns next year.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What do we do with unforgivable people?


Burn 'em!


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 5, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Burn 'em!


In the Christian tradition for ever.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 5, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> In the Christian tradition for ever.


What do we burn apart from unforgivable people?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> What do we burn apart from unforgivable people?


Witches!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> What do we burn apart from unforgivable people?



Bridges?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 5, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Bridges?


And what do we do with bridges apart from burn them?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2018)

Burn?

 

Will not tire of this ^


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Burn?
> 
> View attachment 154508
> 
> Will not tire of this ^


Yeh, you're a well-known fan of the hot dog


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> What do we burn apart from unforgivable people?


Toast
Cakes 
Tigers
Midnight oil
Candles at both ends
Mobile phones, at least in America


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 5, 2018)

flags


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 5, 2018)

Books


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> That's .. something. I don't think anyone else has a clue what will happen tomorrow.



im speculating on a speculative thread.


----------



## tommers (Dec 5, 2018)

More witches.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 5, 2018)

I didnt realises that Norway means accepting EU rules on goods, services, people and capital, *as well as competition and state aid, *I thought it was just the first four. That really is Brexit In Name Only.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 5, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I didnt realises that Norway means accepting EU rules on goods, services, people and capital, *as well as competition and state aid, *I thought it was just the first four. That really is Brexit In Name Only.


As apparently is this "backstop" loophole of indefinite duration


----------



## tommers (Dec 5, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I didnt realises that Norway means accepting EU rules on goods, services, people and capital, *as well as competition and state aid, *I thought it was just the first four. That really is Brexit In Name Only.


Ah yes, but there's a + in our one.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 5, 2018)




----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Is there any strong reason not to believe that we're heading for:
> 
> * Govt loses vote on May's deal
> * May resigns and/or vote of no confidence
> ...


I think there's a number of barriers to this chain of events which - IMO - make it an improbable one.

May's deal will almost certainly lose on first going to parliament: however, I don't think she'll resign - losing at this point is pretty much built into her plans.

There will probably be a confidence vote in the house - MPs will most likely vote down party lines, so whether it passes or not is down to the DUP: and while they've made noises about voting against the government in a confidence vote, I think the very tight majorities of a few key DUP MPs suggests they wouldn't be very keen on an early election. So it probably won't pass.

If it does, then there's 14 days for a new government to be formed before an election can be called - the Tories will likely move fast to replace May with a leader who can command the support of the DUP. There are other possible things that could happen in these 14 days too - some sort of Labour minority government isn't totally out of the question, but it's hard to imagine how they'll persuade enough Tory or DUP MPs to vote for them or sit on their hands - maybe if at this point they promised a second referendum some of the tory remain ultras might commit hari-kiri. I think the most likely thing is a new Tory leader and a new - still unstable - Tory government though.

If there is a general election, Labour will not go into it promising a second referendum, but instead the softest possible brexit. They are unlikely to win a majority, but are likely to be able to form a minority or coalition government (most likely minority w/ confidence & supply) so this is the point at which a second referendum really becomes possible: it's the price of the support of the minor parties.

So then if there's a second referendum... I can't see on current polling any likelihood of a clear win for remain, and I can't see the kind of transformative campaign coming from the remain camp to make that happen.

Am I missing anything?


----------



## alex_ (Dec 5, 2018)

grit said:


> Very true, thankfully this doesn't preclude our interests aligning on occasion



Yes, consumers are needed to buy stuff.

Alex


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 5, 2018)

Last night I was willing May's cunning plan to finally force BlowJob to finally admit his whole part in the Brexit farrago had been bullshit ...
At the end of the day, to my naive eyes there seems to be a lot of brinksmanship going on ...


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

This is about the 31st month of brinkmanship in relation to Brexit.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Last night I was willing May's cunning plan to finally force *BlowJob* to finally admit his whole part in the Brexit farrago had been bullshit ...
> At the end of the day, to my naive eyes there seems to be a lot of brinksmanship going on ...


Who's this? If you're going to give politicians nicknames, at least make it so people can tell who you're talking about.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b that's a plausible scenario (one of many). I think one interesting bit will be what "the Tories will likely move fast to replace May with a leader who can command the support of the DUP" means in practice vis-a-vis Brexit. It could be insistence on removing the backstop (which results in no deal imo) but it actually could mean the UK as a whole staying permanently in a form of customs union (the Labour model). After all the DUP has basically said that they are agnostic about everything apart from NI having exactly the same deal as GB.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

I'm not really proposing a scenario, just talking about the barriers to Buddy Bradley's scenario happening. I've got no idea what the fuck is going to happen.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> So then if there's a second referendum... I can't see on current polling any likelihood of a clear win for remain, and I can't see the kind of transformative campaign coming from the remain camp to make that happen


I think your analysis is sound. It’s more or less what I think, as far as can be ascertained. But this last bit is worth reiterating. The assumption from some  daft Remainers that Remain would necessarily win a second referendum is baffling. How? Based on what? ‘Because that’s what they’d prefer’ seems to be the strength of it. Where is this surge going to come from, though? The movements from Leave to Remain in all the polling that I’ve seen have been more or less matched by roughly equal movements in the other direction. (Disregarding don’t knows and Didn’t Votes). But psephology aside, what is going to change the minds of Leave voters? Calling them “unforgivable people”. I doubt it. That kind of thing just hardens attitudes and confirms group boundaries. And if you’re in a minority, the last thing you want to do is make it feel harder for people to cross that boundary. And yet that’s all Remain has got - a repeat of the campaign that lost them the last vote plus the added patronising message of: “you were deluded: you’ll come to your senses”. I can see that backfiring all over again.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I didnt realises that Norway means accepting EU rules on goods, services, people and capital, *as well as competition and state aid, *I thought it was just the first four. That really is Brexit In Name Only.



This would presumably be used to try and thwart any move towards nationalisation of railways, utilities or anything else. Utilities especially, what with EDF and Eon being big names in fleecing the British public.

Interesting that none of the bank bailouts fell foul of state aid rules though eh?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Am I missing anything?


If we were to get to the point, the EU would likely adopt a more flexible negotiating position with Labour. If Labour so wanted.

Any reopening of negotiations with a new UK gov would also be in the light of a reframed EU, one riven by doubt (by migration), and considering its future without Merkel.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Who's this? If you're going to give politicians nicknames, at least make it so people can tell who you're talking about.


I think it's Boris.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

I see. Dunno why anyone would care what Johnson does or says anymore tbh, he's blatantly a busted flush.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> If we were to get to the point, the EU would likely adopt a more flexible negotiating position with Labour. If Labour so wanted.
> 
> Any reopening of negotiations with a new UK gov would also be in the light of a reframed EU, one riven by doubt (by migration), and considering its future without Merkel.


A good point actually - a Labour minority government may be forced to offer a second referendum, but they would also want to renegotiate first - so any second referendum would be between a Labour negotiated soft brexit (backed by the Labour leadership) and remain. How would the pro-brexit lot campaign under that scenario? I guess they'd probably sit on their hands.


----------



## Supine (Dec 5, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Jesus, it takes a lot to make a bad day these days!


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think your analysis is sound. It’s more or less what I think, as far as can be ascertained. But this last bit is worth reiterating. The assumption from some  daft Remainers that Remain would necessarily win a second referendum is baffling. How? Based on what? ‘Because that’s what they’d prefer’ seems to be the strength of it. Where is this surge going to come from, though? The movements from Leave to Remain in all the polling that I’ve seen have been more or less matched by roughly equal movements in the other direction. (Disregarding don’t knows and Didn’t Votes). But psephology aside, what is going to change the minds of Leave voters? Calling them “unforgivable people”. I doubt it. That kind of thing just hardens attitudes and confirms group boundaries. And if you’re in a minority, the last thing you want to do is make it feel harder for people to cross that boundary. And yet that’s all Remain has got - a repeat of the campaign that lost them the last vote plus the added patronising message of: “you were deluded: you’ll come to your senses”. I can see that backfiring all over again.[/QUOTE
> One thing remain has got is a question to the leavers about how after leaving they are going to take back control of the land border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 5, 2018)

Sorry. On phone and buggered up the quoting .


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.


I'm uncertain about many things, but one thing that's totally certain to me is that Labour under Corbyn will not go into any early election promising a second referendum. They will be offering a renegotiated soft Brexit.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> Labour has been softening its position on a 2nd ref incrementally. If there were to be a GE it wouldn't surprise me if they offered a 2nd ref in their manifesto. It would be difficult for people to argue that a 2nd ref was undemocratic and against the 'will of the people' if it had electoral legitimacy.


Labour has softened, and that might have begun after Corbyn went to Brussels.

We shoudn't forget the EU is itself in now in pretty fundamental flux. It's likely the new German leader (still some distance off but something to be taken into account now) and Labour will have more in common.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

twentythreedom said:


> "It will be a bit like the USSR"



The CPB line about a 'British Road to Socialism' doesn't look so daft now does it?


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 5, 2018)

If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> I think your analysis is sound. It’s more or less what I think, as far as can be ascertained. But this last bit is worth reiterating. The assumption from some  daft Remainers that Remain would necessarily win a second referendum is baffling. How? Based on what? ‘Because that’s what they’d prefer’ seems to be the strength of it. Where is this surge going to come from, though? The movements from Leave to Remain in all the polling that I’ve seen have been more or less matched by roughly equal movements in the other direction. (Disregarding don’t knows and Didn’t Votes).


I'm not sure there's an assumption that remain would win, at least from anyone who has a vague clue. It's more that there are limited options ahead. If you don't want May's deal, don't want no deal and don't believe a renegotiation is possible, then it has to be either a referendum or a stitch-up. 

That said, you need to take into account that a referendum would not be leave/remain. If it is remain versus the deal, then polling since the deal was reached does show a decent and consistent lead for remain. Not that it's a guarantee.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.


Yeah, the promise of a second referendum would just pile up votes in safe city seats and lose them a load of towns. It would be a disastrous policy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The CPB line about a 'British Road to Socialism' doesn't look so daft now does it?


british roads for british lefties


----------



## T & P (Dec 5, 2018)




----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> I think there's a number of barriers to this chain of events which - IMO - make it an improbable one.
> 
> May's deal will almost certainly lose on first going to parliament: however, I don't think she'll resign - losing at this point is pretty much built into her plans.
> 
> ...


Even after yesterday - maybe even especially after yesterday (with the grieve thing) - there may still be routes through to a revote and something getting through that splits the tory party but with Labour support. Which would in turn need the EU to open up negotiations again, at least to the point where something _different_ could be put to parliament.

With regard to a gen election I still don't see that as likely, not just or even predominantly because the ftpa, just the pure self interest of tory mps. But if there was and Labour are in a position to form a government, that would inevitably be with snp support. Wouldn't be a coalition, probably just confidence and supply, though there would have to be an agreement between them over brexit (and a second indie ref as well). Labour get pulled out of shape by this just as much as the tories were by the dup (unless of course labour _wanted_ to use it as cover to remain).

I'm not predicting, just exploring the logics that flow from the madness created by May's negotiations and the tory party. There will be genuine consequences for a lot of people in whatever becomes the outcome, but for now it's most entertaining seeing our bosses and rulers lost at sea.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> A good point actually - a Labour minority government may be forced to offer a second referendum, but they would also want to renegotiate first - so any second referendum would be between a Labour negotiated soft brexit (backed by the Labour leadership) and remain. How would the pro-brexit lot campaign under that scenario? I guess they'd probably sit on their hands.


There's no way to do that without somehow convincing others that you think whatever soft brexit you get is better than remain. If you actually think remain is better than any soft brexit deal, then how do you campaign for a soft brexit in a new referendum where 'no brexit' is also on the ballot? That's the mess at the moment - 'we've negotiated this deal, but we recommend you reject it because not leaving is in our opinion better': that will be the real position of many on the Labour side. At the moment, May can dismiss the merits of remain by saying that it is not an option. Labour wouldn't have that luxury in a second ref on their watch.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

No way to do what?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Yeah, the promise of a second referendum would just pile up votes in safe city seats and lose them a load of towns. It would be a disastrous policy.


In some ways, that's been labour's problem for the last 2 years and why they've managed to say little of any interest other than '6 tests'. The Tories have been screwed by brexit as they've been in the driving seat, but Labour are more _compromised_ by it.

I think it was a few pages back, people were saying Labour still remain trapped in a neo-liberal vision of what life might be like both inside and outside the EU. If they'd had a different vision - a _Lexit_ even - they might have found their way to a political strategy and message that overcame the divide your mention.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I think it was a few pages back, people were saying Labour still remain trapped in a neo-liberal vision of what life might be like both inside and outside the EU. If they'd had a different vision - a _Lexit_ even - they might have found their way to a political strategy and message that overcame the divide your mention.


I don't think so - Lexit is an electoral dead end. Maybe if it had been policy for a decade or so...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think so - Lexit is an electoral dead end. Maybe if it had been policy for a decade or so...


Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU.  The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.

Edit: even now I'd be surprised if many people have any sense of what brexit would be like in labour's hands.


----------



## Florkleshnort (Dec 5, 2018)

Maybe now would be a good time to start thinking about joining the Euro.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That said, you need to take into account that a referendum would not be leave/remain. If it is remain versus the deal, then polling since the deal was reached does show a decent and consistent lead for remain. Not that it's a guarantee.


I'll preface this by saying I don't know what sequence of events will play out.  I can make assumptions, like anyone else, and I can interrogate the assumptions of others.  But I accept that I may be wrong.

That said, it's true that we don't know what would be on the ballot paper of this hypothetical referendum.  But it's these very steps further into the hypothetical that makes the polling less reliable.  _If_ there's a referendum and _if_ these are the questions, how might you answer them?  If, if, might.  It could be that today, people are answering that to say "the deal doesn't sound very good".  Just as in the referendum itself people were probably answering a different set of questions to the precise one actually posed, people may well be taking that question to mean "do you like the deal?".  But if that turns into a choice between a brexit and no brexit in the polling booth, rather than in a survey, then I'm not convinced we have the evidence to say the majority will opt for no brexit. 

I took part in a poll this morning for YouGov.  The question asked was three way - deal, no deal, or remain, and respondents were asked to rank the choices.  Hypothetical options in a hypothetical referendum.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 5, 2018)

Raheem said:


> If you don't want May's deal, don't want no deal and don't believe a renegotiation is possible, then it has to be either a referendum or a stitch-up.


I think a stitch up of some sort is about the only certain outcome in any of this


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU.  The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.


Yeah, that's what I meant too: I don't think that would have been something possible to do, with the current makeup of Labour support. The 6 tests position was the only way of keeping a massive amount of the membership and voter base onboard. The centrality of the EU to Labour politics isn't something that could have been undone in two years, even with a positive vision for life outside the EU.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> One thing remain has got is a question to the leavers about how after leaving they are going to take back control of the land border on the island of Ireland.


While that is of course an issue that exercises people near that border and (to a degree) those responsible for the negotiations, I think you're overestimating it as a killer point on the path to the ballot box.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> No way to do what?


Hold a second referendum in which you endorse your own deal. How would that work? And if you didn't endorse your own deal, the brexit camp would be all over you saying that you deliberately produced a shit deal. I don't see any way around that, given that Labour backed remain originally and any soft brexit deal is going to be wide open to attack as something that is brexit in name only and is less preferable than remain even to someone who wants brexit to happen.

So in a hypothetical situation where a new labour govt negotiated a new deal and put it to a referendum with the other option being 'remain', I don't see how they wouldn't be stuffed whether they recommended their deal or recommended remain. In that sense, I do see dlr's point about a 2nd ref not having remain as an option, but I think that's impossible now - any 2nd ref will have remain as an option. Labour would need to come out and say that they were wrong to support the first ref and wrong to support triggering A50. That's a lot of humble pie for a politician, and they'd get hammered for doing that as well. They'll get hammered whatever they do.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Don't mean Lexit as a 'thing', just shorthand for making a positive out of a social democratic vision of life outside the EU.  The '6 test mantra' is so far away from being a political position. It's not active statement of anything and it doesn't provide a way of bringing those cities and small towns together.
> 
> Edit: even now I'd be surprised if many people have any sense of what brexit would be like in labour's hands.


I was one of those saying there's been no vision from the formal labour movement about what a social democratic life outside the EU might be like.  I wasn't saying it out of any expectation that this vision could in reality have arisen from either the Labour Party or the unions, though.  More out of frustration as to how things might have been different.  If the formal labour movement had been different.  Which it isn't.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Yeah, that's what I meant too: I don't think that would have been something possible to do, with the current makeup of Labour support. The 6 tests position was the only way of keeping a massive amount of the membership and voter base onboard. The centrality of the EU to Labour politics isn't something that could have been undone in two years, even with a positive vision for life outside the EU.


This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that. Helen Thompson | Returning to Democracy: The British Left and the Constitutional Temptation of the European Union - Judicial Power Project


----------



## two sheds (Dec 5, 2018)

I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.


I don't think they seriously wanted any inspection of their tests.  They just wanted a sonic screwdriver to wave at the Tories.  "You're in charge of the negotiations.  We have this doohicky.  But look: your negotiating is crap".


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I think it's been a mistake for Labour to just keep talking about "6 tests" without summarizing what they mean. It's a bit abstract - better would have been to add a couple of sentences each time explaining that it meant keeping environmental and worker protections (which aren't even explicitly mentioned), maintaining strong security contacts with the EU, etc, etc.



The 6 tests are a nonsense though - the 'exact same benefit' language was Keir Starmer quoting David Davies back at him in a "ah gotcha" moment. It wasn't a stupid thing to do politically at the time, but hanging the entirety of Labour's Brexit policy on it and saying nothing else was stupid (of course they couldn't really have said more without having one - and they can't have one which satisfies both Corbyn and Starmer).


----------



## TopCat (Dec 5, 2018)

Lucy Fur said:


> grape, wine and piss


Any chance to all fuck off on a whimsical tangent. I blame brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

The 6 test thing was a logical *starting point*, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get _either_, but I'm talking about _Labour's_ analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts.  But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, _even now_ (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.

edit: as danny la rouge said, 3 posts ago.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The 6 test thing was a logical *starting point*, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get _either_, but I'm talking about _Labour's_ analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts.  But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, _even now_ (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.



Agree with all of this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The 6 test thing was a logical starting point, an entry into the issue of whether can we get social democracy and a decent degree of regulation inside the EU or outside (to be clear, I don't believe you can get _either_, but I'm talking about _Labour's_ analysis and strategy). It should have been about the world they wanted, the active campaigns they sought to build and the rest, but just became a defensive way of dealing with brexit in interviews. They've waited for the tories to fuck up and deliver the keys to number 10 to corbyn, largely through McDonnell or Starmer coming out with varying statements and minor shifts.  But it hasn't worked. For all their fuck ups, the tories are still in power and, _even now_ (to me at least) are favourites to win the next election.



tbh it appears to me like Labour have been banking on the tories doing brexit (or indeed abandoning brexit) and that breaking them in such a way that Labour get back in, but brexit has been done one way or another. Labour's actions have in no way prepared them for an eventuality in which they get back in and brexit still hasn't been done.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

i think one of the fundamental problems with a 2 ref is what you have on the ballot paper?
there are very good arguments for not having "no deal - just fuck off now" on there - because it would be chaotic and destructive  and no government will want to do it - and parliament  may well block it even if it did. 
the only way that would go on is if whoever was supporting 2nd ref was absolutely certain it was not going to win - and even then it would be a massive gamble.
But if "no deal" is not on there - what do you have as a brexit option? may's shitty deal that everyone hates? or a "renegotiation" (which the EU has already said is not going to happen). Without a proper "brexit" option the referendum is severely lacking in any kind of legitimacy. The whole thing would be seen (correctly) as a massive stitch up.
I also think that there is no guarantee that "remain" would win. there is evidence of some movement - but its not massive and polling is always uncertain. you'd need to see remain consistently polling at 60% or above to be in anyway sure.
It would be more honest for parliament to just rescind A50 and be honest with the voters - "sorry - but its a massive fuck up - we did our best but - tbh - tough shit. blame cameron." 
Thats why i think 2nd ref failing to get off the ground, no deal looming, escalating panic and a last minute pressing of the big red "stop!" button is a plausible scenario.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 5, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> While that is of course an issue that exercises people near that border and (to a degree) those responsible for the negotiations, I think you're overestimating it as a killer point on the path to the ballot box.



I believe that another referendum will be meaningless without a border solution, because without a solution there can be no brexit  as the UK is discovering at the moment and as lots of people have realised since before the last vote.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 5, 2018)

So has the AG Cox not resigned yet ?

Mays leadership leaves a trail of bodies that puts napoleons retreat from Moscow to shame


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I believe that another referendum will be meaningless without a border solution, because without a solution there can be no brexit  as the UK is discovering at the moment and as lots of people have realised since before the last vote.


I know you believe that.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> So has the AG Cox not resigned yet ?
> 
> Mays leadership leaves a trail of bodies that puts napoleons retreat from Moscow to shame


I was wondering the same thing. Government is agreed to have held Parliament in contempt and nobody resigns - it's not so much a breach of some fucking ancient protocol, it's fucking shameless.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> It would be more honest for parliament to just rescind A50 and be honest with the voters - "sorry - but its a massive fuck up - we did our best but - tbh - tough shit. blame cameron."


Strikes me as the best option.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 5, 2018)

Bang to rights Theresa. Take her down


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 5, 2018)

It’s pretty astounding /Not astounding  that she fought to hide this. Columbo would have kept unexpectedly popping into number 10 if he had been assigned this case

“ something that’s been bothering me prime minister....”


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

The Back Stop looks impossible in this form. Surely the Advice must lead to a renegotiation, god knows by whom.


----------



## Patteran (Dec 5, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> If Corbyn promises a second referendum he'll probably lose the votes of most of the Labour Brexit voters - "Vote for me and I'll see about overturning your earlier vote" isn't much of a platform - and he'll likely discover that most Tory Remainers would sooner leave the EU than have him as PM.



Right on cue.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 5, 2018)

Anyone summarise the advice?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Fucking tories conflating 'the tory interest' with 'the national interest'. It was May's big play yesterday as well. Bastards will be trotting that fucking line out again and again and again.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 5, 2018)

The advice is here btw:

Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that. Helen Thompson | Returning to Democracy: The British Left and the Constitutional Temptation of the European Union - Judicial Power Project



They could have made a start in two years.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 5, 2018)

Crispy said:


> The advice is here btw:
> 
> Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice


Ta.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> This article is an instructive read about Labour and the EU - (I've posted it before, but it's worth another look). Labour has no internal infrastructure for making a decent lexit argument. It's a minority crank position in the party, and two years wouldn't have changed that.


Same with Brexit and the Tories.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

Crispy said:


> The advice is here btw:
> 
> Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice


i am confused how they managed to make the gist of it into a 50 page document the other day


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

There's no point reading the Advice. It's particularly cunning and opaque - lawyers will reflect on it over today and there will be much analysis of the analysis. Fwiw, I want to hear more of the potential for NI staying in the customs union alone. Obv. can't happen.

Starting point is Article 50 says you can leave unilaterally, Back Stop says 'not without our consent' - after which _the potential_ of it  gets very, very tricky and intentionally opaque.

Instinct is it's a well disguised bait and switch, hence they didn't want to publish.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Same with Brexit and the Tories.


Sorry, but this just isn't true. They may be cranks, but they've enjoyed majority support by the membership and a large base in parliament for decades.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They could have made a start in two years.


Which would have made recent Labour infighting look like pure tranquility. There would have been a formal split, with a substantial part of the membership leaving too.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> There's no point reading the Advice. It's particularly cunning and opaque - lawyers will reflect on it over today and there will be much analysis of the analysis. Fwiw, I want to hear more of the potential for NI staying in the customs union alone. Obv. can't happen.
> 
> Starting point is Article 50 says you can leave unilaterally, Back Stop says 'not without our consent' - after which _the potential_ of it  gets very, very tricky and intentionally opaque.
> 
> Instinct is it's a well disguised bait and switch, hence they didn't want to publish.



The advice is fairly clear imo. There's nothing particularly surprising in there. 

Not sure what you mean by bait and switch - you think they are gearing up to revoke Art 50?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

One issue flagged up so far relates to the temp Back Stop not being a temp measure at all, but over time having the potential to lead to different outcomes for GB and NI.

Arlene Foster last seen reaching into her hadnbag for the knuckledusters.

Sections 26-30.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> The advice is fairly clear imo.


Get back to me when you're earning £500,000 a year giving professional advice and not a bloke on the internet.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Get back to me when you're earning £500,000 a year giving professional advice and not a bloke on the internet.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Get back to me when you're earning £500,000 a year giving professional advice and not a bloke on the internet.


yeh. when you reciprocate and do the same in all those situations in your life when other people know much, much better than you what to do.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

yeh, yeh


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Which would have made recent Labour infighting look like pure tranquility. There would have been a formal split, with a substantial part of the membership leaving too.



Would that have been a bad thing or a good thing?

If May's deal gets through it will be with the support of Labour rebels that should have been removed from office by now.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> The advice is fairly clear imo. There's nothing particularly surprising in there.
> 
> Not sure what you mean by bait and switch - you think they are gearing up to revoke Art 50?



Some of them would definitely like to - were it to become politically palatable to do so.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would that have been a bad thing or a good thing?
> 
> If May's deal gets through it will be with the support of Labour rebels that should have been removed from office by now.


How could they have been removed?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> How could they have been removed?



Empower CLP's to deselect and replace MP's - at the very least you'd have a mechanism to threaten them with.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Could anyone tell me by the way - May's deal means staying in the customs union so there will be no need for border checks on goods, at least during the potentially permanent 'backstop'. 

However, would there be immigration checks on the Irish border? Or will free movement between ROI and NI continue?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 5, 2018)

I think it depends on what we want. A CU does not automatically mean no border checks -the EU is full of them


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Empower CLP's to deselect and replace MP's - at the very least you'd have a mechanism to threaten them with.


How might they have been removed from office 'by now' though? 

Selections for the next election haven't happened yet in constituencies with sitting MPs (and if there's a snap election they'll be automatically reselected anyway). Many of the people you want to see threatened with deselection _are _being threatened with deselection, and there has been an ongoing battle within the party to empower CLPs further, which was one of the big stories of this year's conference. 

Do you think the Labour Party is some monolithic entity that just does what the leader says it should? You can't have been paying much attention the last couple of years if so...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Could anyone tell me by the way - May's deal means staying in the customs union so there will be no need for border checks on goods, at least during the potentially permanent 'backstop'.
> 
> However, would there be immigration checks on the Irish border? Or will free movement between ROI and NI continue?


depends on the day of the week


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> How might they have been removed from office 'by now' though?
> 
> Selections for the next election haven't happened yet in constituencies with sitting MPs (and if there's a snap election they'll be automatically reselected anyway). Many of the people you want to see threatened with deselection _are _being threatened with deselection, and there has been an ongoing battle within the party to empower CLPs further, which was one of the big stories of this year's conference.
> 
> Do you think the Labour Party is some monolithic entity that just does what the leader says it should? You can't have been paying much attention the last couple of years if so...



No, of course I don't, but I think if the Labour leadership had been arguing for the principle that MP's should come under the democratic control of their CLP since Corbyn was elected then we would be in a different place right now. You say there's been a battle and there has been but Corbyn hasn't actually fought very hard.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> Sorry, but this just isn't true. They may be cranks, but they've enjoyed majority support by the membership and a large base in parliament for decades.


But when it comes down to it can't bring down May.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 5, 2018)

Patteran said:


> Right on cue.



They’re gonna scrape May’s deal through, aren’t they? 

“Anything but Corbyn”. That’s the big sell. Doesn’t matter how shit it is, what principles they have to ditch, it’s not Corbyn as PM.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> But when it comes down to it can't bring down May.


But you were making out the brexit strand in the Tories was somehow analogous with the lexit crew in Labour, which is total bollocks. 

I know it's tempting to see the two parties and leaders as some kind of bizzaro mirror image of each other, but the factions and balances of power are totally different, as well as the party machines they have to contend with.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 5, 2018)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 5, 2018)

That video is embarrassing.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

as if you watched it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 5, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> That video is embarrassing.





killer b said:


> as if you watched it.



I can simultaneously hold both positions without any cognitive trauma whatever.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

Apparently the Archbishop of Canterbury has said a second ref may  be desirable - and called for 'national reconciliation'. Game changer.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Apparently the Archbishop of Canterbury has said a second ref may  be desirable - and called for 'national reconciliation'. Game changer.


I confess that I don't even know his name. Bloke who replaced beardy Gandalf-type, Williams. Don't even know what he looks like.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I confess that I don't even know his name. Bloke who replaced beardy Gandalf-type, Williams. Don't even know what he looks like.


Welby. Wasn't he some kind of oil trader or summat, pre-priesthood?

edit: wiki -
Welby worked for eleven years in the oil industry, five of them for the French oil company Elf Aquitaine based in Paris. In 1984 he became treasurer of the oil exploration group Enterprise Oil plc in London, where he was mainly concerned with West African and North Sea oil projects. He retired from his executive position in 1989 and said that he sensed a calling from God to be ordained.[22]


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> And what do we do with bridges apart from burn them?



Ask John Terry!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 5, 2018)

_Gott mit uns_


----------



## brogdale (Dec 5, 2018)

Hard to disagree with former tory chief whip Mark Harper; win and they've lost...lose and...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> They’re gonna scrape May’s deal through, aren’t they?
> .



no. not in a million years. something like 70-100 tory mps are against it. the revolt is only getting bigger - especially since the legal advice confirms one of the main weaknesses (it could lead to the UK in Euro limbo indefinitely) . May and her deal are fucked.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> no. not in a million years. something like 70-100 tory mps are against it. the revolt is only getting bigger - especially since the legal advice confirms one of the main weaknesses (it could lead to the UK in Euro limbo indefinitely) . May and her deal are fucked.


They’re against it now, but faced with no Brexit at all or Corbyn? Self preservation will kick in, surely?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

This might not be an entirely radical, cutting edge, groundbreadking point - _that governments are duplicitous and dishonest_... but it's interesting seeing bits of the debate after the legal opinion was published in full. Particularly on the backstop, a couple of MPs are saying they will now definitely vote against the deal (latest I've seen was the former tory chief whip).  If they are genuine in that, that seeing the legal advice has made a material difference to their voting intentions, there's an obvious conclusion to be drawn i.e. government were dishonestly withholding the information and, in practice, deceiving MPs. Rather than a farty vote of censure, MPs should be apoplectic. Instead it's the government making the running with Leadsome saying you 'will regret forcing us to give you the legal advice'.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

At 16:49 here:
Brexit: MPs rail against backstop plans in second day of debate on May's deal – Politics live
... there's speculation that the grieve amendment from yesterday may make brexiteers move towards May's deal - as it would be the most brexity outcome of all the possibilities then opened up.

Staggering that, as a process, they are making decisions on the hoof without really understanding the legal or parliamentary scenarios their actions create/disallow. Funny as fuck. Sort of.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> They’re against it now, but faced with no Brexit at all or Corbyn? Self preservation will kick in, surely?



the brexiteers will go down with brexit - what have they got to lose? they can look their voters in the eye and say - we fought for it, we didn't cave in. A far easier position to live with then enabling mays shitty deal. They cant row back now - they'd look (even more) ridiculous. They'd still be mps. still getting paid. they are (sadly)  not actually dying in a ditch.  
And rejecting mays deal does not automatically mean Corbyn in no.10 - any more than mays deal going through prevents it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> the brexiteers will go down with brexit - what have they got to lose? they can look their voters in the eye and say - we fought for it, we didn't cave in. A far easier position to live with then enabling mays shitty deal. They cant row back now - they'd look (even more) ridiculous. They'd still be mps. still getting paid. they are (sadly)  not actually dying in a ditch.
> And rejecting mays deal does not automatically mean Corbyn in no.10 - any more than mays deal going through prevents it.



Indeed - May's deal going through would basically collapse the govt anyway and make the election (although not governing) much easier for Corbyn.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> no. not in a million years. something like 70-100 tory mps are against it. the revolt is only getting bigger - especially since the legal advice confirms one of the main weaknesses (it could lead to the UK in Euro limbo indefinitely) . May and her deal are fucked.



Has the Attorney General's advice to the government been published yet?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> At 16:49 here:
> Brexit: MPs rail against backstop plans in second day of debate on May's deal – Politics live
> ... there's speculation that the grieve amendment from yesterday may make brexiteers move towards May's deal - as it would be the most brexity outcome of all the possibilities then opened up.
> 
> Staggering that, as a process, they are making decisions on the hoof without really understanding the legal or parliamentary scenarios their actions create/disallow. Funny as fuck. Sort of.



That happens anywhere in any scenario when you are confronting something that has never been seen before.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 5, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Has the Attorney General's advice to the government been published yet?


Yes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Has the Attorney General's advice to the government been published yet?


Yea. Linked to above. Says what everyone assumed it said.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> ... there's speculation that the grieve amendment from yesterday may make brexiteers move towards May's deal - as it would be the most brexity outcome of all the possibilities then opened up.


This is the government's line, being repeated by credulous (or complicit) lobby journalists. No need to help them out is there.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yea. Linked to above. Says what everyone assumed it said.



Apart from Fornicator who thinks you need to make £500K a year rather than just read Twitter.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> That happens anywhere in any scenario when you are confronting something that has never been seen before.


I was being ever so slightly rhetorical. But yes, new situations, unintended consequences and all that, but there's a frantic idiocy about this, which largely comes out of May running the clock down. The 'how the fuck did we get into this situation' question should leave them rather embarrassed.


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Staggering that, as a process, they are making decisions on the hoof without really understanding the legal or parliamentary scenarios their actions create/disallow. Funny as fuck. Sort of.



Most of them have only recently understood the result of voting for Art. 50.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> This is the government's line, being repeated by credulous lobby journalists. No need to help them out is there.


I'm not really helping them out, just incredulous at the grand old duke of York-ing, volte face-ery and headless chickening that's going on.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I was being ever so slightly rhetorical. But yes, new situations, unintended consequences and all that, but there's a frantic idiocy about this, which largely comes out of May running the clock down. The 'how the fuck did we get into this situation' question should leave them rather embarrassed.



The 'how' is easy.

The 'how the fuck do we get out of this?' less so.

I'm nailing my colours to the 'second referendum' mast, and praying for a sensible outcome.

The advice that we can withdraw from Article 50 without penalty is cheering.


----------



## andysays (Dec 5, 2018)

Brexit: Legal advice warns of Irish border 'stalemate'


> When lawyers give legal advice they are expected to speak frankly. Many will conclude this advice is franker and starker than the way in which the government has presented the legal implications of the withdrawal agreement. In particular on the Northern Ireland backstop, it is there in black and white, that *in the absence of an agreement replacing it, the backstop will continue indefinitely. The UK could not force the EU to conclude an agreement bringing it to an end.*





> That punctures the government's optimism on the issue. *Whereas Article 50 allowed the UK to pull out of the EU, there is no provision for the UK to pull out of the withdrawal agreement.* That will pour petrol on the flames of the political debate



Rubs hands together in delight...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

yeah but - will the  gammon battalions march on the capital? *




*(no they won't)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This might not be an entirely radical, cutting edge, groundbreadking point - _that governments are duplicitous and dishonest_... but it's interesting seeing bits of the debate after the legal opinion was published in full. Particularly on the backstop, a couple of MPs are saying they will now definitely vote against the deal (latest I've seen was the former tory chief whip).  If they are genuine in that, that seeing the legal advice has made a material difference to their voting intentions, there's an obvious conclusion to be drawn i.e. government were dishonestly withholding the information and, in practice, deceiving MPs. Rather than a farty vote of censure, MPs should be apoplectic. Instead it's the government making the running with Leadsome saying you 'will regret forcing us to give you the legal advice'.


They're not genuine. We all knew exactly what the legal advice said and exactly why the govt didn't want to publish it. if seeing the legal advice has genuinely made a material difference, then either they are complete morons or they are using this as cover to justify their upcoming act of disloyalty to the govt. 

This deal is not only dead, its corpse is being flogged. It's extremely likely that the ECJ will have confirmed the revokable nature of A50 by the time of the vote, removing excuses for the Labour right to support May. There could be a three-figure majority against the deal come next week.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They're not genuine. We all knew exactly what the legal advice said and exactly why the govt didn't want to publish it. if seeing the legal advice has genuinely made a material difference, then either they are complete morons or they are using this as cover to justify their upcoming act of disloyalty to the govt.
> 
> This deal is not only dead, its corpse is being flogged. It's extremely likely that the ECJ will have confirmed the revokable nature of A50 by the time of the vote, removing excuses for the Labour right to support May. There could be a three-figure majority against the deal come next week.


Ok, another way of putting it is: the very reasons the govt wanted to keep it for their eyes only are the very reasons mps should be annoyed at the attempt to keep it secret.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

some speculation that May will withdraw the bill. If she loses by the sort of margins being talk about - she could well be finished. Resign or cabinet push her out. I mean - what is the point of theresa may?


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I'm not really helping them out, just incredulous at the grand old duke of York-ing, volte face-ery and headless chickening that's going on.


ok, but saying _there is speculation_ about something that is only really being speculated about because of some desperate spinning by number 10 without mentioning the source of the speculation does help strip it of it's political purpose, so it is helping them out. even if only a tiny bit. lots of tiny bits make up a big bit.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> some speculation that May will withdraw the bill. If she loses by the sort of margins being talk about - she could well be finished. Resign or cabinet push her out. I mean - what is the point of theresa may?


again, who's speculating? anyone real or some bullshitter on twitter?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 5, 2018)

killer b said:


> again, who's speculating? anyone real or some bullshitter on twitter?



paul mason i think. its what would normally happen when a government is facing certain defeat. but "normally" seems to have left the building some time ago.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Ok, another way of putting it is: the very reasons the govt wanted to keep it for their eyes only are the very reasons mps should be annoyed at the attempt to keep it secret.


And we all knew that! It was blindingly obvious what the legal advice said. Tbh I think there are probably quite a few outside the govt on both sides who are revelling in the power they have just exercised to force the govt to publish. I get the impression that many backbenchers are rather enjoying the fact that they are getting all this attention. I tuned in briefly to the debate this afternoon, and they're all standing up to have their go at looking statesmanlike with their little speeches.


----------



## killer b (Dec 5, 2018)

'fraid Mason counts as _some bullshitter on twitter._


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And we all knew that! It was blindingly obvious what the legal advice said. Tbh I think there are probably quite a few outside the govt on both sides who are revelling in the power they have just exercised to force the govt to publish. I get the impression that many backbenchers are rather enjoying the fact that they are getting all this attention. I tuned in briefly to the debate this afternoon, and they're all standing up to have their go at looking statesmanlike with their little speeches.



Given the seeming magnitude of whats going on its not surprising that they all want to make a speech.  Wouldn't you be a bit bothered if your MP decided they had nothing to say on the subject?  I mean what would be the point of sending them to Parliament to be a representative and then decide they're not going to contribute to this debate?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Johnson now claiming (probably not completely incorrectly) that the deal represents an attempt by the EU to extend their influence in NI.

EU making 'predatory claim' on NI - Johnson


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And we all knew that! It was blindingly obvious what the legal advice said. Tbh I think there are probably quite a few outside the govt on both sides who are revelling in the power they have just exercised to force the govt to publish. I get the impression that many backbenchers are rather enjoying the fact that they are getting all this attention. I tuned in briefly to the debate this afternoon, and they're all standing up to have their go at looking statesmanlike with their little speeches.


Oh, yes, certainly. There's no 'good side' in these parliamentary manoeuvres, just a series of fuckers who have unexpectedly found themselves in some kind of 12th night-misrule-mischief night.  Nothing has been challenged, nothing broken, just a few random turds have temporarily floated to the top.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> some speculation that May will withdraw the bill. If she loses by the sort of margins being talk about - she could well be finished. Resign or cabinet push her out. I mean - what is the point of theresa may?



Human shit magnet/saviour of British capitalism?

E2A: _Martyr _of British capitalism even.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Human shit magnet/saviour of British capitalism?
> 
> E2A: _Martyr _of British capitalism even.


For £0.01
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Uses-John-Major-Patrick-Wright/dp/0233988629


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Given the seeming magnitude of whats going on its not surprising that they all want to make a speech.  Wouldn't you be a bit bothered if your MP decided they had nothing to say on the subject?  I mean what would be the point of sending them to Parliament to be a representative and then decide they're not going to contribute to this debate?


It's about Hansard. MPs want to appear in the official record because everyone understands this is historic. They were doing it at midnight with 5 people in the chamber, and a completely empty Labour/Opposition side.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> Apart from Fornicator who thinks you need to make £500K a year rather than just read Twitter.


I know it's complicated, but what you read on Twitter is written by people, and people earn money from writing and from having insight. Twitter is called a *platform*. 

You sound a little bitter at not having the authority of qualified professionals.


----------



## paolo (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Johnson now claiming (probably not completely incorrectly) that the deal represents an attempt by the EU to extend their influence in NI.
> 
> EU making 'predatory claim' on NI - Johnson



I’m not sure exactly what he means.

I could see them backing ROI if it’s up for reunification. Is that it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I know it's complicated, but what you read on Twitter is written by people, and people earn money from writing and from having insight. Twitter is called a *platform*.
> 
> You sound a little bitter at not having the authority of qualified professionals.



Do you have the authority of a qualified professional? Or did you pay someone to explain the legal advice to you?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m not sure exactly what he means.
> 
> I could see them backing ROI if it’s up for reunification. Is that it?


It's to do with the Back Stop extending over time causing - by some mechanism, I was distracted - to separate GB and NI via the CU. I'm sure it'll be repeated often tonight. This is the realm of the obtuse I mentioned earlier.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 5, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Given the seeming magnitude of whats going on its not surprising that they all want to make a speech.  Wouldn't you be a bit bothered if your MP decided they had nothing to say on the subject?  I mean what would be the point of sending them to Parliament to be a representative and then decide they're not going to contribute to this debate?


Yea fair point. No reason they shouldn't enjoy it either. It they don't they're probably in the wrong job


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I know it's complicated, but what you read on Twitter is written by people, and people earn money from writing and from having insight. Twitter is called a *platform*.
> 
> You sound a little bitter at not having the authority of qualified professionals.


What qualifications do you have?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’m not sure exactly what he means.
> 
> I could see them backing ROI if it’s up for reunification. Is that it?



My understanding of the proposed deal is that Northern Ireland could end up permanently in the customs union, which might make it considerably more economically attractive than it is currently. Whether Irish capitalism is really up for re-unification I'm not sure but I think the deal brings NI closer to the EU and to the Eurozone.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Exactly.

We could have of course just asked Winot, who has read the document.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> My understanding of the proposed deal is that Northern Ireland could end up permanently in the customs union, which might make it considerably more economically attractive than it is currently. Whether Irish capitalism is really up for re-unification I'm not sure but I think the deal brings NI closer to the EU and to the Eurozone.


Not sure it's really *Irish* capitalism given the penetration of the market by multinationals, any more than you have british capitalism when do much of the infrastructure etc is owned by foreign firms


----------



## Winot (Dec 5, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> I know it's complicated, but what you read on Twitter is written by people, and people earn money from writing and from having insight. Twitter is called a *platform*.
> 
> You sound a little bitter at not having the authority of qualified professionals.



You’re not making a lot of sense. I commented earlier that there weren’t many surprises in the full advice and you took umbrage at that. Not sure why. 

I’m a lawyer so well aware of the value of professional advice. I’m not an expert in this area but follow a number of commentators who are. 

Here’s David Allen Green in the FT this afternoon:

“There is, in fact, little that would not be gained by closely reading the withdrawal agreement itself. Anyone claiming some grand revelation from this advice is admitting they have not read or understood the draft deal.”

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

If you think he’s wrong then feel free to write to him to explain your expertise. I’m sure he’ll be fascinated.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure it's really *Irish* capitalism given the penetration of the market by multinationals, any more than you have british capitalism when do much of the infrastructure etc is owned by foreign firms



Fair enough - would you accept Irish bourgeoisie?


----------



## andysays (Dec 5, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> My understanding of the proposed deal is that Northern Ireland could end up permanently in the customs union, which might make it considerably more economically attractive than it is currently. Whether Irish capitalism is really up for re-unification I'm not sure but I think the deal brings NI closer to the EU and to the Eurozone.



I haven't read the agreement in detail so I might be missing something, but I thought the 'backstop' provides for the whole UK to remain in the Customs Union until both parties (EU & UK) agree that a solution has been found to the Irish border issue.

The only possibility of NI remaining in the CU while Britain did not would be if the UK govt agreed to it, using the argument that 'losing' NI was a price worth paying in order to achieve a meaningful Brexit. But I'm not sure any likely UK govt, of whatever party, would consider that an option, if only because of the potential political fallout.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 5, 2018)

Winot said:


> You’re not making a lot of sense. I commented earlier that there weren’t many surprises in the full advice and you took umbrage at that. Not sure why.
> 
> I’m a lawyer so well aware of the value of professional advice. I’m not an expert in this area but follow a number of commentators who are.
> 
> ...


I'm making perfect sense, you're being a cunt. "Who else thinks .." as if you're 12-years old in the school playground. Really, when did you last use that phrase in your life.

"You're not making a lot of sense .." And you, Mr/s Twitter and the well-know international lawyer Paul Mason do.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 5, 2018)

Leave ‘very likely’ won Brexit referendum due to illegal overspending, Oxford professor to tell High Court


----------



## grit (Dec 5, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Not sure it's really *Irish* capitalism given the penetration of the market by multinationals, any more than you have british capitalism when do much of the infrastructure etc is owned by foreign firms



We invited them in with open arms to launder their money in exchange for jobs and capital investment. That is Irish capitalism, some argue it's the only play available to us as a cold wet rock on the side of the Atlantic.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 5, 2018)

Starting to feel like we'll have another general election soon...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 5, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Leave ‘very likely’ won Brexit referendum due to illegal overspending, Oxford professor to tell High Court


Well, it _may_ well be true. By definition, in a close-ish (but not knifedge) vote, any one single factor _might_ have taken the result in another direction. But - even if the overspend was illegal - it's an elitist politics to try and overturn a result that way. And, to be honest, it doesn't sound that plausible that the overspend _really did_ flip that many voters, turn non-voters into voters etc. Feels like another Gina Miller move to me.


----------



## gosub (Dec 5, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Leave ‘very likely’ won Brexit referendum due to illegal overspending, Oxford professor to tell High Court



this £10 million spend  is estimated to have helped remain by 3%.  Oddly HMG decided not to pursue ANY of the 3 possible leave outcomes it said were possible in the event of a Leave vote


----------



## Supine (Dec 5, 2018)

grit said:


> We invited them in with open arms to launder their money in exchange for jobs and capital investment. That is Irish capitalism, some argue it's the only play available to us as a cold wet rock on the side of the Atlantic.



Is a great cold wet rock for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products. Lots of jobs in Ireland related to the industry (and a bunch more as manufacturing is moving there to avoid brexit)


----------



## grit (Dec 5, 2018)

Supine said:


> Is a great cold wet rock for the manufacture of pharmaceutical products. Lots of jobs in Ireland related to the industry (and a bunch more as manufacturing is moving there to avoid brexit)



That and IT, nothing more suited to an island nation than a industry that doesn't have to deal with traditional logistics.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2018)

gosub said:


> this £10 million spend  is estimated to have helped remain by 3%.  Oddly HMG decided not to pursue ANY of the 3 possible leave outcomes it said were possible in the event of a Leave vote



HMG jumped ship the day after the vote. HM has a different G now.


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 5, 2018)

Watching May getting dashed around in the Chamber by her own back-benchers-it really would be a miracle if she were to come through this still in post.As John McDonnell said on C4 News if her deal is rejected and there is a need to negotiate something better its not credible that she could be the one to do it.It might be my imagination but those still arguing for Remain sound increasingly like voices in the wilderness.Blowjob got one thing right when he said that the country voted for change and expects to get it.A change of Government would do for me.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

‘Vote for me, I’ll set you free’
Ball of Confusion.


----------



## xenon (Dec 5, 2018)

I've not read everything on this thread lately (I still have some sanity) but why are people seemingly so confident no deal will be avoided? As I understand it, A50 needs some legistlation to be revoked. With May's deal not getting through and no revokcation of A50, no deal is the default on 29/03/19.

As for how bad or otherwise no deal would be. OK, doubtless there's a lot of scare mongering but also I've read nothing to convince me it won't be a fucking disaster. Especially with these cunts in power.


----------



## paolo (Dec 5, 2018)

Off on an anecdotal tangent. Excuse me.

I’ve had a few random chats with EU mainland people in the last month. People who don’t live here.

The perception (only a few asks, statistically irrelevant) was “you have left”. I have to emphasise this was not a confrontational POV. A shrug.

The thing that struck me was that they think it’s already happened. 

*waffling* As you were.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 5, 2018)

xenon said:


> I've not read everything on this thread lately (I still have some sanity) but why are people seemingly so confident no deal will be avoided? As I understand it, A50 needs some legistlation to be revoked. With May's deal not getting through and no revokcation of A50, no deal is the default on 29/03/19.


Government could bypass parliament to revoke Article 50 - Sky News

It's like the news can hear you.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Government could bypass parliament to revoke Article 50 - Sky News
> 
> It's like the news can hear you.



George bloody Orwell giving them ideas!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 5, 2018)

btw....only 24 more pages and we'll have beaten the actual agreement...come on; the final push


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

brogdale said:


> btw....only 24 more pages and we'll have beaten the actual agreement...come on; the final push



Post on, brothers, sisters, comrades!


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2018)

brogdale said:


> btw....only 24 more pages and we'll have beaten the actual agreement...come on; the final push


Can we revoke this thread in favour of a thread about Norway or Canada or something?


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Can we revoke this thread in favour of a thread about Norway or Canada or something?



How about a referendum?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> How about a referendum?


Kaka Tim needs to add a second 'people's poll' to this thread


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

Badgers said:


> Kaka Tim needs to add a second 'people's poll' to this thread



Rebel with a cause?


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 5, 2018)

K T & the Sunshine Plan!
Sorry folks.


----------



## T & P (Dec 5, 2018)

Fairytale stuff I know, but I was talking to someone this evening at a work do who reckons a mutually beneficial Brexit deal has long been informally agreed between the UK and the EU, but the political circus we've all been subjected to for the last year+ is a premeditated plot designed to both fool the populace into believing the final agreement will have been very hard fought and thus worthy, and dissuade the citizens of other EU countries with similar inclinations from pushing ahead with plans for their own referendum.

As conspiracy theories go, that's one I would happily see being confirmed. Sadly I think it's more likely there are alien glass dome bases on the Moon.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 5, 2018)

Good time for a shitpost then ..feast your eyes on this bleeeur
 
Seemingly the ECJ attended to their case at lightening speed, which was obviously due to them being really shit scared of Smith, Jolyon and Co, aye.
Alyn Smith taking on the might of the EU back in 2016:


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 5, 2018)

T & P said:


> Fairytale stuff I know, but I was talking to someone this evening at a work do who reckons a mutually beneficial Brexit deal has long been informally agreed between the UK and the EU, but the political circus we've all been subjected to for the last year+ is a premeditated plot designed to both fool the populace into believing the final agreement will have been very hard fought and thus worthy, and dissuade the citizens of other EU countries with similar inclinations from pushing ahead with plans for their own referendum.
> 
> As conspiracy theories go, that's one I would happily see being confirmed. Sadly I think it's more likely there are alien glass dome bases on the Moon.


The media circus is surely 9/10ths everyone needing to post something fabulous and sublime every 2 minutes lest they become irrelevant. Little do they know....


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 5, 2018)

"Unite leader warns Labour against backing second EU referendum" 

guardian article here


----------



## paolo (Dec 5, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> "Unite leader warns Labour against backing second EU referendum"
> 
> guardian article here



It’s yet another “sources” piece, but even with that caveat it’s an eyebrow raiser.

Anyone recall (I can’t google this minute) what Unite’s position was before this?


----------



## belboid (Dec 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s yet another “sources” piece, but even with that caveat it’s an eyebrow raiser.
> 
> Anyone recall (I can’t google this minute) what Unite’s position was before this?


Essentially - we must support brexit, although the Tory deal will be shit, so we should force a general election, tho maybe, just maybe, consider a second referendum if absolutely desperate. 

“We are also open to the possibility of a popular vote being held on any deal, depending on political circumstances. Within these principles, the Executive Council has authority to respond as it thinks best to a fast-changing political situation.”


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> Anyone recall (I can’t google this minute) what Unite’s position was before this?



broadly, unite were pro-remain before the referendum.

as of september, seemed to be in favour of a vote on the deal not a second referendum (more here)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 5, 2018)

paolo said:


> Off on an anecdotal tangent. Excuse me.
> 
> I’ve had a few random chats with EU mainland people in the last month. People who don’t live here.
> 
> ...



There are also UK-resident people still scared they'll be deported or chased out with pointy sticks. 

Bearing in mind lots of people have come here from places in Europe where large fascist mobs aren't uncommon, nor overtly fascist police and mainstream politicians, its understandable that some folk aren't trusting in assurances from politicians that they're still welcome here.


----------



## paolo (Dec 5, 2018)

.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

Looking forward to tomorrow in parliament. Haven't got a clue what they are discussing, but it's bound to be funny. 

'My government is happy to announce that all MPs voting for the deal will receive a small book of 2nd class stamps, a porcelain figurine of Michael Gove and an almost full bottle of Blue Stratos'.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 6, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> There are also UK-resident people still scared they'll be deported or chased out with pointy sticks.
> 
> Bearing in mind lots of people have come here from places in Europe where large fascist mobs aren't uncommon, nor overtly fascist police and mainstream politicians, its understandable that some folk aren't trusting in assurances from politicians that they're still welcome here.


Sounds charming. Where do I sign up for a 2nd referendum? Halt Brexit!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 6, 2018)

Blue Stratos is very appropriate Wilf,
Have a double like.


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

paolo said:


> I knew I was failing to make a point. Apologies.
> 
> It was that I’ve met people who think we have already left.



 At you.


Public consultation wasn't best of 3. The onus should have been on those that lost to work towards a workable way of accepting and working with the result.


----------



## paolo (Dec 6, 2018)

.


----------



## paolo (Dec 6, 2018)

.


----------



## paolo (Dec 6, 2018)

Venting... hence the deletes. Park it under "no added value".


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 6, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> broadly, unite were pro-remain before the referendum.
> 
> as of september, seemed to be in favour of a vote on the deal not a second referendum (more here)



That’s correct. But crucially Unite’s lay leadership is under no doubts that support for a second referendum (a people’s vote ) would go down like a lump of shit amongst its activist base. Even those whose who support remain recognise that the democratic consequences outweigh the unions arguments for remain (which some of us don’t accept in any case)


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 6, 2018)

leave is turning out to be a people carrier that can do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds while being economical and easy to park
 What people want and what's actually possible are completely different things.


----------



## Winot (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> leave is turning out to be a people carrier that can do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds while being economical and easy to park
> What people want and what's actually possible are completely different things.



Thread —> https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/brexit-analogy-spotters-thread.362159/#post-15833550


----------



## teqniq (Dec 6, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Dec 6, 2018)

Arron Banks firm 'has no address'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> Arron Banks firm 'has no address'


_
One internal email in the documents sent to the BBC contained the comment: "Redact the reference for Ural Properties and any references which include sensitive info e.g. the account numbers that the money was sent from."
_
Forgot to redact the instruction to redact eh? We've all been there.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 154655


I'm surprised Bojo's dad doesn't give him an old school whacking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I'm surprised Bojo's dad doesn't give him an old school whacking.


reminded of the auld beatles' song, 'piggies':



Spoiler


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 6, 2018)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 154655



"All we would need to do is join the other side and find 11 suckers to take our places."


----------



## Poi E (Dec 6, 2018)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Starting to feel like we'll have another general election soon...



But that would undermine the will of the people, surely?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> leave is turning out to be a people carrier that can do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds while being economical and easy to park
> What people want and what's actually possible are completely different things.



Similarly, remain is presented as some sort of workers paradise and democratic idyll that's secured peace in our time etc


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2018)

Today's Times' 'what next?' flowchart is interesting


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> Today's Times' 'what next?' flowchart is interesting


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> Today's Times' 'what next?' flowchart is interesting



With reference to the 'Think You Can Do Better' Box, I've set my team of political scientists, lawyers and graphic designers on it. They came up with this:


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 6, 2018)

I think the idea is you stick it on the wall and chuck a dart at it, since that is probably the most accurate way of predicting any outcome at this point.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> Today's Times' 'what next?' flowchart is interesting


Summed up as “Anything could happen in the next half hour”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> Today's Times' 'what next?' flowchart is interesting





May's fucked and chaos abounds whatever happens. Warms the cockles of my heart it does, what says andysays?


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> May's fucked and chaos abounds whatever happens. Warms the cockles of my heart it does, what says andysays?


Warms the heart of my cockles too, but I'm hoping the chaos and fuckedness extends well beyond the current PM and contributes to undermining the whole rotten edifice.


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> leave is turning out to be a people carrier that can do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds while being economical and easy to park
> What people want and what's actually possible are completely different things.



What I wanted (along with others) was a leave that was possible.   What we got, was to be ignored completely.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Summed up as “Anything could happen in the next half hour”


How Dare You! _Strong and Stable_.


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Summed up as “Anything could happen in the next half hour”


Sort of, although an awful lot of those flows end in 'general election'


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> Sort of, although an awful lot of those flows end in 'general election'


Maybe a reset involving a batwing Delorean or Bobby Ewing walking out of the shower.


----------



## killer b (Dec 6, 2018)

(Fwiw I'm unconvinced there'll be a general election. But I'm not convinced by anything else either.)


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Maybe a reset involving a batwing Delorean or Bobby Ewing walking out of the shower.


Now you're showing your age


----------



## teuchter (Dec 6, 2018)

andysays said:


> Warms the heart of my cockles too, but I'm hoping the chaos and fuckedness extends well beyond the current PM and contributes to undermining the whole rotten edifice.


What exactly is it that you hope happens, in non hand-wavy terms?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 6, 2018)

gosub said:


> What we got, was to be ignored completely.



It's true that nothing has happened as a consequence of the leave vote. Everything has carried on just like it would have otherwise. Everyone's forgotten about the referendum and there's nothing to see here.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

MickiQ said:


> Now you're showing your age




I was born before we even _joined_ the EU or the _common market_ as it was in my day.   At least we still had pounds, shillings and Mike Pence and you could smoke in hospitals then. It's all friends reunited and Gameboys nowadays, don't think we'll ever get the bend back in our bananas.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I was born before we even _joined_ the EU or the _common market_ as it was in my day.   At least we still had pounds, shillings and Mike Pence and you could smoke in hospitals then. It's all friends reunited and Gameboys nowadays, don't think we'll ever get the bend back in our bananas.


you were there when jesus christ had his moment and died in vain 



or was that sasaferrato?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 6, 2018)

killer b said:


> (Fwiw I'm unconvinced there'll be a general election. But I'm not convinced by anything else either.)



I'm guessing an election would go down pretty badly with the public.  I think most of sick of it by now and when the last one got called many were more than miffed.  Besides it doesn't seem to me that an election would actually solve anything.  Even in the unlikely scenario of one party gaining a clear majority the parties themselves are do divided would anything come of it?

I suppose a few more loyal tories might make a May deal mark 2 possible.  I can't see the tories wanting an election, they are genuinely worried / scared about a Corbyn led Labour party, more worried than I've seen them in my adult life.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you were there when jesus christ had his moment and died in vain
> 
> 
> 
> or was that sasaferrato?


We used to sing that song at meetings of the European Iron and Steel Community, that Beethoven feller hadn't written The Ode to Joy yet. A simpler time. Used to play rounders at school, I was the backstop.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We used to sing that song at meetings of the European Iron and Steel Community, that Beethoven feller hadn't written The Ode to Joy yet. A simpler time. Used to play rounders at school, I was the backstop.


when i was at primary school i was short for my age so i used to sit at the front but when the class became unruly sometimes i was the back's top


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's true that nothing has happened as a consequence of the leave vote. Everything has carried on just like it would have otherwise. Everyone's forgotten about the referendum and there's nothing to see here.



That I recognise as sarcasm.

The views, ideas, research and plans  that I, and others put forward both here, and elsewhere, over more than a decade ARE a matter of digital record.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 6, 2018)

gosub said:


> What I wanted (along with others) was a leave that was possible.   What we got, was to be ignored completely.



you got stuffed because people were too busy wanking to Ayn Rand and visions of singapore and the few weirdos in favor of lexit think cuba is a model worth following missing the fact they arnt even invited to the table.
  EU maybe far from perfect beats being a cold wet puto rico without even the ability to dance


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> you got stuffed because people were too busy wanking to Ayn Rand and visions of singapore and the few weirdos in favor of lexit think cuba is a model worth following missing the fact they arnt even invited to the table.
> EU maybe far from perfect beats being a cold wet puto rico without even the ability to dance


puerto rico

puerto rico does of course have the benefit of a caribbean climate


----------



## Crispy (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> a cold wet puerto rico


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> puerto rico
> 
> puerto rico does of course have the benefit of a caribbean climate


How to Help Puerto Rico and Other Islands After Hurricane Maria


----------



## chilango (Dec 6, 2018)

_Puto Rico_ does have an meaning in Spanish perhaps though....


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

likesfish said:


> you got stuffed because people were too busy wanking to Ayn Rand and visions of singapore and the few weirdos in favor of lexit think cuba is a model worth following missing the fact they arnt even invited to the table.
> EU maybe far from perfect beats being a cold wet puto rico without even the ability to dance


We got stuffed coz people were far more interested on venting about how those ideas were nuts than they were in working towards a pragmatic way forward.  

But division always makes for more entertaining copy


----------



## teuchter (Dec 6, 2018)

gosub said:


> That I recognise as sarcasm.
> 
> The views, ideas, research and plans  that I, and others put forward both here, and elsewhere, over more than a decade ARE a matter of digital record.



What was your plan for NI? Are you sure your plans were ignored rather than rejected?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 6, 2018)

Only a cartographical expression of (extrapolated) polling numbers, I know, but rarely has such a map so starkly screamed political failure.

btw, wtaf is wrong with the sampled folk in those 2 red constituencies?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 6, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Only a cartographical expression of (extrapolated) polling numbers, I know, but rarely has such a map so starkly screamed political failure.
> 
> btw, wtaf is wrong with the sampled folk in those 2 red constituencies?
> 
> View attachment 154699


But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.


Makes you wonder why they bother with votes.   Mayb3 cost benefit analysis is that the sham is cheaper than dealing the public order problems of not having them


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

wonder if the USA 'll have us? adding Britain might just make it Great again


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.


So just have "our" representatives decide for us?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

the alternative being what?
serious question.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

Delegate democracy, economic democracy, soviets.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

Fine by me. Is that it then?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 6, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Only a cartographical expression of (extrapolated) polling numbers, I know, but rarely has such a map so starkly screamed political failure.



Why does it scream 'political failure'? To me it just screams 'misleading graphic'.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So just have "our" representatives decide for us?


That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.



You may be onto something, more votes are required.  We'll vote our way out of this mess.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's still voting. In fact it's voting twice, so it just compounds the problem.


So what are you suggesting then?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> Fine by me. Is that it then?


Well it will do for starters. Control of the MoP is the aim.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So what are you suggesting then?


Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy. The fact that the same survey can produce completely different results by switching between two counting systems both widely considered legitimate shows that the results of a vote can be largely arbitrary.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy.


Of course it is. But the answer is not to reduce democracy but to increase it.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course it is. But the answer is not to reduce democracy but to increase it.


I'm not saying anything should be reduced. I'm saying that looking at the result of a general election, or a vote in Parliament, or a referendum and calling it the will of the people is, at least part of the time, a mistake, or possibly a lie.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> the alternative being what?
> serious question.


Benevolent dictatorship.


----------



## yield (Dec 6, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Benevolent dictatorship.


Green dictatorship.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

yield said:


> Green dictatorship.


Bowling green


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Just that it's a mistake to think that just because you've had a vote you have a democracy. The fact that the same survey can produce completely different results by switching between two counting systems both widely considered legitimate shows that the results of a vote can be largely arbitrary.


Not really. If you're offering a choice between more than two options, taking the one that is the favourite of more people to be the winner doesn't make much sense, particularly when in this case two of the options are versions of leave but only one is a version of remain. It's not arbitrary to use a preference system to get your result - it's the way of getting the least-hated option as the winner. In most votes of this nature, 'least hated' is probably the best you can do. But this is also an illustration of how the first vote wasn't a mandate for the various things that have been proposed to have been mandated by it - particularly the ending of free movement from/to the EU. 

One way out of this mess may be for May's deal to be voted down, for May to then resign, and then for May's successor to announce an extension of A50 in order to allow for a general election and calling a general election. That way, everyone can campaign giving a clear idea of what they intend to do next: cancel brexit (which is very likely to be an option from Monday), hold a second ref (which I think would not be a very popular option), or go back in to renegotiate a new deal (with details of what you'll be trying to achieve). Regarding democracy, I think this is about the most democratic option available. It could lead to a cancellation of brexit, but not until there has been a democratic debate and process. Either way, it would put the onus back on those who seek to govern to say how they will try to govern. At the moment, you have 'the referendum must be honoured' being used by various parties, currently May, to cover up for the crap job they're doing.


----------



## andysays (Dec 6, 2018)

Neither May nor her successor can simply announce an A50 extension,  it has to be agreed by all the other EU govts (although I imagine they would agree, if perhaps grudgingly or with conditions)


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Well it will do for starters. Control of the MoP is the aim.



I almost certainly dream similar dreams - but - how we use Brexit to gain control of the Means of Production .. I mean exactly how, in stages .. I'm missing that bit. It's actually my number 1 gripe with this whole mess.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> I almost certainly dream similar dreams - but - how we use Brexit to gain control of the Means of Production .. I mean exactly how, in stages .. I'm missing that bit. It's actually my number 1 gripe with this whole mess.


Regardless of the UK leaving the EU or not, greater democracy has to be something socialists/communists/anarchists push for.

It was always there but the contempt for democracy that liberal pro-EU pricks have come out with since the referendum shows which side they are on and it isn't ours.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

No it isn't - and neither is the _leave _shit, outside of eg the Morning Star's take on it all. The people chiefly responsible for the planning, promotion and execution of Leave / Brexit, they're not on our side. We're letting them get away with this egregious fuckery because we don't want to be in the EU, but what we're going to gain from it apart from some abstract nouns is truly a mystery to me.

And as for how we get from ''here'' to ''there'', well.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 6, 2018)

mojo pixy said:


> No it isn't - and neither is the _leave _shit, outside of eg the Morning Star's take on it all. The people chiefly responsible for the planning, promotion and execution of Leave / Brexit, they're not on our side. We're letting them get away with this egregious fuckery because we don't want to be in the EU, but what we're going to gain from it apart from some abstract nouns is truly a mystery to me.
> 
> And as for how we get from ''here'' to ''there'', well.


We just have a t


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 6, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> We just have a t


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 6, 2018)

Raheem said:


> But note that using the Condorcet method, May's deal wins, according to the same survey. Nicely illustrates the fallacy that voting necessarily gives you the people's will.



Apparently it gives you the will of people in, where is that, Watford and Bournemouth?

Harlow and Christchurch maybe.


----------



## gosub (Dec 6, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What was your plan for NI? Are you sure your plans were ignored rather than rejected?


My start point on that would have been acknowledging the need for a hard border (mostly hedge (thus free movement of wild life (snakes and that sort of thing) but hard enough to stop findus horse lasagne. Promise to bring people doing bat shit things with wood chip burners under close examination of the law and as to the vexing  complex long standing argument argument at the core of the troubles....

To me the colour of cheese and onion crisps is as much an inter island matter as as an inter Ireland one ...as much is true of both islands.


----------



## paolo (Dec 6, 2018)

Corbyn’s latest pitch.

Not much we didn’t know already, but he’s now put his voice behind the conference decision on 2nd ref:

“if under the current rules we cannot get an election, all options must be on the table. Those should include Labour’s alternative and, as our conference decided in September, the option of campaigning for a public vote to break the deadlock.”

Jeremy Corbyn: Labour could do a better Brexit deal. Give us the chance


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 6, 2018)

I respect anyone who still truly believes in a lexit outcome to this - seriously - my  jaundiced and cynical outlook still has the same old shit running the show afterwards. I wish I could believe in anything else at the minute


----------



## Crispy (Dec 6, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> an extension of A50 in order to allow for a general election and calling a general election. That way, everyone can campaign giving a clear idea of what they intend to do next: cancel brexit (which is very likely to be an option from Monday), hold a second ref (which I think would not be a very popular option), or go back in to renegotiate a new deal (with details of what you'll be trying to achieve).


But neither party even _have_ a clear idea of what they intend to do next.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 6, 2018)

unknown unknowns


----------



## paolo (Dec 6, 2018)

It’s come to something when the Economist runs their “end of year awards” opinion piece on the parliamentary establishment, which can be summarised as “bunch of cunts”.

The Economist | Prize idiots 
Our end-of-year awards celebrate the worst in politics


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 6, 2018)

McDonnell gets a nod for having a brain


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2018)

Crispy said:


> But neither party even _have_ a clear idea of what they intend to do next.


I know. That's why there needs to be a general election. Force them to make a stand. The big thing that has been absent from this whole process is accountability - governments can't hold the electorate accountable for their policies in the way May is currently trying to do. A new government elected after this fiasco will be able to be held accountable for what they do. If they decide to continue with brexit, they can be held accountable for any consequent mess. If they decide to cancel it, they can at least put that up as what they intend to do before the election, giving it some legitimacy. 

Probably not a popular thing to say on here, but imo a brave move (and possibly a smart move) for Labour would be to campaign on a policy of cancelling brexit - not a 2nd ref, just revoking A50. Be honest about it - there is no such thing as a 'good deal'; there's no magic wand a labour negotiation team would be able to wave; any deal they might bring to a second ref, they wouldn't really believe that it was better than just not brexitting at all - 'we've worked really hard to get you this deal, but we recommend you vote against it' even if done in good faith just sounds like a stitch-up. Brexit done this way at least is just a bad idea - that's what most of them think. Let them say it. Admit that it was a mistake to support triggering A50 as they did. But at the same time really engage about the things you intend to do regarding austerity, the housing crisis, etc. Brexit is not the answer to any of those questions. 

imo Labour have handled this very very badly. They've allowed themselves to be dragged into it and tarnished by it. That makes doing the above trickier. But what other solution is there? Taking a bad deal to a 2nd ref doesn't solve anything -  we're back to politicians trying to blame the electorate for the consequences of their policies.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

Wookey said:


> "Why do people cut themselves? Obviously, because they are unhappy, frustrated, angry. They feel that no one cares about them, no one listens to them. But it still seems hard to understand the attractions of inflicting pain on yourself. Three things seem to make cutting addictive. One is that it gives the pain you feel a name and a location. It becomes tangible and visible – it has an immediate focus that is somehow more tolerable than the larger, deeper distress. The second is that it provides the illusion of control. You choose to do it – you are taking an action and producing a result. It is a kind of power, even if the only one you can exercise that power over is yourself and even if the only thing you can do to yourself is damage. And the third is that it can seem in an unhappy mind like an act of love.
> 
> You can hurt yourself for someone or something. “So,” sings the great balladeer of English self-pity Morrissey, “scratch my name on your arm with a fountain pen. This means you really love me.” For some, marking Leave on the ballot paper in June 2016 was a way of scratching the name of England on their arms to prove their love."
> 
> That is amazing. Properly describes a lot of what I've been thinking of the emotional reasoning behind many people's Brexit vote.



Despicable and beyond tasteless. you liberals will be the first to parade it above all of us how in tune you are with mental health difficulties and will deploy it in such a crass way to point score. filth. no wonder mh services in this country are fucked. even if they were well funded this kind of snobbery would just alienate people even more.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 7, 2018)

dialectician said:


> Despicable and beyond tasteless. you'll be the first to parade it above all of us how in tune you are with mental health and will deploy it in such a crss way to point score. filth.



You have issues beyond this thread mate.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fintan O'Toole may be many things, but second-rate writer is not one of them. Here he is back in February laying out exactly the problem that has led to exactly this deal from May, and that _had to_ lead to this deal.
> 
> Sometimes an outside voice is needed, and I think this is one of those instances. When he says this
> 
> ...



Intellectual rigor, amirite?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

Wookey said:


> You have issues beyond this thread mate.



No, i am making a valid political point. MH is political. don't fucking call me mate either, especially when it will be you social democrats to sell us out to the far right if ever a situation like that arises. thanks.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know. That's why there needs to be a general election. Force them to make a stand. The big thing that has been absent from this whole process is accountability - governments can't hold the electorate accountable for their policies in the way May is currently trying to do. A new government elected after this fiasco will be able to be held accountable for what they do. If they decide to continue with brexit, they can be held accountable for any consequent mess. If they decide to cancel it, they can at least put that up as what they intend to do before the election, giving it some legitimacy.
> 
> Probably not a popular thing to say on here, but imo a brave move (and possibly a smart move) for Labour would be to campaign on a policy of cancelling brexit - not a 2nd ref, just revoking A50. Be honest about it - there is no such thing as a 'good deal'; there's no magic wand a labour negotiation team would be able to wave; any deal they might bring to a second ref, they wouldn't really believe that it was better than just not brexitting at all - 'we've worked really hard to get you this deal, but we recommend you vote against it' even if done in good faith just sounds like a stitch-up. Brexit done this way at least is just a bad idea - that's what most of them think. Let them say it. Admit that it was a mistake to support triggering A50 as they did. But at the same time really engage about the things you intend to do regarding austerity, the housing crisis, etc. Brexit is not the answer to any of those questions.
> 
> imo Labour have handled this very very badly. They've allowed themselves to be dragged into it and tarnished by it. That makes doing the above trickier. But what other solution is there? Taking a bad deal to a 2nd ref doesn't solve anything -  we're back to politicians trying to blame the electorate for the consequences of their policies.


They had the chance to make a stand at the last election and neither did. What makes you think they'll do it this time?
and please stop projecting your "cancel brexit" preference behind the deep political insights with every.single.one.of.your.fucking.posts...please.


----------



## Humberto (Dec 7, 2018)

I see it coming out as basically staying in the EU with less benefits vs shoot ourselves in the face and no deal. We've had a succession of ministers that have tactically resigned or been booted out after getting us nowhere. Keir Starmer is still there. What does he stand for? Are they all hiding behind a Lexit by stealth or let them topple themselves gamble? At the end of the day, politics doesn't go on hold because of a hung parliament/Brexit impasse


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course it is. But the answer is not to reduce democracy but to increase it.



Or alternatively


----------



## paolo (Dec 7, 2018)

Humberto said:


> At the end of the day, politics doesn't go on hold because of a hung parliament/Brexit impasse



Right now though, that’s exactly what it feels like. We’re in a weird never-seen-before stasis cum turmoil.

It *shouldn’t* be like this, for sure, but we are where are, and it’s rubbish for anyone with an interest either way.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

This thread like no other really shows the divide.
You can feel the ardent remainers frothing at the prospect that this threat to thier privileges could be collapsing, that the restoration of the stability and growth of thier  privilged status quo is within grasp. They're going for the kill.
While the few of us that have the bottle, or better said the misfortune in life - through permanently peering into the financial abyss, realise that that brexit poses a lifetime opportunity to front the old UK elites, the core of capital no less, to a proverbial one-on-one ''outside in the carpark" are being left exposed.
Sure, that fight still needs to be settled, but what a bunch of worthless shitcunts some are, doing the elites dirty work for them from within our ranks, spreadibg the neoliberal fear of 'negative growth', 'drops in house prices', '''what will the city think?'... 
Scared that mummy and daddy's wealth will be wiped out and all that inheritance turn to shit?
Lexit here nor there, the rise of corbyn on the back of brexit wasnt just a coincidence and coversely, still banging on about remain 2 years down the line is nothing short of a knife in the back of socialism.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> This thread like no other really shows the divide.
> You can feel the ardent remainers frothing at the prospect that this threat to thier privileges could be collapsing, that the restoration of the stability and growth of thier  privilged status quo is within grasp. They're going for the kill.
> While the few of us that have the bottle, or better said the misfortune in life - through permanently peering into the financial abyss, realise that that brexit poses a lifetime opportunity to front the old UK elites, the core of capital no less, to a proverbial one-on-one ''outside in the carpark" are being left exposed.
> Sure, that fight still needs to be settled, but what a bunch of worthless shitcunts some are, doing the elites dirty work for them from within our ranks, spreadibg the neoliberal fear of 'negative growth', 'drops in house prices', '''what will the city think?'...
> ...


More hand-wavy stuff.
What or where exactly is the carpark of opportunity?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> This thread like no other really shows the divide.
> You can feel the ardent remainers frothing at the prospect that this threat to thier privileges could be collapsing, that the restoration of the stability and growth of thier  privilged status quo is within grasp. They're going for the kill.
> While the few of us that have the bottle, or better said the misfortune in life - through permanently peering into the financial abyss, realise that that brexit poses a lifetime opportunity to front the old UK elites, the core of capital no less, to a proverbial one-on-one ''outside in the carpark" are being left exposed.
> Sure, that fight still needs to be settled, but what a bunch of worthless shitcunts some are, doing the elites dirty work for them from within our ranks, spreadibg the neoliberal fear of 'negative growth', 'drops in house prices', '''what will the city think?'... scared that mummy and daddy's wealth will be wiped out and all that inheritance turn to shit.
> Lexit here nor there, the rise of corbyn on the back of brexit wasnt just a coincidence - and coversely, still banging on about remain now is a vote for privileged neoliberalism - and a knife in the back of socialism.



oh please fuck off with the self righteous prolier-than-thou-wank. most people on here who are anti-brexit hold that position because they believe it will  make things significantly worse for the people who are already fucked over - i.e higher prices, unemployment, even greater cuts to services plus the clear hazard of  the shredding of regulations across a whole host of areas from employment rights to food standards to health and safety. oh - and the threat of nhs privatisation. and the fucking over of the lives of everyone in northern ireland cos the reintroduction of the border.
has one single person mentioned fucking house prices? or what the city will think?

I work in a community centre in one of the most deprived areas of leeds. I am absolutely certain that brexit will make it significantly harder to fund the programs we run - everything from benefits advice to a bike library to community arts to advocacy to a  youth club. Because there will be less money from local authorities and other funders. At the the same time the demand for our services will increase.
There is no great opportunity that a radicalised working class is going to up and seize. they will not be confronting the captains of capital one on one in the carpark.  It will just make life  even meaner and shitter for people who are already on the edge.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 7, 2018)

I'd think something pretty fucking shifty was going on if I confronted the old UK elites in a carpark and Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson offered to hold my coat.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 7, 2018)

Trying to work out whether the car park analogy is better or shitter than the divorce one. Or maybe Brexit is actually like a divorce on a car park.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> has one single person mentioned fucking house prices? or what the city will think?


Numerous people have talked about how leaving the EU will 'harm the economy', the analysis of the BoE has been posited as a neutral apolitical body, the spoutings of libdem 'trade experts' have been posted favourably.



mojo pixy said:


> No it isn't - and neither is the _leave _shit, outside of eg the Morning Star's take on it all. The people chiefly responsible for the planning, promotion and execution of Leave / Brexit, they're not on our side.


Of course they aren't. But the difference is that no one on U75 (bar a few UKIP-lite loons who inevitably get booted after a while) has argued that they are. Whereas some U75 posters have argued that the EU is on the side of the workers, individuals/groups supporting remain have been quoted approvingly regardless of their shitty politics


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

'the economy.'


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> There is no great opportunity that a radicalised working class is going to up and seize. they will not be confronting the captains of capital one on one in the carpark.  It will just make life  even meaner and shitter for people who are already on the edge.



ive said it loads of times there is no 'lexit' and whatever the result, remain will win. but it is dubious at best that your side (not you personally btw!) is willing to castigate people who advance this line or refused to vote. imagine being uncritical of an institution that contributed to the deaths of nearly 4000 migrants and refugees alone last year.

And leading on from this everything gets made to retrofit into a guilt tripping narritive.

workers get sacked/capital pushes chhanges on industry? brexit. more cuts? brexit.
unions fail to represent immigrants? brexit.
corbyn puts more cops on the table? fortress britain and brexit.

rise in racism? brexit

more knife crime? brexit.

this is hardly analysis is it. it's just succumbing to media spectacle.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I work in a community centre in one of the most deprived areas of leeds...



Bully for you. EU funded by any chance?


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know. That's why there needs to be a general election. Force them to make a stand. The big thing that has been absent from this whole process is accountability - governments can't hold the electorate accountable for their policies in the way May is currently trying to do. A new government elected after this fiasco will be able to be held accountable for what they do. If they decide to continue with brexit, they can be held accountable for any consequent mess. If they decide to cancel it, they can at least put that up as what they intend to do before the election, giving it some legitimacy.
> 
> Probably not a popular thing to say on here, but imo a brave move (and possibly a smart move) for Labour would be to campaign on a policy of cancelling brexit - not a 2nd ref, just revoking A50. Be honest about it - there is no such thing as a 'good deal'; there's no magic wand a labour negotiation team would be able to wave; any deal they might bring to a second ref, they wouldn't really believe that it was better than just not brexitting at all - 'we've worked really hard to get you this deal, but we recommend you vote against it' even if done in good faith just sounds like a stitch-up. Brexit done this way at least is just a bad idea - that's what most of them think. Let them say it. Admit that it was a mistake to support triggering A50 as they did. But at the same time really engage about the things you intend to do regarding austerity, the housing crisis, etc. Brexit is not the answer to any of those questions.
> 
> imo Labour have handled this very very badly. They've allowed themselves to be dragged into it and tarnished by it. That makes doing the above trickier. But what other solution is there? Taking a bad deal to a 2nd ref doesn't solve anything -  we're back to politicians trying to blame the electorate for the consequences of their policies.


#desperately attempts to avoid mangling that Brecht quote about the government kicking out the electorate and appointing another one. Fails...#


----------



## andysays (Dec 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> More hand-wavy stuff.
> What or where exactly is the carpark of opportunity?


The car park of opportunity leads to the shopping centre of the imagination


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2018)

andysays said:


> #desperately attempts to avoid mangling that Brecht quote about the government kicking out the electorate and appointing another one. Fails...#



This bit?

_*"...the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?"*_​


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Bully for you. EU funded by any chance?


I agree with a lot of what you posted on this thread. And I know that sometimes it can be exasperating (I've been a bit quick off the trigger myself occasionally), but I think this is a bit unfair.

I disagree with much of Kaka Tim's analysis but he's motivated by a genuine concern about how the UK leaving the EU will affect his local community - just as you are.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Trying to work out whether the car park analogy is better or shitter than the divorce one. Or maybe Brexit is actually like a divorce on a car park.


or that half of 'the left' don't have the will to fight the fight that needs to be fought, but would rather sneer from the sidelines.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Dec 7, 2018)

I'm curious about why Lexit seems to be such a British thing. It's at odds with the views of Podemos, Syriza and  the rest of the left (mostly) in the mainland EU. There's certainly a degree or ten of Euroscepticism but there's also a willingness to turn it into a community of nations among the left nationalists and there are ideas like mutualisation of debt being floated (although Podemos would like national control of currency brought back, I think). Is a return to at least the social  Europe envisaged by Brandt not an option? Achieved by staying in and changing things? 

Britain obviously has an opinion about Europe that crosses ideologies while Spain, say, has a generally positive almost visceral need to be in a European community that also crosses similar ideologies.

Perhaps it's physical geography and history that changes the left's view of Europe in different parts of it.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> I agree with a lot of what you posted on this thread. And I know that sometimes it can be exasperating (I've been a bit quick off the trigger myself occasionally), but I think this is a bit unfair.
> 
> I disagree with much of Kaka Tim's analysis but he's motivated by a genuine concern about how the UK leaving the EU will affect his local community - just as you are.


I'm glad you picked up on that, and I completely agree with what you say. my comment was in context and probably only Kaka Tim got it. I was reflecting his own bully for you moment up thread, where he couldn't help himself by ridiculing my outlook on life despite being told about the precarious financial situation me and my family are in. It was a cunts trick and nobody pulled him up on it then... no respect. Back at him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm glad you picked up on that, and I completely agree with what you say. my comment was in context and probably only Kaka Tim got it. I was reflecting his own bully for you moment up thread, where he couldn't help himself by ridiculing my outlook on life despite being told about the precarious financial situation me and my family are in. It was a cunts trick and nobody pulled him up on it then... no respect. Back at him.


sorry, i missed that


----------



## co-op (Dec 7, 2018)

JuanTwoThree said:


> I'm curious about why Lexit seems to be such a British thing. It's at odds with the views of Podemos, Syriza and  the rest of the left (mostly) in the mainland EU. .



I've wondered this too. The best books I've read on why we need a lexit was Varoufakis's description of how the Syriza govt in Greece was destroyed by the EU and then you see him actually pounding the streets of Britain campaigning for Remain. Seriously I might have swallowed the mainstream Remain argument if I hadn't read him, and I still don't get how he can maintain the position. If it was Greece we were talking about then I can see it - it's a tiny country with a militarist nationalist Turkey next door, a collapsing state in Syria, refugees by the thousand, all sorts of war potential. But the UK? Surely he can see we have the option and given the reality of what the EU actually does (as opposed to its fluffy talk) we should be taking that seriously, at least to weaken the EU as much as possible. Don't get it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

co-op said:


> Varoufakis's description of how the Syriza govt in Greece was destroyed by the EU


and of course - *of course* - the uk government had nothing whatsoever to do with that, they just happened to be at the big table where decisions were made, purely by chance, stood idly by etc.


all the fault of the eu, nothing to do with auld blighty, right.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2018)

co-op said:


> But the UK? *Surely he can see we have the option *and...



Do we?
What evidence of that would Yanis be able to see?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm glad you picked up on that, and I completely agree with what you say. my comment was in context and probably only Kaka Tim got it. I was reflecting his own bully for you moment up thread, where he couldn't help himself by ridiculing my outlook on life despite being told about the precarious financial situation me and my family are in. It was a cunts trick and nobody pulled him up on it then... no respect. Back at him.



You'll forgive us if we didn't get your coded reference to a post 500 pages back.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Bully for you. EU funded by any chance?



no. but so what if it was? there a lots of EU


pocketscience said:


> I'm glad you picked up on that, and I completely agree with what you say. my comment was in context and probably only Kaka Tim got it. I was reflecting his own bully for you moment up thread, where he couldn't help himself by ridiculing my outlook on life despite being told about the precarious financial situation me and my family are in. It was a cunts trick and nobody pulled him up on it then... no respect. Back at him.



i dont remember what led to that comment - and i'll fess up that is  comes across a bit snide - sorry. up until pretty recently i was in a similar situation - and many of my mates and most of the people i work with are either clinging on or going under.


----------



## co-op (Dec 7, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Do we?
> What evidence of that would Yanis be able to see?



Relative to Greece we do, surely that's clear? What's equivalent of the dangers of the eastern Med now for the UK? What threats do we face?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> This thread like no other really shows the divide.
> You can feel the ardent remainers frothing at the prospect that this threat to thier privileges could be collapsing, that the restoration of the stability and growth of thier  privilged status quo is within grasp. They're going for the kill.
> While the few of us that have the bottle, or better said the misfortune in life - through permanently peering into the financial abyss, realise that that brexit poses a lifetime opportunity to front the old UK elites, the core of capital no less, to a proverbial one-on-one ''outside in the carpark" are being left exposed.
> Sure, that fight still needs to be settled, but what a bunch of worthless shitcunts some are, doing the elites dirty work for them from within our ranks, spreadibg the neoliberal fear of 'negative growth', 'drops in house prices', '''what will the city think?'...
> ...


Out of interest, are you feeling as angry at Labour for blocking Brexit? (In particular by not voting for the transition deal)


----------



## co-op (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> up until pretty recently i was in a similar situation - and many of my mates and most of the people i work with are either clinging on or going under.



I know I'm late to this conversation but that's been the case for at least half of the people I know for the past 10 years. And even when you're up, you know it's just "for now", there's no long term security. How's the EU helped us get out of that trap?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> and of course - *of course* - the uk government had nothing whatsoever to do with that, they just happened to be at the big table where decisions were made, purely by chance, stood idly by etc.
> 
> 
> all the fault of the eu, nothing to do with auld blighty, right.



Its an interesting question because at the time it was very much portrayed as being a Eurozone issue rather than an EU one.  Whilst British governments have clearly had a lot of input into the original mess Greece found itself into I don't know how much involvement there was in the bailout conditions.  I remember Osborn was not at the table for those.  That being said there are always fingers in pies.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2018)

co-op said:


> Relative to Greece we do, surely that's clear? What's equivalent of the dangers of the eastern Med now for the UK? What threats do we face?


I'm yet to be convinced that 'we' have any option to leave the EU.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

co-op said:


> I know I'm late to this conversation but that's been the case for at least half of the people I know for the past 10 years. And even when you're up, you know it's just "for now", there's no long term security. How's the EU helped us get out of that trap?



it hasn't - but its not primarily down to the EU - the malasie is far more deep rooted and structural  than that - and primarily the result of deliberate uk gov policy and how its exacerbated rather then ameliorated the impact of  wider global forces. The question is weather leaving the EU makes the situation even worse


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> no. but so what if it was? there a lots of EU
> 
> 
> i dont remember what led to that comment - and i'll fess up that is  comes across a bit snide - sorry. up until pretty recently i was in a similar situation - and many of my mates and most of the people i work with are either clinging on or going under.


Fair enough. Apology accepted, but tbf it doesn't really bother me (remember, I try to stay positive) but it did make me more aware of the attitudes of remainers whenever the discussion veers towards the opportunities opening up to the left via brexit. A lot of snide stuff coming out of the remainer camp in those particular discussions - snuffing out opinions with ridicule - (and you're nowhere near the worst) - it needs challenging.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 7, 2018)

A bit of an emotive headline but just proof postive (as if we didn't already know) what a fucking evil shit Priti Patel is

Tory MP suggests using threat of 'no-deal' food shortages in Ireland to drop the backstop

Not much to add to the debate here regarding MPs but fucking hell the lack of awreness of Ireland and it's history from leaders of the Tories is to be expected but food shortages as a bargining chip, thats fucking emotive and stupid.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its an interesting question because at the time it was very much portrayed as being a Eurozone issue rather than an EU one.  Whilst British governments have clearly had a lot of input into the original mess Greece found itself into I don't know how much involvement there was in the bailout conditions.  I remember Osborn was not at the table for those.  That being said there are always fingers in pies.



https://assets.publishing.service.g...502291/54284_EU_Series_No1_Web_Accessible.pdf
so they could express a view about it even if they didn't have a vote on it


----------



## co-op (Dec 7, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its an interesting question because at the time it was very much portrayed as being a Eurozone issue rather than an EU one.  Whilst British governments have clearly had a lot of input into the original mess Greece found itself into I don't know how much involvement there was in the bailout conditions.  I remember Osborn was not at the table for those.  That being said there are always fingers in pies.



The Greek govt debt crisis was 100% a creation of the eurozone. It was turned into a disaster for the Greek people by the decision of the German and French govts to pay off all their own bank's loans to the Greek govt out of "taxpayers money" in France and Germany and then go after the Greek govt for almost full repayment despite the fact that it was bankrupt (and still is in reality). The UK wasn't part of the eurozone and the UK negotiated an explicit exemption from paying into the bankers bail out fund.

None of that was done out of anything except self-interest of course but the destruction of Greece is not something you can meaningfully lay at the UK govt's feet*.

ETA *in fact, with stunning hypocrisy, I have seen tory newspapers and tory brexiteer MPs denouncing "EU-imposed sado-austerity" in Greece.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

dialectician said:


> rise in racism? brexit


That bit is true. It was an openly racist and xenophobic campaign


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

flypanam said:


> A bit of an emotive headline but just proof postive (as if we didn't already know) what a fucking evil shit Priti Patel is
> 
> Tory MP suggests using threat of 'no-deal' food shortages in Ireland to drop the backstop
> 
> Not much to add to the debate here regarding MPs but fucking hell the lack of awreness of Ireland and it's history from leaders of the Tories is to be expected but food shortages as a bargining chip, thats fucking emotive and stupid.


even for a tory that's shit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 7, 2018)

She is fuckibg disgusting- as if that wasn’t already evident

The patronising attitude towards Ireland is DNA coded in Tory filth- they cannot help themselves


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

flypanam said:


> A bit of an emotive headline but just proof postive (as if we didn't already know) what a fucking evil shit Priti Patel is
> 
> Tory MP suggests using threat of 'no-deal' food shortages in Ireland to drop the backstop
> 
> Not much to add to the debate here regarding MPs but fucking hell the lack of awreness of Ireland and it's history from leaders of the Tories is to be expected but food shortages as a bargining chip, thats fucking emotive and stupid.



vile.  maybe she picked up a few tips from her holiday jaunt to israel  on how to deal with formerly occupied territories who wont toe the line.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Dec 7, 2018)

Priti Vacant


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> That bit is true. It was an openly racist and xenophobic campaign



Not really. resurgance of racism has been germinating in british society for years.

It might be a good pat on the back for white liberals, can reassure themselves that we live in a happy tolerant society and all but we have known that has been rarely the case. the limits to antiracism in this country are democratic communalist representation. and representation is not an emancipatory politics.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 7, 2018)

dialectician said:


> Not really. resurgance of racism has been germinating in british society for years.



I'm not sure its a resurgence so much as an unmasking.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Out of interest, are you feeling as angry at Labour for blocking Brexit? (In particular by not voting for the transition deal)


pocketscience ? Anyone?
Posters on here arent blocking Brexit: Labour, LibDem and SNP MPs are.



dialectician said:


> Not really. resurgance of racism has been germinating in british society for years.
> It might be a good pat on the back for white liberals, can reassure themselves that we live in a happy tolerant society and all but we have known that has been rarely the case. the limits to antiracism in this country are democratic communalist representation. and representation is not an emancipatory politics.


yes it has been germinating for years, and brexit gave it the legitimacy to come more out in the open. Stats show that and my own eyes and experiences show that. I dont care what white liberal back patters think - facts is facts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> pocketscience ? Anyone?
> Posters on here arent blocking Brexit: Labour, LibDem and SNP MPs are.


if truth be told it's may who has played the greatest role in blocking brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> yes it has been germinating for years, and brexit gave it the legitimacy to come more out in the open. Stats show that and my own eyes and experiences show that. I dont care what white liberal back patters think - facts is facts.


didn't think it ever really went away


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> didn't think it ever really went away


of course not.
 anyhow we've done this bit several times now


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if truth be told it's may who has played the greatest role in blocking brexit.


Not at this point though


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> yes it has been germinating for years, and brexit gave it the legitimacy to come more out in the open. Stats show that and my own eyes and experiences show that. I dont care what white liberal back patters think - facts is facts.



What makes you think labour hasn't been legitimising it either and not just labour leavers.

I mean if anyone was arguing that all leavers are the noble salt of the earth then they are fucking cretins to begin with. noone is arguing that on this forum. some people are arguing for 'the people' though. blech.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Not at this point though


take a look at it.

she refuses to think of remaining in the single market. she refuses to join efta. she calls a wholly unnecessary election which loses her the tory majority. she faffs about getting davis to negotiate away while she prepares something completely different behind the scenes, leading to his resignation. she runs with this bollocks plan and refuses to countenance any alternative. she's run the clock down so the only alternatives are no deal or no brexit. i'd say she's done a fantastic job of blocking brexit.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> yes it has been germinating for years, and brexit gave it the legitimacy to come more out in the open. Stats show that and my own eyes and experiences show that. I dont care what white liberal back patters think - facts is facts.



What do you think may have been contributing to the germination of xenophobia in the UK over the (insert number of) years?


----------



## likesfish (Dec 7, 2018)

flypanam said:


> A bit of an emotive headline but just proof postive (as if we didn't already know) what a fucking evil shit Priti Patel is
> 
> Tory MP suggests using threat of 'no-deal' food shortages in Ireland to drop the backstop
> 
> Not much to add to the debate here regarding MPs but fucking hell the lack of awreness of Ireland and it's history from leaders of the Tories is to be expected but food shortages as a bargining chip, thats fucking emotive and stupid.



Jesus fuck I can't actually belive anyone would be that stupid she really should be publicly shamed for that.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2018)

grauniad have been running 'motorways blocked with lorries, unburied dead, planes chartered for medicines' stories.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2018)

In what seventh circle of political hell does Kinnock jnr yield the answer.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Out of interest, are you feeling as angry at Labour for blocking Brexit? (In particular by not voting for the transition deal)


Not sure angry's the word. The Labour Party being hijacked by liberals is nothing new.
it was mentioned here a few pages ago that if the LP entertains a second referendum, the party will split itself into oblivion - so yes, I think it is a shame to see any oppertunity for radical change be snuffed out. I can't get _angry_ about the LP anymore though.

It does get my goat up seeing the lack of fight on a website that I once liked to think was towards the radical end of the left wing anarchist spectrum and yes, I get positively angry when that lack of fight turns into a wierd kind of anti-brexit neoliberal evangelism on here.

like...  <--- that angry


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 7, 2018)

brogdale said:


> In what seventh circle of political hell does Kinnock jnr yield the answer.
> 
> View attachment 154808


everytime I think of him now I also think of his wifes voice in the background 'why are you doing this? why now?'


----------



## brogdale (Dec 7, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> everytime I think of him now I also think of his wifes voice in the background 'why are you doing this? why now?'


SK - "*I don't know." *


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Not sure angry's the word. The Labour Party being hijacked by liberals is nothing new.
> it was mentioned here a few pages ago that if the LP entertains a second referendum, the party will split itself into oblivion - so yes, I think it is a shame to see any oppertunity for radical change be snuffed out. I can't get _angry_ about the LP anymore though.
> 
> It does get my goat up seeing the lack of fight on a website that I once liked to think was towards the radical end of the left wing anarchist spectrum and yes, I get positively angry when that lack of fight turns into a wierd kind of anti-brexit neoliberal evangelism on here.
> ...


But taking things as they are do you think Labour should vote for the deal?


----------



## likesfish (Dec 7, 2018)

problem with getting out of the EU is the people who are in charge of Brexit are right wing fruit loops using immigration as the excuse.

so its a choice of the EU a bit shit or Being trumps gimp


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> But taking things as they are do you think Labour should vote for the deal?


no, but that wont help their case either at this stage of the game. Getting caught up arguing about May's 50 shades of shit is pointless.
They should have been building the  case for a radical left wing brexit right from the start.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> no, but that wont help their case either at this stage of the game. Getting caught up arguing about May's 50 shades of shit is pointless.
> They should have been building the  case for a radical left wing brexit right from the start.


very hard for a party which isn't either radical or left-wing


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> very hard for a party which isn't either radical or left-wing


hope sprang fleetingly


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Not sure angry's the word.


Confused is probably better. There is no lexit.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Confused is probably better. There is no lexit.


right on cue 
snub out any dicourse of a left wing post brexit society repeating in the most certain of terms that it doesn't exist.  condition us to the ways of your liberal overlords. Drinketh from the cup the cool aid of the devine lord Vince Cable.
Amen


----------



## ska invita (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> They should have been stating the  case for a radical left wing brexit right from the start.


What difference do Labour's hypothetical possible pronouncements make? The Tories were in power and it's their Brexit that the referendum was for. It was Aaron and Nigel and Boris leading the campaign, for a Tory party to instigate. 

If it had been an openly Lexit Brexit at the referendum I may well have voted for it. But the passionate case made by Lexiters, here and elsewhere, is Vote For It Anyway ... Vote For This Brexit On Offer. You;re still saying it today:


pocketscience said:


> While the few of us that have the bottle, or better said the misfortune in life - through permanently peering into the financial abyss, realise that that *brexit poses a lifetime opportunity to front the old UK elites*, the core of capital no less, to a proverbial one-on-one ''outside in the carpark" are being left exposed.


Its  a once in a lifetime opportunity. So I dont know understand why now you say 


pocketscience said:


> no


Is this very different from your expectations? It isnt from mine.

I'm fairly convinced by the argument that leaving the EU is *that* important, that it will all be worth, and especially now the referendum was won I'm basically of the mind Les Get On With It Then. That makes me want Mays deal to go through at this stage. Anything else really is a backing out of the initial vote. Though that said I dont feel like more referendum are undemocratic - by their nature they are more democratic. But yeah, Id rather we just Brexited now and I think all the Brexit Betrayal stuff, Brexit Means Exit, is completely justified. And Labour are at the heart of it.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

]


ska invita said:


> So I dont know understand why now you say
> [no]


because that would send the signal that the LP endorses the tories and thus weaken the LP ahead of the next GE.
l think the LP was right in letting the tories get on with their own brexit and allow them to continue to spactaculatly implode. but at the same time they should have been making a clearer principled stand for a real left wing post brexit society. I'm thinking that moment has passed now and even worse, the talk of a 2nd ref is a huge step backwards.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 7, 2018)

ska invita said:


> What difference do Labour's hypothetical possible pronouncements make? The Tories were in power and it's their Brexit that the referendum was for. It was Aaron and Nigel and Boris leading the campaign, for a Tory party to instigate.
> 
> If it had been an openly Lexit Brexit at the referendum I may well have voted for it. But the passionate case made by Lexiters, here and elsewhere, is Vote For It Anyway ... Vote For This Brexit On Offer. You;re still saying it today:
> 
> ...



You want May's deal to go through? Interesting - is there anyone else here who wants it to pass? 

Think we need another poll I'd certainly love to see the answers!


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm glad you picked up on that, and I completely agree with what you say. my comment was in context and probably only Kaka Tim got it. I was reflecting his own bully for you moment up thread, where he couldn't help himself by ridiculing my outlook on life despite being told about the precarious financial situation me and my family are in. It was a cunts trick and nobody pulled him up on it then... no respect. Back at him.


OK. Sorry I missed that post and yes it was out of order (and fair play to KT for apologising).


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You want May's deal to go through? Interesting - is there anyone else here who wants it to pass?
> 
> Think we need another poll I'd certainly love to see the answers!


we all want it to pass


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> right on cue
> snub out any dicourse of a left wing post brexit society repeating in the most certain of terms that it doesn't exist.  condition us to the ways of your liberal overlords. Drinketh from the cup the cool aid of the devine lord Vince Cable.
> Amen


Right on cue.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 7, 2018)

Defeat in tuesdsy i recon about 70 or 80 votes


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 7, 2018)

extra dry said:


> Defeat in tuesdsy i recon about 70 or 80 votes



I'm hoping it tops the ton and then they immediately do it again just to rub May's nose in it.  I'm way past caring what actually happens (because I have zero influence over any of it anyway) and now I'm just in it for the lols.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 7, 2018)

Me too, but family and urbanites, lots of friendsstuck in deadend jobs hopelessly struggling to make ends meet, only to see prices going for ever up, sluggish economy, the weather etc


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I'm hoping it tops the ton and then they immediately do it again just to rub May's nose in it.  I'm way past caring what actually happens (because I have zero influence over any of it anyway) and now I'm just in it for the lols.



well - this is actually a serious point. We watching the political establishment in meltdown, the tory's tearing themselves apart and the wet dreams of the brit neo-cons get flushed down the toilet - its hilarious but an utterly discredited system also offers space for more radical ideas to get through whatever happens next. (health warning - although space for far right ideas as well)


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2018)

May and the cabinet seem to be thinking about postponing the vote whilst simultaneously saying they won't (Schrodinger's brexit etc.). I won't link to the stories, no point, it's just the same straws floating round and round. But the existence of those stories shows how fucked up the whole thing is. There's no telling whether the house of commons may inherited would have been easier, but her cynical decision to call an election keeps giving and giving. Ha ha.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 7, 2018)

I would venture to say that if Brexit where to be stopped, that would open the door or present on a plate ideal grounds for far-# to emerge furthur stronger, with greater not less support.

People with no voice or believe they have not been listened to will turn to the loudest voice in there corner.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> May and the cabinet seem to be thinking about postponing the vote whilst simultaneously saying they won't (Schrodinger's brexit etc.). I won't link to the stories, no point, it's just the same straws floating round and round. But the existence of those stories shows how fucked up the whole thing is. There's no telling whether the house of commons may inherited would have been easier, but her cynical decision to call an election keeps giving and giving. Ha ha.



apparently  - because of the "meaningful vote" amendment from last year - she cant cancel the vote without a vote in parliament to postpone it.

Even if Theresa May wants to delay the meaningful vote, she can't

how shit must it be to be theresa may right now?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 7, 2018)

Bloody hell, Tony Robinson has full-on centrist dad rage doesn't he?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 7, 2018)

extra dry said:


> I would venture to say that if Brexit where to be stopped, that would open the door or present on a plate ideal grounds for far-# to emerge furthur stronger, with greater not less support.
> 
> People with no voice or believe they have not been listened to will turn to the loudest voice in there corner.



i think most people will just shrug tbh - people are utterly fucked off and bored with the whole thing. the ukip types and associated fash will huff and puff - but their main impact will be fracturing the tory party and splitting their vote.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 7, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Bloody hell, Tony Robinson has full-on centrist dad rage doesn't he?



Thats got to be fake.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 7, 2018)

extra dry said:


> I would venture to say that if Brexit where to be stopped, that would open the door or present on a plate ideal grounds for far-# to emerge furthur stronger, with greater not less support.
> 
> People with no voice or believe they have not been listened to will turn to the loudest voice in there corner.



Hmmm, I fear you may be right.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 7, 2018)

extra dry said:


> Thats got to be fake.


Why? Blue tick and everything.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 7, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> watching the political establishment in meltdown, the tory's tearing themselves apart and the wet dreams of the brit neo-cons get flushed down the toilet - its hilarious but an utterly discredited system also offers space for more radical ideas to get through whatever happens next



All these melodramatic descriptions of crumbling edifices, the establishment in meltdown, tories tearing themselves apart... that's not what I see; I see the political institutions continuing to do their stuff, just wasting an immense amount of time trying to square the circle. Whatever the Brexit outcome I don't see any plausible reason to believe that the houses of parliament will be in ruins or that a revolutionary government will be installed. I don't even know why people think the Tory party will be in pieces. No-one seems to be able to describe a believable chain of events that leads to us having anything substantially different a few years from now. Just waffly talk about 'spaces for more radical ideas' and so on. What does that actually mean in practice?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 7, 2018)

As I mentioned the other day-  Scandis   say no 

Redirect Notice


----------



## Supine (Dec 7, 2018)

extra dry said:


> Thats got to be fake.



Maybe Baldrick had a cunning plan


----------



## Wilf (Dec 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> All these melodramatic descriptions of crumbling edifices, the establishment in meltdown, tories tearing themselves apart... that's not what I see; I see the political institutions continuing to do their stuff, just wasting an immense amount of time trying to square the circle. Whatever the Brexit outcome I don't see any plausible reason to believe that the houses of parliament will be in ruins or that a revolutionary government will be installed. I don't even know why people think the Tory party will be in pieces. No-one seems to be able to describe a believable chain of events that leads to us having anything substantially different a few years from now. Just waffly talk about 'spaces for more radical ideas' and so on. What does that actually mean in practice?


I - _gasp_ - agree with this. 

We don't know what the impact of this will be on politics. Blair's lies on Iraq had consequences and tarnished him/the political class.  If anything, the message coming out of this is the _impotence_ of the political class, at least in a certain kind of international scenario. But yeah, there's no automatic link to radical shifts in direction.


----------



## Patteran (Dec 7, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Right on cue.
> 
> View attachment 154833



That really made me laugh (we've a house full of those books).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> All these melodramatic descriptions of crumbling edifices, the establishment in meltdown, tories tearing themselves apart... that's not what I see; I see the political institutions continuing to do their stuff, just wasting an immense amount of time trying to square the circle. Whatever the Brexit outcome I don't see any plausible reason to believe that the houses of parliament will be in ruins or that a revolutionary government will be installed. I don't even know why people think the Tory party will be in pieces. No-one seems to be able to describe a believable chain of events that leads to us having anything substantially different a few years from now. Just waffly talk about 'spaces for more radical ideas' and so on. What does that actually mean in practice?



I think what's crumbling isn't the system but it's legitimacy. And yeah, I know, what legitimacy, but British capitalism functions because it convinces enough people it is legitimate or at least that it isn't explicitly illegitimate. That's what's important about what's happening - the veneer of democracy is being shown to be just that to mass numbers of people.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Schrodinger's Brexit


Yet another of your quotes I will shamelessly steal and pass off as mine


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Right on cue.
> 
> View attachment 154833


What the fuck's that supposed to imply? that only those who understand the inner mechanisms of the neoliberal global finance industry are grown up enough to understand what brexit means? You're part of the reason Brexit is happening - not the solution.


----------



## extra dry (Dec 7, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Why? Blue tick and everything.


I m not convinced, I would need to hear him utter such statements.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Bloody hell, Tony Robinson has full-on centrist dad rage doesn't he?



For a moment I read that as Tommy Robinson


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What the fuck's that supposed to imply?


That you, and rest of us that voted leave, are racists - or at least enabling racists. Of course this is coming from the pricks that are purposefully blind to the EU's fortress Europe.

Unlike Kaka Tim, this prick is one of those liberal wankers that is willing to defend the EU, that is utterly clueless to the damage that has occurred to our society, that wants to go back to the 90s/00s

EDIT: And let's be absolute clear here, the same bloke that is calling people racists is someone who is willing to defend racial abuse.

In fact we have the same "logic" present in both cases 
_- I like the EU and I'm not a racist so their immigration policies cannot be racist
- I support Liverpool and I'm not a racist so there cannot have been any racial abuse_
An excellent example of the racist liberal anti-racism that the EU typifies.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 7, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think what's crumbling isn't the system but it's legitimacy. And yeah, I know, what legitimacy, but British capitalism functions because it convinces enough people it is legitimate or at least that it isn't explicitly illegitimate. That's what's important about what's happening - the veneer of democracy is being shown to be just that to mass numbers of people.



I think you wildly overestimate the extent which it looks like that to most people. Most people will just be watching westminster do its stuff and doing a bit of rolleyes, not questioning the legitimacy of our democracy.


----------



## likesfish (Dec 7, 2018)

The EU maybe shit but upending everything for an Ayn rand inspired dystopia really isnt going to improve things


----------



## eatmorecheese (Dec 7, 2018)

flypanam said:


> A bit of an emotive headline but just proof postive (as if we didn't already know) what a fucking evil shit Priti Patel is
> 
> Tory MP suggests using threat of 'no-deal' food shortages in Ireland to drop the backstop
> 
> Not much to add to the debate here regarding MPs but fucking hell the lack of awreness of Ireland and it's history from leaders of the Tories is to be expected but food shortages as a bargining chip, thats fucking emotive and stupid.



This has made me angrier the more I dwell on it. Just fucking disgusting. Total scum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 7, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I - _gasp_ - agree with this.
> 
> We don't know what the impact of this will be on politics. Blair's lies on Iraq had consequences and tarnished him/the political class.  If anything, the message coming out of this is *the impotence of the political class, at least in a certain kind of international scenario*. But yeah, there's no automatic link to radical shifts in direction.


Well this might be a good lesson to learn. It's been true for a while now that political 'leaders' around the world are in reality nothing but office managers with virtually no room to manouevre, hemmed in on all sides by the power of the financial forces that can be unleashed on them if they step out of line. The brexit fiasco lays that bare as well as anything. There was a moment with the financial crash when they could have asserted themselves. Instead most of them chose to, um, give a ton of money to bankers.  Just about the only European country to get its reaction to that even nearly right was Iceland. We, on the other hand, have had a decade of 'austerity'. 

These kinds of challenges are not spoken of by anybody at all, including Labour. We still have a hopeless vacuum of ideas at the top of British politics. For all the promise Corbyn initially offered, he appears extraordinarily timid to me now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well this might be a good lesson to learn. It's been true for a while now that political 'leaders' around the world are in reality nothing but office managers with virtually no room to manouevre, hemmed in on all sides by the power of the financial forces that can be unleashed on them if they step out of line. The brexit fiasco lays that bare as well as anything. There was a moment with the financial crash when they could have asserted themselves. Instead most of them chose to, um, give a ton of money to bankers.  Just about the only European country to get its reaction to that even nearly right was Iceland. We, on the other hand, have had a decade of 'austerity'.
> 
> These kinds of challenges are not spoken of by anybody at all, including Labour. We still have a hopeless vacuum of ideas at the top of British politics. For all the promise Corbyn initially offered, he appears extraordinarily timid to me now.


One of the reasons there is a growing illiberalism in Europe is that many people saw liberal economies as faring worse than illiberal ones over the past decade. See for example see boyle's 'the coming illiberal order' in survival 58:2 (2016)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 7, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think you wildly overestimate the extent which it looks like that to most people. Most people will just be watching westminster do its stuff and doing a bit of rolleyes, not questioning the legitimacy of our democracy.



Maybe I do. But I don't think you can deny that we're seeing a lot more discussion about how parliament, referendums and all this democracy stuff should work, instead of just who people vote for. 

There's also the question of what happens next, particularly if the ruling class want to avoid an election. The system will continue to be laid bare by these events.


----------



## yield (Dec 7, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well this might be a good lesson to learn. It's been true for a while now that political 'leaders' around the world are in reality nothing but office managers with virtually no room to manouevre, hemmed in on all sides by the power of the financial forces that can be unleashed on them if they step out of line. The brexit fiasco lays that bare as well as anything. There was a moment with the financial crash when they could have asserted themselves. Instead most of them chose to, um, give a ton of money to bankers.


Obama Tells Wall Street to Thank him for Making Them so Much Money
November 29, 2018


> In one of the most eyebrow-raising moments of the night, Obama pushed back against Wall Street executives who have criticized him. He told the bankers who crashed the global economy in 2008, and who were then bailed out by the US government, that they should have been grateful, because they still made money.
> 
> “Sometimes you go to Wall Street, and folks will be grumbling about, ‘Anti-business…'” Obama said. “And I say, ‘Have you checked where your stocks were when I came in office, and where they are now?’ What what are you talking, what are you complaining about?”
> 
> “Just say thank you, please,” Obama told the bankers. “Because I want to raise your taxes a couple percent to make sure kids have a chance to go to school?”


The Politicians did assert themselves in their own class interest.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 7, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> That you, and rest of us that voted leave, are racists - or at least enabling racists. Of course this is coming from the pricks that are purposefully blind to the EU's fortress Europe.
> 
> Unlike Kaka Tim, this prick is one of those liberal wankers that is willing to defend the EU, that is utterly clueless to the damage that has occurred to our society, that wants to go back to the 90s/00s



No, I don't think that people voted leave are racists and I have given my take on that vote on this thread which you have chosen to ignore. The unicorn was a dig at lexit.




redsquirrel said:


> EDIT: And let's be absolute clear here, the same bloke that is calling people racists is someone who is willing to defend racial abuse.
> 
> In fact we have the same "logic" present in both cases
> _- I like the EU and I'm not a racist so their immigration policies cannot be racist
> ...


I have never called anyone racist. You are a fucking idiot trot though.

The Suarez thing was a mistake on my part.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 7, 2018)

And today a Leave MP called for the Irish to be threatened with starvation so as to get a better deal. That's the politics the Leave vote brought us.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 7, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> And today a Leave MP called for the Irish to be threatened with starvation so as to get a better deal. That's the politics the Leave vote brought us.



If I was a non-racist, liberal Leave voter, I'd be looking at the pond-life I've gotten into bed with and wondering where life went so wrong.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 7, 2018)

Wookey said:


> If I was a non-racist, liberal Leave voter, I'd be looking at the pond-life I've gotten into bed with and wondering where life went so wrong.


As a liberal remainer what's it been like watching the pond life in your bed for the last 10 years while it continues to cause this ?:



> More appropriate indicator to illustrate the worsening of the living
> standards of children is the one calculated based on a poverty line
> anchored at a fixed point in time, such as 2007, by weighting the
> incomes as to their differences in the purchasing power. As shown in
> ...


----------



## sunnysidedown (Dec 7, 2018)

Wookey said:


> If I was a non-racist, liberal Leave voter, I'd be looking at the pond-life I've gotten into bed with and wondering where life went so wrong.



I doubt there are many liberal leave voters. Those wet-arses tend to be remainers.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> As a liberal remainer what's it been like watching the pond life in your bed for the last 10 years while it continues to cause this ?:
> View attachment 154862



My mum said she voted Brexit because of 'what they did to Greece'.

Of course she doesn't understand one jot what has happened to Greece, she's just repeating something she heard as a retrospective justification for the idiocy of her vote.

In fact, we both know she reads the Daily Mail and is racist. I suspect many other people who suddenly have a deep and abiding need to protect Greek people are also lying about their motivations.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 7, 2018)

I don't think we'll find many of them on here though.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 7, 2018)

sunnysidedown said:


> I doubt there are many liberal leave voters. Those wet-arses tend to be remainers.



I doubt it too.



pocketscience said:


> As a liberal remainer what's it been like watching the pond life in your bed for the last 10 years while it continues to cause this ?:
> View attachment 154862



And as for my opinion, I know the EU isn't perfect, it needs reform badly, not something we can achieve from outside the EU if course.

I'm not blindly pro-EU...it's just clearly and provably a lot better than the shitfest the Brexit morons are now plunging us into.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Dec 7, 2018)

Wookey said:


> My mum said she voted Brexit because of 'what they did to Greece'.
> 
> Of course she doesn't understand one jot what has happened to Greece, she's just repeating something she heard as a retrospective justification for the idiocy of her vote.
> 
> In fact, we both know she reads the Daily Mail and is racist. I suspect many other people who suddenly have a deep and abiding need to protect Greek people are also lying about their motivations.



I’d rather have a pint with your mum than have one with you.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 7, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> As a liberal remainer what's it been like watching the pond life in your bed for the last 10 years while it continues to cause this ?:


You're not on-message; the Germans didn't waterboard Greece for a decade, it wasn't the *fault* of the Empire of Virtue, it was those dreadful Greeks. 

The Empire of Virtue on its usual form : Half a Titanic - the price of EU's let them drown policy


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I doubt it too.
> And as for my opinion, I know the EU isn't perfect, it needs reform badly, not something we can achieve from outside the EU if course.


come on then, point us to all the posts you've made with your suggestions for reforming the eu. The poverty  caused by eu's austerity has been going on for over a decade now, so you've had plenty of time to come up with solutions. What and where are they?


Wookey said:


> I'm not blindly pro-EU...it's just clearly and provably a lot better than the shitfest the Brexit morons are now plunging us into.


that's still hyperthetical and conditional on tories being in power for any period of time which i personally see as debatable.
However, the real shitfest is the one the eu has been causing for millions of poverty stricken south europeans, tens of thousands of drowned refugees. These things are actually happening. They're happening as we speek.
What exactly do you suggest we do?
How do you suggest to reform a continent thats shifting towards becoming an ever more radical right wing block?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

sunnysidedown said:


> I’d rather have a pint with your mum than have one with you.



You don't know either of us from Adam, so I can only assume that's an attempt to offend me in some way! You'll have to work much harder than that if such is your goal.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 8, 2018)

Would you like the thread to be about you because it does seem that way?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What do you suggest we do?
> How do you suggest to reform a continent thats shifting towards and ever more radical right wing block?



Staying inside it would be an obvious start, as our influence isn't going to get greater once we've left. A left-wing and internationalist UK government would be a start, not Corbyn obviously.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Would you like the thread to be about you because it does seem that way?



It's a 550 page thread. I've posted maybe six times. 

I know I have a disproportionate impact but you do flatter me.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 8, 2018)

You do, but only because of your emotional driven provocative drivel.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 8, 2018)

Poi E said:


> But that would undermine the will of the people, surely?



Haha!


.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I doubt it too.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You bandy abusive terms about quite liberally yet spout mantras of change from within that meet Einstein's definition of crazy


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Staying inside it would be an obvious start, as our influence isn't going to get greater once we've left. A left-wing and internationalist UK government would be a start, not Corbyn obviously.


What like Syriza? Podemos? What are they achieving?
You need to be a bit more specific about these reforms. More fiscal union? UK adopt the Euro? more bendy bananas? chlorinated chickens?? what exactly?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> What like Syriza? Podemos? What are they achieving?
> You need to be a bit more specific about these reforms. More fiscal union? UK adopt the Euro? more bendy bananas? chlorinated chickens?? what exactly?



Yes, chlorinated chickens. How did you guess?

And Brexit. Lots and lots of it. I think that's bound to subtly change the world in a controlled and predictable way that will no doubt make the average poor man much happier. 

Oh, bendy bananas too.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> You bandy abusive terms about quite liberally yet spout mantras of change from within that meet Einstein's definition of crazy



I've been very controlled in my use of abusive terms actually! You should see the shit I have to delete before I post. 

I'd get banned if I wrote what I really think of the Brexit loving spoonheads, misguidedly sabotaging my country, like a man poking himself in the eyes with a skewer because he doesn't like the glasses he's wearing....


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 8, 2018)

Spoken like a true batshit believer.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yes, chlorinated chickens. How did you guess?
> 
> And Brexit. Lots and lots of it. I think that's bound to subtly change the world in a controlled and predictable way that will no doubt make the average poor man much happier.
> 
> Oh, bendy bananas too.


Lets face it, you don't have a clue do you.
Yet you don't mind implying that an anti EU principled stand, due to the poverty it's causing (in this case the greeks) is really the sign of a daily mail reading racist like yer mum.


Wookey said:


> In fact, we both know she reads the Daily Mail and is racist. I suspect many other people who suddenly have a deep and abiding need to protect Greek people are also lying about their motivations.


Fairly low level that. Pond life lol.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Lets face it, you don't have a clue do you.
> Yet you don't mind implying that an anti EU principled stand, due to the poverty it's causing (in this case the greeks) *is really the sign of a daily mail reading racist like yer mum.*



I see _absolutely zero_ signs of racism in the post from Wookey that you quoted, when you posted the above.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Dec 8, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I see _absolutely zero_ signs of racism in the post from Wookey that you quoted, when you posted the above.



Try re-reading wookeys previous few posts for clarity you insufferable bore.


----------



## gosub (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I've been very controlled in my use of abusive terms actually! You should see the shit I have to delete before I post.
> 
> I'd get banned if I wrote what I really think of the Brexit loving spoonheads, misguidedly sabotaging my country, like a man poking himself in the eyes with a skewer because he doesn't like the glasses he's wearing....


Was in pub the other night 6 of us 3 remain 3 leave. Abuse and calls of idiots from remainers who presumably stop Brexit and go back to the days of government ramming EUropean arrangements through Parliament.   Consensus among the leavers on the way they would have gone about Brexit and it wouldnt have been like this


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> My mum said she voted Brexit because of 'what they did to Greece'.
> 
> Of course she doesn't understand one jot what has happened to Greece, she's just repeating something she heard as a retrospective justification for the idiocy of her vote.
> 
> In fact, we both know she reads the Daily Mail and is racist. I suspect many other people who suddenly have a deep and abiding need to protect Greek people are also lying about their motivations.


See when people start even reducing even their own parents and that to cariacatures, I reckon it’s the surest sign that Thatchers plan to change hearts and minds has come full circle. Paul Heaton fucking warned you!

(That’s a 4 am post for me, bed time for night workers)


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 8, 2018)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2018)

Well this thread's gone to shit again.


----------



## tommers (Dec 8, 2018)

Isn't it Johnson, JRM etc that are recommending this Norway plus thing? And it means freedom of movement, accepting ECJ etc etc. I thought that was the reason we were leaving? That sounds like all of the shit with less of the benefits.

Must be a very big plus. Wonder what it is?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 8, 2018)

tommers said:


> Isn't it Johnson, JRM etc that are recommending this Norway plus thing? And it means freedom of movement, accepting ECJ etc etc. I thought that was the reason we were leaving? That sounds like all of the shit with less of the benefits.
> 
> Must be a very big plus. Wonder what it is?



The full title is 'Norway + Northern Ireland', it's a cunning plan to solve everything by giving the six counties to the Norwegians, like a sort of anti-christmas present.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The full title is 'Norway + Northern Ireland', it's a cunning plan to solve everything by giving the six counties to the Norwegians, like a sort of anti-christmas present.


Probably returning the compliment of all the Trafalgar Square Christmas trees Norway present the UK with.

Here Have this!


----------



## tommers (Dec 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The full title is 'Norway + Northern Ireland', it's a cunning plan to solve everything by giving the six counties to the Norwegians, like a sort of anti-christmas present.


In return for the tree.

 god damn you Sprocket


----------



## tommers (Dec 8, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Probably returning the compliment of all the Trafalgar Square Christmas trees Norway present the UK with.
> 
> Here Have this!


Hahaha, jinx!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 8, 2018)

tommers said:


> In return for the tree.


Ha!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 8, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well this thread's gone to shit again.


'prefigurative posting'


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 8, 2018)

gosub said:


> Consensus among the leavers on the way they would have gone about Brexit and it wouldnt have been like this



and what would this  brexit winning strategy have looked like?


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 8, 2018)

tommers said:


> In return for the tree.
> 
> god damn you Sprocket



Sadly can’t be damned by something inconceivable to me, try Carl Sagan maybe!


----------



## Winot (Dec 8, 2018)

tommers said:


> Isn't it Johnson, JRM etc that are recommending this Norway plus thing? And it means freedom of movement, accepting ECJ etc etc. I thought that was the reason we were leaving? That sounds like all of the shit with less of the benefits.



Not BJ/JRM as far as I know (for the reasons you mention). They either want a Canada-style FTA or no deal.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 8, 2018)

yeah - the moggladytes are very much against a norway type deal.


----------



## tommers (Dec 8, 2018)

Ah, it was Amber Rudd.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 8, 2018)

So with Norway, apart from the fishing quotas, what is their motivation for preferring their option ?


----------



## magneze (Dec 8, 2018)

It's not a preferred option, Rudd is saying "if you don't vote for May's deal, you might get Norway+, do you really want that?" in an attempt to get people to vote for May's deal.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 8, 2018)

No way - will May say it's my way or Norway?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 8, 2018)

perhaps there will be some decent british noir come out of any norway+


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 8, 2018)

I meant, I couldn't tell from that video why Norway itself prefers the deal it has.
Trade imbalance ?


----------



## teqniq (Dec 8, 2018)




----------



## Winot (Dec 8, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I meant, I couldn't tell from that video why Norway itself prefers the deal it has.
> Trade imbalance ?



Big fish(er) in a small pond?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> My mum said she voted Brexit because of 'what they did to Greece'.
> 
> Of course she doesn't understand one jot what has happened to Greece, she's just repeating something she heard as a retrospective justification for the idiocy of her vote.
> 
> In fact, we both know she reads the Daily Mail and is racist. I suspect many other people who suddenly have a deep and abiding need to protect Greek people are also lying about their motivations.



Dear Old Mam in Pretend Empathy Secret Racist Shocker 

Do you realise what you sound like?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I've been very controlled in my use of abusive terms actually! You should see the shit I have to delete before I post.
> 
> I'd get banned if I wrote what I really think of the Brexit loving spoonheads, misguidedly sabotaging my country, like a man poking himself in the eyes with a skewer because he doesn't like the glasses he's wearing....



Your country?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 8, 2018)

magneze said:


> It's not a preferred option, Rudd is saying "if you don't vote for May's deal, you might get Norway+, do you really want that?" in an attempt to get people to vote for May's deal.



I'm not so sure. Rudd says here if there were a second ref she'd vote Remain. Anything could happen if MPs don't back May's Brexit deal, says Rudd


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Dear Old Mam in Pretend Empathy Secret Racist Shocker
> 
> Do you realise what you sound like?


I'm picturing a remainer gammon.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 8, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> You do, but only because of your emotional driven provocative drivel.



I don't think a Tory policy is something we should be supporting. You do.

Therein lies the difference.


SpackleFrog said:


> Your country?



Well, it used to be my country. My new Irish passport came through a few weeks ago, so I'm now Irish.

My former country is currently swirling in the toilet pan, about to be sucked out into the sewers. If the Brexit-mongering vandals who dragged us here are in charge, you can fucking keep it. I wash my hands of the lot of you.

I'm glad to say I have never found myself in political alignment with Tommy Robinson. Tell me, how does _that_ feel?


----------



## Santino (Dec 8, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'm picturing a remainer gammon.


Ham hock.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> My former country is currently swirling in the toilet pan, about to be sucked out into the sewers. If the Brexit-mongering vandals who dragged us here are in charge, you can fucking keep it. I wash my hands of the lot of you.





So *your* country has been *ruined* by *vandals*?




Wookey said:


> I don't think a Tory policy is something we should be supporting. You do...
> 
> I'm glad to say I have never found myself in political alignment with Tommy Robinson. Tell me, how does _that_ feel?



I don't support Tory policy, I don't support May's Brexit deal. I don't know what it's like to be in political alignment with Yaxley-Lennon, never have. Maybe we should ask you - you both seem to have some notion about *your* country being ruined by people you don't like.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 8, 2018)

snag is, if remain had won, then that would be a tory policy as well.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 8, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> snag is, if remain had won, then that would be a tory policy as well.


Those 3 must be so pissed about this pic


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 8, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Those 3 must be so pissed about this pic



I believe that TM does not like it being posted round the interweb...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 8, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I don't think a Tory policy is something we should be supporting. You do.
> 
> Therein lies the difference.
> 
> ...


The Tories campaigned for Remain, mind. 


Good time to repost this, lemons/lemonade etc 
‘I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK’


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 8, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The Tories campaigned for Remain, mind.
> 
> 
> Good time to repost this, lemons/lemonade etc
> ‘I WANT MY COUNTRY BACK’


Is he a tory?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 8, 2018)

tommers said:


> Isn't it Johnson, JRM etc that are recommending this Norway plus thing? And it means freedom of movement, accepting ECJ etc etc. I thought that was the reason we were leaving? That sounds like all of the shit with less of the benefits.
> 
> Must be a very big plus. Wonder what it is?


To be fair loads of people- even daily mail readers! - assumed EFTA would be what we were getting. I certainly heard that mentioned often anyway, from both socialists and just general leave voters.


----------



## T & P (Dec 8, 2018)

General question: in the event of a non-deal Brexit, does anyone know if the promises made regarding the status of EU citizens living in the UK (and UK citizens living in the Continent as well of course) will definitely be honoured?

Ultimately I refuse to believe things would descend to tit-fit-tat repatriations, but it’s reaching the point where i’m considering not making plans for any foreign trips after March until matters are clearer.

Next month I will have lived here for 25 years, and have been fully employed, Inland Revenue and electoral roll-registered pretty much from my arrival, and yet I don’t trust whoever might be in government come March, or the UK Border Agency to actually let me back in if I leave the UK for a weekend away after Brexit Day.

i’ve received zero communications from the government regarding the issue of the much trumpeted ‘settled status’ I’m fully entitled to. In fact neither the deal supporters nor the no-deal advocates have said a single word about any plans even being drafted on how to process applications and grant said settled status permits. And there’s zero fucking chance they could possibly issue 2-3 million permits in three months if there is a no-deal Brexit.

This is a horrible, fucking shit situation.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

T & P said:


> General question: in the event of a non-deal Brexit, does anyone know if the promises made regarding the status of EU citizens living in the UK (and UK citizens living in the Continent as well of course) will definitely be honoured?


I doubt it very much. I've seen it mentioned a few times that all cards are off the table in the event of a no deal. but if that's the case, the forrinas will be the least of anyone's worries.


T & P said:


> Ultimately I refuse to believe things would descend to tit-fit-tat repatriations, but it’s reaching the point where i’m considering not making plans for any foreign trips after March until matters are clearer.
> 
> Next month I will have lived here for 25 years, and have been fully employed, Inland Revenue and electoral roll-registered pretty much from my arrival, and yet I don’t trust whoever might be in government come March, or the UK Border Agency to actually let me back in if I leave the UK for a weekend away after Brexit Day.
> 
> ...


I also doubt very much you'll have problems even with the trips abroad - the beauty of the UK is there's no registration system. Just keep your library membership open and have a friend lend a ladybird book each month you're away (the Pocketscience household is in the same situation - couldn't give a fuck tbh).
Try to relax. I know it's no tonic, but half the UK's population arrived and were able to stay in the UK while enduring much worse circumstances.

good luck!


----------



## Supine (Dec 8, 2018)

T & P said:


> General question: in the event of a non-deal Brexit, does anyone know if the promises made regarding the status of EU citizens living in the UK (and UK citizens living in the Continent as well of course) will definitely be honoured?
> 
> Ultimately I refuse to believe things would descend to tit-fit-tat repatriations, but it’s reaching the point where i’m considering not making plans for any foreign trips after March until matters are clearer.
> 
> ...



Honestly I don't know but reckon you will be fine in the long run. Brexiteers have turned this country to shit and I can only apologise. 

It's embarrassing that people like you don't know what the situation is. I've got a lot of friends who are in the same boat - most are just keeping on doing what they do. One has left already


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 8, 2018)

T & P said:


> ...i’ve received zero communications from the government regarding the issue of the much trumpeted ‘settled status’ I’m fully entitled to....


I would chase it up then because they're not in a hurry to tell you and there is a timescale.

Use the first two links here to start.

settled status - Search - GOV.UK


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I would chase it up then because they're not in a hurry to tell you and there is a timescale.
> 
> Use the first two links here to start.
> 
> settled status - Search - GOV.UK


The reason they're not saying anything is that most of the advice on those pages are preliminary.
In the words of Mayhem: nothing's agreed until everything is agreed.
Running around getting a ton of bureaucracy sorted on the basis of speculation wouldn't be my advice.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 8, 2018)

Yeah don't listen to that person.  Absolute ignorance right there.

Brussels investigates UK over deported EU citizens
'Anyone who meets me thinks I'm British'
EU Citizens Living in the UK: Protection from Deportation under EU Law | European Futures


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 8, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Yeah don't listen to that person.  Absolute ignorance right there.
> 
> Brussels investigates UK over deported EU citizens
> 'Anyone who meets me thinks I'm British'
> EU Citizens Living in the UK: Protection from Deportation under EU Law | European Futures


sorry but is there anything of substance in each of those subjective sources that anyone should take as a given?


----------



## flypanam (Dec 9, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Well, it used to be my country. My new Irish passport came through a few weeks ago, so I'm now Irish.



Great, failte. Now, it’s time to have a look at how the EU has treated Ireland, this is a useful start...

42% of Europe’s banking crisis paid by Ireland and https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxf...st-austerity-inequality-ireland-120913-en.pdf


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

What's Boris next move?


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

flypanam said:


> 42% of Europe’s banking crisis paid by Ireland



I'm calling BS on that.

2008 was catastrophic. The US went through political turmoil before it could reach it's pockets (TARP etc) to stop a horrendous run.

Europe took longer, squabbling (we do that), before money was found and then catastrophic austerity was enforced on the potential defaulters.

"Ireland paid out the crisis" - Jeeez, read your economic history. Ireland was one of the worst actors, offshooting from London. Dublin has no clean sheet on all of this.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 9, 2018)

Supine said:


> Honestly I don't know but reckon you will be fine in the long run. Brexiteers have turned this country to shit and I can only apologise.






			
				Melvyn Bragg said:
			
		

> We were getting on pretty well.











Yes it was all those awful Brexiteer's the country (again "nice" nationalism raising it's head) has been "turned to shit". Nothing to do with 35 years of increasing inequality, attacks on workers, anti-strike legislation, etc. Nothing to do with the policies introduced by the LibDems you voted for that have increased poverty and created a crisis in public services.


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

Moving on.

There's been some cheap jibes here of late. And before on occasion. "If you voted leave you're a racist". "If you voted remain, you think everyone else is racist."

I've barely seen any racism here on this thread. They get sniffed out and booted sharpish. 

So... there's an actual racist coming to town today. Yaxley-Lennon is rolling in.

Anyone fancy a wander?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> Moving on.
> 
> There's been some cheap jibes here of late. And before on occasion. "If you voted leave you're a racist". "If you voted remain, you think everyone else is racist."
> 
> ...


Tell him I said hi by high fiving his face, cheers


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 9, 2018)

Which alias is he using lately?


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Which alias is he using lately?



His usual pretend name, but now trying to latch onto brexit.

Prey on people’s fears - the playbook is ... well, that.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

flypanam said:


> Great, failte. Now, it’s time to have a look at how the EU has treated Ireland, this is a useful start...
> 
> 42% of Europe’s banking crisis paid by Ireland and https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxf...st-austerity-inequality-ireland-120913-en.pdf


This is the thing there’s a bubble of folks across  Europe that seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that it’s only fascists that oppose the EU- but can they not see the only difference here is we had a vote on it.  None of them really connecting with the people where they actually live, it’s all very antisocial. Twitter pals in the twitterverse.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 9, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> snag is, if remain had won, then that would be a tory policy as well.



Remain has one. this is what the high and mighty anti-racist has missed. the same 'economic' changes are still going ahead whilst all public discussion gets submerged into this stupid inter-party struggle. business as usual. wookey got what they want. why are they moaning? total waste of time. looks like some monetisable guilt trip vibe tbh.


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This is the thing there’s a bubble of folks across  Europe that seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that it’s only fascists that oppose the EU- but can they not see the only difference here is we had a vote on it.  None of them really connecting with the people where they actually live, it’s all very antisocial. Twitter pals in the twitterverse.



Yes and add another six or ten factions. A mixture of small c conservative, left leaning, radical right, radical left, pro and anti EU.

It used to be easy to know who to hate


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yes and add another six or ten factions. A mixture of small c conservative, left leaning, radical right, radical left, pro and anti EU.
> 
> It used to be easy to know who to hate


 as an aside;
I hate the term left leaning by the way. It’s quite a managerial term that one, gives me the dry boak. Plant your feet or get tae!


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> as an aside;
> I hate the term left leaning by the way. It’s quite a managerial term that one, gives me the dry boak. Plant your feet or get tae!



'social fascist' leaning?


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> as an aside;
> I hate the term left leaning by the way. It’s quite a managerial term that one, gives me the dry boak. Plant your feet or get tae!





It’s my centrist euphism. I’m not actually from Surrey, but I can pull it off sometimes.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 9, 2018)

i still regret egham massively. most drab place ive ever lived. tiny overcrowded pubs as well.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> It’s my centrist euphism. I’m not actually from Surrey, but I can pull it off sometimes.


It’s a cracking centrist euphemism!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

...too much derail in hindsight...


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

Of all people Pamela Anderson this morning offers clear-eyed thoughts on Brexit, and particularly Lexit. She seems to have this aspect nailed :


> If you read coverage of Brexit in The Guardian, for example, you might think that the end of the world or Armageddon is due at 1pm local time on 29th March 2019, the Brexit time. The Guardian, the metropolitan elites and the likes describe the EU as some sort of humanitarian charity that is a force of unquestionable good and that nothing is more important than being a member of it, no matter what.





> But let's be honest. For the bureaucrats and shareholders of the biggest global corporations the EU is nothing more than their own pet project. The main pillar of the EU is free trade without any national limitations, including national tariffs and laws protecting workers, consumers or nature. I am fully aware that the EU helped achieve a lot of good and introduced many measures that have been beneficial to the people and to life on this planet. But this is just a disguise used to ensure its true purpose.
> 
> There are neoliberal policies enshrined in EU treaties which EU countries are forced to implement even if against their will. Inequality between the EU countries has been increasing. Weaker states have been pushed deeper into crisis. Just look at Greece - and the barbaric treatment it had to endure - to see the true ruthlessness of the EU.


Pam gets it! Well, some of it.

Brexit and I (also starring Shakespeare and Churchill)


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 9, 2018)

Nothing on Periscope yet about the march - what time is it supposed to start ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 9, 2018)

> The Brexit 'betrayal' march must leave from Park Lane by 12.30pm and follow a set route to Parliament Street. No-one is allowed to join en-route and no vehicles will be allowed.
> The march must take place between 12.30pm and 2pm, and the rally must end by 3.30pm.
> 
> A counter-protest by Oppose Tommy Robinson and Unite Against Racism & Fascism must march from Portland Place along a set route to Whitehall and set off by 12pm. No-one is allowed to join en-route and no vehicles will be allowed.
> The march must end by 1.15pm and a rally in Whitehall, near Trafalgar Square, must end by 4.30pm.



Tommy Robinson and Ukip to lead Brexit 'betrayal' march - live


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Of all people Pamela Anderson this morning offers clear-eyed thoughts on Brexit, and particularly Lexit. She seems to have this aspect nailed :
> 
> 
> Pam gets it! Well, some of it.
> ...



On Greece, misses the point that it was the Eurozone not the EU. Corbyn admitted as much recently.

Arguably it’s two sides of the same coin. Big club of countries exerts will. (I’d rather we were in, but that’s a “least worst” thing rather than any idea of ideological wonder)


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> On Greece, misses the point that it was the Eurozone not the EU. Corbyn admitted as much recently.
> 
> Arguably it’s two sides of the same coin. Big club of countries exerts will. (I’d rather we were in, but that’s a “least worst” thing rather than any idea of ideological wonder)


Sure, I think her point is German national interest, as expressed via different European institutions - including ECB (and Lisborn).


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Tommy Robinson and Ukip to lead Brexit 'betrayal' march - live



Indy using a photo from a pro remain march? Jeez.

Anyhow, I don’t think he speaks for anyone on this thread.


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Sure, I think her point is German national interest, as expressed via different European institutions - including ECB (and Lisborn).



I’ll admit some cribbing.

My current take is from reading Adam Tooze (halfway) - “Crashed: How a decade of financial crisis changes the world”.

It’s a bloody long read... but my take so far is that the German national interest was not simple bullying, but more an arguably arrogant manifestation of their national thrift. Exemplary exports, combined a social level of distrust for debt. Even if Merkel had wanted to open the big box of Euros, she’d have been screwed locally.

As I say, it’s a long read


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> On Greece, misses the point that it was the Eurozone not the EU. Corbyn admitted as much recently.
> 
> Arguably it’s two sides of the same coin. Big club of countries exerts will. (I’d rather we were in, but that’s a “least worst” thing rather than any idea of ideological wonder)


No it was the EU doing the cuntery- the Eurozone is basically countries that have adopted the euro, it’s not a separate institution from the EU ken. but the difference is  the EU can’t quite exert the same influence on those outside the Eurozone - well to be fair that’s only concrete fact in the sense a socialist govt in the U.K. hasn’t tried similar- now have you read the difference in wording between the clause we opted out of and the clause that applies to us? It’s like one says “will” and the other  says “will endeavour to” - actually I think the difference was even less than that but grammatically- google it,growth and stability pact, I’m past it this morning ! -

Anyway- no precedent. I reckon the ECJ could easily interpret the law to come down hard on a fictional socialist U.K. govt. who knows, it’s all down to the leanings of the judge and what he can get away with eh?  all we do know is that The Law isn’t some mythical angel saving the wee man from harm.

And also, fucking reject the institution that did that to Greece whatever! Fuck those cunts!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> I’ll admit some cribbing.
> 
> My current take is from reading Adam Tooze (halfway) - “Crashed: How a decade of financial crisis changes the world”.
> 
> ...


Great author, very clear. He also explains why so many politicians - esp. Tory - are now second rate, and actually the *wrong type*.

You have probably seen this - highly rec to all :  113 | Crashed


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> No it was the EU doing the cuntery- the Eurozone is basically countries that have adopted the euro, it’s not a separate institution from the EU ken. but the difference is  the EU can’t quite exert the same influence on those outside the Eurozone - well to be fair that’s only concrete fact in the sense a socialist govt in the U.K. hasn’t tried similar- now have you read the difference in wording between the clause we opted out of and the clause that applies to us? It’s like one says “will” and the other  says “will endeavour to” - actually I think the difference was even less than that but grammatically- google it,growth and stability pact, I’m past it this morning ! -
> 
> Anyway- no precedent. I reckon the ECJ could easily interpret the law to come down hard on a fictional socialist U.K. govt. who knows, it’s all down to the leanings of the judge and what he can get away with eh?  all we do know is that The Law isn’t some mythical angel saving the wee man from harm.
> 
> And also, fucking reject the institution that did that to Greece whatever! Fuck those cunts!



I think you’re right on most of that. It’s largely the same ideology.

If Greece hadn’t been in the Eurozone, they could have done their own begging. Or printing. Or “extend and pretend”

They could have - were almost certain to be - the “poor man of europe”, but at least could have set their own (likely horrible) destiny.


I’m waffling so an attempt at a conclusion... the Euro is fundamentally bad. It marries incompatible economies. They can’t print their own money. The euro isn’t managed centrally in a beneficial way.

The Euro works for big economies like France and Germany. It doesn’t work for smaller ones.

We don’t have to leave the EU to get out of the Euro. We’re not in it. Not being in it today, and still not being it next year, make shit all difference to the small Eurozone countries.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 9, 2018)

Ironically, as one of those big economies ourselves, it isn’t obvious we wouldn’t economically have been one of the winners rather than losers from being in the Euro.

I say that merely as a statistical observation.  It’s doesnt change any of the rest of the reasons why it was an ideologically bad idea.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> I think you’re right on most of that. It’s largely the same ideology.
> 
> If Greece hadn’t been in the Eurozone, they could have done their own begging. Or printing. Or “extend and pretend”
> 
> ...


As I’m sure you know what is favourable to business doesn’t help most of us.
We need to mostly focus on everything outside these votes- though I do firmly believe a leave vote does cut down on the roadblocks we would face should the folks get together and fight things again. But I’d go with Danny La Rouge  and Ralph Leonard on the unaffiliated radical front.


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Great author, very clear. He also explains why so many politicians - esp. Tory - are now second rate, and actually the *wrong type*.
> 
> You have probably seen this - highly rec to all :  113 | Crashed



The whole book, all the technical detail, is a page turner of WTF? 

I think I need to read Picketty next.


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> As I’m sure you know what is favourable to business doesn’t help most of us.
> We need to mostly focus on everything outside these votes- though I do firmly believe a leave vote does cut down on the roadblocks we would face should the folks get together and fight things again. But I’d go with Danny La Rouge  and Ralph Leonard on the unaffiliated radical front.



I had a side chat with SpackleFrog 

It was about finding positives for a different vision.

Tangibles that people could think “yeah, I get that”. Rail nationalisation. That would be a good debate.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 9, 2018)

Live coverage by Tony Blackburn !

Tony Blackburn @tonyblackburn


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Ironically, as one of those big economies ourselves, it isn’t obvious we wouldn’t economically have been one of the winners rather than losers from being in the Euro.
> 
> I say that merely as a statistical observation.  It’s doesnt change any of the rest of the reasons why it was an ideologically bad idea.



Being a winner you can take or leave until 2008. 

After that... We’d have had to taken a fiscal view ultimately, in the club.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> I had a side chat with SpackleFrog
> 
> It was about finding positives for a different vision.
> 
> Tangibles that people could think “yeah, I get that”. Rail nationalisation. That would be a good debate.


Yeah great idea! 
I’m reaching “psychotic” in the spectrum of Hours You Ploughed On For After A Nightshift 
But this is what I’ve been doing practically recently, wiping social media on a local level and trying to find a more positive way of engaging. 
Had a cracking conversation with a fellow careworker that voted remain 2 nights ago, he was genuinely interested in the reasons I put forward for voting leave as well- was shocked at the stuff I told him re fortress europe “ I had no idea” 
But yeah you and Spacklefrog are sound, happy sidechatting!


----------



## paolo (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah great idea!
> I’m reaching “psychotic” in the spectrum of Hours You Ploughed On For After A Nightshift
> But this is what I’ve been doing practically recently, wiping social media on a local level and trying to find a more positive way of engaging.
> Had a cracking conversation with a fellow careworker that voted remain 2 nights ago, he was genuinely interested in the reasons I put forward for voting leave as well- was shocked at the stuff I told him re fortress europe “ I had no idea”
> But yeah you and Spacklefrog are sound, happy sidechatting!



I have absolutely no idea what you’re on about.

For the record me and spacklefrog have opposing views. We had a polite chat.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

paolo said:


> I have absolutely no idea what you’re on about.
> 
> For the record me and spacklefrog have opposing views. We had a polite chat.


I know you do! Which part of my post irked thee? You seem a wee bit irked!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

I basically said- I like you, I like Spacklefrog. Happy chatting.
I don’t care if you guys oppose muh views


----------



## ska invita (Dec 9, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You want May's deal to go through? Interesting - is there anyone else here who wants it to pass?
> 
> Think we need another poll I'd certainly love to see the answers!


No need for another poll - Im sure everyone who voted to leave the EU will be keeping their fingers crossed that the deal goes through eventually


----------



## flypanam (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This is the thing there’s a bubble of folks across  Europe that seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that it’s only fascists that oppose the EU- but can they not see the only difference here is we had a vote on it.  None of them really connecting with the people where they actually live, it’s all very antisocial. Twitter pals in the twitterverse.


what does this mean?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

Can we just accept 'May's Deal' isn't a deal and was never intended to be a deal. It's a bargaining position from the Empire of Virtue, is all. After Tuesday the final deal that can't be reopened or renegotiated will be reopened and renegotiated.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Of all people Pamela Anderson this morning offers clear-eyed thoughts on Brexit, and particularly Lexit. She seems to have this aspect nailed :





> If you read coverage of Brexit in The Guardian, for example, you might think that the end of the world or Armageddon is due at 1pm local time on 29th March 2019, the Brexit time. The Guardian, the metropolitan elites and the likes *describe the EU as some sort of humanitarian charity that is a force of unquestionable good* and that nothing is more important than being a member of it, no matter what.



This is just, well, made-up nonsense. The equivalent of saying that all Brexit voters are racists.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2018)

its an exaggeration or a generalisation but I have encountered plenty who seem to think our labour rights were gifted  to us in the 90s by the EU. Theres also an extreme reluctance to ascribe anything other than the purest, most pragmatic of motives onto the EU. 

Anyway I knew pam was onside after Barb Wire


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This is just, well, made-up nonsense. The equivalent of saying that all Brexit voters are racists.


And there's still plenty of that on here.

I don't think she describes it well, I do prefer Empire of Virtue (which I borrow from a specific author). That is a lot closer.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Can we just accept 'May's Deal' isn't a deal and was never intended to be a deal. It's a bargaining position from the Empire of Virtue, is all. After Tuesday the final deal that can't be reopened or renegotiated will be reopened and renegotiated.


The UK has no leverage with which to renegotiate. Anything more than a cosmetic simulation of a renegotiation would require May or her successor to make the EU a better offer, such as Norway plus. They have no need to give the UK actual concessions, because they have the safe alternative of just watching things play out.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The UK has no leverage with which to renegotiate ...


Ding! Disengage with post.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Ding! Disengage with post.


Maybe you can come back to it in a week.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

A week is a long time in .. oh.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 9, 2018)




----------



## Smangus (Dec 9, 2018)

Tye best thing about Brexit is that it has finally exposed for all to see unequivocally what a bunch of hapless, witless , self-interested,  venal, vain, selfish cunts our politicians are. From all parties without exception. 

Of course some of us knew that already but its so obvious to all now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 9, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Ding! Disengage with post.


You're very sure of yourself for someone who was cheering on bitcoin this time last year, insisting it wasn't a scam and that 'wall street' would stop it crashing, and urging people to buy at the peak of the bubble. You've gone very quiet about bitcoin recently, like the other cheerleaders, and resurfaced here making equally firm and bold predictions and being equally sure that nobody else *gets it* the way you do. tbh I think you're about as knowledgeable about politics as you are about ponzi schemes.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

flypanam said:


> what does this mean?


Tough crowd in here today like


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're very sure of yourself for someone who was cheering on bitcoin this time last year, insisting it wasn't a scam and that 'wall street' would stop it crashing, and urging people to buy at the peak of the bubble. You've gone very quiet about bitcoin recently, like the other cheerleaders, and resurfaced here making equally firm and bold predictions and being equally sure that nobody else *gets it* the way you do. tbh I think you're about as knowledgeable about politics as you are about ponzi schemes.


Gonna need to look up “ding” in the dictionary as it seems to have a more complicated meaning than I thought it had!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 9, 2018)

Put this here.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 9, 2018)

My older Urbz comrades...I feel this needs a **blood pressure trigger warning**....but I thought you opught to see what's going down in the 'Telegraph' from all-round 'Vote Leave' cunt Matthew Elliot...



The fucking horror


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 9, 2018)

brogdale said:


> My older Urbz comrades...I feel this needs a **blood pressure trigger warning**....but I thought you opught to see what's going down in the 'Telegraph' from all-round 'Vote Leave' cunt Matthew Elliot...
> 
> View attachment 155067
> 
> The fucking horror


Hey I was 9 when Thatcher stepped down, the hatred is something we working class inherited like a mutation!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're very sure of yourself for someone who was cheering on bitcoin this time last year, insisting it wasn't a scam and that 'wall street' would stop it crashing, and urging people to buy at the peak of the bubble. You've gone very quiet about bitcoin recently, like the other cheerleaders, and resurfaced here making equally firm and bold predictions and being equally sure that nobody else *gets it* the way you do. tbh I think you're about as knowledgeable about politics as you are about ponzi schemes.


Posts that begin "You're very sure of yourself .. "  what an odd attempt at intimidation.
You don't seem to have a grasp of ponzi schemes - ftr, the only idea is to not be holding when the music stops. I remember posting in that thread when I took the initial stake back.
Why on earth would you mention here, something quite randomly from so long ago that I have no interest in?

On reflection, this feels creepy and unsettling. It is the more so because I don't remember you at all.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Hey I was 9 when Thatcher stepped down, the hatred is something we working class inherited like a mutation!


Apols, I've got the post 'spoons rage; what a cunt, though.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 9, 2018)

I think may is just doggedly going through the motions. She knows that her deal is going to be comprehensively defeated on tuesday - maybe she will just walk away at that point arguing that this was the best deal on offer and passing the blame what happens next on parliament. "I  have fulfilled my duty in honoring the referendum result" kind of schiz. 
Or maybe shes is just fucking batshit and cant think outside of her programming.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 9, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I think may is just doggedly going through the motions. She knows that her deal is going to be comprehensively defeated on tuesday - maybe she will just walk away at that point arguing that this was the best deal on offer and passing the blame what happens next on parliament. "I  have fulfilled my duty in honoring the referendum result" kind of schiz.
> Or maybe shes is just fucking batshit and cant think outside of her programming.



If she is going to go back to the EU, she needs to be able to show them that she has done everything possible to get the deal through - it might not be bad politicking in that sense.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Gonna need to look up “ding” in the dictionary as it seems to have a more complicated meaning than I thought it had!


Facts are chiels that winna ding.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 9, 2018)

brogdale said:


> My older Urbz comrades...I feel this needs a **blood pressure trigger warning**....but I thought you opught to see what's going down in the 'Telegraph' from all-round 'Vote Leave' cunt Matthew Elliot...
> 
> View attachment 155067
> 
> The fucking horror


You bad, bad, bad man!
I’ve had an attack of the vapours.
Not the pop band!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 9, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> You bad, bad, bad man!
> I’ve had an attack of the vapours.
> Not the pop band!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 9, 2018)

Although Arthur has always been anti EU, I do not think we could ever say he and Margaret Hilda Roberts would be bedfellows on this topic.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 9, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Tough crowd in here today like


Maybe it’s me. I just cant make sense of it.

ETA no its definitely me. Apologies.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 9, 2018)

Meanwhile...the post claret C4 'debate' seems to be getting some folk excited..


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 9, 2018)

mx wcfc said:


> If she is going to go back to the EU, she needs to be able to show them that she has done everything possible to get the deal through - it might not be bad politicking in that sense.



she knows she is going to get the best part of fuck all out of the EU. The EU are quite happy to sit on there hands and see what happens - they have zero incentive to help may - certainly not to the extent of conceding anything remotely meaningful - what's in it for them?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 9, 2018)

I see Belgium has gone to shit tonight. Faith in politcal class falling apart.

Macron's gonna love a no deal right now. Even more so Merkel's successor AKK. Great start for her bolloxing their 3rd largest export market. And over what exactly , an Irish what now .. CDU can't afford to give the Greens an open goal.

Even more instability ..


----------



## Maltin (Dec 9, 2018)

There’s a quite funny @realgollumtrump twitter account that trolls Donald Trump but Andy Serkis has gone one better and reprised his role as Gollum but mixed with Theresa May.

Nothing to do with Brexit but quite a funny portrayal of May so thought it may as well go here.

Gollum actor Andy Serkis trolls Theresa May in hilarious Brexit video


----------



## Raheem (Dec 9, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> she knows she is going to get the best part of fuck all out of the EU.


The best part? Will she never learn to stop deluding herself?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 9, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Meanwhile...the post claret C4 'debate' seems to be getting some folk excited..
> 
> View attachment 155093


he's the newest member of the harry potter left lol


----------



## Wilf (Dec 9, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 155067
> 
> The fucking horror



Indeed, peas in a pod:


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

Final ECJ ruling: UK can revoke A50, with no change to previous EU member status, following "democratic process in accordance with national constitutional requirements."


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 10, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Final ECJ ruling: UK can revoke A50, with no change to previous EU member status, following "democratic process in accordance with national constitutional requirements."



So A50 can be unilaterally revoked at any time until the withdrawal date (or any agreed A50 extension date) but only where no withdrawal agreement has been agreed. So the Brexiteers can remove the possibility of remaining by voting for May's withdrawal agreement?


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> So A50 can be unilaterally revoked at any time until the withdrawal date (or any agreed A50 extension date) but only where no withdrawal agreement has been agreed. So the Brexiteers can remove the possibility of remaining by voting for May's withdrawal agreement?



Yes


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> So A50 can be unilaterally revoked at any time until the withdrawal date (or any agreed A50 extension date) but only where no withdrawal agreement has been agreed. So the Brexiteers can remove the possibility of remaining by voting for May's withdrawal agreement?


Looks that way. Full text of the judgement follows. Para 5 seems to say exactly that. "Deal or (possible) No Brexit".



> Court of Justice of the European Union
> PRESS RELEASE No 191/18
> Luxembourg, 10 December 2018
> Judgment in Case C-621/18
> ...


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

Wait till the brexiters realise who sought this judgement, heh.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

The judgement doesn't really change much as far as I can see: no chance of parliament voting to withdraw notification as things stand...

There's a good piece in the times this morning about Labour's gradually changing position, which I think is probably the thing to watch.

The words Corbyn cannot bear to speak: he’s inching away from Brexit

Pasted here if you're over your free articles limit:

_



			Have you heard the old joke about how to tell when a politician is lying? Answer: their lips move. With Jeremy Corbyn, that rule doesn’t apply. The Labour leader struggles to say things that he does not sincerely believe, even when he has been persuaded of the need to say them.

As far as Corbyn is concerned, the gag needs to be modified slightly. How can you tell when the leader of the opposition is lying to you? Answer: his words are in print. Corbyn’s favoured medium when he has to say something that makes him uncomfortable is the written word.

Perhaps “lying” is a bit strong, but Labour has two leaders: the Corbyn who says the things that he knows he has to, who exists solely in the pages of The Guardian, and the Corbyn who struggles to say them out loud.

The problem is particularly acute on the matter of Europe. In the flesh, Corbyn is at his most impressive and fluent when he is singing from a Eurosceptic hymn sheet. It’s not a coincidence that his most emphatic victories against Theresa May in the House of Commons are the ones in which he criticises the ways that the deal she has negotiated with the European Union falls short of the Brexiteer dream.

When Corbyn is criticising it from a “remain” perspective, he sounds hesitant and less assured. He doesn’t particularly care for a halfway-house Brexit, let alone no Brexit at all. But while Corbyn is a Eurosceptic of long years standing, he is not, as one ally put it recently, “swivel-eyed” about it and knows that his electoral coalition in the country, and the party, is made up chiefly of remainers.

So, while the leader of the opposition largely avoids sounding a pro-remain note when he speaks, telling Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on Sunday programme recently that he did not know how he would vote in another referendum, Corbyn is persuaded of the position that he sketched out in The Guardian on Friday: try to trigger a general election to negotiate Labour’s “better plan”, and, failing that, support another referendum vote.

It’s not just Corbyn for whom the issue is painful. The European question causes Labour in general great discomfort, with the parliamentary party split in several directions and its voters divided, albeit less so. The shadow cabinet tends to deal with the problem in the way many families deal with an awkward topic: by avoiding talking about it.

When the shadow cabinet meets on a Tuesday and Brexit is on the agenda, what usually happens is that Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, gives a lengthy presentation and there are a handful of questions, but no real discussion, about what the party should do. Often, creative agenda management limits the time available. At the first shadow cabinet meeting after Dominic Raab’s resignation as Brexit secretary, the first item for discussion was the UN’s damning report on poverty in Britain. What followed was a prolonged session of what one of those present dismissively described as “am dram”, as frontbencher after frontbencher talked about how shocking the findings were. “But of course we all know that — we see it in our constituencies every week.”

The cuts are an easier topic for Labour because its position is settled and uncontroversial. What the party would do about Brexit is uncertain and fiercely contentious. But Labour knows its position will be in the spotlight when May’s withdrawal agreement is defeated. There is no resolution to the Brexit crisis that can pass the Commons without the co-operation of the Labour Party.

The party’s official position draws heavily from “shared market” proposals put forward by the Institute for Public Policy Research think tank. Under the leadership of Tom Kibasi, who became its director in 2016, the IPPR has transformed itself from the intellectual beating heart of New Labour to a laboratory of Corbynism.

Labour’s plans bear the fingerprints of the think tank’s shared market scheme, proposing a heavier degree of alignment with the EU’s rules than is envisaged by May and a greater say in those rules than is enjoyed by Norway, the largest non-EU economy in the European Economic Area.

Privately, most in Brussels know that an accord between the UK and EU will need more shared decision-making than between the EU and Norway because Britain’s financial services are so large. An arrangement in which the UK had no say over financial regulation would come unstuck during the first financial crisis, with potentially disastrous consequences all round.

For Corbyn, it isn’t concern for the future of British banks but his scepticism about the European Court of Justice that makes shared institutions instinctively unattractive. Anyway, the EU dislikes creating new institutions for solely bilateral purposes, which makes the full scope of what the IPPR proposes highly unlikely to fly, although something like it would be needed for financial services.

So what’s left? That’s where the two Corbyns come into play. The remaining outcomes are another vote, which might put paid to Brexit, a result that many of Corbyn’s closest allies think the Labour leader would find hard to countenance, and a Norway-type status in which the UK continues to follow most of the rules of the European club without setting them, including free movement and being subject to the ECJ.

Neither is desirable to Corbyn personally. But on the printed page he is no longer explicitly committed either to ending free movement or to escaping the long arm of European law. However much that might stick in his throat, Labour is slowly but surely easing its way to supporting a close Brexit with the EU — or no Brexit at all.
		
Click to expand...

_


----------



## pk (Dec 10, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> IS BREXIT ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN



No. Everyone both won & lost.

I know nobody falls for that EU globalist Jewish cabal conspiracy bollocks here.

All I know is... I cunted off Dr Jazzz for good reason.

This is what you get for letting cunts have free speech.

Me included.

Edit: that’s my bit for 2018, I hope everyone I know is doing good, or at least making plans to do good. I love you all. Even the cunts.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

Peeks! Hope you're well lad. X


----------



## Supine (Dec 10, 2018)

I agree with this. Coming from Jez's friends I hope he listens.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/10/jeremy-corbyn-europe-socialists-brexit?


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

I don't think anything in that article changes the electoral mathematics that's driving Labour policy on Europe.


----------



## moochedit (Dec 10, 2018)

So in theory could they cancel a50 then immediatly invoke a50 again, thus restarting the 2 year clock?


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

No, there's a clause about good faith I believe.


----------



## Supine (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think anything in that article changes the electoral mathematics that's driving Labour policy on Europe.



True, but at some point Labour will need an actual policy if there is a second ref or a GE. The current deal proves you can't keep everyone happy by trying a middle ground fudge.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

They have a policy though - a renegotiated soft brexit under a Labour government. It might not be the policy you want, but it is a policy.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> They have a policy though - a renegotiated soft brexit under a Labour government. It might not be the policy you want, but it is a policy.



There is no evidence I can see that the EU is willing to renegotiate, and lots of evidence that says they won't.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

They are unwilling to negotiate with current red lines.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

The idea that, under a different government, the only deal available is the one negotiated by the previous government is laughable. Of course they'd renegotiate.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Cabinet supposedly 'on call' for a meeting/video-conference (grauniad). I've given up trying to understand where things are up to in this madness, but that bit at least suggests a discussion about postponing tomorrow's deal and/or squeezing the tiniest concessions out of Brussels?


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> No, there's a clause about good faith I believe.



It looks like the clause about good faith was in the AG opinion but isn't in the CJEU ruling. It does however require the UK's notice of revocation to be "unequivocal and unconditional" and "in accordance with its constitutional requirements"


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Bloomberg say she's pulled the vote, but nothing official yet.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Bloomberg say she's pulled the vote, but nothing official yet.


As soon as Gove said this morning it was defo going ahead...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

taking the piss a bit now I feel. Wasn't this supposed to happen on friday


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 10, 2018)

moochedit said:


> So in theory could they cancel a50 then immediatly invoke a50 again, thus restarting the 2 year clock?



Would definitely be interesting to see what the pro-Brexit press made of that.

SCREW YOU EU - May Sticks Two Fingers Up at Brussels and RESTARTS Article 50
"We'll leave when we're good and ready," says Gove


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

Strong and stable.


----------



## T & P (Dec 10, 2018)

moochedit said:


> So in theory could they cancel a50 then immediatly invoke a50 again, thus restarting the 2 year clock?


Yes but not exactly, according to the BBC reporter commenting on the ruling. Such cancellation must be triggered by either a Commons vote, referendum or general election. In other words, it cannot be executed on the orders of the Prime Minister. This apparently has been introduced into the ruling to ensure the UK, and any other nation that might trigger Article 50 in the future, don't use the right of cancellation as a negotiating or stalling tool.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

"You must pass the deal.. it's the only deal there is... the EU will not offer anything else"
- But, Theresa, you'll lose the vote by a margin that might trigger the '48 letters'
"We'll put the vote off so that we can wring some meaningful concessions irrelevant shifts in the wording of some fucking document out of the EU"


----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 10, 2018)

She’s calling the vote off


----------



## 2hats (Dec 10, 2018)




----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

Oh just cancel the whole fucking thing for fucks sake


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Hahahahahahahaha.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

"Respect the will of the people" my fucking arse


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

There's a sense of seeing how far the rabbit hole goes as we circle round via the Madhatter's Tea Party a few more times. If these weren't MP's, just normal folks with an ounce of dignity and self awareness, they'd have walked out a fortnight ago and got their Christmas shopping in. Whilst I haven't got an ounce of sympathy for them, it must be weird being trapped in this virtual world of brexit-bureaucratic-parliamentary-arsewank.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 10, 2018)

The day will be won by the faction with the most stamina to just keep going. Which is clearly the EU bureaucrats and Brexit headbangers making no deal the best guess outcome.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

By the by, my instant response to the notion that she's problem got some kind of wording from the EU about limiting the backstop (as a statement, not in the agreement), is 2 things: it probably shifts 20/30 MPs who were going to vote against her or abstain. However it also makes her look more and more of an idiot, thus increasing the chance of her getting kicked out as and when the new vote fails.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

What would happen if they made the meaningful vote properly meaningful? Following today's ruling at the European Courts, could they make real May's threat of 'my deal or no brexit' by making the parliament vote a choice between her deal and withdrawing article 50? Or would that see her immediate removal as leader of the Tories?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Another random thought: this postponement leaves even less time for a 2nd referendum.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Another random thought: this postponement leaves even less time for a 2nd referendum.


Good, because that’s a terrible idea.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

its going to be another of those long afternoons spent watching a lectern and a bored copper until she shuffles out to say fuck all of note. Again.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Good, because that’s a terrible idea.


I agree, certainly in terms of the in/out bit.

Edit: there's also the irony that Labour might finally commit themselves to some kind of 2nd ref (on the terms of the deal) just at the point there isn't time for one.  I still have a feeling May could get 'something' through, 'at some point', largely due to her multiple failures so far draining the will and life force of the MPs. Getting something through as a result of previous failures.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> its going to be another of those long afternoons spent watching a lectern and a bored copper until she shuffles out to say fuck all of note. Again.


I'd normally agree with you, but there's no road left to kick the can down. There's got to be some sort of change of tack.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> What would happen if they made the meaningful vote properly meaningful? Following today's ruling at the European Courts, could they make real May's threat of 'my deal or no brexit' by making the parliament vote a choice between her deal and withdrawing article 50?


Not explicitly, I'd have thought. All the house can do is Aye nor Nay a particular bill. There'd have to be two votes, one against the deal and one for remain.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Not explicitly, I'd have thought. All the house can do is Aye nor Nay a particular bill. There'd have to be two votes, one against the deal and one for remain.


Ah yes. So not that then.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

I chuckled


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Strange days when even an arse like Hodges can say something amusing...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Ah yes. So not that then.


I thought they _were_ accepting amendments (to the substantive thingy) after the Grieve amendment last week (though there was some speculation the day after that it _didn't_ mean that  ).

((((( Mother of Parliaments))))


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Apparently there needs to be a vote in parliament to approve the vote being pulled... which the government could lose, and the vote go ahead anyway (and they'd then lose that).


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

hope someones been round to tell STOP BREXIT shouter that there will be another live broadcast to crash.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Another random thought: this postponement leaves even less time for a 2nd referendum.


 
Timescales for a theoretical ref have  the been played with and dry run by academics and random MP’s - can’t remember which uni but may have been UCL- I think a practical roll ref out can be a couple of months maximum should it be required


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 10, 2018)

Supine said:


> I agree with this. Coming from Jez's friends I hope he listens.
> 
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/10/jeremy-corbyn-europe-socialists-brexit?



"Fellow Socialists" - shower of bastards. Bet that'll really help the cause


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I thought they _were_ accepting amendments (to the substantive thingy) after the Grieve amendment last week (though there was some speculation the day after that it _didn't_ mean that  ).


How would you word such an amendment though? It doesn't seem possible to my mind.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Is that Bobby Ewing coming out of the shower?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> "Fellow Socialists" - shower of bastards. Bet that'll really help the cause


chief among the names, the ex leader of PASOK. Say no more


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 10, 2018)

Crispy said:


> I chuckled




This covers it perfectly at this point. What the fuck is going on? Why aren't we in the streets? We don't have a government!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> chief among the names, the ex leader of PASOK. Say no more



Surprised Blair didn't sign himself.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> How would you word such an amendment though? It doesn't seem possible to my mind.


No vote; no Grieve amendment.
Game on again for the Brextremist Atlanticist loons.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> No vote; no Grieve amendment.
> Game on again for the Brextremist Atlanticist loons.


So maybe parliament _will_ force a vote to get the Grieve amendment through?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

When/if they vote on something/some other thing, there'll be a very real chance of MPs wandering into the wrong lobby. Bit like me pissed on holiday trying to get in the wrong room. That's it, that's British politics - _me, sunburned and pissed_.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Utter May Hmmm!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Strange days when even an arse like Hodges can say something amusing...
> 
> View attachment 155145


Someone needs to take that wanker to task for using urban brackets. I’ve been sucked in by that a few times, it makes his name impossible not to like.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

We were ensconced in Greece when the referendum result came through. We have often wished we had just stopped there.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

I'm listening to the Revolutions podcast (which is excellent btw) at the moment. At this point in the narrative there are usually crowds in the street, regimes trembling behind palace gates, and everything just one "and then someone, nobody knows who, fired their gun" away from barricades, provisional governments and madame la guillotine. 

Meanwhile Paris burns.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This covers it perfectly at this point. What the fuck is going on? Why aren't we in the streets? We don't have a government!


Get out on the streets FFS us rural no marks depend on youse for opportunities  like this.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Just seen somebody from telegraph, mentioned in grauniad thread, speculating that she could put the vote off till New Year to allow 'meaningful negotiations' with the EU. 100% speculation, but if anything like that is true it (obviously) gives the lie to her claim that no further negotiations were possible.  That's at the level of 'you shameless fucking liar', something that in itself should lead to her being booted out.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Someone needs to take that wanker to task for using urban brackets. I’ve been sucked in by that a few times, it makes his name impossible not to like.


I thought on wider internet it meant something anti semitic


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why aren't we in the streets?



It’s a bit nippy, chance of rain.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I thought on wider internet it meant something anti semitic


I did not know this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> It’s a bit nippy, chance of rain.


gammy legs all round


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Apparently there needs to be a vote in parliament to approve the vote being pulled... which the government could lose, and the vote go ahead anyway (and they'd then lose that).


They might as well just play the Laurel & Hardy theme tune over the PA system in parliament.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

Crispy said:


> I'm listening to the Revolutions podcast (which is excellent btw) at the moment. At this point in the narrative there are usually crowds in the street, regimes trembling behind palace gates, and everything just one "and then someone, nobody knows who, fired their gun" away from barricades, provisional governments and madame la guillotine.
> 
> Meanwhile Paris burns.


It _is_ a bit wet and cold outside though.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Thank you Mr. Speaker may I say my pantaloons are dripping wet!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I did not know this.


Triple parentheses - Wikipedia


twats


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Triple parentheses - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> twats



But a Spartacus act when done to one's own Twitter name:

"some Twitter users, including Jews and non-Jews, intentionally put triple parentheses around their usernames in an act of solidarity"


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Apparently there needs to be a vote in parliament to approve the vote being pulled... which the government could lose, and the vote go ahead anyway (and they'd then lose that).


apparently there's a workaround. hmph.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

(even if it did get forced they could filibuster)


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

"After her success with Brexit, the United Nations has put Theresa May in charge of sorting out climate change, ISIS and the ever thorny issue of cheese vs beans"


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> apparently there's a workaround. hmph.



Astonishing!


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This covers it perfectly at this point. What the fuck is going on? Why aren't we in the streets? We don't have a government!



I'd say its the opposite   ...the problem is the government we do have, and the reason for not taking to the streets is it would further embolden the wingnuts ....Still trying to work out how Islam is responsible for EU


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> So maybe parliament _will_ force a vote to get the Grieve amendment through?


WTFK any more!


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> The idea that, under a different government, the only deal available is the one negotiated by the previous government is laughable. Of course they'd renegotiate.



That's not a one-way street though is it? Spain had only just got its arse into gear over Gib before the deal was finalised  - many countries would be asking for improvements to the deal from their perspective. It could end up being unrecognisable from the current deal, the idea that they will tinker with the backstop and change nothing else is fantasy.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

This is getting like the Blackadder episode with his pants on his head and pencils up his nose.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

Genuine option, or just more politicking?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Absolutely fucking outrageous. This simpering fucking half-wit, the worst PM I have ever seen, Is trying to save her own fucking miserable skin,

Resign now you fucking lying bastard.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This is getting like the Blackadder episode with his pants on his head and pencils up his nose.


Wibble.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Genuine option, or just more politicking?




The DUP have already said they'd back the government.  Its dead in the water unless they just fancy some showboating.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> This is getting like the Blackadder episode with his pants on his head and pencils up his nose.


'who would have noticed another madman around here?'


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

She fucking is delaying the vote!

PM understood to be delaying Brexit vote


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Lololol

You have to laugh don’t you


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> She fucking is delaying the vote!
> 
> PM understood to be delaying Brexit vote



Utterly fucking disgraceful!


----------



## eatmorecheese (Dec 10, 2018)

Just making it up as they go along. Woeful.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

After spending all weekend insisting she wasn't going to do it.  Whats changed?  Did she actually think she could carry the vote or something?

What are the chances we will now see a revision of her proposal after insisting it was the best possible deal?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

We're at £0.99 against both Euro and Dollar. That seems... I dunno, low? High? The bad one, though


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> That's not a one-way street though is it? Spain had only just got its arse into gear over Gib before the deal was finalised  - many countries would be asking for improvements to the deal from their perspective. It could end up being unrecognisable from the current deal, the idea that they will tinker with the backstop and change nothing else is fantasy.


I don't think Labour would only want to tinker with the backstop though.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

eatmorecheese said:


> Just making it up as they go along. Woeful.


The politics of the past few years has frequently put me in mind of this analysis from the terraces:


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> We're at £0.99 against both Euro and Dollar. That seems... I dunno, low? High? The bad one, though



That doesn't seem right - it would require the Euro and Dollar to be the same value which they're presumably not.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> That doesn't seem right - it would require the Euro and Dollar to be the same value which they're presumably not.


Good point. Would it? Can they have the same price against one currency but different against others? I don't know how economics works   Anyway, got it from here: 





Wookey said:


> She fucking is delaying the vote!
> 
> PM understood to be delaying Brexit vote





> The pound fell sharply in response, shedding 0.5% versus the US dollar to stand at £0.99. Against the euro, the pound was 0.8% down at £0.99.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think Labour would only want to tinker with the backstop though.



The Labour suggestion of a renegotiation relies on rejection of the Freedom of Movement, which cannot happen according to the EU - one point they've been steadfastly and uniformly agreed on. It's the same impasse, different colour.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 10, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

It is indeed a world turned upside down. 
Me and Brother Sasaferrato are in agreement .


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



That's perfect for my desk at work.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Good point. Would it? Can they have the same price against one currency but different against others? I don't know how economics works   Anyway, got it from here:



Looks like a mistake, it now reads: 'The pound fell sharply in response, shedding 0.5% versus the US dollar to stand at $1.26. Against the euro, the pound was 0.8% down at 1.10 euros.'


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> It's the same impasse, different colour.


A change is as good as a break, they say.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> She fucking is delaying the vote!
> 
> PM understood to be delaying Brexit vote


She is hopeless


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 10, 2018)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Looks like a mistake, it now reads: 'The pound fell sharply in response, shedding 0.5% versus the US dollar to stand at $1.26. Against the euro, the pound was 0.8% down at 1.10 euros.'


Ohhhhh, wait! When I read yours it said exactly the same, £0.99 and £0.99, but I've just realised it's because I've got a currency converter extension running on my browser   

As you were, everyone...


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Good point. Would it? Can they have the same price against one currency but different against others? I don't know how economics works   Anyway, got it from here:



I'm selling in US$ at the moment, and have been for a while.


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Ohhhhh, wait! When I read yours it said exactly the same, £0.99 and £0.99, but I've just realised it's because I've got a currency converter extension running on my browser
> 
> As you were, everyone...



That extension is costing you a penny every time you use it.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 10, 2018)

She'll be making a statement to the House around 3.30. Should be fun!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Good point. Would it? Can they have the same price against one currency but different against others? I don't know how economics works   Anyway, got it from here:


  1.26 usd 
1.10 eur

This is subject to change obvs


----------



## moochedit (Dec 10, 2018)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> That doesn't seem right - it would require the Euro and Dollar to be the same value which they're presumably not.



on the xe app on my phone it says £1 = 1.10 euro  and 1.26 usd  

or the other way round 1 euro = 90p  1 usd = 79p


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The Labour suggestion of a renegotiation relies on rejection of the Freedom of Movement, which cannot happen according to the EU - one point they've been steadfastly and uniformly agreed on. It's the same impasse, different colour.


Well, maybe it would work out like that, I dunno. Either way, if there's a new government before an agreement is signed, then the EU will go back to the negotiating table rather than say _it's take it or leave it _on the one negotiated by the previous government.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 10, 2018)

When do they go on holidays? Them MP’s like ? It can’t be long now....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 10, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Someone needs to take that wanker to task for using urban brackets. I’ve been sucked in by that a few times, it makes his name impossible not to like.



Trust me comrade not impossible


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

Dr. Furface said:


> She'll be making a statement to the House around 3.30. Should be fun!



Will she be doing it whilst riding a unicycle?


----------



## a_chap (Dec 10, 2018)

moochedit said:


> So in theory could they cancel a50 then immediatly invoke a50 again, thus restarting the 2 year clock?





killer b said:


> No, there's a clause about good faith I believe.



Let me get this straight: the UK can revoke Article 50 but if the UK tried to re-invoke Article 50 it could be declared "bad faith" by the EU and, er... ignored.



Seems all very Hotel California to me.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Such a lovely place


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

a_chap said:


> Seems all very Hotel California to me.



Beware of the ‘Steely Knives’


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

I think May is trying to put her best foot forward but is just falling on her arse through indecision.
Like Mrs Doyle on a windowsill!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

2 years wasted. Whatever we think of the actual ref result itself, this is fucking criminal.

The tramp steamer is loading up with poor quality nutty slag for the long voyage to the south Atlantic territories with its cargo of former people as we speak


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Life’s been good for Theresa May so far


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> 2 years wasted. Whatever we think of the actual ref result itself, this is fucking criminal.
> 
> The tramp steamer is loading up with poor quality nutty slag for the long voyage to the south Atlantic territories with its cargo of former people as we speak



Diabolical and criminal waste of much needed public money!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Sadness in her eyes!


----------



## Dr. Furface (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Will she be doing it whilst riding a unicycle?


Dunno but she should definitely wear a crash helmet


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

No more leopard pattern kitten heels for Theresa


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Diabolical and criminal waste of much needed public money!



And fucking unfair on the penguins


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

gosub said:


> And fucking unfair on the penguins


I don't know, they won't need to travel so far to find food


----------



## Beermoth (Dec 10, 2018)

Time to revoke and retrigger Article 50 for two more years of Tory in-fighting!


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Genuine option, or just more politicking?



It's both.  The offer's been on the table for years for Labour to accept SNP (and probably Scot Greens) support to fuck over the tories when possible or for a Lab minority gov.   

The politicking side is mainly to do with Scottish politics and indy.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Where are the rest of the numbers for a VONC supposed to be coming from?


----------



## likesfish (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Diabolical and criminal waste of much needed public money!



fit it with cameras make " former person you not getting out of this"  it will pay for itself


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Labour accepting an offer from the SNP to table a motion of no confidence that they then don't win won't _fuck over_ anyone apart from themselves.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 155152
> Sadness in her eyes!



There should be a 'spoiler' on that. Not fit to be viewed by anyone.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 10, 2018)

What on earth can she actually say at this point? What will she say at 3.30?

She can't say she's going to renegotiate when she's said she wouldn't and the EU has said she can't. What justification can be given for delaying the vote?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Labour accepting an offer from the SNP to table a motion of no confidence that they then don't win won't _fuck over_ anyone apart from themselves.



The DUP have stated that they will support the government in a 'Vote of no confidence'. I dare say another £1Bn has been promised.


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The DUP have stated that they will support thye government in a 'Vote of no confidence'. I dare say another £1Bn has been promised.



They are only going to support them if May's deal gets voted down.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

There is no way the DUP will risk bringing down a Tory government to end up with a Corbyn led government, no chance at all.



SpackleFrog said:


> What on earth can she actually say at this point? What will she say at 3.30?
> 
> She can't say she's going to renegotiate when she's said she wouldn't and the EU has said she can't. What justification can be given for delaying the vote?



I imagine she'll just attempt to style it out by saying she's listening to valid objections.  From where I'm stood she hasn't listened yet in this process so I doubt she'll start now but it won't stop saying whatever it takes to get her through another day.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 10, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> Genuine option, or just more politicking?




This may just be a semantic point but to me it reads like a Labour diss for the ears of remain majority Scottish voters, "@theSNP will ...give people *the chance to stop Brexit* in another vote. " - whereas Labour are just about still triangulating. "so how about it?" followed by inevitable Labour silence positions SNP as the party representing majority interests in Scotland in a way the Labour isn't doing (openly...yet). Knowing Labour dont dare say "Lets Stop Brexit" openly allows the SNP to tease with "how about it?".


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Life’s been good for Theresa May so far


It's hard to _leave_ when you can't find the door.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 10, 2018)

The nation is breathless with anticipation


----------



## steveo87 (Dec 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> The nation is breathless with anticipation


But there is an obesity problem, so it could be that....


----------



## ska invita (Dec 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> The nation is breathless with anticipation


supposedly shes going to go back and have an EU waffle about the backstop to try and placate some Tory backbenchers.....not that exciting really


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

ska invita said:


> This may just be a semantic point but to me it reads like a Labour diss for the ears of remain majority Scottish voters, "@theSNP will ...give people *the chance to stop Brexit* in another vote. " - whereas Labour are just about still triangulating. "so how about it?" followed by inevitable Labour silence positions SNP as the party representing majority interests in Scotland in a way the Labour isn't doing (openly...yet). Knowing Labour dont dare say "Lets Stop Brexit" openly allows the SNP to tease with "how about it?".


Pretty much, ska, yup.

I did say it was mainly to do with Scotland


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

House looks busy.....


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> The nation is breathless with anticipation


"We'll be standing behind the backstop to keep an eye on it. If it gets too backstoppy, we'll have a serious word with it. _You'd better watch out Mr Backstop!"_


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Badgers said:


> The nation is breathless with anticipation



Breathless with laughter!


----------



## Beermoth (Dec 10, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What on earth can she actually say at this point? What will she say at 3.30?
> 
> She can't say she's going to renegotiate when she's said she wouldn't and the EU has said she can't. What justification can be given for delaying the vote?



"Well, we've all had a rollercoaster ride these last two years. Some laughs, a few tears...but now I think it's time to wind down Brexit..."


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> House looks busy.....


you're actually watching this live?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> you're actually watching this live?



Yes. My human rights are being taken away, I'd like to witness it.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 10, 2018)

My money* is still on May's deal passing in some form in the end come what....may.

especially when it comes eventually to crunch point 



*£1 tops


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Looking at the numbers, allowing for the speakers and Sinn Fein, 35 MPs are absent today. Are all of them ill? Rather unhealthy bunch if so.



That's syphilis for you.


----------



## andysays (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yes. My human rights are being taken away, I'd like to witness it.


You fucking buffoon.

Didn't you claim to have taken out Irish citizenship recently anyway, so YOUR human rights will still be protected by the wonderful EU, it's all us stupid Brits who are supposedly the losers


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

It's actually a pretty good speech.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 10, 2018)

She’s going to do it. A load of talks then some extra waffle to get it through by the skin of her teeth.


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2018)

For all the ongoing fuck ups and unprecedented shambles you can at least still say this about Mrs May...

...she has never stuck her cock in the mouth of a dead pig's head.

Not every Prime Minister can boast that.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> It's actually a pretty good speech.


So far, it doesn't look like the tories are going to kick off too much _today_ (from the body language).


----------



## Winot (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> So far, it doesn't look like the tories are going to kick off too much _today_ (from the body language).



Nanny says stop misbehaving or there'll be no spotted dick.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 10, 2018)

Winot said:


> Nanny says stop misbehaving or there'll be no spotted dick.


 from cake and eat it, to there'll be no divorce cake at all if you dont behave


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Bercow!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Bercow!



Nice.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Bercow!


I'm confused, is he offering a vote to vote on whether they should still vote tomorrow rather than delaying.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

Everything to play for in the second half


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> You fucking buffoon.
> 
> Didn't you claim to have taken out Irish citizenship recently anyway, so YOUR human rights will still be protected by the wonderful EU, it's all us stupid Brits who are supposedly the losers



LGBT Brits without Irish citizenship are clearly the losers - I suspect strongly you could not give a shit about them.

I'm switching nationality because many of my fundamental human rights as a gay person came to me through the European Charter  - the same Charter that the Tories voted to ditch, after Brexit morons handed _Brexit_ to the _Tories_ to enact. THAT is a fucking stab in the back for LGBT people that has yet to be justified. How dare these idiots erode my human rights and call it progress?

Rights to a family life, military equality, partnership equality, equality at work legislation, trans rights, there are LOTS of rights that the UK government at the time fought against, which the dreaded and hateful EU subsequently GIFTED TO ME and PROTECTS FOR ME.

NOT the Tories, not even Labour, but the EU protects those rights of mine and my LGBT brethren. And now, post-Brexit, they will be open to the same kind of erosion that IDS promised when he said that, were we to leave the EU after the lifting on the ban on gay people in the military, the Conservative part would look again at re-introducing that gay ban.

Anyone who voted Brexit caused this. Hence my anathema towards them as the true enemy of my freedom and liberty to be myself.


----------



## chilango (Dec 10, 2018)

Do you think this will push those written, but unsent, letters from Tory MPs re a leadership challenge into the Christmas post?


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

chilango said:


> Do you think this will push those written, but unsent, letters from Tory MPs re a leadership challenge into the Christmas post?


Nope. And no VONC either. Anything, _anything, *anything but even the risk of a Corbyn govenment.*_


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Bercow showing why the Labour Party allowed themselves to be painted as in denial about workplace bullying etc when they went all out to keep him in position last month...


----------



## kabbes (Dec 10, 2018)

It's hard to think of another government that has treated the house of commons with quite such contempt.  Even when treating MPs with contempt in the past, there was at least some level of lip service towards following the form.  But this government is having to be forced to give MPs votes and information that is pretty fundamental to the point of their existence.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 10, 2018)

Will we see a bunch of honours being given out to recalcitrant tories to bring them into line? Or alternatively thumbscrews.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

Backstop , shbackstop ....


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> It's both.  The offer's been on the table for years for Labour to accept SNP (and probably Scot Greens) support to fuck over the tories when possible or for a Lab minority gov.
> 
> The politicking side is mainly to do with Scottish politics and indy.



You mean minority SNP government, propped up by the Greens. A bit rich Sturgeon spouting on, when she doesn't even have a majority in her own parliament, and is about to see their budget voted down.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You mean minority SNP government, propped up by the Greens. A bit rich Sturgeon spouting on, when she doesn't even have a majority in her own parliament, and is about to see their budget voted down.


Isn't the Scottish Parliamentiary system designed to prevent absolute majorities - full SNP control was an aberration rather than the norm?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

Ah well

At least this particular brand of English democracy is now fully exposed as a fucking  gerrymandered self serving sham. It’s now utterly pointless those 650  scummers thinking they can go back to the comfy good ole days. 

This has to be a good thing 

More unwilling flesh for the south Atlantic settlement programme


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 10, 2018)

You had it all once Theresa —everything you ever wanted- maybe it’s time for you to get an early night


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

Am I the only Urabanite who doesn't know what "frit" means ?
(Dennis Skinner)


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Isn't the Scottish Parliamentiary system designed to prevent absolute majorities - full SNP control was an aberration rather than the norm?


Yes. Even when Labour seemed monolithic in Scottish politics, it needed to be in coalition with the Lib Dem in order to form governments. 

This was the outcome of a system specifically designed to deliver “consensus”.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Am I the only Urabanite who doesn't know what "frit" means ?
> (Dennis Skinner)



You young uns!


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Am I the only Urabanite who doesn't know what "frit" means ?
> (Dennis Skinner)


Accountable I think?


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Am I the only Urabanite who doesn't know what "frit" means ?
> (Dennis Skinner)



Thatcher accused Dennis Healy of being frit, frightened!


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

Best line of the day so far - "She doesn't know whether she's on this earth or Fuller's!"

Skinner, of course.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

Gawd I missed that ... is that some sort of reference to its medical uses - or is it a reference to dark satanic mills ?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

I can't see how slightly rewording the backstop agreement will convince 50 odd MP's to change their mind?  This is just yet more can kicking.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Gawd I missed that ... is that some sort of reference to its medical uses - or is it a reference to dark satanic mills ?


Beer


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Fuck knows where this ends, but may got remarkably little flak from her own side there.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

DEFCON 3: Time to stock up the freezer. Also make more shelf space for pasta/sauces.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

Have the Republican interests in Northern Ireland been vocal about this "backstop" ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> DEFCON 3: Time to stock up the freezer.


Yeh that's the spirit. You fill up the freezer while the rest of us get food that won't be fucked when the leccy's turned off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen Trump's been silent on the matter


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Fuck knows where this ends, but may got remarkably little flak from her own side there.



Silent assassins all.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> LGBT Brits without Irish citizenship are clearly the losers - I suspect strongly you could not give a shit about them.
> 
> I'm switching nationality because many of my fundamental human rights as a gay person came to me through the European Charter  - the same Charter that the Tories voted to ditch, after Brexit morons handed _Brexit_ to the _Tories_ to enact. THAT is a fucking stab in the back for LGBT people that has yet to be justified. How dare these idiots erode my human rights and call it progress?
> 
> ...


If I'm to blame for all this identified oppression (I voted to leave) will you take on the yoke of all the drowned migrants and dead (by suicide) Greeks?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Gawd I missed that ... is that some sort of reference to its medical uses - or is it a reference to dark satanic mills ?



I know it as an old Northern saying, not sure he's using it to mean anything other than stupidly confused! lol


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> If I'm to blame for all this identified oppression (I voted to leave) will you take on the yoke of all the drowned migrants and dead (by suicide) Greeks?



Are you stopping dead migrants and suicidal Greeks by leaving the EU?

No. You're just washing your hands of the responsibility, aren't you?

Why are you intent on taking away my human rights and protections as a gay person? Did that occur to you when you voted and you discounted it, or did you not give a shit either way?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> LGBT Brits without Irish citizenship are clearly the losers - I suspect strongly you could not give a shit about them.
> 
> I'm switching nationality because many of my fundamental human rights as a gay person came to me through the European Charter  - the same Charter that the Tories voted to ditch, after Brexit morons handed _Brexit_ to the _Tories_ to enact. THAT is a fucking stab in the back for LGBT people that has yet to be justified. How dare these idiots erode my human rights and call it progress?
> 
> ...


This would be the human rights thing which isn't anything to do with the EU I suppose


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Are you stopping dead migrants and suicidal Greeks by leaving the EU?
> 
> No. You're just washing your hands of the responsibility, aren't you?
> 
> Why are you intent on taking away my human rights and protections as a gay person? Did that occur to you when you voted and you discounted it, or did you not give a shit either way?


Fucking hell, you're as good as Theresa May at deflecting direct questions.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Fucking hell, you're as good as Theresa May at deflecting direct questions.



It’s panto season.
Oh no he isn’t!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Why are you intent on taking away my human rights and protections as a gay person?


Post of the Day, and some.

Empire of Virtue: Status confirmed


----------



## andysays (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> LGBT Brits without Irish citizenship are clearly the losers - I suspect strongly you could not give a shit about them.
> 
> I'm switching nationality because many of my fundamental human rights as a gay person came to me through the European Charter  - the same Charter that the Tories voted to ditch, after Brexit morons handed _Brexit_ to the _Tories_ to enact. THAT is a fucking stab in the back for LGBT people that has yet to be justified. How dare these idiots erode my human rights and call it progress?
> 
> ...


This is a load of hysterical cobblers


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Are you stopping dead migrants and suicidal Greeks by leaving the EU?
> 
> No. You're just washing your hands of the responsibility, aren't you?
> 
> Why are you intent on taking away my human rights and protections as a gay person? Did that occur to you when you voted and you discounted it, or did you not give a shit either way?


I have found the debate before, during, and after the referendum to be nuanced and informed. However your comment is the most stupid thus far.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> This would be the human rights thing which isn't anything to do with the EU I suppose



The EU Charter on Fundamental Rights has nothing to do with the EU?

Are you for real?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> This is a load of hysterical cobblers



And you've said nothing to make me feel any better, or contradict what I have said, because let's face it, you don't even understand what you've done, do you?


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Is it possible May is heading for her Night of the Letter OpeniNG knives?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> And you've said nothing to make me feel any better, or contradict what I have said, because let's face it, you don't even understand what you've done, do you?


It's really still not about you.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I have found the debate before, during, and after the referendum to be nuanced and informed. However your comment is the most stupid thus far.



Why are you so eager to take me out of the one piece of legislation that protects me from future gay-hating Tory governments?


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Is it possible May is heading for her Night of the Letter Opening Knives?



I don't think so.  She does seem to have a fair amount of support, just not enough.  Its just gridlocked.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Is it possible May is heading for her Night of the Letter Opening Knives?


Nah, they don't have the numbers for the actual confidence vote. Would just be handing her a year of invincibility.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It's still not about you.



It's all about me, it's my human rights you're choosing to erode.

In the name of what? Progress?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Any road, if it wasn't clear before, may's strategy is to play for time. Vote late January or even later - they can't even get her to answer that question. ERG wankers just huff and puff about putting pressure on to limit the backstop, she carries on saying 'yes dear'. They never get the 48 letters, labour never gets an election and... 'something' gets passed in about 8 weeks.  MPs shuffle off and refuse to look their constituents in the eye. Democracy eh?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> It's all about me, it's my human rights you're choosing to erode.
> 
> In the name of what? Progress?


In the name of .. Jason Statham. What the living fuck are you on?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The EU Charter on Fundamental Rights has nothing to do with the EU?
> 
> Are you for real?


Right. And it was taken away when?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> And you've said nothing to make me feel any better, or contradict what I have said, because let's face it, you don't even understand what you've done, do you?


I hope you don't come here expecting people to make you feel better or agree with you


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Any road, if it wasn't clear before, may's strategy is to play for time. Vote late January or even later - they can't even get her to answer that question. ERG wankers just huff and puff about putting pressure on to limit the backstop, she carries on saying 'yes dear'. They never get the 48 letters, labour never gets an election and... 'something' gets passed in about 8 weeks.  MPs shuffle off and refuse to look their constituents in the eye. Democracy eh?



Yes, play for time.  Keep ducking and diving and hope to be able to scrape something through.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Why are you so eager to take me out of the one piece of legislation that protects me from future gay-hating Tory governments?


It was indeed the EU that made the gay-hating Tory government legalise gay marriage.


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, play for time.  Keep ducking and diving and hope to be able to scrape something through.



TBH I think she'll wait until the last possible moment and then give the ERG / DUP a choice; either this deal or withdraw Article 50.  She probably has a majority for both.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Bercow the thorn in May’s side this afternoon.


----------



## andysays (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> And you've said nothing to make me feel any better, or contradict what I have said, because let's face it, you don't even understand what you've done, do you?


Don't worry dear, I'm sure that newly armed with your Irish citizenry you'll be able to to exercise your inalienable human rights to join the military.

Maybe you can start a thread to let us know how you get on in basic training


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, play for time.  Keep ducking and diving and hope to be able to scrape something through.


I don't even see her as a back door remainer any more. It really is about surviving and making up for her stupidity in calling the 2017 election. Her only criteria for accepting a proposed deal is that it has the word _deal_ in it.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Bercow the thorn in May’s side this afternoon.


They'll ignore him.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> They'll ignore him.


We are in plan B now...and it ain't nothing to do with democracy


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> We are in plan B now...and it ain't nothing to do with democracy



And when has democracy had anything to do with politics.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> And when has democracy had anything to do with politics.


Fair..should have said voting.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 10, 2018)

Here's what the TUC has to say about LGBT rights and Brexit - sounds like there could be reason to worry, especially with the DUP propping up the government.

LGBT+ rights and Brexit: the facts


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

From May's point of view, she did well today. Held it together, managed to get it out there that the vote will be 2 months+ away, didn't encounter any _systematic_ opposition (it was almost _all_ opposition to her plan, but the number of MPs asking about a second ref played into her hands).  Corbyn wasn't even memorable.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> Bercow showing why the Labour Party allowed themselves to be painted as in denial about workplace bullying etc when they went all out to keep him in position last month...



Bercow is an obnoxious little cunt.


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I don't even see her as a back door remainer any more. It really is about surviving and making up for her stupidity in calling the 2017 election. Her only criteria for accepting a proposed deal is that it has the word _deal_ in it.



She wasn't stupid to call the 2017 election (as opposed to how that was fought, which was profoundly stupid); the likes of Rees-Mogg were always going to hate her deal and it needed 60+ others to make them an irrelevance.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> Don't worry dear, I'm sure that newly armed with your Irish citizenry you'll be able to to exercise your inalienable human rights to join the military.
> 
> Maybe you can start a thread to let us know how you get on in basic training


It's the big issue.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

agricola said:


> TBH I think she'll wait until the last possible moment and then give the ERG / DUP a choice; either this deal or withdraw Article 50.  She probably has a majority for both.



I don't know.  Nothing I've seen from her so far suggests she will countenance a withdrawal of article 50.  A no deal crash out seems the more likely scenario.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I don't know.  Nothing I've seen from her so far suggests she will countenance a withdrawal of article 50.  A no deal crash out seems the more likely scenario.


A no deal crash out will be worse for the capitalists. Hence less likely than simply saying fuck democracy and revoking Article 50.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Siri : If there is a vote of confidence in the PM, how long will we have to wait after that until we get a second MPs vote? (( #MPvote ))


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Siri : If there is a vote of confidence in the PM, how long will we have to wait after that until we get an MPs vote? (( #MPvote ))


Siri should be confused by a question asking about a _vote of confidence _leading to any change.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

You're right, I should just ask Caroline Lucas instead.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> Don't worry dear, I'm sure that newly armed with your Irish citizenry you'll be able to to exercise your inalienable human rights to join the military.
> 
> Maybe you can start a thread to let us know how you get on in basic training



I see you find this funny. 

How enlightening.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

me, me, me, me, me!


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I don't know.  Nothing I've seen from her so far suggests she will countenance a withdrawal of article 50.  A no deal crash out seems the more likely scenario.



They've been mentioning the possibility of "no Brexit at all" for at least a couple of weeks now, and Parliament can (and probably will) prevent a no deal crashout because there is not the majority to allow it to happen.  Her problem is the ERG and the DUP, she has to get them back on side or she can't pass any deal.


----------



## gosub (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Am I the only Urabanite who doesn't know what "frit" means ?
> (Dennis Skinner)


The act of sallow frying in  batter   as pineapple fritter


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I don't know.  Nothing I've seen from her so far suggests she will countenance a withdrawal of article 50.  A no deal crash out seems the more likely scenario.


Tbh she's set the scene for this clusterfuck and afaics she won't have control of any of this much longer. But she's done a grand job blocking brexit


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 10, 2018)

agricola said:


> They've been mentioning the possibility of "no Brexit at all" for at least a couple of weeks now, and Parliament can (and probably will) prevent a no deal crashout because there is not the majority to allow it to happen.  Her problem is the ERG and the DUP, she has to get them back on side or she can't pass any deal.



Yeah but today she just waived her hand and said no vote, it seems she can kick that all the way to the day before the finish line.  The ERG want a crash out, why would they back any deal?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah but today she just waived her hand and said no vote, it seems she can kick that all the way to the day before the finish line.  The ERG want a crash out, why would they back any deal?


Yep, the only game in town now; take it to the wire and deny any chance of voting on anything. Ironically, very EUish in strategy.


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah but today she just waived her hand and said no vote, it seems she can kick that all the way to the day before the finish line.  The ERG want a crash out, why would they back any deal?



Because they'll never get it.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbh she's set the scene for this clusterfuck and afaics she won't have control of any of this much longer. But she's done a grand job blocking brexit


Do you think this was her intention all along? 
Fuck Brexit and herself with it but get a Kinnock style treachery job with the EU after?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Sometimes you forget just how supine politicians are. They've just wasted several days gassing, only to find she's pressed the reset button. She probably knew a week ago there was no movement towards the deal from the Tories and pretty much knew she would call it off around then.  Just about the ultimate contempt for parliament. I've got contempt for parliament, but that's a different matter...

Leaders avoiding votes for procedural reasons? Ring any bells SpackleFrog ?


----------



## moochedit (Dec 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> This would be the human rights thing which isn't anything to do with the EU I suppose



Yep european court of human rights is part of the council of europe which is a seperate organisation from eu. I think many leavers and remainers alike confuse them.

IIRC May wanted to pull out of the human rights bill when she took over but didn't have enough support in parliament.

Council of Europe - Wikipedia


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Do you think this was her intention all along?
> Fuck Brexit and herself with it but get a Kinnock style treachery job with the EU after?


She'll get more than her arse wet when she takes a tumble


----------



## mauvais (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> Don't worry dear, I'm sure that newly armed with your Irish citizenry you'll be able to to exercise your inalienable human rights to join the military.


Yeah, but which one?


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> You mean minority SNP government, propped up by the Greens. A bit rich Sturgeon spouting on, when she doesn't even have a majority in her own parliament, and is about to see their budget voted down.


Ah yes...the libdems refusing to support the budget unless the SNP stop campaigning for independence.  We'll see how that goes at the next election.

Your party's being propped up by the DUP isn't it?  Anti-abortion, homophobic, racists.  Well done you.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

I don't think gay rights are really a gift of the EU, but I don't think mocking a gay man for being worried about the impact of brexit on his rights is a good look lads.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Bercow is an obnoxious little cunt.



True, but whether it’s him or a deputy speaker they are bound to refer to the house procedures and rules.
Contempt of parliament is something any government should at least try to avoid.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 10, 2018)

There has been far too much reference  of these rights only achieved through the EU.
For instance 8 hour shifts etc.
The trade union movement was responsible for most rights in this country.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> True, but whether it’s him or a deputy speaker they are bound to refer to the house procedures and rules.
> Contempt of parliament is something any government should at least try to avoid.


Yes, but today they knew exactly what they were doing and that, however Brecow might have been peeved, they could do this and kick the whole down the road.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> There has been far too much reference  of these rights only achieved through the EU.
> For instance 8 hour shifts etc.
> The trade union movement was responsible for most rights in this country.


The eu didn't prevent the prevention of terrorism act, the 1988 (and indeed1992) local government finance acts, clause 28, the cja, the terrorism act 2000 etc.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think gay rights are really a gift of the EU, but I don't think mocking a gay man for being worried about the impact of brexit on his rights is a good look lads.


If you're addressing me I have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Dear Corbyn, jrm, Johnson et al, you've just been outwitted - how does it feel?  Maybe May should have scattered some of Intercity Firm calling card around.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think gay rights are really a gift of the EU, but I don't think mocking a gay man for being worried about the impact of brexit on his rights is a good look lads.



I really don't mind - I would rather they revealed themselves now, at least I know with what and with whom I am dealing.


moochedit said:


> Yep european court of human rights is part of the council of europe which is a seperate organisation from eu. I think many leavers and remainers alike confuse them.
> 
> IIRC May wanted to pull out of the human rights bill when she took over but didn't have enough support in parliament.
> 
> Council of Europe - Wikipedia



This is like pulling teeth. I'm referring not to the ECHR but the EU Charter, which was rescinded in UK law as part of the Withdrawal Act  - do you understand what was in that Charter, which will no longer apply to LGBT people post-Brexit?

If you do understand what rights I am losing, I ask why you would take them away from me without replacing them in UK law?

If you don't understand what rights I am losing, I ask WHY ON EARTH you voted to destroy something that protects LGBT people and their partners within the EU?


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> If you're addressing me I have no idea what you're talking about.


You must have half the boards on ignore if you think that was at you.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I really don't mind - I would rather they revealed themselves now, at least I know with what and with whom I am dealing.


Do you really think urban is a hotbed of homophobia? Do you really think anyone who voted leave did so to actively deprive you of any rights (and that's completely separate to the question of whether not being in the EU really does deprive LGBT people of their rights)?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I really don't mind - I would rather they revealed themselves now, at least I know with what and with whom I am dealing.
> 
> 
> This is like pulling teeth. I'm referring not to the ECHR but the EU Charter, which was rescinded in UK law as part of the Withdrawal Act  - do you understand what was in that Charter, which will no longer apply to LGBT people post-Brexit?
> ...


I don't understand what rights you're losing and I didn't vote to leave. Right to a family life, you mention. How does the charter of fundamental rights differ in this regard from echr article 8?


----------



## moochedit (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I really don't mind - I would rather they revealed themselves now, at least I know with what and with whom I am dealing.
> 
> 
> This is like pulling teeth. I'm referring not to the ECHR but the EU Charter, which was rescinded in UK law as part of the Withdrawal Act  - do you understand what was in that Charter, which will no longer apply to LGBT people post-Brexit?
> ...



Ok fair enough. I must admit i have no idea about what the "eu charter" says about LBGT rights but if you have a link post it up and i will have a read of it. Might have a google myself later when i have time.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't understand what rights you're losing and I didn't vote to leave. Right to a family life, you mention. How does the charter of fundamental rights differ in this regard from echr article 8?



Mate, five minutes ago you hadn't even heard of the EU Convention on Fundamental Human Rights...forgive me if I suggest you need some basic background knowledge before I start comparing the legal protections of two massive pieces of legislation, one of which you appear not to realise even existed.


----------



## agricola (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Dear Corbyn, jrm, Johnson et al, you've just been outwitted - how does it feel?  Maybe May should have scattered some of Intercity Firm calling card around.



How have they been outwitted?  What she has done is basically thrown a sicky on the day she was due to attend a meeting at which she was going to be demoted.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Do you really think urban is a hotbed of homophobia? Do you really think anyone who voted leave did so to actively deprive you of any rights (and that's completely separate to the question of whether not being in the EU really does deprive LGBT people of their rights)?



We won these rights within my lifetime. I remember the faces of those who tried to deny us those rights...many of them are still in government.

We have every reason to be worried. And our true allies would share those worries.


----------



## Reno (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Do you really think urban is a hotbed of homophobia? Do you really think anyone who voted leave did so to actively deprive you of any rights (and that's completely separate to the question of whether not being in the EU really does deprive LGBT people of their rights)?


I've come across plenty of homophobia on the politics forums and here is a prime example:


The Fornicator said:


> me, me, me, me, me!


....because not wanting to go back the decades of discrimination and inequality apparently is selfish.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Mate, five minutes ago you hadn't even heard of the EU Convention on Fundamental Human Rights...forgive me if I suggest you need some basic background knowledge before I start comparing the legal protections of two massive pieces of legislation, one of which you appear not to realise even existed.


Neither the echr nor the fundamental rights charter are "massive pieces of legislation"

And you again seem to conflate the echr and charter of fundamental rights by calling it the convention of fundamental rights

I've directed you to the article on family life in the echr. With your detailed knowledge of thr fundamental rights charter I'm sure you'll be able to compare and contrast the two in mere minutes.

E2A here's your fundamental charter EUR-Lex - 12012P/TXT - EN - EUR-Lex


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Mate, five minutes ago you hadn't even heard of the EU Convention on Fundamental Human Rights...forgive me if I suggest you need some basic background knowledge before I start comparing the legal protections of two massive pieces of legislation, one of which you appear not to realise even existed.


Anyway I'll save you the time. Article seven of the charter is in essence the same as article eight of the convention. Perhaps you could tell me again precisely which family life rights you think you might lose


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> You must have half the boards on ignore if you think that was at you.


My post which talked about homophobia was #17428, yours #17429 was immediately after it and talked about gay rights.

I responded fairly by asking if you were talking to me.

Maybe you should start quoting or tagging the person you're talking to if their post doesn't immediately precede yours.  It stops confusion on a fast-updating thread and the fault (arrogance) was yours.  Barring that...get to fuck.

But yes...life is certainly more pleasant here these days.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

You bothered to type all that out?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> You bothered to type all that out?


The devil finds work for idle hands


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Do you really think anyone who voted leave did so to actively deprive you of any rights?


More a simple question of ignorance of the issue, I would have thought, like the implications for the Good Friday Agreement.


----------



## not a trot (Dec 10, 2018)

Mays Christmas card list must be getting shorter by the hour.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

So May's only 'tactic' left is deny any parliamentary vote/amendment until the days before March 29 2019, when MPs will literally be left with the 'choice' of (her) deal or no deal. That's it.

That leaves May's opponents only destructive options; her party could bring her down or Labour could go VoNC.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 10, 2018)




----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> True, but whether it’s him or a deputy speaker they are bound to refer to the house procedures and rules.
> Contempt of parliament is something any government should at least try to avoid.



Indeed.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Ah yes...the libdems refusing to support the budget unless the SNP stop campaigning for independence.  We'll see how that goes at the next election.
> 
> Your party's being propped up by the DUP isn't it?  Anti-abortion, homophobic, racists.  Well done you.



I have no party allegiance, certainly not the DUP.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The eu didn't prevent the prevention of terrorism act, the 1988 (and indeed1992) local government finance acts, clause 28, the cja, the terrorism act 2000 etc.



To say nothing of that wonderful piece of Labour legislation, RIPA.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)




----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Labour could go VoNC


the numbers tho? Am I right in saying that lab+snp votes for no confidence is not enough to do it without tory rebels? That rare beast etc


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> the numbers tho? Am I right in saying that lab+snp votes for no confidence is not enough to do it without tory rebels? That rare beast etc


The SNP & LDs have called on Corbyn to do it today...but I think he's waiting on the DUP who might just join if she looked like getting her deal through.
Pretty craven really; they should at least have a go.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> To say nothing of that wonderful piece of Labour legislation, RIPA.


Are we now arguing that the EU is shit for not having completely erased all trace of national sovereignty?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I really don't mind - I would rather they revealed themselves now, at least I know with what and with whom I am dealing.
> 
> 
> This is like pulling teeth. I'm referring not to the ECHR but the EU Charter, which was rescinded in UK law as part of the Withdrawal Act  - do you understand what was in that Charter, which will no longer apply to LGBT people post-Brexit?
> ...



As I understand it, all EU law has been encapsulated into UK law, and will be dealt with on a case by case basis after we leave?

Why on earth would any party try and water down or abolish the existing legislation? Forty years ago maybe, but political suicide now.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think gay rights are really a gift of the EU, but I don't think mocking a gay man for being worried about the impact of brexit on his rights is a good look lads.


I kind of agree with you but his position is childish at best. It depends on a complete contempt for all the other interests involved in this and threw insults about ta boot.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Are we now arguing that the EU is shit for not having completely erased all trace of national sovereignty?



Not quite sure what your point is. The Regulatory Powers Act was introduced by Charles Clarke when he was Home Secretary.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> There has been far too much reference  of these rights only achieved through the EU.
> For instance 8 hour shifts etc.
> The trade union movement was responsible for most rights in this country.


I think more about the EU insisting on the abolition of collective bargaining for new entrants to the project.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Then there is what they did to the Greeks. 
Was this a price worth paying?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Ah yes...the libdems refusing to support the budget unless the SNP stop campaigning for independence.  We'll see how that goes at the next election.
> 
> Your party's being propped up by the DUP isn't it?  Anti-abortion, homophobic, racists.  Well done you.



Oh, and don't ascribe views to me I don't hold.

You are either being deliberately obtuse, or remarkably uninformed re your beloved SNP. The reason the putrid fish had to approach the Lib Dems is because her erstwhile allies, the Greens, refused to support the budget without a promise of Council Tax reform. This is something you should have been aware of.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Oh, and don't ascribe views to me I don't hold.



This seems to be rife on Brexit threads.


----------



## killer b (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The SNP & LDs have called on Corbyn to do it today...but I think he's waiting on the DUP who might just join if she looked like getting her deal through.
> Pretty craven really; they should at least have a go.


The SNP and LDs know it wouldn't pass, or they'd call it themselves. Their calls today are for looks is all, hence why they did it on twitter.

If Labour call and lose a VONC, the screaming starts in earnest to get them to commit to a second referendum, the tories get an easy win. I can understand why they'd want to avoid both those things.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Oh, and don't ascribe views to me I don't hold.
> 
> You are either being deliberately obtuse, or remarkably uninformed re your beloved SNP. The reason the putrid fish had to approach the Lib Dems is because her erstwhile allies, the Greens, refused to support the budget without a promise of Council Tax reform. This is something you should have been aware of.


Not the thread for it.

Also...entirely wrong.

Buuuut...not the thread for it, is it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

So she's buggered off to Paris, Berlin and Brussels to go through the motions - all without consulting the house ...


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 10, 2018)

.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> The SNP and LDs know it wouldn't pass, or they'd call it themselves. Their calls today are for looks is all, hence why they did it on twitter.
> 
> If Labour call and lose a VONC, the screaming starts in earnest to get them to commit to a second referendum, the tories get an easy win. I can understand why they'd want to avoid both those things.


Agree about the minor party grandstanding, but they did both call on Corbyn to do this in the debate (?) this afternoon...as well as twitter. Waiting for the DUP will leave things too late I feel.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> The SNP and LDs know it wouldn't pass, or they'd call it themselves. Their calls today are for looks is all, hence why they did it on twitter.
> 
> If Labour call and lose a VONC, the screaming starts in earnest to get them to commit to a second referendum, the tories get an easy win. I can understand why they'd want to avoid both those things.



Yes, and in the meantime, whilst our elected representative are going round knifing one another, the populace swings in the wind.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Agree about the minor party grandstanding, but they did both call on Corbyn to do this in the debate (?) this afternoon...as well as twitter. Waiting for the DUP will leave things too late I feel.



The DUP hold the whip. They are enjoying a level of power beyond their wildest dreams. Rearrange these words... Christmas for turkeys vote don't.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 10, 2018)

.


gentlegreen said:


> So she's buggered off to Paris, Berlin and Brussels to go through the motions - all without consulting the house ...


Stephen barclays disappearing act was quite funny.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> The DUP hold the whip. They are enjoying a level of power beyond their wildest dreams. Rearrange these words... Christmas for turkeys vote don't.


If May persists with her 'deal' and Corbyn offers a whole UK customs arrangement...it could well be in their interest to join a VoNC.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 10, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> .
> 
> Stephen barclays disappearing act was quite funny.


It's almost charming and normal compared to the way the French do business...

REPLAY. "Gilets jaunes" : regardez en intégralité l'allocution d'Emmanuel Macron


----------



## Calamity1971 (Dec 10, 2018)

Ay up. Corbyn back in da house with emergency debate application...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Calamity1971 said:


> Ay up. Corbyn back in da house with emergency debate application...


Govt. have still got away with it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Then there is what they did to the Greeks.
> Was this a price worth paying?


How will Brexit change that?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> How will Brexit change that?


Leaving sends a clear message that we don't agree with EU policy such as this?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 10, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> So she's buggered off to Paris, Berlin and Brussels to go through the motions - all without consulting the house ...



time to close the border


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

brogdale said:


> If May persists with her 'deal' and Corbyn offers a whole UK customs arrangement...it could well be in their interest to join a VoNC.



Perhaps. Corbyn isn't in a position to offer anything, at the moment, and I don't see a Labour government cosying up to the DUP.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

Perhaps Gavin Barwell encourages May to press on, crawl even towards the guns and barbed wire. 
Who else will employ the man?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 10, 2018)

killer b said:


> I don't think gay rights are really a gift of the EU, but I don't think mocking a gay man for being worried about the impact of brexit on his rights is a good look lads.



yeh, i don't agree with wookey at all but c'mon.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Leaving sends a clear message that we don't agree with EU policy such as this?


It's not been part of any of the discussions or reasoning as to why we left, it wasn't on the side of the bus. Why would the EU or people here think it was part of the message?. It wasn't.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 10, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Perhaps. Corbyn isn't in a position to offer anything, at the moment, and I don't see a Labour government cosying up to the DUP.


Simple maths dictates that they may have to secure (at least) abstention from the DUP.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's not been part of any of the discussions or reasoning as to why we left, it wasn't on the side of the bus. Why would the EU or people here think it was part of the message?. It wasn't.


People I know discussed it, it was pertinent to many voting leave. Staying in suggests much more strongly that remainers thought "fuck the Greeks".


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> More a simple question of ignorance of the issue, I would have thought, like the implications for the Good Friday Agreement.



yeh, this is why you should formulate the critique of politics as a critique of policy making. but you'll never do that cos you won't feel high and mighty then either.

(i didn't vote either...)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2018)

dialectician said:


> yeh, this is why you should formulate the critique of politics as a critique of policy making. but you'll never do that cos you won't feel high and mighty then either.
> 
> (i didn't vote either...)


You misunderstand that post if you think I think it makes me feel high and mighty. I was ignorant of the stuff Wookey posted about EU-based gay rights. I wasn't ignorant of the GFA stuff because I'm a bit of a politics nerd. I don't expect others to be politics nerds nor do I feel superior to people who aren't. But crack on with your unwarranted assumptions about me.


----------



## andysays (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> People I know discussed it, it was pertinent to many voting leave. Staying in suggests much more strongly that remainers thought "fuck the Greeks".


But it wasn't on the side of the bus...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> People I know discussed it, it was pertinent to many voting leave. Staying in suggests much more strongly that remainers thought "fuck the Greeks".


I've heard zero discussion about it apart from a bit on here. As a Remainer I don't think "fuck the greeks", I think brexit will make no difference to them while screwing this country up.


----------



## Supine (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> People I know discussed it, it was pertinent to many voting leave. Staying in suggests much more strongly that remainers thought "fuck the Greeks".



What planet do you live on?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 10, 2018)

The idea that the UK leaving will send a message to the EU about Greece or about immigration into the EU is completely and utterly bonkers.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 10, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> I've heard zero discussion about it apart from a bit on here. As a Remainer I don't think "fuck the greeks", I think brexit will make no difference to them while screwing this country up.



Succinctly put.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 10, 2018)

andysays said:


> But it wasn't on the side of the bus...


It was on the backside of the bus


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

Maybe that's the plan.  Us and the Greeks will be dirt poor and then - Vive La Revolucion!!!!


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You misunderstand that post if you think I think it makes me feel high and mighty. I was ignorant of the stuff Wookey posted about EU-based gay rights. I wasn't ignorant of the GFA stuff because I'm a bit of a politics nerd. I don't expect others to be politics nerds nor do I feel superior to people who aren't. But crack on with your unwarranted assumptions about me.



No unwarranted assumptions. this thread should have been dead as early as june 25th 2016.

Not to speak of the other, lexxit one.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

the 'what will it do for greece' argument has been discussed many times here, its a fundamental misunderstanding. You say 'what will brexit do for greece' and I say 'why do you want to remain in an organisation that will do that to a member state?'

of course the response is 'they cannot do it to us, we have our own currency' which is missing the point again with a side order of alright jackism thrown in

Now, and this applies to austerity too, the fact that remain on the whole confronts reasons like greece and austerity kickback _after the fact._ No, remain wasn't fuck the greeks, why would it be? You hadn't even considered them until after the fact. Nor the people knuckling under austerity. John Harris on prole safari in the guardian.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 10, 2018)

Scenes today: Ceremonial mace - Wikipedia
"she's behind you!" "oh no you didn't!" etc.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Those Remain nutters waving their long pole placards on the news - I suppose they think if a slogan on a bus was good enough to win 52%, they're nightly placard waving must win the public over. Logical, if you're fucking stupid.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Those Remain nutters waving their long pole placards on the news - I suppose they think if a slogan on a bus was good enough to win 52%, they're nightly placard waving must win the public over. Logical.



The "I love EU" people are the people I understand least in this whole shitshow.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 10, 2018)

wonder if tory mps will start sending more letters in to the 1922? its pretty clear she has seriously fucked a lot of them off


----------



## Raheem (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> You say 'what will brexit do for greece' and I say 'why do you want to remain in an organisation that will do that to a member state?'


Rephrasing the question ought not to give us a different answer. What Greece would directly get from Brexit, all else being equal, is a billion euros or whatever less a year in subsidies, a slight drop in the value of its exports, a slight decline in tourism. If it also satisfies your indignation, then that would be great for you but pretty worthless to them.


----------



## grit (Dec 10, 2018)

TopCat said:


> A no deal crash out will be worse for the capitalists. Hence less likely than simply saying fuck democracy and revoking Article 50.


The hedge funds are shorting retailer businesses, they get rich either way.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Rephrasing the question ought not to give us a different answer. What Greece would directly get from Brexit, all else being equal, is a billion euros or whatever less a year in subsidies, a slight drop in the value of its exports, a slight decline in tourism. If it also satisfies your indignation, then that would be great for you but pretty worthless to them.


thankyou for giving me a humpty dumpty cost/benefit analysis pulled out of your arse while dismissing principles as 'indignation'. As I say the way some remainers miss the greece point is instructive, as is the timing of the counterpoints.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 10, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> thankyou for giving me a humpty dumpty cost/benefit analysis pulled out of your arse while dismissing principles as 'indignation'. As I say the way some remainers miss the greece point is instructive, as is the timing of the counterpoints.



My pleasure, as always. 

Call it indignation, call it principles. Either way, it adds up to nothing outside your head.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> The "I love EU" people are the people I understand least in this whole shitshow.


Quite a job trying to get to the roots of the irrationality. I don't recall this fervent level of emotional investment in a political body before. Fwiw, I do sometimes look to how we view the NHS for clues as to how/why this has happened (the only other example I can think of) - we all know the idea of the NHS being the closest we have to a national religion. All made more curious because it's demonstrably undeserved. I do come back to this notion of 'the virtuous empire'.


----------



## Supine (Dec 10, 2018)

A labour mp took the ceremonial mace from the house of commons in protest. It was returned by security. The HoP is like east enders at the moment


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Quite a job trying to get to the roots of the irrationality. I don't recall this fervent level of emotional investment in a political body before. Fwiw, I do sometimes look to how we view the NHS for clues as to how/why this has happened (the only other example I can think of) - we all know the idea of the NHS being the closest we have to a national religion. All made more curious because it's demonstrably undeserved. I do come back to this notion of 'the virtuous empire'.



The NHS is demonstrably undeserved by the people who pay for it?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

FFS. Have a coffee, or go to bed.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Newsnight  being a reminder of just how much the Irish political class love their moment in the sun.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> FFS. Have a coffee, or go to bed.



Fair point, I misread.

I will in future, duly spurn the people who gave me the 3 machines in my chest which keep me alive as well as the external testing kit and the consumable bits and pieces they require and the ongoing laundry list of drugs and the assessments and the operations and the many times they needed to restart my heart etc. etc...

You know, I think all that stuff has made me a bit biased.  Is there a re-education place I can book into?


----------



## tim (Dec 10, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Why are you so eager to take me out of the one piece of legislation that protects me from future gay-hating Tory governments?




This being the Tory Party of Justine Greening, Ruth Davidson, Alan Duncan, Nigel  Evans and Michael Fabricant.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 10, 2018)

nevermind


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

tim said:


> This being the Tory Party of Justine Greening, Ruth Davidson, Alan Duncan, Nigel  Evans and Michael Fabricant.



I hear they have several brown people too.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> The "I love EU" people are the people I understand least in this whole shitshow.



I think a lot of people see membership of the EU as bringing us closer to other Europeans.

The Fornicator: NHS reputation undeserved?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 10, 2018)

Closer in what sense ... the same passport covers? Six of them sharing a two-bed flat next door?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I think a lot of people see membership of the EU as bringing us closer to other Europeans.



I've never thought of Norwegians as particularly standoffish due to their arms-length treatment of the EU.  Unless I go somewhere and notice due to the admin, I'm generally unaware of a country's status, and can't say I feel closer to them or not on this basis.

I suppose certain kinds of cooperation, like that among scientists, is going to influence a small number of people.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Closer in what sense ... the same passport covers? Six of them sharing a two-bed flat next door?



<shakes fist at sexually-liberal Norwegians next door> 

Wait - they're not even members!  I can't believe I've been listening to them shagging all this time and they're not even signed up!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> I've never thought of Norwegians as particularly standoffish due to their arms-length treatment of the EU.  Unless I go somewhere and notice due to the admin, I'm generally unaware of a country's status, and can't say I feel closer to them or not on this basis.
> 
> I suppose certain kinds of cooperation, like that among scientists, is going to influence a small number of people.



More along the lines of people having friends in Europe and the EU means they have something in common.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Those Remain nutters waving their long pole placards on the news - I suppose they think if a slogan on a bus was good enough to win 52%, they're nightly placard waving must win the public over. Logical, if you're fucking stupid.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

two sheds said:


> More along the lines of people having friends in Europe and the EU means they have something in common.



Most of the scientists I know are very pro-EU, but it's like the infrastructure upon which their whole kinda 'club' works, and I like meeting their research mates when they come over and stuff.  I've also had friends from work (connected to science but we're more of a contractor) leave the country due to this nonsense (earlier on, when the right to remain was a lot less clear).  One came back when things were cleared up.

There is a degree to which it does feel to some like we're being broken up from our mates, but that seems to me to be a very small number overall.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

Ranbay said:


>



Spoiler code FFS!!!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 10, 2018)

8ball said:


> There is a degree to which it does feel to some like we're being broken up from our mates, but that seems to me to be a very small number overall.



I'd have thought a larger number - a lot of people aren't interested in politics and don't really see the EU as a political body. The xenophobic Leave campaign also I think pushed people the other way and they see a vote for membership of the EU as standing against racism.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I'd have thought a larger number - a lot of people aren't interested in politics and don't really see the EU as a political body. The xenophobic Leave campaign also I think pushed people the other way and they see a vote for membership of the EU as standing against racism.



It's a very simplistic stance, but I think you're right.
Farage helped cement that impression with his posters.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 10, 2018)

Yep. And when remainers talk about the racism of leave voters they're really talking about people who were swayed by that sort of message. They don't recognize that most leave voters didn't actually vote leave for that reason.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Yep. And when remainers talk about the racism of leave voters they're really talking about people who were swayed by that sort of message. They don't recognize that most leave voters didn't actually vote leave for that reason.



Sovereignty being the most common reason quoted, as eny fule no.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Yep. And when remainers talk about the racism of leave voters they're really talking about people who were swayed by that sort of message. They don't recognize that most leave voters didn't actually vote leave for that reason.


I agree with this. However, there was a pretty strong correlation between number of people in an area not born in Britain and that area voting remain. There are loads of ways to divide the vote, not all of them particularly useful, but it does seem that the more foreigners you personally know, the more likely you were to vote remain. I do think that's relevant - I have quite a few EU national mates, and their situation most certainly affects my view of this. And while it wasn't the only reason, immigration was cited by many as a major reason for voting leave. tbh when people cited 'sovereignty', I suspect a degree of immigration control mixed in there as well. Combining that with the various social attitude surveys of remain/leave voters does paint a picture of the vote where the older you were, the fewer foreigners you knew, and the more generally socially conservative you were, the more likely you were to vote leave. Many younger people in many parts of the country will barely know anyone in their circle who voted leave, aside perhaps from their parents. I'm not so young any more, but my parents, who both voted leave, would fit all those categories: old, don't know many foreigners, generally socially conservative. 

When people talk about the anger of the leave side if brexit doesn't happen, they should also remember the anger of the remain side if it does. While it is of course true that not all leave voters are stupid racists, it is equally true that not all remain voters are privileged elitists.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> When people talk about the anger of the leave side if brexit doesn't happen, they should also remember the anger of the remain side if it does. While it is of course true that not all leave voters are stupid racists, it is equally true that not all remain voters are privileged elitists.



Though I am a privileged elitist. 
Now stroke my strawberry-scented mane, you plebs!


----------



## Wilf (Dec 10, 2018)

agricola said:


> How have they been outwitted?  What she has done is basically thrown a sicky on the day she was due to attend a meeting at which she was going to be demoted.


I've been out all night since writing that post, so I might have missed developments. But anyway, my logic was that was another step - she got it through cabinet, they missed the 48 letters and now she avoided the vote in parliament. When it does come back to a vote, the logic might be 'look, look, we crash out in x days. Vote for this or.. wasteland'. She's put the vote off, but she might have put it off to a point where chronological desperation works in her favour.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 10, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've been out all night since writing that post, so I might have missed developments. But anyway, my logic was that was another step - she got it through cabinet, they missed the 48 letters and now she avoided the vote in parliament.



There are only 26 letters, as eny fule no.


----------



## tim (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Closer in what sense ... the same passport covers? Six of them sharing a two-bed flat next door?



Do you listen for the little one to say roll over or its equivalent in whatever Continental tongue they speak?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 10, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Closer in what sense ... the same passport covers? Six of them sharing a two-bed flat next door?


The mask slips on occasion, doesn't it? Pesky mask.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

That's a remainer right there. Straight out of The Guardian play book.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

Deckchair hire now (up to) 70% off - with free popcorn!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> That's a remainer right there. Straight out of The Guardian play book.


What calling you on your sly dog-whistle racism? Why don't you go play with your bitcoins.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Oh dear, it's gone very urban75 very quickly. A chorus of Ode to Joy and it's time for Nexflix.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What calling you on your sly dog-whistle racism? Why don't you go play with your bitcoins.



You can't play with bitcoins, they are made of ethereum.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Oh dear, it's gone very urban75 very quickly.



Tends to happen round these parts.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Closer in what sense ... the same passport covers?



Ah I hadn't realized you were referring to my comment. No, closer in the sense of having something in common with their friends in Europe. 



> Six of them sharing a two-bed flat next door?


Nope I've no idea what you mean by that. Explain? Any particular nationality you're referring to?


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Nope I've no idea what you mean by that. Explain? Any particular nationality you're referring to?



We've covered this.  Norway isn't even a member.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Ah I hadn't realized you were referring to my comment. No, closer in the sense of having something in common with their friends in Europe.
> 
> 
> Nope I've no idea what you mean by that. Explain? Any particular nationality you're referring to?


Forrin. That's the nationality. Living on top of one another. Smelly food. You know the type.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Forrin. That's the nationality. Living on top of one another. Smelly food. You know the type.



I don't like to be uncharitable, but it looks that way at first glance.


----------



## agricola (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I've been out all night since writing that post, so I might have missed developments. But anyway, my logic was that was another step - she got it through cabinet, they missed the 48 letters and now she avoided the vote in parliament. When it does come back to a vote, the logic might be 'look, look, we crash out in x days. Vote for this or.. wasteland'. She's put the vote off, but she might have put it off to a point where chronological desperation works in her favour.



That is what she may be trying to do, but then again this is someone whose record as Home Secretary and as Prime Minister is one of fairly consistent wrongness.  

If she is dangling the prospect of no deal vs this deal in front of the ERG and DUP, it makes them think there is a possibility of no deal (which they want), and the consequent weakness of the Government keeps Labour keen to try to defeat it.  The weakness also makes the Tory remainers / soft Brexit crowd emboldened (well emboldened as in them going on TV, not actually voting against most of it) to push their ideas, as they recognize that with Opposition support they can plausibly win votes as well.  As a policy it basically unites the opposition to the deal against it, making it impossible to pass (as we are seeing) and resulting in the odd circumstance that we find ourselves in of a Government having to deal with an opposition that has a majority of probably more than a hundred.

The only way she could ever pass this is to instead threaten Brexit itself (ie: by making it a contest of her deal vs her withdrawing Article 50); if she does that successfully (and it will be very difficult) then the ERG / DUP crowd are perhaps going to be less likely to rebel, she is more likely to pick up the Lexit crowd and the likes of Grieve and Soubry can then get to decide between loyalty to the Party and stopping Brexit without a referendum (a decision for which we all know the outcome).   In the short to medium term it would probably trash the party, but then it is going to be trashed anyway.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

agricola said:


> <snip>



I may be wrong, but I wouldn't count too much on Soubry's loyalty to the party.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

“The anger of the remain side” thing is it’s only the “privileged elitists” that IME tend to think a vote should be overturned on their say so. This certainly doesn’t apply to all- I’d even go out on a limb and say most- remain voters, and I know a fair number that are disgusted at the idea that it should be overturned. I’d be interested to know what would trigger this anger given the majority voted leave and U.K. leaving would be a logical follow through from that point. Nah, “the anger of remain voters” I don’t buy it and I certainly don’t see it outside of the twitter bubble. 
It would be more passive aggression from the same FBPE cunts.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> “The anger of the remain side” thing is it’s only the “privileged elitists” that IME tend to think a vote should be overturned on their say so. This certainly doesn’t apply to all- I’d even go out on a limb and say most- remain voters, and I know a fair number that are disgusted at the idea that it should be overturned. I’d be interested to know what would trigger this anger given the majority voted leave and U.K. leaving would be a logical follow through from that point. Nah, “the anger of remain voters” I don’t buy it and I certainly don’t see it outside of the twitter bubble.
> It would be more passive aggression from the same FBPE cunts.



I feel really ignorant, but I had to look up what FBPE meant.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I feel really ignorant, but I had to look up what FBPE meant.


No you’re not ignorant, you’re sane


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> No you’re not ignorant, you’re sane



I'm not well up on this Twitterspeak.

#oldster #uselesseater


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I feel really ignorant, but I had to look up what FBPE meant.



Florida Board of Professional Engineers


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I'm not well up on this Twitterspeak.
> 
> #oldster #uselesseater


You won’t believe what hashtags they came up with next!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

shouldn't that have no spaces, and a hashtag?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Florida Board of Professional Engineers


Find bored pompous elephants.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Find bored pompous elephants.



Fetch big pie, eejit!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> Fetch big pie, eejit!


Feart by prick’s effort!


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Feart by prick’s effort!



I liked that, but looking up "feart" it's a bit worrying.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I liked that, but looking up "feart" it's a bit worrying.


Hey you’re not scotch!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

When Scots say “scotch” it’s not racist


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Hey you’re not scotch!



I might be a tiny bit Scotch!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Forrin. That's the nationality. Living on top of one another. Smelly food. You know the type.


Creepy, stalking guy slowly morphs into over-invested, evangelical smeary remainer: you really swallowed those virtue pills hard. It's part of your identity, right? Criticism of it is like criticism of your extended family? All these lovely people from all of Europe serving you metropolitan coffee and validating your life choices and your open-hearted warmth. I know, I know, it's so nice to have everything in your comfortable, liberal life validated.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I might be a tiny bit Scotch!


Drink more uisge beatha, mo chompanach


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Creepy, stalking guy slowly morphs into over-invested, evangelical smeary remainer: you really swallowed those virtue pills hard. It's part of your identity, right? Criticism of it is like criticism of your extended family? All these lovely people from all of Europe serving you metropolitan coffee and validating your life choices and your open-hearted warmth. I know, I know, it's so nice to have everything in your comfortable, liberal life validated.



So what did you mean?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Get yer chairs oot 8ball, game is back on. Sweet and salted low calorie popcorn for me!


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I don't like to be uncharitable, but it looks that way at first glance.





8ball said:


> So what did you mean?


There is of course another angle to view it. That within the glorious EU half the younger southern citizens* have all gone and made themselves utterly poverty-stricken, so now have to enjoy their basic fundamental human rights by leaving their family villas overlooking a Mediterranean beach, to take up residence in sub-sub-sub-letted garden sheds in places like Catford, or Grantham, with half a dozen other unfortunate souls just to be exploited for a minimum wage working in a shit job with no perspectives. 
All in the name of integration and freedom of movement.
Perhaps?

*I personally much prefer their smelly food to ours, and also envy their darker skin over my pasty celtic hue - just to clear that up before the usual barrage of 'oi racist' from camp remain


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Drink more uisge beatha, mo chompanach



I've possibly had enough already.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

agricola said:


> That is what she may be trying to do, but then again this is someone whose record as Home Secretary and as Prime Minister is one of fairly consistent wrongness.
> 
> If she is dangling the prospect of no deal vs this deal in front of the ERG and DUP, it makes them think there is a possibility of no deal (which they want), and the consequent weakness of the Government keeps Labour keen to try to defeat it.  The weakness also makes the Tory remainers / soft Brexit crowd emboldened (well emboldened as in them going on TV, not actually voting against most of it) to push their ideas, as they recognize that with Opposition support they can plausibly win votes as well.  As a policy it basically unites the opposition to the deal against it, making it impossible to pass (as we are seeing) and resulting in the odd circumstance that we find ourselves in of a Government having to deal with an opposition that has a majority of probably more than a hundred.
> 
> The only way she could ever pass this is to instead threaten Brexit itself (ie: by making it a contest of her deal vs her withdrawing Article 50); if she does that successfully (and it will be very difficult) then the ERG / DUP crowd are perhaps going to be less likely to rebel, she is more likely to pick up the Lexit crowd and the likes of Grieve and Soubry can then get to decide between loyalty to the Party and stopping Brexit without a referendum (a decision for which we all know the outcome).   In the short to medium term it would probably trash the party, but then it is going to be trashed anyway.


I can see what you mean, of course. It's a multidimensional slide rule, every time she drifts one way she alienates at least one group - and in complex ways. My point was more about the erg and wider tory opposition and, just as much, Labour. They have yet again failed to achieve any purchase and the further it goes on - January? February? - we move closer to the out door. She's now going to enter into discussions with euro leaders and will come back with some farty drips around the backstop. But when we get to the vote, it becomes harder and harder that a) there's time for a proper re-negotiation or B) ref2 or indeed a gen election. 

Admittedly, there may be points between now and then where the opposition and brexiteers are able to exert purchase on a proxy issue, but unless they get really canny she may well stumble through to 'her' big vote in Jan/Feb.  She's fucked, has no authority, is breaching most rules of parliamentary accountability, but she _may_ win out.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> There is of course another angle to view it. That within the glorious EU has half the younger southern citizens* have all gone and made themselves utterly poverty-stricken, so now have to enjoy their basic fundamental human rights by leaving their family villas overlooking a Mediterranean beach, to take up residence in sub-sub-sub-letted garden shed in Catford with half a dozen other unfortunate souls, just to be exploited at a minimum wage working in a shit job with no perspectives. All in the name of integration and freedom of movement.
> 
> *I personally much prefer their smelly food to ours, and also envy their darker skin over my pasty celtic hue - just to clear that up before the usual barrage of 'oi racist' from camp remain



Worse than Hitler.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Creepy, stalking guy slowly morphs into over-invested, evangelical smeary remainer: you really swallowed those virtue pills hard. It's part of your identity, right? Criticism of it is like criticism of your extended family? All these lovely people from all of Europe serving you metropolitan coffee and validating your life choices and your open-hearted warmth. I know, I know, it's so nice to have everything in your comfortable, liberal life validated.



Reasoned debate at last


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> It's a multidimensional slide rule...



I got one of them last Christmas.
Was trying to do basic multiplication and got a phone call from a woman in Tokyo telling me to stop turning her lights on and off.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> There is of course another angle to view it. That within the glorious EU half the younger southern citizens* have all gone and made themselves utterly poverty-stricken, so now have to enjoy their basic fundamental human rights by leaving their family villas overlooking a Mediterranean beach, to take up residence in sub-sub-sub-letted garden shed in Catford with half a dozen other unfortunate souls, just to be exploited at a minimum wage working in a shit job with no perspectives. All in the name of integration and freedom of movement.
> 
> *I personally much prefer their smelly food to ours, and also envy their darker skin over my pasty celtic hue - just to clear that up before the usual barrage of 'oi racist' from camp remain


Bagging “my pasty Celtic hue”
It’s shit, my faether and that have the likely  gypsy related darker skin but an inch of sun touches me and I BURN ON THE SPOT


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> There is of course another angle to view it. That within the glorious EU half the younger southern citizens* have all gone and made themselves utterly poverty-stricken, so now have to enjoy their basic fundamental human rights by leaving their family villas overlooking a Mediterranean beach, to take up residence in sub-sub-sub-letted garden sheds in places like Catford or Grantham with half a dozen other unfortunate souls, just to be exploited at a minimum wage working in a shit job with no perspectives. All in the name of integration and freedom of movement.
> Perhaps?
> 
> *I personally much prefer their smelly food to ours, and also envy their darker skin over my pasty celtic hue - just to clear that up before the usual barrage of 'oi racist' from camp remain


Yep, to see how so many live. People leaving London because it's too expensive yet somehow the girl from the Balkans somewhere rocks up for her 12-hour shift in the local coffee shop every day, at eight quid an hour. We are the world, lets join hands everyone.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> It's a multidimensional slide rule


sonic screwdriver?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I got one of them that Christmas.
> Was trying to do basic multiplication and got a phone call from a woman in Tokyo telling me to stop turning her lights on and off.


Witty post ! In the very literal sense


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> sonic screwdriver?


Actually, let's merge the threads. And bring Bungle back. He'd have something to say about non-penis Doctors and harmonising Euro timetables after we crash out.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Actually, let's merge the threads. And bring Bungle back. He'd have something to say about non-penis Doctors and harmonising Euro timetables after we crash out.


I called Philosophical an Irish Border Dalek if anyone is still interested.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I called Philosophical an Irish Border Dalek if anyone is still interested.


Are all those words in the correct order?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I called Philosophical an Irish Border Dalek if anyone is still interested.


That's the spirit!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Don’t do this to me again urban I am nervous enough about my grasp of beurla as it is. I’m bilingual, the doctor had to do some work on me because my brain was too primitive to absorb two languages, and now I can speak neither. 

Regards-
The working class Invernessian companion RTD would have casted, with a real Invernessian accent to boot.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

Leave EU March 29th
Trade Deal with Skaro enacted March 30th.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

Davros goes to Davos!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Leave EU March 29th
> Trade Deal with Skaro enacted March 30th.


The pandorica will open and science(tists for the EU) will fall....


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

I bet Jolyon Maugham would pure back #cybermenforremain


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

The backstop - it's bigger on the inside.

coat


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The backstop - it's bigger on the inside.
> 
> coat


Gold!


----------



## Raheem (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> I may be wrong, but I wouldn't count too much on Soubry's loyalty to the party.


You may well be. Seen her in a couple of recent TV interviews, and think she's seriously terrified of going down in internal Tory history as (one of) Corbyn's John the Baptist(s) .


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

The Doctor: 


> I didn’t say you could go. *Article 570* of the Shadow Proclamation. This is a fully-established level five planet country. And you were going to burn it. What? Did you think no one was watching. You lot. Back here. Now. Okay. Now I’ve done it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> The Doctor:


Yeah but WILF, look up “Maastricht treaty” , you’re in the biggest library in the universe, look it up. You’ll see a picture of ME next to it with the words “OVER MY DEAD BODY”


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You may well be. Seen her in a couple of recent TV interviews, and think she's seriously terrified of going down in internal Tory history as (one of) Corbyn's John the Baptist(s) .



Fair point, I'll have to look it up.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yeah but WILF, look up “Maastricht treaty” , you’re in the biggest library in the universe, look it up. You’ll see a picture of ME next to it with the words “OVER MY DEAD BODY”



Don't put it in capitals - it looks like it stands for Woman I'd Like (to) Fuck.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> Don't put it in capitals - it looks like it stands for Woman I'd Like (to) Fuck.


PROJECTING MUCH


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 11, 2018)

8ball said:


> Don't put it in capitals - it looks like it stands for Woman I'd Like (to) Fuck.


I’m kidding, there’s nout worse than passive aggressive sleaze


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> You may well be. Seen her in a couple of recent TV interviews, and think she's seriously terrified of going down


This is exactly how Pickman whasit quotes posts.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> This is exactly how Pickman whasit quotes posts.


What, he misses off the end of the quote so as to turn it into juvenile filth?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

To change the meaning. Fwiw, it's somewhat puritanical to describe oral sex as filth.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Forrin. That's the nationality. Living on top of one another. Smelly food. You know the type.



Yeh cos fish and chips doesn't stink up the place  try walking into a chippy after a night on the ouzo/raki


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

I am comforted by the knowledge that we have a strong and stable government to steer us through this crisis.
Sorry I meant to say we are looking a joke.
Or did I ?
But then again!


----------



## xenon (Dec 11, 2018)

Raheem said:


> My pleasure, as always.
> 
> Call it indignation, call it principles. Either way, it adds up to nothing outside your head.



 You completely failed to take his point. None of it means anything outside anyone’s head. We don’t make   The policies. Yes this goes for remain as well.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> This is exactly how Pickman whasit quotes posts.


Yes we both use the quote function


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I am comforted by the knowledge that we have a strong and stable government civil service to steer us through this crisis.


ftfy


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

Juncker has just repeated there is no further negotiation. Breaking news!
‘No room whatsoever’


----------



## extra dry (Dec 11, 2018)

How easily Europe just refuses to give inch, where as May has given miles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

extra dry said:


> How easily Europe just refuses to give inch, where as May has given miles.


They refuse as Europe doesn't know what an inch is


----------



## OzT (Dec 11, 2018)

I think it's daft having a Remainer in charge of a goverment trying to carry out the peoples wishes to leave.

All she had to do, and I think she's playing a blinder here, is to fluff about getting a deal she knows the Leave side will not accept, thus vote against it, and then maybe a general election with Labour coming in, and trigger off the offer from the EU to not leave. But the aim is to not Leave, even though she is supposedly working for a Leave deal.

Hmm re reading that it was quite hard reading but hope I got what I was trying to say across?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

OzT said:


> I think it's daft having a Remainer in charge of a goverment trying to carry out the peoples wishes to leave.
> 
> All she had to do, and I think she's playing a blinder here, is to fluff about getting a deal she knows the Leave side will not accept, thus vote against it, and then maybe a general election with Labour coming in, and trigger off the offer from the EU to not leave. But the aim is to not Leave, even though she is supposedly working for a Leave deal.
> 
> Hmm re reading that it was quite hard reading but hope I got what I was trying to say across?


How is it dafter than any other time politicians are in government?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 11, 2018)

OzT said:


> I think it's daft having a Remainer in charge of a goverment trying to carry out the peoples wishes to leave.
> 
> All she had to do, and I think she's playing a blinder here, is to fluff about getting a deal she knows the Leave side will not accept, thus vote against it, and then maybe a general election with Labour coming in, and trigger off the offer from the EU to not leave. But the aim is to not Leave, even though she is supposedly working for a Leave deal.
> 
> Hmm re reading that it was quite hard reading but hope I got what I was trying to say across?


She got a more Brexity deal than the Norwayesque thing I was expecting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> She got a more Brexity deal than the Norwayesque thing I was expecting.


The sort of Brexit deal where the eu says when you can go


----------



## OzT (Dec 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> She got a more Brexity deal than the Norwayesque thing I was expecting.



But I think she knows the house will vote against her deal, hence I said wot I said above.

Disclaimer: I know very little about the whole Brexit thing other than reading the Metro so my views are in no way knowledable or come from any useful sources


----------



## Winot (Dec 11, 2018)

ska invita said:


> She got a more Brexity deal than the Norwayesque thing I was expecting.



Yep. And as has been pointed out by others, shot through with her real passion, which is reducing immigration.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 11, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I called Philosophical an Irish Border Dalek if anyone is still interested.



The Irish border is still a fundamental issue regarding the practicalities of Brexit.
That is the issue, and won't change because some posters wish to describe other posters in either entertaining or insulting ways.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> The sort of Brexit deal where the eu says when you can go


I bet they had a good chuckle at that clause 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





I doubt in reality it's as bad as it sounds but it has a strong ring of humiliation about it


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Winot said:


> Yep. And as has been pointed out by others, shot through with her real passion, which is reducing immigration.


What is the latest data you've seen on immigration, or do you mean European migration?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish border is still a fundamental issue regarding the practicalities of Brexit.
> That is the issue, and won't change because some posters wish to describe other posters in either entertaining or insulting ways.


It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.



The four words on the ballot paper (for brexit) were 'Leave the European Union'. Leave something and there is a border or separatIon.
That is why I see the land border in Ireland as a practical and fundamental issue.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The four words on the ballot paper (for brexit) were 'Leave the European Union'. Leave something and there is a border or separatIon.
> That is why I see the land border in Ireland as a practical and fundamental issue.





kabbes said:


> It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


It's telling as well that the threat of terrorism which directly impacts that particular negotiation (ireland border/ united ireland) hasn't been challenged - particularly seeing as May and the Eu persue a zero tolerance policy on terrorism


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


Lets not forget the Brussels priority of blocking Brexit, and/or buying time, by other means.


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'd normally agree with you, but there's no road left to kick the can down. There's got to be some sort of change of tack.


May may be crap at negotiating, but she appears to be in a class of her own when it comes to can kicking. 

If she can postpone this 'meaningful vote' for a bit longer, the clock will have run down so far that there will be no time for anything else, except a total cancellation. 

I was originally sceptical about this being a deliberate tactic, but I'm slowly becoming convinced.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The Irish border is still a fundamental issue regarding the practicalities of Brexit.
> That is the issue, and won't change because some posters wish to describe other posters in either entertaining or insulting ways.


*Renegotiate! Renegotiate!*


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> *Renegotiate! Renegotiate!*


Oh no, you can't renegotiate because, you know, you can't renegotiate.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> *Renegotiate! Renegotiate!*


----------



## Winot (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> What is the latest data you've seen on immigration, or do you mean European migration?



I just meant that her passion is reducing the numbers of people coming into this country who aren't British. Obviously stopping FoM won't of itself achieve her immigration targets, but she has focussed on FoM instead of coming out of a customs union (for example).


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

FWIW, I've just heard something on LBC suggesting that significant numbers of NI unions polled chose remaining in the EU over remaining in UK


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

That would go really well. Perhaps Paul MacCartney could record a single in support.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


You make it sound like NI moving from the UK to the ROI would just be a trivial matter of some paperwork and something that most people would agree would be reasonable to do without asking the people who live there.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It's only a fundamental issue to the extent that it reveals the true priorities of the parties involved.  The real fundamental issue is that Brexit is not the priority.  For example, as repeatedly mentioned, the unification of the island of Ireland removes all the border issues in one fell swoop.  But the maintenance of the UK union outranks Brexit in the eyes of those making the decisions.


Brexit is not a priority over everything, no. Of course it isn't. It shouldn't be a priority over respecting the GFA, for example. On that extremely narrow point, I am in agreement with May.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You make it sound like NI moving from the UK to the ROI would just be a trivial matter of some paperwork and something that most people would agree would be reasonable to do without asking the people who live there.


It's been pointed out before many times that any solution will cost some effort. A bit of effort shouldn't really be a sole factor to decide to do nothing.
All solutions need persuing: united ireland, hard border, irish sea border, fully independent NI in EU (give scotland that too)


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Brexit is not a priority over everything, no. Of course it isn't. It shouldn't be a priority over respecting the GFA, for example. On that extremely narrow point, I am in agreement with May.


Are you saying that the GFA takes priority over respecting brexit then?


----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You make it sound like NI moving from the UK to the ROI would just be a trivial matter of some paperwork and something that most people would agree would be reasonable to do without asking the people who live there.



Quite like how the 6 counties came into existence then.


----------



## Chz (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Are you saying that the GFA takes priority over respecting brexit then?


The time it took to get the GFA in order makes Brexit look like a pinky swear. Do _you_ think our government's solemn promise to the people of Ireland to help resolve decades of violence should be less important?

Though I suppose no-one at all should be surprised that Westminster has learned nothing from the past.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> *Renegotiate! Renegotiate!*



I have not mentioned renegotiation.
You mention again your Dalek idea presumably in an attempt to mock me, and by association any mentions I make regarding the border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> May may be crap at negotiating, but she appears to be in a class of her own when it comes to can kicking.
> 
> If she can postpone this 'meaningful vote' for a bit longer, the clock will have run down so far that there will be no time for anything else, except a total cancellation.
> 
> I was originally sceptical about this being a deliberate tactic, but I'm slowly becoming convinced.


Yep, I'd agree with that. And in parallel, her opponents seem to have missed every opportunity to try and defeat/remove her, right back to the 10 days after the 2017 election (which was the point in normal politics where she should have resigned or be kicked out). I recognise that there never were 48 letters, but even last week a co-ordinated set of cabinet resignations and calls for her to resign might have created momentum (after the final cabinet deal - or even back to the Chequers deal). Poor leadership by Johnson, erg lot, inability to put any kind of coalition against May together. Ditto Labour, they've failed to be an active voice on brexit and even now seem unsure about vonc or calls for a 2nd ref. It's left her dull, utterly uninspiring, a laughing stock, but still keeping buggering on. And whilst the maths hasn't changed, time is increasingly on her side.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Are you saying that the GFA takes priority over respecting brexit then?


Doesn't it?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I have not mentioned renegotiation.
> You attempt to mention again your Dalek idea presumably in an attempt to mock me, and by association any mentions I make regarding the border on the island of Ireland.


Yes.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You make it sound like NI moving from the UK to the ROI would just be a trivial matter of some paperwork and something that most people would agree would be reasonable to do without asking the people who live there .



And without asking those in Eire either. Such a move would come at a high financial cost.

A united Ireland would be worse off than the Republic

I think May's suggestion was pretty off the cuff...but maybe it's something to think about. I was reading the other day about NI Unionists who are rather moderate, and have been learning Irish and debating what it might be like for NI to join the Republic. 

Interesting times ... 

Some unionists are thinking the unthinkable about living in a united Ireland

As for Foster giving out about anything...she has some nerve. She hasn't worked for the NIA in ages. And is still getting paid. 
She objects to everything. It's her only position on all matters. She has set back NI and is a rubbish arrogant politician.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You make it sound like NI moving from the UK to the ROI would just be a trivial matter of some paperwork and something that most people would agree would be reasonable to do without asking the people who live there.


Who said anything about doing it without asking the people who live there?

If Brexit is the priority, a question for the people of NI could be, for example:
a) Do you want to be part of a united Ireland?
OR
b) Do you want to be part of the UK, recognising that this will involve a hard ported between NO and RoI?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

Chz said:


> Do _you_ think our government's solemn promise to the people of Ireland to help resolve decades of violence should be less important?


No.
fwiw I'd like to see either a united ireland or independed NI / Scotland

eta: and I'd like to see the decisions made without appeasement to terrorism


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Who said anything about doing it without asking the people who live there?
> 
> If Brexit is the priority, a question for the people of NI could be, for example:
> a) Do you want to be part of a united Ireland?
> ...


It would certainly be interesting to ask the question.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 11, 2018)

Economic downturn in Ireland post-reunification? Possibly, but sure, there might well be the same in the remainder of the UK, post-Brexit.

As for the former scenario, I imagine the 32 county ROI will receive some benefits from the dastardly EU if reunification goes ahead.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It would certainly be interesting to ask the question.


Who would ask the question on behalf of the Crown, the Conservative and Unionist Party?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Are you saying that the GFA takes priority over respecting brexit then?



For everyone on the island of Ireland it does. And for all those living in NI it certainly does. 
For those who lived through the troubles it does. 
The BIGGEST and only positive thing to happen in our combined history has been the GFA. It's way bigger than Brexit...believe it or not. 

Do you seriously think you can pull a huge group of people out of the EU and throw back in a hard border where its not wanted and expect no backlash?



kabbes said:


> Who said anything about doing it without asking the people who live there?
> 
> If Brexit is the priority, a question for the people of NI could be, for example:
> a) Do you want to be part of a united Ireland?
> ...



They already voted by a majority to stay in the EU. And for everyone in NI the GFA is far more important that Brexit. 
As for the Hard Border
...you forgot that there is a country at the other side who also doesnt want it.
Nobody wants a fucking border. 
Do you get that? Not those in NI and definitely not those in Eire. Why should people not living there have any fucking say in that? Who the fuck do you think you are suggesting that anyone here has to vote for a border? We voted to accept the GFA an masse. We voted for peace and cross border free movement. Why the fuck should Brexit fuck that up?

Typical.. attitude of superiority ... the "we know best" attitude.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

A good point just made. If and it looks unlikely, if the EU are able to offer anything, there is now serious concern that May will still be incapable of delivering a positive result.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Are you saying that the GFA takes priority over respecting brexit then?


Yep. A preexisting treaty that the UK has committed to takes priority. Anything less than that renders that initial commitment a deceit.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

The only way out of this if Brexit is to happen is to let each part of the UK decide for themselves. 
And as Scotland and NI have clearly voted no to Brexit and they have their own governing bodies then leave them stay in the EU. 
Sure....the UK won't exist anymore. But hey...That's ok isn't it? 
Wales and England can combine as the EW or WE.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

don't mind me


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> For everyone on the island of Ireland it does. And for all those living in NI it certainly does.
> For those who lived through the troubles it does.
> The BIGGEST and only positive thing to happen in our combined history has been the GFA. It's way bigger than Brexit...believe it or not.
> 
> ...


united ireland it is then. fine with me.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

You've got more chance of the Republic joining the UK.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. A preexisting treaty that the UK has committed to takes priority. Anything less than that renders that initial commitment a deceit.


so you'd be completely against any treaty that united the island of ireland?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Here's what the TUC has to say about LGBT rights and Brexit - sounds like there could be reason to worry, especially with the DUP propping up the government.
> 
> LGBT+ rights and Brexit: the facts



If they're so upset about it all why don't they pull their finger out and bring the govt down? FFS.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Sometimes you forget just how supine politicians are. They've just wasted several days gassing, only to find she's pressed the reset button. She probably knew a week ago there was no movement towards the deal from the Tories and pretty much knew she would call it off around then.  Just about the ultimate contempt for parliament. I've got contempt for parliament, but that's a different matter...
> 
> Leaders avoiding votes for procedural reasons? Ring any bells SpackleFrog ?



Ey up, bit of de ja vu here!


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ey up, bit of de ja vu here!


_"Oi, Theresa, turn the sound system off, that'll shut the fuckers up!"_


----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> And without asking those in Eire either. Such a move would come at a high financial cost.
> 
> A united Ireland would be worse off than the Republic
> 
> ...



There are enough rich fuckers in the south that can pay for unification, I wouldn't worry about the cost so much. The Dublin establishment will be fearful as they will no longer be able to provide the old meagre excuses for their politics or justification for their position.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Can't renegotiate because you can't renegotiate, says the Empire of Virtue. Perfectly reasonable, it's us being awkward. Terribly sorry to bother you, Mr Junkers. Excuse me while you throw me under a bus. What's the Empire's preferred outcome from here :

1. General Election (Corbyn wins)
2. Second ref (risky)
3. ?


----------



## Sasaferrato (Dec 11, 2018)

Brexit summed up by Ireland's leading columnist.


Fintan O’Toole: 

Historians will not believe sheer ignorance of Brexit supporters
Future chroniclers will in fact have to distinguish between three kinds of ignorance

When future historians try to understand how Britain ended up with a choice between chaos and becoming a satellite of the European Union, one question will stump them. Were these people telling deliberate lies or were they merely staggeringly ignorant? Where does mendacity stop and idiocy begin? Historians generally have to assume that people in power have a basic grasp of what they are doing, that their actions are intentional. They may use deception as a tactic and they may be deluded in what they think they can achieve. But they must, at least at the beginning, have some grasp on reality – otherwise they would not have achieved power. Yet, for the poor historians trying to make sense of Brexit, this assumption will be mistaken.

There is, of course, plenty of straightforward mendacity for them to identify. Boris Johnson’s whole journalistic and political career has been driven by his talent for taking minor regulations and distorting them into wildly exaggerated claims of oppression by the Eurocrats. This can’t be done by mistake. For example, you cannot by accident take, as Johnson did, a Council of Europe (not EU) convention on the repatriation of corpses and turn it into a repeated claim that “There really is European legislation on the weight, dimensions and composition of a coffin”. There isn’t. This is not ignorance – it is a knowing falsification of the truth. So let’s leave that aside. Historians will know it when they see it.

A spotter’s guide

Their problem will be, rather, with the shades of obliviousness. Here our future scholars will have to try to distinguish between three kinds of ignorance: deliberate unknowing, crass self-delusion and what we can only call pig ignorance. So, for their benefit, here is a brief spotter’s guide.

Deliberate unknowing is when you are fully aware of something but then choose to suppress that consciousness. A good example is Theresa May speaking about the Irish border on June 21st 2016, just two days before the referendum: “Just think about it. If we are out of the European Union with tariffs on exporting goods into the EU, there’d have to be something to recognise that, between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. And if you pulled out of the EU and came out of free movement, then how could you have a situation where there was an open border with a country that was in the EU and has access to free movement?” So she knew full well that a Brexit that involved leaving the customs union would create a hard border. And then, as prime minister, she insisted on the opposite: that a hard Brexit was perfectly compatible with no return of a hard border. She unknew what she had known.

And then there’s pig ignorance – the genuine hallmarked, unadulterated, slack-jawed, open-mouthed, village idiot variety 

Crass self-delusion is when you start with an ideological premise that you believe to be true even though it isn’t and then draw apparently reasonable conclusions from it.

Thus, for example, David Davis sincerely believed the EU is just a front for German domination of Europe. Hence he also believed quite genuinely that the Brexit negotiations would be conducted not with Brussels but over a convivial weissbräu and schnitzel in Berlin and that frictionless trade would be decreed immediately because the German car manufacturers wished it so: sincerely fatuous self-delusion.

Village idiot

And then there’s pig ignorance – the genuine hallmarked, unadulterated, slack-jawed, open-mouthed, village idiot variety in which the people who are in charge of the British state don’t know stuff that anyone off Gogglebox could tell them. The Brexiteer MP Nadine Dorries admitted in effect that she didn’t know what a customs union is. Her comrade Andrew Bridgen said last month: “As an English person, I do have the right to go over to Ireland and I believe that I can ask for a passport. Can’t I?” 

Karen Bradley, the actual secretary of state for Northern Ireland, said:“I freely admit that when I started this job, I didn’t understand some of the deep-seated and deep-rooted issues that there are in Northern Ireland. I didn’t understand things like when elections are fought, for example, in Northern Ireland – people who are nationalists don’t vote for unionist parties and vice versa.”

And last week the actual Brexit secretary, Dominic Raab: “I hadn’t quite understood the full extent of this, but if you look at the UK and look at how we trade in goods, we are particularly reliant on the Dover-Calais crossing.”

Crass self-delusion

What’s charming about this is that Bradley and Raab’s ignorance is publicly self-proclaimed. It’s not just that they didn’t know basic stuff, it’s that they didn’t think there was anything shameful in not knowing. This is the purest form of ignorance: it’s not just that you don’t know, but that you don’t even know that you’re meant to know. 

Historians will in time get to the bottom of the deliberate unknowing and the crass self-delusion. They can be charted. But this pure pig ignorance, innocent and unalloyed, is unfathomable. It will be impossible not to conclude that it was all part of some great strategic plan, that, if only we could plumb its depths, we could reveal the hidden truth of Brexit. How will they ever believe that the hidden truth is so asinine?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Sasaferrato said:


> Brexit summed up by Ireland's leading columnist.


No substance. Just playing to the gallery, like dozens of others in the Brexit Industry. It's certainly boosting a lot of PEPS.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> May may be crap at negotiating, but she appears to be in a class of her own when it comes to can kicking.
> 
> If she can postpone this 'meaningful vote' for a bit longer, the clock will have run down so far that there will be no time for anything else, except a total cancellation.
> 
> I was originally sceptical about this being a deliberate tactic, but I'm slowly becoming convinced.



Yeah, I keep thinking this. It seems a bit conspiraloon but... if you're Tory PM and you want to stop Brexit...

It's not like she hasn't consistently sowed the rhetoric - all that stuff about the Lords blocking it, telling Parliament it's this or maybe no deal or maybe no Brexit... She's trying to do what she says is the only thing she can but it's the damn democratic system blocking everything... 

It's a very populist line. Right wing populism kind of thrives off the EU across Europe. Its almost as if they have an interest in the maintenance of the project in order to rail against it. I assume some Tories are uncomfortable about the extent to which Parliamentary procedure is being undermined.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> For everyone on the island of Ireland it does. And for all those living in NI it certainly does.
> For those who lived through the troubles it does.
> The BIGGEST and only positive thing to happen in our combined history has been the GFA. It's way bigger than Brexit...believe it or not.
> 
> ...


The people of NI can be given the absolute right to join the ROI forever.  What’s wrong with that?  There’s no “we know best” attitude in that.  And if they don’t want to do it, if they want to remain part of the UK, they then have to accept what this means — being a full part of the UK subject to the same rules and procedures as the rest of the UK.  Nothing wrong with the rest of the UK saying either is fine but you have to choose.

And if ROI doesn’t want NI they should make that clear too so that the people of NI can be clear where they stand.

As it is, the people of ROI seem to think they have the right to dictate to the people of UK whether or not they are allowed to leave the EU.  Talk about “knowing best”!


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

It's like some people on here have never conducted a tough negotiation in their lives. This has to go to the cliff edge. The UK may even have to actually leave on WTO terms before the Empire finally reins back. But it will, in the end.


----------



## killer b (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah, I keep thinking this. It seems a bit conspiraloon but... if you're Tory PM and you want to stop Brexit...
> 
> It's not like she hasn't consistently sowed the rhetoric - all that stuff about the Lords blocking it, telling Parliament it's this or maybe no deal or maybe no Brexit... She's trying to do what she says is the only thing she Can but it's the damn democratic system blocking everything...


I think May's weakness has been so baked in since last summer that lots of people forget her direction of travel before the snap election, and the expected result of that election when it was called. I don't think she was bluffing with all that stuff - everything just changed when she lost her majority.


----------



## CRI (Dec 11, 2018)




----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> As it is, the people of ROI seem to think they have the right to dictate to the people of UK whether or not they are allowed to leave the EU.  Talk about “knowing best”!



Re the people can you not just say the Dublin establishment, I know for a fact that not all 4.7 million of them are actively trying to stop the people of the UK from leaving the EU anymore than the people of the UK can be blamed for Britain's troubled relationship with Ireland.


----------



## Winot (Dec 11, 2018)

Survey reveals 65% in Northern Ireland would now vote Remain - and 60% think united Ireland more likely after Brexit - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Winot said:


> Survey reveals 65% in Northern Ireland would now vote Remain - and 60% think united Ireland more likely after Brexit - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


"A total of 3,882 people took part in the non-scientific survey"

Fantastic. You know it's click bait?

I like 'total respondents 4431. Sample including non-response 3882'


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It's like some people on here have never conducted a tough negotiation in their lives. This has to go to the cliff edge. The UK may even have to actually leave on WTO terms before the Empire finally reins back. But it will, in the end.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Who said anything about doing it without asking the people who live there?
> 
> If Brexit is the priority, a question for the people of NI could be, for example:
> a) Do you want to be part of a united Ireland?
> ...



So would you agree that it would be wrong to proceed with Brexit until there has been a referendum in NI, giving people there the above options?

And then if the answer is reunification, a referendum in RoI to ask whether they want it?

...and if RoI says no, then what - we don't do Brexit, or just say tough luck to the people of NI?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

It's like the biggest negotiation of their lives is the one the estate agent does for them for their dream home, and that's their basis for deciding how you negotiate in this situation. No folks, you actually have to be prepared to walk away, and then walk away.

The Empire will give nothing. Lets see how the Republic feels when it's largest trade partner says fuck off.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So would you agree that it would be wrong to proceed with Brexit until there has been a referendum in NI, giving people there the above options?
> 
> And then if the answer is reunification, a referendum in RoI to ask whether they want it?
> 
> ...and if RoI says no, then what - we don't do Brexit, or just say tough luck to the people of NI?


No, you proceed with Brexit whilst simultaneously giving the referendum to the people of NI, who will be able to join the ROI before the end of the transition period if that’s what they choose.

If the people of NI choose to join ROI and then the ROI reject this then I guess NI will have to stay in the UK but nobody gets to make a big fucking stink any more about how it’s really all just one island and omigosh now brothers separated by a border not of their choosing will have to have a passport to drive across it.  Because one of those brothers when pushed went, “er, actually”


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. A preexisting treaty that the UK has committed to takes priority. Anything less than that renders that initial commitment a deceit.


Historically, this is nonsense. It's perfectly possible for priorities to change and for one of the parties to a treaty to say "actually, we don't want to continue with this agreement, so let's talk about ending it" or even "we've had enough, we're out", without the initial agreement being based on deceit 

It's also funny how some of those happy to call for another Brexit ref in the hope that they get the result they want this time are suggesting that the GFA is in some way permanent as if it were handed to us on tablets of stone.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you proceed with Brexit whilst simultaneously giving the referendum to the people of NI, who will be able to join the ROI before the end of the transition period if that’s what they choose.
> 
> If the people of NI choose to join ROI and then the ROI reject this then I guess NI will have to stay in the UK but nobody gets to make a big fucking stink any more about how it’s really all just one island and omigosh now brothers separated by a border not of their choosing will have to have a passport to drive across it.  Because one of those brothers when pushed went, “er, actually”


The Opiad version of Brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> The Opiad version of Brexit.


Opiad?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

The delusional version. The version that has no constitutional basis, has no pathway from here to "giving" "a referendum" "to NI". LIke a Christmas present, perhaps.

The version that denies that tough negotiations have barely even started yet, and yet you're bending over greasing your arse already.

Altogether now: Lets not be beastly to the Germans ...


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

This thread appears to be mimicking aspects of Puckoon.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> The people of NI can be given the absolute right to join the ROI forever.  What’s wrong with that?  There’s no “we know best” attitude in that.  And if they don’t want to do it, if they want to remain part of the UK, they then have to accept what this means — being a full part of the UK subject to the same rules and procedures as the rest of the UK.  Nothing wrong with the rest of the UK saying either is fine but you have to choose.
> 
> And if ROI doesn’t want NI they should make that clear too so that the people of NI can be clear where they stand.
> 
> As it is, the people of ROI seem to think they have the right to dictate to the people of UK whether or not they are allowed to leave the EU.  Talk about “knowing best”!



Who are you saying is going to give them the right to join the ROI? Your government can't sort your own problems and you're ready to put NI back to the ROI? Without any discussion or without any preparation on the Irish side? It's as if the British Gov want to completely implode because some gobshites arent getting what they want...ie..to wave their British flag and say "fuck the EU we're alright". ....Only that wont be the case. The UK will be fucked after Brexit. Its already heading that way. And the old Stiff Upper Lip is combining with the hard jaw of "We will be great again" and turned the UK into an ugly bossy pain in the ass trying to pretend they are still an Empire when they are fucked. 
The only dictators here are the Brexiteers. And the nutty nationalist brigade who want to think they'll be on the lifeboat and fuck the rest of Europe.... Only the boat is a rubber dinghy with a hole in it and there will be no repairing it. Sterling is falling already. It'll fall further. You'll have massive inflation...increased interest rates and you'll fucking drag others into this nonsense and all for what? 
Jumping off a cliff together? 

By the way, Ireland is not just Eire and NI. The people in NI are Irish citizens too whether you realise it or not.
And why should a fuck up like Brexit force Ireland into a United Ireland before it's ready? Before it is prepared and ready? Before it has the funds to take it on? Eire is in massive debt and trying to just stay afloat. Throwing NI into the mix or rather "discarding" NI because they are suddenly an uncomfortable addition to the UK isn't something to be done lightly. 
Don't get me wrong...a united Ireland would be great...But it should be done correctly and with major preparations and funding. 

NI is made up of diverse groups of  people of very different backgrounds. Unionist and Republican. After the GFA a lot was done to try to get communities to work together and there was and has been a major effort to eliminate sectarianism
I saw a poll last August (I think) showed a 52% majority in favour of reunification with the ROI. But to force it before people and governments are ready would throw some back into entrenched sectarianism. In case you don't know the NIA (northern Ireland asaembly) hasn't sat in ages....the current DUP leadership are so entrenched in their own little weird battle about the Irish language so just think how that group and their grass roots will react to a forced unification of NI into the ROI ... 
You live in a country where your politicians are not aligned with paramilitarism. So the Tories or Labour aren't going to start sending people to murder other people for their views on Brexit. 
Imagine if you lived in a country where paramilitarism was still under the surface.  

You say that the people of NI can decide for themselves....The people of NI were already very clear where they stand. They voted to remain in the EU. That has conveniently been ignored. By remaining in the EU the people in NI maintain a peaceful arrangement of movement of people north to the Republic and vice versa. The country north and south has been a much better place to live since the GFA. 

I just read this...


The Fornicator said:


> The Empire will give nothing. Lets see how the Republic feels when it's largest trade partner says fuck off.



Lol....Well you'll have no decent butter, cheddar or beef from us anymore. 
Sterling is collapsing. Not the euro. And the Empire? What Empire? There is no Empire. 

48% to 52% is not a mandate to fuck up other countries....And disrupt the peace of your closest neighbours.


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So would you agree that it would be wrong to proceed with Brexit until there has been a referendum in NI, giving people there the above options?
> 
> And then if the answer is reunification, a referendum in RoI to ask whether they want it?
> 
> ...and if RoI says no, then what - we don't do Brexit, or just say tough luck to the people of NI?


If RoI say no in those circumstances, wouldn't they be breaking the terms of the GFA which provide for re-unification if a majority in NI want it?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Goodness knows we don't want to disrespect the Taoiseach, a more honourable, decent politican  it would be hard to meet .. How much of a better deal has he done with Brussels than the DUP did with Theresa May?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Who are you saying is going to give them the right to join the ROI? Your government can't sort your own problems and you're ready to put NI back to the ROI? Without any discussion or without any preparation on the Irish side? It's as if the British Gov want to completely implode because some gobshites arent getting what they want...ie..to wave their British flag and say "fuck the EU we're alright". ....Only that wont be the case. The UK will be fucked after Brexit. Its already heading that way. And the old Stiff Upper Lip is combining with the hard jaw of "We will be great again" and turned the UK into an ugly bossy pain in the ass trying to pretend they are still an Empire when they are fucked.
> The only dictators here are the Brexiteers. And the nutty nationalist brigade who want to think they'll be on the lifeboat and fuck the rest of Europe.... Only the boat is a rubber dinghy with a hole in it and there will be no repairing it. Sterling is falling already. It'll fall further. You'll have massive inflation...increased interest rates and you'll fucking drag others into this nonsense and all for what?
> Jumping off a cliff together?
> 
> ...


Geez.  The very definition of tl;dr


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Goodness knows we don't want to disrespect the Taoiseach, a more honourable, decent politican  it would be hard to meet .. How much of a better deal has he done with Brussels than the DUP did with Theresa May?



He doesn't have to deal. The ROI is not trying to leave the EU.
The EU is protecting it's member...ie the ROI. And rightly so.

Are you're implying that the GFA is being used to prevemt Brexit?


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

You and Kabbes should get a group discount on the aforementioned opiads.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Geez.  The very definition of tl;dr



Typical Brexiteer.....won't read....cos they know it all already


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> You and Kabbes should get a group discount on the aforementioned opiads.


I literally don’t know what you’re talking about


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Typical Brexiteer.....won't read....cos they know it all already


I voted remain.

A sovereign nation, however, can not be told it has to stay in the EU because a different sovereign nation has problems if they leave.  This should be recognised as the utter nonsense it is.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> So would you agree that it would be wrong to proceed with Brexit until there has been a referendum in NI, giving people there the above options?
> 
> And then if the answer is reunification, a referendum in RoI to ask whether they want it?
> 
> ...and if RoI says no, then what - we don't do Brexit, or just say tough luck to the people of NI?


then it's Billy no mates independence (or Patrick no mates, whatever your leanings)


----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> And the Empire? What Empire? There is no Empire.



Virtuous empire, Thomas Jefferson speak.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

the virtuous empire across the shining channel; give me your tired, your poor, your huddled *masses* yearning to breathe free, and about seven billion quid a year.

Reference : Half a Titanic - the price of EU's let them drown policy


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I voted remain.
> 
> A sovereign nation, however, can not be told it has to stay in the EU because a different sovereign nation has problems if they leave.  This should be recognised as the utter nonsense it is.



You're getting the wrong end of it though...
Your sovereign nation is telling another sovereign nation what they should do...and that they should be made reinstate and maintain a border they dont want, with their own people...And also that they should throw out the GFA if it interferes with your sovereign nations nonsensical twattery.

Maybe the UK should put out a vote to Scotland and Wales too. Maybe they should get the chance to stay in the EU too. Eh?
Let Scotland NI and Wales have a vote to either stay in the UK or stay in the EU.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I literally don’t know what you’re talking about


It means you're literally lost up your own arse. Get a grip. Focus. Stay with us.


----------



## CRI (Dec 11, 2018)




----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> You're getting the wrong end of it though...
> Your sovereign nation is telling another sovereign nation what they should do...and that they should be made maintain a border they dont want, with their own people...And also that they should throw out the GFA if it interferes with your sovereign nations nonsensical twattery.
> 
> Maybe the UK should put out a vote to Scotland and Wales too. Maybe they should get the chance to stay in the EU too. Eh?
> Let Scotland NI and Wales have a vote to either stay in the UK or stay in the EU.


Yes, sovereign nations have borders.  This happens all over the world.  It’s hardly a special unique thing invented by the UK.

My proposal is that if the people of the island of Ireland prefer not to have that border in a world in which the U.K. has a border with the rest of the world, this is actually pretty easily solved.  But I see no reason why the people of NI should expect to be a special case in which they have no borders with Britain and also no borders with Ireland.  Make a choice, which do you want?

And yes, I’m also fine with the Scottish and Welsh having independence votes if they want them.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It means you're literally lost up your own arse. Get a grip. Focus. Stay with us.


Er, ok bitcoin boy.  How’s that $100k by the end of the year prediction working out for you?  We all quail in the glory of your astute readings of political and economic landscapes.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

Lol....why should we do anything? We aren't the ones looking for out of the EU? 
We have no border with NI. 
Why the fuck should we have one because of another country's actions?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

Just spotted this...



Lol.

I actually feel a bit sorry for May.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Er, ok bitcoin boy.  How’s that $100k by the end of the year prediction working out for you?  We all quail in the glory of your astute readings of political and economic landscapes.


No do tell us more of this NI referendum. It sounds fascinating. I promise not to laugh at you. I wouldn't want to question your internet status, or undermine your message board capital.

Please don't feel threatened.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Lol....why should we do anything? We aren't the ones looking for out of the EU?
> We have no border with NI.
> Why the fuck should we have one because of another country's actions?


Because that’s how it works when other countries leave the EU.  Borders appear.  But you don’t get to insist others stay part of the EU forever because you don’t like having borders.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> If RoI say no in those circumstances, wouldn't they be breaking the terms of the GFA which provide for re-unification if a majority in NI want it?


I think the GFA says re-unification should happen if a majority in both RoI and NI want it.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

This is akin to the Solvenians saying that the Italians have to stay part of the EU forever because they want to be able to travel unimpeded to Spain.  Or some other tortuous metaphor that involves thinking you get a say in whether another country is allowed to erect borders around its own nation or not.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Because that’s how it works when other countries leave the EU.  Borders appear.  But you don’t get to insist others stay part of the EU forever because you don’t like having borders.



I'm not insisting Britain stays. I couldn't care less what ye do. Its the fuck up that your actions will create here that I give a shit about.
Jeez.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> I'm not insisting Britain stays. I couldn't care less what he do. Its the fuck up that your actions will create here that I give a shit about.
> Jeez.


Actually, you are exactly insisting that the U.K. not leave the EU customs union.  I don’t know what else you think you’re arguing for.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> No, you proceed with Brexit whilst simultaneously giving the referendum to the people of NI, who will be able to join the ROI before the end of the transition period if that’s what they choose.
> 
> If the people of NI choose to join ROI and then the ROI reject this then I guess NI will have to stay in the UK but nobody gets to make a big fucking stink any more about how it’s really all just one island and omigosh now brothers separated by a border not of their choosing will have to have a passport to drive across it.  Because one of those brothers when pushed went, “er, actually”



Ok. But is it then reasonable to take the Brexit referendum result as a mandate for this to happen? When people voted in the Brexit referendum, was it clear that a consequence of a Leave vote would be NI being presented with this choice: hard border with the Republic or leave the UK? And add in the fact that if NI were given this choice there'd be a pretty strong argument for giving Scotland the same option. Unless it's reasonable to assume that people anticipated these consequences when voting in the referendum, surely the argument for a second referendum is strengthened? One where people are given a choice at a point where significant consequences of the decision are as clear as they can be.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Actually, you are exactly insisting that the U.K. not leave the EU customs union.  I don’t know what else you think you’re arguing for.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


>


Is that you realising that you are indeed insisting Britain stays in the customs union?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> Is that you realising that you are indeed insisting Britain stays in the customs union?



No... Its me realising that you're so far up your own arse that you can't possibly see any other point of view other than your own shit.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Ok. But is it then reasonable to take the Brexit referendum result as a mandate for this to happen? When people voted in the Brexit referendum, was it clear that a consequence of a Leave vote would be NI being presented with this choice: hard border with the Republic or leave the UK? And add in the fact that if NI were given this choice there'd be a pretty strong argument for giving Scotland the same option. Unless it's reasonable to assume that people anticipated these consequences when voting in the referendum, surely the argument for a second referendum is strengthened? One where people are given a choice at a point where significant consequences of the decision are as clear as they can be.


People wanted to leave.  In my view, this is the best way to make that happen

As I said before, it’s all about priorities


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> No... Its me realising that you're so far up your own arse that you can't possibly see any other point of view other than your own shit.


How else do you propose getting what you want other than either Britain staying in the customs union or unifying Ireland?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

The British government can't agree.


kabbes said:


> How else do you propose getting what you want other than either Britain staying in the customs union or unifying Ireland?




What I want?

Ffs do you not get that Ireland was perfectly happy and didn't "want" anything but to just get on with things.
BREXIT is not our baby. Its yours.
Go change your own nappy.
And stop looking for Ireland to mop up after you're done..cos that's what Brexit is doing. Its going to fuck up Ireland. And Brexiteers don't give a flying fuck about that do they? They're only desire is for a Great Britain...an Empire again.
Grow up. The modern world doesn't actually have a British Empire anymore. It will crash and burn ....What bothers most people in Ireland is that it will burn us all with it no matter what we do or say.
Do you get that? At all?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> People wanted to leave.  In my view, this is the best way to make that happen
> 
> As I said before, it’s all about priorities



Why is it better than just doing a Brexit that keeps us in the customs union? That's based on your assumption about what people's priorities were when they voted, isn't it?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> The British government can't agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You know that doesn’t answer the question, right?  It’s just an angry brain dump.

You say that you don’t want to dictate that Britain has to stay in the customs union but you also reject a border and reject NI being cut loose.  So how are you solving it?  You either have to insist we stay in the customs union or you have to accept one of the solutions that allows us to leave.  It can’t be both.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why is it better than just doing a Brexit that keeps us in the customs union? That's based on your assumption about what people's priorities were when they voted, isn't it?


No, it’s my preference.  Not what should happen.

I’m just pointing out that if your priority is Brexit, the Irish issue is not insoluble.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> I’m just pointing out that if your priority is Brexit, the Irish issue is not insoluble.



That seems like stating the obvious. The real questions are about what it's acceptable to give Brexit priority over, and how to determine what kind of Brexit counts as Brexit.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You know that doesn’t answer the question, right?  It’s just an angry brain dump.
> 
> You say that you don’t want to dictate that Britain has to stay in the customs union but you also reject a border and reject NI being cut loose.  So how are you solving it?  You either have to insist we stay in the customs union or you have to accept one of the solutions that allows us to leave.  It can’t be both.



Its not for Ireland to solve it. We are actually doing our best to govern our own country and to protect our interests and that's what we should be doing. 

I think that in my posts I've been very clear. 
Nobody is stopping you leaving. But your government can't even agree on what to do so why would I be able to find a solution for you? All I'm doing is showing you the repercussions of the Brexit process producing a hard border...on people who have little or nothing to do with Brexit but who will suffer for it. 

There is one glaringly obvious solution that could sort all of this easily. But if I suggest it then you'll accuse me of telling a sovereign country what to do. I'll leave that elephant in that room and just close that door.  It can only be opened by the people of the UK .


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Lol....why should we do anything? We aren't the ones looking for out of the EU?
> We have no border with NI.
> Why the fuck should we have one because of another country's actions?


Brussels will insist you do it. Like they do with your budgets etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Its not for Ireland to solve it. We are actually doing our best to govern our own country and to protect our interests and that's what we should be doing.
> 
> I think that in my posts I've been very clear.
> Nobody is stopping you leaving. But your government can't even agree on what to do so why would I be able to find a solution for you? All I'm doing is showing you the repercussions of the Brexit process producing a hard border...on people who have little or nothing to do with Brexit but who will suffer for it.
> ...


it's been mentioned several times as a way out of this impasse


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Its not for Ireland to solve it. We are actually doing our best to govern our own country and to protect our interests and that's what we should be doing.
> 
> I think that in my posts I've been very clear.
> Nobody is stopping you leaving. But your government can't even agree on what to do so why would I be able to find a solution for you? All I'm doing is showing you the repercussions of the Brexit process producing a hard border...on people who have little or nothing to do with Brexit but who will suffer for it.
> ...


I see.  The pass-agg solution.  “I’m not MAKING you do it.  But I’ll sulk and stamp my foot if you don’t.”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's been mentioned several times as a way out of this impasse



Yeah, and yet Ireland seems reluctant to leave to EU. No telling some people


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> The British government can't agree.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Great post.

Remember too that for almost 50% of the referendum voters, this was never our issue either. The country has been hijacked.

My priorities three years ago would have been social care, homelessness and social housing, NHS protection, fracking, and that little issue about the end of civilisation as we know it within our lifetimes due to global climate change.

The number of bills, papers and reports that have been piling up since the start of this hijacking has slowed our progress by many years. The UK government is now a contradiction in terms and probably against the trade descriptions act... They are not governing, and we did not ask for any of this. Not our idea, not our beef, not our priority.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It's like some people on here have never conducted a tough negotiation in their lives. This has to go to the cliff edge. The UK may even have to actually leave on WTO terms before the Empire finally reins back. But it will, in the end.



You've done lots of tough negotiations then?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The country has been hijacked.



Maybe _your _country has been hijacked. Most of us never had one.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> The number of bills, papers and reports that have been piling up since the start of this hijacking has slowed our progress by many years. The UK government is now a contradiction in terms and probably against the trade descriptions act... They are not governing, and we did not ask for any of this. Not our idea, not our beef, not our priority.


So basically, you're saying that Brexit has tied this Tory government up so much that it hasn't had the time to fuck things up elsewhere?  Sounds good to me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> Historically, this is nonsense. It's perfectly possible for priorities to change and for one of the parties to a treaty to say "actually, we don't want to continue with this agreement, so let's talk about ending it" or even "we've had enough, we're out", without the initial agreement being based on deceit
> 
> It's also funny how some of those happy to call for another Brexit ref in the hope that they get the result they want this time are suggesting that the GFA is in some way permanent as if it were handed to us on tablets of stone.



Good point. While I remember, the GFA is fucking shit and we should rip it up.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Great post.
> 
> Remember too that for almost 50% of the referendum voters, this was never our issue either. The country has been hijacked.
> 
> ...


As if any of those priority topics were progressing in the right direction before brexit even became a thing. They were all getting demonstrably worse under EU rule, and still are, and will continue to if there's a 2nd ref won by remain and the whole thing is shit canned... worse regardless of brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> My priorities three years ago would have been social care, homelessness and social housing, NHS protection, fracking, and that little issue about the end of civilisation as we know it within our lifetimes due to global climate change.
> 
> .


Well, y'know, get involved and do something about social care, housing, the NHS and fracking. Don't expect states to do anything for you, they are your enemy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Well, y'know, get involved and do something about social care, housing, the NHS and fracking. Don't expect states to do anything for you, they are your enemy.



Any day now, that there EU is gon' save our souls, mister!


----------



## Wilf (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Any day now, that there EU is gon' save our souls, mister!


'Dear Lord, protect us from the _other_ capitalists'


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Wilf said:


> 'Dear Lord, protect us from the _other_ capitalists'



This is, essentially, the left reformist argument for the EU. The European bourgeoisie is _nicer _than the British bourgeoisie.


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Maybe _your _country has been hijacked. Most of us never had one.


He's got TWO countries,  the greedy so and so...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 11, 2018)

Thread now 6 pages longer than May's failed deal; just saying.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 11, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thread now 6 pages longer than May's failed deal; just saying.


waste of bloody time it's cost the economy millions billions


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thread now 6 pages longer than May's failed deal; just saying.



We should submit this thread as the withdrawal agreement. There's something for everyone here!


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

Lupa said:


> There is one glaringly obvious solution that could sort all of this easily. But if I suggest it then you'll accuse me of telling a sovereign country what to do. I'll leave that elephant in that room and just close that door.  It can only be opened by the people of the UK .


Oooh, go on, don't be a tease...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2018)

if its the break up of the union then I'm all for it


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> if its the break up of the union then I'm all for it



I want to know who will take care of the elephant?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I want to know who will take care of the elephant?



Don't worry - because May pulled the vote they're discussing the Ivory bill today so the elephant will be fine 

MPs to debate ivory and fuel poverty instead of Brexit deal | Press and Journal


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 11, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Thread now 6 pages longer than May's failed deal; just saying.



And both a waste of everyones time and other peoples money.


----------



## gosub (Dec 11, 2018)

There is no truth in the rumour that Theresa May has requested political asylum in Berlin.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't worry - because May pulled the vote they're discussing the Ivory bill today so the elephant will be fine
> 
> MPs to debate ivory and fuel poverty instead of Brexit deal | Press and Journal



I’m guessing they won’t mention Tusk when May is in the room with said elephant!


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I want to know who will take care of the elephant?



I fully expect to be told that those of us who voted Leave are responsible for the prolonged and agonising death of the elephant, cruel heartless bastards that we are...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> I fully expect to be told that those of us who voted Leave are responsible for the prolonged and agonising death of the elephant, cruel heartless bastards that we are...




tbf the elephant is an immigrant, so it must be the leave voters that wanted it to suffer, cos racist.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> tbf the elephant is an immigrant, so it must be the leave voters that wanted it to suffer, cos racist.


also, too thick to use one of those long handled brooms


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> also, too thick to use one of those long handled brooms




They have long memories though.


----------



## andysays (Dec 11, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> tbf the elephant is an immigrant, so it must be the leave voters that wanted it to suffer, cos racist.



You're making a racist assumption that the elephant is an immigrant, whereas in fact it was born here after its forbears arrived here perfectly legally from the former British Empire. 

The elephant in the room is as British as you or I, and need not fear for its status post-Brexit.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> You're making a racist assumption that the elephant is an immigrant, whereas in fact it was born here after its forbears arrived here perfectly legally from the former British Empire.
> 
> The elephant in the room is as British as you or I, and need not fear for its status post-Brexit.



If you go back far enough I bet there were elephants stamping around here long before us puny humans!


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> If you go back far enough I bet there were elephants stamping around here long before us puny humans!


mammoths.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> mammoths.



 Thanks, It’s these trousers!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 11, 2018)

andysays said:


> You're making a racist assumption that the elephant is an immigrant, whereas in fact it was born here after its forbears arrived here perfectly legally from the former British Empire.
> 
> The elephant in the room is as British as you or I, and need not fear for its status post-Brexit.




Nelly is a very British name I guess.




DotCommunist said:


> mammoths.



But that sounds Welsh


----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

gosub said:


> There is no truth in the rumour that Theresa May has requested political asylum in Berlin.


I think the Germans have strict testing for asylum. The first test is getting out of a car
Theresa May gets locked in car when meeting Angela Merkel


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

flypanam said:


> I think the Germans have strict testing for asylum. The first test is getting out of a car
> Theresa May gets locked in car when meeting Angela Merkel



Locked into something she can’t exit.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 11, 2018)

(Part of) Cornwall trying to brexit already…


----------



## binka (Dec 11, 2018)

So what was the DUP rationale for supporting Brexit? Do they want the re-introduction of a hard border? Surely even the most ardent unionist 'business leaders' in the north don't want that? Did they consider that NI might end up being treated differently to the rest of the UK? Did they consider Brexit might increase the popularity of reunification with the Republic?

It just seems to me the status quo would suit the DUP most so what am I missing?


----------



## flypanam (Dec 11, 2018)

binka said:


> So what was the DUP rationale for supporting Brexit? Do they want the re-introduction of a hard border? Surely even the most ardent unionist 'business leaders' in the north don't want that? Did they consider that NI might end up being treated differently to the rest of the UK? Did they consider Brexit might increase the popularity of reunification with the Republic?
> 
> It just seems to me the status quo would suit the DUP most so what am I missing?


A couple of reasons one they got a lot of cash for it google dark money and dup, secondly the Uk leaving the eu makes cross border institutions as enshrined in the gfa more difficult. Their reasoning is that brexit would have put the question of a border poll back into the long grass. They recognise the demographic change in the north and want to at least prolong the union by any means possible. 

It’s back fired on them as certain sections of the unionist middle class are re thinking their relationship to the union, the farmers are deserting as brexit without the back stop really fucks them and lastly the most important section of unionism the Protestant working class have for years become distrustful of the big house or fur coat brigade. Not to the extent that they support Irish reunification but some, a small number though growing are agnostic about it.

Lastly their pig headedness have in some way mobilised the catholic middle class to assert their nationalist aspirations much more assertively.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 11, 2018)




----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 11, 2018)

another  award...


----------



## grit (Dec 11, 2018)

binka said:


> So what was the DUP rationale for supporting Brexit? Do they want the re-introduction of a hard border? Surely even the most ardent unionist 'business leaders' in the north don't want that? Did they consider that NI might end up being treated differently to the rest of the UK? Did they consider Brexit might increase the popularity of reunification with the Republic?
> 
> It just seems to me the status quo would suit the DUP most so what am I missing?





flypanam said:


> A couple of reasons one they got a lot of cash for it google dark money and dup, secondly the Uk leaving the eu makes cross border institutions as enshrined in the gfa more difficult. Their reasoning is that brexit would have put the question of a border poll back into the long grass.
> 
> It’s back fired on them as certain sections of the unionist middle class are re thinking their relationship to the union, the farmers are deserting as brexit without the back stop really fucks them and lastly the most important section of unionism the Protestant working class have for years become distrustful of the big house or fur coat brigade. Not to the extent that they support Irish reunification but some, a small number though growing are agnostic about it.





DexterTCN said:


>



 Love it


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Anyway I'll save you the time. Article seven of the charter is in essence the same as article eight of the convention. Perhaps you could tell me again precisely which family life rights you think you might lose



I don't expect you to believe my concerns for Human Rights (especially LGBT rights) under Brexit - you're a cynical Simon and I'm a stranger on the interwebs.

Would you listen to Stonewall perhaps?

What about the Human Rights Commission?

Human Rights Watch?

Amnesty International??

They've all expressed grave concern over the loss of the Charter rights which, contrary to what you claim, are NOT replicated elsewhere in UK law. In fact, the Charter is as far as I know the ONLY international treaty to cover the UK that expressly mentions LGBT people.

Have a read and educate yourself.
Why is no one talking about the Brexit threat to LGBT rights?
Human Right Watch: Will Human Rights Still Be Protected After UK Brexit?
Brexit Bill leaves hole in UK Human Rights
Oxford Human Rights Hub: The fate of the Charter of Fundamental Human Rights in UK law after Brexit is sealed
Equality Human Rights Commission: What does Brexit mean for Equality and Human Rights in the UK?
Equality Human Rights Commission: Brexit and the EU Charter of Fundamental Human Rights: Our Concerns
New Statesman: The unacceptable side of Brexit: MPs must save the EU Charter on Fundamental Human Rights
Amnesty International: Withdrawal Bill is a Bleak Day for Human Rights


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I don't expect you to believe my concerns for Human Rights (especially LGBT rights) under Brexit - you're a cynical Simon and I'm a stranger on the interwebs.
> 
> Would you listen to Stonewall perhaps?
> 
> ...


I didn't say all the charter rights were covered elsewhere, some of them are drawn from the convention, some from the social chapter and some from other places. But everything in the convention is in the human rights act. Your right to family life is therefore protected whatever happens. Educate yourself, wookey


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I didn't say all the charter rights were covered elsewhere, some of them are drawn from the convention, some from the social chapter and some from other places. But everything in the convention is in the human rights act. Your right to family life is therefore protected whatever happens. Educate yourself, wookey



Do I believe you, or Amnesty International??

Such choices.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> I don't expect you to believe my concerns for Human Rights (especially LGBT rights) under Brexit - you're a cynical Simon and I'm a stranger on the interwebs.
> 
> Would you listen to Stonewall perhaps?


Why don't you listen to this; 185 years ago Britian outlawed slavery in the empire. 70 years ago Germany was busy gassing 6 million civilians.

No one needs any fucking lessons from you on human rights, you stupid muppet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Do I believe you, or Amnesty International??
> 
> Such choices.


Don't believe me, believe your own comparison of article 7 of the charter and article 8 of the convention


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Why don't you listen to this; 185 years ago Britian outlawed slavery in the empire. 70 years ago Germany was busy gassing 6 million civilians.
> 
> No one needs any fucking lessons from you on human rights, you stupid muppet.


Germany wasn't gassing anyone in 1948


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Germany wasn't gassing anyone in 1948



Good to see in the midst of all this pedantry is alive and well.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't believe me, believe your own comparison of article 7 of the charter and article 8 of the convention



The point is that the Charter is the key to unlocking EU Human Rights Law, which will be adopted by the UK. Losing it leaves LGBT people open to abuse from any future UK government, and that's not acceptable to people who have been historically oppressed by the UK Government.

"It should be inconceivable that a democratic legislature would vote to take away rights, but leaving those arguments of principle to one side for a moment, with the loss of the Charter goes rights that don’t exist in the Human Rights Act or common law. Gone is the enforceable right to human dignity. We also say farewell to express rights to data protection, comprehensive protection for the rights of the child, refugee rights, the right to conscientious objection, academic freedom and wide-ranging fair trial rights to name but a few. And, I haven’t even started on economic and social rights." Oxford Human Rights Hub

In terms of right to family life, we will lose the express mention of LGBT people - which leaves the UK law open to interpretation.

We've seen elsewhere in the world where specific mention of LGBT people has been used to protect our rights, and also where no mention of LGBT people has allowed judges to interpret the protection in a way that doesn't cover LGBT people.

*"Losing (the Charter) creates a human rights hole because the Charter provides some rights and judicial remedies that have no clear equivalents in UK law."*  - Equality Human Rights


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 11, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Why don't you listen to this; 185 years ago Britian outlawed slavery in the empire. 70 years ago Germany was busy gassing 6 million civilians.
> 
> No one needs any fucking lessons from you on human rights, you stupid muppet.


75 years ago Britain presided over famine in India. 170 years ago Britain presided over the Irish famine. What's your point, that Britain's better than Germany?


----------



## killer b (Dec 11, 2018)

Yougov have done one of their MRP models on no deal/may's deal/remain. The closeness of those numbers don't bode well for a remain result of any second referendum IMO (The MRP model has been very accurate in recent elections, and I'd say it's right here too). 

May’s Brexit deal leads in just two constituencies as it suffers from being everyone’s second choice | YouGov


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Why don't you listen to this; 185 years ago Britian outlawed slavery in the empire. 70 years ago Germany was busy gassing 6 million civilians.
> 
> No one needs any fucking lessons from you on human rights, you stupid muppet.



OK.

Twenty-eight years ago it was illegal for me to have sex with a third person in the room, in private.

Twenty-four years ago, I was considered a sex criminal by the UK state, for having underage consensual sex with my male partner. He, aged 22, was considered a statutory rapist.

Twenty-two years ago, I was told by the Prime Minister that I had no right to assume a family life, and no inalienable right to be gay.

Twenty years ago I was still banned from joining the Armed Forces like my dad had done, and his dad before him.

Eighteen years ago I was banned from having a civil partnership, or adopting children.

Five years ago I was still banned from getting married.

The rights I have came to me during my lifetime, and I believe in the risk they could be taken away in my lifetime too.

I imagine none of this concerns you, and why should it, you reek of privilege.

But don't lecture me on human rights in the UK, when we had to riot and protest and march and organise to prise ours from the fingers of the powers that be.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Good to see in the midst of all this pedantry is alive and well.


It may be all we have left.

Also, ideally you'd have a comma in there.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> It may be all we have left.
> 
> Also, ideally you'd have a comma in there.



Well spotted. Pass.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

Lord Camomile said:


> It may be all we have left.
> 
> Also, ideally you'd have a comma in there.



Ideally two.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 11, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Ideally two.


Two, ideally.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 11, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Ideally two.


Heh, I did wonder, to be honest. Figured it depended on style.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 11, 2018)

Main thought is "Good to see pedantry is alive and well.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 11, 2018)

Aye, fair enough.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 11, 2018)

"Good to see pedantry is alive and well in the midst of all this" has all the same words and doesn't need commas.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 11, 2018)

BBC reporting that the 48 letters to Sir Graham point has been reached.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 11, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> BBC reporting that the 48 letters to Sir Graham point has been reached.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> 75 years ago Britain presided over famine in India. 170 years ago Britain presided over the Irish famine. What's your point, that Britain's better than Germany?



And 74 years ago British troops were shooting Greek resistance fighters who helped beat the Nazis. Nothing like the Germans.


----------



## CRI (Dec 11, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> BBC reporting that the 48 letters to Sir Graham point has been reached.



Why have I got 48 Crash by Suzi Quatro in my head!


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

CRI said:


> View attachment 155294



Shelley?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Germany wasn't gassing anyone in 1948



Sometimes your pedantry becomes an art form in and of itself.


----------



## CRI (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Shelley?


I think Star Light, Star Bright - Wikipedia


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sometimes your pedantry becomes an art form in and of itself.



Don’t mention the pedantry, I did once, but I think I got away with it.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 11, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Shelley?


The voice in my head is reciting it in the tarmac tones of J C-C.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> OK.
> 
> Twenty-eight years ago it was illegal for me to have sex with a third person in the room, in private.
> 
> ...


'Each new generation must win its rights anew'

To misquote Arthur Miller (or was it Ronald Reagan?)

It is easy to forget that and to take stuff for granted, but the likes of Trump and now Bolsonaro are a reminder of what can happen. I'm amazed, tbh, by how many people seem positively enthusiastic about the UK leaving the ECJ. Strikes me as supreme arrogance or foolishness or probably both to think that we will be better protected by a smaller jurisdiction. Many matters need to be devolved down as far as possible, but things like fundamental human rights need to be devolved as high as possible. And that should be celebrated when it happens - the whole of the EU, 27 countries, has adopted these legal rights. That's an achievement not to be carelessly tossed away.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Each new generation must win its rights anew'
> 
> To misquote Arthur Miller (or was it Ronald Reagan?)
> 
> It is easy to forget that and to take stuff for granted, but the likes of Trump and now Bolsonaro are a reminder of what can happen. I'm amazed, tbh, by how many people seem positively enthusiastic about the UK leaving the ECJ. Strikes me as supreme arrogance or foolishness or probably both to think that we will be better protected by a smaller jurisdiction. Many matters need to be devolved down as far as possible, but things like fundamental human rights need to be devolved as high as possible. And that should be celebrated when it happens - the whole of the EU, 27 countries, has adopted these legal rights. That's an achievement not to be carelessly tossed away.



You know you can only go to the ECJ after you've been through the domestic court system right? Unless you're taking an EU institution to court?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know you can only go to the ECJ after you've been through the domestic court system right? Unless you're taking an EU institution to court?


yes, your point?


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 11, 2018)

Can she win a VONC?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> yes, your point?



Just that it's only really companies and nation states by and large that can actually afford to go through all those judicial processes, or *maybe* a well resourced union. It's a fairly abstract right for the vast majority of people. 

I don't want to dismiss the struggle for LGBT rights for example, at a time when we're seeing LGBT rights under attack and homophobic violence increasing in many countries around the world. But I would like to know what the ECJ is doing for LBGT people in Poland and Hungary at the moment.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Each new generation must win its rights anew'
> 
> To misquote Arthur Miller (or was it Ronald Reagan?)
> 
> It is easy to forget that and to take stuff for granted, but the likes of Trump and now Bolsonaro are a reminder of what can happen. I'm amazed, tbh, by how many people seem positively enthusiastic about the UK leaving the ECJ. Strikes me as supreme arrogance or foolishness or probably both to think that we will be better protected by a smaller jurisdiction. Many matters need to be devolved down as far as possible, but things like fundamental human rights need to be devolved as high as possible. And that should be celebrated when it happens - the whole of the EU, 27 countries, has adopted these legal rights. That's an achievement not to be carelessly tossed away.



I totally agree with you, Europe protected me when Westminster failed. Kinda stays in your memory does that. It's a powerful civilising influence - and we went from gay people being ejected from their military posts, to the Armed Forces joining in our Pride parades within a decade, which is extraordinary healing.


----------



## Combustible (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> and we went from gay people being ejected from their military posts, to the Armed Forces joining in our Pride parades within a decade, which is extraordinary healing.



Thanks to the European Court of Human Rights rather than the EU


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know you can only go to the ECJ after you've been through the domestic court system right?



Yep, it was Stonewall who supported Lustig-Preen et al in the gay military ban case, after their case was dismissed by the High Court and Court of Appeal, who openly disagreed with the ban but were powerless to stop it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 11, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yep, it was Stonewall who supported Lustig-Preen et al in the gay military ban case, after their case was dismissed by the High Court and Court of Appeal, who openly disagreed with the ban but were powerless to stop it.



ECHR.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 11, 2018)

Combustible said:


> Thanks to the European Court of Human Rights rather than the EU



Teresa May tried to ditch the ECHR in the UK, to make it easier for her to deport people. She was stopped last year I think, after Barnier said leaving the ECHR would jeopardise Europe-wide security operations...


----------



## Supine (Dec 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just that it's only really companies and nation states by and large that can actually afford to go through all those judicial processes, or *maybe* a well resourced union. It's a fairly abstract right for the vast majority of people.



It's designed to address issues of european importance, not for people contesting parking tickets in Hammersmith or Chelsea.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 12, 2018)

just caught a thing on the bbc where a women from demos and tim montgomerie (leading tory commentator - but actually quite astute) both agreed that a tory leadership contest would likely mean that  the new leader would revoke a50 - and THEN RESTART THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN!!! Suffering fuck - another 2 years of this shit?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 12, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> just caught a thing on the bbc where a women from demos and tim montgomerie (leading tory commentator - but actually quite astute) both agreed that a tory leadership contest would likely mean that  the new leader would revoke a50 - and THEN RESTART THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN!!! Suffering fuck - another 2 years of this shit?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 12, 2018)

is there an article (A51?) allowing a 27 member majority the option to throw any single member out?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 12, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> just caught a thing on the bbc where a women from demos and tim montgomerie (leading tory commentator - but actually quite astute) both agreed that a tory leadership contest would likely mean that  the new leader would revoke a50 - and THEN RESTART THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN!!! Suffering fuck - another 2 years of this shit?


I think that would mean one of the first acts of the new tory leader would be paying loadsamoney in to the EU pot and  arranging candidates for European Parliament elections in May


----------



## moochedit (Dec 12, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> is there an article (A51?) allowing a 27 member majority the option to throw any single member out?



I vaguely remember there is something like that but it only applies in certain circumstances.

Edit - article 7 allows a country to be suspended but not expelled...

Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union - Wikipedia


----------



## moochedit (Dec 12, 2018)

moochedit said:


> So in theory could they cancel a50 then immediatly invoke a50 again, thus restarting the 2 year clock?





Kaka Tim said:


> just caught a thing on the bbc where a women from demos and tim montgomerie (leading tory commentator - but actually quite astute) both agreed that a tory leadership contest would likely mean that  the new leader would revoke a50 - and THEN RESTART THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN!!! Suffering fuck - another 2 years of this shit?



Have they been reading this thread?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 12, 2018)

moochedit said:


> I vaguely remember there is something like that but it only applies in certain circumstances.
> 
> Edit - article 7 allows a country to be suspended but not expelled...
> 
> Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union - Wikipedia


no expulsion. ouch, they must be regretting lack of foresight


----------



## moochedit (Dec 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I think that would mean one of the first acts of the new tory leader would be paying loadsamoney in to the EU pot and  arranging candidates for European Parliament elections in May



Which would effectively be another referendum on the eu. If that happens i bet Farage wishes he hadn't quit ukip. couple more years he could cash in on the gravy train.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 12, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Great post.
> 
> Remember too that for almost 50% of the referendum voters, this was never our issue either. The country has been hijacked.
> 
> ...



Why have your priorities changed? does your sorry old backside have a comfy seat in the civil service, or god forbid, Sky News? this has been my point all along but anyone who didn't fall for this ideological smokescreen of a referendum got labeled a dogmatist at best and apolitical at worst. like yeah i agree with you and some of the remoaners that it is the reactionary voices that are *dominating* public discussion.

But...

for god's sake, have some humility before jennuflecting at the shrine of the democratic adhesive filth!

This whole ref was a project of the remainers and they are winning.

Either you advocate revolutionary terror or you advocate concilliationist bourgeois terror. time to pick sides Wookey, time to pick sides. the country has never existed, it will never exist, it is never going to exist. Death to the people!

If you believe remainers are less homophobic than leavers then i'd like to see you try and navigate the coloured queer experience. Just cos remainers can dress their racism up in anti-racist language or their homophobia in anti-homophobic language doesn't negate this fact. uh, um, there's a word i'm looking for it's perhaps 'intersectionality' but i think you'll agree with that. no, can't be that. better be 'class' then, here comes that putrified stench again...

Most of my remainer (ex)mates have become cutthroat british nationalists just like the 'lexiters' they were castigating in 2015-16. fucking joke the whole thing. and you know what's even funnier? remainer people who were guilt tripping me for abstaining are now vociferously pro-leave, not because they always held that position on principle like ppl like redsquirrel or dotty have (which i have absolutely no issue with) but because they've dishonourably renounced class politics and liquidated themselves in the labour party. Anything to uphold the cohesion of the nation amirite?


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 12, 2018)

kabbes said:


> So basically, you're saying that Brexit has tied this Tory government up so much that it hasn't had the time to fuck things up elsewhere?  Sounds good to me.



Don't be a fucking eejit (even if this post was intended as a mocking of that position.) they are still fucking shit up. every day. just cos there is a separation between political society and civil society doesn't mean a delegitimation of government equates to a crisis of capital ... yet.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Any day now, that there EU is gon' save our souls, mister!



How is building the mass political party going then? like come off it ur not that different to wookey are you.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 12, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> It means you're literally lost up your own arse. Get a grip. Focus. Stay with us.



Christ you're tedious. Self awareness clearly not your strong point either. You're actually making me want to agree with Liberal remainers. Fucking stop it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've done lots of tough negotiations then?


Secured an extra £1.50 pocket money off his mum and he did it by dangling the dog over the edge of a cliff until she gave in. That is just the latest one, he does the biggest and best deals there are, like a Donald trump only with bitcoin and beano comics instead of Mexico and walls. Or something.


----------



## killer b (Dec 12, 2018)

Tim Montgomerie isn't 'astute', he's a raging bellend. A complete clown-shoed ignoramus


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 12, 2018)

Today might need a drinking game: how about starting with a shot every time someone on the news ironically says 'strong and stable'.


----------



## The Fornicator (Dec 12, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> Christ you're tedious. Self awareness clearly not your strong point either. You're actually making me want to agree with Liberal remainers. Fucking stop it.


Yesterday he solved the back stop. Can't I at least hope for climate change today.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 12, 2018)

Conspiracy theorist _security liberals _now going full on putschist on the basis that everything is a Putinist plot to “destroy Britain”. (I am not saying that various agents of influence and strategies are not in play, but the _security liberals’ _response reveals their attachment to the establishment and lack of imagination or alternatives) This one is an ex cop with a large following of the more extreme #FBPEers:


----------



## teuchter (Dec 12, 2018)

This thread is strangely quiet this morning


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This thread is strangely quiet this morning


yes, we have reached consensus that there will be no brexit. the thread is therefore redundant.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 12, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This thread is strangely quiet this morning


The current fun is elsewhere. Related, but elsewhere.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 12, 2018)

dialectician said:


> How is building the mass political party going then? like come off it ur not that different to wookey are you.



Where did that come from? Did you just wake up thinking about me?


----------



## CRI (Dec 12, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Conspiracy theorist _security liberals _now going full on putschist on the basis that everything is a Putinist plot to “destroy Britain”. (I am not saying that various agents of influence and strategies are not in play, but the _security liberals’ _response reveals their attachment to the establishment and lack of imagination or alternatives) This one is an ex cop with a large following of the more extreme #FBPEers:



"Attachment to the establishment and lack of imagination or alternatives . . ."

Wtf does that even mean? Like, an afternoon of crafting will fix this shit ?

Had a quick look at this guy's Twitter feed. His 7 year old kid is an insulin dependent diabetic. Can see why he's not reassured by Rees Mogg or internet randos saying everything will be fine with a no deal.

Folks I know who are dependent on imported meds to survive are bricking it, too.  The people actually involved in getting the drugs to them are saying it will be the opposite of fine if there is no deal.  But maybe they just need to be more imaginative about their situ, too. Perhaps think up an alternative to insulin.


----------



## rekil (Dec 12, 2018)

killer b said:


> Tim Montgomerie isn't 'astute', he's a raging bellend. A complete clown-shoed ignoramus


Nonsense. He's full of new ideas. A breath of fresh 21st century tory air.





Spoiler



you're better than this Kaka Tim


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 12, 2018)




----------



## CRI (Dec 12, 2018)




----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Where did that come from? Did you just wake up thinking about me?



Which post did i even fucking quote i have no idea at this rate.

Oh yeah.

sorry for catching an earful of my ire, one of my former mates was talking about how leave vote was quite reactionary and socialists should have voted remain in 2016. changed his tune when it came to building the mass 'working class' political party (aka. corbynite labour) in 2017 though. grime historian and all. so was having a kneejerk sectarian dig at your trot org. 

Facebook is really bad for my mental health it's like seeing your grandad go senile except its happening to people who i used to consider friends who are in their early 30s at the most.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 12, 2018)

a brace of pricks on Andrew Neill are claiming that this is effectively all labours fault at the end of the day, time to take a couple more cocodamol and have a doze i think


----------



## Wilf (Dec 12, 2018)

Wookey said:


> OK.
> 
> Twenty-eight years ago it was illegal for me to have sex with a third person in the room, in private.
> 
> ...


You seem to forget we were in the EU during those years of explicit homophobia and repression.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2018)

Wilf said:


> You seem to forget we were in the EU during those years of explicit homophobia and repression.



The EU is still happy to include overtly homophobic regimes.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 12, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The EU is still happy to include overtly homophobic regimes.



How overt?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 12, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> a brace of pricks on Andrew Neill are claiming that this is effectively all labours fault at the end of the day, time to take a couple more cocodamol and have a doze i think


Ooh, yes, just reminds me I haven't had any for 5 hours. Brexit and no-confidence in one day I think I'll add some pregabalin to the 60mgs of co-codamol. Please excuse any hysterical silliness in my future posts. A phrase you may also be hearing from Theresa later in the day.


----------



## gosub (Dec 12, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Germany wasn't gassing anyone in 1948



No, but the pink triangles that made through to the liberation of the concentration camps, had been processed by then, and returned to prison to finish their sentences


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 12, 2018)

gosub said:


> No, but the pink triangles that made through to the liberation of the concentration camps, had been processed by then, and returned to prison to finish their sentences


that's a bit shit


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 12, 2018)

The Fornicator said:


> Yesterday he solved the back stop. Can't I at least hope for climate change today.


You don't even understand what he's saying. It's embarrassing.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 12, 2018)

CRI said:


> "Attachment to the establishment and lack of imagination or alternatives . . ."
> 
> Wtf does that even mean? Like, an afternoon of crafting will fix this shit ?
> 
> ...



To be clear, I am not saying No Deal would be fine.  It absolutely wouldn’t. But what I am saying is there is almost no chance we are heading for no deal. As others indicate above, we are heading for suspension or abandonment of Article 50 and then either a People’s Vote or the softest Brexit after a delay.
So why the hysteria over No Deal scenarios?  Could it be that certain elements would relish a state of emergency? A desperate attempt to reinstate the status quo ante? By any means, (up to and including a coup, by the looks of the quoted tweet) rather than significant change to the existing economic and political framework.....


----------



## andysays (Dec 12, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> To be clear, I am not saying No Deal would be fine.  It absolutely wouldn’t. But what I am saying is there is almost no chance we are heading for no deal. As others indicate above, we are heading for suspension or abandonment of Article 50 and then either a People’s Vote or the softest Brexit after a delay.
> So why the hysteria over No Deal scenarios?  Could it be that certain elements would relish a state of emergency? A desperate attempt to reinstate the status quo ante? By any means, (up to and including a coup, by the looks of the quoted tweet) rather than significant change to the existing economic and political framework.....



I think No Deal is increasingly unlikely, but apparently it's still seen by some as a significant possibility

*Tusk: EU27 will talk Brexit deal and 'no-deal preparations'*


> The European Council president has written to member states ahead of its last meeting of 2018. Donald Tusk said the two-day event over Thursday and Friday will cover a matter of topics, but "given the seriousness of the situation in the UK", they will start with Brexit. He says Theresa May will present her assessment to the council before the EU27 meet to discuss their conclusions. *"As time is running out, we will also discuss the state of preparations for a no-deal scenario," *added Mr Tusk.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think No Deal is increasingly unlikely, but apparently it's still seen by some as a significant possibility
> 
> *Tusk: EU27 will talk Brexit deal and 'no-deal preparations'*



Yes, as I say, those waving the bogeyman of no deal are mainly doing it to serve their own agenda and exert influence in one direction or another.

Those actively pursuing it are a tiny number, with almost no chance of achieving their ends - I.e they would not only have to bring down May tonight, but then install a hard Brexiteer as PM as a first step (and beyond that point the required sequence of events would be be even more unlikely.....)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think No Deal is increasingly unlikely, but apparently it's still seen by some as a significant possibility
> 
> *Tusk: EU27 will talk Brexit deal and 'no-deal preparations'*




no deal risk management: they have been on the case for a long while obviously - this is just propaganda


----------



## Poi E (Dec 12, 2018)

Where's Gordon Brown when his country needs him?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 12, 2018)

whatever we think about broon, at least he had a brain


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 12, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Where's Gordon Brown when his country needs him?



I belive 'in Nice, with his trotters up' is the customary destination for failed primes minister.


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 12, 2018)

killer b said:


> Yougov have done one of their MRP models on no deal/may's deal/remain. The closeness of those numbers don't bode well for a remain result of any second referendum IMO (The MRP model has been very accurate in recent elections, and I'd say it's right here too).
> 
> May’s Brexit deal leads in just two constituencies as it suffers from being everyone’s second choice | YouGov



Just want to pick up on this, beause nobody else has yet. My strong feeling (previously posted  ) is that a second referendum of any sort is a very low possibility, but that a second referendum including 'no deal' as one of three options is even less likely.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 12, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Just want to pick up on this, beause nobody else has yet. My strong feeling (previously posted  ) is that a second referendum of any sort is a very low possibility, but that a second referendum including 'no deal' as one of three options is even less likely.



Yeah no fucking way we're getting Remain or basically Remain no deal will not be an option for the proles


----------



## grit (Dec 12, 2018)

The optimism shown in the previous posts regarding the absence of a no deal is heartening yet terribly misguided


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 12, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah no fucking way we're getting Remain or basically Remain no deal will not be an option for the proles




I'm a Remainer yet I even agree with you there. The only way there'd be a 2nd referendum (which I donlt think anyway) would be if no deal was off the agenda.

But just because I say that, doesn't mean I think Remain would win! More later.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 12, 2018)

I dont think May is as wounded from the confidence vote today as other PMs would be in the past, the reason being that she isn't really a PM at the moment, she's the minsiter for Brexit, with PM powers. Her sole function is to try and make Brexit happen in some shape or form, and she'll die trying. As soon as her ability to enact Brexit is dead so is she. On that level she's already been walking dead for a while now.

Logically from there you can presume that MPs from across the parties might want to stop Brexit purely so as to kill her off...which was the case pretty much before the confidence vote....so on that level little has changed.

I can see only one play that would potentially get a version of her deal through, and thats present it to the house, and if/when it fails reason that the Commons cant agree on an outcome and so call a referendum with her deal running off against remain (other options may be available - but this all depends on who gets to set the questions - does the HoC?).

Possibly another factor is that now the Tory No Dealers are out of ammo she could soften up the existing Brexit deal to win over some votes from other parties. I guess that counts as a second play of sorts. Though I doubt she'd water it down too much, nor would it help that much in winning broader support. I cant see her switching to Norway.

ETA: then again if there is a second ref, who would campaing for Mays Deal? What would the likes of Boris, Farage and the gang campaign for?


----------



## Humberto (Dec 12, 2018)

I don't see how remain can win. And for all the bitterness that this has opened up I think that is for the best. I'm winning no friends but I'll tell you why:

A second ref would be awful. The longer this drags on, with imperfect solutions either way, the more disastrous it will be when we inevitably leave. Years of uncertainty and stagnation is the last thing we need during and after the breakaway. It could be storing up problems when we need a firmer less worried outlook.

I don't see a convincing case that public opinion has changed dramatically and decisively. The problem is, and I know it will irk some, there was a referendum. In other words; if the (hypothetical) next one is an unconvincing remain, will those who made up the majority of voters first time round accept that? I don't think they would. So divisions could get uglier wherever we find them.

I think it would be best all round if we took a few concessions (well British capital more so than 'we') and offered a little more. Instead of haggling and back-biting. A few good faith gestures. Because as it stands the country is past the point of beginning to look silly, self-centred and indecisive. People in this country from across the divide are beginning to get bored and impatient and I would expect that goes for the people in the EU. Maybe this post is a year or two late but I would suggest that is where the country is going to find problems.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 12, 2018)

andysays said:


> I think No Deal is increasingly unlikely, but apparently it's still seen by some as a significant possibility
> 
> *Tusk: EU27 will talk Brexit deal and 'no-deal preparations'*



I think it is a very real possibility and the only true Brexit.

May has survived the no confidence vote as the alternatives are too awful to stomach for Tory MPs.

She still has to get her deal through at some point, it is a shit deal; Junker and co are saying it is the only deal.

When it does get put to a vote, which it must, it will be rejected, as it should as it does what Mogg says it does, enslaves the UK.

That leaves hard Brexit. Which as the name suggests will be hard. It will be hard on both sides and seeing how volatile many leading E.U. nations are right now that could well bring about the downfall of the whole shitty edifice.

Roll on the future


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 12, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I dont think May is as wounded from the confidence vote today as other PMs would be in the past, the reason being that she isn't really a PM at the moment, she's the minsiter for Brexit, with PM powers. Her sole function is to try and make Brexit happen in some shape or form, and she'll die trying. As soon as her ability to enact Brexit is dead so is she. On that level she's already been walking dead for a while now.



I think that's a very good way of looking at it.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It will be hard on both sides and seeing how volatile many leading E.U. nations are right now that could well bring about the downfall of the whole shitty edifice.
> 
> Roll on the future



Unencumbered by EU rules, Europe's wealthier nations will open their borders to north african immigrants, neoliberalism will be dead, those death camps will all close, Greece will be sorted and everyone will live happily ever after.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Unencumbered by EU rules, Europe's wealthier nations will open their borders to north african immigrants, neoliberalism will be dead, those death camps will all close, Greece will be sorted and everyone will live happily ever after.


Or we can try that _with_ EU rules? Where do you suggest we sign up?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I dont think May is as wounded from the confidence vote today as other PMs would be in the past, the reason being that she isn't really a PM at the moment, she's the minsiter for Brexit, with PM powers. Her sole function is to try and make Brexit happen in some shape or form, and she'll die trying. As soon as her ability to enact Brexit is dead so is she. On that level she's already been walking dead for a while now.


Yes, this. She's been a dead thing since 2017 animated by nothing more than a desire to get Brexit through after the election fuck up. She's at once deeply pathetic but also resilient and quite able. But as far as I can see it's not an ability made from any kind of tactical nous, just buggering on and letting the twirly buffoons who oppose her miss those moments where they had a chance to do her (which of course they should have done within 48 hours of losing the majority). With their ill timed vonc, they've probably upped the chances of her dragging some kind of shitty deal over the line by about 10%. And there's not much chance that the cobra Corbyn is going to inflict any damage any point soon.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 13, 2018)

agree that may is actually stronger now - she no longer has the leadership challenge hanging over her.
I think she has a very good chance of going on as prime minister for perhaps as long as 6 weeks - when her deal gets flushed down the shitter by parliament and she is left with a choice between no deal exit, 2nd ref or revoking A50.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

So here''s my take on where we are:

-The ERG and the No Deal Brexit Tory crew are fucked. They've played their hand, weakened May but not killed her, they're not getting the Brexit they want and they're not leading the Tory Party. They never were that powerful really.

-May is now suspended in mid air. She can't do anything except press for her deal, which will lose. She's been utterly nullified and will be shunted between Britain and the EU for as long as it takes.

-She could make it a VoC in her and say she'll resign if it doesn't pass, but even if she does it probably fails. When it fails that's her done. 

-Corbyn is under pressure to call a VoNC in May from all the ultra Remain crowd - SNP, Lib Dems, Blairites etc. He calls it when her deal gets voted down, it brings down May.

-When that happens (Probably around February) any one of the fuckers who can organise a majority behind them - any of them! - can form a govt. No need for an election of course - the line will be that isn't what people want or need right now. With just a month left this govt comes together across parties in the national interest to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit.

There's not a majority for Brexit but there is for shafting May and Rees-Mogg and cancelling the whole thing, and I reckon whether by accident or design in the last week or so the MP's have managed to secure a route to cancelling Brexit in the national interest. And because it's late and I'm feeling speculative, I reckon you could get a majority in Parliament that would be willing to do all that *and* shaft Corbyn in the process. 

Late night thoughts (can't sleep) so please excuse, come at me and tell me where I'm wrong.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 13, 2018)

dialectician said:


> grime historian



Drink actually came out of my nose when I read that.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> -Corbyn is under pressure to call a VoNC in May from all the ultra Remain crowd - SNP, Lib Dems, Blairites etc. He calls it when her deal gets voted down, it brings down May.


Yeah supposedly the Labour plan has been to call a VoNC once the deal fails to pass...I guess maybe these new circumstances of a wounded May might bring that forward? If so now is the time.

But lets presume that is still the plan, to wait till the arrangement gets voted down, I wonder if May planning a referendum post the HoC failing to pass her agreement might mean Labour shelves the VoNC and just sticks with the referendum.

Perhaps a VoNC might drag things on and even give the Tories a second wind? Is she wins its a boost and if she loses does it force a general election or just a Tory election? A Tory election would be a sort of renewal too.

What will the Labour front bench campaign for in this potential referendum? Remain? Lol. If so that gives May some real leverage against Labour as Brexit Betrayers and firms up her position - it brings Labour out of the bushes  -all the more reason for her to call it. Is it her decision alone to call it?

If this is true:


Kaka Tim said:


> I think she has a very good chance of going on as prime minister for perhaps as long as 6 weeks - when her deal gets flushed down the shitter by parliament and *she is left with a choice between no deal exit, 2nd ref or revoking A50.*


then of those options it means a 2nd ref is now looking almost certain. And if May wins it (which with Labour campaigning full remain she might well do) she'd emerge victorious and remain in the job. Corbyn would be left pretty scorched too, if not toasted. Even if Remain/Labour win thats going to lose Labour votes at the next GE.

I've got a bad feeling that whatever people might want to happen about Brexit May might still survive this. And get a deal through. And fuck Corbyn.

I think amongst some Labour supporters theres a tendancy towards gloating and taking comfort in the tory infighting, which kind of maps onto Remain In The Referendum Overconfidence. The Brexit process might yet fuck Labour up.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Yeah supposedly the Labour plan has been to call a VoNC once the deal fails to pass...I guess maybe these new circumstances of a wounded May might bring that forward? If so now is the time.
> 
> But lets presume that is still the plan, to wait till the arrangement gets voted down, I wonder if May planning a referendum post the HoC failing to pass her agreement might mean Labour shelves the VoNC and just sticks with the referendum.
> 
> ...


Very few of those 117 Tory MPs who voted against May last night would vote against the govt in a parliamentary VoNC.

This hasn't changed Labour's situation significantly, at least not yet.


----------



## Plumdaff (Dec 13, 2018)

Labour are calling for a VONC after the deal fails because that's when the DUP have said they'll vote against May. At this point it seems quite likely to me to happen. Let's see what happens this morning though.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> Labour are calling for a VONC after the deal fails because that's when the DUP have said they'll vote against May. At this point it seems quite likely to me to happen. Let's see what happens this morning though.


what happens if May loses that vote, anyone know?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 13, 2018)

I posted this on the May thread yesterday:



cupid_stunt said:


> I've got this gut feeling the EU will give a little on the backstop, just enough so she can get her deal through, but not sure she'll hang on much longer after brexit actually happening.
> 
> I certainly wouldn't.



Knowing the EU has said there would be no renegotiation, my gut feeling was/is there could some sort of 'clarification' over the nature of the backstop, which both Sky & the BBC are reporting to be likely, this morning.



> The EU will not renegotiate the deal but may be willing to give greater assurances on the temporary nature of the backstop, the BBC understands.
> PM to join EU summit after surviving vote



She's weaker at home, following last night's vote, but weirdly that actually makes her stronger in further talks with the EU.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2018)

VONC needs what, 130-ish Tory MPs to vote for it? Have I got that right? Never going to work unless the Tories themselves decide to gamble again on actually winning a GE.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

mauvais said:


> VONC needs what, 130-ish Tory MPs to vote for it? Have I got that right? Never going to work unless the Tories themselves decide to gamble again on actually winning a GE.


Is a lost VoNC a definite GE, or could it just lead to a new Tory leader?


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Is a lost VoNC a definite GE, or could it just lead to a new Tory leader?


I'm thinking of it in the context of the Fixed Term Parliament Act. I'm not sure that there's any point in anything less given what happened last night.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> what happens if May loses that vote, anyone know?


The government would have lost the confidence of the HoC and unless a vote of confidence in a government is passed within 14 days of the VoNC we move to a GE - FTPA2011. So theoretically May could lose a VoNC, resign, the Tories quickly appoint someone as leader and and get a VoC passed making them PM, avoiding a GE.

(There has been some talk that the FTPA does not have to apply, that there are other routes about a VoNC but I think they are somewhat theoretical)


----------



## Winot (Dec 13, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> Labour are calling for a VONC after the deal fails because that's when the DUP have said they'll vote against May. At this point it seems quite likely to me to happen. Let's see what happens this morning though.



I think the DUP have said that they will vote for ‘no confidence’ if May’s deal goes through, but that if it is defeated they won’t, because their concern is the backstop. If the backstop goes, they are content.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 13, 2018)

John McDonnell, on Sky just now, making excuses why Labour is not calling for a VoNC today, saying it's not about party political advantages, it's about what's best for the country.

He could just be honest, and say that they haven't got the numbers, nor will they unless the current deal goes through, which is not going to happen, and that's why my gut feeling is the EU will end-up giving some sort of 'clarification' over the nature of the backstop. 

But, it's only a gut feeling, anything could still fucking happen.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2018)

Oh I'd forgotten about the FTPA two thirds provisions and the VONC provision being different things, so I was wrong. What are the required numbers then?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 13, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Oh I'd forgotten about the FTPA two thirds provisions and the VONC provision being different things, so I was wrong. What are the required numbers then?


For VoNC? Simply majority of those that vote I believe (so, again theoretically, some Tory MPs could abstain rather than vote for the VoNC)


----------



## Plumdaff (Dec 13, 2018)

Winot said:


> I think the DUP have said that they will vote for ‘no confidence’ if May’s deal goes through, but that if it is defeated they won’t, because their concern is the backstop. If the backstop goes, they are content.



I don't think there's any way that the backstop goes.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

There doesn't seem to be any way of the backstop going. To the point where something that has seemed unthinkable - the DUP voting to bring down a Tory government with Corbyn in the wings - becomes an actual possibility. A probability even.


----------



## Winot (Dec 13, 2018)

Plumdaff said:


> I don't think there's any way that the backstop goes.



Certainly as far as the EU is concerned. Who knows what delusions Parliament will tell themselves.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 13, 2018)

Don't forget that the Lib Dems will probably miss the bus or get collectively locked in a toilet or something and thus not fulfil their promises.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

And people wonder why it took so long to "fix" NI?
The DUP
They're the biggest wankers in history. They'll fuck up Brexit for everyone and walk away smirking. 
Arlene Foster.....fuck off ya smug witch. Representing NI? Nooooo...representing nutjobs.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

The DUP are maniacs, but I'm not sure it's wise to dismiss a third of the electorate of Northern Ireland as 'nutjobs'


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

it is wise to dismiss a third of the british electorate as nutjobs though. on whatever side and for whatever party.

#woke.


----------



## paolo (Dec 13, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Don't forget that the Lib Dems will probably miss the bus or get collectively locked in a toilet or something and thus not fulfil their promises.



Minibus?

There was a time when I could, on a standard driving license, legally drive their entire parliamentary party around in a single vehicle.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

The problem with brinkmanship is that it helps no one regarding the border issue if the UK leaves with no deal.  If there is no deal, Barnier as well as May should be recognised as also having failed utterly at his job.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 13, 2018)

Would my brain hurt if I actually had a go at understanding the "backstop" ?
Is it a bit like quantum physics or religion ?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> The DUP are maniacs, but I'm not sure it's wise to dismiss a third of the electorate of Northern Ireland as 'nutjobs'



Not exactly what I said... 
Hardline unionists are a different breed to the rest of the unionists. 
I've a lot of respect for those unionists who are working to build bridges and forge relationships between nationalists and unionists but don't for one minute think that Arlene Foster is one of those. She is hardline...no compromise....hates nationalists and republicans and I'd go so far as to say that she will do anything to keep hardline unionists on side. ...including fucking up NI...for everyone. 
She is a disaster. ...And does not represent the people of NI at all because she doesn't recognise half of them.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 13, 2018)

paolo said:


> Minibus?
> 
> There was a time when I could, on a standard driving license, legally drive their entire parliamentary party around in a single vehicle.



You drive them about and I’ll come and shout Bus Wankers at them!


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think it is a very real possibility and the only true Brexit.
> 
> May has survived the no confidence vote as the alternatives are too awful to stomach for Tory MPs.
> 
> ...



What is this apart from sloganeering? you make me want to side with the nationalist remainer twats.  the alternatives are not too awful for the tories to stomach, it's only that the tory right played their hand extremely badly this time. Otherwise in the long term they have no problem with a split. Why would they? the tory party doesn't have anything like the social base it had in the 20thC. In 5 years time they are going to become a ghost party. they are shrinking incredibly fast.

There will be no no deal. you will have to show me how it is in the interests of capital before you can make that contention, something i am not averse to entertaining. No stake in this inter-party struggle.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Would my brain hurt if I actually had a go at understanding the "backstop" ?
> Is it a bit like quantum physics or religion ?


What are you struggling to understand about it?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Not exactly what I said...
> Hardline unionists are a different breed to the rest of the unionists.
> I've a lot of respect for those unionists who are working to build bridges and forge relationships between nationalists and unionists but don't for one minute think that Arlene Foster is one of those. She is hardline...no compromise....hates nationalists and republicans and I'd go so far as to say that she will do anything to keep hardline unionists on side. ...including fucking up NI...for everyone.
> She is a disaster. ...And does not represent the people of NI at all because she doesn't recognise half of them.


A third of the NI electorate voted for the DUP though. They are, literally, representing them. You said: 


Lupa said:


> Representing NI? Nooooo...representing nutjobs.


I agree with your assessment of the DUP themselves, fine. But how does making sweeping generalisations like this about the people they represent help to build bridges and forge relationships between nationalists and unionists, like those unionists you have respect for?


----------



## moochedit (Dec 13, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Would my brain hurt if I actually had a go at understanding the "backstop" ?
> Is it a bit like quantum physics or religion ?



What ! .. you mean you don't know what the back stop is? *pfft!* common EVERYONE knows that!


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> A third of the NI electorate voted for the DUP though. They are, literally, representing them. You said:
> 
> I agree with your assessment of the DUP themselves, fine. But how does making sweeping generalisations like this about the people they represent help to build bridges and forge relationships between nationalists and unionists, like those unionists you have respect for?


Doesn't voting for hate-filled politicians make one a bit of a nutjob by default?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Doesn't voting for hate-filled politicians make one  bit of a nutjob by default?


The great question of the age isn't it? I'd say no. And even if it did, you'd want people to change their minds and row back from their nutjobism, so calling them nutjobs is poor strategy.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Doesn't voting for hate-filled politicians make one a bit of a nutjob by default?



The class enemy hates us either way. who cares if they are hate filled or not. it is inevitable. the borg demands it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Doesn't voting for hate-filled politicians make one a bit of a nutjob by default?


corrected for you


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 13, 2018)

dialectician said:


> What is this apart from sloganeering? you make me want to side with the nationalist remainer twats.  the alternatives are not too awful for the tories to stomach, it's only that the tory right played their hand extremely badly this time.



The majority of Tory MPs are remainers. If May was booted out last night it would be Davis or Johnson replacing her.  That was too awful for the majority of Tory MPs to stomach.



> the tory party doesn't have anything like the social base it had in the 20thC. In 5 years time they are going to become a ghost party. they are shrinking incredibly fast.



Bet you £500 that you are wrong on this.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> A third of the NI electorate voted for the DUP though. They are, literally, representing them. You said:
> 
> I agree with your assessment of the DUP themselves, fine. But how does making sweeping generalisations like this about the people they represent help to build bridges and forge relationships between nationalists and unionists, like those unionists you have respect for?




The current leadership of the DUP is representing only hardliners. 
It is in no way the same party or even close to the DUP that worked for peace in NI...the party that finally saw that compromise is the only way forward. The current DUP leadership is leading to entrenchment and quite frankly they are the reason the NIA has not sat/worked for months on end. Arlene is a disaster....for everyone. Short sighted foolishness....


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Yeah supposedly the Labour plan has been to call a VoNC once the deal fails to pass...I guess maybe these new circumstances of a wounded May might bring that forward? If so now is the time.
> 
> But lets presume that is still the plan, to wait till the arrangement gets voted down, I wonder if May planning a referendum post the HoC failing to pass her agreement might mean Labour shelves the VoNC and just sticks with the referendum.
> 
> ...



May is dead dead set against a 2nd ref. I think she would resign before calling it. I think if it happens - or a50 being cancelled - it will be the result of parliament as a whole calling it in the face of no other alterantive other than crashing out.
The tories will split over it - with the ERG mob pushing for no deal crashing out - but they would have maybe 60 votes (which means they can take a "principled stand" without having to actually live with the consequences). Maybe they will form their own party.
To get to such a stage would be an admission that mays entire brexit process has been an abject failure. Conf vote aside - if she did try and stay on, her own cabinet would force her out.
Labour has probably done the right thing in not coming out for remain - it means that the "brexit betrayed" badge goes to the tories.
This is all very "fuck knows whats going to happen" but - I can def see government collapsing -  and a general election in April/May - probably with the tories losing votes to whatever electoral form the brexit spectre takes.
Personally i think a 2nd ref is a bad idea - parliament should fess up and say "1rst ref was a huge mistake, we utterly fucked it up, a 2nd ref would make matters worse" - (labour can try and  dump most of that on the tories).


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> The current leadership of the DUP is representing only hardliners.
> It is in no way the same party or even close to the DUP that worked for peace in NI...the party that finally saw that compromise is the only way forward. The current DUP leadership is leading to entrenchment and quite frankly they are the reason the NIA has not sat/worked for months on end. Arlene is a disaster....for everyone. Short sighted foolishness....


But the current party is the party 36% of the voters of Northern Ireland voted for last year?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> May is dead dead set against a 2nd ref.


She's also dead set against suspending A50 and a No Deal though! Those are her 3 options by your reckoning. Something has to give.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The majority of Tory MPs are remainers. If May was booted out last night it would be Davis or Johnson replacing her.  That was too awful for the majority of Tory MPs to stomach.



Why? more likely a vonc in the govt would be triggered before the leadership election could amount to anything. at the best of times it's a long, drawn out 12 week process. a50 would be revoked either way. Anyway you contradict what you just said. noone's arguing that the ERG wing of the party is a najority. I'm just saying that a split would not be against their long term interests, at least let May bollix it up a bit more. In this sense yer proletarian hero JRM is totally on the side of remain.



Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Bet you £500 that you are wrong on this.



You can do that but betting is unscientific and haraam.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> She's also dead set against suspending A50 and a No Deal though! Those are her 3 options by your reckoning. Something has to give.



A50 will be revoked or a sham govt will topple Corbyn. Outwitted by Sir Vincent Cable of all people. what a time to be alive.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> But the current party is the party 36% of the voters of Northern Ireland voted for last year?



And?

She is not representing the majority of people in NI.
Do you see that?
She isn't even representing the 36% who voted DUP. She is way Too hardline even for many of them.
Previous DUP leaders were prepared to work with others and govern NI as a whole. She is not. She is too partisan

I mean...if Paisley was able to move towards peace and powersharing...and Robinson was able to govern with Sinn Fein.....you've got to ask the question...wtf is wrong with Arlene Foster?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> And?
> 
> She is not representing the majority of people in NI.
> Do you see that?
> ...


Obviously the DUP don't represent the majority of people in NI. They represent - in parliament at least - 36% of adults who voted in the 2017 UK general election. That's in the post you quoted. 

I don't really understand what your issue is here - I was just making a point about it being poor politics to talk about the people a politician or party represents as nutjobs. I've no interest in an argument about how debased the DUP themselves actually are - I know they're bastards.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> She's also dead set against suspending A50 and a No Deal though! Those are her 3 options by your reckoning. Something has to give.



What gives is May - She will resign. She would have to.  Again its all a bit "fuck knows" - she might go and say - "i tried my best - now in this time of national crises its time a for parliament as a whole (i.e. a national government) to take over" (thus sharing the blame). nat gov moves to  or 2nd ref or revoke A50 - or negotiate a suspension so they can try and get a "norway" deal.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Obviously the DUP don't represent the majority of people in NI. They represent - in parliament at least - 36% of adults who voted in the 2017 UK general election. That's in the post you quoted.
> 
> I don't really understand what your issue is here - I was just making a point about it being poor politics to talk about the people a politician or party represents as nutjobs. I've no interest in an argument about how debased the DUP themselves actually are - I know they're bastards.




No..the current DUP are not representing all of those who voted for them. They are only representing hardliners. That's my point. Not all supporters are hardline but those who aren't are not listened to...And the hardliners are shouting loudest ...that's my point.

And Arlene Foster and Dodds are inherently anti Catholic and anti nationalist to the extent that the DUP lost support in the last NI elections. With them losing something like 10 seats in the NIA and Sinn Fein only one seat behind them now...but they still refuse to powershare and work with them..
The current DUP and their leadership have really messed up in NI. And they are only about objecting and fighting...and refuse to take responsibility and actually do the fucking job they were initially elected to do. 
Even Protestants in NI are sick to the teeth of them at this stage. 
... it's horrendous to think  how people can fuck up peace so easily with their arrogance.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Do we have a different understanding of what the word 'represent' means?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> What gives is May - She will resign. She would have to.  Again its all a bit "fuck knows" - she might go and say - "i tried my best - now in this time of national crises its time a for parliament as a whole (i.e. a national government) to take over" (thus sharing the blame). nat gov moves to  or 2nd ref or revoke A50 - or negotiate a suspension so they can try and get a "norway" deal.


Yeah, just about the only thing I can confidently predict is that May will resign. She is tied to her deal now. She's tied herself to her deal - it goes down, she goes down. And she knows it, hence putting off the vote in parliament. But equally, it seems clear that she won't resign until she absolutely has to, so it will take a vote in parliament rejecting her deal to get rid of her.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Do we have a different understanding of what the word 'represent' means?



This is bigger than the people she represents. 
Once she took over (or didn't and just took the money without doing her job) she stopped representing those who elected her. 
She is supposed to be working in a power *sharing* executive. She isn't. She is a disaster and probably the worst thing to happen to NI in years. She was anti the GFA in the late 90s. She is not interested in power sharing or working for all of NI. She is only interested in a return to the past.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Why do you keep telling me how terrible the DUP are? I know.

The people they represent - 36% of the irish electorate - voted for them either because of or despite their terribleness. They represent these people, politically, in the UK parliament. And I think calling these people 'nutjobs' - as you did in the post I originally replied to - is bad politics. That's the only point I wanted to make.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Why do you keep telling me how terrible the DUP are? I know.
> 
> The people they represent - 36% of the irish electorate - voted for them either because of or despite their terribleness. They represent these people, politically, in the UK parliament. And I think calling these people 'nutjobs' - as you did in the post I originally replied to - is bad politics. That's the only point I wanted to make.


northern irish electorate. and 23.5% of the northern irish electorate, there was a turnout of 65.4%


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Argh. I anticipated your pedantry in my previous post, but slipped up this time. I'll try to be more thorough in future.


killer b said:


> 36% of adults who voted in the 2017 UK general election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Argh. I anticipated your pedantry in my previous post, but slipped up this time. I'll try to be more thorough in future.


tbh the more important point was your omission of 'northern' in front of 'irish'.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh the more important point was your omission of 'northern' in front of 'irish'.



Norn. Surely?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

quite right. my deepest apologies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Norn. Surely?


or a variation thereof


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

You know what, I think that the current shambles are so fucking stupid they'd sleepwalk into a no deal situation and be too fucking proud to do an about turn. 

This whole sorry mess is a story of British hubris from start to finish.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

I dunno if the cleverest of minds could unpick this tbf. The numbers inside and outside parliament just don't stack up for any solution, and whichever faction blinks first is taking a massive political hit.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> You know what, I think that the current shambles are so fucking stupid they'd sleepwalk into a no deal situation and be too fucking proud to do an about turn.
> 
> This whole sorry mess is a story of British hubris from start to finish.



Yes, a British tradition and one parliament will no doubt be proud of!


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> I dunno if the cleverest of minds could unpick this tbf. The numbers inside and outside parliament just don't stack up for any solution, and whichever faction blinks first is taking a massive political hit.



See, that's the point about hubris. This is not about being "brilliant" or a "genius" or whatever these cunts imagine themselves to be because this wasn't a ever a decision made in thought, rather one of the heart or a machivellien power grab. 

It's about having a fucking spine.

Neither the govt, ruling party, nor the opposition seem to have one.

They're got plenty of pride though.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

If the entire parliament collectively found their fucking spines, then we wouldn't have need to worry about a political end game, cuz everyone would be calling bullshit from the same hymn sheet.

That's never gonna happen tho. Hense the sleepwalking into no deal.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> If the entire parliament collectively found their fucking spines,



What would they do and how would they solve this problem?


----------



## Crispy (Dec 13, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Would my brain hurt if I actually had a go at understanding the "backstop" ?
> Is it a bit like quantum physics or religion ?


Currently, goods, people and services cross the NI/RoI border seamlessly.
This open border is one of the key parts of the Good Friday Agreement.
After Brexit Day, the future trade negotiations begin.
The nature of the Irish border will be part of those negotiations.
In case those negotiations break down, a "plan B" must be ready, and legally enforceable, to maintain that open border.
This "backstop" is part of the Withdrawl Agreement, and it effectively keeps NI in the customs unions and subject to many EU laws, *indefinitely.*
Brexiteers don't like this because it's Not Full Brexit.
The DUP don't like this because it's Not A United Kingdom.
The EU sees it as a fundamental part of the Withdrawl Agreement and will not budge.

Stalemate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What would they do and how would they solve this problem?


maybe reading the whole sentence might help:


FabricLiveBaby! said:


> If the entire parliament collectively found their fucking spines, then we wouldn't have need to worry about a political end game, cuz everyone would be calling bullshit from the same hymn sheet.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What would they do and how would they solve this problem?



The problem of spinelessness? 

I'm afraid it's a terrible prognosis. Incurable.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What would they do and how would they solve this problem?



There is no problem to solve. business as usual.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 13, 2018)

Been reports of former brexit-ultras softening and moving towards may after the vote yesterday, inc. the charming Nigel Evans. Won't bother linking, it's just the usual feverish reporting. Same time, there is a likely direction of travel there: May strengthens her position in the party (just); former soft opponents of her deal persuade themselves that the whole show is moving towards Deal; May gets some warm words on the backstop (but not much more) from the euro bods; drags on till January and everybody feels the choice really becomes deal or no deal >>>> squeaks through.

That's all a scenario, a wheel falls off even if a dozen erg-ultras remain opposed. Suspect this comes down to whether she's able to get the dup back on board after her frantic non-negotiations in Europe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Been reports of former brexit-ultras softening and moving towards may after the vote yesterday, inc. the charming Nigel Evans. Won't bother linking, it's just the usual feverish reporting. Same time, there is a likely direction of travel there: May strengthens her position in the party (just); former soft opponents of her deal persuade themselves that the whole show is moving towards Deal; May gets some warm words on the backstop (but not much more) from the euro bods; drags on till January and everybody feels the choice really becomes deal or no deal >>>> squeaks through.
> 
> That's all a scenario, a wheel falls off even if a dozen erg-ultras remain opposed. Suspect this comes down to whether she's able to get the dup back on board after her frantic non-negotiations in Europe.








the wheels have already come off


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> See, that's the point about hubris. This is not about being "brilliant" or a "genius" or whatever these cunts imagine themselves to be because this wasn't a ever a decision made in thought, rather one of the heart or a machivellien power grab.
> 
> It's about having a fucking spine.
> 
> ...


what do you think they should do?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 13, 2018)

I'm not sure where a January vote puts those complicated outcome diagrams? Presumably, short of an article 50 suspension, the second referendum idea disappears (no time). And so, given that they won't remain without a referendum, it's looking like original deal + soapy warm words Vs No Deal Brexit. That logic - theoretically - takes us to parliament having little choice other than voting it through (not in itself a guarantee that they _will_, but a lack of alternatives if they _don't_). However there's always a chance that one or both sides will completely reinvent process and even timescales. Who knows.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> You know what, I think that the current shambles are so fucking stupid they'd sleepwalk into a no deal situation and be too fucking proud to do an about turn.
> 
> This whole sorry mess is a story of British hubris from start to finish.


hubris first, under cameron, nemesis now, under may


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

this is Ed Miliband's Christmas card btw.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> what do you think they should do?



1) May putting her deal to parliament would be a start.

2) Honestly debate about whether a better deal is possible to get through parliament

Likelyhood is any deal will be rejected in parliament. 

3) a - people's vote on deal, no deal or remain
3) b - parliamentary vote on no deal and leave or remain.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> this is Ed Miliband's Christmas card btw.



Where’s mine Ed, oh I forgot I walked away didn’t I?
In his defence, he’s a lovely bloke.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

Also bare in mind that EU parliament is also has to vote through any deal. I find it highly unlikely any deal would get through both UK. But the whole thing will only be resolved when pride is put aside.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> If the entire parliament collectively found their fucking spines, then we wouldn't have need to worry about a political end game, cuz everyone would be calling bullshit from the same hymn sheet.
> 
> That's never gonna happen tho. Hense the sleepwalking into no deal.


Tempting though it is to explain the current position as being the result of all the MPs just being spineless, it's really not as simple as that. 

The issue is more that they, collectively, cannot currently find a majority for ANY positive course of action around leaving the EU, and it's difficult to see how that might change. 

(Which isn't to disagree with the general point that they are all a bunch of spineless twats,  of course)


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Currently, goods, people and services cross the NI/RoI border seamlessly.
> This open border is one of the key parts of the Good Friday Agreement.
> After Brexit Day, the future trade negotiations begin.
> The nature of the Irish border will be part of those negotiations.
> ...



What I'm a bit unclear about is what it means for the rest of the UK: if there's not to be a customs 'border' in the Irish sea then does it mean the whole UK is in the customs union indefinitely? Or is the idea just to quietly drop the commitment to no borders in the Irish Sea?


----------



## Crispy (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> does it mean the whole UK is in the customs union indefinitely? Or is the idea just to quietly drop the commitment to no borders in the Irish Sea?


Those are the options that currently present themselves.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> What I'm a bit unclear about is what it means for the rest of the UK: if there's not to be a customs 'border' in the Irish sea then does it mean the whole UK is in the customs union indefinitely? Or is the idea just to quietly drop the commitment to no borders in the Irish Sea?


This is what exercises the DUP so much. Evidently didn't think of that when they jumped in to support brexit. wtf did they think would happen? The idea of being on the same side as Sinn Fein in _anything_ was clearly too much to bear.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> 1) May putting her deal to parliament would be a start.
> 
> 2) Honestly debate about whether a better deal is possible to get through parliament
> 
> ...


Well... you're right the current deal isn't going to pass parliament. nor is any other iteration of deal or no deal, so your option 4 is out too. 

So some chat in parliament and a second referendum should clear everything up. OK.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Well... you're right the current deal isn't going to pass parliament. nor is any other iteration of deal or no deal, so your option 4 is out too.
> 
> So some chat in parliament and a second referendum should clear everything up. OK.


If Parliament had to vote for an option, on same terms as the public, ie whatever gets most votes happens, then one of those options would pass!


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> If Parliament had to vote for an option, on same terms as the public, ie whatever gets most votes happens, then one of those options would pass!


The problem here - as I think Crispy raised the other day - is that parliamentary bills don't work like that. A bill either passes or doesn't. And no bill for any likely form of brexit will currently pass.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Solutions which appear simple usually aren't that simple. or solutions.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> The problem here - as I think Crispy raised the other day - is that parliamentary bills don't work like that. A bill either passes or doesn't. And no bill for any likely form of brexit will currently pass.


oh yeah i know, but IF they did....its how FabricBaby phrased it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> So here''s my take on where we are:
> 
> -The ERG and the No Deal Brexit Tory crew are fucked. They've played their hand, weakened May but not killed her, they're not getting the Brexit they want and they're not leading the Tory Party. They never were that powerful really.
> 
> ...



Following on from last nights late night ramblings Nicky Morgan has had some interesting things to say of late: 

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/bre...nt-of-national-unity-and-whos-calling-for-it/


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> If the entire parliament collectively found their fucking spines, then we wouldn't have need to worry about a political end game, cuz everyone would be calling bullshit from the same hymn sheet.
> 
> That's never gonna happen tho. Hense the sleepwalking into no deal.



Ironically, I think that's preciely what will happen, although why you think that would be something to celebrate I don't know.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

ska invita said:


> oh yeah i know, but IF they did....its how FabricBaby phrased it


Maybe someone should start a 'fantasy Brexit scenarios' thread  so we can attempt to remain focused on reality on this one


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure where a January vote puts those complicated outcome diagrams? Presumably, short of an article 50 suspension, the second referendum idea disappears (no time). And so, given that they won't remain without a referendum, it's looking like original deal + soapy warm words Vs No Deal Brexit. That logic - theoretically - takes us to parliament having little choice other than voting it through (not in itself a guarantee that they _will_, but a lack of alternatives if they _don't_). However there's always a chance that one or both sides will completely reinvent process and even timescales. Who knows.



You misunderstand the ambition of the ruling class comrade! They want to cancel Brexit not just minimise it.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ironically, I think that's preciely what will happen, although why you think that would be something to celebrate I don't know.


It won't be - whatever the feelings are in parliament, there's close to 50% of the country are more or less full on brexit ultras. The Tories would be utterly crushed and Labour hugely damaged if they 'called bullshit'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> Maybe someone should start a 'fantasy Brexit scenarios' thread  so we can attempt to remain focused on reality on this one


fantasy brexit, like fantasy football, where you have to pick your cabinet only instead of avoiding players from the same club you avoid politicians from the same school


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is what exercises the DUP so much. Evidently didn't think of that when they jumped in to support brexit. wtf did they think would happen? The idea of being on the same side as Sinn Fein in _anything_ was clearly too much to bear.


The DUP would be quite happy to have a border back.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> It won't be - whatever the feelings are in parliament, there's close to 50% of the country are more or less full on brexit ultras. The Tories would be utterly crushed and Labour hugely damaged if they 'called bullshit'.


And if they call bullshit jointly? A bill is presented to parliament to rescind A50 and it passes with cross-party support. Who is damaged more by that? Because in a way it's the comparative damage that matters electorally, no? Tories very very damaged versus Labour just very damaged leaves Labour ahead by one degree of 'very'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> The DUP would be quite happy to have a border back.


Yes I know. But they surely realised that wasn't going to happen. Or maybe they didn't. They're hard to fathom at times.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> It won't be - whatever the feelings are in parliament, there's close to 50% of the country are more or less full on brexit ultras. The Tories would be utterly crushed and Labour hugely damaged if they 'called bullshit'.



I'm not saying there won't be anger. But if May resigns in February, and a new govt comes to power, what are they gonna do? May's Deal? No Deal? Not viable. They will choose No Brexit and they will say sorry May fucked it up we had to do this in the national interest. 

In the article I linked to above both Soubry and Nicky Morgan made it perfectly clear they don't give a fuck about the unity of the Tory Party and they are speaking on behalf of other Remain Tories who are staying quiet for now. As for how interested many Labour MP's are in the unity of the Labour Party, well, I think we've done that to death over the last 3 and a half years.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And if they call bullshit jointly? A bill is presented to parliament to rescind A50 and it passes with cross-party support. Who is damaged more by that? Because in a way it's the comparative damage that matters electorally, no? Tories very very damaged versus Labour just very damaged leaves Labour ahead by one degree of 'very'.



I love how right at the end of this process me and LBJ are suddenly agreeing so much 

He's absolutely right. It's the brand that gets damaged relative to the other brand.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> fantasy brexit, like fantasy football, where you have to pick your cabinet only instead of avoiding players from the same club you avoid politicians from the same school



Imagine if you had Johnson as Captain this game week. You'd be disappointed with his points haul!


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Where's that fantasy brexit thread again?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

nod along all you like to things that aren't going to happen lads.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> nod along all you like to things that aren't going to happen lads.



If you don't agree fair enough. But can you tell me something more likely?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Some form of norway-ish brexit pushed through by whoever is in power next year, probably after extending A50 is my best guess.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

it's a peep over the cliff of no deal followed by remain


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 13, 2018)

May's deal gets the boot, she resigns, whoever takes over looks over the cliff then pulls A50/gets a lengthy extension from the EU "in the national interest", the can gets kicked further down the road, meanwhile a convenient war somewhere lets everyone look the other way.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You misunderstand the ambition of the ruling class comrade! They want to cancel Brexit not just minimise it.


We seem to be at a point where we've shifted from political economy to a ball zipping round a pinball table. For about the full 2 years after the brexit vote you could see state theory in operation, with different bits of capital publicly and privately playing the great game over brexit. We now seem to be in a situation where events, timescales and crude politico-self interest has taken over. The multinationals, manufacturers and banks must still be wittering on, but the government is distracted, doing it's multi-level okey cokey, rats in a sack, prisoners dilemma.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Here's my reasoning fwiw - the chart below is from the yougov MRP poll (20,000 people responded so it should be reliable in it's findings). It's asking about May's deal, but I think the figures would be pretty similar for most other forms of negotiated soft brexit.

While the population is more or less 50/50 split over remain/leave, the leavers will support leave by whatever method: deal if that's what there is, or no deal if necessary. 

A substantial number of remainers would go for the deal though, if it were a choice between deal or no deal. 

The weak point is the remainers, a substantial number of whom will do whatever is necessary to avoid no deal - so in the end, that's the way the deadlock will break. Because no-one else is budging.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

Interesting development following previous posts addressing the issue of whether the Irish govt were attempting to tell the UK govt and people that they couldn't have Brexit.

*Irish premier wants 'enduring assurance'*


> Leo Varadkar, the Irish premier (taoiseach), said he expects Theresa May's assurances on the backstop to be honoured. "What we want is an enduring assurance that there will not be a hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, no matter what the circumstances. That is an assurance the UK government gave us over a year ago. The withdrawal agreement puts that into law and now we would like to see that agreement ratified."





> He suggested Britain could lift the threat of a no-deal Brexit *by suspending, or ending, the Article 50 withdrawal process*. "It is absolutely within the gift of the United Kingdom to take no deal off the table if they wish to," he added.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> Interesting development following previous posts addressing the issue of whether the Irish govt were attempting to tell the UK govt and people that they couldn't have Brexit.
> 
> *Irish premier wants 'enduring assurance'*


What point are you trying to make here? The Irish pm's primary concern is to remove any risk of a hard border appearing on the island of Ireland. That's a very fundamental thing. Let's be very clear about this, given the history of Ireland, the imposition of a hard border across it by the UK would be an act of imperialism. So yes, why not tell an ex-imperialist power that used to rule the whole of Ireland and has clung on to one gerrymandered corner of it that they can't do that?


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

Crispy said:


> Currently, goods, people and services cross the NI/RoI border seamlessly.
> This open border is one of the key parts of the Good Friday Agreement.
> After Brexit Day, the future trade negotiations begin.
> The nature of the Irish border will be part of those negotiations.
> ...


Stalemate except for the fact that in the absence of a deal, it’s not the Brexiteers and DUP that don’t get their way, it’s the EU.  That’s what I don’t understand about the EU’s intransigence — for a body that is supposedly prioritising the needs of the Irish citizens above all else, they are fucking cavalier about the fact the hardest border of all is about to be erected as a default option in the absence of a deal.  It’s almost like they don’t actually give a fuck about Irish residents after all.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What point are you trying to make here? The Irish pm's primary concern is to remove any risk of a hard border appearing on the island of Ireland. That's a very fundamental thing. Let's be very clear about this, given the history of Ireland, the imposition of a hard border across it by the UK would be an act of imperialism. So yes, why not tell an ex-imperialist power that used to rule the whole of Ireland and has clung on to one gerrymandered corner of it that they can't do that?


It’s quite a stretch to say that the hard border across it will be imposed by the UK.  The UK clearly has no desire to do any such thing.  If anybody is imposing the border, it is international trade bodies such as the WTO and, specifically, the EU.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What point are you trying to make here? The Irish pm's primary concern is to remove any risk of a hard border appearing on the island of Ireland. That's a very fundamental thing. Let's be very clear about this, given the history of Ireland, the imposition of a hard border across it by the UK would be an act of imperialism. So yes, why not tell an ex-imperialist power that used to rule the whole of Ireland and has clung on to one gerrymandered corner of it that they can't do that?



If the reporting is correct, he's not just saying that (which I have no problem with), he's suggesting that the UK govt should lift the threat of a no-deal Brexit *by suspending, or ending, the Article 50 withdrawal process.
*
In other words, it is the govt of one nation attempting to tell the govt of another how it should conduct its affairs. When this was discussed recently by (I think) kabbes and Lupa, I don't think it had been said quite so explicitly, but it certainly seems to be pretty explicit now...


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> If the reporting is correct, he's not just saying that (which I have no problem with), he's suggesting that the UK govt should lift the threat of a no-deal Brexit *by suspending, or ending, the Article 50 withdrawal process.
> *
> In other words, it is the govt of one nation attempting to tell the govt of another how it should conduct its affairs. When this was discussed recently by (I think) kabbes and Lupa, I don't think it had been said quite so explicitly, but it certainly seems to be pretty explicit now...


And at a personal, visceral level, it is exactly this kind of belief on the behalf of the EU and EU nations that they have the right to tell another sovereign state what they should (or even must) do that has pushed me from remain to leave.  My impulse is, “fuck you, I won’t do what you tell me”.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Re: Ireland, this article I read this morning in the Irish indie is relevant (and interesting). Dunno how prevelent this view is over there tho. 

Dan O'Brien: 'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent' - Independent.ie


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

And yes, I am aware of the irony of a UK citizen (ie me) getting bent out of shape at the idea of being told what to do by another country given the inglorious history of the UK’s meddling in the affairs of other nations.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Re: Ireland, this article I read this morning in the Irish indie is relevant (and interesting). Dunno how prevelent this view is over there tho.
> 
> Dan O'Brien: 'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent' - Independent.ie


A good article.  We have a tendency to just concentrate on our own failures of negotiation, but the kick in the balls swings from both feet.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> the kick in the balls swings from both feet.


Trying to work out how this works.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

In other news

*Meaningful vote in January, says Number 10*


> MPs will not be asked to vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal before the end of this year, Downing Street has said. A Number 10 spokeswoman told reporters: "The 'meaningful vote' will not be brought to Parliament before Christmas." The spokeswoman said the vote - which was scheduled for Tuesday this week but postponed by the prime minister after she accepted she would lose heavily - will come "as soon as possible in January". The government has committed to holding it before 21 January.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Trying to work out how this works.


It involves tripping up and falling flat on your face.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Some form of norway-ish brexit pushed through by whoever is in power next year, probably after extending A50 is my best guess.



Exactly, I agree, but the easiest way to get that is a cross party govt no?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> Here's my reasoning fwiw - the chart below is from the yougov MRP poll (20,000 people responded so it should be reliable in it's findings). It's asking about May's deal, but I think the figures would be pretty similar for most other forms of negotiated soft brexit.
> 
> While the population is more or less 50/50 split over remain/leave, the leavers will support leave by whatever method: deal if that's what there is, or no deal if necessary.
> 
> ...


Think this is a slightly faulty reading of the data, because it is based on participants being asked to rank the options. But we're very unlikely to get that model of referendum. The same YouGov survey also did binary choices, in which case remain wins with a reasonable margin against the deal.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Raheem said:


> =
> 
> Think this is a slightly faulty reading of the data, because it is based on participants being asked to rank the options. But we're very unlikely to get that model of referendum.


I'm not suggesting a referendum is likely. I don't think it will be. It is a guide to how flexible the support for each options is, is all - and all the flexibility is among the remainers.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Exactly, I agree, but the easiest way to get that is a cross party govt no?


there will not be a cross party government of national unity though. That I'm absolutely certain of.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> there will not be a cross party government of national unity though. That I'm absolutely certain of.



Why are you so certain? 

It would be easier, wouldn't it? Labour can't rescind A50. The Tories can't rescind A50. If either party did the other would win the election.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not suggesting a referendum is likely. I don't think it will be. It is a guide to how flexible the support for each options is, is all - and all the flexibility is among the remainers.


No, what is being shown by the data is not flexibility. The remainers are not opting for the deal as a compromise. Both they and the leavers are picking the deal as a second option, allowing it to possibly sneak through the middle in a condorcet vote.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why are you so certain?
> 
> It would be easier, wouldn't it? Labour can't rescind A50. The Tories can't rescind A50. If either party did the other would win the election.


because politics.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> because politics.



That's not your most detailed answer comrade!


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's not your most detailed answer comrade!


None of the parties have enough MPs who would torpedo their own political careers to form a national government. I'd be surprised if you could even scrape together double figures, let alone enough for a majority.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Raheem said:


> No, what is being shown by the data is not flexibility. The remainers are not opting for the deal as a compromise. Both they and the leavers are picking the deal as a second option, allowing it to possibly sneak through the middle in a condorcet vote.


Ah, ok. that's a fair point.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> None of the parties have enough MPs who would torpedo their own political careers to form a national government. I'd be surprised if you could even scrape together double figures, let alone enough for a majority.



I don't think they will see it as torpedoing their own careers.

Remember the euphoria from the liberal media over Macron? Makes no difference to him now of course. The euphoria from the media over a Government in the _National Interest, _cancelling Brexit - they'll love that. It'll hold together for long enough, and after that they're all disposable, just like May.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

the _liberal media_ is the guardian. I don't think anyone gives a shit what they think.


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

what media have you been reading where you think a crossparty government cancelling brexit will be greeted with euphoria and not calls for insurrection?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s what I don’t understand about the EU’s intransigence — for a body that is supposedly prioritising the needs of the Irish citizens above all else



To be fair its not just needs but LIVES.

What with the awful (and very recent) Irish - English history, I'd be doing the same.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s quite a stretch to say that the hard border across it will be imposed by the UK. * The UK clearly has no desire to do any such thing*.  If anybody is imposing the border, it is international trade bodies such as the WTO and, specifically, the EU.



Is it that clear? The UK voted for brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Is it that clear? The UK voted for brexit.


Yes.  Well spotted.  They voted for Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It’s quite a stretch to say that the hard border across it will be imposed by the UK.  The UK clearly has no desire to do any such thing.  If anybody is imposing the border, it is international trade bodies such as the WTO and, specifically, the EU.


I don't think it is. The UK is proposing unilaterally withdrawing from the customs union. The UK and Ireland joined the EU together. That wasn't a coincidence. Were the ROI not entitled to some kind of a say over whether Northern Ireland stays in that union or leaves, after all the grief that has been through to reach the point we're at now? I'd argue that they're way more more involved and more entitled to an opinion over that than Great Britain, yet there it is, these things are being imposed on NI and ROI. Thing is May has as good as conceded this point - yes they are entitled to a say, and through the EU, a final say at that. This should have been made clear on day 1 of the referendum campaigns as a parameter that any UK govt would have to work within.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

Ireland is entitled to ensure that lives remain peaceful and that people in our country can move freely as they have done under the GFA. We are allowed to have peace. We waited long enough for it. And thats not an emotive point...it's a realistic one.

There is a growing annoyance in the UK press, and even some posters here are showing annoyance at the Irish PM and the Irish people. Unfairly in my view. 

David Cameron fucked you over. May fucked you over. Your government lied to the people about Brexit. A vote took place that was based on those lies. Now your PM is suddenly making it all about the backstop?  Its called redirecting. It is deliberate. It's designed to take the heat off her and tge Tories and to place it on to Ireland....Don't blame Ireland for this mess.
We were happily going about our business trying to live in a peaceful way in a relatively united country.... at least in terms of peace and freedom of movement and trade.

I'm waiting for this entire mess to be blamed on the Irish.
Wait for it...And when the UK crashes out and things go to pot it will be our fault.

Eta... littlebabyjesus ...Your post above is spot on.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 13, 2018)

DUP and Labour 'hold talks on motion of no confidence against Tories' | Evolve Politics


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Don't blame Ireland for this mess.


Totally this. The Irish are fully entitled to be pissed off about this mess, which is absolutely none of their making, and to state as clearly as they like what they think needs to happen to safeguard their future. And by 'they', in this instance, I mean both the Irish people and their politicians. The GFA is not something that should be fucked with.

Little Englander complaints about the uppity Irish just reveal the ignorance of those complaining.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> the _liberal media_ is the guardian. I don't think anyone gives a shit what they think.



Fair liberal media probably not a useful phrase. But in the media generally I think they would go nuts for it and praise it enough that it lasted as long as they needed. I'm not saying there wouldn't be a huge backlash, there would, but they will see it as worthwhile collateral damage. 



killer b said:


> what media have you been reading where you think a crossparty government cancelling brexit will be greeted with euphoria and not calls for insurrection?



Ahhh cmon. The Express and the Sun will print those headlines, sure, but who else? The Daily Heil won't since its recent sharp political turn. 

There would *be* calls for insurrection but they're increasingly becoming part of daily life in the EU anyway.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> A vote took place that was based on those lies. Now your PM is suddenly making it all about the backstop?  Its called redirecting. It is deliberate. It's designed to take the heat off her and tge Tories and to place it on to Ireland....Don't blame Ireland for this mess.



Hang on! May isn't making it about the backstop. May has been desperately trying to avoid talking about the backstop for months. 

The EU has made it all about the backstop, very deliberately and skillfully. Instead of saying "You can't leave" the EU has made it all about the Irish border. And Leo Varadkar has been an enthusiastic partner in that - no doubt there will be some benefits for the Irish govt for their loyalty to the EU project. 

I take the point about people "blaming" Ireland - nobody should be doing that obviously. But we all need to be clear as well that Varadkar is making political statements here, for political reasons, and they are not motivated by any genuine fear of a hard border in Ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Totally this. The Irish are fully entitled to be pissed off about this mess, which is absolutely none of their making, and to state as clearly as they like what they think needs to happen to safeguard their future. And by 'they', in this instance, I mean both the Irish people and their politicians. The GFA is not something that should be fucked with.
> 
> Little Englander complaints about the uppity Irish just reveal the ignorance of those complaining.


I don't give a shit about safeguarding the future of politicians and it's really rather disappointing that you do


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The EU has made it all about the backstop, very deliberately and skillfully. Instead of saying "You can't leave" the EU has made it all about the Irish border. And Leo Varadkar has been an enthusiastic partner in that - no doubt there will be some benefits for the Irish govt for their loyalty to the EU project.


Can you suggest a different solution here? How do you keep the border open without a customs union on both sides of the border? I'm not saying the EU is being all virtuous here - both sides are playing their hands to the full - but the whole point is that neither May nor anybody else has come up with a solution other than a backstop-style guarantee. The bullshit about 'technological solutions' (aka 'magic') that was still being touted even a few weeks ago has disappeared from sensible discussion because it was bullshit. What else could there be? 

And if you say 'how about a united Ireland?', I'm not going to disagree except that the UK has committed to a principle by which NI remains in the UK until such a time as it votes to leave. How does the UK govt go back on that commitment? Hard to see how it could even if it wanted to, which I don't think it does.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hang on! May isn't making it about the backstop. May has been desperately trying to avoid talking about the backstop for months.
> 
> The EU has made it all about the backstop, very deliberately and skillfully. Instead of saying "You can't leave" the EU has made it all about the Irish border. And Leo Varadkar has been an enthusiastic partner in that - no doubt there will be some benefits for the Irish govt for their loyalty to the EU project.
> 
> I take the point about people "blaming" Ireland - nobody should be doing that obviously. But we all need to be clear as well that Varadkar is making political statements here, for political reasons, and they are not motivated by any genuine fear of a hard border in Ireland.




May is sucking up to the DUP and spouting on about the backstop. She was all for no hard border....until the vote that she called off.
It's now going to be all about the backstop whether you like it or not....And that's on her and the DUP


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> The EU has made it all about the backstop, very deliberately and skillfully. Instead of saying "You can't leave" the EU has made it all about the Irish border. And Leo Varadkar has been an enthusiastic partner in that - no doubt there will be some benefits for the Irish govt for their loyalty to the EU project.


I think you have this the wrong way round. Ireland want the backstop, not the EU, and they have a veto on any trade deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can you suggest a different solution here? How do you keep the border open without a customs union on both sides of the border? I'm not saying the EU is being all virtuous here - both sides are playing their hands to the full - but the whole point is that neither May nor anybody else has come up with a solution other than a backstop-style guarantee. The bullshit about 'technological solutions' (aka 'magic') that was still being touted even a few weeks ago has disappeared from sensible discussion because it was bullshit. What else could there be?
> 
> And if you say 'how about a united Ireland?', I'm not going to disagree except that the UK has committed to a principle by which NI remains in the UK until such a time as it votes to leave. How does the UK govt go back on that commitment? Hard to see how it could even if it wanted to, which I don't think it does.



Comrade. I would never say "How about a United Ireland?" That would be simplistic and would lack ambition. We need a voluntary Socialist federation of Wales, Scotland, England and Ireland Norn and South - as part of a confederation of European Socialist States!

Seriously though, obviously its impossible for May because of all the red lines she drew, but I think if your starting point is that you want Brexit but you don't want to control the flow of goods, services and labour over borders then it's less of a problem. Tory Brexit obviously means immigration control, but I don't think leaving the EU has to mean that. A starting point could be that you say free movement of labour continues but we won't accept the Posted Workers directive, for example. Although this is all irrelevant now as our Neoliberal Overlords have very nearly worked out how to keep us in the EU.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> May is sucking up to the DUP and spouting on about the backstop. She was all for no hard border....until the vote that she called off.
> It's now going to be all about the backstop whether you like it or not....And that's on her and the DUP


TBH this is just about the only thing in all of this that I think May has got right. The UK should not be able to impose a border around NI without the consent of the ROI. Even though she's probably only got that right by accident.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> May is sucking up to the DUP and spouting on about the backstop. She was all for no hard border....until the vote that she called off.
> It's now going to be all about the backstop whether you like it or not....And that's on her and the DUP



She's talking about the backstop cos she keeps getting grilled on the backstop. She doesn't want to!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> I think you have this the wrong way round. Ireland want the backstop, not the EU, and they have a veto on any trade deal.



Quite probably Ireland or the Irish govt do want the backstop but so do the EU and negotiations are with the EU, not Ireland directly. I think it's pretty clear the EU put so much emphasis on the Irish question because they knew May wouldn't find a work around.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> She's talking about the backstop cos she keeps getting grilled on the backstop. She doesn't want to!




She is attempting to renegotiate and her focus is the backstop. 
Stop making excuses for her. She'd throw everyone under the bus to save her skin.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Seriously though, obviously its impossible for May because of all the red lines she drew, but I think if your starting point is that you want Brexit but you don't want to control the flow of goods, services and labour over borders then it's less of a problem. Tory Brexit obviously means immigration control, but I don't think leaving the EU has to mean that. A starting point could be that you say free movement of labour continues but we won't accept the Posted Workers directive, for example. Although this is all irrelevant now as our Neoliberal Overlords have very nearly worked out how to keep us in the EU.


I wouldn't really disagree with this. I've said from the start that I might well enthusiastically support a brexit being carried out for totally different reasons and aims than the one we have. But we don't live in that world unfortunately.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> She is attempting to renegotiate and her focus is the backstop.
> Stop making excuses for her. She'd throw everyone under the bus to save her skin.



I'm not making excuses for her. I'm not known for defending Tories. What are you on about?

She's not attempting to renegotiate, she's said that's not possible and even if she hadn't we all know it won't be renegotiated. She's trying to sell the backstop to Parliament and she's failed completely.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I wouldn't really disagree with this. I've said from the start that I might well enthusiastically support a brexit being carried out for totally different reasons and aims than the one we have. But we don't live in that world unfortunately.



And we never will live in a better world if everyone thinks like you comrade!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> And we never will live in a better world if everyone thinks like you comrade!


No but this isn't that brexit and never could be. This isn't me saying 'oh that stuff is impossible'. This is me saying it's not possible _like this_. Brexit done like this, with its emphasis on separation and immigration-scapegoating, just makes everything worse.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No but this isn't that brexit and never could be. This isn't me saying 'oh that stuff is impossible'. This is me saying it's not possible _like this_. Brexit done like this, with its emphasis on separation and immigration-scapegoating, just makes everything worse.



So do it differently!


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Quite probably Ireland or the Irish govt do want the backstop but so do the EU and negotiations are with the EU, not Ireland directly. I think it's pretty clear the EU put so much emphasis on the Irish question because they knew May wouldn't find a work around.


It's not a _quite probably_ issue - it's a question that could bring down the government of Ireland. You've got it the wrong way round, totally - the EU and the Government would be just fine (minus a few grumbles) with a border in the Irish sea - it's the Irish government's red lines, and the Tories' unfortunate lash up with the DUP that has fucked this all up. The border in Ireland wasn't really an issue before the general election. Guess why.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not making excuses for her. I'm not known for defending Tories. What are you on about?
> 
> She's not attempting to renegotiate, she's said that's not possible and even if she hadn't we all know it won't be renegotiated. She's trying to sell the backstop to Parliament and she's failed completely.



Why is she over and back to Europe and Ireland with a 2 page document of suggestions? 
Time wasting? 
Looking like she's doing something?
She is trying to soften the backstop and put a deadline on it. That is to appease the Tories and the DUP. 
It's shit. She will propose an end to the backstop in 10 years or so. Kicking the whole mess down the road to a generation of people who will end up trying to deal with this mess. 

Brexit is going to happen..one way or the other isn't it? So why fuck up another country for the sake of her career? Mind you... I am assuming she is a normal person. She isn't. She is a calculator....literally.  
If she had any moral fibre she would put all of this deal back to the people.

One correction there for killer b ..the Irish Government has not aligned with the DUP and they have only tried to maintain the status quo in Ireland as per the GFA


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> One correction there for killer b ..the Irish Government has not aligned with the DUP and they have only tried to maintain the status quo in Ireland as per the GFA


poor wording rather than a claim they were allied with the DUP


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> poor wording rather than a claim they were allied with the DUP



Ok... phew.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

There would be a rather satisfying irony to all this if brexit is eventually scuppered by May's need for the DUP. The DUP's intransigence brings it all tumbling down, like a badly built stack of pallets.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Why is she over and back to Europe and Ireland with a 2 page document of suggestions?
> Time wasting?
> Looking like she's doing something?



Bingo. 



Lupa said:


> She is trying to soften the backstop and put a deadline on it. That is to appease the Tories and the DUP.
> It's shit. She will propose an end to the backstop in 10 years or so. Kicking the whole mess down the road to a generation of people who will end up trying to deal with this mess.
> 
> Brexit is going to happen..one way or the other isn't it? So why fuck up another country for the sake of her career? Mind you... I am assuming she is a normal person. She isn't. She is a calculator....literally.
> If she had any moral fibre she would put all of this deal back to the people.



I give up with you, you don't know what you're on about.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> It's not a _quite probably_ issue - it's a question that could bring down the government of Ireland. You've got it the wrong way round, totally - the EU and the Government would be just fine (minus a few grumbles) with a border in the Irish sea - it's the Irish government's red lines, and the Tories' unfortunate lash up with the DUP that has fucked this all up. The border in Ireland wasn't really an issue before the general election. Guess why.



But the Irish government wouldn't have a problem with a sea border would they?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But the Irish government wouldn't have a problem with a sea border would they?


No more than, say, France would. Why would they?


----------



## killer b (Dec 13, 2018)

Actually probably more than france. But there isn't the same complications or grounds for an objection with a border in the irish sea, and no grounds to exercise a veto.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2018)

DUP


----------



## Nik (Dec 13, 2018)

Now on the topic of there being a border installed between the Republic of Ireland and North-Ireland (supposedly dealt with by what is called 'the backstop'), wouldn't you agree that it's in fact up to the Irish people to decide where they want to belong?

The way I see it, their choice is quite simple, binary if you will:
- either they want to remain in the EU and therefore have no other option than to abide by a border between Ireland and the UK being installed by the EU if that institution decides to put one up in the first place (BTW, there's no law of nature that requires a border to be installed anywhere; it's all mankind's work);
- or they opt to team up with Great Britain and as a result also leave the EU, thus avoiding the need for any border at all.

It all has to do with what you think is more important (aka knowing on which side of your bread you expect there to be the most butter).

The way to solve this conundrum, you ask? How about holding an Irish referendum sometime between today and Mach 29, 2019.........

Let me know what you think.

_P.S.: in case the above has already been covered before, simply consider my contribution as not submitted; while I did read some of the posts, I haven't yet come around to reading all 18,000+_


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 13, 2018)

andysays said:


> If the reporting is correct, he's not just saying that (which I have no problem with), he's suggesting that the UK govt should lift the threat of a no-deal Brexit *by suspending, or ending, the Article 50 withdrawal process.
> *
> In other words, it is the govt of one nation attempting to tell the govt of another how it should conduct its affairs...


Shocking.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 13, 2018)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2018)

Nik said:


> Now on the topic of there being a border installed between the Republic of Ireland and North-Ireland (supposedly dealt with by what is called 'the backstop'), wouldn't you agree that it's in fact up to the Irish people to decide where they want to belong?
> 
> The way I see it, their choice is quite simple, binary if you will:
> - either they want to remain in the EU and therefore have no other option than to abide by a border between Ireland and the UK being installed by the EU if that institution decides to put one up in the first place (BTW, there's no law of nature that requires a border to be installed anywhere; it's all mankind's work);
> ...



If you wanted this to happen, the citizens of the ROI needed to have a vote in the _first_ referendum. Imperialist arrogance to try to impose one on them now.

Maybe we could starve them into submission if they refuse?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If you wanted this to happen, the citizens of the ROI needed to have a vote in the _first_ referendum. Imperialist arrogance to try to impose one on them now.
> 
> Maybe we could starve them into submission if they refuse?


I'm recollecting what the EU did to them over the referendum they had.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 13, 2018)

Another nice thread here


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 13, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




The Andy in andysays ?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

Nik said:


> Now on the topic of there being a border installed between the Republic of Ireland and North-Ireland (supposedly dealt with by what is called 'the backstop'), wouldn't you agree that it's in fact up to the Irish people to decide where they want to belong?
> 
> The way I see it, their choice is quite simple, binary if you will:
> - either they want to remain in the EU and therefore have no other option than to abide by a border between Ireland and the UK being installed by the EU if that institution decides to put one up in the first place (BTW, there's no law of nature that requires a border to be installed anywhere; it's all mankind's work);
> ...




No 
The GFA precedes this and stipulates no border and free movement and trade between all parts of the island of Ireland


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2018)

..


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 13, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> The Andy in andysays ?


Doubtful.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 13, 2018)

killer b said:


> None of the parties have enough MPs who would torpedo their own political careers to form a national government. I'd be surprised if you could even scrape together double figures, let alone enough for a majority.



Fair point, but worth remembering that we have an increasingly desperate PM who has self-torpedoed her own political future and, in doing so, guaranteed herself 12 months of protected status. She's already started talking about 'reaching out' to those in other parties.


----------



## andysays (Dec 13, 2018)

Some of the people currently commenting should really read the article that killer b posted earlier


killer b said:


> Re: Ireland, this article I read this morning in the Irish indie is relevant (and interesting). Dunno how prevelent this view is over there tho.
> 
> Dan O'Brien: 'The backstop demand could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent' - Independent.ie


Some exerts


> Thirteen months ago the Irish and EU side in the Brexit negotiations placed a new demand on the table. What has become known as the "backstop" was designed to ensure that the Border on this island would undergo absolutely no change under any circumstances in the future.





> There was always a risk the backstop would bring about a no-deal Brexit. A no-deal outcome would be a disaster for Ireland on multiple levels. It would place Ireland in a position of policing the Republic's side of what will be an external frontier of the EU, or not policing it and ending up having French, Belgium and Dutch customs officials treating Ireland like a non-EU country.





> A hard deal would also inflict maximum economic disruption to east-west trade. That includes the imports which keep production lines in Irish factories rolling. It also includes the food on supermarket shelves. Ireland may be a net exporter of food, as the Taoiseach stressed on last Friday's 'The Late Late Show', but the headline figures mask a more vulnerable position. Irish farmers specialise in beef and dairy.





> Exports of these products massively exceed imports. But the opposite is true for many important foodstuffs. Among these are cereals, such as flour, and vegetables, including potatoes (last year the value of potato imports was 20 times greater than exports, according to the CSO). Much of the food that is imported either originates in Britain or travels through it from the continent.





> Those who came up with the backstop misread British politics and the British, placing a demand on the table that could end up bringing about that which it was designed to prevent.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 13, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But the Irish government wouldn't have a problem with a sea border would they?



Well, they probably would. A lot of their trade with the continental EU transits through UK ports.

Reality Check: The Brexit challenge for Irish trade


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 13, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Fair point, but worth remembering that we have an increasingly desperate PM who has self-torpedoed her own political future and, in doing so, guaranteed herself 12 months of protected status. She's already started talking about 'reaching out' to those in other parties.


My own hunch about this is that May will go down with the ship of her deal whenever the "meaningful vote"actually happens.Adopting her deal and "the National Interest"have become one and the same thing for her.Her wooden-ness is astonishing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 13, 2018)

Duncan2 said:


> My own hunch about this is that May will go down with the ship of her deal whenever the "meaningful vote"actually happens.Adopting her deal and "the National Interest"have become one and the same thing for her.Her wooden-ness is astonishing.


She won't go down with the ship, she'll be captain Bob Bob Bob


----------



## Nik (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus
As far as I know the British 'Leave or Remain' referendum was confined to Britons, so by the mere (value whoops, sorry) virtue of that the Irish identity holders were excluded of participating. It's also logical, because the future of the UK was at stake, so no other nationals had a say.

TopCat
All the more reason to drop membership of such an institution as soon as possible.

Lupa
Well, bearing in mind that the UK - according to a certain British MP - won't set up a border, things can stay exactly as they are right now......

all
I fully concur with what is written about the British PM, but a word of warning: let's avoid wishful thinking here and not rule out the EU before Brexit is a done deal. My guess, the EU will not rest until that moment and maybe not even after that. Boy, revenge is an ugly emotion.....


----------



## TopCat (Dec 13, 2018)

Nik said:


> littlebabyjesus
> As far as I know the British 'Leave or Remain' referendum was confined to Britons, so by the mere value of that the Irish identity holders were excluded of participating. It's also logical, because the future of the UK was at stake, so no other nationals had a say.
> 
> TopCat
> ...


Responding in this format leaves me scoobied.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 13, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I'm recollecting what the EU did to them over the referendum they had.


Recollecting is to do with drawing on memories of past events. What you're doing is dreaming at the end of a heavy evening of farageohol.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 13, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> She won't go down with the ship, she'll be captain Bob Bob Bob


Yep, having made the promise to 'go after Brexit'/not lead into the 2022 GE, that leaves her looking for 3 more years ("_*THREE MORE YEARS!! *_shouted in true Fatcher youth style).

I can actually imagine her revoking A50 to 'save Brexit' if it bought her some more time in a 'bomb the village to save the village' mentality.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

Nik said:


> littlebabyjesus
> As far as I know the British 'Leave or Remain' referendum was confined to Britons, so by the mere value of that the Irish identity holders were excluded of participating. It's also logical, because the future of the UK was at stake, so no other nationals had a say.



People in  NI voted too. And don't forget that there are plenty people in NI who Irish passport holders too. And the majority vote in NI was to remain in the EU


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There would be a rather satisfying irony to all this if brexit is eventually scuppered by May's need for the DUP. The DUP's intransigence brings it all tumbling down, like a badly built stack of pallets.



Or like a stack of pallets which due to a lack of cross border standardisation were inconsistent in dimension or structural integrity, the sort of thing the European Pallet Association endeavours to avoid. I for one hope the work of the UK & Ireland National Committee for EPAL can continue smoothly whatever kind of Brexit comes to pass.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 13, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Or like a stack of pallets which due to a lack of cross border standardisation were inconsistent in dimension or structural integrity, the sort of thing the European Pallet Association endeavours to avoid. I for one hope the work of the UK & Ireland National Committee for EPAL can continue smoothly whatever kind of Brexit comes to pass.


Yes, let's hope for a Brexit that is at least palletable.


----------



## Nik (Dec 13, 2018)

Lupa said:


> People in  NI voted too. And don't forget that there are plenty people in NI who Irish passport holders too. And the majority vote in NI was to remain in the EU



Well, provided that I was informed correctly the majority of the entire voters was in favor of leaving (I believe 17.2 million). Furthermore, as I understand the majority of certain PARTS of the Kingdom wanted to remain. It's totally irrelevant what a PART of the voters opted for; it's the accumulated result that counts.

Here's a thought: let's give the peoples of certain other EU member states a vote too; in fact, let's give the entire EU a say. I for one can guess what would happen. The (vast) majority would probably vote 'Remain'. They're just terrified that a member would "..._have the audacity (= wisdom) to leave such a fine institution_...". If not to say: shared misery implies shared burden


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 13, 2018)

Nik said:


> Well, provided that I was informed correctly the majority of the entire voters was in favor of leaving (I believe 17.2 million). Furthermore, as I understand the majority of certain PARTS of the Kingdom wanted to remain. It's totally irrelevant what a PART of the voters opted for; it's the accumulated result that counts.
> 
> Here's a thought: let's give the peoples of certain other EU member states a vote too; in fact, let's give the entire EU a say. I for one can guess what would happen. The (vast) majority would probably vote 'Remain'. They're just terrified that a member would "..._have the audacity (= wisdom) to leave such a fine institution_...". If not to say: shared misery implies shared burden




Sorry but the wink doesn't excuse that post


----------



## kabbes (Dec 13, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There would be a rather satisfying irony to all this if brexit is eventually scuppered by May's need for the DUP. The DUP's intransigence brings it all tumbling down, like a badly built stack of pallets.


Extra irony points for the fact that she only has to rely on the DUP in the first place because she called a totally unnecessary general election and royally fucked up the campaign.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Seriously, Nik. I'd be totally happy with the UK leaving..

In fact. I was a remainer who has now changed her mind. I've lived in Poland for nearly 9 years but being a filthy half-breed Anglo-Hungarian am now voluntarily "repatriating" (expatriating ) myself. 

(edit) 

Ahh... Fukkit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 14, 2018)

killer b said:


> No more than, say, France would. Why would they?



But not in the same way as a hard land border with the North?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But not in the same way as a hard land border with the North?


What are you saying? Is this a surprise to you?


----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Sorry but the wink doesn't excuse that post



I guess the humor of the EU member states trying to do everything within their power to deliberately make it as difficult as possible for the UK to leave - or set an example if you will - while what they'll really miss is the UK's annual monetary contribution (they'll never admit this though!), is lost on you. Hence my remark about misery and burden; pity you didn't grasp that.


----------



## teqniq (Dec 14, 2018)

I really don't know what else was likely to happen tbh.

EU leaders reject May's idea to salvage her Brexit deal


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 14, 2018)

Nik said:


> I guess the humor of the EU member states trying to do everything within their power to deliberately make it as difficult as possible for the UK to leave - or set an example if you will - while what they'll really miss is the UK's annual monetary contribution (they'll never admit this though!), is lost on you. Hence my remark about misery and burden; pity you didn't grasp that.



I'd say that's a sad post rather than a funny one. 
Firstly, the UK is leaving. 
Secondly, the deal is done and there will be no backstop.
Thirdly, the EU isn't the party delaying things....that'd be May and her government.
Finally, you've the wrong end of the stick about money. The UK will be paying out to the EU til 2064. 
The UK government has agreed to pay £37.1 billion to the European Union as part of its departure from the bloc, in order to pay off financial commitments it signed up to prior to the British public voting for Brexit.
And...That does not account for future payments Britain may make in exchange for access to the single market or participation in European agencies....which theyve also agreed to. So the UK will be paying out for another generation...And longer...

Britain will be paying the EU until 2064


Not so funny...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Firstly, the UK is leaving.



you sure about that?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> you sure about that?



Lol...I'd really love to say no, but I think the British government is too chicken to go back to the people.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Lol...I'd really love to say no, but I think the British government is too chicken to go back to the people.



when mays deal get rejected and no deal looms they will revoke or suspend a50 - probably for a 2nd ref. they wont have a choice.


----------



## killer b (Dec 14, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> But not in the same way as a hard land border with the North?


Of course not. I'd imagine if your focus is a united Ireland, a border in the Irish sea might actually be something that rather takes the sting out of the hit they'll take on trade.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> when mays deal get rejected and no deal looms they will revoke or suspend a50 - probably for a 2nd ref. they wont have a choice.



And then? 
Will it automatically go to a people's vote? By that stage there could be a bigger majority voting leave just because their so pissed off at the government and the entire mess.


----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

Lupa said:


> I'd say that's a sad post rather than a funny one.
> Firstly, the UK is leaving.
> Secondly, the deal is done and there will be no backstop.
> 
> ...


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2018)




----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

Lupa said:


> And then?
> Will it automatically go to a people's vote?* By that stage there could be a bigger majority voting leave just because their so pissed off at the government and the entire mess*.



That's my fear too, Remainarian though I am.

People would be absolutely correctly pissed off by the Government's faffing around and incompetence, this 'Just get on with it' feeling appears to be widespread?? So my personally thinking that's a wrongheaded question is irrelevant.

And if there's a second ref (which I still doubt),  very likely plenty of people would be further pissed off by being "asked again until they give the correct answer" -- the more widespread that impression, if there's a second ref, the more likely people are to think, correctly really, that being asked 'are you sure now?' is patronising ...

Any 'Remain' campaign would have a LOT of work to do  to counteract that. Remain-mindeds show no signs of having done any so far, IMO.


----------



## Winot (Dec 14, 2018)

^absolutely right


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

yep. a 2nd ref will likely be even more toxic and divisive and leave could easily win again. 

fuck knows - but two things are pretty certain - mays deal will fail and parliament will not allow teh uk to crash out on march 29. 

so we could have a50 being revolved. a 2nd ref  - or a50 being revoked - and then being retriggered so we can start the whole process again! imagine the joy


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> That's my fear too, Remainarian though I am.
> 
> People would be absolutely correctly pissed off by the Government's faffing around and incompetence, this 'Just get on with it' feeling appears to be widespread?? So my personally thinking that's a wrongheaded question is irrelevant.
> 
> ...


the question should not be 'are you sure now?', it should have been 'before we voted on the principle, now we are voting on the reality. in the 1970s, when we entered the european union, parliament took us in and you were only asked afterwards if you wanted to stay. this time you have been asked twice, before negotiations began, and after the conclusion of negotiations when the shape of our future relationship with europe is clearer. this is democracy. this is taking back control. show us how you'd like to proceed.'

only now it looks like a second ref is something cobbled together in an utter absence of leadership and a mark of desperation. the opportunity to make this a positive moment has been wasted as none of the people in parliament had a clue of how to disentangle themselves from the eu.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> yep. a 2nd ref will likely be even more toxic and divisive and leave could easily win again.


Not "Leave", but Mays Deal (or other deal)


----------



## ska invita (Dec 14, 2018)

Robert Peston has been consistently ahead of the curve on the gossip - (though maybe this is already in the papers now)

*Robert Peston*
7 hrs ·
Facebook Creator
 ·
It has been a catastrophic night for the prime minister here in Brussels.

She was rebuffed by EU leaders in her request to them for a few weeks of fresh work by officials to formulate words of what she called “reassurance” such that Tory Brexiter and DUP MPs could be confident that the backstop they hate would only ever be short lived if implemented.

“We do not want the UK to think there can be any form of renegotiation whatsoever” said EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker.

This means that the PM knows that as and when she puts her Brexit plan to the Commons for a vote, more than 100 of her MPs will vote against it, plus the DUP and the opposition parties. She would lose by a colossal and humiliating margin of more than 200 votes.

Her plan would be dead and the UK’s Brexit or no-Brexit future more uncertain than ever.

All EU leaders provided was a bit of carrot and a big stick to persuade recalcitrant MPs to think again and possibly back May’s and their Brexit plan.

The carrot is that “preparations” on the future relationship with the EU could start a month or two earlier than scheduled, as soon as the UK and EU parliaments ratify the plan - rather than after Brexit day on 29 March 2019.

What EU leaders are trying to suggest with this concession is that they are raring to get on with the talks on the future trade and security relationship, so that there really should be no need for the backstop to take effect for more than a few months (perhaps!).

But Juncker also put the boot in, implying that if talks were to take years and years and years, such that the UK fell into a backstop with seemingly no end - potentially driving that feared wedge between Northern Ireland and Great Britain and preventing the UK negotiating third-country trade deals - it would be the UK’s fault.

How so?

Well Juncker said he listened to the recent debates in our parliament and realised neither the government nor MPs have a clue what kind of future relationship with the EU they want.

And absent a coherent plan from the UK, that future relationship with the EU cannot be settled.

So he begged the government to give him more coherent detail in the next few weeks about the future relationship we seek.

And he warned - waving that stick I told you about - that the EU is advancing its preparations for a no-deal Brexit.

Juncker implied he was surprised May bothered to ask the 27 leaders for help - because their collective view having watched our MPs oppose her and their Brexit plan is that there is nothing further they can do to help her.

Which surely means that May’s Brexit plan, constructed over 21 gruelling months, is not even on life support any longer.

And the PM’s only choice now surely is to seek the will of MPs and the kind of Brexit or even no-Brexit (a referendum) they could coalesce around.

And then having established what THEY want, sue for it with a disgruntled and disillusioned council of EU leaders.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

"mays deal" vs "remain" as a referendum question? 
will be bitterly resented by many leavers. nobody but Theresa May and her remaining band of gimps will campaign for the deal. 
be kind of funny though.


----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Aah, the key word is 'intends'.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2018)

Nik said:


> Aah, the key word is 'intends'.


I think the key is that there's no more negotiation.

That's it.  Take it or leave it.


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "mays deal" vs "remain" as a referendum question?
> will be bitterly resented by many leavers. nobody but Theresa May and her remaining band of gimps will campaign for the deal.
> be kind of funny though.


Definite prediction in this area is a mug's game, but I think it's more likely that the May deal will be voted down in parliament and then abandoned.

If we do get to the point of another referendum, the May deal won't be one of the options.


----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "mays deal" vs "remain" as a referendum question?
> will be bitterly resented by many leavers. nobody but Theresa May and her remaining band of gimps will campaign for the deal.
> be kind of funny though.



Wrong, IMO.
That the UK will be leaving anyway has already been determined; in other words, it's a done deal. Therefore, even if there is a second referendum, the only question can revolve around HOW the UK leaves. So something along the lines of: May's deal or No deal, wouldn't you agree?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Nik said:


> Wrong, IMO.
> That the UK will be leaving anyway has already been determined; in other words, it's a done deal. Therefore, even if there is a second referendum, the only question can revolve around HOW the UK leaves. So something along the lines of: May's deal or No deal, wouldn't you agree?


no


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Nik said:


> Wrong, IMO.
> That the UK will be leaving anyway has already been determined; in other words, it's a done deal. Therefore, even if there is a second referendum, the only question can revolve around HOW the UK leaves. So something along the lines of: May's deal or No deal, wouldn't you agree?



that ref question is not what im suggesting - its one that's doing the rounds

and also - no matter how many times you say "its a done deal" it does not make it fact. Parliament will almost certainly reject mays deal  - and will definitely revoke article 50 before allowing the uk to leave with no deal on march 29th.

if we get to a 2nd ref - remain will definitely be one of the options, its moot weather "no deal" will be. Its parliament who get to decide this - nobody else. And they will never allow the two options they most oppose (no deal and mays deal) as the only options.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

I don't want it to happen but if this can't be resolved, which looks like the case, maybe the only thing left to focus minds is the harshest of the harsh.
The springboard could be the UK refusing to pay what it already owes, which is the 39 billion I am assuming. That could be followed by forced repatriation of UK nationals in the EU and EU nationals in the UK, a militarized border on the island of Ireland, Gibraltar isolated on it's land crossing. No UK flights over EU airspace, no security cooperation at all, imports and exports between the UK and the EU being halted, or halted by checks that turns the UK motorway network into a huge car park. No imports or exports of vital medical supplies between the UK and the EU. Workplaces that depend on EU trade being closed down due to the halting of trade.
Bring it on, leave means leave after all, if the UK can't get it's act together then isolation from all aspects of the EU would be a practical manifestation of leave means leave.
Not project fear, project give the UK population what it apparently voted for.
Harsh reality might cut through theorizing and posturing and focus minds, because so far feck all is working.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> that ref question is not what im suggesting - its one that's doing the rounds
> 
> and also - no matter how many times you say "its a done deal" it does not make it fact. Parliament will almost certainly reject mays deal  - and will definitely revoke article 50 before allowing the uk to leave with no deal on march 29th.
> 
> if we get to a 2nd ref - remain will definitely be one of the options, its moot weather "no deal" will be. Its parliament who get to decide this - nobody else. And they will never allow the two options they most oppose (no deal and mays deal) as the only options.


I think Parliament would have to simultaneously repeal the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 that itself repealed the 1972 EC Act.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Yup. 

Just put in for Hungarian citizenship. Apparently its a 6 month wait. That's two months too long so I'm crossing my fingers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't want it to happen but if this can't be resolved, which looks like the case, maybe the only thing left to focus minds is the harshest of the harsh.
> The springboard could be the UK refusing to pay what it already owes, which is the 39 billion I am assuming. That could be followed by forced repatriation of UK nationals in the EU and EU nationals in the UK, a militarized border on the island of Ireland, Gibraltar isolated on it's land crossing. No UK flights over EU airspace, no security cooperation at all, imports and exports between the UK and the EU being halted, or halted by checks that turns the UK motorway network into a huge car park. No imports or exports of vital medical supplies between the UK and the EU. Workplaces that depend on EU trade being closed down due to the halting of trade.
> Bring it on, leave means leave after all, if the UK can't get it's act together then isolation from all aspects of the EU would be a practical manifestation of leave means leave.
> Not project fear, project give the UK population what it apparently voted for.
> Harsh reality might cut through theorizing and posturing and focus minds, because so far feck all is working.


you'll be very disappointed that what happens bears no resemblance to your apocalyptic scenario


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I don't want it to happen but if this can't be resolved, which looks like the case, maybe the only thing left to focus minds is the harshest of the harsh.
> The springboard could be the UK refusing to pay what it already owes, which is the 39 billion I am assuming. That could be followed by forced repatriation of UK nationals in the EU and EU nationals in the UK, a militarized border on the island of Ireland, Gibraltar isolated on it's land crossing. No UK flights over EU airspace, no security cooperation at all, imports and exports between the UK and the EU being halted, or halted by checks that turns the UK motorway network into a huge car park. No imports or exports of vital medical supplies between the UK and the EU. Workplaces that depend on EU trade being closed down due to the halting of trade.
> Bring it on, leave means leave after all, if the UK can't get it's act together then isolation from all aspects of the EU would be a practical manifestation of leave means leave.
> Not project fear, project give the UK population what it apparently voted for.
> Harsh reality might cut through theorizing and posturing and focus minds, because so far feck all is working.


The right party of capital would never do this; not because they care about the human cost, but because this would threaten rates of accumulation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The right party of capital would never do this; not because they care about the human cost, but because this would threaten rates of accumulation.


i think you're wrong but it won't happen anyway


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you're wrong but it won't happen anyway


The fact that it won't happen might suggest that I'm not wrong?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 14, 2018)

Even if he UK crashes out they'll still have to pay what they owe if not by agreement then through the courts.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The fact that it won't happen might suggest that I'm not wrong?


i don't think it will be up to the right party of capital


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2018)




----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> that ref question is not what im suggesting - its one that's doing the rounds
> 
> _Just to be clear, I didn't write that you suggested the text._
> 
> ...



_If a new referendum is a replacement one as if the 2016 one never took place, then the board is completely blank and May's deal doesn't have a basis anymore._


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> She won't go down with the ship, she'll be captain Bob Bob Bob



If she floats does that signify she is a witch?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> If she floats does that signify she is a witch?


only if she weighs the same as a duck


----------



## Nik (Dec 14, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I think the key is that there's no more negotiation.
> 
> That's it.  Take it or leave it.



Well, then I'd say: leave it (and the EU in the process).


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Nik said:


> _If a new referendum is a replacement one as if the 2016 one never took place, then the board is completely blank and May's deal doesn't have a basis anymore._


if the orange vole in the attic swallows a mandible then the geese are singing east for humbugs


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if the orange vole in the attic swallows a mandible then the geese are singing east for humbugs



I thought that only applied before Michaelmas!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> I thought that only applied before Michaelmas!


between michaelmas and candlemas, except on crowleymas


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> between michaelmas and candlemas, except on crowleymas


Every fourth year?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Every fourth year?


third and seventh


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think it will be up to the right party of capital


Quite so; the 200 will require various elements of the left parties of capital to help effect the rescue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Quite so; the 200 will require various elements of the left parties of capital to help effect the rescue.


it's less a rescue and more an undignified scramble


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's less a rescue and more an undignified scramble


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 155498



"sorry - irish passport holders only!"


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2018)

Talk of Labour throwing in the kitchen sink to get a vote before Xmas rolleyes:
Labour plans to 'throw kitchen sink' to force May's hand on Brexit
If they were to succeed in these little gambits, which would probably mean getting a few tory abstentions, combined with the EU27 rejecting may's attempt to open things up again... who knows what might happen. Pity the erg lot went for their vonc this week. Not saying they would succeed if it happened next week, but it would have added a further layer to the crisis. As it was the failed vonc, momentarily at least, helped May.

Suppose what I'm thinking is that if labour forced a vote or even a proxy vote on May's deal pre Xmas, it still opens up things like a gen election or 2nd ref (though the route to either is difficult). But if that point is only reached mid January the possibilities are different.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> if the orange vole in the attic swallows a mandible then the geese are singing east for humbugs



It's manticore you're thinking of, not mandible.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's manticore you're thinking of, not mandible.


ah! the writing was difficult to decipher


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> you'll be very disappointed that what happens bears no resemblance to your apocalyptic scenario


I said I don't want my scenario to happen, so no disappointment if it doesn't.
Have you any idea what will happen and what it will bear any resemblance to?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> I said I don't want my scenario to happen, so no disappointment if it doesn't.
> Have you any idea what will happen and what it will bear any resemblance to?


yes

as i have said several times on this thread

there will be no may deal
there will be no no deal
there will be a revocation of article 50
this may lead to a referendum
this may be done through parliament
but the chances of an exit from the european union have never been lower than they are today


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> there will be no may deal
> there will be no no deal
> there will be a revocation of article 50
> this may lead to a referendum
> ...



It's like Philip Larkin is back with us.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's like Philip Larkin is back with us.


Hull 4 Brussels 0


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

I think the EU will effectively just push us out come March

no way they'll put up with any more of these pathetic bitchings in UK Parliament - finally they'll be doing us a favour, just get onto WTO like the people instructed


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

People didn't instruct the UK to go to the WTO, or even to negotiate a deal of any kind.
There were four words on the winning line of the ballot paper.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> People didn't instruct the UK to go to the WTO, or even to negotiate a deal of any kind.
> There were four words on the winning line of the ballot paper.


that's true, it was even more simple than that  - it just said LEAVE EU - and if the govt expects anyone to believe in democracy than that is what must happen


----------



## teqniq (Dec 14, 2018)

'Democracy' lol.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

what's your term then for a majority winning a referendum, a GE from both parties honouring the result and also an Act of Parliament approving the triggering of Article 50?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> what's your term then for a majority winning a referendum, a GE from both parties honouring the result and also an Act of Parliament approving the triggering of Article 50?


a clusterfuck


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

grow up you little fucking cunt!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> grow up you little fucking cunt!


i'd rather stay a child and keep my self-respect if being an adult means being like you


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

what's your term then , for my post about democracy, other than saying it's a 'clusterfuck'

that's just ducking the issue


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> what's your term then , for my post about democracy, other than saying it's a 'clusterfuck'
> 
> that's just ducking the issue


oh your post's a post and the situation you describe is a clusterfuck


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> grow up you little fucking cunt!



I bet this guy thinks he could have gotten a much better deal from the EU with his superior diplomatic skills.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 14, 2018)

Honestly the quality of troll has nosedived of late.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2018)

They'll be glad to see the back of her and the UK...


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I bet this guy thinks he could have gotten a much better deal from the EU with his superior diplomatic skills.


but you see Prickman's model cannot answer my question other than give a peurile response.

Let's have it


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

gentle green - and your point is?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> gentle green - and your point is?


I thought it was a lucky photo - showing her left out of the greetings...


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

and what is your point in showing it?


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> and what is your point in showing it?


Your coat is hanging on the door knob...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> I thought it was a lucky photo - showing her left out of the greetings...


Has the fist-bump now become a common greeting among diplomats and EU functionaries. WTF


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> what's your term then , for my post about democracy, other than saying it's a 'clusterfuck'



a democratic clusterfuck


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

and your solution?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 155507



they are clearly conducting a  negotiation on the terms the common agricultural policy

"one potato, two potato...."


----------



## ska invita (Dec 14, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's like Philip Larkin is back with us.


They fuck you up, your centrist dads. They may not mean to, but they do.

(thats the best i could do  )


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> and your solution?


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> that ref question is not what im suggesting - its one that's doing the rounds
> 
> and also - no matter how many times you say "its a done deal" it does not make it fact. Parliament will almost certainly reject mays deal  - and will definitely revoke article 50 before allowing the uk to leave with no deal on march 29th.
> 
> if we get to a 2nd ref - remain will definitely be one of the options, its moot weather "no deal" will be. Its parliament who get to decide this - nobody else. And they will never allow the two options they most oppose (no deal and mays deal) as the only options.


'Parliament' can only vote on bills put in front of it, it can't put forward bills of its own. And although there will be provision for amendments to the promised 'meaningful vote', I don't think that can include a 'let's call the whole thing off' option.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

they're all old has-beens - pretty soon Merkel will be out, as will Jucnker etc....by then, who left to believe in their failed EU dream?


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

The only people that want to call the thing off are the sad losers who can't yet reconcile the fact that they lost 

this includes idealists like Strugeon as well as numersous Tory turncoats, and never-grown-up hippies such as Caroline Lucas


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> they're all old has-beens - pretty soon Merkel will be out, as will Jucnker etc....by then, who left to believe in their failed EU dream?


 
too true - they will thrust aside by the young, dashing buccaneers of brexit britain 







Bow down before the Gammonoracy!


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Your coat is hanging on the door knob...


And his knob is hanging on the coat hook...


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 155507
> They'll be glad to see the back of her and the UK...



They’ll push us out into deep water and watch us flounder.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> I think the EU will effectively just push us out come March
> 
> no way they'll put up with any more of these pathetic bitchings



I think that this is far more likely than parliament growing a spine and actually voting on something any time soon. 



gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 155507
> They'll be glad to see the back of her and the UK...



This is also true.

Fuck knows what my husband will do. The entire company he works for are outsourced from the UK. He might have to go work for the Yanks (or start his own business). Who knows.

What we do no is no way are we going back to the UK.

Mainly because it's a soggy little island full of selfish stupid cunts with delusions of grandeur.. and massive entitlement. 

Can't wait for the stags and roudy Brit tourists to fuck off out of here as well...they are proper ruining the bars with their cuntery.

Good riddance to bad rubbish.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> too true - they will thrust aside by the young, dashing buccaneers of brexit britain



Looks like at least four of them are still alive, though the Bill O'Reilly lookalike on the far left might be a zombie.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby:  sounds like you also have a sense of entitlement


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> too true - they will thrust aside by the young, dashing buccaneers of brexit britain
> 
> 
> Bow down before the Gammonoracy!


More like dried-up old gristle.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 14, 2018)

killer b said:


> Of course not. I'd imagine if your focus is a united Ireland, a border in the Irish sea might actually be something that rather takes the sting out of the hit they'll take on trade.



That's what I would have thought just trying to understand what you're saying!


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> They’ll push us out into deep water and watch us flounder.



This is kinda funny, but on a serious point, even the European nationals have gone from Brexit bemusement to pissed off with the UK.

So many people's lives over here are up in the air that even they are starting to wish the UK would just fuck off and sink itself. At least that way they (and my husband and I) will get back some stability and be able to plan for the future.

I've gone from "remain"  to "fuck it, you'll get what's coming to you so get on with it".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think it will be up to the right party of capital



Certainly not all of them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> They’ll push us out into deep water and watch us flounder.


the herringvolk


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> FabricLiveBaby:  sounds like you also have a sense of entitlement



Mate, I'm agreeing that you should have your Brexit for breakfast, lunch and dinner. 

Why u mad bro?


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> T
> 
> *So many people's lives over here are up in the air that even they are starting to wish the UK would just fuck off* and sink itself. At least that way they'll (and my husband and I) will get back some stability back and be able to plan for the future.
> 
> .


why don't they just get jobs in their own fuckkin countries then and stop bitching about ours


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> why don't they just get jobs in their own fuckkin coutries then and stop bitching about ours


yeh british bitching for british people


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

A small group of yellow vested pro-Brexit protestors have shut down Westminster Bridge. 

Yellow Vest protests SPREAD to UK: Brexit supporters SHUT DOWN central London


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 14, 2018)

How come we never get any new "keeper" boardz members ?


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

phillm said:


> A small group of yellow vested pro-Brexit protestors have shut down Westminster Bridge.
> 
> Yellow Vest protests SPREAD to UK: Brexit supporters SHUT DOWN central London


too fucking right - about time too!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> How come we never get any new "keeper" boardz members ?


we get loads. 

only, so many of them need keepers


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

phillm said:


> A small group of yellow vested pro-Brexit protestors have shut down Westminster Bridge.
> 
> Yellow Vest protests SPREAD to UK: Brexit supporters SHUT DOWN central London


they'll be known as the yellow-bellies


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> How come we never get any new "keeper" boardz members ?


because this forum is just a bubble of sore, yet righteous leftie, deluded Remoaners...meanwhile, out in the real world...that kinda thing


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> too fucking right - about time too!



why don't you get off your arse/keyboard and join them it's a healthy 4 degrees out there and no doubt the black cabs will be honking in sympathy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> because this forum is just a bubble of sore, yet righteous leftie, deluded Remoaners...meanwhile, out in the real world...that kinda thing


is the 451 to do with the number of friends you have, plus 451?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 14, 2018)

Tear gas and give them some CRS inspired back of the van rough justice - it’s what they would have wanted


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> why don't they just get jobs in their own fuckkin countries then and stop bitching about ours



Oh you sweet little peach!

You know I live and work abroad yeah?

We have jobs in our own adopted countries which we love. It's just some of us (not me... I just export our language) have to work with people like you as part of the business.

If you don't want to work with us, then fuck off so we can find someone who does.

If the UK doesn't stop clogging up the metaphorical doorway like an confused angry drunk who is shouting "YOUR ALL CUNTS I'M LEAVING YOU CUNTS" but getting more and more AGGRESSIVE and red faced,  yet refusing to budge, don't be surprised if the pub gets pissed off enough to boot your silly moaning arse in to the sopping rain.

 Why are you bitching at me for agreeing that you should fuck off and stop disrupting our lives?

Seriously. Sheesh.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> is the 451 to do with the number of friends you have, plus 451?


like I said earlier, grow up you little cunt


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they'll be known as the yellow-bellies



It’s from the Express, they are probably there to repair or replace something!


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2018)

By the way, I'm confused as to what it is may has turned up to, to do her pleading and wailing. It's described as a 'summit' - I thought we had one of those 2 or 3 weeks ago? Whenever she nips over there to moan and they all gather round to tell her to fuck off, does it become a 'Summit'?  Surely they have to put an 'out of office' on at some point or just shut the curtains and pretend they are having the works do?


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Tear gas and give them some CRS inspired back of the van rough justice - it’s what they would have wanted


that would actually help the Brexit cause somwhat, would lead to far bigger protests


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 14, 2018)

You should have spent a week or two ingratiating yerself before going postal - it’s crap isn’t it


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> like I said earlier, grow up you little cunt


struck a nerve, i see.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> they'll be known as the yellow-bellies


Or from Lincolnshire.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the way, I'm confused as to what it is may has turned up to, to do her pleading and wailing. It's described as a 'summit' - I thought we had one of those 2 or 3 weeks ago? Whenever she nips over there to moan and they all gather round to tell her to fuck off, does it become a 'Summit'?  Surely they have to put an 'out of office' on at some point or just shut the curtains and pretend they are having the office do?


it's a summit to make it sound important but what it means is that it looks like they're doing summit when they're not


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Tear gas and give them some CRS inspired back of the van rough justice - it’s what they would have wanted



Oh happy days!


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Oh you sweet little peach!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


find someone else then - or is it your own 'adopted' country's fault then , for needing the UK?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the way, I'm confused as to what it is may has turned up to, to do her pleading and wailing. It's described as a 'summit' - I thought we had one of those 2 or 3 weeks ago? Whenever she nips over there to moan and they all gather round to tell her to fuck off, does it become a 'Summit'?  Surely they have to put an 'out of office' on at some point or just shut the curtains and pretend they are having the works do?



I have no idea. I just see it as clogging up the political metaphorical doorway to the pub with bullshit in the hope somone drags her in or kicks her out.

Waste of fucking time.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 14, 2018)

EU say no


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "sorry - irish passport holders only!"



That’s Mrs. S. away then!


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> or is it your own 'adopted' country's fault then , for needing the UK?



See. Delusions of grandeur.

These guys think that we're in partnership with them because we "need" them, rather than in a consenting two way relationship with mutual benefits.

It's like listening to my controlling ex who thought the reason I was with him was because I needed him rather than enjoying his company.

I booted him off too eventually. Because he was an arrogant cunt.

We don't NEED you, you fools, at one point we had a beneficial relationship but now that the UK is being such a pain in the arse we're wondering if it's still beneficial for us.

Eventually the EU will stop humouring the UK. Of course it will be "all EUR fault" but the EU won't give a shit about the the whinging ex who pissed them off.

You're deluded mate.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

And just how many millions of UK, low-paid workers have flooded over the the EU in the last 15 years then?


----------



## Crispy (Dec 14, 2018)

Wilf said:


> By the way, I'm confused as to what it is may has turned up to, to do her pleading and wailing. It's described as a 'summit' - I thought we had one of those 2 or 3 weeks ago? Whenever she nips over there to moan and they all gather round to tell her to fuck off, does it become a 'Summit'?  Surely they have to put an 'out of office' on at some point or just shut the curtains and pretend they are having the works do?


It's the quarterly European Council summit of national leaders.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> EU say no




how it went in T.M's head


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> And just how many millions of UK, low-paid workers have flooded over the the EU in the last 15 years then?



Mate. That's down to UK. If the UK wants to pay its working class shit wages (regardless of where they're from) all you had to do was raise the minimum wage or lower living costs like housing, and educate your workforce so that they stay competitive with the rest of Europe and so British businesses wouldn't have needed to look abroad for brains.

That's totally in your court. UK parliament could have done a number of things but didn't cuz it was too busy blaming somone else for its own problems.

What you don't realise, is thats you're still going to have those problems because the UK have been voting for 30+ years of neoliberalism.

You literally have what you voted for.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2018)

If this is version 451, I'd hate to see budgies versions 1 to 450.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricliveBaby:

 If the wages are so 'shit' then why are all the EU workers coming over to the UK?

If the wages in the EU are even shitter (which of course they are, especially in the East), then yes, those countries NEED the UK.

Hence, we have great leverage to use here.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> The only people that want to call the thing off are the sad losers who can't yet reconcile the fact that they lost
> 
> this includes idealists like Strugeon as well as numersous Tory turncoats, and never-grown-up hippies such as Caroline Lucas


There are also people who see that the GFA cancels out brexit phenomenologically despite the motivation of any individuals.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Mate. That's down to UK. If the UK wants to pay its working class shit wages (regardless of where they're from) all you had to do was raise the minimum wage or lower living costs like housing, and educate your workforce so that they stay competitive with the rest of Europe and so British businesses wouldn't have needed to look abroad for brains.
> 
> That's totally in your court. UK parliament could have done a number of things but didn't cuz it was too busy blaming somone else for its own problems.
> 
> ...


Mad innit? Like Thatcher was a dastardly European plot.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> There are also people who see that the GFA cancels out brexit phenomenologically despite the motivation of any individuals.


In what way is it phenomenonological?


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> If this is version 451, I'd hate to see budgies versions 1 to 450.





philosophical said:


> There are also people who see that the GFA cancels out brexit phenomenologically despite the motivation of any individuals.


no it doesn't you silly little fuck - the GFA can be adjusted if necessary


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> the GFA can be adjusted if necessary



Idea!  You can be put in charge of negotatiations with Varadkar


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> no it doesn't you silly little fuck - the GFA can be adjusted if necessary


Where does 'silly little fuck' come from I have not been rude to you?  Can you detail the GFA adjustments possible?


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In what way is it phenomenonological?


The GFA is a phenomena.
Brexit is a phenomena.


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> Idea!  You can be put in charge of negotatiations with Varadkar


fuck that little bitch - he is no more than a maggot having his moment in the sun!


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Where does 'silly little fuck' come from I have not been rude to you?  Can you detail the GFA adjustments possible?


Brexit supersedes the GFA - adjustments to the border, if necessary, will be done


----------



## Budgie451 (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The GFA is a phenomena.
> Brexit is a phenomena.



is there some kind of point being made here?


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> fuck that little bitch - he is no more than a maggot having his moment in the sun!



You did say yourself that the GFA can be adjusted (key word here : "Agreement"  )

Good luck with those tweaks in the negotiations room, diplomat 

No doubt you have a better plan though ...


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The GFA is a phenomena.
> Brexit is a phenomena.



doooo doo do do-do do


----------



## Wilf (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> fuck that little bitch - he is no more than a maggot having his moment in the sun!


'Little bitch' eh?


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> Brexit supersedes the GFA - adjustments to the border, if necessary, will be done


giggle


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

I don't suppose it's much more delusional than believing Brexit will deliver is unto the Socialist Kingdom of God...


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie451 said:


> FabricliveBaby:
> 
> If the wages are so 'shit' then why are all the EU workers coming over to the UK?
> 
> ...



They're shit of you have to live in the UK and feed yourself and house yourself, aren't they? Isn't there a reason that Britain's natives don't take those jobs? If it's not the money then what is it?

The reasons why minimum wage earning Europeans go to work in the UK is because its a fuck load of money for them. Of course it is. Because cost of living over is half of what it is in the UK. Mate, I can go to the pub on a fiver here, have four beers and still take change home.

 I have a mate who how to pick strawberries in the UK every summer to subsidises his uni studies. He'll probably go to France next year.

If he lived in the UK no way would he pick strawberries. You wouldn't be able to survive. Which presumably is why the English is don't go for that type of work.

Hey, say you raised the wages of strawberry pickers, do you think you'd get more English applicants working those jobs instead?  Or say you lowered the price of housing and necessities? That minimum wage sure would go a lot further!

If UK leaves do you think the wages will rise? I mean, the minimum wage will still be the minimum wage right? And rents will still be rents. And there's nothing to stop foreign investors or buy to letters buying up the UK housing stock and getting renters to pay off the ír mortgages. Last time I checked the UAE and Russia weren't in the EU, and the Brits could still buy-to-let

I toyed with going to make a quick buck teaching Arabs in Dubai for a year much in the same way that Poles go pick strawberries. They're pay you a fuck load more for similar work. Then I'd be able to come back here and live like a fucking King.

Don't think I could last in Dubai for a year,tho. I find it politically distasteful.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

Someone spent a lot of time and effort teaching that Budgie to swear.
I ask you!


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

Our new "Good Friday Agreement Renegotiation Ambassador" has been sacked far, far quicker than the Tories delivered Brexit!


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Aww. I enjoyed our new pet..

Gone too soon.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Someone spent a lot of time and effort teaching that Budgie to swear.
> I ask you!



Imagine if you could teach one to think independently and make its own sentences!


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Aww. I enjoyed our new pet..
> 
> Gone too soon.



It’s an outrage! 

<pages FM>


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 14, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Aww. I enjoyed our new pet..
> 
> Gone too soon.


And all because of the fear that there may be a cuttlefish bone shortage after Brexit!


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

In a previous life I was banned for quoting METHLABS leaving post in full - I still have it copied - twas a work of art ! no warnings or nuffink - 2000 posts and whuff gone in a puff of vape.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

We've gone ban-mental.

Now I'm trapped in here with just libtard remainers for company.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The GFA is a phenomena.
> Brexit is a phenomena.


You don’t understand what phenomenonology is.  It’s just an impressive sounding word to you, isn’t it?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> We've gone ban-mental.
> 
> Now I'm trapped in here with just libtard remainers for company.


Oi!


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2018)

Why on earth did he get banned???

Unless he’s done something elsewhere that’s just silly.


----------



## TopCat (Dec 14, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why on earth did he get banned???
> 
> Unless he’s done something elsewhere that’s just silly.


Sweary Brexit type. Held to different standards than sweary remainers.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> We've gone ban-mental.
> 
> Now I'm trapped in here with just libtard remainers for company.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why on earth did he get banned???
> 
> Unless he’s done something elsewhere that’s just silly.


Yes, he's done something elsewhere. Homophobic slurs against the Irish PM are not a good look.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Sweary Brexit type. Held to different standards than sweary remainers.


Someone must have reported him though.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, he's done something elsewhere. Homophobic slurs against the Irish PM are not a good look.


Ah, ok. Fair enough.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, he's done something elsewhere. Homophobic slurs against the Irish PM are not a good look.



Does "little bitch" count as homophobic slur?  
There were a few Americanisms in there (possibly picked up from right-wing forums) and it seems like a general-purpose insult on those.

Hence the timely retort of "cuck" earlier.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 14, 2018)

im shocked - shocked i say - that shouty sweary aggressive brexit poster budgie 451 turned out to be a homophobic bigot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

8ball said:


> Does "little bitch" count as homophobic slur?
> There were a few Americanisms in there (possibly picked up from right-wing forums) and it seems like a general-purpose insult on those.
> 
> Hence the timely retort of "cuck" earlier.


In context, I would say yes. It followed posts of explicit homophobic insults.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In context, I would say yes. It followed posts of explicit homophobic insults.



Fair enough - just going by a search result.
As you were.


----------



## tommers (Dec 14, 2018)

Budgie 452 incoming.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 14, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> Why on earth did he get banned???
> 
> Unless he’s done something elsewhere that’s just silly.


I think the “don’t be a dick” rule was applied.


----------



## binka (Dec 14, 2018)

tommers said:


> Budgie 452 incoming.


Well exactly it was obviously a banned returner just on the wind-up shouldn't have to wait for them to break any other rules just ban them on sight. They'll be back in 30 pages time, posting similarly stupid comments which for some reason people bother replying to and the thread gets even more tedious.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 14, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I think the “don’t be a dick” rule was applied.


That’s a daft rule, tbf. If it were applied evenly I’d be the only poster here.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> That’s a daft rule, tbf. If it were applied evenly I’d be the only poster here.



Just you and editor.

Ignoring each other.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Dec 14, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> That’s a daft rule, tbf. If it were applied evenly I’d be the only poster here.


----------



## binka (Dec 14, 2018)

Just close sign ups and ban everyone who joined after 2009, it's the only way to be sure


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> You don’t understand what phenomenonology is.  It’s just an impressive sounding word to you, isn’t it?


I bow to your superior knowledge.
The point I was clumsily trying to make is that the GFA and the referendum result both exist in opposition to one another regardless as to whether any individual is trying to make brexit happen or to stop it.


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

binka said:


> Just close sign ups and ban everyone who joined after 2009, it's the only way to be sure


 Or alternatively ban everyone over 50,000 posts - like Logan's Run kill off the dinosaurs - obviously, editor as 'God' of this Universe gets exempt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

philosophical said:


> The GFA is a phenomena.
> Brexit is a phenomena.


one phenomenon
many phenomena


----------



## binka (Dec 14, 2018)

phillm said:


> Or alternatively ban everyone over 50,000 posts - like Logan's Run kill off the dinosaurs - obviously, editor as 'God' of this Universe gets exempt.


I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

binka said:


> I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense


the entire rationale of urban is what you contemptuously call 'the time wasting nonsense'


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

binka said:


> I do like this idea. Or ration people to three posts per day - that should cut down on the time wasting nonsense



Even better idea - post rationing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

phillm said:


> Even better idea - post rationing.


perhaps we could have a market in posts, where 'spivs' who never use their ration sell them to people who desire more than the allocation


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

phillm said:


> Even better idea - post rationing.


or better yet people could be allowed to post 20% of their postcount on 31/12/2018 throughout 2019


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> the entire rationale of urban is what you contemptuously call 'the time wasting nonsense'


One of the more important posts of 2018.


----------



## phillm (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> or better yet people could be allowed to post 20% of their postcount on 31/12/2018 throughout 2019



factoring likes there as well in some context. Why not have a referendum on it? They seem like a good way to find consensus in making important decisions.


----------



## realitybites (Dec 14, 2018)

Successfully we have made the UK one of the most undesirable countries in the West.. Toursim in the UK is going to be drop like a lead balloon . . Ironic really as London will always be safe, but the regional towns will first feel the sting - In 5/8 years we will really start to see the overall picture of this. Brexit started out as as a way to control borders, now no one in their right mind would want to come to this country 'Project Undesirable'..


----------



## 8ball (Dec 14, 2018)

I think if the vitriol dies down, tourism will do very well from a weakened pound in the longer term.

The production sector will be in deep shit, though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.



Bargain!
Is that a return?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Bargain!
> Is that a return?


only if you're unlucky


----------



## brogdale (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> only if you're unlucky


the old "...and second prize is...' one


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 7 euros to travel to Europe from 2020. So that'll be about ten quid then.


This story isn't really about Brexit, but about changes to EU rules affecting everyone entering the EU from the 61 nations on the special (most favourable) list
Great news for supporters of freedom of movement


> Citizens of EU countries - which currently includes British people - are able to travel anywhere in the EU. But anyone from a non-EU country has to apply for a visa - unless they are from a special list of 61 countries, which also includes the US, Japan and Australia. Nationals from these 61 countries can travel within the EU's Schengen zone - the area where people can travel without border checks - for up to 90 days without a visa.





> However, *because of the migrant crisis and security concerns over terrorism, the EU has decided to bring in more controls* over the countries on this special list.





> The EU says the ETIAS system will "to strengthen security checks on those persons who travel visa-free to the EU"...
> ...The details needed for the application form will include passport information as well as background questions about criminal records or medical conditions.





> Applications can also be denied or take up to four weeks to process... ...*The document will be checked by border guards when crossing the EU border*.


This last bit reads to me as if the EU will have to install guards on the border between NI and Eire, to check the documents of anyone entering the EU that way...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

We can just add it to the list of thousands of small things that will be shit about brexit. Some might be much bigger shocks than this - any kind of hard brexit will end the EHIC arrangement for instance.

This in addition to all the shit big things. Yay!


----------



## Wookey (Dec 14, 2018)

Saw this BTL comment on the Guardian, liked it thought I'd share.







Pinkie123
6d ago
 Guardian Pick
4041
I think the critical nature of our times beyond extends political upheavals such as Brexit. These political convulsions are manifestations of anxieties generated by a whole nexus of traumatic cultural, economic, political and ecological shifts. Perhaps the most significant is the advent of the anthropocene. With anthropgenc climate change, the idea of nature being a stable background to human affairs in no longer tenable. Furthermore, digital infrastructures are breaking down the boundary between man and machine. Biogenetics and AI augur the death of the liberal subject.

Then there is a crisis of political economy. Given that a market economic system predicated on goods cannot adapt to a world run by fibre optics and algorithms, capitalism is having to assume ever more authoritarian and violent forms in order to reproduce itself. This it does in a paradoxical symbiosis with new 'deterritorialized' ways of living and working with no roots in place or encitizened community.

In principle this article is right. Politics has been utterly debased into infotainment and nefarious data manipulation. But the solution cannot be as straightforward as to return 'gravitas' to political dscourse. Liberals are wrong to believe that technocratic governance can be restored by returning to a 'centre ground' representing moderate common-sense, or simply by reputable media organisations giving people 'facts'. Firstly, there is no longer a secure, demarcated space within which an elite technocracy can successfully operate. Once politicians took to Twitter, that was game up for politics as an elite profession separate from the spheres of commerce and media. Second, as a result of the sudden proliferation of publicly accessible data given rise to by the data economy, we are finding it ever-harder to organise facts into political narratives. Instead, we create personal narratives rooted in our own subjective experience. In a final conclusion to consumerism, knowledge itself has become a commodity to be shopped for in a digital marketplace.

I think you are right when you say that we no longer know what it means to be informed. We no longer know what truth is in the ethical sense. One does not have to be a relativist to conclude that there is much more to truth than facts. Truth is a question of what facts are slected or ommitted in support an ideological narrative. Third Way liberalism, for all its claims to rationality, was never common-sensical or empiricist. Think of all the reckless wars and crazy economic experiments of the past twenty years! What is called moderate is pure ideology. Since events such as Iraq and the financial crash, it has become harder to trust politicians as bearers of truth. WikiLeaks and other leaking of deep state secrets into the public domain, along with the permanent threat to public institutionsby cyber-terrorists, show that politicians and elite officials cannot maintain control of information, and therefore their authority, as they once did.

But neither is populism the answer, as many anti-neoliberals of the right believe. Populism is a retreat from the trauma and terrifying complexity of sociopolitical upheaval into toxic fantasy. Absurdly, the populist assumes that 'ordinary people' have an innate wisdom and are immune fom ideology. Conspiracy theories constructed around the hate figure of the immigrant, Muslim or the Jew serves to restore a false coherency to his or her worldview. They suggest, comfortingly, that someone (the elite) is in charge and all it takes is for an enemy interloper to be removed from the democratic community for the power of its rightful members (an ethno-culturally homogenous 'people') to be restored. Apart from anything else, the populist cannot engage with questions of structural economics - only cultural idenity. Similarly, left-wing identitarianism is a form of populism insofar as its organising principle is culture rather than class in the Marxian sense.

What the answer is I do not know, but both the populist reactionaries and the centrist liberals long to return to versions of the past which, even if they did ever truly exist, are now irrevocable."

Pretty high standard of global socio-economic insight I thought.

Our age lacks gravitas. That’s why we cannot deal with crisis | Ian Jack


----------



## binka (Dec 14, 2018)

tl;dr


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Saw this BTL comment on the Guardian, liked it thought I'd share.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Can you summarise?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 14, 2018)

Meanwhile pantomimes across the country are being cancelled, because despite how much they spend on stars & production, they don't feel they can compete with what's coming out of parliament, free of charge.


----------



## Sea Star (Dec 14, 2018)

binka said:


> tl;dr


"what the answer is I do not know." - there, saved you some reading.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Can you summarise?



Word salad.


----------



## Helen Back (Dec 14, 2018)

From the BBC news website:
_"However, the prime minister has ruled out the prospect of another public vote. Mrs May has repeatedly told MPs that the 2016 referendum result "should be respected"."
_
But that is now outdated data. Surely the _current _"will of the people" should be respected? Especially since the original Leave campaign has been shown to be flawed and not entirely honest. We all now have a better understanding of the effects of Brexit, both good and bad. Surely another referendum will either confirm the 2016 vote or show that the majority now want to remain? 

As a great philosopher once said, "Is that your _final _answer?"


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 14, 2018)

Helen Back said:


> Especially since the original Leave campaign has been shown to be flawed and not entirely honest.



As if the Remain campaign wasn't flawed and not entirely honest.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

The flaw in the reasoning is elsewhere, I think. The result of the 2016 referendum is not the only thing deserving of respect. And it is not necessarily the ultimate trump card beneath which all other eventualities (and institutions of UK democracy) must be subservient. It is self-serving of May to insist that it is. It is one of the many things she should be called on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> As if the Remain campaign wasn't flawed and not entirely honest.


So radical right people on your side breaking the law fine then


----------



## tommers (Dec 14, 2018)

The one vote to rule them all, and in the darkness bind them.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 14, 2018)

Helen Back said:


> From the BBC news website:
> _"However, the prime minister has ruled out the prospect of another public vote. Mrs May has repeatedly told MPs that the 2016 referendum result "should be respected"."_
> "


She'll keep saying that until the the vote, in the vain hope a naive MP might vote for her deal because "its the only option". Once she loses that the line will change...most likely to referendum.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The flaw in the reasoning is elsewhere, I think. The result of the 2016 referendum is not the only thing deserving of respect. And it is not necessarily the ultimate trump card beneath which all other eventualities (and institutions of UK democracy) must be subservient. It is self-serving of May to insist that it is. It is one of the many things she should be called on.


That’s true but it ignores the fact that the 2017 election was then fought on the basis of political manifestos that were quit explicit about the intention to perform a full Brexit (eg the Labour manifesto promised to retain the “benefits of the single market and the customs union” but without being a member of either whilst the Tories also made it clear that they intended to exit the customs union.). So it’s not just about the 2016 referendum — it’s also about fulfilling explicit election promises.


----------



## planetgeli (Dec 14, 2018)

Election promises not being fulfilled comes pretty low down on the dishonesty surprise scale.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s true but it ignores the fact that the 2017 election was then fought on the basis of political manifestos that were quit explicit about the intention to perform a full Brexit (eg the Labour manifesto promised to retain the “benefits of the single market and the customs union” but without being a member of either whilst the Tories also made it clear that they intended to exit the customs union.). So it’s not just about the 2016 referendum — it’s also about fulfilling explicit election promises.


Yeah well that didn't work out so well, did it? If When this deal is voted down, that will be a sure sign of deadlock in parliament. It should be the trigger of an immediate dissolution of parliament and a new general election. Minority govts dependent on the support of fringe nutters to prop them up rarely last long, and for good reason. This isn't unprecedented by any means. The nonsense fixed-term act was easily finessed last year when there was no need for an election. Now there really is a concrete need for an election.


----------



## Supine (Dec 14, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> Meanwhile pantomimes across the country are being cancelled, because despite how much they spend on stars & production, they don't feel they can compete with what's coming out of parliament, free of charge.



Oh no they're not


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 14, 2018)

kabbes said:


> That’s true but it ignores the fact that the 2017 election was then fought on the basis of political manifestos that were quit explicit about the intention to perform a full Brexit (eg the Labour manifesto promised to retain the “benefits of the single market and the customs union” but without being a member of either


Can you point to the bit of the manifesto where it explicitly states that the plan is to exit the SM and CU?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Can you summarise?



Yeah course! The long and short of it is, you're a bit of a cunt.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 14, 2018)

Supine said:


> Oh no they're not


Oh yes they are.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2018)

Here they come.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2018)

Riding the people's tiger


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yeah course! The long and short of it is, you're a bit of a cunt.


Perhaps next time you think of doing a c&p odyssey you could think twice, read the FAQ and not bother, especially as you don't think any points in your great screed actually worth making


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

I didn't think that that overlengthy piece that Wookey cut and pasted was by Ian Jack!! 

(*His* article, at the top, looks from a quick skim as if it'll be a _lot_ better -- his Saturday Guardian articles are almost always worth reading IMO/IME -- I'm saving reading it til my trad paper-reading Saturday time  --in the pub!! But with coffee not beer, I'm in the middle of a ten-day pre-Xmas break from  alcohol


----------



## Santino (Dec 14, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> I didn't think that overlengthy piece that Wookey cut and pasted was by Ian Jack!!
> 
> (*His* article, at the top, looks from a quick skim as if it'll be a _lot_ better -- his Saturday Guardian articles are almost always worth reading IMO/IME -- I'm saving reading it til my trad paper-reading Saturday time  --in the pub!! But with coffee not beer, I'm in the middle of a ten-day pre-Xmas break from  alcohol   )


Why don't you read it before you recommend it?


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 14, 2018)

Santino : Why not try being nicer and more friendly? 

I recommended it because I know from experience that Ian Jack's articles are nearly always worth reading**  -- the suggestion was from knowledge therefore. And I did skim it briefly. People don't have to agree anyway 

**He did a brilliant one at the beginning of the year about India, just before I went there ...


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 14, 2018)

100 years ago today, Ireland held an election. No ordinary election. This was to be the first one where women could vote. The first one where a woman was elected to parliament...(Countess  Markievicz) The first one where 73 Sinn Fein candidates were elected...and they never took their seats in Westminster either. Many of those elected were in prisons in the UK at that time. The clear message sent by that Irish electorate was overwhelmingly to break away from the UK. It was a resounding defeat for Home Rule and a massive finger to Westminster. The separatists had their mandate. Unfortunately, Labour had decided not to contest the election so as not to weaken that position. Maybe things would have been different if they had run....who knows.

The reason I'm bringing this up is that the talk on that election night, 100 years ago, turned towards the predominantly Unionist vote in the north east of Ireland and how this very obvious split could lead to a border and how that border might come about...And of course the inevitable and unsettling thought was dawning that a civil war could be imminent. As it turned out...It was this border issue that directly caused the Civil War here.

Roll on 100 years later. And there is talk of a border in Ireland on the table once again only this time Ireland is in a position of relative peace. But that border has never been good for Ireland or indeed NI. Anyone looking at things clearly knows that is the truth.
Make no mistake. A border will be  a massive challenge. It may revive divisions. It could lead to the unthinkable. Or maybe people will be so disinterested that it wont matter. ... yeah right..  no that won't be the case.

The 2016 Brexit vote was based on lies.
So when your parliament lies to you and a 52% majority vote is reached based on those lies...And your parliament spins stories about in a deliberate obfuscation then maybe it's time for the UK to realise that your parliament is a dead loss. One thing is certain. A border here will magnify the position of Sinn Fein here and in NI. They're already stronger in NI. They only have one candidate less than the DUP in the NIA. And there will come a stage where NI will be increasingly less unionist. When that happens, NI will want out of the UK and Westminster better be ready for that ..and deal with their position by accepting that desire and mandate to leave the UK... just as the UK now wants to leave the EU.

Interesting times. I hope I get to see all of this take place.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 14, 2018)

I'm seriously thinking that if they start heading for No Deal we ought to have some damn proper protest, like a national walkout. No Deal would just be fucking suicide.


----------



## T & P (Dec 14, 2018)

I reckon the Xmas retail figures are going to be absolutely dismal. Even central London seems quiet for this time of the year.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 14, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm seriously thinking that if they start heading for No Deal we ought to have some damn proper protest, like a national walkout. No Deal would just be fucking suicide.


I think they don't care.

Like they believe in some magic carpet of britishness or something.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 14, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps next time you think of doing a c&p odyssey you could think twice, read the FAQ and not bother, especially as you don't think any points in your great screed actually worth making



Apologies. My point was it was a BLT comment from presumably a punter rather than a paid commentator, the implicit bit being that it kinda belies the trope that Brexit political discourse has been trite and one-dimensional.

Also dint realise how long it was.


----------



## Gerry1time (Dec 15, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> I think they don't care.
> 
> Like they believe in some magic carpet of britishness or something.



They massively care, they have a lot riding on it. In the short term, no deal will make a small number of people a lot of money. In the medium and longer term, the far right tories know that it's the only way they can finally realise their dream of a tiny state, low tax, unfettered free market Britain with almost complete privatisation and minimal state intervention. Europe kept getting in the way of that, and would do still unless we have no deal.

It's why the Internet is currently full of 'pro-brexit' astroturfers, presumably being funded from somewhere. Both this forum with its sudden 'new members' posting about brexit, and other ones I watch. Conservative Home is the most amusing example of it, given that the regular posters there still seem completely oblivious to the sometimes blatant astroturfing by people posting from a script.

There's money still being invested in the brexit project, because people with money are still keen to see the benefits it will bring them.


----------



## strung out (Dec 15, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Apologies. My point was it was a BLT comment


Bacon, lettuce and tomato?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 15, 2018)

strung out said:


> Bacon, lettuce and tomato?



I have a lumbar puncture headache, I really should not be posting at all.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> There's money still being invested in the brexit project, because people with money are still keen to see the benefits it will bring them.



In Mayfair, Browns not so long back, Steve Bannon, Farage et al got together with the idea of pumping cash into the populist anti EU movements.

In their stupidity, having gathered with their big financing plan, they shortly learnt it's illegal, or very very limited, in most (not all) of their targeted European countries, to fund from outside.

Expensive dinner of the arrogant ignorant.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> .... dream of a tiny state, low tax, unfettered free market Britain with almost complete privatisation and minimal state intervention. Europe kept getting in the way of that, and would do still unless we have no deal.


The EU has been supporting the privatisation and marketisation of public services for decades. What the fuck do you think happened in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, etc

If you're going to argue for Remaining ok, but this nonsense of the white knight EU is not just wrong but revolting when people are dying as a result of policies enacted by the EU.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The EU has been supporting the privatisation and marketisation of public services for decades.



Worth remembering that, for rail, the UK has gone far far beyond any idea that the EU had about privatisation, for decades.

Even now the EU is only vaguely near "catching up" with the UK on that one.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

No the idea for both is the same. This isn't nation states vs the EU, but nation states working hand in glove with the EU.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 15, 2018)

hash tag said:


> There is no need to panic or worry, Tim, nice but Dim is going on tour to explain eveverthings gonna be alright
> https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/wetherspoons-boss-tim-martin-pub-tour-no-deal-brexit/



I saw Tim Martin on a Ch4 news discussion panel. He's very passionate about this issue, even adorning his pubs with propaganda, but you have stop for a moment.
1) How is his business going to be affected by Brexit , particularly staff recruitment?
2) Why is he so driven by this issue when he has built up huge business while the Uk has been a member of the EU?
3) He claims food prices will drop out of the EU, how could they be any cheaper in Wetherspoons anyway?


----------



## Mr Moose (Dec 15, 2018)

T & P said:


> I reckon the Xmas retail figures are going to be absolutely dismal. Even central London seems quiet for this time of the year.



You say that, but I’m seriously contemplating buying a new phone, so I think it’s a little early to assume the wheels have come off.


----------



## Mr Moose (Dec 15, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I saw Tim Martin on a Ch4 news discussion panel. He's very passionate about this issue, even adorning his pubs with propaganda, but you have stop for a moment.
> 1) How is his business going to be affected by Brexit , particularly staff recruitment?
> 2) Why is he so driven by this issue when he has built up huge business while the Uk has been a member of the EU?
> 3) He claims food prices will drop out of the EU, how could they be any cheaper in Wetherspoons anyway?



He’s an utter wanker probably covers it.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I saw Tim Martin on a Ch4 news discussion panel. He's very passionate about this issue, even adorning his pubs with propaganda, but you have stop for a moment.
> 1) How is his business going to be affected by Brexit , particularly staff recruitment?
> 2) Why is he so driven by this issue when he has built up huge business while the Uk has been a member of the EU?
> 3) He claims food prices will drop out of the EU, how could they be any cheaper in Wetherspoons anyway?



1) He would probably like to staff all his pubs with backpackers from Australia, South Africa, and New Zealand
2) He's a wanker who cares more about the colour of his passport than the declining living conditions of his staff and customers
3) Approximately 80% of the meat served in his restaurants is already roadkill from South Asia


----------



## splash (Dec 15, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm seriously thinking that if they start heading for No Deal we ought to have some damn proper protest, like a national walkout. No Deal would just be fucking suicide.





No Deal would be Bangladesh status. Matt Frei  speaks to former Director-General of WTO


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

Great. More shit from LibDem wankers.

Wouldn't want to do anything about lovely trade. Might infer with implementing tuition fees, the bedroom tax, attacks on social security and public services.

Like Blair's intervention yesterday the above is the best support the Leave campaign can get.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 15, 2018)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I saw Tim Martin on a Ch4 news discussion panel. He's very passionate about this issue, even adorning his pubs with propaganda, but you have stop for a moment.
> 1) How is his business going to be affected by Brexit , particularly staff recruitment?
> 2) Why is he so driven by this issue when he has built up huge business while the Uk has been a member of the EU?
> 3) He claims food prices will drop out of the EU, how could they be any cheaper in Wetherspoons anyway?




He has started to stock all his pubs with British produce gradually removing non-European stuff....
I think people have been saying the portion size has been reduced in the pubs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2018)

hash tag said:


> He has started to stock all his pubs with British produce gradually removing non-European stuff....
> I think people have been saying the portion size has been reduced in the pubs.


Oh the portions started declining years ago

When I ordered nachos in the tally ho in North finchley or the moon under water in Barnet in the early 90s there was enough to share. After a year or two the amount of food but not the price declined. Now it's very much a portion for one


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh the portions started declining years ago
> 
> When I ordered nachos in the tally ho in North finchley or the moon under water in Barnet in the early 90s there was enough to share. After a year or two the amount of food but not the price declined. Now it's very much a portion for one



"The portions have always been the same size. All the best wine has always come from Belarus. Brexit means Brexit."


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The EU has been supporting the privatisation and marketisation of public services for decades. What the fuck do you think happened in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, etc
> 
> If you're going to argue for Remaining ok, but this nonsense of the white knight EU is not just wrong but revolting when people are dying as a result of policies enacted by the EU.




I think you'll find Thatcher was adept at all that too....And she was completely uncontrollable and pretty unaccountable to anyone. 



redsquirrel said:


> Great. More shit from LibDem wankers.
> Wouldn't want to do anything about lovely trade. Might infer with implementing tuition fees, the bedroom tax, attacks on social security and public services.
> 
> Like Blair's intervention yesterday the above is the best support the Leave campaign can get.



Whether you like it or not the UK needs trade...it's what keeps it going. The UK will not survive as a level 4 WTO member. You may think you've enough to feed your citizens but you'll find that the most vulnerable will be worse off because the first things to go will be welfare...and benefits.
I don't get how you can't see this? 

Your government will not have to answer to the EU. They'll do exactly what they want and you think they're suddenly going to change their spots and give more money to the NHS and the more vulnerable? Not a chance. No they'll up taxes and screw every last penny out of public servants. The super rich will not stick around...sure they'll keep a few pads but they won't live in The UK long enough every year to pay taxes. Banks will stop giving loans....because of high risk and no guaranteed returns if trade is shite....think about that for a minute...there goes manufacturing and industry. Small businesses may as well kiss their asses goodbye. 

Leave is a great option for anyone who believes in a return to pre WW2 times. Start saving brown paper and string cos by the time all that money you owe is paid back to the EU (2065) The UK will not exist. NI will be part of ROI and the EU. Scotland will also have opted for freedom and will be in the EU. 
Dunno anything about Wales.
England will be an outcrop on the edge of Europe and I'm sorry but it'll be fucked. Its never going to be like Norway because it hasnt got that "north sea gas and oil" wealth to share with its citizens. People will leave the UK in droves for work elsewhere. You will lose a generation or even two. 

But why even think about that when you can be like this....


----------



## two sheds (Dec 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh the portions started declining years ago
> 
> When I ordered nachos in the tally ho in North finchley or the moon under water in Barnet in the early 90s there was enough to share. After a year or two the amount of food but not the price declined. Now it's very much a portion for one



The fields round my house have shrunk since I got here, too


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

Lupa said:


> I think you'll find Thatcher was adept at all that too....And she was completely uncontrollable and pretty unaccountable to anyone.


The difference being no one has claimed otherwise. 

The rest of the rubbish you posted is again the type of crap that made people decide to vote leave.

Anyway government continuing to try to get Labour MPs onside. 


> Ms Rudd - who backed Remain in the referendum - said she supported Mrs May's deal and advocated assembling a "coalition" to avoid what she called "the rocks of no deal".
> 
> She said the country "will face serious trouble" if MPs "dig in against the prime minister's deal".
> 
> ...


Dangerous game. If they really do plan on getting May's deal through on Labour votes then those Tories opposed end up getting pushed into going to a VoNC.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

There's an idea that's been growing on this thread.

The British border in Ireland, is a problem entirely of the Irish/EU making.

The problem is nothing to do with the British or Brexit.

WTAF.


----------



## JimW (Dec 15, 2018)

So is there nothing the EU, vaunted granter of workers' rights, can do to stop the Hungarian government's latest attack on working hours?


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

JimW said:


> So is there nothing the EU, vaunted granter of workers' rights, can do to stop the Hungarian government's latest attack on working hours?



Do you mean the EU should have *more* controls over working hours, or that nations should be able to opt out and have *less* control by the EU?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> There's an idea that's been growing on this thread.
> 
> The British border in Ireland, is a problem entirely of the Irish/EU making.
> 
> ...


The _problem_ is nothing to do with either the Irish or the British. The amalgamation of populaces with their governments (as in your post) is the problem.

Fuck the EU, the Irish government and the British government.


----------



## JimW (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Do you mean the EU should have *more* controls over working hours, or that nations should be able to opt out and have *less* control by the EU?


No, I meant quite clearly it's not EU membership that brings worker protections.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

JimW said:


> No, I meant quite clearly it's not EU membership that brings worker protections.



So if we get rid of the Working Time Directive, people in the UK will work *less* hours?

Working Time Directive 2003 - Wikipedia


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

If there's one thing we can surely all agree on, it's that it's "fewer".


----------



## JimW (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> So if we get rid of the Working Time Directive, people in the UK will work *less* hours?


How does that question even follow unless you think the EU is the only political force able to impact the state of workers' protections?


----------



## JimW (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> If there's one thing we can surely all agree on, it's that it's "fewer".


Think paolo might be right there actually, "less hours" is a special usage when it comes to working time I reckon.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

And _that's_ why we've got Brexit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> So if we get rid of the Working Time Directive, people in the UK will work *less* hours?
> 
> Working Time Directive 2003 - Wikipedia


As has been pointed out time and again, this isn't nation states vs the EU. They support each other.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 15, 2018)

Do NOT look at Hungary. Do NOT look at Hungary.
DO refer to hypotheticals. Do NOT look at Hungary.

Talking about auschwitz without talking about capital


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> So if we get rid of the Working Time Directive, people in the UK will work *less* hours?
> 
> Working Time Directive 2003 - Wikipedia



Is this the same Working Time Directive that prospective employees are encouraged to tick away by employers?


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

JimW said:


> How does that question even follow unless you think the EU is the only political force able to impact the state of workers' protections?



You: "I meant quite clearly it's not EU membership that brings worker protections."

Now we get into clarifications. You've now said "the only"... and I'll agree with you on that.

Protections can have many sources, and the EU isn't the sole arbiter. Generally though, they can only add, not take away.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Is this the same Working Time Directive that prospective employees are encouraged to tick away by employers?



Yeah that one.

The EU should enforce it more strongly.

(Or do you think it should be scrapped?)


----------



## binka (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Is this the same Working Time Directive that prospective employees are encouraged to tick away by employers?


I was about to post the same thing. It's absolutely standard for all new employees to be presented with a form at the start of their employment asking them to opt out of the wtd. Of course you don't _have_ to sign it...


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Protections can have many sources, and the EU isn't the sole arbiter. Generally though, they can only add, not take away.


FFS. The Greek people must be really glad how the EU _added_ to their welfare.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

binka said:


> I was about to post the same thing. It's absolutely standard for all new employees to be presented with a form at the start of their employment asking them to opt out of the wtd. Of course you don't _have_ to sign it...



Should we enforce the EU directive? Prevent the opt out?


----------



## binka (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Should we enforce the EU directive? Prevent the opt out?


We? I don't think I'm going to be much use


----------



## andysays (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yeah that one.
> 
> The EU should enforce it more strongly.
> 
> (Or do you think it should be scrapped?)


Any thoughts as to why 'the EU' doesn't enforce it more strongly?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Should we enforce the EU directive? Prevent the opt out?


"We" who?


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Any thoughts as to why 'the EU' doesn't enforce it more strongly?



No, I barely know what our own parliament is doing one day from the next.

What's your theory in this master end game of 27 countries on the working time directive? Bildeberg?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Yeah that one.
> 
> The EU should enforce it more strongly.
> 
> (Or do you think it should be scrapped?)



They should, but they don't. Funny, that.


----------



## binka (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> No, I barely know what our own parliament is doing one day from the next.
> 
> What's your theory in this master end game of 27 countries on the working time directive? Bildeberg?


I don't know what the end game is but I'm starting to suspect it might not be a workers paradise


----------



## andysays (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> No...



Maybe you should at least read and attempt to understand the wiki page you just linked to before continuing any further out of your depth...


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> No, I barely know what our own parliament is doing one day from the next.
> 
> What's your theory in this master end game of 27 countries on the working time directive? Bildeberg?



What has the Bilderberg Group got to do with anything? Because it looks from here like you're trying to equate anti-EU positions in general with conspiracy nonsense. Which would be a transparent attempt to de-legitimise any and all opposition to the EU no matter what its political basis.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> They should, but they don't. Funny, that.



You're now ascribing the responsibility to the EU - that it's for them to protect us.

The EU are to blame for not enforcing their *minimum* rules?

Not the UK, the sovereign state, but the EU are not enforcing things?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Any thoughts as to why 'the EU' doesn't enforce it more strongly?


Because governments such as the UK one have strongly resisted things like getting rid of the 48hrs 'opt out'.


----------



## hash tag (Dec 15, 2018)

Tim calls for May to go shock 'In the name of God, GO' Wetherspoons boss REVEALS Theresa May's 'essential Brexit flaw'


----------



## toblerone3 (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> FFS. The Greek people must be really glad how the EU _added_ to their welfare.



.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

The WTD isn't just 48 hours. That's the only optional bit, and it's the UK that made it optional, whilst complaining about the entire WTD as the creeping 'social charter'. French working time regulations aren't optional, IIRC.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> What has the Bilderberg Group got to do with anything? Because it looks from here like you're trying to equate anti-EU positions in general with conspiracy nonsense. Which would be a transparent attempt to de-legitimise any and all opposition to the EU no matter what its political basis.



"They should, but they don't. Funny, that."

It's the nod and wink of your comment. Bilderberg reference is extreme, but the "funny that" was what led me there.


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2018)

After all this time there are still fundamental misunderstandings regarding roles and responsibilities when it comes to legislation and enforcement.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Maybe you should at least read and attempt to understand the wiki page you just linked to before continuing any further out of your depth...



I'm out of my depth more often than Raab has seen lorries at Dover.

Is there anything in the WTD that forcefully *removes* UK workers rights?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> You're now ascribing the responsibility to the EU - that it's for them to protect us.
> 
> The EU are to blame for not enforcing their *minimum* rules?
> 
> Not the UK, the sovereign state, but the EU are not enforcing things?


You really cannot think in terms other than "the EU" vs "the UK" can you?


----------



## JimW (Dec 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> After all this time there are still fundamental misunderstandings regarding roles and responsibilities when it comes to legislation and enforcement.


The main point being made was we were regularly assured protecting workers' rights was something the EU did by the sort of people who would then go on berate leave voters for not understanding the issues.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> The WTD isn't just 48 hours. That's the only optional bit, and it's the UK that made it optional, whilst complaining about the entire WTD as the creeping 'social charter'. French working time regulations aren't optional, IIRC.


But France is in the EU. How can that be possible? And what about all those French state owned companies? How are they allowed? 

Maybe just maybe what's gone on in the UK since 1979 wasn't caused by the EU. 

Calling out the EU for its flaws and failures is one thing. Pretending it is this all powerful force that is ruining our lives, holding us back, is just fantasy. Dangerous fantasy as it feeds in to the UKIP daily express daily mail Sun nonsense that's been fuelling division and xenophobia for decades. Up yours delors haha.


----------



## andysays (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> You're now ascribing the responsibility to the EU - that it's for them to protect us.
> 
> The EU are to blame for not enforcing their *minimum* rules?
> 
> Not the UK, the sovereign state, but the EU are not enforcing things?



It's the responsibility of the member states to enforce the rules within their jurisdictions, not the EU.

If people have signed the opt-out, then the rules (such as they are) are not being broken, that's the whole point of the opt-out.

You clearly have very little idea of how this works and appear to be clutching at straws...


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> You're now ascribing the responsibility to the EU - that it's for them to protect us.
> 
> The EU are to blame for not enforcing their *minimum* rules?
> 
> Not the UK, the sovereign state, but the EU are not enforcing things?





mauvais said:


> The WTD isn't just 48 hours. That's the only optional bit, and it's the UK that made it optional, whilst complaining about the entire WTD as the creeping 'social charter'. French working time regulations aren't optional, IIRC.



All of which puts the lie to the notion that the EU is any friend of workers. It was within the interests of UK state and capital to make that bit optional, and oh look what happened.



paolo said:


> "They should, but they don't. Funny, that."
> 
> It's the nod and wink of your comment. Bilderberg reference is extreme, but the "funny that" was what led me there.



If you think I was implying anything conspiranutty, then you're delusional. The EU is openly committed to capitalism and its rules (as well its behaviour in the real world) reflect that.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

The EU are pursuing Article 7 against Hungary by the way which unfortunately is about as strong as it gets, since expulsion is impossible. The strongest punishment is to remove voting rights but then you can argue that's anti-democratic (ho ho ho) so...


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

The original point I reacted to was 

“vaunted granter of workers' rights”

I think we’ve established that there is no vaunted granter.


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2018)

I'm betting it's mainly UK conservative company owners who will be happy to avoid the upcoming EU anti tax avoidance directive. I'm sure the workers would prefer more money going into the pot for fair distribution.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> All of which puts the lie to the notion that the EU is any friend of workers. It was within the interests of UK state and capital to make that bit optional, and oh look what happened.


I think you're trying to have your cake & eat it here - EU protections were weakened by UK capital, certainly, but the ultimate influence was positive and much further than the UK wanted to go were it left alone.


> The UK strongly opposes any attempt to tell people that they can no longer work the hours they want


UK Government Employment Secretary, 1993. Are things any different now?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I think you're trying to have your cake & eat it here - EU protections were weakened by UK capital, certainly, but the ultimate influence was positive and much further than the UK wanted to go were it left alone.
> UK Government Employment Secretary, 1993. Are things any different now?


I'd even go further than that. With regulations such as those guaranteeing holiday and sick pay to part-time workers, which were brought in by the EU, not the UK independently, you have one win that extends across 27 countries. How is that not a good thing? And as keeps being pointed out, these things are invariably _minimums_ - any state is free to take things further if they wish.

I see confused thinking in a lot of posts here. The EU is simultaneously too powerful and not powerful enough.


----------



## Gerry1time (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The EU has been supporting the privatisation and marketisation of public services for decades. What the fuck do you think happened in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, etc
> 
> If you're going to argue for Remaining ok, but this nonsense of the white knight EU is not just wrong but revolting when people are dying as a result of policies enacted by the EU.



That wasn't what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that as neo-liberal as the EU undoubtedly is, it's still seen as a left wing construct by many on the even-further-right due to its support for things like quality standards and to some degree workers' rights. I'm no fan of the EU either, but I was just pointing out that the slide towards a no deal brexit isn't due to lack of care from the far right, it's something they're proactively pushing.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> That wasn't what I was saying at all. What I was saying was that as neo-liberal as the EU undoubtedly is, it's still seen as a left wing construct by many on the even-further-right due to its support for things like quality standards and to some degree workers' rights. I'm no fan of the EU either, but I was just pointing out that the slide towards a no deal brexit isn't due to lack of care from the far right, it's something they're proactively pushing.



The Mayfair dinner that brought Europe's far right together


----------



## andysays (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> The WTD isn't just 48 hours. That's the only optional bit, and it's the UK that made it optional, whilst complaining about the entire WTD as the creeping 'social charter'. French working time regulations aren't optional, IIRC.


Funnily enough, my previous employer was under the impression that the whole thing was optional and that he could insist that I didn't have four weeks paid holiday a year.

Maybe I should have reported him to the EU...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Funnily enough, my previous employer was under the impression that the whole thing was optional and that he could insist that I didn't have four weeks paid holiday a year.
> 
> Maybe I should have reported him to the EU...


Your employer was doing something illegal. So you should have reported him to the UK authorities, who could have done something about it, not the EU - this is UK law, brought in through the EU. We're entitled to 20 days' paid leave plus bank holidays, or a pro-rata equivalent, by law. And the vast majority of UK employers do comply with this, given that it's the law.

Holiday entitlement


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

Lupa said:


> Your government will not have to answer to the EU. They'll do exactly what they want


You seem to be an expert on EU regurlations, so can you anwer me this;
when remainers were challenged up thread, that Corbyn's plan to nationalise key industries would be hindered by the regulations of EU competition law (were the UK to be bound to the EU), those remainers suggested that the UK could simply ignore EU rules just like France and Germany regularly do.
So can the UK gov ignore those EU rules thattyou're suggesting they answer to? and if so, why do you think that tory governments haven't previously ignored those rules anyway and gone all out Singapore?


Lupa said:


> and you think they're suddenly going to change their spots and give more money to the NHS and the more vulnerable? Not a chance. No they'll up taxes and screw every last penny out of public servants. The super rich will not stick around...sure they'll keep a few pads but they won't live in The UK long enough every year to pay taxes. Banks will stop giving loans....because of high risk and no guaranteed returns if trade is shite....think about that for a minute...there goes manufacturing and industry. Small businesses may as well kiss their asses goodbye.


Sorry, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that this post brexit goverment will up taxes _and_ cut spending on the NHS? what kind of government would that be? Tory, Labour, who?

I mean, forgive me for thinking you've got this a bit arse about face, I can only imagine that as an Irish citizen your opinion may be distorted if you think the prospects of raised taxes causing the super rich to fuck off is something negative.
Are you particularly worried that Apple (and just about every other rich multi-national) may leave Ireland when they're told to pay more taxes?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I think you're trying to have your cake & eat it here - EU protections were weakened by UK capital, certainly, but the ultimate influence was positive and much further than the UK wanted to go were it left alone.
> UK Government Employment Secretary, 1993. Are things any different now?



The point is that such "protections" will always be gimped by the interests of capital, because that's ultimately what they are designed to serve. It's for them, not for us. When the National Minimum Wage was introduced (no thanks to the EU by the way), younger workers and apprentices got fucked, and are still getting fucked with poorer rates.



littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd even go further than that. With regulations such as those guaranteeing holiday and sick pay to part-time workers, which were brought in by the EU, not the UK independently, you have one win that extends across 27 countries. How is that not a good thing? And as keeps being pointed out, these things are invariably _minimums_ - any state is free to take things further if they wish.



It's not a win, it's not even a concession, grudgingly given after demands and action by European workers. Those minimums are borne out of a desire by the EU for regulatory harmonisation. That they may have resulted in slightly better conditions than might otherwise have occurred is incidental.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 15, 2018)

The U.K. choosing to take an ill considered and destructive route into gerrymandered neoliberalism under the EU umbrella yet simultaneously ensuring that the EU is also the taking the popular ogre across the water role in the performance is a quite remarkable piece of engineering


----------



## andysays (Dec 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Your employer was doing something illegal. So you should have reported him to the UK authorities, who could have done something about it, not the EU - this is UK law, brought in through the EU. We're entitled to 20 days' paid leave plus bank holidays, or a pro-rata equivalent, by law. And the vast majority of UK employers do comply with this, given that it's the law.



Yes, I know all that. That's what I told him and that, among other reasons, is why I told him to stick his job.

The bit about reporting him to the EU was a joke referring to paolo's apparent belief that it's for the EU to enforce


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Yes, I know all that.The bit about reporting him to the EU was a joke referring to paolo's apparent belief that it's for the EU to enforce


In this instance, the UK is compliant with EU law. If a member state were not to comply with EU law, then yes, the EU would need to do something about it. And evidently it isn't always successful when a member state doesn't comply. Fact remains that your legal right to four weeks plus public holidays came in as an EU directive. If you want to see how bad things could potentially get, have a look at the US and its holiday entitlement. You know how many days a worker is legally entitled to there? A big fat ZERO. That's the direction the r/w brexiteers want to take the UK in - 'flexibility to remain competititve in this tough world...' Things can get far worse than they are now, and if brexit succeeds they probably will.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 15, 2018)

NoXion said:


> The point is that such "protections" will always be gimped by the interests of capital, because that's ultimately what they are designed to serve. It's for them, not for us. When the National Minimum Wage was introduced (no thanks to the EU by the way), younger workers and apprentices got fucked, and are still getting fucked with poorer rates.


No shit. But until you remove the influence of the entire external environment of global capital, this is like leaving your umbrella at home and arguing with the rain.



NoXion said:


> It's not a win, it's not even a concession, grudgingly given after demands and action by European workers. Those minimums are borne out of a desire by the EU for regulatory harmonisation. That they may have resulted in slightly better conditions than might otherwise have occurred is incidental.


It's not incidental if you value your 'slightly better' conditions. I don't need to give a shit if it's the product of harmonisation. Is it better or worse?


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

andysays said:


> Yes, I know all that. That's what I told him and that, among other reasons, is why I told him to stick his job.
> 
> The bit about reporting him to the EU was a joke referring to paolo's apparent belief that it's for the EU to enforce



My concluding point was (intended)

Is there anything from the EU that *reduces* worker rights, that when we leave, will no longer reduce rights?


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

Let's start afresh:

What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I see confused thinking in a lot of posts here. The EU is simultaneously too powerful and not powerful enough.


What twaddle. The only person who's come close to arguing anything like this over the last couple of pages is paolo.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let's start afresh:
> 
> What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?


When did you stop hitting your wife?


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let's start afresh:
> 
> What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?



The right to chlorinate mucky chicken rather than the requirement to grow them in sanitary conditions. 

The right to breath air that doesn't need to comply with those pesky environmental protections.

The right to a paycut as our companies start competing with the third world on cost.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let's start afresh:
> 
> What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?


you could do much worse than taking a look at labour laws in Iceland or Norway (or Human Rights, LGBT rights etc) to see that social protection isn't an exclusive domain of the EU


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you could do much worse than taking a look at labour laws in Iceland or Norway (or Human Rights, LGBT rights etc) to see that social protection isn't an exclusive domain of the EU


No it's not. How is the UK going to magically transform itself into a Scandinavia-style social market? Is that a likely direction of travel post-Brexit? Is there a single tory politician who would seek such a thing? Or are they likely to push in the opposite direction?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> The right to chlorinate mucky chicken rather than the requirement to grow them in sanitary conditions.


The remainers version of bendy bananas.

oi, stop chlorinating my anti-biotics contaminated chicken wings


----------



## NoXion (Dec 15, 2018)

mauvais said:


> No shit. But until you remove the influence of the entire external environment of global capital, this is like leaving your umbrella at home and arguing with the rain.



There is no "external" environment to global capital, it's all of a piece. The fuckers have more in common with each other than they do to us. The EU dresses up in its "good cop" outfit because that's useful to furthering the project, not because they have any intrinsic concern for the rights of workers.



> It's not incidental if you value your 'slightly better' conditions. I don't need to give a shit if it's the product of harmonisation. Is it better or worse?



We don't know, because you've only given counter-factuals to support your case. In actual history the UK government introduced the NMW without the EU's prodding.

In any case, whatever the EU and UK gov. give, they can take away. I'm not going to refuse scraps from the table if I'm starving, but I'm also not going to delude myself that's the best or most sustainable solution.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The difference being no one has claimed otherwise.
> 
> The rest of the rubbish you posted is again the type of crap that made people decide to vote leave.
> 
> ...



At this stage you're probably going to be better off leaving with no deal.



pocketscience said:


> You seem to be an expert on EU regurlations, so can you anwer me this;
> when remainers were challenged up thread, that Corbyns plan to nationalise key industries would be hindered by the regulations of EU competition law, were the UK bound to the EU, those remainers suggested that the UK could simply ignore EU rules - just like France and Germany regularly do.
> So can the UK gov ignore those EU rules you're suggesting they answer to? and if so, why do you think the tory governments haven't previously ignored those rules anyway and gone all out Singapore?
> 
> ...




Quite honestly, what the UK does politically is totally up to you....and in this case, so long as it doesn't fuck up NI and the GFA I hope whatever you decide is your very best option. I just hope that whatever happens doesn't wreck peace over here.


----------



## Supine (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The remainers version of bendy bananas.
> 
> oi, stop chlorinating my anti-biotics contaminated chicken wings



The only difference being it's based on fact rather than the bendy banana bullshit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you could do much worse than taking a look at labour laws in Iceland or Norway (or Human Rights, LGBT rights etc) to see that social protection isn't an exclusive domain of the EU




The same twats will be running the show whether under the EU or not - this is the U.K.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you could do much worse than taking a look at labour laws in Iceland or Norway (or Human Rights, LGBT rights etc) to see that social protection isn't an exclusive domain of the EU




Why are you looking to Norway?
The UK will NEVER be like them. 
They are rolling in gas and oil money and share that wealth with their population. 
The UK will NEVER be like that.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let's start afresh:
> 
> What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?



I'll keep doing this - I'm going down the shop. Try in an hour?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> Let's start afresh:
> 
> What increased workers rights do we get when we leave?


The working time directive came into force in 2003. So have the hours workers actually work decreased since then? Are we working fewer hours than in the 50s/60s/70s/80s?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. How is the UK going to magically transform itself into a Scandinavia-style social market? Is that a likely direction of travel post-Brexit? Is there a single tory politician who would seek such a thing? Or are they likely to push in the opposite direction?


Sure, if the ''left wing' opinion on here is anything to go by, then no chance - being either to lathargic or really just liberals at heart.
There's no will in the left to fight for it, neither out nor in the EU from what I can tell.
Look at the Gilets juanes thread as an example, seemed someswere desperate in the hope that the protesters are just aabunch of French gammons


----------



## ska invita (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The working time directive came into force in 2003. So have the hours of workers actually work decreased since then? Are we working fewer hours than in the 50s/60s/70s/80s?


Does anyone know about this for certain? I have the vaguest of understanding of it:
Id expect working hours would have gone down in the countries that recognised the directive (France at an educated guess?) - IIRC the UK govenrment fought to make sure it wasnt binding and included opt outs, which employees are bascially forced to sign if they want a job that goes over the limits
Even that 48 hours is under threat supposedly (indy link)
Theresa May refuses to guarantee EU rules to limit the working week to 48 hours will survive Brexit


----------



## ska invita (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Look at the Gilets juanes thread as an example, seemed someswere desperate in the hope that the protesters are just aabunch of French gammons


Thats unfair pocketscience, theres clearly a battle over the political direction of the Vests - French people nearly elected Le Pen as President last year, of course there are many reactionary attitudes amongst the French masses. I didnt see anyone on that thread *desperate* to say thats* all *it is ... clearly there is a big reactionary element within it. The last election proves that, based purely on head count.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sure, if the ''left wing' opinion on here is anything to go by, then no chance - being either to lathargic or really just liberals at heart.
> There's no will in the left to fight for it, neither out nor in the EU from what I can tell.


All the energy going into the Labour party couldnt be more of an attempt to recreate an imagined Scandinavia idyll


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> The only difference being it's based on fact rather than the bendy banana bullshit


you missed the point. anyone who doesn't give a shit about their chickens being pumped full of anti-biotics really shouldn't care less about chlorinated water to clean them.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Thats unfair pocketscience, theres clearly a battle over the political direction of the Vests - French people nearly elected Le Pen as President last year, of course there are many reactionary attitudes amongst the French masses. I didnt see anyone on that thread *desperate* to say thats* all *it is ... clearly there is a big reactionary element within it. The last election proves that, based purely on head count.


OK fair enough. They may be legit concerns but my wider point is that the left are doing nothing of note about neoliberal policies eating away at workers living standards except trying to decipher the voting patterns of those that are. I recall similar attitudes during the catalan independence protests.


----------



## dshl (Dec 15, 2018)

Helen Back said:


> From the BBC news website:
> _"However, the prime minister has ruled out the prospect of another public vote. Mrs May has repeatedly told MPs that the 2016 referendum result "should be respected"."
> _
> But that is now outdated data. Surely the _current _"will of the people" should be respected? Especially since the original Leave campaign has been shown to be flawed and not entirely honest. We all now have a better understanding of the effects of Brexit, both good and bad. Surely another referendum will either confirm the 2016 vote or show that the majority now want to remain?
> ...



If only we could now whizz over to a parallel universe where the remainders won and it was the leavers who were harping on about a second referendum. If only we could see for just a flash moment what your sentiment would be about another referendum.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Does anyone know about this for certain? I have the vaguest of understanding of it:
> Id expect working hours would have gone down in the countries that recognised the directive (France at an educated guess?) - IIRC the UK govenrment fought to make sure it wasnt binding and included opt outs, which employees are bascially forced to sign if they want a job that goes over the limits
> Even that 48 hours is under threat supposedly (indy link)
> Theresa May refuses to guarantee EU rules to limit the working week to 48 hours will survive Brexit


The amount of unpaid overtime that is been done has been steadily increasing since the records began (sometime in the 80s IIRC). 1, 2, 3, 4.
And you see the same trend across countries.

EDIT: As Seymour points out the official average number of hours of worked might have dropped but the number of hours workers are actually working hasn't.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 15, 2018)

So far all I'm really getting from this Newtons Cradle style debate is that, whether we leave the EU or stay in the EU, we need better UK government(s). Till then nothing gets better, whether we're in or out.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> All the energy going into the Labour party couldnt be more of an attempt to recreate an imagined Scandinavia idyll


Maybe, there's just too little energy coming out of it 
As mentioned upthread, I'd personally prefer them to be much more vocal on laying out specific terms for their vision of socialist society, but currently you cant do that unless you're specific on Brexit. Labour hasn't been so need to spend some of that energy on it.


----------



## paolo (Dec 15, 2018)

One of the frustrating things, for socialist remainers, is nothing to cling on to.

Labour are, for now, roughly, aligned with the tories.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sure, if the ''left wing' opinion on here is anything to go by, then no chance - being either to lathargic or really just liberals at heart.
> There's no will in the left to fight for it, neither out nor in the EU from what I can tell.
> Look at the Gilets juanes thread as an example, seemed someswere desperate in the hope that the protesters are just aabunch of French gammons



"leftist radicals" cant magic up a mass workers movement out of thin air though can they? 
Ive aruged before that Lexit is only plausible if you have a strong, organised working class with the desire to defend and advance their interests (and things like a strong manufacturing base)
We are a million miles away from that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> One of the frustrating things, for socialist remainers, is nothing to cling on to.
> 
> Labour are, for now, roughly, aligned with the tories.


Are you, in your view anyway, a "socialist remainer"?

The fact that you append the first with the second speaks volumes.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you, in your view anyway, a "socialist remainer"?
> 
> The fact that you append the first with the second speaks volumes.


What is he in your view?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> "leftist radicals" cant magic up a mass workers movement out of thin air though can they?
> Ive aruged before that Lexit is only plausible if you have a strong, organised working class with the desire to defend and advance their interests (and things like a strong manufacturing base)
> We are a million miles away from that.


I like to think it's closer that we realise. The results of the last GE testifes to that imo. A correlation between Labour moving (not radically but) leftwards and a significant increase in votes tends to suggest thet should continue upping that particular ante.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 15, 2018)

Supine said:


> I'm betting it's mainly UK conservative company owners who will be happy to avoid the upcoming EU anti tax avoidance directive. I'm sure the workers would prefer more money going into the pot for fair distribution.


I'm not sure it's worth distinguishing between 'conservative company owners' and 'company owners'. They are members of a _class_, that's the important bit.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Maybe, there's just too little energy coming out of it
> As mentioned upthread, I'd personally prefer them to be much more vocal on laying out specific terms for their vision of socialist society, but currently you cant do that unless you're specific on Brexit. Labour hasn't been soso ne to spend some if that energy on it.


Well Brexit is defintiely a massive hurdle that needs getting over - its created a vacuum/ black hole in terms of parliamentry politics - good and bad results of that


Wilf said:


> I'm not sure it's worth distinguishing between 'conservative company owners' and 'company owners'. They are members of a _class_, that's the important bit.


I like the ones in the labour party 
Lord Sugar pledges to leave UK if Jeremy Corbyn becomes Prime Minister


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you, in your view anyway, a "socialist remainer"?
> 
> The fact that you append the first with the second speaks volumes.


What, on a thread called 'Is Brexit actually going to happen'? In context, it's hardly surprising to specify that you are a socialist who opposes brexit.

I would describe myself as a socialist who thinks brexit is a bloody stupid idea and makes all the things I would like to see even more difficult to get. It places things we still have in jeopardy while imposing things like new border controls that I detest. I would not only describe myself as a socialist but an internationalist. Not a very popular position on here, but there it is.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Well Brexit is defintiely a massive hurdle that needs getting over - its created a vacuum/ black hole in terms of parliamentry politics - good and bad results of that
> 
> I like the ones in the labour party



imo its not a good time to be sitting on the fence (analogy spoiler alert) and getting sucked into the inevitable black hole/vacuum. Labour still seemsto be hedging its bets which is mad considering Corbyn's known to be partial to leaving, yet May, a remainer, has committed herself to it. 
For want of a better word, Labour have lost the momentum it had after the GE (small m) because they of it.

if anything, it's the left wing repeating 'Tory Brexit' that's the self fulfilling prophecy


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> an internationalist. Not a very popular position on here, but there it is.


internationalism is supposed to extend beyond schengian borders and generally refers to class solidarity, rather than cheering for the european faction of capital. Nobody has abandoned internationalism here because they don't share your 'remain and reform' view. Nice of you to redefine internationalism and claim it for your own view on the EU though. I remember hilary benn redefining the concept to justify bombs for syria, was it last year


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 15, 2018)

O god, oh jesus christ



of course its cucumber snatch


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 15, 2018)

Presumably they won't be able to finish the Film until April ? - I wonder how many different endings they would need ...


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 15, 2018)

Whichever side of the debate you are on, this tweet is quite special:


----------



## pesh (Dec 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> O god, oh jesus christ
> 
> 
> 
> of course its cucumber snatch



wtf


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> O god, oh jesus christ
> 
> 
> 
> of course its cucumber snatch




I bet the trailer has the only dramatic bits and the rest of the movie is just close-ups of angry people posting on Facebook.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 15, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you missed the point. anyone who doesn't give a shit about their chickens being pumped full of anti-biotics really shouldn't care less about chlorinated water to clean them.



Anyone who cares about the chlorinated water thing is likely also to care about the anti-biotics issue. And guess what - the EU just passed new regulations a couple of months ago that are aimed exactly at this, including a prohibition on prophylactic use of antibiotics.

Green light for new rules on veterinary medicines and medicated feed - Consilium

So if we Brexit, is the UK going to go with similar rules or is it going to be looking at the commercial implications of doing so in light of new relationships with trading partners?

UK could use Brexit to avoid EU ban on antibiotics overuse in farming


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What, on a thread called 'Is Brexit actually going to happen'? In context, it's hardly surprising to specify that you are a socialist who opposes brexit.


There are socialists on here that voted remain, but I don't think they'd call themselves "socialist remainers". Because they can see that the first gives some description of ones politics while the Remainer vs Leaver nonsense is a fight between two sides of arseholes. 





littlebabyjesus said:


> I would not only describe myself as a socialist but an internationalist. Not a very popular position on here, but there it is.


 What DotCommunist said. Fuck this pathetic shite, don't you dare pretend that others aren't internationalists because they don't share your love in with the EUs "Freedom of Movement"



Spymaster said:


> What is he in your view?


I don't know I've not seen them make a political argument for anything besides staying in the EU. But none of the arguments they've made for remain start from a socialist basis.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Presumably they won't be able to finish the Film until April ? - I wonder how many different endings they would need ...


Plenty of old stock riot footage, surely?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Presumably they won't be able to finish the Film until April ? - I wonder how many different endings they would need ...


There's only ever been one ending. Although I understand there are a few competing plot summaries for the sequel.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2018)

I doubt they'll bring it up to the present day, they'll just finish with the Farage character celebrating, the Cameron character resigning, and the May character arriving at Downing Street, fading out with the words on the screen "The next year, May held an election. She did not do well. And then nothing much happened for a while..."


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

paolo said:


> There's an idea that's been growing on this thread.
> 
> The British border in Ireland, is a problem entirely of the Irish/EU making.
> 
> ...


Is this the internationalism you're in favour of littlebabyjesus?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> I doubt they'll bring it up to the present day, they'll just finish with the Farage character celebrating, the Cameron character resigning, and the May character arriving at Downing Street, fading out with the words on the screen "The next year, May held an election. She did not do well. And then nothing much happened for a while..."


It leaves the stage set for the sequel, the eu strikes back, which will itself be followed by return of the jezza


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It leaves the stage set for the sequel, the eu strikes back, which will itself be followed by return of the jezza



Wasn't it the prequels that dealt with endless boring trade disputes?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 15, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> O god, oh jesus christ


Dear God. I think this deserves it's own thread. 19th of Jan, how can we wait.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 15, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Dear God. I think this deserves it's own thread. 19th of Jan, how can we wait.


Better than what will happen on the night of 29/3-30/3, night of the living dead


----------



## Mr Moose (Dec 15, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh the portions started declining years ago
> 
> When I ordered nachos in the tally ho in North finchley or the moon under water in Barnet in the early 90s there was enough to share. After a year or two the amount of food but not the price declined. Now it's very much a portion for one



Nachos in the early 90s? Early adopter.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 15, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Anyone who cares about the chlorinated water thing is likely also to care about the anti-biotics issue. And guess what - the EU just passed new regulations a couple of months ago that are aimed exactly at this, including a prohibition on prophylactic use of antibiotics.
> 
> Green light for new rules on veterinary medicines and medicated feed - Consilium
> 
> ...


Prophylactic use isn't prohibited. Just limited in use to animals that run a risk of desease. So considering the conditions in Europes chicken factories, that'll be about 99 out of every 100 chickens sold.

From your link:


> This will be of benefit to animal health and help boost the *competitiveness* of the EU veterinary pharmaceutical sector...
> ...
> the package is aimed in particular at increasing the availability of veterinary medicines in the EU, improving the functioning of the EU market, reducing administrative burdens and fostering innovation
> "It is a win-win for public health and the competitiveness of the EU pharmaceutical industry"


Basically they're handing over free rein to pharma giants in the name of competition. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## Duncan2 (Dec 15, 2018)

This is where I,personally, am at with this thread.A liberal faction argue that EU membership is an( unalloyed) good.The w.c.,while they lose nothing by free-movement-that essential concomitant of membership,in fact gain greatly from the extensive protections afforded by EU employment-law.
A second faction argue conversely that the wc would be better off outside the EU.Whereas employment protection laws are all very well in principle such 
"protections" are useless ("get gimped")in the wider context of EU membership.In this context free-movement obtains and workers are actually without defence in the face of mean employers who can ,and sometimes do,dispense entirely with the indigenous work-force long before said work-force has a chance to think about getting organised.This is,as I mentioned, where I,currently,am at based on my experience of doing working-class jobs in the West-Midlands over the last ten to fifteen years.There isn't much dignity at work these days and I would be the first to admit that it is EU workers,especially older ones,who get the least respect.I wish I could be as philosophical about it as they are and,indeed,as the liberals are (worse things happen in Bangladesh etc) but somehow that level of detachment eludes me.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 15, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Presumably they won't be able to finish the Film until April ? - I wonder how many different endings they would need ...


----------



## teuchter (Dec 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Prophylactic use isn't prohibited. Just limited in use to animals that run a risk of desease. So considering the conditions in Europes chicken factories, that'll be about 99 out of every 100 chickens sold.


It bans it as routine treatment and reserves it as a last resort. I've no idea what the reality of the implementation will be but it seems to be a meaningful step towards dealing with the problem that you suggested was being ignored in the EU while everyone is getting in a flap about chlorinated chicken. It's not.

Is the EU ahead or behind in legislation dealing with overuse of antibiotics in agriculture, compared to the rest of the world? Do you know?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 16, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It bans it as routine treatment and reserves it as a last resort. I've no idea what the reality of the implementation will be but it seems to be a meaningful step towards dealing with the problem that you suggested was being ignored in the EU while everyone is getting in a flap about chlorinated chicken. It's not.


In factories with 20000 chickens, you'll always need the 'last resort'.

The EU set a limit on nitrous oxide emission limits on vehicles in 2007 and just after that Europe's leading car manufacturers got creative - now we're sucking in 20 times the amount of those limits. What is the EU doing about it?

Anyway, wasn't you the one advocating the UK ignore EU regulations because the French and Germans do it, when we were discussing nationalisation laws?
eta: no it was lbj - sorry.
and btw, the UK has been working unilaterally on it's own amr solutions since 2000


----------



## Poi E (Dec 16, 2018)

That report shows strong dependency on EU agencies (and other international bodies). The 2017 report on progress specifically described the dependency on the EU European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control for the supply of data to a UK body.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> In factories with 20000 chickens, you'll always need the 'last resort'.
> 
> The EU set a limit on nitrous oxide emission limits on vehicles in 2007 and just after that Europe's leading car manufacturers got creative - now we're sucking in 20 times the amount of those limits. What is the EU doing about it?
> 
> ...


What's your point? That EU regulations are toothless?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2018)

I thought we had established this on the thread but having caught up with the last couple of days, it seems necessary to say that regardless of whether you voted Leave or Remain *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both. *


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> In factories with 20000 chickens, you'll always need the 'last resort'.
> 
> The EU set a limit on nitrous oxide emission limits on vehicles in 2007 and just after that Europe's leading car manufacturers got creative - now we're sucking in 20 times the amount of those limits. What is the EU doing about it?


They modified the testing regime last year. Air - Policies - Environment - European Commission

But actually, the whole point of brexit was to lower standards for businesses, the tories don't want to raise them, that's not the point of it.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 16, 2018)

Amid the micro-politics of this shitshow there have been reports of Liddington and Barwell 'reaching out' to Labour and plotting to get a 2nd ref. All routinely denied of course e.g.
No 10 denies making plans for second Brexit referendum

May's denials that there can be a 2nd ref are so long standing and vehement that even with the morals of the average politician, there's no way she could stay in office if a 2nd ref does come about (she'd have to resign of course, can't be booted out by her MPs now). I'm bemused as to where things are up to, but a possible running order may now be:

1. Vote on her deal in January > loses
2. MPs seek to get the right to discuss other options
3. Norway+, 2nd ref and the rest fight it out - most of which will require Article 50 extension
4. May resigns (unless resigned after 1 or 2)
5. Something or other gets passed...
6. … or if not, leave with no deal

Haven't mentioned Labour in that because A) unlikely to have the numbers to do anything other that vote May's deal down. B) I'm not convinced dup will back a vonc at any point. If they do though, that makes everything after 1. above wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 16, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Amid the micro-politics of this shitshow there have been reports of Liddington and Barwell 'reaching out' to Labour and plotting to get a 2nd ref. All routinely denied of course e.g.
> No 10 denies making plans for second Brexit referendum
> 
> May's denials that there can be a 2nd ref are so long standing and vehement that even with the morals of the average politician, there's no way she could stay in office if a 2nd ref does come about (she'd have to resign of course, can't be booted out by her MPs now). I'm bemused as to where things are up to, but a possible running order may now be:
> ...


You missed out article 50 cancellation by Parliament without second ref


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I thought we had established this on the thread but having caught up with the last couple of days, it seems necessary to say that regardless of whether you voted Leave or Remain *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both. *


If you think there is anything progressive about Brexit you're a moron or a fantasist.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You missed out article 50 cancellation by Parliament without second ref


Definitely a possibility, in fact the deeper we get into January without a sign that 'something other than that' could get through it becomes more likely. However as much as MPs are nervous about calling for a 2nd ref on grounds of 'betraying the Brexit result', they will be even more nervous about cancelling A50. Doesn't mean that they won't, but they will feel there has to have been a demonstrable process of 'everything else failing' before that becomes 'last option standing'. Politicians eh?


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both. *





sleaterkinney said:


> If you think there is anything progressive about Brexit you're a moron or a fantasist.


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both. *



GDPR wouldn't have happened by a single government in isolation.


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 16, 2018)

If you think there is anything progressive about any institutional process left largely untouched by working class leverage over the course of multiple decades ...


----------



## mauvais (Dec 16, 2018)

Is 'progressive' relative, and if so, to what?


----------



## Rob Ray (Dec 16, 2018)

Progressing Forward to the glorious socialist future, comrade.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 16, 2018)

mauvais said:


> Is 'progressive' relative, and if so, to what?


This is why I asked pocketscience how the EU's measures to deal with antibiotic resistance compare with those enacted by other governments/institutions (I did not get an answer)


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is, essentially, the left reformist argument for the EU. The European bourgeoisie is _nicer _than the British bourgeoisie.



True, but most left reformists are about as politically-aware as a jam doughnut.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 16, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Twenty-four years ago, I was considered a sex criminal by the UK state, for having underage consensual sex with my male partner. He, aged 22, was considered a statutory rapist.



He would have been considered a sex criminal. You would have been considered as an underage victim, as you would not have been of an age to give "meaningful" consent, even though anyone else over 18 would have been. Total shit law.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 16, 2018)

As a reluctant pragmatic arguably Wank socialist remainer  - yes I know -  I have to take comfort that at the very least , we are seeing to Tory filth ripping themselves apart over this. On s personal micro level, this is the immediate foe. I don’t think the bourgeois pro EU reformists will amount to much but they never have done anyway . It’s not much to take  pleasure from but it’s a start- this is unexplored territory so the unexpected may pop up at some point.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 16, 2018)

kabbes said:


> It involves tripping up and falling flat on your face.



...into a big mound of dogshit.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 16, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> As a reluctant pragmatic arguably Wank socialist remainer  - yes I know -  I have to take comfort that at the very least , we are seeing to Tory filth ripping themselves apart over this. On s personal micro level, this is the immediate foe. I don’t think the bourgeois pro EU reformists will amount to much but they never have done anyway . It’s not much to take  pleasure from but it’s a start- this is unexplored territory so the unexpected may pop up at some point.



You wank socialists? FFS! How depraved can you get???


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 16, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> He would have been considered a sex criminal. You would have been considered as an underage victim, as you would not have been of an age to give "meaningful" consent, even though anyone else over 18 would have been. Total shit law.



I'm not convinced.  i am fairly sure that (pre AOC equality) that 'under age' gay men (over 16) could also be prosecuted (and were) - one of the gay men convicted in the 'operation spanner' case was (at the time of the 'offence' 17 and was not considered a 'victim' by the law.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

Elite remainer Oxbridge professor and expert Simon Wren-Lewis (enough caveats?) has produced this helpful(?) graphic showing the various breads with which the tory-Brexit shit sandwich might be made. Yum yum.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> If you think there is anything progressive about Brexit you're a moron or a fantasist.



I didn't say that, did I?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2018)

Supine said:


> GDPR wouldn't have happened by a single government in isolation.



That's your go to? "What about GDPR"?

What's happening inside your brain?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Elite remainer Oxbridge professor and expert Simon Wren-Lewis (enough caveats?) has produced this helpful(?) graphic showing the various breads with which the tory-Brexit shit sandwich might be made. Yum yum.
> 
> 
> View attachment 155828



I can work MS Paint and state the bleeding obvious too, can I have an Oxbridge professorship please?


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> What's happening inside your brain?


I'm not sure who I find more contemptible; right wing "they come over here, taking our jobs" dickheads, or smug lexit pricks who insist that they've got it right, the rest of us are stupid, and come out with shit like this ^^^


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can work MS Paint and state the bleeding obvious too, can I have an Oxbridge professorship please?



Chair, dear boy.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 16, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This is why I asked pocketscience how the EU's measures to deal with antibiotic resistance compare with those enacted by other governments/institutions (I did not get an answer)



I pointed you towards the UKs own AMR initiative that predates the EU's by over a decade and was it's key influence (as well as the WHOs).
You'll also find that modern emmisions standards were pioneered in california, again influencing/ being taken up by the EU.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 16, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Chair, dear boy.



Professor of chairs? Not my specialist subject but I'll take it. As long as I get to wear tweed all the time and drink brandy at 10am I'm happy.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Professor of chairs? Not my specialist subject but I'll take it. As long as I get to wear tweed all the time and drink brandy at 10am I'm happy.


Professor Rowley Birkin!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Professor of chairs? Not my specialist subject but I'll take it. As long as I get to wear tweed all the time and drink brandy at 10am I'm happy.


You can wear tweed all the time and drink brandy at 8am at any wetherspoons you care to name without going to all the hassle of taking a doctorate and developing an academic career


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not sure who I find more contemptible; right wing "they come over here, taking our jobs" dickheads, or smug lexit pricks who insist that they've got it right, the rest of us are stupid, and come out with shit like this ^^^


Why does it have to be either / or?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You can wear tweed all the time and drink brandy at 8am at any wetherspoons you care to name without going to all the hassle of taking a doctorate and developing an academic career


*Rumbled*


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 16, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Why does it have to be either / or?


The right wingers are less deluded, tbf.


----------



## yield (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> The right wingers are less deluded, tbf.


It's the extreme centre I'm worried about


----------



## two sheds (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> The right wingers are less deluded, tbf.



fewer


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm not sure who I find more contemptible; right wing "they come over here, taking our jobs" dickheads, or smug lexit pricks who insist that they've got it right, the rest of us are stupid, and come out with shit like this ^^^



That was nothing to do with Brexit or Lexit, I just really want to know why, when asked for a positive example of progressive social change, someone would suggest the General Data Protection Regulation. That to me is quite an interesting response. Do you not find anything odd about that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 16, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can work MS Paint and state the bleeding obvious too, can I have an Oxbridge professorship please?


Only if you do us a picture of former lucasian professor Stephen hawking done in ms paint


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I just really want to know why, when asked for a positive example of progressive social change



Except that isn't what you actually asked is it.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 16, 2018)

two sheds said:


> fewer


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> That was nothing to do with Brexit or Lexit, I just really want to know why, when asked for a positive example of progressive social change, someone would suggest the General Data Protection Regulation. That to me is quite an interesting response. Do you not find anything odd about that?



Yeah, but Brexit is not about progress; it's crucially about the velocity of regression.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I'm not convinced.  i am fairly sure that (pre AOC equality) that 'under age' gay men (over 16) could also be prosecuted (and were) - one of the gay men convicted in the 'operation spanner' case was (at the time of the 'offence' 17 and was not considered a 'victim' by the law.



Spanner was a different kettle of fish. It was about whether or not certain sado-masochistic acts could be considered consensual, as opposed to the perpetration of bodily harm.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 16, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> Spanner was a different kettle of fish. It was about whether or not certain sado-masochistic acts could be considered consensual, as opposed to the perpetration of bodily harm.



I can't find detail now (and it's a bit of a tangent from this thread) but I was led to believe when I was 18-ish that if I and (over 21) partner did get caught, we'd both be in the dock.  And have a recollection that one of the arguments in the equalising AoC debate was that gay men under 21 were put off reporting sexual assault / rape because they risked prosecution if the case wasn't proved.

The 1967 partial decriminalisation happened before the UK joined the EEC of course


----------



## two sheds (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


>



I hate people saying "less" when they should say "fewer" so I correct them whenever I have chance, whether they need it or not.


----------



## Voley (Dec 16, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I hate people saying "less" when they should say "fewer" so I correct them whenever I have chance, whether they need it or not.


This happens on less fewer occasions than I'd like tbh.


----------



## Spymaster (Dec 16, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I hate people saying "less" when they should say "fewer" so I correct them whenever I have chance, whether they need it or not.


I'm fewer than impressed, to be honest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm fewer than impressed, to be honest.


Yeh being as impressed is a trio


----------



## two sheds (Dec 16, 2018)

Spymaster said:


> I'm fewer than impressed, to be honest.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 16, 2018)

No sorry, you're right, I didn't ask - I said there was nothing socially progressive about the EU, to which you said:



Supine said:


> GDPR wouldn't have happened by a single government in isolation.


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2018)

Strewth, you said ' *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both.'
*
No mention of socially progressive. Honestly you really shouldn't throw the word moron around so readily.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 16, 2018)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I can't find detail now (and it's a bit of a tangent from this thread) but I was led to believe when I was 18-ish that if I and (over 21) partner did get caught, we'd both be in the dock.  And have a recollection that one of the arguments in the equalising AoC debate was that gay men under 21 were put off reporting sexual assault / rape because they risked prosecution if the case wasn't proved.
> 
> The 1967 partial decriminalisation happened before the UK joined the EEC of course



Absolutely my memory of it too, it wasn't the same as Hetero AoC, the younger underage partner was often criminalised too, and very certainly socially ostracised.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 16, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I pointed you towards the UKs own AMR initiative that predates the EU's by over a decade and was it's key influence (as well as the WHOs).



You pointed me towards a 'strategy and action plan' document from nearly twenty years ago. My question was about actual implemented policy. Has the UK been implementing policy on AMR in agriculture ahead of what is being done by the EU as a whole? Have other countries? Your implication was that we shouldn't be worrying about chlorinated chicken because of the EU's failure to do anything about AMR. So, is the EU ahead or behind of other parts of the world in terms of actually implementing meaningful policy?


----------



## seventh bullet (Dec 16, 2018)

Supine said:


> Strewth, you said ' *if you think there is anything progressive about the EU you are either a moron or the enemy or both.'
> *
> No mention of socially progressive. Honestly you really shouldn't throw the word moron around so readily.



Socially progressive. What is this exactly?


----------



## Supine (Dec 16, 2018)

seventh bullet said:


> Socially progressive. What is this exactly?



Pub opening hours being extended?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 16, 2018)

> Damon Albarn joins call for citizens' assembly to break Brexit deadlock



more here (guardian)

shall we all volunteer?


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 16, 2018)

I think that line about GDPR is ripe for a placard though. Surrounded by a circle of stars.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 16, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> I think that line about GDPR is ripe for a placard though. Surrounded by a circle of stars.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 16, 2018)

teuchter said:


> You pointed me towards a 'strategy and action plan' document from nearly twenty years ago. My question was about actual implemented policy. Has the UK been implementing policy on AMR in agriculture ahead of what is being done by the EU as a whole? Have other countries? Your implication was that we shouldn't be worrying about chlorinated chicken because of the EU's failure to do anything about AMR. So, is the EU ahead or behind of other parts of the world in terms of actually implementing meaningful policy?


It's the strategy and action plan that was later adopted by the EU (together with the WHO).
The UK couldn't effectivlye persue its own course for implementation because it's as much about import regulations as it is about governing your own market. So being paet of the single market meant pushing it through the EU.
If the UK wasn't part of the EU, would have been unilaterally implemented and the EU would have most probably followed suit - as they did with the Californian (CARB) emissions standards.
You'd be surprised how many of Europe's EN, CEN, CENELEC, etc standards (and even ISO standards for that matter) are just verbatim copies of older BSI standards.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

two sheds said:


> I hate people saying "less" when they should say "fewer" so I correct them whenever I have chance, whether they need it or not.





two sheds said:


> Corbyn showing another lack of leadership by claiming less than £6,000



fewer or less?


----------



## two sheds (Dec 17, 2018)

Riklet said:


> fewer or less?





> Use less when you’re referring to something that can’t be counted or doesn’t have a plural



£6000 can't be counted so "less" is clearly correct


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

two sheds said:


> £6000 can't be counted so "less" is clearly correct





Hope you never lend anyone any money!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 17, 2018)

I'm talking about after Brexit, clearly, 

But
as it happens
"fewer than six thousand pounds" would sound right but
"less than £6000" would too

not quite sure why but it *is* in the way that Mount Everest *is* or Alma Cogan *isn't*


----------



## teuchter (Dec 17, 2018)

It's normal usage to use 'less' when talking about money, even though it comes in countable units. A proper grammar nazi needs to know about these exceptions.

I have recently come to the conclusion that the word 'fewer' is pointless and am campaigning for an accelerated end to its life.


----------



## lizzieloo (Dec 17, 2018)

It's unlikely that anyone would have trouble understanding either way.

I don't know what a mixed metaphor is, it's surprising I've coped.


----------



## andysays (Dec 17, 2018)

There's a story about rights for flexible workers on the BBC website this morning which appears to contradict the proposition that it's only the EU which 'cares' about such things...


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It's normal usage to use 'less' when talking about money, even though it comes in countable units. A proper grammar nazi needs to know about these exceptions.
> 
> I have recently come to the conclusion that the word 'fewer' is pointless and am campaigning for an accelerated end to its life.


There are places where nouns are the same in their plural form and can be both countable and uncountable, in which cases it removes confusion.  “Things would be better with less media” means something different to “things would be better with fewer media” (although admittedly this is a pretty rubbish example off the top of my head — I’m sure better examples can be constructed).  It doesn’t make it crucial to have the distinction but it does mean the distinction isn’t “pointless”.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> There are places where nouns are the same in their plural form and can be both countable and uncountable, in which cases it removes confusion.  “Things would be better with less media” means something different to “things would be better with fewer media” (although admittedly this is a pretty rubbish example off the top of my head — I’m sure better examples can be constructed).  It doesn’t make it crucial to have the distinction but it does mean the distinction isn’t “pointless”.


You sir are the James t kirk of pedantry


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> There's a story about rights for flexible workers on the BBC website this morning which appears to contradict the proposition that it's only the EU which 'cares' about such things...



Yes, thank our good fortune we have Theresa May and the Tories looking after us workers!


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

I see damon albarn has called for workers' councils people's assemblies


----------



## Cloo (Dec 17, 2018)

I think a 2nd Ref might be being given serious thought now as the only fucking way out for the government,


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2018)

Clearly Albarn has never met the sort of people who go to 'people's assemblies'.

The solution to a problem caused by corrupt, petty careerist politicians cannot possibly be a bunch of self-appointed busybodies lacking even an MP's tenuous connection to those they claim represent.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> I see damon albarn has called for workers' councils people's assemblies



Is there no other way?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I think a 2nd Ref might be being given serious thought now as the only fucking way out for the government,


it's the only way out for the government but it will reinforce divisions among the people, as no poll shows a decisive win likely for stay or go - if you're lucky it'll be 55/45 but no chance of 60/40 and even less of 70/30


----------



## teuchter (Dec 17, 2018)

kabbes said:


> There are places where nouns are the same in their plural form and can be both countable and uncountable, in which cases it removes confusion.  “Things would be better with less media” means something different to “things would be better with fewer media” (although admittedly this is a pretty rubbish example off the top of my head — I’m sure better examples can be constructed).  It doesn’t make it crucial to have the distinction but it does mean the distinction isn’t “pointless”.


This is the first time someone has been able to give me an example. I may revise my position and perhaps even restart my campaign to introduce a new word to go alongside 'more' to perform the same function.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> This is the first time someone has been able to give me an example. I may revise my position and perhaps even restart my campaign to introduce a new word to go alongside 'more' to perform the same function.


why not spend some time off urban to design the campaign and raise funds for its publicity


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 17, 2018)

is damon albarn going to head up a "brit pop" government of all the talents then? Maybe morrisey can take over from rees mogg as chair of the ERG and be archly racist from the sidelines.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the only way out for the government but it will reinforce divisions among the people, as no poll shows a decisive win likely for stay or go - if you're lucky it'll be 55/45 but no chance of 60/40 and even less of 70/30


That might depend on whether Farage’s recent musings about Leavers boycotting any further referendum actually firms up and how many would follow him.....


----------



## Cloo (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the only way out for the government but it will reinforce divisions among the people, as no poll shows a decisive win likely for stay or go - if you're lucky it'll be 55/45 but no chance of 60/40 and even less of 70/30


Exactly, that's what worries me. Any campaigning for it is going to be utterly _vicious - _the Leave side, backed by countless Russian trolls, will focus solely on the argument that this is the Metropolitan Elite trying to wrest Control from The People (and, to be fair, it is the Metropolitan Elite at least disagreeing with a lot of The People) as even their own research shows no positive outcomes of leaving for the UK.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 17, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> is damon albarn going to head up a "brit pop" government of all the talents then? Maybe morrisey can take over from rees mogg as chair of the ERG and be archly racist from the sidelines.



I think we're more likely to see a public debate that ends with Menswear and Northern Uproar kicking the shit out of each other.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is there no other way?


Very good


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

Now might be the time to establish the 'rules of engagement' for pitched street battles that could attend a EUref (II)?

Perhaps adopting suitably colour-coded vests could effect a more organised approach to the chaos? Say Blue for the remainarians, Purple for the Tommeh leavists, Red for the few 'Lexit' folk...etc.


----------



## rekil (Dec 17, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> is damon albarn going to head up a "brit pop" government of all the talents then? Maybe morrisey can take over from rees mogg as chair of the ERG and be archly racist from the sidelines.


_I Want The Brexit I Can't Have_


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Now might be the time to establish the 'rules of engagement' for pitched street battles that could attend a EUref (II)?
> 
> Perhaps adopting suitably colour-coded vests could effect a more organised approach to the chaos? Say Blue for the remainarians, Purple for the Tommeh leavists, Red for the few 'Lexit' folk...etc.
> 
> View attachment 155881


black for the tommeh leavers


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is there no other way?



Oh yes very good.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 17, 2018)

I now think a second referendum is very likely. It is the only way forward from this horrendous mess. That, and withdrawal of A50


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> I now think a second referendum is very likely. It is the only way forward from this horrendous mess. That, and withdrawal of A50


yeh but ref ii may end up creating more problems than it solves. after all, a remain win - and a remain win by such a margin as concludes the matter - is as unlikely as a decisive leave win. no matter what happens it's a clusterfuck for years to come


----------



## Poi E (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> black for the tommeh leavers
> 
> View attachment 155883



Pleated linen pants must be for the weekend fash


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Okay, have I got this right: Blur (Remain) and Oasis (Leave) release a Christmas single - and that's the whole thing sorted?


----------



## mauvais (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Okay, have I got this right: Blur (Remain) and Oasis (Leave) release a Christmas single - and that's the whole thing sorted?


Things go awry immediately when it's suggested the respective bands put out 'Modern Life Is Rubbish*' and 'Don't Look Back In Anger'.

*yes I know. 'For Tomorrow' if you must.


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but ref ii may end up creating more problems than it solves. after all, a remain win - and a remain win by such a margin as concludes the matter - is as unlikely as a decisive leave win. no matter what happens it's a clusterfuck for years to come


yes, basically, to all that. As a country, we are split right down the middle on this. 
Cheers, Tories, especially Cameron and Johnson, this is your doing. Thanks a fucking bundle


----------



## Streathamite (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the only way out for the government but it will reinforce divisions among the people, as no poll shows a decisive win likely for stay or go - if you're lucky it'll be 55/45 but no chance of 60/40 and even less of 70/30


tragically - agreed. The only thing that may change this is the generational thing: most under 40 are Remain, by a long way


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> black for the tommeh leavers
> 
> View attachment 155883


Ironing - another thing that the fash are rubbish at.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is there no other way?



No. All that you can do is watch them play.


----------



## krtek a houby (Dec 17, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Is there no other way?



 woo-hoo


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Ironing - another thing that the fash are rubbish at.


you know their patriarchal attitudes about society, probably expect the riechfrau to do that work


----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 17, 2018)

copliker said:


> _I Want The Brexit I Can't Have_



Brexit is murder

William, brexit was really nothing.

Frankly, Mr. Farage. 

&c.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 17, 2018)

Charles Moore arguing Farage’s line that Brexiteers should boycott a referendum, on Torygraph website today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> Brexit is murder
> 
> William, brexit was really nothing.
> 
> ...


some brexits are bigger than others


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 17, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Charles Moore arguing Farage’s line that Brexiteers should boycott a referendum, on Torygraph website today.



This assumes that Moore and Farage speak to and for the bulk of the vote. Which they do not. 

It also wrongly characterizes the motivations of working class leave voters - which involved voting to stick it to the political class.


----------



## alsoknownas (Dec 17, 2018)

There is a light (across Europe) that will never go out.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 17, 2018)

EU've Got Everything Now


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 17, 2018)

I dont owe EU Anything

(etc)


----------



## andysays (Dec 17, 2018)

I was looking for a Brexit and I found a Brexit, and heaven knows...


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 17, 2018)

I Started Something I Couldn't Finish


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 17, 2018)

these things take time


----------



## rekil (Dec 17, 2018)

_Is Anti-Miscegenation Really So Strange? _


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Frankly Mister Juncker.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Chlorinated Chicken is Murder.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Please, please, please let me get what I want.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Freetraders of the World Unite.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 17, 2018)

what difference does it make / heaven knows I'm miserable now.

brexit in song.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Backstop to the Old House.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

the prime minister ritual


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Heath at One's Elbow.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

i won't share eu


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2018)

irish blood, english heart


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

A Rush and a Push and the Land is Ours.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

i think the only two smiths song theresa may knows are 'panic' and 'i started something'


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Panic.


----------



## rekil (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> A Rush and a Push and the Land is Ours.


_A Rush And A Push And The Fish Stocks Are Ours (Hang On A Sec, Trawlers Are Worse Than Treblinka)_


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Stop Me if You Think You've Voted on This One Before.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Unhappy Brexitday.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Blair Afraid.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)




----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 17, 2018)

Don't (Back)Stop Me Now


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



pity they didn't put the same amount of effort into the actual negotiations, which seem to me very reminiscent of david cameron's trip to brussels to bring back some tuppence-ha'penny concessions.


----------



## rekil (Dec 17, 2018)

This was painful even by SNL standards. Why do people like Damon keep doing this to themselves. 

Saturday Night Live skit sends up Theresa May's Brexit woes


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Dec 17, 2018)

Last night I dreamt that Juncker loved me.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Dec 17, 2018)

Brexiteers of the world unite.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2018)

government in a coma oh no


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Yeah, 2 billion will be plenty. Brussels will definitely get the message now.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> Frankly, Mr. Farage.


I want leave. You will not miss me. I want to roll back two hundred years of history.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Dec 17, 2018)

The Deal is Dead


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

Raheem said:


> Yeah, 2 billion will be plenty. Brussels will definitely get the message now.


It's not for brussels.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Don't (Back)Stop Me Now



That's not the Smiths!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> The Deal is Dead



And it's so lonely on a limb...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Writing frightening verse To a Pissed Up Juncker from Luxembourg


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Dec 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> And it's so lonely on a limb...


I said Jacob, don't you ever crave 
To appear on the front of the Daily Mail 
Dressed in your nanny’s bridal veil? 
Oh... 
And so, I checked all the registered historical facts 
And I was shocked into shame to discover 
That you’re the eighteenth pale descendant 
Of some old queen or other


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 17, 2018)

In seeking to get the EU to wobble on the agreed Northern Ireland backstop, Theresa May shows no regard or awareness for:

1) The Republic's sovereignty and the broad support among parties in The Dail for opposing the move.

2) The EU's responsibility to act in the interests of the state that will be remaining with them.

The EU giving way would look very weak. I doubt they will.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 17, 2018)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I said Jacob, don't you ever crave
> To appear on the front of the Daily Mail
> Dressed in your nanny’s bridal veil?
> Oh...
> ...



His real aristocracy is that which he married into. 

He is a pretty much a vulgar fraud in aristo terms.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> In seeking to get the EU to wobble on the agreed Northern Ireland backstop, Theresa May shows no regard or awareness for:
> 
> 1) The Republic's sovereignty and the broad support among parties in The Dail for opposing the move.
> 
> ...


corrected for you


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Dec 17, 2018)

This is interesting


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



Thats basically 2billion to try and blackmail MPs.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Thats basically 2billion to try and blackmail MPs.


An aggressive pro-no deal campaign more like.  

It's extremely doubtful there will be a 2nd ref, imo.  No deal is probably going to be the bookies favourite by January.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 17, 2018)

Its been May's strategy all along to try and run the clock down and then propose her deal or no deal as the only two options.  The last few weeks had seem to thwart that but it now looks like she is trying it again.  Its absolutely rotten and shows how utterly bereft of ideas she is and what contempt she hold parliament and the population in.


----------



## flypanam (Dec 17, 2018)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> This is interesting



 Is it? Old Kev just sounding like a bank manager, showing the intellectual poverty of Sinn Fein. What you get is a history lesson, and nowt else beyond a call for a border poll. Same old Shinners. If, Kev had talked about opposing a border through civil disobedience or reaching out and engaging with WC loyalists to persuade them of breaking with the DUP, then that would've been interesting.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Its been May's strategy all along to try and run the clock down and then propose her deal or no deal as the only two options.  The last few weeks had seem to thwart that but it now looks like she is trying it again.  Its absolutely rotten and shows how utterly bereft of ideas she is and what contempt she hold parliament and the population in.


However dull and robotic she is, I've never subscribed to the view she's an idiot. In as much as she'd deployed tactics, they've just about come off, at least as much as they could*. However in normal circumstances she'd have been booted out long ago. Weirdly, the very parliamentary arithmetic (in the house and her own party) that has stopped her getting anything through is the same arithmetic that stops her getting booted out. A perfect storm of/for inertia. The clock is just about the only thing driving this now.

* _domestically_, that is. Tactics with the EU not quite as successful...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> black for the tommeh leavers
> 
> View attachment 155883


I knew this would happen...put a logical, well thought-through proposal to sort things out and all you get on Urban is harping & bickering.

So let's start again...
1. '*Royal' Blue* (with stick-on yellow stars obvs) for the remainarians, 
2. *Purple* for the Tommeh leavists...because they're UKIP now!, 
3. *Red* for the few 'Lexit' folk,
4. '*Navy' Blue *for supporters of May's 'deal' (tories/red tories?)
5. '*Lime' Green* for...the Greens, I suppose
6. *Black *for Tarquin and the rest of the bloc

any takers for pink, white, maroon, sky blue or raspberry red?

I'm assuming that Labour remainers in and around my neck of the woods could turn up in their Palace shirts?

Could be quite colourful events, the riots of 2019.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I knew this would happen...put a logical, well thought-through proposal to sort things out and all you get on Urban is harping & bickering.
> 
> So let's start again...
> 1. '*Royal' Blue* (with stick-on yellow stars obvs) for the remainarians,
> ...


Why do leavers get to choose from 5 colours but remainers only get one?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do leavers get to choose from 5 colours but remainers only get one?


Er...pink, white, maroon, sky blue & 'raspberry' red are still available. I've reserved normal yellow hi viz for any French visitors wishing to join in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Why do leavers get to choose from 5 colours but remainers only get one?




it's clear you fell out of the stupid tree and knocked your head on every branch on the way down

because there's lots of sorts of leave but only one remain


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> one remain


'...and in the darkness bind them'


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

Theyre quite right to be preparing for no deal, it's what they should have done since day one, whatever you think of Brexit an whichever way you voted. Gonna take quite a few billion more though - to be saved off the 39 billion magic money tree maybe.

You cant get a good deal from the EU through reasonable negotiation on the inside -  look at how the Greeks tried and failed. And look at the consequences of that.  At least if the Tories/whoever runs the shitshow next year are prepared for the chance of no deal they might have the chance of some kind of "deal" on 28th March next year.  It's testimony to their ruthless incompetence and arrogance that theyve spent 2 years fucking around achieving ziltch, burning the best cards left right and centre.

Even a pissed up staggering Juncker on the podium, chucking around _nébuleux_ while France burns, the far-right organise and European economies are sliding slowly into recession seems calm and in control in comparison.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> '...and in the darkness bind them'


this is the engraving on the one ring which is the opening lines to the lisbon treaty


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> because there's lots of sorts of leave but only one remain



Only one remains, would be the proper English. And there are still at least two sorts of leave remaining as far as I can see.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> it's clear you fell out of the stupid tree and knocked your head on every branch on the way down
> 
> because there's lots of sorts of leave but only one remain


Hmmm...thinking the *Sky Blue *vests might suit the 'reluctant' remainers...those 'with no illusions'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Only one remains, would be the proper English. And there are still at least two sorts of leave remaining as far as I can see.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Hmmm...thinking the *Sky Blue *vests might suit the 'reluctant' remainers...those 'with no illusions'?


no, i refuse to wear anything people might associate with manchester city


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


>



Haven't seen that one. 







You might say it remains to be seen.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

Doesn't have a happy ending.

A film for our times.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Hmmm...thinking the *Sky Blue *vests might suit the 'reluctant' remainers...those 'with no illusions'?



yellow


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i refuse to wear anything people might associate with manchester city


Here we go...I just knew that Urbz wouldn't follow my anarchist rules for the forthcoming riots.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> yellow


Not allowed; read the rules!


----------



## kabbes (Dec 17, 2018)

Streathamite said:


> tragically - agreed. The only thing that may change this is the generational thing: most under 40 are Remain, by a long way


There might be something in this.  At the time of the referendum, I was 39 and voted remain.  I’m now 42 and would vote leave.  Maybe something happens on your 40th birthday.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

I reckons there's tons of poorer angry young people who voted leave and would do again. Or who maybe couldnt even vote last time - there's tons of skinto 17 year olds nowadays.

I reckon they dont come up in a lot of surveys.  Most young people don't have land-lines and if they do they don't answer them to random daytime numbers cos they're at work or whatever.  I reckon liberal middle class types are more visible, easier to contact/survey online, more likely to respond at all and more likely to reflect staunch remain attitudes.  This is backed up by the "shock" Labour swing in 2017.

The idea that it's just all the old racists voting leave and they will "die off" is biggoted and naive.  I'm friends with an 87 year old Labour remainer and I know people in their 20s who voted out - for a variety of reasons.


----------



## andysays (Dec 17, 2018)

If we're still doing Smiths songs...

Jeane (-Claude Juncker)

_We tried and we failed 
We tried and we failed 
We tried and we failed 
We tried and we failed 
We tried... 
Oh Jeane..._


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Doesn't have a happy ending.
> 
> A film for our times.


What about _Howard's End_?

Leaves space for smutty posters to comment:


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> What about _Howard's End_?
> 
> Leaves space for smutty posters to comment:


What Michael Howard popping his clogs slowly and painfully? Sounds a winner


----------



## andysays (Dec 17, 2018)

Theresa May sets January date for MPs' Brexit vote


> MPs will vote on the UK's Brexit deal in the week beginning 14 January, Theresa May has told Parliament. The vote was due to be held last week but was put on hold after Theresa May admitted she was set to lose. Announcing a new date, Mrs May said the EU had made it clear the Irish backstop was "not a plot to trap the UK" and urged MPs to see Brexit through. Labour had threatened to force a confidence vote in the PM if she did not set a date for the vote.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Theresa May sets January date for MPs' Brexit vote


Four weeks? Doubt she'll last five


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

andysays said:


> Theresa May sets January date for MPs' Brexit vote


Desperate


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 17, 2018)

When it the transition period document falls through it'll give them about two months not to sleepwalk into crashing out.

Can they get their shit together in 10 weeks between mid January and the end of March??

Who knows. But I'm not hopeful.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> When it the transition period document falls through it'll give them about two months not to sleepwalk into crashing out.
> 
> Can they get their shit together in 10 weeks between mid January and the end of March??
> 
> Who knows. But I'm not hopeful.


Who is the Them and Their in your post?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Desperate


Maybe, if she's really struggling, she could put the vote off till _after_ we've left.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Dec 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Who is the Them and Their in your post?



The government.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> The government.


sorry, was being dim


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

In fact if she doesn't make the end of March, are there any auspicious dates for a retrospective deal?

D-Day, certainly. Then there's the 11th day of the 11th month. Or perhaps St Crispen's Day (gentlemen of England, now abed etc.). But in the end it's going to be St Swithin's Day. It'll just piss down.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> In fact if she doesn't make the end of March, are there any auspicious dates for a retrospective deal?
> 
> D-Day, certainly. Then there's the 11th day of the 11th month. Or perhaps St Crispen's Day (gentlemen of England, now abed etc.). But in the end it's going to be St Swithin's Day. It'll just piss down.



All fool’s day!


----------



## nemoanonemo (Dec 17, 2018)

Mayday mayday mayday


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

Wilf said:


> In fact if she doesn't make the end of March, are there any auspicious dates for a retrospective deal?
> 
> D-Day, certainly. Then there's the 11th day of the 11th month. Or perhaps St Crispen's Day (gentlemen of England, now abed etc.). But in the end it's going to be St Swithin's Day. It'll just piss down.


Crispin & Crispian; both forriners


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Four weeks? Doubt she'll last five



Nah she'll make it - think it's an exercise in killing time now. She can't collapse too quickly, there might be enough time for an election or a referendum or something...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2018)

I bet Brenda's having a whale of a time trying to come up with something vaguely good to say on christmas day this year.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> I bet Brenda's having a whale of a time trying to come up with something vaguely good to say on christmas day this year.


Anus brexitus or summat


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah she'll make it - think it's an exercise in killing time now. She can't collapse too quickly, there might be enough time for an election or a referendum or something...


In some Christmas ghost story fashion, we'll discover that she actually died the day after the 2017 election, murdered in a wheatfield by a farmer worried about future subsidies. _Yeah, Jacob Rees-Mogg, you've been destroyed by a shade! _

She'll be forever commemorated as the Cunterville Ghost.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 17, 2018)

Well Christmas dinner with right-wing uncles are going to be fun this year, all over the country.

_Some buns are bigger than others._


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Desperate


Not really...kills another 5 weeks.


----------



## Winot (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Anus brexitus or summat



One great big evacuation.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

tory gets asked to leave the interview


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 17, 2018)

‘Politics is beyond satire’. 
Iannuci.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Not really...kills another 5 weeks.


Yes, another 5 weeks of survival.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> tory gets asked to leave the interview



Grade A.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Yes, another 5 weeks of survival.


For who? 

Getting very close to a no-deal brexit here.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 17, 2018)

So, a no confidence motion then...


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> So, a no confidence motion then...


Not a proper one, though. Guess pissing about is the order of the day.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 17, 2018)

Well, why change up at this stage in the game?


----------



## killer b (Dec 17, 2018)

I'm not totally sure what they're up to with this.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 17, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not totally sure what they're up to with this.



Trying to isolate her more?  Dunno, she's determined to make it all about her and listen to no one else.  Maybe she is the problem and her refusal to countenance anything except her own way is the road block.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

Labour want to fire shots but theyve only got blanks so i guess reason they might as well fire them. Cant hurt


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 17, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> So, a no confidence motion then...



It's a no confidence motion in May, not in the government, Corbyn is just playing silly games, because he knows he hasn't got the numbers for a proper no confidence motion.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 17, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not totally sure what they're up to with this.


I think “pissing about” is as good as any of this gets now


----------



## killer b (Dec 17, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> Trying to isolate her more?  Dunno, she's determined to make it all about her and listen to no one else.  Maybe she is the problem and her refusal to countenance anything except her own way is the road block.


Perhaps if they'd gone ahead with the tabling as trailed this afternoon, rather than pulling it then u-turning and tabling it after all I'd think it was ok. As it is, Labour look a bit daft, and they're closing down their options re: holding off supporting a second vote. I guess something must have happened backstage.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> tory gets asked to leave the interview





Suitcase or coffin used to be the options given in a collapsing Algeria 

Coffin or coffin is the only choice these scum will get on the glorious day


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a no confidence motion in May, not in the government, Corbyn is just playing silly games, because he knows he hasn't got the numbers for a proper no confidence motion.


Probably more strategic than that, though not necessarily in a good way. If they were to table & lose a VoNC in the Government they would not be able to hide behind the claim that they were going for a GE. That 'fire-wall' gone, Jezz would have to come clean about EUref II.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>



"We will unleash forces not seen since the 30s. "
?
Seems like a nice chap. Nice to see a well presented young man on television.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Suitcase or coffin used to be the options given in a collapsing Algeria
> 
> Coffin or coffin is the only choice these scum will get on the glorious day


Have to admit that I keep on thinking about that gantry of a garage in Milan's Piazzale Loreto.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> "We will unleash forces not seen since the 30s. "
> ?...


Half the posters on this thread tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Suitcase or coffin used to be the options given in a collapsing Algeria
> 
> Coffin or coffin is the only choice these scum will get on the glorious day


Coffin or coffin top


----------



## Supine (Dec 17, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Half the posters on this thread tbh.



I'm thinking about getting a camo vest for Christmas. And maybe a bow and arrow


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

Riklet said:


> Well Christmas dinner with right-wing uncles are going to be fun this year, all over the country.
> 
> _Some buns are bigger than others._



Not for me, mines in prison 

_Strangeways here we come._


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 17, 2018)

I don't quite know what Corbyn is playing at but I'll be interested to know who advised him this was a good idea - looks a bit odd when he could just go for a proper no confidence in govt vote. 

I get the impression as we've increasingly become drawn into Parliamentary procedures, Corbyn as well as May has become somewhat dragged along by events - does he really know what he's doing here? 

PS Same old suit since 1962...


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 17, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't quite know what Corbyn is playing at but I'll be interested to know who advised him this was a good idea - looks a bit odd when he could just go for a proper no confidence in govt vote.
> 
> I get the impression as we've increasingly become drawn into Parliamentary procedures, Corbyn as well as May has become somewhat dragged along by events - does he really know what he's doing here?
> 
> PS Same old suit since 1962...



I think the theory was that this might have got some of the tories who aren't happy with current policy (either the hard brexiters or the second referendumers) to vote with labour, which they almost certainly wouldn't do on a real no confidence vote.

The numbers aren't there at the moment for a proper no confidence vote - that would only stand a chance if the DUP got really pissed off with the tories, and a few tories were pissed off enough to go with it.

But can't help thinking this has put Corbyn in to a position (quite possibly intentionally by political enemies both inside the labour party and not) where he'd be criticised if he didn't go for a vote, and likewise if he did and lost.


----------



## tommers (Dec 17, 2018)

She had 117 of her own MPs vote against her last time.  If he makes it about her and not the govt then he can make a big thing about that not happening again.

"Tories acting in party interests and not the interests of the country"


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 17, 2018)

WRM was on bbc earlier saying ‘I would always back the pm in a no confidence vote’.
Typical two faced tory.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

Labour continuing their fine tradition of having zero impact on the Brexit process.  After May won _their_ own vonc, it was obvious that just about nil tories were going to peel off and vote for _his_ vonc in her.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 17, 2018)

I'm beginning to think Corbyn is fucking dense. What a way to make yourself and your party look ineffective and manipulative. Not quite looking like the leader to win a Gen Election is he?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 17, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Labour want to fire shots but theyve only got blanks so i guess reason they might as well fire them. Cant hurt


But what's the point in firing shots that can't hurt?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 17, 2018)

Raheem said:


> But what's the point in firing shots that can't hurt?


Mood music...creating a narrative...keeping busy till January....frustration...genuine disgust at having to sit opposite that bunch of cunts....and so on


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 17, 2018)

Also, having no shots to fire that can conceivably actually hurt (I thought that was the original point of the analogy but whatever rly)

tl;dr





the joke being, Labour just now.


----------



## Riklet (Dec 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




That Femi mid-atlantic accent bloke is the co-founder of OFOC (Our Future Our Choice - Off Fuck/Fuck Off) - some social media cesspit campaign based in Milkbank tower  with some big Remain money funding it, but pretending to be some normal student group. Not one to talk about political integrity really.

I don't see why someone under investigation can't be on the news or interviewed, no matter how much we disagree with them.  Half the political figures on Sky News wouldn't be allowed on probably!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 18, 2018)

The Smiths shite is the worst thing to happen on this thread. Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 18, 2018)

I fucking hate the Smiths. Music for pretentious vegetarian tossers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The Smiths shite is the worst thing to happen on this thread. Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.


Quite right.

It's my brexit and i'll cry if I want to


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 18, 2018)

They always say all avenues and options should be explored.

Bishops pray for politicians' integrity amid Brexit turmoil

We had a gaffer at work who took to prayer when he had exhausted his ability to get the production line back running.
Successfully some times!!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.



This must be a Smiths song surely?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> They always say all avenues and options should be explored.
> 
> Bishops pray for politicians' integrity amid Brexit turmoil
> 
> ...


There are some things too big for prayer to solve and politicians' integrity is one of them


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> This must be a Smiths song surely?


Yeh it's a bonus track on the 30th anniv CD of strangeways here we come


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 18, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> They always say all avenues and options should be explored.
> 
> Bishops pray for politicians' integrity amid Brexit turmoil
> 
> ...




That’s the most sensible aspect of brexit I have seen so far


----------



## tim (Dec 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> That’s the most sensible aspect of brexit I have seen so far


The Lord moves in mysterious, and, at times, nebulous ways.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

Nice tans they all have.


----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 18, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> I dont owe EU Anything
> 
> (etc)



Please, please, please let me get the Remain l want this time

Meet me by the cemetery cliff edge

A rush and a push and the brexit is ours


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The Smiths shite is the worst thing to happen on this thread. Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.



agree. that joke isn't funny any more.


----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 18, 2018)

Cliff edge here we come


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> Cliff edge here we come


strange ways here we come


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2018)

Riklet said:


> I don't see why someone under investigation can't be on the news or interviewed, no matter how much we disagree with them.


Yeah there's not enough voices threatening a rerun of 1930s street fascism on TV. Nice to see a bit of balance for once in the mainstream media.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 18, 2018)

SpineyNorman said:


> I fucking hate the Smiths. Music for pretentious vegetarian tossers.



Don't hate me cos you ain't me


----------



## rekil (Dec 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The Smiths shite is the worst thing to happen on this thread. Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.


Good post, for a change.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 18, 2018)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The Smiths shite is the worst thing to happen on this thread. Some people need to re-evaluate their life choices.



You certainly paint a vulgar picture.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 18, 2018)




----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

tim said:


> The Lord moves in mysterious, and, at times, nebulous ways.


 "Yeah and can you fucking believe it, they give us £39 billion _as well_!"


----------



## Raheem (Dec 18, 2018)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 155973


I think it might be stuck.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> I think it might be stuck.


even stuck countdown clocks are right once a brexit


----------



## Badgers (Dec 18, 2018)

We are a toilet of a country and this shit is blood all over the place, not just on the hands


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

very interesting speech by sir ivan rogers here Full speech: Sir Ivan Rogers on Brexit - News - University of Liverpool
and summary here Ivan Rogers’ Brexit bombshell, digested | Martha Gill


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

We've now reached the 'troops on standby' stage on the ladder of bullshit (14:12 here):
Brexit: 3,500 troops on standby to help in event of any no-deal crisis, MPs told - Politics live

Why do they always assume troops can multitask? Can nurses do drone strikes? Teachers inspect nuclear powerstations?


----------



## Raheem (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We've now reached the 'troops on standby' stage on the ladder of bullshit (14:12 here):
> Brexit: 3,500 troops on standby to help in event of any no-deal crisis, MPs told - Politics live
> 
> Why do they always assume troops can multitask? Can nurses do drone strikes? Teachers inspect nuclear powerstations?


That's more than eight per local authority area. Or none if you're north of Watford. What will they all find to do?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We've now reached the 'troops on standby' stage on the ladder of bullshit (14:12 here):
> Brexit: 3,500 troops on standby to help in event of any no-deal crisis, MPs told - Politics live
> 
> Why do they always assume troops can multitask? Can nurses do drone strikes? Teachers inspect nuclear powerstations?


i don't know if i can do drone strikes but i'd give it a go. if i could pick the targets, mind


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's more than eight per local authority area. Or none if you're north of Watford. What will they all find to do?


Exploratory talks with the WTO?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Badgers said:


> We are a toilet of a country and this shit is blood all over the place, not just on the hands


more a portaloo than something attached to the sewers


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's more than eight per local authority area. Or none if you're north of Watford. What will they all find to do?


renegotiate the deal with the eu at a rather higher standard than the pisspoor performance of our godforsaken government


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

After Brexit, do we have to call chips _Freedom Fries_?  Perhaps the troops could defend out Melton Mowbrays?


----------



## Supine (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We've now reached the 'troops on standby' stage on the ladder of bullshit (14:12 here):
> Brexit: 3,500 troops on standby to help in event of any no-deal crisis, MPs told - Politics live
> 
> Why do they always assume troops can multitask? Can nurses do drone strikes? Teachers inspect nuclear powerstations?



They are good at logistics. They can man the borders until the border force recruit enough staff.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> We've now reached the 'troops on standby' stage on the ladder of bullshit (14:12 here):
> Brexit: 3,500 troops on standby to help in event of any no-deal crisis, MPs told - Politics live
> 
> Why do they always assume troops can multitask? Can nurses do drone strikes? Teachers inspect nuclear powerstations?


Why are you assuming they're not just on call to be troops?


----------



## andysays (Dec 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> That's more than eight per local authority area. Or none if you're north of Watford. What will they all find to do?


Defending key strategic infrastructure from hoards of marauding Remainiacs?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Why are you assuming they're not just on call to be troops?


Because, well, I'm larking about. But no, I don't imagine Brexit will see troops on the streets.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 18, 2018)

andysays said:


> Defending key strategic infrastructure from hoards of marauding Remainiacs?


Starbucks will have its own private security.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

Defending town halls against feral bands of cultural commentators and craft brewers.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 18, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Bishops pray for politicians' integrity amid Brexit turmoil


 Guys, try going for something more realistic, like the Second Coming.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Guys, try going for something more realistic, like the Second Coming.


there will be the second coming before the economy recovers


----------



## Johnny Doe (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> Guys, try going for something more realistic, like the Second Coming.



Yup:

"At the heart of the Christian message is Jesus’ command to love our neighbour. This includes those with whom we agree and disagree – at home, in Europe, and further afield."

Comedy genius!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 18, 2018)

Not Brexit related but on the back of all the Smiths jokes this is brilliant.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 18, 2018)

Get the coppers tooled up Theresa


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Because, well, I'm larking about. But no, I don't imagine Brexit will see troops on the streets.



  I don’t think we have any spare squaddies left what with pointless wars overseas and capita recruitment on the case. Maybe time to kickstart a Black and Tan style force of patriotic irregulars to ensure the streets are under control


----------



## Badgers (Dec 18, 2018)

God bless you merry gentleman


----------



## Wilf (Dec 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> I don’t think we have any spare squaddies left what with pointless wars overseas and capita recruitment on the case. Maybe time to kickstart a Black and Tan style force of patriotic irregulars to ensure the streets are under control


All we need now is Tony Blair broadcasting defeatist messages from Brussels.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 18, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> more a *portaloo* than something attached to the sewers


I feel a singalong coming on...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Wilf said:


> All we need now is Tony Blair broadcasting defeatist messages from Brussels.


I understand that Tony Blair would have been Lord Haugh-Haugh if he'd been enobled


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 18, 2018)

Lord War Whore was that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 18, 2018)

So the latest wheeze is to have a series of votes to consider _other plans_ first before May's plan. 'Hey guys, I've worked really hard on this but I'm not going to ask you to support it. Instead I'm going to give you a series of hypotheticals to reject. Then you can agree to my deal.' This is quite quite mad.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

So hard Brexit or no Brexit. I'm picking a hard one.


----------



## Cloo (Dec 18, 2018)

Government talking about No Deal and there being 'public service announcements' forthcoming.

So in other words they are talking about literally creating a state of emergency, which it it totally within their power to avoid.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

Better late than never No-deal Brexit plans put 3,500 troops on standby


----------



## Cloo (Dec 18, 2018)

I'm just clinging to the hope that they're only talking about it in order to make any other alternative whatsoever seem better.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

That suggests a plan. There is no plan.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> So hard Brexit or no Brexit. I'm picking a hard one.





Poi E said:


> Better late than never No-deal Brexit plans put 3,500 troops on standby


#HardMen4AHardBrexit #BackOurBrexitBoys #CucksSuckEUDick


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm just clinging to the hope that they're only talking about it in order to make any other alternative whatsoever seem better.





Poi E said:


> That suggests a plan. There is no plan.



There is a plan. The plan is to scare the bejaysus out of people so they accept the alternative.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm just clinging to the hope that they're only talking about it in order to make any other alternative whatsoever seem better.


My favoured outcome is the cabinet's heads on spikes outside the banqueting house on whitehall


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm just clinging to the hope that they're only talking about it in order to make any other alternative whatsoever seem better.


In number ten theresa may is dancing round in a paroxysm of agony shrieking what can we do what can we do while michael gove sticks pins into a voodoo doll with boris johnson's raggedy hair


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 18, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I'm just clinging to the hope that they're only talking about it in order to make any other alternative whatsoever seem better.


Like spacklefrog said, these are cheap, nasty scare tactics. I don't believe for one second that no deal will happen. They would call an emergency sitting of Parliament and vote to revoke A50 before letting that happen. They cannot claim that this is not their fault if it does happen.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like spacklefrog said, these are cheap, nasty scare tactics. I don't believe for one second that no deal will happen. They would call an emergency sitting of Parliament and vote to revoke A50 before letting that happen. They cannot claim that this is not their fault if it does happen.


So your belief is based on the premise of tories admitting they were wrong?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> So your belief is based on the premise of tories admitting they were wrong?


First, there would be calls from all quarters to stop it happening. Second, there very well could, probably would, be rioting, and governments hate losing control of the means to violence above all else. Third, they won't want to go down in history as the arseholes who let that happen. Fourth, enough tories would calculate that allowing this to happen really could finish the tories off (yes, I know lots of people have said that in the past and it hasn't happened, but it can and does happen to long-established political parties and it could happen here).

Oh, and no doubt they would try to blame Labour for the failure of brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> First, there would be calls from all quarters to stop it happening. Second, there very well could, probably would, be rioting, and governments hate losing control of the means to violence above all else. Third, they won't want to go down in history as the arseholes who let that happen. Fourth, enough tories would calculate that allowing this to happen really could finish the tories off (yes, I know lots of people have said that in the past and it hasn't happened, but it can and does happen to long-established political parties and it could happen here).
> 
> Oh, and no doubt they would try to blame Labour for the failure of brexit.


First...not necessarily...bbc, sun, express, sky, telegraph, corbyn, the pub landlord...who?

Second...they're getting the army together and rioters would very quickly be demonized by First.

Third...they are the arseholes of history, doesn't seemed to have mattered so far, they've been voted in more than anyone.

Fourth...their vote would grow, if you step back and look at the way things are.

Labour are complicit in this.

I'm not saying it will happen...I'm saying I don't see any convincing reason for it not to happen.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Like spacklefrog said, these are cheap, nasty scare tactics. I


Not cheap. £2Billion supposedly. 
Still, sets a nice atmosphere for Xmas.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

Tories may as well go hard Brexit. Revoking Article 50 won't help their electoral chances. Corbyn only wants to fight on a post-brexit battleground. Crash out by default.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 18, 2018)

Everyday, I become more enamoured with proposing a resurgence in defenestration and throwing the lot of them, out of the windows into the Thames.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

Having the legislature in the largest city of the largest country is a silly idea.


----------



## tim (Dec 18, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Maybe time to kickstart a Black and Tan style force of patriotic irregulars to ensure the streets are under control



I was born on a Weybridge Crescent Where the artisanal baker made regular deliveries,
And those elderly Brexiteer feet they tramped all our buddleia
And each and every night papa came home sozzled
He'd invite theFeathersonehaugh's outside with this chorus:
Come out ye Black and Tans bounders, come out and fight me like a man,
Not in an oikish Northern clog wearing way


----------



## Raheem (Dec 18, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> First...not necessarily...bbc, sun, express, sky, telegraph, corbyn, the pub landlord...who?
> 
> Second...they're getting the army together and rioters would very quickly be demonized by First.
> 
> ...


It won't happen because everyone with direct influence over it understands what a complete disaster it would be (with the likely exception of a small number of MPs who would struggle to understand the plot of Herbie Rides Again) and it is possible to stop it. Those two ingredients make a complete recipe. The idea that it could happen by default is an illusion. When they come to the bridge, they will need to make a decision about whether to cross it or not.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Tories may as well go hard Brexit. Revoking Article 50 won't help their electoral chances. Corbyn only wants to fight on a post-brexit battleground. Crash out by default.


If you think unplanned unprepared couple of months to sort it back of an envelope crash out brexit is a vote winner you couldn't be more wrong.
It'll kill the Tories reputation for a generation.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 18, 2018)

And there as me thinking it was remainers who were supposedly  pushing “project fear”.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 18, 2018)

Raheem said:


> The idea that it could happen by default is an illusion. When they come to the bridge, they will need to make a decision about whether to cross it or not.


Yep. The day before, they can call an emergency meeting of parliament and stop it. This much is completely clear now. Actually, I just checked and it happens at 11pm. They can call it off _that evening_ - quick vote, phone call to Brussels. 

If it comes to that, I'll be marching down to parliament that day. So will hundreds of thousands and quite probably millions of other people. It won't happen.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 18, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. The day before, they can call an emergency meeting of parliament and stop it. This much is completely clear now. Actually, I just checked and it happens at 11pm. They can call it off _that evening_ - quick vote, phone call to Brussels.
> 
> If it comes to that, I'll be marching down to parliament that day. So will hundreds of thousands and quite probably millions of other people. It won't happen.



yep. no fucking way will it be allowed to happen.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 18, 2018)

"no fucking way will it be allowed to happen". By whom?


----------



## killer b (Dec 18, 2018)

The Tory rebels who will vote to bring down the government if... oh.


----------



## killer b (Dec 18, 2018)

Face it lads, we're fucked if you're expecting owt from those cunts.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 18, 2018)

I dont usually look at twitter but in just a few scrolls I count 5 Tory MPs who said they'll leave the party if No Deal becomes policy


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 18, 2018)

killer b said:


> The Tory rebels who will vote to bring down the government if... oh.


The ERG twats (and perhaps the DUP) are the only people in parliament who would not oppose 'no deal'. That's why it won't happen. It's never been a real possibility. If anything the ECJ ruling perhaps makes grandstanding and brinksmanship more possible now because they know for sure that they can't do no deal by accident. But that doesn't make no deal any more possible.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 19, 2018)

Poi E said:


> "no fucking way will it be allowed to happen". By whom?



everyone from the media, to the CBI, the TUC, the civil service, the entire public sector, every manufacturer and retailer who relies on EU imports and exports, most of the mps in parliament and masses of people demonstrating on the streets will be screaming at the government not to do it. 
And the government dont want to do it anyway. its insane.


----------



## zahir (Dec 19, 2018)

If a deal isn’t agreed what would the mechanism be for avoiding a ‘no deal’ brexit?


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Everyday, I become more enamoured with proposing a resurgence in defenestration and throwing the lot of them, out of the windows into the Thames.



I'd do it from the upper floors of the Shard to be on the safe side.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

zahir said:


> If a deal isn’t agreed what would the mechanism be for avoiding a ‘no deal’ brexit?


Either ask for A50 to be extended - requires agreement from EU. Or A vote in parliament to revoke A50, which requires no permission from EU. It can't happen by accident basically.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Either ask for A50 to be extended - requires agreement from EU. Or A vote in parliament to revoke A50, which requires no permission from EU. It can't happen by accident basically.



 If there is no majority for either of those things it can happen. Your faith in parliament is greater than mine.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2018)

Sprocket. said:


> Everyday, I become more enamoured with proposing a resurgence in defenestration and throwing the lot of them, out of the windows into the Thames.




 A shame to pollute the river though.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 19, 2018)

> One point is that this can happen even if most people do not want it. In Austria-Hungary, Yugoslavia and even the Soviet Union, most people were afraid of life on the outside and initially pursued their national goals within the familiar confines of the federal entity. Another is that, when the final collapse does come, it can happen so quickly that almost everyone is caught unawares. Even in 1989, few people foresaw the collapse of Yugoslavia or the Soviet Union, which is one reason why malcontent members pushed their demands so hard.


The above is from a 2015 piece about the collapse of the EU.
But the general point, that paths that have only minority support (or are even unpopular), can occur as groups take a series of steps, each of which they view as correct only to end up "forced" to position they did not want. 

I don't think the UK leaving the EU without some type of deal is the most likely outcome, and it's clear that May's tactics are to position the current deal as the only alternative to staying in the EU or "no deal", but with different groups all trying to fight for their outcomes and all engaging in brinkmanship things can spiral out of control.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Fourth, enough tories would calculate that allowing this to happen really could finish the tories off (yes, I know lots of people have said that in the past and it hasn't happened, but it can and does happen to long-established political parties and it could happen here).



The UK will be finished before the Tories are.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Either ask for A50 to be extended - requires agreement from EU. Or A vote in parliament to revoke A50, which requires no permission from EU. It can't happen by accident basically.


The way May has chosen to play it, there will be very little time to get agreement for an extension, and there is a chance that some countries will take the chance to put conditions on their permission.  At this point, I wouldn't assume that any extension is necessarily a quick and easy thing to arrange.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 19, 2018)

Talks of an extension must be the new "government of national unity".


----------



## Supine (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> At this point, I wouldn't assume that any extension is necessarily a quick and easy thing to arrange.



I suspect the agreement to extend is already being finalised so it'll just need signatures to take affect. A lot of stuff goes on at a level we don't hear about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> I suspect the agreement to extend is already being finalised so it'll just need signatures to take affect. A lot of stuff goes on at a level we don't hear about.


You hope


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. The day before, they can call an emergency meeting of parliament and stop it. This much is completely clear now. Actually, I just checked and it happens at 11pm. They can call it off _that evening_ - quick vote, phone call to Brussels.
> 
> If it comes to that, I'll be marching down to parliament that day. So will hundreds of thousands and quite probably millions of other people. It won't happen.


So pleased you've caught up with me at last about a50


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Talks of an extension must be the new "government of national unity".


Committee of national salvation


----------



## Lucy Fur (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Committee of national salvation


C.O.N.S.  ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

Lucy Fur said:


> C.O.N.S.  ?


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 19, 2018)




----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> I suspect the agreement to extend is already being finalised so it'll just need signatures to take affect. A lot of stuff goes on at a level we don't hear about.


Extend for what, though?


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> I suspect the agreement to extend is already being finalised so it'll just need signatures to take affect. A lot of stuff goes on at a level we don't hear about.


Yeah, because everything else about the whole Brexit process has been so well planned and organised in plenty of time so there's no last minute panic...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Extend for what, though?


time to persuade everyone we're not leaving


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Yeah, because everything else about the whole Brexit process has been so well planned and organised in plenty of time so there's no last minute panic...


yeh the master criminal always has a master plan and the tories' is to look fuckwitted and disorganised until the very last minute when they will snatch victory defeat from the jaws of defeat victory


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> time to persuade everyone we're not leaving



Time to persuade everyone it was just bants!


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)




----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




They could just put coppers in fatigues.
Payback for the eighties.


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 19, 2018)

Supine said:


> I suspect the agreement to extend is already being finalised so it'll just need signatures to take affect. A lot of stuff goes on at a level we don't hear about.


And then what?, they've spent the last two and a half years do nothing but faff around, if they extend it by 12 months it's hard to conceive they will do anything other than more faffing around.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh the master criminal always has a master plan and the tories' is to look fuckwitted and disorganised until the very last minute when they will snatch victory defeat from the jaws of defeat victory


But surely everyone knows that there's always a fatal flaw in the master plan of even the most masterful master criminal, and I'm pretty sure May doesn't reach that standard


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> But surely everyone knows that there's always a fatal flaw in the master plan of even the most masterful master criminal, and I'm pretty sure May doesn't reach that standard


yeh she's got big ideas but not the ability to carry them out


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> I dont usually look at twitter but in just a few scrolls I count 5 Tory MPs who said they'll leave the party if No Deal becomes policy


Tory MPs say all sorts of shit on twitter.

Here's Soubry saying on twitter that she definitely won't vote to bring down the government. 

Which is it?


----------



## weltweit (Dec 19, 2018)

The only way Brexit might not happen is if 1) there was a second referendum which seems unlikely and 2) that remain was on the ballot paper which seems unlikely and 3) that a majority of voters voted remain which implies a big swing from the last vote which seems unlikely!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2018)

weltweit said:


> The only way Brexit might not happen is if 1) there was a second referendum which seems unlikely and 2) that remain was on the ballot paper which seems unlikely and 3) that a majority of voters voted remain which implies a big swing from the last vote which seems unlikely!


Yeah, but we now know that A50 can be revoked unilaterally and that March 29 results from domestic legislation that can be repealed. I know both of these are politically unlikely, but they represent a potential exit from Brexit without necessitating another referendum.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

weltweit said:


> The only way Brexit might not happen is if 1) there was a second referendum which seems unlikely and 2) that remain was on the ballot paper which seems unlikely and 3) that a majority of voters voted remain which implies a big swing from the last vote which seems unlikely!


Points 2 and 3 are wrong. If there were a second ref, remain would definitely be on the ballot paper. It is 'leave with no deal' that would struggle to get on there. And it would only take a small swing to change the result from last time, which is very possible.

This also isn't the only way brexit might not happen. IMO it's not even the most likely way brexit might not happen. If article 50 is revoked by parliament, brexit doesn't happen. May's brinksmanship, delays and attempt at a new Project Fear only increase the likelihood of revoking A50, quite probably in an unseemly, panicked haste. It would be an appropriately chaotic and incompetent end to this phase of the mess.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

There's loads of ways Brexit could be cancelled without another referendum - a revocation of article 50, a general election where the lib dems/SNP hold the balance of power and demand it for their support, etc etc...  the only issue is - as with a second referendum itself, and every shade of possible brexit - no-one has the numbers to make any of them happen.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Committee of national salvation



committee (for) uniting nation's territories


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If article 50 is revoked by parliament


How could this happen, without support from the government?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> How could this happen, without support from the government?


 I was assuming that the government takes it to parliament - my understanding of the ECJ ruling is that its judgement's requirements would be interpreted here (given our lack of a written constitution) as a vote in parliament rather than merely a government decree. It would be a massive climb down, clearly, and it would have to happen after May has resigned, but once May resigns, everything is back in play.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

Ah, a 'not going to happen' solution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was assuming that the government takes it to parliament - my understanding of the ECJ ruling is that its judgement's requirements would be interpreted here (given our lack of a written constitution) as a vote in parliament rather than merely a government decree. It would be a massive climb down, clearly, and it would have to happen after May has resigned, but once May resigns, everything is back in play.


yeh. and when she doesn't resign?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> Ah, a 'not going to happen' solution.


We'll see. A lot can happen between now and March.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. and when she doesn't resign?


If (when) her deal gets voted down she'll go, surely?


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

TBH I'm coming round to ska invita 's view that something like May's deal will go through eventually. It's the path of least(ish) resistance.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> If (when) her deal gets voted down she'll go, surely?


Yep. Hence all the delaying tactics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> If (when) her deal gets voted down she'll go, surely?


you'd hope so. but not a guarantee


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> TBH I'm coming round to ska invita 's view that something like May's deal will go through eventually. It's the path of least(ish) resistance.


The ultimate in the 'design by committee' genre of decision making.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> TBH I'm coming round to ska invita 's view that something like May's deal will go through eventually. It's the path of least(ish) resistance.


How do we get "something like" her deal though? She's pinned herself to it and the EU seem to not be moving...


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

(Actually, no deal is the path of least resistance. But I think in the end it'll scare enough MPs to cobble a majority together for May's deal)


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 19, 2018)

Watching some Tory drone on telly this morning I get the uneasy feeling that possible gaps in the agri sector  may be plugged by ersatz press ganging of brits


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> How do we get "something like" her deal though? She's pinned herself to it and the EU seem to not be moving...


'something like her deal' could mean 'her deal'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> 'something like her deal' could mean 'her deal'.


especially as the europeans seem so reluctant to revisit the entire negotiation thing


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> 'something like her deal' could mean 'her deal'.


Or it could mean something like her deal, renegotiated with different red lines by her successor.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> (Actually, no deal is the path of least resistance. But I think in the end it'll scare enough MPs to cobble a majority together for May's deal)



It must be what May thinks, otherwise why bother delaying the vote?  I guess she might just fancy Christmas at Chequers.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Committee of national salvation



Committe of Public Safety, surely. After all, virtue without terror_ is _impotent.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> especially as the europeans seem so reluctant to revisit the entire negotiation thing


I'm not sure I really believe this. It's not just the British indulging in brinkmanship.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 19, 2018)

Theresa will have a great Xmas- she is doing God’s bidding after all


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure I really believe this. It's not just the British indulging in brinkmanship.


I think I believe it to the extent that any renegotiation would require the UK to change its 'red lines'. And that would require May to resign first. TBH any solution other than 'May's deal' requires May to resign first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure I really believe this. It's not just the British indulging in brinkmanship.


it's the europeans saying no more negotiation


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think I believe it to the extent that any renegotiation would require the UK to change its 'red lines'. And that would require May to resign first. TBH any solution other than 'May's deal' requires May to resign first.


Why? She's changed her mind on countless things without shame or real consequence. Why not this?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> 'something like her deal' could mean 'her deal'.


But do the numbers stack up? Like you say, part of the problem seems to be that every outcome doesn’t seem to have enough bodies behind it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think I believe it to the extent that any renegotiation would require the UK to change its 'red lines'. And that would require May to resign first. TBH any solution other than 'May's deal' requires May to resign first.


What red lines?.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> Why? She's changed her mind on countless things without shame or real consequence. Why not this?


That's a fair point. She'd need never to present her deal to parliament in that case, because it won't be passed and if it is defeated she has to go. And tbh I don't really see that as much less of a climb down than revoking A50 altogether. Rudd's been pushing Norway+, and that would mean removing May's biggest and, according to her, most important red line, which is free movement.


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> But do the numbers stack up? Like you say, part of the problem seems to be that every outcome doesn’t seem to have enough bodies behind it.


They absolutely don't stack up today. But for there to be anything other than no deal something has to shift, and IMO currently the direction with most give - which still isn't a lot - is towards May's deal (or something like it).


----------



## killer b (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> if it is defeated she has to go.


Why?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> What red lines?.


Ending free movement of people is the main one. There are others, such as withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the ECJ. They're the reason May's deal is so shit.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 19, 2018)

not-bono-ever said:


> Theresa will have a great Xmas- she is doing God’s bidding after all



Maybe, but the devil is in the detail.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ending free movement of people is the main one. There are others, such as withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the ECJ. They're the reason May's deal is so shit.


She's given up on both of those in the withdrawal agreement.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was assuming that the government takes it to parliament - my understanding of the ECJ ruling is that its judgement's requirements would be interpreted here (given our lack of a written constitution) as a vote in parliament rather than merely a government decree. It would be a massive climb down, clearly, and it would have to happen after May has resigned, but once May resigns, everything is back in play.


Someone really should start that 'Fantasy Brexit scenarios' thread...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> They absolutely don't stack up today. But for there to be anything other than no deal something has to shift, and IMO currently the direction with most give - which still isn't a lot - is towards May's deal (or something like it).


This (i think)...allied with the hope that she/they can split apart the PLP. With the right of the PLP persuaded to back May's 'deal' in the national interest, casting the Corbyn loyal rump as the enemies of the people whose only answer seems to be the remainian dream of ref II.

We could mock up the Daily Mail headlines if we could be bothered.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Someone really should start that 'Fantasy Brexit scenarios' thread...


The fantasy scenario is crashing out with no deal on 29 March. My scenario would happen before that could happen.


----------



## 8ball (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> They absolutely don't stack up today. But for there to be anything other than no deal something has to shift, and IMO currently the direction with most give - which still isn't a lot - is towards May's deal (or something like it).



What about the "kicking the ball down the road" scenarios?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

8ball said:


> What about the "kicking the ball down the road" scenarios?


the road has come to a junction and they don't know which way to kick


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The fantasy scenario is crashing out with no deal on 29 March. My scenario would happen before that could happen.


The fantasy is your apparent belief that it would definitely happen. It *might *happen,  but it's by no means certain.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> The fantasy is your apparent brief that it would definitely happen. It *might *happen,  but it's by no means certain.


A50 would be revoked before a crash out, yes. You're buying into May's project fear if you believe otherwise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A50 would be revoked before a crash out, yes. You're buying into May's project fear if you believe otherwise.


we'll see about that in 90 days or so


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A50 would be revoked before a crash out, yes. You're buying into May's project fear if you believe otherwise.


You appear to have a magical belief in the power of parliamentary democracy to save us at the eleventh hour from (what you regard as) disaster.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> You appear to have a magical belief in the power of parliamentary democracy to save us at the eleventh hour from (what you regard as) disaster.


Not at all. Read back, I spelled out the reasons why this won't happen. There are lots of other ways to prevent it from happening, including something like May's deal actually getting through or extending A50 in order to renegotiate, but no deal crash out won't happen. As I said, you're believing the propaganda that is intended to scare people into accepting a shit deal if you think otherwise.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> we'll see about that in 90 days or so


Even if it does turn out the way lbj is suggesting, it's his blind faith I'm challenging


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> You appear to have a magical belief in the power of parliamentary democracy to save us at the eleventh hour from (what you regard as) disaster.


every which way out is a disaster, stay is a disaster, leave is a disaster, zimbabwe+++ is a disaster, and all because of one line left out of the brexit referendum legislation saying 'and this will only happen if x% vote for a result'. as it is we have a referendum in which broadly half the voters who turned out went one way and broadly half the other.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Even if it does turn out the way lbj is suggesting, it's his blind faith I'm challenging


he should have gone to specsavers


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> Even if it does turn out the way lbj is suggesting, it's his blind faith I'm challenging


Try reading what I write. It is nothing to do with blind faith. fuck's sake. But well done for falling for the bullshit. The scare tactics might just work if enough people believe them.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The fantasy scenario is crashing out with no deal on 29 March. My scenario would happen before that could happen.


 You keep saying this, but it is the default option.  I don’t know from whence  get your confidence that Parliament will act to avoid this.  It’s like no one is strong enough in the struggle, to take control of the wheel and the bus rolls over the cliff anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

xenon said:


> You keep saying this, but it is the default option.  I don’t know from whence  get your confidence that Parliament will act to avoid this.  It’s like no one is strong enough in the struggle, to take control of the wheel and the bus rolls over the cliff anyway.


----------



## cybershot (Dec 19, 2018)

Hmmm, liking this idea of a general strike. : The people can prevent a no-deal Brexit – with a general strike | Jolyon Maugham


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 19, 2018)

windmill jolyon is a gade A cunt and the sort of cunt who would scab on anything.


----------



## xenon (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A50 would be revoked before a crash out, yes. You're buying into May's project fear if you believe otherwise.



 This is self delusion. Even if most people don’t want that, it doesn’t mean it won’t happen.  Look at the dynamics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> windmill jolyon is a gade A cunt and the sort of cunt who would scab on anything.


never liked jolyons since i first encountered the name in a tintin book


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> zimbabwe+++


----------



## ska invita (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> TBH I'm coming round to ska invita 's view that something like May's deal will go through eventually. It's the path of least(ish) resistance.


Please don't associate me in any way with what's going on 

I also thinkb that scenario is looking less likely than ever... I think even less Labour MPs will support it after the last week or so of contempt/confidence votes etc.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Please don't associate me in any way with what's going on
> 
> I also thinkb that scenario is looking less likely than ever... I think even less Labour MPs will support it after the last week or so of contempt/confidence votes etc.


That's at 100 days, though. Things may look different as things roll towards 50?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 19, 2018)

brogdale said:


> That's at 100 days, though. Things may look different as things roll towards 50?


Yes.
What a load of shite it all is


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2018)

killer b said:


> Ah, a 'not going to happen' solution.


Well that 3500 troops story is actually a couple of weeks old...And it wasnt, as the Metro headlined it May doing it...It was done without formal request from civilians.

That HMG is now using that as a poker move (ffs).  It isnt enough troops to deal with scale of the issue ..probably would be enough to take control of one or two significant buildings...


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The ultimate in the 'design by committee' genre of decision making.


Completely the opposite.  When and where was the consultation?   
And ALL the Select Comittees roasted her over  that 2 weeks ago.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> When and where was the consultation?


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


>


Seriously?  

Go back and watch her last performance with the Select Committee liason . And you've got the Scots Government screaming they haven't been consulted the DUP saying they have been lied to.  She's even had 2 Brexit Secretaries resign over being out of the loop on the deal as is.. All to try and do something we lost an EU Ambassador over , that can't get past Parliament.


She binned all the notes that were sent out by Government ahead of referendum and is ramming her own 'vision' through as 'will of the people' on the back of an advisory referendum  ...though her vision seems only to extend as far as the colour scheme


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2018)

gosub said:


> Seriously?
> 
> Go back and watch her last performance with the Select Committee liason . And you've got the Scots Government screaming they haven't been consulted the DUP saying they have been lied to.  She's even had 2 Brexit Secretaries resign over being out of the loop on the deal as is.. All to try and do something we lost an EU Ambassador over , that can't get past Parliament.
> 
> ...


The consultation was in June 2016, if you didn't notice. I wasn't talking about May's decision making process but the potential 'path of least resistance' outcome of the way voting works in Parliament.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 19, 2018)

Almost certainly a by-election now in Peterborough. This voted leave in 2016. Big test for both parties. Labour will be wiped out if its further adopted remain by then...  

MP convicted of speeding driver lie


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The consultation was in June 2016, if you didn't notice. I wasn't talking about May's decision making process but the potential 'path of least resistance' outcome of the way voting works in Parliament.


And I was saying that ADVISORY referendum was remain vs 3 different outlined types of Leave.  Mrs May has negotiated a "deal' that isn't along the lines of any of the 3 the public were told it would be, and done so without taking input from Parliament  Government(s)  and even kept the Ministers supposed to be responsible in the dark


----------



## Wilf (Dec 19, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Almost certainly a by-election now in Peterborough. This voted leave in 2016. Big test for both parties. Labour will be wiped out if its further adopted remain by then...
> 
> MP convicted of speeding driver lie


Yep, already marginal (607) - along with a convicted MP - not looking good for Lab. Same time, she won it in2017, as a remainer. But yeah, looks like a con gain, unless ukip make a comeback and split the vote.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 19, 2018)

Wilf said:


> Yep, already marginal (607) - along with a convicted MP - not looking good for Lab. Same time, she won it in2017, as a remainer. But yeah, looks like a con gain, unless ukip make a comeback and split the vote.


Sorry state of affairs when a beleaguered govt can make by-election gains mid-term. It will be an interesting test of where we are - if Labour cannot even hold on to what they have in a by-election, they're in deep shit in a general election.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Almost certainly a by-election now in Peterborough. This voted leave in 2016. Big test for both parties. Labour will be wiped out if its further adopted remain by then...
> 
> MP convicted of speeding driver lie



No date for sentencing yet, and unlikely anything will happen before the New Year.

Even if there is eventually a by election, the Brexit decisions could all have been made by the time it happens...


----------



## Wilf (Dec 19, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry state of affairs when a beleaguered govt can make by-election gains mid-term. It will be an interesting test of where we are - if Labour cannot even hold on to what they have in a by-election, they're in deep shit in a general election.


Not sure of any likely by election date, but even if it hasn't happened it will leave Lab one down when it comes to the final brexit vote

edit: or perhaps that^


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> No date for sentencing yet, and unlikely anything will happen before the New Year.
> 
> Even if there is eventually a by election, the Brexit decisions could all have been made by the time it happens...



Precisely. In which case it'll be the first public vote post the decision that the political class arrive at.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2018)

andysays said:


> You appear to have a magical belief in the power of parliamentary democracy to save us at the eleventh hour from (what you regard as) disaster.



I think to be fair it's pretty reasonable to believe in the capacity of MP's to come up with a plan to stop (what they regard) as disastrous for them. 

It's not like it's complicated either is it? They either vote for May's deal or get rid of May and revoke A50.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 19, 2018)

How is it disastrous for MPs? They'll still have their jobs. For a while.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2018)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Precisely. In which case it'll be the first public vote post the decision that the political class arrive at.


OK, I misunderstood your point, I thought you were suggesting this might somehow change the parliamentary arithmetic and influence decisions made about Brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 19, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> windmill jolyon is a gade A cunt and the sort of cunt who would scab on anything.



I can't imagine any of them guardian prats with their blue face paint will do anything other than scab, selfishness is kind of the point of them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2018)

Poi E said:


> How is it disastrous for MPs? They'll still have their jobs. For a while.



They mostly keep their jobs by doing what the bourgeoisie wants, a no deal brexit would be disastrous for the class forces they represent.


----------



## Teaboy (Dec 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They mostly keep their jobs by doing what the bourgeoisie wants, a no deal brexit would be disastrous for the class forces they represent.



I very much doubt it, money looks after money.  Brexit even a hard one is not going to damage the merry go round.  Same as it ever was etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> They mostly keep their jobs by doing what the bourgeoisie wants, a no deal brexit would be disastrous for the class forces they represent.


MPs will keep a big trough for their snouts


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2018)

Teaboy said:


> I very much doubt it, money looks after money.  Brexit even a hard one is not going to damage the merry go round.  Same as it ever was etc



I'm unconvinced a no deal Brexit wouldn't disrupt the accumulation of surplus value but I don't think we'll find out whether it does or not.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 19, 2018)

Poor Britannia!


----------



## brogdale (Dec 19, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm unconvinced a no deal Brexit wouldn't disrupt the accumulation of surplus value but I don't think we'll find out whether it does or not.



No offence intended, but the above interaction reads like the tory party in microcosm; one part believes that accumulation benefits from the neo-liberal supra-state, others believe it will accelerate under national 'sovereignty'.

And that's why we are where we are.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> "We will unleash forces not seen since the 30s. "
> ?
> Seems like a nice chap. Nice to see a well presented young man on television.



Yes, as well turned out as his role model, Sir Oswald Mosley.


----------



## AnandLeo (Dec 19, 2018)

Parliament unanimously asserted all the way that they would not allow a no deal Brexit. Are they still certain on that?


----------



## NoXion (Dec 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


>




Brendan O'Neill has always been a provocative reactionary who's full of shit. Is this supposed to be news?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2018)

brogdale said:


> No offence intended, but the above interaction reads like the tory party in microcosm; one part believes that accumulation benefits from the neo-liberal supra-state, others believe it will accelerate under national 'sovereignty'.
> 
> And that's why we are where we are.



I don't disagree with that at all but the section of the Tory party that favours 'national sovereignty' is quite a bit smaller than the other section, who have the advantage that they will be able to get Labour to vote with them. The number of MP's in Parliament who want no deal isn't significant.


----------



## dshl (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> every which way out is a disaster, stay is a disaster, leave is a disaster, zimbabwe+++ is a disaster, and all because of one line left out of the brexit referendum legislation saying 'and this will only happen if x% vote for a result'. as it is we have a referendum in which broadly half the voters who turned out went one way and broadly half the other.


Why should that x be anything more or less than 49 for remainers or 51 for leavers?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

dshl said:


> Why should that x be anything more or less than 49 for remainers or 51 for leavers?


Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken


----------



## Cloo (Dec 19, 2018)

I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken



I'm not sure how much it would have helped to have had Farage ranting about how the vote was stacked in favour of remain all through the referendum campaign to be fair. It was bad enough as it was, could have been worse.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'...


Not been reading the posts on this thread then?


----------



## teuchter (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken


There'd have been none of this nonsense at all and this thread would never have existed.


----------



## Supine (Dec 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There'd have been none of this nonsense at all and this thread would never have existed.



We wish


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

teuchter said:


> There'd have been none of this nonsense at all and this thread would never have existed.


And we'd recall your finest moments on the dogging or toilet lock threads and not the dross you've inflicted on us on this one


----------



## TopCat (Dec 19, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?


If you think the shit was caused by the half who voted Leave you are kidding yourself. This shit has been piling up for years and the haves cared not a jot.


----------



## Sue (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> never liked jolyons since i first encountered the name in a tintin book


Though the ones in the Forsyte Saga were generally quite decent...


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?


To be fair the blitz spirit wasn't everything it's cracked up to be


----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 19, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken


 
1975 was 67% on a 64% turnout.


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 19, 2018)

isvicthere? said:


> 1975 was 67% on a 64% turnout.



Yes, 2016 was the second referendum.
And that was bollocks too!


----------



## Gerry1time (Dec 19, 2018)

TopCat said:


> If you think the shit was caused by the half who voted Leave you are kidding yourself. This shit has been piling up for years and the haves cared not a jot.



The thing that bugs me is that there's a chap called Tom Steinberg, don't know if anyone here has heard of him. He was big in the early days of online democracy with his My Society organisation, and they did some really interesting stuff early on. I knew him then, and in 2004 iirc, they ran some research to work out how politics was actually working in the UK.

They found two big dividing lines, and the biggest of them was being pro or anti Europe. The data was pretty clear that it was a huge division line, and they sent it to lots of politicians and journalists in the hope they'd take interest. None did.

So yes, the idea that Brexit is a recent phenomenon is way off the truth. It's been staring people in the face for something like 15 years now at least, and they've done nothing about it. Hardly a surprise we are where we are. Not only having voted to leave, but now also completely unable to agree a national consensus on what that means.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)

TopCat said:


> If you think the shit was caused by the half who voted Leave you are kidding yourself. This shit has been piling up for years and the haves cared not a jot.


Um...this shit was pretty much caused by the half who voted leave...yup.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 19, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> They found two big dividing lines, and the biggest of them was being pro or anti Europe. The data was pretty clear that it was a huge division line, and they sent it to lots of politicians and journalists in the hope they'd take interest. None did.



Did he say how that correlated with (for example) party vote?


----------



## TopCat (Dec 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um...this shit was pretty much caused by the half who voted leave...yup.


You don't see or grasp the anticedants.


----------



## Gerry1time (Dec 19, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Did he say how that correlated with (for example) party vote?



I've actually just found the presentation I was sent. Was 2005 not 2004, and it looks like the place it was put online no longer exists, but I'll see if I can find a way of uploading it in the morning...


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 19, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um...this shit was pretty much caused by the half who voted leave...yup.


you really are a bit thick aren't you


----------



## TopCat (Dec 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you really are a bit thick aren't you


To be fair, remainers across the cognitive spectrum think the same.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 19, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you really are a bit thick aren't you





TopCat said:


> You don't see or grasp the anticedants.



lol you sound like tories


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 19, 2018)

TopCat said:


> To be fair, remainers across the cognitive spectrum think the same.


I dunno, I can see a lot of sense in the some the of the view points of posters that want to remain, but if there was any remain poster that ever embodied the bitter, twisting, bullshit spouting, cliche gammon type antithesis, it's got to be our dexter.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 19, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?


It's a good analogy tbf: shops looted, dead bodies scavanged for valuables, regular black outs and a diet of bread and sometimes jam, all in the name of fighting the Germans.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 19, 2018)

ska invita said:


> It's a good analogy tbf: shops looted, dead bodies scavanged for valuables, regular black outs and a diet of bread and sometimes jam, all in the name of fighting the Germans.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 19, 2018)

Needs a few arrows from the UK side I think, like Farage, Johnson, Chlorinated Chicken, ...


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 19, 2018)

The 'we'll fight them on the beaches' in our time... the bell doth toll...



			
				Churchill... no wait a minute... some Greek bloke said:
			
		

> Do we believe in our own strength or not? Do we believe in the strength of working people, the power of the working class and the poorer layers of British society? If we don’t, we might as well pack up and go home. If the magnitude of the task scares us, there is no point talking about socialism and what the left should do. We can confront these people and defeat them – of course we can. We can oppose the EU and big business and we can defeat them. We should rely on the strength of working-class hostility towards the current regime in Britain and the current state of social affairs – which is very deep. And we can rely on the yearning of ordinary people for popular sovereignty.



coz we iz all gammonz:
EU Reading List
Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 20, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?


It's mad innit. During the Blitz, a foreign power was dropping bombs on British cities. To extend the analogy, this is the British government dropping bombs on its own cities. It is why, outside the UK, the idea that brexit is a very puzzling act of self-harm is so prevalent. 

I reckon the only brexit plan that would pass a parliament vote tomorrow would be revoking A50. Who would dare vote against it? 'We fucked up, people. It's a mess and we can't do it. We'd like to cancel the whole thing.' Seriously, how many mps would vote against that if it were presented to them tomorrow as an option?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's mad innit. During the Blitz, a foreign power was dropping bombs on British cities. To extend the analogy, this is the British government dropping bombs on its own cities. It is why, outside the UK, the idea that brexit is a very puzzling act of self-harm is so prevalent.
> 
> I reckon the only brexit plan that would pass a parliament vote tomorrow would be revoking A50. Who would dare vote against it? 'We fucked up, people. It's a mess and we can't do it. We'd like to cancel the whole thing.' Seriously, how many mps would vote against that if it were presented to them tomorrow as an option?


you are Teresa May ... I claim my funf euro etc


----------



## TopCat (Dec 20, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I reckon the only brexit plan that would pass a parliament vote tomorrow would be revoking A50. Who would dare vote against it? 'We fucked up, people. It's a mess and we can't do it. We'd like to cancel the whole thing.' Seriously, how many mps would vote against that if it were presented to them tomorrow as an option?


Most of the MP's on thin majorities in areas that voted leave would vote against.


----------



## xenon (Dec 20, 2018)

Cloo said:


> I can't believe some of those people who go 'Ah well, everything going to shit will bring back the Blitz Spirit and toughen people up and make them rally together'. Uhm, yeah, that may work when everyone is menaced by an external force, but when the shitstorm's been brought about by basically half the population, in a massively unequal society where the upper % will be massively insulated from its effects, it's not quite the same thing, is it?



 They are just mouth breathing fuckwits.  Leave means leave. And so on.


----------



## xenon (Dec 20, 2018)

TopCat said:


> If you think the shit was caused by the half who voted Leave you are kidding yourself. This shit has been piling up for years and the haves cared not a jot.



 I agree with this though.  Let us remember who really brought this state of affairs into being.


----------



## xenon (Dec 20, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Um...this shit was pretty much caused by the half who voted leave...yup.



 Do you not care why there were so many who caused it though? What Fuled that? Because it isn’t going away come the 29th of March.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> Do you not care why there were so many who caused it though? What Fuled that? Because it isn’t going away come the 29th of March.


No, but it's also not going away whatever happens on 29th March.


----------



## 2hats (Dec 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken





> There could be unstoppable demand for a re-run of the EU referendum if Remain wins by a narrow margin on 23 June, UKIP leader Nigel Farage has said.
> 
> The question of a second referendum was raised by Mr Farage in an interview with the Mirror in which he said : "In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the Remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it."


BBC News, 17 May 2016.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 20, 2018)

.


----------



## dshl (Dec 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Because when big questions are decided you generally need a decisive majority. Apparently it was 60% in the 1975 referendum. There'd be none of this second referendum nonsense if there's been a required margin of opinion before action was taken


Logically couldn't leavers argue the same thing i.e.  Remaining in Europe is too big a decision and therefore remainers need to get 60% to stay in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

dshl said:


> Logically couldn't leavers argue the same thing i.e.  Remaining in Europe is too big a decision and therefore remainers need to get 60% to stay in.


let's see someone try and then take things from there


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Most of the MP's on thin majorities in areas that voted leave would vote against.


Aw don't puncture his bubble of illusions


----------



## Supine (Dec 20, 2018)

dshl said:


> Logically couldn't leavers argue the same thing i.e.  Remaining in Europe is too big a decision and therefore remainers need to get 60% to stay in.



No


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> you really are a bit thick aren't you


people in glass houses, pocketscience...


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 20, 2018)

xenon said:


> Do you not care why there were so many who caused it though? What Fuled that? Because it isn’t going away come the 29th of March.


What fuelled it?

Probably stuff like this.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 20, 2018)

Wish someone would mock some of those up from a colonised people's perspective.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 20, 2018)

With the small print impossible to read, those front pages make it look like Kate Middleton is Migrant Enemy No. 1, with the Queen close behind.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 20, 2018)

The other day I was doing a bit of a clearout and found this. 

 


That map.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 20, 2018)

To the decades of Tabloid headlines, add the targetted Facebook ads.
In retrospect I'm slightly worrying I got so many targetted Tory vile anti-Corbyn election ads I got on Youtube.
Given my viewing history, I might have hoped for something more subtle rather than adverts that made voting for Corbyn a no-brainer.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 20, 2018)




----------



## Yossarian (Dec 20, 2018)

teuchter said:


> The other day I was doing a bit of a clearout and found this.
> 
> View attachment 156146
> 
> ...



"Vote Remain if you want Iraqis in your lane."


----------



## TopCat (Dec 20, 2018)

All these examples of shit electioneering being pulled out.

Don't you recollect the great exposure though?

Politicians of all parties working happily  together to explain firmly the message of remaining. It went down like cold sick at the time and the flavour has not improved with age.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 20, 2018)

Did they really get Tony Blair, David Cameron, Gordon Brown, and John Major all together for a Remain ad, or was that a fucked-up dream I had?


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 20, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Did they really get Tony Blair, David Cameron, Gordon Brown, and John Major all together for a Remain ad, or was that a fucked-up dream I had?


Nightmare surely.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Did they really get Tony Blair, David Cameron, Gordon Brown, and John Major all together for a Remain ad, or was that a fucked-up dream I had?


they're headlining at glasto


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 20, 2018)

the travelling winnets


----------



## Poi E (Dec 20, 2018)

Where the fuck is Yurts when you need him?


----------



## Poi E (Dec 20, 2018)

Out of interest, when I search "Brexit" on Google it says that people also search for the disappearance of Madeline McCann and the European migrant crisis. Do others get this?


----------



## Ted Striker (Dec 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Out of interest, when I search "Brexit" on Google it says that people also search for the disappearance of Madeline McCann and the European migrant crisis. Do others get this?



Maybe not, but hats off to the Star to roll back the years on MM today. Obvs the thing on all our minds at the mo.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 20, 2018)

NoXion said:


> Brendan O'Neill has always been a provocative reactionary who's full of shit. Is this supposed to be news?



You forgot the words "middle class" between "provocative" and "reactionary", and the word "cunt" between "reactionary" and "who's".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Dec 20, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> To be fair the blitz spirit wasn't everything it's cracked up to be



The Blitz was a great opportunity to go on the rob, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

ViolentPanda said:


> The Blitz was a great opportunity to go on the rob, though.


quite so. or to do all manner of other naughty things, pulling down buildings and blaming it on bomb damage etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

Ted Striker said:


> Maybe not, but hats off to the Star to roll back the years on MM today. Obvs the thing on all our minds at the mo.


and why should the police stop looking for mm when the overtime from the case has built conservatories up and down the land?


----------



## CRI (Dec 20, 2018)

She better get a finger out then! 

Vladimir Putin tells Theresa May to 'fulfil will of people' on Brexit


----------



## Enviro (Dec 20, 2018)

CRI said:


> She better get a finger out then!
> 
> Vladimir Putin tells Theresa May to 'fulfil will of people' on Brexit



Lol, if Vlad thinks it's a good idea, then it must be a good idea!


----------



## JimW (Dec 20, 2018)

We get out one side and he comes in the other, seems fair enough.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 20, 2018)

Putin has a sense of humour, the old rascal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Putin has a sense of humour, the old rascal.


which is more than can be said for our po-faced pm


----------



## CRI (Dec 20, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Putin has a sense of humour, the old rascal.


Maybe all those journos and critics who passed on in mysterious circumstances died laughing!


----------



## Raheem (Dec 20, 2018)

That gag he did with the trick perfume bottles was classic.


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 20, 2018)

those 3500 troops they're talking about on standby for no-deal brexwhat. we need them on our side. I mean the working class who need more from brexit than tax breaks for their bosses. it ought to be a matter of the highest priority IMO.

not that I have any idea how to actually make it happen, but it feels important.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 21, 2018)

You need to try some outreach. Go with the common touch


----------



## AnandLeo (Dec 21, 2018)

The Commons Select Committee for Exiting the EU scrutinises the Brexit negotiations of the government. However, the all-party committee has no role in negotiating and determining the terms of the Brexit deal that sets the future relationships of UK with EU, which is the reason that the currently agreed deal of the government with EU is not approved by the UK parliament. What is the point of an all-party select committee scrutinising the progress of negotiations of a deal, that members do not subscribe to?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 21, 2018)

If you thought Blair campaigning for Remain was counter-productive, just wait until you see this video:


----------



## mojo pixy (Dec 21, 2018)

Poi E said:


> You need to try some outreach. Go with the common touch



Exactly. We can go on at length why the left in this country is fucked, but that picture says it as well as anything else.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 21, 2018)

Citizens militia I'm afraid.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 21, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> If you thought Blair campaigning for Remain was counter-productive, just wait until you see this video:




I guess people can make their own decision how seriously to take this 

Breunion Boys


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 21, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I guess people can make their own decision how seriously to take this
> 
> Breunion Boys


I was trying to work out if it's a joke - if it is they've gone quite far with it: Britain Come Back! New single by pro-EU boyband urges UK to rethink Brexit


----------



## gosub (Dec 21, 2018)

preferred


----------



## Gerry1time (Dec 21, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> I was trying to work out if it's a joke - if it is they've gone quite far with it: Britain Come Back! New single by pro-EU boyband urges UK to rethink Brexit



Having been around EU funded democratic engagement projects for 15 years or so now, I wouldn't be surprised if that had had some degree of EU funding behind it. Their two funding criteria seem to be 1.the idea is shit and 2.it will have zero impact. It's why for all the many hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, thrown at the UK by the EU over the last 15 years to build pro EU sentiment over here, you've probably never heard of a single one of the projects they funded.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 21, 2018)

Gerry1time said:


> Having been around EU funded democratic engagement projects for 15 years or so now, I wouldn't be surprised if that had had some degree of EU funding behind it. Their two funding criteria seem to be 1.the idea is shit and 2.it will have zero impact. It's why for all the many hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, thrown at the UK by the EU over the last 15 years to build pro EU sentiment over here, you've probably never heard of a single one of the projects they funded.


The website specifies that they have no EU funding.

I've only really known the Erasmus programme, which is fair enough as an idea - fund young people to travel around and experience the different cultures of the EU - but seemed to mostly be taken up by middle class kids who would have travelled anyway, so still a bit of a misdirection of funding.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 21, 2018)

9 months coverage from the UK govt if you get EU funding.

The government’s guarantee for EU-funded programmes if there’s no Brexit deal


----------



## Poi E (Dec 21, 2018)

These documents are blackly hilarious.

Other stuff on hard Brexit.
All EU countries will become 3rd countries for the purposes of financial services. No transition. Limited number of temporary passporting licences.
Civil procedure cooperating regime out. Govt explicitly rules out continuing to cooperate.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 21, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> With the small print impossible to read, those front pages make it look like Kate Middleton is Migrant Enemy No. 1, with the Queen close behind.


Here's a fresh one.


----------



## magneze (Dec 22, 2018)

> Jeremy Corbyn has defiantly restated Labour’s policy of leading Britain out of the European Union with a refashioned Brexit deal, shrugging off intense pressure from Labour MPs and activists for the party to throw its weight behind a second referendum.
> 
> The Labour leader insisted that even if his party won a snap general election in the new year, he would seek to go to Brussels and try to secure a better deal – if possible, in time to allow Brexit to go ahead on 29 March.
> 
> “You’d have to go back and negotiate, and see what the timetable would be,” he said.


Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election


----------



## two sheds (Dec 22, 2018)

magneze said:


> Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election





> To those activists who support his leadership but ardently hope he will stop Brexit, Corbyn said: “We have to recognise a number of things. One is, as a party, about 60% of Labour voters voted remain; about 40% voted leave. We have to recognise why people voted in those directions.”



Interesting paragraph I felt.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 22, 2018)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 22, 2018)

magneze said:


> Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election



Not bad.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 22, 2018)

Presumably a Corbyn deal would look even less like "Brexit" than May's ?


----------



## Theisticle (Dec 22, 2018)

JC’s state aid stance has been critiqued here:


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

We’re now in a moronic stasis.

Corbyn’s effectively backing a variation of May’s already proven unvotable deal.

The two party system is offering a single “choice”.

Wow.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’re now in a moronic stasis.
> 
> Corbyn’s effectively backing a variation of May’s already proven unvotable deal.
> 
> ...



Don't worry, Jeremy's twinkly charm will sort everything. You just have to believe hard enough.


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

Corbyn is now taking the same line as May:

With some tweaks, Brexit will happen.

Some as yet not discovered tweaks, but with polls suggesting against them both.

May and Corbyn are both full steam ahead.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’re now in a moronic stasis.
> 
> Corbyn’s effectively backing a variation of May’s already proven unvotable deal.


I presume you're talking about the recent Guardian "Exclusive"? The position Corbyn articulated is the same position that Labour have had since their conference (and in some aspects prior to that), that the tactic would be first to try and force a GE and re-negotiate the deal. You might not like that policy but to pretend it's changed, as the Guardian implies, is simply false - as noted by the MPs "condemning" the policy being long term right-wing scumbags 1, 2


> Labour’s former shadow business minister Chuka Umunna said the interview was “deeply depressing and disappointing”.





> Wes Streeting, a regular critic of Corbyn, also attacked the party leader’s remarks and cast doubt on the suggestion that a Labour government would be able to negotiate a better deal than the one proposed by Theresa May





> Luciana Berger, the Labour MP for Liverpool Wavertree, said her party would never be forgiven if it facilitated Brexit,





paolo said:


> The two party system is offering a single “choice”.


As for the above, it's an incredible statement to make at the current time, when we probably have a greater difference between the parties than has existed for decades. Have you been asleep since birth? You only have to 2015 (or 2010) to find all three major parties in England promising cuts and attacks on public services.

I'm no supporter of either the LP or party politics but the criticisms in your post are just poor.


----------



## toblerone3 (Dec 23, 2018)

Corbyn: Brexit would go ahead even if Labour won snap election

If that's the way he thinks he doesn't deserve to win a general election and with 60% of Labour voters voting remain he probably won't.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 23, 2018)

FFS do people not read past headlines. The main text makes it utterly clear that this is the same line that the LP has advocated since the referendum.


> Jeremy Corbyn has defiantly* restated *Labour’s policy of leading Britain out of the European Union with a refashioned Brexit deal, shrugging off intense pressure from Labour MPs and activists for the party to throw its weight behind a second referendum.


(my emphasis) 

If you don't like that line, fine criticise it but don't pretend that it's not consistent with either the general policy since 2016 or the specific policy developed at this years conference. This is not _news_


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> FFS do people not read past headlines. The main text makes it utterly clear that this is the same line that the LP has advocated since the referendum.
> (my emphasis)
> 
> If you don't like that line, fine criticise it but don't pretend that it's not consistent with either the general policy since 2016 or the specific policy developed at this years conference. This is not _news_



Fair shout on that point - the headline was bait, and I got dog whistled.

(I think he's being a "soft Tory Brexit" on Brexit, but yep, separate argument).


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’re now in a moronic stasis.
> 
> Corbyn’s effectively backing a variation of May’s already proven unvotable deal.
> 
> ...


Seems more like tactics than conviction from Labour.  By promising a better Brexit they keep the debate focused on May's pisspoor handling of it, and keep at least some Leave voters sympathetic in case of early GE. Suspect we'll see a change of tack the closer we get to no deal, however...


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Seems more like tactics than conviction from Labour.  By promising a better Brexit they keep the debate focused on May's pisspoor handling of it, and keep at least some Leave voters sympathetic in case of early GE. Suspect we'll see a change of tack the closer we get to no deal, however...



Yep. I think it’s shoddy tactics. A nod and a wink “we’ll get this sorted, can’t say too much guv, eh, trust me squire”

And we head to the wire.

A bus half full of people screaming, and the other half the bus downing another happy vally.

Who is taking back control?


----------



## Poi E (Dec 23, 2018)

History.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 23, 2018)

What else would he say? If there's a GE before March, what do you think should be the Labour message? Presumably 'revoke A50' in some form or other, with or without reissuing it?


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

mauvais said:


> What else would he say? If there's a GE before March, what do you think should be the Labour message? Presumably 'revoke A50' in some form or other, with or without reissuing it?



Right now, there's no GE.

I'd like to hear the actual position on the *now*, not a possible position on a possible position.

[sounds like I'm having a go at you there mauvais - really not  ]


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Seems more like tactics than conviction from Labour.  By promising a better Brexit they keep the debate focused on May's pisspoor handling of it, and keep at least some Leave voters sympathetic in case of early GE. Suspect we'll see a change of tack the closer we get to no deal, however...


In what way? You lot really do not get that he isn't secretly remain. It's mental.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Or that people like you aren't the focus of his tactics . 2010 lib dem come and go, you're nothing to build on. Those 60%of Labour seats that voted leave are and have been.


----------



## mauvais (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> Right now, there's no GE.
> 
> I'd like to hear the actual position on the *now*, not a possible position on a possible position.
> 
> [sounds like I'm having a go at you there mauvais - really not  ]


The Labour position is that Maydeal is crap, isn't it? But there's nothing much that can be done without being in power, so they do have to answer the GE strategy question. There might not be enough time afterwards.

They can talk some long winded spiel about technicalities of deferral and they'll become labelled as the party that would stop Brexit, which is not a good thing for either electability or their stability once elected. Or they can talk about how without May's red lines they can get a better deal, which tbh is probably not really true but I don't know that truth matters.

I expect we're probably looking at: continuation -> updated proposed deal -> referendum or similar to confirm

But it wouldn't make a lot of sense to call that out now. If you think about May and Maydeal then the closest it's come to success is through obfuscation and delaying the full crystallisation of it until as late as possible.

I don't love any of this and there's a strong element of benefit of the doubt, but with a weak set of cards it so far seems like a reasonable play.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> In what way? You lot really do not get that he isn't secretly remain. It's mental.


He may not be, but the Lab membership is. In my view he is toast if he facilitates a Brexit that is anything but very soft BINO.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 23, 2018)

Theisticle said:


> JC’s state aid stance has been critiqued here:




Is nationalizing the same as giving state aid? In which case surely no EU country would have any nationalized sector.

From Wiki: Germany "*2008* Renationalization of the "Bundesdruckerei" (Federal Print Office), which had been privatized in 2001."

Eta: and trains and NHS for example in UK get large subsidies - how does that work?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Is nationalizing the same as giving state aid? In which case surely no EU country would have any nationalized sector.
> 
> From Wiki: Germany "*2008* Renationalization of the "Bundesdruckerei" (Federal Print Office), which had been privatized in 2001."
> 
> Eta: and trains and NHS for example in UK get large subsidies - how does that work?


Opening public services up to market competition - which the state can win if it's the best at opening up the service to free market competition. That's what nationalistion means in the EU. Not what you are thinking of at all.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Eta: and trains and NHS for example in UK get large subsidies - how does that work?


The EU is based on subsidising capital and its costs. Getting you to pay. That's not uniquely british and its the whole point of the project.

The NHS gets money because we choose to fund it - there is no profit motive that needs to be met. Where is the problem? The EU has a problem with that not being open to market competition though.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> He may not be, but the Lab membership is. In my view he is toast if he facilitates a Brexit that is anything but very soft BINO.


Because you appear to have no  principles or views beyond brexit. This, of course, was behind  the massive lib dem surge in the last election.


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Is nationalizing the same as giving state aid? In which case surely no EU country would have any nationalized sector.
> 
> From Wiki: Germany "*2008* Renationalization of the "Bundesdruckerei" (Federal Print Office), which had been privatized in 2001."
> 
> Eta: and trains and NHS for example in UK get large subsidies - how does that work?



I’ll let someone else comment on state provided healthcare.

For trains...

The UK has always been privatising far beyond any EU directive.

The EU might just get vaguely near UK policy, with the forthcoming fourth railway package. It requires that ops are put out to tender. State owned business can win a tender.

And indeed here in the UK, they already have. In the UK, EU state companies run trains and buses.

The only that thing that isn’t allowed here - which the EU completely allows and will
do - is our own state running anything (Except when the private sector defaults, natch)

When the EU fourth railway package kicks in, well maybe it’s to hell in a hand cart. A cart we pioneered decades ago. Take back control!


----------



## ska invita (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> We’re now in a moronic stasis.
> 
> Corbyn’s effectively backing a variation of May’s already proven unvotable deal.
> 
> ...


Imo hes just triangulating and posturing and positioning Labour as honouring the vote. It's a signal to Leave voters, who I doubt buy it, yet Remainers seem to be taking it as gospel.


paolo said:


> Yep. I think it’s shoddy tactics. A nod and a wink “we’ll get this sorted, can’t say too much guv, eh, trust me squire”
> 
> And we head to the wire.
> 
> ...


I recommend switching off till after the vote in a month's time. There's nothing to see here


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Corbyn slapping down Starmer and pricks like that in the party is nothing to see?


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 23, 2018)

Posted this elsewhere but Brexit is making some people totally lose the plot.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Not Rowling! Oh No!! etc


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Same cloth as half the posts on this thread.


----------



## Brainaddict (Dec 23, 2018)

I know she's always had crap views, just amazed that she sat down and planned out that whole cringe-worthy thread and posted it. It's like something a sixth-former might write while bored in a class.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Obv inspired by that guilty christian labour MP the other day.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 23, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> I know she's always had crap views, just amazed that she sat down and planned out that whole cringe-worthy thread and posted it. It's like something a sixth-former might write while bored in a class.



its shit, but then Rowling has been taking the piss out of her audience for a long time. Laziness.


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

It's nuts.

There's Lineker, Delia Smith and now Rowling at the forefront.

How can they challenge the big thinkers?

Putin, Trump, even our own Yaxley Lennon, they're backing it! Take back control they say, so let them!


----------



## TopCat (Dec 23, 2018)

Again, the millionaires should realise their remainer bleating solidifies the leave vote.


----------



## Wilf (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> It's nuts.
> 
> There's Lineker, Delia Smith and now Rowling at the forefront.
> 
> ...


Hang on, is Delia up for re2? That's me in!


----------



## Wookey (Dec 23, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Again, the millionaires should realise their remainer bleating solidifies the leave vote.



Just who the hell in the Remain camp are you listening to if you aren't listening to Delia Fucking Smith?? 

She virtually invented custard probably. Spect your elders.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 23, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Posted this elsewhere but Brexit is making some people totally lose the plot.




That was the first writing of JK Rowling I have ever read that wasn't in her actual voice. Don't think I'll bother with any more, it's tortured. 

Still, she is on the right side and I'm grateful for that coz her audience is young and has votes now.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Same cloth as half the posts on this thread.


Such a shame. 

She loves writing about unicorns - you two should get along.


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Again, the millionaires should realise their remainer bleating solidifies the leave vote.



Trump.
Putin.

Solid.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> Trump.
> Putin.
> 
> Solid.


In full


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 23, 2018)

paolo said:


> Trump.
> Putin.
> 
> Solid.


288 posts on this thread and not once has a supposed socialist talked about class.
It's the EU vs UK, Labour vs Tory, Remainers vs Leavers. But labour vs capital, nope that doesn't exist.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 23, 2018)

FT reckons on the attritional strategy from the tories...



based on winning over the DUP with some 'confection' from Brussels and the 'domino effect' on their own malcontents.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> 288 posts on this thread and not once has a supposed socialist talked about class.
> It's the EU vs UK, Labour vs Tory, Remainers vs Leavers. But labour vs capital, nope that doesn't exist.


That's somewhat patronising.
It's simply that quite a lot of us see the EU as imperfect, but the best option at the moment - and this exercise will hopefully make us take more of an active interest in future - especially as it has revealed a massive level of incompetence among the UK political class.
If you really want violent revolution, I believe you can join in for the price of a cheap hiviz ...


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> That's somewhat patronising.
> It's simply that quite a lot of us see the EU as imperfect, but the best option at the moment - and this exercise will hopefully make us take more of an active interest in future - especially as it has revealed a massive level of incompetence among the UK political class.
> If you really want violent revolution, I believe you can join in for the price of a cheap hiviz ...


eh? You literally prove the point.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> 288 posts on this thread and not once has a supposed socialist talked about class.
> It's the EU vs UK, Labour vs Tory, Remainers vs Leavers. But labour vs capital, nope that doesn't exist.


Not once have they said what they're going to do to turn the EU into a socalist super state or a single thint to stop the EU neoliberalism that attacks this.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 23, 2018)

Most leave people have disengaged - happy to see what havoc clown liberals like lbj might wrought. We haven't gone away.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 23, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> But labour vs capital, nope that doesn't exist.


It does, but brexit either won't make any difference to it, or it will be an opportunity for capital to muscle in even more.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 23, 2018)




----------



## isvicthere? (Dec 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Most leave people have disengaged - happy to see what havoc clown liberals like lbj might wrought. We haven't gone away.



LBJ? Not president Johnson?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Most leave people have disengaged - happy to see what havoc clown liberals like lbj might wrought. We haven't gone away.


Speaking of behalf of most leave people now.


----------



## paolo (Dec 23, 2018)

I work, for my sins, down the road from Browns in Mayfair.

Brexit love in last month.

Bannon, Farage et al. They all piled in.

The funny thing is, they said they were taking back control, then later realised that most European countries ban foreign political money, and sacked it all off.

Oh. Taking Back Control.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 23, 2018)

butchersapron said:


> Most leave people have disengaged


Why? Your team won- you should be flooding the airwaves with your plan for a socialist utopia, free from the nasty EU neolibs... don't play into the stereotype of being all piss and wind


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 23, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> That's somewhat patronising.
> It's simply that quite a lot of us see the EU as imperfect, but the best option at the moment - and this exercise will hopefully make us take more of an active interest in future - especially as it has revealed a massive level of incompetence among the UK political class.
> If you really want violent revolution, I believe you can join in for the price of a cheap hiviz ...


As BA said QED.
Don't pretend that you're some opponent of the EU when you've been defending it and neo-liberalism from your first post on this thread. You wanted to "go back to what worked" - increasing inequality, increasing marketisation, increasing technocracy.


sleaterkinney said:


> It does, but brexit either won't make any difference to it, or it will be an opportunity for capital to muscle in even more.


 Like GG you're not interested in class, you've dismissed it for years. And if the UK leaving the EU won't make any difference in the fight between labour and capital then it's irrelevant.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 23, 2018)

Brainaddict said:


> Posted this elsewhere but Brexit is making some people totally lose the plot.




You wouldn't know she made a living from writing would you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> You wouldn't know she made a living from writing would you?


Guardian journos make their livings from writing and most of them're as shit at writing as auld jk


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 23, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> You wouldn't know she made a living from writing would you?



I prefer her earlier work.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 23, 2018)

Debate here

 between Grace Blakeley and Zoe Williams examining the case for a 'lexit' and the case against it from a lw perspective. The essential difference between them seems to be about where democracy might be possible. Blakeley basically doesn't see it as possible above the level of the nation state. Williams does and sees possibilities for reform of the likes of the EU through international alliances. Further she sees it as necessary for reasons of global concern such as climate change and resource management. I suspect that they both think of the other as an idealist. Williams is possibly the more pessimistic. Open up possibilities to challenge the forces of neoliberalism by first fucking up your own economy with those very neoliberals in power doing the fucking up? I don't think so, particularly here in the UK of all places - the source of the main driver of neoliberalism in the EU. I agree with that. Confronted with the immediate bad things that we are already seeing happen it's all very handwavy.


----------



## splash (Dec 23, 2018)




----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Zoe Williams examining the case for a 'lexit' and the case against it from a lw perspective.


So left wing she want's a progressive alliance with the LibDems and believes that Blair "left a blueprint for social democratic government"


----------



## brogdale (Dec 24, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So left wing she want's a progressive alliance with the LibDems and believes that Blair "left a blueprint for social democratic government"


coalition, maybe?


----------



## Theisticle (Dec 24, 2018)

Peak Bastani


----------



## philosophical (Dec 24, 2018)

Leaving something means a border (of some kind).
After brexit there is supposed to be a border in a place where an international treaty (and I would say a very significant one) says there isn't supposed to be a border.
Brexit/Lexit, call it what you will, won the vote.
After two and a half years the winners have no solution to the land border connundrum.
Most of the winners say they leave that solution to the politicians.
There is no solution, so the winners want to blame everybody but themselves instead of resolving the mess.
The so called backstop will (if it is voted in) remain forever because an ultimate border solution cannot be found.
The conclusion I come to is that Brexiters and Lexiters have lost even though they think they have won, it will be brexit in name only at best.
The best solution to the border problem was there already, not having a border, but now that Brexiters and Lexiters have voted for one they should in my view say in practical day to day detail how they intend to establish and maintain the land border they voted for.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 24, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> So left wing she want's a progressive alliance with the LibDems and believes that Blair "left a blueprint for social democratic government"


Backed  Owen Frothy Coffee Smith during the coup days
Owen Smith: decent bloke, good politics. But is that enough? | Zoe Williams
And then eventually once Corbyn had finally got control gave a feeble apology
I backed Owen Smith against Jeremy Corbyn. But I regret it now | Zoe Williams


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 24, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Debate here
> 
> between Grace Blakeley and Zoe Williams examining the case for a 'lexit' and the case against it from a lw perspective. The essential difference between them seems to be about where democracy might be possible. Blakeley basically doesn't see it as possible above the level of the nation state. Williams does and sees possibilities for reform of the likes of the EU through international alliances. Further she sees it as necessary for reasons of global concern such as climate change and resource management. I suspect that they both think of the other as an idealist. Williams is possibly the more pessimistic. Open up possibilities to challenge the forces of neoliberalism by first fucking up your own economy with those very neoliberals in power doing the fucking up? I don't think so, particularly here in the UK of all places - the source of the main driver of neoliberalism in the EU. I agree with that. Confronted with the immediate bad things that we are already seeing happen it's all very handwavy.




Williams seemed to mainly be being very rude and interrupting a lot - debate is putting it a bit strong.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 24, 2018)

Theisticle said:


> Peak Bastani



Interesting choice of trading partners you’ve got there Aaron.....
Bastani - proof you can be highly qualified, from a prestigious institution, be “a leader” and still be a damned immoral fool.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 24, 2018)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Interesting choice of trading partners you’ve got there Aaron.....
> Bastani - proof you can be highly qualified, from a prestigious institution, be “a leader” and still be a damned immoral fool.


As though generations of auld etonian oxbridge educated mps hadn't demonstrated that already


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 24, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> As though generations of auld etonian oxbridge educated mps hadn't demonstrated that already


Well, exactly.
But Bastani and his minions “fully automated luxury communism” looks more like the old “fully enslaved poverty Stalinism” by the day.


----------



## A380 (Dec 27, 2018)

philosophical said:


> Leaving something means a border (of some kind).
> After brexit there is supposed to be a border in a place where an international treaty (and I would say a very significant one) says there isn't supposed to be a border.
> Brexit/Lexit, call it what you will, won the vote.
> After two and a half years the winners have no solution to the land border connundrum.
> ...


There is a solution. Leave Northern Ireland ( which voted remain) across the sectarian divide) in the EU  and have an internal UK border at Holyhead, Heysham etc.

Simple*....



Spoiler



*Irony


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 27, 2018)

Biggest worry there would be the risk of the DUP summoning Zombie Ian Paisley.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 27, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> Biggest worry there would be the risk of the DUP summoning Zombie Ian Paisley.
> 
> View attachment 157005



the eurovision song contest has changed a lot since the 80s


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 27, 2018)

Theisticle said:


> Peak Bastani




Brazil super unproblematic right now as well.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 27, 2018)

My observation during christmas travels outside of the urban75 discussion bubble: no-one's even heard of the term 'lexit' let alone what it might mean.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 27, 2018)

Project Fear continues apace Met Police chief warns over no-deal Brexit


----------



## TopCat (Dec 27, 2018)

I'm waiting to hear what the furniture makers guild have to say.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 27, 2018)

last poll of the year saw the explicitly pro remain parties on 10% of the vote (between them) while Lucas thunders on twitter 'Labour, the young will never forgive you!'


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I'm waiting to hear what the furniture makers guild have to say.


You won't believe the stance the tufty club has taken


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 27, 2018)

Another catastrophic phall-ure of the Brexit vision:
British curry industry ‘dying’ because of Brexit and staff shortages, leading restaurateurs warn


----------



## teuchter (Dec 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You won't believe the stance the tufty club has taken


Brexit will open up a space for discussion of road safety issues, with disruption to road traffic causing new opportunities for children to cross roads at a grassroots level. The tufty club is currently working on a critical analysis of child/road relations in preparation for making concrete proposals for further dialectic examination of the possible scenarios in which members can organise and meet around common grounds left vacant in post-Brexit Britain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Brexit will open up a space for discussion of road safety issues, with disruption to road traffic causing new opportunities for children to cross roads at a grassroots level. The tufty club is currently working on a critical analysis of child/road relations in preparation for making concrete proposals for further dialectic examination of the possible scenarios in which members can organise and meet around common grounds left vacant in post-Brexit Britain.


Wrong I'm afraid, they're staunch remainers as they're concerned that any brexit could see Brussels imposing driving on the right on the UK whereas atm the UK could veto such a diktat


----------



## Poi E (Dec 27, 2018)

Fear not! The government is seized of the important matters of state.Hunt orders persecuted Christians review


----------



## yield (Dec 27, 2018)

TopCat said:


> I'm waiting to hear what the furniture makers guild have to say.


Richard Jessup: what does Brexit mean for British manufacturing?
Furniture News. Oct 17, 2017


> Richard Jessup, sales director at Lectra – a leading provider of integrated solutions to the upholstered furniture industry, covering design, product development and automated cutting – talks Brexit, British manufacture and the importance of the Manufacturing Guild Mark.


tldr. boring tbf. Weak pound maybe good for domestic manufacturing.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 27, 2018)

yield said:


> Richard Jessup: what does Brexit mean for British manufacturing?
> Furniture News. Oct 17, 2017
> 
> tldr. boring tbf. Weak pound maybe good for domestic manufacturing.



puff piece in a furniture magazine about how everything will be fine...by a salesman


----------



## yield (Dec 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> puff piece in a furniture magazine about how everything will be fine...by a salesman


Really?


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 27, 2018)

yield said:


> Really?


Richard Jessup, sales director at...
...habits of the Millennials...
 Companies can think of Brexit as an opportunity or a threat. Forward thinking companies are ......
We have every confidence that the sector will thrive post-Brexit....
British manufacturers need to seek out the new trends and focus on areas of growth...
(and of course this line) We are already seeing that ‘Made in Britain’ is becoming more important to consumers.


----------



## yield (Dec 27, 2018)

Wow genuinely astonished how quickly you saw through that. 

Who would've thought that Richard Jessup, sales director at Lectra would be a salesman?

Luckily there are no other PR puff pieces around though.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 27, 2018)

yield said:


> Really?



I'd have to agree!


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 27, 2018)

yield said:


> Wow genuinely astonished how quickly you saw through that.
> 
> Who would've thought that Richard Jessup, sales director at Lectra would be a salesman?
> 
> Luckily there are no other PR puff pieces around though.


Don't worry I'll keep you right.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 27, 2018)

This is the informed economist, soothsayer and sofa guru Richard Jessup, of Lectra. 

Would you trust this man?

Ginger hair and a blue suit, and he's in charge of our furniture??


----------



## Poi E (Dec 27, 2018)

Hair is fine but the tie makes men look dodgy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Ginger hair



More Remaniac bigotry


----------



## friedaweed (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> View attachment 157037
> 
> Ginger hair and a blue suit, and he's in charge of our furniture??



I would go out tonight,
but I haven't got a _wig grey suit dicky-bow _ (Delete as applicable) to wearrrrrrrRRRRRRRRHHHH!



SpackleFrog said:


> More Remaniac bigotry



Yup


----------



## Wilf (Dec 27, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Hair is fine but the tie makes men look dodgy.


Which reminds me, my uncle was in A & E at North Manchester Hospital the other night and saw Paul Scholes. Missed the chance to see where he stood on the people's vote. However one of the nurses said he was the best midfielder they'd had in (Scolesy that is, not our Les).


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> View attachment 157037
> 
> This is the informed economist, soothsayer and sofa guru Richard Jessup, of Lectra.
> 
> ...


Why don't you post a picture of you for purposes of comparison


----------



## Wookey (Dec 27, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Why don't you post a picture of you for purposes of comparison



Erm...when I'm next interviewed by Furniture News on the likely impacts of Brexit on the UK furniture industry, backed up by my keen knowledge of integrated solutions to the upholstered furniture industry, covering design, product development and automated cutting, I'll be sure to illustrate it with a head and shoulders shot for you to wank over.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 27, 2018)

I think we should all post pictures of ourselves for assessment in a Brexit context.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Erm...when I'm next interviewed by Furniture News on the likely impacts of Brexit on the UK furniture industry, backed up by my keen knowledge of integrated solutions to the upholstered furniture industry, covering design, product development and automated cutting, I'll be sure to illustrate it with a head and shoulders shot for you to wank over.


The only sexual purpose such an image might serve would be to dispel lascivious thoughts, not to promote them


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

teuchter said:


> I think we should all post pictures of ourselves for assessment in a Brexit context.


Go on then


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 27, 2018)

teuchter said:


> My observation during christmas travels outside of the urban75 discussion bubble: no-one's even heard of the term 'lexit' let alone what it might mean.


No wonder really, if they're all as smug as you.


teuchter said:


> There's no doubt I'm 'sheltered' from Leave voters. I'm a middle class scot with a professional job living in London in the country's most 'remain' borough.
> 
> [...]


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 27, 2018)

pocketscience : Not _necessarily_ all that 'smug', he's just stating his facts.

As in : teuchter lives in London**

**Like I used to, for 17 years until 2008.

Personally, I now have a *vastly* better understanding of leavemindedness since I left London for Swansea (52% Leave, 48% Remain ... with that, Swansea = the closest city _anywhere_ to the *actual* 2016 result).
Like my partner, I remain Mr Heavily Remainist of 137 Remain Street  , *but* also, I have a *far* better idea now of why so many voted Leave 

When in pubs, and at work, etc., we even _sometimes_ discuss socialism, TUs, employment rights, etc. etc.
I'm happy to chat leftie politics, and even Brexit (   ), with sound people on all or any sides, so like redsquirrel (to his major credit  ) acknowledges, class politics are far more important than Brexitism .... but for myself, I still think Brexit is utterly shit


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Would you trust this man?
> 
> Ginger hair


What has that got to do with anything?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 27, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> What has that got to do with anything?



You're quoting me partially. Or should I say selectively?! 

Ginger hair on it's own is neither here nor there, I'm not a racist.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 27, 2018)

William of Walworth said:


> pocketscience : Not _necessarily_ all that 'smug', he's just stating his facts.
> 
> As in : teuchter lives in London**
> 
> ...


You're missing the point. 
Teuchter implied that lexit's unique to a u75 bubble, but the reality is that it's actually him that's in a middle-class remain bubble outside of u75.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 27, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> You're missing the point.
> Teuchter implied that lexit's unique to a u75 bubble, but the reality is that it's actually him that's in a middle-class remain bubble outside of u75.


Can you back that up with some polls or stats?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Can you back that up with some polls or stats?


Sure; 1 out of every poster called Teuchter stated that "there's no doubt that they are sheltered from leave voters".
That's a whopping 100% of Teuchters who are in a remain bubble


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 27, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sure; 1 out of every poster called Teuchter stated that "there's no doubt that they are sheltered from leave voters".
> That's a whopping 100% of Teuchters who are in a remain bubble


Thought so.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 27, 2018)

I was just looking for opinium or yougov data on Tuechter but its oddly absent, I guess we will just have to go on what he has said. How frustrating.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 27, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> Thought so.


Here to help.
If you need any other blatantly obvious facts spelt-out in the simplest of statistical forms, don't hesitate to ask.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 27, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Sure; 1 out of every poster called Teuchter stated that "there's no doubt that they are sheltered from leave voters".
> That's a whopping 100% of Teuchters who are in a remain bubble



Im from teuchter  area in London. I don't have middle class job. Nearly all of the people I know - they do working class jobs , some are Council tenants are Remain. I was Remain as well.

In Lambeth EU was not the issue.  Housing , gentrification and cost of living are. As are Tory austerity cuts to Councils hitting services.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 27, 2018)

Wookey said:


> You're quoting me partially. Or should I say selectively?!
> 
> Ginger hair on it's own is neither here nor there, I'm not a racist.


All quotes are by definition selective


----------



## Wookey (Dec 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All quotes are by definition selective



You state the obvious, obviously. 

To chop a sentence in half, deliberately to change the meaning, and then to challenge me on the newly created meaning, is the game of a knave!


----------



## teuchter (Dec 28, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> No wonder really, if they're all as smug as you.


It was simply an acknowledgement of the facts - just about everything about me predicts me as 'remain'. Yes, the majority of people I saw over Christmas are also remain. My point about 'Lexit' - unless you want those who already want Brexit to support the Lexit version of its aims, surely those who want to promote the Lexit approach should be targeting Remain voters. If you read urban75 (which in reality is fairly heavy with middle class posters, and Remain posters) then you might get the impression that this Lexit argument is current amongst Remain voters. Even if they reject it, that they are aware of it. But my observation in my christmas corner of the 'real world' is that this simply isn't the case. The idea that there can be a 'left' version of Brexit is barely even considered. Whether that's the fault of remainers not being widely enough read, or the fault of Lexit advocates failing to present a plausible message is up for discussion.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Whether that's the fault of remainers not being widely enough read


well the guardian has been running (negative) opinion pieces that discuss left leave for some time now, why just yesterday there was another one. So its literally being discussed on a semi regular basis in the paper written by and for that demographic you describe. 

322,000 results on google for 'guardian lexit', going back a couple of years

so, while left leave had no real mainstream coverage the guardian has been publishing arguments against it for two years now. 
So I think a fair chunk of the remain vote will have heard the left leave arguments by now, even if only in the rebuttal.


teuchter said:


> my observation in my christmas corner of the 'real world


Ah. Here it is, you slid from personal observations to talking about 'remainers' in general. You've attempted to go from 'my holidays with my family and friends' into 'all remainers'. tsk tsk.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 28, 2018)

The Guardian only has a circulation of 138,000, not sure what the online figures are but I doubt the opinion pieces are reaching all that many people - I've certainly talked to enough people who should know better but think the existence of a Left Leave argument is some kind of weird oxymoron.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2018)

Wookey said:


> You state the obvious, obviously.
> 
> To chop a sentence in half, deliberately to change the meaning, and then to challenge me on the newly created meaning, is the game of a knave!


You brought up his hair colour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2018)

Wookey said:


> You state the obvious, obviously.
> 
> To chop a sentence in half, deliberately to change the meaning, and then to challenge me on the newly created meaning, is the game of a knave!


If you said the words and they were consecutive then you have not a leg to stand on


----------



## Borp (Dec 28, 2018)

Couldn't even be sure if he's drunk


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2018)

teuchter said:


> It was simply an acknowledgement of the facts - just about everything about me predicts me as 'remain'. Yes, the majority of people I saw over Christmas are also remain. My point about 'Lexit' - unless you want those who already want Brexit to support the Lexit version of its aims, surely those who want to promote the Lexit approach should be targeting Remain voters. If you read urban75 (which in reality is fairly heavy with middle class posters, and Remain posters) then you might get the impression that this Lexit argument is current amongst Remain voters. Even if they reject it, that they are aware of it. But my observation in my christmas corner of the 'real world' is that this simply isn't the case. The idea that there can be a 'left' version of Brexit is barely even considered. Whether that's the fault of remainers not being widely enough read, or the fault of Lexit advocates failing to present a plausible message is up for discussion.


Could you summarise your dismal post pls


----------



## teuchter (Dec 28, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> Ah. Here it is, you slid from personal observations to talking about 'remainers' in general. You've attempted to go from 'my holidays with my family and friends' into 'all remainers'. tsk tsk.



I don't think so. I've not claimed that those I speak to represent 'all remainers'.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 28, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The Guardian only has a circulation of 138,000, not sure what the online figures are but I doubt the opinion pieces are reaching all that many people - I've certainly talked to enough people who should know better but think the existence of a Left Leave argument is some kind of weird oxymoron.



same as, the left leave argument has not been widely heard but I did not say it had. The rebuttals haven't solely been confined to guardian opinion pieces, plenty in the Indy (when did that go to shit?) and similar publications. I'd be interested to see how much penetration the arguments have had, perhaps someone has done surveys. I simply think its known better than tuechters limited sample size shows.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 28, 2018)

Borp said:


> View attachment 157106
> 
> 
> 
> Couldn't even be sure if he's drunk



Not sure why he's even calling for a second referendum when he's basically saying: "It's too late to change your minds, Brexiters, you are now forever tainted in the eyes of Baron Adonis."


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 28, 2018)

Adonis has been tweeting his wank from the ski slopes this christmas.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Dec 28, 2018)

The chief problem with arguing round the houses over whether Lexit or Left “Remain & Reform” are better is the same for either position - as it currently stands both are highly unlikely.......

(Considering balance of forces, divided left and Parliamentary arithmetic) It is, atm, afaics, RW disaster capitalist xenophobic Leave v. Neoliberal austerity “fortress Europe” Remain....

(With a fair chance of an outcome that combines the worst of both worlds)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Dec 28, 2018)

Wookey said:


> You're quoting me partially. Or should I say selectively?!
> 
> Ginger hair on it's own is neither here nor there, I'm not a racist.



You're not a racist because you only hate ginger people with blue ties...?




Wookey said:


> the game of a knave!



Who the eff are you, the Mayor of Casterbridge?


----------



## andysays (Dec 28, 2018)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're not a racist because you only hate ginger people with blue ties...?


His dislike is clearly aesthetic, not racist...


----------



## two sheds (Dec 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> If you said the words and they were consecutive then you have not a leg to stand on



First gingerism, now mocking one-legged people


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 28, 2018)

two sheds said:


> First gingerism, now mocking one-legged people


By no means. One-legged people do have a leg to stand on


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 28, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> The Guardian only has a circulation of 138,000, not sure what the online figures are but I doubt the opinion pieces are reaching all that many people - I've certainly talked to enough people who should know better but think the existence of a Left Leave argument is some kind of weird oxymoron.


But DC is correct in that it's the house paper for the liberal left. The fact that they have so many (bad) pieces attacking the left wing arguments for Leave shows that such arguments do exist.

EDIT: And is a recognition of the fact that as a movement British socialism has been hostile to the EU since the start.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 28, 2018)

Just out of interest - Sun now the most visited newspaper website in the UK supposedly.

The Sun overtakes Mail Online to become UK’s biggest online newsbrand, latest Comscore data shows - Press Gazette

UK news website traffic for April 2018:

Title /// Total monthly unique visitors (in millions) /// % change month-on-month
Sun 30.2 2.7
Mail 29.6 -0.7
Guardian 23.9 0.8
ESI 23.9 2.6
Telegraph 21.3 -4.9
Mirror 15.9 -12.2
Express 12.7 2.4
Star 6.6 1.5
Times 4.2 -4.5

*guardian has a big US and OZ readership


----------



## Wookey (Dec 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> You brought up his hair colour.



Yes, danny la rouge - I did bring up his hair colour, but then I also (within the self-same sentence, so it wasn't hard to spot) juxtaposed that with his BLUE SUIT. That BLUE SUIT is an essential ingredient in that sentence pie, and I'll tell you for why heartface.

Red and blue are commonly considered to _clash _in terms of their place on the colour wheel, something some people _instinctively_ know, and other more heterosexual people need to be taught.

So it's a comment on his perceived colour blindness you see, which I was using to perniciously and quite unreasonably undermine his position as a major salesperson of interior colour schemes to the nation.

But also, and this bit is the clever bit, AT ONE AND THE SAME TIME as casting aspersions on his entire suite of abilities using disability as a cruel and judgemental prism, I concomitantly undermine his simplistic and biased views on Brexit.

Badooom!

So leave the ginger hair alone now, it's a red herring love.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 28, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> By no means. One-legged people do have a leg to stand on



That's actually worse. Was at the local hospital yesterday, bloke (I presumed diabetic) with his lower legs amputated. Not sure he'd share the joke


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 28, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Red and blue are commonly considered to _clash _in terms of their place on the colour wheel,


“Red” hair isn’t red in that sense though. I’ve worn blue all my life without incident.


----------



## Santino (Dec 28, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> “Red” hair isn’t red in that sense though. I’ve worn blue all my life without incident.


Not gay enough, apparently.


----------



## pesh (Dec 29, 2018)

Wookey said:


> this bit is the clever bit



no. there was no clever bit.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 29, 2018)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 29, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> In Lambeth EU was not the issue.  Housing , gentrification and cost of living are.



So middle class Scots with professional jobs are the big problem in Lambeth? Who knew? What to do about it?


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> Im from teuchter  area in London. I don't have middle class job. Nearly all of the people I know - they do working class jobs , some are Council tenants are Remain. I was Remain as well.
> 
> In Lambeth EU was not the issue.  Housing , gentrification and cost of living are. As are Tory austerity cuts to Councils hitting services.


if it's class credentials you want, I was born and raised on council estates in your eastern neigbouring SE London borough and there's no other consequence of brexit I'd more enjoy than to see the banking sector fuck off to Frankfurt, for exactly the reasons you mention.

Can you see the EU improving any of those things if we remain? Convince me


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> But DC is correct in that it's the house paper for the liberal left. The fact that they have so many (bad) pieces attacking the left wing arguments for Leave shows that such arguments do exist.
> 
> EDIT: And is a recognition of the fact that as a movement British socialism has been hostile to the EU since the start.


This was the last article of its kind (2013). Maybe the left arguement (at least in the graun) died with Bob (RIP):
Exit Europe from the left | Bob Crow


----------



## andysays (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> “Red” hair isn’t red in that sense though. I’ve worn blue all my life without incident.


*makes note never to listen to danny la rouge's opinion on *anything* ever again*


----------



## Badgers (Dec 29, 2018)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> “Red” hair isn’t red in that sense though. I’ve worn blue all my life without incident.


You call yourself Danny la rouge but I bet you don't even have auburn hair


----------



## kabbes (Dec 29, 2018)

Wookey said:


> Yes, danny la rouge - I did bring up his hair colour, but then I also (within the self-same sentence, so it wasn't hard to spot) juxtaposed that with his BLUE SUIT. That BLUE SUIT is an essential ingredient in that sentence pie, and I'll tell you for why heartface.
> 
> Red and blue are commonly considered to _clash _in terms of their place on the colour wheel, something some people _instinctively_ know, and other more heterosexual people need to be taught.
> 
> ...


In the other hand, blue and orange are a well known popular colour combination


----------



## inva (Dec 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> But DC is correct in that it's the house paper for the liberal left. The fact that they have so many (bad) pieces attacking the left wing arguments for Leave shows that such arguments do exist.
> 
> EDIT: And is a recognition of the fact that as a movement British socialism has been hostile to the EU since the start.


'Lexit' had some circulation within the liberal left with the likes of Paul Mason and some of Novara iirc and other LP/trade union types, i doubt anyone else was paying much attention though.

but the over-focus on whether top down LP socialists etc had any currency (very little) obscures the real class politics around the referendum.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 29, 2018)

inva said:


> 'but the over-focus on whether top down LP socialists etc had any currency (very little) obscures the real class politics around the referendum.


Yes I agree.

EDIT: And the popular antagonism of politicians and "experts" the desire for greater democratic control etc are areas that socialists can engage with.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 29, 2018)

These ferries seem a good investment for the nation. Did the tender process get the taxpayers a good deal?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Badgers said:


> These ferries seem a good investment for the nation. Did the tender process get the taxpayers a good deal?


Via "alternative ports" apparently.
The sort of ports that shun convention.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Via "alternative ports" apparently.
> The sort of ports that shun convention.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 157180


Immingham a bit of an outlier there


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> You call yourself Danny la rouge but I bet you don't even have auburn hair


Well, that which remains is mostly grey now, but I was once ginger and proud.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> Immingham a bit of an outlier there


too conventional?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> too conventional?


All the others are in the southeast, Immingham between grimsby and hull


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All the others are in the southeast, Immingham between grimsby and hull


Plymouth; South East?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Plymouth; South East?


Quite right, pls insert "or south" into my post after "southeast"


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

There's a geographic logic tbf


----------



## Poi E (Dec 29, 2018)




----------



## teqniq (Dec 29, 2018)

So John Redwood got a knighthood in the New Year's honours. I wonder why.

Being called a bribehood on Twitter. Shurely not.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 29, 2018)

teqniq said:


> So John Redwood got a knighthood in the New Year's honours. I wonder why.
> 
> Being called a bribehood on Twitter. Shurely not.


His votes against gay rights or for the death penalty?


----------



## philosophical (Dec 29, 2018)

If he gets a knighthood, does that lead to a discount on a private medical operation for swivel eyes?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

philosophical said:


> If he gets a knighthood, does that lead to a discount on a private medical operation for swivel eyes?


 he's very happy with his swivel eyes and refuses to have the problem resolved


----------



## tommers (Dec 29, 2018)

Badgers said:


>


----------



## Badgers (Dec 29, 2018)

tommers said:


>


This is fine


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 29, 2018)

boom time for smaller forgotten European ports. Ramsgate - Ostend already running I think.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



At some point, all British citizens will cease to be EU citizens, so the status of many millions of current EU citizens is going to change after Brexit.  Everyone is suggesting that.  It's kind of the point.


----------



## Wookey (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> “Red” hair isn’t red in that sense though. I’ve worn blue all my life without incident.



OK, so we're nearing the nub of the point of the reason behind the entire thread really... you're a ginger who wears blue.

But are you russet or umber? Strawberry blond or more mahogany? There's no single type of ginger, as you well know without Googling.

What kind of blue are you wearing? Sky blue, blue-green, turquoise, navy, the list is almost endless.

I imagine you might be one of the few successful combiners of ginge and blue, its possible. I'd have to see photo evidence to be sure. But when it comes to furniture salesmen, I don't think his ginge and that blue do anything to support a positive assessment on the impact of Brexit on interior soft furnishings and their increasingly complex manufacture, no sir.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> At some point, all British citizens will cease to be EU citizens, so the status of many millions of current EU citizens is going to change after Brexit.  Everyone is suggesting that.  It's kind of the point.


All?
Plenty of duals?


----------



## Wookey (Dec 29, 2018)

kabbes said:


> In the other hand, blue and orange are a well known popular colour combination



But would you put these people in charge of rhe design and manufacture of your new kitchen?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> All?
> Plenty of duals?


To be fair, I’ve no idea. Which is why I was having a go at the vague language masquerading as certainty.


----------



## Winot (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> At some point, all British citizens will cease to be EU citizens, so the status of many millions of current EU citizens is going to change after Brexit.  Everyone is suggesting that.  It's kind of the point.



Exactly. Brexit was clearly (amongst other things) going to remove rights from a large number of people*. Which is why Hannan’s tweet was wholly disingenuous.

(*in fact from all EU citizens no matter where they live)


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

Wookey said:


> you're a ginger


My hair, in my youth, was a colour known as ginger.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Have any of the remainarian crowd tested the legality of UK citizens (>45yrs) retaining EU citizenship on the basis that they were born in the EU?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Have any of the remainarian crowd tested the legality of UK citizens (>45yrs) retaining EU citizenship on the basis that they were born in the EU?


There was some talk early on about current British passport holders being able to pay for some kind of EU citizenship extension to their passport. But it seems to have been nonsense.

As for those who were born EU citizens; their citizenship status will be changed whether or not they like it. It’s a bureaucratic relationship, not an identity (which is a word that would need to be defined anyway).


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> There was some talk early on about current British passport holders being able to pay for some kind of EU citizenship extension to their passport. But it seems to have been nonsense.
> 
> As for those who were born EU citizens; their citizenship status will be changed whether or not they like it. It’s a bureaucratic relationship, not an identity (which is a word that would need to be defined anyway).


But isn't birth geography the basis for much citizenship/passport holding with state entities?


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> But isn't birth geography the basis for much citizenship/passport holding with state entities?


Yes. And it’s an interesting point. In fact, it’s something that fucks with nationalist fundamentalism, so I’d quite like it to be pulled about in the courts.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> All the others are in the southeast, Immingham between grimsby and hull



Except Poole and Plymouth.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> At some point, all British citizens will cease to be EU citizens, so the status of many millions of current EU citizens is going to change after Brexit.  Everyone is suggesting that.  It's kind of the point.



I think that March, 2016 tweet was an attempt to assure EU nationals residing in the UK that their status wouldn't be affected by a Brexit vote.

Because of course, Brexiting would be an orderly process, and a Brexit vote wouldn't result in years of uncertainty and worry for millions of EU citizens residing in the UK.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a bureaucratic relationship, not an identity (which is a word that would need to be defined anyway).


It just shows how slippery those words are. In one sense, bureaucratic credentials are only verified identity you have. Passport, driving license, birth certificate, council tax bills. These are “ID”. So it’s not surprising people get confused about what “identity” actually means.

Which is why definitions are important when discussing these things.


----------



## Winot (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Have any of the remainarian crowd tested the legality of UK citizens (>45yrs) retaining EU citizenship on the basis that they were born in the EU?



There is a question as to whether the removal of non-UK EU citizens’ rights is compatible with Art 8 of the ECHR (right to family life). No doubt it will be tested in the Court.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

Yossarian said:


> EU nationals


The point Brogdale raises is that anyone born in the UK after the UK joined the precursor organisation to the EU might claim they are “EU nationals”.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

SpookyFrank said:


> Except Poole and Plymouth.


yes we've been through this already


----------



## tommers (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> The point Brogdale raises is that anyone born in the UK after the UK joined the precursor organisation to the EU might claim they are “EU nationals”.


The EU isn't a nation.

It's being used by Hannan and the Home Office to denote "people from Europe". Citizens of nations that are within the EU but aren't the UK.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 29, 2018)

tommers said:


> The EU isn't a nation.
> 
> It's being used by Hannan and the Home Office to denote "people from Europe". Citizens of nations that are within the EU but aren't the UK.


Yes, I know. But the lack of precision is a problem. The British Isles will continue to be part of Europe even when the UK nation-state leaves the EU. So in that sense residents on these islands will continue to be “people from Europe”.


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 29, 2018)

Can't be long now can it? i mean it's almost 2019 already....


----------



## andysays (Dec 29, 2018)

Badgers said:


>



I don't doubt that Martin O'Neill believes it to be true that his 90 year old mother-in-law is under threat of deportation, but I wonder how correct that belief really is


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

danny la rouge said:


> There was some talk early on about current British passport holders being able to pay for some kind of EU citizenship extension to their passport. But it seems to have been nonsense.
> 
> As for those who were born EU citizens; their citizenship status will be changed whether or not they like it. It’s a bureaucratic relationship, not an identity (which is a word that would need to be defined anyway).


Was here:


pocketscience said:


> What's stopping the EU from handing out (real) EU passports: i.e ones that aren't printed & distributed by a nation state but the EU itself in Brussels - where a holder would be a proto European of full integration?


As Tommers said, seems that not being a nation state would put a block to it.


MickiQ said:


> The EU isn't a state, it doesn't have any territory under its exclusive control so the holder of such a passport would have to live in a member state thus making themselves subject to that countries rules


I'm not entirely convinced. When states can get tricky with things like tax havens and the vatican, surely the EU could create a nation state the size of a postage stamp somewhere in their car park and offer all the remainers a citizenship (and let any citizen from any other EU nation apply while they're at it).. Would keep everyone happy and serve as a prototype/ forerunner to fast track federal expansion and all these 'reforms' that everyone keeps pipe-dreaming about, but never actually get off the ground.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

tommers said:


> The EU isn't a nation.
> 
> It's being used by Hannan and the Home Office to denote "people from Europe". Citizens of nations that are within the EU but aren't the UK.


 
Why the distinction between supra-state & state? If the entity confers citizenship based upon birth geography or residence (as it does) then those born on/after 01/01/1973 must have a strong claim upon retention of citizenship whatever the political decision of the sub-state (formerly) sharing sovereignty?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 29, 2018)

Frankie Boyle: "Theresa Mays whole plan seems to be just hang on till the new year... There are people in hospices with better plans than that."


----------



## teuchter (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Why the distinction between supra-state & state? If the entity confers citizenship based upon birth geography or residence (as it does) then those born on/after 01/01/1973 must have a strong claim upon retention of citizenship whatever the political decision of the sub-state (formerly) sharing sovereignty?



The Wikipedia page on EU citizenship has a section on this question, with some references to the legal opinions.

Citizenship of the European Union - Wikipedia


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Why the distinction between supra-state & state? If the entity confers citizenship based upon birth geography or residence (as it does) then those born on/after 01/01/1973 must have a strong claim upon retention of citizenship whatever the political decision of the sub-state (formerly) sharing sovereignty?


Of course one of the purposes/advantages of the EU (and other trans-national entities) is that like states it facilities the exploitation of labour but does not have to accede to the same level of social contract that states are still required to do.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course one of the purposes/advantages of the EU (and other trans-national entities) is that like states it facilities the exploitation of labour but does not have to accede to the same level of social contract that states are still required to do.


Yes, the 'contract' being at one remove from the people; nation states giving up (sharing) sovereignty in return for free market/neoliberal security.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> if it's class credentials you want, I was born and raised on council estates in your eastern neigbouring SE London borough and there's no other consequence of brexit I'd more enjoy than to see the banking sector fuck off to Frankfurt, for exactly the reasons you mention.
> 
> Can you see the EU improving any of those things if we remain? Convince me



No.

imo Tory austerity cuts affects on my area in London would be happening regardless of EU membership. Unlike other EU countries UK was not in Euro and had more leeway in dealing with the economic crisis.

I do agree effect of Brexit is weakening of London as financial centre. Which will have knock on effect of possibly slowing down gentrification. As it has been growth in importance of the City post Thatchers Big Bang that has driven gentrification of London.

I'm not great fan of EU. What happened to Greece for example. I didn't llke referendum as it had so much about immigration/ getting "our" borders back in run up to it. Having a partner from another EU country and having friends / workmates from other EU countries coloured my views. Brexit is affecting me personally.

My partner ias worried about her future here. My Polish friend is staying as she has husband and life here after being here 10 years. The referendum result made her not feel welcome here. She is going down the route of trying to get British citizenship which is not an easy process. She doesn't trust promises of status of non UK EU nationals to be the same after Brexit. And shes seen what happened to Windrush generation.

I don't think a Peoples Vote is good idea. It would cause even more resentment and anger in some parts of country. Though some friends of mine would like it.

I'm pessimistic about anything good coming out of this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> No.
> 
> imo Tory austerity cuts affects on my area in London would be happening regardless of EU membership. Unlike other EU countries UK was not in Euro and had more leeway in dealing with the economic crisis.
> 
> ...


It's all a huge clusterfuck


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Pickman's model said:


> It's all a huge clusterfuck


Almost needs its own descriptive term, doesn't it?

*Brexastrophe ?
Brexebacle ?
*
Any others?


----------



## Winot (Dec 29, 2018)

Brexshit


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Winot said:


> Brexshit


Is this all your own work?

See me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Almost needs its own descriptive term, doesn't it?
> 
> *Brexastrophe ?
> Brexebacle ?
> ...


Brexitopocalypse


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 29, 2018)

Archaeologists in yucatan have uncovered a new panel illustrating the mayan end of days showing what appears to be theresa may removing a star from a circle of 12 stars


----------



## paolo (Dec 29, 2018)

As we head towards the cliff.

Why is it good to take away people’s rights?

It’s a good thing right? It must happen. To benefit the people; they *must* have restrictions.

They must not be allowed to move.

Why is this good?


----------



## Winot (Dec 29, 2018)

paolo said:


> As we head towards the cliff.
> 
> Why is it good to take away people’s rights?
> 
> ...



Those in favour of Brexit must explain to those who are losing their rights why it is worth it.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I'd more enjoy than to see the banking sector fuck off to Frankfurt, for exactly the reasons you mention.



The city paid nearly 11.5% of the UK’s total taxes  in tax in 2016.

Finance sector 'paid £71.4bn in tax'

So if the city fucks off we need to find some pretty monsterous tax cuts.

Any suggestions ?

Alex


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

alex_ said:


> The city paid nearly 11.5% of the UK’s total taxes  in tax in 2016.
> 
> Finance sector 'paid £71.4bn in tax'
> 
> ...


It won't; the economic terrorists will not easily be weaned from their BoT secrecy regimes.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 29, 2018)

parliament manevoruing to avoid no deal crash out - Cross-party move to stop the clock on hard Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> parliament manevoruing to avoid no deal crash out - Cross-party move to stop the clock on hard Brexit.


No mention in that piece about the concomitant requirement to repeal the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> No mention in that piece about the concomitant requirement to repeal the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018?



no - but i guess if they'll vote for a pausing the process, they'll vote their way around that as well. Cant see May staying on after her deal is voted down. I actually could see a "national government" taking over the A50 suspension and subsequent election and/or referendum.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Kaka Tim said:


> no - but i guess if they'll vote for a pausing the process, they'll vote their way around that as well. Cant see May staying on after her deal is voted down. I actually could see a "national government" taking over the A50 suspension and subsequent election and/or referendum.


Suppose so. Bet the remain vermin wish they still had 50ish LDs that they could persuade to join them, do the deed and take the rap.


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Suppose so. Bet the remain vermin wish they still had 50ish LDs that they could persuade to join them, do the deed and take the rap.


Yes, most of Liberal MP's are now 60ish at the youngest


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

tim said:


> Yes, most of Liberal MP's are now 60ish at the youngest



50 odd


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

alex_ said:


> The city paid nearly 11.5% of the UK’s total taxes  in tax in 2016.
> 
> Finance sector 'paid £71.4bn in tax'
> 
> So if the city fucks off we need to find some pretty monsterous tax cuts.


I knew it wouldn't take long before someone defended the banks.


alex_ said:


> Any suggestions ?
> 
> Alex


Do something else other than fucking banking?
The cunts got north of £500bn in bailouts over the last decade. You tell me what good that did?
To put that into perspective, the program cost for the Airbus A350 was £11bn.
Don't you think that investing in tech skills and companies might have been better, or are you happy keeping usery as the dominant industry?


brogdale said:


> It won't; the economic terrorists will not easily be weaned from their *BoT* secrecy regimes.


Bank of Thailand? British oversees Territories? Band of Thieves? Bunch of Terrorists? Beans on Toast?


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I knew it wouldn't take long for someone to defend the banks.
> 
> Do something else other than fucking banking?
> The cunts got north of £500bn in bailouts over the last decade. You tell me what good that did?
> ...



The financial service industry will carry on much as before but with less EU regulation. There is so much money to launder and we do it the best.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

tim said:


> The financial service industry will carry on much as before but with less EU regulation. There is so much money to launder and we do it the best.


Yeah, they do it so well they needed rescuing to the tune of £500bn.


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah, they do it so well they needed rescuing to the tune of £500bn.



At some stage, certainly, but, then, they'll pick themselves up, brush themselves down, and start all over again. Just like they did last time, with directorships a-go-go for the kindly politicians who bail them out.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I knew it wouldn't take long before someone defended the banks.
> 
> Do something else other than fucking banking?
> The cunts got north of £500bn in bailouts over the last decade. You tell me what good that did?
> ...


You don't use banks then?  You boycott them, I guess.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> I knew it wouldn't take long before someone defended the banks.
> 
> Do something else other than fucking banking?
> The cunts got north of £500bn in bailouts over the last decade. You tell me what good that did?
> ...



I’m pointing out that they contribute a lot of tax, which is useful.

Incidentally the bank bail out prevented the collapse of a large part of the banking sector, which meant that people with deposits didn’t lose their savings, and the government didn’t have to pay out via bank guarantee schemes.

Re 500 billion the NAO ( Taxpayer support for UK banks: FAQs - National Audit Office (NAO) ) says it was 123 billion in cash, and upto another trillion in guarantees. 

Which is now down to 32 billion, around 10 billion of which is UK mortgages and the rest is 62% of RBS. From reading the NAO link, it seems that the bail out will have cost nothing give or take a couple of billion.

So where does 500 billion come from ?

Alex


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

DexterTCN said:


> You don't use banks then?  You boycott them, I guess.


Never taken credit from a bank in my life. Nnever been in the red. Always been skint though.
What's your point? I don't like cars but tend to use roads now and then.


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

alex_ said:


> I’m pointing out that they contribute a lot of tax, which is useful.
> 
> Incidentally the bank bail out prevented the collapse of a large part of the banking sector, which meant that people with deposits didn’t lose their savings, and the government didn’t have to pay out via bank guarantee schemes.
> 
> ...


2008 United Kingdom bank rescue package - Wikipedia
It's irrelevant that it's being paid off (good luck with RBS btw) - if they'd have invested in more sustainable industries that don't tend to fuck people over I'd be happy.
I bet wonga paid a fair bit in taxes - is that the model of the economy you want to support? why not just go back to opium wars and the slave trade?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 29, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Of course one of the purposes/advantages of the EU (and other trans-national entities) is that like states it facilities the exploitation of labour but does not have to accede to the same level of social contract that states are still required to do.


Because that stuff takes time. You don't easily go from states committing atrocities against each other to pooled welfare systems.

The US had massive rows between frontier and coastal states over monetary policy in a way which mirrors the euro periphery vs Germany. They got there in the end. I think we will too.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Because that stuff takes time. You don't easily go from states committing atrocities against each other to pooled welfare systems.
> 
> The US had massive rows between frontier and coastal states over monetary policy in a way which mirrors the euro periphery vs Germany. They got there in the end. I think we will too.


"...we..."?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Yes, the 'contract' being at one remove from the people; nation states giving up (sharing) sovereignty in return for free market/neoliberal security.


How is this different to the pooled sovereignty we have in the UK involving sending your constituency MP to Parliament - which can enact laws that are binding in your constituency?


----------



## tim (Dec 29, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> How is this different to the pooled sovereignty we have in the UK involving sending your constituency MP to Parliament - which can enact laws that are binding in your constituency?




The European Parliament has very limited power.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> 2008 United Kingdom bank rescue package - Wikipedia
> It's irrelevant that it's being paid off (good luck with RBS btw) - if they'd have invested in more sustainable industries that don't tend to fuck people over I'd be happy.
> I bet wonga paid a fair bit in taxes - is that the model of the economy you want to support? why not just go back to opium wars and the slave trade?



Most of it wasn’t even loaned, it was guarantees - ie it was never invested, spent or even real money.

You said you want the banks to go.

I’ve said they contribute a lot of tax.

I’ve got no idea what to replace it with, but yes it would be good if it was something genuinely useful.

What do you propose replacing it with ?

Alex


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 29, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> The cunts got north of £500bn in bailouts over the last decade. You tell me what good that did?


The world's entire banking system (including our own) came close to a disorderly failure, which would have come to pass if they weren't bailed out. This would have led to bank runs, closures, failures of payment processing etc. I am not going to try and estimate the costs but I think it would have been pretty shit/chaotic for most.

The most recent cost of banking support I can find is this:

'Total outstanding support as at 31 March 2018(£bn)
Guarantee commitments 14
Cash outlay 32
Total support 46


The total £1,029 billion guarantees and non-cash support has fallen significantly and stood at £14 billion as at 31 March 2018. All of the sector wide support schemes have now closed and the figure now solely relates to Northern Rock and B&B undrawn loan facilities.'


(Taxpayer support for UK banks: FAQs - National Audit Office (NAO))


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 29, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Most of it wasn’t even loaned, it was guarantees - ie it was never invested, spent or even real money.
> You said you want the banks to go.
> I’ve said they contribute a lot of tax.
> I’ve got no idea what to replace it with, but yes it would be good if it was *something genuinely useful*.
> ...


You've answered your own question.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 29, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> The world's entire banking system (including our own) came close to a disorderly failure, which would have come to pass if they weren't bailed out. This would have led to bank runs, closures, failures of payment processing etc. I am not going to try and estimate the costs but I think it would have been pretty shit/chaotic for most.
> 
> The most recent cost of banking support I can find is this:
> 
> ...


Hmmm. Iceland let its banks go under. The UK govt in fact paid out on many of the accounts of Icesave and others that Iceland had let go to the wall. Didn't have to. In fact should not have done so. If you want the govt to guarantee your savings, you should buy premium bonds, not bonds that promise double the interest of anyone else. That would have been a harsh lesson for some, but there it is.

Iceland later nationalised the banks in order to keep the money flowing. They've rather unwisely just sold off one of them. Country has very low national debt and is doing just fine btw. Very small place, so not necessarily the same rules apply here, but the UK could and should have let many of the banks go under, paying a certain amount of pennies in the pound (not 100 - that's the premium bond lesson) to savers who lost out, and taking over the assets after the banks had gone under. Could have done it, chose not to and crazily to attempt to reinflate the bubble instead.

The banks were genuinely shitting themselves for a short while there. The whole game looked like it might be up. That it wasn't is probably the biggest missed political opportunity (and biggest successful confidence trick) of my lifetime.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 29, 2018)

brogdale said:


> "...we..."?


- meaning EU nation states.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 29, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> - meaning EU nation states.


I see; you think the UK will remain and join the Euro, then?


----------



## twentythreedom (Dec 29, 2018)

This £100m No Deal emergency ferries plan could be just the job for Weymouth. The place is racist as fuck and voted 60 - 40 for leave, and a couple of years back the last cross-channel ferry service was withdrawn, losing the town a vital revenue stream.
However, the infrastructure is still in place to dock and unload ferries, so it could well be the "Brexit dividend" we've all been waiting for if they use Weymouth Harbour. New jobs, money, food and goods flowing in, shoes for povs, German cars etc 

Coincidentally, suspiciously and ominously, in 1348, the Black Death came ashore in Weymouth from foreign parts, going on to kill a third of the population of Britain 

It's (not) all starting to make sense now. 



> In what is regarded as the first example of biological warfare, Tartars had catapulted victims of the Black Death over the walls of the Black Sea port of Kaffa. The disease had invaded every corner of continental Europe, killing without mercy or discrimination. Even the Channel Islands had been ravaged to the extent that King Edward III had written to Jersey’s Governor, with humane consideration, to cancel the taxes of the few remaining fishermen. But now, in the summer of 1348, the Black Death was massing across the Channel. It also lurked among the hundreds of merchant and military ships that thronged our coastal waters and dipped in and out of English ports.





> "In this year 1348, in Melcombe* in the county of Dorset, a little before the feast of St John the Baptist [24 June], two ships, one of them from Bristol, came alongside. One of the sailors had brought with him from Gascony the seeds of a terrible pestilence and, through him, the men of that town of Melcombe were the first to be infected."



Dorset’s plague port  |  Dorset Life - The Dorset Magazine

*Weymouth Harbour area

Eta on rereading I see this makes little sense


----------



## yield (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Most of it wasn’t even loaned, it was guarantees - ie it was never invested, spent or even real money.


£50bn bid to save UK banks
8 Oct 2008


> The evaporation of confidence in British banking came as the worldwide crisis escalated. Australia cut interest rates by one percentage point - the biggest reduction in 16 years - amid rising expectations that the Bank of England's monetary policy committee will cut rates tomorrow despite the rise in inflation.
> 
> There was evidence of panic selling in the US last night as Wall Street suffered its second worst day of the crisis to date. The Dow Jones industrial average dived 508 points to 9,447, partly driven by bust hedge funds liquidating their portfolios. Bank of America, saw its value plunge by a quarter.



Banks profit as mortgage gap hits historic high
10 Nov 2008


> But some banks have yet to pass on these rate cuts to customers. As a result the difference between the average standard variable rate (SVR) – the banks' main mortgage rate – and UK interest rates has widened, prompting allegations of profiteering.


It wasn't just the loan guarantees and the explicit promise to nationalise any bank in trouble they also cut interest rates to nearly zero.

Anything to restore confidence. Like when Mario Draghi said "the ECB is ready to do whatever it takes" in 2012


Wolveryeti said:


> The world's entire banking system (including our own) came close to a disorderly failure, which would have come to pass if they weren't bailed out. This would have led to bank runs, closures, failures of payment processing etc. I am not going to try and estimate the costs but I think it would have been pretty shit/chaotic for most.
> 
> The most recent cost of banking support I can find is this:


Eight years of austerity, rising homelessness, poverty, food banks. Do the ends justify the means? A statistical recovery and a human recession. 

Poorest dying nearly 10 years younger than rich in 'deeply worrying' trend, study shows
November 22, 2018

Unacceptable rises in child poverty as more working parents left unable to make ends meet
04/12/18


----------



## teuchter (Dec 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Iceland let its banks go under.


Isn't that a bit of a myth? Or at least, it doesn't really make sense to compare the scenario there with the one in the UK?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

teuchter said:


> Isn't that a bit of a myth? Or at least, it doesn't really make sense to compare the scenario there with the one in the UK?


No it's not. They allowed the banks to default on their liabilities, something the UK government got very nasty about for a little while there because the UK govt bizarrely opted to pay out on them, expecting Iceland to give them the money. They didn't, and quite right too. There is a difference of scale between what Iceland did and what the UK might have done, but the UK absolutely could have treated the crisis very differently and allowed failing banks to fail. The fundamental point of difference here is that Iceland treated private banks as private businesses. The UK most emphatically did not, and yet here they are today, raking in the billions as private businesses once more, hoovering up other people's wealth. It was a missed opportunity to change that dynamic, redirect banking back towards doing social good - the banks were in no position to say no.

And all the stuff that yield points out has been done as a consequence of a decision to protect the assets and wealth of the rich first and foremost. Obscene is the only word for it.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I see; you think the UK will remain and join the Euro, then?


No, not necessarily. But I think Europe will become more federal, like the US, and pressure will grow for a common social contract to head off a risk of a 'race to the bottom' - style competition between states based on who can be the stingiest.

The US/EU comparison was not a point about the inevitability of converging on one currency standard, but more about how very differing views on optimal policy within a confederation in its infancy should not necessarily be taken as a sign that greater integration is doomed...


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. Iceland let its banks go under... Very small place, so not necessarily the same rules apply here, but the UK could and should have let many of the banks go under, paying a certain amount of pennies in the pound...


Whether the UK could have got away with just guaranteeing UK investor deposits and wipeing out shareholders and external investors is a v. good question  (and not one I am able to answer).

This having been said, it stands separate from my view that some public money (aka 'bailout') was needed to avert much bigger crisis, much was paid back, and that it is now nowhere near £500bn.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Whether the UK could have got away with just guaranteeing UK investor deposits and wipeing out shareholders and external investors is a v. good question  (and not one I am able to answer).


Yes, they could. The alternative at the time was what? For said shareholders/investors to be liable for the debt themselves? They were in no position to say or do anything - they didn't have the money. Nobody did - that's fractional reserve lending for you. They were standing there cap in hand. Private banks take risks and profit when those risks pay off. As we have seen in the last 10 years, they _also profit_ when the risks fail because the government bails them out.

Quantitative Easing made sense at the time as a way to stop the money supply from shrinking and plunging the economy into a recession. But what made absolutely no sense whatsoever was to give that money to the very cunts who caused the problem in the first place. They should - and could - have been hounded out of town, after having every last asset stripped from them.

I can't quite work out whether Gordon Brown is an idiot or a cunt over his handling of this. Probably a bit of both.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

yield said:


> Eight years of austerity, rising homelessness, poverty, food banks. Do the ends justify the means? A statistical recovery and a human recession.
> 
> Poorest dying nearly 10 years younger than rich in 'deeply worrying' trend, study shows
> November 22, 2018
> ...


The bank bailouts didn't cause austerity though - they were just cynically used as (partial) cover for it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> The bank bailouts didn't cause austerity though - they were just cynically used as (partial) cover for it.


Partly true. But we have had this vicious austerity at a time when house prices have not only returned to their previous bubble level but in many parts of the country surpassed it, in London way surpassed it. That tells you everything about the priorities of those managing finance and where that bailout money went. Banker bonuses are sweet once more.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> Yeah, they do it so well they needed rescuing to the tune of £500bn.


If you get the £500bn, that's doing it well.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> How is this different to the pooled sovereignty we have in the UK involving sending your constituency MP to Parliament - which can enact laws that are binding in your constituency?


Because, as I asserted, the 'contract' is at one remove from the 'sovereign' people of the nation state. In political philosophy, social contract theory emphasises the relationship between voter and executive and the ultimate ability of the sovereign people to overturn the executive. Most people recognise that the structural democratic deficit of the EU hinges on the failure to effect that ultimate censure.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> No, not necessarily. But I think Europe will become more federal, like the US, and pressure will grow for a common social contract to head off a risk of a 'race to the bottom' - style competition between states based on who can be the stingiest.
> 
> The US/EU comparison was not a point about the inevitability of converging on one currency standard, but more about how very differing views on optimal policy within a confederation in its infancy should not necessarily be taken as a sign that greater integration is doomed...


OK, so going back to the question asked then...perhaps "they" rather than "we"?


----------



## mauvais (Dec 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. They allowed the banks to default on their liabilities, something the UK government got very nasty about for a little while there because the UK govt bizarrely opted to pay out on them, expecting Iceland to give them the money. They didn't, and quite right too. There is a difference of scale between what Iceland did and what the UK might have done, but the UK absolutely could have treated the crisis very differently and allowed failing banks to fail. The fundamental point of difference here is that Iceland treated private banks as private businesses. The UK most emphatically did not, and yet here they are today, raking in the billions as private businesses once more, hoovering up other people's wealth. It was a missed opportunity to change that dynamic, redirect banking back towards doing social good - the banks were in no position to say no.
> 
> And all the stuff that yield points out has been done as a consequence of a decision to protect the assets and wealth of the rich first and foremost. Obscene is the only word for it.


I'm no economist but it's not merely scale. Iceland's economy is made up of real things. Fish, energy and aluminium IIRC. Not based on a load of possibly fictional financial services. Therefore there's a world of difference between allowing your banks to fail and going about the fundamentals as usual, and letting your banks fail only to discover that, whoops, they were the fundamentals.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 30, 2018)

yield said:


> £50bn bid to save UK banks
> 8 Oct 2008
> 
> 
> ...



Pocket sciences point was that we spent 500 billion on the banks, but could have spent it on something else more useful than banking.

The facts as pointed out by me and Wolveryeti ( quoting the same source ) are that the cost was nowhere near that, and are possibly even nothing.

This is a key fallacy of lexit, we don’t need the revenue from the city of London’s taxation because we spent 500 bn on them. We didn’t.

Alex


----------



## alex_ (Dec 30, 2018)

Raheem said:


> If you get the £500bn, that's doing it well.



No one got 500bn


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Pocket sciences point was that we spent 500 billion on the banks, but could have spent it on something else more useful than banking.
> 
> The facts as pointed out by me and Wolveryeti ( quoting the same source ) are that the cost was nowhere near that, and are possibly even nothing.
> 
> ...


It's just as much of a fallacy to suggest that the costs of taxpayer support for UK banks are (were) possibly "even nothing".
At peak state support stood at £1.162tn and currently (as of end last financial year) is £46bn. 
The provision of such support clearly had (has) costs.
Source


----------



## yield (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Pocket sciences point was that we spent 500 billion on the banks, but could have spent it on something else more useful than banking.
> 
> The facts as pointed out by me and Wolveryeti ( quoting the same source ) are that the cost was nowhere near that, and are possibly even nothing.
> 
> ...


The finance curse: how the outsized power of the City of London makes Britain poorer
Nicholas Shaxson. 05/10/18


> Of course, the City proudly trumpets its contribution to Britain’s economy: 360,000 banking jobs, £31bn in direct tax revenues last year and a £60bn financial services trade surplus to boot. Official data in 2017 showed that the average Londoner paid £3,070 more in tax than they received in public spending, while in the country’s poorer hinterlands, it was the other way around. In fact, if London was a nation state, explained Chris Giles in the Financial Times, it would have a budget surplus of 7% of gross domestic product, better than Norway. “London is the UK’s cash cow,” he said. “Endanger its economy and it damages UK public finances.”
> 
> To argue that the City hurts Britain’s economy might seem crazy. But research increasingly shows that all the money swirling around our oversized financial sector may actually be making us collectively poorer.





> A growing body of economic research confirms that once a financial sector grows above an optimal size and beyond its useful roles, it begins to harm the country that hosts it. The most obvious source of damage comes in the form of financial crises – including the one we are still recovering from a decade after the fact. But the problem is in fact older, and bigger. Long ago, our oversized financial sector began turning away from supporting the creation of wealth, and towards extracting it from other parts of the economy. To achieve this, it shapes laws, rules, thinktanks and even our culture so that they support it. The outcomes include lower economic growth, steeper inequality, distorted markets, spreading crime, deeper corruption, the hollowing-out of alternative economic sectors and more.
> 
> Newly published research makes a first attempt to assess the scale of the damage to Britain. According to a new paper by Andrew Baker of the University of Sheffield, Gerald Epstein of the University of Massachusetts Amherst and Juan Montecino of Columbia University, an oversized City of London has inflicted a cumulative £4.5tn hit on the British economy from 1995-2015. That is worth around two-and-a-half years’ economic output, or £170,000 per British household. The City’s claims of jobs and tax benefits are washed away by much, much bigger harms.





> This estimate is the sum of two figures. First, £1.8tn in lost economic output caused by the global financial crisis since 2007 (a figure quite compatible with a range suggested by the Bank of England’s Andrew Haldane a few years ago). And second, £2.7tn in “misallocation costs” – what happens when a powerful finance sector is diverted away from useful roles (such as converting our savings into business investment) toward activities that distort the rest of the economy and siphon wealth from it. The calculation of these costs is based on established international research showing that a typical finance sector tends to reach its optimal size when credit to the private sector is equivalent to 90-100% of gross domestic product, then starts to curb growth as finance grows. Britain passed its optimal point long ago, averaging around 160% on the relevant measure of credit to GDP from 1995-2016.
> 
> This £2.7tn is added to the £1.8tn, checking carefully for overlap or double-counting, to make £4.5tn. This is a first rough approximation for how much additional GDP Britons might have enjoyed if the City had been smaller, and serving its traditional useful roles. (A third, £700bn category of “excess profits” and “excess remuneration” accruing to financial players has been excluded, to be conservative.)


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Pocket sciences point was that* we* spent 500 billion on the banks, but could have spent it on something else more useful than banking.
> ...
> This is a key fallacy of lexit, *we* don’t need the revenue from the city of London’s taxation because we spent 500 bn on them. *We* didn’t.


_We're all in it together!_ 



Wolveryeti said:


> Because that stuff takes time. You don't easily go from states committing atrocities against each other to pooled welfare systems.
> 
> The US had massive rows between frontier and coastal states over monetary policy in a way which mirrors the euro periphery vs Germany. They got there in the end. I think we will too.


I'm not sure whether this is incredibly naive, utterly dishonest or a combination of them both. 

The whole idea of the EU is that it assists and enables neo-liberalism, it is designed to increase the exploitation of labour. Minor concessions may be forced on it, but it is designed and organised for the benefit of capital and states.  
Moreover, there is no desire, popular or governmental, for a United States of Europe. It is a dream of a few free-market pricks. 


The above post(er)s exemplify why the EU needs to opposed (even if you believde that a remain vote was a better option)


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

brogdale said:


> Because, as I asserted, the 'contract' is at one remove from the 'sovereign' people of the nation state. In political philosophy, social contract theory emphasises the relationship between voter and executive and the ultimate ability of the sovereign people to overturn the executive. Most people recognise that the structural democratic deficit of the EU hinges on the failure to effect that ultimate censure.


I still don't clearly see the difference. The European Council is elected heads of state, laws are ratified by elected MEPs. If laws being passed that there isn't a majority for at country level amounts to a democratic deficit then the same thing happens in the UK. Also, doesnt the fact that we are leaving show that the UK Parliament is in fact sovereign?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> I still don't clearly see the difference. The European Council is elected heads of state, laws are ratified by elected MEPs. If laws being passed that there isn't a majority for at country level amounts to a democratic deficit then the same thing happens in the UK. Also, doesnt the fact that we are leaving show that the UK Parliament is in fact sovereign?


The 'fact' that we are leaving demonstrates that the 'sovereign' people decided to end the shared sovereignty, in part due to the obvious democratic deficit of the EU.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The whole idea of the EU is that it assists and enables neo-liberalism, it is designed to increase the exploitation of labour.


That's just your opinion- it isn't obvious to me at all. The EU is for instance responsible for regulations that are clearly negative to owners of capital - two examples off the top of my head are compensation for flight delays and clamping down on mobile roaming charges.

Or look at state aid restrictions, which have massively reduced the ability of big corporates to play states off against each other for a nice wedge of taxpayer cash (as you see in the US all the time).


----------



## TopCat (Dec 30, 2018)

Bigger cages! Longer chains!


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

brogdale said:


> The 'fact' that we are leaving demonstrates that the 'sovereign' people decided to end the shared sovereignty, in part due to the obvious democratic deficit of the EU.


The irony of course being that we will in an important sense have even less sovereignty, becoming passive rule takers on trans-European matters (like trade with Europe). At some point in replicating existing trade deals it will also be discovered that provisions restricting autonomy/ sovereignty are rather common. Or maybe we will just make everything we need ourselves?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> The irony of course being that we will in an important sense have even less sovereignty, becoming passive rule takers on trans-European matters (like trade with Europe).


"We" are rule-takers whether or not we are formally part of the political union; that's how neoliberalism works.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

brogdale said:


> "We" are rule-takers whether or not we are formally part of the political union; that's how neoliberalism works.


But we get to influence those rules if we have a seat at the table...


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> But we get to influence those rules if we have a seat at the table...


Sounds as though you genuinely believe there is such a thing as 'the national interest'.


----------



## Chz (Dec 30, 2018)

mauvais said:


> I'm no economist but it's not merely scale. Iceland's economy is made up of real things. Fish, energy and aluminium IIRC. Not based on a load of possibly fictional financial services. Therefore there's a world of difference between allowing your banks to fail and going about the fundamentals as usual, and letting your banks fail only to discover that, whoops, they were the fundamentals.


Also missing out that Landsbankinn's problems were 90% foreign money. The Iceland-only portion of the bank had no problems at all. That's not the same case as in the UK.

The "oh we don't need the banks" stuff is intellectual wanking. It's not going to happen. Corbyn won't make it happen. A hypothetical Prime Minister Michael Foot wouldn't have made it happen. A sensible government would do well to invest in other sectors of the economy to prevent a "Oh shit, all our eggs are in that one basket" thing happening again, but that requires a _sensible _government. Which also isn't going to happen.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 30, 2018)

More of less the same ruling class, or the establishment if you like, has been in charge throughout my 65 years. 
'Sovereignty' will probably mean such a situation will remain for evermore if they (the drone controlling establishment) can get away with it.
A certain dilution of this horror due to being in the EU, although far from perfect has offered some hope, the PR system for electing Euro MP's is one example.
In my view one democratic deficit is leaving the arguably more democratic EU, and reverting to the less democratic national system of the UK.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> More of less the same ruling class, or the establishment if you like, has been in charge throughout my 65 years.
> 'Sovereignty' will probably mean such a situation will remain for evermore if they (the drone controlling establishment) can get away with it.
> A certain dilution of this horror due to being in the EU, although far from perfect has offered some hope, the PR system for electing Euro MP's is one example.
> In my view one democratic deficit is leaving the arguably more democratic EU, and reverting to the less democratic national system of the UK.


I've yet to see a convincing argument that the EU is 'more democratic' than its member states.
This link offers a short, simple overview of some aspects of the democratic deficit inherent in the project:
Democratic deficit (EU) | tutor2u Politics
Though, of course, we are here restricting ourselves to the political democracy of the superstructure; whether in or out the base remains beyond our democratic control.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 30, 2018)

just read this:
From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote

on brexit and labour


----------



## teuchter (Dec 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it's not. They allowed the banks to default on their liabilities, something the UK government got very nasty about for a little while there because the UK govt bizarrely opted to pay out on them, expecting Iceland to give them the money. They didn't, and quite right too. There is a difference of scale between what Iceland did and what the UK might have done, but the UK absolutely could have treated the crisis very differently and allowed failing banks to fail. The fundamental point of difference here is that Iceland treated private banks as private businesses. The UK most emphatically did not, and yet here they are today, raking in the billions as private businesses once more, hoovering up other people's wealth. It was a missed opportunity to change that dynamic, redirect banking back towards doing social good - the banks were in no position to say no.
> 
> And all the stuff that yield points out has been done as a consequence of a decision to protect the assets and wealth of the rich first and foremost. Obscene is the only word for it.



I have to say I just get a bit lost trying to understand this kind of financial stuff. But I do recall reading a fair bit some time ago saying that Iceland's actions, and subsequent consequences, from the 2008 crash were not really quite as popularly presented...for a number of various complicated reasons.

Again, I struggle to get my head around exactly what it means, but there was an analysis of the public cost of the crisis that claimed that Iceland in fact sunk more public money into its recovery than any other country except Ireland. Maybe this information is now out of date, but it does seem that people throw around these figures for how much we 'bailed out' the banks here, but it turns out that quite a bit of that has subsequently been recovered, and that whatever the details of Iceland's strategy, it's not the case that it resulted in less public money being lost.



Iceland:- Economic Survey of Iceland 2011 - OECD


----------



## andysays (Dec 30, 2018)

philosophical said:


> More of less the same ruling class, or the establishment if you like, has been in charge throughout my 65 years.
> 'Sovereignty' will probably mean such a situation will remain for evermore if they (the drone controlling establishment) can get away with it.
> A certain dilution of this horror due to being in the EU, although far from perfect has offered some hope, the PR system for electing Euro MP's is one example.
> In my view one democratic deficit is leaving the arguably more democratic EU, and reverting to the less democratic national system of the UK.


You seem to be assuming either that the ruling class or establishment is a uniquely British thing, or that the EU/European ruling class is somehow much nicer and fluffier and will treat us all much kinder and fairly than the British RC.


----------



## andysays (Dec 30, 2018)

TopCat said:


> Bigger cages! Longer chains!


European cages and chains are *so* much more stylish than ugly British ones, dahling...


----------



## William of Walworth (Dec 30, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> just read this:
> From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote
> 
> on brexit and labour



I've just read this and I think it's a good, thoughtful article -- well worth a read.


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

lol


----------



## pocketscience (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Pocket sciences point was that we spent 500 billion on the banks, but could have spent it on something else more useful than banking.
> 
> The facts as pointed out by me and Wolveryeti ( quoting the same source ) are that the cost was nowhere near that, and are possibly even nothing.
> 
> ...


No it wasn't. I said they got bailed out. LBJ makes one of my points in that they shouldn't have been left to die. IMO the bail out funds should havehbeen diverted to something more tangible (or at least more reliable than an industry that has proben it cant be trusted). 

Actually my initial point was about the impact that accomodating a huge banking sector has on London, due to all the scum that said sector brings with it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 30, 2018)

also worth a read
The Italian compromise | Richard Seymour on Patreon





> That's because, contrary to most reporting, this fight was not about Italy's debt repayments. As we've seen from Greece, deficit and debt work very differently. The government can run a surplus and still drive up its debt-to-GDP ratio. Indeed, in a depressed economy, that is the most likely outcome. The reality is that the European Union tends to use debt as a lever to secure other policy objectives, rather than ensure maximum repayment.
> 
> Nor is it about the government's adherence to the rules of the Stability & Growth Pact. The government's deficit plans were well within the strict 3 per cent limit imposed by the Pact, and still on the lower end of recent deficits run by the Italian government.
> 
> ...


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

brogdale said:


> I've yet to see a convincing argument that the EU is 'more democratic' than its member states.
> This link offers a short, simple overview of some aspects of the democratic deficit inherent in the project:
> Democratic deficit (EU) | tutor2u Politics
> Though, of course, we are here restricting ourselves to the political democracy of the superstructure; whether in or out the base remains beyond our democratic control.


A very poor article if I may say so. Talks about 'principles of democracy' which are not followed by the EU without setting out what they are, no discussion of how the setup varies from a typical nation state one (surprise surprise UK Parliament doesn't sack ministers or governor of BoE either). Maybe we should elect e.g. heart surgeons to solve the 'democratic deficit' there?


----------



## brogdale (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> A very poor article if I may say so. Talks about 'principles of democracy' which are not followed by the EU without setting out what they are, no discussion of how the setup varies from a typical nation state one (surprise surprise UK Parliament doesn't sack ministers or governor of BoE either). Maybe we should elect e.g. heart surgeons to solve the 'democratic deficit' there?


You may.
There are, of course, many more detailed articles on the democratic deficit of the EU (eg. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00650.x ) but I really was hoping that a pro-EU poster would be able to support the notion that the EU is "arguably _more_ democratic" than its member states.


----------



## alex_ (Dec 30, 2018)

pocketscience said:


> IMO the bail out funds should havehbeen diverted to something more tangible (or at least more reliable than an industry that has proben it cant be trusted.



Yet you have no suggestion what.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

Chz said:


> Also missing out that Landsbankinn's problems were 90% foreign money. The Iceland-only portion of the bank had no problems at all. That's not the same case as in the UK.
> 
> The "oh we don't need the banks" stuff is intellectual wanking. It's not going to happen. Corbyn won't make it happen. A hypothetical Prime Minister Michael Foot wouldn't have made it happen. A sensible government would do well to invest in other sectors of the economy to prevent a "Oh shit, all our eggs are in that one basket" thing happening again, but that requires a _sensible _government. Which also isn't going to happen.


It isn't quite a question of 'we don't need the banks' (although we absolutely don't, not in their current configuration - they're part of the problem). The point is that the assets of the banks - their loans - could and should have been nationalised for good in 2008. Banking for people rather than banking for bankers - a remutualisation of the system. This is still desperately needed, but the opportunity to do it easily has passed. Now the forces of capital have regathered so such a thing becomes very hard to do even with the political will to do it. There was an option to do it in 2008 - a rare moment when politicians were not merely business managers, when they had real choices about what to do. 

I take mauvais's point about fundamentals, but how fundamental is a sector that needs 100s of billions of pounds to be printed to shore it up? How much of that 'fundamental' is in fact a mirage of fictitious capital in the shape of asset price bubbles? The financial sector isn't quite as dominant in the UK economy as some think it is - manufacturing is still bigger. It is dominant in one place - London. How would London cope if the financial sector shrank? Fewer pointless skyscrapers. Far cheaper housing, space to rent for community activities, etc. A bunch of rich bankers no longer there - what kind of loss is it when these people often work huge long hours and contribute the square of fuck all to their local communities outside that? No more billionaire oligarchs buying up whole streets as an investment. Boohoo. Before the latest finance bubble in London, back in the 1990s, the city was a far easier and nicer place to live in a great many ways for most people. It really would be no loss not to have these fuckers around. Yes, a few coffee shops would close, some buildings wouldn't be built, but then, as is regularly pointed out on this thread, London has largely needed to import workers from the EU to fill these vacancies. And in any case, a job market isn't zero-sum - with the bankers gone, other things would open up in the newly vacated spaces. The city would have a chance to renew itself in a non-gentrification manner, in a way that does not push all but the richest out into the margins. Lose a bit of tax? Base rate goes back up a bit perhaps. But if you're paying hundreds less per month in rent/mortgage, you're still way better off. We're being ripped off by the rich at the moment. And the idea that we need their taxes is laughable - if they take 100 pounds from you and pay 45 pounds of it back in tax (ha! it'll be way less than that of course once their accountants have been through it), that still leaves you 55 pounds out of pocket.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 30, 2018)

andysays said:


> You seem to be assuming either that the ruling class or establishment is a uniquely British thing, or that the EU/European ruling class is somehow much nicer and fluffier and will treat us all much kinder and fairly than the British RC.



I don't know about nicer and fluffier, or kinder or fairer, there exists those downsides, which are inherent downsides in the domestic system too. It is a matter of preference.
One of the upsides of being oppressed by the wider EU establishment, rather than oppressed by the UK establishment, is the opportunity to be oppressed in 28 countries rather than be confined to just this one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

alex_ said:


> Yet you have no suggestion what.


Oh I can suggest things. Social housing building programmes underwritten by the QE money. Local authorities/ housing associations authorised to borrow against that money on long-term mortgages to build new, high quality, and importantly top of the range eco-wise housing. The rents paid pay off the mortgage over time, thus destroying the money that's been printed and removing any inflationary pressure from it, loads of builders get work, loads of people get a place to live. At the end of the process you have great new housing, loads of people with affordable homes and a bunch of assets in the form of buildings owned communally.

You could hold national architecture competitions to come up with the new designs. Involve everyone in the process. All kinds of possibilities just with that one idea, and there are plenty of others. Moving to a low-carbon economy requires investment and that investment is not forthcoming from market forces alone.

This is not pie in the sky - it's not only easily doable, it's the very easiest way to solve the UK's current housing crisis. Both the easiest and the best way to do it. It's a no-brainer. Or it would be if we had a government that didn't put the interests of the rich first. Nah. Let's build another pointless skyscraper instead, eh?


----------



## Wilf (Dec 30, 2018)

Badgers said:


> His votes against gay rights or for the death penalty?


Services to the Welsh language.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> The EU is for instance responsible for regulations that are clearly negative to owners of capital - two examples off the top of my head are compensation for flight delays and clamping down on mobile roaming charges.



Out-fucking-standing.

So people who fly a lot and then use their mobiles whilst jet setting are better off under the EU, yet the racist ingrates of the UK still voted out.

If only someone like you had mentioned these wonderful benefits of EU membership before the great unwashed were given their (undeserved) vote.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 30, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Oh I can suggest things. Social housing building programmes underwritten by the QE money. Local authorities/ housing associations authorised to borrow against that money on long-term mortgages to build new, high quality, and importantly top of the range eco-wise housing. The rents paid pay off the mortgage over time, thus destroying the money that's been printed and removing any inflationary pressure from it, loads of builders get work, loads of people get a place to live. At the end of the process you have great new housing, loads of people with affordable homes and a bunch of assets in the form of buildings owned communally.
> 
> You could hold national architecture competitions to come up with the new designs. Involve everyone in the process. All kinds of possibilities just with that one idea, and there are plenty of others. Moving to a low-carbon economy requires investment and that investment is not forthcoming from market forces alone.
> 
> This is not pie in the sky - it's not only easily doable, it's the very easiest way to solve the UK's current housing crisis. Both the easiest and the best way to do it. It's a no-brainer. Or it would be if we had a government that didn't put the interests of the rich first. Nah. Let's build another pointless skyscraper instead, eh?



Yep, and for Cornwall and similar places use all those holiday homes that nobody lives in for 50 weeks of the year. And other buildings that are being left empty, just compulsorily purchase them. Plus rent control again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 30, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Yep, and for Cornwall and similar places use all those holiday homes that nobody lives in for 50 weeks of the year. And other buildings that are being left empty, just compulsorily purchase them. Plus rent control again.


Yep, and all that. The main point wrt redirecting investment is the move away from the absurd, extremist, false dogma that 'the market will provide'. The market will provide maximum returns for capital, not maximum good for people. In the case of housing, that maximum return for capital is produced by perpetual shortage, as with any essential, finite resource. It is crazy, irrational thinking to contend otherwise.

Not particularly sure how to link this back to brexit, except to say that brexit does nothing to push us away from this extremism. In Europe at least, the UK has been the prime driver of the extremism for decades, and has taken it much further than anywhere else. We have a low-tax, low-provision economy (34% GDP in tax compared to 40%+ in most other northern European countries except Ireland, which is also low-tax, low-provision), a much smaller public sector than most, massive economic inequality, low social mobility, bulging prisons, and a worsening crisis for the poor and in social provision for, well, everyone except the very richest. The real conversation ought to involve ways to move away from this and, frankly, towards a model that is closer in many respects to those of many other European countries, which would be a pretty good start. Leaving the EU produces pressures to continue even further down the extremist path by empowering those who nakedly seek a race to the bottom and a hire-em-fire-em US-style economy - the kinds of wankers like Liam Fox who imagine the UK as the bridge between the US and Europe. Brexit means many different things to many different people, but we all know what it means to the pro-brexit wing of the tory party, which may be about to be handed a very significant win.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 30, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> That's just your opinion- it isn't obvious to me at all. The EU is for instance responsible for regulations that are clearly negative to owners of capital - two examples off the top of my head are compensation for flight delays and clamping down on mobile roaming charges.


The Blair Labour government brought in the minimum wage that doesn't mean that it wasn't neo-liberal. The fact that capital may be forced to accede to (or will even willing endorse) regulations that some business owners* may oppose is not counter to neo-liberalism.

It is illuminating, and entirely in character, that the two supposed examples of EU acting against capital you've chosen** are based on people as _consumers,_ as individuals.  The actions of the EU on people as workers, as a social group are ignored.


*and business owners does not equal capital, I would have thought such someone so shit hot on economics as yourself would understand this.

**neither of which are "clearly negative" to capital.


Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If only someone like you had mentioned these wonderful benefits of EU membership before the great unwashed were given their (undeserved) vote.


They did. That's why Leave won.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 30, 2018)

Bahnhof
[QUOTE="Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If only someone like you had mentioned these wonderful benefits of EU membership before the great unwashed were given their (undeserved) vote.



Who are the "unwashed"?


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 30, 2018)

two sheds said:


> Yep, and for Cornwall and similar places use all those holiday homes that nobody lives in for 50 weeks of the year. And other buildings that are being left empty, just compulsorily purchase them. Plus rent control again.



I've lived in London for years but Plymouth is my home town. My brother is still there. A Remainer in area where Brexit won vote. 

When I was growing up there rich Londoners bought houses in South west. Local population were reduced to service industry for them in countryside. I know I did that for a while. It was resented quietly. Class is an issue in countryside. 

In seventies when I grew up in Plymouth the largely working class population in Docklands all had relatively good jobs in hindsight. I go back there now and it looks poorer. And it is. Child poverty rate in Devonport is obscenely high.

Revealed: Shocking rates of child poverty in Plymouth

Child poverty rate where I grew up is now almost 40%. 

Plymouth is divided spatially by class. Always was. My and my brother grew up in blue collar Docklands. That area voted Leave. Plymouth is one of the left behind areas. 

My brother ( faced possible redundancy several times recently) and wife work in public sector. Only thing that keeps town like Plymouth going. 

As my brother realises its not EU that is the problem its years of Tory government. And New Labour didn't do much either. 

Me and brother see part of reasons why people vote leave. But it was wrong target.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Out-fucking-standing.
> 
> So people who fly a lot and then use their mobiles whilst jet setting are better off under the EU, yet the racist ingrates of the UK still voted out.
> 
> If only someone like you had mentioned these wonderful benefits of EU membership before the great unwashed were given their (undeserved) vote.


Shit, I forgot that workers don't take flights - too busy taking care of their pit ponies or something.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Dec 30, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> The Blair Labour government brought in the minimum wage that doesn't mean that it wasn't neo-liberal. The idea that capital can't be forced to accede to (or will even willing endorse) regulations that some business owners* may oppose is not counter to neo-liberalism.
> 
> It is illuminating, and entirely in character, that the two supposed examples of EU acting against capital you've chosen** are based on people as _consumers,_ as individuals.  The actions of the EU on people as workers, as a social group are ignored.
> 
> ...


Workers are also consumers. If you are considering whether the EU is a good thing,  it is a little silly in my view to focus solely on the impact of one dimension of their lives. 

Really not interested in debating semantics and dick sizing over how you define words btw.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 30, 2018)

Your individualistic view of people perfectly encapsulates your politics and why it is every bit as regressive and anti-worker as the ERG, UKIP, etc.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 30, 2018)

Defence Secretary outlines expansionist British nationalist military project; Australia and NZ etc will be looking to the UK for leadership. Defence Secretary accused of ‘naked ambition’ over plans for new military bases - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Dangerous lunatics at the heart of government, or just more the same by the British state?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Defence Secretary outlines expansionist British nationalist military project; Australia and NZ etc will be looking to the UK for leadership. Defence Secretary accused of ‘naked ambition’ over plans for new military bases - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk
> 
> Dangerous lunatics at the heart of government, or just more the same by the British state?


There should be a Brexit bollocks thread and this ^^ could be the op


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 30, 2018)

Poi E said:


> Defence Secretary outlines expansionist British nationalist military project; Australia and NZ etc will be looking to the UK for leadership. Defence Secretary accused of ‘naked ambition’ over plans for new military bases - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk
> 
> Dangerous lunatics at the heart of government, or just more the same by the British state?


Just sending a message to the core voters.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 30, 2018)

Gramsci said:


> Who are the "unwashed"?



Those nasty wacists that voted the wrong way.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2018)

Wolveryeti said:


> Shit, I forgot that workers don't take flights - too busy taking care of their pit ponies or something.




Nice, following up with a sneer at the millions of Britons for whom a sojourn to foreign parts is not even on their radar.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 31, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Those nasty wacists that voted the wrong way.


Desperate to erect this straw man to stop any criticism of brexshit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 31, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Desperate to erect this straw man to stop any criticism of brexshit.



Talk me through it.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 31, 2018)

sleaterkinney said:


> Desperate to erect this straw man to stop any criticism of brexshit.


It's just posted to get a reaction. Not that I would know about that kind of thing


----------



## ska invita (Dec 31, 2018)

DotCommunist said:


> just read this:
> From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote
> 
> on brexit and labour


A few thing I didn't like about that piece but this stands out particularly strongly to me


> Wren-Lewis's last point - empathy for EU migrants - probably counts a lot for a small number of people with direct personal involvement or a strong sense of ethical obligation, but it isn't a priority for most voters for whom empathy with Latvians is no more salient than empathy with Laotians. This doesn't make them xenophobic or callous, it merely reflects their personal circumstances and their mental ranking of the factors that will determine their vote.



Its not about Latvians being equal to Loatians, that's a false but telling equivalence..  it's about people legally living in the UK, who may not be British passport holders but have full citizens rights, and are defacto British Citizens.... They're not migrants, they're people who have at one time migrated, but they're now in practice UK citizens.

 And to not care about fellow citizens IS callous, at best. How can it be otherwise? Unless they're considered always just Latvians, always Other, always a step from being kicked out. Not real Brits.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Dec 31, 2018)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Talk me through it.


You put words in people's mouths, then argue against them, to try and stop any criticism of brexshit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 31, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Its not about Latvians being equal to Loatians, that's a false but telling equivalence..  it's about people legally living in the UK, who may not be British passport holders but have full citizens rights, and are defacto British Citizens.... They're not migrants, they're people who have at one time migrated, but they're now in practice UK citizens.
> 
> And to not care about fellow citizens IS callous, at best. How can it be otherwise? Unless they're considered always just Latvians, always Other, always a step from being kicked out. Not real Brits.


This is a very strange argument.

For a start it is not correct to say that people who have migrated from the EU to the UK have full citizens rights, for example many will not be entitled to vote in a GE.

But more importantly your argument makes legality and citizenship the basis on which empathy should be extended. So what about those migrants that aren't UK citizen's, either de facto or de jura, that may have entered the country illegally? Are they to be extended a lesser degree of empathy?

EDIT: You've also misread Timoney's argument he states 






			
				Timoney said:
			
		

> but it isn't a *priority* for most voters for whom empathy with Latvians is no more salient than empathy with Laotians.


 and goes onto say (in the same paragraph as the one you've quoted)



			
				Timoney" said:
			
		

> Many people are unhappy with the anticipated future treatment of EU migrants, just as they are unhappy with the proliferation of foodbanks, but it doesn't follow that either would cause them to ignore all other issues when it comes to a general election.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> This is a very strange argument.
> 
> For a start it is not correct to say that people who have migrated from the EU to the UK have full citizens rights, for example many will not be entitled to vote in a GE.
> 
> But more importantly your argument makes legality and citizenship the basis on which empathy should be extended. So what about those migrants that aren't UK citizen's, either de facto or de jura, that may have entered the country illegally? Are they to be extended a lesser degree of empathy?



They have my solidarity and are part of the same legal national unit I live in (the UK), so of course I care about them as much as anyone else affected by the jurisdiction of our parliament and the outcome of my voting decisions on them.

The article here reckons they're as important as Laotians. They're not. My vote does not affect the people of Laos. And to think they are shows up the mental distinction between real Brits and foreigners/migrants.

But I must be that little weird minority troubled by "ethical obligation". Or I'm someone who doesn't start off classifying people from the EU as migrants with less of a right to be here.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 31, 2018)

Jesus. I'm actually amazed that you can come out with the above. That EU migrants are more "important" than other migrants. You think this is internationalism? FFS.

This is more of the regressive politics you've tied yourself to by dying at the stake for the supposed _freedom_ of movement designated by an neo-liberal supra-state.

(And as I've mentioned in the edit above you've totally misinterpreted Timoney's argument)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Jesus. I'm actually amazed that you can come out with the above. That EU migrants are more "important" than other migrants. You think this is internationalism? FFS.
> 
> This is more of the regressive politics you've tied yourself to by dying at the stake for the supposed _freedom_ of movement designated by an neo-liberal supra-state.
> 
> (And as I've mentioned in the edit above you've totally misinterpreted Timoney's argument)


I'll sidestep the issue of how one considers an EU/non-EU person as I make no such kinship distinction mentally at all. But to reverse the argument, there is no need to mention the treatment of Laotians in order to oppose the impending change in the treatment of Latvians. Saying that the fact that a Latvian who came here under one set of expectations is about to be treated in a very different way is a bad thing to be opposed in no way implies any kind of endorsement of the way a Laotian is treated.

The same goes for the freedom of movement argument. That there is not freedom of movement everywhere for everyone is not an argument against opposing the removal of a set of limited freedoms of movement that do exist.

Back in 1962 when they stripped the right to come to the UK from citizens of the Commonwealth, a similar argument could have been made that these restrictions were simply the same, or in reality still a bit better than, those imposed on non-Commonwealth people, so it's not such a big deal. That's not an argument anyone wants to be making, surely?


----------



## ska invita (Dec 31, 2018)

redsquirrel said:


> Jesus. I'm actually amazed that you can come out with the above. That EU migrants are more "important" than other migrants. You think this is internationalism? FFS.
> 
> This is more of the regressive politics you've tied yourself to by dying at the stake for the supposed _freedom_ of movement designated by an neo-liberal supra-state.
> 
> (And as I've mentioned in the edit above you've totally misinterpreted Timoney's argument)


Yeah that's what I said, you've got me.
Haven't got the energy


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 31, 2018)

ska invita said:


> Yeah that's what I said, you've got me.
> Haven't got the energy


I'm sorry but that* is* what you said, it's right there in black and white.


ska invita said:


> The article here reckons they're as important as Laotians. They're not.


Now it might not be what you _meant,_ we've all posted a reply quickly and then realised what we've written is not quite what we meant. But it absolutely is what you wrote.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 31, 2018)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'll sidestep the issue of how one considers an EU/non-EU person as I make no such kinship distinction mentally at all. But to reverse the argument, there is no need to mention the treatment of Laotians in order to oppose the impending change in the treatment of Latvians. Saying that the fact that a Latvian who came here under one set of expectations is about to be treated in a very different way is a bad thing to be opposed in no way implies any kind of endorsement of the way a Laotian is treated.
> 
> The same goes for the freedom of movement argument. That there is not freedom of movement everywhere for everyone is not an argument against opposing the removal of a set of limited freedoms of movement that do exist.
> 
> Back in 1962 when they stripped the right to come to the UK from citizens of the Commonwealth, a similar argument could have been made that these restrictions were simply the same, or in reality still a bit better than, those imposed on non-Commonwealth people, so it's not such a big deal. That's not an argument anyone wants to be making, surely?


I'd agree with all of the first and third paragraphs (though I would point out again that Timoney is not making any argument counter to this). The attacks of this government of those that have migrated from the EU are appalling, and so are the attacks on those that have migrated from outside the EU. The second paragraph I partly agree with.


----------



## zahir (Dec 31, 2018)

Why do you only partly agree with the second paragraph?


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 31, 2018)

> Wren-Lewis's last point - empathy for EU migrants - probably counts a lot for a small number of people with direct personal involvement or a strong sense of ethical obligation, but it isn't a priority for most voters



I do have direct personal involvement. Like a lot of people I know. I don't know what he means by ethical obligation. 

From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote

A lot of this article is about the middle class. I don't find it that relevant in my context.

This analysis I do agree with:



> It is now clear that some on the right and centre of the party see opposition to Brexit, and specifically the call for a second referendum, as a short-cut to their goal of defeating the left, essentially by co-opting the new membership to a "sensible" platform that combines staying in the EU with a programme of redistributive justice and public sector investment (the more fundamental issues of economic power raised by



Chatting to a New Labour ex Cllr in Lambeth that is how he sees it I reckon.


----------



## Gramsci (Dec 31, 2018)

On identity. 




> The "question of identity" isn't really a question but a presumption, and one that trivialises actual conflicts of identity in places such Northern Ireland. For all the talk of a divided nation and ruined Christmas dinners, Britons are not being obliged to choose an identity in an environment where the consequences can be fatal.




From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote

Yesterday I met my friend , originally from Northern Ireland, now in Brixton. A Remainer. Like a lot of people in Northern Ireland. So are these people like me just a minority to be dismissed as small number of people?


----------



## philosophical (Dec 31, 2018)

This might interest some people.
It is about a freight system within the (future?) EU, that makes the Republic of Ireland a bit less dependent for supplies on freight driving through the UK.

‘Brexit-busting’ ferry launched from Dublin Port


----------



## Ranbay (Dec 31, 2018)

My living room wall, today


----------



## Wookey (Dec 31, 2018)

That's fucking awesome.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 31, 2018)

Don't be fucking stupid. Your whole reading of this piece is mental. It's not about value it's about electoral blocs. You're not an idiot.

Don't throw me over to stupid hype rhetoric.


----------



## gentlegreen (Dec 31, 2018)

Are we going to have a Brexit dome ?


----------



## Winot (Dec 31, 2018)

gentlegreen said:


> Are we going to have a Brexit dome ?



It leaks.


----------



## extra dry (Jan 1, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> My living room wall, today View attachment 157411


Can I use this, I mean it was downloaded but may I use it?


----------



## existentialist (Jan 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> This might interest some people.
> It is about a freight system within the (future?) EU, that makes the Republic of Ireland a bit less dependent for supplies on freight driving through the UK.
> 
> ‘Brexit-busting’ ferry launched from Dublin Port


Hmm, that's going to have some implications for this corner of Wales, I suspect. Although it makes perfect sense.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> just read this:
> From Arse To Elbow: The Progressive Vote
> 
> on brexit and labour



Myself I don't care about Labour, not even about Corbyn the "stupid people" liar any more. So I read that article as a critique of brexit more than one of Labour. I did not like these bits...




			
				 Arse to Elbow said:
			
		

> The "question of identity" isn't really a question but a presumption, and one that trivialises actual conflicts of identity in places such Northern Ireland. For all the talk of a divided nation and ruined Christmas dinners, Britons are not being obliged to choose an identity in an environment where the consequences can be fatal. Yes, an MP was assassinated in 2016, but the idea that people are taking their lives in their hands when they mention Brexit in an unfamiliar pub is ridiculous. Regarding yourself as European is an affinity, like being a liberal, rather than a socially-imposed identity, like being brought up as a Catholic or as a native German-speaker. Citizens of the UK will be no less European outside the EU than the citizens of Norway or Switzerland



Being or even feeling European is just not something anyone wants to shoot each other over. Complaining that people _identifying_ as European (rather than just _being _it as a matter of fact)  'trivialises' sectarian and identarian conflicts elsewhere suggests that identity is only important when it creates conflict, not when it doesn't. So if you want to be listened to, just start shooting people. Then your struggle for identity will be one that can _be trivialized_, rather than just being trivial. That's fucking toxic.

Also anyway, there's and always was a strong undercurrent of _I'm not European I'm British!_ in the leave campaigns I encountered. Not always stated explicitly but it was always there. And then again, British exceptionalism has been a key part of _our '_European project' since 1975.




			
				 Arse to Elbow said:
			
		

> The idea that the EU is non-ideological, that it embodies "rational argument" and implicitly the Enlightenment, is itself pure ideology.



I love this one, as if the idea _Britain Knows Better _isn't ideological, the whole shit show is ideological. The nation state is ideological. Representative democracy is ideological. Accepting or denying the validity of a referendum is ideological. This is the Newton's cradle analogy I made. Back and forth, tit for tat, the least meaningful thing anyone can say on the subject.




			
				 Arse to Elbow said:
			
		

> Wren-Lewis's last point - empathy for EU migrants - probably counts a lot for a small number of people with direct personal involvement or a strong sense of ethical obligation, but it isn't a priority for most voters for whom empathy with Latvians is no more salient than empathy with Laotians. This doesn't make them xenophobic or callous /...



Yes, it does, and accepting in any way the notion that not having been born within the bounds of this sceptred isle makes your needs and experiences less important than ours is fucked, utterly _fucked_. As a matter of fact it's a major Leave argument on the left, that Fortress Europe's policies of keeping outsiders outside is thoroughly evil and ought to make any right-thinking person want to leave the EU. And yet, here are the same assumptions: _Doesn't matter about Lativans because they're no more important to most people than Laotians, and that's OK because we have personal circumstances that make us vote one way and if that fucks the foreigners' personal circumstances well never mind, they're foreigners. They can just go home._

Did I misread?

And in an apparently left-wing piece ffs.

Then,




			
				 Arse to Elbow said:
			
		

> To claim that empathy with migrants is a major motive is to make the classic error of assuming that what matters to activists is necessarily representative of broader social movements, ironically a criticism routinely levelled at the left. Together with the emphasis on EU patriotism, it also suggests that remainers are driven more by emotion than rational calculation, ...



People even here voted Leave in part because of sympathy with migrants - the ones being excluded from the EU and dying in camps around its margins. So what exactly is this guy's argument, that they lacked rational calculation too?

I mean, I might just stop there because this is just illustrative of the entire Brexit fuck up. It's not actually about leaving the EU, it's just about sticking it to our enemies at home.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 1, 2019)

not today but later


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2019)

Hey look, at least I read it. Tried to see around my prejudices, couldn't 
I reckon I'm not alone in that though.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 1, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Myself I don't care about Labour, not even about Corbyn the "stupid people" liar any more. So I read that article as a critique of brexit more than one of Labour. I did not like these bits...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



On xenophobic and callous; I think you are misreading it entirely. We are getting into “Why is everyone in the U.K.  more upset about a terrorist attack in London when 30 people just died in a place they’ve never been to” territory here are we not? And then the inevitable- and in my opinion, very insincere-  Performance Empathy that follows from that. Not prioritising the further away tragedy in comparison to something that just happened where you grew up isn’t racist, nor does it mean you don’t care about it at all, it’s just naturally not going to be at the forefront of your mind. So then in the context of going out to vote, even Less so if we are talking about people that can’t afford to feed their kids, don’t know where their next wage will come from etc... empathy with Latvians may not be prioritised over those worries. 
Haveiexplainedthatright?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2019)

Why are we (note, _we_, not_ the state_ or _the media_ whatever) seprating people into _We _and _Latvians _anyway? What purpose does that serve? I have a passport, but that's not me, it's a document I need so I can travel. I resent it, I would burn it if everyone else would burn theirs etc. Why are we accepting this assumption that there is any such thing as Latvians, Laotians, and Us?

This is way beyond Brexit though because Remain also makes these assumptions but on a bigger scale.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 1, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Why are we (note, _we_, not_ the state_ or _the media_ whatever) seprating people into _We _and _Latvians _anyway? What purpose does that serve? I have a passport, but that's not me, it's a document I need so I can travel. I resent it, I would burn it if everyone else would burn theirs etc. Why are we accepting this assumption that there is any such thing as Latvians, Laotians, and Us?
> 
> This is way beyond Brexit though because Remain also makes these assumptions but on a bigger scale.


Oh come on! I think I’ll pass on that one


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2019)

OK, fair enough.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 1, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> I love this one, as if the idea _Britain Knows Better _isn't ideological, the whole shit show is ideological. The nation state is ideological. Representative democracy is ideological. Accepting or denying the validity of a referendum is ideological. This is the Newton's cradle analogy I made. Back and forth, tit for tat, the least meaningful thing anyone can say on the subject.


 Of course opposition to the EU is ideological, the difference is that it is not being presented, by Timoney or others, as non-ideological. 

That simply isn't true of pro-EU/remain positions, see the Bank of England being treated as a neutral body, see the argument that political viewpoints have a truth



			
				Peston said:
			
		

> “weighing the evidence and saying on the balance of probabilities … this is the truth. It is the role of a journalist to say, ‘we’ve got these two contradictory arguments, I’m now going to advise all of you which is likely to be closer to the truth.’”


----------



## JJ50 (Jan 1, 2019)

I fear Brexit will happen but regard it as a HUGE mistake. I think the UK will be much worse off by not being a member of the EU. We need them and they need us, imo.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 1, 2019)

It wouldn't be a mistake if it was being done for the right reasons and in something approaching a rational way, but it's just not. Maybe the end justifies the means, that can definitely be argued. But as of 1/1/19 I can't see how the end is going to benefit anyone but tax-dodging millionaires around the world, so it's hard to see what justifies what exactly.

Plus also there's every likelihood that the cowardly fuckers in charge of it all will pull the UK out of the EU just far enough to lose its legal influence there, but not a step further. That _will _be a huge mistake.


----------



## paolo (Jan 1, 2019)

In the last week we’ve had more comedy Brexit.

It’s banging! Somewhere after the easiest deal in history... Barnier laughing his way to imaginary ferry companies (oh no, is that us)

A Brexit negotiator who didn’t know about Dover. Can you imagine how dumb Brussels is! (Oh is that us again?)

Still, there German Car industry will come to our rescue. (Whoosh! The sound of an Audi in Surrey! Quieter than ever! Posting here!)

The best thing, is the bloke who put £900k into Brexit. He won! Shorted the pound off the back of supporting Taking Back Control, and got £230 million betting the the fail!

Taking Back Control.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> On xenophobic and callous; I think you are misreading it entirely. We are getting into “Why is everyone in the U.K.  more upset about a terrorist attack in London when 30 people just died in a place they’ve never been to” territory here are we not? And then the inevitable- and in my opinion, very insincere-  Performance Empathy that follows from that. Not prioritising the further away tragedy in comparison to something that just happened where you grew up isn’t racist, nor does it mean you don’t care about it at all, it’s just naturally not going to be at the forefront of your mind. So then in the context of going out to vote, even Less so if we are talking about people that can’t afford to feed their kids, don’t know where their next wage will come from etc... empathy with Latvians may not be prioritised over those worries.
> Haveiexplainedthatright?



The way I read it was that I'm in a minority so can be dismissed. In his view. Be a British person who is one of those who have "direct personal involvement."

Also I know a Latvian here in London.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 1, 2019)

extra dry said:


> Can I use this, I mean it was downloaded but may I use it?




yeah, you can, but you will find better copied online that my shitty photo


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 1, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> The way I read it was that I'm in a minority so can be dismissed. In his view. Be a British person who is one of those who have "direct personal involvement."
> 
> Also I know a Latvian here in London.


That’s not what was written though. Tell me, in your view has this method of regarding everyone as racist until proven innocent worked well up until now?


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That’s not what was written though. Tell me, in your view has this method of regarding everyone as racist until proven innocent worked well up until now?





> Wren-Lewis's last point - empathy for EU migrants - probably counts a lot for a small number of people with direct personal involvement



This is what he says. As a British person with direct personal involvement that is how I read it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 1, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> This is what he says. As a British person with direct personal involvement that is how I read it.


He doesn’t say you should be dismissed, does he? he’s trying to engage with the rest  of the vote in a more meaningful way than saying they all voted how they did primarily due to  racism.


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> He doesn’t say you should be dismissed, does he? he’s trying to engage with the rest  of the vote in a more meaningful way than saying they all voted how they did primarily due to  racism.



In the circles I live in "direct personal involvement" is common. His views on this being a minority position does not reflect my life. I live in Lambeth ( Brixton) which had one of the highest remain votes.


----------



## andysays (Jan 2, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> In the circles I live in "direct personal involvement" is common. His views on this being a minority position does not reflect my life. I live in Lambeth ( Brixton) which had one of the highest remain votes.


Claims of 'direct personal involvement' look to me like another attempt to dismiss and devalue the opinions of people who disagree with you.

We *all* have direct personal involvement in society and in Brexit, whether or not we have friends or relations from other parts of the EU or the rest of the world (and most of us do, BTW, you're not special in that regard) and whether we voted to remain or to leave, or whether we voted at all.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 2, 2019)

NOT SAFE FOR WORK


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

Please don’t ruin Stewart Lee for me as well.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Please don’t ruin Stewart Lee for me as well.


(((HoratioCuthbert)))


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> In the circles I live in "direct personal involvement" is common. His views on this being a minority position does not reflect my life. I live in Lambeth ( Brixton) which had one of the highest remain votes.


Maybe he’s not worded it very well, but I don’t think saying fuck you Gramsci and yer ilk was the general thrust of his craic. But I’ve said that already so I’ll weeesht, I work in care so as you can imagine work/have worked with hunners of EU nationals.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> NOT SAFE FOR WORK



You know he’s being ironic about metropolitan liberal elite characters like himself that make those kind of statements, right?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You know he’s being ironic about metropolitan liberal elite characters like himself that make those kind of statements, right?


Doesn't seem that way.  He backs it up with the next bit about the angry letter-writer.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You know he’s being ironic about metropolitan liberal elite characters like himself that make those kind of statements, right?


No he's not.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

He’s really not. He’d also lose most of his audience if he really got stuck in there let’s face it.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 2, 2019)

Having been to see that show live twice, I can promise you he is.  He simultaneously means it but also sends himself up for meaning it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Having been to see that show live twice, I can promise you he is.  He simultaneously means it but also sends himself up for meaning it.


Oh I can see he’s doing both, but not really impressed at his half hearted attempt at the latter. Yeah I’ve not seen the whole show but I’ve seen lots of bits. As I’ve seen him live and he’s one of my favourite comedians, I think I’ll sit this next year or so out ha!


ETA: I’m aware that contradicts my last post, I just meant he reeeally means it!


----------



## kabbes (Jan 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Oh I can see he’s doing both, but not really impressed at his half hearted attempt at the latter. Yeah I’ve not seen the whole show but I’ve seen lots of bits. As I’ve seen him live and he’s one of my favourite comedians, I think I’ll sit this next year or so out ha!
> 
> 
> ETA: I’m aware that contradicts my last post, I just meant he reeeally means it!


You have to see the whole show.  That’s how Stewart Lee works — his show is an entity entire unto itself, not a series of “bits”.  It all links together around a theme. If you haven’t seen it all, you simply haven’t seen it.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You know he’s being ironic about metropolitan liberal elite characters like himself that make those kind of statements, right?



I know he made me laugh.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You have to see the whole show.  That’s how Stewart Lee works — his show is an entity entire unto itself, not a series of “bits”.  It all links together around a theme. If you haven’t seen it all, you simply haven’t seen it.


Can you promise me he’s not going to really piss me off Kabbes, though, can you? That’s my concern. It’s pure legitimate!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

I know it’s not a series of bits, I saw the pear cider shit LIVE man


----------



## kabbes (Jan 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Can you promise me he’s not going to really piss me off Kabbes, though, can you? That’s my concern. It’s pure legitimate!


He pisses everyone off.  He’d be disappointed any other way.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I know he made me laugh.


This fills me with hope, for it may be the case that  your year long Irish Border skit has a punchline but you’re such a trooper you won’t drop it until we’ve all nearly died!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You have to see the whole show.  That’s how Stewart Lee works — his show is an entity entire unto itself, not a series of “bits”.  It all links together around a theme. If you haven’t seen it all, you simply haven’t seen it.


Fair enough. It is true enough that his shows are wholes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This fills me with hope, for it may be the case that  your year long Irish Border skit has a punchline but you’re such a trooper you won’t drop it until we’ve all nearly died!


He's a super trouper


----------



## gosub (Jan 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> NOT SAFE FOR WORK




I last met that man the night I split from my wife (I was the bloke with piss on his trousers).[Divorce pending}  Conversations about  differences between owning and renting in the particular area of London he (and a mutual friend lives in) ensued.  As to Damo I still remember the Bovinus gig at thr Railway Winchester.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 3, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> The way I read it was that I'm in a minority so can be dismissed. In his view. Be a British person who is one of those who have "direct personal involvement."


With respect, like HC I think your reading of this piece is miles off.

The whole focus of the piece is on the Labour party position and specifically, in the in the paragraph you've quoted, the electoral effect of the LPs position.



			
				Timoney said:
			
		

> Wren-Lewis's last point - empathy for EU migrants - probably counts a lot for a small number of people with direct personal involvement or a strong sense of ethical obligation, but it *isn't a priority for most voters* for whom empathy with Latvians is no more salient than empathy with Laotians. This doesn't make them xenophobic or callous, it merely reflects their personal circumstances and their mental *ranking of the factors that will determine their vote.* Many people are unhappy with the anticipated future treatment of EU migrants, just as they are unhappy with the proliferation of foodbanks, but it doesn't follow that either would cause them to ignore all other issues when it comes to a general election.


(My emphasis) Timoney is arguing (counter Wren-Lewis) that the LP not taking a more Remain stance (or more specifically calling for a second referendum) is not going to result in the loss of many voters.
As he summarises in the second to last paragraph



			
				Timoney said:
			
		

> The shared premise of Wren-Lewis and Bertram is that support for remaining in the EU is so fundamental to the identity of progressive middle class voters that a large number of them will withdraw their support from Labour unless it commits (at a minimum) to a second referendum with remain on the ballot.



I do not think it's fair to say that Timoney thinks you should be "dismissed", but on a crude electoral level yes Labour probably can "dismiss" the small minority of voters that are such strong "remainers" that they will vote for the LDs or Greens in protest of the LPs stance on the EU (at least in England and Wales, the situation in Scotland is obviously a bit different). From the perspective of electoral calculations your vote (and mine) certainly matters much less than the votes of people in, say, Pudsey or Shipley. We are in safe Labour seats, the same seats (generally) that the die-hard remain vote  is concentrated, a minor loss of support in our seats is neither here nor there, whereas if Labour want to win a GE they certainly need to be winning Pudsey and ideally want to take Shipley too.

For all the claims by polticians, the media and LDs that the UK leaving the EU is the greatest issue of our times, it certainly wasn't to most voters at the last GE. For all the daft talk of LDs removing Hoey, she ended up with a swing towards her. Many Labour voters may prefer a more Remain stance from the party but is that going to mean that come election time they don't vote/vote for someone else? IMO only in a small minority of cases, and mostly where the LP can afford it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 3, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You have to see the whole show.  That’s how Stewart Lee works — his show is an entity entire unto itself, not a series of “bits”.  It all links together around a theme. If you haven’t seen it all, you simply haven’t seen it.


Seen it? We all live it. It's his/their society and he really should take some responsibility for it. And i don't care how much he loves mark e smith and robert lloyd until he does.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Seen it? We all live it. It's his/their society and he really should take some responsibility for it. And i don't care how much he loves mark e smith and robert lloyd until he does.


Yeaaaah get him telt


----------



## Gramsci (Jan 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> With respect, like HC I think your reading of this piece is miles off.
> 
> The whole focus of the piece is on the Labour party position and specifically, in the in the paragraph you've quoted, the electoral effect of the LPs position.
> (My emphasis) Timoney is arguing (counter Wren-Lewis) that the LP not taking a more Remain stance (or more specifically calling for a second referendum) is not going to result in the loss of many voters.
> ...



On the level of crude electoral politics I agree he is right. But its saying the obvious imo.

I catched up on a couple of friends over Christmas. One Corbyn hating Labour party member ( she is basically middle class New Labour) who is strong remainer. She will vote Labour if there is election soon.

My other friend (not that well off) does not like Corbyn over anti semitism but hates New Labour. She is also strong remainer. But will always vote Labour.

I did try to tell them over Xmas there is left view on Brexit but it either falls on deaf ears or looks of incredulity. And yes I know the arguments put forward by Costas Lapiavitsas.

Also Yanis Varoufakis ( criticize Euro and EU but reform and stay My position). Who says and I agree with him a second referendum would be a mistake.

What I got from my friends was that now March deadline is coming up they are getting more angry about outcome. It is becoming issue of our times now that the reality of it is becoming to hit. There is no plan. Both Labour leadership and Tory leadership aren't up to it.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 3, 2019)

Latest attempt to ratchet up the pressure on potential Tory waverers.

Police reinforcements for Northern Ireland in case of no-deal Brexit



> Almost 1,000 police officers from England and Scotland are to begin training for deployment in Northern Ireland in case of disorder from a no-deal Brexit, the Guardian has learned.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Latest attempt to ratchet up the pressure on potential Tory waverers.
> 
> Police reinforcements for Northern Ireland in case of no-deal Brexit


'Will you be voting for Mrs May's deal, Mr Twatty Cunt MP?'
- Never! I'm a stout hearted Englishman!
'Ok, will you be voting for Mrs May's deal, _Sir _Twatty Cunt MP?'
- Erm...


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 4, 2019)

Gramsci said:


> What I got from my friends was that now March deadline is coming up they are getting more angry about outcome. It is becoming issue of our times now that the reality of it is becoming to hit.


For some maybe, but I think a lot of people are just fucking bored of the whole thing and want it finished with.


> In the YouGov Sunday Times poll last week they asked what people’s emotional response would be to the most plausible outcomes (current deal, no deal, soft Brexit, referendum and no Brexit).
> ...
> When asked about their reaction to the deal or a soft Brexit, most people gave people towards the middle of the scale – they’d be disappointed, or relieved, or wouldn’t mind.


Moreover, IME the people that care most about it are those that are already aligned to a party. Of the two most strident remainers I know one's a LD and the other a LP member, and for all there dislike of Brexit they'd vote exactly the same way whatever.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 4, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Jan 4, 2019)

We need to let the public know somehow. Perhaps some timers on the sides of buses.


----------



## OzT (Jan 4, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2019)

Poi E said:


> We need to let the public know somehow. Perhaps some timers on the sides of buses.


perhaps an mp being thrown from the roof of the victoria tower every 4 hours ((84x6)+3=507) would concentrate people's minds. or make sure it went to the wire.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 4, 2019)

With suitable fencing to protect the public I can see that working.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 4, 2019)

People could pay to push them. We could have an auction and spend the money on the NHS, thus proving the bus ads true


----------



## andysays (Jan 4, 2019)

Brexit: Manston Airport to host lorry park trial


> Plans to tackle post-Brexit traffic queues by holding lorries in a disused Kent airport will be tested on Monday, it has been revealed. More than 100 HGVs will travel the 20-mile route from Manston Airport, near Ramsgate, to the Port of Dover. Hauliers fear that a no-deal Brexit will create additional border checks, leading to queues of up to 29 miles. The government said it had to "prepare for all eventualities... including a possible no deal".


----------



## gosub (Jan 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 157715






Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 157716




ffs 84 days to go and haven't even agreed a font


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> ffs 84 days to go and haven't even agreed a font


Au contraire, we have agreed to use different fonts


----------



## gosub (Jan 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Au contraire, we have agreed to use different fonts



fingers crossed she hasn't negotiated wingdings.


----------



## Supine (Jan 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> fingers crossed she hasn't negotiated wingdings.



Comic sans


----------



## tim (Jan 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Au contraire, we have agreed to use different fonts



Bourgeois intellectuals like you with your fancy foreign phrases are the ones who brought this country to its knees. After Brexiteer there will be no more "Au contraire" treason. And none of this different fonts crap. We will only have Church of England fonts. The Papists, Lutherans and dunking Baptist can conform or face the consequenced.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 4, 2019)

tim said:


> Bourgeois intellectuals like you with your fancy foreign phrases are the ones who brought this country to its knees. After Brexiteer there will be no more "Au contraire" treason. And none of this different fonts crap. We will only have Church of England fonts. The Papists, Lutherans and dunking Baptist can conform or face the consequenced.


Oak on chair


----------



## Supine (Jan 4, 2019)

tim said:


> We will only have Church of England fonts. The Papists, Lutherans and dunking Baptist can conform or face the consequenced.



Aren't they all foreign religions at heart? They can go too!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 4, 2019)

Fuck 'em if they're not dancing with trees and singing to the stars. With wine.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 4, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> dancing with trees and singing to the stars. With wine.



i despair at what the Church of England has become ....


----------



## Humberto (Jan 5, 2019)

One thing that occurs to me, the country as it was is dead. This is not a great country, or more pertinently, a great society in terms of its state of affairs. The version of the country given in the mainstream press, the BBC and all of them is not strictly accurate.

People are so wound up because changes are not 'all good', but they are heavily saturated with the message that they are, despite the evidence of their own lives and those of their friends. What drives the political agenda? The paring down and vilification of legal aid, for one instance amidst a myriad. Tory cunts actually think they are the good guys? I can't bring myself to believe it.

The thing is, this could be a great country, by which I mean and will always mean for its honest inhabitants. And their wider effect. For a small class though (and it doesn't have to be this way) the quickest route is to stamp on us and fill their pockets. All our reasonable left-wing demands and advantages they see as a threat, so they move against us. Talk about it even and you are the 'bad guy'. Concentration of wealth, rights, property, a future, culture is all they strive for.

A fightback would look to stop being dominated by establishment institutions. Brussels, Westminster; both are for the rich, who are against the poor. Both make an exact science of deceiving us, or I should say, emptying your pockets in order to fill theirs (and anyone else's who will jump on board). That's not hyperbole. It happens and we have accepted it. The difference between now and 20 years ago is that people are less free, have less hope and are controlled by a myth and technocracy. One blends into the other though I don't quite understand it; a rich man's world where we don't get the scraps anymore. They covet our scraps.

Its a dangerous time for sure. We can't bury our heads and pretend it isn't a shitshow, that institutions hold things together. Why not? I would suggest again, because across the board here and everywhere else it seems they have been subverted by the 'elite', or call them what you will. An adversary; not from abroad but no less real for all of that. You've more in common with your class wherever they are from, despite the seeming differences. That's just a bare truth as far as I can see it, and it is an important one.

So, let your target and efforts be against the ones that are hurting you, not those they tell you are doing so.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 5, 2019)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph..._term=.d4674c76d416&__twitter_impression=true

Views from across the pond


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 5, 2019)

One thing that has me scratching my heid is the extent to which it is apparently now acceptable to leave those people who have the misfortune to be mainly or wholly reliant on benefits with zero income for weeks and months.The "fuck-off and die" attitude to claimants referred to earlier by someone on these boards is something new I think.Even under Thatcher, I seem to recall,those claimants who were regarded,for one reason or another,as undeserving-not available for work-were nevertheless not left altogether penniless with one or other form of begging their only remaining option.Those things that were once regarded as citizen's rights are easily eroded when there is endless scope for argument about who is a citizen.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph..._term=.d4674c76d416&__twitter_impression=true
> 
> Views from across the pond


Seems to be the view pretty much everywhere outside of england and wales.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 5, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> One thing that has me scratching my heid is the extent to which it is apparently now acceptable to leave those people who have the misfortune to be mainly or wholly reliant on benefits with zero income for weeks and months.The "fuck-off and die" attitude to claimants referred to earlier by someone on these boards is something new I think.Even under Thatcher, I seem to recall,those claimants who were regarded,for one reason or another,as undeserving-not available for work-were nevertheless not left altogether penniless with one or other form of begging their only remaining option.Those things that were once regarded as citizen's rights are easily eroded when there is endless scope for argument about who is a citizen.



Killing your own people. Pol Pot tried it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 5, 2019)




----------



## Argonia (Jan 5, 2019)

After Brexit you’ll let a guy with a crossbow watch you wank into a bonfire for a vegan sausage roll - Frankie Boyle


----------



## teuchter (Jan 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



Fake poster plus preposterously hyperbolic response. Thanks for sharing


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Fake poster plus preposterously hyperbolic response. Thanks for sharing


I thought she has cancer and is currently undergoing treatment, I'm sure you're right though.  

Anyway the tories are telling people it's all ok No Deal Brexit - Continuity of Medicines Supplies - NECS Medicines Optimisation


> _*Local stockpiling is not necessary and any incidences involving the over ordering of medicines will be investigated and followed up*_





> *the Government has plans in place to ensure a continued supply of medicines to patients from the moment we leave the EU*


All fine.


----------



## Smangus (Jan 5, 2019)

Apparently pizzas will be delivered by ferries at public expense. so I've heard anyway. Brexit, what's not to like?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 5, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Apparently pizzas will be delivered by ferries at public expense. so I've heard anyway. Brexit, what's not to like?


If this is true...the UK is not self-sufficient in pizza.

I've found out on this thread that the UK is self-sufficient in....tea...nissan cars...precious metals and jewels...art... and everythingscotlandhas.

Meh we can afford dearer pizza...who cares about food products targeted at the lower end of the market anyway?  It's the bigger picture...they'll thank (whoever) for it...bigger picture.

Anyway they've sent a warship to the English channel to stop an orange dinghy from touching the beach, they're deporting people and have suggested setting up military bases in forrin parts but it's all good. 

Lots of people post how much they've learned on urban...this thread has been a revelation to me.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 6, 2019)

Fintan O’Toole: Here’s how post-Brexit Ireland could turn out

Fintan O' Toole theorizing on what could happen in Ireland post a no deal Brexit. 
And it's not good.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Fintan O’Toole: Here’s how post-Brexit Ireland could turn out
> 
> Fintan O' Toole theorizing on what could happen in Ireland post a no deal Brexit.
> And it's not good.


Reads like a pitch for a dystopian novel which hinges upon this:


> The UK leaves the EU on March 29th, 2019, _with no deal_.


Hmm


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 6, 2019)

He’s been binging on the max max films whilst speeding off his face by the look of the dot joining going on. Doesn’t mean to say if won’t happen of course


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 6, 2019)

Preston . Like lolz.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 6, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Fake poster plus preposterously hyperbolic response. Thanks for sharing



Yeah sick and disabled people should just trust the tories to make everything OK because that's been going super well lately.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 6, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 157904 Preston . Like lolz.


She is deliberately running the clock down in the hopes of scaring her own rebellious MPs into backing her deal, but other than that she really doesn't have a clue what else to do. The reality is that's she's all out of options anyway.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2019)

teqniq said:


> She is deliberately running the clock down in the hopes of scaring her own rebellious MPs into backing her deal, but other than that she really doesn't have a clue what else to do. The reality is that's she's all out of options anyway.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 6, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 157909


She'd fuck that up too


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 157904 Preston . Like lolz.


Peston sounds pissed off that the post-vote preparations have not been leaked to him.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> She'd fuck that up too


If she missed, but killed Barwell, I'd take that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If she missed, but killed Barwell, I'd take that.


She'd miss and hit larry


----------



## brogdale (Jan 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> She'd miss and hit larry


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Peston sounds pissed off that the post-vote preparations have not been leaked to him.



Or, more likely No10's post vote plans are about as developed as Cameron's what to do if leave wins plans


----------



## andysays (Jan 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 157909


May is playing Russian roulette with (at least) five full chambers and (at most) one empty one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 157912


----------



## agricola (Jan 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> May is playing Russian roulette with (at least) five full chambers and (at most) one empty one.



_"Corbyn in bullet theft shock!  Is he using them to murder your kids?"_ - all papers.


----------



## andysays (Jan 6, 2019)

May has told the BBC the commons Brexit vote will 'definitely' go ahead next week...

...so that's definitely that then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> May has told the BBC the commons Brexit vote will 'definitely' go ahead next week...
> 
> ...so that's definitely that then.


She will be the pm who cried the vote will go ahead


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> She will be the pm who cried the vote will go ahead



Do you mean:

She will be the pm who cried, 
"the vote will go ahead".

Or


She will be the pm who cried. 
The vote will go ahead.


----------



## eoin_k (Jan 6, 2019)

She will be the PM.
Who cried "The vote will go ahead"?
Obviously


----------



## teqniq (Jan 6, 2019)

According to this:

Theresa May hints she will force MPs to vote multiple times on her Brexit deal if she loses

Shameless. As if we didn't know already.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 6, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Do you mean:
> 
> She will be the pm who cried,
> "the vote will go ahead".


Yes


----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2019)

teqniq said:


> According to this:
> 
> Theresa May hints she will force MPs to vote multiple times on her Brexit deal if she loses
> 
> Shameless. As if we didn't know already.


Define meaningful.


Interesting no one asked her if she would resign if she loses the vote..coz  you have to ask how big do her fingerprints have to be for her to have personal accountability  after the number of public servants that  stepped down for things where Mrs May should have carried the can is well into double figures.  And she's probably right SHE can't  get a better deal . .Whether the EU would be receptive to a fresh tack under a different PM a different question


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> ...And she's probably right SHE can't  get a better deal . .Whether the EU would be receptive to a fresh tack under a different PM a different question


Nah.  The EU don't care who the PM is and there won't be any other deal.

No brexit or current deal or no deal...that's it.  That's where we are.

Would be nice to know before the very last day though.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 6, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Jan 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nah.  The EU don't care who the PM is and there won't be any other deal.
> 
> No brexit or current deal or no deal...that's it.  That's where we are.
> 
> Would be nice to know before the very last day though.


Listened to radio play yesterday about the death of Queen Victoria there was a line 'Everybody was an expert so nobody was an expert.' Equally a case  that Brexit is some sort of Withnailian lholiday where we leave EU with no deal by 'mistake'


Anything could happen in the next half hour..


----------



## brogdale (Jan 7, 2019)

Latest project fear 2.0 nonsense inadvertently lapses into metaphor.



> The Department of Transport is carrying out a live trial of an emergency traffic congestion system to be used in Dover in the event of a no-deal Brexit, with 79 lorry drivers participating.
> 
> The trucks started their journey at the disused Manston airport north of the port near Ramsgate at 7am on Monday and were due to make their way to Dover and return for a second test run at 11am.
> 
> The challenge facing the government and Kent county council was evident at dawn as *an argument broke out between marshals over where the trucks were due to go.*





> The Road Haulage Association *described the test as “window dressing”*, saying it could not be “mimicking the reality of 6,000 trucks” that would be held at the airport in the event of no deal.





> The Department of Transport had hoped for 150 trucks to take part in Monday’s test , but *only 79 turned up..*



Operation _*Brock*_; presumably a portmanteau of _*Brexit* _and _*Block
*_


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Operation _*Brock*_; presumably a portmanteau of _*Brexit* _and _*Block
> *_


perhaps Badgers can shed some light on it


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2019)

Vote now set for next Tuesday, 15th January, definitely, and won't be postponed again, for sure, don't even suggest it...


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 7, 2019)

God, I'm so confused.  One minute May is telling us that it's her deal or hard Brexit yet now she's banging on about no Brexit.  It's almost like she's flailing around in the dark without a scooby what to do.

What a terrible time to not be drinking.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> Vote now set for next Tuesday, 15th January, definitely, and won't be postponed again, for sure, don't even suggest it...



She's certainly to be trusted on these things.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps Badgers can shed some light on it


Local or industry insight?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 7, 2019)

This is roughly 1/100th of the daily HGV traffic through the Port of Dover.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Local or industry insight?


he's familiar with brock


----------



## pesh (Jan 7, 2019)

wild or out?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> Vote now set for next Tuesday, 15th January, definitely, and won't be postponed again, for sure, don't even suggest it...



To be fair I think the vote will go ahead this time. Can't see any reason for it not to. What's interesting is the general lack of chat about what will happen when May loses the vote.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair I think the vote will go ahead this time. Can't see any reason for it not to. What's interesting is the general lack of chat about what will happen when May loses the vote.



Isn't a potential reason for it being pulled again contained in your last sentence?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair I think the vote will go ahead this time. Can't see any reason for it not to. What's interesting is the general lack of chat about what will happen when May loses the vote.


a debate about which lamppost to string her up from


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2019)

The stated reason for it being postponed was that it wouldn't pass; I don't think it's any more likely to pass next week than last month, so if it was a valid reason then, it's still more or less valid now. 

And I think there has been some speculation from some about what might happen when May loses, but part of her 'strategy' is to portray the while thing as if her deal is literally the only possibility,  so such speculation is discouraged.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nah.  The EU don't care who the PM is and there won't be any other deal.
> 
> No brexit or current deal or no deal...that's it.  That's where we are.
> 
> Would be nice to know before the very last day though.


A Labour soft Brexit (customs and trade union) would be preferable to the EU over whats on the table and I think they would reopen "negotiations" (a lot less to negotiate tbh) if that became a possibility.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This is roughly 1/100th of the daily HGV traffic through the Port of Dover.
> 
> View attachment 157978


Pure theatre....we already now how it looks and works because of Stack (4,600 lorries stretched back 30 miles)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Isn't a potential reason for it being pulled again contained in your last sentence?






andysays said:


> The stated reason for it being postponed was that it wouldn't pass; I don't think it's any more likely to pass next week than last month, so if it was a valid reason then, it's still more or less valid now.
> 
> And I think there has been some speculation from some about what might happen when May loses, but part of her 'strategy' is to portray the while thing as if her deal is literally the only possibility,  so such speculation is discouraged.



Yeah but I think the vote was always going to be lost - I reckon it was delayed more because people advising May wanted her to lose the vote a bit closer to March than she was going to. Before lots of Tories wanted it delayed, now only May will.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> A Labour soft Brexit (customs and trade union) would be preferable to the EU over whats on the table and I think they would reopen "negotiations" (a lot less to negotiate tbh) if that became a possibility.


Have a read of this.

Embarrassment Of The Year


----------



## kabbes (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> The stated reason for it being postponed was that it wouldn't pass; I don't think it's any more likely to pass next week than last month, so if it was a valid reason then, it's still more or less valid now.
> 
> And I think there has been some speculation from some about what might happen when May loses, but part of her 'strategy' is to portray the while thing as if her deal is literally the only possibility,  so such speculation is discouraged.


As I recall, that was Ed Miliband’s strategy for dealing with the popularity of the SNP.  I don’t recall what happened next — he was wildly successful, right?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Have a read of this.
> 
> Embarrassment Of The Year


That seems wrong on both points it makes.
The reason there is no more negotiations is based on the fact that there's no way May wants free movement. If she did then there's plenty to talk about. 

And the vote of no confidence will happen next week and fail by the sounds of it, so not sure why the author is so excited about that. Sucked into the SNP playbook by the sounds of things.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> That seems wrong on both points it makes.
> The reason there is no more negotiations is based on the fact that there's no way May wants free movement. If she did then there's plenty to talk about.
> 
> And the vote of no confidence will happen next week and fail by the sounds of it, so not sure why the author is so excited about that. Sucked into the SNP playbook by the sounds of things.


That 'Wings Over Scotland' site has been discussed at some length on here previously...

Wings Over Scotland


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 7, 2019)

Crowd on BBC news channel chanting 'soubry is a nazi'. Getting a bit lively!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> That 'Wings Over Scotland' site has been discussed at some length on here previously...
> 
> Wings Over Scotland


Why don't you fuck off?  That wasn't a discussion that was just the usual shit-throwing from danny who also says the indy movement has a racism problem and then there was his michelle thomson thread as well.

You're the twat that says the woman with cancer who was worried about her medicine was being 'preposterously hyperbolic' two pages ago, aye?  Why don't you fuck off to her twitter page and tell her that, come back and tell us what she says?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Why don't you fuck off?  That wasn't a discussion that was just the usual shit-throwing from danny who also says the indy movement has a racism problem and then there was his michelle thomson thread as well.
> 
> You're the twat that says the woman with cancer who was worried about her medicine was being 'preposterously hyperbolic' two pages ago, aye?  Why don't you fuck off to her twitter page and tell her that, come back and tell us what she says?



Alright, chill out bawbag.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Alright, chill out bawbag.


Does he need your help?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Does he need your help?



I thought you did


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah but I think the vote was always going to be lost - I reckon it was delayed more because people advising May wanted her to lose the vote a bit closer to March than she was going to. Before lots of Tories wanted it delayed, now only May will.


What, from those people's point of view, would be the purpose of losing the vote in Jan 2019 rather than Dec 2018?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> What, from those people's point of view, would be the purpose of losing the vote in Jan 2019 rather than Dec 2018?


the aftermath won't ruin christmas


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 7, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> Crowd on BBC news channel chanting 'soubry is a nazi'. Getting a bit lively!



Just tried to find this on BBC site (also subsearched site for 'Soubry') and I'm not suceeding ... what's that all about then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I thought you did


the forum rules explicitly state teuchter should never be assisted


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2019)

I hope the Brexit thread isn't going to descend into unseemly inter-personal squabbling, BTW.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> What, from those people's point of view, would be the purpose of losing the vote in Jan 2019 rather than Dec 2018?



Not enough time to negotiate a new deal or hold a second referendum, so it becomes a choice between no deal or no Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not enough time to negotiate a new deal or hold a second referendum, so it becomes a choice between no deal or no Brexit.


yeh, so this time next year it's entirely possible we will still be in the eu without the doubtful pleasure of a second referendum


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 7, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Just tried to find this on BBC site (also subsearched site for 'Soubry') and I'm not suceeding ... what's that all about then?


Simon McCoy was interviewing her outside parliament and a crowd kicked off chanting it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, so this time next year it's entirely possible we will still be in the eu without the doubtful pleasure of a second referendum



bobby ewing brexit - "it was all a dream..."


----------



## teuchter (Jan 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You're the twat that says the woman with cancer who was worried about her medicine was being 'preposterously hyperbolic' two pages ago, aye?  Why don't you fuck off to her twitter page and tell her that, come back and tell us what she says?



Because my issue wasn't with her - hyperbolic or not her fears may well be understandable - but with your posting of a response to what as far as I can see was a fake poster/leaflet. The regurgitation of meaningless social media rubbish that just muddles discussion of the real risks of a no-deal Brexit.


----------



## andysays (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not enough time to negotiate a new deal or hold a second referendum, so it becomes a choice between no deal or no Brexit.


So what would the preferred outcome of these 'people advising May' which they think can be better achieved by losing the vote later?

I agree that there is more chance of either no deal or no Brexit, but surely the danger is that they get the option they're least keen on rather than the one they'd prefer.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 7, 2019)

No deal is going to be realpolitik political suicide for whoever is in charge, despite the likes of Johnson stirring this as - the brexit we voted for trope -from the sidelines .


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 7, 2019)

The Tory filth do have a penchant for all or nothing gambling options - kinda undermines the lie that they are the sensible safe hands of administration. 


I used to play “ turn of a card for money” when drunk with my mates in the old days - no skill or tactics, highest card drawn wins the pot. It always ended badly


----------



## ska invita (Jan 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not enough time to negotiate a new deal or hold a second referendum, so it becomes a choice between no deal or no Brexit.


Theres time for a norwayesque free movement deal as nothing much changes.




not-bono-ever said:


> No deal is going to be realpolitik political suicide for whoever is in charge, despite the likes of Johnson stirring this as - the brexit we voted for trope -from the sidelines .


BJ has a proven record of backing a Brexit outcome he hopes doesnt acutally come to pass - I think he's doubled down on that bet thinking SURELY this time it won't go through...allows him to play to the party membership nicely


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> So what would the preferred outcome of these 'people advising May' which they think can be better achieved by losing the vote later?
> 
> I agree that there is more chance of either no deal or no Brexit, but surely the danger is that they get the option they're least keen on rather than the one they'd prefer.



I would assume they would mostly prefer no Brexit.


----------



## happie chappie (Jan 7, 2019)

I'dd be very surprised if May didn't have something up her sleeve re the Backstop to be revealed prior to the vote taking place. 

Whether this will be enough to swing the vote in her favour is quite another matter but with an aggressive whipping/wining-and-dining operation designed to peel off any waverers I reckon it will be closer than may people think.

As a matter of interest I had a brief chat with a Labour MP over Xmas.

I asked him what he thinks will happen and he said he's absolutely no idea except that there is a large number of Tory MPs who actively want a "no-deal" exit and so are immune to threats or promises of promotion etc - so who knows.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 7, 2019)

happie chappie said:


> I'dd be very surprised if May didn't have something up her sleeve re the Backstop to be revealed prior to the vote taking place.
> 
> Whether this will be enough to swing the vote in her favour is quite another matter but with an aggressive whipping/wining-and-dining operation designed to peel off any waverers I reckon it will be closer than may people think.
> 
> ...



i take the opposite view - i don't think there's anything left in the EU's concessions box, i think May knows that, and i think that unlike many other politicians, she understands the rabbit hole of dangers that would be opened up by holding a referendum and then effectively discarding the result because its one the overwhelming majority of the political class dislike. its also pretty clear that May isn't someone is does, or is any good at, the shmoozing and whipping stuff.

i'd put much more money on a no-deal brexit than i would a postponement - i don't think Labour will _really_ attempt to force a postponement, they will prefer to make political hay from the fall out, and Corbyn isn't a fan of the EU anyway. there will be some LD whining, some ardently remain Tory and Labour shreiking and howling, but in the end i think that the UK will just fall out of the EU on the 29th March..


----------



## agricola (Jan 7, 2019)

happie chappie said:


> I'dd be very surprised if May didn't have something up her sleeve re the Backstop to be revealed prior to the vote taking place.
> 
> Whether this will be enough to swing the vote in her favour is quite another matter but with an aggressive whipping/wining-and-dining operation designed to peel off any waverers I reckon it will be closer than may people think.
> 
> ...



That is the one remaining mystery about Theresa May; that she can get so many people to apparently believe that there must be some grand scheme behind all this rather than the live action version of Sideshow Bob and the rakes.


----------



## elbows (Jan 7, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> Crowd on BBC news channel chanting 'soubry is a nazi'. Getting a bit lively!



Soubry isn't very happy that the police refused to arrest these disrespectful citizens and their disregard for public order.

MP urges police action over 'Nazi taunts'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> That is the one remaining mystery about Theresa May; that she can get so many people to apparently believe that there must be some grand scheme behind all this rather than the live action version of Sideshow Bob and the rakes.


I will possibly give her some credit for calling the election in 2017. At the time I thought it smacked of hubris, but I will now consider the idea that she had the foresight to see that a majority of 12 would never be enough to push through the kind of deal she knew she was going to get, but a majority of 50+ might. It's been a slow-motion car crash since the moment the exit polls were reported.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 7, 2019)

elbows said:


> Soubry isn't very happy that the police refused to arrest these disrespectful citizens and their disregard for public order.
> 
> MP urges police action over 'Nazi taunts'






			
				From the video said:
			
		

> "Soubry is a liar...Soubry is a liar"
> Soubry: *no reaction*
> "Soubry is a Nazi....Soubry is a Nazi"
> Soubry: "Well, I _do _object to being called a Nazi, actually"


Calling her a liar is OK then?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 7, 2019)

At the knuckle dragging loons harassing Soubry. Proper vitriolic frothing.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 7, 2019)

MP urges police action over 'Nazi taunts'

The guys flanking on both sides have popped up a few times now. The one on the left "Trump Flag boy" is a yank, the other bloke wearing the jack is from from the UK and is a pants flapper. Last seen on the Extinction rebellion demo.


----------



## Theisticle (Jan 7, 2019)

True colours shining through


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 8, 2019)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

We are close to full circle among sections of the left now. If your politics lead you to defending Tory MP's like Soubry then you probably need to rethink them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> We are close to full circle among sections of the left now. If your politics lead you to defending Tory MP's like Soubry then you probably need to rethink them.


soz who's defending her?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz who's defending her?



Have a look on twitter.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz who's defending her?


Obviously all those that defended Corbyn when Hodge screamed in his face that he was a fucking anti-semite...obviously.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Have a look on twitter.


yeh perhaps you could outline who you mean, then armed with those names i will look on twitter


----------



## andysays (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Have a look on twitter.


If your beef is with what some people are posting on Twitter, maybe challenge them about it on Twitter.

Although it didn't say it explicitly, your previous post appeared to be suggesting that some on this thread were supporting Soubry.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 8, 2019)

So is this whole Soubry affair a bunch of weirdo right wingers calling a weirdo right winger a Nazi?

Not sure I have skin in this game.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> If your beef is with what some people are posting on Twitter, maybe challenge them about it on Twitter.
> 
> Although it didn't say it explicitly, your previous post appeared to be suggesting that some on this thread were supporting Soubry.



WTF?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> WTF?


you post made it sound like people here were defending soubry. it helps if you say who you're having a pop at, if you say 


Smokeandsteam said:


> We are close to full circle among sections of the left now. If your politics lead you to defending Tory MP's like Soubry then you probably need to rethink them.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you post made it sound like people here were defending soubry. it helps if you say who you're having a pop at, if you say



Except a) it said 'sections of the left' and b) if I wanted to have a pop at someone on here I would have quoted their post. 

Anyway, back to the point - how and why have sections of the left found themselves in a position where they have to defend scum like Soubry?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Except a) it said 'sections of the left' and b) if I wanted to have a pop at someone on here I would have quoted their post.
> 
> Anyway, back to the point - how and why have sections of the left found themselves in a position where they have to defend scum like Soubry?


which sections of the left do you mean?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> which sections of the left do you mean?



LP members (and activists)/remainer/'love Corbyn, hate Brexit' nexus


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> LP members (and activists)/remainer/'love Corbyn, hate Brexit' nexus


i don't believe being a member of the labour party puts you on the left, nor even being a labour party activist.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 158061



...which must mean pro-EU = in league with Satan.

Actually that kind of makes sense. I'm just not sure where _my_ conscience fits in.


----------



## happie chappie (Jan 8, 2019)

kebabking said:


> i take the opposite view - i don't think there's anything left in the EU's concessions box, i think May knows that, and i think that unlike many other politicians, she understands the rabbit hole of dangers that would be opened up by holding a referendum and then effectively discarding the result because its one the overwhelming majority of the political class dislike. its also pretty clear that May isn't someone is does, or is any good at, the shmoozing and whipping stuff.



I don’t think they’ll be a major concession by the EU but a form of words on the Backstop that could be of help to May.

I guess the whips know the vote is going to be lost and will be focusing their efforts on cutting the margin of defeat to a bare minimum to avoid humiliating May (reducing her diminished authority even more) while at the same time giving her a better chance of getting her deal through on a second , or even third, vote.

However I think many Brexiteers will not vote for this deal under any circumstances as they simply don’t want a deal – any deal.

For them the NI border issue is just a fig-leaf to justify their opposition because they think that leaving without a deal increases the chances of the UK becoming like Singapore, a low-tax, low regulation economy. A pure form of Thatcherism though the back door.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 8, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> ...which must mean pro-EU = in league with Satan.
> 
> Actually that kind of makes sense. I'm just not sure where _my_ conscience fits in.



 Wasn’t that venom’s first album ?

/ 

I am not sure whether to laugh or cry at the current situation. Not felt so powerless since the thatcher era. Have resorted to shouting at politicians on the telly in the morning  ( all of them )


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am not sure whether to laugh or cry at the current situation. Not felt so powerless since the thatcher era. Have resorted to shouting at politicians on the telly in the morning  ( all of them )



You should get yourself down to College Green and join in the fun.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 8, 2019)

I would get myself nicked if I came up against any of the wankers behind yersterday pantomime tbh


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I would get myself nicked if I came up against any of the wankers behind yersterday pantomime tbh



Yeah but there is no access to TV, radios or the web in Police cells, so every cloud eh?


----------



## NoXion (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 158061



"God has work for Britain which could not be accomplished while shackled to Europe"

So much for the omnipotence of the Divine. Or does the EU have iron chariots?


----------



## andysays (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't believe being a member of the labour party puts you on the left, nor even being a labour party activist.


Smokeandsteam apparently does though, and some of them are apparently saying silly shit on Twitter, so clearly that's the new subject for this thread


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> We are close to full circle among sections of the left now. If your politics lead you to defending Tory MP's like Soubry then you probably need to rethink them.



She’s a horrible austerity enabler for sure. But I don’t think this precludes being concerned that pretty extreme right wing people have the audacity to openly harass elected representatives and others on the street, esp post Jo Cox.

Maybe it’s other sections of the left that have gone full circle. The left used to be pretty keen on ensuring the streets were clear of that sort of politics. Do you now want to tolerate it? Are we supposed to applaud their efforts because they don’t like some people we don’t like? Holding a tiger by the tail if you are.

_First they came for Anna Soubry..._


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> She’s a horrible austerity enabler for sure. But I don’t think this precludes being concerned that pretty extreme right wing people have the audacity to openly harass elected representatives and others on the street, esp post Jo Cox.
> 
> Maybe it’s other sections of the left that have gone full circle. The left used to be pretty keen on ensuring the streets were clear of that sort of politics. Do you now want to tolerate it? Are we supposed to applaud their efforts because they don’t like some people we don’t like? Holding a tiger by the tail if you are.
> 
> _First they came for Anna Soubry..._


Are you part of the left that opposed fascists and right wingers on the streets?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Are you part of the left that opposed fascists and right wingers on the streets?



Is there a bar for commenting? What is your point?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Is there a bar for commenting? What is your point?


Well if you aren't part of the anti fascist left, and are here defending a tory MP, how do you think this characterises you?

Further, given you tolerated the hard right and never opposed them surely you bear some responsibility for them roaming about now?


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 8, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> She’s a horrible austerity enabler for sure. But I don’t think this precludes being concerned that pretty extreme right wing people have the audacity to openly harass elected representatives and others on the street, esp post Jo Cox.
> 
> Maybe it’s other sections of the left that have gone full circle. The left used to be pretty keen on ensuring the streets were clear of that sort of politics. Do you now want to tolerate it? Are we supposed to applaud their efforts because they don’t like some people we don’t like? Holding a tiger by the tail if you are.
> 
> _First they came for Anna Soubry..._



Hopefully in the future the 'left,' a 'left' will have the mass clout and lists that enable it to hunt down former 'elected representatives.'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Hopefully in the future the 'left,' a 'left' will have the mass clout and lists that enable it to hunt down former 'elected representatives.'


hunting the former people will be very easy especially as so many of them have kindly listed their addresses in who's who


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 8, 2019)

They'll have gone in to hiding.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> They'll have gone in to hiding.


they'll get a hiding


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 8, 2019)

Not all. Plenty of work for them to do.


----------



## andysays (Jan 8, 2019)

Bercow now suggesting that harassing MPs (including calling them Nazis, I guess) is 'a type of fascism'.

Where will it all end?


----------



## killer b (Jan 8, 2019)

fascism, I expect.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 8, 2019)

It has been a circus at College Green in the last few months and was bound to attract a few interested parties. Surprised Bone has not been down there. The right are going unchallenged but given the police have promised today to deal with infractions _robustly_, it will likely change. 

The fella in that pic wearing the union jack around his neck was live streaming to some channel or other, it's his thing. Anyone know what channel?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Not all. Plenty of work for them to do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Bercow now suggesting that harassing MPs (including calling them Nazis, I guess) is 'a type of fascism'.
> 
> Where will it all end?


tears


----------



## Supine (Jan 8, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Hopefully in the future the 'left,' a 'left' will have the mass clout and lists that enable it to hunt down former 'elected representatives.'



Aggressive bollocks


----------



## Poi E (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 158097



It'll warm up in time, not that half the campers will believe that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> It'll warm up in time, not that half the campers will believe that.



it does, every summer


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Well if you aren't part of the anti fascist left, and are here defending a tory MP, how do you think this characterises you?
> 
> Further, given you tolerated the hard right and never opposed them surely you bear some responsibility for them roaming about now?



I’m not defending a Tory MP. I defending people having concerns about who harassing her. I’ve certainly protested the far right many times, though admittedly from the shouty side of the street.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 158099
> it does, every summer



I would warrant this may not be the last we see of wish you were here postcards from the land of former peoples


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I would warrant this may not be the last we see of wish you were here postcards from the land of former peoples


they won't have long to wait as recipients of these postcards will be swept away on a cruise to the south atlantic


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 8, 2019)

Supine said:


> Aggressive bollocks



I wish it wasn't.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Smokeandsteam apparently does though, and some of them are apparently saying silly shit on Twitter, so clearly that's the new subject for this thread



Do I? How have you arrived at that conclusion then? 

You clearly don't see the myriad of problems that arise from elements on the left demanding the police are used to 'protect' Tory MP's. I can't say I'm surprised. 

Is there a point to the 'new subject to the thread' bit of your comment or is it best ignored?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Do I? How have you arrived at that conclusion then?
> 
> You clearly don't see the myriad of problems that arise from elements on the left demanding the police are used to 'protect' Tory MP's. I can't say I'm surprised.
> 
> Is there a point to the 'new subject to the thread' bit of your comment or is it best ignored?


if these elements on the "left" are labour party members then it is no surprise that they are saying the police should protect tory mps.

the myriad of problems arising from this are all solely in your imagination.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Wasn’t that venom’s first album ?



There was a song called it on _Welcome to Hell._ Heh, thanks for the reminder:


----------



## andysays (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Do I? How have you arrived at that conclusion then?
> 
> You clearly don't see the myriad of problems that arise from elements on the left demanding the police are used to 'protect' Tory MP's. I can't say I'm surprised.
> 
> Is there a point to the 'new subject to the thread' bit of your comment or is it best ignored?



I don't actually see elements on the left demanding the police are used to 'protect' Tory MP's, but then I'm not glued to twitter like you...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 8, 2019)

Commons division on the cross party 'Cooper/Morgan' Amendment 7 to the Finance (No.3) Bill at report stage aiming to prevent Govt. implementing "No Deal" Brexit without Parliamentary consent;

Ayes (for Amendment) = 303
Noes (against Amendment) = 296
Government loses; an important precedent set, making "No Deal" even more improbable.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 8, 2019)

And that's with DUP support AFAICS; May can't win anything.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 8, 2019)

Now that the police are officially protecting tory MPs' feelings, May could just have those 303 arrested for pissing her off, then hold a second vote because _the facts on the ground make a new ballot necessary_ and all that.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 8, 2019)

Happy happy happy joy joy joy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't actually see elements on the left demanding the police are used to 'protect' Tory MP's, but then I'm not glued to twitter like you...



To be fair you don't need to be glued to twitter to know that some on the left will be saying that and it's a reasonable point to make that such a position is ridiculous.


----------



## D'wards (Jan 8, 2019)

That Cunt Farage has been on Twitter saying "welcome to my world" and has posted a video of him being well harranged by a very aggressive mob, which he states is a regular event.
He reckons it's been going on years, and is complaining that it happens once to an establishment Tory mp and people are calling for a change in the law.

As much as I hate to agree with the odious prick, but if you're right you're right.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 8, 2019)

Diane Abbot in full solidarity with Soubry.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 158099
> it does, every summer


Why do you keep posting pictures of the latest Pontins camp?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> ...the myriad of problems...





Pickman's model said:


> ...the myriad of problems...



I'm happy to be the grammar Nazi and inform you that really is a pet peeve of mine. It is supposed to be "myriad problems", not "myriad _of _problems". Sort it out, you two!

Then again, at least you didn't say "myriad*s* of problems", so there is some hope left at least.

As you were.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 8, 2019)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> I'm happy to be the grammar Nazi and inform you that really is a pet peeve of mine. It is supposed to be "myriad problems", not "myriad _of _problems". Sort it out, you two!
> 
> Then again, at least you didn't say "myriad*s* of problems", so there is some hope left at least.
> 
> As you were.



Technically a myriad is 10,000, and if you have multiples of tens of thousands, then you have myriads.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> I'm happy to be the grammar Nazi and inform you that really is a pet peeve of mine. It is supposed to be "myriad problems", not "myriad _of _problems". Sort it out, you two!
> 
> Then again, at least you didn't say "myriad*s* of problems", so there is some hope left at least.
> 
> As you were.


I was using Smokeandsteam's phrase, so leave me out of it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Why do you keep posting pictures of the latest Pontins camp?


It's not a Pontins camp


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair you don't need to be glued to twitter to know that some on the left will be saying that and it's a reasonable point to make that such a position is ridiculous.



And on cue up pops labour left Abbott in solidarity with Soubry. So we’ve now got two constituent groups - left remainers adopting Soubry as a kindred spirit and comrade in arms and fellow pols who hate being confronted by riff raff and disingenuously conflate protest with more sinister events. Soubry’s energetic support for attacks on trade unionists and benefit claimants is no bar to ‘solidarity’ it seems. I wonder if the 700 postal workers in her constituency she attacked for ‘wasting her time’ when they asked for her support over privatisation also stand in solidarity with her? 

Clearly only an issue for Twitter obsessives though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> And on cue up pops labour left Abbott in solidarity with Soubry. So we’ve now got two constituent groups - left remoaners adopting Soubry as a kindred spirit and fellow pols who hate being confronted by riff raff and disingenuously conflate protest with more sinister events.
> 
> Clearly only an issue for Twitter obsessives though.


And that grinding noise is the moving of goalposts


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> And on cue up pops labour left Abbott in solidarity with Soubry. So we’ve now got two constituent groups - left remainers adopting Soubry as a kindred spirit and comrade in arms and fellow pols who hate being confronted by riff raff and disingenuously conflate protest with more sinister events. Soubry’s energetic support for attacks on trade unionists and benefit claimants is no bar to ‘solidarity’ it seems. I wonder if the 700 postal workers in her constituency she attacked for ‘wasting her time’ when they asked for her support over privatisation also stand in solidarity with her?
> 
> Clearly only an issue for Twitter obsessives though.



I’d imagine most of those postal workers don’t like her, but also don’t want people harassed in the street by facists. It’s not so difficult to understand. 

As their confidence grows you simply don’t know who they will be after next esp if you don’t look like they do.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 8, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’d imagine most of those postal workers don’t like her, but also don’t want people harassed in the street by facists. It’s not so difficult to understand.
> 
> As their confidence grows you simply don’t know who they will be after next esp if you don’t look like they do.



Fuck Soubry. And fuck those offering her solidarity.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fuck Soubry. And fuck those offering her solidarity.


Yes fuck Soubry but also fuck the people screaming abuse at her. If, however they were screaming abuse at her because of the destruction of the NHS or the shocking numbers of homeless on the streets or the people that have died as a direct result of welfare cuts, well that would be another matter entirely.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fuck Soubry. And fuck those offering her solidarity.


Yep, pretty unpleasant for her, most of those abusing her are outright cunts, but when all's said and done she _already_ had police protection for many of those exchanges. I'd take the level of harassment she received over getting harassed by the DWP any day.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Yes fuck Soubry but also fuck the people screaming abuse at her. If, however they were screaming abuse at her because of the destruction of the NHS or the shocking numbers of homeless on the streets or the people that have died as a direct result of welfare cuts, well that would be another matter entirely.


Well, yes, it might be in terms of their _cuntishness_, by why would it be any different as a _tactic_? Like everybody else I think MPs should be able to expect protection from rape threats, real violence and the rest, but not people getting in their face about the _job_ they are doing.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 8, 2019)

More and more often I am reminded that most, if not all of the tories regard the role of MP as nothing much more than a gravy train. A substantial portion of the right of the Labour party too I suspect. Subsequently I have surfeit of contempt for them.


----------



## Patteran (Jan 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Commons division on the cross party 'Cooper/Morgan' Amendment 7 to the Finance (No.3) Bill at report stage aiming to prevent Govt. implementing "No Deal" Brexit without Parliamentary consent;
> 
> Ayes (for Amendment) = 303
> Noes (against Amendment) = 296
> Government loses; an important precedent set, making "No Deal" even more improbable.



Cue 'with Yvette Cooper in charge the Labour Party would be ten points ahead' & associated leadership challenge talk.


----------



## killer b (Jan 8, 2019)

Patteran said:


> Cue 'with Yvette Cooper in charge the Labour Party would be ten points ahead' & associated leadership challenge talk.


just saw an absolute beaut of these.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2019)

teqniq said:


> More and more often I am reminded that most, if not all of the tories regard the role of MP as nothing much more than a gravy train. A substantial portion of the right of the Labour party too I suspect. Subsequently I have surfeit of contempt for them.


It is impossible to have a surfeit of contempt for mps.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Well, yes, it might be in terms of their _cuntishness_, by why would it be any different as a _tactic_? Like everybody else I think MPs should be able to expect protection from rape threats, real violence and the rest, but not people getting in their face about the _job_ they are doing.



For "getting in their face" let's read what I saw, which was intimidating, threatening acts of sexual violence, and at one point physically preventing her from entering Parliament (which she does on behalf of thousands of constituents, not as a holiday).

That's plain against the law, whether you'd personally be upset by it, or whether you believe Anna Soubry has no right to be upset by it, nor the public right to have any disquiet over it - it's just against the law to treat anyone that way. Imagine that was your mother copping that.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fuck Soubry. And fuck those offering her solidarity.



Ooh you’re hard m8.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Well, yes, it might be in terms of their _cuntishness_, by why would it be any different as a _tactic_? Like everybody else I think MPs should be able to expect protection from rape threats, real violence and the rest, but not people getting in their face about the _job_ they are doing.



Yep, there should be no protection from home truths.

But even Boney was quite polite to JRM.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2019)

Wookey said:


> For "getting in their face" let's read what I saw, which was intimidating, threatening acts of sexual violence, and at one point physically preventing her from entering Parliament (which she does on behalf of thousands of constituents, not as a holiday).
> 
> That's plain against the law, whether you'd personally be upset by it, or whether you believe Anna Soubry has no right to be upset by it, nor the public right to have any disquiet over it - it's just against the law to treat anyone that way. Imagine that was your mother copping that.


Not convinced she goes into parliament on behalf of her constituents to be honest.  But if there was a threat of sexual violence that should have been treated like any other threat of sexual violence - the OB should have arrested the person making the threat. As I said above - 'Like everybody else I think MPs should be able to expect protection from rape threats, real violence and the rest'. But I'm not really interested in new police powers or extra layers of protection for MPs on the basis of having to put up with shoutiness. They already _have_ more police protection than you or I.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Not convinced she goes into parliament on behalf of her constituents to be honest.  But if there was a threat of sexual violence that should have been treated like any other threat of sexual violence - the OB should have arrested the person making the threat. As I said above - 'Like everybody else I think MPs should be able to expect protection from rape threats, real violence and the rest'. But I'm not really interested in new police powers or extra layers of protection for MPs on the basis of having to put up with shoutiness. They already _have_ more police protection than you or I.



Again, let's remove the sexual threats of violence, and what you call "real violence" and narrow this right down to what you call "shoutiness".

It wasn't raised voices in a heated discussion, you saw it as well as I did and it was not that. It was intended to be intimidating, and if they had done it to me as a 6ft 5 man, I'd be pretty sure it would have ended in violence, because I would have had to have face them down. Jostling, blocking, screaming obscenities and accusing people of being Nazis and traitors is not a bit of shoutiness, and minimising that kind of behaviour towards anyone, but especially towards one woman from ten or more men, is not right.

And the powers that make it illegal aren't new, they were passed by Thatcher in 1986.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> They already _have_ more police protection than you or I.



If I was being hounded at work every day by right-wing extremists, barely months after one of my colleagues had been stabbed to death by same, I would expect something extra yes.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If I was being hounded at work every day by right-wing extremists, barely months after one of my colleagues had been stabbed to death by same, I would expect something extra yes.


There's no doubt a strong gender element in what soubry is getting and even more so (obviously and entirely) when women MPs have had wave after wave of rape threats and the rest. Gruesome, intimidating, vile. But why start here, why not start with the violence done to sex workers, to migrants, to asylum seekers in detention centres, to victims of dv?  Why start with MPs, a group who are supposed to be engaged with the public but _already_ receive significant police and state protection? I'm happy to say I haven't seen these clips in detail, but FFS in at least one she's actually got a copper giving her one to one protection!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 8, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If I was being hounded at work every day by right-wing extremists, barely months after one of my colleagues had been stabbed to death by same, I would expect something extra yes.


Oh and on gender, whilst I'm not suggesting this mitigates any threats of sexual violence against her, let's not forget soubry has supported a government that has had a massive impact on dv services.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> There's no doubt a strong gender element in what soubry is getting and even more so (obviously and entirely) when women MPs have had wave after wave of rape threats and the rest. Gruesome, intimidating, vile. But why start here, why not start with the violence done to sex workers, to migrants, to asylum seekers in detention centres, to victims of dv?  Why start with MPs, a group who are supposed to be engaged with the public but _already_ receive significant police and state protection? I'm happy to say I haven't seen these clips in detail, but FFS in at least one she's actually got a copper giving her one to one protection!



Wilf Look at who these right-wingers are targeting in their Facebook videos by accosting them in Parliamant Square  - Anna Soubry (woman), Faisal Islam (Muslim), Owen Jones (gay), Kay Burleigh (woman, abused every fucking day of her working life over the last fortnight since they showed up) and Femi Oluwole (a black man).

That's not accidental.

The friendly but passionate flag-waving Remainers who've campaigned in this area for months, who were subsequently joined by equally friendly flag-waving Brexiters, have now been joined by a whole other shower of human shit. This is the far right working, raising funds on Facebook with their provocative videos - and the very real threat that this could prevent women, gay people, Muslims and people of colour from using THEIR democratic right to protest in public should have you thinking harder about your response to this I think.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 8, 2019)

Patteran said:


> Cue 'with Yvette Cooper in charge the Labour Party would be ten points ahead' & associated leadership challenge talk.


...and yet...


----------



## Wookey (Jan 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Oh and on gender, whilst I'm not suggesting this mitigates any threats of sexual violence against her, let's not forget soubry has supported a government that has had a massive impact on dv services.



I think by mitigates you might mean justify? Or minimise?

Why mention her impact on dv services if you aren't actually (despite the underline) trying precisely to do that? It's not relevant at all to the discussion, unless you are suggesting she somehow asked for it coz of her CV, which I'm sure you wouldn't.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I think by mitigates you might mean justify? Or minimise?
> 
> Why mention her impact on dv services if you aren't actually (despite the underline) trying precisely to do that? It's not relevant at all to the discussion, unless you are suggesting she somehow asked for it coz of her CV, which I'm sure you wouldn't.


Couldn't be clearer, that's why I underlined. But if you want to emphasise the threats made to an MP, there's no harm mentioning the damage she has done to women's lives.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm happy to say I haven't seen these clips in detail!



Well Wilf ...really. You should. There's an undercurrent of violence in the videos these guys are making that goes beyond shouty shouty, and it's co-ordinated to intimidate. They choose Yellow Vests because black shirts are just _so _1923...


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Couldn't be clearer, that's why I underlined. But if you want to emphasise the threats made to an MP, there's no harm mentioning the damage she has done to women's lives.



Yes, COULD be clearer Wilf 

It's the word "mitigates" - you're using it wrongly and it's pretty vital to the understanding of your sentence - in fact, it hinges on it, so I provided a couple of alternatives that might be what you meant, they might not.  By all means try again with another word, but don't use "mitigates" again, it doesn't work here.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Well Wilf ...really. You should. There's an undercurrent of violence in the videos these guys are making that goes beyond shouty shouty, and it's co-ordinated to intimidate. They choose Yellow Vests because black shirts are just _so _1923...


But why are we starting with these particular women, this particular gay man, this particular Muslim? Hasn't there been a battle going on for years to get involved in? Well away from Westminster.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But why are we starting with these particular women, this particular gay man, this particular Muslim? Hasn't there been a battle going on for years to get involved in? Well away from Westminster.



Because the fact they are doing this to well-known figures, in public and on-camera, and even in front of police officers, would indicate to me a new level of boldness that has me VERY worried. The homophobia, racism and sexism being recorded (for monetary gain to further the right-wing cause) on the steps of our Parliament is not every day hate, it's another level. But it will only ever inevitably filter down to the blacks and the queers and the disableds as it has always done once these right-wing bullies are given licence. Exclusion orders should be made in the morning by the local beak!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Because the fact they are doing this to well-known figures, in public and on-camera, and even in front of police officers, would indicate to me a new level of boldness that has me VERY worried. The homophobia, racism and sexism being recorded (for monetary gain to further the right-wing cause) on the steps of our Parliament is not every day hate, it's another level. But it will only ever inevitably filter down to the blacks and the queers and the disableds as it has always done once these right-wing bullies are given licence. Exclusion orders should be made in the morning by the local beak!


So, 'let's protect the MPs so that this kind of thing doesn't start happening to the poor people'?  I think that's rather got it the wrong way round!


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, 'let's protect the MPs so that this kind of thing doesn't start happening to the poor people'?  I think that's rather got it the wrong way round!



It's MPs and journalists, people of influence who represent our civic society. They're being targeted by rightwing former EDL, Britain First and Pegida UK members, and these aggressive numbnuts are breaking the law in doing so. They're shouting the word "traitor" - which is a trope used by the Nazis when they challenged the orthodoxy in their own very special way. I'm surprised you find all this so acceptable. 

If Owen Jones can get jumped by fascist cunts on the 6 o clock news and no-one gets arrested, what fucking chance have I got?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 9, 2019)

what has kay burley done to upset the fucknuckles? a few months ago she did a thing at our community centre and threats and  misogynistic shit got posted on our facebook page - i dont get it.


----------



## billbond (Jan 9, 2019)

ha ha it was all a hoot on here when farage and Mogg etc  were getting abused
Hypocrites 
It was just handbags , nothing bad at all.
She should shut up 
Move the mob with the EU flags and hats from that area, they provoke it


----------



## Humberto (Jan 9, 2019)

I dunno, you should be able to go to work without trouble. That said it cuts both ways. By which I mean, the HoC and its members are or have become long since the epicentre of craft. They are flailing around and wailing that they can't do what they want any more. No one has confidence in them and that has manifested in the shambles we see before us. In other words, they have increasingly knackered themselves. For instance; very few of them are liked or admired by the broad, ordinary populace. They have brought that on themselves. There is an arrogance and selfish ambition and a lack of quality. Because of a lack of decency, pettiness and onanistic qualities. I don't want to see them heckled by buffoons or otherwise, but it is inevitable. The answer isn't to close ranks, it is to show respect for the office and institution they volunteered for and clear out those dreadful qualities.

Between gallivanting amongst heads of state and losing her party May is supposed to be some kind of leader.


----------



## Patteran (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> ...and yet...




With numbers like that, I'd guess it was whipped was it? Which means a collective party response. Hasn't stopped the 'real leader of the opposition/only grown up in the room/national unity govt' appeals to technocratic authority from the usual crowd.


----------



## Poot (Jan 9, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> what has kay burley done to upset the fucknuckles? a few months ago she did a thing at our community centre and threats and  misogynistic shit got posted on our facebook page - i dont get it.


Sometimes just being a woman with a voice is enough.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Patteran said:


> With numbers like that, I'd guess it was whipped was it? Which means a collective party response. Hasn't stopped the 'real leader of the opposition/only grown up in the room/national unity govt' appeals to technocratic authority from the usual crowd.


_Usual crowd_ doing what _usual crowd_ does.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

I can see why Diane Abbot has showed recognition as she has been on the receiving end of endless vitriol, plenty of which was clearly illegal (hate speach, death threats etc). Every incident of that should be investigated and prosecuted and the law upheld. Has it? Ive not heard of any prosecutions. Thats what should be happening - illegal behaviour prosecuted.

Dont think Soubry has had that, and if any of the things said at her were breaking the law then that shoud be prosecuted too. The alledged anal rape with a EU flagpole comment may have likley counted, I dont know, but the heckling reported/caputred on video I've seen is just shit but perfectly legal heckling.

Fuck these BNP cunts doing it, but for the vast majority of it they're not doing anything illegal. And if it's illegal then prosecute accordingly.
What would you like to see happen here Wookey?


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 9, 2019)

Poot said:


> Sometimes just being a woman with a voice is enough.



Yup. Can't stand her but fucking hell - threats of violence and all that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I can see why Diane Abbot has showed recognition as she has been on the receiving end of endless vitriol, plenty of which was clearly illegal (hate speach, death threats etc). Every incident of that should be investigated and prosecuted and the law upheld. Has it? Ive not heard of any prosecutions. Thats what should be happening - illegal behaviour prosecuted.
> 
> Dont think Soubry has had that, and if any of the things said at her were breaking the law then that shoud be prosecuted too. The alledged anal rape with a EU flagpole comment may have likley counted, I dont know, but the heckling reported/caputred on video I've seen is just shit but perfectly legal heckling.
> 
> ...


that might have been the entire bnp, their  numbers have so dwindled.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Because the fact they are doing this to well-known figures, in public and on-camera, and even in front of police officers, would indicate to me a new level of boldness that has me VERY worried. The homophobia, racism and sexism being recorded (for monetary gain to further the right-wing cause) on the steps of our Parliament is not every day hate, it's another level. But it will only ever inevitably filter down to the blacks and the queers and the disableds as it has always done once these right-wing bullies are given licence. Exclusion orders should be made in the morning by the local beak!


it's not a new level of boldness. abuse has been hurled at the queen by the movement against the monarchy (eg when she gave out maundy money in bristol) and prince charles (eg when he and camilla were on their first appearance together in public in hoxton) before now, and you've said nothing about it. not to mention mps (norman tebbit by camden stop the poll tax, for example). or is your point that it's the right where in the past they've always been craven whereas people on the left have always been so bold?

it's plain you haven't heard of the league of empire loyalists or you wouldn't come out with such tripe about such things never having been done before by the right.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's MPs and journalists, people of influence who represent our civic society. They're being targeted by rightwing former EDL, Britain First and Pegida UK members, and these aggressive numbnuts are breaking the law in doing so. They're shouting the word "traitor" - which is a trope used by the Nazis when they challenged the orthodoxy in their own very special way. I'm surprised you find all this so acceptable.
> 
> If Owen Jones can get jumped by fascist cunts on the 6 o clock news and no-one gets arrested, what fucking chance have I got?


The underlined is just peak liberal. If you want to fight the fash, fight the fash (in whatever way you want). But don't do it by joining John Bercow's campaign for extra protection for MPs. 

Anyway, _john Bercow_ calling for women to be protected from harassment...


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 9, 2019)

They don't represent me or anyone I know.  And anyway, those outside of 'civic society,' the mob, the riff raff, the rabble...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

'Government' defeated, again.

Commons division (preceding the re-commencement of the EU withdrawal 'agreement') on today's Dominic Grieve amendment to the Government's timetabling motion. It requires May to return to Parliament within 3 (not 21) sitting days of her losing the 'Agreement' vote to explain what she'll do.

Ayes (for Grieve's amendment) = 308
Noes (against)						  = 297

This significant defeat will accelerate her demise/response once she's defeated next Tuesday.



...again.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Anyway, _john Bercow_ calling for women to be protected from harassment...


Recent drama in the house has amply demonstrated why Labour humiliated themselves and went in to bat for him so hard over the harassment stuff mind.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 'Government' defeated, again.
> 
> Commons division (preceding the re-commencement of the EU withdrawal 'agreement') on today's Dominic Grieve amendment to the Government's timetabling motion. It requires May to return to Parliament within 3 (not 21) sitting days of her losing the 'Agreement' vote to explain what she'll do.
> 
> ...


 I should probably avoid all predictions as the situation/process is so chaotic/ridiculous but... she'd die for losing by that margin next week.  She'd definitely be in sight of the winning line and with a few tweaks and concessions, close to a majority in the second vote.

Of course that logic goes straight out of the window if she loses big.  However I have the feeling a good few tory rebels want to be seen to vote against it the first time only to 'reluctantly vote for the least worst option to save brexit' 3 days later. I also think Corbyn calling a vonc - presumably within the '3 days' - helps May. He'll lose it, which may in turn 'de-embolden' the tory rebels. Anyway, whilst the whole thing is both depressing and dull, it's still nice to see the British political system working so badly.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I should probably avoid all predictions as the situation/process is so chaotic/ridiculous but... she'd die for losing by that margin next week.  She'd definitely be in sight of the winning line and with a few tweaks and concessions, close to a majority in the second vote.
> 
> Of course that logic goes straight out of the window if she loses big.  However I have the feeling a good few tory rebels want to be seen to vote against it the first time only to 'reluctantly vote for the least worst option to save brexit' 3 days later. I also think Corbyn calling a vonc - presumably within the '3 days' - helps May. He'll lose it, which may in turn 'de-embolden' the tory rebels. Anyway, whilst the whole thing is both depressing and dull, it's still nice to see the British political system working so badly.


The 20-odd erm headbangers won't vote for it ever, though. They'd rather no brexit at all. So even if May gets her remainer rebels onside and gets the DUP back onside, she still loses if Labour stick together. I still don't see May passing any kind of deal without at least some Labour votes.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

Another and perhaps better way of putting all that is that even with the 3 day thing, May is still 'in control'. Her strength is that she no longer cares about her party or there being a functioning government after March. Her own psychodrama and lone political objective is to get some form of brexit through, short of the full hard brexit bounce.  The 3 day thing jerks her around even further, but that doesn't really matter to her. All she's got is 'must do brexit, must do brexit...'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 9, 2019)

Well she can't credibly threaten 'no deal' any more, not that such a thing was ever going to happen. So I guess she'll increasingly be threatening 'no brexit at all'. Problem with that is it's not much of a threat to many MPs, given that it's what most of them actually want.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The 20-odd erm headbangers won't vote for it ever, though. They'd rather no brexit at all. So even if May gets her remainer rebels onside and gets the DUP back onside, she still loses if Labour stick together. I still don't see May passing any kind of deal without at least some Labour votes.


I'll admit I'm pretty much ignoring maths  but I do have a feeling the dup may come onside and also that a few labour and ex labour mps could flake off.  There's _every_ chance I'm wrong, particularly if she loses big in the first vote, but I just have a sense it might get into squeaky bum territory, which then puts massive pressure on some of the demi-headbangers.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I should probably avoid all predictions as the situation/process is so chaotic/ridiculous but... *she'd die for losing by that margin next week.  She'd definitely be in sight of the winning line and with a few tweaks and concessions, close to a majority in the second vote.*



I'm sure that's what the No.10 expectation management exercise wants us to believe.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.


----------



## gosub (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.
> 
> View attachment 158172



So if she can get it through the UK Parliament it won't get through all the 27 Parliaments


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.
> 
> View attachment 158172


this will go down like a bucket of christmas puke in brussels


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.
> 
> View attachment 158172



Back to bizarro world.  Then again I suppose it's worth a try and everything else is failing.  Instead of taking the deal with the EU to parliament take parliament's deal to the EU.  I doubt it'll work but its desperation all round now.


----------



## Winot (Jan 9, 2019)

Christ - when will this dog-end of a government finally be put out of its misery?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 'Government' defeated, again.
> 
> Commons division (preceding the re-commencement of the EU withdrawal 'agreement') on today's Dominic Grieve amendment to the Government's timetabling motion. It requires May to return to Parliament within 3 (not 21) sitting days of her losing the 'Agreement' vote to explain what she'll do.
> 
> ...




EU will tear us apart. 
Dead Souls
Decades (of austerity)

We could go on.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.
> 
> View attachment 158172


So, we end up with no Brexit, but we can at least blame those pesky European bureaucrats?


----------



## Winot (Jan 9, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> So, we end up with no Brexit, but we can at least blame those pesky European bureaucrats?



We will have Brexited by then.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> We will have Brexited by then.


Or not; one of the two, for certain.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Or not; one of the two, for certain.



Discounting the Schrodinger Brexit I see?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Discounting the Schrodinger Brexit I see?


Forrin shite like that can get well fucked off.

btw <*Ctrl* + ;> then release these keys and type the vowel


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's not a new level of boldness. abuse has been hurled at the queen by the movement against the monarchy (eg when she gave out maundy money in bristol) and prince charles (eg when he and camilla were on their first appearance together in public in hoxton) before now, and you've said nothing about it.



Didn't see it on the news, do you have a link to the video so I can compare? Would be odd if the monarch had been completely surrounded by screeching fascists blocking her path with the police looking on, but if you say the situations are comparable then the news report will show that.



> or is your point that it's the right where in the past they've always been craven whereas people on the left have always been so bold?



Nope. Not my point. My point starts and ends with this recent episode for which I've seen evidence. No other political wing or incident is relevant to this, neither to me nor the investigating officers.



> it's plain you haven't heard of the league of empire loyalists or you wouldn't come out with such tripe about such things never having been done before by the right.



Where did I say this had never been done before by the right?

I'm saying in the context of Brexit that this is a clear escalation of intimidation that reveals a new boldness, bolder for reasons I have explained to do with social media hits and fundraising... Which again, is a fairly new motivating factor isn't it, on account of it having just been invented.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Fuck these BNP cunts doing it, but for the vast majority of it they're not doing anything illegal. And if it's illegal then prosecute accordingly.
> What would you like to see happen here Wookey?



I think it is illegal going from my reading of the harassment laws. It should be investigated and if appropriate, prosecuted. Thankfully thats not for you or me to analyse, as we're not CPS or legally trained.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Didn't see it on the news, do you have a link to the video so I can compare? Would be odd if the monarch had been completely surrounded by screeching fascists blocking her path with the police looking on, but if you say the situations are comparable then the news report will show that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I can't link to a memory, soz


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 9, 2019)

Sorry for being on-topic, but have the government now got _three days_ (308-297) to come up with an alternative plan than no-deal?

hahahahaaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa etc.  What poor fuckers aren't sleeping till Sunday?
They should start a thread here tbf.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Sorry for being on-topic, but have the government now got _three days_ (308-297) to come up with an alternative plan than no-deal?


from tuesday, if they lose the vote (if the vote happens on tuesday)


----------



## Flavour (Jan 9, 2019)

They coule revoke a50 and call a general election with the campaign promise to retrigger a50. It's all a bit too bizzarro land but nothing shocks anymore. Teresa May might even get the vote through!


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 9, 2019)

May isn't going to get her thing through, is she? The most likely outcomes now have to be either
a) extend Article 50 and stay in the EU for another year or two, or 
b) leave the EU with fuck all in place.
Either way it looks like there are plenty of people ready to make it a bumpy ride.


----------



## Winot (Jan 9, 2019)

Flavour said:


> They coule revoke a50 and call a general election with the campaign promise to retrigger a50. It's all a bit too bizzarro land but nothing shocks anymore. Teresa May might even get the vote through!



The ECJ said Art 50 could only be revoked to end Brexit, not as a tactic. 

I still think a version of May’s deal could get through.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I can't link to a memory, soz



I strongly suspect that if anything at all akin to Soubry's treatment was meted out to the Queen, we wouldn't need to be relying on your memory for evidence to compare the two.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> I still think a version of May’s deal could get through.


I reckon there'll be a more norway-ish version settled on and voted through eventually, but I wouldn't put any money on it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

Bercow is an interesting character.  I mean, a complete an utter shitbag obviously but interesting none the less.


brogdale said:


> Failing to get any further concessions from the supra-state, May has made up some of her own. This will doubtless go down well in Brussels.
> 
> View attachment 158172



Just coming back to this as I've been thinking a bit more.  Does this mean that the MP's will be voting on a deal which may not be or just plain isn't achievable?	Would be quite something if the government got the vote through on a deal that Brussels rejected.  Then again I'd put nothing past May at the moment.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> I still think a version of May’s deal could get through.



Its the only possible outcome I can see at the moment.  Then again who knows?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 9, 2019)

That is a third possibility. Create our own deal that nobody else agrees to but we insist is the best and most correct way forward for everyone, and won't back down from. It would be a supremely British solution and may end up being pretty much what happens despite reason or diplomacy.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Bercow is an interesting character.  I mean, a complete an utter shitbag obviously but interesting none the less.
> 
> 
> Just coming back to this as I've been thinking a bit more.  Does this mean that the MP's will be voting on a deal which may not be or just plain isn't achievable?	Would be quite something if the government got the vote through on a deal that Brussels rejected.  Then again I'd put nothing past May at the moment.


It's utter bollux...has no meaning whatsoever


----------



## Wilf (Jan 9, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> May isn't going to get her thing through, is she? The most likely outcomes now have to be either
> a) extend Article 50 and stay in the EU for another year or two, or
> b) leave the EU with fuck all in place.
> Either way it looks like there are plenty of people ready to make it a bumpy ride.


Labour look to be heading towards A) according to the latest chatter (17:02 here):
Brexit: MPs vote 308-297 in favour of amendment for three-day 'plan B' deadline - Politics live


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> That is a third possibility. Create our own deal that nobody else agrees to but we insist is the best and most correct way forward for everyone, and won't back down from. It would be a supremely British solution and may end up being pretty much what happens despite reason or diplomacy.



Then send a gunboat to sit a few miles off Antwerp.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Then send a gunboat to sit a few miles off Antwerp.



We'd hire it from Gunboats-Я-Us (Russian-owned obvs)


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's utter bollux...has no meaning whatsoever


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> We'd hire it from Gunboats-Я-Us (Russian-owned obvs)


"We" meaning that the UK state's Naval military would contact their outsourced procurement service provider to deal with their outsourced brokers who would speak with the outsourced marketing department of the Panama based shell company......


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I strongly suspect that if anything at all akin to Soubry's treatment was meted out to the Queen, we wouldn't need to be relying on your memory for evidence to compare the two.


Ian Bone got within gobbing distance to the Queen and cunted her off at length. She deffo heard the abuse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I strongly suspect that if anything at all akin to Soubry's treatment was meted out to the Queen, we wouldn't need to be relying on your memory for evidence to compare the two.


Ah, you're like editor, very keen to believe that reporters are everywhere and everything newsworthy is reported.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "We" meaning that the UK state's Naval military would contact their outsourced procurement service provider to deal with their outsourced brokers who would speak with the outsourced marketing department of the Panama based shell company......



Quite so, it was the royal We


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ian Bone got within gobbing distance to the Queen and cunted her off at length. She deffo heard the abuse.



Not sure a shouty septogenatian with Parkies and a walking stick is quite on a par with these much louder, much bigger, much younger men who gathered in numbers to target these MPs and journos. 

And if Bone had spat at the Queen, he would havr been arrested and charged with assault as that's against the law, the same as causing fear  distress to Soubry would be against the law. 

Harassment laws have been woefully misused since the 80s...this would at last be a justifiable use of it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 9, 2019)

The bristol event was rather more lively than the crap this outrage is about and aimed  at rather a higher value target.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Ah, you're like editor, very keen to believe that reporters are everywhere and everything newsworthy is reported.



No, I'm keen to fulfil the comparison you made, but I can't because the assault on the Queen remains only in your memory it seems.

And if you did see this happen and the person assaulting the Queen wasn't arrested, that doesn't mean these clowns shouldn't be arrested either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> No, I'm keen to fulfil the comparison you made, but I can't because the assault on the Queen remains only in your memory it seems.
> 
> And if you did see this happen and the person assaulting the Queen wasn't arrested, that doesn't mean these clowns shouldn't be arrested either.


you don't like comparing like with like do you. A statement, not a question


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you don't like comparing like with like do you. A statement, not a question



Is your heart really in this?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Is your heart really in this?


I was trying to say politely that you're being very dishonest. I say abuse hurled. You say assault. Do you know the difference between shouting at someone and hitting them? You don't seem to.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 9, 2019)

where is the evidence that May's deal will go through? 

there were over 100 mps prepared to vote agasint it last time - has any publically changed their minds? May has - as everyone predicted - got absolutely fuck all from the EU other than some warm words - so nothing has changed since last time when the bill got pulled. 
The DUP and the mogladytes wont budge - their is no benefit in it for them. The DUP will do nothing without specific legal guarantees on the back stop - which will not happen. The brexiteers hate mays deal and rejecting it opens the door to "no deal" or "no brexit" with them in the role of defending the people's will to the last (as opposed to vacillating enablers of EU "vasselage" which many have said is worse than staying in anyway). 
Remainer MPs see rejecting the deal as a route to a 2nd ref, a50 being revoked or some sort of very soft brexit.


----------



## tim (Jan 9, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ian Bone got within gobbing distance to the Queen and cunted her off at length. She deffo heard the abuse.



Yes, but Bone is a  national treasure and HMQ would be offended if he didn't abuse her. For her it's just another ritual, like being woken up by bagpipes.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> where is the evidence that May's deal will go through?



There isn't any.

That being said I can still so it going along the lines of what Fox and Rudd have been suggesting that a series of votes on the different issues might manage to scrape it across the line, so a version of May's deal.  Clearly as it stands its dead in the water but how dead will depend on how big the loss is.  It seems that the figure of 100+ is being bandied around as a bad loss, but anything under 80 may lead to the series of votes as suggested.

Fuck knows, its all guess work.


----------



## Winot (Jan 9, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> where is the evidence that May's deal will go through?
> 
> there were over 100 mps prepared to vote agasint it last time - has any publically changed their minds? May has - as everyone predicted - got absolutely fuck all from the EU other than some warm words - so nothing has changed since last time when the bill got pulled.
> The DUP and the mogladytes wont budge - their is no benefit in it for them. The DUP will do nothing without specific legal guarantees on the back stop - which will not happen. The brexiteers hate mays deal and rejecting it opens the door to "no deal" or "no brexit" with them in the role of defending the people's will to the last (as opposed to vacillating enablers of EU "vasselage" which many have said is worse than staying in anyway).
> Remainer MPs see rejecting the deal as a route to a 2nd ref, a50 being revoked or some sort of very soft brexit.



There’s no evidence, and it looks likely to be rejected at first. However when the wobblers stare into the abyss of no deal or no Brexit, I imagine many will wobble. Who knows.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

It won't pass this time - my guess is though that eventually - perhaps after a change of red lines, a change of leadership, an extension of A50 or even a change of government - what will eventually pass will be something not too far from May's deal.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> It won't pass this time - my guess is though that eventually - perhaps after a change of red lines, a change of leadership, an extension of A50 or even a change of government - what will eventually pass will be something not too far from May's deal.



they cant extend A50 without the agreement of the EU27 - and they only agree to that if theres going to be a general election, a 2nd ref  or a change of government - they wont do it just to allow may more time to get absolutely nowhere.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

I know.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

What other route out of this impasse is there?


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> What other route out of this impasse is there?


Seems to have been a few people talking up the EEA route recently, which could feasibly pull in a lot of the remain lot as a last resort against no deal.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

I think the suggestion is may's deal + membership of the EEA - I reckon that's the most likely route, or something along those lines.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think the suggestion is may's deal + membership of the EEA - I reckon that's the most likely route, or something along those lines.



I can see that.  I suspect Labour under Corbyn would probably go along with that, or at least enough of them.  Like you suggest  though it would probably take a fundamental change at the top for it to happen, red lines and all that.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

This pamphlet from the cross-party Norway Plus group (chaired by Stephen Kinnock and Nick Boles lol) outlines their proposals. It's quite boring so I haven't read the whole thing, but despite it's authors from what I've read I think it's the closest to something that could work (and can get anything close to a majority) that I've yet seen.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> What other route out of this impasse is there?



Invade Belgium.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think the suggestion is may's deal + membership of the EEA - I reckon that's the most likely route, or something along those lines.


Not sure May's deal + EEA membership makes sense. You can have one or the other, a bit like veganism and pigs in blankets.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I was trying to say politely that you're being very dishonest. I say abuse hurled. You say assault. Do you know the difference between shouting at someone and hitting them? You don't seem to.



You don't need to physically strike someone to be charged with assault, it would be enough to cause a person to apprehend the imminent use of unlawful violence. But that is legalistic nit-picking anyway and doesn't further this debate a jot.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Back to bizarro world.  Then again I suppose it's worth a try and everything else is failing.  Instead of taking the deal with the EU to parliament take parliament's deal to the EU.  I doubt it'll work but its desperation all round now.


May loyalist Hugo Swire admits that his proposed amendment is merely performative.



Clown-car government.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> This pamphlet from the cross-party Norway Plus group (chaired by Stephen Kinnock and Nick Boles lol) outlines their proposals. It's quite boring so I haven't read the whole thing, but despite it's authors from what I've read I think it's the closest to something that could work (and can get anything close to a majority) that I've yet seen.


Apart from the problem of, you know, Norway.

Norwegian politicians reject UK's Norway-plus Brexit plan

(I don't know how significant the criticism is, tbf)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You don't need to physically strike someone to be charged with assault, it would be enough to cause a person to apprehend the imminent use of unlawful violence. But that is legalistic nit-picking anyway and doesn't further this debate a jot.


There's nothing you like better than legalistic nit-picking unless it's liberal drivelling


----------



## free spirit (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> Seems to have been a few people talking up the EEA route recently, which could feasibly pull in a lot of the remain lot as a last resort against no deal.


The problem with this being that the EEA is based on an agreement between the EU and EFTA, so the UK would need agreement of both the EU and EFTA to join the EEA seperately from the EU.

Norway's Prime Minister has very clearly rejected the idea at least of the UK joining EFTA and I think that went as far as the UK joining the EEA, because the UK would just mess everything up for them (or words to that effect).

This would also mean accepting free movement of people, and paying into the EU budget (probably more than currently as we'd likely lose our current rebate), while losing our current level of input into the rules we'd have to obey, and there's a fair chunk of hard brexit supporters who'd prefer us to remain in the EU than take this route.

Could happen I guess, but would likely take a lot of persuasion for the EFTA countries to agree to it, and I'm not sure what we've got to persuade them with.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

I know it's a route which has problems - just strikes me the least problematic one, and the one most likely to command a majority in the commons. 

And it'll still be a shitshow after whatever happens. Whoop.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

free spirit said:


> The problem with this being that the EEA is based on an agreement between the EU and EFTA, so the UK would need agreement of both the EU and EFTA to join the EEA seperately from the EU.
> 
> Norway's Prime Minister has very clearly rejected the idea at least of the UK joining EFTA and I think that went as far as the UK joining the EEA, because the UK would just mess everything up for them (or words to that effect).
> 
> ...


I think it neednt be equivalent to existing arrangements, it can be a "bespoke" one, like Mays deal is already bespoke, but with the 4 freedoms on top.
??


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

When did the Norse prime minister rule out the UK joining the efta btw free spirit? It says here they'd welcome us: Norway for now—or never?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 9, 2019)

Some unnamed ministerial source quoted in the Independent saying that If May loses convincingly on her deal but is not no confidenced she may call an election anyway, setting date at beginning of April, immediately after Brexit date.........so Parliament taken out of equation????
We can only guess what this would unleash, but the fact a Minister has been floating it ( in spicy language if the Independent is to be believed) indicates what strange times we are in.
Also suggestions that DUP preparing to play hard ball over no confidence vote to try and extract more concessions/bribes......


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> When did the Norse prime minister rule out the UK joining the efta btw free spirit? It says here they'd welcome us: Norway for now—or never?


Norwegian politicians reject UK's Norway-plus Brexit plan
7th December 2018


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Some unnamed ministerial source quoted in the Independent saying that If May loses convincingly on her deal but is not no confidenced she may call an election anyway, setting date at beginning of April, immediately after Brexit date.........so Parliament taken out of equation????
> We can only guess what this would unleash, but the fact a Minister has been floating it ( in spicy language if the Independent is to be believed) indicates what strange times we are in.
> Also suggestions that DUP preparing to play hard ball over no confidence vote to try and extract more concessions/bribes......


Ive heard the Torys have hired election agents or whatever it is political partys pay peole to do ahead of elections, a little while back too. But that could be hedging bets.


----------



## A380 (Jan 9, 2019)

The loon faction on Conservative Home are swivelling their eyes so much it’s like one of those old fashioned dolls’eye switchboards this evening:

‘Parliament is now the enemy of the people’

‘A state of emergency should  be declared’

‘ The Queen should go to the commons and dissolve it personally ‘

It’s brightened up my day I can say.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> When did the Norse prime minister rule out the UK joining the efta btw free spirit? It says here they'd welcome us: Norway for now—or never?


Not the Norman leader but it may give a general idea.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Norwegian politicians reject UK's Norway-plus Brexit plan
> 7th December 2018


So not the Norwegian prime minister then, an unnamed 'senior minister'.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Not the Norman leader but it may give a general idea.



Beware right-wing loons from other countries who might be motivated to say things helpful to our right-wing loons.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Beware right-wing loons from other countries who might be motivated to say things helpful to our right-wing loons.


Beware people who comment on a 6 minute video 4 minutes after it's posted.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> So not the Norwegian prime minister then, an unnamed 'senior minister'.


Not unnamed
"the plan was rejected by Heidi Nordby Lunde, an MP in Norway’s governing Conservative party, and leader of Norway’s European movement. She said her views reflected those of the governing party even though the Norwegian prime minister, Erna Solberg, has been more diplomatic by saying Norway would examine a UK application."

...

She said the only politicians in Norway who wanted the UK to join Efta were the Eurosceptic party that wanted to destroy Norway’s relationship with the EU.

Her fears have been echoed by Ole Erik Almlid, of the Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise business association, who has also questioned whether the UK would be willing to go from rule maker to rule taker. He said Norway would suffer and parts of the Efta agreement with the EU would have to be suspended if an Efta member such as the UK refused to abide by the obligations in the agreement.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Beware people who comment on a 6 minute video 4 minutes after it's posted.


Watched it live....you know, like on the telly.
Yes, I'm that old.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Watched it live....you know, like on the telly.
> Yes, I'm that old.


Took me a few minutes to find.

Then I gave up and just typed 'norway brexit' into youtube.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Took me a few minutes to find.
> 
> Then I gave up and just typed 'norway brexit' into youtube.


...and?


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 9, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Invade Belgium.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Not unnamed
> "the plan was rejected by Heidi Nordby Lunde, an MP in Norway’s governing Conservative party, and leader of Norway’s European movement. She said her views reflected those of the governing party even though the Norwegian prime minister, Erna Solberg, has been more diplomatic by saying Norway would examine a UK application."
> 
> ...
> ...


Ah yeah, there's more after the advert. 

But - not the prime minister, just some random Norwegian MP with an obvious agenda, and her mate at the norse CBI.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You don't need to physically strike someone to be charged with assault, it would be enough to cause a person to apprehend the imminent use of unlawful violence. But that is legalistic nit-picking anyway and doesn't further this debate a jot.


You deliberately hammed it up.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Some unnamed ministerial source quoted in the Independent saying that If May loses convincingly on her deal but is not no confidenced she may call an election anyway, setting date at beginning of April, immediately after Brexit date.........so Parliament taken out of equation????


Fixed Term Parliament Act, though. She couldn't get a General Election past MPs without getting an A50 extension first.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> Ah yeah, there's more after the advert.
> 
> But - not the prime minister, just some random Norwegian MP with an obvious agenda, and her mate at the norse CBI.


true but from the off EFTA members were saying the UK would be too big (economcially) to be a member...i remember being convinced why they were correct to think that at the time, but my memory has moved on to other things


----------



## Cloo (Jan 9, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Invade Belgium.


 It'd distract everyone, I'll say that. Especially the Belgians.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

Cloo said:


> It'd distract everyone, I'll say that. Especially the Belgians.


Assuming we actually managed to make it as far as Belgium.


----------



## Cloo (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Assuming we actually managed to make it as far as Belgium.


Yeah, we'd probably try to get over there using this new ferry company that doesn't have any ships or port facilities and end up rowing over in some polystyrene kebab containers.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Fixed Term Parliament Act, though. She couldn't get a General Election past MPs without getting an A50 extension first.


Do you think that Labour would vote against a chance of an election, regardless of A50 extension?  May’s loyalists plus Labour would be enough wouldn’t it? Then timing of election would be her choice.  Labour went with the 2017 election despite not having the finance they would have liked and a lot of the Parliamentary Party convinced they were going to get a drubbing. FPA did not prevent 2015 election....
Not buying that it is a main Tory plan at moment, but don’t think it is impossible.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 9, 2019)

TopCat said:


> You deliberately hammed it up.



OK, yeah. 

I'd love to chat further on your remarkable insight into the workings of my inner mind, but I've just painted my kitchen cupboards a jaunty powder blue, and the paintwork is just at that tacky stage? So I'm gonna go just check that out instead...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)




----------



## agricola (Jan 9, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Do you think that Labour would vote against a chance of an election, regardless of A50 extension?  May’s loyalists plus Labour would be enough wouldn’t it? Then timing of election would be her choice.  Labour went with the 2017 election despite not having the finance they would have liked and a lot of the Parliamentary Party convinced they were going to get a drubbing. FPA did not prevent 2015 election....
> Not buying that it is a main Tory plan at moment, but don’t think it is impossible.



2015 election was the result of the FTPA, and Labour would never vote for a FTPA-called General Election without May triggering A50 first - they wouldn't have to, as if she ever tried that she would lose enough of her support that Corbyn could get a vote of no confidence through.  Then you'd think someone would be called upon to form an government (probably Corbyn), trigger an A50 extension and _then_ have the election when that government inevitably got no-confidenced.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 9, 2019)

Wookey said:


> OK, yeah.
> 
> I'd love to chat further on your remarkable insight into the workings of my inner mind, but I've just painted my kitchen cupboards a jaunty powder blue, and the paintwork is just at that tacky stage? So I'm gonna go just check that out instead...


Not interested in your murky mind. Your words were clear. All this stuff about cupboards is just flim flam.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)

So if that's right we're officially in no deal/no brexit territory.


----------



## killer b (Jan 9, 2019)

it isn't right, and we aren't.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Do you think that Labour would vote against a chance of an election, regardless of A50 extension?



No, Labour would demand an A50 extension. Why would they not?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> No, Labour would demand an A50 extension. Why would they not?


Well they couldn't demand fuck all tbf.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I can't link to a memory, soz



Famously you can’t put your arms around one either.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Well they couldn't demand fuck all tbf.


You mean because they're over-polite, or because May's self-assured control of events leaves them scrambling in her wake?

Whatever happens is likely to require Labour votes, so, when it comes down to it, they will be in a position to make demands.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 9, 2019)

Paul Mason on why Lexit in current form is bunk

Brexit: Labour must let its members decide its next step


----------



## Wilf (Jan 10, 2019)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Paul Mason on why Lexit in current form is bunk
> 
> Brexit: Labour must let its members decide its next step


He's right that no lexit exists or is likely to exist in the near future, but there looks to be a lot of liberal-masquerading-as-leftist piffle going on in there (at least on my slightly drunken speed read). But the bit he's right about is mobilising the labour and trade union movement, regardless of what he wants to mobilise it for. It's never occurred to Corbyn that the organised working class and/or labour movement could become active players in the Brexit thing - or indeed anything. If Corbyn thought there was at the very least a workers friendly Brexit, he could have at least thought that.


----------



## CRI (Jan 10, 2019)

Any idea who's really footing the bill for this expensive Facebook ad campaign that's currently targeting people 35 plus (seemingly more men in the 35-54 range for most) in Labour held constituencies in England?

Can't imagine Tim Dawson's able to raise that much lolly through a Paypal button on the Britains Future website.  They already spent more than £21K on Facebook ads in early December, so they do seem to have quite a fat wallet for such a small operation.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> When did the Norse prime minister rule out the UK joining the efta btw free spirit? It says here they'd welcome us: Norway for now—or never?


It was a couple of days ago, Theresa May's been up there and the Norwegian PM was gave an interview dismissing the idea of the UK joining the EEA and / or EFTA as not in Norway's interests.

I can't find the full interview now, but the Mail reported on it briefly "*Norway premier Erna Solberg dismissed idea of Britain temporarily joining EEA"*


----------



## NoXion (Jan 10, 2019)

CRI said:


> Any idea who's really footing the bill for this expensive Facebook ad campaign that's currently targeting people 35 plus (seemingly more men in the 35-54 range for most) in Labour held constituencies in England?
> 
> Can't imagine Tim Dawson's able to raise that much lolly through a Paypal button on the Britains Future website.  They already spent more than £21K on Facebook ads in early December, so they do seem to have quite a fat wallet for such a small operation.
> 
> ...



Oh my god. People saw these, and might have actually considered writing to their MPs?! Whatever sordid attack on our fine democracy will they think of next? I bet the Russians are behind this!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> a shouty septogenatian with Parkies



Pointless dig of the day: 

Who THE FUCK shortens Parkinson’s to “Parkies” 

Cheers. 
HC


----------



## Raheem (Jan 10, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Oh my god. People saw these, and might have actually considered writing to their MPs?! Whatever sordid attack on our fine democracy will they think of next? I bet the Russians are behind this!


Only the Russians would have the cunning to think of bombarding Dennis Skinner with emails. They've found our national weak-spot! We're done for!

All the same, someone is paying for these ads, and the fact that we're not allowed to know who isn't really just one of those things.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

free spirit said:


> It was a couple of days ago, Theresa May's been up there and the Norwegian PM was gave an interview dismissing the idea of the UK joining the EEA and / or EFTA as not in Norway's interests.
> 
> I can't find the full interview now, but the Mail reported on it briefly "*Norway premier Erna Solberg dismissed idea of Britain temporarily joining EEA"*


the key word there is 'temporarily'


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

I can't see much chance of the UK negotiating this suggested Norway plus/membership of EEA deal, whether temporary or permanent, before the exit date in ten weeks time, especially given the government's record over the previous few years.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Not sure a shouty septogenatian with Parkies and a walking stick is quite on a par with these much louder, much bigger, much younger men who gathered in numbers to target these MPs and journos.
> 
> And if Bone had spat at the Queen, he would havr been arrested and charged with assault as that's against the law, the same as causing fear  distress to Soubry would be against the law.
> 
> Harassment laws have been woefully misused since the 80s...this would at last be a justifiable use of it.


Fuck me you're stupid. 

Ian wasn't seventy at the time. Nor sixty. It was about fucking twenty years ago. It's like you're dougal out of father Ted only stupider and without his charm,


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 10, 2019)

Any Norway style deal will involve free movement, which as well as being one of May’s red lines, really would be the thing to get the rabble roused, can’t see that happening at all.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

It certainly isn't without it's issues. But i reckon that's where we're headed eventually. 'The rabble' are already roused, and will be roused with whatever deal they eventually light upon.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Any Norway style deal will involve free movement, which as well as being one of May’s red lines, really would be the thing to get the rabble roused, can’t see that happening at all.



Yeah, but how many Leave voters would be politically active about it? Many would settle for Leaving pretty much in name and never hearing about it again. 

Some people would make a noise, but unless the Tory right can come to govern not a lot will happen.

Brexit was never going to change anything for anyone. The comfortable in the shires who voted for it in droves will continue to be xenophobic, but comfortable. The left behind won’t get housed in anything decent. The latter are just as likely to conclude Brexit was a sell out as much as it was sold out.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Any Norway style deal will involve free movement, which as well as being one of May’s red lines, really would be the thing to get the rabble roused, can’t see that happening at all.



Which is why May would have to go first.  TBH, I was thinking about this lat night and all roads seem to lead to that general conclusion, for anything to get resolved May really has to go either just her or her whole wretched Government.  Thing is she seems determined to hang in there till Brexit is achieved even if it kills her.

I worked for a Norwegian company a few years back and I'm not sure how great a deal it is they have tbh.   It made protecting their own businesses a lot easier through high import tariffs but exporting was very difficult but this was in part due to the high cost of production in Norway.  It was also a total pain getting stuff shipped over from Norway as it kept on getting stuck in customs.  Norwegians I spoke with thought they had a shot deal but then again these were senior business types and not exactly Johann Bloggs so not representative.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Which is why May would have to go first.  TBH, I was thinking about this lat night and all roads seem to lead to that general conclusion, for anything to get resolved May really has to go either just her or her whole wretched Government.  Thing is she seems determined to hang in there till Brexit is achieved even if it kills her.


thing is the tory party membership have a final vote as to who replaces her, and they're going to vote for a no-free-movement brexiter.
which leads towards the possiblity of a general election next 
amongst all the other possibilities


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> thing is the tory party membership have a final vote as to who replaces her, and they're going to vote for a no-free-movement brexiter.
> which leads towards the possiblity of a general election next
> amongst all the other possibilities


But it's the PCP that are the 'gatekeepers' of which 2 candidates are put to the membership; whether they'd get the 'no-free' option is highly questionable; they after all the party of capital.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

Does anyone believe that a general election would actually solve anything?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Does anyone believe that a general election would actually solve anything?


Depends on the result, doesn't it?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Depends on the result, doesn't it?



Elections usually do.

ETA: Sorry for being a bit glib, no coffee yet this morning etc.

I think what I'm trying to ask if does anyone see an election being decisive for either party and then them actually managing to get their Brexit strategy (assuming they actually have one) through Parliament?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Elections usually do.


Exactly why your question was redundant.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Elections usually do.
> 
> ETA: Sorry for being a bit glib, no coffee yet this morning etc.
> 
> I think what I'm trying to ask if does anyone see an election being decisive for either party and then them actually managing to get their Brexit strategy (assuming they actually have one) through Parliament?


Id imagine that the election would be considered as a proxy for a second referendum - wether that would be enough to stop a standoff in parliament....partly depends on the election result i guess. a hung parliament would probably lead back to the same impasse


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Id imagine that the election would be considered as a proxy for a second referendum - wether that would be enough to stop a standoff in parliament....partly depends on the election result i guess. a hung parliament would probably lead back to the same impasse


so the only lifeline left would be phone a friend as they've already gone 50:50 and would have asked the audience not only once but twice


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think what I'm trying to ask if does anyone see an election being decisive for either party and then them actually managing to get their Brexit strategy (assuming they actually have one) through Parliament?


There’s no reason to believe that Labour, were they to win, would command any more of a Commons consensus for their Brexit strategy than the Tories. The stalemate in the political classes is an ecumenical matter.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no reason to believe that Labour, were they to win, would command any more of a Commons consensus for their Brexit strategy than the Tories. The stalemate in the political classes is an ecumenical matter.



Send it to the Lords for the Bishops to sort out?  

That's the sort of blue sky thinking we need, I like it.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so the only lifeline left would be phone a friend as they've already gone 50:50 and would have asked the audience not only once but twice


Ian Duncan Smith could cough


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Send it to the Lords for the Bishops to sort out?


No.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Does anyone believe that a general election would actually solve anything?



Yes, it would resolve the question as to whether Jeremy Corbyn’s time is up.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No.



Spoil sport.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no reason to believe that Labour, were they to win, would command any more of a Commons consensus for their Brexit strategy than the Tories. The stalemate in the political classes is an ecumenical matter.


I think the utter stalemate is the best argument for a second referendum: parliament is stuck, we'll do whatever the 2nd referendum tells us to do, no questions asked


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Ian Duncan Smith could cough


don't worry, he will cough after a few months working in the sacn basalt mines


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Send it to the Lords for the Bishops to sort out?
> 
> That's the sort of blue sky thinking we need, I like it.


the press would bash the bishops


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Does anyone believe that a general election would actually solve anything?



Not with current Labour party Brexit policy, no.


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yeah, but how many Leave voters would be politically active about it? Many would settle for Leaving pretty much in name and never hearing about it again.
> 
> Some people would make a noise, but unless the Tory right can come to govern not a lot will happen.
> 
> Brexit was never going to change anything for anyone. The comfortable in the shires who voted for it in droves will continue to be xenophobic, but comfortable. The left behind won’t get housed in anything decent. The latter are just as likely to conclude Brexit was a sell out as much as it was sold out.



Agree absolutely with your final paragraph. 

I think you’re first paragraph is naive though - any hint of not being able to stop Poles coming in and Farage will be on it like a shot, whipping up the same discontent as the last time.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Ian Duncan Smith could cough


Just realised Ian Duncan Smith is acutally called Ian Smith and he probably thought his name sounded a bit too common like, so brought out the Duncan to spice it up a bit


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Brexit was never going to change anything for anyone.


Brexit might yet change a lot for EU citizens who have made a home in the UK


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Just realised Ian Duncan Smith is acutally called Ian Smith and he probably thought his name sounded a bit too common like, so brought out the Duncan to spice it up a bit



ian smith - harold bishop out of neighbours - insisted ids put in the duncan as he was sick of getting hate mail intended for the tory mp


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Brexit might yet change a lot for EU citizens who have made a home in the UK



True that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I think the utter stalemate is the best argument for a second referendum: parliament is stuck, we'll do whatever the 2nd referendum tells us to do, no questions asked


Well, that does kind of lead us to wonder why it requires two referendums to do what the result tells them to. 

The second thing to consider: if it’s another close run thing, then what? What changes?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 10, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Assuming we actually managed to make it as far as Belgium.



We've already got the best ferry people in Europe onside.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes, it would resolve the question as to whether Jeremy Corbyn’s time is up.


In the same way that 2017 made clear that it isn't and that if anything his position is strengthening?

A brexit focused general election (like the 2017 one that brexit obsessed media-politico liberal demanded be nearly solely about - the electorate had other ideas, and may well still have in any coming contest) is much more likely to decide if new labour will have achieved its final internal victory through much of the left (and by that i mean the corbynite left - the new corybite left that didn't come out of the battles of the 70s and 80s and is now a large deciding chunk of the membership) adopting many of its tenets - certainly as regards the EU at the very least. In much the way that thatcher consider new-labour her greatest achievement. Or whether that old style labour-socialism we're so often told the labour left with corbyn as leader represents  actually has some real life left in it beyond technocratic guff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> We've already got the best ferry people in Europe onside.


yes, gerry and the pacemakers and bryan ferry and his family are all onside.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

I think the most likely result of a general election (a Labour minority or slim majority government) would give us a government who could certainly push through the norway-ish brexit deal they're probably going to light upon. There's more-or-less the numbers to push it through now, just not the executive to carry it out.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> In the same way that 2017 made clear that it isn't and that if anything his position is strengthening?
> 
> A brexit focused general election (like the 2017 one that brexit obsessed media-politico liberal demanded be nearly solely about - the electorate had other ideas, and may well still have in any coming contest) is much more likely to decide if new labour will have achieved its final internal victory through much of the left (and by that i mean the corbynite left - the new corybite left that didn't come out of the battles of the 70s and 80s and is now a large deciding chunk of the membership) adopting many of its tenets - certainly as regards the EU at the very least. In much the way that thatcher consider new-labour her greatest achievement. Or whether that old style labour-socialism we're so often told the labour left with corbyn as leader represents  actually has some real life left in it beyond technocratic guff.



Simply, if he wins his time is not up and if he loses that’s probably it at his age. As much as he has changed things for the better it’s a results based business and one result matters above all.

Doesn’t mean that the wishes he embodies have run their course.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

I want a general election just to see what brexit policy Labour run with. They managed to neutralise it pretty effectively last time, don't think that would be possible now...


----------



## chilango (Jan 10, 2019)

As an aside I wonder how much of the Tory backbench Brexiteer rebellion is fuelled not by some belief in the detail but in a fear of losing personal self-identity as "Eurosceptic" MPs that has been cherished through comfortable careers in politics should we actually leave.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 10, 2019)

Hence those shady Facebook ads mentioned on the last page - they’re not actually about getting people to write to their MPs but about undermining support for Labour MPs with their constituents, with an eye on a general election in the short term. If such a thing happens it’ll be swimming with dirty money aimed at supporting the tories, given a Corbyn government actually appears a possibility this time rather than the idea being the joke it was in 2017. There won’t be the complacency of that campaign and I can see it being a lot tougher for Labour.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, that does kind of lead us to wonder why it requires two referendums to do what the result tells them to.
> 
> The second thing to consider: if it’s another close run thing, then what? What changes?



This is it - why should a brexity voter have any faith in their, err... good faith?

It's pretty clear that a sizable proportion on the political class don't intend to honour the result of the first referendum so why would anyone believe that they would honour the result of a second referendum?

This, imv, is where stuff gets much more important and much more dangerous than EU membership or otherwise, trade deals or otherwise, this is where large swathes of the population who would otherwise consider themselves fully paid up members of parliamentary politics, civil society suddenly feel as if they no longer have a stake in the political concensus.

Does anyone believe that the setting aside of the - however flawed - Catalan referendum isn't going to have long term consequences in terms of Catalans feeling they have a place in Spain?

Does anyone think that had the Scottish referendum been won by the 'yes' side, and three years later the political class was kicking it from the 'really hard' pile into the 'now people know the facts, perhaps they should think again' pile, that there would be no consequences, both in terms of political engagement, polirpoli legitimacy and even violence?


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2019)

Independence from the UK has been done loads before, so easy compared to this shit show.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Does anyone think that had the Scottish referendum been won by the 'yes' side, and three years later the political class was kicking it from the 'really hard' pile into the 'now people know the facts, perhaps they should think again' pile, that there would be no consequences, both in terms of political engagement, polirpoli legitimacy and even violence?


The difference there is that in the Scottish Referendum they wrote down what Leave meant, and produced a long and thought out document that was the subject of the vote, the subject of debate in the lead up to the vote, and the process to be enacted. Here we had politicians arguing over what colour they think Brexit should be. The lack of definition at the start has been at the heart of so much of the problems since the referendum, and the disagreement on the defintion still hasnt been resolved,


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Memory ah - the most reliable of narrators.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The difference there is that in the Scottish Referendum they wrote down what Leave meant, and produced a long and thought out document that was the subject of the vote, the subject of debate in the lead up to the vote, and the process to be enacted. Here we had politicians arguing over what colour they think Brexit should be. The lack of definition at the start has been at the heart of so much of the problems since the referendum, and the disagreement on the defintion still hasnt been resolved,






Indeed. 649 pages of detail. In fact, too much detail, I think. But whatever you thought of it (and I didn’t agree with all of it), nobody could argue it wasn’t a thought through plan. 

Brexit, on the other hand “means Brexit”, but other than that we keep hearing from this and that politician what “the Brexit the people voted for” was. Well, the only thing they voted for was “the United Kingdom should leave the European Union”. That’s it.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

_The brexit people voted_ for line is just rhetoric though: none of them actually think they're working to enact the will of the people - they're just invoking the will of the people for their own factional advantage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> _The brexit people voted_ for line is just rhetoric though: none of them actually think they're working to enact the will of the people - they're just invoking the will of the people for their own factional advantage.


conflating their own will with the will of the people


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 10, 2019)

Interesting technique. Much beloved of many great leaders.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> conflating their own will with the will of the people


I dunno, I think conflation implies they've mistaken one for the other - I don't think there's many people invoking the will of the people who're doing so except in an entirely cynical way.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> I dunno, I think conflation implies they've mistaken one for the other - I don't think there's many people invoking the will of the people who're doing so except in an entirely cynical way.


i don't think conflation implies a mistake


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

OK fair enough.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> I dunno, I think conflation implies they've mistaken one for the other - I don't think there's many people invoking the will of the people who're doing so except in an entirely cynical way.


Theresa May is a remainer,  but she has decided that The WIll Of The People was to end free movement and reduce immigration. Thats not her factionalism, thats her taking a read on Brexit voters. I dont think thats her being cynical in the matter.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2019)

She's an opportunist.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Theresa May is a remainer,  but she has decided that The WIll Of The People was to end free movement and reduce immigration. Thats not her factionalism, thats her taking a read on Brexit voters. I dont think thats her being cynical in the matter.


Reducing immigration has been an obsession of May's for her entire political career. Don't you remember her time at the home office?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 158249
> 
> 
> Indeed. 649 pages of detail. In fact, too much detail, I think. But whatever you thought of it (and I didn’t agree with all of it), nobody could argue it wasn’t a thought through plan.
> ...


I think the two biggest Brexit procedural fuck ups were
1. Cameron calling a referendum and not requiring such a document to form the basis of the Leave vote.
2. May, backed by Labour, triggering A50, so soon after the referendum without first hashing out the internal disagreements as to what form Brexit would take. There was a second opportunity before triggering A50 to make up for #1.
Both 1 & 2 were the prodcut of pure arrogance.


killer b said:


> Reducing immigration has been an obsession of May's for her entire political career. Don't you remember her time at the home office?


Yeah i do. Yet she's a remainer. And her desire to reduce immigration is primarily driven by knowing thats what a lot of people, especially Tory voters, want.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Yeah i do. Yet she's a remainer. And her desire to reduce immigration is primarily driven by knowing thats what a lot of people, especially Tory voters, want.


Her relentless focus on immigration in her time at the home office is one of the reasons it's what a lot of people want. It's a feedback loop. You know this.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> Her relentless focus on immigration in her time at the home office is one of the reasons it's what a lot of people want. It's a feedback loop. You know this.


the key point for me is that its not a cynical excercise on her part and to downplay her red line on brexit meaning no more freedom of movement is to willfully ignore the direction of a key stream of british politics of the last however many years


----------



## free spirit (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> the key word there is 'temporarily'


That's in the Daily Mail article, but I don't remember it being in what she actually said.

Just a fairly unequivocal 'it would not be in Norway's interests to allow the UK to join and screw it up for us in the way you've screwed the EU up for yourselves' or words to that affect.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> the key point for me is that its not a cynical excercise on her part and to downplay her red line on brexit meaning no more freedom of movement is to willfully ignore the direction of a key stream of british politics of the last however many years


The direction of travel of actual public opinion has been in the opposite direction though.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

free spirit said:


> That's in the Daily Mail article, but I don't remember it being in what she actually said.
> 
> Just a fairly unequivocal 'it would not be in Norway's interests to allow the UK to join and screw it up for us in the way you've screwed the EU up for yourselves' or words to that affect.


it's in the article I linked to last night, and she was explicitly talking about temporary membership.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> _The brexit people voted_ for line is just rhetoric though: none of them actually think they're working to enact the will of the people - they're just invoking the will of the people for their own factional advantage.


Indeed.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

A lot of people voted for the Brexit which involved the political class being hit with a brick.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2019)

But they're still there, huh.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> A lot of people voted for the Brexit which involved the political class being hit with a brick.


Well, they're certainly stunned.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> it's in the article I linked to last night, and she was explicitly talking about temporary membership.


The only article I can see that you linked to last night is partly behind a paywall so I can't read it all, but was written in November and therefore can't reflect something that was said within the last week.
Is this the article you meant?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> it's in the article I linked to last night, and she was explicitly talking about temporary membership.


I don't believe for a second that Norway would allow the UK even temp membership without MAJOR concessions and binding promises not to fuck up what is a very delicate piece of political brinkmanship as regards Norwegian relations with the EU. Norwegians are generally against EU membership (around 2:1 last I checked), but simultaneously pro EEA. UK entry into EEA would completely alter the dynamics and not for the better. And as close as the UK and Norway are, the EU is ultimately a much more important partner for Norway and more closely aligned with our strategic interests.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

free spirit said:


> The only article I can see that you linked to last night is partly behind a paywall so I can't read it all, but was written in November and therefore can't reflect something that was said within the last week.
> Is this the article you meant?


It was. I assumed you had your dates wrong, cause the relevant quote was close to what you said: 

_But as Erna Solberg, Norway’s prime minister, put it diplomatically when she met Mrs May in Oslo this week, joining with the declared intention of leaving a few years later would be “a little bit difficult” for other members.
_
Anyway, the only comments I could find from the Norwegian PM about it was opposing temporary membership. Permanent membership seems to be on the table, unless you can find something that actually backs up what you've said? 

Not that I can really be arsed arguing about it tbh. I know there's obstacles to EEA membership, domestically as well as diplomatically - but there's obstacles to all of the solutions. I just think that the path of least resistance is some kind of Norway-type deal, so that's what's probably going to happen in the end.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

TruXta said:


> UK entry into EEA would completely alter the dynamics and not for the better.


it shouldn't do, being as the uk's been a member of the eea for many years


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)




----------



## TruXta (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it shouldn't do, being as the uk's been a member of the eea for many years


Fair enough, the EFTA then.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 10, 2019)

are they taking the piss now or what?

ETA; should stop wasting time with this minute by minute nonsense


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> are they taking the piss now or what?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

Well May fought like hell for Parliament to have no say in Brexit and she's resisted every attempt along the way, even to the point of being held in contempt of Parliament.  Why stop now?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> _The brexit people voted_ for line is just rhetoric though: none of them actually think they're working to enact the will of the people - they're just invoking the will of the people for their own factional advantage.



And quite how 52% over 48% of 70 odd % gives you the ‘will of the people’ even if one single will on a clear question could be discerned is another thing.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 10, 2019)

The will of the people that could be arsed. Not as catchy, mind.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> A lot of people voted for the Brexit which involved the political class being hit with a brick.



But most people who voted for Brexit actually voted for it to have more power to act unilaterally and more harshly. 

The marginalised made the vital difference in the numbers, but they are outnumbered by solid Tories and nationalists in the 17.2m.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> But most people who voted for Brexit actually voted for it to have more power to act unilaterally and more harshly.
> 
> The marginalised made the vital difference in the numbers, but they are outnumbered by solid Tories and nationalists in the 17.2m.


they wrote this on the ballot forms i suppose.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Poi E said:


> The will of the people that could be arsed. Not as catchy, mind.



The ‘will of the people’ should be banned from use. It’s a phrase only a charlatan would use.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The ‘will of the people’ should be banned from use. It’s a phrase only a charlatan would use.


i met will of _the people_ once, a horrible greasy journo just as you'd expect


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> they wrote this on the ballot forms i suppose.



I believe it considering what Tories usually vote for. Metropolitan Tories might have voted for Remain, but what do you think, 17.2m were disenfranchised and marginalised? So if not, what do you suppose they voted for?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I believe it considering what Tories usually vote for. Metropolitan Tories might have voted for Remain, but what do you think, 17.2m were disenfranchised and marginalised? So if not, what do you suppose they voted for?


they voted to leave the european union.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> they voted to leave the european union.



The point was raised that many voted to hit the political class with a brick. If we are speculating on reasons, rather than merely stating the obvious, I’d say that doesn’t match the demographics of most who voted Leave. Many of the better off may have wanted to give it the old ‘Up Yours Delors’, but I suspect many also wanted a stronger British State.

But that’s the trouble with the elites. You’d think they’d just band together and agree to fuck us all over in the same way, but they have to compete and co-opt ordinary folks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The point was raised that many voted to hit the political class with a brick. If we are speculating on reasons, rather than merely stating the obvious, I’d say that doesn’t match the demographics of most who voted Leave. Many of the better off may have wanted to give it the old ‘Up Yours Delors’, but I suspect many also wanted a stronger British State.
> 
> But that’s the trouble with the elites. You’d think they’d just band together and agree to fuck us all over in the same way, but they have to compete and co-opt ordinary folks.


no, the question of hitting people with bricks wasn't on the ballot paper so the results can not be adduced in that way. i am surprised by your implicit claim that people like boris johnson, michael gove and nigel farage - members of the political class all - campaigned to be hit with bricks.


----------



## hammerntongues (Jan 10, 2019)

Where is Guy Fawkes when you need him ...........


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The point was raised that many voted to hit the political class with a brick. If we are speculating on reasons, rather than merely stating the obvious, I’d say that doesn’t match the demographics of most who voted Leave.



It matches a significant set of them very well.  People from places where all the industries have closed down, who were perhaps hopeful for something from Labour in the Blair years and then got ignored while everyone marvelled at the success of the City Of London Money Laundering Miracle.  Few of them actually believed the EU was the origin of these problems, but they wanted something different, and also resented the way David Cameron and so many other people in power assumed they would just vote in line with how they were told like good little plebs.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, the question of hitting people with bricks wasn't on the ballot paper so the results can not be adduced in that way. i am surprised by your implicit claim that people like boris johnson, michael gove and nigel farage - members of the political class all - campaigned to be hit with bricks.



It was 8ball’s line, but you know full well that during the campaign parasites and nose in the trough merchants of many flavours were encouraging the idea that voting Leave was an act of rebellion against parasites and nose in the trough merchants.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It was 8ball’s line, but you know full well that during the campaign parasites and nose in the trough merchants of many flavours were encouraging the idea that voting Leave was an act of rebellion against parasites and nose in the trough merchants.


people said lots of things during the campaign. but i wouldn't take them all as the reasons people actually voted as they did.


----------



## chilango (Jan 10, 2019)

Will of the People.  Bad thing to invoke right now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

chilango said:


> Will of the People.  Bad thing to invoke right now?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

chilango said:


> Will of the People.  Bad thing to invoke right now?


Reminds me that the original people's vote was the anti Irish home rule 'peoples no' campaign


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The point was raised that many voted to hit the political class with a brick. If we are speculating on reasons, rather than merely stating the obvious, I’d say that doesn’t match the demographics of most who voted Leave. Many of the better off may have wanted to give it the old ‘Up Yours Delors’, but I suspect many also wanted a stronger British State.
> 
> But that’s the trouble with the elites. You’d think they’d just band together and agree to fuck us all over in the same way, but they have to compete and co-opt ordinary folks.



That's the problem, isn't it? The more you analyse the vote, the less coherent it appears. Young people (<25) of all classes voted majority remain, old people of all classes majority leave. That's probably the clearest demographic difference. Even the apparent class divide isn't as clear-cut as it first appears - LSE did research showing that, while the wealthier tended towards remain, so did those right at the bottom. The clearest leave sector was that just above the bottom. Makes some sense, I would think - if you're on minimum wage, you're unlikely to see a Polish colleague as a threat to your job, but if you have a trade that is worth a bit more than that, you may see a Pole with the same skills as you as a threat, especially as you see your wage dropping over time. And that is, imo, very revealing of one of the main drivers behind the leave majority. As others have said, that narrative was fuelled by the actions and words of many politicians, including May, ever since the credit crunch of 2008, right back to Gordon Brown's specious 'British jobs for British people' bullshit. And as has been pointed out by a few people on these threads, it bears a nasty resemblance to the narratives constructed in the 60s and 70s re immigrants from the Commonwealth.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 10, 2019)

17 million odd people voted for possibly 17 million odd reasons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> 17 million odd people voted for possibly 17 million odd reasons.


just as the people who cast their ballot the other way had their own odd and often frankly peculiar reasons for so doing


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 10, 2019)

hammerntongues said:


> Where is Guy Fawkes when you need him ...........


Yeah, a Catholic fundamentalist terrorist is just what we need right now


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yeah, a Catholic fundamentalist terrorist is just what we need right now


something something honest intentions


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 10, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Yeah, a Catholic fundamentalist terrorist is just what we need right now



Dark ages here we come!


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Brexit, on the other hand “means Brexit”, but other than that we keep hearing from this and that politician what “the Brexit the people voted for” was. Well, the only thing they voted for was “the United Kingdom should leave the European Union”. That’s it.



Which is why complaints about ‘Brexit in name only’ carry little weight.


----------



## Winot (Jan 10, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Dark ages here we come!



I think you’ll find the English Civil War came next.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> I think you’ll find the English Civil War came next.



The Clash discography?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> I think you’ll find the English Civil War came next.



I meant dragging us back to the past!


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> I think you’ll find the English Civil War came next.


I think you'll find it was the bishops war/ scotland vs england...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yep, there should be no protection from home truths.
> 
> But even Boney was quite polite to JRM.



Oh c'mon, you can't claim what they did is different to what Bone did/does. 

I don't give a fuck for clarity, for Soubry or JRM or his kids, but lets not pretend it's different.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Yes, COULD be clearer Wilf
> 
> It's the word "mitigates" - you're using it wrongly and it's pretty vital to the understanding of your sentence - in fact, it hinges on it, so I provided a couple of alternatives that might be what you meant, they might not.  By all means try again with another word, but don't use "mitigates" again, it doesn't work here.



I don't think you're in any position to lecture Wilf on politics or on language.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> 17 million odd people voted for possibly 17 million odd reasons.



So come on everyone what odd reason did you vote out for?

Don't think gold stars against a blue background works as a colour scheme?
Don't like the shape of Denmark
Got overcharged for a meal in Strasbourg in 1982


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So come on everyone what odd reason did you vote out for?
> 
> Don't think gold stars against a blue background works as a colour scheme?
> Don't like the shape of Denmark
> Got overcharged for a meal in Strasbourg in 1982



God told me too!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> if you say the situations are comparable then the news report will show that.



Touching faith in the media from our resident liberal fantasist.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There’s no reason to believe that Labour, were they to win, would command any more of a Commons consensus for their Brexit strategy than the Tories. The stalemate in the political classes is an ecumenical matter.



Depends what their Brexit strategy is to be fair but you can guarantee if it's any good Parliament will oppose it.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So come on everyone what odd reason did you vote out for?
> 
> Don't think gold stars against a blue background works as a colour scheme?
> Don't like the shape of Denmark
> Got overcharged for a meal in Strasbourg in 1982



I don’t like changing currency when I go on holiday.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So come on everyone what odd reason did you vote out for?
> 
> Don't think gold stars against a blue background works as a colour scheme?
> Don't like the shape of Denmark
> Got overcharged for a meal in Strasbourg in 1982



I wanted justice for the pigs.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Depends what their Brexit strategy is to be fair but you can guarantee if it's any good Parliament will oppose it.


Maybe. I think killerb has a point that some kind of Norway+ could perhaps get through. I heard a tory yesterday stand up to urge people to support May's Deal before listing all the reasons why N+ would be better. It's amazing that nobody likes May's deal, but everyone has a different reason for disliking it.  

But if, say, May's deal falls through, May falls, and a caretaker PM decides to go for a GE after obtaining an extension to A50, all of which I think are possible, you could have a situation where both the tories and labour end up campaigning on relatively similar versions of brexit. Were that to happen, a Brino N+-style deal could perhaps get through with cross-party support whoever wins the election. Problem I would see with that would be more for Labour than the Tories. I think a lot in Labour would be pushing hard for a 2nd ref as a policy, with the intention of stopping any kind of brexit. After all, most Labour MPs, members and voters oppose brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Maybe. I think killerb has a point that some kind of Norway+ could perhaps get through. I heard a tory yesterday stand up to urge people to support May's Deal before listing all the reasons why N+ would be better. It's amazing that nobody likes May's deal, but everyone has a different reason for disliking it.
> 
> But if, say, May's deal falls through, May falls, and a caretaker PM decides to go for a GE after obtaining an extension to A50, all of which I think are possible, you could have a situation where both the tories and labour end up campaigning on relatively similar versions of brexit. Were that to happen, a Brino N+-style deal could perhaps get through with cross-party support whoever wins the election. Problem I would see with that would be more for Labour than the Tories. I think a lot in Labour would be pushing hard for a 2nd ref as a policy, with the intention of stopping any kind of brexit. After all, most Labour MPs, members and voters oppose brexit.



Is an extension at all likely? I haven't seen a suggestion the EU would allow it.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is an extension at all likely? I haven't seen a suggestion the EU would allow it.


It would only be allowed in the case of a GE, 2nd ref or other such board-changing game move.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

Crispy said:


> It would only be allowed in the case of a GE, 2nd ref or other such board-changing game move.



So what would the EU do if there’s nothing like that happening and the Government asks them to hang on for a bit?


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> So what would the EU do if there’s nothing like that happening and the Government asks them to hang on for a bit?



According to what they've previously said, the EU should tell the UK they've had long enough and they either need to accept the existing deal or leave with no deal, but who knows if they'll actually do that...


----------



## Crispy (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> So what would the EU do if there’s nothing like that happening and the Government asks them to hang on for a bit?


They'd say no


----------



## Santino (Jan 10, 2019)

Ultimately the EU would prefer the UK to be in rather than out, so I imagine they'll make whatever concessions and rationalisations they need to if they can do that without damaging the overall European project.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 10, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> So what would the EU do if there’s nothing like that happening and the Government asks them to hang on for a bit?


I can't see that happening, tbh. But if it did, if there had been no change in the negotiating conditions, they'd just say no, knowing full well that the UK has power to revoke A50 right up to 10:59 on the evening of Friday 29 March, and banking on them doing that. If that situation were reached, no brexit would become a virtual inevitability, but I don't think it will be reached.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

Crispy said:


> They'd say no



Yeah, I mean what happens when they say no.  Not that I think things would get to that point in the first place, even with this shower.


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

The other thing I'm trying to get my head around is the timing of the General Election Corbyn is still saying he's going for.

If/when May loses the vote next Tuesday, even if Labour call and win a VoNC immediately, they still need to wait 14 days to see if the government can win another confidence vote, which takes us up to 29 January before a GE could be called (this is the earliest, and that depends on the VoNC being called immediately May loses). 

That leaves just two months before Brexit day, during which time the election must be held, a new government formed and whatever legislation is necessary being passed by the new HoC.

When May called a GE in 2017, there was a period of just over seven weeks between calling the election (18 April) and it being held (8 June), so it seems there's very little time for this General Election tactic of Corbyn's to work, even if he can command a clear majority rather than having to form some sort of coalition.

Thoughts?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> The other thing I'm trying to get my head around is the timing of the General Election Corbyn is still saying he's going for.
> 
> If/when May loses the vote next Tuesday, even if Labour call and win a VoNC immediately, they still need to wait 14 days to see if the government can win another confidence vote, which takes us up to 29 January before a GE could be called (this is the earliest, and that depends on the VoNC being called immediately May loses).
> 
> ...


May stands down, GE is called, govt goes to the EU to ask for an extension to A50 to allow for the election (with cross-party support), after which a new negotiation will be needed. EU would almost certainly have to agree to that, not to be seen to be blocking a democratic process.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can't see that happening, tbh. But if it did, if there had been no change in the negotiating conditions, they'd just say no, knowing full well that the UK has power to revoke A50 right up to 10:59 on the evening of Friday 29 March, and banking on them doing that. If that situation were reached, no brexit would become a virtual inevitability, but I don't think it will be reached.



Cheers - that’s kind of what I meant. 

Though a part of me wonders what would happen in actual reality if A50 then wasn’t revoked...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

8ball said:


> Cheers - that’s kind of what I meant.
> 
> Though a part of me wonders what would happen in actual reality if A50 then wasn’t revoked...


That's the one thing I don't think will happen. We're already seeing moves to block it and by March, there would be strong pressure on any govt to rule it out. No deal brexit is a bluff. Always has been.


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> May stands down, GE is called, govt goes to the EU to ask for an extension to A50 to allow for the election (with cross-party support), after which a new negotiation will be needed. EU would almost certainly have to agree to that, not to be seen to be blocking a democratic process.



We're not talking about May standing down, we're talking about the government losing a vote of no confidence. Once that happens, there is, surely, no government to ask the EU anything until after the election when a new government is formed.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

Maybe they'd send the queen to request the extension.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> When May called a GE in 2017, there was a period of just over seven weeks between calling the election (18 April) and it being held (8 June),


In theory, a GE can be a minimum of 3 weeks after a No Confidence vote. Practically it’s 3 Thursdays, though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> We're not talking about May standing down, we're talking about the government losing a vote of no confidence. Once that happens, there is, surely, no government to ask the EU anything until after the election when a new government is formed.


Ah ok. In that case, I would think some kind of a cross-party delegation could be sought to get the extension. A constitutional fudge of some kind or another. We're into uncharted waters clearly, but by that point the EU itself might be stepping in to offer an extension. Euro elections then become a bit tricky, I guess. There is no non-messy solution to any of this.


----------



## Santino (Jan 10, 2019)

During elections there is always an increased risk of invasion because there's no one to order the army to fight.


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In theory, a GE can be a minimum of 3 weeks after a No Confidence vote. Practically it’s 3 Thursdays, though.


I was wondering if there was a minimum of that sort, and pretty sure that someone here would know if there was


----------



## andysays (Jan 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Ah ok. In that case, I would think some kind of a cross-party delegation could be sought to get the extension. A constitutional fudge of some kind or another. We're into uncharted waters clearly, but by that point the EU itself might be stepping in to offer an extension. Euro elections then become a bit tricky, I guess. There is no non-messy solution to any of this.


This is just fantasy on your part now, isn't it...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> This is just fantasy on your part now, isn't it...



They were talking about this kind of thing on Newsnight last night.


----------



## Fez909 (Jan 10, 2019)

Thought this would've had an outing here by now:

Tech developer quits UK saying Brexit has ‘killed’ his business

IT manager complains he can't afford to outsource his work to Romania anymore due to Brexit, moves to Switzerland.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 10, 2019)

Santino said:


> During elections there is always an increased risk of invasion because there's no one to order the army to fight.


Could not make things any worse


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

looking at the FTPA, I _think_ May would remain prime minister until either someone else manages to cobble together a government and gets a confidence vote through, or the ensuing general election results are in. So she would ask for the extension.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Just realised Ian Duncan Smith is acutally called Ian Smith and he probably thought his name sounded a bit too common like, so brought out the Duncan to spice it up a bit


Ian Smith was Prime Minister of Rhodesia. I think the Tory right must have something equivalent to Equity rules.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> Thought this would've had an outing here by now:
> 
> Tech developer quits UK saying Brexit has ‘killed’ his business
> 
> IT manager complains he can't afford to outsource his work to Romania anymore due to Brexit, moves to Switzerland.



Yet the headline on yesterday's City AM proudly proclaimed London topped the EU rankings for tech companies yet again.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> looking at the FTPA, I _think_ May would remain prime minister until either someone else manages to cobble together a government and gets a confidence vote through, or the ensuing general election results are in. So she would ask for the extension.


Yes, the “outgoing” PM stays PM until a new one is appointed by HerMaj.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 10, 2019)

Its interesting that Sterling is sliding again apparently on the back of fears over another general election.  The markets are an unreliable indicator but its interesting none the less.  Corbyn's speech today did seem like an attempt at an opening salvo and setting the general theme for an election campaign.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> looking at the FTPA, I _think_ May would remain prime minister until either someone else manages to cobble together a government and gets a confidence vote through, or the ensuing general election results are in. So she would ask for the extension.



Gordon Brown remained PM for about a week after his GE defeat, until he realised he couldn't form a government, then asked Brenda to invite Disco Dave to have a go.


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its interesting that Sterling is sliding again apparently on the back of fears over another general election.  The markets are an unreliable indicator but its interesting none the less.  Corbyn's speech today did seem like an attempt at an opening salvo and setting the general theme for an election campaign.


There was some chat yesterday about a 'briefing note' circulated to Tory remainers which said the only surefire way of blocking no deal was to vote with Corbyn in a no confidence motion. I guess that is probably the more significant story as far as elections go.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> This is just fantasy on your part now, isn't it...


Speculation rather than fantasy, I'd say. Don't ask people for their thoughts if you're just going to ridicule them, eh? Nasty.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 10, 2019)

Santino said:


> During elections there is always an increased risk of invasion because there's no one to order the army to fight.



Are they like those security bots that just sit dormant until enters the passcode?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

Crispy said:


> It would only be allowed in the case of a GE, 2nd ref or other such board-changing game move.



Why would it be allowed then?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> The other thing I'm trying to get my head around is the timing of the General Election Corbyn is still saying he's going for.
> 
> If/when May loses the vote next Tuesday, even if Labour call and win a VoNC immediately, they still need to wait 14 days to see if the government can win another confidence vote, which takes us up to 29 January before a GE could be called (this is the earliest, and that depends on the VoNC being called immediately May loses).
> 
> ...



I'm not saying it isn't a bit speculative but we have to remember the fight to get an election would continue after March (I know you think it's fantasy but I'm fairly confident Brexit would be cancelled by then) and that may be in his mind.

I'm not sure it's quite the issue you think it is though because the 14 day window is for _any _govt to show it has the confidence of the house and I don't rate May or Corbyn's chances of doing that.

The Cooper/Morgan axis might though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gordon Brown remained PM for about a week after his GE defeat, until he realised he couldn't form a government, then asked Brenda to invite Disco Dave to have a go.



That would be handy as no incoming PM would have to humiliate themselves


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The Cooper/Morgan axis might though.


Ah, the centrist wank fantasy of a Cooper-led _government of all the talents._


----------



## Crispy (Jan 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why would it be allowed then?


That's what they've said

Article 50 extension would need major shift in UK politics, say EU officials


----------



## killer b (Jan 10, 2019)

Crispy said:


> That's what they've said
> 
> Article 50 extension would need major shift in UK politics, say EU officials


This is what they've said, but I'm not sure how solid anything one party in the middle of a negotiation of this sort says is. Plenty of things that definitely weren't going to happen have happened already - no reason to believe there aren't other circumstances where an extension would be granted.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't think you're in any position to lecture Wilf on politics or on language.



I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.


'Must do better'.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Must do better'.


Listen to _the experts_ pleb. Then we'd have none of this bother in the first place.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Must do better'.



Lol, see me!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.



Access to google puts us all in a similarly strong position, check this out:


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.


'kinnel


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Must do better'.



‘Must do _fewer’._


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.


No you're not, the evidence points to you correcting people for money. So why are you behaving so amateurishly?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Access to google puts us all in a similarly strong position, check this out:
> 
> View attachment 158278


Yeh I'm not sure I believe Wookey's claims either


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Access to google puts us all in a similarly strong position, check this out:
> 
> View attachment 158278



I love that you made such an effort to catch me out! Bravo.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh I'm not sure I believe Wookey's claims either



Totally see why, it just looks too good to be true, doesn't it?! 

Anyway, back to Brexit, boys, I've done enough boasting.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.



This kind of crap always comes out eventually with the m/c, doesn't it?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> ...Plenty of things that definitely weren't going to happen have happened already...


Yup.  They were all said by brexiters though.

Everything they said would happen isn't happening.

Everything they said wouldn't happen is happening.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

He like the nursery rhymes this one .


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually with the m/c, doesn't it?



This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

Wow.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?


Jesus.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?



Obverse of m/c being low achievers.

Hmmm


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 10, 2019)

Another one for the placard there wookey. Vote remain you untermensch


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

The class sneering and dismissal or even glee at inequality and its effects is something you get used to.  It's also what partly made me into a communist.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Wow.



Couldn't resist the bitch, I've actually have no idea what you have or haven't achieved. I only know what _I've _achieved from a deprived w/c childhood, so touch that matey and I'm gonna come after you I'm afraid.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

No. You can't row back from the above crap.


----------



## rekil (Jan 10, 2019)

There'll be an _I was born working class but made something of myself_ along in a minute.

e2a aw too late.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> No. You can't row back from the above crap.



You called me middle class. Go fuck yourself.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You called me middle class. Go fuck yourself.



You are.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> You are.



Go fuck yourself again.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 10, 2019)

Ever called someone a chav, Wookey?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?


BINGO!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Ever called someone a chav, Wookey?


He used to use the term all the time but not since 2011


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Ever called someone a chav, Wookey?


He fucks chavs, don't you remember his _i can't be a snob i fuck chavs thing_. They're delightful.

The lederhosen twat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Go fuck yourself again.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Chav


----------



## teqniq (Jan 10, 2019)

I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

Theresa May contacts union leaders for Brexit deal support from Labour


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> Ever called someone a chav, Wookey?



Yep, I'm from Salford. It's part of my local dialect, and the chavs I fuck love being called chavs, it's how they introduce themselves very often. Is that the answer you needed? 

I earn way less than the national average, I live and always will live in a rented place, I have precisely £1.27 to my name until next Tuesday, and no gas on the meter to get warm. My mum who I'm carer for lives round the corner, in rented sheltered accommodation, I didn't have a dad as a kid but I do know he was an Irish immigrant from fuck poor stock. Just because I got myself into lifelong debt to get a degree, and blagged a few cushty white collar jobs does not give you the right to re-assign my identity to better fit your world-view, so as previously requested go fuck yourself. It also means that when my relatively meagre accomplishments against pretty big odds are called into question, I'm going to get defensive. And on that, go fuck yourself again.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 10, 2019)




----------



## The39thStep (Jan 10, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I love the smell of desperation in the morning.
> 
> Theresa May contacts union leaders for Brexit deal support from Labour



Prob (the TUC) the EUs biggest boot kissers so makes sense


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The lederhosen twat.



And what's wrong with my lederhosen??


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Yep, I'm from Salford. It's part of my local dialect, and the chavs I fuck love being called chavs, it's how they introduce themselves very often. Is that the answer you needed?
> 
> I earn way less than the national average, I live and always will live in a rented place, I have precisely £1.27 to my name until next Tuesday, and no gas on the meter to get warm. My mum who I'm carer for lives round the corner, in rented sheltered accommodation, I didn't have a dad as a kid but I do know he was an Irish immigrant from fuck poor stock. Just because I got myself into lifelong debt to get a degree, and blagged a few cushty white collar jobs does not give you the right to re-assign my identity to better fit your world-view, so as previously requested go fuck yourself. It also means that when my relatively meagre accomplishments against pretty big odds are called into question, I'm going to get defensive. And on that, go fuck yourself again.


And that knife you broke.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And that knife you broke.



Butch, that's just scary man. I don't even remember that and it's my life!!


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 10, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Prob (the TUC) the EUs biggest boot kissers so makes sense


The ETUC has been one of the biggest enablers of euro-neoliberalism going.  A yellow union euro-wide that actual unions joined up to.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Yep, I'm from Salford. It's part of my local dialect, *and the chavs I fuck love being called chavs, it's how they introduce themselves very often.* Is that the answer you needed?
> 
> I earn way less than the national average, I live and always will live in a rented place, I have precisely £1.27 to my name until next Tuesday, and no gas on the meter to get warm. My mum who I'm carer for lives round the corner, in rented sheltered accommodation, I didn't have a dad as a kid but I do know he was an Irish immigrant from fuck poor stock. Just because I got myself into lifelong debt to get a degree, and blagged a few cushty white collar jobs does not give you the right to re-assign my identity to better fit your world-view, so as previously requested go fuck yourself. It also means that when my relatively meagre accomplishments against pretty big odds are called into question, I'm going to get defensive. And on that, go fuck yourself again.



Mr Irresistible


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 10, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Prob (the TUC) the EUs biggest boot kissers so makes sense


So the tory pm is going to the unions for help?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> So the tory pm is going to the unions for help?


Wonder what she would offer?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Mr Irresistible



You wouldn't believe, looks like a Job Centre Plus in my bedroom some days.

Can we get back to Brexit please?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 10, 2019)

From the Guardian, as though she needed any more opposition once the Arch Bish stuck his knife in, she now has these pair bending the ears of the Tory faithful. 

"An ex-MI6 chief and a former head of the armed forces have warned that the prime minister’s Brexit deal will threaten national security if it is not defeated, according to Sky News. The letter from Sir Richard Dearlove and Field Marshal Lord Guthrie reads:

We are taking the unprecedented step of writing to all Conservative party chairmen to advise and to warn you that this withdrawal agreement, if not defeated, will threaten the national security of the country in fundamental ways. Please ensure that your MP does not vote for this bad agreement.

The first duty of the state, above trade, is the security of its citizens. The withdrawal agreement abrogates this fundamental contract and would place control of aspects of our national security in foreign hands.

Please ensure that your MP votes against this bad agreement and supports a sovereign Brexit on WTO rules, without payment of ransom, for which we now know from an heroic anonymous civil servant, the civil service is, of course, fully prepared."


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?



You think you're a high achiever?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Jesus.



He was a low achiever too.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Just because I got myself into lifelong debt to get a degree, and blagged a few cushty white collar jobs does not give you the right to re-assign my identity to better fit your world-view, so as previously requested go fuck yourself. It also means that when my relatively meagre accomplishments against pretty big odds are called into question, I'm going to get defensive. And on that, go fuck yourself again.



I don't know about re-assigning, but the way in which we establish our forum identity is through the words that we post. Perhaps yours have not properly represented the solidarity that might be expected from someone with your self-identified status?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I don't know about re-assigning, but the way in which we establish our forum identity is through the words that we post. Perhaps yours have not properly represented the solidarity that might be expected from someone with your self-identified status?



Tommy Robinson is working class, isn't he? We're not all heroes, and some of us are cunts. The anti-intellectual ones who mistake learning for economic or class progression are the biggest self-limiting cunts of all.

Being well educated and being working class are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Tommy Robinson is working class, isn't he? We're not all heroes, and some of us are cunts. The anti-intellectual ones who mistake learning for economic or class progression are the biggest self-limiting cunts of all.
> 
> Being well educated and being working class are not mutually exclusive.


You may have been marked present during lectures and various other educational events but a well educated person would have the sense- or even just the good grace, given you see yourself as a standard we must live up to-  to look up  a word he clearly had trouble spelling. Especially prior to bragging about his 25 years of experience in teaching, of all things, fucking English. 

No, “too intellectual” is not your problem here.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You may have been marked present during lectures and various other educational events but a well educated person would have the sense- or even just the good grace, given you see yourself as a standard we must live up to-  to look up  a word he clearly had trouble spelling. Especially prior to bragging about his 25 years of experience in teaching, of all things, fucking English.
> 
> No, “too intellectual” is not your problem here.



To be honest my MS has taken my vision away and I make lots of mistakes trying to type on my mobile. I spend as much time correcting posts as I do writing them, but that one clearly slipped through. I'm sure there'd be plenty more mistakes if I looked, and I could read them properly. Thank fuck for predictive text. 

And there's a difference between academic learning and emotional intelligence isn't there. I can claim one, not making any claims about the other.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You may have been marked present during lectures and various other educational events but a well educated person would have the sense- or even just the good grace, given you see yourself as a standard we must live up to-  to look up  a word he clearly had trouble spelling. Especially prior to bragging about his 25 years of experience in teaching, of all things, fucking English.
> 
> No, “too intellectual” is not your problem here.



Also, not claiming to be perfect, but when I _could_ see properly I made a nice wedge editing national magazines and copy-editing and proof-reading print materials, so I have no need to prove my orthographic credentials to you. I just spelled a word wrongly, it tells you nothing about me despite what you claim to have deduced from it.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Other than this forum clearly doesn't pay me enough to care in quite the same way as an actual job does.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Really brilliant analysis on the Bercow manoeuvre on the Grieve amendment, from Ian Dunt who has fast become my fave commentator and political nerd. 

Parliament is now at war with government - and it's winning

"There is also an awful lot of nonsense about the idea that Bercow is abusing his impartiality as Speaker to help Remain. In actual fact, the last time Bercow went against convention so aggressively was in 2013, during the Queen's Speech, when he allowed an unprecedented third amendment about the absence of a bill for a referendum on Britain's membership of the EU. When he breaks the conventions for Brexiters, they say nothing. When it is against their interests, they scream about parliamentary procedure."


----------



## free spirit (Jan 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> We're not talking about May standing down, we're talking about the government losing a vote of no confidence. Once that happens, there is, surely, no government to ask the EU anything until after the election when a new government is formed.


The FTP act allows for anyone to attempt to gain the necessary support to form a government following the first vote of no confidence before a general election is called - as the explanatory notes for the legislation make clear.

So it's possible parliament could vote out May's government and then vote in either Corbyn, or someone else who's capable of gaining the majorty support of Parliament.

Currently the only person who seems able to get a majority on Brexit related votes in the Commons seems to be dominic grieve who put forward the motion that's reduced the time between Brexit votes to 3 days from 21.

If May loses the 2 votes Parliament could actually vote to remove the government, and then vote in a different temporary unity government pretty much straight away, probably just to either cancel article 50 or more likely put the legislation through for a 2nd referendum and ask the EU to extend article 50 to allow it. I'm pretty sure from the timings that this is Grieve's aim, not sure who they have in mind as the unity prime minister candidate.



eta actually Grieve has detailed his strategy here, which doesn't mention this route, but it is a possibility if Corbyn does put forward a motion of no confidence in the government.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You wouldn't believe, looks like a Job Centre Plus in my bedroom some days.


Fucking hell! 
As a self confessed fuckwit when it comes to brexit, I like to read this thread for people's views. I'm obviously not as educated as you, but if i slated people who had to frequent jobcentre plus like you have I'd be very fucking ashamed.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?


Urgh.


----------



## andysays (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> This kind of crap always comes out eventually from low achievers, doesn't it?


Would you believe it, some of those daring to post here don't even have a basic grasp of colour coordination...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Tommy Robinson is working class, isn't he? We're not all heroes, and some of us are cunts. The anti-intellectual ones who mistake learning for economic or class progression are the biggest self-limiting cunts of all.
> 
> Being well educated and being working class are not mutually exclusive.


Invoking tommeh to justify your own cuntishness looks almost like a deliberate attempt to illustrate the notion that, of itself, educational attainment does not necessarily endow wisdom.
Dismal derail of a good thread; I’ll strive to ignore your narcissistic twaddle from now on.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

I do quite a lot of business with Scandinavian companies. Around a third are saying they are not coming to the UK as they don't trust us (the government) to manage Brexit.

Can't really blame them


----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

Christ, and I thought I was a sneering twat...


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

free spirit said:


> The FTP act allows for anyone to attempt to gain the necessary support to form a government following the first vote of no confidence before a general election is called - as the explanatory notes for the legislation make clear.
> 
> So it's possible parliament could vote out May's government and then vote in either Corbyn, or someone else who's capable of gaining the majorty support of Parliament.
> 
> ...


The problem with a temporary unity government is that Theresa May is still leader of the conservatives and Jeremy Corbyn is leader of Labour, and neither of them would be interested in getting involved. Any MP for either party who did would have the whip removed. Are there enough Labour and Tory MPs prepared to torpedo their careers to form a government? I don't think so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You wouldn't believe, looks like a Job Centre Plus in my bedroom some days.
> 
> Can we get back to Brexit please?


Not sure if you're saying you shag dolies or making out you wake up next to officious sanctioning wankers


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You wouldn't believe, looks like a Job Centre Plus in my bedroom some days.



So you degrade and insult your clients?

Or maybe you just have really nasty furniture.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.


LOL


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> the chavs I fuck love being called chavs, it's how they introduce themselves very often.



I met a black man


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Tommy Robinson is working class, isn't he? We're not all heroes, and some of us are cunts. The anti-intellectual ones who mistake learning for economic or class progression are the biggest self-limiting cunts of all.
> 
> Being well educated and being working class are not mutually exclusive.



The problem is not with education per se but the use of access to formal education as a way to to not only denigrate and attempt to humiliate people into silence (_what would you know about such things van driver/hair dresser/stay at home parent_) or to try and invalidate what they are saying because of their class/economic status. And it's that status value which some people attach to that access and through which I have seen nasty irl put-downs of 'ordinary' people.  It is often used as a way to dismiss or disregard w/c people and it should be challenged. 

I am also amused by your conflation of access to formal education with intelligence or intellectual curiosity and learning. That is where the above is also used to attack and exclude w/c people, when these types are challenged by the arguments or better knowledge of people deemed their social inferiors. It is intended to shut those challenges down by appealing to their own authority.  The parading of educational credentials as a way to put the prole back in their place.  There's nasty class dynamics going on with that and it should be shown up for what it is.

TR is petit-bourgeois labour camp fodder.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 11, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> I am also amused by your conflation of access to formal education with intelligence or intellectual curiosity and learning.



This. I have a degree in history these days but I'm actually less inclined to read it now than I was before and there's not many areas of history where I wouldn't defer to seventh bullet or butchersapron, neither of whom have a degree to the best of my knowledge. 

In my experience an arts or languages degree just means you had the chance to go, either through background or sheer luck, and you're not completely academically incapable. It's really not difficult even I fucking managed it.

My apprenticeship was fucking difficult and hard work though...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Leadership contender Hunt all over the media 'warning' that voting down May's 'agreement' would result in "_Brexit paralysis".
_
Their desperation is such that indictment of their own capabilities is regarded as leverage.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> Would you believe it, some of those daring to post here don't even have a basic grasp of colour coordination...



Colour coordination? WTAF is that?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Christ, and I thought I was a sneering twat...



Oh, don't worry, you still are!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I met a black man



Was that the 45-yr old black man who'd been in the Royal Navy for 40 yrs?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Oh, don't worry, you still are!



thank God for that - i can see myself having to up my game though, i'm not going to get to 400 points with this coasting attitude!


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Leadership contender Hunt all over the media 'warning' that voting down May's 'agreement' would result in "_Brexit paralysis".
> _
> Their desperation is such that indictment of their own capabilities is regarded as leverage.


last time I saw that weak chin on the tele he was extolling the virtues of democracy, in Singapore.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> The problem is not with education per se but the use of access to formal education as a way to to not only denigrate and attempt to humiliate people into silence (_what would you know about such things van driver/hair dresser/stay at home parent_) or to try and invalidate what they are saying because of their class/economic status. And it's that status value which some people attach to that access and through which I have seen nasty irl put-downs of 'ordinary' people.  It is often used as a way to dismiss or disregard w/c people and it should be challenged.



Frankly, even if you've attained similar or better formal education awards, if you speak with a working class accent, then you're still dismissed and disregarded, or you're treated like a pet monkey, by the "learned" middle classes.

I've posted here before about being on the receiving end of that in real life, most recently from an Oxbridge wanker (same college as Laurie Penny and fuck off dwyer) who's a local councillor. She waved her Bachelor's degree (at me as a way of implying that I didn't know what I was talking about regarding white collar crime in local authorities, so I waved my Masters (Criminology) back (not that I needed to, because I live in a thoroughly corrupt borough that's been the "south of Watford" equivalent of Doncaster for decades, so have seen quite a bit of it first-hand). Cue her trying (and failing) to have me blacklisted from attending any meetings or events at the Town Hall. 



> I am also amused by your conflation of access to formal education with intelligence or intellectual curiosity and learning. That is where the above is also used to attack and exclude w/c people, when these types are challenged by the arguments or better knowledge of people deemed their social inferiors. It is intended to shut those challenges down by appealing to their own authority.  The parading of educational credentials as a way to put the prole back in their place.  There's nasty class dynamics going on with that and it should be shown up for what it is.



Appeals to authority, especially one's own (unless thoroughly qualified) are often the mark of a very poor argument. We know this, and those doing it know it too. There will ALWAYS be nasty class dynamics, because for some people it's all they've got. It's why the Tories (Blue *and* Red) have gone out of their way to insulate the middle classes for so long, while hacking away the access of working class adults to formal further and higher education and to libraries.



> TR is petit-bourgeois labour camp fodder.



Not even worth a bullet.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Was that the 45-yr old black man who'd been in the Royal Navy for 40 yrs?


Thick pig fucking twat said he was 40 & had been in the Navy for 30 years.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Thick pig fucking twat said he was 40 & had been in the Navy for 30 years.



Knew it was something like that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Frankly, even if you've attained similar or better formal education awards, if you speak with a working class accent, then you're still dismissed and disregarded, or you're treated like a pet monkey, by the "learned" middle classes.


not to mention that working class students are often bullied by entitled scum who believe only their class should be at uni


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> not to mention that working class students at are often bullied by entitled scum who believe only their class should be at uni



Sadly true.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> not to mention that working class students at are often bullied by entitled scum who believe only their class should be at uni


My experience was sometimes bullying, but nearly always patronising.


----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Frankly, even if you've attained similar or better formal education awards, if you speak with a working class accent, then you're still dismissed and disregarded, or you're treated like a pet monkey, by the "learned" middle classes.



Which is why private education is designed to enable the transmission/acquisition/reproduction of social and cultural capital as well as educational capital.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 11, 2019)

So your chances in life come down to where you stick your tongue when you make vowel sounds. Seems fair.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> So your chances in life come down to where you stick your tongue when you make vowel sounds. Seems fair.



That's why we change our accents at job interviews. I always felt more sorry for the posh people who actually can't change their accents as well, because they've never had to. They have one posh default, and if they try to informalise their accent and drop their H's, it sounds effected to me...

I can code switch from my natural Salford urban working class idiolect to newsreader in a heartbeat, it's what you do to increase your social mobility, it should not be a fact of life of course, but it is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> That's why we change our accents at job interviews. I always felt more sorry for the posh people who actually can't change their accents as well, because they've never had to. They have one posh default, and if they try to informalise their accent and drop their H's, it sounds effected to me...
> 
> I can code switch from my natural Salford urban working class idiolect to newsreader in a heartbeat, it's what you do to increase your social mobility, it should not be a fact of life of course, but it is.


affected. the effect is it sounds affected. people get this wrong all the fucking time.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 11, 2019)

I thought Wookey was intelligent enough to know the difference.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> That's why we change our accents at job interviews.



Can I add that IMO it is OK to do that, just like we dress up the body for an interview, I don't see any harm in dressing up the voice to go along with the clothing. If changing the accent to grab a bit more temporary social capital is dishonest, then so is changing the clothes or having a haircut.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> I thought Wookey was intelligent enough to know the difference.


it's his erroneous vocabulary


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

seventh bullet said:


> The problem is not with education per se but the use of access to formal education as a way to to not only denigrate and attempt to humiliate people into silence (_what would you know about such things van driver/hair dresser/stay at home parent_) or to try and invalidate what they are saying because of their class/economic status. And it's that status value which some people attach to that access and through which I have seen nasty irl put-downs of 'ordinary' people.  It is often used as a way to dismiss or disregard w/c people and it should be challenged.
> 
> I am also amused by your conflation of access to formal education with intelligence or intellectual curiosity and learning. That is where the above is also used to attack and exclude w/c people, when these types are challenged by the arguments or better knowledge of people deemed their social inferiors. It is intended to shut those challenges down by appealing to their own authority.  The parading of educational credentials as a way to put the prole back in their place.  There's nasty class dynamics going on with that and it should be shown up for what it is.
> 
> TR is petit-bourgeois labour camp fodder.



If I tried to fix a tap, and I was doing it wrongly, and a plumber with 20 years plumbing experience tried to tell me how to do it, I would concede to her superior experience, STFU and listen to her. Expertise shouldn't be dismissed as a way of protecting one's fragile ego. Some people just know more about certain things - so when I was told I was in no position to question Wilf's use of the word "mitigates", as a linguist, English teacher and professional writer, I would disagree.

In the same way as my years as a barman mean I know what goes into cocktails, my years as a waiter mean I do subservient customer service really well, my years as a court reporter mean I kinda understand the workings of applied justice - it's just what we know.

I guess the people have had enough of experts though, eh?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> affected. the effect is it sounds affected. people get this wrong all the fucking time.



I get it wrong every time, and also "effect" and "affect". It's a blind spot, we all have them apparently, repeated mistakes that show up again and again until we can't recall which one is the right one, cause we've made the mistakes so repeatedly.


----------



## seventh bullet (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If I tried to fix a tap, and I was doing it wrongly, and a plumber with 20 years plumbing experience tried to tell me how to do it, I would concede to her superior experience, STFU and listen to her. Expertise shouldn't be dismissed as a way of protecting one's fragile ego. Some people just know more about certain things - so when I was told I was in no position to question Wilf's use of the word "mitigates", as a linguist, English teacher and professional writer, I would disagree.
> 
> In the same way as my years as a barman mean I know what goes into cocktails, my years as a waiter mean I do subservient customer service really well, my years as a court reporter mean I kinda understand the workings of applied justice - it's just what we know.
> 
> I guess the people have had enough of experts though, eh?



Way to have completely misunderstood what I posted.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's his erroneous vocabulary



As bad as your punctuation mate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I think by mitigates you might mean justify? Or minimise?
> 
> Why mention her impact on dv services if you aren't actually (despite the underline) trying precisely to do that? It's not relevant at all to the discussion, unless you are suggesting she somehow asked for it coz of her CV, which I'm sure you wouldn't.


i think you might want to review what mitigate means, as it seems to be covered by meanings 4.c. and/or 4.e. of the verb 'mitigate'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> As bad as your punctuation mate.


i don't have a punctuation mate. you see how your omitted comma changes the meaning of your sentence from what i presume was intended to be 'as bad as your punctuation, mate'.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 11, 2019)

Hear a posh accent and I usually assume their bullshitting. Maybe Hollywood villains have done that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I get it wrong every time, and also "effect" and "affect". It's a blind spot, we all have them apparently, repeated mistakes that show up again and again until we can't recall which one is the right one, cause we've made the mistakes so repeatedly.


you mean you've made the mistakes so frequently. i thought as a linguist and teacher, not to mention as a professional writers, you'd be able to differentiate between two words of similar appearance but different meanings.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Hear a posh accent and I usually assume their bullshitting. Maybe Hollywood villains have done that.


the posher the accent the deeper the bullshit?


----------



## Supine (Jan 11, 2019)

If I was interviewing somebody and thought they were putting on an accent i'd think their a twat.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the posher the accent the deeper the bullshit?



If so, JRM is in trouble.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> If so, JRM is in trouble.


not to mention the queen and her nefandous spawn


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> If I was interviewing somebody and thought they were putting on an accent i'd think their a twat.



How would you know?
Would you feel the same if you didn't think their clothes suited them?


----------



## andysays (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> That's why we change our accents at job interviews. I always felt more sorry for the posh people who actually can't change their accents as well, because they've never had to. They have one posh default, and if they try to informalise their accent and drop their H's, it sounds effected to me...
> 
> I can code switch from my natural Salford urban working class idiolect to newsreader in a heartbeat, it's what you do to increase your social mobility, it should not be a fact of life of course, but it is.


(((Posh people)))


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't have a punctuation mate. you see how your omitted comma changes the meaning of your sentence from what i presume was intended to be 'as bad as your punctuation, mate'.



no it doesn change the meaning at all, the meaning remains quite the same even without punctuation, you're just pointing out the difference between formal punctuation and less formal punctuation, not semantic differences


----------



## Supine (Jan 11, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> How would you know?
> Would you feel the same if you didn't think their clothes suited them?



I wouldn't know how clothes suited somebody. I'd be looking to employ somebody authentic regardless of accent, hometown, suit colour or football team supported...


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

lads.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> no it doesn change the meaning at all, the meaning remains quite the same even without punctuation, you're just pointing out the difference between formal punctuation and less formal punctuation, not semantic differences


ywstwy


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

I love it when _experts _attempt urban demotic mate.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 11, 2019)

May needs to bring the vote if for no other reason then to get this thread back on track.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> I wouldn't know how clothes suited somebody. I'd be looking to employ somebody authentic regardless of accent, hometown, suit colour or football team supported...


I'm not working for you. You're a prick.


----------



## Winot (Jan 11, 2019)

U75 threads will stay relevant after we’ve left the EU.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 11, 2019)

.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 11, 2019)

So foreign accents ok for the job but not local ones? Someone needs to sort this shit out. Fuck being ashamed of your country and its linguistic splendour.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you might want to review what mitigate means, as it seems to be covered by meanings 4.c. and/or 4.e. of the verb 'mitigate'
> View attachment 158350



Thanks for that, I love new knowledge and being better informed today than I was yesterday, no matter the class of the person telling me! 



Pickman's model said:


> you mean you've made the mistakes so frequently. i thought as a linguist and teacher, not to mention as a professional writers, you'd be able to differentiate between two words of similar appearance but different meanings.



Not frequently, _every single time_. The same way I can never spell receive properly (just got it wrong there again, thanks spellcheck!) it's a repeated error of mine. We all have them, I used to have a journo work for me who would always get "could of" and "could have" wrong - he had a degree in English too. Doesn't mean he wasn't a superb writer and communicator who was very, very good at punctuation. It was just his blind spot.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

Make sure that's its clear that they worked for you. For you.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I can code switch from my natural Salford urban working class idiolect to newsreader in a heartbeat, it's what you do to increase your social mobility, it should not be a fact of life of course, but it is.



This post certainly increases your social status as a wanker.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you mean you've made the mistakes so frequently. i thought as a linguist and teacher, not to mention as a professional writers, you'd be able to differentiate between two words of similar appearance but different meanings.



We're also on a bulletin board, writing in real time with very little in the way of post-editing (clearly!) so that is how you can get away with your cavalier attitude to punctuation, you see. I could correct your posts all day long, but that would make me as tedious as you, and has nothing to do with the thread at all.

Asking Wilf why mentioning Anna Soubry's actions on domestic violence in the House could be construed as a way to minimise the harassment she faces on the streets was a pertinent question, considering Wilf had tried to claim that was exactly what he wasn't doing. Either he chose the right word, and was not being truthful, or he was being truthful and chose the wrong word. I wondered which.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

Notice how the claim of linguistic expertise morphs into social-political expertise.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Asking Wilf why mentioning Anna Soubry's actions on domestic violence in the House could be construed as a way to minimise the harassment she faces on the streets was a pertinent question, considering Wilf had tried to claim that was exactly what he wasn't doing. Either he chose the right word, and was not being truthful, or he was being truthful and chose the wrong word. I wondered which.


 In which case, I'd like to thank you for wondering.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Make sure that's its clear that they worked for you. For you.



I was his Editor and had to correct his usage regularly, which is pertinent to the point I am making that you can correct someone every time they do it wrongly, and they'll still keep getting it wrong. The fact I was his BOSS and he was my STAFF should not upset you, it's a commonly replicated power structure in what I like to call "the real world".


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In which case, I'd like to thank you for wondering.



Most welcome Wilf. I like your posts, otherwise I wouldn't be arsed asking.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

Make sure everyone knows that you were his superior though . Make sure


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

sunnysidedown said:


> This post certainly increases your social status as a wanker.



Really, do elucidate on why the almost universal human practice of linguistic code switching makes me a wanker?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I was his Editor and had to correct his usage regularly, which is pertinent to the point I am making that you can correct someone every time they do it wrongly, and they'll still keep getting it wrong. The fact I was his BOSS and he was my STAFF should not upset you, it's a commonly replicated power structure in what I like to call "the real world".




What kind of cunt for a boss lets their staff repeatedly make the same mistake?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> We're also on a bulletin board, writing in real time with very little in the way of post-editing (clearly!) so that is how you can get away with your cavalier attitude to punctuation, you see. I could correct your posts all day long, but that would make me as tedious as you, and has nothing to do with the thread at all.
> 
> Asking Wilf why mentioning Anna Soubry's actions on domestic violence in the House could be construed as a way to minimise the harassment she faces on the streets was a pertinent question, considering Wilf had tried to claim that was exactly what he wasn't doing. Either he chose the right word, and was not being truthful, or he was being truthful and chose the wrong word. I wondered which.


yeh you'd correct my posts all day long then i'd have to go back and correct you and it'd be super tedious all round.

as for Wilf, he may have chosen the right word and been truthful, which would be my starting point.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Really, do elucidate on why the almost universal human practice of linguistic code switching makes me a wanker?


because this is Urban


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh you'd correct my posts all day long then i'd have to go back and correct you and it'd be super tedious all round.
> 
> as for Wilf, he may have chosen the right word and been truthful, which would be my starting point.



I think we might well have reached that conclusion naturally, had we been allowed to continue that discussion without your interruption that I was in no position to question him on what he meant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> The first duty of the state, above trade, is the security of its citizens.


no it isn't, as anyone who has travelled down the walworth road would know


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> because this is Urban



See, I will keep forgetting that - like a daily, repeated mistake that I just wont learn from.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)




----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You called me middle class. Go fuck yourself.





Wookey said:


> The fact I was his BOSS and he was my STAFF should not upset you, it's a commonly replicated power structure in what I like to call "the real world".



Sorry Wookey you can't have it both ways.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> See, I will keep forgetting that - like a daily, repeated mistake that I just *wont* learn from.


you huff about other people's punctuation but your own is abysmal. any degree-waving linguist ought to be able to use apostrophes, let alone a professional writer and teacher. and it's not the first time you've missed one out. i suppose this is *another* of your blind spots.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Really, do elucidate on why the almost universal human practice of linguistic code switching makes me a wanker?



Linguistic birth marks should be left alone, not subjected to correctionist surgery.

And I said _as a wanker_ ie, you were already one before you made that post.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

sunnysidedown said:


> Linguistic birth marks should be left alone, not subjected to correctionist surgery.
> 
> And I said _as a wanker_ ie, you were already one before you made that post.


yeh. anyone who can ask a question starting 'do elucidate' hasn't only just made it to wankerville but is an obvious long-term resident.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

Food Politics and Policies in Post-Brexit Britain


> Brexit, for better or worse, means a major structural change in how people in the UK think about the food they eat. There is an opportunity to reformulate food policy for the better, but this could be easily squandered if not managed carefully.



Adequate food


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Really, do elucidate on why the almost universal human practice of linguistic code switching makes me a wanker?


do elucidate on why? what sort of gibberish is that? elucidate on? really? pisspoor.


----------



## elbows (Jan 11, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> last time I saw that weak chin on the tele he was extolling the virtues of democracy, in Singapore.



I groaned when I saw a headline about that, but he also used the speech to say they wouldn't follow the Singapore low tax, 'low regulation climate' model that gives so many parasitic scum eggs a stiffy.

Hunt says UK 'can learn' from Singapore


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

elbows said:


> I groaned when I saw a headline about that, but he also used the speech to say they wouldn't follow the Singapore low tax, 'low regulation climate' model that gives so many parasitic scum eggs a stiffy.
> 
> Hunt says UK 'can learn' from Singapore


you'd have hoped we'd have learned from singapore a long time ago


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> So your chances in life come down to where you stick your tongue when you make vowel sounds. Seems fair.



Oh come on, Geordies were in vogue for at least one week. What more is it you want?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Food Politics and Policies in Post-Brexit Britain
> 
> 
> Adequate food



I'm going to guess the government isn't about to suddenly start managing things carefully.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm going to guess the government isn't about to suddenly start managing things carefully.


yeh it hasn't so far so why change now?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> So your chances in life come down to where you stick your tongue when you make vowel sounds. Seems fair.



Or where you are prepared to stick your tongue after employment!


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> I'm going to guess the government isn't about to suddenly start managing things carefully.


Arent we getting pizzas delivered from Ramsgate?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 11, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Arent we getting pizzas delivered from Ramsgate?



Unfortunately the people who are contracted to do it haven't got an oven.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Unfortunately the people who are contracted to do it haven't got an oven.


or delivery people


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 11, 2019)

They do have plenty of dough though.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do elucidate on why? what sort of gibberish is that? elucidate on? really? pisspoor.



Pickman's model 

I really don't have time engage with all these fascinating and relevant posts my friend, so if you don't mind I'm going to turn down the volume on you for a while.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

chilango said:


> Sorry Wookey you can't have it both ways.



I was someone's boss once. That irrevocably and permanently changes my class identity and social status does it? 

I think we need more self-identified working class people in positions of influence, rather than fewer. Self-flaggalation is not a good look. And no temporary job contract is going to change who I am and where I am from.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

that's arse about tit - we need less positions of influence.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> that's arse about tit - we need less positions of influence.



You work on your preferred model, let me know how you're getting on with that.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 11, 2019)

Jesus, I’m middle-class on every conceivable axis — relation to economic power, social signifiers, cultural capital, you name it — and even I think you could do with toning down the middle class outrage, Wookey


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Jesus, I’m middle-class on every conceivable axis — relation to economic power, social signifiers, cultural capital, you name it — and even I think you could do with toning down the middle class outrage, Wookey



I'm not middle class by most general accepted indices, and I have a blue collar CV for blue collar jobs, and a white collar one for professional jobs. They can't be mixed without raising suspicion in my experience.

I was trained as a journalist on a Trinity Mirror scheme which was aimed at low-income people and BAME, so my professional status is wholly down to where I am from and who I am. That should be celebrated, as most mainstream media is dominated by people who own their own home, and have mummy and daddy there to help them, and who have been gifted their privilege rather than working for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Pickman's model
> 
> I really don't have time engage with all these fascinating and relevant posts my friend, so if you don't mind I'm going to turn down the volume on you for a while.


you've gone all brave sir robin.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm not middle class by most general accepted indices, and I have a blue collar CV for blue collar jobs, and a white collar one for professional jobs. They can't be mixed without raising suspicion in my experience.
> 
> I was trained as a journalist on a Trinity Mirror scheme which was aimed at low-income people and BAME, so my professional status is wholly down to where I am from and who I am. That should be celebrated, as most mainstream media is dominated by people who own their own home, and have mummy and daddy there to help them, and who have been gifted their privilege rather than working for it.


Then stop acting like spoilt Celia who has just had her pony taken away


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Then stop acting like spoilt Celia who has just had her pony taken away


grand sexism there


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 11, 2019)

This is the filth that meritocracy helps float to the top.


----------



## tommers (Jan 11, 2019)

So.  Is Brexit actually going to happen? 

It's an interesting question.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 11, 2019)

Mind your language


----------



## Supine (Jan 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> So.  Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> It's an interesting question.



It's swinging away at the moment. Just read an article about finance twats who are now investing in £ expecting an upside when brexit is cancelled. 

Of course the opposite could happen so who knows in these crazy times.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> ...so my professional status is wholly down to where I am from and who I am....



bollocks. 

you wouldn't have known about the scheme unless you had the _privilage_ of having pretty switched on parents or teachers - or, if it was later in life, came from an upbringing that pushed/allowed you to believe that any job/career you fancied was yours for the taking.

you wouldn't have got near the scheme if your basic standard of literacy hadn't been pretty good - your application would have gone in the bin otherwise - and you won't have got past the short list if you hadn't interviewed reasonably well, which requires a degree of self-confidence and social skills.

your ability to do your job might be 'you', but what it takes to get you to the start line is overwhelmingly other people. it is those people and the conditions they provide who are the difference between being privilaged and being unprivilaged.

i am privilaged, very privilaged. if you think that the difference between you and people who didn't get the TM scheme is your natural ability then you are utterly divorced from reality.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> bollocks.
> 
> you wouldn't have known about the scheme unless you had the _privilage_ of having pretty switched on parents or teachers - or, if it was later in life, came from an upbringing that pushed/allowed you to believe that any job/career you fancied was yours for the taking.
> 
> ...



I saw an advert in the Liverpool Echo. I applied because it said if you can't afford this training in any other way, we can offer it to you for free. It was my poverty that made me eligible, and my skills that got me chosen ahead of other working class people who applied. Positive discrimination worked for me, as opposed to the traditional negative discrimination I'm getting from some people on this thread.

I now work for a housing charity, currently heading up a national campaign on benefit reform, Universal Credit roll out and tenant's rights. Of the 20 people om my team, I am the only one in insecure housing, the only one who grew up in a council house, and the only one to have been on Universal Credit in the last two years. My lived experience is often crucial to the direction of the work we're doing, and yet it seems some people want to deny me that lived experience the minute I get a salary rather than a wage. 

I don't deny I have had luck, in that my mum believed in books, my teachers thought I was gifted, I was able to (get myself into masses of debt to) get a degree that meant I could leave Salford more easily. But the idea I should see this as a privilege rather than a basic human right is really, painfully wrong.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> So.  Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> It's an interesting question.



That is an interesting question!! We should find a bespoke thread to put that in, must be one close by....


----------



## ska invita (Jan 11, 2019)

Arent MPs(pointlessly) debating today? When is this vote going to happen?


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

tuesday (theoretically)


----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I saw an advert in the Liverpool Echo. I applied because it said if you can't afford this training in any other way, we can offer it to you for free. It was my poverty that made me eligible, and my skills that got me chosen ahead of other working class people who applied. Positive discrimination worked for me, as opposed to the traditional negative discrimination I'm getting from some people on this thread.
> 
> I now work for a housing charity, currently heading up a national campaign on benefit reform, Universal Credit roll out and tenant's rights. Of the 20 people om my team, I am the only one in insecure housing, the only one who grew up in a council house, and the only one to have been on Universal Credit in the last two years. My lived experience is often crucial to the direction of the work we're doing, and yet it seems some people want to deny me that lived experience the minute I get a salary rather than a wage.
> 
> I don't deny I have had luck, in that my mum believed in books, my teachers thought I was gifted, I was able to (get myself into masses of debt to) get a degree that meant I could leave Salford more easily. But the idea I should see this as a privilege rather than a basic human right is really, painfully wrong.



I'm finding this digression from Brexit interesting so please forgive me for continuing it!

I've no intention of denying you your lived experience of being w/c. At the same time you can't then deny your lived experience as a boss.

Both of these experiences contribute to your current outlook. Though it's not for me to say how.

But, my point remains that you can't get outraged at being accused of being m/c when, by your own admission, this is part of your lived experience too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> So.  Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> It's an interesting question.


We can say a few things that won't happen now, I think. Progress of sorts. So May's initial ultimatum that the UK leaves the EU on 29 March either under her deal or under no deal at all includes the two things that we can say with confidence will not happen. Beyond that, much to be played out. Norway+ or no brexit seem the possible options. A general election before brexit must be increasingly likely.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We can say a few things that won't happen now, I think. Progress of sorts. So May's initial ultimatum that the UK leaves the EU on 29 March either under her deal or under no deal at all includes the two things that we can say with confidence will not happen.


I'm not sure we can be confident of that at all. Not unless a majority can be found for something else.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure we can be confident of that at all. Not unless a majority can be found for something else.


No deal won't happen. A50 would be pulled before that - there is already a majority against no deal in the commons, and that majority will only grow larger as 29 March approaches. Scaremongering about no deal is exactly that, scaremongering. May's deal can't happen where even those voting for it would mostly rather have Norway+, and I think it will be dead very soon. Nobody likes it, and it can't win the vote on Tuesday.

You may disagree with the above, but that is the basis of my confidence in just these two things.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

There's a majority for no deal, but no majority for May's deal, any other deal, or for no confidence. There needs to be a majority for one of those things, or no deal happens automatically.

I think something will be bodged together, but I'm not confident about it. Whoever blinks first is done, so everyone is taking it to the very edge. No reason to suppose it couldn't tip over entirely.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

chilango said:


> I'm finding this digression from Brexit interesting so please forgive me for continuing it!
> 
> I've no intention of denying you your lived experience of being w/c. At the same time you can't then deny your lived experience as a boss.
> 
> ...



For about 3 years from 1999-2002 ish I was someone's boss, and I haven't been anyone's boss since then by choice, when I realised I didn't ever want to be responsible for sacking someone (that kinda limits your ability as a manager of people).  For those few years in London, I was uncomfortable every day with the middle class people I had to work with, mix with, the accents I had to listen to, the backgrounds I had to feel intimidated by, because I know I am not like them and never will be.

So if that brief sojourn into line management is what makes me m/c then fine, I'll concede. Although as I look around my life today, this wondrous middle class life of mine, I do wonder if it's too late to get my money back.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No deal won't happen. A50 would be pulled before that - there is already a majority against no deal in the commons, and that majority will only grow larger as 29 March approaches. Scaremongering about no deal is exactly that, scaremongering. May's deal can't happen where even those voting for it would mostly rather have Norway+, and I think it will be dead very soon. Nobody likes it, and it can't win the vote on Tuesday.
> 
> You may disagree with the above, but that is the basis of my confidence in just these two things.



But isn't the Norway+ idea predicated on getting permission from the other EEA members, who have said get to fucky?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But isn't the Norway+ idea predicated on getting permission from the other EEA members, who have said get to fucky?


  


no one from the eea has told the uk to 'get to fucky'

do you know the difference between the european economic area and the european free trade association?


Spoiler


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But isn't the Norway+ idea predicated on getting permission from the other EEA members, who have said get to fucky?


have a pity like


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But isn't the Norway+ idea predicated on getting permission from the other EEA members, who have said get to fucky?


they said no to temporary membership.


----------



## Supine (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> For about 3 years from 1999-2002 ish I was someone's boss, and I haven't been anyone's boss since then by choice, when I realised I didn't ever want to be responsible for sacking someone (that kinda limits your ability as a manager of people).  For those few years in London, I was uncomfortable every day with the middle class people I had to work with, mix with, the accents I had to listen to, the backgrounds I had to feel intimidated by, because I know I am not like them and never will be.
> 
> So if that brief sojourn into line management is what makes me m/c then fine, I'll concede. Although as I look around my life today, this wondrous middle class life of mine, I do wonder if it's too late to get my money back.



Any chance you could brexit your lived experience / class struggle off this thread?


----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> For about 3 years from 1999-2002 ish I was someone's boss, and I haven't been anyone's boss since then by choice, when I realised I didn't ever want to be responsible for sacking someone (that kinda limits your ability as a manager of people).  For those few years in London, I was uncomfortable every day with the middle class people I had to work with, mix with, the accents I had to listen to, the backgrounds I had to feel intimidated by, because I know I am not like them and never will be.
> 
> So if that brief sojourn into line management is what makes me m/c then fine, I'll concede. Although as I look around my life today, this wondrous middle class life of mine, I do wonder if it's too late to get my money back.



It made you m/c for that period. You have that lived experience. You referred to it to support a
point you were making in argument. 

That's all.

Anyway, I've no real interest in this just being about you. For me, it was just a starting point into a potentially interesting diversion into how privilege is acquired, or not, and the role education plays in that.

I guess that's my academic area of interest, so was enjoying reading the spat tbh.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But isn't the Norway+ idea predicated on getting permission from the other EEA members, who have said get to fucky?


They haven't even started negotiating for such a thing yet, so too early to say. It would require changing from May's 'red lines', and changing from May. Every possible outcome involves that. Not saying it will happen, merely that we can't say with confidence that it won't.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I was someone's boss once. That irrevocably and permanently changes my class identity and social status does it?
> 
> I think we need more self-identified working class people in positions of influence, rather than fewer. Self-flaggalation is not a good look. And no temporary job contract is going to change who I am and where I am from.



Class is not a fucking identity. It's a social and economic relationship.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I was someone's boss once. That irrevocably and permanently changes my class identity and social status does it?
> 
> I think we need more self-identified working class people in positions of influence, rather than fewer. Self-flaggalation is not a good look. And no temporary job contract is going to change who I am and where I am from.


self-flagellation: another blind spot i see


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> they said no to temporary membership.


And they'd say no to permanent membership for the same reasons.  There is no advantage to them allowing the UK into their bloc, so why would they? Unless there were significant financial incentives, which are unlikely (almost impossible under May, just about possible under Corbyn, I suppose)


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Class is not a fucking identity. It's a social and economic relationship.


There's no such thing as 'middle-class' though, in social and economic relationship terms.  That _is _an identity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> And they'd say no to permanent membership for the same reasons.  There is no advantage to them allowing the UK into their bloc, so why would they? Unless there were significant financial incentives, which are unlikely (almost impossible under May, just about possible under Corbyn, I suppose)


there'd be i think the same fishing issues which departure from the eu was said to resolve.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

looks like it's no deal then. ah well.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> There's no such thing as 'middle-class' though, in social and economic relationship terms.  That _is _an identity.


True.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there'd be i think the same fishing issues which departure from the eu was said to resolve.


EEA doesn't cover fisheries (I read). Norway has tariff free trade in white fish, but pays tariffs for others.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> There's no such thing as 'middle-class' though, in social and economic relationship terms.  That _is _an identity.


I'm confused now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> looks like it's no deal then. ah well.


Nah. The idea that no deal could somehow happen by accident is a big lie. It is entirely within the power of the govt to call parliament together and ask for a revocation of A50, a bill that would surely pass if the final day were reached without agreement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> EEA doesn't cover fisheries (I read). Norway has tariff free trade in white fish, but pays tariffs for others.


can we say efta when we mean efta and eea when we mean the european economic area pls.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. The idea that no deal could somehow happen by accident is a big lie. It is entirely within the power of the govt to call parliament together and ask for a revocation of A50, a bill that would surely pass if the final day were reached without agreement.


It is within the power of the govt to commit political suicide, yes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> It is within the power of the govt to commit political suicide, yes.


if the government hasn't already committed political suicide it is only because we haven't yet reached 30 march.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> can we say efta when we mean efta and eea when we mean the european economic area pls.


If I talk about EFTA, I will. I'm not doing, though


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> It is within the power of the govt to commit political suicide, yes.


No deal is political suicide. We'll have to agree to differ on this one, I think. I think they would have absolutely no choice but to revoke A50 in such a situation, while you think they might just crash.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> There's no such thing as 'middle-class' though, in social and economic relationship terms.


I’d disagree: the middle class are those who play the role of supervisor under real subsumption of labour.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No deal is political suicide. We'll have to agree to differ on this one, I think. I think they would have absolutely no choice but to revoke A50 in such a situation, while you think they might just crash.


I think some kind of solution will be found before then, but of those two scenarios I think it's more likely we'll crash out with no deal than some last minute A50 revocation.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No deal is political suicide. We'll have to agree to differ on this one, I think. I think they would have absolutely no choice but to revoke A50 in such a situation, while you think they might just crash.



no deal would be difficult, but not political suicide - revoking A50 would be political suicide for a tory PM. 

the reverse of course is true for Labour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> If I talk about EFTA, I will. I'm not doing, though


so who is their bloc in your 19858? sounds to me like you mean efta.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’d disagree: the middle class are those who play the role of supervisor under real subsumption of labour.


I'm not sure you mean subsumption, but, either way.....

That is a semi traditional way of using the term (along with anyone on an income higher than XX, usually the notional average wage), but in an age where so may have some supervisory responsibilities, I'm not sure how useful that is. For those whose role is solely supervisory, maybe, but there aren't many of those roles these days.


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am at a loss then to understand why you thought utter irrelevancies would advance the discussion


you're right, I should just have ignored you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> you're right, I should just have ignored you.


i edited


Pickman's model said:


> so who is their bloc in your 19858? sounds to me like you mean efta.


----------



## andysays (Jan 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. The idea that no deal could somehow happen by accident is a big lie. It is entirely within the power of the govt to call parliament together and ask for a revocation of A50, a bill that would surely pass if the final day were reached without agreement.


It's also within the power of the government *not *to revoke A50, and the current government have said repeatedly that they don't intend to do so.

That may be bollocks, or the current government may fall and be replaced by another, but it certainly isn't impossible that in the event of the necessary steps for an agreement not being completed by Brexit day, A50 isn't revoked and the UK leaves without a deal.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> I'm not sure you mean subsumption, but, either way.....
> 
> That is a semi traditional way of using the term (along with anyone on an income higher than XX, usually the notional average wage), but in an age where so may have some supervisory responsibilities, I'm not sure how useful that is. For those whose role is solely supervisory, maybe, but there aren't many of those roles these days.


I do mean subsumption. I discussed it more fully here: https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/are-these-people-middle-class.346881/page-5#post-14676967


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> May needs to bring the vote if for no other reason then to get this thread back on track.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> So.  Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> It's an interesting question.


The word was leave. But there is a common travel area with the EU.
This has not been sorted yet, there are less than a hundred days to go, so whilst there is a common travel area with the EU, then the UK won't be leaving.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The word was leave. But there is a common travel area with the EU.
> This has not been sorted yet, there are less than a hundred days to go, so whilst there is a common travel area with the EU, then the UK won't be leaving.


indeed, as noted in parliament there are fewer than ninety days to go


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 11, 2019)

Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.


that's not fair

there are lots of other ways she could do away with herself


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 11, 2019)

So, what about this rumour that John Mann and some other “Blue Labour” types are going to break ranks and vote for May’s deal then?  Are May’s “leaked” calls to (Lexiter?) union leaders an attempt to provide “left cover” for this?


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.


It's not just personal political suicide though is it? Any Tory party that cancels Brexit will be crushed by the electorate, and would probably split.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's not just personal political suicide though is it? Any Tory party that cancels Brexit will be crushed by the electorate, and would probably split.


One can only hope that


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> One can only hope that


That's why it's not going to happen though.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> So, what about this rumour that John Mann and some other “Blue Labour” types are going to break ranks and vote for May’s deal then?  Are May’s “leaked” calls to (Lexiter?) union leaders an attempt to provide “left cover” for this?


Yeah, she'll get some of the right-wingers...but she needs loads.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 11, 2019)

Are we about to see the Brit nationalist labour right and their Stalinist outriders riding to the salvation of the Tory Party and potential fatal wounding of the Corbyn project, if not the Labour Party itself. If successful,it would be one if the biggest acts of treachery in British political history.....


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)




----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 11, 2019)




----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.



depends what you mean by political suicide - if May, as is the general concencus of opinion, has only one real political objective, which is to leave the EU on 29th March 2019, then she has a good chance of achieving it. it would, imv, be foolish to ignore a large constituancy out there who will happily put her in the 'Great PM's' box if she achieves that almost regardless of whatever difficuluties arise as a result of a crash-out brexit.

i think that she thinks that if she could achieve brexit - deal or no deal - and get to October 2019 as PM she'll have played a blinder, getting to party conference 2020 would be miracle territory, but if she achieves brexit, deal-or-no-deal, and gets to the summer holidays before resigning as PM she'll be happy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's not just personal political suicide though is it? Any Tory party that cancels Brexit will be crushed by the electorate, and would probably split.


that's what we all want to see, a tory party with all the electoral clout of the liberal party after lloyd george


----------



## belboid (Jan 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I do mean subsumption. I discussed it more fully here: https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/are-these-people-middle-class.346881/page-5#post-14676967


fair play, but I am still doubtful of the terms relevance here - or even in the original context. Those kind of supervisors are far less common these days. Even in the days when such Fordist production line work was prevalent (tho it was never entirely dominant), such supervisors (bet summed up in  the Not So Red Flag lyrics - 'the working class can kiss my arse, I've got the foreman's job at last) weren't what we now see as 'middle class', but had generally proletarian lifestyles (and pay). They could be reasonably held to be the equivalent of the petit-bourgeoisie,  ie placed and pulled between the working and ruling classes, swayed depending upon the strength of class forces at the time. But now..... there are very few of those wholly supervisory roles about, ime.  Every line manager I have ever had has also had a 'main job' where surplus value is extracted from them. What does it mean when someone is 90% proletarian and 10% 'middle-class'? How great a supervisory role must they have?

For lefty organisations, the dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable roles you could take was the power of hire and fire, which seems reasonable, except, these days, many fairly senior managers don't actually have that power, as it is devolved to someone whose sole job that is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> depends what you mean by political suicide - if May, as is the general concencus of opinion, has only one real political objective, which is to leave the EU on 29th March 2019, then she has a good chance of achieving it. it would, imv, be foolish to ignore a large constituancy out there who will happily put her in the 'Great PM's' box if she achieves that almost regardless of whatever difficuluties arise as a result of a crash-out brexit.
> 
> i think that she thinks that if she could achieve brexit - deal or no deal - and get to October 2019 as PM she'll have played a blinder, getting to party conference 2020 would be miracle territory, but if she achieves brexit, deal-or-no-deal, and gets to the summer holidays before resigning as PM she'll be happy.


i think there's a lot of people who'd like to see her in a coffin whatever it said on top


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's what we all want to see, a tory party with all the electoral clout of the liberal party after lloyd george


Sure, but they don't. So it won't happen. For the Tory Party's political survival - in the short term at least - no deal would be preferred to cancelling brexit.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.




She is so shit, she would probably plan to end it all by putting her head in the #10 microwave without realising there is an issue with the door needing to be closed to do its job


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> Sure, but they don't. So it won't happen. For the Tory Party's political survival - in the short term at least - no deal would be preferred to cancelling brexit.


so it's either a no deal tory disaster or a cancelled brexit tory annihilation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> She is so shit, she would probably plan to end it all by putting her head in the #10 microwave without realising there is an issue with the door needing to be closed to do its job


if there was a bigger microwave she'd climb inside and shut the door and only then realise she'd need to turn it on.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> Any chance you could brexit your lived experience / class struggle off this thread?



I've been trying for several pages to do that, but I keep getting irrelevant posts like yours to respond to. What to do.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> Every line manager I have ever had has also had a 'main job' where surplus value is extracted from them. What does it mean when someone is 90% proletarian and 10% 'middle-class'? How great a supervisory role must they have?


I do discuss that in the post I linked to.   But my point wasn’t to say there _isn’t_ an identity aspect to middle classness; but rather to point out that, in my view, there _is_ a economically structural function for the term, in a Marxian analysis of society.  You seemed to be saying there wasn’t. It’s a widely held position - Eugene Kamenka, for example, would agree with you here rather than me.  I just thought it was more interesting than another couple of pages of people guessing what next on Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I just thought it was more interesting than another couple of pages of people guessing what next on Brexit.


especially as there have been no novel notions of where it might go


----------



## kebabking (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so it's either a no deal tory disaster or a cancelled brexit tory annihilation.



why do you assume that no deal would entail a tory disaster?

there would certainly be difficulties, both in PR terms and in economics/redundancies, but the more difficult they are the less likely that a tory government would lose a VONC in parliament precisely because those difficulties would make a Labour government more likely. give it three years till 2022 and a) it gives things a chance to settle down - there will probably be massive queues at Dover in 2019, but much less likely by 2021/2, and if/when the economy takes a no-deal hit it _may_ recover by election time, and b) it will allow the tories and their friendly media a good few years to really work on the the idea that Labours stance has solely been about trying to cancel brexit, without saying so.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> why do you assume that no deal would entail a tory disaster?...there will probably be massive queues at Dover in 2019, but much less likely by 2021/2...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> why do you assume that no deal would entail a tory disaster?
> 
> there would certainly be difficulties, both in PR terms and in economics/redundancies, but the more difficult they are the less likely that a tory government would lose a VONC in parliament precisely because those difficulties would make a Labour government more likely. give it three years till 2022 and a) it gives things a chance to settle down - there will probably be massive queues at Dover in 2019, but much less likely by 2021/2, and if/when the economy takes a no-deal hit it _may_ recover by election time, and b) it will allow the tories and their friendly media a good few years to really work on the the idea that Labours stance has solely been about trying to cancel brexit, without saying so.


What I like about you is your irrepressible optimism

By the time you're saying the UK economy will be on the mend everywhere else's will have tanked. And the latest figures from Germany are hardly encouraging, manufacturing output down...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Apols for source; hence screen-shot.

Fucking clowns.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Canvassing door to door in April/May for the 2019 Euro elections would probably be quite an experience for any Tory candidates deciding to stand.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Canvassing door to door in April/May for the 2019 Euro elections would probably be quite an experience for any Tory candidates deciding to stand.


Do they even do that?


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Avoiding political suicide is way back in the other direction. All May has now is a choice between head in the oven or toaster in the bathtub.



Do we get to vote on that?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 11, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Do we get to vote on that?


A true People's Vote.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Do they even do that?


Any constituency party worth its salt should be out delivering leaflets and using the opportunity to do voter ID as well, so...yes. Though obviously the EU constituencies are so large that the chance of actually seeing any candidate at your door would be low to zero.


----------



## Winot (Jan 11, 2019)

Osborne’s Evening Standard leading on likely delay to Brexit. Some serious warming up being done.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Apols for source; hence screen-shot.
> 
> Fucking clowns.
> 
> View attachment 158378




Don’t they have more pressing things to sort out ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Don’t they have more pressing things to sort out ?


They do indeed. Leading tories have approached me asking about block names in the sir john redwood memorial barracks in grytviken, seeking to attach their enemies' names to them


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Don’t they have more pressing things to sort out ?


You'd think, but political power, innit?
That'll draw 'em further than gunpowder will blow 'em...


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> I can't see much chance of the UK negotiating this suggested Norway plus/membership of EEA deal, whether temporary or permanent, before the exit date in ten weeks time, especially given the government's record over the previous few years.



Indeed. Quite a lot of MPs are calling for this now who should have done years ago. To my knowledge, Nichola Sturgeon was the first big noise but even that was only circa November


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> depends what you mean by political suicide - if May, as is the general concencus of opinion, has only one real political objective, which is to leave the EU on 29th March 2019, then she has a good chance of achieving it. it would, imv, be foolish to ignore a large constituancy out there who will happily put her in the 'Great PM's' box if she achieves that almost regardless of whatever difficuluties arise as a result of a crash-out brexit.
> 
> i think that she thinks that if she could achieve brexit - deal or no deal - and get to October 2019 as PM she'll have played a blinder, getting to party conference 2020 would be miracle territory, but if she achieves brexit, deal-or-no-deal, and gets to the summer holidays before resigning as PM she'll be happy.



She'll not last another month if we leave with no deal. And her deal is clearly fucked.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> She'll not last another month if we leave with no deal.


How will she be removed?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They do indeed. Leading tories have approached me asking about block names in the sir john redwood memorial barracks in grytviken, seeking to attach their enemies' names to them


. 

I pity the infirm who have to spend any time in the Jeremy Hunt memorial clinic and mortuary- though they may be momentarily cheered by the fact that it is funded entirely by efficiency savings made elsewhere in the camp


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> How will she be removed?


 I am a great believer in harpic for those stubborn stains


----------



## brogdale (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> How will she be removed?


Hopefully publicly in tears.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I'm a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years. So I am in a very strong position to correct Wilf on his erroneous vocabulary, actually.



Just to clarify, *regardless of your occupation or education, *I still don't think you're in any position to lecture Wilf, because you're a *fucking inadequate. *


----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> How will she be removed?



She'll resign at the first opportunity.

She's staked herself on getting "Brexit" and if she gets any sort of Brexit at all over the line she'll quit with almost indecent haste.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

I'm not sure she will resign tbh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's not just personal political suicide though is it? Any Tory party that cancels Brexit will be crushed by the electorate, and would probably split.



It could well be possible for Tory MP's to kill off the Tory Party and save their careers.


----------



## chilango (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure she will resign tbh.



If, and it's a massive if, she gets Brexit over the line I reckon she will.  Quit on a "high".


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It could well be possible for Tory MP's to kill off the Tory Party and save their careers.


Surely not? “They have this thing called solidarity” 

Just re- running the threads greatest hits as all predictions are running on a loop now


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 11, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Surely not? “They have this thing called solidarity”
> 
> Just re- running the threads greatest hits as all predictions are running on a loop now



Ahhhhh man that was brilliant! What post number was it I want to revisit?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ahhhhh man that was brilliant! What post number was it I want to revisit?


I cannae even link to it lest I be accused of following ahem someone around the boardz


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 11, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am a great believer in harpic for those stubborn stains


Sharpic to the bottom of the glass


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)




----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 11, 2019)

I’m not sure what “trusting Jeremy Corbyn on Brexit” really means. It’s not like he’s selling car he owns.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 11, 2019)

Trust me on Brexit if you like guys, it’s meaningless but I’ll never fuck you over. And you can take that to the bank!


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Why did you post that Dexter?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> Why did you post that Dexter?


you're only seeing the raw poll options, I guess

I was posting the current results.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



What a waste of a tweet/post.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> you're only seeing the raw poll options, I guess
> 
> I was posting the current results.


Why would we care what this freaks mates think of Jeremy Corbyn?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What a waste of a tweet/post.


I'll hand myself in to the relevant authorities.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> Why would we care what this freaks mates think of Jeremy Corbyn?


I don't give a fuck about your 'we' or what they care about.   

I'll post what I like on the brexit thread if it's relevant to brexit.

Maybe I got fed up of you posting laughable shite about a Norway deal and wanted to put something present-day into the mix.  Who knows.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Fair enough if you don't agree with my arguments, but at least they're actually arguments. You seem to be mostly barking random anti-brexit slogans and posting links to bellends on twitter.

Do you think _this_ is twitter or something?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> Fair enough if you don't agree with my arguments, but at least they're actually arguments. You seem to be mostly barking random anti-brexit slogans and posting links to bellends on twitter.
> 
> Do you think _this_ is twitter or something?


They're not arguments


DexterTCN said:


> What will the T be in EFTA (even though it's not happening it's just another desperate rumour)?
> 
> What will the UK be bringing to the table, what is going to open the trade doors with Norway or any other place...what are the assets, the goods, the high or low value reason/s for trade?


I need twitter to find something up to date, mate.  You're talking about something I brought up 7 months ago, there were no answers then, Norway has told you to fuck off (what about the other ones?) but you're still talking about it now.  You've not shown the slightest knowledge of that area and the trade agreements or the opinions of the countries involved.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I need twitter to find something up to date, mate


maybe you could stay there. It seems more suited for your temperament.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Norway has told you to fuck off


Norway told killer b to fuck off?  That’s not very friendly of them.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Norway told killer b to fuck off?  That’s not very friendly of them.


To be fair, they said it behind their hand, like the footballers do nowadays.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

killer b said:


> maybe you could stay there. It seems more suited for your temperament.



Maybe you could answer my question.


DexterTCN said:


> What will the T be in EFTA (even though it's not happening it's just another desperate rumour)?
> 
> What will the UK be bringing to the table, what is going to open the trade doors with Norway or any other place...what are the assets, the goods, the high or low value reason/s for trade?



You brought it back up.  I asked 6 months ago...run with it.   What would the UK bring to that table?


----------



## Maltin (Jan 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Norway told killer b to fuck off?  That’s not very friendly of them.


Gazza started it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 11, 2019)

Meanwhile...2 days ago on twitter.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just to clarify, *regardless of your occupation or education, *I still don't think you're in any position to lecture Wilf, because you're a *fucking inadequate. *



Thanks for clarifying Spackers! Appreciate your time and effort on that one.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 11, 2019)

chilango said:


> If, and it's a massive if, she gets Brexit over the line I reckon she will.  Quit on a "high".



The one thing she has shown is that she gives nary a fuck about anything or anyone but Theresa. She has no ideas, no philosophy, wouldn’t care if there were 1m immigrants a year or ten providing the Daily Mail was happy with her. Windrush and benefits show she has no shame or human feeling.

So she’ll stay in power until her cold corpse is crowbarred reluctantly into a coffin if she can. The commitment to resign was forced on her and she’ll try to reverse it I’m sure. Only absolute cabinet rebellion will shift her this year.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You brought it back up.  I asked 6 months ago...run with it.   What would the UK bring to that table?


I don't really know what you're asking me about there, sorry.

What I do know though, is that some sort of Norway type deal is the most likely option currently in play to be able to get a majority in parliament, and that membership of the EFTA hasn't been ruled out - far from the UK (or me) being told to _fuck off_,the prime minister of Norway has repeatedly said they would work to accommodate the UK in the bloc - in here from last month (_Asked whether Norway would support Britain coming back to EFTA, Solberg told Reuters in an interview: “If that is what they really want, we will find solutions in the future")_, and in here from last May (_If the U.K. does opt to join Norway, she said the group's members would "always find a good way of solving this,"even though it would entail some disadvantages for Norway._). I'm sure there's more.


----------



## killer b (Jan 11, 2019)

Survation have a new poll out today. These are not comfortable numbers anyone who wants a second referendum


----------



## Wookey (Jan 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> Survation have a new poll out today. These are not comfortable numbers anyone who wants a second referendum



Polls should have a minimum of 1000 answers in order to have any kind of statistical relevancy - I note the Daily Mail paid for 1,013, which is quite a slim margin to say the least, but does give them the headline narrative of May is thrown a lifeline, which supports their editorial view, as it just so happens.


----------



## free spirit (Jan 12, 2019)

strong support for a referendum on it though.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 12, 2019)

free spirit said:


> strong support for a referendum on it though.
> 
> View attachment 158453



i think "don't know" should be an option in the second referendum


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2019)

Page 666, c'mon folks, something special.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 12, 2019)

I've heard that Wilf has cloven feet


----------



## Wilf (Jan 12, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> I've heard that Wilf has cloven feet


Limits the athlete's foot though.


----------



## Humberto (Jan 12, 2019)

It'll be some obscure diabolical signifier rather than shit internet username appendages. Such as a company they run conforming to a graph or something.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 12, 2019)

Humberto said:


> It'll be some obscure diabolical signifier rather than shit internet username appendages. Such as a company they run conforming to a graph or something.



Speaking in tongues, that is also a Mark of the Beast


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Page 666, c'mon folks, something special.


I noticed! But I’m all out of special!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 12, 2019)

I’m away to say Teresa May got her head chopped off 7 times in the mirror before 3am checks in the home. You never know.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 12, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> i think "don't know" should be an option in the second referendum


Should be the only option, really.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 12, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Maybe you could answer my question.
> 
> 
> You brought it back up.  I asked 6 months ago...run with it.   What would the UK bring to that table?



You asked this fucking stupid _"yur but whut will you TRAAAAAAAAADE?"_ question before, and multiple people answered you at the time. What makes you think that the answers have substantially changed since then? I don't know if you've noticed, but the means of production in this country haven't suffered a case of spontaneous combustion, and neither has the British workforce been devastated by some kind of pandemic. If you still think that this idiotic question of yours is some kind of hella-awesome "gotcha", then that only proves how absolutely fucking thick you are. Well, you could also simply be trolling, but that just means that you're being a twat on purpose rather than by accident.


----------



## maomao (Jan 12, 2019)

NoXion said:


> that's just means that you're being a twat on purpose rather than by accident


Both IME


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

Wookey said:


> ...  Positive discrimination worked for me, as opposed to the traditional negative discrimination I'm getting from some people on this thread.



Where is this "negative discrimination"?



Wookey said:


> I now work for a housing charity, currently heading up a national campaign on benefit reform, Universal Credit roll out and tenant's rights.



I am impressed. I look forward to the day when you and your national campaign might feel able to campaign for the rights of more than one tenant.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Any constituency party worth its salt should be out delivering leaflets and using the opportunity to do voter ID as well, so...yes. Though obviously the EU constituencies are so large that the chance of actually seeing any candidate at your door would be low to zero.



Nah, no point doing that here in Scotland. It doesn't matter.


----------



## maomao (Jan 12, 2019)

Celyn said:


> I am impressed. I look forward to the day when you and your national campaign might feel able to campaign for the rights of more than one tenant.



Don't take the piss. He's a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years don't you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m away to say Teresa May got her head chopped off 7 times in the mirror before 3am checks in the home. You never know.


Teresa a porn star theresa a pm


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Teresa a porn star theresa a pm


Aaah. It’s how my cousins name is spelt.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 12, 2019)




----------



## Yossarian (Jan 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Page 666, c'mon folks, something special.



The Daily Express had this covered on Day 2.


----------



## andysays (Jan 12, 2019)

maomao said:


> Don't take the piss. He's a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years don't you know.


AND he knows not to wear a blue suit if you have red hair (not sure about vice versa, maybe he could clarify).


----------



## brogdale (Jan 12, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I love the smell of desperation in the morning.
> 
> Theresa May contacts union leaders for Brexit deal support from Labour


Reminded me of....



Gotta hope that's how Len answered the call!


----------



## grit (Jan 12, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I don't know if you've noticed, but the means of production in this country haven't suffered a case of spontaneous combustion



True, part of it is moving out of the UK.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

maomao said:


> Don't take the piss. He's a linguistics graduate, qualified secondary English teacher, a TEFL teacher and a professional writer of 25 years don't you know.



Fair enough. That's me tellt.


----------



## killer b (Jan 12, 2019)

free spirit said:


> strong support for a referendum on it though.
> 
> View attachment 158453



sure, but how people say they would vote with the three current scenarios isn't comforting for the FBPE crowd. 

Gvt's Brexit agreement (41%) vs Leave with No Deal (32%) 
Gvt's Brexit agreement (40%) vs Remain in EU (40%) 
Leave with No Deal (41%) V Remain in EU (46%)


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> sure, but how people say they would vote with the three current scenarios isn't comforting for the FBPE crowd.
> 
> Gvt's Brexit agreement (41%) vs Leave with No Deal (32%)
> Gvt's Brexit agreement (40%) vs Remain in EU (40%)
> Leave with No Deal (41%) V Remain in EU (46%)



Its interesting.  The one thing that really stands out to me is that there is a clear majority against a no deal Brexit.  My interpretation of this is that May's deal is what would probably keep the most people happy.


----------



## killer b (Jan 12, 2019)

May's deal wouldn't keep anyone happy - it's a 'least worst' option for the vast majority of people who'd vote for it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2019)

I wonder how many people have actually read the terms of May's deal?  I'll be honest I've only skimmed it.


----------



## treelover (Jan 12, 2019)

> *I’m a remainer. So why do I feel more and more sympathy for leave voters? *
> 
> Joseph Harker
> Anti-Brexit campaigners really do act like a ‘metropolitan elite’, with little or no interest in northern and working-class people
> ...






> Certainly, few of them are likely to be persuaded by the leading voices in the people’s vote campaign – almost all wealthy and middle class, and most of them southerners. The same is true of almost all remainer commentators in the media. The notion of the “metropolitan elite” used to seem like a ridiculous putdown; yet, more and more, it seems to be becoming a truth. “The people have spoken. The people must be wrong,” seems to be their mantra.






> Of course, this mattered little in the media world – dominated as it is by Oxbridge graduates, especially at its most senior levels. These are the people who have least to fear from austerity, and the most to lose from leaving Europe; nor do they have to worry about migrants moving in next door or changing their neighbourhoods, taking their jobs or undercutting their wages. To them, the concerns of poorer or working-class areas are irrational, merely evidence of their simple-mindedness. So the commentators demand Labour ditch all connection with its heartlands.





Hard to believe this is in the Guardian, and by Joseph Harker, the G's deputy opinion editor, especially the last part, can't see comments being opened though.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I wonder how many people have actually read the terms of May's deal?  I'll be honest I've only skimmed it.


Honestly, I have no idea what May's deal is. What is May's deal? Could somebody explain in a good and sensible and understandable way, please?

Yes, I know it is not Urban's job and that it is May's job, but she doesn't seem to be very good at it.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Honestly, I have no idea what May's deal is. What is May's deal? Could somebody explain in a good and sensible and understandable way, please?
> 
> Yes, I know it is not Urban's job and that it is May's job, but she doesn't seem to be very good at it.



My understanding is is more a road map than a deal in so far it lays out how the future arrangements will look but it doesn't actually go so far as to spell out the exact nature of them as that is work still to do.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 12, 2019)

She kicks a can well.


----------



## Winot (Jan 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> My understanding is is more a road map than a deal in so far it lays out how the future arrangements will look but it doesn't actually go so far as to spell out the exact nature of them as that is work still to do.



My understanding is as follows but happy to be corrected as have only read commentary:

There’s two parts - the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration. 

The WA is the divorce bit covering the repayments, citizens rights and the NI border (including the backstop). It’s legally binding. 

The PD isn’t legally binding but sets out intentions for the future trade relationship. It’s short and a bit hand-wavey apparently (haven’t read it). 

The main objections to the WA are that 

- it ties the UK into a customs union with the EU which means the UK can’t make it’s own trade deals

- it ties NI closer to the EU than GB which effectively splits the UK

- it doesnt deal with services only goods


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> My understanding is is more a road map than a deal in so far it lays out how the future arrangements will look but it doesn't actually go so far as to spell out the exact nature of them as that is work still to do.




Aaargh, no. It's the actual holding position that comes into force after the A50 deadline is passed - it's the transition agreement - intendedf to last until the future relationship can be negotiated. The road map for the future relationship is the totally woolly Political Declaration. The backstop is unusual in that it is part of the transition agreement, but it would only come into force if there is no agreed future relationship.

Edit: Also what Winot said. If someone more motivated than me could add in the various deadline date possibilities that'd be grand.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> She kicks a can well.


I don't even understand this simplified (for which many thanks) version.

She kicks a can.	  

It might be a new old folky song. sort of ""Weel May the keel row".


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 12, 2019)

Celyn said:


> I don't even understand this simplified (for which many thanks) version.
> 
> She kicks a can.
> 
> It might be a new old folky song. sort of ""Weel May the keel row".



Like 'kicking it into the long grass', only for it to come back to haunt you.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

I now think that the only problem is that the wrong people are sorting out this thing.

Obviously the only person to make sense of it is Lewis Carroll.

Or Flann O'Brien. He would be good at it.   O Yes!


----------



## Celyn (Jan 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Like 'kicking it into the long grass', only for it to come back to haunt you.


Has this ever really happened to anyone, though?  

I think the only thing I might ever have kicked into the long grass might be a bit of dog shit that was in my way.  Aha, a new form of non-violent protest beckons!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 12, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Has this ever really happened to anyone, though?
> 
> I think the only thing I might ever have kicked into the long grass might be a bit of dog shit that was in my way.  Aha, a new form of non-violent protest beckons!



It's just a saying -
What does 'Kick something into the long grass' mean? If an issue or problem is kicked into the long grass, it is pushed aside and hidden in the hope that it will be forgotten or ignored.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Has this ever really happened to anyone, though?
> 
> I think the only thing I might ever have kicked into the long grass might be a bit of dog shit that was in my way.  Aha, a new form of non-violent protest beckons!



Its an american phrase.  Basically a person walking along a street kicking a can as they go.  Not fixing a problem but just delaying dealing with it is like constantly kicking a can down a road.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 12, 2019)

Winot said:


> My understanding is as follows but happy to be corrected as have only read commentary:
> 
> There’s two parts - the Withdrawal Agreement and the Political Declaration.
> 
> ...





TheHoodedClaw said:


> Aaargh, no. It's the actual holding position that comes into force after the A50 deadline is passed - it's the transition agreement - intendedf to last until the future relationship can be negotiated. The road map for the future relationship is the totally woolly Political Declaration. The backstop is unusual in that it is part of the transition agreement, but it would only come into force if there is no agreed future relationship.
> 
> Edit: Also what Winot said. If someone more motivated than me could add in the various deadline date possibilities that'd be grand.



Thanks.

This is why I should skim read less.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its an american phrase.  Basically a person walking along a street kicking a can as they go.  Not fixing a problem but just delaying dealing with it is like constantly kicking a can down a road.



In this case it's a slighty more nuanced - deliberately kicking the can down the road has had, for May, two positive consequences: firstly it's pushed big internal party disagreements over brexit policy much further along the timetable than was thought likely, and secondly it has probably made getting whatever agreement through parliament easier - both remainy and brexity MP's are far more likely to bin the agreement when there's 6 months left to do a new one, however if there's two weeks left and the choices are her agreement, no deal crash put brexit or opening the door to a US-style culture war, she'll find it easier to force otherwise reluctant MP's to sign up.

She may be awkward, but she's not stupid.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 12, 2019)

yes yes, my nuanced americanism

eta: fuck, I've been saying "elevator", too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 12, 2019)

kebabking said:


> In this case it's a slighty more nuanced - deliberately kicking the can down the road has had, for May, two positive consequences: firstly it's pushed big internal party disagreements over brexit policy much further along the timetable than was thought likely, and secondly it has probably made getting whatever agreement through parliament easier - both remainy and brexity MP's are far more likely to bin the agreement when there's 6 months left to do a new one, however if there's two weeks left and the choices are her agreement, no deal crash put brexit or opening the door to a US-style culture war, she'll find it easier to force otherwise reluctant MP's to sign up.
> 
> She may be awkward, but she's not stupid.


well she may be stupid but she is cunning


----------



## CRI (Jan 12, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 12, 2019)

That's really crap


----------



## Cloo (Jan 12, 2019)

Civil service friend from a department with relatively little involvement in Brexit has just been telling us that in the event of No Deal she, and other civil servants like her, have been told they may be drafted in to do passport stamping at border points because there won't be enough people to handle it at short notice.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 13, 2019)

Reading this

Brexit: Circling the Drain | naked capitalism

...in the comments there is some discussion about NI that I am trying to get my head round. They seem to be saying that the arrangement for NI that would exist post withdrawal agreement sort of gives UK access to single market without having to be in it. I don't know if that's accurate. I guess it would be a situation that could be superseded by the next stage of negotiations though?



> there will be, under the Withdrawal Agreement, a new Single Market member, designated as “UK (NI)”. This Member State (or maybe better put “Member State-lette”) will be governed by Single Market rules, under the jurisprudence of the CJEU. Border checks will be imposed to ensure total adherence to agriculture and phytosanitary standards in incoming food and animal products. Manufactured goods placed on the Single Market (to use the EU parlance) will be subject to much less onerous checking at the “border” between UK (NI) and the rest of the UK (checking can be conducted at point of manufacture in the mainland in a lot of cases, probably 99.9% or even in totality) but must still meet Single Market standards to be placed on the Single Market. The UK will have to accept complete alignment with EU tariffs.
> 
> It is a very elegant solution. It benefits all parties. It completely obviates the need for a hard border. It protects agricultural produce standards in the Republic, which is an essential requirement as agribusiness is pivotal to the South and one which the UK could not by any fair or diplomatic norms ever threaten by not having a waterproof solution for. It is a compromise for the UK (and NI) but it is just as much a compromise for the EU, too.





> that is the big advantage to the U.K. of the Withdrawal Agreement. It retains Single Market access via NI. It’s not completely clear if U.K. Country of Origin manufactured goods can be placed on the Single Market _unless _they physically route through the province or, and this seems more likely, if it will suffice to have the goods marketed by a legal entity which is merely registered in NI iteself but the goods still shipable from their base in the U.K. mainland. If it is indeed the latter, then the Withdrawal Agreement offers, for manufactured goods, the kind of crazy-thinking nirvana that the Ultras actually envisioned in the first place — Single Market access outside of the EU with no payments to the EU27 and no CJEU jurisdiction for the U.K. overall.
> 
> The nonsense about how it somehow is a weakening of the U.K. union is ridiculous. NI really will have the best of both worlds. Yes, the EU will have a finger in the province’s pie. But NI has always been a sovereignty compromise. Heck, the entire Island of Ireland has always been a sovereignty lash-up. The Withdrawal Agreement actually rationalises and adds a layer of logicality to it all.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 13, 2019)

Thats the assumption the NI property developers I work for are making. "We'll be the Hong Kong of the UK!" They think they're going to make out like bandits.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 13, 2019)

Is Brexit actually going to happen? At present, neither answer to the OP's question seems plausible. How does that happen?


----------



## Supine (Jan 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Reading this
> 
> Brexit: Circling the Drain | naked capitalism
> 
> ...in the comments there is some discussion about NI that I am trying to get my head round. They seem to be saying that the arrangement for NI that would exist post withdrawal agreement sort of gives UK access to single market without having to be in it. I don't know if that's accurate. I guess it would be a situation that could be superseded by the next stage of negotiations though?



While logical it's just what the DUP don't want.


----------



## Voley (Jan 13, 2019)

The political big guns are getting involved now:

Neil Warnock on Brexit: ‘I can’t wait to leave. To hell with the rest of the world’


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 13, 2019)

Voley said:


> The political big guns are getting involved now:
> 
> Neil Warnock on Brexit: ‘I can’t wait to leave. To hell with the rest of the world’



"Just look at me, I've managed to get through my entire career without going to Europe."


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 13, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "Just look at me, I've managed to get through my entire career without going to Europe."


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 13, 2019)

Colin Wanker


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

Voley said:


> The political big guns are getting involved now:
> 
> Neil Warnock on Brexit: ‘I can’t wait to leave. To hell with the rest of the world’


Ever since 2016 I've been appalled at attempts by Remainiacs to portray Brexiteers as thick, selfish nationalists...

_All hail the Exception that Proves the Rule!_


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2019)

not all leavers are thick/ not all remainers are snobs.This whole issue may have ensured that the arrogant political classes do a bit of shape shifting  and cling on for a bit longer.fuckers


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> not all leavers are thick/ not all remainers are snobs.This whole issue may have ensured that the arrogant political classes do a bit of shape shifting  and cling on for a bit longer.fuckers


Aye but you have to forgive us for being reactionary sometimes given the sheer fuckton of snobbery we’ve had to wade through in our political wellies.


----------



## billbond (Jan 13, 2019)

How dare neil have a opinion the northern thicko
Only real heavyweights should get involved in politics like  Brand and izzard


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Ever since 2016 I've been appalled at attempts by Remainiacs to portray Brexiteers as thick, selfish nationalists...
> 
> _All hail the Exception that Proves the Rule!_


I hadn’t considered the football element. Be great if the heavy guns of the thread could thrash that one out, since everything else has been done. 

Warning: we found it harder to get involved in the good old “anyone but England” harmless ribbing in the pub post/during Indy ref, which used to be fun for all the nations. Then the last World Cup I actually ended up wanting to sing “it’s coming home” all the time just as a wee fist of solidarity given our  English comrades had had such a tough year, with Scotland no helping matters. Footballwise, it seems we aren’t having as much fun as we used to, and this can only get worse after Brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

billbond said:


> How dare neil have a opinion the northern thicko
> Only real heavyweights should get involved in politics like  Brand and izzard


Warnock is getting laughed at because he's a wanker - as have brand and izzard - repeatedly - on this thread and others.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

grauniad reporting that the EU would accept an article 50 extension till July+ (if may requests it following her defeat next week). All sorts of things become _logically_ possible at that point, the most logical being a general election to get a majority government in place who could negotiate and get an actual deal through parliament. Problem is it's hard to see how the votes stack up to get to a gen election. I doubt that May would resign even though she would have failed on her most central claim, that Britain will leave the EU at the end of March. Tory MP's can no longer hoy her out now of course.

An utter bollux of a situation. Probability is that things would just limp on as they have done and at some point over the Summer a mixture of knighthoods, backstop rewording and the rest squeaks something through.  However it's still hard to see the point at which either party sees it in their interest to call for a 2nd ref.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> grauniad reporting that the EU would accept an article 50 extension till July+ (if may requests it following her defeat next week). All sorts of things become _logically_ possible at that point, the most logical being a general election to get a majority government in place who could negotiate and get an actual deal through parliament. Problem is it's hard to see how the votes stack up to get to a gen election. I doubt that May would resign even though she would have failed on her most central claim, that Britain will leave the EU at the end of March. Tory MP's can no longer hoy her out now of course.
> 
> An utter bollux of a situation. Probability is that things would just limp on as they have done and at some point over the Summer a mixture of knighthoods, backstop rewording and the rest squeaks something through.  However it's still hard to see the point at which either party sees it in their interest to call for a 2nd ref.


most likely scenario to me is an attempt to have a ge as a referendum on the issue, and the attempt failing to resolve anything

either that or parliament revoking article 50 at the last possible moment


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> most likely scenario to me is an attempt to have a ge as a referendum on the issue, and the attempt failing to resolve anything
> 
> either that or parliament revoking article 50 at the last possible moment


After losing the vote, I reckon she'll be in Brussels on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning negotiating a postponement of A50 whilst No 10 set up the required amendment to the EU withdrawal Act (March 29) back at base. She'll blame the IRA/Hamas loving enemies of the people, obvs.

That guarantees one thing only; her survival as PM. (Can't see Corbo's VoNC getting anywhere tbh).


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> most likely scenario to me is an attempt to have a ge as a referendum on the issue, and the attempt failing to resolve anything
> 
> either that or parliament revoking article 50 at the last possible moment


Yeah, I think that's the case in a number of ways. Labour have a battle of their own remain and leave factions when it comes to their GE manifesto/stance - a problem that would intensify if they came to power (even more so if that was with snp support). The Tories problem is that while a GE might well give them an outright majority, that's unlikely to be big enough to overcome the opposition + headbanger bloc that would still line up on key votes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> After losing the vote, I reckon she'll be in Brussels on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning negotiating a postponement of A50 whilst No 10 set up the required amendment to the EU withdrawal Act (March 29) back at base. She'll blame the IRA/Hamas loving enemies of the people, obvs.
> 
> That guarantees one thing only; her survival as PM. (Can't see Corbo's VoNC getting anywhere tbh).


Corbyn's a voncker


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Corbyn's a voncker


Sounds like that could be Guy Maurice Marie Louise Verhoftwat's Flemish bag carrier!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> After losing the vote, I reckon she'll be in Brussels on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning negotiating a postponement of A50 whilst No 10 set up the required amendment to the EU withdrawal Act (March 29) back at base. She'll blame the IRA/Hamas loving enemies of the people, obvs.
> 
> That guarantees one thing only; her survival as PM. (Can't see Corbo's VoNC getting anywhere tbh).


Certainly the vonc won't get anywhere. I dread to think what goes on in May's bonce, but I also can't see her resigning until she loses at least 2 'substantive' votes on Brexit.  And as the tory party doesn't seem to have the men in gray suits any more, I'm not sure how her party levers her out. She stays until a deal is done or, somehow, there's an (unlikely) set of circumstances that produces either a GE or a 2nd ref.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 13, 2019)

By the way, I'll have to step out for a few moments to celebrate Rashford'd goal.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I hadn’t considered the football element. Be great if the heavy guns of the thread could thrash that one out, since everything else has been done.


Foreigners out!
FA to push for cut on overseas players in Premier League regardless of Brexit
(im not against the cut tbh)


----------



## Supine (Jan 13, 2019)

A general election would just be awful.  Presumably it would be a corbyn ticket of delivering brexit against the will of his party vs whoever the tories put up. Would that be a headbanger Brexiteer like Mogg or a mays deal bino candidate? The public wojld essentially get no choice between staying in or leaving.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> After losing the vote, I reckon she'll be in Brussels on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning negotiating a postponement of A50 whilst No 10 set up the required amendment to the EU withdrawal Act (March 29) back at base. She'll blame the IRA/Hamas loving enemies of the people, obvs.
> 
> That guarantees one thing only; her survival as PM. (Can't see Corbo's VoNC getting anywhere tbh).



As if by....


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 13, 2019)

Supine said:


> A general election would just be awful. Presumably it would be a corbyn ticket of delivering brexit against the will of his party vs whoever the tories put up. Would that be a headbanger Brexiteer like Mogg or a mays deal bino candidate? The public wojld essentially get no choice between staying in or leaving.



is that much different to 2017?  

pro-remain voters can always vote LD or green like they did in 2017...


----------



## Supine (Jan 13, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> pro-remain voters can always vote LD or green like they did in 2017...



Doesn't really work does it. A GE would only settle matters if the two main parties took opposing sides. As that isn't going to happen I think we need a referendum on Stay vs Mays Deal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 13, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> pro-remain voters can always vote LD or green like they did in 2017...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 13, 2019)

billbond said:


> How dare neil have a opinion the northern thicko
> Only real heavyweights should get involved in politics like  Brand and izzard


His name is Colin.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is that much different to 2017?
> 
> pro-remain voters can always vote LD or green like they did in 2017...


Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain.  How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain. How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?



sorry, what, who, where?

</ metropolitan elite >


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain.  How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?



Your voices were heard, but you're small numbers in the great scheme of things. 

Sorry, but that's the fact of the matter.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 13, 2019)

Am hoping for May's deal to be annihilated on Tuesday.In that event surely to God she will have to resign?


----------



## Poot (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain.  How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?


You should probably just do what the English do, it makes it much easier for everyone.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2019)

why should she resign ? no on wants her job and its not like she has anything else going on in her life that she can be getting on with. She is like the doomesday bomb mechanism at the end of Dr Straneglove- she is unbale to reevaulate things with any new facts presented - she will see this through whatever the cost


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain.  How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?



UDI


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Both Scotland (every single council area) and Northern Ireland voted to remain.  How do you suggest we vote next time to get our voices heard?


"We"?
Speaking for the entire nation?
Impressive.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> UDI


They had the chance.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They had the chance.



best of 3?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They had the chance.


'They'


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> 'They'


Yes; _they_, as in the enfranchised of 2014.
That wasn't me; how should I properly refer to those who were able to?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes; _they_, as in the enfranchised of 2014.
> That wasn't me; how should I properly refer to those who were able to?


The brexit vote was in 2016.  What are you talking about?

Scotland and NI voted to remain, how do you suggest they get heard this time?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> The brexit vote was in 2016.  What are you talking about?
> 
> Scotland and NI voted to remain, how do you suggest they get heard this time?


Not very cryptic, tbf...


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

Anybody?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Anybody?



Lump it, like you'd be quite happy for leave voters to have had to have done if the EU vote had gone otherwise, or you'd have been quite happy for unionist voters to have had to do had the independence ref gone otherwise.

You know, reciprocity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Lump it, like you'd be quite happy for leave voters to have had to have done if the EU vote had gone otherwise, or you'd have been quite happy for unionist voters to have had to do had the independence ref gone otherwise.
> 
> You know, reciprocity.



I don't think you know what reciprocity means.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> best of 3?


Paper scissors rock


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Anybody?


You do know what UDI stands for?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You do know what UDI stands for?


Yes...if you don't like it leave.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Your voices were heard, but you're small numbers in the great scheme of things.
> 
> Sorry, but that's the fact of the matter.



There is another aspect, though, in that the pro-UK campaign in the independence referendum placed a great deal of emphasis on their notion that "an independent Scotland would be at the very end of the queue to join the EU, nyah njah nyah, you will have no friends, so there!"  This would have influenced some people's vote.  Now Scotland is to be dragged out of the EU despite voting 62% in favour of remain.

I realise it doesn't matter from your point of view, but it is sort of relevant to some of us.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> There is another aspect, though, in that the pro-UK campaign in the independence referendum placed a great deal of emphasis on their notion that "an independent Scotland would be at the very end of the queue to join the EU, nyah njah nyah, you will have no friends, so there!"  This would have influenced some people's vote.  Now Scotland is to be dragged out of the EU despite voting 62% in favour of remain.
> 
> I realise it doesn't matter from your point of view, but it is sort of relevant to some of us.


Yeh but democracy means whither England pulls Scotland goes [/cs]


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> The brexit vote was in 2016.  What are you talking about?
> 
> Scotland and NI voted to remain, how do you suggest they get heard this time?



Scotland and Northern Ireland didn't vote.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> There is another aspect, though, in that the pro-UK campaign in the independence referendum placed a great deal of emphasis on their notion that "an independent Scotland would be at the very end of the queue to join the EU, nyah njah nyah, you will have no friends, so there!"  This would have influenced some people's vote.  Now Scotland is to be dragged out of the EU despite voting 62% in favour of remain.
> 
> I realise it doesn't matter from your point of view, but it is sort of relevant to some of us.


Yes but the nyah nyah nyah was more or less from the same people who campaigned for remain in 2016. All the main parties did. It’s not them pulling us out of the EU really is it, the majority vote was to leave the EU and it could only ever be a U.K. wide vote, how else would they have gone about it, I’m sorry but Scotland had a chance to vote Yes in 2014 and it didn’t happen. If you want a future Yes vote to be upheld, please don’t go down this road because it will come right back in your face if project fear/establishment/whateveryouwantotcallthem  tried to block a future majority Yes vote.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

Fuck me if they manage to block Brexit and Scottish Yes voters are applauding it because Scotland didnae want to leave the EU waaah waaah waaah then they’d be very confident indeed in pulling the same shit if we tried to break up the union.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is that much different to 2017?
> 
> pro-remain voters can always vote LD or green like they did in 2017...


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Scotland and Northern Ireland didn't vote.


That's technically true, of course. However, that sort of shorthand is used very often. It is an aspect worth noting given the amount of newspaper commentary telling us that the "metropolitan elite" voted to remain, or that only young people voted to remain _etc. _There may very well have been analyses attempting to show that people with different hairstyles voted differently for all I know, or people who open their boiled eggs from the top or the bottom.  

Certainly it makes sod-all difference to May and her wonderful deals, but if one of the countries of the UK has an electorate who voted 62% to remain, that is something worth noticing. It might not be important to many, but it adds to the whole "getting Tory governments when not voting Tory" aspect of things, and might have implications for the future.

As a tangential aside, is anyone else annoyed by the "everyone over 35 or so is an ancient useless evil bastard and voted to leave and is therefore guilty of ruining the future of all younger people" narrative? And the "everyone who voted 'leave' is a terrible dim-witted racist bastard" one? That level of discourse is pretty poisonous.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yes but the nyah nyah nyah was more or less from the same people who campaigned for remain in 2016.



Really? I am not sure that is the case. Admittedly, I have not read any proper surveys examining that, so it would be interesting to see some.

Also, of course, there were people who voted for independence who voted to leave the EU. It's all nicely complicated. 


HoratioCuthbert said:


> All the main parties did. It’s not them pulling us out of the EU really is it, the majority vote was to leave the EU and it could only ever be a U.K. wide vote, how else would they have gone about it, I’m sorry but Scotland had a chance to vote Yes in 2014 and it didn’t happen. If you want a future Yes vote to be upheld, please don’t go down this road because it will come right back in your face if project fear/establishment/whateveryouwantotcallthem  tried to block a future majority Yes vote.


Oh, I didn't call anybody "Project Fear". The Labour Party invented that name, didn't they?


----------



## gosub (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> That's technically true, of course. However, that sort of shorthand is used very often. It is an aspect worth noting given the amount of newspaper commentary telling us that the "metropolitan elite" voted to remain, or that only young people voted to remain _etc. _There may very well have been analyses attempting to show that people with different hairstyles voted differently for all I know, or people who open their boiled eggs from the top or the bottom.
> 
> Certainly it makes sod-all difference to May and her wonderful deals, but if one of the countries of the UK has an electorate who voted 62% to remain, that is something worth noticing. It might not be important to many, but it adds to the whole "getting Tory governments when not voting Tory" aspect of things, and might have implications for the future.
> 
> As a tangential aside, is anyone else annoyed by the "everyone over 35 or so is an ancient useless evil bastard and voted to leave and is therefore guilty of ruining the future of all younger people" narrative? And the "everyone who voted 'leave' is a terrible dim-witted racist bastard" one? That level of discourse is pretty poisonous.


Yeah but...Watched that Benn Heath question time from 97 last week and it was same slant then oldies holding us back from joining EUro...Reality was/is thank fuck and if the EUro obsessives  hadn't had a hand in it we wouldn't have had a Euro convergence unit in the treasury  then maybe we would nt have chased interest rate parity and fucked the banks and the housing market


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Really? I am not sure that is the case. Admittedly, I have not read any proper surveys examining that, so it would be interesting to see some.
> 
> Also, of course, there were people who voted for independence who voted to leave the EU. It's all nicely complicated.
> 
> Oh, I didn't call anybody "Project Fear". The Labour Party invented that name, didn't they?


You didn’t, no. I just mean like, The Establishment. The people who campaigned for remain in 2016: Tories, Labour, Lib Dem, BUISINESS *applause*, leading economists fucking... Bob Geldof.... etc. Yes I’ve no doubt some swivel eyed Tory leavers were involved in scaring Scottish people into maintaining the union but 90 per cent of the establishment is pro remain. 
So the “they” that were doing the nyah nyah nyah not wholly or even mostly invested in crashing out of the EU, basically.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

I’m sorry if I didn’t use the term Project Fear with laser accurate precision but that’s because I know I’m posting to a generally clued up audience like yersel


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m sorry if I didn’t use the term Project Fear with laser accurate precision but that’s because I know I’m posting to a generally clued up audience like yersel


You were probably too busy singing "It's coming home!"


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> not all leavers are thick/ not all remainers are snobs ...


Quite. How has this level of debate become normal or acceptable? It makes no sense whatsoever. I wonder who benefits from it.  



not-bono-ever said:


> This whole issue may have ensured that the arrogant political classes do a bit of shape shifting  and cling on for a bit longer.fuckers


 
Ah, yes.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You were probably too busy singing "It's coming home!"


Interesting. I was born and bred in Scotland and as far as football goes always indulged in “anyone but England” type banter... but my dad and his whole family are English. Is that a problem in your future Scottish paradise?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> As a tangential aside, is anyone else annoyed by the "everyone over 35 or so is an ancient useless evil bastard and voted to leave and is therefore guilty of ruining the future of all younger people" narrative? And the "everyone who voted 'leave' is a terrible dim-witted racist bastard" one?



Don't think anyone's annoyed by that, no. It's not even an issue that's been mentioned on this thread I don't think.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Don't think anyone's annoyed by that, no. It's not even an issue that's been mentioned on this thread I don't think.


I didn’t say that, what the fuck is up with the quote function recetntly


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You were probably too busy singing "It's coming home!"


This ethnic nationalist bullshit is exactly what Yes worked hard to distance itself from. Your sort weren’t welcome before, I only hope if Indy2 gets it’s legs sense will prevail again.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Thats the assumption the NI property developers I work for are making. "We'll be the Hong Kong of the UK!" They think they're going to make out like bandits.


That's very interesting. Thanks. I hadn't thought of that.   Oh dear, all this big property development might not be all that good for actual people who live where these "developers" have their beady eyes on.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Interesting. I was born and bred in Scotland and as far as football goes always indulged in “anyone but England” type banter... but my dad and his whole family are English. Is that a problem in your future Scottish paradise?


lol god you're so predictable

gtf


----------



## teuchter (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I didn’t say that, what the fuck is up with the quote function recetntly



Sorry. I've fixed it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Sorry. I've fixed it.


I don’t mind cause it was an alright post but I hope it doesn’t cause problems in future. Last couple of days  I’ve seen some odd quotes that turned out to be rogue as they didn’t match the posters usual craic


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Civil service friend from a department with relatively little involvement in Brexit has just been telling us that in the event of No Deal she, and other civil servants like her, have been told they may be drafted in to do passport stamping at border points because there won't be enough people to handle it at short notice.


If people are sort of requisitioned from their usual jobs to do this passport stamping, won't that mean that their actual jobs are not being done, and that a certain amount of disorganisation and chaos might ensue?  Oh, what fun and joy there will be.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> lol god you're so predictable
> 
> gtf


Gladly, just actioned the ignore you threatened yourself ages ago. So you can carry on speaking for the whole of Scotland in blissful ignorance


----------



## brogdale (Jan 13, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Yes...if you don't like it leave.


Which, in 2014, the Scottish electorate chose (for whatever reasons) not to do. Hence, the 2016 vote to Leave the supra-state was a UK vote.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Gladly, just actioned the ignore you threatened yourself ages ago. So you can carry on speaking for the whole of Scotland in blissful ignorance


um...I can still see your posts you moron


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I love it when _experts _attempt urban demotic mate.



It's even funnier than listening to 1940s/50s character actors doing Cockernee. Even funnier than Dick Van Dyke doing it!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> because this is Urban



Wanker.


----------



## Celyn (Jan 13, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You didn’t, no. I just mean like, The Establishment. The people who campaigned for remain in 2016: Tories, Labour, Lib Dem, BUISINESS *applause*, leading economists fucking... Bob Geldof.... etc.


 
The image of leading economists fucking Bob Geldof is not one I want in my head, really.  



HoratioCuthbert said:


> Yes I’ve no doubt some swivel eyed Tory leavers were involved in scaring Scottish people into maintaining the union but 90 per cent of the establishment is pro remain.
> So the “they” that were doing the nyah nyah nyah not wholly or even mostly invested in crashing out of the EU, basically.



Sorry, but this seems a bit confusing. Not quite sure what you are addressing here. I don't think I mentioned any swivel-eyed Tory leavers. And if they were leavers, Tory, swivel-eyed or otherwise, they would not have been using the possibility of not being in the EU as a threat or disadvantage, would they?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



Not if you follow the Thelemick Law, young man.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do elucidate on why? what sort of gibberish is that? elucidate on? really? pisspoor.



Hmm, "as to why" would have been correct but clumsy, but best to not have any word between "elucidate" and "why" at all.

English teachers, eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This is the filth that meritocracy helps float to the top.



Meritocracy?

Oh, you mean that narrow ladder that the greasers and forelock-tuggers try to ascend?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if the government hasn't already committed political suicide it is only because we haven't yet reached 30 march.



They're going for the Death of a Thousand Cuts, and I fear that at least 990 of the cuts will be on we, the people.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 13, 2019)

Celyn said:


> The image of leading economists fucking Bob Geldof is not one I want in my head, really.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, but this seems a bit confusing. Not quite sure what you are addressing here. I don't think I mentioned any swivel-eyed Tory leavers. And if they were leavers, Tory, swivel-eyed or otherwise, they would not have been using the possibility of not being in the EU as a threat or disadvantage, would they?


What are you doing here? I’ll be the first to admit I’m not the most articulate poster in the world so you’ve won on that score, have at. 
You talked about a pro U.K. campaign, my response was those behind the pro U.K. campaign(commonly known as Project Fear) are not wholly invested in making sure Scotland is dragged out of the EU. This is happening primarily because the people that reside within the region the vote relates to voted to leave by a majority. So for “Scotland” (or the few that claim to speak for Scotland despite the fact that Yes doesn’t automatically =remain, and remain doesn’t automatically= “ignore the democratic vote”)  to claim it’s being dragged out, a mandate for independence is needed to justify that first.
And I say this as a Yes voter.


----------



## grit (Jan 14, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> English teachers, eh?



In fact in this instance it should be "teachers of English"


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> They're going for the Death of a Thousand Cuts, and I fear that at least 990 of the cuts will be on we, the people.


What they fear is the death of 1000 cunts, the massacre of MPs and other enemies of the people


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

Celyn said:


> There is another aspect, though, in that the pro-UK campaign in the independence referendum placed a great deal of emphasis on their notion that "an independent Scotland would be at the very end of the queue to join the EU, nyah njah nyah, you will have no friends, so there!"  This would have influenced some people's vote.  Now Scotland is to be dragged out of the EU despite voting 62% in favour of remain.



Oh, I am well aware of that, but circumstances changed, unfortunate for anyone that only voted to remain in the UK to ensure they remained in the EU, but how many would that be?

It doesn't seem to have been very significant judging by the polls, which continue to show a strong lead in staying in the UK, which is why the SNP isn't pushing for another Scottish referendum.  



> I realise it doesn't matter from your point of view, but it is sort of relevant to some of us.



It's not a question of my point of view, as I posted before, it's the fact of the matter, because it was a UK wide vote.


----------



## grit (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, I am well aware of that, but circumstances changed, unfortunate for anyone that only voted to remain in the UK to ensure they remained in the EU, but how many would that be?


Considering the queues at the Irish passport office, potentially a lot


----------



## NoXion (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> um...I can still see your posts you moron



He means that *he* has put *you* on ignore, you hunchbrain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> um...I can still see your posts you moron




You're full of fail


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

NoXion said:


> He means that *he* has put *you* on ignore, you hunchbrain.


His is an early contender for stupidest post of the year


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 14, 2019)

You can get 10/1 for this vote to be passed- not absurd odds. Ish


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

So, May is making her statement to Parliament at 3.30pm concerning new assurances obtained from the EU, I doubt it'll be enough to get it over the line, but I suspect it will reduce the level by which she will lose.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 14, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This ethnic nationalist bullshit is exactly what Yes worked hard to distance itself from. Your sort weren’t welcome before, I only hope if Indy2 gets it’s legs sense will prevail again.


Indeed. DexterTCN also likes to talk of “your” actions to English posters, when he means something like the actions of “the UK state”. He’s big on identifying persons with states, (including himself: things the Scottish government does are always “we”). He did so recently to killer b . I made a dig, but he probably didn’t understand it. 

Apparently, having the misfortune of living under the UK state equates you with its institutions, unless you are born in Scotland. In which case it doesn’t.

In my view, this belief that people born or living somewhere are identified with their government is dangerous and abhorent.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. DexterTCN also likes to talk of “your” actions to English posters, when he means something like the actions of “the UK state”. He’s big on identifying persons with states, (including himself: things the Scottish government does are always “we”). He did so recently to killer b . I made a dig, but he probably didn’t understand it.
> 
> Apparently, having the misfortune of living under the UK state equates you with its institutions, unless you are born in Scotland. In which case it doesn’t.
> 
> In my view, this belief that people born or living somewhere are identified with their government is dangerous and abhorent.


in that case i am disappointed that nicola sturgeon and dextertcn held meetings with alex salmond when they shouldn't have


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> um...I can still see your posts you moron


The only two posters I've seen who think that someone putting you on ignore means that you can't see their posts are good mates sass and this dexter.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

NoXion said:


> He means that *he* has put *you* on ignore, you hunchbrain.


It may be the intended meaning but technically the wording could be read as the other way around.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

archpedant teuchter said:


> It may be the intended meaning but technically the wording could be read as the other way around.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 14, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It may be the intended meaning but technically the wording could be read as the other way around.



Good thing none of us are composing a legal document, eh?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Good thing none of us are composing a legal document, eh?


_None of us is._


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> _None of us is._


none of us need compose


----------



## andysays (Jan 14, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It may be the intended meaning but technically the wording could be read as the other way around.


Unless Lazy Llama has been up to some technical wizardry I'm unaware of, it's not actually possible to block specific posters from reading your comments, is it?

Although I can certainly see the attraction of avoiding moronic responses to your posts by the likes of DexterTCN, so maybe that's a function which could be enabled...


----------



## NoXion (Jan 14, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> _None of us is._



"None of us is composing" doesn't sound right to me.


----------



## andysays (Jan 14, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> _None of us is._


Can we have a bit fewer of this pedantic nit-picking, please


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 14, 2019)

NoXion said:


> "None of us is composing" doesn't sound right to me.


“None” should be treated as if a contraction of “not one”.  

(I mean, I don’t actually care. But since we were doing banter about language exactitude I thought it would be amusing to insist).


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2019)

teqniq said:


> View attachment 158677



Never understood why it's such an honour to be put in charge of the bogs.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 14, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Never understood why it's such an honour to be put in charge of the bogs.



Reminds me of Pratchett:
_
“I wonder what's the difference between ordinary councillors and privy councillors?" wondered the merchant aloud.

The assassin scowled at him. "I think," he said, "it is because you're expected to eat shit.” 	_


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> “None” should be treated as if a contraction of “not one”.
> 
> (I mean, I don’t actually care. But since we were doing banter about language exactitude I thought it would be amusing to insist).


Top 10 grammar myths: none always takes a singular verb - Online Grammar


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 14, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



i can still see your posts. could you stop posting so i don't have to see them in future?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 14, 2019)

...and stop linking to The S*N.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 14, 2019)

Can someone put may out of her misery? I know life is pain but This is too much


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

Ground being prepared for no Brexit imo.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 14, 2019)

Will we have to man the barricades against the gammon hordes ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 14, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Can someone put may out of her misery? I know life is pain but This is too much


She'll do very nicely thanks - taking one for the team and then retiring on a mahoosive pension.
A bit like our dear Lord's three day sacrifice. (vicar)


----------



## 03gills (Jan 14, 2019)

Supine said:


> Doesn't really work does it. A GE would only settle matters if the two main parties took opposing sides. As that isn't going to happen I think we need a referendum on Stay vs Mays Deal.



They do take opposing sides though. In fact there's more clear blue water between the two main parties than there has been in my lifetime. 

I mean If all you give a shit about is brexit & could give two fucks about a nasty Tory government that has shafted the country since 2010 then sure, i could see your logic.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




We've got a really special one here folks


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> We've got a really special one here folks


dextertcn is the auld moany of urban


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

chilango said:


> Ground being prepared for no Brexit imo.


Where are the numbers in parliament coming from for this?


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> Where are the numbers in parliament coming from for this?



I don't think that it will get voted on, so the numbers won't be an issue.

I think a number of things will be going on.

First, that "no Brexit" becomes the "only sensible option" in the immediate term.

Second that A50 gets revoked "temporarily, but indefinitely.

Third that those in power "wargame" the fallout of no Brexit and figure that they can ride it out.

Fourth (and this is what I read into May's speech) that the various camps are able to all blame "someone else" for the collapse of Brexit and thus diffuse the backlash.

Utter speculation in my part of course. But that's all anyone can offer right now, no?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

chilango said:


> Utter speculation in my part of course. But that's all anyone can offer right now, no?


this is the home of speculation


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

Sure, I just wanted to see your workings-out. 

Personally I think cancelling brexit altogether by the executive is one of the least likely possibilities, just because of what it will do to the conservative party.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2019)

chilango said:


> I don't think that it will get voted on, so the numbers won't be an issue.


It would need to be voted on, no? My understanding of the ECJ's ruling is that a unilateral revocation of A50 by the UK is allowed but only after the country's due democratic process has been followed, and that's been widely interpreted to mean a vote in parliament.


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It would need to be voted on, no? My understanding of the ECJ's ruling is that a unilateral revocation of A50 by the UK is allowed but only after the country's due democratic process has been followed, and that's been widely interpreted to mean a vote in parliament.



There *might* be a vote on revoking A50, maybe. But it won't be an explicit "no Brexit" vote imo. It could be painted by some as buying time get "proper Brexit" organised if need be,...

Equally I'm sure the EU will be more flexible about interpreting stuff when it's iin its own interests


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> Sure, I just wanted to see your workings-out.
> 
> Personally I think cancelling brexit altogether by the executive is one of the least likely possibilities, just because of what it will do to the conservative party.



Maybe.

But if the "blame" can plausibility shifted into Labour/the rest of parliament and/or if May falls on her sword over it. They might gamble that they can ride it out and even profit from the feelings of betrayal.

Fuck knows.

May might even get her deal through for all I or anyone else knows!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 14, 2019)

We're all just treading water really until tomorrow's vote happens. Things might be clearer after that. Who knows, May might even finally resign.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 14, 2019)

It's kind of funny the way we talk about this stuff as if it's physics rather than group arrangements.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 14, 2019)

oh dear. One of the Tory whips has just resigned as he cant support the deal. 
Will the vote get delayed again - or pulled all together? 
Def looks like they will look to  extend the a50 deadline though.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 14, 2019)




----------



## Winot (Jan 14, 2019)

chilango said:


> There *might* be a vote on revoking A50, maybe. But it won't be an explicit "no Brexit" vote imo. It could be painted by some as buying time get "proper Brexit" organised if need be,...



The ECJ judgement is clear that revocation of Art. 50 *cannot *be used as a delaying tactic. It needs to be to stop Brexit, following a democratic mandate. I think this could be a vote in Parliament or a 2nd Ref (which would then need a vote in Parliament anyway).


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> oh dear. One of the Tory whips has just resigned as he cant support the deal..



LOL.   Strong and Stable.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 14, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> oh dear. One of the Tory whips has just resigned as he can't support the deal.


Another going down the death spiral


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 158704


They can't even get the brexit advice line number right


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're all just treading water really until tomorrow's vote happens. *Things might be clearer after that. *



You think so? 

I think it'll be as clear as mud.


----------



## andysays (Jan 14, 2019)

chilango said:


> I don't think that it will get voted on, so the numbers won't be an issue.
> 
> I think a number of things will be going on.
> 
> ...


There's an explicit and very significant difference between revoking, ie cancelling completely, and postponing to allow negotiations to resume.

The EU/ECJ has previously set out quite specific conditions and limits for how and when each of those can happen (which can always themselves be revoked or amended, I  guess)


----------



## 8ball (Jan 14, 2019)

Winot said:


> The ECJ judgement is clear that revocation of Art. 50 *cannot *be used as a delaying tactic. It needs to be to stop Brexit, following a democratic mandate. I think this could be a vote in Parliament or a 2nd Ref (which would then need a vote in Parliament anyway).



Can you stop and start, though?
We've done it before...


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They can't even get the brexit advice line number right



Phone a friend only really works as a lifeline if you have friend's to phone


----------



## Winot (Jan 14, 2019)

8ball said:


> Can you stop and start, though?
> We've done it before...



Yes you can revoke and then later on re-trigger Art. 50. However you can't cynically use it to delay negotiations. Ultimately the ECJ (yes, them) would decide whether the UK had breached EU law.

In practice it's a pretty unlikely scenario.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

Winot said:


> The ECJ judgement is clear that revocation of Art. 50 *cannot *be used as a delaying tactic. It needs to be to stop Brexit, following a democratic mandate. I think this could be a vote in Parliament or a 2nd Ref (which would then need a vote in Parliament anyway).


How is that defined though? Is it like parking restrictions where you can't return within the hour? Otherwise the effect would appear to be to commit us to staying in the EU forever.


----------



## pesh (Jan 14, 2019)

who's idea was it to have her give the speech while surrounded by mugs


----------



## Winot (Jan 14, 2019)

teuchter said:


> How is that defined though? Is it like parking restrictions where you can't return within the hour? Otherwise the effect would appear to be to commit us to staying in the EU forever.



I asked that question on Twitter the day the ECJ judgement was published. It isn't entirely clear. However:

The judgement sets the following rules for revocation (quote from para 74 of judgement):

"the revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw must, first, be submitted in writing to the European Council and, secondly, be unequivocal and unconditional, that is to say that the purpose of that revocation is to confirm the EU membership of the Member State concerned under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a Member State, and that revocation brings the withdrawal procedure to an end."

Furthermore the revocation decision must be taken by the member state "through its democratic process in accordance with its constitutional requirements" (paras 67 & 75).

However Art. 50 is still part of the Lisbon Treaty and the ECJ judgement cannot mean that a member state is committed to staying in the EU forever​
But the bar is fairly high - it can't be done on a whim. Furthermore I reckon that if Parliament did it without a GE or 2nd ref there would be a legal challenge as to whether this fulfilled the second test. In practice I think the bar is high enough that there isn't really an issue - if the UK could demonstrate that it had jumped through the hoops then it would be allowed to revoke. If later on it decided to leave then it could do so.

Interestingly the Advocate General's Opinion said that the revocation of Art. 50 had to be in good faith, but that wording didn't appear in the ECJ judgement.


----------



## T & P (Jan 14, 2019)

This is what the Treasury minister was seen carrying out of a cabinet meeting a few minutes ago...


----------



## 8ball (Jan 14, 2019)

I want to see the rest of the numbers. 

...
7) March 21st - bunkers ready 
8) March 25th - launch missiles


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2019)

T & P said:


> This is what the Treasury minister was seen carrying out of a cabinet meeting a few minutes ago...


They were obviously having a 21st Century John Lee Hooker singalong:

No food on my table.
And no shoes to go on my feet.
No food on my table.
And no shoes to go on my feet.
My children cry for mercy.
They got no place to call your own.

Hard times, hard times.
Hard times seem like a jealous thing.
Hard times, hard times.
Hard times seem like a jealous thing.
If someone don't help me.
And I just can't be around three months long.

No shoes on my feet.
And no food to go on my table.
Oh no, too sad.
Children crying for bread.


----------



## pesh (Jan 14, 2019)

3. Above us only sky.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 14, 2019)

4. No Woman


----------



## pesh (Jan 14, 2019)

5. No Diggity


----------



## Badgers (Jan 14, 2019)

T & P said:


> This is what the Treasury minister was seen carrying out of a cabinet meeting a few minutes ago...


Is that REAL?  

What does the bottom line say?


----------



## mauvais (Jan 14, 2019)

'No channel tunnel'


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

May is on her feet in the house, yet the house is half empty.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> May is on her feet in the house, yet the house is half empty.





A boycott?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2019)

T & P said:


> This is what the Treasury minister was seen carrying out of a cabinet meeting a few minutes ago...


I try to avoid ramping up the clichéometer up to 11, with phrases like 'why oh why, in the 4th largest economy in the world...', but you do wonder how we got to a point where the government are having to discuss frighten us by contemplating a lack of food.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 14, 2019)

I'd like to say that's so obviously planted for the media, but the sheer ineptitude of this government makes me wonder.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 14, 2019)

More here :-


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 14, 2019)

skyscraper101 said:


> I'd like to say that's so obviously planted for the media, but the sheer ineptitude of this government makes me wonder.




I thought it was a Photoshop job...


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

pesh said:


> who's idea was it to have her give the speech while surrounded by mugs


Looks to me like a load of delicate chinaware in precarious stacks which will come crashing down as a result of a move in the wrong direction.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> Where are the numbers in parliament coming from for this?



Huge majority of MP's are Remain, no? 



chilango said:


> I don't think that it will get voted on, so the numbers won't be an issue.
> 
> I think a number of things will be going on.
> 
> ...



I think it will get voted on. Once a govt is in place that will cancel Brexit, they'll fall over themselves to vote for that - after all the govt will get the blame not the MP's.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

Winot said:


> The ECJ judgement is clear that revocation of Art. 50 *cannot *be used as a delaying tactic. It needs to be to stop Brexit, following a democratic mandate. I think this could be a vote in Parliament or a 2nd Ref (which would then need a vote in Parliament anyway).



*shrug* They don't seem bothered. EU preparing to delay Brexit until at least July


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 14, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Looks to me like a load of delicate chinaware in precarious stacks which will come crashing down as a result of a move in the wrong direction.



"Do the dance!".....CRASH


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 14, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> "Do the dance!".....CRASH


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Huge majority of MP's are Remain, no?


No, there isn't. There's not even 150 for a second referendum.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> No, there isn't. There's not even 150 for a second referendum.



OK, huge majority of MP's were Remain in previous referendum.


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK, huge majority of MP's were Remain in previous referendum.


So what?


----------



## andysays (Jan 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> *shrug* They don't seem bothered. EU preparing to delay Brexit until at least July


A delay is not a revocation.

They might start with a delay, and then engineer a full revocation, but it's important to understand the difference.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> So what?



And if they think there's a chance that the whole thing can go away they'll grab the chance.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

andysays said:


> A delay is not a revocation.
> 
> They might start with a delay, and then engineer a full revocation, but it's important to understand the difference.



Sorry should have been clear - what I meant was that since they're quite happy to accept an extension it's redundant whether you can revoke and then invoke A50 again.


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> And if they think there's a chance that the whole thing can go away they'll grab the chance.


they won't though. partly at least because voting to revoke article 50 will not 'make the whole thing go away'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> they won't though. partly at least because voting to revoke article 50 will not 'make the whole thing go away'.



I'm not saying it will go away and I'm talking about what they will do if they believe there is a chance it can be made to go away.


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

They won't believe there's a chance it would go away though, so they won't.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Jan 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What they fear is the death of 1000 cunts, the massacre of MPs and other enemies of the people



More likely to be "death of 100,000 cunts" then, if we're getting rid of them all.


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> They won't believe there's a chance it would go away though, so they won't.



Don't overestimate their complacency.

This whole mess is just the latest example of their beliefs being utterly out of touch with reality.


----------



## chilango (Jan 14, 2019)

That said I don't think even they're daft enough to go for a second referendum.

I think they'll drop it without one.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

So, as the most important decision this country is about to undertake in my lifetime, and the debate continues - only about 10-20% of MPs can be arsed to be in the house.


----------



## killer b (Jan 14, 2019)

it's teatime.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

The bars are open.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, as the most important decision this country is about to undertake in my lifetime, and the debate continues - only about 10-20% of MPs can be arsed to be in the house.



Corbyn and May have both held mass meetings with MPs in the last hour or so. Plus, at this stage of the debate it's Random Backbencher #573 sharing their reckonings, and who has time for that shit.


----------



## Supine (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, as the most important decision this country is about to undertake in my lifetime, and the debate continues - only about 10-20% of MPs can be arsed to be in the house.



Get with the times grandad. WhatsApp is on fire tonight in sw1


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

So, basically take the debate out of the house, out of public view.

May as well call it a day, and close the house down.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, basically take the debate out of the house, out of public view.
> 
> May as well call it a day, and close the house down.


The main thing is that things are being discussed somewhere in London. It's like you said about scotland - if you don't like it feel free to leave the UK.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The main thing is that things are being discussed somewhere in London. It's like you said about scotland - if you don't like it feel free to leave the UK.





You are such a low level troll, once in a while you hit the spot, but generally you come across as a complete twat.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are such a low level troll, once in a while you hit the spot, but generally you come across as a complete twat.


Really?  I thought it was a great reply.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 14, 2019)

i have spunked a free bet tenner on a pass vote at 9/1.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Really?  I thought it was a great reply.



Funny enough, I have him on the same list as the likes of you and Gromit.


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2019)

hm I got 16 to 1. First meaningful vote passes.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Funny enough, I have him on the same list as the likes of you and Gromit.


Well as long as you're making lists of people I'm sure you're on the right track


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> i have spunked a free bet tenner on a pass vote at 9/1.


Nothing to do with brexit but won £70 on a national lottery game earlier


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 14, 2019)

xenon said:


> hm I got 16 to 1. First meaningful vote passes.



thats gooder odds - i was limited cos of free bet


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Nothing to do with brexit but won £70 on a national lottery game earlier



Euromillions?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> Euromillions?


No, it was one of the online national lottery ones


----------



## teuchter (Jan 14, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are such a low level troll, once in a while you hit the spot, but generally you come across as a complete twat.


If you don't like it feel free to leave urban, or the whole internet if you prefer


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jan 14, 2019)

Getting real for friends abroad:

Image further down thread with personal details obscured !


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2019)

Harry Smiles said:


> Getting real for friends abroad:
> [A]


You might want to remove the customer number too


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jan 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You might want to remove the customer number too



Oops, opied straight off her FB

How do I remove attachment, anyone?


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 14, 2019)

Harry Smiles said:


> Oops, opied straight off her FB
> 
> How do I remove attachment, anyone?


edit post, delete the [attachment] bits, drag pic to your desktop from facebook, post it here


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jan 14, 2019)

Now with other details scrubbed:


----------



## Wilf (Jan 14, 2019)

Bit of a side issue, but Bercow's battle with the government must be without precedent, at least with recent speakers and particularly in terms of _tone_.  I find it amusing that he's annoying the tories, but ain't trying to portray him as some kind of democratic hero - he's an (apparently) abusive wanker. Still, he's stirring the pot. 


> And on Monday the Commons Speaker, John Bercow, was forced to bat off questions from loyal Tory MPs suggesting he was willing to facilitate a backbench takeover. “I have no intention of taking lectures in doing right by Parliament from people who have been conspicuous in denial of and, sometimes, contempt for it,” he said. “I will stand up for the rights of the Commons and I won’t be pushed around by agents of the executive.”


May faces crushing Brexit defeat despite last-minute plea to MPs


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 14, 2019)

Apparently I'm not the first person on the Interwebs to thing he's starting to look more and more like Terry Jones.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 14, 2019)

Harry Smiles said:


> Now with other details scrubbed:
> 
> View attachment 158730


No doubt they'll have to carry the permits.  For when people hear their accents.  Someone will call the authorities, no doubt.


----------



## xenon (Jan 14, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> thats gooder odds - i was limited cos of free bet


Was Skybet. Stuck a tenner on it from previous winnings...


----------



## gentlegreen (Jan 14, 2019)

Why does Youtube keep showing me investment and gambling ads ?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 14, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Well as long as you're making lists of people I'm sure you're on the right track


What kind of cunt doesn't have a list?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Nothing to do with brexit but won £70 on a national lottery game earlier



There’s your metropolitan elite right there.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

groan - some speculation - which i suspect will turn out to be right - that when may's deal get's booted into touch tomorrow she will try and get an extension of a few months on the withdrawal date so she can go back to the EU. Apparently according to "sources within the cabinet" the EU are indicating they will offer some concessions once may's deal has been rejected (Why on earth they would suddenly change their position is anybodies guess) 
What it actually mean is that may will have bought herself  a bit more time to go back and forth between two brick walls getting nowhere - just like she has been doing for the past two years. 

Now i was hoping that the tories might just chuck her overboard once she has been thoroughly humiliated and the whole point of her premiership has been flushed down the toilet - but apparently there is no appetite to do that from either wing of the tory party cos it would ignite a massive fuck off civil war. They want to keep May there so all the brexit dog shit  bags can be hung off her.   
So we will be exactly where we were and nothing will have changed.

 Just ... make ... it ... fucking ... stop.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> groan - some speculation - which i suspect will turn out to be right - that when may's deal get's booted into touch tomorrow she will try and get an extension of a few months on the withdrawal date so she can go back to the EU. Apparently according to "sources within the cabinet" the EU are indicating they will offer some concessions once may's deal has been rejected (Why on earth they would suddenly change their position is anybodies guess)
> What it actually mean is that may will have bought herself  a bit more time to go back and forth between two brick walls getting nowhere - just like she has been doing for the past two years.
> 
> Now i was hoping that the tories might just chuck her overboard once she has been thoroughly humiliated and the whole point of her premiership has been flushed down the toilet - but apparently there is no appetite to do that from either wing of the tory party cos it would ignite a massive fuck off civil war. They want to keep May there so all the brexit dog shit  bags can be hung off her.
> ...



The saving grace here is May (the month) EU elections and financial contributions...or not... i heard there might be a way around (some precedent from an eastern european country...cant remember the details...government appoint somebody rather than an election or something). but the absolute deadline is July when a new term of EU parliament sits? I think thats what i heard.
ETA: yes, July. But that would mean an agreement to circumnavigate the EU elections and spending round, which might get blocked by the commons.

bluergh


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> groan - some speculation - which i suspect will turn out to be right - that when may's deal get's booted into touch tomorrow she will try and get an extension of a few months on the withdrawal date so she can go back to the EU. Apparently according to "sources within the cabinet" the EU are indicating they will offer some concessions once may's deal has been rejected (Why on earth they would suddenly change their position is anybodies guess)
> What it actually mean is that may will have bought herself  a bit more time to go back and forth between two brick walls getting nowhere - just like she has been doing for the past two years.
> 
> Now i was hoping that the tories might just chuck her overboard once she has been thoroughly humiliated and the whole point of her premiership has been flushed down the toilet - but apparently there is no appetite to do that from either wing of the tory party cos it would ignite a massive fuck off civil war. They want to keep May there so all the brexit dog shit  bags can be hung off her.
> ...



I could totally see that to be fair. I still think the end game would be revoking A50 but never rule out kicking the can further down the road.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What kind of cunt doesn't have a list?



The cunt that's on everyone's list.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

Ch 4 news pushing this guy as speaking for banking industry. Doesn't quote in article but in video as well as saying no deal apocalyptic and May's deal bad he said a 2nd ref risks a bigger mandate for leave and should be avoided. 

UK finance chief warns of no-deal Brexit ‘catastrophe’ for banking indusry

Also spied Chukka demanding Corbyn table no confidence and extend A50.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)

What time is the farce vote?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ch 4 news pushing this guy as speaking for banking industry. Doesn't quote in article but in video as well as saying no deal apocalyptic and May's deal bad he said a 2nd ref risks a bigger mandate for leave and should be avoided.
> 
> UK finance chief warns of no-deal Brexit ‘catastrophe’ for banking indusry
> 
> Also spied Chukka demanding Corbyn table no confidence and extend A50.



Time for 'left' remainers to take a fucking good look at themselves when even a remainer banker gets it better than they do:



> He also said the banking industry could do more to bridge social divides, saying: “There’s no question that the social costs of austerity and frankly the lack of benefit for the so-called boom times leading up to the credit crisis accruing to London and the South East are a real factor that has driven Brexit and something that we as a country and perhaps we as industry need to try and help heal.
> 
> “There’s no question in my mind that the psyche of we’re not being listened to by those Londoners and that the benefit of the boom economy in London hasn’t accrued to the rest of the country is something that has fed through to the Brexit vote.”


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What time is the farce vote?



9pm-ish


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> (Why on earth they would suddenly change their position is anybodies guess)


Because they want a deal, but indicating beforehand that they are willing to make some movement (probably not a lot in this case but some) weakens their hand.

This is classic negotiating tactics, the position you put out publicly, the position you put to other side of the table and your actual position will often differ.


----------



## andysays (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Time for 'left' remainers to take a fucking good look at themselves when even a remainer banker gets it better than they do:


#notallLondoners


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 15, 2019)

Harry Smiles said:


> Now with other details scrubbed:
> 
> View attachment 158730



It's dated tomorrow?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Because they want a deal, but indicating beforehand that they are willing to make some movement (probably not a lot in this case but some) weakens their hand.
> 
> This is classic negotiating tactics, the position you put out publicly, the position you put to other side of the table and your actual position will often differ.



Its not a negotiating tactic - at best its the EU playing along with Mays self-delusion. They are not going to shift on the fundamentals - Irish border, free movement and customs union - the whole back stop bruhah. not in a million years. Its just spin put out by the government.  It will be just some more warm words and a couple of very minor tweaks. 
The EU are basically rolling there eyes and waiting for the UK political system to actually agree on something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> It's dated tomorrow?


how curious


----------



## Johnny Doe (Jan 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> It's dated tomorrow?


Hadn't noticed that!

Bloody efficient, your Europeans!


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Its not a negotiating tactic - at best its the EU playing along with Mays self-delusion. They are not going to shift on the fundamentals - Irish border, free movement and customs union - the whole back stop bruhah. not in a million years. Its just spin put out by the government.  It will be just some more warm words and a couple of very minor tweaks.
> The EU are basically rolling there eyes and waiting for the UK political system to actually agree on something.


What you've just outlined _is_ a negotiating tactic. One that both the EU and UK gov hope to use to get this deal over the line.

Yes any changes will be largely cosmetic but the idea that the EU won't budge on things _as that's what they have publicly _said is naive. All kinds of statements are made during negotiations, very many/most of them playing to the gallery.


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Time for 'left' remainers to take a fucking good look at themselves when even a remainer banker gets it better than they do:



This is straw man bollocks.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What you've just outlined _is_ a negotiating tactic. One that both the EU and UK gov hope to use to get this deal over the line.
> 
> Yes any changes will be largely cosmetic but the idea that the EU won't budge on things _as that's what they have publicly _said is naive. All kinds of statements are made during negotiations, very many/most of them playing to the gallery.



the EU are not negotiating. they haven't got anyone to negotiate with. Parliament wants conflicting outcomes - from no deal to mays deal to "norway" to no brexit - but none of them can get through. All the EU can do wait and see what the UK finally comes up with.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> This is straw man bollocks.


I don't think it is.  I can't see the People's Vote crowd doing anything other than repeating the same mistakes. They won't win a hypothetical (and still in my view unlikely) 2nd referendum without addressing those very points that even a banker can acknowledge.


----------



## killer b (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it is.  I can't see the People's Vote crowd doing anything other than repeating the same mistakes. They won't win a hypothetical (and still in my view unlikely) 2nd referendum without addressing those very points that even a banker can acknowledge.


TBF I don't think the People's Vote crowd could _really_ be called 'Left remainers'.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don't think it is.  I can't see the People's Vote crowd doing anything other than repeating the same mistakes. They won't win a hypothetical (and still in my view unlikely) 2nd referendum without addressing those very points that even a banker can acknowledge.


It's straw man firstly because most remainers are perfectly aware of these points.
Secondly, acknowledging reasons why people voted leave doesn't necessarily mean that you think leaving the EU is therefore the right thing to do, or that leaving the EU will do anything about the issues that led to the leave vote.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

Righto, predictions / guessing time I reckon.

Lets assume for one minute that May actually has a bigger strategy at play here rather than this deal or nothing.  Lets assume that the reason for delaying the vote was to do a lot of work in the background for a strategy that would come into play when she loses.  Relatively loyal cabinet colleagues (Rudd & Fox) are sent out to prepare the ground for a series of votes to get a deal through Parliament whilst she plays up the 'death of democracy' angle.

May has to go through with the deal but when it fails I think we'll see a series of votes as just enough waverers on both side of the house cave in and back a version of May's deal.  May will then have to go back to Europe and get that agreed which may or may not be achievable but I think this is what the EU negotiating team must be expecting now.

So I guess key to this will be the numbers in the vote.  Is she loses by 50 or so votes then that doesn't really seem like an insurmountable problem as all she'd need to do is convince 27 people to change their mind.  Losing by 100+ would be a difficult situation.


----------



## Flavour (Jan 15, 2019)

she's going to lose by maybe 150 votes. this isn't getting through without some really major changes. changes that either A) May says are red lines (e.g. FoM) or B) the EU says are non-starters. the EU i think will call May's bluff and continue to refuse to make concessions to push Britain closer and closer to the No-Deal default... Corbyn's VONC will fail. Can't imagine beyond that. I think revocation of A50 on March 28th is quite possible unless there is an extension agreed, though the EU have said there will be no extension unless there is a "fundamental" (i.e. leadership) changed in the British position


----------



## Poi E (Jan 15, 2019)

I can't reasonably credit them with planning given their recklessness to date.


----------



## cybershot (Jan 15, 2019)

They don't vote until 7pm!!

Is this so they can put more meals and hotels on expenses!!


----------



## T & P (Jan 15, 2019)

I'm debating whether to go for a pint at the Red Lion this evening and watch the drama unfold on TV over a pint...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> TBF I don't think the People's Vote crowd could _really_ be called 'Left remainers'.


Fair enough. I was thinking of people like my brother (an SNP member who calls himself a socialist and who supports a second referendum), with whom I’ve been discussing Brexit on our family group chat this morning. He’s not as left as me (he recoils from the term “communist”, and declines to read certain online material I attempt to share with him), but he’d call himself “left”.  

It’s hard to know what terms to use these days. I voted Remain, but wouldn’t class myself a “Remainer”, and I would abstain in a 2nd referendum.  I don’t think we get anywhere by imagining the two positions on the ballot paper in 2016 represent homogenous tribes, or indeed were the only positions that existed then, far less now.



teuchter said:


> It's straw man firstly because most remainers are perfectly aware of these points.
> Secondly, acknowledging reasons why people voted leave doesn't necessarily mean that you think leaving the EU is therefore the right thing to do, or that leaving the EU will do anything about the issues that led to the leave vote.


Your first part is incorrect. It does not prove a “straw man”. Many “Remainers” may well be aware of those points. But they need to be more than aware: they need to address them *if they hope to affect a Remain*. 

Your second part is itself a straw man: I’m not arguing that addressing those points necessitates advocating leaving the EU.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2019)

She'll lose by 86 votes.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 15, 2019)

87


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 87



Oh you're a poor sport.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Your first part is incorrect. It does not prove a “straw man”. Many “Remainers” may well be aware of those points. But they need to be more than aware: they need to address them *if they hope to affect a Remain*.
> 
> Your second part is itself a straw man: I’m not arguing that addressing those points necessitates advocating leaving the EU.



The post concerned referred to the quote from a banker, saying that even this banker 'gets it' where most remainers don't.

I think most remainers 'get it' as the quoted banker does. Remainers may well be vague on the means of addressing the issues, but no more so than the quoted banker, who is saying no more than 'something must be done'.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)

88


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The post concerned referred to the quote from a banker, saying that even this banker 'gets it' where most remainers don't.
> 
> I think most remainers 'get it' as the quoted banker does. Remainers may well be vague on the means of addressing the issues, but no more so than the quoted banker, who is saying no more than 'something must be done'.


It said “left Remainers” need to look at themselves in that regard. I think they do.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

There's a certain amusement inhearing some of those opposed to second referendum arguing that you can't keep voting till you get the result you want, whilst at the same time that appears to be exactly the strategy of Theresa May in the Commons


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> There's a certain amusement inhearing some of those opposed to second referendum arguing that you can't keep voting till you get the result you want, whilst at the same time that appears to be exactly the strategy of Theresa May in the Commons


 & especially given they got the result they wanted as a result of a second referendum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

T & P said:


> I'm debating whether to go for a pint at the Red Lion this evening and watch the drama unfold on TV over a pint...


how goes the debate?


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> There's a certain amusement inhearing some of those opposed to second referendum arguing that you can't keep voting till you get the result you want, whilst at the same time that appears to be exactly the strategy of Theresa May in the Commons


Theresa who?????


----------



## T & P (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how goes the debate?


I think the Ayes have it.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> & especially given they got the result they wanted as a result of a second referendum.




Heard this bullshit a lot recently.  The Common Market and the EU are not the same thing.   That we got from one to the other without consultation is part of the problem


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

harry may would have been a far better pm


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 15, 2019)

JRM V's JOB on LBC right now.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

Flavour said:


> she's going to lose by maybe 150 votes...



That many?  That would be huge and certainly a lot higher than any predictions I've seen.  A defeat that large would be hard to salvage anything from.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 15, 2019)

I keep seeing people mentioning how many callaghan was defeated by and that surely she must go after this defeat if it is large. But she isn't going to is she? Because its not written that she formally has to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I keep seeing people mentioning how many callaghan was defeated by and that surely she must go after this defeat if it is large. But she isn't going to is she? Because its not written that she formally has to.


this is the centre piece of her administration. this is the culminating moment of brexit. the moment that the agreement she has negotiated is put to the vote. everyone else has said they're fine with it, this is when we find whether the uk's up for it. nothing else theresa may does as prime minister compares in importance to whether this part of her work is crowned with success - or failure. so obvs she has to go if there's a heavy defeat, she's nailed her name to this particular mast.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this is the centre piece of her administration. this is the culminating moment of brexit. the moment that the agreement she has negotiated is put to the vote. everyone else has said they're fine with it, this is when we find whether the uk's up for it. nothing else theresa may does as prime minister compares in importance to whether this part of her work is crowned with success - or failure. so obvs she has to go if there's a heavy defeat, she's nailed her name to this particular mast.



Not only that but it would be impossible for her to tear her deal up and negotiate something different that might get through Parliament


----------



## killer b (Jan 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That many?  That would be huge and certainly a lot higher than any predictions I've seen.  A defeat that large would be hard to salvage anything from.


Lots of places (Guardian & Sky included) are saying 200+


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Not only that but it would be impossible for her to tear her deal up and negotiate something different that might get through Parliament


yeh, it's now or never. there is no time to renegotiate, no one, not even st jeremy corbyn, would be able to persuade the eu to rip this up and start again.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Heard this bullshit a lot recently.  The Common Market and the EU are not the same thing.   That we got from one to the other without consultation is part of the problem



Not really. Even by the 2010 election, the EU wasn’t on many British people’s list of things that concerned them the most. It’s been a monumental effort to boil everyone’s piss so thoroughly about it. 

Free movement is not without complications, but it’s been a scapegoat for austerity. If people living here had some kind of citizen’s rights to housing who would care? Virtually no one gave a care about the Sovereignty of a Parliament determined to do so very little for people in need. Anything big, Health, Education, Housing, Defence policy all still determined by Her Majesty’s Govt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> Lots of places (Guardian & Sky included) are saying 200+


frankly i think it will be narrower than that, wouldn't be surprised if downing street are briefing 'oh noes we will be shat on' so a defeat of 60-80 looks by contrast moderate


----------



## killer b (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there is no time to renegotiate, no one, not even st jeremy corbyn, would be able to persuade the eu to rip this up and start again.


this isn't true though. If there was a change of administration before the deal is signed they would clearly be open to renegotiation.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, it's now or never. there is no time to renegotiate, no one, not even st jeremy corbyn, would be able to persuade the eu to rip this up and start again.



Bollocks, a fresh broom and there is justification for an Art 50 extension.  And a fresh tack.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> Lots of places (Guardian & Sky included) are saying 200+


I think it’ll either be by loads or it will be really close.

Or it might be somewhat in between.  One of those things.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> Lots of places (Guardian & Sky included) are saying 200+



OK, I've missed that.  It would be huge.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> this isn't true though. If there was a change of administration before the deal is signed they would clearly be open to renegotiation.


They have said exactly that, in just so many words. They'd bloody love to renegotiate, if it had a hope of achieving something.


----------



## killer b (Jan 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I think it’ll either be by loads or it will be really close.
> 
> Or it might be somewhat in between.  One of those things.


they have an interactive game and everything. 

Can you get May's Brexit deal through parliament?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> this isn't true though. If there was a change of administration before the deal is signed they would clearly be open to renegotiation.


i don't deny that there may be flexibility over elements of the deal, but there is no way on god's green earth that 27 countries and the eu are going to say ok, let's start from the beginning once again. your 'they will clearly be open to renegotiation' isn't true if by renegotiation you mean starting from a clean canvas.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> they have an interactive game and everything.
> 
> Can you get May's Brexit deal through parliament?


Oh guardian where would we be without you


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> they have an interactive game and everything.
> 
> Can you get May's Brexit deal through parliament?



Is it like Flappy Bird?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Bollocks, a fresh broom and there is justification for an Art 50 extension.  And a fresh tack.


yeh. this extension, how long do you think it will be?


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. this extension, how long do you think it will be?



6months


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't deny that there may be flexibility over elements of the deal, but there is no way on god's green earth that 27 countries and the eu are going to say ok, let's start from the beginning once again. your 'they will clearly be open to renegotiation' isn't true if by renegotiation you mean starting from a clean canvas.



We just want to go back to the good old days.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. this extension, how long do you think it will be?



You've got 24 hours, Callaghan!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> 6months


right. so from the end of march to the end of september. you're living in cloud-cuckoo land if you think that in those six months something new can be negotiated from scratch which will go through all the places it needs to go through. and that's assuming that all the ducks line up.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

Mark my words.

I think May will lose by 230 votes.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Not really. Even by the 2010 election, the EU wasn’t on many British people’s list of things that concerned them the most. It’s been a monumental effort to boil everyone’s piss so thoroughly about it.
> 
> Free movement is not without complications, but it’s been a scapegoat for austerity. If people living here had some kind of citizen’s rights to housing who would care? Virtually no one gave a care about the Sovereignty of a Parliament determined to do so very little for people in need. Anything big, Health, Education, Housing, Defence policy all still determined by Her Majesty’s Govt.



Up to 2010 Establishment was still in play down the significance of EU mode,  part of the reason remain lost was the cognative dissonance of painting economic meltdown from leaving an organisation that did little more than bendy bananas


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> they have an interactive game and everything.
> 
> Can you get May's Brexit deal through parliament?


It really is rather tricky to get the deal through, isn’t it?


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> right. so from the end of march to the end of september. you're living in cloud-cuckoo land if you think that in those six months something new can be negotiated from scratch which will go through all the places it needs to go through. and that's assuming that all the ducks line up.



Would take six months to do Norway thang.   

As to cloud cuckoo land  define normal in 2019.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> frankly i think it will be narrower than that, wouldn't be surprised if downing street are briefing 'oh noes we will be shat on' so a defeat of 60-80 looks by contrast moderate



That would be my guess too.

But ...

...these aren't normal times.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Would take six months to do Norway thang.
> 
> As to cloud cuckoo land  define normal in 2019.


could i see your working on the 'norway thang'?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> It really is rather tricky to get the deal through, isn’t it?



Yes it is, isnt it? 

I wonder if anyone will abstain tonight.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

If she loses by less that 100 votes she'll consider that a win.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Would take six months to do Norway thang.
> 
> As to cloud cuckoo land  define normal in 2019.



You could be right, but Norway itself could be a stumbling block as it has already said it doesn’t want the UK joining the EEA just to piss around waiting for a better offer.

Better to get a lot more leeway by asking the EU to delay Article Fiddy for a decade or so.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If she loses by less that 100 votes she'll consider that a win.


Why?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You could be right, but Norway itself could be a stumbling block as it has already said it doesn’t want the UK joining the EEA just to piss around waiting for a better offer.
> 
> Better to get a lot more leeway by asking the EU to delay Article Fiddy for a decade or so.


soz is this eea the european economic area or the european free trade association?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Why?


because everyone's saying she'll lose by many  more votes


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Why?



Her experience of life is that wearing people down until they succumb sort of works. Worked on Phillip clearly.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> because everyone's saying she'll lose by many  more votes


VICTORY!!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Why?



One of her aides explicitly told Nick Ferrari that this morning.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If she loses by less that 100 votes she'll consider that a win.


she might.  Everyone else would consider it a massive loss that she wont recover from.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz is this eea the european economic area or the european free trade association?



I can never remember. The one Norway doesn’t want us pissing about in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I can never remember. The one Norway doesn’t want us pissing about in.


efta


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> One of her aides explicitly told Nick Ferrari that this morning.


Thats as may be - its not a victory in any sense of the word, unless you're delusionsal (not you personally) - or more accurately they're briefing that so when she loses by 100 she can say Its Only A Scratch and not stand down when the pressure to do so hits.

"I consider this a victory - onwards!!" 
er, no.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> efta



No that’s a volcano m8.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> right. so from the end of march to the end of september. you're living in cloud-cuckoo land if you think that in those six months something new can be negotiated from scratch which will go through all the places it needs to go through. and that's assuming that all the ducks line up.


it wouldnt really need to be 'from scratch' tho, will it? The main issues, which have been raised as problems, are the backstop and the lack of any kind of customs union. Sort out the latter and the former falls away. If a new UK government simply agreed to joining the customs union, all problems solved, and the EU would be delighted (with a bit of delay to sort out a non-EFTA way of joining the EEA). 

Whether Labour could negotiate a customs union that isn't _the _customs union is a slightly different matter. JC would need something clever up his sleeve to sort out a CU that didn't involve free movement (which, altho I'd like hm to retain it, he wont)


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> groan - some speculation - which i suspect will turn out to be right - that when may's deal get's booted into touch tomorrow she will try and get an extension of a few months on the withdrawal date so she can go back to the EU. .



I would welcome this. My hungarian nationality is due to arrive in June and I don't really fancy involuntary repatriation, and leaving my husband here.

An extra three months will do nicely.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

Flicked on the BBC to see if anything ibterintere was happening in the HoC and all I saw was a bunch of self-satisfied smug wankers having a whale of a time in a big self-indulgent circle jerk that they all seemed to enjoying immensely.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Thats as may be - its not a victory in any sense of the word, unless you're delusionsal - or more accurately they're briefing that so when she loses by 100 she can say Its Only A Scratch and not stand down when the pressure to do so hits.




Well, quite.

But as many are expecting >200, <100 will be something of a result. This of course goes against the background of "there is no other deal that the EU will acquiesce to, however Boris or Jez  may like to imagine they will'. 

It really is this deal (or very close) or no deal.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> But as many are expecting >200, <100 will be something of a result. .


My point is, no it won't.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Flicked on the BBC to see if anything ibterintere was happening in the HoC and all I saw was a bunch of self-satisfied smug wankers having a whale of a time in a big self-indulgent circle jerk that they all seemed to enjoying immensely.



Stuff starts happening about 7 , chaos by about 9


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> My point is, no it won't.



It's like if you manage to go a full round with Tyson before intensive care calls, rather than 10 seconds...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Flicked on the BBC to see if anything ibterintere was happening in the HoC and all I saw was a bunch of self-satisfied smug wankers having a whale of a time in a big self-indulgent circle jerk that they all seemed to enjoying immensely.


is that the npolitics coveage team on the beeb or the MPs? ' 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> it wouldnt really need to be 'from scratch' tho, will it? The main issues, which have been raised as problems, are the backstop and the lack of any kind of customs union. Sort out the latter and the former falls away. If a new UK government simply agreed to joining the customs union, all problems solved, and the EU would be delighted (with a bit of delay to sort out a non-EFTA way of joining the EEA).
> 
> Whether Labour could negotiate a customs union that isn't _the _customs union is a slightly different matter. JC would need something clever up his sleeve to sort out a CU that didn't involve free movement (which, altho I'd like hm to retain it, he wont)


well, you're rather more sanguine than i am. and between today and any final deal there's a lot of potential slips. let's see what happens this week, which will help determine whether jc gets a run at it at all.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Suff starts happening about 7 , chaos by about 9



Chaos has been here a while....and nothing will happen at 7.

Well, nothing that hasn't already happened before Christmas.

What happens to first as tragedy, second as farce, if it was already a farce first time round?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Chaos has been here a while....and nothing will happen at 7.
> 
> Well, nothing that hasn't already happened before Christmas.
> 
> What happens to first as tragedy, second as farce, if it was already a farce first time round?


f-t-f
or
t-f-t


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> is that the npolitics coveage team on the beeb or the MPs? ' 'The creatures outside looked from pig to man'


MPs.

But yeah, could equally have been the journos and commentators.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Chaos has been here a while....and nothing will happen at 7.
> 
> Well, nothing that hasn't already happened before Christmas.
> 
> What happens to first as tragedy, second as farce, if it was already a farce first time round?



get repeated, with trousers round ankles -   do you know nothing of British culture?


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> well, you're rather more sanguine than i am. and between today and any final deal there's a lot of potential slips. let's see what happens this week, which will help determine whether jc gets a run at it at all.


well, yeah. Without a change in government, leading to a LAbour/SNP majority of 30+, I dont see anything new being achievable. And even then....


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> it wouldnt really need to be 'from scratch' tho, will it? The main issues, which have been raised as problems, are the backstop and the lack of any kind of customs union. Sort out the latter and the former falls away. If a new UK government simply agreed to joining the customs union, all problems solved, and the EU would be delighted (with a bit of delay to sort out a non-EFTA way of joining the EEA).
> 
> Whether Labour could negotiate a customs union that isn't _the _customs union is a slightly different matter. JC would need something clever up his sleeve to sort out a CU that didn't involve free movement (which, altho I'd like hm to retain it, he wont)



You can be in the/a customs union without free movement (see Turkey). It’s the single market that you’re thinking of.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> get repeated, with trousers round ankles -   do you know nothing of British culture?


and fruit in mouth


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's like if you manage to go a full round with Tyson before intensive care calls, rather than 10 seconds...


Losing by a 100 votes on the key bit of legislature of the last however many years does not win you a Ooh Nearly pat on the head. The Tories are trying to create a narrative to make her inevitable attempt at staying on after getting TROUNCED seem justifiable. It isn't justifiable. Its doublespeak of the highest order. 
I expect Nick Ferrari will repeat it as a victory tomorrow.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and fruit in mouth



Bin bag round head.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Losing by a 100 votes on the key bit of legislature of the last however many years does not win you a Ooh Nearly pat on the head. The Tories are trying to create a narrative to make her inevitable attempt at staying on after getting TROUNCED seem justifiable. It isn't justifiable. Its doublespeak of the highest order.
> I expect Nick Ferrari will repeat it as a victory tomorrow.



Expect so too. Great, inn'it.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> You can be in the/a customs union without free movement (see Turkey). It’s the single market that you’re thinking of.


Turkey isn't in 'the' customs union (and it took them nigh on  a decade to negotiate the one they are in). I'm not sure exactly what the terms of their version is, tho I do know JC thinks it is unsuitable for the UK. The EU doesnt actually want free movement from Turkey tho, whereas it is fine with it from the UK. So, it's doable, but not straightforward.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Expect so too. Great, inn'it.


Not really - LBC is a cesspit


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Losing by a 100 votes on the key bit of legislature of the last however many years does not win you a Ooh Nearly pat on the head. The Tories are trying to create a narrative to make her inevitable attempt at staying on after getting TROUNCED seem justifiable. It isn't justifiable. Its doublespeak of the highest order.
> I expect Nick Ferrari will repeat it as a victory tomorrow.



It's the difference between (at 100ish votes) being able resign muttering "we'd have had Brexit if wasn't for you pesky Eurosceptic rebels" and her successor bring sbleeto repeat that excuse when dealing with the inevitable cancellation, sorry "postponement" of Brexit.

...and the reality of nobody giving a fuck what she says as the door hits her arse on the way out at around 200 votes.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

Badgers said:


>




...and this is exactly why they will be willing to risk "street protests" in doing whatever they want in Parliament.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> It's the difference between (at 100ish votes) being able resign muttering "we'd have had Brexit if wasn't for you pesky Eurosceptic rebels" and her successor bring sbleeto repeat that excuse when dealing with the inevitable cancellation, sorry "postponement" of Brexit.
> 
> ...and the reality of nobody giving a fuck what she says as the door hits her arse on the way out at around 200 votes.


and who has set those figures as the benchmark? other than tory briefs on LBC
whatever the final vote figures tories wont depose her in vote of no confidence


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> and who has set those figures as the benchmark?
> whatever the final vote figures tories wont depose her in vote of no confidence



Some dickheads or other.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Some dickheads or other.


its damage limitation narrative creation spin and nothing more


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> Turkey isn't in 'the' customs union (and it took them nigh on  a decade to negotiate the one they are in). I'm not sure exactly what the terms of their version is, tho I do know JC thinks it is unsuitable for the UK. The EU doesnt actually want free movement from Turkey tho, whereas it is fine with it from the UK. So, it's doable, but not straightforward.



You said:



belboid said:


> JC would need something clever up his sleeve to sort out a CU that didn't involve free movement



This is wrong. You can be in a CU and not have free movement. It's not a CU that is inextricably linked to free movement (as far as the EU is concerned), it's being in the SM.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> its damage limitation narrative creation spin



Exactly.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> You said:
> 
> 
> 
> This is wrong. You can be in a CU and not have free movement. It's not a CU that is inextricably linked to free movement (as far as the EU is concerned), it's being in the SM.


Yes, I know you can. I am fully aware there are different types of CU. But the Turkish version is _massively _different to the main one, and doesn't cover, eg, agriculture and public procurement, as well as free movement. It is not the deal JC (or anyone) wants, and so couldn't just be taken off the shelf and copied over. And, as said, the EU doesn't want free movement from Turkey, whereas it is fine with it from the UK. These are vast, important, differences. 

So, as I said, a deal would be possible, but not straightforward.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> This is straw man bollocks.


I don't really understand what you mean there. Whose position have I misrepresented?


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't really understand what you mean there. Whose position have I misrepresented?



Did you see Teuchter's replies?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Did you see Teuchter's replies?


The ones where he misapplied the term "straw man", was wrong about what had been said, what had been implied, and added his own straw man into the bargain?  Those ones?


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The ones where he misapplied the term "straw man", was wrong about what had been said, what had been implied, and added his own straw man into the bargain?  Those ones?



Why are you bothering with this? Bad day?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Why are you bothering with this? Bad day?


Why am I discussing on a discussion board?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Did you see Teuchter's replies?


Yes. He either completely missed the point or chose to strawman me himself. Take your pick.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Why am I discussing on a discussion board?



<shakes fist at moon>


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yes. He either completely missed the point or chose to strawman me himself. Take your pick.



What was your point? Charitably, perhaps I misunderstood it too.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

I think it would be a grievous mistake to take anything the brixton posho mafia post on here charitably.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> What was your point? Charitably, perhaps I misunderstood it too.


Pretty simple. That if they want to get their way they need to take seriously the issues that led people to vote leave in the first place. Posts on here by the likes of cri or whatever they call themselves (the really tedious one who posts on all the US threads) and the crap I've seen in the guardian suggest to me that won't happen.

It was pretty simple - you won't get a more obvious spokesman of the ruling class than that and he knows its not just racism or people not understanding.

To be clear, I didn't vote in the ref. I'm not a 'leaver' as such and no deal fills me with fear. I just don't really want to be in either - it's not my debate, not my issue, and I understand why people like me would vote leave just to stick it to the cunts who've ignored us for years.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Pretty simple. That if they want to get their way they need to take seriously the issues that led people to vote leave in the first place. Posts on here by the likes of cri or whatever they call themselves (the really tedious one who posts on all the US threads) and the crap I've seen in the guardian suggest to me that won't happen.
> 
> It was pretty simple - you won't get a more obvious spokesman of the ruling class than that and he knows its not just racism or people not understanding.



What you said was:



> Time for 'left' remainers to take a fucking good look at themselves when even a remainer banker gets it better than they do:



The banker says pretty much what I hear most remainers saying. Things should be done to bridge the divide. We need to recognise the things that led people to vote leave. It's not just racism. What is it that he 'gets' that most remainers, or 'left remainers' don't?


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Pretty simple. That if they want to get their way they need to take seriously the issues that led people to vote leave in the first place. Posts on here by the likes of cri or whatever they call themselves (the really tedious one who posts on all the US threads) and the crap I've seen in the guardian suggest to me that won't happen.
> 
> It was pretty simple - you won't get a more obvious spokesman of the ruling class than that and he knows its not just racism or people not understanding.
> 
> To be clear, I didn't vote in the ref. I'm not a 'leaver' as such and no deal fills me with fear. I just don't really want to be in either - it's not my debate, not my issue, and I understand why people like me would vote leave just to stick it to the cunts who've ignored us for years.



Your views and mine are pretty close. And yet I am ‘left remainer’ (of course to many on this board I am a Tory ). So my problem with your initial post is that it attributes to a group a stereotypical set of views that they do not necessarily hold in order (seemingly) to then shoot down those views.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> of course to many on this board I am a Tory .


A posho Brixton mafia one too


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> A posho Brixton mafia one too


I didn't call them a tory. We're dealing with _a very broad spectrum nowadays._ Posho brixton mafia types support all parties, yet turn up supporting each other out of the blue.


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Retro said:


> A posho Brixton mafia one too



Kiss my ring


----------



## Cloo (Jan 15, 2019)

Been an interesting day to work on Parliament Square. I'm struck by the fact that actually neither side gathered on the square tonight can or will be made happy by either outcome of the evening's vote.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 15, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Been an interesting day to work on Parliament Square. I'm struck by the fact that actually neither side gathered on the square tonight can or will be made happy by either outcome of the evening's vote.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Saddens me that two years on people in TV vox pops say stuff like ‘we need to make our own laws’.

As if ‘we’ don’t on most of the things people really care about, as if we could on most of the trade stuff (we’ll always have to compromise with someone/agree standards etc) and as if they ever have been genuinely ours, not made to favour a few.

So yes, we do, but this Brexit isn’t it by a country mile.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

why have Labour and the SNP pulled their amendments??


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 15, 2019)

so we need room for about 700 on the next scheduled service to the new south atlantic territories after this vote is over and they have served their purpose . is the Canberra still available ?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> why have Labour and the SNP pulled their amendments??



What were they?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 15, 2019)

Nigel’s on now, all has been restored at the bbc.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> What were they?


*Amendment A: Labour frontbench*
Proposed by Jeremy Corbyn, Keir Starmer and others, this seeks to rule out a no-deal departure and criticises May’s plan for not providing “a permanent UK-EU customs union and strong single market deal”, which Labour says would harm business and could mean the Irish backstop coming into force.

*Amendment K: SNP/Plaid Cymru*
Put down by both parties’ frontbenches, this condemns the deal on the basis that it “would be damaging for Scotland, Wales and the nations and regions of the UK as a whole”. It calls instead for an extension of article 50 so that a new plan can be made.


Both pulled so that there is a completely clear rejection of May's plan,apparently.


----------



## tommers (Jan 15, 2019)

Haha. The guy who wrote that amendment insisted on a vote because he didn't accept Bercow saying that the "nays" were louder.

600 to 24.  Those 24 must have been pretty fucking loud. Dickhead.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2019)

Results on May's deal in about 15 minutes.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2019)

Here we go then


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2019)

tommers said:


> Haha. The guy who wrote that amendment insisted on a vote because he didn't accept Bercow saying that the "nays" were louder.
> 
> 600 to 24.  Those 24 must have been pretty fucking loud. Dickhead.



And getting on for half an hour wasted.

This whole voting system is fucking crazy, it's 2019, give them all a tablet, votes counted within a couple of minutes.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Results on May's deal in about 15 minutes.


Might have a beer.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> why have Labour and the SNP *pulled their amendments*??


Is that a euphemism


----------



## tommers (Jan 15, 2019)

My mum voted leave just to piss off David Cameron.  I'm definitely coming round to her point of view.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And getting on for half an hour wasted.
> 
> This whole voting system is fucking crazy, it's 2019, give them all a tablet, votes counted within a couple of minutes.


Na it's better like this. We get to see what they're all wearing today


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Been an interesting day to work on Parliament Square. I'm struck by the fact that actually neither side gathered on the square tonight can or will be made happy by either outcome of the evening's vote.


Tbh most people in the square were remainers. The remain lot so dire they had malcolm tucker alistair campbell give a speech


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 15, 2019)

Lock the doors!








light the fuse


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Na it's better like this. We get to see what they're all wearing today


And on the way out they can remove their garb and put on former people clothes


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Nigel’s on now, all has been restored at the bbc.



Save yourself - watch BBC Parliament's coverage


----------



## eoin_k (Jan 15, 2019)

Anticipating the outcome of a foregone conclusion that will lead to an ongoing state of uncertainty can be quite exciting.


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

202-432



record smashed


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2019)

202 -v- 432


----------



## Calamity1971 (Jan 15, 2019)

Christ


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> 222 -v- 432


Everyone over to the theresa may's time is up thread


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 15, 2019)

Shit the bed


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

defeated by 230 votes. ouch


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 15, 2019)

"I'm not dead yet..."


----------



## treelover (Jan 15, 2019)

How can any PM in a democracy survive that?


----------



## Voley (Jan 15, 2019)

A right hammering.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 15, 2019)

She has no shame so don't be surprised if she doesn't resign anytime soon.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> How can any PM in a democracy survive that?


Because no-one else wants to be PM before March 29th.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)

OUTSTANDING 

She oversaw the biggest defeat in history


----------



## Argonia (Jan 15, 2019)

Fuck what a vote


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

Shameless. First thing she mentions is EU citizens. Extraordinary the front.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 15, 2019)

432 to 202 i hear


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Mark my words.
> 
> I think May will lose by 230 votes.


I called it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Because no-one else wants to be PM before March 29th.



See, you can post sense when you try.


----------



## treelover (Jan 15, 2019)

I have to say if she goes, disabled and sick people will fare worst under Mogg or Johnson


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

The margin of defeat is 19 more than the total number of Labour MPs forming the 1924 government (who were the previous defeat record holders).

edit:  sorry, its 41 more not 19 more


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

Corbs moves a vote of no confidence.


----------



## Argonia (Jan 15, 2019)

Biggest defeat since the 1920s


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Biggest defeat since the 1920s



its bigger than the defeats of the 1920s


----------



## Plumdaff (Jan 15, 2019)

She must be very sure she's going to win the VoNC.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 15, 2019)

Put a vonc on it Jezza


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> Put a vonc on it Jezza


He will, he's a vonc-er


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 15, 2019)

agricola said:


> Corbs moves a vote of no confidence.



More time wasted.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> defeated by 230 votes. ouch


This is MASSIVE, but Brexit has put parliament in a new space.


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> More time wasted.



To get a general election it probably is, however to try and form a government that could pass an agreement it might not be. 

This is after all a way in which the Tories could defenestrate May very easily - just lose the vote, remove her government from office and then form a government that does enjoy the House's confidence with the support of the anti-Corbynite Labour crowd.  She remains as leader, but not PM.


----------



## Supine (Jan 15, 2019)

She can manage the footy team next. Magnificent loss. One of the best losses in history


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

Oh dear, that was much larger than I thought.  What a mess.


----------



## Crispy (Jan 15, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> Put a vonc on it Jezza


Voncky Tonk woman
Vonc if you hate Tories


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 15, 2019)

At some point May must surely say "I cannot be fucked with this"

She looked a tad upset after the announcement.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> She must be very sure she's going to win the VoNC.



She will.  DUP will vote with and the tories aren't going to bring down their own government and risk a Corbyn government, no way.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> At some point May must surely say "I cannot be fucked with this"
> 
> She looked a tad upset after the announcement.



Arrogance is a beacon of light when wading through the darkness of defeat


----------



## andysays (Jan 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> I have to say if she goes, disabled and sick people will fare worst under Mogg or Johnson


Neither Mogg or Johnson will be the PM when May goes, or indeed ever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> She will.  DUP will vote with and the tories aren't going to bring down their own government and risk a Corbyn government, no way.


On the other hand why not let auld corby dig himself a grave by letting him have a go


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Arrogance is a beacon of light when wading through the darkness of defeat



I don't think she's got the imagination to be arrogant.


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> She will.  DUP will vote with and the tories aren't going to bring down their own government and risk a Corbyn government, no way.



A vote of no confidence only removes the Government; if someone can form a new Government then there is no election, as they never get to the point of getting 2/3 of the House to vote for an early general election.  If the ERG - or anyone on the Tory side - wants to get rid of May as PM, this is the way to do it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> I don't think she's got the imagination to be arrogant.


I don't think she's got the imagination not to be


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> On the other hand why not let auld corby dig himself a grave by letting him have a go



Bit of theatre really.  She practically called a VONC herself, so Corbyn didn't really have much choice.  It was never going to work but keeps the pressure on I suppose.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> I don't think she's got the imagination to be arrogant.



Privilege goes hand in hand with arrogance.


----------



## Supine (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Privilege goes hand in hand with arrogance.



Just goes to show privilege doesn't always lead to a successful career.


----------



## Mr Retro (Jan 15, 2019)

State of fucking Hancock being interviewed on the BBC just now. Clueless clown


----------



## grit (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> On the other hand why not let auld corby dig himself a grave by letting him have a go



This was what immediately came to my mind


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> defeated by 230 votes. ouch



And she’s a record breaker!!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 15, 2019)

Supine said:


> Just goes to show privilege doesn't always lead to a successful career.



GW Pharma doing ok. Not like any of these cunts will see the inside of a dole office is it?


----------



## Supine (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> GW Pharma doing ok. Not like any of these cunts will see the inside of a dole office is it?



No idea about the GW reference but your right they won't be on the dole. May will go down in history's records with this defeat though and that's priceless


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> On the other hand why not let auld corby dig himself a grave by letting him have a go



Probably so, but famously the Eurosceptic right are the ‘bastards’ and who knows whether one or two might not wish to stab her in the front. 

With the DUP it could even be like that scene in Airplane! when they all line up to give the hysterical passenger a slap.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Your views and mine are pretty close. And yet I am ‘left remainer’ (of course to many on this board I am a Tory ). So my problem with your initial post is that it attributes to a group a stereotypical set of views that they do not necessarily hold in order (seemingly) to then shoot down those views.


Why are you a left remainer? I never even mentioned you and don't know who you are so that didn't come from me.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Probably so, but famously the Eurosceptic right are the ‘bastards’ and who knows whether one or two might not wish to stab her in the front.
> 
> With the DUP it could even be like that scene in Airplane! when they all line up to give the hysterical passenger a slap.


The DUP are the first to come out and support her.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> At some point May must surely say "I cannot be fucked with this"
> 
> She looked a tad upset after the announcement.



After a very long front bench political career, this is the main thing she will be remembered for in the history books. The largest parliamentary defeat of a government ever. That’s got to hurt.

Her fault mind, but still.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> After a very long front bench political career, this is the main thing she will be remembered for in the history books. The largest parliamentary defeat of a government ever. That’s got to hurt.
> 
> Her fault mind, but still.


Is Ramsey Mac's defeats in the 20s what he's remembered for?


----------



## rubbershoes (Jan 15, 2019)

andysays said:


> Neither Mogg or Johnson will be the PM when May goes, or indeed ever.



I hope you're right


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is Ramsey Mac's defeats in the 20s what he's remembered for?



That's an interesting question. What is Ramsey McDonald remembered for?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The DUP are the first to come out and support her.



True, but we can dream.

You would have hoped Labour would have sounded this out thoroughly first though. Do they think they have no chance?


----------



## Barking_Mad (Jan 15, 2019)

2 Labour MP's voted FOR the deal.
2 more spoilt their ballot.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but we can dream.



Lets see if Soubry, Greening, Johnson Jr, Rudd and Morgan come out in support of May.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

Barking_Mad said:


> 2 Labour MP's voted FOR the deal.
> 2 more spoilt their ballot.



Mann and Flint?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting question. What is Ramsey McDonald remembered for?



The restaurant chain must be a big one.


----------



## killer b (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Lets see if Soubry, Greening, Johnson Jr, Rudd and Morgan come out in support of May.


Soubry already has. The rest of them will too.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Lets see if Soubry, Greening, Johnson Jr, Rudd and Morgan come out in support of May.



Er, I certainly don’t see any of them voting no confidence. For Rudd that would mean no confidence in herself.


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Why are you a left remainer? I never even mentioned you and don't know who you are so that didn't come from me.



Because I am a Remainer and my politics are left of centre  

Or are you giving those words some special meaning?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting question. What is Ramsey McDonald remembered for?


Without looking it up I would speculate it was for selling out the working class .


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is Ramsey Mac's defeats in the 20s what he's remembered for?



Oh come on. The defeats of Ramsay Mac were massively partisan, and on an issue far more niche than Brexit, aimed at attacking a nascent left. This defeat is cross party and on an issue of truly national significance.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Mann and Flint?


Austin, Barron, Mann (and Field)


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Because I am a Remainer and my politics are left of centre
> 
> Or are you giving those words some special meaning?


Are you giving left of centre some special meaning?


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 15, 2019)

Barking_Mad said:


> 2 Labour MP's voted FOR the deal.
> 2 more spoilt their ballot.



Who?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> give them all a tablet



suppose it wouldn't be any more chaotic if they were all on drugs





SpackleFrog said:


> Mann and Flint?



guardian has a full list of MPs and how they voted - here


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Oh come on. The defeats of Ramsay Mac were massively partisan, and on an issue far more niche than Brexit, aimed at attacking a nascent left. This defeat is cross party and on an issue of truly national significance.


Her time in charge of brexit will be what's remembered - not some vote. The same as RM being remembered for splitting the labour party not a parliamentary vote.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Because I am a Remainer and my politics are left of centre
> 
> Or are you giving those words some special meaning?


No but I do want out of the EU so when you said our views were pretty close I wasn't sure what you meant.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 15, 2019)

Labour "For" cunts 


Ian Austin
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




Dudley North


Sir Kevin Barron
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



Rother Valley


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Her time in charge of brexit will be what's remembered - not some vote. The same as RM being remembered for splitting the labour party not a parliamentary vote.



Yes, because it's far easier for the popular consciousness to remember intricate debates about Canada plus plus plus and Norway minus that it is for it to remember the largest parliamentary defeat of a government ever.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> Labour "For" cunts
> 
> 
> Ian Austin
> ...


and John 'Utter Cunt' Mann

(and 'independents' Frank Field, Lady Hermon, and Stephen Lloyd, whoever the latter two are - aah, ex UUP & Liberal)


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Yes, because it's far easier for the popular consciousness to remember intricate debates about Canada plus plus plus and Norway minus that it is for it to remember the largest parliamentary defeat of a government ever.


Easier for people to remember either we left the eu/we failed to leave the eu than a single vote yes. And far more relevant and so likely.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> At some point May must surely say "I cannot be fucked with this"
> 
> She looked a tad upset after the announcement.



Yes she was a bit but she also appeared very prepared and ready with what to say. I think if there was a successor they will show themselves very soon now but I've not heard any really likely candidates.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Yes, because it's far easier for the popular consciousness to remember intricate debates about Canada plus plus plus and Norway minus that it is for it to remember the largest parliamentary defeat of a government ever.


Nah, agree with butchers. What happens out in the world is what will be remembered. I had no idea Callaghan had lost a bunch of votes heavily, for instance. Emphatically not what he's remembered for.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

Can't see the vonc passing 

Only way it would is if either:

The Eurosceptics figured that they could bring May down and form a new Govt more to their liking. But their failed leadership bid shows that is isn't really a goer.

Or

If the remainer Tories had been talking across the floor and figured they could get some sort of cross Party interim government going.

Neither is plausible imo


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

ERG voting with govt


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> No but I do want out of the EU so when you said our views were pretty close I wasn't sure what you meant.



I meant the stuff about taking seriously (and actually doing something about) the reasons why people voted leave in the first place. 

Which won’t imo be solved by Brexit.


----------



## agricola (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Can't see the vonc passing
> 
> Only way it would is if either:
> 
> ...



The second more likely than the first; one would imagine that the price of support from the centrists would be something that May would refuse to pay.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but we can dream.
> 
> You would have hoped Labour would have sounded this out thoroughly first though. Do they think they have no chance?


It appears that whether or not you have a chance of winning isn't the measure in today's crazy world.  But the govt was crushed today - more than a third of its own mps against it - so Labour kind of has to call a vonc. It's Labour's job to do so, which even May conceded.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> ERG voting with govt



Not really a surprise. They played their hand early and it wasn't strong enough for them to do the unthinkable tomorrow.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Not really a surprise. They played their hand early and it wasn't strong enough for them to do the umthiunthin tomorrow.


_BUT REES MOGG WILL BE KING. (Like we said Boris johnson would be if leave won)_


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _BUT REES MOGG WILL BE KING. (Like we said Boris johnson would be if leave won)_



If by "king" you mean tiresome guest on dull TV shows, then, yeah, maybe...


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah, agree with butchers. What happens out in the world is what will be remembered. I had no idea Callaghan had lost a bunch of votes heavily, for instance. Emphatically not what he's remembered for.



I'll happily check back in in five years time and see what she's remembered for


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> I'll happily check back in in five years time and see what she's remembered for


50 years would be a better measure.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2019)

Pound vrs Euro

Forex traders smell Brexit end game?


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 50 years would be a better measure.



Sadly I'll be dead by then. I think we need to look for leading indicators.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _BUT REES MOGG WILL BE KING. (Like we said Boris johnson would be if leave won)_



I think you might think that game is over when it's still in play. 

Imagine for a moment there is a General Election any time soon. May can't lead the Tories into it. It's likely that on the slate will be a champion of the Right vs a champion of the 'centre'. As the rabid mob that are Tory Party members get to decide only two 'centre' candidates getting through to the decider would likely stand in the way of Boris who they LOVE or similar being crowned. This is a potentially difficult scenario for Labour as it would turn a pre-Brexit election into another referendum and UKiP to Tory votes kept the Tories just afloat last time.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

You have a mad idea of the tory party. Cartoon stuff.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You have a mad idea of the tory party. Cartoon stuff.



Because? How do you see it’s next leadership contest shaping up? Say if it happened in the next couple of months?

Boris is an absolute crowd puller. If Jezza, why not him?


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Because? How do you see it’s next leadership contest shaping up? Say if it happened in the next couple of months?
> 
> Boris is an absolute crowd puller. If Jezza, why not him?



The only way a leadership contest happens is if May quits, or she loses the general election we might have.

If she was going to quit she would have done it by now.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The only way a leadership contest happens is if May quits, or she loses the general election we might have.
> 
> If she was going to quit she would have done it by now.



Or if the Tories grandees decide she’s out like with Thatcher.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 15, 2019)

If May survives the confidence vote I presume she’ll try to assemble a coalition for a Norway style arrangement which will cause further tectonic implosions in the Tory party. But also within Labour. It also presumes the EU will agree to it. 

Meanwhile the real life House of Cards politics - where the leader just refuses to do what every leader before her would automatically do - resign - continues. 

I despise the lot of them.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

hmm - i think corbyn may give way calling for a 2nd ref - especially as this time the PLP will have the backing of most of the membership.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmm - i think corbyn may give way calling for a 2nd ref - especially as this time the PLP will have the backing of most of the membership.



Told by who?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmm - i think corbyn may give way calling for a 2nd ref - especially as this time the PLP will have the backing of most of the membership.




Suspect this will be Blairties. The conference policy labour adopted is clear


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Told by who?



"freinds of chuka" probably. yeah - its likely kite flying - but the pressure for him to support 2nd ref will massively increase. Still think there are possibly insurmountable problems with what you have as the question though.


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

I cannot fathom why any of them are pushing for a 2nd referendum that will - surely - spit out a similar result.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Or if the Tories grandees decide she’s out like with Thatcher.



Not for another year., she won the party no confidence vote.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> I cannot fathom why any of them are pushing for a 2nd referendum that will - surely - spit out a similar result.


IKR?

I can only assume they have the delusion that they will be able to convince the hoi polloi to change their bloody minds this time by sheer application of implacable logic.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> I cannot fathom why any of them are pushing for a 2nd referendum that will - surely - spit out a similar result.


A 2nd ref with a split leave vote leaves remain with a plurality and we all know that 33-37% is better than a 52% on quality alone. That's the hope. Meanwhile the country and the condition that produced that 52% are just ignored by these lately concerned types.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Failing that decisive victory, more chaos, _can't possibly go ahead_. The village elders have said there is too much going on so a democratic martial law needs be in just for a while.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 15, 2019)

Where's fucking lexit when you need it?


----------



## chilango (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> A 2nd ref with a split leave vote leaves remain with a plurality and we all know that 33-37% is better than a 52% on quality alone. That's the hope. Meanwhile the country and the condition that produced that 52% are just ignored by these lately concerned types.



3 options on the referendum ballot paper? 

That'd be brazen


----------



## Cid (Jan 15, 2019)

That'd be unlikely.


----------



## Voley (Jan 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> 3 options on the referendum ballot paper?
> 
> That'd be brazen


I was wondering whether people might want that.

No deal/May's Deal/Remain ?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

So the two options on a 2nd ref are likely to be remain or leave?

All i hear is eu deal/no deal/no brexit. No in/out.


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 15, 2019)




----------



## Cid (Jan 15, 2019)

A three way ref vote is a ridiculous idea, wouldn't fly with anyone.

I could imagine a similar two choice question, with an additional question on manner of leaving on a second out vote.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

I must have imagined all those suggestions in the last few weeks. From people it damn well would fly with due to what it means.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So the two options on a 2nd ref are likely to be remain or leave?
> 
> All i hear is eu deal/no deal/no brexit. No in/out.


I'm not a big fan of STV, but that could be the answer here.  A straight 3 way vote would be a disaster.  Would we seriously leave with no deal if that got 34% of the vote with May's deal & remain getting 33% each?   That would be ridiculous.  Let people vote on a "I want to stay in, but if not, the deal is shit but it beats no deal" basis.  a second vote would note be compulsory.  I'd vote stay in, no deal fwiw.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Cid said:


> A three way ref vote is a ridiculous idea, wouldn't fly with anyone.
> 
> I could imagine a similar two choice question, with an additional question on manner of leaving on a second out vote.


So that’s a three way vote, by slightly different means. 

Remainers wouldn’t support a vote without Remain on the ballot, ERG wouldn’t support a vote without No Deal on the ballot. Only one outcome is plausible.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 15, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Where's fucking lexit when you need it?



Precisely. Instead a flabby 2nd referendum call is rumoured to be the idea with agency


----------



## Raheem (Jan 15, 2019)

Cid said:


> A three way ref vote is a ridiculous idea, wouldn't fly with anyone.
> 
> I could imagine a similar two choice question, with an additional question on manner of leaving on a second out vote.


I have a hunch the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow that, cos it would tend towards remainers just not bothering with the second question, even if some might say that's up to them. Instead, it would probably need to be a single three-way question with answers ranked 1 to 3.


----------



## mx wcfc (Jan 15, 2019)

Cid said:


> A three way ref vote is a ridiculous idea, wouldn't fly with anyone.
> 
> I could imagine a similar two choice question, with an additional question on manner of leaving on a second out vote.



Actually, yours is probably a better idea than mine.  

q1 In/out
q2 if q1 = out, then May's deal or no deal.

yep, like that


----------



## Winot (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Not for another year., she won the party no confidence vote.



Doesn’t that just mean they can’t use the same mechanism for a year? What would happen if her cabinet told her to go?

Although I guess Corbyn carried on in that scenario.


----------



## belboid (Jan 15, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I have a hunch the Electoral Commission wouldn't allow that, cos it would tend towards remainers just not bothering with the second question, even if some might say that's up to them. Instead, it would probably need to be a single three-way question with answers ranked 1 to 3.


They've had two stage polls before - Welsh parliament, iirr.  An STV version is way more likely tho


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Winot said:


> Doesn’t that just mean they can’t use the same mechanism for a year? What would happen if her cabinet told her to go



Well, Duke of Wellington currently holds the record from most cabinet posts similtanoously -3 (rabble marched down from London to Stratfield Saye to riot about it specially).  Thats if she isn't confident that history will remember her: sack the lot of em and hold cabinet meetings with cats if you really want a memorable wikpedia entry Mrs May


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting question. What is Ramsey McDonald remembered for?


Betrayal


----------



## Cid (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> So that’s a three way vote, by slightly different means.
> 
> Remainers wouldn’t support a vote without Remain on the ballot, ERG wouldn’t support a vote without No Deal on the ballot. Only one outcome is plausible.



Yeah... So remain/leave ballot, then manner of exit question (though you'd need a proposal to vote on). Having a scan of people's vote, they're suggesting that, or AV style. Though, judging by their wording, they clearly _want_ a three way vote. But even they know it would be laughable in terms of legitimacy (assuming something like remain v no deal v negotiated).


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 15, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The only way a leadership contest happens is if May quits, or she loses the general election we might have.
> 
> If she was going to quit she would have done it by now.



Yep, not saying they will lose the nc vote,but her situation is precarious so it’s reasonable to speculate on which utter bastard comes next.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's an interesting question. What is Ramsey McDonald remembered for?


Stating a catering firm that has the White House as one of it clients?


Eta opps soz Mr Moose didnt read through


----------



## Borp (Jan 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> Remainers wouldn’t support a vote without Remain on the ballot, ERG wouldn’t support a vote without No Deal on the ballot. Only one outcome is plausible.



Don't think it needs erg for a majority. Doesn't mean it wouldn't happen or shouldn't, but mathematically I think a 2ref without no deal could pass parliament.


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Jan 15, 2019)

That song from Evita comes to mind

Either that or a French farce

My thought is that she has the most amazing manicure - she's hanging by her cuticles


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

I'd like a manner of staying in option - that's only fair.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 15, 2019)

KeeperofDragons said:


> That song from Evita comes to mind


Dice Are Rolling?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'd like a manner of staying in option - that's only fair.


Full fat Euro membership


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

Evil EU negotiators vs greece, same crap vs UK = masters, who did we think we were up against.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Full fat Euro membership


Extra dead in/on the med on the side.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

Borp said:


> Don't think it needs erg for a majority. Doesn't mean it wouldn't happen or shouldn't, but mathematically I think a 2ref without no deal could pass parliament.


Nah. Yhey may have been arse holes last week going after Soubry but they d have a point if that happened.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Nah. Yhey may have been arse holes last week going after Soubry but they d have a point if that happened.


How would they have a point? Various MPs have been making moves to ensure that no deal can't happen. I think that's the one thing that definitely wouldn't be on any hypothetical second referendum, which is the sticking point - what could go on it? Try again/give up? And if they try again and it's still shit, a third referendum? Whatever the result, which would be bound to be close I would think, either way, you'd have the same problem that the major parties would again be campaigning for 'give up', so who would do the 'try again', and how would anything they did this time be any good?


----------



## A380 (Jan 15, 2019)

Pearoast.


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Jan 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Dice Are Rolling?


"oh what a circus


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How would they have a point? Various MPs have been making moves to ensure that no deal can't happen. I think that's the one thing that definitely wouldn't be on any hypothetical second referendum, which is the sticking point - what could go on it? Try again/give up? And if they try again and it's still shit, a third referendum? Whatever the result, which would be bound to be close I would think, either way, you'd have the same problem that the major parties would again be campaigning for 'give up', so who would do the 'try again', and how would anything they did this time be any good?


Well remember watching quite a few politcos8 getting worse harassed while out on the campaign trail...Shit game but part of it ..Another referendum and especially one where the majority view in the first one isnt even represented  ..Fuck em and their work place their 70k a year and full pension to thwart the will of the people


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Well remember watching quite a few politcos8 getting worse harassed while out on the campaign trail...Shit game but part of it ..Another referendum and especially one where the majority view in the first one isnt even represented  ..Fuck em and their work place their 70k a year and full pension to thwart the will of the people


Sorry, the majority view of the first one isn't represented if there's no 'no deal' option? That's nonsense.

An extraordinary amount of nonsense is spouted about what that first ref meant. Caught a labour mp yesterday saying that his constituency had voted to end free movement of people. It did no such thing.


----------



## gosub (Jan 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry, the majority view of the first one isn't represented if there's no 'no deal' option? That's nonsense.
> 
> An extraordinary amount of nonsense is spouted about what that first ref meant. Caught a labour mp yesterday saying that his constituency had voted to end free movement of people. It did no such thing.



Not disagreeing.   Just saying it would be SO bunko booth as to legitimise more drastic action than letting the Establishment dictate terms


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> Not disagreeing.   Just saying it would be SO bunko booth as to legitimise more drastic action than letting the Establishment dictate terms


I don't think it would. Then again, what did anyone expect from a brexit negotiation conducted by a tory government other than the establishment dictating the terms. That's one of the problems with any second ref - all the established parties are likely - again - to be led by someone who opposes brexit, or at least would campaign to remain. So if the answer is 'leave', who does it? And what do they do? Second ref doesn't solve anything unless it presents a specific deal or remain as the two options, and as others have pointed out, such a second ref would stink of stitch-up, especially if all the major parties say 'actually, we think you should reject this deal we've negotiated for you...' 

It's a pickle, but not one that's solved by presenting 'no deal' as if it were an option. It's not. It's never been.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> Soubry already has. The rest of them will too.



Fair, that does surprise me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

I have to say I assumed we were past the point of referendum territory, but if they do go for it then I'm a bit nervous about how ugly it could get.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 16, 2019)

well, it's hard to argue with that as a policy position...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> View attachment 158828
> 
> well, it's hard to argue with that as a policy position...


It's the covfefe for the Brexit era.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 16, 2019)

you could not, in good faith, have a meaningful brexit option as on option on a 2nd ref because it cant be delivered. 

which is exactly why having a 2nd ref is shit idea. Its a way politicians ducking responsibility for the clusterfuck.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

No leave option? You lot are pretty crazy.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

I wan't my master to decide for me.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> because it cant be delivered.


I’ll get Littlejohn Removals to accept an EU withdrawal agreement at their depot in Nairn then and they can deliver it instead. 

No no sorry, wrong rabbit hole  

/rurallaughs


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> you could not, in good faith, have a meaningful brexit option as on option on a 2nd ref because it cant be delivered.
> 
> which is exactly why having a 2nd ref is shit idea. Its a way politicians ducking responsibility for the clusterfuck.


Agreed that you couldn't have no deal, at least not without the caveat that you're not getting it any time soon. But why couldn't you have May's deal?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Where's fucking lexit when you need it?


Down the pub, where it's been all along.


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)

Tusk has 'suggested' that the UK stays in the EU (BBC)...


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 16, 2019)

ah well the shit show of brexit continues

about 40 years of Tory planning has lead to this situation..


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

So they lied to the people who then voted to leave based on lies.
They got a deal, apparently it was the only deal available..and voted against it....and now they're saying they can't go back to the people.
Why not go back to the people?
They have to take instruction from them surely?
The people are more informed now (possibly) and should have the chance to have their input.

On an aside.....ish...
What gets me is the likes if Ms Foster rewriting Irish history to suit herself.  The other day she had the gall to state that there never was a hard border in Ireland. I wonder then who were those guys with guns who stopped us and searched our dad's car and pointed guns at us when we were tots?
Soft border my arse.

The lies are flowing out from every political orifice...office... whatever.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Tusk has 'suggested' that the UK stays in the EU (BBC)...



A helpful intervention...

Either trolling for Lols or on Aaron Banks payroll for the Leave campaign 2.0?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wan't my master to decide for me.



Well they decided we could vote on this question. No route offered is bottom up.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 16, 2019)

Corbyn and Labour must now go hell for leather for another referendum | Polly Toynbee

Even now remainers can’t help but dismiss and trivialise the serious concerns of those voting to leave in deindustrialised areas. The idea that Corbyn can lead a 2nd referendum campaign whilst ‘winning back’ these towns is frankly the gibbering of a lunatic. 

“Those left-behind Labour towns were a small, if worrying, part of the result. Those places can and must be won back, now that Labour has chosen to no longer be muffled. Roll on a splendid Labour campaign”


----------



## likesfish (Jan 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So they lied to the people who then voted to leave based on lies.
> They got a deal, apparently it was the only deal available..and voted against it....and now they're saying they can't go back to the people.
> Why not go back to the people?
> They have to take instruction from them surely?
> ...



Tbf there were countless "illegal crossing points" aka lanes which occasionally the security forces made efforts to block but there was never a border fence or even marked border.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Corbyn and Labour must now go hell for leather for another referendum | Polly Toynbee
> 
> Even now remainers can’t help but dismiss and trivialise the serious concerns of those voting to leave in deindustrialised areas. The idea that Corbyn can lead a 2nd referendum campaign whilst ‘winning back’ these towns is frankly the gibbering of a lunatic.
> 
> “Those left-behind Labour towns were a small, if worrying, part of the result. Those places can and must be won back, now that Labour has chosen to no longer be muffled. Roll on a splendid Labour campaign”



The converse is true though. It’s lunacy to pretend that Parliament has no power to help those communities while in the EU. 

Their concerns aren’t addressed by remaining, nor are they addressed by the patronising sop of merely leaving. They are addressed by being addressed. Roll on a Labour campaign where it does that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Roll on a splendid Labour campaign”


the three certainties in life are death, taxes, and dire labour campaigns


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 16, 2019)

likesfish said:


> Tbf there were countless "illegal crossing points" aka lanes which occasionally the security forces made efforts to block but there was never a border fence or even marked border.


It was still the most heavily defended border in Western Europe.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 16, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The converse is true though. It’s lunacy to pretend that Parliament has no power to help those communities while in the EU.
> 
> Their concerns aren’t addressed by remaining, nor are they addressed by the patronising sop of merely leaving. They are addressed by being addressed. Roll on a Labour campaign where it does that.


Defo not a good summary of the arguments on here, assuming that was your intention.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> It was still the most heavily defended border in Western Europe.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wan't my master to decide for me.



OK then boss, what _should _we do?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> all those castles


You edited! You must have sensed I was about to note that Puhdys got out no bother by singing rock covers with the saddest eyes in music.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK then boss, what _should _we do?


Guys guys it’s too early in the morning, neither of you will thank yourselves for it.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> dire labour campaigns





By invitation. At gun point.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 16, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> It was still the most heavily defended border in Western Europe.


Indeed, those security towers must have just been plonked down for no reason in South Armagh. And those heavily fortified barracks must have been butlin's for paras.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the three certainties in life are death, taxes, and dire labour campaigns


"We're alright!"


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



Jacob Rees Mogg checks out the new border arrangements.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Indeed, those security towers must have just been plonked down for no reason in South Armagh. And those heavily fortified barracks must have been butlin's for paras.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> "We're alright!"


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

...or was he pushed?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2019)

It makes me very happy that we don't have that complete arsehole Kinnock in the frame.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It makes me very happy that we don't have that complete arsehole Kinnock in the frame.


His son is doing a good proxy.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> ...or was he pushed?



Look at how she shifts her centre of gravity and keeps her forward momentum going....


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> His son is doing a good proxy.


The son is an irrelevant cunt, the father was a loathsome cunt.


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The son is an irrelevant cunt.


You sure about that? Reckon his & Boles' Norway+ group's proposals could well be the form Brexit finally takes...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> You sure about that? Reckon his & Boles' Norway+ group's proposals could well be the form Brexit finally takes...


'If' missing?


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

where?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> where?


before the word 'Brexit' in your post


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> You sure about that? Reckon his & Boles' Norway+ group's proposals could well be the form Brexit finally takes...



I could see that.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> You sure about that? Reckon his & Boles' Norway+ group's proposals could well be the form Brexit finally takes...


shudder


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

The supra-state says we've got until the 22nd May (at very latest), then?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

You listening every other country - that message was for you. Don't even think of questioning the direction of travel of the EU. The fantasist left-reform program shot down with one tweet.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The supra-state says we've got until the 22nd May (at very latest), then?
> 
> View attachment 158857


Well, 3 weeks before that, presumably, since if the UK is still a member there'd be chaos over whether it gets to stand MEPs (which has just been reduced from 751 to 705 in honour of Brexit).  So they're not going to want Article 50 stretched beyond that, presumably.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You listening every other country - that message was for you. Don't even think of questioning the direction of travel of the EU. The fantasist left-reform program shot down with one tweet.


He knows his audience, alright.
Gotta say, Brexit has been a gift to the supra-state...stronger now, by far...like Bourne's _War is the health of the state _notion.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, 3 weeks before that, presumably, since if the UK is still a member there'd be chaos over whether it gets to stand MEPs (which has just been reduced from 751 to 705 in honour of Brexit).  So they're not going to want Article 50 stretched beyond that, presumably.


Messy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He knows his audience, alright.
> Gotta say, Brexit has been a gift to the supra-state...stronger now, by far...like Bourne's _War is the health of the state _notion.



Well, there's other stuff happening...but yeah it's not been weakened by it so far.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 16, 2019)

So we have the choice between Oxbridge toffs and landowners vs grande ecole ‘and INSEAD ‘crats. Or no choice at all.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In theory, a GE can be a minimum of 3 weeks after a No Confidence vote. Practically it’s 3 Thursdays, though.


andysays  When I said this, I was basing it on old knowledge.  I'd forgotten the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 might have changed things.  And it has: after a VoNC, there is a period of 14 calendar days in which the government can seek to regain the confidence of MPs, or else another government can be formed.  If this does not happen, then parliament will be dissolved, with a 25 working-day gap needed before the election is held.

So the minimum period would be 25 working days (if the govt conceded a GE immediately), or 14 calendar days + 25 working days in the more likely event that the govt hung on trying to regain confidence.

Not that I expect May to lose the VoNC.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> andysays  When I said this, I was basing it on old knowledge.  I'd forgotten the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 might have changed things.  And it has: after a VoNC, there is a period of 14 calendar days in which the government can seek to regain the confidence of MPs, or else another government can be formed.  If this does not happen, then parliament will be dissolved, with a 25 working-day gap needed before the election is held.
> 
> Not that I expect May to lose the VoNC.



So basically, either a govt is formed from Parliament or no govt until March.

Should it pass. Which you think it won't.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

Thing is at this point I don't think anybody involved actually, really, wants some sort of deal

You've got the handful of headbangers playing chicken in the hope that it leads to us crashing out with no deal. And the vast majority who never wanted to leave in the first place now figuring that if they too play chicken that they can stop Brexit all together.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So basically, either a govt is formed from Parliament or no govt until March.
> 
> Should it pass. Which you think it won't.


The old govt stays until it's replaced.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The old govt stays until it's replaced.



Ahhhhh. Twist.


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which you think it won't.


Do you _actually_ think it could?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

chilango said:


> Thing is at this point I don't think anybody involved actually, really, wants some sort of deal


My MP (Tory, but only elected in 2017) voted for the deal.  But he also signed the "ransom note" letter.  So I'm not sure what he "actually, really" wants.

Though I do know he has strange underwear, because he's a Mormon.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The old govt stays until it's replaced.


This.

Remember when the Coalition was being formed?  Gordon stayed on while those meetings took place, so even after the election results were in.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> Do you _actually_ think it could?



Look, I mean, it's speculation obviously. But what benefit is there for Tory MP's to keep May in post?

She needs almost all of them to actively support her. And if they do, this could all happen again in a week or two. What concessions can either side extract from her that they haven't already? Keeping her in place means being asked to vote on her deal again. 

I keep hearing this argument the ERG want to keep her to get to no deal - if that's their plan (and they have no other options) then why should Remain Tories support her?


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Look, I mean, it's speculation obviously. But what benefit is there for Tory MP's to keep May in post?


because they want to remain being tory MPs, which they won't be if they vote against the government in a VONC.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The supra-state says we've got until the 22nd May (at very latest), then?
> 
> View attachment 158857


_If you are in the EU and have a border, we own you - forever. Now shut the fuck up and eat your porridge. And clean my shoes._


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> because they want to remain being tory MPs, which they won't be if they vote against the government in a VONC.



You're assuming there would be an election? Or that the electorate in their constituencies would remember and punish them? Or that they would be de-selected?


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're assuming there would be an election? Or that the electorate in their constituencies would remember and punish them? Or that they would be de-selected?


They would have to resign from the party or have the whip withdrawn if they voted no confidence in the government.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

I've been reading a lot of stuff around syriza and greece recently. What is clear across all of them is that the EU never once, not for a second believed that tsipras and his party were serious about the possibility of leaving the euro and potentially the EU. And they were 100% right. Once they were clear on that the path was clear to crush the greek working class and give their money and infrastructure to german italian and french banks. I feel the eu has taken the same approach here as regards a no deal brexit - and the last 24 hours+ seems to have given them a bit of a rude awakening. Plenty of backwards scrambling appearing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> They would have to resign from the party or have the whip withdrawn if they voted no confidence in the government.



Aye maybe.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> They would have to resign from the party or have the whip withdrawn if they voted no confidence in the government.


A withdrawn whip would mean nothing if the government collapsed, and they wouldn't have to resign from the party - they're the real defenders of it, after all (they'd claim).  I don't think it is likely we'll see any of them vote with Corbyn, but it isn't impossible. Maybe a few will offer to pair with Tulip so she doesn't have to come in again today.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I've been reading a lot of stuff around syriza and greece recently. What is clear across all of them is that the EU never once, not for a second believed that tsipras and his party were serious about the possibility of leaving the euro and potentially the EU. And they were 100% right. Once they were clear on that the path was clear to crush the greek working class and give their money and infrastructure to german italian and french banks. I feel the eu has taken the same approach here as regards a no deal brexit - and the last 24 hours+ seems to have given them a bit of a rude awakening. Plenty of backwards scrambling appearing.



Do you think no deal is a possibility then? Seems a stretch. Or are you just saying that now, the EU think that?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you think no deal is a possibility then? Seems a stretch. Or are you just saying that now, the EU think that?


The EU. I don't think they ever understood that it was and is a real possibility.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 16, 2019)

sorting about the EU seeking off national industrure and the bank


they are bit late to do that to the United Kingdom


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

belboid said:


> A withdrawn whip would mean nothing if the government collapsed


It'd mean they couldn't stand as tories in any ensuing election though, unless it was restored


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> It'd mean they couldn't stand as tories in any ensuing election though, unless it was restored



Doesn't stop them standing. And some of the Remain Tories may feel their careers are best served outside of the Tory Party in future. 

What are the prospects for someone like, say, Soubry to advance her career as a Tory MP in the future anyway? What is it they're losing out on?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The EU. I don't think they ever understood that it was and is a real possibility.



Agree with that, but why do you think they think it's more likely after yesterday? Because the defeat was so bad?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The EU. I don't think they ever understood that it was and is a real possibility.


And I think May has been banking on this long-predicted defeat for the deal teaching them just that.  She hopes now to get further minor concessions, so she can tell parliament: _look, new improved deal.  But the offer won't last long_.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with that, but why do you think they think it's more likely after yesterday? Because the defeat was so bad?


Because it shows that parliament are taking it to the wire. _ 29th March looms, but we still don't want this deal.  So what if it risks No Deal: we're voting against it by the biggest margin in modern times. _That's the message the EU was delivered_.  _


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with that, but why do you think they think it's more likely after yesterday? Because the defeat was so bad?


That helped yes, and it brought into clear focus - or should have - the absolute parliamentary and social deadlock and the lack of options to resolve it. They always had a little they kept back, they're not idiots, but now i think they realise that even what little flex they built in in case of emergency will have little to no impact on the overall picture. None at all. So they are now in the position of realising it's no deal or making serious game changing concessions. I do think their team is half full of people who expect article 50 to be revoked quite simply because _that's what they would do_ - and they are now going to be fighting the other half. Either way, they are playing with fire.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Because it shows that parliament are taking it to the wire. _ 29th March looms, but we still don't want this deal.  So what if it risks No Deal: we're voting against it by the biggest margin in modern times. _That's the message the EU was delivered_.  _


No the only message, though. The other message coming from many MPs (most of those who voted against the deal and no doubt a fair chunk of those who voted for it) is that they don't want 'no deal' under any circumstances and that they are already working on preventing it. The other way the EU may take this is that a withdrawal of A50 is on its way.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Because it shows that parliament are taking it to the wire. _ 29th March looms, but we still don't want this deal.  So what if it risks No Deal: we're voting against it by the biggest margin in modern times. _That's the message the EU was delivered_.  _


Is it? Or is it, 'you know when I said I quit, well, I can't find another job, so...'?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No the only message, though. The other message coming from many MPs (most of those who voted against the deal and no doubt a fair chunk of those who voted for it) is that they don't want 'no deal' under any circumstances and that they are already working on preventing it. The other way the EU may take this is that a withdrawal of A50 is on its way.


While some may hope that, they surely must realise that this would not be without social risks in the UK. Risks which mean that I don't think parliament will _withdraw_ Article 50 unilaterally.  It may extend it until the start of May.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Is it? Or is it, 'you know when I said I quit, well, I can't find another job, so...'?


See above.


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> andysays  When I said this, I was basing it on old knowledge.  I'd forgotten the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 might have changed things.  And it has: after a VoNC, there is a period of 14 calendar days in which the government can seek to regain the confidence of MPs, or else another government can be formed.  If this does not happen, then parliament will be dissolved, with a 25 working-day gap needed before the election is held.
> 
> So the minimum period would be 25 working days (if the govt conceded a GE immediately), or 14 calendar days + 25 working days in the more likely event that the govt hung on trying to regain confidence.
> 
> Not that I expect May to lose the VoNC.


I don't expect May to lose the vote either, but the 14 day 'cooling off period' is interesting. 

Like you, I don't remember that existing before. It allows the theoretical possibility that a dozen or so Tories could abstain, losing the govt the vote, then attempt to force May to change her stance in which case they'll vote for her in the second vote.

But it's such a high risk strategy, both politically and personally for those who do it. I don't think it will happen,  but I bet there will be some considering it this afternoon .


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> It'd mean they couldn't stand as tories in any ensuing election though, unless it was restored


That's true in Labour, but not entirely so for the Tories (or Libscum). As party membership isn't automatically revoked, it's up to the local party. I'm not sure if any have actually not stood again when the whip's been withdrawn.  The tories are a viciously pragmatic bunch, they have usually reinstated the rebel and just got on with it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

I do find it fascinating on threads like this how people can read the same events so differently.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't expect May to lose the vote either, but the 14 day 'cooling off period' is interesting.
> 
> Like you, I don't remember that existing before. It allows the theoretical possibility that a dozen or so Tories could abstain, losing the govt the vote, then attempt to force May to change her stance in which case they'll vote for her in the second vote.
> 
> But it's such a high risk strategy, both politically and personally for those who do it. I don't think it will happen,  but I bet there will be some considering it this afternoon .


That's an interesting point.  I don't see it myself, but as I heard someone say yesterday, "all the outcomes may seem unlikely, but eventually it _will_ be one of them".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That helped yes, and it brought into clear focus - or should have - the absolute parliamentary and social deadlock and the lack of options to resolve it. They always had a little they kept back, they're not idiots, but now i think they realise that even what little flex they built in in case of emergency will have little to no impact on the overall picture. None at all. So they are now in the position of realising it's no deal or making serious game changing concessions. I do think their team is half full of people who expect article 50 to be revoked quite simply because _that's what they would do_ - and they are now going to be fighting the other half. Either way, they are playing with fire.



Hmmmm. I'm not sure about this - the points you made about Greece were important but it's also worth remembering some of them were happy for Greece to leave the Euro. There is a trade off between concessions they offer and weakening the European project. I agree there's always been a possibility of No Deal but I don't see how they get to it now unless they have a referendum and are stupid enough to put no deal on the ballot. 




littlebabyjesus said:


> No the only message, though. The other message coming from many MPs (most of those who voted against the deal and no doubt a fair chunk of those who voted for it) is that they don't want 'no deal' under any circumstances and that they are already working on preventing it. The other way the EU may take this is that a withdrawal of A50 is on its way.



Agree with this - they certainly know the majority of British politicians are on their side in wanting to prevent No Deal, so they may feel it's not a risk.

I thought Tusk suggesting the UK just Remain seemed a pretty aggressive tactic, rather than a desperate concession.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> While some may hope that, they surely must realise that this would not be without social risks in the UK. Risks which mean that I don't think parliament will _withdraw_ Article 50 unilaterally.  It may extend it until the start of May.


I think if this were 28 March and still in complete deadlock, it would withdraw A50 unilaterally to avoid no deal. Of course a lot can happen between now and then, and I agree that an extension is more likely. Clearly the euro elections are the spanner in the works there - I would think that the EU ideally would like to extend A50 by more than just a few weeks to get a fresh negotiation that ditches May's 'red lines'. There's still no clear path out of this.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree there's always been a possibility of No Deal but I don't see how they get to it now unless they have a referendum and are stupid enough to put no deal on the ballot.


That's not really the point.  The UK was told 29th is the deadline, it's deal, no deal, or No Brexit by that date.  Now that parliament has said it doesn't want the deal, suddenly the deadline can move as far as the Euro Parl elections.  So the EU is pulling away from No Deal.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hmmmm. I'm not sure about this - the points you made about Greece were important but it's also worth remembering some of them were happy for Greece to leave the Euro. There is a trade off between concessions they offer and weakening the European project. I agree there's always been a possibility of No Deal but I don't see how they get to it now unless they have a referendum and are stupid enough to put no deal on the ballot.


Sachauble gave it some brief mouth about letting them go but was never taken seriously by either the ECB the eu or the IMF. Getting to it isn't the key bit here, it's them belatedly realising that there is a real path to it - even by inertia - is. That they probably have to do something. The tweet brogdale posted earlier hints at dissension within the EU bosses cabal and a rising frustration at politics actual being on the table  -_ real life politics_ - rather than their usual technocratic behind the scenes guff.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> it would withdraw A50 unilaterally to avoid no deal.


Not without a mandate to do so.  I really don't think it would.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That's not really the point.  The UK was told 29th is the deadline, it's deal, no deal, or No Brexit by that date.  Now that parliament has said it doesn't want the deal, suddenly the deadline can move as far as the Euro Parl elections.  So the EU is pulling away from No Deal.



Ahhh right I'm with you now. Yeah, suddenly announcing an extension could be granted is definitely a shift.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not without a mandate to do so.  I really don't think it would.


It has no mandate for 'no deal' either.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It has no mandate for 'no deal' either.


It has a mandate for Leave, which No Deal is (a subset of).  It may not want No Deal, but it doesn't have a mandate for No Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It has a mandate for Leave, which No Deal is.  It may not want No Deal, but it doesn't have a mandate for No Brexit.


Nah. There is no mandate for 'any brexit at all, whatever its consequences', and come 28 March, there would be voices from across society telling them to stop - TUC and CBI and a host of others.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> While some may hope that, they surely must realise that this would not be without social risks in the UK. Risks which mean that I don't think parliament will _withdraw_ Article 50 unilaterally.  It may extend it until the start of May.


I wouldn't like to predict what will happen in this respect, because who knows, but I think withdrawal - signposted as temporary - is entirely on the cards. You talk about risks, presumably internal civil unrest, but there are no paths from here without problematic consequences.

I'm puzzled as to how you can look at this nonplussed British clusterfuck and see it as a challenge to or surprise for the EU rather than a success for it. Its primary objectives are (a) economic business as usual and (b) don't allow more members to escape. Both are presently fulfilled in the stalemate, more or less. Actual no-deal endangers the former, as does further uncertainty to a lesser extent, but nothing other than an unlikely rosy successful Brexit endangers the latter. Moving the deadline retains the status quo and is not much of a concession, other than to uncertainty.

All Britain has done so far is demonstrate to the rest of the EU & world that there is not a clear path to a happy life outside the union, or indeed one where you even ask questions about it.


----------



## Winot (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I think withdrawal - *signposted as temporary*



They cannot do this because it is contrary to the ECJ decision. Or rather they can but it would be challenged and they would probably lose.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. There is no mandate for 'any brexit at all, whatever its consequences', and come 28 March, there would be voices from across society telling them to stop - TUC and CBI and a host of others.


I think you're missing stuff that you wish wasn't there.

The mandate is for Leave.  That includes the government's, the CBI's, the TUC's etc, least favoured option of Leaving with No Deal.  At the moment, it's the government's best bargaining chip.  (So it has to be willing to use it).  But no matter how much you might think it ill-advised, it is still a form of Leave.  And Leave the government must deliver, unless it gets a mandate not to (by GE or 2nd ref).  You surely must see that the government can't and won't won't take us 2 and a half years down this road just to say "actually no", without a mandate to do so?


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> They cannot do this because it is contrary to the ECJ decision. Or rather they can but it would be challenged and they would probably lose.


This is bobbins, as was pointed out the last time ECJ decision making was hailed (wrongly) as the barrier to something or other relating to A50 procedure. What do you think is insurmountable here? If it's in the interests of the union, it will be made to work.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I'm puzzled as to how you can look at this nonplussed British clusterfuck and see it as a challenge to or surprise for the EU rather than a success for it.


I'm puzzled as to how you can read what I've said and interpret me that way.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm puzzled as to how you can read what I've said and interpret me that way.


TBF, I've probably conflated what you wrote with butchers' posts that led to it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think you're missing stuff that you wish wasn't there.


We may have to agree to differ here. You seem to be taking the vagueness of the initial referendum (in/out but with no plan for out) as strengthening its mandate for any kind of brexit. For me, it weakens the referendum's mandate - there is no mandate for any particular form of brexit, which is a weakness, not a strength.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We may have to agree to differ here. You seem to be taking the vagueness of the initial referendum (in/out but with no plan for out) as strengthening its mandate for any kind of brexit. For me, it weakens the referendum's mandate - there is no mandate for any particular form of brexit, which is a weakness, not a strength.


I think you're conflating is with ought.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Another curiosity is the same people saying the EU will not move it is united and impregnable and also that it will move when it becomes politically expedient to do so. Lots of these little oddities i'm noticing.


----------



## Winot (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> This is bobbins, as was pointed out the last time ECJ decision making was hailed (wrongly) as the barrier to something or other relating to A50 procedure. What do you think is insurmountable here? If it's in the interests of the union, it will be made to work.



Take a look at the wording of the decision referred to in this post.

IMO the scenario would be legally challengeable. Now if you are saying that politically the ECJ will overturn its previous decision then I wouldn't know about that - all I know is that there is a legal barrier.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think you're conflating is with ought.


This is why we're not going to agree. I think the exact same thing about what you're saying.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is why we're not going to agree. I think the exact same thing about what you're saying.


But why do you think that?


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Another curiosity is the same people saying the EU will not move it is united and impregnable and also that it will move when it becomes politically expedient to do so. Lots of these little oddities i'm noticing.


There's no meaningful contradiction. Big and small.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> TUC and CBI and a host of others.


indeed, we will have our fill of alphabet soup that day


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Do you want fish and chips or curry for tea? 

Curry.

Where's me tea?

You didn't say what curry, so i didn't get anything. And it was non-binding. And you're a racist simpleton.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think you're missing stuff that you wish wasn't there.
> 
> The mandate is for Leave.  That includes the government's, the CBI's, the TUC's etc, least favoured option of Leaving with No Deal.  At the moment, it's the government's best bargaining chip.  (So it has to be willing to use it).  But no matter how much you might think it ill-advised, it is still a form of Leave.  And Leave the government must deliver, unless it gets a mandate not to (by GE or 2nd ref).  You surely must see that the government can't and won't won't take us 2 and a half years down this road just to say "actually no", without a mandate to do so?


The risk for May in still saying 'it could be No Deal' is that some Tories _would eventually _be willing to remove her,and support a VONC, than that. They see that as an even worse option than a Corbyn government.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you want fish and chips or curry for tea?
> 
> Curry.
> 
> ...



Chips and rice. Chips _and_ rice.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think you're missing stuff that you wish wasn't there.
> 
> The mandate is for Leave.  That includes the government's, the CBI's, the TUC's etc, least favoured option of Leaving with No Deal.  At the moment, it's the government's best bargaining chip.  (So it has to be willing to use it).  But no matter how much you might think it ill-advised, it is still a form of Leave.  And Leave the government must deliver, unless it gets a mandate not to (by GE or 2nd ref).  You surely must see that the government can't and won't won't take us 2 and a half years down this road just to say "actually no", without a mandate to do so?



I agree with your analysis but not your conclusion - if the last few years have taught us anything it's that the ruling class and their political representatives are largely out of touch, disorientated and prone to doing things that threaten their long term interests in order to solve immediate problems - both referendums, Indy and Brexit and the Corbyn saga show they regularly have done this IMO.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you want fish and chips or curry for tea?
> 
> Curry.
> 
> ...



Curry smells off. You bring back curry anyway and everyone gets food poisoning, just as you thought they would, or you go next door and get fish and chips instead?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree with your analysis but not your conclusion - if the last few years have taught us anything it's that the ruling class and their political representatives are largely out of touch, disorientated and prone to doing things that threaten their long term interests in order to solve immediate problems - both referendums, Indy and Brexit and the Corbyn saga show they regularly have done this IMO.


I think there's an interesting comparison to be made with the ongoing and deepening of the finacialisation of capital here - politicians have tended to become the in-out make a quick buck via circulation rather than long term investment and there's a subsequent lack of the previous long term planning on behalf of _total capital_ that we used to see in the past. Which does lend itself to the possibility of local fuck ups like this impacting on the wider whole. It's one of our opps  - and is something the eu is designed to clamp down on.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Curry smells off. You bring back curry anyway and everyone gets food poisoning, just as you thought they would, or you go next door and get fish and chips instead?



And i think with that we have reached the centre of the whole damn thing.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

Curry is nice. I'll get you curry for your tea.

Oh ok. I'm hungry. I'll eat anything really.

Cool. I'm just off out to get your curry.

[Years pass. Nobody returns with a curry. But somebody does pop past daily to do a shit through your letterbox]


----------



## ska invita (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, 3 weeks before that, presumably, since if the UK is still a member there'd be chaos over whether it gets to stand MEPs (which has just been reduced from 751 to 705 in honour of Brexit).  So they're not going to want Article 50 stretched beyond that, presumably.


I said this a few pages back there is precedent for getting around this - I forget what country - Bulgaria maybe? - couldn't take part in EU elections for reasons that escape me now, and they had government appointed officials fill the post in a place-filler fashion. 
But supposedly once the new EU parliament sits in July then it does become pretty impractical (according to the 'expert' on this I heard), and so that date would be a pretty impassable deadline.

TBH with the options running out and the stalling tactics played out, things should speed up a bit now


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Oh i would love the EU to appoint our MEPs. That would be perfect. Please please let it happen.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

Technocrats


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Anyway, i'm allergic to fish - why do you keep making me eat it? It's making me really ill.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

You go to get a curry. The curry house is on fire. You go inside anyway. You catch on fire. You roll around outside until the fire is out. You're burnt now. No curry. The fish and chip shop is still open but it's a fucking shit fish and chip shop, fuck them. You stumble home with a Fray Bentos pie that you got somehow. This is the best pie for our family, you say. Your family kick you to death. This is later found to be lawful under the 'maritime transport' section of takeaway law.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 16, 2019)

chilango said:


> Technocrats


yes, though I think in this plan they wouldn't actually sit, as the new parliament starts in july - it would be a nominal role.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 16, 2019)

Can I have pizza?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Friggin' lib-dems


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Can I have pizza?


Yes, but only Hawaiian


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Can I have pizza?




*rings Seaborne Freight


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 16, 2019)

"Slightly more than half of you wanted curry, the rest wanted fish and chips, so I got the chip shop to pour some of its curry sauce over a few orders of fish and chips. This is the best thing I could get, you might think it's shit but it's literally the only thing I can give you, there's no point sending me out to get anything else."

"Could somebody else take care of dinner?"

"No."


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> But why do you think that?


I'll expand on what my question to you is.

Whereas you have said this:


littlebabyjesus said:


> We may have to agree to differ here. You seem to be taking the vagueness of the initial referendum (in/out but with no plan for out) as strengthening its mandate for any kind of brexit. For me, it weakens the referendum's mandate - there is no mandate for any particular form of brexit, which is a weakness, not a strength.


I think it's based on a false hypothesis.  You seem to be saying (and here I'm paraphrasing you, so tell me if I'm going wrong), that the question "Should the UK Leave the EU?" was too vague, and so can't _possibly_ include "Leave with no deal".  This is where I think you are confusing is and ought.  You think there should have been a worked-out document detailing what kind of Leave process was intended.  And maybe there should have been.  But there wasn't.

My analysis is that: the government has said it will respect and deliver the outcome of the referendum, which was that the UK should Leave the EU.  I don't see how it can find a way to now go back on that without first seeking a revised mandate.  (It _could_, but it would risk consequences it has said it would not wish to risk).

I may be wrong.  But I wonder where you think I'm confusing is and ought.  There _is_ a mandate for Leave, which includes a manner of Leaving you'd prefer not to countenance.  As butchersapron has said, people voted for curry.  You can't decide "they can't possibly have meant chicken curry.  They'd obviously prefer no curry".  If chicken curry is all there is, the instructions only allow for: get chicken curry.

(I accept that governments do and have gone against the wishes of the people.  But I think this government would find it tricky, and costly in social terms, to go against this wish in these circumstances, unilaterally).


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "Slightly more than half of you wanted curry, the rest wanted fish and chips, so I got the chip shop to pour some of its curry sauce over a few orders of fish and chips. This is the best thing I could get, you might think it's shit but it's literally the only thing I can give you, there's no point sending me out to get anything else."
> 
> "Could somebody else take care of dinner?"
> 
> "No."


Fish n chips n curry sauce. That's a perfect northern tea, that is


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 16, 2019)

Loving the analogies. If only we had a perfect analogy we could all agree and hold hands and sing happy songs of unity.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I said this a few pages back there is precedent for getting around this - I forget what country - Bulgaria maybe? - couldn't take part in EU elections for reasons that escape me now, and they had government appointed officials fill the post in a place-filler fashion.
> But supposedly once the new EU parliament sits in July then it does become pretty impractical (according to the 'expert' on this I heard), and so that date would be a pretty impassable deadline.
> 
> TBH with the options running out and the stalling tactics played out, things should speed up a bit now


I was just trying to interpret what Vefhofstadt's statement would mean in practical terms.  He wants it done and dusted before the elections.  Practically speaking, he must mean before the campaign.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

belboid said:


> Fish n chips n curry sauce. That's a perfect northern tea, that is


That's corbyn's current plan to keep them exact seats i think.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's corbyn's current plan to keep them exact seats i think.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

Fish n chips for dinner.

I don't want fish n chips. I fancy a change. I've had fucking fish n chips every fucking night. It's making me sick.

Whatever. Like I care I suppose you've got a choice. Do you want curry or fish n chips? 

Er, I'd rather have pizza.

Curry or fish n chips? And tbh I'd rather you had fish n chips 

Er, curry then.

You know you don't like curry. But fine I'll get it for you anyway.

[Time passes. No curry returns. You head down the street towards the curry house to see what the delay is. Over the road you notice that the fucker's bought himself fish n chips with your money]


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

...and is shitting in other peoples letter boxes


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

We need to look to europe to give us a strong clear lead:


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

chilango said:


> Fish n chips for dinner.
> 
> I don't want fish n chips. I fancy a change. I've had fucking fish n chips every fucking night. It's making me sick.
> 
> ...



The next night he comes round your house again.

You're starving cos you didn't get any dinner last night.

*Ding dong*

Do you want curry or fish n chips? Remember you know don't like curry do you?

[You stab the the fucker repeatedly in the face with one of those wooden forks you get in the chippy, steal his car, break into his house and make yourself a meat feast on thin crust in a fancy wood fired pizza oven you find on the bastard's extensive patio]


----------



## Ted Striker (Jan 16, 2019)

No daal is better than a bad daal.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

chilango said:


> The next night he comes round your house again.
> 
> You're starving cos you didn't get any dinner last night.
> 
> ...


You awake to find that _The Dam Busters _is on again and you've still not had any tea.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 16, 2019)

I just had a curry for lunch...


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> No daal is better than a bad daal.


You fucker


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> No daal is better than a bad daal.


I mean, I’d still prefer pizza. (And I honestly believe that even a bad pizza is better than most other food).

(Pizza is communism in this analogy. But it also works if you want to take it literally).


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 16, 2019)

half rice half chips?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> half rice half chips?


I’d like to think that comes under the heading of “the curry people voted for”.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 16, 2019)

I voted for no food. 17m greedy fuckers are making me eat their shite anyway.

That's 34m shoes to puke on. Pass the curry.


----------



## chilango (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I mean, I’d still prefer pizza. (And I honestly believe that even a bad pizza is better than most other food).
> 
> (Pizza is communism in this analogy. But it also works if you want to take it literally).


Of course we don't just want a _slice_ of the pizza...


----------



## kebabking (Jan 16, 2019)

I've just had KFC - the zinger burrito thing. The chips are still shit...

I would have preferred pizza: spicy chicken, bacon, red onions and mushrooms, but if it should prove neccessary I'll happily accept everlasting war with France and it's assortment of lickspittle continentals.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Jeremy: you’re not doing a good job of taking down our order. You didn’t include naan. I’m going to ask you to cancel your order. I’ll do it on my app.
Theresa: you don’t have a good enough rating. I’ll download a different app.
Jeremy: I’ll just keep demanding you cancel your order. 
Theresa: it’ll be too late. They’ve already given me the estimated delivery time.


----------



## prunus (Jan 16, 2019)

Instead of pizza box contained enraged bobcat.  

Would not order again.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Jeremy: you’re not doing a good job of taking down our order. You didn’t include naan. I’m going to ask you to cancel your order. I’ll do it on my app.
> Theresa: you don’t have a good enough rating. I’ll download a different app.
> Jeremy: I’ll just keep demanding you cancel your order.
> Theresa: it’ll be too late. They’ve already given me the estimated delivery time.



The estimated delivery time is given in the unusual format of XX:25 am/pm.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 16, 2019)

No vegan option I see


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I may be wrong. But I wonder where you think I'm confusing is and ought. There _is_ a mandate for Leave, which includes a manner of Leaving you'd prefer not to countenance.


During the referendum campaign all the talk from Leave campaigners was of negotiating a deal with the EU - some of them even claimed it would be a piece of piss. I don't remember anyone campaigning for just leaving without a deal (if anyone did they'd have been in a very tiny minority). Most of the focus back then seemed to be about how much money, if any, we should have to pay the EU to get out - it was not about deal vs no-deal.

So although the referendum didn't ask specifically about the terms we should leave on, the presumption was that it would be with a deal with the EU. The referendum was advisory only (by definition, as it can only be enacted through parliament) and therefore what it advised the govt to do was to agree the terms under which we'd leave the EU, which they've done. There was certainly never any mandate to leave without a deal.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> The estimated delivery time is given in the unusual format of XX:25 am/pm.


Theresa: I told them we’re arguing over the order. They’ve just sent an email saying “your order is still being assembled. Please re-enter your preferred delivery time. This option will time out if no reply is received”.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

Dr. Furface said:


> During the referendum campaign all the talk from Leave campaigners was of negotiating a deal with the EU - some of them even claimed it would be a piece of piss. I don't remember anyone campaigning for just leaving without a deal (if anyone did they'd have been in a very tiny minority). Most of the focus back then seemed to be about how much money, if any, we should have to pay the EU to get out - it was not about deal vs no-deal.
> 
> So although the referendum didn't ask specifically about the terms we should leave on, the presumption was that it would be with a deal with the EU. The referendum was advisory only (by definition, as it can only be enacted through parliament) and therefore what it advised the govt to do was to agree the terms under which we'd leave the EU, which they've done. There was certainly never any mandate to leave without a deal.


Wishful thinking specimen #5732655654


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Dr. Furface said:


> There was certainly never any mandate to leave without a deal


What did the ballot paper say? And what did the result say?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 16, 2019)

Meanwhile, the pizza shop is on fire, there are a load of blokes in yellow vests having a punch up in the chippie, the environmental health are visiting the Chinese take away and the curry house staff are on strike......


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What did the ballot paper say? And what did the result say?


Again, I think you have this backwards. The lack of clarity in the referendum doesn't strengthen its mandate. It weakens it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

I refuse to let you - or anyone -  poison yourself. You don't even really like curry.

(last one)


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Again, I think you have this backwards. The lack of clarity in the referendum doesn't strengthen its mandate. It weakens it.


_The takeaway menu only said curry. It didn’t say what kind. So that means you only wanted biryani. Not rogan josh._


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

I distinctly remember interviews with leave voters just after the referendum asking why we had to wait years and why couldn't the UK just leave straight away. Pretty sure they didn't give a fuck about no deal.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Again, I think you have this backwards. The lack of clarity in the referendum doesn't strengthen its mandate. It weakens it.



The ballot paper didn't mention a deal, or no deal, it was simply leave or remain. I read the ballot paper, and voted remain - for me, it's 'a deal' which has questionable democratic legitimacy, not no deal.

No one was asked if they wanted a deal or what that might contain, it's only those who consider themselves the Guardians of the People's Good who think there has to be a deal, otherwise there can be no exit.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Guardians of the People's Food

(def last one)


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jan 16, 2019)

no amount of pizza will curry favour with me, thanks very much


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What did the ballot paper say? And what did the result say?


It's what it didn't say. And that's why we are where we are.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Meanwhile, the pizza shop is on fire, there are a load of blokes in yellow vests having a punch up in the chippie, the environmental health are visiting the Chinese take away and the curry house staff are on strike......



There are no curry house staff, they couldn't get visas.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Dr. Furface said:


> It's what it didn't say. And that's why we are where we are.


I’ll tell you what it didn’t say. It didn’t say:

Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?

Leave (except with no deal, in which case don’t). [  ]

Remain		[  ]


----------



## killer b (Jan 16, 2019)

Poll after poll shows no deal would be very popular with the vast majority of leave voters. On the recent survation poll it only lost narrowly to remain (there was a similar split in the big yougov MRP model). _No Deal_ isn't a threat to leave voters, they don't give a fuck.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2019)

Dr. Furface said:


> It's what it didn't say. And that's why we are where we are.



Did it miss off the bit about poppadoms? My curry house often misses off the poppadoms, or if it remembers them it forgets the chutney, rendering the poppadoms useless.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ll tell you what it didn’t say. It didn’t say:
> 
> Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
> 
> ...


Or only with a deal.

Most people i know who voted leave didn't realise there would be a deal required because there wasn't and still isn't. 

We don't need to wait til march btw - we can just leave now. Which i think a huge chunk of leave expected. The not knowing shit racist want-wits.


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Again, I think you have this backwards. The lack of clarity in the referendum doesn't strengthen its mandate. It weakens it.


The question in the referendum was absolutely clear, and the answer was to leave.

Not 'leave if we can get a deal which parliament approves of', just 'leave'


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

This stuff really is in the order of the three option 2nd ref. Well shady.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ll tell you what it didn’t say. It didn’t say:
> 
> Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?
> 
> ...


That'll do for the next one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Dr. Furface said:


> That'll do for the next one.


But the last one. What was the question, and what was the result?

I’m amazed people are still wilfully misreading this.


----------



## gosub (Jan 16, 2019)

kebabking said:


> The ballot paper didn't mention a deal, or no deal, it was simply leave or remain. I read the ballot paper, and voted remain - for me, it's 'a deal' which has questionable democratic legitimacy, not no deal.
> 
> No one was asked if they wanted a deal or what that might contain, it's only those who consider themselves the Guardians of the People's Good who think there has to be a deal, otherwise there can be no exit.



At last a plan B : dispatch Noel Edmunds to Brussels with a couple of cardboard boxes


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

gosub said:


> At last a plan B : dispatch Noel Edmunds to Brussels with a couple of cardboard boxes


december 12:


Pickman's model said:


> noel edmonds has been roped in. he will be enobled and will depart forthwith for brussels as britain's new brexit secretary. no one in the land knows more about deals and indeed no deals than he.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> december 12:




Which banker will be on the end of the phone though? Farage?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 16, 2019)

kebabking said:


> The ballot paper didn't mention a deal, or no deal, it was simply leave or remain. I read the ballot paper, and voted remain - for me, it's 'a deal' which has questionable democratic legitimacy, not no deal.
> 
> No one was asked if they wanted a deal or what that might contain, it's only those who consider themselves the Guardians of the People's Good who think there has to be a deal, otherwise there can be no exit.


And this was the whole problem with the first ref. The ballot paper didn't mention deal/no deal. There was no plan on offer at all, and no group mandated to carry out its plan. That vagueness isn't its strength. It's its weakness.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Which banker will be on the end of the phone though? Farage?


not sure a phone cord would bear his weight, piano wire or a good auld-fashioned hemp rope for nf


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 16, 2019)

Don’t blame me, I voted for naan of the above.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Don’t blame me, I voted for naan of the above.


it's a raita auld mess


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And this was the whole problem with the first ref. The ballot paper didn't mention deal/no deal. There was no plan on offer at all, and no group mandated to carry out its plan. That vagueness isn't its strength. It's its weakness.


You can keep saying this as many times as you like, but it’s just not the case. The question was asked Leave or Remain. The answer, narrowly but still majority of those voting, was Leave.  You may think the question was inadequate. But the question “Remain or Leave” was what was asked, and answer was “Leave”.

I honestly can’t understand what you’re not getting. So much so that I don’t believe for a moment that you’re not getting it. That would just be too far fetched.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I honestly can’t understand what you’re not getting. So much so that I don’t believe for a moment that you’re not getting it. That would just be too far fetched.


no it wouldn't


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

What _could_ this voter’s intention have been?  I mean, I wouldn’t know _how_ to carry out that mandate. The vagueness is its weakness.


----------



## belboid (Jan 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> Poll after poll shows no deal would be very popular with the vast majority of leave voters. On the recent survation poll it only lost narrowly to remain (there was a similar split in the big yougov MRP model). _No Deal_ isn't a threat to leave voters, they don't give a fuck.


A majority of leave voters, not a 'vast majority'  And considering the narrowness of the win, it only takes a small number to hate No Deal enough for it to fail. In the polls I've seen for an STV style vote, No Deal drops out first (and Mays deal narrowly wins - which is why she is actually daft for not supporting it, imo)


----------



## Winot (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You can keep saying this as many times as you like, but it’s just not the case. The question was asked Leave or Remain. The answer, narrowly but still majority of those voting, was Leave.  You may think the question was inadequate. But the question “Remain or Leave” was what was asked, and answer was “Leave”.
> 
> I honestly can’t understand what you’re not getting. So much so that I don’t believe for a moment that you’re not getting it. That would just be too far fetched.



It means that May’s deal (if agreed) achieves the result of the referendum and undermines the argument from some Leavers that somehow she is not honouring the intention of the people.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Oh i would love the EU to appoint our MEPs. That would be perfect. Please please let it happen.


Parachute them in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Parachute them in.


only without the parachutes


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> It means that May’s deal (if agreed) achieves the result of the referendum and undermines the argument from some Leavers that somehow she is not honouring the intention of the people.


With whom are you debating?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> No vegan option I see


For God, For Harry and for Greggs !


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> With whom are you debating?


very lardy da


----------



## Winot (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> With whom are you debating?



Sorry I thought this was a discussion board.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> It means that May’s deal (if agreed) achieves the result of the referendum and undermines the argument from some Leavers that somehow she is not honouring the intention of the people.


It would be a variety of leave yes. The same as no deal leave would be. So thanks for confirming what danny has been saying and doing away with the nonsense that leave meant only a very specific leave.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> Sorry I thought this was a discussion board.


Indeed. But you quoted me and made a seemingly random reply underneath. I’m trying to ascertain whether you think you’re addressing something I’ve said, or whether it’s addressed to someone else.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> very lardy da


I am indeed a fairly lardy Da’. But I’m cutting down now, and plan to pick the exercise up. Thanks for mentioning it.


----------



## Winot (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. But you quoted me and made a seemingly random reply underneath. I’m trying to ascertain whether you think you’re addressing something I’ve said, or whether it’s addressed to someone else.



Nope, not addressing you, just using your comment as a springboard for an observation.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> Nope, not addressing you, just using your comment as a springboard for an observation.


OK, and your observation is that May's deal, if carried through, would qualify as a form of Brexit?  I agree.  It is one of a number of possible forms of Brexit. (Albeit one that has been rejected by MPs).


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

It _is _interesting that a form of brexit is a form of brexit.


----------



## tommers (Jan 16, 2019)

Brexit means Brexit.

Aren't we all Brexit in some way?  Hmm?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2019)

Winot said:


> Nope, not addressing you, just using your comment as a springboard for an observation.


That's pretty much the way that remainers are treating the referendum result, no more than an 'observation' made by 52%.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

tommers said:


> Brexit means Brexit.
> 
> Aren't we all Brexit in some way?  Hmm?


Immanentize the brexathon NOW


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Immanentize the brexathon NOW


Their world ended back in 2016.


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We may have to agree to differ here. You seem to be taking the vagueness of the initial referendum (in/out but with no plan for out) as strengthening its mandate for any kind of brexit. For me, it weakens the referendum's mandate - there is no mandate for any particular form of brexit, which is a weakness, not a strength.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

likesfish said:


> Tbf there were countless "illegal crossing points" aka lanes which occasionally the security forces made efforts to block but there was never a border fence or even marked border.



Ah yeah.. I know. But the soldiers with guns pointing at your car made it a hard border....nobody wants that again. Arlene Foster doesn't mention that though ...


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> View attachment 158879


Wonder which one of the brexit secretaries he blames for this situation? Himself? Raaaaab? The erm... other one?


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Wonder which one of the brexit secretaries he blames for this situation? Himself? Raaaaab? The erm... other one?



I think he's suggesting that plans could or should have been prepared *before* the referendum was held, and that the reason they weren't was because the political leadership at the time were afraid of how people might react, which relates (kind of) to lbj's complaint that as there was no plan for exit, we didn't know exactly what we were voting for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ah yeah.. I know. But the soldiers with guns pointing at your car made it a hard border....nobody wants that again. Arlene Foster doesn't mention that though ...


yeh but i doubt they were pointing guns at her car


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What _could_ this voter’s intention have been?  I mean, I wouldn’t know _how_ to carry out that mandate. The vagueness is its weakness.
> 
> 
> View attachment 158875



Ignore the cliff ahead, the gps says straight on. 

I haven’t seen such levels of self sabotage since I was a chronic cocaine addict.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Now we should trust you.


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Now we should trust you.



Hardly, Over this side of the Irish Sea we are licking our lips at what is going on.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Ignore the cliff ahead, the gps says straight on.
> 
> I haven’t seen such levels of self sabotage since I was a chronic cocaine addict.


And that is not a reply to what was posted you arrogant tit. Jumping in like an entitled coke-head.


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And that is not a reply to what was posted you arrogant tit. Jumping in like an entitled coke-head.



Must try harder butchers.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Hardly, Over this side of the Irish Sea we are licking our lips at what is going on.


No you're not. What a stupid thing to post. There is no you.

The knock on effect on irish w/c could be big. Licking your lips? Rubbing your nose more like.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Must try harder butchers.


This is all the effort you can muster now?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Ha ha brexit brits and that black and tans oh fuck


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but i doubt they were pointing guns at her car



Fair point ..


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Ignore the cliff ahead, the gps says straight on.
> 
> I haven’t seen such levels of self sabotage since I was a chronic cocaine addict.


Yes, you disapprove.  But are you in any doubt as to the intention of the voter, and of the majority?  Do you think there's ambiguity about whether Leave might include the possibility of Leaving with no deal?


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, you disapprove.  But are you in any doubt as to the intention of the voter, and of the majority?  Do you think there's ambiguity about whether Leave might include the possibility of Leaving with no deal?



In fairness, there is no doubt and I don’t believe a second ref would be fair to the brexit supporters.

Id also add that obviously Ireland has a far different relationship with the eu, as said before we offered ourselves up to be money launders to them as a survival tactic


----------



## Wilf (Jan 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think he's suggesting that plans could or should have been prepared *before* the referendum was held, and that the reason they weren't was because the political leadership at the time were afraid of how people might react, which relates (kind of) to lbj's complaint that as there was no plan for exit, we didn't know exactly what we were voting for.


I suspect there will be some interesting (well, y'know...) public admin type studies after this about the power of the bureaucracy. All those old ideas about a permanent bureaucracy stabilising the state throughout changes in political leadership, major policy shifts and the rest have been severely tested. From the outside - and my knowledge on it is woeful - it looks like the political level fuck ups and paralysis have played out in the civil service. Senior civil servants don't seem to have been able to give ministers a good kick up the arse.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> With whom are you debating?


AFAICT it's no-one on U75.



Wilf said:


> Senior civil servants don't seem to have been able to give ministers a good kick up the arse.


Which is no bad thing and feeds into butchers point and the squabbles of capital being opportunities for us.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

Is it the opportunity to talk about what an opportunity it is?


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

[QUOTE="redsquirrel, post: 15890906, member: 6084]

Which is no bad thing and feeds into butchers point and the squabbles of capital being opportunities for us.[/QUOTE]

Strange, he didn’t share that view regarding Ireland


----------



## Chz (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> In fairness, there is no doubt and I don’t believe a second ref would be fair to the brexit supporters.


You're looking at it the wrong way. Another referendum should be primarily seen as a choice of "What Brexit do you want?". Normally we'd leave this to Parliament, but you can see how that's gone. Remain should be a choice on that referendum, because people are allowed to change their minds. It's not like we elected Dave Cameron with a majority in 2015 and that's it, we made our choice, we're stuck with that for eternity.

Editing to say: This is not some way I've come up with to get what I want. No Deal is simple. Remain is simple. May's Deal is complex. I expect simple to beat complex every time.


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

Chz said:


> You're looking at it the wrong way. Another referendum should be primarily seen as a choice of "What Brexit do you want?". Normally we'd leave this to Parliament, but you can see how that's gone. Remain should be a choice on that referendum, because people are allowed to change their minds. It's not like we elected Dave Cameron with a majority in 2015 and that's it, we made our choice, we're stuck with that for eternity.


 
That’s dangerous territory because having remain on the page essentially says “right thicko you didn’t get it correct the first time, try again”.  I believe that’s a bleak state of affairs, Ireland has done that. The referendum was held, remain lost so I say to sore losers, get over it. 

A referendum on deal or no deal feels reasonable. On the other hand, in the final ten weeks, should it just be prioritized to surviving Likely scenarios in a “disorderly brexit” , which on a pragmatic level makes sense. 

It would feel anti climatic, but an a50 extension seems more and more possible.


----------



## Chz (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> “right thicko you didn’t get it correct the first time, try again”


There is a lot of that from the Remain side, and it aggravates me to no end as it's the sort of attitude that led to a Leave vote in the first place. They're (haughty remainers) the ones who don't learn. But it doesn't change that, from a pragmatic point of view, the public must be given all the options that are _currently_ open to them: May's Deal, No Deal, Remain. If you offer some pie-in-the-sky, renegotiate bullshit then we'll end up exactly where we are now. If a ranked system is used, I would fully expect No Deal to win.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

curry


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> curry


If we've voted for curry we should have a further decision how hot it should be.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Hardly, Over this side of the Irish Sea we are licking our lips at what is going on.



Not true.
I know plenty people who are very concerned at the repercussions of Brexit.


----------



## likesfish (Jan 16, 2019)

My platoon commander once met an Irish army patrol and they couldn't decide who was on the wrong side of the border days before GPS.
 So  they decided to settle it by talking to a local  farmer as a suggestion that the officers duel to the death was ignored.
 Local farmer who owned the field response was "well it depends what part of the field you were in"


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Not true.
> I know plenty people who are very concerned at the repercussions of Brexit.



Is Brexit actually going to happen?

I talked about this previously, we are most definitely economically exposed on several fronts. However, its also possible that we would benefit as the english speaking gate to Europe, we have built a whole economy on these service based companies for better or worse.

Also for me and many people wishing for a united Ireland, it feels like a step closer to that.


----------



## xenon (Jan 16, 2019)

Fish and chips again tonight or something else? 

Fish and chips has been alright for most of us. Have it again. There might not be anything better, probably isn't in fact.

Stop having fish and chips. Aren't you sick of it. We could have anything else, Chinese, Japanese, Brazilian. Anything from any where around the world. it will be great.

OK then, fair enough no more fish and chips, that's your choice.

What's for tea?

Well, not fish and chips. , The Chinese, curry... Er, Anything in fact might be a while and it's going to cost more and will arrive cold...


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 16, 2019)

Sort of like that the idea of "the Eu won't do this to jolly old england" is be subverted and ground into the dust by the British Parliament doing it to  themselves


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

Chz said:


> You're looking at it the wrong way. Another referendum should be primarily seen as a choice of "What Brexit do you want?". Normally we'd leave this to Parliament, but you can see how that's gone. Remain should be a choice on that referendum, because people are allowed to change their minds. It's not like we elected Dave Cameron with a majority in 2015 and that's it, we made our choice, we're stuck with that for eternity.
> 
> Editing to say: This is not some way I've come up with to get what I want. No Deal is simple. Remain is simple. May's Deal is complex. I expect simple to beat complex every time.



Its a fair point and the pragmatist in me struggles on this question. What feels a more important thought is the question of where do you draw the line, referendums lose their value if they aren't ever enforced.

Also, I'm unlikely to be impacted by it in any meaningful way, so it's easy from the cheap seats to be throwing around observations. My intense interest in it is as a possible step towards a united Ireland.

I think a no deal exit has the potential to take down what appears to be already fragile economies in several European countries.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Its a fair point and the pragmatist in me struggles on this question. What feels a more important thought is the question of where do you draw the line, referendums lose their value if they aren't ever enforced.
> 
> Also, I'm unlikely to be impacted by it in any meaningful way, so it's easy from the cheap seats to be throwing around observations. My intense interest in it is as a possible step towards a united Ireland.
> 
> I think a no deal exit has the potential to take down what appears to be already fragile economies in several European countries.



...wouldn't the most fragile and exposed European economy be Ireland?


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...wouldn't the most fragile and exposed European economy be Ireland?



Very possibly, it’s hard to tell but we will be towards the top of the queue. We can’t really influence the outcome, so I think acceptance that it’s out of our control is healthy for Irish people. I’m in the fortunate position that brexit has increased my wages due to increased demand.

As always those with the least will get hurt the most.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 16, 2019)

Mother in law is coming to stay tonight, she wants Chinese chicken curry for tea, which kinda complicates matters.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> I talked about this previously, we are most definitely economically exposed on several fronts. However, its also possible that we would benefit as the english speaking gate to Europe, we have built a whole economy on these service based companies for better or worse.
> 
> Also for me and many people wishing for a united Ireland, it feels like a step closer to that.




48% of our exports are to Britain and the UK. It's a real concern that the UK wont be in the EU. 

As for a united Ireland it will happen when the majority in northerm Ireland and in the republic want a united Ireland. It's nearly there now. Last thing needed here is a border and a reversal back to sectarianism violence and hate.


----------



## andysays (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> 48% of our exports are to Britain and the UK. It's a real concern that the UK wont be in the EU.
> 
> As for a united Ireland it will happen when the majority in northerm Ireland and in the republic want a united Ireland. It's nearly there now. Last thing needed here is a border and a reversal back to sectarianism violence and hate.



Couldn’t agree more, a border would be devastating.

The exports impacted are a real concern but as I said we are down wind of the mess, with no real way to move. In addition to some sectors getting a boost, that has already been seen in the economy. There is a train of thought that even if remain wins, the damage is done to the uk


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

What will they be asking for now?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What will they be asking for now?
> 
> View attachment 158887


Poppadoms and chutney while they make up their minds what they’re having.

And a Kingfisher. Do you do Cobra? Two Cobras.


----------



## agricola (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What will they be asking for now?
> 
> View attachment 158887



Well at least that is the "consulting with senior Parliamentarians" box ticked.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## teqniq (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## pesh (Jan 16, 2019)

really want a curry now.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...wouldn't the most fragile and exposed European economy be Ireland?


Probably it would be second.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> View attachment 158879



If only David Davis had been *Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, we’d not had any of these issues....

Alex *


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

pesh said:


> really want a curry now.


I'm having veggie pies instead


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

Border checks on trade to follow no-deal Brexit - Coveney and Ross in private conversation caught on tape - Independent.ie

Shite.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Border checks on trade to follow no-deal Brexit - Coveney and Ross in private conversation caught on tape - Independent.ie
> 
> Shite.



Project fear


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> Border checks on trade to follow no-deal Brexit - Coveney and Ross in private conversation caught on tape - Independent.ie
> 
> Shite.


The border's not going to be in the sea though, is it.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> The border's not going to be in the sea though, is it.


It'll be in our heads.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 16, 2019)

.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> We need to look to europe to give us a strong clear lead:
> 
> View attachment 158871


They've fixed it now.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Sweet sweet clarte

That's a lot votes btw


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> It'll be in our heads.


No it will be on land, all around the UK.  That's why there's a massive recruitment drive for border control officers.  (lookin at £30k there btw because it's one of the few civil service jobs with shift allowances and overtime)

They'll need ships patrolling as well, obviously.  Harder to recruit, obviously.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> No it will be on land, all around the UK.  That's why there's a massive recruitment drive for border control officers.  (lookin at £30k there btw because it's one of the few civil service jobs with shift allowances and overtime)
> 
> They'll need ships patrolling as well, obviously.  Harder to recruit, obviously.


Sounds like what we really need is a wall.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Sounds like what we really need is a wall.


Yeh like in the auld edgar allen poe story 'the cask of amontillado', with former people immured in cellars


----------



## TopCat (Jan 16, 2019)

19 majority


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> I think acceptance that it’s out of our control is healthy for Irish people. .



The poverty of reformism


----------



## flypanam (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No you're not. What a stupid thing to post. There is no you.
> 
> The knock on effect on irish w/c could be big. Licking your lips? Rubbing your nose more like.



Spot on, the Irish wc could to be on the receiving end of some savage attacks from a TINA FG/FF/Lab/Greens combo, that will make the wave of austerity look mild. Everyone in my home town on the border is worried, but defiant too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 19 majority


Sadly the wrong way round


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 19 majority


That was a lot closer than expected


----------



## 8ball (Jan 16, 2019)

What a fucking shitshow.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> That was a lot closer than expected



Why?

Her majority is about that. She was always going to win, and the numbers were always going to be in that ballpark.


----------



## grit (Jan 16, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Why?
> 
> Her majority is about that. She was always going to win, and the numbers were always going to be in that ballpark.



Maybe this whole farce has prompted me to expect strange outcomes. I stand corrected


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> That was a lot closer than expected



Really?
Total tory + DUP =327
Rest (-shinners)  =315
Diff = 12 (assuming [wrongly] that all 'Indeps' vote agin Govt.)


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Really?
> Total tory + DUP =327
> Rest (-shinners)  =315
> Diff = 12 (assuming [wrongly] that all 'Indeps' vote agin Govt.)


Two tellers for the Tories not counted, right? So everyone turned up and voted with party.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> That was a lot closer than expected


Only if you're paying no attention at all.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Good to see leaders of opposition parties singing from the same hymn-sheet in setting out no 'No Deal' conditionality upon entering talks with May.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

With their 8 or whatever votes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Good to see leaders of opposition parties singing from the same hymn-sheet in setting out no 'No Deal' conditionality upon entering talks with May.



Yeah, always good to dump your best bargaining chip when going into further negotiations.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

Interesting that Corbyn's immediate response was to demand no deal be taken off the table. I suppose it's better than asking for a referendum.

Extension to A50 coming soon I'm guessing then!


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

How did my MP vote in the no-confidence motion?

Our fucking useless now-independent MP didn't turn up, it seems, just like he doesn't turn up to his constituency, the cunt.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Interesting that Corbyn's immediate response was to demand no deal be taken off the table. I suppose it's better than asking for a referendum.
> 
> Extension to A50 coming soon I'm guessing then!


SNP already on that.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, always good to dump your best bargaining chip when going into further negotiations.


She has no bargaining chips, let alone a 'best' one.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> She has no bargaining chips, let alone a 'best' one.


No deal is a heavy weapon.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No deal is a heavy weapon.


Like MAD was.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Interesting that Corbyn's immediate response was to demand no deal be taken off the table. I suppose it's better than asking for a referendum.



It's his attempt to avoid his party's policy of moving on to calling for that second referendum, clever move for him, not so clever for further negotiations.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> She has no bargaining chips, let alone a 'best' one.


Any bargaining crisps at all? 

I'm so sorry.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Like MAD was.


Not the end of all life. Not a good comparison.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?


It seemed like the right order to do things months ago at that Lab conference.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?



None.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 16, 2019)

Right


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Not the end of all life. Not a good comparison.


Maybe more analogous than strictly comparative.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?



Just seemed to be what was expected. At best it's another bit of mud to sling at the tories, their MPs back May but not her actual policies, what a shitshow etc.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Anyway, from Corbyn's perspective, it makes complete sense to make 'talks' conditional on no 'no Deal'; if in the unlikely situation that she acceded he'd be able to paint himself as 'saviour of the nation' to his core remainarian members/supporters and if she refuses...she can try to use that 'best' bargaining chip with the supra-state and the tories retain complete ownership of the shit-storm.
clever politics.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?


It's just optics. Was never going to pass but necessary symbolic gesture. Without it they'd be called out as content in opposition. Plus to what negligible extent it matters, now all the Tories are explicitly to blame for whatever it is they continue to do, not just their leadership. Plus there's the bleakly amusing stick to beat them with of the fact that however many voted no confidence in her as leader, now can't _change_ the leader, and yet freshly decided she was the best person to run the country. Must be a bit of party mileage in that.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




Hard Brexit. ....not hard border. 
Article was edited.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just seemed to be what was expected. At best it's another bit of mud to sling at the tories, their MPs back May but not her actual policies, what a shitshow etc.



All part of the pre-arranged theatre.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 16, 2019)

grit said:


> That was a lot closer than expected



No, it was less close than expected.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> How did my MP vote in the no-confidence motion?
> 
> Our fucking useless now-independent MP didn't turn up, it seems, just like he doesn't turn up to his constituency, the cunt.



3 Labour didn't vote. Tulip Siddiq voted. Jared O'Mara is disgraced and expelled and he voted. Only one Tory didn't vote so they weren't pared. 

Fuck Rosie Winterton. Seriously.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It seemed like the right order to do things months ago at that Lab conference.



C'mon, it didn't really even then.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> 3 Labour didn't vote. Tulip Siddiq voted. Jared O'Mara is disgraced and expelled and he voted. Only one Tory didn't vote so they weren't pared.
> 
> Fuck Rosie Winterton. Seriously.


Winterton is shadow speaker, speakers don't get counted either.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Winterton is shadow speaker, speakers don't get counted either.



Oh, fair play, so she is. GAH.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> C'mon, it didn't really even then.


Yeah, I was speaking for them...not with them


----------



## mauvais (Jan 16, 2019)

Sorry, deputy speaker, not shadow. There's three of em. Hoyle, Lang, Winterton.


----------



## eoin_k (Jan 16, 2019)

As far as I can see, there were only four more votes up for grabs. Three ex-Labour MPs who've lost the whip and an ill Labour MP:

Ind
John Woodcock
Barrow and Furness
--
––


Ind
Fiona Onasanya
Peterborough
--
––

Ind
Mr Ivan Lewis
Bury South
--
––

Lab
Paul Flynn
Newport West
--
––


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Jan 16, 2019)

Well fuck me


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Hard Brexit. ....not hard border.
> Article was edited.


All articles are edited.


----------



## xenon (Jan 16, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Remind me, what was the point of the vonc?


Mischief. Showboating?

Don't know what another election would solve either re this farse.

Are we having fun yet.


----------



## eoin_k (Jan 16, 2019)

All the Tories and DUP made it in, apart from deputy speaker. The big shock of the night was that the wife of the former head of the RUC.... wait for it... voted with the government. Who'd have seen that coming.


----------



## planetgeli (Jan 16, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> As far as I can see, there were only four more votes up for grabs. Three ex-Labour MPs who've lost the whip and an ill Labour MP.
> Lab
> Paul Flynn
> Newport West
> ...



Sad to find out about Paul Flynn’s ill health. A decent man. I hope he has better days ahead.

The rest can go fuck themselves


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 16, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> As far as I can see, there were only four more votes up for grabs. Three ex-Labour MPs who've lost the whip and an ill Labour MP:
> 
> Ind
> John Woodcock
> ...



Yesterday all eligible MPs (save the very ill Flynn) voted. That can't have happened very often.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 19 majority


10 DUP and the 9 seats in Scotland where labour voters turned to tory to keep out the snp.

Fact.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

teqniq said:


>




Why the fuck hearing impaired people have to put up with a second-rate subtitling service I'll never know, it makes me mad! And in some instances I think it could be said to contravene their human right to access democracy, like when it's bloody Parliament!?


----------



## teqniq (Jan 16, 2019)

So, your sense of humour has left the building then?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

teqniq said:


> So, your sense of humour has left the building then?



Well, I found it slightly funny for half a second before I reminded myself who those subtitles are for and why they need them? That instance is unintentionally amusing, but many of the errors made regularly in subtitles just make gobbledegook of the content, and it's not good enough. It's like giggling at fucked up Braile...I mean, ha de ha.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 16, 2019)

Like any deaf person is actually going to think that it meant Batman? _Really?_


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> All the Tories and DUP made it in, apart from deputy speaker. The big shock of the night was that the wife of the former head of the RUC.... wait for it... voted with the government. Who'd have seen that coming.


Yep.
Maj of 19; a perfect (maximum leverage) outcome for the 10 DUP...Arlene will have made sure that May knows her office is dependent on ditching the backstop.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 16, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Why the fuck hearing impaired people have to put up with a second-rate subtitling service I'll never know, it makes me mad! And in some instances I think it could be said to contravene their human right to access democracy, like when it's bloody Parliament!?


To be honest mate there was a part when Gove was talking that my ears stopped working anyway. I think I'd of preferred the Batman option at that point.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jan 16, 2019)

Podium job outside No. 10 at 22:03, presumably so we can hear the news headline that she's won something beforehand


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jan 16, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Why the fuck hearing impaired people have to put up with a second-rate subtitling service I'll never know, it makes me mad! And in some instances I think it could be said to contravene their human right to access democracy, like when it's bloody Parliament!?



I'm suddenly reminded of ten (?) years ago when we were all ordering free copies of the UKIP manifesto in braille


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Like any deaf person is actually going to think that it meant Batman? _Really?_



No, they probably just laughed their tits off at under-funded services for the hearing impaired! 

The BBC has a legal duty to broadcast to disabled communities as well as they broadcast to able bodied ones. It's OK to find it funny, haha Batman!! I mean Batman!! It is a funny error, I'm not disputing that humour, that's why you posted it.

But wait a second and wonder it would feel like for you as a presumably hearing person, if the newsreader who reads the news at 6 o Clock got every tenth word wrong, you'd soon get pissed off wouldn't you??


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> I'm suddenly reminded of ten (?) years ago when we were all ordering free copies of the UKIP manifesto in braille



Braille costs a fucking fortune to print, and you must print it to be DDA compliant - that is GENIUS abuse of disability law!!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Why the fuck hearing impaired people have to put up with a second-rate subtitling service I'll never know, it makes me mad! And in some instances I think it could be said to contravene their human right to access democracy, like when it's bloody Parliament!?


Absolutely.  Deaf people should have to suffer as much as the rest of us.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Podium job outside No. 10 at 22:03, presumably so we can hear the news headline that she's won something beforehand


There's a fatsploitation programme on C4 at 10pm; might be slightly less predictable?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 16, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Podium job outside No. 10 at 22:03, presumably so we can hear the news headline that she's won something beforehand



oh joy, the lectern again. Bit late on a schoolnight to be wheeling that out


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> oh joy, the lectern again. Bit late on a schoolnight to be wheeling that out


She's not bothered; them pesky kidz are all remainiacs anyway


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Confirmation, as if it were needed, that the lectern is badged.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Absolutely.  Deaf people should have to suffer as much as the rest of us.



Why should they be spared the panic??!


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Why should they be spared the panic??!


Eh?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Eh?



Do you need me to sign that joke?


----------



## Spymaster (Jan 16, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Podium job outside No. 10 at 22:03, presumably so we can hear the news headline that she's won something beforehand


a) Going back to Brussels to fight
b) 2nd referendum
c) "Fuck this. I'm off"


----------



## Wookey (Jan 16, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> a) Going back to Brussels to fight
> b) 2nd referendum
> c) "I'm off"



I fantasise about C.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Holographic projection of any of her speeches from last 2 years?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Er...BBC1 SotonVDer has just gone to extra time...that won't be over by 10.03pm

That Derby equaliser has saved us!


----------



## planetgeli (Jan 16, 2019)

Another spectacular announcement of fuck all coming up...right after these penalties.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Er...BBC1 SotonVDer has just gone to extra time...that won't be over by 10.03pm
> 
> That Derby equaliser has saved us!



hahahahaha oh man, she's cursed.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 16, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Do you need me to sign that joke?


um...old ones are the best?

it's basically just a reflex with me, I can't lie


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

Missed this shit from the pig fucker earlier 
Cameron: I don't regret calling referendum


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Jan 16, 2019)

I'm glad the Beeb felt entitled to cut their main news programme by 15m on such a day to accomodate the football


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Missed this shit from the pig fucker earlier
> Cameron: I don't regret calling referendum


piano wire


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Missed this shit from the pig fucker earlier
> Cameron: I don't regret calling referendum



I bet he doesn't regret quitting the day after the result.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Er...BBC1 SotonVDer has just gone to extra time...that won't be over by 10.03pm
> 
> That Derby equaliser has saved us!



they have just said that the PM will be on BBC 2 at 10 pm


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> they have just said that the PM will be on BBC 2 at 10 pm


I know...but it was fun for a while


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Er...BBC1 SotonVDer has just gone to extra time...that won't be over by 10.03pm
> 
> That Derby equaliser has saved us!



They've just announced it's gonna be on BBC 2 instead 

Decent game by the way if anyone's interested.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They've just announced it's gonna be on BBC 2 instead
> 
> Decent game by the way if anyone's interested.


I'm sticking with it


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They've just announced it's gonna be on BBC 2 instead
> 
> Decent game by the way if anyone's interested.


Enjoying the game but have switched over for a few minutes. The game is more entertaining by far


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

Was that it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> I'm glad the Beeb felt entitled to cut their main news programme by 15m on such a day to accomodate the football



So am I. It'd be really shit if they just cut the football wouldn't it?


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 16, 2019)

Back to the match!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Was that it?


Like the famous river of fire in 2000


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 16, 2019)

May must be a Southampton fan. Missed an open goal.

Or rather, completely fucked up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> May must be a Southampton fan. Missed an open goal.


Southampton refused her a season ticket


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Mrs B tells me she just used that prime time news speech to trash Corbyn...jesus.


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Southampton refused her a season ticket



She couldn't find the exit last time she was at St Mary's.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Mrs B tells me she just used that prime time news speech to trash Corbyn...jesus.


She has the thinkers of the DUP at her side


----------



## brogdale (Jan 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> She has the thinkers of the DUP at her side


A few opportunities for " "s in that


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Rosemary Jest said:


> She couldn't find the exit last time she was at St Mary's.


What irked Southampton was that she managed to find the way in


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Southampton refused her a season ticket


She will just give them a few million quid and buy her seat


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 16, 2019)

Is it me, or is she utterly and oddly obsessed with the word 'delivering'?


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Is it me, or is she utterly and oddly obsessed with the word 'delivering'?


Probably borrowed it from a pizza shop terms and conditions.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 16, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Is it me, or is she utterly and oddly obsessed with the word 'delivering'?


She found out what it means last week


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Jan 16, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Is it me, or is she utterly and oddly obsessed with the word 'delivering'?



Waiting for a delivery from Yodel.

Popped out of number 10 to see if it was there.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Probably borrowed it from a pizza shop terms and conditions.



It's a term I notice a lot on LinkedIn, particularly around project management in large enterprises. I wonder if that's what she thinks this is. Not some complex negotiation that impacts real people's live, but an outcome she has to project manage to completion, regardless of its wider systemic impacts. The harder it gets to 'deliver', the more heroic she feels. I've long suspected she's not that well at the moment, and has had to divorce herself from reality just to keep going. This obsession with 'delivery' could be a symptom of it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

What did she say then? Gone to Penalties at St Mary's!

It should be stressed that nothing that happens tonight is as important as last night, when an important and decisive result was returned. 

Salop came from 2 goals down to beat Stoke 3-2  We'll go on to beat Wolves in the next round and declare ourselves Kings of the Brexit heartlands.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 16, 2019)

Redmond did a Theresa  Derby go through


----------



## Badgers (Jan 16, 2019)

So are the remain hardline Lib Dems joining with the Tories with no deal still a strong possibility?


----------



## A380 (Jan 16, 2019)




----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 17, 2019)

I'm not sure that what I want to tell TM would be considered acceptable parliamentary language...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I'm not sure that what I want to tell TM would be considered acceptable parliamentary language...



One word: Resign.


----------



## ManchesterBeth (Jan 17, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I'm not sure that what I want to tell TM would be considered acceptable parliamentary language...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 17, 2019)

We the people say no to a lucasade duma


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 17, 2019)

It would appear that, having told Jeremy Corbyn to sod off for asking for 'no deal' to be ruled out, Phillip Hammond has told business leaders that 'no deal' is about to be ruled out.

 

Telegraph article here.  (being reported elsewhere)


----------



## teuchter (Jan 17, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> It would appear that, having told Jeremy Corbyn to sod off for asking for 'no deal' to be ruled out, Phillip Hammond has told business leaders that 'no deal' is about to be ruled out.
> 
> View attachment 158938
> 
> Telegraph article here.  (being reported elsewhere)


Headline says 'will', article says 'could'.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> One word: Resign.



I was thinking more of something in two words...


----------



## Raheem (Jan 17, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I was thinking more of something in two words...


I don't know why you would want to add 'please'.


----------



## OzT (Jan 17, 2019)

^^^^^^^^


----------



## andysays (Jan 17, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Well, I found it slightly funny for half a second before I reminded myself who those subtitles are for and why they need them? That instance is unintentionally amusing, but many of the errors made regularly in subtitles just make gobbledegook of the content, and it's not good enough. It's like giggling at fucked up Braile...I mean, ha de ha.


Surely the real scandal here is that the leader of her majesty's opposition appeared in the house wearing a *blue* suit and a *red* tie.

After such a blatant insult to the colour coordination community it was no surprise he lost the VoNC. The sooner Labour ditch him and select a leader with a correct position on aesthetics the better...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Today =* 37 **‘*working’/sitting days left in Parliament until March 29th.
Just saying.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Today =* 37 **‘*working’/sitting days left in Parliament until March 29th.
> Just saying.


You can tell how seriously they take their work in parliament when they describe it as sitting. If you tell your boss you've been sitting around all day they tend not to be as understanding of your laziness as party leaders are


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You can tell how seriously they take their work in parliament when they describe it as sitting. If you tell your boss you've been sitting around all day they tend not to be as understanding of your laziness as party leaders are



I think that's a little harsh on baby sitters.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Perhaps most concerning since their colossal defeat is the (magical) belief coming from Tories in the media that they can, somehow, strike a deal with a) their own rebels b) rebels in other parties c) other party leaders d) 'senior Parliamentarians' etc. when any deal has to be between state & supra-state.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Perhaps most concerning since their colossal defeat is the (magical) belief coming from Tories in the media that they can, somehow, strike a deal with a) their own rebels b) rebels in other parties c) other party leaders d) 'senior Parliamentarians' etc. when any deal has to be between state & supra-state.



Yep. ‘No deal’ has little to do with the EU. It’s leverage on all those others.


----------



## Poot (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> I think that's a little harsh on baby sitters.


Babysitters are usually people that you don't mind leaving your kids with, too.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Mrs B tells me she just used that prime time news speech to trash Corbyn...jesus.


 
I don’t care for corbyn but this is a petty vindictive ploy . Urgh


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I don’t care for corbyn but this is a petty vindictive ploy . Urgh


Default when their absolute ineptitude is exposed; it's literally all they've got.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You can tell how seriously they take their work in parliament when they describe it as sitting. If you tell your boss you've been sitting around all day they tend not to be as understanding of your laziness as party leaders are



They only stand when they want to be elected. The yanks run.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Default when their absolute ineptitude is exposed; it's literally all they've got.


 
I hate them all tbh but this careerist middle management mediocrity mindset is appalling.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> I think that's a little harsh on baby sitters.


very few baby sitters sit around all day, it being more of an evening occupation. and it is the 'baby' who is expected to sit, rather than the baby sitter who is after all someone who gets the child to sit.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

The _preconditions for 'talks' _matrix is becoming ever more Byzantine...May has her 'redlines', Corbyn has his no to 'NoDeal', SNP also have no to 'NoDeal' but with specific rider of A5o extension and the SNP,LDs & the rest have all laid the "People's Vote" pre-condition on joining Lab any further VoNC.

Pick the bones out of that Juncker.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The _preconditions for 'talks' _matrix is becoming ever more Byzantine...May has her 'redlines', Corbyn has his no to 'NoDeal', SNP also have no to 'NoDeal' but with specific rider of A5o extension and the SNP,LDs & the rest have all laid the "People's Vote" pre-condition on joining Lab any further VoNC.
> 
> Pick the bones out of that Juncker.


so talks about talks about talks


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so talks about talks about talks


or not.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 17, 2019)

ABI warning that a no deal may require the implementation of green cards as proof of insurance for U.K. cross border traffic and international drivers permits.  This is proper retro. Hipster brexit.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 17, 2019)

Brexstalgia


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 17, 2019)

Steamer trunk , revolver and letters of introduction brexit


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2019)

Don't get all this no to no deal shit.

UK: "We want a deal, it must be a good deal, but we won't accept no deal."
EU: "Ok, the deal is, everything stays as it was. or no deal."


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Steamer trunk , revolver and letters of introduction brexit


they can use the letters of introduction as kindling on the slopes of the thatcher peninsula


----------



## killer b (Jan 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Don't get all this no to no deal shit.
> 
> UK: "We want a deal, it must be a good deal, but we won't accept no deal."
> EU: "Ok, the deal is, everything stays as it was. or no deal."


he isn't talking to you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I hate them all tbh but this careerist middle management mediocrity mindset is appalling.



Apalling is right. That's way too many M words in a row.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Apalling is right. That's way too many M words in a row.


It’s one too many. Or one too few. Never rhetoric an even number (unless doing a list of pairs).


----------



## Voley (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The _preconditions for 'talks' _matrix is becoming ever more Byzantine...May has her 'redlines', Corbyn has his no to 'NoDeal', SNP also have no to 'NoDeal' but with specific rider of A5o extension and the SNP,LDs & the rest have all laid the "People's Vote" pre-condition on joining Lab any further VoNC.
> 
> Pick the bones out of that Juncker.


Caroline Lucas came out of her meeting saying May isn't budging on anything even if you do sit down with her.

The whole thing just gets more bonkers by the day.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

Le pen calling for the convocation of the estates general to deal with the Eu question in france is rancid populism. Calling for a citizens assembly in the UK on the same issue is the height of democratic responsibility. After arguing for two years straight that parliament is sovereign of course. Another little oddity i've noticed this week.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 17, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Don't get all this no to no deal shit.
> 
> UK: "We want a deal, it must be a good deal, but we won't accept no deal."
> EU: "Ok, the deal is, everything stays as it was. or no deal."



I'd have a lot more respect for Corbyn at this point if he said as much instead of pretending he could somehow conjure up a better deal between now and March. Bearing in mind even if May called a general elction tomorrow it wouldn't actually happen for another six weeks, after which Prime Minister Corbyn would have all of ten working days to get a deal together and get it agreed by the EU and parliament.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'd have a lot more respect for Corbyn at this point if he said as much instead of pretending he could somehow conjure up a better deal between now and March. Bearing in mind even if May called a general elction tomorrow it wouldn't actually happen for another six weeks, after which Prime Minister Corbyn would have all of ten working days to get a deal together and get it agreed by the EU and parliament.


auld corbo likes a challenge


----------



## killer b (Jan 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'd have a lot more respect for Corbyn at this point if he said as much instead of pretending he could somehow conjure up a better deal between now and March. Bearing in mind even if May called a general elction tomorrow it wouldn't actually happen for another six weeks, after which Prime Minister Corbyn would have all of ten working days to get a deal together and get it agreed by the EU and parliament.


didn't he say an extension would be necessary now the other day?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> didn't he say an extension would be necessary now the other day?



Even so, that buys him less than two months.


----------



## Winot (Jan 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> didn't he say an extension would be necessary now the other day?



Did he? Interesting if so, because up to now Labour seem to be sticking to the formulation 'we are not calling for an extension but if one becomes necessary it will be May's fault'. They are terrified of being painted as 'delaying Brexit'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Even so, that buys him less than two months.


I've pretty much given up pretending to understand what's going on here now, but surely the point Corbyn should be driving, and is driving, is that May's 'red lines' have failed. May appears to be in a state of deep denial about this. It's a strong position, potentially - lay out how your negotiating position would be different (and Labour's under Corbyn would be significantly different) and what you would expect to come from it. Just removing one of May's red lines - ending free movement - would massively change things. Add in remaining in the customs union and you have a totally different position really. May's deal represents an attempt to be both hard and soft at the same time. It can't be done, so a choice between the two needs to be made, and the case needs to be made that there is no mandate for a hard brexit when nearly half of people who voted don't want any brexit at all.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 17, 2019)

A, or the, customs union preserves the common travel area in Ireland.
Shouldn't that be the aspiration of all parties in this mess?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The _preconditions for 'talks' _matrix is becoming ever more Byzantine...May has her 'redlines', Corbyn has his no to 'NoDeal', SNP also have no to 'NoDeal' but with specific rider of A5o extension and the SNP,LDs & the rest have all laid the "People's Vote" pre-condition on joining Lab any further VoNC.
> 
> Pick the bones out of that Juncker.


At least it's giving these right wing parties a sense of what it's been like on the left for decades.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Jan 17, 2019)

Isn't labour's insistence on taking no deal off the table their way of saying that they don't want anything to do with helping the tories out of their bexit mess. They'd rather just let the tories continue to fail to come up with a solution the commons can agree to rather than get involved in coming up with a viable cross party solution. 

Sit back on the opposition benches and discuss when is the best time for the next no confidence vote. It's arguably playing party politics above the national interest.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 17, 2019)

Kilgore Trout said:


> Isn't labour's insistence on taking no deal off the table their way of saying that they don't want anything to do with helping the tories out of their bexit mess. They'd rather just let the tories continue to fail to come up with a solution the commons can agree to rather than get involved in coming up with a viable cross party solution.
> 
> Sit back on the opposition benches and discuss when is the best time for the next no confidence vote. It's arguably playing party politics above the national interest.



There is simply nothing to suggest that May’s offer to listen is genuine. Corbyn found her out in one request. 

The other parties will leave the ‘talks’ enraged soon enough.


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

What the fuck is this "national interest" that people keeping deploying as some sorta trump card?

I bet you the national interest and my best interests differ somewhat....


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> What the fuck is this "national interest" that people keeping deploying as some sorta trump card?
> 
> I bet you the national interest and my best interests differ somewhat....


Precisely.  That chimes very closely with what I've just said here.  (Should there be a second referendum? New question.).

Wish I'd seen your post first, chilango, I'd have incorporated that point.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

I suppose it flows naturally when you imagine that your role is _in loco parentis _to society as a whole. The greater good must come from the parent.


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Precisely.  That chimes very closely with what I've just said here.  (Should there be a second referendum? New question.).
> 
> Wish I'd seen your post first, chilango, I'd have incorporated that point.



...or to put it more succinctly.

Fuck the national interest. It's not mine.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2019)

The National Interest is also an American neoconservative magazine.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 17, 2019)

ideological cover for bellends basically


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> ideological cover for bellends basically



Usually used in service of making geopolitical aims look like a moral mission.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Jan 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> There is simply nothing to suggest that May’s offer to listen is genuine. Corbyn found her out in one request.
> 
> The other parties will leave the ‘talks’ enraged soon enough.



In one impossible request. How is it possible to absolutely rule out no deal? Its an impossible negotiating position to say you can't walk away from the table. 

I see that Vince Cable has said he won't vote with Labour on any future no confidence votes now. So the lib dems at least seem more enraged with labour.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 17, 2019)

Kilgore Trout said:


> I see that Vince Cable has said he won't vote with Labour on any future no confidence votes now. So the lib dems at least seem more enraged with labour.



Oh yeah, those guys.  Great bunch of lads.

*sarcasm*


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 17, 2019)

its not like the lib dems to affect moral outrage at labour that forces them to reluctantly stand by and help tories


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 17, 2019)

Kilgore Trout said:


> In one impossible request. How is it possible to absolutely rule out no deal? Its an impossible negotiating position to say you can't walk away from the table.
> 
> I see that Vince Cable has said he won't vote with Labour on any future no confidence votes now. So the lib dems at least seem more enraged with labour.



Maybe Vince fancies a bit more austerity enabling.

One more time, ‘no deal’ is not on the table to leverage the EU. They don’t especially care what form of self harm our Govt wishes to choose. They can simply mop up the opportunities we leave behind.

No deal is about leveraging the scared public to demand their MPs vote for May’s deal. It needs euthanasing so people, like EU citizens here, can get on with their lives.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 17, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its not like the lib dems to affect moral outrage at labour that forces them to reluctantly stand by and help tories



Why wouldn't they do that seeing as it always works out so well for them?


----------



## Santino (Jan 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Maybe Vince fancies a bit more austerity enabling.
> 
> One more time, ‘no deal’ is not on the table to leverage the EU. They don’t especially care what form of self harm our Govt wishes to choose. They can simply mop up the opportunities we leave behind.
> 
> No deal is about leveraging the scared public to demand their MPs vote for May’s deal. It needs euthanasing so people, like EU citizens here, can get on with their lives.


No Deal would cause immense problems in EU countries other than the UK. The EU really doesn't want it to happen either, and will do a lot to stop it (but not something that threatens the longer-term aim of the European project). The EU _doesn't want the UK to leave_.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

I see Yvette Cooper and Hillary Benn have met with May. They're not bothered about No Deal being off the table then?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> No deal is about leveraging the scared public to demand their MPs vote for May’s deal.


If you’ve got the time and inclination, you should study what your MP wants on Brexit, then write to them demanding they do one of the things they don’t want. Or write something confusing about why what they want is against some other principles that they hold. Or tell them that everyone you know is split evenly into thirds on what you think the three options are.

My MP signed the “hard Brexit” “ransom note” letter a year ago, then voted for May’s deal this week. I’m going to write and tell him that as a Remain voter, I think this was exactly the right thing for him to do.


----------



## Supine (Jan 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I see Yvette Cooper and Hillary Benn have met with May. They're not bothered about No Deal being off the table then?



May as well find out what the next labour leader is thinking


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

Supine said:


> May as well find out what the next labour leader is thinking


You really are clueless.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 17, 2019)

Kilgore Trout said:


> So the lib dems at least seem more enraged with labour.


Liberal Enragés, militant wing of the Remainiac Faction.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

Supine said:


> May as well find out what the next labour leader is thinking



They're not gonna tell the likes of you.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its not like the lib dems to affect moral outrage at labour that forces them to reluctantly stand by and help tories


So, in effect the lib-dems have decided that there is not to be a general election and that may is to be propped up. Here we go again, this time they just don't get the deputy PM limo.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Liberal Enragés, militant wing of the Remainiac Faction.


Jonny bercow's red and ? army.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They're not gonna tell the likes of you.


not least because they don't know themselves


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Jonny bercow's red and ? army.


multicoloured, if his choice in tie is anything to go by


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

Let's just call it an erasmus army instead.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> *What the fuck is this "national interest"*



Thank you chilango! This appeal to an obviously non-existent universal/unifying 'national interest' has been doing my head in; and I say that as someone who feels a strong attachment to a certain sort of Britishness.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Thank you chilango! This appeal to an obviously non-existent universal/unifying 'national interest' has been doing my head in; and I say that as someone who feels a strong attachment to a certain sort of Britishness.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


good to see you posting again


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'd have a lot more respect for Corbyn at this point if he said as much instead of pretending he could somehow conjure up a better deal between now and March. Bearing in mind even if May called a general elction tomorrow it wouldn't actually happen for another six weeks, after which Prime Minister Corbyn would have all of ten working days to get a deal together and get it agreed by the EU and parliament.



Surely the no deal demand is aimed squarely at the DUP and ERG? I think the aim is quite accurate since the HoC is going to go all out to stop a no deal, thus the  split of the DUP and ERG from May seems pretty nailed on.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 17, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Thank you chilango! This appeal to an obviously non-existent universal/unifying 'national interest' has been doing my head in; and I say that as someone who feels a strong attachment to a certain sort of Britishness.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


 welcome back!


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> If you’ve got the time and inclination, you should study what your MP wants on Brexit, then write to them demanding they do one of the things they don’t want. Or write something confusing about why what they want is against some other principles that they hold. Or tell them that everyone you know is split evenly into thirds on what you think the three options are.
> 
> My MP signed the “hard Brexit” “ransom note” letter a year ago, then voted for May’s deal this week. I’m going to write and tell him that as a Remain voter, I think this was exactly the right thing for him to do.


Lol, in what I think was an inspired move (if I say so myself), I praised him for supporting the Northern Ireland backstop, allowing a "separate regulatory regime for Northern Ireland", which I know he was uncomfortable about, as a Unionist worried about the precedent it sets for Scotland.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 17, 2019)

Supine said:


> May as well find out what the next labour leader is thinking



They've gone to see her, not the other way around. And in doing so they've shown themselves to be cut from a different cloth to the unreasonable wrecker Corbyn. Neither side is actually interested in what the other thinks about Brexit...it's a side show to 'bigger' party political concerns.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> What the fuck is this "national interest" that people keeping deploying as some sorta trump card?
> 
> I bet you the national interest and my best interests differ somewhat....


The National Interest is the preserve of those good Christian hard working families.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Could have gone in Tory Death spiral/civil war thread, but might as well go here...even by recent standards, the language is pretty direct. I know it's the Telegraph but, even so....sounds a bit schismy.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 17, 2019)

A tory schism is obviously a dream Brexit.  There is a route to it but it looks rather arduous and unlikely but, we're allowed to dream.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Could have gone in Tory Death spiral/civil war thread, but might as well go here...even by recent standards, the language is pretty direct. I know it's the Telegraph but, even so....sounds a bit schismy.
> 
> View attachment 159004


He'll be tied to a radiator and interrogated in the lubyanka tory hq


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

There won't be s Tory split.

Maybe, just maybe, a handful might chuck their toys out the pram. But the internal bickering of the last half a century or so over Europe will just rumble on


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> There won't be s Tory split.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, a handful might chuck their toys out the pram. But the internal bickering of the last half a century or so over Europe will just rumble on


They'd hate it more than anything if the feud ended


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They'd hate it more than anything if the feud ended



They'd have to find something else to cover their egoism and careerism with


----------



## Wilf (Jan 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Could have gone in Tory Death spiral/civil war thread, but might as well go here...even by recent standards, the language is pretty direct. I know it's the Telegraph but, even so....sounds a bit schismy.
> 
> View attachment 159004


The tory party is behaving like the participants in the trans v terf war at the Bookfair, expressed in the language of 1930s Stalinism, with a light dusting of Anabaptists persecution.


----------



## agricola (Jan 17, 2019)

chilango said:


> They'd have to find something else to cover their egoism and careerism with



Whether nanny went to a state school or an academy, probably.


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> Whether nanny went to a state school or an academy, probably.



John Major already tried that one with Cameron and school mates  cabinet.

Pigfucker didn't take the bait and tutted along helpfully.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The tory party is behaving like the participants in the trans v terf war at the Bookfair, expressed in the language of 1930s Stalinism, with a light dusting of Anabaptists persecution.


Not quite Münster 1534 yet, though!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I see Yvette Cooper and Hillary Benn have met with May. They're not bothered about No Deal being off the table then?



They are both chairs of cross-party select committees overseeing Brexit, so it would be amiss not to talk with May, despite Corbyn's stand.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 17, 2019)

Both Plaid Cymru and SNP have been to be to see Mayhem and told her that No-Deal has got to be off the table, Corbyn should do the same. Refusing to even meet her without her agreeing this first just makes him look petty.
It gives ammuniton to those who are determined to pin as much of this clusterfuck as possible on him and possibly even risks restarting internal squabbles in the Labour Party.
That said this whole "Reach Out" shit strikes me as pointless,  Taking No-Deal off the table reduces the choice to a (slightly) tweaked version of her Deal or rescinding A50, neither of those will fly with her own MP's 
I think we will probably crash out with No Deal since they all seem more interested in a pissing contest than anything else.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Both Plaid Cymru and SNP have been to be to see Mayhem and told her that No-Deal has got to be off the table, Corbyn should do the same. Refusing to even meet her without her agreeing this first just makes him look petty.
> It gives ammuniton to those who are determined to pin as much of this clusterfuck as possible on him and possibly even risks restarting internal squabbles in the Labour Party.
> That said this whole "Reach Out" shit strikes me as pointless,  Taking No-Deal off the table reduces the choice to a (slightly) tweaked version of her Deal or rescinding A50, neither of those will fly with her own MP's
> I think we will probably crash out with No Deal since they all seem more interested in a pissing contest than anything else.


It's already provoked a lie from May, namely that it is not within the power of the govt to rule out no deal. That's simply not true.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 17, 2019)

Corbyn orders Labour MPs to boycott Brexit talks with government until Theresa May drops no-deal threats


> When asked whether Mr Corbyn should be there, Mr Benn said: “That is a decision for Jeremy to take. He's demonstrating that it's not just the prime minister who can be stubborn.”



Ouch.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Both Plaid Cymru and SNP have been to be to see Mayhem and told her that No-Deal has got to be off the table, Corbyn should do the same. Refusing to even meet her without her agreeing this first just makes him look petty.
> It gives ammuniton to those who are determined to pin as much of this clusterfuck as possible on him and possibly even risks restarting internal squabbles in the Labour Party.
> That said this whole "Reach Out" shit strikes me as pointless,  Taking No-Deal off the table reduces the choice to a (slightly) tweaked version of her Deal or rescinding A50, neither of those will fly with her own MP's
> I think we will probably crash out with No Deal since they all seem more interested in a pissing contest than anything else.


May is trying to rub the blood over everyone with this move. Corbyn is entirely right to refuse to stick his hands in the wound. It's not his gang.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn orders Labour MPs to boycott Brexit talks with government until Theresa May drops no-deal threats
> 
> 
> Ouch.


Orders/request.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn orders Labour MPs to boycott Brexit talks with government until Theresa May drops no-deal threats
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We could solve the energy crisis by using his dad's spinning corpse as the centre-piece of a massive power station.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> When asked whether Mr Corbyn should be there, Mr Benn said: "That is a decision for Jeremy to take. He's demonstrating that it's not just the prime minister who can be stubborn."



_As if by magic, the shitstirrer appeared..._


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's already provoked a lie from May, namely that it is not within the power of the govt to rule out no deal. That's simply not true.


Where's the lie? She can't. She can say she won't support it, that her party will do all they can to stop it happening but her govt cannot rule it out anymore than bielsa is able to rule out a draw against stoke this weekend.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit and there is a majority in the HoC for it but Corbyn's current tack seems to prioritise splitting the Tories over actually ruling it a No Deal Brexit. Perhaps that will change.  He is still smarting a bit from the failure of his slightly premature VONC which might have been better timed for early next week.

Much better to do something positive and practical to avoid and rule out a No Deal Brexit it such as working on motions to extend or revoke Article 50.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 17, 2019)

Surely he knew it would fail? That wasn’t the point of calling it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit and there is a majority in the HoC for it but Corbyn's current tack seems to prioritise splitting the Tories over actually ruling it a No Deal Brexit. Perhaps that will change.  He is still smarting a bit from the failure of his slightly premature VONC which might have been better timed for early next week.


Why? Are we expecting a sudden diminution in the number of tory mps over the weekend?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit and there is a majority in the HoC for it but Corbyn's current tack seems to prioritise splitting the Tories over actually ruling it a No Deal Brexit. Perhaps that will change.  He is still smarting a bit from the failure of his slightly premature VONC which might have been better timed for early next week.


You can't rule out the future ffs. We really are in fantasy land here.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why? Are we expecting a sudden diminution in the number of tory mps over the weekend?


That could be arranged *gets gun*


----------



## andysays (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why? Are we expecting a sudden diminution in the number of tory mps over the weekend?


I think it's a reference to May having to present her Plan B to the Commons on Monday, but who knows what might happen in the meantime...


----------



## chilango (Jan 17, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That could be arranged *gets gun orange and bin bag*


 Cfy.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 17, 2019)

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-poll-remain-majortity-yougov-theresa-may-deal/

The will of the people


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

Dear Theresa,

If you don’t want to get an extension on Article 50 because it looks bad.


“If Prince Philip dies before the Queen, she is expected to enter a period of mourning which will last for eight days.

During this time, laws will not be given the Royal Assent and affairs of state will be put on pause in a sign of respect”.

Just saying.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Dear Theresa,
> 
> If you don’t want to get an extension on Article 50 because it looks bad.
> 
> ...



Are you suggesting the breaking news was an attempt at this? 

Prince Philip unhurt in crash while driving


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you suggesting the breaking news was an attempt at this?
> 
> Prince Philip unhurt in crash while driving


No, the timing is all wrong. It only buys you 8 days.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You can't rule out the future ffs. We really are in fantasy land here.



So you believe that No Deal is the future?	Why so defeatist, surely we have to have some hope.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/brexit-poll-remain-majortity-yougov-theresa-may-deal/
> 
> The will of the people



Presumably the poll that was paid for the 'Peoples Vote' campaign?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> So you believe that No Deal is the future?	Why so defeatist, surely we have to have some hope.


No canute, i believe that you can't say such a stupid thing as _i rule out no-deal. _


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No canute, i believe that you can't say such a stupid thing as _i rule out no-deal. _



I agree. Much better to do something positive to avoid it such as working on motions to extending or revoke Article 50.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> I agree. Much better to do something positive to avoid it such as working on motions to extending or revoke Article 50.


So 




			
				you said:
			
		

> We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit



but you agree that it's impossible rule out a no deal brexit.

Gotcha now. _Clarte_.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> I agree. Much better to do something positive to avoid it such as working on motions to extending or revoke Article 50.


Feel free to draft one and send it in.

WriteToThem


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why? Are we expecting a sudden diminution in the number of tory mps over the weekend?



Not all Tory MPs support a No Deal Brexit.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You can try and rule out a No Deal Brexit by declaring that you will not aim for it. But you will still need to take some actions to make it less likely. Revoking A50 would be one of them. So better to skip to the action rather than get hung up on a declaration.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> So you believe that No Deal is the future?	Why so defeatist, surely we have to have some hope.



Surely you have grasp of power dynamics?

If the UK passes a law that states that it cannot leave the EU without a deal of some kind that parliament agrees to, then the EU could, for example, withdraw the current deal and not offer another one - thus meaning that the UK could not leave the EU, or it could amend the current offered deal to make it more advantageous to them: so it could demand an annual UK financial contribution to the EU budget - of say, £10bn a year - and it could decide to say that for each week the UK doesn't agree to it, the sum would rise by 10%...

That's what happens when you say that you won't accept a no deal exit  - you are saying that you will accept anything the other side puts in front of you.

How do you cope with shoelaces?


----------



## Badgers (Jan 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Presumably the poll that was paid for the 'Peoples Vote' campaign?


Why do you presume that?

YouGov was the source


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> You can try and rule out a No Deal Brexit by declaring that you will not aim for it. But you will still need to take some actions to make it less likely. Revoking A50 would be one of them. So better to skip to the action rather than get hung up on a declaration.


She's done that - the first bit. Now what?

I agree that stopping brexit would make a no-deal brexit less likely. Top quality analysis here, thanks.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Why do you presume that?



Actually, good point.  I conflated two different things I read today.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Surely you have grasp of power dynamics?
> 
> If the UK passes a law that states that it cannot leave the EU without a deal of some kind that parliament agrees to, then the EU could, for example, withdraw the current deal and not offer another one - thus meaning that the UK could not leave the EU, or it could amend the current offered deal to make it more advantageous to them: so it could demand an annual UK financial contribution to the EU budget - of say, £10bn a year - and it could decide to say that for each week the UK doesn't agree to it, the sum would rise by 10%...
> 
> ...



My earlier post was about Corbyn and criticising his demand that TM rules out a No Deal Brexit and supporting instead positive moves to mobilise the probable majority in the HoC to make positive moves to make it less likely. You are attempting to turn what I said into its opposite. You should be addressing your comments about power dynamics to Jeremy Corbyn not me.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> My earlier post about Corbyn and criticising his demand that TM rules out a No Deal Brexit and supporting instead positive moves to mobilise the probable majority in the HoC to make positive moves to make it less likely.



Clarte, pure clarte.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

My earlier post was about Corbyn and criticising his demand that TM rules out a No Deal Brexit and supporting instead positive moves to mobilise the probable majority in the HoC to make positive moves to make it less likely. You are attempting to turn what I said into its opposite. You should be addressing your comments about power dynamics to Jeremy Corbyn not me.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 17, 2019)

kebabking said:


> How do you cope with shoelaces?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Not all Tory MPs support a No Deal Brexit.


But all tories supported the government when the VoNC-er Corbyn tried to topple it


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


>



Errr   See my earlier post. your laughter should be directed at Kebabking for his stupidity or at Jeremy Corbyn for his naivety.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Errr   See my earlier post. your laughter should be directed at Kebabking for his stupidity or at Jeremy Corbyn for his naivety.


Cs laughs at everyone


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> But all tories supported the government when the VoNC-er Corbyn tried to topple it



A backbench motion is different from a VONC.  Could in theory backbench motions force the government's hand in extending/revoking A50. I'm not an expert in HoC protocol but I thought that the recent kerfuffle with the Speaker was something to do with that.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Actually, good point.  I conflated two different things I read today.


This shit is really grating on us all isn't it? I had two snappy exchanges in work today 

Person1: The problem with Corbyn is that he is really regative, just seems to oppose things the government do.
Me: That is what the opposition party generally does, especially when they oppose a self-serving shower of cunts 

Person2: I would rather vote Lib Dems than Labour, at least they are trying to help get the best Brexit.
Me: *explodes*


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Errr   See my earlier post. your laughter should be directed at Kebabking for his stupidity or at Jeremy Corbyn for his naivety.





toblerone3 said:


> We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit ....


Are you claiming by saying 'we', you wasn't including yourself?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 17, 2019)

Bit of clue when the chancellor of the right party of capital tells capital not to worry their pretty little heads about the 'No-deal' threat to their rate of accumulation.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> This shit is really grating on us all isn't it? I had two snappy exchanges in work today
> 
> Person1: The problem with Corbyn is that he is really regative, just seems to oppose things the government do.
> Me: That is what the opposition party generally does, especially when they oppose a self-serving shower of cunts
> ...


Brexit is definitely one of those setting father against son, brother against brother kind of things, some of the exchanges on this thread have got very heated at times.


----------



## agricola (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> A backbench motion is different from a VONC.  Could in theory backbench motions force the government's hand in extending/revoking A50. I'm not an expert in HoC protocol but I thought that the recent kerfuffle with the Speaker was something to do with that.



IIRC only a statute specifically revoking the previous Act (the one enshrining the leave date) would do that, and only if it ordered a specific person to do it.  They could concievably do that via a Private Members' Bill, though almost certainly not in the face of determined opposition (lack of time, being talked out etc).


----------



## Badgers (Jan 17, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Brexit is definitely one of those setting father against son, brother against brother kind of things, some of the exchanges on this thread have got very heated at times.


I don't like it at all...

Can see the flaws in the EU but compared to the flaws in our beshitted country


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> IIRC only a statute specifically revoking the previous Act (the one enshrining the leave date) would do that, and only if it ordered a specific person to do it.  They could concievably do that via a Private Members' Bill, though almost certainly not in the face of determined opposition (lack of time, being talked out etc).



Or successfully adding an amendment to one of the in-scope Bills dealing with aspects of brexit currently halted at various stages of parliamentary approval. The amendment would have to be about A50 revocation as a last resort, of course. But if the votes are there, anything is possible.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you claiming by saying 'we', you wasn't including yourself?



FFS my whole point was differentiating between different ways of ruling out a No Deal Brexit against Corbyn's approach of political grandstanding, ineffective and politically naive (as others have said) and in favour of effective practical action such as backbench motions which move the process on. Go back and read it. I've added in a bit from my next post to make it clearer.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> IIRC only a statute specifically revoking the previous Act (the one enshrining the leave date) would do that, and only if it ordered a specific person to do it.  They could concievably do that via a Private Members' Bill, though almost certainly not in the face of determined opposition (lack of time, being talked out etc).



So this whole narrative of backbenchers being able to take control of the process is not true then (?)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> So this whole narrative of backbenchers being able to take control of the process is not true then (?)


Everything you think you believe is based on a tissue of lies


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Brexit is definitely one of those setting father against son, brother against brother kind of things, some of the exchanges on this thread have got very heated at times.


I've seen worse on the jacket potatoes threads


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> IIRC only a statute specifically revoking the previous Act (the one enshrining the leave date) would do that, and only if it ordered a specific person to do it.  They could concievably do that via a Private Members' Bill, though almost certainly not in the face of determined opposition (lack of time, being talked out etc).


Private members bill? Only needs one person to shout 'object' to halt it


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 17, 2019)

judging  by the bumbling fuckwittery on display so far from both sides, i would warrant neither the PM nor the leader of the opposition have ever played a game of poker or bought a second hand car in their lives.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 17, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> So this whole narrative of backbenchers being able to take control of the process is not true then (?)



The Speaker allowed a vote on Dominic Grieve _et al_'s amendment to the business motion that's resulted in the government having to bring forward plan B on Monday instead of in a few weeks time. That surely qualifies as backbenchers taking control of (at least part of) the process.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 17, 2019)

Surely if MPs are going to have a "meaningful" vote on the Brexit deal that should not mean just a vote on Theresa May's deal and if that falls it is a No Deal Brexit.  ,'My Way or the Highway' is not a meaningful choice?  The government is not in a strong position at the moment.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Where's the lie? She can't. She can say she won't support it, that her party will do all they can to stop it happening but her govt cannot rule it out anymore than bielsa is able to rule out a draw against stoke this weekend.



Agree but there's no way Stoke are getting a point at the weekend, we can all rule that out. 

They've been broken by the Mighty Salop.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2019)

The lie is that the govt can call parliament together to vote on rescinding A50 whenever it likes right up to 11pm 29 March, and May won't admit that. It's nothing like the football analogy - it doesn't matter at all what the EU does in such a situation, it's between the government and parliament. Crashing out with on deal on 29 March is a conscious, willed decision, as conscious and willed as a decision not to save a drowning person would be for someone with lifeguard qualifications. I didn't drown them, they might say. But if they sat on the edge of the pool and did nothing when they knew full well that they could jump in and save them if they chose, then really they did.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> May is trying to rub the blood over everyone with this move. Corbyn is entirely right to refuse to stick his hands in the wound. It's not his gang.



Definitely agree on this - what would be the point of Corbyn anyway if he meets with May and tries to find compromises? His main function is as a symbol that things could be vaguely different. Clearly, the Remaniacs in all the minor parties think they're gonna get something out all this and they're happy to turn fire on Corbyn after demanding and supporting a no confidence vote. If anything comes of these cosy chats then it'll be filthy - there's definitely room for May to tack towards a softer Brexit and abandon the 100 or so Brexiteers as a nuisance. Corbyn should keep his hands clean.

It's so frustrating he tied it to no deal though - could have just said no you're a busted flush, you're totally dishonest and clinging on, you need to resign. 



chilango said:


> There won't be s Tory split.
> 
> Maybe, just maybe, a handful might chuck their toys out the pram. But the internal bickering of the last half a century or so over Europe will just rumble on



How many is a handful? There could be a split of 50, no worries. And space for them to grow in. The ERG aren't getting anything they want, full stop. Boris's career prospects in the Tory party look bleak.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The lie is that the govt can call parliament together to vote on rescinding A50 whenever it likes right up to 11pm 29 March, and May won't admit that. It's nothing like the football analogy - it doesn't matter at all what the EU does in such a situation, it's between the government and parliament. Crashing out with on deal on 29 March is a conscious, willed decision, as conscious and willed as a decision not to save a drowning person would be for someone with lifeguard qualifications. I didn't drown them, they might say. But if they sat on the edge of the pool and did nothing when they knew full well that they could jump in and save them if they chose, then really they did.



Maybe if they were drowning in a swimming pool. Open ocean or fast moving water say, no such certainty, risks involved.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Maybe if they were drowning in a swimming pool. Open ocean or fast moving water say, no such certainty, risks involved.


Which is why I chose a swimming pool for the analogy. We already know there would be a majority in the HoC for withdrawing A50 if the only alternative were crashing out.

Not talking here about consequences or repercussions, simply the mechanics of the process by which to do it. Corbyn should be pointing this out if he wants to take this line - probably has done tbh, not been following it too closely today.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Which is why I chose a swimming pool for the analogy. We already know there would be a majority in the HoC for withdrawing A50 if the only alternative were crashing out.
> 
> Not talking here about consequences or repercussions, simply the mechanics of the process by which to do it. Corbyn should be pointing this out if he wants to take this line - probably has done tbh, not been following it too closely today.



He shouldn't take this line at all, imo, but not just because May can't guarantee it - as you say a majority in the Commons would be needed to revoke A50 and she can't promise to make Parliament vote a certain. 

I completely agree by the way that MP's would find a way to take control and revoke A50 but we can't guarantee it.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 18, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Which is why I chose a swimming pool for the analogy.



Corbyn!
What's it like to wet your foot in a cold swimming pool?


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I've seen worse on the jacket potatoes threads


Yeah well let's be honest., jacket spud fillings are life and death issues


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> as you say a majority in the Commons would be needed to revoke A50 and she can't promise to make Parliament vote a certain.


Not sure about this. The legal judgement is that it would need to be done "in accordance with national constitutional requirements". Which goes without saying. But it doesn't stipulate what those are. Some commentators have said that since the mandate for it was provided by parliament, then a similar mandate is needed to revoke it. But does that necessarily follow? It's only a letter. In practical terms, it would be up to the government to decide and there would not be time for a legal challenge to stop it, even if we might eventually see the Attorney General's advice.


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

Haven't read the whole thread. But my tuppence worth.

If you accept Tories are good at what they do  and not incompetent (check the track record since 1979...successful) then a no-deal Brexit is by design surely? The EU said 2 years ago there'd be no concessions. So the Checkers thing is just panto for the masses isn't it?
A no deal Brexit will give them (and their backers and mates with lots of liquidity) a great excuse to asset strip the public sphere. It'll be like 'well you voted for it'. I think that's why JRM had a champagne celebration at his place yesterday after the vote of no confidence failed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Haven't read the whole thread. But my tuppence worth.
> 
> If you accept Tories are good at what they do  and not incompetent (check the track record since 1979...successful) then a no-deal Brexit is by design surely? The EU said 2 years ago there'd be no concessions. So the Checkers thing is just panto for the masses isn't it?
> A no deal Brexit will give them (and their backers and mates with lots of liquidity) a great excuse to asset strip the public sphere. It'll be like 'well you voted for it'. I think that's why JRM had a champagne celebration at his place yesterday after the vote of no confidence failed.



Are you saying May's incompetence is all a cunning ruse to get a no deal Brexit?


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you saying May's incompetence is all a cunning ruse to get a no deal Brexit?


Yes. The EU said 2 years ago there'd be no concessions. None. So why would May offer Checkers which is asking for 'more' when its already be plainly stated there'd be no concessions? What do the Tories hate? Taxes, the public sphere and regulation. And a no-deal would give them carte blanche to turn the UK into Singapore.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Yes. The EU said 2 years ago there'd be no concessions. None. So why would May offer Checkers which is asking for 'more' when its already be plainly stated there'd be no concessions? What do the Tories hate? Taxes, the public sphere and regulation. And a no-deal would give them carte blanche to turn the UK into Singapore.


You're thinking about them as if they were a monolithic thing. A small group of Tory MPs believe in all that (and even then, we need to use the term 'believe' with caution). The problem is that a few thousand people who are members of the Tory party possibly do believe in it. Which is why May is still unable to let go of her deal. Don't, though, make the mistake of thinking it's a clever Tory plot. They might have been capable of that 30 years ago. But what we're really living through is a stupid Tory car crash.


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> You're thinking about them as if they were a monolithic thing. A small group of Tory MPs believe in all that (and even then, we need to use the term 'believe' with caution). The problem is that a few thousand people who are members of the Tory party possibly do believe in it. Which is why May is still unable to let go of her deal. Don't, though, make the mistake of thinking it's a clever Tory plot. They might have been capable of that 30 years ago. But what we're really living through is a stupid Tory car crash.


But the EU said 'no concessions' quite clearly 2 years ago. Why Checkers?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> But the EU said 'no concessions' quite clearly 2 years ago. Why Checkers?


Cos most Tory members believed in and demanded cake and eat it. It's not a clever plot. It's an idiot trying to please a few thousand other idiots.


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Cos most Tory members believed in and demanded cake and eat it. It's not a clever plot. It's an idiot trying to please a few thousand other idiots.


Have to disagree. Previous behaviour predicts future behaviour. Look at the way they got policies through in the past. They're mostly Oxbridge graduates. Very smart.


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Cos most Tory members believed in and demanded cake and eat it. It's not a clever plot. It's an idiot trying to please a few thousand other idiots.


Also...JRM's champagne celebration after the no confidence vote failed?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 18, 2019)

Don't be silly.


----------



## grit (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> They're mostly Oxbridge graduates. Very smart.



This reads like a fucking wind up.


----------



## Supine (Jan 18, 2019)

For the first time I'm starting to think no deal is more likely than anything else


----------



## andysays (Jan 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I've seen worse on the jacket potatoes threads


People who choose cheese then beans are thick racists, and their choice should be over-ruled by parliament. 

There, I said it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> People who choose cheese then beans are thick racists, and their choice should be over-ruled by parliament.
> 
> There, I said it


The only civilized answer to this age-auld conundrum is simultaneous


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> They're mostly Oxbridge graduates. Very smart.


Yeh, stupid manipulative amoral rabid twats


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Brexit is definitely one of those setting father against son, brother against brother kind of things, some of the exchanges on this thread have got very heated at times.


Really?  That's totally hyperbolic, in my experience.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Really?  That's totally hyperbolic, in my experience.


It is hyperbollocks


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Also...JRM's champagne celebration after the no confidence vote failed?


Yeh the champagne celebration was a failure


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 18, 2019)

What are the chances of a dictatorship emerging in the UK?
In a no deal situation..


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> But the EU said 'no concessions' quite clearly 2 years ago. Why Checkers?


They can't play chess


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What are the chances of a dictatorship emerging in the UK?
> In a no deal situation..


We already have a dicktatorship


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

Much of last night’s QT audience in Derby appeared to be cheering for a ‘No Deal’ Brexit outcome. Bit like the Gordon Brown phase of British jobs for British workers but kind of in reverse.


----------



## Voley (Jan 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What are the chances of a dictatorship emerging in the UK?
> In a no deal situation..


In the absence of any functioning democracy I am considering declaring myself King.

I've no policies, I'll make it up as I go along, the whole thing will undoubtedly be a total disaster but it'll still be preferable to what we've got right now.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

Voley said:


> In the absence of any functioning democracy I am considering declaring myself King.
> 
> I've no policies, I'll make it up as I go along, the whole thing will undoubtedly be a total disaster but it'll still be preferable to what we've got right now.


Lord Protector, surely?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 18, 2019)

Voley said:


> In the absence of any functioning democracy I am considering declaring myself King.
> 
> I've no policies, I'll make it up as I go along, the whole thing will undoubtedly be a total disaster but it'll still be preferable to what we've got right now.




This is an excellent plan.


----------



## Voley (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Lord Protector, surely?


Hmm, not sure that goes far enough. 

'God' has a nice ring to it, though.


----------



## Voley (Jan 18, 2019)

I'm gonna stick this idea up on Twitter. If I get any likes at all I'm declaring it The Will Of The People.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 18, 2019)

I don't believe in gods or kings, though Emperor Voley I has a good ring to it...


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I have to say I assumed we were past the point of referendum territory, but if they do go for it then I'm a bit nervous about how ugly it could get.


Oh no - gammon/dad's army riot - scary!

Riddle me this though: what will they do when they can't find any unprotected female MPs to harass/stab? Suspect riot police may be a slightly harder target.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> They're mostly Oxbridge graduates. Very smart.




I've met Oxbridge graduates.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 18, 2019)

Has anyone suggested breaking the deadlock with a BRINO concession on the EU's part?

I give you: a rename to the European Younion.

To the tune of the Flintstones: _goodbye EU, hello Ee You, it's the European Younion. Not a re-do, this is all new, it's the European Newnioooon._


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

Voley said:


> In the absence of any functioning democracy I am considering declaring myself King.
> 
> I've no policies, I'll make it up as I go along, the whole thing will undoubtedly be a total disaster but it'll still be preferable to what we've got right now.


No gods. No masters. No Voley.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I've met Oxbridge graduates.



And I'm sure they talked the talk.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What are the chances of a dictatorship emerging in the UK?
> In a no deal situation..


How? What mechanism are you imagining? And why?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

If that sounds short or sarcastic, that’s not how I meant it. I literally mean, what’s your thinking here?


----------



## A380 (Jan 18, 2019)




----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 18, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> We do need to rule out a No Deal Brexit and there is a majority in the HoC for it but Corbyn's current tack seems to prioritise splitting the Tories over actually ruling it a No Deal Brexit. Perhaps that will change.  He is still smarting a bit from the failure of his slightly premature VONC which might have been better timed for early next week.
> 
> Much better to do something positive and practical to avoid and rule out a No Deal Brexit it such as working on motions to extend or revoke Article 50.



I’m sure the right wing press would be on the vinegar strokes if Corbyn stepped in to ‘frustrate Brexit’ by extending/revoking art.50. It’s something that is possibly going to be necessary due to May’s ineptness, but would delight certain people if it was the communist gnome taking the blame. Not going to happen, let Theresa wipe her own arse.


----------



## chilango (Jan 18, 2019)

I don't know about "dictatorship" but there's a few pretty undemocratic ideas being floated:


Appointed rather than elected MEPs for the UK should this not be resolved by the upcoming Euro election.
So-called Citizens Assemblies selected at "random" (like the QT audience?) To play a role in the decision.
Cross-bench alliances to push remain/BINO through.

Which side is this all coming from? Oh, the side that allowed an unelected government in a major member nation just a few years ago? Yep. That side. Remain ain't exactly the guardian of democracy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 18, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m sure the right wing press would be on the vinegar strokes if Corbyn stepped in to ‘frustrate Brexit’ by extending/revoking art.50. It’s something that is possibly going to be necessary due to May’s ineptness, but would delight certain people if it was the communist gnome taking the blame. Not going to happen, let Theresa wipe her own arse.



I can just imagine how shameless the press would be in pinning any delay on Corbyn despite the obvious fact it's May who has fucked this up in every possible way.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 159063


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> I don't know about "dictatorship" but there's a few pretty undemocratic ideas being floated:
> 
> 
> Appointed rather than elected MEPs for the UK should this not be resolved by the upcoming Euro election.
> ...



Is that less democratic than the situation we have now? 

FWIW I agree that remain is in general terms no more interested in democracy than leave.


----------



## chilango (Jan 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Is that less democratic than the situation we have now?



Yep. I think so. I think it's part of a trend away from liberal democracy and towards technocracy.

Not that I think that liberal democracy is particularly democratic either.



SpookyFrank said:


> FWIW I agree that remain is in general terms no more interested in democracy than leave.



Yep. That was my main point. The EU has a track record of it. The Leavers don't, yet


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yep. I think so. I think it's part of a trend away from liberal democracy and towards technocracy.
> 
> Not that I think that liberal democracy is particularly democratic either.
> 
> ...



The leavers do have a track record for cheating in referendums tbf.


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> The leavers do have a track record for cheating in referendums tbf.


as, _tbf_, do the remainers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> as, _tbf_, do the remainers.


yeh so the thing should be set aside and rerun


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

how cute.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 18, 2019)

The boring and never ending debate about 'cheating' has one fatal flaw. The Brexit vote is living proof that people don't listen to the professional middle class campaigns of both hues.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 18, 2019)

I’m shocked. Politicians cheating and lying. In elections!


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

I wonder if the mythical _free and fair election_ has ever been sighted in the wild?


----------



## andysays (Jan 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m shocked. Politicians cheating and lying. In elections!


One expects it from Johnny Foreigner, of course, but not the *British *for goodness sake...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> I wonder if the mythical _free and fair election_ has ever been sighted in the wild?



Probably best to just ignore all transgressions then.

I think a lot of people in a lot of places would be glad to have elections which were only as corrupt as the UK's.


----------



## tommers (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> as, _tbf_, do the remainers.


I keep seeing this. What did they do?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 18, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The boring and never ending debate about 'cheating' has one fatal flaw. The Brexit vote is living proof that people don't listen to the professional middle class campaigns of both hues.


Yes, they listen to Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson instead.


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

tommers said:


> I keep seeing this. What did they do?


The remain campaign also overspent, lied like fuck at every opportunity, and had a booklet send out by the government to every household in the country detailing why you should vote remain (I wonder how many of those were even opened?)


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

2 years ago, to the day.
Wearing well?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 18, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Yes, they listen to Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson instead.


He's upper class and decidedly not a professional of any sort.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> The remain campaign also overspent, lied like fuck at every opportunity, and had a booklet send out by the government to every household in the country detailing why you should vote remain (I wonder how many of those were even opened?)


Yes.
If, in the past, we'd been asked to imagine an election in which both 'options' were fronted/run by tory liars...maybe we'd have predicted a shitstorm of epic proportions?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 18, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The boring and never ending debate about 'cheating' has one fatal flaw. The Brexit vote is living proof that people don't listen to the professional middle class campaigns of both hues.



No, it’s proof that one campaign hit the right notes for enough people to make a win. That those notes were nationalist and xenophobic and appear to have cemented a belief among many of Labour’s traditional voters that this is what delivers wins for them is a bit of a problem imo.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 18, 2019)

A response to something in the betting thread, but I am not at all convinced that extending article 50 is a likely option. While on the face of it many MPs would prefer that to a no-deal, I am not convinced either major party wants to awaken the wrath of the hard leavers at this point - which extending article 50 would surely do. I also think extending article 50 would push Brexit closer to the next election, which is highly undesirable for the Tories, who need the mess to be cleared at least a bit before the next election. I think no deal is still very much an option - May has always been a sacrificial lamb who will be cleared out the way once the chaos of Brexit is over. Since that's her role anyway, why not push her to create the higher level chaos of no-deal brexit, get the whole clusterfuck out of the way, put in a new leader and have time to sort things out a bit before the next election. I also think another option is some sort of fudge where May gets the approval of parliament for something that she then interprets as approval for her deal, and she goes ahead with it over the howls of MPs. Again that's career-ending, but her career has a clock ticking on it anyway, so why not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> May has always been a sacrificial lamb who will be cleared out the way once the chaos of Brexit is over.


might as well say she'll be pm for life then


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2 years ago, to the day.
> Wearing well?
> 
> View attachment 159070


missed the story about russian prostitutes at the time


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2019)

Would we be in a different position now if someone other than Theresa May had been 'in charge'? I'm not sure we would: we might be sitting with a slightly different compromise deal but still with no majority in the public or parliament in favour of it. Of course everyone enjoys watching and accusing government/parliament ineptitude but the ineptitude happened at the point the referendum was set and with a marginal win for leave it seems pretty inevitable we'd end up like this.
Ask a stupid question/get a stupid answer.


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

No, we probably wouldn't. She's made some mistakes no doubt, but I reckon the narrative of May being uniquely incompetent is overplayed - she has an impossible coalition of interests to hold together, and it would be impossible for anyone (cf the same narrative across the floor re: Corbyn).


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> No, we probably wouldn't. She's made some mistakes no doubt, but I reckon the narrative of May being uniquely incompetent is overplayed - she has an impossible coalition of interests to hold together, and it would be impossible for anyone (cf the same narrative across the floor re: Corbyn).


Not convinced that Labour couldn't have done better; had conference sanctioned 'red lines' comparable to those eventually agreed upon, (CU, 'worker rights' etc.), the supra-state would have been more comfortable with such an agreed withdrawal.


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not convinced that Labour couldn't have done better; had conference sanctioned 'red lines' comparable to those eventually agreed upon, (CU, 'worker rights' etc.), the supra-state would have been more comfortable with such an agreed withdrawal.


Oh, I think Labour could have made a better hash of it. I though teucher meant if the same parties were in the same positions, but with different leaders.


----------



## Supine (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2 years ago, to the day.
> Wearing well?
> 
> View attachment 159070



Luckily she hasn't worn those trousers again


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

That said: the biggest mistake May made was calling the election: another leader might not have done that. With a majority - even a small one - the story could be quite different.


----------



## Supine (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not convinced that Labour couldn't have done better; had conference sanctioned 'red lines' comparable to those eventually agreed upon, (CU, 'worker rights' etc.), the supra-state would have been more comfortable with such an agreed withdrawal.



At least negotiating strategy and red lines would have been discussed. On the negative side corbyn wanted to trigger article 50 the day after the referendum.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oh, I think Labour could have made a better hash of it. I though teucher meant if the same parties were in the same positions, but with different leaders.


The incompetence really lies in getting yourself (and all of us) into that position, though.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 18, 2019)

Yeah, not sure the Tories could have come up with anything different. Another reason I still think we might leave in March. Once you accept the logic that there is no 'good' way to leave that would keep everyone happy, and no way to undo the referendum without destroying your party, that leaves only the bad ways to leave. If you have to leave in a bad way, why not do it as quick as possible - rip off the sticking plaster and get the fucking thing over with. I feel this is what May has been pushed towards, and I'm not sure any Tory leader would have done any better.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

I think that the EU's reaction to a Corbyn led withdrawal negotiation would have been even more obdurate and unbending - the thing they really do not want to happen and really do want to close the door on for the good of their wider undemocratic neo-liberal project is a successful exit from the left that shows that things like workers rights 'state aid' citizen rights etc are not in fact tied to the EU or are evil. That sort of thing being well managed is everything they fear.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> That said: the biggest mistake May made was calling the election: another leader might not have done that. With a majority - even a small one - the story could be quite different.



Added to the the loss of x number of votes in the commons, is her catastrophic loss of authority within the party and in the commons more widely. I wonder what proportion of the hassle shes had she would have not have had without that loss?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

Supine said:


> At least negotiating strategy and red lines would have been discussed. On the negative side corbyn wanted to trigger article 50 the day after the referendum.


To be accurate, as leader of HMLO, he _said _he wanted to trigger A50 the day after the referendum. There may well have been strategising behind such pressure on May.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think that the EU's reaction to a Corbyn led withdrawal negotiation would have been even more obdurate and unbending - the thing they really do not want to happen and really do want to close the door on for the good of their wider undemocratic neo-liberal project is a successful exit from the left that shows that things like workers rights 'state aid' citizen rights etc are not in fact tied to the EU or are evil. That sort of thing being well managed is everything they fear.


Don't agree (though, of course all speculation). I think that faced with Corbyn at the outset, (& then unsure of the potential 'domino effect') the supra-state would have seen the opportunity to lash together an 'agreement' most favourable for an easy Brejoin in the medium term.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> That said: the biggest mistake May made was calling the election: another leader might not have done that. With a majority - even a small one - the story could be quite different.


As in, a deal that wasn't really bothered about NI interests?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

Literally what he said in a live interview was:

“The British people have made their decision. We must respect that result and Article 50 has to be invoked now so that we negotiate an exit from European Union.

If he had put the _now _at the start of that second sentence it changes things immensely and brings it closer to what he shortly after clarified was his meaning, that now the vote has been held and the results know that it's clear article 50 has to be triggered - that the referendum cannot and should not be ignored. And remember, this was at the time of the first flurry of non-binding rubbish so it was important to make this very clear.

"I may not have put that as well as I should have done," he told presenter Evan Davis.

"The view I was putting was that Article 50 will be invoked at some point. I did not mean it should be invoked on Friday morning and we should rush over to Brussels and start negotiating things away because clearly the negotiations are going to be very long and very complicated."


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> As in, a deal that wasn't really bothered about NI interests?


One which wasn't bothered about a border in the Irish sea, at least. The DUP's interests =/= NI interests.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Don't agree (though, of course all speculation). I think that faced with Corbyn at the outset, (& then unsure of the potential 'domino effect') the supra-state would have seen the opportunity to lash together an 'agreement' most favourable for an easy Brejoin in the medium term.


I think you may well be underestimating the rigid ideological dogmatism of the EU technocrats and the unaccountable people in charge of the process and their utter determination that their way is the only way. They would have attempted to vietnamise him - precisely on domino effect grounds.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Oh no - gammon/dad's army riot - scary!
> 
> Riddle me this though: what will they do when they can't find any unprotected female MPs to harass/stab? Suspect riot police may be a slightly harder target.



Fucking moron. 

There will be people who voted Remain who will be very angry. Never mind the fact that 17 million people are not all old men.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fucking moron.
> 
> There will be people who voted Remain who will be very angry. Never mind the fact that 17 million people are not all old men.


I think that post of wolveryeti demonstrates perfectly why only stupid bastards use gammon (i can guess what pic will follow this btw) - because it ties you into highlighting the common ground you share with these pro-capital, pro-eugenics class doesn't exist sons of privilege like that. It says well i can forget everything else, they don't matter that much to me - that, in fact, i don't give too much of a shit about the social issues that need politically addressing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think that post of wolveryeti demonstrates perfectly why only stupid bastards use gammon (i can guess what pic will follow this btw) - because it ties you into highlighting the common ground you share with these pro-capital, pro-eugenics class doesn't exist sons of privilege like that. It says well i can forget everything else, they don't matter that much to me - that, in fact, i don't give too much of a shit about the social issues that need politically addressing.



He won't use the picture now, he'll say _Gammon isn't racist _


----------



## brogdale (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think you may well be underestimating the rigid ideological dogmatism of the EU technocrats and the unaccountable people in charge of the process and their utter determination that their way is the only way. They would have attempted to vietnamise him - precisely on domino effect grounds.


Yeah, it's a good point; I suppose we shouldn't get too drawn into such whatifery!


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He won't use the picture now, he'll say _Gammon isn't racist _


(Ah i wasn't thinking of _that _picture - was expecting the _only stupid bastards use heroin_ one from the 80s, probably being worn by new model army).


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

There is a treaty to have a common travel area with the EU.
There will be no brexit (if the word 'Ieave' means what I think it does) unless that changes.


----------



## andysays (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There is a treaty to have a common travel area with the EU.
> There will be no brexit (if the word 'Ieave' means what I think it does) unless that changes.


What do you think it means, and what is the significance of the CTA?


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

The CTA applies to the British Isles, not the EU


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

The common travel area negates borders in the usual sense.
When you travel from Lewisham to Bromley the speed limit changes, but there are no border checks as such between those boroughs. I think of the CTA in Ireland as being like going from Lewisham to Bromley.
The significance is that it you leave something there is a border.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> The CTA applies to the British Isles, not the EU


The Republic of Ireland is in the EU.
So the common travel area applies to both the UK and the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

So all states with common area treaties are then, by this absurd logic, also members of EU style supra-states. We could literally annul every piece of EU legislation but if we have a common travel area agreement with Ireland we are still in the EU. Right.


----------



## chilango (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> (Ah i wasn't thinking of _that _picture - was expecting the _only stupid bastards use heroin_ one from the 80s, probably being worn by new model army)



There's a sort of *bittersweet *feeling watching all the *great expectations *on both sides being dashed by *the price* they suddenly realising they have to pay to get their choice through.

Even two years after the result, there's *no rest *for the fantasists on both both sides thinking that one more push will lead them towards a *brave new world *be it some mythical pan-European free market or the *51st State *of a WTO based Atlantacist market.

Such fantasy *poison. Street* by street faith in liberal democracy is collapsing as social concerns are dismissed as *stupid questions. *Migrants are villified as *vagabonds *if they happen to be poor or feted as innicein victims if they're on an Erasmus.

Yet, the Remainer vote has yet to translate into a political voice for Lib Dems or *Green and grey* men in grey suits chip away at liberal democracy in the name of democracy.

The howl of "*get me out" *that the referendum result gave voiced is portrayed as impractical Brexiteer *purity* by the media and the soi-disant moderates as they Scrabble for BINO, but their failure to address this voice leaves a *space* for others to fill, others perhaps more intent on exploiting division, for good or ill. *Here comes the war.  *

Ignore these voices at your peril, for *vengeance* will be sought, one way or another

May's deal is not a *wonderful way to go. *Obviously, she's not the *Queen of My Heart* or anything, nor anyone elses, but this *island* is simmering with discontent on all sides. The clock for Article *BD3* or whatever it's called is ticking and it's *wired *to s powder keg that's gonna blow....


I think that's all of them. I'm really, really sorry. Blame butchersapron


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

I knew i shouldn't have gone that route!


----------



## ska invita (Jan 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> Appointed rather than elected MEPs for the UK should this not be resolved by the upcoming Euro election.


To repeat, the hypothetical-proposal (ive not heard any MP propose it, just some non-parliamentary constitutional nerd who found a precedent) is that the appointed figures act as place holders BEFORE the next EU parliament sits. It would be a way of buying two months of negotiating time. The appointed figures would not sit in parliament or have any power. So meaningless in terms of technocratic power.



chilango said:


> So-called Citizens Assemblies selected at "random" (like the QT audience?) To play a role in the decision.


Will never happen, file under "dreams"



chilango said:


> Cross-bench alliances to push remain/BINO through.
> .


There is a super slim chance that will happen. A vote on a different plan is a cross-bench alliance of sorts I guess. Not sure any version of that's particularly technocratic though.  That would be the (representative) house of commons taking back proverbial control, rather than technocrats taking over.

In short I don't think the 'Dictatorship' angle has anything to it, and even the above suggestions are tame in terms of power at best.
 Now, if a Crash Out No Deal happens and one things leads to another and a state of emergency results.....maybe then.


-------
*ETA: Just read this on the point #1 appointment of MEPs, which suggests that in one eventuality they might take their seats after all :*

"Ambassadors seem keen to signal that they would respond if Boles succeeded in allowing parliament to vote to suspend article 50, so removing the 29 March deadline for the UK’s departure.

A diplomat said: “It must come from the UK parliament, but if it passes a simple bill to delay article 50, then that means no deal is off the table, and Europe, I am sure, will respond not flexibly, but super flexibly.”

The previous assumption that Europe would only accept deferral if there was a clear plan to hold a second referendum seems to be misplaced.

*The key issue is not the principle of the suspension, but its duration. Some say suspension can only go so far as the first meeting of the newly elected European parliament in July, but that may not be long enough.

One diplomat suggested the UK’s political parties could appoint MEPs to the new parliament for the interim, probably distributing the seats between the parties on the basis of the last 2014 European elections. *“Some federalists in the European parliament might object, but there is a bigger prize there.”

This diplomat claimed the democratic objections could be overridden in the interests of an orderly Brexit."


Would see UKIP back for more lol


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So all states with common area treaties are then, by this absurd logic, also members of EU style supra-states. We could literally annul every piece of EU legislation but if we have a common travel area agreement with Ireland we are still in the EU. Right.


In this specific case there is a CTA with an EU state, Logical or not in order to leave you have to not have a common travel area. Right?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In this specific case there is a CTA with an EU state, Logical or not in order to leave you have to not have a common travel area. Right?


No.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In this specific case there is a CTA with an EU state, Logical or not in order to leave you have to not have a common travel area. Right?


You really don’t know what you’re talking about


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 18, 2019)

Supine said:


> At least negotiating strategy and red lines would have been discussed. On the negative side corbyn wanted to trigger article 50 the day after the referendum.


Would have been all over by now at least.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> You really don’t know what you’re talking about



There is a common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
The Republic of Ireland is in the EU.
The UK intends to leave the EU.
There will be differentiation between the EU and the UK in some way or another.
The differences manifest on the/a border.
There will be a border between the UK and the EU.
There exists a common travel area between the UK and the EU, put into place by treaty and a referendum.
So in order to differentiate between the EU and the UK the common travel area has to stop, unless some kind of solution is found.
If the common travel area stops, it happens either because the GFA is changed in some way, or it is ignored in a kind of 'turn a blind eye' way.

So enlighten me and explain which bits of what I have written are wrong.


----------



## killer b (Jan 18, 2019)

waster


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There is a common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
> The Republic of Ireland is in the EU.
> The UK intends to leave the EU.
> There will be differentiation between the EU and the UK in some way or another.
> ...



The point is they are trying to do this without changing the GFA, which is the circle they can't square.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 1 There is a common travel area between the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
> 2 The Republic of Ireland is in the EU.
> 3 The UK intends to leave the EU.
> 4 There will be differentiation between the EU and the UK in some way or another.
> ...


6 has the wrong tense - there already is a border between the UK and the EU
7 is wrong, as there was no referendum on the issue, it predates the ECSC, let alone the EU.

Even if they weren't wrong, your conclusion is not supported by your premises. You haven't shown that a CTA can ONLY exist for countries within the EU (or similar such body).

This is  very basic logic, as a 'philosopher', you should be able to construct a basic argument using aristotelian logic. You failed.

Or, just go look at the Nordic Passport Union.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> 6 has the wrong tense - there already is a border between the UK and the EU
> 7 is wrong, as there was no referendum on the issue, it predates the ECSC, let alone the EU.
> 
> Even if they weren't wrong, your conclusion is not supported by your premises. You haven't shown that a CTA can ONLY exist for countries within the EU (or similar such body).
> ...



The common travel area started in the 1920's, but there was a hard border as any cursory research would reveal. So 7 is wrong in that it reads like the common travel area happened after the EU. I apologise for that.
However events like both countries joining the EU in the form/name it was at the time, the modern 'troubles', the Good Friday Agreement, has eventually led to a common travel area such as it is today.


1998 Northern Ireland Good Friday Agreement referendum - Wikipedia

I have never mentioned that a common travel area can only exist in one particular place, I am not really that aware of others that exist between two countries with different customs arrangements, maybe you know of some examples.

In the Nordic situation there is a Schlengen aspect, and checks at borders on documentation and other paperwork we (re?) introduced in 2015 and 2016 because of the 'migrant crisis'.

If you want to seize on my posts in order to either put me down or put yourself up, go ahead, but it is a handy way of avoiding the notion that the Good Friday Agreement established, more firmly or recently if you like, the common travel area to an extent that border posts were dismantled.

Leaving the EU clashes against the current common travel area within the EU.
If it doesn't, then perhaps you could explain how the land border in Ireland will operate in the future.


----------



## andysays (Jan 18, 2019)

Doesn't the CTA between UK and Ireland pre-date the EU?

And wasn't making a comparison with crossing the boundary between two London boroughs exactly the idiocy that Johnson was rightly mocked for some months ago?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Doesn't the CTA between UK and Ireland pre-date the EU?
> 
> And wasn't making a comparison with crossing the boundary between two London boroughs exactly the idiocy that Johnson was rightly mocked for some months ago?


the 1923 introduction of the the cta does indeed pre-date the european union

and yes the comparison one which boris de pffefer wanker johnson was roundly mocked for


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The common travel area started in the 1920's, but there was a hard border as any cursory research would reveal. So 7 is wrong in that it reads like the common travel area happened after the EU. I apologise for that.
> However events like both countries joining the EU in the form/name it was at the time, the modern 'troubles', the Good Friday Agreement, has eventually led to a common travel area such as it is today.
> 
> 
> ...


so, basically, you agree you were wrong, and are talking about the GFA not the CTA. The GFA had no formal effect upon the CTA. You are confusing the two.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> so, basically, you agree you were wrong, and are talking about the GFA not the CTA. The GFA had no formal effect upon the CTA. You are confusing the two.



Easy enough, both are three letters, ending with 'A'.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jan 18, 2019)

It makes a thread so incredibly boring when people get caught up in trying to force a person to admit they are wrong, with endless back and forth about the details of how they are incorrect. Why not just correct the person and move on? No important decisions are being made on the basis of errors people make here, unlike in parliament.


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> It makes a thread so incredibly boring when people get caught up in trying to force a person to admit they are wrong, with endless back and forth about the details of how they are incorrect. Why not just correct the person and move on? No important decisions are being made on the basis of errors people make here, unlike in parliament.


That's cool, until the original person goes 'no, I was right.'  And, occasionally, the person making the correction is wrong.  It's a bugger.


----------



## zahir (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> If you accept Tories are good at what they do  and not incompetent (check the track record since 1979...successful) then a no-deal Brexit is by design surely? The EU said 2 years ago there'd be no concessions. So the Checkers thing is just panto for the masses isn't it?
> A no deal Brexit will give them (and their backers and mates with lots of liquidity) a great excuse to asset strip the public sphere. It'll be like 'well you voted for it'. I think that's why JRM had a champagne celebration at his place yesterday after the vote of no confidence failed.


I’m sure May wants her withdrawal agreement, or a version of it, to be agreed. The question is what her plan B is if some form of it can’t be agreed. I suspect she would be willing to go for a no deal rather than a fundamental change of approach or another referendum. Either that or she’s bluffing quite well. What she has been successful in is holding her party together. If she had gone for a softer brexit in the first place she would probably have split the party and would have had to depend on opposition support. And if she leads us into a no deal brexit at the end of March, or a few months later, then her party should still be largely intact, whatever the consequences for everyone else. From the point of view of delivering brexit without splitting the Tories her leadership could still be seen as a success.


----------



## zahir (Jan 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Would we be in a different position now if someone other than Theresa May had been 'in charge'? I'm not sure we would: we might be sitting with a slightly different compromise deal but still with no majority in the public or parliament in favour of it. Of course everyone enjoys watching and accusing government/parliament ineptitude but the ineptitude happened at the point the referendum was set and with a marginal win for leave it seems pretty inevitable we'd end up like this.
> Ask a stupid question/get a stupid answer.


I’d say some kind of Norway type deal could have been achieved but would have been very difficult for any Tory leader to sell to their own party without it leading to a split.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think that the EU's reaction to a Corbyn led withdrawal negotiation would have been even more obdurate and unbending - the thing they really do not want to happen and really do want to close the door on for the good of their wider undemocratic neo-liberal project is a successful exit from the left that shows that things like workers rights 'state aid' citizen rights etc are not in fact tied to the EU or are evil. That sort of thing being well managed is everything they fear.



Yes, and if anyone doubts that they should read Varoufakis account of Greece's negotiations with the EU/IMF/ECB. What's more the current debate here in Britain - which is basically what model/route allows us to remain as close as possible to the neo-liberal EU single market project as possible - has only been possible because Corbyn failed to outline what a left exit could mean and would entail and left the stage open for the various administrative wings of neo liberalism to battle it out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, and if anyone doubts that they should read Varoufakis account of Greece's negotiations with the EU/IMF/ECB. What's more the current debate here in Britain - which is basically what model/route allows us to remain as close as possible to the neo-liberal EU single market project as possible - has only been possible because Corbyn failed to outline what a left exit could mean and would entail and left the stage open for the various administrative wings of neo liberalism to battle it out.


that's because auld corbo's really not that left wing, look at his taxation policies for example and compare and contrast with auld red jim callaghan's


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's because auld corbo's really not that left wing, look at his taxation policies for example and compare and contrast with auld red jim callaghan's



Not that much happening today, so since this is one of your favourites... 

Agree that Corbyn is failing to show much radicalism but the 1970's and 2019 are quite different contexts. The point was made in 2015 that the 1997 Labour manifesto was to the left of 'Red' Ed Milliband's manifesto. Context is important when making comparisons across time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not that much happening today, so since this is one of your favourites...
> 
> Agree that Corbyn is failing to show much radicalism but the 1970's and 2019 are quite different contexts. The point was made in 2015 that the 1997 Labour manifesto was to the left of 'Red' Ed Milliband's manifesto. Context is important when making comparisons across time.


if the left of the labour party now is far to the right of the labour party in government in the 1970s then it's not really left is it, if the people everyone thought then were right wing shits are now almost revolutionary in comparison to the dross so many people are lauding as leftists now


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if the left of the labour party now is far to the right of the labour party in government in the 1970s then it's not really left is it, if the people everyone thought then were right wing shits are now almost revolutionary in comparison to the dross so many people are lauding as leftists now



By that logic, the Tory party in the 1950's and 60's was to the left of Corbyn.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> By that logic, the Tory party in the 1950's and 60's was to the left of Corbyn.


yeh, it's not a good look for auld corbs, to the right of anthony eden, harold macmillan and arguably edward heath


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jan 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think that post of wolveryeti demonstrates perfectly why only stupid bastards use gammon (i can guess what pic will follow this btw) - because it ties you into highlighting the common ground you share with these pro-capital, pro-eugenics class doesn't exist sons of privilege like that. It says well i can forget everything else, they don't matter that much to me - that, in fact, i don't give too much of a shit about the social issues that need politically addressing.


 Nah - mainly laughing at the ridiculous notion espoused by Spackletwat that people will be rioting in the name of democracy against people being allowed to exercise their democratic rights. 

As for Brexit addressing social issues - also v. laughable. On the evidence so far and the clueless comments on this thread about what the EU (rather than elected UK govts) are stopping us from doing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Nah - mainly laughing at the ridiculous notion espoused by Spackletwat that people will be rioting in the name of democracy against people being allowed to exercise their democratic rights.
> 
> As for Brexit addressing social issues - also v. laughable. On the evidence so far and the clueless comments on this thread about what the EU (rather than elected UK govts) are stopping us from doing.





I believe in the possibility of redemption and positive growth for the vast majority of people but some broken records belong in the bin.


----------



## zahir (Jan 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> She has no bargaining chips, let alone a 'best' one.





butchersapron said:


> No deal is a heavy weapon.



Is no deal really that much of a bargaining chip? I’m sure the EU would rather it didn’t happen but I’m not convinced they’d concede much to avoid it. The idea of it being used as a negotiating tactic brings this to mind for me:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

zahir said:


> Is no deal really that much of a bargaining chip? I’m sure the EU would rather it didn’t happen but I’m not convinced they’d concede much to avoid it. The idea of it being used as a negotiating tactic brings this to mind for me:




I don't think it's as simple as it being a bargain chip but it represents a challenge and a decision to be made - not so much for the official bodies of the EU but of the European bourgeoisie. They could a) punish the UK severely (capital flight, de facto trade embargoes, protectionist measures etc) or b) not do so, and then the predictions of economic catastrophe will look a bit silly. The former feeds into the problems with the EU 'brand' and the latter will suggest to other member states that leaving won't be so bad.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Ireland would suffer from a no-deal Brexit though so that may be an important factor.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 18, 2019)

Interesting from Robert Peston: Tories maneuvering to stop a crash out and the increasing  possibility of an election:

*Robert Peston
*
Theresa May's opposition to ruling out a no-deal Brexit looks increasingly like defiance of the laws of gravity.

On Monday we'll see at least two motions laid against the PM's amendable motion on its Brexit plan - the Boles one, which would legislate to force the government to sue the EU for a nine-month delay to Brexit, in the event that no-deal loomed, and a Spelman/Dromey one, which would more simply express the will of the House against no-deal.

Now the calamity for May's opposition to no deal is not just that a majority of backbench MPs would support one or both of these motions - which are likely to be put to the vote on 29 January - but that significant numbers of her own ministers would feel obliged to defy her will and also support them.

Here are some choice quotes from ministers who are thinking of doing just that, and for obvious reasons wish to stay anonymous (for now).

Minister A: "This looks the only way of stopping no deal".

I asked how many government rebels there are. "From what I hear 15 to 25", said minister A.

So I put the same question to Minister B: "Hard to be sure, but enough!"

And on to minister C: "There are at least 20 [of us]".

What would happen to them if they voted against, I enquired.

Minister C: "Frankly she can't lose more than one [of us]. There's no one left [on the backbenches] to replace even the modest PPS's [most junior ministers] who haven't rebelled recent".

Or to put it another way, she could not make voting against her on no-deal a sacking offence, because there's no way she could replace all the offending ministers.

And then on to Minister D: "I think it all depends quite a bit on what the final version of [Boles's] bill ends up saying, But if he gets it right...there will be pressure for a free vote".

To put it another way, May's official position may be to oppose no-deal, but if she doesn't allow her ministers to vote with their consciences for one in ten days, she could see the collapse of her government (yes again!).

Her position however is that once no-deal is dead, so too would be her leverage in future talks with dithering Labour MPs, who might prefer some version of her Brexit plan to what they see as the chaos of no deal, and her leverage in any future talks with the EU.

All this is another illustration of why I said on News at Ten last night that I am pessimistic the PM can get any Brexit deal through this parliament.

That is why plenty of MPs and officials are talking about the rising probability of a fairly imminent general election, because if parliament is the impasse, perhaps parliament has to be changed (I discussed this in bulletins a couple of days ago).

But there is a flaw even in the election route through the Brexit blockage - because neither Labour nor the Tories has a settled position on what kind of Brexit or no-Brexit they want, and there would be no point in having a general election unless and until each party was able to spell out in their respective manifestos how and even whether we leave the EU.

To state the obvious, simply arriving at a manifesto position on this could split each of them (I talked yesterday about Labour's divide on a referendum, and the Tories on the degree to which the UK after Brexit should follow EU rules).

It might come down to an election. But an election would still force May and Corbyn to do what each has eschewed as if it were Kryptonite, namely make a definitive Brexit choice.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 18, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Interesting from Robert Peston: Tories maneuvering to stop a crash out and the increasing  possibility of an election:
> 
> *Robert Peston
> *
> ...



Pretty fucking bang on from the Pest there.


----------



## Winot (Jan 18, 2019)

zahir said:


> Is no deal really that much of a bargaining chip? I’m sure the EU would rather it didn’t happen but I’m not convinced they’d concede much to avoid it. The idea of it being used as a negotiating tactic brings this to mind for me:




For ‘no deal’ to be an effective bargaining chip it has to be believable. And that meant HMG starting serious preparations 2 years ago. The fact they are only just starting shows it is an empty threat. Hence the description of Grayling’s recent exercise as a ‘Potemkin traffic jam’.


----------



## Chz (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> By that logic, the Tory party in the 1950's and 60's was to the left of Corbyn.


This is a real thing everywhere. Back home in the Old Country, the province of Ontario was run by the Conservatives (called the "Big Blue Machine" for their consistent election wins) for 42 years straight. But they couldn't manage that in the world of the 60s and 70s without being considerably to the left on many policies of Canada's so called "left wing" parties today. Education spending went up by 250% in one 5 year term. They decided to fund Catholic schools equally. They went deeply into debt building highways and nuclear reactors that are still the bedrock of the province's infrastructure. 

50 years ago was a different time. Shocking. Inequality still exists, but the baseline level of comfort in the West is such that no-one wants to rock the boat too much.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 18, 2019)

Reagan was more left wing than Obama. So what?


----------



## belboid (Jan 18, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Reagan was more left wing than Obama. So what?


Bush nationalised more banks than Lenin, so.....


----------



## Mr Moose (Jan 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> There's a sort of *bittersweet *feeling watching all the *great expectations *on both sides being dashed by *the price* they suddenly realising they have to pay to get their choice through.
> 
> Even two years after the result, there's *no rest *for the fantasists on both both sides thinking that one more push will lead them towards a *brave new world *be it some mythical pan-European free market or the *51st State *of a WTO based Atlantacist market.
> 
> ...



Like for giving a nod to the fact they are still going. You nearly jumped off around 1989.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Chz said:


> This is a real thing everywhere. Back home in the Old Country, the province of Ontario was run by the Conservatives (called the "Big Blue Machine" for their consistent election wins) for 42 years straight. But they couldn't manage that in the world of the 60s and 70s without being considerably to the left on many policies of Canada's so called "left wing" parties today. Education spending went up by 250% in one 5 year term. They decided to fund Catholic schools equally. They went deeply into debt building highways and nuclear reactors that are still the bedrock of the province's infrastructure.
> 
> 50 years ago was a different time. Shocking. Inequality still exists, but the baseline level of comfort in the West is such that no-one wants to rock the boat too much.



I think somebody might be rocking the boat.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think somebody might be rocking the boat.


I’m not hanging around then as urban’s  archives taught me what happens to the Boathappy.


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

grit said:


> This reads like a fucking wind up.


I’m not on a wind up. I know a few Oxbridge grads and they’re all clever. I feel if you call the Tories incompetent your letting them of the hook in a way. Saying what they do is not deliberate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> I know a few Oxbridge grads and they’re all clever.


IT’S LIKE PLAYING WHACKAMOLE IN THIS THREAD MUN


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> I’m not on a wind up. I know a few Oxbridge grads and they’re all clever. I feel if you call the Tories incompetent your letting them of the hook in a way. Saying what they do is not deliberate.



How do you know they're clever? 

If May wants no deal, why doesn't she just do no deal?


----------



## Ming (Jan 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> IT’S LIKE PLAYING WHACKAMOLE IN THIS THREAD MUN


My prediction is in 10 years the Tories will have sold off the NHS, reduced regulation to US levels, shifted taxation to indirect hugely, reduced social safety nets to as low as they can politically get away with without civil insurrection, etc, etc. And i think these ‘stupid incompetents’ will succeed. I hate them don’t get me wrong but underestimate them at your peril. They do lie you know?


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> How do you know they're clever?
> 
> If May wants no deal, why doesn't she just do no deal?


Can’t be that blatant politically because of what’ll happen after March 29th. They need to say ‘it was the forrins fault’.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> My prediction is in 10 years the Tories will have sold off the NHS, reduced regulation to US levels, shifted taxation to indirect hugely, reduced social safety nets to as low as they can politically get away with without civil insurrection, etc, etc. And i think these ‘stupid incompetents’ will succeed. I hate them don’t get me wrong but underestimate them at your peril. They do lie you know?


I don’t underestimate their power but I think you overestimate their intelligence.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I don’t underestimate their power but I think you overestimate their intelligence.


Look at the track record since 1979. And they changed the nature of the Labour Party (remember Thatcher said New Labour was her proudest achievement). I hate all that but don’t underestimate the opponent.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Look at the track record since 1979. And they changed the nature of the Labour Party (remember Thatcher said New Labour was her proudest achievement). I hate all that but don’t underestimate the opponent.


Thatcher was clever, but being thick doesn’t prevent cunts floating to the top.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 19, 2019)

See: the entire fucking EU ref debate.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 19, 2019)

zahir said:


> I’m sure May wants her withdrawal agreement, or a version of it, to be agreed. The question is what her plan B is if some form of it can’t be agreed.



Plan B that will be presented at the end of the month probably wont be that much different to Plan A other than it will happen nearer the impending March date. However Plan B's amendments will hopefully kill the crash out option once and for all. Even No Dealers in parliament wanted a so-called 'managed' no deal, not a crash out. Since the Brexit process is now killing off each option and possibility one by one, crash out does need killing, and hopefully that will happen on Jan 29th.

It was reported that the semi-secret government plan was to keep bringing back the deal with the most minor tweeks and getting parliament to vote for it again and again until the cliff edge really loomed and they forced their hand. In theory with Crash Out ruled out that will be May done and off to the dustbin of history.


Speculation on top of speculation on top of speculation here on in, but if Robert Peston is right and it does go to an election at some point soon its interesting to imagine how that would play out. May would have to go and I expect a managed no deal brexiter would take her place. Thats who the party membership would vote in.

 What would Labour do? I expect Corbyn and bench would go for Norway. If there was any sanity the centrists wouldnt try and oust Corbyn but there's no sanity there, so there'll probably be a leadership fight there too. Whatever happens it will be time consuming and A50 would have to be suspended to allow it all to happen.

Taking the above as correct, who would win such an election? Hardcore remainers would peel off the labour vote and go lib dem. Some Tories would also not vote Tory, but would they vote Labour? And what if abandoning Labour let the Tories win through the back door? Or maybe a new party would launch and further split votes? People who vote UKIP of late would vote Tory, which would give the Tories a big boost. It could get really crazy...Based on all that nonsense I could see the Labour vote splitting more than the Tories and the Tories winning. Probably thats enough speculation


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> See: the entire fucking EU ref debate.


I think that was a bunch of cynical liars lying to a bunch of very gullible angry people. I think the involvement of Robert Mercer and Cambridge Analytica indicate a plan (i’m Not Dr Jazzing it look them up). I get that the EU is a neo-liberal organization which i’m not very fond of but as a country we stand a better chance of reforming from within.


----------



## zahir (Jan 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Plan B that will be presented at the end of the month probably wont be that much different to Plan A other than it will happen nearer the impending March date. However Plan B's amendments will hopefully kill the crash out option once and for all. Even No Dealers in parliament wanted a so-called 'managed' no deal, not a crash out. Since the Brexit process is now killing off each option and possibility one by one, crash out does need killing, and hopefully that will happen on Jan 29th.
> 
> It was reported that the semi-secret government plan was to keep bringing back the deal with the most minor tweeks and getting parliament to vote for it again and again until the cliff edge really loomed and they forced their hand. In theory with Crash Out ruled out that will be May done and off to the dustbin of history.


How does an amendment remove the possibility of a crash out, given that a crash out is the default option if nothing else is agreed?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Probably thats enough speculation



You might think so.

The thing with an election is that there's so much it could set off, so it's really unpredictable. Either main party could properly fracture as a result of an election being called. The Lib Dems and UKIP will get guaranteed TV coverage and either might capture the public's attention. How do the EU respond? They'll be reluctant to be seen to interfere, but can they really just stand by if you have the Tories and/or Labour standing on a daydream manifesto commitment?

If it happened and it was relatively drama-free, I agree that the Tories would probably win. But May would put her deal in the manifesto and a significant proportion of Tory candidates would, for different reasons, openly campaign in opposition to it. So she'd finish the election still not able to Brexit unless she got a majority far more massive than is likely. Alternatively, she might put her deal minus backstop in the manifesto, but that's still not something that she will be able to make happen.

I think there's a chance she might go for it, just on the basis that it will buy some time. And even if she loses, at least she never sold out. But I think it's more likely that this is a tactical rumour being put out in the hope that it will make her party fall into line with whatever nonsense she comes out with on Monday.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

zahir said:


> How does an amendment remove the possibility of a crash out, given that a crash out is the default option if nothing else is agreed?


Cos the amendment would agree something else.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Can’t be that blatant politically because of what’ll happen after March 29th. They need to say ‘it was the forrins fault’.



They could have done that months ago if they'd wanted. In any case, it's abundantly clear about 2/3rds of the Parliamentary party never wanted to leave in the first place and still don't now.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 19, 2019)

zahir said:


> How does an amendment remove the possibility of a crash out, given that a crash out is the default option if nothing else is agreed?


in all honesty i dont really understand whats going on with amendments, and theres work in progress, but the signs are that there will be at least one that will be designed to block a crash out and it will be supported by the house


Raheem said:


> You might think so.
> 
> The thing with an election is that there's so much it could set off, so it's really unpredictable. Either main party could properly fracture as a result of an election being called. The Lib Dems and UKIP will get guaranteed TV coverage and either might capture the public's attention. How do the EU respond? They'll be reluctant to be seen to interfere, but can they really just stand by if you have the Tories and/or Labour standing on a daydream manifesto commitment?
> 
> ...


May will be gone. She actually promised not to stand again. But she'd have to go as she is tied to her deal. Her deal would be dead in this scenario. The Tory manifesto would inevitably take a different position, more extreme in either direction. I expect harder.
May: I won't lead Tories into election


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> in all honesty i dont really understand whats going on with amendments, and theres work in progress, but the signs are that there will be at least one that will be designed to block a crash out and it will be supported by the house
> 
> May will be gone. She actually promised not to stand again. But she'd have to go as she is tied to her deal. Her deal would be dead in this scenario. The Tory manifesto would inevitably take a different position, more extreme in either direction. I expect harder.
> May: I won't lead Tories into election


Read the article, though. She committed not to lead the party into the 2022 election. She didn't actually use the word 'next'.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 19, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Read the article, though. She committed not to lead the party into the 2022 election. She didn't actually use the word 'next'.


True enough in a literal sense, but there's no way she could lead the party at the next election, whether its next week or in two years time. This is her ship and she's going down with it. The fact she's even in the post now is unparalleled as it is.


----------



## twentythreedom (Jan 19, 2019)

I hope none of you cunts pronounce it "Bregzit"


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> True enough in a literal sense, but there's no way she could lead the party at the next election, whether its next week or in two years time. This is her ship and she's going down with it. The fact she's even in the post now is unparalleled as it is.


Yes, unparalleled, but we're in unusual times. She's immune from being challenged for a year, so if she decides an election is the least shit of the shit choices she's left herself with, then she can do it. There's no time to fit in a leadership contest first anyway.

I'm not saying she will. I think she probably won't.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

twentythreedom said:


> I hope none of you cunts pronounce it "Bregzit"


Egg sacked ly.


----------



## Humberto (Jan 19, 2019)

Neither party has covered themselves in glory. I do wonder to what extent that they are behaving like a rabbit caught in the headlights, since we are all guessing. Theresa May's deal is shit and the EU mandarins have said they won't re-negotiate. I'm sure the EU officials are very pleased with themselves rather than the actual democratic nations and their constituent citizens.

Its a shambles. The 'conspiracy' if you can call it that is the brutal nakedness of capitalism. The dishonourable frauds who con you into submitting to the reality of capital facing up to a crisis, of fucking things up. So, yes, they are cunts in the opposite corner. Shut them down is the only recourse.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They could have done that months ago if they'd wanted. In any case, it's abundantly clear about 2/3rds of the Parliamentary party never wanted to leave in the first place and still don't now.


It'll be no-deal on 29th. Mark my words. Corbyn doesn't like the EU because it's neo-liberal in nature (I don't like it either actually for the same reason). They need to be able to say 'we did everything we could. Its the EU's fault'. The consequences for Joe Public will be catastrophic and they are acutely aware of this so they need to be able to deflect the blame.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

twentythreedom said:


> I hope none of you cunts pronounce it "Bregzit"


It's pronounced like Grand Prix.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> It's pronounced like Grand Prix.


But how is that pronounced?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> It'll be no-deal on 29th. Mark my words. Corbyn doesn't like the EU because it's neo-liberal in nature (I don't like it either actually for the same reason). They need to be able to say 'we did everything we could. Its the EU's fault'. The consequences for Joe Public will be catastrophic and they are acutely aware of this so they need to be able to deflect the blame.



it wont. people are already starting to panic buy medicines and that is going to get worse. If we get to march and no deal is still on the horizon the fucking shops will be empty and people will be going apeshit. The pressure on the government to - at the very least - delay article 50 will be irresistible.  The mps know this - so they are not going to vote for may's shitty deal. 
May will then use the delay to carry on trying to get her deal through until she hits the next brick wall.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

Raheem said:


> But how is that pronounced?


You need to go back to its latin roots 'El Grande Priximus'.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> it wont. people are already starting to panic buy medicines and that is going to get worse. If we get to march and no deal is still on the horizon the fucking shops will be empty and people will be going apeshit. The pressure on the government to - at the very least - delay article 50 will be irresistible.  The mps know this - so they are not going to vote for may's shitty deal.
> May will then use the delay to carry on trying to get her deal through until she hits the next brick wall.


Well being the cynical fucker i am i think they'll view civil disorder as a great opportunity to invest in private security providers stock and privatise the police.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well being the cynical fucker i am i think they'll view civil disorder as a great opportunity to invest in private security providers stock and privatise the police.



they'll fucking need it when an angry mob descends on parliament because there is no petrol, the shops are empty and people cant get essential medication. you'll have a general strike before you get "no deal".


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> they'll fucking need it when an angry mob descends on parliament because there is no petrol, the shops are empty and people cant get essential medication. you'll have a general strike before you get "no deal".


I don't think most people are aware of what trading under WTO 3rd country status actually means (and all our current trade deals suddenly becoming defunct on 29th). And after the 29th it'll be enshrined in law so no going back. Although i live in Canada i have skin in the game (small inheritance in a UK bank which has already taken a 20% hit) so believe me i have a strong opinion on this. They don't give a shit. The #3blokes in a pub podcast is really good if you haven't seen it. Jason Hunter really knows his stuff.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> I don't think most people are aware of what trading under WTO 3rd country status actually means (and all our current trade deals suddenly becoming defunct on 29th). And after the 29th it'll be enshrined in law so no going back. Although i live in Canada i have skin in the game (small inheritance in a UK bank which has already taken a 20% hit) so believe me i have a strong opinion on this. They don't give a shit. The #3blokes in a pub podcast is really good if you haven't seen it. Jason Hunter really knows his stuff.



the panic is already starting. its only to get more hysterical. once people start stocking up, then everyone starts doing it because they assume everyone else will do it - then you get empty shelves and petrol shortages and people getting ever more anxious. Nobody is going to listen to terresa may croaking "there is no need to panic - everything is under control" - throw in the CBI having a meltdown, the pound collapsing and the FTSE crashing and massive demonstrations demanding A50 is revoked or suspended and you have a situation no government would be able to withstand. just a whiff of this sort of chaos will likely be enough.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the panic is already starting. its only to get more hysterical. once people start stocking up, then everyone starts doing it because they assume everyone else will do it - then you get empty shelves and petrol shortages and people getting ever more anxious. Nobody is going to listen to terresa may croaking "there is no need to panic - everything is under control" - throw in the CBI having a meltdown, the pound collapsing and the FTSE crashing and massive demonstrations demanding A50 is revoked or suspended and you have a situation no government would be able to withstand. just a whiff of this sort of chaos will likely be enough.


I hope you're right. Thing is i think they've anticipated this (1000 police training for deployment for NI and 3500 troops on standby for Britain). I think they don't think it'll affect them and they may be right. JRM advised his clients last year of the hazards.
Brexit warning from investment firm co-founded by Rees-Mogg


----------



## Chz (Jan 19, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Theresa May's deal is shit and the EU mandarins have said they won't re-negotiate. I'm sure the EU officials are very pleased with themselves rather than the actual democratic nations and their constituent citizens.


There were a few polls in the Netherlands and France that suggested the general populace thought the EU should be _harder _on Britain. There's sympathy for British people, but it ends at "you elected those assholes, you're stuck with them". 

That's the Dutch and the French, though. I'd like to believe they're a bit less harsh in other countries.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 19, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the panic is already starting. its only to get more hysterical. once people start stocking up, then everyone starts doing it because they assume everyone else will do it



I think anyone who has dealt with supermarkets around Christmastime will be able to deal with this situation, tbf.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the panic is already starting. its only to get more hysterical. once people start stocking up, then everyone starts doing it because they assume everyone else will do it - then you get empty shelves and petrol shortages and people getting ever more anxious. Nobody is going to listen to terresa may croaking "there is no need to panic - everything is under control" - throw in the CBI having a meltdown, the pound collapsing and the FTSE crashing and massive demonstrations demanding A50 is revoked or suspended and you have a situation no government would be able to withstand. just a whiff of this sort of chaos will likely be enough.


I'm looking forward to the runs on the banks

BTW - empty shelves? Supermarkets have been becoming more soviet for a while now, I've certainly seen this in sainsburys and it's been commented on here


----------



## flypanam (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> I hope you're right. Thing is i think they've anticipated this (1000 police training for deployment for NI and 3500 troops on standby for Britain). I think they don't think it'll affect them and they may be right. JRM advised his clients last year of the hazards.
> Brexit warning from investment firm co-founded by Rees-Mogg


Those 1000 cops will get a rude awakening in the north. I wonder if they’ll get guns like the psni. One thing that unites the communities is a dislike of peelers.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I think anyone who has dealt with supermarkets around Christmastime will be able to deal with this situation, tbf.



But all the shelves are creaking under the weight of extra provisions at Christmas, the end of aisle displays are all loaded up, fresh produce never seems to run out despite massive demand... They even gave huge baskets of free vegetables away near me cause they just had too many potatoes and sprouts.

So not that similar really, when you think about it.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 19, 2019)

Think more 'fuel strikes' than Christmas, I suspect.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 19, 2019)

Wookey : I suspect Yossarian wasn't being entirely serious


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> It'll be no-deal on 29th. Mark my words. Corbyn doesn't like the EU because it's neo-liberal in nature (I don't like it either actually for the same reason). They need to be able to say 'we did everything we could. Its the EU's fault'. The consequences for Joe Public will be catastrophic and they are acutely aware of this so they need to be able to deflect the blame.



Yada yada, wake up Sheeple etc. Stuff your words, show me your money! 

£20 says we won't have a no deal Brexit by the end of March.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> I don't think most people are aware of what trading under WTO 3rd country status actually means (and all our current trade deals suddenly becoming defunct on 29th). And after the 29th it'll be enshrined in law so no going back. Although i live in Canada i have skin in the game (small inheritance in a UK bank which has already taken a 20% hit) so believe me i have a strong opinion on this. They don't give a shit. The #3blokes in a pub podcast is really good if you haven't seen it. Jason Hunter really knows his stuff.





Of course you like that twat who pretends to be an ornery bloke in a pub, just drinking a fackin' pint innit. 

You're guided by a Farage rip off merchant.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> £20 says we won't have a no deal Brexit by the end of March.



I'd take that bet too.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm looking forward to the runs on the banks



Ah the one time when being penniless comes into its own.  You get to sit back and observe from a safe distance the mad panic whilst idly fantasizing that the impending bank collapse could mean the write off of all that money you owe.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'd take that bet too.


Me too


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 19, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'd take that bet too.



I'm not taking any bets in pounds: A 5-pound bag of potatoes, three onions, four leeks, a good-sized turnip and two carrots says we won't have a no-deal Brexit by the end of March.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 19, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Think more 'fuel strikes' than Christmas, I suspect.


It'll be great news for air quality in London.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not taking any bets in pounds: A 5-pound bag of potatoes, three onions, four leeks, a good-sized turnip and two carrots says we won't have a no-deal Brexit by the end of March.


I'll see your veg and raise you a celeriac and a pound of runner beans


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> My prediction is in 10 years the Tories will have sold off the NHS, reduced regulation to US levels, shifted taxation to indirect hugely, reduced social safety nets to as low as they can politically get away with without civil insurrection, etc, etc. And i think these ‘stupid incompetents’ will succeed. I hate them don’t get me wrong but underestimate them at your peril. They do lie you know?


You do understand that the tory party - the one with these medium-long term evil plans you briefly outline - supported and campaigned to remain in the EU and that most tory MPs today still want to remain. Would that not suggest that if you are correct about their intentions then these super competent politicians deciding that they can _best _achieve this under the aegis of the EU (probably looking at the EU doing what you outline in country after country in europe over the last decade+) then this throws up[ serious doubtsd about your and others analysis of what both the EU and remain is?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 19, 2019)

FYI panic buying season is a great time to shoplift.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2019)

Today's little oddity is that a no-deal brexit would leave the UK in economic tatters whilst apparently the impact on eu countries of the other half of the deals that disappear or are significantly delayed would be minimal to non-existent. Certainly not enough to shift the EU over anything at all.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It'll be great news for air quality in London.


I suspect people burnt more fuel sitting in queues for petrol stations &supermarkets than they would have otherwise.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll see your veg and raise you a celeriac and a pound of runner beans



You think I've never gambled before? I'll raise you four parsnips and ... drum roll ... three brown bananas. They might look a little rough but the browner, the sweeter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> You think I've never gambled before? I'll raise you four parsnips and ... drum roll ... three brown bananas. They might look a little rough but the browner, the sweeter.


I'll raise you a cabbage, half a pound of peas and a tangerine


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll raise you a cabbage, half a pound of peas and a tangerine



Shelled or unshelled peas?


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll raise you a cabbage, half a pound of peas and a tangerine



A tangerine?? You're just making shit up now, no deal. What am I supposed to counter that with, a bag of lemons, a watermelon, and a pint of maple syrup?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Shelled or unshelled peas?


They're petit pois


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> What am I supposed to counter that with, a bag of lemons, a watermelon, and a pint of maple syrup?


Yes


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 19, 2019)

Meanwhile remain groups are already using fake news in Facebook advertising, apparently brexit threatens endangered animals.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They're petit pois



And where are you going to get these poncy french foods from once the drawbridge goes up eh?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> And where are you going to get these poncy french foods from once the drawbbridge goes up eh?


They'll be smuggled


----------



## Winot (Jan 19, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I suspect people burnt more fuel sitting in queues for petrol stations &supermarkets than they would have otherwise.



Luckily they’ve closed most of the petrol stations in inner London.


----------



## maomao (Jan 19, 2019)

Petits pois (plural on the petit too, it's French) are just peas that have been picked a bit early. They also can be bought shelled or unshelled.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Meanwhile remain groups are already using fake news in Facebook advertising, apparently brexit threatens endangered animals.


What sort? Furry cuddly animals?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What sort? Furry cuddly animals?



All sea-life, plus orangutans, no doubt playing on the publicity surrounding the banning of Iceland's Christmas TV ad.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What sort? Furry cuddly animals?



Definitely not plucky robins and lovable hedgehogs.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> . They don't give a shit. The #3blokes in a pub podcast is really good if you haven't seen it. Jason Hunter really knows his stuff.


That would be the Jason Hunter that supports CETA that wants TTIP. Never mind I'm sure that this bunch of libdem twats will save us from the Tories.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> Petits pois (plural on the petit too, it's French) are just peas that have been picked a bit early. They also can be bought shelled or unshelled.



Cool. Coincidentally I've started selling this great new boutique product called petits pommes. They might look like crabapples, but they're actually artisan micro-apples from carefully selected orchards, produced by only the beardiest, most authentic country folk around. Be the envy of all your friends and buy now, only £17.99 for 500g.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not taking any bets in pounds: A 5-pound bag of potatoes, three onions, four leeks, a good-sized turnip and two carrots says we won't have a no-deal Brexit by the end of March.





Pickman's model said:


> I'll see your veg and raise you a celeriac and a pound of runner beans





Yossarian said:


> You think I've never gambled before? I'll raise you four parsnips and ... drum roll ... three brown bananas. They might look a little rough but the browner, the sweeter.





Pickman's model said:


> I'll raise you a cabbage, half a pound of peas and a tangerine



I've been growing opium poppies in a secluded location. I'm in for 100ml of raw poppy milk


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> no deal.



O fuck, here we go....


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

Not that Corbyn would ever accept the will of the party members (2nd ref unanimous), but on the basis of voters sounds like 2ndRef is likely to be fully dead from Labour, if the PLP takes this vote as indicative:

Voters less likely to back Labour with 'stop Brexit' policy, leaked poll suggests


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Not that Corbyn would ever accept the will of the party members (2nd ref *unanimous*)...


Cue Inigo Montoya meme


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Not that Corbyn would ever accept the will of the party members (2nd ref unanimous), but on the basis of voters sounds like 2ndRef is likely to be fully dead from Labour, if the PLP takes this vote as indicative:
> 
> Voters less likely to back Labour with 'stop Brexit' policy, leaked poll suggests


That looks very much like a leak with an agenda, and the data mentioned in the article doesn't look like it supports the headline. The number of people more likely to vote Labour being less than the number less likely might sound like bad news for second ref supporters, but it looks like it includes people who are very unlikely to vote Labour anyway on the one hand and people who are already very likely to do so. What's needed is data about potential switchers, not about the opinions of the whole electorate. The data it does give about switchers is less dramatic and just as useless (at least the way the Guardian has written it up). Slightly fewer Tory to Labour switchers compared to the number of Labour voters less likely to vote Labour. Note that there is not equivalence between the two groups, because people less likely to vote Labour may still vote Labour and if they don't, it doesn't mean they will vote Tory.


----------



## killer b (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> 2nd ref unanimous


have you just redefined the word 'unanimous'?


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

killer b said:


> have you just redefined the word 'unanimous'?



Good catch. Majority?


----------



## killer b (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Good catch. Majority?


I'm not sure it's that much of a priority for most members. While most of them would prefer to remain, would like a second vote and would vote to remain if there was one, only a third of the party actively oppose current policy. (see near the bottom of this).


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Not that Corbyn would ever accept the will of the party members (2nd ref unanimous), but on the basis of voters sounds like 2ndRef is likely to be fully dead from Labour, if the PLP takes this vote as indicative:
> 
> Voters less likely to back Labour with 'stop Brexit' policy, leaked poll suggests



From the IWCA:

“Coming out unequivocally against Brexit damages Labour less in purely electoral terms than coming out for it, as much of Labour’s working class base deserted the party long ago. The Oxford researchers Jon Mellon and Geoffrey Evans found in 2014 that ‘Labour’s move to the ‘liberal consensus’ on the EU and immigration left many of their core voters out in the cold a long time before UKIP were an effective political presence. These voters left Labour in 2001, 2005 and 2010.’ Labour accepting the liberal agenda on first Brexit, and then presumably everything else, only further exacerbates this process.

If one wants to give the Corbyn leadership some credit, one might say they at least have some vestigial awareness of the danger taking this path entails. When Transport Secretary Chris Grayling recently said that blocking Brexit would 'open the door to extremist populist political forces in this country of the kind we see in other countries in Europe’, Labour’s David Lammy accused him of ‘gutter politics’ and ‘appeasement’ while Nick Ryan of Hope Not Hate said the remark ‘simply plays into the hands of those extremists seeking to use Brexit as a platform to boost their profile.’

While Grayling’s timing may well have been cynically motivated, the observation is not wrong. What most of the political, economic and media elite have wanted since the Brexit vote is as close to neo-liberalism as usual as possible, with the minimum of disruption emanating from this democratic aberration. Should they succeed, any semi-competent populist right movement would be able to adopt a narrative of class and democratic betrayal, and position themselves as the alternative to the entire condescending liberal establishment. It’s a narrative that would have resonance for one simple reason: there would be a good deal of truth to it.

And where the BNP took over half a million votes at the 2010 general election, close to a million in the 2009 Euro election, and UKIP 3.8 million votes in 2015, this narrative would in the first instance have a pool of 17 million disproportionately working class Leave voters to pitch to. So while middle-class ultra-Remainers like to pitch the idea that Brexit = fascism, it is the contempt for democratic expression, and the longer-term fundamental retreat from class politics by the left, that creates the imminent risk. Furthermore, there is nothing the Labour party can do to address this: it is a task for the class itself and those who believe in it as the ultimate agent of change.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Shelled or unshelled peas?


'Aye well, when I were a lad, we had straight bananas'
- luxury!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> From the IWCA:
> 
> “Coming out unequivocally against Brexit damages Labour less in purely electoral terms than coming out for it, as much of Labour’s working class base deserted the party long ago. The Oxford researchers Jon Mellon and Geoffrey Evans found in 2014 that ‘Labour’s move to the ‘liberal consensus’ on the EU and immigration left many of their core voters out in the cold a long time before UKIP were an effective political presence. These voters left Labour in 2001, 2005 and 2010.’ Labour accepting the liberal agenda on first Brexit, and then presumably everything else, only further exacerbates this process.
> 
> ...



Saw that. Not sure how it sits with the 2017 election results, when a lot of traditional w/class labour voting areas saw a huge increase in labour voters.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not taking any bets in pounds: A 5-pound bag of potatoes, three onions, four leeks, a good-sized turnip and two carrots says we won't have a no-deal Brexit by the end of March.



I think this is the wrong way round y'kno, vegetables would only replace sterling as a currency in the event of the no deal (which will be apocalyptic and anyone who says it might not be is fake news ) so you should bet in sterling, if you lose it won't matter and if you win you'll want the money and not the veg.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 19, 2019)

With no evidence at all, since we're into a bit of a _reckon limbo_ till January 29th...

I reckon a huge number of Labour's recent upswell in voters do not consider themselves Working Class, and furthermore do not see Labour as strictly a pro-Working Class party. Anecdotally, I hear people saying Labour is a party for _The Poor_ - _For The Many against The Elitist Few_ (this is what IMO drawn in the current crop of conspiraloons, they love that_ we are many they are few_ narrative too).

Rarely if ever do I hear the term _working class_ in discussions on Corbyn's Labour Party, and if I introduce it it usually provokes an argument right away as several people try to define the term in some confused way or another to either include or exclude themselves.

Never do the Labour party's actual policies join together with the concept of _The Working Class_, not with that term. Though I would add that most of my friends and almost all my work colleagues are not very engaged with_ politics as it relates to everyday life_ in general. Which is also part of the problem.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

What does this mean?

“As I set out in Liverpool, a public vote has to be an option for Labour. After all, deeply embedded in our values are internationalism, collaboration and cooperation with our European partners.”

And?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> What does this mean?
> 
> “As I set out in Liverpool, a public vote has to be an option for Labour. After all, deeply embedded in our values are internationalism, collaboration and cooperation with our European partners.”
> 
> And?



Where is this from/who said it?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2019)

It means starmer is continuing  to try and pile pressure on corbyn to make a public commitment to support and campaign for a second referendum with the long term aim of stopping brexit in a democratic guise.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Where is this from/who said it?


Starmer.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Starmer.



Thanks. And agree with your analysis. 

I cannot understand why people keep suggesting Starmer is some sort of leadership candidate, he's a charisma vacuum with a silly voice. 

Then again I suppose people who say that just want someone who will cancel Brexit.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I cannot understand why people keep suggesting Starmer is some sort of leadership candidate, he's a charisma vacuum with a silly voice.


Last privately-educated Oxbridge white male in with a shot. What's not to like?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 19, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Wookey : I suspect Yossarian wasn't being entirely serious



I thought it didn't make sense from Yossarian especially! Apologies to everyone.


----------



## treelover (Jan 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> From the IWCA:
> 
> “Coming out unequivocally against Brexit damages Labour less in purely electoral terms than coming out for it, as much of Labour’s working class base deserted the party long ago. The Oxford researchers Jon Mellon and Geoffrey Evans found in 2014 that ‘Labour’s move to the ‘liberal consensus’ on the EU and immigration left many of their core voters out in the cold a long time before UKIP were an effective political presence. These voters left Labour in 2001, 2005 and 2010.’ Labour accepting the liberal agenda on first Brexit, and then presumably everything else, only further exacerbates this process.
> 
> ...



Good to see their perspective, really value it, Main issue at the moment for Momentum seems to be AbbotGate


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Where is this from/who said it?



Keir Starmer, yesterday I think.


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

Starmer keeps going off-message.

Tories and Corbyn are consistent. This needs to be kept to parliament, the public must not be involved.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Starmer keeps going off-message.
> 
> Tories and Corbyn are consistent. This needs to be kept to parliament, the public must not be involved.


Yeh we know where it ends when the publick have a say


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 19, 2019)

paolo said:


> Starmer keeps going off-message.
> 
> Tories and Corbyn are consistent. This needs to be kept to parliament, the public must not be involved.



I dimly remember something about there having been a referendum already.

Not the brexit we voted for? Well, if you're going to vote for something as vague as 'leave the EU' and leave the rest to the tories you can't really complain if the final details aren't quite as you envisaged them. The people wanted chaos, and they've got it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 19, 2019)

cupid stunt said:
			
		

> Meanwhile remain groups are already using fake news in Facebook advertising, apparently brexit threatens endangered animals





TopCat said:


> What sort? *Furry cuddly animals?*



Super Furry Animals here in Wales, if you don't mind


----------



## paolo (Jan 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I dimly remember something about there having been a referendum already.



General already. Why won’t socialists just accept they lost!


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 19, 2019)

"Only 69 sleeps until Brexit!"


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 19, 2019)

A car bomb's gone off in Derry.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yada yada, wake up Sheeple etc. Stuff your words, show me your money!
> 
> £20 says we won't have a no deal Brexit by the end of March.


You’re on!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 19, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> A car bomb's gone off in Derry.



Yep it happened at about 8 30 
In front of courthouse.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 19, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yep it happened at about 8 30
> In front of courthouse.


BBC's reporting it as londonderry


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You do understand that the tory party - the one with these medium-long term evil plans you briefly outline - supported and campaigned to remain in the EU and that most tory MPs today still want to remain. Would that not suggest that if you are correct about their intentions then these super competent politicians deciding that they can _best _achieve this under the aegis of the EU (probably looking at the EU doing what you outline in country after country in europe over the last decade+) then this throws up[ serious doubtsd about your and others analysis of what both the EU and remain is?


I know it’s a neo-liberal organization. And i’m sure Corbyn and JRM (both not fans of the EU) have different reasons for an exit. That said I do think the Tories will use it as an excuse to asset strip the country. As to remain Tories...OK they’re not a monolithic group with identical opinions but come ‘no-deal’ they’ll all try and profit from it. I just wish people on the left (my side) woul stop calling them stupid. You see a lot of that on CiF also. Look at the track record since 1979. They’ve pretty much achieved everything they set out to achieve. Brexit’ll be their endgame.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> You’re on!



Done. 

Can I have an independent witness that if there is not a no deal Brexit by March 30th Ming owes me £20 please?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> I know it’s a neo-liberal organization. And i’m sure Corbyn and JRM (both not fans of the EU) have different reasons for an exit. That said I do think the Tories will use it as an excuse to asset strip the country. As to remain Tories...OK they’re not a monolithic group with identical opinions but come ‘no-deal’ they’ll all try and profit from it. I just wish people on the left (my side) woul stop calling them stupid. You see a lot of that on CiF also. Look at the track record since 1979. They’ve pretty much achieved everything they set out to achieve. Brexit’ll be their endgame.


That's not really much in that that responds to what I posted


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Done.
> 
> Can I have an independent witness that if there is not a no deal Brexit by March 30th Ming owes me £20 please?


em...the norm is to donate it to the server fund


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 19, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> BBC's reporting it as londonderry



Yeah. Derry.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Done.
> 
> Can I have an independent witness that if there is not a no deal Brexit by March 30th Ming owes me £20 please?


It’s a bet. I’ll pay up if i lose. And funnily enough i hope i do.


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's not really much in that that responds to what I posted


I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers  (including Cameron). I think if we leave the EU we’ll be toast economically. Yes, its full of neo-liberal technocrats but you can’t reform anything from outside the tent.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 19, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> em...the norm is to donate it to the server fund



I like to think of myself as exceptional. 




Ming said:


> It’s a bet. I’ll pay up if i lose. And funnily enough i hope i do.



So do I 



Ming said:


> I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers  (including Cameron). I think if we leave the EU we’ll be toast economically. Yes, its full of neo-liberal technocrats but you can’t reform anything from outside the tent.



Was resigning and being one of the most ostracised PM's in history just part of the cunning ruse then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> It’s a bet. I’ll pay up if i lose. And funnily enough i hope i do.


We all hope you pay up


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 19, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> em...the norm is to donate it to the server fund


SF cannot be accused of being merely normal


----------



## Ming (Jan 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We all hope you pay up


In 1 pence pieces or a cheque on the side of a cow (eta: mind you judging on how the fx rate’ll go after the 29th the penny option will be a bit easier).


----------



## Raheem (Jan 20, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> A car bomb's gone off in Derry.


It's just project fear, though.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 20, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's just project fear, though.



The police got a 30 minute warning. They didn't get to warn everyone... pubs and restaurant locked their doors and people were told not to leave.

Bishop street is in a predominantly Catholic area. Take from that what you will.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 20, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The police got a 30 minute warning. They didn't get to warn everyone... pubs and restaurant locked their doors and people were told not to leave.



That’s ok then.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 20, 2019)

alex_ said:


> That’s ok then.




No it fucking isn't ok.
The police didn't get there in time to warn everyone. 
And they've kept the road closed because they suspect there may be another bomb in a car parked there.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The police got a 30 minute warning. They didn't get to warn everyone... pubs and restaurant locked their doors and people were told not to leave.
> 
> Bishop street is in a predominantly Catholic area. Take from that what you will.



Do you mind if I ask what you would take from it, other than the bomb was planted by some sort of loyalist group? 

Just trying to understand whether you think it's simply a continuation of the general rise in sectarian violence or whether the Brexit/hard border stuff has influenced their tactics.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 20, 2019)

paolo said:


> Starmer keeps going off-message.
> 
> Tories and Corbyn are consistent. This needs to be kept to parliament, the public must not be involved.


That's not Corbyn's position nor Labours official position. Both keep a 2nd referendum open as a possibility.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 20, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you mind if I ask what you would take from it, other than the bomb was planted by some sort of loyalist group?
> 
> Just trying to understand whether you think it's simply a continuation of the general rise in sectarian violence or whether the Brexit/hard border stuff has influenced their tactics.



In Derry, outside a courthouse? It could be dissidents as they've being trying to explode something in Derry for a while, i guess a show of strength to their young followers but some people are speculating it could be loyalists because its not the first time they've let bombs off to force goverments hand. 

As an aside there are rumours that sections of the IRA in Dublin especially those that used to around Alan Ryan are involved in burning direct provision centers in places like Rooskey.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 20, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you mind if I ask what you would take from it, other than the bomb was planted by some sort of
> loyalist group?
> 
> Just trying to understand whether you think it's simply a continuation of the general rise in sectarian violence or whether the Brexit/hard border stuff has influenced their tactics.



I've no idea.They will know better when/ if the powers that be release some information on the warning given. 

My gut feeling is that it is loyalist sectarianism and to do with the border issue. 
It's a nasty development.


----------



## Supine (Jan 20, 2019)

Pretty funny company


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 20, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yeah. Derry.



What happened to the protocol that emerged after the 1998 agreement calling it Derry/Londonderry?

When I was a kid in the '70s and the Troubles seemed to be on the telly almost daily, I thought they were two different towns.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 20, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I've no idea.They will know better when/ if the powers that be release some information on the warning given.
> 
> My gut feeling is that it is loyalist sectarianism and to do with the border issue.
> It's a nasty development.




..It looks like it's being linked to by the "New IRA".
Car bomb linked to dissident group 'the New IRA' - Independent.ie


----------



## Badgers (Jan 20, 2019)




----------



## agricola (Jan 20, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> What happened to the protocol that emerged after the 1998 agreement calling it Derry/Londonderry?
> 
> When I was a kid in the '70s and the Troubles seemed to be on the telly almost daily, I thought they were two different towns.



If you are on a bus through Derry and noone gets up to offer a seat, speak to each other or have eye contact, then its Londonderry.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 20, 2019)

I can’t help thinking that at the back of Corbyn’s mind is the comforting knowledge he has an allotment.


----------



## gosub (Jan 20, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> What happened to the protocol that emerged after the 1998 agreement calling it Derry/Londonderry?
> 
> When I was a kid in the '70s and the Troubles seemed to be on the telly almost daily, I thought they were two different towns.


Depends which bunch of balaclavas is blowing shit up


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 20, 2019)

> John Prescott to thump an MP every hour on the hour until Brexit gets sorted



Newsthump article


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers  (including Cameron).


Based on what? As SpackleFrog says if Cameron supported leave he could still be in power now. I'm sorry but this is tin-foil hat nonsense.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 20, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> What happened to the protocol that emerged after the 1998 agreement calling it Derry/Londonderry?
> 
> When I was a kid in the '70s and the Troubles seemed to be on the telly almost daily, I thought they were two different towns.


Colonialists call it londonderry.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 20, 2019)

That's why the bbc is calling it londonderry.  It's a message to you know who about the state position on the matter.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 20, 2019)

Ming said:
			
		

> think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers (including Cameron).





redsquirrel said:


> Based on what? As SpackleFrog says if Cameron supported leave he could still be in power now. I'm sorry but this is tin-foil hat nonsense.



I agree with you there about Ming's point on 'lying'. 

But with Cameron, If he'd supported leave in 2016,would he really still be there now? Whether or not remain had won?

Counterfactuals solve nothing, but interesting points.


----------



## Ming (Jan 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Based on what? As SpackleFrog says if Cameron supported leave he could still be in power now. I'm sorry but this is tin-foil hat nonsense.


Can't back it up with anything, that's true. Just a feeling. A no-deal Brexit is a hell of an opportunity if your already wealthy and it'll enable them to push further getting rid of the welfare state. Also they have a track record of telling shameless whopping great porkies. Remember 'No top down reorganisation of the NHS?'. Followed by the biggest reorganisation in its history The Health and Social Care Act 2012. And then Portillo admitting they lied.

eta: I met Esther McVey once (my old local MP for West Wirral). She was campaigning about the local post office closing with a petition. I mentioned the Tory track record on post office closures and asked if her petition was cross party. She lied and said it was.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I agree with you there about Ming's point on 'lying'.
> 
> But with Cameron, If he'd supported leave in 2016,would he really still be there now? Whether or not remain had won?
> 
> Counterfactuals solve nothing, but interesting points.



Quite possibly if Cameron had campaigned to Leave it would have tipped the balance the other way


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> Can't back it up with anything that's true. Just a feeling. A no-deal Brexit is a hell of an opportunity if your already wealthy and it'll enable them to push further getting rid of the welfare state. Also they have a track record of telling shameless whopping great porkies. Remember 'No top down reorganisation of the NHS?'. Followed by the biggest reorganisation in its history The Health and Social Care Act 2012. And then Portillo admitting they lied.
> 
> eta: I met Esther McVey once (my old local MP for West Wirral). She was campaigning about the local post office closing with a petition. I mentioned the Tory track record on post office closures and asked if her petition was cross party. She lied and said it was.




Why not go all the way then and say Blair is secretly desperate for a no deal crash out? He probably did more to ensure Leave won and is still likely to win than any Tories.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 20, 2019)

blood pressure trigger warning - 



> A citizens’ assembly is now the only way to break the Brexit deadlock
> - Gordon Brown



Guardian article here

Think it's slightly less likely an outcome than Larry the Cat being elevated to the Lords and being asked to lead a government of national unity, but...


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 20, 2019)

Supine said:


> View attachment 159238
> 
> Pretty funny company



I dunno, I would have thought a manufacturer of paper towels would be very well placed to deal with a massive stinking pile of shit.


----------



## Ming (Jan 20, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why not go all the way then and say Blair is secretly desperate for a no deal crash out? He probably did more to ensure Leave won and is still likely to win than any Tories.


I think he only joined the Labour Party because he wanted to shag Cherie Booth personally. Maybe he is. I am confident it’ll be a no-deal. They’re just running the clock down now. By the way you’ll see a lot more stories like this in the coming months...
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 20, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> Think it's slightly less likely an outcome than Larry the Cat being elevated to the Lords and being asked to lead a government of national unity, but...


You've heard the rumours about what May's going to announce tomorrow, then.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 20, 2019)

Fuck it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 20, 2019)

Raheem said:


> You've heard the rumours about what May's going to announce tomorrow, then.



Amending the GFA? Ambitious...


----------



## Theisticle (Jan 20, 2019)

Absolute madness...

Exclusive: Theresa May mulls amending Good Friday Agreement to get her Brexit deal past MPs

Read without paywall here:


----------



## Raheem (Jan 20, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Amending the GFA? Ambitious...


No, I think she'll go with the feline Lord Protector idea. She's not completely crazy, after all.


----------



## xenon (Jan 20, 2019)

Overton window


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 20, 2019)

I want Britain and Europe to be closer. Europe does not want to be lead by the Germans, it wants Britain right in there.  It so fucking criminal that we are talking about leaving Europe.  Europe wants us to take a lead.   We are FUCKING  pussy  for not taking on this role.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 20, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I dunno, I would have thought a manufacturer of paper towels would be very well placed to deal with a massive stinking pile of shit.



I think it's beyond the stage where shovels would be enough, let alone paper towels...


----------



## xenon (Jan 20, 2019)

So basically re-write the GFA to say no hard border on the island of Ireland. There, take  that EU.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 20, 2019)

Reckon it's completely likely that Theresa May currently doesn't know what she will be saying tomorrow.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2019)

xenon said:


> Overton window


That's French for 'Open your window', if I'm not mistaken.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 21, 2019)

I quite enjoyed this in the NY Times

*The Malign Incompetence of the British Ruling Class *
With Brexit, the chumocrats who drew borders from India to Ireland are getting a taste of their own medicine.

Opinion | The Malign Incompetence of the British Ruling Class


----------



## brogdale (Jan 21, 2019)

The deal is dead; long live the new deal?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Can't back it up with anything, that's true. Just a feeling. A no-deal Brexit is a hell of an opportunity if your already wealthy and it'll enable them to push further getting rid of the welfare state. Also they have a track record of telling shameless whopping great porkies. Remember 'No top down reorganisation of the NHS?'. Followed by the biggest reorganisation in its history The Health and Social Care Act 2012. And then Portillo admitting they lied.


I don't think anyone is in any doubt that politicians (of all parties) are lying scumbags. But your "feeling" ignores common sense, history and any type of serious analysis.  

The leadership of the Tory party has long been in favour of the EU, they wanted to enter the common market, they supported the remain vote in 75, they are after all the right party of capital and capital is certainly in favour of the UK remaining in the EU (unless you also think the BoE, CBI etc are all lying?). And if Cameron and all these Tories were in favour of leaving, why not campaign for Leave, it would have certainly helped him/them with the wider CP membership, they could have neutralised the loss of votes to UKIP. As I said tin-foil hat stuff.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 21, 2019)

Theisticle said:


> Absolute madness...
> 
> Exclusive: Theresa May mulls amending Good Friday Agreement to get her Brexit deal past MPs
> 
> Read without paywall here:




Negotiating a smooth brexit with the EU would be a piece of cake compared with fucking with the GFA and getting all parties to agree


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers  (including Cameron).


I'm afraid this is nothing more than _post hoc_ rationalisations of _feelings_.  Because you _feel_ that Remain is ("must be") the 'progressive' choice, and since you understand Tories as being _not progressive_, therefore Tories can't be Remain.  But the reason the conclusion is incorrect is that both the first and second premises are faulty. 

You strongly believe Remain to be the Progressive choice, but you are not allowing all the evidence against Remain.  You merely feel that it is the internationalist choice, therefore it cannot be anything but progressive.  This despite knowing about Fortress Europe, about the neoliberal nature of the EU rules, about the treatment of Greece and the periphery (Portugal etc), and despite knowing that Remain was led by a Tory prime minister and chancellor.  But this must be black and white, right?  You have to choose Remain or Leave, and the decision has to be clear cut...doesn't it? One is the left choice and the other the rightwing choice. (Well, how about, no: it isn't that simple).

Still on premise one: you are not clearly defining "progressive".  Remember, the Tories under Cameron passed the Same Sex Couples Act, and so on.  Indeed, neoliberalism successfully co-opted many of the individualist concerns of identity politics.  So "progressive" ideals can't be seen simply in left and right shorthand any more, as far as mainstream UK parties are concerned.  They are no longer a reliable marker of leftness.

Which leads us to the problem with premise two: that the Tories aren't "progressive".  Well, we already know that we haven't defined that well enough to exclude Tory policies.  So it can't be used to rule out Toryness.  And secondly, it misses what is the primary concern of the Tory party under Cameron and Osborne: the neoliberal project.  Look at who else supported Remain - the CBI, the British Chambers of Commerce, the financial institutions, and so on.  The neoliberal project, in other words.

Which means that your feeling that Tories couldn't have been Remain is based on a number of errors, failures to properly define terms, and a lack of structural analysis.  But mainly it was just a _feeling_ that you couldn't possibly feel this strongly about something that Tories also cared about.

What you should be watching now, however, is the way that the neoliberal project copes with coming to an accommodation with Brexit.  That's what is at the root of the Tories' turmoil at the moment.


----------



## zahir (Jan 21, 2019)

A post from eureferendum.com arguing that we’re heading for a no deal:

Brexit: a black hole at the heart of government


----------



## teuchter (Jan 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm afraid this is nothing more than _post hoc_ rationalisations of _feelings_.  Because you _feel_ that Remain is ("must be") the 'progressive' choice, and since you understand Tories as being _not progressive_, therefore Tories can't be Remain.  But the reason the conclusion is incorrect is that both the first and second premises are faulty.
> 
> You strongly believe Remain to be the Progressive choice, but you are not allowing all the evidence against Remain.  You merely feel that it is the internationalist choice, therefore it cannot be anything but progressive.  This despite knowing about Fortress Europe, about the neoliberal nature of the EU rules, about the treatment of Greece and the periphery (Portugal etc), and despite knowing that Remain was led by a Tory prime minister and chancellor.  But this must be black and white, right?  You have to choose Remain or Leave, and the decision has to be clear cut...doesn't it? One is the left choice and the other the rightwing choice. (Well, how about, no: it isn't that simple).
> 
> ...


Ming hasn't even used the word 'progressive' as far as I can see


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ming hasn't even used the word 'progressive' as far as I can see


S/He didn’t expressly outline the formal, deductive argument either. I’m not quoting: I’m inferring.  (As I think is quite clear from the content and context of my post).


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 21, 2019)

Marriage equality is an 'individualistic concern' now. Awesome.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 21, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Marriage equality is an 'individualistic concern' now. Awesome.


First of all, that’s not what I said. And secondly, are you inferring that I disapprove of equal marriage? Because I don’t. In fact I don’t necessarily disapprove of individualistic concerns, per se. I’m not dismissing individual ‘freedoms’.  I’m pointing out that they’re a side of the equation that the neoliberal project felt able to grant. So they can’t be used to define what is and isn’t Tory.

But if you’d read my post you’d know that.


----------



## AnandLeo (Jan 21, 2019)

The outcome of the Brexit referendum is not a paradigm for democracy. Democracy by rule of majority is only a shade of democracy. Democracy is rule by people directly or by representation. After the Brexit referendum, people have called for respecting the views of 48 percent who voted to remain, not just the 52 percent voted to exit the EU. That is the true democracy. The reality is only a very small minority would wish to remain in the EU under its present terms and emerging trends. The rest of the majority of remainers would like to remain for ties in trade, and many other economic scientific and cultural objectives with restrictions on movement of people. Leavers want a stop the free movement of people and political and legal union with the EU. Leavers are not against free trade with EU.

If there is another referendum, and if remainers win, the situation is back to the status quo. Not many remainers want that either. Most remainers prefer a soft Brexit. It was just that option was not available in the Brexit referendum. If the leavers win, the situation is back to the current impasse of no consensus on a Brexit agreement or the feared no deal. So what is the point of another referendum?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> The outcome of the Brexit referendum is not a paradigm for democracy. Democracy by rule of majority is only a shade of democracy. Democracy is rule by people directly or by representation. After the Brexit referendum, people have called for respecting the views of 48 percent who voted to remain, not just the 52 percent voted to exit the EU. That is the true democracy. The reality is only a very small minority would wish to remain in the EU under its present terms and emerging trends. The rest of the majority of remainers would like to remain for ties in trade, and many other economic scientific and cultural objectives with restrictions on movement of people. Leavers want a stop the free movement of people and political and legal union with the EU. Leavers are not against free trade with EU.
> 
> If there is another referendum, and if remainers win, the situation is back to the status quo. Not many remainers want that either. Most remainers prefer a soft Brexit. It was just that option was not available in the Brexit referendum. If the leavers win, the situation is back to the current impasse of no consensus on a Brexit agreement or the feared no deal. So what is the point of another referendum?


Not sure where you've got a lot of this from. 'most remainers prefer a soft brexit'? Really? I don't think that is the case - lots of people want to stay in the EU. And 'leavers want to stop the free movement of people'  - all of them? Really? Not true either. There are examples of countries outside the EU within the free movement area (Switzerland and Norway), so leaving the EU does not have to mean ending free movement, and never has had to mean that.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 21, 2019)

Turns out, like all worldly wrongs, Brexit is the Lib Dems' fault:



			
				Donald Tusk said:
			
		

> I asked David Cameron, ‘Why did you decide on this referendum, this – it’s so dangerous, so even stupid, you know,’ and, he told me - and I was really amazed and even shocked - that the only reason was his own party, [He told me] he felt really safe, because he thought at the same time that there’s no risk of a referendum, because, his coalition partner, the Liberals, would block this idea of a referendum. But then, surprisingly, he won and there was no coalition partner. So paradoxically David Cameron became the real victim of his own victory.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

I think he even read that wrong - i'm not sure the lib-dems would have blocked a referendum when in coalition. They had a manifesto commitment to an in/out referendum under certain circumstances (circumstances so vague and unspecific that they allowed them to play all side of the argument to different markets at diff times of course). I think they may well have saw the opp to split their tory competitors as one too juicy to turn down.

edit: yes, looking around it seems Clegg was happy to support a referendum if given a few scraps elsewhere.


----------



## treelover (Jan 21, 2019)

> On every table in every Wetherspoon watering hole, there’s a little folded up card which preaches to the drunks why Britain would be best outside the EU. Makes me wonder why the New Zealander who owns the chain is so passionate about this. Maybe he thinks it will create an even bigger underclass to go and drown their sorrows while eating cheap, microwaved slops.



Posted on John Harris's article in the Guardian about the growing tensions/culture wars around Brexit, and before anyone says this is just CIF, ignore it, this unpleasant Eloi/Moorlock bifurcation as an example of class snobbery is being replicated in numerous middle class milieus across the UK, inc social media.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 21, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> I want Britain and Europe to be closer. Europe does not want to be lead by the Germans, it wants Britain right in there.  It so fucking criminal that we are talking about leaving Europe.  Europe wants us to take a lead.   We are FUCKING  pussy  for not taking on this role.


 that little bit of nuttiness has brightened up a bit of a crap day for me!


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover Tim Martin who owns wetherspoons is British not kiwi. As a simple Google will confirm


----------



## Wilf (Jan 21, 2019)

You'll have to take my Wetherspoons veggie sausage and mash from my cold dead hand.


----------



## treelover (Jan 21, 2019)

> Pickman's model said:
> 
> 
> > treelover Tim Martin who owns wetherspoons is British not kiwi. As a simple Google will confirm
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted on John Harris's article in the Guardian about the growing tensions/culture wars around Brexit, and before anyone says this is just CIF, ignore it, this unpleasant Eloi/Moorlock bifurcation as an example of class snobbery is being replicated in numerous middle class milieus across the UK, inc social media.


I see you added this little paragraph after I pointed out tim martin not kiwi


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover you ask if I care to respond to the substantive point. I've responded to the post as it was originally posted.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 21, 2019)

Yeah


----------



## treelover (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I see you added this little paragraph after I pointed out tim martin not kiwi




for gods sake, i was having trouble with the quotes!

now could you reply, i am interested to know if my opinion is shared about this growing class snobbery.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> for gods sake, i was having trouble with the quotes!


Not my problem


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 21, 2019)

See


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted on John Harris's article in the Guardian about the growing tensions/culture wars around Brexit, and before anyone says this is just CIF, ignore it, this unpleasant Eloi/Moorlock bifurcation as an example of class snobbery is being replicated in numerous middle class milieus across the UK, inc social media.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 21, 2019)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 159345


"A lot of my friends are..."


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> now could you reply, i am interested to know if my opinion is shared about this growing class snobbery.


this wasn't there when I replied a minute ago

As anyone who reads the guardian knows there is nothing new in this class snobbery, and I'd like to see some evidence for your claim it's growing


----------



## chilango (Jan 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> You'll have to take my Wetherspoons veggie sausage and mash from my cold dead hand.



I don't think that's a particularly uncommon scenario.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted on John Harris's article in the Guardian about the growing tensions/culture wars around Brexit, and before anyone says this is just CIF, ignore it, this unpleasant Eloi/Moorlock bifurcation as an example of class snobbery is being replicated in numerous middle class milieus across the UK, inc social media.


I don't think it's growing so much we are just seeing a number of factors bringing it to light anew and removing the factors that previously kept it quiet or able to be managed. We had people calling for restrictions on the franchise on hidden class grounds the day after the referendum, people arguing for what effectively is a franchise tied to 'property in the nation' etc. And we also see leave people from v privileged positions attempting to play the role of the 'smallest he' in return. The social apartheid it's bringing to light has long been a feature of this society - i'd put the height of the _hidden _growth of it (that is, on top of the traditional cleavages around work education and housing) around the first two new labour govts - and it was always going to be uncovered when the tide went out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

chilango said:


> I don't think that's a particularly uncommon scenario.


I can recommend the fish and chips at grimsby's wetherspoons, the yarborough hotel


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I don't think it's growing so much we are just seeing a number of factors bringing it to light anew and removing the factors that previously kept it quiet or able to be managed. We had people calling for restrictions on the franchise on hidden class grounds the day after the referendum, people arguing for what effectively is a franchise tied to 'property in the nation' etc. And we also see leave people fro, v privileged positions attempting to play the role of the 'smallest he' in return. The social apartheid it's bringing to light has long been a feature of this society - i'd put the height of the _hidden _growth of it (that is, on top of the traditional cleavages around work education and housing) around the first two new labour govts - and it was always going to be uncovered when the tide went out.


There was a load of shit in the Guardian in the ref campaign saying almost explicitly you need to be thick racist and working class to vote leave


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> for gods sake, i was having trouble with the quotes!
> 
> now could you reply, i am interested to know if my opinion is shared about this growing class snobbery.


I'd recommend noting that it is a comment from a reader, not John Harris himself. Is one person really evidence of such 'growing class snobbery'?


----------



## treelover (Jan 21, 2019)

Butchers reply would appear to endorse this view and there are many other examples on social media, etc. The post also got a lot of recommends


----------



## belboid (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Butchers reply would appear to endorse this view and there are many other examples on social media, etc. The post also got a lot of recommends


I'm not entirely sure that "I don't think it's growing" is really an endorsement of your view that it is growing.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 21, 2019)

I would certainly say - in a liberal, wishy-washy, both one thing and the other way - that there has been a growth in the _acceptability _of the public espousement of snobbishness/class hatred that treelover is talking about.


----------



## chilango (Jan 21, 2019)

I'm just writing a piece about social mobility and schools and the the role they play in widening the gap and right in the first fucking paragraph  I found myself referencing the Brexit vote - comparing a map of social mobility and Brexit vote shows a stark correlation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Butchers reply would appear to endorse this view and there are many other examples on social media, etc. The post also got a lot of recommends


Doesn't really cut the evidence mustard


----------



## grit (Jan 21, 2019)

Poland sticking their oar in now Backstop trouble: first cracks in the EU's solidarity with Ireland on Brexit - Independent.ie


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Ah i see, EU _concerns _and _positions_ suddenly become _oars_.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> S/He didn’t expressly outline the formal, deductive argument either. I’m not quoting: I’m inferring.  (As I think is quite clear from the content and context of my post).


I don't think it's clear. When you say, for example, 




			
				danny la rouge said:
			
		

> you are not clearly defining "progressive"



that rather strongly implies someone has used that word; otherwise you are complaining that they have failed to define a term they haven't even used.

It read more like speculation than inference to me. Speculation that a remain proponent conforms to remainer stereotypes.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 21, 2019)

hot air baboon said:


> View attachment 159345


Here's the whole of the table:


In order of bothered-ness about a relative marrying a leave voter:

Intend to vote Lib dem: 50% bothered
Voted remain: 37% bothered
2017 Lib dem voters: 33% bothered
Intend to vote Labour: 32% bothered
2017 Labour voters: 32% bothered
18-24 yr olds: 32% bothered

Looking at class:

ABC1: 24% bothered
C2DE: 14% bothered


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Speculation that a remain proponent conforms to remainer stereotypes.


Did you read the context? The context of Ming ‘s conspiracy theory that the Tories who supported Remain weren’t really “Remain” supporters?




			
				Ming said:
			
		

> I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers (including Cameron)



I was starting from there, and wondering how someone might get to that point. What might the reasoning be that leads to that conclusion.

If I’m wrong Ming will no doubt get back to me.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

I dread a referendum, but believe remain would probably win. Now people have seen the darker shades of Brexit never revealed for the first ballot, let them decide. Incidentally, focus groups show the so-called magic slogan, “Tell them again!”, only works with die-hard no dealers: those thinking again flinch at its aggressive tone. Simplistic slogans won’t swing it this time. What will win is a Labour campaign promising to change the country with a shift of power, wealth and well-paid work out of London and the south, understanding what the Brexit vote really meant.

• Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Here's the whole of the table:
> View attachment 159360
> 
> In order of bothered-ness about a relative marrying a leave voter:
> ...


What were the results if the leave voter was a dogger?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I dread a referendum, but believe remain would probably win. Now people have seen the darker shades of Brexit never revealed for the first ballot, let them decide. Incidentally, focus groups show the so-called magic slogan, “Tell them again!”, only works with die-hard no dealers: those thinking again flinch at its aggressive tone. Simplistic slogans won’t swing it this time. What will win is a Labour campaign promising to change the country with a shift of power, wealth and well-paid work out of London and the south, understanding what the Brexit vote really meant.
> 
> • Polly Toynbee is a Guardian columnist


What will win is shipping identified leave voters to the british antarctic territory

More chance of that than a Labour campaign promising to change the country with a shift of power, wealth and well-paid work out of London


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Here's the whole of the table:
> View attachment 159360
> 
> In order of bothered-ness about a relative marrying a leave voter:
> ...


It's a bit weird to read these results as saying that much tbh. The headline figures are that only 1 out of 10 leave voters said they'd mind even a little, while just 1 in 5 remain voters said they'd mind even a little. It's a non-issue for a large majority of people. The results from half a dozen libdem voters in the sample don't mean much.


----------



## quiet guy (Jan 21, 2019)

Just seen this brilliant post from Mike Harding to Boris Johnson.





To Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson AKA Bojo The Clown C.O. The Circus. Westminster. London. England. Europe.

Dear Bojo,
I hope this finds you well.

The moppet you see here is a pretty poor model of you made of fly-tying beeswax into which I am sticking thorns. This is called “magick” and it’s supposed to give you aches and pains and stuff. The trouble is that, to work, it has to contain some of your hair or a toenail or as a last resort some belly button fluff. So far I have been unable to obtain these items. Sadly.

You won’t have heard of me because I didn’t go to Eton or Oxford, I wasn’t a member of the Bullingdon Club, I didn’t burn £50 notes under the noses of the destitute, and I didn’t smash up restaurants and then pay for the repairs with mummy and daddy’s money. You won’t know me because I am one of the “Great Unwashed” the “Plebs” who live North of your Westminster bubble.

The reason I’m writing to you is simple. I read some of your pieces in the Telegraph recently from way back when you were their Brussels correspondent – you’ll remember those days – lots of boozy lunches followed by you hammering copy out into cyberspace. Easy peasy job, lots of perks. And to earn all that money you told lots of lies.
This is how you describe it…
“I was sort of chucking these rocks over the garden wall and I listened to this amazing crash from the greenhouse next door over in England as everything I wrote from Brussels was having this amazing, explosive effect – and it really gave me this, I suppose, rather weird sense of power,”

Ah, what japes you had Bojo, almost as funny as when you offered to procure a hit man to batter somebody who had troubled your friend Darius Guppy.

And here’s some of the lies/rocks you chucked over the garden wall:
“Brussels recruits sniffers to ensure that Euro–manure smells the same”
“Threat to British pink sausages” 
“Snails are fish, says EU”. 
You wrote total bollocks about straight bananas and conkers being banned from school playgrounds; about plans to standardise condom sizes and plans to ban prawn cocktail flavour crisps. 
In fact you got paid incredibly well, and lunched even better by sending total bollocks to London for 5 yrs. It was a drip-feed of EU hate and it eventually worm its way into the nation’s psyche.

You never once mentioned the EU’s great achievements – cementing peace for 70 yrs, uniting the continent, creating the world’s largest single market, enabling its citizens to travel and live anywhere they choose, busting monopolies, improving the environment, sharing research into things like cancer and dementia, sending thousands of doctors and nurses and teachers here. Not one single mention.
You allowed the lies about our laws, money and borders to fester and stink because it was more fun that way.
Laws – We voted for 95% of all EU laws. Of the other 5% we abstained on 3% and lost 2%.
Money – We never entered the Euro so always had control of our money. The money we paid the EU was returned over and again in benefits and in total amounted to less each year than we spend on Northern Ireland.
Our borders – We could return anybody from the EU after 3 months if they had no means of subsistence or abode. We chose not to enact this ruling.
Never mentioned that did you Bojo? Not japish enough? Couldn’t get it on the clown car? But there was room for “£350 Million.”

I am surprised that there is not, in Brussels, a statue of you with the legend “Bollocksmeister” on it. The statue of course would need to be made out of solid Home Counties, Bullingdon Club Manure.

I remember you getting elected for parliament and how you said “There’s too much sense of entitlement in this country.” That made me smile. A bit rich coming from a privately educated chap who was given a job on the Times because of family connections and who (as most old Etonians do) sees himself as entitled to rule over the rest of us. The “Entitlement” you were talking about of course was entitlement to a minimum wage, sickness and unemployment benefit and a reasonable pension; the entitlement, in other words, to a decent life and some dignity towards the end. (The French state pension, BTW, is €1200 – how does that compare with ours?)

I checked up on your record as an administrator and man of ideas. Gosh! I am completely whelmed!
As Mayor of London you promised to totally eradicate rough sleeping by 2012; it doubled under your leadership. Your 2008 manifesto promised there would be manned ticket offices at every station; you closed all of London's ticket offices. You aimed to reduce transport fares; they increased by 4.2 per cent. You trashed the London Fire Service, bought water canons to subdue the population of the city you governed (they were sold for scrap at a massive loss) and managed to spend £46 million on a bridge that was never built. Where did that money go Bojo? To funding a new clown school or into the pockets of your pals, the consultants?
But hey – what fun – what japes along the road eh?
And then May, to get you off her manor, made you Foreign Secretary. I realised then that Satire is dead. Even Swift could not have invented such a scenario. You said that Muslim women wearing the veil look like bank robbers and letterboxes; black children are “piccaninnies” and all black people have “watermelon smiles” I thought all this was bad enough – but then you went on to say that Libya would be a good tourist destination, “once they have cleared all the dead bodies off the streets.” 
Whilst Editor of The Spectator, you published an article which stated, “Orientals … have larger brains and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the other pole.”
Good basic stance for a Foreign Sec. at the time of Disraeli – doesn’t quite cut it now.
And you are some writer Bojo. I remember during the Ref campaign you wrote two pieces, one saying the EU was a heap of ordure and the other saying it was le best thing aprés le pain sliced. You couldn’t make up your mind which article best served, “le project Boris” but plumped for the leave one since you thought Leave would lose but that you would be seen as its champion and would therefore get David Macaroon’s job once he’d buggered off to his shepherds’ hut.
The sight of your face and Michael Gove’s face when you found you had won that Brexit morning was something to behold. You hadn’t a feckin’ clue what to do next and, if I remember rightly buggered off into hiding for several days.
As Mrs Gove said, “You were only supposed to blow the bloody doors off.”
And how you worked at that Brexit job – the greatest con since The Trojan Horse – convincing the population that all the problems caused by the Thatcher-led, Tory destruction of our industries, and the savage cuts of Austerity were the fault of the EU. Pure brilliant I must admit. And the way you sold those sunlit uplands that would lead us to Empire2 – Majestic.
So here we are now Bojo, in the Brexit circus ring, you in your clown car racing round still throwing rocks over the wall telling people they can have their cake and eat it, and that the Irish tail is wagging the UK dog. Ah Bojo, did you ever read the stories of the Irish Famine? How food was leaving Ireland under armed guard as starving people died in the ditches, the green foam of the grass that was their last meal flecking their mouths? One million dead - England's own Holocaust? Did you ever count the dead of The Troubles? Do you even know that the first murder of those terrible years was that of an official at a border post? No I thought not. Not enough of a jape for you.
I awoke last night in a bit of a lather because I’d had a nightmare in which I was trying to describe you to a visitor from Mars. Assuming the Martian had read the Greyfriar’s books the closest I came was, “Flashman in the shape of the Fat Owl of the Remove.” all the bumble and chortle of Billy Bunter but behind the mask, an all-devouring ego on legs, what William Golding in his novel, Pincher Martin describes thus… “This painted bastard here takes anything he can lay his hands on.... He was born with his mouth and his flies open and both hands out to grab. He’s a cosmic case of the bugger who gets his penny and someone else’s bun.”
Or in your case, “cake and eat it.”
So Bojo, you bumble malevolently on, always on the look out for Number One and quite prepared to destroy the country in the process – because, well, you know, it’s all a bit of a jape isn’t it? 
I’ve just got an email from your barber. He’s prepared to send me some of your hair in exchange for tickets to my next show. It’s a deal. The hair is in a jiffy bag on its way North. So, as from tomorrow, you may notice a few twinges and niggly pains, then after a few days….well…… “Lorks! Crikey! Lumme! I say you chaps! Looks like my tadger’s fallen orf!”

Yours
Michael Christopher Damien Makepiece Harding.
Yorkshire
England 
Europe
The World
The Cosmos
Wherever.


----------



## LDC (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There was a load of shit in the Guardian in the ref campaign saying almost explicitly you need to be thick racist and working class to vote leave



Not only _The Guardian_. I lost respect for a number of friends who pretty much said the same, albeit sometimes slightly cloaked.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 21, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Not only _The Guardian_. I lost respect for a number of friends who pretty much said the same, albeit sometimes slightly cloaked.



If you quote the bit you're talking about it would make more sense to me Lynn. x


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

What made you turn from criticising people for saying 'fuck you greece' to chanting very loudly 'fuck you greece' wookey?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What made you turn from criticising people for saying 'fuck you greece' to chanting very loudly 'fuck you greece' wookey?


All those declared anti capitalists getting right into the four freedoms...


----------



## Wookey (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What made you turn from criticising people for saying 'fuck you greece' to chanting very loudly 'fuck you greece' wookey?



Where am I chanting that?

E2A: I'll overlook the fact that you've grabbed a quote from a three year old thread on a different subject, for now. I reserve the right to unilaterally withdraw from that position with no notice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If you quote the bit you're talking about it would make more sense to me Lynn. x


It makes perfect sense you dullard


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Where am I chanting that?
> 
> E2A: I'll overlook the fact that you've grabbed a quote from a three year old thread on a different subject, for now. I reserve the right to unilaterally withdraw from that position with no notice.


It was directly related - indeed it was in a thread about the referendum result and if leave voters were racist and you gleefully characterised people taking the position that you now support as saying 'fuck you greece'.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 21, 2019)

Unsurprisingly, a 'Plan C' needed.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It was directly related - indeed it was in a thread about the referendum result and if leave voters were racist and you gleefully characterised people taking the position that you now support as saying 'fuck you greece'.



It's cross-thread baiting.

I'll ask again, where have I chanted very loudly "fuck you Greece".

Or, to be generous, what have I said that you have interpreted so, and how did you get there?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's cross-thread baiting.
> 
> I'll ask again, where have I chanted very loudly "fuck you Greece".
> 
> Or, to be generous, what have I said that you have interpreted so, and how did you get there?


You need only follow the post that i linked to and scroll down a few.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You need only follow the post that i linked to and scroll down a few.



Mate, that's like _homework_.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Dilettante.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 21, 2019)

Why the fuck is May trying to fix the backstop issue? That’ll bring maybe a couple of dozen on board, she needs to overturn a 230 vote defeat. Futile. She basically needs to fuck off, her deal is going nowhere.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 21, 2019)

What was it Ken said? "bloody difficult woman"?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Why the fuck is May trying to fix the backstop issue? That’ll bring maybe a couple of dozen on board, she needs to overturn a 230 vote defeat. Futile. She basically needs to fuck off, her deal is going nowhere.


No ones else's is either. It's not her that's the problem.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No ones else's is either. It's not her that's the problem.


It's getting interesting. May has no alternative but to plough on. She is doing what the Greeks did not have the support or balls to do. Hilariously it's the last thing she wants to do.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It's getting interesting. May has no alternative but to plough on. She is doing what the Greeks did not have the support or balls to do. Hilariously it's the last thing she wants to do.


The idea of her staring down the EU when Syriza and tsipras already buckled is one for the ages. 

(There's a reason that Farage is a hero in greece as well).


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

May has the support for a EU exit. Syrizia never ever did.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> May has the support for a EU exit. Syrizia never ever did.


I'm on about the bottle from the leaders.

She's entirely trapped. They had room to do stuff


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm on about the bottle from the leaders.
> 
> She's entirely trapped. They had room to do stuff


Agreed. She really has nowhere to go but tragedy and farce and eventual resignation. Uncharted waters indeed. LLetsa would fucking love this.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Agreed. She really has nowhere to go but tragedy and farce and eventual resignation. Uncharted waters indeed. LLetsa would fucking love this.


LLETSA would say - as he did for the 20+ years i talked to him - _nothing is happening_. Even though it's now literally happening. _Nothing changes or can change._


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 21, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Jan 21, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Why the fuck is May trying to fix the backstop issue? That’ll bring maybe a couple of dozen on board, she needs to overturn a 230 vote defeat. Futile. She basically needs to fuck off, her deal is going nowhere.


Quite. I was reading this
May's deal is dead as a dodo - Weekly Worker
which doesn't add anything new really, but has this analogy which i like

"Watching Theresa May’s progress as prime minister is bizarre. The oddity of it consists in her behaving as if she has some clever move saved up for later, except that she does not - like a poker player going all in on a pair of twos. Except that everybody knows she has no way out, so it is as if our poker player, before betting, had inadvertently dropped their cards face up on the table, picked them up, and wagered the family silver anyway."

Seems to me her clever move is to fillibuster to the deadline and pray for a miracle. I note they're trying to push back the 29th January vote as not a real vote. And there'll more re-votes and re-hashes to come it seems. Grind down the opposition. Throw in the odd shit bribe and tweak. No chance of working and a waste of everyone's time. I guess the interesting bit is at what point exactly will the final crunch happen.


----------



## treelover (Jan 21, 2019)

Labour calls for vote in Commons on holding second referendum

Labour calls for vote on 2nd ref, constructive ambiguity over? How will this impact on their pro leave vote.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

No one else has better cards or it would be game over


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 21, 2019)

There is something reminiscent of "Being There" in it for sure.(intending to reply to ska there)


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour calls for vote in Commons on holding second referendum
> 
> Labour calls for vote on 2nd ref, constructive ambiguity over? How will this impact on their pro leave vote.


It doesn't call for a second vote. It's to kill the idea.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It doesn't call for a second vote. It's to kill the idea.


Thank fuck.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It doesn't call for a second vote. It's to kill the idea.



this is all getting a bit zen - not calling for a second vote by calling for a second vote


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> this is all getting a bit zen - not calling for a second vote by calling for a second vote


But it doesn't at all. The MP numbers are not there. It's there to show that. 

The only bit of that press release designed as news is:



> The group is planning to take the argument further at a news conference on Tuesday, fronted by Labour MPs David Lammy and Bridget Phillipson with Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson and Caroline Lucas, the Green party leader in Westminster.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

What's the collective noun for that lot?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Agreed. She really has nowhere to go but tragedy and farce and eventual resignation. Uncharted waters indeed. LLetsa would fucking love this.


He'd be hiding his glee behind his miserablist facade


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Thank fuck.


There has not been a single poll that's not  hostile to the idea of a 2nd ref. Not even amongst remainers. It's why this lot focusing on 2nd ref or citizens assembly are so miles out of touch. It's a perfect example of disconnect and it's been going on since that AV vote. (The public demonstration of it i mean, not the disconnect).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the collective noun for that lot?


Wankers


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> There has not been a single poll that's not  hostile to the idea of a 2nd ref. Not even amongst remainers. It's why this lot focusing on 2nd ref or citizens assembly are so miles out of touch. It's a perfect example of disconnect and it's been going on since that AV vote. (The public demonstration of it i mean, not the disconnect).


They exist in a class bubble.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Wankers


Can do better 5/10.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the collective noun for that lot?


Them. They. Don't give _them _nothing. Don't tell _them _nothing.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Them. They. Don't give _them _nothing. Don't tell _them _nothing.


Less chance to frame us?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the collective noun for that lot?


A disappointment


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Less chance to frame us?


Less chance of _them _doing it for sure.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm afraid this is nothing more than _post hoc_ rationalisations of _feelings_.  Because you _feel_ that Remain is ("must be") the 'progressive' choice, and since you understand Tories as being _not progressive_, therefore Tories can't be Remain.  But the reason the conclusion is incorrect is that both the first and second premises are faulty.
> 
> You strongly believe Remain to be the Progressive choice, but you are not allowing all the evidence against Remain.  You merely feel that it is the internationalist choice, therefore it cannot be anything but progressive.  This despite knowing about Fortress Europe, about the neoliberal nature of the EU rules, about the treatment of Greece and the periphery (Portugal etc), and despite knowing that Remain was led by a Tory prime minister and chancellor.  But this must be black and white, right?  You have to choose Remain or Leave, and the decision has to be clear cut...doesn't it? One is the left choice and the other the rightwing choice. (Well, how about, no: it isn't that simple).
> 
> ...



Superb post. Should be pinned onto the head of every ‘socialist’ who continues to swallow the guff of the remainers


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> But it doesn't at all. The MP numbers are not there. It's there to show that.


The numbers are not there to get it through as a bankbench amendment, but what Corbyn seems to be proposing is a government bill backed by the Labour leadership (he would have to back it, since he is calling for it). That would stand a very good chance, surely, if May were to go for it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

No he isn't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> I think a lot of remain Tories are lying about being remainers  (including Cameron). I think if we leave the EU we’ll be toast economically. Yes, its full of neo-liberal technocrats but you can’t reform anything from outside the tent.


You obviously didn't notice the referendum was called because the tories were divided over the issue of Europe and Cameron wanted to resolve the issue


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 21, 2019)

Raheem said:


> The numbers are not there to get it through as a bankbench amendment, but what Corbyn seems to be proposing is a government bill backed by the Labour leadership (he would have to back it, since he is calling for it). That would stand a very good chance, surely, if May were to go for it.


Yeh if things were entirely different you mean


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You obviously didn't notice the referendum was called because the tories were divided over the issue of Europe and Cameron wanted to resolve the issue



maybe - although it's being reported today that ham-face never expected the referendum to happen because he expected the limp dems to veto it.  report in the 'i' here


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh if things were entirely different you mean


Yeah, she's not going to go for it, but that's just another reason why interpreting it as an attempt to kill a public vote can't be correct.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No he isn't.


He is according to the article. Maybe you know something additional.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Raheem said:


> He is according to the article. Maybe you know something additional.


As if that would be possible eh raheem? As if.


----------



## Ming (Jan 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You obviously didn't notice the referendum was called because the tories were divided over the issue of Europe and Cameron wanted to resolve the issue


This is going to sound really bad but in i go....I still think its a ruse. My reasoning is Tories lie, are motivated by wealth and power not the well being of fellow citizens and a no-deal Brexit being the biggest opportunity for them (for everything...money, asset grabs on the public sphere, etc) ever. When I moved from ‘analyse what they say’ to ‘don’t believe a word they say’ was over the Health and Social Care Act 2012. They put the legislation in place to sell off the NHS and then admitted lying about it. No one saw that coming that i’m aware off. I think a no-deal Brexit is the same. I know it’s an impossible position to defend but lets see what the outcome is. And I’ve got 20 quid on it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> This is going to sound really bad but in i go....I still think its a ruse. My reasoning is Tories lie, are motivated by wealth and power not the well being of fellow citizens and a no-deal Brexit being the biggest opportunity for them (for everything...money, asset grabs on the public sphere, etc) ever. When I moved from ‘analyse what they say’ to ‘don’t believe a word they say’ was over the Health and Social Care Act 2012. They put the legislation in place to sell off the NHS and then admitted lying about it. No one saw that coming that i’m aware off. I think a no-deal Brexit is the same. I know it’s an impossible position to defend but lets see what the outcome is. And I’ve got 20 quid on it.


No one minds views like that as long as you line out some reasoning. This is just saying that tories are bad and the thing you like is good. The problem is when the thing you like is how the tories exercise their evil. Quite openly, right in front of you.

Neoliberalism  transformed into a binding legal obligation

Why tories support the EU.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> the Health and Social Care Act 2012. They put the legislation in place to sell off the NHS and then admitted lying about it. No one saw that coming that i’m aware off.



Not many people would have seen it coming that they'd admit to lying about it. Fairly clear at the time they were going to do it as I recall.

I agree with you though. I got an email from MP Sarah Newton around that time telling me the NHS wasn't being privatized based on some World Bank (or something) definition of 'privatization'.  Tells you there's no use writing to her again.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Every single left winger had been shouting generally that they would attack the NHS and those with more specific knowledge wrote millions of words on how and why. Thousands of people were out every weekend informing warning and supporting. This is utter guff ming.


----------



## Ming (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No one minds views like that as long as you line out some reasoning. This is just saying that tories are bad and the thing you like is good. The problem is when the thing you like is how the tories exercise their evil. Quite openly, right in front of you.


Well it’s impossible to prove that Cameron and a lot of other ‘Remainer’ Tories  were secretly for a Brexit (as i believe) hence the shit ineffective campaigning. But they have told equally big whoppers in the past (NHS). I think the older Tories voting for closer links to Europe back in the past were a different breed. Maybe a lot less venal. And in relation to some progressive legislation Cameron and his crew introduced...just grabbing votes (like his green credentials...he was reported as saying ‘now drop the green crap’ after they were elected). I’m progressive and i remember how clause 28 affected a friend of mine (not well).


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well it’s impossible to prove that Cameron and a lot of other ‘Remainer’ Tories  were secretly for a Brexit (as i believe) hence the shit ineffective campaigning. But they have told equally big whoppers in the past (NHS). I think the older Tories voting for closer links to Europe back in the past were a different breed. Maybe a lot less venal. And in relation to some progressive legislation Cameron and his crew introduced...just grabbing votes (like his green credentials...he was reported as saying ‘now drop the green crap’ after they were elected). I’m progressive and i remember how clause 28 affected a friend of mine (not well).


You haven't even made an effort. You've just talked about tories and crap like a school intrigue. Brexit is about class war, about how states relate to wider global capital dynamics, how local parties relate to that in turn. Not some crap about never trusting tories.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> This is going to sound really bad but in i go....I still think its a ruse. My reasoning is Tories lie, are motivated by wealth and power not the well being of fellow citizens and a no-deal Brexit being the biggest opportunity for them (for everything...money, asset grabs on the public sphere, etc) ever. When I moved from ‘analyse what they say’ to ‘don’t believe a word they say’ was over the Health and Social Care Act 2012. They put the legislation in place to sell off the NHS and then admitted lying about it. No one saw that coming that i’m aware off. I think a no-deal Brexit is the same. I know it’s an impossible position to defend but lets see what the outcome is. And I’ve got 20 quid on it.


Funnily enough they're starting to make noises about rowing back on parts of that  as even they realise they've fucked things up badly.


----------



## Ming (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Every single left winger had been shouting generally that they would attack the NHS and those with more specific knowledge wrote millions of words on how and why. Thousands of people were out every weekend informing warning and supporting. This is utter guff ming.


Did you watch the Portillo clip i posted? He admits they’d never have been elected if they’d admitted what they were up to. Cameron said specifically ‘no top down reorganization on my watch’. I won’t argue with over how many people on the left saw it coming (i didn’t...i believed him).


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Did you watch the Portillo clip i posted? He admits they’d never have been elected if they’d admitted what they were up to. Cameron said specifically ‘no top down reorganization on my watch’. I won’t argue with over how many people on the left saw it coming (i didn’t...i believed him).


Of course i didn't watch your youtube clip. You sound like a loon with no experience of what happened before the 2010 election. The whole point of the left focus was a tory attack on the NHS. That only you managed to foresee.


----------



## Ming (Jan 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You haven't even made an effort. You've just talked about tories and crap like a school intrigue. Brexit is about class war, about how states relate to wider global capital dynamics, how local parties relate to that in turn. Not some crap about never trusting tories.


That’s true. It is class war, etc. And that makes me not trust Tories. I’m bailing on this. But i will pay my bet if i’m wrong.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

_Did you watch the Portillo clip i posted? He admits they’d never have been elected if they’d admitted what they were up to!_

They would never have been elected if they’d admitted what they were up to.

He knows.

Admits

they’d never have been elected if they’d admitted what they were up to

admitted

up to

And our next guest...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> maybe - although it's being reported today that ham-face never expected the referendum to happen because he expected the limp dems to veto it.  report in the 'i' here


Makes complete sense tbh. Always thought the coalition suited the Cameron/Osborne wing of the Tory party perfectly, better than being without them. Chuck a few socially liberal bones over things they don't give two shits about either way, and use the libdems as cover for their agenda while at the same time keeping the tories in line. 

Bit like US Republicans who bleat on about abortion. Last thing they want is to actually be able to ban abortion. Roe v Wade allows them to bluster about it without ever having to act on the bluster.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well it’s impossible to prove that Cameron and a lot of other ‘Remainer’ Tories  were secretly for a Brexit/--



Can I say I strongly disagree. Belief aside, what would it gain them to pretend to support remaining? fwiw I actually think this is one issue where from MPs uncharacteristically we're hearing truth, or hearing nothing.

As for pretending, it'd be more likely imo to pretend to support leaving, since that was the winning side?

I think you're being duped by hate for Tories, it's a fair motive but less useful than critical thinking in the long term.


----------



## Ming (Jan 21, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Can I say I strongly disagree. Belief aside, what would it gain them to pretend to support remaining? fwiw I actually think this is one issue where from MPs uncharacteristically we're hearing truth, or hearing nothing.
> 
> As for pretending, it'd be more likely imo to pretend to support leaving, since that was the winning side?
> 
> I think you're being duped by hate for Tories, it's a fair motive but less useful than critical thinking in the long term.


It is a bit of a leap i admit . ‘Now lets drop the green crap’ though?? I’m in a really weird position now though because i’ll lose my bet if i’m wrong (and i don’t want to be wrong) and the pound’ll drop through the floor if i’m Right so that’ll screw me on money i’ve got in Britain i was hoping to bring to Canada. So i’m fucked both ways!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 21, 2019)

> The group is planning to take the argument further at a news conference on Tuesday, fronted by Labour MPs David Lammy and Bridget Phillipson with Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson and Caroline Lucas, the Green party leader in Westminster.


Wonder which one of them will become the Remainiac Jan Pallach?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

the Green party leader in Westminster.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> ‘Now lets drop the green crap’ though?


a little greenwashing at that point was fairly transparent but have a look at this way, if they can wear the green rags when it suits do you not think that they can sell you the idea of the progressive EU enthusiastically? 'Lets drop all the workers rights crap, greece is ours now'. You smell the lie because it is one and they know it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

...and a weird oxbridger from the jim murphy school of _just fuxk it up._


----------



## two sheds (Jan 21, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour calls for vote in Commons on holding second referendum
> 
> Labour calls for vote on 2nd ref, constructive ambiguity over? How will this impact on their pro leave vote.





> The party’s [i.e. Labour's]  alternative Brexit plan, which would be the subject of a separate vote if the amendment were carried, proposes that the UK remain in a post-Brexit customs union with the European Union and have a strong relationship with the single market. Citizens’ rights and consumer standards would be harmonised with the EU’s.
> 
> Corbyn said: “Our amendment will allow MPs to vote on options to end this Brexit deadlock and prevent the chaos of a no-deal. It is time for Labour’s alternative plan to take centre stage, while keeping all options on the table, including the option of a public vote.”



That bit's interesting: would harmonize citizens' rights and consumer standards. You'd hope things like human rights and working hours and environmental standards, too. Might give a suitable start for negotiations with the EU?  

I admit to not having followed all this too closely, but isn't customs union needed to solve Irish border problem? I can't see the EU agreeing to no customs posts if people are going to be able to import stuff into the UK and then just walk across the border to sell it on into the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 21, 2019)

Yes, john mann has sorted it all with this amendment. Why didn't anyone think of it before. There will be some problems mind.


----------



## Ming (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> a little greenwashing at that point was fairly transparent but have a look at this way, if they can wear the green rags when it suits do you not think that they can sell you the idea of the progressive EU enthusiastically? 'Lets drop all the workers rights crap, greece is ours now'. You smell the lie because it is one and they know it.


I don’t think it’s particularly progressive. I remember all the protests against the IMF, The World Bank and the WTO in the 90’s.I’m definitely confused now because if we crash out we’ll be fucked for years. And will this lead to political space for the left to blossom in Britain? I’m pessimistic. I’m also an internationalist. Don’t like nationalism or patriotism. So do i support the EU to stop economic catastrophe or get out to avoid membership of a new-liberal organisation? I’m a remainer because you can’t reform an organization you’re not a member off.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Of course you can. You keep saying this. It's not true. Sometimes you can only reform it by leaving. He'll change though eh.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 22, 2019)

Ming said:


> I’m a remainer because you can’t reform an organization you’re not a member off.



I've only started with the link butchers posted but the first section answers that 
Against Law-sterity | Salvage

if you're a member you have to abide by their rules: they have control.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 22, 2019)

Ming said:


> I don’t think it’s particularly progressive. I remember all the protests against the IMF, The World Bank and the WTO in the 90’s.I’m definitely confused now because if we crash out we’ll be fucked for years. And will this lead to political space for the left to blossom in Britain? I’m pessimistic. I’m also an internationalist. Don’t like nationalism or patriotism. So do i support the EU to stop economic catastrophe or get out to avoid membership of a new-liberal organisation? I’m a remainer because you can’t reform an organization you’re not a member off.


right but what I am saying is if you smell falseness and avarice in the tory pro-EU take you are correct but not because they are secret brexiteers waiting to reap the bounty of a hard brexit but because the EU is not any of the cuddly things it is painted as. They know that, and they'll happily pretend otherwise to sell the idea. Thats the falseness. Thats where your 'aha but you can never trust a tory' bit is still 100% correct.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> right but what I am saying is if you smell falseness and avarice in the tory pro-EU take you are correct but not because they are secret brexiteers waiting to reap the bounty of a hard brexit but because the EU is not any of the cuddly things it is painted as. They know that, and they'll happily pretend otherwise to sell the idea. Thats the falseness. Thats where your 'aha but you can never trust a tory' bit is still 100% correct.


I fear we will all die still explaining the basics


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I've only started with the link butchers posted but the first section answers that
> Against Law-sterity | Salvage
> 
> if you're a member you have to abide by their rules: they have control.


Which is why they do not want to be outside - because a real political battle can happen. A real life drag to the dirt political fight. This is all they hate. Get it done under laws or constitution. Take me and ye out of it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

grit said:


> Poland sticking their oar in now Backstop trouble: first cracks in the EU's solidarity with Ireland on Brexit - Independent.ie



But I thought they had this thing called _solidarity_? 

Dexter? Dexter I don't understand what happened to the solidarity?

Somebody please tag Dexter for me I don't know how to do it


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

DexterTCN


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But I thought they had this thing called _solidarity_?
> 
> Dexter? Dexter I don't understand what happened to the solidarity?
> 
> Somebody please tag Dexter for me I don't know how to do it


the @ symbol followed by username.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Dexter? Dexter I don't understand what happened to the solidarity?


First line of a music hall song for the Brexit era.


----------



## Ming (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> right but what I am saying is if you smell falseness and avarice in the tory pro-EU take you are correct but not because they are secret brexiteers waiting to reap the bounty of a hard brexit but because the EU is not any of the cuddly things it is painted as. They know that, and they'll happily pretend otherwise to sell the idea. Thats the falseness. Thats where your 'aha but you can never trust a tory' bit is still 100% correct.


OK. I see what you mean. They're still all cunts but for different, equally cuntish reasons.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 22, 2019)

Ming said:


> Can't back it up with anything, that's true. Just a feeling. A no-deal Brexit is a hell of an opportunity if your already wealthy and it'll enable them to push further getting rid of the welfare state. Also they have a track record of telling shameless whopping great porkies. Remember 'No top down reorganisation of the NHS?'. Followed by the biggest reorganisation in its history The Health and Social Care Act 2012. And then Portillo admitting they lied.
> 
> eta: I met Esther McVey once (my old local MP for West Wirral). She was campaigning about the local post office closing with a petition. I mentioned the Tory track record on post office closures and asked if her petition was cross party. She lied and said it was.




I did watch the clip btw, lovely to see how brazen and cynical they are


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> First line of a music hall song for the Brexit era.


 Be better if it was a Phil Ochs style protest singer in Scotland lamenting the state of the post-Brexit Yes movement. Also featuring “where have all the comrades gone” sang with a daisy chain on his head.


----------



## Ming (Jan 22, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I did watch the clip btw, lovely to see how brazen and cynical they are


It's stunning isn't it? The arrogance and contempt for the people who vote for them. Slightly off topic but this ones a cracker for Brexiteer de Pfeffel Johnson. He gets called on his track record.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 22, 2019)

Ming said:


> OK. I see what you mean. They're still all cunts but for different, equally cuntish reasons.


we are knee deep in absolute filth and all I have is this trowel. But there are many more, with trowels and we can keep shovelling...


----------



## Ming (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> we are knee deep in absolute filth and all I have is this trowel. But there are many more, with trowels and we can keep shovelling...


I have a trowel also. I will join you in the trench.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> First line of a music hall song for the Brexit era.


I knew it was all a plot to bring back music hall. Making cinema tickets over a tenner each was never going to be enough on its own.


----------



## grit (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But I thought they had this thing called _solidarity_?
> 
> Dexter? Dexter I don't understand what happened to the solidarity?
> 
> Somebody please tag Dexter for me I don't know how to do it



In fairness, the poles are the only ones to have hinted at breaking ranks and there has been moves by other members to distance themselves from the suggestion already.


----------



## grit (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> we are knee deep in absolute filth and all I have is this trowel. But there are many more, with trowels and we can keep shovelling...


Law of holes - Wikipedia


----------



## TopCat (Jan 22, 2019)

two sheds said:


> That bit's interesting: would harmonize citizens' rights and consumer standards. You'd hope things like human rights and working hours and environmental standards, too. Might give a suitable start for negotiations with the EU?
> 
> I admit to not having followed all this too closely, but isn't customs union needed to solve Irish border problem? I can't see the EU agreeing to no customs posts if people are going to be able to import stuff into the UK and then just walk across the border to sell it on into the EU.


No deal means the Irish have to police the border.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

TopCat said:


> No deal means the Irish have to police the border.


yeh they'll set up camps for the refugee remainers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But I thought they had this thing called _solidarity_?
> 
> Dexter? Dexter I don't understand what happened to the solidarity?
> 
> Somebody please tag Dexter for me I don't know how to do it


it's very simple: @ immediately followed by username.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Can't be long now... Anyone booked Monday the 1st April off just in case like? Long weekend then to celebrate, or board up your house etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Can't be long now... Anyone booked Monday the 1st April off just in case like? Long weekend then to celebrate, or board up your house etc.


if they'd given the matter a moment's thought they wouldn't have had the first working day of brexit as april fools.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Can't be long now... Anyone booked Monday the 1st April off just in case like? Long weekend then to celebrate, or board up your house etc.


to celebrate boarding your house up


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

I taking it off and I’m going to sit about drinking French red wine and stuffing my face with Chorizo while crying listening to Enya CD's


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I taking it off and I’m going to sit about drinking French red wine and stuffing my face with Chorizo while crying listening to Enya CD's


i cry listening to enya cds too, i'd far rather have had something else for those birthdays and christmases


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Oh and it's 66 Days by the way...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Oh and it's 66 Days by the way...


we'll get our kicks on day 66


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Oh and it's 66 Days by the way...


but we'll have no fun on day 61


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> the @ symbol followed by username.



That's quite easy I assumed it was complicated! 

I'm gonna do this a lot now DotCommunist people will not thank you for this.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I taking it off and I’m going to sit about drinking French red wine and stuffing my face with Chorizo while crying listening to Enya CD's


Are you doing anything special though?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm gonna do this a lot now DotCommunist people will not thank you for this.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you doing anything special though?



Nope Standard weekend for me. might wear clean pants or something?

you?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's very simple: @ immediately followed by username.



Hush Pickers.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Nope Standard weekend for me. might wear clean pants or something?
> 
> you?


Might post a load of crap off Facebook and twitter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hush Pickers.



is not


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Might post a load of crap off Facebook and twitter.



Don't forget about urban tho yeah? someone will need to put funny pics in here if i'm busy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Nope Standard weekend for me. might wear clean pants or something?
> 
> you?



I've been trying to think of something that is fun but illegal under EU law but not in UK law but so far nothing


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 22, 2019)

Having a border with Ireland?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 159405
> is not
> View attachment 159406



If you're not the same person how come you never post at the same time?


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've been trying to think of something that is fun but illegal under EU law but not in UK law but so far nothing



Trawl for some fish some place?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Having a border with Ireland?



Doesn't strike me as immediately fun. 

On the other hand...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you're not the same person how come you never post at the same time?


on that rationale you're ernestolynch and i claim my £5


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've been trying to think of something that is fun but illegal under EU law but not in UK law but so far nothing


Set up and run a 'state aided' non competitive business.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> on that rationale you're ernestolynch and i claim my £5



You got me. You'll have to get the fiver off ernesto though.


----------



## andysays (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Set up and run a 'state aided' non competitive business.


Not sure many people would do that simply for fun


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Set up and run a 'state aided' non competitive business.



FUN, butchers, FUN, how is that fun?




Ranbay said:


> Trawl for some fish some place?



You people have an odd idea of fun. I'm veggie anyway.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

More anti corbyn smears.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Look at the way these pricks have us using the term state aid.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> More anti corbyn smears.



Yeah, well, if he talked about expropriation more maybe he'd have more mates.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Look at the way these pricks have us using the term state aid.





Not me. Just you.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 22, 2019)

So just because Labour are putting forward an amendment for a people's vote, it doesn't mean they are supporting it. Have I got that right?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

It's horrible ain't it. What's wrong. Are you so shit and uncompetitive that you need state aid. Ugh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So just because Labour are putting forward an amendment for a people's vote, it doesn't mean they are supporting it. Have I got that right?



I don't think they've even put it forward as a Labour amendment, they're just saying MP's should be able to vote on it.


----------



## andysays (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't think they've even put it forward as a Labour amendment, they're just saying MP's should be able to vote on it.


My understanding is that their amendment says MPs should be able to vote on a range of options, *including* holding a referendum on what is agreed by parliament


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> FUN, butchers, FUN, how is that fun?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Eat some bendy bananas then init?


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

andysays said:


> My understanding is that their amendment says MPs should be able to vote on a range of options, *including* holding a referendum on what is agreed by parliament


The amendment basically says _shut up keir._


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Eat some bendy bananas then init?



Sorry that assumes you can get British Grown ones in April, very silly of me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Eat some bendy bananas then init?



I ate a bendy banana this morning, and yesterday to be fair. Doesn't sound exciting.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I ate a bendy banana this morning, and yesterday to be fair. Doesn't sound exciting.


It will be in a few months.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I ate a bendy banana this morning, and yesterday to be fair. Doesn't sound exciting.



Find a load of 7 year olds and get them to blow up a room full of balloons.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Find a load of 7 year olds and get them to blow up a room full of balloons.



There we go


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> There we go



Children to be banned from blowing up balloons, under EU safety rules

Fuck em!


----------



## Wilf (Jan 22, 2019)

So, it begins, all those precious freedoms and protections won by the EU and Guardian readers melt into air.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Children to be banned from blowing up balloons, under EU safety rules
> 
> Fuck em!


I think that's illegal even under UK law, for now.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

European Commission - PRESS RELEASES  - Press release - EU DOES NOT ban children from blowing up balloons

Oh no! seems it was bullshit... my bad.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> European Commission - PRESS RELEASES  - Press release - EU DOES NOT ban children from blowing up balloons
> 
> Oh no! seems it was bullshit... my bad.





You're not to blame Ranbay, it's those Eurocrats


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

if the remain campaign had issued a series of posters of eurocats the referendum might have had a very different outcome


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 22, 2019)

^ That looks like a Bureaucat. Avoid at all costs.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 22, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> ^ That looks like a Bureaucat. Avoid at all costs.


Given the amount of whisky in that glass, it might be the worst Eurocat of them all, Jean-Cat Junker.


----------



## Santino (Jan 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Given the amount of whisky in that glass, it might be the worst Eurocat of them all, Jean-Cat Junker.


Jean-Clawed


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Once again this serious thread descends into a competition on who can come up with the most purrfect pun...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Once again this serious thread descends into a competition on who can come up with the most purrfect pun...



That was a bit of a catty comment.


----------



## emanymton (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Once again this serious thread descends into a competition on who can come up with the most purrfect pun...


The whole thread is a catastrophe.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if the remain campaign had issued a series of posters of eurocats the referendum might have had a very different outcome



Cat-based campaigning material of course guarantees a referendum victory


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jan 22, 2019)

emanymton said:


> The whole thread is a catastrophe.


Were feline pretty sick of it all...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> Were feline pretty sick of it all...


furry sorry to hear that


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Can we please get back to the thread and post what ever Jacob Rees-Moggie has been saying this week?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Can we please get back to the thread and post what ever Jacob Rees-Moggie has been saying this week?


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Litter-ally none of you seem to care


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Litter-ally none of you seem to care



Stop getting so hot under the collar.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

I'm really mewsing on all this. It's given me paws.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I'm really mewsing on all this. It's given me paws.



You've gotta be kitten me, that was pawful. Can we get back to the thread please? 

Personally I don't see how May's deal can even get within a whisker of passing, even if the govt adds a claws about the backstop.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

Maybe after we leave the EU they'll make us our own special entrance with a flap.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 22, 2019)

If there's no free vote on stopping a crash out doesnt that mean cabinet resignations? Is that Mays threat? (To their jobs?)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Maybe after we leave the EU they'll make us our own special entrance with a flap.


there'll be a door for the filthy rich and catflap for us


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 22, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Maybe after we leave the EU they'll make us our own special entrance with a flap.


People needing to cross the NI border could have a special chip to activate it. Problem solved.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 22, 2019)

TopCat said:


> No deal means the Irish have to police the border.




There go my plans for chlorinating chickens just north of the border and moving them south to sell to our European neighbours. Bloody bureaucracy of the EU blocking entrepreneurship again  .


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 22, 2019)

Dogs are better than cats.


----------



## Supine (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Can we please get back to the thread and post what ever Jacob Rees-Moggie has been saying this week?



He is now suggesting farage could join the conservatives. Cunt magnets!


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> He is now suggesting farage could join the conservatives. Cunt magnets!


Think about this post.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there'll be a door for the filthy rich and catflap for us



Pawdoors. 

Sorry.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> He is now suggesting farage could join the conservatives. Cunt magnets!





No accounting for taste I suppose.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> He is now suggesting farage could join the conservatives. Cunt magnets!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Today I have learnt how to @ Urbanites and upload pics. Truly, Brexit has enriched my life.


----------



## belboid (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Today I have learnt how to @ Urbanites and upload pics. Truly, Brexit has enriched my life.


well, amost.  two of your pics are just red X's from here...


----------



## brogdale (Jan 22, 2019)

(( SpackleFrog ))


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

3rd time lucky! I couldn't make the red X things go away!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 22, 2019)

Lol


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Dogs are better than cats.


See how no one's rising to that? Dogs and cats used to be the main dividing line in British society, but now we have something oh so much better.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> 3rd time lucky! I couldn't make the red X things go away!


Post Brexit deskilling.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Jan 22, 2019)

Raheem said:


> See how no one's rising to that? Dogs and cats used to be the main dividing line in British society, but now we have something oh so much better.



interspecies intersectionality


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 22, 2019)

*Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
"The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "

Brexit survival box on sale for £295


----------



## Badgers (Jan 22, 2019)

No-deal Brexit 'means hard border'

Project fear


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> No-deal Brexit 'means hard border'
> 
> Project fear


Are you going to actually say something on this thread or not?


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 22, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
> "The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "
> 
> Brexit survival box on sale for £295



Looks like Tobyjug found his niche & fortune.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 22, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
> "The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "
> 
> Brexit survival box on sale for £295




Brexit survival guide: Stockpiling Food

I am speaking to the food manufacturer coincidentally. They usually supply via aid agencies for refugees and charities.

Seems the UK is now a target for the humanitarian and disaster management sectors


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
> "The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "
> 
> Brexit survival box on sale for £295


Bet you everyone buying this is a hardcore leaver.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 22, 2019)

No Bishop's Finger; not interested.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 159458


More like a second rate thread security guard. I dunno, can't see the post.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Seems the UK is now a target for the humanitarian and disaster management sectors


It has been for years now.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> More like a second rate thread security guard. I dunno, can't see the post.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No Bishop's Finger; not interested.


With that on your application to be a curate, you can't lose. One way out, I suppose.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 22, 2019)

Bishops finger, curate's egg.  Whatever.  Onwards with the thread.


----------



## grit (Jan 22, 2019)

Thread has gone to the dogs.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 22, 2019)

grit said:


> Thread has gone to the dogs.



Your barking up the wrong tree of you think there will be a string of dog pun now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Your barking up the wrong tree of you think there will be a string of dog pun now.


It'll give him paws for thought


----------



## CRI (Jan 22, 2019)

Taking back control, right?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 22, 2019)

Raheem said:


> See how no one's rising to that? Dogs and cats used to be the main dividing line in British society, but now we have something oh so much better.



Simpler times


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 22, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Simpler times


Is simpler a word? Should it be more simple? Sounded right in my head but now I'm having second thoughts


----------



## Raheem (Jan 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Your barking up the wrong tree of you think there will be a string of dog pun now.


There could be, if someone takes the lead.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 22, 2019)

'kennel, you lot


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 'kennel, you lot


They'll all be in the doghouse


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 22, 2019)

yeah pug it in


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 22, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Is simpler a word? Should it be more simple? Sounded right in my head but now I'm having second thoughts


it is a word. The simpler the better


----------



## brogdale (Jan 22, 2019)

So...if Juncker's people are saying...


> ... it was “pretty obvious” border infrastructure would be necessary if the UK were to leave without an agreement.



& both Government's involved have said they won't build one...that leaves an obvious question.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 22, 2019)

this is going round in circles.i think its time i fucked off for a while. see yas on the other other side of brexit. maybe


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 22, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> this is going round in circles.i think its time i fucked off for a while. see yas on the other other side of brexit. maybe


... said Theresa May in her final statement to the Commons.


----------



## Winot (Jan 22, 2019)

If this comes to pass, seems pretty significant:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> If this comes to pass, seems pretty significant:




That is fucking hilarious to be fair. I hope those documents are real.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That is fucking hilarious to be fair. I hope those documents are real.


sounds legit - how could they tell the difference? its march 2021 at the v earliest that the car crash registration process will be 'complete', in as much as it will come into effect


----------



## Badgers (Jan 23, 2019)

Brexit prompts Sony's Europe HQ move

I worked there for 5 years ^ and still know a fair few people employed there. Article not really clear if there will be any job losses, but Sony were always fairly ruthless with that sort of thing  If I recall correctly there is around 1200 employees.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit prompts Sony's Europe HQ move
> 
> I worked there for 5 years ^ and still know a fair few people employed there. Article not really clear if there will be any job losses, but Sony were always fairly ruthless with that sort of thing  If I recall correctly there is around 1200 employees.



Worked?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Worked?


tested games for them


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 23, 2019)

Wanking in the work loo's is no Game!


----------



## Lucy Fur (Jan 23, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Wanking in the work loo's is no Game!


tested games, not testes games!


----------



## Badgers (Jan 23, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Worked?


Well, sat around in the place moaning for 5 years


----------



## Duncan2 (Jan 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Well, sat around in the place moaning for 5 years


pretty much what Ranbay said?


----------



## ska invita (Jan 23, 2019)

RE that fishing blockade story coming through , i worked for a few weeks on a small creel boat in scotland -* all *the prawn caught were iced and sent to Spain...there just isnt a market enough for seafood in the UK


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Well, sat around in the place moaning for 5 years


it's a tough job but someone's got to do it


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> RE that fishing blockade story coming through , i worked for a few weeks on a small creel boat in scotland -* all *the prawn caught were iced and sent to Spain...there just isnt a market enough for seafood in the UK



But isn't the point not the limited market in the UK its that it should be the UK fishing industry that catches and exports to Europe and elsewhere, not Spanish trawlers etc.  Its not about the UK market its about the riches in UK waters which should benefit the UK boats.

Whatever your feelings about the EU, I'd be amazed if anyone doesn't think its been a total disaster for the UK fishing industry.  Not that they're likely to do much better out of Brexit as they are likely to be one of the 1st industries to be sold out again under any deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> But isn't the point not the limited market in the UK its that it should be the UK fishing industry that catches and exports to Europe and elsewhere, not Spanish trawlers etc.  Its not about the UK market its about the riches in UK waters which should benefit the UK boats.
> 
> Whatever your feelings about the EU, I'd be amazed if anyone doesn't think its been a total disaster for the UK fishing industry.  Not that they're likely to do much better out of Brexit as they are likely to be one of the 1st industries to be sold out again under any deal.


in 2017 about 11,700 fishermen were active in the uk.
the uk's fishing fleet is the seventh largest in the eu with the second highest capacity, landing more than 700,000 tonnes of fish in 2017.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 23, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> But isn't the point not the limited market in the UK its that it should be the UK fishing industry that catches and exports to Europe and elsewhere, not Spanish trawlers etc.  Its not about the UK market its about the riches in UK waters which should benefit the UK boats.


right, except that what can you do about "blockades by French crew, angry at no longer being able to fish in UK waters, [who] could leave their catch rotting at the border". Spanish fleet yet to speak. With no deal in place its left to this kind of thing.


----------



## CRI (Jan 23, 2019)

*Majority of UK ports confess to little or no Brexit planning*



> Just 16 per cent of the leaders of the UK’s about 100 port and harbour authorities, surveyed by global recruiters Odgers Berndtson, said they had made any “significant and practical” plans for Brexit. The UK is scheduled to leave the bloc on March 29. The remainder was split evenly between ports that had done “only some high-level planning” and nothing at all.



Oh well, that's that then.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
> "The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "
> 
> Brexit survival box on sale for £295


What a cunt.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> this is going round in circles.i think its time i fucked off for a while. see yas on the other other side of brexit. maybe


Okay, see you behind the ransacked warehouse (y'know, the one near the illegal fuel dump).


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2019)

JRM now suggesting may could close parliament down, to thwart mps voting no deal down.  Aside from all the bigger issues, it's both amusing and wearying watching this madness unfold. It's as if the rats in a sack each have their own sack of rats that they swing at each other amid some kind of version of The Running Man, taking place in the palace of westminster.
May should close parliament if necessary to stop bill blocking no deal Brexit, says Rees-Mogg - Politics live


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jan 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> JRM now suggesting may could close parliament down, to thwart mps voting no deal down.  Aside from all the bigger issues, it's both amusing and wearying watching this madness unfold. It's as if the rats in a sack each have their own sack of rats that they swing at each other amid some kind of version of The Running Man, taking place in the palace of westminster.
> May should close parliament if necessary to stop bill blocking no deal Brexit, says Rees-Mogg - Politics live


JRM no doubt sees himself as a latter day Cromwell,  demanding that the unruly MPs be sent packing....when in actual fact he comes across as a political Mr Bean, a comical loser.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> JRM now suggesting may could close parliament down, to thwart mps voting no deal down.  Aside from all the bigger issues, it's both amusing and wearying watching this madness unfold. It's as if the rats in a sack each have their own sack of rats that they swing at each other amid some kind of version of The Running Man, taking place in the palace of westminster.
> May should close parliament if necessary to stop bill blocking no deal Brexit, says Rees-Mogg - Politics live


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> JRM now suggesting may could close parliament down, to thwart mps voting no deal down.  Aside from all the bigger issues, it's both amusing and wearying watching this madness unfold. It's as if the rats in a sack each have their own sack of rats that they swing at each other amid some kind of version of The Running Man, taking place in the palace of westminster.
> May should close parliament if necessary to stop bill blocking no deal Brexit, says Rees-Mogg - Politics live


I think some of the more determined Brexiteers like Fox and Mogg the Merciless are starting to worry about Brexit atually getting canned, Brexit Delayed means Brexit Cancelled becomes less unthinkable thus they spout ever more craziness. The irony is I think we're going to end up with No Deal simply because these buffoons are too busy fighting over how to avoid a No Deal.
I am glad to see you haven't lost your gift for prose though, when we are fighting over rodents for the cooking fire in the ruins of our once great nation we are going to need something to laugh about.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 23, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Brexit survival box on sale for £295*
> "The "Brexit Box", retailing at £295, provides food rations to last 30 days, according to its producer, businessman James Blake who says he has already sold hundreds of them. "
> 
> Brexit survival box on sale for £295


Would probably be cheaper to buy all the stuff seperately from Costco, We have an second freezer in the garage which we plan to stock up come March probably discover that there is no power to run it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 23, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Would probably be cheaper to buy all the stuff seperately from Costco, We have an second freezer in the garage which we plan to stock up come March probably discover that there is no power to run it.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

Amongst all the Brexigloom...some really cheering news...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Amongst all the Brexigloom...some really cheering news...
> 
> View attachment 159569


Oh, ffs. A minister of state.

It’s “here is the video of Eli Cohen and _me_”.


----------



## Poi E (Jan 23, 2019)

That's Doctor to you.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

Poi E said:


> That's Doctor to you.


he's signed the Psychopathic Oath alright


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 23, 2019)

Hypocritic Oath.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

Hypercuntic oath...we could go on!


----------



## chilango (Jan 23, 2019)

(((hippos)))


----------



## Poi E (Jan 23, 2019)

(((cunts)))


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)




----------



## chilango (Jan 23, 2019)

Poi E said:


> (((cunts)))



*Refrains from trying to draw female genitals using brackets etc.*


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Hypercuntic oath...we could go on!


If they ever make a science fiction film out of brexit, the spacecraft would be powered by a Hypercunt Drive.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

Relax...it's all sorted...


----------



## chilango (Jan 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If they ever make a science fiction film out of brexit, the spacecraft would be powered by a Hypercunt Drive.


It's a bit shit though. It's not getting anywhere.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> It's a bit shit though. It's not getting anywhere.


I've only got until the 29th of March, Cap'n.  I cannae work miracles!


----------



## chilango (Jan 23, 2019)

Maybe it'll work better in the sequel?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Maybe it'll work better in the sequel?


_To badly go ?_


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Relax...it's all sorted...
> 
> View attachment 159575


I'd noticed the pampas grass plant growing outside no10...


----------



## Raheem (Jan 23, 2019)

Wonder whose car keys Arlene got.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 23, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I'd noticed the pampas grass plant growing outside no10...


Ew!


----------



## killer b (Jan 23, 2019)

lads.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Relax...it's all sorted...
> 
> View attachment 159575


'What would like for dinner Mrs Foster?'
- Just porridge please
'A Mess of Pottage it is then'
- How much does that cost?
'£10 billion'


----------



## treelover (Jan 23, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Would probably be cheaper to buy all the stuff seperately from Costco, We have an second freezer in the garage which we plan to stock up come March probably discover that there is no power to run it.



Always an opportunity.


----------



## CRI (Jan 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 159565


Might Moggy and co's impatience to get Brexit over the line have something vaguely to do with this?

New EU corporate tax avoidance measures to take effect


----------



## Winot (Jan 23, 2019)

More Project Fear

British food and drink industry warns that Theresa May is ignoring their concerns about a 'catastrophic' no-deal Brexit


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 23, 2019)

Winot said:


> More Project Fear
> 
> British food and drink industry warns that Theresa May is ignoring their concerns about a 'catastrophic' no-deal Brexit




Watch out for the thread police !


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Relax...it's all sorted...
> 
> View attachment 159575


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Jan 24, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 159636
> 
> 
> 
> Watch out for the thread police !


I’m here, you can’t use the same joke twice in 48 hrs.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 24, 2019)

I was asked yesterday if I could do a quick stocktake in the machine spares stores yesterday. As there has been a sudden realisation by management that vital spares may be delayed following Brexit, this fear was highlighted by our Dutch and German suppliers, even though all our engineers have been saying this for a year!


----------



## Poi E (Jan 24, 2019)

Ahh, but mere workers cannot hope to understand the alchemy behind management.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I was asked yesterday if I could do a quick stocktake in the machine spares stores yesterday. As there has been a sudden realisation by management that vital spares may be delayed following Brexit, this fear was highlighted by our Dutch and German suppliers, even though all our engineers have been saying this for a year!


Ime a quick stocktake is an impossibility


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I’m here, you can’t use the same joke twice in 48 hrs.


can if it's funny enough


----------



## gosub (Jan 24, 2019)

Any chance of changing poll to include Australian MRA model?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Any chance of changing poll to include *Australian MRA model*?



Unlike in real life etc. etc. :

99.6% of the eligible electorate** will *surely* be thoroughly ignorant about that option    ...

**In a made-up poll that hasn't happened yet


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 24, 2019)

If they're too busy/lazy to Google anyway


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Unlike in real life etc. etc. :
> 
> 99.6% of the eligible electorate** will *surely* be thoroughly ignorant about that option    ...
> 
> **In a made-up poll that hasn't happened yet


Mra=men's rights activist


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Ime a quick stocktake is an impossibility


They meant quick as before the end of the month!


----------



## gosub (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Mra=men's rights activist



Mutual Recognition Agreement


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Any chance of changing poll to include Australian MRA model?


Yes, there is no difference in trade between a country next door and a country the other side of the world.


----------



## gosub (Jan 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Yes, there is no difference in trade between a country next door and a country the other side of the world.



Just coz their view of the moon is inverted from ours, doesn't mean you can't model how they did their deal with EU you fuckwit


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Jan 24, 2019)

What about Jez agrees to support deal (suitably cosmetically adjusted) in return for a general election? 

May comes out of it having fulfilled her promises to honour the referendum result and not contest next GE with statesperson head held high. 

This was being floated by the BBC this morning.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 24, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> What about Jez agrees to support deal (suitably cosmetically adjusted) in return for a general election?
> 
> May comes out of it having fulfilled her promises to honour the referendum result and not contest next GE with statesperson head held high.
> 
> ...



No percentage in that for Corbyn, as he'd then have to contend a general election as the bloke who let a universally hated brexit deal through, while the tories could run with a new leader with (relatively) clean hands.

Corbyn also loses his 'moral case' for a GE if the ink on the brexit deal is already dry.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Ime a quick stocktake is an impossibility



Not if you half-arse it, safe in the knowledge that another stocktake isn't going to happen until so much time has passed that you'll have deniability for any glaring discrepancies.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 24, 2019)

Brexit uncertainty a disgrace, says Airbus

Airbus to fuck off Etc Etc


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> No percentage in that for Corbyn, as he'd then have to contend a general election as the bloke who let a universally hated brexit deal through, while the tories could run with a new leader with (relatively) clean hands.
> 
> Corbyn also loses his 'moral case' for a GE if the ink on the brexit deal is already dry.


unsure as to how many mp's he could get to vote for mays deal, whip or no whip. Anyway its a ludicrous idea, another 'how could jearomy corbayn sort out brexit' from people desperate to make sure the people blamed for brexit end up being the labour left


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> No percentage in that for Corbyn, as he'd then have to contend a general election as the bloke who let a universally hated brexit deal through, while the tories could run with a new leader with (relatively) clean hands.
> 
> Corbyn also loses his 'moral case' for a GE if the ink on the brexit deal is already dry.


It's hard to imagine any other members of the Tory Party going for it either, Mayhem gets to walk away with her head held high but the rest of them have to fight an GE which they have at least a 50% chance of losing.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Just coz their view of the moon is inverted from ours, doesn't mean you can't model how they did their deal with EU you fuckwit


And do you think the EU would see any difference?. The other party in the deal.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Just coz their view of the moon is inverted from ours, doesn't mean you can't model how they did their deal with EU you fuckwit


Until I read this, I didn't realise this (never been near the equator never mind south of it) but it is actually obvious when you think about it. Not only that but having googled it I have learnt that if you stand ON the equator the moon appears to flip depending on whether you face north or south. Amidst these 700+ pages of sometimes angry pontificating, an interesting fact.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

CRI said:


> Might Moggy and co's impatience to get Brexit over the line have something vaguely to do with this?
> 
> New EU corporate tax avoidance measures to take effect



no.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Ime a quick stocktake is an impossibility



We should all take stock quickly.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Until I read this, I didn't realise this (never been near the equator never mind south of it) but it is actually obvious when you think about it. Not only that but having googled it I have learnt that if you stand ON the equator the moon appears to flip depending on whether you face north or south. Amidst these 700+ pages of sometimes angry pontificating, an interesting fact.


Yes, and if you think about it carefully it demonstrates that the earth is not spherical; it's all explained here:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> No percentage in that for Corbyn, as he'd then have to contend a general election as the bloke who let a universally hated brexit deal through, while the tories could run with a new leader with (relatively) clean hands.
> 
> Corbyn also loses his 'moral case' for a GE if the ink on the brexit deal is already dry.



Totally if Corbyn is seen to collaborate with May to get Brexit through he might as well not bother contesting the GE.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 24, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Brexit uncertainty a disgrace, says Airbus
> 
> Airbus to fuck off Etc Etc


Note he is slating the handling of it, not Brexit per se


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

It's all got a bit boring hasn't it? Nothing about Brexit on BBC news homepage, except Frances O'Grady doing her best Stern Teacher impression. 

TUC chief: Stop playing to Brexit 'bad boys'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's all got a bit boring hasn't it? Nothing about Brexit on BBC news homepage, except Frances O'Grady doing her best Stern Teacher impression.
> 
> TUC chief: Stop playing to Brexit 'bad boys'


you missed 

further down the home page:


----------



## zahir (Jan 24, 2019)

Ivan Rogers speaking at UCL on Tuesday

Transcript: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/european-inst...iles/sir_ivan_rogers_lecture_ucl_22012019.pdf


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Totally if Corbyn is seen to collaborate with May to get Brexit through he might as well not bother contesting the GE.



A bit like Nick Clegg and his AV referendum thing.  Agree to shit just to get your vote, lose badly and look like a useless mug.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 24, 2019)

In general I think May's plan (in so much that she has one) is becoming clearish.  Find a wording that will get the DUP onside, the ERG lot will fold quickly then (they're already making overtures presumably because they are worried about no Brexit) and this will isolate the tory remainers.  Its easy to hide in a load of dissenting voices, less so when there are a few of you.  The pressure on them to agree a deal will be huge.

May has never and will never give a fuck about what anybody / any party thinks.  From the off this has been all about the tories and she'll find a solution from within her party no matter the damage it causes to the country.  Anything and everything must be done to avoid a schism.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 24, 2019)

I don’t think she can get any deal through, there’s enough Tory remainers such that a tilt towards the ERG will guarantee they don’t come onboard. She needs almost all of her party, the couple of Labour brexiters aren’t going to be enough to get it over the line. It’s a fucked up stalemate and who knows where it will end.

I do wonder whether Labour’s Customs Union plan could pass with the support of Tory remainers/soft brexiteers, but there’s a risk of them then owning the chaos/betrayal. No clue where this can go other than an extension to art 50 at the moment.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I don’t think she can get any deal through, there’s enough Tory remainers such that a tilt towards the ERG will guarantee they don’t come onboard. She needs almost all of her party, the couple of Labour brexiters aren’t going to be enough to get it over the line. It’s a fucked up stalemate and who knows where it will end.



She got a few votes from the opposition benches last time and she could probably get a few more with a slightly better deal (Hoey etc).  There are also quite a few Labour MP's with relatively small majorities in leave majority seats, again a few of these might fold as well. Plus there are still who will quite happily kick Corbyn just for the sake of it and break cover and blame everything on him.

Its looks tricky for May but not inconceivable.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> No clue where this can go other than an extension to art 50 at the moment.



It can't be extended more than a few weeks, so where now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It can't be extended more than a few weeks, so where now?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>


_There's no point in asking..._


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _There's no point in asking..._


.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> .


Well ahead of the curve with their privileging of the affective...

_I don't believe illusions 'cause too much is real
So stop your cheap comment
Cause we know what we feel

_


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 24, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I don’t think she can get any deal through, there’s enough Tory remainers such that a tilt towards the ERG will guarantee they don’t come onboard. She needs almost all of her party, the couple of Labour brexiters aren’t going to be enough to get it over the line. It’s a fucked up stalemate and who knows where it will end.
> 
> I do wonder whether Labour’s Customs Union plan could pass with the support of Tory remainers/soft brexiteers, but there’s a risk of them then owning the chaos/betrayal. No clue where this can go other than an extension to art 50 at the moment.


Yeh try a revocation of a50 in a while


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you missed
> View attachment 159680
> further down the home page:
> View attachment 159681



I think you'll find that what you missed Pickers (with the exception of the Airbus story which is boring and doesn't relate to anything happening in Parliament) that all those other links have been there for weeks!

No change seems to be the message.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you'll find that what you missed Pickers (with the exception of the Airbus story which is boring and doesn't relate to anything happening in Parliament) that all those other links have been there for weeks!
> 
> No change seems to be the message.


Not from me anyway, I rarely carry cash these days

Oh and I'm not Pickers


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you'll find that what you missed Pickers (with the exception of the Airbus story which is boring and doesn't relate to anything happening in Parliament) that all those other links have been there for weeks!
> 
> No change seems to be the message.


Pickman's model missed at least 2 other 'Brexit-related' stories there...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Not from me anyway, I rarely carry cash these days



Quite. Modern (present day) Britain is cold, cashless and clueless.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Quite. Modern (present day) Britain is cold, cashless and clueless.


Yeh your repeated confusion of me with another poster is rather clueless


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Not from me anyway, I rarely carry cash these days


I'm trying to use only cash in 2019; let the fuckers algorithm that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 24, 2019)

zahir said:


> Ivan Rogers speaking at UCL on Tuesday





> We desperately need clear and honest thinking about our choices not just for the weeks but for the years, indeed decades, ahead. I continue to think that our political debate is bedevilled by what, at the time I resigned, I termed “muddled thinking”, and by fantasies and delusions as to what our options really are in the world as it is.


Thank goodness we've got people like Ivan Rogers to set out what "our" options really are. How would we manage without them


----------



## TruXta (Jan 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Thank goodness we've got people like Ivan Rogers to set out what "our" options really are. How would we manage without them


Would rather take advice from Ivan the Terrible


----------



## Raheem (Jan 24, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Would rather take advice from Ivan the Terrible


Ivan the Slightly Disappointing, we could call him.


----------



## Badgers (Jan 24, 2019)

The Airbus thing has the potential to shake things up a bit. They are warmongering cunts but carry a bit more economic weight than Dyson or Spoons cunt.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Jan 24, 2019)

So we are still careering our entire socio-economic systems towards Nigel Farage's wank fantasy based on the notion that a second referendum would be undemocratic because reasons. 

A shower of shitfesting blundercunts.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> The Airbus thing has the potential to shake things up a bit. They are warmongering cunts but carry a bit more economic weight than Dyson or Spoons cunt.


Won't make any difference either way.


----------



## Supine (Jan 24, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Won't make any difference either way.



It might to the 100,000+ people with airbus associated jobs


----------



## mauvais (Jan 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> It might to the 100,000+ people with airbus associated jobs


Sure. But not to the political process of Brexit.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 24, 2019)

This is the maddest thing I've heard for a while:



> But the chancellor said businesses had to accept that free movement was coming to an end and urged companies to rethink business models based on cheap, low-skilled labour.


 via Philip Hammond urges business leaders to accept Brexit result

Businesses don't have to accept it, they just have to move to somewhere else where their current business model will still work. Like the continent. 

I refuse to believe that the Chancellor believed what he just said, and can only assume he'd been told to say it. He knows full well that faced with a choice between rethinking their entire business model against the trend of global economics, or moving to somewhere their business model still works, they'll choose the latter. He's basically trying to argue that numerous businesses should rethink their model because a long running, internal and essentially irresoluble Tory part fight would quite like them to. 

Whether that model is right or wrong is a whole other debate. The idea that businesses will choose to rethink it to help out a Tory party fight is laughable.


----------



## Supine (Jan 24, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Sure. But not to the political process of Brexit.



I'm hopeful the seriousness of job losses will eventually hit home. Labour talk about a jobs first brexit while Boris shouts Fuck Business. This madness had to end at some point!


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Won't make any difference either way.


It might do exactly what it was intended to; give cover to a tranche of 'rebel' tory MPs who will now fall back into line muttering things about wings etc.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm hopeful the seriousness of job losses will eventually hit home. Labour talk about a jobs first brexit while Boris shouts Fuck Business. This madness had to end at some point!


After Brexit, if it happens. Until then it can be compartmentalised to the hypothetical, or the 'they would say that', or the 'would have happened anyway'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> This is the maddest thing I've heard for a while:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yep, moving all those farms, hand car wash places, etc., etc., shouldn't be too difficult.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, moving all those farms, hand car wash places, etc., etc., shouldn't be too difficult.


Yeah, in-person services are obviously not vulnerable to relocation to low(er) wage jurisdictions. But they are vulnerable to wage depression if routine production employers are doing so and shedding workers.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, moving all those farms, hand car wash places, etc., etc., shouldn't be too difficult.



Moving them in and of themselves is not possible obviously, so the trade they represent moves to the continent and we buy it back at higher prices due to higher transaction costs and reduction of just in time (farming). Which we can't as easily afford because the jobs that could move have done so. Or they stop existing, and higher cost services have to replace them (hand car washing), which again can't as easily be afforded, because a number of the jobs that paid for them have now gone.

Sometimes political decisions are nuanced and difficult to understand. This whole brexit thing has gone on so long now that we're right down at the economics 101 level, and people are still unclear about it. I'm very, very far from being a Tory, but on a human level I do feel for Phillip Hammond, meant to be the Chancellor, but now being made to say illiterate things him and his team surely just cannot believe.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 24, 2019)

We should probably just leave it to the experts.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> We should probably just leave it to the experts.



No, we should attempt to understand the issues ourselves, then take our democratic decisions based on them. Democracy requires those who vote to research and think about the issues they're voting on. We may each come to different conclusions as a result of it, and that's fantastic. But abrogation of our decision to others, or refusal to consider demonstrable evidence (because "we've had enough of experts / it's just project fear") essentially cause democracy to stop working. Which is exactly what people pushing those lines want. 

I mean ffs, Jacob R-M proposed that the Queen should return to shut Parliament yesterday, to prevent the prevention of no-deal brexit. How is that the British people / parliament taking back control? How did millionaire oxbridge bankers become the ones people listen to, rather than looking objectively at the facts themselves?


----------



## killer b (Jan 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Democracy requires those who vote to research and think about the issues they're voting on. We may each come to different conclusions as a result of it, and that's fantastic.


this is very sweet.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> We should probably just leave it to the experts.


I don't think you're qualified to decide this.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 24, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I don't think you're qualified to decide this.


That was the remainer argument.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> I'm very, very far from being a Tory, but on a human level I do feel for Phillip Hammond, meant to be the Chancellor, but now being made to say illiterate things him and his team surely just cannot believe.


If Hammond had a problem saying things he knows to be untrue I'd imagine he'd have chosen another career.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If Hammond had a problem saying things he knows to be untrue I'd imagine he'd have chosen another career.



Fair point. I just got the feeling for the last few weeks he's been trying to speak some sanity in amongst the made up nonsense of an internal political party fight, and now even he has been forced to toe the line.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> We should probably just leave it to the experts.


There was a phase on this thread where that was the line - the people voted for Brexit; the Irish stuff isn't their problem; the politicians just have to sort it out now.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If Hammond had a problem saying things he knows to be untrue I'd imagine he'd have chosen another career.


Doubt his careers advisor would have had much on file that didn't involve lying to some extent.


----------



## grit (Jan 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> There was a phase on this thread where that was the line - the people voted for Brexit; the Irish stuff isn't their problem; the politicians just have to sort it out now.



Even the “experts” still fail to grasp the republic is not in the UK.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 25, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> How did millionaire oxbridge bankers become the ones people listen to, rather than looking objectively at the facts themselves?



Probably busy working in fast food, hospitality, cleaning, transport, sewage treatment, refuse collection and all the other industries that will move to other countries when we leave the EU. 

Maybe then they'll have time to think for themselves and expropriate the millionaire oxbridge bankers.


----------



## Humberto (Jan 25, 2019)

If they say 'we are calm and steady' (strong and stable)  enough times and that sinks into people's perception then that is what matters to them. The political leadership has however been anything but the competent actors that they pretend to be. They are drunk on power and not able to plot a steady course. They cannot order their own cabinet and party and are dogged by constant dramatic attempts at alliances and theatrical resignations. So why do May and her tattered government survive?

They are not earning their keep and there is widespread talk of meeting a cliff edge in a few weeks time. Its a shitshow, plain and simple. The idiots really are coming out of the woodwork and having their feeble day in the sun. The dearth in quality lends them authority. I do get the impression that they are embarrassingly slow-minded and are wasting time. Flailing around in other words.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 25, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not if you half-arse it, safe in the knowledge that another stocktake isn't going to happen until so much time has passed that you'll have deniability for any glaring discrepancies.



All done and uploaded onto the system. We only did one in September.
It’s just those bosses right at the very top we only see once a year got panicked. Citing one occasion when someone had used the last item from engineering stores and not logged it out.
We will struggle on through this distressing and chaotic period.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 25, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> No, we should attempt to understand the issues ourselves, then take our democratic decisions based on them. Democracy requires those who vote to research and think about the issues they're voting on. We may each come to different conclusions as a result of it, and that's fantastic. But abrogation of our decision to others, or refusal to consider demonstrable evidence (because "we've had enough of experts / it's just project fear") essentially cause democracy to stop working. Which is exactly what people pushing those lines want.


And what are the _issues_? The economics 101 you mentioned? How is this demonstrable evidence defined?* You seem to that a similar view to Rogers when he says



			
				Ivan Rogers said:
			
		

> We desperately need clear and honest thinking about our choices not just for the weeks but for the years, indeed decades, ahead. I continue to think that our political debate is bedevilled by what, at the time I resigned, I termed “muddled thinking”, and by fantasies and delusions as to what our options really are in the world as it is.



You talk about democracy but seek to limit politics to choices within a narrow set of boundaries. And if someone goes outside those boundaries they are insane, fantasists, deluded. I'm sorry but your and Rogers position is essentially _you can have any politics you want so long as its neo-liberal_. Well fuck that. The politics I want are completely economically illiterate, that's_ why_ I am in favour of them.


*To talk about demonstrable evidence and economics together is somewhat farcical, many of the _laws_ discovered by economists have been shown to be utterly false. The predictions of the OBR have been consistently wrong. These astrologists don't seem very good with _evidence_.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 25, 2019)

"Of course there will be a hit"


----------



## brogdale (Jan 25, 2019)

Warning us that if they do decide to punch us in the face it may cause damage.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 25, 2019)

Day by day i do see things beginning to solidify for May and her deal.  There is definitely some European countries sweating and breaking cover and today reports that the DUP may have been won over.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Jan 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Day by day i do see things beginning to solidify for May and her deal.  There is definitely some European countries sweating and breaking cover and today reports that the DUP may have been won over.



How much are they getting this time? £25 Billion?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 25, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> How much are they getting this time? £25 Billion?



What's in it for the DUP?

They get Brexit and they keep the tories in power which are two things they very much want.  Like the ERG they have to play their hand delicately, they want to dictate things exactly on their terms but if they overplay their hand then they run the risk of a general election, a Corbyn government and a soft Brexit or even no Brexit at all.   Things they are not keen on, one little bit.

A pride saving compromise just needs to be found on the backstop, which I suspect will or already has.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> What's in it for the DUP?
> 
> They get Brexit and they keep the tories in power which are two things they very much want.  Like the ERG they have to play their hand delicately, they want to dictate things exactly on their terms but if they overplay their hand then they run the risk of a general election, a Corbyn government and a soft Brexit or even no Brexit at all.   Things they are not keen on, one little bit.
> 
> A pride saving compromise just needs to be found on the backstop, which I suspect will or already has.


Not quite sure why the DUP wants brexit, tbf. It's not particularly logical for them to support something that stresses the Union. Keeping the tories in power has to be their main motivation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 159842
> Warning us that if they do decide to punch us in the face it may cause damage. they may decide not to stop


c4u


----------



## Winot (Jan 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not quite sure why the DUP wants brexit, tbf. It's not particularly logical for them to support something that stresses the Union. Keeping the tories in power has to be their main motivation.



A cynical interpretation is that they want Brexit because it puts the GFA under stress.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 25, 2019)

Winot said:


> A cynical interpretation is that they want Brexit because it puts the GFA under stress.


Dangerous, some might say foolish, game. I'm not sure they supported brexit for much other reason than that Martin McGuinness vocally opposed it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not quite sure why the DUP wants brexit, tbf. It's not particularly logical for them to support something that stresses the Union. Keeping the tories in power has to be their main motivation.



They are the ultimate in Little Englanders. Which is odd, as they're Irish.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 25, 2019)

Separates them a bit more from the Republic as well maybe?  Demarcates some strict boundaries which the EU project is beginning to blur across Europe.

Dunno really.  Not sure anyone here can really get into mind of the DUP, they seem a a unique bunch of people.


----------



## Winot (Jan 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Separates them a bit more from the Republic as well maybe?  Demarcates some strict boundaries which the EU project is beginning to blur across Europe.



Yeah this makes sense.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 25, 2019)

Winot said:


> A cynical interpretation is that they want Brexit because it puts the GFA under stress.





Teaboy said:


> Separates them a bit more from the Republic as well maybe?  Demarcates some strict boundaries which the EU project is beginning to blur across Europe.
> 
> Dunno really.  Not sure anyone here can really get into mind of the DUP, they seem a a unique bunch of people.



I think it's both of these really, i'm sure that the whole demographic projection is playing on their minds. I wouldn't be surprised if they think that direct rule (they've enginneered the breakdown of Stormont), a border, and economically two seperate entities in Ireland, with less influence from Dublin is a way to gerrymander the statelet for the foreseeable. Which in turn undermines the GFA, which is dependent on the idea of an all Ireland economy and 'parity of esteem'.

Shows what a flawed agreement it is.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 25, 2019)

Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today


> This is the noxious climate in which Europe’s parliamentary elections will take place in May. Unless something changes; unless something comes along to turn back the rising, swelling, insistent tide; unless a new spirit of resistance emerges, these elections promise to be the most calamitous that we have known. They will give a victory to the wreckers. For those who still believe in the legacy of Erasmus, Dante, Goethe and Comenius there will be only ignominious defeat. A politics of disdain for intelligence and culture will have triumphed. There will be explosions of xenophobia and antisemitism. Disaster will have befallen us.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today



There is such a massive disconnect between what some people would claim the EU project is and what it actually is.  There is no way a blind spot that big can be accidental.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today


Proposals = none. Nothing to say, nothing to offer.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

Long on classic elite-school taught rome derived hidden-aristocratic republican rhetoric though


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

Just to make clear the phrase 'strange defeat' they use at the end refers to the military defeat of france by the nazis 1939-40. It is made to call all those who oppose these normaliens and their kin's actions, intentions and politics of being nazis. Actual nazis.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today





> For those who still believe in the legacy of Erasmus, Dante, Goethe and Comenius there will be only ignominious defeat


----------



## rekil (Jan 25, 2019)

Mario Vargas Llosa lol.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


>


Dky Dante lumped with two early modern thinkers and Goethe from the 18th/19th c


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

They own Europe across all the centuries. Or, at least, they're very busy trying to steal it from us.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

copliker said:


> Mario Vargas Llosa lol.


Had to have a non-euro one to not look like the cream of pampered EU universities and cultural institutions that they are.


----------



## Supine (Jan 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There is such a massive disconnect between what some people would claim the EU project is and what it actually is.  There is no way a blind spot that big can be accidental.



I agree. Somebody must be funding the mistaken neoliberal people.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today




Holy fuck, are these pricks real?



> We count ourselves among the European patriots (a group more numerous than is commonly thought, but that is often too quiet and too resigned), who understand what is at stake here.


----------



## belboid (Jan 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Holy fuck, are these pricks real?


just proves that being a great writer (and there are a few on there) does not mean you are a great intellectual.


----------



## rekil (Jan 25, 2019)

Mario Vargas Llosa said:
			
		

> "When I arrived in England, it was a decadent country – a country with freedom but whose mettle was being snuffed out gradually by the Labor Party’s economic nationalism. Margaret Thatcher’s revolution woke Britain up. They were tough times; finishing with the sinecure of the trade unions, creating a competent free-market society, and defending democracy with conviction while facing up to socialism."


Has europe not been thatcherised enough for him.



> I don’t know what this thing is they call neoliberalism. It’s a way of caricaturing liberalism and presenting it as a ruthless form of capitalism. Liberalism is not dogmatic, it doesn’t have the answer to everything.


Oh fuck off.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2019)

Not even one of them manages to include a single word about building a Europe that addresses living standards, health, powerlessness...

Vassilis Alexakis, Svetlana Alexievitch, Anne Applebaum, Jens Christian Grøndahl, David Grossman, Agnès Heller, Elfriede Jelinek, Ismaïl Kadaré, György Konrád, Milan Kundera, Bernard-Henri Lévy, António Lobo Antunes, Claudio Magris, Ian McEwan, Herta Müller, Lyudmila Ulitskaya, Orhan Pamuk, Rob Riemen, Salman Rushdie, Fernando Savater, Roberto Saviano, Eugenio Scalfari, Simon Schama, Peter Schneider, Abdulah Sidran, Leïla Slimani, Colm Tóibín, Mario Vargas Llosa, Adam Michnik and Adam Zagajewski .... *your boys took* *one hell of a beating!*


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 25, 2019)

nvm


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2019)

Am I alone in reading Peter Schneider as Peter Schmeichel?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There is such a massive disconnect between what some people would claim the EU project is and what it actually is.  There is no way a blind spot that big can be accidental.


They talk about Europe, not the 'EU project', which I assume is deliberate.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

Yes, i doubt there's much relation. What with them mentioning coming elections, brexit and other things highlighting that europe = eu for this letter. Co-incidental if at all.

Oh god, there i did it, a reply to teucther.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 25, 2019)

The Unbearable Lightness of Being a European Patriot


----------



## brogdale (Jan 25, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The Unbearable Lightness of Being a European Patriot


Fascinating concept.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2019)

Bet they were _itching_ to include the word barbarians.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, i doubt there's much relation. What with them mentioning coming elections, brexit and other things highlighting that europe = eu for this letter. Co-incidental if at all.
> 
> Oh god, there i did it, a reply to teucther.


((((butchersapron))))


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2019)

Any how, why didn't they ask Jose Mourhino to sign it? He's reet clever.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

This is the main thing: _A politics of disdain for intelligence and culture will have triumphed
_
What you going to do about it?_ Publish a very short thing in a series of elite led and read platforms written by the french equivalent of tony blair._


----------



## Raheem (Jan 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Any how, why didn't they ask Jose Mourhino to sign it? He's reet clever.


He doesn't sign anything worth less than 20 million.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 25, 2019)

Raheem said:


> He doesn't sign anything under 20 million.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today



Hmmm...

Not only that, it's a crap article as well:



> The idea of Europe is in peril.
> 
> From all sides there are criticisms, insults and desertions from the cause.
> 
> “Enough of ‘building Europe’!” is the cry. Let’s reconnect instead with our “national soul”! Let’s rediscover our “lost identity”! This is the agenda shared by the populist forces washing over the continent. Never mind that abstractions such as “soul” and “identity” often exist only in the imagination of demagogues.



The idea of Europe apparently doesn't count as an abstraction.



> Europe is being attacked by false prophets who are drunk on resentment, and delirious at their opportunity to seize the limelight. It has been abandoned by the two great allies who in the previous century twice saved it from suicide; one across the Channel and the other across the Atlantic. The continent is vulnerable to the increasingly brazen meddling by the occupant of the Kremlin. Europe as an idea is falling apart before our eyes.



Funny how the efforts of millions of Russian and Soviet soldiers who died in one of history's biggest series of land battles just evaporates into the ether of memory like that. I guess none of these massive intellectuals were vulgar enough to actually study history, rather than just abuse it to prop up their arguments.



> This is the noxious climate in which Europe’s parliamentary elections will take place in May. Unless something changes; unless something comes along to turn back the rising, swelling, insistent tide; unless a new spirit of resistance emerges, these elections promise to be the most calamitous that we have known. They will give a victory to the wreckers. For those who still believe in the legacy of Erasmus, Dante, Goethe and Comenius there will be only ignominious defeat. A politics of disdain for intelligence and culture will have triumphed. There will be explosions of xenophobia and antisemitism. Disaster will have befallen us.



God damn voters, how dare they spoil things by not voting in exactly the same manner as a specific clique of self-regarding intellectuals! You can't trust the common man with democracy.

Article is vapid shit, I'll not bother with the rest.


----------



## alsoknownas (Jan 25, 2019)

Seems like that is prompted more by the prospect of far right successes in the European elections, than brexit.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 25, 2019)

And it ties brexit into that. If it hadn't, would you really be in any doubt as to the authors and signatories views on leaving the EU?


----------



## alsoknownas (Jan 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And it ties brexit into that. If it hadn't, would you really be in any doubt as to the authors and signatories views on leaving the EU?


Sure, I just mean that seems to be their main preoccupation.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Vomit inducing letter by "30 top intellectuals" in the Guardian today



'We urge patriots to resist nationalism'

If this is the work of the smartest people in Europe it's probably best to simply accept that we're all doomed now and beat the rush.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 25, 2019)

> For those who govern find it necessary to occupy themselves with things which they do not understand, and, above all, to waste the greater part of their energy in keeping themselves in power, striving to satisfy their friends, holding the discontented in check, and mastering the rebellious.


1891

Not wrong then; not wrong now.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2019)

Watching this again today. Best analysis I've seen of our EU stance, from 20:19: 


https://r2---sn-u5a3u5a3-aigs.googl...requiressl,source,expire&gir=yes&key=yt6#t=26


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 26, 2019)

Not sure about anyone else but that link does not work for me.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 26, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> "Of course there will be a hit"




I’m Amused there are no replies to this.

Alex


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2019)

Ta, did when I posted but doesn't for me either now. It's an episode of the standard work on british politics. (from 20:19 again)


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 26, 2019)

alex_ said:


> I’m Amused there are no replies to this.
> 
> Alex


Why? What tickles you about the lack of response to a clip of a knob arguing with a knob neither of them with much relevance to arguments made here?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2019)

alex_ said:


> I’m Amused there are no replies to this.
> 
> Alex


Beyond _thick, rich cunt_ what is there to say?


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 26, 2019)

Delingpole is one of that crop of writers who are wrong for money. It’s intellectual dishonesty by design. Don’t give the smirking cunt any attention.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Beyond _thick, rich cunt_ what is there to say?



Getting owned by Andrew neill, ha


----------



## rutabowa (Jan 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 1891
> 
> Not wrong then; not wrong now.


Thats a pretty good article


----------



## Raheem (Jan 26, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Delingpole is one of that crop of writers who are wrong for money.


'Columnists', I think they're called in the trade.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2019)

Raheem said:


> 'Columnists', I think they're called in the trade.


You've been on form recently


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Beyond _thick, rich cunt_ what is there to say?


You will be taken from here to a place of execution where you will be hanged by the neck until dead


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You will be taken from here to a place of execution where you will be hanged by the neck until dead



Not even the transport for this one, then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not even the transport for this one, then?


No, it'll be easier to get former people on the boats if they know what happens to former people who stay


----------



## Patteran (Jan 26, 2019)

copliker said:


> Has europe not been thatcherised enough for him.
> 
> 
> Oh fuck off.



Such bad politics, such good writing. This came up last week when he quit PEN over their comments on Catalunya, old piece from Monde Diplo about the contrast between his older works & his current views. Neocon with a Nobel.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 26, 2019)

Burns has never been more apt than now.

Still thou are blest, compared wi’ me!
The _present_ only toucheth thee:
But Och! I _backward_ cast my e’e,
On prospects drear!
An’ _forward_, tho’ I cannot _see_,
I _guess_ an’ _fear_!


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 26, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Seems like that is prompted more by the prospect of far right successes in the European elections, than brexit.



The letter is a bit high European culture pomposity but I like Goethe a lot and don't think that there is isn't anything terribly wrong with the letter in the Guardian.  I do believe, however, that the concept of what consitututes European culture and European heroes needs to be widened out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> The letter is a bit high European culture pomposity but I like Goethe a lot and don't think that there is isn't anything terribly wrong with the letter in the Guardian.  I do believe, however, that the concept of what consitututes European culture and European heroes needs to be widened out.


Marx durruti bakunin bone sands
The communards wat tyler cumann mban


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Marx durruti bakunin bone sands
> The communards wat tyler cumann mban


Or indeed every psychopath that has sat on a throne or headed up a state.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 26, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Or indeed every psychopath that has sat on a throne or headed up a state.


There are other Europes, and there are far more people who believe in the Europe 'from below' than believe in the Europe 'from above' which these intellectuals would foist on us. I consider myself reasonably well educated but I never heard about comenius before we found an auld book by him in the library a year or two back.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There are other Europes, and there are far more people who believe in the Europe 'from below' than believe in the Europe 'from above' which these intellectuals would foist on us. I consider myself reasonably well educated but I never heard about comenius before we found an auld book by him in the library a year or two back.


Vaguely recognised the name from my comparative religion courses... I think


----------



## CRI (Jan 27, 2019)

Paywalled, so can't see the whole piece, but gee - something to look forward to, eh?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 27, 2019)

Sure is, gee whizz.


----------



## andysays (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Paywalled, so can't see the whole piece, but gee - something to look forward to, eh?
> 
> View attachment 160101


So, the other day you suggested Trump would cancel the 2020 elections, now you're suggesting the UK government will introduce martial law.

You really would have been better sticking to endless cute cat pics...


----------



## CRI (Jan 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> So, the other day you suggested Trump would cancel the 2020 elections, now you're suggesting the UK government will introduce martial law.
> 
> You really would have been better sticking to endless cute cat pics...


Ah, bless your heart. Trusting the Tories to do the right thing then?

This one's not paywalled and quotes _The Times_ article.

Brexit planners could use martial law against civil disobedience



> Whitehall officials are looking at how to use powers available under the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 to stop civil disobedience after the UK leaves the EU.





> According to a report in The Sunday Times, the legislation gives ministers the power to impose curfews, travel bans, confiscate property and deploy the armed forces.


----------



## andysays (Jan 27, 2019)

It might help you look a bit less hysterical if you and Edwin Hayward (whoever *he *is) understood what is meant by the term 'gaming'.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 27, 2019)

Gotta hand it to the supra-state...they know how to 'negotitate'; this latest offer to May is a classic...you can 'revisit' the threat of a trojan horse for permanent customs union by...err...accepting a permanent customs union.
Genius.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah, bless your heart. Trusting the Tories to do the right thing then?
> 
> This one's not paywalled and quotes _The Times_ article.
> 
> Brexit planners could use martial law against civil disobedience


Do you _personally _foresee martial law being introduced CRI ?


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Gotta hand it to the supra-state...they know how to 'negotitate'; this latest offer to May is a classic...you can 'revisit' the threat of a trojan horse for permanent customs union by...err...accepting a permanent customs union.
> Genius.
> 
> View attachment 160127


And yet you will still have remainiacs talking about staying in  and reforming  from the inside.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> And yet you will still have remainiacs talking about staying in  and reforming  from the inside.


The ones that trouble me are those that think this is all an opportunity for _disaster capitalism_ to *begin*.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The ones that trouble me are those that think this is all an opportunity for _disaster capitalism_ to *begin*.


All capitalism is disaster capitalism


----------



## brogdale (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> All capitalism is disaster capitalism


innit


----------



## CRI (Jan 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Do you _personally _foresee martial law being introduced CRI ?


Do you think it's impossible?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Do you think it's impossible?


shuffling the goalposts


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Do you think it's impossible?



Do you think anything that is theoretically possible can also improbable?


----------



## andysays (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Do you think it's impossible?



It clearly isn't *impossible*, given that the legislation which makes it possible was passed in 2004, but that's quite a long way from saying it's likely to happen, or even that the government is planning to do it.

What they are doing, according to the Times article, is exploring a variety of options for various post-No Deal Brexit scenarios, of which the imposition of martial law is but one. And it's fairly obvious that this news has been deliberately leaked to increase fear about No Deal, and encourage MPs to support some version of May's deal.

Off the top of my head, I can't remember any specific occasions in the past 15 years when news of the government exploring a similar option of introducing martial law to deal with a supposed threat has been leaked, but I'd be amazed if this was the first time such a thing had been considered since the Civil Contingencies Act of 2004


----------



## maomao (Jan 27, 2019)

According to CRI three years ago we'd all definitely be dead in a nuclear war by now anyway so I don't think we need to pay a lot of attention to what she says. Not generally worth replying to unless she's spouting her offensive lies and accusing everyone of being racist anyway.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

I was tangentially, and at a junior level, involved in the logistics of the 2001 Foot and Mouth outbreak - all manner of ideas were considered, gamed and had planning (to differing degrees) done to allow them be implemented - curfews and martial law among them. Less than 10% of them came within a million miles of being put into action...

Our pet fuckwit fails to understand what contingency planning is.


----------



## Favelado (Jan 27, 2019)

Loads of people would love it. British soldiers on the streets as we leave the EU, adding to the image of us _taking back control_. This is Britain, being British. Don't fuck with Britain. Don't fuck with Brexit.

It doesn't make sense of course, but it doesn't need to.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

Favelado said:


> Loads of people would love it. British soldiers on the streets as we leave the EU, adding to the image of us _taking back control_. This is Britain, being British. Don't fuck with Britain. Don't fuck with Brexit.
> 
> It doesn't make sense of course, but it doesn't need to.



If we got paid overtime, rather than just having to do it, it would be ace.

Being paid time and a half to shoot Guardian columnists - it would be like Penelope Cruz paying for dinner and offering you a one night stand!

Otherwise it just sounds shit - I think I'll stay at home and watch the riots on telly.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 27, 2019)

CRI said:


> Do you think it's impossible?


No I don't think it's impossible. It's in the box of things that are '_not impossible_', which includes items like Jose Mourhino being reappointed as Man United manager next week and then sticking a bust of napoleon up his bum in a post match press conference. The_ Box of Really Quite Unlikely but Not Theoretically Impossible Things_ is quite large.

Do you have the martial law thing in that box or do you think there's a real chance it might happen?

Oh, and if you _don't _think there's much chance of it happening, why post it?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2019)

Worrying about 3500 soldiers lazing about outside town halls, lol when there are already 6million cctv cameras watching everything already.

They need gone btw. If we're eh taking_ our country back_ after 29/3/19 I reckon that might be a good place to begin.


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

As unlikely as martial law being imposed on the uk mainland is. It’s very upsetting to recognize the real possibility of something approaching it in Northern Ireland.


----------



## alsoknownas (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> As unlikely as martial law being imposed on the uk mainland is. It’s very upsetting to recognize the real possibility of something approaching it in Northern Ireland.


Well this is it.  I do wonder quite gravely how this is all going to play out there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> As unlikely as martial law being imposed on the uk mainland is. It’s very upsetting to recognize the real possibility of something approaching it in Northern Ireland.


There's a long history of districts being proclaimed in Ireland but I don't believe any part of Northern Ireland of placed under martial law: even tho things like eg the rape of the falls may feel very much like it. The army was of course officially there in support of the civil power. If it wasn't imposed in 1972 it is very unlikely to be imposed now. Martial law would be people going before courts-martial, rather than your normal or diplock courts.


----------



## alsoknownas (Jan 27, 2019)

Mock wall (complete with mock squaddies) at Co. Louth Brexit demo yesterday:


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There's a long history of districts being proclaimed in Ireland but I don't believe any part of Northern Ireland of placed under martial law: even tho things like eg the rape of the falls may feel very much like it. The army was of course officially there in support of the civil power. If it wasn't imposed in 1972 it is very unlikely to be imposed now. Martial law would be people going before courts-martial, rather than your normal or diplock courts.


Yes as said, approaching it, I don’t think it would satisfy the full definition, but it’s going to be fucking ugly if we end up with “disorderly” brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Mock wall (complete with mock squaddies) at Co. Louth Brexit demo yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 160150


I'm sure someone will be along shortly to give us chapter and verse on those assault rifles


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> Yes as said, approaching it, I don’t think it would satisfy the full definition, but it’s going to be fucking ugly if we end up with “disorderly” brexit.


Soz you either have the civil power in charge or you have the military in charge it's not a tj hooker million shades of grey. And being as the British army so small now they can't go back to how it was in the 80s or 90s in the six counties, let alone the 70s certainly not if there's a degree of unhappiness in England, Wales or Scotland. So tbh it's much more likely to be a paper tiger than anything real.


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Soz you either have the civil power in charge or you have the military in charge it's not a tj hooker million shades of grey. And being as the British army so small now they can't go back to how it was in the 80s or 90s in the six counties, let alone the 70s certainly not if there's a degree of unhappiness in England, Wales or Scotland. So tbh it's much more likely to be a paper tiger than anything real.



I applaud the optimism, but don’t share it.


----------



## A380 (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm sure someone will be along shortly to give us chapter and verse on those assault rifles


I think they are carbines actually...

Inaccurate impression of British servicemen. There are two of them and they are both dressed the same.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 27, 2019)

A380 said:


> I think they are carbines actually...
> 
> Inaccurate impression of British servicemen. There are two of them and they are both dressed the same.



out of date camouflage design as well


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Mock wall (complete with mock squaddies) at Co. Louth Brexit demo yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 160150



Apropos of nothing but amusement, but if it were the Republic that had chosen to leave the EU, and an anti-Eirexit demo was held in NI, they'd be some proper foaming at the mouth about outrageous British interference in the sovereign, domestic affairs of the Republic of Ireland...


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> out of date camouflage design as well



Amusingly, the kneeling chap is wearing Irish Army camouflage trousers, which it is an offence for a non-member of the Irish Defence Forces to wear in the Republic. Some Defence Act or other.. I look forward to his prosecution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> I applaud the optimism, but don’t share it.


Yeh you'd rather bang your hands together than share the rationale behind your opinion.


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> All capitalism is disaster capitalism





alsoknownas said:


> Mock wall (complete with mock squaddies) at Co. Louth Brexit demo yesterday:
> 
> View attachment 160150




Surely that constitutes a hard border.  If the fella with the cheque book that signs for imaginary ferries is reading...A couple of hundred of these on the shopping list could spice things up


----------



## treelover (Jan 27, 2019)

> A worthwhile read and how I share the author's feelings regards the creativity and kindness of our youngest in primary schools. There, at least, hope springs eternal.
> 
> "Identity is the crisis can't you see?" sang Poly Styrene some 40 years ago already and it's as apt now as it was then. National identity and nationalism is anathema to the EU; its visitor centre has these words at its entrance, " National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times….The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.”
> 
> ...






Posted on CIF, imo it is a balanced incisive piece, well perhaps not its conclusion.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> I applaud the optimism, but don’t share it.



Pickman's model has been accused of many things but never optimism!


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh you'd rather bang your hands together than share the rationale behind your opinion.



A few republican skirmishes on the uk mainland designed to capitalize on the chaos could invoke a military response.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 27, 2019)

Favelado said:


> Loads of people would love it. *British soldiers on the streets as we leave the EU, adding to the image of us taking back control*. This is Britain, being British. Don't fuck with Britain. Don't fuck with Brexit.
> 
> It doesn't make sense of course, but it doesn't need to.



That's horrific, but I suspect with some Leavers, very true indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> A few republican skirmishes on the uk mainland designed to capitalize on the chaos could invoke a military response.


maybe even provoke one

But you're saying this could lead to martial law in the six counties which makes you sound er overwrought


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ... overwrought



Overwrought as a newt?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Overwrought as a newt?




No, as in frantic, feverish, swivel-eyed, delirious, unhinged


----------



## NoXion (Jan 27, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Worrying about 3500 soldiers lazing about outside town halls, lol when there are already 6million cctv cameras watching everything already.
> 
> They need gone btw. If we're eh taking_ our country back_ after 29/3/19 I reckon that might be a good place to begin.



Bit of a diversion, but...

Aren't the vast majority of those CCTV cameras privately operated? Judging from this Independent article, it would seem so. And I also understand that a lot of CCTV operators don't keep the footage past 24 or 48 hours. Because any longer would be a shitload of data to store (plus there may be legal as well as financial issues with such long-term storage of potentially identifying data), even if the images are stored at a low frame rates and resolutions, which would also negatively impact their usefulness in actually catching out crims. Well, identifying  This isn't even getting into the various relatively easy things that people can do for themselves to evade identification.

I'm not a fan of those big Panopticon-style cameras you see mounted on light posts in public streets (my town has them), but getting rid of them would barely make a dent in the scary-sounding numbers that get bandied about by such bastions of esteemed journalism as the Daily Mail, which was the first result for me on a Google search for "6 million CCTV cameras".


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Bit of a diversion, but...
> 
> Aren't the vast majority of those CCTV cameras privately operated? Judging from this Independent article, it would seem so. And I also understand that a lot of CCTV operators don't keep the footage past 24 or 48 hours. Because any longer would be a shitload of data to store (plus there may be legal as well as financial issues with such long-term storage of potentially identifying data), even if the images are stored at a low frame rates and resolutions, which would also negatively impact their usefulness in actually catching out crims. Well, identifying  This isn't even getting into the various relatively easy things that people can do for themselves to evade identification.
> 
> I'm not a fan of those big Panopticon-style cameras you see mounted on light posts in public streets (my town has them), but getting rid of them would barely make a dent in the scary-sounding numbers that get bandied about by such bastions of esteemed journalism as the Daily Mail, which was the first result for me on a Google search for "6 million CCTV cameras".


I work on the assumption that footage kept for a month unless crime detected in which case it'd be saved

But no one knows how many cameras there are


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I work on the assumption that footage kept for a month unless crime detected in which case it'd be saved
> 
> But no one knows how many cameras there are



Who wants to lives in the sort of state where "the man" knows how many cameras there are.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Who wants to lives in the sort of state where "the man" knows how many cameras there are.


"the man"


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 27, 2019)

with his suit and tie. And cameras.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2019)




----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2019)

Yeah sorry I was just amused that anyone in one of the most surveilled nations on Earth should be worried about a few squaddies being added to the mix. When armed police are at most a phone call away in any case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Yeah sorry I was just amused that anyone in one of the most surveilled nations on Earth should be worried about a few squaddies being added to the mix. When armed police are at most a phone call away in any case.


There are of course only a few squaddies


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 27, 2019)

And ultimately we want them on _our _side instead of the HMQ's side. Having them dotted about in public where they become everyday people again instead of _heroes off fighting for queen and cunty _.. might work for us in the long run.

I don't know. I'm pretty much fully converted by this point to _leave and get on with it_. I'm way more worried about the kind of rhetoric that would justify undoing a referendum, however narrow the result. Talk of troops in the streets is bullshit scare tactics and I just wanted to say in no uncertain terms that it's not scary. What's _really _scary is hearing millions of people cry _not fair, do it again_ like we're a nation of toddlers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> And ultimately we want them on _our _side instead of the HMQ's side. Having them dotted about in public where they become everyday people again instead of _heroes off fighting for queen and cunty _.. might work for us in the long run.
> 
> I don't know. I'm pretty much fully converted by this point to _leave and get on with it_. I'm way more worried about the kind of rhetoric that would justify undoing a referendum, however narrow the result. Talk of troops in the streets is bullshit scare tactics and I just wanted to say in no uncertain terms that it's not scary. What's _really _scary is hearing millions of people cry _not fair, do it again_ like we're a nation of toddlers.


It is widely believed, but nonetheless a myth, that the armed forces fight for Elizabeth ii and Spymaster


----------



## two sheds (Jan 27, 2019)

You're thinking of the mounted bicycle fusiliers there.


----------



## A380 (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> "the man"



‘The Man’


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> maybe even provoke one
> 
> But you're saying this could lead to martial law in the six counties which makes you sound er overwrought


I said it could be something _approaching_ it, which doesn’t feel outlandish.

E2a: while I’m only in my mid 30s I still have memories of dealing with British military in the north. So I don’t take the prospect of their return lightly and I don’t think the possibility is something to be sneered at.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> I said it could be something _approaching_ it, which doesn’t feel outlandish.
> 
> E2a: while I’m only in my mid 30s I still have memories of dealing with British military in the north. So I don’t take the prospect of their return lightly and I don’t think the possibility is something to be sneered at.



Serious question: what is the mechanism you think might be set in train that puts soldiers on the streets or in the fields of NI other than a new republican armed campaign?

By far and away away more likely is the Irish Army being used to secure/manage the _Irish imposed _border - within UK law (and any of the projected outcomes) it's not the UK that will be imposing a hard infrastructure on the border, but the EU, through its member state Ireland.

Thats the thing with the EU customs union, it has hard external borders.


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Serious question: what is the mechanism you think might be set in train that puts soldiers on the streets or in the fields of NI other than a new republican armed campaign?
> 
> By far and away away more likely is the Irish Army being used to secure/manage the _Irish imposed _border - within UK law (and any of the projected outcomes) it's not the UK that will be imposing a hard infrastructure on the border, but the EU, through its member state Ireland.
> 
> Thats the thing with the EU customs union, it has hard external borders.



I think the reintroduction of a border will be enough to put armed British security forces back in the north. They may not be specifically military, and It may not be full martial law however it’s British forces (more than likely armed) at some level back in the north. That is a very unpleasant thought for the people of this Island.

In addition, I’ve seen this rhetoric come up several times here, that it’s an EU imposed border. This is obviously factually correct, but it does appear to be used to suggest that as if there would be no British presence on the other side.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Serious question: what is the mechanism you think might be set in train that puts soldiers on the streets or in the fields of NI other than a new republican armed campaign?
> 
> By far and away away more likely is the Irish Army being used to secure/manage the _Irish imposed _border - within UK law (and any of the projected outcomes) it's not the UK that will be imposing a hard infrastructure on the border, but the EU, through its member state Ireland.
> 
> Thats the thing with the EU customs union, it has hard external borders.




Think back.
Bloody Sunday....anniversary is in 3 days btw.
A peaceful civil rights March....was enough for the British army to shoot Catholics.

If you think people are not terrified of what could happen in the 6 counties in the event of the British Army being deployed then you've been living a completely blinkered  life.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> I think the reintroduction of a border will be enough to put armed British security forces back in the north. They may not be specifically military, and It may not be full martial law however it’s British forces (more than likely armed) at some level back in the north. That is a very unpleasant thought for the people of this Island.
> 
> In addition, I’ve seen this rhetoric come up several times here, that it’s an EU imposed border. This is obviously factually correct, but it does appear to be used to suggest that as if there would be no British presence on the other side.




The EU is committed to no land border. 
It's the DUP and Tories pushing that scenario. And if the Tories didn't need the bloody DUP they'd drop that idea too.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Serious question: what is the mechanism you think might be set in train that puts soldiers on the streets or in the fields of NI other than a new republican armed campaign?
> 
> By far and away away more likely is the Irish Army being used to secure/manage the _Irish imposed _border - within UK law (and any of the projected outcomes) it's not the UK that will be imposing a hard infrastructure on the border, but the EU, through its member state Ireland.
> 
> Thats the thing with the EU customs union, it has hard external borders.




The Irish army will have fuck all to do with it.


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The EU is committed to no land border.
> It's the DUP and Tories pushing that scenario. And if the Tories didn't need the bloody DUP they'd drop that idea too.



Up until recently I was confident in the EU standing firm, that has been shaken recently. People like Coveney and Ross being unexpectedly caught on mic talking about it as a real possibility makes me worried further


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> Up until recently I was confident in the EU standing firm, that has been shaken recently. People like Coveney and Ross being unexpectedly caught on mic talking about it as a real possibility makes me worried further




Yeah...I know. But Coveney and others are adamant that the EU won't throw us under the bus for the sake of keeping the UK unionists happy.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The Irish army will have fuck all to do with it.


Leave it to the Guards?


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Leave it to the Guards?



Basically, or whatever the specific name of the customs bods is. But Lupa is correct there is no way it will be the army


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Leave it to the Guards?


No.

Customs officers at a push. 
Many people here would be of the opinion that we not co operate or recognise any border.


----------



## grit (Jan 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Many people here would be of the opinion that we not co operate or recognise any border.



I don’t think that’s a runner, if EU decides there is a border, we are going to have to do it.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 27, 2019)

grit said:


> I don’t think that’s a runner, if EU decides there is a border, we are going to have to do it.



They can't and wont decide that while the Belfast agreement is in place.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There are of course only a few squaddies



Fewer every year.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 28, 2019)

It won’t be the British Army anyway. Remember who’s running this show - it’ll be Capita/G4S/Academi guarding the border.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> They can't and wont decide that while the Belfast agreement is in place.


It's not really their decision to make anyway. 

The whole idea of the UK challenging Ireland to enforce the border is such a load of macho, seventh-level cloudcukcooland. We're not going to get there, and even if you can be bothered thinking it through, it's pretty obvious that the EU will be able to make us play nicely quite easily. We'd probably fold after half a dozen asylum-seekers. But they can pretty much blockade us if we were to push them that far.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's not really their decision to make anyway.
> 
> The whole idea of the UK challenging Ireland to enforce the border is such a load of macho, seventh-level cloudcukcooland. We're not going to get there, and even if you can be bothered thinking it through, it's pretty obvious that the EU will be able to make us play nicely quite easily. We'd probably fold after half a dozen asylum-seekers. But they can pretty much blockade us if we were to push them that far.



So why the ridiculous posturing? Politicians in the UK with their brass necked "after all we are Great Britain" approach saying they'll demand x y z from the EU...
Nobody thought we would be in this position. Hell ...Nobody thought the Brexit vote would go the way it did...but look where we are? 
Any thing could happen... nothing would surprise me.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> Basically, or whatever the specific name of the customs bods is. But Lupa is correct there is no way it will be the army



The Irish Government seems to disagree, and I think they have a bit more over it...


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> The Irish Government seems to disagree, and I think they have a bit more over it...



Got a link or anything that supports the idea that the Irish army will manage the border?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> Got a link or anything that supports the idea that the Irish army will manage the border?



On phone, so can't quote it - but Leo Varadkar said it explicitly in the least few days: border infrastructure, cameras, customs officers, Gardai to protect them, and the Irish Army in support of them.


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> They can't and wont decide that while the Belfast agreement is in place.


Your view of the EU as the friend and protector of Ireland is ridiculously naive.

The EU is using the GFA as leverage in these negotiations with the UK. If it becomes 'necessary' from their point of view to impose a hard border, they'll drop their current objections in an instant.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> Got a link or anything that supports the idea that the Irish army will manage the border?


In certain circumstances, said Varadkar at Davos.

Varadkar ‘contradicting everything we have been told’ about Brexit – Martin


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Your view of the EU as the friend and protector of Ireland is ridiculously naive.
> 
> The EU is using the GFA as leverage in these negotiations with the UK. If it becomes 'necessary' from their point of view to impose a hard border, they'll drop their current objections in an instant.


 They are not our friend, we are their money launderers as I’ve said several times in this thread

Edit: oops just realized this wasn’t aimed at me


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In certain circumstances, said Varadkar at Davos.
> 
> Varadkar ‘contradicting everything we have been told’ about Brexit – Martin




In that, Varadkar says one thing, his obviously un-named "Government spokesman" almost-but-not-quite contradicts him :




			
				Irish Times said:
			
		

> A Government spokesman later clarified that the Taoiseach was not referring to Irish personnel or infrastructure. He “was asked to describe a hard border, and gave a description of what it used to look like, and the risk of what it could look like in the worst-case scenario.”
> 
> The spokesman said Mr Varadkar was “not referring to personnel and the Irish Government has no plans to deploy infrastructure or personnel at the border”.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 28, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> In that, Varadkar says one thing, his obviously un-named "Government spokesman" almost-but-not-quite contradicts him :


Yeah, he said one thing, then the government had to row back a little, as far as plausibility would allow.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 28, 2019)

Thought the way that row-back was worded was interesting, as much as anything else!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yeah, he said one thing, then the government had to row back a little, as far as plausibility would allow.



And what he described was what he didn't want to happen. 
It was what was there previously
He has since stated that It was a reflection back to what had been there before...a hard border...that nobody wants. .


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Your view of the EU as the friend and protector of Ireland is ridiculously naive.
> 
> The EU is using the GFA as leverage in these negotiations with the UK. If it becomes 'necessary' from their point of view to impose a hard border, they'll drop their current objections in an instant.




Well...let's put it this way. 
The UK won't get shit. 
They're leaving. Why should the EU make Any thing better for them and make life worse for an actual member? 
Great Britain has such a ridiculous sense of entitlement. ... It's laughable.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> And what he described was what he didn't want to happen.
> It was what was there previously
> He has since stated that It was a reflection back to what had been there before...a hard border...that nobody wants. .


Yes, he was clear it’s what he didn’t want. But that it could happen in certain circumstances.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

The EU will stand their ground because they must. 
The UK needs to grow up. Accept that if they leave they are on their own and atop fucking up other countries.


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 28, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 160203


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The EU will stand their ground because they must.
> The UK needs to grow up. Accept that if they leave they are on their own and atop fucking up other countries.


the final three countries (and one province) the uk will fuck up are england, wales, scotland and the six counties.

then it will dissolve as recounted in the novel of the while powder:

The Novel of the White Powder - Wikisource, the free online library


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The EU will stand their ground because they must.
> The UK needs to grow up. Accept that if they leave they are on their own and atop fucking up other countries.


I fear you may be in for a rude awakening before this is all over...


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

I think a few months ago I read about the UK getting floating 'power stations' (something I didn't know existed) for the six counties, because the electricity comes from the republic.
If that is true, at the very least a breakdown in EU/UK  cooperation has been contemplated by somebody in authority.
The practicalities of things are interesting when the theoretical becomes manifest. The mock border dramatized at the weekend was a bit of a window into a possible practicality, and of course the government shut down in the USA led to practical consequences, for example in Air Traffic Control.
Brexit voters are fond of saying they knew what they were voting for.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The EU will stand their ground because they must.
> The UK needs to grow up. Accept that if they leave they are on their own and atop fucking up other countries.



_Please _tell me i'm watching an Irish nationalist (political) explain how that when a polity within a wider political, economic and legal union leaves that union through an expression of national self determination, that polity is morally responsible to the other parts of the union for the inconveniences caused by the now holes in that wider political, economic and legal union....


----------



## ska invita (Jan 28, 2019)

I don't really understand the Brady amendment fully but according to Peston it's tabling is a possible crunch point. If it fails to pass Mays deal goes in the toast rack and if it does pass it either massively delays brexit or gets a No Chance from different countries

Or something like that... This may make more sense to you:



Hopefully the bit about Brady being voted down and May left with nothing will be the case


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I don't really understand the Brady amendment fully but according to Peston it's tabling is a possible crunch point. If it fails to pass Mays deal goes in the toast rack and if it does pass it either massively delays brexit or gets a No Chance from different countries
> 
> Or something like that... This may make more sense to you:
> 
> ...



It appears to be not a lot more than 'EU, you must change the backstop cos we say so'. It's a continuation of the fantasy that the UK is calling the shots here when the only gun it has is pointed at its own head.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It appears to be not a lot more than 'EU, you must change the backstop cos we say so'. It's a continuation of the fantasy that the UK is calling the shots here when the only gun it has is pointed at its own head.



That's not quite true actually, as will surprise no one - if it's selected, and if it passes, it gives May what the EU have been asking for since the defeat of the agreement last week: what the EU wants is a specific, short list of changes the UK parliament needs in order to pass the agreement. The EU has not said that it will then immediately change the text of the agreement, but has said that that if it believes that ratification is a near political certainty with those changes, then it would certainly look to be as helpful as possible, given that it doesn't want a no-deal-crashout anymore than the UK parliament does.

Helpfully, Dominic Greives (arch Tory remainer) has said that he will almost certainly supporting it in preference to the Bowles/Cooper amendment, as it helps the changes of a deal (however imperfect) while also respecting the referendum result. The inference being that the Bowles/Cooper amendment is a more than a bit 'kick brexit off into the long grass and hope it goes away' remainy...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 28, 2019)

I guess what it would do if the government backs it - and it gets through parliament (big if) is shoot the ERGs fox when the EU inevitably turns round and says "which part of 'fuck off - we are not changing the backstop arrangement'  did you not understand" - thereby illustrating that the "getting tough with the EU tactic" is not going to work.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 28, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It won’t be the British Army anyway. Remember who’s running this show - it’ll be Capita/G4S/Academi guarding the border.



And a fearsome bunch they are. I wouldn't hire them to guard my gran and she's been dead ten years already.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> That's not quite true actually, as will surprise no one - if it's selected, and if it passes, it gives May what the EU have been asking for since the defeat of the agreement last week: what the EU wants is a specific, short list of changes the UK parliament needs in order to pass the agreement. The EU has not said that it will then immediately change the text of the agreement, but has said that that if it believes that ratification is a near political certainty with those changes, then it would certainly look to be as helpful as possible, given that it doesn't want a no-deal-crashout anymore than the UK parliament does.
> 
> Helpfully, Dominic Greives (arch Tory remainer) has said that he will almost certainly supporting it in preference to the Bowles/Cooper amendment, as it helps the changes of a deal (however imperfect) while also respecting the referendum result. The inference being that the Bowles/Cooper amendment is a more than a bit 'kick brexit off into the long grass and hope it goes away' remainy...


They would want something in return, though. That's what a negotiation normally entails. Would May be offering something, and if so, would that get through parliament?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

Raab tried to introduce a time limit to the backstop before and didn't get anywhere, plus there's nothing sensible to replace it with.


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They would want something in return, though. That's what a negotiation normally entails. Would May be offering something, and if so, would that get through parliament?


I think the idea is that the EU or its member states would prefer to avoid a No Deal crash out and so will be prepared to compromise at the 11th hour, despite what they've said. What they will get in return is an agreement, even if it isn't the agreement they want.

I'm not saying I agree with this reasoning, BTW, just that that's what the thinking is...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think the idea is that the EU or its member states would prefer to avoid a No Deal crash out and so will be prepared to compromise at the 11th hour, despite what they've said. What they will get in return is an agreement, even if it isn't the agreement they want.
> 
> I'm not saying I agree with this reasoning, BTW, just that that's what the thinking is...


There is one crucial difference between the two sides. If no agreement can be reached, there are two possible consequences - no deal crash out or the UK withdrawing A50. The rest of the EU wishes to avoid only one of those two possibilities, while the UK government is trying to avoid both.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> They would want something in return, though. That's what a negotiation normally entails. Would May be offering something, and if so, would that get through parliament?



They would want something in return, though they would get the transition agreement - which means no border. At the moment, without some movement on the indefinite nature of the backstop, they get the border in 8 weeks. Neither side wants that, and in everywhere except Dublin, the realisation is dawning that in pushing too hard, the EU (and Ireland) may get the exact opposite of what it wants.

The time to sort out the truly satisfactory solution to the border is in the future trade agreement. Had serious work on that started before the UK left the EU, it's quite possible that the backstop wouldn't be the stumbling block it currently is...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> They would want something in return, though they would get the transition agreement - which means no border. At the moment, without some movement on the indefinite nature of the backstop, they get the border in 8 weeks. Neither side wants that, and in everywhere except Dublin, the realisation is dawning that in pushing too hard, the EU (and Ireland) may get the exact opposite of what it wants.
> 
> The time to sort out the truly satisfactory solution to the border is in the future trade agreement. Had serious work on that started before the UK left the EU, it's quite possible that the backstop wouldn't be the stumbling block it currently is...



I agree with most of that, except I suspect Dublin also knows a change to the backdrop needs to be made, but are just playing hardball ATM.

None of the parties want a no-deal Brexit, none of the parties want a hard border in Ireland, so there's no reason not to put a time limit on the backstop, in order to focus minds in sorting out a decent free trade agreement going forward.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I agree with most of that, except I suspect Dublin also knows a change to the backdrop needs to be made, but are just playing hardball ATM.
> 
> None of the parties want a no-deal Brexit, none of the parties want a hard border in Ireland, so there's no reason not to put a time limit on the backstop, in order to focus minds in sorting out a decent free trade agreement going forward.


don't see why, the two year a.50 limit hasn't really concentrated minds.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There is one crucial difference between the two sides. If no agreement can be reached, there are two possible consequences - no deal crash out or the UK withdrawing A50. The rest of the EU wishes to avoid only one of those two possibilities, while the UK government is trying to avoid both.



Again, not quite true - there are two possibilities, crash out, no deal brexit in 8 weeks, or a short term (8 - 12 weeks) extention of A50, which has to be agreed by all parties and will only be agreed if the EU believes it's within a gnats whisker of a deal. 

A straightforward withdrawal of A50 simply isn't on the cards - and certainly not if the EU refuses an extension - the vibe from Tory remainers (who area after all, in most contact with their Labour colleagues) is that there are less than 200 MP's who would vote for a straightforward withdrawal of A50 - everyone else wants to leave and get a deal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> don't see why, the two year a.50 limit hasn't really concentrated minds.



You don't think minds are currently concentrated?


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Again, not quite true - there are two possibilities, crash out, no deal brexit in 8 weeks, or a short term (8 - 12 weeks) extention of A50, which has to be agreed by all parties and will only be agreed if the EU believes it's within a gnats whisker of a deal.
> 
> A straightforward withdrawal of A50 simply isn't on the cards - and certainly not if the EU refuses an extension - the vibe from Tory remainers (who area after all, in most contact with their Labour colleagues) is that there are less than 200 MP's who would vote for a straightforward withdrawal of A50 - everyone else wants to leave and get a deal.


LBJ is allowing his eagerness for an A50 withdrawal to cloud his judgement, I suspect


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You don't think minds are currently concentrated?



Concentrated on pride and face-saving maybe. On pissing up a wall.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You don't think minds are currently concentrated?


maybe on saving their own political arses


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Again, not quite true - there are two possibilities, crash out, no deal brexit in 8 weeks, or a short term (8 - 12 weeks) extention of A50, which has to be agreed by all parties and will only be agreed if the EU believes it's within a gnats whisker of a deal.
> 
> A straightforward withdrawal of A50 simply isn't on the cards - and certainly not if the EU refuses an extension - the vibe from Tory remainers (who area after all, in most contact with their Labour colleagues) is that there are less than 200 MP's who would vote for a straightforward withdrawal of A50 - everyone else wants to leave and get a deal.


We'll see. Wanting to leave and get a deal is all good except there isn't a deal on the table at the moment that can pass. If it then becomes a choice between no deal and withdrawal of A50, the numbers will change. 

To your first point, I was lumping an extension of A50 in with 'getting an agreement'. If I had to bet on this, I would probably bet on an extension of some kind at the moment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> LBJ is allowing his eagerness for an A50 withdrawal to cloud his judgement, I suspect


no it's just an irruption of his liberalism


----------



## Winot (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I agree with most of that, except I suspect Dublin also knows a change to the backdrop needs to be made, but are just playing hardball ATM.
> 
> None of the parties want a no-deal Brexit, none of the parties want a hard border in Ireland, so there's no reason not to put a time limit on the backstop, in order to focus minds in sorting out a decent free trade agreement going forward.



How long do you think the time limit should be? In other words how long to negotiate an FTA?

And if the limit runs out before an FTA is agreed, what happens then?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I agree with most of that, except I suspect Dublin also knows a change to the backdrop needs to be made, but are just playing hardball ATM.
> 
> None of the parties want a no-deal Brexit, none of the parties want a hard border in Ireland, so there's no reason not to put a time limit on the backstop, in order to focus minds in sorting out a decent free trade agreement going forward.



The reason the backstop is there and needs to be permanent is because of the red lines and the fact the UK wants to diverge from the EU rules. It's either a backstop or a customs union.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Winot said:


> How long do you think the time limit should be? In other words how long to negotiate an FTA?
> 
> And if the limit runs out before an FTA is agreed, what happens then?



A FTA should be possible to agree by the end of 2020, we have a template with the Canadian deal, that just needs amending in parts. 

But, I don't think it's unreasonable to have a time limit of 5 years in total.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> The reason the backstop is there and needs to be permanent is because of the red lines and the fact the UK wants to diverge from the EU rules. It's either a backstop or a customs union.



Even the EU is saying the backstop is not intended to be permanent, the plan going forward is for a FTA that will prevent a hard border, not a customs union.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Even the EU is saying the backstop is not intended to be permanent, the plan going forward is for a FTA that will prevent a hard border, not a customs union.


What is that plan? What could that plan be? Canada-style deals involve border checks. They also don't cover services, so 'just needs amending in parts' isn't really true. The UK would need a vastly different deal from Canada.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Even the EU is saying the backstop is not intended to be permanent, the plan going forward is for a FTA that will prevent a hard border, not a customs union.


Who's plan?. Why didn't the EU put a time limit in it then?


----------



## Winot (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> A FTA should be possible to agree by the end of 2020, we have a template with the Canadian deal, that just needs amending in parts.
> 
> But, I don't think it's unreasonable to have a time limit of 5 years in total.



And what happens if we get to the end of 5 years without an FTA? 

I'd suggest that what happens is that the EU would insist on an extension. So in other words, you'd end up with an agreement in which in effect the backstop would be in place until an FTA is agreed - which is where we are now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

Winot said:


> And what happens if we get to the end of 5 years without an FTA?
> 
> I'd suggest that what happens is that the EU would insist on an extension. So in other words, you'd end up with an agreement in which in effect the backstop would be in place until an FTA is agreed - which is where we are now.


It's an exercise in kicking the can down the road. Nobody has an actual idea of how to maintain 'frictionless trade' while withdrawing from the customs union. One thing is for sure though - a Canada-style deal or something similar does not maintain frictionless trade at all. It will be an expensive and time-consuming pain in the arse for all concerned.

It's an idiotic idea that somehow you can get frictionless trade without customs union. That's the function of the customs union.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What is that plan? What could that plan be? Canada-style deals involve border checks. They also don't cover services, so 'just needs amending in parts' isn't really true. The UK would need a vastly different deal from Canada.



The Canada deal involves minimal actual border checks, everything is processed online, with token checks at the border, IIRC amounting to about 1% of what comes into the EU.  

The EU stated long ago that they were open to any minimal checks required in Ireland, to be done away from the border, at factory/warehouse/farm locations.

The deal also includes services, although somewhat more limited than what would be needed for the EU & UK going forward.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2019)

I imagine the speaker will select the Brady amendment, though it would be quite funny if he didn't.   Anyway, assuming he does, it seems to be edging towards being the unofficial government fallback position. DUP may also be on board:
Is Theresa May Nearing A Brexit Deal Breakthrough?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I imagine the speaker will select the Brady amendment, though it would be quite funny if he didn't.   Anyway, assuming he does, it seems to be edging towards being the unofficial government fallback position. DUP may also be on board:
> Is Theresa May Nearing A Brexit Deal Breakthrough?


if there's one thing we've learned about brexit, it's that everything that promises to be a brexit breakthrough isn't.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The EU stated long ago that they were open to any minimal checks required in Ireland, to be done away from the border, at factory/warehouse/farm locations.



Where was that stated?


----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It won’t be the British Army anyway. Remember who’s running this show - it’ll be Capita/G4S/Academi guarding the border.



Ah I can see why the Irish are pissed off.  "you can't come in trainers" is annoying


----------



## Winot (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Canada deal involves minimal actual border checks, everything is processed online, with token checks at the border, IIRC amounting to about 1% of what comes into the EU.
> 
> The EU stated long ago that they were open to any minimal checks required in Ireland, to be done away from the border, at factory/warehouse/farm locations.
> 
> The deal also includes services, although somewhat more limited than what would be needed for the EU & UK going forward.



So if it's this easy the WA can say that the backstop is in place until an FTA is agreed.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Canada deal involves minimal actual border checks, everything is processed online, with token checks at the border, IIRC amounting to about 1% of what comes into the EU.
> 
> The EU stated long ago that they were open to any minimal checks required in Ireland, to be done away from the border, at factory/warehouse/farm locations.
> 
> The deal also includes services, although somewhat more limited than what would be needed for the EU & UK going forward.


- someone gave Australia as an example as well, but there is a big difference between a trade deal with a country close up and one far away. 

The issue with the backstop is that it ties NI to EU rules and regulations. The DUP don't want a difference between NI and the mainland and some in the Tory party want to be able to bring in chlorinated chicken etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> some in the Tory party want to be able to bring in chlorinated chicken etc.


some in the tory party should be made to eat it


----------



## gosub (Jan 28, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> - someone gave Australia as an example as well, but there is a big difference between a trade deal with a country close up and one far away.
> 
> The issue with the backstop is that it ties NI to EU rules and regulations. The DUP don't want a difference between NI and the mainland and some in the Tory party want to be able to bring in chlorinated chicken etc.



No that someone was me and you don't know what you are talking about.  Geography doesn't come into MRA its about acknowledgement of regulatory alignment


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> No that someone was me and you don't know what you are talking about.  Geography doesn't come into MRA its about acknowledgement of regulatory alignment


 Geography doesn't come into trade?. Someone tell Barnier quick.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> I fear you may be in for a rude awakening before this is all over...



Lol...are you kidding? I'm fully aware of the complete fuck up that Brexit is and will be for Eire and NI deal or no deal. 
The UK does not give a flying fuck about Eire or NI...And they will throw the Belfast agreement under the bus to get what they think they need. 
Nothing at this stage is going to make things better....bar going back to the people who were lied to and telling them that they were lied to...And giving them another vote.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Do you think that's how it works? Do you think that the British Governement had the right to manipulate the deal to suit their pro Brexit populace whilst at the same time fucking up a peace agreement with another country? 

The British Government seems to think it has a right to a holden deal. They're the ones who want to leave... why on earth do they deserve a golden handshake?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> ...nothing at this stage is going to make things better....bar going back to the people who were lied to and telling them that they were lied to...And giving them another vote.



That won't make things better - and i'm afraid you've fallen for the Guardian bollocks regarding the referendum: of those who voted leave who i've spoken to (I voted remain), none cite crap spoken by politicians as their reason for voting leave. In every case it was about identity.

Most leavers I know are fully aware that the leave campaign was full of shit - but they didn't vote leave based on the campaign, so re-running it would have no effect on their vote.


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Lol...are you kidding? I'm fully aware of the complete fuck up that Brexit is and will be for Eire and NI deal or no deal.
> The UK does not give a flying fuck about Eire or NI...And they will throw the Belfast agreement under the bus to get what they think they need.
> Nothing at this stage is going to make things better....bar going back to the people who were lied to and telling them that they were lied to...And giving them another vote.



Going back to the people and giving them another vote until they give the 'correct' answer is, of course, something the voters of Ireland know all about with regards to the EU.

The part of your post I was referring to when I said you may be in for a rude awakening is this bit


Lupa said:


> The EU will stand their ground because they must...


If they *do* stand their ground, it won't be because they're defending the Irish or even the GFA, it will be because it's in the overall interests of the EU


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> That won't make things better - and i'm afraid you've fallen for the Guardian bollocks regarding the referendum: of those who voted leave who i've spoken to (I voted remain), none cite crap spoken by politicians as their reason for voting leave. In every case it was about identity.
> 
> Most leavers I know are fully aware that the leave campaign was full of shit - but they didn't vote leave based on the campaign, so re-running it would have no effect on their vote.




So a group of people who think that the UK will actually survive Brexit did this to their own country for the sake of "identity"?
What does that mean? Whose identity? Isnt the UK multicultural? 
The identity of a NI unionist isn't going to be anything like a NI nationalist? And if you're saying that Brexit leavers voted because of their desire to copperstamp one identity only then they're 100% thick as planks.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So a group of people who think that the UK will actually survive Brexit did this to their own country for the sake of "identity"?
> What does that mean? Whose identity? Isnt the UK multicultural?
> The identity of a NI unionist isn't going to be anything like a NI nationalist? And if you're saying that Brexit leavers voted because of their desire to copperstamp one identity only then they're 100% thick as planks.


That's all well and good, but it doesn't change the facts on the ground does it? Besides I think most leavers have had quite enough of being called thick.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> If they *do* stand their ground, it won't be because they're defending the Irish or even the GFA, it will be because it's in the overall interests of the EU


Defending the Irish, or at least being seen to be defending the Irish, is in the interests of the wider EU, though. They need to demonstrate the benefits to being in the club.


----------



## Winot (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> If they *do* stand their ground, it won't be because they're defending the Irish or even the GFA, it will be because it's in the overall interests of the EU



How will you be able to tell the difference, and will the Irish care?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Defending the Irish, or at least being seen to be defending the Irish, is in the interests of the wider EU, though. They need to demonstrate the benefits to being in the club.




Well if they don't defend a member state then they're not a union are they?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So a group of people who think that the UK will actually survive Brexit did this to their own country for the sake of "identity"?
> What does that mean? Whose identity? Isnt the UK multicultural?
> The identity of a NI unionist isn't going to be anything like a NI nationalist? And if you're saying that Brexit leavers voted because of their desire to copperstamp one identity only then they're 100% thick as planks.



I'd love to read your views on the Irish campaign for independence....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I'd love to read your views on the Irish campaign for independence....


What does leaving the EU have to do with independence?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well if they don't defend a member state then they're not a union are they?


they won't get you you're part of the union


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Defending the Irish, or at least being seen to be defending the Irish, is in the interests of the wider EU, though. They need to demonstrate the benefits to being in the club.


This is all very well, unless and until they decide it isn't in the interests of the wider EU any longer.

Did this need to demonstrate the benefits of being in the club help the people of Greece when other interests outweighed it?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I'd love to read your views on the Irish campaign for independence....




Eh?

Are you seriously comparing what the British did to Ireland with Brexit?...


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Eh?
> 
> Are you seriously comparing what the British did to Ireland with Brexit?...



Do you believe that polities only have the right to leave a wider polity if they have been subject to a particular type or quantity of behaviour?

As defined by you, of course...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Do you believe that polities only have the right to leave a wider polity if they have been subject to a particular type or quantity of behaviour?
> 
> As defined by you, of course...


So you look at the reasons for a national movement of independence and the meanings imbued in a nationalism as a result of those reasons. British, or English, nationalism has a set of meanings that derive from a history of imperialism - Rule Britannia (never be slaves - but will make slaves of others). It is only ever going to be a very ugly thing as a result. The UK is not and never has been oppressed by the EU.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Do you believe that polities only have the right to leave a wider polity if they have been subject to a particular type or quantity of behaviour?
> 
> As defined by you, of course...



You brought up Irish independence. What do you think?
Ireland gaining independence from the UK is a completely different scenario to Brexit. Firstly they were an oppressed country that endured extreme hardship at the hands and from the deliberate neglect of their needs. They were seen as little better than animals. In fact they were of less value than animals. The British Government turned a blind eye to the 1.5 million who died from starvation and the 2 million who left.
If the people of the UK feel that they were oppressed by the EU then they have no idea what real suppression and oppression is.

To reduce this to polity is rubbish. You brought up identity. What has that got to do with the running of a country? If people voted to leave a union of like minded supportive countries because they didn't like the evolution of the identity of their country then they were foolish.
Emigration is what made the UK. Irish working there for half nothing building roads and buildings. Others from all over Europe working the jobs the British wouldn't do themselves.

Tell me something. After Brexit, who's going to fund your social welfare system? When the dole isn't paid and people are told that the hourly rate of pay is reduced and food prices increase as they will undoubtedly, and you find that professionals from other EU countries like nurses and doctors decide to leave and return to an EU country... Tell me then that the British who want only a certain Identity wont regret anything about what they have done to themselves.  Maybe they will walk around with stiff upper lips telling all and sundry that "at least we can govern ourselves now harrumph"..." we will show them"...
"we will be great again"

It's quite sad. But I'm not shedding tears. Brexit will make life much harder for Ireland. Delays in food stuffs arriving. God only knows what will happen to gas imports from the UK...And other crucial services and goods.
Brexit is an insular viewpoint of one group wearing blinkers...they are never going to see the repercussions...as the full extent will be realised in 10 or 20 years.
Their children will look back and say "England gambled our futures  for the sake of identity...a completely intangible concept....bravo"...

Don't compare the EU and what your government and Brexiteers are doing to yourselves, with what the Brits did to Ireland. There is no comparison.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ..The UK is not and never has been oppressed by the EU.



Does it matter?

Are you saying that the UK, or any other country, cannot leave the EU (or any other body that you approve of) without some level of oppression (and I think that butchersapron and redsquirrel might have a view on that...) regardless of the views of the electorate of that country?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Does it matter?
> 
> Are you saying that the UK, or any other country, cannot leave the EU (or any other body that you approve of) without some level of oppression (and I think that butchersapron and redsquirrel might have a view on that...) regardless of the views of the electorate of that country?


I'm saying very precisely that British nationalism, and specifically English nationalism, as it has manifested itself recently in various arenas including the brexit vote, is a very ugly thing.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Does it matter?
> 
> Are you saying that the UK, or any other country, cannot leave the EU (or any other body that you approve of) without some level of oppression (and I think that butchersapron and redsquirrel might have a view on that...) regardless of the views of the electorate of that country?




Who is oppressing you?
As far as I can see most people in NI and Scotland voted to remain and the English vote was very marginal as was the Welsh vote. 
So...who is oppressing whom? 
Do you think the remainers feel oppressed by this ? I'd say they feel pretty ticked off... 

Or do you think Ireland is oppressing the UK? That would be fucking hilarious....

Or do you think the EU is oppressing the UK? 

Nah. There has been no oppression ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So you look at the reasons for a national movement of independence and the meanings imbued in a nationalism as a result of those reasons. British, or English, nationalism has a set of meanings that derive from a history of imperialism - Rule Britannia (never be slaves - but will make slaves of others). It is only ever going to be a very ugly thing as a result


As any fule kno there was the very real slavery facing Britons, aye and Irish, captured by the barbary corsairs in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Their ravages helped precipitate the British civil wars as Charles I raised the famous ship money to fund naval efforts to combat them. The corsairs continued to be a threat until the nineteenth century. I've always understood the slaves bit in rb to refer to the rise in british naval power that would prevent corsair depredations


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm saying very precisely that British nationalism, and specifically English nationalism, as it has manifested itself recently in various arenas including the brexit vote, is a very ugly thing.



I don't particularly care, I'm interested in whether you think people have rights independent of your approval of their choices..


----------



## klang (Jan 28, 2019)

I feel oppressed by the EU and I'm not British.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I don't particularly care, I'm interested in whether you think people have rights independent of your approval of their choices..


Let me answer for lbj. No, no he doesn't.


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:
			
		

> regardless of the views of *the electorate*



I suggest a somewhat higher level of precision there ....


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

littleseb said:


> I feel oppressed by the EU and I'm not British.



In what way has the EU oppressed you more than the UK government?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Who is oppressing you?
> As far as I can see most people in NI and Scotland voted to remain and the English vote was very marginal as was the Welsh vote.
> So...who is oppressing whom?
> Do you think the remainers feel oppressed by this ? I'd say they feel pretty ticked off...
> ...



Does it matter? 

Should someone only be allowed a divorce if they are getting slapped about?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I don't particularly care, I'm interested in whether you think people have rights independent of your approval of their choices..


What rights are you talking about here, and whose?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Does it matter?
> 
> Should someone only be allowed a divorce if they are getting slapped about?



Well should someone be allowed a divorce if only half their body wants it?


----------



## klang (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> In what way has the EU oppressed you more than the UK government?


equal measures. I'm poor.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What rights are you talking about here?



To leave something they've previously joined?

Do you think Scotland has the right to leave the UK without a recent massacre?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 28, 2019)

Feel slightly dirty recycling guardian tittle tattle, but here's further evidence labour still haven't struggled their way to an actual position on brexit:
Labour support for Yvette Cooper's Brexit amendment in doubt


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well should someone be allowed a divorce if only half their body wants it?



More than half. 52% is more than half...


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> To leave something they've previously joined?
> 
> Do you think Scotland has the right to leave the UK without a recent massacre?




I'm perfectly ok with Britain leaving. It's just the way they think they can fuck up the one good thing that's happened in Ireland in the past 20 years...the veey hard won peace agreement. It's the blithe way that they are blaming the border for the mess they're in regarding their own ridiculous propping up of a particularly bigoted political group of unionists* who would gladly see every Irish Catholic burned in their beds and NI handed over to them on a plate. 



*note that not all unionists are this hardline or ignorant. I'm referring to the two "all mouth...not much brain", types in your government.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> More than half. 52% is more than half...



Ok...so let's throw in body hair.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> To leave something they've previously joined?
> 
> Do you think Scotland has the right to leave the UK without a recent massacre?


Regarding 'rights', the only people whose rights I see under attack at the moment regarding brexit are non-UK EU citizens who have made their homes here.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> As far as I can see most people in NI and Scotland voted to remain and the English vote was very marginal as was the Welsh vote.



*cough*

The vote to leave in England was 53.4% to 46.6%, a lead of almost 7%, that's not 'very marginal'. 

In Wales it was a lead of around 5%. 

Also interesting is the turn out in England & Wales was over 70%, whereas Scotland & N.I. was well under that.

EU Referendum Results


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Regarding 'rights', the only people whose rights I see under attack at the moment regarding brexit are non-UK EU citizens who have made their homes here.



And you wouldn't see democratic rights as being under attack if, having voted to leave the EU, the it was decided that they couldn't as it would be too much trouble for everyone else?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> And you wouldn't see democratic rights as being under attack if, having voted to leave the EU, the it was decided that they couldn't as it would be too much trouble for everyone else?




If you're sold a lie and you fall for it and then you get another chance to choose a better option wouldn't you want to take it?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> And you wouldn't see democratic rights as being under attack if, having voted to leave the EU, the it was decided that they couldn't as it would be too much trouble for everyone else?


Not necessarily, no. Given that there was no plan offered in the referendum, I wouldn't see the referendum result as meaning 'do some kind of a brexit whatever the cost', no. In fact, the politicians using the referendum and its lack of clarity as cover to do whatever they want are acting in a very undemocratic way. I don't accept that this referendum and its result were the last word in democracy.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> *cough*
> 
> The vote to leave in England was 53.4% to 46.6%, a lead of almost 7%, that's not 'very marginal'.
> 
> ...




Ok then so the divorce will include toenails and fingernails.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I'm perfectly ok with Britain leaving. It's just the way they think they can fuck up the one good thing that's happened in Ireland in the past 20 years...the veey hard won peace agreement.



No one is trying to fuck up the peace agreement, everyone is working on keeping peace.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> If you're sold a lie and you tall for it and get another chance to choose a better option wouldn't you want to take it?



As i've explained, to you, no one I know who voted leave did so because they believed anything written in the side of a bus.

I'm sorry that you continue with this delusion.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ok then so the divorce will include toenails and fingernails.



They usually do. I assume you've never gone through one..


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No one is trying to fuck up the peace agreement, everyone is working on keeping peace.




That's the problem though. The very act of leaving the EU will happen when the deal is accepted (capitulation to the unionists) or via a no deal crash out..
Both of which will inevitably lead to a border and that means that Ireland will not have the freedom of movement it has had as part of the Belfast agreement for the past 20 years...which means the agreement is dead in effect. A border of any description will lead to terrorism and that will lead to British Army personnel at the border. 
None of this is good for peace.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> They usually do. I assume you've never gone through one..




If only 54% of your body wants to divorce then......what happens? You work on it. That's what you do.


----------



## klang (Jan 28, 2019)

the divorce analogy doesn't work. I've split up with partners over less than 10% dissatisfaction.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That's the problem though. The very act of leaving the EU will happen when the deal is accepted (capitulation to the unionists) or via a no deal crash out..
> Both of which will inevitably lead to a border and that means that Ireland will not have the freedom of movement it has had as part of the Belfast agreement for the past 20 years...which means the agreement is dead in effect. A border of any description will lead to terrorism and that will lead to British Army personnel at the border.
> None of this is good for peace.



Even if there's a no deal, which I doubt, it'll not be a crash-out, that's to no one's advantage, it'll be a managed exit. 

The common travel area between the UK, RoI, Isle of Man, and the Channel Island states, will remain, whether there's a deal or not. 

If there's a deal, which I am sure there will be, there will be no hard border on the island. If it's a no deal & the EU decides to impose a hard border, they will be responsible for any outcome as a result of that policy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> In what way has the EU oppressed you more than the UK government?



In what way are these bodies seperate from each other?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

littleseb said:


> the divorce analogy doesn't work. I've split up with partners over less than 10% dissatisfaction.



It was not my analogy...initially. 



kebabking said:


> Should someone only be allowed a divorce if they are getting slapped about?



But 90% satisfaction in a relationship would be really good I would have thought? I mean...nobody is perfect. 

As for Brexit...does anyone think things will be better for the UK people post Brexit? 
And if so...how?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In what way are these bodies seperate from each other?




Well obviously 54% of the UK population seem to think one is more oppressive than the other.


----------



## klang (Jan 28, 2019)

as far as I know countries can't really get married. fuck, it's difficult enough for 2 human lovers of the same sex....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well obviously 54% of the UK population seem to think one is more oppressive than the other.



That's not obvious at all. There was nothing on the ballot paper about the UK govt. 

I'll ask again: In what way are these bodies seperate?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> If you're sold a lie and you fall for it and then you get another chance to choose a better option wouldn't you want to take it?



Wasn't sold a lie. Wasn't buying any lies.


----------



## LDC (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well obviously 54% of the UK population seem to think one is more oppressive than the other.



You do know the referendum didn't ask which is the most oppressive institution right?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> You do know the referendum didn't ask which is the most oppressive institution right?




Why exactly was there a referendum to leave? Dissatisfaction with being in the EU. What was so unsatisfactory?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Why exactly was there a referendum to leave? Dissatisfaction with being in the EU. What was so unsatisfactory?



Don't you live in Ireland? Surely you should know?


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's not obvious at all. There was nothing on the ballot paper about the UK govt.
> 
> I'll ask again: In what way are these bodies seperate?



For us lowly mortals, just to confirm, are you asking how the eu and uk are separate?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't you live in Ireland? Surely you should know?



Why? I didn't vote or have a vote. I'm in Eire. 
Quite frankly I'm still wondering why the vote actually happened ... apart from Cameron having promised it and following through with it and then scarpering.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> For us lowly mortals, just to confirm, are you asking how the eu and uk are separate?



Yes.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't you live in Ireland? Surely you should know?



It’s generally accepted that EU membership has benefited Ireland. That’s why when a Irexit campaign was started they were laughed out of the room


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Why? I didn't vote or have a vote. I'm in Eire.
> Quite frankly I'm still wondering why the vote actually happened ... apart from Cameron having promised it and following through with it and then scarpering.



Since you're still wondering, let me clear it up: it happened because Cameron was attempting to put to bed divisions on the EU in the Tory Party and thought he could win a referendum. He miscalculated.

I would have thought that you would know why people might not like the EU given that, despite what grit asserts... 



grit said:


> It’s generally accepted that EU membership has benefited Ireland.



...the EU has carried out acts of economic terrorism against Ireland and the Irish working class, as they have against countries like Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Greece and Italy.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...the EU has carried out acts of economic terrorism against Ireland and the Irish working class, as they have against countries like Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Greece and Italy.



And yet Eu membership support in Ireland is overwhelming, funny old world isint it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> That’s why when a Irexit campaign was started they were laughed out of the room


I read this a while back about Ireland having to vote twice on Lisbon. 

They'll always have Lisbon | Richard Seymour on Patreon




> *IV.*
> Nonetheless, the signs for the Irish government were good. The boom hadn't bust yet. The employers were backing the Treaty, the unions were backing it, the farmers were backing it, the bishops were keeping their noses out, almost all of the major parties barring Sinn Fein were for 'Yes'.  Overwhelmingly, the polls showed more people supporting than opposed. The 'No' campaign was fractured between various left groups, a right-wing, free-market opposition run by Declan Ganley, and a more diffuse, religious worry about abortion.
> 
> Think about this. When you're a ruling class, and the principles by which you rule are widely accepted, entrenched in civil society, saturating all the dominant institutions, that is _hegemony_. When your historic mission, your project for the social future, is accepted by the representatives of opposing classes, and reproduced unthinkingly across all media, while the opposition is scattered into various marginalised enclaves, that is hegemony. What could go wrong?
> ...


article is mainly about the 'peoples vote' campaign and from year.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> And yet Eu membership support in Ireland is overwhelming, funny old world isint it.



It's almost like they _like_ "terrorism"! 

Which is handy, because they're about to get a shedload more of it, thanks to the Brexit fiasco.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

UK citizens ratified the GFA in a referendum.
The result of that referendum creates conflict with the brexit referendum where the significant verb was 'leave'.
Leave an entity where at present there is a common travel area and the GFA, which effectively joins the two entities together in a way that has helped to create greater peace over the last few decades.
So which referendum result is to be 'honoured'?
If it is the notion of 'leaving' which must be honoured primarily, what are the practical manifestations on the land border proposed by the winning leaving side?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> And yet Eu membership support in Ireland is overwhelming, funny old world isint it.



Probably because Ireland has thrived massively since joining. We went from a poor country to a relatively much more prosperous one. When you go from nothing and people living in decrepid tenaments and mass emigration to a place where there is a decent standard of living....
where families are not holding wakes for their offspring because they're leaving for America anymore. 
It's not perfect by any means. But it is better by far than it was under British rule...and there is no comparison between the Eire of 1970 and now...And a lot of this is due to the EU and government initiatives that encouraged businesses to come here. 

We can't afford to survive without the EU. Simple as. .


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> And yet Eu membership support in Ireland is overwhelming, funny old world isint it.



Is it? Do you have evidence for this overwhelming support?

In any case, the question was "what was so unsatisfactory" about EU membership. I just said I didn't think anyone living in Ireland would need to ask the question.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> We can't afford to survive without the EU. Simple as. .



What will you do when the EU collapses then?


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> UK citizens ratified the GFA in a referendum...



When was that then?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Why? I didn't vote or have a vote. I'm in Eire.
> *Quite frankly I'm still wondering why the vote actually happened* ... apart from Cameron having promised it and following through with it and then scarpering.



So, you missed out on the years leading up to this situation? How Cameron went to the EU in an attempt to get some reform? But, typical of the modern EU, they refused to give anything, and brought this mess on themselves.

I suggest you watch 'Inside Europe: Ten Years of Turmoil', starting tonight at 9 pm on BBC 2, to get a proper insight into how we are where we are.

And, having admitted you don't understand why the vote happened, perhaps it's best to stop accusing the majority that took part in it, of being thick.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's almost like they _like_ "terrorism"!
> 
> Which is handy, because they're about to get a shedload more of it, thanks to the Brexit fiasco.



That's not funny.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, you missed out on the years leading up to this situation? How Cameron went to the EU in an attempt to get some reform? But, typical of the modern EU, they refused to give anything, and brought this mess on themselves.
> 
> I suggest you watch 'Inside Europe: Ten Years of Turmoil', starting tonight at 9 pm on BBC 2, to get a proper insight into how we are where we are.
> 
> And, having admitted you don't understand why the vote happened, perhaps it's best to stop accusing the majority that took part in it, of being thick.




Ah now...come on. 
Cameron didn't think the vote would go this way. I know what he did. What I don't get is how the EU made life in the UK so awful as to push people for a vote to leave. How bad was it? 
Was it worse than pre EEC days and a UK government ?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Just saw in the news that the EU has said the backstop issue will not be reopened. It's non negotiable. 
Thank fuck for that.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is it? Do you have evidence for this overwhelming support?
> 
> In any case, the question was "what was so unsatisfactory" about EU membership. I just said I didn't think anyone living in Ireland would need to ask the question.


It’s filed beside water being wet and fire being hot.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ah now...come on.
> Cameron didn't think the vote would go this way. I know what he did. What I don't get is how the EU made life in the UK so awful as to push people for a vote to leave. How bad was it?
> Was it worse than pre EEC days and a UK government ?



Theres a good deal of media available regarding the vote, as well as the gradual falling out of love over the last 30 years - if you can take some time away from calling people thick, you might like to educate yourself on something you yourself say you don't understand.

I rather liked Mark Mardells' 'brexit - a love story?' podcast - it's on the BBC sounds app.


----------



## Supine (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Just saw in the news that the EU has said the backstop issue will not be reopened. It's non negotiable.
> Thank fuck for that.



It was never going to be. It's fundamentally impossible to have an agreement without one. The conservatives know this but seem to be running down the clock discussing getting amendments.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, you missed out on the years leading up to this situation? How Cameron went to the EU in an attempt to get some reform? But, typical of the modern EU, they refused to give anything, and brought this mess on themselves.
> 
> I suggest you watch 'Inside Europe: Ten Years of Turmoil', starting tonight at 9 pm on BBC 2, to get a proper insight into how we are where we are.
> 
> And, having admitted you don't understand why the vote happened, perhaps it's best to stop accusing the majority that took part in it, of being thick.


What happened was that the UK already had a special deal, with rebates and vetoes and all sorts and Cameron went and asked for even more and the EU told him to get stuffed. It was a mistake on their part to give the UK a special deal in the first place, because the politicians would just keep coming back for more. Even today both parties are coming out with this have cake and eat it attitude.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Theres a good deal of media available regarding the vote, as well as the gradual falling out of love over the last 30 years - if you can take some time away from calling people thick, you might like to educate yourself on something you yourself say you don't understand.
> 
> I rather liked Mark Mardells' 'brexit - a love story?' podcast - it's on the BBC sounds app.




But does any one in the UK think life would have been better if they had not joined the EEC ...EU? 
Seriously? I know people were not happy with regulations etc but was it that bad? 
I just don't believe that the UK would have been better off in any way if it had not joined the EU. 
But that is only my opinion. 
Any way.. I'm going to have something to eat...


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> That's not funny.



It's not funny no, but you'll recognise that dark humour is one very human way of dealing with gross abuse, inequality, and the threat of social breakdown. As an Irishman whose family was directly effected by the Troubles, I will use whatever coping mechanisms I have to hand, and won't be waiting on your approval. x


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> But does any one in the UK think life would have been better if they had not joined the EEC ...EU?
> Seriously? I know people were not happy with regulations etc but was it that bad?
> I just don't believe that the UK would have been better off in any way if it had not joined the EU.
> But that is only my opinion.
> Any way.. I'm going to have something to eat...



Who's definition of 'better' are we using?

Can there be different versions of 'better' - Is there one, single, objective definition or is more of a subjective opinion that's about personal taste?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's not funny no, but you'll recognise that dark humour is one very human way of dealing with gross abuse, inequality, and the threat of social breakdown. As an Irishman whose family was directly effected by the Troubles, I will use whatever coping mechanisms I have to hand, and won't be waiting on your approval. x



I didn't mean to upset you. 
And I know exactly what you mean by using dark humour. 
I've had family effected by the troubles too. And I understand what you're saying. Just found it a bit raw... x


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Just saw in the news that the EU has said the backstop issue will not be reopened. It's non negotiable.
> Thank fuck for that.



They are being crystal clear, aren't they?

So it beggars belief that Corbyn is _continuing_ to pretend he can go back to them for a radically different deal.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Who's definition of 'better' are we using?
> 
> Can there be different versions of 'better' - Is there one, single, objective definition or is more of a subjective opinion that's about personal taste?



But if 51% overall voted to leave they must have felt that the UK would be better out of the EU.
Can you explain how that might happen? How the UK will be better?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I didn't mean to upset you.
> And I know exactly what you mean by using dark humour.
> I've had family effected by the troubles too. And I understand what you're saying. Just found it a bit raw... x



You're right to find it so, I appreciate your words.

I'm literally jaw-dropped at the risks the English seem prepared to take with the Irish peace...after all that work, all that compromise that has saved potentially many lives...and some fanatics seem prepared to throw it all away, for a glittery bangle that will turn out to have been plastic tat all along.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> But if 51% overall voted to leave they must have felt that the UK would be better out of the EU.
> Can you explain how that might happen? How the UK will be better?


Cliff richard will never set foot in the UK again

Of course we could just lop his feet off for the same result


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You're right to find it so, I appreciate your words.
> 
> I'm literally jaw-dropped at the risks the English seem prepared to take with the Irish peace...after all that work, all that compromise that has saved potentially many lives...and some fanatics seem prepared to throw it all away, for a glittery bangle that will turn out to have been plastic tat all along.



You put it better than I could.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Cliff richard will never set foot in the UK again




Hmmmm...


----------



## mauvais (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> They are being crystal clear, aren't they?
> 
> So it beggars belief that Corbyn is _continuing_ to pretend he can go back to them for a radically different deal.


He could go to them for a different deal, were he ever able to. Different red lines means different input, different output.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You're right to find it so, I appreciate your words.
> 
> I'm literally jaw-dropped at the risks the English seem prepared to take with the Irish peace...after all that work, all that compromise that has saved potentially many lives...and some fanatics seem prepared to throw it all away, for a glittery bangle that will turn out to have been plastic tat all along.


You don't know anything about Irish history then

If you did you'd know the famine was caused by British indifference to the fate of the Irish and a belief the free market was sacrosanct

Nothing has changed


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't know anything about Irish history then
> 
> If you did you'd know the famine was caused by British indifference to the fate of the Irish and a belief the free market was sacrosanct
> 
> Nothing has changed




I think many Irish had hoped that that was all in the past. Sadly it looks like it may not be the case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I think many Irish had hoped that that was all in the past. Sadly it looks like it may not be the case.


The attitude remains the same even if the Royal writ no longer extends to all 32 counties


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

mauvais said:


> He could go to them for a different deal, *were he ever able to*. Different red lines means different input, different output.



But the bold bit is the key, innit? He isn't getting a GE, he isn't getting a unity government even - he's not getting anywhere near the EU in the next 6 weeks. He's suggesting something he just cannot practically deliver in time, even if his VONC had worked, or the Tory VONC had worked.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

It doesn't matter, I don't know why everyone's hanging on what Corbyn would do .. I mean, I do know why, it's another stick to beat him with .. but he could say he'd negotiate waterslides to Le Havre and Rosslare, free unicorns for all every Monday and it doesn't matter because he's the leader of the opposition. What he thinks or says he might try to do is entirely irrelevant to the reality of what's taking place.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> When was that then?



1998


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> It doesn't matter, I don't know why everyone's hanging on what Corbyn would do .. I mean, I do know why, it's another stick to beat him with .. but he could say he'd negotiate waterslides to Le Havre and Rosslare, free unicorns for all every Monday and it doesn't matter because he's the leader of the opposition. What he thinks or says he might try to do is entirely irrelevant to the reality of what's taking place.



But we're in a hung parliament, meaning even as the opposition leader, it's crucial what Corbyn says he will do (which indicates the parameters of a Tory Brexit that he might be willing to support and whip).

In a normal parliament you'd have a point, but since the HUGE defeat of May's deal, the PM's need to get a cross-party majority on any deal (and a stable majority at that) depends on what Corbyn says and does like never before.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> It doesn't matter, I don't know why everyone's hanging on what Corbyn would do .. I mean, I do know why, it's another stick to beat him with .. but he could say he'd negotiate waterslides to Le Havre and Rosslare, free unicorns for all every Monday and it doesn't matter because he's the leader of the opposition. What he thinks or says he might try to do is entirely irrelevant to the reality of what's taking place.



I disagree actually - if anyone believed he could do better (and by that I mean in technical terms and the politics of what he could offer and what he needed in return) then he might be in a possession to command a majority in the HoC, or put pressure on May to shift in either objective or method by the threat of VONC, but no one does.

I don't believe that the UK could get a substantively different agreement without agreeing to the continuation of the customs union and therefore ignoring two 'leave' bugbears - free movement and ECJ jurisdiction. his party might love that, but half of his electorate would go mental, so his MP's might end up causing him as much grief as Mays are causing her...


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

I have to say I think there's no matter on which JC will or can ever command a parliamentary majority because too many people hate him for too many reasons - and not just across the floor either. It would also help if it were possible to have a coherent policy on leaving the EU but everyone's got three different opinions and accommodating it all democratically is IMO impossible. So there's him whose stated wish is to leave, supported by a hardcore, deep-labour _leave_ tendency .. but having to appease a majority of actual MPs, who want to stay. There's nothing he can say or do that won't piss off loads of people.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I disagree actually - if anyone believed he could do better (and by that I mean in technical terms and the politics of what he could offer and what he needed in return) then he might be in a possession to command a majority in the HoC, or put pressure on May to shift in either objective or method by the threat of VONC, but no one does.
> 
> I don't believe that the UK could get a substantively different agreement without agreeing to the continuation of the customs union and therefore ignoring two 'leave' bugbears - free movement and ECJ jurisdiction. his party might love that, but half of his electorate would go mental, so his MP's might end up causing him as much grief as Mays are causing her...


The personnel is irrelevant, basically. Corbyn could get a very different deal, as mauvais says, if he were to go there with different objectives and 'red lines'. May could get that same deal if she went back with the same different objectives. The individuals involved aren't particularly relevant - with the red lines she was insisting on and the GFA to deal with, May's deal was always going to look like it does. It's an attempt to do both hard and soft brexit at the same time, and ends up pleasing nobody.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But we're in a hung parliament, meaning even as the opposition leader, it's crucial what Corbyn says he will do (which indicates the parameters of a Tory Brexit that he might be willing to support and whip).
> 
> In a normal parliament you'd have a point, but since the HUGE defeat of May's deal, the PM's need to get a cross-party majority on any deal (and a stable majority at that) depends on what Corbyn says and does like never before.


~

It's not a hung parliament, it's a Conservative-DUP coalition, at least on paper. And again - everyone hates Corbyn, nothing he says is going to be taken seriously by anyone in that place except his few allies. Sad but true. For Brexit purposes, Corbyn/McDonnell are irrelevant until and unless there's a general election.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> ~
> 
> It's not a hung parliament, it's a Conservative-DUP coalition, at least on paper. And again - everyone hates Corbyn, nothing he says is going to be taken seriously by anyone in that place except his few allies. Sad but true. For Brexit purposes, Corbyn/McDonnell are irrelevant until and unless there's a general election.


Technically, it's not a coalition either. The Tory-LibDem govt was a coalition. This is a minority Tory government with a 'supply and confidence' agreement with the DUP (which the DUP has basically broken by not supporting May's deal, in spirit at least, but hey ho).


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> ~
> 
> It's not a hung parliament, it's a Conservative-DUP coalition, at least on paper. And again - everyone hates Corbyn, nothing he says is going to be taken seriously by anyone in that place except his few allies. Sad but true. For Brexit purposes, Corbyn/McDonnell are irrelevant until and unless there's a general election.



Sorry, it was returned as a hung parliament by the public, yes, but I think the DUP have shown in recent votes that it's far from a "coalition" in a sense that would make May happy.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

Tomato/tomato ill it stops being convenient/necessary, really.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't know anything about Irish history then
> 
> If you did you'd know the famine was caused by British indifference to the fate of the Irish and a belief the free market was sacrosanct
> 
> Nothing has changed


I agree with the sentiment of this post, but I don’t believe indifference is the correct word. It was more spiteful than that.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The personnel is irrelevant, basically. Corbyn could get a very different deal, as mauvais says, if he were to go there with different objectives and 'red lines'. May could get that same deal if she went back with the same different objectives. The individuals involved aren't particularly relevant - with the red lines she was insisting on and the GFA to deal with, May's deal was always going to look like it does. It's an attempt to do both hard and soft brexit at the same time, and ends up pleasing nobody.



Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum, jumped on the illegality of the vote, the overspend by Leave, the cack-handed negotiation, Teresa May handed all that to him on a plate - and 48% and rising of the referendum voters would have had someone to rally behind. He could have saved the country but he didn't think big enough.

He's fucked it up as bad as she has.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Tomato/tomato ill it stops being convenient/necessary, really.


There are important differences. The Tory Libdem thing was a formal agreement, making the Libdems, nominally at least, part of the government, with ministers on the govt payroll. The DUP agreement is simply an agreement by the DUP to vote with the govt on matters that would otherwise bring the govt down, such as the budget and the queen's speech (and you could argue, brexit!) - formally, something the Tories can initially take to the Queen as evidence that they have the confidence of the house, and practically, something that stops the Tories losing their first budget/QS vote. But the DUP is in no sense a part of the government.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum /---



Corbyn has never been pro-EU. That's half the trouble he's having now.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum, jumped on the illegality of the vote, the overspend by Leave, the cack-handed negotiation, Teresa May handed all that to him on a plate - and 48% and rising of the referendum voters would have had someone to rally behind. He could have saved the country but he didn't think big enough.
> 
> He's fucked it up as bad as she has.


I think there are two moments when he could have acted differently, which would have given him distance from this nonsense now and far more freedom to act. First, he didn't have to support the referendum in the first place - if the tories want one, let them vote it through, nothing to do with us. And he could have pointed out the lack of clarity about what it meant in doing so. Second, having done that, he could have opposed triggering A50 when it was triggered, arguing that there still wasn't any idea what brexit meant, and until there was, he would not support starting the countdown clock. Neither of those things would necessarily have cast him as anti the people who voted for brexit. All he would have been doing is opposing government policy, which an opposition is entirely entitled to do. And he would have been doing something that around two thirds of labour voters would have supported, and a big majority of young people would have supported.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Corbyn has never been pro-EU. That's half the trouble he's having now.



Well yeah, I realised as I was typing it probably needed quotation marks...!

He was "pro-EU" during the ref campaign, and the majority of his party. I realise I'm backwards imagining, but I do wish he...well, I wish he wasn't Jeremy Corbyn really, coz he is anti-EU and you can't change that. 

I'da voted for him if it weren't for this!


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I'm in Eire.


 This should probably be a PM. But I’m curious, were you born in Ireland? the usage of Eire in my personal experience has weird connotations to it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> I agree with the sentiment of this post, but I don’t believe indifference is the correct word. It was more spiteful than that.


They were indifferent to whether the Irish starved to death or emigrated


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> This should probably be a PM. But I’m curious, were you born in Ireland? the usage of Eire in my personal experience has weird connotations to it.



Yes. I was born and live here.
Weird how? It's on our stamps you know.
It's what I was taught and how I write my address ...

Eta it's the Irish for Ireland.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think there are two moments when he could have acted differently, which would have given him distance from this nonsense now and far more freedom to act. First, he didn't have to support the referendum in the first place - if the tories want one, let them vote it through, nothing to do with us. And he could have pointed out the lack of clarity about what it meant in doing so. Second, having done that, he could have opposed triggering A50 when it was triggered, arguing that there still wasn't any idea what brexit meant, and until there was, he would not support starting the countdown clock. Neither of those things would necessarily have cast him as anti the people who voted for brexit. All he would have been doing is opposing government policy, which an opposition is entirely entitled to do. And he would have been doing something that around two thirds of labour voters would have supported, and a big majority of young people would have supported.



I'd totally agree, those were two points of flex. No idea what a point of flex IS, but I like the sound of it, so keeping it.

Distance from the whole Tory project would have been easier had he not been anti-EU perhaps? Does it return to that fact again?

And I think triggering A50 was one of her biggest errors - even as a Remainer I could just about put up with a slow, well-managed, meticulously planned soft Brexit over the space of several years, informed by an in-depth analysis of what it meant to voters, what issues they expected Brexit to solve....start fucking solving those issues _anyway, _and potentially see through the daft logical conclusion of the Tory clusterfuck. It should have taken two or three years to do this, before A50 was even triggered.

She could also have come out the day after the referendum and taken no deal off the table before JRM had even had his morning feed. It would have saved her such a headache later.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes. I was born and live here.
> It's on our stamps you know.
> It's what I was taught and how I write my address ...



These are all very good reasons. 

I didn't know this btw.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Yes. I was born and live here.
> Weird how? It's on our stamps you know.
> It's what I was taught and how I write my address ...
> 
> Eta it's the Irish for Ireland.


 Maybe it’s the context of us discussing brexit on a British forum. But Eire being used automatically makes me think you are a Brit living in Ireland.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 28, 2019)

grit said:


> Maybe it’s the context of us discussing brexit on a British forum. But Eire being used automatically makes me think you are a Brit living in Ireland. It could possibly be a Dublin/not Dublin thing




Not really. 
Eire is the country's name. The fact is that most English peopke call it Ireland...
My mum whose family came from Momaghan, all spoke Irish. And I as taught to put Eire as my address from when I was a dot. 
Went to an all Irish language school etc. So it's second nature to me to call it Eire. 
It's just a language thing really.


----------



## grit (Jan 28, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Not really.
> Eire is the country's name. The fact is that most English peopke call it Ireland...
> My mum whose family came from Momaghan, all spoke Irish. And I as taught to put Eire as my address from when I was a dot.
> Went to an all Irish language school etc. So it's second nature to me to call it Eire.
> It's just a language thing really.



Ah, gaeilgeoir I get it now


----------



## andysays (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 1998


Please provide some evidence of this referendum where the people of the UK voted to ratify the GFA, in 1998 or any other year.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think there are two moments when he could have acted differently, which would have given him distance from this nonsense now and far more freedom to act. First, he didn't have to support the referendum in the first place - if the tories want one, let them vote it through, nothing to do with us. And he could have pointed out the lack of clarity about what it meant in doing so. Second, having done that, he could have opposed triggering A50 when it was triggered, arguing that there still wasn't any idea what brexit meant, and until there was, he would not support starting the countdown clock. Neither of those things would necessarily have cast him as anti the people who voted for brexit. All he would have been doing is opposing government policy, which an opposition is entirely entitled to do. And he would have been doing something that around two thirds of labour voters would have supported, and a big majority of young people would have supported.



Imagine this stance from Day One!

*Nick Cohen*‏ @*NickCohen4* 9h9 hours ago 

Nick Cohen Retweeted Jonathan Lis

Everyone goes on about the elite, but if we had a real elite with guts it would just revoke Article 50 saying "I'm sorry but Brexit is a threat to the economy and national security. You can't have it, not least because you wouldn't want it if you got it."


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Imagine this stance form Day One!
> 
> *Nick Cohen*‏ @*NickCohen4* 9h9 hours ago
> 
> ...


My fucking intestines are cringing. What a cunt


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> My fucking intestines are cringing. What a cunt



I think he is joking, rather than suggesting policy.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I think he is joking, rather than suggesting policy.


If it's that Nick Cohen I'm not so sure


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> UK citizens ratified the GFA in a referendum.





andysays said:


> When was that then?





philosophical said:


> 1998



Let me get this straight. Are you claiming there was a UK-wide referendum to ratify the Good Friday Agreement and that it took place in 1998?

No there wasn’t, and no it didn’t. There have only been 3 UK-wide referendums. And that wasn’t one.

There was a NI-only referendum on the GFA. But that’s only a small proportion  of UK citizens.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> If it's that Nick Cohen I'm not so sure



Well, he's quoting someone else, Jonathan Lis, you know him.

Jonathan Lis (@jonlis1) on Twitter


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Well, he's quoting someone else, Jonathan Lis, you know him.
> 
> Jonathan Lis (@jonlis1) on Twitter


No, should I?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> No, should I?


Short for Jonathan *Li* vingstone *S* eagull.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Short for Jonathan *Li* vingstone *S* eagull.


Oh right. Drummer in Jethro Tull?


----------



## Wookey (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> No, should I?



I've seen his mush on the box, during Brexit shenanigans.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Let me get this straight. Are you claiming there was a UK-wide referendum to ratify the Good Friday Agreement and that it took place in 1998?
> 
> No there wasn’t, and no it didn’t. There have only been 3 UK-wide referendums. And that wasn’t one.
> 
> There was a NI-only referendum on the GFA. But that’s only a small proportion  of UK citizens.


Yes. What I wrote was perfectly true. Read my exact words.
Your use of the word 'only' is interesting, and opens up the debate about the degree of 'democracy' in referenda.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes. What I wrote was perfectly true. Read my exact words.
> Your use of the word 'only' is interesting, and opens up the debate about the degree of 'democracy' in referenda.


It's not interesting, it's literally true. There were two referendas about the GFA, one in NI and one in the ROI.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> It's not interesting, it's literally true. There were two referendas about the GFA, one in NI and one in the ROI.


Yes. UK citizens ratified the GTA in a referendum.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes. UK citizens ratified the GTA in a referendum.


No, that's misleading. _*Some *_UK citizens, namely those entitled to vote in the NI referendum on the GFA, ratified that agreement. No other UK citizens were given a vote.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> No, that's misleading. _*Some *_UK citizens, namely those entitled to vote in the NI referendum on the GFA, ratified that agreement. No other UK citizens were given a vote.


It might have misled you, but what I wrote was true. You have written the word 'some' in bold. I deliberately chose not to use the word 'all'.
It may be that you are suggesting there should be some kind of hierarchy of referenda voted in by UK citizens.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 28, 2019)

It was European citizens who ratified the GFA.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It might have misled you, but what I wrote was true. You have written the word 'some' in bold. I deliberately chose not to use the word 'all'.
> It may be that you are suggesting there should be some kind of hierarchy of referenda voted in by UK citizens.


What you wrote was ambiguous. As for what I'm suggesting, it'd be mainly that you stop obfuscating and bullshitting. No idea where you got the other stuff from.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> It was European citizens who ratified the GTA agreement.


Gerry from Belfast, NI, UK, Europe, Eurasian Continent, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, TEH UNIVERSE


----------



## TopCat (Jan 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It might have misled you, but what I wrote was true. You have written the word 'some' in bold. I deliberately chose not to use the word 'all'.
> It may be that you are suggesting there should be some kind of hierarchy of referenda voted in by UK citizens.


What the fuck you going on about?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 28, 2019)

French people ratified the GFA. Or are we saying there are *no* French people in Ireland who voted???

Bit bloody meaningless intit.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> It was European citizens who ratified the GFA.


Yes it was.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 28, 2019)

And the French.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> And the French.


And the Turks? Were they European in 1998?


----------



## philosophical (Jan 28, 2019)

What I am going on about is what seems to be a conflict between the results of two referenda voted on by UK citizens.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 28, 2019)

TruXta said:


> And the Turks? Were they European in 1998?



Yep I bet there were a couple in Ireland then, too.


----------



## Combustible (Jan 29, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum, jumped on the illegality of the vote, the overspend by Leave,



The vote was not "illegal", very few people give a shit about the overspend by leave. Doing as you say would win him practically nothing and lose Labour  a large chunk of support. And it's quite clear from recent days that he wouldn't have been able to persuade his MPs to follow such a daft plan.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What I am going on about is what seems to be a conflict between the results of two referenda voted on by UK citizens.



You mean a bit like the Scottish 'home rule' referendums of 1979 and 1997?

Or the EU membership referendums of 1974 and 2016?

It's almost as if you are massively ignorant...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What I am going on about is what seems to be a conflict between the results of two referenda voted on by UK citizens.


You seem unaware of how elections, policies, laws, and so on, work. Later events supercede earlier.

We hear that elections express “the will of the people” at any given time. Let’s compare that with the personal Will that people make. When a family comes to work out the Last Will and Testament of the deceased, they have to be sure they have before them the most recent version of the document, since measures may have been altered in later versions.

Imagine my Dad had made a Will in the  70s, and fondly left me all his Clancy Brothers records. But by the 90s had decided that I wouldn’t appreciate them as much as his grandchildren, and decided instead to divide the record collection amongst them. Feeling a pang of guilt in 2005, he made one last alteration and, as a token, decided that I was to get his Spotlight on the Corries live double LP.

The latest will is the one that is valid.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It might have misled you, but what I wrote was true. You have written the word 'some' in bold. I deliberately chose not to use the word 'all'.
> It may be that you are suggesting there should be some kind of hierarchy of referenda voted in by UK citizens.


What you wrote was not just ambiguous but actually misleading and therefore incorrect, I suspect deliberately so. 

And I for one am happy to suggest a hierarchy where referendums where all UK citizens can vote are more significant than those where only a small fraction are able to.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

A party of four goes into a branch of Biscuitville. A member of the party says to the waitress “we’re all having the sausage biscuit. Four sausages biscuits please”

Another member of the party looks up from the menu “Actually, I think I’ll have the low carb platter. So make that three sausage biscuits and one low carb platter”

The first person says “and four coffees”.

Yet another pipes up “make mine a decaf. Three full strength and one decaf”.

How many sausage biscuits should arrive? Four or seven? And how many coffees?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> A party of four goes into a branch of Biscuitville. A member of the party says to the waitress “we’re all having the sausage biscuit. Four sausages biscuits please”
> 
> Another member of the party looks up from the menu “Actually, I think I’ll have the low carb platter. So make that three sausage biscuits and one low carb platter”
> 
> ...


Who cares? They'll get what they deserve. Or not, as the case may be


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

TruXta said:


> And the Turks? Were they European in 1998?


Only the ones in europe


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Who cares? They'll get what they deserve. Or not, as the case may be


philosophical should.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2019)

Always making me hungry, this thread. First curry and chips, then pizza, now it's a Biscuitville low-carb platter.

Can brexit be salad and rice with some hummous next? I need to lose a bit of weight after xmas so I can tighten my belt come April...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> philosophical should.


The waitress comes back, trips over a bag, and all the food and drink goes over philosophical


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> A party of four goes into a branch of Biscuitville. A member of the party says to the waitress “we’re all having the sausage biscuit.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

You can almost hear the creak of the cogs as philosophical thinks he’s being clever.

What I want to know is: if the EU are so focussed on what’s best for Ireland here, why are they apparently totally phlegmatic about the idea of the UK leaving without a deal, which is exactly the thing that would ensure a hard border?  It’s almost as if the EU couldn’t give a fuck about Ireland at all and have really just found a useful negotiating lever.  But surly that can’t be the case, what with the EU being so much Ireland’s best mate and all that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 29, 2019)

Two countries sign a peace treaty.  Later on one of them decides it's going to renege.

Some even treat it like a laughing matter.

The whole world looks a them like they're cunts.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Two countries sign a peace treaty.  Later on one of them decides it's going to renege.
> 
> Some even treat it like a laughing matter.
> 
> The whole world looks a them like they're cunts.


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You can almost hear the creak of the cogs as philosophical thinks he’s being clever.
> 
> What I want to know is: if the EU are so focussed on what’s best for Ireland here, why are they apparently totally phlegmatic about the idea of the UK leaving without a deal, which is exactly the thing that would ensure a hard border?  It’s almost as if the EU couldn’t give a fuck about Ireland at all and have really just found a useful negotiating lever.  But surly that can’t be the case, what with the EU being so much Ireland’s best mate and all that.



Yeah it’s outrageous that the EU hasn’t come up with a plan for the UK to leave which is both acceptable to the Tory party (that can’t agree amongst itself) and which also solves the problems created by the UK’s own red lines.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You seem unaware of how elections, policies, laws, and so on, work. Later events supercede earlier.
> 
> We hear that elections express “the will of the people” at any given time. Let’s compare that with the personal Will that people make. When a family comes to work out the Last Will and Testament of the deceased, they have to be sure they have before them the most recent version of the document, since measures may have been altered in later versions.
> 
> ...



I see where you're coming from but am unconvinced. Are you saying that the brexit referendum wipes out things like the common travel area in Ireland and the Belfast Agreement because it is the latest one?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Yeah it’s outrageous that the EU hasn’t come up with a plan for the UK to leave which is both acceptable to the Tory party (that can’t agree amongst itself) and which also solves the problems created by the UK’s own red lines.


They do have a plan.  It’s the hardheaded refusal to even countenance reopening the withdrawal agreement or revisiting the nature of the backstop.  It’s a plan that’s win-win from their perspective, it would seem.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 29, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> ...Can brexit be salad and rice with some hummous next? I need to lose a bit of weight after xmas so I can tighten my belt come April...



Sounds a bit forrin.

I shouldn't worry about tightening your belt come April, eating rotting turnips in the rain-lashed fields while the dead pave the streets will see you lose that Christmas muffin-top soon enough.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I see where you're coming from but am unconvinced. Are you saying that the brexit referendum wipes out things like the common travel area in Ireland and the Belfast Agreement because it is the latest one?


What I am saying is that laws, policies, etc, pile up chronologically, and quite often cause earlier ones to have to be amended. 

My starting place would not be here. But here is where we are.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You can almost hear the creak of the cogs as philosophical thinks he’s being clever.
> 
> What I want to know is: if the EU are so focussed on what’s best for Ireland here, why are they apparently totally phlegmatic about the idea of the UK leaving without a deal, which is exactly the thing that would ensure a hard border?  It’s almost as if the EU couldn’t give a fuck about Ireland at all and have really just found a useful negotiating lever.  But surly that can’t be the case, what with the EU being so much Ireland’s best mate and all that.



What you imagine I think is incorrect.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What you imagine I think is incorrect.


So not even you think you’re being clever?  Well, that makes sense.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What you imagine I think is incorrect.


You just quoted him saying he thinks you think you’re being clever.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I see where you're coming from but am unconvinced. Are you saying that the brexit referendum wipes out things like the common travel area in Ireland and the Belfast Agreement because it is the latest one?


No, referenda do not wipe out laws. Newer laws may however supercede older ones. In this case the older laws have not been superceded.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What I am saying is that laws, policies, etc, pile up chronologically, and quite often cause earlier ones to have to be amended.
> 
> My starting place would not be here. But here is where we are.


The Belfast Agreement hasn't been changed or amended (yet) as far as I know. Is the suggestion that the agreement need not be amended because chronology (the brexit referendum) now invalidates it?
If there were a UK wide referendum on Scottish independence, and the majority of the UK voted that Scotland should be independent would that invalidate the previous vote they had in Scotland to stay?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> . Is the suggestion that the agreement need not be amended because chronology (the brexit referendum) now invalidates it?


No.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You just quoted him saying he thinks you think you’re being clever.


I am clumsy with the quoting system in this site. My point to him is that he may wish to put me down (creak of the cogs) but he is ignorant of my thought processes.
In addition digging me out is not discussing any issue but avoiding one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am clumsy with the quoting system in this site. My point to him is that he may wish to put me down (creak of the cogs) but he is ignorant of my thought processes.
> In addition digging me out is not discussing any issue but avoiding one.


It would seem that you’re hoping above hope that the GFA cannot be superseded or amended by subsequent laws. Like it or not, it can. Laws can be amended. Treaties can be renegotiated.

This is of course different to saying that the job currently being done in trying to square the GFA with leaving the EU by the government is a good one, in the way it is being carried out, or the one you’d want it to do, in its intention.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> So not even you think you’re being clever?  Well, that makes sense.


If this site is about parading degrees of cleverness to you, then fine. I try to avoid those kind of middle class concerns and attempt to look at issues that interest me. On this occasion I am trying to wrestle with assumptions about the meaning and significance of referenda, a topic mentioned on this thread a lot.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It would seem that you’re hoping above hope that the GFA cannot be superseded or amended by subsequent laws. Like it or not, it can. Laws can be amended. Treaties can be renegotiated.
> 
> This is of course different to saying that the job currently being done in trying to square the GFA with leaving the EU by the government is a good one, in the way it is being carried out, or the one you’d want it to do, in its intention.


I do have that hope yes.
But I am also interested in what might follow any amendments or changes, especially the practical realities on the UK/EU border.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I do have that hope yes.


It is a forlorn one, and with centuries of precedent to counter it.



> But I am also interested in what might follow any amendments or changes, especially the practical realities on the UK/EU border.


Indeed. And we await the outcome.

I think that in the longer term, the future of Northern Ireland is looking more and more like it lies in reunion with the South. But I’ll admit my own sentiment here may well be impinging on my judgement.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If there were a UK wide referendum on Scottish independence, and the majority of the UK voted that Scotland should be independent would that invalidate the previous vote they had in Scotland to stay?


I don’t know what it would mean to say the first vote had been “invalidated” but the second vote would certainly supersede the first one, yes.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> They do have a plan.  It’s the hardheaded refusal to even countenance reopening the withdrawal agreement or revisiting the nature of the backstop.  It’s a plan that’s win-win from their perspective, it would seem.


I see it the opposite, the EU and the government have come up with a joint deal, much more brexity than I expected for at this stage which includes Mays red lines and leaves the door nicely open to reduce workers rights, eject EU citizens etc etc.

The fact the commons and particularly the disunited tories won't vote for it is the sticking point.

Your position is Ghastly EU won't give the ERG what they want the bastards.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I don’t know what it would mean to say the first vote had been “invalidated” but the second vote would certainly supersede the first one, yes.


I suppose by invalidated I should have used your word superceeded.
It is theoretical, but in my imagined scenario using your chronological method, Scotland could be pushed out of the UK despite previously voting to stay.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I suppose by invalidated I should have used your word superceeded.
> It is theoretical, but in my imagined scenario using your chronological method, Scotland could be pushed out of the UK despite previously voting to stay.


It would be messy, but the logic would be that, assuming it is a unitary UK-wide vote by majority, the later referendum would indeed show that the majority wanted Scotland to leave the UK.  In this unlikely scenario, no doubt the prime minister of the day would resign, and the subsequent prime minister would attempt to carry out the mandate of the referendum.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The Belfast Agreement hasn't been changed or amended (yet) as far as I know. Is the suggestion that the agreement need not be amended because chronology (the brexit referendum) now invalidates it?
> If there were a UK wide referendum on Scottish independence, and the majority of the UK voted that Scotland should be independent would that invalidate the previous vote they had in Scotland to stay?


The whole of the UK hasn't previously had the chance to vote on whether Scotland becomes independent, and neither should it, IMO. 

It's perfectly appropriate IMO that the rest of the UK couldn't vote for the GFA, but that decision by the voters of NI (currently a small part of the UK) shouldn't be used to block the wishes of the voters of the whole of the UK.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You seem unaware of how elections, policies, laws, and so on, work. Later events supercede earlier.
> 
> We hear that elections express “the will of the people” at any given time. Let’s compare that with the personal Will that people make. When a family comes to work out the Last Will and Testament of the deceased, they have to be sure they have before them the most recent version of the document, since measures may have been altered in later versions.
> 
> ...


Sounds like an argument for a second referendum.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for a second referendum.


Are you suggesting we should have a referendum to decide how danny la rouge's dad's records should be divided up?

I say they should all go to the grandchildren as Danny has more than enough records already


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for a second referendum.


You’re not reading very closely then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Sounds like an argument for a second referendum.


get your ears tested


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

“Yes, police. I’d like to report a murder!”
“Can you describe the scene?”
“Yes, Colin has been stabbed. He’s dead!”.
“So you’re advocating the murder of Colin?”


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> middle class concerns.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> “Yes, police. I’d like to report a murder!”
> “Can you describe the scene?”
> “Yes, Colin has been stabbed. He’s dead!”.
> “So you’re advocating the murder of Colin?”


Ah. So when you described the scenario where your dad changed his mind, you weren't saying that that was a thing that should have been allowed to happen, or even a thing that is considered normal to happen. It was just an entertaining non sequitur, that coincidentally seemed like an analogy for things being discussed on the thread. It's meaning was 'a thing is so, because a thing is so'.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I see it the opposite, the EU and the government have come up with a joint deal, much more brexity than I expected for at this stage which includes Mays red lines and leaves the door nicely open to reduce workers rights, eject EU citizens etc etc.
> 
> The fact the commons and particularly the disunited tories won't vote for it is the sticking point.
> 
> Your position is Ghastly EU won't give the ERG what they want the bastards.


And what does May take back to the table in return for changes? That's the real question, imo. A vote in the commons that the beastly backstop must change? That's not how negotiations work, and just smacks of typical British arrogance.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ah. So when you described the scenario where your dad changed his mind, you weren't saying that that was a thing that should have been allowed to happen, or even a thing that is considered normal to happen. It was just an entertaining non sequitur, that coincidentally seemed like an analogy for things being discussed on the thread. It's meaning was 'a thing is so, because a thing is so'.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ah. So when you described the scenario where your dad changed his mind, you weren't saying that that was a thing that should have been allowed to happen, or even a thing that is considered normal to happen. It was just an entertaining non sequitur, that coincidentally seemed like an analogy for things being discussed on the thread. It's meaning was 'a thing is so, because a thing is so'.


You’re wilfully misinterpreting. It’s quite annoying.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You’re wilfully misinterpreting. It’s quite annoying.


Well, you could just explain straightforwardly where the misunderstanding is, rather than by further analogy.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

Well its ten thirty and the EU have described the latest tory plan as nonsense and unworkable.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Well its ten thirty and the EU have described the latest tory plan as nonsense and unworkable.


the natural party of government


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

I am an avid politics watcher but I am getting fucking confused as to what will be voted on later today.


----------



## killer b (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>


the brass neck on you posting this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

killer b said:


> the brass neck on you posting this.


yeh i know i've used it before but it bears repetition


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> The whole of the UK hasn't previously had the chance to vote on whether Scotland becomes independent, and neither should it, IMO.
> 
> It's perfectly appropriate IMO that the rest of the UK couldn't vote for the GFA, but that decision by the voters of NI (currently a small part of the UK) shouldn't be used to block the wishes of the voters of the whole of the UK.



I understand this point of view which seems to be saying 'size matters'.
Not sure I agree with it as a principle.
I think it is probably more complicated, and it is about how larger entities treat minorities.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Well its ten thirty and the EU have described the latest tory plan as nonsense and unworkable.


Cheaper than a watch battery.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I understand this point of view which seems to be saying 'size matters'.
> Not sure I agree with it as a principle.
> I think it is probably more complicated, and it is about how larger entities treat minorities.


so how do you think the republic of ireland has treated the six counties?


----------



## kebabking (Jan 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Well its ten thirty and the EU have described the latest tory plan as nonsense and unworkable.



One of the this game I've found most depressing about the whole thing - and I suspect causes some of the societal conflict over Brexit - is the propensity of the media and arch remainy types to note that the UK government _claims _while the EU _states. 
_
As if the EU is some omnipotent, all knowing fact-checker whos only thought is of objective truth and not a highly political body that is only one side in a multi-faceted negotiation.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so how do you think the republic of ireland has treated the six counties?


Possibly like the way a loved one is treated when they are visited in prison.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I am an avid politics watcher but I am getting fucking confused as to what will be voted on later today.



That's because we don't know yet.  There are a series of amendments tabled but its unlikely that they'll all be put to a vote, the speaker will decide which ones are I think.  

Assuming it will be chosen by the speaker the amendment proposed by Graham Brady seems to be the most significant in that the government are supporting and will whip.  They may get that amendment through which would give May ammunition to go back the EU and say _I need this to get a deal through parliament.  _At the moment the EU is waiting to find this out because there is no point in them getting involved in any discussions until May can get a deal through.

There is another amendment by Yvette Cooper (I think) which would be significant if passed because it would effectively postpone Brexit and enshrine Parliament's role in law, or something like that.  It seems unlikely to pass as even the Labour front bench are luke warm on it.

Truth be told I don't think today will tell us much more than confirming the direction of travel is May slowly eating away at apposition to her plan on her own benches.


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> They do have a plan.  It’s the hardheaded refusal to even countenance reopening the withdrawal agreement or revisiting the nature of the backstop.  It’s a plan that’s win-win from their perspective, it would seem.



The backstop was agreed to by HMG in the Joint Report of December 2017. That was supported by the DUP and most Tories. Some people’s “hardheaded refusal” is other’s “sticking to what was agreed”.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Well, you could just explain straightforwardly where the misunderstanding is, rather than by further analogy.


There is no misunderstanding, only a disingenuous misreading.

You know very well that I have not argued that there _could_ not be a second referendum on Brexit. I have stated that I don’t think there _should_ be one. (And I have given reasons why). 

Should does not necessarily follow from could.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There is no misunderstanding, only a disingenuous misreading.
> 
> You know very well that I have not argued that there _could_ not be a second referendum on Brexit. I have stated that I don’t think there _should_ be one. (And I have given reasons why).
> 
> Should does not necessarily follow from could.



The terms of the good Friday agreement could be superseded by subsequent acts. Should does not necessarily follow from could. I'm not really clear what point you were making with the last will and testament story.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I'm not really clear what point you were making with the last will and testament story.


The context was an exchange whereby philosophical hoped that the GFA could not be superseded or amended by subsequent laws, and, in support of this, that the 1998 NI referendum result could in some way be used to prevent the present government carrying out ... whatever it comes to carry out regarding the Border with the Republic.  I was pointing out that this was not in fact how these things work.

As you'd know had you read the exchange.

ETA: inserted a “not” where is was needed.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

It looks to me as if the Brady amendment could just end up being another can-kicking exercise. 

By calling for 'alternative arrangements' to the current backstop, it's vague enough to get support in parliament, and might even result in the EU agreeing to some slight amendment to the existing deal, but that change would still needed to be agreed by parliament, and there's every chance enough MPs would say 'those alternative arrangements weren't what we had in mind, we're not voting for that', and we're still in the same place, but even closer to March 29...


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The context was an exchange whereby philosophical hoped that the GFA could be superseded or amended by subsequent laws, and, in support of this, that the 1998 NI referendum result could in some way be used to prevent the present government carrying out ... whatever it comes to carry out regarding the Border with the Republic.  I was pointing out that this was not in fact how these things work.
> 
> As you'd know had you read the exchange.



I read the exchange, and I have read it again now. I do not see where philosophical 'hoped that the GFA could be superseded or amended by subsequent laws'. philosophical pointed out that there is a conflict between the result of the GFA referendum, and the result of the Brexit referendum. That is true, is it not? Hence your story reads to me either like a non sequitur, or making a point about the 'will of a people' not being set in stone.

What I do see in that exchange is some misreading (wilful or otherwise) of philosophical's statement that UK citizens ratified the GFA. It was clear to me on first reading that he did not mean 'all UK citizens'.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> The backstop was agreed to by HMG in the Joint Report of December 2017. That was supported by the DUP and most Tories. Some people’s “hardheaded refusal” is other’s “sticking to what was agreed”.


HMG forgot to actually check that parliament were happy with it though, didn’t they?


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I am an avid politics watcher but I am getting fucking confused as to what will be voted on later today.


I get the impression something called the Malthouse compromise is where the action is at now. The swivel eyed seem to be backing it, as do the DUP and, I think, Theresa May. What the fuck it is and what it does about backstops is another matter. As, presumably will be the attitude of the eu towards it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I do not see where philosophical 'hoped that the GFA could be superseded or amended by subsequent laws'.






danny la rouge said:


> It would seem that you’re hoping above hope that the GFA cannot be superseded or amended by subsequent laws.





philosophical said:


> I do have that hope yes.


 ^


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Oh, and just this minute, Labour have said they are supporting the Cooper thing:
Labour backs Cooper plan to rule out no-deal Brexit, creating high risk of defeat for May - Politics live


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> HMG forgot to actually check that parliament were happy with it though, didn’t they?



And that's the EU's fault how?


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I get the impression something called the Malthouse compromise is where the action is at now. The swivel eyed seem to be backing it, as do the DUP and, I think, Theresa May. What the fuck it is and what it does about backstops is another matter. As, presumably will be the attitude of the eu towards it.


From what I read on the BBC website, it appears to be an extension to the transition period. Not sure why that should be regarded as particularly helpful


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

I've now reached the point where I can't even bothered to check whether my speculation is even plausible, but I'm guessing that means a Tory amendment may get through tonight or whenever they vote and a Labour one also.  In terms of procedure, I've no idea at all whether they still go on to vote on a substantive motion this week.

Maybe I'm proving Tony Blair is right and that MPs are far better qualified to do this than the rest of us plebs: (11:27 in the link above).


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> And that's the EU's fault how?


Their intransigence at being willing to talk now is because they agreed something with people who didn’t have the ability to actually sign off in what they were agreeing


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I've now reached the point where I can't even bothered to check whether my speculation is even plausible, but I'm guessing that means a Tory amendment may get through tonight or whenever they vote and a Labour one also.  In terms of procedure, I've no idea at all whether they still go on to vote on a substantive motion this week.
> 
> Maybe I'm proving Tony Blair is right and that MPs are far better qualified to do this than the rest of us plebs: (11:27 in the link above).


in 45 minutes tony blair can be ready to give a press interview


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> From what I read on the BBC website, it appears to be an extension to the transition period. Not sure why that should be regarded as particularly helpful


Yes, seems to be:
The 'Malthouse compromise': everything you need to know
Sounds like it solves just about nothing, waffle and kicking things further down the road, weariness of battle etc.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> in 45 minutes tony blair can be ready to give a press interview


'Hi, guys, look, y'know...'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, seems to be:
> The 'Malthouse compromise': everything you need to know
> Sounds like it solves just about nothing, waffle and kicking things further down the road, weariness of battle etc.


my experience of kicking things further down the road is that after a while there's a miskick and it ends up in traffic and what happens when the government hits that point?


----------



## prunus (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> my experience of kicking things further down the road is that after a while there's a miskick and it ends up in traffic and what happens when the government hits that point?



With a bit of luck they’ll blindly run out after it.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 29, 2019)

All the things sound like Ludlum thriller titles now. The Irish Backstop. The Malthouse Agreement. The Parfisal Mosaic


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> All the things sound like Ludlum thriller titles now. The Irish Backstop. The Malthouse Agreement. The Parfisal Mosaic


the ipcress amendment


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> All the things sound like Ludlum thriller titles now. The Irish Backstop. The Malthouse Agreement. The Parfisal Mosaic




Hopefully the quartet will be finished with the less punchy title: _Sweaty Sock in Mouth and Bundled in the Boot of Car Heading for Landfill._


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Their intransigence at being willing to talk now is because they agreed something with people who didn’t have the ability to actually sign off in what they were agreeing



Fools to think the UK Prime Minister represented the UK


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Fools to think the UK Prime Minister represented the UK


The question is what they want to do about this mistake and how important a deal is to them.  All their insistence about how Ireland is the most important thing — what’s that worth when they’re apparently happy to just throw Ireland under the bus of no deal because they refuse to engage with parliament at this point?  Was Ireland important or not?


----------



## not a trot (Jan 29, 2019)

My wife overheard two oldies speaking the other day. One of them pondered on what Vera Lynn makes of Brexit. Maybe the government should consult her.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> ^


That exchange comes *after* your 'last will & testament' post. So you are asking me to read the intended meaning of your post in the context of discussion that occurred after it was made? That it was a response to statements from the future?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the ipcress amendment


The Brady codicil


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The question is what they want to do about this mistake and how important a deal is to them.  All their insistence about how Ireland is the most important thing — what’s that worth when they’re apparently happy to just throw Ireland under the bus of no deal because they refuse to engage with parliament at this point?  Was Ireland important or not?



The biggest mistake the EU made was to assume that the UK was a rational negotiator. At this stage all they can really do is to be amenable to an extension of time. Then (I agree) they have a moral duty to be flexible in order to avoid an IE/NI border. 

However I think it's perfectly reasonable for the EU to ask the UK to come up with an alternative plan (given that there was a plan and the UK has rejected it). It's also perfectly reasonable to sit back and wait for the UK to finish its internal battle before engaging with it further. The EU has, as you say, made the mistake once already of taking May's agreement in good faith. It won't make that mistake again.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> That exchange comes *after* your 'last will & testament post'. So you are asking me to read the intended meaning of your post in the context of discussion that occurred after it was made? That it was a response to statements from the future?


It is where philosophical agreed that this was his/her meaning.

I have no idea why you want to go around in tedious circles of your making here. If you have a specific question to ask me, here and now, do so. But if your aim is simply to manufacture a petty snowstorm of misdirection and postiche pedantry, then count me out.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The question is what they want to do about this mistake and how important a deal is to them.  All their insistence about how Ireland is the most important thing — what’s that worth when they’re apparently happy to just throw Ireland under the bus of no deal because they refuse to engage with parliament at this point?  Was Ireland important or not?


What kind of practical concession could they even make at this point? Should they do something like offer a deal involving a customs union, and advise that parliament votes on this, instead of whatever is being proposed by the UK 'negotiating team'?


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Their intransigence at being willing to talk now is because they agreed something with people who didn’t have the ability to actually sign off in what they were agreeing





Winot said:


> Fools to think the UK Prime Minister represented the UK



_Represent the UK _of course not the same as _able to sign off what they agree_ (having of course excluded the rest of Parliamanent from the word go)


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> _Represent the UK _of course not the same as _able to sign off what they agree_ (having of course excluded the rest of Parliamanent from the word go)



Sure - so what should the EU have done differently? Refuse to engage with May until she held a vote to get Parliamentary agreement? A reminder that it is HMG that has delayed putting the plan to Parliament, not the EU.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> in 45 minutes tony blair can be ready to give a press interview



A weapon of misdirection.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, seems to be:
> The 'Malthouse compromise': everything you need to know
> Sounds like it solves just about nothing, waffle and kicking things further down the road, weariness of battle etc.



Apparently a key part of the Malthouse Compromise was replacing the backstop with technology that doesn't exist yet - should be called the Alehouse Compromise since they clearly came up with it in the pub.


----------



## treelover (Jan 29, 2019)

> British retirees in EU will lose free healthcare under no-deal Brexit






> For many the alternative may be to return to the UK, something the government has said in the past will cost the British taxpayer more in NHS expenditure because of the savings in cheaper health systems around Europe.




I thought this wasn't going to happen, UKIP may get a boost here though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The question is what they want to do about this mistake and how important a deal is to them.  All their insistence about how Ireland is the most important thing — what’s that worth when they’re apparently happy to just throw Ireland under the bus of no deal because they refuse to engage with parliament at this point?  Was Ireland important or not?


Thing is, only the UK can stop 'no deal crash out'. The EU cannot do that for them. The other way to look at this is that the UK govt is currently attempting to use 'no deal' as a negotiating threat, prepared to bring everyone down _in the name of democracy_, bizarrely enough. But the one-sided nature of that threat is pretty clear - the UK can throw itself off the cliff, taking others down with it as it blunders over, but the EU cannot push them off that cliff. And part of the EU calculation has to be whether or not the UK govt would not be foolish enough to throw itself off the cliff - whoever is hurt by no deal brexit, it is the British first and foremost. If they really are serious in trying to make the EU believe that no deal crash out is a possibility, they're playing a very dangerous game of bluff, and why wouldn't the EU call them on that bluff? They might well end up with no brexit at all - from their pov, result!

The UK govt is also trying to use its own weakness and lack of domestic authority as a bargaining chip. Bizarre times indeed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

treelover said:


> I thought this wasn't going to happen, UKIP may get a boost here though.


if they haven't had a boost so far i very much doubt this will be the issue which people latch onto


----------



## rutabowa (Jan 29, 2019)

Haven't really been following this "brexit" story, could someone sum it up in a sentence or two?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

rutabowa said:


> Haven't really been following this "brexit" story, could someone sum it up in a sentence or two?


after a referendum in the summer of 2016 you won't believe what the british did next


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It is where philosophical agreed that this was his/her meaning.
> 
> I have no idea why you want to go around in tedious circles of your making here. If you have a specific question to ask me, here and now, do so. But if your aim is simply to manufacture a petty snowstorm of misdirection and postiche pedantry, then count me out.



I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Apparently a key part of the Malthouse Compromise was replacing the backstop with technology that doesn't exist yet - should be called the Alehouse Compromise since they clearly came up with it in the pub.



You mean the technology that the EU accepts does exist in respect of most checks, so those involving customs, tax and regulatory checks can be done away from the border? That just leaves the problem of livestock sanitary checks, and it's not going to take rocket science to solve that minor issue.



> But in the meeting with ministers on Tuesday evening, Barnier for the first time described how a more nuanced approach might work and why the U.K. should not feel threatened. He explained that of four types of inspections of goods — sanitary, customs, tax and regulatory — only the sanitary controls, essentially those applying to livestock, would need to be done at the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland, according to an EU diplomat.
> 
> The other checks could be carried out on ferries, on the premises of business, using barcodes and scanning technology, Barnier told the ministers. The infrastructure for these checks is already in place, the negotiator said, but currently only 10 percent of sanitary goods are checked — a figure that will have to increase to 100 percent, according to the diplomat.



https://www.politico.eu/article/michel-barnier-eu-irish-border-proposal-improved-brexit-red-lines/


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.


Jesus.  

Do you have a question?

(Also, to be pedantic, I said it was postiche pedantry. Not simply pedantry).


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Sure - so what should the EU have done differently? Refuse to engage with May until she held a vote to get Parliamentary agreement?



Pretty much, yes. The Sun and The Mail would have gone apeshit, as would the right wing of the tories (_EU won't negotiate with an elected government!!11!_) but in the long run it probably would have helped.

Anyway what ifs. Apologies for my part in them.

Edit to add, they didn't do anything like that because May's and her government's utter weakness and incompetence suited them quite well, so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.


you're right. it's ultrapedantry


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Pretty much, yes. The Sun and The Mail would have gone apeshit, as would the right wing of the tories (_EU won't negotiate with an elected government!!11!_) but in the long run it probably would have helped.



It also would have been utterly hilarious to watch


----------



## TruXta (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're right. it's ultrapedantry


Putting you to shame innit.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

rutabowa said:


> Haven't really been following this "brexit" story, could someone sum it up in a sentence or two?


----------



## rutabowa (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.


cheers i reckon i've got it now


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Putting you to shame innit.


not only can i not compete with teuchter's ultrapedantry, i don't want to


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

rutabowa said:


> Haven't really been following this "brexit" story, could someone sum it up in a sentence or two?


Referendum takes place. Government can’t carry parliament. Nobody is happy.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Jesus.
> 
> Do you have a question?
> 
> (Also, to be pedantic, I said it was postiche pedantry. Not simply pedantry).



To be pedantic, I did not say that you did not say that it was postiche pedantry, which means that you are not being pedantic but simply restating a point of view unecessarily.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.



I think this may be the first ever example of an octuple negative in a sentence in English.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> To be pedantic, I did not say that you did not say that it was postiche pedantry, which means that you are not being pedantic but simply restating a point of view unecessarily.


never mind your postiche, you're speaking out of your posterior


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> To be pedantic, I did not say that you did not say that it was postiche pedantry, which means that you are not being pedantic but simply restating a point of view unecessarily.


I was considering letting this be the last word in our exchange. But I thought that would be cruel. So if you’d like to quote this post, we’ll let whatever you reply be the last word.


----------



## gosub (Jan 29, 2019)

rutabowa said:


> Haven't really been following this "brexit" story, could someone sum it up in a sentence or two?



Deadline approaching.  Dog ate homework.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Read somewhere that May is now planning to vote against her own backstop arrangements. Not sure how, under the guise of which amendment etc. Nor I imagine, is she

((((((Mother of Parliaments)))))


----------



## killer b (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Read somewhere that May is now planning to vote against her own backstop arrangements. Not sure how, under the guise of which amendment etc.


The Tories are whipping in support of Brady's amendment.


----------



## klang (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Nobody is happy.


I am happy. And so is my wife.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

killer b said:


> The Tories are whipping in support of Brady's amendment.



Tail wagging the dog.

I do wonder how much the backstop is just a catch all proxy for general dissatisfaction with the situation.  We're at stalemate now and if its going to shift than a fair amount of MP's are going to have to give so we're in face saving mode.  May couldn't propose an amendment herself but if she supports one others can support etc than everyone can save a bit of face.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

killer b said:


> The Tories are whipping in support of Brady's amendment.


a lot of them will enjoy that


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Thing is, only the UK can stop 'no deal crash out'. The EU cannot do that for them. The other way to look at this is that the UK govt is currently attempting to use 'no deal' as a negotiating threat, prepared to bring everyone down _in the name of democracy_, bizarrely enough. But the one-sided nature of that threat is pretty clear - the UK can throw itself off the cliff, taking others down with it as it blunders over, but the EU cannot push them off that cliff. And part of the EU calculation has to be whether or not the UK govt would not be foolish enough to throw itself off the cliff - whoever is hurt by no deal brexit, it is the British first and foremost. If they really are serious in trying to make the EU believe that no deal crash out is a possibility, they're playing a very dangerous game of bluff, and why wouldn't the EU call them on that bluff? They might well end up with no brexit at all - from their pov, result!
> 
> The UK govt is also trying to use its own weakness and lack of domestic authority as a bargaining chip. Bizarre times indeed.


Let's not be naive, the EU is also using the prospect of No Deal in an attempt to force the UK government to give ground, and even though No Deal would clearly adversely affect one EU nation in particular,  they may decide that's preferable than the possible damage to the wider EU project of making concessions to the UK at the 11th hour.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think it's 'pedantry' to defend myself against accusations that my failure to correctly interpret your analogy is down to not properly reading the discussions leading up to it - when the fact is, that the discussions you accuse me of not reading had not even happened yet.



You are such a fucking tedious cunt.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> Let's not be naive, the EU is also using the prospect of No Deal in an attempt to force the UK government to give ground, and even though No Deal would clearly adversely affect one EU nation in particular,  they may decide that's preferable than the possible damage to the wider EU project of making concessions to the UK at the 11th hour.



EU will let a no deal brexit occur, regardless of how it impacts Ireland or other member states. As it should. It’s fucking baffling that the UK thinks this is some sort of bluff that EU won’t call.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

I see the DUP are backing the Brady amendment but the EU have already said no chance.  This vote alone will be interesting to see how many tory remainers will blink, not sure if it'll pass but it might get close.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I see the DUP are backing the Brady amendment but the EU have already said no chance.  This vote alone will be interesting to see how many tory remainers will blink, not sure if it'll pass but it might get close.


the dup are the brady bunch


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I see the DUP are backing the Brady amendment but the EU have already said no chance.  This vote alone will be interesting to see how many tory remainers will blink, not sure if it'll pass but it might get close.


If it does, the dup and vast majority of the tory party will believe they've got to a reassuring place where they can start to put the whole nightmare behind them, without solving any of the core issues - which is just about the best they can hope for. They'll also feel that even if they get lose by, say, 25?  Having said it solves nothing, however, I do think that passing this, now or soon, does push us closer to getting some kind of fudge through. In the end, the eu may also go with some kind of fudge, even if it isn't this one.  Anyway, regardless It's probably a sign of how shit things have been for May that today's fudged bullshit gives her the best feeling she's had in months.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Sure - so what should the EU have done differently? Refuse to engage with May until she held a vote to get Parliamentary agreement? A reminder that it is HMG that has delayed putting the plan to Parliament, not the EU.


How did we get from a discussion about what the EU are refusing to do now to a question about what the EU should have done differently then?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Fuck me, Ian Blackford, SNP leader at Westminster has not only almost emptied the house, by pointlessly droning on & on, over old ground that no ones interested in hearing again, even his own MPs are nodding off & yawning.  

EDIT - Blackford not Blackmore. 

Still a total waste of space.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> How did we get from a discussion about what the EU are refusing to do now to a question about what the EU should have done differently then?


What is it that the EU are refusing to do? May presented her 'red lines' and the EU gave her in return their conditions for allowing those red lines. The thing entirely absent, it appears, from today's amendment is any suggestion as to which of those 'red lines' they should offer to change in order to gain a change in the EU's position.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Fuck me, Ian Blackmore


Blackford. That aside, you already had my full agreement at that point.


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> EU will let a no deal brexit occur, regardless of how it impacts Ireland or other member states. As it should. It’s fucking baffling that the UK thinks this is some sort of bluff that EU won’t call.



This sounded about right:


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2019)

If they get the Brady bunch amendment through parliament it just wastes more time. The EU will say  "no" again. Probably in an very annoyed voice.  And May will be back to square one. She is still playing ping pong - bouncing between the EU and parliament hoping one side will change its mind. We've had 18 months of this - and all the time its been clear there are only two ways out - A soft Customs Union type BINO or a 2nd ref/cancellation.
But she is too much of a blinkered, obstinate nutjob to actually do the cross party politics bit.  It will just mean her ultimate humiliation  - when she is forced to suspend A50 in the face of no deal - all the more painful


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> We've had 18 months of this


but it feels like two and a half years


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> If they get the Brady bunch amendment through parliament it just wastes more time. The EU will say  "no" again. Probably in an very annoyed voice.  And May will be back to square one. She is still playing ping pong - bouncing between the EU and parliament hoping one side will change its mind. We've had 18 months of this - and all the time its been clear there are only two ways out - A soft Customs Union type BINO or a 2nd ref/cancellation.
> But she is too much of a blinkered, obstinate nutjob to actually do the cross party politics bit.  It will just mean her ultimate humiliation  - when she is forced to suspend A50 in the face of no deal - all the more painful


Apparently there are doubts about whether it will pass anyway...


> *Brady amendment could 'fall short'*
> BBC political correspondent Nick Eardley tweets





> Well connected Tories predicting Brady will fall short. A few Brexiteers will oppose and a few more Tories abstaining as things stand. We’ll see some time after 1900.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Blackford. That aside, you already had my full agreement at that point.



He did actually make me laugh, when he started moaning that the PM & leader of the opposition wasn't in the house to hear him.

They've heard it all before, you bore the fuck out of them & everyone else, they couldn't give a toss about you droning on & on again, when you have fuck all new to bring to the table.

Talk about a total lack of self awareness.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> but it feels like two and a half years



i was counting from when she fucked the election - but its arguable she would still be in much the same place even if she'd not have jumped on that particular banana skin.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What is it that the EU are refusing to do? May presented her 'red lines' and the EU gave her in return their conditions for allowing those red lines. The thing entirely absent, it appears, from today's amendment is any suggestion as to which of those 'red lines' they should offer to change in order to gain a change in the EU's position.


The EU would apparently rather a hard border be imposed immediately in Ireland than discuss alternative arrangements to the backstop that prevents a hard border in Ireland.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The EU would apparently rather a hard border be imposed immediately in Ireland than discuss alternative arrangements to the backstop that prevents a hard border in Ireland.


Again, you choose more or less arbitrarily to look at this as the EU refusing something. Equally, the UK would apparently rather a hard border be imposed than discuss alternative arrangements to May's 'red lines'.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Again, you choose more or less arbitrarily to look at this as the EU refusing something. Equally, the UK would apparently rather a hard border be imposed than discuss alternative arrangements to May's 'red lines'.


Yes, they probably would.  What’s that got to do with the EU’s hypocrisy about pretending to care about Ireland and weeping crocodile tears about a border they want to use as leverage for their position?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Yes, they probably would.  What’s that got to do with the EU’s hypocrisy about pretending to care about Ireland and weeping crocodile tears about a border they want to use as leverage for their position?


Not sure I see it as hypocrisy not to budge on an agreed deal without the other party offering something in return.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Yes, they probably would.  What’s that got to do with the EU’s hypocrisy about pretending to care about Ireland and weeping crocodile tears about a border they want to use as leverage for their position?


Ireland is the EU


----------



## Raheem (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The EU would apparently rather a hard border be imposed immediately in Ireland than discuss alternative arrangements to the backstop that prevents a hard border in Ireland.


Think they would say they've already had that discussion and it goes 'What are the alternative arrangements?' / 'Don't know'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

The EU has stated most of any checks required can be held away from the border, there's no reason to not set a time limit to resolve the issues surrounding the few remaining checks to also be done away from the border, i.e. a time-limit on the backstop.

The border issue is only an issue because the EU is just playing dangerous games.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Not sure I see it as hypocrisy not to budge on an agreed deal without the other party offering something in return.



It's a daft deal, not an agreed deal.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a daft deal, not an agreed deal.


of course it's a daft deal - because May's trying to be hard and soft at the same time. It's May's red lines that have produced the daftness.


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The border issue is only an issue because the EU is just playing dangerous games.



the EU is playing dangerous games


----------



## brogdale (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's a daft deal, not an agreed deal.


Agreed between the two parties, just not between the parties on one side; nothing draft about it at all.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> the EU is playing dangerous games



Yeah, a right bunch of saints those EU mandarins. They wouldn't ever impose crippling austerity on member states, or bypass democracy with repeated referenda or the appointment of technocrats.

_oh wait_


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 29, 2019)

They are not going to bend over backward to the united kingdom request or general sense of not have a fucking clue what they want


as i think they want to remain a Union of countries after the UK leaves

*shrugs*


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i was counting from when she fucked the election - but its arguable she would still be in much the same place even if she'd not have jumped on that particular banana skin.


I was commenting on my feeling that that period has dragged so that yes chronologically it is 18 months but it feels like 30


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> of course it's a daft deal - because May's trying to be hard and soft at the same time. It's May's red lines that have produced the daftness.



That was supposed to be 'draft deal', not daft, as I am sure you are aware - it has never been a 'agreed deal' as you claimed.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That was supposed to be 'draft deal', not daft, as I am sure you are aware - it has never been a 'agreed deal' as you claimed.


I didn't twig that at first no. as for it's never been an agreed deal, well that's not what May has been insisting. She was insistent that this was agreed and done and dusted and there was no alternative.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That was supposed to be 'draft deal', not daft, as I am sure you are aware - it has never been a 'agreed deal' as you claimed.


A daft draft deal


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I didn't twig that at first no. as for it's never been an agreed deal, well that's not what May has been insisting. She was insistent that this was agreed and done and dusted and there was no alternative.



And, as we all know, you included, it is not an 'agreed deal' until our parliament, and indeed those of the other EU parliaments have agreed it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> A daft draft deal



That I can't disagree with.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Ffs, how blind do you have to be not to see that the EU is fucking with Ireland every bit as much as the U.K., but worse because they are pretending to do it from a position of “_you’re our mate, you are, stay with us and we’ll look after you..._”. If they gave the first crap about Ireland, they wouldn’t be hiding behind procedure and previous discussions as an excuse for not working overtime to come to something mutually acceptable.  If they gave the first crap about Ireland, they’d be doing what it took to avoid Ireland facing the fall out of no deal.  But no, they’re not even willing to countenance further discussion about something that’s almost but not quite acceptable to all the stakeholders that need to be satisfied — and I do mean ALL the stakeholders, not just Barnier and May.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> They are not going to bend over backward to the united kingdom request or general sense of not have a fucking clue what they want


I almost admire the latest strategy. Go to Brussels and demand that they give you a bunch of new things because you have no authority at home, meaning that they have to do exactly as you ask. Power through weakness.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 29, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> They are not going to bend over backward to the united kingdom request or general sense of not have a fucking clue what they want
> 
> 
> as i think they want to remain a Union of countries after the UK leaves
> ...



And that's why the EU will fail. It wants to impose uniformity, from the top downwards, on a continent made up of 40 to 50 countries, depending on how you're counting, many with histories that go back centuries. It certainly won't survive in its current state.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I didn't twig that at first no. as for it's never been an agreed deal, well that's not what May has been insisting. She was insistent that this was agreed and done and dusted and there was no alternative.


She might have been saying that, but it’s not “done and dusted” unless it can be implemented. It’s a draft deal until parliament agrees it. And we’ve known since the middle of November at least that it couldn’t get through Parliament. And May acknowledged that at the beginning of December by delaying the vote. If you and I knew that in November, then you can be sure that May’s government knew it, and the EU also knew it.  

So both May’s government and the EU have been running down the clock.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, as we all know, you included, it is not an 'agreed deal' until our parliament, and indeed those of the other EU parliaments have agreed it.


Right, so if you want changes to be made, you have to offer something in return. That's how negotiations normally go. May has to let go of her red lines and allow a different kind of brexit to happen, basically. It's utterly bizarre that May's deal has been rejected yet May is offering nothing to the EU in return for changes.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The EU has stated most of any checks required can be held away from the border, there's no reason to not set a time limit to resolve the issues surrounding the few remaining checks to also be done away from the border, i.e. a time-limit on the backstop.



And what happens when the time limit runs out, and the 'issues' have not been resolved?


----------



## rutabowa (Jan 29, 2019)

What about when the time limit doesn't run out, and the non issues haven't not been resolved


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

Some extraordinarily whiny British exceptionalism being demonstrated on this thread.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Some extraordinarily whiny British exceptionalism being demonstrated on this thread.


How do you reach that conclusion?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Some extraordinarily whiny British exceptionalism being demonstrated on this thread.


God forbid the UK try and cross daddy EU ...


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> But no, they’re not even willing to countenance further discussion about something that’s almost but not quite acceptable to all the stakeholders that need to be satisfied — and I do mean ALL the stakeholders, not just Barnier and May.



You wanted brexit, this is what it looks like. Why is this basic concept so hard for you to grasp.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 29, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ah now...come on.
> Cameron didn't think the vote would go this way. I know what he did. What I don't get is how the EU made life in the UK so awful as to push people for a vote to leave. How bad was it?
> Was it worse than pre EEC days and a UK government ?



Since the discussion is boring me...

Yes, actually, life in Britain for the working class now is worse than it was prior to EEC membership. 

We joined the EEC in 1973. The 1950's and '60's were a time when living standards in Britain massively increased - the NHS, the welfare state, full employment, these were things that massively benefitted ordinary people. After we joined the EEC in 1973, we had the global economic crisis of the 1970's and the global neoliberal turn begins. Enter Thatcher - who had a huge hand in shaping the Single Market, which basically is the EU, and taking Britain into it. Fast forward a few decades and to be honest, things are pretty bleak here. 

Now I'm not saying that's all because of the EU. It's not. The neoliberal turn in the global economy and the EU developed simultaeneously and the former conditioned the development of the latter. But if you want to know if people thought things were better then, actually, in general people who remember those days probably do. Which might explain why more older voters voted to Leave.


----------



## Winot (Jan 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> How do you reach that conclusion?



Nah, I’m out. This thread is worse than Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 29, 2019)

Wookey said:


> But the bold bit is the key, innit? He isn't getting a GE, he isn't getting a unity government even - he's not getting anywhere near the EU in the next 6 weeks. He's suggesting something he just cannot practically deliver in time, even if his VONC had worked, or the Tory VONC had worked.



Might be a GE quite soon actually. 



Wookey said:


> Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum, jumped on the illegality of the vote, the overspend by Leave, the cack-handed negotiation, Teresa May handed all that to him on a plate - and 48% and rising of the referendum voters would have had someone to rally behind. He could have saved the country but he didn't think big enough.
> 
> He's fucked it up as bad as she has.



Do you _really _believe that?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> You wanted brexit, this is what it looks like. Why is this basic concept so hard for you to grasp.


Who said it’s hard to grasp.  I’m just making it transparent just how little the EU gives the first fuck about Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Ffs, how blind do you have to be not to see that the EU is fucking with Ireland every bit as much as the U.K., but worse because they are pretending to do it from a position of “_you’re our mate, you are, stay with us and we’ll look after you..._”. If they gave the first crap about Ireland, they wouldn’t be hiding behind procedure and previous discussions as an excuse for not working overtime to come to something mutually acceptable.  If they gave the first crap about Ireland, they’d be doing what it took to avoid Ireland facing the fall out of no deal.  But no, they’re not even willing to countenance further discussion about something that’s almost but not quite acceptable to all the stakeholders that need to be satisfied — and I do mean ALL the stakeholders, not just Barnier and May.



My understanding is that the EU has been willing to come to something 'mutually acceptable', and have been open to suggestions made by the UK. The problem is that the UK has not made any suggestions to the EU regarding a post brexit border in Ireland.
Now you may say it is up to the EU to make the first suggestion on the road to mutual acceptability. However by participating in the 'deal' that includes a backstop the EU believes it has landed on a mutually acceptable place.
Then you mention 'all stakeholders'. Is it your position that 'the EU', in a way that by-passes Barnier and May engages with some other kind of 'stakeholders' like splinter groups within the UK Parliament, or some other bodies?
If the UK had been able to come up with something regarding the border, something that works in practice given the future separation of the UK and the EU, but the UK's position has been 'don't worry about the border, it will be irrelevant because we will have trade agreements that basically negates it's existence', and the EU is simply asking 'what if we don't have those agreements though?'
It might now be the time for everybody to work overtime, but it might also well be the time for the UK to come up with ideas...which are as I type glaringly absent from the Brady amendment.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Nah, I’m out. This thread is worse than Brexit.


Deserves a thread of its own: _Is 'Worse than Brexit' the new 'Worse than Hitler'?_


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I almost admire the latest strategy. Go to Brussels and demand that they give you a bunch of new things because you have no authority at home, meaning that they have to do exactly as you ask. Power through weakness.



What's the 'bunch of new things' being demanded?

The only issue seems to be the backstop, it appears that it could be a trap that May walked into. If the EU is honest in wanting to keep checks away from the border, and only wanting the backstop as a temporarily measure, there is no reason whatsoever not to put a time limit on it.  

The idea that you can expect a country to agree to be trapped in an arrangement, that they don't want to be in, forever, with no way of getting out of it, is fundamentally flawed.

It flies in the face of the principle of self determination, and is frankly fucking ridiculous.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> You wanted brexit, this is what it looks like. Why is this basic concept so hard for you to grasp.


See here:  
Is Brexit actually going to happen?

This is where this thread and this issue runs aground. People make assumptions.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The EU has stated most of any checks required can be held away from the border, there's no reason to not set a time limit to resolve the issues surrounding the few remaining checks to also be done away from the border, i.e. a time-limit on the backstop.
> 
> The border issue is only an issue because the EU is just playing dangerous games.


The checks at the border is just to solve the physical infrastructure problem .

The DUP etc have a problem with the backstop altogether, no matter where the checks are.

EU playing games?. May is voting against the agreement she negotiated.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The only issue seems to be the backstop, it appears that it could be a trap that May walked into. If the EU is honest in wanting to keep checks away from the border, and only wanting the backstop as a temporarily measure, there is no reason whatsoever not to put a time limit on it.



There is a time limit on it, it's just that it is tied to an event, not a fixed date.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> My understanding is that the EU has been willing to come to something 'mutually acceptable', and have been open to suggestions made by the UK. The problem is that the UK has not made any suggestions to the EU regarding a post brexit border in Ireland.
> Now you may say it is up to the EU to make the first suggestion on the road to mutual acceptability. However by participating in the 'deal' that includes a backstop the EU believes it has landed on a mutually acceptable place.
> Then you mention 'all stakeholders'. Is it your position that 'the EU', in a way that by-passes Barnier and May engages with some other kind of 'stakeholders' like splinter groups within the UK Parliament, or some other bodies?
> If the UK had been able to come up with something regarding the border, something that works in practice given the future separation of the UK and the EU, but the UK's position has been 'don't worry about the border, it will be irrelevant because we will have trade agreements that basically negates it's existence', and the EU is simply asking 'what if we don't have those agreements though?'
> It might now be the time for everybody to work overtime, but it might also well be the time for the UK to come up with ideas...which are as I type glaringly absent from the Brady amendment.


I don't think kabbes or indeed anyone else on the thread who is criticizing the EU is supportive of the UK govt position or blind to May's incompetence.

That's the problem with this discussion - too many posters seem to think that if you criticize one 'side' in the UK/EU tussle you are necessarily supporting or agreeing with the other


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Indeed.  May and the U.K. government are a bunch of shits.  But that doesn’t absolve the EU for playing a game using Ireland as their pawn.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> There is a time limit on it, it's just that it is tied to an event, not a fixed date.



That is not a time limit.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

The only noise I hear coming from Dublin is that the backstop has to stay, end of story.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.  May and the U.K. government are a bunch of shits.  But that doesn’t absolve the EU for playing a game using Ireland as their pawn.



Ditto.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That is not a time limit.



It's not intended to exist in perpetuity though, is the point.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The only noise I hear coming from Dublin is that the backstop has to stay, end of story.


That’ll be fun for them when there’s no deal at all as a consequence


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The only noise I hear coming from Dublin is that the backstop has to stay, end of story.



No problem with it staying, it just needs a proper time limit.

That's the only reasonable way out of this.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's not intended to exist in perpetuity though, is the point.



PMSL. 

You have totally missed the point, by a fucking country mile.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That’ll be fun for them when there’s no deal at all as a consequence



Sure, but it occurs to me that the EU's official position appears to identically reflect the Irish government's official position. So this 



kabbes said:


> Indeed.  May and the U.K. government are a bunch of shits.  But that doesn’t absolve the EU for playing a game using Ireland as their pawn.



isn't the full story, no? 

It would surprise me more if the EU started contradicting the Irish government at this stage.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> PMSL.
> 
> You have totally missed the point, by a fucking country mile.



Oh, quite probably. I doubt I'm the only one - there certainly seemed to be a lot of confused people in Parliament earlier.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Sure, but it occurs to me that the EU's official position appears to identically reflect the Irish government's official position. So this
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sure, Ireland’s position is totally independent of what the EU have been telling them for the last three years. It’s all stuff they would have said regardless.  No game playing by the EU here at all.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Sure, Ireland’s position is totally independent of what the EU have been telling them for the last three years. It’s all stuff they would have said regardless.  No game playing by the EU here at all.



Yes, Ireland only cares about no border because of what the EU says. Well done.


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Sure, Ireland’s position is totally independent of what the EU have been telling them for the last three years. It’s all stuff they would have said regardless.  No game playing by the EU here at all.



I don't know.  Does the EU's position reflect the wishes of the Irish Government or have the Irish Government been told what's best for them and like it or lump it?  

I honestly don't know, we'll probably see in a few weeks.  Of the remaining EU countries Ireland stand to lose most from a no deal / crash out.  If the backstop is merely an EU obsession rather than an Irish red line I would expect to see the Irish Government break cover.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No problem with it staying, it just needs a proper time limit.
> 
> That's the only reasonable way out of this.



For a time limit to be “reasonable”, the Irish government would have to trust the British government not to simply fuck them by letting time tick down to that limit and then imposing whatever border it pleases. The entire history of the two islands strongly militates against any Irish government showing that degree of trust. 

More particularly, the British insistence that there must be a time limit by itself tends to cause even the most gullible of those negotiating with them to wonder why exactly a time limit is so important if there is really no chance that the British would unilaterally leave the backstop without reaching a mutually acceptable arrangement.

The Irish government is not in a particularly enviable situation. It has two basic national interests at stake - not having a hard border and not having trade with Britain fucked. The EU are playing on the first of those interests to make life awkward for the Brits, the British government are using the second of those interests to try to blackmail the Irish one.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> If the backstop is merely an EU obsession rather than an Irish red line I would expect to see the Irish Government break cover.



Which won’t happen. It’s frustrating to read British people talking about the border with an attitude of “oh it’s not really a big deal”. A very enthusiastic fuck you to anyone in the UK who takes that position. Reading some posters on this thread would be a great recruitment tool for the IRA.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> For a time limit to be “reasonable”, the Irish government would have to trust the British government not to simply fuck them by letting time tick down to that limit and then imposing whatever border it pleases. The entire history of the two islands strongly militates against any Irish government showing that degree of trust.
> 
> More particularly, the British insistence that there must be a time limit by itself tends to cause even the most gullible of those negotiating with them to wonder why exactly a time limit is so important if there is really no chance that the British would unilaterally leave the backstop without reaching a mutually acceptable arrangement.
> 
> The Irish government is not in a particularly enviable situation. It has two basic national interests at stake - not having a hard border and not having trade with Britain fucked. The EU are playing on the first of those interests to make life awkward for the Brits, the British government are using the second of those interests to try to blackmail the Irish one.


And let's not forget who the cunts may is trying to appease are: Tory brexiteers and the dup.  Fuck them and their demands. There is no sense in which any of us should be supporting may's current efforts to save her vile deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not forget who the cunts may is trying to appease are: Tory brexiteers and the dup.  Fuck them and their demands. There is no sense in which any of us should be supporting may's current efforts to save her vile deal.


No one is supporting may's efforts or her deal


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not forget who the cunts may is trying to appease are: Tory brexiteers and the dup.  Fuck them and their demands. There is no sense in which any of us should be supporting may's current efforts to save her vile deal.


So which of us do you believe *are* supporting May's efforts to save her deal, or is this just another bit of pointless bleating against people who don't agree with you?


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Which won’t happen. It’s frustrating to read British people talking about the border with an attitude of “oh it’s not really a big deal”. A very enthusiastic fuck you to anyone in the UK who takes that position.



Agreed.  

I think the Irish government are absolutely sincere in their stance and if they believed the backstop wasn't crucial then we wouldn't be where we are.  In truth though I don't know anything for sure in this whole shit show, I also have a feeling the Irish Government may get sold out by the EU in the final crunch.  All guesswork mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> So which of us do you believe *are* supporting May's efforts to save her deal, or is this just another bit of pointless bleating against people who don't agree with you?


He's very liberal with his accusations


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> For a time limit to be “reasonable”, the Irish government would have to trust the British government not to simply fuck them by letting time tick down to that limit and then imposing whatever border it pleases. The entire history of the two islands strongly militates against any Irish government showing that degree of trust.
> 
> More particularly, the British insistence that there must be a time limit by itself tends to cause even the most gullible of those negotiating with them to wonder why exactly a time limit is so important if there is really no chance that the British would unilaterally leave the backstop without reaching a mutually acceptable arrangement.
> 
> The Irish government is not in a particularly enviable situation. It has two basic national interests at stake - not having a hard border and not having trade with Britain fucked. The EU are playing on the first of those interests to make life awkward for the Brits, the British government are using the second of those interests to try to blackmail the Irish one.



The UK government has made it clear it has no intention of introducing a hard border in Ireland, no one wants such a border, there is no need even under a 'no deal' situation for one to happen, the EU has agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border, it's a small step to take to resolve remaining issues over the remaining possible border checks.

There's no reason for not having a time limit on the backstop, unless the EU is being totally dishonest & are aiming to trap the UK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Which won’t happen. It’s frustrating to read British people talking about the border with an attitude of “oh it’s not really a big deal”. A very enthusiastic fuck you to anyone in the UK who takes that position. Reading some posters on this thread would be a great recruitment tool for the IRA.


If the border isn't such a big deal perhaps it could just be abolished


----------



## philosophical (Jan 29, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Indeed.  May and the U.K. government are a bunch of shits.  But that doesn’t absolve the EU for playing a game using Ireland as their pawn.


The concept of the EU using Ireland as their pawn needs a bit of fleshing out in my view.
If anybody or anything is being 'used', then to what end?
I thought that the integrity of the GFA and the common travel area in Ireland is something the UK has said it wants to protect from the outset, and the EU is collaborating in that UK aspiration.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Which won’t happen. It’s frustrating to read British people talking about the border with an attitude of “oh it’s not really a big deal”. A very enthusiastic fuck you to anyone in the UK who takes that position. Reading some posters on this thread would be a great recruitment tool for the IRA.



Who on this thread is saying the border is no big deal?


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Jan 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> If the border isn't such a big deal perhaps it could just be abolished



Not without the consent of the people of 26 and 6.

It’s not for non Irish 32 county sympathisers to tell them what to do any more than it is for John Humphreys.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The UK government has made it clear it has no intention of introducing a hard border in Ireland, no one wants such a border, there is no need even under a 'no deal' situation for one to happen, the EU has agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border, it's a small step to take to resolve remaining issues over the remaining possible border checks.
> 
> There's no reason for not having a time limit on the backstop, unless the EU is being totally dishonest & are aiming to trap the UK.


The issue is not the border it's having full alignment with the EU (the backstop) that's the problem the UK have.


----------



## billbond (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not forget who the cunts may is trying to appease are: Tory brexiteers and the dup.  Fuck them and their demands. There is no sense in which any of us should be supporting may's current efforts to save her vile deal.



So no Labour voters voted for Brexit  then


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Not without the consent of the people of 26 and 6.
> 
> It’s not for non Irish 32 county sympathisers to tell them what to do any more than it is for John Humphreys.


I'm not telling irish people what to do

If the UK want shot of the six counties all they have to do is go, being as we were told 25 years ago Britain had no selfish reason for being in the six counties perhaps the time has come to leave Ireland to the irish


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The UK government has made it clear it has no intention of introducing a hard border in Ireland, no one wants such a border, there is no need even under a 'no deal' situation for one to happen, the EU has agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border, it's a small step to take to resolve remaining issues over the remaining possible border checks.
> 
> There's no reason for not having a time limit on the backstop, unless the EU is being totally dishonest & are aiming to trap the UK.



That is total horseshit.

The EU has no reason to want to “trap” the UK into leaving Northern Ireland in a position where it permanently gains the benefits of EU membership without having to pay for those benefits. But Ireland has an entirely reasonable suspicion that if the British get what they want without having to guarantee no border permanently, that they will find themselves in negotiations with the British in a few years about the border where Britain no longer has any reason to make any compromise and Ireland no longer has any leverage to insist on one. That the British have tried so hard to get out of the guarantee they have already agreed to only reinforces that suspicion. 

In short, if the Brits weren’t at least open to fucking Ireland on the border they wouldn’t be arguing so hard to keep open their ability to fuck Ireland on the border. When one party to negotiations is willing to risk the whole negotiations in order to preserve the right to fuck the other party at a later date, you can’t really be surprised when the the latter party hears “we are planning to fuck you at a later date”.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And let's not forget who the cunts may is trying to appease are: Tory brexiteers and the dup.  Fuck them and their demands. There is no sense in which any of us should be supporting may's current efforts to save her vile deal.



May is irrevocably compromised on this by her deal with the DUP and no Irish person on either side of the border should trust a word she says. I doubt many do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> May is irrevocably compromised on this by her deal with the DUP and no Irish person on either side of the border should trust a word she says. I doubt many do.


You'd be hard pushed to find anyone who really trusts her. Even the dup ain't sure and she's given them a billion pounds


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> That is total horseshit.
> 
> The EU has no reason to want to “trap” the UK into leaving Northern Ireland in a position where it permanently gains the benefits of EU membership without having to pay for those benefits. But Ireland has an entirely reasonable suspicion that if the British get what they want without having to guarantee no border permanently, that they will find themselves in negotiations with the British in a few years about the border where Britain no longer has any reason to make any compromise and Ireland no longer has any leverage to insist on one. That the British have tried so hard to get out of the guarantee they have already agreed to only reinforces that suspicion.
> 
> In short, if the Brits weren’t at least open to fucking Ireland on the border they wouldn’t be arguing so hard to keep open their ability to fuck Ireland on the border. When one party to negotiations is willing to risk the whole negotiations in order to preserve the right to fuck the other party at a later date, you can’t really be surprised when the the latter party hears “we are planning to fuck you at a later date”.



The UK has no intention of fucking over Ireland, it's not in the UK's interest to do so, what a fucking ridiculous, and clueless post.

And, what's total horseshit about EU having agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border? 

Are you suggesting the EU are liars?

It's funny that every time this fact is pointed out, it's totally ignored by those trying to make a big drama out of the situation. There is no need for a hard border, under any circumstances whatsoever.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jan 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes, actually, life in Britain for the working class now is worse than it was prior to EEC membership.
> 
> We joined the EEC in 1973. The 1950's and '60's were a time when living standards in Britain massively increased - the NHS, the welfare state, full employment, these were things that massively benefitted ordinary people.



You seem at least in part to be talking about economics and incomes here.  Is there any evidence that incomes for the working class (say the median [not mean] income in the country) is lower today than it was in 1973?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> the EU has agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border



"Most" is no good - it has to be "all". Otherwise there is a border with checks.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Reading some posters on this thread would be a great recruitment tool for the IRA.


Which posts and which posters?  It’s great to use these rhetorical flourishes, but if you can’t be specific, then you’re raging at either a) people who aren’t here or b) an imagined position you’re reading into what someone else is saying. 

You’ve already jumped to the wrong conclusion about how kabbes voted in the referendum. Please try to understand that there are not just two polar positions at play here.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who on this thread is saying the border is no big deal?



You are 

There is 'no big drama':



cupid_stunt said:


> It's funny that every time this fact is pointed out, it's totally ignored by those trying to make a big drama out of the situation. There is no need for a hard border, under any circumstances whatsoever.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

Winot said:


> Some extraordinarily whiny British exceptionalism being demonstrated on this thread.





Winot said:


> Nah, I’m out. This thread is worse than Brexit.



This is another example. Make a sweeping statement about something being demonstrated, and then when asked where it is being demonstrated, refuse to back it up. 

Maybe it was being demonstrated. If so, point it out. If you are unable to, then I’m afraid we have to assume you’re having an argument with an interlocutor of your own imagination.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> That is total horseshit.
> 
> The EU has no reason to want to “trap” the UK into leaving Northern Ireland in a position where it permanently gains the benefits of EU membership without having to pay for those benefits. But Ireland has an entirely reasonable suspicion that if the British get what they want without having to guarantee no border permanently, that they will find themselves in negotiations with the British in a few years about the border where Britain no longer has any reason to make any compromise and Ireland no longer has any leverage to insist on one. That the British have tried so hard to get out of the guarantee they have already agreed to only reinforces that suspicion.
> 
> In short, if the Brits weren’t at least open to fucking Ireland on the border they wouldn’t be arguing so hard to keep open their ability to fuck Ireland on the border. When one party to negotiations is willing to risk the whole negotiations in order to preserve the right to fuck the other party at a later date, you can’t really be surprised when the the latter party hears “we are planning to fuck you at a later date”.




Excellent explanation


----------



## Supine (Jan 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> "Most" is no good - it has to be "all". Otherwise there is a border with checks.



Technology and 'away from border' checks are fine for normal above board trade. The border will be physically needed to stop smuggling in and out of the EU.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The UK has no intention of fucking over Ireland, it's not in the UK's interest to do so, what a fucking ridiculous, and clueless post.
> 
> And, what's total horseshit about EU having agreed that technology is already available to keep most checks away from the border?
> 
> ...



It’s not in the UKs interest to crash out of the EU with no deal, but it’s entirely possible that it will do so anyway. 

There are substantial factions in British politics which regard the Belfast Agreement as a mistake (the Tory right and the DUP). There are larger factions which are neutral towards or even mildly positive about the Belfast Agreement, but ultimately don’t really place much priority on it. That’s more or less the mainstream position in British politics where most of the time NI is marginally less important than the Isle of Wight.

No Irish government can simply assume that this or future British governments will never take actions in pursuit of trade agreements with other parties, in pursuit of national prestige or simply out of complete stupidity that ends up creating a hard border. The current UK government saying that it has no such intention is all well and good, but when it first agrees to be bound permanently by that intention and then suddenly decides that actually it will never agree to be bound by that intention, the value of that intention becomes rather dubious.

The idea of a technological fix is at this point just hand waving. Neither Britain nor Ireland is in a position to implement an actually frictionless border immediately or in the next few years. And even if such a technological fix does become logistically viable in the future it won’t remove the consequences for cross border trade of standards divergences etc.

At the moment, the Irish government has enormous leverage on Britain on the border issue. If the British government manages to get the border issue dealt with in a way that is less than permanently binding, then in future negotiations all of that leverage will be gone and the British government will be more or less able to impose any arrangement it feels like on Ireland. There’s no mystery to why the Irish government won’t agree to that because someone who keeps changing their mind, representing a government that has spent actual centuries screwing Ireland, offers good intentions.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> It’s not in the UKs interest to crash out of the EU with no deal, but it’s entirely possible that it will do so anyway.
> 
> There are substantial factions in British politics which regard the Belfast Agreement as a mistake (the Tory right and the DUP). There are larger factions which are neutral towards or even mildly positive about the Belfast Agreement, but ultimately don’t really place much priority on it. That’s more or less the mainstream position in British politics where most of the time NI is marginally less important than the Isle of Wight.
> 
> ...




Spot on.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Picture tells a thousand words


----------



## killer b (Jan 29, 2019)

looks more like four to me.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

killer b said:


> looks more like four to me.



Ha.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Just watching reports on the latest votes tonight...Why the fuck does the British Government give a shite about the backstop?? 
I mean they suddenly give a shit about a couple of million in NI over the 16 million who voted no to leaving the EU?

Are they for real? 

Its a complete joke.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Just watching reports on the latest votes tonight...Why the fuck does the British Government give a shite about the backstop??
> I mean they suddenly give a shit about a couple of million in NI over the 16 million who voted no to leaving the EU?
> 
> Are they for real?
> ...



I suspect the backstop issue is merely a convenient proxy for various different interests.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Just watching reports on the latest votes tonight...Why the fuck does the British Government give a shite about the backstop??
> I mean they suddenly give a shit about a couple of million in NI over the 16 million who voted no to leaving the EU?
> 
> Are they for real?
> ...



They dont give a shit about the people who live there - its cos the EU wont agree a deal without the a guarantee of an open border between Eire and N.Ireland. I think this may have been mentioned occasionally  over the past 18 months.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I suspect the backstop issue is merely a convenient proxy for various different interests.


Yep, this basically. A symbol of independence for some - loony headbanging r/w tories and the DUP mostly. As good a reason as any to hope that the EU does not budge one inch on the issue.


----------



## chilango (Jan 29, 2019)

I'm beginning to wonder if May might scrape a "victory" of sorts this evening...


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> They dont give a shit about the people who live there - its cos the EU wont agree a deal without the a guarantee of an open border between Eire and N.Ireland. I think this may have been mentioned occasionally  over the past 18 months.




What they are saying is they won't accept a deal unless the backstop is removed. That's what I'm referring to. So why does the backstop matter at all to them? 
I know what it is...
I know it makes a massive difference to Ireland and the people living on the border areas. But the British government has a neck  saying they want the backstop removed ...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jan 29, 2019)

Because the only way that there can be a permanent open border between NI and the RoI is if there is a permanent customs union for  all of the UK (which the brexiteers wont accept) or a sea border in the Irish Sea (which is anathema to the DUP). The backstop effectively prevents a hard/"proper" brexit.


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 29, 2019)

Brexit: Border control could move to Europe

Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has told opposition leaders there is a “risk” border checks in a no-deal Brexit could be operated in France or the Netherlands as opposed to on the island of Ireland.

In a private meeting with party leaders yesterday evening, Mr Varadkar and his department secretary general John Callinan said the EU could move control of any needed border away from Ireland and onto the continent.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 29, 2019)

hot air baboon said:


> Brexit: Border control could move to Europe
> 
> Taoiseach Leo Varadkar has told opposition leaders there is a “risk” border checks in a no-deal Brexit could be operated in France or the Netherlands as opposed to on the island of Ireland.
> 
> In a private meeting with party leaders yesterday evening, Mr Varadkar and his department secretary general John Callinan said the EU could move control of any needed border away from Ireland and onto the continent.


Which would help how? Serious question and likes available for plausible answers.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Which posts and which posters?  It’s great to use these rhetorical flourishes, but if you can’t be specific, then you’re raging at either a) people who aren’t here or b) an imagined position you’re reading into what someone else is saying.
> 
> You’ve already jumped to the wrong conclusion about how kabbes voted in the referendum. Please try to understand that there are not just two polar positions at play here.



I purposefully didn’t call out names because I didn’t think it had value. However since you asked, it was primarily kabbes posts which labored the points of the Eu doesn’t give a shit about Ireland and this is just a tactic that had irritated me. To me personally there was a stink of the thick paddy to it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> I purposefully didn’t call out names because I didn’t think it had value. However since you asked, it was primarily kabbes posts which labored the points of the Eu doesn’t give a shit about Ireland and this is just a tactic that had irritated me.


And that will drive people into the ranks of the IRA. I see.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And that will drive people into the ranks of the IRA. I see.



It brings out the arm chair republican in a lot of Irish people who generally wouldn’t call themselves Republicans, yes. Such as the movie black 47 did.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Because the only way that there can be a permanent open border between NI and the RoI is if there is a permanent customs union for  all of the UK (which the brexiteers wont accept) or a sea border in the Irish Sea (which is anathema to the DUP). The backstop effectively prevents a hard/"proper" brexit.




There is a permanent open border now. So why not just leave it as is? 
They should just leave and let the NI assembly sort out the details when they start working again... 

I am obviously being facetious. 

To be honest.. I'd rather an Irish sea border than an on land border.  Fuck the DUP. The majority of the people in Ireland do not want a border. And the DUP needs to recognise that they're not representing the people living along the border at all. They are a sectarian bigoted group who want to be joined at the hip to Britain... they are blinkered and living in the past. Ireland and NI has moved on significantly. We want freedom of movement and goods and no border. The DUP views are not relevant except to a small group of radical sectarian full of hatred for things that are Irish.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> It brings out the arm chair republican in a lot of Irish people who generally wouldn’t call themselves Republicans, yes. Such as the movie black 47 did.


Why?


----------



## TruXta (Jan 29, 2019)

Are any of the amendments voted on tonight binding?


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Why?


Irish people are sensitive to the British trivializing things important to us.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Irish people are sensitive to the British trivializing things important to us.


Was kabbes doing that?

(Also, “the British”. Get over yourself).


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> I purposefully didn’t call out names because I didn’t think it had value. However since you asked, it was primarily kabbes posts which labored the points of the Eu doesn’t give a shit about Ireland and this is just a tactic that had irritated me. To me personally there was a stink of the thick paddy to it.


I think you've seriously misread or misunderstood what kabbes has said here.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> (Also, “the British”. Get over yourself).



The defense rests your honor.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> The defense rests your honor.


Seriously?


----------



## billbond (Jan 29, 2019)

Risk of No Deal Brexit increased after MPs reject Yvette Cooper's delay bid


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> I purposefully didn’t call out names because I didn’t think it had value. However since you asked, it was primarily kabbes posts which labored the points of the Eu doesn’t give a shit about Ireland and this is just a tactic that had irritated me. To me personally there was a stink of the thick paddy to it.



The EU doesn’t give a shit about Ireland though. It’s really not very long ago that they crucified our economy to bail out EU banks, remember? It’s using Ireland’s interest in avoiding a hard border to make things awkward for the Brits, to make a softer Brexit or no Brexit more likely and to demonstrate to other members that it’s better to be in the club than out. Crucially it is doing all that with Ireland rather than the real players carrying the bulk of the risk if it goes wrong.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

So the thread has descended to reductionist nonsense about what 'Irish people' are like and what 'British people' do to them now, has it...


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> The EU doesn’t give a shit about Ireland though. It’s really not very long ago that they crucified our economy to bail out EU banks, remember? It’s using Ireland’s interest in avoiding a hard border to make things awkward for the Brits, to make a softer Brexit or no Brexit more likely and to demonstrate to other members that it’s better to be in the club than out. Crucially it is doing all that within Ireland rather than the real players carrying the bulk of the risk if it goes wrong.



Correct as I’ve stated several times previously we are essentially money launderers. What had irritated me was conflating that with the view that really a border in the north is not important.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Seriously?



Yes.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 29, 2019)

Nigel Irritable said:


> That is total horseshit.
> 
> The EU has no reason to want to “trap” the UK into leaving Northern Ireland in a position where it permanently gains the benefits of EU membership without having to pay for those benefits. But Ireland has an entirely reasonable suspicion that if the British get what they want without having to guarantee no border permanently, that they will find themselves in negotiations with the British in a few years about the border where Britain no longer has any reason to make any compromise and Ireland no longer has any leverage to insist on one. That the British have tried so hard to get out of the guarantee they have already agreed to only reinforces that suspicion.
> 
> In short, if the Brits weren’t at least open to fucking Ireland on the border they wouldn’t be arguing so hard to keep open their ability to fuck Ireland on the border. When one party to negotiations is willing to risk the whole negotiations in order to preserve the right to fuck the other party at a later date, you can’t really be surprised when the the latter party hears “we are planning to fuck you at a later date”.



Exactly.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> So the thread has descended to reductionist nonsense about what 'Irish people' are like and what 'British people' do to them now, has it...


That’s what wading around in nationalism gets you.


----------



## agricola (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> So the thread has descended to reductionist nonsense about what 'Irish people' are like and what 'British people' do to them now, has it...



Who cares what those Q-Celts are like?  Prydein for the Prydeinish.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Are any of the amendments voted on tonight binding?


The Cooper one would have been, had it passed, I  think.

The two that have passed aren't.


----------



## TruXta (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> The Cooper one would have been, had it passed, I  think.
> 
> The two that have passed aren't.


Cheers.


----------



## andysays (Jan 29, 2019)

agricola said:


> Who cares what those Q-Celts are like?  Prydein for the Prydeinish.


I have no idea what any of that means


----------



## Wookey (Jan 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Might be a GE quite soon actually.



Really, how do you see that happening?




> Do you _really _believe that?



Honestly, no, it's wishful thinking, woulda, coulda, shouldabeens.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> I have no idea what any of that means


Gaels or Brythonnic Celts.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> I have no idea what any of that means



He’s advocating driving the Scots into the sea.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

Summary?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

On to the next act in this endless farce. May can now go back to the EU and say she has a vote in the commons indicating that she could get the deal through if it were a different deal. She also goes back with a vote in the commons telling her to rule out no deal. Ball's in her court - what does she offer in return for changing the backstop arrangement? If nothing, why would she get anything other than nothing in return, particularly as there is already a sign that the Commons will block no deal when push comes to shove.


----------



## xenon (Jan 29, 2019)

TruXta said:


> Are any of the amendments voted on tonight binding?



In what sense? Isn't it just stuff that should have been happening 2 years ago. i.e. govt and parliament coming to some form of consensus about what sort of deal they're looking for. Formalating a unified position to start negociating with the EU from.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> In what sense? Isn't it just stuff that should have been happening 2 years ago. i.e. govt and parliament coming to some form of consensus about what sort of deal they're looking for. Formalating a unified position to start negociating with the EU from.


I think consensus is a bit of a strong word - every single amendment tonight was won/lost on narrow majorities. But a deal that stands a hope of getting past parliament, yes. You'd have thought that would have been a sensible starting point. 

I would have thought the EU would now be digging in and insisting on major changes to May's red lines. They will know that there is a significant constituency in parliament for Norway-style exit or indeed no brexit at all. Why would they pander to the extremist wing of the Tory party and the DUP nutjobs? May has to pander to them. The EU doesn't.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Which would help how? Serious question and likes available for plausible answers.



Avoids having the border in a place with long standing political tensions, practically it’s effectively just moving the problem somewhere else. But it’s to a place where it’s less likely to cause/reignite  such tensions.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 29, 2019)

grit said:


> Avoids having the border in a place with long standing political tensions, practically it’s effectively just moving the problem somewhere else. But it’s to a place where it’s less likely to cause/reignite  such tensions.


Doesn't this just take all of Ireland out of frictionless trade?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Doesn't this just take all of Ireland out of frictionless trade?


No it transfers the friction to the France/Netherlands–Ireland border, I would think. Pretty rotten deal for RoI.


----------



## billbond (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think consensus is a bit of a strong word - every single amendment tonight was won/lost on narrow majorities. But a deal that stands a hope of getting past parliament, yes. You'd have thought that would have been a sensible starting point.
> 
> I would have thought the EU would now be digging in and insisting on major changes to May's red lines. They will know that there is a significant constituency in parliament for Norway-style exit or indeed no brexit at all. Why would they pander to the extremist wing of the Tory party and the DUP nutjobs? May has to pander to them. The EU doesn't.



Yeah remainers dont like narrow majority's do they, unless its swings their way


----------



## newbie (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think consensus is a bit of a strong word - every single amendment tonight was won/lost on narrow majorities.


not quite, there was 327 to 39 consensus that the SNP are irrelevant in this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

newbie said:


> not quite, there was 327 to 39 consensus that the SNP are irrelevant in this.


Ah ok. Missed that one.  All the later ones were close, although not as close as many were predicting.


----------



## Nigel Irritable (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it transfers the friction to the France/Netherlands–Ireland border, I would think. Pretty rotten deal for RoI.



Yes. It should make it clear to the intensely europhile Irish media that the EU doesn’t give a flying fuck about Ireland and is supporting Ireland on the border issue for its own reasons, but almost all Irish journalists are such EU cargo cultists that they won’t learn anything.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No it transfers the friction to the France/Netherlands–Ireland border, I would think. Pretty rotten deal for RoI.


In what way is this 'no'?


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> On to the next act in this endless farce. May can now go back to the EU and say she has a vote in the commons indicating that she could get the deal through if it were a different deal. She also goes back with a vote in the commons telling her to rule out no deal. Ball's in her court - what does she offer in return for changing the backstop arrangement? If nothing, why would she get anything other than nothing in return, particularly as there is already a sign that the Commons will block no deal when push comes to shove.


The EU have made and wrapped the shit sandwich they expect us to eat. They might add some lettuce or a slice of gas ripened tomato but remove the shit? Not at the moment. Be very interesting to see if their arse goes in the days and weeks to come.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> In what way is this 'no'?


It doesn't take Ireland out of frictionless trade. It imposes frictionful trade upon the whole of Ireland.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> On to the next act in this endless farce. May can now go back to the EU and say she has a vote in the commons indicating that she could get the deal through if it were a different deal. She also goes back with a vote in the commons telling her to rule out no deal. Ball's in her court - what does she offer in return for changing the backstop arrangement? If nothing, why would she get anything other than nothing in return, particularly as there is already a sign that the Commons will block no deal when push comes to shove.



Hasn't she already been told that the mythical 'different deal' is a non starter?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Hasn't she already been told that the mythical 'different deal' is a non starter?


Yep.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Hasn't she already been told that the mythical 'different deal' is a non starter?


Yes at 10:39 this morning by Barnier and again by Tusk about 40 mins ago.


----------



## TopCat (Jan 29, 2019)

I am finding a certain satisfaction (after watching what the EU et al did to the Greeks) in seeing their comfortable world getting a whole lot more pressured.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It doesn't take Ireland out of frictionless trade. It imposes frictionful trade upon the whole of Ireland.


It's been a long day and I'm probably being thick so perhaps ELI5 but how are these things different?


----------



## xenon (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think consensus is a bit of a strong word - every single amendment tonight was won/lost on narrow majorities. But a deal that stands a hope of getting past parliament, yes. You'd have thought that would have been a sensible starting point.
> 
> I would have thought the EU would now be digging in and insisting on major changes to May's red lines. They will know that there is a significant constituency in parliament for Norway-style exit or indeed no brexit at all. Why would they pander to the extremist wing of the Tory party and the DUP nutjobs? May has to pander to them. The EU doesn't.



I haven't been able to face catching up with the news yet. IS there anything substancial, with parliament's support the govt can go back to the EU with? 

<guesses another fortnight of this shit to come>


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's been a long day and I'm probably being thick so perhaps ELI5 but how are these things different?


Well taking the whole of Ireland out of frictionless trade (with EU/UK) would be what we have now, no? What you would have then is friction along the Irish border with the rest of the EU, rather than friction directly at the border with the UK. It would be imposing on RoI the very thing NI has been insisting must not be imposed on it - RoI gets a new frictionful border rather than NI. Why ? Cos ten nutjobs in the UK parliament have stumbled into a situation where they hold the balance of power? 

It's all theoretical anyway. No deal still isn't going to happen.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's been a long day and I'm probably being thick so perhaps ELI5 but how are these things different?



It's whay they call reframing. Same shit situation, new package courtesy of 'behavourial economics' style fudging.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> I haven't been able to face catching up with the news yet. IS there anything substancial, with parliament's support the govt can go back to the EU with?
> 
> <guesses another fortnight of this shit to come>


As far as I know, no. Simply one vote saying go back and change the deal and in theory we will then back it. No actual thing to offer other than 'I might be able to get this different deal through'. I can't see the EU doing anything other than what it has said it will do in response to that. May has to actually offer something different for a different deal, and the EU must be betting that the UK will blink first when it comes to no deal.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> I haven't been able to face catching up with the news yet. IS there anything substancial, with parliament's support the govt can go back to the EU with?
> 
> <guesses another fortnight of this shit to come>



No.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As far as I know, no. Simply one vote saying go back and change the deal and in theory we will then back it. No actual thing to offer other than 'I might be able to get this different deal through'. I can't see the EU doing anything other than what it has said it will do in response to that. May has to actually offer something different for a different deal, and the EU must be betting that the UK will blink first when it comes to no deal.


Why would the supra-state offer any concessions? They now have concrete evidence that Parliament will not accept ‘No-Deal’ and that increasing numbers of PLP will back the only other alternative, the withdrawal agreement. It’s in the bag for Brussels.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Why would the supra-state offer any concessions? They now have concrete evidence that Parliament will not accept ‘No-Deal’ and that increasing numbers of PLP will back the only other alternative, the withdrawal agreement. It’s in the bag for Brussels.


It's still only narrow evidence, but yes I would expect the opposition to no deal to only grow from this point onwards, particularly two weeks from now when May returns empty-handed. And surely the EU expect that as well.


----------



## xenon (Jan 29, 2019)

How will parliament not except no deal. Is there a mechanism they've agreed on to proactively tstop it. 

I know, I'm repeating myself. No deal is the default. Theyn've not been able to rule it out, how they gonna stop it at the last minute. Panic voting? That always works well.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> How will parliament not except no deal. Is there a mechanism they've agreed on to proactively tstop it.
> 
> I know, I'm repeating myself. No deal is the default. Theyn've not been able to rule it out, how they gonna stop it at the last minute. Panic voting? That always works well.


I believe formally, the govt presents a bill to withdraw A50, and parliament votes on it. They can do this right up to 11pm on the day of brexit itself, so there could be some panic voting potentially. In terms of non-government actors forcing the issue, I'm not entirely clear on how that mechanism works, but new motions are brought forward, I guess, which I think is at the speaker's discretion, but we all know that he would certainly allow it.  

If we reach that point, I would expect the government already to have completely fallen apart, tbh.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> How will parliament not except no deal. Is there a mechanism they've agreed on to proactively tstop it.
> 
> I know, I'm repeating myself. No deal is the default. Theyn've not been able to rule it out, how they gonna stop it at the last minute. Panic voting? That always works well.


They’ll stop it by accepting the withdrawal agreement & the PLP will be riven...why’d yah think Corbyn looks so pissed off?


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I believe formally, the govt presents a bill to withdraw A50, and parliament votes on it. They can do this right up to 11pm on the day of brexit itself, so there could be some panic voting potentially. In terms of non-government actors forcing the issue, I'm not entirely clear on how that mechanism works, but new motions are brought forward, I guess, which I think is at the speaker's discretion, but we all know that he would certainly allow it.
> 
> If we reach that point, I would expect the government already to have completely fallen apart, tbh.


 Agreed, the UK “blinking” in the negotiations is withdrawal of A50.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well taking the whole of Ireland out of frictionless trade (with EU/UK) would be what we have now, no?


No, assuming now means pre-Brexit. It is frictionless. The rest of it (apart from the prospect of no deal) is correct but has bigger problems than outlined: RoI retains full EU membership but sacrifices or is denied one of its core benefits, _and_ probably creates new precedent by forming an exceptional one-nation trade deal with a non-bloc country, all of which precipitates 'well if they can do that' fragmentation possibilities for the EU.


----------



## grit (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> probably creates new precedent by forming an exceptional one-nation trade deal with a non-bloc country, all of which precipitates 'well if they can do that' fragmentation possibilities for the EU.



This is why I feel moving the border to nl/France is unlikely . As you correctly point out a one nation trade deal if allowed throws the whole EU concept out the window. In some ways it feels as if this alone could be bigger than uk leaving.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 29, 2019)

mauvais said:


> No, assuming now means pre-Brexit. It is frictionless. The rest of it (apart from the prospect of no deal) is correct but has bigger problems than outlined: RoI retains full EU membership but sacrifices one of its core benefits, _and_ probably creates new precedent by forming an exceptional one-nation trade deal with a non-bloc country, all of which precipitates 'well if they can do that' fragmentation possibilities for the EU.


Yes, that's what I meant, that Ireland with frictionless trade with EU/UK is what we have now but wouldn't be what Ireland would have then. Your second point is an interesting one that hadn't occurred to me. Like most post-brexit scenarios, it remains worse for all parties concerned than what we have now.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

Well then, May has a mandate to go and have a pointless discussion with the EU which, I imagine, will lead to MPs voting for some variation on what we have now as a deal. Ho hum. But Corbyn? His achievements are more modest.


----------



## Humberto (Jan 30, 2019)

The EU taking the attitude that you are no longer members and can't expect any preferential treatment/courtesy is wrong in my opinion. Almost peevish. I'm told the UK has for a long time been a net contributor for example. Now you are walking away we will spoil your shit? Send you off with a bad sentiment? Almost like they are insulted.

Its a stark example of the reality; the 'suck up or be kicked down' people are sick of. I know people will rightly say 'this isn't a Lexit', but it is nonetheless true that our society is obscene in it's inequality. In it's sidelining of the downtrodden. I don't respect the EU institution; I do respect the people of the countries they are conning. Stay in and reform? Or outgrow it? Cast it off?

Politics in this country doesn't end at the EU. Nor is it indentured to a frankly rotten and ludicrous level of self serving bureaucracy. Its this idea that we must depend upon and be wedded to institutions that don't do anything for us that is a problem. Yes, we need agreements, and yes co-operation benefits us all and should be held onto, but we don't serve them. They don't get to cream off our labour whilst we, the people, get attacked by would be political masters. People are literally going hungry, and it really needn't be that way.

It doesn't look good anyway. I don't know what the next 5 years will bring, but they aren't all light. Our brethren are literally dying in their thousands (and I'm not sure where to lay the blame exactly, others can discuss it) trying to cross from disaster zones at the border. 'Rescuing them will only encourage them', anyone? That is a very serious discussion. Blood is dripping off somebody's hands and I make no apology for saying so.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

Humberto said:


> The EU taking the attitude that you are no longer members and can't expect any preferential treatment/courtesy is wrong in my opinion. Almost peevish. I'm told the UK has for a long time been a net contributor for example. Now you are walking away we will spoil your shit? Send you off with a bad sentiment? Almost like they are insulted.
> 
> Its a stark example of the reality; the 'suck up or be kicked down' people are sick of.



What do you want the EU to actually do, then? What courtesy do you want extended?

What is it that we have to 'suck up' that isn't an inevitable consequence of our decision to leave, and how exactly are we being 'kicked down'?

If anyone wants an example of 'whiny British exceptionalism' then I'd suggest it might be found in the post quoted above.

Really, the idea that you leave something and then complain that you no longer get preferential treatment...


----------



## Humberto (Jan 30, 2019)

Your post is shit. So I can't be arsed trying to reply to it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I believe formally, the govt presents a bill to withdraw A50, and parliament votes on it. They can do this right up to 11pm on the day of brexit itself, so there could be some panic voting potentially. In terms of non-government actors forcing the issue, I'm not entirely clear on how that mechanism works, but new motions are brought forward, I guess, which I think is at the speaker's discretion, but we all know that he would certainly allow it.
> 
> If we reach that point, I would expect the government already to have completely fallen apart, tbh.



Would be filibustered by Moggites and we crash out, then the real work of sorting out the FTA starts, this can’t happen until we’re out though.

Is my guess.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Would be filibustered by Moggites and we crash out,


Can't be done in our system, because the speaker is able to limit the length of speeches.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Can't be done in our system, because the speaker is able to limit the length of speeches.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Can't be done in our system, because the speaker is able to limit the length of speeches.


Then why won't he silence theresa may every time she rises to speak?


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Then why won't he silence theresa may every time she rises to speak?


No system is perfect.


----------



## kebabking (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Can't be done in our system, because the speaker is able to limit the length of speeches.



And yet it happens.


----------



## prunus (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Then why won't he silence theresa may every time she rises to speak?



For the lulz


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2019)

kebabking said:


> And yet it happens.


Only on private members bills.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Can't be done in our system, because the speaker is able to limit the length of speeches.



I can think of a few bills talked to death in recent years. The upskirting one, the 'homes fit for human habitation' one. It's one of many areas where the speaker has too much authority. He could tell the filibusterer (?) to STFU but often doesn't.


----------



## 03gills (Jan 30, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Our brethren are literally dying in their thousands (*and I'm not sure where to lay the blame exactly*, others can discuss it)



Erm, 18 years of Conservative government? Followed by 13 years of Conservative lite government? Followed by a further 9 years of Conservative government?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

03gills said:


> Erm, 18 years of Conservative government? Followed by 13 years of Conservative lite government? Followed by a further 9 years of Conservative government?


the lib dems must shoulder their share of the blame.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can think of a few bills talked to death in recent years. The upskirting one, the 'homes fit for human habitation' one. It's one of many areas where the speaker has too much authority. He could tell the filibusterer (?) to STFU but often doesn't.


In this case, we can be very confident that he will, though. It's clear that Bercow will help anyone trying to stop no deal in any way he can.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can think of a few bills talked to death in recent years. The upskirting one, the 'homes fit for human habitation' one. It's one of many areas where the speaker has too much authority. He could tell the filibusterer (?) to STFU but often doesn't.


the upskirting one wasn't talked to death but killed by a shout of 'object'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What do you want the EU to actually do, then? What courtesy do you want extended?
> 
> What is it that we have to 'suck up' that isn't an inevitable consequence of our decision to leave, and how exactly are we being 'kicked down'?
> 
> ...



You know the EU's not a real thing right? It doesn't have an opinion, or rights. It's a nebulous accretion of competing interests, none of which is some magical force pulling in the direction of what is right or fair. The EU, insofar as it wants anything, wants to keep its own nest feathered for as long as possible and would cast the lot of us into penury tomorrow morning if the costs and benefits stacked up.

 I don't want to be the guy who keeps saying 'look at Greece' but well, look at Greece.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the upskirting one wasn't talked to death but killed by a shout of 'object'



Oh that's right. I still feel as though a swift speakerly STFU could have resolved that also.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh that's right. I still feel as though a swift speakerly STFU could have resolved that also.


the swift delivery of knee to groin might also have worked


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Our brethren are literally dying in their thousands (and I'm not sure where to lay the blame exactly, others can discuss it) trying to cross from disaster zones at the border. 'Rescuing them will only encourage them', anyone? That is a very serious discussion. Blood is dripping off somebody's hands and I make no apology for saying so.





03gills said:


> Erm, 18 years of Conservative government? Followed by 13 years of Conservative lite government? Followed by a further 9 years of Conservative government?



I believe the post before was referring to the thousands trapped just outside the EU who aren't allowed to enter because of EU laws, rather than specifically the thousands dying in the UK due to EU-mandated austerity policies (never voted on by the millions they affect) which are being facilitated by our own lovely blue, yellow and red tories via 'domestic' austerity policies we also have no choice over.


----------



## newbie (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can think of a few bills talked to death in recent years. The upskirting one, the 'homes fit for human habitation' one. It's one of many areas where the speaker has too much authority. He could tell the filibusterer (?) to STFU but often doesn't.


During a debate the other day he, Bercow, observed that people tend to complain about process when the outcome isn't to their liking.

There's a few hundred years of precedent to inform him as to how the speaker should behave but ultimately, as with the rest of the British constitution, it comes down to the balance of power at the time.  I've been wondering recently how this process would be if we had a written constitution, created by and for men in powdered wigs 200-odd years ago, and enforceable according to the explicitly politically appointed make-up of the supreme court.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> You know the EU's not a real thing right?



Oh right. What are we Brexiting from then?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> You know the EU's not a real thing right? It doesn't have an opinion, or rights. It's a nebulous accretion of competing interests, none of which is some magical force pulling in the direction of what is right or fair. The EU, insofar as it wants anything, wants to keep its own nest feathered for as long as possible and would cast the lot of us into penury tomorrow morning if the costs and benefits stacked up.
> 
> I don't want to be the guy who keeps saying 'look at Greece' but well, look at Greece.


I largely agree, although there is a pretty clear and codified commitment to the neoliberal project, a project that is very good at find the useful accommodations at any one time that keep its core ideas functioning as the “common sense” of the day.  That’s what the EU coalesces around. 

So, now that I’ve said that, people will be saying “so you want May’s plan, then”, or “so you want the ERG’s Singapore option, then”, or any number of the other things that I don’t want, from a hard border in Ireland, to  electronic tagging of Syrians.

But hey ho, that’s where we are these days.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> the thousands trapped just outside the EU who aren't allowed to enter because of EU laws,


They are trapped outside because EU member states don't want uncontrolled immigration and exactly the same would be the case if the EU didn't exist.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I largely agree, although there is a pretty clear and codified commitment to the neoliberal project, a project that is very good at find the useful accommodations at any one time that keep its core ideas functioning as the “common sense” of the day.  That’s what the EU coalesces around.
> 
> So, now that I’ve said that, people will be saying “so you want May’s plan, then”, or “so you want the ERG’s Singapore option, then”, or any number of the other things that I don’t want, from a hard border in Ireland, to  electronic tagging of Syrians.
> 
> But hey ho, that’s where we are these days.


yeh in the shit


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What are we Brexiting from then?


That would be a worthy inquiry, if I thought it would actually be followed through.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Oh right. What are we Brexiting from then?



As it stands, nothing. We can choose between remaining under a mildly rebranded EU-neoliberal sword of Damocles as per May's deal or letting the sword fall. Being away from the EU's influence is not now nor has it ever been on the table.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> They are trapped outside because EU member states don't want uncontrolled immigration and exactly the same would be the case if the EU didn't exist.



So with no EU you'd still have personnel from all over Europe patrolling the Italian and Spanish borders in the Mediterranean?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

newbie said:


> During a debate the other day he, Bercow, observed that people tend to complain about process when the outcome isn't to their liking.
> 
> There's a few hundred years of precedent to inform him as to how the speaker should behave but ultimately, as with the rest of the British constitution, it comes down to the balance of power at the time.  I've been wondering recently how this process would be if we had a written constitution, created by and for men in powdered wigs 200-odd years ago, and enforceable according to the explicitly politically appointed make-up of the supreme court.


Yes, it's been interesting to watch this aspect play out. With a reasonable majority, a government in the UK system has huge, virtually untrammelled power - just look at how Thatcher pissed all over the other democratic institutions as she liked. But with a minority government, parliament comes to the fore and people like the speaker come to wield a great deal of power. In the absence of either a written constitution or a legitimate head of state, it becomes quite the free-for-all. Effectively the speaker is taking the role of head of state in various regards at the moment.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So with no EU you'd still have personnel from all over Europe patrolling the Italian and Spanish borders in the Mediterranean?


You'd still have personnel patrolling the borders, and I imagine they'd be more likely to be from the respective countries. What's the significance of where the personnel come from?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You'd still have personnel patrolling the borders, and I imagine they'd be more likely to be from the respective countries. What's the significance of where the personnel come from?



No, nothing. Carry on.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

Been out of the thread for a little while...so...where are we now?

The ERG have engineered a pointless diversion for May (doomed to fail) which, importantly, takes them 2 weeks closer to their goal of 'No-Deal' inevitability?
On the 14th, when May admits she has failed again, most(?) of the ERG will vote against.
May will then need between 20 - 50 (?) additional PLP members to rebel along with the 15 existing RW Labour 'Leave' core on show yesterday to get Agreement 1 passed.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> As it stands, nothing. We can choose between remaining under a mildly rebranded EU-neoliberal sword of Damocles as per May's deal or letting the sword fall. Being away from the EU's influence is not now nor has it ever been on the table.


Ok. The questions I asked, which you initially responded to, were to do with what the EU is actually supposed to do at this point in the proceedings. Like Humberto, it doesn't sound like you've got anything to say on that front. As demonstrated by Parliament, it's easy to talk about what you don't like, and hard to make real-world suggestions as to how to get towards something that you do want. We're the nation of hand-wavers.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You'd still have personnel patrolling the borders, and I imagine they'd be more likely to be from the respective countries. What's the significance of where the personnel come from?


Perfect example of the complete and utter non-thinking there is on this topic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ok. The questions I asked, which you initially responded to, were to do with what the EU is actually supposed to do at this point in the proceedings. Like Humberto, it doesn't sound like you've got anything to say on that front. As demonstrated by Parliament, it's easy to talk about what you don't like, and hard to make real-world suggestions as to how to get towards something that you do want. We're the nation of hand-wavers.


if you had your way we'd be a nation of bathroom-door lockers.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Perfect example of the complete and utter non-thinking there is on this topic.


Go ahead and explicate your superior thinking on this topic in a way I and other members of the non-thinking masses can understand, then.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Been out of the thread for a little while...so...where are we now?
> 
> The ERG have engineered a pointless diversion for May (doomed to fail) which, importantly, takes them 2 weeks closer to their goal of 'No-Deal' inevitability?
> On the 14th, when May admits she has failed again, most(?) of the ERG will vote against.
> May will then need between 20 - 50 (?) additional PLP members to rebel along with the 15 existing *RW* Labour 'Leave' core on show yesterday to get Agreement 1 passed.



RW?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

sunnysidedown said:


> RW?


rebel warrior or right wing


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Really, how do you see that happening?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*shrug* Tories are supposedly putting themselves on an election footing. How do you see there not being an election this year? Were there a movement in the streets demanding one - which could develop - there could be one very soon. 

When I asked if you were serious, I meant this: 



Wookey said:


> Imagine if Corbyn had continued being pro-Europe after the Referendum, jumped on the illegality of the vote, the overspend by Leave, the cack-handed negotiation, Teresa May handed all that to him on a plate - and 48% and rising of the referendum voters would have had someone to rally behind. He could have saved the country but he didn't think big enough.
> 
> He's fucked it up as bad as she has.



Do you think the "48% and rising" as you term them would have rallied behind Corbyn? Really? A lot of that 48% are Tories, Nats and liberals.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> rebel warrior or right wing


was thinking right-wing, as in happy to see Corbyn further embarrassed/diminished


----------



## Ax^ (Jan 30, 2019)

Humberto said:


> The EU taking the attitude that you are no longer members and can't expect any preferential treatment/courtesy is wrong in my opinion. Almost peevish. I'm told the UK has for a long time been a net contributor for example. Now you are walking away we will spoil your shit? Send you off with a bad sentiment? Almost like they are insulted.
> 
> Its a stark example of the reality; the 'suck up or be kicked down' people are sick of. I know people will rightly say 'this isn't a Lexit', but it is nonetheless true that our society is obscene in it's inequality. In it's sidelining of the downtrodden. I don't respect the EU institution; I do respect the people of the countries they are conning. Stay in and reform? Or outgrow it? Cast it off?
> 
> ...



so post Brexit is Britian going to except refugees 

sorry  remember a kick off about Syrian refugees


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Go ahead and explicate your superior thinking on this topic in a way I and other members of the non-thinking masses can understand, then.


OK. You have just replied “what does it matter where the personnel patrolling the borders come from?” (I paraphrase, but I think fairly) to the point initially raised (I think) by @mojo pixie about “Fortress Europe”.  If that is meant as an argument for staying in the EU (which, correct me if I’m wrong, but I think you’d still favour trying to achieve), then it is a poor one.

But more specifically, on the issue in hand: Currently EU members and supporters talk of “freedom of movement”, but this is for (mainly white) Europeans, not (mainly non white) non Europeans. This has to be acknowledged. It’s not pretty and it’s not pleasant. If the only defence is “other countries not in supra national organisations also have shit attitudes”, that is not a compelling defence.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> was thinking right-wing, as in happy to see Corbyn further embarrassed/diminished



Can't say I know much about Labour or it's MPs but I wouldn't say the following were right wing. Fuck knows about the others.

Ronnie Campbell
Dennis Skinner
Stephen Hepburn


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> They are trapped outside because EU member states don't want uncontrolled immigration and exactly the same would be the case if the EU didn't exist.



Letting in refugees isn't "uncontrolled immigration" lol, even using that term in this context shows how the propaganda works.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

sunnysidedown said:


> Can't say I know much about Labour or it's MPs but I wouldn't say the following were right wing. Fuck knows about the others.
> 
> Ronnie Campbell
> Dennis Skinner
> Stephen Hepburn


List of PLP members who 'rebelled' last night:
Ian Austin (Dudley North), 
Kevin Barron (Rother Valley), 
Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley), 
Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire), 
Jim Fitzpatrick (Poplar and Limehouse), 
Caroline Flint (Don Valley), 
Roger Godsiff (Birmingham, Hall Green), 
Stephen Hepburn (Jarrow), 
Kate Hoey (Vauxhall), 
John Mann (Bassetlaw), 
Dennis Skinner (Bolsover), 
Laura Smith (Crewe and Nantwich), 
Gareth Snell (Stoke-on-Trent Central), 
Graham Stringer (Blackley and Broughton).


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ok. The questions I asked, which you initially responded to, were to do with what the EU is actually supposed to do at this point in the proceedings.



What someone is 'supposed to do' depends entirely on their aims and principles. If they were dedicated to democracy above all, they would realise that May's imcompetence is not something for which the whole UK should be punished. They would present the British _public_ with a clear range of options and refuse to allow May and the tories to do all this behind closed doors.

This is a fantasy of course, because they don't give a tinker's toss about democracy, save as a useful coat of polish on the steaming turd of neoliberalism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> List of PLP members who 'rebelled' last night:
> [...]
> Dennis Skinner (Bolsover),
> Laura Smith (Crewe and Nantwich),
> ...


et tu dennis, thought jeremy corbyn


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I can think of a few bills talked to death in recent years. The upskirting one, the 'homes fit for human habitation' one. It's one of many areas where the speaker has too much authority. He could tell the filibusterer (?) to STFU but often doesn't.



Aye, but Bercow is pro-Upskirting, and anti-Brexit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye, but Bercow is pro-Upskirting, and anti-Brexit.



The quintessential modern liberal then.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> You know the EU's not a real thing right? It doesn't have an opinion, or rights. It's a nebulous accretion of competing interests, none of which is some magical force pulling in the direction of what is right or fair. The EU, insofar as it wants anything, wants to keep its own nest feathered for as long as possible and would cast the lot of us into penury tomorrow morning if the costs and benefits stacked up.
> 
> I don't want to be the guy who keeps saying 'look at Greece' but well, look at Greece.



If the EU were a living, breathing creature, it would experience only two emotions or instincts that we would understand. firstly, it would be perpetually hungry and feed constantly on a diet of new markets in order to surive. Secondly it would occasionally feel an uncomfortable irritation and begin gnawing at the flesh of its own limbs. No matter; provided the supply of new markets remains contant, its limbs will regenerate, and it does not consider its hunger or its irritation in any real depth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If the EU were a living, breathing creature, it would experience only two emotions or instincts that we would understand. firstly, it would be perpetually hungry and feed constantly on a diet of new markets in order to surive. Secondly it would occasionally feel an uncomfortable irritation and begin gnawing at the flesh of its own limbs. No matter; provided the supply of new markets remains contant, its limbs will regenerate, and it does not consider its hunger or its irritation in any real depth.


if it were a living organism, what would it excrete?


----------



## klang (Jan 30, 2019)

Greece.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 30, 2019)

I guess we've got another 2 weeks of just repeating conversations we've already had whilst May runs the clock down some more, so in that spirit........


danny la rouge said:


> supporters talk of “freedom of movement”, but this is for (mainly white) Europeans, not (mainly non white) non Europeans. This has to be acknowledged. It’s not pretty and it’s not pleasant. If the only defence is “other countries not in supra national organisations also have shit attitudes”, that is not a compelling defence.


I've never understand the line of reasoning that says freedom of movement only applies between countries within the union and not to the whole world, so lets have Brexit and have no freedom of movement at all, as if that is an improvement. 
(not sure if thats your position Danny, cant work out what you and teuchter are talking about, so might well be out of context)

 As someone born behind the iron curtain I can vouche for the profound effect that being able to cross borders on the continent unchecked has had across many generations of people living in europe. I think people on this island of ours have a very different experience - Brits always have a border check arriving or leaving (apart from a couple of cases for pedants to point out), even as EU members. I don't like to lean on psychogeographic arguments on Brexit, but the island experience is a thing.

Id be a tragedy to see a return of strong european borders. However much the EU as an unaccountable political superstate needs dismantling it would be a step backward to see that freedom of movement taken away with it.

Broadening out freedom of movement across the world requires greater global equality, and thats the prize and goal


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I've never understand the line of reasoning that says freedom of movement only applies between countries within the union and not to the whole world, so lets have Brexit and have no freedom of movement at all, as if that is an improvement.
> (not sure if thats your position Danny,


It isn't.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Been out of the thread for a little while...so...where are we now?
> 
> The ERG have engineered a pointless diversion for May (doomed to fail) which, importantly, takes them 2 weeks closer to their goal of 'No-Deal' inevitability?
> On the 14th, when May admits she has failed again, most(?) of the ERG will vote against.
> May will then need between 20 - 50 (?) additional PLP members to rebel along with the 15 existing RW Labour 'Leave' core on show yesterday to get Agreement 1 passed.


I've no idea what's going to happen, but I wonder if last night ties May to seeking a majority made up of her own party and the dup? Obvious as that sounds, I mean that it now rules out the 11th hour 59th minute option of her trimming further in Labour's direction and seeking a grand coalition of most lab MPs, 50% + of the Tories. Of course as you say, the EU most likely won't allow her to trim in the direction of the _erg_, so... fuck knows.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I've no idea what's going to happen, but I wonder if last night ties May to seeking a majority made up of her own party and the dup? Obvious as that sounds, I mean that it now rules out the 11th hour 59th minute option of her trimming further in Labour's direction and seeking a grand coalition of most lab MPs, 50% + of the Tories. Of course as you say, the EU most likely won't allow her to trim in the direction of the _erg_, so... fuck knows.


Yes, that's my reading of it. Last night dragged May to the right for the next two weeks at least. When that fails, as you say we're back to fuck knows territory. Last night was also an indication that parliament will block no deal if it comes to that. Will May survive February? I've written her off a few times and been proven wrong, but it's becoming hard to see how she carries on once this latest wheeze fails.


----------



## andysays (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You'd still have personnel patrolling the borders, and I imagine they'd be more likely to be from the respective countries. What's the significance of where the personnel come from?


Maybe you could suggest this as a way of sorting out the border between NI and Eire - EU border guards rather than the hated Brits


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> OK. You have just replied “what does it matter where the personnel patrolling the borders come from?” (I paraphrase, but I think fairly) to the point initially raised (I think) by @mojo pixie about “Fortress Europe”.  If that is meant as an argument for staying in the EU (which, correct me if I’m wrong, but I think you’d still favour trying to achieve), then it is a poor one.
> 
> But more specifically, on the issue in hand: Currently EU members and supporters talk of “freedom of movement”, but this is for (mainly white) Europeans, not (mainly non white) non Europeans. This has to be acknowledged. It’s not pretty and it’s not pleasant. If the only defence is “other countries not in supra national organisations also have shit attitudes”, that is not a compelling defence.



You've not explained what the relevance is of where the border personnel came from, which, yes is what my question was, the one you said was a perfect demonstration of non-thinking.

Yes, freedom of movement means freedom of movement for EU citizens within the EU, and not for non-Europeans. I acknowledge that. Maybe it's not pretty and not pleasant, but I do not believe the situation would be more pretty or pleasant if none of us were in the EU. It's also something that individual nations are currently able to determine for themselves. Your starting point is that I have to defend the status quo: why? My argument is simply that leaving the EU, or the EU not existing, would not make things any better, and therefore I don't accept it as an argument for leaving.

Anyway, that's all a diversion from what I invited you to explain, and which you haven't.


----------



## CRI (Jan 30, 2019)




----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> On to the next act in this endless farce. May can now go back to the EU and say she has a vote in the commons indicating that she could get the deal through if it were a different deal. She also goes back with a vote in the commons telling her to rule out no deal. Ball's in her court - what does she offer in return for changing the backstop arrangement? If nothing, why would she get anything other than nothing in return, particularly as there is already a sign that the Commons will block no deal when push comes to shove.



The EU have stated categorically that there is no more negotiation. The 'deal' is on the table, we take it or leave it.

The Commons have now voted for further negotiation (tin ear or what?), but also that we should not leave without a 'deal'.

It is the irresistible force versus the immovable object. Unless the EU blink (very unlikely), then we are out without a 'deal'.

Also, although an amendment was accepted re the NI/Eire border, there is no detail of what is being proposed.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> Maybe you could suggest this as a way of sorting out the border between NI and Eire - EU border guards rather than the hated Brits


The Guards and Irish custom officials are not popular either. Most custom officials are from counties far away from the border where their families can't be victimised for their behaviour.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Letting in refugees isn't "uncontrolled immigration" lol, even using that term in this context shows how the propaganda works.


Member states don't want uncontrolled immigration.
Member states don't want to accept large numbers of refugees.
This is reflected in what the EU as a whole does. 
Does the EU inflict a 'maximum' quota of refugees on member states? No, they tried to inflict a mimimum quota, and many states defied it.


----------



## rekil (Jan 30, 2019)

I assume you (cri) help spam twitter and fb with this shit so why oh why are you compelled to do it here as well.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You've not explained what the relevance is of where the border personnel came from, which, yes is what my question was, the one you said was a perfect demonstration of non-thinking.


You are incorrect.  It was the entirety of your post and the context in which it was made it that I was referring to as an example of non thinking.

If you want to take that out of context and make that about the free-floating question "what is the relevance of where the border personnel came from?", the answer is: that depends on why one wants to know.  It may be relevant in some circumstances.  But as a general rule, shit border policies are shit border policies, and shit border policing is shit border policing, and people drowning in the Med don't care at the moment of their last breath which flag is responsible.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, that's my reading of it. Last night dragged May to the right for the next two weeks at least. When that fails, as you say we're back to fuck knows territory. Last night was also an indication that parliament will block no deal if it comes to that. Will May survive February? I've written her off a few times and been proven wrong, but it's becoming hard to see how she carries on once this latest wheeze fails.


Agreed, except I'm not sure about May not surviving. It's a bit like Brexit itself, how does anything get decided >>> how does she work out that the latest fuck up is her actual moment to leave (as the party can't kick her out and probably doesn't want the soul draining morass of a leadership contest). She'll resign or simply evaporate at some point, but why now as opposed to … some other time? Having said all that, it's pmqs today and I be she's looking a bit smug today. So, today is not a good day for her to die.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> What someone is 'supposed to do' depends entirely on their aims and principles. If they were dedicated to democracy above all, they would realise that May's imcompetence is not something for which the whole UK should be punished. They would present the British _public_ with a clear range of options and refuse to allow May and the tories to do all this behind closed doors.
> 
> This is a fantasy of course, because they don't give a tinker's toss about democracy, save as a useful coat of polish on the steaming turd of neoliberalism.


Well, that's an interesting suggestion: in the context of a vote to leave the EU, and escape from its control and influence, you think the EU should intervene more directly in the UK's decision making process.

But I don't think there's a lack of clarity from the EU on what the options are. The lack of clarity comes from the UK side.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Sasaferrato said:


> It is the resistible farce versus the immovable object. Unless the EU blink (very unlikely), then we are out without a 'deal'.


c4u


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

copliker said:


> I assume you (cri) help spam twitter and fb with this shit so why oh why are you compelled to do it here as well.


People posting, without comment, a video nobody is going to watch.  Terrific contribution to the thread.  Love it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> What someone is 'supposed to do' depends entirely on their aims and principles. If they were dedicated to democracy above all, they would realise that May's imcompetence is not something for which the whole UK should be punished. They would present the British _public_ with a clear range of options and refuse to allow May and the tories to do all this behind closed doors.
> 
> This is a fantasy of course, because they don't give a tinker's toss about democracy, save as a useful coat of polish on the steaming turd of neoliberalism.


to be fair no one in government gives a tinker's cuss about democracy. if they did you wouldn't have seen things like the withdrawal of esa or the great increase in tuition fees (or indeed the introduction of tuition fees). doesn't matter if they're in local, national or even supra-national government, democracy's only invoked to gain support for something or to put someone else down.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Agreed, except I'm not sure about May not surviving. It's a bit like Brexit itself, how does anything get decided >>> how does she work out that the latest fuck up is her actual moment to leave (as the party can't kick her out and probably doesn't want the soul draining morass of a leadership contest). She'll resign or simply evaporate at some point, but why now as opposed to … some other time? Having said all that, it's pmqs today and I be she's looking a bit smug today. So, today is not a good day for her to die.


At some point if we get within, say, one month of the deadline and no deal still hasn't been formally taken off the table, ministers are likely to start resigning. As I said above, I can't see this government reaching the deadline day without a decision having been made without falling apart first. Plenty in govt will not want to be associated with no deal.


----------



## andysays (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> People posting, without comment, a video nobody is going to watch.  Terrific contribution to the thread.  Love it.


It could be worse - it could actually include one of CRI's sneery comments accusing people of racism or whatever...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Well, that's an interesting suggestion: in the context of a vote to leave the EU, and escape from its control and influence, you think the EU should intervene more directly in the UK's decision making process.



If I meant that I'd have fucking said it wouldn't I? Presenting a range of options would not be 'interfering in our decision making process'. The exact oposite if anything, it would be a vital precondition of having a valid decision making process in the first place.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> to be fair no one in government gives a tinker's cuss about democracy. if they did you wouldn't have seen things like the withdrawal of esa or the great increase in tuition fees (or indeed the introduction of tuition fees). doesn't matter if they're in local, national or even supra-national government, democracy's only invoked to gain support for something or to put someone else down.



And the democratic EU was happy to have us on board regardless. Same as it's happy to have Orban, Salvini etc in the big tent.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Member states don't want uncontrolled immigration.
> Member states don't want to accept large numbers of refugees.
> This is reflected in what the EU as a whole does.
> Does the EU inflict a 'maximum' quota of refugees on member states? No, they tried to inflict a mimimum quota, and many states defied it.



Well I don't know, maybe there should be no ''EU Policy'' on refugees. Maybe it should simply be up to countries to decide for themselves. The EU is like those states' big brother (no pun intended, but on the other hand...) that every nation can ultimately point to and say ''Well _they _won't like it'' .. the EU then says, ''We support whatever individual states decide'' and nobody is responsible for the misery but the refugees themselves, for putting themselves where they are. Neoliberal dreamcometrue.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> People posting, without comment, a video nobody is going to watch.  Terrific contribution to the thread.  Love it.


I skipped straight past the video without even thinking about it. But now someone is telling me I am not going to watch it, I'm feeling an itching compulsion to scroll back up. This is exactly how we got here, isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I skipped straight past the video without even thinking about it. But now someone is telling me I am not going to watch it, I'm feeling an itching compulsion to scroll back up. This is exactly how we got here, isn't it?


by wanting to go back in time? quite possibly


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> People posting, without comment, a video nobody is going to watch.  Terrific contribution to the thread.  Love it.


I thought it was quite funny. It was a welcome interlude from PMQ's


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> At some point if we get within, say, one month of the deadline and no deal still hasn't been formally taken off the table, ministers are likely to start resigning. As I said above, I can't see this government reaching the deadline day without a decision having been made without falling apart first. Plenty in govt will not want to be associated with no deal.


To be honest, I'm (genuinely) unsure what the critical mass of resignations is for May to feel the games is up. She's trying to push a car over a line that's a mile uphill and she doesn't care how many times it hits a wall or runs someone over (herself) in the process. She's the Brian Harvey of British politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, I'm (genuinely) unsure what the critical mass of resignations is for May to feel the games is up. She's trying to push a car over a line that's a mile uphill and she doesn't care how many times it hits a wall or runs someone over (herself) in the process. She's the Brian Harvey of British politics.


she's the eddie the eagle of british politics.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You are incorrect.  It was the entirety of your post and the context it was made it that I was referring to as an example of non thinking.
> 
> If you want to take that out of context and make that about the free-floating question "what is the relevance of where the border personnel came from?", the answer is: that depends on why one wants to know.  It may be relevant in some circumstances.  But as a general rule, shit border policies are shit border policies, and shit border policing is shit border policing, and people drowning in the Med don't care at the moment of their last breath which flag is responsible.



I can see I'll never get a straight answer - so, I give up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I can see I'll never get a straight answer - so, I give up.


on yer way then


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

Raheem said:


> But now someone is telling me I am not going to watch it, I'm feeling an itching compulsion to scroll back up. This is exactly how we got here, isn't it?


No. I thought we got where we are because two sides I don’t trust and neither of whom have my interests at heart have negotiated a shot draft shit deal which is basically a new bunch of ways to fuck me over and which Parliament is having a ridiculous pretend fight over, knowing full well that the end product will differ from it in no appreciable way.

I thought that was it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No. I thought we got where we are because two sides I don’t trust and neither of whom have my interests at heart have negotiated a shot draft shit deal which is basically a new bunch of ways to fuck me over and which Parliament is having a ridiculous pretend fight over, knowing full well that the end product will differ from it in no appreciable way.
> 
> I thought that was it.



You missed out the bit where it's all your fault.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, I'm (genuinely) unsure what the critical mass of resignations is for May to feel the games is up. She's trying to push a car over a line that's a mile uphill and she doesn't care how many times it hits a wall or runs someone over (herself) in the process. She's the Brian Harvey of British politics.


Well I could name one that would surely sink her - Hammond.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I can see I'll never get a straight answer - so, I give up.


I thought I had.

What is your question, in clear, concise and precise terms?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jan 30, 2019)

Saw this on twitter last night. 

Not sure what to make of it but it looks about right...


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> You missed out the bit where it's all your fault.


Ah, OK. I’m trying to ditch my Catholic upbringing, but fair play: I’m probably to blame.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Saw this on twitter last night.
> 
> Not sure what to make of it but it looks about right...
> 
> View attachment 160373



Loving 'chaos' at the bottom left there


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Saw this on twitter last night.
> 
> Not sure what to make of it but it looks about right...
> 
> View attachment 160373


Looks about right except for one bit. May refuses changes to red lines and refuses backstop. In such an instance, there would be no deal for MPs to vote on. Did it mean to say 'and accepts backstop'?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if it were a living organism, what would it excrete?



De-industrialisation.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well I could name one that would surely sink her - Hammond.



Would it though...? 

Who cares about Hammond really. If Hammond was giving a resignation speech right now live on the Beeb I'd probably change channel or fall asleep.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would it though...?
> 
> Who cares about Hammond really. If Hammond was giving a resignation speech right now live on the Beeb I'd probably change channel or fall asleep.


I know what you mean, and I know these are not normal times, but the CoE is the de facto number 2. If he were to resign over no deal, who could she replace him with? Fox????


----------



## hot air baboon (Jan 30, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I know what you mean, and I know these are not normal times, but the CoE is the de facto number 2. If he were to resign over no deal, who could she replace him with? Fox????





The obvious choice, but it doesn't really matter does it. 

They can't replace May and they won't risk Corbyn, unless they're forced to. A sack of potatoes would do as CoE right now. Govt isn't really functioning anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

ian duncan smith has let it be known he would answer the call


----------



## kabbes (Jan 30, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Saw this on twitter last night.
> 
> Not sure what to make of it but it looks about right...
> 
> View attachment 160373


So if my mental arithmetic is right, they’re giving it something like a 13% chance of getting a deal at this stage.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ian duncan smith has let it be known he would answer the call


Cruxifixction?  I don’t think it would be of practical assistance, but it would raise morale.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> c4u


?


----------



## T & P (Jan 30, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Saw this on twitter last night.
> 
> Not sure what to make of it but it looks about right...
> 
> View attachment 160373


It'd be helpful if Charlie Brooker were to quickly produce an interactive one-off dramatised Brexit programme whereby we are asked to choose from the various options available and see how it all pans out, like with that recent Black Mirror episode.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Jan 30, 2019)

T & P said:


> It'd be helpful if Charlie Brooker were to quickly produce an interactive one-off dramatised Brexit programme whereby we are asked to choose from the various options available and see how it all pans out, like with that recent Black Mirror episode.



Except with less cereal, cuz all the shelves will be empty.


----------



## T & P (Jan 30, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Except with less cereal, cuz all the shelves will be empty.


----------



## newbie (Jan 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, it's been interesting to watch this aspect play out. With a reasonable majority, a government in the UK system has huge, virtually untrammelled power - just look at how Thatcher pissed all over the other democratic institutions as she liked. But with a minority government, parliament comes to the fore and people like the speaker come to wield a great deal of power. In the absence of either a written constitution or a legitimate head of state, it becomes quite the free-for-all. Effectively the speaker is taking the role of head of state in various regards at the moment.


not convinced about your last point. Presuming you mean heads of state with executive rather than constitutional/ceremonial roles (as is nominally the case here), you'd need to demonstrate that he's overstepped the bounds of the traditional speaker that can be found in most (all?) legislatures, with duties based around overseeing votes, enabling debate and keeping decorum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Sasaferrato said:


> ?


corrected 4 u


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Cruxifixction?  I don’t think it would be of practical assistance, but it would raise morale.


for cofe 

although as you say it would be popular to crucify him. or stick him in the wicker man


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

newbie said:


> not convinced about your last point. Presuming you mean heads of state with executive rather than constitutional/ceremonial roles (as is nominally the case here), you'd need to demonstrate that he's overstepped the bounds of the traditional speaker that can be found in most (all?) legislatures, with duties based around overseeing votes, enabling debate and keeping decorum.


No I mean the latter - head of state as in the German President or the Italian President. They are elected to the role of overseer of the constitution, with no executive power. I see the speaker doing much the same thing here in the way he is effectively deciding when and where parliament should take priority.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2019)

Thought I had been joking with a work colleague about amassing a personal stockpile of food etc. for Brexit, but it turns out he is actually seriously doing it, and isn't the only one.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

We've got a Brexit cupboard of tins. Not my idea but I don't object either.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We've got a Brexit cupboard of tins. Not my idea but I don't object either.



Well, guess you'd have some tins in anyway...

I've been advised by a couple of people to make sure I have a stash of essential meds - haven't done anything about it, though.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> I've been advised by a couple of people to make sure I have a stash of essential meds -


I hear anxiety meds are likely to be a particular issue.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> Thought I had been joking with a work colleague about amassing a personal stockpile of food etc. for Brexit, but it turns out he is actually seriously doing it, and isn't the only one.


everyone's doing it, if not because there will be brexit difficulties then because there will be panic buying from at least the middle of march and runs on banks are scheduled for the first few days of april.

sainsburys are promoting prudent preparation by leaving shelves in some sections understocked


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> Well, guess you'd have some tins in anyway...
> 
> I've been advised by a couple of people to make sure I have a stash of essential meds - haven't done anything about it, though.


We have a bunch of stuff we will eventually use, but wouldn't otherwise have in the quantity we do. Not a prepper stash or anything, but something.

My own view is that there's a very narrow window, between business-as-usual and everything being completely fucked, where reasonable preparation will make any difference. That's stuff like fuel-protest-style panic buying. Could get by without, but it's a comfort factor, so if there's no waste, why not.

I think a fair few people are doing this to some extent. It's not like you can have faith in any particular outcome.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We have a bunch of stuff we will eventually use, but wouldn't otherwise have in the quantity we do. Not a prepper stash or anything, but something.
> 
> My own view is that there's a very narrow window, between business-as-usual and everything being completely fucked, where reasonable preparation will make any difference. That's stuff like fuel-protest-style panic buying. Could get buy without, but it's a comfort factor, so if there's no waste, why not.
> 
> I think a fair few people are doing this to some extent. It's not like you can have faith in any particular outcome.



You'll know people are taking things seriously when you can't find bottled water or candles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> You'll know people are taking things seriously when you can't find bottled water or candles.


yeh those have run out in my local sainsburys recently


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> You'll know people are taking things seriously when you can't find bottled water or candles.


Move it on a couple of months and we'll be burning jrm in a wicker man to save the harvest.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Irish media reporting:

Simon Coveney has compared the British government’s latest negotiating tactic to saying ”unless you give me what I want I’m jumping out the window”.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Move it on a couple of months and we'll be burning jrm in a wicker man to save the harvest.



Brexit gets better and better


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> for cofe
> 
> although as you say it would be popular to crucify him. or stick him in the wicker man





Wilf said:


> Move it on a couple of months and we'll be burning jrm in a wicker man to save the harvest.


great minds think alike


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Irish media reporting:
> 
> Simon Coveney has compared the British government’s latest negotiating tactic to saying ”unless you give me what I want I’m jumping out the window”.


To be honest, that's the most coherent May's stance has been so far.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> great minds think alike


Ooops! Note to self: must read earlier pages.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Irish media reporting:
> 
> Simon Coveney has compared the British government’s latest negotiating tactic to saying ”unless you give me what I want I’m jumping out the window”.


Why do I get the feeling that we are all going around in circles?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

2hats said:


> Why do I get the feeling that we are all going around in circles?


----------



## andysays (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Irish media reporting:
> 
> Simon Coveney has compared the British government’s latest negotiating tactic to saying ”unless you give me what I want I’m jumping out the window”.


And the BBC have reported him as saying that avoiding a hard border is more important than economic  relationships. 

He's certainly on a roll today...


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> everyone's doing it, if not because there will be brexit difficulties then because there will be panic buying from at least the middle of march and runs on banks are scheduled for the first few days of april.
> 
> sainsburys are promoting prudent preparation by leaving shelves in some sections understocked


The problem is that people start panic buying because they're worried that other people might start panic buying and they want to get in first,  it rapidly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. 
Even so at the risk of sounding hypocritical we plan to do some, Being a big family we've always bought in bulk anyway just to save costs, so buying extra is no problem, the stuff won't get wasted and it won't really cost extra, it's just that some money gets spent earlier than usual.
The folks that are going to lose out are those who live payday to payday and can't stock up and those who rely on things like foodbanks.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

I'm not panic buying because I've spent the winter months panic eating & drinking; reckon I've put on enough fat to burn for a good few weeks.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> And the BBC have reported him as saying that avoiding a hard border is more important than economic  relationships.
> 
> He's certainly on a roll today...



Almost as if the paddies take the border issue seriously


----------



## andysays (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Almost as if the paddies take the border issue seriously


Lots of people take border issues seriously, lots of people take economic relationships seriously. I thought it was interesting to see which of the two the Irish Foreign Minister has today chosen to say he thinks is more important.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The problem is that people start panic buying because they're worried that other people might start panic buying and they want to get in first,  it rapidly becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
> Even so at the risk of sounding hypocritical we plan to do some, Being a big family we've always bought in bulk anyway just to save costs, so buying extra is no problem, the stuff won't get wasted and it won't really cost extra, it's just that some money gets spent earlier than usual.
> The folks that are going to lose out are those who live payday to payday and can't stock up and those who rely on things like foodbanks.


i think the government's contributing to this sense of fear and panic. maybe it will all be ok on 30 march. quite possibly. i'm not going out of my way to get months of food in, just laying in an extra bag of rice here, some tins of tomatoes there - just so we have a few days' food in case it all goes tits up.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

Sudden panicky moment...we won't run out of beer, will we?


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Sudden panicky moment...we won't run out of beer, will we?


We've got big breweries. Carlseburg in northampton, they do all sorts under license

Prosseco might run out tho hehehe


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Sudden panicky moment...we won't run out of beer, will we?



There will be riots* !

* Not drunken ones.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 30, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> We've got big breweries. Carlseburg in northampton, they do all sorts under license
> 
> Prosseco might run out tho hehehe


Break out the muskets and broom handle mausers, defend the breweries!


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> We've got big breweries. Carlseburg in northampton, they do all sorts under license
> 
> Prosseco might run out tho hehehe


Should have written Ale; don't count that fizzy stuff from the beer factories. 
But...hold on...aren't alot of the ingredients imported now? 
Starting to worry myself, now.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

#BrexitBeerShortage #BrexitBeerCrisis...shit, this is how the 'panicks' will start, isn't it? They government haven't got a hope in hell of stopping panic in the era of social media, have they?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> #BrexitBeerShortage #BrexitBeerCrisis...shit, this is how the 'panicks' will start, isn't it? They government haven't got a hope in hell of stopping panic in the era of social media, have they?



A beer crisis would be OK tbf, I'd make a killing flogging all the dodgy homebrew I've got hanging around.


----------



## Sasaferrato (Jan 30, 2019)

2hats said:


> There will be riots* !
> 
> * Not drunken ones.



I have big stocks of cognac, malt whisky and pastis. By big, I mean about 60 bottles.


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 30, 2019)

a much better deal could have been had if May threatened the east europeans a bit. a gentle threat of pulling UK troops out of Poland and the baltic states would have frightened them into being more receptive.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

A better deal could have been had if we had a single half-decent negotiator and a pm who wasn't such a wus


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> a much better deal could have been had if May threatened the east europeans a bit. a gentle threat of pulling UK troops out of Poland and the baltic states would have frightened them into being more receptive.


genius idea; can' think why our 'leaders' haven't considered threatening to withdraw those 280 'troops'.


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> genius idea; can' think why our 'leaders' haven't considered threatening to withdraw those 280 'troops'.



it's more than numbers. its the principle. you don't know your history which is why you don't get the impact it would have had.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> it's more than numbers. its the principle. you don't know your history which is why you don't get the impact it would have had.


Did you write to No. 10 or the Queen to suggest this idea?


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Did you write to No. 10 or the Queen to suggest this idea?



Man dem thinks it's only about troop numbers. Lol.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We've got a Brexit cupboard of tins. Not my idea but I don't object either.



But canning is a *French* innovation How can Britons keep tins....?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

pogofish said:


> But canning is a *French* innovation How can Britons keep tins....?


Literally just spat out me John West tuna; bastard forriners


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> Man dem thinks it's only about troop numbers. Lol.


You win, pal.


----------



## friedaweed (Jan 30, 2019)

8ball said:


> You'll know people are taking things seriously when you can't find bottled water or candles.


It's when bottled wine and sandals are in short supply that I'll be putting up defences around my playboy mansion.


----------



## pogofish (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Literally just spat out me John West tuna; bastard forriners



Quite right - salt them and dry them from now-on!


----------



## donkyboy (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> A better deal could have been had if we had a single half-decent negotiator and a pm who wasn't such a wus



of course. being kicked out of the Galileo project after investing over a billion pounds is one example. for what? security reasons. yet most of these EU states are NATO members who share information with the UK via NATO but secrets becomes an issue because we voted leave? Should never have been accepted without getting the money back.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> Man dem thinks it's only about troop numbers. Lol.


Quite. It’s about Empire, not-making-a-fuss, make-do-and-mend, queuing-for-the-omnibus, Godfrey’s cottage, and a little bit of derring do. Numbers be damned.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Godfrey’s cottage


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> A better deal could have been had if we had a single half-decent negotiator and a pm who wasn't such a wus



What makes you say this? I don’t think a different pm or negotiation team would have made much difference. It’s a losing proposition from the start.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> it's more than numbers. its the principle. you don't know your history which is why you don't get the impact it would have had.


Ah it _wasn't_ a joke? 

It's so hard to tell on brexit threads whether a suggestion is serious or not - from a poster, from Theresa May, from whomever.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Quite. It’s about Empire, not-making-a-fuss, make-do-and-mend, queuing-for-the-omnibus, Godfrey’s cottage, and a little bit of derring do. Numbers be damned.



I'll swear it was in the 70s during a particularly dodgy bit of the Cold War when the BBC started putting Russian lessons on TV and a few people were asking whether they knew something we didn't know. Perhaps it's the same with repeats of Dad's Army they're softening us all up


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Break out the muskets and broom handle mausers, defend the breweries!



Tadcaster is easy to defend, there’s one road and one bridge in. Though Masham is equally defendable.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 30, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I'll swear it was in the 70s during a particularly dodgy bit of the Cold War when the BBC started putting Russian lessons on TV and a few people were asking whether they knew something we didn't know. Perhaps it's the same with repeats of Dad's Army they're softening us all up



Maybe, what doesn’t kill you makes you a POW.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> #BrexitBeerShortage #BrexitBeerCrisis...shit, this is how the 'panicks' will start, isn't it? They government haven't got a hope in hell of stopping panic in the era of social media, have they?



I think what might be happening is that they're wondering why it's taken so long to get people panicking in the era of social media... 

What they don't realise is lots of us can't afford to panic buy anything


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 30, 2019)

Brexit. Many old people who are now dead voted leave. Many racists who panicked at the migrants flooding across Europe voted leave. Many anti-Cameron protest votes were cast for Leave. Many idiots for trivial reasons voted Leave. Many people swayed by Russian-back social media bent on destabilising Europe voted Leave. The under 18s who will be most affected by Leave were denied the vote. The Government are determined to drive us off a cliff without checking if that's what "we" still want now that the situation is clearer.

Brexit will go ahead, of that I have no doubt. No amount of whining by me or any other "remoaner" will change that. I'll have my "I told you so" t-shirt made up and ready...

In the meantime, just in case: "Ok, Google - how to get an Irish passport..."


----------



## alex_ (Jan 30, 2019)

donkyboy said:


> being kicked out of the Galileo project after investing over a billion pounds is one example. for what? security reasons. yet most of these EU states are NATO members who share information with the UK via NATO but secrets becomes an issue because we voted leave? Should never have been accepted without getting the money back.



The British insisted that only EU members could be PRS members of Galileo.

The access they don’t get is the super accurate and harder to jam bit PRS

Everyone in the uk will be able to access regular Galileo signals, and will get more accurate positioning due because your device will be able to use gps, glonass and Galileo whatever happens.

The uk military won’t be able to use the top spec bits of Galileo, just like they can’t now ( because they don’t exist ).

Alex


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the government's contributing to this sense of fear and panic. maybe it will all be ok on 30 march. quite possibly. i'm not going out of my way to get months of food in, just laying in an extra bag of rice here, some tins of tomatoes there - just so we have a few days' food in case it all goes tits up.



They've definitely managed to lower expectations to the point where anything that doesn't involve food shortages and riots will be seen as a success...


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

alex_ said:


> Everyone in the uk will be able to access regular Galileo signals, and will get more accurate positioning due because your device will be able to use gps, glonass and Galileo whatever happens.
> 
> The uk military won’t be able to use the top spec bits of Galileo, just like they can’t now ( because they don’t exist ).


Everyone in the UK can already use the open service. I've been doing so for months. The UK military/government can always pay to use the high accuracy commercial service.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 30, 2019)

2hats said:


> Everyone in the UK can already use the open service. I've been doing so for months. The UK military/government can always pay to use the high accuracy commercial service.



Which isn’t the same as the PRS service which the UK decided the UK couldn’t have access to.


----------



## DexterTCN (Jan 30, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> What makes you say this? I don’t think a different pm or negotiation team would have made much difference. It’s a losing proposition from the start.


It's a losing proposition if you say oh 52/48 that means we'll have to throw all options out the window that might make for a smooth transition


----------



## paolo (Jan 30, 2019)

I had reason to check what happens to aviation licenses (personal ones - pilots, engineers etc) with hard Brexit.

For new licenses, for issue after these two months ... there’s no announced CAA plan. The old ‘national’ licenses don’t really exist. CAA won’t be able to issue European ones any more, obvs.

I assume the CAA have something prepped, but... no news yet... making people nervous. Flight Crew Licensing policy & process isn’t something you scribble on the back of an envelope.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 30, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



As I said above, it's really very hard to tell who is being serious and who is joking in this.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

alex_ said:


> Which isn’t the same as the PRS service which the UK decided the UK couldn’t have access to.


That's correct. Which would be why I didn't use the term PRS.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> What makes you say this? I don’t think a different pm or negotiation team would have made much difference. It’s a losing proposition from the start.



Interesting. So you think that it would be impossible for the UK to extricate itself from the EU on good terms?

Sounds kind of like the EU holds member-states hostage but OK.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 30, 2019)

2hats said:


> That's correct. Which would be why I didn't use the term PRS.



Ok, prs is expressedly targetted at the use cases you mentioned.


----------



## Wookey (Jan 30, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Interesting. So you think that it would be impossible for the UK to extricate itself from the EU on good terms?
> 
> Sounds kind of like the EU holds member-states hostage but OK.



How could the EU offer us a deal equal to the one that members get (never mind better) without undermining the quality of membership of other states?

We were aware of this 1vs 27 proposition very early on, there's no such beast as a good Brexit because it wasn't invented to improve us, it's not in its DNA to do that.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 30, 2019)

Wookey said:


> How could the EU offer us a deal equal to the one that members get (never mind better) without undermining the quality of membership of other states?
> 
> We were aware of this 1vs 27 proposition very early on, there's no such beast as a good Brexit because it wasn't invented to improve us, it's not in its DNA to do that.



Nobody needs to "invent" the idea of the UK leaving the EU. It's supposed to be a voluntary association of nations, not an empire that uses economic force to maintain cohesion, yes?


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

alex_ said:


> Ok, prs is expressedly targetted at the use cases you mentioned.


That could quite possibly be why I mentioned them.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's a losing proposition if you say oh 52/48 that means we'll have to throw all options out the window that might make for a smooth transition



Why are you referencing the referendum split? I’m talking about the situation where Brexit needs to be negotiated. So what tactics or movements do you think would have secured a better outcome than the one the uk is currently facing?


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 30, 2019)

danny la rouge said:
			
		

> *Godfrey's cottage*





two sheds said:


> I'll swear it was in the 70s during a particularly dodgy bit of the Cold War when the BBC started putting Russian lessons on TV and a few people were asking whether they knew something we didn't know. *Perhaps it's the same with repeats of Dad's Army they're softening us all up*



I hope they repeat the Godfrey's cottage episode soon -- I've seen loads of them over the years, but never that one 

And I had to Wiki-search what 'Godfrey's cottage' meant** because of that!

**That's pretty good use of Brexit thread time though, tbf


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Interesting. So you think that it would be impossible for the UK to extricate itself from the EU on good terms?
> 
> Sounds kind of like the EU holds member-states hostage but OK.


 
I think it’s painfully naive to think the UK could unwind itself of membership from the EU without major upheaval. EU is not holding the UK hostage, you actively voted for this situation.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Why are you referencing the referendum split? I’m talking about the situation where Brexit needs to be negotiated. So what tactics or movements do you think would have secured a better outcome than the one the uk is currently facing?


You're really not the sharpest tool in the box. I am referring to the referendum result because any political leader with any sense would have noted country divided and not have put out a load of red lines preventing any easy transition which protected jobs, confidence and stability. The red lines fucked the negotiations from the off when may wasn't busy fucking David davis


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You're really not the sharpest tool in the box. I am referring to the referendum result because any political leader with any sense would have noted country divided and not have put out a load of red lines preventing any easy transition which protected jobs, confidence and stability. The red lines fucked the negotiations from the off when may wasn't busy fucking David davis



So what should have been done differently, be specific, you were confident earlier in your assertion.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Nobody needs to "invent" the idea of the UK leaving the EU. It's supposed to be a voluntary association of nations, not an empire that uses economic force to maintain cohesion, yes?


Marriage is supposed to be a voluntary association of two people but if your missus wants out I don't suppose you'd be falling over yourself to give her more than half the house, and yet it still wouldn't be economic force or hostage taking would it, just the blindingly fucking obvious result.

Other crass, uselessly anthropomorphic analogies are available.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> So what should have been done differently, be specific, you were confident earlier in your assertion.


Indeed I was and I refer you to my previous post


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Indeed I was and I refer you to my previous post



Looks like May isint the only one who is delusional about brexit.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Marriage is supposed to be a voluntary association of two people but if your missus wants out I don't suppose you'd be falling over yourself to give her more than half the house, and yet it still wouldn't be economic force or hostage taking would it, just the blindingly fucking obvious result.
> 
> Other crass, uselessly anthropomorphic analogies are available.


I wish I could like this post more than once.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Marriage is supposed to be a voluntary association of two people but if your missus wants out I don't suppose you'd be falling over yourself to give her more than half the house, and yet it still wouldn't be economic force or hostage taking would it, just the blindingly fucking obvious result.
> 
> Other crass, uselessly anthropomorphic analogies are available.



I wasn't making an analogy? At least I thought I wasn't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Looks like May isint the only one who is delusional about brexit.


No indeed, she's a party full of deluded people


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No indeed, she's a party full of deluded people


 Along with people like you shouting from the cheap seats.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Along with people like you shouting from the cheap seats.


I don't know what you're doing here in the cheap seats if you're not shouting


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I wasn't making an analogy? At least I thought I wasn't.


No, I was.

You are, however, assigning anthropomorphic qualities and value judgements on to something that effectively is a deterministic machine. Same input, same conditions, guess what? Same output. Nobody did anything differently because May was a bad negotiator or did a bad dance or because they like or don't like Britain. It was on rails from the start.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Along with people like you shouting from the cheap seats.


You rattling your jewellery, then?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You rattling your jewellery, then?



I’m so far removed I can’t even get entry. I’m watching it at home on the tv.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> No, I was.
> 
> You are, however, assigning anthropomorphic qualities and value judgements on to something that effectively is a deterministic machine. Same input, same conditions, guess what? Same output. Nobody did anything differently because May was a bad negotiator or did a bad dance or because they like or don't like Britain. It was on rails from the start.



What if different input though? If someone had gone in from the start saying that Britain would keep to customs union and environmental and labour laws and Justice Court rulings the EU might have found it harder to refuse.


----------



## NoXion (Jan 30, 2019)

mauvais said:


> No, I was.
> 
> You are, however, assigning anthropomorphic qualities and value judgements on to something that effectively is a deterministic machine. Same input, same conditions, guess what? Same output. Nobody did anything differently because May was a bad negotiator or did a bad dance or because they like or don't like Britain. It was on rails from the start.



I didn't mention individuals or their qualities, so you're just way off the mark here.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

two sheds said:


> What if different input though? If someone had gone in from the start saying that Britain would keep to customs union and environmental and labour laws and Justice Court rulings the EU might have found it harder to refuse.


Yes, of course. It no doubt leads to some other permissible outcome. But that happening or the possibility of it doesn't make the EU better or worse, friendlier or more hostile, or even particularly directed to a specific outcome.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

two sheds said:


> What if different input though? If someone had gone in from the start saying that Britain would keep to customs union and environmental and labour laws and Justice Court rulings the EU might have found it harder to refuse.



No. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You don’t get the customs union without everything else. Why is this so difficult to understand.


----------



## alex_ (Jan 30, 2019)

2hats said:


> That could quite possibly be why I mentioned them.



So uk emergency services should use the commercial Galileo services because we can’t use PRS any more ?

Alex


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> I’m so far removed I can’t even get entry. I’m watching it at home on the tv.



Not many folk can claim to be 'far-removed' from the consequences of Brexit.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 30, 2019)

alex_ said:


> So uk emergency services should use the commercial Galileo services because we can’t use PRS any more ?


That’s not a decision for me to make.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> No. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You don’t get the customs union without everything else. Why is this so difficult to understand.


You don't enter a negotiation presenting your final position, like you don't start haggling near the amount you aim to pay.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't enter a negotiation presenting your final position, like you don't start haggling near the amount you aim to pay.


 Great  now as to those specifics, please elaborate.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> No. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You don’t get the customs union without everything else. Why is this so difficult to understand.



Well I've not seen the question posed often, and haven't really seen an answer so what is "everything else"?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not many folk can claim to be 'far-removed' from the consequences of Brexit.



Many people can claim to be far removed from the (negative) consequences of brexit. It’s been a positive for me. I even have bets in the bookies on particular outcomes at this stage.


----------



## mauvais (Jan 30, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I didn't mention individuals or their qualities, so you're just way off the mark here.


This stuff about empire or hostages or being offered good deals - what is it?

I assume that for example, under normal circumstances, you wouldn't put your money in a vending machine and _then_ talk about what a good or bad deal it'd given you.

So there must be something you feel is different about EU negotiation, some latitude in there, something deliberate or wilful about this process that wasn't just inevitable. What is it?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Many people can claim to be far removed from the (negative) consequences of brexit. It’s been a positive for me. I even have bets in the bookies on particular outcomes at this stage.


What are the (negative) consequences of Brexit from which many can claim to be immune?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What are the (negative) consequences of Brexit from which many can claim to be immune?



Loss or reduction of income for a start. The price for my services increases the closer we get to March. Many people In Irish service industries claim if brexit happens or not is immaterial as the business has already left the uk


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Loss or reduction of income for a start.


So...you're speculating that Brexit will result in lower incomes...and that many people will be unaffected by this consequence? Bit difficult to get your drift tbh


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So...you're speculating that Brexit will result in lower incomes...and that many people will be unaffected by this consequence? Bit difficult to get your drift tbh



Yes, I wouldn’t want to be an Irish farmer right now but as a service provider the value of what I provide has increased.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Yes, I wouldn’t want to be an Irish farmer right now but as a service provider the value of what I provide has increased.



Value is a pretty slippery concept in a capitalist system. Some people would argue that food is more valuable than most, if not all services.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Yes, I wouldn’t want to be an Irish farmer right now but as a service provider the value of what I provide has increased.


So you're suggesting that Brexit will cause the income of most_ service providers _to fall, but you happen to be in the fortunate minority for whom the process will see income rise_? _


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Value is a pretty slippery concept in a capitalist system. Some people would argue that food is more valuable than most, if not all services.


 Fair comment, I’ll be more explicit, I’m able to make more money as a direct consequence of brexit.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So you're suggesting that Brexit will cause the income of most_ service providers _to fall, but you happen to be in the fortunate minority for whom the process will see income rise_? _



The producers of Agriculture commodities will experience a reduction of income (obviously other sectors will also). Many service providers, of which a large amount of the Irish economy is built on (for better or worse) will find the value/price of their output increase And thus will profit.

For the Reddit generation , tldr we are profiting from brexit by taking the business from the uk.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> No. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You don’t get the customs union without everything else. Why is this so difficult to understand.


That's not really the case, is it


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> That's not really the case, is it


 May doesn’t think it’s the case despite the numerous assurances it is. Time will tell.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> The producers of Agriculture commodities will experience a reduction of income (obviously other sectors will also). Many service providers, of which a large amount of the Irish economy is built on (for better or worse) will find the value/price of their output increase And thus will profit.
> 
> For the Reddit generation , tldr we are profiting from brexit by taking the business from the uk.


I see. Why then, would you be describing the concerns of a UK citizen using a disparaging expression like 'shouting from the cheap seats'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> May doesn’t think it’s the case despite the numerous assurances it is. Time will tell.


depends what you mean by all the rest.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I see. Why then, would you be describing the concerns of a UK citizen using a disparaging expression like 'shouting from the cheap seats'?


This particular uk citizen claimed a different pm and negotiation team could have gotten a different outcome and then failed to provide specifics when prompted. So why the fuck would I care about their concerns?


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> This particular uk citizen claimed a different pm and negotiation team could have gotten a different outcome and then failed to provide specifics when prompted. So why the fuck would I care about their concerns?


It's pretty self-evident that a different PM unencumbered by May's 'red-lines' could have effected a different Withdrawal agreement. For instance, starting with an aspiration to remain within the/a customs union would have rendered notions of any 'backstop' redundant.
Shame that you seem unconcerned about the concerns of a fellow EU citizen.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 30, 2019)

The effects of Brexit on me so far have been only negative, if I discount the entertainment and education I have received from this thread, basically having a contract I was offered withdrawn  because the company it was for has decided to move the relevant dept to the EU. That was a pain for me of course since it meant a couple of months where I was not earning whilst I found another, bit more of a pain for the 77 permanent staff who got made redundant.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's pretty self-evident that a different PM unencumbered by May's 'red-lines' could have effected a different Withdrawal agreement. For instance, starting with an aspiration to remain within the/a customs union would have rendered notions of any 'backstop' redundant.
> Shame that you seem unconcerned about the concerns of a fellow EU citizen.



How is this self evident?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> How is this self evident?



(i.e. a different PM unencumbered by May's 'red-lines' could have effected a different Withdrawal agreement)

No, this relates back to my question on customs union to which you replied: 



grit said:


> No. You can’t have your cake and eat it. You don’t get the customs union without everything else. Why is this so difficult to understand.



Again: what is "everything else"?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

two sheds said:


> Again: what is "everything else"?



The requirements of being a EU member state.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> How is this self evident?


Because UK membership of the/a customs union would not have necessitated a 'backstop' arrangement. Equally, an alternative PM willing to undermine the GFA could have effected a very different outcome.
Not sure why you might find this so difficult to imagine.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Because UK membership of the/a customs union would not have necessitated a 'backstop' arrangement. Equally, an alternative PM willing to undermine the GFA could have effected a very different outcome.
> Not sure why you might find this so difficult to imagine.



I have no problem imagining the uk being prepared to undermine the GFA, it’s one of the things that upsets me. I don’t think it would have caused a different outcome to the one currently presented.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> The requirements of being a EU member state.



But _why_ do we need all the requirements of being a EU member state for just a customs union?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> The requirements of being a EU member state.


Norway doesn't have all these requirements


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

two sheds said:


> But _why_ do we need all the requirements of being a EU member state for just a customs union?



Because those are the rules of the customs union. Fuck sake.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Nor does Switzerland


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Because those are the rules of the customs union. Fuck sake.


No they aren't

Is having meps a requirement of the customs union?


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Because those are the rules of the customs union. Fuck sake.



Is EU immigration policy a requirement of the customs union?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Norway doesn't have all these requirements



Indeed, that’s why they are in the single market, not the customs union


----------



## Libertad (Jan 30, 2019)

Wouldn't any substantive changes to the GFA require ratification through a border poll?


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Wouldn't any substantive changes to the GFA require ratification through a border poll?


I’d like to think so, but I’m not sure.


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Nor does Switzerland


Again not in the customs union.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

Why can't we have a customs union without paying into the EU budget?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> Again not in the customs union.



Andorra. Monaco. Turkey...


----------



## grit (Jan 30, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Andorra. Monaco. Turkey...


 Good skiing there. Heard it’s expensive. Produce a lot of smack.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Andorra. Monaco. Turkey...


Vatican City


----------



## two sheds (Jan 30, 2019)

Why would you need a common foreign and security policy to be in the customs union?

I think you've answered your own somewhat condescending question grit .


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2019)

grit said:


> I have no problem imagining the uk being prepared to undermine the GFA, it’s one of the things that upsets me. I don’t think it would have caused a different outcome to the one currently presented.


I can see why you’ve chosen to ignore the first suggestion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2019)

San marino


----------



## Raheem (Jan 31, 2019)

This genius has the answer. Why has it taken so long? 
History makes it unlikely, but there are good reasons for Ireland quitting the EU


----------



## Wilf (Jan 31, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Though Masham is equally defendable.


 True, though I'm not risking my life for something that's only 3.8%


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 31, 2019)

Raheem said:


> This genius has the answer. Why has it taken so long?
> History makes it unlikely, but there are good reasons for Ireland quitting the EU


Firewall only allows me to read the first paragraph of that, which is probably just as well. Why can't those pesky Irish just leave the EU to solve the UK's brexit problem. Selfish fuckers. 

British arrogance/exceptionalism done to a tee, and yet another example of how it can be hard to see what is parody and what is serious in all this.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jan 31, 2019)

Wilf said:


> True, though I'm not risking my life for something that's only 3.8%



Sacrifices must be made if we are to remain strong and stable!


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> The producers of Agriculture commodities will experience a reduction of income (obviously other sectors will also). Many service providers, of which a large amount of the Irish economy is built on (for better or worse) will find the value/price of their output increase And thus will profit.
> 
> For the Reddit generation , tldr we are profiting from brexit by taking the business from the uk.


Could you flesh this out a bit?

 I fail to see how a bunch of bankers, investment firms and other oddities of the financial system setting up EU offices in Dublin helps Ireland. If anything apart from a slightly larger tax take down the road,all I see is estate agents, lawyers and consultants bloating already bloated salaries and bonuses. Allowing FFG to claim everything is great, yet anyone I speak to at home can’t see this economic recovery and are bracing themselves   For a rough brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 31, 2019)

two sheds said:


> Why would you need a common foreign and security policy to be in the customs union?
> 
> I think you've answered your own somewhat condescending question grit .


Because The Rules were handed down from God almighty on the back of stone tablets.  What can you do, they are not for mortal men to question.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> British arrogance/exceptionalism done to a tee, and yet another example of how it can be hard to see what is parody and what is serious in all this.



While you were describing that article, this is also a very fitting description for this thread.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

*Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*
*Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*

*"Our preparations are well-advanced and we expect to be fully operational by March 29 2019."*

The move is designed to deal with the consequences of a no-deal hard Brexit, in which UK-based banks would lose passporting rights that allow them to function in the EU's single market, the world's richest trading bloc.

For its part, Barclays will increase its Dublin headcount by around 150 to 300 as a result of Brexit.


Forgive me for thinking that Britain's misfortune is occasionally Ireland's gain*
I do realise we could be starving over here by May. But the banks will be looking good. 




*not smug


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 31, 2019)

The Irish government could always tax that €190bn at Apple rates and buy someone a Peperammi with the proceeds


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Irish government could always tax that €190bn at Apple rates and buy someone a Peperammi with the proceeds


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*
> *Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*
> 
> *"Our preparations are well-advanced and we expect to be fully operational by March 29 2019."*
> ...


If you think Dublin is dear now wait til these smug cunts have moved in


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

Is it just me or is anyone else dismayed that a poster whom ill assume lived in Dublin during the Celtic tiger and lived through a recession that was wholly caused by the greed and hubris of bankers is greeting Barclay’s arrival in Dublin as some gleeful celebration of Irish triumph over the brits? 

I’d only be happy if the bankers arrived, the banks assests were seized and said bankers find themselves up a scaffold on college Green losing their heads.

Fucking hell the arrival of bankers in Dublin should be warning to prepare to get fleeced again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*
> *Barclays set to transfer €190bn of assets to Dublin*
> 
> *"Our preparations are well-advanced and we expect to be fully operational by March 29 2019."*
> ...


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Is it just me or is anyone else dismayed that a poster whom ill assume lived in Dublin during the Celtic tiger and lived through a recession that was wholly caused by the greed and hubris of bankers is greeting Barclay’s arrival in Dublin as some gleeful celebration of Irish triumph over the brits?
> 
> I’d only be happy if the bankers arrived, the banks assests were seized and said bankers find themselves up a scaffold on college Green losing their heads.
> 
> Fucking hell the arrival of bankers in Dublin should be warning to prepare to get fleeced again.


I guess this illustrates yet again the dangers of having a primarily nationalist based outlook rather than a class based one


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Is it just me or is anyone else dismayed that a poster whom ill assume lived in Dublin during the Celtic tiger and lived through a recession that was wholly caused by the greed and hubris of bankers is greeting Barclay’s arrival in Dublin as some gleeful celebration of Irish triumph over the brits?
> 
> I’d only be happy if the bankers arrived, the banks assests were seized and said bankers find themselves up a scaffold on college Green losing their heads.
> 
> Fucking hell the arrival of bankers in Dublin should be warning to prepare to get fleeced again.



This is my first comment on the thread since the Barclays news was posted.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> This is my first comment on the thread since the Barclays news was posted.


Congratulations, you huffy roaster.


----------



## alsoknownas (Jan 31, 2019)

It's awfully nice of the Tory Party to be offering cash injections to some of the former coalfield communities as part of their effort to woo Labour MPs.  That really is a charming gesture.


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> This is my first comment on the thread since the Barclays news was posted.


I thought flypanam 's comment was directed at Lupa , though TBH you seem to be allowing your evident nationalism to overshadow any real class awareness too


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> I guess this illustrates yet again the dangers of having a primarily nationalist based outlook rather than a class based one



More an acceptance of the economic strategy of attracting foreign direct investment. It’s a strategy that certainly has no shortage of risks, however providing services as a small island nation so far appears to be our best bet. 

Brexit makes Ireland a more appealing place for FDI.


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

"our" best bet


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

Loving the use of the term "assets".
Within a month of the U.K. Financial Services (Banking Reform) Act 2013 (Commencement No. 12) Order that finally imposes ring-fencing & non ring-fencing (NRFB) controls, Barclays has shunted a load of (foreign-owned) derivative NRFB shite to Dublin, so that personal accounts can be 'managed'.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 31, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Firewall only allows me to read the first paragraph of that, which is probably just as well. Why can't those pesky Irish just leave the EU to solve the UK's brexit problem. Selfish fuckers.
> 
> British arrogance/exceptionalism done to a tee, and yet another example of how it can be hard to see what is parody and what is serious in all this.



To be fair they were forced to keep voting on the Lisbon treaty until they got the 'right' answer. Nothing arrogant or exceptionalist about EU though.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> I thought flypanam 's comment was directed at Lupa , though TBH you seem to be allowing your evident nationalism to overshadow any real class awareness too


No, I think he's very definitely showing some clear class awareness.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, I think he's very definitely showing some clear class awareness.


Indeed.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> I thought flypanam 's comment was directed at Lupa , though TBH you seem to be allowing your evident nationalism to overshadow any real class awareness too


it was, but Butchers post is spot on.


----------



## chilango (Jan 31, 2019)

Fwiw an ardent Remainer I know was loudly bemoaning the "stupidity of Leave voter" to us the other day. "Don't they realise that the financial sector will leave London? House prices are already falling...".

I think he's answered his own question there.


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, I think he's very definitely showing some clear class awareness.


Makes me wonder exactly what sort of services he's providing which be expects to be able to put up the prices of


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

chilango said:


> Fwiw an ardent Remainer I know was loudly bemoaning the "stupidity of Leave voter" to us the other day. "Don't they realise that the financial sector will leave London? House prices are already falling...".
> 
> I think he's answered his own question there.


It’s instructive that houses are seen, in the first instance, as investment commodities, rather than somewhere to live.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> More an acceptance of the economic strategy of attracting foreign direct investment. It’s a strategy that certainly has no shortage of risks, however providing services as a small island nation so far appears to be our best bet.
> 
> Brexit makes Ireland a more appealing place for FDI.



It's a shit strategy. It's based on non existant corporation tax, fuck all regulation, a highly skilled workforce paid peanuts and direct line to the cabinet for those times when you feel the need to blackmail the state and get a higher dividend or be let off a little bit of white collar crime.

The reliance on services has bloated Dublin making it unliveable for some. Did you see that IT house porn article that in parts of D2 you need to earn over 8000 after tax to rent a place? Making Dublin the playground of the rich, while those that work there service their need to make a profit and cater for their whims. Ireland it's no more than a 'Mini Me' UK. Fuck sake Varadkar styles himself on Blair.

grit have you been out of Dublin recently? Have you been to say Dundalk? I went to the RTC there in '94, it was a good town, there was work with Harris and a few other firms, good times. Went back after Christmas it's a ghost town now.


----------



## chilango (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s instructive that houses are seen, in the first instance, as investment commodities, rather than somewhere to live.



Indeed.

Another conversation around Brexit i had with an vociferous Remainer went along similar lines...

Remainer: Stupid poor people. _[I paraphrase, but not not by much] _Don't they realise they'll just get pooepo if we Brexit? I mean, the markets will crash...

Me: I'm not sure they'll give a fuck about the market...I certainly don't

Remainer: Well you should! What about the value of your pension?

Me: What pension?

...and so on.

Utter, utter disconnect from the lives of most. The Remainer in my earlier post was also going on and on about the need for a second referendum, wasn't listening to me saying they'they'ose that as well until a fellow Remainer in the vonvedconver quoted the polling suggesting that Leave would win again. Maybe even with a bigger margin. The first Remainer then harrumphed "well at least the blame for all the shit that follows will be clear".

Nice.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

chilango said:


> Remainer: Well you should! What about the value of your pension?
> 
> Me: What pension?


 Sad fist bump.

But that’s the thing, isn’t it? Complete lack of insight into the world others live in.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> It's a shit strategy. It's based on non existant corporation tax, fuck all regulation, a highly skilled workforce paid peanuts and direct line to the cabinet for those times when you feel the need to blackmail the state and get a higher dividend or be let off a little bit of white collar crime.
> 
> The reliance on services has bloated Dublin making it unliveable for some. Did you see that IT house porn article that in parts of D2 you need to earn over 8000 after tax to rent a place? Making Dublin the playground of the rich, while those that work there service their need to make a profit and cater for their whims. Ireland it's no more than a 'Mini Me' UK. Fuck sake Varadkar styles himself on Blair.
> 
> grit have you been out of Dublin recently? Have you been to say Dundalk? I went to the RTC there in '94, it was a good town, there was work with Harris and a few other firms, good times. Went back after Christmas it's a ghost town now.



We sold our soul to the multinationals out of desperation. Less than five million people on a cold wet island don’t have a lot of options. We made a desperate move and it brought much needed employment and tax revenue in to the country. I’ve not seen any alternatives presented that don’t require us being forced back to the levels of economic activity of the early eighties. If such an option was presented I’d welcome it with open arms. So welcoming foreign direct investment increases due to brexit is a sign of desperation, it brings in money we need.

Regarding housing, I’m painfully experiencing the issue. My basic salary is higher than Varadkar yet I don’t feel I’ll ever be able to afford my own house. If my current housing situation changes I’ve accepted I’ll need to leave the country as I did during the 2008 recession, something that was emotionally an extremely difficult thing to do which was a major contributor to me falling down the dark hole of depression and chronic drug abuse(something I’ve thankfully recovered from in the past few years).

Areas outside of major cities have been decimated, and are now in the spiral you observed due to others being forced to go to major cities or leaving the country all together.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> My basic salary is higher than Varadkar


for people who don't know, the taoiseach is paid €185,350


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> for people who don't know, the taoiseach is paid €185,350



His basic is 95k and it’s the service led economy which enabled people like me without a 3rd level education to make it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> His basic is 95k and it’s the service led economy which enabled people like me without a 3rd level education to make it.


your memory lets you down





> The Taoiseach's pay is set to soar by more than €21,000 in the next three years under the successor to the Lansdowne Road Agreement. The salary for the Taoiseach will rise from €190,233 to €211,588.


Revealed: The salary hike TDs will pocket over the next three years - Independent.ie


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> your memory lets you down
> Revealed: The salary hike TDs will pocket over the next three years - Independent.ie



TDs and Senators salaries

The other 100k is structured as an allowance, why I have no fucking idea. But that’s why I specifically said basic salary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> TDs and Senators salaries
> 
> The other 100k is structured as an allowance.


right, that makes all the difference.


----------



## Libertad (Jan 31, 2019)

I'm sure you'll manage somehow.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Libertad said:


> I'm sure you'll manage somehow.



Until the next inevitable economic crash occurs. Then it’s the same thing of packing my life in to the 80 liter backpack and doing it all over again.


----------



## Libertad (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> Until the next inevitable economic crash occurs. Then it’s the same thing of packing my life in to the 80 liter backpack and doing it all over again.



Welcome to the precariat.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

Mind when someone posted a PDF of their tax return to show how much they earned? That was magic bantz. grit , can you do that?


----------



## chilango (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Mind when someone posted a PDF of their tax return to show how much they earned? That was magic bantz. grit , can you do that?



It was almost as good as _credentialgate_.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

My all-time favourite was “you need to prove your Arab heritage if you want to say ‘bint’ like I do”.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Mind when someone posted a PDF of their tax return to show how much they earned? That was magic bantz. grit , can you do that?



I have the technical ability to attach files to posts as do all other users of the forum.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

The best one was drringding posting a wetherspoons receipt to prove his class cred.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> *Mind when someone posted a PDF of their tax return to show how much they earned*? That was magic bantz. grit , can you do that?


that prick was trying to dole shame me, and predictably burned out later in a cloud of racism.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 31, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Welcome to the precariat.


You'll never leave.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> You'll never leave.



Never did, my contract is renewed (or not) every six months with no pension or other benefits. It’s structured in such a way that I can’t apply for the dole when the contract is terminated as I’m technically considered as self employed.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 31, 2019)

I'd stop digging now if I were you.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> Never did, my contract is renewed (or not) every six months with no pension or other benefits. It’s structured in such a way that I can’t apply for the dole when the contract is terminated as I’m technically considered as self employed.


It's fine to be Irish, so long as you don't make the mistake of actually living in that fucking country.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'd stop digging now if I were you.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The best one was drringding posting a wetherspoons receipt to prove his class cred.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> Never did, my contract is renewed (or not) every six months with no pension or other benefits. It’s structured in such a way that I can’t apply for the dole when the contract is terminated as I’m technically considered as self employed.


Are you sure that's right about the dole, though? When I taught for the Dumb Blonde School, I didn't even have a contract, but I still paid into the system. . .


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Are you sure that's right about the dole, though? When I taught for the Dumb Blonde School, I didn't even have a contract, but I still paid into the system. . .


Dumb blonde school took me a second to twig but 

I attempted to get the dole a couple of years ago but they rejected the claim. There was so much bollocks around it, I recall arguing the case that I paid 52% tax on everything but it fell on deaf ears.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> Dumb blonde school took me a second to twig but
> 
> I attempted to get the dole a couple of years ago but they rejected the claim. There was so much bollocks around it, I recall arguing the case that I paid 52% tax on everything but it fell on deaf ears.


Also known as "Daddy's Business School" and "Didn't Bother Studying".

From my experience of dealing with those people, I'm not convinced they really know what they're doing.


----------



## rekil (Jan 31, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Are you sure that's right about the dole, though? When I taught for the Dumb Blonde School, I didn't even have a contract, but I still paid into the system. . .


You can apply if you're self-employed but it'd be means tested and affected by any subsequent earnings. Putting down 'i make more than varadkar' on the form probably won't help the case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> that prick was trying to dole shame me, and predictably burned out later in a cloud of racism.


what was his name...


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Mind when someone posted a PDF of their tax return to show how much they earned? That was magic bantz. grit , can you do that?



Was that phildwyer?


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Looks like the feb recess has been canceled but there is no brexit business scheduled for next week.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">The business for next week will be: <a href="Leader's Office on Twitter">pic.twitter.com/typd105PsP</a></p>&mdash; Leader&#39;s Office (@CommonsLeader) <a href="">January 31, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

There'll be some spare capacity in Klosters & Verbier for you 'high flyers'.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2019)

chilango said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Another conversation around Brexit i had with an vociferous Remainer went along similar lines...
> 
> ...



Anecdotal accounts of remainer/leaver views are definitely helpful for the discussion. We need more of them.


----------



## chilango (Jan 31, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Anecdotal accounts of remainer/leaver views are definitely helpful for the discussion. We need more of them.



I've got plenty more in the same vein.


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Anecdotal accounts of remainer/leaver views are definitely helpful for the discussion. We need more of them.


Considerably more helpful than your sneering contentless posts, that's for sure


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Is it just me or is anyone else dismayed that a poster whom ill assume lived in Dublin during the Celtic tiger and lived through a recession that was wholly caused by the greed and hubris of bankers is greeting Barclay’s arrival in Dublin as some gleeful celebration of Irish triumph over the brits?
> 
> I’d only be happy if the bankers arrived, the banks assests were seized and said bankers find themselves up a scaffold on college Green losing their heads.
> 
> Fucking hell the arrival of bankers in Dublin should be warning to prepare to get fleeced again.




Eh? 

Come off it. 

Do you understand dark humour at all?


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Eh?
> 
> Come off it.
> 
> Do you understand dark humour at all?


That's not dark humour, it's crowing.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> I guess this illustrates yet again the dangers of having a primarily nationalist based outlook rather than a class based one




Pfft.
Class strata didn't exist in Ireland til very recently. 
You had the poor...
The rich...
And the gone.... 

Don't lecture me on class. I know what it is and the shit Ireland was left in post British rule. Its not that long ago. 

I think that there are more than banks moving business from the UK...some are moving to Germany...other European countries...And indeed Ireland. 

And my post was to do with irony and black humour. ..


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> That's not dark humour, it's crowing.


.

No 
Its irony.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Class strata didn't exist in Ireland til very recently.


That’s not true.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not true.


C'mon Danny it came with the Pope in '79, stayed for mass then got back on the plane.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not true.



You had extreme poverty and wealth.
You had landlords and tenants...And tenant farmers.
The vast majority of Irish were poor. 

Middle class? Tiny group. 
Upper class? Anglo Irish and inside the pale. 

The Irish left because of poverty.
You know this .


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> C'mon Danny it came with the Pope in '79, stayed for mass then got back on the plane.




You're a bit of an ignoramus


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You had extreme poverty and wealth.
> You had landlords and tenants...And tenant farmers.
> The vast majority of Irish were poor.
> 
> ...


And the giants - don't forget the giants.


----------



## flypanam (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You're a bit of an ignoramus



The happy union of Monto and the debutante. The townhouse and the tenement. St Patrick's history free isle.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You're a bit of an ignoramus


(((Lupa)))


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And the giants - don't forget the giants.



Things were shite for the vast majority of Irish people until relatively recently.
Millions of Irish left between 1920 and 1990 and indeed since then too when the economy crashed....
A whole generation of people left in the 80s.
It was not a country with a broad middle class. I'm not sure why people think otherwise? Ireland was not and is not an industrialised country. Wealth literally was in the hands of a small minority.

It was not in any way similar to the UK in terms of class strata.

Kind of amazed that anyone thinks Ireland pre 1990s was anything other than one very large group of people that would be classed as poor and pretty destitute and another group of workers who were also poor ..just not exactly destitite but as close to it as you could get.
Wealth was in a small few hands. Mainly the church...the big farm owners, absentee landlords and wealthy business owners. Many of the wealthiest lived in Dublin. 

Between the 90s and 2006 the country boomed. People were able to save and have a decent income. Saving schemes were put in place where the government paid you to save x amount for 5 years. 
Then came the collapse and people lost homes and jobs. 

So yeah. There is a class strata now. It's still comprising of the "have nots", the "have some", and the "have a lot". 
Most people I know and meet have a working class mentality.  
Hard working people some of whom take on extra jobs just to get by. 
People really think Ireland had a class system up to 1960? 
Nah. The village priest, doctor and teacher were the "middle class. Everyone else was poor. Some a lot poorer than others. My dad did not consider himself from the poorest family....but he told me that he had no shoes til he was 13. I mean that's only back in the 1950s. He says that at the time everyone was the same. He grew up in a city.... with plenty communities connected to his. 
People just didn't have much at all. 

Ach. .I'm out of this thread now.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ach. .I'm out of this thread now.


maybe this needs its own thread?


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not true.



It’s very close to the truth. The class system until recently was nothing like the uk has. The concept of “old money” was extraordinarily rare and typically it wasn’t Irish people who held it.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> maybe this needs its own thread?


What, whether Dublin one of the sites of the most heroic of the classic industrial class struggles as well as one of the shining lights of labour history (The ICA) had any working class people living there? If it gets this nationalist mythory off this thread, then let's do it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

grit said:


> It’s very close to the truth. The class system until recently was nothing like the uk has.


I don’t know what people think class means, but it doesn’t mean “is identical to socio-economic profile of the UK”.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

flypanam said:


> C'mon Danny it came with the Pope in '79, stayed for mass then got back on the plane.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Things were shite for the vast majority of Irish people until relatively recently.
> Millions of Irish left between 1920 and 1990 and indeed since then too when the economy crashed....
> A whole generation of people left in the 80s.
> It was not a country with a broad middle class. I'm not sure why people think otherwise? Ireland was not and is not an industrialised country. Wealth literally was in the hands of a small minority.
> ...


I’ve never seen anyone flounce after an argument with themself before. That was quite something.

You know, if you want to discuss this at all, you might start by asking why you think there was poverty on the one hand and wealthy landowners and business owners on the other, but no class system?

Who were those people living in the big townhouses in the fancy Georgian squares in Dublin?  Not people of the same class as your Dad. That’s who.

You know this, but somehow you’ve edited it into a nationalist myth where you can both say it existed and didn’t exist at the same time.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve never seen anyone flounce after an argument with themself before. That was quite something.
> 
> You know, if you want to discuss this at all, you might start by asking why you think there was poverty on the one hand and wealthy landowners and business owners on the other, but no class system?
> 
> ...


Flounce after an argument with themselves they've lost at that.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jan 31, 2019)

Is brexit over with now then?


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Is brexit over with now then?



We are only getting to the good bits.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Is brexit over with now then?


All fixed.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 31, 2019)

I'm wondering if there's one upside to this threat of a new Irish border, in that we could see the revival of some old customs dodging tactics, and some diddly folk classics.


----------



## Wilf (Jan 31, 2019)

Mrs Merton's question to Debbie McGee on Ireland's class system:


Lupa said:


> Kind of amazed that anyone thinks Ireland pre 1990s was anything other than one very large group of people that would be classed as poor and pretty destitute and another group of workers who were also poor ..just not exactly destitite but as close to it as you could get.
> Wealth was in a small few hands. Mainly the church...the big farm owners, absentee landlords and wealthy business owners. Many of the wealthiest lived in Dublin.


----------



## grit (Jan 31, 2019)

skyscraper101 said:


> I'm wondering if there's one upside to this threat of a new Irish border, in that we could see the revival of some old customs dodging tactics, and some diddly folk classics.




This has been doing the rounds in Irish what’s app groups to much amusement


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Mrs Merton's question to Debbie McGee on Ireland's class system:


There’s no class system. There’s a lot of poor people. And a small number of people with all the wealth and power. But there’s no class system.


There’s no cooked breakfast. There’s eggs, bacon, sausage, black pudding, haggis, white pudding, red pudding, tattie scones, soda scones, grilled tomatoes, grilled mushrooms, baked beans. But there’s no cooked breakfast.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You know, if you want to discuss this at all, you might start by asking why you think there was poverty on the one hand and wealthy landowners and business owners on the other, but no class system?
> 
> Who were those people living in the big townhouses in the fancy Georgian squares in Dublin?  Not people of the same class as your Dad. That’s who..




Like I said....
There were the poverty striken...
Then the "working class" who were also poverty striken. And then the Anglo Irish wealthy business people and big landowners. You ask me why that was? Because those wealthy individuals supported and were supported by a system that maintained its wealth even after the country became a republic. Nothing I wrote suggests that they didn't exist as a "class". But it was more than that. It was to do with priveledge and money. They were still very tied into the British wealth systems.

As for the comment about working class industrial movements.. made by another posted.. .nothing I wrote runs contrary to that history. You think I don't know about Larkin ? Connolly?  Just because I am sharing what happened to poor  Irish people does not mean that my views are only reflecting "nationalism".  The country was full of extremely poor people. High mortality rates. Extreme TB contamination. Horrendous tenements and the highest rates of emigration.
Why doubt history and make my comments political just because I point the finger at those who had governed Ireland for hundreds of years and left it in  a deplorable state. They left it with two distinct groups. A massive group of deprived poverty stricken people with very little and a very small group of extremely well off people who had been very connected to those in

Outside of Dublin in the countryside there was also extreme poverty.

As regards my family history?
I have no family history in Dublin pre 1965... Mine comes from Monaghan and Tryrone down to Clare and Limerick.
Industry didn't happen in Clare. Limerick had piggeries, toffee (cleeves), clothing company, and timber manufacturing. All poorly paid work. People lived in tenaments and everyone rented. Most rented accommodation was owned by absentee landlords...based in the UK
The biggest thing to happen in Clare was the Shannon electric scheme and German workers came over to build it because there weren't enough skilled Irish workers. Between the early days of the republic and the 1990s, if you lived outside the pale and you had work at all that was not on a farm you were extremely lucky....

The majority of workers were unskilled. You mention the Dublin lockout. Irish unskilled workers living in tenements that were horrendous. Widespread TB. Very high mortality rates...it was more than a "working class" issue.... It was an entire mass group of people living in abject poverty.  This happened all over Ireland...  Not much in terms of steel works or coal mining...Most jobs were in low paid manufacturing..
Bit really there were very few work options for the majority of people.

Hence the mass emigration...that has gone on since people could get on a boat and leave

For those who think Irish people were living good lives in the 20th century? They were fucked. People left in droves ... 30s...40s...50s...60s...70s...80s..
90s...And again recently. The difference now is that the peoole leaving are skilled educated workers...leaving because there is not enough work for them here.

What happened in Ireland was much more than just class systems. It was abject discrimination and slavery...by a dominant foreign power. The country was left in a dreadful state...And it has taken a century to get something half decent..And that's not to say it's perfect...it isn't. Not at all. Class structure implies that you have some inkling of your potential rights. Unfortunately Ireland's history is one of a country full of people who had no rights and were so oppressed as to not know they could have rights...just basic human rights...let alone workers rights. A nation treated like animals.....used and abused.

Someome called me a nationalist and implied that it's a dirty word ...a slur...
Nationalism here is not like British nationalism. A nationaliat herr can also hold a view of peace and wanting cooperation
 If you or anyone else cannot understand that then you'll never ever understand or appreciate what happened in our combined histories.....I know exactly how degraded in every way the Irish populace was at the hands of another country. And I take a sense of pride in the fact that most of the country is independent of that situation now. It does not mean that I want a war or a return to the troubles....it does not make me a radical republican to be proud of the Republic...or even knowing my own language...or indeed calling the country I live in Eire...because that's it's name. Some people here would say "you're a sympathiser" just because you remember Bloody Sunday as a fact.

Eta
Actually...I've just read the latest posts now.
What the fuck?


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

You’re having a lot of arguments with things nobody has said. A lot.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You’re having a lot of arguments with things nobody has said. A lot.



I'm not arguing at this stage.
I'm reminding.

It's relevant. Think about it.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa never said there was "no class system".


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Lupa never said there was "no class system".


Oh. My. God.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Class strata didn't exist in Ireland til very recently.


.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> .


Danny - you surely know better than even to respond to his smug prodding.


----------



## danny la rouge (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Danny - you surely know better than even to respond to smug prodding.


Apparently not.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2019)

Well, 'strata' and 'system' both start with an s, so I suppose they must mean the same thing?

From reading what Lupa has written, my interpretation was that the point they were making was that there were a bunch of people at the 'bottom', a very few at the top and not many in the middle, and this was different to the stratification you see in the UK. How true that is, I'm not sure, but its not the same as saying there was no class system.


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Like I said....
> There were the poverty striken...
> Then the "working class" who were also poverty striken. And then the Anglo Irish wealthy business people and big landowners. You ask me why that was? Because those wealthy individuals supported and were supported by a system that maintained its wealth even after the country became a republic. Nothing I wrote suggests that they didn't exist as a "class". But it was more than that. It was to do with priveledge and money. They were still very tied into the British wealth systems.
> 
> ...





andysays said:


> I guess this illustrates yet again the problem with having a primarily nationalist based outlook rather than a class based one


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

Maybe the problem is that you only see class? 
I see a history of deprivation and slavery...a sub class. 
Maybe you should think about that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Like I said....
> There were the poverty striken...
> Then the "working class" who were also poverty striken. And then the Anglo Irish wealthy business people and big landowners. You ask me why that was? Because those wealthy individuals supported and were supported by a system that maintained its wealth even after the country became a republic. Nothing I wrote suggests that they didn't exist as a "class". But it was more than that. It was to do with priveledge and money. They were still very tied into the British wealth systems.
> 
> ...


Have you ever considered reading peter berresford ellis's 'a history of the irish working class'?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you ever considered reading peter berresford ellis's 'a history of the irish working class'?



I will look it up. Thanks. I note after a quick Google that he quotes Shaw in  his preface. 

""A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality, it will think of nothing else but getting it set again."


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Things were shite for the vast majority of Irish people until relatively recently.
> Millions of Irish left between 1920 and 1990 and indeed since then too when the economy crashed....
> A whole generation of people left in the 80s.
> It was not a country with a broad middle class. I'm not sure why people think otherwise? Ireland was not and is not an industrialised country. Wealth literally was in the hands of a small minority.
> ...


There has always been a class system in Ireland.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Maybe the problem is that you only see class?
> I see a history of deprivation and slavery...a sub class.
> Maybe you should think about that?


Urban75 has a kind of hypervigilance to any denial or ignorance of the relevance of class and doesn't like to miss an opportunity to castigate and/or lecture people, sometimes based on stuff they didn't actually even say, or are perfectly well aware of already. That's all - just business as usual.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There has always been a class system in Ireland.



If you count a sub class as part of a class system...and a tiny elite wealthy group at the other extreme owning everything and enslaving other people....then it resembled a class system..
If you mean it was a deliberate organisation of people then yes
.....ok call it a class system. 
But to call it just that is to not recognise that slavery existed. The dehumanizing of the Irish populace was deliberately carried out.... a deliberate crushing of one group of people ...a deliberate abdication of any responsibilty for those people by its government. 

Of course, there's a class system now and for the past 40 to 50 years. It's still not as rigid as in the UK...from what I can see. Not sure how "organised" or deliberate this class system is? Apart from the elite wealthy still up top...always there....no matter what the system. ..eh?
... it may be by education or social links...or location... inner city poverty vs suburban relative wealth. 
Don't know. 
There are middle class people eating in soup kitchens. 
There are working class people living in mansions... 
Really ... it's not so clearly defined..


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What, whether Dublin one of the sites of the most heroic of the classic industrial class struggles as well as one of the shining lights of labour history (The ICA) had any working class people living there? If it gets this nationalist mythory off this thread, then let's do it.


Sometimes I'm just too polite.

Anyway...thought that those discussing the pros & cons of Dublin becoming the new Canary Wharf might be interested in this from 1989...from that radical institution...the BoE...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2019)

Lupa said:


> If you count a sub class as part of a class system...and a tiny elite wealthy group at the other extreme owning everything and enslaving other people....then it resembled a class system..
> If you mean it was a deliberate organisation of people then yes
> .....ok call it a class system.
> But to call it just that is to not recognise that slavery existed. The dehumanizing of the Irish populace was deliberately carried out.... a deliberate crushing of one group of people ...a deliberate abdication of any responsibilty for those people by its government.
> ...


Yeh it's a really new creation 

Race, Language and Social Class in Seventeenth-Century Ireland - Persée


----------



## Patteran (Jan 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you ever considered reading peter berresford ellis's 'a history of the irish working class'?



Great book. Recommended reading in late 80s/early 90s RA/AFA circles.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

Have I got this right, the Tories are offering to invest six billion in northern areas only if Labour support Mays deal... And if they don't those areas don't get the money? Is that really what's happening?


----------



## grit (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Have I got this right, the Tories are offering to invest six billion in northern areas only if Labour support Mays deal... And if they don't those areas don't get the money? Is that really what's happening?



Correct, it’s a naked bribe.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh it's a really new creation
> 
> Race, Language and Social Class in Seventeenth-Century Ireland - Persée




Ok...maybe its the language that is my issue...The Brehon laws allowed for social strata...with a lot of degrees within each strata. They were not strictly applied...And movement between each was commonly possible. They were related very much to responsibility and ability. Being born at one level did not mean you stayed at that level. They were very different to more modern descriptions of "working class", " middle class", "elite class".  At the Flaith level for example, there was an emphasis on property ownership over generations and wealth so that does relate in some way to more modern descriptions of 'class'...but the fact that a person could move through these strata / classes was and is the big difference. 
It's not as straight forward as x number of classes and people left slotting into them because they're born in that class. People could move through merit and work through the system. Chieftains could be elected. Movement through strata was also used a reward or indeed a punishment. 
Classification of ancient Irish Society - Brehon Laws

It's a lot more subtle than a modern view of rigid class systems and was an excellent social construct in many ways.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ok...maybe its the language that is my issue...The Brehon laws allowed for social strata...with a lot of degrees within each strata. They were not strictly applied...And movement between each was commonly possible. They were related very much to responsibility and ability. Being born at one level did not mean you stayed at that level. They were very different to more modern descriptions of "working class", " middle class", "elite class".  At the Flaith level for example, there was an emphasis on property ownership over generations and wealth so that does relate in some way to more modern descriptions of 'class'...but the fact that a person could move through these strata / classes was and is the big difference.
> It's not as straight forward as x number of classes and people left slotting into them because they're born in that class. People could move through merit and work through the system. Chieftains could be elected. Movement through strata was also used a reward or indeed a punishment.
> Classification of ancient Irish Society - Brehon Laws
> 
> It's a lot more subtle than a modern view of rigid class systems and was an excellent social construct in many ways.


Perhaps you might benefit from reading some basic sociology, maybe some marx and weber or a sociology textbook like haralambos and holborn sociology: themes and perspectives


----------



## Libertad (Feb 1, 2019)

I'm proud to have attained the status of villein.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Have I got this right, the Tories are offering to invest six billion in northern areas only if Labour support Mays deal... And if they don't those areas don't get the money? Is that really what's happening?



Worked (ish) on the DUP.
The Labour position on brexit is wibble wobble incomprehensible cack anyway.
I am surprised Labour don't get attacked more for their useless approach.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Worked (ish) on the DUP.
> The Labour position on brexit is wibble wobble incomprehensible cack anyway.
> I am surprised Labour don't get attacked more for their useless approach.


Only because the tory party are also conspicuous by their ineptitude and have the good fortune to be in office if not in power


----------



## killer b (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am surprised Labour don't get attacked more for their useless approach.


have you missed the last three years of politics or something?


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> have you missed the last three years of politics or something?



Its the one thing you can say about Corbyn, till this point he's had a pretty easy ride.


----------



## eoin_k (Feb 1, 2019)

Given that the basic unit for measuring debt was one slave girl, maybe we should be careful about romanticising Brehon laws, never mind the practical issues with trying to reintroduce a pre-feudal system of political economy.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

grit said:


> Correct, it’s a naked bribe.


Small change to secure Singapore-on-Thames.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> Given that the basic unit for measuring debt was one slave girl, maybe we should be careful about romanticising Brehon laws, never mind the practical issues with trying to reintroduce a pre-feudal system of political economy.


Obviously there's some tinkering to be done but if we want to reintroduce a pre-feudal system of political economy into the UK you could do much worse than use the Brehon Laws as a starting point


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> have you missed the last three years of politics or something?


Have you missed the word 'more' in my post?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Have you missed the word 'more' in my post?


It was the word that stuck out, to be fair. I wondered how much more opprobrium you imagined.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

grit said:


> Correct, it’s a naked bribe.


Who made that offer (6bill for the north)? is it on public record?

ETA: Im gleaning that it was at the May & Corbyn meeting?? Is that right?
Fuck me, Labour should go to town on this and expose the Tories over this, turn it around and say to the country: The Tories deliberately withhold the funding you desperately need but are prepared to use your poverty as a gambling chip. Its a total disgrace if that's what's happened. Labour should force the 6billion investment whatever, now they've 'admitted' the money is available from the magic money tree


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It was the word that stuck out, to be fair. I wondered how much more opprobrium you imagined.


The criticism of Labour has been along the lines of what ideas have they got.
I (yes you can't turn back time) would say they should be castigated for voting for article 50, and for having brexit in their 2017 manifesto...If only because they're clueless about the practicalities of brexit, and originally the party was supposed to have been in favour of remain.
I voted Labour in that election, and in the Lewisham East by-election, because anti Tory and anti austerity mattered more, but who are they trying to kid on brexit?
They ought to have been straightforward and honest from the outset and said they are anti brexit because of the Irish border, and as a party that did so much to get the GFA they were not prepared to devastate it.
I am no fan of Ian Blackford, but I thought his repeated assertions that the Tories want to destroy the GFA (despite their lying words) were spot on.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> originally the party was supposed to have been in favour of remain.


During the referendum campaign. Do you think they should have continued with that stance _after_ the result?  That would have been electoral suicide in their post-industrial heartlands.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

My mind boggles with this - the idea that 6 billion to poorest northern areas is a bribe *to Labour* - as if those areas are nothing to do with Tories responsibilities - has got me genuinely shocked. Fuck me, lets try a (very weird) bung, Tory habits die hard eh. Im not sure why this feels more outrageous than the DUP 1 Billion....maybe the open naming and defining of it as poorest areas, most desperate for the money. You wouldnt want people to become destitute would you? Better vote for my deal. Utter cunts


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 1, 2019)

So where is Corbyn calling out this despicable behaviour? Of all the open goals...


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> During the referendum campaign. Do you think they should have continued with that stance _after_ the result?  That would have been electoral suicide in their post-industrial heartlands.


Yes I do think they should have continued that stance after the result.
Maybe it was a choice between electoral suicide or electoral hypocrisy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Maybe it was a choice between electoral suicide or electoral hypocrisy.



I mean they're all politicians already, so they made that choice a long time ago.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So where is Corbyn calling out this despicable behaviour? Of all the open goals...


If that really was said at their meeting - and I cant find anything that says it actually was (anyone?) - then its a massive open goal. the only reporting ive seen is that lab mps are squabbling whether to accept the 'bribe' or notnot enough facepalms


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> If that really was said at their meeting - and I cant find anything that says it actually was (anyone?) - then its a massive open goal. the only reporting ive seen is that lab mps are squabbling whether to accept the 'bribe' or notnot enough facepalms


May's bribe to Labour MPs from Leave-voting ("Northern") constituencies was reported here but it looks like the reported leak (?) was behind Murdoch's paywall.


----------



## CRI (Feb 1, 2019)

Not that the Tories or Labour seem to give a shit about the illegal actions impacting on the wafer-thin referendum result, but . . .

*U.K. Regulator Fines Pro-Brexit Group and Banks-Linked Insurer*



> The U.K.’s Information Commissioner’s Office fined Brexit supporting campaign Leave.EU and a linked insurance company 120,000 pounds ($156,000) for serious breaches of electronic marketing laws as it opens a probe into how both are complying with data-protection rules.
> 
> The ICO announced an audit and issued a preliminary enforcement notice as well as three notices of intent to fine Leave.EU and Arron Banks’s Eldon Insurance in November 2018 as part of its investigation into data analytics for political purposes.





> ICO investigation found that Leave.EU and Eldon Insurance were closely linked. Systems for segregating the personal data of insurance customers’ from that of political subscribers’ were ineffective.
> Leave.EU used Eldon Insurance customers’ details unlawfully to send almost 300,000 political marketing messages. Leave.EU has been fined 15,000 pounds for this breach.
> Eldon Insurance carried out two unlawful direct marketing campaigns.
> The campaigns involved the sending of over 1 million emails to Leave.EU subscribers without sufficient consent.
> Leave.EU has been fined 45,000 pounds and Eldon Insurance has been fined 60,000 pounds for the breach.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes I do think they should have continued that stance after the result.
> Maybe it was a choice between electoral suicide or electoral hypocrisy.


I just want to be clear on this: you think that it should have been the policy of the Labour Party, after the referendum had taken place, to overturn the result of the referendum?

I’m not talking here about whether they, as individuals or collectively, regretted the result, but that they should have had a stated policy to overturn the referendum result, and that’s your advice to the Labour Party?

I mean, I think that’s problematic.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> May's bribe to Labour MPs from Leave-voting ("Northern") constituencies was reported here but it looks like the reported leak (?) was behind Murdoch's paywall.
> 
> View attachment 160559


"_Brexit communities" 
_
That's just sunk in; FFS.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 1, 2019)

Some real banana republic shit this.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Some real banana republic shit this.


Oligarchs are perfectly happy for public money* to be spunked on behalf of their interests.

*that they don't have to contribute to


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> May's bribe to Labour MPs from Leave-voting ("Northern") constituencies was reported here but it looks like the reported leak (?) was behind Murdoch's paywall.
> 
> View attachment 160559


Its hard to tell from that if it was actually said at the meeting to Corbyns face...id guess not. Hard to tell from the reporting.


SpookyFrank said:


> Some real banana republic shit this.


a very british all above board bung...british corruption is a well oiled machine - envy of the world


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 1, 2019)

She can't stiff the DUP because thats the slim majority gone. What guarantee have any potential labour rebels got? Have to be a mug to go for it unless its part of a wider attempt to fuck the party in general.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Obviously there's some tinkering to be done but if we want to reintroduce a pre-feudal system of political economy into the UK you could do much worse than use the Brehon Laws as a starting point



Interesting piece by Marx I've just read that butchers pointed to a (long) while ago about the theft of Scottish land from clanspeople in 18th and 19th centuries: 



> Thus you see, the clan is nothing but a family organized in a military manner, quite as little defined by laws, just as closely hemmed in by traditions, as any family. But the land is the _property of the family_, in the midst of which differences of rank, in spite of consanguinity, do prevail as well as in all the ancient Asiatic family communities.
> 
> The first usurpation took place, after the expulsion of the Stuarts, by the establishment of the family Regiments. From that moment, _pay_ became the principal source of revenue of the Great Man, the Mhoir-Fhear-Chattaibh. Entangled in the dissipation of the Court of London, he tried to squeeze as much money as possible out of his officers, and they applied the same system of their inferiors. The ancient tribute was transformed into fixed money contracts. In one respect these contracts constituted a progress, by fixing the traditional imposts; in another respect they were a usurpation, inasmuch as the “great man” now took the position of landlord toward the “taksmen” who again took toward the peasantry that of farmers. And as the “great men” now required money no less than the “taksmen”, a production not only for direct consumption but for export and exchange also became necessary; the system of national production had to be changed, the hands superseded by this change had to be got rid of. Population, therefore, decreased. But that it as yet was kept up in a certain manner, and that man, in the 18th century, was not yet openly sacrificed to net-revenue, we see from a passage in Steuart, a Scotch political economist, whose work was published 10 years before Adam Smith’s, where it says (Vol.1, Chap.16):
> 
> ...



The Duchess of Sutherland and Slavery by Karl Marx


----------



## andysays (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Its hard to tell from that if it was actually said at the meeting to Corbyns face...id guess not. Hard to tell from the reporting.
> 
> a very british all above board bung...british corruption is a well oiled machine - envy of the world


There's an article by Laura K from yesterday on the BBC website which might be worth reading. Although what's happening here is unusual in how blatant it is, it certainly isn't unique in British politics. 

And the EU policy of supporting regional development and then putting up a sign to say where the money for the new road etc has come from isn't a million miles/kilometres away either...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> She can't stiff the DUP because thats the slim majority gone. What guarantee have any potential labour rebels got? Have to be a mug to go for it unless its part of a wider attempt to fuck the party in general.


She'll stiff the DUP on the 14th; she'll have nothing else that she can do. That's why she's wooing PLP arseholes like Mann; she'll need Lab votes if she's got any hope of getting her (unaltered) agreement passed.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So where is Corbyn calling out this despicable behaviour? Of all the open goals...



How would we know whether Corbyn was calling out this despicable behaviour?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 1, 2019)

two sheds said:


> How would we know whether Corbyn was calling out this despicable behaviour?



He has some limited access to news outlets.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> He has some limited access to news outlets.



Well there was a piece in the Mirror. Theresa May in furious backlash for 'bribing' Labour MPs to back her Brexit deal



> Remain-backing MP Neil Coyle added: "If the Prime Minister has money to try and bribe gullible MPs to back her UK downgrade, she's got the money to end the shameful rise in rough sleeping since she came to office."
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn said every Labour MP should "demand appropriate resources for their constituencies."
> 
> He said: "Many, particularly from mining areas, have been disgracefully treated by this Tory government and indeed previous ones - ever since the miners' strike in the 1980s.



Is it Corbyn's fault these aren't being plastered across the front pages of the Sun, Daily Mail and Daily Express? And did you look before making your claim?


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

I looked and couldnt find...theres a massive difference between "every Labour MP should "demand appropriate resources for their constituencies." and calling this out for what it is. I do wish Corbyn/Lab front bench would get a bit angry and on the offensive once in a while

"every Labour MP should "demand appropriate resources for their constituencies."  is hardly a front page battle cry


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I looked and couldnt find...theres a massive difference between "every Labour MP should "demand appropriate resources for their constituencies." and calling this out for what it is. I do wish Corbyn/Lab front bench would get a bit angry and on the offensive once in a while



If they don't go with the quote before his: "If the Prime Minister has money to try and bribe gullible MPs to back her UK downgrade, she's got the money to end the shameful rise in rough sleeping since she came to office." they probably wouldn't report Corbyn saying similar either. 

Point taken, and I wish he'd get angrier, but he does say stuff and there's no way people will find out unless they go to one of his meetings or see reports of them.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

It's almost as though forces antipathetic to the goals of social democracy control the media


----------



## ska invita (Feb 1, 2019)

two sheds said:


> If they don't go with the quote before his: "If the Prime Minister has money to try and bribe gullible MPs to back her UK downgrade, she's got the money to end the shameful rise in rough sleeping since she came to office." they probably wouldn't report Corbyn saying similar either.
> 
> Point taken, and I wish he'd get angrier, but he does say stuff and there's no way people will find out unless they go to one of his meetings or see reports of them.


The quote before was from a back bench MP ive never heard of..all eyes were on corbyn at that historic [sic] meeting with May - he should have come out of there stood outside number 10 and called them all sick cunts*  i think they're justified to go ballistic over this and never let it drop

*if it was said at the meeting, which im not sure it was, but still

#releasethefunds


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

Yes true enough.


----------



## Supine (Feb 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> He has some limited access to news outlets.



And his own twitter and fb accounts for direct messaging


----------



## two sheds (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Who made that offer (6bill for the north)? is it on public record?
> 
> ETA: Im gleaning that it was at the May & Corbyn meeting?? Is that right?
> Fuck me, Labour should go to town on this and expose the Tories over this, turn it around and say to the country: The Tories deliberately withhold the funding you desperately need but are prepared to use your poverty as a gambling chip. Its a total disgrace if that's what's happened. Labour should force the 6billion investment whatever, now they've 'admitted' the money is available from the magic money tree



I deleted the "Fuck me" and e-mailed this to my local Labour candidate. I wish there was a Labour or Momentum forum for things like this. They only seem to be active on Facebook and Twitter.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> And his own twitter and fb accounts for direct messaging


Tell us exactly what he should be doing. Don't just say doing better or something equally meaningless. Tell us what he should say/do, how he should say/do it and and to whom he should say/do it - stuff like that. Then how he should deal with resistance to him doing this and so on. Off you go.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The quote before was from a back bench MP ive never heard of..all eyes were on corbyn at that historic [sic] meeting with May - he should have come out of there stood outside number 10 and called them all sick cunts*  i think they're justified to go ballistic over this and never let it drop
> 
> *if it was said at the meeting, which im not sure it was, but still
> 
> #releasethefunds



I'm really not sure if Corbyn should have met with May at all. But having met her, he should have called a press conference immediately and hammered her. Caroline Lucas managed to do that and she's the only MP in a party of tinfoil lunatics.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Tell us exactly what he should be doing. Don't just say doing better or something equally meaningless. Tell us what he should say/do, how he should say/do it and and to whom he should say/do it - stuff like that. Then how he should deal with resistance to him doing this and so on. Off you go.



But don't you see Butchers? Corbyn should be demanding we Remain. Anything else is a betrayal of the labour movement. #FACTZ


----------



## teuchter (Feb 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> There's an article by Laura K from yesterday on the BBC website which might be worth reading. Although what's happening here is unusual in how blatant it is, it certainly isn't unique in British politics.
> 
> And the EU policy of supporting regional development and then putting up a sign to say where the money for the new road etc has come from isn't a million miles/kilometres away either...


That's not the same at all. Doing the stuff and then letting people know how it was paid for is not the same as telling people that you'll only do the stuff if they first do something in exchange.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I just want to be clear on this: you think that it should have been the policy of the Labour Party, after the referendum had taken place, to overturn the result of the referendum?
> 
> I’m not talking here about whether they, as individuals or collectively, regretted the result, but that they should have had a stated policy to overturn the referendum result, and that’s your advice to the Labour Party?
> 
> ...


I

I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I
> 
> I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.


Labour's position is and was to respect the results of the referendum.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

It's amazing how you approach things really - you pick a random point then insist that this should apply forevermore - the GFA, a (misunderstood) position in a referendum once held must be stuck to forever etc This isn't really politics is it. The only political bit is where _you _choose _at which point_ history stops isn't it? That actually is intensely political.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I
> 
> I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.



but Labour campaigned for/accepted Brexit in the post-referendum 2017 General Election. so you think that Labour should campaign for a thing that lost a referendum and was entirely contrary to its promises in a subsequent GE?

_problematic_?

you are the idiot of the worlds largest, and most idiot filled village, and i claim my five pounds...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I
> 
> I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.


Labour have difficulties over Brexit, of course (support in remain cities vs leave towns; Corbyn more leave minded than his MPs and activists etc.). To my mind, the leadership have reacted the wrong way to this, just sticking with the 6 tests for so long, hoping to mount a sneak attack in Parliament at some point. Would have been better to try and work on the actual causes of the Brexit vote and do something about that, which might in turn have meant doing something about the Labour Party itself.

But it doesn't matter how much of this you factor in, the one single they had to take account of was the vote to leave.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> but Labour campaigned for/accepted Brexit in the post-referendum 2017 General Election. so you think that Labour should campaign for a thing that lost a referendum and was entirely contrary to its promises in a subsequent GE?
> 
> _problematic_?
> 
> you are the idiot of the worlds largest, and most idiot filled village, and i claim my five pounds...


… and voted for a50.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I
> 
> I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.


Seriously, that is an _immensely_ daft logic.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> but Labour campaigned for/accepted Brexit in the post-referendum 2017 General Election. so you think that Labour should campaign for a thing that lost a referendum and was entirely contrary to its promises in a subsequent GE?
> 
> _problematic_?
> 
> you are the idiot of the worlds largest, and most idiot filled village, and i claim my five pounds...



Thanks for that.
The Labour party position has been poor since before the 2017 election when they said they 'respected' the result. They could have accepted that as a party they lost brexit, and left it to the winners to get on with, whilst opposing every move every step of the way
They ought not to have made brexit 'promises' before the 2017 election in my view, and declared that they were against the referendum result.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> … and voted for a50.



indeed. and voted for the referendum, _and_ said that A50 should be invoked the day after the ref. 

_problematic_ is an excellent euphamism - lets try it out in some other situations:

i had a _problematic_ conversation with my wife when she caught me balls deep in her sister. i had a _problematic_ interview with HR after they discovered that i had paid off my mortgage with the company pension scheme. i had a _problematic_ letter from the CPS after i admitted to the Police that i have been importing some 90 tonnes of Heroin each year for the last decade...


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Thanks for that.
> The Labour party position has been poor since before the 2017 election when they said they 'respected' the result. They could have accepted that as a party they lost brexit, and left it to the winners to get on with, whilst opposing every move every step of the way
> They ought not to have made brexit 'promises' before the 2017 election in my view, and declared that they were against the referendum result.


And been wiped out as a party at this point.


----------



## killer b (Feb 1, 2019)

Didn't the conservative party also campaign against Brexit in the referendum?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> i had a _problematic_ conversation with my wife when she caught me balls deep in her sister.


If this was radio show 'the unbelievable truth' I'd buzz after this as one of the truths you were trying to smuggle past the panel


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 1, 2019)

See I just think that Labour Party policy should be exactly aligned with my own thoughts on subjects.  If not they are wrong and rubbish.


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> If this was radio show 'the unbelievable truth' I'd buzz after this as one of the truths you were trying to smuggle past the panel



I'd have gone for "said that A50 should be invoked the day after the ref. "


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

We all now know the reality is that the day after the referendum he said that article 50 must be invoked.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I
> 
> I agree it may be problematic, but in my view Labour should campaign against brexit because that was their stance before the referendum.



1. Are you familiar with the concept and generally accepted aims of a referendum? 

2. Are you aware Labour does not have a majority in Parliament?

3. Did you know Labour had MP's and members and supporters in both camps during the campaign even if their policy was the same as the LD's, Greens, Tories, Scot Nats, Plaid etc? 

3. Presumably, your view is Labour wouldn't need a second referendum to kill Brexit as these are merely 'problematic'. Instead they could simply ignore the vote and just crack on? Can you see any problems, for example electorally or in respect of the concept of liberal democracy, that might arise with this approach?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

Love it that people have picked up the term “problematic”, but to be fair to philosophical , it was me who brought it into play, (although I was using it sardonically: humour-in-understatement sort of a way).


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> Didn't the conservative party also campaign against Brexit in the referendum?


yeah, but they come with austerity added.


----------



## andysays (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> yeah, but they come with austerity added.


The point is that by your reasoning (and I use the word in its loosest sense) having campaigned against Brexit in the referendum, the Conservatives should also have stuck to their principles and refused to enact Brexit even though the electorate voted for it.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 1. Are you familiar with the concept and generally accepted aims of a referendum?
> 
> 2. Are you aware Labour does not have a majority in Parliament?
> 
> ...



1. 'Generally accepted'? No I am not rock solid in my understanding of what that would mean in relation to a referendum.
2. Yes
3. Yes

I did not introduce the concept of 'problematic', I responded to it's use by another poster.
I also said that Labour could've stood aside, let the winners get on with the unicorn chasing, and opposed and shown up what they were doing constantly.
You may think this is a wrong approach, but I would've voted for them because of other policies...mind you I am metropolitan and see it from my perspective.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> The point is that by your reasoning (and I use the word in its loosest sense) having campaigned against Brexit in the referendum, the Conservatives should also have stuck to their principles and refused to enact Brexit even though the electorate voted for it.


Nah. The whole shitshow is a Tory thing, they can own the result.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 1. 'Generally accepted'? No I am not rock solid in my understanding of what that would mean in relation to a referendum.
> 2. Yes
> 3. Yes
> 
> ...


What does 'stood aside' mean?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> .mind you I am metropolitan and see it from my perspective.


Indeed.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What does 'stood aside' mean?


In this instance it would have been to let the Tories try to do whatever, and to automatically oppose it without explanation.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In this instance it would have been to let the Tories try to do whatever, and to automatically oppose it without explanation.


What does this mean? What does any of that mean? 'let the tories' try to do whatever'? 

What do you think _has _happened?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

Loving the use of "Analysis" there!


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What does this mean? What does any of that mean? 'let the tories' try to do whatever'?
> 
> What do you think _has _happened?



What has happened is that Labour has been suckered, or positioned themselves, into feeling like they have to say what they would do. They have been too involved in the Tory brexit narrative in my view, and would have been more appealing to me over brexit if they watched the Tories (doing whatever) without giving them ammunition in the form of the crap Labour brexit 'policy'.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What has happened is that Labour has been suckered, or positioned themselves, into feeling like they have to say what they would do. They have been too involved in the Tory brexit narrative in my view, and would have been more appealing to me over brexit if they watched the Tories (doing whatever) without giving them ammunition in the form of the crap Labour brexit 'policy'.


In a way, I agree with you that Labour have been stuck within a parliamentary process, rabbits in the headlights, not much to say. But the way out of that isn't to run back to the neoliberal EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What has happened is that Labour has been suckered, or positioned themselves, into feeling like they have to say what they would do. They have been too involved in the Tory brexit narrative in my view, and would have been more appealing to me over brexit if they watched the Tories (doing whatever) without giving them ammunition in the form of the crap Labour brexit 'policy'.


Are you really 60+? Other people and groups have different aims and ends than you. Them not doing what you want them to do to meet your aims and ends is surely an early basic realisation for most people. Repeating over and over that they should do what you want them to do to an end that's yours not theirs is in no way making any sort of political point - or, indeed, showing any understanding of what politics is.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

Talking of Labour and Brexit; Gary Younge's piece in today's 'Guardian' reminds us that the party's cornerstone 1997 PPB featured _Fritz _'the New Labour bulldog' breaking free (taking back control?) and striding off into the sunlit uplands. Makes yer think...



This really happened, kidz.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Loving the use of "Analysis" there!
> 
> View attachment 160579



Got to see the text of this article, anyone get round the paywall?

Classic Torygraph! "We'll show Johnny Foreigner by not Leaving and in fact Remaining, wot wot?"


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Talking of Labour and Brexit; Gary Younge's piece in today's 'Guardian' reminds us that the party's cornerstone 1997 PPB featured _Fritz _'the New Labour bulldog' breaking free (taking back control?) and striding off into the sunlit uplands. Makes yer think...
> 
> View attachment 160586
> 
> This really happened, kidz.



That was a shit article too. Good election broadcast tho to be fair!


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you really 60+? Other people and groups have different aims and ends than you. Them not doing what you want them to do to meet you aims and ends is surely an early basic realisation for most people. Repeating over and over that they should do what you want them to do to an end that's yours not theirs is in no way making any sort of political point - or, indeed, showing any understanding of what politics is.


I am stating my preference, as others (other people and groups) state theirs. I am not saying what they should do as a kind of order or demand.
As for your saying I don't have any understanding of what politics is, you can think that all day long if it is measured against your personal template, but don't you see the irony in what you're saying?
That I should be aware of the variety of viewpoints of other people and groups, but conform to your singular viewpoint of what politics is.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That was a shit article too. Good election broadcast tho to be fair!


tbf I do think Younge has a point about the timespan and players invloved in embedding core notions of English exceptionalism. Affective notions that the oligarchs have so effectively exploited in their wealth defence.


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> The point is that by your reasoning (and I use the word in its loosest sense) having campaigned against Brexit in the referendum, the Conservatives should also have stuck to their principles and refused to enact Brexit even though the electorate voted for it.


Or stood aside so that Nigel Farage et al could have a go


----------



## CRI (Feb 1, 2019)

Nothing to see here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 1, 2019)

A Rebecca Black tweet on a Friday.


----------



## andysays (Feb 1, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> A Rebecca Black tweet on a Friday.


And no sign of Corax


----------



## Raheem (Feb 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Talking of Labour and Brexit; Gary Younge's piece in today's 'Guardian' reminds us that the party's cornerstone 1997 PPB featured _Fritz _'the New Labour bulldog' breaking free (taking back control?) and striding off into the sunlit uplands. Makes yer think...
> 
> View attachment 160586
> 
> This really happened, kidz.


If you decide to call a bulldog Fritz, don't be surprised if he ends up with a bit of identity confusion.


----------



## rioted (Feb 1, 2019)

Fuck the EU and fuck the horse it rode in on.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Feb 1, 2019)

Theresa May is trying to bribe the people of Redcar. She can forget it | Anna Turley


----------



## mauvais (Feb 1, 2019)

If it's anything like every other supposed investment in the north, they'd never deliver the fucking money anyway. Northern whathouse now?


----------



## Poi E (Feb 1, 2019)

Poorhouse


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 1, 2019)

CRI said:


> Nothing to see here.



There's a fucking shitload to see there


----------



## CRI (Feb 1, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> There's a fucking shitload to see there


Yes - this (not the music either.)


----------



## CRI (Feb 1, 2019)

Maybe the Government will suggest hungry people eat the waste - solve two problems in one! 

Officials warn of ‘putrefying’ rubbish after no-deal Brexit



> If the UK leaves the EU without a deal on 29 March, export licences for millions of tonnes of waste will become invalid overnight. Environment Agency (EA) officials said leaking stockpiles could cause pollution.





> “If there is a no-deal scenario, the current export of waste may cease for a period. This could result in stockpiled waste which causes licence breaches,” the email said. “Odours will obviously be an issue as the stockpiled waste putrefies and there may be runoff of leachates, causing secondary pollution.”





> The second example related to animal slurry. “Problems may arise in exporting livestock to the EU. In that situation, farmers may be overstocked and unable to export lamb/beef etc. That means that they may have problems with slurry storage capacity and insufficient land spreading capability.”





> As well as recycling waste, the UK ships about 3m tonnes of rubbish a year to the EU to be burned in incinerators that generate electricity. Most of this is household rubbish, which is sometimes shredded and has metal removed before being sent abroad. If waste has to be stockpiled after a no-deal Brexit, industry experts say the populous south-east of England would be worst affected. The UK’s lack of incinerator capacity and shrinking number of landfill sites drives the exports.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 2, 2019)

Talks to take place between the EU & Ireland, Germany & others trying to find a way of solving the backstop issue, which is acceptable to both Ireland & the UK.



> The Irish Premier Leo Varadkar will head to Brussels next week for emergency Brexit talks amid signs that Dublin is coming under pressure to compromise in the showdown between Britain and the European Union over the backstop.
> 
> EU diplomats will continue to show united support for Dublin in public – and they do not expect Mr Varadkar to reverse his position, which is popular with the Irish public.
> 
> ...



https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/dub...on-backstop-to-save-theresa-mays-brexit-deal/


----------



## teqniq (Feb 2, 2019)

Leave.EU and Banks firm fined £120,000



> Leave.EU and an insurance company owned by its founder Arron Banks have been fined £120,000 over data law breaches.
> 
> It represents a reduction in the £135,000 total previously announced by the Information Commissioner's office.
> 
> *The pro-Brexit Leave.EU group's £60,000 fine was reduced to £45,000 after "considering the company's representations", the ICO said.*


What the fuck?



> Leave.EU said it was a "politically motivated attack against our involvement in Brexit".
> 
> A spokesman said it was "disappointed but not surprised" and would be appealing against the fine in court....


----------



## CRI (Feb 2, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Leave.EU and Banks firm fined £120,000
> 
> 
> What the fuck?


Seemingly, nobody cares.  

And it looks like a quarter of MPs are SO concerned about preparing for leaving that . . . they're not bothering to attend the special sitting to discuss it.  

One in four MPs set to miss special 'Brexit sitting' to be with families over half-term


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> Seemingly, nobody cares.
> 
> And it looks like a quarter of MPs are SO concerned about preparing for leaving that . . . they're not bothering to attend the special sitting to discuss it.
> 
> One in four MPs set to miss special 'Brexit sitting' to be with families over half-term


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 2, 2019)

Badgers posted about Nissan yet or what?


----------



## Poi E (Feb 2, 2019)

Ghosn is a crook. Allegedly.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Feb 2, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Value is a pretty slippery concept in a capitalist system. Some people would argue that food is more valuable than most, if not all services.


Water is worth much more than food, surely. Yet how much does a pint of tap water cost?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Water is worth much more than food, surely. Yet how much does a pint of tap water cost?


Nothing if you get it from work


----------



## kebabking (Feb 2, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Water is worth much more than food, surely. Yet how much does a pint of tap water cost?



Depends on your definition of 'worth' - in a supply/demand economic system a pint of water is worth far less than a pork chop because supply so far outstrips demand, even though you could live without a pork chop but not a pint of water.

If there was a long term loss of power and water purification and the water delivery system ground to a halt, then the 'value' of a pint of clean water water would rocket, assuming you could find one...


----------



## CRI (Feb 2, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Badgers posted about Nissan yet or what?



This?

Brexit Blamed For Nissan Pulling Manufacture Of X-Trail From U.K.



> On Monday, Nissan of Japan is expected to announce that the new X-Trail SUV will now not be built at its U.K. plant in Washington, Tyne and Wear. Sky News has reported that Brexit is one of the key reasons for the switch. Washington is close to Sunderland, the first city to announce voting results for the 2016 referendum on Brexit – Sunderland voted to Leave by a large margin despite the many warnings both before and after the referendum that car manufacturing in the region would be affected.





> Ironically, the E.U. recently signed a free trade agreement with Japan, but the U.K. will only be able to benefit from this FTA while it is still in the European Union. The U.K. is scheduled to leave the E.U. on March 29th. After this date, cars exported from the U.K. to the E.U. could be subject to a 10% tariff. The X-Trail is currently made only in Japan, and thanks to the recent FTA, these cars could be imported into the E.U. at a tariff of zero percent. Nissan may also announce that one of its other factories in the E.U. – probably in France – would now produce the X-Trail.



*cough*


----------



## billbond (Feb 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> Nothing to see here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## CRI (Feb 2, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Feb 2, 2019)

Perhaps it's time to revisit Streeck?

In _'How will capitalism end' _Wolfgang Streeck identifies and explores...
_



			...five systemic disorders of today’s advanced capitalism; all of them result in various ways from the weakening of traditional institutional and political restraints on capitalist advance. I call them stagnation, *oligarchic redistribution*, the plundering of the public domain, corruption and global anarchy.
		
Click to expand...

_
Streeck's notion of _*oligarchic redistribution *_suggesting that growing numbers of ultra high net worth individuals have no 'skin in the game' with national economic or social system within which they choose to reside or use to defend their wealth.



> Redistribution to the top thus becomes oligarchic: rather than serving a collective interest in economic progress, as promised by neoclassical economics, it turns into extraction of resources from increasingly impoverished, declining societies. Countries that come to mind here are Russia and Ukraine, but also Greece and Spain, and increasingly the United States. Under oligarchic redistribution, the Keynesian bond which tied the profits of the rich to the wages of the poor is severed, cutting the fate of economic elites loose from that of the masses.This was anticipated in the infamous ‘plutonomy’ memorandums distributed by Citibank in 2005 and 2006 to a select circle of its richest clients, to assure them that their prosperity no longer depended on that of wage earners. Oligarchic redistribution and the trend toward plutonomy, even in countries that are still considered democracies, conjure up the nightmare of elites confident that they will outlive the social system that is making them rich. Plutonomic capitalists may no longer have to worry about national economic growth because their transnational fortunes grow without it; hence the exit of the super-rich from countries like Russia or Greece, who take their money—or that of their fellow-citizens—and run, preferably to Switzerland, Britain or the United States. The possibility, as provided by a global capital market, of rescuing yourself and your family by exiting together with your possessions offers the strongest possible temptation for the rich to move into endgame mode—cash in, burn bridges, and leave nothing behind but scorched earth.



The ultra high net worth individuals (oligarchs) who have chosen to support a political process that insulates the UK's wealth defence secrecy regimes from the threat of supra-state regulation will have no concerns about an accelerated de-industrialistion in the UK.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 2, 2019)




----------



## CRI (Feb 2, 2019)

Has this popped up yet?  Operation Yellowhammer?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> Has this popped up yet?  Operation Yellowhammer?
> 
> View attachment 160748



Is this the same yellowhammer first reported five months ago?


----------



## Libertad (Feb 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> Has this popped up yet?  Operation Yellowhammer?
> 
> View attachment 160748




For more information please reread.


----------



## CRI (Feb 2, 2019)

Cheers - that's why I asked it as a question.


----------



## killer b (Feb 2, 2019)

great twitter compilation page guys. no wonder buzzfeed is going under.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Ghosn is a crook. Allegedly.





Say.it.Ain’t.So.


----------



## Chz (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Say.it.Ain’t.So.


That shit-show is worthy of its own thread. My reading is that everyone was complicit until Nissan got fed up with Renault bossing them about and turned him in.


----------



## gosub (Feb 3, 2019)

....So its not just UK thats fucking this up....Thats the EUropean Parliament's spokesman on Brexit (good help us)  - for 2.5 years the EU has been saying it will not discuss future relationship until the divorce terms are settled


----------



## Badgers (Feb 3, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Badgers posted about Nissan yet or what?


I don't dare to 'contribute' to the thread due to some wanker the Thread Police


----------



## Poi E (Feb 3, 2019)

Chz said:


> That shit-show is worthy of its own thread. My reading is that everyone was complicit until Nissan got fed up with Renault bossing them about and turned him in.



Been a dramatic drop in Nissan reliability over the last few years.

Apologies for derail


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Been a dramatic drop in Nissan reliability over the last few years.
> 
> Apologies for derail


Got a Nissan - nearly 12 years old now and them most reliable car I've had in nearly 40 years of driving.  Maybe they're crap now, dunno.  Second most reliable was a Toyota.  The shittiest?  A Rover and a Vauxhall.


----------



## treelover (Feb 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Perhaps it's time to revisit Streeck?
> 
> In _'How will capitalism end' _Wolfgang Streeck identifies and explores...
> _
> ...






> This was anticipated in the infamous ‘plutonomy’ memorandums distributed by Citibank in 2005 and 2006 to a select circle of its richest clients, to assure them that their prosperity no longer depended on that of wage earners. Oligarchic redistribution and the trend toward plutonomy, even in countries that are still considered democracies, conjure up the nightmare of elites confident that they will outlive the social system that is making them rich.



Plutonomy - Wikipedia

Wow, never heard of that, did it get much coverage?


----------



## Chz (Feb 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Got a Nissan - nearly 12 years old now and them most reliable car I've had in nearly 40 years of driving.  Maybe they're crap now, dunno.  Second most reliable was a Toyota.  The shittiest?  A Rover and a Vauxhall.


Way derailing here, but... It's a case of what sort of cars Nissan makes changing. All low-end cars (Micra, in their case) have become less reliable in the past ~15 years as the definition of "basic" equipment includes things like traction control, variable valve timing, multiple airbags, satnav, etc... There more things there are to break, the more they break. They're targeting owners who want the fully-loaded experience more, and this brings more things to break in the higher-end vehicles as well.
FWIW, over the past 12 years we've had a K12 Micra and an E11 Note and the only thing that's ever gone wrong was that the Micra needed a new CD player.
Thus ends my derail, I'll start a different thread if I feel the need to talk more about it.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 3, 2019)

treelover said:


> Plutonomy - Wikipedia
> 
> Wow, never heard of that, did it get much coverage?


Yes, despite Citibank's attempts to delete the documents; most notably in Michael Moore's _"Capitalism: A love story" _(2009).


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

Chz said:


> Way derailing here, but... It's a case of what sort of cars Nissan makes changing. All low-end cars (Micra, in their case) have become less reliable in the past ~15 years as the definition of "basic" equipment includes things like traction control, variable valve timing, multiple airbags, satnav, etc... There more things there are to break, the more they break. They're targeting owners who want the fully-loaded experience more, and this brings more things to break in the higher-end vehicles as well.
> FWIW, over the past 12 years we've had a K12 Micra and an E11 Note and the only thing that's ever gone wrong was that the Micra needed a new CD player.
> Thus ends my derail, I'll start a different thread if I feel the need to talk more about it.


It's only a partial de-rail though!  

I think that's an issue with all modern vehicles with every more complicated features and tech to drive them.  Gone are the days when my uncle could fix just about anything wrong on any car with stuff from his garage.  But yes, I think some makes and models may be more durable than others.

Not entirely a derail because if there is No Deal, the UK will probably have to do a lot more "make do and mend" for some time, as so many parts for cars and other machinery are imported, and will be harder to get and/or more expensive to bring in to the country.  Maybe I should just get a bicycle!


----------



## kebabking (Feb 3, 2019)

Continuing the derail...

The new model X-trail is utter pump compared to the pre-facelift model and the reviews have planned it. They are trying to ape the Range Rover Evoque instead of producing a far superior Land Rover Freelander - if you 'aspire' to an Evoque and can afford an X-trail you'll somehow buy an Evoque, if want a decent SUV with lots of space, practically and value for money you'll no longer buy an X-TRAIL.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Got a Nissan - nearly 12 years old now and them most reliable car I've had in nearly 40 years of driving.  Maybe they're crap now, dunno.  Second most reliable was a Toyota.  The shittiest?  A Rover and a Vauxhall.



Yeah last few years seen a real drop.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Got a Nissan - nearly 12 years old now and them most reliable car I've had in nearly 40 years of driving.  Maybe they're crap now, dunno.  Second most reliable was a Toyota.  The shittiest?  A Rover and a Vauxhall.


Datsun was better


----------



## Poi E (Feb 3, 2019)

Well, you always drove a Datsun to the scrapyard after 5 years.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 3, 2019)

People, people...Brexit!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 3, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Well, you always drove a Datsun to the scrapyard after 5 years.


On occasion Badgers drove one back too


----------



## Badgers (Feb 3, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Well, you always drove a Datsun to the scrapyard after 5 years.


We had a number of 120Y Datsuns which served us very well


----------



## Poi E (Feb 3, 2019)

I have one. Old, old friends going back to days of rusty surf wagons in NZ.


----------



## flypanam (Feb 3, 2019)

Brenda is getting evicted Queen to be evacuated if Brexit turns ugly – reports


----------



## two sheds (Feb 3, 2019)

Right, that convinces me all right - we need to Remain people we need to Remain.


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Datsun was better


----------



## Raheem (Feb 3, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Brenda is getting evicted Queen to be evacuated if Brexit turns ugly – reports


So we can infer that no one in the entire armed forces will be expected to give a shit about their oath to faithfully defend the royal family, when push comes to shove.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2019)

I want the queen to be evacuated. On telly.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> We had a number of 120Y Datsuns which served us very well


I learnt to drive in one. Full of filler but it would never die never. Always started too.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 3, 2019)

Who'd like to start?


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

Well, the Hon Member for Shrewsbury's lie on Twitter was so bad, even Twitter felt obliged to call it out.




And someones been looking into what's motivating him, apart from just being a Tory bastard.

 We need to talk about Daniel Kawczynski MP (@DKShrewsbury) & Gold Speculation.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 3, 2019)

Reading up on Nissan, they say that they were always going to make the X Trail primarily in Japan, they agreed to make a small percentage in the UK to reaffirm their commitment to Sunderland, now they are pulling out, saying that Brexit uncertainty is not good, which of course it is not, but will be dealt with shortly, however the actual reason for not building here is the UK’s and EU’s downer on diesel cars making it uneconomical to build here when the market for sales of that model has tanked, so they will make in Asia where they can flog ‘em in local countries that are not so fussy about their population being poisoned by Nissan’s products.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Reading up on Nissan, they say that they were always going to make the X Trail primarily in Japan, they agreed to make a small percentage in the UK to reaffirm their commitment to Sunderland, now they are pulling out, saying that Brexit uncertainty is not good, which of course it is not, but will be dealt with shortly, however the actual reason for not building here is the UK’s and EU’s downer on diesel cars making it uneconomical to build here when the market for sales of that model has tanked, so they will make in Asia where they can flog ‘em in local countries that are not so fussy about their population being poisoned by Nissan’s products.


Don't you just love globalisation?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Reading up on Nissan, they say that they were always going to make the X Trail primarily in Japan, they agreed to make a small percentage in the UK to reaffirm their commitment to Sunderland, now they are pulling out, saying that Brexit uncertainty is not good, which of course it is not, but will be dealt with shortly, however the actual reason for not building here is the UK’s and EU’s downer on diesel cars making it uneconomical to build here when the market for sales of that model has tanked, so they will make in Asia where they can flog ‘em in local countries that are not so fussy about their population being poisoned by Nissan’s products.


Didn't Japan recently sign a 0% tariff agreement with the EU?

Didn't Japan recently say to the UK that they should reconsider brexit?

At the start of the whole brexit thing Nissan voiced concern over its Sunderland plant and _apparently_ May reassured them at the time and everyone accepted it without knowing what it was.

More jobs gone.  How many's that now?  How many businesses exiting stage left?


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> View attachment 160877
> Who'd like to start?



Clearly, they assume Irish people will be like . . .


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 3, 2019)

The whole world is becoming global now


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Didn't Japan recently sign a 0% tariff agreement with the EU?
> 
> Didn't Japan recently say to the UK that they should reconsider brexit?
> 
> ...



Who cares to your first point, they won’t be selling many of their polluting X Trails in the EU or the UK.






How many jobs gone from not making a car here that isn’t made here? None.


----------



## CRI (Feb 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> How many's that now?  How many businesses exiting stage left?



This guy is keeping track of jobs leaving and money being pissed up a wall to "prepare" for Brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Who cares to your first point, they won’t be selling many of their polluting X Trails in the EU or the UK...


Um...if they sell to the EU from the UK there will be a tariff...if they sell directly from Japan there will be no tariff.  Why would they keep Sunderland?


----------



## Supine (Feb 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> More jobs gone.  How many's that now?  How many businesses exiting stage left?



Latest estimate I've seen was 207k jobs at the end of January.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Um...if they sell to the EU from the UK there will be a tariff...if they sell directly from Japan there will be no tariff.  Why would they keep Sunderland?



No one in the EU will be buying the X Trail, cos the  EU has rules that add massive tariffs to polluting diesels, (effectively banned from London with the ULEZ), which is why they won’t build the X Trail in the EU or in the UK. Brexit is nothing to do with Nissan changing its mind on building X Trails in Sunderland. However much you want it to be so.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No one in the EU will be buying the X Trail, cos the  EU has rules that add massive tariffs to polluting diesels, (effectively banned from London with the ULEZ), which is why they won’t build the X Trail in the EU or in the UK. Brexit is nothing to do with Nissan changing its mind on building X Trails in Sunderland. However much you want it to be so.


Even if the company said so?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 3, 2019)

Here's the EU's deputy negotiator on the technological solution for the backstop.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No one in the EU will be buying the X Trail, cos the  EU has rules that add massive tariffs to polluting diesels, (effectively banned from London with the ULEZ), which is why they won’t build the X Trail in the EU or in the UK. Brexit is nothing to do with Nissan changing its mind on building X Trails in Sunderland. However much you want it to be so.


Plenty of pro-Brexit people are extremely keen to find something else to blame this on, be it non-Brexit conditions or the supposed inevitable movement of capital. However: diesel may be down, and Nissan may be in trouble, but SUV demand isn't going away any time soon, it's not that difficult to re-engine a model for petrol or electric, and the solution to market suitability problems isn't to stop making cars, it's to pivot and make the right thing instead, as many are doing. On any of those notes, I doubt very much that there's going to be any replacement production at Sunderland any time soon, and I doubt this will be the last cancellation or abandonment of its type. I think you dismiss this entirely predictable outcome at your peril.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Plenty of pro-Brexit people are extremely keen to find something else to blame this on, be it non-Brexit conditions or the supposed inevitable movement of capital. However: diesel may be down, and Nissan may be in trouble, but SUV demand isn't going away any time soon, it's not that difficult to re-engine a model for petrol or electric, and the solution to market suitability problems isn't to stop making cars, it's to pivot and make the right thing instead, as many are doing. On any of those notes, I doubt very much that there's going to be any replacement production at Sunderland any time soon, and I doubt this will be the last cancellation or abandonment of its type. I think you dismiss this entirely predictable outcome at your peril.


Only not liked due to use of "pivot".


----------



## Raheem (Feb 3, 2019)

And you liked mine even though it included the word "pivot". I feel bad now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Plenty of pro-Brexit people are extremely keen to find something else to blame this on, be it non-Brexit conditions or the supposed inevitable movement of capital. However: diesel may be down, and Nissan may be in trouble, but SUV demand isn't going away any time soon, it's not that difficult to re-engine a model for petrol or electric, and the solution to market suitability problems isn't to stop making cars, it's to pivot and make the right thing instead, as many are doing. On any of those notes, I doubt very much that there's going to be any replacement production at Sunderland any time soon, and I doubt this will be the last cancellation or abandonment of its type. I think you dismiss this entirely predictable outcome at your peril.




Read Nissan’s own statement as to why they have now decided not to carry through within the decision they made in 2016 to make a small percentage of new X Trails here. It has nothing to do with Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Read Nissan’s own statement as to why they have now decided not to carry through within the decision they made in 2016 to make a small percentage of new X Trails here. It has nothing to do with Brexit.


Trouble is...there are reasons why corps & elements of May’s administration may choose to be economical with the actualité; who knows to what extent this production decision was influenced by Brexit?

Does, though, demonstrate sovereignty and who really can take back control...irrespective of the UK’s relationship with the supra-state.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Read Nissan’s own statement as to why they have now decided not to carry through within the decision they made in 2016 to make a small percentage of new X Trails here. It has nothing to do with Brexit.



Yeah, I get the sense that some decisions that were already made are being released to gain a little traction.
You have to wonder at the sheer amount of them, though.

Where I work we are doing a huge amount of "Brexit mitigation" stuff.  It is ironically making my company some money right now, but no one views it as a good thing.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Read Nissan’s own statement as to why they have now decided not to carry through within the decision they made in 2016 to make a small percentage of new X Trails here. It has nothing to do with Brexit.


Update to Production Plan for Next-Generation X-Trail

"While we have taken this decision for business reasons, the continued uncertainty around the UK's future relationship with the EU is not helping companies like ours to plan for the future."

It's not 'nothing', is it?

We will play this game plenty more times, I'm sure, but likely piecemeal and with ambiguities instead of en masse and with clarity.


----------



## Santino (Feb 3, 2019)

I remember before 2016 when no companies ever announced mass redundancies in the UK. A happier time of unproblematic economic growth.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 4, 2019)

Santino said:


> I remember before 2016 when no companies ever announced mass redundancies in the UK. A happier time of unproblematic economic growth.


That's really good satire for anyone who thinks things just happen randomly and cause and effect is a sort of myth.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 4, 2019)

Raheem said:


> That's really good satire for anyone who thinks things just happen randomly and cause and effect is a sort of myth.



That's quite a neat way of saying nothing whatsoever


----------



## Raheem (Feb 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's quite a neat way of saying nothing whatsoever


Whatever you mean by that, thanks.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 4, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Whatever you mean by that, thanks.



I'm not sure you mean, that, but ok.


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2019)

Fantastic line on Beeb telly news earlier explaining that "large companies don't like to involve themselves in politics.."  Um, yes they do, what they don't like is doing so publicallly and transparently.  

That said the Japanese companiest have probably been at the more honourable end of how the large cooperates conduct themselves, especially  over Brexit, but its not  but the only factor  clearly going to be a shake up given the arrest of Ghosn, already on top of emissions cheating....shame they ain't got hybrid varients of both X Trail nor the Qashqai they will still make at Sunderland


----------



## kabbes (Feb 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> ....So its not just UK thats fucking this up....Thats the EUropean Parliament's spokesman on Brexit (good help us)  - for 2.5 years the EU has been saying it will not discuss future relationship until the divorce terms are settled



Lol "eating biss-quits and drinking tea"


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Lol "eating biss-quits and drinking tea"


Shows once again the EU's indifference towards/ignorance if the British and our customs and culture. Cocaine and underage rentboys not biss-quits and tea, this is the Tories. Fucking Eurocrats.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Shows once again the EU's indifference towards/ignorance if the British and our customs and culture. Cocaine and underage rentboys not biss-quits and tea, this is the Tories. Fucking Eurocrats.


Presumably, this is what he's getting at when he says he hopes it won't just be biscuits and tea.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 4, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> No one in the EU will be buying the X Trail, cos the  EU has rules that add massive tariffs to polluting diesels, (effectively banned from London with the ULEZ), which is why they won’t build the X Trail in the EU or in the UK. Brexit is nothing to do with Nissan changing its mind on building X Trails in Sunderland. However much you want it to be so.



As an aside, they only make and sell the petrol version in Japan. Not sure if Japanese emission and tax regs make selling diesel passenger vehicles worthwhile, unless they're for taxis. Did one with the SR20DET in it. Would have been fun.


----------



## DownwardDog (Feb 4, 2019)

SR20 = God-Emporer of all IL4 engines.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

Hopefully one upside of Brexit will be the collapse of the UK car manufacturing industry and we can start making some socially useful things instead.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

Santino said:


> I remember before 2016 when no companies ever announced mass redundancies in the UK. A happier time of unproblematic economic growth.


Fair point, but the concern for the Government will be the extent to which this decision to withdraw Foreign Direct Investment represents an indicator of a trend towards the need for ever more costly 'incentives' to invest within the UK. Japanese automotive FDI in the UK since 1986 has been based upon producing for the EU market from the most 'trans-Atlantic'/English speaking EU member state. Were the UK to end up outside a CU (and the Japanese/EU FTA) the logic of UK based Japanese-owned production is obviously undermined.

This shocker for May has already revealed that £60m of corporate welfare was bunged at Nissan in 2016 just to keep quiet about Brexit.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Hopefully one upside of Brexit will be the collapse of the UK car manufacturing industry and we can start making some socially useful things instead.


856,000 people out of a job in pursuit of your confused eco-nationalism


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Hopefully one upside of Brexit will be the collapse of the UK car manufacturing industry and we can start making some socially useful things instead.


locks for toilet doors for example i suppose


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> locks for toilet doors for example i suppose


----------



## killer b (Feb 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> Japanese companiest have probably been at the more honourable end of how the large cooperates conduct themselves





brogdale said:


> £60m of corporate welfare was bunged at Nissan in 2016


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

there's thousands of useful things could be made in the uk

China Toilet Door Lock, China Toilet Door Lock Manufacturers and Suppliers on Alibaba.com


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

mauvais said:


> 856,000 people out of a job in pursuit of your confused eco-nationalism


Somewhat fewer than those employed in the financial services sector.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

The *Alternative Arrangements Working Group ...*sounds like a possible title for Pickman's model 's Grytviken planning committee!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The *Alternative Arrangements Working Group ...*sounds like a possible title for Pickman's model 's Grytviken planning committee!


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I was asked yesterday if I could do a quick stocktake in the machine spares stores yesterday. As there has been a sudden realisation by management that vital spares may be delayed following Brexit, this fear was highlighted by our Dutch and German suppliers, even though all our engineers have been saying this for a year!



Just got the spares budget asked for signed off. £231,000, order gone in, replies from German and Dutch suppliers estimate delivery from four weeks to eighteen months!!!!
We haven’t left yet.


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

mauvais said:


> 856,000 people out of a job in pursuit of your confused eco-nationalism


And jobs lost due to cafes, shops and other businesses those employees use.  It will take years, significant investment (from where?) and actual demand for the products for a shift from car manufacturing to some warm, fuzzy, socially beneficial, eco-friendly thing.  In the mean time, let them eat grass, eh?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> And jobs lost due to cafes, shops and other businesses those employees use.  It will take years, significant investment (from where?) and actual demand for the products for a shift from car manufacturing to some warm, fuzzy, socially beneficial, eco-friendly thing.  In the mean time, let them eat grass, eh?


The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.


We're not rid of the bankers; that's what Brexit is all about.


----------



## grit (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.



I can’t tell, is this post a wind up?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

grit said:


> I can’t tell, is this post a wind up?


if you look in the column on the left and you see teuchter, then yes, it is a wind-up


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.


Only the ones who refuse to ride unicorns!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

Correction; £80m apparently.

Guardian reports that the FT has got hold of Greg Clark’s 2016 letter to Nissan containing the bung pledge.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> And jobs lost due to cafes, shops and other businesses those employees use.  It will take years, significant investment (from where?) and actual demand for the products for a shift from car manufacturing to some warm, fuzzy, socially beneficial, eco-friendly thing.  In the mean time, let them eat grass, eh?


I love how we've got 3 Liberal remain freaks arguing between themselves and against a position nobody holds.


----------



## xenon (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Hopefully one upside of Brexit will be the collapse of the UK car manufacturing industry and we can start making some socially useful things instead.



Don't they also make electric and hybrede models in Sunderland?

I like the idea of cars as a service as a way to tackle pollution, conjestion and whatnot but it still relies on having actual cars.


----------



## gosub (Feb 4, 2019)

xenon said:


> Don't they also make electric and hybrede models in Sunderland?
> 
> I like the idea of cars as a service as a way to tackle pollution, conjestion and whatnot but it still relies on having actual cars.


The Leaf...And vane They don't currently do hybrid or electrics for their larger cars.  Presume they will eventually but think they are a bit rabbit in headlights at mo


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

So, this was only sent to NHS Trusts a couple days ago.   Like how much useful support with achieving everything on this list in less than two months?  FFS.



Brexit support through the Trust System Support Model - NHS Digital


----------



## Supine (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.



If shaking things up by huge amounts of job losses is a lexiter plan I'm not sure it'll be very popular.


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Correction; £80m apparently.
> 
> Guardian reports that the FT has got hold of Greg Clark’s 2016 letter to Nissan containing the bung pledge.



UK Promised Nissan 80 Million Pounds of Support for 2016 Car Investment: FT


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> If shaking things up by huge amounts of job losses is a lexiter plan I'm not sure it'll be very popular.



This thread has much discussion of lexiter plans where massive economic disruption is welcomed, in return for longer term benefits. Apparently this is what large portions of the population willingly voted for. People say so on this thread, so I think it must be true.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

Lexit's not a thing though, is it.

Meanwhile it sounds like the gov is attempting to deny the £60-80m to Nissan, although different media outlets can't agree on either the number or what's happening to it. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## philosophical (Feb 4, 2019)

This was the ballot paper. One of the more reliable guides as to what people voted for.
Four words, the verb being 'leave'.
I find it easier to discuss around those four words. The UK will leave the EU.
The UK is over here having 'left', the EU is over there.
Two separate entities with no instruction that those entities will be joined up in any way.
The vote was to 'leave'.
So once separate there is a border, (unless I am mistaken and leave actually means joined together.)
But lo!
Pesky Geography shows that the EU and the UK although apart are joined together by land.
The question remains after all this time about how exactly do you manifest leaving something you are physically joined together with on that actual land.
If those who voted leave knew what they voted for, perhaps they can tell the rest of us how they think it will be done.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 4, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> UK Promised Nissan 80 Million Pounds of Support for 2016 Car Investment: FT
> 
> View attachment 160933


Yes.

This Guardian piece from 27/10/16 makes interesting reading in the light of today's revelation.

This is particularly smelly:


> No 10 refused to say what has been promised to the car industry or to say whether any public money was involved, although it signalled that *it had not made any declaration to the EU about a proposal to offer state aid.* “The assurances are that we will get the best possible deal from leaving the EU,” May’s deputy official spokesman said. *“There was no special deal for Nissan.”*


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes.
> 
> This Guardian piece from 27/10/16 makes interesting reading in the light of today's revelation.
> 
> This is particularly smelly:


You mean the Government may have . . . lied?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> You mean the Government may have . . . lied?


I believe that tories prefer the phrase _economical with the actualité_


----------



## andysays (Feb 4, 2019)

philosophical said:


> This was the ballot paper. One of the more reliable guides as to what people voted for.
> Four words, the verb being 'leave'.
> I find it easier to discuss around those four words. The UK will leave the EU.
> The UK is over here having 'left', the EU is over there.
> ...


There is currently a border between NI and Eire, just as there is a border between, for example, France and Belgium.

You (and others) might also benefit from reading this
Brexit: Does the Irish peace accord rule out a hard border?


> What does the Good Friday Agreement say about a hard border? A lot less than you might think. The only place in which it alludes to infrastructure at the border is in the section on security. During the Troubles there were heavily fortified army barracks, police stations and watchtowers along the border. They were frequently attacked by Republican paramilitaries.





> Part of the peace deal involved the UK government agreeing to a process of removing those installations in what became known as "demilitarisation". The agreement states that "the development of a peaceful environment... can and should mean a normalisation of security arrangements and practices." The government committed to "as early a return as possible to normal security arrangements in Northern Ireland, consistent with the level of threat". That included "the removal of security installations". That is as far as the text goes. There is no explicit commitment to never harden the border, and there is nothing about customs posts or regulatory controls.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 4, 2019)

Petition: Offer the Republic of Ireland full UK membership so they can rejoin the Union.










Originally seen on A Petition To "Offer The Republic Full UK Membership" Has Been Gaining Signatures Online    - Lovin.ie


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

Just heard part of Clark's statement to the Commons in which he acknowledges Nissan's "No-Deal Brexit" concerns and said that they "should be listened to and encourage Parliament to come together...etc."

May's loyalists to her 'deal' are certainly trying to use this Nissan shit-show.


----------



## andysays (Feb 4, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Petition: Offer the Republic of Ireland full UK membership so they can rejoin the Union.
> 
> View attachment 160939
> 
> ...



Have you signed?


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

Murphy's Law says the government will get into a spat with Nissan over this capital, then as a result Nissan will also move Qashqai production away (the other half of this deal?), and meanwhile successfully claim the funds because the duff agreement was somehow binding.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Murphy's Law says the government will get into a spat with Nissan over this capital, then as a result Nissan will also move Qashqai production away (the other half of this deal?), and meanwhile successfully claim the funds because the duff agreement was somehow binding.


You've seen theresa may at work before then


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Petition: Offer the Republic of Ireland full UK membership so they can rejoin the Union.
> 
> View attachment 160939
> 
> ...


It's on 2221 now


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 4, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The UK will leave the EU.


On this, at least, we agree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> On this, at least, we agree.


Let's wait and see if it happens


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Let's wait and see if it happens


Balance of probabilities is still that it will. But, OK, let’s be completely empirical.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I love how we've got 3 Liberal remain freaks arguing between themselves and against a position nobody holds.





mauvais said:


> 856,000 people out of a job in pursuit of your confused eco-nationalism


Hang on. You specifically argued that climate change was too important to be left to the workers, that only governments could tackle it. Surely you should be argued for car plants to be re-purposed


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

Who was the third, was it me?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Balance of probabilities is still that it will. But, OK, let’s be completely empirical.


There's been so many twists and turns I think we're due a couple more including a final denouement


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> If shaking things up by huge amounts of job losses is a lexiter plan I'm not sure it'll be very popular.



It's not anyone's plan. It exists only in the fevered imagination of pro EU liberals.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Who was the third, was it me?


Not telling


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Hang on. You specifically argued that climate change was too important to be left to the workers, that only governments could tackle it. Surely you should be argued for car plants to be re-purposed


There's a lot of long winded tangents to potentially unpack in that, but let's be honest, logical continuity should never be an obstacle to having a pop at teuchter's terrible trolling.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 4, 2019)

mauvais said:


> but let's be honest, logical continuity should never be an obstacle to having a pop at teuchter's terrible trolling.


OK, that's fair.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

The actual boring answer to your cross-thread point is, aside from probably it already being too late, then yes I do think there will need to be a top-down forced transition to something that isn't, in this order: diesel cars, petrol cars, personal cars, maybe any cars. But I don't suppose that teutcher's dream of the UK car industry going unilaterally down the shitter ASAP due to domestic government ineptitude will be a lot of use in that goal.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's on 2221 now




DUP extended families ...?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 4, 2019)

andysays said:


> Have you signed?


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.


Assuming that you're not trolling, the UK car manufacturing industry going down the shitter won't actually reduce the number of cars on the road (well maybe some due to fewer people having jobs)? There will just be more imported cars on the road. There are plenty of countries in the world with no car industry at all that have plenty of cars in them.
One of the hard core Brexit arguments was always Germany will give us a good deal because we'll stop buying Audi, BMW, VW etc. No we won't we'll just pay more for them because of tariffs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Lexiteers will agree with me though, because this whole thing is an opporrunity for a shake-up and a move to better things. We can get rid of the bankers and the car companies at the same time.


Not to mention scores of other industries you disapprove of


----------



## Supine (Feb 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> It's not anyone's plan. It exists only in the fevered imagination of pro EU liberals.



People on this thread have been talking about losing jobs being good.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> People on this thread have been talking about losing jobs being good.


I know they have. That's what I'm referring to in the post you've quoted.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> It's not anyone's plan. It exists only in the fevered imagination of pro EU liberals.



Nope, it's been suggested at various points on this thread that the worst off in the UK have nothing to lose from large scale economic disruption and that this explains a portion the Leave vote, and therefore Lexit fantasists don't have to feel bad about their preferred outcomes meaning that a bunch of less badly off people will likely lose their jobs, and furthermore we must all remember that if this kind of outcome does come to pass, it's what people voted for.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Nope, it's been suggested at various points on this thread that the worst off in the UK have nothing to lose from large scale economic disruption and that this explains a portion the Leave vote, and therefore Lexit fantasists don't have to feel bad about their preferred outcomes meaning that a bunch of less badly off people will likely lose their jobs, and furthermore we must all remember that if this kind of outcome does come to pass, it's what people voted for.


I suppose you've got quotes to back that up?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I suppose you've got quotes to back that up?



eg



pocketscience said:


> I think for a lot of working class have weighed it up and decided it's better to end it ruinously than to live with endless ruin.





Terry Manners said:


> I believe there will be a massive negative economic impact from Brexit, however that’s not to say a crash wouldn’t have happened with Remain anyway, so it’s not really about hard figures, but saying the gamble was probably worth it in terms of disruption of the normal way of doing things.
> 
> Of course whether people are in a position to take advantage of the disruption to create a more economically democratic society is another matter. If they are then we will know how much it was worth it.


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Nope, it's been suggested at various points on this thread that the worst off in the UK have nothing to lose from large scale economic disruption and that this explains a portion the Leave vote, and therefore Lexit fantasists don't have to feel bad about their preferred outcomes meaning that a bunch of less badly off people will likely lose their jobs, and furthermore we must all remember that if this kind of outcome does come to pass, it's what people voted for.


I haven't followed the whole thread, but I do often see on social media from left-leaning, pro-leave folks saying that for some people, things are so bad that they couldn't possibly get worse to argue the case for leaving, including with "No Deal."  Granted, quite a few of those on Twitter at least are bots/shills, but not all of them.  It's bananas to think that because the situation is worse than it's ever been for some people, it can't get even worse still.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> I haven't followed the whole thread, but I do often see on social media from left-leaning, pro-leave folks saying that for some people, things are so bad that they couldn't possibly get worse to argue the case for leaving, including with "No Deal."  Granted, quite a few of those on Twitter at least are bots/shills, but not all of them.  It's bananas to think that because the situation is worse than it's ever been for some people, it can't get even worse still.


We will look back on the spring of 2019 as the last of the halcyon days


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> I haven't followed the whole thread, but I do often see on social media from left-leaning, pro-leave folks saying that for some people, things are so bad that they couldn't possibly get worse to argue the case for leaving, including with "No Deal."  Granted, quite a few of those on Twitter at least are bots/shills, but not all of them.  It's bananas to think that because the situation is worse than it's ever been for some people, it can't get even worse still.


You're a proven liar with a track record of deliberately misrepresenting others in order to smear them so nobody should take a word you say seriously.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> eg


That's a no then.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> I haven't followed the whole thread, but I do often see on social media from left-leaning, pro-leave folks saying that for some people, things are so bad that they couldn't possibly get worse to argue the case for leaving, including with "No Deal."  Granted, quite a few of those on Twitter at least are bots/shills, but not all of them.  It's bananas to think that because the situation is worse than it's ever been for some people, it can't get even worse still.


You don't have to be 'pro-leave' to appreciate why those who have suffered most from neoliberal, late capitalism might have rejected the tory Government's injunction to support the supra-state.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We will look back on the spring of 2019 as the last of the halcyon days


The olive hoarding months


----------



## agricola (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The olive hoarding months



As opposed to 2020's Olive, hoarding moths.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We will look back on the spring of 2019 as the last of the halcyon days



When we still had salad, days.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> When we still had salad, days.


Before the locust days when we had to eat insects


----------



## teuchter (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You don't have to be 'pro-leave' to appreciate why those who have suffered most from neoliberal, late capitalism might have rejected the tory Government's injunction to support the supra-state.


I think that should be 'speculate' rather than 'appreciate'.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I think that should be 'speculate' rather than 'appreciate'.


Probably best if you stick to writing your own posts.


----------



## CRI (Feb 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You don't have to be 'pro-leave' to appreciate why those who have suffered most from neoliberal, late capitalism might have rejected the tory Government's injunction to support the supra-state.


I'm not disputing that.  I'm disputing the idea that "things can't get any worse."  They absolutely can.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 4, 2019)




----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

Nissan was offered secret state aid to cope with Brexit, minister concedes


> The business secretary has been forced to admit the existence of a previously secret package of state aid to Nissan that could have been worth up to £80m had the carmaker gone ahead with plans to manufacture a new model X-Trail in Sunderland after Brexit.
> 
> Greg Clark released a letter dated October 2016 in which he pledged tens of millions of taxpayer support and promised the Japanese company it would not be “adversely affected” after the UK left the EU.
> 
> Yet, at the time the commitments were first made, Downing Street had said “there was no special deal for Nissan” and Clark refused six times to answer a question about what was on offer when interviewed on the BBC. He even appeared to suggest no money was involved. Asked on BBC One’s Question Time about the deal, he said: “There’s no chequebook. I don’t have a chequebook.”


Whoops. But also:





> Nissan said it planned to consolidate all production of the X-Trail in its plant in Kyushu, Japan. Cars manufactured there will benefit from the recently completed free-trade agreement between the EU and Japan, which will mean all tariffs on cars are reduced to zero within seven years.


Went into effect on 1st of Feb. Not good news for Britain until if/when it manages to replicate this FTA (it took the EU about six years). But not exactly a clear argument for a jobs-based Remain either.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 4, 2019)

They'll use us and they'll us eu too. This is what capital does. It didn't start in 2016 - and the red rose has been sucking up shit like this since what, 81? Protect us EU.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 4, 2019)

Who's arguing otherwise?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 4, 2019)

Those supporting the EU and that at all costs we must remain. On here we need only click the who replied button. Lots of right wing people arguing for the rights of the workers.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 5, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2019)

Arlene is bemoaning others' political *intransigence:
*


> Well, actually, I could reverse that by saying, through the intransigence of the European Union and the Republic of Ireland in their attitude, they are actually more likely to bring about the very thing that they want to avoid.



Irony dial set to...


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Nissan was offered secret state aid to cope with Brexit, minister concedes
> Whoops. But also:Went into effect on 1st of Feb. Not good news for Britain until if/when it manages to replicate this FTA (it took the EU about six years). But not exactly a clear argument for a jobs-based Remain either.


Stop the benefit scroungers


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 5, 2019)

Really don't like this term 'state aid'. It's highly ideological. It's doing a job for the EU isn't it?


----------



## grit (Feb 5, 2019)

Interesting that we have now progressed to the powers that be suggesting where the blame lies when a no deal brexit occurs.

Each passing day makes no deal look more certain.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 5, 2019)

grit said:


> Interesting that we have now progressed to the powers that be suggesting where the blame lies when a no deal brexit occurs.
> 
> Each passing day makes no deal look more certain.


Thats probably why he said it - to make it look more certain


----------



## CRI (Feb 5, 2019)

grit said:


> Interesting that we have now progressed to the powers that be suggesting where the blame lies when a no deal brexit occurs.
> 
> Each passing day makes no deal look more certain.


Well yes - the Government message has always been that it's the EU being difficult, even when the staggering incompetence of UK ministers completely fucking up "negotiations" time and again was clear to see.  They're definitely ramping up the propaganda to make it look like the EU and individual EU nations (particularly Ireland) are the villains of the piece, victimising the poor little Britannia, who's trying her best and but everyone is just being so mean to her.  Increasingly convinced that "No Deal" was the goal all along.  

Funny, they're just waking up to this very real prospect.  The Irish American lobby is politically bipartisan and far stronger than the Masterpiece Theatre and Benny Hill watching, tea and crumpet loving anglophile contingent.

Ministers fear Irish lobby influence over US post-Brexit trade deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2019)

saw this on my way to work this morning


----------



## CRI (Feb 5, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Feb 5, 2019)

Hard hitting content this.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 5, 2019)

**Nah, actually, won't post that.**

(Cue_ great content_ etc)


----------



## CRI (Feb 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> Well yes - the Government message has always been that it's the EU being difficult, even when the staggering incompetence of UK ministers completely fucking up "negotiations" time and again was clear to see.  They're definitely ramping up the propaganda to make it look like the EU and individual EU nations (particularly Ireland) are the villains of the piece, victimising the poor little Britannia, who's trying her best and but everyone is just being so mean to her.  Increasingly convinced that "No Deal" was the goal all along.
> 
> Funny, they're just waking up to this very real prospect.  The Irish American lobby is politically bipartisan and far stronger than the Masterpiece Theatre and Benny Hill watching, tea and crumpet loving anglophile contingent.
> 
> Ministers fear Irish lobby influence over US post-Brexit trade deal


And the Irish Deputy PM is in Washington, DC this week.

Coveney to discuss Brexit with powerful figures in Washington



> Members of the Irish-American caucus in the US capital are watching events in London closely. And several have indicated that a return to a hard border in Ireland must be avoided at all costs, in particular, Richard Neal, the Massachusetts congressman who was centrally involved in the Belfast Agreement and is the co-chairman of the Friends of Ireland caucus on Capitol Hill. He has recently been appointed as head of the powerful Ways and Means committee. This committee will play a key role in overseeing any future trade agreement between Britain and the US after Britain leaves the EU. Two other Irish-American members of congress – Brendan Boyle and New York congressman Brian Higgins – are also members of the committee.





> The promise of a bilateral trade agreement between Britain and the US is a central plank of Britain’s post-Brexit economic policy given that British exports to the States are worth about £100 billion to the British economy.





> US food and pharmaceutical companies have argued that Britain needs to align more closely with US standards, particularly in the food sector, as a precondition for a trade deal post-Brexit. The office of the US trade representative published a request for input from interested parties about a potential new trade deal last November. It received approximately 130 comments from interested companies. Some called for access to US hormone-fed beef in Britain as a condition for the trade deal. Others urged the NHS to lower the barriers that prevent the national health service from sourcing more medicines from the United States.



So hey, might avoid American food with dodgy standards after all, but if the Government is counting on this trade deal so much, might just end up avoiding food all together.  They'll spin starvation as a new strategy for tackling obesity!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2019)

If all else fails...



Desperate stuff.


----------



## TruXta (Feb 5, 2019)

There's no UK-wide FA for starters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If all else fails...
> 
> View attachment 161008
> 
> Desperate stuff.


i was hoping the nefandous may would be history by the end of this year


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 5, 2019)

.


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If all else fails...
> 
> View attachment 161008
> 
> Desperate stuff.



Can we have some bread with that circus, please? No, not baguette.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 5, 2019)

Ireland & the UK?  There is this traditional thing that the hosts get automatic qualification.  So that means Ireland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and now we know that Gibraltar is _most certainly not a colony _I guess they're in as well.

Will there be any spaces for any other countries?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Ireland & the UK?  There is this traditional thing that the hosts get automatic qualification.  So that means Ireland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and now we know that Gibraltar is _most certainly not a colony _I guess they're in as well.
> 
> Will there be any spaces for any other countries?


----------



## mauvais (Feb 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If all else fails...
> 
> View attachment 161008
> 
> Desperate stuff.


The good news is that the combined approach will offer a 66% saving to the taxpayer.

The bad news is it'll have to take place on the Holyhead-Dun Laoghaire ferry and is also contingent on all citizens sending their Tesco Clubcard vouchers to Number 10 at least 48 hours before departure.

Edit: more good news - racism declines to zero during the tournament!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Ireland & the UK?  There is this traditional thing that the hosts get automatic qualification.  So that means Ireland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and now we know that Gibraltar is _most certainly not a colony _I guess they're in as well.
> 
> Will there be any spaces for any other countries?



If Gib's in the IoM, Guerney, Jersey etc. will be in too. 

Even with an all British world cup we'll probably still lose.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If Gib's in the IoM, Guerney, Jersey etc. will be in too.
> 
> Even with an all British world cup we'll probably still lose.



Gibraltar do actually have a proper team and everything that take part in the qualifiers, they're similar to the likes of San Marino and the Faroe Islands.  The Channels Islands and IoM probably do have national teams just so far down the tiers they don't get to play in the qualifiers.

I once got a flight with the Gibraltar under 18 national side.  Bunch of Spanish looking lads speaking in Spanish to each other yet clutching UK Passports.  Must be a very strange place down there.


----------



## CRI (Feb 5, 2019)

Speaking of ferries . . . whoopsie!

UK to spend £800k on Eurotunnel Brexit case



> The government plans to pay a law firm £800,000 for advice in case Eurotunnel decides to sue over the effects of Brexit on its business.  The contract description originally said Getlink, previously called Eurotunnel, was "highly likely" to go through litigation.   It said the government could be forced to pay "significant damages" if the firm was successful.





> Last December, it emerged that the government had awarded contracts worth £107m to three companies to provide extra ferry services in the event of a no-deal Brexit.  A BBC investigation found that Seaborne Freight, which won a contract for £13.8m to run ferries from Ramsgate to Ostend, had no ships.





> In January, Eurotunnel wrote to Transport Secretary Chris Grayling to complain that they had not been considered when the contracts were awarded. The company also warned that their award of these contracts could be illegal.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Gibraltar do actually have a proper team and everything that take part in the qualifiers, they're similar to the likes of San Marino and the Faroe Islands.  The Channels Islands and IoM probably do have national teams just so far down the tiers they don't get to play in the qualifiers.
> 
> I once got a flight with the Gibraltar under 18 national side.  Bunch of Spanish looking lads speaking in Spanish to each other yet clutching UK Passports.  Must be a very strange place down there.



I once took a train with Plymouth Argyle, so used to odd looking buggers.

Guernsey will field Matt Le Tissier, they can't go wrong


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If all else fails...
> 
> View attachment 161008
> 
> Desperate stuff.


The number of bridges that are going to get burned between London and Dublin between now and then, I suspect that this is not very likely at all.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 5, 2019)

TruXta said:


> There's no UK-wide FA for starters.



Canada, the US and Mexico are jointly hosting 2026, so that's not a problem.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2019)

She obviously likes being told to fuck off.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I once got a flight with the Gibraltar under 18 national side.  Bunch of Spanish looking lads speaking in Spanish to each other yet clutching UK Passports.  Must be a very strange place down there.



I had to read that twice because the first time I read it as "I once got in a fight with the Gibraltar under 18 national side..."


----------



## Supine (Feb 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> She obviously likes being told to fuck off.
> 
> View attachment 161037



Told to fuck off in 27 different languages


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> Speaking of ferries . . . whoopsie!
> 
> UK to spend £800k on Eurotunnel Brexit case



How is Eurotunnel supposed to run services that are not Folkestone-Calais?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 5, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Canada, the US and Mexico are jointly hosting 2026, so that's not a problem.


Only way Canada will ever qualify


----------



## brogdale (Feb 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Told to fuck off in 27 different languages


----------



## TruXta (Feb 5, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Canada, the US and Mexico are jointly hosting 2026, so that's not a problem.


Whoosh


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 5, 2019)

grit said:


> Interesting that we have now progressed to the powers that be suggesting where the blame lies when a no deal brexit occurs.
> 
> Each passing day makes no deal look more certain.



i will bet one entire brussels euro  that no deal will not happen.



With every day that passes the panic level increases. Once May comes back later this week from being told to fuck off by the EU and then the commons tells her to fuck off as well,  A50 will be extended for a few   more months so the everyone can tell Theresa May to fuck off for a little bit longer.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 5, 2019)

I totally get the "Telling May to Fuck Off" thing, the sense of satisfaction must be enormous, At the moment I think we're sliding towards No-Deal by default, even though no-one bar the odd crazy wants it. There just aren't enough people wanting anything else and  No-Deal is what we get stuck with by default.
I don't totally buy they all want to avoid No-Deal either, I think they all want to avoid being the person who gets _blamed _for a No-Deal but that's not the same as avoiding it. They all seem to putting far too much effort into
trying to pin the blame on someone else for it rather than avoiding it in the first place.
I would love to be proven wrong.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 5, 2019)

Mega lolz


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 5, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I totally get the "Telling May to Fuck Off" thing, the sense of satisfaction must be enormous, At the moment I think we're sliding towards No-Deal by default, even though no-one bar the odd crazy wants it. There just aren't enough people wanting anything else and  No-Deal is what we get stuck with by default.
> I don't totally buy they all want to avoid No-Deal either, I think they all want to avoid being the person who gets _blamed _for a No-Deal but that's not the same as avoiding it. They all seem to putting far too much effort into
> trying to pin the blame on someone else for it rather than avoiding it in the first place.
> I would love to be proven wrong.




Because the government can suspend or revoke A50 at any time. Parliament will force them to. If we get within two weeks of no deal their will be medicine,food and fuel shortages because of panic buying and the pound will be sliding south. Its bad enough now. No fucking way will any government drive the country over a cliff by choice. Its all a bluff for may to get her dismal shitty deal through and everyone knows it bullshit.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 5, 2019)

If I were in charge of the Tories, I'd not do any no-deal prep, look like I was trying really hard for some impossible compromise, run slap bang into no-deal Brexit for which I'd blame everyone else, let everything go properly to shit for a few days and then - by popular demand - rejoin the EU, therein killing stone dead forever by way of a sort of national cognitive behavioural therapy the idea within my party or beyond of ever doing that again.

But I'm not in charge of the Tories, I'm only the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, and they've not paid me for the second half of my idea.


----------



## free spirit (Feb 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> How is Eurotunnel supposed to run services that are not Folkestone-Calais?


tbf they awarded a contract to another company with no ferries. Eurotunnely also have no ferries.

More seriously, there is a massive container unloading area in London sat idle that was supposed to be for Eurotunnel freight services, but ended up closing after the government made it impossible to operate those services due to the checks for migrants they decided were needed.

Have You Seen These Remnants Of A Failed Eurotunnel Project?


----------



## grit (Feb 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i will bet one entire brussels euro  that no deal will not happen.
> 
> View attachment 161049
> 
> With every day that passes the panic level increases. Once May comes back later this week from being told to fuck off by the EU and then the commons tells her to fuck off as well,  A50 will be extended for a few   more months so the everyone can tell Theresa May to fuck off for a little bit longer.



... and then no deal brexit?


----------



## ska invita (Feb 5, 2019)

grit said:


> ... and then no deal brexit?


And then May stands down and a general election?


----------



## prunus (Feb 5, 2019)

The UK is fucked. There’s no way out of this that isn’t fucked. Some of the fuckednesses are marginally less fucked for some groups of people (with concomitant extra fuckedness for their complements), but there’s no way that almost everyone living here is going to escape some level of fuckedosity.  

The exception being the very rich, who will be either or both of fine and made richer, depending on whether they just pull up their drawbridges or actively decide to capitalise on the fucking.  

And all to ‘save’ the vermin that are the tories. 

Well done everybody.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 5, 2019)

After an extra  three months or so of May being told to fuck off she will have to either have to go norway,  2nd ref or cancel the whole shebang. And then resign. Most of the political class don't want brexit - but they want May to take the bullet for canning it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 5, 2019)

Less than 60 days to go and no-one knows what's happening.  2 and a half years.

Easiest trade deals ever, countries banging at the door, money and jobs all over.   Bucketloads for the NHS, good times.

The far left joins the far right.

Now?   Arguing with Ireland, non-citizens having to register, employers and landlords making decisions, utter shite from the bbc, companies moving out, jobs being lost.

A laughing stock to the whole world.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> If I were in charge of the Tories, I'd not do any no-deal prep, look like I was trying really hard for some impossible compromise, run slap bang into no-deal Brexit for which I'd blame everyone else, let everything go properly to shit for a few days and then - by popular demand - rejoin the EU, therein killing stone dead forever by way of a sort of national cognitive behavioural therapy the idea within my party or beyond of ever doing that again.


You think the EU would let the UK just slink back in like that? It'd have to be a by-the-books Ascension according to article whatever of the wherever treaty. No more special rules just for the UK. No more discounts. No more Pound Sterling. It'd be just as long and tortuous as Brexit, all over again.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 5, 2019)

Crispy said:


> You think the EU would let the UK just slink back in like that? It'd have to be a by-the-books Ascension according to article whatever of the wherever treaty. No more special rules just for the UK. No more discounts. No more Pound Sterling. It'd be just as long and tortuous as Brexit, all over again.


I do think. I'd get Die Grosse Engländerslinke pre-agreed in fact. Noone else would ever try and leave the EU either after my great works and the sun would rise on a new era of pan-European neoliberal capitalist calm, until the next debt crisis anyway.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 5, 2019)

Crispy said:


> You think the EU would let the UK just slink back in like that? It'd have to be a by-the-books Ascension according to article whatever of the wherever treaty. No more special rules just for the UK. No more discounts. No more Pound Sterling. It'd be just as long and tortuous as Brexit, all over again.


I agree with mauvais. The EU doesn't want the UK to leave. They've already said that the UK can cancel at any time right up to the deadline, one minute before it, and keep all their privileges. If there were an enormous post-crash-out UK crisis, they could appear magnanimous in getting exactly what they want. 

I still don't think for one second that 'no deal' brexit will happen, btw.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> With every day that passes the panic level increases. Once May comes back later this week from being told to fuck off by the EU and then the commons tells her to fuck off as well, A50 will be extended for a few more months so the everyone can tell Theresa May to fuck off for a little bit longer.



and then tell her to fuck off some more


----------



## Wookey (Feb 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Less than 60 days to go and no-one knows what's happening.  2 and a half years.
> 
> Easiest trade deals ever, countries banging at the door, money and jobs all over.   Bucketloads for the NHS, good times.
> 
> ...



I've come to the conclusion that the BBC News is pretty defunct as far as it's remit to educate the public goes. It's failing spectacularly by confusing balance with impartiality, and it's most watched shows are by far the worst offenders.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I agree with mauvais. The EU doesn't want the UK to leave. They've already said that the UK can cancel at any time right up to the deadline, one minute before it, and keep all their privileges. If there were an enormous post-crash-out UK crisis, they could appear magnanimous in getting exactly what they want.
> 
> I still don't think for one second that 'no deal' brexit will happen, btw.



Yeah but if the UK left - and then tried to rejoin at a later date the EU would want to make the UK far more under its rubic - no more opting out, adopting the Euro, no more special treatment. They would be in the stronger position. They'd probably insist we have straight bananas, ban marmite and insist we make esperanto the official language just for trolling lols.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 6, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I've come to the conclusion that the BBC News is pretty defunct as far as it's remit to educate the public goes.



I think you'll find you're wrong

McCartney awarded gold Blue Peter badge


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Yeah but if the UK left - and then tried to rejoin at a later date the EU would want to make the UK far more under its rubic - no more opting out, adopting the Euro, no more special treatment. They would be in the stronger position. They'd probably insist we have straight bananas, ban marmite and insist we make esperanto the official language just for trolling lols.


They might, but it would depend on the strength of the EU at the time. We all know that 'no deal' would seriously fuck the Uk. I think perhaps more of an unknown is how much it would fuck the EU. 

Poland, for example, despite its current political unpleasantness, is in many ways the shining example of the positive nature of the EU. Living standards have, on average, risen over the last 20 years significantly. Average wages are way up and the economy is doing well (and this is basically half of the whole of the Eastern European EU block -it's the biggest deal in terms of that part of the EU). Poland is the EU's success story in many ways, and that story has been very closely linked to the UK, with close to 1 million Poles coming here to work. What kinds of ruptures will happen when the UK leaves? How will it affect Poland and other Eastern European countries? I think this is perhaps more significant than questions about how it might affect France or Germany or the Netherlands. 

(again, I don't think 'no deal' will happen, so this is all moot really)


----------



## Wookey (Feb 6, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I think you'll find you're wrong
> 
> McCartney awarded gold Blue Peter badge



Ha! Give a rich man more gold why don't ya.


----------



## paolo (Feb 6, 2019)

Tory Bexit must not be questioned.

For the left and the right, we will soon reach ideological purity. Sacrifices, even if they exist and claimed by our enemies, must be made. What is a job if that job is against the will of all? What job or family is worth that?

Ideological purity will be a freedom, especially for our dissenting children

They must - to show their loyalty - remain here rather than travel and be influenced. They must not be allowed to travel, for their own good.

At this point, tell your children.

You must stay pure. Do not resist. In 50 days we will have purity.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 6, 2019)

paolo said:


> Tory Bexit must not be questioned.
> 
> For the left and the right, we will soon reach ideological purity. Sacrifices, even if they exist and claimed by our enemies, must be made. What is a job if that job is against the will of all? What job or family is worth that?
> 
> ...



*shudders*


----------



## teuchter (Feb 6, 2019)

free spirit said:


> tbf they awarded a contract to another company with no ferries. Eurotunnely also have no ferries.
> 
> More seriously, there is a massive container unloading area in London sat idle that was supposed to be for Eurotunnel freight services, but ended up closing after the government made it impossible to operate those services due to the checks for migrants they decided were needed.
> 
> Have You Seen These Remnants Of A Failed Eurotunnel Project?


The reasons it was never used properly are a bit more complicated than just the migrant checks stuff. Anyway it's too late to use that site now; the cranes were dismantled in the past couple of months I believe.


----------



## teqniq (Feb 6, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Feb 6, 2019)




----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 6, 2019)

The Thread Police will get ya!


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> The Thread Police will get ya!


Who they?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Who they?


If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to worry about.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to worry about.


Was it a joke, then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> If you've done nothing wrong, then you've got nothing to worry about.


how do you know if you've done anything wrong when the list of crimes is secret?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

Fuck the thread police coming striaght from the the undergorund
young remainer got it bad cos im down...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Was it a joke, then?


Larry the Cat?.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 6, 2019)

Donald Tusk: “I've been wondering what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan on how to carry it out” 

No new offer.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Donald Tusk: “I've been wondering what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan on how to carry it out”



It's right next door to the place in hell for people who try to deny abortion rights to rape victims.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

he's a loon


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 6, 2019)

As if we needed a clearer confirmation of what Tusk actually said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> As if we needed a clearer confirmation of what Tusk actually said.


if anyone's trident-wielding, surely it's theresa may?


----------



## Poi E (Feb 6, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if anyone's trident-wielding, surely it's theresa may?



I wouldn't put her in charge of a teaspoon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I wouldn't put her in charge of a teaspoon.


best not to, especially if you've heard the story about the really nasty party she threw


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Donald Tusk: “I've been wondering what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan on how to carry it out”
> 
> No new offer.



This is such a dramatic piece of Crosby-style dead-catting that it must be worth looking around to see what it was that Tusk wanted to distract from.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's right next door to the place in hell for people who try to deny abortion rights to rape victims.



Poland has harsh (anti) abortion laws, but this is allowed. Does he advocate removing this final right?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 6, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Poland has harsh (anti) abortion laws, but this is allowed. Does he advocate removing this final right?



Someone in his government floated the idea of tightening abortion laws, to the point of requiring a police investigation in the event of a miscarriage, but Poland's women were having none of it and immediately went on strike. The policy was shitcanned in less than a week.

Derail I know, but I get mad whenever I see Donald Tusk's name not preceded by, 'the loathsome piece of shit...'


----------



## flypanam (Feb 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if anyone's trident-wielding, surely it's theresa may?


I think wee Sammy calls his lad trident
Sammy Wilson naked photos: Do we need the naked truth about public figures? - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

flypanam said:


> I think wee Sammy calls his lad trident
> Sammy Wilson naked photos: Do we need the naked truth about public figures? - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk



perhaps the advertisers are trying to tell sammy something about his 'tache


----------



## flypanam (Feb 6, 2019)

Or his bush?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

"Up to 60..."


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "Up to 60..."
> 
> View attachment 161124


60 shits, that's going to block up the parliamentary sewers


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

Two - nil to the Euro boys today; they've polished the zingers  



Something's afoot.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 161111
> 
> he's a loon


Clearly a man who seems willing and ready to compromise, shouldn't there be references to Dunkirk and WW2 in there?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

Might stick my life savings on no deal or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Might stick my life savings on no deal or something.


the government's already stuck your life savings on no deal


----------



## Wilf (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Donald Tusk: “I've been wondering what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan on how to carry it out”
> 
> No new offer.


I saw that:
Donald Tusk: 'special place in hell' for those who promoted Brexit without plan
Seems the EU have departed from their tone of pained reasonableness now. 

I have a vague memory of the first major meeting in the 'negotiations', perhaps Juncker visiting Downing Street or Chequers for a meal 18 months ago. The EU side leaked that May hadn't got a clue or similar and there was hell to pay for a while about breaches of protocol.  Donald Tusk doesn't seem too worried about that now. 

The weird thing about this whole process and trying to position yourself in it, I agree with pretty much every word he said. I detest EU neoliberalism and would be a lexiteer if there was such a thing to be. But in his judgement about the way the UK state/government has behaved since 2016, about the game of politics, he's got a point. And he's right about Corbyn.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 6, 2019)

Actually, "devilish, trident wielding, euro maniac” is quite good. Reminds you that the unionists always have a splendidly nutty religious insult prepared for all occasions.


----------



## flypanam (Feb 6, 2019)

Shows how shit they are too. Least the good Rev wanted to punch the pope this mob....tweet. Weak wankers.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 6, 2019)

"The former Ukip leader Nigel Farage, who is planning to launch a new pro-Brexit movement, tweeted in response to Tusk: “After Brexit we will be free of unelected, arrogant bullies like you – sounds like heaven to me.”





At least Tusk is honest.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 6, 2019)

Tusk is elected by the heads of state of the national Governments. I believe he was opposed by Poland last time. Either way he is not unelected, but then again Farage knows this, but lies are his stock in trade.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 6, 2019)

paolo said:


> Tory Bexit must not be questioned.
> 
> For the left and the right, we will soon reach ideological purity. Sacrifices, even if they exist and claimed by our enemies, must be made. What is a job if that job is against the will of all? What job or family is worth that?


I thought you were supposed to be a "socialist remainer"? 

Or is having some sort of political consistency_ ideological purity_?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 6, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Tusk is elected by the heads of state of the national Governments. I believe he was opposed by Poland last time. Either way he is not unelected, but then again Farage knows this, but lies are his stock in trade.


Can't get more democratic than that!

I bet the process of _election  _was totally open and democratic too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 6, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Tusk is elected by the heads of state of the national Governments. I believe he was opposed by Poland last time. Either way he is not unelected, but then again Farage knows this, but lies are his stock in trade.


Like the holy roman empire was a democracy


----------



## Raheem (Feb 6, 2019)

About as democratic as they way Theresa May and Gordon Brown were elected prime minister.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 6, 2019)

Somehow I don't think either butchers or PM would consider the UK parliament democratic.

(And pedantically the prime minister _isn't_ elected, it's simply whoever can command a majority in the HoC.)

EDIT: And while the UK is not democratic (and like most countries has systematically weakened democratic processes over the last 30 years), the EU is even less democratic (and designed to be so)


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Donald Tusk: “I've been wondering what a special place in hell looks like for those who promoted Brexit without even a sketch of a plan on how to carry it out”


You might wonder what his reasons are for saying it out loud, but it’s a rare case of an EU analysis I agree with. Not sure what the controversy is really.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 6, 2019)

How bad is it going to get if/when the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal?


----------



## Poi E (Feb 6, 2019)

Be fine.


----------



## ferrelhadley (Feb 6, 2019)

Lupa said:


> How bad is it going to get if/when the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal?


In the short term it will be a pain in the arse for many companies. They hype will prove over cooked but delays and unexpected issues will be a drain. Over the years it will likely see a steady drag on growth and an endless set of mini emergencies. The car and aviation manufacturing industries are likely to take relatively serious hits. There will also likely be a period of inflation as tarrifs kick in and bigger trade blocks like the EU, China and US can drive hard bargains targeting our markets while blocking our access to theirs. Its a layer of friction on trade and headwinds in an era when the UK will be slipping down the ladder of "biggest economies" as the developing world continues to develop. A mid sized economy in a world dominated by what will be the big 3 (EU, US, PRC) for a while till other blocks and countries get to the same size.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

People will probably die and stuff


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

LBC will go bust


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

Nigel will get his own show on the BBC


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

Tickets for bexit fest will be free with with the daily mail


----------



## philosophical (Feb 6, 2019)

I used the term 'elected', not the term 'democratic'.
Just saying.


----------



## Beermoth (Feb 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I saw that:
> Donald Tusk: 'special place in hell' for those who promoted Brexit without plan



But absolutely no-one had a plan for Brexit though? All parties - bar SNP - voted to have an in/out referendum. None of them anticipated Leave winning and no-one had a plan. The Parliamentary chaos/stagnation/fudge/whatever was inevitable.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 6, 2019)

Lupa said:


> How bad is it going to get if/when the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal?



Depends on what you mean by 'bad'.

The Guardian thinks that any interuption of Avacado or chorizo supply is the end of the world, and would justify the hanging of everyone who hasn't written articles for the Guardian decrying brexit.

I voted remain, and I think 'bad' is a widespread and prolonged interuption of medicine supplies, brown/blackouts for weeks, the prolonged absence of basic foodstuffs to the point where average people are on less than 1000 calories a day, fuel for private cars runs out, and the place grids to a halt. I think there is a less than 1% chance that it will get within a mile of this.

My definition of 'catastrophe' is the above, but much worse - 500 calories a day for 3 months, no fuel for police, fire and ambulance and their workers, inflation in the hundreds of %, and widespread looting - but with nothing in the shops, it's looting of people's homes.

A catastrophe is famine, epidemics and the dead paving the streets. Queues at airports don't qualify.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)

Cocaine might be cheaper tho?


----------



## Supine (Feb 6, 2019)

Lupa said:


> How bad is it going to get if/when the UK crashes out of the EU with no deal?



Somewhere between a clusterfuck and an omnishambles.


----------



## Poot (Feb 6, 2019)

Supine said:


> Somewhere between a clusterfuck and an omnishambles.


That's a relief. I thought we were headed for shitstorm territory.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 6, 2019)

Raheem said:


> About as democratic as they way Theresa May and Gordon Brown were elected prime minister.



Has any British prime minister ever been elected? I thought all they needed was to be leader of a political party and be an elected MP.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 6, 2019)

It's possible that the initial impacts in the first couple of days might be very slight since no-one will known what to do. I have this vision of French customs officials stood around on 30th March saying to each other.
"Are we supposed to search all these trucks or what?"
"Dunno mate, let's just do what we usually do until the gaffer tells us otherwise"
I also have a feeling that things will happen that no-one has planned for, what happens if French fishermen pissed about being told not to fish in UK decided to blockade Calais?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Be fine.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 6, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I voted remain, and I think 'bad' is a widespread and prolonged interuption of medicine supplies, brown/blackouts for weeks, the prolonged absence of basic foodstuffs to the point where average people are on less than 1000 calories a day, fuel for private cars runs out, and the place grids to a halt. I think there is a less than 1% chance that it will get within a mile of this.
> 
> My definition of 'catastrophe' is the above, but much worse - 500 calories a day for 3 months, no fuel for police, fire and ambulance and their workers, inflation in the hundreds of %, and widespread looting - but with nothing in the shops, it's looting of people's homes.


Are you quoting from some military briefing circa 2003?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 6, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I also have a feeling that things will happen that no-one has planned for, what happens if French fishermen pissed about being told not to fish in UK decided to blockade Calais?



We once sunk the entire French navy in an afternoon, reckon we can take a few fishermen.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> We once sunk the entire French navy in an afternoon, reckon we can take a few fishermen.


We also lost the Cod Wars, which I'm led to understand was a series of wars against one not particularly large cod.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 6, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We also lost the Cod War, which I'm led to understand was a war against one not particularly large cod.



He did have a pointy stick tbf.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

Beermoth said:


> But absolutely no-one had a plan for Brexit though? All parties - bar SNP - voted to have an in/out referendum. None of them anticipated Leave winning and no-one had a plan. The Parliamentary chaos/stagnation/fudge/whatever was inevitable.


Well, technically 84% of Parliament voted *with the Government *to hold an EU referendum. But i think Tusk's point relates to the fact that the 2016 referendum was unique (amongst the 11 UK referendums) in not being a choice between status quo and a worked up proposal for change.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 6, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We also lost the Cod Wars, which I'm led to understand was a series of wars against one not particularly large cod.


No, I think it was just a bit of naff warring. Cod as in cod reggae.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> We once sunk the entire French navy in an afternoon, reckon we can take a few fishermen.


Nope.  I guarantee you those French (and Spanish) fishermen get what they want if brexit happens.  The tories do not give a shit about fishing, it's nothing to them.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 6, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Has any British prime minister ever been elected? I thought all they needed was to be leader of a political party and be an elected MP.


Think it might only be the first of these, strictly speaking. Or maybe not even the first. Either way, you don't need to be elected to the job.

Otoh Tusk is really a high-profile civil servant and not an ultimate decision-maker. There's arguably more of a case for his job being subject to open recruitment than for EU-wide public elections.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

More signs of May moving to neutralise the ERG/DUP ...


_"...up to 60..."_


----------



## mauvais (Feb 6, 2019)

And those promises will last how long?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

mauvais said:


> And those promises will last how long?


Long enough to persuade the PLP scum through the Government division lobby.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 6, 2019)

Possibly. Since it's effectively non-binding and likely to be thrown under the next available bus then it's not much of a gain if the government would collapse and could be replaced by a Labour majority any time soon. But I tend to agree that some of the PLP could be sold any old shit.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 6, 2019)




----------



## killer b (Feb 6, 2019)

Labour are off the fence finally... and it looks like Norway. 

Jeremy Corbyn throws his weight behind a soft Brexit in surprise letter to Theresa May


----------



## ska invita (Feb 6, 2019)

We often hear "there is a majority for norway in the house", but i wonder what percentage of the Tory party would be prepared to vote for it? Norway as a position keeps the labour party together on the whole but Id expect it splits the Tories very hard. Are there any clear indicators of Tory support for it?


----------



## T & P (Feb 6, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 161148


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Labour are off the fence finally... and it looks like Norway.
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn throws his weight behind a soft Brexit in surprise letter to Theresa May



Allows May to choose to go down with her extremist loons...or...


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Labour are off the fence finally... and it looks like Norway.
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn throws his weight behind a soft Brexit in surprise letter to Theresa May


Which would rely on a split in the Tories. He's still trying to juggle.


----------



## T & P (Feb 6, 2019)




----------



## killer b (Feb 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> We often hear "there is a majority for norway in the house", but i wonder what percentage of the Tory party would be prepared to vote for it? Norway as a position keeps the labour party together on the whole but Id expect it splits the Tories very hard. Are there any clear indicators of Tory support for it?


If May accepted these demands and renegotiated with the EU on these terms it would get through the commons no problem. But she probably won't, as it'll split the party. 

I dunno if it'll change anything tbh. But it's movement.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Which would rely on a split in the Tories. He's still trying to juggle.


It's a clear sign to Nandy's "up to 60" & allows Corbyn to make sure that if they do break to support May's deal they've broken the whip. More about the Labour split, i reckon.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Which would rely on a split in the Tories. He's still trying to juggle.


TBF I think its a position he's genuinely content to go along with, as opposed to some ingenious Machiavellian manoeuvre. If there was an election tomorrow and corbyn won it I think he would push for that Norway deal regardless. Thats my impression


----------



## Wilf (Feb 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> We often hear "there is a majority for norway in the house", but i wonder what percentage of the Tory party would be prepared to vote for it? Norway as a position keeps the labour party together on the whole but Id expect it splits the Tories very hard. Are there any clear indicators of Tory support for it?


That was my instant reaction. Presumably, short of the UK remaining, the EU likes that outcome? Or does it open the door to others becoming semi detached?   It does as much as anything can to get a compromise between Labour wings - doesn't solve anything but is a compromise. But the Tories, or at least May, will be much more compromised. Enough Tories will probably vote for it, but she becomes the PM who failed to achieve a 'proper' Brexit.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> TBF I think its a position he's genuinely content to go along with, as opposed to some ingenious Machiavellian manoeuvre. If there was an election tomorrow and corbyn won it I think he would push for that Norway deal regardless. Thats my impression


 I think Brogdales called it right


----------



## ska invita (Feb 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I think Brogdales called it right


I dont disgree with that part of it - it keeps the party in check - but as I say, if Corbyn did win his dream snap election what would he do? I think hed do a norway style brexit


----------



## ska invita (Feb 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Enough Tories will probably vote for it, but she becomes the PM who failed to achieve a 'proper' Brexit.


Id be really curious to see what percentage would (before it happens)

BTW : No freedom of movement in the letter...splitting the sacred four freedoms?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I dont disgree with that part of it - it keeps the party in check - but as I say, if Corbyn did win his dream snap election what would he do? I think hed do a norway style brexit


I think he would do but that again is more about juggling the Lab Party than any principled position.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's a clear sign to Nandy's "up to 60" & allows Corbyn to make sure that if they do break to support May's deal they've broken the whip. More about the Labour split, i reckon.



I'm not sure about that. I think it moves the focus away from the WA, and puts it onto the PD. In order for something Norway-like to happen then *something* needs to pass Parliament, and very soon. If it is May's transition, then so be it. Something Norway-like, for the future relationship, I reckon would have a solid majority.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 6, 2019)

If there's any sign that this flies and there's real potential for it getting through parliament, I suppose it also has the effect of scaring a number of erg types back towards May's current path nonsense.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If there's any sign that this flies and there's real potential for it getting through parliament, I suppose it also has the effect of scaring a number of erg types back towards May's current path nonsense.



Something needs to happen. There's, what, six Bills that need to be passed for _any_ type of orderly Brexit that are currently stuck in Parliament, about 500 remaining Statutory Instruments that need scrutiny and approval. Oh, and the actual Withdrawal Bill hasn't even been published yet. The tick tock of that is surely concentrating minds. (I almost posted "sensible minds" there, but fucking lol)


----------



## Humberto (Feb 7, 2019)

So what are they telling us now? They've already ruined shit. Now that is our fault. Its our fault also that they are basically a weak entity lacking in any solidity beyond sour faced grudging and grasping. I hope they go to hell.


----------



## Smangus (Feb 7, 2019)

Humberto said:


> So what are they telling us now? They've already ruined shit. Now that is our fault. Its our fault also that they are basically a weak entity lacking in any solidity beyond sour faced grudging and grasping. I hope they go to hell.



Who are you talking about? this could equally apply to the EU, Tories, DUP, Labour Party, Lib dems, etc etc


----------



## Raheem (Feb 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If there's any sign that this flies and there's real potential for it getting through parliament, I suppose it also has the effect of scaring a number of erg types back towards May's current path nonsense.


Wouldn't rule out May playing it that way, but scaring the erg, even if it were to work, is not going to be enough on its own.

She'll be under enormous pressure to kill Corbyn's letter at birth. If she doesn't do that within a few days, I'd say it's not that she's trying to scare anyone, but that she's actually going to go for it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 7, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Who are you talking about? this could equally apply to the EU, Tories, DUP, Labour Party, Lib dems, etc etc


All of those cunts plus Temple Normanton allotment society and Chesterfield Townswomens guild.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2019)

Corbyns Norway is, correct me if Im wrong, alignment with the EU on everything apart from movement of people? 
It will be interesting to hear if theres any EU reaction to the proposal, to the tune of https://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-uk-cant-choose-what-it-is-part-of-after-brexit/


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2019)

There's no mention of movement of people in the letter, and Labour have been making noises about softening their stance on it these last few days too.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2019)

T & P said:


>


One of my favourite memories from all the Brexit madness was just after the referendum Theresa May with a big smile getting on a plane to India - the old colony - to go and rebuild those ties, open up those old imperial trade routes. Perhaps one of those 40 trade deals Fox was counting in his head. A big set piece example of the new commonwealth union with which the EU would be replaced. India promptly told her they'd be up for a deal but it would be predicated on more people from India being allowed to migrate to the UK and that working out the details of the deal would take about 10 years. Lol.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Corbyns Norway is, correct me if Im wrong, alignment with the EU on everything apart from movement of people?
> It will be interesting to hear if theres any EU reaction to the proposal, to the tune of https://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-uk-cant-choose-what-it-is-part-of-after-brexit/


#Corbway ?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> One of my favourite memories from all the Brexit madness was just after the referendum Theresa May with a big smile getting on a plane to India - the old colony - to go and rebuild those ties, open up those old imperial trade routes. Perhaps one of those 40 trade deals Fox was counting in his head. A big set piece example of the new commonwealth union with which the EU would be replaced. India promptly told her they'd be up for a deal but it would be predicated on more people from India being allowed to migrate to the UK and that working out the details of the deal would take about 10 years. Lol.



Wasn’t free movement mentioned?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Wasn’t free movement mentioned?


Yeh she shat herself


----------



## ska invita (Feb 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Wasn’t free movement mentioned?


Well quite. TBF the racists in the Tories were always more on for a CANZUK + US set up...definitely no more brown people coming here.
Supposedly India was already on the backfoot because 1. May had already been screwing over people with Indian heritage during her tenure as Home Secretary and onwards/Hostile Environment 2. India already has very strong trade links with the UK, but a big part of that is to get access to other parts of the EU 
Her coming back from that visit in 2016 seemed to me one of those moments when a big penny dropped.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> One of my favourite memories from all the Brexit madness was just after the referendum Theresa May with a big smile getting on a plane to India - the old colony - to go and rebuild those ties, open up those old imperial trade routes. Perhaps one of those 40 trade deals Fox was counting in his head. A big set piece example of the new commonwealth union with which the EU would be replaced. India promptly told her they'd be up for a deal but it would be predicated on more people from India being allowed to migrate to the UK and that working out the details of the deal would take about 10 years. Lol.



One of the stories I heard direct from somebody who worked for the treasury was that when Brexit was all kicking off it was decided that someone should be sent to Oz to start working on a trade deal.  The response from Oz was we can't talk about anything till you actually leave the EU.  However it was vitally important that the UK government were seen to be getting on with Brexit so someone was duly packed off.  When he arrived no one would meet him so he just had a 2 week holiday and came home.

With such a slick set up at the start you wonder how we've managed to end up in a mess like this.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 7, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Are you quoting from some military briefing circa 2003?



No, I'm just looking at a wider perspective than the doom mongers - and again, I voted remain.

I'm of the first generation in my family to have never gone to bed hungry because there was no food in the house, my grandparents and uncle were bombed out of their home, another branch of my family were subjected to the onslaught of the Nazis in Eastern Europe - one of my grandparents could reel off the names of 50 people her parents knew who were never heard of again after 1941- and I could take you to a string of villages in Dorset where, between 1600 and 1900, the churchyards heaved with the burials of children, my relatives, who died of disease and malnutrition.

If you want a more recent example, when I was younger than the youngest MP on the commons, I spent 6 months in a first world European state burying families who had been slaughtered by the side of the road, handing out packets of biscuits to middle class professionals who were pathetically grateful for food that would keep their children alive for another 2 days, and giving hot drinks to people who had burned everything they owned - furniture, clothes, books, carpets - to keep warm in a Balkan winter.

Taken against that wider perspective, queues at airports, gaps in supermarket shelves and customs paperwork begin to look very much like things at the shallower end of the disaster pool - and pretty much everyone on this thread will have a similar family history...


----------



## Poi E (Feb 7, 2019)

Identity and issues of nationhood and sovereignty were central to ex-Yugo. Not that the UK has a massive army and a history of military aggression, right?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 7, 2019)

I think even Polly Toynbee would probably agree that a no-deal Brexit won't be in the same league as the Holocaust, the Black Death, and the Balkan wars.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Feb 7, 2019)

Christ, she's defeated. The supplicant.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2019)

Fucks sake, the disapproving headmistress look.  All a big game as per usual.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## kebabking (Feb 7, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I think even Polly Toynbee would probably agree that a no-deal Brexit won't be in the same league as the Holocaust, the Black Death, and the Balkan wars.



Have you _seen _the Guardian in the last two years?


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 7, 2019)

my favourite was the story about how all jamie ollivers good works will be undone and kids will grow fat on turkey twizzlers again. Thats the youth vote secured


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> my favourite was the story about how all jamie ollivers good works will be undone and kids will grow fat on turkey twizzlers again. Thats the youth vote secured


jamie oliver will work in the south atlantic canal network kitchens serving turkey twizzlers to the former people.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

kebabking said:


> No, I'm just looking at a wider perspective than the doom mongers - and again, I voted remain.
> 
> I'm of the first generation in my family to have never gone to bed hungry because there was no food in the house, my grandparents and uncle were bombed out of their home, another branch of my family were subjected to the onslaught of the Nazis in Eastern Europe - one of my grandparents could reel off the names of 50 people her parents knew who were never heard of again after 1941- and I could take you to a string of villages in Dorset where, between 1600 and 1900, the churchyards heaved with the burials of children, my relatives, who died of disease and malnutrition.
> 
> ...


Of course; but it's not at all unreasonable for working people who are precariously employed and/or dependent upon state transfer payments to worry about the economic consequences of the Atlanticist/Oligarch vision of the UK economy.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2019)

Worth noting that some of the more influential FBPE types - Dunt, Maugham etc - seem to be welcoming (grudgingly) the new Labour move.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> Worth noting that some of the more influential FBPE types - Dunt, Maugham etc - seem to be welcoming (grudgingly) the new Labour move.


No reason not to; doesn't really make EUref2.0 any less likely, does it?


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No reason not to; doesn't really make EUref2.0 any less likely, does it?


Well... in that it's never been very likely I guess not. But it does show that as political moves go, this was probably the right one for Labour to make.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> Well... in that it's never been very likely I guess not. But it does show that as political moves go, this was probably the right one for Labour to make.


Yep; bit tricky to stand on this manifesto pledge and then not advocate same...


----------



## tommers (Feb 7, 2019)

As long as Brexit doesn't mean the death of 2 million people from Spanish Flu then I'm alright with it, to be fair.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

tommers said:


> As long as Brexit doesn't mean the death of 2 million people from Spanish Flu then I'm alright with it, to be fair.


depends on who the two million people are tbh


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 7, 2019)

It won't be as bad as living in the 17th century, I suppose.  Perspective innit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> It won't be as bad as living in the 17th century, I suppose.  Perspective innit.


no, it will be worse than that


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 7, 2019)

It won't be as bad as living in the 17th century, says the MP for the 18th century, Jacob Rees-Mogg.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

Expectation management, eh?

Whatever happened to our demands for the fucking impossible?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, it will be worse than that



I was just thinking what would Henry Ireton do!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I was just thinking what would Henry Ireton do!


when sarsfield sailed away i wept


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> when sarsfield sailed away i wept



How lyrically apt.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2019)

They are auctioning off Spitting Image puppets right now. I think they should keep hold of Claire Rayner and use her for a Brexit Special...


----------



## elbows (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## elbows (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2019)

Spoiler: May's reasoning


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

The FT leads with a (£-walled) piece about Civil Service 'No-Deal' macro-economic planning; "*project after*"



> A secret group at the heart of the UK government is drawing up plans to kick-start the British economy in the event of a no-deal Brexit through options that range from *cutting taxes* and *boosting investment* to *slashing tariffs*. The plan, dubbed “Project After” by some ministers, is being marshalled by Mark Sedwill, who as cabinet secretary is head of the civil service. It has brought together senior figures from the Cabinet Office, the Treasury, the business department and the international trade department, in close contact with the Bank of England. Although the project has been mentioned at cabinet meetings in recent weeks its existence has not been made public. “It’s basically a Doomsday list of economic levers we could pull if the economy is about to tank,” said one Whitehall figure. “Sedwill has been working on it since the summer.” The group is looking at other medium-term scenarios alongside a no-deal Brexit. While some ideas are radical — such as slashing tariffs and cutting taxes — others are more conventional, such as *supply-side reform* and *export support*.


So, that planning, in short:

Lower Corporation tax
Lower tax on capital
Increased tax 'incentives' to invest
Zero tariffs 
Supply-side 'reforms' inc. 
Greater 'incentives' to find work
Measures to increase Labour productivity
'Training'
Measures to increase geographical mobility of labour

Increased corporate welfare
Increased subsidy for exporters
Sounds like...er...Hell?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

A _special place _indeed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2019)

Tusk is Goatse.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> A _special place _indeed.


hindley and brady


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> hindley and brady


innit


----------



## CRI (Feb 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The FT leads with a (£-walled) piece about Civil Service 'No-Deal' macro-economic planning; "*project after*"
> 
> ​So, that planning, in short:
> 
> ...


Without the warmth.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> hindley and brady



Definitely not Hope and Keen!


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 161217
> 
> A _special place _indeed.


Is this from the TV series or the Kevin and Perry Go Large film?


----------



## free spirit (Feb 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The reasons it was never used properly are a bit more complicated than just the migrant checks stuff. Anyway it's too late to use that site now; the cranes were dismantled in the past couple of months I believe.


I'm sure there were other reasons it didn't take off as much as it should have done, but understood that the migrant checks were the final nail in the coffin that closed the site completely.


----------



## andysays (Feb 7, 2019)

Not sure if determined or deluded...

Brexit: May says she can get deal through with binding changes


> Theresa May has promised EU leaders she can get the Brexit deal through Parliament if they give her legally-binding changes to it. The UK prime minister - who also vowed to deliver Brexit "on time" - was speaking after a series of meetings with top EU officials in Brussels. European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker again ruled out the kind of changes Mrs May wants to see. But the two sides agreed to further talks to break the deadlock.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The FT leads with a (£-walled) piece about Civil Service 'No-Deal' macro-economic planning; "*project after*"
> 
> ​So, that planning, in short:
> 
> ...



It was always going to be thus with the tories in charge of Brexit.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> Not sure if determined or deluded...



She's both I think.  That being said I still think she'll get some sort of dogs dinner of ifs and maybes through.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It was always going to be thus with the tories in charge of Brexit.


Yes, and tbf, that lot wouldn't have readily fitted on the side of a coach.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 7, 2019)

JC now in charge.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> She's both I think.  That being said I still think she'll get some sort of dogs dinner of ifs and maybes through.


This. I used to think some combination of time wasting and arm twisting would get her 'a deal' through. Now its more likely to be half a mars bar and a wet fart in a plastic bag - with Corbyn _almost _almost doing/saying something in the wings - but still getting something through. _When _she will get something through is another matter entirely. I could see us leaving at the end of March and all sides having to - literally - pretend some bits of a ragged agreement had been done when they hadn't. In fact both Brussels and London are both buying in fast growing long grass as we speak.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2019)

After we leave the EU and she resigns as PM, various multinationals will want to buy up May's expertise and personal contacts, to give them a competitive advantage when it comes to new trading relationships with the EU states. _Surely_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> After we leave the EU and she resigns as PM, various multinationals will want to buy up May's expertise and personal contacts, to give them a competitive advantage when it comes to new trading relationships with the EU states. _Surely_?


I'll start the bidding at £0.01


----------



## Wilf (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll start the bidding at £0.01


€0.01


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> €0.01


€0.02


----------



## Poi E (Feb 7, 2019)

Bloody brexflation


----------



## teuchter (Feb 7, 2019)

free spirit said:


> I'm sure there were other reasons it didn't take off as much as it should have done, but understood that the migrant checks were the final nail in the coffin that closed the site completely.


Certainly part of the story but it's always seemed a bit of a scapegoat reason to me, with more blame probably attributable to the way BR railfreight was privatised, with hugely expensive public assets sold off cheap and essentially one private company handed a monopoly on traffic through the tunnel. Eurotunnel seems to have less trouble keeping a steady flow of lorry borne freight going - on which there's competition from the ferry companies.


----------



## killer b (Feb 7, 2019)

this is some solid trolling from Tusk. 

Donald Tusk Told Theresa May That Jeremy Corbyn's Plan Could Be "A Promising Way" Out Of The Brexit Impasse


----------



## brogdale (Feb 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> this is some solid trolling from Tusk.
> 
> Donald Tusk Told Theresa May That Jeremy Corbyn's Plan Could Be "A Promising Way" Out Of The Brexit Impasse


----------



## ferrelhadley (Feb 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Corbyns Norway is, correct me if Im wrong, alignment with the EU on everything apart from movement of people?
> It will be interesting to hear if theres any EU reaction to the proposal, to the tune of https://www.politico.eu/article/juncker-uk-cant-choose-what-it-is-part-of-after-brexit/


"Brexodus, no free movement for the people....."


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> €0.02



Is that not the same as £0.01?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Is that not the same as £0.01?


It's as high as I'm prepared to go


----------



## treelover (Feb 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Without the warmth.




Very very worrying, there is a brutal welfare regime already,* and now it looks like people will be forced to work all over the UK

*and very little resistance to it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Is that not the same as £0.01?



£8.23 at March 30th rates


----------



## gosub (Feb 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £8.23 at March 30th rates


Don't be so sure. France Recalls Ambassador to Italy, Revealing Strains at Europe’s Core. Though if EUrope does fall apart think we will be blamed more than thanked


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 7, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Feb 8, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> £8.23 at March 30th rates


That’s why if i win my bet i’ll really lose.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



Double irony there, considering that for the EU even the pretence of solidarity ends at the Mediterranean, and for DexterTCN's raging nationalism it ends at Gretna Green.
edited after newbie pointed out the problems with the original wording


----------



## Poi E (Feb 8, 2019)

Love it when unionists prattle on about the interests of the working class.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

Ming said:


> That’s why if i win my bet i’ll really lose.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 8, 2019)

Seems reasonable


----------



## tommers (Feb 8, 2019)

Hmm.... I can't think what they're up to.


----------



## Ming (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



You can't lose with a smile like that.


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Double irony there, considering for most europhiles solidarity ends, in practice, at the Mediterranean


There have been a lot of people coming into Europe, by sea or land, before, during and since the referendum campaign.  In my memory the 'philes, from Merkel through to those on here with somewhat less influence, have tended to welcome them, or at least shown great concern for their welfare.  'Twas the 'phobes who demanded border controls, fences, internment camps and naval patrols to turn them back and who have voted for rightwing populist anti-migrant rhetoric.

Is my memory faulty?


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> There have been a lot of people coming into Europe, by sea or land, before, during and since the referendum campaign.  In my memory the 'philes, from Merkel through to those on here with somewhat less influence, have tended to welcome them, or at least shown great concern for their welfare.  'Twas the 'phobes who demanded border controls, fences, internment camps and naval patrols to turn them back and who have voted for rightwing populist anti-migrant rhetoric.
> 
> Is my memory faulty?


Don't know about your memory, but your understanding of how the EU works is fairly flawed


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> There have been a lot of people coming into Europe, by sea or land, before, during and since the referendum campaign.  In my memory the 'philes, from Merkel through to those on here with somewhat less influence, have tended to welcome them, or at least shown great concern for their welfare.  'Twas the 'phobes who demanded border controls, fences, internment camps and naval patrols to turn them back and who have voted for rightwing populist anti-migrant rhetoric.
> 
> Is my memory faulty?



By this logic the EU itself is a 'europhobe'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> 'Twas


twee


----------



## two sheds (Feb 8, 2019)

twit


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

two sheds said:


> twit


twat


----------



## two sheds (Feb 8, 2019)

I was thinking more of 

twoo

but as you were


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> By this logic the EU itself is a 'europhobe'.


Hmmm. What do you mean by 'the EU', though? Newbie is right about Merkel. She didn't have to adopt that policy over refugees, and took a big political hit for doing so. She is an EU leader, making decisions for a bit of the EU. 

Given the UK's absolutely dismal record of taking in refugees over the last few years, I find using the refugee crisis as part of an argument for the UK leaving the EU bizarre, tbh. There is no indication whatever that the UK will improve in this regard, and every chance that it will get even worse post-brexit.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 8, 2019)

According to recent polls, for what they are worth, people in the Republic of Ireland pretty overwhelmingly support their government in rejecting any changes to the backstop insurance policy, even if that means no deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> There have been a lot of people coming into Europe, by sea or land, before, during and since the referendum campaign.  In my memory the 'philes, from Merkel through to those on here with somewhat less influence, have tended to welcome them, or at least shown great concern for their welfare.  'Twas the 'phobes who demanded border controls, fences, internment camps and naval patrols to turn them back and who have voted for rightwing populist anti-migrant rhetoric.
> 
> Is my memory faulty?


the greater number arrived before the referendum:

Migration to Europe in charts
so there's been a huge decline since the great wave of refugees in the during and after of the referendum, but no let up in the volume of oh noes the refugees are going to swamp us nonsense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I was thinking more of
> 
> twoo
> 
> but as you were


maybe post both up next time


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Don't know about your memory, but your understanding of how the EU works is fairly flawed


is it?  You really think that solidarity for those from outside comes from Europhobes?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> is it?  You really think that solidarity for those from outside comes from Europhobes?


UKIP explicitly played on fears of refugees from outside the EU, despite the UK's dismal record in taking them in. With an added dash of racism thrown in.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> UKIP explicitly played on fears of refugees from outside the EU, despite the UK's dismal record in taking them in. With an added dash of racism thrown in.



so UKIP built a fence across south eastern Europe and established a standing naval force in the Med to interdict the people smugglers?

blimey, their power grows every day...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2019)

kebabking said:


> so UKIP built a fence across south eastern Europe and established a standing naval force in the Med to interdict the people smugglers?
> 
> blimey, their power grows every day...


Criticism of the Fortress Europe response is all very valid. How on earth that has anything to do with brexit is where I struggle with this. This is bad. Let's respond by making things even worse and creating a mini-fortress next to the big one.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> is it?  You really think that solidarity for those from outside comes from Europhobes?


I should probably have avoided using the word europhiles in my earlier post, as it seems to have led to the discussion proceeding on the basis of individuals rather than the economic and legal structures of the EU as an organisation. 

But it would be ridiculous to suggest that the EU as an organisation has anything to do with solidarity, even within its borders, but far less for anyone from outside of them.


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> I should probably have avoided using the word europhiles in my earlier post, as it seems to have led to the discussion proceeding on the basis of individuals rather than the economic and legal structures of the EU as an organisation.
> 
> But it would be ridiculous to suggest that the EU as an organisation has anything to do with solidarity, even within its borders, but far less for anyone from outside of them.


indeed you should have done.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Criticism of the Fortress Europe response is all very valid. How on earth that has anything to do with brexit is where I struggle with this. This is bad. Let's respond by making things even worse.



i see little difference in _effect_ between the smooth language of the EU and the vulgar courseness of UKIP and the others - neither want refugees/migrants from south-east Europe, the ME and NA in the EU, and both are prepared to put significant physical barriers in their way. 

to suggest that one is better than the other is somewhat akin to saying that you won't have the Mackeral because you object to fishing, so you'll have the Cod instead.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> indeed you should have done.


Original post edited...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 8, 2019)

kebabking said:


> so UKIP built a fence across south eastern Europe and established a standing naval force in the Med to interdict the people smugglers?
> 
> blimey, their power grows every day...



To inderdict the migrants. If they gave a tiny fuck about smugglers they'd provide people with legitimate ways to enter the EU and thus cut off the smugglers' reason for existence.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 8, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> To inderdict the migrants. If they gave a tiny fuck about smugglers they'd provide people with legitimate ways to enter the EU and thus cut off the smugglers' reason for existence.



yeah, everyone knows that it was about depriving the migrants of a source of transport - the smugglers were a problem in their own right however, so it was two birds, one stone.


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> To inderdict the migrants. If they gave a tiny fuck about smugglers they'd provide people with legitimate ways to enter the EU and thus cut off the smugglers' reason for existence.


ok Andy has edited his post to make it a pop at the EU rather than the 'philes but do you really doubt that the political backlash against migrants came from the right, the populists who just happen to be 'phobes?  Not all 'phobes, yes I appreciate that, and doubtless not all rightwing populists are Europhobic, but the correlation is pretty clear.  And that the scale and intensity of that backlash determined the current EU position, which previously had been somewhat more accomodating?


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 8, 2019)

Polls suggest far-right to gain ground in 2019 EU vote | Reuters

this is from late last year, found it briefly amusing that UKIPs meps now don't get to be part of the far right push


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> the current EU position, which previously had been somewhat more accomodating?


you're having a laugh


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're having a laugh


from the same page you quoted earlier


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> ok Andy has edited his post to make it a pop at the EU rather than the 'philes but do you really doubt that the political backlash against migrants came from the right, the populists who just happen to be 'phobes?  Not all 'phobes, yes I appreciate that, and doubtless not all rightwing populists are Europhobic, but the correlation is pretty clear.  And that the scale and intensity of that backlash determined the current EU position, which previously had been somewhat more accomodating?


And Brexit is one more manifestation of that political backlash, not a reaction to it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> from the same page you quoted earlier
> View attachment 161278


october 2015:

Migration policy: three things to know about ‘Fortress Europe’

may 2014

Fortress Europe: Fortress Europe. English edition

january 2014

EU must open doors to avoid Syrian refugee catastrophe, says UN
if the previous regime was as you insist more accommodating then the un wouldn't have had to ask the eu to open the doors


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> ok Andy has edited his post to make it a pop at the EU rather than the 'philes but do you really doubt that the political backlash against migrants came from the right, the populists who just happen to be 'phobes?  Not all 'phobes, yes I appreciate that, and doubtless not all rightwing populists are Europhobic, but the correlation is pretty clear.  And that the scale and intensity of that backlash determined the current EU position, which previously had been somewhat more accomodating?


My point is that anyone believing or claiming that the EU is a paragon of internationalist solidarity is sadly deluded. 

Brexit in itself certainly won't turn Britain into such a paragon either (no one here had claimed it will) but to use this as a stick to beat anyone who supported leave (see the original quote I was responding to) is frankly ridiculous


----------



## CRI (Feb 8, 2019)

treelover said:


> Very very worrying, there is a brutal welfare regime already,* and now it looks like people will be forced to work all over the UK
> 
> *and very little resistance to it.


Suspect the demonisation of poor people, disabled people, those with long term illnesses (physical or mental) will be ramped up.  Once it doesn't wash so well to blame Europe for everything, they'll need other people to blame for the shit the country will be in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Suspect the demonisation of poor people, disabled people, those with long term illnesses (physical or mental) will be ramped up.


it's already been quite ramped up tbh, there's not really anywhere for it to go unless it's t4 and i don't suppose the government's ready for that


----------



## CRI (Feb 8, 2019)

Sweet!  



Link to tweet and link to HM Government page with assessment info.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> My point is that anyone believing or claiming that the EU is a paragon of internationalist solidarity is sadly deluded.


Who are these people that you speak of and where have you encountered them, other than in your imagination?


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if the previous regime was as you insist more accommodating then the un wouldn't have had to ask the eu to open the doors


well, up to a point. Previously, as one of your sources, and the stats, make clear there wasn't a real EU migration regime, there were individual states with differing regimes, although under a common set of laws.  The 'catastrophe' of millions from Syria joining the pre-existing flow of migrants tipped that into chaos. The stats, and the contrasting political fortunes of eg Merkel, Conte and Orban, indicate reasonably clearly how much has changed.


----------



## CRI (Feb 8, 2019)

Well, they're getting ready for "something," at least.  

Brexit crisis command centre starts hiring civilians



> Briefing notes issued by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) to recruitment agencies state the EU Exit Emergencies Centre (EUXE) could stay open “potentially for two years”.
> 
> The chief executive of the civil service, John Manzoni, has already said it is looking to second 5,000 civil servants, with volunteers sought in non-Brexit departments including the Department for Education and the Department for International Development.





> Candidates are being offered between £300 and £400 a day and must be prepared to start by the end of this month.





> In what appears to be a military-style setup, the emergency control centre will have a team of officers producing briefing notes for ministers “at pace” and checking the “battle rhythm” for emerging urgent policy changes.
> 
> Whitehall departments were told in December to ramp up their no-deal planning and since then, leaks have emerged from Defra of plans to deal with “putrefying stockpiles” of uncollected waste and of issues in relation to livestock caught in potential gridlock in Kent.  The department will also have to deal with water quality issues that may emerge if there is a shortage of purification chemicals and will have to liaise with local resilience groups on any civil reaction to shortages in the shops.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> My point is that anyone believing or claiming that the EU is a paragon of internationalist solidarity is sadly deluded...


Who?  When?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> well, up to a point. Previously, as one of your sources, and the stats, make clear there wasn't a real EU migration regime, there were individual states with differing regimes, although under a common set of laws.  The 'catastrophe' of millions from Syria joining the pre-existing flow of migrants tipped that into chaos. The stats, and the contrasting political fortunes of eg Merkel, Conte and Orban, indicate reasonably clearly how much has changed.


which rubbishes your supposition about how everything was more er accommodating in the auld days


----------



## CRI (Feb 8, 2019)

Looks like a future trade deal with the USA (that is if Irish American legislators don't slam the door on Britain for shitting on Ireland with Brexit) may be subject to a few "conditions."  Oh, I'm sure that will be just fine.  

Brexit Wish-List For Trump: What US Lobbyists Want From A Trade Deal With The UK


> Changing how NHS chiefs buy drugs to suit big US pharmaceutical companies
> 
> Britain scraps its safety-first approach to safety and food standards
> Law changes that would allow foreign companies to sue the British state
> Removal of protections for traditional British products.


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> but to use this as a stick to beat anyone who supported leave (see the original quote I was responding to) is frankly ridiculous


a random I've never heard of responding to an mp I've never heard of pointlessly said something on Twitter about worker solidarity and you've extended that dull but commonplace point into '_a stick to beat anyone who supported leave_'?  When it comes to it I don't really care how or why you did that- pointless spats on twitter are pointless and reproducing them here is more so.


----------



## newbie (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> which rubbishes your supposition about how everything was more er accommodating in the auld days


the last word is yours, as ever.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Who?  When?


What was the point of posting the original tweet which started this exchange off?


----------



## CRI (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's already been quite ramped up tbh, there's not really anywhere for it to go unless it's t4 and i don't suppose the government's ready for that


You think we've already reached "peak demonisation" of the poorest and most vulnerable in Britain?  I'm quite sure the Government can go even further.  There's a significant contingent of the population not only prepared to let it happen, but will actively participate.  I don't think anyone believes in the sunny uplands bullshit after Brexit, and even the Government are open that times will be "hard."  To think angry, hungry people won't want to take their anger out on someone really truly naive.


----------



## andysays (Feb 8, 2019)

newbie said:


> a random I've never heard of responding to an mp I've never heard of pointlessly said something on Twitter about worker solidarity and you've extended that dull but commonplace point into '_a stick to beat anyone who supported leave_'?  When it comes to it I don't really care how or why you did that- pointless spats on twitter are pointless and reproducing them here is more so.


I agree with your point about Twitter but you should probably take that up with the person who originally posted it here


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> You think we've already reached "peak demonisation" of the poorest and most vulnerable in Britain?  I'm quite sure the Government can go even further.  There's a significant contingent of the population not only prepared to let it happen, but will actively participate.  I don't think anyone believes in the sunny uplands bullshit after Brexit, and even the Government are open that times will be "hard."  To think angry, hungry people won't want to take their anger out on someone really truly naive.


yeh i said the government could go further - do you know what t4 was?


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh i said the government could go further - do you know what t4 was?



A jaunty channel 4 program?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A jaunty channel 4 program?


if your notion of a jaunty c4 programme involves euthanasia of the disabled then yes


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 8, 2019)

> Several cabinet ministers have told the BBC a no-deal Brexit could lead to a vote on Irish unification.
> 
> One senior minister said the prospect is "very real" and very much on the prime minister's mind.
> 
> ...



That should put the shits up the DUP.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 8, 2019)

A common mistake made by Remainers - and currently the frontbench of the Labour Party - is that membership of the common market and the neo-liberal economic shibboleths that underpin the single market are essential for economic growth. This isn't the case as this 50 year study of economic data reveals: 

EU membership has many benefits, but economic growth is not one of them – new findings


----------



## brogdale (Feb 8, 2019)

And....UKIP are back!


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 8, 2019)

She seems perfectly reasonable.

ETA: It seems an odd time to be doing this given there is still the possibility / probability of a no deal / crash out which, presumably, is the ex-kippers ultimate goal.


----------



## Chilli.s (Feb 8, 2019)

I try not to pay attention to the news too much, but shouldn't this brexit thing be all done and dusted by now? With the astounding boost to the economy that was promised, everyone luxuriating in cheaper everything with loadsa jobs to pick and choose from? I'm shocked and amazed!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 8, 2019)

Chilli.s said:


> I try not to pay attention to the news too much, but shouldn't this brexit thing be all done and dusted by now? With the astounding boost to the economy that was promised, everyone luxuriating in cheaper everything with loadsa jobs to pick and choose from? I'm shocked and amazed!


Rip van Chilli.s

You could sleep for twenty years and wake to find us still in the same shit #wastedyears


----------



## Supine (Feb 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> A common mistake made by Remainers - and currently the frontbench of the Labour Party - is that membership of the common market and the neo-liberal economic shibboleths that underpin the single market are essential for economic growth. This isn't the case as this 50 year study of economic data reveals:
> 
> EU membership has many benefits, but economic growth is not one of them – new findings



It doesn't show much tbh


----------



## ferrelhadley (Feb 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Sweet!
> 
> View attachment 161285
> 
> Link to tweet and link to HM Government page with assessment info.


There is more chance of Theresa May getting naked to debate with the naked economist on Brexit than the UK setting up a permanent nuclear waste repository in the 6 counties.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 8, 2019)

Another billion then?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 8, 2019)

ferrelhadley said:


> There is more chance of Theresa May getting naked to debate with the naked economist on Brexit than the UK setting up a permanent nuclear waste repository in the 6 counties.


What would you describe this example of targeted scaremongering as then? Targeted pro-remain scaremongering?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 8, 2019)

ferrelhadley said:


> *There is more chance of Theresa May getting naked to debate with the naked economist* on Brexit than the UK setting up a permanent nuclear waste repository in the 6 counties.



You bastard, I urgency need mind bleach.


----------



## T & P (Feb 8, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Feb 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Criticism of the Fortress Europe response is all very valid. How on earth that has anything to do with brexit is where I struggle with this. This is bad. Let's respond by making things even worse and creating a mini-fortress next to the big one.


The biggest illogical step is that its The EU enforcing the European border rather than individual nation states wanting and using all their powers to do so, which means local enforcement and using their seats within the EU to do so. Talking about the EU as a monolith ignores the key agency that nation states have in the process. Germany's offer to take in a million refugees proves the point that if a nation state wants to let people in, it can. 'The EU' didn't stop it from happening.

When the migrant crisis was at its peak and an EU-wide response was attempted (with quotas set for each country to share out the incoming migrants) it was individual nation states who one by one shut the gates (literally in some cases), not a directive from a faceless bureaucrat in Brussels.

What happened in that summer of 2016 was a failure of the EU to create a form of consensus-solution to the crisis amongst member states - a failure driven utterly by individual nation states, who basically ignored any notion that they had an obligation to being part of a Union-wide programme, and acted independently. A bit like how the UN is so often toothless in aiding wider disputes, the EU too proved to be totally ignorable by individual nations.

And of course nation states will continue to act in that fashion, perhaps even more so with current wave of ethno-nation-centered politics.



andysays said:


> My point is that anyone believing or claiming that the EU is a paragon of internationalist solidarity is sadly deluded.


It is a paragon of solidarity, but between the various dominant neoliberal parties that have dominated European politics for the last however many decades. Its an issue of power balance. The question is if you replace a majority of those parties with socialist ones what form does the EU take then?

Current trends suggest we'll never find out, though we will much more likely find out what a wave of racist ethnonationalist capitalist parties do to the EU.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> And....UKIP are back!
> 
> View attachment 161320



Wonder if Carswell will apply for the shits & giggles?


----------



## isvicthere? (Feb 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Wonder if Carswell will apply for the shits & giggles?
> 
> View attachment 161343



I'm at a loss, in the current insane environment, as to whether this is real or satire.


----------



## gosub (Feb 8, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The biggest illogical step is that its The EU enforcing the European border rather than individual nation states wanting and using all their powers to do so, which means local enforcement and using their seats within the EU to do so. Talking about the EU as a monolith ignores the key agency that nation states have in the process. Germany's offer to take in a million refugees proves the point that if a nation state wants to let people in, it can. 'The EU' didn't stop it from happening.
> 
> When the migrant crisis was at its peak and an EU-wide response was attempted (with quotas set for each country to share out the incoming migrants) it was individual nation states who one by one shut the gates (literally in some cases), not a directive from a faceless bureaucrat in Brussels.
> 
> ...



Good post and I agree with all of it BUT (1) Building a constructive consensus isn't that doable given the number of people, viewpoints and the way info deseminates.  (2) That wasn't the only thing that happened in 2016 our  democratic interfaces aren't fit for purpose.  As they seem to be going out of their way to prove


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 9, 2019)

We're now in 2019. Who here supports the brexit processs, and why?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 9, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> I'm at a loss, in the current insane environment, as to whether this is real or satire.



Apparently real, even though "Nigel Farage's Brexit Party" sounds more like it should be a live event on Channel 5 with Farage getting progressively drunker as he counts down to midnight on the evening of March 28.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That should put the shits up the DUP.


Pretty sure that's precisely why they've said it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're now in 2019. Who here supports the brexit processs, and why?


What might support for the brexit process look like? What does that question even mean? Support for May and the way she is handling it? Acceptance that there's a clearer democratic mandate for brexit than pretty much anything else the government does? Not being so hysterical that all you can see is Jacob Rees Hitler coming to power in a post brexit coup and completely miss any positives, even if they are outweighed by negatives? 

For someone who fancies himself as a philosopher you don't half lack clarity. 

I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.

I could give a list of positive consequences that we've already seen but since I don't support it I assume you don't want to hear them. Most of the negatives are yet to be worked out so there's not a lot to say about them, other than that they will probably outweigh the positives but you can most definitely say that about remoan (that was a genuine typo but fuck it, it stays) too.


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 9, 2019)

isn't it March 29th at 11pm in the evening??


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're now in 2019. Who here supports the brexit processs, and why?


Excellent 2am Friday post. Stasi plus are you a racist.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)




----------



## chilango (Feb 9, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.



This. So much this.


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


>




OT, but fuck me, that was exactly quarter of a century ago, which makes me feel well old.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus : That was an appallingly worded question tbf! It forces people to include answering yes or no to this, FFS!! :




			
				SpineyNorman said:
			
		

> Support for May and the way she is handling it?



Even the firmest Left-Brexit inclined** poster on here could think that your question as it stood was bonkers, and while I read this thread (and occasionally post) as a Remainer** I'd agree with their reaction. 

**Just shorthand, folks ...


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> OT, but fuck me, that was exactly quarter of a century ago, which makes me feel well old.


It's alright, we'll have the bang up to date hot fuzz refs later.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We're now in 2019. Who here supports the brexit processs, and why?


The brexit process laid down in article 50 you mean? Not sure anyone supports it, it's just there and no one has suggested it should be changed


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's alright, we'll have the bang up to date hot fuzz refs later.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.


I keep saying this, and the thread Remainers steadfastly ignore it, so it’s probably worth everyone who feels this way just quoting this forever until  the end of the thread.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 9, 2019)

Don't you care about workers rights you racist.


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

Irish media reporting on what the revenue commissioners (Irish HMRC) are expecting in increase of administration

'The Revenue service said last month it was not planning for customs posts along the border. It is, however, preparing for a massive increase in import and export declaration forms – in the region of 20 million, compared to last year’s figure of around 1.7 million. "

They are confident that their IT system will be able to handle it.....


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

grit said:


> Irish media reporting on what the revenue commissioners (Irish HMRC) are expecting in increase of administration
> 
> 'The Revenue service said last month it was not planning for customs posts along the border. It is, however, preparing for a massive increase in import and export declaration forms – in the region of 20 million, compared to last year’s figure of around 1.7 million. "
> 
> They are confident that their IT system will be able to handle it.....


Reminiscent of auld perry nove on 17/6/99


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



But what do you think?


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> But what do you think?



It's wonderful.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> But what do you think?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 9, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What might support for the brexit process look like? What does that question even mean? Support for May and the way she is handling it? Acceptance that there's a clearer democratic mandate for brexit than pretty much anything else the government does? Not being so hysterical that all you can see is Jacob Rees Hitler coming to power in a post brexit coup and completely miss any positives, even if they are outweighed by negatives?
> 
> For someone who fancies himself as a philosopher you don't half lack clarity.
> 
> ...


 You express it better, but this whole post is my position too, especially the underlined bit. I didn't vote, for that reason - sure as fuck wasn't voting for the EU and there wasn't the possibility of a lexit or working class politics in leave. Most of all though, you are right about there being nothing in remain for anybody interested in class politics or even some ill defined 'social justice' to head in the direction of. 2.5 years on from the vote, I'm still not joining a plea for the neo-liberal, racist EU to save our souls.

Quite rightly, remainers or people worried about workers/minorities rights post-brexit can ask, 'so, where does that position leave us'?  Well, don't keep trying to overturn the one clear thing in this whole shitshow, that a majority voted to leave. And so what, what would you do if you want to defend workers rights, if you want environmental protection, if you want to x... y... z....? Shouldn't be a difficult question. Organise, struggle, make connections...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

grit said:


> It's wonderful.


Because?


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> But what do you think?


You know, I'm beginning to suspect DexterTCN *doesn't* think, he just reposts any old shit from any Scots nationalist source regardless of whether it's even relevant to the discussion at hand...


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Because?


 
It's a tactic that, due to the chaos with the tories, has the potential to move Ireland closer to unification.


----------



## newbie (Feb 9, 2019)

the phantom ferry company has been dumped, but what caught my eye was Ramsgate council trolling Grayling





> Grayling contacted Thanet district council to ask it to postpone a budget that would have shut down parts of the port of Ramsgate for use by freight shipping.
> 
> Keeping the site open is costing local taxpayers £7,224 a day, according to a local source, and the council – which has already spent months in fruitless negotiations with Seaborne – had proposed shutting it down to help balance the books.


watching him rotate on an upturned finger is a pleasure.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> You know, I'm beginning to suspect DexterTCN *doesn't* think, he just reposts any old shit from any Scots nationalist source regardless of whether it's even relevant to the discussion at hand...


A video about Irish politicians talking about Irish re-unification possibly being caused by brexit?   Yeah it's got Scots fingerprints all over it and is entirely irrelevant to a brexit thread.  From your point of view, that is 

Maybe you can get back to posting your braindead shite from the BBC giving that state's opinion on what's happening in 'londonderry'.  It's so educational, honest.


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> A video about Irish politicians talking about Irish re-unification possibly being caused by brexit?   Yeah it's got Scots fingerprints all over it and is entirely irrelevant to a brexit thread.  From your point of view, that is ...


The logo on that tweet certainly suggests Scots Nats to me. Am I wrong?

If you post a video with absolutely no indication of what it might contain, you can hardly complain if people don't watch it, and instead dismiss it as yet another of your pointless, contentless offerings.



> Maybe you can get back to posting your braindead shite from the BBC giving that state's opinion on what's happening in 'londonderry'. It's so educational, honest.



I don't remember posting anything even vaguely like that, TBH


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> The logo on that tweet certainly suggests Scots Nats to me. Am I wrong?


Hope Over Fear is the name registered by the Tommy Sheridan-led splinter, “Solidarity (Scotland’s Socialist Movement)”, in 2016. 

For that reason I don’t touch anything with Hope Over Fear branding.


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hope Over Fear is the name registered by the Tommy Sheridan-led splinter, “Solidarity (Scotland’s Socialist Movement)”, in 2016.
> 
> For that reason I don’t touch anything with Hope Over Fear branding.


Thanks for the info, seems a wise policy


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> Thanks for the info, seems a wise policy


Pro-Yes women denounce perjurer Tommy Sheridan's Hope Over Fear Rally


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> Thanks for the info, seems a wise policy


Like I said...a video of an Irish politician at a news conference (guess where) saying some pretty strong stuff about the consequences of brexit.

But it was retweeted by a group of people in another country that contains someone you don't like...best not to watch it or discuss it.

You're such a joke.  Honestly.

Honestly


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

It’s a group of SF politicians reiterating SF policy (well, what has been SF policy since ML’s U turn).  I hope unification _is_ one of the things that comes out of all of this (along with the break-up of the UK). But Sinn Fein  espousing (3 days ago) what everyone knows is their policy doesn’t really in itself bring any of that any closer.

You could have said some of that yourself, though. Rather than posting videos without comment, then going all PassAgg and nationalist circumlocution.


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a group of SF politicians reiterating SF policy (well, what has been SF policy since ML’s U turn).  I hope unification _is_ one of the things that comes out of all of this (along with the break-up of the UK). But Sinn Fein  espousing (3 days ago) what everyone knows is their policy doesn’t really in itself bring any of that any closer.
> 
> You could have said some of that yourself, though. Rather than posting videos without comment, then going all PassAgg and nationalist circumlocution.



It’s a bit more explicit as it’s being proposed as a resolution to the backstop issue rather than “we want this some day”


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

grit said:


> It’s a bit more explicit as it’s being proposed as a resolution to the backstop issue rather than “we want this some day”


It’s a perfectly logical resolution. But it’s not new.


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a perfectly logical resolution. But it’s not new.



I’m not aware of it being proposed by a member of the Irish government before this.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

grit said:


> I’m not aware of it being proposed by a member of the Irish government before this.


I'm not aware of it being proposed by a member of the Irish government in that video.  That's ML McDonald.  She's an opposition TD.


----------



## isvicthere? (Feb 9, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Apparently real, even though "Nigel Farage's Brexit Party" sounds more like it should be a live event on Channel 5 with Farage getting progressively drunker as he counts down to midnight on the evening of March 28.



Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds? No, Nigel Farage's Brexit Party!


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hope Over Fear is the name registered by the Tommy Sheridan-led splinter, “Solidarity (Scotland’s Socialist Movement)”, in 2016.
> 
> For that reason I don’t touch anything with Hope Over Fear branding.



How small is Tommy's splintered-splintering-splinter nowadays? Down to two* people, maybe?

* One of those people is the nice lady who works on the reception desk at Tommy's favourite tanning salon. She's far too polite to disagree with a paying customer.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 9, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds? No, Nigel Farage's Brexit Party!


Deffo something of the ('Day Today') Alan Partridge about it. Sounds like it might have been part of the Horse Racing coverage...


> "Two to look out for, number one there - _Zeinab Badawi's Twenty Hotels_, and number three, _Two Headed Sex Beast_."


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 9, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> How small is Tommy's splintered-splintering-splinter nowadays? Down to two people, maybe?


No idea. But he got 1.4% of the vote where he stood in 2016.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Deffo something of the ('Day Today') Alan Partridge about it. Sounds like it might have been part of the Horse Racing coverage...



Nigel Farage's Novelty Bobble


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Like I said...a video of an Irish politician at a news conference (guess where) saying some pretty strong stuff about the consequences of brexit.
> 
> But it was retweeted by a group of people in another country that contains someone you don't like...best not to watch it or discuss it.
> 
> ...


Like you *didn't *say.

Honestly


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)

Just downt road from me...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just downt road from me...
> 
> View attachment 161400


So will you go to see the wno production of the magic flute?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So will you go to see the wno production of the magic flute?




Sounds rude tbh


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 9, 2019)

Booked 2 tickets keep you posted


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> Like you *didn't *say.
> 
> Honestly


You *quote *me saying it in post #23165.  You replied to me saying it and now you're saying I didn't say it?  This isn't the fun I thought it was going to be, tbh.

I'm just not going to bother now.  You away and watch the beeb, it's more your cup of tea.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 9, 2019)

It looks like the position of Sinn Fein is not one to view as an unintended consequence of all this brexit stuff, but a consequence entirely to be expected, and for brexiters I would suggest a position they would have anticipated if they knew what they were voting for.
That it is repeated endlessly that brexiters knew what they were voting for can only be reliably reduced down to singly and only to leave the European Union. No deals or arrangements of any kind were on the ballot paper.
Leaving means there are two different systems with a border in between sooner or later. Brexiters voted for that border, and Sinn Fein as nationalists have always had one united and independent Ireland as their goal, and are to be expected to oppose that border as much as they can. Really not dramatic or surprising.
I personally don't see the appeal of Nationalism anyway, but as a movement to try to get rid of constraints imposed by outside forces I certainly understand it if other things don't work. That is my understanding of part of the Scottish vote, a feeling that outside interests were constraining those people in a particular area who identify collectively.
I find it ironic that the nationalist aspect of the brexit vote has fired up the other nationalist forces round and about, and conflict seems to be the threat, because the vote (to leave) wasn't about collaboration, and collaboration does not seem to be the main feature of nationalist aspirations. Borders seem to be more important to them.
The diminution of many borders has been a feature of the existence of the EU, and personally I like that. I would agree that the EU has faults and challenges, maybe impossible ones to overcome eventually, but I don't personally see the direction of travel to break the EU up into bite sized chunks as the best approach.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Booked 2 tickets keep you posted


Be interested to hear how you find it

Have you heard the queen of the night aria?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 9, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It looks like the position of Sinn Fein is not one to view as an unintended consequence of all this brexit stuff, but a consequence entirely to be expected, and for brexiters I would suggest a position they would have anticipated if they knew what they were voting for.
> That it is repeated endlessly that brexiters knew what they were voting for can only be reliably reduced down to singly and only to leave the European Union. No deals or arrangements of any kind were on the ballot paper.
> Leaving means there are two different systems with a border in between sooner or later. Brexiters voted for that border, and Sinn Fein as nationalists have always had one united and independent Ireland as their goal, and are to be expected to oppose that border as much as they can. Really not dramatic or surprising.
> I personally don't see the appeal of Nationalism anyway, but as a movement to try to get rid of constraints imposed by outside forces I certainly understand it if other things don't work. That is my understanding of part of the Scottish vote, a feeling that outside interests were constraining those people in a particular area who identify collectively.
> ...


Sinn féin are republicans.


----------



## andysays (Feb 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You *quote *me saying it in post #23165.  You replied to me saying it and now you're saying I didn't say it?  This isn't the fun I thought it was going to be, tbh.
> 
> I'm just not going to bother now.  You away and watch the beeb, it's more your cup of tea.


You originally posted it without any comment at all, you twit


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> You originally posted it without any comment at all, you twit


----------



## gosub (Feb 9, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Apparently real, even though "Nigel Farage's Brexit Party" sounds more like it should be a live event on Channel 5 with Farage getting progressively drunker as he counts down to midnight on the evening of March 28.


As long as he brings back the gunge tank from Noels House Party I'm sure it will make for an entertaining distraction


----------



## grit (Feb 9, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I'm not aware of it being proposed by a member of the Irish government in that video.  That's ML McDonald.  She's an opposition TD.


 That should have been sitting td.


----------



## Celyn (Feb 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> twat


You are Robert Browning and I claim my £5.


----------



## isvicthere? (Feb 10, 2019)

JRM spells it out...


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

Celyn said:


> You are Robert Browning and I claim my £5.



How they Brought the Good News to Kent of Brex

“I SPRANG to the WhatsApp Group”, said Boris, with glee;
Davis bungled, Raab bungled, they bungled, all three;
‘Good grief!’ cried the watchers, as the government unravelled;
‘Grief!’ echoed all, as the drab chaos travelled,
From front bench to lecturn, to despatch box and the rest,
And into the chaos we galloped abreast.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You *quote *me saying it in post #23165.  You replied to me saying it and now you're saying I didn't say it?  This isn't the fun I thought it was going to be, tbh.
> 
> I'm just not going to bother now.  You away and watch the beeb, it's more your cup of tea.


Scotland is going to be such fun.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

This looks like a potential avenue for leavers and remainers

Back May’s deal, then hold people’s vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> This looks like a potential avenue for leavers and remainers
> 
> Back May’s deal, then hold people’s vote: plan to end Brexit deadlock


For leavers who don't want to leave you mean aka remainers. Desperate.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> For leavers who don't want to leave you mean aka remainers. Desperate.



Obviously some leavers would be scared of another vote, but hey that's democracy in action.


----------



## paolo (Feb 10, 2019)

Ideological purity is voiced by the honoroble Rees Mogg.

Ignore the dissenters, the “remoaners”. They trawl over detail, like the invisible ferries, or the NHS (350m), or the companies leaving. The NHS is not important nor are companies. All the remoaners want to do is moan moan.

Ideological purity must happen. Rees Mogg has been clear, and now we must accept this and not question it.

In less than 50 days we will stop foreigners coming to live here.

This is critical to reach purity.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> Obviously some leavers would be scared of another vote, but hey that's democracy in action.


I'm talking more of your inability to politically read this nonsense for what it is.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm talking more of your inability to politically read this nonsense for what it is.



I might need you to spell it out for me then. It seems like a good idea to me.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

And there we go. A remainer (sorry, i mean leaver) thinks a plan to stop the UK leaving the EU is a good idea.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I might need you to spell it out for me then. It seems like a good idea to me.


It's a shit idea. More dimwitted gambling to try and weasel a way into some political outcome. Why other than to improve your hand do you need to 'back' an outcome to offer a choice on it?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> For leavers who don't want to leave you mean aka remainers. Desperate.


Think there are quite a lot of leavers who don't want to leave in Westminster, though. On that basis, I can see it happening.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Sinn féin are republicans.


They describe themselves as  nationalists too.
Check out what Sinn Fein MEP Martina Anderson said in Thessaloniki on 5th June 2018.
'Sinn Fein is a progressive Irish Republican and proud nationalist party which is committed to the establishment of a united, 32 county, Irish sovereign relublic.'


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2019)

philosophical said:


> They describe themselves as  nationalists too.
> Check out what Sinn Fein MEP Martina Anderson said in Thessaloniki on 5th June 2018.
> 'Sinn Fein is a progressive Irish Republican and proud nationalist party which is committed to the establishment of a united, 32 county, Irish sovereign relublic.'


Which part of the establishment of a united, 32 county, Irish sovereign republic would you have a problem with?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> Which part of the establishment of a united, 32 county, Irish sovereign republic would you have a problem with?



That might be alright but I'm not sure about a relublic


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> Ideological purity is voiced by the honoroble Rees Mogg.
> 
> Ignore the dissenters, the “remoaners”. They trawl over detail, like the invisible ferries, or the NHS (350m), or the companies leaving. The NHS is not important nor are companies. All the remoaners want to do is moan moan.
> 
> ...


Is some sort of preview of your shit poetry?

I know it's a crazy suggestion but how about you make a political comment.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Is some sort of preview of your shit poetry?


 That was my shit poetry.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 10, 2019)

andysays said:


> Which part of the establishment of a united, 32 county, Irish sovereign republic would you have a problem with?


None particularly, it is the concept of Nationalism that I struggle with.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 10, 2019)

'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "

Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

philosophical said:


> None particularly, it is the concept of Nationalism that I struggle with.


I think your posts don't say any such thing. It's a particular nationalism (or what you think is a particular nationalism) that you struggle with. But you struggle with it on counter-nationalist grounds. In fact, your fundamentals are entirely nationalist.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm talking more of your inability to politically read this nonsense for what it is.



It's trying to stop the No Deal nightmare in a democratically justifiable way is what I can see. 

How would you propose preventing a crash out and the misery that will almost certainly ensue?


----------



## Wookey (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


>



Literally! I had to repeat it out loud to get the full surreality of that...


----------



## quiet guy (Feb 10, 2019)

Farage - the gob-shite that keeps on giving


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

It's_ just shorthand for idiosyncrasy versus	   
bureaucracy

It's what good politicians do._


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.



He meant to say, 'I want funny and odd shaped balls'.

Why that has anything to do with Brexit I have no idea, he's been surrounded by oddballs for years.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.




^^^^^
This needs to be plastered on signs and buses all over the UK. Along with...
"This is one of the brains behind Brexit." 
"This is your future"


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> ^^^^^
> This needs to be plastered on signs and buses all over the UK. Along with...
> "This is one of the brains behind Brexit."
> "This is your future"


Not sure that's fair on wookey


----------



## prunus (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.



Leaving aside the total fuckwittedness of the statement as it stands, it isn’t even true that the EU has ever in any way prevented the sale of funny or odd shaped anything.

The man is a cunt, a liar and a fraud, brexit is a shitshow, and the whole thing is fucked.


----------



## 2hats (Feb 10, 2019)

prunus said:


> it isn’t even true that the EU has ever in any way prevented the sale of funny or add shaped anything.
> 
> The man is a cunt, a liar and a fraud, brexit is a shitshow


You’ll have to prise the wonky British apples, that we are definitely not allowed to purchase, from my cold, dead hands.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think your posts don't say any such thing. It's a particular nationalism (or what you think is a particular nationalism) that you struggle with. But you struggle with it on counter-nationalist grounds. In fact, your fundamentals are entirely nationalist.


Your guesswork is wrong, especially your guesswork regarding my 'fundamentals'.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2019)

2hats said:


> You’ll have to prise the wonky British apples, that we are definitely not allowed to purchase, from my cold, dead hands.
> View attachment 161468


It's not what Britons overwhelmingly voted for. If you can look at it and be reasonably sure it's an apple, that's Brexit-in-name-only.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

Brexit....fuckin all about apples and oranges...


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Your guesswork is wrong, especially your guesswork regarding my 'fundamentals'.


No guesswork mein nationalist friend.


----------



## xenon (Feb 10, 2019)

For anyone else who didn't hear LBC this morning, , Farage was going on about the desirability of buying British food. Support your local farmer etc etc. Brexit making this all the more possible of course. Never mind that the economist hard brexiters love siting, Proph Patrick Minford,  has said a no deal would likely lead to the desimation of British farming and manufacturing and that this is a good thing because cheap Austrailian beef and more sweat shop goods can be imported.


----------



## xenon (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> ^^^^^
> This needs to be plastered on signs and buses all over the UK. Along with...
> "This is one of the brains behind Brexit."
> "This is your future"



The apple thing is stupid. I dispise Farage but all he was commenting about there, was about the variety of fruit and vege we've lost due to supermarket buying practises. He was talking to a caller who brought this up. The caller talking about his forebares who grew several different local apple species but couldn't sell them to the supermarkets because uniformity is what's demanded.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> The apple thing is stupid. I dispise Farage but all he was commenting about there, was about the variety of fruit and vege we've lost due to supermarket buying practises. He was talking to a caller who brought this up. The caller talking about his forebares who grew several different local apple species but couldn't sell them to the supermarkets because uniformity is what's demanded.




I know what he meant. 
But it's his mind set that everything will be peachy (to bring in more fruit) post brexit. It's the mythical view of a return to a picture box olde englande with horses happily ploughing in fields and the idea that life will be like the Hovis ad again.

It won't.
And it will be shit.
For here too.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> For anyone else who didn't hear LBC this morning, , Farage was going on about the desirability of buying British food. Support your local farmer etc etc. Brexit making this all the more possible of course. Never mind that the economist hard brexiters love siting, Proph Patrick Minford,  has said a no deal would likely lead to the desimation of British farming and manufacturing and that this is a good thing because cheap Austrailian beef and more sweat shop goods can be imported.




Buying British was surely always an option?


----------



## xenon (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Buying British was surely always an option?



Well yeah. Importing cheaper food, goods and labour is just normal business, under the EU or without. A no deal will be pretty disasterous it seems, making local grown food less likely to compete, not more is my particular contention.


----------



## grit (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> For anyone else who didn't hear LBC this morning, , Farage was going on about the desirability of buying British food. Support your local farmer etc etc. Brexit making this all the more possible of course. Never mind that the economist hard brexiters love siting, Proph Patrick Minford,  has said a no deal would likely lead to the desimation of British farming and manufacturing and that this is a good thing because cheap Austrailian beef and more sweat shop goods can be imported.



For all the predictions this one feels to me as striking the balance between being very damaging and most likely to happen. If tariffs go to 0%, it has the potential to just wipe out local producers.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Buying British was surely always an option?


Some of us here will remember the (in)famous 1968 'campaign to get people 'buying British'. 
Turned out the tee-shirts were made in fash Portugal! 



That's still on my bush-hat...under the stairs.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> Well yeah. Importing cheaper food, goods and labour is just normal business, under the EU or without. A no deal will be pretty disasterous it seems, making local grown food less likely to compete, not more is my particular contention.


Not only can't they compete, they can't even come anywhere close to filling the shelves.

Around 50% of veg and 90%  (not a typo) of fruit is non-domestic.  (A large part is Spanish, they have a proper food industry because of the weather.)

So at this stage there will not be enough food.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

Meanwhile in another part of the UK.


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.


Sounds like Brexit has just been a covert Morrisons marketing campaign with Farage at its head


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Not only can't they compete, they can't even come anywhere close to filling the shelves.
> 
> Around 50% of veg and 90%  (not a typo) of fruit is non-domestic.  (A large part is Spanish, they have a proper food industry because of the weather.)
> 
> So at this stage there will not be enough food.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

When is May going to wake up and see that this is a shit way to lead a country.


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> The apple thing is stupid. I dispise Farage but all he was commenting about there, was about the variety of fruit and vege we've lost due to supermarket buying practises. He was talking to a caller who brought this up. The caller talking about his forebares who grew several different local apple species but couldn't sell them to the supermarkets because uniformity is what's demanded.


It's also because each variety which is grown commercially has to have a special EU licence, the cost of which is ridiculous, so traditional niche varieties of, for example, apples aren't economic to licence and therefore can't be produced.

It's a pretty bizarre thing for Farage to mention at this point, though I'm certainly not suddenly regretting my vote to Leave on the basis of some nonsense he's just come out with.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 10, 2019)

Wookey said:


> 'I want funny and odd shaped apples, and that is going to be one of the biggest benefits of Brexit... "
> 
> Word for word what Farage just said on LBC.


Has he given up on fish ?
I never quite figured out if he meant that ring-fenced fish would be cheap enough for the Brits to actually start buying it.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> When is May going to wake up and see that this is a shit way to lead a country.


When she is interested in the country and not her party/husband/friend/donor/business interests one would assume?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> When is May going to wake up and see that this is a shit way to lead a country.


Quick, the pillow - she need never wake up


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Around 50% of veg and 90%  (not a typo) of fruit is non-domestic.  (A large part is Spanish, they have a proper food industry because of the weather.)
> 
> So at this stage there will not be enough food.



Why are you worrying about this? 

Are you not in Scotland?


----------



## philosophical (Feb 10, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No guesswork mein nationalist friend.



I am neither yours, nor a friend of yours, nor a nationalist.
Hope that helps.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Some of us here will remember the (in)famous 1968 'campaign to get people 'buying British'.
> Turned out the tee-shirts were made in fash Portugal!
> 
> View attachment 161473
> ...



Bet that's still on your record player in the attic


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Why are you worrying about this?
> 
> Are you not in Scotland?


What vegetables are native to Scotland?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What vegetables are native to Scotland?


Stuart Campbell and Tommy Sheridan.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Stuart Campbell and Tommy Sheridan.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Why are you worrying about this?
> 
> Are you not in Scotland?


Why are you not?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 10, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am neither yours, nor a friend of yours, nor a nationalist.
> Hope that helps.


You'd think not.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What vegetables are native to Scotland?



Deep fried Mars bars.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What vegetables are native to Scotland?



Haggis


----------



## chilango (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> The apple thing is stupid. I dispise Farage but all he was commenting about there, was about the variety of fruit and vege we've lost due to supermarket buying practises. He was talking to a caller who brought this up. The caller talking about his forebares who grew several different local apple species but couldn't sell them to the supermarkets because uniformity is what's demanded.



I remember reading something out out by Freedom Press making exactly the same point...


----------



## paolo (Feb 10, 2019)

There’s a guy on here who lives in Surrey, driving an Audi, saying that the German car companies will stop any bad Brexit deal.


----------



## prunus (Feb 10, 2019)

xenon said:


> The apple thing is stupid. I dispise Farage but all he was commenting about there, was about the variety of fruit and vege we've lost due to supermarket buying practises. He was talking to a caller who brought this up. The caller talking about his forebares who grew several different local apple species but couldn't sell them to the supermarkets because uniformity is what's demanded.



The phrase “but all he was commenting about” seems to be excusing the idiocy of his comments on this, but surely the point is that said supermarkets’ demands are absolutely nothing to do with the EU?  Ie he uses absolutely any opportunity to lie and blame anything seen as bad on the EU.   He is a cunt, a liar, etc.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> There’s a guy on here who lives in Surrey, driving an Audi, saying that the German car companies will stop any bad Brexit deal.


OK here's your opportunity to make a political point. What does a "bad Brexit deal" look like? As opposed to a "good" one. How are these terms defined?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> There’s a guy on here who lives in Surrey, driving an Audi, saying that the German car companies will stop any bad Brexit deal.



Define bad deal.

Off you go.

Vroom, vroom.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> There’s a guy on here who lives in Surrey, driving an Audi, saying that the German car companies will stop any bad Brexit deal.


There's a guy on here who posted something along the lines of 'if troops are put on the street they'll go back to their working class roots and overthrow the state'.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

I think you should both have a go at that yourselves.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I think you should both have a go at that yourselves.



I think people who bandy around terms like ‘bad deal’ and ‘good deal’ need to state what they mean by that. Shouldn’t be too much to ask.


----------



## andysays (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> There's a guy on here who posted something along the lines of 'if troops are put on the street they'll go back to their working class roots and overthrow the state'.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I think people who bandy around terms like ‘bad deal’ and ‘good deal’ need to state what they mean by that. Shouldn’t be too much to ask.


That's as may be. But I think that if you're going to reject a view because it doesn't sufficiently define good or bad thresholds, you should be able to do the same.

It's not like it doesn't exist. There's presumably some outcome scenario where you would have to admit it'd been a net negative on your chosen terms, and thus a bad deal. One poster on here has it approximately defined in availability of calories per day. I think that's much more bleak than I'd draw the line at, but it's a start.

You can certainly label the whole thing 'not my circus, not my monkeys', but if you (a general you) are going to even attempt to integrate a position on Brexit into a political outlook that's predominantly concerned with the welfare of others, you should probably have an idea of what set of effects on that welfare makes it acceptable or not. The lack of definition on that is one of the things that pisses me off the most about U75 discussion of Brexit as a positive or neutral.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> That's as may be. But I think that if you're going to reject a view because it doesn't sufficiently define good or bad thresholds, you should be able to do the same.
> 
> It's not like it doesn't exist. There's presumably some outcome scenario where you would have to admit it'd been a net negative on your chosen terms, and thus a bad deal. One poster on here has it approximately defined in availability of calories per day. I think that's much more bleak than I'd draw the line at, but it's a start.
> 
> You can certainly label the whole thing 'not my circus, not my monkeys', but if you (a general you) are going to even attempt to integrate a position on Brexit into a political outlook that's predominantly concerned with the welfare of others, you should probably have an idea of what set of effects on that welfare makes it acceptable or not. The lack of that is one of the things that pisses me off the most about U75 discussion of Brexit as a positive or neutral.



It seems that perhaps the timeline is being lost in this;

A pig-fucking PM called it.

The masses voted the way that the establishment hadn’t expected, to the extent that they had done zero preparation for the prospect.

The EU went through all the stages of grief. 

The Greeks outlined in detail why we would not get any meaningful deal.

Nearly three years on and we are entering the denouement and there is still no prospect of any deal, cos there really can’t be one.

March 29th will come and go, either May will have capitulated and not actually left the EU or we will
leave with no deal. 

Regardless, the sky will not fall in.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Regardless, the sky will not fall in.



So, it turns out you do have a threshold in mind.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

Oh the timeline's fine except for what happens if we leave with no deal, which IMO is highly unpredictable in both its likelihood & the outcome of it.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

Raheem said:


> So, it turns out you do have a threshold in mind.



Tbf, I have a brolly, so skys falling in would be OK too.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Oh the timeline's fine except for what happens if we leave with no deal, which IMO is highly unpredictable in both its likelihood & the outcome of it.



I have consistently said that I think we will leave with no deal. Which of course is unpredictable, but as paolo’s snide digs fail to note, the world will keep turning. Audi will keep delivering parts, The City will keep doing whatever the fuck it is that it does. This is the UK, global home to neo-lib economics and its spawn, the EU. For those whose main concern is ‘the economy’, they are demonstrating a woeful lack of understanding as to how capital operates.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Tbf, I have a brolly, so skys falling in would be OK too.



But sky falling in really means things like job losses, loss of FOM, opening NHS to further competition, more expensive goods. A brolly wouldn't help with those kind of problems.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The City will keep doing whatever the fuck it is that it does.


Defending that is what it's for, after all.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> But sky falling in really means things like job losses, loss of FOM, opening NHS to further competition, more expensive goods. A brolly wouldn't help with those kind of problems.


Are you suggesting the EU has been buffering the drive to privatise the NHS like?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Are you suggesting the EU has been buffering the drive to privatise the NHS like?


This is just pathetic.

Leave won.  Answers are fucking required.

Moving the goal-posts shite all over this (page) thread.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Stuart Campbell and Tommy Sheridan.


Nice


----------



## kebabking (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> But sky falling in really means things like job losses, loss of FOM, opening NHS to further competition, more expensive goods. A brolly wouldn't help with those kind of problems.



You need a new definition of 'sky falling in' - what you've described is a fairly standard, and not particularly bad, reccession with a Tory government in power - or a new Labour government in power.

Not quite the Fall of Rome, is it?


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

kebabking said:


> You need a new definition of 'sky falling in' - what you've described is a fairly standard, and not particularly bad, reccession with a Tory government in power - or a new Labour government in power.
> 
> Not quite the Fall of Rome, is it?



I don't know exactly how bad it would be and nor do you. You seem to be saying these things don't matter. Do you not have compassion for people who would be affected?

I also like being European which is difficult to quantify but for me is a massive loss.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Haggis


I actually tried vegetarian haggis today as part of an invented veggie fry up, it was really quite rank. I must concur, you do need the sheep's vital organs or else don't even bother.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I also like being European which is difficult to quantify but for me is a massive loss.


You seem to be suggesting you’ll cease being European. How?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I don't know exactly how bad it would be and nor do you. You seem to be saying these things don't matter. Do you not have compassion for people who would be affected?
> 
> I also like being European which is difficult to quantify but for me is a massive loss.



You will still be European you utter tool. The UK is not being dragged away to the Caribbean. More's the pitty.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You will still be European you utter tool...


Can Supine be deported then, like the other Europeans?


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You will still be European you utter tool.



I'm offended by that. Why are people do rude these days.

There is a difference between being a member of the EU and living on a small island on one side of the EU having fun being isolationists.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Can Supine be deported then, like the other Europeans?



Probably


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm offended by that. Why are people do rude these days.
> 
> There is a difference between being a member of the EU and living on a small island on one side of the EU having fun being isolationists.



You are offended by being European or by being labeled a tool for imagining that you will no longer be a European once the UK leaves a political union with some other European countries?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm offended by that. Why are people do rude these days.
> 
> There is a difference between being a member of the EU and living on a small island on one side of the EU having fun being isolationists.


You're talking about citizenship of the supra-state?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You are offended by being European or by being labeled a tool for imagining that you will no longer be a European once the UK leaves a political union with some other European countries?


Maybe Supine is one of the people who has to register and then apply to live in the UK.

There's an app for it.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You are offended by being European or by being labeled a tool for imagining that you will no longer be a European once the UK leaves a political union with some other European countries?



We all know I'm not talking about being European in a geographical way.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> We all know I'm not talking about being European in a geographical way.


It is a kind of geographical sort of thing, though.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It is a kind of geographical sort of thing, though.



Brexit? Nope.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> I have consistently said that I think we will leave with no deal. Which of course is unpredictable, but as paolo’s snidey digs fails to note, the world will keep turning. Audi will keep delivering parts, The City will keep doing whatever the fuck it is that it does. This is the UK, global home to neo-lib economics and its spawn, the EU. For those whose main concern is ‘the economy’, they are demonstrating a woeful lack of understanding as to how capital operates.


By default I would probably agree with you. However if you think that the overall self-interest of global capital lies in continuity and growth through BAU (and you can argue that it's not) then you also have to address the beshitted Brexit bed and capital's failure thus far to counter the disruption. Can't easily have it both ways.

Then there's the problem that this description is framed entirely in terms of capital and not in terms of either nation (if that's your bag) or people. Maybe that's fair if the initiator for this was the topic of automotive supply chains but, surprising as this may be, even I don't make my judgements on the merits of Brexit based on Bosch parts lead times.

TL;DR global capital will, like water, find a way, but that way may very well not be to the benefit of the UK nor random British Audi purchaser #sixtymillionandfour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> Blah blah


C4U


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> C4U


Haaaa ha


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> Brexit? Nope.


Being 'European' as opposed to holding supra-state citizenship; one is essentially a geographical descriptor of populations and the other a relationship between people and a polity.
tbh, I reckon the supra-state missed a trick with the UK popuation...I think they should have insisted that UK citizens had the right to retain supra-state citizenship whatever the state decided to do.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> We all know I'm not talking about being European in a geographical way.


In which ways will you cease being European, and in which ways will you continue to be European?


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> C4U



I don't know what that means but I also don't really give a toss


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> We all know I'm not talking about being European in a geographical way.


Aye you are talking about it in a"voting to leave the EU makes you a traitor to Europe" kinda way, because that kind of rank patriotism is really sexy when Verhofstadt and that come out with it.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

While I'm at it, this "european" debate is essentially one of identity and there's probably not a lot of value or dignity in arguing with someone that they're wrong about their own perceived identity.

I don't love the narrative that often develops from this idea, but you should probably wait for that to unfurl first.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> There's a guy on here who posted something along the lines of 'if troops are put on the street they'll go back to their working class roots and overthrow the state'.


And a Scottish nationalist who cant tell when someone is taking the piss.


----------



## Supine (Feb 10, 2019)

You can all pile on to me because I'm pro EU but I don't ever see any valid reasons on u75 for leaving. None with tangible benefits for UK citizens anyway.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> And a Scottish nationalist who cant tell when someone is taking the piss.


 here due to ignored content I thought that was aimed at me


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I think you should both have a go at that yourselves.


And this, again, is where the real division is. Between those of us who believe in labour and those that don't.
I'm not particularly interested in "deals" stitched up by different factions of capital.

For you the key is getting the "right" party in power and then things will improve. I utterly reject that view. Not only do I not believe that remaining in the UK or having the Labour (or whatever) Party in power will not bring about the changes I want. I think the insistence to push the working class out of the equation is part of the problem. Now you might not agree with that view, fine, but to say that it's not been explained to you, that I and others haven't made a political argument (and one that is based on socialist politics) is simply false.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> While I'm at it, this "european" debate is essentially one of identity and there's probably not a lot of value or dignity in arguing with someone that they're wrong about their own perceived identity.


What I’m interested in is why someone who feels they’re European on 28th March thinks they won’t be on 30th.  Will their culture, language, personal history, social group, and so on, have changed?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 10, 2019)

Supine said:


> I don't know what that means but I also don't really give a toss


You've been here more than 15 years and haven't figured out the common abbreviation for corrected for you

You're not the sharpest tool in the box


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)

Having to register then apply to stay in their homes would change.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What I’m interested in is why someone who feels they’re European on 28th March thinks they won’t be on 30th.  Will their culture, language, personal history, social group, and so on, have changed?


This was one of the reasons why Mrs B & myself have booked a short break to Belgium on the 27th March. We're intrigued about what Doctor Who like 'regeneration' will occur at 11pm (UK time) on the 29th. As a control we will travel with full EU citizenship, temporarily reside the supra-state heartland and then, suddenly...as the clock strikes...all will be different...or will it? 
Who knows? Maybe we'll have to claim asylum?


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What I’m interested in is why someone who feels they’re European on 28th March thinks they won’t be on 30th.  Will their culture, language, personal history, social group, and so on, have changed?


They'll never qualify for a blue peter badge


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And this, again, is where the real division is. Between those of us who believe in labour and those that don't.
> I'm not particularly interested in "deals" stitched up by different factions of capital.
> 
> For you the key is getting the "right" party in power and then things will improve. I utterly reject that view. Not only do I not believe that remaining in the UK or having the Labour (or whatever) Party in power will not bring about the changes I want. I think the insistence to push the working class out of the equation is part of the problem. Now you might not agree with that view, fine, but to say that it's not been explained to you, that I and others haven't made a political argument (and one that is based on socialist politics) is simply false.


Two things to unpack here, this post in context and then the bit about what I believe.

You haven't really answered the question which was what constitutes 'bad'. Yeah OK if you add the word deal then we're led towards framing a discussion in parliamentary/capitalist terms, but we can both choose to not do that. The process still happens. You and everyone else are still subject to the outcome, whatever it turns out to be. So what would be an unacceptable outcome of Brexit? The easy way out of that question is to move the deadline to the right, perhaps infinitely, but let's deny that luxury. Can there exist a point at which we assess e.g. 20 years post-Brexit and see that your aspirations have not been met, and e.g. British working conditions have materially worsened, and you can say yeah OK this is actually a failure, we (the big WC we) done fucked up? The criteria for _that_ are what I'm really interested in. Because the criteria for me as a skeptic being wrong are relatively clear.

Then there's what I believe, which you characterise as rooted in PP or technocracy and although I might be more inclined towards outcomes from this in some of our discussions, objection one, I wouldn't say I have a lot of confidence in any form of parliament other than as mild differentiation from another, and objection two, I think you paint me as wildly more optimistic than I am. Perhaps I don't think _anything_ will significantly improve within my lifetime, whether that's a failure of parliament or the working class or whatever else. I do think there is plenty of potential to make it worse.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What I’m interested in is why someone who feels they’re European on 28th March thinks they won’t be on 30th.  Will their culture, language, personal history, social group, and so on, have changed?


Ah come on, you might not agree with the guy, but it's not that difficult to sympathise with commonality, access rights and membership forming part of identity. I can't be arsed to do any more of other people's legwork as I've got enough of my own to trouble me, but it's not exactly an objectively unreasonable reaction.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're talking about citizenship of the supra-state?



well he still be a citizen of Britain


and have a unelected house of representative making discussion I.E the house of lords


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 10, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Ah come on, you might not agree with the guy, but it's not that difficult to sympathise with commonality, access rights and membership forming part of identity. I can't be arsed to do any more of other people's legwork as I've got enough of my own to trouble me, but it's not exactly an objectively unreasonable reaction.


You could answer what you think, or they could answer what they think.  It’s a reasonable question. Not sure why it’s troubling you, but if you’ve got an opinion and you want to give it: this is a discussion board.


----------



## agricola (Feb 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




Well thats one way of ensuring they aren't all parked on the M20.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 10, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What I’m interested in is why someone who feels they’re European on 28th March thinks they won’t be on 30th.  Will their culture, language, personal history, social group, and so on, have changed?



My legal citizenship will, certainly.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Ah come on, you might not agree with the guy, but it's not that difficult to sympathise with commonality, access rights and membership forming part of identity. I can't be arsed to do any more of other people's legwork as I've got enough of my own to trouble me, but it's not exactly an objectively unreasonable reaction.


It's a difficult subject as generally speaking working class solidarity ( and frankly i don't care if I've used that word wrong) between migrants and locals is absolutely defined in those terms- my mum and every other working class person I know that voted remain did so primarly cause of the racism whilst the rest of my family and myself voted leave, my mum is a carer like me so obvs works with lots of eastern europeans. The tendency to define internationalism in those terms is so pervasive now that those engaged in the vital work of BUILDING SOLIDARITY need to accept that such language isn't a reliable indicator of yer social class, or how much "skin in  the game" we have and  and so on and so on.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 10, 2019)

Total digression from what you said right? It's just something that's bugging me about this whole debate. Identity gets boring in about 2 seconds anyway haha


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 10, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> My legal citizenship will, certainly.


Indeed. You, and I, and presumably Supine , will lose EU citizenship.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 10, 2019)

Meanwhile in the world of procedural shit, May has ruled out Corbyn's proposal, managing to do so with the leadership style of a passive aggressive village fete organiser:


> I am not clear why you believe it would be preferable to seek a say in future EU trade deals rather than the ability to strike our own deals?


I didn't think there was anything that the woman hadn't [optional 'always'] been very clear about, but there we have it.

What's the motive for this?


> This was reinforced when Liz Truss, the chief secretary to the Treasury, indicated she would resign if this happened.


Phew. We could have lost out on...

<fucked up, shit eating grin-backed pause>

... some innovative cheese deals!

So now in bizarro world it's Jeremy Corbyn who is the friend of business and err Lockheed Martin. What absolute times.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

More _fear project _than _project fear...


_
Looking like we might be needing a 'UK Recession 2019' thread soon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> More _fear project _than _project fear...
> 
> View attachment 161565
> _
> Looking like we might be needing a 'UK Recession 2019' thread soon.


what's it called when it's like a recession only much, much worse?

the may catastrophe perhaps


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

agricola said:


> Well thats one way of ensuring they aren't all parked on the M20.



HM Gov is just trolling the UK haulage firms now.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

the may catastrophe perhaps[/QUOTE]


Pickman's model said:


> what's it called when it's like a recession only much, much worse?
> 
> the may catastrophe perhaps



I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> the may catastrophe perhaps




I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_[/QUOTE]
i saw one of her films once


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_


i saw one of her films once[/QUOTE]
Are you sure you're not confusing her with _Stormy Fundamentals?_


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> i saw one of her films once


Are you sure you're not confusing her with _Stormy Fundamentals?_[/QUOTE]
yes i'm sure i'm not. stormy fundamentals did a series of challenging feminist documentaries while sunlight uplands was much more of a b movie actress, whose early career promised much more than it ever delivered.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 11, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


>


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

lol


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> the may catastrophe perhaps




I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_[/QUOTE]

That sounds about right for the way we're headed, as in . . .


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> That sounds about right for the way we're headed, as in . . .
> 
> View attachment 161577


Is this what passes for analysis these days?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 161571



More like 16 years. 



Sixteen years
Sixteen banners united over the field
Where the good shepherd grieves
Desperate men, desperate women divided
Spreading their wings 'neath the falling leaves

Fortune calls
I stepped forth from the shadows to the marketplace
Merchants and thieves, hungry for power, my last deal gone down
She's smelling sweet like the meadows where she was born
On midsummer's eve, near the tower


----------



## andysays (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_
> 
> That sounds about right for the way we're headed, as in . . .


WTF are you posting this racist nonsense for?


----------



## kebabking (Feb 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> WTF are you posting this racist nonsense for?



he is a massive twat who crayons all over threads with stuff they don't understand?


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 11, 2019)

Sun_lit_ uplands. From a churchill speech. You know how the tories love that old monster


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

So, May has 'rejected' Corbyn's proposal, not surprisingly, but is talking about 'common ground'. For Example:
Brexit: May has ruled out Corbyn's customs union plan – minister
So, where does that leave us? She's hoping to get a version of 'her' deal through, with a sprinkling of fake workers/environmental protection, to get enough Labour MPs onboard to displace the ultra-swivelists who will vote against? Not sure how that fits in the timetable, possible extensions and the rest, but is that her strategy now?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, May has 'rejected' Corbyn's proposal, not surprisingly, but is talking about 'common ground'. For Example:
> Brexit: May has ruled out Corbyn's customs union plan – minister
> So, where does that leave us? She's hoping to get a version of 'her' deal through, with a sprinkling of fake workers/environmental protection, to get enough Labour MPs onboard to displace the ultra-swivelists who will vote against? Not sure how that fits in the timetable, possible extensions and the rest, but is that her strategy now?



I think so. But fuck knows.


----------



## andysays (Feb 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> he is a massive twat who crayons all over threads with stuff they don't understand?


She, but yeah, this. It's particularly  bizarre that they've accused various posters of racism on utterly spurious grounds and think it's OK to post the above...

They also have numerous posters on ignore,  so may not have read my post.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> he is a massive twat who crayons all over threads with stuff they don't understand?


she. she is a massive twat...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> *Sunlit uplands*. From a churchill speech. You know how the tories love that old monster


changed her name to sunlight


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think so. But fuck knows.


I'm taking it as read that she won't even come up with a compromise that allows the bulk of Labour MPs to vote with her, though as you say, fuck knows. Which, if that's the case, means she's reducing the next vote down to 'what can I put in to get flint, mann and the rest, without losing too many of the tory balm pots'.

I think the irony is that if it was a secret ballot in the commons, the Corbyn plan would probably come out as most preferred option. It's just never going to happen. Anyway, the period through to when some or no deal is finalised in 50 days (?) isn't going to show humanity in its finest light.  

((((Rats in a sack))))


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm taking it as read that she won't even come up with a compromise that allows the bulk of Labour MPs to vote with her, though as you say, fuck knows. Which, if that's the case, means she's reducing the next vote down to 'what can I put in to get flint, mann and the rest, without losing too many of the tory balm pots'.
> 
> I think the irony is that if it was a secret ballot in the commons, the Corbyn plan would probably come out as most preferred option. It's just never going to happen. Anyway, the period through to when some or no deal is finalised in 50 days (?) isn't going to show humanity in its finest light.
> 
> ((((Rats in a sack))))


strange you should say 'rats in a sack' as that's the preferred option of where to put mps on 30 march.

based on a poll of 1847 voters around the country, weighted for demographic reasons, who were asked on the weekend of 9/10 february


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> strange you should say 'rats in a sack' as that's the preferred option of where to put mps on 30 march.


I feel like I can cautiously support that proposal.


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, May has 'rejected' Corbyn's proposal, not surprisingly, but is talking about 'common ground'. For Example:
> Brexit: May has ruled out Corbyn's customs union plan – minister
> So, where does that leave us? She's hoping to get a version of 'her' deal through, with a sprinkling of fake workers/environmental protection, to get enough Labour MPs onboard to displace the ultra-swivelists who will vote against? Not sure how that fits in the timetable, possible extensions and the rest, but is that her strategy now?


It's game playing.  May wants to push Corbyn to compromise so she can get "her" proposal through, and split the Labour party as a bonus.  Corbyn wants May to compromise to get "his" Brexit through, while spitting the Tories as a bonus.  Neither will succeed.  Clock is ticking and prospect of No Deal crash out increases with every day of fannying about, and the infrastructure of the UK is utterly unprepared for that so, fun times ahead, eh?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> I think the term used was _sunlight uplands_



That sounds about right for the way we're headed, as in . . . 

View attachment 161577[/QUOTE]
CRI, would you mind clarifying what you meant by posting that up?


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> WTF are you posting this racist nonsense for?


Christ - Sunlight is written on the advert.  Plenty who support Brexit seem keen to return to the "good old days" of those adverts with the shite they spout, so there you go.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Christ - Sunlight is written on the advert.  Plenty who support Brexit seem keen to return to the "good old days" of those adverts with the shite they spout, so there you go.


they seem keen to return to antediluvian advertising? where has anyone said that? not even nigel farage has suggested that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 11, 2019)

Just posting racist cartoon ads to own the racists.


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> That sounds about right for the way we're headed, as in . . .
> 
> View attachment 161577


CRI, would you mind clarifying what you meant by posting that up?[/QUOTE]
Once more with gusto.  It is an advertisement for Sunlight soap from the early 20th Century.  Someone made a comment about "Sunny Uplands" being "Sunlight Uplands."  As I said, going by the racist shite spouted particularly by No Deal supporting folks, they'd like to return to the good old days celebrated in adverts like that one.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, May has 'rejected' Corbyn's proposal, not surprisingly, but is talking about 'common ground'. For Example:
> Brexit: May has ruled out Corbyn's customs union plan – minister
> So, where does that leave us? She's hoping to get a version of 'her' deal through, with a sprinkling of fake workers/environmental protection, to get enough Labour MPs onboard to displace the ultra-swivelists who will vote against? Not sure how that fits in the timetable, possible extensions and the rest, but is that her strategy now?



Not forgetting the bribery of labour MPs in areas voting Leave. If turned down, the tory hopefuls at the next election will doubtless accuse the MPs of failing to inject money into the local economy that was there for the taking.


----------



## Sue (Feb 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> strange you should say 'rats in a sack' as that's the preferred option of where to put mps on 30 march.
> 
> based on a poll of 1847 voters around the country, weighted for demographic reasons, who were asked on the weekend of 9/10 february


Fixed that for you.


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

Fuck me, this thread needs a fainting couch and smelling salts.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 11, 2019)

what it really needs is for you to stop posting your irrelevant drivel.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Christ - Sunlight is written on the advert.  Plenty who support Brexit seem keen to return to the "good old days" of those adverts with the shite they spout, so there you go.


That is completely spurious. There’s “plenty” who want to return to the days of racist adverts?  Where are you getting this from?

Oh, that’s right. Your imagination.

Stop posting up shite with absolutely no reason. It wasn’t even tenuous; it was completely uncalled for.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Once more with gusto.  It is an advertisement for Sunlight soap from the early 20th Century.  Someone made a comment about "Sunny Uplands" being "Sunlight Uplands."  As I said, going by the racist shite spouted particularly by No Deal supporting folks, they'd like to return to the good old days celebrated in adverts like that one.



You chose an explicitly racist portrayal. Is that what you think no dealer or leavers want to return to - that leavers are racists? Is that the people on this thread? You chose to put something explicitly racist on the thread, could at least explain why you think that's what you imagine represents 'the good old days' to leavers.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 11, 2019)

The good old days is jumpers for goalposts, veg bought in lb and oz and white dog poo.

cri, as she tediously reminds everyone on US threads, grew up in the states so she gets nostalgic for racism, slavery and segragation. Like her hero Hilary.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The good old days is jumpers for goalposts, veg bought in lb and oz and white dog poo.
> 
> cri, as she tediously reminds everyone on US threads, grew up in the states so she gets nostalgic for racism, slavery and segragation. Like her hero Hilary.



I mean, you're right, but I've never understood your fascination with dog poo


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I mean, you're right, but I've never understood your fascination with dog poo


I had day surgery this morning in Northallerton and the anaesthetist came round to see me beforehand. I had urban open on my phone, at Unread Threads. He spied that _How Much Does a Poo Weigh _was in the list and gave me a rather strange look.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The good old days is jumpers for goalposts, veg bought in lb and oz and white dog poo.
> 
> cri, as she tediously reminds everyone on US threads, grew up in the states so she gets nostalgic for racism, slavery and segragation. Like her hero Hilary.


auld times there are not forgotten


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I had day surgery this morning in Northallerton and the anaesthetist came round to see me beforehand. I had urban open on my phone, at Unread Threads. He spied that _How Much Does a Poo Weigh _was in the list and gave me a rather strange look.


your anaesthetist is another urb


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I mean, you're right, but I've never understood your fascination with dog poo



No obsession but I will resist anything the EU bureaucrats try to foist upon us. Like for example the dogshit and curly wurly act of 2003, which mandated that henceforth all dogshit must be brown (they even included those little sample things paint shops have to show which colours are acceptable). It also reduced the length of a curly wurly to 3 inches. They were about 7 foot long before that the bastards!


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> You chose an explicitly racist portrayal. Is that what you think no dealer or leavers want to return to - that leavers are racists? Is that the people on this thread? You chose to put something explicitly racist on the thread, could at least explain why you think that's what you imagine represents 'the good old days' to leavers.


 Have you not seen social media posts, the comments on tv and radio, etc., from people who support leave and reports of racist and xenophobic attacks from people who support leave - especially the No Deal version of it?  I mean, you don't have to look hard to find examples.

And are people here so delicate that every criticism of Leave supporters has to be predicated by a "not all Leavers" caveat?  Cripes.  If you support leaving - even no deal and you "know" you aren't racist, it's not about you!

For those having palpitations from the advert I posted for Sunlight soap - drawing attention to racism =/= racism.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> drawing attention to racism =/= racism.


But there was no racism on the thread before you posted your picture.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Have you not seen social media posts, the comments on tv and radio, etc., from people who support leave and reports of racist and xenophobic attacks from people who support leave - especially the No Deal version of it?  I mean, you don't have to look hard to find examples.
> 
> And are people here so delicate that every criticism of Leave supporters has to be predicated by a "not all Leavers" caveat?  Cripes.  If you support leaving - even no deal and you "know" you aren't racist, it's not about you!
> 
> For those having palpitations from the advert I posted for Sunlight soap - drawing attention to racism =/= racism.



So basically some people somewhere are racist therefore it's appropriate to post racist cartoons on this thread? Glad we cleared that up


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> your anaesthetist is another urb


… and I've lived to tell the tale!


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> … and I've lived to tell the tale!


Best of (british - best in the world) luck wilf.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> But there was no racism on the thread before you posted your picture.


There was something about Scots and deep fried mars bars


----------



## CRI (Feb 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> There was something about Scots and deep fried mars bars


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

The fools are now tutting at each other. Great.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> There was something about Scots and deep fried mars bars


Yes, directed at me and I certainly took it as racist.

Pointless saying that to these cunts though.   CRI hasn't blocked enough of them imo.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Have you not seen social media posts, the comments on tv and radio, etc., from people who support leave and reports of racist and xenophobic attacks from people who support leave - especially the No Deal version of it?  I mean, you don't have to look hard to find examples.
> 
> And are people here so delicate that every criticism of Leave supporters has to be predicated by a "not all Leavers" caveat?  Cripes.  If you support leaving - even no deal and you "know" you aren't racist, it's not about you!...



i take it you caveat your posts about remaining and remainers with examples of the disgusting attitudes of _some_ who voted remain?

suggestions that poor people - who were more likely to vote leave - shouldn't be allowed to vote because they aren't educated enough to _see the real issues._

suggestions that a good way to have _good politics _is to have a property qualification - no property, no vote.

threads about how amusing it is when global corporations use the excuse of brexit (and perhaps sometimes they are telling the truth) to close large employers in relatively poor, leave voting areas: ha! thicky racists - serves you right...

tl:dr. you're a cunt, and not just a cunt, but not very bright, nor very interesting - a dull cunt, the very worst kind.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

This thread really is a treat.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

Heaven _forfend _a stereotype argues a nationalist.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The fools are now tutting at each other. Great.


Excellent non-tutting post - good work.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In which ways will you cease being European, and in which ways will you continue to be European?


In a crash-out what we will lose is the right to travel, live, work and retire anywhere we want in the EU, it's clear that a very significant proportion of the UK population and a lot of posters on U75 don't think these rights are actually worth having. I can find you several people who would think otherwise including one friend/former colleague who now finds himself in a position where he has to make a stark choice.
Take up German citizenship and due to their arcane citizenship laws renounce his British one or return in his mid-50's to a country he no longer calls home and has neither home nor job.
For extra LOL's he's gay and feels he's can be open about it in his German workplace and is highly doubtful he could be here.


brogdale said:


> Being 'European' as opposed to holding supra-state citizenship; one is essentially a geographical descriptor of populations and the other a relationship between people and a polity.
> tbh, I reckon the supra-state missed a trick with the UK popuation...I think they should have insisted that UK citizens had the right to retain supra-state citizenship whatever the state decided to do.


I can't imagine them doing that what would be in it for the EU? The EU is not some evil empire out to crush us but it isn't benevolent and does nothing out of kindness. Freedom of movement is the biggest plus for individuals, there is no way it would give that to citizens of a country outside the EU without something or a lot of somethings in return.
This is why the Irish Passport Office is currently snowed under with applications from NI


HoratioCuthbert said:


> Are you suggesting the EU has been buffering the drive to privatise the NHS like?


The NHS has pretty much a monopoly on drug purchases in this country, a fact that gives it immense leverage when negotiating drug prices with largely American companies, Most speciality drugs cost about
a third here of what they do in the US (still making obscene profits though). Big Pharma in the US is lobbying Congress hard to make sure that any US-UK Trade Deal will cover this and restrict the NHS's
ability to do this. It doesn't necessarily mean they will succeed but the US has the same advantage over us that the EU does of a much larger economy and thus more able to call the shots.
Even a left wing Corbyn-led government (never mind the current shower) might find itself with the stark choice of a trade deal that protects 100,000's of export dependent jobs or a massive cost burden on the NHS.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Excellent non-tutting post - good work.



I so want to brixton.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The fools are now tutting at each other. Great.


They are quite a disparate group, with different talents and outlooks. Maybe they need a title to bring them together. 
#Brevengers Assemble.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> In a crash-out what we will lose is the right to travel, live, work and retire anywhere we want in the EU, it's clear that a very significant proportion of the UK population and a lot of posters on U75 don't think these rights are actually worth having. I can find you several people who would think otherwise including one friend/former colleague who now finds himself in a position where he has to make a stark choice.
> Take up German citizenship and due to their arcane citizenship laws renounce his British one or return in his mid-50's to a country he no longer calls home and has neither home nor job.
> For extra LOL's he's gay and feels he's can be open about it in his German workplace and is highly doubtful he could be here.



What? You still can. He still can. What rights are the EU imposing?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> suggestions that poor people - who were more likely to vote leave - shouldn't be allowed to vote because they aren't educated enough to _see the real issues._
> 
> .


… and the elderly.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> In a crash-out what we will lose is the right to travel, live, work and retire anywhere we want in the EU, it's clear that a very significant proportion of the UK population and a lot of posters on U75 don't think these rights are actually worth having. I can find you several people who would think otherwise including one friend/former colleague who now finds himself in a position where he has to make a stark choice.
> Take up German citizenship and due to their arcane citizenship laws renounce his British one or return in his mid-50's to a country he no longer calls home and has neither home nor job.
> For extra LOL's he's gay and feels he's can be open about it in his German workplace and is highly doubtful he could be here.


Since you appear to have addressed a different question to the one asked, I’m not entirely sure how to respond. However, your friend has my sympathy. He clearly doesn’t deserve the bureaucratic nightmare, or its consequences.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What? You still can. He still can. What rights are the EU imposing?


Not sure what you're asking


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 11, 2019)

There's a suffragette poster where they had images of scruffy and obviously irresponsible working class men who were getting the franchise and it basically said you need us 'respectable' women to vote too to counteract their idiocy. Can we all pretend I posted it for cri's benefit? Can't be arsed to look for it.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Not sure what you're asking


I'm saying that the bit of yours that i quoted is mental.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> There's a suffragette poster where they had images of scruffy and obviously irresponsible working class men who were getting the franchise and it basically said you need us 'respectable' women to vote too to counteract their idiocy. Can we all pretend I posted it for cri's benefit? Can't be arsed to look for it.


ladies vs women


----------



## Sue (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I can find you several people who would think otherwise including one friend/former colleague who now finds himself in a position where he has to make a stark choice.
> Take up German citizenship and due to their arcane citizenship laws renounce his British one or return in his mid-50's to a country he no longer calls home and has neither home nor job.


No longer true, changed a few years ago. I've a German friend who's lived here for a very long time who got dual German-British citizenship a year or so ago. (She had to do the citizenship test and provide lots of paperwork but that's pretty standard.)


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> In a crash-out what we will lose is the right to travel, live, work and retire anywhere we want in the EU, it's clear that a very significant proportion of the UK population and a lot of posters on U75 don't think these rights are actually worth having. I can find you several people who would think otherwise including one friend/former colleague who now finds himself in a position where he has to make a stark choice.
> Take up German citizenship and due to their arcane citizenship laws renounce his British one or return in his mid-50's to a country he no longer calls home and has neither home nor job.
> For extra LOL's he's gay and feels he's can be open about it in his German workplace and is highly doubtful he could be here.
> 
> ...


 I know I'm not addressing the actual points you raise, but SpineyNorman 's point a day or two back should be the starting point for any kind of response:


> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I know I'm not addressing the actual points you raise, but SpineyNorman 's point a day or two back should be the starting point for any kind of response:


Indeed. It needs to be on every page.

Hope you’re well, btw.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

Sue said:


> Not true, changed a few years ago. I've a German friend who's lived here for a very long time who got dual German-British citizenship a year or so ago. (She had to do the citizenship test and provide lots of paperwork but that's pretty standard.)


Under German law, you can only have dual citizenship IF you acquired the German one through birth (like the children of GI's who have a German parent) OR the other country is a member of the EU (which we currently are) If we leave then the 2nd rule won't apply anymore (unless something is agreed). Under UK Law you can have as many citizenships as you like.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. It needs to be on every page.
> 
> Hope you’re well, btw.


Yeah, not so bad thanks. It was just a nerve root block, but because it was spinal they do it in surgery. In at 8, op, brew and biscuits and out by 10.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, not so bad thanks. It was just a nerve root block, but because it was spinal they do it in surgery. In at 8, op, brew and biscuits and out by 10.


8 special brew. Best in world.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, not so bad thanks. It was just a nerve root block, but because it was spinal they do it in surgery. In at 8, op, brew and biscuits and out by 10.


Good, take care.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Have you not seen social media posts, the comments on tv and radio, etc., from people who support leave and reports of racist and xenophobic attacks from people who support leave - especially the No Deal version of it?  I mean, you don't have to look hard to find examples.
> 
> And are people here so delicate that every criticism of Leave supporters has to be predicated by a "not all Leavers" caveat?  Cripes.  If you support leaving - even no deal and you "know" you aren't racist, it's not about you!
> 
> For those having palpitations from the advert I posted for Sunlight soap - drawing attention to racism =/= racism.



Won't be difficult for you to provide examples of other posters here who share your love of racist cartoons then will it?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> 8 special brew. Best in world.


I was hoping for a cheeky pre med, but none was offered.


----------



## Sue (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Under German law, you can only have dual citizenship IF you acquired the German one through birth (like the children of GI's who have a German parent) OR the other country is a member of the EU (which we currently are) If we leave then the 2nd rule won't apply anymore (unless something is agreed). Under UK Law you can have as many citizenships as you like.


So if it was that much of an issue for your friend, did they not think about this before?  (I know my friend waited until a change in the law as before she would've had to give up her German passport and she wanted both.)

ETA Or just going for German citizenship would surely be easier? I've a friend who's lived in France for 30 years who'd currently in the process of getting French citizenship. He never bothered before because he didn't need to but can't realistically see himself moving back here. He's not that bothered whether he has a GB or French passport tbh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I was hoping for a cheeky pre med, but none was offered.



If you don't ask you don't get. Cutbacks


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Under German law, you can only have dual citizenship IF you acquired the German one through birth (like the children of GI's who have a German parent) OR the other country is a member of the EU (which we currently are) If we leave then the 2nd rule won't apply anymore (unless something is agreed). Under UK Law you can have as many citizenships as you like.


I'm confused... one of my sons has restored German citizenship (his grandad's was revoked by the Nazis) along with his original British citizenship. Does that mean he loses his German citizenship now? Surely not


----------



## andysays (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Christ - Sunlight is written on the advert.  Plenty who support Brexit seem keen to return to the "good old days" of those adverts with the shite they spout, so there you go.


"Sunlight is written on the advert"

Utterly pathetic.

Has anyone on this thread or any other posted anything which even hints at support for a return to the days when that shit was seen as acceptable?

Your continued attempts to smear as racist those who don't agree with you are frankly disgusting.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you don't ask you don't get. Cutbacks


If I'd had it at my nearest hospital in Middlesbrough, they'd have been dishing them out by the handful under May's bribe for northern leave areas.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> "Sunlight is written on the advert"
> 
> Utterly pathetic.
> 
> ...


And more than that, it led to the unwarranted, unrelated posting of a racist image.

The “logic”, such as there was, appeared to be: _“oh, a word. That reminds me of racism. Like this. *posts up racism*”._

Completely unacceptable.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

Wish I hadn't used the phrase, now. Apols if I've led anyone astray.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> "Sunlight is written on the advert"
> 
> Utterly pathetic.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I'm not wild about the accusation made by posting the cartoon up - against urbanites, against leavers generally. But the CRI modus operandi is just as annoying, write 2 sentences, post up an inflammatory clip, rinse and repeat. When pressed to justify it, wheels comes off aplenty.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

Sue said:


> So if it was that much of an issue for your friend, did they not think about this before?  (I know my friend waited until a change in the law as before she would've had to give up her German passport and she wanted both.)


Who's they? the EU, the UK Govt, the people who campaigned for either leave or remain? clearly they didn't think about it anymore than they thought about the Irish border question either.
As my friend he never really thought about it either but then he never imagined this in his wildest dreams.
He went to the Berlin Office of our then mutual employer about fifteen years ago, the company actually asked for volunteers from our team. Being married with a young family I wasn't interested but he
was up for it and FoM meant he just packed his bags and rocked up on the doorstep in Berlin a week or so later. 
He has (last time I spoke to him) applied for German citizenship and is hoping a) he gets it (though my information is probably out of date by now) and that b) some deal will be struck that will enable him to keep his British one.  His employer has also told they will do everything they can to sort out work permits etc if needed but are funnily enough hindered by the fact they know as little as anyone else about what is going to happen, they're keen to keep him. 
It's a worst case scenario obviously but there is a possibility that come the 30th March he will turn up for work and effectively be working illegally at the job he as done for the last 15 or so years.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Wish I hadn't used the phrase, now. Apols if I've led anyone astray.


((((broggers))))


----------



## chilango (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> ladies vs women



That scene in Peterloo.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Wish I hadn't used the phrase, now. Apols if I've led anyone astray.


There’s absolutely no way you could have known a word would have been plucked from your post and used to try to justify (where no justification exists) that non sequitur of a post from CRI .


----------



## Sue (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Who's they? the EU, the UK Govt, the people who campaigned for either leave or remain? clearly they didn't think about it anymore than they thought about the Irish border question either.
> As my friend he never really thought about it either but then he never imagined this in his wildest dreams.
> He went to the Berlin Office of our then mutual employer about fifteen years ago, the company actually asked for volunteers from our team. Being married with a young family I wasn't interested but he
> was up for it and FoM meant he just packed his bags and rocked up on the doorstep in Berlin a week or so later.
> ...


'They ' referred to your friend. Turning up at work on the 30th of March and not being able to work or whatever seems vanishingly unlikely. Hopefully his citizenship will be through by then though so it'll be less stressful for him.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> I'm confused... one of my sons has restored German citizenship (his grandad's was revoked by the Nazis) along with his original British citizenship. Does that mean he loses his German citizenship now? Surely not


Under Article 116 of Germany's constitution, known as the Basic Law,[8] anyone who had their German citizenship revoked during the Nazi regime for "political, racist, or religious reasons" may reobtain citizenship. The Article also includes the descendants of Nazi victims, and does not require them to give up the citizenship of their new home countries.[9]
This is from the Wikipedia article on German citizenship which my friend (who we will call S from now on since that is his initial) pointed me to when I responded WTF?? to his sorry tale
He is a Brummie born and bred the most recent German ancestors he had came over with the Saxon invasion.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Under Article 116 of Germany's constitution, known as the Basic Law,[8] anyone who had their German citizenship revoked during the Nazi regime for "political, racist, or religious reasons" may reobtain citizenship. The Article also includes the descendants of Nazi victims, and does not require them to give up the citizenship of their new home countries.[9]
> This is from the Wikipedia article on German citizenship which my friend (who we will call S from now on since that is his initial) pointed me to when I responded WTF?? to his sorry tale
> He is a Brummie born and bred the most recent German ancestors he had came over with the Saxon invasion.


I’m sorry, I’m completely lost now. What was the problem your friend had?  (His most recent German ancestors being in the Dark Ages).


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Under Article 116 of Germany's constitution, known as the Basic Law,[8] anyone who had their German citizenship revoked during the Nazi regime for "political, racist, or religious reasons" may reobtain citizenship. The Article also includes the descendants of Nazi victims, and does not require them to give up the citizenship of their new home countries.[9]
> This is from the Wikipedia article on German citizenship which my friend (who we will call S from now on since that is his initial) pointed me to when I responded WTF?? to his sorry tale
> He is a Brummie born and bred the most recent German ancestors he had came over with the Saxon invasion.


what's a bit shit is that descendants of people forced to flee austria because of the nazis can't get austrian nationality in the same way descendants of people forced to flee germany because of the nazis can.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

chilango said:


> That scene in Peterloo.


Not seen him. Nor sure i'd like it tbh.


----------



## alsoknownas (Feb 11, 2019)

Gavin Williamson sounds like he's channelling Comical Ali now. Brexit to 'enhance UK's lethality' .


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m sorry, I’m completely lost now. What was the problem your friend had?


My friend is working in Germany under EU FoM, the same agreement that brings so many Poles etc here, If we crash out No-Deal then he loses that right and will be in no different a position from say an American (it's a US company) needing a work permit. He doesn't actually expect that German immigration will turn up in April and drag him off, (he's white and can speak fluent German so he could scam them for a bit anyways) but he could technically be expelled for working illegally and is naturally concerned about any long term future he has and ending up in a kind of Windrush situation. 
Incidentally concern over where this is going is why one of son's mates and his Polish girlfriend are getting married at very short notice next month. No-one believes she will either a) lose her job or b) get deported but they have decided best to cover all the bases.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Gavin Williamson sounds like he's channelling Comical Ali now. Brexit to 'enhance UK's lethality' .


Regrettably Williamson is actually channelling his own ability and personality. Rather sadly, he seem like the sort who was bullied at school and we're living out the consequences of that.


----------



## andysays (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Wish I hadn't used the phrase, now. Apols if I've led anyone astray.


No need for you to apologise,  the responsibility is entirely CRI's


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> My friend is working in Germany under EU FoM


Right, gotcha. OK, well I hope it works out for him.  

Not at all sure why you quoted my question in order to tell his story. But all the best to him anyway.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Right, gotcha. OK, well I hope it works out for him.
> 
> Not at all sure why you quoted my question in order to tell his story. But all the best to him anyway.


Yours seemed to be the last post in a chain saying how will we not be European post-Brexit, we will still be just won't have the same rights as them.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Gavin Williamson sounds like he's channelling Comical Ali now. Brexit to 'enhance UK's lethality' .


Bob Calvert did this album about the West German air force and their Lockheed Starfighter - more dangerous to their own pilots than any enemy. 



(((The UK's Enhanced Lethality)))


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> No need for you to apologise,  the responsibility is entirely CRI's


Yeah, I'm just a bit upset that a little bit of joshing around led to that...& rarely great when someone pisses on their own chips.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, I'm just a bit upset that a little bit of joshing around led to that...& rarely great when someone pisses on their own chips.


is this your first time at a harvesters?


----------



## editor (Feb 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> View attachment 161577


Don't post this is anything similar again please.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> is this your first time at a harvesters?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Yours seemed to be the last post in a chain saying how will we not be European post-Brexit, we will still be just won't have the same rights as them.


You’re confusing European with EU citizen. Not all European countries are in the EU. And so not all Europeans are EU citizens.

Indeed, before Maastricht, I was not an EU citizen, and after the UK leaves the EU, I will once again not be an EU citizen. Although I will remain European. This has implications, but they’re different things.


----------



## editor (Feb 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> tl:dr. you're a cunt, and not just a cunt, but not very bright, nor very interesting - a dull cunt, the very worst kind.


Too much personal abuse. No more please.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> is this your first time at a harvesters?


… but, but, free salad!


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You’re confusing European with EU citizen. Not all European countries are in the EU. And so not all Europeans are EU citizens.
> 
> Indeed, before Maastricht, I was not an EU citizen, and after the UK leaves the EU, I will once again not be an EU citizen. Although I will remain European. This has implications, but they’re different things.


There's no such thing as an EU citizen there is being a citizen of an EU or EEA country which grants extra rights in addition to those you get from your native country, you're right this is nothing to do with being ethnically or geographically European but I think Norman was on about those rights not ethnicity and we will lose some or all of these rights post-Brexit. (Deal or No-Deal).
It's down to a matter of choice whether you feel losing those rights is a bad thing, me I think so even though I have never really excercised them. S is or rather was shitting himself.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

That's just not right.


----------



## chilango (Feb 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Not seen him. Nor sure i'd like it tbh.



I'm not sure you would either.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> There's no such thing as an EU citizen there is being a citizen of an EU [snip] country


That is what confers EU citizenship.

See:

EU citizenship


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That is what confers EU citizenship.
> 
> See:
> 
> EU citizenship


That's pretty much what I said, It's more like an add-on rather than true citizenship but if you wish to be pedantic I will conceed the point and agree that its called EU citizenship.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

In case anyone is interested, Paddy Power are offering 1/4 on A50 being extended. 

Online Betting & Odds | Bet with Paddy Power Sports

Interestingly, they are offering the same odds (1/4) *against *a no deal Brexit, which they define as an agreement being reached or A50 being extended. So it doesn't seem like they think a deal is likely either. 

Not that bookies are much better than polls. But they're a bit better.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In case anyone is interested, Paddy Power are offering 1/4 on A50 being extended.
> 
> Online Betting & Odds | Bet with Paddy Power Sports
> 
> ...


Bookies unlike politicians are at least honest about why they are doing things.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Bookies unlike politicians are at least honest about why they are doing things.



Well...no. It's Paddy Power. There's a reason they're offering so many silly bets on Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Regrettably Williamson is actually channelling his own ability and personality. Rather sadly, he seem like the sort who was bullied at school and we're living out the consequences of that.


Seems to ranting like a maniac today...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

Williams warming to his theme now. Our future lethality will be 'swarms of drones'. 
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...rexit-says-defence-secretary-gavin-Williamson
I suspect this was how the Butlerian Jihad kicked off in Dune. Self aware photocopiers giving you a kick in the shins. 

Edit: curses!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Seems to ranting like a maniac today...
> 
> View attachment 161594


so our swarms of drones will be unopposed by russia or china. right.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

"What do you mean Flash Gordon approaching? Open fire! All weapons! Dispatch war rocket Ajax The Jacob Rees-Mogg Drone Swarm to bring back his body"


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> "What do you mean Flash Gordon approaching? Open fire! All weapons! Dispatch war rocket Ajax The Jacob Rees-Mogg Drone Swarm to bring back his body"


you're forgetting one thing.

there will no longer be putting williams and his loathsome ilk up against the wall.

we will just unleash swarms of drones against the vermin instead.

the ones who don't get sent to the south atlantic anyway


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so our swarms of drones will be unopposed by russia or china. right.


I look forward to Putin making him apologise in the style of Peter Ohanrahanraham in The Day Today.

*"LOOK LIKE YOU MEAN IT!"*


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

Gavlar and his _Airfix _squad vrs...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 11, 2019)

TBH he's probably going to get arrested for flying his new toys at Heathrow.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well...no. It's Paddy Power. There's a reason they're offering so many silly bets on Brexit.


 3-1 on before the ireland game.


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Under Article 116 of Germany's constitution, known as the Basic Law,[8] anyone who had their German citizenship revoked during the Nazi regime for "political, racist, or religious reasons" may reobtain citizenship. The Article also includes the descendants of Nazi victims, and does not require them to give up the citizenship of their new home countries.[9]


Cheers for that  I tried to get him to learn German as well, seeing he's now a German citizen. Said I'd even learn it with him, moral support and all that... but he just couldn't be arsed, the lazy sod


----------



## two sheds (Feb 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Cheers for that  I tried to get him to learn German as well, seeing he's now a German citizen. Said I'd even learn it with him, moral support and all that... but he just couldn't be arsed, the lazy sod



A dutch mate did once say to me that Life's too short to learn German.


----------



## AnandLeo (Feb 11, 2019)

Prime Minister Theresa May has apparently rejected the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s idea of a custom’s union. She says a custom’s union does not give a smooth trading relation, single market does, albeit with free movement – the Labour party or Tory government does not agree to. However, she is willing to discuss other issues the Corbyn has put forward. The key issue in an amicable Brexit that benefits both UK and EU is smooth trade relation for the business, industry, and supply chain.

In my opinion, the strategy is to explore the approaches of a custom’s union, and single market with a reformed free movement for tourists, and opportunity for EU citizens to work in UK without displacing the permanent inhabitants of the UK. The temporary seasonal EU labour is vital to UK economy. Also, the permanent migrant workers of all occupations are also important to UK as long as it does not make UK residents unemployed. The essential NHS care for migrant workers can be managed through primary care, and compulsory insurances. Unemployment benefit can also be managed as applied currently for temporary and permanent migrant workers.

It is not a custom’s union or single market terms applied across the EU, that we are talking about. The UK wants to negotiate a new unique bilateral agreement of custom’s union or single market compatible with EU, with compromised fee movement whichever is less intricate, and feasible without having to muddle with a backstop for Irish border. Free movement can be sensibly compromised and reformed. It is a basis for fresh negotiation without preconceived cynicism.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 11, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> It is not a custom’s union or single market terms applied across the EU, that we are talking about. The UK wants to negotiate a new unique bilateral agreement of custom’s union or single market compatible with EU, with compromised fee movement whichever is less intricate, and feasible without having to muddle with a backstop for Irish border. Free movement can be sensibly compromised and reformed. It is a basis for fresh negotiation without preconceived cynicism.



Sounds like it'll all be fine then.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 11, 2019)

Bit late for that isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 11, 2019)

It'll be alright on the night


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 11, 2019)

Break a leg!


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 11, 2019)

The government would have to shell out for sufficient staff to make it work - they clearly figure it's cheaper to not enforce immigration law adequately ...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The government would have to shell out for sufficient staff to make it work - they clearly figure it's cheaper to not enforce immigration law adequately ...


Border Force reckon a 'No-Deal' exit is the way to maintain free movement:


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

Really deserved to be on the side of the big red lie-bus; "*enhance our lethality and increase our mass"*



What an absolute fucking clown


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 11, 2019)

They're really scraping the barrel now...


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> They're really scraping the barrel now...


Really wouldn't trust that one to put yer bins out, would you?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Really wouldn't trust that one to put yer bins out, would you?


There's people here who don't know how to do that


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 11, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Prime Minister Theresa May has apparently rejected the Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s idea of a custom’s union. She says a custom’s union does not give a smooth trading relation, single market does, albeit with free movement – the Labour party or Tory government does not agree to. However, she is willing to discuss other issues the Corbyn has put forward. The key issue in an amicable Brexit that benefits both UK and EU is smooth trade relation for the business, industry, and supply chain.
> 
> In my opinion, the strategy is to explore the approaches of a custom’s union, and single market with a reformed free movement for tourists, and opportunity for EU citizens to work in UK without displacing the permanent inhabitants of the UK. The temporary seasonal EU labour is vital to UK economy. Also, the permanent migrant workers of all occupations are also important to UK as long as it does not make UK residents unemployed. The essential NHS care for migrant workers can be managed through primary care, and compulsory insurances. Unemployment benefit can also be managed as applied currently for temporary and permanent migrant workers.
> 
> It is not a custom’s union or single market terms applied across the EU, that we are talking about. The UK wants to negotiate a new unique bilateral agreement of custom’s union or single market compatible with EU, with compromised fee movement whichever is less intricate, and feasible without having to muddle with a backstop for Irish border. Free movement can be sensibly compromised and reformed. It is a basis for fresh negotiation without preconceived cynicism.


So basically can we have all the bits we do like such as tariff free trade but not the bits we don't like such as the grubby forrins coming here? 
This is what Farage promised and Davis was asking for at Day 1 and the EU laughed its head off, we're back at the you can't leave the club and keep all the benefits of membership jag again. This record is not only worn but the stylus has gone through and is destroying the turntable.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> the EU laughed its head off



All 28 of them?


----------



## grit (Feb 11, 2019)

.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Really deserved to be on the side of the big red lie-bus; "*enhance our lethality and increase our mass"*
> 
> What an absolute fucking clown


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> There's people here who don't know how to do that


No many other folk defending Williamson, today.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No many other folk defending Williamson, today.


I'm not defending that twat.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm not defending that twat.


I obviously misunderstood your meaning.


----------



## rekil (Feb 12, 2019)

flypanam said:


> As an aside there are rumours that sections of the IRA in Dublin especially those that used to around Alan Ryan are involved in burning direct provision centers in places like Rooskey.


I haven't heard anything about this, but Rooskey got done again. Fire suspected at Rooskey asylum seeker hotel for second time in a month - Independent.ie



Spoiler



not brexit related content before anyone starts but at least it's not racist cartoons amirite


----------



## Badgers (Feb 12, 2019)

How many trade deals has Fox got done? I recall he promised 40


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 12, 2019)

Badgers said:


> How many trade deals has Fox got done? I recall he promised 40



I would be amazed if it totalled one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No many other folk defending Williamson, today.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 12, 2019)

According to the BBC, a deal just signed with Switzerland brings it up to a whopping 4 trade deals, though one of them apparently covers "eastern and southern Africa." The other two are with Chile and the Faroe Islands, so that's Britain sorted for copper and ... fish?

UK signs trade deal with Switzerland


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> According to the BBC, a deal just signed with Switzerland brings it up to a whopping 4 trade deals, though one of them apparently covers "eastern and southern Africa." The other two are with Chile and the Faroe Islands, so that's Britain sorted for copper and ... fish?
> 
> UK signs trade deal with Switzerland


There has been merriment in torshavn since the faeroese got the better of Britain in the trade negotiation


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> According to the BBC, a deal just signed with Switzerland brings it up to a whopping 4 trade deals, though one of them apparently covers "eastern and southern Africa." The other two are with Chile and the Faroe Islands, so that's Britain sorted for copper and ... fish?
> 
> UK signs trade deal with Switzerland


People watching closely will have noticed you saw a hand signing the deal, rather than seeing liam fox signing. This is because the best fox can do is make his mark


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 12, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> According to the BBC, a deal just signed with Switzerland brings it up to a whopping 4 trade deals, though one of them apparently covers "eastern and southern Africa." The other two are with Chile and the Faroe Islands, so that's Britain sorted for copper and ... fish?
> 
> UK signs trade deal with Switzerland



I am sat, amazed and pleased the nation’s future is in such capable hands.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> People watching closely will have noticed you saw a hand signing the deal, rather than seeing liam fox signing. This is because the best fox can do is make his mark



A fox achieves its goal by cunning not intelligence too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I am sat, amazed and pleased the nation’s future is in such capable hands.


An hour after the ceremony the nation's future was in incapable hands as fox cannot hold his drink figuratively and literally


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> A fox achieves its goal by cunning not intelligence too.


He was only in the ceremony at all because no one else wanted to be there


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> According to the BBC, a deal just signed with Switzerland brings it up to a whopping 4 trade deals, though one of them apparently covers "eastern and southern Africa." The other two are with Chile and the Faroe Islands, so that's Britain sorted for copper and ... fish?
> 
> UK signs trade deal with Switzerland


And cuckoo clocks.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And cuckoo clocks.



Toblerone?


----------



## Poot (Feb 12, 2019)

I'm happier now that I know that if it all goes tits up there'll be Toblerone. 

eta. Too slow


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

And assault rifles in every house


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> And assault rifles on every house



Nah, old hat, had them stored since last time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Nah, old hat, had them stored since last time.


There's a backstop in the Swiss deal, they get first dibs on throwing theresa may from the reichenbach falls


----------



## brogdale (Feb 12, 2019)

Holey cheese? Have we had that yet?


----------



## Poot (Feb 12, 2019)

I think we're on a roll.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 12, 2019)

Poot said:


> I think we're on a roll.


Watch you don't go too far with this, eh?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 12, 2019)

the whole thing is crackers...


----------



## Poot (Feb 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Watch you don't go too far with this, eh?


It seems Heidi unlikely.


----------



## Supine (Feb 12, 2019)

Poot said:


> It seems Heidi unlikely.



In the post brexit wonderland we'll tell or children stories about Heidi the Cumbria sheep farmer. None of that foreign culture anymore.


----------



## flypanam (Feb 12, 2019)

copliker said:


> I haven't heard anything about this, but Rooskey got done again. Fire suspected at Rooskey asylum seeker hotel for second time in a month - Independent.ie
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Fuck, again? A worrying development...

As for the rumour, I saw a friend of a friend make the claim on fb.


----------



## rekil (Feb 12, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Fuck, again? A worrying development...
> 
> As for the rumour, I saw a friend of a friend make the claim on fb.


There's a chance that this one was accidental I suppose. The pool of characters willing to indulge in this level of activity is very small. My money's on John Waters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> the whole thing is crackers...


the ritz, the ritz, we've got to get rid of the ritz


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 12, 2019)

More business people complaining their businesses will fold after brexit...

_Then you can be as poor and desperate as me and mine. I am so sorry about that, but still, welcome to my world._

Feel like I'm beginning to get into the brexit mindset at last


----------



## brogdale (Feb 12, 2019)

Tele's Dep. Political Ed. reckons we're spending more time discussing Brexit than the Cabinet...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

Not sure if we've reached peak Remaniac-ery now, but here's a Cambridge economist appearing nude on Good Morning Britain and challenging jrm to a (naked) debate.
Naked anti-Brexit campaigner challenges Rees-Mogg on live TV
She makes some arguable points justifying it on feminist grounds, but the real Partridgesque/The Day Today point comes because she's pixelated. That leaves Richard Madely reading out the slogans she has written on each breast. Words fail me (but not him, obviously)


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Not sure if we've reached peak Remaniac-ery now


What do you mean by this exactly?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What do you mean by this exactly?



You know what he means. He means "surely the Remaniacs can get no dafter than this?"

They probably can though. You're definitely about to say something moronic and probably prove him wrong.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know what he means. He means "surely the Remaniacs can get no dafter than this?"
> 
> They probably can though. You're definitely about to say something moronic and probably prove him wrong.



Why do you think she is daft though?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why do you think she is daft though?


it's been in her since birth no doubt poor thing.

it's wicked to mock the afflicted.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2019)

The naked remainiac has proved her tactic is very effective tbh. There she is on GMB, making a political argument she wouldn't have been able to make clothed.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why do you think she is daft though?



because, as a broad rule, neither the electorate nor 'the elites' are swayed by the political arguments of streakers. they tend to get pigeon-holed as either exibitionists or loons, and therefore little weight is given to their arguments.



killer b said:


> The naked remainiac has proved her tactic is very effective tbh. There she is on GMB, making a political argument she wouldn't have been able to make clothed.



she has been effective at getting on telly - though you can't pretend that she's the first remainer to get on telly since june 2016 - that doesn't mean she's been effective at getting those watching to either pay attention to her argument or persaude them of it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 12, 2019)

kebabking said:


> because, as a broad rule, neither the electorate nor 'the elites' are swayed by the political arguments of streakers. they tend to get pigeon-holed as either exibitionists or loons, and therefore little weight is given to their arguments..


This is very true. Erika Roe's message about the incoherence of Tory monetarist policy, predicated as it was on a fundamental misunderstanding of the way money is produced, was widely ignored.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is very true. Erika Roe's message about the incoherence of Tory monetarist policy, predicated as it was on a fundamental misunderstanding of the way money is produced, was widely ignored.


erica


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What do you mean by this exactly?


If she wants to focus on jrm, she might want to emphasise his sick making attitudes to rape and abortion, to his refusal to raise a finger raising his own children and the rest. In fact she probably does think/say these things - but instead she ends up here denying what she's doing is a stunt. I'd suggest getting to a situation in a TV studio with Richard Madeley reading slogans off your breasts is a pretty weird 'stunt'. But the point about this being peak remainery is that it confirms the remain campaign is so distant from the real issues that lead to the Brexit vote.  And on page 783 of this thread I'm not going to (re)type out what those issues are.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> The naked remainiac has proved her tactic is very effective tbh. There she is on GMB, making a political argument she wouldn't have been able to make clothed.


I think I'd agree with that, sort of. It works, essentially, as a stunt.  But that's itself a sign of the failure of remain as a wider campaign, from before the vote through to now. It isn't rooted in communities, it hasn't engaged with the reasons for the initial vote and the rest. I can't put that failure down to an individual who is probably being creative and PR savvy, but her performance on telly should be seen against that backdrop.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

I don't think her chosen method of drawing attention to what she wants to say is 'weird'.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think her chosen method of drawing attention to what she wants to say is 'weird'.


Ah, I see.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 12, 2019)

Aw fuck. teuchter's sat in the buff whilst typing this, isn't he


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Aw fuck. teuchter's sat in the buff whilst typing this, isn't he


here, have some mind bleach


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> The naked remainiac has proved her tactic is very effective tbh. There she is on GMB, making a political argument she wouldn't have been able to make clothed.



I know this is an utterly predictable point from me but...

...not any old naked body gets a platform to espouse their views in the national media.

The fact that this particular naked body belongs to a Cambridge professor with degrees from both Oxford _and_ Cambridge probably counts more than simple nudity.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> I know this is an utterly predictable point from me but...
> 
> ...not any old naked body gets a platform to espouse their views in the national media.
> 
> The fact that this particular naked body belongs to a Cambridge professor with degrees from both Oxford _and_ Cambridge probably counts more than simple nudity.


She also has a media platform already via Tim Montgomeries 'unherd' website fwiw.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

I feel like I've allowed teuchter to troll me into a clarification  but here goes: there's a long history of nudity in protests (Critical Mass for example) and using nudity to demonstrate powerlessness against state violence. However playing this out in a tv studio with Richard Madelely acting as interpreter, along with a light dusting of jrm, is the weird bit. And it does fit into the problem remain have.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

To those who think she is 'daft' or a maniac - now she has your attention why not read up on her views on Brexit, economics and feminism and criticise her on the basis of those instead?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> To those who think she is 'daft' or a maniac - now she has your attention why not read up on her views on Brexit, economics and feminism and criticise her on the basis of those instead?


Now that you've read them, why don't you start a thread about them?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Now that you've read them, why don't you start a thread about them?


I was actually just thinking about doing that.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2019)

Or you could even read her new book, _The Sex Factor: how women made the West rich, _which will be published by Polity Books in April.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

She was on Newsnight a week or two ago (talking about the middle east if I remember correctly). On that occasion she was clothed and I noted her dress style which is sort of Victorian-ish. This is part of the persona she's decided to present, and yes: doing stuff that makes you noticeable, in conjunction with being a Cambridge professor, makes you noticeable, and more likely to get asked onto the media and yes helps to sell books. If that's her strategy so what. It's maybe interesting to consider that in the context of her challenge to JRM who also uses and old-fashioned look to draw attention to himself. I think that if she could debate JRM that would be a good thing. I would like to see that. Perhaps she is not going to reach certain portions of the UK populace with her approach, but perhaps she can reach the attention of some of those who take JRM seriously. She is not daft, or a maniac. Anyway, it's good to see advocates of a Lexit position giving lectures on how to reach a wide audience without being perceived as a lunatic fringe.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why do you think she is daft though?



Others have provided you with sufficient answers but just to really zero in on it in a way that hopefully even you will understand.

-Remainiacs (as distinct from people who voted Remain) have spent nearly 3 years telling Leave voters and themselves that Leave voters just didn't understand the arguments, and if they would just listen to sensible people then they would understand that they voted the wrong way. Some of them have twigged that this has failed.
-Remainiacs have decided that this is not because there arguments are moronic (how could they be? These are the sensible people) but because right wing Brexiteers are given a free ride by the media and are telling a 'simple' story that people can understand. As opposed to the complicated story Remaniacs tell people which is correct, but too complicated for mere proles to get.
-This Remainiac has decided that in order to get the proles to listen, they have to do ludicrous stunts like, for example, naked tv debates. This is just a continuation of the whole "Tell people they voted the wrong way but wave Union Jacks about so that they'll listen" strategy - the genius innovation here being that "people will pay attention to a naked woman".

None of this will work though. 



teuchter said:


> To those who think she is 'daft' or a maniac - now she has your attention why not read up on her views on Brexit, economics and feminism and criticise her on the basis of those instead?



Are you simple? We *already know what her views are*. 

Those of us who were not swayed by the argument over the last *nearly 3 years *are not going to be swayed by those arguments simply because she is naked.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> To those who think she is 'daft' or a maniac - now she has your attention why not read up on her views on Brexit, economics and feminism and criticise her on the basis of those instead?



she hasn't got my attention. its just more white noise from someone who'se basic premise is that i'm thick and racist, and who quietly believes that i shouldn't really have a vote on scuh things, and that i should _know my station_ and stick to voting on X Factor or Britains Favourite Dogs and leave the important stuff to people like her.

perhaps she doesn't, but i've no intention of finding out because she hasn't got my attention.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's been in her since birth no doubt poor thing.
> 
> it's wicked to mock the afflicted.


----------



## killer b (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Those of us who were not swayed by the argument over the last *nearly 3 years *are not going to be swayed by those arguments simply because she is naked.


she's been naked for the whole of those three years 

Cambridge academic stages nude protest over Brexit in front of 30 economists


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> she's been naked for the whole of those three years
> 
> Cambridge academic stages nude protest over Brexit in front of 30 economists


If only the naked rambler had published a few papers, he wouldn't have spent so long in Barlinnie.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> she's been naked for the whole of those three years
> 
> Cambridge academic stages nude protest over Brexit in front of 30 economists



haha, didn't even realise she'd been doing this for ages!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> she's been naked for the whole of those three years
> 
> Cambridge academic stages nude protest over Brexit in front of 30 economists



Apparently has been getting naked to make political points for some time before Brexit as well!


----------



## kebabking (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If only the naked rambler had published a few papers, he wouldn't have spent so long in Barlinnie.



methinks that as soon as it transpired that the Naked Rambler was a scrawny, ginger, uncooked chip his chances of political victory evaporated!


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Those of us who were not swayed by the argument over the last *nearly 3 years *are not going to be swayed by those arguments simply because she is naked.



So what? You've made your mind up and aren't going to change it. You're therefore irrelevant to all this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

kebabking said:


> methinks


please never say that again


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So what? You've made your mind up and aren't going to change it. You're therefore irrelevant to all this.



By that logic, aren't you also irrelevant?

By that logic, isn't basically everyone irrelevant?

E2A: A further step in the Remaniac logic is apparently that everyone that cannot be won to a Remaniac position is an irrelevance.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

kebabking said:


> methinks that as soon as it transpired that the Naked Rambler was a scrawny, ginger, uncooked chip his chances of political victory evaporated!



methinks you should say that again!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So what? You've made your mind up and aren't going to change it. You're therefore irrelevant to all this.


you've a range of ludicrous but strongly held opinions - on dogging and toilet doors, for example - but i'd never say you were irrelevant to discussions on those matters. unwelcome, yes, irritating - certainly. but irrelevant? by no means. same here with SpackleFrog - you may not like his views but they're hardly irrelevant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> methinks


it's the sort of thing which makes me want to nail your hands to your face


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you've a range of ludicrous but strongly held opinions - on dogging and toilet doors, for example - but i'd never say you were irrelevant to discussions on those matters. unwelcome, yes, irritating - certainly. but irrelevant? by no means. same here with SpackleFrog - you may not like his views but they're hardly irrelevant.



Although sometimes irreverant


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the sort of thing which makes me want to nail your hands to your face



So many things make you want to do that Pickers


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So many things make you want to do that Pickers


no, you're thinking of the many things which make me want to nail people's hands to desks - it takes something special to make me want to nail hands to faces.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

kebabking said:


> she hasn't got my attention. its just more white noise from someone who'se basic premise is that i'm thick and racist, and who quietly believes that i shouldn't really have a vote on scuh things, and that i should _know my station_ and stick to voting on X Factor or Britains Favourite Dogs and leave the important stuff to people like her.
> 
> perhaps she doesn't, but i've no intention of finding out because she hasn't got my attention.



Again, you're not interested in changing your mind, and use your own prejudices to decide what the motivations and premises of others are. So her nakedness or otherwise is beside the point, unless you are telling me that you decide whether or not to listen to people based on whether they have the right clothes on.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> By that logic, aren't you also irrelevant?



I'm open to having my opinion changed. You think you haven't changed my opinion to match yours because I'm a moron. Maybe I am, or maybe your arguments aren't good enough.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I'm open to having my opinion changed. You think you haven't changed my opinion to match yours because I'm a moron. Maybe I am, or maybe your arguments aren't good enough.



I love how you've flipped this from me saying maybe the Remaniac arguments aren't good enough to you saying my arguments aren't good enough. Well played. Maybe you're not a total moron. 

What are my arguments? Tell me what I think about the situation.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Again, you're not interested in changing your mind, and use your own prejudices to decide what the motivations and premises of others are. So her nakedness or otherwise is beside the point, unless you are telling me that you decide whether or not to listen to people based on whether they have the right clothes on.


With all your provocations, straw men and false extrapolations, you certainly display the tools of your trade. Tool.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> unless you are telling me that you decide whether or not to listen to people based on whether they have the *right* clothes on.


 Yeah, that was definitely the point being made.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I love how you've flipped this from me saying maybe the Remaniac arguments aren't good enough to you saying my arguments aren't good enough. Well played. Maybe you're not a total moron.
> 
> What are my arguments? Tell me what I think about the situation.



I've not described you as daft or as a moron, so I don't think it's encumbent on me to go and justify such a statement by ensuring I make an accurate representation of your actual position, backed up with evidence.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, that was definitely the point being made.


It's certainly what the commentary on Victoria Bateman has focused on. Or should I change "right" to "enough"?


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's certainly what the commentary on Victoria Bateman has focused on. Or should I change "right" to "enough"?



Where?


----------



## kebabking (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's certainly what the commentary on Victoria Bateman has focused on. Or should I change "right" to "enough"?



actually, its completely the opposite - her stunt just makes her arguments look foolish (on the basis that if her arguments were any good she either wouldn't need to get her bits out to draw attention to them, or that she knows they're a bit _sub-optimal_, and is using her bits as a way of distracting the public from looking too closely at them - look at the shiney-shiney).

its just desperate, desperate stuff, and nothing is less attractive than desperation.

is there any real comentary on her arguments - does there need to be? the last 4 years has seen the media absolutely chock full of intelligent, well spoken, articulate people warning us of the potential problems and dangers of brexit. are her arguments any different, any more persuasive than those that have gone before - or is it infact just a massive ego at work, telling her that if only she would reach down to the public before they settle in to Jeremy Kyle and a bit of internet bingo during the ads, grab their attention with a bit flesh and then explain to them in small, simple words, spoken slowly for the mouth-breathers and people in velour lesiurewear who live in places like Hull or Kidderminster (wheresoever they might be), then they will finally understand how wrong they were, and look upon her with wonder and thankfulness for their delivery from ignorance and presumption?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I've not described you as daft or as a moron, so I don't think it's encumbent on me to go and justify such a statement by ensuring I make an accurate representation of your actual position, backed up with evidence.



You've just said that: 



teuchter said:


> maybe your arguments aren't good enough.



So I think it is incumbent on you to have some idea. 

I'm not asking for detailed evidence either. Just a sentence on where you think I stand in this debate.


----------



## gosub (Feb 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the sort of thing which makes me want to nail your hands to your face


Verily


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's certainly what the commentary on Victoria Bateman has focused on. Or should I change "right" to "enough"?


As chilango has just asked you, could you point out where this has been focused on:


> unless you are telling me that you decide whether or not to listen to people based on whether they have the *right* clothes on.


Thanks.


----------



## gosub (Feb 12, 2019)

So two years of arguing about what was written on the side of a bus the debate has moved to what was written on a tit.

Brexit wasn't even mentioned in cabinet today.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> As chilango has just asked you, could you point out where this has been focused on:
> Thanks.



It started here:



Wilf said:


> Not sure if we've reached peak Remaniac-ery now, but here's a Cambridge economist appearing nude on Good Morning Britain and challenging jrm to a (naked) debate.
> Naked anti-Brexit campaigner challenges Rees-Mogg on live TV
> She makes some arguable points justifying it on feminist grounds, but the real Partridgesque/The Day Today point comes because she's pixelated. That leaves Richard Madely reading out the slogans she has written on each breast. Words fail me (but not him, obviously)


----------



## AnandLeo (Feb 12, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Bit late for that isn't it?


No, not quite. If UK has the will EU will bend over backward for a Brexit deal more in line with EU trade policies than the currently agreed deal not approved by the UK parliament.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It started here:


I don't see any reference to whether she is wearing the _right_ clothes there.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've just said that:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Which debate specifically? Let's take the question of the idea that a 'Lexit' was, or is, feasible. I think you think that it was or is. I don't. I can't recall any arguments you've made that have really persuaded me to change my mind. My general impression of the arguments has been 'a bit hand-wavy'. As I said, it might be that I'm a moron, or it might be that your arguments weren't very good. Or both.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I don't see any reference to whether she is wearing the _right_ clothes there.


Happy to change my statement to _enough_ clothes, as I already said. Rather than engaging in a pedantic debate about whether views on the _right_ clothing someone should wear could be reasonably assumed to encompass the extent of that clothing and what is or isn't covered by it.


----------



## AnandLeo (Feb 12, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> So basically can we have all the bits we do like such as tariff free trade but not the bits we don't like such as the grubby forrins coming here?
> This is what Farage promised and Davis was asking for at Day 1 and the EU laughed its head off, we're back at the you can't leave the club and keep all the benefits of membership jag again. This record is not only worn but the stylus has gone through and is destroying the turntable.


Basically it may be the policy of both Labour and Tory. What I am suggesting is a pacified, rational compromise.


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> .So her nakedness or otherwise is beside the point, unless you are telling me that you decide whether or not to listen to people based on whether they have the right clothes on.





Spoiler: Only one post has really done this...






teuchter said:


> She was on Newsnight a week or two ago (talking about the middle east if I remember correctly). On that occasion she was clothed and I noted her dress style which is sort of Victorian-ish. This is part of the persona she's decided to present, .


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Happy to change my statement to _enough_ clothes, as I already said. Rather than engaging in a pedantic debate about whether views on the _right_ clothing someone should wear could be reasonably assumed to encompass the extent of that clothing and what is or isn't covered by it.


Oh, I think you chose your words very carefully. You wanted to make this into an issue of policing her choices, which it isn't.  But my mistake for engaging.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Which debate specifically? Let's take the question of the idea that a 'Lexit' was, or is, feasible. I think you think that it was or is. I don't. I can't recall any arguments you've made that have really persuaded me to change my mind. My general impression of the arguments has been 'a bit hand-wavy'. As I said, it might be that I'm a moron, or it might be that your arguments weren't very good. Or both.



I've said repeatedly I'm not a 'Lexiter' and I don't agree with those who are talking about a 'Lexit'.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 12, 2019)

over to the Brexit Minister, who's had his first meeting with...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've said repeatedly I'm not a 'Lexiter' and I don't agree with those who are talking about a 'Lexit'.


So you're a Remainer then?.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So you're a Remainer then?.



I think you know the answer to that question don't you? 

How do you think it makes you look, acting like there are at most only 3 opinions on this topic?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Happy to change my statement to _enough_ clothes, as I already said. Rather than engaging in a pedantic debate about whether views on the _right_ clothing someone should wear could be reasonably assumed to encompass the extent of that clothing and what is or isn't covered by it.


Perhaps you could simply change your statement to "I shall never comment on this or any other subject again" which would fill many urban hearts with gladness


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

I was right that SpineyNorman ’s handy summary needed to be quoted every page.  It’s a useful distillation of what I’ve been trying to say on this thread forever. 



SpineyNorman said:


> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.






SpackleFrog said:


> How do you think it makes you look, acting like there are at most only 3 opinions on this topic?


There is another factor too, which Spiney’s quote hints at. As well as seeing polar, (tripartite?) homogenous positions, many on this thread seem to mistake commentary for preference. That saying where we’re at equals being happy with that.

I think it comes from the place where some people who wanted the UK to Remain in the EU think that because they really, _really_ want it, it can still happen. Maybe they’re not used to what they want not happening, who knows. But you’d think that this close to the finishing line they’d be able to conceptualise the difference between what they had hoped for and what is actually happening.


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I was right that SpineyNorman ’s handy summary needed to be quoted every page.  It’s a useful distillation of what I’ve been trying to say on this thread forever.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



...and I'd add. I'm sure many of us would contest any racist or right-wing arguments for Leave if they were posted. But they're not. We get some broadly Lexit posts which most of us share much common ground with even if we don't fully agree and a larger number of vociferous liberal arguments for Remain with which we have less in common.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...and I'd add. I'm sure many of us would contest any racist or right-wing arguments for Leave if they were posted. But they're not. We get some broadly Lexit posts which most of us share much common ground with even if we don't fully agree and a larger number of vociferous liberal arguments for Remain with which we have less in common.


I’m nodding.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...and I'd add. I'm sure many of us would contest any racist or right-wing arguments for Leave if they were posted. But they're not.


*Whaaaat!*  You refuse to join up with people like Gina Miller, you refuse to sign up for the People's Vote, you won't wrap yourself in the EU flag? That can only mean you want EU nationals deported, lined up with farage, name all your kids after Jacob Rees Mogg ...>>> RINSE >>>>> REPEAT.


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *Whaaaat!*  You refuse to join up with people like Gina Miller, you refuse to sign up for the People's Vote, you won't wrap yourself in the EU flag? That can only mean you want EU nationals deported, lined up with farage, name all your kids after Jacob Rees Mogg ...>>> RINSE >>>>> REPEAT.



I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer SpineyNorman gave some moments ago.



> don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So you're a Remainer then?.


The process of elimination, the Sleaterkinney way:


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer SpineyNorman gave some moments ago.


I think we've created the new 'that would be an ecumenical matter'.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I was right that SpineyNorman ’s handy summary needed to be quoted every page.  It’s a useful distillation of what I’ve been trying to say on this thread forever.
> 
> There is another factor too, which Spiney’s quote hints at. As well as seeing polar, (tripartite?) homogenous positions, many on this thread seem to mistake commentary for preference. That saying where we’re at equals being happy with that.
> 
> I think it comes from the place where some people who wanted the UK to Remain in the EU think that because they really, _really_ want it, it can still happen. Maybe they’re not used to what they want not happening, who knows. But you’d think that this close to the finishing line they’d be able to conceptualise the difference between what they had hoped for and what is actually happening.


I'd think _you'd _have clocked that almost exactly nothing has _actually _happened, so noone's views have had to be collapsed into the singularity yet. You can have whatever Brexit dream you like right up until you can't.

You can repeat it as much as you like but not-my-circus only goes so far too. The legitimacy of washing your hands of the issue isn't automatic protection against the consequences of it. If and when the dust settles and the victims of whatever outcome ask the question of what position did you take, then 'the proud none' isn't going to have any credibility either. Can you help us with this roof? Oh no mate, I can't change the weather can I. Well come and tell me your great ideas again once you've actually done something to shelter us from the effects of other people's disastrous scraps.


----------



## tommers (Feb 12, 2019)

For people who don't care about it you don't half talk about it a lot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> For people who don't care about it you don't half talk about it a lot.


It is the urban way


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I'd think _you'd _have clocked that almost exactly nothing has _actually _happened, so noone's views have had to be collapsed into the singularity yet. You can have whatever Brexit dream you like right up until you can't.


You really can’t. Well, you can delude yourself, but that’s not very useful.



> The legitimacy of washing your hands of the issue isn't automatic protection against the consequences of it.


Absolutely nowhere have I said or implied that it does. I’m only too aware that the government is not acting in my interests. In fact I’ve said on this thread several times that they’re not. It seems to pass people by. Which is fine; I don’t expect everyone to memorise everyone else’s  position.  But it’d be good if people realised that there are a range of places people can be on this.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> For people who don't care about it you don't half talk about it a lot.


Who doesn’t care?


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

Quite.

One if the few things I do agree with in sleaterkinney's post is that we're all going to have to deal with the consequences of whatever happens.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I'd think _you'd _have clocked that almost exactly nothing has _actually _happened, so noone's views have had to be collapsed into the singularity yet. You can have whatever Brexit dream you like right up until you can't.
> 
> You can repeat it as much as you like but not-my-circus only goes so far too. The legitimacy of washing your hands of the issue isn't automatic protection against the consequences of it. If and when the dust settles and the victims of whatever outcome ask the question of what position did you take, then 'the proud none' isn't going to have any credibility either. Can you help us with this roof? Oh no mate, I can't change the weather can I. Well come and tell me your great ideas again once you've actually done something to shelter us from the effects of other people's disastrous scraps.


My pure guess is there will be some kind of downturn and loss of jobs, though equally, there may be some kind of temporary Brexit bounce if an agreement is ultimately signed. Yeah, there may be a downturn, there may be a loss of jobs. Whoever is in government in a couple of years may also find it is easier to make things worse in all kinds of areas. Specific groups may be hit. But again, how to respond to that? Campaign for a 'people's re-vote', give our support to the neoliberal EU, line up, support one of the key institutions of capital?  The EU isn't 'ours'. To fight for communities, fight for communities. To fight deportations, fight deportations etc. Don't keep asking me to line up with Juncker et al.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> Quite.
> 
> One if the few things I do agree with in sleaterkinney's post is that w*e're all going to have to deal with the consequences of whatever happens*.


 You said it half a sentence what I just spent a paragraph typing.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You really can’t. Well, you can delude yourself, but that’s not very useful.


What outcome can you categorically call a delusion? At best you have an opinion on likelihood. Otherwise bet the house on something.


danny la rouge said:


> Absolutely nowhere have I said or implied that it does. I’m only too aware that the government is not acting in my interests. In fact I’ve said on this thread several times that they’re not. It seems to pass people by. Which is fine; I don’t expect everyone to memorise everyone else’s  position.  But it’d be good if people realised that there are a range of places people can be on this.


There is indeed a whole matrix of positions you could take. And surely noone would be so confused as to call you pro-government. These aren't problems. The problem as I see it is that persistent abstention equals irrelevance.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> What outcome can you categorically call a delusion? At best you have an opinion on likelihood. Otherwise bet the house on something.
> There is indeed a whole matrix of positions you could take. And surely noone would be so confused as to call you pro-government. These aren't problems. The problem as I see it is that persistent abstention equals irrelevance.


But irrelevance on what? I'd say there were more positive outcomes in spending x weeks organising your workplace than organising petitions for a second referendum, pissing about in momentum to get Corbyn to commit himself to doing this, that or the other. Brexit will have an impact certainly, but like a lot of others on here, I'm resistant to committing to what amounts to a conscious self-delusion, thinking that the EU is on our side and running to its aid. It won't come to ours.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> My pure guess is there will be some kind of downturn and loss of jobs, though equally, there may be some kind of temporary Brexit bounce if an agreement is ultimately signed. Yeah, there may be a downturn, there may be a loss of jobs. Whoever is in government in a couple of years may also find it is easier to make things worse in all kinds of areas. Specific groups may be hit. But again, how to respond to that? Campaign for a 'people's re-vote', give our support to the neoliberal EU, line up, support one of the key institutions of capital?  The EU isn't 'ours'. To fight for communities, fight for communities. To fight deportations, fight deportations etc. Don't keep asking me to line up with Juncker et al.


We've had a decade of austerity. At each and every turn you could have - correctly - argued that all significant political entities are the enemy in the fight against austerity. And for the most part that _is _what happened. What did it yield? The worst variant, the darkest timeline, not even the shit, mildly reformist hesitant-Guardian-lite differentiator. Fuck all. And no credible position afterwards. Either suck up the lesser evilism on your next door neighbour's behalf, or christ, actually blow something up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You really can’t. Well, you can delude yourself, but that’s not very useful.
> 
> Absolutely nowhere have I said or implied that it does. I’m only too aware that the government is not acting in my interests. In fact I’ve said on this thread several times that they’re not. It seems to pass people by. Which is fine; I don’t expect everyone to memorise everyone else’s  position.  But it’d be good if people realised that there are a range of places people can be on this.



I want to agree with you and SpineyNorman and I mostly do. But where I think mauvais might have a point is on this general idea that there's liberal remainer politicians on one side and racist Tory Brexiters on the other, and that we cant do anything but sit and watch, which I think is actually quite dangerous. 

Individually, sure, there isn't anything any of us can do. But collectively the working class can always impose its will on any situation. Brexit isn't any different in that sense from any other crisis. 

I agree with Wilf here: 



Wilf said:


> My pure guess is there will be some kind of downturn and loss of jobs, though equally, there may be some kind of temporary Brexit bounce if an agreement is ultimately signed. Yeah, there may be a downturn, there may be a loss of jobs. Whoever is in government in a couple of years may also find it is easier to make things worse in all kinds of areas. Specific groups may be hit. But again, how to respond to that? Campaign for a 'people's re-vote', give our support to the neoliberal EU, line up, support one of the key institutions of capital?  The EU isn't 'ours'. To fight for communities, fight for communities. To fight deportations, fight deportations etc. Don't keep asking me to line up with Juncker et al.



Obviously when it comes to people who won't wanna know what we think unless we're also ardently committed to keeping the EU together, there's no point even engaging really. But we can say to people who are worried about deportations, we'll fight deportations with you. We can say to people worried about job losses we'll fight job losses with you. We can say to people worried about (oh God need a rule of three what else) chlorinated chicken that we'll fight against chlorinated chicken imports with you. I mean, I'm not so fussed about that last one but you know what I mean.

The situation is pretty unpredictable but we need to be clear about one thing: if the working class chooses to do so the working class can bring down this Tory govt.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> What outcome can you categorically call a delusion? At best you have an opinion on likelihood.


Come on, I was responding to you saying “You can have whatever Brexit dream you like right up until you can’t”, as I think you know. I can dream all I like about a Europe of federated workers' councils, but at 11.01pm on 29th March, that is not going to be one of the likely outcomes.

What there is going to be is whatever accommodation neoliberalism comes to with neoconservatism in Brexit Britain, which will require resistance.  In the unlikely event that Brexit goes away, then we'll have the neoliberal EU, which will also require resistance.

So, I'm quite clear what needs to be done.  I'm also fairly sure who it needs to be done against.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> We've had a decade of austerity. At each and every turn you could have - correctly - argued that all significant political entities are the enemy in the fight against austerity. And for the most part that _is _what happened. What did it yield? The worst variant, the darkest timeline, not even the shit, mildly reformist hesitant-Guardian-lite differentiator. Fuck all. And no credible position afterwards. Either suck up the lesser evilism on your next door neighbour's behalf, or christ, actually blow something up.



Oh c'mon, that's nonsense. The choice is austerity or armed struggle? 

Lesser evilism achieves nothing but allowing the benchmark for evil to shift over time.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But where I think mauvais might have a point is on this general idea that there's liberal remainer politicians on one side and racist Tory Brexiters on the other, and that we cant do anything but sit and watch, which I think is actually quite dangerous.
> 
> Individually, sure, there isn't anything any of us can do. But collectively the working class can always impose its will on any situation. Brexit isn't any different in that sense from any other crisis.


This crossed with my last post.  I think I've covered that, though.


----------



## isvicthere? (Feb 12, 2019)

Edited for thread title read fail.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Oh c'mon, that's nonsense. The choice is austerity or armed struggle?
> 
> Lesser evilism achieves nothing but allowing the benchmark for evil to shift over time.


You certainly don't have to interpret it literally as armed struggle. Just leave me off the credits if you do.

As for lesser evilism, it's a sad & embarrassing defeatism from which I'm having to try and defend it. But asking to be shot in the leg is generally better than getting shot in the head. And since you seem to have dropped your own gun somewhere in the 20th century it's probably worth a try.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> You certainly don't have to interpret it literally as armed struggle. Just leave me off the credits if you do.
> 
> As for lesser evilism, it's a sad & embarrassing defeatism from which I'm having to try and defend it. But asking to be shot in the leg is generally better than getting shot in the head. And since you seem to have dropped your own gun somewhere in the 20th century it's probably worth a try.


But what is it you would have people actually do?


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But we can say to people who are worried about deportations, we'll fight deportations with you. We can say to people worried about job losses we'll fight job losses with you. We can say to people worried about (oh God need a rule of three what else) chlorinated chicken that we'll fight against chlorinated chicken imports with you. I mean, I'm not so fussed about that last one but you know what I mean.


And when they say, correctly, that it was fucking obvious that there would be job losses and deportation and chlorinated chicken if we went with Brexit, and that you weren't willing to do a single thing about it because, quote, neoliberalism, what then? Something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway? Something unhelpful about how it's all someone else's battle? Something about how it was necessary to bring about change? Doesn't seem like the ideal platform, does it.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what is it you would have people actually do?


Hold their nose, support whatever they perceive to be the least damaging practical outcome at any point, silently if necessary but with some honest leadership would be better. Then carry on doing in parallel whatever they would have done anyway. At this point, where everything is already reactive, what's there to lose?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Hold their nose, support whatever they perceive to be the least damaging practical outcome at any point, silently if necessary but with some honest leadership would be better. Then carry on doing in parallel whatever they would have done anyway. At this point, where everything is already reactive, what's there to lose?


But what does _that_ amount to at this stage? Putting pressure on Corbyn to join the people's vote? Joining John Mann and Carolyn Flint trying to get some sort of workers rights bill into Brexit?
Labour MPs demand workers’ rights bill to secure Brexit backing
Aren't many 'progressive' options left in this shit show.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> And when they say, correctly, that it was fucking obvious that there would be job losses and deportation and chlorinated chicken if we went with Brexit, and that you weren't willing to do a single thing about it because, quote, neoliberalism, what then? Something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway? Something unhelpful about how it's all someone else's battle? Something about how it was necessary to bring about change? Doesn't seem like the ideal platform, does it.



Look, first of all I am willing to do something about it and I am doing something about it. I'm just not wasting my breath on things that won't improve the situation at all, like demanding a second referendum that will never happen and isn't the right answer anyway. You can't just demand that people change their minds. 

More importantly though, you're missing the point. Austerity isn't caused by 'Brexit' which may or may not happen - for the record I'm still firmly convinced it won't happen by the way. The referendum vote was a direct result of austerity. 

You can't tell people that job losses are because of Brexit when they've seen job losses for years and when everyone knows full well there would continue to be job losses if we went with Tory Remain. You can't tell people that deportations are because of Brexit when there have already been deportations and will be more deportations and none of them are because of Brexit, they're a result of the Tory Hostile Environment policy. You can't keep pushing Thatcher's line that There Is No Alternative and expect anyone to listen.



mauvais said:


> Hold their nose, support whatever they perceive to be the least damaging practical outcome at any point, silently if necessary but with some honest leadership would be better. Then carry on doing in parallel whatever they would have done anyway. At this point, where everything is already reactive, what's there to lose?



And how will that ever get us anywhere?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> You certainly don't have to interpret it literally as armed struggle. Just leave me off the credits if you do.
> 
> As for lesser evilism, it's a sad & embarrassing defeatism from which I'm having to try and defend it. But asking to be shot in the leg is generally better than getting shot in the head. And since you seem to have dropped your own gun somewhere in the 20th century it's probably worth a try.



I don't even understand this, sorry.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> This crossed with my last post.  I think I've covered that, though.



Yeah, broadly but I'm still not certain if you think there are things that could be done between now and 29th March or not.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what does _that_ amount to at this stage? Putting pressure on Corbyn to join the people's vote? Joining John Mann and Carolyn Flint trying to get some sort of workers rights bill into Brexit?
> Labour MPs demand workers’ rights bill to secure Brexit backing
> Aren't many 'progressive' options left in this shit show.


In some respects it's too late for this particular Brexit adventure, but I also can't answer your perfectly reasonable question because it's not yet apparent what if any choices anyone has left before this thing crystallises into outcomes. It's more a question of what happens whenever the next possibility presents itself.


----------



## chilango (Feb 12, 2019)

What will be a problem is every attack on us being met (from certain loud quarters) with cries of "Told you so! It's your own fault for voting Leave".

Less dramatically, there'll be a wider temptation to blame all kinds of stuff on Brexit rather than Bosses.

I think we're gonna have real problems coming up if we can't get some clear distance between ourselves and the Brexit circus (on either side).


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you know the answer to that question don't you?
> 
> How do you think it makes you look, acting like there are at most only 3 opinions on this topic?


You're Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my £5.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You can't tell people that job losses are because of Brexit when they've seen job losses for years and when everyone knows full well there would continue to be job losses if we went with Tory Remain. You can't tell people that deportations are because of Brexit when there have already been deportations and will be more deportations and none of them are because of Brexit, they're a result of the Tory Hostile Environment policy.


I don't disagree with you on everything, but this is where I think you have it wrong. This is why I said, "something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway". Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit and then you will have to argue with or mansplain* to the unemployed that _well actually_, it wasn't Brexit and it was the fundamental nature of capital that did for you, and you will lose that argument with a deserved kicking, even if it is indeed entirely true, because it is ridiculous. So it is with deportations and further enablement of hostility, no matter how bad the baseline. There's bad and there's worse and people aren't nearly stupid enough to miss the difference.

*othergendersplains are available


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I don't disagree with you on everything, but this is where I think you have it wrong. This is why I said, "something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway". Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit and then you will have to argue with or mansplain to the unemployed that _well actually_, it wasn't Brexit and it was the fundamental nature of capital that did for you, and you will lose that argument with a deserved kicking, even if it is indeed entirely true, because it is ridiculous. So it is with deportations and further enablement of hostility, no matter how bad the baseline. There's bad and there's worse and people aren't nearly stupid enough to miss the difference.


I somehow doubt that the Gina Miller/guardian crowd will be at the forefront of defending those jobs though. 

And trite as that sounds, I think it's an important point. Those people are not our allies.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You can't tell people that deportations are because of Brexit when there have already been deportations and will be more deportations and none of them are because of Brexit, they're a result of the Tory Hostile Environment policy.


Deportations/the making illegal of EU citizens will be because of Brexit.
Hostile Environment simply wouldn't have applied to the 3.5+ million currently in the searchlight.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> For people who don't care about it you don't half talk about it a lot.


Or they could just be sitting on the fence because they like the splinters in their arse.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> You're Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my £5.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I don't disagree with you on everything, but this is where I think you have it wrong. This is why I said, "something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway". Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit and then you will have to argue with or mansplain* to the unemployed that _well actually_, it wasn't Brexit and it was the fundamental nature of capital that did for you, and you will lose that argument with a deserved kicking, even if it is indeed entirely true, because it is ridiculous. So it is with deportations and further enablement of hostility, no matter how bad the baseline. There's bad and there's worse and people aren't nearly stupid enough to miss the difference.
> 
> *othergendersplains are available



Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit by people who want to reverse Brexit. If it happens which it won't. Even if it does though, in some limited non Brexit form, I test out my politics on the street week in, week out, I will continue to do so and I don't think I'll have any problems but ta for the concern


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I somehow doubt that the Gina Miller/guardian crowd will be at the forefront of defending those jobs though.
> 
> And trite as that sounds, I think it's an important point. Those people are not our allies.


No. But what does it matter? They're either issue-based and have no relevance post-Brexit, or gain nothing from their hapless positions, whereas - wavy lines, montage - 'the left' presumably aspires to influence and indeed taking advantage of the situation. So it has something at stake from how it looks after this sorry affair moves forward.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 12, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> You're Jeremy Corbyn and I claim my £5.



We really need to up that prize.  Especially with the imminent collapse of the pound.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit by people who want to reverse Brexit. If it happens which it won't. Even if it does though, in some limited non Brexit form, I test out my politics on the street week in, week out, I will continue to do so and I don't think I'll have any problems but ta for the concern


This is a path of denial. Tell it to car workers if and when their jobs are gone. It won't be abstract shadowy people that want to reverse Brexit who've decided that generic job losses are because of XYZ, it'll be individual people on the sharp end who've just lost _their_ job. And your narrative competition will be the far right.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> This is a path of denial. Tell it to car workers if and when their jobs are gone. It won't be abstract shadowy people that want to reverse Brexit who've decided that generic job losses are because of XYZ, it'll be individual people on the sharp end who've just lost _their_ job. And your narrative competition will be the far right.



You've got a cheek really, accusing me of denial. 

Look, you want Brexit cancelled. We get it. What will you say to millions of people, most of them working class, on low incomes, at the sharp end of austerity, if you succeed in that?

"Hey guys, I know things are awful, but trust me, if we hadn't just straight up cancelled a democratic process things would be even worse?"

Flip around and drink in the sheer hopelessness of your position.


----------



## Humberto (Feb 12, 2019)

It's good that people are taking enough time to offer an opinion formed on the back of the testimony of wretched shambling dissemblers of no real consequence. Once they've started walking away from the pitches that leaders of the opposition bravely suppose can carry us through the arduous delay and resumption of politics, the opposition can then take a chance to formulate how it is expedient to desert the differing sub-sets of factional disagreement and obdurately bring the least assonance between those giving indications of destructive forces/momentums/winds. The deep dark chasm (not so belatedly) being given individual organs officially leads us to expectations of cannibalism two days into our new reparation and investiture themed occult hierarchy.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm resistant to committing to what amounts to a conscious self-delusion, thinking that the EU is on our side and running to its aid.


Tbh, I think remainers who are thinking primarily in terms of running to the EU's aid would form a pretty small club.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've got a cheek really, accusing me of denial.
> 
> Look, you want Brexit cancelled. We get it. What will you say to millions of people, most of them working class, on low incomes, at the sharp end of austerity, if you succeed in that?
> 
> ...


That's not what I want and I doubt you can evidence it. I mean, I want it all to have never happened, but I've happened to notice that it's a teensy bit late now. So I want the least disastrous outcome. Whilst so much is in flux, I'm open minded about what that is, but it's probably not cancellation without either a lived experience or material change. There are ultimately no good outcomes from this point as I see it.

But let's be honest, I don't have to say shit to anyone. I don't do anything useful. I don't and realistically probably will never lead anything, and I'm certainly not being led at present. Thing is, I haven't claimed otherwise and I haven't criticised action. The sum total of my position amounts to (a) armchair criticism of a shit idea that I think will bring about significantly more pain than the default, and (b) a deeper ire for people that think they can somehow positively leverage either the process or the consequences without confronting their (lack of) role in the very same.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah, broadly but I'm still not certain if you think there are things that could be done between now and 29th March or not.


There are certainly “things that can be done”. But there are also things that can’t be done in the timescale, because there isn’t, and hasn’t been, the organisation in place preparing for it. There is no realistic chance of a “hard Lexit”, for example. 

I agree with Costas Lapavitsas that WTO rules _could_ provide significant opportunities for a left inspired restructuring of the UK economy. The hit we’re (the working class, and more) going to take is based on the way the situation at 11:01pm will impact the future of the economy, but beginning with the economy as it is structured now; the way it has been shaped over the last few decades. It has been deindustrialised and financialised by neoliberalism. It needn’t be that type of economy that the UK responds to Brexit with.

However, there has been no groundwork, there is no organisation, there is no preparation, to get us there by 29th March. 

So, yes, the UK is Brexiting by some kind of right wing map, still being drawn, and the options open to us now are reactive.


----------



## 8ball (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> That's not what I want and I doubt you can evidence it. I mean, I want it all to have never happened, but I've happened to notice that it's a teensy bit late now. So I want the least disastrous outcome. Whilst so much is in flux, I'm open minded about what that is, but it's probably not cancellation without either a lived experience or material change. There are ultimately no good outcomes from this point as I see it.



Yeah, you do seem to get a lot of remainers who seem to think everything goes away and back to "normal" if the Good Fairy grants a second vote.

Kansas has gone bye bye.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've got a cheek really, accusing me of denial.
> 
> Look, you want Brexit cancelled. We get it. What will you say to millions of people, most of them working class, on low incomes, at the sharp end of austerity, if you succeed in that?
> 
> ...


As well as that, the two main Leaders are committed to leaving, but I still think my vote to remain was right, and I hope that given another chance 2.1% of the electorate would agree.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I don't disagree with you on everything, but this is where I think you have it wrong. This is why I said, "something hand-wavey about how they were fucked anyway". Jobs will be categorised as lost because of Brexit and then you will have to argue with or mansplain* to the unemployed that _well actually_, it wasn't Brexit and it was the fundamental nature of capital that did for you, and you will lose that argument with a deserved kicking, even if it is indeed entirely true, because it is ridiculous. So it is with deportations and further enablement of hostility, no matter how bad the baseline. There's bad and there's worse and people aren't nearly stupid enough to miss the difference.
> 
> *othergendersplains are available


Where and how do you expect these fictional conversations to take place? I actually agree that things will be worse in the short term at the very least (with a no deal brexit anyway, there might not be much difference at all if they get a deal through) but given what we know about the brexit vote the people in these conversations that will definitely happen probably voted for brexit.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 12, 2019)

Humberto said:


> It's good that people are taking enough time to offer an opinion formed on the back of the testimony of wretched shambling dissemblers of no real consequence. Once they've started walking away from the pitches that leaders of the opposition bravely suppose can carry us through the arduous delay and resumption of politics, the opposition can then take a chance to formulate how it is expedient to desert the differing sub-sets of factional disagreement and obdurately bring the least assonance between those giving indications of destructive forces/momentums/winds. The deep dark chasm (not so belatedly) being given individual organs officially leads us to expectations of cannibalism two days into our new reparation and investiture themed occult hierarchy.


I was going to say that


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've said repeatedly I'm not a 'Lexiter' and I don't agree with those who are talking about a 'Lexit'.



You voted leave, didn't you? So what were you voting for - a non-lexit Brexit? 

Now that I have demonstrated my failure to discern quite what argument you've been advancing throughout this thread - that's actually of any use or relevance in trying to work out what the best thing is to do at this stage, or any stage, in the actual process of acting on the referendum result - now that I have demonstrated my moronity, perhaps you can explain? What I said was that maybe your arguments haven't been good enough: they haven't been good enough for me to understand what actual proposals you have.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Where and how do you expect these fictional conversations to take place? I actually agree that things will be worse in the short term at the very least (with a no deal brexit anyway, there might not be much difference at all if they get a deal through) but given what we know about the brexit vote the people in these conversations that will definitely happen probably voted for brexit.


And remain haven't exactly done a good job of having a conversation with leave voters, full stop.

Some of this almost feels like those people wearing 'Don't blame me I voted Labour' T shirts after the 1979 general election. It's a non-engagement.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

mauvais said:


> That's not what I want and I doubt you can evidence it. I mean, I want it all to have never happened, but I've happened to notice that it's a teensy bit late now. So I want the least disastrous outcome. Whilst so much is in flux, I'm open minded about what that is, but it's probably not cancellation without either a lived experience or material change. There are ultimately no good outcomes from this point as I see it.



Hang about, I thought you were arguing I should be campaigning for Brexit it to be cancelled, have I got confused? If so I'm sorry.

If you want the least disastrous outcome, and you don't think that's simply cancelling Brexit, what does that look like? 

Would you feel better about a Brexit where there were no new restrictions on immigration, where we kept free movement of goods, and there was no more Tory austerity for example?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You voted leave, didn't you? So what were you voting for - a non-lexit Brexit?
> 
> Now that I have demonstrated my failure to discern quite what argument you've been advancing throughout this thread - that's actually of any use or relevance in trying to work out what the best thing is to do at this stage, or any stage, in the actual process of acting on the referendum result - now that I have demonstrated my moronity, perhaps you can explain? What I said was that maybe your arguments haven't been good enough: they haven't been good enough for me to understand what actual proposals you have.



I wasn't voting _for _anything, I was voting against things. I voted against Cameron, against the Tories, against the EU, against the ECB and the IMF. There wasn't anything positive on the ballot paper to vote for.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 12, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wasn't voting _for _anything, I was voting against things. I voted against Cameron, against the Tories, against the EU, against the ECB and the IMF. There wasn't anything positive on the ballot paper to vote for.


So you voted for something negative.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So you voted for something negative.


FFS, grow up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So you voted for something negative.



No, opposition to the Tories is a positive.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, opposition to the Tories is a positive.


You said there was nothing positive on the ballot paper. But anyway, a vote for Brexit represents a vote for opposition to the Tories. So you voted for Brexit. But not a Lexit. Just a Brexit that is opposition to the Tories, and then something or other will happen, where the Tories are opposed, and Brexit happens, but not a Lexit Brexit, but that's still OK. Or, maybe, you voted for Brexit, in the hope that Brexit never really happens, but you don't think Brexit should be cancelled, or that there should be a second vote.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You said there was nothing positive on the ballot paper. But anyway, a vote for Brexit represents a vote for opposition to the Tories. So you voted for Brexit. But not a Lexit. Just a Brexit that is opposition to the Tories, and then something or other will happen, where the Tories are opposed, and Brexit happens, but not a Lexit Brexit, but that's still OK. Or, maybe, you voted for Brexit, in the hope that Brexit never really happens, but you don't think Brexit should be cancelled, or that there should be a second vote.



No, I think we should mobilise for a general election, bring down the govt with strikes and demonstrations, elect a Corbyn-led govt and be ready to mobilise to make sure he keeps his limited promises. Actually, I think that giddy with the confidence of bringing down the Tories, maybe I'd like us to even go a bit further than that. But it'll do as a demand for now. 

But the thing is, that's what I thought before the referendum. Lexit never really made any sense because before the referendum, it was obvious to anyone with any sense that in or out of the EU, we'd have to get the Tories out.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, I think we should mobilise for a general election, bring down the govt with strikes and demonstrations, elect a Corbyn-led govt and be ready to mobilise to make sure he keeps his limited promises. Actually, I think that giddy with the confidence of bringing down the Tories, maybe I'd like us to even go a bit further than that. But it'll do as a demand for now.
> 
> But the thing is, that's what I thought before the referendum. Lexit never really made any sense because before the referendum, it was obvious to anyone with any sense that in or out of the EU, we'd have to get the Tories out.


So Brexit was a means to bring about a general election in which a Corbyn led govt gets elected?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I somehow doubt that the Gina Miller/guardian crowd will be at the forefront of defending those jobs though.
> 
> And trite as that sounds, I think it's an important point. Those people are not our allies.


I'm unclear about what you're saying here. Is it that backing Brexit is the only way of avoiding agreeing with a bunch of wankers?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So Brexit was a means to bring about a general election in which a Corbyn led govt gets elected?



No. Firstly, I said specifically that the means to bring about a general election should be:



SpackleFrog said:


> strikes and demonstrations



Secondly, I still want now what I want before the referendum. I didn't want the referendum to happen but I didn't have a choice over it. When it happened I voted to Leave. I thought that doing that would make a Corbyn govt more likely, absolutely, but even if Milliband was still leader and was ardently campaigning for Remain I would still have voted Leave for the reasons I've stated. 

LOL I've just imagined an alternative reality where Milliband stays on as Labour leader after the 2015 election and campaigns for Remain


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what is it you would have people actually do?


Vote Labour, vote Macron, vote Remain, etc. Elect social democrats.


mauvais said:


> Hold their nose, support whatever they perceive to be the least damaging practical outcome at any point, silently if necessary but with some honest leadership would be better. Then carry on doing in parallel whatever they would have done anyway. At this point, where everything is already reactive, what's there to lose?


Because the above groups are the ones attacking us, they are every bit as much the enemy as the Tories.

Fundamentally what you want isn't what I want. Your aim is for some "left wing" government to come in and fix things, I think that aim leads to very attacks on the working class that we've see for the last 30 years.

For me, and others, the only way positive change can come is though the actions of the working class. And the parties/organisations that above are directly opposed to that, see the response of the LP to any party on its left flank.
This is not just some theoretical discussion it's key, you supported governments attacking deprived local communities in the name of doing something about climate change. That's exactly opposite to my fight for workers to control their communities.

EDIT: And the most recent post on the Birmingham bin strike thread gives an excellent example of what I'm talking about. We've a Labour council attacking workers, fighting for workers necessarily means fighting Labour.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 13, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Fundamentally what you want isn't what I want. Your aim is for some "left wing" government to come in and fix things


No. I mean, you can keep saying it and ignore what I say in return, but it doesn’t make it true. There's a difference between an aim and the least miserable hope. I think governance is the latter, the most likely to yield any improvement not because it's the answer but because there is a total absence of what you want. What's been produced throughout Brexit? No ideas, no direction, no credibility, just passive observance of the creation of a big empty hole that you're apparently waiting to react to but which the right can push you into first. This isn't a plan, it's just hoping that one day the stars align and people decide to try whatever it is you want entirely of their own initiative. And don't get me wrong, it's really fucking difficult, and you may well end up covered in shit trying to engage in someone else's battle, but I doubt it's going to go much better in abstention.


redsquirrel said:


> EDIT: And the most recent post on the Birmingham bin strike thread gives an excellent example of what I'm talking about. We've a Labour council attacking workers, fighting for workers necessarily means fighting Labour.


Which is the perfect opposite of all this. It's active, tangible, it's consistent with a long-established narrative, there's organisation and a message. Good luck to everyone involved.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh. 

https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/


----------



## newbie (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I test out my politics on the street week in, week out, I will continue to do so and I don't think I'll have any problems but ta for the concern


 just AAMOI for context, what were the ref percentages in your area?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.
> 
> https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/


Who’d have thought that a Cambridge economist would be so right wing?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No. Firstly, I said specifically that the means to bring about a general election should be:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So you didn't vote leave as a means to bring about a GE and Corbyn led government.

You voted leave because it would increase the likelihood of a Corbyn led government.

Sounds like lexit to me.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who’d have thought that a Cambridge economist would be so right wing?


Would you believe she appeared at Spiked!'s _Battle of Ideas_ festival last year?


----------



## Poi E (Feb 13, 2019)

Ah, a fruit loop.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

mauvais said:


> There's a difference between an aim and the least miserable hope.


You’re falling into the trap of saying “something needs to be done. This is something. Therefore this needs to be done”.

We have the equivalent of two gangster families fighting over territory. We’re going to be fucked over by whoever wins. And even if one side smiles at your kids and ruffles their hair, they’re still going to be sociopathic parasites. You might say “the reality is one side is going to win; it doesn’t help to do nothing”. But ‘not picking a side to lend support to’ is not necessarily the same as ‘doing nothing’.

When Cameron decided to hold the referendum, then along with Osborne and most Tories led the Remain campaign, we had a choice between their side - the neoliberal establishment - or a campaign led by a coalition of neoconservative oddballs and opportunists. That was the choice we were faced with. I was undecided whether to vote, and if so how to vote, right up until the last minute. Because I knew that as well as the _prima facie_ question on the ballot paper, there were other levels of decision to be made. Debates between the lines. In the end I made my decision based on the campaign run by Leave. I decided to vote _against_ that. In particular, on polling day, I saw again online the infamous dog whistle queue poster. I decided to vote Remain. Not wholeheartedly.  Not even half-heartedly.  But in the heat of the moment.

Nor was I happy with the Remain campaign.  There was a lot I didn't like about it.  A lot.  I didn't like the story they told that went "if you don't vote for our option, you're being ignorant and aren't understanding the realities".  That's a story you can sell to people who are already onside, but to people who are already unhappy it's a red rag.  And it's a mistake that 2nd referendum enthusiasts are repeating.  In fact, it's been repeated recently on this very thread (eg here). Hoping that people will "come to their senses" will never happen if your message is predominantly "surely you've come to your senses by now?"  Even if there was a 2nd referendum, I really can't see any sign that the Remain camp are going to do anything but repeat those mistakes.  

We need to survey the scene in front of us.  Where does the balance of possibilities and probabilities lie?  Well, in the political classes, we know it's stalemate.  The ragtag of neoconservative oddballs and opportunists won the day, but it turns out they have no sway in parliament. In addition, they are poor strategists, and overplayed their hand in the House. So the neoliberal establishment have mainly fallen into a position of finding the most neoliberal way that they can make Brexit work, hoping to find a way that is just neoconservative enough to carry the oddballs, and that the EU will agree to, and that the supporters of the neoliberal project outside of the House will swallow (ie, the CBI, the British Chambers of Commerce, the financial institutions, etc), and that looks enough like Brexit to satisfy the Leave vote in the population.  

I can't see the cancelling of Brexit by the establishment doing anything but creating more social problems.  I think in addition, it'd open the door to the far right in a disastrous way.  (Not that I'd back away from a straight fight with the far right if that was what was required, but I see no reason to drive millions into their clutches).  

Nor do I think Labour have covered themselves in glory.  They had an opportunity to present a distinctive alternative, but chose instead to say as little as possible and wait to see what mistakes the government made.  An understandable tactic, but one that has deprived us of a social democratic alternative.

And as I said in a previous post, there has been insufficient groundwork to organise for Lexit.  (Not that I think "socialism in one country" is achievable, but I do think there were possibilities for a left-inspired restructuring of the economy under WTO rules.  But that won't just happen by magic).

So, what is there on the Brexit table for me to support?  Nothing.  Only things to oppose.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Ah, a fruit loop.


I'm not sure it was necessary to look too deeply into it to work this bit out tbf


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So you didn't vote leave as a means to bring about a GE and Corbyn led government.
> 
> You voted leave because it would increase the likelihood of a Corbyn led government.
> 
> Sounds like lexit to me.


get your lugs cleaned out


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.
> 
> https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/





kabbes said:


> Who’d have thought that a Cambridge economist would be so right wing?



First time I have ever knowingly read something by a Cambridge fellow. She seems incredibly blinkered to any way of life other than her own.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've got a cheek really, accusing me of denial.
> 
> Look, you want Brexit cancelled. We get it. What will you say to millions of people, most of them working class, on low incomes, at the sharp end of austerity, if you succeed in that?
> 
> ...


Is it necessary to 'say' anything to millions of people beyond 'you won, have your brexit'.
I would prefer to ask rather than say.
I would ask those millions of people for their detailed practical realistic plan for the land border with two divergent systems either side of it.
Those millions of people who won this particular version of a 'democratic process', could solve a lot of problems by owning the result and describe what 'Ieave' means in terms of the land border in Ireland.
Winners don't get told, they get asked, because they often say they knew what they were voting for. Tell the rest of us on the losing side. After more than two years the winners have had a chance to work out what to say.


----------



## chilango (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Would you believe she appeared at Spiked!'s _Battle of Ideas_ festival last year?



Er...yes.  it'd be more surprising if she hadn't.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Is it necessary to 'say' anything to millions of people beyond 'you won, have your brexit'.
> I would prefer to ask rather than say.
> I would ask those millions of people for their detailed practical realistic plan for the land border with two divergent systems either side of it.
> Those millions of people who won this particular version of a 'democratic process', could solve a lot of problems by owning the result and describe what 'Ieave' means in terms of the land border in Ireland.
> Winners don't get told, they get asked, because they often say they knew what they were voting for. Tell the rest of us on the losing side. After more than two years the winners have had a chance to work out what to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


>


even a scratched record is right twice a day


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> just AAMOI for context, what were the ref percentages in your area?



51% voted Leave


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So you didn't vote leave as a means to bring about a GE and Corbyn led government.
> 
> You voted leave because it would increase the likelihood of a Corbyn led government.
> 
> Sounds like lexit to me.



As I've tried to explain, there are more than 3 viewpoints.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I'm unclear about what you're saying here. Is it that backing Brexit is the only way of avoiding agreeing with a bunch of wankers?


I think we've reached the point that danny la rouge has been making, that we need to quote SpineyNorman 's words on each page.



> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> As I've tried to explain, there are more than 3 viewpoints.


Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.


you're all over the shop on this one


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There are certainly “things that can be done”. But there are also things that can’t be done in the timescale, because there isn’t, and hasn’t been, the organisation in place preparing for it. There is no realistic chance of a “hard Lexit”, for example.
> 
> I agree with Costas Lapavitsas that WTO rules _could_ provide significant opportunities for a left inspired restructuring of the UK economy. The hit we’re (the working class, and more) going to take is based on the way the situation at 11:01pm will impact the future of the economy, but beginning with the economy as it is structured now; the way it has been shaped over the last few decades. It has been deindustrialised and financialised by neoliberalism. It needn’t be that type of economy that the UK responds to Brexit with.
> 
> ...


That gets to the heart of it for me. Brexit isn't the defeat, Brexit is a consequence of those decades. And those decades have left us weaker in the bigger fight, they have affected patterns of class struggle. Those are the real issues. All of that imprints onto how we face the reality of Brexit, certainly, but doesn't add up to some desperate attempt to get back into the EU. What we need is the fight, is the organisation, to fight neo-liberalism from wherever it hails. That's not complacency about Brexit, I suspect things _will_ be worse as the map is redrawn further. But ultimately, in the context of those left structures organisations not existing or functioning, it's still a mistake to think the EU, People's Vote and the rest are some kind of 'next best thing'.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 13, 2019)

Agree completely Wilf and danny la rouge . That's exactly how I see it too.

Whilst we're at it, I don't think this post can be repeated too many times:


Wilf said:


> My pure guess is there will be some kind of downturn and loss of jobs, though equally, there may be some kind of temporary Brexit bounce if an agreement is ultimately signed. Yeah, there may be a downturn, there may be a loss of jobs. Whoever is in government in a couple of years may also find it is easier to make things worse in all kinds of areas. Specific groups may be hit. But again, how to respond to that? Campaign for a 'people's re-vote', give our support to the neoliberal EU, line up, support one of the key institutions of capital?  The EU isn't 'ours'. To fight for communities, fight for communities. To fight deportations, fight deportations etc. Don't keep asking me to line up with Juncker et al.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Yes, and your viewpoint seems to be one which sees a leave vote as something that makes a left-wing government more likely. I'd say that sits within the category of viewpoints described as 'Lexit'.



Well then Lexit is a pretty fucking broad term isn't it? 

Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.
> 
> https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/


Her husband was also involved in a discrimination case at work. He is, somewhat inevitably, a senior officer at an investment bank and distributed photos of a naked painting of his wife to junior female colleagues. A female lawyer at the firm objected and was sacked, leading to a tribunal. I'd link to the story, but its in the Mail, so won't.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well then Lexit is a pretty fucking broad term isn't it?
> 
> Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.


Not only broad, but essentially redundant and meaningless. The challenges facing the '_Le_' bit of '_Lexit' _remain unchanged_ t_hough, perhaps, seen in greater clarity as a result of the whole process?


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Nor do I think Labour have covered themselves in glory. They had an opportunity to present a distinctive alternative, but chose instead to say as little as possible and wait to see what mistakes the government made. An understandable tactic, but one that has deprived us of a social democratic alternative.


Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any _distinctive alternative_ would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative _has_ been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.

I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.

Both parties are in a similar bind, with forces within and outside Westminster making the ground they have to maneuvere almost non existent - their only hope of a way out which doesn't see their party destroyed involves making sure the other one is blamed for whatever happens.

The final paragraph of Stephen Bush's latest morning mail out is pertinent:

_...the biggest reason that a no deal exit might happen: almost everyone is convinced that when push comes to shove, a no deal scenario is so catastrophic that someone will take political damage to prevent it. Up until the point where a majority of MPs are ready to say "and that someone is me", the chance of a no deal exit remains very real. _


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which is why I don't use it. You're not sticking me in a pigeon hole with the CPB and their British Road to Socialism nonsense.


when i win the euromillions a portion of it will go on buying a pub which i will rename 'socialism' at the end of a road i will rename 'british road' which is the only way the cpb will ever go down a british road to socialism


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh.


I think that’s probably fair, as it happens. I did nearly expand on the way the forces lay within the PLP. It doesn’t stop me from feeling disappointed though.

In fact disappointment is one of the overarching emotions the whole thing has left me with.

(I could go on about the situation here in Scotland, but I don’t have the strength this morning).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Her husband was also involved in a discrimination case at work. He is, somewhat inevitably, a senior officer at an investment bank and distributed photos of a naked painting of his wife to junior female colleagues. A female lawyer at the firm objected and was sacked, leading to a tribunal. I'd link to the story, but its in the Mail, so won't.



Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...
> 
> View attachment 161716


that's a face orwell would have taken a boot to


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Having had my attention drawn to naked brexit lady by her nude stunts, I've been reading some of her ideas this morning. Can't say I'm into them tbh.
> 
> https://capx.co/welfare-reform-why-susbsidising-other-peoples-kids-must-have-limits/


I’d seen headlines about someone challenging Rees Mogg to “a naked debate”, but didn’t read on because I didn’t feel there was anything else I needed to know on the topic. Having been informed by this thread a little more about the background to those headlines, I also read a little more about the  “naked Brexit professor”.  It turns out that my first instinct had been correct: the initial headline was already as much information as I needed.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any _distinctive alternative_ would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative _has_ been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.
> 
> I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.
> 
> ...


I've been very critical of Labour and Corbyn's inaction, though I agree with you about the problem Labour has had, about the coalition(s) that make up Labour. Also, we are certainly in a position now where Labour has just about no chance to influence anything. But what remains in terms of criticism is what Labour sh_ould have been doing _over the last couple of years. There may never have been a way of squaring the circle of it's remain voting and leave voting areas. But Labour should have been resisting austerity, fighting atos and the rest. Creating a better context for facing up to Brexit.

Also, perhaps a bit hypocritical of me to say this, given that I've said we shouldn't be seeking salvation in the EU, but maybe Labour should have used the points it sent to May last week as a public position on Brexit. _I_ don't think things like remaining in the single market and keeping alignment over workers rights and the rest would be much of a victory, but it was at least a political position that allowed the party to respect the original vote and give a kind of second prize to its remain voters/members. [Edit: it would at least have been *a* strategy, something to take out on the road. Better than not having a strategy]


----------



## brogdale (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any _distinctive alternative_ would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative _has_ been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.
> 
> I've seen people - usually those agitating for remain - say Labour should be prepared to take the damage: that a politician with a clear view of the way forward should show leadership and take the party and country with him. I think this ignores reality. There isn't the time or political space for any party or politician to change enough minds in the places they need to be changed for such a project to result in anything but a crushing defeat at the general election which would surely immediately follow, to an even more right wing, more brexity Tory party.
> 
> ...


Labour's problems with the whole Brexit process inevitably date back to the period preceding the 2015 GE when their response to Cameron's telegraphed, then specific commitment to hold an in/out referendum was met with the fudge of Miliband's "_manifesto for business_" that sought to assure capital that the UK's position in the EU would be secure in Labour's hands whilst also offering the sop to members of a referendum for any further 'sharing of sovereignty'. That triangulation never allowed a coherent, straightforward policy trajectory. 

If at the time the LP had come out and said that they wanted nothing to do with Cameron's attempt to resolve his own party discipline, then their subsequent performance under Corbyn might make sense...but that's not where they started from.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Not to judge a book by its cover, but he looks like a right scum-fucker...
> 
> View attachment 161716


it's a face that would send any farmer off to lock up his flocks and herds


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Also, perhaps a bit hypocritical of me to say this, given that I've said we shouldn't be seeking salvation in the EU, but maybe Labour should have used the points it sent to May last week as a public position on Brexit. _I_ don't think things like remaining in the single market and keeping alignment over workers rights and the rest would be much of a victory, but it was at least a political position that allowed the party to respect the original vote and give a kind of second prize to its remain voters/members. [Edit: it would at least have been *a* strategy, something to take out on the road. Better than not having a strategy]


Isn't this more or less what they did? Isn't this their public position on Brexit now (one which has seen a 5% fall in support)?


----------



## elbows (Feb 13, 2019)

> The Brexit secretary has played down a report that Theresa May could force MPs to choose between backing her deal or accepting a delay to EU withdrawal.
> 
> ITV News said chief UK negotiator Olly Robbins was overheard in a Brussels bar saying the EU was likely to allow an extension to the Brexit process.
> 
> ...



Brexit choice of deal v delay 'not policy'

Lock-in at the Brexit bar.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Agree with most of your post, but I'm not sure how much of a choice this really was tbh. I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any _distinctive alternative_ would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative _has_ been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.



I disagree with this point. It's absolutely true that the Labour leadership have tried to balance between their coalition of interests (NuLab Remainers and working class/young people bearing the brunt austerity, with some mild crossover between the two) but I think it's important to note that they don't have to do that. Corbyn always had options - particularly immediately after the election he was expected to be destroyed at.

Genuinely democratising and transforming the Labour party was possible. It's not like he didn't have a mandate and the support of the membership. We'd be in a very different situation right now if he'd whipped votes and disciplined Blairites, brought in automatic re-selection and opened up the Labour party to the working class and the trade unions. 

It's also not as if Corbyn couldn't have come out several times strongly in favour of Brexit, and put that in socialist terms. The *only* coherent political response to the threat of no deal is to radically transform our economy and decisively reject neoliberalism, privatisation and austerity. The majority of passionate Remainers were passionate because they were opposed to the nationalism and racism of UKIP/Tories. Promising a 'Brexit' with no new immigration controls, a Britain that accepts refugees, and linking that to an anti-austerity program would have had an appeal for many of them. It would be interesting as well to see how the media and the EU would respond to Corbyn going on the telly and saying well if no deal is a real possibility we'll have to nationalise everything and bring in capital controls in order to ensure the stability of the country.

I think this would have meant that he didn't have to placate the NuLab liberals any more, because he'd have other sources of support to draw strength from, not least a lot of disillusioned former Labour voters who aren't convinced he's different from Milliband. 

I'm not saying he would ever have done it you understand - him and the rest of the Labour left wouldn't even believe it was possible. But if we fall into the trap of saying he didn't have a choice, then we fall into the trap of shit reheated social democratic rubbish.

"It doesn't have to be like this" is pretty much always a relevant slogan.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Isn't this more or less what they did? Isn't this their public position on Brexit now (one which has seen a 5% fall in support)?


Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). I'm a bit of a broken record on this,, but that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). And - I'm a bit of a broken record on this - that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.



Excellent use of 'parliamentary cretinism'. I just wrote a long post and missed a great opportunity to use it.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Excellent use of 'parliamentary cretinism'. I just wrote a long post and missed a great opportunity to use it.


I tend towards the verbose, but for once managed to be pithy.


----------



## Sue (Feb 13, 2019)

Personally, I think we should just put danny la rouge in charge of stuff in general.

(Sorry to make you blush but I agree with pretty much everything you say on this and you express it very clearly, fairly and reasonably* too.)

*Not sure what you're doing on urban with an attitude like that though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Sue said:


> Personally, I think we should just put danny la rouge in charge of stuff in general.
> 
> (Sorry to make you blush but I agree with pretty much everything you say on this and you express it very clearly, fairly and reasonably* too.)
> 
> *Not sure what you're doing on urban with an attitude like that though.


i think we should put teuchter in charge so we can rip the piss out of him when he buggers it all up


----------



## Sue (Feb 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think we should put teuchter in charge so we can rip the piss out of him when he buggers it all up


Tbf, it's already all buggered up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Sue said:


> Tbf, it's already all buggered up.


yeh but to paraphrase brendan behan, i cannot conceive of a situation so dire it couldn't be made worse by putting teuchter in charge


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 13, 2019)

I think I should be in charge really


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I should be in charge really


yeh but people like you so i don't think we'd want to give you such a poisoned chalice.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, it is their position on Brexit now, put together seemingly as a Parliamentary strategy, a way of ambushing May. But for too long it's been little more than 'the five tests' and saying that May is fucking things up. There hasn't been an active strategy to get out of Westminster and push a distinctive social democratic take on Brexit (whatever that might be, again, it's not my bag). I'm a bit of a broken record on this,, but that in turn reflects Labour's parliamentary cretinism and also its lack of real links to working class voters.


I'm talking about Labour as it _is_, rather than how I'd like it to be though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think we should put teuchter in charge so we can rip the piss out of him when he buggers it all up



Typucal anarchist


----------



## NoXion (Feb 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> even a scratched record is right twice a day



I will not buy this record.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm talking about Labour as it _is_, rather than how I'd like it to be though.



Of course - but it's necessary to talk about how things could be.

Especially when things as they are are dire!


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Of course - but it's necessary to talk about how things could be.
> 
> Especially when things as they are are dire!


But they aren't how things could be though, because of how things are. Labour doesn't have any significant links with the working class anymore, this is true: but nor can they be wished into existence, or created with any real speed - it's the work of a generation. Corbyn could in theory 'discipline' the PLP, push for mandatory reselection and deselect key blairites: but that would only guarantee the split that has been threatened since he became leader, and the end to any real electoral chances for some time. The stalemate in the country, in the party and in parliament is real.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm talking about Labour as it _is_, rather than how I'd like it to be though.


Me too, really. I'm just reflecting that Labour's failure to make any kind of progress on Brexit in part flows from the limits of what Labour _is_.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I disagree with this point. It's absolutely true that the Labour leadership have tried to balance between their coalition of interests (NuLab Remainers and working class/young people bearing the brunt austerity, with some mild crossover between the two) but I think it's important to note that they don't have to do that. Corbyn always had options - particularly immediately after the election he was expected to be destroyed at.
> 
> Genuinely democratising and transforming the Labour party was possible. It's not like he didn't have a mandate and the support of the membership. We'd be in a very different situation right now if he'd whipped votes and disciplined Blairites, brought in automatic re-selection and opened up the Labour party to the working class and the trade unions.
> 
> ...


Ah yes, if only Corbyn had ditched the centrists,  pledged open borders and threatened to nationalise eerything - he'd be ahead in the polls instead of behind!.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Me too, really. I'm just reflecting that Labour's failure to make any kind of progress on Brexit in part flows from the limits of what Labour _is_.


ok - but you kept talking about things Labour _should_ be doing, when the reasons they aren't able to do them aren't really a matter of choice.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ah yes, if only Corbyn had ditched the centrists,  pledged open borders and threatened to nationalise eerything - he'd be ahead in the polls instead of behind!.



I didn't say open borders. But yes, I do think Labour would be ahead in the polls if he'd taken that approach.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> But they aren't how things could be though, because of how things are. Labour doesn't have any significant links with the working class anymore, this is true: but nor can they be wished into existence, or created with any real speed - it's the work of a generation. Corbyn could in theory 'discipline' the PLP, push for mandatory reselection and deselect key blairites: but that would only guarantee the split that has been threatened since he became leader, and the end to any real electoral chances for some time. The stalemate in the country, in the party and in parliament is real.



I don't think it needs to be the work of a generation. The political situation is fluid, and things can move very fast. I genuinely believe a bold approach would have won massive support and could even have led to the rebuilding of solid links to working class communities (which I accept could take a generation to consolidate). That might sound far fetched, but it's worth remembering how well Corbyn did in the GE despite the very weak watered down social democratic message he put out. We'd be fools to say it wasn't possible for him to win that election with a different approach. 

This could be connected to the fact that I think a split with the Blairites would be a great thing of course, and would really boost Corbyn in the polls! Sure it would be a small party initially but one that had a real chance of building support across the Leave/Remain divide.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

I don't really have anything to say to that tbh. I think you're wrong about almost everything.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I didn't say open borders.


Ah. So you support racist immigration policies.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ah. So you support racist immigration policies.


You've managed to begin a fair number of posts on this thread with 'So, you ...'.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> You've managed to begin a fair number of posts on this thread with 'So, you ...'.



It's all part of teuchter's War on Straw.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

NoXion said:


> It's all part of teuchter's War on Straw.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't really have anything to say to that tbh. I think you're wrong about almost everything.



Fair enough! 

I'm not though, I'm right about everything and I should be in charge, not SpineyNorman


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

Sue said:


> Personally, I think we should just put danny la rouge in charge of stuff in general.
> 
> (Sorry to make you blush but I agree with pretty much everything you say on this and you express it very clearly, fairly and reasonably* too.)
> 
> *Not sure what you're doing on urban with an attitude like that though.


That’s very kind of you to say, but if offered for real, I think I’d have to decline in order to spend more time with my booze cabinet.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Ah. So you support racist immigration policies.



If anything less than open borders is a racist immigration policy to you, does that make the immigration policy of the EU a racist immigration policy?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s very kind of you to say, but if offered for real, I think I’d have to decline in order to spend more time with my booze cabinet.


(((work/life balance))))


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

NoXion said:


> It's all part of teuchter's War on Straw.


_Tough on Straw, Tough on the Causes of Straw._


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

Just as an aside, never again will the UK be able to make snide comments about problems of governance and it's impact on people's lives in developing countries. What a shining example of enlightened Parliamentary excellence this has been! Government run by a Troika of Alan Partridge, John Bull and the Cat-in-the Bin Woman.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If anything less than open borders is a racist immigration policy to you, does that make the immigration policy of the EU a racist immigration policy?



That's what I have been told on this thread, so it must be true.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> That's what I have been told on this thread, so it must be true.


you're an awful gobshite. now you've been told that on this thread it must be true.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 13, 2019)

To be clear, if I was  put in charge I'd do the same as I do in every job I've had. Fuck all. I think it would be a dramatic  improvement compared to what we have now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> To be clear, if I was  put in charge I'd do the same as I do in every job I've had. Fuck all. I think it would be a dramatic  improvement compared to what we have now.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 13, 2019)

Vertical organisational psychopaths, the lot of you!_ _


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> To be clear, if I was  put in charge I'd do the same as I do in every job I've had. Fuck all. I think it would be a dramatic  improvement compared to what we have now.


Thankyou for your presentation, we have other candidates to see, but someone from Personnel will be in touch _very_ soon.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Thankyou for your presentation, we have other candidates to see, but someone from Personnel will be in touch _very_ soon.


Not heard it called Personnel in years!


----------



## andysays (Feb 13, 2019)

I'm sure there's a lesson here about her approach to getting a Brexit deal, or perhaps to what life in Britain will be like after we crash out with No Deal, but I'll leave you to suggest your own punch lines...

Theresa May 'scrapes the mould off jam'


> As if Theresa May was not in enough of a jam over Brexit, she has now sparked a debate about how to handle actual jam - the kind that comes in jars. It comes after she reportedly told cabinet ministers she scrapes the mould off the fruit preserve rather than throw it away. The PM reportedly made the comments in a cabinet discussion on food waste.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not heard it called Personnel in years!


I still have to take a second when someone says “wireless”...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not heard it called Personnel in years!


At mine, it went from personnel to HR and then back again. TBH, I don't use _either_ term.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 13, 2019)

corbyn makes new jam, may scrapes the mould off of old jam. Message.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 13, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> corbyn makes new jam, may scrapes the mould off of old jam. Message.



Yes, one of them is a consumerist wastrel.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I still have to take a second when someone says “wireless”...


(((((dlr)))))


----------



## Combustible (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think this would have meant that he didn't have to placate the NuLab liberals any more, because he'd have other sources of support to draw strength from, not least a lot of disillusioned former Labour voters who aren't convinced he's different from Milliband.



The problem being that much  of of the "other sources of support" are remainers much like the "NuLab liberals", and if Corbyn followed them he would be calling for a second referendum/cancellation of Brexit.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I didn't say open borders. But yes, I do think Labour would be ahead in the polls if he'd taken that approach.


Why?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 13, 2019)

mauvais said:


> No. I mean, you can keep saying it and ignore what I say in return, but it doesn’t make it true. There's a difference between an aim and the least miserable hope.


I am reading what you've said. You've specifically argued against workers controlling their own conditions - for the EU/national government to decide what's best for them and lay off workers.
And when you are arguing for that it's pointless to try and separate an aim and "the least miserable hope".

You've specifically called for workers to be taken out of the equation. That politics has changed and so needs to come from the first place from parliament (or at least some type of party organisation).



mauvais said:


> NoWhich is the perfect opposite of all this. It's active, tangible, it's consistent with a long-established narrative, there's organisation and a message. Good luck to everyone involved.


And yet you want to channel support to those doing the attacking and any from the workers.

On a different thread chilango talked about how communities could take control of migration policy. The idea he floated with swiftly shot down by people who if they didn't consider them socialists at least would consider themselves on "the left", because fundamentally they were afraid of the choices people might make. And that's a core point, I want workers to control who gets to work in a workplace, how housing is allocated, how they deal with climate change. Yes sometimes the choices people will make won't be in agreement with my personal preferences but for me that's not an argument against workers control.[/QUOTE]


----------



## mauvais (Feb 13, 2019)

Because you've done this before, presumably you're on about how I think climate change can only be minimised, if at all, top-down by international government. Yep, still think that. Guess what? Doesn't apply to everything or indeed all that much. And if that's not the point you're attempting to extrapolate from, then be specific.

As for Birmingham, I don't live there, but I can imagine voting for a Labour council if I felt it kept out a worse one (thus, least miserable) _and then _still supporting the strike. If the former is seen in binary terms as channeling support against the latter then so be it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

Combustible said:


> The problem being that much  of of the "other sources of support" are remainers much like the "NuLab liberals", and if Corbyn followed them he would be calling for a second referendum/cancellation of Brexit.



No, I don't see it that way - I think most Corbyn supporters are Remain because they're nauseated by the Tory right and UKIP. I don't think they see EU membership as more important than say, austerity. So I think they could be won to a vision of 'Leave' that is totally opposed to the Farage/Johnson vision. As opposed to the New Labour types, for whom EU membership is far more important than anything else. 

Some of the brighter second ref types have been making the point that most voters don't think the EU is anywhere near as important as the NHS, jobs, education etc. That's true but it cuts both ways - lots of remain voters could accept leaving if they felt certain that Corbyn would sort out the NHS crisis, stop austerity, create jobs etc.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> brighter second ref types


Christ....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Why?



Because I think he's doing pretty well in the polls even though at the moment he's mostly fucking up. The Tories are hated enough and in enough of a mess that if he had a coherent program that offered something positive people could have some hope in he'd be 20 points ahead.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Christ....



Don't worry I wasn't talking about you.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't worry I wasn't talking about you.


Nobody is sure what you're talking about, apart from yourself.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

I want a second ref to bin brexit.
I want a Labour government to end austerity. 
I want Corbyn gone so we can get a Labour government.

Simple .


----------



## Supine (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Nobody is sure what you're talking about, apart from yourself.



I don't think he's entirely sure himself


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I want a second ref to bin brexit.
> I want a Labour government to end austerity.
> I want Corbyn gone so we can get a Labour government.
> 
> Simple .



Well there's no way you're getting all of those things. So you're gonna have to pick. But don't worry - we already know what you'll decide.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 13, 2019)

Not read the news all day as busy but see that Ford are ready to halt all UK manufacturing.

Ford ‘preparing to pull 5,000 manufacturing jobs out of UK’

Should be fine eh? Just them, Nissan, Airbus and a load others. Hopefully Poundland, Wetherspoons and Foxtons will hang on and keep Britain great


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 13, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> corbyn makes new jam, may scrapes the mould off of old jam. Message.



We will all be scraping the mould off jam, it will be our only source of penicillin.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I want a second ref to bin brexit.
> I want a Labour government to end austerity.
> I want Corbyn gone so we can get a Labour government.
> 
> Simple .


(((sleaterkinney)))


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I want a second ref to bin brexit.
> I want a Labour government to end austerity.
> I want Corbyn gone so we can get a Labour government.
> 
> Simple .


Who do you have in mind to replace Corbyn?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well there's no way you're getting all of those things. So you're gonna have to pick. But don't worry - we already know what you'll decide.


Yeh simple


----------



## Wookey (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Who do you have in mind to replace Corbyn?





I can but dream.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

I think you need to be an MP to lead the Labour Party, refreshing though Big Bird would be in the role.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 13, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Because you've done this before, presumably you're on about how I think climate change can only be minimised, if at all, top-down by international government. Yep, still think that. Guess what? Doesn't apply to everything or indeed all that much. And if that's not the point you're attempting to extrapolate from, then be specific.


That is one example yes. Another is here where you specifically cite parliamentary (or party) politics as the most important factor in improving conditions for labour. I'm sorry but I don't think that I'm misrepresenting your position from those posts



mauvais said:


> As for Birmingham, I don't live there, but I can imagine voting for a Labour council if I felt it kept out a worse one (thus, least miserable) _and then _still supporting the strike. If the former is seen in binary terms as channeling support against the latter then so be it.


IMO voting is pretty much apolitical so I don't disagree with you on that but your previous posts go a bit further than merely voting. You're arguing for party politics over class politics. 



sleaterkinney said:


> I want a second ref to bin brexit.
> I want a Labour government to end austerity.
> I want Corbyn gone so we can get a Labour government.


Wonderful, we can have a Labour government implementing "austerity" instead of a Tory one, just like 97-05.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think you need to be an MP to lead the Labour Party, refreshing though Big Bird would be in the role.



Dagnamit. 

I thought muppets were the preferred type.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think you need to be an MP to lead the Labour Party, refreshing though Big Bird would be in the role.



Even though Big Bird would not have choreographed as many photo ops as Caroline Flint!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Who do you have in mind to replace Corbyn?


Emily Thornberry seems alright. You could keep McDonnell in there.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> (((sleaterkinney)))


In life, you don't always get what you want.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

Wookey said:


> View attachment 161759
> 
> I can but dream.


Not surprised you want a lib dem running the Labour party


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Emily Thornberry seems alright. You could keep McDonnell in there.


Would the electoral forces behind Corbyn's fudge on Brexit magically change under Thornberry?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> In life, you don't always get what you want.


But you might find you get what you need


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 13, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I want a second ref to bin brexit.


Never going to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 13, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Never going to happen.


Yeh the people will never be trusted with a referendum again


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Would the electoral forces behind Corbyn's fudge on Brexit magically change under Thornberry?


I don't think his fudge is helping him electorally so I think it would. He is not making any headway as it is.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

What do you think Thornberry would do differently?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> That is one example yes. Another is here where you specifically cite parliamentary (or party) politics as the most important factor in improving conditions for labour. I'm sorry but I don't think that I'm misrepresenting your position from those posts
> 
> IMO voting is pretty much apolitical so I don't disagree with you on that but your previous posts go a bit further than merely voting. You're arguing for party politics over class politics.
> 
> Wonderful, we can have a Labour government implementing "austerity" instead of a Tory one, just like 97-05.



Just getting on to something more interesting for a second - imagine if Corbyn _wasn't _leading Labour and you had someone like Yvette Cooper or Tristram Hunt as Leader of the Opposition right now. They'd lead the charge to stop Brexit and reverse the referendum and we'd probably have the Tories in another 10 years or more. 

Not saying this as some sort of token defence of Corbyn, just that it would actually be pretty convenient for the establishment if they hadn't lost control a bit in the Labour Party right now.


----------



## killer b (Feb 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> someone like Yvette Cooper or Tristram Hunt as Leader of the Opposition right now. They'd lead the charge to stop Brexit and reverse the referendum and we'd probably have the Tories in another 10 years or more.


Yvette Cooper would have a very similar policy to Corbyn as leader fwiw. She isn't one of the remain ultras. Aren't you following this stuff?


----------



## Wookey (Feb 13, 2019)

brexit-truth-revised.pdf

Great run down on No Deal reality - he's still getting called a scaremonger on Twitter.

2.5 million views - and people are bored of this shit, really?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not heard it called Personnel in years!



HR is easier to spell...



Wilf said:


> At mine, it went from personnel to HR and then back again. TBH, I don't use _either_ term.



i can think of a few terms for most of them...


----------



## mauvais (Feb 13, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> That is one example yes. Another is here where you specifically cite parliamentary (or party) politics as the most important factor in improving conditions for labour. I'm sorry but I don't think that I'm misrepresenting your position from those posts


I mean, you've just done it again in this post. What you've linked to is my assessment on where we are - and you can certainly argue it's wrong - but what you've presented it as is my assessment of where we _should _be. 'Most important factor' is your phrase, not mine, and implies that this is a philosophy rather than commentary.

Take your bin dispute. There are obviously many factors behind this, and it can be many things at once. But, choosing from two oversimplified possibilities, what's the most direct & immediate driver of it? Is it, as you put it, the [overall & inevitable] interaction between capital and labour? Or is it a specific result of austerity as inflicted on councils and as selected by the national government? If you can't argue out of it being the latter, then why are we arguing about what the biggest influence (my words this time) on conditions is? At most it's framing. None of this is to assert that this situation is _right_. The whole discussion that you have pointed to is not about that, but my lack of faith in whether we can expect it to change any time soon.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 13, 2019)

Second referendum or we quit Labour MPs, what's the thinking? It's not as if the commons will vote for a second referendum... Corbyn doesn't have the power to make it happen anyhow. Does anyone know the motivation here? Is it just to create a cleavage within the party?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> Yvette Cooper would have a very similar policy to Corbyn as leader fwiw. She isn't one of the remain ultras. Aren't you following this stuff?



Well, hang on, she's not demanding a second ref but she's trying to build cross party support for an amendment that would force an extension of A50.  Which looks to me like a much more sensible tactic if you want to stop Brexit to me.

In any case though, I don't think you can infer from the situation now how a Labour Party that hadn't suddenly trebled its membership, with a fairly unified PLP that still revered Blair instead of flirting with policies that break with neoliberal orthodoxy would have operated over the last 3/4 years. It's not quite the same organisation. They would have been much more firmly the party of remain throughout the process.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 13, 2019)

ska invita said:


> It's not as if the commons will vote for a second referendum...


Probably not tomorrow, but I don't see any reason to suppose it can't happen under any circumstance. If either front bench supported it, then it would be likely to pass. That could easily happen because Labour can't at any point decide to just sit on their hands, and there are a limited number of positions left for them to work through. And because the Tories are already quite close to having boxed themselves in to the extent that they will have to do whatever the EU requires (that might not mean a referendum, but it could) in order to secure an article 50 extension.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 13, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Second referendum or we quit Labour MPs, what's the thinking? It's not as if the commons will vote for a second referendum... Corbyn doesn't have the power to make it happen anyhow. Does anyone know the motivation here? Is it just to create a cleavage within the party?



Making noise about a second ref in an attempt to make it seem more likely?
Making noise about a cross party breakaway party to make it seem more likely? 

Dunno really. Maybe they're just out of ideas.


----------



## ddraig (Feb 14, 2019)




----------



## hipipol (Feb 14, 2019)

ddraig said:


>



She looks jus like me sista Carol, she live next door, is she a secret famous?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 14, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I mean, you've just done it again in this post. What you've linked to is my assessment on where we are - and you can certainly argue it's wrong - but what you've presented it as is my assessment of where we _should _be. 'Most important factor' is your phrase, not mine, and implies that this is a philosophy rather than commentary.


No you used "biggest enabler" instead, hardly that a misrepresentation. And you then went on to state that


mauvais said:


> It's merely that PP has, after arriving at that point, become the dominant force for either change or lack of it.





mauvais said:


> Most people of whatever class look for leadership and lean heavily on the ideas and work of others, most people are malleable.....And so again when a vacuum is produced, something will fill it, and if you don't want it to be e.g. Yaxley Lennon, there had better be a workable counter.





mauvais said:


> I think there's a lot of latitude that comes with the starting point of one of the strongest economies,


You can't make statements like these and then argue that your politics isn't PP (you term) driven.



mauvais said:


> Or is it a specific result of austerity as inflicted on councils and as selected by the national government?


What do you mean by austerity? The set of policies implemented by governments since 2007?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Second referendum or we quit Labour MPs, what's the thinking? It's not as if the commons will vote for a second referendum... Corbyn doesn't have the power to make it happen anyhow. Does anyone know the motivation here? Is it just to create a cleavage within the party?


What's the evidence these Labour MPs are going to quit besides the Guardian advert, the same one they've been running for the last two years?


----------



## ska invita (Feb 14, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What's the evidence these Labour MPs are going to quit besides the Guardian advert, the same one they've been running for the last two years?


No evidence, Im asking about the thinking/strategy behind it. It doesnt really make any sense on any level


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> No evidence, Im asking about the thinking/strategy behind it. It doesnt really make any sense on any level


I'm sure it does, from their perspective


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> No evidence, Im asking about the thinking/strategy behind it. It doesnt really make any sense on any level


I think the thinking is “This is what ‘my public’ want to hear me saying”.  


Whether or not it’s electorally advantageous depends on the particular constituency.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 14, 2019)

Its weird, its likely an empty threat as to whether they'll follow through, but more importantly its a demand that cant be met. The call for a vote of no confidence was the same nonsense/charade - Corbyn did it in the end and now its off the table.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Its weird, its likely an empty threat as to whether they'll follow through, but more importantly its a demand that cant be met. The call for a vote of no confidence was the same nonsense/charade - Corbyn did it in the end and now its off the table.


Politics-as-Twitter-post.


----------



## killer b (Feb 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well, hang on, she's not demanding a second ref but she's trying to build cross party support for an amendment that would force an extension of A50. Which looks to me like a much more sensible tactic if you want to stop Brexit to me.


Well, she campaigned in the general election promising her constituents in the general election campaign that she would never block brexit and her proposed amendment - drawn up with Nick Bowles, who also doesn't want to stop brexit, and currently withdrawn again because there's no chance ATM of getting enough support for it - is explicitly to avoid a no deal cliff edge. 

Maybe that's all bluff though.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 14, 2019)

Another on the unexpected consequences of Brexit purely for interest, Got this email this morning, since I'm a self-employed one man band, I have a company email address, when I registered the .co.uk one I got the .eu for free it seems I could lose it. This doesn't actually bother me, I'm a long way from being a global megacorp but I wonder how many companies this will affect especially the bit about trademarks.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> What do you think Thornberry would do differently?


Be a credible leader?.


----------



## killer b (Feb 14, 2019)

nothing real then. just 'not him'.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> nothing real then. just 'not him'.


What do you mean "real"?.


----------



## T & P (Feb 14, 2019)

*



			Brexit has cost UK economy at least £80bn since vote – Bank rate-setter
		
Click to expand...

*


> Gertjan Vlieghe’s estimate for weekly cost of Brexit – £800m – is more than double Vote Leave said could be spent on NHS



Brexit has cost UK economy at least £80bn since vote – Bank rate-setter

What a cunting clusterfuck


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 14, 2019)

T & P said:


> Brexit has cost UK economy at least £80bn since vote – Bank rate-setter
> 
> What a cunting clusterfuck


Investment avoids uncertainty, I guess, and the last two years have been nothing if not uncertain. It's still uncertain. So an argument there would be that once it is done, however it is done really, the uncertainty reduces and investment returns, perhaps with a bit of a spike if some of that investment has merely been delayed rather than withdrawn. That could give a bit of a misleading picture of a 'brexit bounce' when in reality it is just recovering some of the lost ground caused by the brexit process. I hate to think of the kinds of 'incentives' that will be produced by a post-brexit government to bring investment back. To the bottom we race...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> Well, she campaigned in the general election promising her constituents in the general election campaign that she would never block brexit and her proposed amendment - drawn up with Nick Bowles, who also doesn't want to stop brexit, and currently withdrawn again because there's no chance ATM of getting enough support for it - is explicitly to avoid a no deal cliff edge.
> 
> Maybe that's all bluff though.



I know (and I wouldn't be surprised if it was bluff), but the point of the original post was that without the historical accident of Corbyn getting on the ballot, the situation would be radically different 

Do you think if someone other than Corbyn had been elected leader, that Labour might not be positioning themselves as the anti Brexit party right now?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know (and I wouldn't be surprised if it was bluff), but the point of the original post was that without the historical accident of Corbyn getting on the ballot, the situation would be radically different
> 
> Do you think if someone other than Corbyn had been elected leader, that Labour might not be positioning themselves as the anti Brexit party right now?


I would think only if they had prepared the ground previously, either by not supporting the referendum in the first place or by not supporting triggering A50 when it happened, or both. Having actively supported both things, they're now in a bind that goes far further than Corbyn.


----------



## killer b (Feb 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know (and I wouldn't be surprised if it was bluff), but the point of the original post was that without the historical accident of Corbyn getting on the ballot, the situation would be radically different
> 
> Do you think if someone other than Corbyn had been elected leader, that Labour might not be positioning themselves as the anti Brexit party right now?


Not really, no - the electoral forces in play now would still (more or less) be in play. If Mary Creagh had somehow won perhaps? Or if Owen Smith had won when he challenged Corbyn? Otherwise it's triangulation all the way, and what they'd have to triangulate would be the same.


----------



## CRI (Feb 14, 2019)

Has anyone noticed that HM Government is vomiting out Brexit related "notices" onto their website at lightning speed about everything from changes to Company Registration to Brit residents needing health insurance to travel to Ireland.  They're not exactly shouting about it, or drawing attention of the people who need to know this stuff.  It's just to cover their asses later so they can say, "Well, we issued guidance on that.  Not our fault you didn't see it."

Looks like companies in the EU that sell to the UK will have to register with HMRC, and pay Import VAT on parcels under £135 in value.  Some might go though that palaver, and of course pass the additional cost on to their British customers, but I suspect quite a few won't bother and will just shut down their shops to UK customers.


----------



## andysays (Feb 14, 2019)

This amused me earlier

Brexit 'monster' urges Dutch to prepare








> The Dutch government sees Brexit not as the elephant in the room but as a giant Muppet-style monster lying on a desk. That is the picture tweeted by Foreign Minister Stef Blok, with the warning: "make sure Brexit doesn't sit - or lie - in your way". There is a link to an official website where Dutch firms can see the potential impact of Brexit on their business.





> The Netherlands is among the UK's top trading partners, and Dutch officials say Brexit could deliver a major blow. There is much speculation that the UK could leave the EU without a deal on 29 March - seen by many as the worst-case scenario.


----------



## andysays (Feb 14, 2019)

PM defeated over Brexit strategy

PM Theresa May suffers a fresh defeat in Commons vote on her Brexit strategy by 303 to 258


----------



## Crispy (Feb 14, 2019)

303 to 258 That's the toothless Motion right? Not any of the ammendments.


----------



## andysays (Feb 14, 2019)

Crispy said:


> 303 to 258 That's the toothless Motion right? Not any of the ammendments.



Yeah, that's the government motion


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Feb 14, 2019)

andysays said:


> This amused me earlier
> 
> Brexit 'monster' urges Dutch to prepare



i thought that was the new minister for brexit


----------



## agricola (Feb 14, 2019)

Crispy said:


> 303 to 258 That's the toothless Motion right? Not any of the ammendments.



it was only 266 - 258 once the mould had been scraped off


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 14, 2019)

killer b said:


> Not really, no - the electoral forces in play now would still (more or less) be in play. If Mary Creagh had somehow won perhaps? Or if Owen Smith had won when he challenged Corbyn? Otherwise it's triangulation all the way, and what they'd have to triangulate would be the same.



Fair enough. I'm not convinced - I think they'd see lib dem and pro-EU Tory voters as there to be won etc. Because of their logic of triangulation.


----------



## agricola (Feb 14, 2019)

that mould must be a powerful hallucinogen:

*



			No 10 says accuses Labour of putting party interests ahead of national interest
		
Click to expand...

*


> Downing Street has released this statement about the result. A spokesman said:
> 
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn yet again put partisan considerations ahead of the national interest – and yet again, by voting against the government’s motion, he is in effect voting to make no deal more likely.
> ...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 14, 2019)

CRI said:


> Looks like companies in the EU that sell to the UK will have to register with HMRC, and pay Import VAT on parcels under £135 in value.  Some might go though that palaver, and of course pass the additional cost on to their British customers, but I suspect quite a few won't bother and will just shut down their shops to UK customers.



They'd just have to send it DAP then the recipient pays the VAT (which they should have been doing anyway). Its 20% vat the same as on all sales afaik.


----------



## tommers (Feb 14, 2019)

agricola said:


> that mould must be a powerful hallucinogen:


This is all so fucking depressing.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 14, 2019)

Missed the news today but seems to be going well again


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 14, 2019)

May has snookered herself.
She either revokes A50 - and the Conservative party explodes, or begs an extension off the EU,and concedes a 2nd referendum, and the Tory party explodes, or she goes for no deal, and the economy - and large parts of the country Go completely tit's up


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 14, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's true but it cuts both ways - lots of remain voters could accept leaving if they felt certain that Corbyn would sort out the NHS crisis, stop austerity, create jobs etc.


Very true,but would it be possible to do so if the economy,thank to Brexiteers, was at best stagnant,and at worst mired in deep recession?


----------



## philosophical (Feb 14, 2019)

Zugzwang


----------



## Crispy (Feb 14, 2019)

Streathamite said:


> May had snookered herself.
> She either revokes A50 - and the Conservative party explodes, or begs an extension off the EU,and concedes a 2nd referendum, and the Tory party explodes, or she goes for no deal, and the economy - and large parts of the country Go completely tit's up


The Tory party appears to be unexploded in your third option. That's got to be what they'll go for then.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 14, 2019)

here's an unsolicited tweet without comment


----------



## Streathamite (Feb 14, 2019)

Crispy said:


> The Tory party appears to be unexploded in your third option. That's got to be what they'll go for then.


Probably,yes,and they'll unite as one to blame the entire ensuing shitshow on Brussels and Labour


----------



## Wilf (Feb 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If only the naked rambler had published a few papers, he wouldn't have spent so long in Barlinnie.


After the Cambridge economist appears in the nip, we've now got Rachel Johnson doing (almost) the same:
Rachel Johnson speaks out after 'stripping off' for Brexit attention
I think it's interesting that rich posh people have taken to stripping for Remain - or, as Johnson said, 'I know it can be hard to get your voice heard about Brexit nowadays'. The perhaps obvious contrast is that Cameron accidentally created a space for people who didn't normally get their voice heard in 2016. Now it's those with the most public voices - an academic and a journalist - who are left moaning.

Worth pointing out that I don't think Brexit has opened up a permanent space for people's voices. Nor, to state the obvious (and shouldn't have to 800 pages in), can all of the 52% be reduced down to working class rage. But it is revealing (pun intended) to see the lengths some of those already with a voice feel they have to go to.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 15, 2019)

Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


----------



## Sue (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


Is that an offer we can't refuse..?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


Neil Warnock's been all decent after his player died, but give it another week...


----------



## Raheem (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


David Cameron and Boris Johnson, three years ago.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 15, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> here's an unsolicited tweet without comment



Are you trying to get people to back no deal now? What's good for the CBI is good for the proles eh?


----------



## Brainaddict (Feb 15, 2019)

Crispy said:


> The Tory party appears to be unexploded in your third option. That's got to be what they'll go for then.


But no-deal would potentially make the tories unelectable for years. This is where it looks to me like they've gone stark staring mad. If the ERG get what they seem to want, no-one will ever forgive them for it. If the Tories bow to the ERG in allowing it to happen, and there is chaos with a no-deal brexit, people won't forget it in a hurry. I guess in the same way Cameron was utterly convinced he could get the outcome he wanted, May is arrogant enough to think she can flirt with and appease the ERG nutters while still getting the result that she wants. You'd think she'd see Cameron as an object lesson but she appears to see him as a role model.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


I reckon Cameron in an unexpected twist.


----------



## fishfinger (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Who will get their cock out for leave I wonder?


Boris, stroking his cock:


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I reckon Cameron in an unexpected twist.


If there are pigs involved, definitely.


----------



## tommers (Feb 15, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> But no-deal would potentially make the tories unelectable for years



I think the key word there is potentially. 

People in this country have a disturbing record of voting Tory whatever the fuck they do to them.


----------



## Brainaddict (Feb 15, 2019)

Yeah, maybe you're right. There are thousands of people on twitter baying for a no-deal brexit. I think it might be what psychologists would call a compulsion to repeat their traumas.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

It's a mistake to mistake the obsessions of people on twitter for anything other than the obsessions of people on twitter tbh.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 15, 2019)

I see and hear no deal cunts everywhere, online, on the radio, and in the pubs.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I see and hear no deal cunts everywhere, online, on the radio, and in the pubs.


And roughly half are likely to be able to correctly articulate what it means.


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

I hear a fair few people IRL advocating "no deal" there's an element of macho posturing, mixed with a lot of over anologising (is that a word? It should be) but also plenty of weary cynicism and a desire for a clean break/fresh start etc. "No deal" seems to be quite a broad church ime.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

I think in most cases, _no deal_ is just shorthand for 'jesus christ just get on with it you cunts'


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2019)

I meant to like killer b’s post there, but for some reason it jumped and liked chilango’s instead. But you know what? I like them both.


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

...and I'll make this point but again, because it'll soon become crucial.

Brexit, if it happens, will be used as cover for all kinds of fresh assaults on us. And the opposition to this is going to get sucked into a "It's Brexit's fault" impotence and play right into the enemy's hands.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 15, 2019)

May rejected Corbyn's recent proposal because it wouldn't leave us free to negotiate other trade deals, so no deal would seem the ideal solution for her.


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think in most cases, _no deal_ is just shorthand for 'jesus christ just get on with it you cunts'



Definitely. 

Just as the vote for Brexit itself was often shorthand for "Jesus Christ ..you cunts"


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

chilango said:


> Definitely.
> 
> Just as the vote for Brexit itself was often shorthand for "Jesus Christ ..you cunts"



As in fact were a lot of Remain votes.


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

In fact if you fairly distilled voting motivation down to:

"No fucking way do I want those cunts in charge"

You've managed to encapsulate Leave, Remain and the non-voters motivation all at once.

I thinks there's hope for unity yet....


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

Propose to have 'fuck no!' as an option on all ballot papers to improve voter turnout.


----------



## chilango (Feb 15, 2019)

The infamous "Ron" of student union elections.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 15, 2019)

"no deal" will explode the tory party as well. And is anathema to most of their backers - i.e corporate finance, big money generally and sundry other powerful elements of the establishment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> "no deal" will explode the tory party as well. And is anathema to most of their backers - i.e corporate finance, big money generally and sundry other powerful elements of the establishment.


tbh it looks like they'll muddle their way to no-deal, i don't think that this is something which can be sorted out through careful influence from most of their backers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2019)

two sheds said:


> May rejected Corbyn's recent proposal because it wouldn't leave us free to negotiate other trade deals, so no deal would seem the ideal solution for her.


from my pov there's a much better and indeed more permanent solution for her.


----------



## philosophical (Feb 15, 2019)

No deal means a new kind of border on the island of Ireland sooner or later.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 15, 2019)

two sheds said:


> May rejected Corbyn's recent proposal because it wouldn't leave us free to negotiate other trade deals, so no deal would seem the ideal solution for her.



She rejected it because she can't be seen doing business with a commie terrorist.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> No deal means a new kind of border on the island of Ireland sooner or later.



Keeping up I see, well done.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 15, 2019)

Well, no deal certainly solves the Irish border problem, for a certain value of “solve”


----------



## ska invita (Feb 15, 2019)

I read this week that WTO rules are very similar to EU rules in terms of state aid etc, the main difference is the court governing the process is slower to act.  
?




Crispy said:


> The Tory party appears to be unexploded in your third option. That's got to be what they'll go for then.


No Deal explodes the Tories too, perhaps more than the first two options


----------



## belboid (Feb 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I read this week that WTO rules are very similar to EU rules in terms of state aid etc, the main difference is the court governing the process is slower to act.


hmm, not really.  There are similarities, neither is keen on SA, but the WTO is generally more retroactive whereas the EU is proactive,.

*World Trade Organisation Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures*
In addition to EU state aid rules, the UK is party to the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. Under the Agreement, some subsidies are prohibited outright while the rest are ‘actionable’ – meaning that the subsidy is allowed, but other countries can take certain actions if the subsidy harms them. Countries can protect their industries by taxing imports of the subsidised good – this is known as imposing a ‘countervailing duty’.

Although the definition of a ‘subsidy’ under the WTO regime is broadly similar to ‘state aid’ in EU law, the EU rules are a lot more stringent than the WTO rules on subsidies. The key differences are:


The default position in WTO rules is that subsidies are generally allowed, while EU rules consider subsidies to be generally illegal.
WTO rules apply to goods, but EU rules include services too.
EU rules are applied prospectively (i.e. legality must be proved before awarding any support), while WTO rules are only reactive, and are only triggered if a member country lodges a complaint.
WTO rules rely on state-to-state enforcement while under EU rules there are remedies available to businesses and individuals.
Under EU rules, a business has to repay illegal state aid. There is no such mechanism to remove anti-competitive effects under the WTO rules.
In case the UK exits the EU without a formal agreement, the WTO rules on subsidies would still apply.
Commons Briefing papers SN06775
EU State Aid rules and WTO Subsidies Agreement - Commons Library briefing - UK Parliament


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are you trying to get people to back no deal now? What's good for the CBI is good for the proles eh?


No deal is great for me.  I'm against brexit because of the harm it will do but E&W voted for it so they should get it, the people have spoken, hell mend them.


----------



## CRI (Feb 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I see and hear no deal cunts everywhere, online, on the radio, and in the pubs.



Don't forget quite a few of the "people" on social media pushing extolling the virtues of No Deal are paid bots/trolls/shills.  Easy to spot them, but people still engage with them, which lends "legitimacy" to their message - messages amplified as well by real people, whether it's because they "just want to get on with it" (don't shilly shally with possible reprieves or pardons, just hang me now!) and probably have no clue or are in denial about what "no deal" will entail, "what, I thought it would be same as before with just fewer dark people and people who don't talk English."  

This is I don't think another vote is the answer.  They still haven't prosecuted most of those involved in rigging the last referendum.  There's still masses of cash being pumped into micro targeting "No Deal" on social media and no one knows where that's coming from.  And too few people seem to have any clue what No Deal actually means - still fingers in their ears, dismissing it as project fear as businesses and resources bleed out from the UK.  It's just a fucking mess and we're all pretty screwed whatever happens.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I read this week that WTO rules are very similar to EU rules in terms of state aid etc, the main difference is the court governing the process is slower to act.
> ?
> 
> 
> ...



Aye, don't see the Remain wing of the Tory party going along with that. If it got close to it I think they'd support Yvette Cooper's A50 extension amendment thing.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 15, 2019)

CRI said:


> Don't forget quite a few of the "people" on social media pushing extolling the virtues of No Deal are paid bots/trolls/shills.  Easy to spot them, but people still engage with them, which lends "legitimacy" to their message - messages amplified as well by real people, whether it's because they "just want to get on with it" (don't shilly shally with possible reprieves or pardons, just hang me now!) and probably have no clue or are in denial about what "no deal" will entail, "what, I thought it would be same as before with just fewer dark people and people who don't talk English."
> 
> This is I don't think another vote is the answer.  They still haven't prosecuted most of those involved in rigging the last referendum.  There's still masses of cash being pumped into micro targeting "No Deal" on social media and no one knows where that's coming from.  And too few people seem to have any clue what No Deal actually means - still fingers in their ears, dismissing it as project fear as businesses and resources bleed out from the UK.  It's just a fucking mess and we're all pretty screwed whatever happens.




I'm on a few forums with real people who constantly spout "NO DEAL! out now and on WTO terms" i left one forum becuse they are all fucking idiots.


----------



## CRI (Feb 15, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> No deal is great for me.  I'm against brexit because of the harm it will do but E&W voted for it so they should get it, the people have spoken, hell mend them.


On that point, I've been shocked how many people who were die hard "no" supporters in the 2014 referendum who are now calling for Scottish Independence.  I guess even if you're not a nationalist, it sounds a better alternative to the shit that's most likely in store otherwise.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 15, 2019)

CRI said:


> Don't forget quite a few of the "people" on social media pushing extolling the virtues of No Deal are paid bots/trolls/shills.  Easy to spot them, but people still engage with them, which lends "legitimacy" to their message - messages amplified as well by real people, whether it's because they "just want to get on with it" (don't shilly shally with possible reprieves or pardons, just hang me now!) and probably have no clue or are in denial about what "no deal" will entail, "what, I thought it would be same as before with just fewer dark people and people who don't talk English."
> 
> This is I don't think another vote is the answer.  They still haven't prosecuted most of those involved in rigging the last referendum.  There's still masses of cash being pumped into micro targeting "No Deal" on social media and no one knows where that's coming from.  And too few people seem to have any clue what No Deal actually means - still fingers in their ears, dismissing it as project fear as businesses and resources bleed out from the UK.  It's just a fucking mess and we're all pretty screwed whatever happens.



Here we go, more bot conspiraloonery


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 15, 2019)

interesting elision of bot/shill though. People who disagree with me are not actually wrong, they are not real people. You can tell by the way they speak/measuring the skull.


----------



## CRI (Feb 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I'm on a few forums with real people who constantly spout "NO DEAL! out now and on WTO terms" i left one forum becuse they are all fucking idiots.



Definitely real people - and they're the ones who'd be voting, but also definitely evidence that messages are being egged along by bots and trolls and microtargeted messages.  People put so much of their personal shit on line these days that they're like sitting ducks.  But yes, it's the ones who vote that are a worry.



SpackleFrog said:


> Here we go, more bot conspiraloonery


Pal, there are people who monitor bot and troll activity online and report where there are spikes around certain hashtags and themes, where they originate, etc.  If you think they're lying and just doing it for shits and giggles, that's up to you.  Three wise monkeys and all.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 15, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> interesting elision of bot/shill though. People who disagree with me are not actually wrong, they are not real people. You can tell by the way they speak/measuring the skull.


To be fair, "bot" accounts can be and are used by humans to post to sometimes, it's just that the majority of their activity is automated (and their claimed identity is fake). That automation is written by humans, too. It is easy to spot if you look at their whole profile, but actually can be hard just from one post, because Twitter has so many humans who post on autopilot.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2019)

CRI said:


> Pal


it's always struck me as strange that nine times out of ten, if not nineteen out of twenty, people who call you mate or pal mean no friendship - quite the contrary - despite their claim of amity


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 15, 2019)

it's very much the opposite of _ya bastard_ or _y'old cow_


----------



## two sheds (Feb 15, 2019)

How does the EU stand on renationalizing? Not really state aid. Germany renationalized the Federal Printing Office  Germany Renationalizes Debt-Ridden Federal Printing Office | DW | 11.09.2008, and Italy was talking about nationalizing Alitalia.

Would renationalizing the rail system be adjudged to affect other countries, for example?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's always struck me as strange that nine times out of ten, if not nineteen out of twenty, people who call you mate or pal mean no friendship - quite the contrary - despite their claim of amity


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's always struck me as strange that nine times out of ten, if not nineteen out of twenty, people who call you mate or pal mean no friendship - quite the contrary - despite their claim of amity



Good insight there, pal.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 15, 2019)

_Listen mate_


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

CRI said:


> On that point, I've been shocked how many people who were die hard "no" supporters in the 2014 referendum who are now calling for Scottish Independence.  I guess even if you're not a nationalist, it sounds a better alternative to the shit that's most likely in store otherwise.


Good.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 15, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> No deal is great for me.  I'm against brexit because of the harm it will do but E&W voted for it so they should get it, the people have spoken, hell mend them.


Not sure what that's got to do with the head of the CBI but I'm happy for you.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's a mistake to mistake the obsessions of people on twitter for anything other than the obsessions of people on twitter tbh.


This, a thousand times this.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Not sure what that's got to do with the head of the CBI but I'm happy for you.


It didn't have anything to do with the head of the CBI, it was you that said that.  Caroline Fairbairn is the head of the CBI, she's the DG.

Anyway...the echo chamber is agreeing that no-one should go on twitter.


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

That's not what I said, ta.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> That's not what I said, ta.


What's not what you said?


----------



## two sheds (Feb 15, 2019)

That


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

No one should go on twitter

no one should go on twitter

no one should go on twitter

no one should go on twitter


----------



## brogdale (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> No one should go on twitter
> 
> no one should go on twitter
> 
> ...


#NoOneShouldGoOnTwitter


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> No one should go on twitter
> 
> no one should go on twitter
> 
> ...


Anytime you want to supply a quote of me saying you said something that you didn't say...feel free. 

Tell you what...I'll file this in the same bin as the CBI shite that I didn't say...carry on.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2019)

It was some other echo chamber somewhere else. Not on this thread. That was just a coincidence.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> No one should go on twitter
> 
> no one should go on twitter
> 
> ...


Twutter's been pissed all over despite your advice


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 15, 2019)

I don't think anyone should go on twitter either.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 15, 2019)

Any time...


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2019)

I don’t think I should go on Twitter.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Feb 15, 2019)

there are some good parrots on Twitter


----------



## killer b (Feb 15, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It was some other echo chamber somewhere else. Not on this thread. That was just a coincidence.


She goes to another school. You wouldn't know her.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 15, 2019)

killer b said:


> She goes to another school. You wouldn't know her.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 15, 2019)

Sky news just rambling on about a No Deal exit and it’s implications on the Irish border, showing a film of lorries driving over the border, one loaded with gas cylinders and another hauling bags of fertiliser.
My pants are slightly damp. Is this more subliminal messaging?


----------



## elbows (Feb 16, 2019)

Sounds like Williamsons shitty speech this week has won a booby prize in the 'how to win trade deals and influence people' category.

Hammond's visit to China not going ahead



> A visit to China by Chancellor Phillip Hammond has been called off amid reports a speech by the UK's defence secretary angered Beijing.
> 
> There were plans for trade talks between Mr Hammond and senior Chinese government figures during the brief visit next week.
> 
> ...


----------



## Badgers (Feb 16, 2019)

Taking back control 

Brexit: New UK investments in the EU are growing, while new EU investments here fall


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 16, 2019)

elbows said:


> Sounds like Williamsons shitty speech this week has won a booby prize in the 'how to win trade deals and influence people' category.
> 
> Hammond's visit to China not going ahead



A shame Boris Johnson is no longer in post to fix things ...


----------



## Wilf (Feb 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> A shame Boris Johnson is no longer in post to fix things ...


Brexit/No Deal 'planning' must be a thing to behold in government at the moment. A mixture of Yes Minister, headless chickens and Corporal Jones. Hopefully there's a The Thick of it Special in production.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Brexit/No Deal 'planning' must be a thing to behold in government at the moment. A mixture of Yes Minister, headless chickens and Corporal Jones. Hopefully there's a The Thick of it Special in production.


The very thick of it


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> A shame Boris Johnson is no longer in post to fix things ...


Probably for the best, we'd be at war if he was


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Probably for the best, we'd be at war if he was



We would have already lost it!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 16, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> We would have already lost it!


By no means, the royal navy would still be steaming round the world, taking on the occasional trawler as an homage to the imperial Russian navy


----------



## T & P (Feb 16, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> A shame Boris Johnson is no longer in post to fix things ...


We could still send Prince Philip as a goodwill ambassador to smooth things out though, now that he's giving up driving and will be itching for a new pastime...


----------



## killer b (Feb 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think the tactic reflects the coalition of interests that make up Labour's base - presenting any _distinctive alternative_ would have damaged that coalition: indeed, now that an attempt at distinctive alternative _has_ been presented, they've taken an immediate 5% hit across the polls.


Or maybe they didn't take a 5% hit  after all and it was statistical noise. Fuck knows tbh.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> A mixture of Yes Minister, headless chickens and Corporal Jones.


----------



## mauvais (Feb 16, 2019)

Flybmi (for clarity, not Flybe) have gone bust, blaming Brexit. Probably closer to the 'would have happened anyway' set than some others.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 16, 2019)

Planes were flying half full. Not how you make money with planes.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 16, 2019)

Jobs though.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Jobs though.



True and however many jobs are lost due to Brexit I can predict there will still be full employment in the Houses of Commons and Lords. The MPs and sitting Lords for clarity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 16, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> True and however many jobs are lost due to Brexit I can predict there will still be full employment in the Houses of Commons and Lords. The MPs and sitting Lords for clarity.


Of course.

If you were to measure brexit purely in numbers of jobs lost/created...it's already a disaster.

And we're not even talking about automation/internet job losses that are crushing jobs all over the west...this is self-inflicted.   It's insane.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 17, 2019)

Should I book flights to Spain before or after Brexit?

What say you boffins?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Should I book flights to Spain before or after Brexit?
> 
> What say you boffins?



probably before. It there's a crash out, the pound's value will drop - meaning foreign holidays will be more expensive.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Should I book flights to Spain before or after Brexit?
> 
> What say you boffins?


What's wrong with Margate; you enemy of the people.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What's wrong with Margate; you enemy of the people.



My family lives in Spain not Margate, I could ask them to move I guess, if I believe in Brexit etc


----------



## Wilf (Feb 17, 2019)

One for the historians: is this the ultimate in terms of '_Parliament Being Totally Shit at Sorting Stuff Out'?_

Parliament has had its chaotic moments before - Repeal of the Corn Laws/Famine (split the Tories), Irish Home Rule (took decades and several bills) Leaders/PMs getting booted out (Chamberlain for example). But has there ever been anything as hopeless as the last 2 years in terms of complete inability to agree _anything_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> One for the historians: is this the ultimate in terms of '_Parliament Being Totally Shit at Sorting Stuff Out'?_
> 
> Parliament has had its chaotic moments before - Repeal of the Corn Laws/Famine (split the Tories), Irish Home Rule (took decades and several bills) Leaders/PMs getting booted out (Chamberlain for example). But has there ever been anything as hopeless as the last 2 years in terms of complete inability to agree _anything_?


House of Lords reform
But the last two years show how utterly inept politicians of all stripes are and fill the heart with apprehension that these soon to be former people won't be able to construct the world's premier infrastructure project, the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge

They'll need to be at the peak of their game for that


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 17, 2019)

Don't know if it's already been posted, but in case there was any doubt whatsoever about the Naked Oxbridge Lecturer is a smug, patronising prat who loves the smell of their own farts...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That should put the shits up the DUP.



Can you put the shits up shits?


----------



## rekil (Feb 17, 2019)

I'm not clicking that and I never want to hear another word about this wretched person ever again.


----------



## killer b (Feb 17, 2019)

copliker said:


> I'm not clicking that and I never want to hear another word about this wretched person ever again.


A post for all the ages.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 17, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> however many jobs are lost due to Brexit I can predict there will still be full employment in the Houses of Commons and Lords.


Part-time employment, surely?


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 17, 2019)

copliker said:


> I'm not clicking that and I never want to hear another word about this wretched person ever again.



I watched it <  +  at self > so that you didn't have to. Owen Jones's questions were reasonable(ish), I thought.

But her answers shed very little light on Brexit whatsover, IMO. And not a lot on feminism either, I don't think.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't know if it's already been posted, but in case there was any doubt whatsoever about the Naked Oxbridge Lecturer is a smug, patronising prat who loves the smell of their own farts...



The word 'Brexit' doesn't seem to have been programmed into youtube's auto-captioning system yet.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 18, 2019)

Why is this person naked?


----------



## Raheem (Feb 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Why is this person naked?


No no no. Why is everyone else dressed?


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 18, 2019)

_


TopCat said:



			Why is this person naked?
		
Click to expand...


Because without a trade deal we're all naked in the face of international blah_

something like that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Why is this person naked?


the emperor's new clothes


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 162229


the 29th of march will be


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

So, does the departure of the unholy 7 affect the various Brexit vote numbers? At one level, they'll be desperate to vote differently to Labour now, just because, to make it look like it was worth leaving the party etc. But I can't think of a scenario on any _significant_ vote where they would end up voting for some version of May's deal. However if May did move a few inches towards Corbyn's letter and Labour whipped their MPs to vote for a deal, they'd certainly vote against _that_. However, fwiw, I don't think Labour supporting 'May's deal + a sprinkling of worker's rights' is a likely scenario anyway. 

It certainly weakens Labour's ability to get any kind of purchase on the Brexit process - with this lot there must be about 8/9 ex-Labour independents now. But it doesn't necessarily strengthen May. I think. Perhaps.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

Keeps the tories in power in the post-brexit general election.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 18, 2019)

Boris Johnson's sister has stripped off for Brexit


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Keeps the tories in power in the post-brexit general election.


How many of the 7 do you think would keep their seats in a hypothetical GE, or even split the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> How many of the 7 do you think would keep their seats in a hypothetical GE, or even split the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent?


none of them


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> none of them


That would be my guess, but i'd be interested to hear from anyone who wants to argue otherwise


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> That would be my guess, but i'd be interested to hear from anyone who wants to argue otherwise




4 of them then.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 4 of them then.


If the real tory candidate stood aside, maybe.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't know if it's already been posted, but in case there was any doubt whatsoever about the Naked Oxbridge Lecturer is a smug, patronising prat who loves the smell of their own farts...



Naked Rambler must be thinking, 'that could have been me. All I needed was an education at both Cambridge and Oxford and a fellowship at Gonville and Caius, but all I got was this lousy Barlinnie T-Shirt'.


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 4 of them then.


I was hoping someone might be prepared to make an argument, not just pluck a number out of the air


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> I was hoping someone might be prepared to make an argument, not just pluck a number out of the air


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 18, 2019)

I guess we'll just have to wait for someone (naming no names) to find a twitter post that takes the place of his (or her) opinion.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

Suppose the ones that have the most chance of keeping their seat are - statement of the obvious - the ones with the largest leave vote. However it doesn't follow that having a large majority from 2017 helps them. They will be pitching for non-Labour votes. Can't be bothered looking the numbers up. More to the point, we can't predict the circumstances the next election will take place in (or indeed when). 

So.… 2 of them will _definitely_ keep their seats.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I guess we'll just have to wait for someone (naming no names) to find a twitter post that takes the place of his (or her) opinion.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Suppose the ones that have the most chance of keeping their seat are - statement of the obvious - the ones with the largest leave vote. However it doesn't follow that having a large majority from 2017 helps them. They will be pitching for non-Labour votes. Can't be bothered looking the numbers up. More to the point, we can't predict the circumstances the next election will take place in (or indeed when).
> 
> So.… 2 of them will _definitely_ keep their seats.


That would depend on those leave voters being as utterly consumed with opposing brexit to the opposition of other issues as the media-lib-left. And i can't see it in any of them. That is a very restricted profile. Voters have other shit to deal with. Polly ain't.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That would depend on those leave voters being as utterly consumed with opposing brexit to the opposition of other issues as the media-lib-left. And i can't see it in any of them. That is a very restricted profile. Voters have other shit to deal with. Polly ain't.


Yeah, an election at some point towards 2022 looks more like a business as usual election, with voters voting along normal lines (admittedly, in an economy being shaped by a slightly different version of neo-liberalism). In that scenario, the 7 get swept away. An election called say next Autumn allows them to wring out the last few drops and justify their existence a tad more.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Suppose the ones that have the most chance of keeping their seat are - statement of the obvious - the ones with the largest leave vote. However it doesn't follow that having a large majority from 2017 helps them. They will be pitching for non-Labour votes. Can't be bothered looking the numbers up. More to the point, we can't predict the circumstances the next election will take place in (or indeed when).
> 
> So.… 2 of them will _definitely_ keep their seats.



To be fair since they're obviously gonna be pushing hard to revoke A50 and cancel Brexit I think it might be the other way round. Angela Smith is _fooked _in Stocksbridge and Peniston. Although could just as easily go Tory as Labour. 




DotCommunist said:


> I guess we'll just have to wait for someone (naming no names) to find a twitter post that takes the place of his (or her) opinion.



Sorry to be that guy...

I have read on Twitter (so it must be true) that they've registered the Independent Group as a private company rather than a party. Which suggests this isn't the party yet. Negotiations with Tory's, Lib Dems and anyone else who isn't fussed about the company they keep presumably on the way. 

I have also read that they have a "ten year plan", don't mind losing their seats and are going to target key marginals after that. Which sounds a bit more far fetched.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> that they've registered the Independent Group as a private company rather than a party


I saw this, it keeps donations private apparently.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I saw this, it keeps donations private apparently.



Private donations essential if they are to secure those all important 4 Remainiac Tory MP's.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I saw this, it keeps donations private apparently.


Can only imagine that they're trying to rake in some dodgy, right-wing £ before declaring as a party. Once they do register as a party they're bound by Electoral law on donor/loan transparency.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I have also read that they have a "ten year plan", don't mind losing their seats and are going to target key marginals after that. Which sounds a bit more far fetched.



Targeting marginals means making it more likely a tory or lib-dem will win doesn't it, given that tory voters are not going to be so daft as to go near them. _Only _tories and lib-dems can benefit from that. Makes that decision to hide the money a bit more interesting that.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 18, 2019)

Honda closing it's only UK plant. 3,500 jobs (at least double that with suppliers etc.)

That Labour party crisis though, eh!


----------



## Poi E (Feb 18, 2019)

Oh no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> Honda closing it's only UK plant. 3,500 jobs (at least double that with suppliers etc.)
> 
> That Labour party crisis though, eh!


details here Honda to stun ministers with closure of Swindon factory


----------



## T & P (Feb 18, 2019)

I'll save people some time by posting this now

''Part of the expected temporary downturn that Brexit will bring about, things will get back to normal in no time, plant closure nothing to do with Brexit'' etc etc.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 18, 2019)

Nissan next, I suppose.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> details here Honda to stun ministers with closure of Swindon factory


Chucky'll be gutted if this knocks their treachery down the news agenda.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 18, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Chucky'll be gutted if this knocks their treachery down the news agenda.


and finally...


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

Swindon was one of the first areas in the country to declare a result, which saw 61,745 (54.7%) vote to leave.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 4 of them then.


Which ones? 



andysays said:


> How many of the 7 do you think would keep their seats in a hypothetical GE, or even split the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent?


Umunna and Berger might have some type of individual following and take some votes, but I still can see them keeping their seats


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Chucky'll be gutted if this knocks their treachery down the news agenda.


i'll tell you who'll be chuffed with chucky and his nefandous pals, zuckerberg, who will be pleased to see the parliamentary report about facebook dumped down the agenda. have chucky and his foul cohorts taken zuckerberg's zlotys?


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll tell you who'll be chuffed with chucky and his nefandous pals, zuckerberg, who will be pleased to see the parliamentary report about facebook dumped down the agenda. have chucky and his foul cohorts taken zuckerberg's zlotys?


They agree with Nick?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Which ones?
> 
> 
> Umunna and Berger might have some type of individual following and take some votes, but I still can see them keeping their seats



I duno, just a guess. i don't even care or know who the 7 are apart from the main one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They agree with Nick?


which nick?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I duno, just a guess. i don't even care or know who the 7 are apart from the main one.


some of them don't even know themselves


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> some of them don't even know themselves



Seems like a good day to bury Brexit news to me.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> which nick?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 162258


i'd quite erased him from my mind


----------



## mwgdrwg (Feb 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Swindon was one of the first areas in the country to declare a result, which saw 61,745 (54.7%) vote to leave.



I think it was Sunderland that was actually first, where over 60% voted leave.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd quite erased him from my mind



I always knew that you were never a Clegg nut!


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

Must be a bit depressing for the guardian. For all the squawking they've been doing about splits, all the breathless reporting of potential rebels, shadow cabinet divides, votes of no confidence in Corbyn... _just seven. _


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Must be a bit depressing for the guardian. For all the squawking they've been doing about splits, all the breathless reporting of potential rebels, shadow cabinet divides, votes of no confidence in Corbyn... _just seven. _


Yeah, but feel the quality.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 18, 2019)

The Insignificant Seven.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

The Independent Group: Strategy Notes

Step 1 Press Conference. Check.
Step 2 Website - already wonky
Step 3 Naked Appearance on Good Morning Britain. It's the only way for the middle classes to get their voice heard on Brexit, but risks looking like a Calendar with only 7 months in the year.
Step 4 - claim wheelbarrow full of money after losing seats.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 18, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> I think it was Sunderland that was actually first, where over 60% voted leave.




8th was Swindon... can't find who was first.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> That would be my guess, but i'd be interested to hear from anyone who wants to argue otherwise


People vote Labour for one of 2 reasons either they want the Labour candidate to win or they don't want the Labour candidate to win but want any of others even less. If you live in a safe seat you can
effectively vote none of the above by not voting. 6 of these are in safe Labour seats 60-70% plus share of the vote only Smith is in a marginal where she might pick up enough disillusioned Labour voters plus
other parties plus the floaters to stand a chance. Chuka probably has the biggest name recognition so maybe outside chance for him as well but were I a betting man Smith is the only one worth putting money on. 
It all depends on what happens next, more could leave or it could trigger a bit of a civil war but if it's just these 7 then I would suggest 6 of them and probably all 7 won't last past 2022.
This is another nail in the coffin of Corbyn's hope for an early GE but that particular coffin lid is firmly nailed down enough as it is.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> This is another nail in the coffin of Corbyn's hope for an early GE but that particular coffin lid is firmly nailed down enough as it is.


 This certainly.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> The Insignificant Seven.



The Scabby Seven


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> This certainly.



Dunno about that actually. They haven't registered a new party yet, so it's hard to make concrete predictions until they do, but if the Tories believe that such a party would split the Labour vote like the SDP did in 1983 then it would probably embolden them to go for one. Corbyn has two routes to an early GE; either a mass movement to force an election or the Tories believing they could win one.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

Running dogs.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The Scabby Seven



I’d get passionate and angry toward scabs. This lot are just dust in the wind.


----------



## TopCat (Feb 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yeah, but feel the quality.


Distinct seconds.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Dunno about that actually. They haven't registered a new party yet, so it's hard to make concrete predictions until they do, but if the Tories believe that such a party would split the Labour vote like the SDP did in 1983 then it would probably embolden them to go for one. Corbyn has two routes to an early GE; either a mass movement to force an election or the Tories believing they could win one.


Yeah, if May goes after Brexit/non-Brexit the new leader may call an election at some point, though they'd be worried after 2017 and they'd also be accused of doing politics at a sensitive time for the economy. So, dunno.  Suppose the 7 come into that calculation if they get a few more MPs and, crucially, some kind of organisation in seats around the country. I don't see much chance of that. Perhaps the practical outcome will be an agreement with the Libdems not to oppose each other whenever the next GE comes.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 18, 2019)

If another party does evolve will we see the return of David Miliband?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 18, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If another party does evolve will we see the return of David Miliband?


this time as farce


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, if May goes after Brexit/non-Brexit the new leader may call an election at some point, though they'd be worried after 2017 and they'd also be accused of doing politics at a sensitive time for the economy. So, dunno.  Suppose the 7 come into that calculation if they get a few more MPs and, crucially, some kind of organisation in seats around the country. I don't see much chance of that. Perhaps the practical outcome will be an agreement with the Libdems not to oppose each other whenever the next GE comes.



Don't rule out a GE with May as leader - winning a majority is about the only way she's gonna get her deal through. It might seem daft but her other options are 'cancel Brexit' or 'prepare for no deal'. 

You've got to assume these 7 are hoping to add Lib Dems and a couple of Tories to their party. Soubry for example. They surely can't think they're going anywhere if they don't.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 18, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If another party does evolve will we see the return of David Miliband?



Maybe even Blair


----------



## mauvais (Feb 18, 2019)

mwgdrwg said:


> Honda closing it's only UK plant. 3,500 jobs (at least double that with suppliers etc.)
> 
> That Labour party crisis though, eh!


There's a critical mass to UK mass production car manufacturing - UK-based supply chain that requires multiple manufacturing sites to be viable. Same sort of thing as America where in the economic crash, the comparatively healthy Ford feared the collapse of GM and/or Chrysler because it would do sufficient damage to the domestic supply ecosystem that it would kill them too.

Enough is going wrong of late that, if unchecked, it's probably close to the end of a significant industry in the UK. There's nearly a million jobs in the UK dependent on it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> How many of the 7 do you think would keep their seats in a hypothetical GE, or even split the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent?


By 'electorally significant' do you mean losing by even more? 

Anyway this is a message from one of the ones who left because of alleged racism in the Labour party.


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> By 'electorally significant' do you mean losing by even more



What I had in mind was that they split the Labour vote to the extent that another candidate won the seat, but someone else might have another, equally valid, idea of what 'electorally significant' means.

So, do you have any answer to my question, or are you going to continue to avoid expressing an opinion of your own?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> ...So, do you have any answer to my question, or are you going to continue to avoid expressing an opinion of your own?



You're *replying* to my opinion, you dumb cunt.



DexterTCN said:


> Keeps the tories in power in the post-brexit general election.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 18, 2019)

You realise that these are different posts dexter. No, of course you don't.


----------



## andysays (Feb 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You're *replying* to my opinion, you dumb cunt.


But *how* are they going to keep the tories in power in your hypothetical post-Brexit general election?

By keeping their seats in a hypothetical GE, or splitting the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent, and if so who and where, or by some other means yet to be revealed?


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> But *how* are they going to keep the tories in power in your hypothetical post-Brexit general election?
> 
> By keeping their seats in a hypothetical GE, or splitting the Labour vote to an electorally significant extent, and if so who and where, or by some other means yet to be revealed?


Just clarify first, cheers.

When you were being a dick and calling me out for not giving an opinion...you were in fact replying to me posting my opinion, yeah?


----------



## CRI (Feb 18, 2019)

HM Gov is still chucking out advisory notices at a rate of knots.  This one is about the export of organic food outside the UK in the event of a (probably now inevitable) no deal Brexit.  According to this article from last year, about 10% of organically certified UK produced food and drink is exported, mostly to the EU, but that is still worth £2.2b in trade involving quite a few small firms.  The notice says explicitly that this will become 0 in the event of No Deal.



> Unless an equivalency deal is reached with the EU, or your UK control body is recognised by the EU, you will not be able to export organic food or feed to the EU.



Suspect organic farming will go under eventually anyhow, especially when that new fangled trade deal with the US compels the UK to import hormone and antibiotic pumped, chlorine washed meat, high fructose corn sweetened everything and all the other dodgy food produced in the US.  Lovely!


----------



## elbows (Feb 18, 2019)

It seems that in the not too distant past, Angela was concerned about renationalising water, lest this development bring a funny tinge to the environment. 



> In October 2018, Smith challenged the policy of her party over the proposed re-nationalisation of the domestic water sector. She argued that taking water out of private ownership risked 'cutting investment in the sector to raise environmental standards'. Smith’s register of interests for 2016 show that she and her husband, whom she employs as her senior parliamentary researcher, were treated to football matches and dinner three times by Whitehouse Construction, a subcontractor to Anglian Water.



Angela Smith (Sheffield MP) - Wikipedia


----------



## elbows (Feb 18, 2019)

Oops I had meant to stick that in a different thread, sorry.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

Something that hasn't been mentioned, I think, is the withdrawal of the right to work.

It's not specifically EU based but I do think that perhaps it's brexit based.   Certainly part of the concept of brexit, whether certain chambers agree or not.

As part of my job as a tax collector I see lots of trends.  Increases in self-employment 2 decades or so ago when so many EU nationals came over (CIS was created because if this, for those in the know), aggressive pursuit of tax credit overpayments stood out.  Lots of EU nationals who were self-employed then leaving (no address, no tax return, no job, no benefits or tax credits generally means they're gone but many also phone from abroad to settle their debts).  They've definitely been trends I've seen/am seeing.  A flow in and now a flow out (and a much more aggressive debt recovery program all over which attacks all of the lower paid).

But the recent trend has been the refusal to work...it's for non-EU residents of the UK so wouldn't come up in EUy/brexity discussion (I didn't think about it myself and I knew it).

Loads of them are being refused the right to work.  Really good earners, people who do £50/100k plus jobs, hard to replace jobs, as well as low/normal earners.  In some cases they're not allowed to have money put into their bank accounts.  This is from discussion with some of them, I've not checked legislation.

Absolutely LOADS from India.


----------



## zahir (Feb 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> But the recent trend has been the refusal to work...it's for non-EU residents of the UK so wouldn't come up in EUy/brexity discussion (I didn't think about it myself and I knew it).
> 
> Loads of them are being refused the right to work.  Really good earners, people who do £50/100k plus jobs, hard to replace jobs, as well as low/normal earners.  In some cases they're not allowed to have money put into their bank accounts.  This is from discussion with some of them, I've not checked legislation.
> 
> Absolutely LOADS from India.



Any idea what reasons are being given for this?


----------



## CRI (Feb 18, 2019)

Christ on a bike.  

Sajid Javid warns EU counterparts of joint policing 'disruption'



> The home secretary, Sajid Javid, has urged his EU counterparts to prepare for the eventuality that current joint policing systems could discontinue on 30 March because of a no-deal Brexit.





> He also warns that there is, as yet, no deal in place for sharing of airline passenger data, critical in the fight against criminals and terrorists who flee to another country to escape the law.





> The letter comes just days after a police chief warned that a no-deal Brexit would damage police powers to detain foreign suspects and leave British fugitives in Europe beyond the law.





> Steve Peers, professor of EU law and human rights law at the University of Essex, said: “The home secretary’s letter admits what many law enforcement practitioners had warned: leaving the EU without an agreement leads to ‘less efficient’ and more costly methods of cooperation between justice and law enforcement officials.”



Suspect it's going to be really shitty for anyone traveling in or out of the UK after 29th March, and probably for some time.  Since they haven't got anything in place at the UK Border, looks like they'll either just wave everyone through after cursory checks  or conversely, go meticulously through their "pencil and paper" back up system, leaving people queuing for miles.  

Methinks EU countries won't have much confidence in the UK's slap dash efforts, so get ready for long waits and possible rejections trying to get into the EU.  I'm sure they'll all be buoyed along by that Dunkirk/Blitz spirit, or something.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

zahir said:


> Any idea what reasons are being given for this?


I'd rather hear other people's.


----------



## zahir (Feb 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I'd rather hear other people's.



There’s a new immigration bill going through as a consequence of brexit so I imagine it’s connected to that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

zahir said:


> There’s a new immigration bill as a consequence of brexit going through so I imagine it’s connected to that.


oh this is already happening...whatever is currently going through enactment will be worse I'd expect


----------



## zahir (Feb 18, 2019)

Maybe related to this?

Where is UK labour migration policy heading after Brexit? - UK in a changing Europe


> Perhaps the most radical proposal in the White Paper is the introduction of strict limits on the duration of migrant workers’ stays in the UK.





> proponents of strictly temporary migration see it as a way for the government to satisfy employer demand for workers without adding to the long-term growth of the migrant population and without taking responsibility for workers’ long-term prospects for integration.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 18, 2019)

zahir said:


> Maybe related to this?
> 
> Where is UK labour migration policy heading after Brexit? - UK in a changing Europe


I wasn't aware of most of that but it fits the pattern.



> One interesting feature of the government’s immigration plan is that it studiously avoids giving employers in lower-paid jobs the administrative duties—and also the power over their workers—that comes with sponsorship.



Keeping that for themselves no doubt.  Still...only the foreign working class, charity begins at home and all that.

(and now someone will be offensive and their mate will move the goalposts...)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 18, 2019)

Cabinet ministers tell May: stop using no-deal threat to negotiate

pressure on may from within the cabinet to rule out no deal as a negotiating tactic- citing damage it is already doing to business. i would say this pressure is only going to increase  to the point where may is going to have to seek a suspension in the A50 process if she cant get her deal through - but which would also mean mps are far more likely to vote against it (again) if there is no fear of crashing out.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 19, 2019)

xenon said:


> For anyone else who didn't hear LBC this morning, , Farage was going on about the desirability of buying British food. Support your local farmer etc etc. Brexit making this all the more possible of course. Never mind that the economist hard brexiters love siting, Proph Patrick Minford,  has said a no deal would likely lead to the desimation of British farming and manufacturing and that this is a good thing because cheap Austrailian beef and more sweat shop goods can be imported.


“Economists for Brexit” group leader Professor Patrick Minford:
"[car industry] "...you are going to have to run it down. It will be in your interests to do it, just as in the same way we ran down the coal and steel industries. These things happen as evolution takes place in your economy."
The devastating future for Welsh manufacturing predicted by a Brexit economist


----------



## Poi E (Feb 19, 2019)

History repeating itself, first as tragedy etc


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 19, 2019)

Wales is propper fucked.


----------



## editor (Feb 19, 2019)




----------



## CRI (Feb 20, 2019)

I'm sure this is fine.

Met police spending on plastic bullets triples in a year



> The Met police have tripled their spending on plastic bullets in a single year, according to figures seen by the Guardian.





> The figures have emerged amid growing fears about the potential for a no-deal Brexit to result in civil disorder. Last month, the Guardian learned that almost 1,000 police officers from England and Scotland were due to begin training for deployment in Northern Ireland in case of trouble in the event of no deal.





> An official report into policing of the August 2011 disturbances in English cities revealed police had wanted to fire plastic bullets at rioters in south London but were unable to do so because specialist units had been deployed elsewhere in the capital. The Met’s response to the riots also revealed the force had increased its capacity since the riots “to make more agile use” of the weapons.  Plastic bullets have been linked to the deaths in Northern Ireland of at least 17 people, eight of whom were children.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 20, 2019)

It's nothing to do with Brexit. We would have all been shot with rubber bullets anyway. It's a cyclical thing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 20, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's nothing to do with Brexit. We would have all been shot with rubber bullets anyway. It's a cyclical thing.


Yup. Completely tenuous.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 20, 2019)

Till everyone has to dress like this.


----------



## CRI (Feb 20, 2019)

Isn't the, "1,000 police officers from England and Scotland were due to begin training for deployment to Northern Ireland," just a tad concerning as well?  I mean 25 years ago, that wouldn't have sounded too strange, but now, well . . .


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 20, 2019)

The new “independent group” which is gathering MPs from labour and conservatives feels like a significant moment in how Brexit will play out. It will not take many more to jump ship before Mrs May has a minority in parliament (even with help from the DUP).

So is the path out of this mess going to be (1) Brexit delay due to lack of deal being voted through within parliament, followed by (2) election due to lack of functioning majority in parliament followed by (3) second referendum due to the pro-remain “independent group” winning a substantial number of seats in the next parliament?

If this can gets kicked far enough down the road, all the objections to a second referendum can be dismissed with the excuse that “public opinion appears to have changed”. For that to stick, there needs to actually be a pro-EU party winning a good amount of seats at an election, and this more than anything else, seems to me to be what’s causing this breakaway “independent group” of MPs to act now.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 20, 2019)

I was surprised to hear there are 11 libdems left - so they would make the numbers up to 22 ...


----------



## Chz (Feb 20, 2019)

I should email my LD MP and convince him to leave. Not that I think he'd listen to me, but I'm sure it would improve his chances around these parts.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 20, 2019)

Chz said:


> I should email my LD MP and convince him to leave.



Pitchforks and torches work best.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 20, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Pitchforks and torches work best.


They're the traditional way to persuade the yellow scum


----------



## grit (Feb 20, 2019)

CRI said:


> Isn't the, "1,000 police officers from England and Scotland were due to begin training for deployment to Northern Ireland," just a tad concerning as well?  I mean 25 years ago, that wouldn't have sounded too strange, but now, well . . .



Just a tad.


----------



## Chz (Feb 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They're the traditional way to persuade the yellow scum


I seem to be fresh out. Any chance I could borrow a few?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 20, 2019)

Chz said:


> I seem to be fresh out. Any chance I could borrow a few?


Have a job lot, and some tiny violins to play him on his way out


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 20, 2019)

Chz said:


> I should email my LD MP and convince him to leave. Not that I think he'd listen to me



Set up a trail of dog turds with attendant local press photographers that leads from his constituency office to whichever wetherspoons Chuka’s chumps are using as a batcave.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 20, 2019)

CRI said:


> Isn't the, "1,000 police officers from England and Scotland were due to begin training for deployment to Northern Ireland," just a tad concerning as well?  I mean 25 years ago, that wouldn't have sounded too strange, but now, well . . .


25 years ago it would have been astonishing

You don't remember the downing street declaration, do you?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 21, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Feb 21, 2019)

The Kyle/Wilson plan of the house voting for Mays deal, but that deal being put to a national referendum - is that something that can come about as a result of a vote/amendment or does it have to come about by some kind of a right honourable agreement behind the scenes?
And if its a vote, is that going to be tabled next week?


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 21, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The Kyle/Wilson plan of the house voting for Mays deal, but that deal being put to a national referendum - is that something that can come about as a result of a vote/amendment or does it have to come about by some kind of a right honourable agreement behind the scenes?
> And if its a vote, is that going to be tabled next week?



Kyle / Wilson plan seems like a lightly reworded and repackaged peoples vote.  I can't see any leaver going for it, especially those leavers who don't much like May's deal.   Then again there might be a majority for it in the house but I think it would risk a further schism of the tories which May is prepared to do anything to prevent.

I still think a second referendum in any form would just create even bigger divisions and factions in the country.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 21, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Kyle / Wilson plan seems like a lightly reworded and repackaged peoples vote.  I can't see any leaver going for it, especially those leavers who don't much like May's deal.   Then again there might be a majority for it in the house but I think it would risk a further schism of the tories which May is prepared to do anything to prevent.
> 
> I still think a second referendum in any form would just create even bigger divisions and factions in the country.


May well be the case, but I don't really understand the hypothetical path to it happening


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 21, 2019)

CRI said:


> Isn't the, "1,000 police officers from England and Scotland were due to begin training for deployment to Northern Ireland," just a tad concerning as well?  I mean 25 years ago, that wouldn't have sounded too strange, but now, well . . .



Astonishing. I had no idea there were still 1,000 police officers in England and Scotland.


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 21, 2019)

I don’t know what’s happening on the Brexit front, but I’ve noticed over the past few months that whenever it starts to look less likely that Brexit can be delivered on time, the pound strengthens against the euro. Today it’s been flying!

Wonder if news will come out this evening or tomorrow about what’s been taking place in Mrs May’s discussions.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 21, 2019)

Huge billboard in Brussels to remind Theresa May she supported Remain - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Huge billboard in Brussels to remind Theresa May she supported Remain


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> I don’t know what’s happening on the Brexit front, but I’ve noticed over the past few months that whenever it starts to look less likely that Brexit can be delivered on time, the pound strengthens against the euro. Today it’s been flying!


Relatively speaking - but I can't see it ever getting back to 1.40


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 21, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I still think a second referendum in any form would just create even bigger divisions and factions in the country.


Especially if they leave off the "do a runner and fuck the UK for a generation" option ...


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 21, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Huge billboard in Brussels to remind Theresa May she supported Remain - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk
> 
> Huge billboard in Brussels to remind Theresa May she supported Remain


i must see how their crowd funding is going - I had a mind to chip in a fiver...


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 21, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Relatively speaking - but I can't see it ever getting back to 1.40



Yep, it’s all relative. I agree with you that overall the pound is in the gutter.  The best indication possible that the leave campaign’s promises were a pack of lies.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> The new “independent group” which is gathering MPs from labour and conservatives feels like a significant moment in how Brexit will play out. It will not take many more to jump ship before Mrs May has a minority in parliament (even with help from the DUP).
> 
> So is the path out of this mess going to be (1) Brexit delay due to lack of deal being voted through within parliament, followed by (2) election due to lack of functioning majority in parliament followed by (3) second referendum due to the pro-remain “independent group” winning a substantial number of seats in the next parliament?
> 
> If this can gets kicked far enough down the road, all the objections to a second referendum can be dismissed with the excuse that “public opinion appears to have changed”. For that to stick, there needs to actually be a pro-EU party winning a good amount of seats at an election, and this more than anything else, seems to me to be what’s causing this breakaway “independent group” of MPs to act now.



I'm not sure I agree - that you need a pro-EU party to win a lot of seats at least. I certainly don't think the 'Independent Group' will win a lot of seats and I don't see a Remain party winning a lot of seats either. 

I think it's more about spoiling the Labour vote and attempting to pressure May and Corbyn to commit to a second ref and/or Remain.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Yep, it’s all relative. I agree with you that overall the pound is in the gutter.  The best indication possible that the leave campaign’s promises were a pack of lies.



Or that 'the markets' are punishing the British electorate for voting the wrong way. That's usually what happens in these circumstances.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Yep, it’s all relative. I agree with you that overall the pound is in the gutter


Next stop is the grave


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 21, 2019)

I get all
My jobs news from mumsnet before you ask


----------



## zahir (Feb 21, 2019)

Ivan Rogers’ evidence to the EU Select Committee yesterday, with an assessment of where negotiations are up to.

Parliamentlive.tv


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 21, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 21, 2019)

Genius !!


----------



## Badgers (Feb 21, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



Project fear again :rollseyes:


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 21, 2019)

Easiest trade deals ever.

Loads of jobs.   Friends all over the world.  Prestige.  Countries queuing up to suck our dicks.  

Citizenship is now removable.   People have to register and be assessed.  Landlords and employers will have to do it soon.   Non-EU citizens are being deported but it rarely makes more than local news, people who've been here for decades.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 21, 2019)

He looks curiously like a grown-up Gove ... 
With a touch of antiquity like Mogg.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 21, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> He looks curiously like a grown-up Gove ...
> With a touch of antiquity like Mogg.



… with the fingers of a disgraced elderly concert pianist.


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 21, 2019)

I watched that documentary film about Fyre Festival a few days ago and it’s just struck me that Brexit is kind of taking the same path, something that promised much, but lead by a stubborn liar who took no advice and didn’t give themselves enough time to do the job properly, with a disastrous outcome. Uncannily similar.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 22, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I watched that documentary film about Fyre Festival a few days ago and it’s just struck me that Brexit is kind of taking the same path, something that promised much, but lead by a stubborn liar who took no advice and didn’t give themselves enough time to do the job properly, with a disastrous outcome. Uncannily similar.



At least we'll get cheese sandwiches then.


----------



## Ming (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> He looks curiously like a grown-up Gove ...
> With a touch of antiquity like Mogg.



Looks like everything’s going according to plan (he went to my old school).


----------



## MrCurry (Feb 22, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I watched that documentary film about Fyre Festival a few days ago and it’s just struck me that Brexit is kind of taking the same path, something that promised much, but lead by a stubborn liar who took no advice and didn’t give themselves enough time to do the job properly, with a disastrous outcome. Uncannily similar.



Well I hope Theresa May is prepared to suck Junker’s dick to ensure the Evian water can still get into the UK post Brexit day. Maybe that’s what Corby has just rushed over there to do.


----------



## Supine (Feb 22, 2019)

If there is any dick ducking going on I reckon it's Fox trying to get some trade deals


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

I see Corbyn has been over to see the in-laws and is hinting at sticking his neck out a bit more ...
I hope he comes up with the goods because I would have to bite my lip very hard to vote for him currently.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

I hadn't known before that Gove was an orphan brought up by socialists !
And he may have been actually experiencing some genuine cognitive dissonance with regards to his affected pro-insanity stance.

(I really *don't* pay any attention to political stuff until it fucks with my life because it gives me the creeps)


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

Scientists have warned of a grave new cause of global warming, the emission of hot noxious fumes from westminster


----------



## Sue (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I hadn't known before that Gove was an orphan brought up by socialists !
> And he may have been actually experiencing some genuine cognitive dissonance with regards to his affected pro-insanity stance.
> 
> (I really *don't* pay any attention to political stuff until it fucks with my life because it gives me the creeps)


They can't have been that socialist, given he went to a private school.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 22, 2019)

Sue said:


> They can't have been that socialist, given he went to a private school.



They can't have been that socialist, given they didn't gulag the fucker


----------



## OzT (Feb 22, 2019)

Sue said:


> They can't have been that socialist, given he went to a private school.



I think a fair percentage of Labout went to private schools, a lot of their children were/are sent to public schools, including current ministers like Abbot, Chakrabarti and Corbyn. so I don't think style of schooling really reflects political leanings


----------



## Sue (Feb 22, 2019)

OzT said:


> I think a fair percentage of Labout went to private schools, a lot of their children were/are sent to public schools, including current ministers like Abbot, Chakrabarti and Corbyn. so I don't think style of schooling really reflects political leanings



Socialist is different from Labour -- there are possibly socialists in the Labour Party but the Labour Party isn't a socialist party -- but yes, there's a lot of hypocrisy about.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

OzT said:


> I think a fair percentage of Labout went to private schools, a lot of their children were/are sent to public schools, including current ministers like Abbot, Chakrabarti and Corbyn. so I don't think style of schooling really reflects political leanings



It's about 13% for Labour. The problem for 'the left' is sending your kids to private school, not being sent. Well, the main one. The further right you move the more likely you will be to have both attended and sent your own kids to private school. So I would say there's clearly an issue of defence of privilege based on experiences of education at play here.


----------



## OzT (Feb 22, 2019)

Ah thanks for clearing that up Sue. I have always assumed Labour=socialists, Conservatives=capitalists.

Cheers


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

OzT said:


> Ah thanks for clearing that up Sue. I have always assumed Labour=socialists, Conservatives=capitalists.
> 
> Cheers


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

OzT said:


> I think a fair percentage of Labout went to private schools, a lot of their children were/are sent to public schools, including current ministers like Abbot, Chakrabarti and Corbyn. so I don't think style of schooling really reflects political leanings


i think you'll find corbyn's son went to qe boys which was selective but not private


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

OzT said:


> Ah thanks for clearing that up Sue. I have always assumed Labour=socialists, Conservatives=capitalists.
> 
> Cheers


----------



## Poi E (Feb 22, 2019)

Bit of good news. I found the last pub on the way to the sunny uplands of Brexit. Might have missed last orders, mind.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find corbyn's son went to qe boys which was selective but not private


Reckon he meant corbyn himself attending private school.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Bit of good news. I found the last pub on the way to the sunny uplands of Brexit. Might have missed last orders, mind.
> 
> View attachment 162596


elsewhere on junction road, another pub's closed down


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Reckon he meant corbyn himself attending private school.


sure he'll be along to correct me if i'm wrong soon enough


----------



## Wilf (Feb 22, 2019)

Random q: what are your views on the Kyle amendment? It seems to be getting remainers excited, though it only has a chance if Labour decide to back it (presumably). But I'd have thought that if there was to be a vote on May's deal vs staying in, May's deal wins by a bigger % than the 2016 vote. Regardless of views on Brexit, which haven't changed much since then, there's bound to be an element of 'ffs, just get it done'. Might be wrong and stories about car factories might swing it, but I'd have thought it was a poor mechanism for remain.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Random q: what are your views on the Kyle amendment? It seems to be getting remainers excited


They should be so lucky.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

There's an extremely (even for her) stupid piece by Toynbee where she argues that Labour should back May's deal so that it can be put to a "people's vote", and thus be defeated and the UK end up remaining in the EU. Even ignoring the sheer contempt for democracy this idea indicates it seems ludicrous when there aren't even the votes for the 2nd referendum in the HoC. 


> But now Corbyn needs to back the Peter Kyle/Phil Wilson clever compromise. Their plan is for MPs to agree to pass Theresa May’s bad deal, but only on condition it is put to the voters for a final decision. People on both sides of the divide are gathering round this option as the best chance of resolving Brexit, once and for all, whenever May finally holds her meaningful vote.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 22, 2019)

Is that the brexiters and 'we hate everyone' mob coming back to the thread now?

They all disappeared when those 3500 jobs went and people were asking about deportations.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> There's an extremely (even for her) stupid piece by Toynbee where she argues that Labour should back May's deal so that it can be put to a "people's vote", and thus be defeated and the UK end up remaining in the EU. Even ignoring the sheer contempt for democracy this idea indicates it seems ludicrous when there aren't even the votes for the 2nd referendum in the HoC.


There's nothing quite as contemptuous of democracy as having a public vote, right enough.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Feb 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> “Economists for Brexit” group leader Professor Patrick Minford:
> "[car industry] "...you are going to have to run it down. It will be in your interests to do it, just as in the same way we ran down the coal and steel industries. These things happen as evolution takes place in your economy."
> The devastating future for Welsh manufacturing predicted by a Brexit economist



Patrick motherfucking Minford, an economist of no relevance for the last 30 years, except to the propagands at the Adam Smith Institute. What a cunt.


----------



## Supine (Feb 22, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Patrick motherfucking Minford, an economist of no relevance for the last 30 years, except to the propagands at the Adam Smith Institute. What a cunt.



The embarrassment from Cardiff university


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> There's nothing quite as contemptuous of democracy as having a public vote, right enough.


Yes those public votes in Iraq under Saddam Hussian were the model of democracy. 

The vote Toynbee desires is purposely designed to block any Leave by insisting on a false choice between May's deal or Remain. You might be (probably are) the sort of prick that thinks that is democratic but most people have enough intelligence/honesty to see through this plan for what it is.


----------



## CRI (Feb 22, 2019)

Surely this is nothing to worry about - just the silly old _Health Service Journal_ and the Royal College of Radiologists stoking the flames of Project Fear.  

Some cancer treatment may be delayed post-Brexit



> Royal College of Radiologists has not seen “any finite logistical detail” of increased air freight capacity needed to deliver short-life medical isotopes.
> If Brexit delays imports, trusts will have to prioritise which patients receive cancer care.
> Latest government report on issue did not confirm a final exit deal was in place to ensure continuity of supply.



Cue the, "What's wrong with growing our own British isotopes, eh?"


----------



## CRI (Feb 22, 2019)

With just a few weeks to set this shit up . . . Easy, peasy, Lemon squeezy (but only lemons grown in the UK soon . . . ) 



Not surprised they disabled comments under that video!


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

CRI said:


> Surely this is nothing to worry about - just the silly old _Health Service Journal_ and the Royal College of Radiologists stoking the flames of Project Fear.
> 
> Some cancer treatment may be delayed post-Brexit
> 
> ...


cue the what's donald trump up to today questions


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 22, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Is that the brexiters and 'we hate everyone' mob coming back to the thread now?
> 
> They all disappeared when those 3500 jobs went and people were asking about deportations.


Personally I feel somewhat "used" by Corbyn.
Having been burned by Blair and his war, and the disaster of Brown as PM, I was still in a libdem frame of mind in 2010 - and it seemed Cameroon needed another coalition to stave off the swivel-headed fraternity, but I was made to feel like a class traitor by people here and elsewhere, so gave Corbyn a go in 2015 ... I even voted for him again in 2017 - I didn't take his promises seriously, but the vile advertising I saw on Youtube was far worse ...

The Brexit boil would have hit critical mass eventually I suppose, but personally I needed it to wait until I was safely settled in France and naturalised there.

Anyway at least Corbyn is making slight noises in the right direction and parliament will probably pull us back from the cliff at the last moment - though clearly massive damage has already been done.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

You certainly didn't give Corbyn "a go" in 2015. And the rest of the post is equally nonsense. Go crawling back to the yellow tories.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You certainly didn't give Corbyn "a go" in 2015.


Certainly not at the general election.

gentlegreen can you clarify?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Certainly not at the general election.
> 
> gentlegreen can you clarify?


Oh yes it was that Milliway chap ?

I pay very little attention in between having to pinch my nose and find someone to vote for ..


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You certainly didn't give Corbyn "a go" in 2015. And the rest of the post is equally nonsense. Go crawling back to the yellow tories.


Better a yellow Tory than a disaster socialist.
I'm sorry if you have so little invested in day to day life.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Better a yellow Tory than a disaster socialist.
> I'm sorry if you have so little invested in day to day life.


_The poorest he that is in England hath a right to live as the greatest he.

Only those with a material interest (that means money and property) in this country - should have a say demands man escaping off to france from 1647.
_
This is pre-civil war basic understanding of what right anyone has to speak here.

You've lost your life.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

Yep redistribution from the poor to the rich, increasing poverty, people dying due to the attacks on the benefit system, the dismantling of what remains of the welfare state - nothing to see here it doesn't affect me.

Some minor inconvenience to being able to retire to France - Oh noes!

Fantastic example of the I'm alright Jack mentality of LibDems.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Better a yellow Tory than a disaster socialist.



Nasty stuff.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

Soubrey post defection


> “the coalition government did a marvellous job” and that austerity was “absolutely necessary and I don’t have a problem with that”.


That's the politics of TIG and their pals in the LibDems


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Oh yes it was that Milliway chap ?
> 
> I pay very little attention in between having to pinch my nose and find someone to vote for ..


Yes. Miliband. He of the Miliband Monolith.

So was it people on here who urged you to vote for Miiband or be “made to feel like a class traitor”?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

I was encouraged to vote "labour" to avoid propping up the Tories for another term.
I had a work colleague assume I was a party member for some bizarre reason (maybe because he knew I posted here and knew others who do) and was encouraging me to support Corbyn in a leadership challenge because he's appointed Kerry McCarthy (vegan) as shadow agriculture minister.

To be fair, in 2017 I was voting for Thangam Debbonaire.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _The poorest he that is in England hath a right to live as the greatest he.
> 
> Only those with a material interest (that means money and property) in this country - should have a say demands man escaping off to france from 1647.
> _
> ...


Do you spend every moment of your life considering the millions living life in abject misery ?

And YOU dictate who has the right to speak here ?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

Eh?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

Oh I see ...
I was just wondering why certain people would be so happy to have violent revolution.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Oh I see ...
> I was just wondering why certain people would be so happy to have violent revolution.


Because they are poor and thus should have no say seems to be your answer. Bring us back to 1647.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

I mean people on _*here *_- though I suppose that could be true of them.
But rioting would affect many on here.

I'm haunted by that poor woman who had loads of priceless musical instruments burned in a fire during some riots a while back.

EDIT:

And she lost her cats too. 

Musicians support renowned flautist who lost all in riot arson | Eastlondonlines


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 22, 2019)

**


----------



## killer b (Feb 22, 2019)

I guess if you wonder why some people might consider violent insurrection a necessity, you could look around you at the ferocity of the pushback currently underway against the mildest of redistributional politics being proposed by Corbyn's Labour.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

My biggest puzzlement at the moment as I think about my fairly modest retirement (effectively sub-minimum wage / SMIC for at least the first six years), is why the super-wealthy _*want *_to be - just how many bathrooms can a person use ?
But there's far too much violence out there already.


----------



## killer b (Feb 22, 2019)

Violence is already carried out daily against the poor by the rich - they started the fight. Fuck a few burnt flutes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

What would you say is the male-female ratio in rioting ?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> What would you say is the male-female ratio in rioting ?


Ask the grrls.


----------



## killer b (Feb 22, 2019)

I'd agree riots need to be made more accessible to women and children. Arm them perhaps?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 22, 2019)

Yes that's the only possible choice - rioting or supporting attacks on the poor.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 22, 2019)

Sad about all those jobs though, eh.  You know...brexit.



DexterTCN said:


>


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 22, 2019)

Fucking hell. Just checked.
Single people have to live on £317 a month benefits these days - that is decidedly grim.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Fucking hell. Just checked.
> Single people have to live on £317 a month benefits these days - that is decidedly grim.


Sure that's worse in real terms than when I was on the dole 15 years ago


----------



## ska invita (Feb 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Sure that's worse in real terms than when I was on the dole 15 years ago


£317 wouldve been £162 in 1995, equivalent of £40 a week, whereas I think it was actually about £55 a week in 95 but dont quote me

Historic inflation calculator: how the value of money has changed since 1900 | This is Money


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> £317 wouldve been £162 in 1995, equivalent of £40 a week. I think it was about £55 a week in 95 but dont quote me
> 
> Historic inflation calculator: how the value of money has changed since 1900 | This is Money


I was on something like £65 a week in 04 iirc


----------



## agricola (Feb 22, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> My biggest puzzlement at the moment as I think about my fairly modest retirement (effectively sub-minimum wage / SMIC for at least the first six years), is why the super-wealthy _*want *_to be - just how many bathrooms can a person use ?
> But there's far too much violence out there already.



Historically, there are few things more demonstrably correct than the notion that extreme wealth is followed by extreme idiocy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I was on something like £65 a week in 04 iirc



Less if you're under 25. Because young people famously need less food.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 22, 2019)

That's why MPs' allowances are so high


----------



## ska invita (Feb 22, 2019)

Why unemployment benefit is worth less than ever


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 22, 2019)

I was on the dole around 1995, from memory proper dole was something like £45, but if you didn’t have enough NI contributions you went on income support which was £35 per week. If you got the higher rate (dole) you got some of the difference taken off your housing benefit I think, so still worked out around the same. Tbh it was comfortable living compared to what I’d lived on as a student, but I was living quite basically, no dependants, and did work now and then which kept my head above water.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 22, 2019)

Wonder which one will be her chancellor?


----------



## Favelado (Feb 23, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I was on the dole around 1995, from memory proper dole was something like £45, but if you didn’t have enough NI contributions you went on income support which was £35 per week. If you got the higher rate (dole) you got some of the difference taken off your housing benefit I think, so still worked out around the same. Tbh it was comfortable living compared to what I’d lived on as a student, but I was living quite basically, no dependants, and did work now and then which kept my head above water.


36.15 I remember. A 20 pack of Regal and a copy of the NME was a weekly treat.


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 23, 2019)

Regals is a bit extravagant. The smokers I lived with were all on Royals, packs of 25 for the price of a normal 20 pack. Tbh it made me quite anti-smoking seeing them occasionally go without food so they could have tabs.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 23, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Regals is a bit extravagant. The smokers I lived with were all on Royals, packs of 25 for the price of a normal 20 pack. Tbh it made me quite anti-smoking seeing them occasionally go without food so they could have tabs.


Did royals exist in 95? I think lambert and butler were the cheap option then


----------



## CRI (Feb 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> Violence is already carried out daily against the poor by the rich - they started the fight. Fuck a few burnt flutes.




You fine with burning cats alive as well I take it.  You seem nice.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 23, 2019)

Favelado said:


> Did royals exist in 95? I think lambert and butler were the cheap option then


In an episode of Yes Minister from whenever, there was a scene where the minister proposed the measure of taxing cigarettes 'so that a pack of twenty costs about the same as a half bottle of whisky', and everyone would give up smoking. The reaction of the studio audience made it clear that this was completely ludicrous and idiotic.

2019, a half bottle of Famous Grouse is £9 in Sainsbury's and 20 L&B is £10.34 (thanks Google).

Not sure what the moral of the story is, though.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 23, 2019)

Jesus Christ. 10 quid!


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 23, 2019)

Raheem said:


> In an episode of Yes Minister from whenever, there was a scene where the minister proposed the measure of taxing cigarettes 'so that a pack of twenty costs about the same as a half bottle of whisky', and everyone would give up smoking. The reaction of the studio audience made it clear that this was completely ludicrous and idiotic.



"But Minister, won't everybody just switch to smoking roll-ups smuggled over from France?"


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 23, 2019)

Favelado said:


> Did royals exist in 95? I think lambert and butler were the cheap option then



Having done some backwards counting I’ve figured out that I moved out of that house in summer 1995, so yes. I think most people I know moved onto rollies eventually. Nobody does proper fags anymore.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 23, 2019)

CRI said:


> Surely this is nothing to worry about - just the silly old _Health Service Journal_ and the Royal College of Radiologists stoking the flames of Project Fear.
> 
> Some cancer treatment may be delayed post-Brexit
> 
> ...



According to one of the radiologists who did my PET scan recently we get very little in the form of isotopes from Europe at the moment anyway.
France is using most of the suitable isotopes they produce for their own services. Britain has for years relied on Canadian and American sources. Those these are not available at the moment.
The isotopes available from Russia and China do not meet our/European safety standards
Apparently our biggest supplier of isotopes currently is South Africa.
Lots of panic over a problem already being sorted maybe.

ETA: currently there are four reactors worldwide that produce suitable isotopes for using as tracers. The original biggest producing reactors in the States had all come to the end of their natural lifespan around the same time, causing a worldwide shortage.
Coincidentally the nuclear industry in the States announced yesterday that funding was available for four new current reactors to produce Mo-99 that creates Technetium-99m, used as tracers in medical radiography.
I cannot post a link at the moment but will later.


Edit: Link as promised.
Four US companies chosen for Mo-99 production funding - World Nuclear News


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 23, 2019)

As with politics, I try not to think of my finances very much, but it's on my mind as I figure out how to live on a pension and it turns out that my contribution to the famous "£350 million extra a week for the NHS" as someone getting around the UK average salary is currently 70p per week or 10p per day.
Including indirect taxation, it's apparently about 50 cents per day for the average EU citizen when you factor-in indirect taxation..


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 23, 2019)

Favelado said:


> Did royals exist in 95? I think lambert and butler were the cheap option then



I remember buying Royals in 25s from the Lo Cost supermarket in Fratton during 1995.

They also sold "whisky style spirit drink", plus brandy and vodka variations, £5 a bottle.


----------



## Favelado (Feb 24, 2019)

I used to write cheques for 5 quid to buy 40 cigarettes when my income support was running out, knowing that they would take 3 days to clear, by which time I'd have money in my account again.


----------



## Humberto (Feb 24, 2019)

Speak about necessary abandonment of brexit betwixt 'affordable' outcomes and an offer of establishment, and nobody relates openly about another alternative to ending an arrangement of officiality conspiring to end a legitimate hoax of fortunate ex-helpless suppurating subordinates.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 24, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Speak about necessary abandonment of brexit betwixt 'affordable' outcomes and an offer of establishment, and nobody relates openly about another alternative to ending an arrangement of officiality conspiring to end a legitimate hoax of fortunate ex-helpless suppurating subordinates.



Whoseitonthe_what_now??


----------



## weltweit (Feb 24, 2019)

There were some folk pointing out my spending on fags back when I used to smoke. 

I now note that they down a bottle of wine a night which is about the same cost.


----------



## Humberto (Feb 24, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Whoseitonthe_what_now??



What?


----------



## Wookey (Feb 24, 2019)

Humberto said:


> What?


 
Sorry Humberto ! I didn't understand a word of what you said is all. I promise I tried and tried!


----------



## Humberto (Feb 24, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Sorry Humberto ! I didn't understand a word of what you said is all. I promise I tried and tried!



Well that's not a problem


----------



## Ming (Feb 24, 2019)

I still think it's a planned series of events. Here's a clip from when Alex got forced into the foreign office post and it was released to the Washington press pack with John Kerry. Particularly from 01:20 onwards. Look at the way Alex is eye gouging the reporter.
edit: the second half is a bit referendum 01:20 to 0300ish. Then
Alex starts bullshitting.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 24, 2019)

Christ he was outclassed. These guys don't cut it on the world stage.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 24, 2019)

Confusing, but sounds legit;


----------



## Humberto (Feb 24, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Well that's not a problem



Actually it is a bit 

Apols


----------



## gosub (Feb 24, 2019)

Church of England plans five days of prayer as Brexit looms - Independent.ie

Worth remembering if things get bumpy and someone to blame is required


----------



## Poi E (Feb 24, 2019)

There I was thinking we didn't have a prayer.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Church of England plans five days of prayer as Brexit looms - Independent.ie
> 
> Worth remembering if things get bumpy and someone to blame is required



I've got a job lot of chocolate fireguards we can use if this plan fails.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 24, 2019)

MPs to have final Brexit vote by 12 March

Theresa May confirms MPs' Brexit vote is delayed until as late as March 12


17 days after the the 'meaningful' vote


----------



## Badgers (Feb 24, 2019)

Brexit could be delayed until 2021, EU sources reveal

This is fine...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit could be delayed until 2021, EU sources reveal
> 
> This is fine...


Why not just say "we're not doing it" now rather than kicking theresa may down the road


----------



## Badgers (Feb 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why not just say "we're not doing it" now rather than kicking theresa may down the road


Not strong and stable enough


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why not just say "we're not doing it" now rather than kicking theresa may down the road



Democracy in motion!


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit could be delayed until 2021, EU sources reveal
> 
> This is fine...



Would it be prudent to return all the stockpiled goods I’ve accumulated?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 24, 2019)

What will be left of the UK after another two years of this ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> What will be left of the UK after another two years of this ?


The cockroaches and, of course, theresa may


----------



## Raheem (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Would it be prudent to return all the stockpiled goods I’ve accumulated?


Dunno. Do you think your nan has noticed they're missing?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Dunno. Do you think your nan has noticed they're missing?



Do you know my family? 

My Gran died in 1964, when they cleared her house there was 78 pound of sugar stored in glass jars in the cellar. She bought a bag and stored it every time she went shopping. 
In case there was another war, she had a really sweet tooth apparently.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Do you know my family?
> 
> My Gran died in 1964, when they cleared her house there was 78 pound of sugar stored in glass jars in the cellar. She bought a bag and stored it every time she went shopping.
> In case there was another war, she had a really sweet tooth apparently.


Well, sorry to hear, about your gran. Shame she died almost sixty years before there was another war.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Do you know my family?
> 
> My Gran died in 1964, when they cleared her house there was 78 pound of sugar stored in glass jars in the cellar. She bought a bag and stored it every time she went shopping.
> In case there was another war, she had a really sweet tooth apparently.


What happened to all the sugar?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What happened to all the sugar?



It was given away between the family, friends and neighbours.

ETA: Her father,my great-grandad was a foreman at Kilners Glass factory at Denaby Main. Hence plenty of large glass storage jars.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> It was given away between the family, friends and neighbours.
> 
> ETA: Her father,my great-grandad was a foreman at Kilners Glass factory at Denaby Main. Hence plenty of large glass storage jars.


I remember my granny panic buying sugar in the early 70s sugar crisis. She had a press* full of bags. (*a wall-recessed cupboard).


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I remember my granny panic buying sugar in the early 70s sugar crisis. She had a press* full of bags. (*a wall-recessed cupboard).




Meant to get sugar while I was out

Only one bag since you ask


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I remember my granny panic buying sugar in the early 70s sugar crisis. She had a press* full of bags. (*a wall-recessed cupboard).



I haven’t heard press for years, our next door neighbours called them that. They moved south from Loganlea.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Why not just say "we're not doing it" now rather than kicking theresa may down the road



I assume they're waiting until they're certain they've bored everyone to death, in order to guard against any backlash.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I assume they're waiting until they're certain they've bored everyone to death, in order to guard against any backlash.


This goes beyond _kicking the can down the road; _she's reached the end and is dementedly kicking the can into the piss-stained settee at the wall at the end of the alley.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This goes beyond _kicking the can down the road; _she's reached the end and is dementedly kicking the can into the piss-stained settee at the wall at the end of the alley.



She's reaching the end. She can't reach the end until she's removed. But yeah we're into demented bag lady/piss stained sofa territory without doubt.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Mrs May has convinced herself that as prime minister she has to leave some form of legacy. This has, in my opinion become obsessive and all encompassing of her tenure at number ten. It is saddening to see someone so blinkered to her inability to provide the solution. Her stubbornness makes her look foolish and arrogant.
David Cameron should be unable to look himself in a mirror again.


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit could be delayed until 2021, EU sources reveal
> 
> This is fine...



I'm lucky enough to be living overseas right now, if these cunts seriously decide to leave everything up in the air for another 2 years, I'm going to shit on my British passport and set it on fire.

Though I'll probably order a new one, just to see what colour it turns up in...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm lucky enough to be living overseas right now, if these cunts seriously decide to leave everything up in the air for another 2 years, I'm going to shit on my British passport and set it on fire.
> 
> Though I'll probably order a new one, just to see what colour it turns up in...



You should have said before now if you wanted a brown passport, negotiations are almost concluded and a deal is in sight.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 24, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm lucky enough to be living overseas right now, if these cunts seriously decide to leave everything up in the air for another 2 years, I'm going to shit on my British passport and set it on fire.
> 
> Though I'll probably order a new one, just to see what colour it turns up in...


My son has literally just renewed his with the new one arriving this week it is still burgundy with European Union stamped on the front, whether this is because Brexit is still a month off or they just using up old stock before they open the box of blue ones, I couldn't tell you.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 24, 2019)

I only got my first lovely burgundy adult password a few years back, so it's got 7 years to go on it.
I was hoping to spend the first few years in France with an EU passport.
Are they going to send me a new blue one by special courier ?


----------



## pinkmonkey (Feb 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> MPs to have final Brexit vote by 12 March
> 
> Theresa May confirms MPs' Brexit vote is delayed until as late as March 12
> 
> ...


The weekly meaningful vote  - it's almost like taking the bins out!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> My son has literally just renewed his with the new one arriving this week it is still burgundy with European Union stamped on the front, whether this is because Brexit is still a month off or they just using up old stock before they open the box of blue ones, I couldn't tell you.



They will say EU until we leave, then stay burgundy with no EU on until the autumn, supposedly.


----------



## BobDavis (Feb 24, 2019)

The European Union will be on the passports issued until March 29 then it will be omitted. That was the plan anyway. If we don’t leave I suppose it will stay on even when the blue ones come out in Sept. They can stay blue even if we don’t leave so cake & eat it.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 24, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> They will say EU until we leave, then stay burgundy with no EU on until the autumn, supposedly.


Are you waiting for a blue one?


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 24, 2019)

There might be a delay if they're still planning to print the blue passports in France.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

pinkmonkey said:


> The weekly meaningful vote  - it's almost like taking the bins out!



And no one turning up to empty them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> And no one turning up to empty them.


And people chucking all manner of things in them


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> And people chucking all manner of things in them



Namely, Chuka?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Are you waiting for a blue one?



Mine's got another six years left on it, BB1's expires in August but I think will need to be renewed before then as she's off to Bavaria with her band in May.

Really dunno what the fuss is all about, it's a travel document.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Namely, Chuka?


Maybe


----------



## Supine (Feb 24, 2019)

I found my super old passport in a drawer recently. Pretty sure it was black rather than blue!


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> I found my super old passport in a drawer recently. Pretty sure it was black rather than blue!



Navy blue, like old bill's outfit.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Mrs May has convinced herself that as prime minister she has to leave some form of legacy. This has, in my opinion become obsessive and all encompassing of her tenure at number ten. It is saddening to see someone so blinkered to her inability to provide the solution. Her stubbornness makes her look foolish and arrogant.



I don't think it's that. I think it's that she is an ardent believer in the Conservative Party, and as such cannot be the leader that allowed it to split. Ever. So when the ERG have come to her and said 'do as we say or we split the party / the grass roots party is on our side', she's done as they said. The problem is of course that this schism has been running in the party for at least 30 years, and is now being forced to a head. So there's probably no way she can avoid a split. It's all too late. On the other side, Europe see the folly of her stance, and have thus given her a pretty crap deal on a 'take it or leave it basis'. But she can't leave it, as that might split the party, either through no deal or no brexit, so all she's left with is taking it. 

Which is why her plan for a long time now has been to just run down the clock, force the country to a cliff edge, then say it's either my deal or the chaos of no deal (that the ERG would quite like). Hence today's announcement of a delay in the meaningful vote right up to the 11th hour, ostensibly for further negotiations. A stance which is becoming increasingly surreal, given the european negotiators have been saying for ages that there is no renegotiation to be had. 

They know full well what her personal mission is, and how it's ruining her and her party, and thus see no reason to renegotiate. The sad irony is that the tory party probably is going to split over this anyway, or at least be no more united than it's been for a while now, so her only hope of not being the leader that presided over a party split is not to be the leader when it happens. But she's also not the sort to give up. The perfect storm of poorly suited character traits.

Basically, she's entirely the wrong person for the job, but when the post-brexit leadership election happened, everyone tried to dive out of the way of having to lead the brexit process, leaving her the only person foolish enough to still be standing. I've always thought that she's one of those types very common from Oxbridge, academically brilliant in certain fields, but crushingly bad at life in general.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 24, 2019)

Good post Gerry1time .


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> The sad irony is that the tory party probably is going to split over this anyway, or at least be no more united than it's been for a while now, so her only hope of not being the leader that presided over a party split is not to be the leader when it happens. But she's also not the sort to give up. The perfect storm of poorly suited character traits.



Good post but nothing sad about it


----------



## gosub (Feb 24, 2019)

Personally I think a 2nd referendum would be a disaster but worth a read Polls show Brexit regret is so strong that 'Remain' would win a second referendum by 9 points


----------



## mauvais (Feb 24, 2019)

I think Gerry's post follows the common habit of forgetting that the EU 'negotiations' were on rails and thus about as negotiable as negotiating with a train. The Tories have also managed to keep on flying for those 30 years despite fundamental internal differences and if your answer to 'why' is only, 'because there wasn't a referendum', then you have to explain why that has materially changed matters. The problem for all Brexit factions, now and always, is that there's no critical mass for any particular thing. If the threat of an external split of the party is actually real then what would it look like and who would it benefit?


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Good post but nothing sad about it



Hah, fair point  I was more thinking a sad irony for her. Regardless of her politics, at a fundamental level she's still a fellow human being on this planet, and there is always a sadness watching someone destroy themselves so utterly (those bags under her eyes these days...) for a cause that is both pointless and utterly doomed to failure. I just want someone to tell her to resign, and go to bed for a bit.


----------



## MickiQ (Feb 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> My son has literally just renewed his with the new one arriving this week it is still burgundy with European Union stamped on the front, whether this is because Brexit is still a month off or they just using up old stock before they open the box of blue ones, I couldn't tell you.


Since the new blue ones are going to be printed in France it would be the very definition of irony if they were impounded at the border in Calais in the event of a No-Deal Brexit


----------



## Supine (Feb 24, 2019)

Nah. Fuck her and the racist ship she sails.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Hah, fair point  I was more thinking a sad irony for her. Regardless of her politics, at a fundamental level she's still a fellow human being on this planet, and there is always a sadness watching someone destroy themselves so utterly (those bags under her eyes these days...) for a cause that is both pointless and utterly doomed to failure. I just want someone to tell her to resign, and go to bed for a bit.



The best thing about this is watching Tories suffer but go you with your empathy man


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I think Gerry's post follows the common habit of forgetting that the EU 'negotiations' were on rails and thus about as negotiable as negotiating with a train.



Possibly, thought I do suspect they were more open to conversation than we allowed them to be with our early 'red lines'. We set some rails ourselves tbf. 



mauvais said:


> The Tories have also managed to keep on flying for those 30 years despite fundamental internal differences and if your answer to 'why' is only, 'because there wasn't a referendum', then you have to explain why that has materially changed matters.



Kept existing yes, but when did they last win a sizable / secure parliamentary majority? About 30 years ago...



mauvais said:


> The problem for all Brexit factions, now and always, is that there's no critical mass for any particular thing. If the threat of an external split of the party is actually real then what would it look like and who would it benefit?



There is that, but it's the tories that brought this into the national debate and kept it there for so long, either by promoting it or being terrified of it. As for what the split would look like, who knows? Isn't that the point of a split? That it's a recasting of the dice, that can and does land in all sorts of unexpected ways.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The best thing about this is watching Tories suffer but go you with your empathy man



What can I say, I'm a zen buddhist


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Even if PM now won’t do “meaningful vote” on a Deal, she still promised to lay an amendable motion this week. We will push cross party amendment this week paving way for our Bill to safeguard against No Deal. PM remarks make it even more vital Commons votes for Bill <a href="News about #NotoNoDeal on Twitter">#NotoNoDeal</a> <a href="Yvette Cooper on Twitter">pic.twitter.com/jCcm3kh8T9</a></p>&mdash; Yvette Cooper (@YvetteCooperMP) <a href="">February 24, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Yvette Cooper seems to think she can table an amendment this week to force May to seek an extension to A50 in the event of no deal agreed by March 13th. Cunningly the length of the extension is not specified.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> What can I say, I'm a zen buddhist



Hit her with a large stick if she loses concentration eh?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

mauvais said:


> I think Gerry's post follows the common habit of forgetting that the EU 'negotiations' were on rails and thus about as negotiable as negotiating with a train. The Tories have also managed to keep on flying for those 30 years despite fundamental internal differences and if your answer to 'why' is only, 'because there wasn't a referendum', then you have to explain why that has materially changed matters. The problem for all Brexit factions, now and always, is that there's no critical mass for any particular thing. If the threat of an external split of the party is actually real then what would it look like and who would it benefit?



There's no critical mass for the Tory party. Dwindling membership, toxic brand, ageing voters, deeply unpopular with almost all Remain voters and most Leave voters, no longer seen as the responsible party of capital, and no clear sign of how they can ever win a majority at an election. 

Seriously, I can't think of when the last time the Tories were in this kind of crisis would be. They are the oldest political representatives of capitalism on the planet but nothing lasts forever.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Feb 24, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Navy blue, like old bill's outfit.



Like a priest's sock.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

two sheds said:


> Hit her with a large stick if she loses concentration eh?



Zen has mellowed somewhat on its trip from japan to west coast america then over to europe. I've never seen the stick used in the UK, and some of the french zen community continue to see wine as an integral part of their practice.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Personally I think a 2nd referendum would be a disaster but worth a read Polls show Brexit regret is so strong that 'Remain' would win a second referendum by 9 points



Also, a pretty good _technical_ analysis of 2nd ref voting possibilities from Andrew Cooper of Populus here (and yes, I know the Tory connections  ). 
That's from Friday's "The Remaining Standard"  

I'm ultra-sceptical of focus groups and how they work, and also I have huge doubts about confirmation bias with questioning in *all* focus groups or polls. 

He does make _some_ useful points though, IMO. Worth a read so long as you challenge parts of what he says. Can others on Urban please attempt that?


----------



## Supine (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> There's no critical mass for the Tory party. Dwindling membership, toxic brand, ageing voters, deeply unpopular with almost all Remain voters and most Leave voters, no longer seen as the responsible party of capital, and no clear sign of how they can ever win a majority at an election.
> 
> Seriously, I can't think of when the last time the Tories were in this kind of crisis would be. They are the oldest political representatives of capitalism on the planet but nothing lasts forever.



But still ahead in the polls...


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 24, 2019)

*PS* after my post #24141 above : I also think a second referendum would be an utter nightmare for any half-sensible/semi-realistic Remain-minded person like me. I am now thinking though, that chances of it happening are becoming stronger


----------



## two sheds (Feb 24, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> Zen has mellowed somewhat on its trip from japan to west coast america then over to europe. I've never seen the stick used in the UK, and some of the french zen community continue to see wine as an integral part of their practice.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> But still ahead in the polls...



As the 'Brexit Party' - if Brexit doesn't happen, what is their pitch to voters?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Also, a pretty good _technical_ analysis of 2nd ref voting possibilities from Andrew Cooper of Populus here (and yes, I know the Tory connections  ).
> That's from Friday's "The Remaining Standard"
> 
> I'm ultra-sceptical of focus groups and how they work, and also I have huge doubts about confirmation bias with questioning in *all* focus groups or polls.
> ...



Yeah, some good points.

Don't see a 2nd ref happening unless it's on May's deal/Remain though.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> But still ahead in the polls...


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't see a 2nd ref happening unless it's on May's deal/Remain though.


Worth a look at what John McDonnell's said in recent days, and at what Keir Starmer also seems to be trying to do. All rumours, so question marks abound obvs.

But I can see the Peter Kyle amendment getting traction, and maybe?? to the point of LP whipping. Even Corbyn's made a couple of very slightly ref-friendly remarks in public


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Worth a look at what John McDonnell's said in recent days, and at what Keir Starmer also seems to be trying to do. All rumours, so question marks abound obvs.
> 
> But I can see the Peter Kyle amendment getting traction, and maybe?? to the point of LP whipping. Even Corbyn's made a couple of very slightly ref-friendly remarks in public



The Kyle amendment is for a referendum on May's deal vs Remain though isn't it?


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The Kyle amendment is for a referendum on May's deal vs Remain though isn't it?



 True. but I can see Corbyn going with Kyle's thing anyway. Maybe.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 24, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> True. but I can see Corbyn going with Kyle's thing anyway. Maybe.



I hope he won't but it might happen anyway.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The Kyle amendment is for a referendum on May's deal vs Remain though isn't it?


I suppose that’s marginally better than the people’s two leave vs one remain option, if you are a glass half full kinda guy.


----------



## Weller (Feb 25, 2019)

Theresa May learning to play Pool for first time  "I will be hopeless" yes , yes you will 
obviously cut the video due to a total miscue 


> has now delayed taking her next shot for 2 weeks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Weller said:


> Theresa May learning to play Pool for first time  "I will be hopeless" yes , yes you will
> obviously cut the video due to a total miscue



Next time she'll be given darts and humiliated again


----------



## brogdale (Feb 25, 2019)

"Chief" of Staff Gavin Barwell's advice and specifically his contorted hand exemplar...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 25, 2019)

Ffs, what is it with these people? Can’t eat a bag of chips or a bacon sandwich, has never picked up a cue, necro-bestial leanings. Yet we let them run the sodding country. Are we mad??


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 25, 2019)

Till we all have to dress like this.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ffs, what is it with these people? Can’t eat a bag of chips or a bacon sandwich, has never picked up a cue, necro-bestial leanings. Yet we let them run the sodding country. Are we mad??


I've never picked up a cue either, but know not to do it as a photo opportunity.
Haven't had a bacon sandwich in 40 years ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ffs, what is it with these people? Can’t eat a bag of chips or a bacon sandwich, has never picked up a cue, necro-bestial leanings. Yet we let them ruin the sodding country. Are we mad??


c4u


----------



## Dogsauce (Feb 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Since the new blue ones are going to be printed in France it would be the very definition of irony if they were impounded at the border in Calais in the event of a No-Deal Brexit



They should apply a special export duty on them, something like £350 million a week would seem appropriate.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 25, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 162917
> 
> Till we all have to dress like this.



Bit optimistic we'll finish a China trade deal by then.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 25, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Bit optimistic we'll finish a China trade deal by then.



But you don't rule out the army on the streets i notice.....


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Next time she'll be given darts and humiliated again



Cribbage. 15-2. One for the nob.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> But you don't rule out the army on the streets i notice.....


they'll be brought in to help with the search for theresa may


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Cribbage. 15-2. One for the nob.


bar billiards
bowling (both 10 pin and grass)
petanque


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Bit optimistic we'll finish a China trade deal by then.


word has it that carole decker is to be the uk's trade emissary to china, on the basis of her hit with t'pau, china in your hand


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I've never picked up a cue either, but know not to do it as a photo opportunity.
> Haven't had a bacon sandwich in 40 years ...



Where are you on necro-bestiality and chips?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Where are you on necro-bestiality and chips?


I like chips


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ffs, what is it with these people? Can’t eat a bag of chips or a bacon sandwich, has never picked up a cue, necro-bestial leanings. Yet we let them run the sodding country. Are we mad??


Who is it in the first place that wants to set out to run a country?


----------



## Santino (Feb 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who is it in the first place that wants to set out to run a country?


Is it cunts?


----------



## kabbes (Feb 25, 2019)

Santino said:


> Is it cunts?


Didn’t we just do this on the bandwidthz thread?  I thought the answer was “counts”.


----------



## CRI (Feb 25, 2019)

Aw, isn't this kind of them?  They're setting up a hardship fund for some of the people they've fucked over with Brexit.  It will be administered by those kind Jobcentres people.  And there may be food aid as well.  Such fun!

*No-deal hardship fund planned for surge in jobless*

(Paywalled if you've used your 2 freebies, so . . . )



> ...measures under consideration include using “tax and benefits policy” to offset rises in the cost of living, protection for parts of the country “geographically vulnerable” to food shortages and sourcing alternative food for schools, prisons and hospitals.





> In the Bank of England’s modelling of a no-deal Brexit last November unemployment would rise to 7.5 per cent. Another government no-deal planning document leaked to _The Times _last year said the unemployment benefit bill could rise by £12 billion over three years and that even in a “smooth” no-deal scenario there would be “adjustment costs” causing a rise in unemployment.





> It is thought that the hardship fund would effectively be a pot of money for which workers who have lost their jobs could apply via the government’s network of jobcentres around the country.





> As well as rises in cost of food, the meeting was preoccupied by the impact of shortages...“all departments” should “support devolved administrations in considering any areas of potential geographical vulnerability to food supply issues”.





> ...enabling a flexible approach by suppliers, working with suppliers on menu flexibility including food substitutions working with Public Health England.”


----------



## Poi E (Feb 25, 2019)

It's the ill of the people.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I suppose that’s marginally better than the people’s two leave vs one remain option, if you are a glass half full kinda guy.



Which do you vote for though? May's awful deal or letting the establishment just cancel the whole thing?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

Cooper now working with Oliver Letwin to put forward her no no deal/extend A50 amendment. Some chumps I've never heard of doing a similar softer one in the hope that MP's go for that instead.

Which Brexit amendments will be tabled?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 25, 2019)

Cooper and Letwin collaborating, who would ever have thought it.
Strange days indeed.


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 25, 2019)

Corbyn strongly rumoured to be tabling or backing an amendment for second referendum according to R4 just now.

Brexit: Labour will back amendment for second vote, says Corbyn – Politics live


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Cooper and Letwin collaborating, who would ever have thought it.
> Strange days indeed.


He looked at Cooper then letwin and back again and whispered "dam' me if I can tell the difference"


----------



## brogdale (Feb 25, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Corbyn strongly rumoured to be tabling or backing an amendment for second referendum according to R4 just now.
> 
> Brexit: Labour will back amendment for second vote, says Corbyn – Politics live


The number threatening to bail must have been considerable, then?


----------



## planetgeli (Feb 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The number threatening to bail must have been considerable, then?



It would seem so wouldn’t it. Succumbing to pressure.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Not a second referendum on staying in the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

There is no difference from previous policy is there?


----------



## agricola (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Not a second referendum on staying in the EU.



I think its his option (this five tests thing), then when that fails its supporting the Kyle-Wilson amendment.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

agricola said:


> I think its his option (this five tests thing), then when that fails its supporting the Kyle-Wilson amendment.


In each and every scenario here we must ask _with with divisions?_


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

I've heard more people running out their doors last 5 minutes shouting YES! than when she died.


----------



## bemused (Feb 25, 2019)

At what point do the saner MPs in the Tory Party grow a pair and stand up to the headbangers? There seems to be a majority in Parliament for a half out option - she should grab that with both hands.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

bemused said:


> At what point do the saner MPs in the Tory Party grow a pair and stand up to the headbangers? There seems to be a majority in Parliament for a half out option - she should grab that with both hands.


A half-out option is more out than the deal.


----------



## agricola (Feb 25, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I've heard more people running out their doors last 5 minutes shouting YES! than when she died.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

I heard it repeated today - the irony that had the first referendum actually been binding on parliament, it would probably have been thrown out because of all the lies and law-breaking (and perhaps because the "remain" camp did such a crap job).
I hope it's stay as we are vs May's shitty deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Not a second referendum on staying in the EU.



It would be May's deal vs Remain




butchersapron said:


> There is no difference from previous policy is there?



Technically not, but basically signifies he's bowed to pressure and given up trying to get a GE.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I heard it repeated today - the irony that had the first referendum actually been binding on parliament, it would probably have been thrown out because of all the lies and law-breaking (and perhaps because the "remain" camp did such a crap job).
> I hope it's stay as we are vs May's shitty deal.


Who told you this guff?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It would be May's deal vs Remain
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why has he tied, or allowed these steps to be tied together. There was and is no need.

Did cuddly Keir trap him a long time ago?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Who told you this guff?


James O'Brien.
Doubtless he's a "blue socialist" or summat ...


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I hope it's stay as we are vs May's shitty deal.


So we can go "back to what worked before". Wonderful


----------



## ska invita (Feb 25, 2019)

Isn't any second referendum amendment or whatever it is just going to get voted down?

Looks like a sop to the potential splitters, and that's all?


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> James O'Brien.
> Doubtless he's a "blue socialist" or summat ...


he certainly isn't a disinterested reporter of facts, that's for sure. 

or any kind of socialist.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> So we can go "back to what worked before". Wonderful


The future direction of the EU will depend on input from a Labour government.
Have you ever explained on here why you think the EU is most hated by the right ?

Meanwhile ...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why has he tied, or allowed these steps to be tied together. There was and is no need.
> 
> Did cuddly Keir trap him a long time ago?



Cuddly Keir was certainly trying to. But as you say, no need. He could have just kept saying he was still pushing for an election. He's just bottled it under the pressure. 

You can never underestimate the depths that social democracy will sink to.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Isn't any second referendum amendment or whatever it is just going to get voted down?
> 
> Looks like a sop to the potential splitters, and that's all?



It'll be on May's deal. If lots of Remainers vote for it to stop Brexit, and those supporting May's deal also voted for it to get May's deal through, we'd have a referendum on May's Deal vs Remain. 

What position will Corbyn take then? Support the deal he's publicly slated? Or campaign for Remain? 

Either way he'll look like a prick and rightfully so.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

You'll have to settle for a velvet revolution.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The future direction of the EU will depend on input from a Labour government.
> Have you ever explained on here why you think the EU is most hated by the right ?


Like the input from Syrzia? 
And UK socialism has been opposed to the EU for 50 years. Unlike the majority of the right (including Thatcher) that were opposed to leaving in 75 and in 16.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You'll have to settle for a velvet revolution.


What the fuck are you even posting?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What position will Corbyn take then? Support the deal he's publicly slated? Or campaign for Remain?


I think ska's right on this one, it's about internal LP politics. I don't think the numbers are there. There are will be more Labour MPs that vote against a 2nd referendum than Tory MPs that vote for one.

But the LP can claim both that it backed a 2nd ref and tried to get it's version of leave through.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It would be May's deal vs Remain




Or labour's leave vs theirs.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think ska's right on this one, it's about internal LP politics. I don't think the numbers are there. There are will be more Labour MPs that vote against a 2nd referendum than Tory MPs that vote for one.



ska invita may well be right, I have no idea, I'm still raging to be honest. Certainly haven't done the maths to know if it could pass! 

But all the same, even if it's just to shut up Watson and Lammy, why do it? Will Corbyn now whip Labour MP's in Leave constituencies to vote for it? Or is Labour supporting it but giving a free vote? How does this help him, honestly? 

The only reason I can think of for doing this is that if it fails, he can say "oh well we tried the second referendum thing". But even then he's agreed to it as an option.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Or labour's leave vs theirs.



Maybe. But which seems more likely to you?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Like the input from Syrzia?
> And UK socialism has been opposed to the EU for 50 years.


Which is a key reason why I used to have to vote Lib(dem)


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Or labour's leave vs theirs.


I don't see how that would work. This is a genuine move to supporting a second in /out referendum IMO. One which allows them to say to what remaining Labour leave voters there are 'we supported the only possible deal that could pass parliament' and to remainers 'we supported a second vote'.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

How convincing this would be to either camp I dunno.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ska invita But all the same, even if it's just to shut up Watson and Lammy, why do it? Will Corbyn now whip Labour MP's in Leave constituencies to vote for it? Or is Labour supporting it but giving a free vote? How does this help him, honestly?


If it does get voted on I think it will be officially whipped - but in practice the whips won't push too hard.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> How convincing this would be to either camp I dunno.



It'll reek of bullshit to all concerned if you're right I'm guessing. Guarantees a Remain vote, surely? Think even the ERG have said they would prefer Remain to May's deal.


----------



## Santino (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I've heard more people running out their doors last 5 minutes shouting YES! than when she died.


Workers across the nation downed tools and lined the streets in a spontaneous demonstration of support for the announcement.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Maybe. But which seems more likely to you?


The former to be honest. I just can't see the basic political madness of them ever supporting a leave-stay vote. Even this formulation of a public vote seems designed to avoid it.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't see how that would work. This is a genuine move to supporting a second in /out referendum IMO. One which allows them to say to what remaining Labour leave voters there are 'we supported the only possible deal that could pass parliament' and to remainers 'we supported a second vote'.


They don't have the numbers to do it. It's cynical and maybe intended to look like what you outline. And, it's far far too late.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The former to be honest. I just can't see the basic political madness of them ever supporting a leave-stay vote. Even this formulation of a public vote seems designed to avoid it.



That's the problem though isn't it? It's a leave on May's terms/stay vote. Which can only produce a stay result.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They don't have the numbers to do it. It's cynical and maybe intended to look like what you outline. And, it's far far too late.


Oh, I can't see it passing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oh, I can't see it passing.



I hope not.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's the problem though isn't it? It's a leave on May's terms/stay vote. Which can only produce a stay result.


Or no deal. There is yet, no vote available to remain. The EU will of course prove nice over the next few weeks.

Corbyn teaming up with the EU monsters is not an appealing look.


----------



## elbows (Feb 25, 2019)

I am ready for pondering far more slippery antics over the next month. Can be a bit draining though so I might wait till all Wednesdays voting is done before trying to think about it properly.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oh, I can't see it passing.


So all positioning and signalling basically. Which, i think means it was never a firm commitment to push for it as a desired outcome rather than nailing down some doors and doing some PR.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Or no deal. There is yet, no vote available to remain. The EU will of course prove nice over the next few weeks.
> 
> Corbyn teaming up with the EU monsters is not an appealing look.



Agree it's an awful look. Think we can be certain no deal will not be on any ballot paper ever.


----------



## elbows (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So all positioning and signalling basically. Which, i think means it was never a firm commitment to push for it as a desired outcome rather than nailing down some doors and doing some PR.



Had cake, ate it, regurgitated much of it, smeared it in some sensitive places.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

this is on the briefing note given to the PLP apparently


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They don't have the numbers to do it. It's cynical and maybe intended to look like what you outline. And, it's far far too late.


Hmm I can see it helping shore up some support from the wet remain crew (see the two mugs on the last couple of pages) in the short term. Though I can't see it working medium, let alone, long term.

EDIT: see the post after this one for another example.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's the problem though isn't it? It's a leave on May's terms/stay vote. Which can only produce a stay result.


It's not a problem, it's a solution.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's not a problem, it's a solution.


not being able to see this is a problem is... a problem.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

(fwiw though I don't even think it's true. I reckon May's deal - against remain - would have a very good chance of winning a referendum)


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> not being able to see this is a problem is... a problem.


As is Leave, as is Leave on May's deal.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

So we note credible. And we note that is would - banally - have to be be agreed on by parliament. Now, does this mean the eu-leave via may is non-credible? Of course it does. In which case their own leave-eu may be credible but not passable - but still their favoured supportable option. Remain just hanging there. And nowhere does that say support it.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

I think they sold a lot of people on this when nothing has changed.


----------



## agricola (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oh, I can't see it passing.



I can.  This (if it is the proposal from Kyle and Wilson) is the only way the Commons ever passes May's deal, without going down the route of running down the clock and voting for it instead of no deal.  It also allows most MPs to say "we couldn't decide this, so its back to you" and thereby avoid responsibility.


----------



## elbows (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ska invita may well be right, I have no idea, I'm still raging to be honest. Certainly haven't done the maths to know if it could pass!
> 
> But all the same, even if it's just to shut up Watson and Lammy, why do it? Will Corbyn now whip Labour MP's in Leave constituencies to vote for it? Or is Labour supporting it but giving a free vote? How does this help him, honestly?
> 
> The only reason I can think of for doing this is that if it fails, he can say "oh well we tried the second referendum thing". But even then he's agreed to it as an option.



I suppose my alternative thought on this is, would be whether I should at least consider the idea that this announcement could have other objectives involving influencing one of more of the votes in parliament on Wednesday in ways that I am in no position to identify right now.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> (fwiw though I don't even think it's true. I reckon May's deal - against remain - would have a very good chance of winning a referendum)


It's a hard sell though, no sunlit uplands, a brexit in name only, a backstop they can't get out of.


----------



## Flavour (Feb 25, 2019)

Corbyn's shitting it from his own MPs is what it looks like.


----------



## killer b (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's a hard sell though, no sunlit uplands, a brexit in name only, a backstop they can't get out of.


yeah but it would be up against remain


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

killer b said:


> yeah but it would be up against remain


Which got 48% remember, and now the actual deal for leaving will be known.


----------



## bemused (Feb 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Corbyn's shitting it from his own MPs is what it looks like.



If anything is going to spark a new election, it'll be the Tories eat themselves over vote to delay Brexit and put a deal to a vote.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It's a hard sell though, no sunlit uplands, a brexit in name only, a backstop they can't get out of.



And it would still probably win against Remain. 




sleaterkinney said:


> It's not a problem, it's a solution.



Do you honestly believe that? What will it solve?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Which got 48% remember, and now the actual deal for leaving will be known.



And then what? So we stay in the EU through bureaucratic manouvre and then...? Does the story end there?


----------



## agricola (Feb 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Corbyn's shitting it from his own MPs is what it looks like.



That is certainly how it will be advertised, though one does wonder whether the realisation that Corbyn would end up here is what sparked TIG's launch - after all, a large part of their argument against him is that he is pro-Brexit, or has betrayed the membership on Brexit.  If he ends up getting a 2nd referendum, the already thin argument for them is that much thinner.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

agricola said:


> That is certainly how it will be advertised, though one does wonder whether the realisation that Corbyn would end up here is what sparked TIG's launch - after all, a large part of their argument against him is that he is pro-Brexit, or has betrayed the membership on Brexit.  If he ends up getting a 2nd referendum, the already thin argument for them is that much thinner.



Think it's already been alluded to, but presumably today's announcement is the result of the threat of further resignations.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Just to remind people, if labour propose a second vote in parliament and it passes then the result of that second vote is non-binding.


----------



## bemused (Feb 25, 2019)

How many more people are egible to vote than the last one?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Just to remind people, if labour propose a second vote in parliament and it passes then the result of that second vote is non-binding.



That would depend upon what the amendment said wouldn't it?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That would depend upon what the amendment said wouldn't it?


Nah. No British parliament can be bound by a referendum. No british parliament can be bound full stop.It was just a dig at the remainers who were arguing this guff as regards the result of the first vote then.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you honestly believe that? What will it solve?


There is no such thing as a good leave.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

...and here's chris with the news. Hard hitting stuff this.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Nah. No British parliament can be bound by a referendum. No british parliament can be bound full stop.It was just a dig at the remainers who were arguing this guff as regards the result of the first vote then.


Yeah I argued with a local govt politician up here about this and it took me about half an hour to get him to state verbally the second vote would also be advisory  


sleaterkinney said:


> There is no such thing as a good leave.


Aye no one was ever not in the EU that lived to tell the tale


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Feb 25, 2019)

You’d never have thought this species invented the wheel sometimes


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Nah. No British parliament can be bound by a referendum. No british parliament can be bound full stop.It was just a dig at the remainers who were arguing this guff as regards the result of the first vote then.



Sorry, should have got that. As you were.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> There is no such thing as a good leave.



That's not what I asked is it?

What do you think will happen when they cancel Brexit? 

It's not even as if we didn't know they were going to do it. We did. They were always going to cancel Brexit. But now Corbyn is helping them.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 25, 2019)

agricola said:


> I can.  This (if it is the proposal from Kyle and Wilson) is the only way the Commons ever passes May's deal, without going down the route of running down the clock and voting for it instead of no deal.  It also allows most MPs to say "we couldn't decide this, so its back to you" and thereby avoid responsibility.


If today's announcement is Kyle Wilson backing it might well pass, I agree. 

But that option rules out a Labour Brexit... Kyle Wilson is a capitulation to Mays Deal

That isnt the tone of the Corbyn announcment I don't think.... It's much more about getting a Labour customs union thing to happen.... Lets wait and see I guess.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Odious thornberry palling with cuddly keir to put the pressure on tonight. Attempts to bounce Corbyn into agreeing that any referendum from their initiative would mean labour supporting remain.

It wasn't just May playing the long game. These posh vipers were not even that well hidden.


----------



## bemused (Feb 25, 2019)

If it goes to a 2nd vote May should step down and hand it over to Boris .... then sit back with a mug of coco and laugh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

ska invita said:


> If today's announcement is Kyle Wilson backing it might well pass, I agree.
> 
> But that option rules out a Labour Brexit... Kyle Wilson is a capitulation to Mays Deal
> 
> That isnt the tone of the Corbyn announcment I don't think.... It's much more about getting a Labour customs union thing to happen.... Lets wait and see I guess.



You could be right. I hope you are. But it's poorly framed. 0/10 for communication skills.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Odious thornberry palling with cuddly keir to put the pressure on tonight. Attempts to bounce Corbyn into agreeing that any referendum from their initiative would mean labour supporting remain.
> 
> It wasn't just May playing the long game. These posh vipers were not even that well hidden.



Thornberry has been quite subtle to be fair. Did not see her announcing Labour would campaign for Remain on the same day.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's not what I asked is it?
> 
> What do you think will happen when they cancel Brexit?
> 
> It's not even as if we didn't know they were going to do it. We did. They were always going to cancel Brexit. But now Corbyn is helping them.


What do you think would happen if it went ahead?. Some great political upheavel?. Do you want this Tory scheme to go through?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> What do you think would happen if it went ahead?. Some great political upheavel?. Do you want this Tory scheme to go through?


Sometimes you need reminding that you support a tory remain. Here we go:  you support a tory remain.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 25, 2019)

bemused said:


> If it goes to a 2nd vote May should step down and hand it over to Boris .... then sit back with a mug of coco and laugh.



She should have done that at the start. Something suddenly occured to me last night though. The looks on Johnson's and Gove's faces at the press conference the morning the result was announced were properly 'oh shit...', as they meant to gain personal capital from the campaign rather than win it. So wasn't it convenient that they mutually screwed up each other's leadership campaigns right at the start, forcing them both to withdraw and leave it to Theresa May? It's almost like they both had to be seen to stand, but didn't want to risk a second time of winning a campaign that would have made things worse for them.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Two years of fucking the country (and Europe) on top of the rest of their evil shit.
We pay these cunts' salaries.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

bemused said:


> How many more people are egible to vote than the last one?


Hopefully quite a few gammons have blown a fuse since then - and many more after the event.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> What do you think would happen if it went ahead?. Some great political upheavel?. Do you want this Tory scheme to go through?



You know exactly what I think about May's deal. Why don't you answer the question put to you?


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Odious thornberry palling with cuddly keir to put the pressure on tonight. Attempts to bounce Corbyn into agreeing that any referendum from their initiative would mean labour supporting remain.
> 
> It wasn't just May playing the long game. These posh vipers were not even that well hidden.



It's Labour policy. A 'decent' Brexit deal or let the country decide. What's up with that? It probably reflects the members views.

Hardly clear that the vipers would even win a second vote.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Two years of fucking the country (and Europe) on top of the rest of their evil shit.
> We pay these cunts' salaries.


Sorry which cunts? The ones you supported and still support, the ones that increase VAT, increased tuition fees, implemented the bedroom tax, etc. 



SpackleFrog said:


> It's not even as if we didn't know they were going to do it. We did. They were always going to cancel Brexit. But now Corbyn is helping them.


And not even for any gain, even on their own terms. They'll loose support in marginals and yellow dicks will vote LD/Green/TIG anyway


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Just to remind people, if labour propose a second vote in parliament and it passes then the result of that second vote is non-binding.



Yes. We are all going to bicker about this until we die, that much is clear.


----------



## Badgers (Feb 25, 2019)

Yahoo is now part of Oath

*British Organic food suppliers 'would undoubtedly go out of out business' under no deal Brexit*


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 25, 2019)

Another nail in Labour’s coffin hammered in. The surrender to middle class cultural and political imperialism won’t end the Blairite rebellion it will fuel it.


----------



## gosub (Feb 25, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You’d never have thought this species invented the wheel sometimes



I was going to liken it to the Golgafranchams......

 



...but the colour scheme is the ONE thing that was sorted early


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:
			
		

> Hopefully quite a few gammons have blown a fuse since then - and many more after the event.



gentlegreen : *Not on* to gloat about old people dying (which one or two on here have been pretty fucking tasteless about at times   )

That said though, I think there've been quite a few recent comments about how Leave (any version) would be much more likely to win a  second ref than remain.

I think it's *far* less predictable than that, we'll only know likelihoods when we know the terms of any referendum, how the campaign will be organised, etc.
Surely not all Remain campaigners will be stupid enough to be as complacent and crap as last time.
And the simple demographics (tasteless shit aside  ) of turnout will definitely be pretty different what with new voters, increased younger-person and general Remain turnout, and all the rest.
Remain would still be up against the 'Tell Them Again' slogan or similar though, so ?????  --
Just saying predicting a result is not as clearcut and obvious as some Leavers seem  to think

For clarity, I might be Remain-minded but I'm opposed to a second ref. I also still think that the chances of one are far from high. For now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> gentlegreen : *Not on* to gloat about old people dying (which one or two on here have been pretty fucking tasteless about at times  )


whoa there, we've long looked forward to the deaths of some elderly people, to wit the Queen and her nefandous consort, the Prince of Wales and of course 'sir' cliff richard


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> gentlegreen : *Not on* to gloat about old people dying (which one or two on here have been pretty fucking tasteless about at times  )



*Certain* old people - I'm prime gammon age myself. These days it's a prejudice/insult I mostly use against certain car drivers I encounter.



Spoiler: youtube video featuring James O'Brien


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> whoa there, we've long looked forward to the deaths of some elderly people, to wit the Queen and her nefandous consort, the Prince of Wales and of course 'sir' cliff richard



Exceptions and the rule, etc etc. 
I just think that expressing joy about pensioner-Leavers dying off is well off the mark.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

I was going to suggest it would have to be a 60/40 result to make a change to what we currently have =- which is how it should have been the first time.
Of course it should never have happened at all.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I was going to suggest it would have to be a 60/40 result to make a change to what we currently have.



You know nothing stays the same whatever happens right? 

Going back in time 3 years and it all being ok is not an option.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Exceptions and the rule, etc etc.
> I just think that expressing joy about pensioner-Leavers dying off is well off the mark.


 billbond has claimed the great majority of remain voters have died since 23/6/16 so the field may be more level than expected


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Exceptions and the rule, etc etc.
> I just think that expressing joy about pensioner-Leavers dying off is well off the mark.


Who said anything about pensioners ? A lot of these cunts are much younger than that.
"Gammon" is more an attitude than a demographic.
But if they are mostly elderly, I'm of that demographic now so I can say what I want


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know nothing stays the same whatever happens right?
> 
> Going back in time 3 years and it all being ok is not an option.


Who wants to go back to the year of the Great Cull?


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> billbond has claimed the great majority of remain voters have died since 23/6/16 so the field may be more level than expected



Whatever that fuckwit says, assume the opposite


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know nothing stays the same whatever happens right?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know nothing stays the same whatever happens right?
> 
> Going back in time 3 years and it all being ok is not an option.


That's what these people want, the massive transfer of wealth from poor to rich, the increase in poverty and inequality - not an issue. "We were getting on pretty well" as said by luvvey Lord Bragg


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Yes of course dear, have a nice cup of tea and a custard cream.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

You specifically argued for this 


gentlegreen said:


> 3. Stick with what worked before.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Shit _working _now. Hence the vote in certain areas.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Shit _working _now. Hence the vote in certain areas.


But they were attacking the wrong target.
Elephant in the room - TORY government.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Who said anything about pensioners ? A lot of these cunts are much younger than that.
> "Gammon" is more an attitude than a demographic.



How can you be ‘of that age’ and yet still be at Novara media level student politics?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> But they were attacking the wrong target.
> Elephant in the room - TORY government.


Who were? 

I have given up on you.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Poor disenfranchised people hitting out at Lord Snooty and the metropolitan elite.
Oh look, another vote, let's fuck 'em up.
It helped that some on the left were conflating Tory austerity and the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

I meant the remain  voters in richer areas. But there you go.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> How can you be ‘of that age’ and yet still be at Novara media level student politics?


I don't do politics.
And after this present insanity, I certainly won't again.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 25, 2019)

I guess it must have been in a another universe that the party that you backed, and still back, were in government for 5 years. 

FFS you clown you've specifically argued in favour of this "TORY austerity".


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It helped that some on the left were conflating Tory austerity and the EU.



You’ve already said you don’t do politics - no need to prove it


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

What's that mnemonic again ?
FAST ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 25, 2019)

Anyway time to do something more interesting for a bit ...


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Feb 25, 2019)

Buddy Bradley said:


> Is there any strong reason not to believe that we're heading for:
> 
> * Govt loses vote on May's deal
> * May resigns and/or vote of no confidence
> ...


Aside from not having a general election, I'm not doing too badly in this prediction.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

The only thing you have right so far is the first one.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

Thing is the Labour proposition is still a 'good' deal first. If Labour, either in Govt or in conjunction with the Tories, delivered the deal they spoke of, a customs union etc. would that be enough for the Remain wing of the Labour Party? It would be enough for me, 'respect' the crap vote, but make the best of it/neuter the excesses ahead of the next election, but would Remainers say 'fair play' or would it all be 'wicked' Jeremy enabled Brexit forever and a day?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Thing is the Labour proposition is still a 'good' deal first. If Labour, either in Govt or in conjunction with the Tories, delivered the deal they spoke of, a customs union etc. would that be enough for the Remain wing of the Labour Party? It would be enough for me, 'respect' the crap vote, but make the best of it/neuter the excesses ahead of the next election, but would Remainers say 'fair play' or would it all be 'wicked' Jeremy enabled Brexit forever and a day?


What's it got to do with you?


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What's it got to do with you?



Lol.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Well what exactly are you going to do if it's not enough? What are you going to do if it is? The fact, remainers have argued for no popular participation in leaving the eu - you even went to court to make sure. The idea that you are or we now have a say after you making legally crystal clear that we do not and that we should not is a bit sickening.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

_Enough for me_ lol indeed. Wow, things have suddenly changed.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 25, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Hopefully quite a few gammons have blown a fuse since then - and many more after the event.


FFS.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> FFS.


It's the apolitical choice.


----------



## Cloo (Feb 25, 2019)

I don't think we're gonna leave on the 29th March... my (totally uninformed) money is on the agony being stretched out longer. I fear we're probably still leaving at the end of it, though.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 25, 2019)

I've been travelling all afternoon so not heard much detail, however I agree with the notion of Corbyn losing his bottle. I can see why he resisted the second referendum and also why he seems to have crumbled now, but ultimately it's a shift of _position_, which is the problem. Remainers delude themselves that they are linked to or representing a current out there, even if they are mistaking guardianista/remain demo people as actual people. But Corbyn hasn't made much effort to connect with leaver sentiment, regardless of his speaking tours. That's one of the reasons why the polls are not shifting towards Labour (regardless of the true picture in terms of real votes).  Thornberry, Soubry and the rest are closer to _their_ people than Corbyn is to _his_ (potential) people.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I've been travelling all afternoon so not heard much detail, however I agree with the notion of Corbyn losing his bottle. I can see why he resisted the second referendum and also why he seems to have crumbled now, but ultimately it's a shift of _position_, which is the problem. Remainers delude themselves that they are linked to or representing a current out there, even if they are mistaking guardianista/remain demo people as actual people. But Corbyn hasn't made much effort to connect with leaver sentiment, regardless of his speaking tours. That's one of the reasons why the polls are not shifting towards Labour (regardless of the true picture in terms of real votes).  Thornberry, Soubry and the rest are closer to _their_ people than Corbyn is to _his_ (potential) people.


Their people beckon apocalypse.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Well what exactly are you going to do if it's not enough? What are you going to do if it is? The fact, remainers have argued for no popular participation in leaving the eu - you even went to court to make sure. The idea that you are or we now have a say after you making legally crystal clear that we do not and that we should not is a bit sickening.



I’m not sure I get what you mean. If you mean the requirement for Parliament to vote on it how does that stop ‘popular participation’? 

What participation was on offer from the Leave side anyway? Thanks for the vote, stand aside while we deregulate.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

It would be enough for me


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It would be enough for me



Heavens sake butchers. Try not to be so over-dramatic.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Heavens sake butchers. Try not to be so over-dramatic.


So nothing has changed? Right.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m not sure I get what you mean. If you mean the requirement for Parliament to vote on it how does that stop ‘popular participation’?
> 
> What participation was on offer from the Leave side anyway? Thanks for the vote, stand aside while we deregulate.


I think it's SpineyNorman time again:



> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So nothing has changed? Right.



Enlighten me. The noose looks just as tight.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Enlighten me. The noose looks just as tight.


Now that he may have won you over tell me, what's changed?


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I think it's SpineyNorman time again:



Or to you, what participation on the basis of a vote to ‘return’ sovereignty to Parliament? Not to a workers committee, but to Parliament so it could seek trade deals with the US and put up a bigger fence.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Now that he may have won you over tell me, what's changed?



‘He’?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Enlighten me. The noose looks just as tight.


The EU as noose is good metaphor. In what ways would you say?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> ‘He’?


Last i checked the man you hate to love is a man.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Last i checked the man you hate to love is a man.



Corbyn? Why do you think a second vote wins me over? I don’t think it’s a good idea. 

Fucks sake he’s not that lovable. You simply want him hated for the correct reasons.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Corbyn? Why do you think a second vote wins me over? I don’t think it’s a good idea.
> 
> Fucks sake he’s not that lovable. You simply want him hated for the correct reasons.


What on earth do you think that you posted a few minutes ago? It's up there. Have a look.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What on earth do you think that you posted a few minutes ago? It's up there. Have a look.



I’m not playing cryptic bollocks. I simply don’t believe in the opportunity presented by Brexit that you appear to. It’s more and more nationalism and spread ‘em for a trade deal with someone else instead. This is not escape. 

Best outcome is a fudged Leave, park it, deflate nationalism, Labour win the election, build inside and out.

Bed beckons, have a good night.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 25, 2019)

Chuka is calling for disciplinary action against any Labour MP's who don't follow Corbyn's line and vote for a second referendum amendment. 

The brass neck of that fucker! 

E2A: Seemed to be anyway - on Newsnight. "What will be done about Labour MP's who refuse to support a second referendum?"


----------



## BobDavis (Feb 26, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m not playing cryptic bollocks. I simply don’t believe in the opportunity presented by Brexit that you appear to. It’s more and more nationalism and spread ‘em for a trade deal with someone else instead. This is not escape.
> 
> Best outcome is a fudged Leave, park it, deflate nationalism, Labour win the election, build inside and out.
> 
> Bed beckons, have a good night.


Agree with this. I don’t think voters will go for any sort of radical lexit & if a party cannot get a majority on a lexit manifesto then there will not be a lexit government. What Labour offered at last election was more popular with voters than the mainstream media ever believed it would be & brexit or no brexit an overall majority at next GE for Labour would certainly be a better outcome for the lower paid in this country than Tories or some sort of centrist coalition.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

BobDavis said:


> Agree with this. I don’t think voters will go for any sort of radical lexit & if a party cannot get a majority on a lexit manifesto then there will not be a lexit government. What Labour offered at last election was more popular with voters than the mainstream media ever believed it would be & brexit or no brexit an overall majority at next GE for Labour would certainly be a better outcome for the lower paid in this country than Tories or some sort of centrist coalition.



Voters wouldn't go for a wadical lemain either so where does that leave us?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Whoever coined the term lexit needs to be shot in the face.


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What will be done about Labour MP's who refuse to support a second referendum?"


“Who will rid us of these turbulent leavers”?


----------



## rekil (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Whoever coined the term lexit needs to be shot in the face.


The earliest mention I could find was by OJ in the guardian in July 2015.



> The more leftwing opponents of the EU come out, the more momentum will gather pace and gain critical mass. For those of us on the left who have always been critical of the EU, it has felt like a lonely crusade. But left support for withdrawal – “Lexit”, if you like – is not new.



I'd hesitate to green light this mission. It'd be very poor optics.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Whoever coined the term lexit needs to be shot in the face.


Whoever came up with "Brexit" needs to be shot in the face - ditto "brexiteer".


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

It's missing the kid flicking the V's if it had that i would put it on my wall.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


donald tusk looks so different in drag


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


oh and about 18 kids seem to be missing


----------



## chilango (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030



Sexist and racist, no?


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

I'm not getting all the pant-wetting about Labour now supporting a 2nd referendum.  Bit too little, too late, surely.  Would have to pass a vote in Parliament, and that's by no means certain.  Even so, it's not in the gift of May, Corbyn or the UK Parliament to decide whether Article 50 gets extended beyond 29th March.  That's up to the EU27, and it's perfectly understandable if they say Fuck Off in every language spoken within the EU, after how the UK has screwed the rest of the EU around for the past 2 1/2 years or so.  

Even if despite all that, by some miracle, there is a "People's Vote."  What question goes on the ballot?  Who gets to vote on it?  Will non-resident UK citizens get a chance this time?  How about EU27 citizens who are permanently resident in the UK?  An since fuck all has been done about the corruption in the 2016 referendum, whose to say it won't be the same again?  The mysterious "Britain's Future" group is already spending £50K per week on Facebook alone with highly targeted pro-leave messaging.  No one seems to know who they are or where their money comes from, and it's surely not just from the "Donate" button on their flimsy website.  

Nope, I think we're still fucked.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

anyone got photo shop? i can only afford paint.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

I've got access to Photoshop and pretty well every other design tool, but I can't even do in it what I can do with paint.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> Nope, I think we're still fucked.


you're taking the wee


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

The bottom line is hardly anyone on the official "leave" side really wanted the answer to be "leave" -  it's a gravy train for people like Farage.

 

The look on his face the morning after when either he was now out of a job (or several), and/or would have to deliver something for which he had no plan ...

Watch: Brexit lies unravel as Nigel Farage calls £350m a week promise to NHS "a mistake"


----------



## ska invita (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> I'm not getting all the pant-wetting about Labour now supporting a 2nd referendum.  Bit too little, too late, surely.  Would have to pass a vote in Parliament, and that's by no means certain.


Not too little too late, the opposite. It wouldve got shot down even further if it was brought to the table earlier. In a way Mays running down the clock gives it the best chance it would ever have of passing


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The bottom line is hardly anyone on the official "leave" side really wanted the answer to be "leave" -  it's a gravy train for people like Farage.


How then do you explain polls consistently showing that the overwhelming majority of the 17.5 million people who voted to leave still wanting to leave?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> How then do you explain polls consistently showing that the overwhelming majority of the 17.5 million people who voted to leave still wanting to leave?


i think he's just talking about the politicians


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> How then do you explain polls consistently showing that the overwhelming majority of the 17.5 million people who voted to leave still wanting to leave?



I mean the people who organised it, not the millions of clueless voters.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I mean the people who organised it, not the millions of clueless voters.


The people who organised it supported remain.


----------



## hot air baboon (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030



don't fall for it kids !


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The people who organised it supported remain.


Well that too ... most of 'em - except headbangers like Mogg.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


Brecht's _Mother Courage _eventually lost all her children; just saying.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Brecht's _Mother Courage _eventually lost all her children; just saying.


So, for an illiterate like me, what's the literary antithesis of Brecht ?


----------



## DownwardDog (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So, for an illiterate like me, what's the literary antithesis of Brecht ?



Leanne Battersby.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So, for an illiterate like me, what's the literary antithesis of Brecht ?


unreadable


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

I confess my Brechtian knowledge doesn't go much further than the Doors' "One more Whisky Bar", but I'm familiar with the pre-war Germany _zeitgeist _..


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Not too little too late, the opposite. It wouldve got shot down even further if it was brought to the table earlier. In a way Mays running down the clock gives it the best chance it would ever have of passing


I don't share your optimism I'm afraid, and increasingly, I think the end game for both parties is a "no deal" or the hardest Brexit possible, for their own reasons.  

What I meant by too little, too late was that Labour missed too many opportunities, too long ago.  Calling on the PM to invoke Article 50 asap after a referendum that went narrowly to Leave confirmed the suspicions of many that the Labour leadership were never _really_ behind the remain campaign at all.  And, at that stage, neither the Tories or Labour had even a whiff of a plan for managing the leave process.  (To be fair, two years later, they still don't have one!)  When shit started to hit the fan about "irregularities" in the Leave campaign, with funding/backing linked to the same far-right folk who helped make Trump the US president, you'd have thought Labour would have said, "hold on a minute," and pushed for a robust investigation before any further steps.  But, they were remarkably quiet about the illegality and corruption.

If Labour had run on a platform to Remain, or have a second, "clean and clear" referendum on leaving the EU, they'd have won the last GE by a long shot against the most unpopular Tory government in decades.  The thought of an unholy alliance between the Tories and far-right DUP to cling to power would have stayed the stuff of nightmares.  Labour seemed loyal only to their supporters who voted out, whether or not they were duped and even in the face of mounting evidence that they and the poorest folk were set to suffer the most from any form of "Leave".  Oh, and they haven't given two shits about the impact of Brexit on Ireland, and clearly they think Scotland can fuck off as well, since there seems no bother that even die hard "Better Together" folks are starting to throw their lot behind Independence is a better option than following the rest of the UK over the cliff.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So, for an illiterate like me, what's the literary antithesis of Brecht ?


You're not illiterate, are you?

I've previously posted the famous extract from Brecht's 1953 anti-statist polemical poem _Die Lösung...
_
_



			After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers' Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
		
Click to expand...

_​Change the date to six days later and a couple of minor details and it might be worth presenting to Corbyn today.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're not illiterate, are you?


I got ungraded in my English lit O Level and failed English - and only scraped it when I retook it.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I got ungraded in my English lit O Level and failed English - and only scraped it when I retook it.


But you understand what the word illiteracy means?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> But you understand what the word illiteracy means?


I meant it in the sense of "literature" rather than "language"..
perhaps I should have used a qualifier ...


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

You couldn't make it up, example #416

No-deal Brexit panic after ministers realise the UK doesn't have the right pallets for exporting to the EU



> DEFRA last week confirmed to industry leaders that the United Kingdom will not have even close to enough EU-approved pallets for companies to use for exporting to the EU after a potential no-deal exit. This means that UK companies would be in competition for a small number of pallets which meet EU rules, while those that missed out would be forced to wait for new pallets, which could take weeks to be ready.





> Affected industry figures who were scheduled for talks with the government said they were baffled as to why it took ministers so long to realise the dearth of pallets, given that they are such a basic feature of cross-border trade.One business figure told BI: "The point of transition was that it provided the two years we needed to get ready. Now we are trying to get ready in a few weeks. What sort of lunatic would do that?"


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I meant it in the sense of "literature" rather than "language"


Best we get back OT?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Best we get back OT?


that means On Topic, gentlegreen


----------



## rekil (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


It looks like Viz's 'Euro School'.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


What’s she done with her other 16 children?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s she done with her other 16 children?


Obv the shit ones don't count. I have a follow up pic, just waiting for a few more responses.


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that means On Topic, gentlegreen



Operating Thetan - Wikipedia 

EtA, I love how Germany and the Netherlands are like best mates in that picture. Total historical accuracy.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s she done with her other 16 children?


she ate them.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> she ate them.


I think she’s put them to work picking fruit and cleaning cars.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

Its more than a bit weird and she clearly doesn't know many Eastern European flags.  I reckon she probably lives near me, we seem to have a lot of that type living round here.  Several homes have EU flags up and there is even one flying above our council offices.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

Right as i failed entirely to entice any remainers into defending that cartoon i may as well post the follow up i had prepared:


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

A Judéo-Yank trap.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

W


butchersapron said:


> Right as i failed to entice any remainers into defending that cartoon i may as well post the follow up i had prepared:
> 
> View attachment 163038


Well, that's shut everyone up, Butchers!


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Right as i failed entirely to entice any remainers into defending that cartoon i may as well post the follow up i had prepared:
> 
> View attachment 163038



Ah, that was it. The picture you posted rang a bell and now I remember what the bell was. I saw this postcard once before, when I studied Vichy France.

I wonder if La Dunbar realises? Or if she would care if she did?

EtA, found this, a re-do from last year. Look at the ''trap box'' now apparently...


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

Is that image widely known to Brighton art school graduates ?
Spooky though ...

Not quite as obvious as this one ...



/Godwins - EOT


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Ah, that was it. The picture you posted rang a bell and now I remember what the bell was. I saw this postcard once before, when I studied Vichy France.


Did you happen to do the OU module Liberation and reconstruction: France and Italy? Pretty sure that's where i first saw it - in the prepared course materials.


----------



## ska invita (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> I don't share your optimism I'm afraid


there was no optimism in my post, i was talking objectively

agree with you about invoking a50, but in practice it would've passed anyway even with labour dissent


----------



## Santino (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030


Mother Europe should be being carried off by Zeus disguised as a bull.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> i failed entirely to entice any remainers into defending that cartoon



Does that surprise you?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

Perhaps she was trying to be "edgy" in reclaiming / subverting it - replacing _la mère poule_ with something less French ...


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> I don't share your optimism I'm afraid, and increasingly, I think the end game for both parties is a "no deal" or the hardest Brexit possible, for their own reasons.
> 
> What I meant by too little, too late was that Labour missed too many opportunities, too long ago.  Calling on the PM to invoke Article 50 asap after a referendum that went narrowly to Leave confirmed the suspicions of many that the Labour leadership were never _really_ behind the remain campaign at all.  And, at that stage, neither the Tories or Labour had even a whiff of a plan for managing the leave process.  (To be fair, two years later, they still don't have one!)  When shit started to hit the fan about "irregularities" in the Leave campaign, with funding/backing linked to the same far-right folk who helped make Trump the US president, you'd have thought Labour would have said, "hold on a minute," and pushed for a robust investigation before any further steps.  But, they were remarkably quiet about the illegality and corruption.
> 
> If Labour had run on a platform to Remain, or have a second, "clean and clear" referendum on leaving the EU, they'd have won the last GE by a long shot against the most unpopular Tory government in decades.  The thought of an unholy alliance between the Tories and far-right DUP to cling to power would have stayed the stuff of nightmares.  Labour seemed loyal only to their supporters who voted out, whether or not they were duped and even in the face of mounting evidence that they and the poorest folk were set to suffer the most from any form of "Leave".  Oh, and they haven't given two shits about the impact of Brexit on Ireland, and clearly they think Scotland can fuck off as well, since there seems no bother that even die hard "Better Together" folks are starting to throw their lot behind Independence is a better option than following the rest of the UK over the cliff.



Where would the Labour votes have come from to win on a Remain or second ref platform? How would they have been enough to replace what they would have lost?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

efta's reached a deal on citizens' rights with the uk


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

I think May is just about to speak in the commons on her latest contortions. However it seems to me she's moving towards allowing votes against no deal and also in favour of extensions. Probably takes the wind out of Labour's sails just at the point they finally come round to 2nd ref?  However the _scheduling_ of all these votes could make things much more complex.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose ready for a vomit? This is by middle class parents fav polly dunbar and is from a new book “Drawing Europe Together: Illustrators against Brexit”. This would surely make even the hardest remainer feel a little queasy?
> 
> View attachment 163030



its is _exactly_ the same as a 19th century cartoon where Queen victoria is gathering all the nations of her empire (depicted as children)  into her embrace but ungrateful ireland is sulkily rejecting her benevolence.  (annoyingly i cant find it on the internet - i have it in a book about anti-irish racism)


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

Corbyn is really pushing the _i hob-nobbed with the EU neo-liberal monsters line and they told me just what i wanted to hear_ line. Is he really that naive?


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

Doubt it. It's all just positioning atm.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

Now he wants a referendum on may's deal if it passes. Quite addictive these PR demands for referendums premised on situations that won't exist aren't they?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> Doubt it. It's all just positioning atm.


Seen the EU bamboozle and flatter into stupidity people like him many many times over the last 3 decades.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> efta's reached a deal on citizens' rights with the uk


Presumably that's only people who are "abroad" at the time and won't apply to any subsequent (re-)entry ?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Presumably that's only people who are "abroad" at the time and won't apply to any subsequent (re-)entry ?


It's tied to citizens’ rights. What are you asking? If non citizens of the EEA EFTA states have citizen's rights in EEA EFTA states?


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Seem the EU bamboozle and flatter into stupidity people like him many many times over the last 3 decades.


Huge swathes of his party and base think the EU is fucking wonderful. Playing pretty with them is for them.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> Huge swathes of his party and base think the EU is fucking wonderful. Playing pretty with them is for them.


They don't need it though. He has shifted focus significantly since he came back from Brussels. To do so is going to destabilise the coalition he's spent two+ years putting together. I can't see why he would do that all of a sudden without being convinced of something when he met these scumbags. Not everything he and his lot do are perfectly judged and executed moves - plenty of room for him to fuck up.


----------



## bemused (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> Huge swathes of his party and base think the EU is fucking wonderful. Playing pretty with them is for them.



Isn't only playing to your base modern politics now ... depressing really


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They don't need it though. He has shifted focus significantly since he came back from Brussels. To do so is going to destabilise the coalition he's spent two+ years putting together. I can't see why he would do that all of a sudden without being convinced of something when he met these scumbags. Not everything he and his lot do are perfectly judged and executed moves - plenty of room for him to fuck up.


I don't know how well judged or executed it is, but that's what he's doing.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

bemused said:


> Isn't only playing to your base modern politics now ... depressing really


it isn't just playing to his base though, it's also about looking like the adult in the room to the electorate.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> it isn't just playing to his base though, it's also about looking like the adult in the room to the electorate.


This looks more like him going _i've talked to the bully behind your back and he agrees with me._


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This looks more like him going _i've talked to the bully behind your back and he agrees with me._


That's certainly how some people will view it, yeah. But it's not really a departure from the approach they've taken over the last couple of years - _a pragmatic & sensible jobs-first brexit negotiated with our fraternal european partners yadda yadda yadda_


----------



## bemused (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> it isn't just playing to his base though, it's also about looking like the adult in the room to the electorate.



The last few days has been good for Labour I think.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

bemused said:


> The last few days has been good for Labour I think.


You not seen the times/yougov polling then?


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

this is the hottest take.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

The interesting thing will be the extent to which the EU get behind Corbyn and his second ref line. In some ways it would be just about the last thing he'd want as he walks almost as many tightropes as May.


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Where would the Labour votes have come from to win on a Remain or second ref platform? How would they have been enough to replace what they would have lost?


If Labour had come out on a platform of remaining in the EU and withdrawing Article 50 for the June 2017 election, they'd have trounced the Tories.  Yes, some Labour-Leave voters would have bitched about it, but there was enough information and opportunity then to make the case for remaining in the EU to persuade enough of them that leaving would be absolutely NOT in their best interest (as we absolutely know to be the case now.)  Even if some stayed home or cast protest votes for UKIP or AN Other, I'm sure Labour still would have picked up enough seats to form a majority.

Opportunity missed.  Big fucking opportunity missed.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> If Labour had come out on a platform of remaining in the EU and withdrawing Article 50 for the June 2017 election, they'd have trounced the Tories.  Yes, some Labour-Leave voters would have bitched about it, but there was enough information and opportunity then to make the case for remaining in the EU to persuade enough of them that leaving would be absolutely NOT in their best interest (as we absolutely know to be the case now.)  Even if some stayed home or cast protest votes for UKIP or AN Other, I'm sure Labour still would have picked up enough seats to form a majority.
> 
> Opportunity missed.  Big fucking opportunity missed.


I'm not seeing a great deal of evidence to support any of that.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

Lol. There is literally no-one who's done any serious research into the 2017 election who actually thinks this.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> If Labour had come out on a platform of remaining in the EU and withdrawing Article 50 for the June 2017 election, they'd have trounced the Tories.  Yes, some Labour-Leave voters would have bitched about it, but there was enough information and opportunity then to make the case for remaining in the EU to persuade enough of them that leaving would be absolutely NOT in their best interest (as we absolutely know to be the case now.)  Even if some stayed home or cast protest votes for UKIP or AN Other, I'm sure Labour still would have picked up enough seats to form a majority.
> 
> Opportunity missed.  Big fucking opportunity missed.



Certainly worked wonders for the lib dems at the last election.

What a bizarre and insular world you operate in.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

Wish fulfilment nothings


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Whoever came up with "Brexit" needs to be shot in the face - ditto "brexiteer".
> 
> View attachment 163026


The inventors of any compound words should be killed in the face with a rusty spoon imo. One of the things I'm 100% with Orwell on.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

_withdrawing article 50 and cancelling brexit _is the policy the Tories wanted Labour to run on ffs.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The inventors of any compound words should be killed in the face with a rusty spoon imo. One of the things I'm 100% with Orwell on.


Portmanteau Cunts.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The inventors of any compound words should be killed in the face with a rusty spoon imo. One of the things I'm 100% with Orwell on.


To be honest, I'd use a splade.


----------



## Crispy (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> The inventors of any compound words


Compentors?


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

Anyway May's announcement today won't be good news to those who want a hard brexit.  Should her deal get voted now (which I'm not sure it will) then an extension looks by far and away the most likely scenario. Just more blackmail this time against the ERG.

I'm not really sure what the point of extension is if May is still in charge. She's deliberately the run the clock down for political expediency and given she only has one gear there is little reason to believe she wouldn't do exactly the same again.


----------



## elbows (Feb 26, 2019)

Bru-turn if you want to, the bradies brot for brurning.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> compound words


portmanteau words. Which is a bastard to spell


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Portmanteau Cunts.


ONE OF THE TEAM


----------



## steveo87 (Feb 26, 2019)

elbows said:


> Bru-turn if you want to, the bradies brot for brurning.


Dentures slippes?


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Certainly worked wonders for the lib dems at the last election.
> 
> What a bizarre and insular world you operate in.


Seriously?  Can't compare the two.  LibDems fucked up by propping up the Tories so regardless of what they offer, plenty wouldn't have nor ever will touch them.  But you carry on believing if it helps.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

Do you have links to any credible research that suggests Labour would have won the election if they'd run on the policies the tories wanted them to? I'd love to read it if so.


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Anyway May's announcement today won't be good news to those who want a hard brexit.  Should her deal get voted now (which I'm not sure it will) then an extension looks by far and away the most likely scenario. Just more blackmail this time against the ERG.
> 
> I'm not really sure what the point of extension is if May is still in charge. She's deliberately the run the clock down for political expediency and given she only has one gear there is little reason to believe she wouldn't do exactly the same again.


There is no point to an extension, and no guarantee the EU27 will agree to it.   If they say "no" then it helps throw more blame on the EU for the pile of shit the country is swan diving into.

The only action the UK can take without agreement of the other EU Countries is to revoke Article 50 - and any politician, of any stripe, who's serious about avoiding said pile of shit should be pushing for revocation immediately.

Yes, after that, do all the awareness raising, campaigning, cleaning up the electoral system, expose the corruption, hold a referendum, come up with some credible plan for UK out of the EU, take dancing lessons, whatever.  Article 50 can be invoked again in future if there is still genuine widespread appetite for suicide leaving the EU.

Even so, the companies that have fucked off, the investments that pulled out, the EU27 residents that left before they were pushed out, any sense of credibility of the UK as a nation, the normalcy of xenophobia, all that shit, will still be with us - the legacy of pompous fuckwit politicians willing to drag the country down the shitter to keep their parties together.  But still better than the alternative.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> Seriously?  Can't compare the two.  LibDems fucked up by propping up the Tories so regardless of what they offer, plenty wouldn't have nor ever will touch them.  But you carry on believing if it helps.



So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?

The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same.  Can you not see the problem here?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> Do you have links to any credible research that suggests Labour would have won the election if they'd run on the policies the tories wanted them to? I'd love to read it if so.


I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the _worst possible point_ to go with remain/2nd ref.


----------



## Chz (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the _worst possible point_ to go with remain/2nd ref.


Pushing a referendum line is not the same as pushing a remain line. Or are we now conceding that Remain will win in that case?

I'm Remain through and through, but even I know pushing it in the 2017 election was suicide. I mean, the _*sane*_ thing would've been to say "We'll get the best deal we can and put it to a public vote", but that doesn't mean it was a good idea, in terms of getting votes.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> There is no point to an extension, and no guarantee the EU27 will agree to it.   If they say "no" then it helps throw more blame on the EU for the pile of shit the country is swan diving into.
> 
> The only action the UK can take without agreement of the other EU Countries is to revoke Article 50 - and any politician, of any stripe, who's serious about avoiding said pile of shit should be pushing for revocation immediately.
> 
> ...


The underlying logic of the underlined bit is 'voters don't understand stuff, so if we ever let them have another go at it they have to be _'educated' _first.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 26, 2019)

A second referendum line from Labour at any point after the original referendum would have been an implicit remain line. No one world have bought it as any other suggestion


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not sure whether we've even reached the point now where Labour pushing a remain line wins more seats than it loses - it probably hasn't. However 2017 would have been just about the _worst possible point_ to go with remain/2nd ref.


I think their constructive ambiguity has more or less run out of road now. But May explicitly wanted to make the 2017 election about brexit, and it was only by not allowing her to do this that Labour managed to make the gains they did. They would have been destroyed.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

Chz said:


> Pushing a referendum line is not the same as pushing a remain line. Or are we now conceding that Remain will win in that case?
> 
> I'm Remain through and through, but even I know pushing it in the 2017 election was suicide. I mean, the _*sane*_ thing would've been to say "We'll get the best deal we can and put it to a public vote", but that doesn't mean it was a good idea, in terms of getting votes.


Part of the reason we are where we are is that silly cunt Cameron not building stage 2 in. And with that not built in, at some point over the last 2 years, May should have had an adult conversation with Corbyn about the this endgame. Not sure she'd have got an adult answer back and all would still have been politics.  However, if you look at Brexit purely as a _process/timeline_, it's hard to think of any bigger fuck up.


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The underlying logic of the underlined bit is 'voters don't understand stuff, so if we ever let them have another go at it they have to be _'educated' _first.


*sigh*


----------



## mojo pixy (Feb 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Did you happen to do the OU module Liberation and reconstruction: France and Italy? Pretty sure that's where i first saw it - in the prepared course materials.



It wasn't - it was a BA in French I took half a lifetime ago, one of the modules was 20th century French history. I chose it because I'd already studied WW2 and Vichy France at A Level. I thought I'd have an easy job because half the module's contents were already in my head


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> *sigh*





killer b said:


> Do you have links to any credible research that suggests Labour would have won the election if they'd run on the policies the tories wanted them to? I'd love to read it if so.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

I'd be happy with non-credible research too tbf, I need cheering up.


----------



## rekil (Feb 26, 2019)

Some eejit on twitter is my final answer chris.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> *sigh*


Well, how do you explain the following, particularly the underlined bit. Wasn't the opportunity to do that _before_ people voted?  And after a couple of years of 'awareness raising', why hasn't there been a significant long term shift in the polls on Brexit? All this smacks of 'the people can't understand this stuff, so we need another go at explaining it to them'.



> Yes, after that, do all the awareness raising, campaigning, cleaning up the electoral system, expose the corruption, hold a referendum, come up with some credible plan for UK out of the EU, take dancing lessons, whatever. Article 50 can be invoked again in future if there is still genuine widespread appetite for suicide leaving the EU.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

copliker said:


> Some eejit on twitter is my final answer chris.


'If you'd said A,_ Leave the European Union_, you'd be going home with nothing... but I don't want to give you that...'


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?
> 
> The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same.  Can you not see the problem here?


May called the bloody thing in hopes of consolidating Tory support for her as leader and "her" Brexit, so yes, I would say it was the most important issue for the election.  

And on that issue, there was little discernible message between the Tories and Labour.  Neither drew attention to emerging evidence of corruption in the original 2016 referendum or of the negative impact of leaving the EU.  Labour blew about that they could make a better fist of a "deal" than the Tories, but with little substance to show they wouldn't balls it up just as badly.  Neither offered a second "clean and clear" referendum or just calling the whole shitshow off.

So, if you went into the polls and wanted to say "no Brexit," you were shit out of luck.   I know both main parties tried to pretend they didn't exist, but more than 48% of people who voted in the referendum wanted to stay in the EU.  And, there were plenty who later realised they'd been conned and had buyers regret.  Neither of the two main Westminster parties give two fucks about them even now.  Lib Dems and Greens had no chance.  The SNP and Plaid Cymru have rallied more people since then not because they are especially nationalist, but because independence is now a better option than suicide.

Brexit was never a left / right issue, which is why a General election didn't make things clearer in 2017, nor would it now.  That's why there are defectors from both main parties, and recent polls showing new support for them.


----------



## CRI (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Well, how do you explain the following, particularly the underlined bit. Wasn't the opportunity to do that _before_ people voted?  And after a couple of years of 'awareness raising', why hasn't there been a significant long term shift in the polls on Brexit? All this smacks of 'the people can't understand this stuff, so we need another go at explaining it to them'.


So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then?  Okay, fine.


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

Credible, non-credible, I don't mind. Just something other than 'I reckon'. 

You're usually so keen to post up bollocks you find on the internet too.


----------



## Combustible (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> So, if you went into the polls and wanted to say "no Brexit," you were shit out of luck.   I know both main parties tried to pretend they didn't exist, but more than 48% of people who voted in the referendum wanted to stay in the EU.



And by this logic, who would the 52% who voted leave have voted for?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then?  Okay, fine.


doesn't really answer the question, 'how do you explain the following' does it?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> Credible, non-credible, I don't mind. Just something other than 'I reckon'.
> 
> You're usually so keen to post up bollocks you find on the internet too.



She probably has you on ignore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

NoXion said:


> She probably has you on ignore.


some guys have all the luck


----------



## killer b (Feb 26, 2019)

As if you'd mute _this_ great content.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 26, 2019)

Personalised echo chambers - not just for Twitter and Facebook!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So are you suggesting that Brexit is not the only thing that mattered at the election?
> 
> The Lib Dems specifically stood on the ticket you have suggested Labour would have walked it had they did the same.  Can you not see the problem here?


Of course not. And that's a perfect illustration of how remain lost on the initial referendum.

Hilary Clinton bubble thinking transferred onto British politics.


----------



## BobDavis (Feb 26, 2019)

Labour probably did better than most thought they would at the last election by doing anything except brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> So you are happy with the success of Cambridge Analytica, Aron Banks, Steve Bannon and co.'s microtargeting misinformation strategy then?  Okay, fine.


So... you are aware that billionaires have used the media in previous elections? Have you factored in the remain supporting media? Oh and what's the threshold you have to reach to overturn basic democratic theory?


----------



## bemused (Feb 26, 2019)

BobDavis said:


> Labour probably did better than most thought they would at the last election by doing anything except brexit.



If Labour had a different leader I think they'd cream the Tories at the moment. Even with the same policies. 

Oh .. and if they booted David Lamy out.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

bemused said:


> If Labour had a different leader I think they'd cream the Tories at the moment. Even with the same policies.



At what and how?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> At what and how?


At the polls


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Oh and what's the threshold you have to reach to overturn basic democratic theory?


Give women and slaves a vote in the assembly


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> If Labour had come out on a platform of remaining in the EU and withdrawing Article 50 for the June 2017 election, they'd have trounced the Tories.  Yes, some Labour-Leave voters would have bitched about it, but there was enough information and opportunity then to make the case for remaining in the EU to persuade enough of them that leaving would be absolutely NOT in their best interest (as we absolutely know to be the case now.)  Even if some stayed home or cast protest votes for UKIP or AN Other, I'm sure Labour still would have picked up enough seats to form a majority.
> 
> Opportunity missed.  Big fucking opportunity missed.



You'd be really entertaining if you weren't so unpleasant. This is comedy gold.


----------



## Teaboy (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> At the polls



Ah yes, the all important polling data with just 3.5 years to go until the next election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Ah yes, the all important polling data with just 3.5 years to go until the next election.


Yeh but Labour would be creaming the tories


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

bemused said:


> If Labour had a different leader I think they'd cream the Tories at the moment. Even with the same policies.
> 
> Oh .. and if they booted David Lamy out.



This is interesting. A deviation from the standard "It's all Corbyn's fault"; apparently it's because of Corbyn and David Lammy, who hates Corbyn. 

Where do you stand on say, Keir Starmer, Dennis Skinner and Yvette Coopet?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is interesting. A deviation from the standard "It's all Corbyn's fault"; apparently it's because of Corbyn and David Lammy, who hates Corbyn.
> 
> Where do you stand on say, Keir Starmer, Dennis Skinner and Yvette Coopet?


their necks


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> their necks



I’d have to let Skinner go, without his past victories we wouldn’t have Stem Cell research. Plus him and his brothers Clay Cross council struggle.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

Yeah Pickers leave the Beast alone. He's alright.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I’d have to let Skinner go, without his past victories we wouldn’t have Stem Cell research. Plus him and his brothers Clay Cross council struggle.


Alright - skinner, scram


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah Pickers leave the Beast alone. He's alright.


Leave Pickers alone, he's ok


----------



## brogdale (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Leave Pickers alone, he's ok


(((((((Pickers))))))


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 26, 2019)

Though Pickers has been tagged more than he’s posted.
Is this a record?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Though Pickers has been tagged more than he’s posted.
> Is this a record?


I just clicked through to exactly where you clicked to and had the same thought. 

'Ooh, I might just log onto that urban75 thingy, didn't really leave my mark there. Right then, user name, pass word ... _*WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK!!!*_'


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I just clicked through to exactly where you clicked to and had the same thought.
> 
> 'Ooh, I might just log onto that urban75 thingy, didn't really leave my mark there. Right then, user name, pass word ... _*WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK!!!*_'


I’d have liked some of Pickers posts, but they only post about Dulwich Hamburg, or whatever it’s called.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now


Come the revolution, it’ll be free pallets time.



Pickers


----------



## Celyn (Feb 26, 2019)

Storm the winter pallets!


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

Battle of the river pallet.



Pickers


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> May called the bloody thing in hopes of consolidating Tory support for her as leader and "her" Brexit, so yes, I would say it was the most important issue for the election.


This isn't even coherent on your own fantastical terms. If leaving the EU was the most important issue of the election you must conclude the that strong majority of voters support leave as both the Labour and the Tories were signed up leave..


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This isn't even coherent on your own fantastical terms. If leaving the EU was the most important issue of the election you must conclude the that strong majority of voters support leave as both the Labour and the Tories were signed up leave..



Not sure about your reasoning there. I doubt leave went from gnat's bollock majority to 'strong majority' in under a year. There were too many other factors at play in that election to make that claim.

 Would you claim that in 2015 a majority of voters supported austerity? Or was there simply no credible party opposing it?

E2a: Just spotted the 'If' in your post. Carry on


----------



## Kaka Tim (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now



if anything will shift the DUPs position on no deal - it will be the threat of a pallet shortage  .


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 26, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Not sure about your reasoning there. I doubt leave went from gnat's bollock majority to 'strong majority' in under a year. There were too many other factors at play in that election to make that claim.
> 
> Would you claim that in 2015 a majority of voters supported austerity? Or was there simply no credible party opposing it?


I'm not making any such claim. CRI _is_, or at least that where her claim that the EU was the most important issue at the last election logically leads.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not making any such claim. CRI _is_, or at least that where her claim that the EU was the most important issue at the last election logically leads.



See edit


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

Unpalatable news? UK faces pallet crisis if there is no-deal Brexit

or something


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now


I've got a load of plastic ones I've been keeping for precisely this kind of eventuality. You don't need to heat treat plastic


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

I'd like to know Pickers views on the pallets. I imagine he's called Pickers  cos he's an order picker in a warehouse so this will be right up his street


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'd like to know Pickers views on the pallets. I imagine he's called Pickers  cos he's an order picker in a warehouse so this will be right up his street


Maybe Pickers is a forklift driver. In which case Pickers will know a great deal about pallets.

I used an old pallet to make a bookcase. I wonder if Pickers has ever done anything similar?



Pickers


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

And one for the kids


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 26, 2019)

CRI said:


> Seriously?  Can't compare the two.  LibDems fucked up by propping up the Tories so regardless of what they offer, plenty wouldn't have nor ever will touch them.  But you carry on believing if it helps.



Just simple maths says you are barking up the wrong tree. Traditional Tories wouldn’t back Corbyn, nor would returning UKIP voters on the basis of a second ref. Your majority could only come from a vanishingly small Lib Dem vote and those voters we not terribly likely to go Corbyn Labour either.

Factor in the Labour supporters this would have disappointed and it’s highly likely your strategy would have been a net vote loser for Labour.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Maybe Pickers is a forklift driver. In which case Pickers will know a great deal about pallets.
> 
> I used an old pallet to make a bookcase. I wonder if Pickers has ever done anything similar?
> 
> ...


I guess you would have to ask Pickers

Pickers, what say you on the pallet question?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now



Don't panic, I've got three red ones and a tin of blue paint.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I guess you would have to ask Pickers
> 
> Pickers, what say you on the pallet question?



I think Pickers silence in response to your question speaks volumes.

Pickers


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Just simple maths says you are barking up the wrong tree. Traditional Tories wouldn’t back Corbyn, nor would returning UKIP voters on the basis of a second ref. Your majority could only come from a vanishingly small Lib Dem vote and those voters we not terribly likely to go Corbyn Labour either.
> 
> Factor in the Labour supporters this would have disappointed and it’s highly likely your strategy would have been a net vote loser for Labour.


It's as close to a sure thing as you're going to get in a general election (doubly so in these interesting times we find ourselves in) 

But I guess if you really really want it to be true and say it is enough times that makes it true, right CRI?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think Pickers silence in response to your question speaks volumes.
> 
> Pickers


Yeah come on Pickers, enquiring minds demand an answer


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yeah come on Pickers, enquiring minds demand an answer



He won't answer such a daft question.

Pickers is too wise for such tomfoolery.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

My old man made a fence out of pallets in 1982 and its still standing at our old house 

Bet Pickers has never done that. He's probably just a kind of tribute act version of my dad.


----------



## two sheds (Feb 26, 2019)

We going for Pickers to beat the record?


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 26, 2019)

two sheds said:


> We going for Pickers to beat the record?


Pickers for the win!


Pickers


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Nah I've gone right off Pickers since I worked out he's basically just a pretender with no real pallet expertise to speak of.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Massive improvement to the quality of this thread in the last page or so by the way, well done to all concerned especially me.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 163099


To be fair Pickers  could win me back if he has the correct line on lysergic acid diethylamide


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

Oh fuck brexit won't mean a shortage of psychedelics will it


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Oh fuck brexit won't mean a shortage of psychedelics will it




I think prices will drop with customs just letting anyone in in case they have food....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Nah I've gone right off Pickers since I worked out he's basically just a pretender with no real pallet expertise to speak of.



I think you're just jealous that Pickers knows so much about pallets that it's beneath him to respond to you. 

Or me for that matter. That Pickers!

Pickers


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you're just jealous that Pickers knows so much about pallets that it's beneath him to respond to you.
> 
> Or me for that matter. That Pickers!
> 
> Pickers


Doubt it. Bet Pickers  doesn't know a euro pallet from a standard. Am I right Pickers? 

Pickers is all mouth with nothing to back it up imo


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 26, 2019)

BobDavis said:


> Labour probably did better than most thought they would at the last election by doing anything except brexit.



So much this. I know 'constructive ambiguity' was deliberate on their part, and probably worked to a fair extent in 2017, but I suspect even Labour were surprised then by how much 'changing the subject to important domestic issues' worked -- in a lot of places anyway.


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 26, 2019)

I wonder if any serious psephological research has been done on how strong "Brexit/the EU/'banging on about Europe' is so fucking boring" was in 2017 as a factor. Or is now?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Massive improvement to the quality of this thread in the last page or so by the way, well done to all concerned especially me.



I concur.
And amazingly still making more sense than anything coming out of Westminster.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just read something about pallets and us not having enough blue pallets or something like that, so yeah pallets now



by blue do you mean euro pallets



nice size but bloody heavy and most used  due to the eu good train service

its a good standard but we use shit pallets in the uk


----------



## NoXion (Feb 26, 2019)

The pallets story doesn't make sense to me. 

On the one hand, most pallets in the UK are somehow not acceptable to the EU, despite us having been in the EU these past few decades. But on the other hand, doesn't the UK do the majority of its trade with countries that are in the EU? Like, eight of the top ten countries in total? So what kind of pallets have UK companies been sending to the EU up until right now? 

It also seems funny that pallets are - suddenly - an issue of national importance requiring government intervention, according to anonymous industry figures. Why can't private companies employ some of that entrepreneurial dynamism I keep hearing about, pull themselves up by their bootstraps and sort out their own damn pallets?

Am I the only one who thinks that something about this story doesn't add up?


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’d have liked some of Pickers posts, but they only post about Dulwich Hamburg, or whatever it’s called.


I'm just reading a John Le Carre book set in Hamburg. 1/3 of the way through and no mention of hipster football yet.


----------



## tommers (Feb 26, 2019)

Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers 

Fucking amateurs.


----------



## tommers (Feb 26, 2019)




----------



## NoXion (Feb 26, 2019)

Would now be a bad time to mention that adding more than one link per post doesn't increase the number of alerts?


----------



## binka (Feb 26, 2019)

NoXion said:


> The pallets story doesn't make sense to me.
> 
> On the one hand, most pallets in the UK are somehow not acceptable to the EU, despite us having been in the EU these past few decades. But on the other hand, doesn't the UK do the majority of its trade with countries that are in the EU? Like, eight of the top ten countries in total? So what kind of pallets have UK companies been sending to the EU up until right now?
> 
> ...


When we export our tat to Europe we send them on a Proper British full-sized pallet, not one complaint ever. 

I think they'll miss us when we're gone


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Would now be a bad time to mention that adding more than one link per post doesn't increase the number of alerts?


Glad you pointed that out NoXion NoXion NoXion ...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 26, 2019)

tommers said:


> @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers @Pickers
> 
> Fucking amateurs.



So we're saying Pickers only gets one alert from all the effort in the above post? Same number as from this half arsed effort from me? Think I know who the amateur is


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 26, 2019)

Yes but ultimately Pickers means Pickers !


----------



## teuchter (Feb 26, 2019)

I actually already brought up the subject of euro pallet standardisation 217 pages ago.

Is Brexit actually going to happen?

Also on the subject of pallets, I'm quite shocked that danny la rouge has a bookshelf made from one, as I thought this was the kind of thing that happened in pretentious coffee shops in London but not in the houses of actual real britons leading real lives outside of the city walls.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 26, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> So we're saying Pickers only gets one alert from all the effort in the above post? Same number as from this half arsed effort from me? Think I know who the amateur is


Working smarter!


----------



## Combustible (Feb 27, 2019)

I'm sure Arlene Foster could help source a few


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers 


teuchter said:


> I actually already brought up the subject of euro pallet standardisation 217 pages ago.
> 
> Is Brexit actually going to happen?



Nobody listened though cos you're such a boring cunt.


----------



## Wookey (Feb 27, 2019)

Stop flooding you daft twats, or I'm telling Sir.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Stop flooding you daft twats, or I'm telling Sir.


Bet you were a fucking prefect at school 

I actually only posted those Pickers's the second time because I quoted them by accident and it was taking too long to delete lol


----------



## Wookey (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Bet you were a fucking prefect at school



I was Head Boy. I ate prefects for breakfast.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

All the blue pallets that abound are the property of one pallet supplier.
CHEP. (Commonwealth Handling Equipment Pool) and are hired out to logistics companies and their customers. They are worldwide and are able to provide standard size platforms for logistical solutions.
They collect and repair and replace any damaged pallets. There is a huge depot of theirs near Pontefract.
I declined a job there as maintenance supervisor in 2007.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

I think people might be getting euro pallets and heat treated pallets mixed up.

The way the term is usually used these days (I'm going on experience as a stock controller at a small wholesaler) a euro pallet is something different from what is being discussed here. What most people in the trade would call a euro is just a pallet that's 1200x800mm. You can send other sizes in the EU but its cheaper to send these with most of the couriers and road freight companies.

That bit doesn't change if we leave with no deal. 

Anyone outside the EU has to send goods on heat treated pallets. As an EU member (and a country where none of the pests are actually native) we're exempt. 

Its not as simple as them needing to be blue either. I'm pretty sure all the blue ones, as @Sprocket says, all belong to one company, they're sort of weirdly leased but I've never worked out how they get them back. I don't know if these pallets are heat treated. It could be they have some kind of stamp that the EU accepts but that seems pretty relaxed and unlike the EU. This is the only bit I'm not 100% on. 

Obviously if we leave with no deal the EU will deal with us on WTO terms which means the same as everyone else so no exemption. 

If its anything like sending to China and most of the far east, where there are similar requirements, you need to send a heat treated pallet with a certificate to prove it is heat treated. In effect it means they can't be reused and you need to have a pallet treated every time you send to the EU.

Or you can use plastic pallets. No certificate required.

Pickers may want to correct me on any of that.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

Pickers, pallet piling perfectionist, portrays perplexing precision, protecting people, products, projects.
Pontificating possibly, perhaps producing plastic palletising plans profusely.


----------



## Flavour (Feb 27, 2019)

Sorry to go off-topic but it is really annoying when people tag the member "Pickers" - sending a notification to the wrong poster.


----------



## DotCommunist (Feb 27, 2019)

Can't may get a job load of pallets from her loyalist mates? They seem to be able to lay hands on loads of them whenever they want...


----------



## Combustible (Feb 27, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Can't may get a job load of pallets from her loyalist mates? They seem to be able to lay hands on loads of them whenever they want...



Apparently they can also do the heat treatment


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I actually already brought up the subject of euro pallet standardisation 217 pages ago.
> 
> Is Brexit actually going to happen?
> 
> Also on the subject of pallets, I'm quite shocked that danny la rouge has a bookshelf made from one, as I thought this was the kind of thing that happened in pretentious coffee shops in London but not in the houses of actual real britons leading real lives outside of the city walls.


What can I say? I’ve even got a beard.



Pickers


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Sorry to go off-topic but it is really annoying when people tag the member "Pickers" - sending a notification to the wrong poster.


Surely it's the right person if we did it on purpose. Right Pickers?


----------



## tommers (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Would now be a bad time to mention that adding more than one link per post doesn't increase the number of alerts?


I think I speak for the nation when I say we are all thoroughly sick of experts NoXion


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Sorry to go off-topic but it is really annoying when people tag the member "Pickers" - sending a notification to the wrong poster.


But Pickers is the right person: he’s the Dulwich supporting pallet expert.


Pickers


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2019)

And alert champion.


Pickers


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

But we're still in the dark over whether Pickers has ever made a fence or shelves from pallets. I need to know.


----------



## Mr Moose (Feb 27, 2019)

He’s not going to reply to you lot, that’s the unpalletable truth.


----------



## rekil (Feb 27, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> All the blue pallets that abound are the property of one pallet supplier.
> CHEP. (Commonwealth Handling Equipment Pool) and are hired out to logistics companies and their customers. They are worldwide and are able to provide standard size platforms for logistical solutions.
> They collect and repair and replace any damaged pallets. There is a huge depot of theirs near Pontefract.
> I declined a job there as maintenance supervisor in 2007.


I'm sure I'm not the only one excited to see Big Pallet exposed at last. Guardian article --> The Unpalletable Truth book --> Pulitzer --> fillum.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 27, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 163127


It wasn't *that* good


----------



## two sheds (Feb 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Sorry to go off-topic but it is really annoying when people tag the member "Pickers" - sending a notification to the wrong poster.



He won't see that unless you tag him.


----------



## newbie (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> If its anything like sending to China and most of the far east, where there are similar requirements, you need to send a heat treated pallet with a certificate to prove it is heat treated. In effect it means *they can't be reused* and you need to have a pallet treated every time you send to the EU.


in as much as global warming is off-topic for this thread, that's outrageous.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2019)

tommers said:


> Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers Pickers
> Fucking amateurs.


you're only supposed to say the name thrice in front of a mirror


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Stop flooding you daft twats, or I'm telling Sir.


grass


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think people might be getting euro pallets and heat treated pallets mixed up.
> 
> The way the term is usually used these days (I'm going on experience as a stock controller at a small wholesaler) a euro pallet is something different from what is being discussed here. What most people in the trade would call a euro is just a pallet that's 1200x800mm. You can send other sizes in the EU but its cheaper to send these with most of the couriers and road freight companies.
> 
> ...



Wise words from Pickers :



Pickers said:


> My opinion only but it sounds like there is still a lot of work to be done behind the scenes to resolve this properly.


----------



## killer b (Feb 27, 2019)

Sorry to report that if you don't log in for a while, your older notifications vanish into the ether, so unless our eponymous hero logs in soon (or you keep the joke running long after it's stopped being funny. A distinct possibility I know) then all your efforts will be for nought. 

I'm glad you're all having such a good time though.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> grass



Snitches get stitches!


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> Sorry to report that if you don't log in for a while, your older notifications vanish into the ether, so unless our eponymous hero logs in soon (or you keep the joke running long after it's stopped being funny. A distinct possibility I know) then all your efforts will be for nought.
> 
> I'm glad you're all having such a good time though.


Pickers was last seen in January. How long does it take for notifications to disappear?


----------



## killer b (Feb 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Pickers was last seen in January. How long does it take for notifications to disappear?


Not sure - I took a couple of months off last year and the earlier notifications had gone by the time I logged back on.


----------



## rekil (Feb 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Pickers was last seen in January. How long does it take for notifications to disappear?


I've been away for months at a time and there are always notifications (abuse mainly but they all count) when I come back. killer b is fooling the people.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

copliker said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only one excited to see Big Pallet exposed at last. Guardian article --> The Unpalletable Truth book --> Pulitzer --> fillum.



My pallet interest has dissipated, robots are the future, robots I tell ee!


----------



## Wilf (Feb 27, 2019)

So, does this mean we have to start talking about Brexit again?


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, does this mean we have to start talking about Brexit again?



We could ask for a meaningful vote?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 27, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> We could ask for a meaningful vote?


previous meaningful votes on the matter are looking more and more insubstantial


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think people might be getting euro pallets and heat treated pallets mixed up.
> 
> The way the term is usually used these days (I'm going on experience as a stock controller at a small wholesaler) a euro pallet is something different from what is being discussed here. What most people in the trade would call a euro is just a pallet that's 1200x800mm. You can send other sizes in the EU but its cheaper to send these with most of the couriers and road freight companies.
> 
> ...



So let me get this straight, pallets going from the UK into the EU would, in the event of no deal, have to be heat-treated from then on because WTO rules say trading partners can't be treated differently, despite the fact that the pests in question are not endemic to Britain, and untreated pallets have been passing to and fro over the Channel for decades without incident?

Is anyone else starting to think that the WTO should fuck off as well? Who are these pricks and what gives them the authority to impose their arbitrary bullshit on supposedly sovereign countries in the name of "fReE tRaDe"?

Also, this story really seems to be scraping the barrel in terms of reasons to panic.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> So let me get this straight, pallets going from the UK into the EU would, in the event of no deal, have to be heat-treated from then on because WTO rules say trading partners can't be treated differently, despite the fact that the pests in question are not endemic to Britain, and untreated pallets have been passing to and fro over the Channel for decades without incident?
> 
> Is anyone else starting to think that the WTO should fuck off as well? Who are these pricks and what gives them the authority to impose their arbitrary bullshit on supposedly sovereign countries in the name of "fReE tRaDe"?
> 
> Also, this story really seems to be scraping the barrel in terms of reasons to panic.


'First they came for our pallets and I did nothing...'


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 27, 2019)

This issue is freight with difficulties. It's not the most palatable topic for discussion.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 27, 2019)

Let’s not get haulier than thou!


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 27, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Let’s not get haulier than thou!



No, we should have no truck with that.


----------



## Dandred (Feb 27, 2019)

Whoops! No-deal Brexit panic after ministers realize the UK doesn't have the right pallets for exporting to the EU


----------



## brogdale (Feb 27, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Let’s not get haulier than thou!


Well articulated Sprocket.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

newbie said:


> in as much as global warming is off-topic for this thread, that's outrageous.


It's not that bad. They can be reused as pallets but once it's been sent somewhere the paper trail is broken so they'd have to be retreated before they could be used for that purpose again.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> So let me get this straight, pallets going from the UK into the EU would, in the event of no deal, have to be heat-treated from then on because WTO rules say trading partners can't be treated differently, despite the fact that the pests in question are not endemic to Britain, and untreated pallets have been passing to and fro over the Channel for decades without incident?
> 
> Is anyone else starting to think that the WTO should fuck off as well? Who are these pricks and what gives them the authority to impose their arbitrary bullshit on supposedly sovereign countries in the name of "fReE tRaDe"?
> 
> Also, this story really seems to be scraping the barrel in terms of reasons to panic.


Yeah it's fucking nuts and I don't think it's actually going to be as bad as they're making out. I send and receive a decent amount to and from the EU and I'll be fine with plastics and the odd one off smaller heat treated pallet.


----------



## andysays (Feb 27, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> We could ask for a meaningful vote?


We should have a meaningful vote on whether to change the thread title to "Is Pickers actually going to happen?"


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yeah it's fucking nuts and I don't think it's actually going to be as bad as they're making out. I send and receive a decent amount to and from the EU and I'll be fine with plastics and the odd one off smaller heat treated pallet.



So the story just doesn't stack up then?


----------



## teuchter (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> So let me get this straight, pallets going from the UK into the EU would, in the event of no deal, have to be heat-treated from then on because WTO rules say trading partners can't be treated differently, despite the fact that the pests in question are not endemic to Britain, and untreated pallets have been passing to and fro over the Channel for decades without incident?
> 
> Is anyone else starting to think that the WTO should fuck off as well? Who are these pricks and what gives them the authority to impose their arbitrary bullshit on supposedly sovereign countries in the name of "fReE tRaDe"?
> 
> Also, this story really seems to be scraping the barrel in terms of reasons to panic.


Presumably the logic is that as we are currently part of the EU, pallets that arrive here from other parts of the world are subject to EU rules. Therefore any pallets in the UK should already meet requirements and don't need further treatment. However, once we are no longer in the EU, the EU no longer has any say on what treatment pallets arriving in the UK have, and therefore why should they accept stuff from us without checks.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> So let me get this straight, pallets going from the UK into the EU would, in the event of no deal, have to be heat-treated from then on because WTO rules say trading partners can't be treated differently, despite the fact that the pests in question are not endemic to Britain, and untreated pallets have been passing to and fro over the Channel for decades without incident?
> 
> Is anyone else starting to think that the WTO should fuck off as well? Who are these pricks and what gives them the authority to impose their arbitrary bullshit on supposedly sovereign countries in the name of "fReE tRaDe"?
> 
> Also, this story really seems to be scraping the barrel in terms of reasons to panic.



Referendum NOW - Take Back Control (from the WTO)!


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Referendum NOW - Take Back Control (from the WTO)!



Then after that, we need to fuck off this 'sea' bollocks, who does it think it is, washing up on our beaches?

#Britianoutofeverything


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Presumably the logic is that as we are currently part of the EU, pallets that arrive here from other parts of the world are subject to EU rules. Therefore any pallets in the UK should already meet requirements and don't need further treatment. However, once we are no longer in the EU, the EU no longer has any say on what treatment pallets arriving in the UK have, and therefore why should they accept stuff from us without checks.


That would be a good explanation if any of it bore even a vague resemblance to reality. It doesn't though. Even under WTO rules the UK would continue to insist on heat treated pallets from those countries. Are you seriously arguing that it wouldn't? The truth is that if there's any risk being taken its by the UK. Most of the EU is at least part of a landmass where those pests can be found. The UK isn't.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 27, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> That would be a good explanation if any of it bore even a vague resemblance to reality. It doesn't though. Even under WTO rules the UK would continue to insist on heat treated pallets from those countries. Are you seriously arguing that it wouldn't? The truth is that if there's any risk being taken its by the UK. Most of the EU is at least part of a landmass where those pests can be found. The UK isn't.


Essentially, once we're a 'third country' why should we expect the EU to offer us special treatment - are you are saying that they should just trust us because it's in our own interests to continue a similar level of controls? Do they offer a similar exemption for other 'third countries' where the relevant pests are not endemic?


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Referendum NOW - Take Back Control (from the WTO)!





billy_bob said:


> Then after that, we need to fuck off this 'sea' bollocks, who does it think it is, washing up on our beaches?
> 
> #Britianoutofeverything



I guess it's easier to just take the piss, rather than to question the role that organisations like the WTO play on the world stage.


----------



## Poi E (Feb 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Well articulated Sprocket.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I guess it's easier to just take the piss, rather than to question the role that organisations like the WTO play on the world stage.



I'm not taking the piss, I completely agreed with your point. We should leave the WTO. Fuck the WTO. 

I don't want a referendum on it, that is taking the piss a bit. But if we did have one I'd vote to leave.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 27, 2019)

You favour a tribal, barter-based economy ?
Lots of hungry people though - unless we dig up every square yard of ground.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You favour a tribal, barter-based economy ?
> Lots of hungry people though - unless we dig up every square yard of ground.



And there it is - it's either the WTO or going back to barter. There Is No Alternative.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You favour a tribal, barter-based economy ?
> Lots of hungry people though - unless we dig up every square yard of ground.



What do you think?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 27, 2019)




----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 163186



So what exactly did you mean when you brought up barter in response to someone saying "fuck the WTO"? Is that not itself a strawman? Or are misrepresentations only bad someone else does it?


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 27, 2019)

In the case of the Brexit dreamers it's more like :-


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> I guess it's easier to just take the piss, rather than to question the role that organisations like the WTO play on the world stage.





SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not taking the piss, I completely agreed with your point. We should leave the WTO. Fuck the WTO.
> 
> I don't want a referendum on it, that is taking the piss a bit. But if we did have one I'd vote to leave.



Ditto. I'm taking the piss because currently it's hard not to feel we've descended into black farce. But absolutely the WTO is entirely consistent with the neoliberal paradigm that underlies the EU, so it's a problem for pretty much the same reasons. (I did not vote leave, but mainly out of extreme pessimism about our politicians' ability to manage it positively.)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

NoXion said:


> So what exactly did you mean when you brought up barter in response to someone saying "fuck the WTO"? Is that not itself a strawman? Or are misrepresentations only bad someone else does it?



I don't think the picture represents a straw man, he just didn't know what to say.


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 27, 2019)

Rather too much turnip in that photo ...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> In the case of the Brexit dreamers it's more like :-
> 
> View attachment 163187



There we go! Eejit status confirmed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You favour a tribal, barter-based economy ?
> Lots of hungry people though - unless we dig up every square yard of ground.



Money actually predates the WTO, shocking as that may seem.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> In the case of the Brexit dreamers it's more like :-
> 
> View attachment 163187



So you're doubling down on There Is No Alternative? Because that's what I'm taking from your posting a cartoon of a mythical creature. Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Money actually predates the WTO, shocking as that may seem.



Don't tell him that international trade predates capitalism, even. The shock might seriously disturb him.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

In the beginning, there was the WTO...


----------



## Supine (Feb 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In the beginning, there was the WTO...



So what do you suggest instead,absolutely no trade with other countries?


----------



## elbows (Feb 27, 2019)

I see various votes are happening now and the Labour front bench amendment has already been defeated.

MPs voting on amendments


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Essentially, once we're a 'third country' why should we expect the EU to offer us special treatment - are you are saying that they should just trust us because it's in our own interests to continue a similar level of controls? Do they offer a similar exemption for other 'third countries' where the relevant pests are not endemic?


I'm not saying they should or shouldn't do anything. Well be operating under wto rules so it's going to happen regardless. 

There will be a deal that avoids this eventually, if it's no deal that just won't be in place on 29 March.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> So what do you suggest instead,absolutely no trade with other countries?


Yes. Those are the two choices.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 27, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Feb 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> So what do you suggest instead,absolutely no trade with other countries?


I think this needs its own thread.

Should the UK leave the WTO?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> So what do you suggest instead,absolutely no trade with other countries?



Have you not read the last page? We've already ridiculed the moron that thought the only option is a binary choice between primitive barter economies and the WTO. You could have learnt from their experience and not just made yourself look a tit.


----------



## Supine (Feb 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Have you not read the last page? We've already ridiculed the moron that thought the only option is a binary choice between primitive barter economies and the WTO. You could have learnt from their experience and not just made yourself look a tit.



I look like a tit for asking you a question? How very dare me. Fuck you.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> I look like a tit for asking you a question? How very dare me. Fuck you.



No. You look like a tit for asking a shit question in bad faith. Or is it genuinely your position that the only way to manage international trade is by barter, or in the specific way it is done by the WTO?


----------



## Supine (Feb 27, 2019)

I'm asking for any ideas on an alternative. I don't know what's wrong with the wto but it seems to work. If you want to leave i'd be genuinely interested in an alternative.


----------



## NoXion (Feb 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm asking for any ideas on an alternative. I don't know what's wrong with the wto but it seems to work. If you want to leave i'd be genuinely interested in an alternative.



The alternative to the WTO is any organisation that serves the interests of people, not profit. It's an instrument of global capital, that's what's wrong with it. Or do you think it's a complete coincidence that since the Seattle protests, the WTO has faded into the background in a world in which increasingly obscene concentrations of wealth are found in the hands of cunts willing to rip off entire cities to the tune of billions?

What exactly makes you think that any of that "works"? For who? To what end?


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 28, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You favour a tribal, barter-based economy ?
> Lots of hungry people though - unless we dig up every square yard of ground.





Supine said:


> So what do you suggest instead,absolutely no trade with other countries?





Supine said:


> I'm asking for any ideas on an alternative. I don't know what's wrong with the wto but it seems to work.


We have increasing poverty, wages declining in real terms, a Gini coefficient the same as in Victorian times (and rising), no statistical social mobility, labour conditions worsening and you think things are "working".

_Economics is the method, the aim is to change the soul._


----------



## Supine (Feb 28, 2019)

I was talking about trade which seems to work. That has nothing to do with the things you mention which are uk results from UK political decisions.


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 28, 2019)

Of course "trade" (and specifically both the EU and WTO) has to do with the increasing poverty and inequality. The fact that you can't, or rather won't, see this shows hows prescient Thatcher's quote was.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Feb 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> We have increasing poverty, wages declining in real terms, a Gini coefficient the same as in Victorian times (and rising), no statistical social mobility, labour conditions worsening and you think things are "working".
> 
> _Economics is the method, the aim is to change the soul._



So let's rip up our existing trade deals and start from a blank piece of paper - that'll definitely fix things

Nothing says socialist utopia like turning motorways into lorry parks.


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 28, 2019)

If we learned one thing from Chairman Mao. It’s that you have to accept a few million have to starve to achieve your political ideology.


----------



## Supine (Feb 28, 2019)

Motorways won't even be needed if red gets his / her way


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 28, 2019)

I was so confident at the time that voting to stay in was the correct vote, I never paid any attention to the news about it or online propaganda. I haven't actually watched or listened to broadcast news in years and only recently started using facebook - after the event - to tell my Tory relatives to fuck off.
It suddenly struck me yesterday, just how it must have seen to a lot of people when it was two-faced bait and switch Cameron telling them after years of "bent bananas" and "Up Yours Delors" that the EU was a good thing - so an "election" became the usual way to stick two fingers up at the government.
In my street, I'm the one with the EU flag in the window, while a neighbour 10 yards away is Labour Central - I'm pretty certain I'm not thought of as a Tory ...


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 28, 2019)

Meanwhile, India and Pakistan, Trump and N. Korea, Trump and Putin both wanting the EU destroyed ...


----------



## Crispy (Feb 28, 2019)

We didn't start the fire....


----------



## gentlegreen (Feb 28, 2019)

Crispy said:


> We didn't start the fire....


Which fire ?


----------



## Crispy (Feb 28, 2019)

The fire with the power


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2019)

Crispy said:


> The fire with the power


What power?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If we learned one thing from Chairman Mao. It’s that you have to accept a few million have to starve to achieve your political ideology.


It's that political power comes from the barrel of a gun


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If we learned one thing from Chairman Mao. It’s that you have to accept a few million have to starve to achieve your political ideology.


It's that a march of a thousand miles starts with a single step


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> So let's rip up our existing trade deals and start from a blank piece of paper - that'll definitely fix things
> 
> Nothing says socialist utopia like turning motorways into lorry parks.


Nothing says socialist utopia like a sign saying "socialist utopia"


----------



## William of Walworth (Feb 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's that political power comes from the barrel of a gun



Larry Love knew that too


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Larry Love knew that too


So did George Harrison - happiness is a warm gun of course written at the height of the cultural revolution

Gh loves a double entendre


----------



## Sprocket. (Feb 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So did George Harrison - happiness is a warm fun of course written at the height of the cultural revolution
> 
> Gh loves a double entendre



Baking as well.
My Sweet Lard.
Here Comes the Bun.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Here Comes the Bun.


Best song since the small faces' here comes the slice


----------



## Crispy (Feb 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What power?


Love


----------



## Raheem (Feb 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So did George Harrison - happiness is a warm gun of course written at the height of the cultural revolution


By John Lennon, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 28, 2019)

Raheem said:


> By John Lennon, though.


you're quite right.  i don't know why, i always have harrison down as the author of happiness and lennon down for as my guitar gently weeps.


----------



## kabbes (Feb 28, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Love


It will tear us apart


----------



## Supine (Feb 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> It will tear us apart



And then bring us back together


----------



## danny la rouge (Feb 28, 2019)

Supine said:


> And then bring us back together


Right now. Over me.


----------



## friedaweed (Feb 28, 2019)

joo joo eyeballs


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 28, 2019)

NoXion, and you accuse _me _of taking the piss


----------



## NoXion (Feb 28, 2019)

billy_bob said:


> NoXion, and you accuse _me _of taking the piss



Sorry, what? I was napping.


----------



## Ranbay (Feb 28, 2019)




----------



## two sheds (Feb 28, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Sorry, what? I was napping.



You accused billy_bob of taking the piss.


----------



## billy_bob (Feb 28, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Sorry, what? I was napping.



I was just thinking you might want to knock some heads together here, like you did mine and SpackleFrog's yesterday


----------



## NoXion (Feb 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> You accused billy_bob of taking the piss.



I was awake for that. The napping was when people on this thread started quoting Beatles lyrics or whatever. Fuck knows why.



billy_bob said:


> I was just thinking you might want to knock some heads together here, like you did mine and SpackleFrog's yesterday



Nah, I just scrolled right past it this time. As annoying as the outbreaks of Karaoke and/or Amateur Night at the Comedy Club can be, they'll get bored of it eventually.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 28, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Sorry, what? I was napping.



Please don't spoil my day, I'm miles away, and after all, I'm only napping.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Feb 28, 2019)

At the risk of getting back on topic this is a pretty damning indictment of the EU and its institutional racism. 

African Union seeks to kill EU plan to process migrants in Africa


----------



## CRI (Feb 28, 2019)

Retro chic, I guess.  Seems you have to get a different one for Spain if you want to drive there.


----------



## bemused (Feb 28, 2019)

CRI said:


> Retro chic, I guess.  Seems you have to get a different one for Spain if you want to drive there.
> 
> View attachment 163285



Why isn't it navy blue? This isn't what people voted for .... outrageous.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2019)

CRI said:


> Retro chic, I guess.  Seems you have to get a different one for Spain if you want to drive there.
> 
> View attachment 163285


Got mine last week...and a green card from the insurers. If you want to drive south of the Pyrenees it's a £11.00 hit as you need both the 1968 & 1949 versions.
Not happy at having to shell out £5.50 but I do like the retro nature; ball-point handwriting & pritt stick pic included.


----------



## DexterTCN (Feb 28, 2019)

navy blue...the whole concept of britain in a colour


----------



## brogdale (Feb 28, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> navy blue...the whole concept of britain in a colour


Albion; white, surely?


----------



## CRI (Feb 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Albion; white, surely?


So white the blue veins show through!


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> So let's rip up our existing trade deals and start from a blank piece of paper - that'll definitely fix things


What relation does that have to what I posted? This is gash. You can perfectly well recognise the fact that trade deals are political, and that their recent impact has been socially harmful, while still supporting some type of trade agreement.

Personally I'd be very happy to "rip up our existing trade deals" (and lets note the _our_ here) but that's not necessary to see that recent multi-national trade agreements, such as CETA, are designed to attack public services and increase worker exploitation.



Supine said:


> Motorways won't even be needed if red gets his / her way





gentlegreen said:


> In my street, I'm the one with the EU flag in the window, while a neighbour 10 yards away is Labour Central - I'm pretty certain I'm not thought of as a Tory ...


Your positions are not just ahistorical gibberish, they are extremely right wing, the fact that you seem incapable of understanding this basic fact is a good indication of just how much neo-liberal tripe you've swallowed.
The apoliticalisation of _trade_, the ludicrous binary of the WTO/EU or barter economies, the opposition to the state subsidising businesses. It's not just socialists or social-democrats that would consider this stuff garbage, so would social-democrats, liberals, conservatives, pretty much the whole post-war consensus. Liberals like Smith or Keynes would look at the crap you've posted and roll their eyes.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)




----------



## Supine (Mar 1, 2019)

Yet when I asked for an alternative u was met with deathly silence. If you want to convince others of your very lefty views you need to sell an alternative instead of just moaning about the right.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yet when I asked for an alternative u was met with deathly silence. If you want to convince others of your very lefty views you need to sell an alternative instead of just moaning about the right.



To be a lefty in these halls all you have to do is tell other lefties why they're wrong.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)

... and the eternal question.
Out (t)here, in the real world, Brexit is driven by the far right.
Is it neoliberalism-plus they're after ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yet when I asked for an alternative u was met with deathly silence. If you want to convince others of your very lefty views you need to sell an alternative instead of just moaning about the right.


This just shows that either you're not reading what is being posted or you're incapable of understanding it. The idea that trade is political really isn't a _very lefty_ view, as I said it's something that people from all over the political spectrum would reject. Keynes wasn't very lefty, Smith wasn't very lefty, hell much as she'd be pleased that she'd done a number on you even Thatcher would be laughing at your claims.



SpookyFrank said:


> To be a lefty in these halls all you have to do is tell other lefties why they're wrong.


You think these jokers are "lefties", come on.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)

We can never be pure enough for Citizen Smith - it probably requires us to throw our clogs in looms or somesuch...


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2019)

OK then, go on outline how you are a "leftie' (whatever that actually means).

This isn't some witch hunt, is is just basic political comprehension. Many of the  positions you hold are not left-wing.

You've argued against government measures to keep workers in employment, you want to see a continuation of neo-liberal policies that we've had since the 70s, you've voted, and supported, the liberals/lib dems for most of your life. Those aren't left-wing positions, they really aren't.

Which is fine, but don't go on about how you "don't do politics" and then dismiss evidenced arguments with a stupid video. Try reading, thinking for a second and engaging with what people are saying.

You seem to think that because you hold some socially liberal positions and are anti-Tory that you're left wing. But that shows a complete disregard of the economic positions. where the differences between the classic left and right was equally, if not more, important than the differences on social questions.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)

Nah I give up, from now on in the strange world of Urban75, I'm now officially a Tory (even though I wouldn't piss on most of 'em if they were on fire) -

.... or perhaps a turncoat one who crossed the floor in 2007.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yet when I asked for an alternative u was met with deathly silence. If you want to convince others of your very lefty views you need to sell an alternative instead of just moaning about the right.



I replied quoting you. Even if you regard that response as inadequate, to call that deathly silence is simply dishonest.

"Agreements" like CETA (the likes of you or I certainly never agreed to this shit) are another turn of the screw for which organisations such as the WTO have laid the groundwork. They include legislative mechanisms like investor-state dispute settlements, which allow private investors to sue governments for "discriminatory practices". Like preventing them from reaping profits at the expense of public health.

Those "raging lefties" at the Economist had this to say:

_"If you wanted to convince the public that international trade agreements are a way to let multinational companies get rich at the expense of ordinary people, this is what you would do: give foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever a government passes a law to, say, discourage smoking, protect the environment or prevent a nuclear catastrophe. Yet that is precisely what thousands of trade and investment treaties over the past half century have done, through a process known as 'investor-state dispute settlement', or ISDS."_

I'm older than the WTO is, and I'm part of the youngest age group in this place. The WTO isn't some essential structure without which global capitalism would be brought to its knees. So what makes its abolishment so radical that you ask for a detailed plan for its replacement?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)

Feck me he has a list (in his little red book ? )


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Nah I give up, from now on in the strange world of Urban75, I'm a Tory (even though I wouldn't piss on most of 'em if they were on fire) -


FFS pathetic shit. this is exactly what I'm taking about. I outline why (with evidence) your argument is incorrect and the best you can do it this crap.

_"Oh I don't do politics"_ -_ here's a stupid video_.

EDIT: I mean you are genuinely politically ignorant, which is fine, we're all ignorant about loads. I'm totally ignorant about cycling. But I don't wade in to cycle threads posting up shitty videos and telling everyone they're wrong.

I really, really am not attacking your politics here, I'm just trying to explain how the positions you hold are not consistent with social-democracy, let alone socialism. They are _liberal _positions. And the politics of liberalism has often been at odds (sometimes violently) with social-democracy and socialism.


----------



## billy_bob (Mar 1, 2019)

I don't really want to get involved in a conversation about individuals' case histories. But the last few years have been eye-opening in terms of how woefully confused most people's understanding of what 'left wing' and 'liberal' mean, and how they do or don't intersect, is.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 1, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> We can never be pure enough for Citizen Smith - it probably requires us to throw our clogs in looms or somesuch...


You're a fucking idiot. There's really nothing more to say.

Having a go at lists now too. What kind of wrong un doesn't have a list?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2019)

Echoing what billy_bob said, I’d add that it’s important to recognise there is a difference between party political distinctions, and different ideologies, philosophies, economic projects, and so on.

For example, neoliberalism transects the major parties in the UK. Recent Tory, Labour, and coalition  governments have been economically neoliberal.

Additionally, the Tories have in some ways been socially liberal. The Cameron government introduced equal marriage laws, for example. Last time I brought this up I was accused of being disparaging of the benefits of that. I’m not. Not in the slightest. What I’m pointing out is that it is not inconsistent with neoliberal economic policy. As David Harvey puts it, it is as if the neoliberal project said to the social movements of the 60s. “OK, we hear your concerns. You can have these individual freedoms. But in return, you need to drop this idea of economic control, economic equality. We’ll redefine individual freedoms as equality. That will be equality”.  

Modern Tories don’t need to be neoconservative. They might be a little neoconservative, a lot neoconservative, or even not at all neoconservative. 

I’m not concerned with rescuing the term “lefty”. It’s beyond calls for precision. But it’s still possible to define socialism, despite it being a heterogenous range of systems. But at the core there’s a belief in social ownership, and there’s a desire for workers’ self management, and there’s a class analysis of society. You can go into a great deal more detail, and I used to read people like Vajada, Meszaros and Agnes Heller, who’d discuss at length what socialism is and what its relationship to the state is, and so on. But keeping it broad, that’s what I think we can boil it down to.

That isn’t a demand for purity from individuals, it’s just a plea for terminological accuracy.  If I ask that you don’t call a sofa a table, it’s not because I demand all furniture be tables.

I’m personally a type of socialist that I’d call communist. And the type of communism I want is free communism, which is another way of saying anarchist communism. This is a position stemming from a core of values. People who don’t hold them can’t reasonably be called anarchist communist. Nor would they want to be, presumably.

I don’t require everyone I cooperate with politically to be an anarchist communist. There's a range of libertarian socialist views that I’m happy to call the extent of my political home.  But I don’t think it’s necessary for people to take the huff if they don’t share views I see as fundamental.  And I’m very happy to discuss the differences. 

But I think there’s a trend (and I know this’ll rile some people) to see political belonging in primarily identarian ways. (And by that I’m meaning a particular use of the notion identity, rather than just knowing what name to give your views). And I think that’s where a lot of cross purpose misunderstanding stems from.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 1, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> But I don't wade in to cycle threads posting up shitty videos and telling everyone they're wrong.


You see me as "a cyclist"


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 1, 2019)

As usual danny you're bang on the money and have managed to make the point more clearly than I did.  



danny la rouge said:


> I’m not concerned with rescuing the term “lefty”. It’s beyond calls for precision. But it’s still possible to define socialism, despite it being a heterogenous range of systems. But at the core there’s a belief in social ownership, and there’s a desire for workers’ self management, and there’s a class analysis of society. You can go into a great deal more detail, and I used to read people like Vajada, Meszaros and Agnes Heller, who’d discuss at length what socialism is and what its relationship to the state is, and so on. But keeping it broad, that’s what I think we can boil it down to.
> 
> *That isn’t a demand for purity from individuals, it’s just a plea for terminological accuracy.  If I ask that you don’t call a sofa a table, it’s not because I demand all furniture be tables.*


I agree with all this, especially the bolded (my emphasis) part


----------



## chilango (Mar 1, 2019)

danny la rouge spot on.

I think it might've been butchersapron who raised a similar point on another thread about the disconnect between political self-identity and actual political views.

I think that's a key thing at the moment in many of the debates we're seeing.

But it's not a new thing. I still remember a moment in my youth were I consciously stopped referring to my self as "a revolutionary" or "an anti-fascist" and started to place more emphasis on what I did and I what I thought rather than "what I was".


----------



## Serge Forward (Mar 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Best song since the small faces' here comes the slice


Surely that song was about biscuits, wasn't it?


----------



## Crispy (Mar 1, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You see me as "a cyclist"


I think the absence of any words ending in "-ist" in redsquirrel's post was quite deliberate.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 1, 2019)

Another £33m gone due to the #FerryFarce I see


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 1, 2019)

Leave this here for the Brexiteers:


----------



## Wilf (Mar 1, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Leave this here for the Brexiteers:



Yes, it looks shit - but why are you 'leaving this here for the brexiteers'?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, it looks shit - but why are you 'leaving this here for the brexiteers'?


So they can join her group?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 1, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So they can join her group?


Righto.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So they can join her group?


Birds of a feather


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 1, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Leave this here for the Brexiteers:




I was hoping she'd say it's time for the country to respect the votes of the 49% of women who voted Leave.


----------



## bemused (Mar 1, 2019)

Nigel and other anti-elite millionaires announce Gammon Ball Run 2019

March to Leave


----------



## marty21 (Mar 1, 2019)

bemused said:


> Nigel and other anti-elite millionaires announce Gammon Ball Run 2019
> 
> March to Leave


Apparently Hugh Janus has registered to go , along with 5 other medium to large Januses


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 1, 2019)

Beware the snides of March!


----------



## Wilf (Mar 1, 2019)

bemused said:


> Nigel and other anti-elite millionaires announce Gammon Ball Run 2019


 First half of sentence, good politics. Second half, good turn of phrase, but shit.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 1, 2019)

bemused said:


> Gammon Ball Run 2019


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 1, 2019)

March to Leave said:
			
		

> ''The UK has a long history of successful popular protests, where the establishment have been forced to deliver much-needed reform by widespread demonstrations of large scale dissatisfaction.''



_Like a latterday Jarrow March_, fuckme the soundbites will write themselves. Oh wait there's more...




			
				March to Leave said:
			
		

> ''Let’s just leave.''


----------



## CRI (Mar 1, 2019)

Sure, t'is just pocket money.  

Government pays £33m over Brexit ferry case


----------



## gosub (Mar 1, 2019)

CRI said:


> Sure, t'is just pocket money.
> 
> Government pays £33m over Brexit ferry case



Outragous they drag Seabourne into this, as was clear from their website, that was a fast food concern, what the fuck have they ever had to do with cross channel ferries?


----------



## gosub (Mar 1, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> _Like a latterday Jarrow March_, fuckme the soundbites will write themselves. Oh wait there's more...


----------



## CRI (Mar 1, 2019)

gosub said:


> Outragous they drag Seabourne into this, as was clear from their website, that was a fast food concern, what the fuck have they ever had to do with cross channel ferries?


Ah, the 33m payout is for this.  Something like £800K was pissed up the wall over Seabourne as well.



> The government will pay £33m to Eurotunnel in an agreement to settle a lawsuit over extra ferry services in the event of a no-deal Brexit.  In December, the Department for Transport (DfT) contracted three suppliers to provide additional freight capacity on ferries for lorries.  But Eurotunnel said the contracts were handed out in a "secretive" way.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 1, 2019)

bemused said:


> Nigel and other anti-elite millionaires announce Gammon Ball Run 2019
> 
> March to Leave


Another massive data collection exercise, a bit like that Brexit Party thing.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 1, 2019)

bemused said:


> Nigel and other anti-elite millionaires announce Gammon Ball Run 2019
> 
> March to Leave





> If you would like to be a core marcher, where you march for more than two days, you will be required to make a one-off payment of £50. A link to make this payment will be made available when you are accepted.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 1, 2019)

Yossarian said:


>


You know....that could come across as quite concerning.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 1, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You know....that could come across as quite concerning.



They sound like grifters - but they say £50 isn't such a bad deal.


> Our core marchers are those that have opted to join us on our epic journey from Sunderland to London for two days or more. Becoming a core marcher costs £50. In return, core marchers will receive an official March to Leave kit. Core marchers will be also be provided with dinner, breakfast and accommodation on us. For £50, that’s not a bad deal!



I would be very disappointed if the breakfast wasn't a full English...


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 1, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> The fuck is that???





Yossarian said:


> I would be very disappointed if the breakfast wasn't a full English...


----------



## CRI (Mar 1, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 1, 2019)

CRI said:


> View attachment 163355


You weren't here in the war were you?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned here what I was reminded of by some posh people in another place, the inauspiciousness of the 15th March ....


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You weren't here in the war were you?


What follows brexit that is good? One thing. Give us one thing. I can give you loads of shit that is bad already. Just look at the EU and immigrants thread. What is it that makes up for that? What makes that sacrifice worth the pain?


----------



## 8ball (Mar 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What follows brexit that is good?



WE'LL MAKE OUR OWN LAWS!!!!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What follows brexit that is good? One thing. Give us one thing. I can give you loads of shit that is bad already. Just look at the EU and immigrants thread. What is it that makes up for that? What makes that sacrifice worth the pain?


Does making the likes of your lose your shit count?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 2, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Beware the snides of March!





gentlegreen said:


> I'm surprised no one has mentioned here what I was reminded of by some posh people in another place, the inauspiciousness of the 15th March ....View attachment 163364


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

Well it was the middle of the night on my phone ...


----------



## Badgers (Mar 2, 2019)

Overseas buyers 'cancel' British meat orders due to Brexit - Farming UK News

Not good news.

Brexit: Michael Gove admits farmers may never recover from no-deal


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

It's a shame a 100 tonne sack of pennies couldn't drop on Westminster all at once ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2019)

It's a pity a hundred tiny meteorites don't simultaneously strike the homes of tory mps, killing them as they sleep, but as the rolling stones sang "you can't always get what you want"


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's a pity a hundred tiny meteorites don't simultaneously strike the homes of tory mps, killing them as they sleep, but as the rolling stones sang "you can't always get what you want"


Who would build the Buenos Aires to grytviken friendship bridge then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Who would build the Buenos Aires to grytviken friendship bridge then?


There are thousands of other former people listed in who's who


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What follows brexit that is good? One thing. Give us one thing


Theresa May's demise


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Does making the likes of your lose your shit count?


LBJ throwing his toys out the pram


----------



## Libertad (Mar 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's a pity a hundred tiny meteorites don't simultaneously strike the homes of tory mps, killing them as they sleep, but as the rolling stones sang "you can't always get what you want"



But if you try sometime, you might find, you get what you need.


----------



## T & P (Mar 2, 2019)

Meanwhile, the USA continues to rub its dirty hands at the prospect of flooding the UK with sub-standard food products after Brexit, and has just stepped up its PR offensive to flog us chlorine-soaked chickens with the help of The Daily Telegraph, patriotic newspaper that it is...

US urges UK to embrace chlorinated chicken

I preferred it when Ambassadors were content to push just Ferrero Rochers on us...


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 2, 2019)

T & P said:


> Meanwhile, the USA continues to rub its dirty hands at the prospect of flooding the UK with sub-standard food products after Brexit, and has just stepped up its PR offensive to flog us chlorine-soaked chickens with the help of The Daily Telegraph, patriotic newspaper that it is...
> 
> US urges UK to embrace chlorinated chicken
> 
> I preferred it when Ambassadors were content to push just Ferrero Rochers on us...



 nicking that!


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

Next stop :-  milk de-soured with borax.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

On the plus side, I may finally be able to try high fructose corn syrup and GM soy


----------



## CRI (Mar 2, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Does making the likes of your lose your shit count?


At least you'll have your spite and bile to keep you warm.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> At least you'll have your spite and bile to keep you warm.


I thought I was on ignore?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 2, 2019)

I've got loads of non heat treated pallets to burn anyway, I'll be toasty


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 2, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> On the plus side, I may finally be able to try high fructose corn syrup and GM soy



I'd wait until the post-brexit insulin supply situation has stabilised tbh.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2019)

Rumours that this is an urbanite have not been confirmed.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

There are indeed some decidedly cringey remainer posts on that thread ...


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 2, 2019)

I sometimes really wish we had retired to Greece three years ago and took the chance!


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 2, 2019)

CRI said:


> At least you'll have your spite and bile to keep you warm.


Irvine Berlin’s original draft, rewritten at the request of Billie Holiday because she didn’t think it scanned.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I sometimes really wish we had retired to Greece three years ago and took the chance!


Sadly I'm not going to be ready until 2021 
But I'm proceeding anyway - but doing research as if I was an "Australian" - I hope the French don't retaliate and insist on a minimum £30K income for British retirees.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 2, 2019)

Spite and Bile...the new musical from people who hate everyone.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 2, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Sadly I'm not going to be ready until 2021
> But I'm proceeding anyway - but doing research as if I was an "Australian" - I hope the French don't retaliate and insist on a minimum £30K income for British retirees.



I wish you well and hope it all falls into place. 

ETA: We missed our opportunity, we will have to wait and see what happens.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

Christ. I haven't watched broadcast media in a Very long time so missed the pre-referendum horrors.
With Cameron selling it, this helps me understand why quite so many people voted to leave.
I like hbomberguy's perspective on things.

With greasy Cameron promoting it, he might have convinced me to vote "leave" for the sake of the EU.



Spoiler: youtube video


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 2, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Christ. I haven't watched broadcast media in a Very long time so missed the pre-referendum horrors.
> With Cameron selling it, this helps me understand why quite so many people voted to leave.
> I like hbomberguy's perspective on things.
> 
> ...



Cameron didn't actually play any part in the remain campaign

As you'd have known if you followed events at the time


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 2, 2019)

Oh well, it all looks horrible.
I was probably in denial - I got a bit pissed and fell over on the day of the vote.
It was so easy to switch off in the "up yours, Delors" days...

Er Cameron was on a Dimbleby thing in that video ...


----------



## Wilf (Mar 2, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Rumours that this is an urbanite have not been confirmed.


----------



## Ming (Mar 3, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Overseas buyers 'cancel' British meat orders due to Brexit - Farming UK News
> 
> Not good news.
> 
> Brexit: Michael Gove admits farmers may never recover from no-deal


I saw on one of the ‘3 blokes in a pub’ videos that when they were in Brussels an EU diplomat told them agriculture would be the first fatality. 18 months to 2 years of cheap imports and ‘bye bye’ that sector.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

There are ships that set off last week for the Far East with cargo to deliver, and they have no idea what our trading status is going to be by the time they arrive.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

T & P said:


> Meanwhile, the USA continues to rub its dirty hands at the prospect of flooding the UK with sub-standard food products after Brexit, and has just stepped up its PR offensive to flog us chlorine-soaked chickens with the help of The Daily Telegraph, patriotic newspaper that it is...
> 
> US urges UK to embrace chlorinated chicken
> 
> I preferred it when Ambassadors were content to push just Ferrero Rochers on us...


His name is Woody Johnson LOL


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> There are ships that set off last week for the Far East with cargo to deliver, and they have no idea what our trading status is going to be by the time they arrive.


What exactly do you think will change? What do you think will happen? They'll have to cut and run? Sanctions will be imposed so the goods can't get in? This really is hysterical nonsense. I've got goods on the way from China, Thailand and Thaiwan and bits going the other way. They'll get delivered no problem. It's the EU stuff, stuff that didn't used to require documentation and didn't clog up the ports, where there will (and i mean will not might) be a problem if it's no deal.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What exactly do you think will change? What do you think will happen? They'll have to cut and run? Sanctions will be imposed so the goods can't get in?



Wouldn't it make some difference with tariffs etc. whether goods are arriving in a country that's part of the EU, not part of the EU, or unable to make its mind up whether it's part of the EU or not? Since total incompetence across the board seems to be the order of the day, I wouldn't be surprised if extra paperwork caused a lot of delays...


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Wouldn't it make some difference with tariffs etc. whether goods are arriving in a country that's part of the EU, not part of the EU, or unable to make its mind up whether it's part of the EU or now? Since total incompetence across the board seems to be the order of the day, I wouldn't be surprised if extra paperwork caused a lot of delays...



The paperwork is already done. Certification, packing lists, bills of lading HS codes. We already have to heat treat timber packaging and all that stuff so that won't change. There could be changes to duty rates (unlikely but possible has been the advice from my forwarder) but only pennies in the pound and the documentation remains the same.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 3, 2019)

Looking like the next vote will be a much closer run thing than last time


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 3, 2019)

Just seen chunkymark's latest video.

Perhaps Theresa May is a europhile after all and is secretly taking pleasure in locking us in with no ability to stick our noses in.






> The deal that will come before Parliament next week represents a devastating failure of British statecraft. It would keep most of the costs of EU membership while junking most of the benefits. It would require Britain to cede part of its territory to foreign jurisdiction. It would allow Brussels to control our commerce with non-EU states even after we leave.
> 
> MPs who believe in parliamentary sovereignty should vote against it. MPs who believe in the Union should vote against it. MPs who believe in free trade should vote against it. MPs who believe that there is such a thing as national honour, and who recognise that we are being treated in a...



No self-respecting country would accept this deal. MPs must vote it down


----------



## Poi E (Mar 3, 2019)

Good to see they're going full febrile at the Telegraph.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 3, 2019)

It's been quite a revelation over the past couple of years to learn what probably goes on inside the head of my estranged father  - a lifetime Torygraph reader and party member who did the cryptic crossword every day and would pontificate from behind it.
I'd always reasoned that at least it wasn't the Fail ...

My poor mother never stopped talking about her experiences on the Bordeaux schools exchange whereas a Jersey honeymoon was the nearest she ever got to France after that because everything to my father was "foreign muck" (I never saw an uncooked onion until I left home)

Ironically, he helped me acquire a love of Ravel and Debussy, whereas he almost certainly looked down on any music that wasn't "British"...


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

Do you think that you're adding something to the thread with your recent run of posts gentlegreen?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you think that you're adding something to the thread with your recent run of posts gentlegreen?


How many fucks do you suppose I give - oh great owner of the politics forum ?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> How many fucks do you suppose I give - oh great owner of the politics forum ?


None. I'm quite sure that you're going to continue to drivel to yourself. Maybe posting an irrelevant video now and then. Low hanging fruit for the alt right is all you are and you don't even know it.  Bring back the pallets.


----------



## Buddy Bradley (Mar 3, 2019)

My brother just referred to Farage's Sunderland-to-London Brexit march as The Gammonball Run.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you think that you're adding something to the thread with your recent run of posts gentlegreen?


----------



## andysays (Mar 3, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It's been quite a revelation over the past couple of years to learn what probably goes on inside the head of my estranged father  - a lifetime Torygraph reader and party member who did the cryptic crossword every day and would pontificate from behind it.
> I'd always reasoned that at least it wasn't the Fail ...
> 
> My poor mother never stopped talking about her experiences on the Bordeaux schools exchange whereas a Jersey honeymoon was the nearest she ever got to France after that because everything to my father was "foreign muck" (I never saw an uncooked onion until I left home)
> ...



Personally I've found it, if not necessarily a revelation, certainly something of an eye-opener the amount of banal and ignorant-of-how-things-actually-work nonsense that a small group of die-hard Remainers such as yourself have managed to come out with, repeatedly, over the course of the past couple of years, and how insistent you (collectively) appear to be in your ignorance, your wish to dismiss any opinions or even facts which don't fit your narrow world view, and  your general all round belief that the world as we know it will end at 23.00 on 29th March.

A large part of it, for many including you, appears to involve some sort of adolescent rejection of what you see as your parents' belief system. Sorry to hear about your estrangement from your father, but maybe you'd do better if you didn't project your feelings about him on to those of us whose political opinions differ from yours (but quite clearly don't resemble his in any way).


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> None. I'm quite sure that you're going to continue to drivel to yourself. Maybe posting an irrelevant video now and then. Low hanging fruit for the alt right is all you are and you don't even know it.  Bring back the pallets.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> None. I'm quite sure that you're going to continue to drivel to yourself. Maybe posting an irrelevant video now and then. Low hanging fruit for the alt right is all you are and you don't even know it.  Bring back the pallets.



Isn't telling someone that they're an enemy of the people if they don't agree with you quite a far-righty thing to do though?

I only ask because that seems to be your entire schtick.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Like a priest's sock.



I thought that a priest's sock was usually crusty?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 3, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> James O'Brien.
> Doubtless he's a "blue socialist" or summat ...



Former public schoolboy and faux-provocateur, rather than any kind of socialist.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Cuddly Keir was certainly trying to. But as you say, no need. He could have just kept saying he was still pushing for an election. He's just bottled it under the pressure.
> 
> You can never underestimate the depths that social democracy will sink to.



Well, anyone who knows the history of Germany's SPD knows there are NO depths social democracy *won't* sink to.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

andysays said:


> Personally I've found it, if not necessarily a revelation, certainly something of an eye-opener the amount of banal and ignorant-of-how-things-actually-work nonsense that a small group of die-hard Remainers such as yourself have managed to come out with, repeatedly, over the course of the past couple of years, and how insistent you (collectively) appear to be in your ignorance, your wish to dismiss any opinions or even facts which don't fit your narrow world view, and  your general all round belief that the world as we know it will end at 23.00 on 29th March



Remainers have helped to switch me from undecided (I abstained) to reasonably pro-Brexit.  If there are solid points to be made in defence of the EU they certainly aren't making them, all I see is scaremongering and classism.  The smug glee over the prospect of medicine shortages is particularly strange.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Isn't telling someone that they're an enemy of the people if they don't agree with you quite a far-righty thing to do though?


I know you don't like BA but he really isn't do that is he. You don't have to share any his political opinions to think that post after post of shit video/gifs without even a comment is crap. No one is asking for essays but having a bit less of the twitter crap would be good for P&P.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 3, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Compentors?



Too gnomic. It'd have to be "compventors", in order to give people freshly exposed to the word, some chance of deciphering it.


----------



## pesh (Mar 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I know you don't like BA but he really isn't do that is he. You don't have to share any his political opinions to think that post after post of shit video/gifs without even a comment is crap. No one is asking for essays but having a bit less of the twitter crap would be good for P&P.


constant cryptic sneering is bollocks too tbf.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 3, 2019)




----------



## Supine (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> If there are solid points to be made in defence of the EU they certainly aren't making them, all I see is scaremongering and classism.



Would you be a remainder if the scaremongering stuff turned out to be true?


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Would you be a remainder if the scaremongering stuff turned out to be true?



This is moot as I don't believe a word of it.  It wouldn't make me a remainer, though, as the issue wouldn't be leaving the EU, but failing to effectively manage leaving the EU.  Not a reason to overturn a democratic vote and not a compelling defence of the EU as an institution.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

If the scaremongering stuff is true, and serious enough to overturn a democratic vote, that just tells us it is literally impossible to leave the EU, which is a horrible line of argument.  I was willing to be convinced of the value of EU membership in its own right but haven't encountered any compelling arguments.  The other common argument, that people were tricked, is also appalling.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 3, 2019)

Am I right that the main difference between May and Corbyn's proposals are that Corbyn wants the Customs Union plus EU labour and environmental laws, while May wants to be able to make separate trade deals with US etc. ?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Would you be a remainder if the scaremongering stuff turned out to be true?


I suspect things will be worse in the short term, due to the fucked up way Brexit is being done by the tories. I also suspect that neoliberal governments in the future will use our 'independence' from the EU to make things even more neoliberal. In those circumstances, I can respect people who think remain/EU neoliberalism is some awful least bad option, though I won't be joining them. Most of all though, we're back in SpineyNorman territory:



> I don't see the point in supporting or opposing it. It's not my issue, both sides are my enemies and there's fuck all I can do to influence it.



Anybody wanting to back remain should take that as a starting point. The struggle against further deregulation is what it always was and involves the same forces that it always did. Seeing the EU as some kind of defender against neoliberalism is just _odd_. Instead, on this thread, we seem to have reverted to calling leave voters thickos in the last couple of pages.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The struggle against further deregulation is what it always was and involves the same forces that it always did. Seeing the EU as some kind of defender against neoliberalism is just _odd_



My original view was that it's the tories not the EU who are the problem.  It's not the EU behind welfare cuts etc.  What I've realised is the EU also offer no protective mechanisms against these sorts of cuts and are part of the same broader neoliberal project as the tories, so how much worse off could we be out?  Are people claiming the austerity imposed this decade would have been harsher if we weren't in the EU?

The EU presents far stronger barriers against socialist policy than it does against neoliberalism.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Remainers have helped to switch me from undecided (I abstained) to reasonably pro-Brexit.  If there are solid points to be made in defence of the EU they certainly aren't making them, all I see is scaremongering and classism.  The smug glee over the prospect of medicine shortages is particularly strange.


Same here.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Would you be a remainder if the scaremongering stuff turned out to be true?


There will no doubt be storms to ride out whether the UK leaves under May’s  Plan Redux or under No Deal. But I think in either case the biggest effect will be lost opportunities. Jobs that might have been created that now won’t be. That sort of thing. These will be harder to visualise because they’re things we haven’t had yet that are being lost.

That said, this is if the UK sticks to the economic model it follows now: a heavily deindustrialised, heavily financialised economy.  If you look at the modelling that’s been done for Brexit with deal or without, it all assumes that Brexit is the one thing that changes, and that the type of economic structure that the UK responds to it with does not change. That’s a key point, and one that is never picked up on by the reporting media: the UK need not keep the heavily financialised economy it has had for the past decades.  It will, of course, but it needn’t.

This is part of what has been so disappointing in Labour’s response to Brexit. (The SNP’s has been similarly unimaginative, but at least there there’s a door that can be pushed at).


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you think that you're adding something to the thread with your recent run of posts gentlegreen?


Better than yours!  

*click*


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Better than yours!
> 
> *click*


I know you are, you said you are so what am I? 

That's basically the level of intellectual rigour that goes into everything you post isn't it?


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Same here.


Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

Lambs to the slaughter . . . literally.

No-deal Brexit threatens cull of 10m lambs



> Millions of British lambs may have to be slaughtered and then buried or burnt, rather than eaten, in the event of a no-deal Brexit, government officials have told farmers.  This is because UK lamb may be banned from sale to the EU from March 30 under meat hygiene rules applied to non-EU countries. If exports are allowed to continue, they would face tariffs of 45%.





> Nearly half the 20m lambs born annually in Britain are sold to the EU. A no-deal Brexit could leave the UK with 9m unsold lambs, with farmers facing mounting feed and veterinary bills.  The surplus will be made worse by imports. In a pre-Brexit deal, Britain has had to agree to take half the 220,000 tons of lamb sent to the EU from New Zealand each year.
> 
> Officials for Michael Gove, the environment secretary, have met farming leaders to discuss how to slaughter Britain’s looming lamb surplus, equivalent to about 90,000 tons of meat.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."



You are missing the point.  Can you make a sound defence of the EU that will appeal to someone with socialist values?  That fact that the pro-EU arguments are so weak has motivated me to think more about whether leaving is really that bad.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."


Yes. We're sexist as well as racist.

You stinking rotter.


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Would you be a remainder if the scaremongering stuff turned out to be true?


By the time they find out, it will be rather too late.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> You are missing the point.  Can you make a sound defence of the EU that will appeal to someone with socialist values?  That fact that the pro-EU arguments are so weak has motivated me to think more about whether leaving is really that bad.


I really wouldn't bother if I were you. This one is not interested in honest debate and discussion. A proven liar who thinks nothing of smearing half of urban as racists. 

I'd be interested in the answer to that question but it won't come from there. mauvais seems like the most grounded one on here arguing for remain, I'd be interested in their take on this.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> By the time they find out, it will be rather too late.



Yes, we'll all be finished. The dead will rise from their graves and enslave the living, led by a recently deceased nigel farrage who for some reason will sport a Hitler tache.

Could you tell us more about how imports and exports will be affected please? I'm in awe of your knowledge and fact checking abilities on that topic.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I really wouldn't bother if I were you. This one is not interested in honest debate and discussion. A proven liar who thinks nothing of smearing half of urban as racists.
> 
> I'd be interested in the answer to that question but it won't come from there. mauvais seems like the most grounded one on here arguing for remain, I'd be interested in their take on this.



Thanks, I didn't expect much having seen CRI previous posting.  I think that type of content-free posting style is a cover when someone wants to defend a certain perspective but isn't confident they can do it convincingly.


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> You are missing the point.  Can you make a sound defence of the EU that will appeal to someone with socialist values?  That fact that the pro-EU arguments are so weak has motivated me to think more about whether leaving is really that bad.


How about YOU, or anyone here explain how leaving the EU, especially with "no deal" (as seems likely to happen) will "appeal" to someone with socialist values?  How do you see those socialist values being upheld or promoted when the UK will never be self-sufficient in food production, when the UK will be a third country and extremely weak in negotiating with other countries for new trade arrangements.  How are socialist values upheld when businesses flee the UK, taking jobs with them, and when food and fuel prices will rise?  How are socialist values upheld after the UK government sells off more of the NHS so it's no longer free at the point of delivery in any form, and when the UK is forced to enter trade deals with the US that bring risky, poor quality food into the country?

Sorry, when someone says they are waiting for someone to convince them that a political action will "appeal to their values," without regard to the impact of those actions on actual, real people, it smacks of entitlement.  Perhaps the people for whom this all seems just an intellectual exercise will be shielded from the worst of what will come if even the Government's own watered down predictions happen.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> How about YOU, or anyone here explain how leaving the EU, especially with "no deal" (as seems likely to happen) will "appeal" to someone with socialist values?  How do you see those socialist values being upheld or promoted when the UK will never be self-sufficient in food production, when the UK will be a third country and extremely weak in negotiating with other countries for new trade arrangements.  How are socialist values upheld when businesses flee the UK, taking jobs with them, and when food and fuel prices will rise?  How are socialist values upheld after the UK government sells off more of the NHS so it's no longer free at the point of delivery in any form, and when the UK is forced to enter trade deals with the US that bring risky, poor quality food into the country?
> 
> Sorry, when someone says they are waiting for someone to convince them that a political action will "appeal to their values," without regard to the impact of those actions on actual, real people, it smacks of entitlement.  Perhaps the people for whom this all seems just an intellectual exercise will be shielded from the worst of what will come if even the Government's own watered down predictions happen.


See what I mean?


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

And ffs, it's pretty telling that some people continuously attack people and their characters here, rather than their arguments, but hey, that's the rarefied air of Urban for ya!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> How are socialist values upheld when businesses flee the UK



If we were moving closer to socialism that's exactly what we'd see. Or do you think we should check our socialism is acceptable to capitalists before we get started? 



CRI said:


> How are socialist values upheld after the UK government sells off more of the NHS so it's no longer free at the point of delivery in any form,



Sorry, the EU is preventing this how exactly?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> And ffs, it's pretty telling that some people continuously attack people and their characters here, rather than their arguments, but hey, that's the rarefied air of Urban for ya!


Isn't that precisely what you're doing in the above post? And with all the lies and smears that you've wiped across these boards like a 5 vindaloo skid mark.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> How about YOU, or anyone here explain how leaving the EU, especially with "no deal" (as seems likely to happen) will "appeal" to someone with socialist values?  How do you see those socialist values being upheld or promoted when the UK will never be self-sufficient in food production, when the UK will be a third country and extremely weak in negotiating with other countries for new trade arrangements.  How are socialist values upheld when businesses flee the UK, taking jobs with them, and when food and fuel prices will rise?  How are socialist values upheld after the UK government sells off more of the NHS so it's no longer free at the point of delivery in any form, and when the UK is forced to enter trade deals with the US that bring risky, poor quality food into the country?
> 
> Sorry, when someone says they are waiting for someone to convince them that a political action will "appeal to their values," without regard to the impact of those actions on actual, real people, it smacks of entitlement.  Perhaps the people for whom this all seems just an intellectual exercise will be shielded from the worst of what will come if even the Government's own watered down predictions happen.



I'm not sure exactly what you think socialist values are


----------



## Chz (Mar 3, 2019)

> SpookyFrank said: ↑
> Isn't telling someone that they're an enemy of the people if they don't agree with you quite a far-righty thing to do though?





redsquirrel said:


> I know you don't like BA but he really isn't do that is he. You don't have to share any his political opinions to think that post after post of shit video/gifs without even a comment is crap. No one is asking for essays but having a bit less of the twitter crap would be good for P&P.


I think it was unfair to BA, but fair to Urban as a whole. There are quite a lot of "with us 100%, or against us" types around these parts. And they seem baffled why people who agree with them 80% of the way can't stand them. 

That being said, you'd have to be pretty ignorant of Soviet history to think it was only a far-righty thing. Communists are always cliquey as fuck, perhaps even moreso than the fascists.

(not really contributing to the thread, but I wanted to join in on the "pass the live hand grenade around the room" game)


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI given the decision to leave has already been made, it would have to be a very strong case to overturn that decision.  Much stronger than the case required to vote for it in the first place.  Probably why you need to paint such an exaggerated doomsday scenario.

Do you think the EU is protective against the aspects neoliberalism you list, including the mobility of capital and privatisation of public services?  Food and fuel prices have been rising for years, parts of the NHS have already been privatised.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

The Lisbon treaty will usher in socialism and stave off the neoliberal devils. You'll just have to trust me on that but it's true honest.


----------



## kebabking (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> And ffs, it's pretty telling that some people continuously attack people and their characters here, rather than their arguments, but hey, that's the rarefied air of Urban for ya!



You could always fuck off....


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> And ffs, it's pretty telling that some people continuously attack people and their characters here, rather than their arguments, but hey, that's the rarefied air of Urban for ya!





CRI said:


> Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."



In the bottom post you are attacking the character rather than the arguments


----------



## mauvais (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I really wouldn't bother if I were you. This one is not interested in honest debate and discussion. A proven liar who thinks nothing of smearing half of urban as racists.
> 
> I'd be interested in the answer to that question but it won't come from there. mauvais seems like the most grounded one on here arguing for remain, I'd be interested in their take on this.


Cheers for the relative compliment, but I don't think there's much left to say at this point, and the thread is hardly at its most fruitful. My position has been that - _I've always been very clear that _- it's not so much that the EU is a positive or god forbid a model, but that it is at present in its negative effects on the UK almost completely eclipsed by, as well as recent & current governments, the probable domestic political winners of any feasible Leave. In other words, Brexit and indeed any large scale disruption is more likely to be exploited by capital than it is for any form of good for you and I, not only immediately but for our lifetimes. The exception to that is if the disruption were so severe that it might lead to what's effectively revolution, but if that is seen as a way forward, noone has ever been particularly keen to state what acceptable collateral damage would be.

I'm deeply aware of the many faults in my avoidant, risk-averse, pessimistic and lesser-evilist view that ultimately would be right at home in some shit Guardian editorial that I myself would find contemptible, but nonetheless I still consider it realistic.

I have quite a lot of sympathy for the underlying basis of sober pro-leave arguments on here, although I consider active proponents of leave to be reckless & naive. I have a fair amount of sympathy for individual remainer or indeed agnostic concerns - my own life in selfish terms has been significantly enhanced by the EU & I will likely be disadvantaged by any Brexit. To completely dismiss that is divisive.

I also have a tiny and strictly finite amount of sympathy for the kneejerk liberal remain stuff, including wanting to give someone or anyone a kicking, because you can't expect everyone to turn up having been appropriately re-educated already. That said, if they've posted here or been engaged in politics for any length of time, they should probably know better, at least on the fundamentals. You won't see me propping up the well-worn remain tropes or those who trot them out, but nothing much is gained from stabbing them to death either, and if you charitably assume that this stuff comes from ignorance, then the mere fact that we on here have all been there & done that already isn't enough of an excuse to write people off. Eesh, what a fucking liberal.

Not a very good message for the side of a bus, is it.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 3, 2019)

The prospective practicalities regarding leaving interest me.
I am caught by the discussion that the day after brexit nothing much will have changed in practical terms, and I suspect that initially it will be true, there will be a sort of 'look...brexit, and the world hasn't ended' sense in the air.
However I fail to see how there can be no practical changes that won't have an impact, for good or ill. The word 'just' comes into play, we should 'just' leave and wing it from then on. To some that sounds great. 
Makes me think about Trump when he shut down the American government, and at the time he did it maybe he thought it would be simple and folk would 'just' get on with it and wing it. Indeed the world didn't end the next day.
Then the practicalities started to emerge, for individuals in their daily lives in a myriad of ways, for systems that aid the smooth running of society, and I believe came to a head when air traffic control at Atlanta airport was at risk.
So in the face of change I think those who wish it to happen might want to think about the consequences rather than leave it all to fate and happenstance, and then find a way to make their desired change happen by taking responsibility for it.
Like solving the Irish land border problem.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."


Finally, after 2 years and 825 pages, we finally get there! *HOUSE*!


----------



## brogdale (Mar 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> those who wish it to happen might want to think about the consequences rather than leave it all to fate


They have, and they want them.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They have, and they want them.



I believe you have a point in as much as they might wan't a kind of chaos.
The sad part if it is true that chaos is the desire, is the detrimental practical impact it might have on individuals.

The following link from the New York Times, is quite an interesting timeline regarding the practical events following Trump's shutdown.
Brexit hasn't happened just yet, but I suspect the timeline of subsequent practical events arising would be similarly interesting.

Government Shutdown Timeline: See How the Effects Are Piling Up


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Brexit and indeed any large scale disruption is more likely to be exploited by capital than it is for any form of good for you and I, not only immediately but for our lifetimes



Not sure what form this could take that is worse than what we've experienced as an EU member.  What it comes down to for me is the EU offers no protection against, and actively encourages, the exploitation of society by capital.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Not sure what form this could take that is worse than what we've experienced as an EU member.  What it comes down to for me is the EU offers no protection against, and actively encourages, the exploitation of society by capital.


It does, but leaving the EU doesn't mean you're any closer to a socialism coming about and in fact forces on the right will be the ones shaping the post brexit landscape.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It does, but leaving the EU doesn't mean you're any closer to a socialism coming about and in fact forces on the right will be the ones shaping the post brexit landscape.



Which will make no difference as they are the ones shaping the landscape now


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Cheers for the relative compliment, but I don't think there's much left to say at this point, and the thread is hardly at its most fruitful. My position has been that - _I've always been very clear that _- it's not so much that the EU is a positive or god forbid a model, but that it is at present in its negative effects on the UK almost completely eclipsed by, as well as recent & current governments, the probable domestic political winners of any feasible Leave. In other words, Brexit and indeed any large scale disruption is more likely to be exploited by capital than it is for any form of good for you and I, not only immediately but for our lifetimes. The exception to that is if the disruption were so severe that it might lead to what's effectively revolution, but if that is seen as a way forward, noone has ever been particularly keen to state what acceptable collateral damage would be.
> 
> I'm deeply aware of the many faults in my avoidant, risk-averse, pessimistic and lesser-evilist view that ultimately would be right at home in some shit Guardian editorial that I myself would find contemptible, but nonetheless I still consider it realistic.
> 
> ...


To be completely honest there's nothing in there I can disagree with (I've tried though).

My position has been reposted a few times so I won't repeat it but the main real difference is I couldnt bring myself to vote remain.

Where I'd be more optimistic than you is that I think after an initial shit storm (mainly due to the lack of preparedness) I don't think it will be all that different.

As you say, capital will take advantage of us leaving. It would also take advantage of us remaining. How do we stop that? The boring and unfashionable shit most of us have been banging on about for years, community and workplace organising etc. And of course it's going to be really hard if half the people you're trying to organise with think the other half are racist fuckwits and in return they think they're traitors and establishment lackies. 

That's why I maintain its not my fight. But among those I know its the remainers who are less tolerant of leavers and not vice versa which is why I always find myself arguing with them.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It does, but leaving the EU doesn't mean you're any closer to a socialism coming about and in fact forces on the right will be the ones shaping the post brexit landscape.



Just like it was them who shaped the pre brexit landscape. What changes?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Which will make no difference as they are the ones shaping the landscape now


I think it will as there will be greater opportunity for them to slash regulations, remove rights etc.


----------



## Poot (Mar 3, 2019)

Right. I'm going to butt in here. Because Brexit and feminism collided a long time ago and this fact seems to have passed many by.

Firstly, of all the people who voted leave, it is the women who have the most to lose. If there is any risk to goods becoming more expensive and jobs being lost, ultimately that creates a situation where women are going to be more reliant than ever on men, especially working class women. Those trying to leave abusive relationships would find it more difficult. The prospect of being paid a decent whack to do caring jobs decreases significantly. It takes a lot more courage for a woman to upset the status quo by voting leave than it does a man. No surprise, then, that women actually voted by a slim margin to stay IN the EU. 

I'm finding the tone of this whole thread quite difficult tbh. It would probably kill some of you to hear it but many of you who are talking about remainers as woolly liberal types are actually in many cases speaking from a position of privilege because you're men.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think it will as there will be greater opportunity for them to slash regulations, remove rights etc.



Which regulations and rights would be most at risk?  Genuine questions btw as I've not kept on top of brexit debates a great deal.  I've always considered that human rights will be fine as even the tories are socially-liberal now if they can be economically liberal.  Perhaps working regulations, but we already have zero hours contracts and all that, so no EU protections there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2019)

Poot said:


> Right. I'm going to butt in here. Because Brexit and feminism collided a long time ago and this fact seems to have passed many by.
> 
> Firstly, of all the people who voted leave, it is the women who have the most to lose. If there is any risk to goods becoming more expensive and jobs being lost, ultimately that creates a situation where women are going to be more reliant than ever on men, especially working class women. Those trying to leave abusive relationships would find it more difficult. The prospect of being paid a decent whack to do caring jobs decreases significantly. It takes a lot more courage for a woman to upset the status quo by voting leave than it does a man. No surprise, then, that women actually voted by a slim margin to stay IN the EU.
> 
> I'm finding the tone of this whole thread quite difficult tbh. It would probably kill some of you to hear it but many of you who are talking about remainers as woolly liberal types are actually in many cases speaking from a position of privilege because you're men.


Tbh the most prominent remainers are all too often woolly liberal types who often  harm their cause by ignoring the obvious, that the eu has flaws some of which are serious.


----------



## campanula (Mar 3, 2019)

OK, please forgive because I am an errant thicko, but I asked my neighbouring beef farmer about his impending doom and he was honestly a bit baffled although expressed a few doubts that he might not have such a wide choice of bottled spunk...and from my point of view, I am thinking of Lincolnshire bulb fields  and many small nurseries, not just unable to compete with a far less employer friendly Dutch model... but global movement of diseased plant stock has almost certainly ushered in chalara and the threat of xylella. 

creeps from thread in dismay.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Which regulations and rights would be most at risk?  Genuine questions btw as I've not kept on top of brexit debates a great deal.  I've always considered that human rights will be fine as even the tories are socially-liberal now if they can be economically liberal.  Perhaps working regulations, but we already have zero hours contracts and all that, so no EU protections there.


The tories are socially liberal? You're having a laugh


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Which regulations and rights would be most at risk?  Genuine questions btw as I've not kept on top of brexit debates a great deal.  I've always considered that human rights will be fine as even the tories are socially-liberal now if they can be economically liberal.  Perhaps working regulations, but we already have zero hours contracts and all that, so no EU protections there.


EU protections are inadequate, but that doesn't mean they don't exist or that they don't make a meaningful difference. The right to holiday and sick pay as a part-time worker is a good example, a regulation brought in as an EU directive in around 2001. That made a massive difference to the lives of millions of low-paid, mostly female workers, and it is enforced - you get a part-time contract, you get holiday and sick pay now; before the EU reg, you mostly didn't. Things can get so much worse than they are now in this regard.


----------



## Supine (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Which regulations and rights would be most at risk?



Some are listed here:

10 ways the EU protects British workers' rights


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Some are listed here:
> 
> 10 ways the EU protects British workers' rights



That article says they plan to convert all EU employment laws into UK law


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> That article says they plan to convert all EU employment laws into UK law


Initially, yes. They can then repeal/change at their leisure. Within the EU they can't change a thing. 

There are many leave-enthusiast tories who would love to get rid of much of that law. It wouldn't be framed like that, of course. It would be framed as a need for the UK to remain 'competitive', perhaps in response to one of those fabled trade deals, and for employers to have 'flexibility'. Remember Thatcher and all the buzz words around destroying worker rights that her government used?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> My position has been reposted a few times so I won't repeat it but the main real difference is I couldnt bring myself to vote remain.
> 
> .


When describing my own position I usually end up a bit verbose.  That's prompted me into something more succinct:_ I'm not pro leave, but I'm anti-remain(er)._


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Initially, yes. They can then repeal/change at their leisure. Within the EU they can't change a thing.
> 
> There are many leave-enthusiast tories who would love to get rid of much of that law. It wouldn't be framed like that, of course. It would be framed as a need for the UK to remain 'competitive', perhaps in response to one of those fabled trade deals, and for employers to have 'flexibility'. Remember Thatcher and all the buzz words around destroying worker rights that her government used?


On the one hand the EU wouldn't be able to stop a UK government from, for example, subsidising a UK firm to save jobs because its toothless or something but they will step in and defend workers rights and the UK government will be powerless.

I think the first one could be correct - that if the UK wanted to subsidise firms they wouldn't be able to really stop them. But going on past behaviour i need to be convinced that they'd stop the government further eroding workers rights. This is the EU we're talking about.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> When describing my own position I usually end up a bit verbose.  That's prompted me into something more succinct:_ I'm not pro leave, but I'm anti-remain(er)._


I'm pro all this shit going away and everyone forgetting about it. Not realistic but I actually have exactly the same ability to make that happen as I do remain or any particular flavour of leave so might as well make it my position.


----------



## Supine (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm pro all this shit going away and everyone forgetting about it



I'm a remainer and I couldn't agree with this more


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> On the one hand the EU wouldn't be able to stop a UK government from, for example, subsidising a UK firm to save jobs because its toothless or something but they will step in and defend workers rights and the UK government will be powerless.
> 
> I think the first one could be correct - that if the UK wanted to subsidise firms they wouldn't be able to really stop them. But going on past behaviour i need to be convinced that they'd stop the government further eroding workers rights. This is the EU we're talking about.


Yet the examples are there. The part-time worker rights are one of those examples. An EU directive that is enforced here and makes a measurable difference to millions of low-paid, mostly female workers. It's enforced here not because it is EU law. It's enforced here because it is UK law, brought in due to an EU directive, and the UK is a country that tends to enforce laws like that. Post-brexit, any UK law like that one can be changed by the UK government. And this is the tories we're talking about here. Of course they could do it.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Not sure what form this could take that is worse than what we've experienced as an EU member.  What it comes down to for me is the EU offers no protection against, and actively encourages, the exploitation of society by capital.


You're apparently saying you can't envisage things getting any worse than they are now. To be fair this forms the basis of various leaver arguments, and obviously I don't know your personal situation, but regardless of whether I'm right or not, I gently suggest that your imagination is a little lacking. There's plenty more to be done, both in scope and speed.


----------



## Poot (Mar 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbh the most prominent remainers are all too often woolly liberal types who often  harm their cause by ignoring the obvious, that the eu has flaws some of which are serious.


That there are serious flaws is obvious to most, probably. But fucking hell, being a woman, especially a working class woman, at the mercy of Jacob Rees Mogg (for example)? Jesus.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yet the examples are there. The part-time worker rights are one of those examples. An EU directive that is enforced here and makes a measurable difference to millions of low-paid, mostly female workers. It's enforced here not because it is EU law. It's enforced here because it is UK law, brought in due to an EU directive, and the UK is a country that tends to enforce laws like that. Post-brexit, any UK law like that one can be changed by the UK government. And this is the tories we're talking about here. Of course they could do it.


I think if they really wanted to go for it they wouldn't let the EU stop them. The Tory establishment (ignore the cartoon headbangers, the serious ones) - who I agree have exactly that agenda - are pro remain after all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2019)

Poot said:


> That there are serious flaws is obvious to most, probably. But fucking hell, being a woman, especially a working class woman, at the mercy of Jacob Rees Mogg (for example)? Jesus.


Yeh I fear for that unfortunate nanny whose predicament is real and not potential

The serious flaws are conspicuous by their absence from the arguments of the most prominent remainers


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> That article says they plan to convert all EU employment laws into UK law


Can't see the article...who says that, is it the tories?


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Can't see the article...who says that, is it the tories?



Theresa May said it



> In truth the current government is unlikely to scrap many, if any, of the rights – not least because Theresa May has promised that workers’ existing protections will be guaranteed while she is Prime Minister. The Government’s Great Repeal Bill will also convert all EU laws, including the ones relating to employment rights, to UK law – at least for now


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> You're apparently saying you can't envisage things getting any worse than they are now. To be fair this forms the basis of various leaver arguments, and obviously I don't know your personal situation, but regardless of whether I'm right or not, I gently suggest that your imagination is a little lacking. There's plenty more to be done, both in scope and speed.



This always comes back to whether the EU offers any real protections, which it certainly hasn't against austerity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Theresa May said it


Well...she only guarantees those rights as long as she's PM.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> This always comes back to whether the EU offers any real protections, which it certainly hasn't against austerity.


Austerity is a UK political program.  Do you have comparative data for other EU countries?  Say pensions or dole payments, both of which are being attacked under UK-instigated austerity.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Theresa May said it


And for how long do you anticipate the nefandous may remaining prime minister?


----------



## kebabking (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Austerity is a UK political program.  Do you have comparative data for other EU countries?  Say pensions or dole payments, both of which are being attacked under UK-instigated austerity.



I think I may have seen something about Greece in the papers....


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Austerity is a UK political program.  Do you have comparative data for other EU countries?  Say pensions or dole payments, both of which are being attacked under UK-instigated austerity.



Austerity is an EU-wide political project, when Greece and Italy tried to go another way they met EU resistance.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Austerity is a UK political program.  Do you have comparative data for other EU countries?  Say pensions or dole payments, both of which are being attacked under UK-instigated austerity.


You literally have no idea of what has been happening in europe for a decade now. 50% youth unemployment, suicides, pensions destroyed etc it's ok though _you're a nationalist now._


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Austerity is an EU-wide political project, when Greece and Italy tried to go another way they met EU resistance.


https://www.ohchr.org/documents/issues/poverty/eom_gb_16nov2018.pdf


----------



## mauvais (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> This always comes back to whether the EU offers any real protections, which it certainly hasn't against austerity.


The trouble with trying to address this is that any discussion of practical relative protections offered by the EU (which are also hypothetical, for now) quickly turns into one of absolutes and motivations. Therefore I leave it up to you to decide whether there's anything in whatever form of EU law - be it employment, consumer, environmental or whatever - that realistic future domestic governments of the UK would like to rid themselves of before the EU does the same.


----------



## Santino (Mar 3, 2019)

Jordan Peterson destroyed the left.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Well...she only guarantees those rights as long as she's PM.





Pickman's model said:


> And for how long do you anticipate the nefandous may remaining prime minister?



I'm not saying it isn't possible that a UK government rolls back these protections, it's certainly something to be concerned about.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> The trouble with trying to address this is that any discussion of practical relative protections offered by the EU (which are also hypothetical, for now) quickly turns into one of absolutes and motivations. Therefore I leave it up to you to decide whether there's anything in whatever form of EU law - be it employment, consumer, environmental or whatever - that realistic future domestic governments of the UK would like to rid themselves of before the EU does the same.



On the other hand, are there regulations a future UK government might want to introduce, which the EU would prevent.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You literally have no idea of what has been happening in europe for a decade now. 50% youth unemployment, suicides, pensions destroyed etc it's ok though _you're a nationalist now._



Much of the Scottish nationalism movement is politically vapid, neoliberalism but we're more progressive than the English.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You literally have no idea of what has been happening in europe for a decade now. 50% youth unemployment, suicides, pensions destroyed etc it's ok though _you're a nationalist now._


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> I'm not saying it isn't possible that a UK government rolls back these protections, it's certainly something to be concerned about.


So one of the consequences of leaving the EU is the strong chance that a future tory government would roll-back employment rights.  And they would, there's no doubt.  tories will always get back in


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> So one of the consequences of leaving the EU is the strong chance that a future tory government would roll-back employment rights.  And they would, there's no doubt.  tories will always get back in



I'd like to take a slightly more hopeful view of the future


----------



## mauvais (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> On the other hand, are there regulations a future UK government might want to introduce, which the EU would prevent.


Sure. Then we're into the dual questions of how likely that scenario is in terms of the nature of UK government, and the ability of the EU to prevent it (which obviously cuts both ways), and ultimately the wisdom of incurring the risks prematurely when you could have just quit once the circumstances were explicitly in your favour.


----------



## Supine (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> On the other hand, are there regulations a future UK government might want to introduce, which the EU would prevent.



Generally the EU regulate for minimum standards not maximums.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Sure. Then we're into the dual questions of how likely that scenario is in terms of the nature of UK government, and the ability of the EU to prevent it (which obviously cuts both ways), and ultimately the wisdom of incurring the risks prematurely when you could have just quit once the circumstances were explicitly in your favour.



Fair enough, I think the risks of leaving have been overstated, and if we're resigned to getting tory governments forever we might as well just give up now


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 3, 2019)

this has all been said before but lets also remember that neither the tory party or the european union gave us our rights.


----------



## tommers (Mar 3, 2019)

mauvais said:


> You're apparently saying you can't envisage things getting any worse than they are now. To be fair this forms the basis of various leaver arguments, and obviously I don't know your personal situation, but regardless of whether I'm right or not, I gently suggest that your imagination is a little lacking. There's plenty more to be done, both in scope and speed.


One of the advantages for the Tories is that they can use any downturn in the economy following this as an excuse to enact policies that they have always wanted to, under the guise of "enabling British business to be competitive again".

So redundancy regulations, parenting leave, minimum wage and other employment rights can be removed much more easily than is currently the case.  People might even cheer them for doing it.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What exactly do you think will change? What do you think will happen? They'll have to cut and run? Sanctions will be imposed so the goods can't get in? This really is hysterical nonsense. I've got goods on the way from China, Thailand and Thaiwan and bits going the other way. They'll get delivered no problem. It's the EU stuff, stuff that didn't used to require documentation and didn't clog up the ports, where there will (and i mean will not might) be a problem if it's no deal.



If it's hysterical nonsense, then it's being peddled by the CBI, British Chamber of Commerce, EEF, British Retail Consortium. They all warned when the deadline was approaching in mid-Feb that the six-week long-haul shipments needed to know what their tariff terms are. They still don't.

So if we go with Mayhem's deal, we should be fine. If we don't and we go no deal, all our trade agreements with places like Japan _will cease to exist_. Which will mean new WTO tariffs on goods, which could entirely disrupt the financial balance of a long-haul trader's route, which by any stretch of the imagination should all be calculated before you set off, rather than while you wait outside a harbour on the far side of the world waiting to get in.

I don't think you _fully _appreciate the edge-like nature of the cliff-edge scenario my friend. If we don't have a deal, all hell will break loose. My point being, the echoes of this rift will not just be post-Brexit. They have already begun. The huge machine that is the world system is unravelling for us already, despite the warnings that were given.

If another country was doing this to us, we'd call it a crime.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If it's hysterical nonsense, then it's being peddled by the CBI, British Chamber of Commerce, EEF, British Retail Consortium. They all warned when the deadline was approaching in mid-Feb that the six-week long-haul shipments needed to know what their tariff terms are. They still don't.
> 
> So if we go with Mayhem's deal, we should be fine. If we don't and we go no deal, all our trade agreements with places like Japan _will cease to exist_. Which will mean new WTO tariffs on goods, which could entirely disrupt the financial balance of a long-haul trader's route, which by any stretch of the imagination should all be calculated before you set off, rather than while you wait outside a harbour on the far side of the world waiting to get in.
> 
> ...


Yet they still sailed. As they will continue to do. I'm not even sure if the CBI and other such groups have my interests completely at heart.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

Sudden  concern for long-haul traders economic well being - check


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

"then it's being peddled by the CBI, British Chamber of Commerce, EEF, British Retail Consortium".


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> YI'm not even sure if the CBI and other such groups have my interests completely at heart.



Reminds me of the remain campaign about how every expert thinks we should remain, cue list of elite bankers etc who everyone hates


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> "then it's being peddled by the CBI, British Chamber of Commerce, EEF, British Retail Consortium".


_Not my words, Carol. The words of Top Gear magazine._


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Reminds me of the remain campaign about how every expert thinks we should remain, cue list of elite bankers etc who everyone hates


car workers


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> If it's hysterical nonsense, then it's being peddled by the CBI, British Chamber of Commerce, EEF, British Retail Consortium. They all warned when the deadline was approaching in mid-Feb that the six-week long-haul shipments needed to know what their tariff terms are. They still don't.
> 
> So if we go with Mayhem's deal, we should be fine. If we don't and we go no deal, all our trade agreements with places like Japan _will cease to exist_. Which will mean new WTO tariffs on goods, which could entirely disrupt the financial balance of a long-haul trader's route, which by any stretch of the imagination should all be calculated before you set off, rather than while you wait outside a harbour on the far side of the world waiting to get in.
> 
> ...


This is the end
No safety or surprise 
The end
I'll never look into your eyes
Again
Can you picture what will be
So limitless and free?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

foreign nurses and doctors


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> foreign nurses and doctors


Have you given up even trying to form sentences now?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yet they still sailed. As they will continue to do. I'm not even sure if the CBI and other such groups have my interests completely at heart.



They did sail, yes. And it might be alright yet, we just don't know. It's that uncertainty which is anathema to business, as you know.

But it's not the most professional of optics, really. We've been sea trading for hundreds and hundreds of years, and we're pissing all over the established world order with no elan OR panache OR even a jaunty tricorn hat. Much like Trump and the China tariffs, which resulted in ships racing across the oceans to beat the soybean tariff increase that China was putting up against Trump's declaration of trade war, we're involved in some dodgy hopeful wait-and-see act with international deliveries because we're _potentially_ about to break our established trade structure in a way and to a degree that no nation in history has ever done before.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> we're pissing all over the established world order



We should know our place


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> They did sail, yes. And it might be alright yet, we just don't know. It's that uncertainty which is anathema to business, as you know.
> 
> But it's not the most professional of optics, really. We've been sea trading for hundreds and hundreds of years, and we're pissing all over the established world order with no elan OR panache OR even a jaunty tricorn hat. Much like Trump and the China tariffs, which resulted in ships racing across the oceans to beat the soybean tariff increase that China was putting up against Trump's declaration of trade war, we're involved in some dodgy hopeful wait-and-see act with international deliveries because we're _potentially_ about to break our established trade structure in a way and to a degree that no nation in history has ever done before.


WTO rules. The goods will get there fine.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> On the other hand, are there regulations a future UK government might want to introduce, which the EU would prevent.


In practice this would seem a bit of a remote risk given the problem to date has entirely been the UK electing governments that enthusiastically lead from the front in pursuing neoliberal policies (e.g. marketisation, privatisation) that far, far outstrip any supranational directives the EU has put forth.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Sudden  concern for long-hail traders economic well being - check



You seem remarkably able to separate our export trade from our domestic economy and the welfare of the average working person. How do you DO that?!


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 3, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> In practice this would seem a bit of a remote risk given the problem to date has entirely been the UK electing governments that enthusiastically lead from the front in pursuing neoliberal policies (e.g. marketisation, privatisation) that far, far outstrip any supranational directives the EU has put forth.



Yes but as I've said, if we have no hope for the future what is even the point


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> We should know our place



We should work within a system that works for us. Or invent a better one.

But jumping from a window shouting Wibble Wibble should not be a menu option.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> WTO rules. The goods will get there fine.



So a 20% increase on whisky tariffs currently on their way to Singapore. That would make the shipment bankrupt. That's Special Ironic Brew Scotch Whisky of course.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You seem remarkably able to separate our export trade from our domestic economy and the welfare of the average working person. How do you DO that?!


Do you seriously think governments in the far East will shaft the UK on import tariffs? Its in their interests to keep them down. It'll be wto rules until separate deals are struck.

EU trade is a different matter.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> So a 20% increase on whisky tariffs currently on their way to Singapore. That would make the shipment bankrupt. That's Special Ironic Brew Scotch Whisky of course.


You were predicting armageddon a few posts ago with the CBI as your witness. Now it's some whisky.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> WTO rules. The goods will get there fine.


As long as they don't rot during checks.
And the export countries recognise our standards.
And the tariffs don't destroy the point of exporting in the first place.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Do you seriously think governments in the far East will shaft the UK on import tariffs? Its in their interests to keep them down. It'll be wto rules until separate deals are struck.
> 
> EU trade is a different matter.



WTO rules would MEAN shafting the UK. They are not good at all. No-one in the world trades solely on WTO rules, BECAUSE they are so shit.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You seem remarkably able to separate our export trade from our domestic economy and the welfare of the average working person. How do you DO that?!



Note the number of _ours _in this. I was talking more of your sudden interest in this issue though - like your fleeting interest in labour party anti-semitism.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> You were predicting armageddon a few posts ago with the CBI as your witness. Now it's some whisky.



Link to where I predicted Armageddon please, or retract and make a payment to a charity of Editors choice, and we'll say no more about it.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> You were predicting armageddon a few posts ago with the CBI as your witness. Now it's some whisky.


A few years ago he was calling the EU scum and supporting brexit. The main thing is to _talk about wookey._


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Have you given up even trying to form sentences now?


Not at all..I'm pointing out all the car workers who are losing their jobs and all the foreign health workers who are leaving the country.  Only two, we can carry on if you like.

See...remainers predicted this, the markets were right, the financiers were right, small businesses were right.  I asked way earlier in this thread why factories whose primary market was the EU (or access to the EU) would stay here...the general answer was "it'll all be good" or "we're hurting capital" or "we're hurting europe" or worst "they'll stay".

I asked 
Is Brexit actually going to happen?

and got sarcasm

You may like whatever...you may not like whatever...people were asking how you'd pay the bills.   Bill-paying time is here and people are losing their jobs.   Many thousands of them.

So if you don't like a brief response, have a longer one, you can respond to it instead of criticising the structure of it


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Not at all..I'm pointing out all the car workers who are losing their jobs and all the foreign health workers who are leaving the country.  Only two, we can carry on if you like.
> 
> See...remainers predicted this, the markets were right, the financiers were right, small businesses were right.  I asked way earlier in this thread why factories whose primary market was the EU (or access to the EU) would stay here...the general answer was "it'll all be good" or "we're hurting capital" or "we're hurting europe" or worst "they'll stay".
> 
> ...


Can you link to the longer reply please?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Note the number of _ours _in this. I was talking more of your sudden interest in this issue though - like your fleeting interest in labour party anti-semitism.



That poor, lonely cargo ship is now half way across the world or thereabouts, and has no clue about the relationship it's mother country will have with the country it seeks to trade with by the time it gets there.

So rather than a sudden interest, just see it as a half-time comment. It's tied into _what's happening in the world_.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> On the other hand, are there regulations a future UK government might want to introduce, which the EU would prevent.


There isn't a Scottish nationalism movement is there?  I'm aware of a Scottish independence one.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

. 


Wookey said:


> Link to where I predicted Armageddon please, or retract and make a payment to a charity of Editors choice, and we'll say no more about it.



Fuck off you pompous twat 


Wookey said:


> There are ships that set off last week for the Far East with cargo to deliver, and they have no idea what our trading status is going to be by the time they arrive.



I took from this post that you were saying they had no idea if they'd be able to trade. If that's not what you meant fair enough but I'm not going to massage you weird little ego with an apology. 

I'm not disputing that no deal would be a horror show. It just won't stop goods getting to their destination.


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

Investor-state dispute settlement.  That's what membership has so far kept at bay. TTIP didn't happen because other Europeans fought hard against it although the British government pushed hard for it. The US is now demanding an ISDS process as part of any trade deal and personally I'm doubtful this or any other UK government will resist.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The main thing is to _talk about wookey._



You talk about me more than anyone else Butch! You've just responded to my point about cargo ships, with a reference to a thread about anti-Semitism and a link to something I said several years ago on another topic.

THAT is talking about me, rather than to me. And it certainly doesn't engage with my point that our international trade system is already creaking with no deal looming. But I can see _why_ you don't want to engage that point meaningfully, and I suspect so do we all.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 3, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Yes but as I've said, if we have no hope for the future what is even the point


Fair enough, but looking at how swiftly the Coalition reversed so many of Labour's achievements, you should at least be able to understand why some might want a supranational check on rolling back some standards that have been achieved (or who might want a body proposing them in the first place). Stuff like ECHR or not pumping raw sewage onto beaches (UWWTD).


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

The EU wanted TTIP. There's a nasty little elision of europeans into the eu there newbie. Not on at all.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Can you link to the longer reply please?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> WTO rules would MEAN shafting the UK. They are not good at all. No-one in the world trades solely on WTO rules, BECAUSE they are so shit.


I didn't say it would be good, just that it wouldn't stop it getting there. They'll quickly do deals similar to what they have with the EU in the far East simply because its in their governments  interests to.

I don't think it will happen either.


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yet the examples are there. The part-time worker rights are one of those examples. An EU directive that is enforced here and makes a measurable difference to millions of low-paid, mostly female workers. It's enforced here not because it is EU law. It's enforced here because it is UK law, brought in due to an EU directive, and the UK is a country that tends to enforce laws like that. Post-brexit, any UK law like that one can be changed by the UK government. And this is the tories we're talking about here. Of course they could do it.



Sorry, a bit behind on this thread, but didn’t the tories opt out (or intend to opt out) of the EU ‘Social Chapter’, so it wouldn’t have been something the EU could enforce, still required national government to enact? Blair getting in is what gave us those rights I think, although EU putting them forward. At the time I was doing long term agency work so benefitted from it significantly after years of never going on holiday (used to do that thing of quitting a job to go away for a couple of weeks then get a new one when I came back, once took a while getting back into work which was shit because no dole).

(Would I be right to say that the EU was a bit more social democratic at the time? How much has this changed or were the hardcore free marketeers always there?)


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Link to where I predicted Armageddon please, or retract and make a payment to a charity of Editors choice, and we'll say no more about it.


Fuck off you pompous twat


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The EU wanted TTIP. There's a nasty little elision of europeans into the eu there newbie. Not on at all.


Which bit do you mean when you say 'EU'? I said Europeans meaning a wide selection of civil society who organised through their political processes. Did you just mean some technocrats whose power was challenged and defeated?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

newbie said:


> Which bit do you mean when you say 'EU'? I said Europeans meaning a wide selection of civil society who organised through their political processes. Did you just mean some technocrats whose power was challenged and defeated?


i mean the EU. You tied opposition and death of TTIP to membership of the EU. That was literally your point.

(Your _their _is a little like wookey's _ours _btw)


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Fuck off you pompous twat


um...are you ok?


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> i mean the EU. You tied opposition and death of TTIP to membership of the EU. That was literally your point.
> 
> (Your _their _is a little like wookey's _ours _btw)


So what's your view on ISDS  in the post Brexit future?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

newbie said:


> So what's your view on ISDS  in the post Brexit future?


Don't come in with that, fuck it up and go out with that. You needed to get it right on such an important issue


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Don't come in with that, fuck it up and go out with that. You needed to get it right on such an important issue


What? It's a straight question, don't duck it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> um...are you ok?


You know what? I'm not sure the concern you appear to be showing me here is entirely genuine.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> . It just won't stop goods getting to their destination.



I don't know that. I know they used to be guaranteed their delivery, and now they're not, and that's no way to run a business.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

newbie said:


> What? It's a straight question, don't duck it.


Hang on, you come in saying that membership of the eu protected _us against something that the eu fought tooth and nail to promote _and it doesn't give you a seconds pause of thought about what you're saying? Righto.

Duck it - what's to duck? I reckon i am against that. Happy?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> You know what? I'm not sure the concern you appear to be showing me here is entirely genuine.


Oh I get that all the time on urban 

I wasn't being a prick though, you posted the same thing twice...just thought you might not be ok was all.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I don't know that. I know they used to be guaranteed their delivery, and now they're not, and that's no way to run a business.


Who can or cannot guarantee their delivery to or from where? Do you understand how shipping contracts work? It's pre established who pays what at what end, that's what the incoterms are all about.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Oh I get that all the time on urban
> 
> I wasn't being a prick though, you posted the same thing twice...just thought you might not be ok was all.


Ah I see, my phone died when I sent the first one so didn't think it had worked but couldn't be arsed to type it all out again. Worth saying twice anyway imo


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Hang on, you come in saying that membership of the eu protected _us against something that the eu fought tooth and nail to promote _and it doesn't give you a seconds pause of thought about what you're saying? Righto.
> 
> Duck it - what's to duck? I reckon i am against that. Happy?


You're against the imposition of ISDS? Good, so am I. Do you think there's much likelihood it won't be part of a future UK US trade deal?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Who can or cannot guarantee their delivery to or from where? Do you understand how shipping contracts work? It's pre established who pays what at what end, that's what the incoterms are all about.



It's usually pre-established. Until no deal Brexit comes along and cancels your trade agreements with Japan, for example. Then you don't know what tariffs and process fees could be applied, and what that means for the businesses sending goods on the ships.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Ah I see, my phone died when I sent the first one so didn't think it had worked but couldn't be arsed to type it all out again. Worth saying twice anyway imo



That is true commitment to your art that is.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

newbie said:


> You're against the imposition of ISDS? Good, so am I. Do you think there's much likelihood it won't be part of a future UK US trade deal?


Why duck your first post? Does it fill me with hope for a clearly researched opposition? No, frankly, newbie, it does not.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 3, 2019)

Poot said:


> Right. I'm going to butt in here. Because Brexit and feminism collided a long time ago and this fact seems to have passed many by.
> 
> Firstly, of all the people who voted leave, it is the women who have the most to lose. If there is any risk to goods becoming more expensive and jobs being lost, ultimately that creates a situation where women are going to be more reliant than ever on men, especially working class women. Those trying to leave abusive relationships would find it more difficult. The prospect of being paid a decent whack to do caring jobs decreases significantly. It takes a lot more courage for a woman to upset the status quo by voting leave than it does a man. No surprise, then, that women actually voted by a slim margin to stay IN the EU.
> 
> I'm finding the tone of this whole thread quite difficult tbh. It would probably kill some of you to hear it but many of you who are talking about remainers as woolly liberal types are actually in many cases speaking from a position of privilege because you're men.


Austerity has had a clear gendered impact, with regard to direct impacts and impacts such as cuts in funding for refuges. Oh, and what about when that austerity is _directed_ by the EU, along with the other institutions of neo-liberalism? For example:
https://www.rosalux.eu/fileadmin/us...AusterityandFeminismaftertheCrisis_Greece.pdf


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Austerity has had a clear gendered impact, with regard to direct impacts and impacts such as cuts in funding for refuges. Oh, and what about when that austerity is _directed_ by the EU, along with the other institutions of neo-liberalism? For example:
> https://www.rosalux.eu/fileadmin/us...AusterityandFeminismaftertheCrisis_Greece.pdf


Austerity is a condition of entry to both the EU and to the eurozone. Not just in passing conjuctural way but requiring being writ into the states constitutions. It's not just happening because of bad leaders - they are so far beyond that shit. They are quite openly making it illegal not to do austerity.


----------



## newbie (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why duck your first post? Does it fill me with hope for a clearly researched opposition? No, frankly, newbie, it does not.


Yet that is where we're heading.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 3, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's usually pre-established. Until no deal Brexit comes along and cancels your trade agreements with Japan, for example. Then you don't know what tariffs and process fees could be applied, and what that means for the businesses sending goods on the ships.


They're constantly subject to change, that's why you have incoterms in the first place and it's why they're structured the way they are.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Austerity is a condition of entry to both the EU and to the eurozone. Not just in passing conjuctural way but requiring being writ into the states constitutions. It's not just happening because of bad leaders - they are so far beyond that shit. They are quite openly making it illegal not to do austerity.



You are probably referring to the fiscal compact  which the UK and Czech Rep opted out of:

European Fiscal Compact - Wikipedia


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

No, i am not.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

The Czech state was forced to FREELY AGREE agree to it of course.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 3, 2019)

CRI said:


> Lambs to the slaughter . . . literally.
> 
> No-deal Brexit threatens cull of 10m lambs



"We'll kill a lamb on the hour every hour until you change your mind"


----------



## tommers (Mar 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, i am not.


What are you referring to?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> You are probably referring to the fiscal compact  which the UK and Czech Rep opted out of:
> 
> European Fiscal Compact - Wikipedia


So, what part of what i posted was wrong?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 3, 2019)

tommers said:


> What are you referring to?


Maybe i was on about that latest one then. Great isn't it? To join the EU gang you have to make stuff like socialism constitutionally illegal.


----------



## Combustible (Mar 3, 2019)

newbie said:


> Investor-state dispute settlement.  That's what membership has so far kept at bay. TTIP didn't happen because other Europeans fought hard against it although the British government pushed hard for it. The US is now demanding an ISDS process as part of any trade deal and personally I'm doubtful this or any other UK government will resist.


Except for the fact that investor state dispute settlement mechanisms are already part of existing trade deals such as the recent EU- Canada deal. And far from resisting them it is the EU policy to include them in future trade deals.


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

So, whatcha all think of Trump's plan for a new trade agreement with the UK after Brexit?



The preamble sets out clearly what the US wants to happen - a quick deal that delivers "substantive results for U.S. consumers, businesses, farmers, ranchers, and workers, consistent with U.S. priorities."

Here's part of the shopping list of what they want to achieve from the "negotiations."

-  Remove barriers to importing US food and agricultural products into the UK.
-  New, enforceable rules to end "unjustified" trade restrictions or "commercial requirements" (like clear labelling and safety testing).
-  US Pharmaceutical companies to have full access to the UK Market (i.e. NHS).
-  US companies have the same access to UK government contracts as UK companies do.
-  Allow US companies to sue UK firms and the UK government for non-compliance with any of the new "rules."
-  Prohibit the UK from adjusting its exchange rates if it could effect the balance of payments or give unfair competitive advantage over US companies.

I suspect the outcome of US-UK trade negotiations will be a deal that looks something like this.  (Hint:  The lions here aren't British.)



Spoiler: Perhaps not for the squeamish


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

Funny how they found all this money down the back of the sofa, or something.  DUP still got a much bigger bung though.  So unfair.

£1.6bn 'bribe' for poorer towns as May seeks Labour's backing for Brexit deal


----------



## CRI (Mar 3, 2019)

And, speaking of the DUP . . . 

Opinion: The ‘stupid English’ are blindly driving Northern Ireland towards conflict


----------



## two sheds (Mar 4, 2019)

campanula said:


> OK, please forgive because I am an errant thicko, but I asked my neighbouring beef farmer about his impending doom and he was honestly a bit baffled although expressed a few doubts that he might not have such a wide choice of bottled spunk...and from my point of view, I am thinking of Lincolnshire bulb fields  and many small nurseries, not just unable to compete with a far less employer friendly Dutch model... but global movement of diseased plant stock has almost certainly ushered in chalara and the threat of xylella.
> 
> creeps from thread in dismay.



nice to see you back 

I'm verging on eco-fascist - no free movement of plants so no import or export of plants/bushes/trees without very good reason. Several tree species seem now threatened with wipeout. I have some disease resistant elms from scotland I'm hopeful for, but the native Cornish elms round here as nearly everywhere else are generally fucked


----------



## Humberto (Mar 4, 2019)

I wonder to what extent the whole thing is a hoax. That it will be aborted and that they will still find a way to fuck us over. e.g. That this austerity is the thin end of the wedge. It's what some people would want and benefit from.

Its a fucking atrocious shambles all over at any rate.


----------



## Ming (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> And, speaking of the DUP . . .
> 
> Opinion: The ‘stupid English’ are blindly driving Northern Ireland towards conflict


I like the Cockburn brothers. His brother Andrew did a great book on Rumsfeld.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2019)

Ming said:


> I like the Cockburn brothers. His brother Andrew did a great book on Rumsfeld.


He's been dead nearly a decade. The living one died inside some time late 2011 and was replaced by a torture rape and murder justifying moron. The father was a murder and torture justifying moron as well.I'm glad that you like them though


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 4, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> "We'll kill a lamb on the hour every hour until you change your mind"


Those poor little baa lambs will be slaughtered. Not like normal where they'd be err... slaughtered. 

This suggests to me Brexit will mean cheap British lamb at least in the short term


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> So, whatcha all think of Trump's plan for a new trade agreement with the UK after Brexit?
> 
> View attachment 163527
> 
> ...


The undisguised glee with which you post stuff about people not getting medicines is fucking vile.

How does the stuff about market access, for example full access to the UK pharma market (and by association the NHS) differ from what we're signed up to now with the EU? 

The fixing of exchange rates sounds like pure fantasy too, how would they even do that?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> ...How does the stuff about market access, for example full access to the UK pharma market (and by association the NHS) differ from what we're signed up to now with the EU?...


Because they want access to the govt IT contracts as well.  They're looking to take *it all*.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> How does the stuff about market access, for example full access to the UK pharma market (and by association the NHS) differ from what we're signed up to now with the EU?



Access to the NHS is very heavily regulated.  In the US the market is very different where suppliers can directly market to the healthcare sector, sales reps etc.  My g/f works in the wider pharma marketing industry and what they can do and say is heavily regulated in the UK in a way that it isn't in the US.

The assumption is that US companies would want direct unfettered access to this market.  Obviously this isn't automatically going to happen with any trade deal because the government can just say no, but it is what the US will want, of course.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> because the government can just say no



I think I see the flaw in your argument


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> Funny how they found all this money down the back of the sofa, or something.  DUP still got a much bigger bung though.  So unfair.
> 
> £1.6bn 'bribe' for poorer towns as May seeks Labour's backing for Brexit deal



Pretty pathetic bribe as well - £1.6 bn over 7 years allocated to regions not based on need, but to persuade Labour MPs there to back the Government.

Over a six year period from 20201, the UK was projected to receive 13 bn, allocated to areas of demonstrable need using criteria for assessment agreed across the EU.  The darker green the areas in the first map, the higher the levels of socio-economic deprivation and/or projections of hardship in the future.

For all the folks bleating about how the money put into the EU pot can now be kept back so "our" Government can decide where to spend it, this is how that actually plays out.  



West and North Wales can kiss goodbye to the fuckton of development funding they would have got from the EU, and they'll be getting sweet FA from Theresa May's round of bribes.  Scottish MPs are of no use to the Tories, so Scotland gets zilch as well. There's little correspondence between the areas set to get the most from May's bribe fund and the areas with greatest need, but that's hardly shocking, given the purpose for the bungs.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 4, 2019)

Nice one Wales you cunts.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Nice one Wales you cunts.



Why is collective victim blaming more acceptable than individual victim blaming?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Why is collective victim blaming more acceptable than individual victim blaming?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Why is collective victim blaming more acceptable than individual victim blaming?


i don't know, why is collective victim blaming more acceptable than individual victim blaming?

e2a: i hope this has a good punchline


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Those poor little baa lambs will be slaughtered. Not like normal where they'd be err... slaughtered.
> 
> This suggests to me Brexit will mean cheap British lamb at least in the short term



Just in time for BBQ season


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just in time for BBQ season



If it does occur I am sure plenty of urbs would like their freezers stocking for the summer.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't know, why is collective victim blaming more acceptable than individual victim blaming?
> 
> e2a: i hope this has a good punchline



Cos he’s Tönnies own?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If it does occur I am sure plenty of urbs would like their freezers stocking for the summer.



Sadly I'm veggie. Maybe tofu will be cheaper?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sadly I'm veggie. Maybe tofu will be cheaper?



After Bregsit??


----------



## 8115 (Mar 4, 2019)

Can I just put down that I think it will definitely happen on 21st (?) March. Probably no deal.


----------



## 8115 (Mar 4, 2019)

29th.


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 4, 2019)

Quite agree-we ,that is UK,now way past the point of no return.


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sadly I'm veggie. Maybe tofu will be cheaper?


It will all be made from All American GMO Soya beans, dontcha know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Quite agree-we ,that is UK,now way past the point of no return.


You won't believe what theresa may did next


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

8115 said:


> Can I just put down that I think it will definitely happen on 21st (?) March. Probably no deal.





8115 said:


> 29th.





Duncan2 said:


> Quite agree-we ,that is UK,now way past the point of no return.



Agree, and strongly suspect that was the intention of the Tories, and probably Labour, too, all along.  We've all been had.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> Agree, and strongly suspect that was the intention of the Tories, and probably Labour, too, all along.  We've all been had.


You haven't, not by labour or the tories


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Correction from this NYT article.  Oh, what a hoot!


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You haven't, not by labour or the tories


Well, both have done a piss poor job of acting in the interest of the UK, so I stand by what I said.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> View attachment 163553View attachment 163555


Updated version.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You won't believe what theresa may did next



Peace Envoy for the Middle East?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 4, 2019)

macron
 “a historic success, the reconciliation of a devastated continent in an unprecedented project of peace, prosperity and freedom.”
yeah?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Updated version.
> 
> View attachment 163579



Fuck you very much Wales.....


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Fuck you very much Wales.....


They've pretty well fucked themselves.


----------



## Fez909 (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> It will all be made from All American GMO Soya beans, dontcha know.


In 2014 the EU put forward a proposal to 'fast track' commercial cultivation of GM food. It is now EU policy. 

The EU is no safety net against GMO in the food chain.


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Pretty good summary of how we got to where we are now, and why we are so fucked.

Thread by @TheScepticIsle: "Support for ‘no deal’ Brexit is the pinnacle of Leave's descent into zealotry. The end result of refusing to plan Like Trump, 'no deal' advo […]" #Brexit #WTOBrexit #NoDealBrexit #SOS


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> macron
> “a historic success, the reconciliation of a devastated continent in an unprecedented project of peace, prosperity and freedom.”
> yeah?


Let's see how well the prick does in May.



newbie said:


> Yet that is where we're heading.


And so is the EU. In fact as Combustible pointed out it's already here under CETA.

It's not national governments vs the EU, it's national governments _with_ the EU. The two of them working together with capital to advance their common purpose. Yes sometimes there is squabbling amongst the thieves but fundamentally they require each other.


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> In 2014 the EU put forward a proposal to 'fast track' commercial cultivation of GM food. It is now EU policy.
> 
> The EU is no safety net against GMO in the food chain.


That may well be, but origins of food must still be labelled, so consumers in the EU can make a choice.

Are you content with the other changes to food and agricultural standards that the US would demand as part of a trade deal with the UK?  This would include dropping detailed and origin labelling?

(See post #24878 and this list from the Soil Association.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Peace Envoy for the Middle East?


Close but no cigar. Crane operator for the sacn


----------



## Fez909 (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> That may well be, but origins of food must still be labelled, so consumers in the EU can make a choice.
> 
> Are you content with the other changes to food and agricultural standards that the US would demand as part of a trade deal with the UK?  This would include dropping detailed and origin labelling?
> 
> (See post #24878 and this list from the Soil Association.)


No, I am not. And it won't happen. Weakening our food standards will mean no exports to the EU, which is - as remainers are so fond of pointing out - where most of our exports go.

Weaken those standards and _then _British farming is truly shafted.

Are you content that "On 22nd February 2011, experts from EU member states voted to weaken GMO rules to allow contamination of animal feed with GMOs that have not been given any safety approval in Europe"? source

This is all happening now, under EU rules. and has been for nearly a decade. In 5 years time, the EU will allow full scale, commerical GMO crops: there was a 10 year period after the initial regulation mentioned in my previous post where countries can "opt out" of fast-tracking GM foods.


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> No, I am not. And it won't happen. Weakening our food standards will mean no exports to the EU, which is - as remainers are so fond of pointing out - where most of our exports go.
> 
> Weaken those standards and _then _British farming is truly shafted.
> 
> ...



I think British farming is already shafted if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, which is looking increasingly like the outcome.  Until there is a new deal with the EU, much UK produce can't be sold in the UK, as it there is no proof that it meets their quality and safety standards.  EU nations have plenty of choice of where else to get foodstuffs - from other EU countries or from nations with which the EU has negotiated trade deals.  Not so for a post No Deal Brexit EU.  Did you see the article above about the potential for nearly a million head of lambs that can't be sold?  Beggars basically can't be choosers here.

And May her Ministers have spoken many times about negotiating a deal with the US as a priority after Brexit.  The US is certainly serious enough about it that the Administration has issued an 18 page report of their goals in such negotiations.  The UK will be in on position to call any tunes in such negotiations  Do you really think the UK Government will draw more of their famous red lines, and the US will roll over and say, "Aw sure, since it's you, we'll let you have whatever you want."


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 4, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So, what part of what i posted was wrong?


The part where you stated austerity was a legal obligation for all MS - the UK opted out of the fiscal compact, as not part of the EZ.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> The part where you stated austerity was a legal obligation for all MS - the UK opted out of the fiscal compact, as not part of the EZ.


Nope - try again. Look closely this time.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Close but no cigar. Crane operator for the sacn



In my experience including some time as a qualified Slinger and Banksman, I can assess she is incapable of doing that job too!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> It will all be made from All American GMO Soya beans, dontcha know.



Will you be upset when all your tinpot predictions don't come true? Will you actually feel angry and hurt and stupid when nobody is force feeding you chlorinated chicken and culling lambs? 

I think you will.

But don't worry. 

I'll forcefeed you chlorinated chicken. SpineyNorman will probably even kill a lamb or two for you, just so you don't feel totally inadequate.


----------



## newbie (Mar 4, 2019)

Combustible said:


> Except for the fact that investor state dispute settlement mechanisms are already part of existing trade deals such as the recent EU- Canada deal. And far from resisting them it is the EU policy to include them in future trade deals.


The CETA deal differs from TTIP and the current US proposals in being designed to enable states to carry out political and regulatory  policies without interference by 'investors'.  It has to be ratified by all states, none have done so I don't think because it's still mired in a case in the CJEU about whether the courts of member states have exclusive jurisdiction. So yes and then again, no. 

We're leaving so none of that matters. Do you think the current or any future UK government will resist US demands for the sort of ISDS regime they've imposed everywhere else in the world?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 4, 2019)

newbie said:


> The CETA deal differs from TTIP and the current US proposals in being designed to enable states to carry out political and regulatory  policies without interference by 'investors'.  It has to be ratified by all states, none have done so I don't think because it's still mired in a case in the CJEU about whether the courts of member states have exclusive jurisdiction. So yes and then again, no.
> 
> We're leaving so none of that matters. Do you think the current or any future UK government will resist US demands for the sort of ISDS regime they've imposed everywhere else in the world?


You sure that you have who is for or against  this time?


----------



## Wolveryeti (Mar 4, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Nope - try again. Look closely this time.


Really? Weaksauce. You are the one with the silly claim that EU enforced austerity is mandatory for all MS. On a thread where the focus is the UK.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 4, 2019)

CRI said:


> I think British farming is already shafted if the UK leaves the EU without a deal, which is looking increasingly like the outcome.  _*Until there is a new deal with the EU, much UK produce can't be sold in the UK*_, as it there is no proof that it meets their quality and safety standards.


 eh


----------



## TopCat (Mar 4, 2019)

dont cull sheep sell them to us. yum


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Will you be upset when all your tinpot predictions don't come true? Will you actually feel angry and hurt and stupid when nobody is force feeding you chlorinated chicken and culling lambs?
> 
> I think you will.
> 
> ...


Christ, you really think people who are trying to point out the massive economic, social and political risks of leaving the EU without arrangements to replace those that will be lost are doing this because (checks notes) they want the chaos to happen?  

FFS, that's as bananas as saying people who "talk down" the economy are responsible if the economy tanks.  One helluva reach.


----------



## CRI (Mar 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> dont cull sheep sell them to us. yum


It's cool that you are rich enough not to worry about food price inflation then. Not sure there will be enough of you wealthy folk to eat all that surplus lamb though.  Of course you could use some of your wealth to buy up the extra and give it to people who'll have lost their jobs or businesses, or otherwise will struggle to afford rising food costs. after a No Deal Brexit.  I'm sure you have a generous side!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> eh


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> In my experience including some time as a qualified Slinger and Banksman, I can assess she is incapable of doing that job too!


Yeh. It's OK, she'll be a crane operator without a crane and will need to improvise one from what she can find on grytviken's beach


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Really? Weaksauce. You are the one with the silly claim that EU enforced austerity is mandatory for all MS. On a thread where the focus is the UK.


It’s a condition of ENTRY


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Really? Weaksauce. You are the one with the silly claim that EU enforced austerity is mandatory for all MS. On a thread where the focus is the UK.


Though we’ve yet to test the limits of the phrase “shall endeavour to” should the uk make a break from the neoliberal consensus.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Those poor little baa lambs will be slaughtered. Not like normal where they'd be err... slaughtered.
> 
> This suggests to me Brexit will mean cheap British lamb at least in the short term


Brexit idiots queuing up for FAKE LAMB ​


----------



## mx wcfc (Mar 4, 2019)

I was discussing brexit with a Belgian today. She was interested in what I thought about it and how we thought the uk would get on outside the EU. After a bit of discussion about lying politicians I said, without realy thinking “we’ll be begging to be let back in in 5 years” to which she replied “pfft, you’ve got to leave  first”.


----------



## Ming (Mar 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He's been dead nearly a decade. The living one died inside some time late 2011 and was replaced by a torture rape and murder justifying moron. The father was a murder and torture justifying moron as well.I'm glad that you like them though


But apart from that...did you enjoy the book?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> Christ, you really think people who are trying to point out the massive economic, social and political risks of leaving the EU without arrangements to replace those that will be lost are doing this because (checks notes) they want the chaos to happen?
> 
> FFS, that's as bananas as saying people who "talk down" the economy are responsible if the economy tanks.  One helluva reach.



We're not leaving though are we? As is becoming abundantly clear. So what is all this really about?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> We're not leaving though are we? As is becoming abundantly clear. So what is all this really about?


i am also concerned about CRI's increasing identification with residents of the uk, as witness her frequent use of 'we' when talking about brexit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am also concerned about CRI's increasing identification with residents of the uk, as witness her frequent use of 'we' when talking about brexit


Is she not in Scotland or are you doing a joke that’s flown over my head. I seen her banging on about Wetherspoons and how in Scotland they let your dog in pubs. In Scotland we also have hundreds of Spoons though ....


----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> We're not leaving though are we?



You don't know that, nobody knows the future. Leaving with no deal is still possible, and absolutely definite without a ratified deal or extension, neither of which has majority support at present. With three weeks to go.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)

24 days....


----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 24 days....



How many sitting days of Parliament?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Is she not in Scotland or are you doing a joke that’s flown over my head. I seen her banging on about Wetherspoons and how in Scotland they let your dog in pubs. In Scotland we also have hundreds of Spoons though ....


def american, thought resident in america


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> How many sitting days of Parliament?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> How many sitting days of Parliament?


have you lost the ability to count?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> have you lost the ability to count?



Some have lost the ability to think too by what is going on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 163613


Future Business as of Tuesday 05 March 2019


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Some have lost the ability to think too by what is going on.


not sure Wookey ever much of a thinker tbh


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Future Business as of Tuesday 05 March 2019



Presentation of Bills
School Uniforms - Nonces the lot of em...


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Future Business as of Tuesday 05 March 2019



Reading ahead I am pleased to see on Friday 08 March, time has been put aside to discuss Low Level Letterbox Legislation.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Future Business as of Tuesday 05 March 2019



International Women’s Day

WFT? sexist or what? when's international Richard Herring Day?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am also concerned about CRI's increasing identification with residents of the uk, as witness her frequent use of 'we' when talking about brexit



CRI has lived in Britain for many years, IIRC.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 5, 2019)

Cats Bill: Second Reading


Where is the Dogs Bill? WHERE?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Cats Bill: Second Reading
> 
> 
> Where is the Dogs Bill? WHERE?



Cats and dogs don’t have bills.
Ducks do.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Cats and dogs don’t have bills.
> Ducks do.


so do people


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so do people



Not after Brexit, people will say,
‘Remember electricity?’


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Not after Brexit, people will say,
> ‘Remember electricity?’


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




New National Anthem?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> New National Anthem?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

Sorry I am just practising this.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 5, 2019)

"After a 2020 referendum asking voters to choose between 'Another Day in Paradise' and 'Against All Odds' was inconclusive, 'Phil Collins' Greatest Hits' became the British national anthem..."


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 5, 2019)

_We voted for God Save the Queen, but those decidey-for-ye bastards just ignored us_


----------



## killer b (Mar 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "After a 2020 referendum asking voters to choose between 'Another Day in Paradise' and 'Against All Odds' was inconclusive, 'Phil Collins' Greatest Hits' became the British national anthem..."


_against all odds_ is clearly the superior song.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You don't know that, nobody knows the future. Leaving with no deal is still possible, and absolutely definite without a ratified deal or extension, neither of which has majority support at present. With three weeks to go.



Look mate, I don't know what's gonna happen tomorrow but I'm pretty confident it will not rain frogs, the sky will not change colour and the Remain supporting Parliament will not vote for no deal. Not difficult is it?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Look mate, I don't know what's gonna happen tomorrow but I'm pretty confident it will not rain frogs, the sky will not change colour and the Remain supporting Parliament will not vote for no deal. Not difficult is it?


Spoilsport!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> _against all odds_ is clearly the superior song.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Look mate, I don't know what's gonna happen tomorrow but I'm pretty confident it will not rain frogs, the sky will not change colour and the Remain supporting Parliament will not vote for no deal. Not difficult is it?


the sky changes colour every day


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Look mate, I don't know what's gonna happen tomorrow but I'm pretty confident it will not rain frogs, the sky will not change colour and the Remain supporting Parliament will not vote for no deal. Not difficult is it?


It is a no deal though, that's what happens come 29-3-19. 

All parliament can do is come up with a deal...which they've not managed in 2 1/2 years but you think will happen in the next 24 days?

What makes you think that...as you check the sky for frogs?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the sky changes colour every day



I knew as soon as I wrote that you'd be on to me Pickers


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> It is a no deal though, that's what happens come 29-3-19.
> 
> All parliament can do is come up with a deal...which they've not managed in 2 1/2 years but you think will happen in the next 24 days?
> 
> What makes you think that...as you check the sky for frogs?



In case you've not been paying attention, Parliament will vote to force May to extend A50.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In case you've not been paying attention, Parliament will vote to force May to extend A50.


May can't force an extension.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 5, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> _We voted for God Save the Queen, but those decidey-for-ye bastards just ignored us_



Good choice as we are now 42 years later on and still There’s no future and England’s dreaming.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

anyway it's dinnertime and nothing new will have happened by the time i rejoin the fray


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> May can't force an extension.



OK, Parliament will vote to force May *to ask *for an extension.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK, Parliament will vote to force May *to ask *for an extension.


...which will be granted. EU has already said as much. It might finally mean the end of May, though. But I've said that before...


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ...which will be granted. EU has already said as much. It might finally mean the end of May, though. But I've said that before...


I agree that it's very likely to be granted if requested, though there may be conditions demanded as a result.

I reckon (based on nothing more than gut feeling) that  Parliament getting its act together to force May to make the request is still the bigger hurdle of the two.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 5, 2019)

I don't know but I have this growing feeling the deal will pass at the next vote.  Its just a sense from reading around the various different media sources but I get the impression that the DUP and ERG lot are softening and throw in a few from the opposition benches that just needs enough tories to back May.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> I reckon (based on nothing more than gut feeling) that  Parliament getting its act together to force May to make the request is still the bigger hurdle of the two.



Not really, that vote is already scheduled.  It seems inevitable should May's deal be voted down.  They'll vote against a no deal and then vote for a request to extend.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> ...which will be granted. EU has already said as much. It might finally mean the end of May, though. But I've said that before...



Yeah I keep thinking this - that May is doomed if she can't get a deal through Parliament after the deadline. But on the other hand, she's defied gravity for so long...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Not really, that vote is already scheduled.  It seems inevitable should May's deal be voted down.  They'll vote against a no deal and then vote for a request to extend.


Yep. The two realistic scenarios are May's deal somehow getting through or an extension. May's deal getting through would be an extraordinary turnaround, but we're learning never to say never with this nonsense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. The two realistic scenarios are May's deal somehow getting through or an extension. May's deal getting through would be an extraordinary turnaround, but we're learning never to say never with this nonsense.


yeh cos obvs no one will ever actually cancel the process. iirc this is but the latest of a series of realistic scenarios you've put forwards, with them dropping by the wayside as things change contrary to your expectations.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah I keep thinking this - that May is doomed if she can't get a deal through Parliament after the deadline. But on the other hand, she's defied gravity for so long...


what goes up must come down


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh cos obvs no one will ever actually cancel the process. iirc this is but the latest of a series of realistic scenarios you've put forwards, with them dropping by the wayside as things change contrary to your expectations.


Never one to miss trying to get in a dig, are you, you nasty, shameless cunt. An extension could indeed be followed by cancelling the process - I haven't said differently have I, but in this particular voting sequence, cancelling A50 before seeking an extension doesn't seem realistic. You think different, say so outright, and leave the being a cunt bit to the side for once.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe i was on about that latest one then. Great isn't it? To join the EU gang you have to make stuff like socialism constitutionally illegal.



There are rules to this neoliberalism. Step outside and the US and others will enforce them.

The EU’s are rather weak as far as the UK is concerned. We are not in the euro and not in debt to Germany. In any case, some redistribution of a very important degree is not precluded, nor better governance, nor nationalisation given the varied model across the EU. So sue us. What would they do, kick us out?

If people want more socialism it has to at some point be a game changer inside or out. You are theorising it is impossible in, theorising it is minutely possible outside. But surely the same strength of purpose is required in either instance? Otherwise all that is for debate is wriggle room.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> cancelling A50 before seeking an extension doesn't seem realistic.


i don't suppose it does, to you. but then a year ago none of this would have seems plausible or realistic. perhaps you could leave the foul language to one side for a change, if you can.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You don't know that, nobody knows the future. Leaving with no deal is still possible, and absolutely definite without a ratified deal or extension, neither of which has majority support at present. With three weeks to go.


If someone could point me towards reliable evidence that the UK is NOT leaving the EU, I'd be grateful for it.  Sorry, but the word of an anonymous poster on a message board isn't quite enough to convince me. Ta!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I don't know but I have this growing feeling the deal will pass at the next vote.  Its just a sense from reading around the various different media sources but I get the impression that the DUP and ERG lot are softening and throw in a few from the opposition benches that just needs enough tories to back May.



nah - every time the vote comes around we get reports that the ERG and DUP are softening, that some labour mps might vote for it etc etc - but its just government spin. Hunt was at it again today - saying there were "positive noises" coming from brussels. Its bollocks - the fundamentals around the back stop and the fact the EU will not reopen the deal that was agreed haven't changed. And now - with the threat of no deal effectively removed - anything may could gain on the pro - brexit mps roundabout she will lose on the pro-remain swings.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> If someone could point me towards reliable evidence that the UK is NOT leaving the EU, I'd be grateful for it.  Sorry, but the word of an anonymous poster on a message board isn't quite enough to convince me. Ta!


Yes, it's a bit like your bizarre claims that Nancy Pelosi secretly agrees with Alexanda O Cortez about everything despite all available evidence including statements by both.

The difference being this one could feasibly be true in the real world and probably is. (majority for remain in parliament, heavy majority against no deal and no majority for May's deal). 

Matthew 7:5


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> There are rules to this neoliberalism. Step outside and the US and others will enforce them.
> 
> The EU’s are rather weak as far as the UK is concerned. We are not in the euro and not in debt to Germany. In any case, some redistribution of a very important degree is not precluded, nor better governance, nor nationalisation given the varied model across the EU. So sue us. What would they do, kick us out?
> 
> If people want more socialism it has to at some point be a game changer inside or out. You are theorising it is impossible in, theorising it is minutely possible outside. But surely the same strength of purpose is required in either instance? Otherwise all that is for debate is wriggle room.


None of these arguments are really much to do with pragmatic or practical routes to socialism though are they. For those who want full-on socialism, I don't think they actually believe that Brexit is going to lead to that. It's more that they are attracted to an anti-remain position by the opportunity to wind up a certain type of remainer stereotype (which might be accurate in some ways), and by a desire not to be on the same side as them. Your enemy's enemy being your friend kind of stuff. If you squint at the Brexit vote from far enough away, you can maybe convince yourself that it was a vote against something which you are ideologically opposed to, even if it was really a vote against something a bit different to that. If you squint really hard perhaps you can make it look like a vote for socialism, I don't know. All this is why we see lots of posters on this thread saying a lot of stuff about what's bad about the EU and especially what's bad about some people who like it for certain reasons, but not really coming up with an explanation for how anything's going to be better when we're out. And posters who voted remain but want to make clear that they aren't really remainers, or who voted leave but say they didn't actually vote in favour of anything, or like to make a big deal out of how they are on neither side and it's not their argument and its nothing to do with them whilst still typing out hundreds of posts on this thread which contains pages of arguments against remaining in the EU but most of those arguments having not very much to do with the things most real-life leave voters get worked up about, but I _would_ say that, because I just simplistically dismiss all leave voters as racist thickos, of course. Everyone will hate this post, I know.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> CRI has lived in Britain for many years, IIRC.


Better part of 30 years, to be exact, in all 4 nations at some point and yes, now in Scotland.  Hoots Mon!


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> May can't force an extension.


And the EU may not agree to it even if it does.  And, they have to agree to accept the Withdrawal Agreement, which seems to still be a garbled mess.  The other 27 nations need to set up procedures and infrastructure to deal changes after the UK leaves, and you can understand why they ain't keen to wait until the 11th hour, and must be pretty pissed off with the UK government's internal dramas, dithering and incompetence.  As my late mother would have said, "They should shit, or get off the pot."


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK, Parliament will vote to force May *to ask *for an extension.


What for though?

The EU are willing to accede to an extension as long as there's a specific purpose for it.  They won't accede for internal UK political reasons, they're firm on that.  (And there's also the EU elections yadda yadda)


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

jinx


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> What for though?
> 
> The EU are willing to accede to an extension as long as there's a specific purpose for it.  They won't accede for internal UK political reasons, they're firm on that.  (And there's also the EU elections yadda yadda)


yeh littlebabyjesus this is why i see a cancellation of article 50 as quite realistic, following on from a refusal of the eu27 to countenance an extension for purely internal reasons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> nah - every time the vote comes around we get reports that the ERG and DUP are softening, that some labour mps might vote for it etc etc - but its just government spin. Hunt was at it again today - saying there were "positive noises" coming from brussels. Its bollocks - the fundamentals around the back stop and the fact the EU will not reopen the deal that was agreed haven't changed. And now - with the threat of no deal effectively removed - anything may could gain on the pro - brexit mps roundabout she will lose on the pro-remain swings.


and as it says on the bridge theme song, everything goes back to the beginning


----------



## ska invita (Mar 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> _against all odds_ is clearly the superior song.


Especially so when Another Day in Paradise is being written and sung by a faux-remorseful multi millionaire tax dodger


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> What for though?
> 
> The EU are willing to accede to an extension as long as there's a specific purpose for it.  They won't accede for internal UK political reasons, they're firm on that.  (And there's also the EU elections yadda yadda)


The 'specific purpose' would be to avoid a No Deal crash out


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Mar 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh littlebabyjesus this is why i see a cancellation of article 50 as quite realistic, following on from a refusal of the eu27 to countenance an extension for purely internal reasons.



If the tories cancel Brexit imagine the headlines on the Sun, Daily Mail etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Especially so when Another Day in Paradise is being written and sung by a multi millionaire tax dodger


i suppose the surviving beatles are multimillionaires, but nonetheless thinking of a multimillionaire tax dodger like phil collins makes me think of this lovely auld song


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Kilgore Trout said:


> If the tories cancel Brexit imagine the headlines on the Sun, Daily Mail etc.


if i can imagine the tories cancelling article 50 then of course i can imagine the headlines which might result.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> None of these arguments are really much to do with pragmatic or practical routes to socialism though are they. For those who want full-on socialism, I don't think they actually believe that Brexit is going to lead to that. It's more that they are attracted to an anti-remain position by the opportunity to wind up a certain type of remainer stereotype (which might be accurate in some ways), and by a desire not to be on the same side as them. Your enemy's enemy being your friend kind of stuff. If you squint at the Brexit vote from far enough away, you can maybe convince yourself that it was a vote against something which you are ideologically opposed to, even if it was really a vote against something a bit different to that. If you squint really hard perhaps you can make it look like a vote for socialism, I don't know. All this is why we see lots of posters on this thread saying a lot of stuff about what's bad about the EU and especially what's bad about some people who like it for certain reasons, but not really coming up with an explanation for how anything's going to be better when we're out. And posters who voted remain but want to make clear that they aren't really remainers, or who voted leave but say they didn't actually vote in favour of anything, or like to make a big deal out of how they are on neither side and it's not their argument and its nothing to do with them whilst still typing out hundreds of posts on this thread which contains pages of arguments against remaining in the EU but most of those arguments having not very much to do with the things most real-life leave voters get worked up about, but I _would_ say that, because I just simplistically dismiss all leave voters as racist thickos, of course. Everyone will hate this post, I know.


No, I like it.  

It's easier to throw a stone at someone who's not that far away from you, and you're more likely to thwack them, than if you're trying to attack a huge, far away fortress.  Same goes for ideology.  "Owning" those whose views aren't actually miles from your own gives instant gratification, and means you can avoid having to think about how you'll tackle the bigger, wider structures of injustice.  If people do ask what your vision actually looks like, and what you'll do to get there, just squirm, lob a few more stones and change the subject.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> The 'specific purpose' would be to avoid a No Deal crash out


Not good enough (they'd say).  An extension would be an agreed timescale *only* in order to allow the UK/EU to prepare for a *defined* exit (or cancellation of A50).  So you need to know what the deal is before an extension is agreed, there will be agreed signposts.

There may be some leeway on this of course, but only with the surety of goodwill and determination towards an agreed purpose.  Would you trust the tories to do that?  Or labour?  Do you think WM in its current state is capable of this (without  internal sabotage)?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> No, I like it.
> 
> It's easier to throw a stone at someone who's not that far away from you, and you're more likely to thwack them, than if you're trying to attack a huge, far away fortress.


if you're aiming for a huge, far away fortress you don't want a stone you want something like this


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> New National Anthem?



I was thinking more of this one!  





> This means no fear, cavalier, renegade and steering clear
> A tournament, a tournament, a tournament of lies
> Offer me solutions, offer me alternatives and I decline


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> nah - every time the vote comes around we get reports that the ERG and DUP are softening, that some labour mps might vote for it etc etc - but its just government spin. Hunt was at it again today - saying there were "positive noises" coming from brussels. Its bollocks - the fundamentals around the back stop and the fact the EU will not reopen the deal that was agreed haven't changed. And now - with the threat of no deal effectively removed - anything may could gain on the pro - brexit mps roundabout she will lose on the pro-remain swings.



You're probably right but I certainly think the vote will be much closer than before.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> If someone could point me towards reliable evidence that the UK is NOT leaving the EU, I'd be grateful for it.  Sorry, but the word of an anonymous poster on a message board isn't quite enough to convince me. Ta!



I don't know if my answer qualifies, but one piece of evidence that the UK is not leaving the EU is a 320 mile long open land (and water) border that joins the UK to the EU. I have been looking out for information as to how 'leaving' will manifest itself along that currently open border.
So far there is nothing, so it looks as though the UK is not leaving the EU.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> No, I like it.



I don't think this fact is going to lead to a net decrease in hatedness though.


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Not good enough (they'd say).  An extension would be an agreed timescale *only* in order to allow the UK/EU to prepare for a *defined* exit (or cancellation of A50).  So you need to know what the deal is before an extension is agreed, there will be agreed signposts.
> 
> There may be some leeway on this of course, but only with the surety of goodwill and determination towards an agreed purpose.  Would you trust the tories to do that?  Or labour?  Do you think WM in its current state is capable of this (without  internal sabotage)?


'They say' is the key phrase here.

I'm not 100% convinced by what they say, anymore than I am by what May says


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I don't know if my answer qualifies, but one piece of evidence that the UK is not leaving the EU is a 320 mile long open land (and water) border that joins the UK to the EU. I have been looking out for information as to how 'leaving' will manifest itself along that currently open border.
> So far there is nothing, so it looks as though the UK is not leaving the EU.


The UK Government seems to be ignoring a whole swathe of crucial legal, policy and infrastructure issues - including what to do about the border in Ireland.  I wish I had faith that this means they'll suddenly develop some kind of self-awareness, admit they've screwed up, and call the whole thing off.  I get the sense that they are determined to plough on regardless though.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think this fact is going to lead to a net decrease in hatedness though.


True.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I don't know if my answer qualifies, but one piece of evidence that the UK is not leaving the EU is a 320 mile long open land (and water) border that joins the UK to the EU. I have been looking out for information as to how 'leaving' will manifest itself along that currently open border.


You really haven’t.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You really haven’t.


That's a good one.
Unreasoned contradiction.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> That's a good one.
> Unreasoned contradiction.


You're wasting your time with that one.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> What for though?
> 
> The EU are willing to accede to an extension as long as there's a specific purpose for it.  They won't accede for internal UK political reasons, they're firm on that.  (And there's also the EU elections yadda yadda)



Because after all May's posturing about delivering Brexit as scheduled, agreeing an extension will basically kill Brexit. Plus they can look magnanimous. If you want to stop Brexit the best way isn't to have a second ref or revoke A50, it's just to kick the can down the road until everyone gives up.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

May's going to knock her opponents out one by one. Vote on her deal, fails. Vote on preventing no deal, passes and blocks the ERG. Vote on a minor extension kicks the can and then means no further extensions will be granted. Check mate. 

The most vital thing is that we take part in the forthcoming EU elections. Without that we're fubared.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> May's going to knock her opponents out one by one.



You're delusional.


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I don't know if my answer qualifies, but one piece of evidence that the UK is not leaving the EU is a 320 mile long open land (and water) border that joins the UK to the EU. I have been looking out for information as to how 'leaving' will manifest itself along that currently open border.
> So far there is nothing, so it looks as though the UK is not leaving the EU.


The border between the UK and the rest of the EU isn't currently 'open', it's staffed by customs eg on both sides of the Channel.

French customs agents disrupt Calais port ahead of Brexit

You really don't understand this 'border' business, do you?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> The border between the UK and the rest of the EU isn't currently 'open', it's staffed by customs eg on both sides of the Channel.
> 
> French customs agents disrupt Calais port ahead of Brexit
> 
> You really don't understand this 'border' business, do you?


I wrote 'land' border (added 'water' due to the lochs).
You really have trouble paying attention, do you?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)




----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're delusional.



I'm just re-stating Ian Dunt's analysis, and he's been spot on so far. She's trying a pincer movement.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




Looks like an indy video, and from STV. Interesting.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> The border between the UK and the rest of the EU isn't currently 'open', it's staffed by customs eg on both sides of the Channel.
> 
> French customs agents disrupt Calais port ahead of Brexit
> 
> You really don't understand this 'border' business, do you?


English much?


----------



## teqniq (Mar 5, 2019)

Private Eye


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 5, 2019)

Is Brexit actually going to happen?  I have always thought it is not going to happen and I still think that.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Private Eye
> 
> View attachment 163652


It's amazing...the world is falling down around them...they never acknowledge it and just carry on.

They've no idea what's going to happen, no-one does (except...horribly...a small amount of tories).  And they just keep making utter fools of themselves.  

It's all about what they 'think'.  As if that helps somehow.

Brexiters are basically jehovah's witnesses...wanting the world to burn but thinking they'll be fine.


----------



## andysays (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> English much?


What a bizarre comment (and also wrong, I'm not English)


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> What a bizarre comment (and also wrong, I'm not English)


You're viewpoint seems to be...if you think the channel is the only border.   Which it obviously is not...half the thread has been about the fucking border.  Only an English viewpoint would think what you said, no-one else in the UK would think that (, except maybe labour and tory mps scattered about the place and some people of an orange persuasion) and _even then in the context of what has undeniably massively been on the thread _it's just an incredibly stupid thing to say.  It could be the worst post on the entire thread.

(And if you or your mates are going to go down the 'racism' avenue...well-trodden these parts...make sure and back it up with any other post in my 15 years, 17,000 posts and zero warnings here.)


----------



## Poot (Mar 5, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?  I have always thought it is not going to happen and I still think that.


That's what my instincts are telling me, too. I just can't see how the Tories would allow it because it disadvantages them. And they'll find a way to squirm out of it. And whatever anyone is second guessing, even people who really know what they're talking about, the government have the best brains in the country working to keep their snouts in the trough, whatever it takes.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 5, 2019)

The ordering of next week's votes is good I think.

a) Do you want May's Deal? - No
b) Do you want a No Deal Brexit - No
c) Do you want an extension/revocation of Article 50 - If the answer to c) is no then wft are you doing voting against a No Deal Brexit.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



I saw that a few people had shared that video, and while most of the comments were either sympathetic or thought it was disgraceful, there were a fair few eejits with the, "Why didn't she become a British citizen if she likes the country so much?" and "They do it in other countries, so why shouldn't they do it here."  

One thing I noticed, is the lady said that she had to "register," when it's actually _applying_ for settled status, which means it can be rejected or revoked at any time.  It's not the same as the old "indefinite leave to remain" like I got in, I think it was about 1991 or something.  It's expensive, bureaucratic and stressful, and the process has been dogged with problems.  You just know the Home Office will fuck it up for so many people.  

Also, in other countries, they have national registers or ID schemes, so everyone does it, and it's just a wee paper exercise with a slightly different slant for non-citizens.  Here, it applies only to non British EU nationals, even if they've been here decades, have families, jobs, businesses, bought their homes, etc.  There's something decidedly iffy about requiring only them to apply for this register, and constantly provide updates to the Home Office, every time they move, change jobs, change banks, etc.  Very iffy.


----------



## CRI (Mar 5, 2019)

Hmmm, sounds like someone may not be too happy with how the British Government is screwing around with the Irish border situation . . . 

Irish link investigated after package bombs sent to Heathrow, Waterloo and City airport


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

CRI said:


> Hmmm, sounds like someone may not be too happy with how the British Government is screwing around with the Irish border situation . . .
> 
> Irish link investigated after package bombs sent to Heathrow, Waterloo and City airport


That's to the west andysays


----------



## teqniq (Mar 5, 2019)

Crazy shit at Victoria Station. I put it here because she talks about Brexit and the police limply offer the excuse of 'immigration' at one point. I love her attitude.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> The ordering of next week's votes is good I think.
> 
> a) Do you want May's Deal? - No
> b) Do you want a No Deal Brexit - No
> c) Do you want an extension/revocation of Article 50 - If the answer to c) is no then wft are you doing voting against a No Deal Brexit.



She's going to bounce the House. She's said as much herself.

a) Do you want May's Deal? - No
b) Do you want a No Deal Brexit - No
c) Do you want an extension/revocation of Article 50? They'll say yes, even the ERG are softening. She'll give them 3 months, and then say we're not taking part in the EU elections.

She won't extend long enough to do anything useful, like plan for no deal or run a 2nd ref. But it is enough time to take us past the real cliff edge, which is the EU elections. After that there can be no extension for any reason, and she will bring back to the House....her Deal!!

And this time all options will have been exhausted. It will truly be her deal or no deal, with no extension possible and no revocation at her hands. And she will win this, and we'll be out by June.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 5, 2019)

Wookey said:


> She's going to bounce the House. She's said as much herself.
> 
> a) Do you want May's Deal? - No
> b) Do you want a No Deal Brexit - No
> ...


Being as you've the political nous of chuka umunna I'll take your prognostication with a decent dose of salt


----------



## Wookey (Mar 5, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Crazy shit at Victoria Station. I put it here because she talks about Brexit and the police limply offer the excuse of 'immigration' at one point. I love her attitude.




WTF is that about??!

I like her attitude too! lol


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 5, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Crazy shit at Victoria Station. I put it here because she talks about Brexit and the police limply offer the excuse of 'immigration' at one point. I love her attitude.



Greece!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 6, 2019)

Belgium!


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> You're viewpoint seems to be...if you think the channel is the only border.   Which it obviously is not...half the thread has been about the fucking border.  Only an English viewpoint would think what you said, no-one else in the UK would think that (, except maybe labour and tory mps scattered about the place and some people of an orange persuasion) and _even then in the context of what has undeniably massively been on the thread _it's just an incredibly stupid thing to say.  It could be the worst post on the entire thread.
> 
> (And if you or your mates are going to go down the 'racism' avenue...well-trodden these parts...make sure and back it up with any other post in my 15 years, 17,000 posts and zero warnings here.)





andysays said:


> ... it's staffed by customs *eg* on both sides of the Channel...



The reason I mentioned the Channel specifically is because it relates to the current work to rule by French customs officials, linked to in my post, not because my views are blinkered by what you imagine to be my Englishness (in fact I'm Scottish enough that I would be granted Scottish citizenship in the event of an independent Scotland).

And I haven't mentioned or even hinted at racism on your part, but if the cap fits...


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> That's to the west andysays



Curiouser and curiouser...


----------



## teuchter (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> The reason I mentioned the Channel specifically is because it relates to the current work to rule by French customs officials, linked to in my post, not because my views are blinkered by what you imagine to be my Englishness (in fact I'm Scottish enough that I would be granted Scottish citizenship in the event of an independent Scotland).
> 
> And I haven't mentioned or even hinted at racism on your part, but if the cap fits...


Are you Welsh?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> The reason I mentioned the Channel specifically is because it relates to the current work to rule by French customs officials, linked to in my post, not because my views are blinkered by what you imagine to be my Englishness (in fact I'm Scottish enough that I would be granted Scottish citizenship in the event of an independent Scotland).
> 
> And I haven't mentioned or even hinted at racism on your part, but if the cap fits...


So there is a border with France already, and there'll be no difference after brexit, is that what you're saying?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

Mornington Crescent!


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 6, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 163698


You should do a Brex-vent Calendar thread.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 6, 2019)

CRI said:


> constantly provide updates to the Home Office, every time they move, change jobs, change banks, etc.  Very iffy.


I hadnt heard that requirement - can you link me please?


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You should do a Brex-vent Calendar thread.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 6, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Are you Welsh?



Fuck the Welsh stupid cunts the lot of us.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> So there is a border with France already, and there'll be no difference after brexit, is that what you're saying?


The first part is clearly true, the second is equally clearly not what I said.

At this stage, no one knows for sure exactly what form the border between the UK and the EU will take after Brexit, even me.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> The first part is clearly true, the second is equally clearly not what I said.
> 
> At this stage, no one knows for sure exactly what form the border between the UK and the EU will take after Brexit, even me.[/QUOT
> 
> ...


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2019)

Sorry messed up the quoting.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

I'm not sure that all Brexit voters are continually saying they 'knew what they were voting for', though I suppose some might be.

When I voted to Leave, I expected the border between the UK and the EU to change in some way, but I realised that the exact form of the new border would depend on negotiations between two sides and could therefore not be predicted in advance, just like many other changes


----------



## teuchter (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure that all Brexit voters are continually saying they 'knew what they were voting for', though I suppose some might be.
> 
> When I voted to Leave, I expected the border between the UK and the EU to change in some way, but I realised that the exact form of the new border would depend on negotiations between two sides and could therefore not be predicted in advance, just like many other changes


Did you vote in the belief that there was currently no 'open' border between the UK and the rest of the EU, as you claimed above?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure that all Brexit voters are continually saying they 'knew what they were voting for', though I suppose some might be.
> 
> When I voted to Leave, I expected the border between the UK and the EU to change in some way, but I realised that the exact form of the new border would depend on negotiations between two sides and could therefore not be predicted in advance, just like many other changes


What is there to negotiate?
You voted leave. Two divergent systems with a line of demarcation.


----------



## CRI (Mar 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I hadnt heard that requirement - can you link me please?


I didn't save the link, but will have to look it up, but it's not unusual for government registration schemes to require people to update such details - like the PVG (Protection of Vulnerable Groups) scheme, which is something like DBS in England and Wales.  You have to notify them when your details change to keep your registration current.  But the difference is that's a scheme related to employment or volunteering, and the worst that can happen if you don't comply is you can't do certain types of jobs.  With settled status, it's mandatory for non UK EU citizens if they want to carry on living in the UK.  There are also big questions about data protection - applicants must give consent that their data will be shared with pretty well whoever the Home Office wants.


----------



## zahir (Mar 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I hadnt heard that requirement - can you link me please?


I’ve seen something along these lines but I haven’t got a link and I can’t remember exactly what was included. I think changing phone number or email address was mentioned though.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN , why are you posting these tweet videos without comment? What point do you imagine you’re making? Do you think it adds to the knowledge of thread readers in some way? I can’t imagine there’s anyone here who isn’t aware of the chlorinated chicken story or the stories of the bureaucratic nightmare people are having with residency.  

A short comment is potentially all that’s needed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> DexterTCN , why are you posting these tweet videos without comment? What point do you imagine you’re making? Do you think it adds to the knowledge of thread readers in some way? I can’t imagine there’s anyone here who isn’t aware of the chlorinated chicken story or the stories of the bureaucratic nightmare people are having with residency.
> 
> A short comment is potentially all that’s needed.



I actually don't know anything about chlorinated chicken but that's deliberate and partly a result of refusing to click on Dexter's silly links.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I actually don't know anything about chlorinated chicken but that's deliberate and partly a result of refusing to click on Dexter's silly links.


Really? It’s been in the news for years.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Really? It’s been in the news for years.



I don't watch bits of the news I find dull. Quite happy to shut my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't watch bits of the news I find dull. Quite happy to shut my eyes and put my fingers in my ears.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

I'm not sure that there's really that much to know about chlorinated chicken, other that it is chicken which has been treated in some sort of chlorination process to kill some sort of bacteria or other organism which would otherwise cause a threat to human health (and that of course begs the question of why it needs to be treated in this way in the first place, presumably because of poor food hygiene or livestock conditions prevalent in places like the US where such processes are commonplace).

But what I confess I *don't* understand is why it's presented like a trump card on this and other threads as if all of us who voted Leave are in favour of chlorinated chicken (I'm certainly not) or its very existance is some sort of definitive argument against Brexit (it really isn't, anymore than much of the other nonsense die hard Remainers post up with much comment or genuine argument).

Still, DexterTCN's tweet quotes someone from the SNP, so clearly no further comment or explanation is necessary...


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

It's called sharing.  It's a modern phenomenon and is the generally accepted way of doing it by millions or billions of people.  Google News has a share button you know.

There are so many disparate opinions and topics within threads so, when I'm not talking to someone specifically I can just throw it out there if I'm on the bus or at work or wherever and if someone _wants_ to discuss it then I'm happy to do so.

Now the interesting thing about that video, as far as this thread is concerned, is the reason _why_ foodstuffs are treated like this in the US and the additional dangers being introduced to the UK by accepting them.   That's not been on this thread as far as I can see.  

And Phillipa Whitford is a good doctor and knows what she's talking about.   She's also very outspoken on the isotope issues with brexit.   And she goes to Gaza to do breast cancer operations and give treatment advice to hospitals there.   She has been very vocal about NHS privatisation in England. I respect her.

And...I'm not looking for approval or validation.  I'll post what I like if it's relevant to the topic. 

This is for andy


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> And Phillipa Whitford is a good doctor and knows what she's talking about. She's also very outspoken on the isotope issues with brexit. And she goes to Gaza to do breast cancer operations and give treatment advice to hospitals there. She has been very vocal about NHS privatisation in England. I respect her.


As it happens, I think she’s a decent person too, from what I’ve seen. 

There’s nothing wrong with sharing links to whatever you want. But a few words about why might help.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> It's called sharing.  It's a modern phenomenon and is the generally accepted way of doing it by millions or billions of people.  Google News has a share button you know.


But this is a discussion board not Google News, facebook or twitter.

I know danny la rouge is a mercurial, unreliable type but he's absolutely correct here. Not even bothering to give a one sentence summary of what your posting is impolite, others may not be able to access that media at that time, which is why it's against the site rules.

And this is a general point not just to Dexter.


----------



## bemused (Mar 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> But what I confess I *don't* understand is why it's presented like a trump card on this and other threads as if all of us who voted Leave are in favour of chlorinated chicken (I'm certainly not) or its very existance is some sort of definitive argument against Brexit (it really isn't, anymore than much of the other nonsense die hard Remainers post up with much comment or genuine argument).



I don't think it is a trump card. Gove was asked on Marr at least twice if he'd rule out allowing beef and chicken to be imported from the USA that doesn't meet UK standards, he danced around it. The NFU has also asked him, he avoids it. JRM diverts the question and talks about Australian beef. I don't even think its an argument against Brexit, it's a demonstration that the Tory government are refusing to commit to basic protections to the UK farming industry.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

bemused said:


> I don't think it is a trump card. Gove was asked on Marr at least twice if he'd rule out allowing beef and chicken to be imported from the USA that doesn't meet UK standards, he danced around it. The NFU has also asked him, he avoids it. JRM diverts the question and talks about Australian beef. I don't even think its an argument against Brexit, it's a demonstration that the Tory government are refusing to commit to basic protections to the UK farming industry.


Or basic protections for livestock. Or basic protections for consumers.

I don’t eat meat, so it doesn’t directly affect me. But it is depressing.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> But this is a discussion board not Google News, facebook or twitter.
> 
> I know danny la rouge is a mercurial, unreliable type but he's absolutely correct here. Not even bothering to give a one sentence summary of what your posting is impolite, others may not be able to access that media at that time, which is why it's against the site rules.
> 
> And this is a general point not just to Dexter.


Yes...good point.

Just about every time you ever post it's only to agree with your mate and dismiss what is being said by the other, usually throwing in a judgement or insult.

Think you'll ever start discussing, squirrel?


----------



## bemused (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Or basic protections for livestock. Or basic protections for consumers.
> 
> I don’t eat meat, so it doesn’t directly affect me. But it is depressing.



Both animal welfare and consumer protection go hand in hand. There is a reason the US can produce chicken meat for 20% of the price they do in the EU. When you have the US Ambassador lobbying for the US meat industry in the press its easy to see the direction of travel.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Or basic protections for livestock. Or basic protections for consumers.
> 
> I don’t eat meat, so it doesn’t directly affect me. But it is depressing.


Or drink whisky, obviously.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Or drink whisky, obviously.


I do occasionally drink whisky. What’s your point?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> It's called sharing.


 You could try hoarding instead.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I do occasionally drink whisky. What’s your point?


LOL

What is the point in talking to you people, honestly?   "oooh discuss it instead!"

Just fucking go away and talk to your mates, eh.  _It's pointless discussing with any of you, you don't listen you just wait for your chance to speak.  
_
LOL  incredible...incredible.  Numpties.  Big smile on my face though.


----------



## andysays (Mar 6, 2019)

Actually, no


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> LOL
> 
> What is the point in talking to you people, honestly?   "oooh discuss it instead!"
> 
> ...


Wow.  

I still have no idea what you’re on about. Do you really think randomly saying “or drink whisky obviously” is actually anything I could potentially engage with?  How?

I occasionally drink whisky.  My favourite whisky is Springbank.  Your move.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I occasionally drink whisky.  My favourite whisky is Springbank.  Your move.


On the clip Dexter posted the SNP MP claims that the US will want to sell whiskey produced in the states in the UK as scotch.

Not sure what this has to do with leaving the EU, as the SNP are in favour of a EU-US trade deal.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

That’s seriously your reply? Posting the video without comment again? And without tagging me?

Do you understand how conversations work?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> On the clip Dexter posted the SNP MP claims that the US will want to sell whiskey produced in the states in the UK as scotch.


I haven’t seen the clip, but I’m aware of the story.

OK, DexterTCN, is that what you’re alluding to? 

OK. I’ll do all the work in this conversation for you. I disapprove of those suggestions.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



But what do you think?


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2019)

Faceboook twitter spamming fucktards


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What is there to negotiate?
> You voted leave. Two divergent systems with a line of demarcation.



You stillhav learned nault .


----------



## Santino (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> LOL  incredible...incredible.  Numpties.  Big smile on my face though.


No, I'm not angry, YOU'RE ANGRY. I'm actually laughing. I'm laughing.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 6, 2019)

Just seen this now on the internets!!!!!omg!!1111one


----------



## ska invita (Mar 6, 2019)

CRI said:


> There's something decidedly iffy about requiring only them to apply for this register, and constantly provide updates to the Home Office, every time they move, change jobs, change banks, etc.  Very iffy.


is this definitely the case (re providing updates) and can you provide a source for it, or where you heard it? Not trying to trip you up, genuinely want to know the details


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 6, 2019)

UK 'given 48 hours' to offer Brexit solution

Another 48 hours


----------



## CRI (Mar 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> is this definitely the case (re providing updates) and can you provide a source for it, or where you heard it? Not trying to trip you up, genuinely want to know the details


I'll keep looking.  I'm sure it was an article.  I tried looking on the Home Office's own site, but all I could find was about how to apply for settled status, not what you have to do in terms of reporting to maintain it.

Zahir seems to have read something, too.



zahir said:


> I’ve seen something along these lines but I haven’t got a link and I can’t remember exactly what was included. I think changing phone number or email address was mentioned though.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 6, 2019)

xenon said:


> You stillhav learned nault .



By some obscure measure you have dreamed up probably not.
Perhaps you will enlighten me as to how the land border on the island of Ireland will operate in practical terms when it is the divide between two different systems.


----------



## Ted Striker (Mar 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and as it says on the bridge theme song, everything goes back to the beginning



And it's the only line in the whole thing that makes legible sense...


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> And it's the only line in the whole thing that makes legible sense...


Echoes start as a crusty you
Trembling voices the crowded zoo.
Facial moody witch seeds too few
Reasoning your musty shoe.
Hollow talking and hello girl
Four three over the rude old pale.

Never said it was good, never said it was near
Shallow rises and something something .


That's as far as I can get.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> ...Do you understand how conversations work?


Mostly.  There are always levels.

One one level I'd post a link, someone would read/watch/look at/listen to it, then there would perhaps be some discussion on it or not.

On another level I'd post a link and someone would criticise posting the link, challenge why it was posted, say it adds nothing to the debate and demand comment on the link...but not actually _peruse _the link.  And there would be no criticism of this from any of his mates even when he's laid bare.

So yeah...I'm aware 

That's us now.  As you say...the shallow rises.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 6, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Mostly.  There are always levels.
> 
> One one level I'd post a link, someone would read/watch/look at/listen to it, then there would perhaps be some discussion on it or not.
> 
> ...


Not everyone is always able to watch videos. During the day I’m mostly not able to. And in any case I’m mostly not a fan of clicking links if I don’t know things like what it is, why it’s interesting, how long it is, what the poster thinks of it.  This is not just your links. It’s links in general. My rule is, don’t click unexplained links. I’ve said this to other people, and I’m definitely not the only one who feels that way.

So, OK. You think something in your video has relevance to the discussion here. Good. You can probably put into words what that is. Then I can discuss it with you.

You made a cryptic remark about whisky. I like whisky. My favourite is Springbank. But I’ll drink most malts. I even drink blends. I’m told points are raised in the video about whisky and US trade. I’m aware of suggestions that Scotch whisky would lose GI status because of Brexit and that the market could be flooded with cheap knock offs. It’s been in the news for a while now. I’m sure you could have found the words to explain that succinctly and even make it into some kind of argument.

You want a discussion about that? Fine. I think it’s a bad thing that consumers wouldn’t have clarity about what they’d be buying. I’m against that.

So, what is your point?


----------



## zahir (Mar 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> is this definitely the case (re providing updates) and can you provide a source for it, or where you heard it? Not trying to trip you up, genuinely want to know the details



There’s this on updating phone number, email address, identity document etc.

Update your EU Settlement Scheme details


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not everyone is always able to watch videos. During the day I’m mostly not able to. And in any case I’m mostly not a fan of clicking links if I don’t know things like what it is, why it’s interesting, how long it is, what the poster thinks of it.  This is not just your links. It’s links in general. My rule is, don’t click unexplained links. I’ve said this to other people, and I’m definitely not the only one who feels that way.
> 
> So, OK. You think something in your video has relevance to the discussion here. Good. You can probably put into words what that is. Then I can discuss it with you.
> 
> ...



 As always, thank you for your eloquence. What you said basically.


----------



## xenon (Mar 6, 2019)

philosophical said:


> By some obscure measure you have dreamed up probably not.
> Perhaps you will enlighten me as to how the land border on the island of Ireland will operate in practical terms when it is the divide between two different systems.



 I will let you know as soon as I have the ability to influence it. Meanwhile we scrap with the tools we have.


----------



## xenon (Mar 7, 2019)

Repetition, I spoiled my vote. I have issues with some remainers philosophy I have problems with some leavers philosophy.  I don’t think anyone on this thread has a chance to influence the outcome directly. So take your  myopic border questions to the people that can. You as well, must surely be bored with your line on this thread by now.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 7, 2019)

zahir said:


> There’s this on updating phone number, email address, identity document etc.
> 
> Update your EU Settlement Scheme details


Thank you.
Id like to read someone who has properly thought through the implications of this untested system but my initial reaction is disgust.


----------



## xenon (Mar 7, 2019)

It is disgusting.


----------



## zahir (Mar 7, 2019)

The Public Accounts Committee report referred to here may be worth looking at.

Brexit: EU citizens risk suffering same fate as Windrush generation


> Millions of EU nationals living in the UK could suffer the same fate as the Windrush generation after Brexit, according to a damning report from MPs.
> 
> The Public Accounts Committee warned on Wednesday that the Home Office's "systemic failure" to keep accurate records could place many EU citizens at risk of being "caught out" and unable to prove their right to remain in the country after the UK leaves the EU.
> 
> ...


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN I’ve watched the video now. It was very short. You could easily have explained what was in it. My response is: I share the concerns about  US chicken husbandry and knock off whisky.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 7, 2019)




----------



## Poot (Mar 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 163762



I still can't help thinking that we're going to have to buy a whole new Brexit advent calendar with many, many more little doors on it, much as I'd like the whole shitstorm to be over.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Poot said:


> I still can't help thinking that we're going to have to buy a whole new Brexit advent calendar with many, many more little doors on it, much as I'd like the whole shitstorm to be over.


The kiss she gave will never ever fade away


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

Come on DexterTCN, I’ve engaged with that video clip far more than you have. I initially had to find out from other posters what was in it, but you’ve had my response to it since before I was even able to watch it. I’ve now watched it, and my response remained the same. But I still have no idea what your views on it are. I know you’ve been about, because I noticed your name in the visitors list.

Just a heads up though: I’m not going to be able to watch any more videos for a while. So you’re going to have to make points in your own words.

So. What are your views on the clip, why did you post it, what point did you hope to raise, and how do you see that contributing to the discussion? (You can bring in the previous clip that you posted without comment and left unexplained too, if you wish).

If you don’t want to give your own views, you could always ask questions.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 7, 2019)

zahir said:


> The Public Accounts Committee report referred to here may be worth looking at.
> 
> Brexit: EU citizens risk suffering same fate as Windrush generation


 Well exactly... The room for deportation by the papercuts of beaurocracy is enormous. 

Any Brexit that doesn't bin the settled status process can fuck off and die. It's indefensible. I was hoping Norway plus would do that (and it's increasingly back on the table going by the headlines), but I don't trust Corbyn on this either. Kicking out foreigners seems to be the key part of Labours brexit vision, union with the EU on everything but kick out at anyone without British citizenship.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

xenon said:


> Repetition, I spoiled my vote. I have issues with some remainers philosophy I have problems with some leavers philosophy.  I don’t think anyone on this thread has a chance to influence the outcome directly. So take your  myopic border questions to the people that can. You as well, must surely be bored with your line on this thread by now.



The way you can no platform me on this site is put me on ignore. I am sure others here do.
If it is because my repetition on this subject is boring to you, save yourself the angst.
Repetition seems to be a regular occurrence on this site, but to me a thread that asks if brexit will happen is the place to continually focus on the land border that joins the UK to the EU as it's existence seems to be central to the concept of leaving, leave being one of the only four words on the winning side of the ballot paper.
All the other discussion is a variation on the central word 'leave' isn't it?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> All the other discussion is a variation on the central word 'leave' isn't it?


Well, that’s not surprising since that was the result of the referendum, and that the two main Westminster parties have said they’ll respect that result. Although Labour’s plans are somewhat muddy, and three weeks out it’s still hard to tell what May’s government will be able to deliver.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well, that’s not surprising since that was the result of the referendum, and that the two main Westminster parties have said they’ll respect that result. Although Labour’s plans are somewhat muddy, and three weeks out it’s still hard to tell what May’s government will be able to deliver.


this respect the result will i submit soon be seen to be of the 'with all due respect' variety


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The way you can no platform me on this site is out me on ignore.


that's not denying you a platform, it's ignoring you. an entirely different thing.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Come on DexterTCN, I’ve engaged with that video clip far more than you have. I initially had to find out from other posters what was in it, but you’ve had my response to it since before I was even able to watch it. I’ve now watched it, and my response remained the same. But I still have no idea what your views on it are. I know you’ve been about, because I noticed your name in the visitors list.
> 
> Just a heads up though: I’m not going to be able to watch any more videos for a while. So you’re going to have to make points in your own words.
> 
> ...


I'm at work you moron, it's busy just now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this respect the result will i submit soon be seen to be of the 'with all due respect' variety


Others seem to agree. It’s not something I feel able to call. All we can do is speculate, and I’m happy to hear and assess the various speculations.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm at work you moron, it's busy just now.



Not that busy then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm at work you moron, it's busy just now.


so you say.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I'm at work you moron, it's busy just now.


 That’s also why I can’t watch videos during the day, and it’s mainly why I think it’s polite to say a few words about what’s in a link and why you’re posting it. 

Take your time, there’s no rush.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s also why I can’t watch videos during the day, and it’s mainly why I think it’s polite to say a few words about what’s in a link and why you’re posting it.
> 
> Take your time, there’s no rush.


it'll hopefully give auld dexter time to cobble a sentence or two together


----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2019)

I tend to find that the more work I have to do, the more I find myself inclined to spend on urban75.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's not denying you a platform, it's ignoring you. an entirely different thing.



I did not use the word 'deny'. It is an entirely different word to 'no'.
Mind you, if you were to put me on ignore I would welcome it. You and I don't have any common ground, and I don't share your desire to personalize things and act all high and mighty with others.
I will personalize (like I am right now with you) in reaction to snide comments from others, but I don't initiate.
Please put me on ignore so I can have a break from you contaminating my visits here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I did not use the word 'deny'. It is an entirely different word to 'no'.
> Mind you, if you were to put me on ignore I would welcome it. You and I don't have any common ground, and I don't share your desire to personalize things and act all high and mighty with others.
> I will personalize (like I am right now with you) in reaction to snide comments from others, but I don't initiate.
> Please put me on ignore so I can have a break from you contaminating my visits here.


i know you didn't use the word 'deny'. to no platform someone is to deny them a platform. if you don't understand that then there's scant hope for you. but given your posting history and your mischaracterisation of people throughout your sojourn here (and sojourn's another word you haven't used, btw) i've never really expected much from you. i expect we have many things we agree on. only you never talk about anything else other than your hobby horse - you've only submitted 56 posts which aren't on this thread. i'm not putting you on ignore.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Only!
Are there rules regarding numbers of posts then, and on which topics?
'Scant hope'?
Hope for what? That I become the person you wish me to be rather than the person I am?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Only!
> Are there rules regarding numbers of posts then, and on which topics?


if you want to find common ground then you should try posting on threads which aren't solely to do with brexit.


> 'Scant hope'?
> Hope for what? That I become the person you wish me to be rather than the person I am?


if you were the person i wished you to be then you'd never have reached this nadir in your posting. there is scant hope for you to understand what is said to you if you don't understand that when someone is no platformed they are denied a platform.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

I understand lots of things, and don't understand a lot more.
However if I seek clarification about anything it won't be from you.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 7, 2019)

Horrible but revealing piece by the former "socialist" French PM  


> Since Adam Smith and the birth of modern economics, we have learned that barriers are harmful to society. They have a negative impact on companies, deterring competition and limiting us all. The rationale is quite clear: companies, as well as people, need to breath and thrive in larger economic and legal systems where harmonisation and sharing is required.





> After half a century of successful globalisation – measured from any parameter – these counter-movements are pushing for an agenda of separation and nationalism.





> The European Union and Spain, particularly, represent successful stories of coexistence, involvement and synergies. Any political decision based on exclusion, lack of solidarity or a false sense of self-governance will only create economic depression and barriers for its citizens. ... That is what I would hope to do as mayor of Barcelona, by building co-operation between the public and private sector, by welcoming entrepreneurs and companies from all over the world to make our great city their home.


This is why _economic_ arguments should be rejected.


----------



## xenon (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The way you can no platform me on this site is put me on ignore. I am sure others here do.
> If it is because my repetition on this subject is boring to you, save yourself the angst.
> Repetition seems to be a regular occurrence on this site, but to me a thread that asks if brexit will happen is the place to continually focus on the land border that joins the UK to the EU as it's existence seems to be central to the concept of leaving, leave being one of the only four words on the winning side of the ballot paper.
> All the other discussion is a variation on the central word 'leave' isn't it?



You've had several answers to your questions already, you just don't like any of them.


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> View attachment 163780


His stance seems an appropriate reaction to the punctuationless disaster that is the tweet you have reposted.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> However if I seek clarification about anything it won't be from you.


Good decision


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> However if I seek clarification about anything it won't be from you.


that's fortunate being as you don't understand even the simplest of explanations.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> View attachment 163780


“Look at this picture of the Attourney General leaving Downing Street this morning. I think the tweet is apposite.  I’d be face palming too, in his position”.

See, not hard, is it?


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> His stance seems an appropriate reaction to the punctuationless disaster that is the tweet you have reposted.




Big fan of Geoffrey Cox then are you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Big fan of Geoffrey Cox then are you?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

xenon said:


> You've had several answers to your questions already, you just don't like any of them.



There have been some answers, but mainly they raise further questions regarding a myriad of practicalities.

In the past one 'answer' that has popped up is 'let there be a United Ireland'.
All well and good possibly, but that would not be 'brexit' in the sense of the current UK leaving the EU. That kind of answer raises questions as to how such a thing can be achieved.
My 'myopic' obsession regarding the border is about the practical realities there. It is my way of engaging with this topic.
Others engage by obsessing about money, or which particular descriptors suit which particular individual or institution.
Incidentally, you don't know what I like it don't like, as I don't know what you like or don't like.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There have been some answers, but mainly they raise further questions regarding a myriad of practicalities.
> 
> In the past one 'answer' that has popped up is 'let there be a United Ireland'.
> All well and good possibly, but that would not be 'brexit' in the sense of the current UK leaving the EU. That kind of answer raises questions as to how such a thing can be achieved.


obviously it wouldn't be 'brexit' in the sense of the current uk leaving the eu. that's kind of the point.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 7, 2019)

Oh christ is he still going on about the Irish border?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's fortunate being as you don't understand even the simplest of explanations.


Sheesh.
Do you have the superiority complex you appear to have?
You don't provide explanations, so you wouldn't know if I do or don't understand them.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh christ is he still going on about the Irish border?


Put him on ignore.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> All well and good possibly, but that would not be 'brexit' in the sense of the current UK leaving the EU.


And?  It’s not (or ought not to be) in the gift of parts of the UK that aren’t those that may leave whether or not other parts leave. That seems fairly self evident to me.

My personal preference would be for the UK state to break down, for Ireland to reunify and for Scotland to become independent. Wales would also hopefully find a settlement that suits its inhabitants. But that’s up to the people who live in those polities.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Sheesh.
> Do you have the superiority complex you appear to have?
> You don't provide explanations, so you wouldn't know if I do or don't understand them.


i don't have a superiority complex. i am talking from experience of not more than a few minutes ago, when you didn't recognise that no platforming someone is the same as denying them a platform. it is nothing to do with me or how i feel about you or anything, and everything to do with the frequent interactions you've had here with a range of posters where the simple points they've made have flown right over your head. as for my providing explanations, i refer you once more to your inability to understand the notion of no platform and your spluttering response to my using a word you'd not employed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Put him on ignore.



I meant you, and you're already on ignore.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't have a superiority complex. i am talking from experience of not more than a few minutes ago, when you didn't recognise that no platforming someone is the same as denying them a platform. it is nothing to do with me or how i feel about you or anything, and everything to do with the frequent interactions you've had here with a range of posters where the simple points they've made have flown right over your head. as for my providing explanations, i refer you once more to your inability to understand the notion of no platform and your spluttering response to my using a word you'd not employed.



You speak for others now?
'a range of posters'.
And you don't have a superiority complex?

I am content with the way I employed 'no platforming' in the context in which I used it.
If you have a problem with that I refer the right honourable gentleman to his own control freakery.


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 7, 2019)

Do clouds no platform us when we yell at them?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You speak for others now?
> 'a range of posters'.
> And you don't have a superiority complex?
> 
> ...


i am not speaking for others. i am pointing out that the difficulties you've displayed in understanding what people have actually said are not limited to the difficulties you've had understanding what i've said. i have observed you misunderstanding lots of people on this thread to the extent where it frankly seems wilful.

i know you're content with the way you employed 'no platforming'. but that doesn't change the fact that your idiosyncratic understanding of the term isn't shared by anyone else.

i don't have a problem with any of this, being as it's not me who has great difficulty understanding what other people say.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it'll hopefully give auld dexter time to cobble a sentence or two together


Let's give him a chance to get home, get his slippers on and have his tea. It will be worth waiting for, game changing even. I'm reckoning about 7 p.m. so I'll set a reminder on my phone.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Let's give him a chance to get home, get his slippers on and have his tea. It will be worth waiting for, game changing even. I'm reckoning about 7 p.m. so I'll set a reminder on my phone.


… though to be fair, if he can't reply by 7, he might need a short extension of Article Dexter.


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2019)

'Is Dexter actually going to happen?'


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am not speaking for others. i am pointing out that the difficulties you've displayed in understanding what people have actually said are not limited to the difficulties you've had understanding what i've said. i have observed you misunderstanding lots of people on this thread to the extent where it frankly seems wilful.
> 
> i know you're content with the way you employed 'no platforming'. but that doesn't change the fact that your idiosyncratic understanding of the term isn't shared by anyone else.
> 
> i don't have a problem with any of this, being as it's not me who has great difficulty understanding what other people say.



'I am not speaking for other's
'...isn't shared by anyone else'.

Yet you say that I am a person who has difficulty understanding?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

Eurostar disruption as French customs agents worked to rule. On the news last night they interviewed disgruntled passengers in the queue at Gare du Nord, these people had been told exactly the same thing, yet interpreted it strictly in accordance with their leave or remain views:

"They are demonstrating what things will be like after the UK leaves the EU."

"They are using the UK leaving the EU as leverage for better pay and conditions."


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 'I am not speaking for other's
> '...isn't shared by anyone else'.
> 
> Yet you say that I am a person who has difficulty understanding?



yes, i say you have difficulty understanding


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Eurostar disruption as French customs agents worked to rule. On the news last night they interviewed disgruntled passengers in the queue at Gare du Nord, these people had been told exactly the same thing, yet interpreted it strictly in accordance with their leave or remain views:
> 
> "They are demonstrating what things will be like after the UK leaves the EU."
> 
> "They are using the UK leaving the EU as leverage for better pay and conditions."



The world might be in chaos, war, poverty, religious fundamentalism are all on the rise, but one thing remains the same: French workers disrupting the transport infrastructure because they can.

Aww, it fair brings a tear to the eye.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And?  It’s not (or ought not to be) in the gift of parts of the UK that aren’t those that may leave whether or not other parts leave. That seems fairly self evident to me.
> 
> My personal preference would be for the UK state to break down, for Ireland to reunify and for Scotland to become independent. Wales would also hopefully find a settlement that suits its inhabitants. But that’s up to the people who live in those polities.



I am resistant to the notion of polities being smaller and smaller and then adding layers of difficulty when contemplating collaboration.
I am of an Irish background, but am not of a nationalist mindset seeking 'freedom', I am more interested in confronting restrictions that might be oppressive whatever the source.
However I think there are cultural ties that create communities, but it seems to me that problems like environmental damage are much wider than individual communities or countries.
I have no ready made solutions to problems, but my personal preference is that there is more and more collaboration everywhere in seeking solutions.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am resistant to the notion of polities being smaller and smaller and then adding layers of difficulty when contemplating collaboration.
> I am of an Irish background, but am not of a nationalist mindset seeking 'freedom', I am more interested in confronting restrictions that might be oppressive whatever the source.
> However I think there are cultural ties that create communities, but it seems to me that problems like environmental damage are much wider than individual communities or countries.
> I have no ready made solutions to problems, but my personal preference is that there is more and more collaboration everywhere in seeking solutions.


Agree with all that. But I think collaboration needs to be by the class. Working classes in various geographies can cooperate in self management and facing down the bosses. Stronger states aren’t a help in that.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 163789
> yes, i say you have difficulty understanding



Seriously?
You go for a dictionary when your invocation of 'anyone else' weakens?

If you are desperate to be precise re-visit the post where I mentioned the term 'no platform' and take it from there.

For a person who has previously delivered pompous lectures regarding language, you might be interested to know language is organic and developing a lot of the time, and is not pinned down by a dictionary definition.

I repeat I am content regarding the context in which I used the term, you are dragging this conversation out for some kind of irrelevant personal quest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The way you can no platform me on this site is put me on ignore. I am sure others here do.


that is not no platforming, as it is not preventing you carrying on. it would be no platforming if the moderators were persuaded to ban you to prevent you carrying on so. refusing someone a platform (or denying them, if you prefer) is an active thing, it is not a passive, fingers in ears, la la la i can't hear you thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

of course your confusion goes back quite a ways





philosophical said:


> The general strategy here is not difficult to follow, dig out a poster, they defend themselves and therefore are accused of attention seeking and it all being 'look at me' or being a troll. It is bollocks. A poster earlier put me on ignore, wouldn't that be a better policy, a personal bit of what people these days call 'no platforming'?


that is not no platforming


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that is not no platforming, as it is not preventing you carrying on. it would be no platforming if the moderators were persuaded to ban you to prevent you carrying on so. refusing someone a platform (or denying them, if you prefer) is an active thing, it is not a passive, fingers in ears, la la la i can't hear you thing.


 
I accept your point about active and passive, although it has always amused me in the past when in some kind of active flounce one poster has declared publicly that they are putting another poster on ignore because they disagree with what they say.
If there is any part of no platforming which includes the blunt shutting down of dialogue, then that is what I am getting at.
There you go. Are you able to leave the personals there?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I accept your point about active and passive, although it has always amused me in the past when in some kind of active flounce one poster has declared publicly that they are putting another poster on ignore because they disagree with what they say.
> If there is any part of no platforming which includes the blunt shutting down of dialogue, then that is what I am getting at.
> There you go. Are you able to leave the personals there?


being as you said i contaminate the boards, that i'm a control freak, i think you're something of a hypocrite here. i have reviewed my posts over the last couple of pages and i am satisfied i have not got personal with you. i have pointed things out - like your difficulty understanding what is said to you. but that's pointing to something that is in evidence on these boards. i haven't drawn conclusions about _why_ you have difficulty understanding: could be noisy neighbours distracting you for all i know. but to point to these things which anyone reading the thread can observe - i haven't said anything _personal_ about you.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> being as you said i contaminate the boards, that i'm a control freak, i think you're something of a hypocrite here. i have reviewed my posts over the last couple of pages and i am satisfied i have not got personal with you. i have pointed things out - like your difficulty understanding what is said to you. but that's pointing to something that is in evidence on these boards. i haven't drawn conclusions about _why_ you have difficulty understanding: could be noisy neighbours distracting you for all i know. but to point to these things which anyone reading the thread can observe - i haven't said anything _personal_ about you.



OK so you want to keep it going.
You say I frequently have difficulty understanding things.
Like you're the judge.
If you don't see that as patronising and personal, I do.
You frequently use digs at me, invoking imaginary past misdeeds, and now saying I am something of a hypocrite, and that is not you returning to your enduring leitmotiv of putting me down presumaby as a way of comforting yourself that in some way you are superior?
What about your earlier complaint about the number of posts I make with the added dressing of the word 'only'.
My interest here is allied to the topic title, not to be fodder for your self aggrandizement.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 7, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Big fan of Geoffrey Cox then are you?


Yes, that's clearly what you should take from that post. You plum.


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

Meanwhile . . . another suspicious package, this time in Glasgow, made safe in a controlled explosion.

Am I the only one old enough here to remember when this sort of thing wasn't a "novelty," and that sometimes resulted in quite a bit of damage and even . . . deaths?

Police say suspect packages linked

I'm sure someone will come along soon and say it's absolutely nothing to do with Brexit.  

Edit:  Just to add, this incident is happening at the moment.  May be unconnected of course.

Suspicious package found at bank closes Princes Street



> A Police Scotland spokesman said: "Police in Edinburgh received a report of a suspicious package having been received at a business premises on Princes Street at around 12.30pm on Thursday, March 7.
> 
> "The building has been evacuated as a precaution and officers are in attendance to progress inquiries."


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yes, that's clearly what you should take from that post. You plum.


At my age, I look more like a prune!


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> At my age, I look more like a prune!


Nowt wrong with prunes, they keep you regular


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Meanwhile . . . another suspicious package, this time in Glasgow, made safe in a controlled explosion.
> 
> Am I the only one old enough here to remember when this sort of thing wasn't a "novelty," and that sometimes resulted in quite a bit of damage and even . . . deaths?
> 
> ...


Okay, I'll dip a toe in: why do you think it is linked to Brexit?


----------



## maomao (Mar 7, 2019)

Can one wave oneself?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 7, 2019)

maomao said:


> Can one wave oneself?


helicopter


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Okay, I'll dip a toe in: why do you think it is linked to Brexit?


I'll push your toe back out.  Why do you think it's not?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> I'll push your toe back out.  Why do you think it's not?


*You* raised the possible connection. In your unwillingness  to make your point you become positively Dexterish.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> OK so you want to keep it going.
> You say I frequently have difficulty understanding things.
> Like you're the judge.
> If you don't see that as patronising and personal, I do.
> ...


you do have difficulty understanding things. if you understood things well you wouldn't have made a fuss about my use of 'deny'. and yes, i can judge whether you've understood something from the response you offer. if i had drawn and shared conclusions from that during this little exchange then yes, conclusions like 'philosophical is stupid' that could have been patronising and personal. i haven't said anything today about any 'misdeeds' you've done in the past - i wouldn't count misunderstanding something to be a misdeed. i'm sorry, i don't recall complaining about your use of only - please tell me the post number and i'll review it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *You* raised the possible connection. In your unwillingness  to make your point you become positively Dexterish.


what, dexter 'i shagged my boss across the desk' dexter or just dextertcn?

sadly shaggy dexter a distant memory, with really only this left to remind us he passed this way


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what, dexter 'i shagged my boss across the desk' dexter or just dextertcn?



Dexterophonic?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Dexterophonic?


dextastic


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you do have difficulty understanding things. if you understood things well you wouldn't have made a fuss about my use of 'deny'. and yes, i can judge whether you've understood something from the response you offer. if i had drawn and shared conclusions from that during this little exchange then yes, conclusions like 'philosophical is stupid' that could have been patronising and personal. i haven't said anything today about any 'misdeeds' you've done in the past - i wouldn't count misunderstanding something to be a misdeed. i'm sorry, i don't recall complaining about your use of only - please tell me the post number and i'll review it.


25123


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what, dexter 'i shagged my boss across the desk' dexter or just dextertcn?
> 
> sadly shaggy dexter a distant memory, with really only this left to remind us he passed this way


Some schools used to have an honours board for all the ex pupils who died in the war. Maybe urban needs its own honours board.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i know you didn't use the word 'deny'. to no platform someone is to deny them a platform. if you don't understand that then there's scant hope for you. but given your posting history and your mischaracterisation of people throughout your sojourn here (and sojourn's another word you haven't used, btw) i've never really expected much from you. i expect we have many things we agree on. only you never talk about anything else other than your hobby horse - you've only submitted 56 posts which aren't on this thread. i'm not putting you on ignore.


philosophical there is no complaint about your use of only in this post
there is no complaint about the number of posts you've made in this thread
you had made at the time something like 821 posts in this thread and 56 in other threads. hence the use of only 56, not to complain about the number of posts you've made but to emphasise that the great majority of them have been in this thread. you've not discussed much else here than brexit and if you want to find common ground perhaps you should enter debates on other threads.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Some schools used to have an honours board for all the ex pupils who died in the war. Maybe urban needs its own honours board.


a dishonours board


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical there is no complaint about your use of only in this post
> there is no complaint about the number of posts you've made in this thread
> you had made at the time something like 821 posts in this thread and 56 in other threads. hence the use of only 56, not to complain about the number of posts you've made but to emphasise that the great majority of them have been in this thread. you've not discussed much else here than brexit and if you want to find common ground perhaps you should enter debates on other threads.


You misunderstand.

It is your use of the word only (we really are heads of a pin now) when you said  'you've only submitted 56 posts which aren't on this thread', as if the number of posts made is a measure of something, and 'only' signifying that that measure falls short.
A simple put down.


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *You* raised the possible connection. In your unwillingness  to make your point you become positively Dexterish.


Um, no.  I cited 3 incidents over the past 48 hours where improvised explosive devices were found in England and Scotland, originating in Ireland and thought to be connected by the police. I can't recall anything similar happening for at least a decade, probably more.  Funny it should be happening right now, dontcha think?

Rather a lot of politicians, academics, historians, and ordinary folks have suggested that the UK Government's failure to uphold its commitments in the Good Friday Agreement with regard to the Border just might run a risk of reopening violent conflict and/or cause serious hardship for Ireland, North and South.

Brexit Could Reawaken Northern Ireland’s Troubles - The Atlantic
Stark no-deal Brexit warning from NI Civil Service head
Northern Ireland must come first, no matter what else is in the Brexit deal
Transport group warns of no-deal Brexit threat to trade
With Troubles in mind, Irish concern grows over British stance on border | Reuters

And this clown, ffs.

Karen Bradley apologises for remarks on Troubles killings



> Bradley provoked widespread criticism on Wednesday when she said “over 90% of the killings during the Troubles were at the hands of terrorists” and that “the under 10% that were at the hands of the military and police were not crimes”.
> 
> Showing an apparent ignorance of basic law and the history of Northern Ireland, Bloody Sunday and other incidents including allegations of collusion with paramilitaries and of shoot-to-kill policies, Bradley told the House of Commons soldiers and police were “people acting under orders and instructions, fulfilling their duties in a dignified and appropriate way”.



So, tell me then why these are just random incidents, totally unconnected with the UK government's fuckwittery over "Brexit?"


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You misunderstand.
> 
> It is your use of the word only


oh do read the fucking post where i address this


Pickman's model said:


> philosophical there is no complaint about your use of only in this post
> *there is no complaint about the number of posts you've made in this thread*
> you had made at the time something like 821 posts in this thread and 56 in other threads. hence the use of only 56, *not to complain about the number of posts you've made but to emphasise that the great majority of them have been in this thread*. you've not discussed much else here than brexit and if you want to find common ground perhaps you should enter debates on other threads.


it's not a fucking put down, it is an observation of a fact without any such pejorative conclusion drawn.


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Um, no.  I cited 3 incidents over the past 48 hours where improvised explosive devices were found in England and Scotland, originating in Ireland and thought to be connected by the police. I can't recall anything similar happening for at least a decade, probably more.  Funny it should be happening right now, dontcha think?
> 
> Rather a lot of politicians, academics, historians, and ordinary folks have suggested that the UK Government's failure to uphold its commitments in the Good Friday Agreement with regard to the Border just might run a risk of reopening violent conflict and/or cause serious hardship for Ireland, North and South.
> 
> ...


Desperate stuff. 

And which of the commitments in the GFA has the UK government failed to uphold, do you think?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> oh do read the fucking post where i address this
> it's not a fucking put down, it is an observation of a fact without any such pejorative conclusion drawn.



I have read the post.
I reproduce what you said in 25124 below.
Are you an example of somebody misquoting themselves?

i know you didn't use the word 'deny'. to no platform someone is to deny them a platform. if you don't understand that then there's scant hope for you. but given your posting history and your mischaracterisation of people throughout your sojourn here (and sojourn's another word you haven't used, btw) i've never really expected much from you. i expect we have many things we agree on. only you never talk about anything else other than your hobby horse - you've only submitted 56 posts which aren't on this thread. i'm not putting you on ignore.

Simple put down as I said, maybe you don't even realise you're doing it.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Funny it should be happening right now, dontcha think?


 Possible there is a Brexit link, but I'd like to hear a tad more evidence than this nonsense. 

What really pisses me off is that it sounds as if you'd _like_ it to be Brexit related, such is the excitement with which you post this stuff up.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 7, 2019)

Back on topic.... anyone seen this?


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Possible there is a Brexit link, but I'd like to hear a tad more evidence than this nonsense.
> 
> What really pisses me off is that it sounds as if you'd _like_ it to be Brexit related, such is the excitement with which you post this stuff up.


Ah so you are a mind reader then?

Sure, makes it easier to ignore information if you can convince yourself the person presenting it has nefarious intentions.  Yup.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have read the post.
> I reproduce what you said in 25124 below.
> Are you an example of somebody misquoting themselves?
> 
> ...


 well I can only tell you what was in my mind when I wrote it, all I can say is I can't be held responsible for you so egregiously misreading it. Maybe you're always looking for putdowns


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Back on topic.... anyone seen this?


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


>





andysays said:


> which of the commitments in the GFA has the UK government failed to uphold, do you think?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> well I can only tell you what was in my mind when I wrote it, all I can say is I can't be held responsible for you so egregiously misreading it. Maybe you're always looking for putdowns


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

philosophical said:


>


Believe you me if it had been in the slightest intended as a put down I wouldn't have made it subtle as I've no confidence in your ability to comprehend


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

maomao said:


> Can one wave oneself?


Yeah always best to keep a football sock handy to clean up the mess though.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah so you are a mind reader then?
> 
> Sure, makes it easier to ignore information if you can convince yourself the person presenting it has nefarious intentions.  Yup.


Not much of a leap in your case though is it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Believe you me if it had been in the slightest intended as a put down I wouldn't have made it subtle as I've no confidence in your ability to comprehend


----------



## CRI (Mar 7, 2019)

This article explains the issues quite well.

Good Friday Agreement: why it matters in Brexit - UK in a changing Europe


----------



## andysays (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> This article explains the issues quite well.
> 
> Good Friday Agreement: why it matters in Brexit - UK in a changing Europe



But which of the commitments in the GFA has the UK government failed to uphold, *do you think*?

This is a specific question about a specific claim which you made above and which I've now invited you three times to respond to.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 7, 2019)

You'd have to be some kind of denialist loonspud to not see the connection between these Ireland-originating explosive devices and the current risk to the peace treaty, what planet are you people on??


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

I don't see why it should be controversial - whichever side of the brexit debate you find yourself on - to state that at the very least this government's actions put the GFA and the relative peace that rests upon it at risk. 

I'd say if you wanted to pin them down the best one to go for is that the UK government is supposed to remain impartial and that can't be the case when their majority depends on confidence and supply agreement from the DUP. 

Also think it would be strange to argue that the prospect of a hard border in Ireland will be seen as a provocation by some. 

Then we've got whatserface saying none of the state killings in NI were crimes. 

We might find out the packages were completely unrelated to brexit but I don't think it's too much of a leap to speculate that they might have been.


----------



## kebabking (Mar 7, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You'd have to be some kind of denialist loonspud to not see the connection between these Ireland-originating explosive devices and the current risk to the peace treaty, what planet are you people on??



I see a potential connection, but I see a good dozen potential other motivations - and most importantly, while the three devices in the London area have been 'viable', there's a significant difference between a 'viable' device that sets light to an envelope and a bomb - that difference is in both capability and intention.

Threat is the mix of both intention and capability.

Am I interested? Yes, of course. 

I note however that the more hysterical reactions come from the more _animated _end of the remainer spectrum, with their conclusions being the tired tropes that brexit should be cancelled because of _insert new scare story here. _

It would, of course, be illustrative to imagine their reaction if the situation were to be reversed: if remain had won the referendum, and three years later some leave obsessed loon was letting off low grade incilindries in protest, I somehow doubt that they'd be posting that despite the referendum result, the UK should leave the EU in order to placate a handful of deranged cunts.

Transparent. Utterly transparent...


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I see a potential connection, but I see a good dozen potential other motivations...



Give us 6.


----------



## Supine (Mar 7, 2019)

You may see more animated reactions from remainers because leavers use confirmation bias to downplay the possibility of their choice causing this. Just saying.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Give us 6.


Kidderminster harriers


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I see a potential connection, but I see a good dozen potential other motivations...



5 then?  Give us 5 at least if you can think of 12.  The main three that jump into your head then another 2.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

CRI said:


> Um, no.  I cited 3 incidents over the past 48 hours where improvised explosive devices were found in England and Scotland, originating in Ireland and thought to be connected by the police. I can't recall anything similar happening for at least a decade, probably more.  Funny it should be happening right now, dontcha think?
> 
> Rather a lot of politicians, academics, historians, and ordinary folks have suggested that the UK Government's failure to uphold its commitments in the Good Friday Agreement with regard to the Border just might run a risk of reopening violent conflict and/or cause serious hardship for Ireland, North and South.
> 
> ...




Fruitloopery of the highest order.

Someone is pissed off about a deal which has not been done and may well not be done and even if it is done no one knows what it looks like. So they send some bombs to a train station, airports and educational facility and RBS (did they? Not closely following this non-story). That’s your theory. That is what you think this is about.

Clue #1: how on earth would this affect the Brexit outcome?

Clue #2: Irish dissidents either send a warning or they don’t, either way their bombs are a little more sophisticated than a pack of Swan Vestas with an alarm click timer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Wookey said:


> You'd have to be some kind of denialist loonspud to not see the connection between these Ireland-originating explosive devices and the current risk to the peace treaty, what planet are you people on??


There is no peace treaty, your saying that shows how ignorant of this you are


----------



## Poi E (Mar 7, 2019)

There was no war. In fact, nothing to see. Move along.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Fruitloopery of the highest order.
> 
> Someone is pissed off about a deal which has not been done and may well not be done and even if it is done no one knows what it looks like. So they send some bombs to a train station, airports and educational facility and RBS (did they? Not closely following this non-story). That’s your theory. That is what you think this is about.
> 
> ...


It's not as if a car bomb has gone off or anything, eh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 7, 2019)

Poi E said:


> There was no war. In fact, nothing to see. Move along.


There was a war. But there was famously no peace treaty, no bit of signed paper to wave about


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> It's not as if a car bomb has gone off or anything, eh.



The impression that some people on here give is that they’d be chuffed if one did. Scum.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The impression that some people on here give is that they’d be chuffed if one did. Scum.


Bomb explodes in car at courthouse


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Bomb explodes in car at courthouse



You sick cunt.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You sick cunt.


Wasn't me.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Wasn't me.



It was you who has attempted to claim a car bombing to advance your own political agenda.  You need help.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It was you who has attempted to claim a car bombing to advance your own political agenda.  You need help.


lol you're furious eh.

Dissing the concept of it being dissidents as 'fruitloopery of the highest order' and I led you into showing that you weren't even aware of (or didn't even remember) the actual car bomb 6 weeks ago.

'scum' 'sick cunt' 'political agenda' 'need help'

Look at you having a sweary tantrum.  Bless.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 7, 2019)

This is the best thread on urban since 2006


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> lol you're furious eh.
> 
> Dissing the concept of it being dissidents as 'fruitloopery of the highest order' and I led you into showing that you weren't even aware of (or didn't even remember) the actual car bomb 6 weeks ago.
> 
> ...



Jesus.


----------



## grit (Mar 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There was a war. But there was famously no peace treaty, no bit of signed paper to wave about


 Technically true, but the GFA is analogous to it.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Give us 6.



 Got any more videos on Twitter that can explain it for you?


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2019)

It’s surely no coincidence that the rise in the youth stabbings coincides with labours anti-Semitism.


----------



## xenon (Mar 8, 2019)

What about all the Brexit mouthbrething phonein nutjobs, threatening violence. Should we   Shit our pants and change policy to accommodate them as well?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 8, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> 5 then?  Give us 5 at least if you can think of 12.  The main three that jump into your head then another 2.


Bryl cream


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 8, 2019)

If we really wanted to stop the bombs we should cancel the fucking partition not brexit.


----------



## andysays (Mar 8, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't see why it should be controversial - whichever side of the brexit debate you find yourself on - to state that at the very least this government's actions put the GFA and the relative peace that rests upon it at risk.
> 
> I'd say if you wanted to pin them down the best one to go for is that the UK government is supposed to remain impartial and that can't be the case when their majority depends on confidence and supply agreement from the DUP.
> 
> ...


This is a far more measured and realistic assessment than some of the more hard-line Remainers are offering though.


----------



## grit (Mar 8, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> If we really wanted to stop the bombs we should cancel the fucking partition not brexit.


 Yes please, fuck up your own country all you like, just give us back ours before you do it.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 8, 2019)




----------



## Rimbaud (Mar 8, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Clue #2: Irish dissidents either send a warning or they don’t, either way their bombs are a little more sophisticated than a pack of Swan Vestas with an alarm click timer.



Not really, this isn't the IRA of the 1980s. An organisation calling itself the IRA has re-emerged, but they have nowhere near the operational capacity that they did 20 odd years ago, and nothing like the level of support. They are a few hardliners who never accepted the GFA, and some younger people who've been brought up with a romanticised version of the troubles. 

Some of the trouble in Derry lately - a car bombing at a court house and shots fired at police during a few days of rioting a few months back - is as much about training up younger recruits and getting them experience as anything else. 

BTW there was a bomb found in Botanic area of Belfast just yesterday and the street was evacuated. A few months back during the 12th I couldn't get home because the only road I could take was closed due to a pipe bomb being found. Such things happen regularly in Northern Ireland, but the explosives are decidedly amateur and don't work more often than not.


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> What about all the Brexit mouthbrething phonein nutjobs, threatening violence. Should we   Shit our pants and change policy to accommodate them as well?


Uh, I guess you haven't noticed how often May and her chums have sited the threat of violence from just this contingent as one of the reasons that the country must proceed with Brexit?


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

grit said:


> Yes please, fuck up your own country all you like, just give us back ours before you do it.


Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.


plus ca change


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Problem is, the UK Government not only wants to fuck up the UK, it seems determined to shit over Ireland, north and south, as much as possible, in the process.


I think it may be worse than wanting to fuck them up, it may just be an irrelevance to them.


----------



## grit (Mar 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> What about all the Brexit mouthbrething phonein nutjobs, threatening violence. Should we   Shit our pants and change policy to accommodate them as well?



Pant shitting is optional, addressing legitimate concerns around disrupting the fragile state of peace (for want of a better word) in the north of Ireland would be prudent.

I'm starting to wonder if the phrase "legitimate target" is going to reenter the Irish lexicon.


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I think it may be worse than wanting to fuck them up, it may just be an irrelevance to them.


Or, perhaps the ongoing disdain that is the legacy of being a former colonial power.

Whatever the intention, there are no words for the incompetence and sheer recklessness of the May Government.

In a similar vein, I spotted this on the Twitters - Facebook post from a former BBC script writer.  Depressing, but helps explain why the BBC has become so overtly a mouthpiece of the Tory Government.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Whatever the intention, there are no words for the incompetence and sheer recklessness of the May Government.


but there are

many of them


----------



## ska invita (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> In a similar vein, I spotted this on the Twitters - Facebook post from a former BBC script writer.  Depressing, but helps explain why the BBC has become so overtly a mouthpiece of the Tory Government.
> 
> View attachment 163878


Interesting, but was ever so I expect


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Mar 8, 2019)

It was much better when Rod Liddle used to edit the Today show.


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Interesting, but was ever so I expect


Maybe it's because I haven't had a tv in perhaps 15 years, and don't tend to listen to the radio so much in the car these days, but I definitely have noticed a "shift" in what the BBC chooses to report and how it pitches it in the past couple years. I've got used to getting information from a variety of sources online, so when I've stayed at a hotel, or turned on Radio 4 on a long car trip, I've been pretty gobsmacked about what's missing, how often blatant lies aren't challenged (none of the Jeremy Paxman broken record questioning of Michael Howard type situs), how leading some questions are (you can almost hear in the voices of some Radio Scotland reporters a "why the fuck am I asking this stupid question?") and how blatant some reporters are in stating their opinions - John Humphries, Andrew Neil, that Nicky guy something or other.

I think it was sometime last summer, I saw a segment on the news where they were interviewing someone - a professor of economics I think, who was explaining the potential negative impact of something related to leaving the European Union.  For balance, they then gave equal time to someone whose only credentials were to be from some or other organisation like "Britain's Best," who did nothing but reply to everything the economist said with, "That's rubbish" or "That's just project fear," while throwing in the odd jingoistic blurb about Britain.  You could see the economics woman making strange faces in response to what the other dude said, but he was still allowed to talk over her and never questioned or challenged by the presenter.  Since then, I've noticed so many similar exchanges - mostly on radio.  

Never expected the BBC to be totally impartial.  They've always done the terrorist/freedom fighter loaded language shit, but now it seems to be that on steroids.  Perhaps what is worse, is what they don't cover at all, or mention only in passing.	

I've been baffled as to why so many people seem completely nonplussed about the impact of leaving the EU if we carry on the current track.  I've raised it in a work-related context with people in terms of risk management, and almost always get either blank stares, like I've suggested they include dealing with an alien invasion in their risk registers, or unconvincing denials with, "Oh, I'm sure nothing much will change," as they look out the window, then try and change the subject.

If people rely on the media and the Government to tell them when there's a big snow storm coming, or a fuel embargo, a nasty strain of flu virus, or any other impending risk, I suppose I can see why some people are still in the, "Problem, what problem?" zone. 

I really do hope the Government manages to pull a rabbit out of a hat somehow at the last minute, even though that won't unfuck the economy, or fix Britain's crap reputation internationally.  But if they don't, and if even a smidgen of the worst predictions come to pass and, "Cheer up, it might never happen!" doesn't work anymore, well then what?


----------



## ska invita (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> Maybe it's because I haven't had a tv in perhaps 15 years, and don't tend to listen to the radio so much in the car these days, but I definitely have noticed a "shift" in what the BBC chooses to report and how it pitches it in the past couple years. I've got used to getting information from a variety of sources online, so when I've stayed at a hotel, or turned on Radio 4 on a long car trip, I've been pretty gobsmacked about what's missing, how often blatant lies aren't challenged (none of the Jeremy Paxman broken record questioning of Michael Howard type situs), how leading some questions are (you can almost hear in the voices of some Radio Scotland reporters a "why the fuck am I asking this stupid question?") and how blatant some reporters are in stating their opinions - John Humphries, Andrew Neil, that Nicky guy something or other.
> 
> I think it was sometime last summer, I saw a segment on the news where they were interviewing someone - a professor of economics I think, who was explaining the potential negative impact of something related to leaving the European Union.  For balance, they then gave equal time to someone whose only credentials were to be from some or other organisation like "Britain's Best," who did nothing but reply to everything the economist said with, "That's rubbish" or "That's just project fear," while throwing in the odd jingoistic blurb about Britain.  You could see the economics woman making strange faces in response to what the other dude said, but he was still allowed to talk over her and never questioned or challenged by the presenter.  Since then, I've noticed so many similar exchanges - mostly on radio.
> 
> ...



HAvent read all of this, but dipped in and out and right from the get go the reason the BBC rose to prominence was because of its licensed role as a deep state communication channel
The BBC
Myth of a Public Service
by Tom Mills
Verso


----------



## gosub (Mar 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There was a war. But there was famously no peace treaty, no bit of signed paper to wave about


British rarely get upset enough to declare war, The troubles were a bit troubling, the Falklands a conflict, and the US war of Independence an odd description of the French being well French


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> British rarely get upset enough to declare war, The troubles were a bit troubling, the Falklands a conflict, and the US war of Independence an odd description of the French being well French


By the by, I always found it curious that in the UK, it's referred to as the "War of Independence" but in the US they call it the "American Revolution."  You'd think it would be the opposite way round.


----------



## gosub (Mar 8, 2019)

CRI said:


> By the by, I always found it curious that in the UK, it's referred to as the "War of Independence" but in the US they call it the "American Revolution."  You'd think it would be the opposite way round.


Calling the Americans revolting would be quite rude.


----------



## kebabking (Mar 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> Calling the Americans revolting would be quite rude.



one doesn't need to describe them as revolting, merely saying it - _Americans - _does the job perfectly well....


----------



## gosub (Mar 8, 2019)

This 'war' the Irish reckon they had...  Prone to  exaggerating a soipson.  The potato crop failure was a famine apparently, its not a famine if there is perfectly good soup  available and you decline to eat it.  Irish fussy eating more like


----------



## Crispy (Mar 8, 2019)

EU make "offer"



(5 tweet thread, but this is the crucial bit)

"You can pull out of the CU if you want, but NI must remain in it."

(EDIT: quotation marks added to first line of post)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 8, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> It was much better when Rod Liddle used to edit the Today show.



Im pretty sure rod liddle was more of liberal lefty back in the days he was editing today - he used to have a column in the guardian or observer. he was still a twat - but cleary found penning right wing, gob shite, contrarian cobblers got him more attention.


----------



## andysays (Mar 8, 2019)

Crispy said:


> EU make offer:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That looks like it will be interpreted as 'some of UK can pull out but NI must stay', so won't go down too well with, eg, the DUP


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> so won't go down too well with, eg, the DUP


It has its merits, then.


----------



## grit (Mar 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> This 'war' the Irish reckon they had...  Prone to  exaggerating a soipson.  The potato crop failure was a famine apparently, its not a famine if there is perfectly good soup  available and you decline to eat it.  Irish fussy eating more like



I can’t tell if this is a wind up.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2019)

Punters say no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Punters say no.
> 
> View attachment 163890


The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...


----------



## brogdale (Mar 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...


You're not wrong.
I don't bet; as a kid our poverty was accentuated by my Dad's gambling.

That said...I reckon the £ is right on this.


----------



## alex_ (Mar 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The number of times punters have been wrong, tho...



Including betfair where this data comes from, you could get 5:1 on betfair at 0200 on the night of the referendum.

Alex


----------



## CRI (Mar 8, 2019)

Well, not a bit surprised at this.  Shame they got away with it until it was too late.

The Banks Files: Brexit funder urged campaign to “press it harder” after Jo Cox murder



> Leaked emails and documents reveal that despite an agreement by all groups to suspend campaigning in the aftermath of her death, the millionaire businessman instructed the social media team at Leave.EU to “boost” an existing sponsored ad on Facebook.
> 
> New evidence also reveals that his campaign discussed secretly exerting influence and control over other groups, pumping in cash not properly declared to authorities, in a potential breach of spending laws.
> 
> Banks secretly bankrolled Labour’s Eurosceptic movement Labour Leave, funding at least three figures on its executive board, an office and computers. Labour Leave is under investigation by the Electoral Commission.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 9, 2019)




----------



## teqniq (Mar 9, 2019)




----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

teqniq said:


>



And it will be ignored, since leadership of both main UK parties seem to be cheeks of the same arse when it comes to leaving the EU ASAP.


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

Just a wee reminder of what the Department for Exiting the EU is costing us all.  Some staff are seconded from other departments, which means other parts of the civil service are threadbare to the point of no being able to function, so here's that, too.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> And it will be ignored, since leadership of both main UK parties seem to be cheeks of the same arse when it comes to leaving the EU ASAP.



Not really. It will be ignored by May and co as to concede that the whole thing was corrupted and maybe should never have happened could lead to end of the tory party as it is currently formed. Brexit is pretty much the only thing keeping the right-wing headbangers onside with their dreams of an untrammelled free market. Labour/left-wing proponents of leaving the EU have an entirely different set of reasons for wanting the same thing focussing more on the notion that the EU is essentially undemocratic and a grand neoliberal project writ large


----------



## maomao (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> Maybe it's because I haven't had a tv in perhaps 15 years, and don't tend to listen to the radio so much in the car these days, but I definitely have noticed a "shift" in what the BBC chooses to report and how it pitches it in the past couple years.



Can we club together and buy her one? Might stop her posting so much ignorant shit on here. I'm in for a tenner.


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Not really. It will be ignored by May and co as to concede that the whole thing was corrupted and maybe should never have happened could lead to end of the tory party as it is currently formed. Brexit is pretty much the only thing keeping the right-wing headbangers onside with their dreams of an untrammelled free market. Labour/left-wing proponents of leaving the EU have an entirely different set of reasons for wanting the same thing focussing more on the notion that the EU is essentially undemocratic and a grand neoliberal project writ large


Politicians can blether til the cows come home about how their "reasons" for leaving the EU are better than the other side's, but the outcome of leaving will still be the same - a far shittier situation than we would have had remaining in the EU.  Stomping about claiming some kind of moral superiority won't fix the shit.  The outcome is what matters.  Both the main parties have failed the people of the UK hideously and unforgiveably.


----------



## agricola (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> Just a wee reminder of what the Department for Exiting the EU is costing us all.  Some staff are seconded from other departments, which means other parts of the civil service are threadbare to the point of no being able to function, so here's that, too.
> 
> View attachment 163987



TBF its even more concerning that a department that apparently is responsible for such a massive and complex piece of work is only spending £43 - £47 million a year (edit: on staff).  They cannot be doing anything substantial there if that is what the actual cost is. 

To put that into context, its what the NHS spent on agency staff over a period of thirty-seven days last year - and that was a year of historically low spending on agency staff.  Its less than what Grayling wasted on that non-ferry ferry company and paying Eurotunnel off.


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

agricola said:


> TBF its even more concerning that a department that apparently is responsible for such a massive and complex piece of work is only spending £43 - £47 million a year (edit: on staff).  They cannot be doing anything substantial there if that is what the actual cost is.
> 
> To put that into context, its what the NHS spent on agency staff over a period of thirty-seven days last year - and that was a year of historically low spending on agency staff.  Its less than what Grayling wasted on that non-ferry ferry company and paying Eurotunnel off.



I think the figure for staffing expenditure for the year to August 2018 was over £43 billion, not million.  I can imagine that sum has increased in the past several months, as there are statutory notices, guidance docs, etc. being flung online at breakneck speed (although most of them being about as useful as a chocolate teapot - but someone's being paid to write them!)


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

whoops - double post


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> Both the main parties have failed the people of the UK hideously and unforgiveably.


How could either main party have better served the people of the UK with regards Brexit?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 9, 2019)

Apologies for the double post.


----------



## alex_ (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> I think the figure for staffing expenditure for the year to August 2018 was over £43 billion, not million.  I can imagine that sum has increased in the past several months, as there are statutory notices, guidance docs, etc. being flung online at breakneck speed (although most of them being about as useful as a chocolate teapot - but someone's being paid to write them!)



Are you sure - if they are being 50k each there are 860,000 of them working there ?

Alex


----------



## agricola (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> I think the figure for staffing expenditure for the year to August 2018 was over £43 billion, not million.  I can imagine that sum has increased in the past several months, as there are statutory notices, guidance docs, etc. being flung online at breakneck speed (although most of them being about as useful as a chocolate teapot - but someone's being paid to write them!)



Its millions, not billions - at least according to the most recent accounts (.pdf file from Gov.uk).


----------



## andysays (Mar 9, 2019)

CRI said:


> ...Stomping about claiming some kind of moral superiority...


Yeah, I just hate it when people do that


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 9, 2019)

agricola said:


> TBF its even more concerning that a department that apparently is responsible for such a massive and complex piece of work is only spending £43 - £47 million a year (edit: on staff).  They cannot be doing anything substantial there if that is what the actual cost is...


If my sums are right that's over £60k each on average.  There's no fucking way civil service workers are getting any more than half that (and most a third).  Something stinks there.   They need a minimum, minimum mind...of 650 _lawyers_ plus 5 times that (easily) in support from the CS...the number of staff that should be seconded is huge, the number of outside staff you have to bring in is also huge...and really, really expensive.

So the number is too small and so is the budget.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 9, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> If my sums are right that's over £60k each on average.  There's no fucking way civil service workers are getting any more than half that (and most a third).  Something stinks there.   They need a minimum, minimum mind...of 650 _lawyers_ plus 5 times that (easily) in support from the CS...the number of staff that should be seconded is huge, the number of outside staff you have to bring in is also huge...and really, really expensive.
> 
> So the number is too small and so is the budget.


Have you forgotten the employer's costs like pension contributions? You don't just divide the big figure by the number of staff, you know


----------



## Poi E (Mar 9, 2019)

No point pissing away time figuring how Tories piss away money. Well be here for a fucking long time.


----------



## Ming (Mar 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> No point pissing away time figuring how Tories piss away money. Well be here for a fucking long time.


True isn’t it (in relation to public money). The party of financial probity.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> No point pissing away time figuring how Tories piss away money. Well be here for a fucking long time.


But they're not pissing it away.  That's what's wrong about it.


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

agricola said:


> Its millions, not billions - at least according to the most recent accounts (.pdf file from Gov.uk).


Thank you for the link - I stand corrected.  Figures for staffing costs up to end of last March are as below.  But, I would expect the figures for staff as well as the cost of employing them will be significantly higher in this financial year.  It's not like the department was doing very much this time last year, compared to the frenetic activity now!



But honestly, it's all a complete waste.  Imagine what else could have been done with all this lolly.


----------



## CRI (Mar 9, 2019)

Another waste of money here:


----------



## Ming (Mar 10, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> But they're not pissing it away.  That's what's wrong about it.


You've lost me. I was always under the impression they raided the public purse to transfer wealth from the tax payer to private hands (unless that's what you mean).


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 10, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 10, 2019)

Ming said:


> You've lost me. I was always under the impression they raided the public purse to transfer wealth from the tax payer to private hands (unless that's what you mean).


Well basically yes (esp the tories).  They should be haemorrhaging money, but that budget is minuscule and so are the staffing numbers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2019)

CRI said:


> Another waste of money here:
> 
> View attachment 164031


Yeh the times isn't what it used to be


----------



## CRI (Mar 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh the times isn't what it used to be


So, you agree with the 35m spend on pointless, hypocritical adverts to try and convince EU27 nationals to stay, after years of demonising them, fostering an environment of xenophobia and subjecting them to a byzantine system to apply for "settled status," etc.?


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2019)

CRI said:


> So, you agree with the 35m spend on pointless, hypocritical adverts to try and convince EU27 nationals to stay, after years of demonising them, fostering an environment of xenophobia and subjecting them to a byzantine system to apply for "settled status," etc.?


The ads don't say please stay, they are spreading the fact people need to register. If the situation of needing to register does become a reality, and I really hope it doesn't, then yes, that is money that needs to be spent.... Might reach a few people who would become illegal, excludable and deportable otherwise


----------



## belboid (Mar 10, 2019)

CRI said:


> So, you agree with the 35m spend


Three POINT five million, not thirty-five million. £1 a head.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 10, 2019)

CRI said:


> So, you agree with the 35m spend on pointless, hypocritical adverts to try and convince EU27 nationals to stay, after years of demonising them, fostering an environment of xenophobia and subjecting them to a byzantine system to apply for "settled status," etc.?


I think both the times and the policy/ads are wastes of money


----------



## CRI (Mar 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The ads don't say please stay, they are spreading the fact people need to register. If the situation of needing to register does become a reality, and I really hope it doesn't, then yes, that is money that needs to be spent.... Might reach a few people who would become illegal, excludable and deportable otherwise


The Application for Settle Status scheme was introduced late last year, so it is already a reality, and it's not a registration scheme either.  You have to apply, and can be accepted, rejected, or granted pre-settled status, which is a kind of limbo status.  If you look at the thread here about EU nationals, you'll see some of the anxiety it is causing already because well, lots of British people have parents, partners, children, work colleagues, neighbours, friends, etc. who are citizens of the other 27 EU countries.  Even if they've lived here for decades, own property, have businesses, etc., they could be thrown out.   Even if that's not likely, knowing that some stuff shirt in the Home Office can determine your fate with a keystroke is likely to be anxiety-inducing.  Once you've been given settled-status, you have to inform the Home Office if you move, change emails or phone numbers, etc., or you could be removed.  There's always the threat of status being removed.  Who wants to live the rest of their lives like that?  Just heard of the 6th person I know from an EU27 country is in the process of leaving the UK for good.

My argument is there should be a need to publicise the settled status scheme because there shouldn't be a settled status scheme in the first place.  Both a fucking waste of money, and just widens divisions and increases insularity of the UK.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 10, 2019)

Not spending enough really.


CRI said:


> The Application for Settle Status scheme was introduced late last year, so it is already a reality, and it's not a registration scheme either.  You have to apply, and can be accepted, rejected, or granted pre-settled status, which is a kind of limbo status.  If you look at the thread here about EU nationals, you'll see some of the anxiety it is causing already because well, lots of British people have parents, partners, children, work colleagues, neighbours, friends, etc. who are citizens of the other 27 EU countries.  Even if they've lived here for decades, own property, have businesses, etc., they could be thrown out.   Even if that's not likely, knowing that some stuff shirt in the Home Office can determine your fate with a keystroke is likely to be anxiety-inducing.  Once you've been given settled-status, you have to inform the Home Office if you move, change emails or phone numbers, etc., or you could be removed.  There's always the threat of status being removed.  Who wants to live the rest of their lives like that?  Just heard of the 6th person I know from an EU27 country is in the process of leaving the UK for good.
> 
> My argument is there should be a need to publicise the settled status scheme because there shouldn't be a settled status scheme in the first place.  Both a fucking waste of money, and just widens divisions and increases insularity of the UK.


I know.
It might still be irrelevant depending what Brexit is agreed on this year.


----------



## CRI (Mar 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Not spending enough really.
> 
> I know.
> It might still be irrelevant depending what Brexit is agreed on this year.


I get what you mean - like having more lifeboats on the Titanic, when it shouldn't have hit the iceberg in the first place.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 11, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Mar 11, 2019)

Interesting week for May.


----------



## CRI (Mar 11, 2019)

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has a car, especially an old one that often needs new parts, and goes to a local mechanic, but hey . . . 

Up to 1,000 vehicle repair companies could collapse within 2 weeks of a no-deal Brexit



> The UK vehicle crash repair industry — which is comprised of around 3,000 companies and employs an estimated 35,000 people nationwide — relies heavily on car parts imported through "just in time" supply chains.





> The minutes from the meeting reveal that any slowdown of car parts entering the UK at the border would force thousands of companies to cancel repairs, leaving them without cash to stay afloat.





> In some cases, dealerships from where repairers get car parts have up to three days worth of stock, and some vehicles can be repaired without using parts from abroad. However, these exceptions account for around just 3% of repairs.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who has a car, especially an old one that often needs new parts, and goes to a local mechanic, but hey . . .
> 
> Up to 1,000 vehicle repair companies could collapse within 2 weeks of a no-deal Brexit


Where do the parts come from?


----------



## alex_ (Mar 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Where do the parts come from?



Huge depots somewhere in Europe presumably.

And yes, they could be established here but it will take time and cost money.

Alex


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Where do the parts come from?



Forrin parts.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 11, 2019)

It'll be fine. With the extensive investment by government in industry and apprenticeships I have no concern about these matters.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

alex_ said:


> Huge depots somewhere in Europe presumably.
> 
> And yes, they could be established here but it will take time and cost money.
> 
> Alex


Yeah I'd expect they're mostly made in China or elsewhere in the far East.

Like most things, if the UK leaves with no deal there'll be disruption for a bit while things are scaled up to cope with the new customs requirements. 

It will still be possible to get car parts imported though. The way some are going off you'd think the borders were being closed in perpetuity.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 11, 2019)

I see a comeback for Reliant Robins, as they need fewer parts.


----------



## CRI (Mar 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> I see a comeback for Reliant Robins, as they need fewer parts.


No no, you only have to believe everything will be fine and it will be fine.  Post Brexit garages will just look something like this:


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> I see a comeback for Reliant Robins, as they need fewer parts.


can be driven on a motorbike license as well.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 11, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> can be driven on a motorbike license as well.



Still the case? I ought to know  but I was under the impression that the rules had changed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> No no, you only have to believe everything will be fine and it will be fine.  Post Brexit garages will just look something like this:



i'll say one thing for brexit, the quality of acid afterwards will be astonishing


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 11, 2019)

Any good Boy Scout can whittle a half decent shock absorber out of a turnip. Panic over nothing, again.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Mar 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'll say one thing for brexit, the quality of acid afterwards will be astonishing



The Swastika wheels are a classy touch too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Swastika wheels are a classy touch too.


yeh it's obvs a fascist's car, look at the shit all over it too


----------



## klang (Mar 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> .


straight to the point, like always


----------



## Poi E (Mar 11, 2019)

littleseb said:


> straight to the point, like always



Pointless quote


----------



## CRI (Mar 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Pointless quote


Quoteless point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Pointless quote


you are richard osman and i claim my £5


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> Quoteless point.


this ^ doesn't really work when you have a quote in your post


----------



## klang (Mar 11, 2019)

quointless pote


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> No no, you only have to believe everything will be fine and it will be fine.  Post Brexit garages will just look something like this:
> 
> 
> View attachment 164169


Lots of opportunities for scrap yards, extra jobs stripping and refurbing old parts - better for the environment too


----------



## Wilf (Mar 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Lots of opportunities for scrap yards, extra jobs stripping and refurbing old parts - better for the environment too


We'll be a bit like Cuba, minus the good weather and state socialism.


----------



## CRI (Mar 11, 2019)

littleseb said:


> quointless pote


----------



## CRI (Mar 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> We'll be a bit like Cuba, minus the good weather and state socialism.


And minus the high standard health care service, free at the point of delivery.  RIP NHS.


----------



## grit (Mar 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> .. for a bit while...



Yup "for a bit" then it will all be sorted, lovely stuff.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

grit said:


> Yup "for a bit" then it will all be sorted, lovely stuff.


Hardly news though is it?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

CRI said:


> And minus the high standard health care service, free at the point of delivery.  RIP NHS.


And it was all going so well pre-brexit. It's a shame the EU won't be there to protect it any more like it did before.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 11, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> And it was all going so well pre-brexit. It's a shame the EU won't be there to protect it any more like it did before.



I wonder whether there are any other subjects on here that lead people to say such strange things.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 11, 2019)

8ball said:


> I wonder whether there are any other subjects on here that lead people to say such strange things.


Brexit and trans threads mainly *ducks*


----------



## 8ball (Mar 11, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Brexit and trans threads mainly *ducks*



The best I could think of was cycling, so you win there.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 11, 2019)

It's a good job the Lisbon treaty got signed off or we'd probably have lost the NHS already.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 11, 2019)

And a special thanks to John Major for saving us in the first place.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2019)

Right here we go...announcement time...again.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 11, 2019)

Oh goody


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Right here we go...announcement time...again.


Spymaster is leading a long overdue coup?


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Spymaster is leading a long overdue coup?


the news, mate


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> the news, mate



Oh, reality bites.  Mate.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 11, 2019)

Hold on...the EU have to accept the UK's unilateral interpretation of the backstop?   That's what she's gone to get?

Jesus.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 11, 2019)

I think my announcement insight is more plausible.


----------



## CRI (Mar 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> And it was all going so well pre-brexit. It's a shame the EU won't be there to protect it any more like it did before.


Ah another, "Oh, things are so bad, they can't get any worse," post.  

I'm guessing you forgot Trump administration's published objectives for a "deal" with the UK post Brexit.  It's not like beggars will get to be choosers here.  So, the NHS will be broken down and sold for parts to US health care corporations and pharma companies.  But you go on being that cock eyed optimist, and hopefully one in excellent health!


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 12, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Mar 12, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Interesting week for May.


For Labour too...might be some more turning a funny Tinge before the week is out


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 12, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah another, "Oh, things are so bad, they can't get any worse," post.
> 
> I'm guessing you forgot Trump administration's published objectives for a "deal" with the UK post Brexit.  It's not like beggars will get to be choosers here.  So, the NHS will be broken down and sold for parts to US health care corporations and pharma companies.  But you go on being that cock eyed optimist, and hopefully one in excellent health!


Have you ever read any of the EU trade agreements? 

They're almost the same as Trump's wishlist. And wishlist is all it is. 

I'm in no way optimistic about the immediate future irrespective if whether we leave the EU. You have some naive, misplaced faith in the neoliberal EU to defend the NHS against neoliberalism. It's fucking nuts and would be funny if you werent such a mendacious lying shit.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 12, 2019)

ska invita said:


> For Labour too...might be some more turning a funny Tinge before the week is out


£77,379 says they won't.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm in no way optimistic about the immediate future irrespective if whether we leave the EU. You have some naive, misplaced faith in the neoliberal EU to defend the NHS against neoliberalism.


Exactly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 12, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164213


Keep calm and hoard food


----------



## brogdale (Mar 12, 2019)

Either cutting up nasty or a refreshing blast of honest self-awareness.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Have you ever read any of the EU trade agreements?
> 
> They're almost the same as Trump's wishlist. And wishlist is all it is.
> 
> I'm in no way optimistic about the immediate future irrespective if whether we leave the EU. You have some naive, misplaced faith in the neoliberal EU to defend the NHS against neoliberalism. It's fucking nuts and would be funny if you werent such a mendacious lying shit.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 12, 2019)

Well, leading NI nudist Sammy Wilson is sceptical of the claim that Maybot2000 has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat:

DUP's Foster says 'huge decisions' to be made as Sammy Wilson claims May's Brexit deal 'falls short of promises' - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

The fact that Leo the V seems to be OK with this one suggests to me that any changes are cosmetic at best.


----------



## grit (Mar 12, 2019)

Idris2002 said:


> Well, leading NI nudist Sammy Wilson is sceptical of the claim that Maybot2000 has snatched victory from the jaws of defeat:
> 
> DUP's Foster says 'huge decisions' to be made as Sammy Wilson claims May's Brexit deal 'falls short of promises' - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk
> 
> The fact that Leo the V seems to be OK with this one suggests to me that any changes are cosmetic at best.



I was worried that Ireland was being thrown under the bus and that Leo was being a good little boy and keeping his masters happy, but now I'm not so sure.


----------



## Idris2002 (Mar 12, 2019)

grit said:


> I was worried that Ireland was being thrown under the bus and that Leo was being a good little boy and keeping his masters happy, but now I'm not so sure.


Leo may be a dirty Blueshirt prick, but he's no Eoghan Harris or RDE. And his background actually immunizes him from the 'cultural cringe' that would lead a lot of the SoCoDub upper-middle classes to dream of hunt balls and receptions at the Governor-General's residence.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 14, 2019)

Sorry i missed yesterday i was kicking my lying girlfriend out of the house.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Sorry i missed yesterday i was kicking my lying girlfriend out of the house.


(((Ranbay))) sorry to hear that


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 14, 2019)

Sorry for your troubles, Ranbay


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 14, 2019)

I'm ok, been on the cards since Xmas, and i still have Badgers. (wub)


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 14, 2019)

plus i now have more room in the house to stock pile spanish food


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 14, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> plus i now have more room in the house to stock pile spanish food


i hear you've a room filled entirely with smoked paprika, dulce, picquante and something in between


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 14, 2019)

Anyways, this threads DEAD now....


----------



## Badgers (Mar 15, 2019)

Snowy


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 15, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Mar 15, 2019)

When they extend it for 3 months do you have enough images / energy to continue?


----------



## elbows (Mar 15, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> When they extend it for 3 months do you have enough images / energy to continue?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 15, 2019)

I want a four year extension so that he has to do four years of it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> When they extend it for 3 months do you have enough images / energy to continue?


Or four years.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164578



That's the kind of _might do_ attitude this country needs.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 15, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 16, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Mar 16, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164663


13-_ish_.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 16, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 16, 2019)

Keep this thead alive !


----------



## Supine (Mar 16, 2019)

Fantastic. You can even see the led by donkeys sign drive past them lol


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 16, 2019)

Nige did a few meeters of the whole March i hear.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 16, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 16, 2019)

Zoom in


----------



## Wilf (Mar 16, 2019)

A quick trawl of the papers (well, the headlines, I'm not signed up for any of the paywall lot) doesn't suggest any startling developments this weekend. No major resignation threats, rumours of new alliances coming together etc. In the absence of all that, presumably it will just be a war of attrition till Tuesday, desperately seeking the DUP, then persuading individual brexiteers to get on board.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 17, 2019)




----------



## Mordi (Mar 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164722
> 
> 
> 
> Zoom in



Jesus, what more do the Manx not want from the EU?


----------



## 2hats (Mar 17, 2019)

Mordi said:


> Jesus, what more do the Manx not want from the EU?


IoM feels like a brexit theme park. Maybe they are just enthusiastic about sharing the experience?


----------



## Mordi (Mar 17, 2019)

2hats said:


> IoM feels like a brexit theme park. Maybe they are just enthusiastic about sharing the experience?



It's been a long time since I've engaged with the lunatic fringe that is Manx nationalism (we don't really talk to that side of the family after a messy divorce) but I thought it was all about hating the 'incomers' and not encouraging them.


----------



## Libertad (Mar 17, 2019)

Mordi said:


> Jesus, what more do the Manx not want from the EU?



Tails. No imposition of European tails. To be fair I've always considered tails to be a bourgeois affectation so they may have a point.


----------



## 2hats (Mar 17, 2019)

I guess if everywhere were more like the IoM then there would be no need to go to the IoM...


----------



## Mordi (Mar 17, 2019)

2hats said:


> I guess if everywhere were more like the IoM then there would be no need to go to the IoM...



Ooh, I like this idea. I bet Sark is probably hoping that it'll persuade their feudal overlords to fuck off and all.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164722
> 
> 
> 
> Zoom in



That red flag with the yellow symbol, is that fash?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> That red flag with the yellow symbol, is that fash?


Looks like Isle of man


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 17, 2019)

South African fash had a three-arm swatika that looked like the Manx flag, but that’s not it, definitely the Manx symbol.

Weirdly I had Radio 4 on in the car yesterday and there was some posh bloke from the Isle of Man on Any Answers pushing a no deal exit, didn’t sound like a native. I’m guessing some moneyed types hole out there with their cash and want to be further beyond the reach of EU tax haven legislation.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 17, 2019)

Looks like it's going to be a much closer run thing next week. Either way it goes the margin will be small. Not sure what the desirable anticapitalist outcome is now. Rejecting the deal a 3rd time leads to lengthy extension. Accepting it will damage the UK and strengthen the EU's hand. Seems like whichever it goes now, the EU wins.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

CRI said:


> Ah bless, this must be the latest version of blokes who say they used to be sympathetic to feminism, until some women said something uppity they didn't like."



You throw out more shit than a fucking Ferguson muck-spreader. Give it a rest. It's tedious as fuck.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> You are missing the point.  Can you make a sound defence of the EU that will appeal to someone with socialist values?  That fact that the pro-EU arguments are so weak has motivated me to think more about whether leaving is really that bad.



There is no defence that can be made, that could appeal to someone with socialist values, because the EU is neoliberalism _par excellence_. It always has been, and it sees no other way to operate *because* people do not matter, as they might do in a socialism-inclined institution.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yes. We're sexist as well as racist.
> 
> You stinking rotter.



TBF, Laura wossername *PROVED* that you're a racist, mate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> There is no defence that can be made, that could appeal to someone with socialist values, because the EU is neoliberalism _par excellence_. It always has been, and it sees no other way to operate *because* people do not matter, as they might do in a socialism-inclined institution.


Yeh there could be a socialist body called the European Union. But the thing we have is formed of aggressively capitalist countries. So it is to say the least unlikely something formed by capitalist countries could ever be socialist.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

Poot said:


> That there are serious flaws is obvious to most, probably. But fucking hell, being a woman, especially a working class woman, at the mercy of Jacob Rees Mogg (for example)? Jesus.



I really don't want to imagine that ballsack in power, even as a working class male, so in a position of relative privilege compared to working class females.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 17, 2019)

Even if it were a socialist European union, its inevitable exclusion of that-which-is-not-European would be, by nature, racist.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Close but no cigar. Crane operator for the sacn



Bit of a privileged job, that. Surely a lowly "apprentice rock basket filler" position would be more apt?


----------



## killer b (Mar 17, 2019)

Reports in the telegraph today that labour will whip for the kyle/Wilson amendment on tuesday: I dont think they'll get the numbers, but it certainly raises the temperature...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Bit of a privileged job, that. Surely a lowly "apprentice rock basket filler" position would be more apt?


She has to build the crane first from what she scavenges off the beach at grytviken and she will be an unproductive former person till she does


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 17, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Bit of a privileged job, that. Surely a lowly "apprentice rock basket filler" position would be more apt?



Maybe this position on an internship would be more fitting? Tories like those.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Even if it were a socialist European union, its inevitable exclusion of that-which-is-not-European would be, by nature, racist.


so any organisation which is not universal is racist?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Even if it were a socialist European union, its inevitable exclusion of that-which-is-not-European would be, by nature, racist.



Always. The dynamic for any power bloc is always to have some force to be in opposition to. That also happens internally, with people from each nation-state attributed with very reductive stereotypes. I was talking with a Hungarian mate who said that back in the day, all Poles were secret Nazis, Russians were drunkards, Czechs were sex-mad, Romanians were all thieves, etc. 
With some - perhaps most - Euro nations, it's always been a "fear" of the east, and the south. Basically a fear of MENA people and "Turks", so Islam, too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 17, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Maybe this position on an internship would be more fitting? Tories like those.


She has to build a crane from flotsam and jetsam before she gets fed. What more do you want?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> She has to build the crane first from what she scavenges off the beach at grytviken and she will be an unproductive former person till she does



That sounds perfectly fair.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> She has to build a crane from flotsam and jetsam before she gets fed. What more do you want?



Gratitude.


----------



## NoXion (Mar 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Even if it were a socialist European union, its inevitable exclusion of that-which-is-not-European would be, by nature, racist.



In the Brave New World of rad-lib "socialism", there will no be no more cultures, nations, or any other distinct geographical identities. The entire planet will be divided up into equally-sized portions labelled with a "logical" sequence of letters and numbers, devised purely for administrative purposes. Any and all objections to this are of course racist.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Even if it were a socialist European union, its inevitable exclusion of that-which-is-not-European would be, by nature, racist.


Because race is determined by where you currently live?


----------



## andysays (Mar 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164739



Brexit: 'Short extension' needed for PM's deal


> There will have to be a "short extension" to the UK's departure date from the EU, even if MPs back Theresa May's deal, the chancellor says. Philip Hammond told the BBC's Andrew Marr it was now "physically impossible" for the UK to leave on 29 March and a delay was needed to pass legislation.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 17, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Because race is determined by where you currently live?



Where did I say that? I said a European Union which excludes non-Europeans is racist. Fortress Europe is racist and still would be if the internal politics of the EU were more socialist than they are now.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 17, 2019)




----------



## mauvais (Mar 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Where did I say that? I said a European Union which excludes non-Europeans is racist.


Mmhmm. Because race is determined by where you currently live?

Is excluding US nationals racist, for example?


----------



## belboid (Mar 17, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Mmhmm. Because race is determined by where you currently live?
> 
> Is excluding US nationals racist, for example?


Fortress Europe isn’t about excluding Americans tho, is it?  We all know what it’s about, and Flavour is quite right.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> Fortress Europe isn’t about excluding Americans tho, is it?  We all know what it’s about, and Flavour is quite right.


Don't get me wrong, it _is_ racist, but the specific argument is bobbins. It would mean never being able to do anything in a local or national interest.


----------



## maomao (Mar 17, 2019)

If the deal goes through with the Irish backstop Varadkar should legalise all drugs just for the lolz.


----------



## A380 (Mar 17, 2019)

People do know the EU includes parts of the Americas and Africa don’t they?  (And technically a part of Asia too...)


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Mar 18, 2019)

He had trainers on, not walking boots. I noted.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 18, 2019)

NoXion said:


> In the Brave New World of rad-lib "socialism", there will no be no more cultures, nations, or any other distinct geographical identities. The entire planet will be divided up into equally-sized portions labelled with a "logical" sequence of letters and numbers, devised purely for administrative purposes. Any and all objections to this are of course racist.



Redutio ad absurdem of the month award goes to...


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164841


The long quite short walk to freedom.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The long quite short walk to freedom.


The long bus ride to westminster


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> He had trainers on, not walking boots. I noted.


Flogged the walking boots already, advertising works


----------



## killer b (Mar 18, 2019)

I wonder if anything will be heard from the march for brexit, now the launch is over?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> I wonder if anything will be heard from the march for brexit, now the launch is over?


Today 13 marchers, lost in rural England, were rescued after taking a wrong turning out of Middlesborough. They are all suffering from hypothermia


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 18, 2019)

"A Lost Marcher - the first so far in 2023 - was today found living in a shack he had built in fenland near King's Lynn. After he was lured out with food, the man assaulted a BBC reporter, believing him to be a Frenchman. After being informed that Brexit negotiations were ongoing, the man returned to the shack and refused to leave."


----------



## pesh (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## klang (Mar 18, 2019)

sorry, what is this march everybody is on about?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 18, 2019)

littleseb said:


> sorry, what is this march everybody is on about?



Four dozen brexit bores walking from Middlesborough to London, to illustrate the fact that some people are never happy even when they get exactly what they wanted.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Four dozen brexit bores walking from Middlesborough to London, to illustrate the fact that some people are never happy even when they get exactly what they wanted.



You would expect them to be skipping and whistling all the way.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Four dozen brexit bores walking from Middlesborough to London, to illustrate the fact that some people are never happy even when they get exactly what they wanted.



Tbf brexit might not happen and it's legitimate to try and pressure the commons to make it happen, though   the march is probably having the opposite effect, making it look like it will only piss off about a dozen moaners.


----------



## andysays (Mar 18, 2019)

Master of ironic understatement:

Brexit: Jeremy Hunt says a 'lot more work' needed to get deal through


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Master of ironic understatement:
> 
> Brexit: Jeremy Hunt says a 'lot more work' needed to get deal through


like a different deal for starters


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Tbf brexit might not happen and it's legitimate to try and pressure the commons to make it happen, though   the march is probably having the opposite effect, making it look like it will only piss off about a dozen moaners.


there'll be more than a dozen people moaning about auld farage somewhere in the countryside even as we speak, if they still have over a dozen.


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

No surprises here:


Although he forgot to add at the end, "for me and my investments," and he had plenty of free characters, too!


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

Interesting piece here about this loathsome man.

The Chaotic Triumph of Arron Banks, the “Bad Boy of Brexit”


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 18, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Tbf brexit might not happen and it's legitimate to try and pressure the commons to make it happen, though   the march is probably having the opposite effect, making it look like it will only piss off about a dozen moaners.


Definitely. Let's see how many make it all the way. My fear would be that there will be a final confrontation between the BMB lot and the PV lot. Idiots dressed in England flags vs idiots dressed in EU flags. I'm in neither camp, but I would want to voice my opposition to brainlessly crashing out.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 18, 2019)

A land battle version of the thames naval engagement where geldof's flotilla of hope clashed with farage's hate barges. Naked Remain Oxford Right Wing Economist to referee


----------



## ohmyliver (Mar 18, 2019)

The Battle of Portaloo

*eta*
also


> geldof's flotilla of hope clashed with farage's hate barges


Sounds like something from a Warhammer 21C expansion pack.


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

Complete coincidence that this airhead has agreed to vote in favour of May's "deal," I'm sure. 

*£21.7 million for North Cheshire Garden Village announced by Chancellor Philip Hammond*





> The £21.7 million will be spent on road improvement works, utilities update and remediation.
> 
> The cash injection – the second in as many months – was announced today, Wednesday, by Chancellor Philip Hammond in his Spring Statement to Parliament.
> 
> Tatton MP Esther McVey welcomed the announcement saying ensuring infrastructure was in place is key.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 18, 2019)

CRI said:


> Complete coincidence that this airhead has agreed to vote in favour of May's "deal," I'm sure.
> 
> *£21.7 million for North Cheshire Garden Village announced by Chancellor Philip Hammond*
> 
> View attachment 164866



TBF that's been in the pipeline for sometime, it was one of the 14 garden village schemes announced by Government back in January 2017.


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF that's been in the pipeline for sometime, it was one of the 14 garden village schemes announced by Government back in January 2017.


Oh, that's fine then.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Today 13 marchers, lost in rural England, were rescued after taking a wrong turning out of Middlesborough. They are all suffering from hypothermia


They were last heard of at the Blue Bell in Acklam, a fairly anonymous boozer in the south of the town. Thought they might have ended up in one of the town centre pubs, particularly the 2 were the fash have met up in before demos.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164836




TOLD YOU


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 18, 2019)

PM's office is not happy that they didn't have any notice of what the Speaker was going to say, oh dear.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> PM's office is not happy that they didn't have any notice of what the Speaker was going to say, oh dear.


everyone's happy in P'sM's office


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

Well, third time won't be lucky for May, looks like.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

CRI said:


> Well, third time won't be lucky for May, looks like.
> 
> View attachment 164877


Airhead


----------



## brogdale (Mar 18, 2019)

Just looked up prorogation; seems to involve Brenda and her kahzi council.


----------



## CRI (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Airhead


----------



## Wookey (Mar 18, 2019)

CRI said:


> Well, third time won't be lucky for May, looks like.
> 
> View attachment 164877



That's inspired!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just looked up prorogation; seems to involve Brenda and her kahzi council.


I saw them play at the marquee once, supporting ruddy yurts

Like a London version of Geoffrey oi!cott


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 18, 2019)

Wookey said:


> That's inspired!!


You're very easily impressed


----------



## mauvais (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

Is he still doing his impressions?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 18, 2019)

mauvais said:


> View attachment 164896


That’s them snookered, then.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 18, 2019)

I can’t wait to see what the papers make of Bercow tomorrow


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s them snookered, then.


Danny, did you just do the most up to date popular culture ref you've ever done? Of course it's from the 80s.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Danny, did you just do the most up to date popular culture ref you've ever done? Of course it's from the 80s.


I’ve got some great George Best material too.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

Gives you an insight into the wholehearted bullshit at the centre of power. Bercow spends the afternoon ruling out a 3rd go on the basis of precedent, events going back to 1604 and the rest. Now the guardian are reporting the EU might give her a 3 month extension which would make the bill she brings back 'fundamentally different'. So, basically, altering the date wipes out 400 years of tradition.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is he still doing his impressions?


"I'd like to do Steve Davis, but wouldn't we all"

Fuck, where did that come from


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Gives you an insight into the wholehearted bullshit at the centre of power. Bercow spends the afternoon ruling out a 3rd go on the basis of precedent, events going back to 1604 and the rest. Now the guardian are reporting the EU might give her a 3 month extension which would make the bill she brings back 'fundamentally different'. So, basically, altering the date wipes out 400 years of tradition.


That was my first thought when this happened. It's her only move now. Zugzwang.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

John Bercow on his decision to defend Parliamentary precedent:


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 18, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I can’t wait to see what the papers make of Bercow tomorrow



They'll put him all over the front pages which is exactly what the egotistical cunt wants. Please don't imagine for a second that he's done this out of a sense of fairness, justice or the right thing to do. He's done it out of self-promotion. Like everything he's ever done.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)

Brexit is Fyre 2019 lol etc


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Brexit is Fyre 2019 lol etc


What does that mean? (And don't know if it's just me but that clip doesn't play)


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What does that mean? (And don't know if it's just me but that clip doesn't play)



Fyre Festival - Wikipedia


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> They'll put him all over the front pages which is exactly what the egotistical cunt wants. Please don't imagine for a second that he's done this out of a sense of fairness, justice or the right thing to do. He's done it out of self-promotion. Like everything he's ever done.


Regardless of his motives for which I suspect you may be right, he's totally pissed on May's chips from which I have derived a certain amount of grim amusement.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 18, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

Rabid once socialist now nationalists shouting in support of the speaker of the house. Fucking loons.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Mar 18, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> They'll put him all over the front pages which is exactly what the egotistical cunt wants. Please don't imagine for a second that he's done this out of a sense of fairness, justice or the right thing to do. He's done it out of self-promotion. Like everything he's ever done.


Oh I couldn’t give two fucks for his motivation, this whole shitshow is now nothing but a farce and he’s just made it funnier.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Regardless of his motives for which I suspect you may be right, he's totally pissed on May's chips from which I have derived a certain amount of grim amusement.


I’m disappointed in you


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

Maybe half a point given back for not calling him Mr Speaker though in the manner of someone gearing up for a massive wank.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2019)

In this shitshow you have to get your laughs when you can.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Rabid once socialist now nationalists shouting in support of the speaker of the house. Fucking loons.



Rabid Headbangers in favour of a No Deal Brexit speaking in favour of the speaker of the house on the comments section of the Daily Express. Fucking loons.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> In this shitshow you have to get your laughs when you can.


Could you not just get a fix from the RT fucker Johnathon Pie till things improve, rather than faceplant yerself in the actual sewer!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s them snookered, then.



what a load of balls


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Airhead


Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

Why the fuck  do people read the comments section of tabloids? Surely when you get to the sort of age most Urbans must be you’d learn that it’s just more productive to engage with people face to face and you get their better side that way, which you can nurture a bit. 



Ming said:


> Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.


Even if that’s true, you’re underestimating the extent to which pro eu fucks are putting people off this forum, and the extent to which BA balances that bile out and keeps us believing there’s such a thing as fucking wc/internationalist solidarity in the world.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

I better shut the window I’m being dramatic


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Could you not just get a fix from the RT fucker Johnathon Pie till things improve, rather than faceplant yerself in the actual sewer!


I fail to see how that is planting my face in the sewer. I have little or no time for Bercow, his personality and attendant failings plus his political persuasion... But as I said, grim amusement is to be had here at least for me. There isn't much else to be had here is there?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I fail to see how that is planting my face in the sewer. I have little or no time for Bercow, his personality and attendant failings plus his political persuasion... But as I said, grim amusement is to be had here at least for me. There isn't much else to be had here is there?


If you get a mirror you’ll note the sewer muck evident on your face when you just said them things


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Why the fuck  do people read the comments section of tabloids? Surely when you get to the sort of age most Urbans must be you’d learn that it’s just more productive to engage with people face to face and you get their better side that way, which you can nurture a bit.
> 
> 
> Even if that’s true, you’re underestimating the extent to which pro eu fucks are putting people off this forum, and the extent to which BA balances that bile out and keeps us believing there’s such a thing as fucking wc/internationalist solidarity in the world.


It’s a complicated world we live in. The price we’ll pay this month is too high. Who do you think will take control in the UK after Brexit? It’ll just be an opportunity for capital to further reinforce it’s grip. Less regulation less taxation. Remains the lesser of two evils in my opinion. You cant reform an organization if you’re not in it.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Why the fuck  do people read the comments section of tabloids?



I have little interest in the leader writers of the Daily Express but I do find it amusing to laugh at the stupidity of their readers.  At the same time I do also wonder what I would say if I ever came across somebody who read the Daily Express and how I could speak to them in such a way that they would change their views.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Even if that’s true, you’re underestimating the extent to which pro eu fucks are putting people off this forum, and the extent to which BA balances that bile out and keeps us believing there’s such a thing as fucking wc/internationalist solidarity in the world.



It's demonstrably true. Attitudes and language can put people off, no matter how valid the core message might be.

Bile plus bile does not equal no bile. It's not like hate formulaic equations is it? 

Bile plus bile equals lots of bile, and people with stuff to say are consequently disinhibited from posting. Which remains the biggest shame and most regrettable loss in this forum imo. It's highly elitist.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 18, 2019)

Wookey said:


> It's demonstrably true. Attitudes and language can put people off, no matter how valid the core message might be.
> 
> Bile plus bile does not equal no bile. It's not like hate formulaic equations is it?
> 
> Bile plus bile equals lots of bile, and people with stuff to say are consequently disinhibited from posting. Which remains the biggest shame and most regrettable loss in this forum imo. It's highly elitist.



Do you think your casual racism puts people off?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.


Who used the term first, do you think?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you think your casual racism puts people off?



Allegations like that aren't called for. You need to grow up sir.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2019)

Thoughts anyone?


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Who used the term first, do you think?


I don’t know.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Thoughts anyone?
> 
> View attachment 164924



I watched that and didn't quite understand it. Looks like he's going totally rogue then.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

CRI said:


> Complete coincidence that this airhead has agreed to vote in favour of May's "deal," I'm sure.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

Is Brexit actually going to happen?

almost certainly no, but we've got to find a way to put people back in their humane skin. People have lost their minds over this.


----------



## Crispy (Mar 18, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I can’t wait to see what the papers make of Bercow tomorrow




HE IS THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA


----------



## teqniq (Mar 18, 2019)

Like something out of Game of Thrones, in a beige sort way.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> I don’t know.


You need to do a bit more research then bosco. Take your time. Work out what's going on. Or jump in half informed like an idiot


----------



## Sue (Mar 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’ve got some great George Best material too.



I saw Jackie Mason in his (allegedly) final, final farewell tour maybe three or four years ago (long story, free ticket, eye opening in a very bad way) and he was still making 'jokes' about the head of the Israeli armed forces during the Six-Day War...


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

Crispy said:


> View attachment 164926
> 
> HE IS THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA



The core Daily Express readership is backing John Bercow and opposing the Daily Express leader writers line.  The readers are right for the wrong reasons.

The leader writers are truly mistaken.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.



he has a go now and then, but most people just LOL and post pics or links with nothing else said. honestly not worth the wear and tear on the keyboard.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> At the same time I do also wonder what I would say if I ever came across somebody who read the Daily Express and how I could speak to them in such a way that they would change their views.


WELL FUCK ME I’M INSPIRED!


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> WELL FUCK ME I’M INSPIRED!



I haven't started my long walk and my long talk with you yet.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> I haven't started my long walk and my long talk with you yet.


Even doctors are taught (well these days) you never stop updating your knowledge. There’s no way you can be all caught up in order to be stopped and parked at the daily express threads. If you’re such a fucking mentor say something, don’t just tell us you are clever.


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You need to do a bit more research then bosco. Take your time. Work out what's going on. Or jump in half informed like an idiot


I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th. It'll hurt the vast majority of the UK's citizens. Right wing power will entrench (sorry...no space for the left to rise...the tabloids'll take care of that). And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th.



Tenner says it won't.


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tenner says it won't.


Is that 20 now? To the server fund.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tenner says it won't.


I’ll hand you another 20 if we can split the winnings


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Tenner says it won't.


Not trying to change the bet or anything but if they delay it by like 3 days do i still lose?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.


What’s your point here? Will you be soaring high above us off the back of a prediction come true? Cause surely the last two years has taught us all bets are pretty much off.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

There is no market but i will offer up £20 if exit on March 29.  i don't think it will happen


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2019)

What does the betting say? So wrong in the past.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th. It'll hurt the vast majority of the UK's citizens. Right wing power will entrench (sorry...no space for the left to rise...the tabloids'll take care of that). And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.


Here is what happened. You didn't know the background of what what going on. So you posted both in ignorance and arrogance that what you thought was happening was more important than reality. 


Thanks for coming back with the refreshing view though


----------



## Wilf (Mar 18, 2019)

If I was to get into some kind of public administration mindset (help, help! Don't let me get trapped in here!) Bercow does seem to be seeking to 'rebalance' the executive and legislature. He's also doing it on the biggest issues of the decade. But as always, he prefers the drama and keeps himself centre stage. He's not one for putting in the patient hard work and in all of this he's playing a fairly blatant remain hand. Oh and lets not forget he's an expenses swindling Monday Club Tory with a side order of bullying.


----------



## Ming (Mar 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> What’s your point here? Will you be soaring high above us off the back of a prediction come true? Cause surely the last two years has taught us all bets are pretty much off.


My point remains this is a planned situation. By the Tories and their financial backers to change the UK for the foreseeable to their advantage. And no i'm fucked either way. If i win my bet i get a massive drop in the exchange rate which is terrible as i have money in the UK i want to bring to Canada. Or if i lose my bet it'll be 20 quid down and then i'll have to make excuses.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 18, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Here is what happened. You didn't know the background of what what going on. So you posted both in ignorance and arrogance that what you thought was happening was more important than reality.


Your cryptic stuff even evades the rum fuelled observer help


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Is that 20 now? To the server fund.



Did I already bet you that?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 18, 2019)

Ming said:


> Not trying to change the bet or anything but if they delay it by like 3 days do i still lose?



Yes. You said 29th.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th. It'll hurt the vast majority of the UK's citizens. Right wing power will entrench (sorry...no space for the left to rise...the tabloids'll take care of that). And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.





HoratioCuthbert said:


> Your cryptic stuff even evades the rum fuelled observer help


I said airhead, quoting CRI. He didn't know and now looks like a duck. Total duck.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Here is what happened. You didn't know the background of what what going on. So you posted both in ignorance and arrogance that what you thought was happening was more important than reality.
> 
> 
> Thanks for coming back with the refreshing view though


Well all sarcasm aside...We'll see.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I said airhead, quoting CRI. He didn't know and now looks like a duck. Total duck.



You ok hun?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Well all sarcasm aside...We'll see.


Will we fuck.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 164930


If you repost that or something substantively similar tomorrow...


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Here is what happened. You didn't know the background of what what going on. So you posted both in ignorance and arrogance that what you thought was happening was more important than reality.
> 
> 
> Thanks for coming back with the refreshing view though


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes. You said 29th.


OK. A bets a bet. A bit like this one which is in no way related to what we're talking about.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> OK. A bets a bet. A bit like this one which is in no way related to what we're talking about.




Which bet? Did I already make this bet with you? I made a bet with someone and fuck knows who it was.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If you repost that or something substantively similar tomorrow...



9 days tomorrow hun


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which bet? Did I already make this bet with you? I made a bet with someone and fuck knows who it was.



It was me, £50


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Oh god Corbyn literally said on Channel 4 news "Nobody voted to bring in chlorinated chicken from the USA".

I can't be arsed to defend even the possibilities he represents any more.

E2A: Sky News sorry bloody youtube autoplay drip feeding me Murdoch news


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> OK. A bets a bet. A bit like this one which is in no way related to what we're talking about.



You're confused if you think Farage and his corrupt hedge fund mates are in control of the brexit process.


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I said airhead, quoting CRI. He didn't know and now looks like a duck. Total duck.


Yeah. Major victory.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> It was me, £50



nah I wouldn't have bet that much and you mostly only post countdown images.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> It was me, £50


The speaker may have to take advice.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The speaker may have to take advice.



Mr Speaker can you advise?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> nah I wouldn't have bet that much and you mostly only post countdown images.



Everyone needs a hobby.


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're confused if you think Farage and his corrupt hedge fund mates are in control of the brexit process.


Confused. I suppose i am.


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

One last thing (!). The leavers on the left are going to condemn the 'not wealthy' in the UK to a really shitty future. And we all know why. If anyone thinks that that would create a space for radical ideas to flourish you're full of shit.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 9 days tomorrow hun


Might be like when we adopted the Gregorian Calendar and a few days disappeared. We need you to keep an eye on things - *DON'T LET BREXIT STEAL OUR DAYS! *


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Seriously I think we should elect Wilf speaker of the thread so he can rule out of order any points which are substantively the same as points which have already been rejected.


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2019)

Let's say EU leaders refuse an extention on Thursday, possibly next week. Why? Because nothing's changed. May has nothing new to put to a vote.

Who still thinks the government will cancel article 50? In that scenario, I 65% don't think it will happen. Not via a vote, neither via government unilateral action. So crash out on 29th.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> One last thing (!). The leavers on the left are going to condemn the 'not wealthy' in the UK to a really shitty future. And we all know why. If anyone thinks that that would create a space for radical ideas to flourish you're full of shit.


I'm not a left leaver, because I don't think there was an ever a Lexit campaign or likely outcome. But blaming the non-liberal left for attacks on the working class is astonishing. Of all the groups and forces in play, y'know, I think there might be a few other culprits.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

xenon said:


> Let's say EU leaders refuse an extention on Thursday, possibly next week. Why? Because nothing's changed. May has nothing new to put to a vote.
> 
> Who still thinks the government will cancel article 50? In that scenario, I 65% don't think it will happen. Not via a vote, neither via government unilateral action. So crash out on 29th.



Sure but EU leaders won't refuse an extension.

Oh god here we go again...MR SPEAKER!


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2019)

has anyone mentioned the NI border issue yet?


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> condemn the 'not wealthy' in the UK to a really shitty future


towing the yacht we could have won away, forever.


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not a left leaver, because I don't think there was an ever a Lexit campaign or likely outcome. But blaming the non-liberal left for attacks on the working class is astonishing. Of all the groups and forces in play, y'know, I think there might be a few other culprits.


Stop with the hyperbole. Capital will royally fuck all kinds of regulations protecting all kinds of things and taxation (and hence the welfare state) will be slashed to the bone as soon as they can post Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> towing the yacht we could have won away, forever.



I coulda won a yacht, too, if it wasn't for those pesky lefties...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Stop with the hyperbole. Capital will royally fuck all kinds of regulations protecting all kinds of things and taxation (and hence the welfare state) will be slashed to the bone as soon as they can post Brexit.



If that's true why isn't capital doing that alrea...oh fuck it just make sure you pay your tenner to the server fund on March 30th please.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Seriously I think we should elect Wilf speaker of the thread so he can rule out of order any points which are substantively the same as points which have already been rejected.


Problem would be, I wouldn't fancy eating swan and all the other rubbish scran that speaker type felllers have to eat.  I will though promise to tell several posters to STFU on this thread.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Problem would be, I wouldn't fancy eating swan and all the other rubbish scran that speaker type felllers have to eat.  I will though promise to tell several posters to STFU on this thread.



I'll eat the swans for you.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Stop with the hyperbole. Capital will royally fuck all kinds of regulations protecting all kinds of things and taxation (and hence the welfare state) will be slashed to the bone as soon as they can post Brexit.


And right on cue...


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> towing the yacht we could have won away, forever.


It's not what we'd like though is it? I always say if you're going that way (points left) i'm with you. If you're going that way (right) i'm against you. Broadly speaking. I'm into collectivism, redistribution and regulation. Very broadly speaking. But there are moments in history when things go decisively one way or the other. 1948 was one for the left and i think this is one for the right.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 19, 2019)

900 pages before I wake up you watch.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

Jim Bowen - _The Speaker_
Period till the 29th March - _the time it takes for board to spin round_
Bully's Special Prize - _great_ _trade deals with everybody, £350m for the NHS, free cats_
Look at What You Could Have Won -_ MV3_
Tankards - _Farage_


----------



## philosophical (Mar 19, 2019)

xenon said:


> has anyone mentioned the NI border issue yet?



Funny you should mention that. Seeing as how the UK is physically joined to the EU on the island of Ireland how is it supposed to leave?
Like voting that men should experience pregnancy and childbirth, vote for it all you like but it can't be done (as far as I know anyway).


----------



## JimW (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> My point remains this is a planned situation. By the Tories and their financial backers to change the UK for the foreseeable to their advantage...


Thought the consensus even among remainers was this wasn't planned at all, Cameron massively miscalculated with an eye only on internal Tory factions.


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 19, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Funny you should mention that.



 speak of the devils favourite point...


----------



## DotCommunist (Mar 19, 2019)

'48 came not to condemn capitalism but to save it


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

JimW said:


> Thought the consensus even among remainers was this wasn't planned at all, Cameron massively miscalculated with an eye only on internal Tory factions.


Can't disagree with the internal factions bit. I'm going to reach here which means i'm easy pickin's...however....I don't think the Tory leave crew were that enthusiastic and not because they thought they'd win. It's not in their entitled mindset to give a fuck about the oiks is it. And any chance to reduce tax and regulation is great, right (from their mind set)? So campaign poorly to deliberately lose. I know i'll get chewed for that but's my honest opinion. Also a lot of external factions had an interest (Russia, Robert Mercer/Koch brothers, Cambridge Analytica, Hedge funds connected to Tory politicians (JRM and Farage that i know about)). Quite a few really.


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> '48 came not to condemn capitalism but to save it


Keynes right?


----------



## CRI (Mar 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I said airhead, quoting CRI. He didn't know and now looks like a duck. Total duck.


I called Esther McVey an airhead, so YOU called ME an airhead in response.  Charming!

You may admire her as an intelligent, well-informed, effective parliamentarian, and wish her success in her forthcoming bid to be leader of the Conservative party.  

I think she's an airhead, among other uncharitable descriptors I could use.  So there.

MP 'regrets' memorial service tweet
Esther McVey: new welfare minister criticised for defending rise of food banks in 2013
#McVeyFacts trends on Twitter after Brexiteer tweets false claim about EU


----------



## Ming (Mar 19, 2019)

CRI said:


> I called Esther McVey an airhead, so YOU called ME an airhead in response.  Charming!
> 
> You may admire her as an intelligent, well-informed, effective parliamentarian, and wish her success in her forthcoming bid to be leader of the Conservative party.
> 
> ...


She used to be my local MP. And she lied to my face over the partisan nature of a petition she was trying to get me to sign over local post office closures.


----------



## elbows (Mar 19, 2019)

Crispy said:


> HE IS THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA


Also...


----------



## collectordave (Mar 19, 2019)

Is that common sense I see peeping through?

Banned from telling the same joke three times, brilliant a well established principle employed all over europe in every bar and cafe why should the Westminster bar be any different?

I thought it would be nice to see the british government getting on with business but then I could not think of anything they do except cock everything up.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.


This is absolute gubbins. In fact it shows the complete misunderstanding at the heart of some on here. It's the same type on nonsense that leads you to make Cameron in favour in leaving the EU. Absolutely no analysis just a division into "good" and "bad" teams, and my enemy's enemy is my friend. Despite it being pointed out to you time and time again that such _politics_ is not just false but actually dangerous.

Leaving aside her appalling personal behaviour (smearing people as racists on a false basis), CRI's politics are hostile to mine, to butchers, to those of us who are socialists, communists and anarchists.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Stop with the hyperbole. Capital will royally fuck all kinds of regulations protecting all kinds of things and taxation (and hence the welfare state) will be slashed to the bone as soon as they can post Brexit.


Yes  down with hyperbole


----------



## andysays (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Charming. Do you know you put people off posting in this forum? We’re supposed to be broadly on the same side. Yes the EU is a neo-liberal organization which fucked Greece. Which is bad. But stop being such a dick.


1. BA was clearly and deliberately echoing CRI 's earlier use of the term 'airhead'

2. Dunno what 'side' you're on, but I'm definitely not on the same side as CRI


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> It's not what we'd like though is it? I always say if you're going that way (points left) i'm with you. If you're going that way (right) i'm against you. Broadly speaking. I'm into collectivism, redistribution and regulation. Very broadly speaking. But there are moments in history when things go decisively one way or the other. 1948 was one for the left and i think this is one for the right.


And in this politics as a badge, as an identity, which side are TIG, the LibDems and the CBI on? They goodies or baddies? After all they all favour Remain, or perhaps, like Cameron, they are secret Leavers?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

The people who complain the most vociferously about being called drunk are drunk. And the people who complain most loudly about being named airhead? What might they be?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The people who complain the most vociferously about being called drunk are drunk. And the people who complain most loudly about being named airhead? What might they be?



Empty vessels make the most noise. But it's wicked to mock the afflicted.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Mar 19, 2019)

Just catching up on this thread.. huh?! Why would David Cameron secretly favour leave? Is this similar to the “novikchok poisoning was false flag by uk govt” reasoning? Or am I missing something?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 19, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Just catching up on this thread.. huh?! Why would David Cameron secretly favour leave? Is this similar to the “novikchok poisoning was false flag by uk govt” reasoning? Or am I missing something?


He wouldn't, and yes it is similar to that but it's a view Ming has repeatedly made


Ming said:


> Can't back it up with anything, that's true. Just a feeling. A no-deal Brexit is a hell of an opportunity if your already wealthy and it'll enable them to push further getting rid of the welfare state.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Just catching up on this thread.. huh?! Why would David Cameron secretly favour leave? Is this similar to the “novikchok poisoning was false flag by uk govt” reasoning? Or am I missing something?


You’re not missing anything. We’ve had that view put on the thread several times before. 

It comes, I think, via this reasoning: 

Farage and BJ and the ERG etc are wild eyed zealots and neocons and worse (which is correct). Therefore they’re the bad guys. (Also correct). 

Therefore I oppose them on this issue and others opposing them must be my fellow travellers (faulty logic).

Therefore bad guys like the CBI, the British Chambers of Commerce, the banks and financial institutions, the majority of Tory MPs and all those others I normally wouldn’t consider “fellow travellers” must be lying when they say they support Remain, because  Remain is a progressive stance and they’re all reactionary. (Faulty Logic step two).

It comes from a failure to correctly position the issue within existing ideological and economic structures, and from the fallacy “my enemy’s enemy is my friend”.


----------



## xenon (Mar 19, 2019)

And also that capitalist  institutes and interests,  aren’t embodied in a monolithic whole  without antagonistic motivations


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

xenon said:


> And also that capitalist  institutes and interests,  aren’t embodied in a monolithic whole  without antagonistic motivations


Absolutely.  The EU is beloved of the neoliberal project (because capital likes to cross borders), but UK neoconservatives tend to be Euroskeptic etc. But to imagine that neoconservatism is the majority ideology in the Parliamentary Tory Party is a huge error. 

(It’s also worth remembering that the division between neocon and neolib is not binary, and a sliding scale between the two might exist in any one given individual).


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It comes, I think, via this reasoning:
> 
> Farage and BJ and the ERG etc are wild eyed zealots and neocons and worse (which is correct). Therefore they’re the bad guys. (Also correct).
> 
> ...





danny la rouge said:


> (It’s also worth remembering that the division between neocon and neolib is not binary, and a sliding scale between the two might exist in any one given individual).


And the same thinking in reverse leads to the attempt to eliminate the ideological differences and divisions between left-liberalism, social democracy and socialism (we're all on the same side, we all want the same things)


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And the same thinking in reverse leads to the attempt to eliminate the ideological differences and divisions between left-liberalism, social democracy and socialism (we're all on the same side, we all want the same things)


Yup. And the differences are also strategic. 

I think campaigning for Corbynite Labour is a waste of energy. A Corbyn-led government, if it ever happens, might be marginally better than May (the hyperbole that calls him Marxist is so far wide of the mark as to be ludicrous), but because you can’t have socialism in one country (because capitalism is global, so opposition has to be global), he wouldn’t get away with anything the international capitalist institutions and so on couldn’t swallow. (David Harvey in a recent podcast gives the example of Mitterand having to reverse hard on various manifesto commitments once in power). This is called “the realities”  and realpolitik.

So while I might (_might_) cast a vote for a political party for some tactical reason, going further than that: campaigning for one, joining one, is a diversion. Even when they have good intentions, they get coopted and subsumed in the establishment. Look at the history of the Labour Party. (And if you think Atlee is a shining beacon, remember the welfare state and the NHS were mooted before he took power by others in the establishment, were supported by Tory governments and the post War Consensus after he left power, and were in fact a compromise that capital felt it had to concede to - small l - labour in the wake of the War. It was a necessary pressure value, in the view of capital. It came from years of working class activity and pressure, not because of one GE result. That result was an effect not a cause). 

Reduction of politics into electoral politics is misdirection and saps useful energy.


So, while you can’t have “socialism in one country”, the working class can, if organised, cohesive and strong, win useful concessions at historic points of crisis.  The energy therefore needs to go into working class organisation and activity.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 19, 2019)

Yep, total agreement with that from me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. And the differences are also strategic.
> 
> I think campaigning for Corbynite Labour is a waste of energy. A Corbyn-led government, if it ever happens, might be marginally better than May (the hyperbole that calls him Marxist is so far wide of the mark as to be ludicrous), but because you can’t have socialism in one country (because capitalism is global, so opposition has to be global), he wouldn’t get away with anything the international capitalist institutions and so on couldn’t swallow. (David Harvey in a recent podcast gives the example of Mitterand having to reverse hard on various manifesto commitments once in power). This is called “the realities”  and realpolitik.
> 
> ...


tbh you see labour in power up and down the land, and their activities don't suggest that a national labour government would be any more progressive than, say, the labour party in local government in hackney.


----------



## Sue (Mar 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh you see labour in power up and down the land, and their activities don't suggest that a national labour government would be any more progressive than, say, the labour party in local government in hackney.



For those unfamiliar with Hackney Council, there are 55 Labour councillors and five Tories so Labour can do whatever they like really. Stuff like this, for example. 

'Zero affordable housing' scheme for Kingsland Fire Station site approved by planning committee - Hackney Citizen


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

Sue said:


> For those unfamiliar with Hackney Council, there are 55 Labour councillors and five Tories so Labour can do whatever they like really. Stuff like this, for example.
> 
> 'Zero affordable housing' scheme for Kingsland Fire Station site approved by planning committee - Hackney Citizen


not to mention what former mayor jules pipe - now in charge of planning in london - did to the haggerston estate, the colville estate etc etc etc ad nauseam

it's interesting that two people from hackney now occupy high office in the mayor's administration, the nefandous pipe in charge of planning and the equally unspeakable sophie linden in charge of mopac, the mayor's office on policing and crime


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 19, 2019)

Sue said:


> For those unfamiliar with Hackney Council, there are 55 Labour councillors and five Tories so Labour can do whatever they like really. Stuff like this, for example.
> 
> 'Zero affordable housing' scheme for Kingsland Fire Station site approved by planning committee - Hackney Citizen



True everywhere. Any party that has a stranglehold on the local authority and no prospect of ever losing it will inevitably turn corrupt.

Here our long-serving council leader, an evangelical gentrifier and friend of dodgy business interests, is stepping down because he's likely to lose his support after the next elections anyway. There's a strong possibility some momentum-approved bod will take his place. My hopes for this change improving anything are not high.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> True everywhere. Any party that has a stranglehold on the local authority and no prospect of ever losing it will inevitably turn corrupt.
> 
> Here our long-serving council leader, an evangelical gentrifier and friend of dodgy business interests, is stepping down because he's likely to lose his support after the next elections anyway. There's a strong possibility some momentum-approved bod will take his place. My hopes for this change improving anything are not high.


meet the new boss...


----------



## Wilf (Mar 19, 2019)

In passing, I wonder if Bercow could _just about_ have done May a favour. Was looking like she would have lost mv3 or would have looked even weaker had she pulled it. Now the EU will gift her an extension, allowing her to claim that what she's putting in to parliament is 'different', give her more time to bribe the dup, push a few more MPs to the point where they cave in etc.  She's clearly not resigning and this might ultimately keep things in her hands (at least versus parliament - it probably weakens her further against the _EU_). Have a vague memory that we might have ended up with 'EQs' next week, some kind of procedure to float different options (?). Does the 'constitutional crisis' avoid May having to face that?


----------



## two sheds (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. And the differences are also strategic.
> 
> I think campaigning for Corbynite Labour is a waste of energy. A Corbyn-led government, if it ever happens, might be marginally better than May (the hyperbole that calls him Marxist is so far wide of the mark as to be ludicrous), but because you can’t have socialism in one country (because capitalism is global, so opposition has to be global), he wouldn’t get away with anything the international capitalist institutions and so on couldn’t swallow. (David Harvey in a recent podcast gives the example of Mitterand having to reverse hard on various manifesto commitments once in power). This is called “the realities”  and realpolitik.
> 
> ...



Yes I'd largely agree. When's it coming though? In the meantime if people want to organize for Corbyn to get in and they see it as a good use of their time then I think that's fine for them. I don't see it as an either/or but a both/and. 

And £500 billion investment in infrastructure and people may not bring back the PWSC but it could alleviate some of the worst conditions that people are living under. That's important.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

two sheds said:


> Yes I'd largely agree. When's it coming though? In the meantime if people want to organize for Corbyn to get in and they see it as a good use of their time then I think that's fine for them. I don't see it as an either/or but a both/and.
> 
> And £500 billion investment in infrastructure and people may not bring back the PWSC but it could alleviate some of the worst conditions that people are living under. That's important.


I didn’t want to give the impression that I was telling others what to do: I was explaining what my own analysis was.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. And the differences are also strategic.
> 
> I think campaigning for Corbynite Labour is a waste of energy. A Corbyn-led government, if it ever happens, might be marginally better than May (the hyperbole that calls him Marxist is so far wide of the mark as to be ludicrous), but because you can’t have socialism in one country (because capitalism is global, so opposition has to be global), he wouldn’t get away with anything the international capitalist institutions and so on couldn’t swallow. (David Harvey in a recent podcast gives the example of Mitterand having to reverse hard on various manifesto commitments once in power). This is called “the realities”  and realpolitik.
> 
> ...



Agree with most of this, but if _one _of the ways that the working class was getting organised was through the Labour Party, would you then see electoral campaigning as part of that? Not saying that's what's happening now as Momentum/Labour Left seem mostly focused on the internetz and passing resolutions in meetings that I would guess are very boring.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with most of this, but if _one _of the ways that the working class was getting organised was through the Labour Party, would you then see electoral campaigning as part of that? Not saying that's what's happening now as Momentum/Labour Left seem mostly focused on the internetz and passing resolutions in meetings that I would guess are very boring.



There's a fair amount of canvassing going on down here, and regular stalls in Truro to talk to people. They have community organizing courses too, but not sure how that's followed up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

two sheds said:


> There's a fair amount of canvassing going on down here, and regular stalls in Truro to talk to people. They have community organizing courses too, but not sure how that's followed up.



To be fair if the extent of that canvassing/stall stuff is to convince people to vote for Labour I don't think that counts.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree with most of this, but if _one _of the ways that the working class was getting organised was through the Labour Party, would you then see electoral campaigning as part of that? Not saying that's what's happening now as Momentum/Labour Left seem mostly focused on the internetz and passing resolutions in meetings that I would guess are very boring.


I don’t think that getting organised around the Labour Party has proved effective. It hasn’t produced organised working class self-activity.  In fact, parliamentary politics is like petitioning in that it’s asking other people to do things. Which they mostly aren’t able to do (for reasons given above). It amounts therefore to indirect inaction. This is the opposite of what’s needed: a self-confident, self-conscious, organised and active working class.

Look at the history of the Labour Party: its movement is in the other direction. Yes, there are times when Labour Party electoral share has been high that have coincided with high working class organisation, but again because there is a tendency to equate electoral politics with politics, this is seen the wrong way around: cause is confused for effect.

Furthermore, not every period of Labour being in power has been correlated with working class self confidence and organisation. The Blair/Brown years saw the working class sidelined and forgotten.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think that getting organised around the Labour Party has proved effective.


for the past 29 years i've heard people talking about 'reclaiming' the labour party. and no one's managed it in all that time. perhaps it's time to give it up as a lost cause.


----------



## Brainaddict (Mar 19, 2019)

Did this get posted here? A look at the material interests behind ruling class Brexit funding/support: Revealed: How dark money split the Tories’ ruling elite


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> for the past 29 years i've heard people talking about 'reclaiming' the labour party. and no one's managed it in all that time. perhaps it's time to give it up as a lost cause.


I’ve been hearing it since 1983. “We just need to get into power, then the masks can come off and we can govern as socialists”. Never happened. Doubt it ever will. Not waiting another 36 years to find out if it ever does.

I think a far better use of effort and time is building working class self confidence and self management. And doing it by getting involved in stuff that matters locally.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think that getting organised around the Labour Party has proved effective. It hasn’t produced organised working class self-activity.  In fact, parliamentary politics is like petitioning in that it’s asking other people to do things. Which they mostly aren’t able to do (for reasons given above). It amounts therefore to indirect inaction. This is the opposite of what’s needed: a self-confident, self-conscious, organised and active working class.
> 
> Look at the history of the Labour Party: its movement is in the other direction. Yes, there are times when Labour Party electoral share has been high that have coincided with high working class organisation, but again because there is a tendency to equate electoral politics with politics, this is seen the wrong way around: cause is confused for effect.
> 
> Furthermore, not every period of Labour being in power has been correlated with working class self confidence and organisation. The Blair/Brown years saw the working class sidelined and forgotten.



Totally appreciate that all of that. But when Corbyn was elected, and then when he was challenged, people flooded into the Labour Party. They haven't then got organised inside the Labour Party, or at least not to do anything beyond vague 'vote labour' electoralism. If they had would your attitude be different?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> for the past 29 years i've heard people talking about 'reclaiming' the labour party. and no one's managed it in all that time. perhaps it's time to give it up as a lost cause.



To be fair there's lots of things people have talked about over the last 29 years that no one has managed but we can't give everything up as a lost cause


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Moving back on to Brexit (dunno why really) but May hasn't made any kind of public statement since Bercow's ruling has she? Will she say anything before PMQ's tomorrow? Is she definitely alive?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Totally appreciate that all of that. But when Corbyn was elected, and then when he was challenged, people flooded into the Labour Party. They haven't then got organised inside the Labour Party, or at least not to do anything beyond vague 'vote labour' electoralism. If they had would your attitude be different?


I think they haven’t _because_ that’s not what electoral politics are for.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Moving back on to Brexit (dunno why really) but May hasn't made any kind of public statement since Bercow's ruling has she? Will she say anything before PMQ's tomorrow? Is she definitely alive?



Was she ever alive?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think they haven’t _because_ that’s not what electoral politics are for.



Fair enough. I think there can be other kinds of electoral politics. Although there aren't in practice right now so perhaps it's a moot point.


----------



## Supine (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Moving back on to Brexit (dunno why really) but May hasn't made any kind of public statement since Bercow's ruling has she? Will she say anything before PMQ's tomorrow? Is she definitely alive?



When she stops swearing they'll let her speak  again


----------



## Brainaddict (Mar 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Totally appreciate that all of that. But when Corbyn was elected, and then when he was challenged, people flooded into the Labour Party. They haven't then got organised inside the Labour Party, or at least not to do anything beyond vague 'vote labour' electoralism.


Funny thing to say, but perhaps it depends where you are. In London where many councils are guaranteed to be Labour the emphasis isn't on elections so much as overthrowing the right wingers in control at local level. It's a long and bloody battle and people are definitely organised to do it. Also lots of stuff of being organised like this:  to try to develop ideas among the grassroots.

You may think none of that is worth doing - or you may, like me, think the Labour hierarchy is too toxic to touch with a bargepole - but to say new lefty members aren't organised inside the Labour Party isn't true in London.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 19, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Funny thing to say, but perhaps it depends where you are. In London where many councils are guaranteed to be Labour the emphasis isn't on elections so much as overthrowing the right wingers in control at local level. It's a long and bloody battle and people are definitely organised to do it. Also lots of stuff of being organised like this:  to try to develop ideas among the grassroots.
> 
> You may think none of that is worth doing - or you may, like me, think the Labour hierarchy is too toxic to touch with a bargepole - but to say people aren't organised inside the Labour Party isn't true in London.



soz can you show me any example of anyone seeking to overthrow the right wing in city hall?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 19, 2019)

Supine said:


> When she stops swearing they'll let her speak  again


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 19, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Funny thing to say, but perhaps it depends where you are. In London where many councils are guaranteed to be Labour the emphasis isn't on elections so much as overthrowing the right wingers in control at local level. It's a long and bloody battle and people are definitely organised to do it. Also lots of stuff of being organised like this:  to try to develop ideas among the grassroots.
> 
> You may think none of that is worth doing - or you may, like me, think the Labour hierarchy is too toxic to touch with a bargepole - but to say new lefty members aren't organised inside the Labour Party isn't true in London.




Yeah that's a fair point - even where there are struggles going on to turf out the right wing though they're conducted internally from what I can see, and not turning outwards to build community support. In Sheffield there are attempts to do this but it's all very internal/behind the scenes.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 20, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> Stop with the hyperbole. Capital will royally fuck all kinds of regulations protecting all kinds of things and taxation (and hence the welfare state) will be slashed to the bone as soon as they can post Brexit.



Why are the Tory establishment pro remain if brexit opens up all these opportunities for their toryism? Or are you the conspiraloon who thinks they're all secretly pro brexit? 

Once more with the naive faith in the institutionally neoliberal EU to protect us from neoliberalism.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 20, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 20, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Why are the Tory establishment pro remain if brexit opens up all these opportunities for their toryism? Or are you the conspiraloon who thinks they're all secretly pro brexit?
> 
> Once more with the naive faith in the institutionally neoliberal EU to protect us from neoliberalism.


The two positions are not mutually exclusive. Most capitalist interests favour remain to smooth the flow of capital, but if brexit happens, while certain possibilities that they would like may be closed down, others open up. As is often mentioned here, the post-war settlement both in the UK and elsewhere in Europe was in large part an accommodation of capital with the interests of workers in order to preserve capital - concessions granted if not willingly then with a view to maintaining supremacy (that it was predominantly loss-making industries that were nationalised being a case in point). Concessions such as those granted in EU worker legislation could be seen in the same light. But take away the framework in which those concessions were granted, and capitalists may no longer see it as in their interests not to scrape away at them. 

A fair few people on here, me included, have never argued that the EU is anything other than a neoliberal project. We have merely argued that the EU neoliberal project is not the worst of all possible worlds. Change the structures, and things can get even worse.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 20, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 165028




What's the French for "Told you"


----------



## alsoknownas (Mar 20, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In passing, I wonder if Bercow could _just about_ have done May a favour. Was looking like she would have lost mv3 or would have looked even weaker had she pulled it...


I agree. If his intention is to be a spoiler he may have shown his hand a bit too soon.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 20, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The two positions are not mutually exclusive. Most capitalist interests favour remain to smooth the flow of capital, but if brexit happens, while certain possibilities that they would like may be closed down, others open up. As is often mentioned here, the post-war settlement both in the UK and elsewhere in Europe was in large part an accommodation of capital with the interests of workers in order to preserve capital - concessions granted if not willingly then with a view to maintaining supremacy (that it was predominantly loss-making industries that were nationalised being a case in point). Concessions such as those granted in EU worker legislation could be seen in the same light. But take away the framework in which those concessions were granted, and capitalists may no longer see it as in their interests not to scrape away at them.
> 
> A fair few people on here, me included, have never argued that the EU is anything other than a neoliberal project. We have merely argued that the EU neoliberal project is not the worst of all possible worlds. Change the structures, and things can get even worse.


That's all very nice, patronising and condescending but none of it is actually relevant to the exchange you butted into. 

So how is the EU preventing the Tories from slashing benefits and destroying the NHS, as ming claims they're anxiously waiting for brexit so they can do this? By what mechanism does EU membership prevent this?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 20, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> That's all very nice, patronising and condescending but none of it is actually relevant to the exchange you butted into.
> 
> So how is the EU preventing the Tories from slashing benefits and destroying the NHS, as ming claims they're anxiously waiting for brexit so they can do this? By what mechanism does EU membership prevent this?



it doesn't as such. but if government revenue shrinks cos of brexit than their is even more pressure - and political justification -  to reign in spending. I am 100% certain that brexit will mean even shitter conditions for poorest communities and less resources for the NHS. That does not contradict believing that the EU is a pile of shit - just that the other pile on offer is even shitter.


----------



## Supine (Mar 20, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> So how is the EU preventing the Tories from slashing benefits and destroying the NHS, as ming claims they're anxiously waiting for brexit so they can do this? By what mechanism does EU membership prevent this?



A new UK - US deal would put pressure on the NHS in a number of ways, as the US would see it as a target for increased spending on US drugs.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 20, 2019)

I think they would see any attempts to protect the NHS from profiteering by US companies as anti-competitive. Wouldn't like to see the US 'health' model being adopted here, but am sure some of the batshitter tories along with insurance companies would prefer it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 20, 2019)

Only thing I would say for sure is that the UK's labour, environmental and trading standards laws are only going to go in one direction as they diverge from those of the EU post-brexit under a tory government. It's quite a simple reason to totally oppose tory-led brexit under pretty much all circumstances.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 20, 2019)

The Scream: Munch London show 'not intentionally timed with Brexit'


----------



## tommers (Mar 20, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> So how is the EU preventing the Tories from slashing benefits and destroying the NHS, as ming claims they're anxiously waiting for brexit so they can do this? By what mechanism does EU membership prevent this?



The difference, in my opinion, is that after no deal (for example) the economy slides rapidly downhill.  The government can then remove employment rights like redundancy pay and paternity leave, or slash NHS costs or the welfare budget (even) further on the grounds of "allowing great british business to compete with the rest of the world".  And not only are people not against that idea, they might actually welcome it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 20, 2019)

All that is already happening and we're still in the EU. I agree no deal would be an economic disaster in the short term at the very least but that's why its the least likely of all the plausible outcomes. 

The serious tories are all in the remain camp. They believe their agenda is best served by remaining in the EU.

You can opt out of the working time directive (and a lot of employers make it a condition of employment to do so irrespective of the law) and paternity leave is two weeks at not much better than dole.

I'm not sure it will make any discernible difference to most of us when the UK leaves with a deal as it almost certainly will. If it fucks over the tory party it might even be a net win.


----------



## binka (Mar 20, 2019)

Thanks to Kaka Tim's vanity we now have 2 Brexit threads on the go at the same time. What a shambles


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 20, 2019)

binka said:


> Thanks to Kaka Tim's vanity we now have 2 Brexit threads on the go at the same time. What a shambles



There can be only one!


----------



## teuchter (Mar 20, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm not sure it will make any discernible difference to most of us when the UK leaves with a deal as it almost certainly will.


Who's 'us'?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Mar 20, 2019)

Temple Normanton allotment society.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Mar 20, 2019)

Why is Corbyn not pushing for a longer extension? There might be a majority for that in parliament.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 20, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Why is Corbyn not pushing for a longer extension? There might be a majority for that in parliament.



*extremely patient Jean Claude Juncker voice* 

Because it doesn't matter what the fuck Parliament vote for in terms of an extension - if they do not pass the deal negotiated with the E.U, then the E.U will not grant an extension.

This, in part, has been the whole problem. May and the Tories have spent THREE YEARS arguing about what they want and changing their minds and issuing demands and negotiating with each other over what Brexit actually is, while the E.U has not fundamentally changed its position and offer since the start *and has been really fucking clear and patient about all this bullshit.*


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 20, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Because it doesn't matter what the fuck Parliament vote for in terms of an extension - if they do not pass the deal negotiated with the E.U, then the E.U will not grant an extension.



is that what they have said, though?

some interpretations of what the EU said today is that they have said will only do a short extension if the deal passes - implying that if the deal doesn't pass then a longer extension is possible.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 20, 2019)

binka said:


> Thanks to Kaka Tim's vanity we now have 2 Brexit threads on the go at the same time. What a shambles





Ranbay said:


> There can be only one!


Rules of Brexitdome? There are no rules! Two threads enter, noone leaves!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 20, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Rules of Brexitdome? There are no rules! Two threads enter, noone leaves!



maybe multiple parallel versions of brexit would be the answer...


----------



## Balbi (Mar 20, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> is that what they have said, though?
> 
> some interpretations of what the EU said today is that they have said will only do a short extension if the deal passes - implying that if the deal doesn't pass then a longer extension is possible.



If May can't pass her deal, she probably can't request or pass a longer extension because the Brexit MPs aren't going to have that either and the E.U isn't going to open up the agreement to renegotiation.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 20, 2019)

Got a good one, but do I stay up for 25 mins?


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Mar 20, 2019)

Balbi said:


> *extremely patient Jean Claude Juncker voice*
> 
> Because it doesn't matter what the fuck Parliament vote for in terms of an extension - if they do not pass the deal negotiated with the E.U, then the E.U will not grant an extension.
> 
> This, in part, has been the whole problem. May and the Tories have spent THREE YEARS arguing about what they want and changing their minds and issuing demands and negotiating with each other over what Brexit actually is, while the E.U has not fundamentally changed its position and offer since the start *and has been really fucking clear and patient about all this bullshit.*


Not true - they said they wouldn’t pass a short extension unless they pass the deal.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Mar 20, 2019)

Balbi said:


> If May can't pass her deal, she probably can't request or pass a longer extension because the Brexit MPs aren't going to have that either and the E.U isn't going to open up the agreement to renegotiation.


There was a majority in Parliament to ask for a longer extension only last week. And the cooper-boles amendment lost only lost by 2 votes.

However corbyn’s team came out this morning saying they wouldn’t be pushing for a long extension. Facilitating the ERG’s hard brexit fantasy. Pathetic.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 21, 2019)




----------



## editor (Mar 21, 2019)

binka said:


> Thanks to Kaka Tim's vanity we now have 2 Brexit threads on the go at the same time. What a shambles


Shall I merge them? Just like this post if that's your opinion and if there's enough likes then I'll do so. 

*I decide how many is 'enough' by the way. It's a rare perk.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 21, 2019)

editor said:


> Shall I merge them? Just like this post if that's your opinion and if there's enough likes then I'll do so.
> 
> *I decide how many is 'enough' by the way. It's a rare perk.



Yes


----------



## pesh (Mar 21, 2019)

no


----------



## editor (Mar 21, 2019)

You're supposed to LIKE the bloody post!


----------



## Almor (Mar 21, 2019)

Why is any extension needed if they pass the deal? 
Doesn't it include trade access to the eu until a new trade deal is negotiated?
Or do I have even less idea what's going on than May?


----------



## Balbi (Mar 21, 2019)

Almor said:


> Why is any extension needed if they pass the deal?
> Doesn't it include trade access to the eu until a new trade deal is negotiated?
> Or do I have even less idea what's going on than May?



Extension to sort out legislation to enact parts of the deal that need it, I assume.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 21, 2019)

Almor said:


> Why is any extension needed if they pass the deal?
> Doesn't it include trade access to the eu until a new trade deal is negotiated?
> Or do I have even less idea what's going on than May?



Just a quick look.

Britain wants to leave the EU.
Britain does not want to leave with no deal
Britain does not want the deal allready signed by the EU

I believe britain likes headless chicken mode so an extension is needed to keep this mode going as long as possible.

It could be to repeal the 'EU' laws passed into law by the british government but that can be done anytime after brexit. It could even have been done before!

Of course the real need for an extension could simply be political. Thr british government will need to blame someone for any post brexit shit, at the moment it is the fault of the british people "if we had stayed in" it would not have been this bad, much better from a political view to say "if the damned EU had just granted the extension" we would have sorted all this out.

So before brexit all the bad was the fault of the EU and after it is all the fault of the EU. Have cake and eat it.

Come on EU help britain again and say no to any extension.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 21, 2019)

editor said:


> Shall I merge them? Just like this post if that's your opinion and if there's enough likes then I'll do so.
> 
> *I decide how many is 'enough' by the way. It's a rare perk.



i think we ought to have a meaningful vote on that


----------



## Poi E (Mar 21, 2019)

"Meaningful vote". What a risible phrase, but one that shows up the hollowness of the British state at a time of constitutional crisis.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 21, 2019)

looks like the petitions site is down ' for maintenance ' after the petition to revoke article 50 breached over 500,000



scrap that , its back up and now up to 644,365


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 21, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> looks like the petitions site is down ' for maintenance ' after the petition to revoke article 50 breached over 500,000



It's crashed - 

Petition website crashes after more than 600,000 demand Article 50 be revoked | Metro News


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 21, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's crashed -
> 
> Petition website crashes after more than 600,000 demand Article 50 be revoked | Metro News


  its back up now


----------



## Poi E (Mar 21, 2019)

Refreshing it and seeing hundreds every few seconds


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 21, 2019)

Be good if it reaches 16,141,241.


----------



## pesh (Mar 21, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> i think we ought to have a meaningful vote on that



just the one?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 21, 2019)

Northern Ireland not that bothered.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Northern Ireland not that bothered.
> View attachment 165220


philosophical


----------



## philosophical (Mar 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> philosophical



I live in Lewisham and am unsure if you are making some kind of point.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 21, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I live in Lewisham and am unsure if you are making some kind of point.


You keep mentioning the NI border. That it’ll sink Brexit. Would you have expected a greater %afe of petition signatories in NI?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 21, 2019)

The petition has passed 1.2million, btw. So it’s doubled since I first saw it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The petition has passed 1.2million, btw. So it’s doubled since I first saw it.



Slowed in last couple of hours though I think.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You keep mentioning the NI border. That it’ll sink Brexit. Would you have expected a greater %afe of petition signatories in NI?



The principle way I discuss the Irish border starts with asking about the practicalities.
I simply cant see how the notion of 'leave' is going to apply when the Geography is there as the link.
Actually the best practical solution I have seen posted is the notion of some kind of honesty boxes for those inclined to engage with them! However there is a long history behind another practical solution which turns out to be right up to date, the clue is in this list (some might be more precise than others, and I may not be accurately chronological but hopefully you will get my drift)

Jericho
Masala
Maiden Castle
The Antonine Wall
Hadrians Wall
The Great Wall of China
Castles
Walled cities
Offas Dyke
Moats
The Pale
The Siegfried Line
The Maginot Line
The Iron Curtain
The Berlin Wall
Trumps dream of a wall.

There may be some I've missed, but it is a pretty persistent trope that a way to create a divide is to do it in some kind of physical way.

I have suggested that in order to leave something you're joined to something has to happen in a practical sense, unless there is some bizarre agreement for the EU and the UK to never speak to each other again and leave it at that.
So it is not so much that the border will sink brexit as much as brexit won't happen in the first place if 'leave' actually means 'remain joined' in some kind of doublethink way.

As for the petition I don't really have the skill to analyse the regional variations and what they might mean.

The border issue of course has history, culture and an International Treaty to consider and I have tried to discuss (probably in a less knowledgeable way than others can discuss it) those things in previous times here, but it suits me at the moment to boringly and persistently ask about the practicalities associated with the concept of leaving.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 21, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The principle way I discuss the Irish border starts with asking about the practicalities.
> I simply cant see how the notion of 'leave' is going to apply when the Geography is there as the link.
> Actually the best practical solution I have seen posted is the notion of some kind of honesty boxes for those inclined to engage with them! However there is a long history behind another practical solution which turns out to be right up to date, the clue is in this list (some might be more precise than others, and I may not be accurately chronological but hopefully you will get my drift)
> 
> ...



You've set him off again danny la rouge. What did you want to go and do that for?


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You've set him off again danny la rouge. What did you want to go and do that for?


I’m in the mood for mischief.


----------



## mx wcfc (Mar 21, 2019)

Poi E said:


> "Meaningful vote". What a risible phrase, but one that shows up the hollowness of the British state at a time of constitutional crisis.


Can’t remember who said it but some EU politician described the parliamentary vote to take no deal off the table as “the Titanic voting for the iceberg to move”. Pretty much sums up how much  MPs have taken back control


----------



## tommers (Mar 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Slowed in last couple of hours though I think.


Nah. If anything it's sped up.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 21, 2019)

Hey guys, what's happening?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Mar 21, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's crashed -
> 
> Petition website crashes after more than 600,000 demand Article 50 be revoked | Metro News



Can't see it at all but I guess it's only available in the UK


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 21, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Can't see it at all but I guess it's only available in the UK


Well it keeps crashing. But, yes, if you sign it you have to confirm your residency.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

philosophical said:


> However there is a long history behind another practical solution which turns out to be right up to date, the clue is in this list (some might be more precise than others, and I may not be accurately chronological but hopefully you will get my drift)
> 
> ...
> Maiden Castle
> ...



I used to live near there

It's nice: nobody there, lots of grass.


----------



## Supine (Mar 21, 2019)

Twitter bot if you want to know the petition numbers without overloading the website


----------



## andysays (Mar 21, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The principle way I discuss the Irish border starts with asking about the practicalities.
> I simply cant see how the notion of 'leave' is going to apply when the Geography is there as the link.
> Actually the best practical solution I have seen posted is the notion of some kind of honesty boxes for those inclined to engage with them! However there is a long history behind another practical solution which turns out to be right up to date, the clue is in this list (some might be more precise than others, and I may not be accurately chronological but hopefully you will get my drift)
> 
> ...


Moats are interesting and seem to have declined in popularity recently.

Maybe some the politicians who have got us into this mess can be pressed into service to alleviate at least part of it by constructing the Great Anglo-Irish Tariff Moat to ensure that no goods can sneak in or out of the EU through the proverbial back door.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 21, 2019)

Seems to be having an effect.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

Supine said:


> Twitter bot if you want to know the petition numbers without overloading the website




Why would we not want to overload the website?  

But yes when it gets to 17 million I'm all in favour of another referendum.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 21, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Can't see it at all but I guess it's only available in the UK



You're not missing anything, it's a bit of fun, but means bugger all.

Some people seem to think these petitions on the government's website forces a debate in Parliament if they hit 100,000 signatures, they don't, any such numbers only ensures 'petitions are considered for debate in Parliament.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 21, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well it keeps crashing. But, yes, if you sign it you have to confirm your residency.



Citizenship - Brits living abroad can sign.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 21, 2019)

Having two now identical threads on brexit is worse than brexit itself!


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 21, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Having two now identical threads on brexit is worse than brexit itself!



We could have yet another meaningful vote.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 21, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 21, 2019)

Or another meaningful drink.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 21, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Mar 21, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 165228


It sounds there is significant disagreement among the EU27 about how long an extension to offer, so you may need to revise your countdown...


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 21, 2019)

andysays said:


> It sounds there is significant disagreement among the EU27 about how long an extension to offer, so you may need to revise your countdown...



Tomorrow i will update with serveral options.


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 21, 2019)

C4 were reckoning a while ago that the extension would be to May 7th but without the pre-condition that the Withdrawal Agreement passes.So prolonging the chaos-Macron's idea they said.


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

I hate to ask this but what would happen to a vote on Corbyn's proposal? As I understand it's leaving without really leaving - so stays in customs union and sort of keeps employment and environmental protections and things? But doesn't fuck us over completely as with hard brexit.


----------



## Phil752 (Mar 21, 2019)

two sheds said:


> I hate to ask this but what would happen to a vote on Corbyn's proposal? As I understand it's leaving without really leaving - so stays in customs union and sort of keeps employment and environmental protections and things? But doesn't fuck us over completely as with hard brexit.


we may as well stay in, he dare not say that does he


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

yeh fair play, but stay out at the same time


----------



## Phil752 (Mar 21, 2019)

two sheds said:


> yeh fair play, but stay out at the same time


you are either in or out


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

or shake it all about 



sorry i'm old


----------



## Phil752 (Mar 21, 2019)

two sheds said:


> or shake it all about
> 
> 
> 
> sorry i'm old


so am I lol


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

although not really *that* old


----------



## Phil752 (Mar 21, 2019)

two sheds said:


> although not really *that* old


me niether more agadoo   lol


----------



## two sheds (Mar 21, 2019)

Phil752 said:


> more agadoo



I've heard of that


----------



## collectordave (Mar 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well it keeps crashing. But, yes, if you sign it you have to confirm your residency.



Back up and over 2.2 million did not have to confirm residency just email. Also available in Portugal.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 22, 2019)

Just read this on BBC web site

The PM's spokesman added: "The PM has long been clear that failing to deliver on the referendum result would be a failure of democracy and a failure she wouldn't countenance."

I see the PM is confused as to the referendum result as well, this must rank alongside "The Will Of The People" myth.

Is it only common people that have common sense?

I do see that an arbitrary poll open to all the British people which is not advertised can be discounted. Whereas an arbitrary poll in which you deny 30% of the British people from voting spend millions advertising and campaigning and which delivers a minority in favour of what you hoped for is the on to go for especially if you call it a referendum.

Mind you even the local paper in Portugal has said 52% of the British people have voted for brexit whereas in truth only 16-17% of the British people voted for Brexit (I do count *ALL* the British people not just those allowed to vote and who did vote).


----------



## Badgers (Mar 22, 2019)

Anyone know anything about this? Hopefully it won't impact on the £350m going to the NHS.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 22, 2019)

Instead of stuff like 'Operation Yellowhammer" and "Operation Redfold," which sound like they could be from James Bond films, the government should be using code names that reinforce the scale of their failure and the shame they should be feeling.

"Operation Shit the Bed has been activated, any news from the team at Operation Cat Vomit?"


----------



## ska invita (Mar 22, 2019)

Operation Brownbed 


Its all an act anyhow - the Express seem very happy about it today


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 22, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Mind you even the local paper in Portugal has said 52% of the British people have voted for brexit whereas in truth only 16-17% of the British people voted for Brexit (I do count *ALL* the British people not just those allowed to vote and who did vote).


Even including under eighteens I make it around 26%. How did you arrive at your figure?


----------



## Poi E (Mar 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 165228


 Nice work


----------



## teuchter (Mar 22, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Even including under eighteens I make it around 26%. How did you arrive at your figure?


Getting mixed up between % and millions I reckon.


----------



## maomao (Mar 22, 2019)

If our population was exactly a hundred million percentages would be so much easier.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 22, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> Shall I merge them? Just like this post if that's your opinion and if there's enough likes then I'll do so.
> 
> *I decide how many is 'enough' by the way. It's a rare perk.


Has this post got enough likes yet?  Do we have to start a viral petition?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> You're supposed to LIKE the bloody post!


the most shameful grubbing for likes i've seen in a long time


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the most shameful grubbing for likes i've seen in a long time



Hang on....


----------



## chilango (Mar 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Has this post got enough likes yet?  Do we have to start a viral petition?



I think editor needs to ask the question again.

...but stress that this time he really, really means it. And blame the mods for something.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Hang on....


are mod decisions to be based on whether they receive a sufficient number of likes? it sets a poor precedent


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> are mod decisions to be based on whether they receive a sufficient number of likes? it sets a poor precedent



No i mean you are grubbing for likes now. like i am.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> I think editor needs to ask the question again.
> 
> ...but stress that this time he really, really means it. And blame the mods for something.




He can't ask it a third time however, as i said so.


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> I think editor needs to ask the question again.
> 
> ...but stress that this time he really, really means it. And blame the mods for something.


It's actually Corbyn's fault. The bastard.


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> are mod decisions to be based on whether they receive a sufficient number of likes? it sets a poor precedent


Sometimes it's good practice to ask the community what they want when it comes to the fairly trivial matter of merging two near-identical threads.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> Sometimes it's good practice to ask the community what they want when it comes to the fairly trivial matter of merging two near-identical threads.



Well seems 52% of us want it merged and 48% Don't ..... and Merge means Merge!


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 22, 2019)

Why should we merge with that thread when there are bigger, more interesting threads all over the place we could merge with? It'd be the easiest thing ever to arrange.


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2019)

Over 3m signatures on that petition now.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> Over 3m signatures on that petition now.


----------



## teqniq (Mar 22, 2019)

Have we had this yet?

Lord Adonis 'to start process to revoke Article 50' as petition hits 2,500,000 signatures | Metro News


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> Sometimes it's good practice to ask the community what they want when it comes to the fairly trivial matter of merging two near-identical threads.



Similar threads, but with different polls, can they be merged?

The poll on the other thread is somewhat more up to date, with options tailored to the current situation, that thread has also been moving much faster since it was started.

Maybe just lock this one, as it's almost 3 years old, and therefore somewhat out of date?


----------



## andysays (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> Sometimes it's good practice to ask the community what they want when it comes to the fairly trivial matter of merging two near-identical threads.


I hope you'll be checking the spending of those campaigning for a thread merger.

I reckon danny la rouge has been using dodgy Russian money in an attempt to subvert the democratic wishes of the community...


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Similar threads, but with different polls, can they be merged?
> 
> The poll on the other thread is somewhat more up to date, with options tailored to the current situation, that thread has also been moving much faster since it was started.
> 
> Maybe just lock this one, as it's almost 3 years old, and therefore somewhat out of date?


I need reasons to merge written on the side of a bus first. 
Just make up anything.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 22, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Even including under eighteens I make it around 26%. How did you arrive at your figure?



My mistake  if you look at this post The British People have voted for BREXIT you can see the logic for the minority.

I apologise for any misleading statements.

However it still leaves the fact that the British people did not vote for brexit only a minority did! The strange thing is the government seem to feel that running with a minority vote in a referendum is perfectly ok. To be true to the referendum the government should do nothing as the majority of people who could vote didn't so in being true to the referendum or carrying out the will of the people the government should sit on its arse and do nothing.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Anyone know anything about this? Hopefully it won't impact on the £350m going to the NHS.



Which £350 million is that?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 22, 2019)

collectordave said:


> My mistake  if you look at this post The British People have voted for BREXIT you can see the logic for the minority.
> 
> I apologise for any misleading statements.
> 
> However it still leaves the fact that the British people did not vote for brexit only a minority did! The strange thing is the government seem to feel that running with a minority vote in a referendum is perfectly ok. To be true to the referendum the government should do nothing as the majority of people who could vote didn't so in being true to the referendum or carrying out the will of the people the government should sit on its arse and do nothing.


That link is to figures posted by you that show a majority of people who could vote did. Bizarre way to conduct a debate.


----------



## Cid (Mar 22, 2019)

collectordave said:


> My mistake  if you look at this post The British People have voted for BREXIT you can see the logic for the minority.
> 
> I apologise for any misleading statements.
> 
> However it still leaves the fact that the British people did not vote for brexit only a minority did! The strange thing is the government seem to feel that running with a minority vote in a referendum is perfectly ok. To be true to the referendum the government should do nothing as the majority of people who could vote didn't so in being true to the referendum or carrying out the will of the people the government should sit on its arse and do nothing.



Yes, this is generally how voting works. Unless you live somewhere with compulsory voting. And voting for kids I suppose.


----------



## Cid (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> I need reasons to merge written on the side of a bus first.
> Just make up anything.



You'll save 350mb of storage every week if you leave the threads.


----------



## Supine (Mar 22, 2019)

editor said:


> I need reasons to merge written on the side of a bus first.
> Just make up anything.



The people have spoken. Just get on with it. We don't care if it leads to oblivion


----------



## editor (Mar 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> The people have spoken. Just get on with it. We don't care if it leads to oblivion


I've heard the people's message loud and clear: start merging random threads immediately.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 22, 2019)

Does this mean I can keep the money from Moscow Analytica?


----------



## chilango (Mar 22, 2019)

Merge means merge editor.

What you merge, how you merge them and what happens to stuff that doesn't get merged I don't really care. Just get in with the merging


----------



## tommers (Mar 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> Merge means merge editor.
> 
> What you merge, how you merge them and what happens to stuff that doesn't get merged I don't really care. Just get in with the merging


This isn't true. The merging has to happen in a very specific way.

chilango is an enemy of the people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

tommers said:


> This isn't true. The merging has to happen in a very specific way.
> 
> chilango is an enemy of the people.


No, chilango is an enemy of _the people_, he cannot abide that loathsome rag


----------



## Supine (Mar 22, 2019)

Red White and Blue merging. The easiest in history.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> Merge means merge editor.
> 
> What you merge, how you merge them and what happens to stuff that doesn't get merged I don't really care. Just get in with the merging


Merde means merde


----------



## chilango (Mar 22, 2019)

Threadxit means threadxit.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 22, 2019)

All Kaka Tim ’s fault. Ban the cunt


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 22, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> All Kaka Tim ’s fault. Ban the cunt



 the people demanded a second poll on updated brexit outcomes (Well i did anyway). 
I think this thread has served urban with distinction but it is time for a new chapter .


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the people demanded a second poll on updated brexit outcomes (Well i did anyway).
> I think this thread has served urban with distinction but it is time for a new chapter .


We still don't know the answer to the question


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 22, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Which £350 million is that?



A new 350 million every week.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We still don't know the answer to the question


 
Its 42


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 22, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Its 42


=*


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> All Kaka Tim ’s fault. Ban the cunt


Perhaps if your post gets sufficient likes editor will have to act


----------



## tommers (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Perhaps if your post gets sufficient likes editor will have to act


2 in 33 mins.

5 million by tomorrow.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Mar 22, 2019)

Looks like it’s not going to happen! Uri Geller is going to stop this madness with the power of his mind. Thank goodness


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 22, 2019)

The Guardian and Tom Watson have decided that everyone out tomorrow is marching for the fucking People's Vote.

Labour deputy leader Tom Watson to address People’s Vote rally


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Guardian and Tom Watson have decided that everyone out tomorrow is marching for the fucking People's Vote.
> 
> Labour deputy leader Tom Watson to address People’s Vote rally


The pubs near the march's end are calling in extra staff to deal with the rush caused by tw's speech


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The pubs near the march's end are calling in extra staff to deal with the rush caused by tw's speech


The Red Lion on Whitehall really must be rolling in it these days.

IME the wetherspoons at the top of Whitehall is the one that really gets the business. It seems to have the monopoly on drunk racists heckling passing marches. Can't imagine a connection between that and the floppy cunt who owns the chain.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 22, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Red Lion on Whitehall really must be rolling in it these days.
> 
> IME the wetherspoons at the top of Whitehall is the one that really gets the business. It seems to have the monopoly on drunk racists heckling passing marches. Can't imagine a connection between that and the floppy cunt who owns the chain.



I was in there last weekend. Load of right wing yellow jacket knobs. Same weekend last year was rammed full of trots. Neither seemed to be in the best of states


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I was in there last weekend. Load of right wing yellow jacket knobs. Same weekend last year was rammed full of trots. Neither seemed to be in the best of states


Saturdays we have the regular FOTL Trump Brexit Q Our Boys loons in that area now. They march up and down Whitehall with the cops wandering along occasionally directing the traffic.


----------



## Santino (Mar 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I was in there last weekend. Load of right wing yellow jacket knobs. Same weekend last year was rammed full of trots. Neither seemed to be in the best of states


Since when have you been allowed west of Dorset?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 22, 2019)

Santino said:


> Since when have you been allowed west of Dorset?


I am allowed to go to london that on that weekend every year.


----------



## andysays (Mar 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Does this mean I can keep the money from Moscow Analytica?


I *knew* it


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 22, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Guardian and Tom Watson have decided that everyone out tomorrow is marching for the fucking People's Vote.
> 
> Labour deputy leader Tom Watson to address People’s Vote rally



I don’t think there’d ever be a better time for a chorus of  ‘Oh, Jeremy Corbyn’ to drown the fucker out.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I don’t think there’d ever be a better time for a chorus of  ‘Oh, Jeremy Corbyn’ to drown the fucker out.



They're about as likely to do that as they are to break into a million-voice Gregorian chant.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> They're about as likely to do that as they are to break into a million-voice Gregorian chant.



Less likely than you justifying #LunaticTinge racism then?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

Have we had this yet?
*Breaking*...or should that be bending?


> In an open letter to the prime minister, the Israeli-British TV personality said he felt “psychically and very strongly” that most Britons were anti-Brexit and promised to stop the process telepathically. He wrote: “I feel psychically and very strongly that most British people do not want Brexit. I love you very much but I will not allow you to lead Britain into Brexit. As much as I admire you, I will stop you telepathically from doing this – and believe me I am capable of executing it. Before I take this drastic course of action, I appeal to you to stop the process immediately while you still have a chance.”
> 
> Geller, who is currently in Israel, used to live in Sonning, which lies in May’s Maidenhead constituency. In his letter, he said he had known the prime minister for 21 years and that she had visited his home.
> 
> ...


----------



## Calamity1971 (Mar 23, 2019)

My favourite bit of that was brought up on ' The Last Leg'

He also claimed he is using the power of his mind to ensure that “Jeremy Corbyn never gets the keys to Number 10 Downing Street”.

“I will ensure that they bend out of all proportion to ensure that he never takes up residence there,” he wrote.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Have we had this yet?
> *Breaking*...or should that be bending?


----------



## CRI (Mar 23, 2019)

Impressive ratio on this tweet!


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Less likely than you justifying #LunaticTinge racism then?



These tortuous little jibes about some perceived racism you think me guilty of just mark you out as a proper cunt, so stop fucking talking to me, referring to me or trying to engage with me. I can't be any clearer than that without seeing you face to face, which you had sincerely better hope never happens.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> These tortuous little jibes about some perceived racism you think me guilty of just mark you out as a proper cunt, so stop fucking talking to me, referring to me or trying to engage with me. I can't be any clearer than that without seeing you face to face, which you had sincerely better hope never happens.



Good threats


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> Good threats



Not really, I didn't even mention my very particular set of skills.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Not really, I didn't even mention my very particular set of skills.



You could have just apologised for making cunty comments on an internet forum. But as you like.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> You could have just apologised for making cunty comments on an internet forum. But as you like.



I've got nothing to apologise for, so get back to your Brexit.


----------



## B.I.G (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> which you had sincerely better hope never happens.



You should apologise for this. But your refusal to think you overstepped the mark makes as little sense as “get back to your brexit”.


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Mar 23, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Looks like it’s not going to happen! Uri Geller is going to stop this madness with the power of his mind. Thank goodness


Stockpile straight spoons! I’m so glad I emigrated last year, I don’t know how you live through this. I was getting panic attacks 2 years ago


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> These tortuous little jibes about some perceived racism you think me guilty of just mark you out as a proper cunt, so stop fucking talking to me, referring to me or trying to engage with me. I can't be any clearer than that without seeing you face to face, which you had sincerely better hope never happens.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 23, 2019)

pseudonarcissus said:


> Looks like it’s not going to happen! Uri Geller is going to stop this madness with the power of his mind. Thank goodness


Even though he's voting against her, he claims to be her mate and some sort of advisor


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Nearly 4m signatures now 

Petition: Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Nearly 4m signatures now
> 
> Petition: Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.


I know at least four of those - some of my fellow trainee teachers expressed their frustration with the process the other day, and clearly imagined me being friends with them meant us having exactly the same politics. 

So when one trotted out the "you should have to take an exam to prove you're fit to vote" line, I explained I'd voted to leave from a left-wing anti-EU perspective, and having no way to make sense of their prejudices being challenged in this way, the four of them essentially started listing landmarks and holiday destinations, equating in their panic _The EU_ for _the continent_ _of Europe._

Lol.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I know at least four of those - some of my fellow trainee teachers expressed their frustration with the process the other day, and clearly imagined me being friends with them meant us having exactly the same politics.
> 
> So when one trotted out the "you should have to take an exam to prove you're fit to vote" line, I explained I'd voted to leave from a left-wing anti-EU perspective, and having no way to make sense of their prejudices being challenged in this way, the four of them essentially started listing landmarks and holiday destinations, equating in their panic _The EU_ for _the continent_ _of Europe._
> 
> Lol.



I'm Remainy McRemain on here but when I talk about Brexit with people in the real world, I as often as not find myself arguing that there are plenty of perfectly good reasons why principled anti-capitalists refused to vote for staying in the EU.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 23, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm Remainy McRemain on here but when I talk about Brexit with people in the real world, I as often as not finding myself arguing that there are plenty of perfectly good reasons why principled anti-capitalists refused to vote for staying in the EU.


Likewise, I can see cogent arguments for remaining, which is why on the day of reckoning I wasn't at the polling station at 7 am sharp with my St George's flag pen and faded "Up yours Delors" t-shirt to put a big cross next to Leave. I thought about it more than any other vote I've ever made, and in the end I just answered the question, irrespective of any outside stuff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I've got nothing to apologise for, so get back to your Brexit.


You've got lots to apologise for


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 23, 2019)

Zahawi on the radio earlier saying this week he could not in conscience go back to his constituency and ask for an extension that would involve taking part in EU elections and that it was therefore MPs getting behind the deal or "melt-down"-and the PM,he said felt the same way. So melt-down it is then.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Zahawi on the radio earlier saying this week he could not in conscience go back to his constituency and ask for an extension that would involve taking part in EU elections and that it was therefore MPs getting behind the deal or "melt-down"-and the PM,he said felt the same way. So melt-down it is then.



Conscience, good one. 

Tory MP Nadhim Zahawi 'closely linked to two tax-haven-based companies'

Minister faces pressure over men-only event as May voices disapproval


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

CRI said:


> Impressive ratio on this tweet!
> 
> View attachment 165317



I went to my MP's surgery yesterday in an attempt to have my miniscule amount of say. Anyway when I said I was marching (mainly out of ambivalent frustration and my team aren't playing anyway) she said she would be on the march too.
She is a Labour MP, so will maybe get into trouble with some Labour whip cracking and judgemental roustabouts.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Mar 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You've got lots to apologise for



Not as much as his mum.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Anti Capitalists turned EU supporters without any self awareness are a puzzle. I think they never meant it to be fair.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> These tortuous little jibes about some perceived racism you think me guilty of just mark you out as a proper cunt, so stop fucking talking to me, referring to me or trying to engage with me. I can't be any clearer than that without seeing you face to face, which you had sincerely better hope never happens.


You muggy cunt.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 23, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th. It'll hurt the vast majority of the UK's citizens. Right wing power will entrench (sorry...no space for the left to rise...the tabloids'll take care of that). And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.



"Academically referenced"? I'm surprised to hear anti-intellectual comments from you, especially about someone who's an auto-didact.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Have a bath Ming


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm generally not into internet spats. However... Here's what'll happen. Brexit'll happen (no-deal) on the 29th. It'll hurt the vast majority of the UK's citizens. Right wing power will entrench (sorry...no space for the left to rise...the tabloids'll take care of that). And you'll still be bleating here with your academically referenced bollocks. To about 10 people who agree with you.


how's your brexit will happen (no deal) on the 29th looking now?


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 23, 2019)

Apparently only in the paper edition of the Express, but chunkymark has it covered :-


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> "Academically referenced"? I'm surprised to hear anti-intellectual comments from you, especially about someone who's an auto-didact.


Problem is I really don’t have anything to back it up with other than a Star Wars ‘I’ve got a bad feeling about this’ type feeling and the Tories terrible record. It’s a bit like it coming out a few years back that in the 80’s they were prepared to let Liverpool (I’m from Moreton on the Wirral) go into a state of ‘managed decline ‘. Didn’t come out until years later. I can’t be arsed getting too in-depth on this forum (but I’ve learned a fair bit from it over the years) because I agreed with most of what’s posted. It was just a ‘bugger off’ type retort! I do still believe that the JRM’s of the Tory party are in for the money purely though. And yeah I still have this unprovable feeling that it’s all a pantomime to run the clock down.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Operation Brownbed
> 
> 
> Its all an act anyhow - the Express seem very happy about it today



In Gavin Williamson's case, he's obviously after an "Operation Brownwings" with Theresa May.


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how's your brexit will happen (no deal) on the 29th looking now?


I’ll pay my bet (presumably to the server fund)...on the 29th if I’m wrong. I still maintain it’ll be a no deal though and I still think that’s being done intentionally.


----------



## chilango (Mar 23, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> "Academically referenced"? I'm surprised to hear anti-intellectual comments from you, especially about someone who's an auto-didact.



Maybe we need to insist that all posts in p&p follow an agreed citation style.

Temp bans for posters not referencing properly?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Ming said:


> I’ll pay my bet (presumably to the server fund)...on the 29th if I’m wrong. I still maintain it’ll be a no deal though and I still think that’s being done intentionally.


well, being as the choice seems to be between an undone deal (one yet to be put together), no deal or no brexit, my money remains as it has for months on no brexit.


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Maybe we need to insist that all posts in p&p follow an agreed citation style.
> 
> Temp bans for posters not referencing properly?


Harvard?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 23, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Have we had this yet?
> 
> Lord Adonis 'to start process to revoke Article 50' as petition hits 2,500,000 signatures | Metro News



Lord Adonis can kiss my claggy ringpiece, the slaphead anti-working class cunt. That piece of shit set up council estates throughout England and Wales for "regeneration", by legislating for them to be declared "brownfield land". He's one of the few politicians I don't want to kill...quickly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Ming said:


> Harvard?


mhra


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Maybe we need to insist that all posts in p&p follow an agreed citation style.
> 
> Temp bans for posters not referencing properly?



Just as long as it's not Harvard. Harvard sucks leprosy sores.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Just as long as it's not Harvard. Harvard sucks leprosy sores (Watson, 1987).


c4u


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Lord Adonis can kiss my claggy ringpiece, the slaphead anti-working class cunt. That piece of shit set up council estates throughout England and Wales for "regeneration", by legislating for them to be declared "brownfield land". He's one of the few politicians I don't want to kill...quickly.


Sometimes we don't agree VP but spot on Sir.


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> well, being as the choice seems to be between an undone deal (one yet to be put together), no deal or no brexit, my money remains as it has for months on no brexit.


the undone deal,if it means participation in upcoming EU elections sort of hard to distinguish from the no brexit option.Things really do seem to have been filed to a point.And if the choice in this binary is for no brexit its going to be sort of hard to justify in coming months,years,decades.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> the undone deal,if it means participation in upcoming EU elections sort of hard to distinguish from the no brexit option.Things really do seem to have been filed to a point.And if the choice in this binary is for no brexit its going to be sort of hard to justify in coming months,years,decades.


i don't think it'll be put to the people, i think the numpties at westminster will do the deed


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

I’m Labour’s NEC youth rep – and I won’t be at the People’s Vote march tomorrow - LabourList

Very articulate. Agree with this woman 100 percent.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I’m Labour’s NEC youth rep – and I won’t be at the People’s Vote march tomorrow - LabourList
> 
> Very articulate. Agree with this woman 100 percent.


She doesn't actually offer anything past '''vote Labour'. Great.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> She doesn't actually offer anything past '''vote Labour'. Great.


it's the labour way

vote labour and get rid of the poll tax

etc etc etc


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

Could have gone in the Guardian thread, but this is a bit of a corker...the poor little rich things can't be there on the march in person but....


----------



## Cid (Mar 23, 2019)

Screenshot of graun’s live feed:


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

Cid said:


> Screenshot of graun’s live feed:
> 
> View attachment 165387


is that the world's largest daffodil?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 23, 2019)

Woman I was teaching this morning claims her army fella has been called to London for later despatch to ports or areas of civil unrest/rioting when we crash out.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Woman I was teaching this morning claims her army fella has been called to London for later despatch to ports or areas of civil unrest/rioting when we crash out.


TA members in the RMPS I have known for decades have been told to get ready. Their job is to keep the deployed squaddies under manners. They ain't happy. I said just shoot your Officers.  This did not improve the mood.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> She doesn't actually offer anything past '''vote Labour'. Great.


What do you advocate?


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What do you advocate?


Anything but this Tory-driven, Tory-decided, last-minute desperate shambles. 

But you posted up that link - what are her solutions that you agree "100%" with?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Anything but this Tory-driven, Tory-decided, last-minute desperate shambles.
> 
> But you posted up that link - what are her solutions that you agree "100%" with?



That does sound a bit like vote labour to be fair. "Anything but the Tories" tends to give you some form of Labour govt.

E2A: She's mostly explaining why a second ref is a dead end and why she doesn't support it to be fair. But the article says "build a Socialist Britain" which goes a little further than Vote Labour.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That does sound a bit like vote labour to be fair. "Anything but the Tories" tends to give you some form of Labour govt.


yeh but then labour manage to out-tory the tories.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That does sound a bit like vote labour to be fair. "Anything but the Tories" tends to give you some form of Labour govt.


Or you could possibly read my words are being desirous of presenting the public with actual, thought-through plans for Brexit and then putting those to a public vote as they absolutely should have the final say in what's being proposed.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but then labour manage to out-tory the tories.



Certainly under Blair and Brown. Those are the only Labour govts I've ever known. For all of Corbyn's deficiencies and the open civil war taking place I don't think a Corbyn led Labour govt would 'out Tory' the Tories. 

I don't think it would _last _very long either, but that's not neccessarily the point.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Or you could possibly read my words are being desirous of presenting the public with actual, thought-through plans for Brexit and then putting those to a public vote as they absolutely should have the final say in what's being proposed.


yeh but that's anti-democratic


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Or you could possibly read my words are being desirous of presenting the public with actual, thought-through plans for Brexit and then putting those to a public vote as they absolutely should have the final say in what's being proposed.



Ahhh right so what you mean is you want a second referendem, got it, thanks.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

4.4 million signatures and over a million on the march...


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Certainly under Blair and Brown. Those are the only Labour govts I've ever known. For all of Corbyn's deficiencies and the open civil war taking place I don't think a Corbyn led Labour govt would 'out Tory' the Tories.
> 
> I don't think it would _last _very long either, but that's not neccessarily the point.


If my local council were Corbyn-esque I'd vote for them. But Lambeth are a bunch of entrepreneur-worshipping Blairite shitehawks.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Nice breakdown of who signed the petition: A50 Petition Live Breakdown

It's currently being signed by 726 people every minute.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Nice breakdown of who signed the petition: A50 Petition Live Breakdown
> 
> It's currently being signed by 726 people every minute.


in about 12 days and 10 hours at this rate it will reach 17.5m


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

945 signatures/minute now.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Fucking morons. Threatening a 77 year old woman, FFS: Death threats for Brexit petition woman


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> If my local council were Corbyn-esque I'd vote for them. But Lambeth are a bunch of entrepreneur-worshipping Blairite shitehawks.



I'm sure they are, don't think I'll vote for Sheffield Labour either, even the ones who claim to be Corbyn-supporting Socialists are pretty weak. But the Blairites will be on the People's Vote march (unless they think it will cost them their seats) and this Lara McNeill person isn't; if you have criticisms fine but it seems like your criticism is that she's not on the march and not supporting a second referendum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> 945 signatures/minute now.


9 days 12 hours


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> 4.4 million signatures and over a million on the march...



Are there over a million? Could well be but I haven't seen that figure anywhere else.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ..... but it seems like your criticism is that she's not on the march and not supporting a second referendum.


Where on earth have you got that from? I have said nothing that even remotely aligns with your spin. Jeez.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Where on earth have you got that from? I have said nothing that even remotely aligns with your spin. Jeez.



I thought that's what you meant by this: 



editor said:


> Or you could possibly read my words are being desirous of presenting the public with actual, thought-through plans for Brexit and then putting those to a public vote as they absolutely should have the final say in what's being proposed.



"Jeez."


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are there over a million? Could well be but I haven't seen that figure anywhere else.


Hard to get accurate figures but it is fucking huge by any measure - 
Hundreds of thousands join Brexit protest

No doubt the police will say it was 10,000 and Farage will insist it was 10 people.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I thought that's what you meant by this:
> 
> 
> 
> "Jeez."


Where did I mention her not being on the march? Why are you making up stuff?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Where did I mention her not being on the march? Why are you making up stuff?



I'm not trying to pick a fight here - tell me if I've misunderstood. You weren't impressed by her article and assessed it as simply saying "Vote Labour". You were asked what you would advocate and you said you want thought through plans for Brexit followed by another referendum.

In which - correct me if I'm wrong - you would want Remain on the ballot paper and you would vote Remain. Right?

E2A: So what I mean is, you want a 2nd ref/People's Vote/Whatever we're calling it and I assumed that's why you didn't like her article.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not trying to pick a fight here - tell me if I've misunderstood. You weren't impressed by her article and assessed it as simply saying "Vote Labour". You were asked what you would advocate and you said you want thought through plans for Brexit followed by another referendum.
> 
> In which - correct me if I'm wrong - you would want Remain on the ballot paper and you would vote Remain. Right?
> 
> E2A: So what I mean is, you want a 2nd ref/People's Vote/Whatever we're calling it and I assumed that's why you didn't like her article.


The point was that topcat flagged it up as some sort of amazing insight when all it appeared to say was "vote Labour" and that was it. No new insights, no new message, just party propaganda. And that was what I was commenting on. I couldn't give a shit if the writer went to the march naked on the back of a pink unicorn or not.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Anything but this Tory-driven, Tory-decided, last-minute desperate shambles.
> 
> But you posted up that link - what are her solutions that you agree "100%" with?


Vote Labour.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Vote Labour.


Like those amazing libraries-closing, children's centres-closing, estate-demolishing, entrepreneur-worshipping nu-Labour cats in Lambeth? Yeah!


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Like those amazing libraries-closing, children's centres-closing, estate-demolishing, entrepreneur-worshipping nu-Labour cats in Lambeth? Yeah!


You don't offer much.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

You won't fight for change and don't want to vote for change either. Go moan to the Guardian. That will help.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> The point was that topcat flagged it up as some sort of amazing insight when all it appeared to say was "vote Labour" and that was it. No new insights, no new message, just party propaganda. And that was what I was commenting on. I couldn't give a shit if the writer went to the march naked on the back of a pink unicorn or not.



Fair enough, in that case I apologise. I think you're being harsh though - unlike the Blairites who will say 'Cancel Brexit now, Vote Labour later' she's saying 'Vote Labour and Build Socialism.'

It's not exactly ground breaking but there's a difference - I totally understand why you wouldn't vote Labour in Lewisham but there are some Labour representatives I would vote for.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Anything but this Tory-driven, Tory-decided, last-minute desperate shambles.
> 
> But you posted up that link - what are her solutions that you agree "100%" with?


Maybe you want a STRONG solution.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Maybe you want a STRONG solution.


Strong. And firm. And juicy too.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Nearly 4.5m signatures now. Biggest petition in British history and quite possibly the biggest march. And 30 fuckwits on Farage's folly.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Nearly 4.5m signatures now. Biggest petition in British history and quite possibly the biggest march. And 30 fuckwits on Farage's folly.


17 million voted LEAVE.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 17 million voted LEAVE.



Capital letters: making facts more factual since, well, never actually.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Lovely.



Apologies...my computer appeared to reject the image I was trying to post.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 17 million voted LEAVE.


They also voted for fictional pots of non-existant NHS money and a Brexit that was promoted as straightforward and profitable. WHOOPS! But if you're happy with career-promoting Tories deciding your future on a Farage-sponsored journey, enjoy the ride!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Nearly 4.5m signatures now. Biggest petition in British history and quite possibly the biggest march. And 30 fuckwits on Farage's folly.



Stop the War march the largest wasn't it? Estimates between 1 and 2 million.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

I can tolerate, just, comrades to the left of me slagging the JC led Labour Party. Despite most of them doing fuck all apart from prancing around with cheap banners. 
I feel less er, sympathy with people to the right of me having a pop. Inevitably these seem to me to desire a stable Tory govt that just hated blacks and gays less.


----------



## chilango (Mar 23, 2019)

Let's pretend for a moment that the petition and march are successful, and a "Peoples' Vote" is called.

What do those of you who are Remainers do if Leave wins that vote too?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

It was this gem from this afternoon....


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Capital letters: making facts more factual since, well, never actually.


I'm on an all inclusive holiday just outside the EU. Bit pissed and mightily pissed off.


----------



## Sue (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Let's pretend for a moment that the petition and march are successful, and a "Peoples' Vote" is called.
> 
> What do those of you who are Remainers do if Leave wins that vote too?


Third time lucky..?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I'm on an all inclusive holiday just outside the EU. Bit pissed and mightily pissed off.


Dover?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> They also voted for fictional pots of non-existant NHS money and a Brexit that was promoted as straightforward and profitable. WHOOPS! But if you're happy with career-promoting Tories deciding your future on a Farage-sponsored journey, enjoy the ride!



I voted out for Socialist reasons.


----------



## chilango (Mar 23, 2019)

Sue said:


> Third time lucky..?


MV3 PV3


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Dover?


Ben Dover boy


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Sue said:


> Third time lucky..?


Limit voting to those who own property. Include those for sure who did right to buy but disenfranchise all others.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Let's pretend for a moment that the petition and march are successful, and a "Peoples' Vote" is called.
> 
> What do those of you who are Remainers do if Leave wins that vote too?



Ask the winners how they will manage the land border on the island of Ireland between the UK system and the EU system.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> They also voted for fictional pots of non-existant NHS money and a Brexit that was promoted as straightforward and profitable. WHOOPS! But if you're happy with career-promoting Tories deciding your future on a Farage-sponsored journey, enjoy the ride!



Yeah you're just spouting off now. This is exactly the same as me saying you voted Remain to avoid disruption of foie gras imports and continue the starvation of Greek children.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Stop the War march the largest wasn't it? Estimates between 1 and 2 million.


Blair called it a million of the wrong. I have been thinking about this all day.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Let's pretend for a moment that the petition and march are successful, and a "Peoples' Vote" is called.
> 
> What do those of you who are Remainers do if Leave wins that vote too?



I know this isn't aimed at me but can't resist; they won't allow No Deal on the ballot, since it could feasibly win, so would be May's deal. And I won't vote for May's deal or Remain.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Ask the winners how they will manage the land border on the island of Ireland between the UK system and the EU system.



A voluntary Socialist federation of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern and Southern Ireland, as part of a voluntary federation of Socialist European states.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Ask the winners how they will manage the land border on the island of Ireland between the UK system and the EU system.


United Ireland. I would be very happy and this shit shows makes it more likely.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It was this gem from this afternoon....
> 
> View attachment 165416


An opportunist nationalist and a huge shit.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know this isn't aimed at me but can't resist; they won't allow No Deal on the ballot, since it could feasibly win, so would be May's deal. And I won't vote for May's deal or Remain.


Why would you vote anyway? You think that supra-state membership changes anything fundamentally?


----------



## gosub (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> An opportunist nationalist and a huge shit.



At least you say the march isn't the "usual suspects"   You would n't have seen Alistar Campbell at the stop the war march. Well maybe in effigy form


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Why would you vote anyway? You think that supra-state membership changes anything fundamentally?



I voted to Leave in the last referendum. In the main to bring down Cameron, without any expectation we would leave, but also out of a desire to express opposition to the supra-state.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> United Ireland. I would be very happy and this shit shows makes it more likely.


I'm sure Northern Ireland and the wonderful DUP people would warmly embrace such an offering. Guaranteed to be peaceful with cream buns all round.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

gosub said:


> At least you say the march isn't the "usual suspects"   You would n't have seen Alistar Campbell at the stop the war march. Well maybe in effigy form


I choose my words.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> I'm sure Northern Ireland and the wonderful DUP people would warmly embrace such an offering. Guaranteed to be peaceful with cream buns all round.


North and South voted remain. The Unionist rich are already realising they have more in common with the Republican South than us Brits. This is reconciliation at work. 
Money talks.


----------



## gosub (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Why would you vote anyway? You think that supra-state membership changes anything fundamentally?



Completely.   This whole Wizard of Oz journey has shown up the inadaquacies of what was lurking behind the curtain.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I voted out for Socialist reasons.


If socialism is the fucking laughable chaos and calamity dreamt up and pushed forward by the Tories, I think I need to change my politics.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Smug


Fact.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A voluntary Socialist federation of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern and Southern Ireland, as part of a voluntary federation of Socialist European states.


I'm all for that but it ain't going to happen.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I voted to Leave in the last referendum. In the main to bring down Cameron, without any expectation we would leave, but also out of a desire to express opposition to the supra-state.


Big state; smaller state...still the state, eh?


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Just putting this here:  Hate crime surge linked to Brexit and 2017 terrorist attacks


 Fucking Cameron. Fucking Tories. Fucking racists cunts.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> I'm all for that but it ain't going to happen.



Isn't that the same logic that reduces people to saying 'vote labour'? Because that's the best we can hope for?


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Isn't that the same logic that reduces people to saying 'vote labour'? Because that's the best we can hope for?


No, it's not.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> If socialism is the fucking laughable chaos and calamity dreamt up and pushed forward by the Tories, I think I need to change my politics.



Exploiting and exacerbating divisions within the ruling class is a fairly old school Socialist tactic.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Big state; smaller state...still the state, eh?



Sure, that's why I oppose both.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

gosub said:


> At least you say the march isn't the "usual suspects"   You would n't have seen Alistar Campbell at the stop the war march. Well maybe in effigy form


The march today can't neatly be boxed. We need less polarisation to avoid going Balkans.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Exploiting and exacerbating divisions within the ruling class is a fairly old school Socialist tactic.


And you think that's what's happening here? The ruling classes seem to be sitting rather pretty in all this.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sure, that's why I oppose both.


I regard those with firm views (either way) like religious zealots (manic street preachers).


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I voted out for Socialist reasons.



I admire your blind and ill-informed optimism, bit like a toddler. It's cute.

But what a fuckwit. You handed the Tory Party their Brexit to gnaw over and bring the average working man, whom you claim to give a shit about, to the brink of joblessness, homelessness and foodlessness. I do hope you're proud of your socialist manoeuvre, you dunce.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> If socialism is the fucking laughable chaos and calamity dreamt up and pushed forward by the Tories, I think I need to change my politics.


A Tory party with less hate would get lots of votes. No one ever expected you on  the barricades anyway.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> I admire your blind and ill-informed optimism, bit like a toddler. It's cute.
> 
> But what a fuckwit. You handed the Tory Party their Brexit to gnaw over and bring the average working man, whom you claim to give a shit about, to the brink of joblessness, homelessness and foodlessness. I do hope you're proud of your socialist manoeuvre, you dunce.


Don't you wanna meet me wookey tell me to my face?


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Oops, I prematurely 4,5m-aculated. It's actually at 4.48m now.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> And you think that's what's happening here? The ruling classes seem to be sitting rather pretty in all this.



You think the ruling class are relaxed about this state of affairs?

When the most enduring political representatives of the ruling class are genuinely in danger of splitting, the ruling class is not sitting pretty. They were sitting pretty in 2014, and 2015, but not after the referendum.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> And you think that's what's happening here? The ruling classes seem to be sitting rather pretty in all this.


The Tory party are on the edge of a split that could keep the left in for ever.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Don't you wanna meet me wookey tell me to my face?


all inclusive's great, innit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> all inclusive's great, innit?



You might have missed it and TopCat is certainly having fun with the open bar today but he means that Wookey offered me a straightener last night.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> all inclusive's great, innit?


I was quoting the little Blair boy from earlier to be fair.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> A Tory party with less hate would get lots of votes. No one ever expected you on  the barricades anyway.


Oh nice - getting personal already. Way to win the argument!


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You think the ruling class are relaxed about this state of affairs?
> 
> When the most enduring political representatives of the ruling class are genuinely in danger of splitting, the ruling class is not sitting pretty. They were sitting pretty in 2014, and 2015, but not after the referendum.


Innit. This is a prize worth working for.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You think the ruling class are relaxed about this state of affairs?


Reckon so, yes. Did the Iraq march bother them?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Oh nice - getting personal already. Way to win the argument!


You already lost. 17 million.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You might have missed it and TopCat is certainly having fun with the open bar today but he means that Wookey offered me a straightener last night.


Silly cunt.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> You already lost. 17 million.


And now you sound like one of those awful puffed-up bragging Brexiteers bellowing out of a car window.

#notdignified


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You might have missed it and TopCat is certainly having fun with the open bar today but he means that Wookey offered me a straightener last night.


Wookey is a horrible cunt. He/She gleefully gloated on the numbers of Leave voters who died and menaced people on here. No ban why editor ?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> And now you sound like one of those awful puffed-up bragging Brexiteers bellowing out of a car window.
> 
> #notdignified


Keep projecting.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Wookey is a horrible cunt. He/She gleefully gloated on the numbers of Leave voters who died and menaced people on here. No ban why editor ?


And now you're trying to get me to ban individual posters at your behest. You sound like a bloody boss. A Brexit boss!

If you think a poster has broken the rules, use the report post function like everyone else and then the mods will decide. Thanks.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> And now you're trying to get me to ban individual posters at your behest. You sound like a bloody boss. A Brexit boss!
> 
> If you think a poster has broken the rules, use the report post function like everyone else and then the mods will decide. Thanks.


Just be aggressive if you want. Stick the pass aggressive thanks.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Silly cunt.




I've been identified.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Just be aggressive if you want. Stick the pass aggressive thanks.


Is this code?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Reckon so, yes. Did the Iraq march bother them?



If you think the ruling class want Brexit, and that the people marching today are marching against the interests of the ruling class, then I think you've become totally disorientated by events mate.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Is this code?


You end a lot of your posts when you are cross with "thanks". It's lame. You don't mean it. Passive aggressive bullshit. Got it?


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> You end a lot of your posts when you are cross with "thanks". It's lame. You don't mean it. Passive aggressive bullshit. Got it?


And there was me thinking I was being polite.

Let me reword it then: "If you think a poster has broken the rules, use the report post function like everyone else and then the mods will decide. Youfackingcunt."


----------



## killer b (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you think the ruling class want Brexit, and that the people marching today are marching against the interests of the ruling class, then I think you've become totally disorientated by events mate.


Some of the ruling class certainly want Brexit. We're currently seeing a rare breakdown in ruling class solidarity - an opportunity if anyone knew how to grab it.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> Some of the ruling class certainly want Brexit. We're currently seeing a rare breakdown in ruling class solidarity - an opportunity if anyone knew how to grab it.


Working class vs the working class is meat and gravy to the ruling classes. Division = opportunity = power = profit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 23, 2019)

Ming said:


> I do still believe that the JRM’s of the Tory party are in for the money purely though. And yeah I still have this unprovable feeling that it’s all a pantomime to run the clock down.


This cartoon villain view of the Tories is silly. The vast majority of Tory party members aren't sitting in their clubs laughing manically about robbing the poor. They believe that their policies and actions are the best course for people and for the country, just like Labour and LD members and MPs. 

The pantomime-esque evil Tory is the type of nonsense the let the fucking LDs in. _Never mind that they want the same policies they aren't Tories so they must be on the right side_. "Austerity" isn't a Tory thing, it was started by Labour (and supported by them until 2015), it was continued and promoted by the LDs.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> Some of the ruling class certainly want Brexit. We're currently seeing a rare breakdown in ruling class solidarity - an opportunity if anyone knew how to grab it.



A minority do, certainly - and that's the point of voting leave, to exacerbate and extend this division within the ruling class. 

Agree it's a shame Corbyn and the unions aren't exploiting the division.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> And there was me thinking I was being polite.
> 
> Let me reword it then: "If you think a poster has broken the rules, use the report post function like everyone else and then the mods will decide. Youfackingcunt."


Your first venture into honesty. I salute this escapade.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A minority do, certainly - and that's the point of voting leave, to exacerbate and extend this division within the ruling class.
> 
> Agree it's a shame Corbyn and the unions aren't exploiting the division.


For those that voted Leave to fuck over the tories...your time has come.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> For those that voted Leave to fuck over the tories...your time has come.


I plan to exploit this further.


----------



## killer b (Mar 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A minority do, certainly - and that's the point of voting leave, to exacerbate and extend this division within the ruling class.
> 
> Agree it's a shame Corbyn and the unions aren't exploiting the division.


I dunno, I think they're doing their best. Under what other circumstances could Corbyn be in with a good chance of becoming the next prime minister, except when the ruling class are busy elsewhere?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Don't interfere when your enemies are fighting.


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 23, 2019)

chilango said:


> Let's pretend for a moment that the petition and march are successful, and a "Peoples' Vote" is called.
> 
> What do those of you who are Remainers do if Leave wins that vote too?



I asked a leaver friend this and he said of course he'd respect the vote next time, because people are fully-informed now.

I really hate the argument that a referendum doesn't count because one side was lying.  That is every democratic vote ever.  Both/all sides lie like fuck.  The remain campaign was and still is packed with absolute nonsense, doesn't mean if they'd won the vote it wouldn't have counted.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 23, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> I asked a leaver friend this and he said of course he'd respect the vote next time, because people are fully-informed now.
> 
> I really hate the argument that a referendum doesn't count because one side was lying.  That is every democratic vote ever.  Both/all sides lie like fuck.  The remain campaign was and still is packed with absolute nonsense, doesn't mean if they'd won the vote it wouldn't have counted.


Spot on.


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> I asked a leaver friend this and he said of course he'd respect the vote next time, because people are fully-informed now.
> 
> I really hate the argument that a referendum doesn't count because one side was lying.  That is every democratic vote ever.  Both/all sides lie like fuck.  The remain campaign was and still is packed with absolute nonsense, doesn't mean if they'd won the vote it wouldn't have counted.


Rarely do you see a lie as big and as blatant as the Brexit bus in politics. And of course the whole thing was supposed to be non binding anyway.


----------



## andysays (Mar 23, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Not really, I didn't even mention my very particular set of skills.



From your posts here, your particular set of skills appear to be colour co-ordination and being patronising about subjects you know far less about that you think.

Yeah, SpackleFrog had sincerely better hope seeing you face to face never happens...


----------



## Sunset Tree (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Rarely do you see a lie as big and as blatant as the Brexit bus in politics. And of course the whole thing was supposed to be non binding anyway.



Doesn't matter how big the lie is.  The remain campaign is claiming Brexit will literally kill people through medicine shortages.

The brexit bus doesn't matter.  People aren't passively manipulated by propaganda to that extent, they'll have voted brexit for many different reasons.  

The non-binding thing was only brought up afterwards as a cop-out, nobody thought they were voting in an 'advisory' referendum, what would even be the point.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> North and South voted remain. The Unionist rich are already realising they have more in common with the Republican South than us Brits. This is reconciliation at work.
> Money talks.


'Us brits.' 
I was born in Kent but prefer the term 'you Brits'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> The non-binding thing was only brought up afterwards as a cop-out, nobody thought they were voting in an 'advisory' referendum, what would even be the point.



Far as I know only an act of parliament is 'binding' and even then (as illustrated by Iain Duncan Smith retrospectively changing a law he'd been caught breaking) it's not really.

There definitely wasn't any binding requirement to invoke article 50 before there was any kind of plan or deal in place. That particular piece of madness was entiely May's invention.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 23, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 'Us brits.'
> I was born in Kent but prefer the term 'you Brits'.



I was born in Britain and would prefer any nationality that made a clear distinction between me and people from Kent.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I was born in Britain and would prefer any nationality that made a clear distinction between me and people from Kent.


Always the Jutes with you people, innit?


----------



## prunus (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I’m Labour’s NEC youth rep – and I won’t be at the People’s Vote march tomorrow - LabourList
> 
> Very articulate. Agree with this woman 100 percent.



 What she appears to be saying is people [apart from the rascists] voted leave as a protest against where politics in this country has left their lives, and what we should try to do therefore is make their lives better [by changing the politics of this country].  Therefore we shouldn’t question this vote. 

But there’s almost nothing about being a member of the EU that has resulted in UK politics being where it is - it’s pretty much  been entirely the choice of the largely Tory governments. Also, leaving the EU will make these people’s along with 99% of everybody’s lives worse, will depress tax take, lessen the ability of any government to do the essential investment needed in the country’s social infrastructure. 

While I agree with her that a Labour govt is to be desired (over the alternatives), not supporting movements that are trying to minimise or hopefully remove the effects of this monumental sack of shit that is brexit is counterproductive to the aims she is espousing (aims I heartily agree with personally) - to fix the broken social contract in the country and share fairly the wealth that the country undoubtably produces, but is currently massively unequally distributed.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

I would reckon (unscientifically) that where a person is born comes under the term 'accident of birth' for most people.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 23, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I would reckon (unscientifically) that where a person is born comes under the term 'accident of birth' for most people.


Except for a handful of football obsessives who want their kids to qualify for a certain national football team, that’s absolutely true.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

Out on a limb here, but if a person voted brexit because it was a protest against something does it matter?
Brexit voters won, they can own that victory and now tell us how 'Ieave' will manifest itself in the land border on the island of Ireland.
Whatever motivated any vote before the result is open to a myriad of explanations and speculations, I couldn't care less, nothing is provable anyway.
If you voted leave own it, don't leave the outcome details for the boffins to sort out.
How hard can it be? 
What's the leave plan? Honesty boxes? Barbed wire and machine gun nests? Something else?
In my useless opinion until leave voters tell us how leave works in Ireland then they're vacuous political posers.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Out on a limb here, but if a person voted brexit because it was a protest against something does it matter?
> Brexit voters won, they can own that victory and now tell us how 'Ieave' will manifest itself in the land border on the island of Ireland.
> Whatever motivated any vote before the result is open to a myriad of explanations and speculations, I couldn't care less, nothing is provable anyway.
> If you voted leave own it, don't leave the outcome details for the boffins to sort out.
> ...


If we lived in a direct democracy it _might _be fair to ask voters to 'own' the outcome of their vote, but we don't.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If we lived in a direct democracy it _might _be fair to ask voters to 'own' the outcome of their vote, but we don't.



I dunno.
Our family legend is that when my now sadly departed sister was giving birth to her first she shouted 'all men should be castrated'.
Judging by that, if a referendum was offered that said all men should go through pregnancy and childbirth*, it might have won by 52 to 48.
At that point I would've said 'Go on then Annie, you voted for it, you won, own it and explain how you will make it happen'.
Brexit might be a simpler ask than pregnant men, so I would've thought it would be a piece of resistance for the leavers to come up with all the answers.
It is down to them, not me, I lost.

*On this concept I recommend the Ursula K Le Guin book 'Left Hand of Darkness'


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 23, 2019)

Hey I don't think this has been factionalised enough, let's raise the bar.


----------



## Supine (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The Tory party are on the edge of a split that could keep the left in for ever.



What a joke. They'd probably still win the next general election.


----------



## Supine (Mar 23, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Doesn't matter how big the lie is.  The remain campaign is claiming Brexit will literally kill people through medicine shortages.



I work in the supply chain side of the pharma industry. In a no deal situation I can tell you it would be illegal for UK manufacturers to export into Europe. Lots of pharma products are only manufactured at one site for worldwide supply. No deal would have a very very real impact on thousands of patients.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2019)

See the GOTCHA stuff re the leave march, it’s really annoying. No, we aren’t at the march because we didn’t, as you keep suggesting, all have massive hard ons for Vote Leave. It’s not our fucking fault we didn’t have a lovely official progressive Vote Leave campaign with celebrity backers like we did with Yes. See that Yes video with people all with shit on their mouths stopping them from speaking and THE OIL WILL RUN OUT and that on it(I’m speaking from memory cause I can’t find it) that applies
DOUBLY  to leave voters cause they had nothing and nobody! 
The poor attendance at the march makes me feel bloody vindicated actually. 


Carry on now guys as you were


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 23, 2019)

1000 urbanites now searching “Yes Indy Scotland Faecal matter mouths”


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The Tory party are on the edge of a split that could keep the left in for ever.



having said that, the same could be said of the labour party being on the edge of a split that could keep the tories (with the limp dems and tinge being pretty much the same thing) in power for a heck of a long time.

both parties seem to be more interested in trying to get the other lot to split first than in actually coming out with anything useful

balls to the lot of it


----------



## Wilf (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Could have gone in the Guardian thread, but this is a bit of a corker...the poor little rich things can't be there on the march in person but....
> 
> View attachment 165386


Silly cunts, quite astonishing really. Though I am mildly intrigued how they managed to do it without leaving footprints. 

The answer's going to be really obvious and make me look stupid isn't it?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 23, 2019)

I've always wished I could afford to go skiing.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Silly cunts, quite astonishing really. Though I am mildly intrigued how they managed to do it without leaving footprints.
> 
> The answer's going to be really obvious and make me look stupid isn't it?


Stepped into & back out of their letters...leaving at the top of the 'C'.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Stepped into & back out of their letters...leaving at the top of the 'C'.


Oh, I can see that escape route, it was more how they got from letter to letter. I think I'm having scale problems, failing the small/far away test.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Oh, I can see that escape route, it was more how they got from letter to letter. I think I'm having scale problems, failing the small/far away test.


It's actually only 5 cm high and 10 cm long. Someone did it with their finger.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's actually only 5 cm high and 10 cm long. Someone did it with their finger.


By the same logic, as soon as the Revoke A50 petition gets 5 million, it officially gets bigger than 17 million.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 23, 2019)

By the way, I'm feeling a bit left out: _anybody want a square go?_


----------



## Duncan2 (Mar 23, 2019)

crikey it's getting like the Italian Parliament and its only the 23rd March.


----------



## Favelado (Mar 23, 2019)

Sunset Tree said:


> Doesn't matter how big the lie is.  The remain campaign is claiming Brexit will literally kill people through medicine shortages.
> 
> The brexit bus doesn't matter.  People aren't passively manipulated by propaganda to that extent, they'll have voted brexit for many different reasons.
> 
> The non-binding thing was only brought up afterwards as a cop-out, nobody thought they were voting in an 'advisory' referendum, what would even be the point.



One lie on one bus caused a two percent swing to Leave? Don't reckon.

I agree about the advisory thing. Never fucking mentioned at all until the results came in.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 23, 2019)

Favelado said:


> One lie on one bus caused a two percent swing to Leave? Don't reckon.
> 
> I agree about the advisory thing. Never fucking mentioned at all until the results came in.


If remain had had genuine links with the people, never mind the working class, they'd have been able to nail that lie.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 23, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Don't you wanna meet me wookey tell me to my face?



Thanks for the kind offer, but I'll decline. Need to wash me beard, y'know.


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This cartoon villain view of the Tories is silly. The vast majority of Tory party members aren't sitting in their clubs laughing manically about robbing the poor. They believe that their policies and actions are the best course for people and for the country, just like Labour and LD members and MPs.
> 
> The pantomime-esque evil Tory is the type of nonsense the let the fucking LDs in. _Never mind that they want the same policies they aren't Tories so they must be on the right side_. "Austerity" isn't a Tory thing, it was started by Labour (and supported by them until 2015), it was continued and promoted by the LDs.


We’ll have to agree to differ i’m afraid. I do think they sit around in policy making meetings planning on how to, for example, defeat the unions or how to sell off the NHS. I also know that they lie openly about these things (see The Health and Social Care Act 2012 to give one example) and I do think they sit around in these meetings discussing how much they think the public are willing to take (hence the post no-deal planning for military and police involvement) etc, etc. No they’re not cartoon villains. Idealism in the Tory party? Maybe when they’re younger and they’ve just finished Hayek, Rand and Strauss as undergraduates but i’m Pretty sure that doesn’t last too long. If they thought their ideas were so great for everyone they wouldn’t lie about them and conceal their real agenda (Dave ‘get rid of the green crap’ Cameron).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2019)

> No amount of cajolery, and no attempts at ethical or social seduction, can eradicate from my heart a deep burning hatred for the Tory Party that inflicted those bitter experiences on me. So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin. They condemned millions of first-class people to semi-starvation. Now the Tories are pouring out money in propaganda of all sorts and are hoping by this organised sustained mass suggestion to eradicate from our minds all memory of what we went through. But, I warn you young men and women, do not listen to what they are saying now. Do not listen to the seductions of Lord Woolton. He is a very good salesman. If you are selling shoddy stuff you have to be a good salesman. But I warn you they have not changed, or if they have they are slightly worse than they were.



plus ca change...


----------



## editor (Mar 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> plus ca change...


Wise words.


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Strong. And firm. And juicy too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 23, 2019)

editor said:


> Wise words.


Bevan summed up the tories in two words, as true now as it was then:

*What is Toryism but organised spivvery?*

Of course that organised spivvery is not confined to the tory party. Blair was also a splendid example.


----------



## Ming (Mar 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Bevan summed up the tories in two words, as true now as it was then:
> 
> *What is Toryism but organised spivvery?*
> 
> Of course that organised spivvery is not confined to the tory party. Blair was also a splendid example.


Her greatest achievement. One thing though from a personal point of view about NL. They did put a lot of money into the NHS. My nursing cohort (2004-2007) was the biggest John Moores University had ever seen and i probably wouldn’t have made it on to the course but for that (id been out of work with depression for 4 years at that point). So NL had a huge positive effect on my life.


----------



## Supine (Mar 23, 2019)

So, lots of talk about cabinet removing maybot soon. Don't know about you guys, but I'll miss her sunny smiley face


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> I dunno, I think they're doing their best. Under what other circumstances could Corbyn be in with a good chance of becoming the next prime minister, except when the ruling class are busy elsewhere?



There was a huge demo today for a People's Vote. And for all the snide comments about it (which I have completely joined in with) a lot of the people on that march would have happily joined a Tories Out demo organised by the unions or by Corbyn or both.  

Sure, some of them were chanting "Where's Jeremy Corbyn?". But if Corbyn had called a Tories Out demo, then it would be a lot harder for them to say that. 

If - and I know it's if and I know it ain't happening - if the TUC had called mass rolling protests after May brought her deal back and first pulled the 'meaningful vote' - then May and the Tories would be gone by now. And the best chance Corbyn could have of being PM would be on the back of such a movement in the streets. So I don't accept that they're doing their best, sorry, it's just not good enough.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Don't interfere when your enemies are fighting.



Why not? Best time to kill the fuckers.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Far as I know only an act of parliament is 'binding' and even then (as illustrated by Iain Duncan Smith retrospectively changing a law he'd been caught breaking) it's not really.
> 
> There definitely wasn't any binding requirement to invoke article 50 before there was any kind of plan or deal in place. That particular piece of madness was entiely May's invention.



Or the people who advised her it was a good idea. 

Not that it matters but if you're pro-Remain and want to stop Brexit, then the early invocation of A50 was incredibly useful.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> So, lots of talk about cabinet removing maybot soon. Don't know about you guys, but I'll miss her sunny smiley face



Not too soon though right? I need her to laSt 8 more days.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not too soon though right? I need her to laSt 8 more days.


I think/hoping, you can scrunch that one up for the cats to play with.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 24, 2019)

Down the cafe last night to enjoy a glass of wine and to my horror found that the price had gone up! It now costs the equivalent of 50p for a very large glass of wine. Not brexit just tourism.

Anyway met a couple that have just moved over from Britain for the quiet life. After explaining that they felt the government was in a headlong retreat from the EU bordering on a rout they asked me who I thought was pulling the strings?

Could not answer at the time but as wine level receded gave it a little thought.

I think it could be any of three USA, Russia or China.

China appears to be insinuating itself by trade and investment.

Russia, I feel, would not bother as a strong europe is still a buffer between them and the USA.

My money is on the USA, after seeing Trump on the Portuguese news telling the Portuguese prime minister that the EU was a military alliance I feel that is how the Americans see the EU.

So it seems likely they would try to take out the weakest link.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

Ming said:


> We’ll have to agree to differ i’m afraid. I do think they sit around in policy making meetings planning on how to, for example, defeat the unions or how to sell off the NHS.


Yes many Tories are in favour of restrictions on unions, in favour of privatisation but not because they want to hurt people but because they think that such policies are beneficial to the country as a whole.

Heidi Allen is a good example, her tears for camera might have been hammed up a little but she (like the vast majority of MPs) was/is no doubt deeply affected by the poverty she saw - despite voting (like MPs from many parties) for the very policies the have increased poverty. The senior management team (many Labour supporters) at my institution have just made a load of redundancies, I absolutely believe them when they say that they didn't want to make these redundancies, that they feel the people they are making redundant. But like Allen despite that feeling they have still implemented policies that damage people. In both cases arguments for the greater good, there being no other choice, that it's in the national/institutional interest would be invoked, and with a genuine belief.

Now none of this means that either the Allen or the bosses at my institution aren't wrong, they absolutely are. Nor do I feel much/any sympathy for them, I reserve that for the people they are attacking. My politics is opposed to theirs and they are the class/political enemy. But they are a class/political enemy because their interests are opposed to mine and my comrades interests not because we wear white shirts and they wear black.

Yes the Conservative party have enacted a series of policies that have increased poverty in this country, but so have Labour so have the LDs, both these parties have supported policies that have partly privatised the NHS, the education system, etc, both these parties have attacked the welfare state. Labour were in power for 12 years and did nothing to roll back trade union legislation, the liberal democrats are certainly no friends to the unions. Does that mean MPs in those parties are "just in it for the money" too? At this very moment Tory, Labour LD, green, SNP, etc councillors are attacking unions and workers are they all just in it for the money?


----------



## Supine (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not too soon though right? I need her to laSt 8 more days.



Disaster capitalist


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

Ooh my head. I awake this morning feeling a bit sad at the polarisation. I am going to duck out of arguing for a bit.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ooh my head. I awake this morning feeling a bit sad at the polarisation. I am going to duck out of arguing for a bit.



Trade unionists, socialists & folk on the left applauded Heseltine yesterday too - let that sink in


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Trade unionists, socialists & folk on the left applauded Heseltine yesterday too - let that sink in


Fuck I need a drink now.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

Yeah.

For all we might be enjoying the Tories tearing  themselves apart (and I know I am) it's not like the Left has emerged stronger from all this to take advantage is it?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yeah.
> 
> For all we might be enjoying the Tories tearing  themselves apart (and I know I am) it's not like the Left has emerged stronger from all this to take advantage is it?


Could be gen election called next week.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yeah.
> 
> For all we might be enjoying the Tories tearing  themselves apart (and I know I am) it's not like the Left has emerged stronger from all this to take advantage is it?



Fuckin joke innit?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Fuck I need a drink now.


But first breakfast then trying to be kind and nice.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Mar 24, 2019)

Manifesto

Stay in it and change it for the better:

"... rule by Europe’s peoples, government by the demos, is the shared nightmare of:

The Brussels bureaucracy (and its more than 10,000 lobbyists)
Its hit-squad inspectorates and the Troika they formed together with unelected ‘technocrats’ from other international and European institutions
The powerful Eurogroup that has no standing in law or treaty
Bailed out bankers, fund managers and resurgent oligarchies perpetually contemptuous of the multitudes and their organised expression
Political parties appealing to liberalism, democracy, freedom and solidarity to betray their most basic principles when in government
Governments that fuel cruel inequality by implementing self-defeating austerity
Media moguls who have turned fear-mongering into an art form, and a magnificent source of power and profit
Corporations in cahoots with secretive public agencies investing in the same fear to promote secrecy and a culture of surveillance that bend public opinion to their will.
The European Union was an exceptional achievement, bringing together in peace European peoples speaking different languages, submersed in different cultures, proving that it was possible to create a shared framework of human rights across a continent that was, not long ago, home to murderous chauvinism, racism and barbarity. The European Union could have been the proverbial Beacon on the Hill, showing the world how peace and solidarity may be snatched from the jaws of centuries-long conflict and bigotry."

"Two dreadful options dominate: 
• Retreat into the cocoon of our nation-states 
• Or surrender to the Brussels democracy-free zone 
There must be another course. And there is!"


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Could be gen election called next week.



Would be carnage.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> So, lots of talk about cabinet removing maybot soon. Don't know about you guys, but I'll miss her sunny smiley face


How does that work then? They had their chance and fucked it, now they have to wait another year. Perhaps they plan to bully the fuck out of her until she resigns.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 24, 2019)

Perhaps they will appeal to her good nature.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ooh my head. I awake this morning feeling a bit sad at the polarisation. I am going to duck out of arguing for a bit.


I hope you change your mind


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why not? Best time to kill the fuckers.


They might both turn on you


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Would be carnage.


Turnout sub Blair nadir level?


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Turnout sub Blair nadir level?



Who knows?

I think it could be very unpredictable


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Turnout sub Blair nadir level?


Blair Nadir lined up to play John Bercow in brexit the movie


----------



## Supine (Mar 24, 2019)

Brixton Hatter said:


> How does that work then? They had their chance and fucked it, now they have to wait another year. Perhaps they plan to bully the fuck out of her until she resigns.



They can ask her to step down. Party comes first so she is supposed to say yes. Maybot could go rogue though if she feels compelled to run us over the cliff edge.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 24, 2019)

Would Labour actually win, even given the scale of the last few years' clusterfuck?


----------



## brogdale (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Who knows?
> 
> I think it could be very unpredictable


Just thinking about all the Brexity vox pops saying _they'll never vote for any politicians ever again _etc.


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just thinking about all the Brexity vox pops saying _they'll never vote for any politicians ever again _etc.



The turnout would be interesting.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Would Labour actually win, even given the scale of the last few years' clusterfuck?



Nope.

Can't see it.

Here - one of the seats they won unexpectedly - there's been absolute silence. The activists I know are comply sucked into People's Vote and hostile to Corbyn as a result. The Labour council has continued cutting and selling everything off to speculators.

It's a heady mix of volatility and apathy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just thinking about all the Brexity vox pops saying _they'll never vote for any politicians ever again _etc.


How pleased farage must have been till he heard that


----------



## newbie (Mar 24, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> The turnout would be interesting.


Indeed, but this petition is highlighting the problem for Labour.  7 of the top 10 constituencies by signature are Labour held.  All have been signed by between a quarter and a third of eligible voters. Meanwhile 8 of the lowest 10, signed by just 2 or 3%, are also Labour held.  While most Labour seats are at one or other end of the list the middle ground, say 7-12%, is where the tories are concentrated.  In many cases that's enough to threaten their GE majority, but it doesn't expose anything like the scale of division that Corbyn has to try to hold together.  In the event of a snap single issue GE with much the same candidates (no time for deselection) it's unclear which party would be most likely to see their vote implode.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes many Tories are in favour of restrictions on unions, in favour of privatisation but not because they want to hurt people but because they think that such policies are beneficial to the country as a whole.
> 
> Heidi Allen is a good example, her tears for camera might have been hammed up a little but she (like the vast majority of MPs) was/is no doubt deeply affected by the poverty she saw - despite voting (like MPs from many parties) for the very policies the have increased poverty. The senior management team (many Labour supporters) at my institution have just made a load of redundancies, I absolutely believe them when they say that they didn't want to make these redundancies, that they feel the people they are making redundant. But like Allen despite that feeling they have still implemented policies that damage people. In both cases arguments for the greater good, there being no other choice, that it's in the national/institutional interest would be invoked, and with a genuine belief.
> 
> ...



They are in it for the capitalism, because they believe in capitalism. And part of that belief is that stratification and inequality is *desirable.* So yes, I do believe that to a large extent they do revel in redundancies and poverty and I can’t believe any twat who has made people redundant goes home particularly crying about it at night. 

It’s in their belief system to fuck us over.


----------



## mauvais (Mar 24, 2019)

Both things can be simultaneously true.


----------



## Supine (Mar 24, 2019)

A GE would be crazy. Both parties would probably stand on a leave manifesto so remainers wouldn't get closure whoever won.

I think the tories would win so it'd be interesting to see who they'd nominate to run. Not that there are any good options.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

The Tories may split next week. All bets are off.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Would Labour actually win, even given the scale of the last few years' clusterfuck?



All depends on the campaign really, and the manifesto. They made up huge ground last time.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

There'll be no winners.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> There'll be no winners.



Ahhhh c'mon. If there's an election - which there won't be any time soon if they can help it - the Tories will be out and that's good.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> There'll be no winners.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

I have no idea which thread to put this on now and realise it will be of minor interest - but i've gone with this one as it seems the one with the more lefty/etc posters on it, but why were LMHR/SUTR both marching in support of the call to revoke/re-vote yesterday when their controlling parent body - the SWP - called v. loudly and v. publicly for a leave vote?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I have no idea which thread to put this on now and realise it will be of minor interest - but i've gone with this one as it seems the one with the more lefty/etc posters on it, but why were LMHR/SUTR both marching in support of the call to revoke/re-vote yesterday when their controlling parent body - the SWP - called v. loudly and v. publicly for a leave vote?


They follow the money

They are otherwise utterly unprincipled


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

Oh, i know why they were doing this really, but such a naked display of utter hypocrisy will surely do them no favours. Anyway, just wanted to make sure the fact that this happened is noted.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I have no idea which thread to put this on now and realise it will be of minor interest - but i've gone with this one as it seems the one with the more lefty/etc posters on it, but why were LMHR/SUTR both marching in support of the call to revoke/re-vote yesterday when their controlling parent body - the SWP - called v. loudly and v. publicly for a leave vote?



Well, not that loudly. And they've been on lots of anti Brexit demo's pushing their cutting edge 'racism is bad' analysis - they'll go wherever they think they might get a hearing.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 24, 2019)

Everyone's pulling together to campaign for what they personally want.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well, not that loudly. And they've been on lots of anti Brexit demo's pushing their cutting edge 'racism is bad' analysis - they'll go wherever they think they might get a hearing.


Their publications have been arguing very vociferously and very clearly for leaving since day one though. Turning up to talk to people on the off chance you'll get a contact address if v diff from forking out for a float banners and placards in support of a position expressly against that of the party though. I know they'll argue that this groups have autonomy and that this proves it but none of us are wet enough behind the ears to buy that. Anyway, don't want to treelover the thread, so...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Their publications have been arguing very vociferously and very clearly for leaving since day one though. Turning up to talk to people on the off chance you'll get a contact address if v diff from forking out for a float banners and and placards in support of a position expressly against that of the party though. I know they'll argue that this groups have autonomy and that this proves it but none of us are wet enough behind the ears to buy that. Anyway, don't want to treelover the thread, so...



True but they always tend to put forward their 'real' ideas in print and I would think most of their members voted Remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

Actually, i may have made a rather embarrassing mistake. I saw pics of the march on this collection and it doesn't make clear where the pics change from yesterday to last weekends SUTR thing (it does if you click on them, the change appears to be after the 'build unions not borders' one). Damn.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

I think the LMHR/SUTR/"softer"SWP types are just as prone as everyone else to getting sucked into the headless chickenery of panicked "People's Vote" to stop the apocalypse nonsense.

We seen it in here.

We've seen irl too.

The fact that the PV stuff is familiar and comfortable in form no doubt aids this.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Actually, i may have made a rather embarrassing mistake. I saw pics of the march on this collection and it doesn't make clear where the pics change from yesterday to last weekends SUTR thing. Damn.



The fact that we all believe it without a second thought is telling enough though.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Mar 24, 2019)

I’m as remain as they come but I’ll take a soft brexshit if it destroys the tories for a generation.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

I'd also argue that the types who a generation ago would been the SWPs periphery are all ime vocal PVers.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I’m as remain as they come but I’ll take a soft brexshit if it destroys the tories for a generation.


I am an ardent leave man but would accept this compromise


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> They are in it for the capitalism, because they believe in capitalism. And part of that belief is that stratification and inequality is *desirable.* So yes, I do believe that to a large extent they do revel in redundancies and poverty and I can’t believe any twat who has made people redundant goes home particularly crying about it at night.
> 
> It’s in their belief system to fuck us over.


The Labour Party believes in capitalism, the LDs believe in capitalism, PC and the SNP do, the Greens do. There's not a major political party in this country that doesn't believe "that stratification and inequality [are] desirable*", *or at least acceptable. It's the belief system all these groups to fuck workers over. 

The bosses at my work that have made people redundant aren't Tories, they're Labour supporters and members. Some of them even back Corbyn but they are still attacking workers. And I'm sure they absolutely _regret_ making people redundant, not enough to not make people redundant, not enough to give up their £100K+ jobs (which is why they are the enemy) but it's something they don't want. The fact the the councillors in Birmingham that are attacking the striking workers there are Labour might mean that they view the actions as less desirable than if they were Tory councillors but if makes fuck all difference to the workers.


----------



## planetgeli (Mar 24, 2019)

Sorry redsquirrel I don’t understand what you are trying to inform me of that I don’t already know. _Other than _your belief that you think they regret these actions slightly more if they are Labour capitalists than if they are Tory capitalists. With which I disagree. Regret is just a useful word for some of them to appear kinder poverty causing twats. Which personally I don’t fall for.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I am an ardent leave man but would accept this compromise


Would that be because the backstop will remain forever because no leaver can solve the Irish land border problem?


----------



## paolo (Mar 24, 2019)

I’m in tears. I marched but my cause is fucked.

I have to bail, losing my sanity, and maybe friends.

 I railed in this thread, met some lovely oppos, kept me in check.

SpackleFrog
DotCommunist

Really I’m in tears.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

Have a hankie mate. It's clean.


----------



## andysays (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yeah.
> 
> For all we might be enjoying the Tories tearing  themselves apart (and I know I am) it's not like the Left has emerged stronger from all this to take advantage is it?


I think it would be unrealistic to expect that 'the left' (however we define that, and clearly different people will define it differently) would/will simply and suddenly emerge stronger from any Tory meltdown, like a butterfly emerging from a chrysalis.

It may create possibilities, but those possibilities will have to be taken up and built upon, which will mean hard work over the years to come. We won't really be in a position to judge whether the left has benefited from the whole Brexit business for another five or ten years, it's certainly not going to be measured by whether or not Corbyn's Labour win the next GE.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Sorry redsquirrel I don’t understand what you are trying to inform me of that I don’t already know.


I'm trying to move beyond Ming's cartoon view of the Tory party, a view is that is both silly and ends up propping Labour/LDs/Greens/PC/SNP attacks on workers.

A worker who is a Tory party member/voter is still a worker, a boss who is a Labour/LD/Green/PC/SNP member/voter is still a boss.

EDIT: Local councillors, of whatever party, that are attacking workers are the enemy, but very, very few of them are in it for the money.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> A GE would be crazy. Both parties would probably stand on a leave manifesto so remainers wouldn't get closure whoever won.


This is an interesting post. If we do a bit of a dolly zoom away from Brexit and shift focus to the background, which for many at the moment will cause a dizzying perspective disparity, that is exactly the feeling I’ve had about general elections for decades now. That no matter how much I care about the issues, there is no real choice between the parties. The neoliberal project has seen to that. Thatcher was right - for the electorate, there has long been no alternative. And even were Corbyn to win, it is likely that even his mild programme (a programme Heath might have thought daringly Hayakian) of centre left tinkering, hysterically vilified as outrageously Marxist, would be limited and stymied where necessary by the financial institutions and others, as “unworkable”.

The background to the Brexit exit debacle is the ongoing strife in the ruling classes between two competing ideologies: neoliberalism and neoconservatism. We await the outcome of the accommodation they will come to. But it is that strife and not Brexit itself which is the wider lens picture. 

The point of a GE would be to shake up the numbers in the House. That it would not deliver a Remain government does not make it ‘crazy’ from the point of view of those willing it. Because that is not what the strife is now. Remain versus Leave is over. Imagine Remain won by the same margin, and three years later Leave was able to put tens of thousands on the streets and gather close to 5 millions signatures on a position. Would you argue that the democratic result should be overturned? I highly doubt it. But that is the close up from Act 1. We’re approaching Act 3 now, and we’re seeing the whole battlefield, and the battle being fought is about the various visions of how capitalism in the UK will be done in future.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Imagine Remain won by the same margin, and three years later Leave was able to put tens of thousands on the streets and gather close to 5 millions signatures on a position.



Not overturned but I would argue that government should acknowledge the apparent change in public opinion and maybe have a second referendum as the margin was so small. I would argue this no matter what side I was on originaly.

We should also remember the 3,600,000 signatories to the original petition in 2016 all of which were ignored.

Personally I vote to elect an MP to run the country for the benefit of the country not to go running to the people when things get a little tough. After this debacle I am left wondering who can I vote for? not for anyone serving as an MP at the moment is my first thought.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 24, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Personally I vote to elect an MP to run the country for the benefit of the country not to go running to the people when things get a little tough.


Whereas I utterly reject this Burkean version of “democracy”, the trustee model of “representation”.  It isn’t democracy and it isn’t representation. It’s paternalist oligarchy. And I’m agin it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 24, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> This is an interesting post. If we do a bit of a dolly zoom away from Brexit and shift focus to the background, which for many at the moment will cause a dizzying perspective disparity, that is exactly the feeling I’ve had about general elections for decades now. That no matter how much I care about the issues, there is no real choice between the parties. The neoliberal project has seen to that. Thatcher was right - for the electorate, there has long been no alternative. And even were Corbyn to win, it is likely that even his mild programme (a programme Heath might have thought daringly Hayakian) of centre left tinkering, hysterically vilified as outrageously Marxist, would be limited and stymied where necessary by the financial institutions and others, as “unworkable”.
> 
> The background to the Brexit exit debacle is the ongoing strife in the ruling classes between two competing ideologies: neoliberalism and neoconservatism. We await the outcome of the accommodation they will come to. But it is that strife and not Brexit itself which is the wider lens picture.
> 
> The point of a GE would be to shake up the numbers in the House. That it would not deliver a Remain government does not make it ‘crazy’ from the point of view of those willing it. Because that is not what the strife is now. Remain versus Leave is over. Imagine Remain won by the same margin, and three years later Leave was able to put tens of thousands on the streets and gather close to 5 millions signatures on a position. Would you argue that the democratic result should be overturned? I highly doubt it. But that is the close up from Act 1. We’re approaching Act 3 now, and we’re seeing the whole battlefield, and the battle being fought is about the various visions of how capitalism in the UK will be done in future.


What I would be arguing, and I said something very similar right after the referendum, would be that there is very obviously a big split in the country and that there is a need to address the concerns of those wanting to leave the EU by being very careful about any future relationship or closer union. If the big demos and big petitions were being made in response to some proposal for closer union (analogous to the current situation with the May deal of ending freedom of movement, leaving customs union, etc), I'd say that they, along with the 48% who voted leave three years ago (let's assume that the numbers are reversed) were an indication that there isn't a mandate to do such a thing.

The equivalent of the above reasoning very obviously hasn't happened in the brexit process thus far, hence May's deal, hence the protests and petitions.

But this also goes back to the weakness of the referendum and the weakness of any mandate for leave that it has produced - there was no plan and there was no democratically mandated group to enact a plan. Not one of May's 'red lines' was on the ballot question. Overturning May's deal isn't overturning the referendum result. And if the result of overturning May's deal is, say, a big long extension of a year or more, then the validity of an already weak and vague mandate from more than four years ago is very seriously called into question. I don't see how it can survive without a second vote, tbh. I've rather changed my opinion on that. Process there is: there is a vote, and the political classes make a total hash of implementing the result; therefore, the process is restarted and there is another vote to validate that new process. This is a failure of political process, but it isn't necessarily an anti-democratic failure - calling the second ref is simply a new act in the democratic process to validate the start of a new political process. If leave wins again, the process to leave goes off again, hopefully with lessons learned as to why the first process failed.

And my final thought on this is to consider the politicians who are most often publicly invoking the 17.4 million and why they are doing so. They are doing so because they want a 'hard' brexit along the lines of May's deal or even harder than that. And they are a using wholly dishonest concern for democracy as a cover for pushing through that vision. Latest in a long line doing this that I just heard on R4 was a certain M. Howard.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

A question for the Remainers, particularly anyone who attended the march yesterday.

Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> A question for the Remainers, particularly anyone who attended the march yesterday.
> 
> Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?



Revoke articroll 50! there is no deal better than what we have now.

I didn't go by the way


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Revoke articroll 50! there is no deal better than what we have now.
> 
> I didn't go by the way



Yes.

But....

...what are the million on the street going to do next in order to get this to happen

That's my question.

Not "what do you want?" But "how are you going to get it?"


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yes.
> 
> But....
> 
> ...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yes.
> 
> But....
> 
> ...



They can probably rely on quite a few MP's 'listening' to be fair - certainly more than the Iraq war march could.


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They can probably rely on quite a few MP's 'listening' to be fair - certainly more than the Iraq war march could.



Personally, I think A50 is going to be revoked anyway...but not because of the protest (or petition).

Both provide useful cover for doing so though.


----------



## Beermoth (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> A question for the Remainers, particularly anyone who attended the march yesterday.
> 
> Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?



Sign another petition!


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


Abolish voting rights for those who don't have property.


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 24, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 24, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Personally I vote to elect an MP to run the country for the benefit of the country not to go running to the people when things get a little tough. After this debacle I am left wondering who can I vote for? not for anyone serving as an MP at the moment is my first thought.



My MP has recently reneged on the party and policies which got him elected, and has thrown his lot in with a bunch of pro-austerity, pro-privatisation blairites and tories. Neither I nor anyone else in this constituency seem to have any way of getting him removed from his position despite the fact he is no longer even pretending to represent the interests of the local electorate.

Representational democracy is not a real thing, it's just a new coat of paint slapped onto a medieval system.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 24, 2019)

The39thStep said:


>




Who is supposed to care what citizenship some random stranger holds?


----------



## philosophical (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> A question for the Remainers, particularly anyone who attended the march yesterday.
> 
> Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?



Depose the Queen and install Larry the cat as monarch.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Abolish voting rights for those who don't have property.


Or might die within say 10 years.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


To reform the EU?


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


They have nothing to offer leavers so all that is left is power moves, top down moves to stop it. They literally can offer nothing in the long term - the daft parts of leave can  pulled apart from the things like defence of the welfare state. That's a real political project. Remain has - _stay like this. _Scary dangerous_. Some people have no idea._


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> A question for the Remainers, particularly anyone who attended the march yesterday.
> 
> Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?


I don’t think there is anyone who can actually “do” anything with the people involved. There are already various groups trying to do something with the fact that a shitload of people were there, claiming they were all (for instance) People’s Vote supporters - but I know people who went along who were against PV. Similarly there were no borders types marching which is definitely not the general position of public remainer factions. I’ve seen comments generally saying that many marchers felt alienated by what structure there was, the speakers particularly.

There is as much or even more push to stereotype people opposed to Brexit by interested parties as people who support it and while that might pass in the press it won’t translate into organised action involving those people more detailed than “go on a march because you’re massively frustrated about one specific thing”. You can also see this on the pro Brexit side - demos there have had a clear ideological side beyond just wanting Brexit, and have been poorly attended because most leave voters are not racist loons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


Go home and prepare for brexit


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Personally, I think A50 is going to be revoked anyway...but not because of the protest (or petition).
> 
> Both provide useful cover for doing so though.


Yeh it'll be revoked when they peer into the no deal abyss and cannot see the bottom


----------



## Badgers (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, to repeat my question to Remainers, a million is a pretty powerful number of people willing to march. What should they do next?


Food stockpiling


----------



## The39thStep (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> To reform the EU?


Never hear any of that these days


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

WE LUV EU


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Never hear any of that these days


The first step would be to have a look at how the EU works. I don't know how any one could look at that and go well that's up for change, democratic change.


----------



## gosub (Mar 24, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Never hear any of that these days



Its on the agenda right after they have finished with Brexit...and reform in a way that is antihesis to how UK would reform.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They have nothing to offer leavers so all that is left is power moves, top down moves to stop it. They literally can offer nothing in the long term - *the daft parts of leave can  pulled apart from the things like defence of the welfare state. That's a real political project*. Remain has - _stay like this. _Scary dangerous_. Some people have no idea._


 It certainly could have been/maybe even still could be. But first of all 2.5 years on Corbyn hasn't managed to do this, and more importantly the wider left hasn't. That's why the battle between remain and leave is stuck on either the wrong version of what should be being debated or entirely meaningless stuff - choosing  between versions of UK and global capital, 'sovereignty', nationalism etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It certainly could have been/maybe even could be. But first of all 2.5 years on Corbyn hasn't managed to do this, and more importantly the wider left hasn't. That's why the battle between remain and leave is stuck on either the wrong version of what should be being debated or entirely meaningless stuff - choosing  between versions of UK and global capital, 'sovereignty', nationalism etc.


I agree 100%. But i think there is also a potential ground with a GE win. That's at least as possible as anything else. It's one of the three strong options. 

There is/was so much space to take if the work was put in. Each time we asked we were told it'd been put in. Here's a million man march clapping fucking tories


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 24, 2019)

The work has been put into winning internal battles - whilst single mothers being evicted by the labour party.


----------



## andysays (Mar 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Its on the agenda right after they have finished with Brexit...and reform in a way that is antihesis to how UK would reform.


Could you be a bit more specific? Whose agenda is it on and what reforms are they seeking?


----------



## chilango (Mar 24, 2019)

Seems to me that Remain's main hope us that the establishment (or at least the majority faction that oppose Brexit) pulls the plug. As butchersapron  says a top down power move.

Which could happen regardless of any remain protests. Cos, y"know it's the establishment acting to preserve the status quo in its own interests.

So...the petition and the march and all the exhortations? A waste of time and effort?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Seems to me that Remain's main hope us that the establishment (or at least the majority faction that oppose Brexit) pulls the plug. As butchersapron  says a top down power move.
> 
> Which could happen regardless of any remain protests. Cos, y"know it's the establishment acting to preserve the status quo in its own interests.
> 
> So...the petition and the march and all the exhortations? A waste of time and effort?



Well, they've certainly provided political cover to the establishment if they do pull the plug...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The work has been put into winning internal battles - whilst single mothers being evicted by the labour party.



Not even that. If there is a snap GE there will be no time for re-selection. Which, we were told, wasn't necessary. So any Corbyn govt will be about as divided as May's has been.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I have no idea which thread to put this on now and realise it will be of minor interest - but i've gone with this one as it seems the one with the more lefty/etc posters on it, but why were LMHR/SUTR both marching in support of the call to revoke/re-vote yesterday when their controlling parent body - the SWP - called v. loudly and v. publicly for a leave vote?


They were at the “school strike” climate protest the other Friday in Westminster, a bunch of guys in their 50s/60s trying to sell papers to 14 year olds with no money. They only have one tactic.


----------



## gosub (Mar 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> Could you be a bit more specific? Whose agenda is it on and what reforms are they seeking?



Introduction | Spinelli Group


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

The Remain demo and the petition are not any more or less of a power move, and certainly any more objectionable than countless other protests, from Poll Tax to disability benefits cuts. Protesters feel strongly about an issue they think is wrong, unjust and which will be think it will be highly damaging to a lot of us. How very dare they.

It might have zero effect on the eventual outcome but does anyone here actually have a problem with people expressing their feelings about it? Is it any more futile or mockable than campaigners protesting against library closures or council service cuts, which in the great majority of cases achieve sweet FA?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

Are you going to apply that same logic to the Brexit March?

And there's plenty that's objectionable about this march - Heseltine, Kendell, Umunna, LibDem shits, the pro-EU crap. That's not saying that everyone who marched is a wanker but the politics of this march are far shitter than those against the poll tax or disability cuts.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Mar 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you going to apply that same logic to the Brexit March?


Which Brexit march?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Which Brexit march?


Sorry I wasn't very clear. In the first sentence I meant the twats doing Farage's walk. In the second sentence I meant yesterdays people's vote march.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Seems to me that Remain's main hope us that the establishment (or at least the majority faction that oppose Brexit) pulls the plug. As butchersapron  says a top down power move.
> 
> Which could happen regardless of any remain protests. Cos, y"know it's the establishment acting to preserve the status quo in its own interests.
> 
> So...the petition and the march and all the exhortations? A waste of time and effort?



I still don't really see much chance of revoke... Not while there are other options, and there will be other options right up to the wire. Contingent on May resignation/no-confidence. GE in those circumstances pretty much inevitable, then the options might be for 2nd ref, or maybe Norway on a Corbyn win (I'm going to coin Corway). Revoke will poison anyone attached to it indefinitely... The problem is obviously time scale, but in the broad context of changing government etc, I suspect the EU will be more flexible than is currently apparent.

The thing that might scupper that is the relentless force that is Theresa May. I think she's trying to put off MV3 so that everyone is basically in the same boat that they would have been in without the extension; my deal or no deal tomorrow. Though even if she did that I think it would be very likely that some kind of remain amendment would be attached. And its entirely possible that no-confidence will go through first.

Anyway, wandering off your main point... Remain is a weird thing. Its brought together a lot of factions that are normally polarised. And I think that's pretty dangerous... I'm seeing a drift toward centrism, not just in my family (which is broadly m/c and therefore not that relevant here), but in friends who are... Kind of semi-political I suppose. Teachers, nurses etc, union members who understand the effects of capitalism, but have little desire to get into left wing political groups. The people who are talking to them about what is an incredibly dominant part of mainstream political discourse at the moment are the kind of people talking at the remain march. I'm a remainer, but I am literally the only person I know outside of urban who will put the left case for brexit... The politics at play may be shitty, but many of the people aren't, and they're attached to the EU in a far more abstract sense than can be written off with rational looks at its policy and foundations.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> The Remain demo and the petition are not any more or less of a power move, and certainly any more objectionable than countless other protests, from Poll Tax to disability benefits cuts. Protesters feel strongly about an issue they think is wrong, unjust and which will be think it will be highly damaging to a lot of us. How very dare they.
> 
> It might have zero effect on the eventual outcome but does anyone here actually have a problem with people expressing their feelings about it? Is it any more futile or mockable than campaigners protesting against library closures or council service cuts, which in the great majority of cases achieve sweet FA?



Are you honestly comparing that to the anti poll tax demos?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> The politics at play may be shitty, but many of the people aren't, and they're attached to the EU in a far more abstract sense than can be written off with rational looks at its policy and foundations.


This was basically what I was trying to say above.


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you honestly comparing that to the anti poll tax demos?


I’m comparing the principle of protesting for issues one cares about, which appears to be arbitrary ITT.

But if you think the Poll Tax protests is a bad comparison, you can use any of the countless  small scale protests up and down the country, most of which have far less of a chance of succeeding than Remain protests. Do you think they are worthy of mockery or contempt too?


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you going to apply that same logic to the Brexit March?
> 
> And there's plenty that's objectionable about this march - Heseltine, Kendell, Umunna, LibDem shits, the pro-EU crap. That's not saying that everyone who marched is a wanker but the politics of this march are far shitter than those against the poll tax or disability cuts.


I don’t think one should criticise or dismiss a march of nearly a million ordinary people because a few dislakeable politicians are tagging along. Certainly given the amount of truly despicable individuals who are amongst the the Brexit support. And at a far higher and more objectionable level than their Remain opposites, one could add.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I’m comparing the principle of protesting for issues one cares about, which appears to be arbitrary ITT.
> 
> But if you think the Poll Tax protests is a bad comparison, you can use any of the countless  small scale protests up and down the country, most of which have far less of a chance of succeeding than Remain protests. Do you think they are worthy of mockery or contempt too?



I've *been* on lots of protests I mocked and held in contempt mate, that's not the point. It's ludicrous to compare protesting against a vicious Thatcherite attack on the working class to protesting to remain in a Thatcherite trade bloc. What are you on?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I don’t think one should criticise or dismiss a march of nearly a million ordinary people because a few dislakeable politicians are tagging along. Certainly given the amount of truly despicable individuals who are amongst the the Brexit support. And at a far higher and more objectionable level than their Remain opposites, one could add.


Dismiss no, but fuck off with criticise. Heseltine, Kendell, the tinge, yellow wankers, pro-EU nonsense - of course anyone who believes in socialism should be criticising these people and their politics. And I think a lot of the people on that march what criticise these twats.

There were a lot of people with a lot of different politics at yesterday's march but it's just ostrich nonsense to pretend that the politics of yesterday's march are equivalent to those of the anti-poll tax riots or cuts to disability. FFS some of those marching yesterday are the shits that instigated those cuts.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I don’t think one should criticise or dismiss a march of nearly a million ordinary people because a few dislakeable politicians are tagging along. Certainly given the amount of truly despicable individuals who are amongst the the Brexit support. And at a far higher and more objectionable level than their Remain opposites, one could add.



There we go - Tony Blair, Anna Soubry and Alistair Campbell aren't as bad as Farage. Lesser evil. Sure. At least we know where you stand now eh? Sure, Blair is responsible for the death of a million Iraqi's but Farage is _despicable._


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Mar 24, 2019)

chilango said:


> Getting a million out onto the streets is impressive. What should be done with all those people now? What's the next step?



They should go back to their constituencies and prepare for...whatever May, Lidington, Gove, Chuka & Soubry tell them is going to happen next.


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog and redsquirrel 

Fair enough, I’m happy to admit the Poll Tax comparison was wholly inappropriate. But if we can move on from that now, the point I was trying to make however badly put is that I’m perceiving a general vibe of contempt ITT towards the march and their participants, for no meritable reason I can think of.

Almost as if some of those here deriding the marchers actually have a problem with the right to protest by citizens if they don’t agree with the protesters’s views, or if the cause seems a lost one. Not from everyone here of course. But it shouldn’t happen in the first place.


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I’m comparing the principle of protesting for issues one cares about, which appears to be arbitrary ITT.
> 
> But if you think the Poll Tax protests is a bad comparison, you can use any of the countless  small scale protests up and down the country, most of which have far less of a chance of succeeding than Remain protests. Do you think they are worthy of mockery or contempt too?


No to sex education!


----------



## TopCat (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I don’t think one should criticise or dismiss a march of nearly a million ordinary people because a few dislakeable politicians are tagging along. Certainly given the amount of truly despicable individuals who are amongst the the Brexit support. And at a far higher and more objectionable level than their Remain opposites, one could add.


One could add but one would be wrong.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> There we go - Tony Blair, Anna Soubry and Alistair Campbell aren't as bad as Farage. Lesser evil. Sure. At least we know where you stand now eh? Sure, Blair is responsible for the death of a million Iraqi's but Farage is _despicable._



If Farage wasn't Farage someone else would be. Blair on the other hand, is a different category of thing altogether.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> Almost as if some of those here deriding the marchers actually have a problem with the right to protest by citizens if they don’t agree with the protesters’s views, or if the cause seems a lost one. Not from everyone here of course. But it shouldn’t happen in the first place.


What TopCat said. Total effing cobblers, no one has made any such argument.

EDIT: And in fact I don't see a great deal of contempt for yesterday's march on this thread.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What TopCat said. Total effing cobblers, no one has made any such argument.
> 
> EDIT: And in fact I don't see a great deal of contempt for yesterday's march on this thread.


Quite a bit for the speakers, only to be expected


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> There we go - Tony Blair, Anna Soubry and Alistair Campbell aren't as bad as Farage. Lesser evil. Sure. At least we know where you stand now eh? Sure, Blair is responsible for the death of a million Iraqi's but Farage is _despicable._


Dismissing a protest or viewpoint simply because some nasty people adhere to it seems to me as utterly absurd as is flawed. There will not have been a single issue in human history that was not supported by some truly abominable individuals.

So since it is certainly a fact that both sides of the Brexit debate have deeply objectionable supporters, what are you proposing here? That both Leave and Remain protesters should be dismissed since they both have odious cheerleaders? Or are you actually suggesting we should play some kind of top trumps game and weight up which side has the lower combined evilness points to decide which one is in the right?


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Quite a bit for the speakers, only to be expected


Yep, expected and justified.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> Dismissing a protest or viewpoint simply because some nasty people adhere to it seems to me as utterly absurd as is flawed. There will not have been a single issue in human history that was not supported by some truly abominable individuals.
> 
> So since it is certainly a fact that both sides of the Brexit debate have deeply objectionable supporters, what are you proposing here? That both Leave and Remain protesters should be dismissed since they both have odious cheerleaders? Or are you actually suggesting we should play some kind of top trumps game and weight up which side has the lower combined evilness points to decide which one is in the right?



That's what you did don't flip it on me!

I'm glad you can acknowledge the poll tax demo comparison was way off. Thanks for that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> Dismissing a protest or viewpoint simply because some nasty people adhere to it seems to me as utterly absurd as is flawed. There will not have been a single issue in human history that was not supported by some truly abominable individuals.


Who's dismissed it? 



T & P said:


> So since it is certainly a fact that both sides of the Brexit debate have deeply objectionable supporters, what are you proposing here? That both Leave and Remain protesters should be dismissed since they both have odious cheerleaders?* Or are you actually suggesting we should play some kind of top trumps game and weight up which side has the lower combined evilness points to decide which one is in the right?*


Hang on, you're the one suggesting this by arguing against against criticism of the LDs etc, while calling those on the Leave side despicable.


----------



## T & P (Mar 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Who's dismissed it?
> 
> Hang on, you're the one suggesting this by arguing against against criticism of the LDs etc, while calling those on the Leave side despicable.


I didn’t “call those on the Leave side despicable”. Please do not twist my words like that. I said the Leave side also has plenty of despicable supporters, *after* you brought up the concept of judging a march by whether it is attended by some objectionable individuals.

I didn’t start this particular game, which is not the best way to judge the merits of a given march or a cause IMO.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 24, 2019)

So, hold on.

No vote at all this week = no deal Brexit on Friday, right?

Pass MV3 = Extension until May 22nd to sort the legal gubbins.

Fail MV3 = Two week extension to basically sort our shit out (lol)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 24, 2019)

Balbi said:


> So, hold on.
> 
> No vote at all this week = no deal Brexit on Friday, right?
> 
> ...


Basically, yes, but the first won't happen. There will be either option 2 or 3. Looking increasingly like 3. What that will then mean, um, er, fuck knows.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Basically, yes, but the first won't happen. There will be either option 2 or 3. Looking increasingly like 3. What that will then mean, um, er, fuck knows.



Yeah, but hasn't Bercow told her to get to fuck with MV3?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 24, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Yeah, but hasn't Bercow told her to get to fuck with MV3?


Yeah, but they can still amend the date on the brexit laws to the new date of 12 April even without MV3 - they don't need to ask for further EU permission to do that. No deal this Friday won't happen - there is no excuse for it to happen.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah, but they can still amend the date on the brexit laws to the new date of 12 April even without MV3. No deal this Friday won't happen - there is no excuse for it to happen.


 
Yeah nah though, I thought the 12 April vote was *contingent* on MV3 passing before the Friday deadline


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 24, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Yeah nah though, I thought the 12 April vote was *contingent* on MV3 passing before the Friday deadline


No, that's the 22 May date. 12 April is for if when nothing gets agreed at all by Friday.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Yeah nah though, I thought the 12 April vote was *contingent* on MV3 passing before the Friday deadline



No... April 12th is the new crunch deadline. A passed MV3 allows an extension until 22 May. I think.

e2a: as lbj said.


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2019)

So does May have to get MV3 out before Friday?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> So does May have to get MV3 out before Friday?


Don't think so, no, but they'll need to amend the legislation to 12 April by then. It is the deal that WILL NOT DIE.


----------



## Balbi (Mar 24, 2019)

The view from this former colonial holding is; _*"And these useless cunts used to be in charge of us?"*_


----------



## Cid (Mar 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Don't think so, no, but they'll need to amend the legislation to 12 April by then. It is the deal that WILL NOT DIE.



Hmm... looking at the legislation I _think_ it's possible for a minister to amend exit day. I think my theory is still that May wants an MV3 crunch vote, but that seems increasingly unlikely. And she doesn't stand a snowball's while there is still potential for other options on the remain/soft brexit side.


----------



## DexterTCN (Mar 24, 2019)

Balbi said:


> So, hold on.
> 
> No vote at all this week = no deal Brexit on Friday, right?
> 
> ...


Yes...and they're all still arguing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 24, 2019)

T & P said:


> I didn’t “call those on the Leave side despicable”. Please do not twist my words like that. I said the Leave side also has plenty of despicable supporters, *after* you brought up the concept of judging a march by whether it is attended by some objectionable individuals.
> 
> I didn’t start this particular game, which is not the best way to judge the merits of a given march or a cause IMO.



You literally did start that game.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 25, 2019)

Balbi said:


> The view from this former colonial holding is; _*"And these useless cunts used to be in charge of us?"*_



and they are still in charge of us!


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 25, 2019)

How many days until Brexit?


----------



## teuchter (Mar 25, 2019)

17 Million Signatures to Revoke Article 50

Just 12 million to go.


----------



## Cid (Mar 25, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> How many days until Brexit?



Yeah, well that’s already wrong isn’t it?


----------



## Wilf (Mar 25, 2019)

Edit: better on the other brexit thread.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, well that’s already wrong isn’t it?



I know, and this is why i quit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 25, 2019)

Momentous announcement due shortly. Oh my God. Hold onto your hats. Take the afternoon off. Do drastic things. Here we go!

Brexit: PM due to cry wolf PM to make Brexit statement in Commons


----------



## chilango (Mar 25, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Momentous announcement due shortly. Oh my God. Hold onto your hats. Take the afternoon off. Do drastic things. Here we go!
> 
> Brexit: PM due to cry wolf PM to make Brexit statement in Commons



I reckon people have been winding her up, pretending they'll now vote for her deal....

...just so she'll move MV3, lose horribly and (they hope) finally fuck off.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> 17 Million Signatures to Revoke Article 50
> 
> Just 12 million to go.



Pity the 16,141,121 votes for remain count for nothing and are ignored and also 3,600,000 signatures for a second referendum that have been ignored.

Is there a pattern emerging here?


----------



## collectordave (Mar 26, 2019)

Just been reading this article. Brexit debate: Do petitions ever work? and found something that needs understanding.

"Months later, the government said it would try and change the relevant EU law so the tax could be removed."

There was no relevant EU law only laws passed by our own government, seems we have all been hoodwinked for a long time by our own government.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 26, 2019)

Letwin ammendment passes by 329 to 302.

That's 52% to 48%


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 26, 2019)

chilango said:


> I reckon people have been winding her up, pretending they'll now vote for her deal....
> 
> ...just so she'll move MV3, lose horribly and (they hope) finally fuck off.


It really is like the common room at Eton isn't it - with TM as a grammar school girl they're patronising ...
I don't want important decisions to be done this way.


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 26, 2019)

So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?


we are leaving on the greek kalends


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?


This song has the answer


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?


this song has the answer


----------



## Supine (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?



Yes. It's definately one of those or another date. It is also definately happening and not happening depending on which way the wind blows.


----------



## andysays (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?





Ranbay said:


> View attachment 165499


----------



## belboid (Mar 26, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Pity the 16,141,121 votes for remain count for nothing and are ignored and also 3,600,000 signatures for a second referendum that have been ignored.
> 
> Is there a pattern emerging here?


Probably, but not the one you are making up.

The 2nd referendum petition didn't get ignored, it got debated in parliament. And lost. Quite a difference.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?



Fuck knows, but from what we've seen so far, I think April 1 could be a date to watch.


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 26, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Fuck knows, but from what we've seen so far, I think April 1 could be a date to watch.


You think Southgate is going to make his move then?


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yes. It's definately one of those or another date. It is also definately happening and not happening depending on which way the wind blows.


I think the answer you were looking for is here...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> I think the answer you were looking for is here...


----------



## Wilf (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?


I thought you were the expert on how many days there were left.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I thought you were the expert on how many days there were left.


he was


----------



## Ranbay (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I thought you were the expert on how many days there were left.



I quit when it got too hard.


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I quit when it got too hard.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I quit when it got too hard.


_Did Mrs May quit?_ No she didn't. Remember, we do these things not because they are easy, but because they are hard (Brexit).


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> _Did Mrs May quit?_ No she didn't.


only because she can't spell quit


----------



## friedaweed (Mar 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> only because she can't spell quit


quite


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 26, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Pity the 16,141,121 votes for remain count for nothing and are ignored and also 3,600,000 signatures for a second referendum that have been ignored.
> 
> Is there a pattern emerging here?



As opposed to all those democratic decisions which produce the result that everyone wants.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 26, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Pity the 16,141,121 votes for remain count for nothing


Why have so many people forgotten how voting works? 

The people who vote get their votes counted. The people who don’t vote don’t. In order to win, a person, party, or proposition has to beat another (maybe more than one other) person, party or proposition.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Why have so many people forgotten how voting works?
> 
> The people who vote get their votes counted. The people who don’t vote don’t. In order to win, a person, party, or proposition has to beat another (maybe more than one other) person, party or proposition.


Sounds a bit far fetched, can't see it ever catching on.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 26, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Pity the 16,141,121 votes for remain count for nothing and are ignored and also 3,600,000 signatures for a second referendum that have been ignored.
> 
> Is there a pattern emerging here?


But what would _not ignoring _the 48% mean? What actions should follow from not ignoring them? 

Does not ignoring them mean having a second referendum?
(Hint: that would actually be ignoring the _52_%).


----------



## mauvais (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what would _not ignoring _the 48% mean? What actions should follow from not ignoring them?
> 
> Does not ignoring them mean having a second referendum?
> (Hint: that would actually be ignoring the _52_%).


It's simple. We leave the EU but we only leave it a little bit. This could take various different forms. For example, at 110,994 km², Bulgaria makes up 2.5% of the EU's surface area. So we could nuke that, possibly twice.


----------



## Wilf (Mar 26, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's simple. We leave the EU but we only leave it a little bit. This could take various different forms. For example, at 110,994 km², Bulgaria makes up 2.5% of the EU's surface area. So we could nuke that, possibly twice.


Could we just be in for the winter months? So much warmer over there.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Mar 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So are we leaving on Friday or in April or May or what now?



it may not be as simple as that


----------



## marty21 (Mar 26, 2019)

We could just leave for one day , rejoin the next day . Meets the demand of the referendum,  it didnt state how long we left for tbf


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Could we just be in for the winter months? So much warmer over there.


Not in Sweden


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

marty21 said:


> We could just leave for one day , rejoin the next day . Meets the demand of the referendum,  it didnt state how long we left for tbf


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what would _not ignoring _the 48% mean? What actions should follow from not ignoring them?
> 
> Does not ignoring them mean having a second referendum?
> (Hint: that would actually be ignoring the _52_%).


No it wouldn't, this would a vote on the practicalities of the leaving agreement as the previous vote was a vote on the principle


----------



## tommers (Mar 26, 2019)

marty21 said:


> We could just leave for one day , rejoin the next day . Meets the demand of the referendum,  it didnt state how long we left for tbf


We should definitely revoke article 50 and then trigger it again the next day, just for lols.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 26, 2019)

marty21 said:


> We could just leave for one day , rejoin the next day . Meets the demand of the referendum,  it didnt state how long we left for tbf


If I could be for only an hour
If I could be for an hour every day
If I could be for just one little hour
Cute in a stupid ass way


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

marty21 said:


> We could just leave for one day , rejoin the next day . Meets the demand of the referendum,  it didnt state how long we left for tbf


We could be leavers 
Just for one day


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 26, 2019)

in, out. when do we get to shake it all about?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> in, out. when do we get to shake it all about?


When we jostle may's limo before we tip it over with her inside


----------



## mojo pixy (Mar 26, 2019)

into the river, naturally. that river is well-placed once we actually get inside the building. currents notoriously treacherous around the bridge supports


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 26, 2019)

I've given up watching the news*. Has anything significant happened today re Brexit.

*Two reasons, one, the urge to throw something at May's face on the screen, two, the threat of violence from Mrs Sas if I don't stop yelling at the TV.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 26, 2019)

Sasaferrato said:


> I've given up watching the news*. Has anything significant happened today re Brexit.
> 
> *Two reasons, one, the urge to throw something at May's face on the screen, two, the threat of violence from Mrs Sas if I don't stop yelling at the TV.


Try listening to the radio


----------



## teqniq (Mar 26, 2019)

Revoke Article 50 petition: Government rejects plea by 5.8 million people to cancel Brexit


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 26, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Revoke Article 50 petition: Government rejects plea by 5.8 million people to cancel Brexit


----------



## Sasaferrato (Mar 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Try listening to the radio



Good idea, smaller target.  Happened to be up early today, car MOT and service, so heard hapless Hancock on Today on R4... what a... I don't know actually know what a...


----------



## collectordave (Mar 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But what would _not ignoring _the 48% mean? What actions should follow from not ignoring them?
> 
> Does not ignoring them mean having a second referendum?
> (Hint: that would actually be ignoring the _52_%).



Depending on the interpretation of the will of the people it is not 52% of the british people that voted to exit the EU just using Uk citizens then only 25% voted to leave but using the wikipedia for british people then it is only 12%.

In the words of winston Churchill there are Lies,Damned Lies and Statistics.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> As opposed to all those democratic decisions which produce the result that everyone wants.



Please name one result that everyone wanted, It seems to me there are allways a few  left overs that did not want whatever decision was made.


----------



## Badgers (Mar 27, 2019)

Fair point


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Depending on the interpretation of the will of the people it is not 52% of the british people that voted to exit the EU just using Uk citizens then only 25% voted to leave but using the wikipedia for british people then it is only 12%.
> 
> In the words of winston Churchill there are Lies,Damned Lies and Statistics.


Er Benjamin Disraeli. Not the racist Winston Spencer Churchill.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 27, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Fair point


How so? If you support representative democracy his positions are not (necessarily) inconsistent.

Representatives are empowered to take decisions on the behalf of the electorate. And that's exactly what many of those that support Remain have been arguing _for _- that A50 should simply be revoked and leaving the EU forgotten about, that referendums are bad, that only the qualified should be allowed to determine political policy.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Please name one result that everyone wanted, It seems to me there are allways a few  left overs that did not want whatever decision was made.


Can you name _any_ election that delivered “the result that everyone wanted”?  That was Frank’s point.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Can you name _any_ election that delivered “the result that everyone wanted”?  That was Frank’s point.



Closest I can find is the 2013 Falklands referendum on remaining part of the UK, which delivered the result all but three voters wanted, for a 99.80% win. A Nazi referendum on remilitarising the Rhineland got 100%, but they apparently didn't include a "No" option.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 27, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Please name one result that everyone wanted, It seems to me there are allways a few left overs that did not want whatever decision was made.





danny la rouge said:


> Can you name _any_ election that delivered “the result that everyone wanted”?  That was Frank’s point.



Elections not mentioned just democratic decisions.

My point is asking for any democratic decision, election or referendum that delivered the result everyone wanted.

I cannot think of any democratic decision (or election or referendum) that delivered such a result.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Elections not mentioned just democratic decisions.
> 
> My point is asking for any democratic decision, election or referendum that delivered the result everyone wanted.
> 
> I cannot think of any democratic decision (or election or referendum) that delivered such a result.


Exactly. 

So your point in singling out the Brexit Ref is...?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Mar 27, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Closest I can find is the 2013 Falklands referendum on remaining part of the UK, which delivered the result all but three voters wanted, for a 99.80% win. A Nazi referendum on remilitarising the Rhineland got 100%, but they apparently didn't include a "No" option.



(((ejakulierender Penis)))


----------



## maomao (Mar 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> (((ejakulierender Penis)))


Anyone wondering what that means don't Google search it and definitely don't Google image search it.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> (((ejakulierender Penis)))


----------



## butchersapron (Mar 27, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Fair point



So channel 4  news are officially campaigning for a second vote now.  OK.


----------



## Poi E (Mar 27, 2019)

He should have had that guy on the ropes and then down. Far to fucking respectful of people in power.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> A Nazi referendum on remilitarising the Rhineland got 100%, but they apparently didn't include a "No" option.


the printers were most remiss


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 27, 2019)

Just watched that video - the points Bradley make are perfectly reasonable. You may not agree with them but they aren't inconsistent or contradictory.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 27, 2019)

The naked exposure of the impotence of the liberal media (Guardian, Channel 4, all the others) in the face of mass disillusionment is not quite as astonishing and satisfying as the deepening fissures which Brexit is opening up within both the Conservative and Labour parties, but it's running a close third.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Depending on the interpretation of the will of the people it is not 52% of the british people that voted to exit the EU just using Uk citizens then only 25% voted to leave but using the wikipedia for british people then it is only 12%.
> 
> In the words of winston Churchill there are Lies,Damned Lies and Statistics.


The government response to the petition was as follows. Leaving aside whether or not you are disappointed by the response, tell us if you will whether it is correct, and if not, how. 

« It remains the Government’s firm policy not to revoke Article 50. We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.

Revoking Article 50, and thereby remaining in the European Union, would undermine both our democracy and the trust that millions of voters have placed in Government.

The Government acknowledges the considerable number of people who have signed this petition. However, close to three quarters of the electorate took part in the 2016 referendum, trusting that the result would be respected. This Government wrote to every household prior to the referendum, promising that the outcome of the referendum would be implemented. 17.4 million people then voted to leave the European Union, providing the biggest democratic mandate for any course of action ever directed at UK Government.

British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.

This Government stands by this commitment.

Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by Government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy. As the Prime Minister has said, failing to deliver Brexit would cause “potentially irreparable damage to public trust”, and it is imperative that people can trust their Government to respect their votes and deliver the best outcome for them.

Department for Exiting the European Union. »


----------



## gosub (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The government response to the petition was as follows. Leaving aside whether or not you are disappointed by the response, tell us if you will whether it is correct, and if not, how.
> 
> « It remains the Government’s firm policy not to revoke Article 50. We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.
> 
> ...


Such a shame the government did nt bother sticking to the options as outlined in their letter to every household


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and *work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone*, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.



I think that bit is incorrect but Tories. The rest of it is perfectly reasonable.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Such a shame the government did nt bother sticking to the options as outlined in their letter to every household


I don’t remember it. What did it say?


----------



## gosub (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t remember it. What did it say?


What are the alternatives? - EU Referendum


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> What are the alternatives? - EU Referendum


While of course I’m aware of those alternatives, I have no recollection of receiving such a letter from the government. This was issued to all households during the referendum campaign, you say?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> While of course I’m aware of those alternatives, I have no recollection of receiving such a letter from the government. This was issued to all households during the referendum campaign, you say?



All households on the electoral register. I chucked mine straight in recycling and didn't read it.


----------



## kabbes (Mar 27, 2019)

I do actually remember getting that now I see it again


----------



## gosub (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> While of course I’m aware of those alternatives, I have no recollection of receiving such a letter from the government. This was issued to all households during the referendum campaign, you say?


Yep £10million of tax payers money was spent on the Pro Remain 16 page booklet... It is estimated to have added 3% to Remain's vote tally.... Rarely gets talked about coz Remain lost., would be a bit like banging on about Hilary Clinton's campaign


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Yep £10million of tax payers money was spent on the Pro Remain 16 page booklet... It is estimated to have added 3% to Remain's vote tally.... Rarely gets talked about coz Remain lost., would be a bit like banging on about Hilary Clinton's campaign


£10m on that, millions on the pizza-ferry people... someone's coining it in and it's not me


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Yep £10million of tax payers money was spent on the Pro Remain 16 page booklet... It is estimated to have added 3% to Remain's vote tally.... Rarely gets talked about coz Remain lost., would be a bit like banging on about Hilary Clinton's campaign


Ah, the 16-page booklet! I do remember that. I binned it without reading it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Ah, the 16-page booklet! I do remember that. I binned it without reading it.


in the recycling, i hope


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> in the recycling, i hope


It’s impossible not to recycle here.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Mar 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s impossible not to recycle here.



Impossible not to recycle and impossible to leave the EU. As things should be.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Such a shame the government did nt bother sticking to the options as outlined in their letter to every household


What would that have looked like? Nothing in the leaflet outlines how the negotiations would be approached. It just gives some examples of deals that other countries have, points out that they were not easily come by and does not say that we would necessarily be able to achieve something similar. 

The main thing that seems to have been missed out in the leaflet is the implication of changes to the border between the UK and Ireland.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 27, 2019)

No pre referendum booklet received in y household.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Exactly.
> 
> So your point in singling out the Brexit Ref is...?





danny la rouge said:


> British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.



I am not singling out the brexit referendum. It just appears to be what people are talking about at the moment.

The government response to the brexit petition (nearly 6,000,000 now ) above singles out the 2017 general election.

What it says is almost completly true except that it was just over 82% of those who voted voted for parties etc.

However statistics are quoted so things can be stated in a different way.

British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where even when given no other option only just over half the British electorate voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.


----------



## Humberto (Mar 28, 2019)

All hail the referendum.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 28, 2019)

collectordave said:


> I am not singling out the brexit referendum. It just appears to be what people are talking about at the moment.
> 
> The government response to the brexit petition (nearly 6,000,000 now ) above singles out the 2017 general election.
> 
> ...


OK, the point about the GE I accept: there were no other options.  But what are you arguing? That because in every election some people don’t vote (often including me), and some people vote for the losing proposition, that elections should be discounted?  You need to state your thesis more clearly.


----------



## danny la rouge (Mar 28, 2019)

Humberto said:


> All hail the referendum.


Meaning?


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

collectordave said:


> I am not singling out the brexit referendum. It just appears to be what people are talking about at the moment.
> 
> The government response to the brexit petition (nearly 6,000,000 now ) above singles out the 2017 general election.
> 
> ...


When will you realise that just because something is in a manifesto it does not follow it will be acted on?


----------



## Sprocket. (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When will you realise that just because something is in a manifesto it does not follow it will be acted on?



It’s more of, a manifest? Oh!


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> It’s more of, a manifest? Oh!


You've reminded me of auld Emmanuel (manny) festo who played the tambourine for ruddy yurts until that awful night at the roundhouse


----------



## ferdinand (Mar 28, 2019)

I think that Brexit highlights the need for a radical overhaul of Government. Not only the ruling system but also our ability to cast meaningful votes. I was not qualified to make the decision on Brexit. politicians have proved that they are not capable of planning, or keeping to their promises and we follow like bleating sheep. Unfortunately democracy means, ' We have sewn the system up so that when you kick us out we just lounge on the opposite side leather seats waiting for our next turn.' As for the House of Lords, well anyone visiting Earth from outer space would would be speechless.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When will you realise that just because something is in a manifesto it does not follow it will be acted on?



History suggests it’s a strong indicator that it won’t be and the opposite will.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> History suggests it’s a strong indicator that it won’t be and the opposite will.


Yeh right. History suggests. Does it really? I think not.


----------



## Flavour (Mar 28, 2019)

ferdinand said:


> I was not qualified to make the decision on Brexit.



Is that a nice way of saying that everyone who voted Leave wouldn't have done so if they'd had "better information"?


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh right. History suggests. Does it really? I think not.



Lol. Have a nice lunch or something you grump.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Lol. Have a nice lunch or something you grump.


it's 9.43. it's too early for dinner.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Lol. Have a nice lunch or something you grump.


it's a very simple point: putting something in a manifesto doesn't mean it will be adhered to. there's the lib dems' tuition fees. there's quite a few parts of the nsdap 20 point programme. not a given that something in there will be pursued.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's 9.43. it's too early for dinner.


Have a nice cup of tea somewhere away from a keyboard.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's a very simple point: putting something in a manifesto doesn't mean it will be adhered to. there's the lib dems' tuition fees. there's quite a few parts of the nsdap 20 point programme. not a given that something in there will be pursued.



Yes. I was agreeing with you. Manifestos are tissue paper and anyone outraged that they are not followed is naive. Even with the best will (very little on offer) circumstances may change.


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's 9.43. it's too early for dinner.



Now that’s simply not true.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Now that’s simply not true.



Indeed, he posted at 9.44.


----------



## Yossarian (Mar 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> There will be climbdowns and fudges and lots of jiggery pokery until there’s just enough argument for a second referendum and we will be back where we where – apart from seeing the near complete meltdown of the british political establishment and possible splitting or even destruction of both of the main parties.



I've got to admit, when the deadline of 29 March 2019 was set two years ago, I didn't think "Is Brexit actually going to happen" would still be a question people were asking on 28 March. Not sure how anybody can look at the clown show in Parliament and still conclude that the EU is the source of Britain's problems...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 28, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I've got to admit, when the deadline of 29 March 2019 was set two years ago, I didn't think "Is Brexit actually going to happen" would still be a question people were asking on 28 March. Not sure how anybody can look at the clown show in Parliament and still conclude that the EU is the source of Britain's problems...


britain's problems would be solved by demolishing the palace of westminster with the legislators inside and convening a constituent assembly at the excel centre or some other similar sized venue


----------



## Dogsauce (Mar 28, 2019)

Maybe Sealand could invade and take over. Pretty sure they have boats so that’s at least one step ahead of the current shower.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 28, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Maybe Sealand could invade and take over. Pretty sure they have boats so that’s at least one step ahead of the current shower.





There's only one person on Sealand, holding the fort, and knowing the old hippy, he will not be invading anywhere.


----------



## gosub (Mar 28, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I've got to admit, when the deadline of 29 March 2019 was set two years ago, I didn't think "Is Brexit actually going to happen" would still be a question people were asking on 28 March. Not sure how anybody can look at the clown show in Parliament and still conclude that the EU is the source of Britain's problems...



There is more than enough blame to share round. But yep.




I am going to spend £2.49 tomorrow streaming Passport to Pimlico if no tv scheduler had the wit to put it on.


----------



## collectordave (Mar 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> britain's problems would be solved by demolishing the palace of westminster with the legislators inside and convening a constituent assembly at the excel centre or some other similar sized venue



The local primary school playground then we can play play spot the difference MP or minor


----------



## collectordave (Mar 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> OK, the point about the GE I accept: there were no other options. But what are you arguing? That because in every election some people don’t vote (often including me), and some people vote for the losing proposition, that elections should be discounted? You need to state your thesis more clearly.



Not arguing at all and no thesis. Just giving a point to ponder.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 28, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Mar 29, 2019)




----------



## kabbes (Mar 29, 2019)

I was just watching some old Peter O’Hanra-hanrahan clips and was surprised at the relevance.  The second one in particular is Chris Grayling.


----------



## William of Walworth (Mar 29, 2019)

gosub said:
			
		

> What are the alternatives? - EU Referendum





danny la rouge said:


> While of course I’m aware of those alternatives, I have no recollection of receiving such a letter from the government. This was issued to all households during the referendum campaign, you say?



ETA : *APOLOGIES*, Health warning on what I posted below .... this quote from National Archives slightly clarifies? -- this statement was prominent on the NA page too  :




			
				National Archives said:
			
		

> This site contains government information on the EU referendum. No material was published on this website between 27 May and 23 June 2016, in line with the restrictions set out in the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.



But 23rd June 2016 date still looks like the date of the leaflet being published, no?? As the date of being Archived is given as 15th August 2016.

So some of my earlier points (below) still stand, probably .....
...................................................

I don't remember receiving this leaflet (?) either (I was at Glastonbury at the time and after getting back, I probably just chucked all referendum-related shit into the paper recycling).

This leaflet (gosub 's link) has got to have been separate from the sixteen page Government-issue booklet though, because (archived version) of this one is dated 23rd June 2016 ... i.e Thursday 23rd June 2016, i.e. actual referendum day -- would such a leaflet have been posted out so ultra-last minute as that? 

The main booklet was definitely earlier than that anyway. But I expect I'm missing some vital point


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 29, 2019)

I did a Google trend search earlier :-

https://trends.google.com/trends/ex...FKR-jkb92XrCq9Y-Lj0_r29t6f_z9qWyd5OucXmZIiqic


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 29, 2019)

"Norway"



"WTO"


----------



## a_chap (Mar 29, 2019)

"Dinner"


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 29, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Mar 29, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> ETA : *APOLOGIES*, Health warning on what I posted below .... this quote from National Archives slightly clarifies? -- this statement was prominent on the NA page too  :
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Its the same content as was in the booklet


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I was born in Britain and would prefer any nationality that made a clear distinction between me and people from Kent.



Wouldn't be so bad if the blokes could make up their minds whether they're Kentish men, or men of Kent, the twats.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Have a hankie mate. It's clean.



Liar.
That's your wankerchief, isn't it?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Mar 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When will you realise that just because something is in a manifesto it does not follow it will be acted on?



I suspect that you too remember Blair's manifesto pledge to get rid of Jobseekers Allowance. 22 years later, it's still fucking here, fucking people over.


----------



## philosophical (Mar 29, 2019)

Not exactly gracious of me, but every time I hear a brexit supporter say if this or if that they will never vote again, I find myself saying 'good'.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 29, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Not exactly gracious of me, but every time I hear a brexit supporter say if this or if that they will never vote again, I find myself saying 'good'.


I’m fucking shocked at you saying this


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Not exactly gracious of me, but every time I hear a brexit supporter say if this or if that they will never vote again, I find myself saying 'good'.




Unless you think there is something 100% wrong with those who voted leave and their reasons for doing so it surely depends om the 'if this and the 'if thats' no?


----------



## Wookey (Mar 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Not exactly gracious of me, but every time I hear a brexit supporter say if this or if that they will never vote again, I find myself saying 'good'.



My Brexiteer mum said "after this, I'll never vote again!"

I said ma, after this you even _look_ like you're about to vote, and I'll chop your fucking hands off....


----------



## Treacle Toes (Mar 30, 2019)

News just in...


----------



## Badgers (Mar 30, 2019)

This should sort it


----------



## Mr Moose (Mar 30, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> "Norway"
> 
> View attachment 166008
> 
> ...



Aha tour announced.


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 30, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Aha tour announced.


Sadly no, that was the Brevik murders - I probably should have chosen a different X axis


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 30, 2019)

Badgers said:


> This should sort it
> 
> View attachment 166060


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2019)

Badgers said:


> This should sort it
> 
> View attachment 166060


I'm reminded of the bit in blackadder goes forth where General melchett outlines the secret plan which is to do what they've done so often before on the basis the enemy won't expect them to do it again


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 30, 2019)

Wookey said:


> My Brexiteer mum said "after this, I'll never vote again!"
> 
> I said ma, after this you even _look_ like you're about to vote, and I'll chop your fucking hands off....


I'm sure you don't realise the light that shines on you


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Mar 30, 2019)

My Brexiteer Auntie posted about the fourth vote today with the words “god loves a trier eh”

This made me laugh, pure Inverness  

Humouring myself now.....


----------



## SpookyFrank (Mar 30, 2019)

Wookey said:


> My Brexiteer mum said "after this, I'll never vote again!"
> 
> I said ma, after this you even _look_ like you're about to vote, and I'll chop your fucking hands off....



A fine way to speak to the person who gave you life.


----------



## Wookey (Mar 30, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> A fine way to speak to the person who gave you life.



We're very close. That's why I can tell her honestly that voting for Brexit and still defending it is a twat's mission.

Plus she created a multilingual Europhile anti-Tory internationalist for a son, she's only got herself to blame.


----------



## A380 (Mar 31, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Mar 31, 2019)

Is that that fucking scumbag Neil Horan?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 1, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 166237



that placard looks fairly barmy, but what the heck's the one about israel?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 1, 2019)

Assuming it's Horan, he prophesies the second coming, disrupting sports events etc. He was also prosecuted for offences against a 7 year old. Found not guilty but shall we say the details emerging from trial weren't good.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is that that fucking scumbag Neil Horan?



it would appear so



> This week, as the Supreme Court debated one of the most serious constitutional cases in history, a strange little man dressed as a leprechaun danced a jig whilst holding placards about Nigel Farage, a Third World War and Brexit.








from here


----------



## collectordave (Apr 1, 2019)

The leave campaign still not missing a trick?


----------



## Libertad (Apr 1, 2019)

No tights? What was he thinking?


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 1, 2019)

Libertad said:


> No tights? What was he thinking?



Practicing for the post-brexit shortage, where he’ll have to paint his legs brown and draw a fake seam on the back of his legs with eyeliner pencil.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 1, 2019)

I'm dreaming of a karmic world where somehow Farage and Horan are banged up together in the same cell ...


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 3, 2019)

So, anyone know anything anymore?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 3, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So, anyone know anything anymore?


----------



## Poot (Apr 3, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So, anyone know anything anymore?


May is asking Corbyn for help, the grass is now blue and the sky is green, we all have to put our clothes on backwards and hop to work because it's Opposite Day or Topsy Turvy Day or something. It's still fine to be openly racist though.

I _think_ that's right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 3, 2019)

A380 said:


>


c4u


----------



## TopCat (Apr 3, 2019)

Tory party ripping themselves asunder. Great stuff.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 3, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Tory party ripping themselves asunder. Great stuff.



We could help by providing them with discarded corned beef and spam tins.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 3, 2019)

The facebook ads story continues in the Guardian - all the pro-hard-Brexit ads are from the same people with close links to the right of the Tory Party, who have been trying to create a grassroots movement for no-deal Brexit by throwing money at it. Still no-one knows who is funding the ads. 
'Grassroots' Facebook Brexit ads secretly run by staff of Lynton Crosby firm


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> ... who have been trying to create a grassroots movement for no-deal Brexit by throwing money at it....


Astroturfers


----------



## CRI (Apr 3, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> The facebook ads story continues in the Guardian - all the pro-hard-Brexit ads are from the same people with close links to the right of the Tory Party, who have been trying to create a grassroots movement for no-deal Brexit by throwing money at it. Still no-one knows who is funding the ads.
> 'Grassroots' Facebook Brexit ads secretly run by staff of Lynton Crosby firm


Hmmm, so much for Facebook's useless new rules that are supposed to show who funds advertising.  Just make up an organisation, take out ads in its name and shovel money into it from fuck knows where, and it's all fine and dandy.  Great.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

This is where we are.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> This is where we are.


Christ almighty, the rest of us have known that for decades. It takes the Dickhead in Chief to tell you in 2019, and you can’t even put it in your own words then.


(Edited to remove a direct link to the twat).


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

Did you ever get an opinion on those videos you posted without comment and were too busy to discuss? Or has nobody tweeted an opinion for you to have yet?


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Did you ever get an opinion on those videos you posted without comment and were too busy to discuss? Or has nobody tweeted an opinion for you to have yet?


Oh there was lots of comment...as I recall you made an arse of yourself for demanding some comment on a 27 second video for 3 hours and you hadn't even watched it  

Whisky...remember?  Numpty.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Oh there was lots of comment...as I recall you made an arse of yourself for demanding some comment on a 27 second video for 3 hours and you hadn't even watched it
> 
> Whisky...remember?  Numpty.


You’ll remember me saying that I can’t usually watch videos during the day. I also let you know when I had finally managed to watch it. But you never told us what your point was. You were busy.  Though you have found the time to, completely without context, say the word “whisky” a few times. 

Will you ever get round to telling us what your point was?


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You’ll remember me saying that I can’t usually watch videos during the day...


I remember you saying it after I caught you out yup.   

But then this is urban, two legs better   The maths is different here, innit.  Don't worry I don't care.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> I remember you saying it after I caught you out yup.
> 
> But then this is urban, two legs better   The maths is different here, innit.  Don't worry I don't care.


Caught me out? You caught me out how?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

So, DexterTCN , as I have said to numerous people over the years, not just you (for example), please, as a matter of courtesy, provide a brief synopsis of what is in a link or video, and why you think it relevant.  We aren’t all in workplaces where we can watch videos. And there may be other reasons videos aren’t convenient.

You were busy back on March 7th, and couldn’t tell me what your views on the clip were, why you posted it, what point you hoped to raise, or how you saw that contributing to the discussion?  Maybe you could say a few words on that now?


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 3, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> So, DexterTCN , as I have said to numerous people over the years, not just you (for example), please, as a matter of courtesy, provide a brief synopsis of what is in a link or video, and why you think it relevant.  We aren’t all in workplaces where we can watch videos. And there may be other reasons videos aren’t convenient.
> 
> You were busy back on March 7th, and couldn’t tell me what your views on the clip were, why you posted it, what point you hoped to raise, or how you saw that contributing to the discussion?  Maybe you could say a few words on that now?


Nope.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nope.


Didn’t think so.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Didn’t think so.


Stopped clocks.

danny, you liked a post calling me an ethnic nationalist, and over the last decade you've been a bit harsh.  I can accept that but you have to understand...as far as I'm concerned you're just a cunt...if the topic is interesting I'll discuss with most people...I'm not here to do your bidding though.  Get it?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Stopped clocks.
> 
> danny, you liked a post calling me an ethnic nationalist, and over the last decade you've been a bit harsh.  I can accept that but you have to understand...as far as I'm concerned you're just a cunt...if the topic is interesting I'll discuss with most people...I'm not here to do your bidding though.  Get it?


You didn’t explain to _anyone_ why you’d posted those clips without comment. I know you don’t care for me, but I’m not the only person reading these boards.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 3, 2019)

danny la rouge I'm not interested.

But this is really out of character for you.


----------



## TopCat (Apr 3, 2019)

oh dear


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Apr 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Christ almighty, the rest of us have known that for decades. It takes the Dickhead in Chief to tell you in 2019, and you can’t even put it in your own words then.
> 
> 
> (Edited to remove a direct link to the twat).


I already knew you were talking about wings before I briefly peeked at the ignored content


----------



## kabbes (Apr 4, 2019)

I also ignore videos that people post up without comment.  If you think it’s worth me watching it, it has to be worth a few seconds of your time to provide a synopsis and reason why it’s worth watching.


----------



## JimW (Apr 4, 2019)

Couldn't watch most of them even if so inclined due to blocks here so with no comment added at best you have to guess what it was from any reply.


----------



## prunus (Apr 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Tory party ripping themselves asunder. Great stuff.



Be nice if they weren’t ripping the country asunder to do it though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> This is where we are.



Dky it's taken to 2019 for them when so many of us found it hard to distinguish tory from labour back when auld tony blair was in charge


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 4, 2019)

Have your calendars to hand, folks.


----------



## Poot (Apr 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Have your calendars to hand, folks.


Are there rumours of an end to this?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 4, 2019)

Poot said:


> Are there rumours of an end to this?


 Time? No, though ‘twould be bless’d relief.


----------



## Poot (Apr 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Time? No, though ‘twould be bless’d relief.


I don't even know what I meant by 'this'. In fact it's been a bit like an illness where you're acutely aware of inner workings and it's both disgusting and fascinating. Sorry, that should probably be in the shit Brexit analogy thread.


----------



## andysays (Apr 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> danny la rouge I'm not interested.
> 
> But this is really out of character for you.


Entirely in character for you though


----------



## TopCat (Apr 4, 2019)

prunus said:


> Be nice if they weren’t ripping the country asunder to do it though.


Which bit of the UK has been ripped asunder? Perhaps remainer entitlement?


----------



## Poi E (Apr 4, 2019)

Rubbish collection missed today on my street. It's starting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 4, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Rubbish collection missed today on my street. It's starting.


i blame the government


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 4, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Rubbish collection missed today on my street. It's starting.


The Spring of Disgruntlement.


----------



## Poi E (Apr 4, 2019)

Actually it was the recycling they missed, so it must be the bonfire of EU environmental regulation that I've heard about.


----------



## TopCat (Apr 4, 2019)

I note the expected delivery of EScooters has not arrived at my local Lidl. I'm crying and would change my vote immediately if I only could.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i blame the government


I blame the EU; we need to get out and take back control of our bins...clearly the out-sourced, out-sourcing, profit gouging 'service' providers will be much improved when we get our country back.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Stopped clocks.
> 
> danny, you liked a post calling me an ethnic nationalist, and over the last decade you've been a bit harsh.  I can accept that but you have to understand...as far as I'm concerned you're just a cunt...if the topic is interesting I'll discuss with most people...I'm not here to do your bidding though.  Get it?



I thought you were an ethnic nationalist?


----------



## rubbershoes (Apr 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Which bit of the UK has been ripped asunder? Perhaps remainer entitlement?




Have you noticed there's a slight division in the country?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 4, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> Have you noticed there's a slight division in the country?



Did you know there were divisions before?


----------



## rubbershoes (Apr 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Did you know there were divisions before?




not like this


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 4, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> not like this



They were exactly like this they just weren't on the telly.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2019)

Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:



I feel like AK's mind wandered a bit during the creation of this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:


Brexit is not fertile ground for art. A mate of mine, who's a really good poet and writes brilliant angry stuff about his own life – relationship breakdown, problems with his son and the like – sent me his angry brexit poem the other day, and I had to be really tactful in my response. I found something I liked about it to say, but overall it produced an emotional response of meeeh.


----------



## maomao (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:


I thought it was female genitalia at first and was going to post 'self portrait'. Can't stand that prick.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 4, 2019)

maomao said:


> I thought it was female genitalia at first and was going to post 'self portrait'. Can't stand that prick.


You’re getting your genitalia mixed up.  So to speak.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:



Perhaps he is poorly attempting to illustrate the open, festering wound opened up in the country by the Tories. That would benefit from the antibiotics that will no longer be available following Brexit.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Perhaps he is poorly attempting to illustrate the open, festering wound opened up in the country by the Tories. That would benefit from the antibiotics that will no longer be available following Brexit.


this is a generous interpretation, all I can see is massive inflamed fanny lips. LBJ's m8s brexit poetry can't be as bad as this


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> this is a generous interpretation, all I can see is massive inflamed fanny lips. LBJ's m8s brexit poetry can't be as bad as this



Sorry, I’ve been reading Gombrich Art and Illusion recently.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> this is a generous interpretation, all I can see is massive inflamed fanny lips. LBJ's m8s brexit poetry can't be as bad as this


Is he saying that England is a massive cunt, perhaps? It is so rich to interpretation.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:


Oh Christ that's bad. Really shit.


----------



## NoXion (Apr 4, 2019)

One might say it's utterly gash.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I feel like AK's mind wandered a bit during the creation of this.



I don't think his mind strayed for a moment from the knowledge that he can get paid cash money for any old shit these days.


----------



## gosub (Apr 4, 2019)

In answer to OP :,Depends how much it rains.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 4, 2019)

Now we know she doesn't care anymore; she's made "Cleverly" a Brexit minister.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Apr 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Perhaps he is poorly attempting to illustrate the open, festering wound opened up in the country by the Tories. That would benefit from the antibiotics that will no longer be available following Brexit.


Nah it’s the putrid rotting flesh from Lady Neoliberalism refusing point blank to turn for decades. You guys just weren’t seeing it before, because as all nurses and carers know the sore festers for a fair while under the skin before we see evidence of it. 
This is why it’s a good idea to reposition regularly. 


 Consider yer analogy worn oot!


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Anish Kapoor has helpfully illustrated the divisions with this:



Fuck off am I on the same side as the Isle of Wight.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Apr 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Brexit is not fertile ground for art. A mate of mine, who's a really good poet and writes brilliant angry stuff about his own life – relationship breakdown, problems with his son and the like – sent me his angry brexit poem the other day, and I had to be really tactful in my response. I found something I liked about it to say, but overall it produced an emotional response of meeeh.


That’s not just brexit, it’s really hard to write a political tune that isn’t totally cringeworthy. “This is what you get when you mess with BDS” etc..... I don’t think I’d be able to write one unless I plagiarised Phil Ochs like fuck, it’s just much easier to bleed poetry whilst writing about being dumped by some guy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 4, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That’s not just brexit, it’s really hard to write a political tune that isn’t totally cringeworthy. “This is what you get when you mess with BDS” etc..... I don’t think I’d be able to write one unless I plagiarised Phil Ochs like fuck, it’s just much easier to bleed poetry whilst writing about being dumped by some guy.


It is hard. It's possible, though, with the right amount and kind of anger. I'm still very fond of New Model Army's Falkland's Spirit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Apr 4, 2019)

Looked


----------



## collectordave (Apr 5, 2019)

We're off to see the wizard the wonderful wizard of oz......because,because,because

because he is the only one we must confess
who can sort out all this bloody mess

First attempt.

but what about were on the eve of destruction?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 5, 2019)

Not really poetry just a little rhyme. Difficult to find word rhyming with cockup.

Wondering what to do when sat in my bedsit
Ah! I know I will vote for brexit

Now it makes me sad
When I am told it is bad

But the EU they can no longer abuse
I have removed their only excuse

If so bad then do it the British way
So we can all be happy and gay

There's no need to be shifty
Just revoke article fifty

Make sure we do it clearly
and apologise sincerly

Then offer them tea
so they listen to our plea

We are an asset
Can't we just forget


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 5, 2019)

Let's not do this ffs


----------



## kabbes (Apr 5, 2019)

If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,—
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: _Dulce et decorum est
Pro Brexit mori_.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 5, 2019)

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the backstop cannot hold;
No-deal Brexit is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 5, 2019)

Shall I compare thee to Brexit day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,
And Brexit’s lease hath all too short a date:


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 5, 2019)

He loves to sit and hear me sing, 
		 Then, laughing, sports and plays with me; 
Then stretches out my golden wing, 
		 And mocks my loss of liberty.


----------



## chilango (Apr 5, 2019)

There was a Prime Minister called Dave,
Who wasn't particularly brave,
He stuck his cock in a hog,
Empowered Rees-Mogg,
and we're all gonna piss on his grave.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 5, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Difficult to find word rhyming with cockup.



stock-up?

as in the brexit stockpile of tinned food and bog roll


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> stock-up?
> 
> as in the brexit stockpile of tinned food and bog roll


Lock up as in shop 
Mock up
Rock up


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 5, 2019)

Highcough


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Apr 5, 2019)

Fuck up

Near enough


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 5, 2019)

Frostrup


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

_...Come and choose wrong,_ they cry, _come and choose wrong;_
And so we rise. At night again they sound,

Calling the traveller now, the outward bound:
_O not for long_, they cry, _O not for long_ -
And we are nudged from comfort, never knowing
How safely we may disregard their blowing,
Or if, this night, happiness too is going.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> _...Come and choose wrong,_ they cry, _come and choose wrong;_
> And so we rise. At night again they sound,
> 
> Calling the traveller now, the outward bound:
> ...


Do not go gentle into that good night,
Brexit should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

Tbh it's all so juvenile I'm getting AA Milne earworms now 

_...and all sorts of funny thoughts run round in my head,
'It isn't really anywhere, it's somewhere else instead'_


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 5, 2019)

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by Brexit, starving hysterical naked...


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 5, 2019)

Imagine, _housewives voting_


----------



## Libertad (Apr 5, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Tbh it's all so juvenile I'm getting AA Milne earworms now
> 
> _...and all sorts of funny thoughts run round in my head,
> 'It isn't really anywhere, it's somewhere else instead'_



Citizen of nowhere.


----------



## LDC (Apr 5, 2019)

In the desert 
I saw a creature, naked, bestial, 
Who, squatting upon the ground, 
Held Brexit in his hands, 
And ate of it. 
I said, “Is it good, friend?” 
“It is bitter—bitter,” he answered; 

“But I like it 
“Because it is bitter, 
“And because it is Brexit.”


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

We were somewhere around Brexit on the edge of the desert when the drugs began to take hold. I remember saying something like “I feel a bit lightheaded; maybe you should drive. . . .” And suddenly there was a terrible roar all around us and the sky was full of what looked like huge bats, all swooping and screeching and diving around the car, which was going about a hundred miles an hour with the top down to Las Vegas. And a voice was screaming: “Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?”

Then it was quiet again. My attorney had taken his shirt off and was pouring beer on his chest, to facilitate the tanning process. “What the hell are you yelling about?” he muttered, staring up at the sun with his eyes closed and covered with wraparound Spanish sunglasses. I hit the brakes and aimed the Great Red Shark toward the shoulder of the highway. _No point mentioning those bats_, I thought. _The poor bastard will see them soon enough_.

Project Fear and Loathing.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 5, 2019)

It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen. Winston Smith, his chin nuzzled into his breast in an effort to escape the vile wind, slipped quickly through the glass doors of Brexit Mansions, though not quickly enough to prevent a swirl of gritty dust from entering along with him.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Apr 5, 2019)

Late August, given heavy rain and sun
For a full week, the blackberries would ripen.
At first, just one, a glossy purple clot
Among others, red, white, blue, hard as a knot.
You ate that first one and its flesh was sweet
Like thickened wine: summer's blood was in it
Leaving stains upon the tongue and lust for
Picking. Then red ones inked up and that hunger
Sent us out with milk cans, pea tins, jam-pots
Where briars scratched and wet grass bleached our boots.
Round hayfields, cornfields and potato-drills
We trekked and picked until the cans were full,
Until the tinkling bottom had been covered
With blue ones, and on top big dark blobs burned
Like a plate of eyes. Our hands were peppered
With thorn pricks, our palms sticky as Bluebeard's.



We hoarded the fresh berries in the byre.
But when the bath was filled we found a fur,
A rat-grey fungus, glutting on our cache.
The juice was stinking too. Once off the bush
The fruit fermented, the sweet flesh would turn sour.
I always felt like crying. It wasn't fair
That all the lovely canfuls smelt of rot.
Each year I hoped they'd keep, knew they would not.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2019)

Didn't we have a lovely time the day we went to Brexit
A beautiful day, we had lunch on the way and all for under a pound you know
But on the way back I cuddled with Jack and we opened a bottle of cider
Singing a few of our favourite songs as the wheels went around

Do you recall the thrill of it all as we walked along the sea grand
Then on the sand we heard a brass band that played the Diddlely-Bump-Terrara
Elsie and me had one cup of tea then we took a Paddler boat out
Splashing away as we sat on the bay and the wheels went 'round

Didn't we have a lovely time the day we went to Brexit
A beautiful day, we had lunch on the way and all for under a pound you know
But on the way back I cuddled with Jack and we opened a bottle of cider
Singing a few of our favourite songs as the wheels went around

Wasn't it nice, eating chocolate ice as we strolled around the fun-fair
Then we ate eels in big ferris wheels as we sailed around the ground but then
We had to be quick 'cause Elsie felt sick and we had to find somewhere to take her
I said to her lad, what made her feel bad was the wheel going 'round

Didn't we have a lovely time the day we went to Brexit
A beautiful day, we had lunch on the way and all for under a pound you know
But on the way back I cuddled with Jack and we opened a bottle of cider
Singing a few of our favourite songs as the wheels went around

Elsie and me, we finished our tea and said goodbye to the seaside
Got on the bus, Flo said to us, oh isn't it a shame to go
Wouldn't it be grand to have cash on demand and to live like this for always
Oh it makes me feel ill, when I think of the mill and the wheels goin' 'round

Didn't we have a lovely time the day we went to Brexit
A beautiful day, we had lunch on the way and all for under a pound you know
But on the way back I cuddled with Jack and we opened a bottle of cider
Singing a few of our favourite songs as the wheels went around.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Didn't we have a lovely time the day we went to Brexit
> A beautiful day, we had lunch on the way and all for under a pound you know
> But on the way back I cuddled with Jack and we opened a bottle of cider
> Singing a few of our favourite songs as the wheels went around
> ...


I have a bastard earworm now [emoji14]


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 5, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I have a bastard earworm now [emoji14]



Ditto.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Brexit's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

/alltooobvious


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

Honestly you leave this thread for five minutes and it turns into undergrad english lit


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

that's still better than the preschool politics of brexit even deserves though


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Honestly you leave this thread for five minutes and it turns into undergad english lit



Undergad. Eee gads!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Honestly you leave this thread for five minutes and it turns into undergad english lit


have a pity like


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 5, 2019)

From where I stand, I see
pain, suffering and misery.

The more I see, the more I see,
the less, the less I believe.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Honestly you leave this thread for five minutes and it turns into undergad english lit



Is Brexit really doing this to people here then??


----------



## RD2003 (Apr 5, 2019)

Michel Houellebecq puts it best: '...in short, the EU is just a dumb idea which has gradually turned into a bad dream, from which we shall eventually wake up.'


----------



## steeplejack (Apr 5, 2019)

what the fuck, this thread's turned into a 2002-style lyric posting thread with Johnny Canuck3 having just snorted a whole bag of amphetamine


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

it's OK, the snarky commentary is never _too _far away


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 5, 2019)

RD2003 said:


> Michel Houellebecq puts it best: '...in short, the EU is just a dumb idea which has gradually turned into a bad dream, from which we shall eventually wake up.'



The Warsaw Pact was a bad dream, from which 'we' woke up. Dictatorship in Portugal and Spain and Greece was a bad dream from which 'we' woke up.

I don't buy Houellebecq's line at all. That's not to say there are not big problems with the project, but pooling of sovereignty across the continent is far from a dumb idea. I also think this and many other things being said about the evils of the EU grossly overstate the extent to which the majority of people living in the EU ever even think about the EU, while taking for granted certain 'invisible' aspects of it, such as free movement. It's very easy to take free movement across the EU for granted, a bit like good health. It only really comes home to you what you have when you look at those who don't have it - try being a Russian with permanent leave to remain in the UK and wanting to travel in Europe, for instance.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 5, 2019)

I have linked the piece below because of my interest in the Irish aspect of brexit.
Now personally I have (if I hadn't let my British one lapse) two passports Irish and British (which I used in the past).
I am born in the UK, but not Northern Ireland and my dual nationality is not because of anything to do with the Belfast Agreement, but more because of what might be called the Mick McCarthy Manoeuvre.
Now it looks as if Bradley is to try to make a distinction between British Citizens born in different places.

This part stood out for me:

*Ms Bradley confirmed that people who consider themselves Irish are not allowed to vote in British referendums.
*
Consider themselves? I suppose her politics were shaped by appearing in school productions of Oliver.

I consider myself British, Irish, European whatever and so on, I will root for China in the table tennis even.

Classic British/Irish chite-stirring by the Secretary of State.

Irish citizens in north may not be allowed to vote in united Ireland poll


----------



## xenon (Apr 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have linked the piece below because of my interest in the Irish aspect of brexit.
> Now personally I have (if I hadn't let my British one lapse) two passports Irish and British (which I used in the past).
> I am born in the UK, but not Northern Ireland and my dual nationality is not because of anything to do with the Belfast Agreement, but more because of what might be called the Mick McCarthy Manoeuvre.
> Now it looks as if Bradley is to try to make a distinction between British Citizens born in different places.
> ...



I think we can all agree,
““The lack of any understanding of the GFA among the current government is getting beyond a joke.””


----------



## Flavour (Apr 5, 2019)

looking increasingly likely that no deal will indeed happen on April 12 now! it's a win win situation really in terms of destroying the tories. no deal fucks them, as does an extension (which looks like won't be given) into EU election period. there's no way they can succesfully pin the blame on corbs


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 5, 2019)

xenon said:


> I think we can all agree,
> ““The lack of any understanding of the GFA among the current government is getting beyond a joke.””


Government in general, but Secretary of State for Northern Ireland _in particular_.  She really is a muppet among muppets.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 5, 2019)

Flavour said:


> looking increasingly likely that no deal will indeed happen on April 12 now! it's a win win situation really in terms of destroying the tories. no deal fucks them, as does an extension (which looks like won't be given) into EU election period. there's no way they can succesfully pin the blame on corbs



No deal fucks everybody. The Labour Party splits in two as Remain cry babies flee blaming them for failing to defend anyone’s interest let alone the working class. You may not care about what Remainers do and that’s something you can chat about with your dwindling Lexit mates.

You are forgetting why the Conservative Party exists. In a world of unregulated, disaster capitalism those are the cockroaches that survive, propped up nicely by a nationalism that can pin the blame for absolutely everything on the EU with you presumably nodding on.

There are no easy wins from here, compromise that enrages the Tories and punctures Brexit probably the best, but a second ref or revoke would stuff them also. In fact no deal is the least of it for them. They get to puff out their chests to the new dawn. May kept her promise, no deal better than a bad one.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 5, 2019)

Cue more Admiral Ackbarage....


----------



## andysays (Apr 5, 2019)

Brexit: Government offers 'no change' to deal, says Labour



> The government has not proposed any changes to the PM's Brexit deal during cross-party talks, says shadow Brexit secretary Sir Keir Starmer. Meetings have been taking place between Tory and Labour politicians to find a proposal to put to the Commons before an emergency EU summit next week.
> 
> But Sir Keir said the government was not "countenancing any change" on the wording of the existing plan. He said it was "disappointing", adding: "Compromise requires change."


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 166722
> 
> Cue more Admiral Ackbarage....



Who is there left to resign? It's pretty much just May, the cat and the coffee machine running the country as far as I can tell.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit: Government offers 'no change' to deal, says Labour



Oh for fuck's sake


----------



## brogdale (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who is there left to resign? It's pretty much just May, the cat and the coffee machine running the country as far as I can tell.



You're forgetting Croydon's own No. 10 Chief of Staff (on left)


----------



## Supine (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh for fuck's sake



This


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're forgetting Croydon's own No. 10 Chief of Staff (on left)
> 
> View attachment 166726



God his face just makes me want to scoop my eyes out so I never have to see it again.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> God his face just makes me want to scoop my eyes out so I never have to see it again.



Looks like Peppa may have done the same.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> God his face just makes me want to scoop my eyes out so I never have to see it again.


At risk of Spooky scooping...there's the absolute fucking wrong'un one...


----------



## collectordave (Apr 5, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Fuck up
> 
> Near enough



Matches the situation though. Must look to include that.


----------



## agricola (Apr 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit: Government offers 'no change' to deal, says Labour



At this point I would not be at all surprised if the ERG, Corbyn and TIG formed a coalition government, solely to end this worst of all administrations.  They are indescribable.


----------



## gosub (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh for fuck's sake


If she wouldn't listen to her own party it would hardly be strong or stable to start compromising with Jeremy


----------



## Balbi (Apr 5, 2019)

agricola said:


> At this point I would not be at all surprised if the ERG, Corbyn and TIG formed a coalition government, solely to end this worst of all administrations.  They are indescribable.



I would, seeing as how TIG appear to be People's Vote UKIP in terms of their issue.

Woke Soubry bashing Labour here The People’s Vote campaign is about Brexit, not patching up broken parties | Anna Soubry


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 5, 2019)

agricola said:


> At this point I would not be at all surprised if the ERG, Corbyn and TIG formed a coalition government, solely to end this worst of all administrations.  They are indescribable.



I would be!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit: Government offers 'no change' to deal, says Labour


This was always going to happen and I'm not sure what May thought she could have got out of it. By now it's obvious that she doesn't listen to anyone else and just keeps pushing the same thing again and again - Labour were always going to be able to say that and sound like the adults in the room, and nothing she could counterspin would be believable, even by other Tories. Plus even the attempt damages her even further internally.


----------



## stdP (Apr 5, 2019)

Listen, and understand. That deal is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, _ever_, until you are dead.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 5, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> This was always going to happen and I'm not sure what May thought she could have got out of it. By now it's obvious that she doesn't listen to anyone else and just keeps pushing the same thing again and again - Labour were always going to be able to say that and sound like the adults in the room, and nothing she could counterspin would be believable, even by other Tories. Plus even the attempt damages her even further internally.


True. Mind you I just heard Starmer on the radio and while he stressed (several times - to avoid saying anything else) that the govt was not prepared to make changes, he also refused to name a single one of the changes Labour had asked for. He also sounded pretty weak, tbh.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> True. Mind you I just heard Starmer on the radio and while he stressed (several times - to avoid saying anything else) that the govt was not prepared to make changes, he also refused to name a single one of the changes Labour had asked for. He also sounded pretty weak, tbh.


It may well be bullshit but in the situation, who is anyone going to believe if they haven't already made their minds up anyway? The FBPE lot will blame Corbyn whatever. The Tories will all blame May, either for talking to him in the first place (far right loons, but there are lots of them) or for being intransigent generally because that's how they've treated them (softer brexit/remain factions). Apart from them, well, one side has submitted their bill to Parliament three times basically unchanged, and they may well be seen as the ones most likely to be frustrating things whatever the details.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 5, 2019)

stdP said:


> Listen, and understand. That deal is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, _ever_, until you are dead.


----------



## andysays (Apr 5, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It may well be bullshit but in the situation, who is anyone going to believe if they haven't already made their minds up anyway? The FBPE lot will blame Corbyn whatever. The Tories will all blame May, either for talking to him in the first place (far right loons, but there are lots of them) or for being intransigent generally because that's how they've treated them (softer brexit/remain factions). Apart from them, well, one side has submitted their bill to Parliament three times basically unchanged, and they may well be seen as the ones most likely to be frustrating things whatever the details.


And meanwhile, we're still due to leave a week today with No Deal. 

Difficult to see how May expects to get an extension at this stage when there still appears absolutely no prospect of any positive decision...


----------



## Balbi (Apr 5, 2019)

Isn't it pretty clear what's happening now? May realises she can't get anything passed in Parliament relating to the actual deal, so is messing about to kill time.

What she wants is for the EU to land the no deal blow, so as she fucks off from the Tories they're left with a narrative about all the problems being because the EU did it - which will suit the headbangers etc


----------



## SpineyNorman (Apr 5, 2019)

I want to get involved in the brexit creative writing but can't actually be arsed to put any work in so please can we all pretend I copied the first few paragraphs of Marx's 18th Brumaire into a post and inserted the word Brexit and various Brexit references and politicians names in hilariously appropriate places? It was really funny too.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 5, 2019)

it's a kind of catharsis.

no, you know, what's that thing when you spend too long dwelling on awful things and getting all tense inside?

piles, that's the ones. it's a kind of piles. brexmorroids.

somebody, make it stop.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 5, 2019)

We're living history here people. Feel the awe. Feel the majesty.

Unfortunately the bit of history we're living is the bit in the history books where they explain what happens when politicians really fuck up for real. It will be next to the bit on WWI, and it will make it clear that it was nowhere near as bad as WWI, but even more stupid. Other textbooks will raise questions such as 'How do you create a political class that cretinously selfish?' or 'How many people did Theresa May have to impress in her career in order to get the top job? Comment on how shit all those people were.' or perhaps 'When a ruling class is fighting over how they can best exploit you, should you have a People's Vote on the options?'

It will all make great discussion material in 50 years time. Just relax and enjoy.


----------



## Fez909 (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who is there left to resign? It's pretty much just May, the cat and the coffee machine running the country as far as I can tell.


I read somewhere that there are 11 govt positions currently unfilled.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 5, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> We're living history here people. Feel the awe. Feel the majesty.
> 
> Unfortunately the bit of history we're living is the bit in the history books where they explain what happens when politicians really fuck up for real. It will be next to the bit on WWI, and it will make it clear that it was nowhere near as bad as WWI, but even more stupid. Other textbooks will raise questions such as 'How do you create a political class that cretinously selfish?' or 'How many people did Theresa May have to impress in her career in order to get the top job? Comment on how shit all those people were.' or perhaps 'When a ruling class is fighting over how they can best exploit you, should you have a People's Vote on the options?'
> 
> It will all make great discussion material in 50 years time. Just relax and enjoy.


As Zhou Enlai apparently said about the French Revolution (the 1968 one), it is too early to tell just yet what will be written in the history books about brexit. Its real significance may be not what is happening now but what happens next.


----------



## mauvais (Apr 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who is there left to resign? It's pretty much just May, the cat and the coffee machine running the country as far as I can tell.


I've known coffee machines to dispense no coffee, burnt coffee, cold coffee, an empty cup of weird powder, and something that was - at best - beef soup. But never a fucked up shambles of a Brexit.

Cats could _possibly_ do it out of spite but good luck holding their attention for three seconds, never mind three years.

So despite surely finding both to be enemies of the people, it still seems unfair to try and tar them by association with May.


----------



## Crispy (Apr 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As Zhou Enlai apparently said about the French Revolution (the 1968 one), it is too early to tell just yet what will be written in the history books about brexit. Its real significance may be not what is happening now but what happens next.


Definitely feels like we're living in the "years and months leading up to *tumultuous epoch-making event*" bit of the story. The bit where you look back with hindsight and think "why didn't they do anything? Surely they could have seen *tumultuous epoch-making event* coming?


----------



## Flavour (Apr 6, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Definitely feels like we're living in the "years and months leading up to *tumultuous epoch-making event*" bit of the story. The bit where you look back with hindsight and think "why didn't they do anything? Surely they could have seen *tumultuous epoch-making event* coming?



what do you think that event will be?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> what do you think that event will be?


England winning an international football tournament


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 6, 2019)

It seems historical now because there's a lot of uncertainty and nobody knows how it's all going to turn out - in 50 years there'll be a few paragraphs in the history books about a bunch of boring politicians debating a boring trade deal and "Brexit" will be the answer to a question at the most boring quiz night on the moon.


----------



## MrSpikey (Apr 6, 2019)

stdP said:


> Listen, and understand. That deal is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, _ever_, until you are dead.





Come with me if you want to leave...


----------



## collectordave (Apr 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who is there left to resign? It's pretty much just May, the cat and the coffee machine running the country as far as I can tell.



My cat just danced on my keyboard, I was just about to gently place her on the ground when I noticed this '*othello lzjkesieub41;o bjg* *monkies*'

I added the bold highlight she hasn't got the hang of the mouse yet just thinks it something she should kill.

Remind them all to turn the light off, eco friendly to the last.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 6, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> It seems historical now because there's a lot of uncertainty and nobody knows how it's all going to turn out - in 50 years there'll be a few paragraphs in the history books about a bunch of boring politicians debating a boring trade deal and "Brexit" will be the answer to a question at the most boring quiz night on the moon.


This.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 6, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> It seems historical now because there's a lot of uncertainty and nobody knows how it's all going to turn out - in 50 years there'll be a few paragraphs in the history books about a bunch of boring politicians debating a boring trade deal and "Brexit" will be the answer to a question at the most boring quiz night on the moon.



There is a load of nonsense spoken at the moment about how this is ‘unprecedented’ national crisis, when it doesn’t come close to times of war or civil war or how ‘faith in democracy’ will suffer, as if people generally trusted politicians.

But nationalists are never going to shut up about this, whichever way it goes. 50 years won’t be nearly long enough. Brexit leaves an unfortunte legacy for many that it is nationalism and identity through which you make a win.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 6, 2019)

Beginning to wonder if the Telegraph's bottom-bar of end of days hyperbole is deserving of it's own thread...


----------



## Crispy (Apr 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> what do you think that event will be?


Oh no predictions. Just feels portentous.
Probably just proximity, as others pointed out


----------



## chilango (Apr 6, 2019)

It's 20 years since the millennium bug.


----------



## agricola (Apr 6, 2019)

chilango said:


> It's 20 years since the millennium bug.



20 years for it to go from a myth to being in charge of the Government is remarkable progress, tbh.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Beginning to wonder if the Telegraph's bottom-bar of end of days hyperbole is deserving of it's own thread...
> 
> View attachment 166794



The Express, meanwhile, seems more focused on the evils of the EU, the Ireland part of it in particular.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 6, 2019)

I can see this being a sort of reverse of 1911. Of immense impact to those in the bubble, irrelevant to most.


----------



## ska invita (Apr 6, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> It seems historical now because there's a lot of uncertainty and nobody knows how it's all going to turn out - in 50 years there'll be a few paragraphs in the history books about a bunch of boring politicians debating a boring trade deal and "Brexit" will be the answer to a question at the most boring quiz night on the moon.



I get how things seem more important at the time and disappear into the footnotes of a long view of history, but I wouldn't write this off so easily.

That would suggest a return to stability and status quo after this is done. It's seems highly unlikely. More likely this is a milestone in the beginning of a process of the return of history/ breakdown of the centre/deepening of inequality.

The drum beat of deportation/eviction of EU citizens over the coming years will be the mood music to the further empowering of the ethnonationalist farright across Europe.

Brexit isn't about to fade away once it's legally passed, whatever the outcome the  warring sides aren't about to move on, Scottish nationalism and Irish unification may yet have their day... And there's the rest of Europe to consider....it's going to define the coming years in myriad ways.

Trump, aka Mr Brexit iirc, today said the USA is full...all these trends will feed into the Brexit historical legacy.


----------



## andysays (Apr 6, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I want to get involved in the brexit creative writing but can't actually be arsed to put any work in so please can we all pretend I copied the first few paragraphs of Marx's 18th Brumaire into a post and inserted the word Brexit and various Brexit references and politicians names in hilariously appropriate places? It was really funny too.



...the second time as farce, and the third, and the fourth.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 6, 2019)

Out of interest, what's the longest ever P and P thread and will this surpass it? 

That might be historically significant. I'm not sure the rest of this will seem that important in 10 years time.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Out of interest, what's the longest ever P and P thread and will this surpass it?
> 
> That might be historically significant. I'm not sure the rest of this will seem that important in 10 years time.



Assuming that it has been resolved within 10 years.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Out of interest, what's the longest ever P and P thread and will this surpass it?
> 
> That might be historically significant. I'm not sure the rest of this will seem that important in 10 years time.


I know the Commentariat thread was a long one - but this has overtaken its 821 pages.


----------



## andysays (Apr 6, 2019)

Has the other "will brexit actually happen?" been merged into this one now?

Incidentally, auto correct suggests changing 'brexit' to 'brevity' which seems about as wrong as it's possible to be...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Out of interest, what's the longest ever P and P thread and will this surpass it?
> 
> That might be historically significant. I'm not sure the rest of this will seem that important in 10 years time.


It's possible to display threads in order of number of replies, and this is the longest in this forum.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> what do you think that event will be?


My own feeling is it won't be an event per se. I think a no-deal Brexit would expose the weaknesses of the UK economy - dependent as it is on finance, house prices and household debt - and I'm not convinced there will be an easy route to 'recovery'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 6, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> My own feeling is it won't be an event per se. I think a no-deal Brexit would expose the weaknesses of the UK economy - dependent as it is on finance, house prices and household debt - and I'm not convinced there will be an easy route to 'recovery'.


The first step to recovery is admit the problem and I can't see tm doing that


----------



## inva (Apr 6, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I get how things seem more important at the time and disappear into the footnotes of a long view of history, but I wouldn't write this off so easily.
> 
> That would suggest a return to stability and status quo after this is done. It's seems highly unlikely. More likely this is a milestone in the beginning of a process of the return of history/ breakdown of the centre/deepening of inequality.
> 
> ...


The breakdown of the centre began about as soon as it achieved victory - rise of the BNP, decline of New Labour, etc. The EU referendum was a symptom of that, not its beginning, though its obviously now a focal point for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 6, 2019)

inva said:


> The breakdown of the centre began about as soon as it achieved victory - rise of the BNP, decline of New Labour, etc. The EU referendum was a symptom of that, not its beginning, though its obviously now a focal point for it.


I don't think you can really describe new labour as of the centre, they were much more of the right in many important ways


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The first step to recovery is admit the problem and I can't see tm doing that



_Hello, I’m Theresa (Hello Theresa!) and I’m a Remainer, er no I’m a Brexiteer er I don’t actually know what the fuck I am._


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 6, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> _Hello, I’m Theresa (Hello Theresa!) and I’m a Remainer, er no I’m a Brexiteer er I don’t actually know what the fuck I am._



_...the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can..._


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 6, 2019)

inva said:


> The breakdown of the centre began about as soon as it achieved victory - rise of the BNP, decline of New Labour, etc. The EU referendum was a symptom of that, not its beginning, though its obviously now a focal point for it.


Don't know if you've read Goodwin and Eatwell's National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy but there is abundant evidence in there of the long term nature of this political vacuum - the utter dislocation on every level, political social economic cultural...4 decades at least.


----------



## inva (Apr 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think you can really describe new labour as of the centre, they were much more of the right in many important ways


I suppose I don't tend to think of the centre/centrists as occupying a point between left and right, more as a ideological tendency of the right.


----------



## inva (Apr 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Don't know if you've read Goodwin and Eatwell's National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy but there is abundant evidence in there of the long term nature of this political vacuum - the utter dislocation on every level, political social economic cultural...4 decades at least.


No I haven't it's been ages since I read anything. I might have a look at that one if I can though, thanks.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 6, 2019)

inva said:


> No I haven't it's been ages since I read anything. I might have a look at that one if I can though, thanks.


It has the great quote from jean rey, ex-pres of EU commission:




			
				the EU said:
			
		

> ‘A referendum on this matter consists of consulting people who don’t know the problems instead of consulting people who know them. I would deplore a situation in which the policy of this great country should be left to housewives. It should be decided instead by trained and informed people.’



Sound familiar?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It has the great quote from jean rey, ex-pres of EU commission:
> 
> 
> 
> Sound familiar?


Our trained and informed people showing an understanding of the problem but no notion of a solution


----------



## brogdale (Apr 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Don't know if you've read Goodwin and Eatwell's National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy but there is abundant evidence in there of the long term nature of this political vacuum - the utter dislocation on every level, political social economic cultural...4 decades at least.


Maybe also Peter Mair's _Ruling the void ?_
Apols no known link to a pdf


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe also Peter Mair's _Ruling the void ?_
> Apols no known link to a pdf


Yes, def (it's here) to be read with Colin Crouch's Post Democracy.


----------



## Badgers (Apr 6, 2019)

Probably won't happen


----------



## ska invita (Apr 6, 2019)

inva said:


> The breakdown of the centre began about as soon as it achieved victory - rise of the BNP, decline of New Labour, etc. The EU referendum was a symptom of that, not its beginning, though its obviously now a focal point for it.


(broadly) I agree...Brexit'll be the convenient milestone on which to mark it


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Probably won't happen




Might turn out to be the first public enquiry of all time to squarely put the blame on the public.


----------



## chilango (Apr 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Don't know if you've read Goodwin and Eatwell's National Populism: The Revolt Against Liberal Democracy but there is abundant evidence in there of the long term nature of this political vacuum - the utter dislocation on every level, political social economic cultural...4 decades at least.



Is that the Pelican one? Worth getting?

I've a couple in that series (the class one and the social mobility one that are surprisingly good)


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 6, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is that the Pelican one? Worth getting?
> 
> I've a couple in that series (the class one and the social mobility one that are surprisingly good)


Yes, pelican one. It's well worth the read and provides plenty of ammo and things to think on.


----------



## Spandex (Apr 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> what do you think that event will be?


Britain will fall out of the EU on 12th April. The economy will crash and Tommy Robinson will be swept to power on a wave of nationalism. He'll lead the British army off to reclaim the empire and be killed near Gombe two months later as the army is crushed between Boko Haram and African Union troops. 

Scotland will declare independence and rejoin the EU. Workers councils will spring up across northern England, and Northumbria, Yorkshire, Lancashire and Wales will declare themselves socialist republics. London will declare itself an independent city state and President Umunna will turn it into a tax haven for the super-rich having been refused membership of the EU. Rutland will declare itself a feudal dukedom.

The remains of the UK will endure a failing UKIP government so bad that the DUP proposes reunification with southern Ireland. Eventually a resurgent Lib Dems will gain power and a sad faced PM Clegg will sell the remaining state assets, including the Queen, to a cryrogenically frozen Rupert Murdoch for $4.2m.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 6, 2019)

Spandex said:


> Britain will fall out of the EU on 12th April. The economy will crash and Tommy Robinson will be swept to power on a wave of nationalism. He'll lead the British army off to reclaim the empire and be killed near Gombe two months later as the army is crushed between Boko Haram and African Union troops.
> 
> Scotland will declare independence and rejoin the EU. Workers councils will spring up across northern England, and Northumbria, Yorkshire, Lancashire and Wales will declare themselves socialist republics. London will declare itself an independent city state and President Umunna will turn it into a tax haven for the super-rich having been refused membership of the EU. Rutland will declare itself a feudal dukedom.
> 
> The remains of the UK will endure a failing UKIP government so bad that the DUP proposes reunification with southern Ireland. Eventually a resurgent Lib Dems will gain power and a sad faced PM Clegg will sell the remaining state assets, including the Queen, to a cryrogenically frozen Rupert Murdoch for $4.2m.


Aw...come on, there has to be a catch somewhere?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 7, 2019)

Britain crashes out with no deal then applies to become a state within the USA. After a couple of years a referendum is held which shows by a slim majority the will of the people is to leave the USA.

Three years or more of confusion as the USA declares that all British colonies should be left with the USA as USA colonies.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 7, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 7, 2019)

As a leave voter I disagree or strongly disagree with all of the above, except blue passports, which I don't give a flying fuck about.

But, then I am not some raving right-wing loon.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 166892


Can't see those who will be held accountable going with the 53%.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As a leave voter I disagree or strongly disagree with all of the above, except blue passports, which I don't give a flying fuck about.
> 
> But, then I am not some raving right-wing loon.


I wonder if there's more data available about the demographic..


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> ...


And? Are you going to try and make a point?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 7, 2019)

And...?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 166892


Have you a more recent survey, from 2018 or even 2019?


----------



## Badgers (Apr 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you a more recent survey, from 2018 or even 2019?


Most of those 'leave voters' will have died of old age


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 166892



They left out birch switches, scrofula and the iron lung.


----------



## Wookey (Apr 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As a leave voter I disagree or strongly disagree with all of the above, except blue passports, which I don't give a flying fuck about.
> 
> But, then I am not some raving right-wing loon.



Does it bother you who's on your side though?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 7, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Does it bother you who's on your side though?


you're like Nigel Farage's secret weapon


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 7, 2019)

Haven't we moved beyond "U R A RACIALISS"? Surely to god we've moved beyond that fatuous bollocks and onto examining the political class' desperate scrabbling to preserve themselves while giving the impression they're doing what's right for the population?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Haven't we moved beyond "U R A RACIALISS"? Surely to god we've moved beyond that fatuous bollocks and onto examining the political class' desperate scrabbling to preserve themselves while giving the impression they're doing what's right for the population?


They're not giving the impression that they are doing what's right for the population


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 7, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 166892



Interestingly this suggests that only up to half of Leave voters are particularly drawn to draconian or nostalgic right wing positions, so 25% of the electorate. This corresponds with the 23% who say they would vote for an anti-Islamic party or the recent poll giving a very racist UKIP 18%. It’s hard then to talk about Leave voters per se or what they want from Brexit other than some noisy cunts appear to get to speak for the whole.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 7, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Interestingly this suggests that only up to half of Leave voters are particularly drawn to draconian or nostalgic right wing positions, so 25% of the electorate.


Pedantry alert: 19.9% of the electorate (0.7221*0.5189*0.53). 

But I agree with the substance of your point.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They're not giving the impression that they are doing what's right for the population


I meant they're scrabbling to give that impression as well as preserve etc etc. I'm only on coffee number one of the day, forgive I


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 7, 2019)

Not everyone who voted remain is a white supremacist neo-liberal refugee drowning racist, but every white supremacist neo-liberal refugee drowning racist voted remain.


----------



## andysays (Apr 7, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Does it bother you who's on your side though?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 7, 2019)

What exactly was the question they asked in the poll anyway?  Was it “do you want to bring back pre-decimal currency?” Y/N?  Or was it “How bothered would you be by bringing back pre-decimal currency on a scale of 1-10?” with anything other than a 9 or 10 being reported as being in favour?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 7, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What exactly was the question they asked in the poll anyway?  Was it “do you want to bring back pre-decimal currency?” Y/N?  Or was it “How bothered would you be by bringing back pre-decimal currency on a scale of 1-10?” with anything other than a 9 or 10 being reported as being in favour?


And if you’re being asked to give a response about predecimal currency, how likely was it to have been on your mind before prompted anyway?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 7, 2019)

I tracked down the original YouGov poll — it’s  not short of remain voters who want death penalties and wasteful lightbulbs too, albeit at much lower levels of prevalence



Some of the questions are very open to interpretation.  Does “selling goods in pounds and ounces should be brought back” mean ONLY selling them in pounds and ounces or printing it in both or leaving it up to the vendor?  Are they saying people should have the option to buy incandescent bulbs or that they personally want incandescent bulbs?

Things like corporal punishment likely reflects age profile more than anything else.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Apr 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And if you’re being asked to give a response about predecimal currency, how likely was it to have been on your mind before prompted anyway?


This is always the one that really bothers me about polls like this.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 7, 2019)

nvm!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 7, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Does it bother you who's on your side though?



Doesn't it bother you who's on your side? Like the racists of the Chuk party for example?


----------



## Combustible (Apr 7, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I tracked down the original YouGov poll — it’s  not short of remain voters who want death penalties and wasteful lightbulbs too, albeit at much lower levels of prevalence



The overall numbers in favour of bringing back the death penalty seem a little low.I wonder if some pro death penalty remain voters are more likely to say no since it is tied to leaving the EU in the question. Although it's also possible that some people on both sides are in favour of the death penalty in principle but don't think it should be reintroduced.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

Combustible said:


> The overall numbers in favour of bringing back the death penalty seem a little low.I wonder if some pro death penalty remain voters are more likely to say no since it is tied to leaving the EU in the question. Although it's also possible that some people on both sides are in favour of the death penalty in principle but don't think it should be reintroduced.


By God it should be brought back for malfeasance in public office, show those pampered fops in westminster we'll not put up with their fuckwittery


----------



## collectordave (Apr 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> They're not giving the impression that they are doing what's right for the population



I thought they were doing the "will of the people" or at the least "delivering on the referendum". Where did this idea of "doing what's right for the population" come from?

Has anybody passed this novel idea onto their MP?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Haven't we moved beyond "U R A RACIALISS"? Surely to god we've moved beyond that fatuous bollocks and onto examining the political class' desperate scrabbling to preserve themselves while giving the impression they're doing what's right for the population?


Here's where it came from


----------



## collectordave (Apr 7, 2019)

Now that is a good idea might be a problem getting the government to understand it.

Maybe we should start a poll.

All those in favour of the government doing whats right for the population, should get their attention long enough to ignore it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 7, 2019)

collectordave said:


> All those in favour of the government doing whats right for the population,


What would that be?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What would that be?



I don't know just trust the government to do it. That is why they get votes is it not?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What would that be?


resigning?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 7, 2019)

collectordave said:


> I don't know just trust the government to do it. That is why they get votes is it not?


I can see a flaw in that plan.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What would that be?


Themselves in


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 7, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What exactly was the question they asked in the poll anyway?  Was it “do you want to bring back pre-decimal currency?” Y/N?  Or was it “How bothered would you be by bringing back pre-decimal currency on a scale of 1-10?” with anything other than a 9 or 10 being reported as being in favour?



Surely on a scale of 1 to 12?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 7, 2019)

It's only recently I've learned how to count to 12 on each hand and I grew up with old money ..


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 7, 2019)

I learnt all my basic numeracy pre decimal then they had to go and change it all just to make it easy for future generations of lazy buggers... while similtaneously destroying my mathematical development. I'm with the Brexit scum on this one


----------



## Wilf (Apr 8, 2019)

How far back are we going with 'pre-decimal' currency?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> How far back are we going with 'pre-decimal' currency?



denarius,solidus and libra?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

collectordave said:


> denarius,solidus and libra?


That fits in with their heroes Mogg and Johnson. By any chance does "School" mint its own coinage for the tuck shop ?


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> That fits in with their heroes Mogg and Johnson. By any chance does "School" mint its own coinage for the tuck shop ?



Even those two simple words, ‘tuck shop’, are redolent of the class hierarchy. Stamped on youngsters from  infancy, evoking characters like Billy Bunter, Lord Snooty and Winker Watson, that we may be successful, but never be like them. The Rees-Moggs and chums.
United Kingdom? Oh my sides.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It's only recently I've learned how to count to 12 on each hand and I grew up with old money ..


I'm surprised, given your extra digits


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

I walked right into that one


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Even those two simple words, ‘tuck shop’, are redolent of the class hierarchy. Stamped on youngsters from  infancy, evoking characters like Billy Bunter, Lord Snooty and Winker Watson, that we may be successful, but never be like them. The Rees-Moggs and chums.
> United Kingdom? Oh my sides.


My suburban primary school had a tuck shop in the 60s


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 8, 2019)

My school (in Salford) also called it a "tuck shop" probably in a vain attempt to make us ferral bleeders "aspire" to be a bit more Winker Watson. It wasn't actually a shop, just a table run by volunteer kids.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Apr 8, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> My school (in Salford) also called it a "tuck shop" probably in a vain attempt to make us ferral bleeders "aspire" to be a bit more Winker Watson. It wasn't actually a shop, just a table run by volunteer kids.



We had one of them in the youth club I used to attend.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 8, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> My school (in Salford) also called it a "tuck shop" probably in a vain attempt to make us ferral bleeders "aspire" to be a bit more Winker Watson. It wasn't actually a shop, just a table run by volunteer kids.


Yup, my state comp had a tuck shop too. We’d get cheap potato snacks you didn’t see anywhere else, like salt and vinegar potato straws; sugary drinks in flimsy, rubbed plastic cups with sealed foil-like lids you pierced with a stubby straw; penny dainties (McCowan’s toffee); and so on.

The local youth club also had a tuck shop.

I think it was just education sector lingo by then.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

I didn't understand the social context until I got chicken pox and was given a box of Beanos and Dandies ... didn't the Bash Street Kids have a tuck shop ?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)




----------



## eatmorecheese (Apr 8, 2019)

Tuck boxes, not tuck shops, are the real mark of the public school tosser


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 8, 2019)

What’s school?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> What’s school?


a group of fish


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 8, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> What’s school?


Smoking. It’s very cool.


----------



## andysays (Apr 8, 2019)

eatmorecheese said:


> Tuck boxes, not tuck shops, are the real mark of the public school tosser


And tucked in shirts


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 8, 2019)

Being honest we did have a kind of tuck shop at school, but I was only in the second year at our secondary modern when they packed it in due to all the thieving from it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> What’s school?


If you have to ask, you didn't go there ...


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Being honest we did have a kind of tuck shop at school, but I was only in the second year at our secondary modern when they packed it in due to all the thieving from it.


Same thing happened at my school because they couldn't persuade enough of the older kids "in charge" of it to act like capitalists...they just used to give the stuff away for free


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 8, 2019)

eatmorecheese said:


> Tuck boxes, not tuck shops, are the real mark of the public school tosser


What’s a tuck _box_? 

Hold on, searching...


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 8, 2019)

Holy fuck!

https://schooltuckboxes.co.uk/tuck-boxes/


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> If you have to ask, you didn't go there ...



I did, it must have been good, it was approved. 

ETA: I must admit though I was a late starter, I started at ten. I was back home at eleven thirty.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 8, 2019)

"well i say a tuck shop - but it were more like a pile of stale crisps on't floor"


----------



## eatmorecheese (Apr 8, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Holy fuck!
> 
> Custom Made Wooden Tuck Boxes for Boarding School – Shop here


Someone I was at school with had his great grandfathers' tuck box. His grandfather and father had used it too. Like some sort of holy fucking relic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Holy fuck!
> 
> Custom Made Wooden Tuck Boxes for Boarding School – Shop here


more money than sense



you can get the sodding things for £85, £87 which in itself is very dear. but much better than £270


----------



## Poi E (Apr 8, 2019)

Fucking hell. Guess they had lunches made for them.


----------



## alsoknownas (Apr 8, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> "well i say a tuck shop - but it were more like a pile of stale crisps on't floor


Floor?  You had a floor? etc.


----------



## Smangus (Apr 8, 2019)

Just get em a coffin, better value and they can use them for the designated purpose a lot earlier.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 8, 2019)

I remember we had a tuck shop at school but they're a thing of the past these days, the school where Mrs Q teaches doesn't have one and the canteen is banned from selling sweets and choccies, All that happens is that the kids sneak out and go the Co-Op around the corner. There are a couple of Y11's apparently who are future entrepeneurs/capitalists/drug dealers in the making who flog stuff from their satchels at a small markup to the other kids.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Fucking hell. Guess they had lunches made for them.



And a footman to chew it up for them and spit it down their throats.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 8, 2019)

I had no idea such boxes were meant for food. Mine was always used for clothes. Latterly it's been used for storing recording equipment and dangerous tools. I have considered having it used as my coffin, as I still just about fit inside


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 8, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> the canteen is banned from selling sweets and choccies


sugar fascism was a feature of megacity 1 in 2000ad, but in this timeline Jamie Olliver ushered it in early


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 8, 2019)

It's all very well celebrating the 882-page length of this thread, the longest ever in P & P! 

But exclude all the _Brexit-irrelevant_ posts and where does that leave you ...... 

<teacher surveys the class sternly .....  >


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> It's all very well celebrating the 882-page length of this thread, the longest ever in P & P!
> 
> But exclude all the _Brexit-irrelevant_ posts and where does that leave you ......
> 
> <teacher surveys the class sternly .....  >


Still in the EU, Sir?


----------



## Libertad (Apr 8, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> It's all very well celebrating the 882-page length of this thread, the longest ever in P & P!
> 
> But exclude all the _Brexit-irrelevant_ posts and where does that leave you ......
> 
> <teacher surveys the class sternly .....  >



"It's your own time you're wasting."


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 8, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> It's all very well celebrating the 882-page length of this thread, the longest ever in P & P!
> 
> But exclude all the _Brexit-irrelevant_ posts and where does that leave you ......
> 
> <teacher surveys the class sternly .....  >


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

altho it's probably more


----------



## gosub (Apr 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> more money than sense
> 
> View attachment 166989
> 
> you can get the sodding things for £85, £87 which in itself is very dear. but much better than £270



Your 85 quid ones can all be opened with the same key.   Add padlock


----------



## Wilf (Apr 8, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 166892


Also:

White dog shit
Jumpers for goalposts
Plain, salt and vinegar and cheese and onion - nothing else
Arthur Scargill
The Cold War


----------



## Poi E (Apr 8, 2019)

finally, some sense on the brexit thread.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 8, 2019)

I was 13 when decimalisation happened, I remember my Grandad telling me that it would bring civilisation crashing down around our ears and lead to the complete collapse of the UK has aviable society. With hindsight he appeared to be mistaken. 
I'm not sure why people would insist on the return of incandescent lightbulbs if they just want to waste money use it to buy booze instead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> Your 85 quid ones can all be opened with the same key.   Add padlock


at that price a padlock should come as standard


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Also:
> 
> White dog shit
> Jumpers for goalposts
> ...


Rickets.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Rickets.


seen a few people with that recently


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 8, 2019)

Same here.


----------



## Mordi (Apr 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Same thing happened at my school because they couldn't persuade enough of the older kids "in charge" of it to act like capitalists...they just used to give the stuff away for free



A mate of mine was suspended for selling cutprice Wham bars and Highland Toffees he'd get from his uncles cash and carry. He'd been running it since he was a nipper and then in fourth year they clamped down on the budding entrepreneur. He must have made a killing.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 8, 2019)

Back on topic: the purpose of TM's awkward fireside chat yesterday seemed to be to signal that no-deal was off the table, and that therefore the hard brexiters have overplayed their hand by refusing to vote for her deal and are now out in the cold.

But is it just a ploy? Is she going to pull out her fourth meaningful vote in a day or two and say to the brexiters 'it's my deal or a long extension with uncertain outcome negotiated with a communist'? 

If I knew I guess I'd start laying bets.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I was 13 when decimalisation happened, I remember my Grandad telling me that it would bring civilisation crashing down around our ears and lead to the complete collapse of the UK has aviable society. With hindsight he appeared to be mistaken.


Harsh...looks like yer Gramps completely got the slow-burn of neoliberal decline...


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 8, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I was 13 when decimalisation happened, I remember my Grandad telling me that it would bring civilisation crashing down around our ears and lead to the complete collapse of the UK has aviable society. With hindsight he appeared to be mistaken.


seems to me he was on the money


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> seems to me he was on the money


Maybe the penny will drop?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> seems to me he was on the money



He certainly observed there would be change.


----------



## Poi E (Apr 8, 2019)

coining phrases is cheap


----------



## brogdale (Apr 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He certainly observed there would be change.


Nugget of truth in there, for sure.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Nugget of truth in there, for sure.



Bet your bottom dollar on it.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 8, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Back on topic: the purpose of TM's awkward fireside chat yesterday seemed to be to signal that no-deal was off the table, and that therefore the hard brexiters have overplayed their hand by refusing to vote for her deal and are now out in the cold.
> 
> But is it just a ploy? Is she going to pull out her fourth meaningful vote in a day or two and say to the brexiters 'it's my deal or a long extension with uncertain outcome negotiated with a communist'?
> 
> If I knew I guess I'd start laying bets.


Yep, I think that's it. Not so much Corbyn being strung along (he probably is being) but put in a position where he feels he has to go ahead with the talks. His involvement is then flourished to frighten just enough erg nobs into the fold - 'look, it's mv4 or Marxism'. There's a chance it will work for her, but it might depend on the EU decision on the extension first. If they insist on a 12 month extension full stop the party will go ballistic and may kick her out forthwith. But if it's a case of '12 months unless your parliament approves mv4', it probably helps her get a deal. The difference for her is tory party waits till the day after the day the deal is signed before booting her out. Other scenarios are available.

I think it's interesting that participation in the EU elections has become the blue touch paper for the tory party. I say this cautiously because there's an outside chance those elections could turn nasty, but other than that I think it would be funny as fuck seeing them unveiling there manifestos and the rest. In fact they may dispense with all of that, leaving the field to farage etc. Grim, but a statement of where our political system has taken us.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 8, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 8, 2019)

Macron, il dit non.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 167025









from newsthump


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 8, 2019)

also 

Cats in doorways getting tired of being used as Brexit metaphor


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 8, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> from newsthump



Sponsored by The Lord Kirkham’s former and current enterprises?


----------



## gosub (Apr 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> at that price a padlock should come as standard


Price of 85 quid is actually quite reasonable for a chest that will outlive you


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 9, 2019)

Funny to me mainly because he's my hometown MP and a nasty piece of work/waste of oxygen. Tory Brexiteer fantasist quits Tory Brexiteer fantasists group because they are Tory Brexiteer fantasists. 

Tory quits ERG for 'endangering Brexit'

By the way, I've decided - this is the one true thread. editor merge the imitation threads, the people have spoken and this is 883 pages long. This is the one true thread that will see us through to the bitter end.


----------



## Poi E (Apr 9, 2019)

Can we just merge all threads about Ireland, Wales and Scotland into this one, too?


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 9, 2019)

How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer


----------



## Poi E (Apr 9, 2019)




----------



## collectordave (Apr 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is the one true thread that will see us through to the bitter end



When will that be?


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 10, 2019)

One thread to bind them all?


----------



## chilango (Apr 10, 2019)

Ever closer union of threads.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 10, 2019)

This is the thread of the people.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 10, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> One thread to bind them all?


With cords that cannot be broken.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 10, 2019)

collectordave said:


> When will that be?



Forever.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer


So then, 2 more sleeps to Brexit. Or 42.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Apr 10, 2019)

it will never end





b3ta.com board


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So then, 2 more sleeps to Brexit. Or 42.



Or NO Brexit...


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Or NO Brexit...



nob-r-exit


----------



## Wilf (Apr 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Or NO Brexit...


I look back to a time when you were posting a picture for each day left. It was a happier time, a _BETTER_ time.


----------



## Badgers (Apr 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Or NO Brexit...


Is a 'NO' Brexit short for Northern Oirland or NOrway ?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 10, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Is a 'NO' Brexit short for Northern Oirland or NOrway ?



*N*ever *O*ver Brexit


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 10, 2019)

Warhol would be having a field day with this fucking saga.


----------



## Balbi (Apr 10, 2019)

Halloween extension is a pure stream of piss taking


----------



## Badgers (Apr 10, 2019)

> The talk in Brussels is that EU leaders have agreed a Brexit delay until 31 October.
> 
> According to diplomatic sources quoted by Reuters, the EU will review this extension in June.


From the BBC ^


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 10, 2019)

Halloween 

If Chris Morris had written this it would have been dismissed as him taking it too far.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 10, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Halloween extension is a pure stream of piss taking


They’ve got us by the ghoulies


----------



## Balbi (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They’ve got us by the ghoulies



Sun headline, right there.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2019)

So, unless we leave without a deal, I think that means we have to take part in euro elections. Cue Tory candidates pissing about on their phones and answering 'whatever' to any question asked.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 11, 2019)

I've seen reports saying Oct 31 was an ill thought out compromise between Macron and the rest. However I think it works quite well for the EU. Isn't time for a Tory leadership and gen election for new PM to get ultra-brexity mandate. However there is time to get either mv4 through or customs union.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 11, 2019)

I've not really been following the news this evening.  Have any tory MPs actually exploded yet?


----------



## realitybites (Apr 11, 2019)

Parliment to allow its MPs to sod off on holiday.. No closer to anything that even resembles an exit agreement but now clutching their prize trump card of a 6 months extension, skools out! -

'Ministers were planning to ask MPs to sit on Friday, and on Monday and on Tuesday next week. But those plans have now been scrapped, and the Easter recess starts at the end of proceedings later today.'


----------



## Wookey (Apr 11, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> it will never end
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Looks like a Slytheren House reunion...


----------



## Ming (Apr 11, 2019)

Wookey said:


> Looks like a Slytheren House reunion...


They really are evil. The numbers are in. I used to think they just had a different opinion on how to make the world a better place. I know better now.


----------



## Riklet (Apr 11, 2019)

cliff-edge avoidance
halloween
european elections
tusk tusk tusk
the tabloids

I'm too knackered to articulate any better


----------



## Humberto (Apr 11, 2019)

Must be a ballache trying to sort this out when the party is semi-mutinous and ungovernable. You are either in or out though. If they can't do it, time to face up to facts. Fuck your career. It's a fuck up. You only have to examine their conduct. I don't have a blind trust in their competence and good faith because of what they do and have done over the years and neither should anyone else. These people think they can game it. They can't. You are either honourable and reasonable or a cunt for want of a better description. That is why we are where we are.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 11, 2019)

I wonder how long the next extension will be?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 11, 2019)

Wonder if we can use this time to hold a third referendum on the EU?

Considering starting a petition but need 5 email addresses of supporters the petition will be worded as below:-

Any supporters?


5 June 1975: Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community
23 June 2016: Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community

As we have now had two referendums on membership of the EU and considering the current inability of government to make a decision and their determination to carry out the "Will of the people" I propose a third referendum on continued membership of the EU.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 11, 2019)

Donald's pissed off about the EU being mean to Brexit.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 11, 2019)

I still believe with all these extensions  that Nick Knowles and the DIY SOS team will be more successful than the current diyers.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 11, 2019)

(((Brexit)))


----------



## andysays (Apr 11, 2019)

Still waiting for Ranbay to sort out a re-calculated countdown...


----------



## teqniq (Apr 11, 2019)

Maybe someone forgot to change the batteries?

May malfunctions on arrival in Brussels and lapses into old script | John Crace


----------



## collectordave (Apr 11, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Donald's pissed off about the EU being mean to Brexit.



Just a tad out of touch again.


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 11, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Wonder if we can use this time to hold a third referendum on the EU?
> 
> Considering starting a petition but need 5 email addresses of supporters the petition will be worded as below:-
> 
> ...


When are you planning to hold it? June 2047?


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)




----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 167285



The gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

Do i save them all off now, or daily?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 11, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> When are you planning to hold it? June 2047?



I was hoping to hold it before the end of the next extension say May 2047.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

is 202 days long enough for the splitters thread to catch up?


----------



## andysays (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 167285


----------



## BoxRoom (Apr 11, 2019)

Trick or Treaty!


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 11, 2019)

Balbi said:


> Sun headline, right there.



When the deadline arrives and May pleads for an extension until Nov.1 so she can hold the 14th vote on her deal, it'll be "DEAL DE LOS MUERTOS."


----------



## KeeperofDragons (Apr 11, 2019)

What's the betting that they'll still be bickering on October 24!


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)




----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 11, 2019)

May is still trying to get her deal through.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

So 202 days to go,
58 days are weekends
84 day for the above stuff

= 60 days


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)




----------



## kabbes (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So 202 days to go,
> 58 days are weekends
> 84 day for the above stuff
> 
> = 60 days


You’re double counting the weekends


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You’re double counting the weekends



202 days, and thats only 28 weekends days? Saturdays and Sundays like ?


----------



## neonwilderness (Apr 11, 2019)

'This is Brexit at its best' claim five protesters who blocked off an Aldi



> One man wrote on Twitter: "They have blocked the road to a German supermarket distribution centre because they 'don't want German they want Brexit'.... with a German motorhome."


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 202 days, and thats only 28 weekends days? Saturdays and Sundays like ?



IIRC they don't sit on Fridays, so 3-day weekends.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> IIRC they don't sit on Fridays, so 3-day weekends.



Ffs , even better


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Ffs , even better



Yeah, but, kabbes is still right about you double counting weekends, 12 weeks off is 84 days INC. weekends, then you added those weekend days with your total for weekends too, but you didn't include Fridays off in those 'sitting week'.

It's a clear as Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

11% approval...how the hell did they find 1 in 10 saying they approved?


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 11% approval...how the hell did they find 1 in 10 saying they approved?
> 
> View attachment 167347



Its a surprising result especially after May's _it's all everyone else's fault, blame them_ speech outside No 10.  I thought that would have won the masses over.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

Maybe it's just that I've been a bit isolated from the rolling news today...but...has the reaction to Brexit being postponed been a bit muted all round?


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, but, kabbes is still right about you double counting weekends, 12 weeks off is 84 days INC. weekends, then you added those weekend days with your total for weekends too, but you didn't include Fridays off in those 'sitting week'.
> 
> It's a clear as Brexit.




now i get it


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe it's just that I've been a bit isolated from the rolling news today...but...has the reaction to Brexit being postponed been a bit muted all round?



Pretty much.  May gave a her speech to Parliament with half her cabinet not there.  Then the commons had a jolly good laugh at Mark 'charge of the light brigade' Francois.  That's about it really.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Just counted and there’s defo 58 weekend days till October 31st



There is, counting just Saturdays & Sundays. 

And, 12 weeks when they are adjourned, which is 60 days of Mon-Fri.

Whereas you double counted the weekends into the adjourned weeks. 



Ranbay said:


> So 202 days to go,
> 58 days are weekends
> 84 day for the above stuff
> 
> = 60 days


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> now i get it



You edited that post. 

But, glad you got it, in the end.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> There is, counting just Saturdays & Sundays.
> 
> And, 12 weeks when they are adjourned, which is 60 days of Mon-Fri.
> 
> Whereas you double counted the weekends into the adjourned weeks.



yeah got there in the end, so they have 84 days to sort it minus a shit load of Fridays


----------



## belboid (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 11% approval...how the hell did they find 1 in 10 saying they approved?
> 
> View attachment 167347


1 in 9, and I'm surprised so few people approve of the way they are tearing themselves apart.


----------



## andysays (Apr 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> yeah got there in the end, so they have 84 days to sort it minus a shot load of Fridays


202 days is 21 weeks plus 5 days
Of that, there are 12 weeks when they aren't sitting at all, leaving 9 weeks
They only sit from Monday to Thursday, so 9 weeks is only 36 working days, plus a few of the 5 extra days.
So of the 202 days between now and October 31st, they're actually only sitting for about 40 days


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> 202 days is 21 weeks plus 5 days
> Of that, there are 12 weeks when they aren't sitting at all, leaving 9 weeks
> They only sit from Monday to Thursday, so 9 weeks is only 36 working days, plus a few of the 5 extra days.
> So of the 202 days between now and October 31st, they're actually only sitting for about 40 days



Eaxctly !


----------



## emanymton (Apr 11, 2019)

The time and date website tells me there are 143 workdays and that it excluded 29 Saturdays and 29 Sundays. Taking of the 29 Fridays then gives us 114 days.

If they are closed for 12 weeks at 4 days per week that is another 48 days lost which comes out at 66 days.

But there are also 3 bank holidays and I cant be arsed to work out how they affect those numbers so 63-69 by my count.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 11, 2019)

Not long in anyones book.


----------



## teqniq (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr. Peck is a tad exercised


----------



## gosub (Apr 11, 2019)

It's a complete contempt of the Royal family,  who come up with a 7th in line to the throne for use as media distraction - and our politicans squander the window.   It's beginning to look a lot like treason


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Pretty much.  May gave a her speech to Parliament with half her cabinet not there.  Then the commons had a jolly good laugh at Mark 'charge of the light brigade' Francois.  That's about it really.


Hmm...all a bit anti-climatic,eh?
Saw on news that Cash had told May to her face that should go...and it happened to remind me of a little (behind the scenes) interaction that I witnessed at College Green on the 24th June 2016. Whilst hanging around on the benches at the Southern end of the green (just basically having a giggle at all the talking heads being lined up to explain the result) along came Bill Cash and the other bloke (don't know?) said:
_"Cheer up Bill, we won."_​Made an impression at the time and I've been thinking about his gloom on 24/06/16 a few times recently.

Obviously something and nothing and perhaps such musing reflects the (rare) slow Brexit news day we seem to have had.

Howsomedever...


----------



## Rosemary Jest (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe it's just that I've been a bit isolated from the rolling news today...but...has the reaction to Brexit being postponed been a bit muted all round?



Everyone's just a bit bored by this point. May is doing what should have been done 2 and a half years ago, as in getting the ball rolling. Nothing more.

Most people are bored off their tits with this shit, me included.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

...and whilst I'm on a roll with Brexit related trivia...on that same day (the first day of taking back control) I went up from Westminster to the 'Economists' Bookshop' (Waterstones) at the LSE and there in their 2nd hand section picked up this tome. Made me giggle on 24/06/16.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

_You're not laughing now._


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _You're not laughing now._



What is that for?


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _You're not laughing now._


Sooooo long ago.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What is that for?


Who'd you think? It was a reply to brogdale's giggle connected to sked who set up UKIP. Do i really have to do this?


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Who'd you think? It was a reply to brogdale's giggle connected to sked who set up UKIP. Do i really have to do this?



If you mean it should be obvious who Sked is, then that’s simply a question about how much patience you have that you’ll have to answer yourself.

If you are asking yourself if you should be posting videos of triumphant xenophobes then it’s a ‘no’ from me.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you mean it should be obvious who Sked is, then that’s simply a question about how much patience you have that you’ll have to answer yourself.
> 
> If you are asking yourself if you should be posting videos of triumphant xenophobes then it’s a ‘no’ from me.


Not sure you're reading the vibe here, Moose


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you mean it should be obvious who Sked is, then that’s simply a question about how much patience you have that you’ll have to answer yourself.
> 
> If you are asking yourself if you should be posting videos of triumphant xenophobes then it’s a ‘no’ from me.


Was it a public manifesto - give it a rest. You didn't get it, you got told.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you mean it should be obvious who Sked is, then that’s simply a question about how much patience you have that you’ll have to answer yourself.
> 
> If you are asking yourself if you should be posting videos of triumphant xenophobes then it’s a ‘no’ from me.


Explain all allusions right now!!!!


----------



## yield (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you mean it should be obvious who Sked is, then that’s simply a question about how much patience you have that you’ll have to answer yourself.
> 
> If you are asking yourself if you should be posting videos of triumphant xenophobes then it’s a ‘no’ from me.


Oh come on. Read it as it is. Rather than what you would want it to be.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

Same day, same bookshop, same shelf...


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not sure you're reading the vibe here, Moose



That’s why I’m asking the question. Hardly outrageous. Not sure why it needs the added drama which is what my reply referred to.


----------



## xenon (Apr 11, 2019)

I have a dream.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> That’s why I’m asking the question. Hardly outrageous. Not sure why it needs the added drama which is what my reply referred to.


auto-drama


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 11, 2019)

xenon said:


> I have a dream.



Not going to happen.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> That’s why I’m asking the question. Hardly outrageous. Not sure why it needs the added drama which is what my reply referred to.


It's literally the void-like lack of drama here today that I'm filling with Brexit-related piffle.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's literally the void-like lack of drama here today that I'm filling with Brexit-related piffle.



Yes. It’s a slow day.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 11, 2019)

By coincidence I’m working up to an essay on Altiero Spinelli and the Ventotene Manifesto.
Horse bolted or beacon of hope?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 11, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> By coincidence I’m working up to an essay on Altiero Spinelli and the Ventotene Manifesto.
> Horse bolted or beacon of hope?


About as much hope as the Salo republic


----------



## brogdale (Apr 11, 2019)

And just to demonstrate balance...I'll remind everyone of the pic I snapped (leaning out from my bathroom window on 23/06/2016) looking over to my MP's house!
Yes, St. Thomas actually had the Remainian airforce aloft from Brake acres.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> About as much hope as the Salo republic





Sadly I’ve only got two thousand words!


----------



## Riklet (Apr 11, 2019)

collectordave said:


> I wonder how long the next extension will be?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 12, 2019)

I do not think I can stand remain in stages.

Why not just apply for an extension to the end of the century\infinity?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 12, 2019)

collectordave said:


> I do not think I can stand remain in stages.
> 
> Why not just apply for an extension to the end of the century\infinity?



‘Remain in stages’ is clearly the plan. Along with boring people to death.  

In return people have made their minds up about all shades of the administrative wing of capital and have now switched off  but have not and will not forget.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 12, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> ‘Remain in stages’ is clearly the plan. Along with boring people to death.
> 
> In return people have made their minds up about all shades of the administrative wing of capital and have now switched off  but have not and will not forget.


Talking of boredom...I reckon the suprastate missed a trick by not giving the U.K. a 6 month ‘taster’ of all that control ‘on appro’...then folk would have see exactly what would actually change in their lives...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Talking of boredom...I reckon the suprastate missed a trick by not giving the U.K. a 6 month ‘taster’ of all that control ‘on appro’...then folk would have see exactly what would actually change in their lives...



I’m looking forward to the moment when citizens get to bask in a lubed frictionless trading bloc with the superstate. I imagine the race to the bottom is going to feel pretty damn good


----------



## brogdale (Apr 12, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m looking forward to the moment when citizens get to bask in a lubed frictionless trading bloc with the superstate. I imagine the race to the bottom is going to feel pretty damn good


Yep, the race that knows no borders...truly the Jeux Sans Frontières


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 12, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m looking forward to the moment when citizens get to bask in a lubed frictionless trading bloc with the superstate. I imagine the race to the bottom is going to feel pretty damn good


Until you see the bill


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep, the race that knows no borders...truly the Jeux Sans Frontières


The tour de arse, as the race to the bottom better known


----------



## Flavour (Apr 12, 2019)

We can look forward to very little happening between now and October.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We can look forward to very little happening between now and October.


The legs under the water will be going furiously. Leaving is now dead.

It was dead the day after the vote tbh. Or before .


----------



## tommers (Apr 12, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We can look forward to very little happening between now and October.


And then a sudden panic and May putting her deal up again.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 12, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We can look forward to very little happening between now and October.


Isn't there someone on here who's profile status tag is _*Nostrafuckingdamus *_?


----------



## brogdale (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The legs under the water will be going furiously. Leaving is now dead.
> 
> It was dead the day after the vote tbh. Or before .


Cash knew?
Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

There is a wise young man at work who took bets off at least seven of us, some for up to £50, that no matter what, the UK would not leave the EU!


----------



## Flavour (Apr 12, 2019)

The tragic comedy of the UK having to take part in the EU elections is going to be quite enjoyable I guess. But it's mana to the far right. And as usual the "left" of the Labour party seem to be doing little to counter the far-right narrative which is striking a chord with more and more people around Europe. I don't what know what I would suggest to a hypothetical left-wing political party that aimed to reclaim the Brexit narrative. But criticising the EU for the correct reasons (enforced privatization and marketization, anti-WC policies at every level) rather than criticising the consequences of those policies and their human faces (ie. immigration of southern/eastern europeans to northern/western countries) would be a start.


----------



## Poi E (Apr 12, 2019)

..


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

Flavour said:


> But criticising the EU for the correct reasons (enforced privatization and marketization, anti-WC policies at every level)


Criticising the EU at all would be a start. 

This is what the People's Vote mob want - to put the genie back in the bottle and go back to what _works_.


----------



## Flavour (Apr 12, 2019)

For most people I know whether they are "into" politics or not (and most of these people are members of the Labour party) _freedom of movement _is like this mantra which you just need to repeat if anyone dares criticise the EU. It's very weird.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Isn't there someone on here who's profile status tag is _*Nostrafuckingdamus *_?


killer b


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This is what the People's Vote mob want - to put the genie back in the bottle and go back to what _works_.



If a second ref ever happens, their thing (in a  token way anyway) will be to "reform the EU from within". Any actual strategist or half way good pollster on the Remain side would *have* to have the sense, after last time, to want to _come over _ as a 'critical friend' or whatever, rather than just worshippers.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> If a second ref ever happens, their thing (in a  token way anyway) will be to "reform the EU from within". Any actual strategist or half way good pollster on the Remain side would *have* to have the sense, after last time, to want to _come over _ as a 'critical friend' or whatever, rather than just worshippers.


Are you joking? Two years and not a peep about this. Europe works as is for them


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

Why? Where's this happening? I don't see those draped in EU flags asking for _reform_. I don't see TIG or the LDs talking about reform. I don't see it's defenders on here making anything more than empty rhetoric about reform.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you joking? Two years and not a peep about this. Europe works as is for them



True, but all I'm was saying is that they'd *have* to be less complacent if they're serious about winning at all. Think strategy etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> True, but all I'm was saying is that they'd *have* to be less complacent if they're serious about winning at all. Think strategy etc.


You said "will be" William. It won't be


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Why? Where's this happening? I don't see those draped in EU flags asking for _reform_. I don't see TIG or the LDs talking about reform. I don't see it's defenders on here making another more than empty rhetoric about reform.




I agree, it's not happening in reality. But that'd have to change if they want to wion a second rtef. 

I'm remain-minded myself, but remain type MPs are utterly useless. Electoral strategy in any actual campaign would *HAVE* to be different. Hard to believe they've learnt nothing at all since 2016. Does look like that  now, but I'd guard against any compacency on the Leave side too.


----------



## chilango (Apr 12, 2019)

They don't need a second referendum now.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You said "will be" William. It won't be



I agree that's most likely, but they may as well not bother if they don't think with more common sense.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

The strategy is obvious reduce politics to a parliamentary stitch up to stop the UK leaving.



William of Walworth said:


> I agree, it's not happening in reality. But that'd have to change if they want to wion a second rtef


They've no intention of holding a 2nd ref if they can stop the UK leaving by other means.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> They don't need a second referendum now.



Nor want one, I suspect!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> If a second ref ever happens, their thing (in a  token way anyway) will be to "reform the EU from within". Any actual strategist or half way good pollster on the Remain side would *have* to have the sense, after last time, to want to _come over _ as a 'critical friend' or whatever, rather than just worshippers.


the people will never be trusted with a referendum again


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The strategy is obvious reduce politics to a parliamentary stitch up to stop the UK leaving.


yeh it's looked that way for months now.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the people will never be trusted with a referendum again



Interesting prediction -- and consistent from you, to your credit.
I sometimes think the same myself, but not always


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We can look forward to very little happening between now and October.


there'll be as little as possible happening here anyway

by here i mean at work


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The strategy is obvious reduce politics to a parliamentary stitch up to stop the UK leaving.



That's going really well isn't it?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> That's going really well isn't it?


Yes, it's going very well for them. What do you think has happened this week?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Interesting prediction -- and consistent from you, to your credit.
> I sometimes think the same myself, but not always


there won't be referenda again, neither the ones promised to coalition partners which deliver the desired result like the proportional representation nor the ones promised to the electorate like the devolution or departure from the eu ones. the people cannot be trusted to know how to vote.


----------



## tommers (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes, it's going very well for them. What do you think has happened this week?



You think they'll vote to revoke it?  

I haven't been paying much attention this week, I've had enough of the whole fiasco.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes, it's going very well for them. What do you think has happened this week?



To be fair I can definitely see the point of that question. Are we going to end up with neither Brexit nor referendum then do you think? Soft Brexit in name only is more where I think we'd end up.

In rush, got to go out. Back later.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 12, 2019)

the eu elections are going to be interesting (there's a first!) - potential for a big turn out from the anti-brexit  movement - but who will benefit? CHUK-UPs will be expecting a bonanza. Left remainers need to steer people away from those cunts to labour or green.
Do SNP and the other nat parties stand in the euros?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> You think they'll vote to revoke it?





William of Walworth said:


> To be fair I can definitely see the point of that question. Are we going to end up with neither Brexit nor referendum then do you think? Soft Brexit in name only is more where I think we'd end up.



I think Smokeandsteam has it right, Remain in stages.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Come back on the points that this pro EU reform campaign hold dear when you get a chance though William.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> You think they'll vote to revoke it?
> 
> I haven't been paying much attention this week, I've had enough of the whole fiasco.


yes, i think they'll vote to revoke. the abject incompetence of this parliament, coupled with the abysmal performance of the may administration, doesn't lend itself to the achievement of complex tasks like delivering either a hard or soft brexit. they'll waste the time between now and october, of that you can be sure (especially as they won't be sitting for some months of that time) and it'll go to the wire again. only this time they'll start murmuring about 'the will of the people' now getting rather dated.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think Smokeandsteam has it right, Remain in stages.


once you've ruled out the only deal in town and you've ruled out no deal the only option on the table is remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think Smokeandsteam has it right, Remain in stages.


And the lesson most remainers (on here and in life) is not to ever let this happen again. To fight to limit anything other than what we have, to restrict it further.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> once you've ruled out the only deal in town and you've ruled out no deal the only option on the table is remain.


Yep. Now just need to create the fiction to decorate it with.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Come back on the points that this pro EU reform campaign hold dear when you get a chance though William.


 
Don't expect anything much.. No-one really wants to reform the EU, but they might? dream up some half-convincing way of pretending to, in a campaign. And would have to, to have much chance, IMO.

Right, really got to dash now


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think Smokeandsteam has it right, Remain in stages.


yes.  When is the anger going to manifest?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Don't expect anything much.. No-one really wants to reform the EU, but they might? dream up some half-convincing way of pretending to, in a campaign. And would have to, to have much chance, IMO.
> 
> Right, really got to dash now


Look at my red hot av campaign.

They won't because, to be honest, they don't need to. They can't either


----------



## inva (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> If a second ref ever happens, their thing (in a  token way anyway) will be to "reform the EU from within". Any actual strategist or half way good pollster on the Remain side would *have* to have the sense, after last time, to want to _come over _ as a 'critical friend' or whatever, rather than just worshippers.


Surely you're not forgetting Cameron's deal?


----------



## andysays (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes, it's going very well for them. What do you think has happened this week?


I agree that there is a significant chance of the extension dragging on and us not actually leaving, but I'm sceptical about the suggestion that that was May's grand plan all along, or that anything that can be meaningfully described as a parliamentary stitch up has happened this week


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> yes.  When is the anger going to manifest?


Today the forces of freedom are staying at home with the electricity off apparently.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> once you've ruled out the only deal in town and you've ruled out no deal the only option on the table is remain.



As anyone who works in change management will tell you, there are only ever three options.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> As anyone who works in change management will tell you, there are only ever three options.


the auld three card trick


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Today the forces of freedom are staying at home with the electricity off apparently.


All you can see is marches? You can't feel the anger around you? You can't imagine the ways that it might manifest itself?


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

How long before someone in parliament introduces a motion to ban referendums?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Today the forces of freedom are staying at home with the electricity off apparently.


today the forces of freedom here are trying to get their manager to have the heating turned back on


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 12, 2019)




----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> today the forces of freedom here are trying to get their manager to have the heating turned back on



Self sufficient or imported from Europe energy?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Self sufficient or imported from Europe energy?


do you know, i've never asked


----------



## gosub (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Why? Where's this happening? I don't see those draped in EU flags asking for _reform_. I don't see TIG or the LDs talking about reform. I don't see it's defenders on here making anything more than empty rhetoric about reform.


Even if they did favour reform, the reform UK would most favour isn't in the direction most the rest of EU want/need and I really don't see them listening to Uk


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

inva said:


> Surely you're not forgetting Cameron's deal?



 
Buy one, get one free?


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

I notice that it is people with Lexiter inclinations who seem convinced that Brexit will be cancelled, perhaps on the grounds that that is the stitch-up of the workers that capital will demand. But it seems to me that capital is very much split on the path by which the most profit can be extracted from the UK, and some fraction (admittedly a minority but not tiny) thinks that they can be more exploitative outside of the EU. As a result we're dealing with a section of the ruling class plus a section of the working class reacting against globalisation, who are (somewhat ironically) aligned with each other. For a while I also thought the Tories would be called into a room by the men in suits and told to end Brexit, or do a Brexit in name only. But I've since reached the conclusion that the criticism of Brexit by the men in suits is muted due to the opportunities some of them see ahead in a lone UK. As a result of that, and of the voting base maths, I don't think it so likely that Brexit will get cancelled.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> All you can see is marches? You can't feel the anger around you? You can't imagine the ways that it might manifest itself?


I'm afraid I have a fairly unsubtle imagination so I will be surprised if those who've spent years working towards leaving don't take to the streets. Maybe they're too smart for that and will have some clever strategy.  Otherwise I wonder whether there will be riots now or later, around the EU elections.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> I'm afraid I have a fairly unsubtle imagination so I will be surprised if those who've spent years working towards leaving don't take to the streets. Maybe they're too smart for that and will have some clever strategy.  Otherwise I wonder whether there will be riots now or later, around the EU elections.


Police to be given 'hugely effective' stop-and-search powers as Home Secretary overturns Theresa May's reforms

not by 26 may but over the summer quite possibly

not persuaded it will be leavers tho, not as leavers anyway


----------



## MickiQ (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I notice that it is people with Lexiter inclinations who seem convinced that Brexit will be cancelled, perhaps on the grounds that that is the stitch-up of the workers that capital will demand. But it seems to me that capital is very much split on the path by which the most profit can be extracted from the UK, and some fraction (admittedly a minority but not tiny) thinks that they can be more exploitative outside of the EU. As a result we're dealing with a section of the ruling class plus a section of the working class reacting against globalisation, who are (somewhat ironically) aligned with each other. For a while I also thought the Tories would be called into a room by the men in suits and told to end Brexit, or do a Brexit in name only. But I've since reached the conclusion that the criticism of Brexit by the men in suits is muted due to the opportunities some of them see ahead in a lone UK. As a result of that, and of the voting base maths, I don't think it so likely that Brexit will get cancelled.


I think the men in suits have called the Tories leadership into meetings and told them in no uncertain words to call it off, they've done it publicly for that matter.
I also think they've discovered the hard way that they don't have the power and influence over the Tories that they thought they had.
There is a determined hard Brexit element in the Tory party that wants out and screw the cost to anyone even their own financial backers.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I notice that it is people with Lexiter inclinations who seem convinced that Brexit will be cancelled, perhaps on the grounds that that is the stitch-up of the workers that capital will demand. But it seems to me that capital is very much split on the path by which the most profit can be extracted from the UK, and some fraction (admittedly a minority but not tiny) thinks that they can be more exploitative outside of the EU. As a result we're dealing with a section of the ruling class plus a section of the working class reacting against globalisation, who are (somewhat ironically) aligned with each other. For a while I also thought the Tories would be called into a room by the men in suits and told to end Brexit, or do a Brexit in name only. But I've since reached the conclusion that the criticism of Brexit by the men in suits is muted due to the opportunities some of them see ahead in a lone UK. As a result of that, and of the voting base maths, I don't think it so likely that Brexit will get cancelled.


Capital is pretty much 100% against brexit. You may be confusing the crisis about how this is politically represented with something else. In the same way that you outline your analysis of alignment, it's a bit naive and focused on later order things. Once again, _politics is the shadow cast on society by economics_. Don't chase shadows so much.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I notice that it is people with Lexiter inclinations who seem convinced that Brexit will be cancelled, perhaps on the grounds that that is the stitch-up of the workers that capital will demand. But it seems to me that capital is very much split on the path by which the most profit can be extracted from the UK, and some fraction (admittedly a minority but not tiny) thinks that they can be more exploitative outside of the EU. As a result we're dealing with a section of the ruling class plus a section of the working class reacting against globalisation, who are (somewhat ironically) aligned with each other. For a while I also thought the Tories would be called into a room by the men in suits and told to end Brexit, or do a Brexit in name only. But I've since reached the conclusion that the criticism of Brexit by the men in suits is muted due to the opportunities some of them see ahead in a lone UK. As a result of that, and of the voting base maths, I don't think it so likely that Brexit will get cancelled.



It would be interesting to have some idea about the size of the different elites within that split.

Pro-Brexit appears to be traditional elites, landowners, certain globalist manufacturers and funds and off shore elites, with support from Governments who have a desire to disrupt the EU as well as the swathes of land owning and shire middle classes.

The antis are metropolitan elites with interests focussed on Europe, the established business groups like the CBI and the metropolitan middle classes with support from the European political classes. 

I’m sure these can be sketched out much better, but who has the most capital? 

The capital itself doesn’t have a side of course. John Redwood, as barmy as any for Brexit, famously telling investors to put their money in Europe because its prospects were better.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> I'm afraid I have a fairly unsubtle imagination so I will be surprised if those who've spent years working towards leaving don't take to the streets. Maybe they're too smart for that and will have some clever strategy.  Otherwise I wonder whether there will be riots now or later, around the EU elections.



i dont think there will be mass anger - you may see high aggro but smallish numbers of tommy botherers taking to the street and their is a worrying  potential for far right terrorist shit - but i think most of it will be people doing red faced shouting on social media and radio phone-ins. 
I suspect many of the people who voted to leave are now resigned to it not happening - disillusioned and bitter (but they were anyway) - but i dont see any grassroots organising happening in my neck of the woods (Leeds) and attempts at spontaneous direct action have fizzled out very quickly.  There is also a split between farage's lot and the UKIP/yaxley-lennon mob.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I notice that it is people with Lexiter inclinations who seem convinced that Brexit will be cancelled, perhaps on the grounds that that is the stitch-up of the workers that capital will demand. But it seems to me that capital is very much split on the path by which the most profit can be extracted from the UK, and some fraction (admittedly a minority but not tiny) thinks that they can be more exploitative outside of the EU. As a result we're dealing with a section of the ruling class plus a section of the working class reacting against globalisation, who are (somewhat ironically) aligned with each other. For a while I also thought the Tories would be called into a room by the men in suits and told to end Brexit, or do a Brexit in name only. But I've since reached the conclusion that the criticism of Brexit by the men in suits is muted due to the opportunities some of them see ahead in a lone UK. As a result of that, and of the voting base maths, I don't think it so likely that Brexit will get cancelled.


What are you saying then - it's still on, that this minority fraction of capital (who somehow run the tory party) are on the path to leaving the EU for personal profit?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It would be interesting to have some idea about the size of the different elites within that split.
> 
> Pro-Brexit appears to be traditional elites, landowners, certain globalist manufacturers and funds and off shore elites, with support from Governments who have a desire to disrupt the EU as well as the swathes of land owning and shire middle classes.
> 
> ...


This is the opposite of reality - trad capital is demanding to stay in of it's political reps, it's small parts of financial disruptive capital who wants to leave/sees an opp.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 12, 2019)

https:// thebrexitparty.com /

The Brexit Party


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Some people on here make me shake my head in disbelief - you really do.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Capital is pretty much 100% against brexit.


I just don't think that's true, or I don't think the opposition is as wholehearted as you suggest. For instance I expected the City to be virulently against Brexit, and of course some of it is, but I think the reality is that they have been distracted from opposing it by things like this: Subscribe to read | Financial Times (City of London struggles to unite on post-Brexit regulation)

In which it is revealed, perhaps predictably, that the City have been manoeuvring to write their own rules after Brexit without being too bound by the EU. You can presumably see that the prospect of not being bound by EU banking and finance regulations is going to be very appealing for them. From where I'm sitting the criticism of Brexit from the City has not been as acute as I expected initially and has sometimes been more focussed on the annoying uncertainty of Brexit rather than the fact of it.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I just don't think that's true, or I don't think the opposition is as wholehearted as you suggest. For instance I expected the City to be virulently against Brexit, and of course some of it is, but I think the reality is that they have been distracted from opposing it by things like this: Subscribe to read | Financial Times (City of London struggles to unite on post-Brexit regulation)
> 
> In which it is revealed, perhaps predictably, that the City have been manoeuvring to write their own rules after Brexit without being too bound by the EU. You can presumably see that the prospect of not being bound by EU banking and finance regulations is going to be very appealing for them. From where I'm sitting the criticism of Brexit from the City has not been as acute as I expected initially and has sometimes been more focussed on the annoying uncertainty of Brexit rather than the fact of it.


Capital is not 'the city' - this may be where you're going wrong. Why do you think the traditional instrument of UK capital - the tory party - opposed brexit?


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What are you saying then - it's still on, that this minority fraction of capital (who somehow run the tory party) are on the path to leaving the EU for personal profit?


With the possible exception of some genuine vultures like JRM, I think the people doing such overt calculations of their profit is real but fairly small. The group I think is much bigger is those who see pros as well as cons to leaving, and so don't oppose it too vigorously.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i dont see any grassroots organising happening in my neck of the woods (Leeds) and attempts at spontaneous direct action have fizzled out very quickly.



interesting, cheers.  My impression here is that informal pro-Remain grassroots networks have strengthened over the last couple of years.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Capital is not 'the city' - this may be where you're going wrong. Why do you think the traditional instrument of UK capital - the tory party - opposed brexit?


I cited the City as an example, not the voice of capital. You might argue it's an atypical example, but I think it has more political sway than traditional manufacturing, so it's an important example. Another more traditional sector that you can see having mixed feelings on it is the oil/power sector due to the chance to shed regulations - see e.g. What impact is Brexit likely to have on the UK’s oil and gas industry?

The Tory party opposed Brexit because capital is doing fairly well at the moment so why disrupt the status quo. But once you see disruption on the horizon anyway, you start to consider the potential benefits of that.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

I work in the square mile and I don’t recall coming across anyone ever in that place that doesn’t believe profits will be hit by Brexit.  

I think the confusion is that the instruments of capital are still run by people who are not, despite the caricature, wholly motivated by maximising profit and many of those people have a background that still grows up on stories of Empire and being superior to Johnny Foreigner, and these people sometimes have a personal preference for Brexit in spite of what it will do to profits, on the grounds that they are already fucking richer that Croesus and know they can ride out any short to medium term downturn.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> interesting, cheers.  My impression here is that informal pro-Remain grassroots networks have strengthened over the last couple of years.



that  may be the case - but i was talking about grassroots leave stuff - should have been clearer.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> that  may be the case - but i was talking about grassroots leave stuff - should have been clearer.


you were clear, i was just reporting back my impression of local conditions here, where Leavers are fairly thin on the ground.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I work in the square mile and I don’t recall coming across anyone ever in that place that doesn’t believe profits will be hit by Brexit.


Profits will undoubtedly be hit short term, and that's why by and large industry and the City oppose Brexit. But don't you think some people might be looking longer term and seeing the chance for increased profits? I think this is a part of the minority of capitalists who are in favour (joined, as you say by some empire nostalgists who are immune to the effects of a downturn).


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Profits will undoubtedly be hit short term, and that's why by and large industry and the City oppose Brexit. But don't you think some people might be looking longer term and seeing the chance for increased profits? I think this is a part of the minority of capitalists who are in favour (joined, as you say by some empire nostalgists who are immune to the effects of a downturn).


If this is true, I’ve not yet come across any such one that believes it, nor overheard any conversation in the pubs and cafes that suggests it.  I’m sure they exist but I can’t believe they are meaningful agents for change when set against the vast bulk that believe the opposite.  Suggesting such a thing would get you laughed out of the meeting room in most offices.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

As an example: I know someone that runs an energy brokerage.  He went to Rugby boarding school and had minor royals at his wedding.  He’s all for Brexit in spite of the fact that he cheerfully admits it will hit his business.  Being an old-school Boris Johnson-style racist has more to do with this inclination than profit-maximisation.

His type are much less predominant than they used to be, though, having been replaced by serious-minded grammar-educated accountants in senior positions in most large companies.  These are the people that only care about profit and they are 100% remain.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I cited the City as an example, not the voice of capital. You might argue it's an atypical example, but I think it has more political sway than traditional manufacturing, so it's an important example. Another more traditional sector that you can see having mixed feelings on it is the oil/power sector due to the chance to shed regulations - see e.g. What impact is Brexit likely to have on the UK’s oil and gas industry?
> 
> The Tory party opposed Brexit because capital is doing fairly well at the moment so why disrupt the status quo. But once you see disruption on the horizon anyway, you start to consider the potential benefits of that.


Remind me, did the FT publicly argue for a remain vote? The same FT seen as the voice of 'the city?'

This is just so crude. Something you don't like=bad=tories=capitalism.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> As an example: I know someone that runs an energy brokerage.  He went to Rugby boarding school and had minor royals at his wedding.  He’s all for Brexit in spite of the fact that he cheerfully admits it will hit his business.  Being an old-school Boris Johnson-style racist has more to do with this inclination than profit-maximisation.
> 
> His type are much less predominant than they used to be, though, having been replaced by serious-minded grammar-educated accountants in senior positions in most large companies.  These are the people that only care about profit and they are 100% remain.


Okay, I'm sure you meet these people more than me. What do people there think of Mervyn King's position: Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
And what did he mean by the 'benefits of leaving' in that article?


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Remind me, did the FT publicly argue for a remain vote? The same FT seen as the voice of 'the city?'
> 
> This is just so crude. Something you don't like=bad=tories=capitalism.


I voted remain but have had the view since the referendum that Brexit should happen, so I'm a long way from an fbpe type. Why do _you_ think 167 Tories actively voted for a no-deal Brexit while being part of the party of capital? Do you think it's nothing to do with the bonfire of regulations that could occur with no-deal?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Okay, I'm sure you meet these people more than me. What do people there think of Mervyn King's position: Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
> And what did he mean by the 'benefits of leaving' in that article?


They’ve already inoculated their companies against Brexit as best they can, so the details of May’s withdrawal deal are kind of irrelevant.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This is the opposite of reality - trad capital is demanding to stay in of it's political reps, it's small parts of financial disruptive capital who wants to leave/sees an opp.


The old Base-Superstructure causality debate. There's an obvious irony that those cheerleading the decline of 'experts'/technocrats are themselves prescribing an agenda 'neoliberal nationalism' for Euro capital with the intent of legitimising by ameliorating/deflecting from the ‘morbid symptoms’ of extreme inequality in increasingly coercive conditions.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Remind me, did the FT publicly argue for a remain vote? The same FT seen as the voice of 'the city?'
> 
> This is just so crude. Something you don't like=bad=tories=capitalism.



Whereas you appear to be - something you do like must be good=possibly revolutionary despite it being firmly hitched to the vehicle of white awakening.

I think you are ignoring just how much capital the traditional elites have or hold sway over and what a prize for international elites a wholly deregulated UK would be. Moreover, the disaster capitalists on the disruptive side have the model in place to sweep up assets and increase their advantage post any downturn. Their representatives would probably ensure this is eased for them again. Austerity becomes no easier to oppose, permanent.

The best you can say is it’s a pissing contest between the two.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I voted remain but have had the view since the referendum that Brexit should happen, so I'm a long way from an fbpe type. Why do _you_ think 167 Tories actively voted for a no-deal Brexit while being part of the party of capital? Do you think it's nothing to do with the bonfire of regulations that could occur with no-deal?


I didn't say that you were one of those types - i said that you have mischacterised capital and have done so by using the FT to support that mischaracterisation.

I think it's utterly irrelevant as it goes. Why does capital that would be effected by this oppose brexit? It's in the same vein as the stuff that brexit is happening because some tories may have their tax affairs made public on last week was it? Sheer narrow-minded madness.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

The other thing is that there are more people in the square mile than you might think that are like me: passionate believers in the failure of capitalism who would love to see the whole system crash and hate themselves for propping it up but too addicted to it to give it up and start all over again in a different field.	Socialists in the heart of capitalism are rare but at least as common as those who think Brexit presents opportunity for more profit.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Whereas you appear to be - something you do like must be good=possibly revolutionary despite it being firmly hitched to the vehicle of white awakening.
> 
> I think you are ignoring just how much capital the traditional elites have or hold sway over and what a prize for international elites a wholly deregulated UK would be. Moreover, the disaster capitalists on the disruptive side have the model in place to sweep up assets and increase their advantage post any downturn. Their representatives would probably ensure this is eased for them again. Austerity becomes no easier to oppose, permanent.
> 
> The best you can say is it’s a pissing contest between the two.


I  have said that brexit is the first necessary rupture in the EU, tearing the beast down - on internationalist lines. If it was the US you would be cheering. Does that mean it will be a perfect rupture - no.That's exactly what politics is for. Remember that, politics?


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The other thing is that there are more people in the square mile than you might think that are like me: passionate believers in the failure of capitalism who would love to see the whole system crash and hate themselves for propping it up but too addicted to it to give it up and start all over again in a different field.	Socialists in the heart of capitalism are rare but at least as common as those who think Brexit presents opportunity for more profit.



It’s no more than an affectation. Sure there are nice people and they do their bit for charridee but mostly its as you do you live.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I  have said that brexit is the first necessary rupture in the EU, tearing the beast down - on internationalist lines. If it was the US you would be cheering. Does that mean it will be a perfect rupture - no.That's exactly what politics is for. Remember that, politics?



What would be the US equivalent?

And what politics? The politics of this are dismal.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Capital = UK money. It doesn't mean the EU.

Ok, that's where we are. In 2019.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What would be the US equivalent?


The US.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I didn't say that you were one of those types - i said that you have mischacterised capital and have done so by using the FT to support that mischaracterisation.
> 
> I think it's utterly irrelevant as it goes. Why does capital that would be effected by this oppose brexit? It's in the same vein as the stuff that brexit is happening because some tories may have their tax affairs made public on last week was it? Sheer narrow-minded madness.


So the majority stance of the party of capital indicates where capital stands on the issue, but the significant minority within that party that is firmly opposed to the majority stance has no significance at all? That makes no sense to me. Didn't we get here precisely because the party of capital was split on this? It's not just a handful of nutters in the Tory parliamentary party who are cheerleading for the hardest brexit possible. It's a very significant number.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s no more than an affectation. Sure there are nice people and they do their bit for charridee but mostly its as you do you live.


A helpful and useful insight.  Thank you for your perspective


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> So the majority stance of the party of capital indicates where capital stands on the issue, but the significant minority within that party that is firmly opposed to the majority stance has no significance at all? That makes no sense to me. Didn't we get here precisely because the party of capital was split on this? It's not just a handful of nutters in the Tory parliamentary party who are cheerleading for the hardest brexit possible. It's a very significant number.


It's significance is in it showing that capital is split - something that your original post argued wasn't happening. That it's not a phantasm dreamed up by mad lexiters. So ta for clearing that up.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The US.



The whole world Balkanised before a leap forward? Or winner takes all for the last beast standing? Better stock up on tins.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The whole world Balkanised before a leap forward? Or winner takes all for the last beast standing? Better stock up on tins.


Are you saying defend the US, defend the USSR, defend, the EU, _defend Red China_?

This is mad extremist stuff.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> A helpful and useful insight.  Thank you for your perspective



Well it’s easy to say nice things when you have a lot of dosh. Plenty of people from the City get mightily peed off with the whole thing, buy a retreat, learn a craft, appear on _Countryfile, _repent at leisure. 

It’s not anything more than individual progress. They’ve done their bit stoking the boiler however many radical things they say in the pub.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Well it’s easy to say nice things when you have a lot of dosh. Plenty of people from the City get mightily peed off with the whole thing, buy a retreat, learn a craft, appear on _Countryfile, _repent at leisure.
> 
> It’s not anything more than individual progress. They’ve done their bit stoking the boiler however many radical things they say in the pub.





kabbes said:


> A helpful and useful insight.  Thank you for your perspective


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you saying defend the US, defend the USSR, defend, the EU, _defend Red China_?
> 
> This is mad extremist stuff.



I’m saying they prop each other up. One collapses the others move in. All you get is chaos. 

Try not to be so madly dichotomous. You desire for collapse has corollaries too.


----------



## chilango (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Well it’s easy to say nice things when you have a lot of dosh. Plenty of people from the City get mightily peed off with the whole thing, buy a retreat, learn a craft, appear on _Countryfile, _repent at leisure.
> 
> It’s not anything more than individual progress. They’ve done their bit stoking the boiler however many radical things they say in the pub.



What do you do for work out of interest?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

They might even live in chipping norton or ascot (in the south west).

16 years into this and we have _tories are bad_. Working class people on the whole opposed brexit. Working class people being labour voters.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m saying they prop each other up. One collapses the others move in. All you get is chaos.
> 
> Try not to be so madly dichotomous. You desire for collapse has corollaries too.


We wouldn't want the collapse of the US or RED CHINA or anything. Another words for collapse is change to establish for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.

But i've just remembered that you're of those anti-corbynites i've heard about.


----------



## OzT (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They might even live in chipping norton or ascot (in the south west).
> 
> 16 years into this and we have _tories are bad_. Working class people on the whole opposed brexit. Working class people being labour voters.



My impression, and I fully admit I can very well be wrong, my impression is that whilst working class generally are Labour voters, it was more the working class that also voted to Leave, whilst the better off/wellto do voted Remain, hence why the Remain camp so often seem to say the Leavers needs education.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> What do you do for work out of interest?


he rants on the internet


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> What do you do for work out of interest?



I’m a care worker. What about you? 

I’m not trying to be holier than thou about city types. I’m just chatting. But what they believe about themselves isn’t especially important for how the thing works.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he rants on the internet



No he meant me, not you dear.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

OzT said:


> My impression, and I fully admit I can very well be wrong, my impression is that whilst working class generally are Labour voters, it was more the working class that also voted to Leave, whilst the better off/wellto do voted Remain, hence why the Remain camp so often seem to say the Leavers needs education.


That's the generally accepted picture yes. Not amongst a cabal of vocal remain supporters on here though.


----------



## chilango (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m a care worker. What about you?
> 
> I’m not trying to be holier than thou about city types. I’m just chatting. But what they believe about themselves isn’t especially important for how the thing works.



Me? I was a special needs teacher. Off long term sick and shortly to be looking for something else.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

OzT said:


> My impression, and I fully admit I can very well be wrong, my impression is that whilst working class generally are Labour voters, it was more the working class that also voted to Leave, whilst the better off/wellto do voted Remain, hence why the Remain camp so often seem to say the Leavers needs education.



Maybe, but there were more than 16m Remain voters. They can’t be all middle class especially when hordes of the middle England middle classes all voted Leave. The working class vote for Remain was one thing certainly, more diverse. And that’s only England and Wales. It can’t be argued in Scotland.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 12, 2019)

Farage has officially launched his new Brexit Party today and announced Jacob Rees-Mogg's sister as his first star candidate.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

chilango said:


> Me? I was a special needs teacher. Off long term sick and shortly to be looking for something else.



Hope you find it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

<posting going haywire -- deleted>


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

All remain voters are middle class. 

Thought someone better say it.


----------



## chilango (Apr 12, 2019)

I think butchersapron recommended this somewhere but this book is well worth a quick read on all this stuff.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he rants on the internet



It must be gratifying having our hobby as a job.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I’m a care worker. What about you?
> 
> I’m not trying to be holier than thou about city types. I’m just chatting. But what they believe about themselves isn’t especially important for how the thing works.


Who said anything about what people believe about themselves?

Is it impossible for care workers to be believers in capitalism?  If so, how?  If not, why not?


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> We wouldn't want the collapse of the US or RED CHINA or anything. Another words for collapse is change to establish for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service.
> 
> But i've just remembered that you're of those anti-corbynites i've heard about.



Thanks. I have been missing the rigour of student politics.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Thanks. I have been missing the rigour of student politics.


 Yes, the very idea of changing things from this shitness is a bit mad.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who said anything about what people believe about themselves?
> 
> Is it impossible for care workers to be believers in capitalism?  If so, how?  If not, why not?



What exactly was your point (other than displaying the width of your network) and what was it you think I was saying?


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, the very idea of changing things from this shitness is a bit mad.



Yes I would like it to say exactly the same, well done.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Thanks. I have been missing the rigour of student politics.


You're the extremist nutter shouting defend the US, defend the USSR, defend, the EU, _defend Red China, change nothing  btw. _An inverted coin of student idiot from your memory saying  er...defend the USSR, change nothing.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes I would like it to say exactly the same, well done.


You must be middle class then. 

Do you really never follow your own logic? Keep track of what you post?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What exactly was your point (other than displaying the width of your network) and what was it you think I was saying?


My point — made over a number of posts in aggregate, not just that one in isolation — was that the reasons for attitudes even in the City are more complex than simply a monolithic view of “whatever gives the largest profit is what we want to happen”.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You're the extremist nutter shouting defend the US, defend the USSR, defend, the EU, _defend Red China, change nothing  btw. _An inverted coin of student idiot from your memory saying  er...defend the USSR, change nothing.



I’m not saying anything of the sort. I’m saying a white awakening does none of the above, tightens the grip in the end. I could say the same about vague attempts to disrupt the system whose consequences can’t be predicted.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

I’m studying psychology and eventually hope to go into something in mental health services.  When I do, I will be allowed to have different views on politics and its shadow, but until that time I’m only allowed to believe that capitalism is good.

What is this nonsense?


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You must be middle class then.
> 
> Do you really never follow your own logic? Keep track of what you post?



I was being sarcastic.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I’m studying psychology and eventually hope to go into something in mental health services.  When I do, I will be allowed to have different views on politics and its shadow, but until that time I’m only allowed to believe that capitalism is good.
> 
> What is this nonsense?



Maybe you know what this means, but it’s not an answer to the question I asked you.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> My point — made over a number of posts in aggregate, not just that one in isolation — was that the reasons for attitudes even in the City are more complex than simply a monolithic view of “whatever gives the largest profit is what we want to happen”.


There's a point here that marxists often make about politics being the legimating function for total capital to carry on  - sometimes against individual capitals or sectors of capital. That is in the glorious process of breaking down. That might be a bit studenty though. The idea that society is just rich people trying to stay rich is much more complex and nuanced.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

Apologies for responding to much earlier posts, I've been out ...




			
				William of Walworth said:
			
		

> If a second ref ever happens, their thing (in a token way anyway) will be to "reform the EU from within". Any actual strategist or half way good pollster on the Remain side would *have* to have the sense, after last time, to want to _come over _ as a 'critical friend' or whatever, rather than just worshippers.





inva said:


> Surely you're not forgetting Cameron's "deal"?



I've added inverted commas for you 
Yes, I do remember, but your mention of it just illustrates how useless and complacent Cameron and the Remain campaign were in 2016, plus also how unaware they were of how likely those shat upon by austerity/exploitation/low pay etc were to give the establishment a big kick.
(Not that many on here were predicting a Leave win at the time as I recall?)

My post that you quote -- its broader point is only about how any Remain campaign in any future election or referendum will have to be 1000 times more savvy and clued up than last time, really learning from its mistakes. React as cynically as you like to any prospects of that because I don't expect Remain clued-upness either.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> My point — made over a number of posts in aggregate, not just that one in isolation — was that the reasons for attitudes even in the City are more complex than simply a monolithic view of “whatever gives the largest profit is what we want to happen”.



And my point is that’s ultimately a bit of a delusion and a nice one for the best off (plenty of others I know) to afford.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

William oif Walworth said:
			
		

> Don't expect anything much.. No-one really wants to reform the EU, but they might? dream up some half-convincing way of pretending to, in a campaign. And would have to, to have much chance, IMO.





QUOTE="butchersapron said:


> They won't because, to be honest, they don't need to. They can't either



Agreeing with "can't" I think. They may well try, but not succeed.

But would they really be so complacent as to _just_ rely on bigger young-voter turnout and all that? Kellner's argued at YouGov that remain could well win just because of differential turnout, and without a single former leave voter switching to remain.

I think that's *stupidly* complacent if they don't come up with any better strategy than that.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> And my point is that’s ultimately a bit of a delusion and a nice one for the best off (plenty of others I know) to afford.


You disagree that the City is formed of multiple perspectives that aren’t all formed around pure profit motive?  What is it, a monothought clique?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Maybe you know what this means, but it’s not an answer to the question I asked you.


Well, your responses and questions had nothing to do with anything I’d asserted, so that’s just how it goes.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I think that's *stupidly* complacent if they don't come up with any better strategy than that.



'They' have come up with a better strategy - remain in stages. If a vote is called it will only be done so once franking their decision is the only option.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Agreeing with "can't" I think. They may well try, but not succeed.
> 
> But would they really be so complacent as to _just_ rely on bigger young-voter turnout and all that? Kellner's argued at YouGov that remain could well win just because of differential turnout, and without a single former leave voter switching to remain.
> 
> I think that's *stupidly* complacent if they don't come up with any better strategy than that.


What if they have no other perspective than that though? Surely if there was it would have come through in some way over the last few years? It hasn't though has it?


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What is it, a *monothought clique*?



I wish I'd copyrighted that phrase when I invented it, back in about 2002/03 or so  

Royalties could come to a handsome total by now


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You disagree that the City is formed of multiple perspectives that aren’t all formed around pure profit motive?  What is it, a monothought clique?



The system is much bigger than what they think. It can also accommodate radicalism and turn a dime from it.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

1812 war isn't it. Lose every battle but win the war. Defend the US


----------



## SpineyNorman (Apr 12, 2019)

What's all this white awakening shite about?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What's all this white awakening shite about?


Shut it gammon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I wish I'd copyrighted that phrase when I invented it, back in about 2002/03 or so
> 
> Royalties could come to a handsome total by now


yeh there's £0.50 on its way to you


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What if they have no other perspective than that though? Surely if there was it would have come through in some way over the last few years? It hasn't though has it?



I know, there's been an utter blank where 'analyse why we lost' should be. 
I'm still finding it hard to believe that 'Kellner polled that we'll win' will be ALL they have. 
If it ever did come time to another ref (at the back end of never, or only as Smokeandsteam states), there'd be all sorts of risks for them unless they end up thinking more strategically.

I might be remain minded, but I'm no fan at all of most Remain thinking.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> yes.  When is the anger going to manifest?


Anger from who? There are plenty that are angry now (and have been for some time) hence the victory for Leave. 



andysays said:


> I agree that there is a significant chance of the extension dragging on and us not actually leaving, but I'm sceptical about the suggestion that that was May's grand plan all along, or that anything that can be meaningfully described as a parliamentary stitch up has happened this week


I'm not suggesting May had some "just as planned scheme". 
But the reduction of politics to the parliamentary, something that has been favoured by politicians, the media, and capital, has led to the state of current state of affairs.


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You disagree that the City is formed of multiple perspectives that aren’t all formed around pure profit motive?  What is it, a monothought clique?


Tories doing bad things because they are Tories (Like lying about wanting to Remain in the EU) - in their genes


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> I think that's *stupidly* complacent if they don't come up with any better strategy than that.





Smokeandsteam said:


> 'They' have come up with a better strategy - remain in stages. If a vote is called it will only be done so once franking their decision is the only option.



I agree with that definitely.

One thing surely absent from most of 'their' thinking/awareness, establishment remainers AND leavers, is the "Brexit is fucking tedious!" factor. 
"Just get on with it" or "Just get rid of it" -- these are statements of the bored -- both sides -- and I think that's much understimated.


----------



## andysays (Apr 12, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> What's all this white awakening shite about?


Yeah, I noticed that, and thought it must be a typo or a weird auto-correct thing, but I'm starting to wonder now...


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I agree with that definitely.
> 
> One thing surely absent from most of 'their' thinking/awareness, establishment remainers AND leavers, is the "Brexit is fucking tedious!" factor.
> "Just get on with it" or "Just get rid of it" -- these are statements of the bored -- both sides -- and I think that's much understimated.


au contraire, the tedium is at the core of the strategy, as making people bored of it is the way they intend to reduce disorder to a minimum when the walking back the actual exit goes through.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Apr 12, 2019)

oh nigel , you really have to learn how the internet works and the importance of registering websites you utter fucking clown.

The Brexit Party (almost)


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I agree with that definitely.
> 
> One thing surely absent from most of 'their' thinking/awareness, establishment remainers AND leavers, is the "Brexit is fucking tedious!" factor.
> "Just get on with it" or "Just get rid of it" -- these are statements of the bored -- both sides -- and I think that's much understimated.



I dunno I'm really quite enjoying it all.

On the other hand the whole shit show is causing chaos in my industry putting my job at risk which is a bit of a downer, the sight however, of the entire charade being exposed (to even the most ardent supporter of UK parliamentary politics) is quite glorious.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 12, 2019)

OzT said:


> My impression, and I fully admit I can very well be wrong, my impression is that whilst working class generally are Labour voters, it was more the working class that also voted to Leave, whilst the better off/wellto do voted Remain, hence why the Remain camp so often seem to say the Leavers needs education.


There is truth to this but it's possible to exaggerate the effect. The working class was also split on Brexit. Of those earning below £20,000 58% voted Leave. That is higher than the average for the population, but it's still a hell of a lot of low income people who voted Remain.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I dunno I'm really quite enjoying it all.



I doubt that you, or almost anyone posting here, is representative more generally about that!! 
Boredom about the whole shabang is _surely_ much more widespread in the "real world".
Would be worth asking, too, whether "anger" about Brexit "not being got on with" is as much to do with boredom with Brexit  as actual Leave commitment ????



> On the other hand the whole shit show is causing chaos in my industry putting my job at risk which is a bit of a downer, the sight however, of the entire charade being exposed (to even the most ardent supporter of UK parliamentary politics) is quite glorious.



Shit and fun at the same time??


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:
			
		

> One thing surely absent from most of 'their' thinking/awareness, establishment remainers AND leavers, is the "Brexit is fucking tedious!" factor.
> "Just get on with it" or "Just get rid of it" -- these are statements of the bored -- both sides -- and I think that's much understimated.





Pickman's model said:


> au contraire, the tedium is at the core of the strategy, as making people bored of it is the way they intend to reduce disorder to a minimum when the walking back the actual exit goes through.



Got to be a four-pint conundrum, that point 

<goes out   >


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> au contraire, the tedium is at the core of the strategy, as making people bored of it is the way they intend to reduce disorder to a minimum when the walking back the actual exit goes through.



People won’t get bored if they believe it is relevant to their lives.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Shit and fun at the same time??



Seems to be how my life works.


----------



## Supine (Apr 12, 2019)

So the brexit party are intolerant of all intollerences apparently


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> People won’t get bored if they believe it is relevant to their lives.


you think people will continue to pay attention over the next 10-15 years it will take to work it all out?


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Anger from who? There are plenty that are angry now (and have been for some time) hence the victory for Leave.


well, the 52% who voted Leave, the 80+% who voted for parties that promised to implement Leave.  All of whom have been cheated by the politicians.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you think people will continue to pay attention over the next 10-15 years it will take to work it all out?



Yes, but largely no. It took a massive boiling of collective piss to get it over the line, but the baseline of how important the EU question has been to most people prior to this was low.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> well, the 52% who voted leave, the 80+% who voted for parties that promised to implement Leave.  All of whom have been cheated by the politicians.



The 80+% stat you quote is a bit misleading though.  I don't think that the large election was really fought on Brexit despite May's best efforts.  Certainly not to an extent that you could say people who voted for Labour or the tories wanted the UK to leave the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The 80+% stat you quote is a bit misleading though.  I don't think that the large election was really fought on Brexit despite May's best efforts.  Certainly not to an extent that you could say people who voted for Labour or the tories wanted the UK to leave the EU.


No one wanted it really, or even voted for it. I mean,_ who would._


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No one wanted it really, or even voted for it. I mean,_ who would._



I think some did and some didn't.  I'd have to go back and check though.

The question was how much Brexit alone influenced voting at the last GE.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think some did and some didn't.  I'd have to go back and check though.
> 
> The question was how much Brexit alone influenced voting at the last GE.


Which has became a way to suggest that no one really wanted to leave the eu or that there was no way of knowing if they wanted to. The quiet gnawing away of the mice. You didn't do that, so sorry, but it's standard now isn't it?


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The 80+% stat you quote is a bit misleading though.  I don't think that the large election was really fought on Brexit despite May's best efforts.  Certainly not to an extent that you could say people who voted for Labour or the tories wanted the UK to leave the EU.


No?  That strikes me as the same sort of revisionism as my local MP, Umunna, saying his values haven't changed, the Labour Party has changed round him.  Which is nonsense, of course.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think some did and some didn't.  I'd have to go back and check though.
> 
> The question was how much Brexit alone influenced voting at the last GE.


The only real inference you can make from the 2017 election is that there wasn't such an upswell of opposition to brexit at that time that people would vote on that issue alone otherwise the libdums would have done better.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The 80+% stat you quote is a bit misleading though.  I don't think that the large election was really fought on Brexit despite May's best efforts.


At least south of the border, it was not contentious that the ref result should be implemented.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> At least south of the border, it was not contentious that the ref result should be implemented.


Of course there was still very little idea what implementing the result actually meant. And here we are two years later and none the wiser...


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

*gnaws*


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> No?  That strikes me as the same sort of revisionism as my local MP, Umunna, saying his values haven't changed, the Labour Party has changed round him.  Which is nonsense, of course.
> 
> View attachment 167435



Its not revisionism at all.  Its simply arguing that the results at the general election in 2017 are a poor indicator of views on Brexit.  The referendum we had on the thing is probably a better indicator. 

Not that it matters much but my own views on the subject have changed a fair bit.  I voted remain solely because I was worried about the inevitable shit show.  Having found myself quite enjoying the shit show I'm hoping opportunities may come out of it (though not holding my breath).  I'm now at the stage to believe that some sort of managed no deal would be the best outcome.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Of course there was still very little idea what implementing the result actually meant. And here we are two years later and none the wiser...


There's currently reasonable clarity about what the EU is prepared to accept and much less opacity about all the vague claims made in 2016.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its simply arguing that the results at the general election in 2017 are a poor indicator of views on Brexit.  The referendum we had on the thing is probably a better indicator.


Clearly it is a better indicator.  If the election had been a credible argument about implementing the result then ...  but whatiffery isn't going anywhere, the simple facts are that neither major party challenged the result, they presented as their intention to implement it.  They've not done so.  

To be a little overdramatic, the political class has ridden roughshod over the will of the people.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> Clearly it is a better indicator.  If the election had been a credible argument about implementing the result then ...  but whatiffery isn't going anywhere, the simple facts are that neither major party challenged the result, they presented as their intention to implement it.  They've not done so.
> 
> To be a little overdramatic, the political class has ridden roughshod over the will of the people.



The reason the UK didn't leave on 31st March is in a large part due to some of the loudest advocates for brexit preventing it from happening.  Whilst you are right to an extent it strikes me that it's a bit simplistic just to say_ the political class has ridden roughshod over the will of the people.  _Its a bit like my other favourite _the brexit people voted for._


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 12, 2019)

That and the fact we were due to leave on March 29th


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

S☼I said:


> That and the fact we were due to leave on March 29th



For you maybe.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> Clearly it is a better indicator.  If the election had been a credible argument about implementing the result then ...  but whatiffery isn't going anywhere, the simple facts are that neither major party challenged the result, they presented as their intention to implement it.  They've not done so.
> 
> To be a little overdramatic, the political class has ridden roughshod over the will of the people.


For the last 3 years the political class has done precious little other than fret over the referendum result. They're eating themselves over it. 

As for 'the will of the people' if nothing else this shitshow has demonstrated that there is no such thing.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

*gnaws*


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> As for 'the will of the people' if nothing else this shitshow has demonstrated that there is no such thing.


of course there is, but we're not asked very often.  33 million people voted to express that will.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> of course there is, but we're not asked very often.  33 million people voted to express that will.



Ok, glossing over how close 52/48 was, let alone that the 52 is only 37% of the voters, what does this _will_ tell you about which of the fifty ways to Leave? I heard a lot of ‘it was alright when it was just the common market’ talk, but many say the will of the people must be leaving the CU, SM etc. How to reconcile those views?


----------



## Flavour (Apr 12, 2019)

more referenda.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Ok, glossing over how close 52/48 was, let alone that the 52 is only 37% of the voters, what does this _will_ tell you about which of the fifty ways to Leave? I heard a lot of ‘it was alright when it was just the common market’ talk, but many say the will of the people must be leaving the CU, SM etc. How to reconcile those views?


Jesus 58% was close earlier. _Defend the scottish leavers._


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Ok, glossing over how close 52/48 was, let alone that the 52 is only 37% of the voters, what does this _will_ tell you about which of the fifty ways to Leave? I heard a lot of ‘it was alright when it was just the common market’ talk, but many say the will of the people must be leaving the CU, SM etc. How to reconcile those views?


That's the job of the politicians, sorting out the detail, reconciling differences, compromising and negotiating.  Not just May and her cohort, all of them.  That's what they were sent there to do, based on the election pledges their parties made.  They've failed and there is likely to be significant fallout from that failure.  I've suggested that may be on the streets.  Maybe I'll be shown to be wrong, and Leavers all over the country, including those out there on the ridiculous right, will just roll over and accept that their betters have taken away what was promised.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> That's the job of the politicians, sorting out the detail, reconciling differences, compromising and negotiating.  Not just May and her cohort, all of them.  That's what they were sent there to do, based on the election pledges their parties made.  They've failed and there is likely to be significant fallout from that failure.  I've suggested that may be on the streets.  Maybe I'll be shown to be wrong, and Leavers all over the country, including those out there on the ridiculous right, will just roll over and accept that their betters have taken away what was promised.



But you don’t know what was promised other than ‘leave’. Quite a lot of people seem to think their politicians job is not to compromise.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Jesus 58% was close earlier. _Defend the scottish leavers._



Try to have a conversation with me rather than some random thing you are getting from the ether. I simply don’t know what on Earth you are referring to here.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 12, 2019)

No idea? Really?


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> That's the job of the politicians, sorting out the detail, reconciling differences, compromising and negotiating.  Not just May and her cohort, all of them.  That's what they were sent there to do, based on the election pledges their parties made.  They've failed and there is likely to be significant fallout from that failure.  I've suggested that may be on the streets.  Maybe I'll be shown to be wrong, and Leavers all over the country, including those out there on the ridiculous right, will just roll over and accept that their betters have taken away what was promised.



But May's deal was leave in a fashion yet it scores pitifully low with the electorate.  The likely outcome I think will be some sort of slightly softer brexit than May's deal, something that will enable enough people to save face.  Yet there will no doubt be people lining up to say that its not the right or proper brexit.

I agree there would be potentially serious repercussions if brexit doesn't happen which is why I think it will, it has to happen. It just won't be to everyone's liking.  This is essentially the problem, just saying we voted leave and that should be it fundamentally misunderstands the complexity of the situation.

Equality is good right?  I want equality.  That's enough, the politicians can sort out the rest.

I'm not in the business of defending politicians, I'd happily see their palace razed with them all in it.  It just strikes me that there is no winning play here, just degrees of loss.  As I said, I'm enjoying the ride. I liked it when the Times started going on about getting the queen involved.  Its merry chaos.


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Quite a lot of people seem to think their politicians job is not to compromise.


Sure, I doubt if they're the majority, but they're there.  There was choice, if those people wanted uncompromising _no Brexit_ they should have voted eg SNP, LD or Green.  The 80% chose not to vote for those parties, they voted for ones that promised to implement the result of the ref.  Their preference was pretty clear, whether or not they say something different now.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> Sure, I doubt if they're the majority, but they're there.  There was choice, if those people wanted uncompromising _no Brexit_ they should have voted eg SNP, LD or Green.  The 80% chose not to vote for those parties, they voted for ones that promised to implement the result of the ref.  Their preference was pretty clear, whether or not they say something different now.



Again you're conflating the result of the referendum with the result of the 2017 GE.  What about those that still want to remain but thought the whole subject less important than boring stuff like housing, fair pay, job security, health and their child's education?


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Equality is good right?  I want equality.  That's enough, the politicians can sort out the rest.


If a national referendum voted against a proposition for full equality it would be wrong for politicians to impose it.  If the result was in favour I'd expect a major change in the Gini index to be implemented pdq.

I do get the rest of what you're saying, particularly the last para


----------



## newbie (Apr 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Again you're conflating the result of the referendum with the result of the 2017 GE.  What about those that still want to remain but thought the whole subject less important than boring stuff like housing, fair pay, job security, health and their child's education?


what about them?  The outcome of an election is always going to be a government which is expected to implement its manifesto.  You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen.  The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref. 

The parties chose their promises based on what they thought would win. Their MPs endorsed those promises. No party that put forward Remain would have won (south of the border anyway). The LD/Green vote share was tiny.


----------



## Humberto (Apr 12, 2019)

TM is not going to get her deal passed, so lets fuck it off and move on while there is time, is what I would be thinking if I'd any say. I don't see what point there is to a delay if she is going to have yet another go and have it rejected once more. She must know this, or at least know there is a high chance of it. Therefore it must be brought back to the people, the constituency they claim to represent. In other words a referendum. I can't see any other way out. Personally, I suspect it is the PM's vanity of getting 'her' deal through and making her mark/legacy which has put things in limbo. In any case, I don't see how revocation or no deal can come about without any backing or consent from the electorate.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 12, 2019)

May’s deal is a was a very badly judged attempt at triangulation. It was presented appallingly. Even if it hadn't been was never likely to be a deal that the polarised administrators of the ruling class could live with. But, unlike Labour she at least had a strategy. Even now, bar collapsing back into the single market, Labour seems to have zero ideas or a strategic vision on the issue. At some point this will haunt them generally and Corbyn in particular


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 12, 2019)

newbie said:


> what about them?  The outcome of an election is always going to be a government which is expected to implement its manifesto.  You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen.  The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref.
> 
> The parties chose their promises based on what they thought would win. Their MPs endorsed those promises. No party that put forward Remain would have won (south of the border anyway). The LD/Green vote share was tiny.


No party did win. But it's a bit false to suggest that a vote for a party is a vote in favour of all its policies. It clearly isn't.  Best of a bad bunch is normally closer to the mark.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 12, 2019)

Its a mystery to me how very easy it seems to have been to hoof the can miles down the road yet again.The last time I looked EU politicians were saying that any further extension would have to be for a very specific purpose but what is the supposed purpose of this latest extension? No doubt May made much of her relationship with Corbyn but does anyone really think that her party will get behind her on a customs-union Brexit? She now has what looks like a perpetual licence to dither.


----------



## Supine (Apr 12, 2019)

This country is so fucked. We may as well have Boris or Mogg as leader, we may as well go out with a bang.


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 12, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> May’s deal is a was a very badly judged attempt at triangulation. It was presented appallingly. Even if it hadn't been was never likely to be a deal that the polarised administrators of the ruling class could live with. But, unlike Labour she at least had a strategy. Even now, bar collapsing back into the single market, Labour seems to have zero ideas or a strategic vision on the issue. At some point this will haunt them generally and Corbyn in particular



What vision could Labour have on Brexit alone? Every turn is wrong, too many principles overlap, respect the referendum, do what the membership prefers, do what MPs feel is right...these are not reconcilable. 

Stick together and make it hard for the Tories is the thing that makes sense. They haven’t done so badly with that. They cannot back a hard Brexit, they cannot back Remain and so they are in the sole space they can be in.


----------



## Duncan2 (Apr 12, 2019)

Labour risk looking more than a bit spineless on this issue it seems to me.Can't even see currently,now that May is looking to Labour for help,where the next development is going to come from.


----------



## Flavour (Apr 12, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Its a mystery to me how very easy it seems to have been to hoof the can miles down the road yet again.The last time I looked EU politicians were saying that any further extension would have to be for a very specific purpose but what is the supposed purpose of this latest extension? No doubt May made much of her relationship with Corbyn but does anyone really think that her party will get behind her on a customs-union Brexit? She now has what looks like a perpetual licence to dither.



Several on here did predict that the EU would make many more allowances for British dithering than they claimed, as that dithering keeps the UK in the EU and further strengthens the EU position. Brussels doesn't lose much face over extending, if any.


----------



## A380 (Apr 13, 2019)

Tha


newbie said:


> Sure, I doubt if they're the majority, but they're there.  There was choice, if those people wanted uncompromising _no Brexit_ they should have voted eg SNP, LD or Green.  The 80% chose not to vote for those parties, they voted for ones that promised to implement the result of the ref.  Their preference was pretty clear, whether or not they say something different now.


This is probably the most stupid post on the entire thread. Which takes some doing. Well done.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> well, the 52% who voted Leave, the 80+% who voted for parties that promised to implement Leave.



The 25.2% that voted leave and the 51% that voted for the only horse in the race.


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

.


----------



## A380 (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> Really?  Deconstruct it and show me the errors then.


Shan’t. It’s far to fucking stupid to bother with As you well know.


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

A380 said:


> Shan’t. It’s far to fucking stupid to bother with As you well know.


I started editing, which was probably a mistake.

You mean you can't.

If people want to vote for a politician who doesn't compromise they need to choose exactly which one to vote for.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 13, 2019)

A380 said:


> Tha
> 
> This is probably the most stupid post on the entire thread. Which takes some doing. Well done.



Not even _close, _sadly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> I started editing, which was probably a mistake.
> 
> You mean you can't.
> 
> If people want to vote for a politician who doesn't compromise they need to choose exactly which one to vote for.


All politicians compromise


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> All politicians compromise


I know, that was my point. That's what their job is.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> what about them?  The outcome of an election is always going to be a government which is expected to implement its manifesto.  You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen.  The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref.
> 
> The parties chose their promises based on what they thought would win. Their MPs endorsed those promises. No party that put forward Remain would have won (south of the border anyway). The LD/Green vote share was tiny.


You're already into 'might' territory.  On what do you base your judgement that those that voted leave feel more strongly about brexit than those that voted remain? 

Tbh a huge amount has changed since 2017. At that stage things like the gfa fuck up still weren't being openly discussed in debates - partly because neither of the main  parties wanted to discuss it. In a new election they would be forced to discuss it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> I know, that was my point. That's what their job is.


When one doesn't compromise on an issue like theresa may you see where it ends up


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> You're already into 'might' territory.  On what do you base your judgement that those that voted leave feel more strongly about brexit than those that voted remain?


I don't think I've said they do, have I?  not in the bit you quoted anyway. 

Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.

Leavers, on the other hand, who helped elect a winning Labour or Tory have every reason for grievance if that translated into an MP who voted to frustrate Brexit. They did not get what they voted for. Instead they have a representative who stood on the doorstep arguing for what was in the manifesto and then went to parliament and voted directly against it.

Leavers were in the majority, they won the ref and they have every right and reason to expect their decision to be carried out.


> Tbh a huge amount has changed since 2017. At that stage things like the gfa fuck up still weren't being openly discussed in debates - partly because neither of the main  parties wanted to discuss it. In a new election they would be forced to discuss it.



Yes, a lot has changed. Of course.  If a new election is what you want then go out and campaign for one.  I don't know what the next Labour manifesto will say, but if, at that election, you want to vote for a party that unambiguously supports Remaining, then there are likely to be candidates from the LDs and Greens.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> I don't think I've said they do, have I?  not in the bit you quoted anyway.
> 
> Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.
> 
> ...


so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy

And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.



A "no deal" brexit would have been hard to square with labour's manifesto position. 



> We will scrap the Conservatives’ Brexit White Paper and replace it with fresh negotiating priorities that have a strong emphasis on retaining the benefits of the Single Market and the Customs Union – which are essential for maintaining industries, jobs and businesses in Britain. Labour will always put jobs and the economy first.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 13, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> A "no deal" brexit would have been hard to square with labour's manifesto position.


And aside from that they lost the election. They're not in power so they don't have to honour that manifesto, although voting against may's deal was following it. Under our system their job is now to come up with a new manifesto for the next election. It is not their job to vote through govt business. That's the govt's problem.


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy


No, exactly the opposite. Implementation of manifesto commitments is at the heart of modern parliamentary democracy.  See, for instance, that the revising chamber can amend anything before it, and can vote down other government business but does not frustrate or wreck manifesto commitments.  The mandate derived from them is central to the formation of government.  

Unhappy Leavers have been shafted by scoundrels who sought their vote based on one thing then in parliament voted directly the opposite.



> And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.



If they want an MP who will not compromise on Remaining in the division lobby then they can try voting LD.  They'll probably get sold out at some point as you say.  There is a difference, you know, between identifying an option and wholeheartedly recommending people actually take it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> No, exactly the opposite. Implementation of manifesto commitments is at the heart of modern parliamentary democracy.  See, for instance, that the revising chamber can amend anything before it, and can vote down other government business but does not frustrate or wreck manifesto commitments.  The mandate derived from them is central to the formation of government.
> 
> Unhappy Leavers have been shafted by scoundrels who sought their vote based on one thing then in parliament voted directly the opposite.
> 
> ...


I don't think parliamentary democracy is democracy - indeed it cannot be at least as long as there's the pernicious institution of party and cabals of MPs set themselves apart from their constituents. There may be a perception parties should implement the planks on which they were elected but I think this is based on an outmoded belief in the honesty of politicians.


----------



## newbie (Apr 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think parliamentary democracy is democracy - indeed it cannot be at least as long as there's the pernicious institution of party and cabals of MPs set themselves apart from their constituents. There may be a perception parties should implement the planks on which they were elected but I think this is based on an outmoded belief in the honesty of politicians.


fair enough.  In terms of parliamentary democracy I'm not seeking to discuss what should be, merely what is.


----------



## gosub (Apr 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you're saying is unhappy leavers received a lesson in parliamentary democracy
> 
> And you suggest remainers vote lib dem if they want unambiguous support for staying in the eu. Forgetting the great student fees fiasco.


The court case that proves you can't sue politicians for breaking their election promises


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 13, 2019)

newbie said:


> Look, Remainers who voted for and helped elect the winning Labour or Tory candidate in the GE 2017 could have no complaint if that winner subsequently voted for the May deal or for a no deal exit. Because implementing the referendum result was in the manifesto they voted for.


But this nonsense is parroted by those "at the hear to parliamentary democracy" doesn't mean people accept it nor that it is true. You're arguing the same line as Blair and Thatcher - that people supported and wanted the increase in inequality, the sell off of public utilities, the privatisation of the NHS and education system, etc.


newbie said:


> fair enough.  In terms of parliamentary democracy I'm not seeking to discuss what should be, merely what is.


No, what the pricks in the bubble want it to be.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 14, 2019)

newbie said:


> You are focussing on those that wanted to Remain, the minority, who appear to have voted in favour of policies they didn't want to happen. The majority, which is who I'm on about, might well have decided not to vote for one or other of the major parties if their manifesto had promised to overthrow/ignore the result of the ref.



Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.

Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.

It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?


----------



## newbie (Apr 14, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.
> 
> Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.
> 
> It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?


Do you think it'll make any odds, this running around trying to pretend that the result of both the referendum and the GE don't properly count because some people didn't or couldn't vote, or that the referendum in the 1970s somehow compromises the results from 2016/7?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 14, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum.
> ...
> It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?


Are you seriously saying that because the results of the 2016 referendum are opposite to those of referendum held 41 years previously they are somehow less legitimate. I don't agree with Newbie's points no the GE but your line of argument is just pitiable.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Apr 14, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Those that wanted to Remain, one minority had no choice. The majority, not leavers which were just a slightly bigger minority, also had no choice.
> 
> Of course both parties manifestos were to overthrow/ignore the result of the first referendum based on the tenuous results of the second referendum. We will never know how the majority would have voted now as choice was missed out in the GE.
> 
> It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?


The first was essentially a ref on belonging to a trading bloc, far cry from what the 2016 ref was about.


----------



## Badgers (Apr 14, 2019)

Good to see.


----------



## Badgers (Apr 14, 2019)

Is this accurate?


----------



## magneze (Apr 14, 2019)

No


----------



## Badgers (Apr 14, 2019)

Cheers


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 14, 2019)

A better question to ask is even if it was true is it a good argument.


----------



## magneze (Apr 14, 2019)

Also, no.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

It’s not right at all.  Global GDP is $75bn and the U.K. is $2.5bn, which is 3.3%, not 2.2%.

In 2017, the U.K. was 5th, not 7th, but almost identical with India and France in 6th and 7th.  It’s not that far off Germany in 4th and more than half as much as Japan in 3rd, though.  

So is Japan suffering from not being in the EU?  India?  Is it okay to be 6% like Japan but not 3.3% like the U.K.?

China is almost five times the GDP of the U.K. and US is eight times.  But so what?  Does being 15% of world GDP somehow grant Chinese people great things?

And what relevance is GDP anyway?  Who does it help?  The working population, somehow?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> It’s not right at all.  Global GDP is $75bn and the U.K. is $2.5bn, which is 3.3%, not 2.2%.
> 
> In 2017, the U.K. was 5th, not 7th, but almost identical with India and France in 6th and 7th.  It’s not that far off Germany in 4th and more than half as much as Japan in 3rd, though.
> 
> ...



Trillion, not billion. Surely?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Trillion, not billion. Surely?


That’s the badger.  It’s too much second-nature to put bn after these numbers.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That’s the badger.  It’s too much second-nature to put bn after these numbers.



From counting your salary, no doubt


----------



## treelover (Apr 14, 2019)

> People's Vote campaigners vow to overhaul 'project fear' image



Remain learning lessons?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Apr 14, 2019)

newbie said:


> No, exactly the opposite. Implementation of manifesto commitments is at the heart of modern parliamentary democracy.  See, for instance, that the revising chamber can amend anything before it, and can vote down other government business but does not frustrate or wreck manifesto commitments.  The mandate derived from them is central to the formation of government.


Are you seriously saying that parties honour their manifestos?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> From counting your salary, no doubt


Come now.  I only take 5%.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> So is Japan suffering from not being in the EU?  India?  Is it okay to be 6% like Japan but not 3.3% like the U.K.?
> 
> China is almost five times the GDP of the U.K. and US is eight times.  But so what?  Does being 15% of world GDP somehow grant Chinese people great things?
> 
> And what relevance is GDP anyway?  Who does it help?  The working population, somehow?



hmmm - I wonder if there are any , obscure, minor geographical factors that mean membership of the EU is not as vital an issue to the likes of india and japan as opposed to the UK?

And larger GDP  does not necessarily  mean less poverty or less inequality. but a shrunken GDP does tend to very mean the opposite. GDP is the size of the economic cake but does not dictate how it is cut - and excludes many other factors. 
But If you measure GDP per capita  the top countries are luxemburg, switzerland and norway  whilst the lowest are Central African Republic, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - so there clearly is a relation between it and quality of life overall. 
China has a massive GDP compared to the UK cos its population is something like 15 times greater. its _per capita_ GDP is 73rd compared to the UK's 26th.  If its gross GDP dropped to the uk's level it would mean abject poverty and starvation. 
but yeah - its a crude measure - ireland's per capita GDP is 5th - which doesn't square with general levels of affluence. Unless it all Bono's piles of loot distorting the figures.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> hmmm - I wonder if there are any , obscure, minor geographical factors that mean membership of the EU is not as vital an issue to the likes of india and japan as opposed to the UK?


What’s that got to do with whether or not Japan is “crushed” by not being in the EU?  The claim is that a country of the UK’s kind of GDP size will be “crushed”, remember?  And it’s obviously nonsense.



> And larger GDP  does not necessarily  mean less poverty or less inequality. but a shrunken GDP does tend to very mean the opposite. GDP is the size of the economic cake but does not dictate how it is cut - and excludes many other factors.
> But If you measure GDP per capita  the top countries are luxemburg, switzerland and norway  whilst the lowest are Central African Republic, Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo - so there clearly is a relation between it and quality of life overall.
> China has a massive GDP compared to the UK cos its population is something like 15 times greater. its _per capita_ GDP is 73rd compared to the UK's 26th.  If its gross GDP dropped to the uk's level it would mean abject poverty and starvation.
> but yeah - its a crude measure - ireland's per capita GDP is 5th - which doesn't square with general levels of affluence. Unless it all Bono's piles of loot distorting the figures.


I’m not talking about the reasons GDP (even per capita) is a shit measure of national wellbeing yet again, having already done so multiple times already in this thread alone.  But it is a shit measure of national wellbeing.


----------



## newbie (Apr 14, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Are you seriously saying that parties honour their manifestos?


I'm saying that people who vote for a party are liable to be angry if manifesto commitments are wrecked by MPs who argued for that manifesto on the doorstep.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Incidentally:


Kaka Tim said:


> But If you measure GDP per capita  the top countries are luxemburg, switzerland and norway...


 Two out of three of which are not in the EU, of course, despite their “geographical factors”.  And yet they have not been “crushed”,


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 14, 2019)

but they are still in the customs union - why they are not full members isn't really clear, cos being outside the bloc doesn't seem to give them any advantages. you'd have to ask them.

The "crushed" thing is - i guess - coming from the uk having left with no deal and having to try and come to a deal with the EU from a very weak position - not the situation for china and japan - who already have trade deals with the EU and who do not rely on EU trade to anything like the same extent and have a far, far bigger manufacturing base.

And i already said GDP is a crude measure - but it doesn't tell as nothing - countries with high levels of affluence and low inequality have high GDP per capita - and countries with low GDP per capita have high levels of widespread poverty. 

The weakness of the whole lexit argument for me is that it seems to assume that leaving the EU is somehow distances the UK from the system of globalised capitalism - but if anything its the reverse -  unless you are arguing to leave the (even more neo-liberal) WTO and IMF an go down the north Korea route.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Who says we are leaving with no deal?  Why shouldn’t the U.K. be in the customs union?  You’re reading what you want to read and interpreting accordingly.  If the U.K. follows Corbyn’s plan, for example, it will be in the same situation as Norway and Switzerland.  I.e. not “crushed”.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who says we are leaving with no deal?  Why shouldn’t the U.K. be in the customs union?  You’re reading what you want to read and interpreting accordingly.  If the U.K. follows Corbyn’s plan, for example, it will be in the same situation as Norway and Switzerland.  I.e. not “crushed”.



i was assuming a no deal scenario where the "the uk will be crushed by the EU" thing came from. 
Customs Union is not in the same ball park - just completely pointless, worst of both worlds etc.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 14, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i was assuming a no deal scenario where the "the uk will be crushed by the EU" thing came from.
> Customs Union is not in the same ball park - just completely pointless, worst of both worlds etc.


The tweet doesn’t say anything except that the U.K. is “about to be crushed”


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The tweet doesn’t say anything except that the U.K. is “about to be crushed”



Didn't it? Well somewhat hyperbolic then - but still a far more accurate assessment than that given by johnsons and the moggladytes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 14, 2019)

Any country with the likes of theresa may in charge can be considered crush-ready


----------



## sleaterkinney (Apr 14, 2019)

newbie said:


> I'm saying that people who vote for a party are liable to be angry if manifesto commitments are wrecked by MPs who argued for that manifesto on the doorstep.


Parties regularly don't do stuff that's in their manifesto.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 14, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Parties regularly don't do stuff that's in their manifesto.


thankfully


----------



## Cid (Apr 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Any country with the likes of theresa may in charge can be considered crush-ready



Have you... Have you thought how that might read given a millennial use of the word 'crush'?


----------



## newbie (Apr 14, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Parties regularly don't do stuff that's in their manifesto.


and their voters get cross about their failure. 

What makes Brexit different is that implementation was promised before and during the referendum (if Leave won) and at the subsequent GE when both major parties had a manifesto pledge to implement it.  Yet it has not been delivered. Politicians have thwarted the people.  Is that not a cause for irritation?


----------



## rubbershoes (Apr 14, 2019)

newbie said:


> and their voters get cross about their failure.
> 
> What makes Brexit different is that implementation was promised before and during the referendum (if Leave won) and at the subsequent GE when both major parties had a manifesto pledge to implement it.  Yet it has not been delivered. Politicians have thwarted the people.  Is that not a cause for irritation?



It can disingenuous for parties to justify their actions by saying they were in the manifesto.  

Voters don't agree with everything in a manifesto


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

newbie said:


> Do you think it'll make any odds, this running around trying to pretend that the result of both the referendum and the GE don't properly count because some people didn't or couldn't vote, or that the referendum in the 1970s somehow compromises the results from 2016/7?



I actually think that anything said or written by me will have as much effect as winking at a girl in a dark room. In fact your reply was quite a surprise!

Definitely not running around, when running you miss so much, I just recognise that my opinion is based on emotion and as such I blow the dust off and take it for a leisurely stroll quite often, just to be sure the emotion used to form my opinion is not solely based on others opinions no matter how loud they shout or how many are shouting.

I am also not trying to pretend anything just providing a view from a different perspective for consideration.

This does still leave my question:-


collectordave said:


> It all started with a referendum then we had a second referendum maybe we should finish it with a third referendum?



Waiting for an answer. 

Please feel free to ignore the second\third referendum reference if you so wish.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Are you seriously saying that because the results of the 2016 referendum are opposite to those of referendum held 41 years previously they are somehow less legitimate. I don't agree with Newbie's points no the GE but your line of argument is just pitiable.



No.

I am providing just another perspective and not questioning the legitimacy of either referendum or the GE.

This mainly because I feel that if I reject any line of reasoning that does not fully agree with my opinion by giving it a name or simply dismissing it as a rant then the state of my mind is pitiable not the reasoning.

As it is just another perspective it is not a line of argument. Arguments are such wasteful things seeming, in my opinion, to prove only that two people with different opinions who are incapable of compromise have met.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Are you that other pricks brother, the brother whose supposed to be  'living in Ireland'?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The first was essentially a ref on belonging to a trading bloc, far cry from what the 2016 ref was about.



Quite true.

The first was a vote on a trading bloc that was going to grow into the EU the second was a vote on the same trading bloc after 40 years of British influence.

I believe the British influence on the EU to be of an inestimable value for good and would like to keep Britain's influence on the EU active and not retreat from attempting to improve it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Quite true.
> 
> The first was a vote on a trading bloc that was going to grow into the EU the second was a vote on the same trading bloc after 40 years of British influence.
> 
> I believe the British influence on the EU to be of an inestimable value for good and would like to keep Britain's influence on the EU active and not retreat from attempting to improve it.


How can hmg's influence on the eu be an inestimable good when so much of what it does at home is bloody awful?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> As it is just another perspective it is not a line of argument. Arguments are such wasteful things seeming, in my opinion, to prove only that two people with different opinions who are incapable of compromise have met.


What is this guff. If you make a claim then you are making an argument.

The nonsense you posted about the 75 referendum is just that, nonsense. That was a referendum over 40 years ago. The idea that because the 2016 referendum gave the opposite result we need a third referendum to decide is pitiable.

Its an example of the regressive nonsense that die-hard Remainers are willing to pull out of anywhere in order to object to leaving the UK. No consideration of the consequences of such a position, no analysis of the politics. Just 'oh look opposition to leaving, this will do'.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Quite true.
> 
> The first was a vote on a trading bloc that was going to grow into the EU the second was a vote on the same trading bloc after 40 years of British influence.
> 
> I believe the British influence on the EU to be of an inestimable value for good and would like to keep Britain's influence on the EU active and not retreat from attempting to improve it.


Could you outline the results of that influence please?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> How can hmg's influence on the eu be an inestimable good when so much of what it does at home is bloody awful?



Bit of "street angel house devil" going on. Nothing new in that surely?


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 15, 2019)

I don’t understand where this belief in the idea that the UK is so influential on the world, when most of the industry, transport infrastructure and utilities including energy, water and banking is owned by overseas companies.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

British influence in Brussels had been far greater than recognised


Unfortunate that the first example given in this article is Thatcherite reference .... but an interesting read if you can possibly move on from that paragraph.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you that other pricks brother, the brother whose supposed to be 'living in Ireland'?



After reading your profound question two answers present themselves.

1. No

2. I do not know which prick you are talking about so maybe you can enlighten everybody from your own experience what it is like to be a prick?

So take your pick


----------



## sleaterkinney (Apr 15, 2019)

newbie said:


> and their voters get cross about their failure.
> 
> What makes Brexit different is that implementation was promised before and during the referendum (if Leave won) and at the subsequent GE when both major parties had a manifesto pledge to implement it.  Yet it has not been delivered. Politicians have thwarted the people.  Is that not a cause for irritation?


The promises made could never have been kept. Blue and Red unicorns the lot, and we don't seem to be having this brought out yet. So yes, they should be irritated for being mislead.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> British influence in Brussels had been far greater than recognised
> 
> 
> Unfortunate that the first example given in this article is Thatcherite policy.... but an interesting read if you can move on from that paragraph.


Unfortunate? Is this some sort of joke? Are you suggesting that we overlook the main and most influential thing the UK has done - the thing that has and will most effect how it operates - when we evaluate the influence the UK has had on the EU  and the argument that its influence is a definite good?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Bit of "street angel house devil" going on. Nothing new in that surely?


I'd like some examples on eg surveillance where the UK has been an eu force for good, privacy, human rights etc not just the UK has been an inestimable force for good. We've been told before what a force for good the uk's been in India, Africa, Ireland etc and sadly it's not always quite rung true


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> British influence in Brussels had been far greater than recognised
> 
> 
> Unfortunate that the first example given in this article is Thatcherite reference .... but an interesting read if you can possibly move on from that paragraph.


Do you know what liberalising means BTW?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Unfortunate? Is this some sort of joke? Are you suggesting that we overlook the main and most influential thing the UK has done - the thing that has and will most effect how it operates - when we evaluate the influence the UK has had on the EU  and the argument that its influence is a definite good?



Not at all.
I was merely stating that the article was about much more than Thatcher.....


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Not at all.
> I was merely stating that the article was about much more than Thatcher.....


The piece is all about how the UK successfully pushed the liberalising Thatcherite agenda, all the other things that it takes about are as examples of this liberalising. It literally is all there. So  is this the good stuff


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What is this guff. If you make a claim then you are making an argument.



It is a point of view not a claim. It only becomes an argument if you cannot accept that someone else has a different point of view to your own.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The piece is all about how the UK successfully pushed the liberalising Thatcherite agenda, all the other things that it takes about are as examples of this liberalising. It literally is all there. So  is this the good stuff




It does state that the UK was influential in the past in the push for open borders and new member states... was that bad?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> It does state that the UK was influential in the past in the push for open borders and new member states... was that bad?


For what reasons does it suggest that the UK pushed for these things?Jesus Christ, just look up the authors and their views if you don't believe their opening statement. Don't just link to the first thing you find after a few seconds googling.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Could you outline the results of that influence please?



British influence in Brussels had been far greater than recognised


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> British influence in Brussels had been far greater than recognised


This liberalising is the thing that is an 'inestimable value for good' ?

Good job you're on the case for remain.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you know what liberalising means BTW?



It means: "to remove or loosen restrictions on (something, typically an economic or political system)"

Would that not be the opposite of what will happen once the UK leaves the EU?


----------



## redsquirrel (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> It is a point of view not a claim. It only becomes an argument if you cannot accept that someone else has a different point of view to your own.


Total utter LD guff. When you put forward a "point of view" you are putting forward a political position, one that leads to certain logical conclusions and that can be interrogated.


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> How can hmg's influence on the eu be an inestimable good when so much of what it does at home is bloody awful?



Now there is a conundrum. Maybe spending to much time on blaming the EU for its failures instead of tackling the problems?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> It means: "to remove or loosen restrictions on (something, typically an economic or political system)"
> 
> Would that not be the opposite of what will happen once the UK leaves the EU?


No it doesn't. It means to privatise, to sell off, to undermine collective public provision of services, it means to cut wages pensions and benefits, it means to force people to work longer in worse conditions and other freedoms.

I have no idea what that question is supposed to mean.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Now there is a conundrum. Maybe spending to much time on blaming the EU for its failures instead of tackling the problems?


Pull your socks up. 

This is drivel. What drives a man to think this is something worth posting?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Total utter LD guff. When you put forward a "point of view" you are putting forward a political position, one that leads to certain logical conclusions and that can be interrogated.



It is just my point of view not a political position. It seems you cannot accept that?


----------



## collectordave (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This is drivel. What drives a man to think this is something worth posting?



Maybe you could tell us all?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Now there is a conundrum. Maybe spending to much time on blaming the EU for its failures instead of tackling the problems?


For forty-five fucking years?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> It is just my point of view not a political position. It seems you cannot accept that?


It seems to me you are having difficulty pointing to anything to back up your pov, to persuade others of it


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No it doesn't. It means to privatise, to sell off, to undermine collective public provision of services, it means to cut wages pensions and benefits, it means to force people to work longer in worse conditions and other freedoms.
> 
> I have no idea what that question is supposed to mean.




Fair enough.  I detest Thatcher for what she did here and to the miners in  England. 

I'm asking a genuine question though. Do you believe that the EU is driven by a Thatcherist form of liberalism?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Fair enough.  I detest Thatcher for what she did here and to the miners in  England.
> 
> I'm asking a genuine question though. Do you believe that the EU is driven by a Thatcherist form of liberalism?


You've just posted a link outlining how this is the case.


----------



## andysays (Apr 15, 2019)

Never mind the effect, feel the effectiveness...


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

The EU IS the Thatcherist version of liberalism!


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> It is just my point of view not a political position.


Lololol


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You've just posted a link outlining how this is the case.



Ok...obviously I need to read more.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The EU IS the Thatcherist version of liberalism!



Hayek and Friedman would agree with you too.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 15, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ok...obviously I need to read more.


Have a pity like


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Have a pity like



I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
I thought the EU was a different fish altogether. 

If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
> I thought the EU was a different fish altogether.
> 
> If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


That depends on the future political decisions of the U.K. and Ireland.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
> I thought the EU was a different fish altogether.
> 
> If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


A 150+ posts on this thread later do you still think the EU is a different fish altogether ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
> I thought the EU was a different fish altogether.
> 
> If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


If we go there will be trouble
If we stay it will be double


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That depends on the future political decisions of the U.K. and Ireland.



But if the UK leaves...it will impact on Ireland regardless of our political leadership. We will be physically isolated from Europe.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That depends on the future political decisions of the U.K. and Ireland.


And the EU. Its role. With our without the UK is to drive wages down and productivity up. That week have a direct downward pressure on UK wages if successful.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
> I thought the EU was a different fish altogether.
> 
> If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


Thatcher’s Tories were socially conservative and authoritarian but as recent political direction across Europe demonstrates, there is nothing preventing this in the EU either.  Economically, however, the EU is built on Thatcherism, not merely parallel to it, let alone in opposition to it.  That’s why the very article you linked to placed Thatcher in the first paragraph, front and centre.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> A 150+ posts on this thread later do you still think the EU is a different fish altogether ?



Well...yes... I'd rather Ireland be part of the EU than part of the UK. Being part of the EU has been far better for us than being part of the UK.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> But if the UK leaves...it will impact on Ireland regardless of our political leadership. We will be physically isolated from Europe.


The EU has never been about physical proximity.  How physically proximal are Germany and Greece?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I have a view of Thatcher and her regime that is based on her actions in NI and her attitude towards the hunger strikers here...and her treatment of the miners the UK...
> I thought the EU was a different fish altogether.
> 
> If Brexit goes ahead, what will happen to ordinary workers in Ireland and the UK?


Are you asking yourself what the price of staying in the EU is for Irish and British workers? If not, why not?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well...yes... I'd rather Ireland be part of the EU than part of the UK. Being part of the EU has been far better for us than being part of the UK.


 Do you still think the EU is a different fish from thatcherite neoliberalism after you poste a link outlining why the EU is exactly that neoliberalism. That's what I asked you.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The EU has never been about physical proximity.  How physically proximal are Germany and Greece?



Well you can drive from one to the other!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The EU has never been about physical proximity.  How physically proximal are Germany and Greece?



Ireland is an island. We transported exports and imports via the UK and it was highly effective because of freedom of movement. You do know that we dont have land links to the EU. And air links are also going to be affected as many go via stops in the UK.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Well you can drive from one to the other!


And you used to able to from Ireland to France before this I'll advised exercise in... er... making new seas and that.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ireland is an island. We transported exports and imports via the UK and it was highly effective because of freedom of movement. You do know that we dont have land links to the EU. And air links are also going to be affected as many go via stops in the UK.



So not physically isolated then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ireland is an island. We transported exports and imports via the UK and it was highly effective because of freedom of movement. You do know that we dont have land links to the EU. And air links are also going to be affected as many go via stops in the UK.


At a meeting of the grytviken-buenos aires friendship bridge management board it was decided to commission a feasibility study for a less ambitious project to test the bridge design, looking at a link from Cork to roscoff. The board also felt this would allow the mettle of the workforce to be tested.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are you asking yourself what the price of staying in the EU is for Irish and British workers? If not, why not?



The price of UK leaving the EU will be massive for Irish workers.... 
As for British workers...there are industries already pulling out of the UK and more threatening to do so....which will effect workers in those industries.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The price of UK leaving the EU will be massive for Irish workers....
> As for British workers...there are industries already pulling out of the UK and more threatening to do so....which will effect workers in those industries.


That's a no then. Which goes some way to explaining why you think the EU is different fish from thatcherite neoliberalism.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> At a meeting of the grytviken-buenos aires friendship bridge management board it was decided to commission a feasibility study for a less ambitious project to test the bridge design, looking at a link from Cork to roscoff. The board also felt this would allow the mettle of the workforce to be tested.




Cork to Roscoff? 
Imagine that...600km.

I doubt that will happen.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Ireland is an island. We transported exports and imports via the UK and it was highly effective because of freedom of movement. You do know that we dont have land links to the EU. And air links are also going to be affected as many go via stops in the UK.


But what is the point here?  The U.K. has to stay in the EU because that is convenient for Irish exporting?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

To be honest, I’m not exactly thrilled anyway about the idea of Britain’s overloaded road network being used as a cheap way for Irish exporters to get to continental Europe and back.  The exporters aren’t paying any tax for this service, after all. The fact that they might have to either pay for a ferry to take them to France, Spain or Holland or pay some kind of duty for the right to use U.K. infrastructure doesn’t fill me with as much horror as you might think.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Cork to Roscoff?
> Imagine that...600km.
> 
> I doubt that will happen.


if it comes to naught then at least we'll have saved the expense of shipping the former people to the south atlantic


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> To be honest, I’m not exactly thrilled anyway about the idea of Britain’s overloaded road network being used as a cheap way for Irish exporters to get to continental Europe and back.  The exporters aren’t paying any tax for this service, after all. The fact that they might have to either pay for a ferry to take them to France, Spain or Holland or pay some kind of duty for the right to use U.K. infrastructure doesn’t fill me with as much horror as you might think.


It's uk labour subsidising capital is what it is.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's uk labour subsidising capital is what it is.



What's that supposed to mean?

You dont believe in freedom of movement?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 15, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> May’s deal is a was a very badly judged attempt at triangulation. It was presented appallingly. Even if it hadn't been was never likely to be a deal that the polarised administrators of the ruling class could live with. But, unlike Labour she at least had a strategy. Even now, bar collapsing back into the single market, Labour seems to have zero ideas or a strategic vision on the issue. At some point this will haunt them generally and Corbyn in particular


Yep and even less of an idea about brexit that they would use as part of an active engagement with the working class.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What's that supposed to mean?
> 
> You dont believe in freedom of movement?


It means that labour - that is your 'ordinary workers'  - pay for the transport networks and related and infrastructure that capital uses to profit from.

And jesus 'effin christ, please save me.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What's that supposed to mean?
> 
> You dont believe in freedom of movement?


Freedom of movement has literally nothing to do with this particular subject


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

_Don't you like freedom boy

 _


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> What's that supposed to mean?
> 
> You dont believe in freedom of movement?


Fom is the freedom for people to relocate from one country to live in another, and should not be confused with the movement of goods as you've done above


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It means that labour - that is your 'ordinary workers'  - pay for the transport networks and related and infrastructure that capital uses to profit from.
> 
> And jesus 'effin christ, please save me.



Same way that workers and anyone paying tax pays for transport infrastructure in every country in the EU?
So you're going to stop exports to the EU because ordinary workers pay tax? Is the UK going to stop exporting to the EU once it leaves? 
You think there are no ordinary workers in the EU? 

So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Same way that workers and anyone paying tax pays for transport infrastructure in every country in the EU?
> So you're going to stop exports to the EU because ordinary workers pay tax? Is the UK going to stop exporting to the EU once it leaves?
> You think there are no ordinary workers in the EU?
> 
> So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?


Yes, that's exactly it.

I think i'm stopping with you now because a) you appear not to know anything about anything and are not prepared to take steps to learn anything about anything and b) you seem to be replying to some conversation that i'm not actually involved - actual mad crazy shit.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?



As for this, you've just shown that you don't care what the EU does to 'ordinary workers' beyond the effects the UK leaving will have on irish and british workers. A great example of two nationalisms for the price of one - a petty anti-british irtish nationalism and a turning of the back on other eu workers - and in the name of international solidarity. Just beyond bizarre.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Same way that workers and anyone paying tax pays for transport infrastructure in every country in the EU?
> So you're going to stop exports to the EU because ordinary workers pay tax? Is the UK going to stop exporting to the EU once it leaves?
> You think there are no ordinary workers in the EU?
> 
> So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?


I think you've beaten supine with this...thing.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 15, 2019)

If UK road use has to be paid for in the journey from the EU (Republic of Ireland) through the newly separate UK to the EU (France, Belgium, Holland for example) I see that as understandable.
I am interested as to exactly what methods the UK might use to track such use once it has crossed the newly established hard border on the Island of Ireland, and how exactly transgressions will be dealt with.
I assume that heavily armed UK security forces will be waiting on the UK side of the land border at all crossing points.
I might be wrong in my assumption. Possibly kabbes has thought through alternative practicalities.
I would assume that road use payment would somehow be reciprocal throughout the EU.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, that's exactly it.
> 
> I think i'm stopping with you now because a) you appear not to know anything about anything and are not prepared to take steps to learn anything about anything and b) you seem to be replying to some conversation that i'm not actually involved - actual mad crazy shit.




Ok.... well I'll make one last point and then I'll fuck off.
The current actions of the UK leaving the EU will effect workers in the UK and also very much so ordinary workers in Ireland.
I'm pointing that out. So why are you more invested in a UK worker than the worker next door in Ireland who will be impacted by the decisions your government is making based on the votes of less than half the population of the UK?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Same way that workers and anyone paying tax pays for transport infrastructure in every country in the EU?
> So you're going to stop exports to the EU because ordinary workers pay tax? Is the UK going to stop exporting to the EU once it leaves?
> You think there are no ordinary workers in the EU?


We’re talking here about Irish importers and exporters being subsidised in their costs by using the infrastructure of a country they are neither exporting to nor importing from.  

In France, roads have tolls precisely because the French government got fed up with this kind of thing.



> So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?


That’s up to the people of the U.K., isn’t it?  It’s a separate argument to saying the U.K. has to stay in the EU because that’s to the benefit of Ireland.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am interested as to exactly what methods the UK might use to track such use once it has crossed the newly established hard border on the Island of Ireland, and how exactly transgressions will be dealt with.
> I assume that heavily armed UK security forces will be waiting on the UK side of the land border at all crossing points.
> I might be wrong in my assumption. Possibly kabbes has thought through alternative practicalities.
> I would assume that road use payment would somehow be reciprocal throughout the EU.


You should know my solution by now.  Northern Ireland to be reunited with ROI


----------



## newbie (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Waiting for an answer.
> 
> Please feel free to ignore the second\third referendum reference if you so wish.


Second.  I voted in 1975 but it was before you and many reading this were out of primary school, those that had got round to being born at all. 

From ordinary Remainers such as yourself the demand comes across as desperation; when articulated by the likes of Watson or Thornberry it just seems condescending in the best Lisbon tradition: _go back and keep doing it until you get it right_.

But you might get your way if you can pressure Labour to make it a redline type demand.  

Of course, afterwards the losing side will feel every right to frustrate at all opportunity until they, in turn, can get another one with a result they like.  And so on, ad infinitum until we all die of boredom.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> We’re talking here about Irish importers and exporters being subsidised in their costs by using the infrastructure of a country they are neither exporting to nor importing from.
> 
> In France, roads have tolls precisely because the French government got fed up with this kind of thing.
> 
> ...


You'll note i specifically said labour not british labour btw because i'm not a petty nationalist.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> it’s a separate argument to saying the U.K. has to stay in the EU because that’s to the benefit of Ireland.



Where did I say that?
I pointed out the impact on Ireland. The UK doesn't give a rate arse about Ireland. They never have done... I'm not that naive to think they'll change their mind about brexit because of Ireland. 
I'm pointing out / reminding the thread that brexit will have repercussions here.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Where did I say that?


And then the _very next sentence_...


> I pointed out the impact on Ireland


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> And then the _very next sentence_...




You do know that Ireland has no influence whatsoever on the UK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You do know that Ireland has no influence whatsoever on the UK.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You do know that Ireland has no influence whatsoever on the UK.


What’s that got to do with anything?

The point of you pointing out the difficulties Ireland will face after Brexit can only be an attempt to suggest the U.K. should bear this in mind when making its decisions, ie it should not leave the EU because of the damage this causes to Ireland.  Saying “I’m just pointing out the consequences but I’m not saying you should do anything about that” is passive aggressive pretence and I’m not having it for a moment.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s that got to do with anything?
> 
> The point of you pointing out the difficulties Ireland will face after Brexit can only be an attempt to suggest the U.K. should bear this in mind when making its decisions, ie it should not leave the EU because of the damage this causes to Ireland.  Saying “I’m just pointing out the consequences but I’m not saying you should do anything about that” is passive aggressive pretence and I’m not having it for a moment.


The UK should certainly take difficulties caused to Ireland, or anyone else, in making its decsions. Are you suggesting it shouldn't?


----------



## Flavour (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa. If all Irish exports were done via sea direct to france rather than via the british road network, how many fucks would you give? Does it matter at all? Has this got anything to do with the reasons why Brexit may or may not happen? You imply that we should stay in the EU because leaving inconveniences Ireland. Believe me, it inconveniences many in the EU much more.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s that got to do with anything?
> 
> The point of you pointing out the difficulties Ireland will face after Brexit can only be an attempt to suggest the U.K. should bear this in mind when making its decisions, ie it should not leave the EU because of the damage this causes to Ireland.  Saying “I’m just pointing out the consequences but I’m not saying you should do anything about that” is passive aggressive pretence and I’m not having it for a moment.


And certainly not from someone who appears as a point of principle to disregard what the eu is currently doing to 'ordinary workers' in countries outside of the UK and Ireland.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The UK should certainly take difficulties caused to Ireland, or anyone else, in making its decsions. Are you suggesting it shouldn't?


I don’t know, frankly.  I think there is a weighing up of relative harm that can be included but I don’t think it should prioritise them over the needs of its own population .

But Lupa is certainly suggesting the U.K. needs to take into account the difficulties caused to Ireland when making its decisions and should have the honesty to own this position and stand behind it rather than this pass-agg attempt to say it and not say it at the same time.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I don’t know, frankly.  I think there is a weighing up of relative harm that can be included but I don’t think it should prioritise them over the needs of its own population .
> 
> But Lupa is certainly suggesting the U.K. needs to take into account the difficulties caused to Ireland when making its decisions and should have the honesty to own this position and stand behind it rather than this pass-agg attempt to say it and not say it at the same time.


At my catholic school the nuns/teachers used to come round at lunchtime with pictures of biafran babies going _don't you care about the black babies _so that kids would hand over dinner money (or pester their parents). This is a version of the same. As was that _don't you believe in freedom then_ move earlier.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> But Lupa is certainly suggesting the U.K. needs to take into account the difficulties caused to Ireland when making its decisions and should have the honesty to own this position and stand behind it rather than this pass-agg attempt to say it and not say it at the same time.



Of course I'm owning my posts. But I also know that Ireland's position means nothing...in the grand scheme of Brexit. Ireland doesn't count in the minds of those who want Brexit....It is not passive aggressive to state that.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Of course I'm owning my posts. But I also know that Ireland's position means nothing...in the grand scheme of Brexit. Ireland doesn't count in the minds of those who want Brexit....It is not passive aggressive to state that.


That was pretty much textbook pass-agg, actually.  “Oh my life is hard but you don’t care anyway.”


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Of course I'm owning my posts. But I also know that Ireland's position means nothing...in the grand scheme of Brexit. Ireland doesn't count in the minds of those who want Brexit....It is not passive aggressive to state that.



It's not passive aggressive, but it is close to meaningless. Brexit isn't happening. It is impossible to 'know the minds' of 17.4 Million people and in terms of the administrative wing of capital, their representatives have become obsessed with the 'position' of Ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> You do know that Ireland has no influence whatsoever on the UK.


This written at a time when what the Irish government thinks has more influence than at any previous time.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

The irony is that Ireland is a HUGE part of the problem with the EU and indirectly a cause of the high levels of dissatisfaction.  By essentially making themselves an off-shore tax haven, they’ve allowed financial services to relocate themselves in an ultra-low corporate tax haven and enabled things like the “Double Irish with a Dutch sandwich” corporate manoeuvre that takes tax revenue out of the hands of where it belongs (namely the countries generating it).  The result is that people outside of the SE of England see jobs and services disappear and they get frustrated and angry with the EU.  In the end, Ireland is the tragic architect of its own destruction on this one.

But Lupa, you have of course been campaigning in Ireland to get these tax loopholes closed, right?  Because you believe in protecting workers in other countries?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 15, 2019)

It seems to me the UK need only pay heed to the Republic of Ireland in terms of the practicalities regarding the land border they share, and through the lens of any international treaties the UK has signed that has issues affecting UK/ROI stuff.
If the British Brexit has any impact on the ROI then so be it. 17.4 million people voted for a different border on the island of Ireland and if it becomes harsh or dangerous then it is possible or the EU can find ways to retaliate.
I am no expert but it might be possible to ban overlying EU territory, and shoot down aircraft originating in the UK.
A bit extreme, maybe there would be other ways to retaliate mind you.

Edit

Overflying


----------



## Flavour (Apr 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am no expert but it might be possible to ban overlying EU territory, and shoot down aircraft originating in the UK.
> A bit extreme, maybe there would be other ways to retaliate mind you.



Hard man


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> At my catholic school the nuns/teachers used to come round at lunchtime with pictures of biafran babies going _don't you care about the black babies _so that kids would hand over dinner money (or pester their parents). This is a version of the same. As was that _don't you believe in freedom then_ move earlier.



Wtf? You must be very old... 



kabbes said:


> But Lupa, you have of course been campaigning in Ireland to get these tax loopholes closed, right?  Because you believe in protecting workers in other countries?



If you are asking me what I support? I support the anti austerity group Solidarity....and Independents for Change.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> If you are asking me what I support? I support the anti austerity group Solidarity....and Independents for Change.


No, that’s not what I’m asking you at all.  I’m asking what you are doing to remove the tax loopholes that allow multinationals to set head offices up in Ireland with minimal corporate tax rates and use those head offices as a base to wash EU profits through, this eliminating the need to pay corporate tax in the place the profit was generated.

You do know that’s what your country does, right?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> No, that’s not what I’m asking you at all.  I’m asking what you are doing to remove the tax loopholes that allow multinationals to set head offices up in Ireland with minimal corporate tax rates and use those head offices as a base to wash EU profits through, this eliminating the need to pay corporate tax in the place the profit was generated.
> 
> You do know that’s what your country does, right?



Well...as a citizen who votes for a party that is pretty much against that policy then I'm doing what I can.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well...as a citizen who votes for a party that is pretty much against that policy then I'm doing what I can.


What does “pretty much” mean?  

And in the meantime, as long as your country keeps voting to enable it, why shouldn’t workers in other countries vote to do things to protect themselves from it?


----------



## newbie (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Well...as a citizen who votes for a party that is pretty much against that policy then I'm doing what I can.


It's a pincer.  If you vote against the RoI corporation tax policies you're voting to impoverish Irish workers.  If you vote for them you're endorsing lowering the tax take elsewhere, and thus impoverishing foreign, to you, workers.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What does “pretty much” mean?
> 
> And in the meantime, as long as your country keeps voting to enable it, why shouldn’t workers in other countries vote to do things to protect themselves from it?



Solidarity are against it. 

As for what your country does? That's up to them and you. I dont believe Brexit will benefit ordinary workers in the UK...you obviously believe that the UK will be a better place for workers once the UK leaves the EU...but nobody will know for sure until the UK has left.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 15, 2019)

Why be passive aggressive when you can be aggressive aggressive?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Why be passive aggressive when you can be aggressive aggressive?


Who’s that then?  Or are you just going to passively aggressively hint at it?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Solidarity are against it.
> 
> As for what your country does? That's up to them and you. I dont believe Brexit will benefit ordinary workers in the UK...you obviously believe that the UK will be a better place for workers once the UK leaves the EU...but nobody will know for sure until the UK has left.


I don’t think that the U.K. will be a better place for workers once Brexit has happened.  I merely think the opportunity is in place for it to become so.  I also think that you are simply seeing cause and effect in action — when people’s standard of living is systematically undermined by neoliberalism— including the actions of the Irish government — they take action, and those actions can be chaotic and even contradictory.  Complaining about this is just pissing in the wind if you weren’t doing anything in the first place about the causes that are being reacted to.  And I have no confidence at all in that regard in anybody who thought the EU was somehow anti-Thatcherite.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I don’t think that the U.K. will be a better place for workers once Brexit has happened.  I merely think the opportunity is in place for it to become so.  I also think that you are simply seeing cause and effect in action — when people’s standard of living is systematically undermined by neoliberalism— including the actions of the Irish government — they take action, and those actions can be chaotic and even contradictory.  Complaining about this is just pissing in the wind if you weren’t doing anything in the first place about the causes that are being reacted to.  And I have no confidence at all in that regard in anybody who thought the EU was somehow anti-Thatcherite.



I think you'd have to have lived in Ireland and seen generation after generation leave in order to get any kind of basic work to possibly understand how people see the EU as something that has been good for the country and at the same time see that we are by no means perfect. 
And the whole tax thing is a problem.....the EU did fine Apple on that...and they'll probably fine more big businesses. I've no doubt the whole tax haven thing will have to change. 
But casting stones at Ireland is a bit weird...considering we are not selling arms to Saudi....or Israel...or other countries violating human rights.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 15, 2019)

it's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 15, 2019)

everyones hard on the internets.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> I think you'd have to have lived in Ireland and seen generation after generation leave in order to get any kind of basic work to possibly understand how people see the EU as something that has been good for the country and at the same time see that we are by no means perfect.
> And the whole tax thing is a problem.....the EU did fine Apple on that...and they'll probably fine more big businesses. I've no doubt the whole tax haven thing will have to change.
> But casting stones at Ireland is a bit weird...considering we are not selling arms to Saudi....or Israel...or other countries violating human rights.


It’s not a matter of casting stones.  It’s a matter of recognising that your country is not a helpless victim of this situation, but has been a leading player in the liberalisation of capital flows that has directly created it.  So there’s no point whining when it blows up in your face.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> It’s not a matter of casting stones.  It’s a matter of recognising that your country is not a helpless victim of this situation, but has been a leading player in the liberalisation of capital flows that has directly creates it.  So there’s no point whining when it blows up in your face.



We have had plenty thing"blow up in our face" that were none of our doing for decades if not centuries. I think we will be able to cope with our short-lived history as a mini tax haven. 

I'd put money on the UK becoming a major tax haven, post Brexit.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> We have had plenty thing"blow up in our face" that were none of our doing for decades if not centuries. I think we will be able to cope with our short-lived history as a mini tax haven.
> 
> I'd put money on the UK becoming a major tax haven, post Brexit.


You’re still making it about morality rather than cause and effect


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 15, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So much for solidarity. You think exports and imports are unnecessary for the UK to survive? How will that work when industries pull out? How many workers will lose jobs then?



Solidarity comrades! _The solidarity of imports and exports between comrades _


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2019)

collectordave said:


> Quite true.
> 
> The first was a vote on a trading bloc that was going to grow into the EU the second was a vote on the same trading bloc after 40 years of British influence.
> 
> I believe the British influence on the EU to be of an inestimable value for good and would like to keep Britain's influence on the EU active and not retreat from attempting to improve it.



You really think the UK is giong to have ANY voice in the next round of EU reform?  Even before we voted to leave, look how Cameron's 'veto' worked out.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> The weakness of the whole lexit argument for me is that it seems to assume that leaving the EU is somehow distances the UK from the system of globalised capitalism - but if anything its the reverse -  unless you are arguing to leave the (even more neo-liberal) WTO and IMF an go down the north Korea route.



I appreciate this is incidental, or at least it probably is for you, but what makes the WTO or the IMF *more* neoliberal than the EU?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I appreciate this is incidental, or at least it probably is for you, but what makes the WTO or the IMF *more* neoliberal than the EU?



cos the EU has other stuff shaping its policies - political imperatives of the member states and its own federal  agenda - plus trade protectionism - the WTO and IMF are focused solely on the bottom line - maximising "growth"  and minimising trade barriers across the board.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> cos the EU has other stuff shaping its policies - political imperatives of the member states and its own federal  agenda - plus trade protectionism - the WTO and IMF are focused solely on the bottom line - maximising "growth"  and minimising trade barriers across the board.



That's not really true, neither organisation has much of an issue with the use of trade tariffs and import taxes in Western countries. They impose free market liberalisation on the global South, sure, but they're just as happy to accept trade protectionism when its in the interests of the US/West etc


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's not really true, neither organisation has much of an issue with the use of trade tariffs and import taxes in Western countries. They impose free market liberalisation on the global South, sure, but they're just as happy to accept trade protectionism when its in the interests of the US/West etc



whilst that is true, their function - their whole point of being - is to further a rigid neo-liberal agenda. EU policy has other pressures acting on it - although its treatment of greece in particular was straight out of the IMF book of cuntery. 
My point is that leaving the EU does not weaken the hold of neo-liberalism over the economy - unless you have the major manufacturing and economic  clout of the USA or China - its likely to  have the reverse effect.


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> cos the EU has other stuff shaping its policies - political imperatives of the member states and its own federal  agenda - plus trade protectionism - the WTO and IMF are focused solely on the bottom line - maximising "growth"  and minimising trade barriers across the board.


Greece gets over quoted, but IMF wanted debt relief EU said no


----------



## gosub (Apr 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> whilst that is true, their function - their whole point of being - is to further a rigid neo-liberal agenda. EU policy has other pressures acting on it - although its treatment of greece in particular was straight out of the IMF book of cuntery.
> My point is that leaving the EU does not weaken the hold of neo-liberalism over the economy - unless you have the major manufacturing and economic  clout of the USA or China - its likely to  have the reverse effect.


Three years in and we still haven't got to the service economy.  No fault of poster, our political mainstream still hasn't even got its head round what borders are about


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> whilst that is true, their function - their whole point of being - is to further a rigid neo-liberal agenda. EU policy has other pressures acting on it - although its treatment of greece in particular was straight out of the IMF book of cuntery.



The function of the EU is the same. The function of supranational institutions is to project the interests of the states that dominate them, which remains in the main the imposition of neoliberalism and austerity. 



Kaka Tim said:


> My point is that leaving the EU does not weaken the hold of neo-liberalism over the economy - unless you have the major manufacturing and economic  clout of the USA or China - its likely to  have the reverse effect.



I appreciate that there are people who argue that it will somehow magically reverse neoliberalism and that's the wrong way to understand it. But this argument about the 'reverse effect' - that we will be exposed to 'more' neoliberalism doesn't make sense. 

The political trajectory was always more neoliberalism, or more concretely, austerity, whatever happened with this sideshow. The political imperative remains to stop austerity. I don't think it makes much sense to talk of 'more' neoliberalism as a consequence of Brexit.


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 16, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 16, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 167882



Branching out I see!


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 16, 2019)

Got a cracker lined up for tomorrow, you watch.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> My point is that leaving the EU does not weaken the hold of neo-liberalism over the economy - unless you have the major manufacturing and economic  clout of the USA or China - its likely to  have the reverse effect.



All economies are subject to the dominance of economic liberalism regardless of their size and/or membership/non-membership of trading blocs.

What we can say however, is that a Labour Government committed to, for example, a radical investment programme in manufacturing, capital controls, reforming to role of the Bank of England to focus on growth, using investment to rebuild deindustrialised towns and for targeted spending and investment on infrastructure would find it easier to do so outside of the common market and ECB/IMF/EU economic project rather than in it. This is a point that constantly seems to escape avowedly 'socialist' leavers who have bizarrely characterised the EU as 'progressive'.

Starmer's vision of 'friction-less trade' with the EU, as well as being a nonsese, would mean abandoning key tenets of Labour's economic programme or, at best, limiting them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Got a cracker lined up for tomorrow, you watch.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> What we can say however, is that a Labour Government committed to, for example, a radical investment programme in manufacturing, capital controls, reforming to role of the Bank of England to focus on growth, using investment to rebuild deindustrialised towns and for targeted spending and investment on infrastructure would find it easier to do so outside of the common market and ECB/IMF/EU economic project rather than in it.



i dont think this is a given at all. The Uk has is not  part of the Euro - so that gives it considerably greater economic autonomy than the rest of the EU nations. Also leaving the EU would almost certainly mean a weaker economy so the government has less money to spend - and leaving less funds for investments and higher borrowing rates. And it would also be a weak position to make trade deals with other nations whilst protecting things like the NHS from private investment.
International finance markets would pressure the UK into further austerity measures - look what happened to callaghan in the 70s. 
Its also worth remembering that many EU countries - especially the bigger ones - routinely break or bend the EU own rules on borrowing requirements and protecting their own public services and industry. 
Would a more socialist economic program from the UK face resistance from the EU? - certainly, but i think it would be even harder to get that program through  if the UK was outside.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i dont think this is a given at all. The Uk has is not  part of the Euro - so that gives it considerably greater economic autonomy than the rest of the EU nations. Also leaving the EU would almost certainly mean a weaker economy so the government has less money to spend - and leaving less funds for investments and higher borrowing rates. And it would also be a weak position to make trade deals with other nations whilst protecting things like the NHS from private investment.
> International finance markets would pressure the UK into further austerity measures - look what happened to callaghan in the 70s.
> Its also worth remembering that many EU countries - especially the bigger ones - routinely break or bend the EU own rules on borrowing requirements and protecting their own public services and industry.
> Would a more socialist economic program from the UK face resistance from the EU? - certainly, but i think it would be even harder to get that program through  if the UK was outside.


smokeandsteam often says things they can't really support. the most problematic thing tho in the post you don't really touch on, which is the unavailability of a labour government committed to a radical investment programme


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> smokeandsteam often says things they can't really support. the most problematic thing tho in the post you don't really touch on, which is the unavailability of a labour government committed to a radical investment programme



smokeandsteam isn't necessarily saying that a labour govt committed to a radical investment programme is available to be fair, just that it could be. 

Although of course how radical is a radical investment programme? Usually not very radical.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> smokeandsteam isn't necessarily saying that a labour govt committed to a radical investment programme is available to be fair, just that it could be.
> 
> Although of course how radical is a radical investment programme? Usually not very radical.


yeh you might as well say a unicorn committed to a radical investment programme, it'd be more likely to turn up


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh you might as well say a unicorn committed to a radical investment programme, it'd be more likely to turn up



Please no more unicorn analogies.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Apr 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i dont think this is a given at all. The Uk has is not  part of the Euro - so that gives it considerably greater economic autonomy than the rest of the EU nations. Also leaving the EU would almost certainly mean a weaker economy so the government has less money to spend - and leaving less funds for investments and higher borrowing rates. And it would also be a weak position to make trade deals with other nations whilst protecting things like the NHS from private investment.
> International finance markets would pressure the UK into further austerity measures - look what happened to callaghan in the 70s.
> Its also worth remembering that many EU countries - especially the bigger ones - routinely break or bend the EU own rules on borrowing requirements and protecting their own public services and industry.
> Would a more socialist economic program from the UK face resistance from the EU? - certainly, but i think it would be even harder to get that program through  if the UK was outside.



1. Given the GDP of the UK I simply do not follow your point that leaving the UK would automatically 'mean a weaker economy'. Our economy on the key measurement is already weak and a net receiver of goods, services and people. In macro terms, freedom from EU strictures _and dependent on the economic priorities of the UK government _leaving makes addressing the imbalance easier and not harder. The overall trade deficit was -£67 billion (-£95 billion on goods) with the EU in 2017. 
_2. _I do not follow what you describe as a 'socialist economic programme' becomes harder to deliver. if you mean an incoming Corbyn administration and its basic social democratic programme then this does become much easier to deliver outside of the EU. State aid rules do not apply. Investment decisions are less fettered by competition rules and investment can be targeted at regions and industries in a way that is currently either prohibited or restricted by the EU. I'd add that it could potentially make the task of multi nationals to flood in imports for harder and not easier too.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Please no more unicorn analogies.


I don’t believe in unicorn analogies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Please no more unicorn analogies.


it's the first unicorn thing i've posted so i've two more left before the mods can step in


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the first unicorn thing i've posted so i've two more left before the mods can step in


Three chimeras and you’re out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Three chimeras and you’re out.


chim-chimera chim-chimera chim-chim-er-ah


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's the first unicorn thing i've posted so i've two more left before the mods can step in



Don't think of it as an enforcable rule but an achievable standard.


----------



## William of Walworth (Apr 16, 2019)

I think? I agree with what Kaka Tim is posting than what Smokeandsteam is posting. 
Good discussion though 

Economics is far from my strong suit , but one of the main reasons I'm (still) remain-minded/anti-Brexit is that I'm *completely* sceptical/pessimistic about any chance whatsoever of radical Left changes post-Brexit (especially if it ends up as hard Brexit or no deal).

Most of the above is because of who'll be in charge in practice of what happens after Brexit.

Please don't read this as a Euro-Fanboi post though -- from this thread and links, I've found out a lot more about the sound criticisms that the EU deserve, than I used to be aware of.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 17, 2019)

Does anyone else have brexit withdrawal symptoms? The last few days, the news just has news stuff on it instead of a new installment in the brexit chaos soap opera.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Does anyone else have brexit withdrawal symptoms? The last few days, the news just has news stuff on it instead of a new installment in the brexit chaos soap opera.



Yes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 17, 2019)

Yeah a bit.


----------



## Supine (Apr 17, 2019)

It's a refreshing breather. Don't worry folks season 3 of brexit will be released soon.


----------



## Yossarian (Apr 17, 2019)

Should get busy again around the first week in October.


----------



## Sprocket. (Apr 17, 2019)

Supine said:


> It's a refreshing breather. Don't worry folks season 3 of brexit will be released soon.



I might record it and binge watch it over Christmas. If we still have electricity!


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 17, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 17, 2019)

It is sort of frustrating... Like, I'm used to regular news updates which are to be discussed. I'm jonesing for a hit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 17, 2019)

"“These elections have proven to be rich hunting grounds for Nigel Farage’s brand of extreme rightwing politics before and may be again,” Beckett said. “But the message of this poll is loud and clear: it suggests that if anyone can stop Farage winning it is Labour – and only if we back [a] people’s vote.”

Beckett, a former foreign secretary, said that if Labour hedged its bets and backed “another form of Brexit, [then] Labour loses voters and Farage will storm to first place”.

The YouGov poll of 1,855 voters on Monday and Tuesday puts Farage’s Brexit party on 27%, followed by Labour on 22% and the Conservatives on 15%, though a high proportion of people said they did not know whom they would vote for or that they would not vote."

EU elections: Farage will win unless Labour backs remain, says Beckett

I can't even explain the logic here. Madness.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Apr 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I can't even explain the logic here. Madness.



i think she means "people will vote for brexity parties not us because we're too brexity, we must be less brexity so people don't vote for parties that are more brexity than us"


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 17, 2019)

For the European elections that probably could be some mileage in being very soft Brexit / 2nd ref.  Those voters who bother to turn up are going to vote solely on the ongoing Brexit process and the outcome they want.  In isolation it probably wouldn't be a bad tactic, however this isn't a vacuum and for the wider picture it could be a very dangerous tactic for Labour.


----------



## andysays (Apr 17, 2019)

Beckett is a Remain and People's Vote supporter, isn't she? Hardly surprising she's trying to argue that there's some electoral necessity in adopting her preference as party policy.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Apr 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> For the European elections that probably could be some mileage in being very soft Brexit / 2nd ref.  Those voters who bother to turn up are going to vote solely on the ongoing Brexit process and the outcome they want.  In isolation it probably wouldn't be a bad tactic, however this isn't a vacuum and for the wider picture it could be a very dangerous tactic for Labour.



Really St Corbs should come out and say Labour will have nothing to do with this pile of plop.


----------



## gosub (Apr 17, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> Beckett is a Remain and People's Vote supporter, isn't she? Hardly surprising she's trying to argue that there's some electoral necessity in adopting her preference as party policy.



Sure but she should at least try to justify it.


----------



## Wolveryeti (Apr 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I can't even explain the logic here. Madness.


Is it so mad to think that defecting Lab Leavers would be more than replaced by harder Remainers from smaller parties? The EU voting system is a bit more proportional than FPTP but will still dick all over a Remain vote spread across many party groupings, hence much potential for tactically voting Lab if it plumps for Remain.


----------



## xenon (Apr 18, 2019)

Beckett's argument makes no sense to me.

Labour have much to lose if they come out in favour of remain now. And if they go hard brexity, they risk losing their remain minded voters to Libdem / no vote.

Brexit party can mop up the angry McAngryy's and split votes from UKIP and Tory as well as Labour. 

Libdem is the remainers alternative already.

The PV lot really do seem to be in a bubble and prone to hubris.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 18, 2019)

dunno - euro elections have a lot lower turn out so only the most politically engaged and motivated turn out. Labour going remain - plus the large and motivated remain campaign - would potentially see them do well in the euros - and fuck over the chuk-ups. 
But labour have to think about more than the Euro elections - and how this stance would play out is a different ball game. 
TBH - i think labours positioning is less about what voters might do and more about keeping the party on the same page. A big chunk of labour mps are against a 2nd ref and a push for a harder remain stance - i.e 2nd ref -  could split the party.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

Graphs and stuff

Polling analysis: The full extent of Britain's division brutally revealed


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 18, 2019)

I don't think I've ever seen 'hard remain' used as a phrase before.  If hard leave is leave every aspect of the EU without any deal what does hard remain mean?  Schengen and the Euro as well?


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

Not new but this has some interesting numbers

For the 'but what about Greece' people: this graph may be of interest (Greece is EL)



What's notable is how little this seems to tally up with the results of a 2016/17 survey


----------



## Dogsauce (Apr 18, 2019)

2016/17 there was the migrant crisis and associated shit-stirring by right wing populists and organised trolls, so I’d guess that’s what’s hitting the numbers on polling then. The leave vote was a beneficiary of this - think Cameron was a bit unlucky with his referendum gamble, taken in a different time he’d have probably got away with it.

Suspect there will be some methodology factors too - what was the question and in what context was it placed? Polls are seldom neutral.

(First poll in teuchter ’s post is from Nov/Dec 2018 if that’s not clear)


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

Surprising it changed so much though - in countries like Greece going from about a third to comfortably over half of respondents. 

Maybe the 'neutral' category was named differently in each questionnaire.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 18, 2019)

Wolveryeti said:


> Is it so mad to think that defecting Lab Leavers would be more than replaced by harder Remainers from smaller parties? The EU voting system is a bit more proportional than FPTP but will still dick all over a Remain vote spread across many party groupings, hence much potential for tactically voting Lab if it plumps for Remain.



Yes, it's completely mad. The hardcore remainiacs won't vote Labour anyway and the majority will either not vote or vote for anti EU parties.


----------



## Teaboy (Apr 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes, it's completely mad. The hardcore remainiacs won't vote Labour anyway and the majority will either not vote or vote for anti EU parties.



If Labour came out on a V. pro remain stance it would surely win a lot of votes at the EU elections?  Its going to be a single issue vote and its a shot to nothing so people who would never consider voting for Corbyn could vote Labour at these elections.

It would still be a terrible tactic but it would surely bring them a decent level of success at the EU elections.


----------



## killer b (Apr 18, 2019)

Labour's EU poll support seems to be holding up ok on the polls they've done on the issue so far - I don't think they need to go chasing the FBPE vote tbh.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

Seems to me that the only reason any party would want to do well at the EU elections is as a proxy-referendum vote for remain or leave, where the party had a clear position on that question.

So if Labour were clearly for remain, then they'd want to do well in the Euro elections. They aren't though, so what would be in it for them, to do well?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> so what would be in it for them, to do well?


“The first national test of the state of the parties since the general election”.

I see where you’re coming from on the proxy referendum notion, but I think it’s a faulty premise: I think it’ll be seen as other things too. Like, who looks like a party of government at this time.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> “The first national test of the state of the parties since the general election”.
> 
> I see where you’re coming from on the proxy referendum notion, but I think it’s a faulty premise: I think it’ll be seen as other things too. Like, who looks like a party of government at this time.


Well, I guess that some people will see it as that, and/or some people will think that people will see it as that, but to me it doesn't make sense to see it as an indication of who looks like a party of government at the moment because so many people who vote in it will be registering a vote one way or the other on the leave/remain argument, and not based on who they would choose as a party of government.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Well, I guess that some people will see it as that, and/or some people will think that people will see it as that, but to me it doesn't make sense to see it as an indication of who looks like a party of government at the moment because so many people who vote in it will be registering a vote one way or the other on the leave/remain argument, and not based on who they would choose as a party of government.


Of course. Just as local government elections are elections on who should run local governments. It doesn’t stop the media from using it, seeing it, reporting on it, as a comment on the Westminster government or opposition, not matter how ill suited those results are for that purpose.


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

If Labour simply fields no candidates then the media can't draw any conclusions


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If Labour simply fields no candidates then the media can't draw any conclusions


Do you think that’s likely?


----------



## teuchter (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Do you think that’s likely?


No


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

I see my planned Labour vote partly as an encouragement to Corbyn. What is his current relationship with left MEPs ?


----------



## killer b (Apr 18, 2019)

Are there likely to be any left MEPs? the current lot were elected on a party list system under Miliband, there's unlikely to be any proper leftwingers among them (whoever they are)


----------



## Supine (Apr 18, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If Labour simply fields no candidates then the media can't draw any conclusions



Oh they would


----------



## chilango (Apr 18, 2019)

Any lefties actually standing? Heard a rumour Class War were standing in London...


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I see my planned Labour vote partly as an encouragement to Corbyn. What is his current relationship with left MEPs ?


What left MEPs?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Of course. Just as local government elections are elections on who should run local governments. It doesn’t stop the media from using it, seeing it, reporting on it, as a comment on the Westminster government or opposition, not matter how ill suited those results are for that purpose.


I think turnout will be interesting. Higher than the normal euros, but lower than the referendum I'd have thought. If the new Farage lot win it on a high turnout, it still doesn't indicate they will become a force in UK politics, but it probably nudges May or her successor into a slightly harder Brexit stance. Their ability to _achieve_ that or indeed any brexit outcome will remain as mired as it was.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What left MEPs?





Find your MEPs

GUE/NGL


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Find your MEPs


 How many of these are 'left MEPs'?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> How many of these are 'left MEPs'?


No true Scotsmen ?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> No true Scotsmen ?


?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> ?



LMGTFY

No true Scotsman - Wikipedia


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> No true Scotsmen ?


I'm not sure what you mean by that, but just to clarify, before you edited in the facebook link you had a link to the general list of Labour MEPs. Which/how many of these are 'left' was my question.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> LMGTFY
> 
> No true Scotsman - Wikipedia


I know what it _means_, I just didn't know what _you_ meant by it. Answering the q as to who the left MEPs are by simply linking to the full list of British Labour MEPs seemed odd.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

Oh I see you were being "funny"  ? - well LOL


----------



## chilango (Apr 18, 2019)

So, is gentlegreen asking what Corbyn's relationships with the various Euro Lefts is?


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> So, is gentlegreen asking what Corbyn's relationships with the various Euro Lefts is?


Yes - and some of them are in the UK and align themselves with Labour.

I know it looks pitiful, but things won't get better if people don't try.

Does Urban recommend I *don't *vote Labour at the Euros ?
(and encourage others to do so ?)


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Oh I see you were being "funny"  ? - well LOL


Nope.  You referred to left MEPs and then posted a link to the full list of British Labour MEPs. As the majority of them are clearly not 'left' in any normal usage of the word, I wondered what you meant by the link.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Nope.  You referred to left MEPs and then posted a link to the full list of British Labour MEPs. As the majority of them are clearly not 'left' in any normal usage of the word, I wondered what you meant by the link.


So I was correct with the logical fallacy I used.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Does Urban recommend I *don't *vote Labour at the Euros ?
> (and encourage others to do so ?)


 Hang on, I'll check.  *HELLO, EVERYBODY, WHAT DO YOU THINK?*


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 18, 2019)

*unsubscribes again*


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So I was correct with the logical fallacy I used.


Actually, I think I may have to duck out of this. My sock drawer needs tidying.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 18, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It would still be a terrible tactic but it would surely bring them a decent level of success at the EU elections.



To what end then?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> So I was correct with the logical fallacy I used.


My question wasn’t “can you supply links to lists of MEPs?”.  I can use search engines.  What I wondered was which MEPs you thought of as “left”, whether any were British MEPs, and so on. Literally, what left MEPs are you referring to?

I don’t have an exhaustive knowledge of MEPs in the UK, but off-hand I can’t think of any who are thought of as “left wingers”. Certainly none of the Scottish MEPs are referred to as “left wingers”.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> For the European elections that probably could be some mileage in being very soft Brexit / 2nd ref.  Those voters who bother to turn up are going to vote solely on the ongoing Brexit process and the outcome they want.  In isolation it probably wouldn't be a bad tactic, however this isn't a vacuum and for the wider picture it could be a very dangerous tactic for Labour.


Exactly as you say, there _may_ be a logic whereby Labour came out as a soft, even anti-brexit, 2nd ref party. It _might_ work if Labour then squeezed the libdems, greens and chuks. And then it _might_ gain then a few seats in certain areas more than it would lose them elsewhere.  That could be a short term strategy as you say, though it would be hard to see Labour becoming the leaders/figureheads for either leave or remain, given how they've managed to avoid anything definitive for the last 2 years. But as you also say, it would both a dangerous and counter productive strategy in the long run. Certainly in terms of Labour ever trying to reengage the working class voters lost in 2016 (and over a longer period).


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Does Urban recommend I *don't *vote Labour at the Euros ?


I don’t think Urban has a collective position on this.

I suppose I’d ask what it is you hope to achieve. I won’t be voting Labour at the Euros, but I probably won’t be voting at all. But you should do whatever you think useful to your ends.


----------



## mojo pixy (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *HELLO, EVERYBODY, WHAT DO YOU THINK?*



there was a vote. everybody was supposed to vote for somebody, but somebody said everybody was cunty, so in the end nobody voted for anybody, and when anybody complained about that, nobody tried to help.


----------



## Brainaddict (Apr 18, 2019)

'Don't throw migrants under the bus' posters in London Rogue anti-Brexit posters pop up across London

The argument that leaving the EU will somehow reduce the UK's complicity in (and actual) violence against people entering Europe has never held much water for me, so this is still one of the best anti-brexit arguments in my book.


----------



## andysays (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t think Urban has a collective position on this.
> 
> I suppose I’d ask what it is you hope to achieve. I won’t be voting Labour at the Euros, but I probably won’t be voting at all. But you should do whatever you think useful to your ends.


Your membership of the monothought clique is suspended pending investigation...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 18, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> 'Don't throw migrants under the bus' posters in London Rogue anti-Brexit posters pop up across London
> 
> The argument that leaving the EU will somehow reduce the UK's complicity in (and actual) violence against people entering Europe has never held much water for me, so this is still one of the best anti-brexit arguments in my book.



Up against plenty of stiff competition there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Your membership of the monothought clique is suspended pending investigation...


Good. I didn’t apply for membership!


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Your membership of the monothought clique is suspended pending investigation...


If this monthought clique could get a bit of democratic centralism, unity of purpose and learn to march in step, We'd be _unstoppable_.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Good. I didn’t apply for membership!


It's like Catholicism - 'soon as yer warm'.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It's like Catholicism - 'soon as yer warm'.


I have a certificate of debaptism. I realise the Catholic Church doesn’t recognise it, but at the time I enjoyed obtaining it.


----------



## belboid (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I have a certificate of debaptism. I realise the Catholic Church doesn’t recognise it, but at the time I enjoyed obtaining it.


I wrote to the pope, JP1 iirr, asking to be excommunicated. 

As he never replied, I assume I was successful.


----------



## andysays (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I have a certificate of debaptism. I realise the Catholic Church doesn’t recognise it, but at the time I enjoyed obtaining it.


Where did you get that from?

I had to obtain a certificate of baptism before I got married recently, which meant tracking down the church I was originally baptised in and applying to them. 

But who issues certificates of debaptism?


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> I wrote to the pope, JP1 iirr, asking to be excommunicated.
> 
> As he never replied, I assume I was successful.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Where did you get that from?
> 
> I had to obtain a certificate of baptism before I got married recently, which meant tracking down the church I was originally baptised in and applying to them.
> 
> But who issues certificates of debaptism?


I think it was a link the National Secular Society had several years ago. Or possibly the Freethinker. I’d need to check.


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> I wrote to the pope, JP1 iirr, asking to be excommunicated.
> 
> As he never replied, I assume I was successful.


It's still on his/her desk.


----------



## danny la rouge (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I think it was a link the National Secular Society had several years ago. Or possibly the Freethinker. I’d need to check.


It was NSS.  

This was the link, but long gone:

https://www.secularism.org.uk/uploads/debaptism.pdf

Wayback machine might help?


----------



## Wilf (Apr 18, 2019)

We've got 2 popes at the moment iirc, the Argentinian feller and the one who retired but fills in for the holidays. Could get a debaptism off one but not the other. Schrodinger's Debaptism.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> We've got 2 popes at the moment iirc, the Argentinian feller and the one who retired but fills in for the holidays. Could get a debaptism off one but not the other. Schrodinger's Debaptism.


Which is the one that shits in the woods?


----------



## andysays (Apr 18, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It was NSS.
> 
> This was the link, but long gone:
> 
> ...


I was just curious, wasn't thinking of applying for one myself


----------



## editor (Apr 18, 2019)

Wanker gets his comeuppance 

Brexiteer who sent death threats and racist messages to MPs jailed


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Apr 18, 2019)

editor said:


> Wanker gets his comeuppance
> 
> Brexiteer who sent death threats and racist messages to MPs jailed



Quite right, but is it really relevant to the brexit thread? On the day after the indie vote in Scotland there was a bit of violent shite happening in Glasgow which some of my mates were unfortunately caught up in, and many(though maybe not most)  of us Yes voters were trying to argue against those suggesting it was  it was as No/Yes clash or “no voters rioting” rather than the usual  fascist cunts making hay- “no voter” hardly the most relevant descriptor is what I’m saying ... to see people south of the border endulging in the same sort of point scoring bs really fucks me off, been there on the other side of it. Don’t do this. It really doesn’t help any of us, just divides.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 19, 2019)

*Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*

*Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*


"A spokesperson for Clarence House said at a press conference this morning that the Prince’s family has deep and historical connections with Ireland going back over 800-years.


"These connections began with the humanitarian aid scheme known as the Plantation of Ulster followed by the appointment of a goodwill ambassador, Oliver Cromwell and eventually the sending of the Black and Tan peacekeeping troops in March 1920.

"The spokesperson added that the Prince is Colonel-in-Chief of the Parachute Regiment who played such a valuable hearts and minds role in the north of the island during the seventies"


----------



## gosub (Apr 19, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*
> 
> *Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*
> 
> ...


Makes a change from the Queen is German don't you know


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 19, 2019)

gosub said:


> Makes a change from the Queen is German don't you know



But not much of a change.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2019)

Lupa said:


> *Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*
> 
> *Prince Charles applies for Irish Passport in light of Brexit Uncertainty*
> 
> ...


a child of a greek citizen automatically acquires greek nationality at birth


----------



## gosub (Apr 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But not much of a change.


The Greek connection studiously avoided as usual


Opps didn't see post above


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Apr 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> a child of a greek citizen automatically acquires greek nationality at birth



It is a satirical website.....
obviously if it were true Charles would rather live here in summer and in Greece for the winter.

ETA


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2019)

Lupa said:


> It is a satirical website.....
> obviously if it were true Charles would rather live here in summer and in Greece for the winter.
> 
> ETA


as it is he may yet get to live in splendid isolation on wales head all year round


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> We've got 2 popes at the moment iirc, the Argentinian feller and the one who retired but fills in for the holidays. Could get a debaptism off one but not the other. Schrodinger's Debaptism.


4 popes, counting the coptic and orthodox. Presumably the coptic and orthodox popes can only excomm you from orthodoxy or coptishness respectively? More research is needed.


----------



## Poi E (Apr 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> as it is he may yet get to live in splendid isolation on wales head all year round
> 
> View attachment 168289



Tussock grass! Great for bedding.


----------



## belboid (Apr 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> 4 popes, counting the coptic and orthodox. Presumably the coptic and orthodox popes can only excomm you from orthodoxy or coptishness respectively? More research is needed.


dont forget Bartholomew I, Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople


----------



## brogdale (Apr 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> as it is he may yet get to live in splendid isolation on wales head all year round
> 
> View attachment 168289


As ever, I am in awe of your meticulous planning for the benefit of the former people. The fact that you've assigned an entire island for the captivity of the Murdoch dynasty is particularly impressive.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Apr 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> I wrote to the pope, JP1 iirr, asking to be excommunicated.
> 
> As he never replied, I assume I was successful.



He was only pope for a month tbf.


----------



## brogdale (Apr 19, 2019)

Two years ago, today.



Polling that weekend was Con : 50%
									   Lab : 25%


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Two years ago, today.
> 
> View attachment 168351
> 
> ...


She always looks like the wicked step-mother


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 20, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Two years ago, today.
> 
> View attachment 168351
> 
> ...


Sounds like time for a corbyn your time is up thread


----------



## brogdale (Apr 20, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Sounds like time for a corbyn your time is up thread


Which inspired me to go back and take a peak at post #1 in that thread, and I'm left wondering if the 58 likes for Pickman's model response is some sort of a forum record?


----------



## binka (Apr 20, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Which inspired me to go back and take a peak at post #1 in that thread, and I'm left wondering if the 58 likes for Pickman's model response is some sort of a forum record?
> 
> View attachment 168395


Unlikely a forum record but undoubtedly a Pickman's Model record


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 20, 2019)

binka said:


> Unlikely a forum record but undoubtedly a Pickman's Model record


Wrong again


----------



## teuchter (Apr 20, 2019)

It's just an artefact of the urban pay-for-likes economy that has recently been uncovered.


----------



## andysays (Apr 20, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's just an artefact of the urban pay-for-likes economy that has recently been uncovered.


Clearly you would never stoop to such base methods...


----------



## Ranbay (Apr 30, 2019)

Well? what day is it now? all gone quiet now?

maybe we should just tell eveyone we done a Brexit and see if anyone notices?


----------



## teuchter (Apr 30, 2019)

I trust that all thread participants will be attending:

Europe's Big Night Out - This time I'm voting - UK


----------



## ska invita (Apr 30, 2019)

kabbes said:


> But Lupa, you have of course been campaigning in Ireland to get these tax loopholes closed, right?  Because you believe in protecting workers in other countries?


What have* you* been doing about tax loopholes and the movement of international capital kabbes?
Are you paying full tax on all your stash?
In your tireless work as Head of Capital are you running some kind of ethical investment fund in the name of the common good?
Are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
Or are you a man preaching the gospel whilst lying in his gold bath tub in a surrey mansion, tutting at how unfair the world is?
You said before its "ironic" that you're Head of Capital - I can see the hypocrisy bit, but whats the ironic bit?


----------



## kabbes (Apr 30, 2019)

Actually, you know what, fuck dignifying that with a response.  If you want to drag my personal life through the mud, fuck you.

And you can go on ignore to boot — I have nothing more to say to you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Apr 30, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Actually, you know what, fuck dignifying that with a response.  If you want to drag my personal life through the mud, fuck you.
> 
> And you can go on ignore to boot — I have nothing more to say to you.


It was a cheap shot at Lupa. Truth is that you have no idea what she may or may not have done irl. You were hypocrisy-hunting wrt someone's life about which you actually don't know anything.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It was a cheap shot at Lupa. Truth is that you have no idea what she may or may not have done irl. You were hypocrisy-hunting wrt someone's life about which you actually don't know anything.


It wasn’t a shot at anybody’s hypocrisy— it was pointing out that Ireland has a big role in the blame for the EU’s unpopularity in the U.K. and you can’t just rail against the Brexit decision whilst ignoring that role.  Ireland can’t just play the victim here, was my point. As a rhetorical device, it may have been cheap.  But I wasn’t accusing Lupa of all kinds of shit, nor was I personally insulting her existence or lifestyle.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Is Ireland the victim of anything?
The UK took the vote independent of the Republic of Ireland, and the result was leave.
Ireland is reacting to that, not playing any kind of victim, and it wants to know the UK's arrangements for the different type of land border that 17.4 million people voted for.
In wanting to know, Ireland has the backing of the wider EU for that aspiration.
In the absence of a realistic and practical answer from the UK, the EU has effectively said that they reckon a good compromise might be a border down the Irish sea.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 30, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Apr 30, 2019)

If Ireland operates as a tax haven and takes tax revenue away from other EU countries, then isn't it for the EU (which the UK is a leading member of) to do something about this, rather than the people of Ireland?

And if Ireland is extracting tax revenue from the UK then is the UK in a better position to do something about that inside or outside of the EU?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Don't know about tax stuff. The word on the ballot paper was 'leave' not 'tax'.
The UK outside the EU has the land border issue to wrestle with.


----------



## kabbes (Apr 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If Ireland operates as a tax haven and takes tax revenue away from other EU countries, then isn't it for the EU (which the UK is a leading member of) to do something about this, rather than the people of Ireland?
> 
> And if Ireland is extracting tax revenue from the UK then is the UK in a better position to do something about that inside or outside of the EU?


Without identifying whose responsibility it is, I can still note that if your country does something injurous to another, you can’t be surprised when that other country reacts.  The reaction might be chaotic, unhelpful or self-harming, but that isn’t my point.  The point is that it’s no use the first country clutching its pearls.

Regarding the second point: it’s probably better to be outside the system that enables tax revenue to be siphoned away from you rather than to be inside it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Don't know about tax stuff. The word on the ballot paper was 'leave' not 'tax'.
> The UK outside the EU has the land border issue to wrestle with.


don't know much about history
don't know much biology
don't know much about a science book,
don't know much about the french i took
but i do know that we voted leave
and i know that if in this you believe
what a wonderful world this would be


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Better to put me on ignore than to quote me surely?
Your ditty is shitty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Better to put me on ignore than to quote me surely?
> Your ditty is shitty.


at least my ditty scans.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

And is mainly stolen from Sam Cooke.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> And is mainly stolen from Sam Cooke.


Post of the millenium


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> And is mainly stolen from Sam Cooke.


if only your politics came from the same source they'd be better


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 30, 2019)

_I see MPs of Green, red roses too,
Tories and splitters, flushed down the loo.
And I think to myself, what a wonderful world...
_


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if only your politics came from the same source they'd be better



And my politics are? 

You seem to be heading towards your high and mighty judgemental patronising place again where your snide tendencies can roam free.

I have suggested many times before, put me on ignore, you seem to find me irresistible judging by the regularity of your snide vacuous comments whenever you quote a post i have written.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> And my politics are?
> 
> You seem to be heading towards your high and mighty judgemental patronising place again where your snide tendencies can roam free.


i wouldn't have believed it if i hadn't seen it with my own eyes. when it comes to high and mighty judgemental patronising with snide tendencies i am your pupil. as examples...


philosophical said:


> Wow.
> Are you the Archbishop of Banterbury or something?
> 
> Given the florid nature and textual diarrhoea of your first post replying to me I thing you could be a bit more creative.





philosophical said:


> Sorry, late to this thread and my first post.
> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?
> [...]
> I will personally hate and despise anybody I know who voted brexit until my dying day (which isn't far off), brexit won, it is your country now and I hold brexit voters in utter contempt.


----------



## andysays (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i wouldn't have believed it if i hadn't seen it with my own eyes. when it comes to high and mighty judgemental patronising with snide tendencies i am your pupil. as examples...


You pretty much *are* the Archbishop of Banterbury, TBF


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> You pretty much *are* the Archbishop of Banterbury, TBF


i think you'll find that's DotCommunist


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i wouldn't have believed it if i hadn't seen it with my own eyes. when it comes to high and mighty judgemental patronising with snide tendencies i am your pupil. as examples...



Nah.
You are desperate now.
Go and surround somebody else with your vacuum of nothingness if you can.
I have asked you many times not to interact with me.
My post such as it was today, was about the situation in Ireland, but you have hi-jacked and personalised and distracted as you regularly do.
Can't you accept we will never ever get along, and that indeed I wouldn't ever want anything to do with you? Stop attention seeking with your snide wind ups.
Put me on ignore.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Nah.
> You are desperate now.
> Go and surround somebody else with your vacuum of nothingness if you can.
> I have asked you many times not to interact with me.
> ...


no. i don't want to ignore you. you want to ignore me. so you do the ignoring, if it's so important to you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Apr 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I trust that all thread participants will be attending:
> 
> Europe's Big Night Out - This time I'm voting - UK



Even less reason to vote. Bleurgh.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

He's now descended into my dad's bigger than your dad territory as I live and breathe!


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> He's now descended into my dad's bigger than your dad territory as I live and breathe!


no, i've descended into the do it yourself you lazy fucker territory


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, i've descended into the do it yourself you lazy fucker territory



You still haven't described my politics yet.
That's lazy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You still haven't described my politics yet.
> That's lazy.


unfortunate, lazy, amorphous. but idiosyncratic's perhaps the kindest way.


----------



## andysays (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> He's now descended into my dad's bigger than your dad territory as I live and breathe!


You've become the pontiff of pathos


----------



## kebabking (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> He's now descended into my dad's bigger than your dad territory as I live and breathe!



no, he didn't.

if you wonder why you get such short shrift around here, including from those who might otherwise be sympathetic to some of the things you write, making shit up and acting like the Most Oppressed Poster Evah is the key.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> You've become the pontiff of pathos


the mufti of muppetry


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 30, 2019)

imam of irritation, archimandrite of moaning etc etc


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> imam of irritation, archimandrite of moaning etc etc


the archimandrite of arsery, the archimandrite of moaning is treelover


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

kebabking said:


> no, he didn't.
> 
> if you wonder why you get such short shrift around here, including from those who might otherwise be sympathetic to some of the things you write, making shit up and acting like the Most Oppressed Poster Evah is the key.



'Cept I don't make things up.
I am not oppressed. I simply react to snide.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2019)

*nah*


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 'Cept I don't make things up.


except you have a history of making things up.

everyone who voted brexit's a racist, remember?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Apr 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> You pretty much *are* the Archbishop of Banterbury, TBF


So which of us is Immanuel Bant?


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> except you have a history of making things up.
> 
> everyone who voted brexit's a racist, remember?



I didn't say that, you made it up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I didn't say that, you made it up.


You said 'am I right in assuming people who voted brexit are thick ignorant racists?' (or words to that effect) in your first post on this thread. Then you told people who hadn't said the way they voted they were nasty brexiters. Other inventions are available, like accusing me of threatening you with violence, threats no one else could see.


----------



## andysays (Apr 30, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So which of us is Immanuel Bant?


Unless anyone else wants to claim the title, it's yours


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You said 'am I right in assuming people who voted brexit are thick ignorant racists?' (or words to that effect) in your first post on this thread. Then you told people who hadn't said the way they voted they were nasty brexiters. Other inventions are available, like accusing me of threatening you with violence, threats no one else could see.



You have proved my point not that it matters. I did not say everyone who voted brexit's a racist. 
You also suggested to me at that time that 'other blows to the head' were available, which I took to mean you threatening violence. I remember suggesting you came down here to Lewisham to attempt blows to my head, but you bottled it.
I wouldn't say you were the master of invention myself, but possibly the masturbator of invention.


----------



## Santino (Apr 30, 2019)

Martin Snidegger


----------



## Santino (Apr 30, 2019)

Karl Snarx


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2019)

[QUOTE="philosophical, post: 16028957, member: 65518] self, but possibly the masturbator of invention.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You have proved my point not that it matters. I did not say everyone who voted brexit's a racist.
> You also suggested to me at that time that 'other blows to the head' were available, which I took to mean you threatening violence. I remember suggesting you came down here to Lewisham to attempt blows to my head, but you bottled it.
> I wouldn't say you were the master of invention myself, but possibly the masturbator of invention.


Yeh well i know what you meant, and I'm by no means alone in that. You said you assumed everyone who voted brexit was thick and racist and ignorant and the question mark was but a fig leaf

I said "other whacks are available". I never said, suggested or insinuated anything along the lines of I will hit you, I want to hit you or it might be nice if you were hit. That's wholly your own er invention.

I never bottled coming down to Lewisham to try to twat you as I'd never said or for that matter thought about twatting you, why go to Lewisham to do something solely an invention of yours? Anyway anyone interested can go back and see what you said at exhaustive length over page after page


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2019)

It's meant to look like that btw


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh well i know what you meant, and I'm by no means alone in that. You said you assumed everyone who voted brexit was thick and racist and ignorant and the question mark was but a fig leaf
> 
> I said "other whacks are available". I never said, suggested or insinuated anything along the lines of I will hit you, I want to hit you or it might be nice if you were hit. That's wholly your own er invention.
> 
> I never bottled coming down to Lewisham to try to twat you as I'd never said or for that matter thought about twatting you, why go to Lewisham to do something solely an invention of yours? Anyway anyone interested can go back and see what you said at exhaustive length over page after page



Interesting that you invoke a fig leaf to cover the bollocks you write.
You are the controlling obsessive who trawls back and then lies about what you think is there, anybody (stupidly) interested in trawling back needn't bother, you will do it for them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Interesting that you invoke a fig leaf to cover the bollocks you write.
> You are the controlling obsessive who trawls back and then lies about what you think is there, anybody (stupidly) interested in trawling back needn't bother, you will do it for them.


There's sadly no way to show your future inventions so the only way to trawl is back. You do make things up. Not surprised you don't like it pointed out. You can claim all you like I'm lying about it but that's just another of your shitty lies.


----------



## killer b (Apr 30, 2019)

This doesn't even look like you're having fun lads.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

killer b said:


> This doesn't even look like you're having fun lads.


Ach it's not so bad


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> And my politics are?


A bit shit?


----------



## Santino (Apr 30, 2019)

Ludwig Sickburnstein


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Apr 30, 2019)

Arsetotal of the Peripathetic School, yo


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> A bit shit?



Is that supposed to be a question?


----------



## Poi E (Apr 30, 2019)

The smell, I suppose.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There's sadly no way to show your future inventions so the only way to trawl is back. You do make things up. Not surprised you don't like it pointed out. You can claim all you like I'm lying about it but that's just another of your shitty lies.



Lies from you. "You do make things up'.
Look in the mirror.


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Is that supposed to be a question?


Rhetorical.


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Rhetorical.


So if you're saying my politics are shit, what do you base that on?


----------



## Serge Forward (Apr 30, 2019)

Your words.


----------



## butchersapron (Apr 30, 2019)

_


philosophical said:



			So if you're saying my politics are shit, what do you base that on?
		
Click to expand...

The words of top gear magazine carol._


----------



## Santino (Apr 30, 2019)

Jacques Derider


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Your words.


Learn to read.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Your words.


convicted out his own mouth so to speak


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> convicted out his own mouth so to speak



Did you leave out an 'of'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Lies from you. "You do make things up'.
> Look in the mirror.


Yeh keep telling yourself that, 'it's not me, it's that Pickman's model' 

Pity your lies and inventions and contrivances have been picked up by all manner of people throughout the thread


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Did you leave out an 'of'?


That's the worst thing I've done on this thread, miss out an of


----------



## andysays (Apr 30, 2019)

Santino said:


> Ludwig Sickburnstein


I was thinking more Witlesswhine, TBH


----------



## xenon (Apr 30, 2019)

This too shall pass....


----------



## Mr Moose (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll find that's DotCommunist



Collectively _Bant and DeC._


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Collectively _Bant and DeC._


You're right on form tonight


----------



## philosophical (Apr 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh keep telling yourself that, 'it's not me, it's that Pickman's model'
> 
> Pity your lies and inventions and contrivances have been picked up by all manner of people throughout the thread


Calling on the cavalry now? You really can't let it go can you?


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Calling on the cavalry now? You really can't let it go can you?


I'm not calling on the cavalry, I am pointing out that throughout your miserable career on this thread you've been pulled up time and again.

Your ill-advised claim not to make things up is a sign of your flagrant refusal to recognise what you've done throughout this thread


----------



## teuchter (Apr 30, 2019)

How many people have got you on ignore philosophical? If it's fewer than have got Pickman's model on ignore then we can all agree that you are the less untrustworthy poster, and move on from this little drama and get back to discussing Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 30, 2019)

teuchter said:


> How many people have got you on ignore philosophical? If it's fewer than have got Pickman's model on ignore then we can all agree that you are the less untrustworthy poster, and move on from this little drama and get back to discussing Brexit.


You've been at the dwyer school of logic

It's not a good look


----------



## Wilf (May 1, 2019)

xenon said:


> This too shall pass....


Brexit as kidneystone.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 1, 2019)

teuchter said:


> How many people have got you on ignore philosophical? If it's fewer than have got Pickman's model on ignore then we can all agree that you are the less untrustworthy poster, and move on from this little drama and get back to discussing Brexit.


Urban doesn’t typically register its disapproval by screaming about the ignore button, usually the word cunt is heard first.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not calling on the cavalry, I am pointing out that throughout your miserable career on this thread you've been pulled up time and again.
> 
> Your ill-advised claim not to make things up is a sign of your flagrant refusal to recognise what you've done throughout this thread



Your obsession is overwhelming you. What does 'pulled up time and time again' even mean? You seem to be losing your grip of reality.
What I have done throughout this thread is pitch in on the Ireland issue because it interests me.
What you do when I post is not discuss any issue but deliver the snide irrelevant personals with predictable regularity.
The degree to which you cast around for applause and recognition is probably desperation in trying to compensate for your own miserable non existence.
You contribute nothing beyond cries for attention.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

teuchter said:


> How many people have got you on ignore philosophical? If it's fewer than have got Pickman's model on ignore then we can all agree that you are the less untrustworthy poster, and move on from this little drama and get back to discussing Brexit.



I don't have anybody on ignore, and I don't _initiate _personal interactions with anybody, I do react to snide comments towards me from those who seem to consider themselves superior.
'Then we can all agree'. What are you then, the ringmaster? 
Have a vote or whatever, start a petition, whip your mates into shape.
'we can all agree', FFS you sound like a Mason or something.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Your obsession is overwhelming you. What does 'pulled up time and time again' even mean? You seem to be losing your grip of reality.
> What I have done throughout this thread is pitch in on the Ireland issue because it interests me.
> What you do when I post is not discuss any issue but deliver the snide irrelevant personals with predictable regularity.
> The degree to which you cast around for applause and recognition is probably desperation in trying to compensate for your own miserable non existence.
> You contribute nothing beyond cries for attention.


you've been pulled up for your calling people thick racists:


stethoscope said:


> You could always spend some time reading the various threads here about it to see what arguments have been made for both leave and remain. Or you could jump in feet first and call people thicko racists.





sealion said:


> You said this -------Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?





andysays said:


> There's a huge irony in you having called many here racists right from your very first post and then whining about the response you got, but I doubt you're capable of recognising it.
> 
> Anyway, what gems of wisdom regarding Brexit has the Irish Times published today that you'd like to share with us?


then there was the lengthy and humiliating episode in March where you showed you had nary a clue what no platforming is, but obvs my posts about that, which I think are really rather gentle under the circumstances of your complete refusal to understand the term, are snide. You invented, made up if you will, a previously unknown and wholly idiosyncratic meaning for the term. Turning now to this little contretemps, following my light-hearted post drawn from the Sam Cooke lyrics you've stormed ahead like I'd called you a fascist or something (that's a simile, I'm not actually calling you a fascist). I'll accept my share of the blame, I should have just told you to fuck off and left it like that. Engaging with you never ends well as you've some er issues about how you're great and no one else knows what they're on about, to put it mildly. Now, you say your interest on this thread's been to do with brexit and Ireland. I suggest you've flogged that particular horse to death and perhaps you should find another er hobby horse elsewhere on the boards. It's 2 years to the day since you last graced the dulwich hamlet forum with a contribution. Why not go back there where you'll at least be among friends?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

Anyway philosophical - thank you, you've helped me while away 30 minutes waiting at the hospital


----------



## andysays (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Anyway philosophical - thank you, you've helped me while away 30 minutes waiting at the hospital


Good luck at the hospital


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> Good luck at the hospital


Cheers!


----------



## Sprocket. (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Anyway philosophical - thank you, you've helped me while away 30 minutes waiting at the hospital



I hope you are being a patient patient?
Good luck.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I hope you are being a patient patient?
> Good luck.


You have to be patient at the hospital


----------



## Sprocket. (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You have to be patient at the hospital



It’s in the unwritten contract.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I should have just told you to fuck off and left it like that.



Would have saved you a load of agg in dealing with the Bishop of Bellend...



Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You are a massive wanker though...





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> And after a week of your rubbish not one thing you have posted has changed my opinion of you as a massive wanker.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Still a massive wanker then.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you've been pulled up for your calling people thick racists:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have not called any specific poster a thick racist, although thick racists exist in my view.
I know what no platforming is, that you don't accept my take on it is an opinion not in any way objective fact.
Engaging with me is a pointless exercise for you because your level of engagement is one of 'look at me' snide comments that don't have relevance to the matter in hand.
Yesterday is typical, somebody talked of Ireland playing the victim that is what I responded to, albeit a 'hobby horse' your controlling nature says I should avoid, yet your response was not about that but a typically snide little dig. You only have to go back one day to see that, not two years.
You enjoy telling me what to do which I put down to your controlling nature possibly covering up personal insecurity. That I don't bow and scrape as your followers on here do, would indeed prompt you to want to tell me to 'fuck off', your controlling nature sees to that.
I have no issues of greatness at all, you're projecting there.
What Dulwich Hamlet has to do with it I don't know, is this a desperate attempt to obfuscate in some way?

A hospital appointment either for yourself or being with a family member or a friend can be stressful and I hope it turns out OK.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have not called any specific poster a thick racist, although thick racists exist in my view.
> I know what no platforming is, that you don't accept my take on it is an opinion not in any way objective fact.
> Engaging with me is a pointless exercise for you because your level of engagement is one of 'look at me' snide comments that don't have relevance to the matter in hand.
> Yesterday is typical, somebody talked of Ireland playing the victim that is what I responded to, albeit a 'hobby horse' your controlling nature says I should avoid, yet your response was not about that but a typically snide little dig. You only have to go back one day to see that, not two years.
> ...


You clearly don't recall telling me what to do yesterday, namely to put you on ignore.

Great perhaps the wrong choice of word, you insist everyone who disagrees with you has it wrong.

I don't have any of your actual followers, sorry to disappoint. 

Dulwich hamlet might be a better venue for you to enjoy the boards

Very much enjoyed the hospital appointment as it became clear I thought it was a follow-up appointment and the consultant thought it a initial referral but we got it sorted in the end


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

I don't say those who disagree with me are objectively wrong.
If they seem wrong in my eyes, I will argue the point and attempt to separate opinion from fact and identify any point of divergence.


----------



## Mr Moose (May 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> Good luck at the hospital



He’s having a banterior bypass operation. On the request of philosophical.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

I enjoy reading a lot on these boards. The local newspaper thread especially.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have not called any specific poster a thick racist, although thick racists exist in my view.



You basically called everyone that voted leave 'thick racists', which include posters on here, that was your starting point, you made a complete fool of yourself, and hence the reaction you got/get, and, you just kept on digging.

You have made about 975 posts here, of which 875 are on this thread, which shows you have no idea about who you are addressing, and their political backgrounds, hence ridiculous claims like 'the Tories, so beloved by many on here'. 

Some posters have tried to engage with your nonsense, but you largely brush over their comments or just totally ignore them, and return time & time again banging out the same nonsense on your drum, just like some supercharged Durcell bunny on speed.


----------



## Steel Icarus (May 1, 2019)

I think he's in danger of rupturing his banterior cruciate ligament


----------



## Libertad (May 1, 2019)

Isn't this fun?


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Your obsession is overwhelming you...
> What I have done throughout this thread is pitch in on the Ireland issue because it interests me.



I think that might be an obsession of yours rather than an interest.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You basically called everyone that voted leave 'thick racists', which include posters on here, that was your starting point, you made a complete fool of yourself, and hence the reaction you got/get, and, you just kept on digging.
> 
> You have made about 975 posts here, of which 875 are on this thread, which shows you have no idea about who you are addressing, and their political backgrounds, hence ridiculous claims like 'the Tories, so beloved by many on here'.
> 
> Some posters have tried to engage with your nonsense, but you largely brush over their comments or just totally ignore them, and return time & time again banging out the same nonsense on your drum, just like some supercharged Durcell bunny on speed.



You are wrong, but attempt to dilute your wrongness by the use of the word 'basically'.
If I were posting to curry favour then I wouldn't bother, I am interested in the Irish situation, which is why I post on a brexit thread.
Of course I don't know about the backgrounds of other posters beyond what is revealed here, and that can be unreliable anyway.
As for the notion of brushing things aside, read your own post above which so typically on here attempts to rally some kind of imaginary cohort to agree with you. Dismissing stuff as 'nonsense' while of course a legitimate opinion is also a method of brushing everything aside. You have mentioned the number of posts made, and decided all of them are the same nonsense banged on the same drum.
I disagree with you.
To say i ignore what others write on this subject is equally a brush stroke dismissal which might suit the agenda you wish to pursue.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think that might be an obsession of yours rather than an interest.



You might be right.
I don't need to justify my interest/obsession anyway.
It may have escaped your notice but the issue regarding the Irish border seems to be the central conundrum with regard to the practicalities of 'leaving'. Interest obsession  or whatever you want to call it, until that issue is resolved then I feel it is is legitimate to bring it up on a thread titled 'is brexit actually going to happen'.


----------



## kebabking (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You might be right.
> I don't need to justify my interest/obsession anyway.
> It may have escaped your notice but the issue regarding the Irish border seems to be the central conundrum with regard to the practicalities of 'leaving'. Interest obsession  or whatever you want to call it, until that issue is resolved then I feel it is is legitimate to bring it up on a thread titled 'is brexit actually going to happen'.



Oh, just fuck off....


----------



## eatmorecheese (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You might be right.
> I don't need to justify my interest/obsession anyway.
> It may have escaped your notice but the issue regarding the Irish border seems to be the central conundrum with regard to the practicalities of 'leaving'. Interest obsession  or whatever you want to call it, until that issue is resolved then I feel it is is legitimate to bring it up on a thread titled 'is brexit actually going to happen'.


Please rest assured that you have raised this issue. Repeatedly.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Oh, just fuck off....


'Just' is such a weasel word.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You basically called everyone that voted leave 'thick racists'.....





philosophical said:


> You are wrong, but attempt to dilute your wrongness by the use of the word 'basically'.


And, that's basically bollocks...(just 2 examples from a quick search)...


philosophical said:


> The consequence of voting brexit is to fuck over the Irish. Whatever motivated people can be guessed at, *I am guessing that they did it because of anti Irish racism*.





philosophical said:


> *I see brexit voters as racists, and it is those ones I hate*.


You never use the word 'some', thus implying 'all', you just lash out, and piss people off, with your relentless stupidity, you seem to have a total lack of self awareness, and that's why you keep getting told to fuck off, get a grip man.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

eatmorecheese said:


> Please rest assured that you have raised this issue. Repeatedly.


When you say repeatedly I have made less than 3.3% of posts here on this thread. If you take away my regular retaliation to snide comments made in my direction my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.
Do you have a censorship line that you draw somewhere?


----------



## eatmorecheese (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When you say repeatedly I have made less than 3.3% of posts here on this thread. If you take away my regular retaliation to snide comments made in my direction my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.
> Do you have a censorship line that you draw somewhere?




I'm out.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When you say repeatedly I have made less than 3.3% of posts here on this thread. If you take away my regular retaliation to snide comments made in my direction my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.
> Do you have a censorship line that you draw somewhere?


140/883 containing Ireland rather more than 1%, could you show your working


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, that's basically bollocks...(just 2 examples from a quick search)...
> 
> 
> You never use the word 'some', thus implying 'all', you just lash out, and piss people off, with your relentless stupidity, you seem to have a total lack of self awareness, and that's why you keep getting told to fuck off, get a grip man.



Unfortunately your 'just' two examples don't sustain the point I think you are trying to make.
Maybe you need to attempt better trawling.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 140/800 where you've mentioned Ireland rather more than 1%, could you show your working


 30 posts per page over 906 pages. My number here is less than 3.3%. Of those about 1% would be a direct comment regarding Ireland regularly followed by about 2.3 percent reacting to snide comments by you and others.
I don't know if showing that working is good enough for you, but I don't much care either, however I thought I would try to be helpful anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.


I ask again, can you show your working as I make 140/883 15.86%


----------



## kebabking (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 'Just' is such a weasel word.



Fuck off.


----------



## kebabking (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When you say repeatedly I have made less than 3.3% of posts here on this thread. If you take away my regular retaliation to snide comments made in my direction my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.
> Do you have a censorship line that you draw somewhere?



Fuck off.


----------



## kebabking (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Unfortunately your 'just' two examples don't sustain the point I think you are trying to make.
> Maybe you need to attempt better trawling.



Fuck off.


----------



## kebabking (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 30 posts per page over 906 pages. My number here is less than 3.3%. Of those about 1% would be a direct comment regarding Ireland regularly followed by about 2.3 percent reacting to snide comments by you and others.
> I don't know if showing that working is good enough for you, but I don't much care either, however I thought I would try to be helpful anyway.



Fuck off.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I ask again, can you show your working as I make 140/883 15.86%


And a search for border returns 253 of your posts, which would be 28.65%, though undoubtedly some overlap with posts containing ireland


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Fuck off.


There you go. Much better.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 30 posts per page over 906 pages. My number here is less than 3.3%. Of those about 1% would be a direct comment regarding Ireland regularly followed by about 2.3 percent reacting to snide comments by you and others.
> I don't know if showing that working is good enough for you, but I don't much care either, however I thought I would try to be helpful anyway.


This is very different from


philosophical said:


> my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> And a search for border returns 253 of your posts, which would be 28.65%, though undoubtedly some overlap with posts containing ireland


See above.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> See above.


Do you not understand what "my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of the posts I have made here" means?


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Do you not understand what "my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of the posts I have made here" means?


Yes I was mistaken in writing that. 
I was attempting to say my posts regarding Ireland add up to about 1% of posts on this thread, not posts I have made here.
My perception is that the ratio of posts I have made here about Ireland is about a third of the posts I have made where about two thirds are in response to snide off topic comments made by you and others.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes I was mistaken in writing that.
> I was attempting to say my posts regarding Ireland add up to about 1% of posts on this thread, not posts I have made here.
> My perception is that the ratio of posts I have made here about Ireland is about a third of the posts I have made where about two thirds are in response to snide off topic comments made by you and others.


So you agree you've banged on about Ireland repeatedly, good.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So you agree you've banged on about Ireland repeatedly, good.


Have I ever denied it?
Overall my banging on about Ireland adds up to about 1% of posts on a thread called 'is brexit actually going to happen'.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Have I ever denied it?
> Overall my banging on about Ireland adds up to about 1% of posts on a thread called 'is brexit actually going to happen'.


Apples and oranges


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When you say repeatedly I have made less than 3.3% of posts here on this thread. If you take away my regular retaliation to snide comments made in my direction my posts regarding Ireland add up to less than 1% of posts I have made here.
> Do you have a censorship line that you draw somewhere?


You seem to me to do your best to deny it here


----------



## kabbes (May 1, 2019)

You keep telling us to put you on ignore. Maybe that’s the only wise thing you’ve ever said.


----------



## Steel Icarus (May 1, 2019)

I seem to recall a happy time, somewhere in the indistinct misty lands of my naive youth, where Brexit was a possibility and this thread talked about that.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You keep telling us to put you on ignore. Maybe that’s the only wise thing you’ve ever said.


Go for it.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You seem to me to do your best to deny it here


See my correction regarding numbers above.


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

You are an obtuse thick cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> See my correction regarding numbers above.


Doesn't matter, you're trying to minimise it, to write it off


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

TopCat said:


> You are an obtuse thick cunt.


Here come de Judge.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Doesn't matter, you're trying to minimise it, to write it off


No I am not. I clarify, you interpret wrongly.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> No I am not. I clarify, you interpret wrongly.


In your opinion


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> In your opinion


Of course in my opinion.
I speak for myself and don't imagine there is a cavalry troop waiting to ride in for any reason of validation.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> No I am not. I clarify, you interpret wrongly.



Yeah, you're right & everyone else is wrong.


----------



## Teaboy (May 1, 2019)

A lot of mood music around in the press suggesting a deal could be done between May and Corbyn.  I still remain skeptical but I can see the attraction for both of them.  I still think May has more to lose.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, you're right & everyone else is wrong.



Everyone else no less. Did you discover that by using Survey Monkey?


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A lot of mood music around in the press suggesting a deal could be done between May and Corbyn.  I still remain skeptical but I can see the attraction for both of them.  I still think May has more to lose.


It will split the Tories more than Labour.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A lot of mood music around in the press suggesting a deal could be done between May and Corbyn.  I still remain skeptical but I can see the attraction for both of them.  I still think May has more to lose.



Yep, noticed that just now...



> Labour has expressed fresh optimism that a Brexit compromise deal can be agreed with the Government as speculation grows that Theresa May is set to water down her red lines.
> 
> Downing Street repeatedly refused to rule out the Government bowing to Labour’s demands to build a Brexit deal on the UK being in a permanent customs union with the EU.
> 
> ...



Could at least be one way of getting philosophical to shut the fuck up.


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Everyone else no less. Did you discover that by using Survey Monkey?


All we have from you is what you post. Your words are there for all to see. Making stuff up is obvious.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Everyone else no less. Did you discover that by using Survey Monkey?



I discovered it by reading your posts.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A lot of mood music around in the press suggesting a deal could be done between May and Corbyn.  I still remain skeptical but I can see the attraction for both of them.  I still think May has more to lose.



The Labour mantra of _*a*_ customs union, rather than staying with the customs union that exists now, will still it seems to me, to imply difference on either side of the Irish border. If the Labour party are saying 'no, no difference at all' then I fail to see how that means 'leave', unless in some doublethink world leave means remain.
I believe the Labour 'policy' on brexit is one that fails to engage with what the word 'leave' means.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)




----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

TopCat said:


> All we have from you is what you post. Your words are there for all to see. Making stuff up is obvious.


 Except I don't make stuff up. If something is repeated often enough, like 'The EU is undemocratic', then it becomes phenomenologically true by dint of repetition, not by dint of actual truth.
My words are indeed there for all to see, and I make no apologies for that. Yours are too.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I discovered it by reading your posts.


 You discovered what everybody else thinks by reading my posts?
Doesn't sound very credible to me.


----------



## kabbes (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Except I don't make stuff up. If something is repeated often enough, like 'The EU is undemocratic', then it becomes phenomenologically true by dint of repetition, not by dint of actual truth.
> My words are indeed there for all to see, and I make no apologies for that. Yours are too.


That’s not a phenomenological process.  This is not the first time you have made that mistake.  If you don’t understand a word, don’t use it.


----------



## belboid (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The Labour mantra of _*a*_ customs union, rather than staying with the customs union that exists now, will still it seems to me, to imply difference on either side of the Irish border. If the Labour party are saying 'no, no difference at all' then I fail to see how that means 'leave', unless in some doublethink world leave means remain.
> I believe the Labour 'policy' on brexit is one that fails to engage with what the word 'leave' means.


Do you think everyone else has forgotten that you already tried this argument, and had to admit to failing in it? You didn't understand what the 'common travel area' was and made a knob of yourself. Simply repeating something often enough doesn't make it true, you know.


----------



## andysays (May 1, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It will split the Tories more than Labour.


There certainly seems to be a concern within the eurosceptic wing of the Tory party that things are getting away from them, and it certainly has the potential to result in a serious split for them as well as a bust up within Labour 

Fingers crossed...


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

belboid said:


> Do you think everyone else has forgotten that you already tried this argument, and had to admit to failing in it? You didn't understand what the 'common travel area' was and made a knob of yourself. Simply repeating something often enough doesn't make it true, you know.



'Everybody else'.
Hail somebody who speaks for 'everybody else'.

I disagree with you. I understand about the common travel area, that it arose from an agreement in 1923, and it has since been affected by both the UK and the Republic of Ireland joining the EU at the same time, and by the Good Friday Agreement.
I have not failed in making the argument that the vote to leave means changing the nature of the land border in Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That’s not a phenomenological process.  This is not the first time you have made that mistake.  If you don’t understand a word, don’t use it.



I disagree with you. If I think that word is suitable I will use it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You discovered what everybody else thinks by reading my posts?
> Doesn't sound very credible to me.



OK, I'll spell it out, as you seem hard of understanding:

I discovered it by reading your posts *AND within those posts, your reaction to just about everyone else, you fuckwit.* 

Clear enough?


----------



## Poi E (May 1, 2019)

Who would have thought the Brexit thread would descended into tiresome exchanges that go nowhere?


----------



## kabbes (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with you. If I think that word is suitable I will use it.


How can it be suitable if it simply doesn’t mean what you are using it to mean?

Phenomenology is a particular thing.  It’s a technique of philosophy developed principally by Husserl and Heidegger to strip away assumed meaning and describe what’s really there.  It’s not just a pretty word to be used however you see fit.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with you. If I think that word is suitable I will use it.


Have you ever considered using the Internet to find out what words mean?


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> OK, I'll spell it out, as you seem hard of understanding:
> 
> I discovered it by reading your posts *AND within those posts, your reaction to just about everyone else, you fuckwit.*
> 
> Clear enough?



That is your explanation of how you know what 'everybody else' thinks?
I would be a fuckwit if I thought you made any sense.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Who would have thought the Brexit thread would descended into tiresome exchanges that go nowhere?


----------



## andysays (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I disagree with you. If I think that word is suitable I will use it.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kabbes said:


> How can it be suitable if it simply doesn’t mean what you are using it to mean?
> 
> Phenomenology is a particular thing.  It’s a technique of philosophy developed principally by Husserl and Heidegger to strip away assumed meaning and describe what’s really there.  It’s not just a pretty word to be used however you see fit.



'To strip away assumed meaning and describe what's really there'?

Here is a link.

Phenomenology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

May I draw you attention to the part that says:

_The discipline of phenomenology may be defined initially as the study of structures of experience, or consciousness. Literally, phenomenology is the study of “phenomena”: appearances of things, or things as they appear in our experience, or the ways we experience things, thus the meanings things have in our experience. Phenomenology studies conscious experience as experienced from the subjective or first person point of view. _

So your assertion is at the very least debatable. You say Phenomenology describes 'what's really there', yet there is another point of view that says it is about subjective conscious experience.

My use of the word isn't controversial in the slightest.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Have you ever considered using the Internet to find out what words mean?



See above.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> See above.


I'll take that as a no then


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll take that as a no then



Take it in whatever way you like. I have provided a link above that explains that my use of the word was perfectly OK.
You seem to be itching for an argument...again.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 1, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Take it in whatever way you like. I have provided a link above that explains that my use of the word was perfectly OK.
> You seem to be itching for an argument...again.


Yeh well I don't think you're entirely equipped to scratch that itch


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Take it in whatever way you like. I have provided a link above that explains that my use of the word was perfectly OK.
> You seem to be itching for an argument...again.


You are really stupid and obtuse and i would wring your neck if it were near.


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

TopCat said:


> You are really stupid and obtuse and i would wring your neck if it were near.



How far away from Lewisham are you?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> How far away from Lewisham are you?


Far enough his arms won't stretch there


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 140/883 containing Ireland rather more than 1%, could you show your working


There’s way more than that, he went through a spell of trying to say “Irish land border” using as many alternative  words/phrases as possible, almost as if he was aware the repition had reached insane levels. That probably accounts for the other 700.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 1, 2019)

My favourite was land (and water!!!) thrown in about 600 posts in


----------



## kabbes (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> 'To strip away assumed meaning and describe what's really there'?
> 
> Here is a link.
> 
> ...


That definition doesn’t mean what you think it means.

Have you actually studied this stuff or are you desperately making it up as you go along?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> There’s way more than that, he went through a spell of trying to say “Irish land border” using as many alternative  words/phrases as possible, almost as if he was aware the repition had reached insane levels. That probably accounts for the other 700.


253 posts containing border


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That definition doesn’t mean what you think it means.
> 
> Have you actually studied this stuff or are you desperately making it up as you go along?



No desperation at all.


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

Ignoring Thrush boy for a moment. 

What are the chances May concedes over a customs union? I think she is on the verge of agreeing. I would expect the LP to drag negotiations out beyond the EU elections but see it more likely a deal done and we are out.


----------



## MickiQ (May 1, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ignoring Thrush boy for a moment.
> 
> What are the chances May concedes over a customs union? I think she is on the verge of agreeing. I would expect the LP to drag negotiations out beyond the EU elections but see it more likely a deal done and we are out.


Who knows? the delicous irony of the situation is that going far enough to get Labour on board will infuriate the loons on her own backbench. Brexit has more plot twists than Game of Thrones these days.


----------



## mojo pixy (May 1, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Who knows? the delicous irony of the situation is that going far enough to get Labour on board will infuriate the loons on her own backbench. Brexit has more plot twists than Game of Thrones these days.




If only the main characters died as often


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Who knows? the delicous irony of the situation is that going far enough to get Labour on board will infuriate the loons on her own backbench. Brexit has more plot twists than Game of Thrones these days.


For sure. If she accommodates the LP positions to get Brexit she splits her party asunder.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> No desperation at all.


Maybe you should look desperation up in a dictionary before expressing such an opinion


----------



## A380 (May 1, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You keep telling us to put you on ignore. Maybe that’s the only wise thing you’ve ever said.


Who keeps telling people to put them on ignore? I haven’t seen that...


----------



## philosophical (May 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Maybe you should look desperation up in a dictionary before expressing such an opinion


More churn from the stalker.


----------



## TopCat (May 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> More churn from the stalker.


You are a low rent Derek.


----------



## Humberto (May 2, 2019)

Its a bit fucking nerve-wracking considering they have not got anything sorted. When DO they deliver? We stand to lose but not gain very much. Theresa May is pretty much a Prime Minister role-play act. Shit in other words. They ARE a fucking shambles. State of that party. Bellends.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You still haven't described my politics yet.
> That's lazy.


You still haven't commented on post 27092, that's typical. You've been happy to keep this exchange going despite affecting outrage. You're a transparent liar


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 2, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Its a bit fucking nerve-wracking considering they have not got anything sorted. When DO they deliver? We stand to lose but not gain very much. Theresa May is pretty much a Prime Minister role-play act. Shit in other words. They ARE a fucking shambles. State of that party. Bellends.



What's nerve wracking?


----------



## Poi E (May 2, 2019)

When who delivers what? The end of the British state?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> When who delivers what? The end of the British state?


Prob waiting on a parcel in the hands of hermes or some similar firm


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What's nerve wracking?


He’s just meaning Brexit. 


Poi E said:


> When who delivers what? The end of the British state?


Brexit. 

Don’t take the piss out of drunk posts in the morning it’s not a fair fight


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You still haven't commented on post 27092, that's typical. You've been happy to keep this exchange going despite affecting outrage. You're a transparent liar



More churn from the stalker.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> More churn from the stalker.


why won't you comment on a reply you demanded?


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Prob waiting on a parcel in the hands of hermes or some similar firm


Sometimes it's easier and quicker to just collect it yourself


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> why won't you comment on a reply you demanded?


Your 'reply' was a series of random words, wrong ones anyway, and doesn't show your working as to how you supposedly know my politics.
No run along and stalk somebody else.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Your 'reply' was a series of random words, wrong ones anyway, and doesn't show your working as to how you supposedly know my politics.
> No run along and stalk somebody else.


no, they were quite the words i wanted to describe what you laughingly call your politics - amorphous (ie shapeless, without form), lazy (i haven't seen any evidence of genuine thought behind them), unfortunate (they don't seem to add up to anything, they don't add anything). as for how i know your politics, there's some hundreds of posts of yours on this thread. you think - as you seem to from the underlined portion of your post - that you haven't conveyed your politics on urban. perhaps you haven't. perhaps you shouldn't. but i think you have.


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, they were quite the words i wanted to describe what you laughingly call your politics - amorphous (ie shapeless, without form), lazy (i haven't seen any evidence of genuine thought behind them), unfortunate (they don't seem to add up to anything, they don't add anything). as for how i know your politics, there's some hundreds of posts of yours on this thread. you think - as you seem to from the underlined portion of your post - that you haven't conveyed your politics on urban. perhaps you haven't. perhaps you shouldn't. but i think you have.



It is sometimes mildly impressive as to how elaborately you manage to be wrong.
Now run along and stalk somebody else.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It is sometimes mildly impressive as to how elaborately you manage to be wrong.
> Now run along and stalk somebody else.


wrong. in your opinion, of course, not in fact.


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> wrong. in your opinion, of course, not in fact.


You are wrong in fact. Opinions for all on here proliferate.
Now run along and stalk somebody else.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are wrong in fact. Opinions for all on here proliferate.
> Now run along and stalk somebody else.


you asked how i would describe your politics. i answered. your politics are amorphous, lazy (eg your demand that brexit voters should come up with a solution) and unfortunate, in that further to my previous post the politics you've displayed here have been abysmal, they've been facile. now, that's my opinion which i can substantiate by pointing to things you've said. when you say 'you're wrong' without any attempt to demonstrate _why_ you think i'm wrong you highlight the absence of any of your actual thought behind what you say.

now, have you ever considered putting me on ignore?


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you asked how i would describe your politics. i answered. your politics are amorphous, lazy (eg your demand that brexit voters should come up with a solution) and unfortunate, in that further to my previous post the politics you've displayed here have been abysmal, they've been facile. now, that's my opinion which i can substantiate by pointing to things you've said. when you say 'you're wrong' without any attempt to demonstrate _why_ you think i'm wrong you highlight the absence of any of your actual thought behind what you say.
> 
> now, have you ever considered putting me on ignore?



You are wrong because you are unable to substantiate.
Now run along and stalk somebody else.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are wrong because you are unable to substantiate.
> Now run along and stalk somebody else.


so let's hear how you describe your politics.


----------



## mojo pixy (May 2, 2019)

I'm beginning to think this little back-and-forth has the potential to outlast brexit itself.


----------



## killer b (May 2, 2019)

can we quarantine it somewhere only they can see it?


----------



## mojo pixy (May 2, 2019)

Participants should be required to submit translations into French, German, Italian, Polish, Hungarian and Gaelic before continuing.


----------



## teuchter (May 2, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> I'm beginning to think this little back-and-forth has the potential to outlast brexit itself.


philosophical clearly has the upper hand, so Pickman's model will concede defeat soon and then it will be over.


----------



## mojo pixy (May 2, 2019)

Remember, translations from all participants


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2019)

teuchter said:


> philosophical clearly has the upper hand...


I can't imagine anyone in the entire history of Urban will ever repeat those words, so let's savour them once again...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

e2a cba


----------



## Teaboy (May 2, 2019)

teuchter said:


> philosophical clearly has the upper hand, so Pickman's model will concede defeat soon and then it will be over.



If the twunt was my glove puppet this is exactly what I would write, word for word.


----------



## Poi E (May 2, 2019)

anywaaaay, so when the tory labour talks fall apart, what next?


----------



## Ranbay (May 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> anywaaaay, so when the tory labour talks fall apart, what next?


----------



## mojo pixy (May 2, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (May 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> anywaaaay, so when the tory labour talks fall apart, what next?



They seem to be progressing well. I say "well" but that depends on your views.  

If there is one thing we have established is there is little forward planning or what planning they have fails dismally.  If the talks collapse they'll just go back to making it up on the hoof.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are wrong because you are unable to substantiate.
> Now run along and stalk somebody else.


do you know what? i popped back to have a look at your first post - you'll recall the one where you said you assumed all brexit voters were ignorant nationalist racists - and what struck me was how much worse your politics are than i'd thought. you don't seem to do nuance at all, for you all your opponents, the ones who voted to leave, have nothing to offer. there's no sense of 'perhaps they have a point', and this NEARLY TWO YEARS after the fucking vote. i'd have thought that in the best part of TWO YEARS you might have realised that people voted leave for a great range of reasons, from being your out and out thick racist - of course there were some in the brexit camp, but some in the remain one too, don't forget - to people who wanted to remove a layer of government which they perceived as being iniquitous to the interests of the working class. a broad spectrum of people from the far right to the far left. you've been a member here for something like four years, and you've said just the other day how you read all over the boards. how can it be that more than 20 months following the referendum you could still believe the 52% of people who voted for brexit were without exception ignorant racists? to me it's the mark of a very stupid man. what makes it worse is that you then went on and displayed a sorry lack of comprehension time and again, with the to-do about no-platform (which for you means something different from what it means to everyone else) and just yesterday or the day before the dust-up about your idiosyncratic use of phenomenological, which kabbes pulled you up on.

you haven't shared your views on many other threads so it's hard to say quite what you think about a number of subjects. but i wouldn't be in the slightest surprised if i learned that your views more widely were based on an 'i'm right and everyone else is a bunch of cunts' which comes across so strongly on this thread. that there's no real desire in you to learn more about an issue beyond grasping one aspect of it - in this case, ireland - and then beating that particular drum to the exclusion of all the other instruments which fall under the heading percussion. so, yes, your politics are in my view lazy. twenty months doesn't appear to have been a sufficient period for you to acquaint yourself with the first 175 pages of this thread, nor any of the numerous other threads on the subject. nor does it seem to have been enough time for you to follow the news and see the explorations of the brexit vote - for examples Brexit vote boosts case for inclusive growth | Bruegel or The fragile UK economy has a chance to abandon failed policies post-Brexit.

your politics are unfortunate because you see things in such stark terms - everyone on the brexit side ignorant racists, for example. you won't ever arrive at a reasonable or indeed reasoned analysis or understanding if you're so happy to write other people off before you've actually heard from them (and that's without your refusal to inform yourself in what had been said here for two or more years before you joined the debate).

and yes, your politics are amorphous. they are without shape. there are things you are against but there is nothing you are for.

i don't see any point in your continuing this. you don't have anything to offer: you don't entertain, you don't have a sense of humour, you don't have a single redeeming feature i can see. you don't have any real views on the matter at hand beyond the most simplistic. you don't have insights denied the rest of us. you don't bring a bloody thing to the table. so perhaps you should think about how you might better use your time here, and - as i suggested yesterday - maybe you should give the dulwich hamlet forum the attention you've so long devoted to this thread. you'd be among friends and you'd be doing everyone else a favour.


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so let's hear how you describe your politics.



Complex.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 2, 2019)

teuchter said:


> philosophical clearly has the upper hand, so Pickman's model will concede defeat soon and then it will be over.


((((((Planet Teuchter)))))))


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Complex.



What is the content of that complexity; what are the elements that make it tricky? Maybe just a little list of preferred political positions to get the ball rolling?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do you know what? i popped back to have a look at your first post - you'll recall the one where you said you assumed all brexit voters were ignorant nationalist racists - and what struck me was how much worse your politics are than i'd thought. you don't seem to do nuance at all, for you all your opponents, the ones who voted to leave, have nothing to offer. there's no sense of 'perhaps they have a point', and this NEARLY TWO YEARS after the fucking vote. i'd have thought that in the best part of TWO YEARS you might have realised that people voted leave for a great range of reasons, from being your out and out thick racist - of course there were some in the brexit camp, but some in the remain one too, don't forget - to people who wanted to remove a layer of government which they perceived as being iniquitous to the interests of the working class. a broad spectrum of people from the far right to the far left. you've been a member here for something like four years, and you've said just the other day how you read all over the boards. how can it be that more than 20 months following the referendum you could still believe the 52% of people who voted for brexit were without exception ignorant racists? to me it's the mark of a very stupid man. what makes it worse is that you then went on and displayed a sorry lack of comprehension time and again, with the to-do about no-platform (which for you means something different from what it means to everyone else) and just yesterday or the day before the dust-up about your idiosyncratic use of phenomenological, which kabbes pulled you up on.
> 
> you haven't shared your views on many other threads so it's hard to say quite what you think about a number of subjects. but i wouldn't be in the slightest surprised if i learned that your views more widely were based on an 'i'm right and everyone else is a bunch of cunts' which comes across so strongly on this thread. that there's no real desire in you to learn more about an issue beyond grasping one aspect of it - in this case, ireland - and then beating that particular drum to the exclusion of all the other instruments which fall under the heading percussion. so, yes, your politics are in my view lazy. twenty months doesn't appear to have been a sufficient period for you to acquaint yourself with the first 175 pages of this thread, nor any of the numerous other threads on the subject. nor does it seem to have been enough time for you to follow the news and see the explorations of the brexit vote - for examples Brexit vote boosts case for inclusive growth | Bruegel or The fragile UK economy has a chance to abandon failed policies post-Brexit.
> 
> ...


“There are things you are against but there is  nothing you are for” is a good summing up of a lot of people’s politics, I think this often. Good line!


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do you know what? i popped back to have a look at your first post - you'll recall the one where you said you assumed all brexit voters were ignorant nationalist racists - and what struck me was how much worse your politics are than i'd thought. you don't seem to do nuance at all, for you all your opponents, the ones who voted to leave, have nothing to offer. there's no sense of 'perhaps they have a point', and this NEARLY TWO YEARS after the fucking vote. i'd have thought that in the best part of TWO YEARS you might have realised that people voted leave for a great range of reasons, from being your out and out thick racist - of course there were some in the brexit camp, but some in the remain one too, don't forget - to people who wanted to remove a layer of government which they perceived as being iniquitous to the interests of the working class. a broad spectrum of people from the far right to the far left. you've been a member here for something like four years, and you've said just the other day how you read all over the boards. how can it be that more than 20 months following the referendum you could still believe the 52% of people who voted for brexit were without exception ignorant racists? to me it's the mark of a very stupid man. what makes it worse is that you then went on and displayed a sorry lack of comprehension time and again, with the to-do about no-platform (which for you means something different from what it means to everyone else) and just yesterday or the day before the dust-up about your idiosyncratic use of phenomenological, which kabbes pulled you up on.
> 
> you haven't shared your views on many other threads so it's hard to say quite what you think about a number of subjects. but i wouldn't be in the slightest surprised if i learned that your views more widely were based on an 'i'm right and everyone else is a bunch of cunts' which comes across so strongly on this thread. that there's no real desire in you to learn more about an issue beyond grasping one aspect of it - in this case, ireland - and then beating that particular drum to the exclusion of all the other instruments which fall under the heading percussion. so, yes, your politics are in my view lazy. twenty months doesn't appear to have been a sufficient period for you to acquaint yourself with the first 175 pages of this thread, nor any of the numerous other threads on the subject. nor does it seem to have been enough time for you to follow the news and see the explorations of the brexit vote - for examples Brexit vote boosts case for inclusive growth | Bruegel or The fragile UK economy has a chance to abandon failed policies post-Brexit.
> 
> ...



I suspect people may have voted leave for a number of reasons, but I also hold that they allied themselves with racists.
However the number of reasons don't seem to matter anyway, because brexit voters said they knew what they were voting for, and any cursory investigation reveals that the word 'leave' was the one significant word on the voting slip.
There may be many reasons, nobody can assert they know any of them. You may be somebody who would use a phrase that Farage frequently uses 'the brexit we all voted for', which leaves him with what he thinks is personal licence to define brexit any way he wants.
The definition of brexit for me is wrapped up in the word 'leave'.
Hence my obsession with the border in Ireland (yes there is one in Gibraltar/Spain too) and how 'leave' is supposed to apply there. I believe that if leave means leave and not stay as you are, then there will be changes to the border. Not only do I believe it is the central issue about brexit itself as defined by the one thing we know, that people voted 'leave', but it is also a central issue by dint of politics, history and culture, and perhaps most significantly for me it is a central issue by dint of Geography.
So however many reasons folk might think they had for voting leave, it turns out that the practicalities of leaving is the only issue anybody can be confident about. Deals, no deals, Canada, Norway, peoples vote, managed no deal or whatever else weren't on the ballot paper. These are the things rather pointlessly argued about since the referendum, when all of those arguments are going to flounder on the rock of the word 'leave'. If there is another interpretation of the word leave that I am unaware of, I would be happy to be enlightened.

You wrote 'you haven't shared your views on many other threads so it's hard to say quite what you think about a number of subjects.' yet you purport to know what my politics (plural) are. Nifty footwork there, but not convincing.

Now off you go and stalk somebody else.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 2, 2019)

Jesus christ


----------



## Steel Icarus (May 2, 2019)

It's like the Walking Dead, this. Great to begin with but then the writing, excitement and logic just fall away.

Please - for the love of Jesus, Joseph, Mary and as many of the latter-day saints you care to include - stop this boring fucking argument and stinking up the thread with a beef only you two care about.


----------



## Ranbay (May 2, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> It's like the Walking Dead, this. Great to begin with but then the writing, excitement and logic just fall away.
> 
> Please - for the love of Jesus, Joseph, Mary and as many of the latter-day saints you care to include - stop this boring fucking argument and stinking up the thread with a beef only you two care about.


oh i've stopped.


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> What is the content of that complexity; what are the elements that make it tricky? Maybe just a little list of preferred political positions to get the ball rolling?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



I am against smacking children, and would attempt to eradicate violence against children by education, persuasion, and where appropriate sanctions.

I am for the concept of Empathy being a central point of study for academics in as wide a remit as possible, and following that I believe there should be an empathy agenda associated firstly with all areas of education, then public life in general, and certainly in politics.

I am for better support and provision for children who are obliged to leave the care system when they reach a certain age.

I am against trident and nuclear weapons and would dismantle and abandon them if I had the power to do so.

I am in favour of all moves to improve the environment, and am happy to be guided by science on this. I live in Lewisham, 70 yards from the South Circular, and today there was a landmark ruling about levels of pollution contributing to the death of a 9 year old living nearby.

I am against borders.

Does that start your balls rolling?


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)




----------



## HoratioCuthbert (May 2, 2019)

mojo pixy said:


> Participants should be required to submit translations into French, German, Italian, Polish, Hungarian and Gaelic before continuing.


merde, Scheisse, merda, cac -skipping polish and Hungarian. You’re welcome.


----------



## Lucy Fur (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ... maybe you should give the dulwich hamlet forum the attention you've so long devoted to this thread. you'd be among friends and you'd be doing everyone else a favour.


less of that if you don't mind, we have quite enough cunts of our own there, we're not in the market for another one.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am against smacking children, and would attempt to eradicate violence against children by education, persuasion, and where appropriate sanctions.
> 
> I am for the concept of Empathy being a central point of study for academics in as wide a remit as possible, and following that I believe there should be an empathy agenda associated firstly with all areas of education, then public life in general, and certainly in politics.
> 
> ...



That doesn't seem very (if at all) complex; indeed it seems all of a very recognisable piece. So where's the trickiness? 

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> less of that if you don't mind, we have quite enough cunts of our own there, we're not in the market for another one.


he's one of yours tho


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he's one of yours tho


And if there's a better argument against the Dulwich Hamlet forum I've yet to see it


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> That doesn't seem very (if at all) complex; indeed it seems all of a very recognisable piece. So where's the trickiness?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice



Ball rolling. I didn't realise it was for analysis, and it is not a complete personal manifesto either. 
Your agenda seems to be to possibly try to label my politics, and test for what you call trickiness, but what I originally called complex.
The usual next stage on these boards is to try to lecture me on the use of the word complex and whether I know what it _really _means.


----------



## Poi E (May 2, 2019)

If something is complex it needs experts. Simps.


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> less of that if you don't mind, we have quite enough cunts of our own there, we're not in the market for another one.



I appreciate that you think of me as a 'cunt', presumably based on what I have written here.
I have no idea what you are.
However it is cunts like me that make the many pricks around here stand to attention, as all the wasted words and stalking would attest to.


----------



## Poi E (May 2, 2019)

Bent over with amusement rather than stood at attention


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2019)

What is it with people complaining about 'stalking'?

Responding critically to comments people make isn't stalking, it's part of how discussion works


----------



## philosophical (May 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> What is it with people complaining about 'stalking'?
> 
> Responding critically to comments people make isn't stalking, it's part of how discussion works



I agree.
However stalking is being obsessively snide to a poster by quoting their posts, being personally abusive, and ignoring comments about issues however well or clumsily made.


----------



## Steel Icarus (May 2, 2019)

Do I have to break out the Leonidas picture again?


----------



## andysays (May 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I agree.
> However stalking is being obsessively snide to a poster by quoting their posts, being personally abusive, and ignoring comments about issues however well or clumsily made.


If you say so, Humpty


----------



## brogdale (May 2, 2019)

People are quoting other folks posts...the bastards.


----------



## Poi E (May 2, 2019)

It's complex.


----------



## Steel Icarus (May 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> People are quoting other folks posts...the bastards.


True, true


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> It's complex.



What the Irish border issue?


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he's one of yours tho



He's one of your own,
He's one of yooooooooooooouuuuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnn,
Obsessed with borders,
He's one of your own.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 2, 2019)

.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> People are quoting other folks posts...the bastards.



It’s sneaky and underhand. To the feedback forum and beg for the quote function to be disabled!


Or just ignore the massive wanker, works for me


----------



## Humberto (May 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> When who delivers what? The end of the British state?



Brexit. It would be wrong not to get this sorted as quick as possible. How many delays is that now? It could go wrong couldn't it? For the economy or whatever, but more so for people and their jobs. The lot of them appear to be useless. I've no confidence that we are in a pair of 'safe hands', or competently administered. Neither do I have much confidence that they are genuinely honourable in their intentions; not that the idea is a novel one but they clearly put themselves first and work for their own enrichment and that of their masters. Although telling them apart (masters and eager puppets) isn't so simple, such is their connectedness or closed elitism.

As an aside, where did this 'power stance' bullshit come from? It is only a small point but they all seem to be onto that. It shows a cynicism I think, and is revealing of the nature of how they see themselves in relation to us and how they are all 'in on it' i.e we their constituents are gullible and should be treated as such. It seems underhand, and although only a small thing it sticks out because it is so blatant and obviously looks completely ridiculous. It illustrates their general lack or real principle beyond the obvious selfishness of their motives. I am contradicting the 'useless/incompetent bit' but they really are shit nonentities as well as greedy. Yet they continue to hold power over us and to come out with all the cruel policies that they have imposed in recent years.

So, useless they may be, in part due to their weird lack of empathy and human decency, but the apparent shitness is because they are liars/actors, in the sense that they pretend to care about (at least some sections of) society and to serve us and fight for us, but they really are not. Their ideology/party dogma is leaned on only insofar as it supports their interests e.g find a scapegoat group and divide the people against each other.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (May 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Ball rolling. I didn't realise it was for analysis, and it is not a complete personal manifesto either.
> Your agenda seems to be to possibly try to label my politics, and test for what you call trickiness, but what I originally called complex.
> The usual next stage on these boards is to try to lecture me on the use of the word complex and whether I know what it _really _means.



I was gently trying to get you to discuss your politics; but it's pretty apparent you won't or can't. 

As a behaviour it's a little odd for a contributor to a politics board; but it's not the end of the world, so I'll leave you to it...whatever it is you think you're doing.

Have fun - Louis MacNeice


----------



## philosophical (May 3, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> I was gently trying to get you to discuss your politics; but it's pretty apparent you won't or can't.
> 
> As a behaviour it's a little odd for a contributor to a politics board; but it's not the end of the world, so I'll leave you to it...whatever it is you think you're doing.
> 
> Have fun - Louis MacNeice



You wanted a sense of my politics and I mentioned a few issues and where I stand on them.
You didn't ask me for a discussion. Anyway I don't  know why you asked in the first place, a little odd on a brexit thread.
Have fun.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 3, 2019)

First time I’ve used the ‘ignore’ button and now I haven’t got a fucking clue what is going on on this thread. Wake me up when it all stops.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 3, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> I was gently trying to get you to discuss your politics; but it's pretty apparent you won't or can't.



Same reason you can't persuade a pigeon to discuss the rules of chess.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Same reason you can't persuade a pigeon to discuss the rules of chess.


Yeh but you can't get a rook to shut up about the game


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 4, 2019)

Itsbacks said:


> England must stay in European Union. The Big Europe is better. Brexit got rejected now that there are 4,700,000,000 internet users



so - which online random quote generator does this piece of bafflement come from?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 4, 2019)




----------



## DotCommunist (May 4, 2019)

remainer ableism, strike 1


----------



## Pickman's model (May 4, 2019)

Itsbacks said:


> Are you mentally ill ??


You need to read a book like 'how to make friends and influence people'. At the moment you come across like a thick as pigshit cunt which I am sure is not how you desire to be seen.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 5, 2019)

Judging by today’s headlines, the Tories are trying to wipe their shitty shoes on Corbyn again. Lots of ‘May & Corbyn’ stuff, deliberate conflation. Pissed off the damage wasn’t shared I guess.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 5, 2019)

On Marr this morning McDonnell was furious about this being leaked by the tories. The anger suggests that there will indeed be a customs union alignment type deal in the offing.


----------



## isvicthere? (May 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> so - which online random quote generator does this piece of bafflement come from?


----------



## Humberto (May 7, 2019)

So, what does the ruling class want? Is a question worth asking.

Is it that a lack of patriotism and belief that Britain is better off alone and anyone else can get to fuck the problem? That there is no room for equivocation. When there obviously is. And these lot complain they have too much on their hands and therefore duck it for their own careers.

If we are to accept the referendum is sacred/binding; what then? Less war, enmity, disagreement, bad feelings? What governments  have we had since becoming a member of this institution? Who pays into it? Parliamentary sinecures for example. When did it/they help us? OK that question should be answered: they didn't. Its an arrangement between bosses. A confederacy of former rivals that is about making money for them, which is taken off us. It is, at best, a self-serving arrangement.

Therefore, do we want to buy into this scheme and keep going where they want us to end up (they might not have a clear idea as such in many of its enthusiasts minds)? A place where we would lose our self-reliance, autonomy or ability to self-start politically. And for what? The threat that that they can leave us out in the cold? I'll explain that because it is contentious: numerity, coalition does not guarantee safety. What does is trust between the public and the governing system. The world isn't 'us in the EU' vs the rest of the world. It is to have equality, solidarity. Otherwise someone if not us ourselves will get fucked. Which I feel is a more accurate indicator, and a more reliable standard. So to be better people, not to have more power/better trade deals.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

Humberto said:


> So, what does the ruling class want? Is a question worth asking.
> 
> Is it that a lack of patriotism and belief that Britain is better off alone and anyone else can get to fuck the problem? That there is no room for equivocation. When there obviously is. And these lot complain they have too much on their hands and therefore duck it for their own careers.
> 
> ...


Do you have a summary?


----------



## Smangus (May 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Do you have a summary?



It's a fucking pile of shit in Westminster. 

That ok?


----------



## Mr Moose (May 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Do you have a summary?



Probably lost something in translation from the original Russian.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Do you have a summary?



No quotes from J A Hobson, I surmise?

ETA: I am currently quoting him in my last essay for this year! Shh!


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> No quotes from J A Hobson, I surmise?
> 
> ETA: I am currently quoting him in my last essay for this year! Shh!



(((((((((((((((( Sprocket. ))))))))))))))))


----------



## Sprocket. (May 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> No quotes from J A Hobson, I surmise?
> 
> ETA: I am currently quoting him in my last essay for this year! Shh!






SpackleFrog said:


> (((((((((((((((( Sprocket. ))))))))))))))))



I skirted around him and used a better quote from Eric Hobsbawm.


----------



## Humberto (May 7, 2019)

Ah well. Point taken


----------



## Sprocket. (May 7, 2019)

Just got this through post. Addressed to me!!!


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

Had one last week, it's such a good money making Scam,

already see a guy in Brexit Party T-shirt and some house notices up down the road.....

He's coining it in.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

In a few months there wont be any such thing as the Brexit party,.... so it's win win


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> In a few months there wont be any such thing as the Brexit party,.... so it's whine whine


C4u


----------



## Wilf (May 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 170165
> Just got this through post. Addressed to me!!!


Surely you would listen to a 'Decorated Royal Marine'?  Yeah, just about as much as I'd listen to a cake or a Christmas Tree.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> In a few months there wont be any such thing as the Brexit party,.... so it's win win


Wouldnt bet on that at all.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> In a few months there wont be any such thing as the Brexit party,.... so it's win win



Where politically do you envisage the 17 million leave voters going? If you assume they will forget about it and drift back to Con/Labour I'd suggest you are wide of the mark. 

I'd also suggest BP is merely the latest attempt to fill the vacuum. Regardless of what happens to it those funding it and politically invested in it aren't simply going to 'go away' because they recognise that the space left by mainstream parties is opening wider and deepening.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

Yeah there was some research a few months ago about where the demand lay for a new political party, and it wasnt for a new centrist group (as the TIG polling demonstrates). It was for a new populist right wing party. And now here we are.


----------



## andysays (May 7, 2019)

Brexit: UK 'has to fight European elections', says David Lidington


> The UK will have to fight European elections, despite hopes from the government a Brexit deal would be done by then, says the PM's de facto deputy. The vote is due on 23 May, but Theresa May said the UK would not have to take part if MPs agreed a Brexit plan first. Now, David Lidington says "regrettably" it is "not going to be possible to finish that process" before the date the UK legally has to take part.





> A number of other parties have already announced their candidates and launched their European election campaigns, but the Conservatives have yet to do the same.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit: UK 'has to fight European elections', says David Lidington


it'll be perhaps the cheapest election campaign fought in the last 30 years


----------



## Wilf (May 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Where politically do you envisage the 17 million leave voters going? If you assume they will forget about it and drift back to Con/Labour I'd suggest you are wide of the mark.
> 
> I'd also suggest BP is merely the latest attempt to fill the vacuum. Regardless of what happens to it those funding it and politically invested in it aren't simply going to 'go away' because they recognise that the space left by mainstream parties is opening wider and deepening.


Yeah, this, though every judgement is a bit provisional at the moment. Kippers and Brexiter Party-ists probably have a dream of the Tory Party splitting and gaining a big blob of ERG-ers. Where we are now I can't see the Tory Party actually splitting and the Westminster electoral system still works against 3rd/4th/5th parties. But there's definitely scope for a Brexit/populist party to exist and become a significant political presence.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But there's definitely scope for a Brexit/populist party to exist and become a significant political presence.



TBF though, there's been one for years in UKIP. Aren't the Brexit party more or less just filling the hole they've left due to falling apart/going hard right since the referendum?


----------



## Sprocket. (May 7, 2019)

UK 'has to fight European elections'

Tories up for it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, this, though every judgement is a bit provisional at the moment. Kippers and Brexiter Party-ists probably have a dream of the Tory Party splitting and gaining a big blob of ERG-ers. Where we are now I can't see the Tory Party actually splitting and the Westminster electoral system still works against 3rd/4th/5th parties. But there's definitely scope for a Brexit/populist party to exist and become a significant political presence.



I don't say this lightly, but I think if the Tories can't find a way to win a general election again they might well split.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Where politically do you envisage the 17 million leave voters going? If you assume they will forget about it and drift back to Con/Labour I'd suggest you are wide of the mark.
> 
> I'd also suggest BP is merely the latest attempt to fill the vacuum. Regardless of what happens to it those funding it and politically invested in it aren't simply going to 'go away' because they recognise that the space left by mainstream parties is opening wider and deepening.




You think he's going to keep it going and get MP's after any MEP's ( good chance any wining MEPs wont even take their seats)


----------



## andysays (May 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, this, though every judgement is a bit provisional at the moment. Kippers and Brexiter Party-ists probably have a dream of the Tory Party splitting and gaining a big blob of ERG-ers. Where we are now I can't see the Tory Party actually splitting and the Westminster electoral system still works against 3rd/4th/5th parties. But there's definitely scope for a Brexit/populist party to exist and become a significant political presence.


If the ERG or some similar anti-EU grouping of MPs does split from the Tory party, I'm not sure how great a match they would be with either UKIP, the Brexit party or any other populist far right party we could imagine.

Possible, but by no means certain.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

Also how stupid would it be to have a party called the Brexit party after we done a Breixt? whole thing is just one massive con.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Also how stupid would it be to have a party called the Brexit party after we done a Breixt? whole thing is just one massive con.



I would have thought given you're in charge of the Countdown to Brexit you might have noticed we aren't Doing A Brexit any time soon!


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I would have thought given you're in charge of the Countdown to Brexit you might have noticed we aren't Doing A Brexit any time soon!



Sometime within the next 177 days


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Sometime within the next 177 days



We'll see!


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Also how stupid would it be to have a party called the Brexit party after we done a Breixt? whole thing is just one massive con.


We already have a con party


----------



## brogdale (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Also how stupid would it be to have a party called the Brexit party *after we done a Breixt?* whole thing is just one massive con.



If May ever gets her Withdrawal Agreement through Parliament, there'll still be a great deal of Brexit left to do tbh.
The end of the beginning...and all that...

Doesn't look at all politically stupid to me.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If May ever gets her Withdrawal Agreement through Parliament, there'll still be a great deal of Brexit left to do tbh.
> The end of the beginning...and all that...
> 
> Doesn't look at all politically stupid to me.




So it's a long game and MP's seats etc and not a short game and a coin it in.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 7, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> TBF though, there's been one for years in UKIP. Aren't the Brexit party more or less just filling the hole they've left due to falling apart/going hard right since the referendum?


Yes, but that rather proves the point. There clearly is political space for a hard right populist party, since ~2000 you've had the rise and fall of the two most electorally successful hard right parties in the UK, and those results show that there is a not insignificant percent of the electorate that want's something along the lines of UKIP, similar to what we are seeing across Western Europe. FPTP is always going to put pressure on these parties, in terms of making any electoral breakthrough more difficult, but such latent support is definitely there.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

£100 a pop


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (May 7, 2019)

£100 a pop, to try to get selected to stand for Parliament, with not a hope in fucking hell of ever getting elected.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

So yeah, definitely not a scam or anything


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

He’s got a few months to rinse the plebs.... 

Once Brexit is done he can retire then.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 170182 View attachment 170183


So former afa members, anl, lmhr, yre, afn all can stand for the Brexit party but not antifa


----------



## bemused (May 7, 2019)

He'll take the £100 hand out seats and give them no support to run. Suckers.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 170182 View attachment 170183


Not to mention red action

If I was ex-red action etc I'd be complaining to farage about this preferential treatment for antifa


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> not a hope in fucking hell of ever getting elected.


I don't think this is true anymore. UKIP came second in a shitload of seats in 2015, and Europe as a wedge issue has only gotten bigger since then. With the right wind behind them there's every chance the Brexit party will get some seats next time.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't think this is true anymore. UKIP came second in a shitload of seats in 2015, and Europe as a wedge issue has only gotten bigger since then. With the right wind behind them there's every chance the Brexit party will get some seats next time.


There'll be a right wind behind them as farage and his cronies have long been known for their flatulence


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

He should probably be known for the danger he poses politically tbh. Hasn't the last few years demonstrated it's probably time to stop laughing at him?


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

£20 says he disbands the Brexit party once we leave, saying his job is done.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> He should probably be known for the danger he poses politically tbh. Hasn't the last few years demonstrated it's probably time to stop laughing at him?


No

When did people stop taking the piss out of Hitler? Er they didn't. So why should people stop laughing at nf?


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

Apparnetly Jeremy Dellar is doing something on Brexit, etc, been 'filming right wing protests' in London, etc.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> £20 says he disbands the Brexit party once we leave, saying his job is done.


Nah, he's explicitly positioned the party so whatever fudge is eventually landed on his party laps up the discontents.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> Apparnetly Jeremy Dellar is doing something on Brexit, etc, been 'filming right wing protests' in London, etc.


And people should be interested because...?


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> View attachment 170165
> Just got this through post. Addressed to me!!!




Nice to see property dealer there.


----------



## andysays (May 7, 2019)

I think it's possible to laugh at aspects of Farage's behaviour and also recognise that he has had, and will likely continue to have, some success in using some of the existing political disillusion many people are feeling.

The idea that this £100 administrative fee for potential candidates is simply a scam to rinse money from the gullible is pretty silly though, even if I suspect that very few if any will actual be elected as MPs come the next GE.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think it's possible to laugh at aspects of Farage's behaviour and also recognise that he has had, and will likely continue to have, some success in using some of the existing political disillusion many people are feeling.
> 
> The idea that this £100 administrative fee for potential candidates is simply a scam to rinse money from the gullible is pretty silly though, even if I suspect that very few if any will actual be elected as MPs come the next GE.



How much do other parties charge?


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> He should probably be known for the danger he poses politically tbh. Hasn't the last few years demonstrated it's probably time to stop laughing at him?




Bang on, its all festival, stunts, etc, better than the ANL lollipops I suppose.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> Bang on, its all festival, stunts, etc, better than the ANL lollipops I suppose.


what are you on about.


----------



## andysays (May 7, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> How much do other parties charge?



I have no idea, never having found it necessary to investigate the process of becoming a parliamentary candidate myself, but most other parties have an income stream through membership fees which the Brexit party doesn't (yet) have. 

Are you suggesting that those membership fees are simply a scam?


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> And people should be interested because...?




Becuse he is very insightful,  his reconstruction on Orgreave was spot on, though the luvvies from the London Arts Scene weren't, but he took the ex mining community with him.

I think if he does something from the Brexit perspective, it will help illuminate the issues.


----------



## Ranbay (May 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> I have no idea, never having found it necessary to investigate the process of becoming a parliamentary candidate myself, but most other parties have an income stream through membership fees which the Brexit party doesn't (yet) have.
> 
> Are you suggesting that those membership fees are simply a scam?




Yes


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> what are you on about.




The nature of the opposition to him


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> The nature of the opposition to him


Oh, ok. I dunno about that. Not seen that many anti-farage festivals tbh. Must be missing out.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> Bang on, its all festival, stunts, etc, better than the ANL lollipops I suppose.





treelover said:


> Becuse he is very insightful,  his reconstruction on Orgreave was spot on, though the luvvies from the London Arts Scene weren't, but he took the ex mining community with him.
> 
> I think if he does something from the Brexit perspective, it will help illuminate the issues.


two posts apart.


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

fwiw I like Jeremy Deller, but then I also think festivals and stunts have a place in political campaigning


----------



## killer b (May 7, 2019)

(although his previous brexit related work is somewhat lacking in subtlety)


----------



## brogdale (May 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't think this is true anymore. UKIP came second in a shitload of seats in 2015, and Europe as a wedge issue has only gotten bigger since then. With the right wind behind them there's every chance the Brexit party will get some seats next time.


Yep, dependent on the timing of the eventual GE & the degree to which the Tories (& Labour now; the fools) are seen to have failed to deliver...it's not too difficult to imagine the Brexit party winning some seats.


----------



## treelover (May 7, 2019)

Apparently one of the Brexit Party candidates is Henrik Overgaard-Nielsen, A Danish national and a NHS Dentist, he says he is a socialist and a trade union representative 

Be interested to see why he has thrown in his lot with Falange.


----------



## brogdale (May 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> Apparently one of the Brexit Party candidates is Henrik Overgaard-Nielsen, A Danish national and a NHS Dentist, he says he is a socialist and a trade union representative
> 
> Be interested to see why he has thrown in his lot with Falange.


Did you look here?


----------



## treelover (May 8, 2019)

Yes, he hardly mentions Farage,


----------



## brogdale (May 8, 2019)

treelover said:


> Yes, he hardly mentions Farage,



What?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Yes



If he finds one prat for every seat that’s £65k in total, less expenses, hardly Bernie Madoff...


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> £20 says he disbands the Brexit party once we leave, saying his job is done.



They'll be going strong for years then?


----------



## brogdale (May 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They'll be going strong for years then?


'Brexit' certainly will, so no reason why NuKIP shouldn't.


----------



## Ranbay (May 8, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If he finds one prat for every seat that’s £65k in total, less expenses, hardly Bernie Madoff...




and if he finds 10 that's 650k  quick maths

They wont be around end of the year, £20 to a charity of your choice says so


----------



## Ranbay (May 8, 2019)

Events are £2.50 a ticket
Registration is £25
To become an MP/MEP it’s £100 fee
No doubt there is also merch on sale at events, I saw someone in a Brexit party shirt just yesterday….
It just screams of the standard Fash for Cash method.

I honestly think once they finaly cram the deal through the door (within the next 176 days) he will say oh well, my job here is done, thanks for the extra money i'm off to retire in the EU or something.


----------



## teuchter (May 8, 2019)

Just a reminder for everyone that this is on tonight. See you all there.

Europe's Big Night Out - This time I'm voting - UK


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> How much do other parties charge?


it's not a proper party if they charge


----------



## Poi E (May 8, 2019)




----------



## CRI (May 8, 2019)

Creepy ass!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 8, 2019)

Seamus Milne conspiracies are highly amusing but I file them alongside 'russia did it!' as bollocks the unhinged center now exists on


----------



## Poi E (May 8, 2019)

the unhinged centre. like it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> the unhinged centre. like it.


i note they're all strung up


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 170182 View attachment 170183


They look to be hideously white shite.


----------



## brogdale (May 8, 2019)

You've got to hope that the vermin are paying top dollar for PR messaging of this calibre...utter genius campaign slogan.


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't think this is true anymore. UKIP came second in a shitload of seats in 2015, and Europe as a wedge issue has only gotten bigger since then. With the right wind behind them there's every chance the Brexit party will get some seats next time.


They were 2nd in 120 seats, about 2/3 of which were Con winners and 1/3 Lab. Just checked, I was surprised it was so high. From memory I think they also came vey close in the Heywood and Middleton/Castleton (can't remember the precise seat name) by election, held just before the2015 General. So yes, I think what you say is right, particularly if there was an election called by the new Tory Leader amid feelings that brexit was betrayed. The FPP electoral system provides high hurdles for non-established parties, but there are now scenarios in some seats of Lab, Con and Brexit getting substantial votes, allowing the odd Brexiteer to win on say 35% of the vote.


----------



## 1%er (May 8, 2019)

I heard on the news here that the UK will be holding election for the European parliament in a couple of weeks, Will this be the "public vote" I keep hearing people asking for?

Will both leavers and remainers turn out? Can this vote be seen as an indication of a second referendum result or not, if all the leave party votes and remain party votes are totted up? If not, can someone explain why not, as I am semi-detached from the UK news.


----------



## brogdale (May 8, 2019)

1%er said:


> I heard on the news here that the UK will be holding election for the European parliament in a couple of weeks, Will this be the "public vote" I keep hearing people asking for?
> 
> Will both leavers and remainers turn out? Can this vote be seen as an indication of a second referendum result or not, if all the leave party votes and remain party votes are totted up? If not, can someone explain why not, as I am semi-detached from the UK news.


Yes, no, yes, no, because it isn't that.


----------



## killer b (May 8, 2019)

The results of the EP elections will be used to support whatever position each politician, political commentator or man in the pub wishes to take, or if they don't and can't be made to support whatever position they take will be irrelevant. So whatever you like really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 8, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> and if he finds 10 that's 650k  quick maths
> 
> They wont be around end of the year, £20 to a charity of your choice says so



The charity of my choice is me and I will take your bet.


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes, no, yes, no, because it isn't that.


I endorse this summary.


----------



## Lucy Fur (May 8, 2019)

^This


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> The results of the EP elections will be used to support whatever position each politician, political commentator or man in the pub wishes to take, or if they don't and can't be made to support whatever position they take will be irrelevant. So whatever you like really.


A minor sub-plot piece of schadenfreude is the Green, Libs and Chuks all hovering round 9-10%
2019 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia (scroll down for polls)
 Doesn't mean they'd have got 27-30% with combined candidates of course, but it does mean these elections will give remainers less to crow about than could have been the case.  I didn't really follow what happened when they turned the Libs down, whether it was Chuka's delusions of grandeur or not, but it was probably a bad move for a one-off brexit focused election.


----------



## Poi E (May 8, 2019)

Looking bad for the Brexit Party in Scotland.


----------



## Wilf (May 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Looking bad for the Brexit Party in Scotland.


I remember Farage hiding in an Edinburgh pub a few years ago, to avoid a few shouty protesters. Happy days.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I remember Farage hiding in an Edinburgh pub a few years ago, to avoid a few shouty protesters. Happy days.


hiding in a pub  like anyone fell for that

he was only too grateful for the excuse to carry on drinking


----------



## Ranbay (May 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The charity of my choice is me and I will take your bet.




Done


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Done



So you're betting me £20 that the Brexit party won't exist by the end of 2019? How is this defined? As in they won't stand in any elections after this year?


----------



## DotCommunist (May 9, 2019)

as a registered party is fair. Take his cleaner money!


----------



## Ranbay (May 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So you're betting me £20 that the Brexit party won't exist by the end of 2019? How is this defined? As in they won't stand in any elections after this year?




£20 says by the end of the year, Nigel wont be about promoting the Brexit party, they wont have any MEPs or MPs


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 9, 2019)

The Revolution is Permanent, comrades. The BP will be around for ever.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> £20 says by the end of the year, Nigel wont be about promoting the Brexit party, they wont have any MEPs or MPs



OK, I'll take that! Let the record show.


----------



## Ranbay (May 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK, I'll take that! Let the record show.



It's on


----------



## Pickman's model (May 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK, I'll take that! Let the record show.





Ranbay said:


> It's on


thus mote it be


----------



## Ranbay (May 9, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (May 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> hiding in a pub  like anyone fell for that
> 
> he was only too grateful for the excuse to carry on drinking


I have never tried this excuse. Got to be worth a go.


----------



## TopCat (May 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> £20 says by the end of the year, Nigel wont be about promoting the Brexit party, they wont have any MEPs or MPs


Can I have a bit of that? Say a score?


----------



## Ranbay (May 9, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Can I have a bit of that? Say a score?



Sorry one time bet...  

fuck knows if we will be able to afford wine by the end of the year, let alone the cleaner we just got.

I'm not made of Euros.


----------



## TopCat (May 9, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Sorry one time bet...
> 
> fuck knows if we will be able to afford wine by the end of the year, let alone the cleaner we just got.
> 
> I'm not made of Euros.


----------



## andysays (May 13, 2019)

Did anyone hear Tom Watson on Today this morning? Did he really say this?


> Asked whether Labour wanted to leave or remain in the EU, he told Radio 4's Today: *"We are a remain and reform party,"* but "when it comes to a deal people can form their own view".



Is this just Watson expressing his own view/wish, or is there something more significant going on?


----------



## oryx (May 13, 2019)

andysays said:


> Did anyone hear Tom Watson on Today this morning? Did he really say this?
> 
> 
> Is this just Watson expressing his own view/wish, or is there something more significant going on?



The former, I'd say.


----------



## 8ball (May 13, 2019)

I stopped watching _Brexit_ after last season's boring cliff-hanger.

Any signs of things looking up?


----------



## Wilf (May 13, 2019)

The 'reform' bit seems to have popped up from nowhere. It makes sense to say that if you want to build some kind of remain case, but I don't remember it being part of Labour's _headline_ strategy at least. I've been critical of Corbyn and the more leave minded Labour leaders, but this also shows how weak the remain lot have been. It's been one long wail about getting a second vote, no attempt to go beyond that or build a real case as to _why_ Labour should support the EU


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The 'reform' bit seems to have popped up from nowhere. It makes sense to say that if you want to build some kind of remain case, but I don't remember it being part of Labour's _headline_ strategy at least. I've been critical of Corbyn and the more leave minded Labour leaders, but this also shows how weak the remain lot have been. It's been one long wail about getting a second vote, no attempt to go beyond that or build a real case as to _why_ Labour should support the EU



I've heard the term 'remain and reform' quite a bit to be fair, clearly Watson has borrowed it. It seems to be an attempt to deal with that, but I haven't seen anyone say what it is that should be reformed or how it should be done.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 13, 2019)

'Remain and Reform' was Corbyn's position during the referendum campaign wasn't it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 13, 2019)

Good luck reforming the EU once all our MEP's are Faragian rent-a-gobs.


----------



## Wilf (May 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've heard the term 'remain and reform' quite a bit to be fair, clearly Watson has borrowed it. It seems to be an attempt to deal with that, but I haven't seen anyone say what it is that should be reformed or how it should be done.


Ta.  Suppose it all adds to the fun - a referendum nobody asked for, a vote that was never really about the EU, Corbyn just about deciding to back remain, random shadow cabinet bods popping up to assert what Labour's position is.  In those circumstances, I'm astonished voters aren't _flocking_ to Labour.


----------



## Wilf (May 13, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> 'Remain and Reform' was Corbyn's position during the referendum campaign wasn't it.


I've slept since then (fitfully).


----------



## Wilf (May 13, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Good luck reforming the EU once all our MEP's are Faragian rent-a-gobs.


A phalanx of Farageist fuckwits!


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 13, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Good luck reforming the EU once all our MEP's are Faragian rent-a-gobs.



To be fair I don't think the EU Parliament could really stop the Council of Ministers doing very much. If it wanted to. I of course await the day when the Council of Ministers decide that it's time to abandon neoliberalism with baited breath.


----------



## MickiQ (May 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> I stopped watching _Brexit_ after last season's boring cliff-hanger.
> 
> Any signs of things looking up?


I believe that Season 3 will be out in October and there might be some cast changes


----------



## 8ball (May 13, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I believe that Season 3 will be out in October and there might be some cast changes



I have this as season 5 at least.  You'd think they could at least clarify that!


----------



## Supine (May 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> I have this as season 5 at least.  You'd think they could at least clarify that!



They were too busy introducing the Tommy Robinson character. With product placement sponsored by McDonald's.


----------



## MickiQ (May 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> I have this as season 5 at least.  You'd think they could at least clarify that!


It's a bit like Lost they started with some original ideas but soon realised they had no idea where they were going with the plot. There is a one off special next week.


----------



## 8ball (May 13, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> It's a bit like Lost they started with some original ideas but soon realised they had no idea where they were going with the plot. There is a one off special next week.



There'd better be blood.


----------



## treelover (May 13, 2019)

8ball said:


> I stopped watching _Brexit_ after last season's boring cliff-hanger.
> 
> Any signs of things looking up?




My mates only watches/listens to US/European News now!


----------



## Serge Forward (May 13, 2019)

Supine said:


> They were too busy introducing the Tommy Robinson character. With product placement sponsored by McDonald's.


----------



## belboid (May 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> A phalanx of Farageist fuckwits!


A falange, shorely?


----------



## treelover (May 14, 2019)

I have used that a few times on here.


----------



## Poi E (May 14, 2019)

treelover said:


> My mates only watches/listens to US/European News now!



You can't rely on UK media for an accurate impression of events given it is part of the current febrile atmosphere.


----------



## oryx (May 14, 2019)

May to meet Corbyn this evening apparently. So may be some sort of announcement due (probably cessation of talks).


----------



## A380 (May 14, 2019)

oryx said:


> May to meet Corbyn this evening apparently. So may be some sort of announcement due (probably cessation of talks).


Perhaps they are going to leave their respective spouses, both resign and move to Rhyl to run a B&B.


----------



## Supine (May 14, 2019)

A380 said:


> Perhaps they are going to leave their respective spouses, both resign and move to Rhyl to run a B&B.



Or Kazakhstan. That works for me


----------



## oryx (May 14, 2019)

A380 said:


> Perhaps they are going to leave their respective spouses, both resign and move to Rhyl to run a B&B.



 it's no more than Brexit bill to be introduced in early June


----------



## Wilf (May 14, 2019)

oryx said:


> it's no more than Brexit bill to be introduced in early June


I was hoping a microphone would descend from the ceiling and they'd break into a rendition of Underneath the Arches. Disappointed.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 15, 2019)

oryx said:


> it's no more than Brexit bill to be introduced in early June



Is this the same deal that’s been rejected three times already?


----------



## MrCurry (May 15, 2019)

Is Bercow going to allow that?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 15, 2019)

More to the point are labour going to support it? On one hand it would get rid of May by July and allow Britain to ‘move on’ from Brexit which sections to the media claim Labour is desperate to do (understandably given the absolute nonsense of a position they ended up in). On the other hand could May and Corbyn command a majority with loons of the ultra remain and No Deal numbers on both sides? Does labour want to be associated with a May deal even if it delivers the alignment to the neoliberal project labour policy demands? Finally, if the May deal tanks what happens then?

This type of nuanced tactical stuff isn’t Jeremy and co’s forte but crunch time is coming


----------



## Yossarian (May 15, 2019)

A380 said:


> Perhaps they are going to leave their respective spouses, both resign and move to Rhyl to run a B&B.



Three weeks later:


----------



## Teaboy (May 15, 2019)

Its a vote on the Withdrawal Bill rather than MV4 or (or whatever number we'd be up to).  How much difference that makes it practice I don't know.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 15, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> More to the point are labour going to support it? On one hand it would get rid of May by July and allow Britain to ‘move on’ from Brexit which sections to the media claim Labour is desperate to do (understandably given the absolute nonsense of a position they ended up in). On the other hand could May and Corbyn command a majority with loons of the ultra remain and No Deal numbers on both sides? Does labour want to be associated with a May deal even if it delivers the alignment to the neoliberal project labour policy demands? Finally, if the May deal tanks what happens then?
> 
> This type of nuanced tactical stuff isn’t Jeremy and co’s forte but crunch time is coming



If he backs May's bill he's an idiot.


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If he backs May's bill he's an idiot.


There's no way he will back May's original bill (the one that's been rejected 3 times by parliament) and these discussions were never about that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 15, 2019)

andysays said:


> There's no way he will back May's original bill (the one that's been rejected 3 times by parliament) and these discussions were never about that.



Sorry, poor phrasing - if he backs anything May brings at this point, he's an idiot.


----------



## Duncan2 (May 15, 2019)

Can't understand why Labour have given May this cover.The talks never looked likely to be productive and it is difficult to imagine that she would have been able to cling on in Downing Street, as she has, had she not been able to claim that someone,albeit her mortal enemy Jezza,was still talking to her


----------



## andysays (May 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sorry, poor phrasing - if he backs anything May brings at this point, he's an idiot.


It would depend to some extent on what exactly was on offer, but it seems increasingly unlikely that anything productive which Corbyn can commit the Labour party to will result.


----------



## mx wcfc (May 15, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Can't understand why Labour have given May this cover.


It's about Labour demonstrating that they are being constructive about this rather than refusing to co-operate, which would have resulted in them being slagged off in the media and blamed for the Tory mess.  Of course, that is still possible, but simply refusing to talk would have been worse.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 15, 2019)

mx wcfc said:


> It's about Labour demonstrating that they are being constructive about this rather than refusing to co-operate, which would have resulted in them being slagged off in the media and blamed for the Tory mess.  Of course, that is still possible, but simply refusing to talk would have been worse.



Damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t. The best way to hurt May is enter into discussion with her. She will not be able to tolerate any ideas Corbyn puts forward. He can walk away in the knowledge that it’s her intransigence that’s the problem.
He has tried to offer an acceptable compromise and his offers will probably be refused.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 15, 2019)

What mx wcfc & Sprocket. said. Labour want the Tories to be the ones to walk away from the table rather than them.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 15, 2019)

mx wcfc said:


> It's about Labour demonstrating that they are being constructive about this rather than refusing to co-operate, which would have resulted in them being slagged off in the media and blamed for the Tory mess.  Of course, that is still possible, but simply refusing to talk would have been worse.



It is, but labour are also desperate for brexit to ‘go away’ and for the focus to return to other issues. Given the imminent kicking both parties are going to get, a deal - especially one where labour is seen to move the tories, and where they get credit for ‘solving it’ - will be of serious attraction to some in labour


----------



## andysays (May 17, 2019)

Interesting choice of words...

Brexit: Talks between Tories and Labour set to close with no deal


> Brexit talks between the Conservatives and Labour are about to close without an agreement, the BBC has learned.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (May 17, 2019)

Given the inevitable defeat of the May deal and then Tory leadership competition their new leader is going to have about 8-10 weeks to box off a ‘new’ deal with the EU and get it through the HoC.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It is, but labour are also desperate for brexit to ‘go away’ and for the focus to return to other issues. Given the imminent kicking both parties are going to get, a deal - especially one where labour is seen to move the tories, and where they get credit for ‘solving it’ - will be of serious attraction to some in labour


Who in labour?


----------



## Teaboy (May 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> Interesting choice of words...
> 
> Brexit: Talks between Tories and Labour set to close with no deal



Yes, its all very amicable and rehearsed.


----------



## killer b (May 17, 2019)

Do you think? That's a pretty damning letter I thought.


----------



## Teaboy (May 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> Do you think? That's a pretty damning letter I thought.



Not really.  Its both sides agreeing that they tried but situations out of their control prevented it going further.  The mess in government is blindingly obvious, even May knows it.  They have stayed clear of blaming the other side.


----------



## andysays (May 17, 2019)

The letter wasn't available when I posted the link earlier, but reading it now it's hard to interpret it any other way that Corbyn saying there's no point in continuing discussions with a PM whose days are numbered. 

As kB says it's pretty damning


----------



## Teaboy (May 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> The letter wasn't available when I posted the link earlier, but reading it now it's hard to interpret it any other way that Corbyn saying there's no point in continuing discussions with a PM whose days are numbered.
> 
> As kB says it's pretty damning



That's just stating the obvious though.  It's both sides agreeing not to blame each other which is what usually happen when talks fail.


----------



## AnandLeo (May 18, 2019)

Brexit negotiations between the government and the Labour party have stalled without agreement. This is because, I think there is no commitment for a resolve among the participants. They have an idea of what they are negotiating. However, no one has taken the ownership to reach an agreement. It is the determination to reach an agreement that is crucial. It is right to start the cross-party negotiations with the Labour party. However, the other parties, the SNP, UDP, and Lib Dems should involve in the process to monitor, support and apply peer pressure preventing astray and negative speculation. Cross-party collective should manage the negotiation in the national interest. I know, there are big divisions in both Tory and Labour party MPs which is putting pressure for non-compromise. Without the ownership and resolute collective decision, it is just a public relation exercise.

Conservative party is preoccupied with ousting Theresa May from leadership. They don’t have anyone else to do better in the Brexit crisis.  

This is all parliamentary democracy. One-MP one-vote. It is not strategic planning or decision-making. Brexit decision ought to be a strategic decision in national interest. Parliament is sleepwalking to medieval society.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 18, 2019)

I'll start practising my carolingian miniscule again then.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 18, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Parliament is sleepwalking to medieval society.


no it isn't


----------



## gosub (May 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no it isn't


French won't bother building castes when they lord it over us this time


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 18, 2019)

some article in the guardian equating the UK atm to Weimar germany. nothing like hyperbole to fill some space. meh


----------



## Ranbay (May 18, 2019)

31st July we Brexit so some people say.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 18, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> some article in the guardian equating the UK atm to Weimar germany. nothing like hyperbole to fill some space. meh


Not seeing anything like cabaret here


----------



## A380 (May 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Not seeing anything like cabaret here


Tomorrow belongs Tomeh.


----------



## Chz (May 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 31st July we Brexit so some people say.


More like 31st of June.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> 31st July we Brexit so some people say.





Chz said:


> More like 31st of June.



Which year?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 21, 2019)

Official dead horse flogging announced for 4pm. Can hardly wait.


----------



## Badgers (May 21, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Official dead horse flogging announced for 4pm. Can hardly wait.


Sounds like her new deal really delivers


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 21, 2019)

"a temporary customs relationship until the next general election"

Make of that what you will. 

Cabinet backs PM's Brexit bill offer


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> "a temporary customs relationship until the next general election"
> 
> Make of that what you will.
> 
> Cabinet backs PM's Brexit bill offer


Measured in weeks.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 21, 2019)

Why is Mrs May doing a really bad David Blunkett impression at the moment?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Why is Mrs May doing a really bad David Blunkett impression at the moment?


there are none so blind as those who will not see?


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Why is Mrs May doing a really bad David Blunkett impression at the moment?


valedictory.

Bye, then.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

why's she seeking common ground in parliament in central asia?


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 171690
> why's she seeking common ground in parliament in central asia?


brought to you by our sponsors; PWC


----------



## Sprocket. (May 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 171690
> why's she seeking common ground in parliament in central asia?



Maybe because she is a politician not a geography teacher?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Maybe because she is a politician not a geography teacher?


she's not very good at either tbh


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

when does she start coughing?


----------



## Sprocket. (May 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> when does she start coughing?



When the noose slowly tightens.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> when does she start coughing?


when her batteries are about to die


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2019)

I'm not watching it live, but the gist seems to be that Parliament will decide on whether to have another referendum or to stay in the customs union. _3 fucking years for that_?


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not watching it live, but the gist seems to be that Parliament will decide on whether to have another referendum or to stay in the customs union. _3 fucking years for that_?



Stay in the customs union _temporarily..._


----------



## Sprocket. (May 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not watching it live, but the gist seems to be that Parliament will decide on whether to have another referendum or to stay in the customs union. _3 fucking years for that_?



It’s diabolical and embarrassing that allegedly grown adults have created this farce.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 21, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> It’s diabolical and embarrassing that allegedly grown adults have created this farce.



Quite right. Kids would have done it for far lower wages.


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

innit?


----------



## Sprocket. (May 21, 2019)

Is that Hemlock flavoured water she is sipping?


----------



## brogdale (May 21, 2019)

Weak applause, followed by questions...."Laura?"


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 21, 2019)

Everyone is so bored of this now that it hasn't even managed to shift Jamie Oliver from the main slot on the BBC news site.


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2019)

I'm not watching this, but I'm absolutely certain she will be answering all questions directly and in forensic detail.


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2019)

She's a card, isn't she.


----------



## Ranbay (May 21, 2019)

Second ref coming up then... maybe LOLZ


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 21, 2019)

Everything is still on fire.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 21, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Second ref coming up then... maybe LOLZ



Nah. No way that gets a majority in Parliament.


----------



## Ted Striker (May 21, 2019)

I thought it was a pretty good speech tbh  Pretty cutting questions though


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 21, 2019)

Have I got this right; May wants them to approve her deal after comprehensively rejecting it three times already, and if they do approve it then MPs can have a vote on whether we can have another referendum on leaving the EU, and should that happen and we vote leave again her deal kicks in, if we vote stay then the whole thing is quietly dropped?


----------



## Drarok (May 21, 2019)

Can't she just take one for the team, announce that it's completely untenable, cancel the whole fucking mess, and step down? C'mon May, you can do it!


----------



## Wilf (May 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah. No way that gets a majority in Parliament.


Yeah, even though there's probably still a remain majority in parliament, relatively few of them would find a way to vote for it after 3 years. Only way they could be re-emboldened would be if the something happened in the vote this week that allowed the remainers to claim a tenuous victory. Interestingly in the yougov poll quoted with 9000 respondents, Brexit got 34, whereas Lib+Green+Chunks was 31%. A further remainwards squeeze on the Labour vote might make this interesting.

Don't get me wrong, _I'm_ not suggesting that whether Brexit or L/G/C gets most can be interpreted as a win for either side. It doesn't factor in Lab and Con votes for a kick off. However those figures are certainly going to be _gamed_.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Second ref coming up then... maybe LOLZ


Lots of leave zombies?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> She's a card, isn't she.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (May 21, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> I thought it was a pretty good speech tbh



She's had lots of practice with it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Interestingly in the yougov poll quoted with 9000 respondents, Brexit got 34, whereas Lib+Green+Chunks was 31%. A further remainwards squeeze on the Labour vote might make this interesting.



Survation, which tends to be more accurate than yougov, puts the 'very leave' vote (Brexit/UKIP) on 33%, and the 'very remain' vote (LibDem/Green/SNP/PC & Chuckle UK) on only 24%.

ETA - 2019 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia


----------



## Poi E (May 21, 2019)

Given the EU vote discrepancy between the constituent nations, it would be useful if the media would break down projections against the nations' respective votes. The whole London media "UK-wide" focus is a symptom of the rot at the heart of the union.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 21, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Given the EU vote discrepancy between the constituent nations, it would be useful if the media would break down projections against the nations' respective votes. The whole London media "UK-wide" focus is a symptom of the rot at the heart of the union.



Polls don't come cheap, and as they tend to be commissioned by large UK wide media outlets, most will tend to be UK wide polls.

Although there's a few for Scotland, Wales & NI, which will be reported mainly by media in those nationss, you can view them on wikipedia -
2019 European Parliament election in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2019)

Has PM's 'new deal' made things worse?



> Of course, the vote itself on this bundle of measures won't be for at least a week - a lifetime in this hyper-speed world. A lot could change.



Hyper-speed my arse! The fucking thing has been dragging on with no positive momentum for what feels like forever. Lauras job means she can get giddy about every shift in detail and every backstab, but from the outside of this bubble this hyper-speed line is a complete joke.


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 21, 2019)

may gearing up for one more parliamentary wet fart before shuffling off.


----------



## Humberto (May 21, 2019)

They don't seem to want to accept responsibility. They take control only so far as it is advantageous. Ignore you and impose savage austerity? Not a problem. Contribute to wars and choose what money is spent on in decades to come in some instances? Simple enough. But show leadership and competence when it is needed? They can't. They can't manage a real and honest debate. Almost as if the state is self-serving and lacking agility, or that important decisions are made (or might as well be) off the cuff or by default.


----------



## not-bono-ever (May 21, 2019)

I am warming to the Theresa.Its not often you see a politican ensuring that they are utterly unemployable in any role whatsoever after they leave the house.That takes real commitment. I see a role for her in site manging the grand South Atlantic project.imagine waking up in your frozen nissen hut every single day, climbing out of your dank sealskin cot, scoffing some blubber and having to go into the field to motivate the massed hordes of former peoples to even greater heights of productivity. forever.


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2019)

I thought I was done with my little hyper-speed rant but then I started thinking about how even Mays termination has been done in hyper-slow-motion. Rather than cutting her political head off, its been done one limb at a time. Dance like you're shedding limbs, Theresa.


----------



## elbows (May 21, 2019)

Mind you her prolonged demise does grant her some accolades. You dont normally get to lose so many critical votes and yet stagger on. Likewise avalanches of cabinet resignations. This wont win her a survival accolade because politically she obviously wont survive. More likely a stubborn zombie award. Serial loser bot rot.


----------



## Ming (May 21, 2019)

I wonder if they’re dragging it out to give their financial backers enough time to position themselves in the markets properly for the Armageddon phase?


----------



## Badgers (May 22, 2019)

She is giving it another try 

Bless her. It is like your nan wanting to go to Happy Eater


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 22, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am warming to the Theresa.Its not often you see a politican ensuring that they are utterly unemployable in any role whatsoever after they leave the house.That takes real commitment. I see a role for her in site manging the grand South Atlantic project.imagine waking up in your frozen nissen hut every single day, climbing out of your dank sealskin cot, scoffing some blubber and having to go into the field to motivate the massed hordes of former peoples to even greater heights of productivity. forever.



Theresa is the greatest enemy the Tory party has ever dealt with.

Absolute legend.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> She is giving it another try
> 
> Bless her. It is like your nan wanting to go to Happy Eater


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> I am warming to the Theresa.Its not often you see a politican ensuring that they are utterly unemployable in any role whatsoever after they leave the house.That takes real commitment. I see a role for her in site manging the grand South Atlantic project.imagine waking up in your frozen nissen hut every single day, climbing out of your dank sealskin cot, scoffing some blubber and having to go into the field to motivate the massed hordes of former peoples to even greater heights of productivity. forever.


She will be in charge of labour relations on east falkland


----------



## MrCurry (May 22, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wonder if they’re dragging it out to give their financial backers enough time to position themselves in the markets properly for the Armageddon phase?



It definitely seems like there’s some underlying motivation for the whole thing being delayed as far as possible.  It’s like Teresa May was put into bat to simply kick the can down the road as far as possible, as each time there was a choice to be made she seems to have chosen the most likely route towards stalemate. 

Maybe they just want to spin it out to the point where a second referendum becomes defensible on the basis that “public opinion seems to have changed” or somesuch? To pull that off, May would have to appear dead set against a second referendum each time the suggestion comes up, which she has.


----------



## teqniq (May 22, 2019)

apparently she's not well.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> It definitely seems like there’s some underlying motivation for the whole thing being delayed as far as possible.  It’s like Teresa May was put into bat to simply kick the can down the road as far as possible, as each time there was a choice to be made she seems to have chosen the most likely route towards stalemate.
> 
> Maybe they just want to spin it out to the point where a second referendum becomes defensible on the basis that “public opinion seems to have changed” or somesuch? To pull that off, May would have to appear dead set against a second referendum each time the suggestion comes up, which she has.


I said some years ago I thought time would be argued to have eroded the force behind the narrow victory of 2016. Didn't think it would take so long mind


----------



## not a trot (May 22, 2019)

So if May fucks off and she's replaced by Johnson, what's to stop him suspending parliament and just sitting it out beyond 31st oct. Can the cunt actually do that ?


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 22, 2019)

not a trot said:


> So if May fucks off and she's replaced by Johnson, what's to stop him suspending parliament and just sitting it out beyond 31st oct. Can the cunt actually do that ?



Yes he could, but he wouldn't, and it would end up in court.


----------



## prunus (May 22, 2019)

teqniq said:


> apparently she's not well.




Illustrates part of why all routes lead to clusterfuck whatever happens - to [at least a section of*] leavers, everyone’s an enemy.   It’s going to take a political genius to get us out of this - and there aren’t many on the horizon. 

Revoke and remain looks like being the best path - whatever happens from here large sections of the population are going to be furious, but at least that way we’re furious but not fucked. 

* it seems to me at least a fairly large section - it appears to be Farage’s main campaigning thrust - “your Shangri-la is being denied you by [insert bogeyman of choice at the time, probably including the word elite]”


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

prunus said:


> Illustrates part of why all routes lead to clusterfuck whatever happens - to [at least a section of*] leavers, everyone’s an enemy.   It’s going to take a political genius to get us out of this - and there aren’t many on the horizon.
> 
> Revoke and remain looks like being the best path - whatever happens from here large sections of the population are going to be furious, but at least that way we’re furious but not fucked.
> 
> * it seems to me at least a fairly large section - it appears to be Farage’s main campaigning thrust - “your Shangri-la is being denied you by [insert bogeyman of choice at the time, probably including the word elite]”


i thought our shangri-la was denied us by the withdrawal from everything east of suez about 50 years ago.


----------



## andysays (May 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought our shangri-la was denied us by the withdrawal from everything east of suez about 50 years ago.


We're certainly not the leaders of the pack since then...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

andysays said:


> We're certainly not the leaders of the pack since then...


born to be mild


----------



## MickiQ (May 22, 2019)

prunus said:


> Illustrates part of why all routes lead to clusterfuck whatever happens - to [at least a section of*] leavers, everyone’s an enemy.   It’s going to take a political genius to get us out of this - and there aren’t many on the horizon.
> 
> Revoke and remain looks like being the best path - whatever happens from here large sections of the population are going to be furious, but at least that way we’re furious but not fucked.
> 
> * it seems to me at least a fairly large section - it appears to be Farage’s main campaigning thrust - “your Shangri-la is being denied you by [insert bogeyman of choice at the time, probably including the word elite]”


That is one scary video they are arguing over who is the most Brexity of them and she is making him look like a reasonable person.


----------



## Ted Striker (May 22, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Theresa is the greatest enemy the Tory party has ever dealt with.
> 
> Absolute legend.



Agent Theresa Theory works a hell lot better when considering Brexit.

It's worth supporting it's revocation to see the Leavers lose their shit about the establishment installing their most effective (former remainer) saboteur in the whole process


----------



## Mr Moose (May 22, 2019)

not a trot said:


> So if May fucks off and she's replaced by Johnson, what's to stop him suspending parliament and just sitting it out beyond 31st oct. Can the cunt actually do that ?



I think it’s much more likely that a new Tory leader, goes to Brussels all pumped, comes back fuming, goes again and comes back with the same deal, maybe some airy bollocks attached to it to save face, which then passes because,

The ERG nut jobs know it’s the only way they can leave and at least a Twatziteer is at the helm for stage two and

Enough undisciplined Labour MPs vote for it.


----------



## Wilf (May 22, 2019)

My take on Johnson is that he's ultimately a shithouse. Faced with public deputations of bankers and industrialists, he'd crumble and avoid no deal. But it's crazy that we are even thinking about that idiot steering the ship.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I think it’s much more likely that a new Tory leader, goes to Brussels all pumped, comes back fuming, goes again and comes back with the same deal, maybe some airy bollocks attached to it to save face, which then passes because,
> 
> The ERG nut jobs know it’s the only way they can leave and at least a Twatziteer is at the helm for stage two and
> 
> Enough undisciplined Labour MPs vote for it.


I dunno about the last bit. Labour have held it together pretty well so far - never more than five of them iirc voting with the govt on any of the iterations of May's vote. With a new tory leader I'd say all bets are off - if it's someone like Johnson, I wouldn't see a single labour mp voting with him. The labour line then would surely be to demand a general election. And in that scenario,  we would see at least a few more remainer tories voting against/defecting. Even with the DUP on board, which as we've seen is far from a given, a new brexity tory leader would have parliamentary arithmetic against them.


----------



## elbows (May 22, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I think it’s much more likely that a new Tory leader, goes to Brussels all pumped, comes back fuming, goes again and comes back with the same deal, maybe some airy bollocks attached to it to save face, which then passes because,
> 
> The ERG nut jobs know it’s the only way they can leave and at least a Twatziteer is at the helm for stage two and
> 
> Enough undisciplined Labour MPs vote for it.


it's this deal with extra icing, no deal or no brexit. and there's not enough icing in the world to stop the shitty deal tasting shitty


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

elbows said:


>


there's enough blubber there to supply japanese blubber fans for two years


----------



## Mr Moose (May 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's this deal with extra icing, no deal or no brexit. and there's not enough icing in the world to stop the shitty deal tasting shitty



Think of it as this deal, but with a nice hat on. Maybe a pirate hat with _ooooh_ glowsticks and sparkly bits on it and you just have to vote for it.


----------



## Lucy Fur (May 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



more this I suggest...
[/QUOTE]


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 22, 2019)

Lucy Fur


----------



## elbows (May 22, 2019)

elbows said:


> I thought I was done with my little hyper-speed rant but then I started thinking about how even Mays termination has been done in hyper-slow-motion. Rather than cutting her political head off, its been done one limb at a time. Dance like you're shedding limbs, Theresa.



Even as I was writing that last night it did occur to me that I was supposed to read between the lines of the hyper-speed comment, and that it was Kuenssbergs way of limply hinting that May wouldnt survive long enough to see the last vote.

The Sun was not so vague, but I try not to post their front pages.

edit - ok to be honest she did spit it out more explicitly at the end of the article, the hyper-speed stuff was an earlier setup line, and I fixated on that.


----------



## agricola (May 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's this deal with extra icing, no deal or no brexit. and there's not enough icing in the world to stop the shitty deal tasting shitty



Indeed, but the tactic of mentioning no deal is what has sunk them here.  The only way that shitty deal (or any deal, tbh) ever passes with a Tory majority is as a question of the deal vs not leaving at all, daring the backbenches to either suck it up (their default position since 1832) or to reject the result of the referendum and accept the wipeout that would follow.   Yet even now she is valiantly threatening them with no deal.

That said, I fully expect whoever the next Tory leader is to keep doing it - after all, if they haven't worked out they could get rid of her as PM by just refusing to vote with the Government whilst she is PM then theres little hope for them to do anything.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2019)

Leader's Office (without Leader) has announced Common's business for the week following the recess and there's no 2nd reading of the WAB scheduled...unsurprisingly, given the fact that she's effectively gone.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 23, 2019)

She's got six days to go till she's outlasted Brown. If she just refuses to talk to anyone for a week, maybe she can do it.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> She's got six days to go till she's outlasted Brown. If she just refuses to talk to anyone for a week, maybe she can do it.


that's a really meaningful landmark


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> She's got six days to go till she's outlasted Brown. If she just refuses to talk to anyone for a week, maybe she can do it.



She can still resign on Friday, as she would remain PM until a replacement is elected, just like Disco Dave did.


----------



## brogdale (May 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's a really meaningful landmark


but I'm coming round to the notion of the unit of Prime Ministerial tenure being "_Browns"; _somehow seems appropriate?
_"How many Browns did she/he last?"_


----------



## Pickman's model (May 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> but I'm coming round to the notion of the unit of Prime Ministerial tenure being "_Browns"; _somehow seems appropriate?
> _"How many Browns did she/he last?"_


----------



## Crispy (May 23, 2019)

I really hope she has the chutzpah to style it out to the 31st, just for the headlines. Might be the most simultaneous identical headlines in british history?


----------



## Wilf (May 23, 2019)

On Monday of course, farage will be demanding meetings with the prime minister, liddington, downing street cat, a milk shake


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2019)

My (LD) MP informs me that "_there are just 51 sitting days in Parliament before 31st October and a No Deal crash-out. With a Tory leadership contest in the middle, that has just been cut to 22 days!"
_
51 sitting days


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> My (LD) MP informs me that "_there are just 51 sitting days in Parliament before 31st October and a No Deal crash-out. With a Tory leadership contest in the middle, that has just been cut to 22 days!"
> _
> 51 sitting days


yeh they're really going to get a load of brexiting done in that time


----------



## MrCurry (May 24, 2019)

So really it becomes (or will become) a stark choice between “no deal” and revoke, regroup and come back and do it all again next year. 

I wonder whether the howls of protest from businesses or from Brexiteers will be loudest, and which will win the day.


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> So really it becomes (or will become) a stark choice between “no deal” and revoke, regroup and come back and do it all again next year.
> 
> I wonder whether the howls of protest from businesses or from Brexiteers will be loudest, and which will win the day.


If Johnson gets the job, he'll waste several days coming out with pointless insults and then spending several more apologising. Almost certain to suggest Juncker is a pisshead.


----------



## Crispy (May 24, 2019)

Crispy said:


> I really hope she has the chutzpah to style it out to the 31st, just for the headlines. Might be the most simultaneous identical headlines in british history?


She overshot, damnit


----------



## Supine (May 24, 2019)

Crispy said:


> She overshot, damnit



She couldn't even get that right!


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2019)

So, assuming it's Johnson... and assuming there's no general election... and assuming he's willing to push it to the point of risking no deal (all 3 of which are questionable assumptions). Would the H of C:

A) end up with 'moderate tories' simply lining up with the opposition to block a hard brexit. Stalemate... further extension... gen election in the end.

or

B) Have a tory leader backed up with his own mandate from the party members, transforming the inner party debate, able to frighten remain minded tories into backing his strategy? Leave with a hard bexit/no deal.

or

C) something else e.g. Johnson is full of shit and just repackages May's deal, gets told to fuck himself by the EU etc.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 24, 2019)

Whoever gets it surely the LP must think about bringing another VoNC quickly if they don't commit to a GE. I mean it won't get through but it traps the LDs and ChUK wankers.


Wilf said:


> something else e.g. Johnson is full of shit and just repackages May's deal,


Whether it's Johnson or someone else I think there's a pretty good chance that this happens first.


----------



## Wilf (May 24, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Whoever gets it surely the LP must think about bringing another VoNC quickly if they don't commit to a GE. I mean it won't get through but it traps the LDs and ChUK wankers.
> Whether it's Johnson or someone else I think there's a pretty good chance that this happens first.


Certainly the EU will already firming up their 'we cannot reopen the Withdrawal Agreement' line.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Certainly the EU will already firming up their 'we cannot reopen the Withdrawal Agreement' line.


no deal v no brexit then


----------



## Flavour (May 24, 2019)

finally some excitement on the brexit front, it's all been a bit dull since they gave us october 31 extension. now we can put it back on the burner!


----------



## sleaterkinney (May 24, 2019)

Surely a new leader would go for a GE. No workable majority in the house. 
They could paint themselves as the saviour of real Brexit.


----------



## andysays (May 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Surely a new leader would go for a GE. No workable majority in the house.
> They could paint themselves as the saviour of real Brexit.


I'm not convinced another GE would result in a workable majority in the house though...


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no deal v no brexit then



September 2019 GE in a nutshell.


----------



## brogdale (May 24, 2019)

Too early for its own thread?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Too early for its own thread?


go for it


----------



## MrCurry (May 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Too early for its own thread?



I thought you were referring to Brexit...


----------



## andysays (May 24, 2019)

Report on the BBC website that EU leaders think the new Tory leader may request a further extension.


----------



## Drarok (May 24, 2019)

Can't we _please_ just revoke and cancel this utter farce?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 24, 2019)

Drarok said:


> Can't we _please_ just revoke and cancel this utter farce?


you've seen the plot summary for season four then


----------



## Cloo (May 24, 2019)

I fear it has to be No Deal now. afaict, all front runners are leavers and the only thing they can do differently from May is to go for No Deal. Then our only hope is Parliament manages to prevent that


----------



## tommers (May 24, 2019)

Yeah it'll be no deal.

The good bit of that will be watching all the gammon blaming each other when they realise that they've fucked everything up. The self delusion will be amazing to behold.


----------



## gosub (May 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> Report on the BBC website that EU leaders think the new Tory leader may request a further extension.


What a fuck up the behind the scenes paperwork blind eyes and emergency patches are only valid til 31st Dec...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 24, 2019)

Cloo said:


> I fear it has to be No Deal now. afaict, all front runners are leavers and the only thing they can do differently from May is to go for No Deal. Then our only hope is Parliament manages to prevent that


May resigning doesn't solve anything. If parliament blocks 'no deal', which surely it would with various former govt payroll tories like Rudd free to vote against it, what do they then do? All very nice for the likes of Johnson to bluster around, but he'll have to come up with a solution here that isn't 'no deal', just like May had to. Tory membership may want it and vote for someone who wants it, but they're a small number of very warped individuals, even more warped than tory MPs, at least some of whom (and it only takes a few) will absolutely block it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 24, 2019)

Drarok said:


> Can't we _please_ just revoke and cancel this utter farce?



And, you think that would solve things?


----------



## Badgers (May 24, 2019)

Jean-Claude Juncker seems a bit vexed 

Brexit will be delayed beyond October 31 as Tories focus on ousting May, says Juncker


> He told CNN: "What I don't like in the British debate is it seems more important to replace the prime minister than to find an agreement among themselves.


----------



## Badgers (May 24, 2019)

Is this correct?


----------



## MrCurry (May 25, 2019)

Knowing Boris, yes it probably fits his MO. Talk bollocks then let other people sort out the details.


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> May resigning doesn't solve anything. If parliament blocks 'no deal', which surely it would with various former govt payroll tories like Rudd free to vote against it, what do they then do? All very nice for the likes of Johnson to bluster around, but he'll have to come up with a solution here that isn't 'no deal', just like May had to. Tory membership may want it and vote for someone who wants it, but they're a small number of very warped individuals, even more warped than tory MPs, at least some of whom (and it only takes a few) will absolutely block it.



Parliament cant necessarily block no-deal as its the default position. But there is the possibility that enough tories rebel for the government lose a Confidence vote in order to prevent it happening - and forcing a general election.  
Be interesting to see if Johnson (or whoever) really is going to try and push for crashing out on oct 31. I seriously doubt it - and i doubt their own government would allow it - My money is on him blustering through with some guff about trying to put pressure on europe - "off course I was  bluffing - but its worked because ... bullshit bullshit". 
Could be the shortest political honeymoon ever.


----------



## xenon (May 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> May resigning doesn't solve anything. If parliament blocks 'no deal', which surely it would with various former govt payroll tories like Rudd free to vote against it, what do they then do? All very nice for the likes of Johnson to bluster around, but he'll have to come up with a solution here that isn't 'no deal', just like May had to. Tory membership may want it and vote for someone who wants it, but they're a small number of very warped individuals, even more warped than tory MPs, at least some of whom (and it only takes a few) will absolutely block it.



What if a Johnson lead govt simply doesn't ask parliament and lets the clock run down?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2019)

xenon said:


> What if a Johnson lead govt simply doesn't ask parliament and lets the clock run down?


I suspect his era as leader might be truncated


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Parliament cant necessarily block no-deal as its the default position. But there is the possibility that enough tories rebel for the government lose a Confidence vote in order to prevent it happening - and forcing a general election.
> Be interesting to see if Johnson (or whoever) really is going to try and push for crashing out on oct 31. I seriously doubt it - and i doubt their own government would allow it - My money is on him blustering through with some guff about trying to put pressure on europe - "off course I was  bluffing - but its worked because ... bullshit bullshit".
> Could be the shortest political honeymoon ever.


It will be a negative honeymoon as it is already over


----------



## Puddy_Tat (May 25, 2019)

xenon said:


> What if a Johnson lead govt simply doesn't ask parliament and lets the clock run down?



wasn't one of the parliamentary votes where they voted no to everything a month or two back, to rule out 'no deal'?

or was this something that didn't actually get in to law?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (May 25, 2019)

What about if the Boris-Bannon-Farage plan is for Boris to push for No Deal, the govt falls and an election is called and then Boris and the Tory-Right populists do a Deal with the Brexit Party and run on a”single issue” platform with the whole financial, technical and manipulative powers of the Putinist oligarchs and Bannon’s army of the night focused on Britain?  We could be heading for one hell of a battle.


----------



## xenon (May 25, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> wasn't one of the parliamentary votes where they voted no to everything a month or two back, to rule out 'no deal'?
> 
> or was this something that didn't actually get in to law?


The Yvette Cooper thing? AFAICT that only applied to the May deadline. I don't think it amended the underlying EU withdrawel legislation.


----------



## xenon (May 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I suspect his era as leader might be truncated



In and definistrated by Christmas would be nice...


----------



## Pickman's model (May 25, 2019)

xenon said:


> In and definistrated by Christmas would be nice...


The working deadline is michaelmas


----------



## MickiQ (May 25, 2019)

I can't see BoJo the Clown going for a No Deal, I think he is a lot more remainy/soft brexit than he lets on but he knows the rubes will never buy that. Even if his own party don't foil a No Deal (and many of them are still loyal to the money if nothing else) then a No Deal end of 2019 means come the elections in 2022, PM Boris, head of a minority govt will most likely find himself presiding over an economy in a major recession and getting blamed for it.
I think he genuinely believes that he can browbeat the EU into giving him what he wants, I've met many people like this dipshit (usually in senior management) who just don't believe they can't get what they want just by demanding it.


----------



## AnandLeo (May 25, 2019)

Changing the Prime Minister does not change the stalemate of Brexit. With a minority government and bitter divisions in both parties Conservatives and Labour, cross-party agreement is imperative for a successful Brexit. Such a deal is likely to contain a form of Customs Union which Theresa May declined to compromise. Difficult to forecast what the next Prime Minister might agree to. If the government agrees to a deal involving a Customs Union, the consensus is that it should not preclude UK negotiating trade deals with rest of the world. That’s what the UK government will have to negotiate with the EU if they reach an agreement in the parliament. Without such a move, EU will not negotiate further.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 25, 2019)

The shouty lot are adamant that anything other than no-deal is a complete sell out of 17.8 million voters. Seems to be a truth-by-assertion thing that is possibly working. Don’t know whether that will gain momentum or if it’s peaked with these euro elections.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 25, 2019)

xenon said:


> What if a Johnson lead govt simply doesn't ask parliament and lets the clock run down?


Parliament has its 'meaningful vote' still. It's written into the Withdrawal Act. That doesn't change with a change in leadership. Johnson, or whoever else it is, will face all the same hurdles and the same parliamentary arithmetic that May faced.



> Section 13 of the EU Withdrawal Act says the Government will not be able to ratify the Withdrawal Agreement unless four conditions have been met:
> 
> The documents and an associated statement have been published.
> “The negotiated Withdrawal Agreement and the framework for the future relationship have been approved by a resolution of the House of Commons on a motion moved by a minister of the Crown”.
> ...



Parliament’s 'meaningful vote' on Brexit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Parliament cant necessarily block no-deal as its the default position. But there is the possibility that enough tories rebel for the government lose a Confidence vote in order to prevent it happening - and forcing a general election.
> Be interesting to see if Johnson (or whoever) really is going to try and push for crashing out on oct 31. I seriously doubt it - and i doubt their own government would allow it - My money is on him blustering through with some guff about trying to put pressure on europe - "off course I was  bluffing - but its worked because ... bullshit bullshit".
> Could be the shortest political honeymoon ever.


Yes, tories are generally a very loyal bunch when it comes to holding onto power, so they didn't rebel against May in the nc vote - they all stood for election in 2017 with her face on the posters after all. But some of them might consider that things have changed now and that loyalty is no longer owed.

I don't think Johnson is going to win. But a bit of me hopes he does. It could properly fuck them up.


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 25, 2019)

If Johnson gets to the members vote he will most likely win. The final two will be a hard brexiteer and a "sensible" unity candidate - Hunt or Gove. If its not Johnson flying the brexit flag - it will most likely be Raab. 
If the candidates dont commit to a "EU must budge or its No Deal" position - they wont win. 
Johnson has stated it 31 Oct for leaving whatever - be intersting to see who else lines up with this (delusional) position. 
What will stop Johnson is how much dirt his (many) enemies dig up on him - thus forcing him to drop out.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 25, 2019)

If the party and the men in suits are expecting a GE in the very near future, Johnson will get the leadership purely to drag the Brexit party votes in an attempt to secure a bigger majority in the house.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 25, 2019)

Don’t think Johnson can be harmed by scandal, so much of it is public knowledge already yet it doesn’t dent his popularity. Paints him more as the maverick outsider. Like Trump in this respect.


----------



## Gerry1time (May 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> What will stop Johnson is how much dirt his (many) enemies dig up on him - thus forcing him to drop out.



The one scandal Johnson has not yet been done for is his pro-european days. He wasn't always a brexiter, and I can see Farage going after him on this as a single issue thing in a GE. 'Why vote for an imitation when you can get the real thing' kind of affair. Farage's aim is to get a deputy prime minister role out of all this through coalition. Johnson is uniquely vulnerable to this whilst looking initially like a safe pair of hands.


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 26, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If the party and the men in suits are expecting a GE in the very near future, Johnson will get the leadership purely to drag the Brexit party votes in an attempt to secure a bigger majority in the house.



"the men in suits"  dont have the final  say - the party membership does. And the final two is decided by the mps - who are split into several different factions. Whoever wins will be on a hard brexit platform and will be aiming to win back brexit party votes to the tory party. 
But wether that position would win the tories a election is highly questionable - especially as they would have a large chunk of the the political, economic  and media establishment - as well a large chunk  of their own party - opposed to them.


----------



## oryx (May 26, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> The one scandal Johnson has not yet been done for is his pro-european days.



No, the one scandal Johnson hasn't been done for is his help to get a journalist beaten up. Can't find the link on YouTube any more. To do with his mate and fellow old Etonian Darius Guppy.


----------



## oryx (May 26, 2019)

oryx said:


> No, the one scandal Johnson hasn't been done for is his help to get a journalist beaten up. Can't find the link on YouTube any more. To do with his mate and fellow old Etonian Darius Guppy.



This has been posted on Urban before, shows him to be unfit not just to be a PM but to hold any sort of public office.

I cannot begin to describe how angry the idea of this cunt becoming PM makes me. I don't like Gove, Rudd, Hunt etc. but would accept them as Tory leaders.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2019)

oryx said:


> No, the one scandal Johnson hasn't been done for is his help to get a journalist beaten up. Can't find the link on YouTube any more. To do with his mate and fellow old Etonian Darius Guppy.


----------



## Fez909 (May 26, 2019)

This interview says it all about Johnson



I wonder if the BBC would dare call the PM a nasty piece of work...


----------



## Don Troooomp (May 26, 2019)

I would like to thank PM May for all her hard work and dedication in making a total pig's breakfast of Brexit - She fucked up everything she touched, and made the Tory party look like a set of cunts by way of a bonus.
Thank you, now let's see if BJ can fuck it up even more. I'm sure he can because he's an incompetent little moron with the magnetism and personality of a dog turd - He's be loved in the same way people love headaches everywhere he goes.
With these cretins in charge, Brexit is as dead as it should be.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 26, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> "the men in suits"  dont have the final  say - the party membership does. And the final two is decided by the mps - who are split into several different factions. Whoever wins will be on a hard brexit platform and will be aiming to win back brexit party votes to the tory party.
> But wether that position would win the tories a election is highly questionable - especially as they would have a large chunk of the the political, economic  and media establishment - as well a large chunk  of their own party - opposed to them.



I know the ‘men in suits’ role is limited, but I know they also have an influence on the direction the membership sway. The Tories disintegration into two camps of a more liberal and a hard right conservatism at the moment and the throat ripping that is increasing is a joy to behold.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 26, 2019)

oryx said:


> No, the one scandal Johnson hasn't been done for is his help to get a journalist beaten up. Can't find the link on YouTube any more. To do with his mate and fellow old Etonian Darius Guppy.



This came on Have I Got News For You back in 1998, didn't harm him then, he went on to be elected as London Mayor, so I can't see it harming him now.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 26, 2019)

People will just think he’s a badass tough guy for talking about having someone beaten up.

A significant chunk of the population want a ‘rule breaker’ leading the country because they’re sick of rules and being told what to do, what they can and can’t say etc.

_These days, if you say you’re English you’ll be thrown in Jail._


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (May 26, 2019)

A lot of folk here and elsewhere are talking about Alex Piffle as if it’s a done deal that he’ll be the next PM. Not so sure myself. Even if he is, remember he is actually pro-EU and his pro-Brexit stance was just bullshit to raise his profile, so will be as lame-duck as May has been...


----------



## ruffneck23 (May 26, 2019)

it may not happen yet :

Backlash hits Boris Johnson’s bid for No 10 as senior Tories back away over no-deal Brexit fears


----------



## Kaka Tim (May 26, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> it may not happen yet :
> 
> Backlash hits Boris Johnson’s bid for No 10 as senior Tories back away over no-deal Brexit fears



he is widely despised among tory mps - but he doesn't need a majority of them - he just needs to come second. And his popularity with the grass roots means a lot of mps will under pressure to support him. He is the most obvious person for the brexiteers to rally around. It may be he takes so much flak that that settle on Raab instead - but right now he looks like the most likely winner.


----------



## brogdale (May 26, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> he is widely despised among tory mps - but he doesn't need a majority of them - he just needs to come second. And his popularity with the grass roots means a lot of mps will under pressure to support him. He is the most obvious person for the brexiteers to rally around. It may be he takes so much flak that that settle on Raab instead - but right now he looks like the most likely winner.


Yep.
'Secret' ballot, or not...loads of ex-remainiac tory MPs will be looking over their shoulders at the backwoodsmen in their local associations before going against TCJ.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep.
> 'Secret' ballot, or not...loads of ex-remainiac tory MPs will be looking over their shoulders at the backwoodsmen in their local associations before going against TCJ.


Especially when the choices start to narrow, they may not be keen on Johnson but a lot of the One Nation set would prefer him to Raab


----------



## maomao (May 26, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> A lot of folk here and elsewhere are talking about Alex Piffle as if it’s a done deal that he’ll be the next PM. Not so sure myself. Even if he is, remember he is actually pro-EU and his pro-Brexit stance was just bullshit to raise his profile, so will be as lame-duck as May has been...


Boris doesn't care about the EU or Brexit he cares about Boris. Given the irrelevance his career has become and what happened to May then going for a no deal by letting the clock run out would be his best move really. He'd be a hero to millions. Even if the economy does go tits up. Any other strategy leads to irrelevance and being seen as a traitor.


----------



## ruffneck23 (May 26, 2019)

like not like for all of those


----------



## Dogsauce (May 26, 2019)

I suspect quite a few of the no deal ERG types don’t like Johnson either, it’s not just about Brexit, and also his insincerity over Brexit might put a few of the fundamentalists off.


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2019)

what is uniquely vile and bad abut a johnson win for try leadership as opposed to say, the far more capable and focused gove?


----------



## Sprocket. (May 26, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> what is uniquely vile and bad abut a johnson win for try leadership as opposed to say, the far more capable and focused gove?



‘Tis the difference between shit and shite.


----------



## xenon (May 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Parliament has its 'meaningful vote' still. It's written into the Withdrawal Act. That doesn't change with a change in leadership. Johnson, or whoever else it is, will face all the same hurdles and the same parliamentary arithmetic that May faced.
> 
> 
> 
> Parliament’s 'meaningful vote' on Brexit




The default is still exit with no deal if the WAB isn't passed.
The Withdrawal Agreement Bill

"If the Government cannot get the Withdrawal Agreement Bill through Parliament, then the default legal position is that the UK cannot ratify the deal, and so would leave the EU on 31 October without a deal."


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> what is uniquely vile and bad abut a johnson win for try leadership as opposed to say, the far more capable and focused gove?



Gove's record of incompetence is possibly even worse than Johnson's


----------



## DotCommunist (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> Gove's record of incompetence is possibly even worse than Johnson's


hmm. Well the question still stands, what is uniquely bad about BJ as opposed to the rest of the assorted cunts, PPE freaks and muslim hating obsessives?


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> Gove's record of incompetence is possibly even worse than Johnson's


Er how so? He was a very successful Minister for Education, he wasn't at Justice for that long but undid some of the mess Grayling had left and at Environment has managed to get praise from liberal and green groups.

Gove's record is excellent (in terms of competence), his attempted 2016 run for the leadership being one of his few mistakes.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Er how so? He was a very successful Minister for Education, he wasn't at Justice for that long but undid some of the mess Grayling had left and at Environment has managed to get praise from liberal and green groups.
> 
> Gove's record is excellent (in terms of competence), his attempted 2016 run for the leadership being one of his few mistakes.


From another thread


spanglechick said:


> Surely there’s recognition that while Gove was successful in making lots of changes while Education secretary, they were half baked nonsense that has driven the profession into crisis?
> 
> I mean, obviously that’s true of hunt at health too, but nobody really cashed in on gove’s chaos.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

Sure, but he achieved his main aims. It's like saying Thatcher wasn't successful, the outcome may be terrible but it's nonsense to say that she was incompetent.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Sure, but he achieved his main aims. It's like saying Thatcher wasn't successful, the outcome may be terrible but it's nonsense to say that she was incompetent.


She was all mbga and where are we now?


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Er how so? He was a very successful Minister for Education, he wasn't at Justice for that long but undid some of the mess Grayling had left and at Environment has managed to get praise from liberal and green groups.



Not sure his record as Education Secretary could ever be described as "very successful" - the Free Schools mess (and the subsequent ballooning of cost - £10bn and counting) was down to him, many of his proposed changes to the curriculum were mindless, he was the one to ramp up tuition fees the most (further fuelling the immense level of student loan debt), the shortfall in the number of teachers going into training began on his watch (and because of his antics) and so (probably) did the off-rolling.  

Being better than Grayling at anything is a very low bar to get over, and whilst people have talked up his time at DEFRA it isn't really based on much, either in terms of actual achievement in his ministry or impact on related matters (he is for both the third runway and fracking).  All he's done there is what he has done elsewhere, ie: used his charm and his mates to get people to like him whilst doing nothing, or nothing good at any rate.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> Not sure his record as Education Secretary could ever be described as "very successful" - the Free Schools mess (and the subsequent ballooning of cost - £10bn and counting) was down to him, many of his proposed changes to the curriculum were mindless, he was the one to ramp up tuition fees the most (further fuelling the immense level of student loan debt), the shortfall in the number of teachers going into training began on his watch (and because of his antics) and so (probably) did the off-rolling.


If your aim is to increase the marketisation of education (as it was Gove's and governments) then it cannot be called incompetence to achieve them. These are examples of his competence not his incompetence.

Again this is like saying Thatcher was incompetent because the result of her policies on mining towns was bad.


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> If your aim is to increase the marketisation of education (as it was Gove's and governments) then it cannot be called incompetence to achieve them. These are examples of his competence not his incompetence.



That is a definition of competence that very few people would recognize, though.  By that standard, chefs are competent before anyone actually eats the food.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

No it's an absolutely standard definition of competence - you measure competence against the aims and objectives set - and on that definition Gove is competent, very much so.


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No it's an absolutely standard definition of competence - you measure competence against the aims and objectives set - and on that definition Gove is competent, very much so.



You've reduced the "aims and objectives set" to a level of "a minister of state successfully brought in a policy", though.  By that definition, Grayling is competent because he was able to sign that ferry contract.


----------



## maomao (May 26, 2019)

They're all competent because they set out to wreck and they wrecked.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> You've reduced the "aims and objectives set" to a level of "a minister of state successfully brought in a policy", though.  By that definition, Grayling is competent because he was able to sign that ferry contract.


The introduction of a series of policies that were/are strongly opposed by groups in the sector and wider society, a series of policies that will re-shape the sector quite drastically in a way they desired. 

Thatcher was successful because she privatised industries, weakened unions or closed coal mines. The coalition government was successful in redistributing wealth upwards, in aggressively marketising sectors where there was/is still some resistance to marketisation. And Gove was key in that marketisation in education a key area for liberalisation, but one that has resisted it quite firmly.


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The introduction of a series of policies that were/are strongly opposed by groups in the sector and wider society, a series of policies that will re-shape the sector quite drastically in a way they desired.
> 
> Thatcher was successful because she privatised industries, weakened unions or closed coal mines. The coalition government was successful in redistributing wealth upwards, in aggressively marketising sectors where there was/is still some resistance to marketisation. And Gove was key in that marketisation in education a key area for liberalisation, but one that has resisted it quite firmly.



This is to confuse achieveing a goal (and not an especially difficult one given that Gove was a minister in a government that had a majority in the Commons to push his plans through) with being competent, though.  Competence, especially competence in a government minister, can only be measured by the impact it has on the government and on the governed.  

Gove's reforms at Education have created a number of looming crises and have worsened things for the majority of people who work in and are educated in the system he ran, therefore he was not a competent Education Secretary.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> This is to confuse achieveing a goal (and not an especially difficult one given that Gove was a minister in a government that had a majority in the Commons to push his plans through) with being competent, though.  Competence, especially competence in a government minister, can only be measured by the impact it has on the government and on the governed.


Sorry but that is total twaddle, it suppose some sort of "objective" measure of positive impact.

Thatcher was many thing but incompetent was not one of them. Both Thatcher and Gove would say that the political changes they made have had/will have a positive impact on the country.


----------



## agricola (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but that is total twaddle, it suppose some sort of "objective" measure of positive impact.
> 
> Thatcher was many thing but incompetent was not one of them. Both Thatcher and Gove would say that the political changes they made have had/will have a positive impact on the country.



Gove's reforms wasted billions of pounds and haven't had the sort of impact he claimed that they would.  To ignore all that and claim that because he was able to do it, in the teeth of advice that correctly told him what would happen, means that he is competent is bizarre.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry but that is total twaddle, it suppose some sort of "objective" measure of positive impact.
> 
> Thatcher was many thing but incompetent was not one of them. Both Thatcher and Gove would say that the political changes they made have had/will have a positive impact on the country.


They would say that. But they obvs wouldn't be right. I'd say that Thatcher was incompetent. Her prescription for the country led to great social discontent. Her proclaimed aim of bringing harmony where there was discord clearly not met.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 26, 2019)

agricola said:


> Gove's reforms wasted billions of pounds and haven't had the sort of impact he claimed that they would.


They have opened the education sector to marketisation in a major way, that was what the aim was, and he was successful in that. 

The above is some sort of pre-Machievllian nonsense. But there's not much point so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Competent doesn't mean "what I'd like to see". The fact that the enclosure of commons increases inequality does not mean that those doing it are incompetent.


----------



## AnandLeo (May 28, 2019)

I say, the politicians who clamour for another referendum on the assumption of overturning the previous result to leave, are imprudent. The objective is to leave as conceded, with provisions to safeguard the vital economic, industrial and cultural relations between UK and EU, by negotiating a smooth Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> I say, the politicians who clamour for another referendum on the assumption of overturning the previous result to leave, are imprudent. The objective is to leave as conceded, with provisions to safeguard the vital economic, industrial and cultural relations between UK and EU, by negotiating a smooth Brexit.


I say another referendum to gain public consent is essential to avoid future discontent. A deal imposed by politicians is unlikely to bring people together unless approved through a confirmatory vote


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Er how so? He was a very successful Minister for Education, he wasn't at Justice for that long but undid some of the mess Grayling had left and at Environment has managed to get praise from liberal and green groups.
> 
> Gove's record is excellent (in terms of competence), his attempted 2016 run for the leadership being one of his few mistakes.



To be fair I thought his 2016 leadership bid was a masterful stitching up of Johnson.


----------



## andysays (May 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I say another referendum to gain public consent is essential to avoid future discontent. A deal imposed by politicians is unlikely to bring people together unless approved through a confirmatory vote


TBH, I think that even *with *a successful confirmatory vote, a certain amount of future discontent and division is likely.


----------



## Drarok (May 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBH, I think that even *with *a successful confirmatory vote, a certain amount of future discontent and division is likely.


Agreed. The country is hugely divided on this topic, which is unsurprising given that leave won by such a small margin.


----------



## LDC (May 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I say another referendum to gain public consent is essential to avoid future discontent. A deal imposed by politicians is unlikely to bring people together unless approved through a confirmatory vote



I'm totally against a second referendum for a variety of reasons.

As one example as to the possible result and mess afterwards though, what if it's a close 'remain' vote but with a lower turn-out, and so has less legitimacy?


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBH, I think that even *with *a successful confirmatory vote, a certain amount of future discontent and division is likely.



Or even an escalation of discontent and division.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

And this is why it's all fucked up


----------



## steeplejack (May 28, 2019)

For the above reasons I think it's best if Brexit happens:

1. this will be the only way to end division, quickly;

2. it will be realised fairly quickly that Brexit isn't really a solution to any of the UK's problems;

3. Momentum will gradually gather to re-join over time, as Brexit will have been tried, and seen not to work at all- indeed to make things much worse.

I don't want to leave the EU but it seems the best compromise solution. Crashing out with no deal or revoking article 50 will define the rest of our lives. If we try it and it doesn't work (99% certain IMO) then we will re-join and the likes of Farage and deranged political zombies from the 90s like Widdecombe will be shown up for the shysters and frauds they are.

Brexit has to be shown to fail on the basis of evidence. Its "newness" and ludicrous "anti-establishment" branding give it an attraction, which remaining and trying to jump-start zombie centrism really doesn't.


----------



## Ted Striker (May 28, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> For the above reasons I think it's best if Brexit happens:
> 
> 1. this will be the only way to end division, quickly;
> 
> ...



I'm on the verge of this, but the 52% will take decades to die off and/or admit they were wrong all along (on the assumption they are proved to be (wrong) ofc).


----------



## teuchter (May 28, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I'm totally against a second referendum for a variety of reasons.
> 
> As one example as to the possible result and mess afterwards though, what if it's a close 'remain' vote but with a lower turn-out, and so has less legitimacy?


Why would that give it less legitimacy?


----------



## Drarok (May 28, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> For the above reasons I think it's best if Brexit happens […]


I can't get behind this thinking, personally. It won't end division at all, since those who want to remain are getting shafted. Will people realise it isn't a solution, or will they just blame MPs for not "getting on with it", and suggest it would have been fine if they'd just got it done sooner? Finally, will the EU have us back after we've dragged our heels and made a big fucking stink for _years_ over leaving?


----------



## steeplejack (May 28, 2019)

I'm not doing a celebratory dance about it, sure. The whole thing is the most horrible mess and I get any kind of Brexit will make the vast majority of us worse off and benefit only well-connected disaster capitalists and the political class.

_However_ people voted for it and no one seems terribly interested in the fact that the vote was a. advisory and b. very dubiously won, however clear that becomes. I'm not sure how many people beyond the twittersphere are even aware that Farage is a person of interest to the American authorities, given the ways in which the great investigative journalism being done on it is being suppressed / ignored / derided by MSM.

Therefore, I think doing it and then realising it makes things much worse, rather than better, is the only way out of the impasse. It will expose the fraudsters for what they are, and people will know from experience it's a really bad thing, and want to reverse it on the basis of evidence. The EU would have us back, albeit on much shitter terms than the ones we enjoy now.

Compared to the unthinkable consequences of no deal, revoking A50, or yet more months wasted on a second referendum which may even produce the same result as last time, I think leaving is the best of some extremely shit options on the table.


----------



## Raheem (May 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why would that give it less legitimacy?


It will have either greater or lesser legitimacy depending on what the person speaking wants it to have.


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

Open question to you all. 

On the scale of 0 to 10. 

What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


----------



## teuchter (May 28, 2019)

4.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.



That's a bit tricky to answer since there was a reasonable chance of riots even before the referendum. But I'll say 8.


----------



## redsquirrel (May 28, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> I'm totally against a second referendum for a variety of reasons.
> 
> As one example as to the possible result and mess afterwards though, what if it's a close 'remain' vote but with a lower turn-out, and so has less legitimacy?


Certainly there has been no thought to all the questions a 2nd referendum might raise because it those proposing it see it as nothing other than a mechanism designed to simply shut down the issue, to put the genie back in the bottle and go back to 2015.


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why would that give it less legitimacy?



Because the number of people voting to remain in a new referendum would be smaller than the number who voted to leave in the last one.


----------



## marty21 (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


2


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


there is a 10 out of 10 chance of civil unrest happening whether brexit happens in whatever form or if it is revoked or otherwise prevented

it might not be related to brexit, mind


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

marty21 said:


> 2


thought you'd be more of an _e_ man


----------



## kabbes (May 28, 2019)

21


----------



## marty21 (May 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> 21


meant to say that, some civil unrest made me jump and press enter


----------



## belboid (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


A fascism that makes Griffin look like a fluffy poodle will re-emerge in the likes of Mansfield and Wakefield, and it will be a shit scary time to be an Eastern European.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


low. Despite Farage's bluster, his attempts at mass demos, etc, have been pitiful. There's a reason for that. 

Depends on how it doesn't happen as well. If it were to not happen under a new labour govt, that would be rather different from it not happening under the tories.


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> low. Despite Farage's bluster, his attempts at mass demos, etc, have been pitiful. There's a reason for that.
> 
> Depends on how it doesn't happen as well. If it were to not happen under a new labour govt, that would be rather different from it not happening under the tories.



Yeah I agree. i really cant see riots or mass civil unrest. 

 I reckon most Brexitiers will just shrug their shoulders and move on. There will be a tiny bunch of far right people hell bent of making a point though.


----------



## teuchter (May 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Because the number of people voting to remain in a new referendum would be smaller than the number who voted to leave in the last one.


So what?


----------



## andysays (May 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So what?


----------



## belboid (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> I reckon most Brexitiers will just shrug their shoulders and move on.


are you kidding??


----------



## SpackleFrog (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Yeah I agree. i really cant see riots or mass civil unrest.
> 
> I reckon most Brexitiers will just shrug their shoulders and move on. There will be a tiny bunch of far right people hell bent of making a point though.



I reckon we're about 48 hours away from socialist utopia. After all, that's what I'd like to happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I reckon we're about 48 hours away from socialist utopia. After all, that's what I'd like to happen.


and only 24 hours from tulsa


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Yeah I agree. i really cant see riots or mass civil unrest.
> 
> I reckon most Brexitiers will just shrug their shoulders and move on. There will be a tiny bunch of far right people hell bent of making a point though.


i think you're being overly optimistic but i daresay we'll find out in a few months time


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

belboid said:


> are you kidding??



I'll put it another way. 

I reckon most people who voted leave will just shrug their shoulders and move on.

Yeah I believe that.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> I'll put it another way.
> 
> I reckon most people who voted leave will just shrug their shoulders and move on.
> 
> Yeah I believe that.


i think the bunch of far right people may be rather larger than tiny


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think the bunch of far right people may be rather larger than tiny



I used to really worry about this. 100s of English Anders Breiviks waiting to strike. 

Maybe wishful thinking on my part but i just don't get a sense of there will be a massive revolt if/when (fingers crossed) Article 50 is revoked.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> I used to really worry about this. 100s of English Anders Breiviks waiting to strike.
> 
> Maybe wishful thinking on my part but i just don't get a sense of there will be a massive revolt if/when (fingers crossed) Article 50 is revoked.


don't think you'll get a great ton of breiviks but you might get a lot of people following the likes of paul golding, tommy robinson etc


----------



## andysays (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> I used to really worry about this. 100s of English Anders Breiviks waiting to strike.
> 
> Maybe wishful thinking on my part but i just don't get a sense of there will be a massive revolt if/when (fingers crossed) Article 50 is revoked.


It's not simply a binary choice between a massive revolt and all those who voted Leave shrugging and moving on though, is it?

That's the same sort of simplistic bollocks which has been all too common in discussions on this issue, mostly, it has to be said, from those who favour remaining...


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> It's not simply a binary choice between a massive revolt and all those who voted Leave shrugging and moving on though, is it?



I didn't say it was. I don't believe there will be a revolt or civil unrest.


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> don't think you'll get a great ton of breiviks but you might get a lot of people following the likes of paul golding, tommy robinson etc



Yep of course. Probably more in the David copeland mould. It's possible.

Edited.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Yep of course. Probably more in the Mark Chapman mould. It's possible.


what mark chapman shot john lennon mark chapman?


----------



## mod (May 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what mark chapman shot john lennon mark chapman?



David copeland i meant. Not sure where mark Chapman came from. Maybe the copy of The Catcher in the Rye on my desk!


----------



## MickiQ (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


Less than < 1/10 Somewhere between 0.5 and 0.9. There will be lots of angry people sat in Weatherspoons muttering into their pints and loads of boring shit posted on Facebook about TREASON  and BETRAYAL. (caps are important). Probably a few more wastrels clambering about on railway station roofs. There is a possibility of violence where I work since our in-ofice Brexiteer's ranting was bad enough when May delayed it. If it gets cancelled someone (possibly me) will end up killing him and stuffing his body in the dumpster out back.
But beyond that no, Farage doesn't strike me as the sort who could lead a charge over the barricades shouting Give Me Brexit or Give Me Death!


----------



## brogdale (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Open question to you all.
> 
> On the scale of 0 to 10.
> 
> What chance do you think there is of civil unrest happening 'if' Brexit doesn't happen? Riots, street battles, terrorist attacks etc.


Dunno, but 10/10 we know what colour their vests will be.


----------



## Sprocket. (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> David copeland i meant. Not sure where mark Chapman came from. Maybe the copy of The Catcher in the Rye on my desk!


----------



## 8ball (May 28, 2019)

mod said:


> Yeah I agree. i really cant see riots or mass civil unrest.
> 
> I reckon most Brexitiers will just shrug their shoulders and move on. There will be a tiny bunch of far right people hell bent of making a point though.



Yeah, I think a whole bunch of people (not just Brexitieres by the way) are entirely bored with it.  
And when people get really bored of something, what do they turn to?

Adequate food, that's what.


----------



## belboid (May 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Dunno, but 10/10 we know what colour their vests will be.


They will be red white and blue! No need for any foreign imports.  Tho yellow was jolly appropriate for Jonny Frenchman, of course.   [/kipper]


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> But beyond that no, Farage doesn't strike me as the sort who could lead a charge over the barricades shouting Give Me Brexit or Give Me Death!



He's threaten it - Nigel Farage has said he would, “don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 28, 2019)

The chances of civil war will depend almost entirely on whether or not the front lines are within easy waddling distance of a wetherspoon's.


----------



## 8ball (May 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> The chances of civil war will depend almost entirely on whether or not the front lines are within easy waddling distance of a wetherspoon's.



I just want to calmly register my outrage and will be following up with a longer response which will include the word "structural" at least four times.


----------



## MickiQ (May 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's threaten it - Nigel Farage has said he would, “don khaki, pick up a rifle and head for the front lines”


The front lines is the new name for the bar is it? I'm 61 and fit for my age but rioting is a young persons game, I'm certainly not up to it and most of the hardcore "We Won't Stand for This OUTRAGE" Brexiteers I know  are older than I am.


----------



## maomao (May 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The front lines is the new name for the bar is it?


And Don Kahki is his mate that's getting a round in.


----------



## treelover (May 28, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


>




surely, that would sink any other politician, perhaps even falange?, but for some reason, not johnson


----------



## Poi E (May 28, 2019)

Maybe in a sensible place like Italy but not here.


----------



## toblerone3 (May 28, 2019)

Could Boris Johnson bring the country together with his No Deal Brexit, bumbling buffoonish ways and random forays into social liberalism?

I think he is a clever politician and might combine a No Deal Brexit with a dose of Corbynism ie social liberalism combined with an end to Austerity.


----------



## gosub (May 28, 2019)

Rioting will be stem from mobility scooter go slows


----------



## Drarok (May 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> It's not simply a binary choice between a massive revolt and all those who voted Leave shrugging and moving on though, is it?
> 
> That's the same sort of simplistic bollocks which has been all too common in discussions on this issue, *mostly, it has to be said, from those who favour remaining...*


Hol' up. _Both_ sides of this debate are prone to massive over-simplification. This sort of fake news is, mostly, it has to be said, from those who favour leaving…


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Could Boris Johnson bring the country together with his No Deal Brexit, bumbling buffoonish ways and random forays into social liberalism?
> 
> I think he is a clever politician and might combine a No Deal Brexit with a dose of Corbynism ie social liberalism combined with an end to Austerity.


he might soon be the convict boris johnson


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

No riots and unrest if we renege and just cancel Brexit but the major political parties will be dead.

I'd say that was a plus but it's probably the Brexit party that replaces one and Lib Dems (back again, shit) the other.


----------



## Wilf (May 29, 2019)

Bercow says he's staying ... Maria Miller tells him to fuck off...

Bercow should go as Speaker over bullying inquiry, says Miller


----------



## Mr Moose (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> No riots and unrest if we renege and just cancel Brexit but the major political parties will be dead.
> 
> I'd say that was a plus but it's probably the Brexit party that replaces one and Lib Dems (back again, shit) the other.



We don’t have two parties because they are any good. We have them because of the interests they represent. They won’t die because of Brexir when all the frames of reference are still ‘a Labour voter who voted Lib Dem’ or ‘a Tory voter who voted BP’. The voters are merely on loan.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> We don’t have two parties because they are any good. We have them because of the interests they represent. They won’t die because of Brexir when all the frames of reference are still ‘a Labour voter who voted Lib Dem’ or ‘a Tory voter who voted BP’. The voters are merely on loan.



The interests will move along with the voters, we've already seen investors becoming skittish about donating.

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

The trade unions might stick with Labour but capital will invest elsewhere if needed.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> The interests will move along with the voters, we've already seen investors becoming skittish about donating.
> 
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times
> 
> The trade unions might stick with Labour but capital will invest elsewhere if needed.


Paywall


----------



## Poi E (May 29, 2019)

The UK Conservative party is facing a worsening cash crunch as some funders hold off from making donations while Theresa May remains prime minister, according to several party donors. The financial pressures have prompted concerns over whether the party can afford to fight a snap general election as growing numbers of ministers and MPs believe that Mrs May’s refusal to countenance alternative proposals for leaving the EU may result in a dissolution of parliament.  Mick Davis, the Tories’ chief executive, has told supporters in recent meetings that the party urgently needs more donations to keep itself afloat. Sir Mick, former chief of mining company Xstrata, is also one of the largest individuals donors, giving £295,500 in the last quarter of 2018. “It apparently has just £1.5m left in the bank, an incredibly low financial buffer, and no donors want to give any money because of the total chaos,” said one fundraiser. One senior figure at Conservative headquarters said “donors are frustrated by the parliamentary party’s failure to get behind the prime minister”. However, one Tory donor said: “We are frustrated by lack of consistency: Mick plans to raise £32m in 2019 from donations, while at the same time it is obvious that the donors have lost confidence in Number 10. Hence no money is coming in.” Another senior Tory agreed that the party’s two treasurers, Sir Mick and Ehud Sheleg, an art gallery director, “themselves are putting in more than they expected to”. Conservative Campaign Headquarters declined to comment on the claims. According to the minutes of a recent meeting of party donors seen by the Financial Times, the party’s income last year was £26m and its expenses were £25m, leaving an operating income of £1m. About £3m of legal costs detailed in the minutes, which are related to an investigation into election expenses in South Thanet during the 2015 general election, according to a party campaigner, are thought to have eaten into the party’s cash reserves. The largest cost has been £5m spent on a team of campaign managers recruited in the wake of the party’s disappointing performance in the 2017 election. These individuals have been working in marginal seats, but some donors have criticised the expense. “Adding to the worries is the direct and indirect costs for the campaign managers; costs Labour do not have to worry about,” said a donor. “Hence [Sir Mick] Davis’s odd claim that if an election had to be fought, CCHQ would be ready. It seems highly inconsistent with the actual finances.” One Conservative MP with knowledge of the situation said: “It is true that we should be doing much better on fundraising. But it is far from dire, the donors just want clarity.” But many Conservative donors have refused to increase funding to the party while Mrs May remains leader, with several Eurosceptics stating that a new prime minister must be installed before they will donate any more money.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Paywall



Google the headline to unlock it's secrets.


----------



## Poi E (May 29, 2019)

So Tories going broke. Well, they've run the country into the ground so the party is next. Will they collapse into a blue hole from which no shire escapes?


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Google the headline to unlock it's secrets.



Blimey, that works, worth knowing for the future, cheers.

"Conservative party faces cash crunch as pressure grows on Theresa May" - Google Search


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Google the headline to unlock it's secrets.


Is it too much to ask for paywalled material to be copied and pasted or screenshots taken?


----------



## brogdale (May 29, 2019)

Caught the eye; spending £3m to defend over-spending.
How very tory.



> About £3m of legal costs detailed in the minutes, which are related to an investigation into election expenses in South Thanet during the 2015 general election, according to a party campaigner, are thought to have eaten into the party’s cash reserves.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Is it too much to ask for paywalled material to be copied and pasted or screenshots taken?



TBF, that's a breach of copyright, and in theory could result in action against urban.


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Is it too much to ask for paywalled material to be copied and pasted or screenshots taken?



When I'm posting on the phone and can't be fucked it is.



cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, that works, worth knowing for the future, cheers.



It's one of the less annoying paywalls. It also tends to add a load of shit to your copy/paste if you do copy the source.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> When I'm posting on the phone and can't be fucked it is.


maybe find a different source for people who are on the phone themselves and don't want to google where they shouldn't have to


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> maybe find a different source for people who are on the phone themselves and don't want to google where they shouldn't have to



No.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF, that's a breach of copyright, and in theory could result in action against urban.


Oh give over, if you're that concerned take it up with editor. There's so much copyright infringing stuff up on the site that one more story won't make the slightest bit of difference


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> No.


It'd show a nice spirit if you liked Poi E's post above where he supplies the paywalled text


----------



## Artaxerxes (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It'd show a nice spirit if you liked Poi E's post above where he supplies the paywalled text



Uh huh.


----------



## teuchter (May 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> TBF, that's a breach of copyright, and in theory could result in action against urban.


It's been officially ok-d by a mod recently.


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's been officially ok-d by a mod recently.



Has it? Perhaps you can point me to that post?

I would only do it within a spoiler tag, to avoid google indexing it. Publishers with paywalls are starting to get arsey about breaches of their paywalls.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has it? Perhaps you can point me to that post?
> 
> I would only do it within a spoiler tag, to avoid google indexing it. Publishers with paywalls are starting to get arsey about breaches of their paywalls.


If you use a screenshot Google can't index it


----------



## teuchter (May 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has it? Perhaps you can point me to that post?



I'm banned from doing so


----------



## cupid_stunt (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> If you use a screenshot Google can't index it



A full article tends to fill more than a mobile screen, or indeed a laptop one, is there a way of doing a screenshot of something that over spills a screen?


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> A full article tends to fill more than a mobile screen, or indeed a laptop one, is there a way of doing a screenshot of something that over spills a screen?


Yes, you do more than one screenshot


----------



## gosub (May 29, 2019)

Poi E said:


> The UK Conservative party is facing a worsening cash crunch as some funders hold off from making donations while Theresa May remains prime minister, according to several party donors. The financial pressures have prompted concerns over whether the party can afford to fight a snap general election as growing numbers of ministers and MPs believe that Mrs May’s refusal to countenance alternative proposals for leaving the EU may result in a dissolution of parliament.  Mick Davis, the Tories’ chief executive, has told supporters in recent meetings that the party urgently needs more donations to keep itself afloat. Sir Mick, former chief of mining company Xstrata, is also one of the largest individuals donors, giving £295,500 in the last quarter of 2018. “It apparently has just £1.5m left in the bank, an incredibly low financial buffer, and no donors want to give any money because of the total chaos,” said one fundraiser. One senior figure at Conservative headquarters said “donors are frustrated by the parliamentary party’s failure to get behind the prime minister”. However, one Tory donor said: “We are frustrated by lack of consistency: Mick plans to raise £32m in 2019 from donations, while at the same time it is obvious that the donors have lost confidence in Number 10. Hence no money is coming in.” Another senior Tory agreed that the party’s two treasurers, Sir Mick and Ehud Sheleg, an art gallery director, “themselves are putting in more than they expected to”. Conservative Campaign Headquarters declined to comment on the claims. According to the minutes of a recent meeting of party donors seen by the Financial Times, the party’s income last year was £26m and its expenses were £25m, leaving an operating income of £1m. About £3m of legal costs detailed in the minutes, which are related to an investigation into election expenses in South Thanet during the 2015 general election, according to a party campaigner, are thought to have eaten into the party’s cash reserves. The largest cost has been £5m spent on a team of campaign managers recruited in the wake of the party’s disappointing performance in the 2017 election. These individuals have been working in marginal seats, but some donors have criticised the expense. “Adding to the worries is the direct and indirect costs for the campaign managers; costs Labour do not have to worry about,” said a donor. “Hence [Sir Mick] Davis’s odd claim that if an election had to be fought, CCHQ would be ready. It seems highly inconsistent with the actual finances.” One Conservative MP with knowledge of the situation said: “It is true that we should be doing much better on fundraising. But it is far from dire, the donors just want clarity.” But many Conservative donors have refused to increase funding to the party while Mrs May remains leader, with several Eurosceptics stating that a new prime minister must be installed before they will donate any more money.


All the best people go bancrupt these days... It's a sign of business genius apparently


----------



## Poi E (May 29, 2019)

To be  sound  has one merely has to have been associated with a fortune, whether made or lost. Of course, not the done thing to lose one's own fortune.


----------



## Dogsauce (May 29, 2019)

If their finances are so fucked, why hasn’t Mike Ashley tried to buy them yet?


----------



## Poi E (May 29, 2019)

No pension pot to strip.


----------



## teqniq (May 29, 2019)

Worthless parasites.

Government spends almost £100m on Brexit consultants


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Worthless parasites.
> 
> Government spends almost £100m on Brexit consultants


You wouldn't say that if you'd won the contract


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

Poi E said:


> The UK Conservative party is facing a worsening cash crunch as some funders hold off from making donations while Theresa May remains prime minister, according to several party donors. The financial pressures have prompted concerns over whether the party can afford to fight a snap general election as growing numbers of ministers and MPs believe that Mrs May’s refusal to countenance alternative proposals for leaving the EU may result in a dissolution of parliament.  Mick Davis, the Tories’ chief executive, has told supporters in recent meetings that the party urgently needs more donations to keep itself afloat. Sir Mick, former chief of mining company Xstrata, is also one of the largest individuals donors, giving £295,500 in the last quarter of 2018. “It apparently has just £1.5m left in the bank, an incredibly low financial buffer, and no donors want to give any money because of the total chaos,” said one fundraiser. One senior figure at Conservative headquarters said “donors are frustrated by the parliamentary party’s failure to get behind the prime minister”. However, one Tory donor said: “We are frustrated by lack of consistency: Mick plans to raise £32m in 2019 from donations, while at the same time it is obvious that the donors have lost confidence in Number 10. Hence no money is coming in.” Another senior Tory agreed that the party’s two treasurers, Sir Mick and Ehud Sheleg, an art gallery director, “themselves are putting in more than they expected to”. Conservative Campaign Headquarters declined to comment on the claims. According to the minutes of a recent meeting of party donors seen by the Financial Times, the party’s income last year was £26m and its expenses were £25m, leaving an operating income of £1m. About £3m of legal costs detailed in the minutes, which are related to an investigation into election expenses in South Thanet during the 2015 general election, according to a party campaigner, are thought to have eaten into the party’s cash reserves. The largest cost has been £5m spent on a team of campaign managers recruited in the wake of the party’s disappointing performance in the 2017 election. These individuals have been working in marginal seats, but some donors have criticised the expense. “Adding to the worries is the direct and indirect costs for the campaign managers; costs Labour do not have to worry about,” said a donor. “Hence [Sir Mick] Davis’s odd claim that if an election had to be fought, CCHQ would be ready. It seems highly inconsistent with the actual finances.” One Conservative MP with knowledge of the situation said: “It is true that we should be doing much better on fundraising. But it is far from dire, the donors just want clarity.” But many Conservative donors have refused to increase funding to the party while Mrs May remains leader, with several Eurosceptics stating that a new prime minister must be installed before they will donate any more money.


Given the number of multimillionaires in the parliamentary conservative party it's telling none of them seem to feel up to putting their money where their mouths are


----------



## teqniq (May 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You wouldn't say that if you'd won the contract



As I would never have bid for it in the first place the question of my not saying the above would not arise.


----------



## Pickman's model (May 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> As I would never have bid for it in the first place the question of my not saying the above would not arise.


Given the ferry contract I think we should start submitting bids for these contracts, much better odds than the lottery. We should have a contract syndicate


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

Sajid Javid on Marr repeated the Boris line regarding brexit that Ireland is the tail wagging the dog, but anyway his solution is the impossible technological one. It won't work unless every part of the border has some kind of detection device, every vehicle and thing and person and animal is microchipped, that the detectors can see inside vehicles, and there are no transgressions with things and people crossing the UK/EU border with no microchips or whatever.
What made it (his interview) worse was he framed it like he would do the Republic of Ireland a favour by 'reaching out' and paying the entire cost of a 'digitized border'.
The contempt brexiters frequently show towards Ireland is an echo of the British racist colonial history and is fixed in British DNA in my view.


----------



## Serge Forward (Jun 3, 2019)

Did you just say colonialism is genetic?


----------



## andysays (Jun 3, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Did you just say colonialism is genetic?


I'm sure Javid will be happy to hear that philosophical considers his DNA is acceptably British though...


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Did you just say colonialism is genetic?


If there is a kind of cultural geneticism yes. I was attempting to be kind of poetic (and failing).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The contempt brexiters frequently show towards Ireland is an echo of the British racist colonial history and is fixed in British DNA in my view.


no it isnt


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm sure Javid will be happy to hear that philosophical considers his DNA is acceptably British though...





Pickman's model said:


> no it isnt



In my opinion it is.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In my opinion it is.


No, it isn't an echo


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No, it isn't an echo


It does not surprise me that you seem disinterested in Javid's stupid proposal made yesterday regarding the border.
I mention it today because it is again kind of current (not that the issue has ever gone away).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It does not surprise me that you seem disinterested in Javid's stupid proposal made yesterday regarding the border.
> I mention it today because it is again kind of current (not that the issue has ever gone away).


It is not an echo of British racist colonial history as British racist colonial rule continues to this day in Ireland


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It does not surprise me that you seem disinterested in Javid's stupid proposal made yesterday regarding the border.
> I mention it today because it is again kind of current (not that the issue has ever gone away).


And of course I am disinterested in what yer man said just as I am disinterested in everything to do with the tory party's internal affairs


----------



## Serge Forward (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If there is a kind of cultural geneticism yes. I was attempting to be kind of poetic (and failing).


The William Topaz McGonagall of Urban poets eh? What is this "cultural geneticism" of which you speak? Does it also mean people who are or have been colonised are genetically coded towards being colonised?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It is not an echo of British racist colonial history as British racist colonial rule continues to this day in Ireland


Yes you are right, British Colonial history which is still in place.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 3, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> The William Topaz McGonagall of Urban poets eh? What is this "cultural geneticism" of which you speak? Does it also mean people who are or have been colonised are genetically coded towards being colonised?


What I meant, poorly expressed, I that so much of established British culture contains a colonial disdain for so many other countries woven in. Hence Javid framing his stupid idea as a way of doing the Irish a favour.


----------



## xenon (Jun 3, 2019)

I hate those racist brits.
It's in their DNA.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 3, 2019)

The British as a people is a bit of a rear view mirror thing these days.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 3, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes you are right, British Colonial history which is still in place.


history is always there


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 3, 2019)

treelover said:


> surely, that would sink any other politician, perhaps even falange?, but for some reason, not johnson



Would it really though? I mean he's just getting a number for a school mate so he can beat some guy up. Is the electorate actually outraged by that? 




Poi E said:


> Maybe in a sensible place like Italy but not here.



That's a joke right? Remember Berlusconi? Who actually has just been elected as an MEP?


----------



## Adsgr8adventure (Jun 4, 2019)

weltweit said:


> The ballot papers said remain or leave the EU and the voters chose leave.


The voters where lied to. You can not say that they where not.


----------



## Ming (Jun 4, 2019)

Adsgr8adventure said:


> The voters where lied to. You can not say that they where not.


Seems to be the spirit of the age. Identify a bunch of thick cunts in gerrymandered voting districts. Lie to them. Get a mandate. Job done.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 4, 2019)

Euro ref had nothing to do with districts. Couldn’t have been simpler.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

Adsgr8adventure said:


> The voters where lied to. You can not say that they where not.



And you cannot say that this is new or different.


----------



## Ming (Jun 4, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Euro ref had nothing to do with districts. Couldn’t have been simpler.


Referring to modern right wing political tactics (should have made that clearer). Although they did lie they're arses off in the referendum (and continue to do so).


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 4, 2019)

Ming said:


> Seems to be the spirit of the age. Identify a bunch of thick cunts in gerrymandered voting districts. Lie to them. Get a mandate. Job done.


Statements like this, and the attitude behind them, had far more with Leave winning than any stupid buses.


----------



## chilango (Jun 4, 2019)

Leave campaigners lied? Boooo!

Let's listen to the not lying Remainers then....


----------



## Poi E (Jun 4, 2019)

After serving the nation the guy is just trying to get some peace in his £5 million mansion in California.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 4, 2019)

'it was the bus' not the failed political consensus of the last 40 years


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 4, 2019)

Poi E said:


> After serving the nation the guy is just trying to get some peace in his £5 million mansion in California.


I heard he takes money to talk shit for facebook now


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> And you cannot say that this is new or different.



To be fair, the argument that politicians lie all the time does a better job of highlighting the limits of liberal democracy in general than it does of defending the outcome of the referendum. If anything, this line of reasoning supports the results of all those other elections because politicians lie all the time, but hey that's democracy! Otherwise, we don't need to see this exercise as having been particularly democratic either and it's legitimate to examine the ways in which the process was manipulated. This might work against remainers who have any illusions about the EU and liberal democracy, but it provides cold comfort for those who are simply concerned that the process seems to be headed towards yet more disaster capitalism led by social reactionaries with the rest of us increasingly divided along lines of race and nationality etc.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> To be fair, the argument that politicians lie all the time does a better job of highlighting the limits of liberal democracy in general than it does of defending the outcome of the referendum. If anything, this line of reasoning supports the results of all those other elections because politicians lie all the time, but hey that's democracy! Otherwise, we don't need to see this exercise as having been particularly democratic either and it's legitimate to examine the ways in which the process was manipulated. This might work against remainers who have any illusions about the EU and liberal democracy, but it provides cold comfort for those who are simply concerned that the process seems to be headed towards yet more disaster capitalism led by social reactionaries with the rest of us increasingly divided along lines of race and nationality etc.



You presuppose a difference between remainers who hold illusions about the EU and liberal democracy and those who are 'simply' concerned about disaster capitalism, reaction and nationalism. There isn't one. Your fundamental point is still the belief that EU membership is protecting us from something. 

It's not about convincing people, it's just about pointing to the hypocrisy of those who use this line, having never previously cared too much whether politicians lied or not.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You presuppose a difference between remainers who hold illusions about the EU and liberal democracy and those who are 'simply' concerned about disaster capitalism, reaction and nationalism. There isn't one. Your fundamental point is still the belief that EU membership is protecting us from something.
> 
> It's not about convincing people, it's just about pointing to the hypocrisy of those who use this line, having never previously cared too much whether politicians lied or not.



What is it you are relying on for protection outside of the EU?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not about convincing people, it's just about pointing to the hypocrisy of those who use this line, having never previously cared too much whether politicians lied or not.


by never much cared i suppose you mean never taken them to court before


----------



## teuchter (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> having never previously cared too much whether politicians lied or not.



It's not like the lib dems suffered electorally for that fees pledge thing, right?


----------



## treelover (Jun 4, 2019)

Trump protests don't seem to big this time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

treelover said:


> Trump protests don't seem to big this time.


what's this thread?


----------



## killer b (Jun 4, 2019)

treelover said:


> Trump protests don't seem to big this time.


That's good isn't it?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 4, 2019)

treelover said:


> Trump protests don't seem to big this time.



Perhaps post that on the Trump thread, and not derail this one.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You presuppose a difference between remainers who hold illusions about the EU and liberal democracy and those who are 'simply' concerned about disaster capitalism, reaction and nationalism. *There isn't one.* Your fundamental point is still the belief that EU membership is protecting us from something.
> [...]



Can you help me explain that to my Brasilian brother-in-law, who holds an Italian passport, or the anarchist mate I'd always previously assumed was second-generation Italian, or my partner's Portuguese NHS colleagues, or my relatives who live along the northern side of the Irish border, or the old school friend who explained how his recent redundancy was specifically due to Brexit? All of them see this as an unmitigated disaster, even if they appreciate the contradictions with the EU.

Simply dismissing their fears, never mind all the others who voted remain out of concern for people like them, as no different from uncritical supporters of the EU shows a basic lack of solidarity. That doesn't mean there isn't a political case for Lexit, but how this will come about is far from clear, leaving plenty of room for legitimate concerns about what happens next. After all, you don't need to be nostalgic about Keynesianism to see that neoliberalism was a disaster for most people. Given the current balance of power, it's hard to see events not following a similar trajectory, only worse.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's not like the lib dems suffered electorally for that fees pledge thing, right?


Memories do seem a little short on that one tuechter, have you not seen the bounce? hopefully they will fade away again tho


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 4, 2019)

treelover said:


> Trump protests don't seem to big this time.



What are you doing about it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> What are you doing about it?


treelover will do what he always does about things: a moment or two of froth and then nothing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> Can you help me explain that to my Brasilian brother-in-law, who holds an Italian passport, or the anarchist mate I'd always previously assumed was second-generation Italian, or my partner's Portuguese NHS colleagues, or my relatives who live along the northern side of the Irish border, or the old school friend who explained how his recent redundancy was specifically due to Brexit? All of them see this as an unmitigated disaster, even if they appreciate the contradictions with the EU.
> 
> Simply dismissing their fears, never mind all the others who voted remain out of concern for people like them, as no different from uncritical supporters of the EU shows a basic lack of solidarity. That doesn't mean there isn't a political case for Lexit, but how this will come about is far from clear, leaving plenty of room for legitimate concerns about what happens next. After all, you don't need to be nostalgic about Keynesianism to see that neoliberalism was a disaster for most people. Given the current balance of power, it's hard to see events not following a similar trajectory, only worse.



I'm not making a case for Lexit. Never have, don't like the word or what it seems to mean. 

I understand why they might see the referendum result as a disaster and I don't wish to be unsympathetic. But had the referendum result gone a different way, their migration status and their jobs would not be any safer. EU membership is not protecting anyone from anything. The Windrush generation were not protected from deportations by EU membership or citizenship. The hundreds of thousands of jobs lost over the last couple of decades were not protected by EU membership or citizenship. 

What happens next is largely governed by who holds power. There was an opportunity - and still is - to get rid of the Tories and have a left Labour govt. That's not to sow illusions in Corbyn or pretend it would all be bread and jam, but you talked about the balance of power. Every individual at every level of society who has prioritised attempting to reverse the referendum result over fighting to get the Tories out is consistently thwarting that opportunity, which is integral to the whole question of what comes next, whether they understand that or not and by now they really should. 

The argument that "things might get worse" makes no sense when things have been getting worse for such a long time. It's a little Englander mentality that does not see the likes of Macron, Merkel, Juncker, Orban, Salvini, Le Pen, Michaloliakos and what is actually happening in the rest of the EU.

Real solidarity means honesty. Pushing this nonsense that lies were printed on a bus so the referendum can be reversed and everything can go back to normal is not solidarity, it's a lie.


----------



## belboid (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But had the referendum result gone a different way, their migration status and their jobs would not be any safer. EU membership is not protecting anyone from anything.


I'll agree with the rest.  But that really is just nonsense. Of course continued EU membership would have made their migration status more secure. With continued EU membership they wouldn't be migrants at all, in effect.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> I'll agree with the rest.  But that really is just nonsense. Of course continued EU membership would have made their migration status more secure. With continued EU membership they wouldn't be migrants at all, in effect.



Would you accept "would not be any safer in the long run."? 

Would you accept that the status of EU as well as non-EU migrants within the EU as a whole is far less secure than it was 5 years ago?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would you accept "would not be any safer in the long run."?


I don't accept that. We can know that their status will be less secure in the short term due to brexit. We can only guess at possible long runs, all of which depend on how various short terms go. I would ask you this: Do brexit and its consequences for EU migrants in the short term make a more positive outcome in the long run more or less likely? My answer is 'less likely'.

Brexit is not a _reaction to_ the rightward shift across Europe. It is _a manifestation of_ that shift.


----------



## eoin_k (Jun 4, 2019)

I can't see the relevance of windrush to the rights of EU citizens in each others member states. This is precisely the sort of increased vulnerability EU passport holders fear from Brexit, becoming another tier of increasingly vulnerable migrant workers. Just because the EU didn't prevent previous cycles of restructuring and job losses, which British policy has driven to such an extent that its hard to hold the European neoliberal project all that responsible for those in this country, it doesn't mean that Brexit won't usher in another cycle of creative destruction.

We don't disagree that much. Varoufakis's _And the Poor Suffer what they Must_ provides a clear analysis of why the EU is beyond reform before concluding that we should reform the EU, which wasn't all that persuasive to me. Rather than the referendum being the cause of the current situation, it was much more a symptom of more fundamental issues that remain politics struggles to confront, but it's unclear what a retreat into national politics will achieve either. Most of the energy behind remain comes from the liberal centre ground in any case. Issues on the left have as much with the inability of Brexit supporters to narrate whats going on positively to those who have been left reeling by event as it does with those people being distracted by hopes of a return to normality.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Brexit is not a _reaction to_ the rightward shift across Europe. It is _a manifestation of_ that shift.



No, it's a _reaction _to the existing order, and it's confused, as is to be expected.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not making a case for Lexit. Never have, don't like the word or what it seems to mean.



You keep saying that, but you also say you voted leave in the hope that it would make an opportunity for a left-wing government in the UK.

You can say that's not a 'Lexit' position, but others can decide for themselves.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> I can't see the relevance of windrush to the rights of EU citizens in each others member states. This is precisely the sort of increased vulnerability EU passport holders fear from Brexit, becoming another tier of increasingly vulnerable migrant workers. Just because the EU didn't prevent previous cycles of restructuring and job losses, which British policy has driven to such an extent that its hard to hold the European neoliberal project all that responsible for those that have occurred in this country, it doesn't mean that Brexit won't usher in another cycle of creative destruction.
> 
> We don't disagree that much. Varoufakis's _And the Poor Suffer what they Must_ provides a clear analysis of why the EU is beyond reform before concluding that we should reform the EU, which wasn't all that persuasive to me. Rather than the referendum being the cause of the current situation, it was much more a symptom of more fundamental issues that remain politics struggles to confront, but it's unclear what a retreat into national politics will achieve either. Most of the energy behind remain comes from the liberal centre of politics in any case. Issues on the left have as much with the inability of Brexit supporters to narrate whats going on positively to those who have been left reeling by event than it does with people being distracted by hopes of a return to normality.



My point re Windrush is that the direction of travel not just in Britain but around the world is making the status of all migrants less secure, including within the EU itself. There are so many anti-migrant govts either in power or on the way to power within the EU now that quite soon the EU will reflect that.

Perhaps we don't disagree that much, remember this started because I pointed out the 'lies on the bus' thing is just pointless. But I'm not arguing for a "retreat into national politics", not that national politics ever went away. I'm not even saying that what's going on is positive. I'm just saying the Tories are in pieces and in danger of splitting over this question and they are there for the taking should we choose it. Obviously, that means not just bringing the govt down, but agitating for an alternative that offers people the hope of a better future. Outside of the EU there are many possible futures, inside the EU means accepting the 'golden straightjacket'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You keep saying that, but you also say you voted leave in the hope that it would make an opportunity for a left-wing government in the UK.
> 
> You can say that's not a 'Lexit' position, but others can decide for themselves.



I didn't want the referendum to happen and I didn't think it would make radical social change any more likely or easier to achieve. That to me is what is meant by Lexit. 

What I've tried to do is recognise the referendum was happening and that the left/working class had three basic options: 

1) Campaign for Remain, in which case you've got to make a positive case for the EU and you will look like a lieing hypocrite prepared to junk your own long held politics at the first sign of turbulence. 
2) Campaign for abstention, which I did briefly consider but is lets face it a bit daft when everyone is being told how incredibly important this all is. 
3) Campaign for Leave while stressing that in or out we have to take on the Tories and fight for socialist change if we ever want things to improve.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> 1) Campaign for Remain, in which case you've got to make a positive case for the EU



No - you just have to satisfy yourself that on balance, Leave is not going to produce a better situation. No hypocrisy required.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> No - you just have to satisfy yourself that on balance, Leave is not going to produce a better situation. No hypocrisy required.



This is what you don't get. That can't work. The second you say that you're in favour of an organisation you're opposed to, you become incoherent. What you say no longer makes sense. 

Perhaps you have the luxury of passively observing politics and society, and approaching elections and referendums with the mentality of a consumer. I don't know. I am an active trade unionist and socialist and I can't and don't want to approach politics like that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, it's a _reaction _to the existing order, and it's confused, as is to be expected.


It is a reaction to the existing order, yes, certainly. I'm not so sure how confused it is, though. It is a nationalist reaction primarily, and as such its most vocal advocates fit in rather well with other r/w nationalist/proto-fascist movements across Europe.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is a reaction to the existing order, yes, certainly. I'm not so sure how confused it is, though. It is a nationalist reaction primarily, and as such its most vocal advocates fit in rather well with other r/w nationalist/proto-fascist movements across Europe.



If that's true, how come there are so many nationalist remainers in the UK and how come so many of the hard right parties across Europe are not explicitly anti-EU?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is what you don't get. That can't work. The second you say that you're in favour of an organisation you're opposed to, you become incoherent. What you say no longer makes sense.
> 
> Perhaps you have the luxury of passively observing politics and society, and approaching elections and referendums with the mentality of a consumer. I don't know. I am an active trade unionist and socialist and I can't and don't want to approach politics like that.


'Lesser of two evils' isn't incoherent.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Lesser of two evils' isn't incoherent.



Yes it is. Lesser of two evils brought us Donald Trump remember. It's childish politics.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes it is. Lesser of two evils brought us Donald Trump remember. It's childish politics.


Did it? How? 

In France, you could make a good case that it kept the FN out of the presidential palace.

You might think it's not a good strategy, but that doesn't make it incoherent.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If that's true, how come there are so many nationalist remainers in the UK and how come so many of the hard right parties across Europe are not explicitly anti-EU?


Most of the most significant of them are vehemently and explicitly anti-EU. France, Holland, Germany, Austria, Sweden... How many examples do you want? Europe of Nations and Freedom, they call themselves in the EU parliament. Google it.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is what you don't get. That can't work. The second you say that you're in favour of an organisation you're opposed to, you become incoherent.



You don't have to say you're in favour of it - you just have to say you're in even less favour of the alternative.

Does the 'incoherence' only kick in when someone asks you the question? If your position is that not being in favour of the EU means that you cannot refuse an opportunity to leave it - then why were you against having the referendum in the first place?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Did it? How?
> 
> In France, you could make a good case that it kept the FN out of the presidential palace.
> 
> You might think it's not a good strategy, but that doesn't make it incoherent.



Does the Macron Presidency make a Le Pen Presidency more or less likely in the future?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You don't have to say you're in favour of it - you just have to say you're in even less favour of the alternative.
> 
> Does the 'incoherence' only kick in when someone asks you the question? If your position is that not being in favour of the EU means that you cannot refuse an opportunity to leave it - then why were you against having the referendum in the first place?



If I had the choice, I would rather a left wing govt came to power that was sufficiently radical to defy EU law, leading to a confrontation that saw the UK leave as a result of breaking with neoliberalism. 

I'm against referendums in general. They are not the political instrument I want to use. That doesn't mean you can just ignore them when they happen. If I lived in Ireland I would have preferred a radical govt to come to power promising abortion rights for example, but if I lived in Ireland I wouldn't have abstained or voted against abortion rights in the referendum. 

We make our own history but not in circumstances of our own choosing.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If I had the choice, I would rather a left wing govt came to power that was sufficiently radical to defy EU law, leading to a confrontation that saw the UK leave as a result of breaking with neoliberalism.
> 
> I'm against referendums in general. They are not the political instrument I want to use. That doesn't mean you can just ignore them when they happen. If I lived in Ireland I would have preferred a radical govt to come to power promising abortion rights for example, but if I lived in Ireland I wouldn't have abstained or voted against abortion rights in the referendum.
> 
> We make our own history but not in circumstances of our own choosing.


That doesn't answer the question.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

teuchter said:


> That doesn't answer the question.



You asked why I was against a referendum. I've answered your question. 

I've always opposed the EU in the exact same way I oppose the Tories and New Labour. The referendum came along and I made a decision coherent with my politics. 

Maybe this will make it easier for you - assuming you consider yourself in some way connected to the radical left and are opposed, _in the abstract at least, _to the neoliberal EU, how would you go about raising the kind of political change you would want to see at the same time as arguing in favour of membership of an organisation whose politics you don't support?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You asked why I was against a referendum. I've answered your question.
> 
> I've always opposed the EU in the exact same way I oppose the Tories and New Labour. The referendum came along and I made a decision coherent with my politics.
> 
> Maybe this will make it easier for you - assuming you consider yourself in some way connected to the radical left and are opposed, _in the abstract at least, _to the neoliberal EU, how would you go about raising the kind of political change you would want to see at the same time as arguing in favour of membership of an organisation whose politics you don't support?


what teuchter's really annoyed about is that there wasn't a lock on the eu's door


----------



## belboid (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would you accept "would not be any safer in the long run."?
> 
> Would you accept that the status of EU as well as non-EU migrants within the EU as a whole is far less secure than it was 5 years ago?


The migration status of EU migrants within the EU is less secure than it was five years ago? That doesn't even makes sense. The only difference to any such migrants status comes directly from Brexit, so, no.  You are just plain wrong. 

Come on.  Just because a thing is, on balance, good, doesn't mean it has no negative consequences.  And we should be upfront and honest about those, or you get a result like Labour's.  And NotoEU not even bothering standing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> The migration status of EU migrants within the EU is less secure than it was five years ago? That doesn't even makes sense. The only difference to any such migrants status comes directly from Brexit, so, no.  You are just plain wrong.
> 
> Come on.  Just because a thing is, on balance, good, doesn't mean it has no negative consequences.  And we should be upfront and honest about those, or you get a result like Labour's.  And NotoEU not even bothering standing.



You know what I mean, EU citizens who live/work in different countries to the ones they are also citizens of, whatever the phrase is. 

Legal status can be undermined and suspended, look at this from the Dutch govt: Dutch Government Asks European Commission to Suspend Visa-Free Movement for Albanians

It's not just about legal status either, as this points to: The past, present and future of free movement in the EU

I wish No 2 EU had stood and I wish Labour had talked about "no new immigration controls" and "no deportations" as they had in the 2017 GE, for the record. But we are where we are.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know what I mean, EU citizens who live/work in different countries to the ones they are also citizens of, whatever the phrase is.
> 
> Legal status can be undermined and suspended, look at this from the Dutch govt: Dutch Government Asks European Commission to Suspend Visa-Free Movement for Albanians
> 
> ...


Don't think Albania in the eu


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think Albania in the eu


 They are lined up to fill the U.K. spot at the big table


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> They are lined up to fill the U.K. spot at the big table


They'll no doubt assume the perfidious label too


----------



## Poi E (Jun 4, 2019)

Oh very droll


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think Albania in the eu



Fair my error.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 4, 2019)

Johnson thinks the Tories face ‘extinction’ if the UK is still in the EU after the next deadline.

Everyone happy with that deal?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You asked why I was against a referendum. I've answered your question.


You just answered it by saying you are against referendums in general.

My point was that not wanting a referendum to leave the EU (even though you strongly oppose the EU), seems similar to voting not to leave the EU under unfavourable conditions (even though you strongly oppose the EU).

I don't think either position is incoherent. You think the latter is, but not the former, for some reason.


----------



## Ming (Jun 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Statements like this, and the attitude behind them, had far more with Leave winning than any stupid buses.


I


redsquirrel said:


> Statements like this, and the attitude behind them, had far more with Leave winning than any stupid buses.


We've been losing since 1979.


----------



## Ming (Jun 5, 2019)

As soon as you get that we might start winning.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You just answered it by saying you are against referendums in general.
> 
> My point was that not wanting a referendum to leave the EU (even though you strongly oppose the EU), seems similar to voting not to leave the EU under unfavourable conditions (even though you strongly oppose the EU).
> 
> I don't think either position is incoherent. You think the latter is, but not the former, for some reason.


They are categorically different positions though.  Hoping for no referendum does not require you to take a position, state a preference, take action or endorse one side or other.  If asked to take a side, you can refuse to do so on the grounds that the question is not pertinent and misses the point of your preferred politics.  Once the referendum is called, however, you are having to either abstain (a positive action in itself) or endorse something.  To endorse something antithetical to your long term goals on the grounds that the means justify the ends is something many philosophers have argued long and hard against, not just SpackleFrog


----------



## gosub (Jun 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Don't think Albania in the eu


Got green lighted this week.  Though was talking to an Albanian who does diplomatic lobbying on behalf of Kosovo. She had doubts it would actually lead to membership


----------



## Plumdaff (Jun 5, 2019)

I think Trump may have inadvertently campaigned for Remain yesterday far more effectively than any People's Voter has managed so far.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is what you don't get. That can't work. The second you say that you're in favour of an organisation you're opposed to, you become incoherent. What you say no longer makes sense.
> 
> Perhaps you have the luxury of passively observing politics and society, and approaching elections and referendums with the mentality of a consumer. I don't know. I am an active trade unionist and socialist and I can't and don't want to approach politics like that.


Out of interest, which political party do you vote for?.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 5, 2019)

kabbes said:


> They are categorically different positions though.  Hoping for no referendum does not require you to take a position, state a preference, take action or endorse one side or other.  If asked to take a side, you can refuse to do so on the grounds that the question is not pertinent and misses the point of your preferred politics.  Once the referendum is called, however, you are having to either abstain (a positive action in itself) or endorse something.  To endorse something antithetical to your long term goals on the grounds that the means justify the ends is something many philosophers have argued long and hard against, not just SpackleFrog


Exactly. I didn't want a referendum because the timing was shit - even a few years earlier, with Greece/the Troika etc, it is likely (imo) a referendum to leave the EU would have a) gained more support from the left and b) had a more pro working class pro wealth redistribution etc slant. But in run up to 2016 it was the right's vision of leave which dominated.

But the referendum was called, and I knew from outset I couldn't have voted remain (although I understand why many did, given the above). So it was abstain or leave. I chose leave, motivated by carnage a leave vote would cause in Tories & labour rather than any of the grand lexit stuff, but came close to abstaining - didn't go to vote until 9pm or something. Voting remain was never on the cards for me.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 5, 2019)

Voting remain was voting to maintain the current state of affairs, for keeping everything as is. Regardless of the another Europe is possible bollocks. I think people need to come to terms with that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Voting remain was voting to maintain the current state of affairs, for keeping everything as is. Regardless of the another Europe is possible bollocks. I think people need to come to terms with that.


Voting remain could be lots of things, among them keeping everything as was. But it could also be 'it's not the time to leave', 'I'd like to leave but I'll be buggered with a fish fork before I see Cameron near negotiating an exit from the eu' or 'the eu has its faults but it's better than the alternatives on offer'.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Voting remain could be lots of things, among them keeping everything as was. But it could also be 'it's not the time to leave', 'I'd like to leave but I'll be buggered with a fish fork before I see Cameron near negotiating an exit from the eu' or 'the eu has its faults but it's better than the alternatives on offer'.


Yeah lots of individual motivations, like with leave. I was more getting at why for lots of people voting remain wasn't an option


----------



## chilango (Jun 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Johnson thinks the Tories face ‘extinction’ if the UK is still in the EU after the next deadline.
> 
> Everyone happy with that deal?



Best Remain argument I've heard in a while


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

kabbes said:


> They are categorically different positions though.  Hoping for no referendum does not require you to take a position, state a preference, take action or endorse one side or other.  If asked to take a side, you can refuse to do so on the grounds that the question is not pertinent and misses the point of your preferred politics.  Once the referendum is called, however, you are having to either abstain (a positive action in itself) or endorse something.  To endorse something antithetical to your long term goals on the grounds that the means justify the ends is something many philosophers have argued long and hard against, not just SpackleFrog


If someone says "would you like a referendum that would give us the opportunity to leave the EU" and you say "no", you are taking a position and stating a preference. How is it categorically different?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If someone says "would you like a referendum that would give us the opportunity to leave the EU" and you say "no", you are taking a position and stating a preference. How is it categorically different?


 kabbes can explain it to you but he can't understand it for you


----------



## chilango (Jun 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Voting remain was voting to maintain the current state of affairs, for keeping everything as is. Regardless of the another Europe is possible bollocks. I think people need to come to terms with that.



Kinda.

Though a large part of my reluctant Remain vote was a "tactical pause" - I don't want to keep everything as is, but we're not ready to push change yet.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 5, 2019)

chilango said:


> Kinda.
> 
> Though a large part of my reluctant Remain vote was a "tactical pause" - I don't want to keep everything as is, but we're not ready to push change yet.


Yeah I obviously phrased that shit. I'm not having a pop at people voting remain, I meant more why lots of people didn't like the flavour of leave but couldn't vote remain


----------



## kabbes (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If someone says "would you like a referendum that would give us the opportunity to leave the EU" and you say "no", you are taking a position and stating a preference. How is it categorically different?


The difference is that nothing turns on my opinion that I don’t want a referendum.


----------



## chilango (Jun 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah I obviously phrased that shit. I'm not having a pop at people voting remain, I meant more why lots of people didn't like the flavour of leave but couldn't vote remain



Not a problem with your phrasing, just another variable to add into the mix.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Out of interest, which political party do you vote for?.



Usually TUSC. Labour in 2017.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You just answered it by saying you are against referendums in general.
> 
> My point was that not wanting a referendum to leave the EU (even though you strongly oppose the EU), seems similar to voting not to leave the EU under unfavourable conditions (even though you strongly oppose the EU).
> 
> I don't think either position is incoherent. You think the latter is, but not the former, for some reason.



No, I didn't. I gave you a specific example to illustrate that while I don't like referendums, you can't just pretend they're not happening when they happen and you have to engage with them.

You cannot have a coherent position that says "hey, lads, I hate the EU but let's vote to stay in it, it would be bad if we left it" and still credibly tell people you oppose the EU.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Usually TUSC. Labour in 2017.


But they are going for a soft brexit, part of the single market. Isn't that incoherent?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The difference is that nothing turns on my opinion that I don’t want a referendum.


I don't think that's true. Whether or not people wanted a referendum factored into who they voted for, in the election that produced a government which initiated one.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You cannot have a coherent position that says "hey, lads, I hate the EU but let's vote to stay in it, it would be bad if we left it" and still credibly tell people you oppose the EU.



Do people who 'oppose capitalism' but still decide to live within mainstream society have an incoherent position?


----------



## Supine (Jun 5, 2019)

So Trump had explicitly stated that the NHS is on the table in trade talks with the USA.

Is privatisation of healthcare and an insurance based model leavers are willing to accept as a price worth paying? I certainly wouldn't be happy about it


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You cannot have a coherent position that says "hey, lads, I hate the EU but let's vote to stay in it, it would be bad if we left it" and still credibly tell people you oppose the EU.


so you can tell them once but not twice of your disdain for the eu?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> So Trump had explicitly stated that the NHS is on the table in trade talks with the USA.
> 
> Is privatisation of healthcare and an insurance based model leavers are willing to accept as a price worth paying? I certainly wouldn't be happy about it



He's withdrawn that statement.

Donald Trump U-turns on saying NHS is 'on the table' in a Brexit trade deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's withdrawn that statement.
> 
> Donald Trump U-turns on saying NHS is 'on the table' in a Brexit trade deal


----------



## philosophical (Jun 5, 2019)

One angle is that voting leave was a vote to damage the hard fought for increase in peace in Ireland, a vote to remain was a vote to try to preserve the hard fought for increase in peace in Ireland.
The only meaningful word on the winners vote was 'leave'. 
So now that it is nearly three years past the vote perhaps we are getting close to the time when those who voted to leave explain in detail how their leave will realistically and practically manifest itself in the island of Ireland.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> One angle is that voting leave was a vote to damage the hard fought for increase in peace in Ireland, a vote to remain was a vote to try to preserve the hard fought for increase in peace in Ireland.
> The only meaningful word on the winners vote was 'leave'.
> So now that it is nearly three years past the vote perhaps we are getting close to the time when those who voted to leave explain in detail how their leave will realistically and practically manifest itself in the island of Ireland.



Change the fucking record.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Change the fucking record.



Are you the site moderator?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> But they are going for a soft brexit, part of the single market. Isn't that incoherent?



In 2017 they were promising to leave the EU, leave the single market and draw up a customs union. I was completely fine with that. Haven't voted for them since.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think that's true. Whether or not people wanted a referendum factored into who they voted for, in the election that produced a government which initiated one.



I voted TUSC in 2015. The referendum was not a factor in how I voted.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Do people who 'oppose capitalism' but still decide to live within mainstream society have an incoherent position?



Oh fuck off.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> So Trump had explicitly stated that the NHS is on the table in trade talks with the USA.
> 
> Is privatisation of healthcare and an insurance based model leavers are willing to accept as a price worth paying? I certainly wouldn't be happy about it



No, of course not. That wasn't on the ballot was it?

Although the NHS *is* being privatised and has been since before the referendum.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so you can tell them once but not twice of your disdain for the eu?



Sure you can but who would believe you?


----------



## MickiQ (Jun 5, 2019)

I suspect Donny doesn't really know what the NHS is, he certainly doesn't seem to know what he said more than about 2 minutes ago.
Assuming we crash out No Deal then everything including the NHS is going to be on the table for negotiations, whether or not we give any of it away depends on whoever is doing the negotiation for the UK and what their priorities are. A Labour government would certainly have different priorities than a Tory one.
If we leave with a Deal then no-one is going to really bother negotiating a deal with us until they know what sort of agreement we are going to come to with the EU since there will be knock on effects on any further negotiations.
That said whilst Donny is an idiot there are clearly people around him who can sniff the chance to make money out of the NHS (which is a big market) post-Brexit and will be lobbying US negotiators to try and get it opened up.
To what extent they do or do not succeed is a bit difficult to predict in the current chaos.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Oh fuck off.


What's the problem with that question?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's the problem with that question?



The problem with the question "well are you really against capitalism if you live in a capitalist society"? Really?

You are Louise Mensch and I claim my £5


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I suspect Donny doesn't really know what the NHS is, he certainly doesn't seem to know what he said more than about 2 minutes ago.
> Assuming we crash out No Deal then everything including the NHS is going to be on the table for negotiations, whether or not we give any of it away depends on whoever is doing the negotiation for the UK and what their priorities are. A Labour government would certainly have different priorities than a Tory one.
> If we leave with a Deal then no-one is going to really bother negotiating a deal with us until they know what sort of agreement we are going to come to with the EU since there will be knock on effects on any further negotiations.
> That said whilst Donny is an idiot there are clearly people around him who can sniff the chance to make money out of the NHS (which is a big market) post-Brexit and will be lobbying US negotiators to try and get it opened up.
> To what extent they do or do not succeed is a bit difficult to predict in the current chaos.



Exactly - the NHS will be safer under a Corbyn led govt, just as it was before the referendum.


----------



## Supine (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No, of course not. That wasn't on the ballot was it



Being on the ballet is irrelevant. It's an obvious consequence of deciding to do independant trade deals. The US are not our friends when it comes to money. Nor are any other nations.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The problem with the question "well are you really against capitalism if you live in a capitalist society"? Really?



Yes, that is the question. What is the answer? 

Everyone has the option of living in a forest somewhere and refusing to engage with any capitalist transactions. They'll probably have a fairly miserable life and die young but given the choice between that, and engaging with a system they don't support but which offers them a better quality of life, if they are serious, they won't go for the 'least bad' option because that would be incoherent, and childish politics, right?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Being on the ballet is irrelevant. It's an obvious consequence of deciding to do independant trade deals. The US are not our friends when it comes to money. Nor are any other nations.



Independent trade deals wasn't on the ballot either. Its "obvious" to you because you decided a long time ago that the only possible future outside of the EU was one in which Britain became an imperial subject of the US. For you, There Is No Alternative.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Yes, that is the question. What is the answer?
> 
> Everyone has the option of living in a forest somewhere and refusing to engage with any capitalist transactions. They'll probably have a fairly miserable life and die young but given the choice between that, and engaging with a system they don't support but which offers them a better quality of life, if they are serious, they won't go for the 'least bad' option because that would be incoherent, and childish politics, right?



I don't know why I'm still playing along because for me that's a ridiculous way of understanding society. But what I would say to you is that your position is going beyond simply existing within capitalism and actively telling people that capitalism is the only possible system and that all possible alternatives are worse.


----------



## Supine (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Independent trade deals wasn't on the ballot either. Its "obvious" to you because you decided a long time ago that the only possible future outside of the EU was one in which Britain became an imperial subject of the US. For you, There Is No Alternative.



Yes they were. The whole independant trade deals thing was a key selling point for the leave camp. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge about trade knew it was bullshit because deals within a big trading block like we currently have with EU would always be more favourable. You really don't understand any of this do you!


----------



## planetgeli (Jun 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's withdrawn that statement.
> 
> Donald Trump U-turns on saying NHS is 'on the table' in a Brexit trade deal



I believe him. And all that stuff about the bestest ever relationship in the world. And unicorns. Unicorns are real too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yes they were. The whole independant trade deals thing was a key selling point for the leave camp. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge about trade knew it was bullshit because deals within a big trading block like we currently have with EU would always be more favourable. You really don't understand any of this do you!



I campaigned independently from all that on an entirely different basis. I spoke to remain voters and leave voters and undecideds and no one talked about trade deals.

You're the one who doesn't understand because you don't have any politics or perspectives independent of the bourgeois politicians.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Yes they were. The whole independant trade deals thing was a key selling point for the leave camp. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge about trade knew it was bullshit because deals within a big trading block like we currently have with EU would always be more favourable. You really don't understand any of this do you!


No they weren't. Just as immigration wasn't on the ballot paper. There are many ways not to be in the EU, and no one single alternative was on the ballot paper. That's a big part of the problem here - some kind of Norway+, such as 'Common Market 2', is fully in line with 'honouring the referendum'. And it could have been sold right from the start as such -_ We will follow the referendum, but nearly half of the country wants to stay, and of those who want to leave, there will be a range of opinion about what that means: this is a sensible compromise position, loosening ties but not cutting them_. But no, it was 'brexit means brexit' and 'a red white and blue brexit' and 'honouring the referendum means ending free movement' and 'citizen of nowhere' anti-immigrant shit, with this rubbish about trade deals tagged on as an afterthought. I very much doubt many people voting leave gave a shit either way about international trade deals.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't know why I'm still playing along because for me that's a ridiculous way of understanding society. But what I would say to you is that your position is going beyond simply existing within capitalism and actively telling people that capitalism is the only possible system and that all possible alternatives are worse.



I'm not trying to tell anyone anything about capitalism or the alternatives. I'm saying, for now we exist in a capitalist system, and the consequences of someone withdrawing from it suddenly and entirely would likely leave them worse off. Therefore it's entirely reasonable for them to remain living within that system whilst looking for and promoting alternatives. The same applies to deciding that we are best off staying in the EU for now, whilst simultaneously being opposed the the EU. I don't think that's incoherent, you said that it was.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I'm not trying to tell anyone anything about capitalism or the alternatives. I'm saying, for now we exist in a capitalist system, and the consequences of someone withdrawing from it suddenly and entirely would likely leave them worse off. Therefore it's entirely reasonable for them to remain living within that system whilst looking for and promoting alternatives. The same applies to deciding that we are best off staying in the EU for now, whilst simultaneously being opposed the the EU. I don't think that's incoherent, you said that it was.



If we take that as logical (and assuming you are opposed to the EU but think we're best of staying in the EU for now) at what point and under what conditions would you feel it was best to leave the EU?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 5, 2019)

I do recall the likes of Hannann talking about potential trade deals, but also the assumption behind leave pre ref was of some sort of deal with EU. Nobody talked about WTO rules.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If we take that as logical (and assuming you are opposed to the EU but think we're best of staying in the EU for now) at what point and under what conditions would you feel it was best to leave the EU?


The point at which someone can provide me with a clear and plausible outline of a plan to leave that puts the people of the UK in a better position than they are in now, with a focus on the portion of the population who are currently worst off in terms of financial, health and housing security. That was not available at the referendum, and it is not available now.


----------



## andysays (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Yes, that is the question. What is the answer?
> 
> Everyone has the option of living in a forest somewhere and refusing to engage with any capitalist transactions. They'll probably have a fairly miserable life and die young but given the choice between that, and engaging with a system they don't support but which offers them a better quality of life, if they are serious, they won't go for the 'least bad' option because that would be incoherent, and childish politics, right?


Sometimes, I wish you would go and live in a forest somewhere and refuse to engage with any external transactions, capitalist or otherwise.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The point at which someone can provide me with a clear and plausible outline of a plan to leave that puts the people of the UK in a better position than they are in now, with a focus on the portion of the population who are currently worst off in terms of financial, health and housing security. That was not available at the referendum, and it is not available now.



In other words you want to stay in the EU forever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In other words you want to stay in the EU forever.


((((EU))))


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I do recall the likes of Hannann talking about potential trade deals, but also the assumption behind leave pre ref was of some sort of deal with EU. Nobody talked about WTO rules.


Exactly, it was all have your cake and eat it, same nonsense as they are coming out with now, Labour included.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 5, 2019)

there was clearly much talk of a fantastic new world of trade deals coming from the likes of Johnson pre vote. I do not however recall WTO popping as as it was something that was kinda below the mighty U.K.- a preserve of foreign Johnny places with no influence


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In other words you want to stay in the EU forever.


You're not optimistic then.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> You're not optimistic then.



I pride myself on seeing reasons for optimism, it's important when there aren't many. That's not the point. The point is you will never leave an organisation like the EU or the IMF or the World Bank in an 'orderly' fashion. It's not in the interests of these organisations to allow any state to leave without economic pain. So by insisting that leaving is only desirable on the basis of an orderly, smooth, predictable basis you're insisting that leaving is never desirable. 

What would you say to Greece? "Of course, we should leave, but not until we can do so smoothly."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I pride myself on seeing reasons for optimism, it's important when there aren't many. That's not the point. The point is you will never leave an organisation like the EU or the IMF or the World Bank in an 'orderly' fashion. It's not in the interests of these organisations to allow any state to leave without economic pain. So by insisting that leaving is only desirable on the basis of an orderly, smooth, predictable basis you're insisting that leaving is never desirable.
> 
> What would you say to Greece? "Of course, we should leave, but not until we can do so smoothly."


My response when Greece is brought up is a relatively simple one: How does Brexit help Greece? I've yet to hear any kind of answer. While I totally agree with you that trade deals were irrelevant in the referendum, one of the big things that I think did carry resonance was the figure for the UK's net contribution. One of the countries that is a net recipient is Greece. (And yes, of course there are problems with the way EU money is spent and the way companies from rich countries benefit from it, but like trade deals, this kind of nicety wasn't part of the anti-EU discourse. It actually runs counter to the simple and simplistic anti-EU narrative as British companies also benefit from EU investment.)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 5, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> there was clearly much talk of a fantastic new world of trade deals coming from the likes of Johnson pre vote. I do not however recall WTO popping as as it was something that was kinda below the mighty U.K.- a preserve of foreign Johnny places with no influence


WTO rules exist as a backstop for countries that haven't negotiated trade deals that are more favourable. They lack a strong authority to enforce them and favour the strong over the weak as a result, which is why countries tend to try to get away from them.


----------



## teuchter (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I pride myself on seeing reasons for optimism, it's important when there aren't many. That's not the point. The point is you will never leave an organisation like the EU or the IMF or the World Bank in an 'orderly' fashion. It's not in the interests of these organisations to allow any state to leave without economic pain. So by insisting that leaving is only desirable on the basis of an orderly, smooth, predictable basis you're insisting that leaving is never desirable.
> 
> What would you say to Greece? "Of course, we should leave, but not until we can do so smoothly."


I didn't insist that it be orderly or smooth. 

Predictable? I don't see the point in engaging in a process the outcome of which is not predictable. Doesn't mean it has to have 100% certainty of outcome, but there should at least be a plausible route to the desired result.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I didn't insist that it be orderly or smooth.
> 
> Predictable? I don't see the point in engaging in a process the outcome of which is not predictable. Doesn't mean it has to have 100% certainty of outcome, but there should at least be a plausible route to the desired result.


This basically. And if the desired result is, in the most general terms, 'more socialism', the most plausible post-brexit routes all head in the opposite direction.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Predictable? I don't see the point in engaging in a process the outcome of which is not predictable. Doesn't mean it has to have 100% certainty of outcome, but there should at least be a plausible route to the desired result.


If you were worried about plausible routes to results then you wouldn't be into far-left politics to begin with.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> If you were worried about plausible routes to results then you wouldn't be into far-left politics to begin with.


i don't think i've ever seen any evidence that teuchter is into far-left politics.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> My response when Greece is brought up is a relatively simple one: How does Brexit help Greece? I've yet to hear any kind of answer. While I totally agree with you that trade deals were irrelevant in the referendum, one of the big things that I think did carry resonance was the figure for the UK's net contribution. One of the countries that is a net recipient is Greece. (And yes, of course there are problems with the way EU money is spent and the way companies from rich countries benefit from it, but like trade deals, this kind of nicety wasn't part of the anti-EU discourse. It actually runs counter to the simple and simplistic anti-EU narrative as British companies also benefit from EU investment.)



Told you before - weakening the EU helps Greece.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I didn't insist that it be orderly or smooth.
> 
> Predictable? I don't see the point in engaging in a process the outcome of which is not predictable. Doesn't mean it has to have 100% certainty of outcome, but there should at least be a plausible route to the desired result.



Well, guess what, the global economy is in crisis and nothing is 'predictable' any more.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> If you were worried about plausible routes to results then you wouldn't be into far-left politics to begin with.



Sleater slightly more honest than Teuchter.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Told you before - weakening the EU helps Greece.


Does Brexit weaken the EU? Thus far, in the form of Ireland and the backstop, it's been handed a massive opportunity to demonstrate how it will stand by all of its members, big or small. Take Sweden as the example - its UKIP equivalent has recently dropped its calls for leaving the EU, short-term at least, while polls in Sweden show that support for membership has strengthened since the start of Brexit. Plus, for eu-enthusiasts, seeing the back of the troublesome semi-detached UK isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Sweden Democrats drop their call for 'Swexit' referendum on leaving EU

I think a lot of people assumed brexit would mean a crisis for the EU. It's not working out that way. The only place with a political crisis is the UK.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Does Brexit weaken the EU? Thus far, in the form of Ireland and the backstop, it's been handed a massive opportunity to demonstrate how it will stand by all of its members, big or small. Take Sweden as the example - its UKIP equivalent has recently dropped its calls for leaving the EU, short-term at least, while polls in Sweden show that support for membership has strengthened since the start of Brexit. Plus, for eu-enthusiasts, seeing the back of the troublesome semi-detached UK isn't necessarily a bad thing.
> 
> Sweden Democrats drop their call for 'Swexit' referendum on leaving EU
> 
> I think a lot of people assumed brexit would mean a crisis for the EU. It's not working out that way. The only place with a political crisis is the UK.



Again, I can't say it enough - this is Little Englander stuff. The crisis within the EU is sustained and manifold. Brexit isn't close to the most damaging thing going on for the EU but *if* Britain leaves it will further weaken the union.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The only place with a political crisis is the UK.


there are none so blind as those who will not see


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The only place with a political crisis is the UK.



Yeah this is just the most erroneous statement, sorry mon but it's literally everywhere.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah this is just the most erroneous statement, sorry mon but it's literally everywhere.


it's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 6, 2019)

so, what's going on eh?

slow moving these days init? used to be alive this thread?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 6, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> so, what's going on eh?
> 
> slow moving these days init? used to be alive this thread?



We're waiting for your recalculated countdown!


----------



## teuchter (Jun 6, 2019)

philosophical


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> We're waiting for your recalculated countdown!


----------



## Teaboy (Jun 6, 2019)

They're just waiting for the last week again.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 6, 2019)

teuchter said:


> philosophical




Ignorant, lazy, know nothing 'leader of the free world' with his fingers twitching to hit the 'nuke' button when he has nothing to lose in his second term.
Fake nukes he will call it.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 7, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Jun 9, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Jun 10, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Jun 11, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Jun 11, 2019)

Looks like a smart move that's consistent with their conference position and has the potential to fuck up some of the tory leadership offers.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Looks like a smart move that's consistent with their conference position and has the potential to fuck up some of the tory leadership offers.
> 
> View attachment 173902



Although in saying that, as much as some of the candidates for Tory leader feel they have to offer a no deal with a red line on the next date, a few of them will be quite happy if Parliament gives them an opt out. 

The likes of Raab and McVey are clearly mad enough to really want it, but others may be counting on Parliament rescuing them even though they will protest otherwise.


----------



## MrCurry (Jun 12, 2019)

Donald Tusk’s words back in April seem now somewhat prescient. In connection with the 6 month extension to 31 Oct, he urged the UK “please do not waste this time”. 

I wonder if anyone thinks the UK is not in fact engaged in “wasting” the time afforded by the extension?  Various tories jumping up and promising we are definitely going to leave 31st Oct doesn’t actually do anything to solve the issues and with labour trying their best to take no deal off the table, I’m struggling to see a path towards Brexit actually taking place on that date. 

Is UK wasting the opportunity of the 6 month extension?


----------



## Supine (Jun 12, 2019)

No, getting rid of May was needed. Unfortunately it looks like any replacement is getting ready to waste more time.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 12, 2019)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 12, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Donald Tusk’s words back in April seem now somewhat prescient. In connection with the 6 month extension to 31 Oct, he urged the UK “please do not waste this time”.
> 
> I wonder if anyone thinks the UK is not in fact engaged in “wasting” the time afforded by the extension?  Various tories jumping up and promising we are definitely going to leave 31st Oct doesn’t actually do anything to solve the issues and with labour trying their best to take no deal off the table, I’m struggling to see a path towards Brexit actually taking place on that date.
> 
> Is UK wasting the opportunity of the 6 month extension?



as it was with Theresa May - its all about the Tories twisting and turning to try and avoid the inevitable - a general election or 2nd referendum. 
Another extension highly likely id have thought - but it may come with the EU insisting it is conditional on a GE or 2nd ref. 
Or they make it clear that if they grant one - there will be no further extensions and it is time to piss or get off the pot wrt brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 12, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 173980


This could work all the way down to Canada Water - New Oxford street.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 12, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Donald Tusk’s words back in April seem now somewhat prescient. In connection with the 6 month extension to 31 Oct, he urged the UK *“please do not waste this time”.*
> 
> I wonder if anyone thinks the UK is not in fact engaged in “wasting” the time afforded by the extension?  Various tories jumping up and promising we are definitely going to leave 31st Oct doesn’t actually do anything to solve the issues and with labour trying their best to take no deal off the table, I’m struggling to see a path towards Brexit actually taking place on that date.
> 
> Is UK wasting the opportunity of the 6 month extension?




Was about to post this also, been thinking about it.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 12, 2019)

None of these people are our friends


----------



## andysays (Jun 12, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> ...Another extension highly likely id have thought - but it may come with the EU insisting it is conditional on a GE or 2nd ref.
> Or they make it clear that if they grant one - there will be no further extensions and it is time to piss or get off the pot wrt brexit.


We might wonder why the EU has already granted two extensions, the second at least against the wishes of some of their members. I suggest that they (or significant numbers of them) are also afraid of no deal. 

Given that they've already agreed twice to extend, with no real conditions, I can't see in principle why they wouldn't make it three in a row. 

Rather than the EU denying a third extension,  I think it's more likely at this stage that the new PM won't ask for one and we will leave in October, deal or no deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2019)

andysays said:


> We might wonder why the EU has already granted two extensions, the second at least against the wishes of some of their members. I suggest that they (or significant numbers of them) are also afraid of no deal.
> 
> Given that they've already agreed twice to extend, with no real conditions, I can't see in principle why they wouldn't make it three in a row.
> 
> Rather than the EU denying a third extension,  I think it's more likely at this stage that the new PM won't ask for one and we will leave in October, deal or no deal.


so proving that johnson really did mean 'fuck business' when he said 'fuck business'

i suspect the tenure of any prime minister who takes us down the no deal path will be brief indeed.


----------



## MrCurry (Jun 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i suspect the tenure of any prime minister who takes us down the no deal path will be brief indeed.



Possibly, but it would surely depend on what happened in the period shortly afterwards.  If a no-deal exit caused such ructions that it led to a very rapidly agreed trading deal on better terms than the EU had offered before, then the PM who took that route would no doubt do well out of it.

If on the other hand it was a calamitous clusterfuck which forced the UK to go cap in hand and beg to be let back into the EU on less favourable terms than before, then yeah..


----------



## gosub (Jun 12, 2019)

Aiwa u



not-bono-ever said:


> None of i people are  not /]
> I8
> K i >8ioiioii8u9phh


----------



## Cid (Jun 12, 2019)

Nah, there is always going to be face element to this... the eu will give a lot of latitude, but if you’ve got Johnson or whoever trying to use no deal as leverage I suspect they’ll just say fuck off or offer some kind of May minus.


----------



## Cid (Jun 12, 2019)

gosub said:


> Aiwa u



Sir, I disagree.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 12, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Possibly, but it would surely depend on what happened in the period shortly afterwards.  If a no-deal exit caused such ructions that it led to a very rapidly agreed trading deal on better terms than the EU had offered before, then the PM who took that route would no doubt do well out of it.
> 
> If on the other hand it was a calamitous clusterfuck which forced the UK to go cap in hand and beg to be let back into the EU on less favourable terms than before, then yeah..


given that the brexit process has thus far been a calamitous clusterfuck i see no reason for the remainder to be different


----------



## brogdale (Jun 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Looks like a smart move that's consistent with their conference position and has the potential to fuck up some of the tory leadership offers.
> 
> View attachment 173902


Lost 298 : 309

So that's 309 MPs determined to keep ND open.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Lost 298 : 309
> 
> So that's 309 MPs determined to keep ND open.



I think more wholly determined to keep the Govt in some sort of control. Could be a different outcome in September.


----------



## agricola (Jun 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I think more wholly determined to keep the Govt in some sort of control. Could be a different outcome in September.



Indeed, and of course the Tory whips office have usually been able to make around a couple of hundred MPs vote for absolutely anything - however ludicrous.  196 of them thought May's deal was fantastic back in January, with 314 having confidence in the Government she led the day afterwards (3 of which left citing they had no confidence in her a month later); 281 of them had confidence in Neville Chamberlain as PM after Narvik.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 12, 2019)

It was a fucking dumb move by Labour, the timing wasn't right, and now they are left with egg on their faces.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 12, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I think more wholly determined to keep the Govt in some sort of control. Could be a different outcome in September.


Don't think the two are distinguishable or mutually exclusive, tbh. They have just voted to keep ND open.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It was a fucking dumb move by Labour, the timing wasn't right, and now they are left with egg on their faces.


Not convinced about that. No harm in an opposition trying to oppose and the margin was not great. But...most importantly, politically Corbyn can point to a key attempt to thwart ND.


----------



## agricola (Jun 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It was a fucking dumb move by Labour, the timing wasn't right, and now they are left with egg on their faces.



Not really - for all the talk of timing, there aren't that many days left to do what they tried to today.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 12, 2019)

Why the motion failed:


----------



## gosub (Jun 12, 2019)

Cid said:


> Sir, I disagree.


Talk to my pocket coz the rest of me hasn't got a clue


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 13, 2019)

.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> View attachment 174037 .


Tbh fully on board with a minority Tory govt standing aside for labour candidates in key constituencies, great


----------



## teqniq (Jun 13, 2019)

Looks like something out of Viz.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jun 13, 2019)

It’s from the pointless letters fb page


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 13, 2019)

If the Brexit debacle has proven anything, it’s how clueless a large section of the population are regarding the Westminster political bubble.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 13, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Jun 13, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> If the Brexit debacle has proven anything, it’s how clueless a large section of the population are regarding the Westminster political bubble.


Alternatively, it's demonstrated how clueless a large section of the Westminster political bubble is regarding much of the wider population (although that was pretty obvious even before the Brexit debacle)


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 13, 2019)

andysays said:


> Alternatively, it's demonstrated how clueless a large section of the Westminster political bubble is regarding much of the wider population (although that was pretty obvious even before the Brexit debacle)



I concur.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 13, 2019)

andysays said:


> Alternatively, it's demonstrated how clueless a large section of the Westminster political bubble is regarding much of the wider population (although that was pretty obvious even before the Brexit debacle)





Sprocket. said:


> If the Brexit debacle has proven anything, it’s how clueless a large section of the population are regarding the Westminster political bubble.



In a situation where you can only agree with possibly half of either group and more likely only a third then, yes, everyone thinks everyone else is clueless. Not really moving anything on.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 13, 2019)

I see Stewart reckons he'll set up an alternative Parliament in the Methodists' place over the road!

lol, fighting talk.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 13, 2019)

The EU : You have six months, don't waste it!

The Tory Party: Hold my Camberwell Carrot.......


----------



## Duncan2 (Jun 13, 2019)

I was marvelling at his (Stewart's) overweening ambition until I googled him and noted that he too is a scion of Eton College.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 14, 2019)




----------



## Poot (Jun 14, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> I was marvelling at his (Stewart's) overweening ambition until I googled him and noted that he too is a scion of Eton College.


It's not even ambition anymore is it? It's a sort of bored acceptance that when such a post becomes available, one ought to put oneself forward, because it's probably one's duty. Or something.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 14, 2019)

When Stewart gets knocked out it will be less entertaining, and even more horrifying if that were possible.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When Stewart gets knocked out it will be less entertaining, and even more horrifying if that were possible.


i don't think it can get any less entertaining than it is atm


----------



## Poi E (Jun 14, 2019)

Poot said:


> It's not even ambition anymore is it? It's a sort of bored acceptance that when such a post becomes available, one ought to put oneself forward, because it's probably one's duty. Or something.



Quite. Not the done thing for a chap to get too excited.


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2019)

> *Wake up, England: Boris Johnson’s ‘charm’ is just the arrogance of those born to rule *
> 
> Wake up, England: Boris Johnson’s ‘charm’ is just the arrogance of those born to rule | Suzanne Moore



Good Suzanne Moore piece


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 14, 2019)

treelover said:


> Good Suzanne Moore piece


What do you especially like about it?


----------



## treelover (Jun 14, 2019)

The title says it all, you went to public school, maybe not a top one, you have seen how confident they are, etc.


----------



## a_chap (Jun 14, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Quite. Not the done thing for a chap to get too excited.



-cough-

I wasn't planning on getting too excited.


----------



## gosub (Jun 14, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Quite. Not the done thing for a chap to get too excited.


So do I stop saving that party popper, I've secreted for a special occasion?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 14, 2019)

treelover said:


> Good Suzanne Moore piece


That's the same Suzanne Moore who backed "Cleggbama", right?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> When Stewart gets knocked out it will be less entertaining, and even more horrifying if that were possible.



They weren’t going to suddenly find someone who isn’t an utter bastard. It’s horrifying they are in power, full stop. 

How weird would life have to be for the party whose internal disputes have split the nation to suddenly come up with a sensible and pleasant leader?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> The title says it all, you went to public school, maybe not a top one, you have seen how confident they are, etc.



... Not exactly original though is it?


----------



## Poi E (Jun 15, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> How weird would life have to be for the party whose internal disputes have split the nation to suddenly come up with a sensible and pleasant leader?



We would then know the Tories had lost all their principles.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2019)

Poi E said:


> We would then know the Tories had lost all their principles.


Their only principle is not to have principles


----------



## philosophical (Jun 15, 2019)

As far as I can tell there has never ever been any Tory principles or guiding ideology.
All this 'one nation Conservative' guff is meaningless, always has been.
Without strife, division and poverty how do you keep wages down and deference up?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> The title says it all, you went to public school, maybe not a top one, you have seen how confident they are, etc.


So for you the best thing wasn't even by Moore but some unknown sub-editor


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jun 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> As far as I can tell there has never ever been any Tory principles or guiding ideology.
> All this 'one nation Conservative' guff is meaningless, always has been.
> Without strife, division and poverty how do you keep wages down and deference up?



Partly. There was, for about 25 years a majority, of Conservative party politicians who bought into Keynesian economics and the ‘rules’ of the post war settlement. The extent to which this was expedient or genuinely held can be debated. They held sway over a section dedicated to reversing union power, reducing public spending and tax cuts for their mates. Put bluntly, at that point (1945-75) there was a genuine tension about the best way to administer capital that recognised the organised industrial working class had agency.

Keith Joseph - who I’d argue was the key ideologue among MPs of the Thatcher years - was key is assembling the neocon coalition of thinkers, journalists and politicians


----------



## treelover (Jun 15, 2019)

When will the resistance in Britain to populism properly begin? | Nick Cohen

Cohen calls for the remain masses to get on the streets, but this time, mean it!


----------



## Supine (Jun 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> When will the resistance in Britain to populism properly begin? | Nick Cohen
> 
> Cohen calls for the remain masses to get on the streets, but this time, mean it!



I kind of agree with his sentiment


----------



## treelover (Jun 15, 2019)

Yes, and how do you think brexit supporters, especially in left behind areas will react? England is a powder keg at present, with new political cleavages, etc.


----------



## Supine (Jun 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> Yes, and how do you think brexit supporters, especially in left behind areas will react? England is a powder keg at present, with new political cleavages, etc.



I really don't think England is a powder keg. It does need to understand why austerity is the biggest shit stain in recent history and not the EU though.


----------



## treelover (Jun 15, 2019)

Ok, expand, why you don't think it isn't?


----------



## Supine (Jun 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> Ok, expand, why you don't think it isn't?



Double negative? There is not much evidence that people care enough to take to the streets. This shit show is for the politicians to deal with (IMHO).


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 15, 2019)

I don't work weekends


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 16, 2019)

Supine said:


> I really don't think England is a powder keg. It does need to understand why austerity is the biggest shit stain in recent history and not the EU though.


But Cohen isn't arguing for opposition to austerity. Quite the opposite, he has been vocal in attacking a Labour Party that has moved away from neo-libealism, describing it as "disaster socialism". Not surprising to see that you agree with such sentiments though.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 17, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

treelover said:


> Ok, expand, why you don't think it isn't?



People could fight back at any time because of the circumstances they find themselves in, but it’s unlikely that will be about Brexit. 

There have been plenty of opportunities for violence to kick off, but the general public’s attitude to right wing agitators has so far been to milkshake them rather than join in.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> People could fight back at any time because of the circumstances they find themselves in, but it’s unlikely that will be about Brexit.
> 
> There have been plenty of opportunities for violence to kick off, but the general public’s attitude to right wing agitators has so far been to milkshake them rather than join in.


Come on. There has been about 5 incidents of milkshake being lobbed at politicians while the Brexit Party has led every poll for two months and the largest demos we've seen in last couple of years, extinction rebellion aside, have all been right wing pro brexit


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Actually there was one large remain demo but point stands


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Come on. There has been about 5 incidents of milkshake being lobbed at politicians while the Brexit Party has led every poll for two months and the largest demos we've seen in last couple of years, extinction rebellion aside, have all been right wing pro brexit



the pro-brexit demos have not attracted big numbers. The anti-brexit march a few months was far bigger - hundreds of thousands - (although probably not the "Million" that was claimed).  Look at the rival "revoke A50" vs "No deal" petitions - the revoke one was 10 times bigger. Outside a small but vocal and angry hardcore - that support for brexit goes much beyond  about 25 % voting Brexit Party. See also - the peterborough by election.
There is no mobilised mass agitating for brexit - which figures if you consider that much of their support is older and more isolated.	
Farage being able to attract a crowd of gammons in fucking clacton does not an insurrection make.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the pro-brexit demos have not attracted big numbers. The anti-brexit march a few months was far bigger - hundreds of thousands - (although probably not the "Million" that was claimed).  Look at the rival "revoke A50" vs "No deal" petitions - the revoke one was 10 times bigger. Outside a small but vocal and angry hardcore - that support for brexit goes much beyond  about 25 % voting Brexit Party. See also - the peterborough by election.
> There is no mobilised mass agitating for brexit - which figures if you consider that much of their support is older and more isolated.
> Farage being able to attract a crowd of gammons in fucking clacton does not an insurrection make.


25% of electorate backing a party that wants brexit at any cost and has no other policies ffs. Come on now.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Come on. There has been about 5 incidents of milkshake being lobbed at politicians while the Brexit Party has led every poll for two months and the largest demos we've seen in last couple of years, extinction rebellion aside, have all been right wing pro brexit



The context was Cohen’s fancy that Remainers are about to get heated on the streets. Unless Parliament is suspended, this is likely to be way too tame to elicit much of a reaction.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The context was Cohen’s fancy that Remainers are about to get heated on the streets. Unless Parliament is suspended, this is likely to be way too tame to elicit much of a reaction.


Ah sorry, fair enough - agree that (given the remain constituency) unlikely to see them booting off


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 17, 2019)

.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 17, 2019)




----------



## belboid (Jun 17, 2019)

blimey, I don't think anyone has mentioned the Irish border before, thanks for pointing it out


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> 25% of electorate backing a party that wants brexit at any cost and has no other policies ffs. Come on now.



25% tops. And could well be less. And it doesn't denote any political action other than voting. you also claimed they had staged "some of the biggest demos in years" but they haven't - there is not big active popular movement for brexit. Its predominately isolated, fucked off older people who are not organised in any meaningful way.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 17, 2019)

E.g. Farage’s grand march, the complete failure of Yellow Vests to get any traction in this country. I don’t think it’s complacent to not be scared at the moment. 

I’m sure a lot of those advocating no deal/walking away have chosen that option because they’re bored sick of the process so far, a position I have sympathy with.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

The two most electorally successful hard-right parties in the UK have both been in the past 10-15 years. There's still a considerable way to go but the BP could be more successful still. 

Yet even if it fails that doesn't mean that it's voters don't exist, to simply dismiss them as fucked off older people is both incorrect and short-sighted, you only have to look at the FN/NR or AfD to see that. The hard-right vote is not going be a majority in Western European counties, it is going to struggle to get 30+% but it is becoming normalised and entrenched.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> 25% tops. And could well be less. And it doesn't denote any political action other than voting. you also claimed they had staged "some of the biggest demos in years" but they haven't - there is not big active popular movement for brexit. Its predominately isolated, fucked off older people who are not organised in any meaningful way.


1 that isn't a quote of anything I've said
2 whether you like it or not, it's best to have some sort of grip on the political reality


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> 1 that isn't a quote of anything I've said
> 2 whether you like it or not, it's best to have some sort of grip on the political reality





> the largest demos we've seen in last couple of years, extinction rebellion aside, have all been right wing pro brexit



thats what you said. And its not true.

and what political reality do i not have a grip on?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> thats what you said. And its not true.
> 
> and what political reality do i not have a grip on?


It isn't what I said as a quick scroll back a few posts would show you and this probably demonstrates my point about grip and reality tbh


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

Also if the UK does not leave the EU the hard right will receive a major boost.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

It's ok, it's just some old people who will knock it on the head when countryfile starts, everything is absolutely fine


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It isn't what I said as a quick scroll back a few posts would show you and this probably demonstrates my point about grip and reality tbh



its a direct quote - post 27949


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> the largest demos we've seen in last couple of years, extinction rebellion aside, have all been right wing pro brexit






Proper Tidy said:


> Actually there was one large remain demo but point stands






Kaka Tim said:


> "some of the biggest demos in years"






Kaka Tim said:


> its a direct quote - post 27949


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

the point is that the argument about some sort of huge explosion of anger if - when - brexit doesn't happen (e.g. after a 2nd ref) is being much exaggerated - and that is born out by the lack of any significant organsied political action beyond people voting for the brexit party


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've heard the term 'remain and reform' quite a bit to be fair, clearly Watson has borrowed it. It seems to be an attempt to deal with that, but I haven't seen anyone say what it is that should be reformed or how it should be done.


Not even attempting 'reform' now,


Toynbee said:


> the only place to be is strongly pro-Europe.





Watson" said:


> I don’t support Europe despite being socialist; I support Europe because I am a socialist.





> We are still scared to tell the truth about Europe...The European Union is not something to apologise for. It is a Good thing with a capital ‘g’


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 17, 2019)

so where and when were the big pro brexit demos?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> so where and when were the big pro brexit demos?


Just some old people, probably got confused and lost bless them


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the point is that the argument about some sort of huge explosion of anger if - when - brexit doesn't happen (e.g. after a 2nd ref) is being much exaggerated - and that is born out by the lack of any significant organsied political action beyond people voting for the brexit party


Is anyone on U75 arguing that there will be a 'huge explosion of anger'? I agree that there isn't going to be mass streetfighting if the UK doesn't leave the EU, but there will be another round of growth and entrenchment of the hard-right.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Also if the UK does not leave the EU the hard right will receive a major boost.



It’s already had the boost. 

Why should leaving the EU now satiate an electorate nearly 25% of whom would back an anti-Islamic party? That has internalised a message that the views of ethnic minorities, the Scots and socialists are inimical to their progress? That considers that populist, overwhelmingly white English and Welsh nationalism is the route to a win?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Just some old people, probably got confused and lost bless them



To be fair, although it was a big news splash that’s not massive. And yes maybe not all old, but pretty homogeneous as was noted.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's ok, it's just some old people who will knock it on the head when countryfile starts, everything is absolutely fine



Let’s be honest CF is a good show.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s already had the boost.


The growth of hard right is the outcome of 40 years of neo-liberalism not the referendum. The UK leaving the EU won't cause the hard right to vanish in a puff of smoke but it is absurd to argue that not leaving won't give it a boost, for goodness sake we've just seen the BP almost take a Westminster seat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The growth of hard right is the outcome of 40 years of neo-liberalism not the referendum. The UK leaving the EU won't cause the hard right to vanish in a puff of smoke but it is absurd to argue that not leaving won't give it a boost, for goodness sake we've just seen the BP almost take a Westminster seat.


You don't think it'll get a boost if we leave?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 17, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The growth of hard right is the outcome of 40 years of neo-liberalism not the referendum. The UK leaving the EU won't cause the hard right to vanish in a puff of smoke but it is absurd to argue that not leaving won't give it a boost, for goodness sake we've just seen the BP almost take a Westminster seat.



It's almost like the same people who have been arguing for neo-liberal policies for forty years are demanding that we need to continue with neo-liberalism instead of thinking about what they've done.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't think it'll get a boost if we leave?



Why would it? The far right has been quite reliant on the spectre of the EU to build politically for a very long time. It would be more likely to experience a boost if we get some sort of soft brexit that they can paint as a betrayal. Actually leaving would force them to deal more directly with politics - UKIP's tack towards a more virulently racist/reactionary politics after the referendum probably shows what direction they would go in and how much success they would have. The Brexit Party is a viable vehicle now but if its name was redundant and they didn't have the MEP cash, not so much.


----------



## agricola (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why would it? The far right has been quite reliant on the spectre of the EU to build politically for a very long time. It would be more likely to experience a boost if we get some sort of soft brexit that they can paint as a betrayal. Actually leaving would force them to deal more directly with politics - UKIP's tack towards a more virulently racist/reactionary politics after the referendum probably shows what direction they would go in and how much success they would have. The Brexit Party is a viable vehicle now but if its name was redundant and they didn't have the MEP cash, not so much.



I doubt it - they'll just blame the mess that follows on everyone else and people will still lap it up.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You don't think it'll get a boost if we leave?


Not electorally. If the UK leaves the EU I'd expect the BP vote to fall back significantly (as the UKIP vote did post referendum). In the wider political sense as long as neo-liberalism is the name of the game the hard right is going to grow. 

Don't get me wrong I'm not arguing that the UK leaving the EU is the, or even an, answer to the growth of the hard right, it isn't (the only answer is to help develop working class organisation and activity). But not leaving the EU is going to act as a draw to hard-right politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why would it? The far right has been quite reliant on the spectre of the EU to build politically for a very long time. It would be more likely to experience a boost if we get some sort of soft brexit that they can paint as a betrayal. Actually leaving would force them to deal more directly with politics - UKIP's tack towards a more virulently racist/reactionary politics after the referendum probably shows what direction they would go in and how much success they would have. The Brexit Party is a viable vehicle now but if its name was redundant and they didn't have the MEP cash, not so much.


So the great rise in racist attacks and abuse in the summer of 2016, you put that down to the fact we hadn't then left. And it's not exactly subsided You think that genie's going back in the bottle?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So the great rise in racist attacks and abuse in the summer of 2016, you put that down to the fact we hadn't then left. And it's not exactly subsided You think that genie's going back in the bottle?



Well we've been through the fact that racist attacks have been increasing year on year for decades before, haven't we? And no one is saying that there will be a fall in racist violence if we leave. But in terms of the far right getting an electoral boost, no chance as redsquirrel says. In fact I'd go further and say they'll struggle to grow politically without the EU to rail against.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well we've been through the fact that racist attacks have been increasing year on year for decades before, haven't we? And no one is saying that there will be a fall in racist violence if we leave. But in terms of the far right getting an electoral boost, no chance as redsquirrel says. In fact I'd go further and say they'll struggle to grow politically without the EU to rail against.


Yeh right

Cos the eu's really been the thing


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh right
> 
> Cos the eu's really been the thing



I'm not saying its the thing _for the far right, _I'm just saying it is the thing which they use to win most of their support in whatever form. There is less opportunity for them to reach wider layers without it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not saying its the thing _for the far right, _I'm just saying it is the thing which they use to win most of their support in whatever form. There is less opportunity for them to reach wider layers without it.


Yeh immigration and talk of Islamic rape gangs and that's just going to disappear and the echonomy tanking won't do them any favours at all  cos obvs the edl and Britain first and that made so much of their capital out of the eu

Have you been watching the right over the past decade?

E2A you think that after they've got one thing they wanted they'll just fade away? Let's come back to this in a year or two and compare notes


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2019)

Getting what they wanted is more likely to empower them. Just a thought. Bit of a conundrum really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh immigration and talk of Islamic rape gangs and that's just going to disappear and the echonomy tanking won't do them any favours at all  cos obvs the edl and Britain first and that made so much of their capital out of the eu
> 
> Have you been watching the right over the past decade?
> 
> E2A you think that after they've got one thing they wanted they'll just fade away? Let's come back to this in a year or two and compare notes



How much support have Britain First or the EDL been able to mobilise? We're not talking on the scale that the BNP or the National Front before them were able to mobilise are we? 

Yes racist sentiment will still be there and the far right will use any opportunity to whip it up and take advantage. But when they've mobilised over the last ten years around anything beyond the EU, electorally or otherwise, they've mainly not been able to mobilise big numbers. The EDL attracted large numbers initially but they diminished and splintered. 



teqniq said:


> Getting what they wanted is more likely to empower them. Just a thought. Bit of a conundrum really.



I hate to be the one to break this to you but what the far right actually want goes some way beyond leaving the EU.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 17, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The growth of hard right is the outcome of 40 years of neo-liberalism not the referendum. The UK leaving the EU won't cause the hard right to vanish in a puff of smoke but it is absurd to argue that not leaving won't give it a boost, for goodness sake we've just seen the BP almost take a Westminster seat.



I don't think that's quite right. Hostile nationalism has long roots in this country. 40 years ago the National Front was polling pretty well and had been growing for a decade or more. Nearly 40 years ago I was having a stand up row with a bloke reading National Front News openly on a bus in Camden Town. The year before I'd legged in on my way home from 30 seig-heiling skins. The NF wasn’t new then, certainly more marginal than the Brexit Party, but generally the Conservative and Unionist Party embodied plenty enough of the UK’s nationalist right wing tendencies to satisfy the sort of people who would follow Nigel now.

What has happened since is that the country has become more socially liberal while making life much more precarious for a fifth, particularly since the crash. Brexit is a Trojan horse falsely coopting many of the fifth making their enemy out to be this change of culture rather than distribution. At some point we have to be clear that it’s going to disappoint people further. It's not going to help them just because there is a minutely plausible case for state aid. Culturally it's just been telling nationalists with a grudge against any modern sensibility that they were correct.

Agreeing with Brexit built on 'we want our country back' doesn't help. You could as plausibly make the case that the utter failure of Brexit would set the fifth against one set of masters and surely as Brexit set them against the other.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I hate to be the one to break this to you but what the far right actually want goes some way beyond leaving the EU.



No shit Sherlock.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> How much support have Britain First or the EDL been able to mobilise? We're not talking on the scale that the BNP or the National Front before them were able to mobilise are we?
> 
> Yes racist sentiment will still be there and the far right will use any opportunity to whip it up and take advantage. But when they've mobilised over the last ten years around anything beyond the EU, electorally or otherwise, they've mainly not been able to mobilise big numbers. The EDL attracted large numbers initially but they diminished and splintered.
> 
> ...


Yeh we're not talking the auld BNP or nf, we're talking in a brexit party world where a radical right party, or perhaps rather a party composed of radical right activists with some other oddballs, can attract a huge number of votes. Loads of people, more respectable than syl, will be eyeing this up.

The demand is certainly there. The supply isn't, not right now. But by the end of the year? By 2022? It's all a bit living on borrowed time, but I wouldn't it it past nf for him to turn the bp into a vehicle to hoover up those votes for a more coherent radical right party


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 17, 2019)

Giving people agency to make a political decision then being perceived to have ignored that political decision because it conflicts with the interests of the political and business class will have political consequences, and in the absence of any sort of progressive outlet for that then the eventual results will be... messy. It isn't really about whether we do or don't leave the EU or what that possible post EU looks like. It's about how it is perceived and felt, and absolutely the murky right are making capital out of that but they are making capital because it strikes a chord in the first place


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh we're not talking the auld BNP or nf, we're talking in a brexit party world where a radical right party, or perhaps rather a party composed of radical right activists with some other oddballs, can attract a huge number of votes. Loads of people, more respectable than syl, will be eyeing this up.
> 
> The demand is certainly there. The supply isn't, not right now. But by the end of the year? By 2022? It's all a bit living on borrowed time, but I wouldn't it it past nf for him to turn the bp into a vehicle to hoover up those votes for a more coherent radical right party



Absolutely, he might well attempt to do that, but outside the EU the BP will need a radical re-think.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I don't think that's quite right. Hostile nationalism has long roots in this country. 40 years ago the National Front was polling pretty well and had been growing for a decade or more. Nearly 40 years ago I was having a stand up row with a bloke reading National Front News openly on a bus in Camden Town. The year before I'd legged in on my way home from 30 seig-heiling skins. The NF wasn’t new then, certainly more marginal than the Brexit Party, but generally the Conservative and Unionist Party embodied plenty enough of the UK’s nationalist right wing tendencies to satisfy the sort of people who would follow Nigel now.
> 
> What has happened since is that the country has become more socially liberal while making life much more precarious for a fifth, particularly since the crash. Brexit is a Trojan horse falsely coopting many of the fifth making their enemy out to be this change of culture rather than distribution. At some point we have to be clear that it’s going to disappoint people further. It's not going to help them just because there is a minutely plausible case for state aid. Culturally it's just been telling nationalists with a grudge against any modern sensibility that they were correct.
> 
> Agreeing with Brexit built on 'we want our country back' doesn't help. You could as plausibly make the case that the utter failure of Brexit would set the fifth against one set of masters and surely as Brexit set them against the other.



Redsquirrel isn't saying that the far right are a _new _development, just that their growth in the last 30-40 years was strongly conditioned by economic and material reality. 

No one is "agreeing with Brexit built on 'we want our country back'".


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I don't think that's quite right. Hostile nationalism has long roots in this country. 40 years ago the National Front was polling pretty well and had been growing for a decade or more.
> 
> Agreeing with Brexit built on 'we want our country back' doesn't help. You could as plausibly make the case that the utter failure of Brexit would set the fifth against one set of masters and surely as Brexit set them against the other.


This is totally contradictory. You claim that neo-liberalism is not the cause of the growth of the hard-right and then proceed to outline how the hard-right has grown over the period of neo-liberal attacks on labour. 

It also totally mistakes the nature of the hard right, both modern and present. The political defeat of the NF was one of the major reasons for the hard-rights turn to electoral politics as well as it's move from an ethnic to a cultural nationalism. It also mistakes where the support for the hard-right is drawn from, the greatest support for the BNP came from non-voters, likewise at its height UKIP was drawing significant support from both non-voters and former Labour voters as well as the Tories. Your characterisation of 20% of the UK as hard-right is also revealing, in fact your politics is an excellent example of the move from a politics based on interests (i.e. class based politics) to one based on views.

And as SpackleFrog noted the last paragraph is nonsense, no one is agreeing with any such contention.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Absolutely, he might well attempt to do that, but outside the EU the BP will need a radical re-think.


I don't think farage will return to private life for some time yet


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Redsquirrel isn't saying that the far right are a _new _development, just that their growth in the last 30-40 years was strongly conditioned by economic and material reality.
> 
> No one is "agreeing with Brexit built on 'we want our country back'".



But that’s what Brexit is.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 18, 2019)

Brexit, like remain, was and is lots of things. Chief amongst them imo was rejection of the way things are


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brexit, like remain, was and is lots of things. Chief amongst them imo was rejection of the way things are


Indeed, you might as well say remain was a vote for more neo-liberalism.

In fact we are, once again, back at leave voters=racists.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

This _stop Brexit to stop the hard right _is just _vote XXX to keep BNP/UKIP/BP/FN/AfD out_ writ large. A strategy that has seen the hard-right prosper.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 18, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This is totally contradictory. You claim that neo-liberalism is not the cause of the growth of the hard-right and then proceed to outline how the hard-right has grown over the period of neo-liberal attacks on labour.
> 
> It also totally mistakes the nature of the hard right, both modern and present. The political defeat of the NF was one of the major reasons for the hard-rights turn to electoral politics as well as it's move from an ethnic to a cultural nationalism. It also mistakes where the support for the hard-right is drawn from, the greatest support for the BNP came from non-voters, likewise at its height UKIP was drawing significant support from both non-voters and former Labour voters as well as the Tories. Your characterisation of 20% of the UK as hard-right is also revealing, in fact your politics is an excellent example of the move from a politics based on interests (i.e. class based politics) to one based on views.
> 
> And as SpackleFrog noted the last paragraph is nonsense, no one is agreeing with any such contention.



I don’t think I said anywhere that 20% of the electorate is ‘hard right’. I noted that 25% of the country polled said it could back an anti-Islamic party. On this week’s form that could be the Tories.

I’m not denying that neoliberalism encourages the growth of the far right. It’s simply that the country was liberal and divided enough to have had exactly the same tendencies 40 years ago. Not every Enoch fan voted NF.

Let’s clarify that there is a hard right, currently personified in UKIP and a wider nationalist electorate that has a confidence and supply arrangement with the Tories.

Your views on this are curious in many ways. Despite warnings that Brexit would simply encourage the right to express itself you championed it. Now you demand it is delivered to put them back in their box.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Your views on this are curious in many ways. Despite warnings that Brexit would simply encourage the right to express itself you championed it. Now you demand it is delivered to put them back in their box.


Like i said leave voters = racists. Opposition to a neo-liberal superstate = support for the hard right. More Hope not Hate, liberal shit. Fuck you.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Like i said leave voters = racists. Opposition to a neo-liberal superstate = support for the hard right. More Hope not Hate, liberal shit. Fuck you.



For god’s sake calm down. It’s a forum for debate. 

Ironic that you have so much to say about shouty progressives and their offensive comments and you are 0-fuck you in an instant.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This _stop Brexit to stop the hard right _is just _vote XXX to keep BNP/UKIP/BP/FN/AfD out_ writ large. A strategy that has seen the hard-right prosper.


it's also short-sighted as - frankly - brexit or no brexit the far-right will make hay out of it


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> For god’s sake calm down. It’s a forum for debate.
> 
> Ironic that you have so much to say about shouty progressives and their offensive comments and you are 0-fuck you in an instant.


You've just called me, thousands of other socialists and millions of people racists I think fuck you is an entirely appropriate response. 

And on the basis of a position that you have made up. Pointing out the political consequences of capital engineering a stitch up so that the UK remains in the EU is not "demand[ing] it is delivered to put them back in their box"


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's also short-sighted as - frankly - brexit or no brexit the far-right will make hay out of it


Indeed


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brexit, like remain, was and is lots of things. Chief amongst them imo was rejection of the way things are


it will be followed by a rejection of the way things still are after there is no brexit


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You've just called me, thousands of other socialists and millions of people racists I think fuck you is an entirely appropriate response.
> 
> And on the basis of a position that you have made up. Pointing out the political consequences of capital engineering a stitch up so that the UK remains in the EU is not "demand[ing] it is delivered to put them back in their box"



How did I call you a racist?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it will be followed by a rejection of the way things still are after there is no brexit



Yes, the contradictions will be apparent. But rejected for what by who? I expect we’ll all have different answers.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> How did I call you a racist?


You've just claimed that those you voted leave are responsible for the rise of the hard-right


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes, the contradictions will be apparent. But rejected for what by who? I expect we’ll all have different answers.


not at the time we won't, it will be quite apparent


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You've just claimed that those you voted leave are responsible for the rise of the hard-right



Like I said, those tendencies were there, Brexit has given encouragement for them to be expressed. 

You had your reasons for voting leave, I disagree with them, doesn’t mean I’m calling you a racist. 

If you believe neoliberalism encourages racism and the EU is neoliberal then are you calling all Remainers racist? 

Daft line of argument. Everyone’s a racist now father. You’re not and neither am I.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> not at the time we won't, it will be quite apparent



Expand please. It all sounds very good, but there do seem to be an extraordinary number of ways the blame can be diverted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Expand please. It all sounds very good, but there do seem to be an extraordinary number of ways the blame can be diverted.





Mr Moose said:


> But rejected for what by who?


it will become apparent. if it doesn't we can revisit the point.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Like I said, those tendencies were there, Brexit has given encouragement for them to be expressed.
> 
> You had your reasons for voting leave, I disagree with them, doesn’t mean I’m calling you a racist.
> 
> ...


Unlike you I've always recognised that people vote based on any number of reasons. I've always been totally clear that though I disagree with them I can see why people might have voted remain. It is a daft line of argument but it's your line.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This _stop Brexit to stop the hard right _is just _vote XXX to keep BNP/UKIP/BP/FN/AfD out_ writ large. A strategy that has seen the hard-right prosper.



It's interesting to see this from people who are usually dismissive of the SWP as well.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't think farage will return to private life for some time yet



I didn't say he would!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> But that’s what Brexit is.



According to you, but as you've demonstrated, you don't know what's going on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I didn't say he would!


good


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> According to you, but as you've demonstrated, you don't know what's going on.


and how fortunate he is


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> According to you, but as you've demonstrated, you don't know what's going on.



Do tell us what’s going on Marvin. In your own words.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it will become apparent. if it doesn't we can revisit the point.



No one's going to be able to prove you wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> No one's going to be able to prove you wrong.


you say that like it's a bad thing


----------



## ice-is-forming (Jun 18, 2019)

You know that no one outside of Gb/europe gives a toss right?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's also short-sighted as - frankly - brexit or no brexit the far-right will make hay out of it


I think a vote to remain would have diminished them. 
The leave vote did boost them and now Farage and his rich boy backers now have a victory that they can use.


----------



## mojo pixy (Jun 18, 2019)

ice-is-forming said:


> You know that no one outside of Gb/europe gives a toss right?



How very dare they uncare so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I think a vote to remain would have diminished them.
> The leave vote did boost them and now Farage and his rich boy backers now have a victory that they can use.


yeh, i think now there's no way out of this that's that palatable


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Unlike you I've always recognised that people vote based on any number of reasons. I've always been totally clear that though I disagree with them I can see why people might have voted remain. It is a daft line of argument but it's your line.



It’s not my line. I can see why if you are at the bottom shaking the dice makes sense. I can see why arguing for Lexit rather than the EU’s continuing capital project is compelling. But the main political thrust for Brexit is delivered by more parochial neoliberals who want a MAGA style UK politics where frictionless trade with the US and a rolling back of regulation and protection, both economic and cultural is the ultimate aim.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Do tell us what’s going on Marvin. In your own words.



People are angry and are rejecting the established order. That anger can be channelled in many different directions. 



Mr Moose said:


> It’s not my line. I can see why if you are at the bottom shaking the dice makes sense. I can see why arguing for Lexit rather than the EU’s continuing capital project is compelling. But the main political thrust for Brexit is delivered by more parochial neoliberals who want a MAGA style UK politics where frictionless trade with the US and a rolling back of regulation and protection, both economic and cultural is the ultimate aim.



You mean the ruling class are in power? Oh lordy. Whatever shall we do?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> People are angry and are rejecting the established order. That anger can be channelled in many different directions.
> 
> 
> 
> You mean the ruling class are in power? Oh lordy. Whatever shall we do?



Everyone’s angry. That’s the UK. And how is the established order being rejected? We are about to get an old Etonian as PM while the most popular political figure in respect of Brexit is a former broker who went to Dulwich College. Key deliverable? A trade deal with the US.

You are dreaming. Name one good direction it is being channelled in.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Everyone’s angry. That’s the UK. And how is the established order being rejected? We are about to get an old Etonian as PM while the most popular political figure in respect of Brexit is a former broker who went to Dulwich College. Key deliverable? A trade deal with the US.
> 
> You are dreaming. Name one good direction it is being channelled in.


Can't argue with this - clearly no positive channel for the resentment and alienation that drove the leave vote at present, which is why hard right making hay


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Everyone’s angry. That’s the UK. And how is the established order being rejected? We are about to get an old Etonian as PM while the most popular political figure in respect of Brexit is a former broker who went to Dulwich College. Key deliverable? A trade deal with the US.
> 
> You are dreaming. Name one good direction it is being channelled in.



All superstructure, no base. Trade deal with US blah blah blah.

I'm not dreaming. I didn't say it was being channelled in a positive direction. I'm just saying that you won't be able to channel that anger towards support for Remain and that you are actively aiding and abetting the development of the far right by ignoring this.

E2A: It's not just the UK by the way - it's everywhere, and I'm tired of Little Englander remainers ignoring this.


----------



## Santino (Jun 18, 2019)

Tom Watson says that 'only by remaining in the EU can we remain *the same Britain at heart that we’ve been for 1000 years*'. Does he mean a quiet backwater on the edge of Europe ruled by a moneyed elite? Or a warmongering colonial superpower?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2019)

Watson is a twat, best ignored TBH.


----------



## gosub (Jun 18, 2019)

Santino said:


> Tom Watson says that 'only by remaining in the EU can we remain *the same Britain at heart that we’ve been for 1000 years*'. Does he mean a quiet backwater on the edge of Europe ruled by a moneyed elite? Or a warmongering colonial superpower?


Run by the French.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 18, 2019)

to bring up a point that's been discussed before and becomes pertinent again if we have a "brexiteer" PM... 
there's absolutely no legal reason why we should have to wait until halloween to formally exit the EU.
A really serious Brexiter Pm could just take us out today. 
Would Johnson have the balls to do that? 
course not.
which tells you everything.


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2019)

Santino said:


> Tom Watson says that 'only by remaining in the EU can we remain *the same Britain at heart that we’ve been for 1000 years*'. Does he mean a quiet backwater on the edge of Europe ruled by a moneyed elite? Or a warmongering colonial superpower?



To have a thousand years of history to pick from and come up with that argument is just dreadful.  He would be better off saying how many times people from here have had to go over there and deal with some jumped-up despot who wanted to rule the continent, and how our abandonment of involvement in European affairs is both a betrayal of what those people suffered and an invitation for the next despot to have a go at it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Britain as it exists now (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) is actually about 97 years old.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Britain as it exists now (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) is actually about 97 years old.



I think you mean -' the *UK* as it exists now'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you mean -' the *UK* as it exists now'.



yeah whatevs


----------



## belboid (Jun 18, 2019)

We have been at war with either Europe or ourselves for nigh on 500 of those 1000 years, so the current situation seems to be somewhere around the median point of that time. Topped and tailed by fifty years of control by Europe...and looks like we could be redoing The Anarchy next


----------



## belboid (Jun 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you mean -' the *UK* as it exists now'.


Yes, there's been 'a' Britain for a thousand years. It's just had rather different borders, nations, definitions. Oh, and relations with Europe.


----------



## andysays (Jun 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you mean -' the *UK* as it exists now'.


The point is still the same though, in appealing to 


> the same Britain at heart that we’ve been for 1000 years


Watson is simultaneously showing a terrible grasp of history and pandering to a cosy idea of shared tradition which has never really existed


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 18, 2019)

It isn't meant to be historically accurate tbf. It's just drivel aimed at people who already agree with him. The old mod looking cunt


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> Yes, there's been 'a' Britain for a thousand years. It's just had rather different borders, nations, definitions. Oh, and relations with Europe.



Strictly speaking there was a Britain between 410 and just after Gildas' time, then no Britain until 1284 whereupon we have had varying forms of Britain (with the most accurate Britain starting in 1485) since.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> All superstructure, no base. Trade deal with US blah blah blah.
> 
> I'm not dreaming. I didn't say it was being channelled in a positive direction. I'm just saying that you won't be able to channel that anger towards support for Remain and that you are actively aiding and abetting the development of the far right by ignoring this.
> 
> E2A: It's not just the UK by the way - it's everywhere, and I'm tired of Little Englander remainers ignoring this.



You are saying nothing of any consequence. If you think trade deals with the US and the capital flow that will ensue are unimportant it’s hard to see what your objection is to the EU. You’ve got on board a bun fight that is entirely on the terms of the right and you don’t have a reason why.

Massive threat to them, this left on left on progressive slagging.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You are saying nothing of any consequence. If you think trade deals with the US and the capital flow that will ensue are unimportant it’s hard to see what your objection is to the EU. You’ve got on board a bun fight that is entirely on the terms of the right and you don’t have a reason why.
> 
> Massive threat to them, this left on left on progressive slagging.



Mate you're desperately defending the staus quo and fuelling the growth of the far right, how are you progressive or left? 

I didn't say I thought trade deals with the US were unimportant. I'm just saying things that might happen aren't quite as important as things that are happening right in front of you, right now.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 18, 2019)

agricola said:


> Strictly speaking there was a Britain between 410 and just after Gildas' time, then no Britain until 1284 whereupon we have had varying forms of Britain (with the most accurate Britain starting in 1485) since.



surely the _Bretwelda_'s count?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

agricola said:


> Strictly speaking there was a Britain between 410 and just after Gildas' time, then no Britain until 1284 whereupon we have had varying forms of Britain (with the most accurate Britain starting in 1485) since.


England I think you mean, being as the most accurate Britain you suggest omitted scotland


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 18, 2019)

ice-is-forming said:


> You know that no one outside of Gb/europe gives a toss right?



Apart from the Americans that threw a lot of resources at getting a leave vote? What was that about then?


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> England I think you mean, being as the most accurate Britain you suggest omitted scotland



Not really - Britain has to include all of the British, which England didn't until Edward I's conquest.  I am not sure the Scots have ever been British, or at least those north of the northernmost wall weren't (hence the linguistic differences).


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2019)

agricola said:


> Not really - Britain has to include all of the British, which England didn't until Edward I's conquest.  I am not sure the Scots have ever been British, or at least those north of the northernmost wall weren't (hence the linguistic differences).


Surely (almost) everyone on this island was British by virtue of er born and bred on the island


----------



## agricola (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely (almost) everyone on this island was British by virtue of er born and bred on the island



That is a modern definition of "British" though - the English didn't consider themselves as British until relatively recently (and indeed many still don't).


----------



## belboid (Jun 18, 2019)

agricola said:


> That is a modern definition of "British" though - the English didn't consider themselves as British until relatively recently (and indeed many still don't).


but we're not talking about being 'British' but about the existence of 'Britain.' And there's been one of them for a couple of millennia. It's just got a really vague meaning, as I think this last page or so demonstrates.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Mate you're desperately defending the staus quo and fuelling the growth of the far right, how are you progressive or left?
> 
> I didn't say I thought trade deals with the US were unimportant. I'm just saying things that might happen aren't quite as important as things that are happening right in front of you, right now.



_I’m_ fuelling the growth of the far right. What that’s provable is it? My personal fault.

Well I think you are with your hopeless Lexit and endless trashing of other left and progressive folk. 

‘Defending the status quo’ says you, desperate to deliver what the Rees-Mogg’s and Johnson’s demand. Happy to join in their illusory fantasy of ‘sovereignty’.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

Brexit in terms of the word 'leave' only happens with a hard 'border' on the island of Ireland.


----------



## Poi E (Jun 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely (almost) everyone on this island was British by virtue of er born and bred on the island



This is the only usage of British that is unambiguous. Anything else and were here for a long time, as belboid notes.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

Isn't where somebody is born an accident of birth?
I suppose somebody can be geographically from the British isles...but it ends there and has no more significance than if a person is Geographically from a place called China.
Any other definition is about family and choice. I am born in Kent but owe nothing to others born there too because they happen to introduce the concept of nationality.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Isn't where somebody is born an accident of birth?
> I suppose somebody can be geographically from the British isles...but it ends there and has no more significance than if a person is Geographically from a place called China.
> Any other definition is about family and choice. I am born in Kent but owe nothing to others born there too because they happen to introduce the concept of nationality.



I think being a boring cunt is probably an accident of birth as well, so you'll just have to buckle up and cope with it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Isn't where somebody is born an accident of birth?
> I suppose somebody can be geographically from the British isles...but it ends there and has no more significance than if a person is Geographically from a place called China.
> Any other definition is about family and choice. I am born in Kent but owe nothing to others born there too because they happen to introduce the concept of nationality.


I'm sure you think your making an incisive point, that people won't have considered this before. You're not.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Brexit in terms of the word 'leave' only happens with a hard 'border' on the island of Ireland.


If you knew then you really should have mentioned this border thing before, why has it taken 936 pages for this issue to be raised?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 18, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I think being a boring cunt is probably an accident of birth as well, so you'll just have to buckle up and cope with it.


No, that one really is a personal failing for which only the boring person can be blamed.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I think being a boring cunt is probably an accident of birth as well, so you'll just have to buckle up and cope with it.[/QUOTE
> You choose to be personally abusive. OK.
> You are simply a plain cunt without even the extra quality you attribute to me.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm sure you think your making an incisive point, that people won't have considered this before. You're not.


Fair enough. Although your certainly as to what I think is quite wrong, but if nationality has been mentioned before I take your point, after all every individual poster here is never repetitive, and always original...not.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> If you knew then you really should have mentioned this border thing before, why has it taken 936 pages for this issue to be raised?


It has been raised before. As has the 'boring' stuff about 'lexit'.


----------



## kebabking (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical -  Boring isn't an additional quality.

The ability to use the quote function might be though....


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

kebabking said:


> philosophical -  Boring isn't an additional quality.
> 
> The ability to use the quote function might be though....


I am not surprised you argue that being boring is not an additional quality.
I argue that it is an additional quality to enhance my cuntishness.
You are left with cuntishness alone, and might be jealous.
After all, it was your choice to respond abusively.


----------



## Duncan2 (Jun 18, 2019)

It was reasonably clear from watching the Tory leadership candidates earlier that none of them think we will be out come November-January at best.Not that any of them gave the impression of having a clue.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It has been raised before. As has the 'boring' stuff about 'lexit'.


'Has' it 'really'? Well I 'never'


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am not surprised you argue that being boring is not an additional quality.
> I argue that it is an additional quality to enhance my cuntishness.
> You are left with cuntishness alone, and might be jealous.
> After all, it was your choice to respond abusively.


If I say you're definitely right about whatever it is you're on about and everyone else is wrong will you stop posting for a bit?


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> If I say you're definitely right about whatever it is you're on about and everyone else is wrong will you stop posting for a bit?


Are you some kind of censor?
Put me on ignore if I bother you that much.


----------



## belboid (Jun 18, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Are you some kind of censor?
> Put me on ignore if I bother you that much.


I think you’ve mistaken bored for bothered.


----------



## Ming (Jun 18, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Apart from the Americans that threw a lot of resources at getting a leave vote? What was that about then?


Robert Mercer. Helped get Trump elected also. Sounds like there’s a game afoot.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 18, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> _I’m_ fuelling the growth of the far right. What that’s provable is it? My personal fault.
> 
> Well I think you are with your hopeless Lexit and endless trashing of other left and progressive folk.
> 
> ‘Defending the status quo’ says you, desperate to deliver what the Rees-Mogg’s and Johnson’s demand. Happy to join in their illusory fantasy of ‘sovereignty’.



I've never once said Lexit. I've only ever said that you can't built Socialist politics by defending neoliberal bosses institutions. 

Yes, if you tell everyone we have to ignore a democratic vote because the majority were too stupid and racist to understand what they were voting for, you will fuel the growth of the far right. Especially if you claim to be on the left while doing it.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've never once said Lexit.



Except for when you're saying you don't say it. 

I don't say bla bla bla!


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've never once said Lexit. I've only ever said that you can't built Socialist politics by defending neoliberal bosses institutions.


On that at least Moose is consistent because he is not interested in Socialist politics but rather wants a _progressive_ politics. In fact he, like Watson, Toynbee, etc are actively opposed to socialist class politics. As I've said previously the real division is not between those that voted leave and those the voted remain but those that see the power of the working class as the only body that can really create the changes needed (and trust in that power) and those that fear or patronise it. Hence, the working class has to be _protected_ by the state, the EU, the Labour Party, etc, ignoring the fact that these are the very bodies that are attacking it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2019)

kebabking said:


> the _Bretwelda_'s count?


Sank off Normandy in 1821 with the loss of its cargo of brandy and tobacco


----------



## ska invita (Jun 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> the real division is not between those that voted leave and those the voted remain but those that see the power of the working class as the only body that can really create the changes needed (and trust in that power) and those that fear or patronise it. Hence, the working class has to be _protected_ by the state, the EU, the Labour Party, etc, ignoring the fact that these are the very bodies that are attacking it.


I agree with the sentiment of that in the broadest terms, but ultimately I think thats a false dichotomy - those are not the only two options, and you replace one binary with another - and maybe this gets to the heart of the split of opinion about this on the left.

Brexit is characterised by polarising conversations that try and fit everything into one of two options - likely a byproduct of a binary referendum. I think theres a similar parallel with the trans debates infact, which tries to force the complexities and spectrum into the binary of sex. But the reality is more complex than a binary choice.

For example, thinking that there is such a thing as False consciousness - Wikipedia within the working class both believes in the centrality of the working class as agent of change but doesn't have blind faith in it, nor is it fearful of it (maybe a little patronising of it  - I dont think so in truth).

Conceptualising a monolothic notion of the working class whose power should be "trusted in" can lead to all kinds of projecting and reductionism.
For example there are lots of working class people within the Labour Party acting in the spirit of the working class taking power for ourselves.
Or another example: the working class is split on Brexit and a substantial part of the working class rejection of Brexit is that part of the class _protecting themselves _from perceived Brexit fallout, not cowering for protection from without.

On a commute so stopping there.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> On that at least Moose is consistent because he is not interested in Socialist politics but rather wants a _progressive_ politics. In fact he, like Watson, Toynbee, etc are actively opposed to socialist class politics. As I've said previously the real division is not between those that voted leave and those the voted remain but those that see the power of the working class as the only body that can really create the changes needed (and trust in that power) and those that fear or patronise it. Hence, the working class has to be _protected_ by the state, the EU, the Labour Party, etc, ignoring the fact that these are the very bodies that are attacking it.



Well this is the nub of your arguments, this passionate belief that Brexit, one time only democracy, somehow represents socialist class politics. 

To do so you have to ignore the rightward shift heavily financed nationalist campaigning caused and blame this on anyone who disagrees with you and any subsequent democracy. You also have to ignore every likely outcome of Brexit, less regulation, a more global neoliberalism, in favour of tenuous possibilities and you ignore any divisions in the segments of working class vote on Brexit. _The _working class vote in this case was apparently not the majority in Scotland nor amongst BAME people nor the skilled working class. It is encapsulated in a large segment of the English and Welsh working classes and (on this) their middle England allies. I think you gloss over these issues as if the conclusions are obvious. Only a class enemy could think otherwise.

I don’t disagree that I am in favour of protections. You are right they come at a cost. But it’s illusory to think that this changes with WTO rules or a US trade deal or even with none of these. Demands for change will be resisted wherever the struggle for it takes place. It will always require a changing of the game, in or out of the EU. Brexit has certain working class people demanding that their freedom is somehow coincidental with the class that has ruled Britain for a thousand years. And that’s a game changer?

But there is no mandate to stay and no mandate for hard Brexit. Compromise required.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I agree with the sentiment of that in the broadest terms, but ultimately I think thats a false dichotomy - those are not the only two options, and you replace one binary with another - and maybe this gets to the heart of the split of opinion about this on the left.
> 
> Brexit is characterised by polarising conversations that try and fit everything into one of two options - likely a byproduct of a binary referendum. I think theres a similar parallel with the trans debates infact, which tries to force the complexities and spectrum into the binary of sex. But the reality is more complex than a binary choice.
> 
> ...



I do imagine squirrel has heard of false class consciousness. He probably doesn’t need a Wikipedia. 

But generally, yes, other views are possible.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 19, 2019)

Surely the only significant word is 'leave', and the only significant issues are the practicalities that follow the leave victory?
I find looking at brexit through that particular lens helpful, and the wider discussion is for another time and place.

The title of this thread suggests to me it is about focus on the practicalities.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The title of this thread suggests to me it is about focus on the practicalities.


the title of this thread suggests to me it's not a done deal


----------



## philosophical (Jun 19, 2019)

Yes. It is a done vote.
Deal wasn't on the ballot paper.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes. It is a done vote.
> Deal wasn't on the ballot paper.


yeh. by it not being done deal i meant, as everyone but you will have worked out, that there is still no firm basis for the belief that a departure from the eu will occur despite the vote in 2016


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 19, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Well this is the nub of your arguments, this passionate belief that Brexit, one time only democracy, somehow represents socialist class politics.


Again you've made this up. I've not argued any such nonsense. 



Mr Moose said:


> I do imagine squirrel has heard of false class consciousness. He probably doesn’t need a Wikipedia.


FYI I reject the idea of class consciousness, precisely because it leads to the type politics you support - the working class needing to be led towards the light by the elect.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I agree with the sentiment of that in the broadest terms, but ultimately I think thats a false dichotomy - those are not the only two options, and you replace one binary with another - and maybe this gets to the heart of the split of opinion about this on the left.


So what are the other options to either seeing the working class as the agent of change or not seeing it as the agent of change? False consciousness certainly isn't it, that is the type of vanguardism that leads to the Fabians or bolsheviks (plus it is incredibly patronising, see the list of those that push it).



ska invita said:


> Conceptualising a monolothic notion of the working class whose power should be "trusted in" can lead to all kinds of projecting and reductionism.
> For example there are lots of working class people within the Labour Party acting in the spirit of the working class taking power for ourselves.
> Or another example: the working class is split on Brexit and a substantial part of the working class rejection of Brexit is that part of the class _protecting themselves _from perceived Brexit fallout, not cowering for protection from without.


I've not argued for that the working class is monolithic, indeed quite the opposite I see it as a highly diverse body shot through with contradictions and differences.

Of course there are lots of working class people in the LP, that does not make the LP itself the agent of change (to use the old phrase the purpose the LP is to deliver the working class up to betrayal). Of course lots of working class people want to remain. That is the point I am making, that class politics is a politics defined on _interests_, that whether someone is in favour of remain or leave, whether someone votes Con, Brexit Party, Labour or LD, they share a political interest in common as they are all exploited by capital. This is contrasted with progressive politics where _views_ are made the basis of political organising, hence the support for the organisation of "progressive" capital (like the EU is supposed to be) with the "progressive" parts of the working class.

These two political views are contradictory. Like your claim that somehow radical anti-fascism and liberal anti-fascism can work together. That somehow those with a radical pro-working class position work with Hope Not Hate, an organisation that calls them extremists and directly undermines them.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh. by it not being done deal i meant, as everyone but you will have worked out, that there is still no firm basis for the belief that a departure from the eu will occur despite the vote in 2016


I don't have the privilege of speaking for everyone as you do.
The basis I go on was that (unfortunately) leave won.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Again you've made this up. I've not argued any such nonsense.
> 
> FYI I reject the idea of class consciousness, precisely because it leads to the type politics you support - the working class needing to be led towards the light by the elect.



If you are not arguing it, why _must_ Brexit be delivered? Why such a crushing sell out if it is not, or if it is neutered?

I’m certainly not a vanguardist, I would have thought that was evident. This isn’t the light in my opinion, that’s not unreasonable to say so. If the working class chooses to move towards we can do so at any time within any arrangement. In the meantime what is best or worst is still a valid debate, issue by issue. Issues of law or benefits or jobs are all framed by social relations. Have to an extent work within them as if they are real.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you are not arguing it, why _must_ Brexit be delivered? Why such a crushing sell out if it is not, or if it is neutered?


Once again you haven't read properly. Your first sentence is a direct contradiction. None of my posts in the last week or so have argued that the UK _should_ leave the EU, simply that there will be political consequences if the UK remains in the EU.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If you are not arguing it, why _must_ Brexit be delivered? Why such a crushing sell out if it is not, or if it is neutered?
> 
> I’m certainly not a vanguardist, I would have thought that was evident. This isn’t the light in my opinion, that’s not unreasonable to say so. If the working class chooses to move towards we can do so at any time within any arrangement. In the meantime what is best or worst is still a valid debate, issue by issue. Issues of law or benefits or jobs are all framed by social relations. Have to an extent work within them as if they are real.



So the working class may move in the future, but for now we must decide which form of management is best for them?


----------



## Supine (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So the working class may move in the future, but for now we must decide which form of management is best for them?



Although you won't be allowed to move to Europe as your supporting a loss of FOM rights


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So the working class may move in the future, but for now we must decide which form of management is best for them?


no management of course


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 19, 2019)

Supine said:


> Although you won't be allowed to move to Europe as your supporting a loss of FOM rights



That's not the kind of movement we're talking about, but for the record, I am not supporting anyone losing their right to move freely.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So the working class may move in the future, but for now we must decide which form of management is best for them?



You write as if no working class person is involved in any decisions, any politics or manages anything.

You can participate in bourgeois institutions, liberal democratic politics or you can choose not to. That’s it really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You write as if no working class person is involved in any decisions, any politics or manages anything.
> 
> You can participate in bourgeois institutions, liberal democratic politics or you can choose not to. That’s it really.



You mean like referendums?


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Once again you haven't read properly. Your first sentence is a direct contradiction. None of my posts in the last week or so have argued that the UK _should_ leave the EU, simply that there will be political consequences if the UK remains in the EU.



What is your preferred outcome and why? Take it as read that includes a working class politics that seizes the initiative, but in broad terms?


----------



## teuchter (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What is your preferred outcome and why?


Good luck getting a straight answer to that.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You mean like referendums?



Is that all participation means to you? Quite literally the Toffs said you get to vote on this one and it appears this one alone.

There isn’t a great principle about referendums to be upheld. If you opposed a result on a referendum or some of its extended consequences, Politics would continue.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Is that all participation means to you? Quite literally the Toffs said you get to vote on this one and it appears this one alone.
> 
> There isn’t a great principle about referendums to be upheld. If you opposed a result on a referendum or some of its extended consequences, Politics would continue.



I was just responding to your suggestion that I can participate in liberal democratic politics or choose not to. Clearly regardless of my choice you won't view the outcome as legitimate!


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Once again you haven't read properly. Your first sentence is a direct contradiction. None of my posts in the last week or so have argued that the UK _should_ leave the EU, simply that there will be political consequences if the UK remains in the EU.


I think there will be severe political consequences of leaving too. Because 'we' won't get what we want. So the war with Europe (the foreign oppressor) will just be beginning. Brexit has to drag on for years, because there's no such thing as no-deal, we will have to negotiate a trade deal with the EU at some point. The moment of Brexit will not put to bed the demand for 'national sovereignty', it is just the beginning. Such a demand could take a socialist direction but it will not, it will take a nationalist direction. We already know this. It is already happening. Stopping Brexit would cause a rise in toxic nationalism. But alas, Brexit happening is going to do the same thing. These trends have been decades in the making and the Tories are riding them as far as they can. That is the Brexit we have.

The working class of the UK is deeply split on the Brexit issue (their interests are split too, since you want to use that language). But also, sometimes the working class - or a section of it - can take a wrong turn. Classic piece on that is Arendt's chapter 'The alliance between capital and the mob': https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...als+of+Totalitarianism,+147-157+(re-scan).pdf

As international as capital may be, the working class of the UK are oppressed chiefly by the ruling class of the UK, not a foreign oppressor. I don't see how the Brexit debacle does anything but muddy the waters on that. The years-long process of Brexit won't provide a moment where everyone goes 'Hang on a moment, it wasn't EU bureaucrats that were the problem, it was capital and its ruling class directors!'. Instead it will provide a succession of moments where everything that goes wrong can be blamed on foreign powers. Some people will cotton onto the con, but the distortion of reality in the media is likely to make that less likely as time goes on. A new normal will be established where we all know we've been screwed over by the EU. Before you accuse me of being too patronising or something, I'm talking about my own parents as much as anyone else 

My pessimism about this direction could alter if we were to see a Labour party with an empowered left wing come to power, but at the moment Brexit is probably the main issue preventing some people from seeing that that would be more in their interests than voting the Tories in again.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I was just responding to your suggestion that I can participate in liberal democratic politics or choose not to. Clearly regardless of my choice you won't view the outcome as legitimate!



And no doubt there are circumstances that you wouldn’t either. 

But I don’t hold the outcome as illegitimate. I’m for a compromise exit. But if that can’t be found, life goes on. This isn’t the only democracy for all time.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> And no doubt there are circumstances that you wouldn’t either.
> 
> But I don’t hold the outcome as illegitimate. I’m for a compromise exit. But if that can’t be found, life goes on. This isn’t the only democracy for all time.



Well then I apologise, I'd understood you as actively arguing that the process should be reversed. 

I'm for a compromise exit too, let's compromise by leaving the EU and eating the rich.


----------



## andysays (Jun 19, 2019)

The Shadow Cabinet are discussing changing policy over another referendum
Brexit: Labour MPs urge Corbyn not to go 'full Remain'


> More than 25 Labour MPs have written to Jeremy Corbyn to urge him not to go "full Remain" as the party reviews its stance on another Brexit referendum. They warn another referendum would be "toxic" and empower the "populist right" in many Labour heartlands.





> They call on the leadership to abandon their pursuit of a "perfect deal" and to back an agreement by 31 October. Mr Corbyn told colleagues on Wednesday afternoon it was "right to demand any deal is put to a public vote". Speaking at a shadow cabinet meeting, Mr Corbyn said he would be listening to colleagues and consulting with trade unions before officially setting out Labour's position next week.


----------



## Supine (Jun 19, 2019)

Long but interesting read about the current state of play. It ain't looking good. 

Ivan Rogers: no deal is now the most likely Brexit outcome | Coffee House


----------



## Cid (Jun 19, 2019)

Supine said:


> Long but interesting read about the current state of play. It ain't looking good.
> 
> Ivan Rogers: no deal is now the most likely Brexit outcome | Coffee House



That is a surprisingly badly written article. I don't mean on its content, just surprised to find out that Rogers apparently has problems writing coherent sentences.


----------



## Sprocket. (Jun 19, 2019)

I don’t know if this has been asked up thread?
Will parliament be taking its usual summer recess or will they spend their summer playing at sorting Brexit out?


----------



## Supine (Jun 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> That is a surprisingly badly written article. I don't mean on its content, just surprised to find out that Rogers apparently has problems writing coherent sentences.



I agree. I think it must be a speech transcript or something. Content is better than the verse!


----------



## klang (Jun 19, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I don’t know if this has been asked up thread?
> Will parliament be taking its usual summer recess or will they spend their summer playing at sorting Brexit out?


i wonder where our new PM will holiday this year?
i'm also always looking forward to Putin's holiday shots.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> I think there will be severe political consequences of leaving too.


Of course there will, I have said as much.



Brainaddict said:


> The working class of the UK is deeply split on the Brexit issue (their interests are split too, since you want to use that language). But also, sometimes the working class - or a section of it - can take a wrong turn. Classic piece on that is Arendt's chapter 'The alliance between capital and the mob': https://static1.squarespace.com/static/599112efcd39c3b3ad2118b0/t/5b761e7388251b180ee6e713/1534467748604/Hannah+Arendt,+The+Alliance+Between+Mob+and+Capital,+The+Originals+of+Totalitarianism,+147-157+(re-scan).pdf


 And which section of the working class has taken a "wrong turn" in your opinion? Those that voted leave? Or those that claim "The European Union is not something to apologise for. It is a Good thing with a capital ‘g’" or "the only place to be is strongly pro-Europe."?



Brainaddict said:


> As international as capital may be, the working class of the UK are oppressed chiefly by the ruling class of the UK, not a foreign oppressor. I don't see how the Brexit debacle does anything but muddy the waters on that.


I not sure how many times I have to repeat myself but it is not a question of the UK state or the EU but the capital, the UK state and the EU. And your reasoning applies to not only the EU but the IMF, the WTO, etc.



Brainaddict said:


> My pessimism about this direction could alter if we were to see a Labour party with an empowered left wing come to power, but at the moment Brexit is probably the main issue preventing some people from seeing that that would be more in their interests than voting the Tories in again.


This rather neatly illustrates my point, the aim becomes the election of the LP, _socialism is what the Labour Party does._


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What is your preferred outcome and why? Take it as read that includes a working class politics that seizes the initiative, but in broad terms?


My preferred outcome is for the working class of Europe to use the opportunities generated by the current stumblings of capital, states and superstates to increase their power.


----------



## Raheem (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> My preferred outcome is for the working class of Europe to use the opportunities generated by the current stumblings of capital, states and superstates to increase their power.


Let's see how that goes.


----------



## Ming (Jun 20, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well then I apologise, I'd understood you as actively arguing that the process should be reversed.
> 
> I'm for a compromise exit too, let's compromise by leaving the EU and eating the rich.


Problem is when we leave with a no-deal (which is absolutely what the rich want) we won’t be eating the rich, they’ll be eating us. I just got the date wrong.


----------



## andysays (Jun 20, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I don’t know if this has been asked up thread?
> Will parliament be taking its usual summer recess or will they spend their summer playing at sorting Brexit out?


It will depend to some extent on what the new PM wants to do.

Had it been Raab, he was planning to send them all off on an extended summer break until early November, but Johnson may have other ideas


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Jun 20, 2019)

An extended break til spring 2020?


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 20, 2019)




----------



## kabbes (Jun 20, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Let's see how that goes.


At least as well as the Remain campaign, I would suggest.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> when we leave with a no-deal (which is absolutely what the rich want)


No it's not. Capital wants frictionless borders.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 20, 2019)

Overall capital wants frictionless borders but sections want economic volatility more tbf


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 20, 2019)

is it fair to say a reasonable amount of domestic capital seems to fear a labour government more than no deal brexit? There was a bar chart doing the rounds yesterday that got my cogs turning...


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

Crispy said:


> No it's not. Capital wants frictionless borders.



But those don’t have to be exclusively with the EU. There are plenty betting that this can be expanded, while keeping the EU in line.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Overall capital wants frictionless borders but sections want economic volatility more tbf



Also want less regulation and less light being shone on tax havens, which is something the EU has got onboard with in recent years, albeit a bit half-heartedly. Suspect that’s a big driver for some of Farage’s slippery hedge fund mates.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> My preferred outcome is for the working class of Europe to use the opportunities generated by the current stumblings of capital, states and superstates to increase their power.



Well let’s work for that. But you’ll forgive us if we point out this is low in detail let alone a favourable wind.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

I don't know what "the rich" want but it is simply false to argue that capital (as a body) is not pro-EU - the CBI, the BoE, the IMF, the G20, the WTO, the majority of MPs, the government - all argued for a remain vote, all seek to keep the UK as close to the EU as possible.

EDIT: And lets be clear the person arguing that "the rich" want the UK to leave with "no deal" is the same person that thinks Cameron was lying when he campaigned for remain. Tinfoilhattery


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Well let’s work for that. But you’ll forgive us if we point out this is low in detail let alone a favourable wind.


How are you going to work for it when you are directly opposed to any such thing? And it's no more lacking in detail, and considerably more realistic,  than your political aspirations of huddling beneath the skirts of organisations that are designed to attack labour.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't know what "the rich" want but it is simply false to argue that capital (as a body) is not pro-EU - the CBI, the BoE, the IMF, the G20, the WTO, the majority of MPs, the government - all argued for a remain vote, all seek to keep the UK as close to the EU as possible.



That’s unarguable, true. 

But the argument of all those with power and influence in support of leaving has been that fears of disruption are overplayed. That capital can run wild and free. 

Hence the desire for a FTA with Europe to protect the current position and free trade deals with everyone from the US to the Faroes. It’s reasonable to fear what this means and there appears little chance of another way. Either we stay close to the EU or open up fully to the world. Voters, Leavers or Remainers are unlikely to demand that we do neither.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Hence the desire for a FTA with Europe to protect the current position and free trade deals with everyone from the US to the Faroes. It’s reasonable to fear what this means and there appears little chance of another way. Either we stay close to the EU or open up fully to the world.


This makes absolutely no sense. The EU has just signed up to CETA, it still wants TTIP, one of the main arguments the remain campaign made was that being part of the EU "was good for trade". The supposed alternative you make in the last sentence is nonsense.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This makes absolutely no sense. The EU has just signed up to CETA, it still wants TTIP, one of the main arguments the remain campaign made was that being part of the EU "was good for trade". The supposed alternative you make in the last sentence is nonsense.


have you a link for the recent ceta signing?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> have you a link for the recent ceta signing?


European Commission - PRESS RELEASES  - Press release - EU and Canada sign CETA


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> European Commission - PRESS RELEASES  - Press release - EU and Canada sign CETA


so it's not a recent thing then as that's a 3 year auld story and the agreement's only been ratified by 14 eu countries .'. only in provisional effect

as for ttip the way things have to go through national and on occasion regional parliaments before taking effect means that any agreement is at best some years off, and may well never happen. i wonder if auld corby would sign up to it - would be be the saviour of the anti-globalisers or their nemesis?


----------



## Crispy (Jun 20, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> is it fair to say a reasonable amount of domestic capital seems to fear a labour government more than no deal brexit? There was a bar chart doing the rounds yesterday that got my cogs turning...


That was tory party members. Some overlap between the two groups, but there's more than enough lunatics in the party to skew the numbers.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> This makes absolutely no sense. The EU has just signed up to CETA, it still wants TTIP, one of the main arguments the remain campaign made was that being part of the EU "was good for trade". The supposed alternative you make in the last sentence is nonsense.



I don’t think this makes sense as a reply to my point. What’s more likely/quicker, TTIP for the EU that has rejected it or similar for post Brexit UK swallowing those terms because the UK economy is stagnating and Brexiteers need to have a tangible consequence of Brexit?


----------



## kabbes (Jun 20, 2019)

Some people who are already rich and who DGAF particularly about how rapidly they accumulate more wealth have more belief in the innate superiority of the English than desire to get richer faster.  They resent being ruled by Johnny Foreigner and want out of the EU.  But do not mistake that for any misunderstanding about what “The Rich” want in terms of being rich.  As a group, that lot find the idea of Brexit completely stupid.  It’s costing a fortune, has ground current business plans to a halt and interrupts all strategic plans.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 20, 2019)

Crispy said:


> That was tory party members. Some overlap between the two groups, but there's more than enough lunatics in the party to skew the numbers.


I know it was a members poll, but it did make me wonder how much of that 'anything but corbyn' crosses over.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 20, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I know it was a members poll, but it did make me wonder how much of that 'anything but corbyn' crosses over.


The rich don’t even for a microsecond conceive that Corbyn could win an election.  If I suggest it, they look at me as if I am mad.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I don’t think this makes sense as a reply to my point. What’s more likely/quicker, TTIP for the EU that has rejected it or similar for post Brexit UK swallowing those terms because the UK economy is stagnating and Brexiteers need to have a tangible consequence of Brexit?


It only doesn't make sense because in your mind the EU cannot be part of the problem - nevermind the fact the purpose the organisation is to attack labour. The EU has not rejected TTIP, there has been some game playing by both the US and the EU but TTIP, or a similar agreement, is still on the cards. And I see we are back to the old canard of the economy being damaged.

EDIT: Of course TTIP is predicted to be _good for the economy_ so to follow your logic through you should be arguing in favour of it.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Some people who are already rich and who DGAF particularly about how rapidly they accumulate more wealth have more belief in the innate superiority of the English than desire to get richer faster.  They resent being ruled by Johnny Foreigner and want out of the EU.  But do not mistake that for any misunderstanding about what “The Rich” want in terms of being rich.  As a group, that lot find the idea of Brexit completely stupid.  It’s costing a fortune, has ground current business plans to a halt and interrupts all strategic plans.


Exactly my view, though I couldn't articulate it. Those people so rich they don't worry about money - the De Pfeffels, Rees-Moogs and Cholmondely-Hedgerow-Bistles of the piece - can afford to see the leaving of the EU in an abstract "reclaiming Blighty" sort of way, whereas the wannabe Bufton-Tufton-Chufftons like Cameron have money tied up in EU stuff.


----------



## Crispy (Jun 20, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I know it was a members poll, but it did make me wonder how much of that 'anything but corbyn' crosses over.


All the developer cunts who ultimately pay my wages are horrified by the idea of a Corbyn government. They're already outraged by Westminster Council allowing people to speak at planning committee meetings (WM council very nearly went red in the locals, so they're making a few sops to local residents to keep them on side), and having to pay a social housing levy on large developments. "But at least that wally corbyn isn't in power, christ can you imagine? lol". I haven't asked directly, but I can easily imagine Brexit being favorable to them,  over corbyn.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> It only doesn't make sense because in your mind the EU cannot be part of the problem - nevermind the fact the purpose the organisation is to attack labour. The EU has not rejected TTIP, there has been some game playing by both the US and the EU but TTIP, or a similar agreement, is still on the cards. And I see we are back to the old canard of the economy being damaged.
> 
> EDIT: Of course TTIP is predicted to be _good for the economy_ so to follow your logic through you should be arguing in favour of it.



You are completely dodging the issue that TTIP of a harsher variety is very likely as a consequence of Brexit. The EU has the power to demand terms. A Farageist politics will simply demand we spread em.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

I don't accept your contention but like I said if you want the economy to 'do well' you are in favour of TTIP. (Also great to see the "we" used by the anti-racist, anti-nationalist progressive set).


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't accept your contention but like I said if you want the economy to 'do well' you are in favour of TTIP. (Also great to see the "we" used by the anti-racist, anti-nationalist progressive set).



No, there is a definite ‘we’ that will be ‘spreading them’ you and me both.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jun 20, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And which section of the working class has taken a "wrong turn" in your opinion? Those that voted leave? Or those that claim "The European Union is not something to apologise for. It is a Good thing with a capital ‘g’" or "the only place to be is strongly pro-Europe."?
> 
> This rather neatly illustrates my point, the aim becomes the election of the LP, _socialism is what the Labour Party does._



To the first: both.

To the second: you seem to be replying to someone else. I didn't even mention socialism. What I was saying is that nationalism is currently in the driving seat of Brexit, and this as always obscures class relations and makes it less likely that ordinary people will see where their real interests lie. What could disrupt this is a government in power that has no interest in propagating the nationalist version of Brexit, that might even talk about class instead. Unfortunately the nationalist Brexit is now so strong that it is one of the big factors reducing the likelihood of a government being elected that doesn't buy into a nationalist Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 20, 2019)

Ming said:


> Problem is when we leave with a no-deal (which is absolutely what the rich want) we won’t be eating the rich, they’ll be eating us. I just got the date wrong.



You have not been paying attention.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 20, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> To the first: both.
> 
> To the second: you seem to be replying to someone else. I didn't even mention socialism. What I was saying is that nationalism is currently in the driving seat of Brexit, and this as always obscures class relations and makes it less likely that ordinary people will see where their real interests lie. What could disrupt this is a government in power that has no interest in propagating the nationalist version of Brexit, that might even talk about class instead. Unfortunately the nationalist Brexit is now so strong that it is one of the big factors reducing the likelihood of a government being elected that doesn't buy into a nationalist Brexit.



When is socialism and internationalism ever in the driving seat? Why are you all so shocked that the ruling class are ruling?


----------



## Flavour (Jun 20, 2019)

to get back to the question, "is brexit actually going to happen", i note BJ has already begun to backtrack a bit on his "leaving 31 oct deal or no deal" schtick. if he does do a no deal exit and the economy tanks then May the Martyr will be able to resume some sort of Daily Telegraph columnist career with variations on "i told you to vote for my deal, now look what happened!".


----------



## treelover (Jun 20, 2019)

Andrew Neil eviscerated Damien Hinds, Johnson's main man on this on Politics Live, basically it is Mays' deal without the back stop.


----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 20, 2019)

treelover said:


> Andrew Neil eviscerated Damien Hinds, Johnson's main man on this on Politics Live, basically it is Mays' deal without the back stop.



Which he can either work on the ERG to accept on the basis that it’s temporary or the party will back no deal. This seems likely after the success of the BP and the recent defeat of the Labour motion. Labour rebels will seal the deal.

Labour looks weak. Won’t get a second ref, doesn’t seem to know what to do if it did. Can’t vote for the deal to prevent no deal either or one half boohoos off to the LibDems.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 20, 2019)

Brexit:


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 20, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> To the second: you seem to be replying to someone else. I didn't even mention socialism. What I was saying is that nationalism is currently in the driving seat of Brexit, and this as always obscures class relations and makes it less likely that ordinary people will see where their real interests lie. What could disrupt this is a government in power that has no interest in propagating the nationalist version of Brexit, that might even talk about class instead. Unfortunately the nationalist Brexit is now so strong that it is one of the big factors reducing the likelihood of a government being elected that doesn't buy into a nationalist Brexit.






			
				Marty Glaberman said:
			
		

> It's essential to reject the idea that nothing can happen until white workers are no longer racist. I don't know what anybody thinks the Russian workers in 1917 were. They were sexist. They were nationalist. A lot of them were under the thumb of the church. But they made a goddamn revolution that began to change them. Whether there's a social explosion or not doesn't depend on any formal attitudes or supporting this particular organisation or that particular organisation.


I am opposed to nationalism but the idea that a nationalist working class can't bring about positive changes is crap. Russian workers were often nationalist in 1917, many of the independence/anti-colonial movements were nationalist, some of the pro-independence Scottish working class are nationalistic. I don't agree with those nationalism but it's nonsense to say that those movements did not bring about real improvements.

Likewise one of the main drivers for leave voters was sovereignty, why not trust in that? Why not trust in the idea that workers want to greater democratic control of their lives? This is exactly what I am talking about, either you trust the working class or you don't.

EDIT: Hell it would be ludicrous to image that the UK working class in 1911, 1926, 1945 etc was not nationalist.


----------



## andysays (Jun 20, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Brexit:



So Gove thinks Brexit is like a new kitchen.

Wasn't there a thread somewhere with crap Brexit analogies? That one beats them all...


----------



## agricola (Jun 20, 2019)

andysays said:


> So Gove thinks Brexit is like a new kitchen.
> 
> Wasn't there a thread somewhere with crap Brexit analogies? That one beats them all...



Perhaps what he means is that he is going to claim Brexit on expenses?


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Jun 20, 2019)

andysays said:


> So Gove thinks Brexit is like a new kitchen.
> 
> Wasn't there a thread somewhere with crap Brexit analogies? That one beats them all...



If Brexit is a new kitchen, it was sold on the basis of a lovely pic in a glossy brochure, but is now revealed to be a flat pack kitchen you build yourself with a lot of parts missing, and stripping the old kitchen out in preparation has revealed dry rot, leaky plumbing and potentially lethal dodgy electrics that are gonna cost a fortune to replace whether you fit the new kitchen or not...


----------



## philosophical (Jun 20, 2019)

For those interested, this is an article published yesterday regarding the practicalities for the land border on the island of Ireland with regard to brexit.

The Irish Border and Backstop Explained

It outlines three possible options that may constitute the choices ahead (personally I think there are more than three, but these ones may be more realistic than any others).
One option that I admit I had hardly given any thought to, is that in certain circumstances the EU might feel compelled to exclude the Republic of Ireland from it's trading regime. From what I understand it would take a no deal brexit, and for the Republic themselves as well as the UK to have basically no border between them.
I suppose that option would add up to the EU abandoning Ireland because circumstances, historical and geographical would preclude a border in Ireland, and the EU would feel they had no choice.
I believe that problem is the reason the EU simply won't re-open or change the Withdrawal (yet to be an) Agreement.
If the EU is seen to abandon the Republic of Ireland in this way, all the lenses re focus quite dramatically. There will be many in the Republic of Ireland who would harbour huge resentment against the UK if 'option three' became the new reality.


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 20, 2019)

"Let's say you ordered a new kitchen three years ago. After years of inaction and debate over what a kitchen actually is, the contractor offers you a blueprint everybody in your family hates and you reject it. After the same plan is brought back and rejected a few more times, the foreman quits. You pop round the offices and find the workers fighting over who should be the next foreman and arguing about whether they should just rip out the old kitchen first and figure the rest out later. Should you be allowed to choose a new contractor, or should you give the same company another three years?"


----------



## Yossarian (Jun 20, 2019)

"Hey, I've figured it out - this is going to work if we replace the fridge with a special microwave that makes things cold instead of hot! You two put the fridge in the skip while I ask somebody to invent a new kind of microwave."


----------



## andysays (Jun 21, 2019)

philosophical said:


> For those interested, this is an article published yesterday regarding the practicalities for the land border on the island of Ireland with regard to brexit.
> 
> The Irish Border and Backstop Explained
> 
> ...


None of those options mention kitchens 

Maybe we should view the Irish border question as analogous to the problem when you install a new kitchen but it unfortunately prevents access to the utility room, and every time you want to do the laundry you have to go through the back garden to get to the washing machine.

Or something...


----------



## Poi E (Jun 21, 2019)

I thought the Irish border question was like building an annex on your neighbour's land.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 21, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Jun 21, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I am opposed to nationalism but the idea that a nationalist working class can't bring about positive changes is crap. Russian workers were often nationalist in 1917, many of the independence/anti-colonial movements were nationalist, some of the pro-independence Scottish working class are nationalistic. I don't agree with those nationalism but it's nonsense to say that those movements did not bring about real improvements.
> 
> Likewise one of the main drivers for leave voters was sovereignty, why not trust in that? Why not trust in the idea that workers want to greater democratic control of their lives? This is exactly what I am talking about, either you trust the working class or you don't.
> 
> EDIT: Hell it would be ludicrous to image that the UK working class in 1911, 1926, 1945 etc was not nationalist.



You are doing this thing you do of claiming the working class has decided. All the demographics surely show that it was very split, BME/white, urban/rural, skilled/clerical or non-skilled, young or old. Up to 80% in some urban areas. I don’t know how you then get to ‘trust’. Leave won and it’s that alliance you have to trust.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 21, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You are doing this thing you do of claiming the working class has decided. All the demographics surely show that it was very split, BME/white, urban/rural, skilled/clerical or non-skilled, young or old. Up to 80% in some urban areas. I don’t know how you then get to ‘trust’. Leave won and it’s that alliance you have to trust.


No I am making no such claim. Yet again another of your falsehoods.


redsquirrel said:


> I've not argued for that the working class is monolithic, indeed quite the opposite I see it as a highly diverse body shot through with contradictions and differences.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 22, 2019)

The DUP will not vote for the deal because of the backstop. Also the tories are likely to lose an mp due to the upcoming brekan by-election. Even if Johnson manages to get the bulk of the  ERG on board to back the deal (and that if a very big if) - it still looks like a mighty struggle to get it through parliament. Plus it could  well be the tory mps who previously backed  mays deal out of loyalty are less likely to vote for it because they hate the fat eton fuck .


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 25, 2019)




----------



## killer b (Jun 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Also the tories are likely to lose an mp due to the upcoming brekan by-election.


They've already lost one - the seat is vacated until after the by-election. 

I believe their current majority - including the DUP - is two. If the Lib Dems win B&R, it'll be one.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 25, 2019)

Lol @ MC liberals just catching on now that the Tories are, like, not cool


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jun 25, 2019)

Good article on the Oxford origins of Brexit and Johnson: Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## ska invita (Jun 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> either you trust the working class or you don't.


Are you up for starting a separate thread on this, expanding on the point "either you trust the working class or you don't."? So as not to derail this thread, and as this has come up before.
To me it reads like class essentialising + class reductionism + binary absolutism + crude marxism - not uncommon around Communist Party parts of the UK left IME. Could be a useful conversation.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Lol @ MC liberals just catching on now that the Tories are, like, not cool



I'm used to seeing m/c or m/class so for a second I thought you were on about a DJ with a really terrible name.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jun 25, 2019)

MC liberals with a lighthouse family megamix


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jun 25, 2019)

MC's act like they don't know


----------



## Santino (Jun 25, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> MC liberals with a lighthouse family megamix


With their Hogwarts house in their twitter bio.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jun 25, 2019)

Santino said:


> With their Hogwarts house in their twitter bio.


Remainclaw


----------



## Santino (Jun 25, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Remainclaw


SlytherIN


----------



## Santino (Jun 25, 2019)

HufflepEUf


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

REUlistic. Claw. The revolutionary space the no deal will create really will energise the proletariat. No it won't. The Murdoch press will get them to blame the EU. We're fucked. And Boris will be PM...slow hand clap...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> REUlistic. Claw. The revolutionary space the no deal will create really will energise the proletariat. No it won't. The Murdoch press will get them to blame the EU. We're fucked. And Boris will be PM...slow hand clap...



All you ever say is that we're fucked. You have no analysis, you're just one of those tools that stands on high streets with a sign saying 'the End is Nigh'.


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> All you ever say is that we're fucked. You have no analysis, you're just one of those tools that stands on high streets with a sign saying 'the End is Nigh'.


Tell me i'm wrong.


----------



## Santino (Jun 25, 2019)

#48%er #ProudCentrist

*picture of a straight couple holding hands at a Pride event*


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> All you ever say is that we're fucked. You have no analysis, you're just one of those tools that stands on high streets with a sign saying 'the End is Nigh'.


Do you honestly think the no-deal we are going to get will be good for anyone apart from rich cunts with liquidity?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Tell me i'm wrong.



Look, you silly fucker, if you stand outside and say it's gonna rain every single day, you're not right when it does rain you're just a miserable prat. 




Ming said:


> Do you honestly think the no-deal we are going to get will be good for anyone apart from rich cunts with liquidity?



1. I don't think there will be a no deal Brexit.

2. If we did it would be very damaging to large sections of the capitalist class as well as having consequences for the working class. 

3. What has this got to do with the point? All you ever say is that everything is fucked, nobody cares what you think because you don't really think you just repeat the same line over and over and over. 

Didn't you have to pay money to the server fund because you bet me we'd have a no deal Brexit back in March? Don't you ever look back at your previous commentary and think "Oh. Maybe I should acknowledge I was wrong about literally everything?"


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Look, you silly fucker, if you stand outside and say it's gonna rain every single day, you're not right when it does rain you're just a miserable prat.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Got the date wrong. 20 quid says we're out on halloween. Cuntbubble (as we're getting uncivilised).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Got the date wrong. 20 quid says we're out on halloween. Cuntbubble (as we're getting uncivilised).



As in 'No Deal' out?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Got the date wrong. 20 quid says we're out on halloween. Cuntbubble (as we're getting uncivilised).


Posted 23rd March...


Ming said:


> I’ll pay my bet (presumably to the server fund)...on the 29th if I’m wrong. I still maintain it’ll be a no deal though and I still think that’s being done intentionally.



Have you paid yet?


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> As in 'No Deal' out?


Yes... erm... toss pot.


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Posted 23rd March...
> 
> 
> Have you paid yet?


Yes.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Yes... erm... toss pot.



OK. I'll take that bet. 20 quid to the server fund. 




Ming said:


> Yes.



Good lad


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> OK. I'll take that bet. 20 quid to the server fund.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your on. And don't call me 'lad' you patronizing wanker. I'm 51 and a well respected nurse at my hospital.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Ming said:


> Your on. And don't call me 'lad' you patronizing wanker. I'm 51 and a well respected nurse at my hospital.



Soz. I forget everyone here is well old.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 25, 2019)

I think now think a 2nd ref is pretty likely - unless Johnson can somehow get a deal through parliament by 31 October - possible, but i think highly unlikely he will fare better than May (and Mays deal is the only option on that front) 
The Eu will not grant an extension beyond 31 october unless its for a general election or a 2nd ref.
Parliament will force a General Election rather than  allow no deal. 
I cant see how the tories can remain in power after a GE - they either campaign on no deal or be eaten by the brexit party. And if they do the former the party will split. And there will be furious opposition to them across the country from pretty much every quarter. 
So - most likely outcome is corbyn in number 10 but relying on SNP and/or Lib dems for a majority - and their price will be a 2nd ref.


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Soz. I forget everyone here is well old.


'soz'? Ok boy.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Parliament will force a General Election rather than  allow no deal.



I am still confused how that would work, as are many commentators.

The default position is we leave on 31st Oct., if parliament votes down the government a couple of weeks before, and forces a GE, which takes at least 6 weeks to happen, we have no government to stop us leaving without a deal.


----------



## Flavour (Jun 25, 2019)

stop it Ming and SpackleFrog


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> stop it Ming and SpackleFrog



Stop what?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am still confused how that would work, as are many commentators.
> 
> The default position is we leave on 31st Oct., if parliament votes down the government a couple of weeks before, and forces a GE, which takes at least 6 weeks to happen, we have no government to stop us leaving without a deal.



VONC to bring down government and force a GE (if they lose a VONC they have- i think-  2 weeks to win the back the support or parliament of they have to have a GE) . Some tories have indicated they would vote against the government do that to prevent no deal - and the pressure for them to do that would be intense.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am still confused how that would work, as are many commentators.
> 
> The default position is we leave on 31st Oct., if parliament votes down the government a couple of weeks before, and forces a GE, which takes at least 6 weeks to happen, we have no government to stop us leaving without a deal.



in that situation the EU would probably grant an extension. although its not definite.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> in that situation the EU would probably grant an extension. although its not definite.



Which would require a government to accept an extension, with no real government & a PM saying 'fuck you', it's back to the default position.


----------



## andysays (Jun 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> in that situation the EU would probably grant an extension. although its not definite.


So you're saying that Parliament would *definitely* bring down the government with a VoNC to prevent a No Deal crash out, on the basis that the EU would *probably* then give us an extension.

Sounds like a great plan to me...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jun 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> So you're saying that Parliament would *definitely* bring down the government with a VoNC to prevent a No Deal crash out, on the basis that the EU would *probably* then give us an extension.
> 
> Sounds like a great plan to me...



To be fair, the EU probably would grant an extension if there was a GE.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 25, 2019)

Would they extend again? won't we just fucking spaff another six months up the wall?


----------



## Smangus (Jun 25, 2019)

It has said it would be likely in the event of a significant political event - ie second ref or gen election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 25, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Would they extend again? won't we just fucking spaff another six months up the wall?


no, we'll be looking for a different wall this time


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Which would require a government to accept an extension, with no real government & a PM saying 'fuck you', it's back to the default position.



I guess it would be something like the government would being  instructed by parliament to request an extension. 
TBH - i dont think it will get to the stage of a VONC - the government could go for a GE if it knew that no deal was not going to get through - (and it would also give them an excuse or avoiding a no deal that most of them know full well would be a disaster)


----------



## Ming (Jun 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> stop it Ming and SpackleFrog


He started it (lol!).


----------



## andysays (Jun 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> To be fair, the EU *probably* would grant an extension if there was a GE.


There's that word again...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 25, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I guess it would be something like the government would being  instructed by parliament to request an extension.
> TBH - i dont think it will get to the stage of a VONC - the government could go for a GE if it knew that no deal was not going to get through - (and it would also give them an excuse or avoiding a no deal that most of them know full well would be a disaster)



And, we come back to...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jun 25, 2019)

Sorry if this is old ground, but was having a shit earlier mulling over what Johnson was waffling on about, how withholding a % of the £39bn with a no deal situation is his bargaining tool. That's his ace card. So on 1st November after we've crashed out, Boris will hop on the Eurostar to Brussels and say, "Bonjour, we need a free trade deal please." "Mais oui, zat will be £39bn plus un backstop en Northern Ireland."

Isn't it?


----------



## Supine (Jun 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sorry if this is old ground, but was having a shit earlier mulling over what Johnson was waffling on about, how withholding a % of the £39bn with a no deal situation is his bargaining tool. That's his ace card. So on 1st November after we've crashed out, Boris will hop on the Eurostar to Brussels and say, "Bonjour, we need a free trade deal please." "Mais oui, zat will be £39bn plus un backstop en Northern Ireland."
> 
> Isn't it?



It'll probably cost more after October. They will hold all the good cards.


----------



## Ming (Jun 26, 2019)

The EU have said 'no more negotiation'. Pretty plainly. Boris is going to be the next PM and he's said plainly 'out on halloween'. Boris doesn't give a shit about the country, his party or anything but himself and a lot of rich cunts will have positioned themselves already to profit from the disaster it will be (see JRM's finance firm and Farage's use of private polling data on the night of the referendum (Bloomberg)). It's not about sovereignty to these fuckers. It's about money.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jun 26, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Are you up for starting a separate thread on this, expanding on the point "either you trust the working class or you don't."? So as not to derail this thread, and as this has come up before.
> To me it reads like class essentialising + class reductionism + binary absolutism + crude marxism - not uncommon around Communist Party parts of the UK left IME. Could be a useful conversation.


My position is directly at odds with the vanguardism of the CP. If you want to start a separate thread then I'm happy to contribute but I don't think this is in any way a derail, it's the crucial point that splits class politics from progressive politics.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> The EU have said 'no more negotiation'. Pretty plainly. Boris is going to be the next PM and he's said plainly 'out on halloween'. Boris doesn't give a shit about the country, his party or anything but himself and a lot of rich cunts will have positioned themselves already to profit from the disaster it will be (see JRM's finance firm and Farage's use of private polling data on the night of the referendum (Bloomberg)). It's not about sovereignty to these fuckers. It's about money.


Is that like when you said May was insisting we would definitely be gone by the end of March?  Turns out politicians often say things they don’t mean.

The EU don’t want the UK to leave. They’ll do whatever they can to facilitate that.  If that means granting extension after extension, that’s what they’ll do.  Death of Brexit by a thousand cuts, and they are the masters of the thousand cuts

And, speaking as somebody deeply embedded within the cloisters of finance, you are literally 100% wrong about the desire for Brexit being about money.  Brexit has cost capital billions already and will continue to do so.  The money men never wanted it and want it to end.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jun 26, 2019)

The portrayal of the leave constituency, in all its messiness and contradictions and conflict, as being about the rich seeking to entrench and further its position is about the most fuckheaded of the common remainiac arguments. Even more than Russia did it through Facebook.


----------



## xenon (Jun 26, 2019)

Well Capitlist interest isn't a monolithic entity. Some people obviously see great financial gains to be made exploiting a post brexit, WTO trading UK.

But yeah the crude simplification and naïv conspiracy theories are rubbish.


----------



## Ming (Jun 26, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Is that like when you said May was insisting we would definitely be gone by the end of March?  Turns out politicians often say things they don’t mean.
> 
> The EU don’t want the UK to leave. They’ll do whatever they can to facilitate that.  If that means granting extension after extension, that’s what they’ll do.  Death of Brexit by a thousand cuts, and they are the masters of the thousand cuts
> 
> And, speaking as somebody deeply embedded within the cloisters of finance, you are literally 100% wrong about the desire for Brexit being about money.  Brexit has cost capital billions already and will continue to do so.  The money men never wanted it and want it to end.


Great stuff! Sounds like the world is in safe hands.


----------



## kabbes (Jun 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Great stuff! Sounds like the world is in safe hands.


What in the last 40 years would lead you to think that?


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 26, 2019)

The rich?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 26, 2019)

I dont think the EU will offer any more extensions unless its for a GE or 2nd re - and have pretty much said as much.
 They would rather the UK stay - but are pissed off with the chaos and uncertainty. They also judge that the UK will balk at no deal - and if they dont, they can take some disruption for a while until a much weakened uk comes crawling back. 
Because a "no deal" exit is not the end of brexit - it means more years of negotiations and bollocks and turmoil for the UK - because the fundamentals of any deal with the EU will be the same. Thing is, all but the most rabid brexiteers know this - johnson knows this, but he loves playing to his audience.


----------



## Dogsauce (Jun 26, 2019)

Don’t think the EU will demand political changes such as a GE as a condition for an extension, more that they would allow an extension if a GE/referendum was proposed by the UK. I can’t see that it would help the EU to be seen interfering in the political process and pulling the strings. Imagine how that would play, and what the result would be. “Juncker demands Corbyn” etc.  The solution has to be determined and offered by the UK, take responsibility  for working it out.


----------



## gosub (Jun 26, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sorry if this is old ground, but was having a shit earlier mulling over what Johnson was waffling on about, how withholding a % of the £39bn with a no deal situation is his bargaining tool. That's his ace card. So on 1st November after we've crashed out, Boris will hop on the Eurostar to Brussels and say, "Bonjour, we need a free trade deal please." "Mais oui, zat will be £39bn plus un backstop en Northern Ireland."
> 
> Isn't it?


nah he'd be too busy with the treasury and the credit ratings agencies trying to persuade the market not to down grade British bonds


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jun 26, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Don’t think the EU will demand political changes such as a GE as a condition for an extension, more that they would allow an extension if a GE/referendum was proposed by the UK.



i really cant see the difference between these two positions. 

It would politically very difficult for the  EU to offer further extensions unless there was a good reason - "do not waste this time" was what they said. So the tory party have done exactly that. 
There was a fair bit of grumbling last time- especially from france - about allowing an extension last time. 
Unless it was for something that might break the brexit log jam (GE or 2nd ref) What would another extension achieve? just more fucking about and going around in circles a la Theresa May.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jun 26, 2019)

For the Liberals ending democracy is a price worth paying for continued membership of the single market. The absolute fucking state of them:

Yvette Cooper or Hilary Benn should lead unity government to halt Brexit – Ed Davey


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jun 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> For the Liberals ending democracy is a price worth paying for continued membership of the single market. The absolute fucking state of them:
> 
> Yvette Cooper or Hilary Benn should lead unity government to halt Brexit – Ed Davey



Just when you think no party could elect a leader worst than Johnson, the LibDems enters the fuckwit race.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> For the Liberals ending democracy is a price worth paying for continued membership of the single market. The absolute fucking state of them:
> 
> Yvette Cooper or Hilary Benn should lead unity government to halt Brexit – Ed Davey



Speaking of ending democracy, this guy has always been pro-remain but in light of the announcement below....



Original tweet by the German foreign office below.


----------



## Ming (Jun 26, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What in the last 40 years would lead you to think that?


Kidding kabbes. I haven’t practiced since 1998 but i used to be an accountant (Samsung and Hi-Tech Logistics/ACCA 1st stage qualified/top 10% of my class) so i can find my way around a financial statement. I’m not suggesting a depth of knowledge that you’ve got but i’m not ignorant on these matters. I just feel that there’s probably a lot of shorting going on. If you’ve got liquidity in a distressed market you can make lots of money. JRM’s firm has made millions already off Brexit and Farage was accused by Bloomberg of using private polling data to move the market on the night of the referendum. And i think there’s a lot of that going on. Which is why i have my opinion. We’ll see what the outcome is in October. All this bluster by the Tories is just running the clock down (IMHO).
ETA: Soros and Black Wednesday? This stuff does happen.


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 27, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Jun 28, 2019)

Hilarious headline from one of the Telegraph's Scotch correspondents.

_With the EU in need of friends on the world stage, conditions are ripe for Boris to pull off a Brexit deal _


----------



## andysays (Jun 28, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Hilarious headline from one of the Telegraph's Scotch correspondents.
> 
> _With the EU in need of friends on the world stage, conditions are ripe for Boris to pull off a Brexit deal _


Choice of two jokes here

1. I didn't know the Telegraph had a correspondent devoted to writing about whisky 

2. How much had they had to drink when they wrote that?


----------



## Ranbay (Jun 28, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Jun 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Choice of two jokes here
> 
> 1. I didn't know the Telegraph had a correspondent devoted to writing about whisky
> 
> 2. How much had they had to drink when they wrote that?



The important thing is that he knows his place.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 1, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Jul 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> To me it reads like class essentialising + class reductionism + binary absolutism + crude marxism .


Can some pointy head explain in plain terms what this means please?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 2, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Jul 2, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Can some pointy head explain in plain terms what this means please?


I think he's saying he doesn't like it.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 2, 2019)

What a shit show


----------



## Mr Moose (Jul 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> What a shit show



Embarrassing little shits. They can pretend it’s just an FU to the institution but that’s not how it comes across.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 2, 2019)

Bunch of toddlers, both BP and the lib dems.

Then again I've been saying for a while that this subject has really brought out the stupid in some people.  This is just the latest manifestation.


----------



## Cloo (Jul 2, 2019)

Heard an interesting economic forecast from the head economist of a big real estate firm - apparently there's a much stronger belief among those in the know than a few months ago that there will now be some kind of negotiated managed Brexit, probably with a long time scale for leaving.

But yeah, those Brexit MEPs are a bunch of embarrassing nobheads.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 2, 2019)

Tbh the yellow t-shirts are just as embarrassing


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2019)

It’s not the kind of message that the brave independent U.K. should be sending out to the world that it wants to make deals with. We are going to be taken to the fucking cleaners by the lot of them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Heard an interesting economic forecast from the head economist of a *big real estate firm* - apparently there's a much stronger belief among those in the know than a few months ago that there will now be some kind of negotiated managed Brexit, probably with a long time scale for leaving.
> 
> But yeah, those Brexit MEPs are a bunch of embarrassing nobheads.



An estate agent?


----------



## Cloo (Jul 2, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> An estate agent?


A bit more qualified than that!


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2019)

Maybe the lib dem lice and brexit lot should fight it out in the Parliament as Champions of the 2 sides.  Don't think there's ever been a fist fight in the Euro Parliament. Oh, hang on...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Maybe the lib dem lice and brexit lot should fight it out in the Parliament as Champions of the 2 sides.  Don't think there's ever been a fist fight in the Euro Parliament. Oh, hang on...


Say what you like about ukip but this and the helicopter are two of the most iconic political images of the recent era


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Say what you like about ukip but this and the helicopter are two of the most iconic political images of the recent era



The full version of this one is more iconic, and one I'd be happy to see repeated in parliaments across Europe...


----------



## Wilf (Jul 2, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The full version of this one is more iconic, and one I'd be happy to see repeated in parliaments across Europe...
> 
> View attachment 176075


Who's he? Looks like Mr Bean channelling John Travolta in _both_ Saturday Night fever and Pulp Fiction.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2019)

That was a bit mad that day


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Who's he? Looks like Mr Bean channelling John Travolta in _both_ Saturday Night fever and Pulp Fiction.


Turkish plod/spook who topped the Russian ambassador on live telly


----------



## Poi E (Jul 2, 2019)

Loooong fingers


----------



## 1%er (Jul 2, 2019)

Anyone read the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017?

This is what it says:
European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017
2017 CHAPTER 9

An Act to confer power on the Prime Minister to notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU.

[16th March 2017]

Be it enacted by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:—
1Power to notify withdrawal from the EU

(1)The Prime Minister may notify, under Article 50(2) of the Treaty on European Union, the United Kingdom's intention to withdraw from the EU.

(2)This section has effect despite any provision made by or under the European Communities Act 1972 or any other enactment.

2 Short title

This Act may be cited as the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017.

I have underlined 3 words under section (2) "any other enactment". Does this mean that the statutory instrument passed by parliament  on Thursday 28 March is unlawful? Surely that is an "other enactment". I also can't see anywhere in the original act that there is a provision to extend ( but that is a different argument).

As I don't live in Europe I don't have an axe to grind on the UK membership one way or the other, I'm raising this point as I was asked about it by by a student of my wife's. He is studying Law and for his Masters he is covering EU law. He noticed this and asked me about it as he felt those 3 words at the end of the bill meant that nothing could stop the UK leaving on the 29th March, extension or otherwise.

I think there are one or two lawyers who post here and hope they can enlighten me, so I can pass that information on to him (apparently under Brazilian law similar wording (in Portuguese) is often used to stop changes being made to the law, other than by passing a new act through both our houses of government and not by Presidential decree.

Edit to add, my understanding is that under UK law the word enactment means "any measure ordained and promulgated by any person or body possessing legislative authority", such as the Prime Minister or Parliament or a statutory instrument.


----------



## B.I.G (Jul 2, 2019)

1%er said:


> Anyone read the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017?
> 
> This is what it says:
> European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017
> ...



Preceding legislation only.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 2, 2019)

Junkers replacement is a woman, Anyone else wondering how long it will take BoJo to say something sexist when they first meet?


----------



## 1%er (Jul 2, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> Preceding legislation only.


where does it say "preceding"? I fully understand your point by I'm not sure the wording only applies in that manor, surely if they only meant preceding they would have worded as such


----------



## B.I.G (Jul 2, 2019)

1%er said:


> where does it say "preceding"? I fully understand your point by I'm not sure the wording only applies in that manor, surely if they only meant preceding they would have worded as such



It doesn’t say preceding, but that’s the way all UK legislation works. I’m sure a practicing lawyer will be able to give more detail of greater aid to you.


----------



## B.I.G (Jul 2, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn’t say preceding, but that’s the way all UK legislation works. I’m sure a practicing lawyer will be able to give more detail of greater aid to you.



This might help a bit Parliament's authority

But the uk constitutional law is a bit


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Junkers replacement is a woman, Anyone else wondering how long it will take BoJo to say something sexist when they first meet?


No, it will be immediate


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 2, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Junkers replacement is a woman,


And Lagarde proposed to take over the ECB.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 2, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn’t say preceding, but that’s the way all UK legislation works. I’m sure a practicing lawyer will be able to give more detail of greater aid to you.


Thanks I understand the point you make and it maybe that is the case, I'd have thought that any act going through the UK parliament would be very clear. Maybe as here they deliberately make it vague, so if you can't get out of the door there could be a window open  

I believe that in the UK no current government can bind and future government, so your point is a good one


----------



## B.I.G (Jul 2, 2019)

1%er said:


> Thanks I understand the point you make and it maybe that is the case, I'd have thought that any act going through the UK parliament would be very clear. Maybe as here they deliberately make it vague, so if you can't get out of the door there could be a window open
> 
> I believe that in the UK no current government can bind and future government, so your point is a good one



Its clear as legislation goes as they don’t rely on common sense language. A lot of the longer bills are terribly written as idiots write them and then don’t make any sense at all.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 2, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> It doesn’t say preceding, but that’s the way all UK legislation works. I’m sure a practicing lawyer will be able to give more detail of greater aid to you.



Every Parliament is theoretically sovereign and should not be able to bind another. Entrenching of constitutions was often done in former colonies but rarely practised in Westminster AFAIK.

Parliamentary drafting standards have gone to shit. Which means more work for lawyers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 2, 2019)

1%er said:


> Thanks I understand the point you make and it maybe that is the case, I'd have thought that any act going through the UK parliament would be very clear. Maybe as here they deliberately make it vague, so if you can't get out of the door there could be a window open
> 
> I believe that in the UK no current government can bind and future government, so your point is a good one


On your notion that legislation passing through parliament would be clear, it should be but there's been a great decline in the quality of drafted legislation which broadly coincided with the start of tony blair's administration


----------



## 1%er (Jul 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> On your notion that legislation passing through parliament would be clear, it should be but there's been a great decline in the quality of drafted legislation which broadly coincided with the start of tony blair's administration


One expects more from the mother of Parliaments in this part of the world  Here everything is drafted with a get-out clause so those in the know can get themselves or their friend out of legal troubles.

Half the members of both houses here are under criminal investigation for something and they almost always get away with it. Can you believe our last President was made President despite already having been convicted and banned from standing for political office for 8 years, the fact that he was already elected when the court banned him meant he could be President


----------



## Poi E (Jul 2, 2019)

specialised stuff and most lawyers do not possess the creativity and brevity required.


----------



## Streathamite (Jul 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Sorry if this is old ground, but was having a shit earlier mulling over what Johnson was waffling on about, how withholding a % of the £39bn with a no deal situation is his bargaining tool. That's his ace card. So on 1st November after we've crashed out, Boris will hop on the Eurostar to Brussels and say, "Bonjour, we need a free trade deal please." "Mais oui, zat will be £39bn plus un backstop en Northern Ireland."
> 
> Isn't it?


More pertinently, if we default on the £38bn,
A) the EU will sue the arse off us,as that sum is simply our commitments going forward on obligations we have already signed up to and
B) Our credit rating would pretty much fall to "junk', ensuring that our costs for borrowing would skyrocket.
Goodbye, the economy....


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 3, 2019)




----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 3, 2019)

The irony of bankers and assorted corporate gangsters bemoaning paying the divorce bill


----------



## Ming (Jul 3, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The irony of bankers and assorted corporate gangsters bemoaning paying the divorce bill


They won’t pay it if they have any personal exposure. It’ll be either be covered by liability insurance or passed on to their customers. Profits are privatised and costs are nationalized.


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jul 3, 2019)

1%er said:


> Anyone read the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017?
> 
> This is what it says:
> European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017
> ...


This Act is concerned with the initial notification to invoke the Article 50 procedure and nothing else. Section 1(2) exists to defeat an argument that the notification would be unlawful because it neutralises legislation (and any associated rights) introduced at any time, including legislation introduced up to the point of exiting the EU.

The SI of March 2019 was made under the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, which allows 'exit day' to be changed through an SI - see section 20(2) to (5). There is no conflict with the 2017 Act since moving exit day doesn't undermine the power to make a notification.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 4, 2019)




----------



## teqniq (Jul 6, 2019)

I'm putting this here for want of anywhere more appropriate.

Ex-MI6 chief: UK going through 'political nervous breakdown'

This bit is somewhat difficult to parse but I think he's saying that Corbyn is not fit to be PM along with the current contenders for the leadership of the vermin. Bit mangled though imo.



> ...Sawers told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “We are going through a political nervous breakdown here in the UK. We have potential prime ministers being elected by the Conservative party now, in the shape of the leader of the opposition, who do not have the standing that we have become used to in our top leadership...


----------



## JudithB (Jul 6, 2019)

MAD-T-REX said:


> Section 1(2) exists to defeat an argument that the notification would be unlawful because it neutralises legislation (and any associated rights) introduced at any time, including legislation introduced up to the point of exiting the EU.



Hello could you expand on what this means for the uninformed like myself. Thank you


----------



## Supine (Jul 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The irony of bankers and assorted corporate gangsters bemoaning paying the divorce bill



Why would bankers give a shit if the government pays its bill?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 6, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I'm putting this here for want of anywhere more appropriate.
> 
> Ex-MI6 chief: UK going through 'political nervous breakdown'
> 
> This bit is somewhat difficult to parse but I think he's saying that Corbyn is not fit to be PM along with the current contenders for the leadership of the vermin. Bit mangled though imo.



As you can guess, SIS think Johnson is a serious liability. Ex SIS bosses do not come up with this stuff off their own backs- they never leave the service


----------



## alex_ (Jul 6, 2019)

Supine said:


> Why would bankers give a shit if the government pays its bill?



Because generally they are paying the bill to bankers, and a key factor in interest rates is the reliability of the borrower.


----------



## agricola (Jul 6, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I'm putting this here for want of anywhere more appropriate.
> 
> Ex-MI6 chief: UK going through 'political nervous breakdown'
> 
> This bit is somewhat difficult to parse but I think he's saying that Corbyn is not fit to be PM along with the current contenders for the leadership of the vermin. Bit mangled though imo.



He's saying Corbyn is worse, irredeemable compared to the other two who might "develop that ("standing") when they become prime minister".  To suddenly discover this state of affairs is very Captain Renault of him.


----------



## 1%er (Jul 6, 2019)

More on the legality of the extension to Article 50

Firstly, I'd like to make it clear I am not interested in the politics around Brexit or the people who have taken this case to court, just the law in this Court case.

Further to my post 28248 about the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017, I have now had the chance of a face to face chat with the student who is looking at this for his Masters.

It seems that there has already been one court case and a ruling. The case was brought claiming that the UK government didn't have "statutory authority" to extend Article 50 pasted the 29th March 2019. Interestingly enough, the government "admitted" in documents placed before the court that they [the government] did not have statutory authority to extend Article 50 and that the extension was made by the prime minister under the "Royal Prerogative". 

In dismissing the case the judge ruled that the extension to Article 50 was legal under "statutory authority", despite the fact that the government itself said in documents placed in-front of the judge, admitted they did not have "statutory authority" and the extension was granted by "Royal Prerogative". Clearly those who petitioned to the court in the first place find this ruling perverse, and have entered an appeal.

The appeal has two prongs, the first is that the judge appears to have ignored the governments admission that they did not have "statutory authority" to extend, and secondly, the judges ruling ignored and failed to mention in any part of his ruling that the extension was lawful because it was made by Royal Prerogative (as claimed by the governments lawyers during the case and was in fact their sole argument for the extension being lawful). The appeal then goes on to talk about the Gina Miller case (remember her?) and the ruling by the supreme court regarding the use of the Royal Prerogative, claiming that this action by the government in extending Article 50 by Royal Prerogative falls foul of the supreme court ruling in that case.  

I have a feeling that is going to end up in the supreme court, but maybe not before October the 31st after which it may be irrelevant in any case


----------



## MAD-T-REX (Jul 6, 2019)

JudithB said:


> Hello could you expand on what this means for the uninformed like myself. Thank you


Sure.

Parliament has passed a mountain of legislation relating to the UK's membership of the EU and Parliament is the top dog in our legal framework. Taking the UK out of the EU wouldn't formally repeal all of that legislation but would make a lot or most of it worthless. If the Prime Minister could take us out of the EU off their own bat, they would be able to cancel the effect of legislation passed by Parliament, which is supposed to be supreme.

The PM can normally conduct international relations as they see fit and that would include leaving an international organisation, but the effect of leaving the EU on UK legislation is so severe that (as the Supreme Court decided in the Gina Miller case) Parliamentary/statutory authority is needed to do it. In other words, the PM can only undermine all of the EU related legislation passed by Parliament if Parliament say it's OK.

That's where the 2017 Act comes in. Section 1(1) allows the PM to make the Article 50 notification and section 1(2) says that power is not subject to anything in other legislation. 

For an example of other legislation, let's say that an Act gives an unquestionable and lifelong right to free milkshakes to all citizens/nationals of EU member states resident in the UK (which is how a lot of EU related legislation is phrased). If we leave the EU, UK citizens in the UK would lose that right as they would no longer be a citizen of a member state. The argument could be made that the PM, by making the notification, would be frustrating Parliament's clear intention to give everyone a free milkshake. Section 1(2) stops this argument dead as nothing in other legislation can prevent the PM making the notification.

Even if Parliament passed the 'Being in the EU is terrific and we should stay it in forever Act', the PM could still make the notification to leave unless that new Act amended or repealed section 1 because section 1(2) prevents it applying to the power in section 1(1).


----------



## JudithB (Jul 6, 2019)

I'd like to say I may be back to ask you to explain more. But I know I WILL be back  Thank you again.


----------



## Argonia (Jul 7, 2019)

*'30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit*
'30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit

De Pfefelle Johnson truly is inheriting a poisoned chalice.


----------



## Ming (Jul 8, 2019)

I wish he's stop using rugby terms. The last time i saw him with a ball he was knocking over a 10 year old Japanese school boy. What a tosser.
Boris Johnson: I'll make UK 'match fit' for no-deal Brexit


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 8, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wish he's stop using rugby terms. The last time i saw him with a ball he was knocking over a 10 year old Japanese school boy. What a tosser.
> Boris Johnson: I'll make UK 'match fit' for no-deal Brexit


being as he can't make himself 'match fit' i have scant confidence in his ability to make the nation ready to face the catastrophe he insists upon


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2019)

Argonia said:


> *'30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit*
> '30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit
> 
> De Pfefelle Johnson truly is inheriting a poisoned chalice.


let him adopt the socratic air and drain the vessel of its hemlock contents in one


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 8, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wish he's stop using rugby terms. The last time i saw him with a ball he was knocking over a 10 year old Japanese school boy. What a tosser.
> Boris Johnson: I'll make UK 'match fit' for no-deal Brexit


This is him Vs the Hun.



Imagine if he does that to Merkel.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 8, 2019)

Argonia said:


> *'30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit*
> '30-plus' Tory rebels willing to defy whip and block no-deal Brexit
> 
> De Pfefelle Johnson truly is inheriting a poisoned chalice.


they won't vote against gov. in a VONC so how are they going to do that? blowhards.


----------



## Ming (Jul 8, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> This is him Vs the Hun.
> 
> View attachment 176735
> 
> Imagine if he does that to Merkel.


Nice to see he plays by the rules of the game.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 8, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> This is him Vs the Hun.
> 
> View attachment 176735
> 
> Imagine if he does that to Merkel.


i think it'd be more his style to knock merkel to the ground in a supermarket and run waddle off with her shopping


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 8, 2019)

Wouldn't need to bother for Merkel, just turn heating up a bit


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 9, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Jul 10, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Jul 11, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 176950


I wonder what you’ve got planned for Halloween.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 11, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 13, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> they won't vote against gov. in a VONC so how are they going to do that? blowhards.



Would they if it went right to the wire though? 

At this point, they can't have much expectation that Corbyn will make a particularly effective PM, what with having very little reliable support in the PLP. I can't see Tory MP's who feel their seats are safe having any major issues about a little spell in opposition. Especially if it doesn't last too long. 

Look at it over the last nine years and apart from the Brexit mess, a lot of the more aggressively neoliberal types who are perfectly comfortable with EU membership (ie the ones we're talking about) will feel like it's been a good owd spell and they've done alright.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would they if it went right to the wire though?
> 
> At this point, they can't have much expectation that Corbyn will make a particularly effective PM, what with having very little reliable support in the PLP. I can't see Tory MP's who feel their seats are safe having any major issues about a little spell in opposition. Especially if it doesn't last too long.
> 
> Look at it over the last nine years and apart from the Brexit mess, a lot of the more aggressively neoliberal types who are perfectly comfortable with EU membership (ie the ones we're talking about) will feel like it's been a good owd spell and they've done alright.


Agree to a point but they've got their constituency parties to consider too. Irrespective of how short lived it might be, would they ever be forgiven for what will be seen as helping corbyn become Pm?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 13, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Agree to a point but they've got their constituency parties to consider too. Irrespective of how short lived it might be, would they ever be forgiven for what will be seen as helping corbyn become Pm?



no they wouldn't. Its would mean the end of their time in the tory party.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 13, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> no they wouldn't. Its would mean the end of their time in the tory party.


Yes it probably would but losing your job doesn't carry the same worry for a Tory backbencher as it does for the common folk, there's plenty of non-executive directorships out there waiting to be filled especially if helping to stop Brexit (which pretty much the entire business community hates) is on your CV.
Personally I think a lot of them may make noises about supporing a VONC and then chicken out when it comes down to the wire but it only takes a few to actually go ahead and do it. 
The one thing Brexit has definitely done is throw all the norms of politics out the window.


----------



## not a trot (Jul 13, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Yes it probably would but losing your job doesn't carry the same worry for a Tory backbencher as it does for the common folk, there's plenty of non-executive directorships out there waiting to be filled especially if helping to stop Brexit (which pretty much the entire business community hates) is on your CV.
> Personally I think a lot of them may make noises about supporing a VONC and then chicken out when it comes down to the wire but it only takes a few to actually go ahead and do it.
> The one thing Brexit has definitely done is *throw all the norms of politics out the window*.



Start with Tebbit and Lamont


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 16, 2019)




----------



## philosophical (Jul 16, 2019)

Yesterday Johnson and Hunt were going on about the necessity of ditching the 'backstop'.
Yet Hunt mentioned some kind of solemn promise to the Irish Republic that there would not be 'infrastructure' on the dividing line of demarcation on the island of Ireland.
For a start the line of division, technically at least, will be between the UK and the EU. In a new reality post leaving there will be, sooner or later, two different systems either side of that divide.
Otherwise in what way is the word 'leave' to become manifest? 
With two different systems there will be checks restrictions and restraints. Obfuscating that reality with talk of infrastructure checks 'away ' from the line, hard or soft borders or whatever is fooling who exactly?
There will be a border, just as there is a border between Mexico and the USA, or North and South Korea, or Norway and Sweden.
There may be in the future a similar border between England and Scotland.
Those who voted brexit are expecting to leave, not be joined in the same way any more, and on the island of Ireland that clashes with the GFA which was a hard won attempt to create peaceful  co-existence on the island of Ireland.
Hunt and Johnson unsurprisingly continue to talk absolute bollocks on this issue.


----------



## MrCurry (Jul 16, 2019)

Over a week for the Brexit thread to grow by just half a page... a good methaphor for how progress on delivering Brexit seems to have stalled.

The pound is heading down against the euro and dollar - seems the markets are no longer seeing a happy ending to this mess in Oct.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 16, 2019)

this is getting excruciatingly boring even for me. i think it won't really heat up again until september


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 16, 2019)

Yeah, not sure i can do another 106 pics, lucky for me im off on holidays for 3-4 weeks of it, and take off weekends etc


----------



## Flavour (Jul 16, 2019)

Do people still think this is "remain in stages" as I believe brogdale called it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Do people still think this is "remain in stages" as I believe brogdale called it?


it's remain but not in stages as that makes it sound planned and this is as chaotic as you like.


----------



## emanymton (Jul 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's remain but not in stages as that makes it sound planned and this is as chaotic as you like.


I don't know, I've managed to fall over in stages with no planning at all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 16, 2019)

emanymton said:


> I don't know, I've managed to fall over in stages with no planning at all.


if you knew how difficult it has proved to ensure you drank *just* the right quantity to be that unsteady on your feet *and* to put the right size of obstacle in your path you wouldn't say there'd been no planning involved.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 17, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Jul 17, 2019)

The whole thing is fucked.


----------



## killer b (Jul 17, 2019)

This is a very enjoyable article about warring factions within err the People's Vote campaign. check out the last couple of paragraphs in particular. 

The People’s Vote Campaign Is At War Over Whether It Should Back Remaining In The EU


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> This is a very enjoyable article about warring factions within err the People's Vote campaign. check out the last couple of paragraphs in particular.
> 
> The People’s Vote Campaign Is At War Over Whether It Should Back Remaining In The EU


And people said Bob Crow's no to EU yes to democracy was a shit name


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 17, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Agree to a point but they've got their constituency parties to consider too. Irrespective of how short lived it might be, would they ever be forgiven for what will be seen as helping corbyn become Pm?






Kaka Tim said:


> no they wouldn't. Its would mean the end of their time in the tory party.



Fair points. Maybe if a new neoliberal/pro-EU party develops.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jul 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fair points. Maybe if a new neoliberal/pro-EU party develops.



Change UK?

Clearly I am not being serious.


----------



## killer b (Jul 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> a new neoliberal/pro-EU party


I think the demand for such a party over the last few years was because there was an impression the Lib Dems were irreversibly tainted by their participation in the coalition government, and done for politically. Recent events have proved this not to be the case, so the likelyhood of a new neoliberal/pro EU party getting off the ground has gone from tiny to completely non-existent.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Change UK?



haha naaaaah


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think the demand for such a party over the last few years was because there was an impression the Lib Dems were irreversibly tainted by their participation in the coalition government, and done for politically. Recent events have proved this not to be the case, so the likelyhood of a new neoliberal/pro EU party getting off the ground has gone from tiny to completely non-existent.



Quite possibly true - more Yellow resurgence to come?


----------



## killer b (Jul 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Quite possibly true - more Yellow resurgence to come?


Who knows? Neither of their leadership candidates have the communication skills of their last two leaders though, and whether their compelling European election message can survive contact with a general election remains to be seen. I think probably not.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> Who knows? Neither of their leadership candidates have the communication skills of their last two leaders though, and whether their compelling European election message can survive contact with a general election remains to be seen. I think probably not.



All scenarios seem a bit mad. But if there isn't either more yellow resurgence or a new neoliberal party then I would assume that would mean the Tories stay basically in tact.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> All scenarios seem a bit mad. But if there isn't either more yellow resurgence or a new neoliberal party then I would assume that would mean the Tories stay basically in tact.


The tories know nothing of tact


----------



## belboid (Jul 17, 2019)

killer b said:


> Who knows? Neither of their leadership candidates have the communication skills of their last two leaders though,


Last two?  You think more of Farron than I expected.


----------



## killer b (Jul 17, 2019)

Sorry yeah, I'd actually forgotten he'd existed. Cable and clegg.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 18, 2019)

Birthday Brexit post ....

coming up


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 18, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 177751


he won't live to see brexit


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he won't live to see brexit



That's me.....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> That's me.....


don't worry. none of us will live to see brexit as we won't be leaving.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 18, 2019)

Brecow has selected the Benn/Grieve amendment designed to prevent a proroguing of Parliament in order to facilitate 'No Deal'.

Will compel May to whip her party to a position of taking control away from Parliament. Great way to shuffle off stage right.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Brecow has selected the Benn/Grieve amendment designed to prevent a proroguing of Parliament in order to facilitate 'No Deal'.
> 
> Will compel May to whip her party to a position of taking control away from Parliament. Great way to shuffle off stage right.


may's position has always been to take power away from parliament - see, for example, her great fight to prevent parliament having a vote on article 50


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 18, 2019)

Anyone want to tell him ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Anyone want to tell him ?View attachment 177764


i'd like him to find out on his own


----------



## brogdale (Jul 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd like him to find out on his own


Wannabe oligarch promotes pro-oligarch position.


----------



## brogdale (Jul 18, 2019)

Just an ordinary small businessman...


----------



## killer b (Jul 18, 2019)

Govt defeat in parliament just now


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 18, 2019)

At least 6 Cabinet ministers (including Hammond and Stewart) abstained, and one (Margot James) voted for the amendment.

Normally, the abstainees would be sacked, but who knows these days. James resigned.


----------



## killer b (Jul 18, 2019)

What's the point in sacking them today when they're getting sacked on Tuesday anyway?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Jul 18, 2019)

killer b said:


> What's the point in sacking them today when they're getting sacked on Tuesday anyway?



Well, exactly. I expect some of them will resign just before Johnson becomes PM anyway.


----------



## treelover (Jul 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just an ordinary small businessman...
> 
> View attachment 177768




what a creep, those carpet baggers basically destroyed the old eastern bloc economies,

which admittedly were in A and E already


----------



## Sprocket. (Jul 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> what a creep, those carpet baggers basically destroyed the old eastern bloc economies,
> 
> which admittedly were in A and E already



He had worked for Price Waterhouse Coopers before that. That’s enough to cause concern. Asset stripping, job destroyers that they are.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> what a creep, those carpet baggers basically destroyed the old eastern bloc economies,
> 
> which admittedly were in A and E already


yes, in asia and europe


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 18, 2019)

Wtf 

BBC News - Brexit: Scheme to block no deal 'could involve Queen'
Scheme to block no-deal Brexit 'could involve Queen'


----------



## editor (Jul 18, 2019)

FFS: Revenue chief who received death threats over Brexit steps down


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 19, 2019)

BSI audit today then 12 days off or something, so update yourselves with this

How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer

Laters noobs


----------



## Flavour (Jul 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wtf
> 
> BBC News - Brexit: Scheme to block no deal 'could involve Queen'
> Scheme to block no-deal Brexit 'could involve Queen'



oh please let that happen, that would be so brilliant. the queen in brussels! talking!


----------



## killer b (Jul 19, 2019)

Each new scheme more tortuously improbably than the last, all so they can ignore that when the chips are down the only thing that can stop Johnson no-dealing (if that's what he's actually planning on doing - I doubt it is) is a confidence vote.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 19, 2019)

'a radical plan involving the queen' LOL


----------



## brogdale (Jul 19, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> 'a radical plan involving the queen' LOL


Can imagine at least one.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 19, 2019)

Yasssss queeen


----------



## danny la rouge (Jul 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yasssss queeen


Madonna would be jealous.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jul 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Can imagine at least one.
> 
> View attachment 177904


I don't think that's what they have in mind


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 19, 2019)

Do the people's vote lot approve of the queens gambit?


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Jul 19, 2019)

Would actually be hilarious to send her Maj off to Brussels and get her to do some actual work for once, rather than wandering around museums cutting ribbons. I imagine she'd probably look competent at it too - compared to the likes of David Davies and Dominic Rabb. 

Also some of the Faragist headbangers would be utterly confused: their beloved Queen doing the business...our democratically elected Queen!


----------



## Santino (Jul 19, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Do the people's vote lot approve of the queens gambit?


She's just a pawn.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

I have to say the pro-Europeans, and all them elected and paid for politicians have really stepped up and sold the institution when it was needed. Oh wait, they are anonymous gravy suckers. Please sir, can I have more anonymously administered austerity while you take my taxes and live like a king?


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

YES yes you can


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

The thing is, yes of course we will be worse off. But the fact is it's a shit institution. They don't represent us.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

They haven't shown any interest. So fuck off and leave me to it.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

'If you leave all the regulations will make you poor. You will fail and it will be all your fault.'

Thats the fat pensioners


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

You have never represented me, contacetd me. Shown up, engaged. Why? Because you are so lame.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

Its a farce, a complete waste of time, completely unneccesary.


----------



## kabbes (Jul 20, 2019)

And... fin.

A play in 6 acts.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> And... fin.
> 
> A play in 6 acts.



I think I lost the plot somewhere around 2


----------



## Humberto (Jul 20, 2019)

So yes, I don't want to be all sack cloth and ashes but I realise it was risible stuff. Apols.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 20, 2019)

Humberto said:


> So yes, I don't want to be all sack cloth and ashes but I realise it was risible stuff. Apols.


I quite liked the turns of phrase tbh, gravy suckers was good


----------



## Poi E (Jul 22, 2019)

Jesus the morons at the BBC

What happened to post-Brexit free-trade nirvana?

Edit. Perhaps a bit of satire. I just can't bloody well tell.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 23, 2019)

At least one of the Brexiteer shitheads will now own the mess


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 23, 2019)

A colleague (aged 17) voted for Johnson in the leadership election as a party member. She says she's met him and he told her he intends to prorogue parliament.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> A colleague (aged 17) voted for Johnson in the leadership election as a party member. She says she's met him and he told her he intends to prorogue parliament.


There are 17 year old's in the Tory Party?, I've only ever met one under the age of 30 and that wasn't by all that much either.
As for proroguing Parliament, BoJo is a lying sod who plays to his audience and tells them whatever he thinks they want to hear.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 23, 2019)

Working class bloke from permboke dock/milford haven way on vox pop on welsh bbc news just then - 'i don't care about being richer or poorer, i just want out' - incredible that for many it's become this holy grail divorced from material conditions


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jul 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Working class bloke from permboke dock/milford haven way on vox pop on welsh bbc news just then - 'i don't care about being richer or poorer, i just want out' - incredible that for many it's become this holy grail divorced from material conditions




Mad isn't it. And equally reflected on the remain side I think.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

not sure on the remain side...

the exiters are a little bit more rabid

they vote in droves from Boris in GE for an exit for the sake of an exit

Regardless of the consequenses


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 23, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> not sure on the remain side...
> 
> the exiters are a little bit more rabid
> 
> ...


I don't understand this post.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

which bit



how many people who are classed as remainers don't care if the result makes them poorer


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 23, 2019)

I would absolutely dispute the idea that leavers are more rabid. Complete headbangers on the absolutes of both. There are many hardline remain weirdos who's brains have melted. I'm closely related to some.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 23, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> which bit
> 
> 
> 
> how many people who are classed as remainers don't care if the result makes them poorer


This bit: 
they vote in droves from Boris in GE for an exit for the sake of an exit


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> This bit:
> they vote in droves from Boris in GE for an exit for the sake of an exit



let see if he call one..

for some reason i suspect it would end with a majority if it happens before October

it is getting that rabid with the leave side "exit for the sake of exit"

hope i'm wrong but look at the last 4 years

look were the money is


----------



## Humberto (Jul 23, 2019)

A lot of people are saying they don't want a Brexit where we leave with no idea of where we are going to be in a years time. They (hard Brexiters) aren't exactly putting much flesh on the bones of an argument as to why it will 'all be fine'. They won't do that because the next couple of years, I would guess, are going to bring an attempt at an extensive programme of tearing apart the foundations of ordinary people's NHS and other services, e.g welfare. I don't think we will leave on or by the 31st October though. It will be a long extension to 'sort this mess out' or something.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 23, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> which bit
> 
> 
> 
> how many people who are classed as remainers don't care if the result makes them poorer



Got more to lose though haven't they?


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

that is the real sad bit 

most leave supporters will lose more from the final result

but they "Voted to leave"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 23, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> which bit
> 
> 
> 
> how many people who are classed as remainers don't care if the result makes them poorer



If you have nothing, reducing that tenfold makes no difference. The status quo meant more nothing, so why should someone give a fuck?


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

because when my mother had a heart attack 2 years ago

I did not have 60 grand to pay for the treatment

and that is without the rest of a consequences


----------



## Bonkers2867 (Jul 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> If you have nothing, reducing that tenfold makes no difference. The status quo meant more nothing, so why should someone give a fuck?


Leaving the EU will make their situation 10 times worse.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I would absolutely dispute the idea that leavers are more rabid. Complete headbangers on the absolutes of both. There are many hardline remain weirdos who's brains have melted. I'm closely related to some.



Am I a complete headbanger for feeling that the most of the arguments in favour of staying in the EU are non-economic.  The attraction of European culture, civic soceity and intellectual exchange and international friendship.  The dislike of the far right, isolationists xenophobic left etc on the other.  As such I would have voted remain even if it would cause economic damage to Britain.  As it happens all the indicators suggest exactly the opposite.  Anyway environment improving for all is more important than GDP.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

> As it happens all the indicators suggest exactly the opposite.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 23, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> that is the real sad bit
> 
> most leave supporters will lose more from the final result
> 
> but they "Voted to leave"



According to you. And you're a muppet. 

How much do you think we've gained already from the damage inflicted on the Tories?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jul 23, 2019)

Bonkers2867 said:


> Leaving the EU will make their situation 10 times worse.



Twenty eight times worse, at least. And they’ve done the maths and still don’t give a fuck.


----------



## Ax^ (Jul 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> According to you. And you're a muppet.
> 
> How much do you think we've gained already from the damage inflicted on the Tories?



Boris Johnson as PM..


----------



## treelover (Jul 23, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Am I a complete headbanger for feeling that the most of the arguments in favour of staying in the EU are non-economic.  The attraction of European culture, civic soceity and intellectual exchange and international friendship.  The dislike of the far right, isolationists xenophobic left etc on the other.  As such I would have voted remain even if it would cause economic damage to Britain.  As it happens all the indicators suggest exactly the opposite.  Anyway environment improving for all is more important than GDP.



are you comfortably off?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 23, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Am I a complete headbanger for feeling that the most of the arguments in favour of staying in the EU are non-economic.  The attraction of European culture, civic soceity and intellectual exchange and international friendship.  The dislike of the far right, isolationists xenophobic left etc on the other.  As such I would have voted remain even if it would cause economic damage to Britain.  As it happens all the indicators suggest exactly the opposite.  Anyway environment improving for all is more important than GDP.



Dunno. I'd probably point out that the EU is a trade bloc and that European culture could mean Hungary or Estonia or Bulgaria or France or Greece, so not really any more a common culture than countries outside the EU might have with each other. It's not all balmy nights drinking espresso outside cafes. 

Also that many of the constituent parts of the EU have far right governments or strong & prominent far right tendencies, which the EU either doesn't sanction or pays lip service to sanctioning, and that the EU itself rigidly enforces its borders at the expense of vulnerable displaced peoples, including the setting up of camps in Turkey - a country which is also a state actor in the displacement of vulnerable peoples... As well as  the EU being remarkable for its lack of democracy even compared to its peers, as demonstrated recently by the 'election' of Von der Leyen as commission president (which really means EU president).

Its environmental record isn't great either.

But not really much point because it's hard to get through the emotionally driven woo on either side. Personally I'm mainly arsed about jobs and homes and food in cupboards and all that material stuff but each to their own.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I would absolutely dispute the idea that leavers are more rabid. Complete headbangers on the absolutes of both. There are many hardline remain weirdos who's brains have melted. I'm closely related to some.


Unless you're the fuck it up lol type of leaver you by definition believe some sort of fantasy scenario.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Unless you're the fuck it up lol type of leaver you by definition believe some sort of fantasy scenario.


I am a fuck it up lol type leaver


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Its [the EU's] environmental record isn't great either.



So are there lots of areas of environmental regulation where the UK has been pushing for better environmental regulation for the EU but has had pushback from other European countries.  I thought it was mainly the other way around.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 24, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> So are there lots of areas of environmental regulation where the UK has been pushing for better environmental regulation for the EU but has had pushback from other European countries.  I thought it was mainly the other way around.


Nice reframing there.

What environmental impact do you think the EU subsidy system (which benefits big farmers) has? Generally positive or negative?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 24, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> Boris Johnson as PM..



Ahhh so you agree.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 24, 2019)

I've been reading up on proroguing of Parliament.  Its seems highly unlikely that Johnson could make it happen even if he wanted to.  Beyond him scrambling through some sort of re-branded version of May's deal is there any route to Brexit happening in October?

Just seems to me that a GE is virtually inevitable now.


----------



## Raheem (Jul 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I've been reading up on proroguing of Parliament.  Its seems highly unlikely that Johnson could make it happen even if he wanted to.  Beyond him scrambling through some sort of re-branded version of May's deal is there any route to Brexit happening in October?
> 
> Just seems to me that a GE is virtually inevitable now.


Don't see that there's any way Brexit can happen in October. But an alternative to a GE would be an art 50 extension for renegotiation, with the shithead being hailed as a genius by his party for his amazing, steely bluff.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 25, 2019)

I deliberately didn't vote in the poll until the new leader was sorted out, then I voted there would be an independent UK,
I didn't vote that way because I want out of the EU, more because I think Boris the gob will deliver and, if the deadline comes along, he'll simply let it, thus forcing a 'no deal'.
I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I deliberately didn't vote in the poll until the new leader was sorted out, then I voted there would be an independent UK,
> I didn't vote that way because I want out of the EU, more because I think Boris the gob will deliver and, if the deadline comes along, he'll simply let it, thus forcing a 'no deal'.
> I hope I'm wrong.


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Nice reframing there.
> 
> What environmental impact do you think the EU subsidy system (which benefits big farmers) has? Generally positive or negative?



There are other things going on which are nothing to do with the EU's  subsidy system. Blaming things on the EU which are really caused by other things is something you share with your allies on the right. 

In the 1950s and 60s there was rapid consolidation of farms with mechanisation and new techniques away from the traditional farm towards and agribusiness approach. The EU system has, if anything slowed the process of consolidation.  It is likely to pick up speed again if we leave the EU and negotiate an agricultural trade deal with the US which is likely to sacrifice agricultural and environmental concerns in favour of concessions on financial services.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 25, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> There are other things going on which are nothing to do with the EU's  subsidy system. Blaming things on the EU which are really caused by other things is something you share with your allies on the right.
> 
> In the 1950s and 60s there was rapid consolidation of farms with mechanisation and new techniques away from the traditional farm towards and agribusiness approach. The EU system has, if anything slowed the process of consolidation.  It is likely to pick up speed again if we leave the EU and negotiate an agricultural trade deal with the US which is likely to sacrifice agricultural and environmental concerns in favour of concessions on financial services.



No idea what the first para means. EU subsidy system encourages intensive factory style farming. This is not a new or controversial criticism.

Anyway, the point I made was that the EU's environmental record is shit. You disagree?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I deliberately didn't vote in the poll until the new leader was sorted out, then I voted there would be an independent UK,
> I didn't vote that way because I want out of the EU, more because I think Boris the gob will deliver and, if the deadline comes along, he'll simply let it, thus forcing a 'no deal'.
> I hope I'm wrong.


You are


----------



## toblerone3 (Jul 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway, the point I made was that the EU's environmental record is shit. You disagree?



Yes I do I disagree with your substantive point   Yes you are right in the sense that in absolute terms every countries' environmental record is shit, but the EU has generally had a much stronger policy than the US, for instance and the record of British environmental policy when we were outside the EU. 

For environmental policy it is MUCH better that we stay in the EU and reform from the inside. For example I don't think Britain, on its own would have had as much success as the EU in rolling out progressive emissions standards for ICE vehicles and getting US vehicle manufacturers to play ball.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 25, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Yes I do I disagree with your substantive point   Yes you are right in the sense that in absolute terms every countries' environmental record is shit, but the EU has generally had a much stronger policy than the US, for instance and the record of British environmental policy when we were outside the EU.


Well you don't disagree then


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jul 25, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Twenty eight times worse, at least. And they’ve done the maths and still don’t give a fuck.


Thing is though, at the time of the vote i never spoke to a leaver who thought we would get a worse deal, or no deal at all.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Jul 25, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Yes I do I disagree with your substantive point   Yes you are right in the sense that in absolute terms every countries' environmental record is shit, but the EU has generally had a much stronger policy than the US, for instance and the record of British environmental policy when we were outside the EU.
> 
> For environmental policy it is MUCH better that we stay in the EU and reform from the inside. For example I don't think Britain, on its own would have had as much success as the EU in rolling out progressive emissions standards for ICE vehicles and getting US vehicle manufacturers to play ball.


How can we reform it from within?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Thing is though, at the time of the vote i never spoke to a leaver who thought we would get a worse deal, or no deal at all.


We?

 Your posts are coming from a total bubble.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How can we reform it from within?


so much more easily than from without, if that's your sort of thing


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You are



I would like to be but boris the gob has filled his new cupboard (or something like that) with Brexiteers all hell bent on fucking up Britain with idiotic ideas and other right wing bollocks - and they feel powerful.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I would like to be but boris the gob has filled his new cupboard (or something like that) with Brexiteers all hell bent on fucking up Britain with idiotic ideas and other right wing bollocks - and they feel powerful.


give it a few days


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jul 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I've been reading up on proroguing of Parliament.  Its seems highly unlikely that Johnson could make it happen even if he wanted to.  Beyond him scrambling through some sort of re-branded version of May's deal is there any route to Brexit happening in October?
> 
> Just seems to me that a GE is virtually inevitable now.



The other alternative is that Johnson creates enough heat that enough of the HoC accept the deal that he will come back with.

That deal is likely to be largely May's deal with the Irish backstop issue kicked down the road to phase 2. It will be presented as deal or GE where the Tories will campaign for 'no deal'. At this point a deal with Farage to give him a clear run at labour leave seats comes into play. The game here is to put the HoC under pressure from below with the fear of losing seats and the return of a Tory Government with the ERG firmly in control.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> give it a few days



My hope would be he pisses everyone off with daft antics and loses the whole think like the bastard he is deserves, but he has a lot of political power given by his large tory election majority and the Brexit party's showing in the euro elections


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> My hope would be he pisses everyone off with daft antics and loses the whole think like the bastard he is deserves, but he has a lot of political power given by his large tory election majority and the Brexit party's showing in the euro elections


have you seen the balance of parties in the commons?


----------



## not a trot (Jul 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> have you seen the balance of parties in the commons?



Thank fuck you read that too. Was worried I might need new goggles.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> have you seen the balance of parties in the commons?



Yes, but I've just been listening to him on Radio 4 and he knows how to speak.
A lot of the public will push in whatever way the best speaker tells them to, and who can beat him?
Corbyn isn't even close and he's messing about like someone looking to make a pair of a load of odd socks so it isn't going to be him. 
Staying in the EU is clearly the way to be, but common sense won't be the winner here until someone steps up and takes boris the gob on properly ... and there isn't much time to stop him.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 25, 2019)

_but he has a lot of political power given by his large tory election majority
*have you seen the balance of parties in the commons?*
Yes, but I've just been listening to him on Radio 4 and he knows how to speak._

This is the stuff.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Yes, but I've just been listening to him on Radio 4 and he knows how to speak.
> A lot of the public will push in whatever way the best speaker tells them to, and who can beat him?
> Corbyn isn't even close and he's messing about like someone looking to make a pair of a load of odd socks so it isn't going to be him.
> Staying in the EU is clearly the way to be, but common sense won't be the winner here until someone steps up and takes boris the gob on properly ... and there isn't much time to stop him.



Every comrade has the right to be stupid, but you abuse the privilege.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 25, 2019)

Stop trying to make Boris the Gob a thing


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Yes, but I've just been listening to him on Radio 4 and he knows how to speak.
> A lot of the public will push in whatever way the best speaker tells them to, and who can beat him?
> Corbyn isn't even close and he's messing about like someone looking to make a pair of a load of odd socks so it isn't going to be him.
> Staying in the EU is clearly the way to be, but common sense won't be the winner here until someone steps up and takes boris the gob on properly ... and there isn't much time to stop him.


tosh. utter tosh. i've just been watching him at the dispatch box and he's crap. a load of auld flannel which would hardly  convince even the most gullible and credulous fool.

if you think he's a powerful prime minister then that only shows how little you grasp the situation.

i ask again: do you understand the balance of political forces within the house of commons?


----------



## andysays (Jul 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. utter tosh. i've just been watching him at the dispatch box and he's crap. a load of auld flannel which would hardly  convince even the most gullible and credulous fool.


It seems to have convinced Don Troooomp though...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 25, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Stop trying to make Boris the Gob a thing



IT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> It seems to have convinced Don Troooomp though...


yeh but he's a gullible and credulous witling and not a gullible and credulous fool. the difference, though apparently minor, is significant.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 25, 2019)

I might be the only person who when he hears the word 'backstop' assumes that people mean the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement even if they don't realize it themselves.


----------



## andysays (Jul 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I might be the only person who when he hears the word 'backstop' assumes that people mean the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement even if they don't realize it themselves.


Yes, I think you might well be...


----------



## Bonkers2867 (Jul 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The other alternative is that Johnson creates enough heat that enough of the HoC accept the deal that he will come back with.
> 
> That deal is likely to be largely May's deal with the Irish backstop issue kicked down the road to phase 2. It will be presented as deal or GE where the Tories will campaign for 'no deal'. At this point a deal with Farage to give him a clear run at labour leave seats comes into play. The game here is to put the HoC under pressure from below with the fear of losing seats and the return of a Tory Government with the ERG firmly in control.


He isn’t going to come back with any new deal. The backstop won’t be allowed into phase 2 in any circumstances.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. utter tosh. i've just been watching him at the dispatch box and he's crap. a load of auld flannel which would hardly convince even the most gullible and credulous fool.



It won't convince you, me, or anyone else with a thinking brain, but it will (over time) put other people into his camp. This strong voice positive tone has been used many times over history, and it works. To ignore that just because WE know it's bullshit is a bad move.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 26, 2019)

As for the opposition, especially Corbyn, they all sounded weak and aimless. That crappy set of responses to a strong, targeted speech (Load of bollocks) is not helping.
Boris the gob offered lots (even if it was all bollocks), but the voices of reason and reality came over as a bunch of party poopers devoid of plans, and armed only with insults and half a wit. 

The leave lot are going to win this unless strong, powerful people are brought in to fire real shots at the silly sod, and do it with massive confidence as well thought out reality that'll show up what the gob really is.


----------



## Humberto (Jul 26, 2019)

Since he's stocked his cabinet with hard Brexiters, they are gonna go full blaze "it is HAPPENING'' for the next few weeks at least. Yet when it becomes difficult they will panic and try and pass the buck to us, the electorate. So they are going to have to pull off something incredible between now and then to look remotely realistic and not a cabal of headbangers. What the last lot couldn't do in three years they expect a positive attitude will allow them to conclude in three months time. If they screw it up, which they are bound to; the markets, the value of the pound, international trade could free fall. Snowball into a major recession, with Johnson's position surely untenable. 

What I 'reckon' is that they will postpone it indefinitely. Politicians are very good at deflecting blame and clinging on in there. So I for one am slightly sceptical and am betting against Johnson's bet with the naysayers that he will put the lead back in Britain's pencil and usher in a golden age.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> As for the opposition, especially Corbyn, they all sounded weak and aimless. That crappy set of responses to a strong, targeted speech (Load of bollocks) is not helping.
> Boris the gob offered lots (even if it was all bollocks), but the voices of reason and reality came over as a bunch of party poopers devoid of plans, and armed only with insults and half a wit.
> 
> The leave lot are going to win this unless strong, powerful people are brought in to fire real shots at the silly sod, and do it with massive confidence as well thought out reality that'll show up what the gob really is.



Stop trying to make Boris the gob happen it isn't going to happen it sounds fucking awful and it is not #fetch.

Also please stop with these unstructured stream of consciousness posts. They are tortuous.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Stop trying to make Boris the gob happen



He's already happened, so it's down to trying to stop him happening any more.
However, I happen the like the name I made up, so fuck off


----------



## Libertad (Jul 26, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> He's already happened, so it's down to trying to stop him happening any more.
> However, I happen the like the name I made up, so fuck off



Have a word with yourself you tedious flake.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 26, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Have a word with yourself you tedious flake.



I just did, and decided I was right to suggest boris (he isn't worth a cap B) is a big gobbed twat - A very merry go fuck yourself to you.


----------



## Libertad (Jul 26, 2019)




----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 26, 2019)

his night of the long knives-esque massacre of anyone but his own croines in the cabinet has pretty much guaranteed a large group of tory backbenchers who will be very willing to fuck him over.
Be interesting to see what they do when he calls a GE on a "no deal" platform


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 26, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> his night of the long knives-esque massacre of anyone but his own croines in the cabinet has pretty much guaranteed a large group of tory backbenchers who will be very willing to fuck him over.



That's lovely to hear, more so because it's true. 

Edit - As Labour have shit all to throw at the bastard, back stabbing from his own party may be the only real hope, and has the advantage of making the tories look like the bunch of bastards they are.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 26, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> his night of the long knives-esque massacre of anyone but his own croines in the cabinet has pretty much guaranteed a large group of tory backbenchers who will be very willing to fuck him over.
> Be interesting to see what they do when he calls a GE on a "no deal" platform


Been wondering about this. Putting all his enemies on the backbenches with a majority of two is bold/stupid, even more so given brexit, 3 month timeframe, Tory MPs committed to stopping no deal.

Reckon maybe they are gambling on fear of a Corbyn govt as a strong whip.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> He's already happened, so it's down to trying to stop him happening any more.
> However, I happen the like the name I made up, so fuck off



Hanging is too good for you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Been wondering about this. Putting all his enemies on the backbenches with a majority of two is bold/stupid, even more so given brexit, 3 month timeframe, Tory MPs committed to stopping no deal.
> 
> Reckon maybe they are gambling on fear of a Corbyn govt as a strong whip.



Nah it's all about moving to an election footing.


----------



## Teaboy (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah it's all about moving to an election footing.



Yup and you can already see on what ground they will fight the election.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah it's all about moving to an election footing.


Yeah fair, much the same though - will be framed as us or Corbyn


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah fair, much the same though - will be framed as us or Corbyn



And Brexit or Remain. Which is possible now Corbyn has been pushed to support Remain. So Johnson can win the majority May wanted.


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 26, 2019)




----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> And Brexit or Remain. Which is possible now Corbyn has been pushed to support Remain. So Johnson can win the majority May wanted.



Nope. Labour policy at a GE is currently to fight for their own version of brexit. They are only remain against a conservative no deal. Confusing ehh!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Nope. Labour policy at a GE is currently to fight for their own version of brexit. They are only remain against a conservative no deal. Confusing ehh!



As far as most people are concerned (not you obviously you're not people) Labour is now a Remain party.


----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> As far as most people are concerned (not you obviously you're not people) Labour is now a Remain party.



Come the next GE we will see what the labour campaign is based on. "People" can then decide if they are remain or leave. Constructive ambiguity hasn't worked so far and I don't imagine it'll be as possible when they present their GE manifesto.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Come the next GE we will see what the labour campaign is based on. "People" can then decide if they are remain or leave. Constructive ambiguity hasn't worked so far and I don't imagine it'll be as possible when they present their GE manifesto.



Agree.


----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree.



Fuck me, that's a first! Happy Friday


----------



## not a trot (Jul 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Come the next GE we will see what the labour campaign is based on. "People" can then decide if they are remain or leave. Constructive ambiguity hasn't worked so far and I don't imagine it'll be as possible when they present their GE manifesto.



If we are still in the EU at the next GE, then Farage and his bunch of twats will be a serious threat to both Tory and labour. I believe BoJo will do anything to avoid such a scenario. Brexit voters are not going to take anymore dithering on extentions etc. Corbyn needs to make it clear once and for all that, Labour are a remain party, and he needs to be doing that now.


----------



## strung out (Jul 26, 2019)

not a trot said:


> If we are still in the EU at the next GE, then Farage and his bunch of twats will be a serious threat to both Tory and labour. I believe BoJo will do anything to avoid such a scenario. Brexit voters are not going to take anymore dithering on extentions etc. Corbyn needs to make it clear once and for all that, Labour are a remain party, and he needs to be doing that now.


If we're not in the EU at the next GE, who will the Brexit party be a threat to?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

not a trot said:


> If we are still in the EU at the next GE, then Farage and his bunch of twats will be a serious threat to both Tory and labour. I believe BoJo will do anything to avoid such a scenario. Brexit voters are not going to take anymore dithering on extentions etc. Corbyn needs to make it clear once and for all that, Labour are a remain party, and he needs to be doing that now.



Wrong.


----------



## Brainaddict (Jul 26, 2019)

not a trot said:


> If we are still in the EU at the next GE, then Farage and his bunch of twats will be a serious threat to both Tory and labour. I believe BoJo will do anything to avoid such a scenario. Brexit voters are not going to take anymore dithering on extentions etc. Corbyn needs to make it clear once and for all that, Labour are a remain party, and he needs to be doing that now.


The moment we leave the EU, being a 'remain' party will be an outdated concept. And Johnson will do anything to make sure we've left by the time of the next election. So I suspect talking about 'remain' at the next election is meaningless. It will all be about next steps, whether we've left with a deal or without.


----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2019)

.


----------



## Supine (Jul 26, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> It will all be about next steps, whether we've left with a deal or without.



Of course leaving without a deal just means starting to make a deal on November 1st as a deal must happen eventually. We'll just have a weaker negotiating position if we are trying from the outside. The Irish border and customs checks will still be a thing. It'll just be another chapter in brexit. 

I suspect BJ will fight a GE first and hope for a big enough majority to loose the DUP, so that Ireland can sort out it's own arrangements. Sea borders on the mainland will be ideal for the brexit crowd.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jul 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Ireland can sort out it's own arrangements.



Tiocfaidh ár lá


----------



## Raheem (Jul 26, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> And Johnson will do anything to make sure we've left by the time of the next election.


I don't think that's it. He will do anything to make sure he looks like he means it, but it won't be possible. So he will be fighting the election as Captain Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Of course leaving without a deal just means starting to make a deal on November 1st as a deal must happen eventually. We'll just have a weaker negotiating position if we are trying from the outside. The Irish border and customs checks will still be a thing. It'll just be another chapter in brexit.
> 
> I suspect BJ will fight a GE first and hope for a big enough majority to loose the DUP, so that Ireland can sort out it's own arrangements. Sea borders on the mainland will be ideal for the brexit crowd.



Again I agree. What's happening to me?


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hanging is too good for you.



Your less than intelligent posts do nothing but explain why Brexit is being made easy for twat boris. Remain, while clearly the sensible move, has nobody to push what should be the best option for the UK - All we have is infighting and idiotic comments between groups that want to see the EU become what it should be, the start of a unified world.
It's fools like you that are allowing Brexit to move forward because you're clearly too daft to see remain needs a unified front and powerful speakers to show the public how foolish leaving the EU is.
Leave is packed full of xenophobic, racist twats that won't stop at Brexit, they'll take their idiocy as far as they can push it, and that's fucking bad news for the world.
Unite and get Brexit booted into whichever pit of hell fucking stupid ideas are dumped into.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> As far as most people are concerned (not you obviously you're not people) Labour is now a Remain party.



Very probably, and boris the gob milked it for every approval point he could get in the commons.
Corbyn dithered and did nothing. 

What's happening here is remain are assuming common sense will win the day, but it's more likely a fat gob and popularist comments are going to beat common sense into a pulp and allow Brexit to happen. Strong leaders with strong voices are commonly appealing to voters, and that means parliamentary support as those very voters voice their opinions to their MPs.
Remain needs a strong voice to push what should be obvious - The UK MUST remain in the EU.

It's getting late in the day so remain needs something right now. August is missing from the parliamentary calendar, so we have 60 days to get this idiocy stopped.
The question is, does remain have someone powerful enough to beat Johnson and show the public how stupid brexit is? I know one thing, it isn't Corbyn.


----------



## teuchter (Jul 27, 2019)

Reads like one of those auto-generated news articles.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Reads like one of those auto-generated news articles.



It might well but it's very probably accurate.
boris the gob is running round doing popular stuff all over the place, promising a load of new coppers on the street, loads of cash to boost local economies, the trans-Pennine rail link, and making sure the world knows he's being tough on Europe, exactly the sort of stuff I said he would do, and it's going to be popular because most people don't look past the ends of their noses. Toss in the tory party knows they're fucked as a political force if Brexit fails, and all the things needed for a brexit disaster are well and truly in place. All he really has to do is make sure the unionists are on his side by telling them there's no way the south will have any influence on NI politics as long as they support him.
He isn't home and dry, but he's making all the noises he needs to make in order to get his daft way.

Remain have Corbyn - there's just no comparison but there's going to have to be something quick because the gob's many promises are going to put a lot of pressure on MPs to go Brexit.
3 months to go, 2 in reality, and there's not a lot in the gob's way right now, less soon.
Corbyn reminds me of that donkey jacket wearing idiot of many years ago. A bright bloke but clueless and with the personality of a dead cat. Great for the fucking tories, but sod all use to Labour or remain.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jul 27, 2019)

Party political games and posturing.
That's what the people in the UK are paying for. 
The ordinary people living in the UK are funding these arseholes who talk utter shite and want to punctuate more than protect your livelihoods and rights.

How long does it take to organise a revolution?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jul 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Party political games and posturing.
> That's what the people in the UK are paying for.
> The ordinary people living in the UK are funding these arseholes who talk utter shite and want to punctuate more than protect your livelihoods and rights.
> 
> How long does it take to organise a revolution?


Three missed meals/thousands of years. Somewhere in between.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Party political games and posturing.
> That's what the people in the UK are paying for.



True, and it's something you aren't going to beat any time soon, especially when the politician in question is bloody good at games and posturing, and more so when his opposition in the house is a useless pillock without a clue.

As for revolution - Not for me, thanks, as they tend to finish with a lot of very ordinary people deader than they were before the shooting started.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 27, 2019)

**


----------



## Poi E (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> As for revolution - Not for me, thanks, as they tend to finish with a lot of very ordinary people deader than they were before the shooting started.



How the middle classes find themselves up against the wall.


----------



## campanula (Jul 27, 2019)

Sometimes, the gates of inanity open wide enough to allow nervous types (myself) to peek in.


----------



## philosophical (Jul 27, 2019)

Common sense won't prevail.
It seems more likely anti English Irish terrorism will re-emerge, because brexit voters voted down the peace process.
Still red blood might work well on blue passports if the shade of blue is just right.


----------



## teqniq (Jul 27, 2019)

Great. 

Nigel Farage has launched a pro-Brexit group which can take anonymous US cash


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> True, and it's something you aren't going to beat any time soon, especially when the politician in question is bloody good at games and posturing, and more so when his opposition in the house is a useless pillock without a clue.
> 
> As for revolution - Not for me, thanks, as they tend to finish with a lot of very ordinary people deader than they were before the shooting started.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

Poi E said:


> How the middle classes find themselves up against the wall.



It's always ordinary people that get fucked up in wars so I would prefer they didn't happen.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 27, 2019)

So get yer gun buddy. Seriously, grow a fucking pair.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> It's always ordinary people that get fucked up in wars so I would prefer they didn't happen.


So you froth and moan but do nothing actual which might involve having to actually do something, you liberal wankstain


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So you froth and moan but do nothing actual which might involve having to actually do something, you liberal wankstain



If not liking death and misery is the mark of a liberal wankstain, I'll happily wear that badge.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> If not liking death and misery moaning and doing nothing is the mark of a liberal wankstain, I'll happily wear that badge.


C4U


----------



## andysays (Jul 27, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Common sense won't prevail.
> It seems more likely anti English Irish terrorism will re-emerge, because brexit voters voted down the peace process.
> Still red blood might work well on blue passports if the shade of blue is just right.


Brexit voters didn't 'vote down the peace process' and if anti English Irish terrorism *does *re-emerge it will be more the result of people like you spouting such idiocy than because of how anyone voted in a referendum


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit voters didn't 'vote down the peace process' and if anti English Irish terrorism *does *re-emerge it will be more the result of people like you spouting such idiocy than because of how anyone voted in a referendum



 It's likely to be the direct result of religious extremists killing people, however Brexit with no Irish backstop could trigger the silly fuckers.
Another good reason not to leave the EU.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 27, 2019)

"religious extremists" are you talking about irish republicans?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> It's likely to be the direct result of religious extremists killing people, however Brexit with no Irish backstop could trigger the silly fuckers.
> Another good reason not to leave the EU.



So, you're saying we should let fear of terrorism tie our hands in this matter? You slag off the religious extremists (spoiler alert: they're not religious extremists at all) but you're basically doing their job for them.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So, you're saying we should let fear of terrorism tie our hands in this matter? You slag off the religious extremists (spoiler alert: they're not religious extremists at all) but you're basically doing their job for them.[/QUOT
> 
> I thought people that killed in the name of religion were religious terrorists, but I suppose I could be wrong. I am aware of the background and sectarianism in the North, but religious belief systems were the driving force.
> However, there is mostly peace there at the moment so sleeping dogs should not be poked with sharp sticks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> It's likely to be the direct result of religious extremists killing people, however Brexit with no Irish backstop could trigger the silly fuckers.
> Another good reason not to leave the EU.


Politics clearly aren't your strong suit, perhaps you should consider confining your contributions to those forums where your want of political nous isn't a constant weeping wound streaming embarrassment


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp  Who exactly was supposed to have been waging a holy war in Ireland.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Jul 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Politics clearly aren't your strong suit, perhaps you should consider confining your contributions to those forums where your want of political nous isn't a constant weeping wound streaming embarrassment



Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.


That wouldn't assist you at all as you simply don't have any idea of what we're talking about.


----------



## eoin_k (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.



Try a Google search for Ronnie Bunting.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.



I've got a better idea. How about you go read a fucking book. Not a book about the troubles, just the Very Hungry Catepillar or anything else that would shut you up for an hour or two.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.


 because the main motivation is to free ireland from british rule. Not to establish a theocracy. Many leading republicans were socialists or marxists and one of the most famous - Wolfe tone- was a protestant.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 27, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> All we have is infighting and idiotic comments between groups that want to see the EU become what it should be, the start of a unified world.



Yeah you're the only one that wants the EU to expand to encompass the rest of the world.


----------



## belboid (Jul 27, 2019)

Why is anyone bothering with the idiot Troomp? Just ignore the idiot


----------



## philosophical (Jul 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit voters didn't 'vote down the peace process' and if anti English Irish terrorism *does *re-emerge it will be more the result of people like you spouting such idiocy than because of how anyone voted in a referendum



Brexit voters voted for a controlled and managed border, the absence of which contributes to the peace process.
You are talking rubbish if you think my comments, however idiotic you think they are, on a message board will result in the re-emergence of terrorism, any re-emergence of terrorism will be 'more the result of people' voting leave


----------



## Badgers (Jul 28, 2019)

UK Access to EU Databases: The National Security Ramifications of a No Deal Brexit

Worth a read regarding data/security if no deal


----------



## Badgers (Jul 28, 2019)

Leaked plans reveal Britain is not prepared for a no-deal Brexit in October


> Ministers were this week handed a confidential list of contingency measures which they must secure for October 31 in order to limit disruption at Britain's borders and keep trade with the EU flowing if there is a no-deal Brexit.


----------



## andysays (Jul 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Leaked plans reveal Britain is not prepared for a no-deal Brexit in October


But on the other hand

No-deal Brexit now 'assumed' by government, says Gove


> The government is now "working on the assumption" of a no-deal Brexit, Michael Gove has said. Mr Gove said his team still aimed to come to an agreement with Brussels but, writing in the Sunday Times, he added: "No deal is now a very real prospect."





> Mr Johnson has made Mr Gove responsible for planning a no-deal Brexit. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has told Mr Gove to chair meetings seven days a week until Brexit is delivered, according to the paper. Mr Gove said tweaks to Theresa May's withdrawal agreement - which was approved by the EU but resoundingly rejected by Parliament - would not be enough.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 28, 2019)

We'll still be in the eu as wetherspoons up and down the country open on the morning of 1 november


----------



## Badgers (Jul 28, 2019)

Sounds like the good auld DUP are not keen on a no deal.


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Sounds like the good auld DUP are not keen on a no deal.


No Deal increases the odds of Irish Re-Unification greatly, The DUP's biggest problem is that they're driven far more by what they don't want rather than what
they do. They don't want a Corbyn led government but they want Irish re-unification even less.
With hindsight it would have made far more sense for them to support Remain but that would mean sharing a platform with Sinn Fein so they had to support Leave


----------



## strung out (Jul 29, 2019)

Saw this excellent (if slightly out of date) banner hung up outside a pub in Bedminster the other day


----------



## Supine (Jul 29, 2019)

strung out said:


> Saw this excellent (if slightly out of date) banner hung up outside a pub in Bedminster the other day
> 
> View attachment 179083



Even Baldrick had plan LOL


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jul 29, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Perhaps you should assist by explaining how mistreated Irish Catholics using terrorism to bring the north into a Catholic state isn't Catholic terrorism.



You're thinking is screwy.


----------



## Poi E (Jul 29, 2019)

I missed that. That is loopy.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 29, 2019)

strung out said:


> Saw this excellent (if slightly out of date) banner hung up outside a pub in Bedminster the other day
> 
> View attachment 179083



What's the Bristol City connection about?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What's the Bristol City connection about?


local rivalry no doubt


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 29, 2019)

I don't know where Bedminster is to be fair but seemed odd.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't know where Bedminster is to be fair but seemed odd.


It's south bristol, the utter heart of trad city support.


----------



## existentialist (Jul 29, 2019)

strung out said:


> Saw this excellent (if slightly out of date) banner hung up outside a pub in Bedminster the other day
> 
> View attachment 179083


I know we're not supposed to be rude about the apparent or alleged inarticulacy or dimness of the Brexit-supporting, ahahaha, "majority", but they really, really don't help themselves with this bullshit, do they?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's south bristol, the utter heart of trad city support.



Ta Butchers that makes sense.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 29, 2019)

Hypothesis : bj is playing tough guy and refusing meetings with eu because it's a vote winner. Once he's confident enough to win a GE the results of which make a successful VONC in his government much less likely, he changes tack. Does he have time?


----------



## maomao (Jul 29, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Hypothesis : bj is playing tough guy and refusing meetings with eu because it's a vote winner. Once he's confident enough to win a GE the results of which make a successful VONC in his government much less likely, he changes tack. Does he have time?


What does he gain by changing tack? What tack is there to change? All compromises have been exhausted and he's highly unlikely to flip to remain.

If the EU renegotiate he's a Tory hero forever. If he manages to drag us into No Deal he's a Tory hero forever. If Parliament manage to throw him out while he's pursuing no deal he's a Tory hero forever. No one expects this government to last long. All there is is Brexit.


----------



## Flavour (Jul 29, 2019)

maomao said:


> What does he gain by changing tack? What tack is there to change? All compromises have been exhausted and he's highly unlikely to flip to remain.
> 
> If the EU renegotiate he's a Tory hero forever. If he manages to drag us into No Deal he's a Tory hero forever. If Parliament manage to throw him out while he's pursuing no deal he's a Tory hero forever. No one expects this government to last long. All there is is Brexit.



He'd rather have a deal. He's much more of a tory hero if he can sell the idea of succeeding where may couldn't and bending the EU to his will. That doesn't mean he actually has to bend the EU to his will, and no doubt he won't, but facts don't matter much anymore in his reasoning. It's all just image management. Banking on ignorance and disinterest. 

It's in the interest of the EU to make brexit as painful as possible for the UK. This is a gamble for them too, a pretty big roll of the dice on which the future of the bloc may rest. They need to show the other member states why exiting is not in their interest. They are already doing, have done that through the withdrawal agreement. The alternative, no deal, allows them to make life harder for the UK. Something the EU will do, all the while presenting itself as the smiley reasonable progressive one. Bj knows all this. He's not a tory hero if no deal brexit leads to Cornyn government and/or having to rejoin the EU down the line (obviously on much worse terms than present)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jul 29, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Hypothesis : bj is playing tough guy and refusing meetings with eu because it's a vote winner. Once he's confident enough to win a GE the results of which make a successful VONC in his government much less likely, he changes tack. Does he have time?



Yeah


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 30, 2019)

This how we chill......


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Hypothesis : bj is playing tough guy and refusing meetings with eu because it's a vote winner. Once he's confident enough to win a GE the results of which make a successful VONC in his government much less likely, he changes tack. Does he have time?


He can always gain more time by asking the EU for another extension. He said he won't but somehow I don't think hypocrisy is a a deal breaker (no pun intended) for BoJo.
The peeps now singing his praises will hate him and feel betrayed but I at least see that as a good thing


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 30, 2019)

My hotel has gone up £50 thanks to the pound.

Fuck you Boris


----------



## MickiQ (Jul 30, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> This how we chill......
> 
> 
> View attachment 179160


Welcome Back Ranbay we have missed you


----------



## gosub (Jul 30, 2019)

EU president-elect praises Croatia as bloc’s ‘role model’ - The Washington Post
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...b38b98-b2cd-11e9-acc8-1d847bacca73_story.html


All things considered,  that's a bit tactless.


----------



## Smangus (Jul 31, 2019)

This is very interesting , highly significant, how cunty chops  and the cabinet of horrors reacts will be pretty fun to watch. 

Brexit: mess with Good Friday and we’ll block UK trade deal, US politicians warn


----------



## brogdale (Jul 31, 2019)

Hadn't expected the row back quite this quickly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Hadn't expected the row back quite this quickly.
> 
> View attachment 179270


He's going 'over there is outside the EU but there's a bloody window in the way'


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 31, 2019)




----------



## Santino (Jul 31, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 179274


Does the 92 shirt represent the Maastricht Treaty?


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 31, 2019)

Santino said:


> Does the 92 shirt represent the Maastricht Treaty?



No


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jul 31, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> My hotel has gone up £50 thanks to the pound.
> 
> Fuck you Boris



I'm questioning whether it's worth me doing any work travel this autumn. I usually visit a couple of trade shows, but it's off-my-own back. I'm a thrifty traveller - airbnb opposite a supermarket and take a pack-up with me every day but still... ouchy....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 31, 2019)

Santino said:


> Does the 92 shirt represent the Maastricht Treaty?


days till 'no deal' exit at halloween. or not.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Hadn't expected the row back quite this quickly.
> 
> View attachment 179270



Time's a wasting. He was always going to have to back down sooner or later and complete reversals have never dented his credibility much in the past. Case in point, that time he suddenly became a leaver after previously stating that leaving the EU would be madness.


----------



## strung out (Jul 31, 2019)

This website might be handy over the next few months https://halloweencountdownlive.com/


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 31, 2019)

pinkmonkey said:


> I'm questioning whether it's worth me doing any work travel this autumn. I usually visit a couple of trade shows, but it's off-my-own back. I'm a thrifty traveller - airbnb opposite a supermarket and take a pack-up with me every day but still... ouchy....



I'm questioning whether it's worth me doing any work at all this autumn. We'll all be eating rats and drinking rainwater by christmas anyway.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Jul 31, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm questioning whether it's worth me doing any work at all this autumn. We'll all be eating rats and drinking rainwater by christmas anyway.


I'm thanking my lucky stars that the next big work gig I've got on is for a firm based in Australia. I can avoid eating rats until January


----------



## Ranbay (Jul 31, 2019)

strung out said:


> This website might be handy over the next few months Countdown to Halloween | Halloween Countdown




 Another lost job due to Brexit i see


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm questioning whether it's worth me doing any work at all this autumn. We'll all be eating rats and drinking rainwater by christmas anyway.


Will there be a vegetarian option?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 1, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Will there be a vegetarian option?


yes, starvation


----------



## andysays (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Will there be a vegetarian option?


If it's a choice between eating rats and eating vegetarians..


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yes, starvation


Like the bloke I heard running a BBQ a few years ago responding to a the same question from someone queuing to be served..._is there a vegetarian option?  Yes, yer can fuck off._


----------



## existentialist (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Like the bloke I heard running a BBQ a few years ago responding to a the same question from someone queuing to be served..._is there a vegetarian option?  Yes, yer can fuck off._


Yeah. They think it's very funny, right up until actual people actually fuck off, then actually post fucked-off reviews on Tripadvisor, etc.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 179404


Yep...91 days...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yeah. They think it's very funny, right up until actual people actually fuck off, then actually post fucked-off reviews on Tripadvisor, etc.


Should have said...this was at a small, local cricket club thing. But, even so...yeah


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep...91 days...
> 
> View attachment 179411


disappointed it's all spelt correctly


----------



## kabbes (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Should have said...this was at a small, local cricket club thing. But, even so...yeah


Locally, people just think, “Wow, John’s a prick” and then bitch about him to the other villagers.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Should have said...this was at a small, local cricket club thing. But, even so...yeah



Actually makes it worse given how many cricketers in the UK from a South Asian background and a observe a diet based upon their religion.

Reminds me when I was 15 and first started playing mens cricket in Oxford.  There was a team in the league that was pretty much exclusively made up of Pakistani immigrants or descendants of.  When we played them at home the sandwiches laid on by us all had ham or bacon in them.  I asked one of their players about it and he reckoned it happened at virtually every away game they played and they just brought their own pack lunch.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)

If it ever did...this (apparently) is what the state thinks will happen. 

One slide in a presentation given to Government before Johnson's selection (leaked to Sky News):


----------



## brogdale (Aug 1, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 179460


What's kingfisher?
E2A Philip Hammond's secret Project Kingfisher bailout fund to kick-start economy in event of No Deal | Daily Mail Online


----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 179460



No mention of good honest normal smuggling as a risk. I suppose folks in small boats is what will be needed to keep the food supplies going.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 2, 2019)




----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 2, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Aug 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What's kingfisher?
> E2A Philip Hammond's secret Project Kingfisher bailout fund to kick-start economy in event of No Deal | Daily Mail Online








Quite frankly I think we'll need something a lot stronger.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


>




9 1/2 weeks (66-67 days) from today is 7 or 8 october. you're full of fail.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 2, 2019)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 9 1/2 weeks (66-67 days) from today is 7 or 8 october. you're full of fail.



It’s the kind of shit we’ll be forced to accept with our shiny US trade deal


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 2, 2019)




----------



## Poi E (Aug 2, 2019)

All those freeport zero customs stuff Liz Truss and Johnson are talking about. How come they're happy with a different tax and customs arrangement for that but not N Ireland and Scotland?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2019)

Poi E said:


> All those freeport zero customs stuff Liz Truss and Johnson are talking about. How come they're happy with a different tax and customs arrangement for that but not N Ireland and Scotland?


because they're hypocritical rats


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> because they're hypocritical rats


Got it in one


----------



## brogdale (Aug 2, 2019)

I know it's the Telegraph...but WTAFF


----------



## Libertad (Aug 2, 2019)

Priest holes all round then.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I know it's the Telegraph...but WTAFF
> 
> View attachment 179565


When he hears the word Luther he thinks of vandross and not Martin


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 2, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Priest holes all round then.


I have a team of scholars combing foxe's book of martyrs for a suitably agonising end for the mp for chingford


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I know it's the Telegraph...but WTAFF
> 
> View attachment 179565


How come that cunt isn't dead yet?


----------



## Combustible (Aug 3, 2019)

Which remainer will play the role of Bloody Mary?


----------



## Raheem (Aug 3, 2019)

Combustible said:


> Which remainer will play the role of Bloody Mary?


Diane Abbott, on the tube.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 3, 2019)

Secret report reveals government fear of schools chaos after no-deal Brexit | Brexit | The Guardian

Sounds a bit shit


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 3, 2019)

Ah, gwaan. 





> In a section entitled School Food, it talks of the “risk that communications in this area could spark undue alarm or panic food buying among the general public... Warehousing and stockpiling capacity will be more limited in the pre-Xmas period."


 So doesn't it make sense for Joe Public to help them out by making use of every domestic pantry/kitchen cupboard/space under the bed _before_ any crisis? 

ETA: Every little helps


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 4, 2019)

Snobbish, sneering, laughably wide off the mark and writing off millions of people who have deep, myriad, reasons for identifying with their side.

Remain really has brought the most vile elements of the middle class - which they normally work hard to submerge - floating to the surface. Like a lump of fucking shit:


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Snobbish, sneering, laughably wide off the mark and writing off millions of people who have deep, myriad, reasons for identifying with their side.
> 
> Remain really has brought the most vile elements of the middle class - which they normally work hard to submerge - floating to the surface. Like a lump of fucking shit:
> 
> View attachment 179764




twatty thing to say - but mike harding is old folk singer and lefty from manchester from a solid w/class background. not really typical guardianista fodder.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> twatty thing to say - but mike harding is old folk singer and lefty from manchester from a solid w/class background. not really typical guardianista fodder.



It's a typical Guardianista comment, solid w/class background or no.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> twatty thing to say - but mike harding is old folk singer and lefty from manchester from a solid w/class background. not really typical guardianista fodder.


He's  been a BBC man his whole life since majority.

His best role was to wind up the 'real folk' stalinist and poshoes. Ewan macoll and all that - equally BBC types - by not performing _proper folk music._


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> twatty thing to say - but mike harding is old folk singer and lefty from manchester from a solid w/class background. not really typical guardianista fodder.



He’s come a long way from his background then. 

What does he think posting stuff like this does? What purpose does it serve? Who does it convince? How does it prevent the ever widening cleavage?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 4, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He's  been a BBC man his whole life since majority.
> 
> His best role was to wind up the 'real folk' stalinist and poshoes. Ewan macoll and all that - equally BBC types by not performing _proper folk music._



i have fond memories of him doing daft folks songs on the telly as a kid-my dad was a fan. Not surprised po-faced macoll wasn't.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> He’s come a long way from his background then.
> 
> What does he think posting stuff like this does? What purpose does it serve? Who does it convince? How does it prevent the ever widening cleavage?




no mystery - its  "bloke posts ill thought-out drivel on twitter"


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 4, 2019)

Was Enoch Powell a massive Villa fan or something


----------



## kabbes (Aug 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Was Enoch Powell a massive Villa fan or something


Millwall till he died


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 5, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Aug 6, 2019)

Bogdanor's response to Cummings' claim that it's all too late for Parliament to stop a 'no-deal' exit at halloween.

MPs can still thwart Boris Johnson over no deal. Here’s how | Vernon Bogdanor

If tl/dr - possible, but unlikely to succeed; all aces in Johnson's hand.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 6, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Aug 6, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Millwall till he died


No he feckin g wasn't.


----------



## andysays (Aug 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Bogdanor's response to Cummings' claim that it's all too late for Parliament to stop a 'no-deal' exit at halloween.
> 
> MPs can still thwart Boris Johnson over no deal. Here’s how | Vernon Bogdanor
> 
> If tl/dr - possible, but unlikely to succeed; all aces in Johnson's hand.


Not only are all the aces in his hand, but there would be serious constitutional (and potentially legal) obstacles to overcome.

And all the while Ranbay's clock is ticking...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2019)

107 days


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 6, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Aug 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> Not only are all the aces in his hand, but there would be serious constitutional (and potentially legal) obstacles to overcome.
> 
> And all the while Ranbay's clock is ticking...


Indeed...some of which relate to the other Cameron/Yellow tories legacy of the FTPA.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 107 days



You counting backwards, PM…? You're 20 days out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 6, 2019)

Gaia said:


> You counting backwards, PM…? You're 20 days out.


i don't care if he goes early.


----------



## Ming (Aug 7, 2019)

More fun from the gift that keeps on giving.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 7, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Aug 7, 2019)

. DP


----------



## brogdale (Aug 7, 2019)




----------



## philosophical (Aug 7, 2019)

This is from the Guardian today. It is by somebody living meters on the UK side of the soon to be (hopefully not) controlled border.
I link it as additional information as much as anything.
It is a short read.

Hard Brexiters’ stance on the Irish border is nonsense – I can tell you, I grew up there | Séamas O’Reilly


----------



## Wilf (Aug 7, 2019)

I don't go along with remainiac wailing about locusts and food shortages in the event of no deal Brexit. But it's quite astonishing that we've got to this point with Johnson and the EU glaring at each other, no obvious movement towards any kind of settlement (even though there will some wild running around and shouting mid October). Putting aside the larger political economy this really is the 'failure of politics'. Only pompous fuckers talk about the failure of politics, but in this case it's a full on parliamentary fuck up. 2 different administrations have (so far) completely failed to deliver anything - while the parliamentary majority against no deal has still not managed to assert itself to the point where there won't be a no deal. fucking useless.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I don't go along with remainiac wailing about locusts and food shortages in the event of no deal Brexit. But it's quite astonishing that we've got to this point with Johnson and the EU glaring at each other, no obvious movement towards any kind of settlement (even though there will some wild running around and shouting mid October). Putting aside the larger political economy this really is the 'failure of politics'. Only pompous fuckers talk about the failure of politics, but in this case it's a full on parliamentary fuck up. 2 different administrations have (so far) completely failed to deliver anything - while the parliamentary majority against no deal has still not managed to assert itself to the point where there won't be a no deal. fucking useless.



Some people (not me) might say that actually the fact that this is happening rather than a war is an indication of the success of politics. 

Those people would probably be Remaniac cunts though and I won't have any truck with them. They're wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Some people (not me) might say that actually the fact that this is happening rather than a war is an indication of the success of politics.
> 
> Those people would probably be Remaniac cunts though and I won't have any truck with them. They're wrong.


the fact that this is happening instead of a war is testament to the fact our two men and a dog armed forces are toothless


----------



## ska invita (Aug 7, 2019)

I see it as the success of politics, or in particular the success of Farage and Farage-ians to:

-hold the EU referendum on their agenda
-win that referendum on their agenda
-not let anything but a brexit that reflects their agenda pass
-win the subsequent EU elections based on that agenda
-become PM by proxy, and shape the Tory party in power in his political image
-create powerful international alliances to support his political project

...the final prize is still there to be won, but any turn away from his agenda will hardly see the back of him and it

A massively successful political record, quite possibly the most successful politician of his generation


----------



## Wilf (Aug 7, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I see it as the success of politics, or in particular the success of Farage and Farage-ians to:
> 
> -hold the EU referendum on their agenda
> -win that referendum on their agenda
> ...


Agree with that, though whether farage is cause or effect is the question. One bit of his recent history is certainly interesting. Ukip fucked itself wit a collection of idiots and scandals that were even beyond the pale of populist politics. But still, the creation and success of the Brexit party was impressive - as a kind of pop up party (admittedly with millions from Banks). It kept the tories at it over Brexit and created some of the conditions for Johnson's victory. It may now be well on the way back down to 10% polling or so but remains as a threat for them to keep at it.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Agree with that, though whether farage is cause or effect is the question. One bit of his recent history is certainly interesting. Ukip fucked itself wit a collection of idiots and scandals that were even beyond the pale of populist politics. But still, the creation and success of the Brexit party was impressive - as a kind of pop up party (admittedly with millions from Banks). It kept the tories at it over Brexit and created some of the conditions for Johnson's victory. It may now be well on the way back down to 10% polling or so but remains as a threat for them to keep at it.



Individuals in politics signify wider currents for sure, and it's definitely not just about him on his own... That said he does seem able to do what others can't. The wider point though is that the political current he signifies is proving very successful, and worryingly they're only just getting going


----------



## treelover (Aug 7, 2019)

> *Big Brother star Jade Goody’s racism foretold the forces behind Brexit*
> 
> The seeds of Brexit didn’t begin with a bus, or a Farage, but with a beautiful Indian woman being told by a foul-mouthed reality TV contestant that her “head was so far up her own arse [she] could smell her own s***”. Jade Goody’s behaviour towards the Bollywood star Shilpa Shetty in the 2007 series of _Celebrity Big Brother_, three years after becoming a star on the non-celebrity version of the show, was born out of working-class insecurity, decades’ worth of political abandonment and increasingly poor state school education. It was also ugly, racist and ignorant, leading to an international uproar. But it now reads as oddly prescient.
> 
> Big Brother star Jade Goody’s racism foretold the forces behind Brexit




Well, well,well, probably needs a thread of its own.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 8, 2019)

Thicko Raab said: “It was amazing to hear an American president talk about our country in such warm terms,”

urggh.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 8, 2019)




----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Thicko Raab said: “It was amazing to hear an American president talk about our country in such warm terms,”
> 
> urggh.


I often talk about my food in warm terms as well. He really is a buffoon. Shame he couldnb't talk about the british workforce in such warm terms.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 8, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I see it as the success of politics, or in particular the success of Farage and Farage-ians to:
> 
> -hold the EU referendum on their agenda
> -win that referendum on their agenda
> ...



Still think that the vast majority of his success is down to the dysfunction of others rather than anything of his own doing. The Tory fragmentation over Brexit has been feeding him for years. Access to money, access to Tory friendly media (which is most of it), an illusion of significance generated by Cameron and May's fear of him. He does well only because others do so badly - be it as politicians or journalists. The fact that he gets fucked over every time he tries to become an MP shows a more real view of his abilities. He's a prop for Tory infighting who got out of their control. If/when Leave happens he'll be done and the Patriotic R/W drivel he trades in will go back to being the standard fodder of the Conservatives, as it always was.


----------



## andysays (Aug 8, 2019)

treelover said:


> Well, well,well, probably needs a thread of its own.


Don't we already have a thread about shit articles in the Independent?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Don't we already have a thread about shit articles in the Independent?


the independent


----------



## binka (Aug 8, 2019)

I am enjoying all the articles about whether queen can save the day or not. There's panic slowly starting to set in and no one has a clue who can do what. Maybe everyone will realise monarchy and an unwritten constitution isn't all its cracked up to be


----------



## hash tag (Aug 8, 2019)

This is part of an email I have just received 
*"2,250 people in Battersea could lose their jobs if we end up with a no-deal Brexit.* [1] That could mean our families, friends, even us - being put out of work, all because Boris Johnson is willing to take the risk of a disastrous no-deal Brexit. [2]

This is scary. *But MPs have the power to stop this.* And your MP, Marsha De Cordova, will be just as worried as us about the possibility of people losing their jobs in Battersea. *Hearing personal messages from constituents like you could convince them to do everything in their power to stop a no-deal Brexit.

So will you email your MP right now telling them the news - that 2,250 people could be put out of work in Battersea if there’s a no-deal Brexit- and ask them to do everything they can to stop it?"

Whats to be done?*


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2019)

hash tag said:


> This is part of an email I have just received
> *"2,250 people in Battersea could lose their jobs if we end up with a no-deal Brexit.* [1] That could mean our families, friends, even us - being put out of work, all because Boris Johnson is willing to take the risk of a disastrous no-deal Brexit. [2]
> 
> This is scary. *But MPs have the power to stop this.* And your MP, Marsha De Cordova, will be just as worried as us about the possibility of people losing their jobs in Battersea. *Hearing personal messages from constituents like you could convince them to do everything in their power to stop a no-deal Brexit.
> ...


yet so much of what we're hearing contradicts this as it is at best unclear whether mps have the power to stop the mad rush to a departure without a deal


----------



## hash tag (Aug 8, 2019)

Sadly and worringly I feel the debate has moved on from leave or remain to deal or no deal


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 8, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 180156


As I said last year


Pickman's model said:


> noel edmonds has been roped in. he will be enobled and will depart forthwith for brussels as britain's new brexit secretary. no one in the land knows more about deals and indeed no deals than he.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 8, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Sadly and worringly I feel the debate has moved on from leave or remain to deal or no deal


Patience grasshopper; when they get back from their recess hols they'll soon realise that the choice is between no-deal brexit and revoke/extend.


----------



## andysays (Aug 8, 2019)

Write your own punchline...

Brexit: Boris Johnson calls for 'common sense' compromise


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> Write your own punchline...
> 
> Brexit: Boris Johnson calls for 'common sense' compromise


Jesus he's channeling auld mcririck


----------



## kebabking (Aug 8, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Sadly and worringly I feel the debate has moved on from leave or remain to deal or no deal



The debate over leave or remain ended when the referendum was held - and the side I voted for lost - if remainy media and MP's had engaged with fighting the next battle rather than trying to fight one that had already been lost, it would be astonishingly unlikely that 'no deal' would be on the cards.


----------



## Supine (Aug 8, 2019)

kebabking said:


> if remainy media and MP's had engaged with fighting the next battle rather than trying to fight one that had already been lost, it would be astonishingly unlikely that 'no deal' would be on the cards.



I don't agree with that. The red line on leaving the customs union is fundamentally incompatible with the Irish border situation. The backstop would have been needed and hated regardless of anyone being a remainer.


----------



## kebabking (Aug 8, 2019)

Supine said:


> I don't agree with that. The red line on leaving the customs union is fundamentally incompatible with the Irish border situation. The backstop would have been needed and hated regardless of anyone being a remainer.



The red lines - which are the conditions which determine the nature of a land border with the EU - were set by a minority government, and of the 640+ MP's who get to vote, only about 250 or so are people who would quite like a no deal, or who liked the red lines.

The other 400 were split between those who reluctantly accepted the red lines, but would prefer a closer trading arrangement, and those who thought that if they were condisending enough, time would start go backwards.

If the arch remainers had accepted reality, however unsatisfactory, and cracked on with the politics of managing brexit, then the reluctant agreeers would have felt less hemmed in to accepting May's red lines.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 9, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Aug 9, 2019)

Michael Gove’s big idea: why not keep banks closed day after Brexit

Can't remember if I posted it hear, but I certainly remember thinking and saying that in the past


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 9, 2019)

This is not filling me with confidence tbh
I don't think BoJo is even capable of grasping the concept that the EU simply won't do what he wants


----------



## tommers (Aug 9, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> This is not filling me with confidence tbh
> I don't think BoJo is even capable of grasping the concept that the EU simply won't do what he wants


Bloody Remoaners / remainiacs.


----------



## tommers (Aug 9, 2019)

Interesting that people who want to stay in the EU are Remoaners or Remainiacs. But people who want to leave are dashing Brexiteers.

Still. I'm sure this is just an accident of language and is absolutely fine.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> Michael Gove’s big idea: why not keep banks closed day after Brexit
> 
> Can't remember if I posted it hear, but I certainly remember thinking and saying that in the past



Banks can't crash if banks are closed.....


----------



## existentialist (Aug 9, 2019)

tommers said:


> Interesting that people who want to stay in the EU are Remoaners or Remainiacs. But people who want to leave are dashing Brexiteers.
> 
> Still. I'm sure this is just an accident of language and is absolutely fine.


I quite like "remainiacs" - it's pejorative, without the false accusation that pointing out the manifest deficiencies in the brexiteers' arguments is "moaning".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I quite like "remainiacs" - it's pejorative, without the false accusation that pointing out the manifest deficiencies in the brexiteers' arguments is "moaning".



Yeah I like it, for me it distinguishes between people who voted remain and arent happy about the result and people who are evangelically pro-EU beyond all rhyme and reason.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 9, 2019)

have to say - going back to the musings in the OP - is that one thing that hasn't really happened is any significant change in public opinion wrt brexit.
Even with no deal looking into view and the promises of a "great deal", "easiest in history" etc failing to become reality -   - there is still a solid bloc of support for brexit. There may well be less support than there was - but there has been no fundamental shift.


----------



## Ming (Aug 10, 2019)

Wow! Never saw that coming.
Boris Johnson’s donor Crispin Odey eyes Brexit jackpot with £300m bet against British firms


----------



## teqniq (Aug 10, 2019)

another worthless scumbag.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 10, 2019)

Ming said:


> Wow! Never saw that coming.
> Boris Johnson’s donor Crispin Odey eyes Brexit jackpot with £300m bet against British firms


Id expect theres a lot of shorting been going on in general
Easy pickings out there if you're in the loop - which no doubt many are


----------



## Ming (Aug 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Id expect theres a lot of shorting been going on in general
> Easy pickings out there if you're in the loop - which no doubt many are


That’s why they’re so enthusiastic about getting a no-deal. Makes perfect sense if you’re a rich disaster capitalist. They’ll make billions and reorder the society. It’s a big fucking deal this. 
It only doesn’t make sense if you run it through the lens of any kind of conventional morality.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 10, 2019)

Ming said:


> That’s why they’re so enthusiastic about getting a no-deal. Makes perfect sense if you’re a rich disaster capitalist. They’ll make billions and reorder the society. It’s a big fucking deal this.
> It only doesn’t make sense if you run it through the lens of any kind of conventional morality.


Possibly relevant to this - someone vaguely in the know was telling me a theory about Farage and his mates wanting to turn the City back to what it was in his day (the 80s/90s) - I forget all the details now as i was a few pints in, something to do with a culture / class make up change amongst bankers and how Brexit helps them achieve that. God knows...sounded sort of convincing at the time


----------



## Ming (Aug 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Possibly relevant to this - someone vaguely in the know was telling me a theory about Farage and his mates wanting to turn the City back to what it was in his day (the 80s/90s) - I forget all the details now as i was a few pints in, something to do with a culture / class make up change amongst bankers and how Brexit helps them achieve that. God knows...sounded sort of convincing at the time


Well, i get a lot of shit for saying this but i think this has been the agenda all along. The likely outcomes are what i’m looking at. And they’re not good for anyone but the currently rising international right and financiers looking to make a fast buck. And i’d love to be proved wrong.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Possibly relevant to this - someone vaguely in the know was telling me a theory about Farage and his mates wanting to turn the City back to what it was in his day (the 80s/90s) - I forget all the details now as i was a few pints in, something to do with a culture / class make up change amongst bankers and how Brexit helps them achieve that. God knows...sounded sort of convincing at the time



Come on fella, you’re (eta) WAY better than that crap.


----------



## toblerone3 (Aug 10, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> have to say - going back to the musings in the OP - is that one thing that hasn't really happened is any significant change in public opinion wrt brexit.
> Even with no deal looking into view and the promises of a "great deal", "easiest in history" etc failing to become reality -   - there is still a solid bloc of support for brexit. There may well be less support than there was - but there has been no fundamental shift.



This is not true and nearly all the polls bear out my opinion on this.


----------



## belboid (Aug 10, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> This is not true and nearly all the polls bear out my opinion on this.


The Brecon and Radnor poll didn't. The liberal might have won, but it was still a majority of people who voted for hard brexit, with a share down a mere 1%.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 10, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> This is not true and nearly all the polls bear out my opinion on this.



please link to polls showing a _fundamental_ shift in public opinion. Like a 10% gap in favour of remain.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> The Brecon and Radnor poll didn't. The liberal might have won, but it was still a majority of people who voted for hard brexit, with a share down a mere 1%.



And that is with the Tory being the same disgraced fucker who’s shenanigans has caused the election in the first place...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 10, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> This is not true and nearly all the polls bear out my opinion on this.


Perhaps you could list these polls to put the matter to bed


----------



## brogdale (Aug 10, 2019)

This is Britain Elects L/R tracker of polling.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2019)

^^For the avoidance of doubt, yellow is remain and teal is Brexit.

There’s a trend but it’s all quite within the margin of error, really.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2019)

*Brexit trackers*

“Do you approve or disapprove of the way in which the Government is handling the Brexit negotiations?”

Pollster: ORB International



*Fieldwork* *Approve* *Disapprove* *NET*
06 May 2019 8 92 Disapprove +84
06 Apr 2019 11 89 Disapprove +78
03 Mar 2019 17 83 Disapprove +66
03 Feb 2019 20 80 Disapprove +60
06 Jan 2019 25 75 Disapprove +50
09 Dec 2018 26 74 Disapprove +48
04 Nov 2018 27 73 Disapprove +46
07 Oct 2018 31 69 Disapprove +38
09 Sep 2018 24 76 Disapprove +52
05 Aug 2018 24 76 Disapprove +52


----------



## Supine (Aug 11, 2019)

kabbes said:


> ^^For the avoidance of doubt, yellow is remain and teal is Brexit.
> 
> There’s a trend but it’s all quite within the margin of error, really.



It shows it goes outside the margin of error for most of this year.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> Interesting that people who want to stay in the EU are Remoaners or Remainiacs. But people who want to leave are dashing Brexiteers.
> 
> Still. I'm sure this is just an accident of language and is absolutely fine.



Seems like "Brexit" wasn't the easiest word to adapt into an insult - maybe because it was already the product of mixing "Greece" and "exit" than adapting it for Britain. "Brexitards" was one I heard but it thankfully never caught on.


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 11, 2019)

Brenda isn't happy. Who's been spilling the beans and why?



> *She was speaking in 2016 but her feelings have only intensified, sources said*




Queen tells aides of her 'disappointment in the current political class' | Daily Mail Online


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> It shows it goes outside the margin of error for most of this year.


Not any more though.  And although it visually appears a strong movement, the scale is really zoomed in — it never actually goes beyond about 55/45.  That’s really tight even at the peak.  Basically, it’s all still as 50/50 as it ever was.


----------



## Supine (Aug 11, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not any more though.  And although it visually appears a strong movement, the scale is really zoomed in — it never actually goes beyond about 55/45.  That’s really tight even at the peak.  Basically, it’s all still as 50/50 as it ever was.



Any idea what gave that bounce after may? Something turned the tables after a steady move towards remain


----------



## kabbes (Aug 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> Any idea what gave that bounce after may? Something turned the tables after a steady move towards remain


I’m not convinced it’s not all just noise.  Polls are not independent from each other, so there is autoregression.  That can give the appearance of trends where no trend actually exists.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 11, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Come on fella, you’re (eta) WAY better than that crap.


Tbf the guy is a good journalist, it sounded fact based. shouldn't have posted it as I can barely remember what was said! But my hate of Nigel overrode it


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 11, 2019)




----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 11, 2019)

Beef and coffee are nailed on. But they forgot prosseco.


----------



## belboid (Aug 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Beef and coffee are nailed on. But they forgot prosseco.


Not sure how much of our coffee comes from the EU. I fear for our jamon iberico tho


----------



## Flavour (Aug 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> Not sure how much of our coffee comes from the EU. I fear for our jamon iberico tho



the coffee beans themselves don't come the EU of course but many of the roasting and processing companies that package the stuff you find in UK shops (e.g. Lavazza) are based in Germany and Italy.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 11, 2019)

A great deal of coffee is through a handful of holding companies in Switzerland IIRC - not sure how that effects things and I dont have my thinking head or my notes anywhere


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 11, 2019)

Just drink tea.


----------



## tommers (Aug 11, 2019)

Sooner we're out the better. Can't wait till our cruel European overlords stop torturing us with foreign muck like coffee and medicine.

Bring back leeches I say! Bleed the sickness out!

We got through the Black Death with only a 60% death rate. This won't be much worse.

Bit of black death spirit will see us through, don't worry


----------



## Ming (Aug 11, 2019)

Fun.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just drink tea.



i wonder how much of the tea drunk in the UK is flown straight in from the producer countries and how much transits through the EU on its way to your mug


----------



## Ming (Aug 11, 2019)

Are there still any people who still think this shit show will increase the possibility of a radical socialist utopia? Because it's not going to. Quite the opposite.


----------



## belboid (Aug 11, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i wonder how much of the tea drunk in the UK is flown straight in from the producer countries and how much transits through the EU on its way to your mug


Tea does come pretty much straight here. PG Tips blends in Manchester, Yorkshire Tea in Harrogate.  Other teas are... pointless.


----------



## FiFi (Aug 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> Tea does come pretty much straight here. PG Tips blends in Manchester, Yorkshire Tea in Harrogate.  Other teas are... pointless.


Theres one upside of brexit. I've learned so much about supply chains and where my food and other goods come from.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 11, 2019)

Ming said:


> Fun.


This is the third ~1 hr vid you've posted without comment in the last couple of weeks.
If you are too lazy to even give a brief review of what these videos contain, who they are by then don't post them. It's against the rules for a reason. Jazz got shit when he did this crap and rightly so.

In this case you've posted a video by a LibDem austerity supporting wanker so what useful point do you think this cunt is making?


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> Tea does come pretty much straight here. PG Tips blends in Manchester, Yorkshire Tea in Harrogate.  Other teas are... pointless.


Ahmad's of London?


----------



## belboid (Aug 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Ahmad's of London?


moved here after the Iranian revolution.


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 11, 2019)

Decent tea though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 11, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Decent tea though.



All proper tea is theft.


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 11, 2019)

Bugger. Walked right into that one.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> Tea does come pretty much straight here. PG Tips blends in Manchester, Yorkshire Tea in Harrogate.  Other teas are... pointless.


Maybe I'd better order *two* years' supply of Oolong and Keemun this week ...
Though my supplier is actually based in Yorkshire.


----------



## gentlegreen (Aug 11, 2019)

Ming said:


> Wow! Never saw that coming.
> Boris Johnson’s donor Crispin Odey eyes Brexit jackpot with £300m bet against British firms



Can you tell what it is yet ?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 11, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Though my supplier is actually based in Yorkshire.



they might declare independence


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 11, 2019)

Tbf I'm not sure leaving iran after the revolution should be a black mark, they did kill all the communists and that


----------



## belboid (Aug 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Tbf I'm not sure leaving iran after the revolution should be a black mark, they did kill all the communists and that


I don't know, but I suspect they didn't bring any of their workforce with them so to avoid such a fate.


----------



## andysays (Aug 11, 2019)

Funnily enough, there was a piece on tonight's Countryfile about growing tea in Scotland


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 11, 2019)

Don’t know if this has been shared yet, but this is a really important statement and long overdue:

Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Don’t know if this has been shared yet, but this is a really important statement and long overdue:
> 
> Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement


Some names on that. One of them is a complete bellend who should be chucked on an empty island (s***smith) and loads of (a particular strand of) corbyn/labour left types. Interesting to see RG of CPB and one welsh republican on there. At least one notable formerly of this parish


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 11, 2019)

Ming said:


> Are there still any people who still think this shit show will increase the possibility of a radical socialist utopia? Because it's not going to. Quite the opposite.


Did anyone actually claim or expect voting leave would lead to a radical socialist utopia?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Some names on that. One of them is a complete bellend who should be chucked on an empty island (s***smith) and loads of (a particular strand of) corbyn/labour left types. Interesting to see RG of CPB and one welsh republican on there. At least one notable formerly of this parish



Yeah, accepted. But just because bellends like the statement doesn’t mean it isn’t a necessary and important one


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yeah, accepted. But just because bellends like the statement doesn’t mean it isn’t a necessary and important one


Ah I was just being a trainspotter


----------



## Poi E (Aug 11, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> they might declare independence



Quite a county.


----------



## Ming (Aug 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Did anyone actually claim or expect voting leave would lead to a radical socialist utopia?


I have seen it expressed that the EU is a neo-liberal organization (which it is) and we should leave it for that reason. It did fuck Greece pretty well after 2008 (but Greece did cook the books to join with the help of Goldman Sachs). I was being slightly facetious.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 12, 2019)

i think the weakness of the lexit argument has always been that leaving the neo-liberal EU does not mean leaving neoliberalism -  and certainly not under a tory  government.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 12, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Did anyone actually claim or expect voting leave would lead to a radical socialist utopia?


See the post two above yours


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> See the post two above yours


I meant among urbz


----------



## Ming (Aug 12, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I meant among urbz


Yep.


----------



## Ming (Aug 12, 2019)

Not the socialist utopia bit (that was me).
ETA: The implication is if we leave the EU it'll be more likely that socialist politics will rise because we won't be under the heel of a neo-liberal organisation. Yes i am back peddling a bit. But i did say i was being slightly facetious.


----------



## Ming (Aug 12, 2019)

It's going to be so cool.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

Caroline Lucas calls for emergency female cabinet to block no-deal Brexit



> The Green MP, Caroline Lucas, has thrown down the gauntlet to 10 high-profile female politicians over blocking a no-deal Brexit, proposing a cabinet of national unity including Labour’s Emily Thornberry, the Liberal Democrat leader, Jo Swinson, and the former Conservative cabinet minister Justine Greening to seek legislation for a fresh referendum.
> 
> In an extraordinary proposal that will be viewed with scepticism by rival parties, Lucas offered to broker a deal with female MPs from all the main political parties in Westminster, as well as the SNP’s leader, Nicola Sturgeon.



I heard her name come up a couple of times, last week, as a potential leader of a national unity government, as someone more likely to get cross party support than Corbyn, she has clearly decided to give it a go. Personally I can't see her getting the total support from Labour that she would need, but she has noting to lose in trying.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> See the post two above yours


That statement doesn't make any mention of a socialist utopia, it doesn't even argue that leaving the EU _will_ bring about a change. It is a statement of intent arguing that the left need to develop a movement to help advance the interests of the working class, and that such a movement needs to be based around leaving the EU.


----------



## Plumdaff (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Caroline Lucas calls for emergency female cabinet to block no-deal Brexit
> 
> 
> 
> I heard her name come up a couple of times, last week, as a potential leader of a national unity government, as someone more likely to get cross party support than Corbyn, she has clearly decided to give it a go. Personally I can't see her getting the total support from Labour that she would need, but she has noting to lose in trying.



It's a clueless, embarrassing attempt that looks more like a tactic to exclude Corbyn supporters than anything else. Are we really meant to fall for the piss poor 'it's women austerity fans therefore it's progressive' line. Really? 
If she's genuinely reaching out to the leadership of the parties why is she writing to Cooper rather than Abbott, who genuinely is in the Labour leadership? Why is fucking Soubry involved, I've got more national political clout than her atm. Why didn't these useless fuckers actually turn up for the votes that could have prevented no deal? Oh, preventing fairly weak social democracy was more important. Fuck Lucas. Fuck the Greens.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 12, 2019)

Democracy in 2019 

Is Lucas proposing she's PM in this gov?


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> It's a clueless, embarrassing attempt that looks more like a tactic to exclude Corbyn supporters than anything else. Are we really meant to fall for the piss poor 'it's women austerity fans therefore it's progressive' line. Really?
> If she's genuinely reaching out to the leadership of the parties why is she writing to Cooper rather than Abbott, who genuinely is in the Labour leadership? Why is fucking Soubry involved, I've got more national political clout than her atm. Why didn't these useless fuckers actually turn up for the votes that could have prevented no deal? Oh, preventing fairly weak social democracy was more important. Fuck Lucas. Fuck the Greens.


She did write to Thornbridge, who is also in the leadership.  Didn't manage to write to a single BME person though, maybe they can't 'reach out to those they disagree with and cooperate to find solutions'


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 12, 2019)




----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

Leave in my book does not mean stay joined.
Not much time left to get the barbed wire, watchtowers, and machine gun emplacements sorted for the land border in Ireland.
Lexit, Brexit, Schmexit, all those who voted leave need to get on with it quickly in Ireland, or they will end up moaning even more about their various shades of hatred.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Not much time left to get the barbed wire, watchtowers, and machine gun emplacements sorted for the land border in Ireland.



Get a grip.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Get a grip.



How does leave manifest itself on the soon to be land border between the UK and the EU on the island of Ireland?
Have you got any ideas, or do you subscribe to the Boris Johnson (non) solution of 'technology'?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 12, 2019)

Aren't you nutters supposed to say _boarders _anyway?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> How does leave manifest itself on the soon to be land border between the UK and the EU on the island of Ireland?
> Have you got any ideas, or do you subscribe to the Boris Johnson (non) solution of 'technology'?



Certainly not with 'watchtowers, and machine gun emplacements'.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 12, 2019)

I diagnose massive anti-irish projection.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Certainly not with 'watchtowers, and machine gun emplacements'.



OK.
I assume from that you are full square behind Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
If you are not, can you outline how 'leave' will not mean 'stay joined'?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Certainly not with 'watchtowers, and machine gun emplacements'.


----------



## andysays (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Caroline Lucas calls for emergency female cabinet to block no-deal Brexit
> 
> 
> 
> I heard her name come up a couple of times, last week, as a potential leader of a national unity government, as someone more likely to get cross party support than Corbyn, she has clearly decided to give it a go. Personally I can't see her getting the total support from Labour that she would need, but she has noting to lose in trying.


When I saw that earlier, I was tempted to post on the 'why the Greens are shit' thread


----------



## Mr. Jelly (Aug 12, 2019)

white, privately educated, successful, upper middle class MP suggests other white, successful, middle class MP's finally be given a voice.


----------



## emanymton (Aug 12, 2019)

andysays said:


> When I saw that earlier, I was tempted to post on the 'why the Greens are shit' thread


To be fair it should go on the why the green party is shit thread.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> How does leave manifest itself on the soon to be land border between the UK and the EU on the island of Ireland?
> Have you got any ideas, or do you subscribe to the Boris Johnson (non) solution of 'technology'?


Hundreds of posts ago, when you joined urban, you started demanding that leave voters should come up with precise borders/customs arrangements in Ireland. It was pointed out that nobody here was responsible for the referendum or what follows in terms of policy. You don't really get 'politics' do you? It's not something that 'we' do - _they_ do it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Hundreds of posts ago, when you joined urban, you started demanding that leave voters should come up with precise borders/customs arrangements in Ireland. It was pointed out that nobody here was responsible for the referendum or what follows in terms of policy. You don't really get 'politics' do you? It's not something that 'we' do - _they_ do it.



I believe those who voted leave are totally responsible for sorting the consequences of their actions.
It certainly isn't down to those who voted remain.
If you believe that means I don't get 'politics' you're wrong if that is a question and also wrong if that is a statement.
My views are no less and no more valid than yours.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I believe those who voted leave are totally responsible for sorting the consequences of their actions.



No it's not, you moron.


----------



## xenon (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I believe those who voted leave are totally responsible for sorting the consequences of their actions.
> It certainly isn't down to those who voted remain.
> If you believe that means I don't get 'politics' you're wrong if that is a question and also wrong if that is a statement.
> My views are no less and no more valid than yours.



As a remain voter, it’s time you gave us your plans to deal with the migrant crisis’.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No it's not, you moron.



My beliefs are my beliefs.
You are at liberty to be abusive as you are indeed being, in my opinion your rush to abuse undermines the point you are failing to make.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

xenon said:


> As a remain voter, it’s time you gave us your plans to deal with the migrant crisis’.



As a remain voter I lost.
So it is not down to me to give you any plans.
If I had the power I would abandon the notion of borders.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> As a remain voter I lost.
> So it is not down to me to give you any plans.
> If I had the power I would abandon the notion of borders.


If I ruled the world there'd be no one in it


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> As a remain voter I lost.
> So it is not down to me to give you any plans.


That “so” suggests you think the latter is a logical consequence of the former. It is not.

The truth of the matter is that it isn’t up to voters, however they voted, to come up with plans. Even if they did, their best chance of being heard is to lodge a petition, which would be debated in parliament if it reached the requisite threshold, and then disregarded. 

Voters vote. Their ‘plans’ are irrelevant to the government.


----------



## xenon (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> As a remain voter I lost.
> So it is not down to me to give you any plans.
> If I had the power I would abandon the notion of borders.



Weak. Didn’t vote leave myself, imagine for a moment I did. Taking your lead... I would make the border on the island of Ireland vanish.


----------



## alex_ (Aug 12, 2019)

xenon said:


> As a remain voter, it’s time you gave us your plans to deal with the migrant crisis’.



Pretty sure this wasn’t caused by the brexit vote.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> My beliefs are my beliefs.
> You are at liberty to be abusive as you are indeed being, in my opinion your rush to abuse undermines the point you are failing to make.



I am not trying to make a point, I am just taking the piss out of you, as a one trick pony, and complete boring twat.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 12, 2019)

If it is too good to be true with politicians and politics in this country, then it always is e.g. party leaders offering something in the way of leadership in the interim and/or Labour being elected into govt. By that logic, fwiw, I'm thinking a hasty last minute delay of a few months to allow a general election, which the Tories will win. So more balls-ups, shitness and disappointment.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am not trying to make a point, I am just taking the piss out of you, as a one trick pony, and complete boring twat.



In that case as far as you're concerned


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That “so” suggests you think the latter is a logical consequence of the former. It is not.
> 
> The truth of the matter is that it isn’t up to voters, however they voted, to come up with plans. Even if they did, their best chance of being heard is to lodge a petition, which would be debated in parliament if it reached the requisite threshold, and then disregarded.
> 
> Voters vote. Their ‘plans’ are irrelevant to the government.


No.
The 'so' suggests it is me replying to xenon.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> No.
> The 'so' suggests it is me replying to xenon.


OK. But do you seem to repeatedly say it is up to _voters_ to come up with plans. In my view, that’s not how it works in practice.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> OK. But do you seem to repeatedly say it is up to _voters_ to come up with plans. In my view, that’s not how it works in practice.



I take your point about how things seem to work in practice.
However my brexit obsession is exactly how things will work 'in practice' on the border.
In a lot of cases when people vote for stuff in manifestos or in promises made in other forms it has an open ended feel, 'we will end rough sleeping, and the need for food banks' is something I would vote for and hope things move in a positive direction over time.
But this brexit thing does not have fuzzy edges as far as I can see. In or out. Over here and over there. End of. This is taking into account how often a can gets kicked down the road.
Something pretty specific must come about in practice by a particular time, in this case the 31st October so we're led to believe.
Nothing generalised or fuzzy there, like there might be in voting for any kind of idealistic aspiration.

Which is why if you voted for it and knew what you were doing you should sort it.

Unless I suppose you (not actually _you_) voted brexit and are prepared to say you didn't have a clue, if enough people did that wouldn't it mean all bets are off?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I take your point about how things seem to work in practice.
> However my brexit obsession is exactly how things will work 'in practice' on the border.
> In a lot of cases when people vote for stuff in manifestos or in promises made in other forms it has an open ended feel, 'we will end rough sleeping, and the need for food banks' is something I would vote for and hope things move in a positive direction over time.
> But this brexit thing does not have fuzzy edges as far as I can see. In or out. Over here and over there. End of. This is taking into account how often a can gets kicked down the road.
> ...


It's very simple, it won't work on the border


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 12, 2019)

BTW, where's Corbyn? 

He seems to have gone AWOL.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I take your point about how things seem to work in practice.
> However my brexit obsession is exactly how things will work 'in practice' on the border.
> In a lot of cases when people vote for stuff in manifestos or in promises made in other forms it has an open ended feel, 'we will end rough sleeping, and the need for food banks' is something I would vote for and hope things move in a positive direction over time.
> But this brexit thing does not have fuzzy edges as far as I can see. In or out. Over here and over there. End of. This is taking into account how often a can gets kicked down the road.
> ...


I understand that you’re frustrated by the continued lack of concrete progress on the border between NI and the Republic. But I don’t follow why you think it is up to Leave voters to sort this (whereas you say vague manifesto promises you might vote for aren’t up to you to sort). 

I disagree. It is not up to voters.

It is up to Johnson to sort the border issue. God save us every one.


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I take your point about how things seem to work in practice.
> However my brexit obsession is exactly how things will work 'in practice' on the border.
> In a lot of cases when people vote for stuff in manifestos or in promises made in other forms it has an open ended feel, 'we will end rough sleeping, and the need for food banks' is something I would vote for and hope things move in a positive direction over time.
> But this brexit thing does not have fuzzy edges as far as I can see. In or out. Over here and over there. End of. This is taking into account how often a can gets kicked down the road.
> ...


Oddly enough, you make no sense. If 'ending rough sleeping' is 'fuzzy' leaving the EU is even more so.  If there are still rough sleepers, then you haven't ended rough sleeping. It's pretty straight forward.  And if the last three years have taught nothing else, they should have shown quite clearly that leaving the EU is fuzzy as hell too.


----------



## Supine (Aug 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> BTW, where's Corbyn?
> 
> He seems to have gone AWOL.



Not grouse hunting apparently


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

belboid said:


> Oddly enough, you make no sense. If 'ending rough sleeping' is 'fuzzy' leaving the EU is even more so.  If there are still rough sleepers, then you haven't ended rough sleeping. It's pretty straight forward.  And if the last three years have taught nothing else, they should have shown quite clearly that leaving the EU is fuzzy as hell too.



"Ending rough sleeping' is more fuzzy than saying 'A total end to all rough sleeping by Christmas Day'.


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> "Ending rough sleeping' is more fuzzy than saying 'A total end to all rough sleeping by Christmas Day'.


But they do put dates in - end of this parliament is the commonest phrase. The word total is tautologous. All your doing is showing how you can quibble about anything, which blatantly obviously  fits with ‘leaving the eu’


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I understand that you’re frustrated by the continued lack of concrete progress on the border between NI and the Republic. But I don’t follow why you think it is up to Leave voters to sort this (whereas you say vague manifesto promises you might vote for aren’t up to you to sort).
> 
> I disagree. It is not up to voters.
> 
> It is up to Johnson to sort the border issue. God save us every one.



God save us indeed. From him, but also from anybody who might take any action to empower him in any way.
It seemed to me that he was empowered from people of the left as well as the right, some would be called lexiters, and he could be empowered yet again by people who believe in fairy tales more than thinking about practical consequences.
I say leave voters should sort the mess because I don't believe remain voters need have any part of it, but it is with trepidation because I am concerned that the solution that leave voters must inevitably come to is to risk a return to conflict in Ireland and elsewhere.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

belboid said:


> But they do put dates in - end of this parliament is the commonest phrase. The word total is tautologous. All your doing is showing how you can quibble about anything, which blatantly obviously  fits with ‘leaving the eu’



There doesn't seem to me to be much quibble room in this question.


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> God save us indeed. From him, but also from anybody who might take any action to empower him in any way.
> It seemed to me that he was empowered from people of the left as well as the right, some would be called lexiters, and he could be empowered yet again by people who believe in fairy tales more than thinking about practical consequences.
> I say leave voters should sort the mess because I don't believe remain voters need have any part of it, but it is with trepidation because I am concerned that the solution that leave voters must inevitably come to is to risk a return to conflict in Ireland and elsewhere.


‘These people are idiotic scum, so I’ll leave them to sort it out’

Seems to be a fair précis of your argument


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There doesn't seem to me to be much quibble room in this question.


Dear god, you really do know how to contradict yourself don’t you?

Not even any date on that. Let alone mention of CU etc etc etc


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

belboid said:


> ‘These people are idiotic scum, so I’ll leave them to sort it out’
> 
> Seems to be a fair précis of your argument



I didn't use the term 'scum' or 'idiotic' for that matter.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 12, 2019)

belboid said:


> Dear god, you really do know how to contradict yourself don’t you?
> 
> Not even any date on that. Let alone mention of CU etc etc etc



Are you saying the question on the ballot paper was 'fuzzy' after all, and I can't see that?


----------



## Supine (Aug 12, 2019)

There will be a border in Ireland. Philosophical - just get used to the idea. It'll be a blame game for who and when, but it'll happen if brexit is implemented without without a deal or customs union. 

The same may well happen with Scotland, but that's not being discussed yet.


----------



## belboid (Aug 12, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Are you saying the question on the ballot paper was 'fuzzy' after all, and I can't see that?


Using the terms in the example of fuzzy you gave before, yes, it very clearly is. For the reasons I’ve already said.


----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> If I ruled the world there'd be no one in it


Me too. I’d go to Blackpool pleasure beach and go on all the rides (no queues!). And i’d put the rides on automatic (before anyone points that out). I can handle the candy floss myself.


----------



## MrCurry (Aug 13, 2019)

This seems portentous and pretty worrying tbh

UK 'first in line' for US trade deal, says Bolton

Am I misreading it or is there a strong suggestion that the UK is heading full steam towards becoming America’s bitch, more fully and completely than ever before?  Can you imagine the danger to UK foreign relations in a post no-deal Brexit scenario with Trump’s hands wrapped firmly around Boris’s balls, giving a quick sharp squeeze each time he wants the Uk to dance to his demented tune?  So much for Brexit giving the UK control of its own destiny.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I say leave voters should sort the mess


How?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> How?


Leaving no doubt and leaving the country to the likes of philosophical


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> This seems portentous and pretty worrying tbh
> 
> UK 'first in line' for US trade deal, says Bolton
> 
> Am I misreading it or is there a strong suggestion that the UK is heading full steam towards becoming America’s bitch, more fully and completely than ever before?  Can you imagine the danger to UK foreign relations in a post no-deal Brexit scenario with Trump’s hands wrapped firmly around Boris’s balls, giving a quick sharp squeeze each time he wants the Uk to dance to his demented tune?  So much for Brexit giving the UK control of its own destiny.


People in Congress have already said no trade deal if gfa fucked with. And no deal fucks with gfa. A trade deal is not in the gift of trump


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Leaving no doubt and leaving the country to the likes of philosophical


No, Phil voted Remain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, Phil voted Remain.


I think he'd like all the Leavers to depart the country forthwith


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think he'd like all the Leavers to depart the country forthwith


And sort the NI border by Skype.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> And sort the NI border by Skype.


He couldn't sort out his books by author so sorting out the border by Skype is something of a big ask


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 13, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 180687


we already have a sufficiency of muppets


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> My beliefs are my beliefs.


ah! you ARE a fan of the mayism


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> People in Congress have already said no trade deal if gfa fucked with. And no deal fucks with gfa. A trade deal is not in the gift of trump



It'll take until well beyond Trump's tenure to make any kind of deal anyways.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> How?



That is their problem.
However in order to be a bit helpful I would advise them to stop using the term 'backstop' and use the term Good Friday Agreement instead.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Leaving no doubt and leaving the country to the likes of philosophical



Lol.
'The likes of'.
No superiority complex there then.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> That is their problem.


I don’t mean what should the solution be. I understand you think that’s up to them. I mean, by what mechanism should voters come up with a plan and get it implemented?

I’m all for direct democracy. But we don’t have it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ah! you ARE a fan of the mayism



I am not a fan of Theresa May.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

Hey philosophical have you ever voted in an election - General or local - where you didn't end up a loser?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Lol.
> 'The likes of'.
> No superiority complex there then.


well spotted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am not a fan of Theresa May.


you are a fan of the mayism - brexit means brexit, my beliefs are my beliefs


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Hey philosophical have you ever voted in an election - General or local - where you didn't end up a loser?


he'd be very unhappy if he had.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> He couldn't sort out his books by author so sorting out the border by Skype is something of a big ask



Yes it is a big ask because I don't have Skype, or Facebook or twitter either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes it is a big ask because I don't have Skype, or Facebook or twitter either.


easily resolved: Skype | Communication tool for free calls and chat


----------



## andysays (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> we already have a sufficiency of muppets


A surfeit, even


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Hey philosophical have you ever voted in an election - General or local - where you didn't end up a loser?



Depends how winning and losing are defined.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 13, 2019)

Copied over from the polling thread...



ItWillNeverWork said:


> Majority of Britons support 'Brexit by any means'
> 
> "A ComRes opinion poll showed 54% of respondents said they agreed with the statement: “Boris (Johnson) needs to deliver Brexit by any means, including suspending parliament if necessary, in order to prevent MPs (Members of Parliament) from stopping it.”"


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Depends how winning and losing are defined.


You voted for the winning candidate


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> easily resolved: Skype | Communication tool for free calls and chat



That is only Skype.
Not the others.
I am kind of surprised you have urged big business on me, but I am going to decline.
For the reasons that I don't want to associate with Bill Zukerberg or whoever, and my technical skills are limited.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you are a fan of the mayism - brexit means brexit, my beliefs are my beliefs



You forgot to add 'it is what it is'.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You voted for the winning candidate



Did I?
When?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Did I?
> When?




Did you ever vote in an election for a candidate that won that election?


----------



## eoin_k (Aug 13, 2019)

If only someone hadn't helped philosophical register with this bulletin board, all these insights would be lost to the internet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> That is only Skype.
> Not the others.
> I am kind of surprised you have urged big business on me, but I am going to decline.
> For the reasons that I don't want to associate with Bill Zukerberg or whoever, and my technical skills are limited.


i urge nothing upon you


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> If only someone hadn't helped philosophical register with this bulletin board, all these insights would be lost to the internet.


it would have been one of the occasions on which ignorance truly was bliss


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Did you ever vote in an election for a candidate that won that election?



Yes.
Won the most votes then yes.
Won in terms of doing what they thought they could do is more complex.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> If only someone hadn't helped philosophical register with this bulletin board, all these insights would be lost to the internet.



Thanks for the compliment, but please no more, I am uneasy having fans.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes.
> Won the most votes then yes.
> Won in terms of doing what they thought they could do is more complex.


Like with Brexit?
If you've ever voted for a winning political party it would be unfair to level their many disasters at your door personally for voting for them. You're trying to do that with people who voted Leave.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i urge nothing upon you



I must have misunderstood your post which contained a link to a big business.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Thanks for the compliment, but please no more, I am uneasy having fans.


You must have an incredibly unperturbed existence.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Thanks for the compliment, but please no more, I am uneasy having fans.



Rest easy then.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Like with Brexit?
> If you've ever voted for a winning political party it would be unfair to level their many disasters at your door personally for voting for them. You're trying to do that with people who voted Leave.



Yes I am.
It is because I see the referendum vote in a very particular way, and it wasn't supposed to be for a particular party but a particular action...leaving.
If it was party political maybe it was about leave voters aspiring to get into bed with a party politician like Boris Johnson.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 13, 2019)

Voting, fucking retro that one.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You must have an incredibly unperturbed existence.



Existence.
Quite revealing and poetic in its own way.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes I am.
> It is because I see the referendum vote in a very particular way, and it wasn't supposed to be for a particular party but a particular action...leaving.
> If it was party political maybe it was about leave voters aspiring to get into bed with a party politician like Boris Johnson.


You seem determined to absolve the Tories - who've had three years to get this shit show sorted - from any culpability. That's weirder than voting the same way Johnson did in a yes/no vote but for extremely different reasons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You seem determined to absolve the Tories - who've had three years to get this shit show sorted - from any culpability. That's weirder than voting the same way Johnson did in a yes/no vote but for extremely different reasons.


he's been going on about this for 527 days so far and unless something extraordinary happens he'll be wittering on for another 527.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You seem determined to absolve the Tories - who've had three years to get this shit show sorted - from any culpability. That's weirder than voting the same way Johnson did in a yes/no vote but for extremely different reasons.



I have not absolved any Tory...I hate the bastards actually.
Lord Buckethead was right and I see you agree with him about a shitshow.
The Brexit industry has spent three years analyzing the reasons why people voted and it has led nowhere.
It is what was on the ballot paper that interests me and it's consequences.
Oh, and those who voted leave voted the same way as Johnson did they not?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he's been going on about this for 527 days so far and unless something extraordinary happens he'll be wittering on for another 527.



Not consecutive days.
I come and go on here, however every time I visit you are here.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he's been going on about this for 527 days so far and unless something extraordinary happens he'll be wittering on for another 527.


So Kant here has form here for cant storms boring tears out of all here for more years.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 13, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> BTW, where's Corbyn?
> 
> He seems to have gone AWOL.


I think it's courgette-harvesting time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Not consecutive days.
> I come and go on here, however every time I visit you are here.


the days have been consecutive, they have not been concurrent. it's a lie to say i'm here every time you deign to grace us with your presence, for example


philosophical said:


> Is there some kind of point you're trying to make?


at that point i was in russia and happily unaware of the noises you were making

that is, as i say, but one example. there are numerous other times when you've been in while i've been out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

MightyTibberton said:


> And a Boris Johson-led UK will be served for breakfast to the US...


if it was cooked by johnson the diners might get dysentry, he's not known for his hygiene


----------



## teuchter (Aug 13, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Copied over from the polling thread...


Telegraph accused of misrepresenting public position on proroguing parliament after 'dodgy' poll

Here are the actual poll results for those interested

https://t.co/tkyVzzbe1i


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have not absolved any Tory...I hate the bastards actually.
> Lord Buckethead was right and I see you agree with him about a shitshow.
> The Brexit industry has spent three years analyzing the reasons why people voted and it has led nowhere.
> It is what was on the ballot paper that interests me and it's consequences.
> Oh, and those who voted leave voted the same way as Johnson did they not?



You voted the same way as May did you not? Further evidence of Mayism


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the days have been consecutive, they have not been concurrent. it's a lie to say i'm here every time you deign to grace us with your presence, for example
> 
> at that point i was in russia and happily unaware of the noises you were making
> 
> that is, as i say, but one example. there are numerous other times when you've been in while i've been out.


I apologise if I have touched a nerve about your seeming ubiquity.
I very much look forward to the next time our paths don't cross on here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I apologise if I have touched a nerve about your seeming ubiquity.
> I very much look forward to the next time our paths don't cross on here.


it's not you've touched a nerve, it's that as here you're frequently reckless with the actualite


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Depends how winning and losing are defined.


you should change your name to Humpty Dumpty


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You voted the same way as May did you not? Further evidence of Mayism



I did vote the same way as May, you are right there.


----------



## andysays (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes.
> Won the most votes then yes.
> Won in terms of doing what they thought they could do is more complex.


Just as the government has struggled with carrying out a decision, you seem to be struggling with the theoretical distinction between making a decision and carrying out that decision.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I did vote the same way as May, you are right there.



So you agree. You aspired to get into bed with Theresa May.

And not in a metaphorical way either. All your attention seeking drivel about borders is actually motivated by the fact that you have the hots for Treeza.

Wait a minute.  Philosophical...  Phillip May...  Hmmmmmmmmmmm...


----------



## Raheem (Aug 13, 2019)

I almost had sex with Theresa May once, but she insisted on a legally binding withdrawal agreement, so I went with Boris Johnson instead. Less fussy, but he totally destroyed my manufacturing sector.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I believe those who voted leave are totally responsible for sorting the consequences of their actions.
> It certainly isn't down to those who voted remain.
> If you believe that means I don't get 'politics' you're wrong if that is a question and also wrong if that is a statement.
> My views are no less and no more valid than yours.


 Look, I get it, you wanted remain. You are entitled to keep saying 'what about Ireland, what about the border'. That's fine. But as others have pointed out, what is the _mechanism _for leave voters to 'sort the consequences of their actions'?

I wasn't actually a leave voter (didn't vote), but let's run with it: I've got a bit of time over the weekend, might sketch out a few ideas. What do I do, pass them to the civil service? Go straight to the politicians?  The idea that power works like that is absurd and you know it is. So, accepting that (hopefully), what does your point about 'leave voters sorting the border' actually add up to? Isn't it time to admit it was a weak rhetorical point that added nothing to the debate?

Edit: us, having that lack of power is the story behind the whole fucking thing (in varying and complex ways, for both sides).


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> us, having that lack of power is the story behind the whole fucking thing


Applause.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I almost had sex with Theresa May once, but she insisted on a legally binding withdrawal agreement, so I went with Boris Johnson instead. Less fussy, but he totally destroyed my manufacturing sector.


that's nothing, philosophical's been moaning about being fucked by both david cameron and theresa may for months and months and months


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's nothing, philosophical's been moaning about being fucked by both david cameron and theresa may for months and months and months


In that case anything he’s got, I’ve got.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In that case anything he’s got, I’ve got.


i hope you've not contracted his shit politics (((danny la rouge)))


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Look, I get it, you wanted remain. You are entitled to keep saying 'what about Ireland, what about the border'. That's fine. But as others have pointed out, what is the _mechanism _for leave voters to 'sort the consequences of their actions'?
> 
> I wasn't actually a leave voter (didn't vote), but let's run with it: I've got a bit of time over the weekend, might sketch out a few ideas. What do I do, pass them to the civil service? Go straight to the politicians?  The idea that power works like that is absurd and you know it is. So, accepting that (hopefully), what does your point about 'leave voters sorting the border' actually add up to? Isn't it time to admit it was a weak rhetorical point that added nothing to the debate?
> 
> Edit: us, having that lack of power is the story behind the whole fucking thing (in varying and complex ways, for both sides).



I am a tiny thread in the tapestry I get that. You say I add nothing to the debate, on that I would be hoping not.
In terms of the mechanism I suppose I am attempting, unsuccessfully it seems, to keep the Irish Border at the forefront of discussion, and in asking about the actual practicalities it might influence any leave voters to vote differently next time...if there is a next time. Or for those inclined to leave to at least consider to what degree their past and future actions (votes) have consequences. 
A probably futile attempt by me to start with a single step where I can.
This site is great for theoretical discussion, I am in awe at the degrees of gradation some posters take the trouble to define in political labels.
However my obsession is about where in this instance theory and practice meet, probably clashes. In fact it even presents an opportunity to draw a line of fewer degrees of separation between a vote and it's practical consequences.
I get it is boring and irritating to some on here, but some other things are boring and irritating to me, so what?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i hope you've not contracted his shit politics (((danny la rouge)))


What makes you an expert on my politics all of a sudden?
"Politics' is a pretty broad term.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What makes you an expert on my politics all of a sudden?
> "Politics' is a pretty broad term.


your 980 posts on this thread


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In terms of the mechanism I suppose I am attempting, unsuccessfully it seems, to keep the Irish Border at the forefront of discussion,


OK. But when you say Leave voters need to sort it, by what channels do you imagine this happening? 

Imagine there’s a room full of Leave voters armed with all the necessary stationery, devices and software. What do they do?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> OK. But when you say Leave voters need to sort it, by what channels do you imagine this happening?
> 
> Imagine there’s a room full of Leave voters armed with all the necessary stationary, devices and software. What do they do?


and paper, pens and so forth


----------



## teuchter (Aug 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Look, I get it, you wanted remain. You are entitled to keep saying 'what about Ireland, what about the border'. That's fine. But as others have pointed out, what is the _mechanism _for leave voters to 'sort the consequences of their actions'?
> 
> I wasn't actually a leave voter (didn't vote), but let's run with it: I've got a bit of time over the weekend, might sketch out a few ideas. What do I do, pass them to the civil service? Go straight to the politicians?  The idea that power works like that is absurd and you know it is. So, accepting that (hopefully), what does your point about 'leave voters sorting the border' actually add up to? Isn't it time to admit it was a weak rhetorical point that added nothing to the debate?
> 
> Edit: us, having that lack of power is the story behind the whole fucking thing (in varying and complex ways, for both sides).


Do you reckon there are people out there who have a feasible, workable plan for how to deal with the border issue that would get through parliament and also give leave voters what they want? Just that they can't get anyone to look at their plan and pass it on to those in power?


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and paper, pens and so forth


That’s not even what I typed!  Apple is auto-incorrecting me!!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That’s not even what I typed!  Apple is auto-incorrecting me!!!


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> your 980 posts on this thread



Ah I get it, the high and mighty stuff returns.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Ah I get it, the high and mighty stuff returns.


from what you're saying now, it appears you don't feel you've expressed your political views on this thread. why is that?


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In terms of the mechanism I suppose I am attempting, unsuccessfully it seems, to keep the Irish Border at the forefront of discussion,?


very brave of you. Of course the border already _is _at the forefront of discussion even without your intervention, but well done anyway.

The problem with your attempt at putting it centre stage is presenting it as a fait accompli. Leaving the EU must, supposedly, mean screwing the GFA. Therefore we can't leave the EU, because the GFA is sacrosanct. It's an utterly anti-democratic argument - not to mention one that was never raised when the GFA was introduced - and is going to backfire on its proponents. Why should a piece of legislation that we never had a vote on stop us bringing through a piece of legislation that we _did _have a vote on? That isn't democracy. 

Ohh, and my solution would be to reunite Ireland to get round the whole issue, before you start.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> from what you're saying now, it appears you don't feel you've expressed your political views on this thread. why is that?


Your interpretation is mistaken.
Have another try if you like, you often do.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Sorry, late to this thread and my first post.
> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?



On balance, I think that you are not right.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> very brave of you. Of course the border already _is _at the forefront of discussion even without your intervention, but well done anyway.
> 
> The problem with your attempt at putting it centre stage is presenting it as a fait accompli. Leaving the EU must, supposedly, mean screwing the GFA. Therefore we can't leave the EU, because the GFA is sacrosanct. It's an utterly anti-democratic argument - not to mention one that was never raised when the GFA was introduced - and is going to backfire on its proponents. Why should a piece of legislation that we never had a vote on stop us bringing through a piece of legislation that we _did _have a vote on? That isn't democracy.
> 
> Ohh, and my solution would be to reunite Ireland to get round the whole issue, before you start.



There was a vote on the GFA.
So how 'utterly' anti-democratic is that?
This might become a discussion on the degrees and nuances of what 'democracy' amounts to.
I believe you are right in saying that leaving the EU means screwing the GFA.


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There was a vote on the GFA.
> So how 'utterly' anti-democratic is that?


Only in NI, not the rest of the UK. So, not very democratic for most of the people who have now been affected by it. Pretty much the opposite, in fact.

Oh, and the GFA could also easily be maintained by leaving the EU but not the EEA.  But the tories (and you it seems) dont want that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Your interpretation is mistaken.
> Have another try if you like, you often do.


it isn't my interpretation but a simple statement of fact. you have posted nearly 1,000 times on a post about british - aye, and irish - politics. your posts in aggregate may not present your political views as you would articulate them if i asked you outright what you think: but they are at the least suggestive of your disdain for leave voters, your insistence that leave voters should come up with a plan to resolve your particular bugbear - the border in ireland, and your inability - as bad as any no deal brexiteer - to take other people's points of view on board. all these are hallmarks of poor politics, the contempt in which you hold the leave voters, your insistence they sort things out, your belief no one else is right... it's not a good look, philosophical


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> Only in NI, not the rest of the UK. So, not very democratic for most of the people who have now been affected by it. Pretty much the opposite, in fact.
> 
> Oh, and the GFA could also easily be maintained by leaving the EU but not the EEA.  But the tories (and you it seems) dont want that.



So it wasn't a piece of legislation we never had a vote on, it is about who the 'we' was.
You say 'only' in NI, so not democratic because circumstances have changed, yet I presume you might think it was democratic at the time.
That position can be the one adopted by Scotland who say their vote against independence is now invalid because circumstances have changed and they should go again (who could blame them?)
Interestingly if this is going to be about what constitutes 'democracy', sixteen year olds were allowed to vote in the independence ballot in Scotland, but not the brexit ballot in Britain, so there is a case to be made that the British brexit vote was not very democratic for people who have been (or will be) affected by it. Pretty much the opposite in fact?
If the GFA can easily be maintained by having two divergent systems side by side would you care to say how?


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Do you reckon there are people out there who have a feasible, workable plan for how to deal with the border issue that would get through parliament and also give leave voters what they want? Just that they can't get anyone to look at their plan and pass it on to those in power?


In addressing the question to the wrong person, you miss the point, which is that philosophical is saying that it is up to Leave voters to solve the problem. Let’s accept that’s correct (it isn’t, but let’s accept it is in order to move on), how is that to take place? Leave aside the uniqueness of the suggestion within the terms of our system. But given that he keeps on saying that this is what must happen, it’s not unreasonable to enquire _how_.

For what it’s worth, I’d opt for a reunited Ireland. If I was the Westminster government, I’d say to the Unionists “we have decided there are two choices: the sort of border you don’t want, or no border, because you’re joining the Republic. You choose”.

That would appear to be the honest position of Johnson. He should just say it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it isn't my interpretation but a simple statement of fact. you have posted nearly 1,000 times on a post about british - aye, and irish - politics. your posts in aggregate may not present your political views as you would articulate them if i asked you outright what you think: but they are at the least suggestive of your disdain for leave voters, your insistence that leave voters should come up with a plan to resolve your particular bugbear - the border in ireland, and your inability - as bad as any no deal brexiteer - to take other people's points of view on board. all these are hallmarks of poor politics, the contempt in which you hold the leave voters, your insistence they sort things out, your belief no one else is right... it's not a good look, philosophical



You have written a more extensive piece than usual.
Do you notice that what you wrap up as my broad political views is seen through the lens of my attitude to one single issue?
I am able to take other views on board when they are put forward for discussion and response quite easily, on brexit and believe it or not on other political issues.
You are right that I hold the leave voters in contempt, and probably right that to many it is not a good look.
However I am ready to accept that plenty of other people are right about plenty of things, even when I would differ with them personally and choose a different path for myself.
You have taken the trouble to glance at what I write, and analyse to the extent that you feel you can declare what my politics are. I can assure you you needn't bother to do such stuff, for my part I can only guess at why you bother. Has it not occurred to you that I am merely one poster on one forum, and you will be exhausted analysing everybody?


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> So it wasn't a piece of legislation we never had a vote on, it is about who the 'we' was.


Quite, we, those voting the the EU referendum, never had a vote on the GFA. The GFA which is now being held over us as sacrosanct.  A blatant lack of democracy.



> You say 'only' in NI, so not democratic because circumstances have changed, yet I presume you might think it was democratic at the time.


I dont think any of those things.


> That position can be the one adopted by Scotland who say their vote against independence is now invalid because circumstances have changed and they should go again (who could blame them?)


It is absolutely nothing to do with 'validity,' it is to do with a changed situation. Of course they should be allowed a vote.  Your point is irrelevant.


> Interestingly if this is going to be about what constitutes 'democracy', sixteen year olds were allowed to vote in the independence ballot in Scotland, but not the brexit ballot in Britain, so there is a case to be made that the British brexit vote was not very democratic for people who have been (or will be) affected by it. Pretty much the opposite in fact?


Not at all. Pisspoor attempt at undermining the biggest vote in British history (whether you like the outcome or not). If there is demand for another vote, by all means have one. That's how it works.


> If the GFA can easily be maintained by having two divergent systems side by side would you care to say how?


I did. I also gave my preferred option.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In addressing the question to the wrong person, you miss the point, which is that philosophical is saying that it is up to Leave voters to solve the problem. Let’s accept that’s correct (it isn’t, but let’s accept it is in order to move on), how is that to take place? Leave aside the uniqueness of the suggestion within the terms of our system. But given that he keeps on saying that this is what must happen, it’s not unreasonable to enquire _how_.
> 
> For what it’s worth, I’d opt for a reunited Ireland. If I was the Westminster government, I’d say to the Unionists “we have decided there are two choices: the sort of border you don’t want, or no border, because you’re joining the Republic. You choose”.
> 
> That would appear to be the honest position of Johnson. He should just say it.



If I am to be taken to task by asking generally _how _leavers plan to manage the Irish border, are you not asking me something similar by asking me _how _leavers are to solve the problem?
My answer would be along the lines of it isn't my problem I didn't vote for it.
Sooner or later there will be two divergent systems side by side that were not so divergent before. I believe brexit voters call it taking back control. 
Something will need to happen there at some time in the future, and I believe that for whatever leave is supposed to mean, it will be a something that conflicts with what Boris Johnson would call the letter and the spirit of the Good Friday Agreement.
At that point it becomes more of my problem because I have family in the Republic of Ireland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You have written a more extensive piece than usual.
> Do you notice that what you wrap up as my broad political views is seen through the lens of my attitude to one single issue?
> I am able to take other views on board when they are put forward for discussion and response quite easily, on brexit and believe it or not on other political issues.
> You are right that I hold the leave voters in contempt, and probably right that to many it is not a good look.
> ...


yes


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If I am to be taken to task by asking generally _how _leavers plan to manage the Irish border, are you not asking me something similar by asking me _how _leavers are to solve the problem?


No. I literally just want to know about the mechanics of this novel approach to British politics: that _those who voted for the winning side must provide the solution to any problems thrown up. 
_
If you don’t accept that the section I have italicised is a reasonable précis of your point, please say in what way.


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> My answer would be along the lines of it isn't my problem I didn't vote for it.


I didn’t vote for capitalism, so should I leave it to capitalists to sort out their mess? I don’t think that’s likely to work. 

If you want the vote overturned just campaign/argue for that. Don’t just try to make clever points, that aren’t very clever, about why it’s impossible. Or you’ll end up with the worst outcome, which is simply the gfa being fucked over.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> Quite, we, those voting the the EU referendum, never had a vote on the GFA. The GFA which is now being held over us as sacrosanct.  A blatant lack of democracy.
> 
> 
> I dont think any of those things.
> ...



I am sure there are differences between the EEA system and the EU system, and there needs to be some kind of meshing or accommodation between the two. As far as I can see the two systems are sympathetic to each other but are still different from each other.
I looked at this:

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-EEA-and-EU

And it quickly becomes complex in trying to figure out it's practical applications in the situation you suggest.

If you are saying there is no difference at all I find it curious, but if you are saying there are no differences at all that would impact the GFA in any way whatsoever I would find it hopeful.
However it remains that the vote was to leave the EU, not to join the EEA or anything else, and that is where the country now stands. Boris Johnson is not waddling around saying lets be part of the EEA only, he waddles around going on about leaving completely in every way, and he says he is mandated because the vote was simply to leave.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 13, 2019)

Quora


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 13, 2019)

Lol


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No. I literally just want to know about the mechanics of this novel approach to British politics: that _those who voted for the winning side must provide the solution to any problems thrown up.
> _
> If you don’t accept that the section I have italicised is a reasonable précis of your point, please say in what way.



Because I have been more specific.
I have not asked for solutions to any problems thrown up, but for what I believe to be the most central practical problem.

I may not be the only one who sees it as the most central practical problem given the amount of time loads of other people here and elsewhere have devoted to the Irish aspect of the whole debate.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Because I have been more specific.
> I have not asked for solutions to any problems thrown up, but for what I believe to be the most central practical problem.
> 
> I may not be the only one who sees it as the most central practical problem given the amount of time loads of other people here and elsewhere have devoted to the Irish aspect of the whole debate.


OK, you only mean the NI border issue.

Assume I’m accepting that this is a perfectly reasonable innovation to the unwritten constitution of the UK. That there’s a perfectly good argument for this issue and no other being resolved by the people who voted Leave.

Interesting proposal, philosophical. How do you see that being put into practise?

How do we identify the correct voters?

How do we collect their contributions?

How do we reach a consensus on the outcome of the consultation?

How do we convince the government to accept the outcome?

How do we convince parliament to vote to approve it?

In short, would you accept that it isn’t a solution at all, but yet another problem?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I believe those who voted leave are totally responsible for sorting the consequences of their actions.
> It certainly isn't down to those who voted remain.
> If you believe that means I don't get 'politics' you're wrong if that is a question and also wrong if that is a statement.
> My views are no less and no more valid than yours.


Ok but only if you sort out the stability & growth pact, the turkish camps and Hungary first


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

And for what it’s worth: I approve of direct democracy, and have over the years described how I’d like to see it working. But I don’t think I can get it up and running by 31st October. Not without some help.


----------



## andysays (Aug 13, 2019)

Away from the heady theoretical debate about how Leave voters should be forced to come up with an acceptable solution to the Irish border question, there appears to be an actual legal case going on

Brexit: Legal bid to stop Westminster shutdown goes to court


> A legal challenge to try to prevent Boris Johnson shutting down parliament to force through a no-deal Brexit has begun in a Scottish court. A group of MPs and peers wants the Court of Session in Edinburgh to rule that suspending parliament to make the UK leave the EU without a deal is "unlawful and unconstitutional".


Among other questions, I'm wondering why this case, which is about the UK parliament in Westminster, is being brought in Edinburgh rather than London


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> OK, you only mean the NI border issue.
> 
> Assume I’m accepting that this is a perfectly reasonable innovation to the unwritten constitution of the UK. That there’s a perfectly good argument for this issue and no other being resolved by the people who voted Leave.
> 
> ...



Of course I accept it is another problem.


----------



## Supine (Aug 13, 2019)

andysays said:


> Among other questions, I'm wondering why this case, which is about the UK parliament in Westminster, is being brought in Edinburgh rather than London



Because it's open for business and not on holiday


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm wondering why this case, which is about the UK parliament in Westminster, is being brought in Edinburgh rather than London


From reading the piece, it would seem that it’s simply that the London courts are on holiday but the Scots ones aren’t. 

I have no way of knowing if that’s the real reason.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Of course I accept it is another problem.


Am I right in reading that to mean that  it was not your intention to present the proposal as a solution?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> From reading the piece, it would seem that it’s simply that the London courts are on holiday but the Scots ones aren’t.
> 
> I have no way of knowing if that’s the real reason.



I've seen various reports saying that's the reason.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've seen various reports saying that's the reason.


Yes, me too: the one that andysays linked to. What I mean is that: this is the reason stated by the BBC. Take that on face value if you will.


----------



## andysays (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> *From reading the piece*, it would seem that it’s simply that the London courts are on holiday but the Scots ones aren’t.
> 
> I have no way of knowing if that’s the real reason.


Well, if you're going to cheat by actually reading the piece before answering...


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Am I right in reading that to mean that  it was not your intention to present the proposal as a solution?



If you mean my proposal that leavers should solve the Irish problem, then no I didn't say it so they could get a solution because they manifestly can't. 
My hope is that they can eventually accept that, and there is enough stuff that could happen to make the brexit vote exposed as the impractical thing it believe it to be. Possibly an unsatisfactory further vote of some kind. Or some kind of at this moment unimaginable surrender by brexit voters. Yeah unimaginable that one.
All the time anybody is cheerleading for 'brexit' there is something to question, and the question they can't brush away is the one about the Irish border.
Maybe brexiters will eventually realise that.


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If you mean my proposal that leavers should solve the Irish problem, then no I didn't say it so they could get a solution because they manifestly can't.
> My hope is that they can eventually accept that, and there is enough stuff that could happen to make the brexit vote exposed as the impractical thing it believe it to be. Possibly an unsatisfactory further vote of some kind. Or some kind of at this moment unimaginable surrender by brexit voters. Yeah unimaginable that one.
> All the time anybody is cheerleading for 'brexit' there is something to question, and the question they can't brush away is the one about the Irish border.
> Maybe brexiters will eventually realise that.


So, you're arguing for something you don't think will ever happen, because it makes you feel better. You're wagging your finger whilst watching people you have disdain for do something you find reprehensible.

What a complete and utter waste of time.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

Perhaps it’s the way I express myself, philosophical, but you seem always to be answering a question other than the one asked.

So, am I right in interpreting the above as saying the reason you proposed making Leave voters sort the NI border issue is not because you actually think that the proposal can be put into operation, but so that they “eventually realise they can’t brush away the issue”?

And once Leave voters realise that (accepting they currently don’t), you’ll consider your job done?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In addressing the question to the wrong person, you miss the point, which is that philosophical is saying that it is up to Leave voters to solve the problem. Let’s accept that’s correct (it isn’t, but let’s accept it is in order to move on), how is that to take place? Leave aside the uniqueness of the suggestion within the terms of our system. But given that he keeps on saying that this is what must happen, it’s not unreasonable to enquire _how_.
> 
> For what it’s worth, I’d opt for a reunited Ireland. If I was the Westminster government, I’d say to the Unionists “we have decided there are two choices: the sort of border you don’t want, or no border, because you’re joining the Republic. You choose”.
> 
> That would appear to be the honest position of Johnson. He should just say it.



For Leave voters to solve the problem, all they have to do is suggest a feasible solution for an agreement that deals with the border, gives Leave voters what they want, and can get through parliament.

The problem is not the mechanism to turn a solution into practical reality, but that no such solution exists.

I don't think your solution would get through parliament, therefore it's probably not a solution.

The other way for Leave voters to solve the problem would be to say, actually let's forget it and stay in 

The above is to some extent facetious, of course.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think your solution would get through parliament, therefore it's probably not a solution.


I’m hoping that the break up of the UK is going to be one of the outcomes of this whole thing. I’m not fussed about the channels.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Perhaps it’s the way I express myself, philosophical, but you seem always to be answering a question other than the one asked.
> 
> So, am I right in interpreting the above as saying the reason you proposed making Leave voters sort the NI border issue is not because you actually think that the proposal can be put into operation, but so that they “eventually realise they can’t brush away the issue”?
> 
> And once Leave voters realise that (accepting they currently don’t), you’ll consider your job done?



Yes essentially. Going out now so can't explain in any more detail.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> So, you're arguing for something you don't think will ever happen, because it makes you feel better. You're wagging your finger whilst watching people you have disdain for do something you find reprehensible.
> 
> What a complete and utter waste of time.



I think what you say following the word because is wrong as I have tried to explain elsewhere on this thread.
Please don't waste any of your time responding.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes essentially.


 I suspect most Leave voters are well aware of the NI border problem, and that the circle the Unionists insist must be squared can’t be. So your job’s essentially done. 



> Going out now so can't explain in any more detail.


Have fun.


----------



## belboid (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I think what you say following the word because is wrong as I have tried to explain elsewhere on this thread.
> Please don't waste any of your time responding.


It really has been a waste of time, hasn't it? You're not interested in an actual discussion, still less resolving the problem you pose, so what is the point of your posts at all?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and paper, pens and so forth


And maybe some crayons.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I am sure there are differences between the EEA system and the EU system, and there needs to be some kind of meshing or accommodation between the two. As far as I can see the two systems are sympathetic to each other but are still different from each other.
> I looked at this:
> 
> https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-EEA-and-EU
> ...


Really? You're seriously citing askastupidquestion.com as a source?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m hoping that the break up of the UK is going to be one of the outcomes of this whole thing. I’m not fussed about the channels.


The English channel will become the kentish strait


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 13, 2019)

It must have been a slow day at work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 13, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> It must have been a slow day at work.


I was actually quite busy


----------



## bluescreen (Aug 13, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I was actually quite busy


I didn't mean you.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 13, 2019)




----------



## Des Kinvig (Aug 13, 2019)

The problem is that there isn’t a solution for the northern ireland border - without a deal that won’t be popular with leavers - other than actually having a border with checks etc. I suspect the dup (as opposed to unionists in the general sense, but with either some or most unionists concurring) don’t care about this and quietly would like the border reinstated, given that they were vehemently opposed to the GFA.

Personally I still think brexit won’t happen. But at this point it is anyone’s guess, I suppose.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 13, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

This guy’s really good. An analysis of why the Brexiteers want to leave this year.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 13, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Really? You're seriously citing askastupidquestion.com as a source?



It was what came up and seems pretty comprehensive. Is it fake news or something?


----------



## existentialist (Aug 13, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It was what came up and seems pretty comprehensive. Is it fake news or something?


Never have I itched so to say "get with the programme, granddad". And I *am* a granddad.


----------



## Wookey (Aug 13, 2019)

Ming said:


> This guy’s really good. An analysis of why the Brexiteers want to leave this year.




He's very good.


----------



## Ming (Aug 13, 2019)

Wookey said:


> He's very good.


I wish he was still sitting down. I don’t like the new look.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 14, 2019)

on tweeter.

 



i think this could have been phrased better.

is the johnson government 'shit' and a potential corbyn government 'bust' or vice versa?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Aug 14, 2019)

Do we need a 2nd poll?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 14, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Do we need a 2nd poll?


Yes this , 52% this !


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 14, 2019)

Ming said:


> This guy’s really good. An analysis of why the Brexiteers want to leave this year.


Sub-Jazzz nonsense.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 14, 2019)

Ming said:


> This guy’s really good. An analysis of why the Brexiteers want to leave this year.




This is gibberish. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting. 

Probably the most through the looking glass line is "The idea of replacing the PM is currently being blocked by Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the opposition." With no explanation. 

How and why is Corbyn propping up Johnson and blocking a replacement PM Ming? Is Brexit actually all just about tax avoidance? Are you sure Brexiters don't just want to leave because we were supposed to six months ago and they know the longer this drags on the less likely it is that Brexit will happen? 

Nice to see Wookey the racist back by the way.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 14, 2019)

Wookey said:


> He's very good.


Hates Corbyn though, fwiw


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 14, 2019)

The (apparently now mainstream among cracked remainers) idea that capital wants to force through brexit is undermined by the absolute naked fact that the overwhelming majority of capital really don't want brexit to happen. This shouldn't need to be constantly and slowly repeated to people.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 14, 2019)

Not a big fan of Toynbee but this gives some idea of the chaos now and in the future.

Brexit has turned our government into an Orwellian Ministry of Truth | Polly Toynbee


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 14, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The (apparently now mainstream among cracked remainers) idea that capital wants to force through brexit is undermined by the absolute naked fact that the overwhelming majority of capital really don't want brexit to happen. This shouldn't need to be constantly and slowly repeated to people.


The above video doesn't even get as far as recognising capital as an actor. Hell it doesn't even get as far as recognising the competing political interests. The "analysis" is nasty Tories doing nasty things to enrich themselves because they are nasty.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 14, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Not a big fan of Toynbee but this gives some idea of the chaos now and in the future.
> 
> Brexit has turned our government into an Orwellian Ministry of Truth | Polly Toynbee


Orwell's ministry of truth was at least competent


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 14, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 14, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The above video doesn't even get as far as recognising capital as an actor. Hell it doesn't even get as far as recognising the competing political interests. The "analysis" is nasty Tories doing nasty things to enrich themselves because they are nasty.



You forgot "and Nasty Corbyn Propping Up Nasty Johnson" but otherwise spot on.


----------



## Spandex (Aug 14, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The (apparently now mainstream among cracked remainers) idea that capital wants to force through brexit is undermined by the absolute naked fact that the overwhelming majority of capital really don't want brexit to happen. This shouldn't need to be constantly and slowly repeated to people.


The only reason brexit is even a thing is because of a disagreement in the UK ruling class over whether the UK should align with US or EU style capitalism. The relative sizes of the pro-brexit and pro-remain factions of capital are kind of moot since the pro-Brexit lot have forced and won the referendum, currently form the government and just have to sit it out until Halloween to get the no deal brexit they want.

Guy in the video may be a prize divot, and the EU tax avoidance directive clearly isn't THE reason for brexit, but it is an example of the kind of things EU capitalism is okay with that pro-brexit capital isn't.


----------



## Brainaddict (Aug 14, 2019)

Spandex said:


> The only reason brexit is even a thing is because of a disagreement in the UK ruling class over whether the UK should align with US or EU style capitalism. The relative sizes of the pro-brexit and pro-remain factions of capital are kind of moot since the pro-Brexit lot have forced and won the referendum, currently form the government and just have to sit it out until Halloween to get the no deal brexit they want.


I think there's a lot of truth in this, though I wouldn't say it's the *only* reason for Brexit. Unfortunately I think some of the discontent of people screwed over by neo-liberalism did end up in harness with the shock doctrine US-style re-structuring adherents who are now pushing for no-deal to maximise their success. It's a bad state of affairs and is probably about to screw people over even more than was thought when Brexit first got voted through (no-one really thought no-deal was likely then). There are some on these boards who insist that the working class are pro-Brexit while the capital is anti-Brexit, and just repeat that in the face of all the evidence of why that might be over-simplified. I haven't even really heard them explain why the party of the ruling class is so split if capital is so pro-Brexit, let alone why members of the ruling class are pushing for no-deal.

Yes, the majority of capital was anti-Brexit, but the pro-Brexit capital played much dirtier and won. Their second trick of turning no-deal into an act of patriotic self-belief is one of the most disgusting and successful manipulations of public opinion I have ever seen, and I am sure that lots of funding has been poured into pulling it off.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 14, 2019)

Is anyone buying this No Deal bit from the Torys? Looks like pure bluster, safe in the knowledge it will be stopped and they can play the plucky anti-establishment (lol) brexiteers, winning back brexit party votes as they go. Can't see the next step in their plan from there though...the problem of delivering brexit doesnt go away


----------



## Raheem (Aug 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> ...the problem of delivering brexit doesnt go away


It does if you can rely on parliament to step in and resolve it one way or another.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Is anyone buying this No Deal bit from the Torys? Looks like pure bluster, safe in the knowledge it will be stopped and they can play the plucky anti-establishment (lol) brexiteers, winning back brexit party votes as they go. Can't see the next step in their plan from there though...the problem of delivering brexit doesnt go away


I have trouble believing Johnson and Cummings are that clever.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 14, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Is anyone buying this No Deal bit from the Torys? Looks like pure bluster, safe in the knowledge it will be stopped and they can play the plucky anti-establishment (lol) brexiteers, winning back brexit party votes as they go. Can't see the next step in their plan from there though...the problem of delivering brexit doesnt go away


Would they have a next step in mind? It seems pretty clear that Johnson has hit the ground running at campaigning speed, so everything is geared towards winning the general election. In a sense, brexit is a sideshow to that, no? Tories exist to be in power above all else. Brexit serves its purpose by getting Johnson into power and keeping him there via an election. They then stumble on, and have no particular plans beyond stumbling on and not falling over (losing power) for as long as possible. 

A general election this year that is won by this tory govt is a very very very scary prospect. That's the immediate endgame, not brexit. Then a new game starts.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 15, 2019)




----------



## kabbes (Aug 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 180945


So that’s 308 days then?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 15, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> There are some on these boards who insist that the working class are pro-Brexit while the capital is anti-Brexit, and just repeat that in the face of all the evidence of why that might be over-simplified...
> 
> ...Yes, the majority of capital was anti-Brexit



That's what I said to prompt this avenue of discussion though - the overwhelming majority of capital never wanted and still doesn't want to leave. Why would capital as a whole want to leave a huge & established frictionless free trade bloc which, from birth to present, exists to benefit capital first and foremost.

Yes there is a section of capital which sees opportunity in chaos, which wants a Singapore type economy of low wage, low rights, low social spend, low tax. There are capitalists who want no deal for the purely short term position of benefit in their exposure to external and developing economy markets. None of this changes the sheer stupidity of presenting the momentum to leave at all costs as a dastardly plan by capital to fuck over labour. It is in face of all evidence. Because the vast majority of capital wants to preserve the status quo. It isn't even as if the business class, the city, the CBI, FSB etc are coy about this. They are explicit, they didn't want to leave and they defo don't want no deal.

There is loads of different motivations and factors, sometimes competing, sometimes conflicting, behind momentum to leave but it isn't a fucking stitch up or conspiracy


----------



## Poi E (Aug 15, 2019)

Capital will adapt. There will be oligarchical opportunities available to crony capitalists under Johnson. Some competition will disappear. Capital is not that fussy.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 15, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Capital will adapt. There will be oligarchical opportunities available to crony capitalists under Johnson. Some competition will disappear. Capital is not that fussy.


Yeah of course, it will adapt and thrive


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah of course, it will adapt and thrive


Well, it will adapt a bit anyway. Thrive? Not so sure


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Well, it will adapt a bit anyway. Thrive? Not so sure


Well some will struggle some will thrive but as a whole reckon that class of people will do just fine as they almost always do


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> So that’s 308 days then?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> That's what I said to prompt this avenue of discussion though - the overwhelming majority of capital never wanted and still doesn't want to leave. Why would capital as a whole want to leave a huge & established frictionless free trade bloc which, from birth to present, exists to benefit capital first and foremost.
> 
> Yes there is a section of capital which sees opportunity in chaos, which wants a Singapore type economy of low wage, low rights, low social spend, low tax. There are capitalists who want no deal for the purely short term position of benefit in their exposure to external and developing economy markets. None of this changes the sheer stupidity of presenting the momentum to leave at all costs as a dastardly plan by capital to fuck over labour. It is in face of all evidence. Because the vast majority of capital wants to preserve the status quo. It isn't even as if the business class, the city, the CBI, FSB etc are coy about this. They are explicit, they didn't want to leave and they defo don't want no deal.
> 
> There is loads of different motivations and factors, sometimes competing, sometimes conflicting, behind momentum to leave but it isn't a fucking stitch up or conspiracy



yep - as ever its a dynamic interplay of different factors and a fair bit of chaos thrown in. the idea that its part of some cunning plan by aaron banks et al is a dangerously deluded reading of how the world is shaped and history unfolds.
Yes you have people who are adapt at exploiting chaos and uncertainty to end up influencing events, being in the right place at the right time with the right message (from lenin to hitler to farage) or profiteering from it - but in only slightly different circumstances they would be lucky to earn themselves a footnote.

If anything, capital is one of the more predictable factors - it will always look to maximise capital - and that generally means swerving away from uncertainty - whilst still keen to exploit any events for its own benefit.

Brexit is borne of the dissaffections thrown up by the 2008 crash, 40 years of deindustrialisation creating social atomisation and resentment within trad working class areas,  a residual strain of romantic english nationalism and xenophobia,  the more atlantasist/neo conservative leanings of the right of the tory party and the incompetence of david cameron.
Tweak any of that marginally and you have remain winning in 2016 or no referendum at all - the underlying dynamics are still there - but how they are expressed might be very different.

(actually thats bollocks IT WAS THOSE RUSSIAN BOTS!!!)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 180946


what's 2017 got to do with anything?


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The above video doesn't even get as far as recognising capital as an actor. Hell it doesn't even get as far as recognising the competing political interests. The "analysis" is nasty Tories doing nasty things to enrich themselves because they are nasty.



Must be why they are so widely considered the Nasty Party.


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what's 2017 got to do with anything?



I duno


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I duno


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 15, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I duno





Pickman's model said:


>



Hey, that's the first accurate answer we've had to the original question in the OP.


----------



## Indeliblelink (Aug 15, 2019)

This is an interesting watch, with some big names, obviously from a Tory angle.
*Portillo: The Trouble with The Tories*
My5 ep1

My5 ep2


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> That's what I said to prompt this avenue of discussion though - the overwhelming majority of capital never wanted and still doesn't want to leave. Why would capital as a whole want to leave a huge & established frictionless free trade bloc which, from birth to present, exists to benefit capital first and foremost.



I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.


----------



## Brainaddict (Aug 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> None of this changes the sheer stupidity of presenting the momentum to leave at all costs as a dastardly plan by capital to fuck over labour. It is in face of all evidence. Because the vast majority of capital wants to preserve the status quo.


The status quo is no longer an option, and most people can see that now. Even if Johnson cancelled Brexit or parliament forced him to cancel it, does anyone believe that would be the end of it? Business leaders are too pragmatic to think that. The idea of leaving the EU itself had much more mixed motivations, but the idea of leaving without a deal as a positive thing? I saw that pushed primarily by certain members of the elite who called on nationalism to back them up. I think that part of the elite have decided that causing maximum disruption to the EU-UK relationship will maximise their ability to restructure the economy. I don't think it's a conspiracy theory to say that. It's true a lot of the elite wants neither Brexit nor a no-deal Brexit, but they have played the political game badly, and the vultures pushing no-deal have played it well. Sometimes the minority element wins.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 15, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.



Think there is the germ of a development here actually. It's true that the majority of the capitalist class is anti Brexit but there is a minority that is looking for a way out of the economic crisis and is increasingly favourable to economic nationalism and protectionism rather than free trade. I've been wondering if there isn't a certain shift towards a more positive perspective on Brexit. Would fit with the US/China trade war, rise of Trump etc. 

Do they really believe Johnson's no deal stuff though? I'm not sure I do. When he says you need to credibly threaten no deal, is he talking about the EU or the electorate? 

I have to assume what Johnson really wants is a big majority in Parliament, a Brexit deal that is very similar to May's and just to move on. He doesn't want No Deal. 

Additionally, the CBI types who are still fully committed to preventing Brexit have the ear of a lot of MP's and have this GNU thing to pin their hopes to. No point publicly arguing with anyone, business will want the politicians to take the blame for that, not them.


----------



## Brainaddict (Aug 15, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.


The shrugging and moving for sure. A friend of my brother does HR in a company with a couple of medium-skilled factories. They are apparently sitting on 2000 P45s to hand out as soon as there's a no-deal Brexit. I don't think they're lobbying politically to stop it though - labour is cheaper in Poland (or wherever they're going) anyway. They had no doubt thought about moving their factories anyway and this just pushes them over the line. Business as usual.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 15, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.


I think different reasons/factors. Some sections of capital have accepted and adapted, either initiated or planned a quiet capital flight to ensure smooth & peaceful transition. Other sections that can't so easily accommodate are kicking up a fuss in their own way - CBI etc and various firms have all placed stuff in public sphere warning of impact of no deal and the funding for the various remain groups which are mostly related anyway is not just down to crowdfunding. Some are now seeking the opportunities no deal could open up. More prosaically, fear of a Corbyn govt seems to be cooling temperatures.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 15, 2019)

Some sections of capital stand to make a lot of money from it.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2019)

More random thoughts on the shittiness of parliamentary/executive led politics/processes: whilst some of the tory ultras have voted with the opposition to knock back May's deal, this is the first time that talk of any kind of formal agreement has been floated (the temporary government to be led by corbyn or others). There's always been a remain majority in parliament, even if that's got a bit soggier with a number of them peeling off to become reluctant brexiteers given the result of the referendum. But regardless of that there certainly is a _majority against no deal_.  But still, three years on and 10 weeks to go, they haven't found a make that into a bloc or policy.  And even if they can manage to get them lined up for a temporary corbyn led government, there are a whole set of hurdles around speakers rulings, the parliament act, extending article 50 etc. In essence, Boris Johnson still has a fair chance at getting through something that even his own MPs don't want (or, to be pedantic, a better chance than corbyn has of forming an administration).

It's that gap between politics and real life - in real life there's usually a way for a group of people to just _decide_ which telly programme they want on, which place to go on holiday, which film to watch. Not in politics.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> More random thoughts on the shittiness of parliamentary/executive led politics/processes: whilst some of the tory ultras have voted with the opposition to knock back May's deal, this is the first time that talk of any kind of formal agreement has been floated (the temporary government to be led by corbyn or others). There's always been a remain majority in parliament, even if that's got a bit soggier with a number of them peeling off to become reluctant brexiteers given the result of the referendum. But regardless of that there certainly is a _majority against no deal_.  But still, three years on and 10 weeks to go, they haven't found a make that into a bloc or policy.  And even if they can manage to get them lined up for a temporary corbyn led government, there are a whole set of hurdles around speakers rulings, the parliament act, extending article 50 etc. In essence, Boris Johnson still has a fair chance at getting through something that even his own MPs don't want (or, to be pedantic, a better chance than corbyn has of forming an administration).
> 
> It's that gap between politics and real life - in real life there's usually a way for a group of people to just _decide_ which telly programme they want on, which place to go on holiday, which film to watch. Not in politics.


nonetheless i think we'll find the uk remains within the european union on 1 november


----------



## Poi E (Aug 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Brexit is borne of the dissaffections thrown up by the 2008 crash, 40 years of deindustrialisation creating social atomisation and resentment within trad working class areas,  a residual strain of romantic english nationalism and xenophobia,  the more atlantasist/neo conservative leanings of the right of the tory party and the incompetence of david cameron.



I'd throw in a grossly centralised state, unelected head of state, unelected upper chamber, antiquated parliament, shite voting system, a feudal system and pattern of land ownership and a make it up as you go along constitution. It all makes for a country with a sell-by date long gone.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> yep - as ever its a dynamic interplay of different factors and a fair bit of chaos thrown in. the idea that its part of some cunning plan by aaron banks et al is a dangerously deluded reading of how the world is shaped and history unfolds.
> Yes you have people who are adapt at exploiting chaos and uncertainty to end up influencing events, being in the right place at the right time with the right message (from lenin to hitler to farage) or profiteering from it - but in only slightly different circumstances they would be lucky to earn themselves a footnote.
> 
> If anything, capital is one of the more predictable factors - it will always look to maximise capital - and that generally means swerving away from uncertainty - whilst still keen to exploit any events for its own benefit.
> ...


I think people have been actively working on the English nationalism for 20+ years, where do you think the residue comes from?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> nonetheless i think we'll find the uk remains within the european union on 1 november


I'm at the stage of not having a clue what will happen next. The date thing itself is interesting. Johnson could _theoretically _come to some form of new political declaration with the EU and sell that back to his MPs* and on the back of that claim a fortnight or so as a 'technical extension'. However he's been so strident about leaving on the 31st - 'no ifs and bits' - that any other kind of or longer extension is impossible.

I'd say the chances of general election are now _very_ high, but whether brexit has happened by that point is the real issue.

* All increasingly unlikely


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 15, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think people have been actively working on the English nationalism for 20+ years, where do you think the residue comes from?



I guess i meant "persistent strain" rather than "residual" - although it maybe that the particular form of english nationalism - WW2, nostalgia for empire and a time of no black people, no feminism and no out and proud gaiety is particular with the older generation and dies out with them.


----------



## treelover (Aug 15, 2019)

Its incredible how things are panning out, Tory M.P's possibly supporting a Corbyn led caretaker Govt, through the looking glass stuff

though it maybe they want him to 'own the disaster'


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 15, 2019)

If Corbyn becomes Caretaker PM can he enact anything other than cancel no deal and enact a GE? Could he, for example, end benefit sanctions, the WCA, and Universal Credit?

I'm guessing...not


----------



## binka (Aug 15, 2019)

I wouldn't put it past him to try and sneak full communism in through the backdoor while no one is looking


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 15, 2019)

liberals exposed as utter self serving hypocrites. Joe Swinson making an impressive start of reminding everyone of that. major political miscalculation - and an interesting insight into the hubris and self delusion of the centrist bubble (see also  - change UK) 
Corbyns proposal is everything the remainers need and the most viable way of making it happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> liberals exposed as utter self serving hypocrites. Joe Swinson making an impressive start of reminding everyone of that. major political miscalculation - and an interesting insight into the hubris and self delusion of the centrist bubble (see also  - change UK)
> Corbyns proposal is everything the remainers need and the most viable way of making it happen.




Yep. What Corbyn has suggested is the first thing since the referendum that could possibly stop Brexit, but she don’t want it. Bring on no deal chaos and lay the blame at the Lib Dem’s door


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 15, 2019)

binka said:


> I wouldn't put it past him to try and sneak full communism in through the backdoor while no one is looking


like a filthy whore


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> If Corbyn becomes Caretaker PM can he enact anything other than cancel no deal and enact a GE? Could he, for example, end benefit sanctions, the WCA, and Universal Credit?
> 
> I'm guessing...not



You guess correctly. If in our current bizarro-reality there actually ends up being a caretaker PM, they'll only have the confidence of the House to enact very, very specific things.

Edit: Sorry, submitted too soon. Any PM still has exec power though, but that doesn't extend to stuff that would need primary legislation. The caretaker PM would have to manage an invasion of, say, Guernsey and would have the power to do so, but getting rid of UC - not so much.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'd say the chances of general election are now _very_ high, but whether brexit has happened by that point is the real issue.
> * All increasingly unlikely


Not enough pointless predicting going on in the thread so I'll have a go:

1. No confidence vote in BJ in early September, which passes
2. Whoever it is who picks up the reigns gets an extension from the EU while an election takes place
3. Election process begins
4. No Deal Brexit doesnt happen
5. Tories run on an anti-establishment ticket, mopping up the Brexit vote, while the leave vote splits all over the place.
6. Tories win the election

^^^thats their plan I reckon anyhow.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Not enough pointless predicting going on in the thread so I'll have a go:
> 
> 1. No confidence vote in BJ in early September, which passes
> 2. Whoever it is who picks up the reigns gets an extension from the EU while an election takes place
> ...


Please god no. I can't take another tory victory.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 15, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Not enough pointless predicting going on in the thread so I'll have a go:
> 
> 1. No confidence vote in BJ in early September, which passes



2. Which leads to BJ having two weeks to have a go at re-establishing confidence, or else there's automatically a General Election. So says the horrifically badly drafted Fixed Term Parliament Act (2011)

3. Nobody has a frigging clue about what needs to happen during that two-week period for someone else to gain the confidence of the House. See this report by the Public Admin and Constitutional Affairs Committee https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpubadm/1813/1813.pdf
The most relevant paragraphs are in the summary:



> The fact that the government of the day must retain the confidence of the House of Commons is the constitutional principle which determines the relationship between Parliament and Government. The Government’s authority to govern is dependent on maintaining the confidence of the House of Commons. This principle remains fundamental to our system of Parliamentary democracy. By convention the confidence of the House has been demonstrated and tested through motions and votes of confidence of the House of Commons.
> 
> The purpose of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 (“the Act”) was to establish fixed five-year election cycles and make provision for early general elections to be called. Therefore, general elections now only occur, and early elections can only be brought about, under the Act. The Act removed the power of the Sovereign to dissolve Parliament, and with this the ability of the Prime Minister to call a general election at a time of their choosing or following a vote of no confidence in the House of Commons.
> 
> ...



4. Profit???


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> There's always been a remain majority in parliament, even if that's got a bit soggier with a number of them peeling off to become reluctant brexiteers given the result of the referendum. But regardless of that there certainly is a _majority against no deal_.  But still, three years on and 10 weeks to go, they haven't found a make that into a bloc or policy.  And even if they can manage to get them lined up for a temporary corbyn led government, there are a whole set of hurdles around speakers rulings, the parliament act, extending article 50 etc.



This is true but that could well be because there will be a massive political cost to Parliament overriding/collapsing the govt to prevent no deal. At the very least they need to minimise the political cost of doing it, so they need to wait until the last minute and then they can say it was the only option. They could have done it before I reckon. 



treelover said:


> Its incredible how things are panning out, Tory M.P's possibly supporting a Corbyn led caretaker Govt, through the looking glass stuff
> 
> though it maybe they want him to 'own the disaster'



Would be a nice bonus for them if Corbyn is the face of stopping Brexit.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Please god no. I can't take another tory victory.


tell me about it
i wonder if George Galloway will back Boris


TheHoodedClaw said:


> 2. Which leads to BJ having two weeks to have a go at re-establishing confidence, or else there's automatically a General Election. So says the horrifically badly drafted Fixed Term Parliament Act (2011)


I think they want the election...they won't stall it. theyre campaigning now and obviously cant do much with a majority of 1


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 15, 2019)

The only person Galloway will back is the person he sees in the mirror, or possibly Steve Bannon, whom he was gladhanding earlier this year.

Given the Libdems are only good for splitting the vote, I don't fancy betting against a tory government. Their refusal to stand aside kept Rudd in position. 

Fuck it all


----------



## ska invita (Aug 15, 2019)

I think the LibDems will fall in line regarding the confidence vote etc - reluctantly - they're busy positioning themselves as Not Corbyn At All to get the Remain Corbyn Haters vote, and appeal to the Tory splitters. Electioneering


----------



## Humberto (Aug 15, 2019)

I wonder how united the Tories are in the parliamentary party, the membership and their media and how sure their potential voters are? I think the Tories are vulnerable and can be  kicked out if 'Corbyn will destroy the economy' and 'Brexit bertrayal' are the key clashing points, if we are indeed going to get a snap election in Nov/Dec.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 15, 2019)

A Tory administered Brexit will likely be a disaster and this bloc will crumble, with Labour waiting in the wings: OR they fail to get it through and lose an election in its wake... with Labour waiting in the wings. I said the other day that I thought the Tories would win a snap election, but I also think it's all there for the taking for Labour if they get it right and are prepared properly for it all.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 15, 2019)

Humberto said:


> I wonder how united the Tories are in the parliamentary party, the membership and their media and how sure their potential voters are? I think the Tories are vulnerable and can be  kicked out if 'Corbyn will destroy the economy' and 'Brexit bertrayal' are the key clashing points, if we are indeed going to get a snap election in Nov/Dec.



If they succeed in doing what they tried to do last time and make it a Brexit election and paint Corbyn as betraying the referendum, I think they win.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 15, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If they succeed in doing what they tried to do last time and make it a Brexit election and paint Corbyn as betraying the referendum, I think they win.


 
Although they fucked that up remember, with Corbyn and Labour well down in the likely running.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 15, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Although they fucked that up remember, with Corbyn and Labour well down in the likely running.



This time Corbyn has been pushed far enough towards Remain I don't see it happening.


----------



## Saunders (Aug 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> like a filthy whore


!!


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

Telegraph names four Tory MPs who it says have welcomed Corbyn's suggestion.

Guardian suggests pressure is growing on LDs to support it too.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

The spectacle of the British political class seeking various grubby lash ups, against a backdrop of a growing sense of quivering panic among their ranks is one of the most enjoyable spectacles of recent years. It can’t be long before one of them seriously  proposes just abolishing elections for good. 

In my lifetime I can’t remember the real motivations and venality of the professional middle class being so stark and above the surface. The long term damage to their ability to achieve consent to govern and make laws is incalculable but undeniable.

I would suggest that those cheering Corbyn’s efforts to be the figurehead of this bankruptcy and squalid panic might want to reflect on where this leads in the longer term. If I as him I’d want to be as far away from it as possible


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The spectacle of the British political class seeking various grubby lash ups, against a backdrop of a growing sense of quivering panic among their ranks is one of the most enjoyable spectacles of recent years. It can’t be long before one of them seriously  proposes just abolishing elections for good.
> 
> In my lifetime I can’t remember the real motivations and venality of the professional middle class being so stark and above the surface. The long term damage to their ability to achieve consent to govern and make laws is incalculable but undeniable.
> 
> I would suggest that those cheering Corbyn’s efforts to be the figurehead of this bankruptcy and squalid panic might want to reflect on where this leads in the longer term. If I as him I’d want to be as far away from it as possible


Isn't that the principle behind proroguing parliament?

There also the fixed term parliament act


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The spectacle of the British political class seeking various grubby lash ups, against a backdrop of a growing sense of quivering panic among their ranks is one of the most enjoyable spectacles of recent years. It can’t be long before one of them seriously  proposes just abolishing elections for good.
> 
> In my lifetime I can’t remember the real motivations and venality of the professional middle class being so stark and above the surface. The long term damage to their ability to achieve consent to govern and make laws is incalculable but undeniable.
> 
> I would suggest that those cheering Corbyn’s efforts to be the figurehead of this bankruptcy and squalid panic might want to reflect on where this leads in the longer term. If I as him I’d want to be as far away from it as possible



I doubt Corbyn really wants to be interim PM as it would surely sink him for good. He wants to be able to say he tried everything to stop no deal.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I doubt Corbyn really wants to be interim PM as it would surely sink him for good. He wants to be able to say he tried everything to stop no deal.


I think it gives him credibility as a leader, actually.  People will stop seeing him as a danger and get used to the idea of him being PM


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 16, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I doubt Corbyn really wants to be interim PM as it would surely sink him for good. He wants to be able to say he tried everything to stop no deal.


And wants to trap the LDs between Brexit and Johnson, which he has succeeded in doing.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I think it gives him credibility as a leader, actually.  People will stop seeing him as a danger and get used to the idea of him being PM



Just imagine the tabloid froth if they could run with a 'Corbyn Coup' angle. Which they would do regardless of what was actually happening, ie a temporary caretaker administration supported by the majority of the house and with very limited power.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Just imagine the tabloid froth if they could run with a 'Corbyn Coup' angle. Which they would do regardless of what was actually happening, ie a temporary caretaker administration supported by the majority of the house and with very limited power.


Just imagine yesterday


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Just imagine yesterday
> 
> View attachment 181050



I'm on holiday and avoiding papers but yeah, not surprised.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 16, 2019)

Actual Soubry...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> People will stop seeing him as a danger and get used to the idea of him being PM



Precisely. He will lose his outsider status and be the figurehead of the rotten establishment. He then goes into a GE trying to put his 'radical' hat back on. Fatal.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm on holiday and avoiding papers but yeah, not surprised.



I recommend having a holiday from this thread too


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I doubt Corbyn really wants to be interim PM as it would surely sink him for good. He wants to be able to say he tried everything to stop no deal.



Yeah, that's clearly what those who dreamt the strategy up thought as well. Personally, if I wanted to win an election in November  I'd want to be as far away from a lash up of Tories/Remaniac Chuggers and Cooper/Starmer/Swinson and the Nats as possible.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 16, 2019)

Even if it's just noise it opens up to dual attack of 'he's dangerous/he's not so different to us'


----------



## teuchter (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Precisely. He will lose his outsider status and be the figurehead of the rotten establishment. He then goes into a GE trying to put his 'radical' hat back on. Fatal.


Do you think, in terms of electability, the portion of people who might consider him too establishment are more important than the portion of people who consider him too 'radical'?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Do you think, in terms of electability, the portion of people who might consider him too establishment are more important than the portion of people who consider him too 'radical'?


Any positive electoral popularity he has (as opposed to best alternative to get the tories out) is going to rest on him representing a clean break


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Do you think, in terms of electability, the portion of people who might consider him too establishment are more important than the portion of people who consider him too 'radical'?



In terms of the last GE the Labour surge was wholly linked to desire for 'change'. Adopting the role of the elderly titular head of a rabble of neo-liberals and failed pols engaged in an naked power grab, with profound democratic consequences, would be a very bad look especially in the seats labour needs to win. In fact it would be the end of the project.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 16, 2019)

This is why I thought the all female cabinet, or Ken Clarke taking over aren't such bad ideas...Let Angela Eagle have a go!  Corbyn seems to be putting himself forward for the role, which I think is a mistake... You never know though, he might be able to ride the tiger


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> You never know though, he might be able to ride the tiger



You definitely need a holiday if that's the conclusion you've reached....


----------



## ska invita (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You definitely need a holiday if that's the conclusion you've reached....


It's clearly not a conclusion


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

YTom Watson is stroking his chin and wondering if letting corbyn destroy himself and Labour in the next GE is ‘a price worth paying’.....


----------



## ska invita (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You definitely need a holiday if that's the conclusion you've reached....


I agree with you, that's why I'm saying let a patsy take over.
But it's not totally impossible for Corbyn to get in the driving seat and take control of the narrative. Power (however limited) creates opportunities. On paper it looks poisoned though, for sure


----------



## teuchter (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> In terms of the last GE the Labour surge was wholly linked to desire for 'change'. Adopting the role of the elderly titular head of a rabble of neo-liberals and failed pols engaged in an naked power grab, with profound democratic consequences, would be a very bad look especially in the seats labour needs to win. In fact it would be the end of the project.


I dunno if the electorate as a whole are that dogmatic.

For some people, maybe he'd be tarred by association, regardless of what the alternatives were, come a GE. For others, otherwise sceptical about him, he might have proved that he's capable of holding office. The latter group might be larger. And if he can't convince them, then the 'project' is dead anyway.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 16, 2019)

teuchter said:


> For others, otherwise sceptical about him, he might have proved that he's capable of holding office. The latter group might be larger. And if he can't convince them, then the 'project' is dead anyway.



In the event this plan comes to fruition you’d have Corbyn installed at the leader propped up by Swinson, Sturgeon, Grieve, Soubry and a load of hostile blairites.

The tories, Farage and the media would talking coups. The markets would be going crazy and Corbyn will be lightening rod for it all. Then he goes into a GE saying we are going to make things better.

Not a winning strategy in my view and surely only of attraction to those who want him gone?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> The only person Galloway will back is the person he sees in the mirror, or possibly Steve Bannon, whom he was gladhanding earlier this year.
> 
> Given the Libdems are only good for splitting the vote, I don't fancy betting against a tory government. Their refusal to stand aside kept Rudd in position.
> 
> Fuck it all


Galloway is currently doing research on which seat has the most Mirpuri voters. He's sniffed a new opp.


----------



## kenny g (Aug 16, 2019)

I very much doubt Corbyn would be capable of the role. He should suggest having Clark or Harman as his deputy with responsibility for negotiating an extension along with implementing a referendum. Corbyn can guarantee an election whatever the result and in the meantime  do what he does best i.e. not a lot.


----------



## chilango (Aug 16, 2019)

1/Enough of capital is now ready and prepared for a no deal Brexit that Boris can just ride it out past the deadline and crash out.

or

2/They're not, and a pro-EU centrist technocratic lash up is installed post VoNC.

I reckon Option 2.


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

kenny g said:


> I very much doubt Corbyn would be capable of the role. He should suggest having Clark or Harman as his deputy with responsibility for negotiating an extension along with implementing a referendum. Corbyn can guarantee an election whatever the result and in the meantime  do what he does best i.e. not a lot.


Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.


----------



## Supine (Aug 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.



I can't see Brexiteers going for Clarke. It'd be ace to see Boris quickly deposed by somebody though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.


anyone but the leader of the largest opposition party


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

Supine said:


> I can't see Brexiteers going for Clarke. It'd be ace to see Boris quickly deposed by somebody though.


I don't think it's really about who Brexiteers would go for, it's more about finding someone that the whole opposition and a handful (because that's all that would be needed) of Tory Remainers could get behind, in order to ensure that a VoNC was successful.


----------



## binka (Aug 16, 2019)

Corbyn can't abrogate responsibility and allow someone else to lead a short term unity government. He's leader of the opposition of course it has to be him


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't think it's really about who Brexiteers would go for, it's more about finding someone that the whole opposition and a handful (because that's all that would be needed) of Tory Remainers could get behind, in order to ensure that a VoNC was successful.


yeh but they're lumbered with corbyn as it's frankly very hard to see how the labour party membership could be kept in any way onside if the elected leader, the leader of the opposition, was junked on the say-so of minor parties like the lib dems.


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but they're lumbered with corbyn as it's frankly very hard to see how the labour party membership could be kept in any way onside if the elected leader, the leader of the opposition, was junked on the say-so of minor parties like the lib dems.


Again, I'm not sure that the Labour party membership are relevant to what is basically a bit of parliamentary manoeuvring, a way of blocking the current government and substituting another one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Again, I'm not sure that the Labour party membership are relevant to what is basically a bit of parliamentary manoeuvring, a way of blocking the current government and substituting another one.


you're missing the point, which is that while in the _short term_ you're right, what it would do to the labour party would be of longer-term interest. the left v the right fighting over the way auld corby was royally fucked.


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're missing the point, which is that while in the _short term_ you're right, what it would do to the labour party would be of longer-term interest. the left v the right fighting over the way auld corby was royally fucked.


Maybe we're talking at cross purposes then.

I agree that there would be wider and longer term political consequences to the parliamentary manoeuvring we're seeing, assuming they were successful, and that they might be differences in the consequences of Corbyn becoming caretaker PM compared to, say, Clarke. 

But that's quite a different question from the one of whether they will be successful in stopping a No Deal Brexit by a VoNC followed by a caretaker govt asking the EU for another extension. 

It's the latter which is what I think most people are focused on ATM, and what my recent posts have referred to.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Maybe we're talking at cross purposes then.
> 
> I agree that there would be wider and longer term political consequences to the parliamentary manoeuvring we're seeing, assuming they were successful, and that they might be differences in the consequences of Corbyn becoming caretaker PM compared to, say, Clarke.
> 
> ...


i think it might be an ask to get it past the plp in sufficient numbers to make it workable - dump your leader so a soft tory can have a go for a bit

i think there'd be a split - even if of 80/20 - which would hamper such a manouevre


----------



## andysays (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it might be an ask to get it past the plp in sufficient numbers to make it workable - dump your leader so a soft tory can have a go for a bit
> 
> i think there'd be a split - even if of 80/20 - which would hamper such a manouevre


I agree that's a significant potential obstacle


----------



## treelover (Aug 16, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> In terms of the last GE the Labour surge was wholly linked to desire for 'change'. Adopting the role of the elderly titular head of a rabble of neo-liberals and failed pols engaged in an naked power grab, with profound democratic consequences, would be a very bad look especially in the seats labour needs to win. In fact it would be the end of the project.



It is threads and contributions like this that can make someone, change their mind.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 16, 2019)

Spandex said:


> The only reason brexit is even a thing is because of a disagreement in the UK ruling class over whether the UK should align with US or EU style capitalism. The relative sizes of the pro-brexit and pro-remain factions of capital are kind of moot since the pro-Brexit lot have forced and won the referendum, currently form the government and just have to sit it out until Halloween to get the no deal brexit they want.


I've been thinking about this, and this:



Dogsauce said:


> I’m not contesting this point, but I’m wondering right now why capital isn’t screaming it’s lungs out in opposition to no deal - is this acceptance, not wanting to lose favour with government, or just that the larger trans-national elements of capital will just shrug and move factories elsewhere without feeling much pain? It seems weird that the CBI types aren’t having very public spats with the administration, unless this isn’t being reported. I guess it might be that they just want it out of the way so some element of certainty returns and they can then adapt to the new environment, the limbo situation of the last couple of years can’t have offered much benefit to them either.



And I've been thinking about how it relates to this:



kabbes said:


> I find myself wondering what recession even means now.  Whose recession?  Do we have sufficient shared interests across a society to even understand what the concept means any more?
> 
> A recession is two consecutive quarters of negative GDP growth and I sure as shit don’t have any faith in GDP to tell me anything about actual social well-being.
> 
> ...



I think that what it comes down to is that _serious_ capital doesn't care that much about Brexit because what happens within Britain is a blip within a global corporation.  There's a regulatory challenge that needs sorting out and that's largely been taken care of now.  Beyond that, Britain's loss is somebody else's gain and somebody playing the game globally is OK either way.

To the more UK-focussed FTSE 250 type of companies, Brexit is a much bigger deal and they _have_ been making a fuss.  They generally don't want cowboy capitalism, actually, because big companies have come to realise that they are much, much better off operating under strong corporate governance anyway -- what kills companies is when they try to take shortcuts.  So they want to play by a good set of rules and they want everybody else to do so too in order to level the playing field.  

It's the smaller companies outside the FTSE 350 that think that they will benefit by slacker rules, and these are the players more generally have had distinct owners keen on deregulation.  There are some exceptions, of course -- Tim Weatherspoon and James Dyson spring to mind (both owners of FTSE 250 companies, although Weatherspoons is at the smaller end of the 250).  Exceptions don't break the general pattern though.  

The other agitators are capital vampires -- those that try to game the system.  The problem with using these guys to determine what "capital" wants, though, is that their interests are generally diametrically opposite to what corporations want, and this means although they stand to gain short-term from chaos, in the long-run they are just as screwed by it as everybody else.  Even a parasite needs its host to be healthy.  Once you've made your money from shorting a position, you are then sitting in a world in which the corporations making the money you hope to siphon off aren't the cash cows they once were.

So what are we left with?
The big players don't care that much.
The medium sized players care quite a lot and are making their voices heard but, frankly, their voices aren't very loud.  Plus they're worried about alienating their customers.
The small players want all kinds of different things, and some of them want something that will actually end up bad for them but they don't realise it yet.
The vampires want a short term gain that will hurt them in the long run.

In short, capital's interest is served by as much stability and free trade as possible but not all the players involved either realise that are incentivised to maintain the very system that allows them to thrive.


----------



## hash tag (Aug 16, 2019)

For Pickman's model (the background changes) Brexit Countdown Timer


----------



## hash tag (Aug 16, 2019)

Or How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

treelover said:


> It is threads and contributions like this that can make someone, change their mind.


Not always as the poster intended tho


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Or How many days to Brexit - A Brexit countdown timer


I think you've confused me with Ranbay


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think you've confused me with Ranbay



I can see how to be honest.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I can see how to be honest.


Yeh two of the most charismatic posters here, playboys of the western world


----------



## hash tag (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Not always as the poster intended tho



Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?


No


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 16, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Have I not seen you posting the final countdown on other threads (trying to put the fear of god into everyone)?


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh two of the most charismatic posters here, playboys of the western world



With Badgers at our side.


----------



## hash tag (Aug 16, 2019)

Forum rules...11.29 on another thread


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 16, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Forum rules...11.29 on another thread


Are you quite alright?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 16, 2019)

_*Life in the Bubble Anti-No Deal Labour-SNP-Plaid but not Libs and other assorted Chukkist Cranks and Running Dogs Government of National Unity News:*_

Grauniad says 'No deal edges closer as key Tories refuse to back Corbyn'
Telegraph says key Tory rebels 'Welcome Corbyn Plan'

Two men say they're Jesus, one of 'em must be wrong...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 16, 2019)

Thoughts on the GFPA going down the shitter with a Boris no deal/no back stop?


----------



## teqniq (Aug 18, 2019)

Observer supporting Labour's plan. Who'dve thunk it?

The Observer view on Jeremy Corbyn and stopping a no-deal Brexit | Observer editorial


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Swinson has now suggested either Clarke or Harman for the caretaker PM role, according to BBC website.


Princess Leia of the Remain Alliance.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 18, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Observer supporting Labour's plan. Who'dve thunk it?
> 
> The Observer view on Jeremy Corbyn and stopping a no-deal Brexit | Observer editorial


I didn't know this bit below. I mean it makes sense because how could they get through any meaningful policy when they're backed up by Tories and libdems but didn't know it was a commitment. I think it's a fucking terrible idea tbh


----------



## Ranbay (Aug 19, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Aug 19, 2019)

Ok, so i'm away from wednesday - Monday the 2nd Sept...

So someone can fill in, or you can all ignore the timer thing becuse nothing will happen in the 2 weeks anyways.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 19, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Thoughts on the GFPA going down the shitter with a Boris no deal/no back stop?


Good Friday Agreement? This is one of the reasons I think No Deal is still just an empty threat by the cabinet. That said I think it's interesting how little comment it generates in the daily Brexit reporting  out of England, including coverage of the Yellowhammer leak in which it was a footnote.

Telegraph floating via IDS an election before a vote of confidence now... That makes sense... better not to fight an election having just lost a voc, and also blocks off unity government maneouvers


----------



## Supine (Aug 19, 2019)

I think an election called on first day back sounds rather likely. All or bust for Johnson.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 19, 2019)

calling a GE before oct 31 seems like johnson's best tactic - can fight promising a no deal exit on oct 31 - neutralising the brexit party -whilst hoping the anti-no deal vote gets split. If he wins (a big if - but not impossible) he then has to decide weather to drive the uk of a cliff or betray all the people who have just voted for him.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

Supine said:


> I think an election called on first day back sounds rather likely. All or bust for Johnson.


We have the possibility of a general election being called, a vote of no confidence, a parliamentary recall and leaving the political/trading bloc we've been a member of since the 70s - all within a few days. Strange days indeed.

Edit: some of these can happen, not all together of course. I'd say the likelihood of any one of these, from most likely to least is:

1. gen election (with or without vonc)
2=.vonc (but no corbyn administration)
3=. leaving on the 31st October
4. recall of parliament


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> So someone can fill in, or you can all ignore the timer thing becuse nothing will happen in the 2 weeks anyways.


broadly, Boris Johnson's position.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 19, 2019)

How long does a general election take?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> How long does a general election take?


6 weeks

6 weeks of hell


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

ska invita said:


> How long does a general election take?


Without checking I have a feeling it's around 6 weeks - but could only be called when parliament is sitting (given the need to do various things under the fixed term parliament act). Suspect it takes even longer if it's done via a vonc as they have to wait 14 days for someone else to form a government.


----------



## Ted Striker (Aug 19, 2019)

A GE sounds rather bonkers for both main parties though - they will simply spend 6 weeks showing the (significant) splits amongst the opposing party, thus leaving it open for Lib Dems/Brexit Party to gain ground.

Granted Johnson has more to lose, but it'd be shit-or-bust for Corbyn too.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 19, 2019)

I assume under the Fixed Term Parliament Act Boris Johnson can't necessarily have a General Election on a whim to suit his timing. I think a vote of no confidence can be made to happen first even if Johnson doesn't want it that way round.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I assume under the Fixed Term Parliament Act Boris Johnson can't necessarily have a General Election on a whim to suit his timing. I think a vote of no confidence can be made to happen first even if Johnson doesn't want it that way round.


early election motion supported by 2/3 majority can do it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> A GE sounds rather bonkers for both main parties though - they will simply spend 6 weeks showing the (significant) splits amongst the opposing party, thus leaving it open for Lib Dems/Brexit Party to gain ground.
> 
> Granted Johnson has more to lose, but it'd be shit-or-bust for Corbyn too.


it's bonkers not to have an election and bonkers to have an election. which is more bonkers, i suppose we'll find out in a few weeks


----------



## Wilf (Aug 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> early election motion supported by 2/3 majority can do it.


Yep and if Johnson wants a GE, Corbyn will support him in that. I suspect the DUP would be just about the only party who'd be against it, given that it would probably lead to their loss or privileges billion pound bungs.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 19, 2019)

I'm betting they let the VOC play out... maximum Traitors mileage that way. 
#whatwouldbannondo?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> We have the possibility of a general election being called, a vote of no confidence, a parliamentary recall and leaving the political/trading bloc we've been a member of since the 70s - all within a few days. Strange days indeed.
> 
> Edit: some of these can happen, not all together of course. I'd say the likelihood of any one of these, from most likely to least is:
> 
> ...


or Johnson could ask the EU for an extension, everyone acts as if he won't but the fucker has gone back on promises before


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> or Johnson could ask the EU for an extension, everyone acts as if he won't but


we'll either be in the eu on 1/11/19 or there's a fair chance johnson's head will end up on a pike


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 19, 2019)

there's a fair chance johnson's head will end up on a pike


----------



## gosub (Aug 19, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Aug 20, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Good Friday Agreement? This is one of the reasons I think No Deal is still just an empty threat by the cabinet. That said I think it's interesting how little comment it generates in the daily Brexit reporting  out of England, including coverage of the Yellowhammer leak in which it was a footnote.


This bombing on the NI/Ireland border has barely scraped the news in England
Police plea for NI political progress after bomb
BBC report not mentioning Brexit is amusing...usually jump on any chance to link to their What Is Brexit Anyway guides


----------



## philosophical (Aug 20, 2019)

From reports it was a nasty incident, a fake device to lure the authorities near a real one.
The inexcusable incident was rather unsurprisingly near the border.
Inexcusable but sadly understandable.


----------



## Crispy (Aug 20, 2019)

Boris flexes his diplomatic muscles





















TL;DR: Kill the backstop, replace it with "we'll try really hard to solve the border some other way, scouts honour"


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

the signature seems to be about two-thirds of the way to a spunking cock


----------



## Poi E (Aug 20, 2019)

Leave N. Ireland and the problem goes away. Simple solution. Surprised he hasn't thought of it.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 20, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Leave N. Ireland and the problem goes away. Simple solution. Surprised he hasn't thought of it.


I am sure he has but he needs the DUP if he had a Tory majority he would sell them down the river in a heartbeat


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the signature seems to be about two-thirds of the way to a spunking cock
> 
> View attachment 181537


PM Bob


----------



## Flavour (Aug 20, 2019)

Does anyone think the Tory's approach to the backstop would be any different if they were not in coalition with the DUP? I don't.


----------



## killer b (Aug 20, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Does anyone think the Tory's approach to the backstop would be any different if they were not in coalition with the DUP? I don't.


absolutely it would. there would be a border down the irish sea and we'd be out of the EU.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 20, 2019)

So there it is, the wonder strategy to make Brexit happen on 31st October.  Just a bit of word play around the backstop to get the DUP on board and hopefully enough will follow.

Interesting to see how the erg types react.  A lot of them were very scathing about a lot of May's plan, a total sell out seemed to be a common phrase.  In the unlikely event that the EU does play ball do the brexiteers stick or twist?  Do you accept it as the best route to Brexit or do you vote it down because a hard brexit is in sight and you have a leader that has promised just that?  Do you risk a GE and a Corbyn led government and another referendum?

It's academic anyway because the EU will tell him to swivel, the battle-lines have been drawn for some time now.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 20, 2019)

killer b said:


> absolutely it would. there would be a border down the irish sea and we'd be out of the EU.



which would effectively mean giving up NI and letting it go independent by default, meaning independence for scotland an inevitability.


----------



## killer b (Aug 20, 2019)

Flavour said:


> which would effectively mean giving up NI and letting it go independent by default, meaning independence for scotland an inevitability.


Perhaps - those issues are pretty secondary to the bulk of the brexit headbangers though. Check the polling, they don't give a fuck. 

The Irish border was a non-issue until the DUP became involved, and would have remained a non-issue - or at least a much more minor obstacle - had May maintained or increased her majority in the 2017 election.


----------



## Supine (Aug 20, 2019)

Flavour said:


> which would effectively mean giving up NI and letting it go independent by default, meaning independence for scotland an inevitability.



Then years of discussions about a border with Scotland. Oh joy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

Supine said:


> Then years of discussions about a border with Scotland. Oh joy.


the antonine wall ftw


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 20, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So there it is, the wonder strategy to make Brexit happen on 31st October.  Just a bit of word play around the backstop to get the DUP on board and hopefully enough will follow.



Did you expect anything else? I certainly didn't.



> Interesting to see how the erg types react.  A lot of them were very scathing about a lot of May's plan, a total sell out seemed to be a common phrase.  In the unlikely event that the EU does play ball do the brexiteers stick or twist?  Do you accept it as the best route to Brexit or do you vote it down because a hard brexit is in sight and you have a leader that has promised just that?  Do you risk a GE and a Corbyn led government and another referendum?



I suspect he's sounded out the ERG, or if they did vote any new agreement down, I suspect Johnson would call a GE, waving the agreement around, Neville Chamberlain style, in the hope it's enough to capture most of the Brexit Party votes. Yes, I know this would involve another short extension, but I think he would ask for that under such circumstances.

Mind you, I don't know why the fuck I typed that, after all no one bloody knows WTF is going to happen.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the antonine wall ftw



The way things are going, a Mancunian Wall might be a more popular boundary.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 20, 2019)

Doesn't matter where we build the wall, it's who we put against it


----------



## Wilf (Aug 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the signature seems to be about two-thirds of the way to a spunking cock
> 
> View attachment 181537


He may have to rely on Spunking Cock MPs in a future coalition government.


----------



## Crispy (Aug 20, 2019)

No surprises here:


----------



## binka (Aug 20, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> calling a GE before oct 31 seems like johnson's best tactic - can fight promising a no deal exit on oct 31 - neutralising the brexit party -whilst hoping the anti-no deal vote gets split. If he wins (a big if - but not impossible) he then has to decide weather to drive the uk of a cliff or betray all the people who have just voted for him.


I don't think the anti-no deal vote will split. When it comes down to it in a tory / lab marginal then lib dems and their ilk will surely vote labour, it's maybe too much to expect anti-no deal tories to vote labour but can see them voting lib dem.

Might be wrong obviously but I think an early election could really work for labour. A lot depends on what the brexit party does though obviously


----------



## teuchter (Aug 20, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Boris flexes his diplomatic muscles
> 
> 
> 
> ...



A letter from one man, who did not write the text and likely does not fully understand, to another man who will likely neither read nor understand it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

teuchter said:


> A letter from one man, who did not write the text and likely does not fully understand, to another man who will likely neither read nor understand it.


a letter which was never considered or they wouldn't patronised donald tusk by explaining what the abbreviations uk and eu meant.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 20, 2019)

"affords the people of N Ireland no influence over the legislation that applies to them".

Tusk is well aware of the collapse of Stormont. This letter just makes Johnson look like a fucking moron.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 20, 2019)

binka said:


> I don't think the anti-no deal vote will split. When it comes down to it in a tory / lab marginal then lib dems and their ilk will surely vote labour, it's maybe too much to expect anti-no deal tories to vote labour but can see them voting lib dem.
> 
> Might be wrong obviously but I think an early election could really work for labour. A lot depends on what the brexit party does though obviously



oh yeah - its could easily end up with the tories being booted out - but its probably the least worst option for johnson. the damage of No deal or having to extend brexit  past oct 31 will fuck the tories chances good and proper


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 20, 2019)

Poi E said:


> "affords the people of N Ireland no influence over the legislation that applies to them".
> 
> Tusk is well aware of the collapse of Stormont. This letter just makes Johnson look like a fucking moron.


Theresa may looks in contrast a veritable stateswoman


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Aug 20, 2019)

I was thinking something slightly absurd but not impossible. If Boris suddenly revoked Article 50 , gave a serious TV address to the nation and moved on would he survive? and what exactly would become of Brexit? In an instance he could become Mr Maverick overnight!

He could actually cling onto power longer than he is currently going to.


----------



## Ming (Aug 20, 2019)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I was thinking something slightly absurd but not impossible. If Boris suddenly revoked Article 50 , gave a serious TV address to the nation and moved on would he survive? and what exactly would become of Brexit? In an instance he could become Mr Maverick overnight!
> 
> He could actually cling onto power longer than he is currently going to.


That’s a nice idea. But it doesn’t suite all the financial backers of Brexit who’ve shorted sterling and are waiting to buy up the businesses which are going to fail like vultures waiting for a dying water buffalo to expire (damn...).


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 20, 2019)

DJWrongspeed said:


> I was thinking something slightly absurd but not impossible. If Boris suddenly revoked Article 50 , gave a serious TV address to the nation and moved on would he survive? and what exactly would become of Brexit? In an instance he could become Mr Maverick overnight!
> 
> He could actually cling onto power longer than he is currently going to.





Ming said:


> That’s a nice idea. But it doesn’t suite all the financial backers of Brexit who’ve shorted sterling and are waiting to buy up the businesses which are going to fail like vultures waiting for a dying water buffalo to expire (damn...).



dunno really.  a lot of big business seems to be anti brexit, but is it big business or hedge funds / vulture capital that's bankrolling the party these days?

would have thought that cancelling brexit would cause a fair proportion of tory party members to explode, and with the numbers in parliament as they are, even half a dozen tory MPs defecting to brexit / ukip / some new and as yet unknown thing, could bugger it all up.  although whether they would want to do a VONC with the risk of a corbyn government is unclear.


----------



## Ming (Aug 20, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno really.  a lot of big business seems to be anti brexit, but is it big business or hedge funds / vulture capital that's bankrolling the party these days?
> 
> would have thought that cancelling brexit would cause a fair proportion of tory party members to explode, and with the numbers in parliament as they are, even half a dozen tory MPs defecting to brexit / ukip / some new and as yet unknown thing, could bugger it all up.  although whether they would want to do a VONC with the risk of a corbyn government is unclear.


It’s the speculators i’m referring to mainly. Hedge funds, private equity, sovereign wealth funds, etc. Disaster capitalists basically. They’re transnational and they don’t get sentimental about any countries in particular. It’s all about the money and avoiding tax and regulation.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Aug 20, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would have thought that cancelling brexit would cause a fair proportion of tory party members to explode, and with the numbers in parliament as they are, even half a dozen tory MPs defecting to brexit / ukip / some new and as yet unknown thing, could bugger it all up.  although whether they would want to do a VONC with the risk of a corbyn government is unclear.



good point, i hadn't thought of the Tory Brexiteers and the precarious nature of the current govt with the DUP. Still, by defecting they'd simply Corbyn the keys as you say so it's all a bit unknown.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Aug 20, 2019)

New Tory remoaner anti Johnson breakaway founded movement46


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Aug 21, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> New Tory remoaner anti Johnson breakaway founded movement46





> We have founded movement46 in honour of Robert Peel’s principled stand for progressive Conservatism.  We want it to be a rallying point for all those who feel politically homeless and who are looking for a movement that unites, not divides… looks outwards, not inwards…. *And is focussed on the future, not the past.*










i suppose the spirit of 1846 is a bit more up to date than what johnson and rees mogg have to offer...


----------



## Raheem (Aug 21, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> i suppose the spirit of 1846 is a bit more up to date than what johnson and rees mogg have to offer...


Time of the Great Famine, so possibly bang on.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 21, 2019)

killer b said:


> Perhaps - those issues are pretty secondary to the bulk of the brexit headbangers though. Check the polling, they don't give a fuck.
> 
> The Irish border was a non-issue until the DUP became involved, and would have remained a non-issue - or at least a much more minor obstacle - had May maintained or increased her majority in the 2017 election.



Sorry to be pedantic. It's not the _Irish_ border, though, is it? It's a British border in Ireland...


----------



## Flavour (Aug 21, 2019)

progressive conservatism, lol


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 21, 2019)

Flavour said:


> progressive conservatism, lol


The groupescule above is certainly worth laughing at. But progressive conservatism is certainly a position with some support, hence the libdems growth into Tory areas.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The groupescule above is certainly worth laughing at. But progressive conservatism is certainly a position with some support, hence the libdems growth into Tory areas.


Yep, but I'm not sure that many of those espousing such ideological positions actually support them as much as they use them as cover for their fundamentally regressive beliefs.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 21, 2019)

Oh goody, Johnson's off to Germany today so Merkel can tell him to get fucked.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 21, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh goody, Johnson's off to Germany today so Merkel can tell him to get fucked.


I envy her it must be nice to be able to do that


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Oh goody, Johnson's off to Germany today so Merkel can tell him to get fucked.


it's a long way to go to be told that, when he could simply phone her up and have a mouthful of german abuse far more cheaply


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> That’s a nice idea. But it doesn’t suite all the financial backers of Brexit who’ve shorted sterling and are waiting to buy up the businesses which are going to fail like vultures waiting for a dying water buffalo to expire (damn...).



Conversely, imagine the gains to be made from a big and unexpected boost to GBP as a result of, for example, a surprise revocation of article 50


----------



## Flavour (Aug 21, 2019)

i wonder if any of the people surrrounding BJ and telling him with their most Eton voices "good show old chap, you stick it to Jerry, there'll soon forget about this backstop!" are laughing behind his back in full knowledge that BJ is heading towards a brick wall, on the other side of which is a cliff


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 21, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i wonder if any of the people surrrounding BJ and telling him with their most Eton voices "good show old chap, you stick it to Jerry, there'll soon forget about this backstop!" are laughing behind his back in full knowledge that BJ is heading towards a brick wall, on the other side of which is a cliff



I think many of them share his delusion that he can just stamp his feet and get what he wants. That is after all how these people got everything in their lives up to this point.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

This was superb car crash TV. Bar the backstop Bridgen was unable to offer up any other coherent objections to May’s deal other than some faint racism and empty platitudes about directions for neo-liberalism.

Those who argue the debate about leave is dominated by the right, that there is no space for left ideas and that they wouldn’t get a hearing should reflect on the intellectual paucity of the Tory leavers.

The Leave Fight Transform campaign is a welcome initiative following Labour’s acceptance of the inevitability of neo-liberalism EU style and offers a place for the type of ideas necessary in the coming debate


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Those who argue the debate about leave is dominated by the right, that there is no space for left ideas and that they wouldn’t get a hearing should reflect on the intellectual paucity of the Tory leavers.



It's not just that the debate about leave is dominated by the right. The right is in power and shaping exactly how brexit will look and what will be done in its name. Regardless of the paucity of their intellect, the Tory leavers are in power right now. Personally, the idea of Johnson calling and winning an election this year leaves me feeling something not far short of despair. It also leaves me wondering at what point in this shitshow people who supported leave from the left might start admitting that they made an error in judgement. How bad to things have to get first?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not just that the debate about leave is dominated by the right. The right is in power and shaping exactly how brexit will look and what will be done in its name. Regardless of the paucity of their intellect, the Tory leavers are in power right now. Personally, the idea of Johnson calling and winning an election this year leaves me feeling something not far short of despair. It also leaves me wondering at what point in this shitshow people who supported leave from the left might start admitting that they made an error in judgement. How bad to things have to get first?


the point one lexiteer made to me well before the referendum was that the only way to get things to change was to vote to leave. that doesn't mean it will be pretty, this change. but the game's not played out and so until we see what form that change takes, and how reactions to that change shape what finally happens, it's a bit early to ask people who supported leave from the left to say they were wrong. i think a lot of lexiteers are playing a longer game than you are.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's not just that the debate about leave is dominated by the right. The right is in power and shaping exactly how brexit will look and what will be done in its name. Regardless of the paucity of their intellect, the Tory leavers are in power right now. Personally, the idea of Johnson calling and winning an election this year leaves me feeling something not far short of despair. It also leaves me wondering at what point in this shitshow people who supported leave from the left might start admitting that they made an error in judgement. How bad to things have to get first?



There is going to be an election in two months. The idea the 'right' is monolithically in power and in control as you suggest, or that it is shaping anything at the moment, is risible to be blunt. It is split and possibly out of government within weeks.

At the election there will be two choices:

1. Labour's position is likely to be 'remain and reform'. In reality, remain and accept EU neo-liberal economics.
2. The Tories position is likely to be leave and turn Britain into a vassal state of the USA.

A massive space now exists for an alternative analysis and set of ideas, counterposed to the disaster of options 1 and 2. Both are utterly piss poor and devoid of hope. LeFT aims to offer something better and something to mobilise around whoever wins.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> There is going to be an election in two months. The idea the 'right' is monolithically in power as you suggest and is shaping anything at the moment is risible to be blunt. At that election there will be two choices:
> 
> 1. Labour's position is likely to be 'remain and reform'. In reality, remain and accept EU neo-liberal economics.
> 2. The Tories position is likely to be leave and turn Britain into a vassal state of the USA.
> ...


Agreed, but when the election is called, those 2 structural positions will be presented to the electorate by more than 2 parties. If Johnson were to enter any form of agreement with the supra-state, (anything short of full-blown No-Dealism), the Brexit Party will clearly run with the betrayal line. And the LDs will certainly be running with the purist remain/Brejoin line. So I'm not sure that the electoral space will be so open as you speculate.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Agreed, but when the election is called, those 2 structural positions will be presented to the electorate by more than 2 parties. If Johnson were to enter any form of agreement with the supra-state, (anything short of full-blown No-Dealism), the Brexit Party will clearly run with the betrayal line. And the LDs will certainly be running with the purist remain/Brejoin line. So I'm not sure that the electoral space will be so open as you speculate.


tbh i don't think the election's the thing people should be concentrating on, should we depart the eu as anticipated, as it is the aftermath to that that will indicate how things may proceed. i think that the more important thing isn't electoral politics but how people respond to the er challenges which will be posed following a no deal brexit - what happens next year and in the several years afterwards. and if the government retreats from its current intransigent position, how that's responded to by people. it's not going to be all about electoral politics in the future, i think social movements and extra-parliamentary expressions of politics are going to be far more important for the left.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Agreed, but when the election is called, those 2 structural positions will be presented to the electorate by more than 2 parties. If Johnson were to enter any form of agreement with the supra-state, (anything short of full-blown No-Dealism), the Brexit Party will clearly run with the betrayal line. And the LDs will certainly be running with the purist remain/Brejoin line. So I'm not sure that the electoral space will be so open as you speculate.



It's not about electoral space. At this point, it's about analysis and ideas. It is about agglomerating support for them.


----------



## Ming (Aug 21, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Conversely, imagine the gains to be made from a big and unexpected boost to GBP as a result of, for example, a surprise revocation of article 50


And monkeys might fly out of my butt. The no deal is going to turn the country (or whatever remains of it) into an Ayn Randian lovers wet dream. A completely deregulated super low tax version of Singapore in Europe. And I've got twenty quid on it.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It's not about electoral space. At this point, it's about analysis and ideas. It is about agglomerating support for them.


Yes, but you were specifically referring to the choices that will be presented to the electorate at the next GE; although you're right to suggest that the choice is essentially 'how do you want your neoliberalism", that's not how it will appear to the voter faced with at least 4 responses to Brexit.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> And monkeys might fly out of my butt. The no deal is going to turn the country (or whatever remains of it) into an Ayn Randian lovers wet dream. A completely deregulated super low tax version of Singapore in Europe. And I've got twenty quid on it.



Who did you place the bet with, and at what point will you be able to collect your $5?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes, but you were specifically referring to the choices that will be presented to the electorate at the next GE; although you're right to suggest that the choice is essentially 'how do you want your neoliberalism", that's not how it will appear to the voter faced with at least 4 responses to Brexit.



I was referring to it in reply to a poster. The GE is merely the end of the beginning.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I was referring to it in reply to a poster. The GE is merely the end of the beginning.



Fair enough; very much.


----------



## Ming (Aug 21, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Who did you place the bet with, and at what point will you be able to collect your $5?


Someone I've got on ignore. But I'll still pay my $3 to the server fund on Halloween.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I was referring to it in reply to a poster. The GE is merely the end of the beginning.


suitably churchillian


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> suitably churchillian


Easy to imagine fighting on beaches.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Easy to imagine fighting on beaches.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> suitably churchillian



But also apt in these circumstances. Anyone who thinks the imminent GE settles anything is seriously wide of the mark.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> But also apt in these circumstances. Anyone who thinks the imminent GE settles anything is seriously wide of the mark.


i don't think it will settle anything


----------



## AnandLeo (Aug 21, 2019)

If Theresa May compromised with the parliament, UK could have left the EU while retaining good relations for trade and industry. Theresa May’s loyalty to the conservative party did not allow that to happen. Boris Johnson is heading for a catastrophic withdrawal from the EU with calamitous consequences for UK, and EU. However, whether that will actually happen remains to be seen until the intervention of the parliament. Boris Johnson’s contrivance tantamount to an Anglo-European economic debacle compounded by a sour no-win trade relation with the US. It has not happened yet, I do not know what might actually happen.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 21, 2019)

Leave does not mean stay joined as far as I can tell.
Brexiters and lexiters and any other leave voter from any part of the political spectrum voted for a hard border in Ireland.
If Boris Johnson does not establish that hard border he will not deliver brexit on the 31st October or at any other time.
We nearly had BINO, and doublethink Boris Johnson will try to persuade people he has succeeded by establishing LINO.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the signature seems to be about two-thirds of the way to a spunking cock
> 
> View attachment 181537


Does that mean if I vote spunking cock the tories will get my vote now?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 21, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Does that mean if I vote spunking cock the tories will get my vote now?


Personally, I'll be looking Spunking Cock's manifesto first.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> A massive space now exists for an alternative analysis and set of ideas, counterposed to the disaster of options 1 and 2. Both are utterly piss poor and devoid of hope. LeFT aims to offer something better and something to mobilise around whoever wins.



We've been hearing about things like _spaces existing for alternative analyses _and_ things to mobilise around_ for some time now, including during the past year or so with parliament pretty much in chaos, and yet nothing's actually happened, so why should anyone expect this to change?

The various 'centrist' parties and groups that continually pop up and wither are frequently mocked, but the performance of any kind of 'lexit' orientated movement is even more hopeless still.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Personally, I'll be looking Spunking Cock's manifesto first.


i fear you'll find the pages stuck together


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i fear you'll find the pages stuck together



its a seminal piece of writing


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This was superb car crash TV. Bar the backstop Bridgen was unable to offer up any other coherent objections to May’s deal other than some faint racism and empty platitudes about directions for neo-liberalism.
> 
> Those who argue the debate about leave is dominated by the right, that there is no space for left ideas and that they wouldn’t get a hearing should reflect on the intellectual paucity of the Tory leavers.
> 
> The Leave Fight Transform campaign is a welcome initiative following Labour’s acceptance of the inevitability of neo-liberalism EU style and offers a place for the type of ideas necessary in the coming debate



He says EU citizens shoudln't have more rights than UK citizens, which implies that, under the EU, citizens are afforded more rights than the Tories would like. Well done you tory twat


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 21, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the point one lexiteer made to me well before the referendum was that the only way to get things to change was to vote to leave. that doesn't mean it will be pretty, this change. but the game's not played out and so until we see what form that change takes, and how reactions to that change shape what finally happens, it's a bit early to ask people who supported leave from the left to say they were wrong. i think a lot of lexiteers are playing a longer game than you are.



If they are playing a long game it’s not one with any apparent strategy.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> If they are playing a long game it’s not one with any apparent strategy.



I’ve just outlined one on this thread. Read the LeFT statement.

Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement - Labour Heartlands

Any questions or queries feel free to leave here and I’ll answer them. It won’t be tonight however as I’m off out.


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ve just outlined one on this thread. Read the LeFT statement.
> 
> Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement - Labour Heartlands
> 
> Any questions or queries feel free to leave here and I’ll answer them. It won’t be tonight however as I’m off out.



I have a question. What are they going to do? It's some meaningless waffle and news articles. 

At least it fits with the whole racist thing that leave has going on. 

Labour drops candidate over claim Jews and Muslims seek to ‘dominate politics’

Lexit, waving racist cunts through since 2016.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> I have a question. What are they going to do? It's some meaningless waffle and news articles.
> 
> At least it fits with the whole racist thing that leave has going on.
> 
> ...


Was racism an issue in society pre 2016?


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Was racism an issue in society pre 2016?



Does your question have a point?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> Does your question have a point?


Yes. One option was to retain the status quo. One wasn't. Maybe have a think about why people were motivated to vote for the latter that goes beyond not liking foreigners


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yes. One option was to retain the status quo. One wasn't. Maybe have a think about why people were motivated to vote for the latter that goes beyond not liking foreigners



Can't be bothered with all this again. The leave campaign was racist to its core and they're starting to ramp up the xenophobic rhetoric again for the election. 

Someone posts a link to a website run by someone who thinks that white working class people are more deserving of political voice than Jewish and Muslim people and that's OK with you. Your first thought is to defend it. Nice.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> I have a question. What are they going to do? It's some meaningless waffle and news articles.
> 
> At least it fits with the whole racist thing that leave has going on.
> 
> ...



I’ll answer your questions in turn:

1. Read the statement. It sets out clearly what LeFT is going to do and how. The first step is to fill the space left by those in support of neo-liberalism of the EU variety (like your good self) and those in favour of the American version.
2. Please provide some evidence of how the statement ‘fits with the whole racist thing’? 
3. The only cunt here is you. You are an abysmal cunt. And a cunt who hides his middle class liberalism with a faux radical veneer. 

Now provide some evidence or fuck off


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> Can't be bothered with all this again. The leave campaign was racist to its core and they're starting to ramp up the xenophobic rhetoric again for the election.
> 
> Someone posts a link to a website run by someone who thinks that white working class people are more deserving of political voice than Jewish and Muslim people and that's OK with you. Your first thought is to defend it. Nice.


Mate I didn't even click your link, nobody did


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Here you go.

Prejudice and the Brexit vote: a tangled web

Or this one "Instead, couching their views in seemingly non-racial ways, they framed their concerns about immigration as a ‘legitimate’ response to a victimised whiteness"

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Next one.

Truly Project Hate: the third scandal of the official Vote Leave campaign headed by Boris Johnson

Not all about Brexit but shares my fear of more racist propaganda from team leave.

Show Racism the Red Card - Brexit and rising racism in Britain showed we must challenge misconceptions about Immigration and Multiculturalism

No comments on the anti Jewish and Muslim stuff?


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Mate I didn't even click your link, nobody did



Well done.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2019)

_Bring back philosophical_


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ll answer your questions in turn:
> 
> 1. Read the statement. It sets out clearly what LeFT is going to do and how. The first step is to fill the space left by those in support of neo-liberalism of the EU variety (like your good self) and those in favour of the American version.
> 2. Please provide some evidence of how the statement ‘fits with the whole racist thing’?
> ...



Very good. You do realise that you're occupying the US space by joining them. That's sort of the whole point of Brexit.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> Very good. You do realise that you're occupying the US space by joining them. That's sort of the whole point of Brexit.



Can you read? Are you some sort of ironic joke? Or are you really this bad??


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _Bring back philosophical_



Make a point or go away Butchers Wddeombe


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Can you read? Are you some sort of ironic joke? Or are you really this bad??



No just wondering how you're going to occupy the space?


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Also, are none of you bothered about what this guy said?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> No just wondering how you're going to occupy the space?



Read. The. Statement. Read. My. Post.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Can you read? Are you some sort of ironic joke? Or are you really this bad??


He really is this bad.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> He really is this bad.



Christ


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Read. The. Statement. Read. My. Post.



I read the statement and your post. Still not clear what's being done to achieve it. 

Are you happy to be associated with the author?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

Anju said:


> I read the statement and your post. Still not clear what's being done to achieve it.
> 
> Are you happy to be associated with the author?



You’ve had your go. Fuck off you clown


----------



## Flavour (Aug 21, 2019)

The point is you refuse to understand why people voted leave, mixing up the racism in the official leave campaign for 17 million people being "send 'em back, ain't no black in the union jack" types. Which is absurd. Some are, sure, and indeed there are some racists both in the official remain campaign and among the 16 million who voted to remain. Neither group has a monopoly on racism. People who like to tar-brush all leave voters as racist are often the same people who believe there should be an IQ test before you're allowed to vote, or that the people can't be trusted to vote in their own interests whatsoever. This is a dangerous way of viewing the world and the british electorate and I'm glad people like you are forced to examine these things which you had conveniently ignored for the previous decades (and would have continued to ignore if Remain had won) and which in large part led to the gap in perceived interests between people like you (internationalist, progressive, intelligent) and people who voted leave (nationalist, racist, thick)


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2019)

This idiot thinks because wragg signed this piece and later - after the original publication - then posted it on his own personal site that he therefore wrote it. Not any of the other far more qualified people who signed it and are far more likely to have done so. Therefore you personally are racist and so are all leave voters and are supportive of crap about jews and muslims.

It's astonishing - this is same stuff he wrote the day after the referendum. Down to the smears of being racist. Imagine not having developed politically one single step in that 3 years? Not having learnt anything about the vote, about wider society, about motivations and agendas etc - nothing. Then coming on here calling people, and i quote, 'Wddeombe'.


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

Flavour said:


> The point is you refuse to understand why people voted leave, mixing up the racism in the official leave campaign for 17 million people being "send 'em back, ain't no black in the union jack" types. Which is absurd. Some are, sure, and indeed there are some racists both in the official remain campaign and among the 16 million who voted to remain. Neither group has a monopoly on racism. People who like to tar-brush all leave voters as racist are often the same people who believe there should be an IQ test before you're allowed to vote, or that the people can't be trusted to vote in their own interests whatsoever. This is a dangerous way of viewing the world and the british electorate and I'm glad people like you are forced to examine these things which you had conveniently ignored for the previous decades (and would have continued to ignore if Remain had won) and which in large part led to the gap in perceived interests between people like you (internationalist, progressive, intelligent) and people who voted leave (nationalist, racist, thick)



I'm not saying every leave voter is racist, anymore, but looking at the potential of a Boris Johnson led Brexit with 5 years to work has upset me. 

I had never voted before the referendum and I mostly did so then because of the leave campaign racism, plus fears for the NHS and preferring EU countries to the other options post Brexit.

Seeing someone post a link to something they seem to see as positive, significant, a strategy and then reading it to discover it's just not is hugely disappointing. 

If people are prepared to vote the same way as a load of bigoted idiots, again not all leave voters, there are consequences if things go wrong and this was a real leap of faith vote when the Tories are in power.

I haven't accused any individual of being racist just of lexit voters waving racists through, which is essentially what happened.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2019)

_This _is a direct accusation of racism. Just over an hour ago.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2019)

As if saying that collectively leave voters are racist is any  better than than making a series of individual accusations anyway.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ve just outlined one on this thread. Read the LeFT statement.
> 
> Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement - Labour Heartlands
> 
> Any questions or queries feel free to leave here and I’ll answer them. It won’t be tonight however as I’m off out.


I have a question.
The founding statement says "Anything that divides the working-class movement and weakens its unity also threatens our democracy — because in a class society like ours it is only this collective solidarity that provides a barrier against the wealth and power of the few.
The new Leave campaign provides a voice for that class solidarity. "


Does that class solidarity begin with the 2.5 million odd people, the vast majority working class, currently in Britain without citizenship, currently at threat to be made illegal, either on 1st Nov 2019 or March 2021?

The one article on it on the site I could find relating to it doesn't fill me with confidence that it does.

It describes the fact that a million have registered simply as "good news" and then finishes the article with this killer critique of the Tory immigration plans :

*"During his leadership campaign, Johnson pledged to entrench EU nationals’ rights – saying he regretted that it had not happened immediately after the 2016 referendum.

“I will sort it out immediately and make sure that this issue is properly dealt with, and millions of people can stop worrying,” he said.

And during his first speech to the Commons, he promised: “under this government [EU citizens] will have the absolute certainty of the right to live and remain.”*

The only thing I got from this piece is that its supporting the Tory governments plans, and repeating Johsnsons outright lies unchallenged. I could see no sign of criticism of it - this perhaps the most obvious and impactful attempt to divide the working class that Brexit has produced so far.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 21, 2019)

That site is not the home of the campaign - they just circulated the founding statement along with a load of others.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 21, 2019)

ska invita I’ve got no involvement with the website that has shared the LeFT statement.

I didn’t think I could have been much clearer that my post was about the _statement_ and not this website, the morning star or any of the sites that have linked to it. In hindsight I should have just posted the statement in full


----------



## Anju (Aug 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This idiot thinks because wragg signed this piece and later - after the original publication - then posted it on his own personal site that he therefore wrote it. Not any of the other far more qualified people who signed it and are far more likely to have done so. Therefore you personally are racist and so are all leave voters and are supportive of crap about jews and muslims.
> 
> It's astonishing - this is same stuff he wrote the day after the referendum. Down to the smears of being racist. Imagine not having developed politically one single step in that 3 years? Not having learnt anything about the vote, about wider society, about motivations and agendas etc - nothing. Then coming on here calling people, and i quote, 'Wddeombe'.



Sorry, spelling mistake. It's just that when I saw AnnvWiddecombe make her EU speech debut it reminded me of you. 

It doesn't matter who wrote the statement, it's just another nail in the lexit coffin. I kind of doubt you were very impressed.

The anti Jewish and Muslim get off my rights thing is pretty telling and I'm surprised people here think it's OK to promote. 

I've actually learned quite a lot over the last couple of years but if I read something that annoys me the internet is best place to rant. Posts like the identity v class politics by Danny la Rouge are really helpful in understanding why the website and author are dodgy.

Also, plenty of studies showing that prejudice was a significant factor in the leave vote.


----------



## krink (Aug 21, 2019)

_numerous studies of support_


----------



## brogdale (Aug 21, 2019)

Is it right to see this as a call for a No-Deal exit?



> the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU as well as the structural racism of Fortress Europe.


----------



## Supine (Aug 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Is it right to see this as a call for a No-Deal exit?



I certainly see it as extremely misguided. It's the turkeys voting for Christmas.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> ska invita I’ve got no involvement with the website that has shared the LeFT statement.
> 
> I didn’t think I could have been much clearer that my post was about the _statement_ and not this website, the morning star or any of the sites that have linked to it. In hindsight I should have just posted the statement in full


Fair enough - i likely missed that earlier part of the conversation - im very distracted at the moment. And yet i think my points stands: founding statement has fine words about class unity...in practice is supported by class nationalists. With friend like these....
and its not just the Communist party types who are going down this road - comes from some class struggle anarchists too. 

If LeFT thinking is filling a gap that gap is being filled by yet more nationalism, judging by its supporters.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> class nationalists



I've never heard this term before, do you mean like left nationalists (english labour network/reclaim the st george cross/billy bragg etc) or like working class as a cultural identity sort of thing?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 22, 2019)

UK state broadcaster reporting that Merkel offered Johnson an opportunity to get rid of the backstop. She did no such thing, she told him that he has 30 days to come up with a workable, legal alternative to a hard border. Muttering some vague bollocks about technology will not be good enough.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I've never heard this term before, do you mean like left nationalists (english labour network/reclaim the st george cross/billy bragg etc) or like working class as a cultural identity sort of thing?


Are we talking 1848 stylee 'class nationalism'?



> The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationalities. The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to be the leading class of the nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word.


Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2019)

The link posted above from the lexit group insists that the Irish border problem can be solved by technology. Their 'proof' is a further link to a Swedish Customs expert appearing at a select committee in Parliament.
I watched it all.
The geezer said there need be no border of any kind if the level of trust either side of a border is high enough. 
So there we have it.
The lexit position is the 'honesty box' position. 'Trust me guv, I promise to do whatever the right thing is'.
It is not a technological solution, and when the expert was pressed on the land border and asked to pay regard to the number of crossing points, he repeated that no infrastructure was needed if the level of trust was high enough. He said no border was possible if everybody was prepared to do the right thing as individuals.
Lexiters are effectively promoting the honesty box answer, which in my view is bollocks. Not only is it not a technological solution (do the lexiters even watch the thing they link to?), but what the lexiters point to is distainful and dismissive with regard to the Irish.
Lexit voters can dress up their stance as somehow progressive, even noble and aspirational, but the reality is they have gotten into bed with a bunch of nasty racist right wing bastards like Boris Johnson, and even seem proud of it.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> I certainly see it as extremely misguided. It's the turkeys voting for Christmas.


That wasn't really the point I was trying to make; I was just interested in pursuing the question of how LeFT supporters might choose to vote in any pre-exit GE. _If _they desire a full-fat No-Deal break with the supra-state, I'm presuming that they'd more logically cast their vote for Johnson or Farage than Corbyn's Labour?

Or have I mis-read this completely?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The link posted above from the lexit group insists that the Irish border problem can be solved by technology. Their 'proof' is a further link to a Swedish Customs expert appearing at a select committee in Parliament.
> I watched it all.
> The geezer said there need be no border of any kind if the level of trust either side of a border is high enough.
> So there we have it.
> ...


soz - that is A lexit position, not THE lexit position.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 22, 2019)

Is he really going to do exactly what the other one did last night?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is he really going to do exactly what the other one did last night?


if "he" is philosophical and "what the other one did" is stupid, then yes


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2019)

I have attempted to respond to the idea *a *(point taken) lexit group has promoted with regard to a solution to the Irish border problem. I have no idea what is meant by any other one any other night is supposed to mean.
Mind you I am well used to the condescending response I get on here, and assume it is because the judgemental high and mighty patronising respondents are some kind of vacuums in human form.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ve just outlined one on this thread. Read the LeFT statement.
> 
> Leave – Fight – Transform: Founding Statement - Labour Heartlands
> 
> Any questions or queries feel free to leave here and I’ll answer them. It won’t be tonight however as I’m off out.



I appreciate you offering a straightforward answer, but I don’t see a lot beyond rhetoric here. I can’t see from where a ‘genuine internationalism’ is to emerge from when many Leave voters are defiantly set against international cooperation (no sophistry in response please - there is no coherence in the Leave position about anything international except the movement of capital) and when many of those who may be attracted to internationalism are determined to fight Brexit. In any case, if you can build a neolib resistant internationalism powerful enough to ignore US and Chinese capital and not immediately fall over bankrupt then it could be done as well within the EU as from without and maybe take some other EU members with it. A movement that can rip up the rules is ripping up rules in or out.

But really what is this? What strategy for elections, for building a coalition capable of getting power and governing? On the Leave side, hopelessly weak set against the forces and vision of the traditional elites and their media who have skilfully employed nationalism and a distrust of socialism. On the Remain side, at this moment, electoral catastrophe. This offers zero prospect of a 'rupture with global capitalism'. It's a position that has convinced vanishingly few people since the referendum. 

And it’s anything but a call for ‘unity’. It ignores the fact that most Labour voters disagree, paints them as neolib collaborators. There is no compromise offered, no suggestion of the future relationship with Europe (no-deal?). In which case it sets itself against both most members and the leadership. A recipe for fragmentation.

'The working class, in all its rich diversity' - sorry, but the _diverse_ working classes did not mostly vote for Brexit. This is offering them nothing, no chance of winning and no defence against the terms of future deals with the US and others.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 22, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have attempted to respond to the idea *a *(point taken) lexit group has promoted with regard to a solution to the Irish border problem. I have no idea what is meant by any other one any other night is supposed to mean.
> Mind you I am well used to the condescending response I get on here, and assume it is because the judgemental high and mighty patronising respondents are some kind of vacuums in human form.



I've clearly fucked up by posting a link rather than the actual LeFT statement.

The statement is therefore posted below. The babble on the website - which 3 posters have now seized on - is best taken up with those associated with it.

_"From Amazon warehouses to Belfast’s shipyards, workers are demanding a break — a break with the failed system of austerity, neoliberalism and capitalism.

The last 40 years have been an era of declining real wages, attacks on trade union and workers’ rights, austerity, abuse of migrants, the hollowing out of democracy and an escalating environmental crisis.

Working-class people across the world are demanding an alternative to this failed status quo.

History shows that if the left does not offer a transformative alternative to capitalism in crisis, the false prophets of the right will step in with their empty promises and reactionary utopias.

To offer a serious alternative, the left must demand and lead a rupture with a system of global capitalism that is irreformable and rotten to its core.

For socialists today in Britain that means calling for a break with the EU, breaking with the logic of neoliberalism and building a radical alternative.

Leave – Fight – Transform: The LeFT Campaign is a grassroots network of socialists, trade unionists and community activists, committed to democracy, internationalism and socialism.

We recognise that the failed neoliberal economic model helped produce both the vote to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum and the surge in support for a left-led Labour Party in the 2017 general election with a radical manifesto, promising genuine change.

To develop the potential of this moment, the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU as well as the structural racism of Fortress Europe.

These institutions promote and sustain the very system that working people are demanding a break from.

We must build a transformative movement that begins with the popular rejection of the EU within many working-class communities and that advances genuine internationalism with allies in the labour movement across the world.

To shape the 21st century in a way which advances the interests of the working class, in all its rich diversity, to begin to turn the tide on the environmental crisis, and to extend democracy into all aspects of people’s lives, the left must demand a break with the status quo. We need to leave the EU and transform society.

To join and support the campaign, or to add your name to the founding statement contact us on LeFTCampaign@gmail.com, or follow us on Twitter: @LeFTCampaign._


----------



## teuchter (Aug 22, 2019)

It's basically just a statement that says they want a thing, and someone needs to do something about it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I've clearly fucked up by posting a link rather than the actual LeFT statement.
> 
> The statement is therefore posted below. The babble on the website - which 3 posters have now seized on - is best taken up with those associated with it.
> 
> ...



I typed 'Irish Border' into the search facility on the linked site. As I said above it points to what the Swedish geezer said at the Parliamentary select committee as the solution.
If it was you who posted the link, and have posted the statement above, and if you are a lexiter, then what is your solution to the problem where the border concept conflicts with the Good Friday Agreement? There is nothing about the border in the above statement. Presumably if you are a lexiter who knew what you were voting for, you had a solution fully formed before the referendum vote took place.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I've clearly fucked up by posting a link rather than the actual LeFT statement.
> 
> The statement is therefore posted below. The babble on the website - which 3 posters have now seized on - is best taken up with those associated with it.
> 
> ...


It's this bit that interests me...and no-one yet seems to have a response to my earlier questions:



Smokeandsteam said:


> To offer a serious alternative, the left must demand and lead a rupture with *a* system of global capitalism that is irreformable and rotten to its core.
> 
> For socialists today in Britain that means calling for *a break with the EU*, breaking with the logic of neoliberalism and building a radical alternative.



From my perspective, demanding a break "with a system of global capitalism" appears naively unambitious. Exiting the supra-state will still see the class exposed to the global, kleptocracy of neoliberal capital. Also, does this LeFT position equate to support for the right's No-Deal outcome?


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> That wasn't really the point I was trying to make; I was just interested in pursuing the question of how LeFT supporters might choose to vote in any pre-exit GE. _If _they desire a full-fat No-Deal break with the supra-state, I'm presuming that they'd more logically cast their vote for Johnson or Farage than Corbyn's Labour?
> 
> Or have I mis-read this completely?


Well, like all these types of statements, it's open to interpretation but that's not the reading I took from it. I read it that they recognise the vote to leave the EU as part of the dissatisfaction of people with neo-liberalism, and that it is up to the left to engage with that rejection. I don't see anything in that statement that necessarily ties it to a 'no deal break'.

These statements are always (deliberately) vague on some points and there are bits of that statement that I might take issue with but the overall thrust I am largely sympathetic to,  





> _We recognise that the failed neoliberal economic model helped produce both the vote to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum and the surge in support for a left-led Labour Party in the 2017 general election with a radical manifesto, promising genuine change.
> 
> To develop the potential of this moment, the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU as well as the structural racism of Fortress Europe.
> 
> These institutions promote and sustain the very system that working people are demanding a break from._


I've said it numerous times before but the posts over the last page with talk of elections and 'governing; show that some still don't get it - the divide is not between those that voted leave those that voted remain but those that recognise (and trust) the working class and those that fear it. A very significant proportion of the working class voted leave, socialists* have to organise around that, have to trust in the attack the working class has made on capital and to help develop routes that help further that attack. The value in the part of the statement quoted above is precisely because it _does not_ lay out some 'strategy for elections, for building a coalition capable of getting power and governing'.


*I'm going to use this term rather than 'the left' as I think that latter term is pretty useless


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 22, 2019)

Or as I'm just about to start _Workers and Capital_ I'll quote Tronti



			
				Mario Tronti said:
			
		

> “Look. Capitalists are afraid of the history of workers, not of the politics of the Left. The ﬁrst they cast down among the demons of hell, the second they are welcomed into the halls of government.”


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

Lots of the signatories are prominent Corbyn supporters, quite a few with roles within the formal structures of the labour party and trade unions, so think it's a given they'd not lend their votes to Johnson to get a no deal scenario tbh


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I appreciate you offering a straightforward answer, but I don’t see a lot beyond rhetoric here. I can’t see from where a ‘genuine internationalism’ is to emerge from when many Leave voters are defiantly set against international cooperation (no sophistry in response please - there is no coherence in the Leave position about anything international except the movement of capital) and when many of those who may be attracted to internationalism are determined to fight Brexit. In any case, if you can build a neolib resistant internationalism powerful enough to ignore US and Chinese capital and not immediately fall over bankrupt then it could be done as well within the EU as from without and maybe take some other EU members with it. A movement that can rip up the rules is ripping up rules in or out.
> 
> But really what is this? What strategy for elections, for building a coalition capable of getting power and governing? On the Leave side, hopelessly weak set against the forces and vision of the traditional elites and their media who have skilfully employed nationalism and a distrust of socialism. On the Remain side, at this moment, electoral catastrophe. This offers zero prospect of a 'rupture with global capitalism'. It's a position that has convinced vanishingly few people since the referendum.
> 
> ...



At this point the aims are plainly simple.

1.	That the central motivation driving the vote to leave the European Union was working class dissatisfaction with the present. This dissatisfaction takes on many forms - unemployment, precarity, low pay, housing, diminishing futures and collapsing public services.	 

2. To build support and draw awareness to the fact that there is a network of socialists, trade unionists, community activists and others - who are internationalists, who want to build solidarities, who want to support and facilitate working class agency and who want change’ – and who recognise the necessity of leaving the EU trading bloc.

3.	 That this network recognises that all of these aims are disrupted and weakened by the EU. That ‘remain and reform’ is impossible due to the political economy of the EU, its treaties and the control exerted by the ECB, IMF and the EU based on the single market project.  

4.	 That it is essential that we leave the EU and do so on the basis that we seek to transform Britain in the process. The first step being the election of a Labour Government committed to a social democratic programme but a much longer term process and set of ideas needs to be developed through dialogue and building networks.

5.	 That if the left fails to provide rational, progressive solutions to economic and social traumas then the far right will_ inevitably_ provide further irrational ones. 

6.	 To provide ideas, space and a network for those who wish to support these aims

7.	 To provide support for working class struggle and unity

In terms of your paragraph about ‘unity’ I think two responses are necessary. Firstly, 35% of labour voters, who voted Labour in the 2017 GE, _did _vote leave. These are disproportionately clustered in specific areas mainly in the Midlands, Wales, the North, the coastal areas and what Guiluy has described as the ‘peripheralised zones’. Peripheralised in terms of jobs, services, amenities and futures, located close to but in a different world to, the nearby cities. Now, if you add in Labour voters from 1997-2015, who didn’t vote Labour in 2017, but did vote for Brexit then the numbers in these peripheralised zones starts to rise to at least 60% in some of these areas. It is possible to argue, as Paul Mason has, that these areas and communities needs to be effectively abandoned to the far right and be left trapped in a culture. Or you can argue, as I do, that recovery work for progressive politics is of critical importance in these areas. There are no short fixes, no easy routes. There needs to be a long term refocussing and rethinking. Where do we start?  You can see already in America with Warren and Sanders and with McDonnell here the basic social democratic ideas – investment, intervention, improved pay, job guarantees for young people, improved amenities, moving beyond the reflexivity of neo-liberalism – that offer a base from which to _start. _Where we end is part of the discussion.	

Second, a lot of labour remainers have confused being pro-Europe and being pro-EU as being the same thing. Given the long run nature of the discussion about Europe – which will take decades - this group, who largely share the impulse for change described above, will increasingly see the contradictions between the trading bloc they currently support and their wider interests and ideas about change.

Your last paragraph (4) is factually incorrect. The diverse working class did, in fact, vote for Brexit. But we can (and probably have already have) argued about what the data tells us so let’s leave this for another time.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Or as I'm just about to start _Workers and Capital_ I'll quote Tronti



Me too. Delighted to see it published.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

And fwiw I think it's all a bit late really. I think a working class based leftwing anti EU campaign from 2015 (or earlier) onwards with some actual clout and prominence could have had a big impact on the imagining of a post ref post EU UK. But all we got was that shitty far left campaign that made zero impact on public or political class (although they stuck an impressive number of stickers on lampposts tbf, mostly now covered with Bollocks to Brexit ones), a few unorganised scatterings here and there, and fucking labour leave, a shitty dodgy grouping with the politics of Spiked, and the ground was completely ceded to the right's business over labour vision. Fuck knows, probably wouldn't have changed anything but at least it could have


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Well, like all these types of statements, it's open to interpretation but that's not the reading I took from it. I read it that they recognise the vote to leave the EU as part of the dissatisfaction of people with neo-liberalism, and that it is up to the left to engage with that rejection. I don't see anything in that statement that necessarily ties it to a 'no deal break'.
> 
> These statements are always (deliberately) vague on some points and there are bits of that statement that I might take issue with but the overall thrust I am largely sympathetic to,
> I've said it numerous times before but the posts over the last page with talk of elections and 'governing; show that some still don't get it - the divide is not between those that voted leave those that voted remain but those that recognise (and trust) the working class and those that fear it. A very significant proportion of the working class voted leave, socialists* have to organise around that, have to trust in the attack the working class has made on capital and to help develop routes that help further that attack. The value in the part of the statement quoted above is precisely because it _does not_ lay out some 'strategy for elections, for building a coalition capable of getting power and governing'.
> ...


Thanks for reply.
It was these words that led me to believe that a 'No-Deal" exit was being advocated/preferred:



> the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU



Any exit based on a WA & Future relationship deal would certainly involve engagement with the treaties, institutions and laws of the neoliberal supra-state.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> And fwiw I think it's all a bit late really. I think a working class based leftwing anti EU campaign from 2015 (or earlier) onwards with some actual clout and prominence could have had a big impact on the imagining of a post ref post EU UK.



I agree completely.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Lots of the signatories are prominent Corbyn supporters, quite a few with roles within the formal structures of the labour party and trade unions, so think it's a given they'd not lend their votes to Johnson to get a no deal scenario tbh


Agreed, it might be a given, but logic would suggest that if they really desire a clean break from the supra-state they might cast their vote differently? Corbyn's BRINO would never bring about the detachment that they espouse.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Agreed, it might be a given, but logic would suggest that if they really desire a clean break from the supra-state they might cast their vote differently? Corbyn's BRINO would never bring about the detachment that they espouse.


I think within this grouping there is a belief that Corbyn/those people are fundamentally opposed to EU and an acceptance that they have to get elected and in, which means playing a game to build a coalition. I think this belief/acceptance thing applies to more than just EU too. Timing of statement looks more like a grouping designed to stop labour left, Corbyn, McDonnell etc going too heavy towards remain


----------



## brogdale (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I think within this grouping there is a belief that Corbyn/those people are fundamentally opposed to EU and an acceptance that they have to get elected and in, which means playing a game to build a coalition. I think this belief/acceptance thing applies to more than just EU too. Timing of statement looks more like a grouping designed to stop labour left, Corbyn, McDonnell etc going too heavy towards remain


Too late for that, surely?
That's Corbyn's only hope of electoral success now, isn't it?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Too late for that, surely?
> That's Corbyn's only hope of electoral success now, isn't it?


Probably, yeah. More tightrope walking I suppose


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Or as I'm just about to start _Workers and Capital_ I'll quote Tronti





Smokeandsteam said:


> Me too. Delighted to see it published.


should have a reading thread for it


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> should have a reading thread for it



Given the ongoing failure of participants on the populism reading thread (me included) I would hesitate...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Given the ongoing failure of participants on the populism reading thread (me included) I would hesitate...


fair enough, maybe when people have finished the first chapter


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> At this point the aims are plainly simple.
> 
> 1.	That the central motivation driving the vote to leave the European Union was working class dissatisfaction with the present. This dissatisfaction takes on many forms - unemployment, precarity, low pay, housing, diminishing futures and collapsing public services.
> 
> ...



All well and good, but since 'leave' peppers all this, where is the solution to the concept of 'leave,' as it applies to the Irish border in the context of the GFA?
If the response is to bounce it on to the Swedish Customs expert geezer, I am sorry to disappoint you that it is no solution at all.
Did you actually watch his appearance in front of the select committee?


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 22, 2019)

philosophical said:


> All well and good, but since 'leave' peppers all this, where is the solution to the concept of 'leave,' as it applies to the Irish border in the context of the GFA?
> If the response is to bounce it on to the Swedish Customs expert geezer, I am sorry to disappoint you that it is no solution at all.
> Did you actually watch his appearance in front of the select committee?



Again, sorry to be repetitive, it's not the Irish border. It's a British border which was put in Ireland.


----------



## krink (Aug 22, 2019)

That Tronti book is on the verso site for a tenner + free delivery until end of august


----------



## philosophical (Aug 22, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Again, sorry to be repetitive, it's not the Irish border. It's a British border which was put in Ireland.



Yes of course.
I should have been more precise about this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

krink said:


> That Tronti book is on the verso site for a tenner + free delivery until end of august


my copy arrived on tuesday


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 22, 2019)

Working class disaffection was not THE central factor in the 2016 advisory ref.

It was A driving factor.

The other driving factor was bourgeois / reactionary.

The latter is now controlling things and using the former as cover.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

Anyway back on the is brexit going to happen stuff.

Obviously all of the hardline stuff from Johnson is about reintroducing threat of leaving with no deal into negotiations to get May deal with movement on backstop, but no signs of the other side falling for it from Merkel and Macron's comments. That's about as far as I've got cos it's dead boring this isn't it.

What do the more sensible brexit geeks think will happen from here then, do I need to buy loads of tinned tomatoes or nah


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 22, 2019)

Go with the tomatoes mate, I am. Fortunately most of the foods I like freeze well


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> What do the more sensible brexit geeks think will happen from here then, do I need to buy loads of tinned tomatoes or nah


Who knows. But I was brought up to start putting a couple of extra tins per shopping trip into the cupboard going into winter anyway, so just look on it that way: you’ve got some bad weather coverage even if nothing else transpires.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Who knows. But I was brought up to start putting a couple of extra tins per shopping trip into the cupboard going into winter anyway, so just look on it that way: you’ve got some bad weather coverage even if nothing else transpires.


Good advice although I have a tiny kitchen, might have to start keeping tins in the loo


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Good advice although I have a tiny kitchen, might have to start keeping tins in the loo


I wouldn’t bother amassing enough to brick yourself in, mind. 

I’m more worried what’ll happen if medicines dry up - both for myself (I rattle with prescriptions when I run) and generally for the more sick and vulnerable.  I don’t trust this lot to have any useful contingency planning in place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I wouldn’t bother amassing enough to brick yourself in, mind.
> 
> I’m more worried what’ll happen if medicines dry up - both for myself (I rattle with prescriptions when I run) and generally for the more sick and vulnerable.  I don’t trust this lot to have any useful contingency planning in place.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 22, 2019)

I know some people who've done it, mostly because they've got access to trade accounts anyway, but don't really see the point of stock piling. If there are major issues it won't be a matter of shortages for a week or two - it'll be a major national supply issue. As with medicines it's not something we can really insulate ourselves against. Unless you've got a warehouse and some industrial freezers going spare.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Anyway back on the is brexit going to happen stuff.
> 
> Obviously all of the hardline stuff from Johnson is about reintroducing threat of leaving with no deal into negotiations to get May deal with movement on backstop, but no signs of the other side falling for it from Merkel and Macron's comments. That's about as far as I've got cos it's dead boring this isn't it.
> 
> What do the more sensible brexit geeks think will happen from here then, do I need to buy loads of tinned tomatoes or nah


Must admit I've not seen anything that really provides an insight into what Johnson's real game is for the next few weeks (me not looking, I'm sure it exists). My pure guess is that he's ultimately shitting it at the thought of no deal, tailbacks of lorries or worse. Or is he listening to the whisperings of Cummings? A further pure guess is that he'll be shamefacedly trying to sell some sort of non-backstop backstop to his party in 30 days. But then I'm not one of the sensible ones.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

I won't really stockpile, I can't even be arsed doing a big shop most of the time. Might get a few extra in early October.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

YouSir said:


> I know some people who've done it, mostly because they've got access to trade accounts anyway, but don't really see the point of stock piling. If there are major issues it won't be a matter of shortages for a week or two - it'll be a major national supply issue. As with medicines it's not something we can really insulate ourselves against. Unless you've got a warehouse and some industrial freezers going spare.


I have, erm, a certain amount of codeine available.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I have, erm, a certain amount of codeine available.



See you on the black market in the post apocalypse then


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I have, erm, a certain amount of codeine available.


PM incoming.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

YouSir said:


> See you on the black market in the post apocalypse then


you'll be able to get anything you want from Badgers in the albert


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

YouSir said:


> See you on the black market in the post apocalypse then


I'm just off to bury my cache of pot noodle.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 22, 2019)

I know which trees to chew the bark of.  I will be running online courses. The code URBAN75GULL gets you 25% off the very reasonable fee.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm just off to bury my cache of pot noodle.


anyone will be able to find them, there'll be a circle of dead plants round the spot


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm just off to bury my cache of pot noodle.


Actually, fuck that, I'm going the whole hog and setting myself up as a Warlord. My men are already controlling everything that comes in through Teesport.


----------



## MrCurry (Aug 22, 2019)

The pound seems to have taken a little jump up against the euro in the last hour, despite not very positive news emerging from the Boris / Macron meeting.

I wonder if there’s more to emerge which will offer a ray of hope, or maybe the markets had priced in Boris being told very publicly to get lost.?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Actually, fuck that, I'm going the whole hog and setting myself up as a Warlord. My men are already controlling everything that comes in through Teesport.


not sure that's going to work all that well 


Teesport - Wikipedia

you'll have all the dredged marine materials you want tho


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 22, 2019)

I have a third of a past its sell by date bottle of Oramorph in my shed if anybody in dire need of pain relief. I've kept it a bit like how spies keep a capsule of cyanide in their cheek


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 22, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> The pound seems to have taken a little jump up against the euro in the last hour, despite not very positive news emerging from the Boris / Macron meeting.
> 
> I wonder if there’s more to emerge which will offer a ray of hope, or maybe the markets had priced in Boris being told very publicly to get lost.?
> 
> View attachment 181772


if johnson jumps off beachy head the pound will soar against the euro, until his successor is announced


----------



## Wilf (Aug 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I have a third of a past its sell by date bottle of Oramorph in my shed if anybody in dire need of pain relief. I've kept it a bit like how spies keep a capsule of cyanide in their cheek


Think big. In 6 months I'm expecting the heads of blue chip companies offering me 10 grand for a couple of tramdols to sort their bad leg.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 22, 2019)

YouSir said:


> I know some people who've done it, mostly because they've got access to trade accounts anyway, but don't really see the point of stock piling. If there are major issues it won't be a matter of shortages for a week or two - it'll be a major national supply issue. As with medicines it's not something we can really insulate ourselves against. Unless you've got a warehouse and some industrial freezers going spare.



Indeed! The BBC coverage, which presents a catastrophic, no-deal crash-out as one blithe option out of several, seems to be underpinned by the notion of 3 to 6 months inconvenience, after which "everything" will be "sorted out". My view is less sanguine.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It was these words that led me to believe that a 'No-Deal" exit was being advocated/preferred:
> Any exit based on a WA & Future relationship deal would certainly involve engagement with the treaties, institutions and laws of the neoliberal supra-state.


Well it's a statement for people to rally around so it is (purposely) ambiguous. I think you could just as easily interpret it as a _political_ demand that the LeFT pushes forward, rather than a _legal_ demand. There is a very bad tendency on the left to put the technical/legal ahead of the political - one example that I've personal experience of is the dispute of the UCU re pensions, rather a than political resistance to the slashing of pensions the fight quickly dissolved to a technical dispute about whether the "correct" implementation had been used. And a point which also leads nicely to ->


Smokeandsteam said:


> Me too. Delighted to see it published.


Just read first part of Lenin in England on the train back home and it's amazing how many sentences jump out


> And yet, precisely at the points where capital’s dominion appears most dominant, the deeper the working-class threat penetrates.





> We too saw capitalist development first and the workers second. This is a mistake. Now we have to turn the problem on its head, change orientation, and start again from first principles, which means focusing on the struggle of the working class. At the level of socially developed capital, capitalist development is subordinate to working-class struggles





> But the working-class point of view seeks a political explanation.





> the workers have already gone beyond the old organisations, but they have yet to arrive at a new one.





> While it is true that the working class objectively imposes precise choices on capital, it is also true that capital then completes these choices in such a way that they work against the working class. Capital, at this moment, is better organised than the working class, and the choices that the working class imposes on capital risk strengthening it. Hence, it is in the working class’s immediate interest to challenge these choices.


Prophetic in all senses of the word (and truly brilliantly written)


----------



## elbows (Aug 22, 2019)

I'm sure I read somewhere that the public information stuff on how people can prepare for Brexit will be starting soon. I can hardly wait. Although it does occur to me that if they want to save some money, just reuse this classic from 1949:

Public Information Films | 1945 to 1951 | Film index | What A Life!


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Well it's a statement for people to rally around so it is (purposely) ambiguous. I think you could just as easily interpret it as a _political_ demand that the LeFT pushes forward, rather than a _legal_ demand.



Well, interpretation is obviously a matter of personal perception, and I have to say that if a "No-Deal" Brexit = leaving the single market & customs union, institutions such as the ECJ & Europol, other EU regulatory bodies and ceasing to contribute to the supra-state's budget, then the LeFT position looks pretty clearly "No-Deal" to me:



> the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU



As such, this is aligned closely with the Brexit Party's key objective: 



> We stand for a clean-break Brexit, by the new deadline of 31st October, that will enable us to take control of our laws, borders and money



All perfectly fine, but I'm not sure why statist democratic socialists would seek such an outcome or why their supporters would seek to deny that it is a call for a "No-Deal" exit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Well, interpretation is obviously a matter of personal perception, and I have to say that if a "No-Deal" Brexit = leaving the single market & customs union, institutions such as the ECJ & Europol, other EU regulatory bodies and ceasing to contribute to the supra-state's budget, then the LeFT position looks pretty clearly "No-Deal" to me:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change


Possibly, but it's also true to say that the BP claim to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as the beginning to political, if not societal, change, albeit very different in nature:



> *This is not only about the EU. It is about what sort of democratic country we live in.*
> *We’re out to challenge the self-serving two-party system, make the people sovereign, and restore trust in our democracy.*


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Possibly, but it's also true to say that the BP claim to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as the beginning to political, if not societal, change, albeit very different in nature:


Strange. I could get on board with challenging the self-serving two party system and making the people sovereign, but they've lost me with "restoring" the trust in "our democracy"


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The BP desire such a situation as a permanent state of affairs, at least some lexiteers see it as a preliminary to greater societal change


Is there anything within the LeFT statement to suggest that they don't see a 'clean' Brexit as anything other than permanent?

Unless I'm mis-reading completely, LeFT appear to see a "No-Deal" Brexit as integral to...



> a rupture with a system of global capitalism that is irreformable and rotten to its core



Which, to my eyes, looks like a call for Socialism in one country?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2019)

Why does arguing for socialism to happen somewhere _first _entail arguing that this exactly where it should stop? That it should have no international impact, that it cannot then be in a position offer help to socialists in other places, that it can foster and enables a real internationalism on a basis other than shared neo-liberal interests from a far more secure platform? To say that calling for socialism outside of bosses clubs can only mean socialism in one country is absurd and basically says the choices are only stalinism or capitalism. And that this is all they can ever be.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 23, 2019)

To me the LeFT statement approving of the leave result is basically useless because it avoids my obsession as to what does 'leave' look like on the Irish border. There is a time limited situation where ideology clashes with practical reality which LeFT seems to be ignorant of. Worse for me is that LeFT seem to axiomatically associate with the racist brexit nutters like Priti Patel who thinks the Irish can be starved into submission.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why does arguing for socialism to happen somewhere _first _entail arguing that this exactly where it should stop? That it should have no international impact, that it cannot then be in a position offer help to socialists in other places, that it can foster and enables a real internationalism on a basis other than shared neo-liberal interests from a far more secure platform? To say that calling for socialism outside of bosses clubs can only mean socialism in one country is absurd and basically says the choices are only stalinism or capitalism. And that this is all they can ever be.


You're right, arguing for socialism here, does not limit the internationalist scope for change.
But, unless I'm mistaken, these are basically statist, democratic socialists (not revolutionaries) who are arguing that a "No-Deal" exit from the bosses supra-state, is a prerequisite for democratic socialism to flower in the UK.  If we do leave the EU on the 31/10/19 we'll be in a bosses state (not supra-state) with the very real chance of a period of depressed wages, living standards, employment opportunities, and even more accelerated neoliberal calls for state shrinkage. 
Maybe just me, but I don't see why democratic socialists would be so keen to align themselves with the oligarch interests of a 'clean' Brexit in order to promote their agenda. Were I in their position I think I'd be very tempted to portray the process as an intra-capital battle to effect variants of neoliberalism, let the right party of capital take the blame for the impending shit-show and then talk up the opportunities for democratic socialism that will open following their actions.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're right, arguing for socialism here, does not limit the internationalist scope for change.
> But, unless I'm mistaken, these are basically statist, democratic socialists (not revolutionaries) who are arguing that a "No-Deal" exit from the bosses supra-state, is a prerequisite for democratic socialism to flower in the UK.  If we do leave the EU on the 31/10/19 we'll be in a bosses state (not supra-state) with the very real chance of a period of depressed wages, living standards, employment opportunities, and even more accelerated neoliberal calls for state shrinkage.
> Maybe just me, but I don't see why democratic socialists would be so keen to align themselves with the oligarch interests of a 'clean' Brexit in order to promote their agenda. Were I in their position I think I'd be very tempted to portray the process as an intra-capital battle to effect variants of neoliberalism, let the right party of capital take the blame for the impending shit-show and then talk up the opportunities for democratic socialism that will open following their actions.



They are a mix of people across the spectrum, there is no single position - there are stalinist nutcases like eddie dempsey and libertarian socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to straight up trad-unionists, to trots and republicans etc. I cannot see your reading as simply calling for a no-deal as correct. I can see that some my welcome it, some may not see it as the bogeyman and some opposed to that version of leaving the EU. I don't see why breaking with something cannot entail agreements as to how that break occurs where and when.

And if we don't leave we will be facing the same people in their liberal guise, with us defeated and weakened, beaten by a coalition of the left-capital with no path out of it for the forseeable, nothing opened up, in fact closed down. All opposition to the EU and its neoliberalism across europe crushed for the foreseeable future -  a modern day massacre by the political descendants of MacMahon and the murderers of the communards. Whereas leaving (or just the threat of) has brought the delegitmation here of the status quo, of the political class, of the way things are run, the ongoing polarisation etc that all lead to potential crisis - and options. Recomposition that people on the far left have been calling for for so long.

So the same as them then? But they are trying to do it right now or at least proposing to start collective project to do just that. I think that you are losing sight of the fact that the EU is bad here and becoming bit too focused on the tories to the detriment of the wider picture. And make no mistake, the left party of capital is going to pay if they get this wrong. Which is what this is designed to highlight and then oppose.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Is there anything within the LeFT statement to suggest that they don't see a 'clean' Brexit as anything other than permanent?


not relevant - i'm not speaking for the LeFT people, i am saying there is a set of people who voted brexit for left reasons who - while seeing the departure from the european union as permanent - see the status quo post exit not as a permanent thing but as a preliminary stage to further greater and permanent social change. they are a subset of all the people who voted brexit for left reasons. the brexit party stand for a permanent little england mentality


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> not relevant - i'm not speaking for the LeFT people, i am saying there is a set of people who voted brexit for left reasons who - while seeing the departure from the european union as permanent - see the status quo post exit not as a permanent thing but as a preliminary stage to further greater and permanent social change. they are a subset of all the people who voted brexit for left reasons. the brexit party stand for a permanent little england mentality


I really don't think the forces/drivers of the BP actually hold any truck with the 'little England' tosh; that's just the false consciousness stuff. Those behind "No-Deal"ism are solidly wedded to post-Brexit political, economic and social change...just not the sort we'd like to see.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They are a mix of people across the spectrum, there is no single position - there are stalinist nutcases like eddie dempsey and libertarian socialists and anarcho-syndicalists to straight up trad-unionists, to trots and republicans etc. I cannot see your reading as simply calling for a no-deal as correct. I can see that some my welcome it, some may not see it as the bogeyman and some opposed to that version of leaving the EU. I don't see why breaking with something cannot entail agreements as to how that break occurs where and when.
> 
> And if we don't leave we will be facing the same people in their liberal guise, with us defeated and weakened, beaten by a coalition of the left-capital with no path out of it for the forseeable, nothing opened up, in fact closed down. All opposition to the EU and its neoliberalism across europe crushed for the foreseeable future -  a modern day massacre by the political descendants of MacMahon and the murderers of the communards. Whereas leaving (or just the threat of) has brought the delegitmation here of the status quo, of the political class, of the way things are run, the ongoing polarisation etc that all lead to potential crisis - and options. Recomposition that people on the far left have been calling for for so long.
> 
> So the same as them then? But they are trying to do it right now or at least proposing to start collective project to do just that. I think that you are losing sight of the fact that the EU is bad here and becoming bit too focused on the tories to the detriment of the wider picture. And make no mistake, the left party of capital is going to pay if they get this wrong. Which is what this is designed to highlight and then oppose.


Thanks for the input about the make-up of LeFT; that's helpful.

Whether or not they fully intended the statement to come across as pro "No-Deal", to my eyes it clearly does. The specific intent is obvious:


> ...the left must ensure the 2016 referendum result is implemented, so that the UK breaks with the treaties, institutions and laws of the EU...


As you probably know, I'm very happy that the vote to leave has delegitimised the political status quo, set capital against itself and opened up the _potential _for recompositions. But I'm still not convinced that 'the left' has to actively support the mechanism responsible for capital's crisis of confidence in order to benefit from it. 

The LeFT position as outlined in the statement looks like it could easily be interpreted as socialism will only be possible if we align with the oligarchic faction of capital to transition from supra-national shared sovereignty to full-fat, national sovereignty. This emphasis on the political superstructure machinations of capital is in danger of relegating the crucial message about the transformations needed in the economic base.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I really don't think the forces/drivers of the BP actually hold any truck with the 'little England' tosh; that's just the false consciousness stuff. Those behind "No-Deal"ism are solidly wedded to post-Brexit political, economic and social change...just not the sort we'd like to see.


i think we agree on that though we may express it differently


----------



## teuchter (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> As you probably know, I'm very happy that the vote to leave has delegitimised the political status quo, *set capital against itself*



What does this mean, exactly?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What does this mean, exactly?


caused dissension in the ranks of the capitalist pigs

remedial english beckons, teuchter


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What does this mean, exactly?


Two schools of capitalist 'thought' in conflict; those who see supra-national bodies as a way of legitimising & institutionalising neoliberal processes against those oligarchic, free-market fundamentalists who see the regulatory functions of supra-national bodies as inimical to the acceleration of those same trends.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Two schools of capitalist 'thought' in conflict; those who see supra-national bodies as a way of legitimising & institutionalising neoliberal processes against those oligarchic, free-market fundamentalists who see the regulatory functions of supra-national bodies as inimical to the acceleration of those same trends.


What's the beneficial consequence of these two schools of thought being in conflict though (or in other words - so what)?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's the beneficial consequence of these two schools of thought being in conflict though (or in other words - so what)?


You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?


he should have gone to specsavers


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 23, 2019)

The left has no means of carrying out that statement, the Brexit party on the other hand are the ones calling the shots, that's the recomposition.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You can't see the benefit(s) of having your class enemy divided?


I don't see that it particularly stops them doing their thing. One half of the 'divide' will be a bit happier than the other, depending on the outcome of Brexit, that's all.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't see that it particularly stops them doing their thing. One half of the 'divide' will be a bit happier than the other, depending on the outcome of Brexit, that's all.


Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.


----------



## Supine (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.



Existential threat to late capitalism is over egging it a bit. There is always a tension between free market libertarianism and regulated industries and bodies but that has nothing to do with capitalism itself being replaced by something else. There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 23, 2019)

Supine said:


> Existential threat to late capitalism is over egging it a bit. There is always a tension between free market libertarianism and regulated industries and bodies but that has nothing to do with capitalism itself being replaced by something else. There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.


The triumph of unleashed, full-fat Randist Oligarchy could easily see any legitimacy that neoliberalism claims undermined to the extent that the manufactured consent dissolves.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 23, 2019)

Supine said:


> There is never even a proposal about what post capitalism would like like.



Who from?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Interesting take on an existential threat to late capitalism.


Well, my take is that there is zero existential threat to late capitalism posed by Brexit. I've yet to find anyone who can explain why there would be.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 23, 2019)

It's like when your mum and dad are rowing lots, maybe they'll shag it out maybe they'll divorce maybe they'll both fuck off and you keep the house


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's like when your mum and dad are rowing lots, *maybe they'll shag it out* maybe they'll divorce maybe they'll both fuck off and you keep the house



So now we have to watch Johnson and Merkel on the job? Can we not just align with North Korea instead, please?


----------



## Humberto (Aug 24, 2019)

It's going to happen, and we won't be eating rats and drinking rain water. Take it from there iyswim.


----------



## Raheem (Aug 24, 2019)

Fuck. I was looking forward to the rats. Are we allowed to do it anyway?


----------



## Humberto (Aug 24, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Fuck. I was looking forward to the rats. Are we allowed to do it anyway?



I'M BACKING BRITAIN!


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 24, 2019)

Latest blog post from LeFT on Ireland.

*Tommy McKearney – Brexit and the Future of Ireland*
by Leave, Fight, Transform






A recent article in the Irish Times reported retired Irish diplomat Sean Ó hUigínn quoting Edmund
Burke’s remark that the English have only one ambition in relation to Ireland, which is to hear no more about it. Undoubtedly, with the Brexit backstop causing turmoil in the House of Commons, senior members of the Conservative
party would very likely secretly share that view. 

Many in Ireland might well suggest that had the English acted on Edmund Burke’s observation and left Ireland way back then, they might be experiencing fewer problems at the moment.
However, we can’t change the past and the Irish question has returned to torment Westminster.

Whatever about history, the Brexit debate does not follow the same line of argument in Northern Ireland, as it does in Britain. Local protagonists make different, although paradoxically
related, calculations when deciding their position on this issue. Moreover, London and Dublin are also playing the Ulster card, yet more often than not
they both conceal the entirety of their reasoning for doing so.

Underlying every political issue in Northern Ireland is the constitutional question of whether the area
should continue to be governed from London or have sovereignty transferred to Dublin. Magnifying the importance of this now are two crucial facts. In the first instance there is the perennial fixation on changing demographics, which are indicating the inevitability within the coming decades of a majority in favour of ending the union. This is compounded by the obvious failure of the
Six Counties to function as a normal political entity.

It is not that people in Northern Ireland are unaware or indifferent to Brexit. It is however the case, that for the most part, they see it as secondary. A contributory factor to this
outlook is the attitude of the British and Irish governments with the former speaking of the need to preserve the precious union and the latter raising alarm over a hard border. Unsurprisingly therefore, the two major local
political parties, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Sinn Fein have focussed on the constitutional impact of Brexit.

The DUP favours the hardest of withdrawal options in the hope that it will result in creating maximum
divergence between north and south and thereby reinforce the partition of Ireland. While this position wins favour in Unionist heartlands (and among the European Research Group), it has caused concern among some middle-class Unionist supporters who fear economic disruption. Nevertheless, the party’s greatest fear is losing its niche as the principal defender of ‘Protestant
Ulster’ and therefore feels obliged to persist with its policy.

Disappointingly for those on the left who wish to rupture with the EU, Sinn Finn has changed its
long-time opposition to the EU. Instead of highlighting the neo-liberal threat from Brussels it now takes the flawed ‘Remain and Reform’ position. With a 55% majority in the Six Counties in favour of remaining, Sinn Fein is making the
obvious case that London disregards the will of the Northern Irish. The party has also led a campaign that focuses on the possible, albeit greatly
exaggerated, difficulties posed by a hard border.

Meanwhile the British and
Irish governments are spinning their own self-serving tales around Brexit.

British Prime Minister
Johnson rejects the backstop option claiming this is because of his deep and
abiding affection for the union between Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In
reality, this love affair is based firmly on Commons arithmetic. To stay in
office and fend off a general election, the Tory party has had to retain DUP
support. Nor is the Irish government completely frank either with its
statements about the impact of Britain leaving the European Union. Dublin has
focused greatly on the threat that this poses to the Good Friday Agreement in
general and to the maintenance of peace in particular.

Alarmist claims about a
return to the pre-1994 ‘Troubles’ are overdone. In spite of the recent death of
journalist Lyra McKee, there is little evidence of any real appetite for a
return to the widespread conflict of previous decades. If anything, the tragedy
illustrated the depth of opposition to armed groups. Moreover, it should also
be born in mind that Britain leaving the European Union will not, in itself,
alter the constitutional position of Northern Ireland within the UK whether
there is a withdrawal deal or not.

Let’s not forget either
that both the British and Irish governments have stated categorically that they
will not create infrastructure along the border. Boris Johnson has repeated on
several occasions that the UK it will not impose tariffs on goods moving
northwards. This means that any checks that may arise from a no-deal Brexit
would be carried out in the Republic and there is every indication that these
will take place well away from the frontier. Incidentally, since the island was
partitioned almost a century ago there is no record of republicans ever
attacking a southern Irish customs post.

In a nutshell, the Brexit
debate in Ireland, North and South, has largely missed the essential elements
of the argument. Northern Ireland is one of the poorest regions of the United Kingdom.
Average income is 8.5% less than in Britain and average disposable income is
less than 40% of that in London and the economy is in ongoing decline as
evidenced by the difficulties faced by the once iconic Harland & Wolff
shipyard. The economic situation in the Republic appears to be infinitely
better. However, this disguises an increasingly unequal society with tens of
thousands homeless, a two-tier health service leaving the less well-off at a
major disadvantage and increasing number of workers in either low-paid or
precarious employment.

On both sides of the border
the answer to this lies in breaking with free-market capitalist economies,
whether controlled by neoliberals sitting in London or in charge of the
European Union. This in essence is the left wing case in relation to Brexit and
applies to Ireland as much as it does to Britain. Instead of working people
discussing the necessity of having democratic socialist control of the economy,
the powers that be have diverted attention towards a highly unlikely resumption
of armed conflict, export delays and possible traffic jams at border crossings.

Above all else, clarity and transparency around this issue are essential here in Ireland as well as in
Britain. The LeFT campaign is therefore not just timely but very necessary and is entitled to all the support we can give it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Latest blog post from LeFT on Ireland.
> 
> *Tommy McKearney – Brexit and the Future of Ireland*
> by Leave, Fight, Transform
> ...



So the article above says: 
*'focuses on the possible, albeit greatly
exaggerated, difficulties posed by a hard border.'
*
Well go on then LeFT. If you want brexit it should be easy to explain how your voted for border will actually work in practice.
I have said above that having watched the Left linked Swedish customs expert geezer at the select committee hearing, that what he suggests as a solution is some kind of glorified honesty box system based on trust from both sides.
It is no solution at all in my view, but if those of LeFT are confident it is a basis to overcome 'exaggerated difficulties', maybe they can tell everybody the detail.
Take all 30 days if you like, or even up to the 31st of October when your practical detailed solution will need to be implemented.
Should be easy for folk in LeFT, after all brexiters frequently say they knew what they were voting for.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> So the article above says:
> *'focuses on the possible, albeit greatly
> exaggerated, difficulties posed by a hard border.'
> *
> ...



Have you not read the proposed 'Alternative Arrangements', the 270+ page document complied by a range of experts, largely based on bringing together various different arrangements from across the globe?

The beauty of the proposals, is it pisses on your fire about using new unproven “high-tech” border technologies, because they have avoided including anything that isn't actually available in the here & now.


----------



## Supine (Aug 24, 2019)

How does this help?



> On both sides of the border
> the answer to this lies in breaking with free-market capitalist economies,
> whether controlled by neoliberals sitting in London or in charge of the
> European Union. This in essence is the left wing case in relation to Brexit and
> applies to Ireland as much as it does to Britain.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> How does this help?


What on earth are you denying?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> How does this help?



The article provides political context to the situation in Ireland. It’s makes clear the red herrings being used in respect of the border and infrastructure. It sets out the key issues facing the island. 

The section you’ve highlighted makes the case that once free of the EU new possibilities open up in respect of the politics of all of Ireland.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Have you not read the proposed 'Alternative Arrangements', the 270+ page document complied by a range of experts, largely based on bringing together various different arrangements from across the globe?
> 
> The beauty of the proposals, is it pisses on your fire about using new unproven “high-tech” border technologies, because they have avoided including anything that isn't actually available in the here & now.



Go on then, how will it work in practice, you seem to be able to understand it, can you explain it?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The article provides political context to the situation in Ireland. It’s makes clear the red herrings being used in respect of the border and infrastructure. It sets out the key issues facing the island.
> 
> The section you’ve highlighted makes the case that once free of the EU new possibilities open up in respect of the politics of all of Ireland.


You've given him too much credit. He's not here for that.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What on earth are you denying?



Supine seems furious that the article points out the potential to travel away from neo-liberalism. Presumably he/she is equally furious with McDonnell, Sanders, Warren etc


----------



## philosophical (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The article provides political context to the situation in Ireland. It’s makes clear the red herrings being used in respect of the border and infrastructure. It sets out the key issues facing the island.
> 
> The section you’ve highlighted makes the case that once free of the EU new possibilities open up in respect of the politics of all of Ireland.



Why is the border a red herring?
Is 'leave' supposed to be the same as 'stay-joined' in some kind of doublethink way?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Supine seems furious that the article points out the potential to travel away from neo-liberalism. Presumably he/she is equally furious with McDonnell, Sanders, Warren etc


They are just an apolitical pro-eu idiot. There's nothing beyond that. And they're not on our side - so a list of people like that and the logic of their positions means nothing to them.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Why is the border a red herring?
> Is 'leave' supposed to be the same as 'stay-joined' in some kind of doublethink way?



Read the article. Read the report. I’m not here to explain stuff to you. When you’ve read them post up your thoughts. That’s how this place works best


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Why is the border a red herring?
> Is 'leave' supposed to be the same as 'stay-joined' in some kind of doublethink way?


Ireland is still in the british empire because when it left it stayed as it still had a border. Right?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Go on then, how will it work in practice, you seem to be able to understand it, can you explain it?



Have you even read it, or at least the summary of it? 

I assume you have, as the border issue seems to be your only purpose on this thread, so perhaps you can explain why it wouldn't/couldn't work?


----------



## Supine (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Supine seems furious that the article points out the potential to travel away from neo-liberalism. Presumably he/she is equally furious with McDonnell, Sanders, Warren etc



Furious? LOL

Just strikes me that the left case for brexit involves making everything super shit so that capitism can be overthrown. If replacing capitalism is a better idea why not argue the case for the proposed new model (whatever it is) instead of helping turn things to shit.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Have you even read it, or at least the summary of it?
> 
> I assume you have, as the border issue seems to be your only purpose on this thread, so perhaps you can explain why it wouldn't/couldn't work?


He must have voted in full knowledge of it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> Furious? LOL
> 
> Just strikes me that the left case for brexit involves making everything super shit so that capitism can be overthrown. If replacing capitalism is a better idea why not argue the case for the proposed new model (whatever it is) instead of helping turn things to shit.


See?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> See?



Aye


----------



## andysays (Aug 24, 2019)

Johnson and Tusk squabbling about who will be 'Mr No Deal'


----------



## philosophical (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Read the article. Read the report. I’m not here to explain stuff to you. When you’ve read them post up your thoughts. That’s how this place works best



Without a link I presume you are referring to this:

Commission - Prosperity UK

I rooted around in the lengthy report looking at what happens in the event of transgressions and couldn't find anything.
Maybe you can point me to the part that deals with what happens with regard to non compliance with the proposed alternative arrangements.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Without a link I presume you are referring to this:
> 
> Commission - Prosperity UK
> 
> ...



So, basically you have no problem with the proposals, just what would happen in the event of transgressions?

Anyone with an IQ above that of a single celled organism, would assume very large fines, and trucks & their loads being impounded, much like what happens elsewhere.


----------



## Supine (Aug 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The article provides political context to the situation in Ireland. It’s makes clear the red herrings being used in respect of the border and infrastructurE



Red herrings? It shows the author doesn't really understand the complexity of the island of Ireland.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 24, 2019)

It's amazing how many people suddenly deeply care about, and have a comprehensive knowledge of, ireland


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 24, 2019)

I am not totally convinced, but I am starting to think BJ may well have played a blinder here…

1 – Ignoring the EU after being promoted to PM, and instead starting his GE campaign based on ‘we are leaving with or without a deal at the end of October’, putting the shits up the EU.

2 – Ignoring the Eurocrats, and going straight to Germany, who let’s be honest runs the show anyway, then France as their lapdogs, and only other country that seriously has any sort of power in the EU. He’s blown a big hole in the ‘you can only negotiate with the EU, not individual countries’ bollocks policy.

3 – The Eurocrats refused to engage in discussions regarding alternatives arrangements to the Irish border issue, until we leave. Now both Merkel & Macron have indicated they are up for that conversation, that Tusk & co, refused to engage in. FFS, Macron has even said the ‘withdrawal agreement’ can be amended, who saw that coming?

4 – Following that, not only has the Irish government now said they are up for that conversation, but even Tusk has, no doubt dragged into this idea screaming & kicking, but hey ho, he’s now in ‘that place’, because those that actually pull the strings have put him there.

5 – the 270+ page 'Alternative Arrangements' report, a document complied by a range of experts, largely based on bringing together various arrangements from across the globe, was ignored by the Eurocrats, they wouldn’t even get involved in discussions concerning it, until we actually leave.

6 – Now Germany, France, Ireland & even Tusk, as leader of the Eurocrats, wants to discuss the proposals.


----------



## Supine (Aug 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's amazing how many people suddenly deeply care about, and have a comprehensive knowledge of, ireland



So you agree with the article and think potential problems are just red herrings?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 24, 2019)

Supine said:


> So you agree with the article and think potential problems are just red herrings?


Dunno. I've been to ireland a fair bit and my other half is sort of irish/lived there for years but even so I don't know enough to know what's workable and what isn't. Did agree with the sentiment that 'the irish issue' is being used cynically by lots of different parties with no fucks really given for the people affected


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, basically you have no problem with the proposals, just what would happen in the event of transgressions?
> 
> Anyone with an IQ above that of a single celled organism, would assume very large fines, and trucks & their loads being impounded, much like what happens elsewhere.



I have a problem with the proposals because they represent a hard border and constraint on the common travel area and the Good Friday Agreement.
The reason I say that is because these so called alternative arrangements of technology, checks in places, registered documentation, trusted trader schemes and the like will need enforcement and sanctions.
You have said it yourself, fines and impounding and the like.
The agencies and systems chasing border crossing trucks, attempting to issue and enforce fines, seizing and impounding vehicles, capturing and restraining people will exist as constraints which don't exist in the current arrangements. Those agencies and systems will be targets, never mind the cost of it all.
A convoy of vans and packed buses can cross twenty times a day in either direction at each crossing point unmarked and unregistered in any way, herds of animals can be driven hither and thither, tell me what the Alternative Arrangements report says about reacting to events like that.
Any enforcement system between the two divergent entities (the UK and the EU) will be a variation on what happens in Ireland now, and will be a target for dissidents.
You presumably have thoroughly read the Alternative Arrangements report you urge on me, would you please point out the part that outlines in detail how all and every kind of transgression is reacted to, and how that squares with the GFA and the agreed common travel area.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have a problem with the proposals because they represent a hard border and constraint on the common travel area and the Good Friday Agreement.
> The reason I say that is because these so called alternative arrangements of technology, checks in places, registered documentation, trusted trader schemes and the like will need enforcement and sanctions.
> You have said it yourself, fines and impounding and the like.
> The agencies and systems chasing border crossing trucks, attempting to issue and enforce fines, seizing and impounding vehicles, capturing and restraining people will exist as constraints which don't exist in the current arrangements. Those agencies and systems will be targets, never mind the cost of it all.
> ...


Can you tell me why IRELAND is still in the british empire please.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Can you tell me why IRELAND is still in the british empire please.



What on earth are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What on earth are you on about?


Did Ireland leave the British Empire?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Did Ireland leave the British Empire?



Maybe you could define your terms.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Maybe you could define your terms.


Can't answer it? Is Ireland part now of the United kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

It turns out the border isn't perhaps the most pressing issue... No-deal Brexit will ‘instantly disrupt’ UK’s role as £174bn global data hub

No deal means legal problems with data transfers from the eu till some sort of compliance established. And it's rather late in the day for that to get sorted out


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

For those interested here is the LeFT founding principles document. This answered questions about how LeFT aims to develop, resist dispersion and promote bottom up working class campaigns and activity. 

Core Principles


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Can't answer it? Is Ireland part now of the United kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?


Do you mean the Republic of Ireland?
Do you mean in terms of political and legal institutions?
Do you mean in terms of a common currency?
You have now morphed from 'the British Empire' to 'the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norther Ireland'. Which do you mean?


----------



## andysays (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have a problem with the proposals because they represent a hard border and constraint on the common travel area and the Good Friday Agreement.
> The reason I say that is because these so called alternative arrangements of technology, checks in places, registered documentation, trusted trader schemes and the like will need enforcement and sanctions.
> You have said it yourself, fines and impounding and the like.
> The agencies and systems chasing border crossing trucks, attempting to issue and enforce fines, seizing and impounding vehicles, capturing and restraining people will exist as constraints which don't exist in the current arrangements. Those agencies and systems will be targets, never mind the cost of it all.
> ...


Can you explain *specifically *how these proposals represent a 'constraint' on the Good Friday Agreement, ie which part or parts of that agreement explicitly rule out the measures in the proposals.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Do you mean the Republic of Ireland?
> Do you mean in terms of political and legal institutions?
> Do you mean in terms of a common currency?
> You have now morphed from 'the British Empire' to 'the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Norther Ireland'. Which do you mean?


Ok, Ireland is now part of the UK in your mad world.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> For those interested here is the LeFT founding principles document. This answered questions about how LeFT aims to develop, resist dispersion and promote bottom up working class campaigns and activity.
> 
> Core Principles


Thanks for posting this.


----------



## andysays (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Ok, Ireland is now part of the UK in your mad world.


I find kind of funny, I find it kind of sad...


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

He thought he was doing some zenoic paradox stuff and he's ended up trapped. Because nothing has ever happened. We haven't and can't leave the EU and Ireland never left GB. It's impossible.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Ok, Ireland is now part of the UK in your mad world.



What on earth are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What on earth are you on about?


Can you not follow your own logic you time-wasting want-wit?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> Can you explain *specifically *how these proposals represent a 'constraint' on the Good Friday Agreement, ie which part or parts of that agreement explicitly rule out the measures in the proposals.


If you are genuinely interested there are some responses here. 

https://www.google.com/url?q=http:/...FjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw3Ny1QP3z-KZEqgDNLEwCWr


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If you are genuinely interested there are some responses here.
> 
> https://www.google.com/url?q=http:/...FjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw3Ny1QP3z-KZEqgDNLEwCWr


andysays this is a PDF from the armagh-based centre for cross-border studies


----------



## andysays (Aug 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If you are genuinely interested there are some responses here.
> 
> https://www.google.com/url?q=http:/...FjABegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw3Ny1QP3z-KZEqgDNLEwCWr


I'm genuinely interested in whether philosophical can answer my question, which has been put to him a number of times without any coherent response.

I'll have a look at your thing later


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have a problem with the proposals because they represent a hard border and constraint on the common travel area and the Good Friday Agreement.



No, they don’t, the whole point is to avoid a hard border, which is defined by any physical infrastructure or related checks and controls at the actual border. The proposals also not only guarantee the common travel area, but looks to reinforce it, whilst also ensuring the principles of the Good Friday Agreement are upheld.



> The reason I say that is because these so called alternative arrangements of technology, checks in places, registered documentation, trusted trader schemes and the like will need enforcement and sanctions.
> You have said it yourself, fines and impounding and the like.
> The agencies and systems chasing border crossing trucks, attempting to issue and enforce fines, seizing and impounding vehicles, capturing and restraining people will exist as constraints which don't exist in the current arrangements. Those agencies and systems will be targets, never mind the cost of it all.
> A convoy of vans and packed buses can cross twenty times a day in either direction at each crossing point unmarked and unregistered in any way, herds of animals can be driven hither and thither, tell me what the Alternative Arrangements report says about reacting to events like that.
> Any enforcement system between the two divergent entities (the UK and the EU) will be a variation on what happens in Ireland now, and will be a target for dissidents.



For some strange reason you seem to be trying to redefine what is meant by a ‘hard border’, there was always going to be the need for some checks, and whole aim is to avoid those actually happening on the actual border, which is what these proposals aim to do.



> You presumably have thoroughly read the Alternative Arrangements report you urge on me, would you please point out the part that outlines in detail how all and every kind of transgression is reacted to, and how that squares with the GFA and the agreed common travel area.



I haven’t read the whole 270 pages, but have skim read the summary, which I’ve found the link to again & is below, it goes into some detail about the ‘implementation, application, supervision and enforcement’, and is certainly the starting point for a constructive conversation, when finer details can be agreed.

At the end of the day, both sides want to avoid a ‘hard brexit’, and both sides want to avoid a ‘hard border’. The backstop without a time limit is a non-starter, as it’s been rejected by parliament three times. We are were we are, so these proposals need urgent serious consideration as a basis for going forward. 

https://www.prosperity-uk.com/wp-co...Final-Report-Executive-Summary-18-07-2019.pdf


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> Can you explain *specifically *how these proposals represent a 'constraint' on the Good Friday Agreement, ie which part or parts of that agreement explicitly rule out the measures in the proposals.



Amongst others there are
Dotted point six in section one of the Rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity section.
Point 1 in section two of the economic social and cultural issues section.
Point one under security.
Article one section two (the external impediment bit).

You are welcome to do your own research.
Maybe you are the poster that can explain how the alternative arrangements can deal with all transgressions with regard to the Geography, topography  and practicalities of the suggestions in the 'alternative arrangements'. Perhaps you can point out the *specific* part of the alternative arrangements proposals text that addresses transgressions.
If you are a lexiter or are part of LeFT go ahead and impose those alternative arrangements if you like, they will not work in my view and you won't have your brexit.
Lexiters and LeFT are axiomatically allied to the likes of Johnson, Farage and Priti (let the threat of food shortages pressure the Irish) Patel. Carry on, although you might wish to tell Priti Patel that the Republic of Ireland is one of the most food secure countries of the world.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Amongst others there are
> Dotted point six in section one of the Rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity section.
> Point 1 in section two of the economic social and cultural issues section.
> Point one under security.
> ...


Where is the UK on this chart?

I would argue that Ireland's strong position is because it never left the UK. Or, at least, given your logic, there must be some link - right?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, they don’t, the whole point is to avoid a hard border, which is defined by any physical infrastructure or related checks and controls at the actual border. The proposals also not only guarantee the common travel area, but looks to reinforce it, whilst also ensuring the principles of the Good Friday Agreement are upheld.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Indeed. Don't you think that sanctions against transgressions will lead to conflict as suggested by the Police Service of Northern Ireland?
I agree the term 'hard border' confuses the issue, a border is a border however it is described.
When you say both sides want to avoid a border, how does that square with 17.4 million people who voted for one by voting leave?
If there are two different regulatory systems side by side, including regulations regarding services, in what way are those differences expressed and managed?
You mention physical infrastructure and checks not being on the actual border itself, the Jacob Rees Mogg manoeuvre. Do you think anybody will be taken in by that? Constraints are constraints and there is every likelihood they will be resisted however hidden away they may be.

In short there will be a brexit enforced difference in the future to what there is now. I believe that will conflict with the peace process, you seem to believe it can be assimilated.
The issue is something mentioned by others not only me.
Right now I am tempted to wish for the EU to tell Boris Johnson, Priti Patel and LeFT to go fuck themselves and have their so called no deal. Following that I hope the Republic of Ireland withdraws from the single electricity market on the island of Ireland, and Mark Francois and Theresa Villiarse can Captain the floating generators moored off the Northern Irish Coast.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Where is the UK on this chart?
> 
> I would argue that Ireland's strong position is because it never left the UK. Or, at least, given your logic, there must be some link - right?



What are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Right now I am tempted to wish for the EU to tell Boris Johnson, Priti Patel and LeFT to go fuck themselves and have their so called no deal. Following that I hope the Republic of Ireland withdraws from the single electricity market on the island of Ireland, and Mark Francois and Theresa Villiarse can Captain the floating generators moored off the Northern Irish Coast.




They can't because you can't leave anything.

Now, there was no electricity in NI before 2007? Or at least it was just _unionist electricity_ right?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What are you on about?


You'll not get anywhere with him; he'll never actually explain any point in a way that is intended to help you understand what he's saying.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They can't because you can't leave anything.
> 
> Now, there was no electricity in NI before 2007? Or at least it was just _unionist electricity_ right?


What on earth are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What on earth are you on about?


Why are you trying to blow apart the GFA agreement by insisting on a hard militarised border between NI and the ROI?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Right now I am tempted to wish for the EU to tell Boris Johnson, Priti Patel and LeFT to go fuck themselves and have their so called no deal. Following that I hope the Republic of Ireland withdraws from the single electricity market on the island of Ireland, and Mark Francois and Theresa Villiarse can Captain the floating generators moored off the Northern Irish Coast.



That doesn't surprise me one bit, because you believe a solution can not be found, in fact you seem to want no solution, you want chaos, so you can claim some victory for the hundreds of posts you have made on this subject.

Yet, Ireland, the EU, and the UK all want to find a solution, and one will have to be found at some point.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That doesn't surprise me one bit, because you believe a solution can not be found, in fact you seem to want no solution, you want chaos, so you can claim some victory for the hundreds of posts you have made on this subject.
> 
> Yet, Ireland, the EU, and the UK all want to find a solution, and one will have to be found at some point.



Precisely. He needs to read the report instead of the carefully constructed narrative, by the EU and their pals in Dublin which the media lap up. It’s an issue. There are solutions. Every side needs to agree on one of them.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why are you trying to blow apart the GFA agreement by insisting on a hard militarised border between NI and the ROI?



Those who voted leave are the ones who insist on a controlled border between the UK and the EU.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Those who voted leave are the ones who insist on a controlled border between the UK and the EU.


No, you are the single person here doing that. The only one. It's madness. No one wants it, so why are you insisting on it? Don't you care about what happens next if your mad plan was ever put in place?

Callous.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Those who voted leave are the ones who insist on a controlled border between the UK and the EU.



No they don't, fool.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That doesn't surprise me one bit, because you believe a solution can not be found, in fact you seem to want no solution, you want chaos, so you can claim some victory for the hundreds of posts you have made on this subject.
> 
> Yet, Ireland, the EU, and the UK all want to find a solution, and one will have to be found at some point.



I have done what you asked and taken a look at the alternative arrangements you mentioned.
I have asked what happens in those arrangements that deals with transgressions.
Neither you, nor the document it seems, are able to answer that point.
If a solution will have to be found at some point then what is that solution?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Think about this mad formulation for a minute - like, _really _think, what does it demand?

_If a solution will have to be found at some point then what is that solution?_


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, you are the single person here doing that. The only one. It's madness. No one wants it, so why are you insisting on it? Don't you care about what happens next if your mad plan was ever put in place?
> 
> Callous.



I disagree, those who promote the alternative arrangements are promoting a controlled border, which it seems they think can happen without a system to deal with transgressions.
Unless what they are really saying is leave isn't what they want after all.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No they don't, fool.



Are they saying leave means stay joined then?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I disagree, those who promote the alternative arrangements are promoting a controlled border, which it seems they think can happen without a system to deal with transgressions.
> Unless what they are really saying is leave isn't what they want after all.


And we're back to why Ireland never left the United Kingdon aren't we?

Why do you crave that hard border, the shooting war, the economic and infrastructural sabotage - what on earth is wrong with you?


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If a solution will have to be found at some point then what is that solution?



A united Ireland?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Are they saying leave means stay joined then?


Ireland never left the UK. 

Nothing ever happened ever in fact. Or could have happened.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Ireland never left the UK.
> 
> Nothing ever happened ever in fact. Or could have happened.



What on earth are you on about?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> A united Ireland?


Under what conditions?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I have done what you asked and taken a look at the alternative arrangements you mentioned.
> I have asked what happens in those arrangements that deals with transgressions.
> Neither you, nor the document it seems, are able to answer that point.



I'll repeat... "and is certainly the starting point for a constructive conversation, when finer details can be agreed."



> If a solution will have to be found at some point then what is that solution?



Beyond totally illogical.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And we're back to why Ireland never left the United Kingdon aren't we?
> 
> Why do you crave that hard border, the shooting war, the economic and infrastructural sabotage - what on earth is wrong with you?



Back where?
To a place and concept that you introduced that I have not engaged with, I think it was because you wrote the British 'empire' that I lost interest in whatever point you're trying to make.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Back where?
> To a place and concept that you introduced that I have not engaged with, I think it was because you wrote the British 'empire' that I lost interest in whatever point you're trying to make.


Back to the logic of your absurd posts. That you cannot recognise this says it all. Just another little englander.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Are they saying leave means stay joined then?



This is beyond a joke, it's like trying to debate with a can of baked beans.


----------



## Magnus McGinty (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Under what conditions?



Was more being sarky assuming that wasn't what they were suggesting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> This is beyond a joke, it's like trying to debate with a can of baked beans.


There are cans of beans with better debating skills than philosophical


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Magnus McGinty said:


> Was more being sarky assumingr that wasn't what they were suggesting.


They actually think that their repeated call for a hard militarised border and economic wafare (or what they think constitutes that)  waged from the ROI is a pro-united ireland position. It's beyond stupid.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I'll repeat... "and is certainly the starting point for a constructive conversation, when finer details can be agreed."
> 
> 
> 
> Beyond totally illogical.



You are right about illogical. I worded that badly.

However you quote 'a constructive conversation where finer details can be agreed'.
Isn't that the issue?
What is described as 'finer details' are actually huge central sticking points?
Like the 'finer detail' about what to do about transgressions.
Beyond somebody somewhere saying 'not a problem, it'll sort itself out, it'll be alright on the night' there isn't a sense of details, finer or huge, being sorted at all.
This has been an issue for a lot of years now, aren't you curious as to why it hasn't been sorted yet, by folks probably better equipped to do so that you and I?
Could it be that nobody can suggest a workable solution that isn't to be a harsh and indeed dangerous one?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

What will happen in transgressions in a scenario only you want and argue for? Well maybe you can answer that for yourself? How will you deal with transgressors?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There are cans of beans with better debating skills than philosophical



Wehey, in rolls Mr High and Mighty Condescending man with the personals.
Carry on.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What will happen in transgressions in a scenario only you want and argue for? Well maybe you can answer that for yourself? How will you deal with transgressors?



I wouldn't change the minimum systems that exist now. I wouldn't have brexit at all. I voted remain.
However I lost that vote and it is for those who promote brexit (there are some on here) to come up with the solutions.
Instead a lot of people are irritated by me because of their own failure to answer the questions that I ask.
Hence the regularity of the personals, which is a way of retreating into ignorance and avoiding things.


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Instead a lot of people are irritated by me because of their own failure to answer the questions that I ask.


that's not why people are irritated by you, and you know it. It's your dishonesty.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I wouldn't change the minimum systems that exist now. I wouldn't have brexit at all. I voted remain.
> However I lost that vote and it is for those who promote brexit (there are some on here) to come up with the solutions.
> Instead a lot of people are irritated by me because of their own failure to answer the questions that I ask.
> Hence the regularity of the personals, which is a way of retreating into ignorance and avoiding things.


Answer the question that you asked yourself._ What will happen in transgressions in a scenario only you want and argue for? Well maybe you can answer that for yourself? How will you deal with transgressors?
_
At least do that.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Back to the logic of your absurd posts. That you cannot recognise this says it all. Just another little englander.



My posts seen illogical and absurd to you, but you fail to explain why.
You are entitled to have and express your opinion, but you may not actually be right.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> that's not why people are irritated by you, and you know it. It's your dishonesty.


That and the massive racist smears.

(_And all them murders what he done_)


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> that's not why people are irritated by you, and you know it. It's your dishonesty.



Dishonesty?
For example?
I believe there is a consistency in the stance I take, but if you can point out my dishonesty then please do so.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Answer the question that you asked yourself._ What will happen in transgressions in a scenario only you want and argue for? Well maybe you can answer that for yourself? How will you deal with transgressors?
> _
> At least do that.



I did not ask myself that question.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> My posts seen illogical and absurd to you, but you fail to explain why.
> You are entitled to have and express your opinion, but you may not actually be right.


I haven't said that they they are illogical. I have, to the contrary, followed though the logic of your posts to demonstrate the absurdity of the positions that they necessarily entail and that you are blissfully old man/bore in pub unaware of.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I did not ask myself that question.


Now we're getting somewhere!


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That and the massive racist smears.
> 
> (_And all them murders what he done_)



Massive racist smears?
Go on then?
Trawl back.
While you're at it remember your use of plurals, and define smears,

For your information I have never murdered anybody...hope that allays any fears you might have.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Massive racist smears?
> Go on then?
> Trawl back.
> While you're at it remember your use of plurals, and define smears,
> ...


You're very welcome.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> This has been an issue for a lot of years now, aren't you curious as to why it hasn't been sorted yet, by folks probably better equipped to do so that you and I?



It hasn't been sorted, because the EU has refused to discuss in any detail, anything about our future relationship until we leave.

And, May agreeing to that fucking daft idea, was the biggest fuck up in the whole miserable situation.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I haven't said that they they are illogical. I have, to the contrary, followed though the logic of your posts to demonstrate the absurdity of the positions that they necessarily entail and that you are blissfully old man/bore in pub unaware of.



You have demonstrated nothing at all.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You're very welcome.


Good. That shows there were no massive racist smears.
Carry on.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Good. That shows there were no massive racist smears.
> Carry on.


Now this, this is the dishonesty that belboid was on about. On a winner today.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It hasn't been sorted, because the EU has refused to discuss in any detail, anything about our future relationship until we leave.
> 
> And, May agreeing to that fucking daft idea, was the biggest fuck up in the whole miserable situation.



The EU had suggested a border down the Irish sea as one possibility for the future, and it accepted the UK suggestion of the (badly named in my view) backstop as another suggestion for the future relationship.
Maybe you don't think of those as 'any details'.

If Theresa May messed up that's her look out, but I was warming to her brexit in name only idea as maybe the best of a bad job in this whole miserable situation.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Now this, this is the dishonesty that belboid was on about. On a winner today.


Err no it isn't.
No massive racist smears written there at all.
Carry on.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The EU had suggested a border down the Irish sea as one possibility for the future, and it accepted the UK suggestion of the (badly named in my view) backstop as another suggestion for the future relationship.
> Maybe you don't think of those as 'any details'.
> 
> If Theresa May messed up that's her look out, but I was warming to her brexit in name only idea as maybe the best of a bad job in this whole miserable situation.


You were demanding leave with a hard border as the only possible outcome a few minutes ago - and have spent two years loudly demanding that leave voters enforce this. 

Carry on. As if you need an invitation.


----------



## belboid (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Dishonesty?
> For example?
> I believe there is a consistency in the stance I take, but if you can point out my dishonesty then please do so.


All gone over previously.  All you do is repeat yourself and ignore the criticisms put to you. You are a complete waste of time and space.  I don't know why anyone bothers attempting to engage with you, just boredom I suppose.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The EU had suggested a border down the Irish sea as one possibility for the future, and it accepted the UK suggestion of the (badly named in my view) *backstop as another suggestion for the future relationship.*
> Maybe you don't think of those as 'any details'.
> 
> If Theresa May messed up that's her look out, but I was warming to her brexit in name only idea as maybe the best of a bad job in this whole miserable situation.



The backstop is not supposed to be part of our future relationship, just a temporary measure until the details can be worked out for a proper solution.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> All gone over previously.  All you do is repeat yourself and ignore the criticisms put to you. You are a complete waste of time and space.  I don't know why anyone bothers attempting to engage with you, just boredom I suppose.


For me (today) it's because if i stop before one we're going to lose another wicket. That's too heavy a price to pay. Nearly there.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> All gone over previously.  All you do is repeat yourself and ignore the criticisms put to you. You are a complete waste of time and space.  I don't know why anyone bothers attempting to engage with you, just boredom I suppose.



Good point, I am going back to ignoring him.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Made it!


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> All gone over previously.  All you do is repeat yourself and ignore the criticisms put to you. You are a complete waste of time and space.  I don't know why anyone bothers attempting to engage with you, just boredom I suppose.


No example then.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The backstop is not supposed to be part of our future relationship, just a temporary measure until the details can be worked out for a proper solution.



It is supposed to be a measure for the future. How temporary is a matter to be sorted.
Initially the backstop was to kick in in the future when brexit is supposed to happen.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> For those interested here is the LeFT founding principles document. This answered questions about how LeFT aims to develop, resist dispersion and promote bottom up working class campaigns and activity.
> 
> Core Principles



Three years and this is all there is from the left side of Brexit?

Both the things you have linked to are just wish lists. Whoever is leading this didn't even bother to do half a days work on a website before putting out the founding statement. Where's the social media, how are the working class going to hear about this and get involved? Where's the list of union meetings or actions. Where's the press coverage? Three years, I've seen better campaigns put together in three days.

It's just the usual suspects going round in circles, ever decreasing circles if this is the extent of their efforts.

Then there's the actual content. The list of countries we will be trading with excludes the US and gives no idea how these new relationships will be more beneficial to us and the countries concerned. How to deal with Brazil for example. 

How are, British, BAME people actually being represented when 75% voted remain. Same with NI and again no mention of the referendum result there. Are their views just wrong so it's OK for you to do what's best for them and simply  ignore the stated aims regarding democracy. 

Can't argue with some the realities of EU refugee policy but we don't have a party offering an egalitarian immigration and refugee policy so effectively no solution is offered by LeFT. At least some EU countries have resettled new arrivals to Italy and Greece. Last time I checked we had resettled 0 people and neither main party has committed to changing this. It could be that staying in the EU would lead to Britain being forced to adopt a better refugee policy. Not saying it will but it's as likely as Brexit leading to the same, possibly more so as the more powerful members would like a quota system. 

Everybody here makes the assumption that I'm middle class. I'm not and neither are most of my social circle, yet none of us voted leave. How are we represented by LeFT? Against our will? Condescendingly from above? LeFT statements should at least qualify their use of the term with something like  "leave voting working class"

Still at least we've got lots of time. Oh.

I can see the backstop issue being solved by rebranding it a border solution with agreed goals that the UK must meet. Basically changing the whole we can't leave without EU permission to we have agreed the solution and will be out when we implement it just like we wanted all along. Same thing different description. If not then it could be no deal exit in a couple of months. 

Tories are already in election mode and doing stuff like this.
NHS bosses ordered to 'stick to script' that no-deal Brexit must happen on 31 October if necessary

If LeFT and their tiny website are the response to Tory Brexit everyone who's experienced abuse, lost their job or suffered from the drop in the pound  as a result of the leave vote can sleep well tonight in the knowledge that another statement will be along shortly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Wehey, in rolls Mr High and Mighty Condescending man with the personals.
> Carry on.


I've yet to see a can of beans inject accusations of racism against all and sundry into a debate as you'll recall you did at your first irruption into this debate


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I've yet to see a can of beans inject accusations of racism against all and sundry into a debate as you'll recall you did at your first irruption into this debate



Except I didn't.
Carry on.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> If LeFT and their tiny website are the response to Tory Brexit everyone who's experienced abuse, lost their job or suffered from the drop in the pound  as a result of the leave vote can sleep well tonight in the knowledge that another statement will be along shortly.


What's your response anju? And it better be both effective and immediate.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

If anybody needs evidence that there has been little to no movement in people's views and position in three years then we could just show them this thread


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Sorry, late to this thread and my first post.
> Am I right is assuming that everybody who voted brexit is an ignorant racist self serving nationalist brainwashed tosser?
> Is there anybody at all, in the universe, who can persuade me that there is anything good about brexit?
> Just to make it easy, start with the day to day practical solutions to the land border on the island of Ireland. We are told brexit voters knew what they were doing, so if there is a brexit voter reading this, tell me your plan for the border that you knew about before voting in the referendum.
> ...


Exhibit a


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Oh and basing supposedly pro working class left wing politics on currency falls or rises is just fuck off


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are probably forgiven if you didn't vote brexit, so if that is the case don't be so hard on yourself.


Exhibit b


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What's your response anju? And it better be both effective and immediate.



Revoke article 50.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh and basing supposedly pro working class left wing politics on currency falls or rises is just fuck off



My parents live in Spain on a state pension, as do other people. The value of their pension has fallen enough to cause them financial distress. I'm not in a position to help them. That causes me distress.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Revoke article 50.


So after pouring scorn on a group for outlining an analysis and seeking to organise around it this drivel is your alternative. Nothing about why this should happen, how to deal with the fallout, what this would say about representative democracy, just _do what i want.
_
Beyond pathetic.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Revoke article 50.


There is no better way to boost farage and his ilk


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So after pouring scorn on a group for outlining an analysis and seeking to organise around it this drivel is your alternative. Nothing about why this should happen, how to deal with the fallout, what this would say about representative democracy, just _do what i want.
> _
> Beyond pathetic.



How is it any different to other solutions. They're all "do what I want"

Much as your obsession with groups, sub groups and who's who within those groups I at least thought you were honest in your posts. Do you think LeFT will achieve anything?


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> There is no better way to boost farage and his ilk



I think a Tory Boris Johnson led Brexit will have a similar impact. Look at the spike in hate crime around the referendum. It's not like people thought oh we've won let's chill out.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> How is it any different to other solutions. They're all "do what I want"
> 
> Much as your obsession with groups, sub groups and who's who within those groups I at least thought you were honest in your posts. Do you think LeFT will achieve anything?


Other groups, sub groups or whatever you're fussed about, offer an analysis. Some substance. Some politics. Something which your immediate and effective alternative is sadly void of. Pair of time-wasters.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Other groups, sub groups or whatever you're fussed about, offer an analysis. Some substance. Some politics. Something which your immediate and effective alternative is sadly void of. Pair of time-wasters.



Do you think LeFT will have any impact. It's a simple question.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Do you think LeFT will have any impact. It's a simple question.


The fact that you're engaged with that question kind of shows that they already have.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Do you think LeFT will have any impact. It's a simple question.


More impact than calling people racist misogynists will, 100%.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> My parents live in Spain on a state pension, as do other people. The value of their pension has fallen enough to cause them financial distress. I'm not in a position to help them. That causes me distress.


Yeah not disputing currency changes have effects. I'm disputing it has any role to play in defining pro working class politics. How do you think sterling or equity markets would react to nationalisations or mass planned social spending and does this make such actions pro or anti working class. Fucks sake


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> I think a Tory Boris Johnson led Brexit will have a similar impact. Look at the spike in hate crime around the referendum. It's not like people thought oh we've won let's chill out.


no indeed. I think i commented on it at the time. But your solution won't happen immediately, there's a number of steps to occur before that could happen. 

Perhaps you missed my post about problems with data transfers following a no deal brexit. And maybe you've missed the noises from the US Congress about how no trade deal will be made with the UK is brexit impacts the gfa. But the long and short of it is I don't believe we will leave the eu, not because of a lack of desire but because it's essentially impossible to leave the eu given the policy choices that have been made.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The fact that you're engaged with that question kind of shows that they already have.



On Urban maybe.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> More impact than calling people racist misogynists will, 100%.



Ok if you don't want to give a meaningful answer fair enough.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> On Urban maybe.


I don't necessarily agree with LeFT's emphasis on backing a 'No-Deal' type of exit, but I don't see why such a well-argued campaign shouldn't have an impact on the wider Labour movement; especially as we approach the Brighton conference.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah not disputing currency changes have effects. I'm disputing it has any role to play in defining pro working class politics. How do you think sterling or equity markets would react to nationalisations or mass planned social spending and does this make such actions pro or anti working class. Fucks sake



Of course nationalisation and social spending are pro working class. I would assume the markets would react negatively but I wouldn't be concerned about that. Constant updates on the stock market should be banned.


----------



## andysays (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Amongst others there are
> Dotted point six in section one of the Rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity section.
> Point 1 in section two of the economic social and cultural issues section.
> Point one under security.
> ...


So again, you're unable to provide a genuine answer to a specific question.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no indeed. I think i commented on it at the time. But your solution won't happen immediately, there's a number of steps to occur before that could happen.
> 
> Perhaps you missed my post about problems with data transfers following a no deal brexit. And maybe you've missed the noises from the US Congress about how no trade deal will be made with the UK is brexit impacts the gfa. But the long and short of it is I don't believe we will leave the eu, not because of a lack of desire but because it's essentially impossible to leave the eu given the policy choices that have been made.



I saw your posts and know that you have believed Brexit won't happen since the referendum. 

like every other solution revoking article 50 is neither guaranteed or simple, just my preferred option.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Of course nationalisation and social spending are pro working class. I would assume the markets would react negatively but I wouldn't be concerned about that. Constant updates on the stock market should be banned.


So why is sterling movement an indication of what the left should be doing in this instance then


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I don't necessarily agree with LeFT's emphasis on backing a 'No-Deal' type of exit, but I don't see why such a well-argued campaign shouldn't have an impact on the wider Labour movement; especially as we approach the Brighton conference.



It's well argued but very late in the day and lacking detail on how to achieve those goals, which it would need at this stage. Compare LeFT to the Brexit party, who publicly at least have very similar aims.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 25, 2019)

Jesus


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So why is sterling movement an indication of what the left should be doing in this instance then



That's not what I'm saying. I gave those examples as I think the left leave argument ignores the impact the vote has had. People I am very close to were hurt from day one and the LeFT thing is an insult to them. Just trying to get my point across with real life stuff.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Jesus



Why don't you either say something or leave it. What's are you hoping to achieve with the condescending comments?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Three years and this is all there is from the left side of Brexit?
> 
> Both the things you have linked to are just wish lists. Whoever is leading this didn't even bother to do half a days work on a website before putting out the founding statement. Where's the social media, how are the working class going to hear about this and get involved? Where's the list of union meetings or actions. Where's the press coverage? Three years, I've seen better campaigns put together in three days.
> 
> ...



As you know I’ve spent 3 years on here bemoaning the failures of the left to engage properly on the issue. A disaster.

LeFT is the first serious attempt to address this with trade unionists, socialists and community activists from across the left committed to supporting, promoting and giving confidence to work developed from the ground up by the struggles and activities of the working class

Your bizarre sneers about the lack of social media when there is a Twitter, Facebook and blog are odd. As is your criticism of a network that has been in existence for a few weeks for failing to be on the brink of seizing power. You are correct that some of ‘the usual suspects’ are involved but there are also community activists, trade unionists and Marxists and libertarian communists - the only bond is our position vis the EU.

I don’t think LeFT could have been clearer on our position vis anti fascism, migrant rights and we expect to pursue ongoing work and new stuff in both areas. The idea black and other minority ethnic communities are automatically as remainiac as you are is offensive. My city - which is one of the most diverse in Britain - voted leave. The black and Asian stewards in my branch support leave and like the material LeFT has put out. There are black trade unionists, Irish republicans and community activists from across the board involved.

You are entitled to think remain and the status quo are the best we can hope for. You are entitled to disagree with anything we put out.

But lies about the lack of social media, sneers about the lack of weight of LeFT after a few weeks of its existence and the pathetic attempt to paint us as excluding the BAME workers is fucking offensive and gratuitously wide of the mark. You get the benefit of the doubt this time but any further attempts to paint us white will get an appropriate response


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Exhibit a



And where are the accusations of racism?
You are the picky one, maybe your forensic analysis can spot a question mark when it's there.
Elsewhere I am accused of 'multiple' racist smears (otherwise know as more than one) where in reality there are none.
For some reason you and others wish to perpetuate this trope, which I interpret along with all the personals as a way of avoiding any debate when things get tricky.
The recent spell is a case in point. some kind of organisation called LeFT pops up and says 'c'mon lets leave'. I yet again counter that by asking questions regarding the border, but when those questions get a little more tricky like what do LeFT suggest regarding transgressions in the event of their 'alternative arrangements'  idea, to answer out comes the play the man not the ball stuff because they have no answer.
On a personal note it depresses me that people who call themselves of the left (some of the stratifications and stuff is way too convoluted to follow clearly) are eager to ally themselves with Nicky Morgan, Priti Patel, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Mark Francois, Andrew Bridgen, Jacob Rees Mogg and others. It depresses me because it looks as if the nutcases have won over an element of the left who I thought might not be taken in by their self serving guff.
It is clearly a steal from David Lammy, but if those in LeFT wish to lay down with dogs, they will catch their fleas, something I personally don't wish to do.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Exhibit b


Eh?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> I think a Tory Boris Johnson led Brexit will have a similar impact. Look at the spike in hate crime around the referendum. It's not like people thought oh we've won let's chill out.



I hope it isn't too embarrassing for you that I write in agreement.
My mixed race son commutes to London Bridge every day for work (he does other stuff too!), and he reported a definite increase in racist abuse towards him immediately after the vote, as well as feeling he had to intervene when racist abuse was directed at others. Since then there has not been a return to the point of the low level racist abuse he was used to, but general unembarrassed abuse has sustained itself at quite a high level for the past three years.
The far right has always been around, but brexit and the Stephen Yackitty Lookatme stuff along with other things had contaminated the life of a family member of mine in an increased way since the referendum.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> So again, you're unable to provide a genuine answer to a specific question.



I have provided a specific answer to a disingenuous question.

You also wrote 'I'm genuinely interested in whether philosophical can answer my question, which has been put to him a number of times without any coherent response'.

My responses are coherent although not in your individual opinion.
You can define 'genuine' and 'coherent' to suit your purposes all you like, and as a way of dismissing my answers. However you choose not to engage with the content of what I write for whatever your own reasons might be.
If you are in favour of leave what would you put in place to deal with transgressions at the border in Ireland between the UK and the EU?
Please be as genuine, coherent and specific as you like.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> _The recent spell is a case in point. some kind of organisation called LeFT pops up and says 'c'mon lets leave'. I yet again counter that by asking questions regarding the bor_der, but when those questions get a little more tricky like what do LeFT suggest regarding transgressions in the event of their 'alternative arrangements'  idea, to answer out comes the play the man not the ball stuff because they have no answer.
> On a personal note it depresses me that people who call themselves of the left (some of the stratifications and stuff is way too convoluted to follow clearly) are eager to ally themselves with Nicky Morgan, Priti Patel, Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage, Mark Francois, Andrew Bridgen, Jacob Rees Mogg and others. It depresses me because it looks as if the nutcases have won over an element of the left who I thought might not be taken in by their self serving guff.
> It is clearly a steal from David Lammy, but if those in LeFT wish to lay down with dogs, they will catch their fleas, something I personally don't wish to do.



So you align with the IoD, CBI, Blair, Cameron, Clegg, Swinson, the Blairite rump in Labour, the IMF, the ECB etc? I ask to check if you are merely ridiculous and pathetic or politically abysmal as well. Either way, the fleas on you and your remain allies, that emanate from your disgusting politics include closed EU borders killing migrants in the sea, the punishment beating of ordinary Greeks and Italians, the 40% youth unemployment in Spain and Portugal and the far right groups you’ve given agency to. They are fucking vile fleas you’ve got. You citing the risible David Lanny about sums you up

On your border transgressions. There are border transgressions in every country, on every day of the week. The idea that border transgressions will bring down the GFA or the south of Ireland is frankly _insane_.

A temporary solution to the border in Ireland will have to be found. The options exist and have been set out in a paper that you continue to refuse to read. What hasn’t happened yet is serious negotiations about them for posturing reasons in Dublin and Brussels and Westminster. Your continued insistence that the people of Ireland hang on every word on this matter is just shite.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> That's not what I'm saying. I gave those examples as I think the left leave argument ignores the impact the vote has had. People I am very close to were hurt from day one and the LeFT thing is an insult to them. Just trying to get my point across with real life stuff.


Yeah I know what you were saying. A section of left backed something which caused sterling to fall, ergo they acted against the working class. Which as we've established is not a consistent or honest position


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> As you know I’ve spent 3 years on here bemoaning the failures of the left to engage properly on the issue. A disaster.
> 
> LeFT is the first serious attempt to address this with trade unionists, socialists and community activists from across the left committed to supporting, promoting and giving confidence to work developed from the ground up by the struggles and activities of the working class
> 
> ...



The majority of non white people did vote remain so not sure what the issue is with the point I made. Not saying it's racist just that if a group of people voted overwhelmingly to remain you can't claim to represent them.

I don't see what LeFT can achieve at this point. If it was started 3 years ago then yes I could see you having an impact but a couple of months from a potential Tory Brexit, deal or no deal, is too late and with the possibility of a fresh 5 year start for them things look bleak.

I'm going to leave it here I think as it's a lovely day and I have other things to do.

Apologies if it seems like a personal attack. It isn't and although I would prefer to remain I would settle for a solution that makes life better for normal people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Eh?


B. Not a


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> And where are the accusations of racism?
> You are the picky one, maybe your forensic analysis can spot a question mark when it's there.
> Elsewhere I am accused of 'multiple' racist smears (otherwise know as more than one) where in reality there are none.
> For some reason you and others wish to perpetuate this trope, which I interpret along with all the personals as a way of avoiding any debate when things get tricky.
> ...


your question is asking support or confirmation in your belief that everyone who voted brexit is racist. You therefore believe everyone who voted brexit is racist. It's admittedly not coming out and saying you're all racist but your intended meaning hides behind a tawdry figleaf


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> The majority of non white people did vote remain so not sure what the issue is with the point I made. Not saying it's racist just that if a group of people voted overwhelmingly to remain you can't claim to represent them.
> 
> I don't see what LeFT can achieve at this point. If it was started 3 years ago then yes I could see you having an impact but a couple of months from a potential Tory Brexit, deal or no deal, is too late and with the possibility of a fresh 5 year start for them things look bleak.
> 
> ...



If you read the thread you will see that LeFT hasn’t just been set up for the period between now and October/November. The explicit aim is to look longer than that because the fall out will reverberate for years (as will ongoing discussion about the nature of EU neo-liberalism). 

Finally, it’s deeply offensive to lump all BAME voters into one category. There were significant differences by class, education, location and millions voted leave.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> So you align with the IoD, CBI, Blair, Cameron, Clegg, Swinson, the Blairite rump in Labour, the IMF, the ECB etc? I ask to check if you are merely ridiculous and pathetic or politically abysmal as well. Either way, the fleas on you and your remain allies, that emanate from your disgusting politics include closed EU borders killing migrants in the sea, the punishment beating of ordinary Greeks and Italians, the 40% youth unemployment in Spain and Portugal and the far right groups you’ve given agency to. They are fucking vile fleas you’ve got. You citing the risible David Lanny about sums you up
> 
> On your border transgressions. There are border transgressions in every country, on every day of the week. The idea that border transgressions will bring down the GFA or the south of Ireland is frankly _insane_.
> 
> A temporary solution to the border in Ireland will have to be found. The options exist and have been set out in a paper that you continue to refuse to read. What hasn’t happened yet is serious negotiations about them for posturing reasons in Dublin and Brussels and Westminster. Your continued insistence that the people of Ireland hang on every word on this matter is just shite.



OK you say I align myself to that stuff, i am not prepared to argue with you. You align yourself to the self serving racist brexiters.
I know where I would rather be. You call my politics disgusting and make links, so in the same spirit I tell you that you are in favour of forcibly repatriating people of the Windrush generation to die alone in a land strange to them.
I cited something David Lammy says in order not to be accused of some kind of plagiarism, and I can easily say that you citing the work of Nicky Morgan about sums you up too.
If you are unable to tell that my shtick is a focus on the impact of brexit on the land border in Ireland then more fool you.
I have not refused to read your quoted paper, indeed I have responded and repeatedly asked if you have any idea what your temporary or permanent solution in Ireland (you know, the one you say will 'have to be found') could possibly be, because it is not there in the alternative arrangements document, nor in the evidence given by the Swedish Customs expert that the LeFT website said would be the place to find the answers.
You are another person who resorts to the personal when frustrated by your own seeming inability to answer a question, indeed the fact you bounce the answer on to a document or a parliamentary hearing suggests you never will be able to answer such a question.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> your question is asking support or confirmation in your belief that everyone who voted brexit is racist. You therefore believe everyone who voted brexit is racist. It's admittedly not coming out and saying you're all racist but your intended meaning hides behind a tawdry figleaf



Admittedly.
LOL.
Exhibit whatever.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I hope it isn't too embarrassing for you that I write in agreement.
> My mixed race son commutes to London Bridge every day for work (he does other stuff too!), and he reported a definite increase in racist abuse towards him immediately after the vote, as well as feeling he had to intervene when racist abuse was directed at others. Since then there has not been a return to the point of the low level racist abuse he was used to, but general unembarrassed abuse has sustained itself at quite a high level for the past three years.
> The far right has always been around, but brexit and the Stephen Yackitty Lookatme stuff along with other things had contaminated the life of a family member of mine in an increased way since the referendum.



It's fine

I find the apparent lack of empathy and denial of the nasty racist stuff frustrating. There's a lot of angry denial and lack of solidarity with non English people on display here. I don't think pe

I know a lot of people who have been affected by the racism of leave. My niece was abused by a few guys on a train in Lewisham. They started making monkey noises. She was with her daughter who has tourettes and was so upset she left London and moved to Cheshire, realised she'd made a rash decision and spent a year trying to arrange a house swap to get back to us. My brother in law lost his job, is mid 50s with 5 kids, 3 still at home, loads of debt. He's struggling to keep his head above water. Still it's hurting the Tories.

ETA, this was the day after the referendum result.v


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> It's fine
> 
> I find the apparent lack of empathy and denial of the nasty racist stuff frustrating. There's a lot of angry denial and lack of solidarity with non English people on display here. I don't think pe
> 
> I know a lot of people who have been affected by the racism of leave. My niece was abused by a few guys on a train in Lewisham. They started making monkey noises. She was with her daughter who has tourettes and was so upset she left London and moved to Cheshire, realised she'd made a rash decision and spent a year trying to arrange a house swap to get back to us. My brother in law lost his job, is mid 50s with 5 kids, 3 still at home, loads of debt. He's struggling to keep his head above water. Still it's hurting the Tories.



Indeed. Lewisham is where I live. And my son was born in Lewisham hospital.
I am sorry to hear of the actual things you and yours have encountered, they may be theoretical risks to some, but to some of us the nasty stuff is up close and personal and real.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If you read the thread you will see that LeFT hasn’t just been set up for the period between now and October/November. The explicit aim is to look longer than that because the fall out will reverberate for years (as will ongoing discussion about the nature of EU neo-liberalism).
> 
> Finally, it’s deeply offensive to lump all BAME voters into one category. There were significant differences by class, education, location and millions voted leave.



First, it's not offensive to use the actual figures to dispute that LeFT represent BAME people but it is offensive to use the some of my friends are black defence.

I know LeFT is not just about the time leading up to the end of October. That's why I mentioned that the Tories are in election mode and posted  a link to an article showing how serious they are. You don't have time to make any impact before the election, assuming it happens, and then it's 5 years of damage to ordinary people's lives. The LeFT campaign, as it is now, doesn't seem slick enough to survive that time.

Also, have LeFT tested the statements by showing them to ordinary people?  I agree with a lot of the things people post here but often the language is off-putting or I don't immediately recognise what's being said. The statements read like they're written for other people who are into politics, which most people aren't.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah I know what you were saying. A section of left backed something which caused sterling to fall, ergo they acted against the working class. Which as we've established is not a consistent or honest position



It is what happened though. It's the left saying we're so ineffective that we'll vote with the right and then hope things go our way later.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Three years and this is all there is from the left side of Brexit?


It is one example not the sum total of stuff. There's this also for example. And part of the reason why there has not been more is because of you and your fellow travellers attacks on these attempts to build left-wing anti-EU politics. 

(Of course the above still persists in the focus on 'the left' rather than concentrating on the real actor the working class)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> It is what happened though. It's the left saying we're so ineffective that we'll vote with the right and then hope things go our way later.


So we've completed the circle and you are actually saying that how capital reacts to something is a guide to what the left's stance should be. So no nationalisations because equity markets would fall and we'd see capital flight and that would affect working class people's pensions. No mass state housebuilding because that would cause house prices to fall, at expense of mid/later life working class people who were relying on their homes to fund their retirement. Because this is what you're saying.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> It is one example not the sum total of stuff. There's this also for example. And part of the reason why there has not been more is because of you and your fellow travellers attacks on these attempts to build left-wing anti-EU politics.
> 
> (Of course the above still persists in the focus on 'the left' rather than concentrating on the real actor the working class)



I don't think it's me or any other remain voter holding back left leave, it's the Labour party fence grabbing. They're the people with the organisation, numbers and media access. Maybe there would be a viable left leave option if they had spent the time building support for it, or if as you and others think there is a left leave group out there they would simply have had to give them a platform.

60% of people in the UK identify as working class so not sure there's a single view available there.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So we've completed the circle and you are actually saying that how capital reacts to something is a guide to what the left's stance should be. So no nationalisations because equity markets would fall and we'd see capital flight and that would affect working class people's pensions. No mass state housebuilding because that would cause house prices to fall, at expense of mid/later life working class people who were relying on their homes to fund their retirement. Because this is what you're saying.



What I'm saying is that the left need to be more confident and put out policies for people to look at and judge for themselves.

I just don't think leaving the EU has to be a prerequisite to achieving what the left want. 

You either circumvent or just ignore any rules that would stand in the way. Our railways are almost entirely state owned, just not by us. Same with workers rights. Deliveroo are gradually pulling out of Germany because of their labour laws. 

Worst case scenario we get thrown out.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

philosophical said:


> OK you say I align myself to that stuff, i am not prepared to argue with you. You align yourself to the self serving racist brexiters.
> I know where I would rather be. You call my politics disgusting and make links, so in the same spirit I tell you that you are in favour of forcibly repatriating people of the Windrush generation to die alone in a land strange to them.
> I cited something David Lammy says in order not to be accused of some kind of plagiarism, and I can easily say that you citing the work of Nicky Morgan about sums you up too.
> If you are unable to tell that my shtick is a focus on the impact of brexit on the land border in Ireland then more fool you.
> ...



It’s embarrassing stuff this. Some of us have spent significant parts of our lives actively fighting fascists and racists, standing up on the pavement and the shop floor. So fuck you, you pathetic shit.

The idea that support for the racist EU and ‘Fortress Europe’ is some signifier of your anti fascist bonafides is frankly laughable.

Similarly, the idea that people can hold the same view as you on one issue and you can violently oppose them a) on everything else and b) even disagree with their motives and reasons for their position on that one issue where you agree doesn’t seem to have entered your empty head.

Lastly, I don’t know who you are or your track record but there will be no more replies from me to you on the basis of your post.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> No mass state housebuilding because that would cause house prices to fall.



Actually I would make all new build developments 50% social housing, provided to government at cost and buy every empty property in the country to use as social  housing. 

I'm lucky enough to live in social housing and it's the only thing that makes life bearable financially.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> First, it's not offensive to use the actual figures to dispute that LeFT represent BAME people but it is offensive to use the some of my friends are black defence.
> 
> I know LeFT is not just about the time leading up to the end of October. That's why I mentioned that the Tories are in election mode and posted  a link to an article showing how serious they are. You don't have time to make any impact before the election, assuming it happens, and then it's 5 years of damage to ordinary people's lives. The LeFT campaign, as it is now, doesn't seem slick enough to survive that time.
> 
> Also, have LeFT tested the statements by showing them to ordinary people?  I agree with a lot of the things people post here but often the language is off-putting or I don't immediately recognise what's being said. The statements read like they're written for other people who are into politics, which most people aren't.



1. paragraph one doesn’t make any sense. You have suggested that LeFT is excluding. I’ve shown you it isn’t. I’ve also directed to towards research that suggests your attempt to paint the entire BAME community as uniform on Brexit is a reductive position. 

2. A more pressing problem in the forthcoming GE is that the opposition to the tories will be exclusively fighting for the middle class liberals who demand the result be overturned. There are not enough of them to win an election. Labour’s position is therefore critical and will be engaged with 

3. The initial material is aimed at those on the left who are politically active. Other material is and will be produced to be used in different circumstances. I’ve shared the initial material in my branch and union region where it’s been well received (except by remain supporters who, strangely, have attempted to dismiss it rather than engage with it).


----------



## philosophical (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It’s embarrassing stuff this. Some of us have spent significant parts of our lives actively fighting fascists and racists, standing up on the pavement and the shop floor. So fuck you, you pathetic shit.
> 
> The idea that support for the racist EU and ‘Fortress Europe’ is some signifier of your anti fascist bonafides is frankly laughable.
> 
> ...



Good.
As you say you know nothing of me or my track record.
So in the spirit of solidarity I say fuck you too you pathetic shit.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 1. paragraph one doesn’t make any sense. You have suggested that LeFT is excluding. I’ve shown you it isn’t. I’ve also directed to towards research that suggests your attempt to paint the entire BAME community as uniform on Brexit is a reductive position.
> 
> 2. A more pressing problem in the forthcoming GE is that the opposition to the tories will be exclusively fighting for the middle class liberals who demand the result be overturned. There are not enough of them to win an election. Labour’s position is therefore critical and will be engaged with
> 
> 3. The initial material is aimed at those on the left who are politically active. Other material is and will be produced to be used in different circumstances. I’ve shared the initial material in my branch and union region where it’s been well received (except by remain supporters who, strangely, have attempted to dismiss it rather than engage with it).



OK.
1. I'm not saying anyone is being excluded. My initial post, which included NI was pointing out that you can't claim to represent those people as they favour remain. 55% in NI and 75% of BAME voters. Having representatives from those communities in LeFT does not mean you represent them.  I haven't painted the BAME community as anything, just given the figures.

2. It's not accurate to look at things as remain = liberal and leave = working class. I think it's too late for labour. I have no idea what will happen to labour when the time comes but right now it doesn't feel like they are ready, willing or able to win an election. 

3. Best to test things outside your normal group if you don't want to end up like one of those singers on X factor who's family have told them they're great. I'm not saying the stuff you posted is badly written or incoherent just that it could put a lot of people off trying to engage.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> Actually I would make all new build developments 50% social housing, provided to government at cost and buy every empty property in the country to use as social  housing.
> 
> I'm lucky enough to live in social housing and it's the only thing that makes life bearable financially.



The second idea of yours, state buying up existing homes, is good, i'd like to see legislation which gives state (central or local) first refusal on every property put to market, alongside some pretty heavy restrictions on buy to let. But anyway. My point is that sterling diving isn't a stick to beat left leavers with


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> 3. Best to test things outside your normal group if you don't want to end up like one of those singers on X factor who's family have told them they're great. I'm not saying the stuff you posted is badly written or incoherent just that it could put a lot of people off trying to engage.




Thanks for the advice. We’ll give it the consideration is deserves


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The second idea of yours, state buying up existing homes, is good, i'd like to see legislation which gives state (central or local) first refusal on every property put to market, alongside some pretty heavy restrictions on buy to let. But anyway. My point is that sterling diving isn't a stick to beat left leavers with



Point taken. I still find the whole left leave thing difficult as my experience of  Brexit has already been pretty negative and I'm instinctively hostile to anything that hurts the people I love. Plus, like a lot of people I didn't know there was a left leave position and I think maybe those on the left need to be more aware that there are people who didn't and indeed still don't know this. I'd never voted before the referendum but I know lifelong labour voters who didn't  know there was a left leave argument. 

Nice to have a semi civil discussion but I am off to drink and smoke in the sun.


----------



## Anju (Aug 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Thanks for the advice. We’ll give it the consideration is deserves



Whatever, guess we'll have to wait and see who's right, as in correct not wing.

It is good advice though.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 25, 2019)

Anju said:


> I don't think it's me or any other remain voter holding back left leave, it's the Labour party fence grabbing. They're the people with the organisation, numbers and media access. Maybe there would be a viable left leave option if they had spent the time building support for it, or if as you and others think there is a left leave group out there they would simply have had to give them a platform.
> 
> 60% of people in the UK identify as working class so not sure there's a single view available there.


You went around calling anyone who voted leave a racist, you defended the EUs murderous attack on Greece, you are pushing for the hardest remain position their is, don't pretend that your politics is not based on shutting down any pro-working class options (remain or leave). 

The last sentence is twaddle. As BA said total time-waster


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 25, 2019)

No discussion here about what Trump's game is in promoting division in Europe/Brexit and offering a carrot to the UK for playing along?  Just thought it might be something to consider.  

To me it looks a bit like Trump (or at least those pulling his strings) want the EU to collapse, as it's a larger rival trading block that promotes a more 'managed' flavour of capitalism than the US model, with consumer standards, environmental protection (although some is just straight protectionism with added greenwash) and is starting to step on the toes of large tax-dodging corporations, including a lot of big US digital firms (Amazon ,Facebook, Google etc. - ever wonder why they're not putting up much of a fight against data misuse by populist campaigns etc?).  It's pretty plain that the EU is seen as a barrier to business/trade by some on the other side of the pond and they'd like it out of the way.

Are the tories aware they are being used as a wedge to prize apart the European Union, and how this will then allow for greater US dominance, or is this kind of what a lot of them want?  Separate nations are unlikely to be able to stand up to global corporations with the same strength as a large block of nations (accepting in a lot of areas this organisation has already been captured by corporations, but they're maybe not the right ones?).


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 26, 2019)

It's kind of ironic that out of all the divisions and disunity, a united Ireland will emerge.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 26, 2019)

I'm wondering what the likely effects will be on London. Large numbers of immigrants, seems to be a hub of globalisation. From reading these boards it's a place where gentrification, inequality and 'unwanted' communities (working class/council estates) are squeezed out and exploited. Will this shit be accelerated or pegged back in the longer term? Bit vague and waffley like.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 26, 2019)

Humberto said:


> I'm wondering what the likely effects will be on London. Large numbers of immigrants, seems to be a hub of globalisation. From reading these boards it's a place where gentrification, inequality and 'unwanted' communities (working class/council estates) are squeezed out and exploited. Will this shit be accelerated or pegged back in the longer term? Bit vague and waffley like.



I'm guessing, whatever the outcome, the working class and the marginalised - will continue to be shafted.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 26, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> I'm guessing, whatever the outcome, the working class and the marginalised - will continue to be shafted.


Post Brexit  rich people Group A will lose money and rich people Group B will make money.
Some not-rich people will get some benefit (especially if there is a drop in house prices) however most of us will get screwed over.
The harder the Brexit on a scale of No Deal to Norway then the larger Group A will be and the more money they will lose and the worse the proles will get it.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 26, 2019)

Huh, that's interesting - just had a call from the Returning Officer asking if the council can reserve my workplace on 31/10, 7/11 and 14/11. My work gets used as a polling station...


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Huh, that's interesting - just had a call from the Returning Officer asking if the council can reserve my workplace on 31/10, 7/11 and 14/11. My work gets used as a polling station...


All Thursdays too.

I'm off to the bookies...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Huh, that's interesting - just had a call from the Returning Officer asking if the council can reserve my workplace on 31/10, 7/11 and 14/11. My work gets used as a polling station...



Blimey, the Returning Officer is working on a bank holiday.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> All Thursdays too.
> 
> I'm off to the bookies...


Bookies onto it. Just checked odds, 11-5 for a GE in 2019. Although should be able to get better odds for specific dates


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, the Returning Officer is working on a bank holiday.


It’s not a bank holiday here. Our August bank holiday is at the start of the month. Our schools are not long back, so a holiday now would be a bit weird.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s not a bank holiday here. Our August bank holiday is at the start of the month. Our schools are not long back, so a holiday now would be a bit weird.



I was aware of that, just didn't know TheHoodedClaw was up your way.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey, the Returning Officer is working on a bank holiday.



It's not a bank holiday here, alas.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You went around calling anyone who voted leave a racist, you defended the EUs murderous attack on Greece, you are pushing for the hardest remain position their is, don't pretend that your politics is not based on shutting down any pro-working class options (remain or leave).
> 
> The last sentence is twaddle. As BA said total time-waster



For someone who claims to care about class you don't know much. It's not like it's a new figure but as I said 60% of people in Britain identify as working class. 
British Social Attitudes | NatCen Social Research
I won't be replying to any angry abusive response so don't bother.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Which one is the bank holiday? I thought today was last one in E&W until christmas

Edit just realised i'm being proper thick here


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I was aware of that, just didn't know TheHoodedClaw was up your way.


Yes, very nearby. We know all the same pizza restaurants.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Odds of 4-1 on Johnson to leave PM office in 2019, looks a decent bet


----------



## Poi E (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> For someone who claims to care about class you don't know much. It's not like it's a new figure but as I said 60% of people in Britain identify as working class.
> British Social Attitudes | NatCen Social Research
> I won't be replying to any angry abusive response so don't bother.



This cracked me up: 

Just under half (47%) of those in jobs classified as managerial and professional
consider themselves working class.
"I say, looks  bit odd. Check how we define "managerial and professional" would you?"


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

Poi E said:


> This cracked me up:
> 
> Just under half (47%) of those in jobs classified as managerial and professional
> consider themselves working class.
> "I say, looks  bit odd. Check how we define "managerial and professional" would you?"



So how people identify isn't important.

Last place I worked my boss, in a print room, was from Peckham family. His dad had worked his way up to manager in a law firm print room. Regardless of job title they are working class. My friend is a bus mechanic. His son started apprenticeship at 16 and now at 25 he is a supervisor. Doesn't stop him being working class. I worked as a manager for a few years but now self employed handyman. Was I out then back in your exclusive little club. 

Just using job status no longer works to define class. It's values and lifestyle that matter. Just not helpful to stick solely to outdated definitions, as by that measure working class will be extinct soon.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> So how people identify isn't important.
> 
> Last place I worked my boss, in a print room, was from Peckham family. His dad had worked his way up to manager in a law firm print room. Regardless of job title they are working class. My friend is a bus mechanic. His son started apprenticeship at 16 and now at 25 he is a supervisor. Doesn't stop him being working class. I worked as a manager for a few years but now self employed handyman. Was I out then back in your exclusive little club.
> 
> Just using job status no longer works to define class. It's values and lifestyle that matter. Just not helpful to stick solely to outdated definitions, as by that measure working class will be extinct soon.


Hi Anju . How are you?  

I disagree with pretty much every sentence in the above post. It’s quicker for me just to say that than tackle each point.

That’s fine, though. I’m used to being out of step with the majority on this.

Are you off work today? I start later this afternoon. Just about to make a potato omelette.  We’ll have half tomorrow, when it’ll be tastier.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Class through identify politics. My grandad was a miner. Nah.


----------



## seventh bullet (Aug 26, 2019)

Purely cultural definitions (values and lifestyle for example) of class are as potentially shite as those that look only at the work someone does (although role in relation to others can and does matter).


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Class through identify politics. My grandad was a miner. Nah.


Mine too. That makes me a miner, right?

(My other grandad was a machine turner. Remind me to put it on my CV).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Mine too. That makes me a miner, right?
> 
> (My other grandad was a machine turner. Remind me to put it on my CV).


I always find the use of a grandparents job telling. Basically tells me they are second generation middle class.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> So how people identify isn't important.
> 
> Last place I worked my boss, in a print room, was from Peckham family. His dad had worked his way up to manager in a law firm print room. Regardless of job title they are working class. My friend is a bus mechanic. His son started apprenticeship at 16 and now at 25 he is a supervisor. Doesn't stop him being working class. I worked as a manager for a few years but now self employed handyman. Was I out then back in your exclusive little club.
> 
> Just using job status no longer works to define class. It's values and lifestyle that matter. Just not helpful to stick solely to outdated definitions, as by that measure working class will be extinct soon.


What about alan sugar, where'd you put him?


----------



## seventh bullet (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I always find the use of a grandparents job telling. Basically tells me they are second generation middle class.



It's those proles that think they've 'made it' to the middle class as well.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And we're back to why Ireland never left the United Kingdon aren't we?
> 
> Why do you crave that hard border, the shooting war, the economic and infrastructural sabotage - what on earth is wrong with you?



Shares in Browning?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Shares in Browning?


Armalite and Barrett more likely


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2019)

If somebody is brought up in a kids care home, yet the majority of the supervisors and staff have degrees, that makes them which class?


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If somebody is brought up in a kids care home, yet the majority of the supervisors and staff have degrees, that makes them which class?


More info needed. Is it Coco Chanel?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 26, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If somebody is brought up in a kids care home, yet the majority of the supervisors and staff have degrees, that makes them which class?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> More info needed. Is it Coco Chanel?



I don't know.
However reading about her she seemed to want to describe her early life as different to what it actually was.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It’s embarrassing stuff this. Some of us have spent significant parts of our lives actively fighting fascists and racists, standing up on the pavement and the shop floor. So fuck you, you pathetic shit.
> 
> The idea that support for the racist EU and ‘Fortress Europe’ is some signifier of your anti fascist bonafides is frankly laughable.
> 
> ...



Let's be frank. In a world where Hope not Hate, Stand Up to Racism and Unite Against Fascism are the main vehicles for "anti-fascism", anti-fascism doesn't have the same meaning that it hate 40, 30 or 20 years ago. What it means now, for many, is going on a point A to point B march, chanting slogans, grassing on genuine anti-fascists taking on the boneheads physically, then fucking off home, aglow with self-righteousness. My personal opinion is that modern-day anti-fascism can be an enabler, not a blocker of hard-right behaviour.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What about alan sugar, where'd you put him?


In a skip.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> Actually I would make all new build developments 50% social housing, provided to government at cost and buy every empty property in the country to use as social  housing.
> 
> I'm lucky enough to live in social housing and it's the only thing that makes life bearable financially.



The problem being that an ever-more-rapacious capitalism won't allow that. Neoliberal govt policies won't allow that, for several reasons.

1) Inside or outside the EU (itself a rapaciously neo-liberally-inclined body) the UK's economy will STILL be shored up by house price inflation, and that inflation can not be allowed to deflate, so housing supply will continue to be constrained/ghost towers will continue to be built.

2) Development and construction companies, and their investors, have their claws deep into politics - not just politicians, but Mandarins too. Take a look at Private Eye's elucidations of "revolving door" shenanigans with developers. This means policy has been constructed to favour the _status quo_, and not any quasi-revolutionary ideas of expropriation.

3) Our "Establishment" and the hedgies have a lot of money and credibility invested in the _status quo_. Turkeys rarely vote for Christmas.

I'd like to see massive change, but the chances of achieving it, inside or outside the EU, are small. They're small because our "democratic" system is not democratic. Indeed it's designed to leave the real decisions in the hands of an elite. It all needs tearing down, and true democracy by plebiscite needs to become the norm. No gods, no masters.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

teqniq said:


> In a skip.



Dissolve the lump in a massive vat of tea.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Is having a degree in isolation a signifier of class and on balance would you expect people who work in care homes to have significant capital, so many questions


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 1. paragraph one doesn’t make any sense. You have suggested that LeFT is excluding. I’ve shown you it isn’t. I’ve also directed to towards research that suggests your attempt to paint the entire BAME community as uniform on Brexit is a reductive position.



Certainly was round here (Brixton). Support appeared generational among my BAME neighbours. Many under-40s voted Remain, and a lot of the over-40s voted Leave.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Armalite and Barrett more likely



Browning make the ammo for the Barrett range.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hi Anju . How are you?
> 
> I disagree with pretty much every sentence in the above post. It’s quicker for me just to say that than tackle each point.
> 
> ...



I assumed I would be officially wrong on this.

Agree that just family history isn't important.  Both the examples I gave were people who started in normal roles and over a number of years were promoted. Lifestyle, friends and family remain the same. I wasn't talking about a radio 4 producer who's great grandfather had a manual job. 

The 60% figure has been fairly constant over a long period so I don't think it's based on a trend of people claiming to be working class because they think it's cool. 

Cheese and ham omelette with chips and coleslaw is the only acceptable omelette. Left over biryani this morning.

Not working today. Collecting cash money tomorrow, tiling shower floor Wednesday, maybe have the rest of the week off then a busy couple of weeks. Then the world is my scallop.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What about alan sugar, where'd you put him?



Special place. Everyone knows that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> I assumed I would be officially wrong on this.


Never mind. The biryani sounds ace.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> The problem being that an ever-more-rapacious capitalism won't allow that. Neoliberal govt policies won't allow that, for several reasons.
> 
> 1) Inside or outside the EU (itself a rapaciously neo-liberally-inclined body) the UK's economy will STILL be shored up by house price inflation, and that inflation can not be allowed to deflate, so housing supply will continue to be constrained/ghost towers will continue to be built.
> 
> ...



I know it's not really possible at the moment. Around 15,000 empty flats just in London and more shooting up everywhere. I live in Deptford and am surrounded, by the building and some of the more objectionable new residents barking about how cool it is while they show their worried looking parents, who after all got them on the ladder, their 'discovery'.

I realise it's not what most posters here believe in but wouldn't a move to PR based system be a start.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> I know it's not really possible at the moment. Around 15,000 empty flats just in London and more shooting up everywhere. I live in Deptford and am surrounded, by the building and some of the more objectionable new residents barking about how cool it is while they show their worried looking parents, who after all got them on the ladder, their 'discovery'.
> 
> I realise it's not what most posters here believe in but wouldn't a move to PR based system be a start.



I'm all in favour of a decent PR system replacing FPTP, but only alongside the placing of a system of recall balloting at both local and national level, so that cunts like my MP - Chuka Umunna - can't pull the sort of shit on their constituents, that they have. There needs to be accountability, and with our present pseudo-democracy, recall seems to be the best tool, from the perspective of this member of the w/c, at least.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> I realise it's not what most posters here believe in but wouldn't a move to PR based system be a start.


What makes you think a proper PR system wouldn’t be popular here? I’d support PR.

However, in and of itself it means next to nothing.


----------



## gosub (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What makes you think a proper PR system wouldn’t be popular here? I’d support PR.
> 
> However, in and of itself it means next to nothing.



 What's your issue with the Scottish Parliament electoral system?


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What makes you think a proper PR system wouldn’t be popular here? I’d support PR.
> 
> However, in and of itself it means next to nothing.



Partially because I think it's a good idea and that normally makes it a bad idea amongst posters here.

Everyone l speak with about it is in favour, there are campaigns promoting it, Urban is in favour yet somehow it's kept out of public debate. Strange.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> Partially because I think it's a good idea and that normally makes it a bad idea amongst posters here.
> 
> Everyone l speak with about it is in favour, there are campaigns promoting it, Urban is in favour yet somehow it's kept out of public debate. Strange.


Apart from when there was that big referendum about it


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Apart from when there was that big referendum about it



Just an average size referendum, during an election?,  and PR wasn't prior to that and hasn't been since, a major part of discussion in Britain.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 26, 2019)

i'm edging towards agreeing with cupid_stunt - perhaps BJ is playing this well. obviously he's banking on *any* tiny change to the backstop looking like a huge victory which will get a "deal" through, and Macron has already suggested such a change is not impossible. the threat of no deal has indeed put the shits up the EU a little bit but as we all know, and as they all know, BJ obviously playing with a potentially large fire.

is brexit going to happen? gonna have to disagree with the long-standing view of many, including Pickman's model on this - i think we will be out on Nov 1st. Unless, unless: the MPs actually do have the capacity to block it. not sure what that would mean though, if they did. BJ can just refuse to ask for another extension even if the MPs order it.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Apart from when there was that big referendum about it


Yeah, but that was AV, which is less representative than FPTP. I voted against that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

gosub said:


> What's your issue with the Scottish Parliament electoral system?


Holyrood is not the only votes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i'm edging towards agreeing with cupid_stunt - perhaps BJ is playing this well. obviously he's banking on *any* tiny change to the backstop looking like a huge victory which will get a "deal" through, and Macron has already suggested such a change is not impossible. the threat of no deal has indeed put the shits up the EU a little bit but as we all know, and as they all know, BJ obviously playing with a potentially large fire.
> 
> is brexit going to happen? gonna have to disagree with the long-standing view of many, including Pickman's model on this - i think we will be out on Nov 1st. Unless, unless: the MPs actually do have the capacity to block it. not sure what that would mean though, if they did. BJ can just refuse to ask for another extension even if the MPs order it.


I think the obstacles to a smooth exit are insurmountable in the time remaining and stand by my views we will be in the eu on 1/11 and Johnson will be out of no 10 by 20 November


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i'm edging towards agreeing with cupid_stunt - perhaps BJ is playing this well. obviously he's banking on *any* tiny change to the backstop looking like a huge victory which will get a "deal" through, and Macron has already suggested such a change is not impossible. the threat of no deal has indeed put the shits up the EU a little bit but as we all know, and as they all know, BJ obviously playing with a potentially large fire.
> 
> is brexit going to happen? gonna have to disagree with the long-standing view of many, including Pickman's model on this - i think we will be out on Nov 1st. Unless, unless: the MPs actually do have the capacity to block it. not sure what that would mean though, if they did. BJ can just refuse to ask for another extension even if the MPs order it.



Bearing in mind, I did say...



cupid_stunt said:


> *I am not totally convinced*, but I am starting to think BJ may well have played a blinder here…
> 
> 1 – Ignoring the EU after being promoted to PM, and instead starting his GE campaign based on ‘we are leaving with or without a deal at the end of October’, putting the shits up the EU.
> 
> ...



Hedging my bets. 

But, yeah, it does seem there's been a bit of a shift from the important countries in the EU, Ireland, Germany & France, because not only are they shitting themselves over a 'no deal' exit, but also losing out on over £30bn as well. 

It's a poker game, that should have been played-out almost 3 years ago, when the EU refused to discuss our future relationship in any detail, until after we have left, May should have refused any discussions unless there were parallel talks over both the withdrawal & future relationship. 

She fucked-up big style, and now the trump card is being probably played, up against a tight deadline, it's fucking scary.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Never mind. The biryani sounds ace.



Totally confused now as to how class is defined. I checked on Wikipedia and settled on  Jilly Cooper's butchers definition. Sadly this only confirmed the difficulties of defining class as we have both streaky bacon from Lidl and Beechwood smoked back bacon from Tesco, the Tesco finest version as well.

Is there a definition you, or anyone else, can point me in the direction of.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think the obstacles to a smooth exit are insurmountable in the time remaining and stand by my views we will be in the eu on 1/11 and Johnson will be out of no 10 by 20 November



I think we could end-up having another very short extension, just to dot the i's & cross the t's on any new agreement, but I reckon we will be out by the end of the year at the very latest.

If you disagree, fancy a £50 bet on it, with the server fund benefiting from the loser?


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 26, 2019)

Poi E said:


> This cracked me up:
> 
> Just under half (47%) of those in jobs classified as managerial and professional
> consider themselves working class.
> "I say, looks  bit odd. Check how we define "managerial and professional" would you?"


The question is, do they own or control the means of production?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think we could end-up having another very short extension, just to dot the i's & cross the t's on any new agreement, but I reckon we will be out by the end of the year at the very latest.
> 
> If you disagree, fancy a £50 bet on it, with the server fund benefiting from the loser?


I'll do you a tenner, don't want to leave you penniless at new years


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll do you a tenner, don't want to leave you penniless at new years



You are not very confident, are you? 

As I wouldn't wish to make you penniless, most likely before the year end, I'll drop to just £10. 

*spits in hand, and goes for the handshake*


----------



## gosub (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think we could end-up having another very short extension, just to dot the i's & cross the t's on any new agreement, but I reckon we will be out by the end of the year at the very latest.
> 
> If you disagree, fancy a £50 bet on it, with the server fund benefiting from the loser?


If had the cash, I'd take the bet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are not very confident, are you?
> 
> As I wouldn't wish to make you penniless, most likely before the year end, I'll drop to just £10.
> 
> *spits in hand, and goes for the handshake*


Ok


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> Totally confused now as to how class is defined.


There’s been many threads.

Class is rooted in the social relations of production. The economic mode of production is what shapes the formation of the social relations of classes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

gosub said:


> If had the cash, I'd take the bet.



So, you are worried about losing.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Bearing in mind, I did say...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Isn't it us who will change position. The backstop will remain but be rebranded. Calling it a border agreement and telling everyone we have an agreement and once we put our solution in place we will be out and the EU can't stop us. Basically leaves things as they are but changes from us needing EU permission to leave, which seems to be the sticking point, to us being in control.

Only works if the ERG types are willing to be complicit but it's a simple speedy solution.


----------



## gosub (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, you are worried about losing.



No, fucked off with my cashflow situation


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> Isn't it us who will change position. The backstop will remain but be rebranded. Calling it a border agreement and telling everyone we have an agreement and once we put our solution in place we will be out and the EU can't stop us. Basically leaves things as they are but changes from us needing EU permission to leave, which seems to be the sticking point, to us being in control.
> 
> Only works if the ERG types are willing to be complicit but it's a simple speedy solution.



Basically, yes, that's what I think Johnson's position is, and if the ERG doesn't fall in line, he'll go for the GE, expecting to hoover up much of the support of the Brexit Party, and get the majority he needs to get the deal done.

It's a big gamble, and as much as I hate BJ, I have a gut feeling he'll pull it off.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> Totally confused now as to how class is defined. I checked on Wikipedia and settled on  Jilly Cooper's butchers definition. Sadly this only confirmed the difficulties of defining class as we have both streaky bacon from Lidl and Beechwood smoked back bacon from Tesco, the Tesco finest version as well.
> 
> Is there a definition you, or anyone else, can point me in the direction of.



Probably less to do with bacon and more to do with material realities, for instance whether you are reliant on your own labour for income, alternatively whether you have sufficient social and cultural capital (connections and so forth) that fears of poverty don't really bother you. Reckon probably a more solid barometer than what bacon you like or what job a grandparent did or whether you know how to say quinoa or whatever


----------



## gosub (Aug 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Basically, yes, that's what I think Johnson's position is, and if the ERG doesn't fall in line, he'll go for the GE, expecting to hoover up much of the support of the Brexit Party, and get the majority he needs to get the deal done.
> 
> It's a big gamble, and as much as I hate BJ, I have a gut feeling he'll pull it off.



curious to know where tbe Scottish reurning officer authorisation came from...Parrellels with the last days of May, when she was adamantly saying x won't happen  while in it was being done (can't remember what it was now. but read it on Order Order at time)  But a public ballot on the date those Scots ERO's are talking about, granted if their were an extension might make sense...but as things stand what would be the point? Votes wouldn't be tallied til after our declared leaving date.  And if the intention (of public consultation) were honourable, why that date?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 26, 2019)

gosub said:


> curious to know where tbe Scottish reurning officer authorisation came from...



He said it was just contingency planning.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

gosub said:


> if the intention (of public consultation) were honourable


I fear there are two misapprehensions lurking in that one short passage.


----------



## gosub (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I fear there are two misapprehensions lurking in that one short passage.



You might think that....I can only suggest an audit trail.


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Probably less to do with bacon and more to do with material realities, for instance whether you are reliant on your own labour for income, alternatively whether you have sufficient social and cultural capital (connections and so forth) that fears of poverty don't really bother you. Reckon probably a more solid barometer than what bacon you like or what job a grandparent did or whether you know how to say quinoa or whatever



I just found the bacon thing amusing as we have both in the fridge. 

So basically no solid definition exists. My wife, black working class, taught me how to pronounce quinoa and she makes kombucha which seems extra middle class to me, plus she has a degree but never had a job where she is in charge of anyone. 

I work for quite a lot of middle class people and it seems like travel habits are the thing that defines them. We go away once every 2-3 years but they seem to holiday 2-3 times a year plus weekends away monthly.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> So basically no solid definition exists.


I posted a perfectly good one.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Anju said:


> I just found the bacon thing amusing as we have both in the fridge.
> 
> So basically no solid definition exists. My wife, black working class, taught me how to pronounce quinoa and she makes kombucha which seems extra middle class to me, plus she has a degree but never had a job where she is in charge of anyone.
> 
> I work for quite a lot of middle class people and it seems like travel habits are the thing that defines them. We go away once every 2-3 years but they seem to holiday 2-3 times a year plus weekends away monthly.


Well a solid definition does exist, I used it in my post


----------



## Anju (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I posted a perfectly good one.






Proper Tidy said:


> Well a solid definition does exist, I used it in my post



I suppose I was hoping for something easy to measure. How to define something like being dependent on your own labour for managers who are just paid a wage seems like it would be a sticking point. 

No expecting an answer, just acknowledging your replies. Already spent too much time online this weekend.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Class through identify politics. My grandad was a miner. Nah.


You learn something every day. My great grandad on my maternal grandfather's side owned a factory and significant shares in a major life assurance company. 

I'm a fucking capitalist 

Do my bidding prole scum


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well a solid definition does exist, I used it in my post


It's not really a 'solid' definition, more a guide to determining the extent to which someone is working class - ish. I've yet to see any widely agreed upon definition which allows you to definitively say someone is or isn't 'working class'.


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 26, 2019)

My great grandad owned a fairground boxing booth and my grandad bought a greengrocers shop with a fight purse. Fill yer boots, trots... I'm a petty bourgeois anarchist


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2019)

It's like some folk on here have never bothered to explore Marxian class theory.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> My great grandad owned a fairground boxing booth and my grandad bought a greengrocers shop with a fight purse. Fill yer boots, trots... I'm a petty bourgeois anarchist


Wasn't there a song about a petty bourgeois anarchist hero being something to be?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's not really a 'solid' definition, more a guide to determining the extent to which someone is working class - ish. I've yet to see any widely agreed upon definition which allows you to definitively say someone is or isn't 'working class'.


Why isn't this definitive


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's not really a 'solid' definition, more a guide to determining the extent to which someone is working class - ish. I've yet to see any widely agreed upon definition which allows you to definitively say someone is or isn't 'working class'.


I don't believe you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's not really a 'solid' definition, more a guide to determining the extent to which someone is working class - ish. I've yet to see any widely agreed upon definition which allows you to definitively say someone is or isn't 'working class'.


If you are the hereditary head of state you are not a horny-handed child of toil, i think you'll find that's widely accepted


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why isn't this definitive


Why isn't what definitive?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Why isn't what definitive?


Why isn't the definition definitive? Don't you read your own posts


----------



## Supine (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why isn't the definition definitive? Don't you read your own posts



Because it's dated and difficult to relate to modern jobs?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why isn't the definition definitive? Don't you read your own posts


If you are on about the two alternative definitions you gave, both have terms that require further definition. Which one would you like to start with?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Because it's dated and difficult to relate to modern jobs?


Oh, is capitalism over, then?


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's not really a 'solid' definition, more a guide to determining the extent to which someone is working class - ish. I've yet to see any widely agreed upon definition which allows you to definitively say someone is or isn't 'working class'.


An old post that goes more fully into matters. 

(I link to it because I remember it, not because nobody wrote anything better, just brain storage issue).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Because it's dated and difficult to relate to modern jobs?


In what way is it difficult to relate?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If you are on about the two alternative definitions you gave, both have terms that require further definition. Which one would you like to start with?


We'll start with the terms you don't understand I suppose


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> We'll start with the terms you don't understand I suppose


We'll be here till hell freezes over then


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Because it's dated and difficult to relate to modern jobs?


Modern jobs such as....


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> We'll start with the terms you don't understand I suppose





Proper Tidy said:


> Probably less to do with bacon and more to do with material realities, for instance whether you are reliant on your own labour for income,



First question here is what you mean by 'reliant' - does it mean that it's your only source of income, or does it mean that it is your main source of income, or does it mean that it's a great enough portion of your income that without it you wouldn't be able to support yourself financially? Or something else?



Proper Tidy said:


> alternatively whether you have sufficient social and cultural capital (connections and so forth) that fears of poverty don't really bother you.


What does this mean - does it mean that you are confident that whatever happens, you will be able to find another job? Does it mean that you are confident that whatever happens someone will support you financially?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> First question here is what you mean by 'reliant' - does it mean that it's your only source of income, or does it mean that it is your main source of income, or does it mean that it's a great enough portion of your income that without it you wouldn't be able to support yourself financially? Or something else?
> 
> 
> What does this mean - does it mean that you are confident that whatever happens, you will be able to find another job? Does it mean that you are confident that whatever happens someone will support you financially?


So it's the words reliant and fear you didn't understand?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So it's the words reliant and fear you didn't understand?


Maybe someone will be able to answer the questions on your behalf.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 26, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> An old post that goes more fully into matters.
> 
> (I link to it because I remember it, not because nobody wrote anything better, just brain storage issue).


Taken from what you wrote there - 
_
The role of the worker is clear: they depend on the capitalist for income, and they don’t own the products of their labour: they aren’t really selling the products as such (they aren’t making stuff to hawk around different potential customers); they’re selling their labour._

Let's say I think of a sole practitioner structural engineer, working in 2019. They don't employ anyone as such. They might do some work for a property developer, effectively on a time basis as a consultant. Work that assists the developer in building on a site, or refurbishing a building or whatever. It's stuff the developer needs to do to create their 'product' which they hawk around and eventually sell at a profit. This all seems quite parallel to the artisan weaver of old. They are selling their time (and knowledge and skill) but not the product of their labour, which is a building which has the quality of probably-not-going-to-fall-down. 

So is that structural engineer a 'worker' and working class or are they what I'd presume them to be which is middle class? Maybe their underlying financial position is relevant: let's assume they have had no significant inheritance come their way, and they are in privately rented housing, both of which are quite plausible scenarios for someone with that job.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So is that structural engineer a 'worker' and working class


I don’t know what structural engineers earn. This is relevant not because “working class” is a synonym for poverty, but because it’s a social and economic relationship. Do they _have to_ work for their wage, or do they have accumulated financial assets that could be (not that they’ve used it, but could) could be used for buying property to rent out, or other such capital investment ventures? In other words property that they use or could use to economically exploit others. This would put them in a different relation to those being thus exploited.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t know what structural engineers earn. This is relevant not because “working class” is a synonym for poverty, but because it’s a social and economic relationship. Do they _have to_ work for their wage, or do they have accumulated financial assets that could be (not that they’ve used it, but could) could be used for buying property to rent out, or other such capital investment ventures? In other words property that they use or could use to economically exploit others. This would put them in a different relation to those being thus exploited.


They generally earn fairly well so yes, potentially over time they could save enough to buy a property (beyond what they need to live in) that they could then rent out.
What you say makes sense but suggests there is a level of earnings above which no-one can claim to be working class - would that be fair to say?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What you say makes sense but suggests there is a level of earnings above which no-one can claim to be working class - would that be fair to say?


I can’t think of a reason why this wouldn’t be true.  Approach it from the other end — could someone receiving a billion a year ever be working class? If not, that proves there is such a level and we are just at the point of deciding where it is.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> They generally earn fairly well so yes, potentially over time they could save enough to buy a property (beyond what they need to live in) that they could then rent out.
> What you say makes sense but suggests there is a level of earnings above which no-one can claim to be working class - would that be fair to say?


Class is a relationship defined by economic role in society. It’s not about thresholds, but social relations.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Class is a relationship defined by economic role in society. It’s not about thresholds, but social relations.


Indeed, and you can see the evidence for this in some of what is misunderstood about wealth.  Somebody with two million in debt who owns a million pound house and a business that is now turning over 500,000 a year but little other tangible assets technically has negative net wealth (without wishing to start micro-defining the profit levels of the business and its valuation).  They are clearly not worse off than an unemployed individual that has no tangible assets and a £500 overdraft, however.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Indeed, and you can see the evidence for this in some of what is misunderstood about wealth.  Somebody with two million in debt who owns a million pound house and a business that is now turning over 500,000 a year but little other tangible assets technically has negative net wealth (without wishing to start micro-defining the profit levels of the business and its valuation).  They are clearly not worse off than an unemployed individual that has no tangible assets and a £500 overdraft, however.


Worth remembering too that the debt is unlikely to be personal if it’s for business purposes: the liability will be in the name of a company entity. 

The point to focus on, though, is that class is a _dynamic_. It’s a relationship.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Worth remembering too that the debt is unlikely to be personal if it’s for business purposes: the liability will be in the name of a company entity.
> 
> The point to focus on, though, is that class is a _dynamic_. It’s a relationship.


Yeh like ep Thompson said it's very hard to see if looked at a a moment, just as you can't examine a song if you stop the record playing


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The EU had suggested a border down the Irish sea as one possibility for the future, and it accepted the UK suggestion of the (badly named in my view) backstop as another suggestion for the future relationship.
> Maybe you don't think of those as 'any details'.
> 
> If Theresa May messed up that's her look out, but I was warming to her brexit in name only idea as maybe the best of a bad job in this whole miserable situation.




No, the EU did NOT suggest a border in the Irish Sea. May said what the EU was proposing was "tantamount to there being a border in the Irish Sea", at no point has that idea ever been mooted by the EU. brexit-and-the-irish-border-question-explained 

The EU know better than to suggest a border in the Irish Sea because that solves precisely fuck all. If Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, then the GFA must be honoured and the GFA states that there will never be a hard border on the island of Ireland. It would stir everything up again - Derry/Londonderry is smack-bang where a hard border would be and it saw the worst of the fighting during the Troubles for that very reason - and that not withstanding, many who live in (London)Derry work in the Republic, having to queue at a border checkpoint and have their passport on them at all times is, I'm sure a hassle nobody would willing agree to. 

Finally, the DUP. It wants to leave and, obviously, it is anti a united Ireland. How do you propose that circle is squared…?


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s not a bank holiday here. Our August bank holiday is at the start of the month. Our schools are not long back, so a holiday now would be a bit weird.



Oh I didn't realise you were one of _them_… this always confuses me. Your schools break up earlier too, don't they…? A week or so…?


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Hi Anju . How are you?
> 
> I disagree with pretty much every sentence in the above post. It’s quicker for me just to say that than tackle each point.
> 
> ...



I do have to say I'm with, Danny here, Anju, that really is a load of unmitigated bollocks.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Oh I didn't realise you were one of _them_… this always confuses me. Your schools break up earlier too, don't they…? A week or so…?


Two usually. As a kid it always used to annoy the hell out of me that the summer holiday children’s TV didn’t start until the English children went on holiday.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i'm edging towards agreeing with cupid_stunt - perhaps BJ is playing this well. obviously he's banking on *any* tiny change to the backstop looking like a huge victory which will get a "deal" through, and Macron has already suggested such a change is not impossible. the threat of no deal has indeed put the shits up the EU a little bit but as we all know, and as they all know, BJ obviously playing with a potentially large fire.
> 
> is brexit going to happen? gonna have to disagree with the long-standing view of many, including Pickman's model on this - i think we will be out on Nov 1st. Unless, unless: the MPs actually do have the capacity to block it. not sure what that would mean though, if they did. BJ can just refuse to ask for another extension even if the MPs order it.



I like CS, I'm just worried I'll find out he's on the t'other side, which means I'll have to start hating him…


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 27, 2019)

Could the six counties and Gib and perhaps the Channel Islands be in the UK but with some kind of zona franca status?


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Class is a relationship defined by economic role in society. It’s not about thresholds, but social relations.



That said, majority of those who consider themselves upper class, in all honesty, have no class. I'm not really one for talking about class as some kind of Victorian construct, which is kinda what you're alluding to, isn't it Dan…? Frankly, I think it far more helpful to talk in terms of skills, because being a structural engineer is far more skilled than being a middle manager or a CEO. Perhaps it's the background I come from, but I abhor the idea of class, in the way you're talking about it, it's TWTWTW 'class' sketch, and I, probably fancifully, thought we were past that.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Indeed, and you can see the evidence for this in some of what is misunderstood about wealth.  Somebody with two million in debt who owns a million pound house and a business that is now turning over 500,000 a year but little other tangible assets technically has negative net wealth (without wishing to start micro-defining the profit levels of the business and its valuation).  They are clearly not worse off than an unemployed individual that has no tangible assets and a £500 overdraft, however.



So, danny la rouge, I can't work, I'm almost completely skint, I guess according to you I have no class…? Well, that ain't telling me summat I didn't already know, boyo.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> but I abhor the idea of class,


I don’t approve of its existence, and wish to bring about its end. But it exists. There’s a difference between analysing what’s there and approving of what’s there.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> So, danny la rouge, I can't work, I'm almost completely skint, I guess according to you I have no class…? Well, that ain't telling me summat I didn't already know, boyo.


No, everyone has a relationship with the mode of production. 

You’re using the word class in one of its other senses.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t approve of its existence, and wish to bring about its end. But it exists. There’s a difference between analysing what’s there and approving of what’s there.



Yes, of course, I didn't mean to imply you did, sorry if I came over like that. I am, unfortunately, from a very upper-middle-class background (at least on my father's side) and it's summat I wish to distance myself from.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, everyone has a relationship with the mode of production.
> 
> You’re using the word class in one of its other senses.



Yes, Daniel, it's what's known as 'a pun', well spotted!  (and no sarcasm meant). Please be aware I have limited communication skills, I'd not like us to fall out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Could the six counties and Gib and perhaps the Channel Islands be in the UK but with some kind of zona franca status?


Be very good for zona franca who never prospered after falling out with ruddy yurts


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> , I'd not like us to fall out.


We’re not falling out, we’re having a discussion.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Be very good for zona franca who never prospered after falling out with ruddy yurts


Maybe it was the Tibetan flute that didn't just get up her nose.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Maybe it was the Tibetan flute that didn't just get up her nose.


His nose. Zona short for zonadiel


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> His nose. Zona short for zonadiel


I did not know that. You're never too old to learn something new.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> No, the EU did NOT suggest a border in the Irish Sea. May said what the EU was proposing was "tantamount to there being a border in the Irish Sea", at no point has that idea ever been mooted by the EU. brexit-and-the-irish-border-question-explained
> 
> The EU know better than to suggest a border in the Irish Sea because that solves precisely fuck all. If Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, then the GFA must be honoured and the GFA states that there will never be a hard border on the island of Ireland. It would stir everything up again - Derry/Londonderry is smack-bang where a hard border would be and it saw the worst of the fighting during the Troubles for that very reason - and that not withstanding, many who live in (London)Derry work in the Republic, having to queue at a border checkpoint and have their passport on them at all times is, I'm sure a hassle nobody would willing agree to.
> 
> Finally, the DUP. It wants to leave and, obviously, it is anti a united Ireland. How do you propose that circle is squared…?



Tantamount is how May technically correctly described one of the EU suggestions. I think it may have been mooted because of the difficulties of physical geography as much as anything else, but also mooted in the context of after leave there will be two divergent systems of regulation to deal with. Anyway May suggested the backstop idea as a way out of the dilemma, which is effectively kicking the can as far down the road as she could think of. Delay was one of May's strategies after all.
I think the way to square the circle is to not try to, leave things be and abandon brexit. However for those on the side of brexit and think they can solve the GFA/border situation it is up to them to come up with a workable solution that will survive scrutiny and practical reality. What LeFT are suggesting is unworkable in my view because there is no suggestion for dealing with transgressions, probably because they know enforcement will very likely undermine the peace process.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Portentous?


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I think the way to square the circle is to not try to, leave things be and abandon brexit...


Not so much squaring the circle as turning it into a nice pointy triangle


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Class is a relationship defined by economic role in society. It’s not about thresholds, but social relations.


By this do you mean that it's always a relative rather than absolute thing?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

is there really any need for this extremely boring nit-picking over definitions of class on a thread about whether or not Brexit will happen and in what form?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I can’t think of a reason why this wouldn’t be true.  Approach it from the other end — could someone receiving a billion a year ever be working class? If not, that proves there is such a level and we are just at the point of deciding where it is.


I reckon though that there's going to be a large 'grey area' where no-one can agree, which is what I meant earlier when I said that there's no definitive way of establishing one way or the other whether anyone is 'working class'.

For example, if someone earns well enough that in middle age they can buy a second property, rent it out and receive sufficient income from it that they can give up working altogether - then clearly they are not working class. What about someone who does the same but it just supplements their income - to the extent that they can live more comfortably, but not enough that they can live off the rental income alone? Are they still working class?


----------



## binka (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> is there really any need for this extremely boring nit-picking


Is this your first time on U75 etc


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> By this do you mean that it's always a relative rather than absolute thing?


I mean class analysis is a study of interactions. Class is a dynamic. To describe someone as working class is to describe them as having a particular relationship within the mode of production.  It’s about the relationship not some static property of individuals.


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I reckon though that there's going to be a large 'grey area' where no-one can agree, which is what I meant earlier when I said that there's no definitive way of establishing one way or the other whether anyone is 'working class'.
> 
> For example, if someone earns well enough that in middle age they can buy a second property, rent it out and receive sufficient income from it that they can give up working altogether - then clearly they are not working class. What about someone who does the same but it just supplements their income - to the extent that they can live more comfortably, but not enough that they can live off the rental income alone? Are they still working class?



What about if they were married, but separated? Say one partner gets the house...the other one if they want to get back on the housing ladder, unless they divorce, it will be regarded as a second home for stamp duty purposes...whilst the married person tax benefits are woeful


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> is there really any need for this extremely boring nit-picking over definitions of class on a thread about whether or not Brexit will happen and in what form?


Over the years this has been done again and again, but people still don’t understand what is meant by a Marxian class analysis. I’ve been here two decades and general comprehension of what people coming from my political standpoint mean by class seems to have got worse.

I know it has different meanings to different people, but people still seem to think they’ve spotted something Marx missed, but without taking the trouble to actually read Marx.


----------



## Supine (Aug 27, 2019)

I'm finding the discussion useful because it's not clear to me. 

So like shares your class can go up and down depending on circumstance?


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm finding the discussion useful because it's not clear to me.
> 
> So like shares your class can go up and down depending on circumstance?


Don’t think of class as a property of a person. It’s not a feature of them, like eye colour.  

What speed is a BMW?  Well, that question makes no sense, does it?  The speed is a result of the interaction of the BMW and it’s environment.  It’s not a static feature of the car itself.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'm finding the discussion useful because it's not clear to me.
> 
> So like shares your class can go up and down depending on circumstance?


Yes, although in practise you have to take into account things like social capital.

Bit busy now. Will come back.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, although in practise you have to take into account things like social capital.
> 
> Bit busy now. Will come back.


Indeed — some cars have the capacity for greater speed than others.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Don’t think of class as a property of a person. It’s not a feature of them, like eye colour.
> 
> What speed is a BMW?  Well, that question makes no sense, does it?  The speed is a result of the interaction of the BMW and it’s environment.  It’s not a static feature of the car itself.



Perhaps it would be useful for people to replace the term "working class" with "currently working class".


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Anju said:


> Three years and this is all there is from the left side of Brexit?
> 
> Both the things you have linked to are just wish lists. Whoever is leading this didn't even bother to do half a days work on a website before putting out the founding statement. Where's the social media, how are the working class going to hear about this and get involved? Where's the list of union meetings or actions. Where's the press coverage? Three years, I've seen better campaigns put together in three days.
> 
> ...


A belated reply to this, the underlined in particular and, in a vague way, the whole post (also, for clarification, I'm not involved in LeFT, so this is just me): Brexit is centre stage, with multiple accusations about on one side remainy middle class politics and on the other, accusations that the Lexit left are in some way colluding with racist sentiments (which are wide of the mark). FWIW, personally, I personally could never vote for the EU, but there wasn't anything like a Lexit campaign/vision to get on board with in 2016, so I didn't vote. I do welcome the LeFT campaign, but yeah, I don't really see how it's going to insert itself into working class politics at this point in the game. 

But as with so much of the Brexit saga, the cart has been firmly in front of the horse throughout. The absence of working class resistance and politics meant that we got a Brexit vote and not a Lexit vote. And time and time again it seems like the question is posed in terms of where working class/black or other groups should position themselves on Brexit - or indeed whether the Labour Party or other groups are lined up with working class and other groups on Brexit. As an aside, this has left the left the Labour Party doing little more than seeking opportunities, not actually battling capital. But that's not my point here. Surely the best thing to do is if you are concerned about refugees is to get involved in campaigns on migration, against deportations? Surely the working class people you are talking about - inc. yourself - should get involved in working class politics? None of that makes Brexit disappear, but an organised working class politics changes the game entirely. Cart>>>>> Horse.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Perhaps it would be useful for people to replace the term "working class" with "currently working class".


Flying visit. But quick thought. You are like an atomic physicist who wants to know about valency but is stuck on defining one particular particle rather than its relationship with others.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Flying visit. But quick thought. You are like an atomic physicist who wants to know about valency but is stuck on defining one particular particle rather than its relationship with others.


cue teuchter enquiring about meanings of atomic, physicist, valency, particle


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> cue teuchter enquiring about meanings of atomic, physicist, valency, particle


Bitzer Teuchter: 





> "Quadruped. Graminivorous. Forty teeth, namely twenty-four grinders, four eye-teeth, and twelve incisive. Sheds coat in the spring; in marshy countries, sheds hoofs, too. Hoofs hard, but requiring to be shod with iron. Age known by marks in mouth."


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 27, 2019)

Class.

This is a major topic as well as a derail. I’m busy right now, but I do think it deserves a thread people can find, and that would have the advantage that this thread can concentrate on news/views on Brexit.  

If someone wants to start a new thread that’d be great. Maybe quote posts from here to inform the conversation. 

Sorry I can’t be more involved RN. Life is getting in the way.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Flying visit. But quick thought. You are like an atomic physicist who wants to know about valency but is stuck on defining one particular particle rather than its relationship with others.



I'm perfectly comfortable with trying to understand it as a relationship rather than intrinsic/static quality of a person. 

This discussion kind of started off when I said that I have never found a definitive way of establishing and agreeing whether any one person can be described as 'working class'. 

I don't see that these things are incompatible.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I'm perfectly comfortable with trying to understand it as a relationship rather than intrinsic/static quality of a person.
> 
> This discussion kind of started off when I said that I have never found a definitive way of establishing and agreeing whether any one person can be described as 'working class'.
> 
> I don't see that these things are incompatible.


perhaps you could outline where you have looked and then we can concentrate attention on those as yet unsearched locations where such a thing may be.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps you could outline where you have looked and then we can concentrate attention on those as yet unsearched locations where such a thing may be.



Your desire to exclude previously searched locations implies that you yourself have yet to find the location.


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Perhaps it would be useful for people to replace the term "working class" with "currently working class".


It's almost like you're on a one man mission to confuse things by exaggerating the amount of disagreement or misunderstanding around this, for some reason of your own...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Your desire to exclude previously searched locations implies that you yourself have yet to find the location.


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Flying visit. But quick thought. You are like an atomic physicist who wants to know about valency but is stuck on defining one particular particle rather than its relationship with others.


Ah, but is the particle moving or at rest? 

If its moving is is close to the speed of light? 

Is it in a vacuum or might it be affected by other particles, or forces such as gravity or magnetism?

Etc, etc, etc...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> Ah, but is the particle moving or at rest?
> 
> If its moving is is close to the speed of light?
> 
> ...


Schrodinger's Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Perhaps it would be useful for people to replace the term "working class" with "currently working class".



No, not really.

If someone is working class they share common economic interests, are conscious of those interests, and engage in collective action which advances those interests.

If they don't, they're not.


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Schrodinger's Brexit.


In line with the current diversion, I was thinking more of Schrodinger's working class, but that works too


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> In line with the current diversion, I was thinking more of Schrodinger's working class, but that works too


schrodinger's teuchter - schrodinger got so fed up he locked teuchter in a lead box: but is teuchter still incarcerated in there?


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, not really.
> 
> If someone is working class they share common economic interests, are conscious of those interests, and engage in collective action which advances those interests.
> 
> If they don't, they're not.



What would be the problem with replacing 'working class' with 'currently working class' in your statement above?


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, not really.
> 
> If someone is working class they share common economic interests, are conscious of those interests, and engage in collective action which advances those interests.
> 
> If they don't, they're not.



Does that make 'working-class Tory' contradictory?


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

Yeah brogdale’s definition seems weird. But class thread would be good... 

Aaanyway this thread needs more looking into the goldfish bowl. Did we have latest voting intention? 

Con: 32
Lab: 22
LD: 20
Brexit: 12

Yougov, 24th Aug. Can’t be arsed linking, on phone.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What would be the problem with replacing 'working class' with 'currently working class' in your statement above?


Because it's superfluous.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> Does that make 'working-class Tory' contradictory?


all tories are contradict-tory


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

So...back OT...

Corbyn has met with the other non-Tory leaders and agreed to use legislation (rather than a VoNC) to prevent a 'No-Deal' exit.
I'm presuming also legislation to prevent proroguing etc.

 VoNC saved for October as last ditch?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

Even if a theortical VoNC were to succeed in ousting BJ in October, would there be enough time for whoever replaced him to stop No Deal? would there be a GE? seems highly unlikely that an october VoNC could stop No Deal


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Even if a theortical VoNC were to succeed in ousting BJ in October, would there be enough time for whoever replaced him to stop No Deal? would there be a GE? seems highly unlikely that an october VoNC could stop No Deal


Theoretically possible under terms of FTPA. If, within 14 days of the VoNC, a new administration could command the support of a majority of MPs, the new executive could revoke A50 or ask for an re-extension or whatever. So, I suppose Oct 16th is about the latest they could try it?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

i think they'd probably want to start calling a VoNC as soon as there's any official confirmation of BJ intention to begin proceedings to prorogue parliament


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> i think they'd probably want to start calling a VoNC as soon as there's any official confirmation of BJ intention to begin proceedings to prorogue parliament


Well yes, but that's a different matter again.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 27, 2019)

Meanwhile, I note the architect of Labour's disastrous policy of not having a policy has now unilaterally changed it:

Labour is the party of remain, says Keir Starmer

And there was me thinking conference made policy and that current policy makes very clear that Labour is not 'the party of remain'.....


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

Are they just bricking it that they might see a brexit-Tory majority coalition? I mean I know intentions are bollocks etc, but does seem they’re retreating from vonc quite fast.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 27, 2019)

If a VoNC succeeds they could revoke A50 the next day in theory. 




Flavour said:


> i think they'd probably want to start calling a VoNC as soon as there's any official confirmation of BJ intention to begin proceedings to prorogue parliament



Maybe before, I mean if he suspends Parliament then they can't do it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 27, 2019)

Doesn't look like they'll go for it straightaway though No-deal Brexit opponents agree strategy


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 27, 2019)

Ming said:


> Someone I've got on ignore. But I'll still pay my $3 to the server fund on Halloween.



I can't believe you've got me on ignore. Is it because you keep losing your bets to me?


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Doesn't look like they'll go for it straightaway though No-deal Brexit opponents agree strategy



Yes, see brogdale’s post 35 minutes ago.


----------



## Supine (Aug 27, 2019)




----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

The opposition is all over the place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

Cid said:


> The opposition is all over the place.


they are strong throughout the country?


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> they are strong throughout the country?



Yep. Exactly.


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Doesn't look like they'll go for it straightaway though No-deal Brexit opponents agree strategy


 Less than a day after a nominated post holder on the EUropean side opened negotiations for a trade deal.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If a VoNC succeeds they could revoke A50 the next day in theory.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


John Bercow comes centre stage again in all of these maneuvres (just how he likes it of course).


----------



## killer b (Aug 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> View attachment 182224


This is amazing. Where is it from?


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> John Bercow comes centre stage again in all of these maneuvres (just how he likes it of course).


Given the historic reasons why a Speaker is dragged to the chair -I believe his behaviour possibly warrants a Knighthood.....Its quite a a heavy sword, and the Queen is not as sprightly as she was.


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> This is amazing. Where is it from?


Is it?  Fuck them, and the cat they roped in to help them. Which one is it? Larry or Palmerston?


----------



## killer b (Aug 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> Is it?  Fuck them, and the cat they roped in to help them.


I think you might misunderstand the source of my amazement.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> View attachment 182224


Working Title: Bellenders Dissemble.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 27, 2019)

lol, theres more


----------



## gosub (Aug 27, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> lol, theres more



Not going to win many games of tennis with that racket


----------



## killer b (Aug 27, 2019)

amazing.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 27, 2019)

It is my understanding (and I accept I could well be wrong) that it is not within the power of the Prime Minister to prorogue parliament.  What they can do do is request it but it is the monarch who has the final say.  I also believe that it has been made very clear to government that the Queen really does not want to be dragged into this mess.


----------



## killer b (Aug 27, 2019)

They need to photoshop the queen's face into that avengers poster too, missed a trick there.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 27, 2019)

Maybe Stephen Fry too. Just to make sure.


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> schrodinger's teuchter - schrodinger got so fed up he locked teuchter in a lead box: but is teuchter still incarcerated in there?


If teuchter goes on one of his thread derailing series of pointless questions, but no one responds to him, does he make a sound?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Maybe Stephen Fry too. Just to make sure.


Gary Lineker's twitter feed swings it for me.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Corbyn seeking to lead the "one-Nation" tories now...



> Dear colleague,
> 
> I am writing to you after convening a meeting earlier today with the leaders of other opposition parties on how we can work together, across Parliament to prevent a damaging No Deal exit from the European Union. At that meeting, we agreed to make efforts to put party politics aside to find a way through the present crisis.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

So... what mechanism are they looking at to achieve this? It seems they’re suggesting a vonc after parliament has got an extension over the head of the government.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

Any tory mp who votes with corbyn and co. in a VoNC is 100% throwing their career away and they know it. He'll need the DUP.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Any tory mp who votes with corbyn and co. in a VoNC is 100% throwing their career away and they know it. He'll need the DUP.



Well several of them have already crossed the house presumably in the knowledge that was a very real risk.  Depends how much they really care about no deal.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Depends how much they really care about no deal.



Not as much as they care about being career politicians.


----------



## Cid (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Not as much as they care about being career politicians.



There are very hefty salaries awaiting them in any number of think tanks and pro eu business groups too though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Not as much as they care about being career politicians.



You mean like the Change lot, currently polling 0%, basically dead & buried.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Any tory mp who votes with corbyn and co. in a VoNC is 100% throwing their career away and they know it. He'll need the DUP.


the likes of Grieve know they are at that point anyway. The question will be how many Labour and Ex Labour Independents vote with Johnson.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You mean like the Change lot, currently polling 0%, basically dead & buried.



They wildly miscalculated. They didn't deliberately kill their careers. They genuinely thought they would become more popular as a result.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> They wildly miscalculated. They didn't deliberately kill their careers. They genuinely thought they would become more popular as a result.



No but they would have known it was a massive risk.  If their careers were really all they cared about the easy thing would have be to just stay quiet and sit it out.  Lets face it Nick Bowles knows his career as an MP is over and does Grieve etc.  I don't think they'll be that many though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 27, 2019)

Flavour said:


> They wildly miscalculated. They didn't deliberately kill their careers. They genuinely thought they would become more popular as a result.


"it seemed like a good idea at the time"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 27, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> No but they would have known it was a massive risk.  If their careers were really all they cared about the easy thing would have be to just stay quiet and sit it out.  Lets face it Nick Bowles knows his career as an MP is over and does Grieve etc.  I don't think they'll be that many though.



Once they return to Westminster I reckon there will be a couple of Tory MPs defecting to the Lib Dems if Johnson doesn't drop the no-deal posturing. Only takes one to put Johnson's majority at -1. So depending on how the independents (non-Tinge obvs) vote...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Once they return to Westminster I reckon there will be a couple of Tory MPs defecting to the Lib Dems if Johnson doesn't drop the no-deal posturing. Only takes one to put Johnson's majority at -1. So depending on how the independents (non-Tinge obvs) vote...


Not sure if he's a full on no-dealer, but getting brexit through might be the final parliamentary act of the loathsome Frank Field, or similar.


----------



## andysays (Aug 27, 2019)

If I remember right, Johnson's effective majority is only one.

With things that tight, Remain inclined Tory MPs don't necessarily need to vote against the government, they only need not to vote for it. Wouldn't be surprised if a few of them develop mystery ailments ahead of a VoNC...


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Perhaps it would be useful for people to replace the term "working class" with "currently working class".


Everything that is is always just currently is.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> If I remember right, Johnson's effective majority is only one.
> 
> With things that tight, Remain inclined Tory MPs don't necessarily need to vote against the government, they only need not to vote for it. Wouldn't be surprised if a few of them develop mystery ailments ahead of a VoNC...



That would be pretty bloody cowardly.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 27, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That would be pretty bloody cowardly.


I don't feel you are taking ingrowing toenails and slightly dry skin seriously here. They can devastate lives.


----------



## Anju (Aug 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> A belated reply to this, the underlined in particular and, in a vague way, the whole post (also, for clarification, I'm not involved in LeFT, so this is just me): Brexit is centre stage, with multiple accusations about on one side remainy middle class politics and on the other, accusations that the Lexit left are in some way colluding with racist sentiments (which are wide of the mark). FWIW, personally, I personally could never vote for the EU, but there wasn't anything like a Lexit campaign/vision to get on board with in 2016, so I didn't vote. I do welcome the LeFT campaign, but yeah, I don't really see how it's going to insert itself into working class politics at this point in the game.
> 
> But as with so much of the Brexit saga, the cart has been firmly in front of the horse throughout. The absence of working class resistance and politics meant that we got a Brexit vote and not a Lexit vote. And time and time again it seems like the question is posed in terms of where working class/black or other groups should position themselves on Brexit - or indeed whether the Labour Party or other groups are lined up with working class and other groups on Brexit. As an aside, this has left the left the Labour Party doing little more than seeking opportunities, not actually battling capital. But that's not my point here. Surely the best thing to do is if you are concerned about refugees is to get involved in campaigns on migration, against deportations? Surely the working class people you are talking about - inc. yourself - should get involved in working class politics? None of that makes Brexit disappear, but an organised working class politics changes the game entirely. Cart>>>>> Horse.



Can't argue with what you say. I regret not having done anything to help with the things I moan about.

I do believe those on the left who set themselves up as leaders of groups/campaigns need to tailor things to have the widest possible appeal. I think I was the first person here to post about the UK BLM protests. I heard about them from family and friends who were involved with issues around deaths in police custody and other issues that affect black people on a day to day basis. Then the activists moved in and I expressed concerns that normal people were losing interest,  for which I was attacked here. Then the activists fucked the whole thing and a promising grass roots organisation died.

There are a lot of working class people doing good things in their communities but not connecting with politics.


----------



## Anju (Aug 27, 2019)

Gaia said:


> I do have to say I'm with, Danny here, Anju, that really is a load of unmitigated bollocks.



Fair enough.


----------



## Anju (Aug 27, 2019)

Not sure if this has been posted anywhere. For anyone, myself included, who thinks Johnson might manoeuvre us out with no deal this is a reassuring picture.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 27, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Everything that is is always just currently is.


I wonder why the word "currently" exists.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I wonder why the word "currently" exists.


Can't wait for the thread.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 27, 2019)

It'll be electric.


----------



## Supine (Aug 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Can't wait for the thread.



It doesn't currently exist... Or it does...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

teqniq said:


> It'll be electric.


And a right bun-fight.


----------



## kabbes (Aug 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I wonder why the word "currently" exists.


To distinguish from things that were and things that are to come.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 27, 2019)

I've been reading Tronti on the way to/from work, I'm only a small way through _Workers and Capital_ but it has already proved invaluable in helping to understand the current populisms and how we (socialists) need to engage with them.

------

There's been a repeated demand on this thread, and others, for strong workers organisations that are in favour of leaving. People suggesting that they could accept the arguments for leave if such organisations existed. But this insistence on the necessity of such organisations is both dishonest and goes to the key division between those arguing from a class perspective and those arguing from a progressive perspective.

It is dishonest because where are strong left wing* organisations arguing for remaining in the UK? They no more exist than those that favour leave. So in fact the argument against leaving the EU because left wing organisations don't exist is implicitly an argument for some sections of capital/the state to protect the working class against other sections, the EU to defend the working class against the UK. And here we have the whole problem, that of making capital the prime mover and the working class a pawn of capitals and states.

(*I don't believe this term is useful but it is the one that has been used most often on the thread so I will use it here)

Instead Let's take up Tronti's advice.



			
				Tront said:
			
		

> We too saw capitalist development first and the workers second. This is a mistake. Now we have to turn the problem on its head, change orientation, and start again from first principles, which means focusing on the struggle of the working class.


From this point of view we can see that the working class (recognising that the organisations it had once developed to advance it's cause are now utterly redundant in the fight with capital after the latest crisis) has engineered a series of political crises. The working class has seized the initiative, once again leaping ahead of its organisations, and used populisms to strike at capital.



			
				Tronti said:
			
		

> The relationship between the two classes is such that whoever has the initiative wins. On the terrain of science, as on the terrain of practice, the strength of either side is inversely proportional to the other: if one grows and develops, the other stays put and thus slips backward. .... If we want to start going forward again, then we need to immobilise the enemy, the better to be able to strike him.






			
				Tronti said:
			
		

> [The working class] must violently break with its own immediate past. It must reject the traditional figure that has been officially attributed to it and surprise the class enemy with its sense of initiative, making a sudden, unpredicted, uncontrollable theoretical advance. And it is worth making our own partial contribution to this new genre, to this modern form of political work.


And it is that last sentence there that is key to understanding what actions socialists should take. Socialist have to take their lead from the working class, have to use the opportunities the working class has created by its actions to help _develop_ new tools that the working class can use to attack capital. To argue that an anti-EU campaign should not be mounted until tools have been developed is to have workers organisations act as the brake on the working class.

Whether one sees more opportunities for the working class with remaining in or leaving the EU no pro-working class politics can start from the point of a return to the _status quo ante_, to undo the initiative that the working class have created.



			
				Tronti said:
			
		

> We are against the present organisation of struggle and research, but that does not mean that we take the practical and theoretical solutions of the past as our model. Saying no to today’s socialism does not mean having to say yes to yesterday’s capitalism.
> ....
> But when it comes to the problems that concern us, from the perspective of unleashing the decisive struggle against the power of capital, there are unknown worlds that are waiting to be explored. The fate of those who sought another route to India and ended up discovering other continents is very similar to our own present manner of proceeding. For this reason, it is fair enough that the seeds of the new have not yet grown to the maturity of a fruit-bearing plant. It is important to recognise the force of what is being born. If it is alive, it will grow. You cannot criticise someone who is still continuing their research for what they have not yet found.


Those of favour remain and are pro-working class are every bit as much in search of India as those who voted/favour leave.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 27, 2019)

Meanwhile...amongst all the Parliamentary shenanigans, Smithson suggests that today's launch of a pan-oppo legislative approach to stopping Johnson's Brexit signals the death of any chance of a pre-Halloween GE. It's that FTPA again!



> There is a widespread assumption, based on what happened with Theresa May two and a half years ago, that prime ministers still have the power to the name election date in spite of the FTPA. This is because it is said that the main opposition party will always have to back holding an election or else it will look weak.
> 
> *But given today’s “anti-no deal” agreement between the opposition parties I wonder if that still holds particularly if Johnson/Cummings want to do it before October 31st with the object of taking away MPs chance to scupper the government’s plans. *
> 
> ...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 27, 2019)

Anju said:


> Then the activists fucked the whole thing and a promising grass roots organisation died.



Oh no. That's terrible. I'm so sorry you have experienced such a thing. Nothing like that has ever happened to any of us. It must be awful.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

caption competition:


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> caption competition:
> 
> View attachment 182293


So audience do we hang them or do we shoot them? All vote now


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

teqniq said:


> It'll be electric.


Together in electric dreams


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That would be pretty bloody cowardly.


and your point is?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I've been reading Tronti on the way to/from work, I'm only a small way through _Workers and Capital_ but it has already proved invaluable in helping to understand the current populisms and how we (socialists) need to engage with them.
> 
> ------
> 
> ...


i am not persuaded you are right, and i'll outline why. i've put numbers in your post to which i refer in my reply.

(1) like you i don't see the importance or need for strong lw / pro-working class bodies as a pre-requisite to leaving the eu. but i don't believe that in any capitalist democratic exercise any section of society operates wholly independently, that all are to some extent pawns of capital and states - in that the setting of the agenda, through the setting of the question, was very much orchestrated by parliament and the campaigns largely run by politicians and businesspeople for example. tbh this isn't *that* important, as it ought to be a given in any poll. 

(2) i am not persuaded that the working class has seized the initiative, as all i see here or in the msm involves the machinations of the political classes here and abroad. aside from some demonstrations the working class has been largely absent, afaics, from pushing things forwards. there has been more activity from the msm and the bourgeois political parties than from the wc. i suspect populisms have made more use of the wc to get where we are today than the wc has made use of populisms. 

(3) i am confused by what you're saying here, as - as far as i can see and as implicitly admitted in your (1) i see no tools which have been developed over the last three years, and there's been anti-eu campaigns, albeit orchestrated by the right, for many, many years. perhaps you could give some examples of the new tools socialists have developed. in addition, this all seems to be predicated on 'the working class' being right, or at least being right for the right reasons. the problem here seems to me to be that nowhere in your analysis quoted do you admit that sections of the working class voted leave for reasons such as opposition to immigration and that it may be desirable to address that while remaining committed to their wish to leave the european union. how would your proposed anti-eu campaign differ from the campaigns previously run over many years and that run in 2016?

(4) there is no return to the status quo ante. the last three plus years cannot be effaced from memory. any abject return to the eu fold would bring with it such a loss of ruling class face in this country and such a humiliation around the world that i think new political spaces could open up. the authority of the ruling class to rule, of the political class to govern, of their right to such things has taken a huge blow through their inability to extricate the country from the european union. as i have said frequently on the boards, i don't believe we will leave - not because the desire to do so among the ruling class isn't there: they want to leave, i feel, in large measure to retain their place at the top of the table following the result of june 2016. i don't believe they have the nous, the wherewithal, to deliver a departure which doesn't result in their own diminishment, which delivers in any way the results promised in 2016 of a brave buccaneering nation swashbuckling its way across the globe. the divide in the ruling class, of which the divisions in the house of commons are the most obvious symptom, shows they're effectively paralysed and unable to come up with any way forwards. stay in the eu or depart, the ruling class has been dealt a great blow the results of which may take years to become fully apparent.

(5) let's hope it's worth it when we find this new route.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Here we go...


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> and your point is?



Its in the post you quoted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Here we go...
> 
> View attachment 182302


so the stickers saying brexit a right-wing coup may have some truth to them after all


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

I see they want to ask the Queen to prorogue Parliament.

This is going well.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

lol.  Suspend democracy.

Its great this taking back control.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Johnson is going to suspend parliament then. Fucks sake.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Here we go...
> 
> View attachment 182302


Democracy, lol


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

“Lexit” lol, you stupid cunts.


----------



## Smangus (Aug 28, 2019)

parliament to be prorogued just in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> lol.  Suspend democracy.
> 
> Its great this taking back control.


it's strange how the sovereignty of parliament is so important that it is the first thing to be dispensed with under both theresa may and boris de pfeffel johnson


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

What chance Brenda tells him to get fucked?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 28, 2019)

Boris Johnson to suspend parliament from mid-September to force through no-deal Brexit

eta, a bit late to the party with this link


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so the stickers saying brexit a right-wing coup may have some truth to them after all



I hope the working class pull it out of the bag soon.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

#_Ermächtigungsgesetz_


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Here we go...
> 
> View attachment 182302


the latest headlines in the mail show themselves unconcerned


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> What chance Brenda tells him to get fucked?



The right wing nutters have fucked her.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> Boris Johnson to suspend parliament from mid-September to force through no-deal Brexit
> 
> eta, a bit late to the party with this link


glad to see you joining the party tho


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

tommers said:


> I hope the working class pull it out of the bag soon.


Any day now. This great opportunity for the left is nearly upon us.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The right wing nutters have fucked her.


she never stood a chance


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> glad to see you joining the party tho


I've been in the kitchen up until now.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

The whole edifice of 'democracy' in the UK is crumbling before our eyes.  We could be a republic in my lifetime now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I've been in the kitchen up until now.


the best place to be at any party


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

Presumably this will be met with a vonc at the first opportunity?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Will certainly drive some the 'rebel' tories (I know) into Corbyn's 'big tent' for legislating against ND


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Presumably this will be met with a vonc at the first opportunity?



The only last resort left I’d have thought.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so the stickers saying brexit a right-wing coup may have some truth to them after all


Funny isn’t it, almost like the entire fucking thing was predictable 3 years ago.


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The whole edifice of 'democracy' in the UK is crumbling before our eyes.  We could be a republic in my lifetime now.



We're more likely to give them back power.

Some people are happy that this is happening.  Suspending what pretence at democracy that we have.

Go Boris.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

tommers said:


> We're more likely to give them back power.
> 
> Some people are happy that this is happening.  Suspending what pretence at democracy that we have.
> 
> Go Boris.


So 1930s.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> The only last resort left I’d have thought.


dk what the last resort would make of that


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So 1930s.



‘Helped into power.’


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> What chance Brenda tells him to get fucked?


Torrid royalist fantasies sorry


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> The only last resort left I’d have thought.



There’s always Cleethorpes!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> There’s always Cleethorpes!








papa's fish and chips on cleethorpes pier is worth a visit to northeast lincolnshire for all on its own


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Hold on...Carshalton & Wallington's 'white knight' wades in with his iron fist!



Is this actually happening?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 28, 2019)

Is Rory the Tory still planning on setting up his alternate parliament in the nearest spoons


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Is Rory the Tory still planning on setting up his alternate parliament in the nearest spoons


I'd go to the visitors gallery...as long as they still kept the £1.89/pint going.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Hold on...Carshalton & Wallington's 'white knight' wades in with his iron fist!
> 
> View attachment 182305
> 
> Is this actually happening?


we're not in kansas now


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the latest headlines in the mail show themselves unconcerned
> View attachment 182303



They might update it later if Johnson displays sideboob and unsightly cankles on his way to ask the Queen to suspend Parliament.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

The country is not in crisis, everyone is just getting on fine with the day to day.  This is not a war and we're not about to be invaded.  Its just a political dead lock.  It would be extraordinary if the Queen thinks this is OK to suspend what we feebly call democracy.

If she agrees now then what next?  It sets a beautiful precedent for every time a government can't get want it wants it just kicks and screams and shuts down Parliament


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> we're not in kansas now


More to the point; this will give the fucking yellow tories a couple of days to swallow Swinson's over-blown pride and actually support a Corbyn VoNC. Otherwise they will go down as complicit with the tories...again.

Simple really, innit?


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It would be extraordinary if the Queen thinks this is OK to suspend what we feebly call democracy.


It won't tbf


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The country is not in crisis, everyone is just getting on fine with the day to day.  This is not a war and we're not about to be invaded.  Its just a political dead lock.  It would be extraordinary if the Queen thinks this is OK to suspend what we feebly call democracy.
> 
> If she agrees now then what next?  It sets a beautiful precedent for every time a government can't get want it wants it just kicks and screams and shuts down Parliament


There's nothing here for the Queen to 'think' about; she's merely being ceremonially asked to do what she always does for a new Parliament. Johnson is just calling the oppo's hand.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> More to the point; this will give the fucking yellow tories a couple of days to swallow Swinson's over-blown pride and actually support a Corbyn VoNC. Otherwise they will go down as complicit with the tories...again.
> 
> Simple really, innit?


now we're not in kansas iron fists can be unveiled.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> There's nothing here for the Queen to 'think' about; she's merely being ceremonially asked to do what she always does for a new Parliament. Johnson is just calling the oppo's hand.



I know they're calling their hand but to my mind it still sets a precedent and drags the monarchy into the middle of one place they don't want to be.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I know they're calling their hand but to my mind it still sets a precedent and drags the monarchy into the middle of one place they don't want to be.


Oh no.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I know they're calling their hand but to my mind it still sets a precedent and drags the monarchy into the middle of one place they don't want to be.


I'm no expert, but I don't think calling for a Queen's speech is without precedent. That's precisely why it's a smart move.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

btw...how many Urban threads have exceeded 1000 pages?

I'm figuring this one will get there pretty soon!


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Oh no.



Well, yes.  I'm just amazed that who is doing it.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 28, 2019)

Maybe Boris thinks dictatorship is so underrated, at least I have LeFT watching my back.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

You've got to admit that the Johnson regime's timing was clever. Let the LDs box Corbyn into the 'legislative' pathway and then within hours pull the rug from under them. 

It's VoNC or Brexit now.
Swinson's choice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> btw...how many Urban threads have exceeded 1000 pages?
> 
> I'm figuring this one will get there pretty soon!


we'll start a new thread on 999 pages


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> we'll start a new thread on 999 pages


You're calling for the thread to be prorogued?

I call for the iron fist!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You've got to admit that the Johnson regime's timing was clever. Let the LDs box Corbyn into the 'legislative' pathway and then within hours pull the rug from under them.
> 
> It's VoNC or Brexit now.
> Swinson's choice.


i think we'll find there'll be other options available, not all of them to be found in erskine may


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I'm no expert, but I don't think calling for a Queen's speech is without precedent. That's precisely why it's a smart move.



This isn't a smart move, on a variety of levels.  In Parliamentary terms it guarantees government defeats when Parliament does come back for a week or so in early September, possibly including a no confidence vote.  It also requires the Crown to get involved, something which she will absolutely hate given the circumstances and without having certainty that this will actually happen.  It sets a dreadful precedent for the future (if it happens) and it is enough warning (and enough justification) for a massive campaign to be formed against this government amongst the wider public, on many times the scale of XR earlier in the year.  It is phenomenally dangerous what he is doing and could easily result in people being killed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're calling for the thread to be prorogued?
> 
> I call for the iron fist!


you can't have it, the best you can hope for is the stark fist of removal


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> This isn't a smart move, on a variety of levels.  In Parliamentary terms it guarantees government defeats when Parliament does come back for a week or so in early September, possibly including a no confidence vote.  It also requires the Crown to get involved, something which she will absolutely hate given the circumstances and without having certainty that this will actually happen.  It sets a dreadful precedent for the future (if it happens) and it is enough warning (and enough justification) for a massive campaign to be formed against this government amongst the wider public, on many times the scale of XR earlier in the year.  It is phenomenally dangerous what he is doing and could easily result in people being killed.


tl;dr? it will end in tears


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> This isn't a smart move, on a variety of levels.  In Parliamentary terms it guarantees government defeats when Parliament does come back for a week or so in early September, possibly including a no confidence vote.  It also requires the Crown to get involved, something which she will absolutely hate given the circumstances and without having certainty that this will actually happen.  It sets a dreadful precedent for the future (if it happens) and it is enough warning (and enough justification) for a massive campaign to be formed against this government amongst the wider public, on many times the scale of XR earlier in the year.  It is phenomenally dangerous what he is doing and could easily result in people being killed.


Those are all 'ifs'; that's not how psychopaths operate.
The Johnson regime allowed the oppo to show their (feeble) hand and had the immediate response to negate their plan.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you can't have it, the best you can hope for is the stark fist of removal


Ouch


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Those are all 'ifs';



They aren't. There is no if about Parliament returning next week. Or the ability to call a Vonc and force a GE.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You've got to admit that the Johnson regime's timing was clever. Let the LDs box Corbyn into the 'legislative' pathway and then within hours pull the rug from under them.
> 
> It's VoNC or Brexit now.
> Swinson's choice.


With opportunity comes risk and all that. Perhaps PM Corbyn just became a bit likelier


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> They aren't. There is no if about Parliament returning next week. Or the ability to call a Vonc and force a GE.


Well yes, but that's (I assume) part of the regime's plan to make the choice a two-party, binary option that sets Corbyn centre stage. The gauntlet is thrown to his 'rebel's; back a Corbyn-led administration or get to fuck.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Those are all 'ifs'; that's not how psychopaths operate.
> The Johnson regime allowed the oppo to show their (feeble) hand and had the immediate response to negate their plan.



It doesn't negate their plan though - it will unify them, at least in terms of winning a VONC.  Shutting the Commons down for a month will mean there are no Labour rebels (even Hoey), all the anti-Corbyn groups will not back them either and it is exactly the set of circumstances that Grieve et al said were the only set of circumstances whereby they would vote against a Tory government.  That is everything that is wrong about it in Parliamentary terms, and the wrongness extends way beyond Parliament.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> It doesn't negate their plan though - it will unify them, at least in terms of winning a VONC.  Shutting the Commons down for a month will mean there are no Labour rebels (even Hoey), all the anti-Corbyn groups will not back them either and it is exactly the set of circumstances that Grieve et al said were the only set of circumstances whereby they would vote against a Tory government.  That is everything that is wrong about it in Parliamentary terms, and the wrongness extends way beyond Parliament.


It precisely negates the plan announced yesterday; the opportunity alliance will not now have the Parliamentary time to bring forward & pass the legislation they (vaguely) proposed yesterday. It's now the denouement; actually vote for a Corbyn government or suck it up.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Well yes, but that's (I assume) part of the regime's plan to make the choice a two-party, binary option that sets Corbyn centre stage. The gauntlet is thrown to his 'rebel's; back a Corbyn-led administration or get to fuck.



That is certainly what they think, but as we have seen there is a massive gap between what they think will happen and what happens.  There is no binary choice in a VONC for a start, nor is it guaranteed that Corbyn wouldn't back any alternative government that he was not the PM of (especially as he would in effect control any alternative regime anyway).


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2019)

We don need no steenking sovereignty of parliament


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> That is certainly what they think, but as we have seen there is a massive gap between what they think will happen and what happens.  There is no binary choice in a VONC for a start, nor is it guaranteed that Corbyn wouldn't back any alternative government that he was not the PM of (especially as he would in effect control any alternative regime anyway).


Gotta say that I've always seen a VoNC as a precisely binary choice. As to Corbyn folding after successfully felling Johnson's administration...hmm...I don't see that.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Gotta say that I've always seen a VoNC as a precisely binary choice. As to Corbyn folding after successfully felling Johnson's administration...hmm...I don't see that.



How would it be folding?  He'd either be PM, or would control the PM.  That alternative government could do nothing without his say-so, even if his control of his party was reduced to 30 or 40 MPs.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> How would it be folding?  He'd either be PM, or would control the PM.  That alternative government could do nothing without his say-so, even if his control of his party was reduced to 30 or 40 MPs.


You're explaining the logic of the challenge Johnson has just put down to his 'rebel' back-benchers; Brexit or Corbyn; that's it.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You're explaining the logic of the challenge Johnson has just put down to his 'rebel' back-benchers; Brexit or Corbyn; that's it.



No, that is what they (No.10) _think_ the choice is - that its either Corbyn as PM or Brexit.  The reality is that they can vote no confidence without that being an option, and even after that its not guaranteed Corbyn would be PM anyway.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

There's no way Corbyn will countenance anyone but himself being PM, he'd look incredibly fucking weak if he did step aside. Besides the change and lib dem lot have been calling him a secret brexiteer so who out of them is going to blink first?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> There's no way Corbyn will countenance anyone but himself being PM, he'd look incredibly fucking weak if he did step aside. Besides the change and lib dem lot have been calling him a secret brexiteer so who out of them is going to blink first?


Swinson's choice.
Corbyn or Brexit.


----------



## Smangus (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> This isn't a smart move, on a variety of levels.  In Parliamentary terms it guarantees government defeats when Parliament does come back for a week or so in early September, possibly including a no confidence vote.  It also requires the Crown to get involved, something which she will absolutely hate given the circumstances and without having certainty that this will actually happen.  It sets a dreadful precedent for the future (if it happens) and it is enough warning (and enough justification) for a massive campaign to be formed against this government amongst the wider public, on many times the scale of XR earlier in the year.  It is phenomenally dangerous what he is doing and could easily result in people being killed.




It paves the way for a Boris GE with a people vs parliament narrative at the core of it. He doesn't care about any of the above.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

All seems very scorched earth to me.


----------



## equationgirl (Aug 28, 2019)

My first thought on seeing this was General Election next, I must admit., although not sure if it would be before or after Brexit given the timescales.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 28, 2019)

Are we officially a banana republic now?


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> There's no way Corbyn will countenance anyone but himself being PM, he'd look incredibly fucking weak if he did step aside. Besides the change and lib dem lot have been calling him a secret brexiteer so who out of them is going to blink first?



Again, that is based on something that everyone "knows" but which isn't supported that much by evidence.  Since he has been leader, Corbyn has not cared about looking strong or weak in the way that modern British politics expects - there have been no purges of opponents, no Churchillian rhetoric, no calls for tough measures against crime / migrants / shirkers etc.  If the choice is someone else being PM or chaos, he will choose someone else being PM.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Are we officially a banana republic now?



No.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Swinson's choice.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Are we officially a banana republic now?


yes we have no bananas


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Smangus said:


> It paves the way for a Boris GE with a people vs parliament narrative at the core of it. He doesn't care about any of the above.



I think this precisely the strategy here. VONC or not he wants a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think this precisely the strategy here. VONC or not he wants a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.



Yep - agree with this as well. 

Its johnson's least worst option - and it might work. Have the GE before crashing out and whilst still promising brexit do or die - meanwhile promising the moon on a stick to the base - laura norder, magic money trees etc etc - whilst whipping up a nationalist "peoples will" populist storm which forces corbyn to be on the same side as the despised  "centrist" wankers.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yes we have no bananas


That’s OK, neither will anyone else soon.

Bananas are facing extinction


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think this precisely the strategy here. VONC or not he wants a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.


yeh well he won't look so clever if data transfers from europe cease at 0001 on 1 november, if his refusal to pay the £39bn leads to a refusal by europe to chat about a trade deal, and if a trade deal with the usa is derailed by the impact on the gfa: all of which are eminently feasible


----------



## teuchter (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.


Seen that way by, at most, half of the electorate.


----------



## dessiato (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> papa's fish and chips on cleethorpes pier is worth a visit to northeast lincolnshire for all on its own


I prefer Ernie Becket. They only deal in cash should you ever go there. They do fantastic mushy peas.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 182315


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think this precisely the strategy here. VONC or not he wants a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.



That it is the strategy isn't in question, but there are many reasons to think that the strategy is nonsense.  

Putting Corbyn, a man who the political class have openly gone after for four years, as the "leader" of their faction for example is profoundly daft.  As is pretending that the poshest people in the country, many of whom have been in government for years and who the papers back overwhelmingly are on the people's side.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You've got to admit that the Johnson regime's timing was clever. Let the LDs box Corbyn into the 'legislative' pathway and then within hours pull the rug from under them.
> 
> It's VoNC or Brexit now.
> Swinson's choice.


And if they go down the vonc route they will have to fight an election having denied the will of the people.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I prefer Ernie Becket. They only deal in cash should you ever go there. They do fantastic mushy peas.







that looks lush


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Smangus said:


> It paves the way for a Boris GE with a people vs parliament narrative at the core of it. He doesn't care about any of the above.


That's certainly Craig "I physically retched" Oliver's view..



The win, win scenario ensuring tory power.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> That it is the strategy isn't in question, but there are many reasons to think that the strategy is nonsense.
> 
> Putting Corbyn, a man who the political class have openly gone after for four years, as the "leader" of their faction for example is profoundly daft.  As is pretending that the poshest people in the country, many of whom have been in government for years and who the papers back overwhelmingly are on the people's side.


one of the self-made difficulties johnson has is that he's filled his cabinet with people who agree with him, he's in an echo chamber of his own creation


----------



## Patteran (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think this precisely the strategy here. VONC or not he wants a narrative of the political class (which Corbyn is now the unofficial head off) v the people in the forthcoming GE.





ETA I'm an idiot - you'd already posted this image.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Are we officially a banana republic now?



More like a turnip kingdom.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> More like a turnip kingdom.


a kale kakocracy


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> As is pretending that the poshest people in the country, many of whom have been in government for years and who the papers back overwhelmingly are on the people's side.




You are aware of Nigel Farage right?  Standing in front of the gold lift with Trump, talking about taking down the metropolitan elites.  Some people lap that shit up.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Seen that way by, at most, half of the electorate.


Half the electorate voting Tory would be a huge majority tbf


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Are we officially a banana republic now?



Only if they are straight bananas.
ETA: only until Brexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> That’s OK, neither will anyone else soon.
> 
> Bananas are facing extinction



Good. Disgusting, smelly things, eaten by smug twats who litter with the skins.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

tommers said:


> You are aware of Nigel Farage right?  Standing in front of the gold lift with Trump, talking about taking down the metropolitan elites.  Some people lap that shit up.



They do, but that stuff has a limited shelf life and although it portrays itself as (and recieves the publicity as if its) popular it is very questionable whether it actually is.  Look at Farage's big rally yesterday, with heavy press coverage, images of an auditorium applauding the leader repeatedly and at which none of the public were actually present (or invited).


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Good. Disgusting, smelly things, eaten by smug twats who litter with the skins.


Enough of your speciesism.


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> They do, but that stuff has a limited shelf life and although it portrays itself as (and recieves the publicity as if its) popular it is very questionable whether it actually is.  Look at Farage's big rally yesterday, with heavy press coverage, images of an auditorium applauding the leader repeatedly and at which none of the public were actually present (or invited).



And yet here we are.  With government trying to suspend Parliament in order to do the thing he has been banging on about for years.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> They do, but that stuff has a limited shelf life and although it portrays itself as (and recieves the publicity as if its) popular it is very questionable whether it actually is.  Look at Farage's big rally yesterday, with heavy press coverage, images of an auditorium applauding the leader repeatedly and at which none of the public were actually present (or invited).


if there is a ndb then i wonder what will happen to all the money in the bp's coffers


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> They do, but that stuff has a limited shelf life and although it portrays itself as (and recieves the publicity as if its) popular it is very questionable whether it actually is.  Look at Farage's big rally yesterday, with heavy press coverage, images of an auditorium applauding the leader repeatedly and at which none of the public were actually present (or invited).


The timing is all here.
_If _the oppo do prove capable of stopping Johnson's Brexit, the electorate will be fed the populist bollocks without ever having felt the 'pain' of the chaotic exit.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 28, 2019)

Wouldn't the smarter move by Corbyn be to allow this to happen (No Deal) and wait for the presumably-quite-bad-post-Brexit-chaos before embarking on GE moves?


----------



## hash tag (Aug 28, 2019)

Such a nasty, evil, divisive move and do unconstitutional. The move of a dictactor.
Hopefully, when parliament sits again and vote of no confidence will be motioned and past. 
When's the protest, who do I write to?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The timing is all here.
> _If _the oppo do prove capable of stopping Johnson's Brexit, the electorate will be fed the populist bollocks without ever having felt the 'pain' of the chaotic exit.


tbh i don't think the oppo could halt a slow moving paper bag. so i will be very surprised if they manage to stop johnson.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Wouldn't the smarter move by Corbyn be to allow this to happen (No Deal) and wait for the presumably-quite-bad-post-Brexit-chaos before embarking on GE moves?



I have wondered whether that's his preferred outcome.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Such a nasty, evil, divisive move and do unconstitutional. The move of a dictactor.
> Hopefully, when parliament sits again and vote of no confidence will be motioned and past.
> When's the protest, who do I write to?



Start a petition?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh i don't think the oppo could halt a slow moving paper bag. so i will be very surprised if they manage to stop johnson.


Yeah, but I suppose it comes down to two things?
1. Swinson eating her words
& 2. The number of tory 'rebels' matching those LP nut jobs determined to vote against Corbyn


----------



## hash tag (Aug 28, 2019)

How the duck do we stop this, just so unconstitutional and undemocratic. How arrogant do you need to be to do this. Still, at least he will go down as the minister who screwed up more than anyone else. Ever.
Boris Johnson: The dictator | EU ROPE


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I have wondered whether that's his preferred outcome.



Indeed. This now is all just him setting himself up to be able to say 'I tried to stop this' after the inevitable catastrophe.


----------



## dessiato (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that looks lush


Do you get white bread and butter with a large cup of tea with it?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

So in summary, Corbyn and Johnson both want the opposite of what they say they want.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Do you get white bread and butter with a large cup of tea with it?


never been there so i don't know


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The timing is all here.
> _If _the oppo do prove capable of stopping Johnson's Brexit, the electorate will be fed the populist bollocks without ever having felt the 'pain' of the chaotic exit.



If it gets that far they will, though whether people buy it two years after the last time it was served up is another question - as is whether they'll be able to trump the (presumably) Labour narrative that this is a government which is profoundly dangerous, which is led by someone who has a long history of fibs, which isn't run in the interests of the people, which is directly responsible for the chaos of Brexit in particular and the state of the country in general and whose manifesto will probably be full of things Labour promised in 2017.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

one thing 2017 should have taught us is that the party calling the general election faces challenges to retain control of the narrative. i've said before i think johnson the one man in the country who could deliver a corbyn government and i think that may yet be the case


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Wouldn't the smarter move by Corbyn be to allow this to happen (No Deal) and wait for the presumably-quite-bad-post-Brexit-chaos before embarking on GE moves?


There's been quite a few theories thrown around that Labour's lacklustre engagement with the Brexit issue up until recently has been a part of some Grand Strategy of letting the Tories well and truly 'own' Brexit, so that when they inevitably turn around to blame Labour they can put their hands up and say "no, this was all you".

Now that Boris has taken over from May, and seems to be performing slightly better - see; still badly - Corbyn has realised Labour need to be definitive on this issue, somewhat too late in my mind. That said, they do seem to be aware of the damage of a No Deal Brexit and are seeking to avoid it. I don't think they'd be quite so willing to risk the jobs and economic wellbeing they claim No Deal will cost (and I believe it will) simply to get elected, but I've long since surrendered any assumptions that our current bunch of politicians have any spine and any desire for anything other than power.



SpookyFrank said:


> Indeed. This now is all just him setting himself up to be able to say 'I tried to stop this' after the inevitable catastrophe.


It's a real shame that the Opposition have fallen this low, if this is the case. I'd love for there to be_ something_ new and fresh in politics that does away with all of these old, moribund political parties trapped under the weight of their own history, but we saw how that went for ChUK. The Lib Dems I will reserve judgement on - I won't easily forget the financial burdens their student loans surrender has cost my family.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

One thing's for sure, if any number of (currently) tory MPs do actually VoNC in their own party's government it would be fair to drop the inverted commas around the word rebel for them.

Johnson's given them the choice now.


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> One thing's for sure, if any number of (currently) tory MPs do actually VoNC in their own party's government it would be fair to drop the inverted commas around the word rebel for them.
> 
> Johnson's given them the choice now.


Other than Theresa May's thrice rejected deal, I can't think of the last time significant numbers of Tories went against the Party. Now that it has become a matter of electoral life and death for the party (with Boris tying them to No Deal 31st October or bust), preventing No Deal is likely to do irreversible damage in the eyes of their supporters - the only people left who will support them.

They don't do well with young people, they don't do well with 25-40 year olds, they don't do well with anyone except the people who already vote Tory, and the Brexit Party like UKIP before them wait in the wings.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that looks lush



Mushy peas in a ramekin is incorrect.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that looks lush



Forty-five minutes, door to door.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Mushy peas in a ramekin is incorrect.


i tend to defer in these matters to the people who have a deeper knowledge of the issue than i, and if in places famous for their fish and chips like grimsby and cleethorpes they use a ramekin i'm inclined to feel it's acceptable


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> Other than Theresa May's thrice rejected deal, I can't think of the last time significant numbers of Tories went against the Party. Now that it has become a matter of electoral life and death for the party (with Boris tying them to No Deal 31st October or bust), preventing No Deal is likely to do irreversible damage in the eyes of their supporters - the only people left who will support them.
> 
> They don't do well with young people, they don't do well with 25-40 year olds, they don't do well with anyone except the people who already vote Tory, and the Brexit Party like UKIP before them wait in the wings.


Oh yeah, it would be a _Kamikaze _mission; it's just whether they've got the guts to do it. Johnson obviously figures they've not, or there's not enough to sink the ship.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

So just speculating - if we're saying that this means that Parliament can either get a VoNC through, or Johnson gets his no deal Brexit, when the VoNC goes through, will they actually let Corbyn be caretaker PM or will they have someone else? 

Because once the VoNC goes through, it's just whoever can command a majority right?


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Since this announcement I’ve had three lads at work say, ‘what’s the point in voting, I’ll never vote again!’

Welcome to the club sez I.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Oh yeah, it would be a _Kamikaze _mission; it's just whether they've got the guts to do it. Johnson obviously figures they've not, or there's not enough to sink the ship.


kamikaze means divine wind. johnson's guts more likely to produce gusts of the evil kind - we'll soon see, if he's given a wide berth in the house of commons


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i tend to defer in these matters to the people who have a deeper knowledge of the issue than i, and if in places famous for their fish and chips like grimsby and cleethorpes they use a ramekin i'm inclined to feel it's acceptable



It's not. Polystyrene pot maybe, ramekin no. Ramekin's are for souffles and creme brulee not mushy peas leave means leave


----------



## tommers (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not. Polystyrene pot maybe, ramekin no. Ramekin's are for souffles and creme brulee not mushy peas leave means leave



RED, WHITE & BLUE BREXIT!!!!11!!1!!


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So just speculating - if we're saying that this means that Parliament can either get a VoNC through, or Johnson gets his no deal Brexit, when the VoNC goes through, will they actually let Corbyn be caretaker PM or will they have someone else?
> 
> Because once the VoNC goes through, it's just whoever can command a majority right?


Yeah, under the FTPA there's 14 days in which (somehow) the ability of another leader to command the confidence of the house can be communicated to brenda.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not. Polystyrene pot maybe, ramekin no. Ramekin's are for souffles and creme brulee not mushy peas leave means leave


i'm not usually a fan of the mushy peas, the main event being the fish and chips. so sometimes i do leave the greater part of the peas.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, under the FTPA there's 14 days in which (somehow) the ability of another leader to command the confidence of the house can be communicated to brenda.


just for clarity is that 14 calendar days or 14 working days?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> just for clarity is that 14 calendar days or 14 working days?


I'll check.


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Oh yeah, it would be a _Kamikaze _mission; it's just whether they've got the guts to do it. Johnson obviously figures they've not, or there's not enough to sink the ship.


I worry that it'll be the latter - some vote with conscience rather than with party, but not enough as the rest run scared.



SpackleFrog said:


> So just speculating - if we're saying that this means that Parliament can either get a VoNC through, or Johnson gets his no deal Brexit, when the VoNC goes through, will they actually let Corbyn be caretaker PM or will they have someone else?
> 
> Because once the VoNC goes through, it's just whoever can command a majority right?


I'd be_ very surprised_ considering past objections to Corbyn if they let him be Caretaker PM, but if the alternative is literally crashing out without a deal with Johnson at the helm, we_ might_ see it.

Personally I think Corbyn needs to step back and to the side, let someone with a fresh face take up the mantle of leadership with Corbyn in the wings managing the campaign somewhat. That way Labour has a remove from his poisoned 'brand image', if it can be called that, and the other parties have deniability - "we didn't put Corbyn in at least".



Sprocket. said:


> Since this announcement I’ve had three lads at work say, ‘what’s the point in voting, I’ll never vote again!’
> 
> Welcome to the club sez I.


Always makes me sad to hear it, but whilst I strongly disagree with not voting I really can't say I don't understand how people have got to that point with the whole flaming mess of it all...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I'll check.


Just 14 days (calendar), I think.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I'd be_ very surprised_ considering past objections to Corbyn if they let him be Caretaker PM, but if the alternative is literally crashing out without a deal with Johnson at the helm, we_ might_ see it.



Once the VoNC goes through, anyone who can show they command a majority can be PM and I feel that's unlikely to be Johnson or Corbyn.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

> Personally I think Corbyn needs to step back and to the side, let someone with a fresh face take up the mantle of leadership with Corbyn in the wings managing the campaign somewhat. That way Labour has a remove from his poisoned 'brand image', if it can be called that, and the other parties have deniability - "we didn't put Corbyn in at least".



I'm not convinced that Labour choosing this moment to conduct a leadership campaign is an especially good idea.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Once the VoNC goes through, anyone who can show they command a majority can be PM and I feel that's unlikely to be Johnson or Corbyn.


Do we all get to put in a 500 word expression of interest?


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Once the VoNC goes through, anyone who can show they command a majority can be PM and I feel that's unlikely to be Johnson or Corbyn.


Yeah, realistically it'll have to be a combination of Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Tory rebels, and who of that bunch commands enough respect cross-party? I'm drawing a blank...



Teaboy said:


> I'm not convinced that Labour choosing this moment to conduct a leadership campaign is an especially good idea.


As in primarying for a GE, or trying to replace Corbyn?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not usually a fan of the mushy peas, the main event being the fish and chips. so sometimes i do leave the greater part of the peas.



Incorrect.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Wouldn't the smarter move by Corbyn be to allow this to happen (No Deal) and wait for the presumably-quite-bad-post-Brexit-chaos before embarking on GE moves?


Which is also why I can't see him letting anyone else be pm in gnu. Either they back him and he saves the country from no deal before taking us into a ge or they don't back him and he can pick up the pieces after and blame it all on the Tories and Lib Dems


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm not usually a fan of the mushy peas, the main event being the fish and chips. so sometimes i do leave the greater part of the peas.



All we are saying, is GIVE PEAS A CHANCE.


----------



## Gaia (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So in summary, Corbyn and Johnson both want the opposite of what they say they want.



More-or-less. Wankface's Torygraph columns prior to the referendum were really bigging up the EU and how it would be "crazy" to leave. The thing with Johnson and Corbyn is that they're both populists; Corbyn is an avowed Bennite (and we all know what Anthony Wedgwood Benn thought of the EEC/EU, that's what his '5 questions' referred to). Corbyn, like Benn, has always viewed the EU as some kind of neoliberal superstate, hellbent on assimilating the whole of Europe but, if saying that he now opposes Brexit will get him where he wants to be (i.e. No. 10) then he'll say he opposes Brexit, likewise with Wankface, he wants to remain PM and he knows that the only way for him to remain PM is to pander to the ERG and Farage. 

Corbyn has a similar problem; he wants to become PM but he doesn't want to sound too Remain-y and risk pissing off the Lexiters, who believe he's betraying them and his principles. Neither Corbyn nor Johnson are fit to be PM, both are career politicians who will say whatever it takes to get to - or remain in - No. 10. In my opinion, neither can be trusted to do what's best for the country. As it stands, what we need is some kind of cross-party remain alliance government (which will forever remain in the realms of fantasy). The next best thing we can hope for is someone with some bollocks to depose JC, but I can't see that happening any time soon, either. 

TL;DR: we're fucked.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Do we all get to put in a 500 word expression of interest?



Only if you're an MP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Incorrect.


i think i have a better notion than you of whether i am a fan of the mushy pea


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> Yeah, realistically it'll have to be a combination of Labour, Lib Dem, SNP and Tory rebels, and who of that bunch commands enough respect cross-party? I'm drawing a blank...



Not sure about respect but I reckon they'll agree on anyone they are confident will fuck Johnson and Corbyn at the same time. Tom Watson could work.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think i have a better notion than you of whether i am a fan of the mushy pea



I wasn't claiming to know your feelings on mushy peas better than you, I was just saying your feelings are incorrect.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Only if you're an MP.


WILL OF THE PEOPLE!  

Not sure you'll find a single person in parliament who could command a majority at this stage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not sure about respect but I reckon they'll agree on anyone they are confident will fuck Johnson and Corbyn at the same time. Tom Watson could work.


tom watson who bigs up nonce fantasists?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wasn't claiming to know your feelings on mushy peas better than you, I was just saying your feelings are incorrect.


in the people's democratic socialist republic of britain you will be served mushy peas and you will like them


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Corbyn has a similar problem; he wants to become PM but he doesn't want to sound too Remain-y and risk pissing off the Lexiters, who believe he's betraying them and his principles. Neither Corbyn nor Johnson are fit to be PM, both are career politicians who will say whatever it takes to get to - or remain in - No. 10. In my opinion, neither can be trusted to do what's best for the country. As it stands, what we need is some kind of cross-party remain alliance government (which will forever remain in the realms of fantasy). The next best thing we can hope for is someone with some bollocks to depose JC, but I can't see that happening any time soon, either.


This is a pretty good summary of where we're at right now. Two career politicians effectively embracing populism as a last-gasp effort to get where they want (No. 10) or stay where they want to be (No. 10 again). No one in either party has the balls to stand up and say "No, this is stupid, let's get some sensible people in the Chair" because everyone's rightly running scared of the idea of No Deal Brexit or a government dissolution.

Because of how highly strung the situation is, we can't replace Corbyn without throwing Labour into chaos, and there's no chance of getting rid of Boris after he's just won an internal leadership contest without a General Election - which again, distracts both parties from what they should be doing at this point, which is sorting out Brexit somehow.



SpackleFrog said:


> Not sure about respect but I reckon they'll agree on anyone they are confident will fuck Johnson and Corbyn at the same time. Tom Watson could work.


I'm not even close to 100% on Watson, I think he's tarnished a little bit although I admire his health transformation.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

If the Queen tells Johnson to fuck off, I will sing the national anthem at the next sporting event I go to.

Can't say fairer than that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tom watson who bigs up nonce fantasists?



Shouldn't be a problem for him in that place. 




Pickman's model said:


> in the people's democratic socialist republic of britain you will be served mushy peas and you will like them



Now you're getting it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I'm not even close to 100% on Watson, I think he's tarnished a little bit although I admire his health transformation.



I'm afraid your opinion isn't going to be a factor. Sorry.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2019)

I still have starmer as next LP leader at 10/1from about 2 years ago - can currently get him as next PM at 16/1 as well


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> If the Queen tells Johnson to fuck off, I will sing the national anthem at the next sporting event I go to.
> 
> Can't say fairer than that.


A lovely dream, but a dream nonetheless - with all this Albert stuff blowing up Queenie won't want to rock the boat by getting involved in politics any more than she has to. Plus, the current rhetoric of "taking back control" and "will of the people" could very easily lead to abolition of the Monarch if she sticks her nose in where Boris and co thinks it doesn't belong.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> A lovely dream, but a dream nonetheless - with all this Albert stuff blowing up Queenie won't want to rock the boat by getting involved in politics any more than she has to. Plus, the current rhetoric of "taking back control" and "will of the people" could very easily lead to abolition of the Monarch if she sticks her nose in where Boris and co thinks it doesn't belong.



don't be silly now


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> A lovely dream, but a dream nonetheless - with all this Albert stuff blowing up Queenie won't want to rock the boat by getting involved in politics any more than she has to. Plus, the current rhetoric of "taking back control" and "will of the people" could very easily lead to abolition of the Monarch if she sticks her nose in where Boris and co thinks it doesn't belong.


if only that were the case


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm afraid your opinion isn't going to be a factor. Sorry.


No doubt, but as this is a discussion about Brexit, my own opinions naturally form a part of what I post here.


not-bono-ever said:


> I still have starmer as next LP leader at 10/1from about 2 years ago - can currently get him as next PM at 16/1 as well


Starmer is, in my opinion, the best bet right now - however, he's only really distinguished himself in the policy arena surrounding Brexit. Post-Brexit would need a leader with more than just opposition to Brexit under their cap.


Flavour said:


> don't be silly now


No silliness - the Queen and the Monarchy exist because they don't get involved in politics and effectively serve as a rubber stamp for the government of the day. I'd like to think something might occur that would push Queenie into saying "enough is enough" on principle, but it would set a precedent for the Royal Family being involved in politics actively. I doubt Parliament would like that, what with sovereignty and all.


----------



## cantsin (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> If the Queen tells Johnson to fuck off, I will sing the national anthem at the next sporting event I go to.
> 
> Can't say fairer than that.



not sure unelected monarch obstructing  leader of elected government ( however much you may dislike that govt )  from carrying out the democratic mandate of the electorate ( however much you may dislike that mandate, and his interpretation of it )  is something to get the bunting our for ?


( am off to occupy Waitrose tho myself

#generalstrike )


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> If the Queen tells Johnson to fuck off, I will sing the national anthem at the next sporting event I go to.
> 
> Can't say fairer than that.



She won't and you can't sit with us at sporting events either.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if only that were the case



Break up the union, remove the monarchy, expose the ruling class for the useless tossers they are. As far as I'm concerned Brexit is going swimmingly


----------



## brogdale (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Break up the union, remove the monarchy, expose the ruling class for the useless tossers they are. As far as I'm concerned Brexit is going swimmingly


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Break up the union, remove the monarchy, expose the ruling class for the useless tossers they are. As far as I'm concerned Brexit is going swimmingly


Can't say I'd mind too much - although I'd like Scotland to remain part of the Union of their own choice, if at all possible, they're a good bunch.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> If the Queen tells Johnson to fuck off, I will sing the national anthem at the next sporting event I go to.
> 
> Can't say fairer than that.


I don't think the queen actually has any real option. . . But I would have thought if she was going to say no it would have already happened and boris wouldn't even be 'officially' asking.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> the current rhetoric of "taking back control" and "will of the people" could very easily lead to abolition of the Monarch if she sticks her nose in where Boris and co thinks it doesn't belong.


Just more incentive, from my POV.


ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> I don't think the queen actually has any real option. . . But I would have thought if she was going to say no it would have already happened and boris wouldn't even be 'officially' asking.


Oh I know, I'm following the example of our glorious leaders and making promises I'm confident I'll never have to follow through on.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Yougov just asked me what I thought of proroguing parliament, I told them I thought it was an awesome idea obviously


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

Could the other MPs not just organise their own meeting at a local pub and/or community centre?


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Could the other MPs not just organise their own meeting at a local pub and/or community centre?


Guardian link (only one I could find on short notice) but Rory Stewart has already suggested something along those lines.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Break up the union, remove the monarchy, expose the ruling class for the useless tossers they are. As far as I'm concerned Brexit is going swimmingly



All that left is for MP's to organise a coup of their own and install their own leader to overturn the referendum result


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Could the other MPs not just organise their own meeting at a local pub and/or community centre?


i note you tacitly admit they couldn't organise a piss-up in a brewery


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> Guardian link (only one I could find on short notice) but Rory Stewart has already suggested something along those lines.


Huh, they moved (almost suspiciously) fast!


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Huh, they moved (almost suspiciously) fast!


I've been hearing rumbles of an alternative Parliament for the last few days, but whether it materialises...

And that would be something - a rogue Parliament! What interesting times we live in.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Disappointed to see the Guardian agreeing with me:

Boris Johnson’s intention is clear: he wants a ‘people v parliament’ election | Tom Kibasi


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Disappointed to see the Guardian agreeing with me:
> 
> Boris Johnson’s intention is clear: he wants a ‘people v parliament’ election | Tom Kibasi


you know their journalists scour urban75 for ideas


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

What a fucking shit fest


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Will certainly drive some the 'rebel' tories (I know) into Corbyn's 'big tent' for legislating against ND



i have alsways though Corbyn may end up as the accidental PM, just as he did leader.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What a fucking shit fest


one way to improve it would be the  news that boris de pfeffel johnson had drowned in a septic tank or similar

that's one shit fest we could all get behind


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> one way to improve it would be the  news that boris de pfeffel johnson had drowned in a septic tank or similar
> 
> that's one shit fest we could all get behind


I'd prefer a less messy, grassy knoll solution


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> one way to improve it would be the news that boris de pfeffel johnson had drowned in a septic tank or similar


I'd feel too bad for the guys who inevitably have to fish him out. Surely there's a way he can remove himself without causing anyone else any more misery?


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you know their journalists scour urban75 for ideas


Why are they going down the pan then? Unless that means... oh


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'd prefer a less messy grassy knoll solution


in the years following kennedy's assassination covert government programmes here and in the united states removed all other grassy knolls save the one in dallas which is a memorial to jfk


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> This isn't a smart move, on a variety of levels.  In Parliamentary terms it guarantees government defeats when Parliament does come back for a week or so in early September, possibly including a no confidence vote.  It also requires the Crown to get involved, something which she will absolutely hate given the circumstances and without having certainty that this will actually happen.  It sets a dreadful precedent for the future (if it happens) and it is enough warning (and enough justification) for a massive campaign to be formed against this government amongst the wider public, on many times the scale of XR earlier in the year.  It is phenomenally dangerous what he is doing and could easily result in people being killed.



Always respect your posts, but how do you imagine people being killed, riots, race attacks, the army being called in?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I'd feel too bad for the guys who inevitably have to fish him out. Surely there's a way he can remove himself without causing anyone else any more misery?


don't feel sorry for jacob rees-mogg and sajid javid


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> Always respect your posts, but how do you imagine people being killed, riots, race attacks, the army being called in?


dk about agricola but speaking for myself, very easily


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> don't feel sorry for jacob rees-mogg and sajid javid


You're right, I can live with that.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

GE called next week according to Owen Jones. The People v the Parliament:


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

called by who?


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> called by who?


Presumably Johnson trying to capitalise on any perceived "Boris Bounce" prior to leaving, if this actually happens.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

agricola said:


> They do, but that stuff has a limited shelf life and although it portrays itself as (and recieves the publicity as if its) popular it is very questionable whether it actually is.  Look at Farage's big rally yesterday, with heavy press coverage, images of an auditorium applauding the leader repeatedly and at which none of the public were actually present (or invited).



BBC coverage didn't even pan around to see the audience, impossible to say how many were really there.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, under the FTPA there's 14 days in which (somehow) the ability of another leader to command the confidence of the house can be communicated to brenda.



There's some suggestion, that as the 14 day deadline would come whilst Parliament is suspended, he could ignore it & just go for a GE off his own back.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> called by who?



Both leaders want an GE. Johnson has left plenty of time for a VONC when parliament returns. He wants a GE. Corbyn wants a GE.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> BBC coverage didn't even pan around to see the audience, impossible to say how many were really there.


i have it on good authority that there were the same number of people in the audience as there are in the audience for only connect

taped applause and fake photos should not surprise


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Still, there's one good thing in all this - seeing Anna Soubry with steam coming out of her ears.


----------



## agricola (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> Always respect your posts, but how do you imagine people being killed, riots, race attacks, the army being called in?



It has been a long, hot summer that has had a load of idiotic and inflammatory rhetoric flowing around already, and this is likely to result in a very large number of people coming out on the streets thinking that they will have to do something about it (as Parliament cannot, because it is closed).  All you then need is for someone to panic, or someone to act maliciously and a riot starts.  I am not sure how it would stop either - you either have the government giving up, or the state repressing it.



treelover said:


> BBC coverage didn't even pan around to see the audience, impossible to say how many were really there.



There weren't any - the "audience" was the 500 candidates the BP had picked.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Looks like Alex's going to 'get it over the line'. And 'drive it home'. (snigger). Fortunes to be made.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Break up the union, remove the monarchy, expose the ruling class for the useless tossers they are. As far as I'm concerned Brexit is going swimmingly



And those things are happening? 

The Union could break sure, but it’s a while off, the monarchy is going nowhere and a portion of the working class, those that we keep on being told should be _listened_ to, have adopted Lord Snooty and co as their heroes. 

Ball is in play is the best you can say.


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> GE called next week according to Owen Jones. The People v the Parliament:



hold my beer


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> And those things are happening?
> 
> The Union could break sure, but it’s a while off, the monarchy is going nowhere and a portion of the working class, those that we keep on being told should be _listened_ to, have adopted Lord Snooty and co as their heroes.
> 
> Ball is in play is the best you can say.


the monarchy has been going nowhere for many years and soon we shall reach the end of the road


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I worry that it'll be the latter - some vote with conscience rather than with party, but not enough as the rest run scared.
> 
> 
> I'd be_ very surprised_ considering past objections to Corbyn if they let him be Caretaker PM, but if the alternative is literally crashing out without a deal with Johnson at the helm, we_ might_ see it.
> ...



Someone like Yvette 'hammer of the disabled and sick' Cooper you mean?

Google 'invisible wheelchair test'


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> Someone like Yvette 'hammer of the disabled and sick' Cooper you mean?


Your words, not mine. I don't know who I think would be best, as I've said earlier here.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> hold my beer



Just watch out for the Liberal Democrat’s Iron Fist.

Clive Lewis is calling the unwashed proles onto the streets to defend the EU and Parliament


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

Has 'our Nigel' said much?


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has 'our Nigel' said much?


Yes. Unfortunately.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has 'our Nigel' said much?



Not yet, but we’re making plans!


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has 'our Nigel' said much?





Not much.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Disappointed to see the Guardian agreeing with me:
> 
> Boris Johnson’s intention is clear: he wants a ‘people v parliament’ election | Tom Kibasi


Haven't even read that yet, but the headline sounds accurate. This move just about rules out the opposition using legislation to stop no deal. Vonc then becomes the mechanism and has a fair chance of success. I _think_ the queen's speech may still take place (not sure) but even if it doesn't Johnson has the basis there for a 'popular' spending manifesto on schools, crime and the NHS. Tories already ahead in the polls and win the election, tbh, regardless of whether it takes place before or after 31 October. Even if there's no vonc or it fails, Johnson can still call a GE - which Corbyn will have to support given his past statements. Same outcome. 

None of that touches on Brexit, which will go ahead at some point in that process - either via a pre-31 October election victory by the tories or just by getting to the 31st full stop.

I'm sure I've got significant bits of that wrong in terms fo procedure (just woke up ), but the key thing is Johnson now has more options and control than the opposition.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has 'our Nigel' said much?


nothing since the weekend


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

You can get odds of 8/15 on a GE in 2019. Could be a nice little brexit bonus to see you through the coming turmoil


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> You can get odds of 8/15 on a GE in 2019. Could be a nice little brexit bonus to see you through the coming turmoil


with the emphasis on little given those odds


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> with the emphasis on little given those odds


53% interest on a couple of months investment is nothing to be sniffed at - better returns than an ISA!


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Just watch out for the Liberal Democrat’s Iron Fist.
> 
> Clive Lewis is calling the unwashed proles onto the streets to defend the EU and Parliament


Saw a few tweets calling for a general strike obviously not by anyone who is in a position of delivering one. Tbh would many people actually miss parliament if it was suspended?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> Always respect your posts, but how do you imagine people being killed, riots, race attacks, the army being called in?


Early days of course, but I don't see much more happening than slightly amped up a - b marches by the usual suspects over this (usual suspects as in those who normally go on remain demos). Amped up to a bit of light civil disobedience maybe, sit down protests, few arrests even less charges. 

Obviously, I'm being a bit daft predicting reactions on this so early, but it hardly feels like a poll tax  moment and I think we'll be seeing opinion polls with a fair degree of agreement for what Johnson has done (along with a lot of 'don't knows' at this stage).


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Saw a few tweets calling for a general strike obviously not by anyone who is in a position of delivering one. Tbh would many people actually miss parliament if it was suspended?



What would be the demand of the general strike, ‘Defend EU Neoliberalism’? ‘God save the Queen and Parliament’??


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> You can get odds of 8/15 on a GE in 2019. Could be a nice little brexit bonus to see you through the coming turmoil


It around the same odds for the Tories to get the most seats


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the monarchy has been going nowhere for many years and soon we shall reach the end of the road



It doesn’t have to go anywhere. It just needs to stay put.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

We're about to get asset stripped.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Early days of course, but I don't see much more happening than slightly amped up a - b marches by the usual suspects over this (usual suspects as in those who normally go on remain demos). Amped up to a bit of light civil disobedience maybe, sit down protests, few arrests even less charges.
> 
> Obviously, I'm being a bit daft predicting reactions on this so early, but it hardly feels like a poll tax  moment and I think we'll be seeing opinion polls with a fair degree of agreement for what Johnson has done (along with a lot of 'don't knows' at this stage).




The unknown, of course, is if counter demo’s would be called. Then it could go off properly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

#


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> What would be the demand of the general strike, ‘Defend EU Neoliberalism’? ‘God save the Queen and Parliament’??



Silly. Fuck the Tories and their future paradise for capital will do.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> It around the same odds for the Tories to get the most seats


Can get 16/1 for a labour majority


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> Can get 16/1 for a labour majority


it's an interesting and underrated fact that the odds for a labour victory in the last three general elections have been the same as the odds on the winner of the derby

but you'd have lost your stake if you bet on the labour party


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The unknown, of course, is if counter demo’s would be called. Then it could go off properly.


Good point. And, back to Lexit, the make up of that counter demo would be interesting. The press would portray it as Johnson/Farage's army, but would that be the case? It would certainly be a good point, even if I'm not convinced it will happen, for Lexit to 'become' something in real life.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> What would be the demand of the general strike, ‘Defend EU Neoliberalism’? ‘God save the Queen and Parliament’??


Pretty much where this inevitable petition is at:
Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

The last few years has seen some really weird bedfellows/unexpected defenses.

Like in the US where the left suddenly saw the FBI as an institution of integrity that should not be impugned.

It's all so... weird.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's an interesting and underrated fact that the odds for a labour victory in the last three general elections have been the same as the odds on the winner of the derby
> 
> but you'd have lost your stake if you bet on the labour party



I know Tom Watson has lost a lot of weight, by it is over a mile and everyone else is on a horse


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Haven't even read that yet, but the headline sounds accurate. This move just about rules out the opposition using legislation to stop no deal. Vonc then becomes the mechanism and has a fair chance of success. I _think_ the queen's speech may still take place (not sure) but even if it doesn't Johnson has the basis there for a 'popular' spending manifesto on schools, crime and the NHS. Tories already ahead in the polls and win the election, tbh, regardless of whether it takes place before or after 31 October. Even if there's no vonc or it fails, Johnson can still call a GE - which Corbyn will have to support given his past statements. Same outcome.
> 
> None of that touches on Brexit, which will go ahead at some point in that process - either via a pre-31 October election victory by the tories or just by getting to the 31st full stop.
> 
> I'm sure I've got significant bits of that wrong in terms fo procedure (just woke up ), but the key thing is Johnson now has more options and control than the opposition.



I'm less confident of Johnson winning an election on that timetable. Brexit at any cost headbangers simply aren't a big enough contingent, and the shameless timing of the election would give the tories little chance of running on a domestic policy ticket and avoiding the elephant in the room. 

Whatever Johnson's master plan is, it's not an actual plan but rather a more or less calculated guess at the best of a bad set of options.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> The last few years has seen some really weird bedfellows/unexpected defenses.
> 
> Like in the US where the left suddenly saw the FBI as an institution of integrity that should not be impugned.
> 
> It's all so... weird.


all that is solid melts into air


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Farage was saying yesterday that its 'no deal or bust'.  If Johnson goes into a GE still saying he wants a deal than the Brexit Party will surely stand its candidates?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Pretty much where this inevitable petition is at:
> Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament



Yes, note the "Parliament must not be prorogued or dissolved unless and until the Article 50 period has been sufficiently extended or the UK's intention to withdraw from the EU has been cancelled"

It's basically a demand to overturn a democratic decision in the name of democracy


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Farage was saying yesterday that its 'no deal or bust'.  If Johnson goes into a GE still saying he wants a deal than the Brexit Party will surely stand its candidates?



In Labour seats only. Farage specifically floated a non-aggression pact with the Tories.


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> In Labour seats only. Farage specifically floated a non-aggression pact with the Tories.


He said they'd stand everywhere if there was no commitment to no deal from the tories. I don't know whether that would stand up to reality though.


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

He says he has 635 candidates ready to go, including her from Bucks Fizz, sounds highly plausible he'd do it


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> In Labour seats only. Farage specifically floated a non-aggression pact with the Tories.



Yeah but he's not stupid enough to cut a deal with Johnson which can easily be reneged upon.  He knows not to trust Johnson and its not beyond the realms of imagination that Johnson wins a GE with an increased majority and a suddenly produces a deal with the back stop slightly rebranded.  He could probably then get that through Parliament.

If its no deal or bust then they would have to stand their candidates.


----------



## klang (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> #


maybe after Brexit we are finally allowed to call it Pound Sign again.
#pound#


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> He said they'd stand everywhere if there was no commitment to no deal from the tories. I don't know whether that would stand up to reality though.



He did. But the chances of a deal a) being negotiable and b) the HoC voting for anything that isn't remain are vanishingly small.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, note the "Parliament must not be prorogued or dissolved unless and until the Article 50 period has been sufficiently extended or the UK's intention to withdraw from the EU has been cancelled"
> 
> It's basically a demand to overturn a democratic decision in the name of democracy


no, it isn't. what it is saying is 'we the undersigned believe that parliament must not be prorogued...' as all the signatories can realistically hope for is that it will be debated in the house of commons: there is no onus on parliament to even debate it, just to consider it. any debate would in any event not lead to a binding division.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

littleseb said:


> maybe after Brexit we are finally allowed to call it Pound Sign again.
> #pound#


# as usual


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, it isn't. what it is saying is 'we the undersigned believe that parliament must not be prorogued...' as all the signatories can realistically hope for is that it will be debated in the house of commons: there is no onus on parliament to even debate it, just to consider it. any debate would in any event not lead to a binding division.



It doesn't just say that. it says it mustn't be until Article 50 has been 'sufficiently extended' or the Referendum result overturned.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

I wonder how many people will lose their jobs and homes as a consequence of this. Not really funny or arch is it. Bye bye NHS.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm less confident of Johnson winning an election on that timetable. Brexit at any cost headbangers simply aren't a big enough contingent, and the shameless timing of the election would give the tories little chance of running on a domestic policy ticket and avoiding the elephant in the room.
> 
> Whatever Johnson's master plan is, it's not an actual plan but rather a more or less calculated guess at the best of a bad set of options.


Pure speculation at this point, but the tories were already ahead in the polls and would certainly go to the country with extra spending plans for education, health and law and order - not exactly negating what Labour would say about these policy areas, but certainly offering something to the voters. And on Brexit itself in a GE, whether it has taken place or is about to, what the fuck can _Labour _say? They can say Johnson has been reckless, but what is Labour's record on Brexit over the last 3 years?  Half arsed wittering driven designed to overcome the disagreements within Labour's ranks/electorate, but half arsed wittering all the same. There's a note of caution over what happened in 2017, but this isn't 2017. Labour don't have a  clear message and don't have a solid engagement with enough voters, even less so in terms of having a tight relationship with a _class_.

I might be getting carried away with myself here, but I'd predict the lib dems getting a higher share of the vote (perhaps not seats) than Labour if there's a GE in the next couple of months.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It doesn't just say that. it says it mustn't be until Article 50 has been 'sufficiently extended' or the Referendum result overturned.


yeh i meant the ...' to stand in for 'or dissolved unless and until the Article 50 period has been sufficiently extended or the UK's intention to withdraw from the EU has been cancelled' which i couldn't be arsed to type out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wonder how many people will lose their jobs and homes as a consequence of this. Not really funny or arch is it. Bye bye NHS.


with a spot of luck one boris de pfeffel johnson will be the first to lose his home and job over this


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Paul Mason has called a pro-democracy protest for tonight. The irony-ometer has just broken forever...


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> with a spot of luck one boris de pfeffel johnson will be the first to lose his home and job over this


He's rich enough to not be bothered. And he'll be well rewarded like Osborne and Cameron were.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Paul Mason has called a pro-democracy protest for tonight. The irony-ometer has just broken forever...



If it's pissing down in London, as it is up here, people can at least legitimately bring umbrellas.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I might be getting carried away with myself here, but I'd predict the lib dems getting a higher share of the vote (perhaps not seats) than Labour if there's a GE in the next couple of months.



Depends how much remainers really care about Brexit.  Labour will promise a referendum so if you care about it that much voting Labour (in any seat they have a reasonable chance of winning) would clearly be the best choice, in England and most of Wales anyway.  So the question comes down to referendum and Corbyn v not Corbyn.


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If it's pissing down in London, as it is up here, people can at least legitimately bring umbrellas.



Its not.  Its hot and sunny.  Maybe the heat has got to Mason.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its not.  Its hot and sunny.  Maybe the heat has got to Mason.


_People's Parasols for the Prevention of Prorogation._


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> He's rich enough to not be bothered. And he'll be well rewarded like Osborne and Cameron were.


i'd prefer him to be well rewarded like the duke of somerset was


Spoiler


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Paul Mason has called a pro-democracy protest for tonight. The irony-ometer has just broken forever...



never heard of this george v statue before


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Depends how much remainers really care about Brexit.  Labour will promise a referendum so if you care about it that much voting Labour (in any seat they have a reasonable chance of winning) would clearly be the best choice, in England and most of Wales anyway.  So the question comes down to referendum and Corbyn v not Corbyn.


… with the risk of losing some Labour-Tory marginals in the north and midlands. 

Actually, I should follow my own advice, it's daft trying to predict before the true line of events emerges. However I do think Johnson now has a clear(_ish_) route to getting another 5 years and, as part of that, some kind of Brexit in October/November with a minor tweak or two to May's deal/backstop.

Remainers and Labour are almost at the stage of hoping the Speaker and the Queen will save them from the darkness.


----------



## klang (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> never heard of this george v statue before


it's shit


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd prefer him to be well rewarded like the duke of somerset was
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Well me too. I'm thinking Persian though.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 28, 2019)

He's playing a dangerous game, If he prorogues Parliament it stops them trying to turf him out or force him to ask for an extension but he still needs the buggers sitting to get a Deal through or it's No Deal by default. If the EU (especially Ireland) won't budge on the backstop then it will be back to slapping a fresh coat of paint on May's Deal and giving them the chance (and a lot of them will be pissed with him) to vote it down.
So either we crash out with No Deal (which I really doubt he wants) or he goes back to ask for an extension which infuriates the faithful who thought he was the chosen one.
I agree with earlier posters though I don't think he has a master plan, he seems to be winging it on what seems to best for him personally (not the country or even the Tory Party) at the current moment in time.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

belboid said:


> He says he has 635 candidates ready to go, including her from Bucks Fizz, sounds highly plausible he'd do it



He’s making his mind up.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I might be getting carried away with myself here, but I'd predict the lib dems getting a higher share of the vote (perhaps not seats) than Labour if there's a GE in the next couple of months.



You're getting carried away I think.

As for Labour's record on brexit, they haven't been in government for the last three years. The party that has been in government has failed dismally on brexit by anyone's standards. If they call an election for before October 31st it will be because they know that all too well.


----------



## andysays (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wonder how many people will lose their jobs and homes as a consequence of this. Not really funny or arch is it. Bye bye NHS.


As a result of Johnson asking the Queen to close parliament a week earlier than it would otherwise have been?


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

Given the language being used by vocal remainers let's see what they're made of.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> You're getting carried away I think.
> 
> As for Labour's record on brexit, they haven't been in government for the last three years. The party that has been in government has failed dismally on brexit by anyone's standards. If they call an election for before October 31st it will be because they know that all too well.


But in a GE, will voters be thinking 'I definitely agree with what Labour have been saying all along on Brexit'? When Johnson says Labour have been pathetic, had no ideas, played it safe to meet their different constituencies on Brexit, what can Labour say back?


----------



## philosophical (Aug 28, 2019)

If a general election is called in October it will be a bit awkward for the (mainly young) voters who are dispersed at Universities.
Personally I assume the younger generation of all levels of educational accomplishment are a generation that won't vote in favour of division, hatred and fear.
I hope there is a way to encourage and help them to vote.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> As a result of Johnson asking the Queen to close parliament a week earlier than it would otherwise have been?


Nah. The no deal Brexit we're going to get.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Still, there's one good thing in all this - seeing Anna Soubry with steam coming out of her ears.


I'd rather see steam going into her ears.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If a general election is called in October it will be a bit awkward for the (mainly young) voters who are dispersed at Universities.
> Personally I assume the younger generation of all levels of educational accomplishment are a generation that won't vote in favour of division, hatred and fear.
> I hope there is a way to encourage and help them to vote.


there is and i imagine that as in previous years universities and student unions will assist students in registering to vote


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Nah. The no deal Brexit we're going to get.



At which point we could actually move forward to the deal bit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Nah. The no deal Brexit we're going to get.



You're gonna have to pay the server fund another £20


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> At which point we could actually move forward to the deal bit.


We'll see. Outcomes. It's all about outcomes. Everything else is froth and nonsense. Tick tock.


----------



## planetgeli (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I might be getting carried away with myself here, but I'd predict the lib dems getting a higher share of the vote (perhaps not seats) than Labour if there's a GE in the next couple of months.




I'll take that bet.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Just been confirmed that the Queen has agreed to the suspension of Parliament. 

Not that she had any choice.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> We'll see. Outcomes. It's all about outcomes. Everything else is froth and nonsense. Tick tock.



Well if anything the negitations have already started (finally) with Verhofsadt saying it'll cost 36 bi.   Gone a bit strange today and admitted that supressing debate is unlikely to lead to a stable EU - UK relationship.   Why he spent since 2016 refusing to discuss that is down to him


----------



## Flavour (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just been confirmed that the Queen has agreed to the suspension of Parliament.
> 
> Not that she had any choice.



at least now we can move past the hopeful, doe-eyed liberal monarchism phase of the day


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just been confirmed that the Queen has agreed to the suspension of Parliament.
> 
> Not that she had any choice.


all the queen's horses and all the queen's men
couldn't stop boris getting his prorogation


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> at least now we can move past the hopeful, doe-eyed liberal monarchism phase of the day


the queen will be spat at in the street by previously loyal remainers.

only it'll be that sort of messy spitting which people unused to gobbing do


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> I'll take that bet.


Okay, tenner for the server fund?

Fwiw, I only think the Libs get a higher vote than Labour in an election before or very soon after Brexit, thus the reference to a couple of months. After Brexit gets done, things won't return to normal but the point of voting Libdem for remainers recedes. That's not me reneging on any bets  just clarifying the political point I'm making.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the queen will be spat at in the street by previously loyal remainers.
> 
> only it'll be that sort of messy spitting which people unused to gobbing do


((( Dribblers))))


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just been confirmed that the Queen has agreed to the suspension of Parliament.



Did anyone specify that it wasn't by the neck?


----------



## planetgeli (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Okay, tenner for the server fund?
> 
> Fwiw, I only think the Libs get a higher vote than Labour in an election before or very soon after Brexit, thus the reference to a couple of months. After Brexit gets done, things won't return to normal but the point of voting Libdem for remainers recedes. That's not me reneging on any bets  just clarifying the political point I'm making.



Ok.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> Well if anything the negitations have already started (finally) with Verhofsadt saying it'll cost 36 bi.   Gone a bit strange today and admitted that supressing debate is unlikely to lead to a stable EU - UK relationship.   Why he spent since 2016 refusing to discuss that is down to him


They're not going to budge. And I don't blame them. If they do you'll get the Troubles starting off in NI and the end of the European project. Which for all its neo liberal faults was designed to keep peace on the continent. Opposing that is a bunch of hard right English chancers and international financial speculators. With big positions on the consequences of a no deal.


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

Some mad shit on this thread today. Chill out lads.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Apparently Anna Soubrey has just asked for a meeting with the queen. She carries all our hopes with her, save us Anna!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently Anna Soubrey has just asked for a meeting with the queen. She carries all our hopes with her, save us Anna!


never mind our hopes, what's she packing?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently Anna Soubrey has just asked for a meeting with the queen. She carries all our hopes with her, save us Anna!



And, the Queen replies with (a) who the fuck are you?, or just (b) fuck off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, the Queen replies with (a) who the fuck are you?, or just (b) fuck off.


will anna soubry prove to be a modern-day john felton?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> never mind our hopes, what's she packing?


Her independence. Sorry, I mean her TIG, sorry I mean her CHUK...


----------



## Combustible (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently Anna Soubrey has just asked for a meeting with the queen. She carries all our hopes with her, save us Anna!



All those meetings about her nonce son suddenly musn't seem so bad in comparison


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Her independence. Sorry, I mean her TIG, sorry I mean her CHUK...


i was hoping for her ppk


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But in a GE, will voters be thinking 'I definitely agree with what Labour have been saying all along on Brexit'? When Johnson says Labour have been pathetic, had no ideas, played it safe to meet their different constituencies on Brexit, what can Labour say back?



He can say 'you've got no plan but to crash out and no way to achieve that besides overruling parliament'.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently Anna Soubrey has just asked for a meeting with the queen. She carries all our hopes with her, save us Anna!



Her right as a Privy Councillor.   Hope it is a 2 way though, her 'I represent all my constituents' was a bit galling.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> Her right as a Privy Councillor.   Hope it is a 2 way though, her I represent all my constituents was a bit galling.


Apparently there will be a meeting of the privy council at Balmoral today. Perhaps they just forgot to invite her?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently there will be a meeting of the privy council at Balmoral today. Perhaps they just "forgot" to invite her?


c4u


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> c4u


"Anna? Oh, _Anna_. It's probably too late to ring her now, she'll be having her tea".


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> "Anna? Oh, _Anna_. It's probably too late to ring her now, she'll be having her tea".


anna? she always brings the vibe down.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

From the YouGov poll mentioned earlier


----------



## hash tag (Aug 28, 2019)

Not sure this will help, but here it is Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament


----------



## teuchter (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the queen will be spat at in the street by previously loyal remainers.
> 
> only it'll be that sort of messy spitting which people unused to gobbing do



Which sort of spitting do you do?


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

This is a coup.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Not sure this will help, but here it is Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament


Yep, after 3 years of this nonsense a petition is definitely the thing that will sort it all out.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Not sure this will help, but here it is Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament



It will not, the order has been sign by the Queen.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> Not sure this will help, but here it is Petition: Do not prorogue Parliament



First sign my petition to get them to stop ignoring petitions.


----------



## andysays (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> This is a coup.


It's really not, you know


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> This is a coup.


No, it's a parliamentary manoeuvre - by a twat with no principles, but a manoeuvre nonetheless. I'm not a Brexiteer, but in liberal democratic theory waffle it's just about a score draw in terms of who is fucking who over. When all's said and done, there was a referendum vote in favour of leave, even if it wasn't specifically for Johnson's version.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Opposing that is a bunch of hard right English chancers and *international financial speculators. With big positions on the consequences of a no deal*.



This is repeated so often (by you along with others) that it seems to have become a truth. Please can you name names of who are these speculators with the big positions and where they have placed them to make that killing once a no deal Brexit happens?


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> This is a coup.


A storm in a tea coup.


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

People calling this a coup either need to choose their words more carefully or take up arms and get on the streets.


----------



## andysays (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is repeated so often (by you along with others) that it seems to have become a truth. Please can you name names of who are these speculators with the big positions and where they have placed them to make that killing once a no deal Brexit happens?


Fancy making a few bob yourself at this late stage?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Which sort of spitting do you do?


on those rare occasions i spit i am a tidy - and accurate - spitter


----------



## klang (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i was hoping for her ppk


can't see her joining the pkk tbh.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Fancy making a few bob yourself at this late stage?


Unlike me, I've already lost a tenner to the server fund.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

Given how many of our Politicans are Privy Council I rarely imagine many are fully attended, especially one at thbe other end of the UK.  But sounds like Anna Soubry has a justified reason to feel aggrieved, and, as a qualified Barrister an opion that may be of import. But it is only Council, or should be. That we have a Sovereign AND Sovereignty means she gets to make her own mind up.

I am glad it is her, she can at least remember what was said and done in the 70's and since


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, the Queen replies with (a) who the fuck are you?, or just (b) fuck off.



Or _Maggie? But you’re dead you evil cow!_


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

littleseb said:


> can't see her joining the pkk tbh.


----------



## andysays (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Unlike me, I've already lost a tenner to the server fund.


I'm sure Bahnhof Strasse would donate his winnings to the server fund


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> Given how many of our Politicans are Privy Council I rarely imagine many are fully attended, especially one at thbe other end of the UK.  But sounds like she has a justified reason to feel aggrieved, and, as a qualified Barrister an opion that may be of import. But it is only Council, or should be. That we have a Sovereign AND Sovereignty means she gets to make her own mind up.
> 
> I am glad it is her, she can at least remember what was said and done in the 70's and since



One report was only 'x' number of Privy Council members were required to make this official, IIRC 'x' is 3.


----------



## teuchter (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> on those rare occasions i spit i am a tidy - and accurate - spitter


So you claim to have virtually no practice and yet are highly proficient.


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

Rob Ford's thread here is worth reading - I more or less agree with him that this isn't about forcing no deal, rather reducing the options so that whatever deal Johnson finally brings back to parliament is the only way to avoid no deal.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm sure Bahnhof Strasse would donate his winnings to the server fund



10% of all returns once Ming fills me in on the deets.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is repeated so often (by you along with others) that it seems to have become a truth. Please can you name names of who are these speculators with the big positions and where they have placed them to make that killing once a no deal Brexit happens?


Hedge funds make big bets against post-Brexit UK economy


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So you claim to have virtually no practice and yet are highly proficient.


it's another example of you trying to drag a thread of topic


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

JRM's firm's doing rather well also (google it).


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

I've just finished work. Should I head for Westminster in the hope of participating in revolutionary insurection, or should I just go home and do the washing?


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This is repeated so often (by you along with others) that it seems to have become a truth. Please can you name names of who are these speculators with the big positions and where they have placed them to make that killing once a no deal Brexit happens?



But that’s sort of obvious though. The well off have become even more so post crash. While you were making ends meet, they were buying assets low. 

They may not twiddle a moustache and go ‘muhahahahaha’ or even have actual positions predicated on a meltdown, it just works either way for them. Their sense will be that a disruptive strategy pays off. Their position is ‘low tax, low regulation’.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Hedge funds make big bets against post-Brexit UK economy



Anything that isn't from the Guardian from before the March 31st date?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> Rob Ford's thread here is worth reading - I more or less agree with him that this isn't about forcing no deal, rather reducing the options so that whatever deal Johnson finally brings back to parliament is the only way to avoid no deal.



Exactly May's plan wasn't it?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

tim said:


> I've just finished work. Should I head for Westminster in the hope of participating in revolutionary insurection, or should I just go home and do the washing?



Washing.


----------



## dessiato (Aug 28, 2019)

From the BBC

BBC News - Parliament to be suspended in September
Parliament to be suspended in September


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> Rob Ford's thread here is worth reading - I more or less agree with him that this isn't about forcing no deal, rather reducing the options so that whatever deal Johnson finally brings back to parliament is the only way to avoid no deal.



I'd have thought once we get through the posturing and the pompous outrage of today, that's what he hopes for. I'm not sure how a vonc next week might affect that scenario, but then I'm not entirely sure a vonc would get through (even amid the florid posturing and the Speaker's undoubted facilitation for a vonc).


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Exactly May's plan wasn't it?


It's all anyone's plan is.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> JRM's firm's doing rather well also (google it).


And OMG individual tax avosion!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's all anyone's plan is.


Those who have been in UK government in this time, yes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> One report was only 'x' number of Privy Council members were required to make this official, IIRC 'x' is 3.



Yep, 3 ...



> The Prime Minister spoke personally on the phone to Her Majesty before a meeting attended by Commons Leader Jacob Rees-Mogg , Lords Leader Baroness Evans and Chief Whip Mark Spencer.
> 
> Queen approves Boris Johnson's request to shut down Parliament for a month


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Those who have been in UK government in this time, yes.


and the opposition


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yep, 3 ...


Small Council is small. Lets poison that blond haired twat Joffrey...


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Anything that isn't from the Guardian from before the March 31st date?


If you think that's the only one you're very naive. Hedge funds and speculators generally don't tend to advertise their positions.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> and the opposition


I think that Corbyn and the EU could/would come to some other arrangement with far more time and give that wouldn't come down to either this or no deal - and that labour have both been operating on that understanding. That doesn't mean i'd be in favour of that mind. But if you mean it's deal or no deal then of course, they are the only options short of not leaving so aren't really a sign of lack of vision or deliberate manipulation - that's all there could be.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Anyway, i thought the lib-dems and that had already ruled that no-deal brexit is impossible. They had a vote and that. Feel their IRON FIST.


----------



## killer b (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think that Corbyn and the EU could/would come to some other arrangement with far more time and give that wouldn't come down to either this or no deal - and that labour have both been operating on that understanding. That doesn't mean i'd be in favour of that mind. But if you mean it's deal or no deal then of course, they are the only options short of not leaving so aren't really a sign of lack of vision or deliberate manipulation - that's all there could be.


ah no, I didn't mean that Corbyn wanted to make this a binary choice between no deal / his deal: but that the only strategy any of them have right now under current conditions is to try and narrow it down to a binary choice and force a decision. This is the government's latest stab at it.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Anyway, i thought the lib-dems and that had already ruled that no-deal brexit is impossible. They had a vote and that. Feel their IRON FIST.


When the queen fails to defend democracy, Caroline Lucas and the speaker have to save the day.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

killer b said:


> Rob Ford's thread here is worth reading - I more or less agree with him that this isn't about forcing no deal, rather reducing the options so that whatever deal Johnson finally brings back to parliament is the only way to avoid no deal.



Someone on sky news saying the same this morning. 

There are Labour MPs like Kinnock who have been saying for six months or more that a deal needs to be passed and then that can be amended at the second reading to require a confirmatory referendum (and presumably now an extension to allow time)


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

tim said:


> I've just finished work. Should I head for Westminster in the hope of participating in revolutionary insurection, or should I just go home and do the washing?



weather forecast reckon rain about 9 oclock


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

John Major now saying he'll mount a legal challenge to Johnson's move.  All part of the pompous flim flam adding up to precisely nothing of course, but still quite odd to see a previous PM mounting a legal challenge against a successor.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> John Major now saying he'll mount a legal challenge to Johnson's move.  All part of the pompous flim flam adding up to precisely of course, but still quite odd to see a previous PM mounting a legal challenge against a successor.


what you really want to see is john major leading a charge by the grenadier guards against the armed police at downing street


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Saw a few tweets calling for a general strike obviously not by anyone who is in a position of delivering one. Tbh would many people actually miss parliament if it was suspended?



General Strike to restore parliament!

We are living in strange times indeed - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what you really want to see is john major leading a charge by the grenadier guards against the armed police at downing street



I’d buy tickets to watch that.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> General Strike to restore parliament!
> 
> We are living in strange times indeed - Louis MacNeice


All hail the sovereign power of the people who oppress us in their battle against the slightly different group of people who oppress us!


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> weather forecast reckon rain about 9 oclock



And Owen Jones says we should all be on the streets at 5. 30 to the stop the coup.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> General Strike to restore parliament!
> 
> We are living in strange times indeed - Louis MacNeice



I've just had a text from a mate, who's a republican, saying how pissed-off he is with the Queen for not refusing the PM's request.

We are living in ironic times indeed.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> All hail the sovereign power of the people who oppress us in their battle against the slightly different group of people who oppress us!


Oh, yeah, and sign the petition to overturn the decision made by, erm, us!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

5.30 IRON FISTS in hand.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We are living in ironic times indeed.


 Jo Swinson nailed on for the Nobel Peace Prize this year!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Disappointed sinn fein haven't petitioned ol' lizzy for a rendezvous yet


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 28, 2019)

You have to laugh really . It’s comedy gold


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> 5.30 IRON FISTS in hand.


_LONG LIVE THE FIGHTERS!_


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I've just had a text from a mate, who's a republican, saying how pissed-off he is with the Queen for not refusing the PM's request.
> 
> We are living in ironic times indeed.


IRON FIST times. All to the front!


----------



## rutabowa (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Disappointed sinn fein haven't petitioned ol' lizzy for a rendezvous yet


If the queen can't save us maybe sinn fein can!


----------



## redcogs (Aug 28, 2019)

Just signed a online petition to stop the Boris junta! Obviously it wont work, so im hoping the TUC will call a general strike before the arrest of Len mccluskey.  im fully expecting the sky to fall in next.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

_VICTORY TO THE JAMIE OLIVER COLUMN!_


----------



## redcogs (Aug 28, 2019)

Lenin and trotsky wouldnt have stood for all this parliamentary tomfoolery.  Time to disperse the hise of commons!

Oh, Boris already done it!


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

Actually, can't the Freemen of the Land sort this out? They seem to know a few courtroom tricks.

Cast forth your REAL NAME against the Satanic Rees-Mogg!


----------



## hash tag (Aug 28, 2019)

We can just rant and rave about things, or Sponsor UK Parliament: Don’t shut down Parliament! #StopTheCoup


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Anything that isn't from the Guardian from before the March 31st date?


https://www.ft.com/content/7095b307-46b5-355f-a881-78cf9d57ce83
ETA : If you require more then i'm sure google will provide.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> We can just rant and rave about things, or Sponsor UK Parliament: Don’t shut down Parliament! #StopTheCoup



i don't know where they're getting their coffee from but i'm sure they could get it rather cheaper than a fiver a pop


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Just signed a online petition to stop the Boris junta! Obviously it wont work, so im hoping the TUC will call a general strike before the arrest of Len mccluskey.  im fully expecting the sky to fall in next.



Yes and fuck strike ballots off too now. The government has set a precedent that voting means fuck all.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> We can just rant and rave about things, or Sponsor UK Parliament: Don’t shut down Parliament! #StopTheCoup


Is this an annual thing?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

hash tag said:


> We can just rant and rave about things, or Sponsor UK Parliament: Don’t shut down Parliament! #StopTheCoup



People are donating money for a petition that'll go nowhere, how very odd.

Who the hell gets the money?


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> People are donating money for a petition that'll go nowhere, how very odd.
> 
> Who the hell gets the money?



The piper who tells us the tune we are getting.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> People are donating money for a petition that'll go nowhere, how very odd.
> 
> Who the hell gets the money?


Facebook I imagine.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> People are donating money for a petition that'll go nowhere, how very odd.
> 
> Who the hell gets the money?


Joke isn't it. Just get filed in the bin. The referendum was the only real opportunity we had. And that was a towering pile of lies and manipulation.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

This thread is about to reach 1000 pages, unless of course Editor Prorogues it.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> People are donating money for a petition that'll go nowhere, how very odd.
> 
> Who the hell gets the money?


Lots and lots of it too. Is this all they can do though - our darkest hour and all they can do is chip in a fiver? No digging up the IRON FIST where their partisan/republican grandad hid it? O


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> And that was a towering pile of lies and manipulation.



They have had two thousand plus years practice.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Joke isn't it. Just get filed in the bin. The referendum was the only real opportunity we had. And that was a towering pile of lies and manipulation.


And it was taken. Exactly because it was the only opp at this level. Did you get to vote a few thousand miles away?


----------



## redcogs (Aug 28, 2019)

i always wondered how the next civil war might begin.  would we get a letter, possibly an email urging attendance at a barricade?  No, its just a 5:30 call from softie Owen Jones ..  Pass me a molotov quick while i sharpen me bayonet


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> The piper who tells us the tune we are getting.



Your stairway lies on the whispering wind.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Your stairway lies on the whispering wind.



Hippies eh!


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> They have had two thousand plus years practice.


Old as sin.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Lots and lots of it too. Is this all they can do though - our darkest hour and all they can do is chip in a fiver? No digging up the IRON FIST where their partisan/republican grandad hid it? O



Not just a fiver, loads are donating £20 or even £25. 

I am going to have to look into this, perhaps starting petitions could be an easy profitable second income.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not just a fiver, loads are donating £20 or even £25.
> 
> I am going to have to look into this, perhaps starting petitions could be an easy profitable second income.


A little monkey man like chris williamson did 75 grand in two hours to sue labour. Lots of people with more money than sense - and it's often those who can least afford it.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> General Strike to restore parliament!
> 
> We are living in strange times indeed - Louis MacNeice



Who wants no Parliament? Every form of social organisation will have a law making forum unless we want corporations or warlords and life brutish and short. We just don’t want it filled with lackeys and toffs reflecting the way the world is currently rigged.

If this is where the old establishment choose to stand their ground then bring on the bunfight. The new elites are another matter.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

We will know when the government is concerned about civil unrest. They will ban sales of glass bottles, petrol and washing-up liquid.
Oh, and matches.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not just a fiver, loads are donating £20 or even £25.
> 
> I am going to have to look into this, perhaps starting petitions could be an easy profitable second income.


Someone just chucked in 97! Mad!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> We will know when the government is concerned about civil unrest. They will ban sales of glass bottles, petrol and washing-up liquid.
> Oh, and matches.


Don't let them know that we know the little secret...


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not just a fiver, loads are donating £20 or even £25.
> 
> I am going to have to look into this, perhaps starting petitions could be an easy profitable second income.


Do a 'fund my holiday' type crowd fund request. Mention your grandma is working 3 jobs to support your spiritual journeys but then set the minimum donation at 5 quid (which means the donator can leave a comment). Lots of people will want to leave less than complimentary messages but it'll cost them a fiver for the privilege. You'll make loads!!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Someone just chucked in 97! Mad!


Bliar tony  i bet


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Someone just chucked in 97! Mad!



As if giving money to causes is effective.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

This is all to distract from the big news of the day.  VINCE CABLE IS RETIRING!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Who wants no Parliament? Every form of social organisation will have a law making forum unless we want corporations or warlords and life brutish and short. We just don’t want it filled with lackeys and toffs reflecting the way the world is currently rigged.
> 
> If this is where the old establishment choose to stand their ground then bring on the bunfight. The new elites are another matter.


Do you think the parliament has been closed forever?

I'd like parliament gone forever because it is just that thing you claim it opposes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> This is all to distract from the big news of the day.  VINCE CABLE IS RETIRING!



Who?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> This is all to distract from the big news of the day.  VINCE CABLE IS RETIRING!


he should have retired a while back to provoke a more timely by-election


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Don't let them know that we know the little secret...



Yes, matches.


----------



## gosub (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who?


that tree in the woods that fell over when nobody was looking


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who?


Only the single person globally who predicted the 2008 crisis then took part in aggressively making it worse for the worst off  - the IRON FIST has been handed over. Anyway, after killing them nigerian anti-sholl activists isn't this like the 10th time that he's retired?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Yes, matches.


Oh that's their job...


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> This is all to distract from the big news of the day.  VINCE CABLE IS RETIRING!



He’s had more returns than Debenhams.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 28, 2019)

Queen Elizabeth II (royal house of Saxe-Coburg&Gotha) has consented to a submission from Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Lord Rees Mogg and other members of her Privy Council, to close down Parliament as elected by the people.

Yes, it's another crushing blow to the elite.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Do you think the parliament has been closed forever?
> 
> I'd like parliament gone forever because it is just that thing you claim it opposes.



No, I’m not saying the reaction isn’t a bit OTT, but I’m not against a bit of outrage about the principle if it looks likely to have any traction.

Parliament for sure protects private property. But it also protects an individuals right not to be killed, provides services and laws on complex human matters. Blame the game that is private property and capital not the backdrop it’s (partly) played on.


----------



## taffboy gwyrdd (Aug 28, 2019)

I once did the easy calculation of how long it would take Cable, on a ministers salary, to pay back the £1bn he lost us by selling off our mail service to spivs. 

I forget the answer, but it was a fucking long time.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

taffboy gwyrdd said:


> Queen Elizabeth II (royal house of Saxe-Coburg&Gotha) has consented to a submission from Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Lord Rees Mogg and other members of her Privy Council, to close down Parliament as elected by the people.
> 
> Yes, it's another crushing blow to the elite.


Is this an annual thing with you?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Labour Party in Sheffield have called a demo against the Parliamentary shutdown. Small print says it is also against a no deal Brexit. Bizarre. 

Am I misreading this or are they essentially protesting against a General Election? Wouldn't be the first time, in 2017 a lot of the Sheffield Labour left said it was irresponsible to have a GE and didn't want one.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Aug 28, 2019)

I'm fucked off. I wonder what Gaz's Rockin Blues stage was about at Carnival last weekend?


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

I just want to post on the 1000th page tbh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> I just want to post on the 1000th page tbh.



I've done it twice. #Winning


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Ruth Davidson to quit as Scots Tory leader amid clashes with Boris Johnson



> Ruth Davidson is to step down from her role as Scottish Conservative leader.
> 
> Davidson, 40, sensationally announced plans to step down from her role after being 'at odds' with Prime Minister Boris Johnson over Brexit.
> 
> It comes after the Queen approved plans from Johnson to suspend Parliament to force through his no-deal Brexit plans.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

Ah well.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Is this circus going to wake more people up to the myth of parliamentary democracy or put their faith in it (as gina miller has already won once  - the state says!)?


----------



## kenny g (Aug 28, 2019)

Would be hilarious if the scot tories joined up with the SNP .


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Would be hilarious if the scot tories joined up with the SNP .


Like an old family meeting.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is this circus going to wake more people up to the myth of parliamentary democracy or put their faith in it (as gina miller has already won once  - the state says!)?



We can live in hope that it's the former.


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Labour Party in Sheffield have called a demo against the Parliamentary shutdown. Small print says it is also against a no deal Brexit. Bizarre.
> 
> Am I misreading this or are they essentially protesting against a General Election? Wouldn't be the first time, in 2017 a lot of the Sheffield Labour left said it was irresponsible to have a GE and didn't want one.



Why is that bizarre? 

And no, I don't think they're protesting against a GE, rather against the means of getting there.


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Labour Party in Sheffield have called a demo against the Parliamentary shutdown. Small print says it is also against a no deal Brexit. Bizarre.
> 
> Am I misreading this or are they essentially protesting against a General Election? Wouldn't be the first time, in 2017 a lot of the Sheffield Labour left said it was irresponsible to have a GE and didn't want one.


You're misreading it.

Not sure why you think this bit is bizarre, Labour has always been against No Deal, and in favour of it being decided in a parliament. Hence it is always going to oppose a suspension of parliament to push trough No Deal


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> Why is that bizarre?
> 
> And no, I don't think they're protesting against a GE, rather against the means of getting there.


I can imagine Corbyn smiling, knowing this move makes a GE more likely. But he still has to be seen to oppose it, as he'd just agreed to a different tactic to buy over the people he needs to win a VONC


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> We can live in hope that it's the former.


I don't think the myth of PD exists beyond bennites powellites and suddenly interested liberals to be fair.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Like an old family meeting.



Campbells not invited.


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Ruth Davidson to quit as Scots Tory leader amid clashes with Boris Johnson



I keep forgetting they have more than one MP now.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 28, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I keep forgetting they have more than one MP now.


She’s an MSP.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> Why is that bizarre?
> 
> And no, I don't think they're protesting against a GE, rather against the means of getting there.



That's what seems bizarre - we do want a GE, but we don't approve of how it's going to happen. Why not just have a protest demanding a GE? 



belboid said:


> You're misreading it.
> 
> Not sure why you think this bit is bizarre, Labour has always been against No Deal, and in favour of it being decided in a parliament. Hence it is always going to oppose a suspension of parliament to push trough No Deal



I didn't mean the no deal stuff so much as what looks effectively like a protest against a GE. 




belboid said:


> I can imagine Corbyn smiling, knowing this move makes a GE more likely. But he still has to be seen to oppose it, as he'd just agreed to a different tactic to buy over the people he needs to win a VONC



Hmmmm, not sure about that. Does his plan involve being a caretaker PM with the support of the Lib Dems? He might think that's a good idea but I'm not sure if it's great for his chances in a GE.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> She’s an MSP.



Along with another 30 plus I think.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Along with another 30 plus I think.


Yup. Due to PR, there’s always been a sizeable Tory presence in Holyrood.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. Due to PR, there’s always been a sizeable Tory presence in Holyrood.


And the SNP


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Me


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's what seems bizarre - we do want a GE, but we don't approve of how it's going to happen. Why not just have a protest demanding a GE?
> 
> I didn't mean the no deal stuff so much as what looks effectively like a protest against a GE.



It's a little mixed up, sure, but not protesting something as significant as this (at least from a parliamentary politics POV) would be batshit.


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hmmmm, not sure about that. Does his plan involve being a caretaker PM with the support of the Lib Dems? He might think that's a good idea but I'm not sure if it's great for his chances in a GE.


It's the only way he can become PM, of course he needs their votes! And, in Sheffield certainly, it's a good way of getting back votes from people who might be tempted to switch to the libs.  It will play less well in Barnsley, but putting stress son opposing No Deal  will mitigate that _a bit_


----------



## planetgeli (Aug 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yup. Due to PR, there’s always been a sizeable Tory presence in Holyrood.



Read that as 'Hollywood' and it still made sense.


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Read that as 'Hollywood' and it still made sense.



Thankfully something is today.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> It's a little mixed up, sure, but not protesting something as significant as this (at least from a parliamentary politics POV) would be batshit.



Yeah fair I mean they have to do something, I just think a 'GE Now' protest would come across better. Also I think they should have done it two years ago. But there you go.


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

The Ruth Davidson thing is also significant in that she's something of a centrist icon. Again, I mean significant in quite a limited sense of course. But significant to centrists looking for guiding figures on what they can get away with/where to throw their hats.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

belboid said:


> It's the only way he can become PM, of course he needs their votes! And, in Sheffield certainly, it's a good way of getting back votes from people who might be tempted to switch to the libs.  It will play less well in Barnsley, but putting stress son opposing No Deal  will mitigate that _a bit_



He could win a GE? That's a way he could actually be PM and not a caretaker that can only do things the Lib Dems support. 

I'm not so convinced about the VoNC route anyway, what's to stop them supporting someone else once it's passed? Not that that would be a bad thing like, his chances in a GE would be improved by not being a part of that lash up.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> It's a little mixed up, sure, but not protesting something as significant as this (at least from a parliamentary politics POV) would be batshit.


Congratulations on post number 30,000 I think you should go back and edit it to something more appropriate for such a momentous occasion


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> Congratulations on post number 30,000 I think you should go back and edit it to something more appropriate for such a momentous occasion



butchersapron 's seminal 'me' post is 30000. Least far as I can see.


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> butchersapron 's seminal 'me' post is 30000. Least far as I can see.


No I think yours is

Edit - this is 30,009 so working back to 30,000 is the first on this page


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> No I think yours is



It says the number on the bottom right of each post.

You got me excited as well.

Arsehole.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> It says the number on the bottom right of each post.
> 
> You got me excited as well.
> 
> Arsehole.


Oh yeah it does on desktop version... I just realised the numbers on the forum main page are replies so yours was 30,000 + 1. Well I'm glad I cleared that up


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> Oh yeah it does on desktop version... I just realised the numbers on the forum main page are replies so yours was 30,000 + 1. Well I'm glad I cleared that up


Binka humiliated, once more. How does it feel to be the mother of a thousand defeats?


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

Labour's doing an internally managed petition now.

Not that I get labour party emails obviously. Have to be a complete tool to have joined labour in the Corbyn glory days. And that's not me eh folks?


----------



## binka (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Binka humiliated, once more. How does it feel to be the mother of a thousand defeats?


I'm just glad none of my mates are here to see it, I'd never live it down


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> I'm just glad none of my mates are here to see it, I'd never live it down


Clever. Too clever. 

I don't get it.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> Why is that bizarre?
> 
> And no, I don't think they're protesting against a GE, rather against the means of getting there.



11pm start, not sure what impact it will have locally.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> She’s an MSP.


Deftly handled like when they try and say Scottish pounds aren’t legal tender.


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> Labour's doing an internally managed petition now.


That's certain to put the shits up Johnson and Co big time


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

Is Nick Clegg sitting on a tank yet?


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> 11pm start, not sure what impact it will have locally.



Well at 11pm at least they'll get the crowds coming out the pubs...

(it's 11am)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is Nick Clegg sitting on a tank yet?


He'll be first against the wall


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

binka said:


> I'm just glad none of my mates are here to see it, I'd never live it down


Didn't realise you had no urban pals 

Binka no-mates


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is Nick Clegg sitting on a tank yet?



What's all this coup shite? A fucking coup?? Middle aged remainers stood outside the hornets nest in London, draped in the EU flag, wearing EU hats waving placards saying 'Stop The Coup' - am I on another fucking planet?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> Well at 11pm at least they'll get the crowds coming out the pubs...
> 
> (it's 11am)


treelover will be there at 23:00 wondering where the masses are


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 28, 2019)

Online fucking petitions Stop The Coup!! Switch off the fucking internet & lets return back to 1991 & fuck their shit up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> What's all this coup shite? A fucking coup?? Middle aged remainers stood outside the hornets nest in London, draped in the EU flag, wearing EU hats waving placards saying 'Stop The Coup' - am I on another fucking planet?


When the raf swoop in and start bombing parliament square it won't be so genteel


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> He'll be first against the wall



Book Nick Clegg UK Former Deputy Prime Minister, Keynote Speaker


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Book Nick Clegg UK Former Deputy Prime Minister, Keynote Speaker


Oh he's been booked for months, but he'll get a shock when he turns up and finds out he's turned up for his own funeral


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not. Polystyrene pot maybe, ramekin no. Ramekin's are for souffles and creme brulee not mushy peas leave means leave


I agree but will have to dock you 5 prole points for knowing what souffles and cream brulee are served in. And another 5 for apparently knowing what the fuck a ramekin even is.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I agree but will have to dock you 5 prole points for knowing what souffles and cream brulee are served in. And another 5 for apparently knowing what the fuck a ramekin even is.



Know thine enemy. And what they eat


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Oh he's been booked for months, but he'll get a shock when he turns up and finds out he's turned up for his own funeral



GoFundMe: No.1 in Free Fundraising and Crowdfunding Online


----------



## Wilf (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is Nick Clegg sitting on a tank yet?


Now that the cunt works for facebook he's basically Neo. Neo will fight for us sheeple against the machines.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> GoFundMe: No.1 in Free Fundraising and Crowdfunding Online


It will be nick clegg in the library with the lead pipe


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 28, 2019)

I'm considering starting a conspiracy theory in one of the loon forums about Boris secretly being a Russian commie (hence the name and his claims that Boris bikes were a little bit communism) who's planning to destroy democracy and bring in a commie dictatorship. The suspension of Parliament is his first step. 

I know this is basically what guardian liberals actually think but could I get someone a bit less credulous - like a conspiraloon - to believe it too?


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> Book Nick Clegg UK Former Deputy Prime Minister, Keynote Speaker


20 odd years ago I was at an event organised where the Keynote Speaker was Bob Monkhouse, I heard later that my employer had spent something like £10K on booking him but he was really witty and funny, I could see what they had got for their money. 
Somehow I can't see Nick Clegg giving the same value.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

The Iron Fist gathers:


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> https://www.ft.com/content/7095b307-46b5-355f-a881-78cf9d57ce83
> ETA : If you require more then i'm sure google will provide.


Did you read that article? It's from the 8th of February and suggests that Rees-Mogg has done nothing untoward. Not the line that you seem to be pushing.


----------



## a_chap (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It will be nick clegg in the library with the lead pipe



You have a lead pipe?

Now all you do is tempt him to visit...


----------



## chilango (Aug 28, 2019)

What's that starry plough doing there?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

a_chap said:


> You have a lead pipe?
> 
> Now all you do is tempt him to visit...


Booked him months ago


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The Iron Fist gathers:
> 
> View attachment 182358


Pimms Hall putsch.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> 20 odd years ago I was at an event organised where the Keynote Speaker was Bob Monkhouse, I heard later that my employer had spent something like £10K on booking him but he was really witty and funny, I could see what they had got for their money.
> Somehow I can't see Nick Clegg giving the same value.


I haven't booked him for his wit and repartee


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Pimms Hall putsch.


The craft beer coup


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Who wants no Parliament?


Me, William Morris, pretty much every communist and anarchist ever.


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'm considering starting a conspiracy theory in one of the loon forums about Boris secretly being a Russian commie (hence the name and his claims that Boris bikes were a little bit communism) who's planning to destroy democracy and bring in a commie dictatorship. The suspension of Parliament is his first step.
> 
> I know this is basically what guardian liberals actually think but could I get someone a bit less credulous - like a conspiraloon - to believe it too?


Essentially the basis of Trotsky’s Run. In the end (spoiler alert) I think he’s offed thanks to dodgy coke...


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> What's that starry plough doing there?



Seems counterproductive... surely best to just let Johnson (forgive me) plough on.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

chilango said:


> What's that starry plough doing there?


They're going down the ICA to see F&F later.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I'd prefer a less messy, grassy knoll solution



Not many grassy knolls around Whitehall and Westminster. Maybe a Parliament Sq solution?


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

General strike?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> General strike?


Might as well, 93 years since the last one


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Might as well, 93 years since the last one


Do what thou wilt and all of that...

Seems like the perfect time


----------



## ViolentPanda (Aug 28, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I agree but will have to dock you 5 prole points for knowing what souffles and cream brulee are served in. And another 5 for apparently knowing what the fuck a ramekin even is.



Off to South Georgia with him!


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

One of the highlights of today has been the remain mob demanding a general strike.

Leaving aside the fact that it’s the defence of EU neoliberalism and MP wankers that has provoked their insistence, and not say - Thatcher, The Miners, the poll tax, austerity, poverty or collapsing services - it betrays both their instinctive anti-democratic impulses (we demand the proles strike) and naivety at how unions actually work in practise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> One of the highlights of today has been the remain mob demanding a general strike.
> 
> Leaving aside the fact that it’s the defence of EU neoliberalism and MP wankers that has provoked their insistence, and not say - Thatcher, The Miners, the poll tax, austerity, poverty or collapsing services - it betrays both their instinctive anti-democratic impulses (we demand the proles strike) and naivety at how unions actually work in practise.


You know they'd be the first to screech at the disruption any general strike caused


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

The Iron Fist clenches:


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You know they'd be the first to screech at the disruption any general strike caused



“When I demanded a general strike I didn’t mean the tube, I’ve got to get to the fucking office”


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Me, William Morris, pretty much every communist and anarchist ever.



It’s not worth a thread derail, but actually I’m sure you do. You’ll throw a ton of sophistry at it, but you still want organisation. 

Think of how complex many spheres are from road transport to genetic medicine. You need debate, oversight, regulation, international relations blah blah. It doesn’t have to be the same Parliament, same MPs, same parties, to the same venal purposes but you will want organisation and law.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

who is behind the 'March, Strike, Occupy' placards, Another Europe? don't think they are branded


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Who wants no Parliament? Every form of social organisation will have a law making forum unless we want corporations or warlords and life brutish and short. We just don’t want it filled with lackeys and toffs reflecting the way the world is currently rigged.
> 
> If this is where the old establishment choose to stand their ground then bring on the bunfight. The new elites are another matter.


No one denies the need for an assembly, for delegates to arrange large scale decisions. Many, many people object to the bizarre anti-democratic body we have now


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s not worth a thread derail, but actually I’m sure you do. You’ll throw a ton of sophistry at it, but you still want organisation.
> 
> Think of how complex many spheres are from road transport to genetic medicine. You need debate, oversight, regulation, international relations blah blah. It doesn’t have to be the same Parliament, same MPs, same parties, to the same venal purposes but you will want organisation and law.



See I'm guilty of this too... Sometimes, when I have a shit argument, but think I'm right and can't be arsed to read up on something, I'll say 'look, here's my opinion, but it's not worth derailing the thread so there we go, what's that? LALALALALALA I'm not listening I've said my piece'. It's a terrible habit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Tbh loads of middle class university challenge sensible centre types doing street stalls and emergency callouts and demanding general strikes is a political development I wouldn't have forecast a few years back


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Tbh loads of middle class university challenge sensible centre types doing street stalls and emergency callouts and demanding general strikes is a political development I wouldn't have forecast a few years back


If they want a general strike they could start by joining a union


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The Iron Fist clenches:



That man is so out of control. From stabbing Corbyn to LEAVE to this absurdity.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

Probably all Russian bots :rollseyes:


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That man is so out of control. From stabbing Corbyn to LEAVE to this absurdity.


Scrabbling about to keep his name in the public eye


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 182363
> 
> Probably all Russian bots :rollseyes:


Undoubtedly


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Scrabbling about to keep his name in the public eye


I don't think he cares about that. I think he's been genuinely enthused and genuinely clueless. Now that he's outside the state bubble and left to his own intellectual devices he's a bit lost.

edit: but not outside of other bubbles of course


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

33k posts on CIF live, record i think.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 182363
> 
> Probably all Russian bots :rollseyes:


Parliament can't consider it if there's no parliament


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

The youth on the streets.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

I watched that mad Paul Mason play thing on telly a while ago. The man is fucked in the head


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> The youth on the streets.


Good, _normal _is exactly what we're trying to break up. Your pre-prepared lifeless banners are not going to stop us! _Normal is not working. Stop defending attacks on my present._


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> The youth on the streets.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s not worth a thread derail, but actually I’m sure you do.


I don't, I really don't.
The idea that anarchists and communists are secretly in favour of representative democracy is as silly as the equating of existence of a body that exists to perpetrate the class war with organisation.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The Iron Fist clenches:






butchersapron said:


> That man is so out of control. From stabbing Corbyn to LEAVE to this absurdity.


Note 'major'. Is that dog whistle or just open?


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No one denies the need for an assembly, for delegates to arrange large scale decisions. Many, many people object to the bizarre anti-democratic body we have now



Yes, of course. It reflects our bizarre anti-democratic world.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


>



Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded


----------



## Favelado (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded



First thing I thought too.


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded


I think it was a Brexit Party banner?


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 28, 2019)

Cid said:


> See I'm guilty of this too... Sometimes, when I have a shit argument, but think I'm right and can't be arsed to read up on something, I'll say 'look, here's my opinion, but it's not worth derailing the thread so there we go, what's that? LALALALALALA I'm not listening I've said my piece'. It's a terrible habit.



You are definitely guilty of making a big fuss about something you claim to also do. 

But by all means derail. On reflection what you think of Parliament, whether it can be put to good purpose, whether chaos is the road to something better, these are key issues to how people will react to what is going on.


----------



## Cid (Aug 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You are definitely guilty of making a big fuss about something you claim to also do.
> 
> But by all means derail. On reflection what you think of Parliament, whether it can be put to good purpose, whether chaos is the road to something better, these are key issues to how people will react to what is going on.



No, no...


Don't want to derail the thread.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded



bet the SWP are livid they can't come to the party, supporting leave as they do


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

tim said:


> Did you read that article? It's from the 8th of February and suggests that Rees-Mogg has done nothing untoward. Not the line that you seem to be pushing.


I'm not suggesting any speculators have done anything illegal. I am suggesting there are a lot of speculators who would like a no deal Brexit because they'll make a lot of money out of it. Disaster capitalism.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded


In a world where fascists will be brought down with an online petition, yes.


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

Lol


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I think it was a Brexit Party banner?



It was a Brexit party banner and there was just jeering from both sides. A pro-Brexit guy in a wheelchair got told off huffily too. 

it was one of the most middle class things I have seen and I have been to a Stockhausen opera. 

Some up for it BME kids in the minority. 

butchersapron main slogan “save our democracy stop the coup” 

I spotted Lisa McKenzie on the sidelines and AC Grayling in the thick of it.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded





Favelado said:


> First thing I thought too.





The39thStep said:


> I think it was a Brexit Party banner?


There is quite a difference between fascists and the ruddy faced retirees/self-employed/closet racists we all enjoy.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> It was a Brexit party banner and there was just jeering from both sides. A pro-Brexit guy in a wheelchair got told off huffily too.
> 
> it was one of the most middle class things I have seen and I have been to a Stockhausen opera.
> 
> ...


This is going perfectly.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Lol



Wow.  The libs prayer.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 28, 2019)

a hard right tory party forcing a no deal crash out will be a fucking disaster - especially for the working class. it should absolutely be resisted by any means necessary. 
Johnson is looking for a path to power based on stirring up anger and nationalism - its really dangerous.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

I note mason has now elevated himself from the voice of the British w/c to the voice of the British people in a few hours. They do say time speeds up in situations of dual power.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 28, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> a hard right tory party forcing a no deal crash out will be a fucking disaster - especially for the working class.* it should absolutely be resisted by any means necessary.*


Including by allying with LibDems and liberal Tories? By rejecting social politics for progressive politics?


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I note mason has now elevated himself from the voice of the British w/c to the voice of the British people in a few hours. They do say time speeds up in situations of dual power.


Cometh the hour cometh the man


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Including by allying with LibDems and liberal Tories? By rejecting social politics for progressive politics?


BAMN! By the IRON FIST or the pathetic status quo. BAMN!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Lol


Honestly voting leave is the best thing I've ever done. We made this possible.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Lol




its Occupy style protesting, repeating, etc.


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Including by allying with LibDems and liberal Tories? By rejecting social politics for progressive politics?


Obviously there was no need for anything to be resisted by all means necessary before a potential no deal brexit, everything was just hunky dory


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> its Occupy style protesting, repeating, etc.


It's not anything yet, give it a chance.


----------



## Flavour (Aug 28, 2019)

I do feel sorry for the people sharing the anti-prorogue petition on Facebook. It's really quite sad. Anyway next stop furious voncing, nothing more to see here imo. The anti-brexit people just don't have the numbers, tactics or organization to be anything more than guardian articles


----------



## The39thStep (Aug 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> its Occupy style protesting, repeating, etc.


should do an accapella version


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Ready or fucking not
"Ready or fucking not"
It's absolutely beautiful


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

I got told off huffily a few times. For being in the wrong place. Mainly for being in the road in front of a BMW.

I was in the wrong place, on reflection. It was really a pro-EU rally rather than a fuck Boris rally. 

It was interesting though.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> I do feel sorry for the people sharing the anti-prorogue petition on Facebook. It's really quite sad. Anyway next stop furious voncing, nothing more to see here imo. The anti-brexit people just don't have the numbers, tactics or organization to be anything more than guardian articles


Well I suppose we could have a march and get kettled. The only time when people really had a voice was the referendum. And we got played. And lied to.


----------



## treelover (Aug 28, 2019)

Momentum calling its troop out to 'defend democracy'


----------



## sunnysidedown (Aug 28, 2019)




----------



## Supine (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Honestly voting leave is the best thing I've ever done. We made this possible.



Good to know you're owning brexit. Going well so far.


----------



## belboid (Aug 28, 2019)

I’m shocked. Spiked day boris is naughty, but nothing like as bad as the people opposing him.

Who will defend democracy?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Supine said:


> Good to know you're owning brexit. Going well so far.


Well we'll have to see how it all plays out but up to this point I'm mostly satisfied


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well we'll have to see how it all plays out but up to this point I'm mostly satisfied


But the UK is embarrassed!!! And that.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

You know, not sensible and adult and grown up. Like this list  of EU neo-liberal states with wonderful PR systems that magically sort all social problems.


----------



## pogofish (Aug 28, 2019)

I’d say that’s the Act of Union totally fucked if this goes ahead......!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

pogofish said:


> I’d say that’s the Act of Union totally fucked if this goes ahead......!


Is this an annual thing?


----------



## pogofish (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is this an annual thing?



Well, it’s far from the first time but Section III makes no provision for anything other the the Parliament of Great Britain as the ruling body for the United Kingdom.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Well played Johnson anyway.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

hmmmmm


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Treason. Get her. I was one second from asking when the libs would call the queen a traitor earlier.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well we'll have to see how it all plays out but up to this point I'm mostly satisfied



Satisfied with what exactly?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

_The more you hear about this monarch the worse she sounds._


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

Wasn’t her Madge supposed to be a secret remainer with that blue hat she wore though.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

Abolish the queen and reestablish parliament. Woah we’ve been here before amirite?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 28, 2019)

Yeah, abolish the monarchy, so the Queen doesn't get to do what she is told to do by the PM, so the PM gets to do it anyway, without getting it rubber stamped.

Great plan!


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

We have nothing to worry about comrades, Labour will come good on this soon, it was only 109 years ago!


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Abolish the queen and reestablish parliament. Woah we’ve been here before amirite?


Abolish parliament, get the queen to do it again for us , stephen fry to rubber stamp it, then a closely monitored free plebiscite to confirm.


----------



## N_igma (Aug 28, 2019)

This whole debacle just shows how clueless most people are when it comes to how Parliament works. Apparently we _used _to live in a democracy.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Abolish parliament, get the queen to do it again for us , stephen fry to rubber stamp it, then a closely monitored free plebiscite to confirm.



Or that. “by all means necessary”. Paul Mason is coming whether you’re ready or not.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Abolish parliament, get the queen to do it again for us , stephen fry to rubber stamp it, then a closely monitored free plebiscite to confirm.



Surely Lord Geldof has to be involved somewhere?


----------



## Sprocket. (Aug 28, 2019)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Surely Lord Geldof has to be involved somewhere?



Remember he won’t do much on Mondays though.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Or that. “by all means necessary”. Paul Mason is coming whether you’re ready or not.


I do hope someone takes care of him and makes sure he's back in the hotel (or BBC/C4  apt his mates still let him use) safe tonight. Let's look after each other people.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Remember he won’t do much on Mondays though.



Actually that's when he's at his best, shooting the whole day down etc.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 28, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Remember he won’t do much on Mondays though.


He's got a few extra off now, so not going to be onside at all.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Satisfied with what exactly?


Them in chaos, increasing lack of faith in political class and structures of liberal parliamentary democracy, unpredictability, the erosion of lifetime party allegiances, all that good stuff really. Might all go to complete shit yet, who knows


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

belboid said:


> I’m shocked. Spiked day boris is naughty, but nothing like as bad as the people opposing him.
> 
> Who will defend democracy?


Spiked are funded by the Koch brothers.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Them in chaos, increasing lack of faith in political class and structures of liberal parliamentary democracy, unpredictability, the erosion of lifetime party allegiances, all that good stuff really. Might all go to complete shit yet, who knows




Them in chaos? Does this not affect all of us? What might 'going to complete shit' look like?


----------



## teqniq (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Spiked are funded by the Koch brother.


CFY


----------



## krink (Aug 28, 2019)

can someone knock up a Mason X - by all means necessary graphic?

I was almost sick seeing local people I thought were sound waving EU flags but that's all been forgotten with this joyous display by Mason. I mean, fuck me, coke amped with speed doesn't half make people do the funniest things.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Them in chaos? Does this not affect all of us? What might 'going to complete shit' look like?


Everything always affects all of us, it's their game but we all play. That it's as volatile and unpredictable for them as us is imo a net positive. Re: complete shit, honestly at this point I couldn't make any reasonable guess. Best case is some sort of space opens in time, worst is they just regroup and continue I suppose


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

teqniq said:


> CFY


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yeah, abolish the monarchy, so the Queen doesn't get to do what she is told to do by the PM, so the PM gets to do it anyway, without getting it rubber stamped.
> 
> Great plan!


What the fuck difference would it make?  Do you really think the Queen has _any_ impact on what the PM does? At all? Save for the fact they have to spend half an hour taking a car to her house and performing a bit of constitutional theatre.

There are plenty of reasons to abolish the monarchy before you get anywhere near any notional role they might play in our government.

<there's a chance I may have misunderstood the point you were making, internet nuance being as it is, so apologies if I did and oh, look, a three-headed monkey!>


----------



## Rimbaud (Aug 28, 2019)

I'm open to being persuaded, and open to the possibility that I am dense and totally missing something, but I literally cannot understand what the Lexit masterplan is. The Brexit supporters on this thread seem to cheering on a hard right government headed by a typical Eton Tory for preventing debate to force through a no-deal that they don't have the mandate for and is likely to be a disaster and mocking opponents of it.

Like I literally can't grasp what you think is going to happen or how anything good is going to come out of it and it seems all you have are sneers rather than explaining this clearly. We are leaving the EU led by the hard right, and while there is a strong left wing case against the EU, leaving the EU is not itself forwarding any working class interests. What are you celebrating here?

Also, the lack of regard and interest in Northern Ireland from even those English people who identity as left wing is something to behold, though not particularly surprising. It is definitely going to kick off here. Police were forced into a retreat from North Belfast by dozens of youths throwing petrol bombs only last week in several nights of unrest in New Lodge housing estate, 80 petrol bombs were thrown at police over the course of a few days in Derry this summer, West Belfast pubs are full of young people singing IRA songs even on weekday evenings, IRA graffiti is appearing everywhere, a car bomb went off outside the courthouse in Derry a couple of months ago, there have been several bombing attempts and shots have been fired at police on several occasions recently, accidentally killing a journalist in one case, and last year loyalists hijacked a bus and set fire to it and shut down the city airport by leaving improvised explosive devices there. If you think the return of a hard border isn't going to escalate things then you are either totally uninformed, totally disinterested, or worst, willfully ignorant. 

There is no chance that Sinn Fein councillors who control every single border constituency are going to cooperate with the attempt to install a hard border, which is what Boris is going to do one way or the other. Remember that a great many people risked their lives, were imprisoned, killed or were killed in the name of a united Ireland, they are not going to take the establishment of a border lying down, and it is going to ultimately become militarised. I wonder if you're still going to be cheering for Brexit and sneering at some stereotype in your head of a pearl clutching Guardian reader once the British army ends up killing people in Northern Ireland again? It's very likely to happen if Boris is trying to force through a no deal Brexit, which would in practise mean shutting down the border.


----------



## mauvais (Aug 28, 2019)

Lexit's not a thing and I don't know what on here makes you think it is.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Everything always affects all of us, it's their game but we all play. That it's as volatile and unpredictable for them as us is imo a net positive. Re: complete shit, honestly at this point I couldn't make any reasonable guess. Best case is some sort of space opens in time, worst is they just regroup and continue I suppose



I can't see how this isn't 'their game' also. This is the also the _political class _doing what it can to stay where it is as much as any other outcome.


----------



## Rimbaud (Aug 28, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Lexit's not a thing and I don't know what on here makes you think it is.



Yeah it's not a thing, that's why I don't get the cheerleading for Farage and Boris led Brexit. Having read through the thread I see a lot of cryptic passive aggressive sneering and Guardian-reader accusations, but very little in the way of a substantive exposition. Can we have it please?

Most Brexit proponents here seem to rely on insinuating that the other side is ignorant of something without explaining what it is, or just insulting them in some way. Fine, I'm ignorant, now tell me what it is I'm ignorant of exactly.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> I can't see how this isn't 'their game' also. This is the also _political class _doing what it can to stay where it is as much as any other outcome.


Yeah of course, agree. It's just choppier waters, huge amount of disruption in tories and labour and increasing loss of faith in political class and structures etc


----------



## kenny g (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Spiked are funded by the Koch brothers.


One of whom is bread.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 28, 2019)

A lot of remainers are beginning to look a bit hysterical. Imagine if Boris DID 'save the day' and it went well. It would shut a lot of people up. Discredit them. Can't help but think some people are going to look stupid whatever happens. Is it a gamble? I would say it is pretty much a done deal now though.

People I respect have said that ANY Brexit, never mind one led by those currently in charge, would be calamitous. If it is; what happens THEN and what is the fallout? See, a lot of people are saying "where is your Lexit", but you are talking to, what, revolutionaries, communists? One thing they can do is bide their time, look for an opportunity. This is one in all probability. i.e. for them and the politics they espouse.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> "Anna? Oh, _Anna_. It's probably too late to ring her now, she'll be having her tea".


No, she'll have had her tea.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 28, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Can't help but think some people are going to look stupid whatever happens.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> I can't see how this isn't 'their game' also. This is the also the _political class _doing what it can to stay where it is as much as any other outcome.



It's not though is it?

You've got the FT openly calling for the Tory govt to be brought down. That isn't the political class speaking with one voice anymore. That's them totally split. 

And that's the point.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I do hope someone takes care of him and makes sure he's back in the hotel (or BBC/C4  apt his mates still let him use) safe tonight. Let's look after each other people.



I'm afraid he made it on to Newsnight. Hasn't had too much coke though. At least I don't think he has...


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 28, 2019)

Is he doing this because he knows there's going to inevitably be a GE and not because he wants to go WTO?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Honestly voting leave is the best thing I've ever done. We made this possible.


I approve your new profile picture- after initially thinking what wanker’s put that up


----------



## rekil (Aug 28, 2019)

Mason to declare a provisional government. Come to a major British city Stoya.


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

Ming said:


> Spiked are funded by the Koch brothers.



Only one Koch left now.


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You've got to admit that the Johnson regime's timing was clever. Let the LDs box Corbyn into the 'legislative' pathway and then within hours pull the rug from under them.
> 
> It's VoNC or Brexit now.
> Swinson's choice.



More likely to be Farage’s panto show yesterday that was pulling his strings rather than what ineffective  remainers were up to- got to guard that right flank.


----------



## Ming (Aug 28, 2019)

tim said:


> Only one Koch left now.


So everyone keeps telling me  (look back up the thread)


----------



## tim (Aug 28, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> View attachment 182385




Sadly they lack that Hong Kong panache.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 28, 2019)

Where do people even buy combat trousers these days, is there a stockpile somewhere


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Were they really fascists? I'm not persuaded


'_Democratic Scum, off our streets!_'


----------



## belboid (Aug 29, 2019)

Len McCluskey has declared it a coup. So we know now what he’d do faced with such an anti-democratic act. Issue a statement. 

Unite chief accuses prime minister Johnson of a no deal Brexit coup


----------



## rekil (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Where do people even buy combat trousers these days, is there a stockpile somewhere


Army surplus shops. You want a serbian army fireman helmet? I can get you one by tomorrow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Is he doing this because he knows there's going to inevitably be a GE and not because he wants to go WTO?



Yes.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 29, 2019)

tim said:


> Only one Koch left now.



half koched


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Rimbaud said:


> I'm open to being persuaded, and open to the possibility that I am dense and totally missing something, but I literally cannot understand what the Lexit masterplan is. The Brexit supporters on this thread seem to cheering on a hard right government headed by a typical Eton Tory for preventing debate to force through a no-deal that they don't have the mandate for and is likely to be a disaster and mocking opponents of it.
> 
> Like I literally can't grasp what you think is going to happen or how anything good is going to come out of it and it seems all you have are sneers rather than explaining this clearly. We are leaving the EU led by the hard right, and while there is a strong left wing case against the EU, leaving the EU is not itself forwarding any working class interests. What are you celebrating here?
> 
> .


All I can say, for me, is that it's a mixture of dark humour and contempt for liberal politics, liberal assumptions and the way some people are now wailing in the name of a non-existent 'democracy'. The very politics and assumptions that fed into the Brexit vote itself. 

I have nothing but contempt for the EU neo-liberalism so I don't feel we are leaving anything positive. Same time, I'm happy (if that's the right word) to admit things are likely to be worse after Brexit, at least in the short term. That's because it will be a hard right led Brexit and because, quite frankly, there's never been an up and running Lexit. But, you know what, we didn't decide to call the Brexit vote and when it did happen, there was a clear result. The way to combat the powerlessness that fed into Brexit surely ain't to overturn Brexit in the courts or in parliament.  More importantly if you want to fight neo-liberalism and develop working class politics, do just that. Go back to what caused Brexit.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Where do people even buy combat trousers these days, is there a stockpile somewhere


I went looking for camouflage trousers recently
Finish the joke yourself, I'm tired


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

If i retire for the night will civilisation still exist in the morning?   

If Corbyn had behaved as Boris and started trampling over centuries of constitutional tradition my guess is that the military would have been mobilised for a take over already.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

redcogs said:


> trampling over centuries of constitutional tradition


Wat


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

Maneuvering and manipulating for Tory advantage etc.


----------



## Badgers (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

redcogs said:


> If i retire for the night will civilisation still exist in the morning?
> 
> If Corbyn had behaved as Boris and started trampling over centuries of constitutional tradition my guess is that the military would have been mobilised for a take over already.


Suspending parliament is Johnson not playing by the/their rules - it's also the act of a self interested shit, leading a pack of shits who lack any kind of basic decency (particularly with the blatant lie that this is just to allow a queens speech). But it's clearly _not _against the constitution at all, it's actually one of the powers of the British PM.

Edit: our posts crossed - yes, it's exactly: 



> Maneuvering and manipulating for Tory advantage etc.


But don't attack it from the basis of 'centuries of constitutional tradition'


----------



## Badgers (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

Constitution  -  can I have a copy so i can bone up on the rules?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Constitution  -  can I have a copy so i can bone up on the rules?


Proroguing Parliament, has its basis in your 'centuries of constitutional tradition'.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 29, 2019)

It just depends. If the ruling class feel like having one. Or not


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

No it ain't my 'centuries of constitutional tradition', just a sloppy phrase - pedant.

Main point is Corbyn would likely be in the tower for antics like Johnson's.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2019)

One step closer to Irish unity. That's the main thing.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 29, 2019)

No one else seems to have any answers worth much. It's funny how this rupture has exposed the constitutional flimsiness of the whole arrangement. We won't see Irish independence though, no matter the violence and desperation.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2019)

We already see Irish independence, because its been with us for quite some time now. And I'm pretty damn sure we'll see a 32 county Republic. Violence isn't the only way for it to happen.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 29, 2019)

Well people say you don't give a fuck, and when you try you get told off. IMO Brexit will never lead to a United Ireland.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 29, 2019)

So what are you 'damned well' upset about?


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2019)

Didn't think at the time but now, it's more likely than it's ever been. After all, if the UK can leave the EU "democratically", the 6 counties can leave the UK. It may take a bit of dialogue and raised voices but the vibe seems to be a lot more positive than had been in many years. Of course there is the ever present threat of extremism from those who saw commitment to the GFA as a sell out but this can be accomplished through peaceful means. IMHO, naturally.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 29, 2019)

It's up for discussion?


----------



## Badgers (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

Phew, Gina Miller will save us from Johnson's coup!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> What the fuck difference would it make?  Do you really think the Queen has _any_ impact on what the PM does? At all? Save for the fact they have to spend half an hour taking a car to her house and performing a bit of constitutional theatre.
> 
> There are plenty of reasons to abolish the monarchy before you get anywhere near any notional role they might play in our government.



None whatsoever, that was my point, I was taking the piss out of the people calling for the abolishment of the monarchy over this, when it would make no difference whatsoever.

It's in the PM's powers to do this, Brenda just gets to rubber stamp it, she hasn't really got the power to stop it. if she wasn't there it would still have happened, unless there was some change to the PM's powers.

I mentioned in another post, that a mate who's a republican texted me, saying he was pissed off with the queen, which made my day.



> <there's a chance I may have misunderstood the point you were making, internet nuance being as it is, so apologies if I did and oh, look, a three-headed monkey!>



<heads off to see the three-headed monkey.>


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just been confirmed that the Queen has agreed to the suspension of Parliament.
> 
> Not that she had any choice.



No, not really any other way she was going to have an opportunity to keep Andrew off the front page.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> None whatsoever, that was my point, I was taking the piss out of the people calling for the abolishment of the monarchy over this, when it would make no different whatsoever.
> 
> It's in the PM's powers to do this, Brenda just gets to rubber stamp it, she hasn't really got the power to stop it. if she wasn't there it would still have happened, unless there was some change to the PM's powers.
> 
> ...



Nonetheless, the descendants of invaders who occupy the head of state, many positions in the House of Lords and own 30% of the land should be given the traditional treatment.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Nonetheless, the descendants of invaders who occupy the head of state, many positions in the House of Lords and own 30% of the land should be given the traditional treatment.



As Lord Camomile said, there are plenty of reasons to abolish the monarchy, but it wouldn't change anything here.


----------



## krtek a houby (Aug 29, 2019)

Humberto said:


> It's up for discussion?



It certainly should be. There's every bit as much of a chance of extremist views and/or violence in the UK over Brexit, as there is in Ireland over the 6 counties leaving the UK.

It shouldn't threaten a peaceful uncoupling. In either case.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Nonetheless, the descendants of invaders who occupy the head of state


Who dares occupy our Queen? She can trace her ancestry back to cerdic, first king of wessex, and beyond him back to woden


----------



## Rimbaud (Aug 29, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Well people say you don't give a fuck, and when you try you get told off. IMO Brexit will never lead to a United Ireland.



Not by itself, but the Protestants will become a minority by 2022, and it also provides a cover for those Protestants who secretly support a United Ireland to back the idea for reasons that don't make them feel like "traitors." Anecdotally, two of my Protestant bosses have came out reluctantly in favour of a united Ireland, unthinkable 10 years ago. Also, a hard border is a very solid rationale for holding a referendum and a chaotic no deal Brexit would be enough to just about give it a majority IMO.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

Overnight highlights:

1. Leader of the British working class, mace the ace, turned up on newsnight and said ‘fuck’. He traced the political base for yesterday’s Iron Fist uprising back to his home town and it’s mining and mill worker history (he correctly failed to mention that his home town voted leave, a blip in the tectonic shift of the class).
2. Undemocratic MPs and ‘campaigners’ will now turn to undemocratic judges to overturn the undemocratic decision of an unelected leader. In the name of defending democracy and the necessity of overturning a democratic decision.

Is it too much to hope for more??


----------



## teqniq (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Overnight highlights:
> 
> 1. Leader of the British working class, mace the ace, turned up on newsnight and said ‘fuck’. He traced the political base for yesterday’s Iron Fist uprising back to his home town and it’s mining and mill worker history (he correctly failed to mention that his home town voted leave, a blip in the tectonic shift of the class).
> 2. Undemocratic MPs and ‘campaigners’ will now turn to undemocratic judges to overturn the undemocratic decision of an unelected leader. In the name of defending democracy and the necessity of overturning a democratic decision.
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> View attachment 182399


Should have a comp for best thing written on that blackboard


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Where do people even buy combat trousers these days, is there a stockpile somewhere



Army surplus.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Should have a comp for best thing written on that blackboard



I don't have access to photoshop right now, but pretend I changed it to 'golf sale'.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


>



It's awful for her but again nobody seems to know how parliament actually works. Mrs SI and I both have friends calling for civil unrest (read: _other people do some civil unrest for us_) because centuries of tradition overturned, unelected PM, nobody reasonable wants Brexit any more, etc etc.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 29, 2019)

it’s the end of the world as we know it


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

couldnt help noticing the large stain on jezzers jeans.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 29, 2019)

Rimbaud said:


> I'm open to being persuaded, and open to the possibility that I am dense and totally missing something, but I literally cannot understand what the Lexit masterplan is. The Brexit supporters on this thread seem to cheering on a hard right government headed by a typical Eton Tory for preventing debate to force through a no-deal that they don't have the mandate for and is likely to be a disaster and mocking opponents of it.


Should socialists, communists and anarchist not be mocking the Queen, John 'Hang Nelson Mandela' Bercow, judges, liberal ex-investment bankers, LD ex-ministers that implemented a huge transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich, pro-EU Labour MPs that supported the Iraq war and backed 'austerity' policies? Is the 'Lemain' masterplan for socialists to ally with this set of filth and back the EU?   

You talk about 'cheering on a hard right government' but you cannot have read the thread very well as no such cheering has happened (bar a few right wing trolls that got banned). On the other hand in the last few pages alone we've had the argument that those of us with socialist politics throw those politics overboard in order to stop Brexit.


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

he must have been busy?  Decorating number 10 perhaps?


----------



## Dogsauce (Aug 29, 2019)

Will all be over soon, looking forward to not having this problem anymore.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

I voted to Leave and now all I'm doing while the ruling class are on fire is chucking a couple of foil-covered taties in for a bit.


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

The great joy in all this is watching the Billy Bunter types having the dormitory bunfight and actually believing their case is critical for the UK.

Last time i looked the future, in or out of Europe was capitalist.

Enjoy the spectacle and hope the tory ***** finally disintegrate painfully.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 29, 2019)

Well, the Queen has failed them but Jess Phillips has stepped up. 

Wonder if the point will come where they run out of fantasy saviours to fall back on and what effect that'll have. I mean, #GeneralStrike was trending, but that's a load of bollocks isn't it. All that frustrated, naive middle class Centrist energy has to go somewhere though doesn't it? Death Squads is my guess.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Well I hope to meet Boris Johnson, I will talk to him like an adult and tell him about what is happening where I live and really ask him if he thinks his actions help or hinder them. I won&#39;t accept guff and platitudes. I expect answers. Let&#39;s see if he&#39;ll meet me.</p>&mdash; Jess Phillips Esq., M.P. (@jessphillips) <a href="">August 28, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Back to the Parliamentary arithmetic.
Boles in despondent mood this morning; responding to a twitter thread identifying 10 potential tory MPs prepared to vote against/VoNC their own party's government.
(Antoinette Sandbach
Philip Lee
Sam Gyimah
Justine Greening
David Gauke
Philip Hammond
Oliver Letwin
Rory Stewart
David Liddington
Dominic Grieve)
Boles reckons they'd be up to double that number of Labour MPs prepared not to vote with the 'oppo alliance'.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

The idea the Queen was going to save democracy. I mean...where to start _explaining_


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

YouSir said:


> Well, the Queen has failed them but Jess Phillips has stepped up.
> 
> Wonder if the point will come where they run out of fantasy saviours to fall back on and what effect that'll have. I mean, #GeneralStrike was trending, but that's a load of bollocks isn't it. All that frustrated, naive middle class Centrist energy has to go somewhere though doesn't it? Death Squads is my guess.
> 
> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Well I hope to meet Boris Johnson, I will talk to him like an adult and tell him about what is happening where I live and really ask him if he thinks his actions help or hinder them. I won&#39;t accept guff and platitudes. I expect answers. Let&#39;s see if he&#39;ll meet me.</p>&mdash; Jess Phillips Esq., M.P. (@jessphillips) <a href="">August 28, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>



the big problem jess phillips has created for herself is her declaration that she will talk to him like an adult, when addressing him as one might a particularly dim recalcitrant child might yield better results.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The idea the Queen was going to save democracy. I mean...where to start _explaining_


yeh it is astonishing the sort of utter bilge some people will believe


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Owen Jones either writing what he knows his audience want to read or simply doing an impression of an eleven year old's first attempt at writing to their MP because their mum's cross at the news



> Call the suspension of parliament what it is: a coup d’état by an unelected prime minister.



Boris Johnson is trashing the democracy fought for with the blood of our ancestors | Owen Jones


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Hugh Grant isn't happy - tweeted at Johnson...



 Over-promoted rubber bath toy.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> View attachment 182399


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Back to the Parliamentary arithmetic.
> Boles in despondent mood this morning; responding to a twitter thread identifying 10 potential tory MPs prepared to vote against/VoNC their own party's government.
> (Antoinette Sandbach
> Philip Lee
> ...


Signs of ongoing conflict within the remain nutters camp there in the Boles tweet.


----------



## Signal 11 (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Should have a comp for best thing written on that blackboard


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Signs of ongoing conflict within the remain nutters camp there in the Boles tweet.


Sounds like he's having something of a breakdown this morning tbh...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)




----------



## belboid (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Owen Jones either writing what he knows his audience want to read or simply doing an impression of an eleven year old's first attempt at writing to their MP because their mum's cross at the news
> 
> 
> 
> Boris Johnson is trashing the democracy fought for with the blood of our ancestors | Owen Jones



It’s a bit hyperbolic, but it is right. This isn’t a coup (tho Mason was interesting on news night in saying it isn’t the prorogation that is couplike, but the promise to ignore any VONC) but it is highly anti-democratic, and is being used to force something through that will have an awful effect upon millions of workers’ lives. We seem to forget that last bit on here when cheering on the hilarious divisions in the ruling class.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

belboid said:


> It’s a bit hyperbolic, but it is right. This isn’t a coup (tho Mason was interesting on news night in saying it isn’t the prorogation that is couplike, but the promise to ignore any VONC) but it is highly anti-democratic, and is being used to force something through that will have an awful effect upon millions of workers’ lives. We seem to forget that last bit on here when cheering on the hilarious divisions in the ruling class.


I'm not claiming it's not underhanded, nasty, self-serving, unusual etc. But to open with two factually-bullshit claims is piss-weak. It's risible stuff, bettered only by the rallying cry for sensible civil disobedience like sitting on the floor or marching from A to B to hear a speech by meeeeeee. Because polite protest makes 'em shake, it really does


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I'm not claiming it's not underhanded, nasty, self-serving, unusual etc. But to open with two factually-bullshit claims is piss-weak. It's risible stuff, bettered only by the rallying cry for sensible civil disobedience like sitting on the floor or marching from A to B to hear a speech by meeeeeee. Because polite protest makes 'em shake, it really does


i'd march from a to b to hear a speech by you. as long as a and b were fairly close together.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

The "meeeeeee" was little Owen, not me, though I could knock something together better than that doggerel in about 20 mins I think. Including a break for a sarnie.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Back to the Parliamentary arithmetic.
> Boles in despondent mood this morning; responding to a twitter thread identifying 10 potential tory MPs prepared to vote against/VoNC their own party's government.
> (Antoinette Sandbach
> Philip Lee
> ...



It's the tories so you can cut that number in half by the time we get to the point where something more concrete than barstool grumbling is called for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The "meeeeeee" was little Owen, not me, though I could knock something together better than that doggerel in about 20 mins I think. Including a break for a sarnie.


what always particularly irritates me about speeches before and after political rallies is firstly, the people who speak so rarely have anything to say worth listening to, secondly they tell you why you're about to do what you're about to do or why you've just done the thing you've done when you know why you're there in the first place, and thirdly it takes up valuable drinking time.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what always particularly irritates me about speeches before and after political rallies is firstly, the people who speak so rarely have anything to say worth listening to, secondly they tell you why you're about to do what you're about to do or why you've just done the thing you've done when you know why you're there in the first place, and thirdly it takes up valuable drinking time.


The pubs near the end/rally point love them though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The pubs near the end/rally point love them though.


yeh i've sometimes wondered if people like tony benn or the more turgid swappie speakers got kickbacks from the brewers


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

belboid said:


> It’s a bit hyperbolic, but it is right. This isn’t a coup (tho Mason was interesting on news night in saying it isn’t the prorogation that is couplike, but the promise to ignore any VONC) but it is highly anti-democratic, and is being used to force something through that will have an awful effect upon millions of workers’ lives. We seem to forget that last bit on here when cheering on the hilarious divisions in the ruling class.



Point taken belboid. i assume most of us stand ready to respond to a serious call for proper resistance from working class organisations (TUC being the obvious example).  Yet the whole issue is a complicated matter.  i voted to remain for example, not out of loyalty to the British state, or because i wanted to contribute to the continual kicking that the former smokestack brothers and sisters have taken since the 1985.  my vote went as it did because Jo Cox was murdered and the Right appeared frighteningly dangerous and developing.  Some on the left took a different view, and wanted out of the EU, regarding Europe as a bosses cartel..

i suppose the confusion is disempowering and creates more confusion.  When things are desperately sad all that's left is a type of grim and possibly cynical gallows humour.  im quite prone to that sadly.

What we all know, despite any tactical differences, is that our class will pay the price unless and until there is an organised fight back?


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The "meeeeeee" was little Owen, not me, though I could knock something together better than that doggerel in about 20 mins I think. Including a break for a sarnie.


Do you though?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Do I what?


----------



## Miss-Shelf (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> View attachment 182399


Is that from coldwar steve?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

Miss-Shelf said:


> Is that from coldwar steve?



No. It’s genuine. Hard to believe I know


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Didn't think at the time but now, it's more likely than it's ever been. After all, if the UK can leave the EU "democratically", the 6 counties can leave the UK. It may take a bit of dialogue and raised voices but the vibe seems to be a lot more positive than had been in many years. Of course there is the ever present threat of extremism from those who saw commitment to the GFA as a sell out but this can be accomplished through peaceful means. IMHO, naturally.


If you think the EU or Ireland is going to allow 30% public sector employment and other state 'subsidies' then you have another thing coming. Harland and Wolff will look like a sideshow when that happens.


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No. It’s genuine. Hard to believe I know



Guest appearance by Tjinder Singh and his dog Celeste.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> Guest appearance by Tjinder Singh and his dog Celeste.


i do like that dog


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Yeah. was just thinking I'd like to fuss the dog


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd march from a to b to hear a speech by you. as long as a and b were fairly close together.



And as long as a and b were both pubs.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Yeah. was just thinking I'd like to fuss the dog


He's a raving remainiac and green hack! He does look like he means business there mind.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> And as long as a and b were both pubs.


not necessarily. if a was a pub you'd really want b to be nearby, but i was thinking of a and b being near to each other with a range of pubs convenient.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He's a raving remainiac and green hack! He does look like he means business there mind.


Yeah, I don't know owt about his politics aside from what I Googled just now. Couldn't vote for Corbyn apparently. Oh well
I like dogs more than people anyway, and all dogs more than that shitty number one from 1988 or whenever it was


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


>



It's sad that she feels she has to argue the case on capitalist terms, that her right to be heard is a product that can only come from being a 'worker' or having a job.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

When is that pic from by the way?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> When is that pic from by the way?


Yesterday evening - sometime after 5-30. The real IRON FIST is assembling for 11, so we shall see it before too long.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> When is that pic from by the way?



The Mason one? From his own twitter page


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

i'm unsure which is more undermining to the cause, the retreat to the pub or the retreat into gallows humour?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

No surprise here...

Ruth Davidson resigns admitting 'conflict' over Boris Johnson's Brexit



> Ruth Davidson has officially resigned as the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, admitting 'conflict' with Boris Johnson on Brexit.
> 
> The Scottish Tory leader today confirmed reports she would quit her role just hours after Mr Johnson announced he would shut down Parliament for a month.
> 
> Ms Davidson, who recently had a baby, said she was quitting to spend more time with family but also that she felt "conflict" over the party's hardline Brexit stance.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

redcogs said:


> i'm unsure which is more undermining to the cause, the retreat to the pub or the retreat into gallows humour?


In the glorious revolution to come we will have BOTH


----------



## teqniq (Aug 29, 2019)

Davidson gone, citing 'family reasons'

Ruth Davidson quits as Scottish Tory leader


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yesterday evening - sometime after 5-30. The real IRON FIST is assembling for 11, so we shall see it before too long.


----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Davidson gone, citing 'family reasons'
> 
> Ruth Davidson quits as Scottish Tory leader



The Tories are ‘one big family’ and they are fucking horrible?


----------



## Ming (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>


  No.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Davidson resignation was a damp squib. She ended up pretty much supporting Johnson's strategy, at least suggesting he's genuine wanting a deal and that pro deal tories should support him. At one level she's probably right, he probably _does _want to snatch some kind of May+ deal at the last minute, but in a broader sense she sounded a bit naïve.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Davidson resignation was a damp squib. She ended up pretty much supporting Johnson's strategy, at least suggesting he's genuine wanting a deal and that pro deal tories should support him. At one level she's probably right, he probably _does _want to snatch some kind of May+ deal at the last minute, but in a broader sense she sounded a bit naïve.


It's not even May + really, it's just May deal with some movement on backstop


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 29, 2019)

I wonder if all this suspension of Parliament bullshit will lead to people finally coming to terms with the fact that British democracy has been fundamentally flawed for quite some time now. The vested interests of money and an elite group coming out of Oxbridge and Eton have twisted our supposedly representative democracy beyond all belief over the last half-century.

Protests mean jack-shit without meaningful goals and a plan of getting there. A general strike will never happen because people are too worried about losing their jobs at predatory exploitative companies that don't give a shit about them anyhow. No one is willing to really sit down and consider any form of alternative to the Way Things Are™.

Europe has done a lot of good for us, but it's fundamentally undemocratic and suffering from a series of crises that have damaged its legitimacy in the eyes of the people who're supposed to have benefited from it the most. Attempts at reform have gone nowhere fast, and often ended up with more integration and less representation. Brexit was about bringing politics back to a national level where you can vote out the fuckers fucking things up (and don't forget immigration, although we already had power over non-EU immigration) and what we've ended up with is more chaos.

There's opportunity in chaos, but not like this. Not with this elite in charge, calling the shots. Or maybe especially like this. Maybe this is what it takes.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Davidson resignation was a damp squib. She ended up pretty much supporting Johnson's strategy, at least suggesting he's genuine wanting a deal and that pro deal tories should support him. At one level she's probably right, he probably _does _want to snatch some kind of May+ deal at the last minute, but in a broader sense she sounded a bit naïve.



That's pretty much in keeping with her whole 'likeable Tory' schtick really isn't it. She does seem like she'd probably be a laugh down the pub but ultimately she's still a Tory, she's hardly going to be sticking the boot in.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Aug 29, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I wonder if all this suspension of Parliament bullshit will lead to people finally coming to terms with the fact that British democracy has been fundamentally flawed for quite some time now. The vested interests of money and an elite group coming out of Oxbridge and Eton have twisted our supposedly representative democracy beyond all belief over the last half-century.


I wish I could say yes, but to be honest, I doubt it.

I think fundamentally, most people just want to be comfortable, and are very willing, consciously or otherwise, to settle for comfortable subjugation rather than fight for something better. Most of us don't have the fight in us, don't know what something better would look like, and aren't willing to sacrifice the little we have.

And I say "us" because, while I'd like it not to be the case, I think if I'm honest with myself I largely fit into that category too.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

Fairly sure our parliamentary democracy was a bag of shit 50+ years ago too tbf


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 29, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I wish I could say yes, but to be honest, I doubt it.
> 
> I think fundamentally, most people just want to be comfortable, and are very willing, consciously or otherwise, to settle for comfortable subjugation rather than fight for something else. Most of us don't have the fight in us, don't know what something better would look like, and aren't willing to sacrifice the little we have.
> 
> And I say "us" because, while I'd like it not to be the case, I think if I'm honest with myself I largely fit into that category too.


Well, here the old adage of 'nine meals from anarchy' comes into play, especially with JIT logistics for most industries these days. We remain a net importer of goods (June 2019 we imported £10.1BN more than we exported, an increase of £1BN from last month) with a fairly consistent £10BN gap between imports and exports.

Brexit will definitely lead to border controls (that's the point) and that will lead to disruption of supply chains across many areas of economic activity. Food production and sales will definitely take a hit. We might hit the nine meals point. That's when things will heat up.


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fairly sure our parliamentary democracy was a bag of shit 50+ years ago too tbf


I don't disagree, but I do see the Thatcher-Reagan era as ushering in a particularly damaging period for trust in political processes, as well as degrading social trust across all walks of life for our country.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

A rosy period of trust in politicians and their institutions was and is a recipe for disaster - the less trust in them the better. The improvements and reforms that we won from the 60s onwards came precisely from not trusting them and trusting in our own collective powers and throwing off forelock tugging disguised as democratic _representation_. The problem with the neo-liberalism from thatcher-reegan's version of it is not that it destroyed trust in politicians and the state but that it - quite deliberately - destroyed those collective traditions and wreaked damaging havoc across society as a result. (And this is the eu today btw).


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I don't disagree, but I do see the Thatcher-Reagan era as ushering in a particularly damaging period for trust in political processes, as well as degrading social trust across all walks of life for our country.



The main prob though TA' is that the UK ain't "our country".  Its the plaything of the super rich *****  and neo aristos ( ) calling the shots, who are skilled at getting our side to blame 'immigrants' or 'Europe' or 'French' or 'China' etc.   every now and then we get an opportunity to seriously address matters.. Gotta make the most of the next chance.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Nine meals from anarchy, shit. Not a price I'm prepared to pay. I thought it was three square meals anyway. Anyone know who said it?


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Nine meals from anarchy, shit. Not a price I'm prepared to pay. I thought it was three square meals anyway. Anyone know who said it?


Don't know who originally said it, but I'm currently imagining Gene Pitney singing it...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> Don't know who originally said it, but I'm currently imagining Gene Pitney singing it...


Or Carter USM


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Alfred Henry Lewis in 1906 apparently. Though also apparently MI5 works on four.


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> A rosy period of trust in politicians and their institutions was and is a recipe for disaster - the less trust in them the better. The improvements and reforms that we won from the 60s onwards came precisely from not trusting them and trusting in our own collective powers and throwing off forelock tugging disguised as democratic _representation_. The problem with the neo-liberalism from thatcher-reegan's version of it is not that it destroyed trust in politicians and the state but that it - quite deliberately - destroyed those collective traditions and wreaked damaging havoc across society as a result. (And this is the eu today btw).


Trust the process, distrust the actor. If you trust the actor to do something, they'll take you for a ride and dump the body; if you trust the process, when the actor tries to take advantage of it you're angry straight off the bat and more likely to do something about it. I agree that the 60's saw reform and improvement precisely because we didn't trust politicians.

The EU as a European organisation that brings together - to some degree - European states is a good idea. This formulation of it, based as it is in the roots of a bureaucratic neoliberal economic integration process, is a pile of wank.


redcogs said:


> The main prob though TA' is that the UK ain't "our country".  Its the plaything of the super rich *****  and neo aristos ( ) calling the shots, who are skilled at getting our side to blame 'immigrants' or 'Europe' or 'French' or 'China' etc.   every now and then we get an opportunity to seriously address matters.. Gotta make the most of the next chance.


It's our country as much as theirs,_ more_ ours than theirs really, because they've got where they are off the backs of our hard work.


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

Just in time delivery.. Frightening way to run an economy when it would be so much more sensible to pause, take stock, slow down, stop generating profits for spivs, take a holiday, and begin to plan the world based on real democracy at workplace and community and street level, with a shorter working week (and life), houses as homes (not fucking investments or offices or palaces of money) but real jobs working with hands and heads and a massive expansion of recreation for everyone as a right.

i commend it to the hise!


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> The EU as a European organisation that brings together - to some degree - European states is a good idea. This formulation of it, based as it is in the roots of a bureaucratic neoliberal economic integration process, is a pile of wank.


Would it have been formulated at all though if not for precisely the reason it was?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> Trust the process, distrust the actor. If you trust the actor to do something, they'll take you for a ride and dump the body; if you trust the process, when the actor tries to take advantage of it you're angry straight off the bat and more likely to do something about it. I agree that the 60's saw reform and improvement precisely because we didn't trust politicians.
> 
> The EU as a European organisation that brings together - to some degree - European states is a good idea. This formulation of it, based as it is in the roots of a bureaucratic neoliberal economic integration process, is a pile of wank.


I don't trust the process. Someone put the processes in place and i don't trust them either. In fact, i know exactly what their interests are and why they designed the process to further exactly those interests - regardless of what actors may come and go. And the EU is an attempt to take this to its undemocratic technocratic final state. That's the process i'm being asked to put my faith in?


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I don't trust the process. Someone put the processes in place and i don't trust them either. In fact, i know exactly what their interests are and why they designed the process to further exactly those interests - regardless of what actors may come and go. And the EU is an attempt to take this to its undemocratic technocratic final state. That's the process i'm being asked to put my faith in?


And neither should we trust the British processes, either political or legal, of course


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Would it have been formulated at all though if not for precisely the reason it was?


I take your point, it wouldn't be here without the reasons it has for being here. That doesn't mean I can't look at what we've ended up with and want to improve it (even if that means tearing down and starting fresh).



butchersapron said:


> I don't trust the process. Someone put the processes in place and i don't trust them either. In fact, i know exactly what their interests are and why they designed the process to further exactly those interests - regardless of what actors may come and go. And the EU is an attempt to take this to its undemocratic technocratic final state. That's the process i'm being asked to put my faith in?


Fair enough, if you don't want to trust people (or anything) to that extent (or to any extent), that's your prerogative and not for me to challenge.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> And neither should we trust the British processes, either political or legal, of course


I was on about the UK in the first bit as it goes. That is the gap that this nonsense opens up, the chance for those leavers critical of the EU for its undemocratic nature to make others aware of and then maybe seem some common ground their similar views on the UK state - (that is backed up by serious ongoing polling across leavers, decades of disaffection). That aspect of brexit has been drowned out by media-remainers and the like (and it's mirrored on here) insisting we talk about how racist we are.  That said, as fozzie said yesterday, the turnout at the HOP appeared to be just pro-eu rather than anything else.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not though is it?
> 
> You've got the FT openly calling for the Tory govt to be brought down. That isn't the political class speaking with one voice anymore. That's them totally split.
> 
> And that's the point.



When has the political class ever spoken with _one_ voice? 

For all this celebrating of _chaos_, at _hand wringing_, at_ liberals losing their minds_ etc how is it not worrying that the extreme right wing of the tory party are effectively doing what the fuck they like? They are perpetuating their power and position just like they always have given the chance. They'll use this opportunity for utter cuntitude, just like they are elsewhere in the world at the moment. Not sure I can celebrate this or the inherent risks no matter how flakey or annoying other parties/mps are.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That is the gap that this nonsense opens up, the chance for those leavers critical of the EU for its undemocratic nature to make others aware of and then maybe seem some common ground their similar views on the UK state - (that is backed up by serious ongoing polling across leavers, decades of disaffection). That aspect of brexit has been drowned out by media-remainers and the like (and it's mirrored on here) insisting we talk about how racist we are.  That said, as fozzie said yesterday, the turnout at the HOP appeared to be just pro-eu rather than anything else.



I think that this is it in a nutshell really. Can those of us - who see the EU as the chosen vehicle for the economic, social and cultural manifestation of the neo-liberal project - a project that Butchers correctly characterises as more deep and complex than just privatisation, cuts and punishment beating of the poor - start to find common cause with those who want change but voted remain.

You’d have to say that this isn’t happening at the moment, and views are hardening and polarising in a binary and reductive manner. But this is going to be a long, very long, unfolding process. 

LeFT is a nascent attempt to begin the work. We will see how it goes, and we are all aware of the pitfalls and some of the problems with some of those involved involved. But a start needs to be made.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

Talking of which:


----------



## ska invita (Aug 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> It's sad that she feels she has to argue the case on capitalist terms, that her right to be heard is a product that can only come from being a 'worker' or having a job.


Yes, and not just a worker, but a worker in a field that sufficient enough people with citizenship here don't want to do. The guestworker narrative wins, points based immigration here we come.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 29, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> I wonder if all this suspension of Parliament bullshit will lead to people finally coming to terms with the fact that British democracy has been fundamentally flawed for quite some time now.  s.


Maybe some, but above all this has been calculated to be popular and election winning.


----------



## ska invita (Aug 29, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> When has the political class ever spoken with _one_ voice?
> 
> For all this celebrating of _chaos_, at _hand wringing_, at_ liberals losing their minds_ etc how is it not worrying that the extreme right wing of the tory party are effectively doing what the fuck they like? They are perpetuating their power and position just like they always have given the chance. They'll use this opportunity for utter cuntitude, just like they are elsewhere in the world at the moment. Not sure I can celebrate this or the inherent risks no matter how flakey or annoying other parties/mps are.


Also the recasting of the Tories as the antiestablisment party, and the deepening of working class Toryism. 
What's going on looks like pure Banon playbook. 
Nothing to cheer on, yet.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Aug 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> What's going on looks like pure Banon playbook.



said those exact words to my cousin last night, it reeks of banon


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> When has the political class ever spoken with _one_ voice?



Is this a serious question? 

Were they split in 2008? Or in 1979?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> When has the political class ever spoken with _one_ voice?
> 
> For all this celebrating of _chaos_, at _hand wringing_, at_ liberals losing their minds_ etc how is it not worrying that the extreme right wing of the tory party are effectively doing what the fuck they like? They are perpetuating their power and position just like they always have given the chance. They'll use this opportunity for utter cuntitude, just like they are elsewhere in the world at the moment. Not sure I can celebrate this or the inherent risks no matter how flakey or annoying other parties/mps are.


I agree with you about the likely future and what the tories will do with 'their' brexit. I _do_ think things will be worse. Not so much worse because of the loss of EU 'protections', there just about aren't any. But worse with an emboldened right in power.

But where to act, where to insert yourself into this? I just can't line up with those waving EU flags and wanting to overturn the referendum result. Not just that I can't work with those people, many (but by no means all) of those people are my enemy. I'd be lined up with a push for Lexit if there was a push for Lexit. I might even line up with, if not join, Corbyn/Labour if they were pushing a Lexit. It's worth saying firmly that they are not doing any such thing. So, what are you left with? Keep fighting the fight, fight back against neo-liberalism, deportations, universal credit, nhs sell offs. Develop a working class politics. The depressing point on that is that we aren't really getting there. But what else is there?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think that this is it in a nutshell really. Can those of us - who see the EU as the chosen vehicle for the economic, social and cultural manifestation of the neo-liberal project - a project that Butchers correctly characterises as more deep and complex than just privatisation, cuts and punishment beating of the poor - start to find common cause with those who want change but voted remain.
> 
> You’d have to say that this isn’t happening at the moment, and views are hardening and polarising in a binary and reductive manner. But this is going to be a long, very long, unfolding process.
> 
> LeFT is a nascent attempt to begin the work. We will see how it goes, and we are all aware of the pitfalls and some of the problems with some of those involved involved. But a start needs to be made.


 This (as in both of your points - that it's crucial to do it and that it ain't happening at the moment)


----------



## Rimbaud (Aug 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> LeFT is a nascent attempt to begin the work. We will see how it goes, and we are all aware of the pitfalls and some of the problems with some of those involved involved. But a start needs to be made.



Word of advice - LeFT is not Googleable, I suggest a different acronym. I saw it discussed here, but couldn't figure out what it stands for, and I tried to find out more but search engines are not caps sensitive.


----------



## existentialist (Aug 29, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The idea the Queen was going to save democracy. I mean...where to start _explaining_


It's a good way of tagging the gullible fools...


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?

Surely this is more important and controversial than the *Poll Tax???

* I'm a bit too young to remember that.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?


_When you hear the third pip, the time sponsored by the doomsday clock will be..._


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?
> 
> Surely this is more important and controversial than the *Poll Tax???
> 
> * I'm a bit too young to remember that.


Between who?


----------



## Flavour (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?
> 
> Surely this is more important and controversial than the *Poll Tax???
> 
> * I'm a bit too young to remember that.



probably not. because the people protesting, in general, don't stand to lose as much materially from Brexit as the poll tax protestors did.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Yes, and not just a worker, but a worker in a field that sufficient enough people with citizenship here don't want to do. The guestworker narrative wins, points based immigration here we come.


A lazy british worker narrative ain't too hot either. In fact, it's pretty dangerous and part of any attempts to further integrate welfare and 'active labour market measures' (workfare and related schemes) and to use the results of this to wages for those already at the bottom and prune what social protections we have left. Capital loves that one.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?
> 
> Surely this is more important and controversial than the *Poll Tax???
> 
> * I'm a bit too young to remember that.



You what?


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Between who?



Me and my Farage loving stepdad.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Me and my Farage loving stepdad.


Well, why's it taken you so long? Not sure that counts as civil unrest, unless you both really go for it.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Are we getting closer to civil unrest and possible conflict?
> 
> Surely this is more important and controversial than the *Poll Tax???
> 
> * I'm a bit too young to remember that.


I'd ask butchersapron 's question again - between who?  You might put Johnson and his buddies in one corner (though they don't represent the whole push for Brexit), but who is in the other?


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You what?



Do you believe the current political climate could lead to riots and civil unrest? Like we seen in 1990.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Well, why's it taken you so long? Not sure that counts as civil unrest, unless you both really go for it.


Post-Brexit Thunderdome?


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'd ask butchersapron 's question again - between who?  You might put Johnson and his buddies in one corner (though they don't represent the whole push for Brexit), but who is in the other?



There have been confrontations between remainers and leavers. Plenty of times. It's not going to take much for that to turn violent. All to pro-EU demos have been peaceful to date. I reckon that could change too.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Do you believe the current political climate could lead to riots and civil unrest? Like we seen in 1990.



I meant your suggestion that Parliament shutting down for a few weeks was somehow more important than the poll tax. 

I hope your stepdad batters you by the way.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Do you believe the current political climate could lead to riots and civil unrest? Like we seen in 1990.


If it doesn't go ahead, possibly. If it does, a bit of a sit down protest and Paul Mason doing his shouty call and response.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> There have been confrontations between remainers and leavers. Plenty of times. It's not going to take much for that to turn violent. All to pro-EU demos have been peaceful to date. I reckon that could change too.



What are the Remainers gonna do? Chant aggressively? Throw baked goods?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> There have been confrontations between remainers and leavers. Plenty of times. It's not going to take much for that to turn violent. All to pro-EU demos have been peaceful to date. I reckon that could change too.


Are they pro-eu demos?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I hope your stepdad batters you by the way.


*Splutter*


----------



## redcogs (Aug 29, 2019)

Global slow down here/slump probably coming.  Heard a pundit gassing on about low wages creating inadequate demand in UK economy, which he thought should be addressed by an increase in the spending power of the poorest most numerous section of population, by simply giving them money to spend.  He was no marxist, prob a Keynsian of sorts, but it occurred to me that some influential  Tory highs may welcome a return of big battalion trade unions to achieve the same end.  We know the 'working poor' are the deliberate creation of decades of austerity and the crushing of trade union potential.  Do people think that fear of slump might herald a return to the old 'tripartite' ways of operating for capital?  

This would be the perfect moment for the TUC to burst back into society following years of invisibility.


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I meant your suggestion that Parliament shutting down for a few weeks was somehow more important than the poll tax.
> 
> I hope your stepdad batters you by the way.



I didn't say that did i?

But i do believe a no-deal brexit would be hugely damaging to the county.


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Are they pro-eu demos?



Pro EU / any-brexit? Whats the difference?


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 29, 2019)

I have a spot of cognitive dissonance going on. Leaving aside my youthful enthusiasms that fucking things up is not a bad idea in general, in part because Im getting on and also because wishing chaos and upheaval on you lot hardly seems fair if I'm going to be well out of it, there does seem to be an opportunity for a left-leaning Brexit to emerge without a bloody revolution.

 Though I think I'd support a left-leaning remain too, if there was one like what we've got here. Remainers as presently represented  are now being such cry-baby wet liberal knobs. That's been quite a change of mind for me over the last year or so. You guys had better go with the best chance of achieving some kind of decent society, be that in or out.

But in Spain we've got a proper left-leaning party that wants Europe to morph into a social (ist/ish) community and there is no real support for any kind of Lexit here. And I'm with them whole-heartedly. Here.

Either a socialisty UK well out of an increasingly neoliberal EU or a neoliberal UK like some kind of horrible Singapore parked off the socialist paradise of a newly revitalised EU are hardly likely outcomes. But leaving seems to be the best chance of UK getting sth like the first, while staying is our best hope. Which doesn't make much sense. But I never said it would.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> I didn't say that did i?
> 
> But i do believe a no-deal brexit would be hugely damaging to the county.



I don't give a shit what you believe. 



mod said:


> Pro EU / any-brexit? Whats the difference?



What do you think the difference is? You don't have to be pro-EU to be anti-Brexit do you? And aren't these demos supposed to be about Johnson shutting down Parliament?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Actually, might be onto something with the fighting talk. Perhaps the Paul Mason and Dominic Raab should sort the Backstop in the Octagon.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

mod said:


> Pro EU / any-brexit? Whats the difference?


You can be anti brexit and pro serious EU reform (fantasy as that is) or think the EU is fab. There a world of difference in those positions and a world of different possibilities too. The question of what democracy they claim to look to defend is, that's a good one.


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I hope your stepdad batters you by the way.



Come and help him, please.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You can be anti brexit and pro serious EU reform (fantasy as that is) or think the EU is fab. There a world of difference in those positions and a world of different possibilities too.



My fantasy!


----------



## mod (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't give a shit what you believe.



OK.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> My fantasy!


It's a position i can respect - i like some of the stuff done by  transform europe for example (with eu funding of course!) but it's not one i am seeing at all from any part of the remain side. It seems even more shut down and invisible than any left-leave voice has been. I don't think that's an accident, i think it's because it's an impossibility and it's also not what that many people most invested in remain believe in. Certainly not media-remain.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

By the by, the anti-prorogation petition is still under 1.5 million. That's not pissing on anyone's chips, just an observation that Johnson's move isn't exactly inspiring a revolt. Be interesting to see what the various planned demos at the weekend manage in terms of numbers.  Regardless of the politics, pure fatigue has become as issue on all sides, people just fucking sick of it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the by, the anti-prorogation petition is still under 1.5 million. That's not pissing on anyone's chips, just an observation that Johnson's move isn't exactly inspiring a revolt. Be interesting to see what the various planned demos at the weekend manage in terms of numbers.  Regardless of the politics, pure fatigue has become as issue on all sides, people just fucking sick of it.



I think I'm gonna be a bad trot and skip them.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think I'm gonna be a bad trot and skip them.


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> ...aren't these demos supposed to be about Johnson shutting down Parliament?


From what I gather, they're about shutting down parliament to prevent, supposedly, the HoC from obstructing Brexit, ie there is an explicitly anti Brexit element to them.

Parliament regularly gets suspended for a variety of reasons, without anyone batting an eyelid.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Momentum saying they are going to 'shut down the streets':
Parliament suspension: Ruth Davidson resigns, acknowledging 'conflict I have felt over Brexit' – live news

Wish they'd done a bit more to shut down evictions, property developers and the rest.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> From what I gather, they're about shutting down parliament to prevent, supposedly, the HoC from obstructing Brexit, ie there is an explicitly anti Brexit element to them.
> 
> Parliament regularly gets suspended for a variety of reasons, without anyone batting an eyelid.



That depends on who you ask though doesn't it? Labour continuing the constructive ambiguity and saying that whatever your views on Brexit this is an attack on democracy and must be opposed. They're not saying they want to obstruct Brexit but scrutinise it. 

Clearly for some people they are anti Brexit protests.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

There's that Stalin quote, 'how many divisions does the Pope have?'

I'm a bit of a broken record on this but Johnson, in his calculations on how it all plays out, must be wondering to himself 'how many divisions does Corbyn have?' Probably not losing much sleep over the answer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> There's that Stalin quote, 'how many divisions does the Pope have?'
> 
> I'm a bit of a broken record on this but Johnson, in his calculations on how it all plays out, must be wondering to himself 'how many divisions does Corbyn have?' Probably not losing much sleep over the answer.


johnson leaves his calculations to cummings


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That depends on who you ask though doesn't it? Labour continuing the constructive ambiguity and saying that whatever your views on Brexit this is an attack on democracy and must be opposed. They're not saying they want to obstruct Brexit but scrutinise it.
> 
> Clearly for some people they are anti Brexit protests.


I get what you're saying, but TBH the distinction between obstruct and scrutinise just depends on your POV.

It's fairly clear that the protests are, effectively anti Brexit, just as calls for a 2nd referendum were/are anti Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> I get what you're saying, but TBH the distinction between obstruct and scrutinise just depends on your POV.
> 
> It's fairly clear that the protests are, effectively anti Brexit, just as calls for a 2nd referendum were/are anti Brexit.



Aye, you're not wrong. Fucking annoying though. I do want to protest the Tory govt. Have wanted to and done so for the last 9 years. I don't want anyone to be associated with anti Brexit protests. Gah.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What are the Remainers gonna do? Chant aggressively? Throw baked goods?



It'd be frangipandemonium.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It'd be frangipandemonium.



Nice.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It'd be frangipandemonium.


 ... Vs Eton Mess.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Corbyn confirms they are still using legislation as the key 'stop johnson' weapon (fear, surpise...).
Jeremy Corbyn says he will try to 'politically stop' prorogation with legislation – live news

Even with Bercow's full support this looks daft to me. So many ways the government can fuck that up, between the commons and the lords etc. I can see the pitfalls of the vonc but it seems like at this stage in the game they should stop fucking about and get on with it. As discussed endlessly, I'm not really on the side of the Rebel Alliance in parliament, but this is precisely the point in their game where a vonc is appropriate to what is going on. Am I being thick, is it just that Corbyn, Swinson and the rest think they haven't got the numbers? The road's running out, the Roadrunner is almost off the cliff edge.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Corbyn confirms they are still using legislation as the key 'stop johnson' weapon (fear, surpise...).
> Jeremy Corbyn says he will try to 'politically stop' prorogation with legislation – live news
> 
> Even with Bercow's full support this looks daft to me. So many ways the government can fuck that up, between the commons and the lords etc. I can see the pitfalls of the vonc but it seems like at this stage in the game they should stop fucking about and get on with it. As discussed endlessly, I'm not really on the side of the Rebel Alliance in parliament, but this is precisely the point in their game where a vonc is appropriate to what is going on. Am I being thick, is it just that Corbyn, Swinson and the rest think they haven't got the numbers? The road's running out, the Roadrunner is almost off the cliff edge.


Agreed.
I suspect the stuff from Boles this morning and Gauke's refusal to countenance VoNC on today's R4 News are indications that the numbers just don't add up (yet?). Too many tory 'rebels' who aren't and too many Labour MPs who aren't.

Quite simply, if they carry on fucking about like this, Johnson will have his day.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Quite simply, if they carry on fucking about like this, Johnson will have his day.


only 84 of those to go


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Corbyn confirms they are still using legislation as the key 'stop johnson' weapon (fear, surpise...).
> Jeremy Corbyn says he will try to 'politically stop' prorogation with legislation – live news
> 
> Even with Bercow's full support this looks daft to me. So many ways the government can fuck that up, between the commons and the lords etc. I can see the pitfalls of the vonc but it seems like at this stage in the game they should stop fucking about and get on with it. As discussed endlessly, I'm not really on the side of the Rebel Alliance in parliament, but this is precisely the point in their game where a vonc is appropriate to what is going on. Am I being thick, is it just that Corbyn, Swinson and the rest think they haven't got the numbers? The road's running out, the Roadrunner is almost off the cliff edge.


Corbyn has long since dropped the ball where Brexit is concerned, for his own reasons he has sat on the fence and pontificated for the last 3 years. He's never really been interested in it per se but only has an opportunity to force a GE.
He's as much a bystander as you or I at this point, it's pretty much down to what the crazy man with the bad hairstyle does. Either Boris is bluffing (which I think is a real possibility) and blinks before the EU and asks for an extension, nobody blinks and we go over the cliff edge of No Deal and have to deal with the consequences (whatever they maybe).
For all their tough talk I still have real doubts that Parliament will actually do anything of significance


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> only 84 of those to go


Out of interest, do you speculate that a 'failure' or 'success' in effecting Brexit is more likely to hasten Johnson's demise?


----------



## andysays (Aug 29, 2019)

Brexit: Next week 'only opportunity' to act on no deal


> Next week could be MPs' "only opportunity" to challenge a no-deal Brexit, ex-minister David Gauke has said.





> Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said opposition MPs would take the first steps towards trying to pass a law blocking a no-deal Brexit when Parliament returns on Tuesday. Asked whether they still had the time to pass such legislation, the Labour leader replied: "We believe we can do it, otherwise we wouldn't be trying to do it."





> He said tabling a no-confidence motion in the PM *at an "appropriate moment"* also remained an option as part of a strategy to block a no-deal scenario.


<checks watch>


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Corbyn has long since dropped the ball.



TBF, you could have stopped right there.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 29, 2019)

He's a secret commie no-dealer!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Out of interest, do you speculate that a 'failure' or 'success' in effecting Brexit is more likely to hasten Johnson's demise?


tbh if we leave the eu on 31/10/19 he's likely to last a week or two; if we don't leave the eu he's toast within hours (or he may already be gone before then).


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Corbyn has long since dropped the ball where Brexit is concerned, for his own reasons he has sat on the fence and pontificated for the last 3 years. He's never really been interested in it per se but only has an opportunity to force a GE.
> He's as much a bystander as you or I at this point, it's pretty much down to what the crazy man with the bad hairstyle does. Either Boris is bluffing (which I think is a real possibility) and blinks before the EU and asks for an extension, nobody blinks and we go over the cliff edge of No Deal and have to deal with the consequences (whatever they maybe).
> For all their tough talk I still have real doubts that Parliament will actually do anything of significance


This was my take in March:


Wilf said:


> *Anyway, now is the moment for Corbyn to strike. Strike while the monster is weakened! Do it, now! *
> 
> Erm, Jeremy, are you ready? Anytime soon? Well, okay, would you be free next week?


----------



## Teaboy (Aug 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He's a secret commie no-dealer!



To be sung in the style of the R Whites lemonade advert?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 29, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I meant your suggestion that Parliament shutting down for a few weeks was somehow more important than the poll tax.



its being shut down so a right wing tory cabal so they can push an extremely damaging, ideologically driven no deal policy with  because it would not able to get through parliament. Its also part of a wider strategy of johnson engineering an election where he represents "the will of the people" and his opponents are anti-democratic saboteurs/traitors - further inflaming  reactionary nationalism with who knows what toxic consequences. 
That is a pretty fucking big deal in my book and an outrageous assault on democracy. Too fucking right people should be on the streets - these cunts are extremists and hugely dangerous, they will throw us to the wolves. 

But no - lol - capital is disrupted -  so its all jolly japes.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh *if we leave the eu on 31/10/19 he's likely to last a week or two*; if we don't leave the eu he's toast within hours (or he may already be gone before then).



How do you work out the first bit (BIB)?  I agree on the second part.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> How do you work out the first bit (BIB)?  I agree on the second part.


because it'll take a few days for it to sink in quite how fucked we are for the slower learners among us. also no one else will want the job. we'll be the bury fc of europe, pleading desperately with the european union to take us back


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> This was my take in March:


Behold the prophet


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> because it'll take a few days for it to sink in quite how fucked we are for the slower learners among us. also no one else will want the job. we'll be the bury fc of europe, pleading desperately with the european union to take us back



Are you assuming we will leave without a deal?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you assuming we will leave without a deal?


it's no deal or no brexit. boris de pfeffel johnson is not going to come up in a month with something so obvious and well-regarded as an alternative to the backstop that no one else has considered and rejected over the past three years.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Behold the prophet


I have a feeling that there's a realistic chance of Labour getting less in the popular vote than the libs in any election that takes place this Autumn (perhaps a 45/55 chance, who knows). If that prediction or anything like it comes true, Corbyn will have to answer the question of how the fuck did it come to this, particularly after the 2017 near miss. He needed a way to get round Brexit and build something else. We're now close to the point where he and Momentum might as well give the fuck up.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's no deal or no brexit. boris de pfeffel johnson is not going to come up in a month with something so obvious and well-regarded as an alternative to the backstop that no one else has considered and rejected over the past three years.



I think he'll get some, probably small, concessions out of the EU, but enough to get a majority in the commons for a deal rather than a no deal.

I think he's a cunt, but he's not thick, I see he's playing a clever game, putting the shits up both the EU & MPs, to focus minds.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think he'll get some, probably small, concessions out of the EU, but enough to get a majority in the commons for a deal rather than a no deal.
> 
> I think he's a cunt, but he's not thick, I see he's playing a clever game, putting the shits up both the EU & MPs, to focus minds.


he's not stupid. but i am not persuaded he's the one in number 10 calling the shots.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he's not stupid. but i am not persuaded he's the one in number 10 calling the shots.



Just remember he ended-up voting for May's deal in the end, and is constantly saying the backstop is the problem.

If a time limit was put on the backstop, he could claim that as a victory. Put that back to the Commons, days before a no-deal exist, and the commons will back it.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think he'll get some, probably small, concessions out of the EU, but enough to get a majority in the commons for a deal rather than a no deal.
> 
> I think he's a cunt, but he's not thick, I see he's playing a clever game, putting the shits up both the EU & MPs, to focus minds.


I agree he's not stupid but I don't think he is as smart as he thinks he is, there is a real risk that we will leave with No Deal not because that's what he wanted but what happened because he cocked up, he has form for that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think he'll get some, probably small, concessions out of the EU, but enough to get a majority in the commons for a deal rather than a no deal.
> 
> I think he's a cunt, but he's not thick, I see he's playing a clever game, putting the shits up both the EU & MPs, to focus minds.



he will get fuck all out of the EU. they are assuming no deal - and they will be pretty pissed off with johnsons antics. His game is power - setting up a "peoples will" vs "the elites" election which may well work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> he will get fuck all out of the EU. they are assuming no deal - and they will be pretty pissed off with johnsons antics. His game is power - setting up a "peoples will" vs "the elites" election which may well work.


The eu hold all the cards. Johnson has a poor hand and is playing it badly. Atm all the eu has to do is sit tight till mid November and they can dictate the terms of a trade agreement or of a re-accession


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think he'll get some, probably small, concessions out of the EU, but enough to get a majority in the commons for a deal rather than a no deal.
> 
> I think he's a cunt, but he's not thick, I see he's playing a clever game, putting the shits up both the EU & MPs, to focus minds.


I can't comment on his thickness or otherwise, other than to observe that his record for getting stuff done when in office is abysmal.

His time as London mayor was characterised by failed projects, corrupt deals, taking credit for someone else's idea ('boris bikes'), and total inaction on anything that actually matters other than to make things worse with his corrupt deals. He was also notoriously lazy as mayor. His time as Foreign Sec involved serial ineptitude, and we all know how he got on with his first stab at involving himself in Brexit negotiations. He shows himself continually to misjudge the mood, motivation, resolve, power, underlying interests and likely reactions of the people he deals with.

He is someone with neither a grand vision nor an eye for detail. Not to be overestimated.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The eu hold all the cards. Johnson has a poor hand and is playing it badly. Atm all the eu has to do is sit tight till mid November and they can dictate the terms of a trade agreement or of a re-accession


_Brejoin _thread ahoy.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Out of interest, do you speculate that a 'failure' or 'success' in effecting Brexit is more likely to hasten Johnson's demise?



He's fucked either way.


----------



## Supine (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Brejoin _thread ahoy.



Great!


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Brejoin _thread ahoy.



Also, in tandem, a _bregret_ thread.


----------



## binka (Aug 29, 2019)

Yougov now asking me if it's appropriate for the queen to get involved to resolve brexit, obviously I told them that's an awesome idea


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 29, 2019)

binka said:


> Yougov now asking me if it's appropriate for the queen to get involved to resolve brexit, obviously I told them that's an awesome idea



She should go over there and sort them forrins out!


----------



## ska invita (Aug 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> its being shut down so a right wing tory cabal so they can push an extremely damaging, ideologically driven no deal policy with  because it would not able to get through parliament. Its also part of a wider strategy of johnson engineering an election where he represents "the will of the people" and his opponents are anti-democratic saboteurs/traitors - further inflaming  reactionary nationalism with who knows what toxic consequences.
> That is a pretty fucking big deal in my book and an outrageous assault on democracy. Too fucking right people should be on the streets - these cunts are extremists and hugely dangerous, they will throw us to the wolves.
> 
> But no - lol - capital is disrupted -  so its all jolly japes.


agree with this other than still not convinced they actually want a no deal...instincts and signs say to me its just a bargaining position/slash brexit party vote winner. Im still of the opinion they are banking on a VONC happening well before then.

The next stage narrative that they will ignore a VONC, or have the election after Halloween doesnt hold up to logic - how could you have a 6 week election campaign, finishing over xmas and ny too, right at the moment when theres real work to do post No Deal? That would be a car crash beyond this test dummy.

Anything is possible though i guess....


----------



## Yossarian (Aug 29, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Also, in tandem, a _bregret_ thread.



Bredemption


----------



## binka (Aug 29, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> She should go over there and sort them forrins out!


I was thinking more like this


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

Brocialism, wait there


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

Branarchy maybe


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> agree with this other than still not convinced they actually want a no deal...instincts and signs say to me its just a bargaining position/slash brexit party vote winner. Im still of the opinion they are banking on a VONC happening well before then.



The broadcast media appear reluctant to explore the idea that Johnson's prorogation move is an attempt to pressure the Germans/French into yielding some ground on the WA. Quite obviously, neutralising the capability of Parliament to undermine his ND threat, increases his negotiation leverage.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Branarchy maybe


I kinda like it, but isn't it a little bit breakfast cereally?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I kinda like it, but isn't it a little bit breakfast cereally?


Better than Coco Populist


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The broadcast media appear reluctant to explore the idea that Johnson's prorogation move is an attempt to pressure the Germans/French into yielding some ground on the WA. Quite obviously, neutralising the capability of Parliament to undermine his ND threat, increases his negotiation leverage.



why on earth do you think this? 
he hasn't got any leverage. they will give him nothing. In fact, as a result of his antics, they are less likely to concede even some meaningless crumb that he can dress up as an "improved deal". How can they be seen to reward this sort bluster and threat?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> why on earth do you think this?
> he hasn't got any leverage. they will give him nothing. In fact, as a result of his antics, they are less likely to concede even some meaningless crumb that he can dress up as an "improved deal". How can they be seen to reward this sort bluster and threat?


If it works (unlikely, granted) = win; orderly Brexit
If it doesn't (external blame) = win; tory GE victory in 'people vrs Parliament' campaign


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Also, in tandem, a _bregret_ thread.


Je ne bregret rien.


----------



## Ming (Aug 29, 2019)

Asian billionaires embark on UK spending spree as pound nosedives
Wow. Who’d a thunk it. Nice photo at the top of the piece also.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 29, 2019)

Have the military junta swarmed into Parliament Sq yet?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 29, 2019)

Ming said:


> Asian billionaires embark on UK spending spree as pound nosedives
> Wow. Who’d a thunk it. Nice photo at the top of the piece also.


Investors investing due to favourable exchange rates isn't really a shock and defo isn't an indication of conspiracy of whatever. Lol at some dickhead buying greene king up though


----------



## mx wcfc (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Investors investing due to favourable exchange rates isn't really a shock and defo isn't an indication of conspiracy of whatever. Lol at some dickhead buying greene king up though


Like, but whatever Asian/middle eastern capitalists buy up means more of this country being owned abroad, and that means profits (the fruits, ultimately, of our labour) going abroad.  Which in a way help us prove the "trickle down effect" is bollocks.  and yes, half of London is already owned by BVI companies etc, and capitalists are our enemy regardless of whether they are UK old money, UK PE houses, or russian oligarchs, but I still think a pound this weak is really bad news for ordinary people in the UK.  It certainly improves the economics for US business looking to buy into the NHS and other public services for example.  

The weak pound will encourage more overseas investors to buy UK (sorry, London) property, which means more luxury flats being built for investors, rather than homes for people.

I don't think it's a conspiracy as such , but UK capitalists are making big short term gains  sucking the cocks of wealthy overseas investors, so there is no pressure from capitalism on De Pfeifle Johnson to change track.  And there's plenty of middle men cashing in without giving a fuck.  

And, yes, I hope Greene King's new owners drown in a tank of that piss they call IPA.  Of course, the greater part of GK's profits are derived, ultimately, from the vast property empire they own, from screwing licensees and British drinkers.  I haven't looked at GK's accounts but they are must be close to being a property investment company rather than a brewer.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 29, 2019)

Ming said:


> Asian billionaires embark on UK spending spree as pound nosedives
> Wow. Who’d a thunk it. Nice photo at the top of the piece also.


Fair point, I agree - the EU is very much opposed to the system that throws up billionaires and does everything it can to attack them and the horse they road in on. Right?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Investors investing due to favourable exchange rates isn't really a shock and defo isn't an indication of conspiracy of whatever. Lol at some dickhead buying greene king up though



Love the new profile pic


----------



## Ming (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Fair point, I agree - the EU is very much opposed to the system that throws up billionaires and does everything it can to attack them and the horse they road in on. Right?


At this stage in the game i’m just predicting outcomes. We’re getting a no-deal. It’ll fuck the country (especially anyone who isn’t a multimillionaire). And it’ll be a disaster capitalists wet dream. And yes, its been planned.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Ming said:


> At this stage in the game i’m just predicting outcomes. We’re getting a no-deal. It’ll fuck the country (especially anyone who isn’t a multimillionaire). And it’ll be a disaster capitalists wet dream. And yes, its been planned.


I suspect we are fucked. Just that bit more but by the same people who have fucked us, forever. Yeah, it's all shit.


----------



## Ming (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I suspect we are fucked. Just that bit more but by the same people who have fucked us, forever. Yeah, it's all shit.


This one is going to be a particularly rough unlubricated fucking though. It's going to change the country to Singapore on the Thames. A no tax/regulation wonderland for oligarchs and their ilk.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 30, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Love the new profile pic


Likewise


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If it works (unlikely, granted) = win; orderly Brexit
> If it doesn't (external blame) = win; tory GE victory in 'people vrs Parliament' campaign


Chivers explores the ‘madman theory’ (game theory) reasoning behind the Johnson regime’s (Cummings’) tactic of throwing away the steering wheel.

https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 30, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Have the military junta swarmed into Parliament Sq yet?


If they do it'll be surrounding the HoC but facing out, not in.


----------



## isvicthere? (Aug 30, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brocialism, wait there



I reckon we should focus our efforts on bre-entry.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Chivers explores the ‘madman theory’ (game theory) reasoning behind the Johnson regime’s (Cummings’) tactic of throwing away the steering wheel.
> 
> https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/



A tactic born of Empire where the successes keep coming. It's not throwing away the steering wheel. It's puncturing your brake lines.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Poi E said:


> A tactic born of Empire where the successes keep coming. It's not throwing away the steering wheel. It's puncturing your brake lines.


I think he's burned the car


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Poi E said:


> A tactic born of Empire where the successes keep coming. It's not throwing away the steering wheel. It's puncturing your brake lines.


I'm thinking that the performative nature of negating Parliament equates to the more dramatic analogy pf casting of the steering wheel, rather than the more subtle (unseen) puncturing of the brake lines.


----------



## Poi E (Aug 30, 2019)

Fair point. 'Tis the visibility of the shenanigans that is relevant. Don't know if I've ever had a shenanigan myself. Maybe something only others do?


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 30, 2019)

There's no such thing as "a" shenanigan, I don't think  . There are only *shenanigans*. Several/multiple.

**</can't be arsed to Google  >


----------



## William of Walworth (Aug 30, 2019)

As for this whole Brexit malarkey though ....


----------



## tommers (Aug 30, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 30, 2019)

BREAKING NEWS - The Scottish court has rejected the application for a injunction against the government.

* Just reported on Sky News.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Major piling in on the Gina Miller one.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 30, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think that this is it in a nutshell really. Can those of us - who see the EU as the chosen vehicle for the economic, social and cultural manifestation of the neo-liberal project - a project that Butchers correctly characterises as more deep and complex than just privatisation, cuts and punishment beating of the poor - start to find common cause with those who want change but voted remain.
> 
> You’d have to say that this isn’t happening at the moment, and views are hardening and polarising in a binary and reductive manner. But this is going to be a long, very long, unfolding process.
> 
> LeFT is a nascent attempt to begin the work. We will see how it goes, and we are all aware of the pitfalls and some of the problems with some of those involved involved. But a start needs to be made.


Do you have a link for these LeFT folk? Google doesn’t give a fuck about upper or lower case.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 30, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - The Scottish court has rejected the application for a injunction against the government.
> 
> * Just reported on Sky News.



Oh, it was only rejection of a 'interim' judgement...



> Doherty said: “I’m not satisfied that it has been demonstrated that there’s a need for an interim suspension or an interim interdict to be granted at this stage.
> 
> “A substantive hearing is set to place on Tuesday, before the first possible date parliament could be prorogued.”



Johnson can prorogue parliament, says Scottish judge in temporary ruling


----------



## Ming (Aug 30, 2019)

It's just running the clock down. Tick tock, tick tock. Halloween!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> its being shut down so a right wing tory cabal so they can push an extremely damaging, ideologically driven no deal policy with  because it would not able to get through parliament. Its also part of a wider strategy of johnson engineering an election where he represents "the will of the people" and his opponents are anti-democratic saboteurs/traitors - further inflaming  reactionary nationalism with who knows what toxic consequences.
> That is a pretty fucking big deal in my book and an outrageous assault on democracy. Too fucking right people should be on the streets - these cunts are extremists and hugely dangerous, they will throw us to the wolves.
> 
> But no - lol - capital is disrupted -  so its all jolly japes.



It's not as important as the poll tax though is it? Not least because that involved a mass movement of working class people.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Aug 30, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Do you have a link for these LeFT folk? Google doesn’t give a fuck about upper or lower case.



Just google Leave Fight Transform and all of our social media etc will come up and our blog site


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 30, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Just google Leave Fight Transform and all of our social media etc will come up and our blog site


Cheers didn’t know what the acronym stood for


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The eu hold all the cards. Johnson has a poor hand and is playing it badly. Atm all the eu has to do is sit tight till mid November and they can dictate the terms of a trade agreement or of a re-accession



Unless he gets a majority and passes May's deal. Doesn't matter if there's a trade border in the Irish sea if you don't need the DUP's support.


----------



## JimW (Aug 30, 2019)

Greene King got a popularity bump in China as Xi had a pint when he visited UK. Sounds tenuous but might have influenced buyout. One of few easy to buy UK bitters here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Unless he gets a majority and passes May's deal. Doesn't matter if there's a trade border in the Irish sea if you don't need the DUP's support.


i think it's safe to say the tory party hasn't covered itself in glory these past years and i think it's a big ask for the blond beast to do better than theresa may, when he's so little to offer


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2019)

JimW said:


> Greene King got a popularity bump in China as Xi had a pint when he visited UK. Sounds tenuous but might have influenced buyout. One of few easy to buy UK bitters here.





(((Chinese drinkers)))


----------



## Crispy (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Chivers explores the ‘madman theory’ (game theory) reasoning behind the Johnson regime’s (Cummings’) tactic of throwing away the steering wheel.
> 
> https://unherd.com/2019/08/dominic-cummings-is-no-chicken/


As the article points out, Chicken Game Theory assumes both vehicles are of equal size.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Jaded as I am by the 'it's an outrage, paul mason, gina miller, take to the streets/high court' mash up, I'm quite looking forward to next week. There's going to be some kind of move against Bercow at some point - editors having a look in their safe type things - and regardless, the pompous show pony is going to be blowing pompous steam out of his arse in Parliament. Adds to the tragedy of this whole shitshow, Brexit or Remain, our future is in their hands not our own.


----------



## Crispy (Aug 30, 2019)

Crispy said:


> As the article points out, Chicken Game Theory assumes both vehicles are of equal size.


Gordon Brown reckons the other vehicle will simply be taken off the road 
EU to 'withdraw' current deadline for Brexit and remove no-deal option says Gordon Brown


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> (((Chinese drinkers)))


I actually quite like greene king.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Jaded as I am by the 'it's an outrage, paul mason, gina miller, take to the streets/high court' mash up, I'm quite looking forward to next week. There's going to be some kind of move against Bercow at some point - editors having a look in their safe type things - and regardless, the pompous show pony is going to be blowing pompous steam out of his arse in Parliament. Adds to the tragedy of this whole shitshow, Brexit or Remain, our future is in their hands not our own.


Not wishing to come over all Lexity-Johnny-come-lately, but the damage being wrought to our political establishment, institutions and constitution will likely never heal back to what was.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Gordon Brown reckons the other vehicle will simply be taken off the road
> EU to 'withdraw' current deadline for Brexit and remove no-deal option says Gordon Brown


Removing the road?


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not wishing to come over all Lexity-Johnny-come-lately, but the damage being wrought to our political establishment, institutions and constitution will likely never heal back to what was.


Yes, unwritten constitution, centuries old traditions, trust, balances .... lol.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it's safe to say the tory party hasn't covered itself in glory these past years and i think it's a big ask for the blond beast to do better than theresa may, when he's so little to offer



Shouldn't be harder for him to do better than May at a GE given the context I reckon, sadly.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I actually quite like greene king.


Well why don't you just go and live in communist China then?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Shouldn't be harder for him to do better than May at a GE given the context I reckon, sadly.


Shouldn't be


But I have faith in Johnson


----------



## JimW (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I actually quite like greene king.


I buy it too, the local lager can make anything else seem tasty.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 30, 2019)

Abbott Ale is pretty nice


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

I've seen Rees-Mogg quoted yesterday in a few different papers. 

I thought it was interesting that in the pro-Brexity tabloids, which I don't wish to link to, he is quoted as saying that if MP's don't like what Johnson is doing they will have to show 'gumption and courage' and bring down the government. Weirdly these comments are not mentioned in the Remain papers like Grauniad, Indy etc. 

I think this is interesting because it gets to the heart of what the anti no deal Alliance or whatever doesn't seem to want to admit - they either have the numbers to bring down the govt or they don't. Instead they're hell bent on legal challenges, outrage and wittering on about changing the law, which just seems unrealistic. Worse, they are not putting themselves on an election footing, which Johnson definitely is and has been for a while. All this challenging in the courts stuff is a complete gift to Johnson's election strategy.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Abbott Ale is pretty nice


Indeed. After Halloween we'll all be drinking the ale of old England, mead or cats piss.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I've seen Rees-Mogg quoted yesterday in a few different papers.
> 
> I thought it was interesting that in the pro-Brexity tabloids, which I don't wish to link to, he is quoted as saying that if MP's don't like what Johnson is doing they will have to show 'gumption and courage' and bring down the government. Weirdly these comments are not mentioned in the Remain papers like Grauniad, Indy etc.
> 
> I think this is interesting because it gets to the heart of what the anti no deal Alliance or whatever doesn't seem to want to admit - they either have the numbers to bring down the govt or they don't. Instead they're hell bent on legal challenges, outrage and wittering on about changing the law, which just seems unrealistic. Worse, they are not putting themselves on an election footing, which Johnson definitely is and has been for a while. All this challenging in the courts stuff is a complete gift to Johnson's election strategy.


Yep, 100%. Ditto the attempt to get Johnson in court over lying in the referendum a couple of months back. Stupid tactics. And I just don't see how the legislative route survives a filibuster in the Lords. Bercow might be able to fix things in the commons, but not there.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 30, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Gordon Brown reckons the other vehicle will simply be taken off the road
> EU to 'withdraw' current deadline for Brexit and remove no-deal option says Gordon Brown


This kinda takes the wind out of his sails


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 30, 2019)

JimW said:


> Greene King got a popularity bump in China as Xi had a pint when he visited UK. Sounds tenuous but might have influenced buyout. One of few easy to buy UK bitters here.


Poor bastards


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think this is interesting because it gets to the heart of what the anti no deal Alliance or whatever doesn't seem to want to admit - they either have the numbers to bring down the govt or they don't. Instead they're hell bent on legal challenges, outrage and wittering on about changing the law, which just seems unrealistic. Worse, they are not putting themselves on an election footing, which Johnson definitely is and has been for a while. All this challenging in the courts stuff is a complete gift to Johnson's election strategy.


Scared of the political argument the 'Remain alliance' are reduced to the technical/legal arguments. As you say it emphases what a deadens they are.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 30, 2019)

Got really pissed on mead once (long story but ended up at somebody's student digs and only drink they had was mead ffs), worst hangover ever and basically pissed lucozade for three days (((peasants)))


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Without wishing to stir up old threads etc...this is quite lol


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)




----------



## binka (Aug 30, 2019)

Yesterday Coral had a Labour majority at the next election @ 16/1, today that's come in to 12/1 - it's on! 

(You can still get 14s at Betfred but everyone else is 12s and below now)


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

binka said:


> Yesterday Coral had a Labour majority at the next election @ 16/1, today that's come in to 12/1 - it's on!


er it just means money's been shovelled on for labour to win, not that it's actually a whit more likely than it was yesterday


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 182511


it's rather a small picket


----------



## binka (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> er it just means money's been shovelled on for labour to win, not that it's actually a whit more likely than it was yesterday


Yes I do know how bookies odds work


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Gordon Brown reckons the other vehicle will simply be taken off the road
> EU to 'withdraw' current deadline for Brexit and remove no-deal option says Gordon Brown


I'm not sure what the legal status of such a move would be. Johnson has already committed to leaving by Oct 31, deal or no, and unless an extension is asked for, I don't see how it can be unilaterally imposed. 

Agree with SpackleFrog above, the real question for the parliamentary opponents of no deal ATM is whether a majority can be mustered to either prevent it or bring down the government. Everything else is a distraction.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

binka said:


> Yes I do know how bookies odds work


perhaps you could display that knowledge in future instead of hiding it under a bushel


----------



## SpineyNorman (Aug 30, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brocialism, wait there


Brocial Femocracy. Something for everyone.


----------



## binka (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps you could display that knowledge in future instead of hiding it under a bushel


Have you ever considered not being so tedious all the time? Give it a go you might even like it!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

binka said:


> Have you ever considered not being so tedious all the time? Give it a go you might even like it!


give it a go COMMA you might even like it


----------



## Artaxerxes (Aug 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure what the legal status of such a move would be. Johnson has already committed to leaving by Oct 31, deal or no, and unless an extension is asked for, I don't see how it can be unilaterally imposed.
> 
> Agree with SpackleFrog above, the real question for the parliamentary opponents of no deal ATM is whether a majority can be mustered to either prevent it or bring down the government. Everything else is a distraction.



Honestly pretending we've left while not leaving sounds the best option right now.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 30, 2019)

It wouldn't be imposed the current status is that we are in the EU until our membership expires and we leave No Deal by default.
If they take the deadline away then we can still leave without a Deal by the UK govt actively leaving No Deal which under UK law (as established by relevant court cases) would need Bozo to put No Deal to Parliament which isn't likely to buy it.
If they do this then the chances of a GE go up massively since Bozo will need a majority to get a Deal or No Deal through.
Alternatively the current paralysis could drag on until the sun goes cold


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure what the legal status of such a move would be. Johnson has already committed to leaving by Oct 31, deal or no, and unless an extension is asked for, I don't see how it can be unilaterally imposed.
> 
> Agree with SpackleFrog above, the real question for the parliamentary opponents of no deal ATM is whether a majority can be mustered to either prevent it or bring down the government. Everything else is a distraction.



Yeah would be the worst PR move in a long line of bad PR moves if the EU just told everyone Britain was still a member.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Honestly pretending we've left while not leaving sounds the best option right now.


You can check out any time you like but ...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> give it a go COMMA you might even like it


Semi-colon would be optimal tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Semi-colon would be optimal tbh.


even a hyphen would have done. i'm surprised maomao liked it despite the desperate need for punctuation in the second sentence.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 30, 2019)

Supreme Court tells woman in 'loveless marriage' she has to stay married


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Supreme Court tells woman in 'loveless marriage' she has to stay married


i see the indy can't decide if she's mrs owens or ms owens


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Politicians are cowardly wankers, part 734:
The last couple of days have seen stories on several members of the cabinet, comparing what they said about prorogation in the leadership campaign to now lining up behind Johnson (best one was Hancock scuttling, _diving_ even, into his ministerial car to avoid the question).

Here's a story about Javid not being told before Cummings fired a couple of his spads, along with having his first major speech cancelled:
Sajid Javid was not told in advance of adviser's sacking by Cummings

I doubt these fuckers can even manage to lie to themselves over their self interest and cowardice at the moment.


----------



## maomao (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> even a hyphen would have done. i'm surprised maomao liked it despite the desperate need for punctuation in the second sentence.


It was the sentiment I enjoyed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

maomao said:


> It was the sentiment I enjoyed.


you auld sentimentalist


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Aug 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> I'm not sure what the legal status of such a move would be. Johnson has already committed to leaving by Oct 31,
> 
> 
> andysays said:
> ...


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Just a random thought on tactical idiocy: John Major too. Diving into legal challenges probably helps Johnson, as previously discussed. If he'd wanted a meaningful intervention the one thing he could have done was focus on centrist tories and give them a bit of backbone. He should probably speak at one of the remainy rallies, do a few public meetings.

Gee, I don't give a fuck about him or his cause, but he can't break out of his own grandiosity. Even in the 1992 GE he managed it a bit when he got his famous soap box out and did a few shouty appearances. Nowadays they are all trapped in their silly roles and the game plays out. Not sure if Johnson will win (increasingly, I think he might), but his opponents are idiots.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah would be the worst PR move in a long line of bad PR moves if the EU just told everyone Britain was still a member.


So what? the leave at any cost brigade would scream blue murder but at the end of the day the EU doesn't have to answer to the UK public and I don't care if anyone takes their frustration out on Bozo


Wilf said:


> You can check out any time you like but ...


Don't you start I have had that song stuck in my head for the last 3 years


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Not sure if Johnson will win (increasingly, I think he might), but his opponents are idiots.


they're all idiots.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Don't you start I have had that song stuck in my head for the last 3 years


as a public service


Spoiler


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> they're all idiots.


Idiot (noun): fool, ninny, clod, person outwitted by Boris Johnson, daftarse, chump


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Idiot (noun): fool, ninny, clod, person outwitted by Boris Johnson, daftarse, chump


johnson's a fuckwit, a low wretch


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2019)

littlebabyjesus 
Something funny gone on with your quote there.

Anyway, *if *Johnson is no longer in power, then things may be different, which is why I said in the very post you replied to that those opposed to a No Deal exit should be trying to actually bring down his government with a VoNC rather than those various other delaying and distracting tactics.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> johnson's a fuckwit, a low wretch


The best pound for pound arsewipe on the planet


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

andysays said:


> Something funny gone on with your quote there.
> 
> Anyway, *if *Johnson is no longer in power, then things may be different, which is why I said in the very post you replied to that those opposed to a No Deal exit should be trying to actually bring down his government with a VoNC rather than those various other delaying and distracting tactics.


who's that to?


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> who's that to?


LBJ (see edit)


----------



## Humberto (Aug 30, 2019)

binka said:


> Yesterday Coral had a Labour majority at the next election @ 16/1, today that's come in to 12/1 - it's on!
> 
> (You can still get 14s at Betfred but everyone else is 12s and below now)



Although he is only 3/1 to get 'most seats'. 'Kinnel, bleak though.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




Rees Moog seems to be stimulating quite a few imaginations atm...


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Just a random thought on tactical idiocy: John Major too. Diving into legal challenges probably helps Johnson, as previously discussed. If he'd wanted a meaningful intervention the one thing he could have done was focus on centrist tories and give them a bit of backbone. He should probably speak at one of the remainy rallies, do a few public meetings.
> 
> Gee, I don't give a fuck about him or his cause, but he can't break out of his own grandiosity. Even in the 1992 GE he managed it a bit when he got his famous soap box out and did a few shouty appearances. Nowadays they are all trapped in their silly roles and the game plays out. Not sure if Johnson will win (increasingly, I think he might), but his opponents are idiots.


I don't agree, having a former tory pm say their move is a stunt is damaging to them.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't agree, having a former tory pm say their move is a stunt is damaging to them.


Yer reckon?

(the day before) yesterday's man fighting yesteryear's battle; doesn't he realise that the bastards have won?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Aug 30, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't agree, having a former tory pm say their move is a stunt is damaging to them.



Having done it himself back 1997...

Fury as sleaze report buried



> The furore over the suppression of the "cash for questions" report was catapulted into the general election campaign last night when Paddy Ashdown wrote to the prime minister demanding its publication and Tony Blair's office indicated that Labour would harry the Tories over it.
> 
> The row will grow with Labour's deputy leader, John Prescott, also writing to John Major today. Labour is expected to accuse Mr Major of proroguing parliament for the longest period since 1918 simply to avoid the embarrassing findings being published.


----------



## andysays (Aug 30, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Having done it himself back 1997...
> 
> Fury as sleaze report buried


Good spot


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't agree, having a former tory pm say their move is a stunt is damaging to them.


Only within the rules of the game, the blather. I'd hardly expect John Major to be engaging with working class voters and addressing the true causes of brexit, but he shows he's stuck in some kind of dusty Gormenghast of dusty tomes and dusty ideas. If these fuckers want to catch up with Johnson they need to change their ideas. They can't though - and fwiw, neither can Corbyn, Swinson or the rest of them. Even Momentum are stuck in a parallel universe of dusty liberal ideas and tactics. They all just keep on confirming why Brexit happened in the first place.


----------



## Wilf (Aug 30, 2019)

High Level Anti-Prorogation Strategy Meeting:


----------



## Anju (Aug 30, 2019)

Can the rebel alliance stop no-deal Brexit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> the EU doesn't have to answer to the UK public



This attitude is why you lost.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> I don't agree, having a former tory pm say their move is a stunt is damaging to them.



I'm afraid you are about as wrong as it is possible to be on this one. They may well quote Major on the Tory election leaflets.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This attitude is why you lost.


I thought maybe he was just giving us an obvious and clear reason as to why the UK public voted leave.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This attitude is why you lost.


Did you get a say in voting for Tusk or Junkers I certainly didn't or their replacements either. No matter what the final outcome of Brexit we aren't going to see a ballot paper with their names on it. 
They don't have to worry about how the British public see them especially after we leave whereas BoZo and Magic Grandpa do at some point need to face a public vote.
Perhaps if the public had more say in choosing the EU leaders we wouldn't be in this mountain of shit but here we are


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 30, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Did you get a say in voting for Tusk or Junkers I certainly didn't or their replacements either. No matter what the final outcome of Brexit we aren't going to see a ballot paper with their names on it.
> They don't have to worry about how the British public see them especially after we leave whereas BoZo and Magic Grandpa do at some point need to face a public vote.
> Perhaps if the public had more say in choosing the EU leaders we wouldn't be in this mountain of shit but here we are



I'm well aware the EU is run by unelected bureaucrats but I thought you wanted Britain to remain in the EU? Don't you think telling people that the EU doesn't have to answer to anyone makes that less likely?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> High Level Anti-Prorogation Strategy Meeting:



I forgot how grey Major was in that show!!! being 9 at the time. I wrote a satirical newspaper piece about him being caught with his pants down with Madonna in gaidhlig “Madonna Dona” (to any gaels yeah I know shit grammar I was 9)

Massive derail sorry


MickiQ said:


> Did you get a say in voting for Tusk or Junkers I certainly didn't or their replacements either. No matter what the final outcome of Brexit we aren't going to see a ballot paper with their names on it.
> They don't have to worry about how the British public see them especially after we leave whereas BoZo and Magic Grandpa do at some point need to face a public vote.
> Perhaps if the public had more say in choosing the EU leaders we wouldn't be in this mountain of shit but here we are


Aye we would


----------



## Supine (Aug 30, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Did you get a say in voting for Tusk or Junkers I certainly didn't or their replacements either



Tusk and Junkers were both elected into their roles democratically. Representative democracy in action.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2019)

Supine said:


> Tusk and Junkers were both elected into their roles democratically. Representative democracy in action.


Who was the electorate?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Only within the rules of the game, the blather. I'd hardly expect John Major to be engaging with working class voters and addressing the true causes of brexit, but he shows he's stuck in some kind of dusty Gormenghast of dusty tomes and dusty ideas. If these fuckers want to catch up with Johnson they need to change their ideas. They can't though - and fwiw, neither can Corbyn, Swinson or the rest of them. Even Momentum are stuck in a parallel universe of dusty liberal ideas and tactics. They all just keep on confirming why Brexit happened in the first place.


This is only a skirmish on the way, he's not trying to overturn brexit itself. That will take a while yet and i don't think Johnson is in that strong a position.


----------



## Supine (Aug 30, 2019)

The UK. 

You don't honestly want to actually vote on everything everywhere yourself in person do you? You'd never have time to do anything as an individual if you did.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm afraid you are about as wrong as it is possible to be on this one.


I'll take that as a compliment.


----------



## philosophical (Aug 30, 2019)

Where is this place where any 'bureaucrats' are 'elected'?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 30, 2019)

Supine said:


> The UK.
> 
> You don't honestly want to actually vote on everything everywhere yourself in person do you? You'd never have time to do anything as an individual if you did.


You mean minor things like whose running Europe?

Really, don't use terms and concepts that a) you don't understand and b) you have no actual political commitment to anyway. Your reply here demonstrates both of these things.


----------



## maomao (Aug 30, 2019)

Supine said:


> The UK.
> 
> You don't honestly want to actually vote on everything everywhere yourself in person do you? You'd never have time to do anything as an individual if you did.


You'd be impressed by Chinese democracy no doubt.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 30, 2019)

Supine said:


> Tusk and Junkers were both elected into their roles democratically. Representative democracy in action.


This is exactly why socialists are right to mock and oppose liberal Remain crap. Either appalling anti-democratic politics or just cowardice and/or dishonesty.


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 30, 2019)

ACG article on the proroguing of parliament silliness:



> *Let Us Not Talk Falsely Now*
> Boris Johnson’s proroguing of Parliament throws light on a number of subjects. It indicates that the British ruling class is bitterly divided like never before. It points towards the pressures that Farage and the Brexit Party are putting on the Conservatives. Johnson knows that he must be seen to act in a decisive way if he wants to avoid the rupturing of the Conservative Party. Unfortunately for him, this ploy opens up other possibilities of disintegration of the Tories and indeed the United Kingdom.
> 
> The British ruling class was once much admired by its international peers for its cohesiveness and solidarity. It acted decisively and intelligently over the years to preserve class rule. Unlike the French ruling class, with the Revolution of 1789 carried out by the emerging bourgeoisie, and which resulted in the mass slaughter of the aristocracy, the British ruling class was able to ally with the old aristocracy and gentry, to the point of intermarrying with them. It preserved the monarchy as part of class rule, and loyalty to the Crown was seen as an essential part of preserving the status quo, the Empire and then the Commonwealth. “The myth of ‘national unity’ is built around the role of the Queen, with all that that entails like privilege and deference, and “continuity” (see our Abolish the Monarchy article). It developed parliamentary democracy to disguise its class dictatorship, its control of all assets including the land, and its tight grip on the State, the “Establishment”. The Labour Party acted within this system of democracy to implement the demands of the IMF, to launch austerity measures against the working class and to support various imperialist adventures, often in league with its US ally.
> ...


_Original article Let Us Not Talk Falsely Now – Anarchist Communist Group_


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 30, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Where is this place where any 'bureaucrats' are 'elected'?


The emphasis is on unelected because such people in the EU are carrying out work usually carried out by our elected representatives. Basically the shittyness of our national system turned up to 11, nay, TWELVE!!!!!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 30, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> ACG article on the proroguing of parliament silliness:
> 
> 
> _Original article Let Us Not Talk Falsely Now – Anarchist Communist Group_


Paragraph beginning however those days are long gone... The loss of the empire may have seriously diminished the ruling class but I'd have expected to see some mention of the commonwealth and dominions, not to mention neo-colonialism. It wasn't as you make it sound, that there was an easy pivot from empire to Europe, that the majority of the rc were all on board with this, orienting to the common market as this meant turning away from established British trading relationships with the dominions eg new zealand. I'm by no means persuaded that your brief dismissal of the period 1947-1973 - Indian & Pakistani independence to accession to the cm - captures the gist of the sea change in British state orientation. Other than this gripe, I very much enjoyed your article.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 30, 2019)

Anju said:


> Can the rebel alliance stop no-deal Brexit?
> 
> View attachment 182555


Article on 'rebel alliance' with a photo of the chancellor of the exchequer 2016 - 2019 at the top, what a time to be alive etc


----------



## Serge Forward (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model Cheers. I'll pass your comments on.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 30, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm well aware the EU is run by unelected bureaucrats but I thought you wanted Britain to remain in the EU? Don't you think telling people that the EU doesn't have to answer to anyone makes that less likely?


Wouldn't argue with you mate, that was after all touted as a reason why some people voted Leave now. Speaking personally I would say that even now the future looks if not brighter at least less dark if Brexit gets knocked on the head. Of all the plausible futures I can imagine outside the EU none of them appeal at all to me.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Paragraph beginning however those days are long gone... The loss of the empire may have seriously diminished the ruling class but I'd have expected to see some mention of the commonwealth and dominions, not to mention neo-colonialism. It wasn't as you make it sound, that there was an easy pivot from empire to Europe, that the majority of the rc were all on board with this, orienting to the common market as this meant turning away from established British trading relationships with the dominions eg new zealand. I'm by no means persuaded that your brief dismissal of the period 1947-1973 - Indian & Pakistani independence to accession to the cm - captures the gist of the sea change in British state orientation. Other than this gripe, I very much enjoyed your article.


Yes. Always worth remembering that the UK had (right party of capital-led) 'Eurosceptic' pressure groups at least 12 years before our accession to the then EEC in 1973. The A_nti Common Market League,_ (ACML), which latterly morphed into the _Get Britain Out _group, was formed in 1961.


----------



## Ming (Aug 30, 2019)

C&P’d from a comment in the Guardian. Shows the lies and hypocrisy.
The patriotic Brexiters...

*Rees-Mogg: Opens funds in Ireland
Redwood: “Don’t invest in UK because of Brexit"
Farage: Gets German passports for kids
Lawson: Applies for French residency
UK’s richest man: moves with all his money to Monaco
Dyson: chooses Singapore for his factory.
Dyson again: now chooses Singapore for his HQ.
Michael Caine - Very wealthy, tax-avoiding, hypocrite who's spent most of his life as a tax exile in the US.
Richard Littlejohn spouts Brexit propaganda shit from Florida*


----------



## Ming (Aug 30, 2019)

maomao said:


> You'd be impressed by Chinese democracy no doubt.


There are a few good tracks on it but it took too long to record so has no unifying sound or cultural lynchpin.


----------



## Humberto (Aug 31, 2019)

See, who is the violent one? A ruling class, the establishment? They chose to be _your_ enemy, and will continue to be so, on their dictated terms. Right, so? We are talking death. Which is what? Violence. They will play you like a fiddle if you let them. You are nothing to them. If you don't speak, they will hurt you. That is all. If you don't resist they will punish you.

Why? Their 'nature' but more to the point: it is class war. They are good at it now. They control you and the world you live in. Therefore, every move they make, everything they tell you is poison. Start as you mean to go on eh, Boris? They will trap you and deceive you. And never forget how many they have killed and will kill: given the chance.

Boris will destroy all you have. These are NOT good people. They have got it in for you. So why do what you are told and vote for the bollix?


----------



## maomao (Aug 31, 2019)

Ming said:


> There are a few good tracks on it but it took too long to record so has no unifying sound or cultural lynchpin.



Well that went right over my head.


----------



## gosub (Aug 31, 2019)

Tusk: Domestic politics could drive Britain out of EU - Reuters


,  stick that in the "best endeavours" file


----------



## teqniq (Aug 31, 2019)

More than 50 rebel MPs pledge to convene alternative parliament


----------



## Ming (Aug 31, 2019)

maomao said:


> Well that went right over my head.


GnR.


----------



## maomao (Aug 31, 2019)

Ming said:


> GnR.


Who fucking knew they released albums this century? I gave up on them when they did that racist song when I was 15.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 31, 2019)

Not everyone's cup of tea I suspect but Marina Hyde's causitic observations nearly always make me smile.

Sajid Javid cowers behind net curtains as Cummings ‘gets ready’ for the final act | Marina Hyde


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Anyone going on the Owen Jones/Paul Mason/Waitrose protests today?

Pics would be good, if you are.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Anyone going on the Owen Jones/Paul Mason/Waitrose protests today?
> 
> Pics would be good, if you are.


Where are these anti-jones. Mason and Waitrose demos?


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Where are these anti-jones. Mason and Waitrose demos?


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2019)

I am assembling outside the Waitrose on Liverpool Road n1 at 1pm and processing via Chapel Market, Penton Street, Pentonville Road and York way to rally by myself outside the guardian offices where I shall address myself


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I am assembling outside the Waitrose on Liverpool Road n1 at 1pm and processing via Chapel Market, Penton Street, Pentonville Road and York way to rally by myself outside the guardian offices where I shall address myself


Remember the pics!


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Remember the pics!


I'll see if can get a passer-by to take a picture of the demonstration


----------



## teqniq (Aug 31, 2019)

Nice bit of trolling here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Nice bit of trolling here.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'll see if can get a passer-by to take a picture of the demonstration


Try not to get kettled.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

Ming said:


> C&P’d from a comment in the Guardian. Shows the lies and hypocrisy.
> The patriotic Brexiters...
> 
> *Rees-Mogg: Opens funds in Ireland
> ...



Thank you for this secondhand low grade Grauniad reader content.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Anyone going on the Owen Jones/Paul Mason/Waitrose protests today?
> 
> Pics would be good, if you are.



Yeah...it starts in 40 minutes I'd best get moving...

Ugh its gonna be horrendous...


----------



## Pickman's model (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Try not to get kettled.


It can happen. In 2004 when gwb visited the UK I was held in the world's smallest kettle by the cops who thought I desired nothing more than to fling myself emily davison like in front of his motorcade


----------



## teqniq (Aug 31, 2019)

I can imagine Javid rather that coming in through the door like us conventional folks, oozing up through the cracks in the floorboards.

Sajid Javid: relationship with PM is 'fantastic' despite aide's sacking


----------



## Ming (Aug 31, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I can imagine Javid rather that coming in through the door like us conventional folks, oozing up through the cracks in the floorboards.
> 
> Sajid Javid: relationship with PM is 'fantastic' despite aide's sacking


Well. There's some moral character and personal self-esteem.


----------



## treelover (Aug 31, 2019)

> Anyone going on the Owen Jones/Paul Mason/Waitrose protests today?
> 
> Pics would be good, if you are.





Friends of mine are going to Sheff one, but they are acutely aware that for millions things are already pretty awful, no mass marches for the disabled and sick, including the guy who slit his throat, or the man who died weighting sic stone after losing his benefits.

Will they be aware that going back to the status quo is not an option, that the causes of Brexit have to be addressed..


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

treelover said:


> Friends of mine are going to Sheff one, but they are acutely aware that for millions things are already pretty awful, no mass marches for the disabled and sick, including the guy who slit his throat, or the man who died weighting sic stone after losing his benefits.
> 
> Will they be aware that going back to the status quo is not an option, that the causes of Brexit have to be addressed..



There at the moment. Natalie Bennett speaking... crowd pretty much as you’d expect. Yeah. Though this sign was refreshingly blunt:


----------



## Brainaddict (Aug 31, 2019)

While I think it is pretty important to prevent a no-deal Brexit in order to protect ourselves from the horrendous 'economic restructuring' that will come in its wake, I have been so far unable to motivate myself to go to protests that are largely about returning to the status quo. I feel like I'm damned if I do and damned if I don't. Strange times.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

Sheff protest is outside John Lewis. They’ll do a roaring trade today.


----------



## treelover (Aug 31, 2019)

Just been told the first speaker has told the massive crowd, that if you disabled or sick, on benefits, do not be frighted about being here, being seen, we are here for you

its good news, but i don't think the DWP would take blind bit of notice.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

There’s a Kashmir demo in peace gardens at 12:30, see how many end up there.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

Also here. Its terrible. I hate it.


----------



## MickiQ (Aug 31, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I am assembling outside the Waitrose on Liverpool Road n1 at 1pm and processing via Chapel Market, Penton Street, Pentonville Road and York way to rally by myself outside the guardian offices where I shall address myself


We're with you in spirit


----------



## Supine (Aug 31, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Anyone going on the Owen Jones/Paul Mason/Waitrose protests today?
> 
> Pics would be good, if you are.



Waitrose. Right. Is this about the free coffee thing?


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 31, 2019)

Supine said:


>



You've confirmed this with your party sources I take it?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Aug 31, 2019)

And from that alleged Cummings threat, now the somewhat unedifying sight of lib dems on Twitter openly courting Tory MPs to come and join them.  2010-15 taught them nothing.

Majority of one disappearing would be fun, but ffs.


----------



## danny la rouge (Aug 31, 2019)

Supine said:


>



Who is Nicktolhurst and what are her/his sources?


----------



## kenny g (Aug 31, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Who is Nicktolhurst and what are her/his sources?


_"Nick Tolhurst is a writer, lecturer & consultant on international governance and finance in the European banking industry. He was previously employed by the Foreign Office."

https://reaction.life/priti-patels-indiscretions-far-serious-boris-johnsons/ 

Maybe this fellow:
Nick Tolhurst_

Don't know his source but guess he has a few contacts with MP's/ advisors as he seems to be pretty accurate at the moment.


----------



## albionism (Aug 31, 2019)

RW fuck-muppets in Wetherspoons in Whitehall, taunting and threatening people, I hear. Stay safe.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 31, 2019)

4 iron fisters out in WELLS patronising people as they pass accusing them of wanting to abolish parliament and make Johnson a dictator because they're failing to engage their interest. Look like classic posh lib dems, got their trespass gear out for the rain and everything. Big EU flag of course.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

Does the recent round of  protests look less wanky and more of a variety of people attending? It did to me in pictures.


----------



## treelover (Aug 31, 2019)

I imagine the sheffield one will be more mixed, probably would have gone another time.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

treelover said:


> I imagine the sheffield one will be more mixed, probably would have gone another time.


I think it was London I was mostly looking at but not sure? It’s a good sign though compared to the other day jesus.


----------



## kenny g (Aug 31, 2019)

Absolutely smashed my toe couple of days back (not fractured but colour has changed ) so having to force myself to not walk for the weekend as facing yet another full-on working week from Monday. Bit gutted to be honest as it does look relatively amusing as protests go.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> 4 iron fisters out in WELLS patronising people as they pass accusing them of wanting to abolish parliament and make Johnson a dictator because they're failing to engage their interest. Look like classic posh lib dems, got their trespass gear out for the rain and everything. Big EU flag of course.


This will be the colour of the protest in Orkney, I’m going nowhere near it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Also here. Its terrible. I hate it.


(((((SpackleFrog)))))


----------



## tommers (Aug 31, 2019)

Supine said:


>


Who voted for Dominic Cummings? Cos I'd hate for an unelected bureaucrat to be in charge of things.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

Could hear St. Caroline down The Level, thought I’d give it a miss.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Could hear St. Caroline down The Level, thought I’d give it a miss.


I approve your tagline.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Does the recent round of  protests look less wanky and more of a variety of people attending? It did to me in pictures.


London was a bit more mixed and random than usual - more "fuck Boris" than "bollocks to Brexit", though obviously still a fair number of euro flags and Lib Dems. Several "abolish Eton" signs.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> London was a bit more mixed and random than usual - more "fuck Boris" than "bollocks to Brexit", though obviously still a fair number of euro flags and Lib Dems. Several "abolish Eton" signs.


That’s great. A lot more positive.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

Bit hard to fairly characterise how it was in Sheff, without actually talking to people. At least one speaker did get a boo from the front - Side note, learn how to use microphones, my friend (muso) helpfully said 'you should hold it like you're sucking a dick, not eating an ice cream' - But couldn't hear who she was, people's vote type I think. They did have some union reps and a woman from Acorn, but like I said, shit use of microphones. Broadly what I did hear was fairly cringey, though some better than others with more emphasis on solidarity, and little demonisation of brexit voters. But yeah, not that likely I'll be going on any more.

The Kashmir protest afterwards was pretty solid... Few Shef MPs stuck around to talk (Paul Blomfield and er... Hallam's I think). Some powerful words from people more directly affected. Most of the prorogue protestors had fucked off by then.

Bit too much Natalie Bennett in general.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2019)

albionism said:


> RW fuck-muppets in Wetherspoons in Whitehall, taunting and threatening people, I hear. Stay safe.


A tiny number of them though, unless more turned up since I saw them arrive on Whitehall surrounded by cops and go on a very short march to the pub. (I thought they wouldn't get in at first.)

They did look very out of place. A lot of people were just laughing at them. "It's not a football match bruv" was one heckle I heard.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

In Sheffield there was one guy who wandered through ranting about hundreds of billions the eu owes, he was just ignored and I think actually just going to the pub.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

tommers said:


> Who voted for Dominic Cummings? Cos I'd hate for an unelected bureaucrat to be in charge of things.


Quite something to be in charge of a party of which he is not even a member.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 31, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> "It's not a football match bruv" was one heckle I heard.



Why does this not surprise me in the slightest?


----------



## gosub (Aug 31, 2019)

Looking at twitter trends, might have been a bigger deal if was football United Kingdom | Twitter trending hashtag and topics today | trends24.in



very depressing



Wales v Ireland is nowhere


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

gosub said:


> Looking at twitter trends, might have been a bigger deal if was football United Kingdom | Twitter trending hashtag and topics today | trends24.in
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

Leafy Lichfield, apparently


----------



## Wilf (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Leafy Lichfield, apparently



Oh my.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

It’s not a fucking coup!!!!


----------



## Wilf (Aug 31, 2019)

Any sightings of Paul Pitbull Mason yet?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Any sightings of Paul Pitbull Mason yet?



Albert Sq in Manchester by the looks of it.



The ordinary people!!!!!


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

Shouts of “whaada we want? Revolution!” In Brighton whilst flying the eu flag. I give up.


----------



## gosub (Aug 31, 2019)

[


Wilf said:


> Any sightings of Paul Pitbull Mason yet?



There is a tweet of his with him in picture;* in Manchester at 1pm

*


sorry for the video source (will happily swap), but had mates that were in Westminster on Wednesday when he said :


----------



## Proper Tidy (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Shouts of “whaada we want? Revolution!” In Brighton whilst flying the eu flag. I give up.


I know this isn't very marxist or even clever but I honestly have never experienced a time more irrationally batshit than now, it blows my mind


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Aug 31, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I know this isn't very marxist or even clever but I honestly have never experienced a time more irrationally batshit than now, it blows my mind



Everyone who’s tweeted or faceached ‘stop the coup’ deserves to be shot.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> It’s not a fucking coup!!!!



I know I’m all over Facebook with that and no one is impressed.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Shouts of “whaada we want? Revolution!” In Brighton whilst flying the eu flag. I give up.


FFS


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

This may well have stopped Brexit.


----------



## andysays (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This may well have stopped Brexit.
> 
> View attachment 182716


"If MPs truly are the voice of the people..."

But what if they're not, Charles, what if they're not...


----------



## Rivendelboy (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Albert Sq in Manchester by the looks of it.
> 
> 
> 
> The ordinary people!!!!!



Pete Beale wouldn't stand for this shit


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> "If MPs truly are the voice of the people..."
> 
> But what if they're not, Charles, what if they're not...


It gets better...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This may well have stopped Brexit.
> 
> View attachment 182716


If they are doing things in that order they’ll have a bloody long wait before they revolt, but I’ve every faith they’ll be able to maintain that energy, clearly meaning business.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Hey Brexit bods, it's all over for you lot.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 31, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Hey Brexit bods, it's all over for you lot.
> 
> View attachment 182728


Is the Queen even *at* Buck House ATM?

Didn't Rees Mogg and a couple of others have to go to Balmoral to see her the other day?

There will be trouble when they get there and find she's not at home...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

andysays said:


> Is the Queen even *at* Buck House ATM?
> 
> Didn't Rees Mogg and a couple of others have to go to Balmoral to see her the other day?
> 
> There will be trouble when they get there and find she's not at home...


Remember that time when both of the free Waitrose coffee machines were "being cleaned" at the same time? 
It'll be mayhem...


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

Aaaannnnd....relax.
It's back to Parliament now.
Well, thank goodness for that.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Everyone who’s tweeted or faceached ‘stop the coup’ deserves to be shot.



While this is true... There was someone with a 'coup d'twat' sign in Sheffield that did raise a brief smile from me.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 31, 2019)

What's the logic behind marching on Buckingham Palace? Do they expect the Queen to actually do something or are they all rabid Republicans now? Honestly can't figure out the point.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 31, 2019)

Also, on a side note, the whole Paul Mason thing is interesting. Only thing of his I remember reading is a piece before the Brexit vote where he explained why Leave made perfect sense from a Left Wing perspective before finishing up by saying 'but don't do it' and now here he is trying to make himself the face of... whatever it is that's happening. It's the sort of thing that's always happening with R/W YouTube and 'intellectual dark web' types, the rabid self-promotion and audience building - never really seen it on the Left though and can't see it working so far.

Although now I think of it George Galloway exists, he was always big on that.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2019)

YouSir said:


> What's the logic behind marching on Buckingham Palace? Do they expect the Queen to actually do something or are they all rabid Republicans now? Honestly can't figure out the point.


I don't think anyone is actually "marching on Buckingham Palace". There are just a lot of people moving around the area.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 31, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I don't think anyone is actually "marching on Buckingham Palace". There are just a lot of people moving around the area.



Is it just the crowd spreading then? Assumed it was a selected route to go past it, or at least an intentional split off to head there.

Either way it's apparently the anniversary of Diana's death and people on Twitter are proudly declaring that she'd be a staunch Remainer, which is quite funny.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

YouSir said:


> Is it just the crowd spreading then? Assumed it was a selected route to go past it, or at least an intentional split off to head there.
> 
> Either way it's apparently the anniversary of Diana's death and people on Twitter are proudly declaring that she'd be a staunch Remainer, which is quite funny.


----------



## maomao (Aug 31, 2019)

YouSir said:


> Is it just the crowd spreading then? Assumed it was a selected route to go past it, or at least an intentional split off to head there.
> 
> Either way it's apparently the anniversary of Diana's death and people on Twitter are proudly declaring that she'd be a staunch Remainer, which is quite funny.


Tbf her remains were in Europe for a while.


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

'kinnel; just when you think that this can't become any more tragic...


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2019)

YouSir said:


> Is it just the crowd spreading then? Assumed it was a selected route to go past it, or at least an intentional split off to head there.
> 
> Either way it's apparently the anniversary of Diana's death and people on Twitter are proudly declaring that she'd be a staunch Remainer, which is quite funny.


There aren't any routes - people are going all over the place as far as I can see (though according to TFL Traffic News, the best source of protest updates, most places have been cleared now). They were at Trafalgar Square, Waterloo Bridge etc. There have apparently been some arrests.


----------



## teqniq (Aug 31, 2019)

yup


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

It's a revolution, I tell ya...


----------



## Helen Back (Aug 31, 2019)

Let's try this: I, Helen Back, hereby order Brexit not to happen.

There you are - fixed it.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Aug 31, 2019)

maomao said:


> Tbf her remains were in Europe for a while.


There's probably the bones of a really good joke involving Diana's remains crossing the road because of Momentum but I haven't the energy to construct it


----------



## brogdale (Aug 31, 2019)

S☼I said:


> There's probably the bones of a really good joke involving Diana's remains crossing the road because of Momentum but I haven't the energy to construct it


Sick fuck; she was the Queen of our hearts.


----------



## YouSir (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Sick fuck; she was the Queen of our hearts.
> 
> View attachment 182743



If you're getting a portrait tattoo as a memorial it's generally best to choose a picture of the person from before they died I reckon. Mind you, could be Prince Philip's tat in which case it's just fucking savage.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Aug 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Sick fuck; she was the Queen of our hearts.
> 
> View attachment 182743



I can see where Harry gets his looks.


----------



## treelover (Aug 31, 2019)

Lots of snobbery, class condescension below the surface, actually its endemic and not really below.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Aug 31, 2019)

pardon?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

YouSir said:


> Also, on a side note, the whole Paul Mason thing is interesting. Only thing of his I remember reading is a piece before the Brexit vote where he explained why Leave made perfect sense from a Left Wing perspective before finishing up by saying 'but don't do it' and now here he is trying to make himself the face of... whatever it is that's happening. It's the sort of thing that's always happening with R/W YouTube and 'intellectual dark web' types, the rabid self-promotion and audience building - never really seen it on the Left though and can't see it working so far.



I'm afraid this exists and it works as well.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

treelover said:


> I imagine the sheffield one will be more mixed, probably would have gone another time.



Nope wanker central. Saw some tankies they looked like they were gonna cry.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Aug 31, 2019)

Cid said:


> Bit hard to fairly characterise how it was in Sheff, without actually talking to people. At least one speaker did get a boo from the front - Side note, learn how to use microphones, my friend (muso) helpfully said 'you should hold it like you're sucking a dick, not eating an ice cream' - But couldn't hear who she was, people's vote type I think. They did have some union reps and a woman from Acorn, but like I said, shit use of microphones. Broadly what I did hear was fairly cringey, though some better than others with more emphasis on solidarity, and little demonisation of brexit voters. But yeah, not that likely I'll be going on any more.
> 
> The Kashmir protest afterwards was pretty solid... Few Shef MPs stuck around to talk (Paul Blomfield and er... Hallam's I think). Some powerful words from people more directly affected. Most of the prorogue protestors had fucked off by then.
> 
> Bit too much Natalie Bennett in general.



The speaker getting booed was Angela "Funny Tinge" Smith.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The speaker getting booed was Angela "Funny Tinge" Smith.



Oh shit, was it? She deserved a lot worse than that... Even within the very narrow political outlook of that group.

I feel a bit tainted now.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Aug 31, 2019)

Helen Back said:


> Let's try this: I, Helen Back, hereby order Brexit not to happen.
> 
> There you are - fixed it.




Fool.

Helen *of the family* Back and it would all be sorted. 

Shot yer bolt now and everything that happens from here on it is down to you. Own it.


----------



## Cid (Aug 31, 2019)

treelover said:


> Lots of snobbery, class condescension below the surface, actually its endemic and not really below.



Explain?


----------



## phillm (Aug 31, 2019)

There was a bit of a ruck when two of the Brexit thugs left the cenotaph to go to the tube and the blonde girlfriend of Tommy's mates got her phone snatched.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 31, 2019)

election being announced thursday apparently- Oct 14


----------



## Cid (Sep 1, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> election being announced thursday apparently- Oct 14



Citation needed...

I mean it’s midnight on a Saturday, just who is your source/sauce?


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

no idea where this has come from, but i could well imagine they've had a look at the polls and concluded the plan is working a charm and its foot down on the pedal time


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 1, 2019)

got a txt. I will apologise profusely if this is incorrect


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

a txt eh. that'll do me!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 1, 2019)

I know, its weak.


----------



## Cid (Sep 1, 2019)

If nbe is right we’ll have to assume he’s in direct contact with someone very close to Johnson. 

Or Corbyn. Depending on who tries it.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 1, 2019)

ah fuck, 17th october . misread txt , Let me check further. apologies


----------



## treelover (Sep 1, 2019)

Cid said:


> Explain?



I don't mean people on here, I mean many of the remainiacs, etc.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 1, 2019)

I heard this last week, GE to be called next Thursday for 17 October. Still could be bollocks but it's defo been spreading. I tried to get a few bookies to let me place a bet on 17th and none would give me odds. Miserable fuckers, I only wanted to stick a tenner on


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 1, 2019)

Cid said:


> If nbe is right we’ll have to assume he’s in direct contact with someone very close to Johnson.
> 
> Or Corbyn. Depending on who tries it.




none of the above.  Source is a journo type

eta- has been drinking


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 1, 2019)

Mrs SI told me big announcement coming tomorrow. Didn't imagine it'd be this big tbh


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 1, 2019)

surely under FPTA there has got to be a vote in the house to call a general election

or has this been over-ridden by parliament being closed?

having said that, it's always been hard to imagine a serious opposition party* voting against the government of the day calling a general election, so it's always been bollocks

* tinge etc may be more keen to stay put for as long as possible


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 1, 2019)

Stephen Fry is The Worst



> Weep for Britain. A sick, cynical brutal and horribly dangerous coup d’état. Children playing with matches, but spitefully not accidentally: gleefully torching an ancient democracy and any tattered shreds of reputation or standing our poor country had left.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 1, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Stephen Fry is The Worst


ancient democracy. Vote was 1918 for landless men, 1928 for landless women as well. Another QI fact from Fry then


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 1, 2019)

He means _for his people_


----------



## Wilf (Sep 1, 2019)

Guardian running with some guff about various top bods 'demanding a high level inquiry' into Cummings@
PM ‘must launch urgent inquiry into Dominic Cummings’s reign of terror’
Complete fantasy stuff of course, why the fuck would johnson do any such thing? But it's yet more evidence of these idiots clinging onto the rules of the old game, in practice, railing against their _own _loss of influence. 

Fwiw I don't feel much lofty superiority over these people, looks like we'll be seeing a Tory majority and the end of Labour's brief flirtation with social democratic politics. And as to working class politics and/or anything to the left of Labour, not much going on. It's depressing not because of where brexit v remain is up to, but because of where labour v capital is up to.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Guardian running with some guff about various top bods 'demanding a high level inquiry' into Cummings@
> PM ‘must launch urgent inquiry into Dominic Cummings’s reign of terror’
> Complete fantasy stuff of course, why the fuck would johnson do any such thing? But it's yet more evidence of these idiots clinging onto the rules of the old game, in practice, railing against their _own _loss of influence.
> 
> Fwiw I don't feel much lofty superiority over these people, looks like we'll be seeing a Tory majority and the end of Labour's brief flirtation with social democratic politics. And as to working class politics and/or anything to the left of Labour, not much going on. It's depressing not because of where brexit v remain is up to, but because of where labour v capital is up to.


It's a side-story, but how is it guff? On the face of it, it's a bully, appointed because if you're a professional cunt you might mistake him for a genius, running around dismissing people at whim because it gives him a hardon. A scandal in a teacup, but still a scandal.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

Someone was saying there actually needs to be a prorogation before there can be another vote on the WA as Bercow ruled out another one in this session so therefor session needs rebooting. Has that been covered in this thread? It probably has, I’m a bit slow it took me ages to understand what he was on about as usual!


----------



## ash (Sep 1, 2019)

S☼I said:


> He means _for his people_


So the economy will be divided into the Brexit haves and have nots - oh that will work ?!?!!!!


----------



## Ming (Sep 1, 2019)

ash said:


> So the economy will be divided into the Brexit haves and have nots - oh that will work ?!?!!!!


Sure it will. The Murdoch press and the BBC’ll get people to blame the EU for their woes.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 1, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Who is Nicktolhurst and what are her/his sources?


'Reports' according to the BBC. (Not clicking on the Sun link).
For once I think the BBC analysis is probably on the money 


> Whether Boris Johnson's government would really go so far as to throw rebellious MPs out of the party isn't yet certain.
> 
> But the fact that today's reports aren't being denied is yet another indication that Downing Street is, it appears, doing its best to dissuade wavering Conservatives from supporting legislation designed to block a no-deal Brexit.
> 
> ...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 1, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Stephen Fry is The Worst


Honestly this makes me want to go all Norwegian commentator. Stephen Fry, Benedict Cumberbatch, AC, AC Grayling, your boys took one hell of a beating


----------



## andysays (Sep 1, 2019)

Doesn't look like the EU are wavering under Johnson's pressure to renegotiate

Brexit: Michel Barnier rejects demands for backstop to be axed


> The EU's lead Brexit negotiator has rejected Boris Johnson's demands for the Irish backstop to be scrapped. Michel Barnier said the backstop - intended to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland - was the "maximum flexibility" the EU could offer. Mr Johnson has previously told the EU the arrangement must be ditched if a no-deal Brexit was to be avoided.


----------



## Supine (Sep 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> Doesn't look like the EU are wavering under Johnson's pressure to renegotiate



I think it's fair to say the EU have been pretty clear on this all the way along.

If it's true that next week the EU will say Oct 31st isn't a fixed deadline anymore Boris will be fuming


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Rebel, rebel...


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Unless he gets a majority and passes May's deal. Doesn't matter if there's a trade border in the Irish sea if you don't need the DUP's support.



This is looking likely to me (this morning!) - election asap, increased tory majority, bin the DUP, pass a deal without a backstop. Suits the EU too


----------



## kebabking (Sep 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> I think it's fair to say the EU have been pretty clear on this all the way along.
> 
> If it's true that next week the EU will say Oct 31st isn't a fixed deadline anymore Boris will be fuming



Failure to understand the process.

The 31st October leaving date was jointly agreed between the UK and EU. The EU can back away from that as much as it likes, but under existing UK law the UK and existing EU law the UK will cease to be a member of the EU at 11pm on 31st October.

That, under EU law, let alone UK law, cannot change without the agreement of the UK government. 

The 'its no longer a deadline' thing is an opportunity to ask for wiggle room - but it's only a thing if the other party wants some wiggle room. It appears not to.


----------



## Supine (Sep 1, 2019)

It's also the EU positioning itself so that the UK can't say no deal was forced on the UK. It'll let Boris own any disasters if they occur after leaving.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Unless he gets a majority and passes May's deal. Doesn't matter if there's a trade border in the Irish sea if you don't need the DUP's support.





ska invita said:


> This is looking likely to me (this morning!) - election asap, increased tory majority, bin the DUP, pass a deal without a backstop. Suits the EU too



This wouldn't surprise, although I still expect the EU to make a few small concessions here & there, minor text changes to the agreement, that Johnson will be able to big-up as a major victory.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Addressing the Q in the OP...my motor says Yes this morning. Went to put something in the boot, and this was lying on the road.

We're going...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Addressing the Q in the OP...my motor says Yes this morning. Went to put something in the boot, and this was lying on the road.
> 
> We're going...
> 
> View attachment 182787


Not sure your motor has a track record of accurate divination


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 1, 2019)

jfc


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> jfc


Mother of parliaments and abominations of the earth


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 1, 2019)

Some mother's do av em.


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> 4 iron fisters out in WELLS patronising people as they pass accusing them of wanting to abolish parliament and make Johnson a dictator because they're failing to engage their interest. Look like classic posh lib dems, got their trespass gear out for the rain and everything. Big EU flag of course.



Trespass gear is shit FFS.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> Trespass gear is shit FFS.


This is the classic purple/pink trespass stuff as well.


----------



## LDC (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> Trespass gear is shit FFS.



Standard off duty uniform for the outraged of (Tunbridge) Wells.


----------



## sihhi (Sep 1, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> While I think it is pretty important to prevent a no-deal Brexit in order to protect ourselves from the horrendous 'economic restructuring' that will come in its wake



Preventing a no-deal Brexit will not protect people from horrendous economic restructuring, it will be horrendous economic restructuring blamed on new economic realities.


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

Fucking ramblers.


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

Entertained myself at a m/c BBQ yesterday winding up Remainers and Leavers alike with my "amusing" Brexit commentary.

Get out of my Aldi and go back to Waitrose ya bastards.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 1, 2019)

Normally I would avoid Cohen articles on general principles. I was tempted to read this one as a friend shared it on FB. He is right in this instance and it bears repeating: There are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding the leave campaingn and Cummings in particular.

Dominic Cummings is the true cowardly face of the Brexiters


----------



## maomao (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> Get out of my Aldi and go back to Waitrose ya bastards.


Aldi and Lidl are pretty middle class. Most of my genuinely working class colleagues turn their nose up at anything downmarket of Tesco and that's before taking into account some of their opinions on the foreign muck they sell.


----------



## Cid (Sep 1, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> jfc



Isn’t that Helena bonham-Carter?


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

maomao said:


> Aldi and Lidl are pretty middle class. Most of my genuinely working class colleagues turn their nose up at anything downmarket of Tesco and that's before taking into account some of their opinions on the foreign muck they sell.




Yeah.

I just get fed up of rich m/c breathlessly enthusing about their discovery of Aldi.

Bring back Netto I say.

(Im  a Booths loyalty card holder. )


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

Cid said:


> Isn’t that Helena bonham-Carter?



Not faux Goth enough.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 1, 2019)

Cid said:


> Isn’t that Helena bonham-Carter?



Only if the cartoon was directed by Tim Burton.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 1, 2019)

maomao said:


> Aldi and Lidl are pretty middle class. Most of my genuinely working class colleagues turn their nose up at anything downmarket of Tesco and that's before taking into account some of their opinions on the foreign muck they sell.


Maybe it depends where you are. I dare you to go into any of the Aldis or Lidls around me in South London and tell people they're middle class...


----------



## maomao (Sep 1, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Maybe it depends where you are. I dare you to go into any of the Aldis or Lidls around me in South London and tell people they're middle class...



Certainly wouldn't try it in Romford where I live and we don't even have a Waitrose. I would give a more complex answer but it's really not the place.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 1, 2019)

sihhi said:


> Preventing a no-deal Brexit will not protect people from horrendous economic restructuring, it will be horrendous economic restructuring blamed on new economic realities.


There will be thousands upon thousands of fairly immediate job losses with a no-deal Brexit. That will really speed up the ability to cut wages, humiliate the poor and all the other things they like to do to make an economy more hideous/'flexible'. Of course they want and plan to do all that anyway, but the loss of hundreds of factories to Eastern Europe/Asia within the space of a year or two will really turbo-boost it. I think even Lexiters should be adamantly opposed to no-deal as an attack on the working class.


----------



## chilango (Sep 1, 2019)

The cultural capital of supermarkets is a more interesting discussion than Brexit imho.


----------



## kenny g (Sep 1, 2019)

Looking forwards to trying out 'middle class wankers' under my breath as I next queue up at Barking Lidl...


----------



## Des Kinvig (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> Trespass gear is shit FFS.



It was all the rage for a year or so on the council estate I lived in as a kid. That and skidaddle. If you didn’t have a trespass or a skidaddle it was game over, really.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Sep 1, 2019)

maomao said:


> Aldi and Lidl are pretty middle class. <snip>



Then what are we to make of this?



> He used to wear Trespass and shop at the Aldi
> Now he’s the joker in the clubhouse at Caldy



The Announcement


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 1, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> There will be thousands upon thousands of fairly immediate job losses with a no-deal Brexit. That will really speed up the ability to cut wages, humiliate the poor and all the other things they like to do to make an economy more hideous/'flexible'. Of course they want and plan to do all that anyway, but the loss of hundreds of factories to Eastern Europe/Asia within the space of a year or two will really turbo-boost it. I think even Lexiters should be adamantly opposed to no-deal as an attack on the working class.


My employers are currently giving for attacking my pay and pensions - their argument is that that if we force them to give a pay rise in line with inflations, that if they are forced to pay a greater amount into pensions then they'll have no choice but to make people redundant. So by your logic the union should not be balloting for action should not be pushing for better pay and no attacks on our pensions.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 1, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Maybe it depends where you are. I dare you to go into any of the Aldis or Lidls around me in South London and tell people they're middle class...



Yeah same with my local Aldi in Guildford, they’d get their butlers to come and sneer at you.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Then what are we to make of this?
> 
> 
> 
> The Announcement


HMHB also mange to distinguish between trespass and the decidedly more bourgeois but state aligned  Lowe Alpine.

_You call Glastonbury “Glasto”
You’d like to go there one day
When they’ve put up the gun towers
To keep the hippies away
December sees Kitzbuehel
Clad in Lowe Alpine
Your children are painfully soulless
Ralph’s in Brize Norton_

btw, my original trespass ref/spot was not to class but pure naffness.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 1, 2019)

N


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 1, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> My employers are currently giving for attacking my pay and pensions - there argument is that that if we force them to give a pay rise in line with inflations, that if they are forced to pay a greater amount into pensions then they'll have no choice but to make people redundant. So by your logic the union should not be balloting for action should not be pushing for better pay and no attacks on our pensions.


Wow, you've really drunk the Lexit koolaid more than anyone I've met to be using arguments this poor.

Companies aren't threatening to move their factories out of the UK as part of some negotiating tactic you plum. They're just quietly preparing to do it as they don't believe they can continue to exist with WTO tariffs on them. What I'd suggest is Johnson knows this and sees many benefits he and his friends can get from the situation.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 1, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Companies aren't threatening to move their factories out of the UK as part of some negotiating tactic you plum.


It's every bit as much a negotiating tactic as it is for many employers in my sector. Under the current structure paying extra wages, maintaining pension contributions probably would see some institutions (including mine) become "uneconomical", so I guess I should be arguing against any industrial action.

 Arguing that socialists should not take actions because capital may hit back is ludicrous.


----------



## maomao (Sep 1, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Looking forwards to trying out 'middle class wankers' under my breath as I next queue up at Barking Lidl...


My observed experience is that you will find tonnes of working class people in Lidl and Aldi but less of the settled British working class. There may be a racial element to that comment but its not a black/white one. 

There was a major controversy at my place of work recently when a telephonist put a customer on silent when they thought they were on hold and overheard them commenting 'don't they have anyone who isn't working class working there'. Meant as a comment on the telephonist's accent more than anything else but all three telephonist's were horifically offended and demanded an official complaint be made. The ridiculousness of questioning whether someone answering the phones for a taxi company could be anything other than working class wasn't mentioned at any point (other than by me but that didn't go down well).


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> HMHB also mange to distinguish between trespass and the decidedly more bourgeois but state aligned  Lowe Alpine.
> 
> _You call Glastonbury “Glasto”
> You’d like to go there one day
> ...



Gun towers to keep hippies away doesn't sound so bad to me tbf


----------



## Supine (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> (Im  a Booths loyalty card holder. )



Waitrose of the north


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 1, 2019)

I'm sorry you all had to see this.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm sorry you all had to see this.


Cummings...lol


----------



## Poi E (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> The cultural capital of supermarkets is a more interesting discussion than Brexit imho.



Each class gets its own supermarket chain in Britain. It's fascinating.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cummings...lol


looking more like Dark Helmet from Spaceballs there tbf


----------



## Libertad (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cummings...lol



Swinson'll be chuffed with her casting.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Swinson'll be chuffed with her casting.


Swindle as Princess Liar?


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 1, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I'm sorry you all had to see this.


That is horrible


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

maomao said:


> you will find tonnes of working class people in Lidl and Aldi but less of the settled British working class.


what has to happen to become part of the "settled British working class". Is there a Home Office app for this?


----------



## oryx (Sep 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> what has to happen to become part of the "settled British working class". Is there a Home Office app for this?


----------



## maomao (Sep 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> what has to happen to be part of the "settled British working class". Is there a Home Office app for this?


Wrong thread to start this on and please remember I'm married to a working class immigrant.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 1, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Each class gets its own supermarket chain in Britain. It's fascinating.


Most people use the supermarket closest to them.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Most people use the supermarket closest to them.


Those with little choice do anyway.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 1, 2019)

Got three within a 5 min walk of me - Jack's, Home Bargains and Aldi. Plus a B&M and a Poundstretcher. Tend to buy certain things from certain ones of them cos they all undercut one another in certain areas.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 1, 2019)

Lidl five mins walk away, Tesco, Morrisons, 30 minute walk, Aldi needs the car. My corner shop (20 second walk away) is by far the best, especially as they stock ACG publications as well... none of the big shops provide this essential service to the local community


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 1, 2019)

Trespass & Mountain Warehouse are outdoor gear for people who like crocs. Kids on bikes I see wear north face, jack wolfskin or the fucking ridiculously priced patagonia


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

maomao said:


> Wrong thread to start this on and please remember I'm married to a working class immigrant.


Not trying to have a go, just cant understand how you can look around a supermarket and tell who is 'settled' or not. Anyway, lets leave it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> N


A grand story by arthur machen


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Trespass & Mountain Warehouse are outdoor gear for people who like crocs. Kids on bikes I see wear north face, jack wolfskin or the fucking ridiculously priced patagonia


At 68 all talk of this brand or that make is nonsense.  It's Clarkes or docs. or better still trainers or sandals or wellies


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

Some really offensive shit going on here in the far north


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

Today it is def wellies (searches for brolly smilie)


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Some really offensive shit going on here in the far north
> 
> View attachment 182839


gonna report to mods as going too far


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

BUT IT’S ALL RED YEAH


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> gonna report to mods as going too far


In my defence the wellies are the only new footwear I will buy for about 3 year- I’m hoping it will take longer for these to split. Charity shop all the way otherwise.


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

RED?  they are girlie pink (looks for hard hat smilie)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> RED?  they are girlie pink (looks for hard hat smilie)


It’s the lighting! I can assure you these are blood red like the blood of capitalists.


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

Capitalist blood is red?


----------



## Cid (Sep 1, 2019)

It's the pink of British Imperialism.


----------



## Cid (Sep 1, 2019)

There's an ad campaign coming:







Probably be all over the tube and shit for those of you who live in London.

e2a: it just links to how to prepare for being brexited as an individual or company.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 1, 2019)

"Red like the people's flag" is what you want there.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> "Red like the people's flag" is what you want there.


I was too caught up in “extremely revolutionary” result of yesterday, sorry.


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

Cid said:


> It's the pink of British Imperialism.


Imperial expansion was undertaken in pink wellies?  Are you certain?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Imperial expansion was undertaken in pink wellies?  Are you certain?



I went on a geography field trip to the Lakes with a teacher who wore pink wellies.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It’s the lighting! I can assure you these are blood red like the blood of capitalists.


Red like blood of capitalists > Hunter wellies

Must go well with your Joules facemask


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I went on a geography field trip to the Lakes with a teacher who wore pink wellies.


Most fascinating.  Is this on topic?


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I went on a geography field trip to the Lakes with a teacher who wore pink wellies.


Just checked - my history of Rourkes Drift offers no account of pink wellied imperial expansion into the lake district.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Just checked - my history of Rourkes Drift offers no account of pink wellied imperial expansion into the lake district.



Secret training exercises.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Imperial expansion was undertaken in pink wellies?  Are you certain?


Pink was considered quite a dynamic macho colour for clothes up to about the 20s.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Just checked - my history of Rourkes Drift offers no account of pink wellied imperial expansion into the lake district.


Rorke's drift, altho Irish the eponymous merchant took no u in his name. And the greater imperial expansion took place long long before the 1870s. Tell you what, read Flashman, the first book, and remind yourself what colour his dashing cavalry uniform was.


----------



## maomao (Sep 1, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Pink was considered quite a dynamic macho colour for clothes up to about the 20s.


Still is. City is crammed full of tossers in pink shirts and where I live the pink polo top is the preferred accessory for a bald head and a beer belly.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 1, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Normally I would avoid Cohen articles on general principles. I was tempted to read this one as a friend shared it on FB. He is right in this instance and it bears repeating: There are a lot of unanswered questions surrounding the leave campaingn and Cummings in particular.
> 
> Dominic Cummings is the true cowardly face of the Brexiters


Not sure that is actually written by Cohen - it doesn't even mention Corbyn, let alone tell us that it's all his fault again.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 1, 2019)

The red jackets worn by hunting tossers, they call that pink. The pricks.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 1, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Not sure that is actually written by Cohen - it doesn't even mention Corbyn, let alone tell us that it's all his fault again.


 I know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The red jackets worn by hunting tossers, they call that pink. The pricks.


Is the manc evening pink still a thing?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 1, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The red jackets worn by hunting tossers, they call that pink. The pricks.




attributed to the shirtmaker Pink apparently- did hunting togs of yore i have been told. Fucks knows really


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

I apologise to everyone for this pink derail.


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Is the manc evening pink still a thing?


I used to love picking up the Football Pink coming out of Old Trafford back in the day. I don't think they have it anymore - though more recently FC United used to do a match day Pink (email download).


----------



## kenny g (Sep 1, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Each class gets its own supermarket chain in Britain. It's fascinating.


Well, thank God for Sainsbury's. At least it draws all the scum out of my local Waitrose.


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Rorke's drift, altho Irish the eponymous merchant took no u in his name. And the greater imperial expansion took place long long before the 1870s. Tell you what, read Flashman, the first book, and remind yourself what colour his dashing cavalry uniform was.



Already been told that i could depend upon a council communist to go on about tedious stuff like historical 'facts'.  But i was always taught that history is mainly a matter of interpretation, and my copy of Ruork's Drift strongly suggests an absence of pink wellies - although i can concede that dark pink tunics abound.


----------



## redcogs (Sep 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I apologise to everyone for this pink derail.



Here's another pink link:  According to one comment it features Arthur Scargill doing his evening job singing the Barnsley WMC's


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Impressive sand installation, tbf


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

This argument means there is no mandate for any brexit ever does't it? Because it wasn't specified what shape brexit might take. It wasn't specified that there should be a deal. Or that the deal should contain a or b or c that might be part of it either.

It's come right back into fashion this last week.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

If anything, these consistent logical sensible grown up adult in the room (i wonder, do dog whistles only work on 'race'?)  types should be supporting all and any brexit. No matter what. Because, for that, there is an existing mandate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Here's another pink link:  According to one comment it features Arthur Scargill doing his evening job singing the Barnsley WMC's


 
Edited because that wasn’t really what I wanted to say


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Impressive sand installation, tbf



Waste of a good effort, imagine having the resources and time to put together a big fuck off amazing sand installation and that’s what you came up with. It’s no wonder the aliens never visit.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This argument means there is no mandate for any brexit ever does't it? Because it wasn't specified what shape brexit might take. It wasn't specified that there should be a deal. Or that the deal should contain a or b or c that might be part of it either.
> 
> It's come right back into fashion this last week.


The 'argument' is Gove's own. When he was trying to get fellow tory MPs to support May's deal back in March, this is exactly the argument he was advancing.


> Mr Gove warned hardline Tory eurosceptics that leaving the EU without a deal "wasn’t the message of the campaign I helped lead".


Irrespective of where we may stand on the Brexit debate, it seems perfectly sensible for those campaigning against the tories' 'no-deal' exit to throw back their own words/arguments against them.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The 'argument' is Gove's own. When he was trying to get fellow tory MPs to support May's deal back in March, this is exactly the argument he was advancing.
> 
> Irrespective of where we may stand on the Brexit debate, it seems perfectly sensible for those campaigning against the tories' 'no-deal' exit to throw back their own words/arguments against them.


And then to return serve to them if they haven't quite grasped the logic of what they are saying.

But Gove's thing is utterly different anyway. They are saying something very different. That we can only leave the EU on the basis the referendum specified. It didn't specify a basis. So saying ther is no mandate to leave because of some other stuff is mendacious pettifogging.

Gove is talking about a specific campaign that he was part of with a  different message he (not all all people who campaigned to leave). That wasn't the entirety of the leave vote or campaign. Nothing else. Actually, these things are not similar at all and there is no turnabout here.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

Tacit Apathy said:


> This is a pretty good summary of where we're at right now. Two career politicians effectively embracing populism as a last-gasp effort to get where they want (No. 10) or stay where they want to be (No. 10 again). No one in either party has the balls to stand up and say "No, this is stupid, let's get some sensible people in the Chair" because everyone's rightly running scared of the idea of No Deal Brexit or a government dissolution.
> 
> Because of how highly strung the situation is, we can't replace Corbyn without throwing Labour into chaos, and there's no chance of getting rid of Boris after he's just won an internal leadership contest without a General Election - which again, distracts both parties from what they should be doing at this point, which is sorting out Brexit somehow.
> 
> ...



Just so's you know, TA, I am NOT - nor have I ever been - a member of Labour. I have never joined a political party, except the Greens for about a fortnight (when I got done over by the militant veganist wing).


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

chilango said:


> called by who?



Owen Jones, evidently… Did I ever mention that I think he's a bit of a twat…? He's often wrong, and I fully expect him to be wrong this time, too…


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Owen Jones, evidently… Did I ever mention that I think he's a bit of a twat…? He's often wrong, and I fully expect him to be wrong this time, too…


About what?


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

redcogs said:


> Just signed a online petition to stop the Boris junta! Obviously it wont work, so im hoping the TUC will call a general strike before the arrest of Len mccluskey.  im fully expecting the sky to fall in next.



Len McCluskey getting arrested…? Least that'll be another twat out the way - Corbyn next!


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

Flavour said:


>


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Oh how delightfuly chosen. _Summat _is up here ain't it?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And then to return serve to them if they haven't quite grasped the logic of what they are saying.
> 
> But Gove's thing is utterly different anyway. They are saying something very different. That we can only leave the EU on the basis the referendum specified. It didn't specify a basis. So saying ther is no mandate to leave because of some other stuff is mendacious pettifogging.
> 
> Gove is talking about a specific campaign that he was part of with a  different message he (not all all people who campaigned to leave). That wasn't the entirety of the leave vote or campaign. Nothing else. Actually, these things are not similar at all and there is no turnabout here.


I assumed they were remain campaigners?
As such they're presumably campaigning to undermine the legitimacy of the referendum vote by highlighting the duplicity of the tory Leave campaigners.
Isn't that their 'logic'?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


>


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

belboid said:


> You're misreading it.
> 
> Not sure why you think this bit is bizarre, Labour has always been against No Deal, and in favour of it being decided in a parliament. Hence it is always going to oppose a suspension of parliament to push trough No Deal



Some of Labour, yes, not the hard-Left, Bennite wing (of which the current leader is a member). Remember it fully believes in the '5 Questions', and believes that the EU is nothing more than an attempt to found a European neoliberal superstate.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I assumed they were remain campaigners?
> As such they're presumably campaigning to undermine the legitimacy of the referendum vote by highlighting the duplicity of the tory Leave campaigners.
> Isn't that their 'logic'?


Their logic is that no specific form of brexit was on the referendum question and that Gove supported this.. Therefore no-deal has no mandate. This argument is used by remain types who don't even know gove said that. And the logic of gove's post doesn't say that either. So, he didn't and the claim has dangerous implications for remain types if they wish to be consistent.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Their logic is that no specific form of brexit was on the referendum question and that Gove supported this.. Therefore no-deal has no mandate. This argument is used by remain types who don't even know gove said that. And the logic of gove's post doesn't say that either. So, he didn't and the claim has dangerous implications for remain types if they wish to be consistent.


Yeah, but just as it's true to say that outcome of the plebiscite mandated no specific form of a deal to effect exit, it's factually correct to say, similarly, that it gave 'no-deal' exit no specific mandate.
I can't see how it's illogical for remainers to exploit tory assurances that a deal would be easily achieved and a 'no-deal' exit avoidable.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but just as it's true to say that outcome of the plebiscite mandated no specific form of a deal to effect exit, it's factually correct to say, similarly, that it gave 'no-deal' exit no specific mandate.
> I can't see how it's illogical for remainers to exploit tory assurances that a deal would be easily achieved and a 'no-deal' exit avoidable.


The difference is the misuse of the word mandate. They argue  - on the basis of Gove saying something entirely different - that there is no mandate for a no-deal brexit. By this, as neither of us are naifs, they politically and logically mean that there is no mandate for brexit at all, as no form of leaving was specified. So we ask, what was the mandate then? And it's something they don't like, something that may involve a no-deal leave.

They are not exploiting anything, they's showing their stupidity. That said, it's only dangerous if they demand the same level of consistency  - political and logical - that they demand of Gove.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> None whatsoever, that was my point, I was taking the piss out of the people calling for the abolishment of the monarchy over this, when it would make no difference whatsoever.
> 
> It's in the PM's powers to do this, Brenda just gets to rubber stamp it, she hasn't really got the power to stop it. if she wasn't there it would still have happened, unless there was some change to the PM's powers.
> 
> ...



Effectively she has no powers at all, at least politically, she can't say "Hang on a minute, I really don't think this is a good idea". I would say prorogation (in this instance) is unconstitutional, but it's a long time since the government gave a shit about anything like that.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Just google Leave Fight Transform and all of our social media etc will come up and our blog site



First link's the _Morning Star_, that's enough for me…


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Is the manc evening pink still a thing?


Nope


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The difference is the misuse of the word mandate. They argue  - on the basis of Gove saying something entirely different - that there is no mandate for a no-deal brexit. By this, as neither of us are naifs, they politically and logically mean that there is no mandate for brexit at all, as no form of leaving was specified. So we ask, what was the mandate then? And it's something they don't like, something that may involve a no-deal leave.
> 
> They are not exploiting anything, they's showing their stupidity. That said, it's only dangerous if they demand the same level of consistency  - political and logical - that they demand of Gove.


I really don't see any danger for the four individuals leading this particular campaign group. Neither do I see it as surprising or inconsistent for them to attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the plebiscite.
I'd imagine that they'd see their campaign to expose tory/leave duplicity as having a life post-Brexit as they exploit the inevitable economic "turbulence" in a (B)rejoin capacity.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Trespass & Mountain Warehouse are outdoor gear for people who like crocs.



 

 I tried to stick two fingers up in this pic, but couldn't manage to do that and take the pic at the same time


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I really don't see any danger for the four individuals leading this particular campaign group. Neither do I see it as surprising or inconsistent for them to attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the plebiscite.
> I'd imagine that they'd see their campaign to expose tory/leave duplicity as having a life post-Brexit as they exploit the inevitable economic "turbulence" in a (B)rejoin capacity.


This argument is beyond these people and has been for a while. It's a central remainer trope. If this wider group still wants to play with it, they will lose and they will lose publicly. For them that's dangerous.

Well, it would be delightful if this was the case - and if was the case before.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This argument is beyond these people and has been for a while. It's a central remainer trope. If this wider group still wants to play with it, they will lose and they will lose publicly. For them that's dangerous.
> 
> Well, it would be delightful if this was the case - and if was the case before.


Really don't think we can speculate with that degree of certainty tbh.
Depending upon the degree of post-ND-Brexit 'turbulence', their trope may gain traction.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> View attachment 182874
> 
> I tried to stick two fingers up in this pic, but couldn't manage to do that and take the pic at the same time


Amateur! (You need to zoom in at the flag on the lamppost across the road.)


----------



## ska invita (Sep 1, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Amateur! (You need to zoom in at the flag on the lamppost across the road.)
> 
> View attachment 182876


Yeah but then the fingers are facing the wrong way...need to be towards the camera, not at my perfectly fine clothes


----------



## Gaia (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Impressive sand installation, tbf




Impressive - but how do they know it can be seen from space…? Did they phone the ISS and ask if it could give them a sign when it passes over Redcar…?  I think we need actual proof of this claim…


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Yeah but then the fingers are facing the wrong way...need to be towards the camera, not at my perfectly fine clothes


Ah fair point.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Sep 1, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Trespass & Mountain Warehouse are outdoor gear for people who like crocs. Kids on bikes I see wear north face, jack wolfskin or the fucking ridiculously priced patagonia





> My jacket’s pumpkin – Páramo


- Mod. Diff. Vdiff. Hard Severe


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Impressive - but how do they know it can be seen from space…? Did they phone the ISS and ask if it could give them a sign when it passes over Redcar…?  I think we need actual proof of this claim…


The claim of visibility doesn't, of course, imply readability. I quote, "The human naked eye has an angular resolution of approximately 0.00028 radians, and the ISS targets an altitude of 400km. Using basic trigonometric relations, this means that an astronaut on the ISS with 20/20 vision could potentially detect objects that are *112m or greater in all dimensions*. However, since this would be at the absolute limit of the resolution, objects on the order of 100m would appear as unidentifiable specs, if not rendered invisible due to other factors, such as atmospheric conditions or poor contrast. For readability from the ISS, using the same trigonometric principles and an assumed legibility requirement of 18 arcminutes, each letter would need to be approximately 2km tall."


----------



## gosub (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Impressive - but how do they know it can be seen from space…? Did they phone the ISS and ask if it could give them a sign when it passes over Redcar…?  I think we need actual proof of this claim…



As much as checking veracity of the claim would be handy....Who in space are they talking to, and why


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Impressive - but how do they know it can be seen from space…? Did they phone the ISS and ask if it could give them a sign when it passes over Redcar…?  I think we need actual proof of this claim…


What on earth can't be seen from space?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What on earth can't be seen from space?



me when i'm indoors, i hope...


----------



## Supine (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The claim of visibility doesn't, of course, imply readability. I quote, "The human naked eye has an angular resolution of approximately 0.00028 radians, and the ISS targets an altitude of 400km. Using basic trigonometric relations, this means that an astronaut on the ISS with 20/20 vision could potentially detect objects that are *112m or greater in all dimensions*. However, since this would be at the absolute limit of the resolution, objects on the order of 100m would appear as unidentifiable specs, if not rendered invisible due to other factors, such as atmospheric conditions or poor contrast. For readability from the ISS, using the same trigonometric principles and an assumed legibility requirement of 18 arcminutes, each letter would need to be approximately 2km tall."



So how come the great Wall of china is visible? It's long but not very wide.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> So how come the great Wall of china is visible? It's long but not very wide.



it's not


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 1, 2019)

It's not.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> So how come the great Wall of china is visible


it's not


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Depends where you are in space.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> So how come the great Wall of china is visible? It's long but not very wide.


Key Brexit info here!


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Depends where you are in space.


John Tracy obvs a remainer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> So how come the great Wall of china is visible? It's long but not very wide.


Depends on how far away you are, and the quality of your binoculars or telescope


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> John Tracy obvs a remainer.
> 
> View attachment 182883


I'm only 42 mate.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm only 42 mate.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Key Brexit info here!


TL;DR “We’ve actually been to space and we couldn’t see a thing like” would suffice.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

_Don't trust experts say remain boffins._


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm only 42 mate.


Then this one will be more suitable for someone of your age:


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 1, 2019)

UNLIKE YOU LOT WITH MALTESER SIZED BRAINS


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

Their nationalism is as rabid and connected to a settled inequality as any stereotypical hard leaver isn't it? They are MAGA just with it being like a few years ago.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 1, 2019)

Also Ian Dunt is a really dull bloke


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> Then this one will be more suitable for someone of your age:
> 
> View attachment 182884


Is it an ipad?


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Is it an ipad?


You can probably watch it on an iPad.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

A star wars? Wookie or something.


----------



## fishfinger (Sep 1, 2019)

Wookiees are fluffier.


----------



## treelover (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> HMHB also mange to distinguish between trespass and the decidedly more bourgeois but state aligned  Lowe Alpine.
> 
> _You call Glastonbury “Glasto”
> You’d like to go there one day
> ...





ska invita said:


> what has to happen to become part of the "settled British working class". Is there a Home Office app for this?



I was HMHB's agent for a short while in the early mid 80's, Geoff from Probe took pity on me and my business acumen.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 1, 2019)

treelover said:


> I was HMHB's agent for a short while in the early mid 80's, Geoff from Probe took pity on me and my business acumen.


Booking agent, press agent? You lucky thing. That would have been Tube time, them blowing up first time around.


----------



## treelover (Sep 1, 2019)

Gaia said:


>




Is that when Ed was the drummer?


----------



## treelover (Sep 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Booking agent, press agent? You lucky thing. That would have been Tube time, them blowing up first time around.



Booking agency, has a mini empire when i was about 24 the farm, etc, putting on bands like the long riders, what went wrong?


----------



## sihhi (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This argument means there is no mandate for any brexit ever does't it? Because it wasn't specified what shape brexit might take. It wasn't specified that there should be a deal. Or that the deal should contain a or b or c that might be part of it either.
> 
> It's come right back into fashion this last week.



It's also an exact mirror image of Leave arguments for decades. There was no mandate for the EU because the Common Market that was mandated in 1975 was not today's EEC/EC/EU.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Well it's going to be an interesting week for sure.

And, if anyone tells you they know what will happen, they haven't been paying attention.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 2, 2019)

sihhi said:


> It's also an exact mirror image of Leave arguments for decades. There was no mandate for the EU because the Common Market that was mandated in 1975 was not today's EEC/EC/EU.


The EU was founded in 93 with no referendum prior to it, it was a massive constitutional change and it happened 18 years after the ref in 75. 
We voted to leave the EU- as it is at the moment, just 3 years ago. So no, not an exact mirror image. That’s a huge stretch.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 2, 2019)

sihhi said:


> It's also an exact mirror image of Leave arguments for decades. There was no mandate for the EU because the Common Market that was mandated in 1975 was not today's EEC/EC/EU.


The counter argument to this would be “you’ve had your ref in 75, there’s your mandate!” I wasn’t even born then. Nah, don’t be daft.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well it's going to be an interesting week for sure.
> 
> And, if anyone tells you they know what will happen, they haven't been paying attention.


i know what will happen.

it will all end in tears


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i know what will happen.
> 
> it will all end in tears


Johnson re-buying those water cannon?


----------



## Tacit Apathy (Sep 2, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Just so's you know, TA, I am NOT - nor have I ever been - a member of Labour. I have never joined a political party, except the Greens for about a fortnight (when I got done over by the militant veganist wing).


Never said you were a member, it's a royal we there that I tend to use whenever discussing politics. Sorry to hear about your foray into the Greens, although I find it mildly amusing that you got done over by vegans in a Green Party


----------



## ska invita (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i know what will happen.
> it will all end in tears


I fear only in ours, not theirs


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

sihhi said:


> It's also an exact mirror image of Leave arguments for decades. There was no mandate for the EU because the Common Market that was mandated in 1975 was not today's EEC/EC/EU.


I think that may have been the mirror image pre 1975. After then it's just right. It's an example.


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 2, 2019)

Jeremy Corbyn has not many friends which is a dilemma an impasse for the Brexit crisis.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Wtf


----------



## tonysingh (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Wtf



Is that in response to something on this thread, something in the news re Brexit or just in general at this whole clusterfuck? ​


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 2, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

tonysingh said:


> Is that in response to something on this thread, something in the news re Brexit or just in general at this whole clusterfuck? ​


The post above mine. Its now corbyn's fault.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I fear only in ours, not theirs


some of them will be blubbering away, never fear


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Why can't he just bring the government down and put someone whose policies he's opposed to but who this idiot sleaterkinney Ming etc agree with.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Jeremy Corbyn has not many friends which is a dilemma an impasse for the Brexit crisis.


this is a common misconception. in fact, jeremy corbyn has a rich social life: but i fail to see the connection with brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Just so's you know, TA, I am NOT - nor have I ever been - a member of Labour. I have never joined a political party, except the Greens for about a fortnight (when I got done over by the militant veganist wing).


do you remember that time you posted 





Gaia said:


> She's so Priti, oh so Priti…………vacant!


and i said





Pickman's model said:


> i doubt you will ever post anything better


there is now no doubt in my mind: you will never post anything better


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do you remember that time you posted and i saidthere is now no doubt in my mind: you will never post anything better


Definitely should have gone out on a high, it can only all be downhill from there...


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

Mr Blair has just made a thoughtful intervention.  Shame he did not mention the interplay between Maastrict spending criteria,  'the third way' and PFI.  (eta My personal recollection of that period was one where Parliamentary process was a mild inconvenience due to the size of Mr Blair's overwhelming majority, and there was a reasonably large among of 'crony capitalism' as a result of' Mr Blair's style of 'sofa politics'.  That he now says that the issue should be put to the people (whilst regretting that it ever was,  How much ever closer Union was conducted from the fig leaf of a plebiscite to join the Common Market?

Also on the radio recently was an interview with Norman Lamont  which told me something I never knew Black Wednesday when interest rates, which determine the rate at which people borrow money went in one day from 10 % to 15% (and back down a bit- but a bit of 'bastard' if you had a mortgage or loan).  Prime Minister John Major refused one on one meetings with Chancellor of the Exchequer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> Definitely should have gone out on a high, it can only all be downhill from there...


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this is a common misconception. in fact, jeremy corbyn has a rich social life: but i fail to see the connection with brexit.


I meant worthwhile political friends! Obviously Corbyn has enough friends, otherwise he won’t be leader of the Labour party in spite of fierce opposition.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>



It concerns me slightly that you have that at your fingertips to post quite so quickly


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> I meant worthwhile political friends! Obviously Corbyn has enough friends, otherwise he won’t be leader of the Labour party in spite of fierce opposition.


obviously he has enough political friends or he wouldn't be leader of the labour party etc


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

One thing Blair said this morning was to not go along with Boris Johnson calling an immediate election, or more particularly an election before the brexit mess is played out a lot more.
He says an election would be a mash up of brexit and Corbyn 'fear', when that combination would play into Boris Johnsons hand.
In the Art of War it says to engage the enemy at a time and a place of your choosing, not theirs which makes sense to me.
Johnson should be back footed and wrong footed as much as possible, his attempt to set the agenda with Cummings needs fucking up.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> One thing Blair said this morning was to not go along with Boris Johnson calling an immediate election, or more particularly an election before the brexit mess is played out a lot more.
> He says an election would be a mash up of brexit and Corbyn 'fear', when that combination would play into Boris Johnsons hand.
> In the Art of War it says to engage the enemy at a time and a place of your choosing, not theirs which makes sense to me.
> Johnson should be back footed and wrong footed as much as possible, his attempt to set the agenda with Cummings needs fucking up.


Tell us how then.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

I think england should try and score 4 or 5 against Bulgaria on saturday. Bulgaria should try to stop them doing that.


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think england should try and score 4 or 5 against Bulgaria on saturday. Bulgaria should try to stop them doing that.



I suggest how they do against Italy might be more important (though its only a friendly)


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

gosub said:


> I suggest how they do against Italy might be more important (though its only a friendly)


That's a mere opp for people to get injured and out of the WC squad. Saturday counts for something. But, if philosophical insists they can also tell us how Italy should just get on with it and win on friday night.


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's a mere opp for people to get injured and out of the WC squad. Saturday counts for something. But, if philosophical insists they can also tell us how Italy should just get on with it and win on friday night.



tbf I'm a Wales fan, so the current answer to the Irish question may well be :who will win on Saturday?


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> obviously he has enough political friends or he wouldn't be leader of the labour party etc


Should I say, friends to firmly deal with the Brexit crisis!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Should I say, friends to firmly deal with the Brexit crisis!


That's Prime Minister Corbyn right?

Too shit to be PM but expected to do PM's job. Poor bloke.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Should I say, friends to firmly deal with the Brexit crisis!


no

you've had two bites at this particular cherry and fluffed them, and this one's no more convincing that the previous twain.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this is a common misconception. in fact, jeremy corbyn has a rich social life: but i fail to see the connection with brexit.



And he can clearly pull a bird too. 

Not relevant to Brexit either of course.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Tell us how then.



Repeatedly demand the no deal brexiters detail their plan for the EU/UK land border in every single Parliamentary exchange.
There you go, I bet you never expected that suggestion from me


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Repeatedly demand the no deal brexiters detail their plan for the EU/UK land border in every single Parliamentary exchange.
> There you go, I bet you never expected that suggestion from me


you're the general sir hogmanay melchett of urban75


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> One thing Blair said this morning was to not go along with Boris Johnson calling an immediate election, or more particularly an election before the brexit mess is played out a lot more.  .....


Do you mean Blair or Brown


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Repeatedly demand the no deal brexiters detail their plan for the EU/UK land border in every single Parliamentary exchange.
> There you go, I bet you never expected that suggestion from me


Blimey, are you sure the country is ready for such drastic action?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Do you mean Blair or Brown



It's what Blair said this morning.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Do you mean Blair or Brown


it says blair. so i suppose he means blair.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Do you mean Blair or Brown



It was Blair talking unless my dementia has worsened. On the television set in the corner of the room. Not actually on it, but on the screen in it. From some place called 'The Institute of...something or other'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Corbyn speaking has basically said, extension to deadline, followed by a GE, which I assume he thinks he can win.

Risky.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn speaking has basically said, extension to deadline, followed by a GE, which I assume he thinks he can win.
> 
> Risky.



Just one more risk added to the many. He's seen out two PMs so far.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 2, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Just one more risk added to the many. He's seen out two PMs so far.



Not quite, he's been in the same building while the Tory party implodes - he contributed, through his success in the 2017 GE, to May's problems, but she would have faced the same problems (broadly) had she not held an election or won a majority of 50.

He's not some gently purring power sat watching his prey disable itself with amused patience.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're the general sir hogmanay melchett of urban75



Does that make you Sir Percy Percy then? Have you yet invented the purest green, or is that the colour of your snot as you condescend, sneer and snort at others?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Does that make you Sir Percy Percy then?


no, no it doesn't.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Does that make you Sir Percy Percy then? Have you yet invented the purest green, or is that the colour of your snot as you condescend, sneer and snort at others?


A post of the purest N - followed by a post with a missing N. You fuckwit.


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no, no it doesn't.



Clearly not, Percy iirc was in series 2.  General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett, VC, KCB, DSO was in Series 4.  Philiophical showing a poor grasp of history there


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It was Blair talking unless my dementia has worsened. On the television set in the corner of the room. Not actually on it, but on the screen in it. From some place called 'The Institute of...something or other'.


Gordon Brown spoke on the BBC this morning, I don’t know what Blair said this morning on TV.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm only 42 mate.


This is surely not true, you can’t be the same age as me.  I’ve always thought of you as a kind of angry uncle.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> A post of the purest N - followed by a post with a missing N. You fuckwit.



The N was a spare that was hanging around.


----------



## klang (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> N


if you want to discuss an indefinite, constant whole number, especially the degree of a quantic or an equation, or the order of a curve, you should start a math thread in the ------> science forum.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

kabbes said:


> This is surely not true, you can’t be the same age as me.  I’ve always thought of you as a kind of angry uncle.


Nah, you can add 5. I still don't know what that pic was though.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Gordon Brown spoke on the BBC this morning, I don’t know what Blair said this morning on TV.



You are right that Brown was on the television too, he was interviewed earlier I believe.
Corbyn was on the television later, speaking from Salford I believe.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

littleseb said:


> if you want to discuss an indefinite, constant whole number, especially the degree of a quantic or an equation, or the order of a curve, you should start a math thread in the ------> science forum.



I suspect he was intending to start a post with 'Northern Ireland', but gave up.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

littleseb said:


> if you want to discuss an indefinite, constant whole number, especially the degree of a quantic or an equation, or the order of a curve, you should start a math thread in the ------> science forum.



You might be right.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Waste of a good effort, imagine having the resources and time to put together a big fuck off amazing sand installation and that’s what you came up with. It’s no wonder the aliens never visit.


Should be a giant spunking cock every time.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 2, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Just so's you know, TA, I am NOT - nor have I ever been - a member of Labour. I have never joined a political party, except the Greens for about a fortnight (when I got done over by the militant veganist wing).


You're making the greens (and vegans) sound a lot better and more exciting than they actually are there.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Brexit latest news: Cabinet meeting called amid growing speculation election will be called this week



> A Cabinet meeting has been called amid growing speculation that an election will be called later this week.
> 
> According to Whitehall sources the meeting will take place at 5pm, before Boris Johnson hosts MPs at a garden party in Downing Street.
> 
> ...



Not much of a surprise TBH, but for Labour to support a GE, surely they will insist on a EU extension?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not much of a surprise TBH, but for Labour to support a GE, surely they will insist on a EU extension?


you credit them with too much political acumen


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Brexit latest news: Cabinet meeting called amid growing speculation election will be called this week
> 
> 
> 
> Not much of a surprise TBH, but for Labour to support a GE, surely they will insist on a EU extension?


Bit of problem for Corbyn. His one line for the last year or more is that Labour wants a GE. He just about knows Labour will lose but he's in the same position as a previous Labour leader, Kinnock maybe, who Thatcher taunted for being 'frit' (in not wanting a GE). There's a good chance you are right, Labour will support it but with the extension caveat. Even that allows Johnson to portray him as dragging out the will of the people for up to 4 years.

Labour are stuck where they've been for 18 months, still not able to square their remain and leave constituencies, MPs and activists. I'm a broken record on this, but for me there's a bigger failure behind that, not engaging with both constituencies and coming up with a social democratic vision for leave (a _lexit_ even ), something to square the circle. Having failed to do that all they are left with is John Bercow and courting the libdems.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Labour are stuck where they've been for 18 months, still not able to square their remain and leave constituencies, MPs and activists.



As someone said the other day, Labour has had more positions on Brexit, then positions in the Karma Sutra.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

Government apparently treating Tuesday votes around no deal as a 'confidence vote'. That presumably means a single vote against the Government triggers the process of talking to the queen, various bods having x days to form another government. Don't know if Johnson wins the war (probably), but he's certainly winning the battle.

Anyway, I suppose the logic is Johnson wants an election but is forcing Corbyn and half a dozen Tories to call it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Government apparently treating Tuesday votes around no deal as a 'confidence vote'. That presumably means a single vote against the Government triggers the process of talking to the queen, various bods having x days to form another government. Don't know if Johnson wins the war (probably), but he's certainly winning the battle.
> 
> Anyway, I suppose the logic is Johnson wants an election but is forcing Corbyn and half a dozen Tories to call it.


Yep - - _they brought down the brexit govt. _That's the fairly naked plan/approach.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

Not Blair's fan at all but he's right about the elephant trap and Corbyn's headed straight for it. Dumbo.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Not Blair's fan at all but he's right about the elephant trap and Corbyn's headed straight for it. Dumbo.


What should he do? Outline it for us.


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




just a suggestion:


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

gosub said:


> just a suggestion:



he was of course right to say that the settlement of the czechoslovakian problem which had been achieved was but the prelude to a greater settlement in which all europe may find peace, only between the prelude and the settlement lay the second world war and its aftermath


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What should he do? Outline it for us.



A I said on the other threaad- 



Smangus said:


> If I were Corbyn I'd not call a no confidence vote until 6 months after Brexit , let Johnson own it and the ramifications of no deal become clear to all. Johnson can't call an election until a no confidence vote is lost.



What would you have him do?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Not Blair's fan at all but he's right about the elephant trap and Corbyn's headed straight for it. Dumbo.



Corbyn's fatal error is the surrender to middle class liberals on Brexit. But given its happened, given Johnson's commitment to leave by 31/10 in all circumstances and given the emerging consensus that a snap GE is needed (before 31/10) to settle the question once and for all - what exactly would you have him do?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> A I said on the other threaad-
> 
> 
> 
> What would you have him do?


What about now, about this upcoming vote? Have him vote with the govt on Tuesday? Have Bulgaria win 6-0? Here and now.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _*You call Glastonbury “Glasto”
> You’d like to go there one day
> When they’ve put up the gun towers
> To keep the hippies away
> ...



To be fair, the first half of this ditty sounds entirely reasonable.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> What would you have him do?



That would require Labour voting for a deal or exit without a deal.

you haven't thought this through have you?

ETA: for some reason Smangus' suggestion that Corbyn should not force a GE doesn't show up in the comment I am referring to.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> A I said on the other threaad-
> 
> 
> 
> What would you have him do?


That's not entirely correct; under the provisions of the FTPA it is possible that a GE can be called without an executive having lost confidence of the house:



> If the House of Commons, *with the support of two-thirds of its total membership* (including vacant seats), resolves "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election".


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What about now, about this upcoming vote? Have him vote with the govt on Tuesday? Have Bulgaria win 6-0? Here and now.



He would have to lend Johnson Labour support - on the VonC. Is this your trap avoidance strategy Smangus


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What about now, about this upcoming vote? Have him vote with the govt on Tuesday? Have Bulgaria win 6-0? Here and now.



If its a no confidence vote moved by Johnson they could abstain , no 2/3rds majority no snap election, Johnson has to own whatever happens on the 31st October and the consequences no ambiguity. 

What would you do Mr 6-0?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

What vote is happening tomorrow?


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> What vote is happening tomorrow?



nobody knows


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> What vote is happening tomorrow?


The one intended to allow backbench MPs to take control of the order paper and then legislate to require the UK PM to seek A50 extension if no deal is agreed by 31/10/19. Would have to pass both commons & lords by end of play Thursday to have any chance of royal assent (I think).


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do you remember that time you posted and i saidthere is now no doubt in my mind: you will never post anything better


That was actually class, come back Gaia


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That was actually class, come back Gaia


one hit wonder


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> If its a no confidence vote moved by Johnson they could abstain , no 2/3rds majority no snap election, Johnson has to own whatever happens on the 31st October and the consequences no ambiguity.
> 
> What would you do Mr 6-0?



So your plan is to keep Johnson in power but prevent him from securing any deal or exit from Europe. 

Then six months later present this to the electroarte?

Wow.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> If its a no confidence vote moved by Johnson they could abstain , no 2/3rds majority no snap election, Johnson has to own whatever happens on the 31st October and the consequences no ambiguity.
> 
> What would you do Mr 6-0?


It's not a no confidence vote. But of course they should vote to force an immediate election. Abstaining here and now is the way to ruin. Doing nothing. Smugly going _see _and then doing what - arguing for a re-entry? - is a sure fire way of ending the party.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Not Blair's fan at all but he's right about the elephant trap and Corbyn's headed straight for it. Dumbo.


Hmmm. What is the motivation for Blair saying that? I mean who gives a fuck what Blair thinks about anything, but what is it he's after? He wants rid of Corbyn, probably more than he wants rid of the Tories. Last thing Blair wants is another election with Corbyn still in charge of Labour. Blair's not afraid Corbyn's Labour party would lose a snap election. He's worried Corbyn might win it.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Hmmm. What is the motivation for Blair saying that? I mean who gives a fuck what Blair thinks about anything, but what is it he's after? He wants rid of Corbyn, probably more than he wants rid of the Tories. Last thing Blair wants is another election with Corbyn still in charge of Labour. Blair's not afraid Corbyn's Labour party would lose a snap election. He's worried Corbyn might win it.



Blair wants Johnson out and a national government led by Cooper/Clarke/Harman. Their job will to lead a government nobody voted for, to deliver a result that is the opposite of what people voted for and to do so in the name of democracy. Now there's a fucking coup eh!!

The last thing he wants in this endeavor are normal people getting involved via an election. The morons have already fucked it up once!

This has the happy side effect of sidelining and humiliating Corbyn and completely undermining his leadership .


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's not a no confidence vote. But of course they should vote to force an immediate election. Abstaining here and now is the way to ruin. Doing nothing. Smugly going _see _and then doing what - arguing for a re-entry? - is a sure fire way of ending the party.



I wouldn't argue for re-entry, not what I'm getting at. Out is out on whatever terms we get or not on the 31st. 

It's about making the Tories own the effects of Brexit, there is a small chance  the opposition can unite and influence it but that realistically looks smaller every day. Johnson is pushing for an election he thinks he can win, see polls etc - bad for labour. Why play his strategy on a ground of his choosing? 

If there is no brexit post 31st the BP will eat his vote. If  there is and it's a disaster then  Johnson et al own it, all. Better chance for a Corbyn win then than now,  imho anyway. 

6-1 now maybe ?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> I wouldn't argue for re-entry, not what I'm getting at. Out is out on whatever terms we get or not on the 31st.
> 
> It's about making the Tories own the effects of Brexit, there is a small chance  the opposition can unite and influence it but that realistically looks smaller every day. Johnson is pushing for an election he thinks he can win, see polls etc - bad for labour. Why play his strategy on a ground of his choosing?
> 
> ...


Why not now? Must people feel the whip first? What is this united opposition anyway? It can't be anything beyond stopping a no-deal brexit. Which has to happen now not april next year.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 2, 2019)

A bloke in the office right now is arguing for a position of "soft remain".


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why not now? Must people feel the whip first? What is this united opposition anyway? It can't be anything beyond stopping a no-deal brexit. Which has to happen now not april next year.



I don't think he can win a ge now really. They can still oppose no deal though.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> I don't think he can win a ge now really. They can still oppose no deal though.


So, here and now - what? With a vote being taken as a no-confidence vote tmw?

And, on what basis do you think labour should contest this april election? Brexit party seen off, promise done, short term measures put in place to ameliorate effects of leaving the eu. They wouldn't even get to offer a serious vote in that situation.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So, here and now - what? With a vote being taken as a no-confidence vote tmw?
> 
> And, on what basis do you think labour should contest this april election? Brexit party seen off, promise done, short term measures put in place to ameliorate effects of leaving the eu. They wouldn't even get to offer a serious vote in that situation.



Is there a nc vote tomorrow? not so sure there will be. 

What make you think they offer a serious  vote now? 

VAR needed.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Is there a nc vote tomorrow? not so sure there will be.
> 
> What make you think they offer a serious  vote now?
> 
> VAR needed.


The post from wilf above suggesting that they will take any of the votes tmw as one of no confidence. That's pretty much what we're talking about.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> I don't think he can win a ge now really. They can still oppose no deal though.


How? The govt has a wafer-thin majority, which it may be about to lose due to defections/rebellions. In such a situation, the opposition forces the government out. What else can it do? It would be remiss in its duty as an opposition to do anything else. 

I'm not sure you're quite right about Johnson's position here. He wants an election, clearly, has been gearing up for it since before he was made PM, but that's a recognition of his inherently weak position, not some dictation of terms from strength. All this bluster and fury from Cummings is the same - what those in a position of weakness do, not those in a position of strength. They're in desperation territory.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Is there a nc vote tomorrow? not so sure there will be.
> 
> What make you think they offer a serious  vote now?



Johnson has made clear - it's the lead story on the Guardian site now - that a vote to delay Brexit will be interpreted as a vote of confidence. 

What now? Vote to stop no deal, vote to keep Johnson in power, sit back and at some point proudly put _this_ in front of voters.

I can see how it unites leavers and remainers against Labour but beyond this I am concerned that you may not have thought this through properly/at all.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 2, 2019)

Corbyn is fucked either way. If there's no GE it's because he didn't make it happen, so gets some of the blame for "letting" BJ do the Brexit he wanted (whatever that leads to). If there is a GE I can only see Labour losing seats and the Tories getting an overall majority. This would ensure May's deal with BJ's photo on the front page gets through the Commons. This may be what Corbyn secretly wants (a deal he can't vote for but wouldn't really mind) ... but then if there's no _BREXIT CHAOS _he's got less to capitalize on afterwards. Though admittedly, if he does lose another GE, he's almost certainly not Labour leader any more. So yeah. I think he's fucked.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How? The govt has a wafer-thin majority, which it may be about to lose due to defections/rebellions. In such a situation, the opposition forces the government out. What else can it do? It would be remiss in its duty as an opposition to do anything else.
> 
> I'm not sure you're quite right about Johnson's position here. He wants an election, clearly, has been gearing up for it since before he was made PM, but that's a recognition of his inherently weak position, not some dictation of terms from strength. All this bluster and fury from Cummings is the same - what those in a position of weakness do, not those in a position of strength. They're in desperation territory.



Maybe , seems to me they are in arch smugness territory.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Corbyn is fucked either way. If there's no GE it's because he didn't make it happen, so gets some of the blame for "letting" BJ do the Brexit he wanted (whatever that leads to). If there is a GE I can only see Labour losing seats and the Tories getting an overall majority. This would ensure May's deal with BJ's photo on the front page gets through the Commons. This may be what Corbyn secretly wants (a deal he can't vote for but wouldn't really mind) ... but then if there's no _BREXIT CHAOS _he's got less to capitalize on afterwards. Though admittedly, if he does lose another GE, he's almost certainly not Labour leader any more. So yeah. I think he's fucked.


Don't give such a fuck about Corbyn being fucked. We're fucked if the tories win a majority. That's what matters. This is a high-stakes election, if it comes. But there is no alternative if you want the tories out and Corbyn, or a Labour a bit like the one Corbyn would lead rather the one Blair would approve, to get in.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Johnson has made clear - it's the lead story on the Guardian site now - that a vote to delay Brexit will be interpreted as a vote of confidence.
> 
> What now? Vote to stop no deal, vote to keep Johnson in power, sit back and at some point proudly put _this_ in front of voters.
> 
> I can see how it unites leavers and remainers against Labour but beyond this I am concerned that you may not have thought this through properly/at all.



Maybe I haven't, has anyone? But atm the scottish conservative seats will likely go to the SNP, theres a fair chance some Labour leave seats will go BP or tory and so where will the Labour gains come from? Labour remainers may well go Orange , there is no gain for them now. All points to a hung parliment again which solves nothing. 

Fucking Pens


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Maybe I haven't, has anyone? But atm the scottish conservative seats will likely go to the SNP, theres a fair chance some Labour leave seats will go BP or tory and so where will the Labour gains come from? Labour remainers may well go Orange , there is no gain for them now. All points to a hung parliment again which solves nothing.
> 
> Fucking Pens


Depends how it is hung. A hung parliament in which Labour could form a majority in a deal with the SNP? I'd take that right now. I'd snap your hand off for it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Not Blair's fan at all but he's right about the elephant trap and Corbyn's headed straight for it. Dumbo.


So Labour should refuse to pass legislation extending A50, refuse to move to a VoNC but should STOP BREXIT! How?


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

Why should they stop Brexit?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

Labour and Libs thought this week in parliament was going to be them channelling a national outrage about constitutional outrages. Instead it's going to be Johnson et al contemptuously telling they can have an election if they want it.

This started with Cameron and ends with Johnson. Bullingdon to Bullingdon. Silly old Bercow only got to the Monday Club.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

Suspect Ruth Davidson and the SNP will have the last laugh.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Suspect Ruth Davidson and the SNP will have the last laugh.


How does that work?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Blair wants Johnson out and a national government led by Cooper/Clarke/Harman. Their job will to lead a government nobody voted for, to deliver a result that is the opposite of what people voted for and to do so in the name of democracy. Now there's a fucking coup eh!!
> 
> The last thing he wants in this endeavor are normal people getting involved via an election. The morons have already fucked it up once!
> 
> This has the happy side effect of sidelining and humiliating Corbyn and completely undermining his leadership .



I have been wondering, given this is obviously what Johnson wants them to do and what they want to do, if it isn't very, very silly of them to be constantly shouting 'COUP'. 

Having said that if they do go for GNU and exclude Corbyn, at least that won't further damage Corbyn in the eyes of the electorate. If he allows himself to be made a puppet caretaker I don't see how he can beat Johnson in the inevitable election.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 2, 2019)

Have we left yet?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Suspect Ruth Davidson and the SNP will have the last laugh.


The up to date news


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Labour and Libs thought this week in parliament was going to be them channelling a national outrage about constitutional outrages. Instead it's going to be Johnson et al contemptuously telling they can have an election if they want it.
> 
> This started with Cameron and ends with Johnson. Bullingdon to Bullingdon. Silly old Bercow only got to the Monday Club.


Ruining curry club too.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How does that work?



Routh Davidson  had a bid roll in reviving the Tories up there to 12 (?) seats now. 

possibly 12 more seats to the SNP , Scottish independence on the cards again.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

Laura Kuenssberg (sorry) thinks there could be a 2/3 vote for a GE, with a pre-31 Oct date, which the Government could then unilaterally change to a post31 Oct date.
Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter
Paul Mason would, _literally_, explode if they did that.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Have we left yet?



Are we there yet?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

The wet fist on the weekend may have helped. I think their calculations are fat beyond that though. Need to really study the 150 plus target seats.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Routh Davidson  had a bid roll in reviving the Tories up there to 12 (?) seats now.
> 
> possibly 12 more seats to the SNP , Scottish independence on the cards again.


How does that give Davidson the last laugh?


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

If the process for calling a GE does begin tomorrow, when is the first date it could realistically be held? 

And would that give enough time for whoever wins to get anything substantive re Brexit through parliament before 31st October?

Whatever the answer to the first question, I suspect the answer to the second is "no".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

I'm pretty convinced at this point that a vote of no confidence in the govt is what Johnson _wants - _that enables him to fight an election on the basis that all the other parties blocked Brexit. Which will make all this coup chat pretty daft as he gears up for a big old "let the people decide" election. 

I'm not so convinced however that the Tory 'rebels', Labour and the assorted Remainiacs can get their shit together in time to pass a VoNC though. Certainly all this mucking about with legislation suggests they can't. I wonder what Johnson will do then.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How does that give Davidson the last laugh?



Ruth Davidson is a secret SNP/Lib Dem plant. Or something.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> If the process for calling a GE does begin tomorrow, when is the first date it could realistically be held?
> 
> And would that give enough time for whoever wins to get anything substantive re Brexit through parliament before 31st October?
> 
> Whatever the answer to the first question, I suspect the answer to the second is "no".



I reckon if you actually got an election the EU would be quite happy to magnanimously offer a month extension to the new government if they wanted it. Fits with everything they've said prior.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ruth Davidson is a secret SNP/Lib Dem plant. Or something.


Impressive sleeper.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Impressive sleeper.



She'll have a lot more time to nap in future certainly.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I reckon if you actually got an election the EU would be quite happy to magnanimously offer a month extension to the new government if they wanted it. Fits with everything they've said prior.


i think they'd stretch to two months.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> If the process for calling a GE does begin tomorrow, when is the first date it could realistically be held?
> 
> And would that give enough time for whoever wins to get anything substantive re Brexit through parliament before 31st October?
> 
> Whatever the answer to the first question, I suspect the answer to the second is "no".


Presumably the process of calling a GE is quicker if it's via a 2/3 vote rather than vonc. The latter has 14 days (?) for various people to have a go getting a workable coalition together.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are we there yet?



I'll turn this Brexit round and there'll be no sunlit uplands for anyone.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Why should they stop Brexit?


I thought you did not want the UK to leave the EU?


----------



## Smangus (Sep 2, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I thought you did not want the UK to leave the EU?



Opposing no deal is not opposing Brexit.

To clarify I think the result of the referendum should be respected but we should leave with a deal. no deal will be too damaging to too many people's lives. Those that can least afford it.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I reckon if you actually got an election the EU would be quite happy to magnanimously offer a month extension to the new government if they wanted it. Fits with everything they've said prior.


But if Johnson wins and doesn't want an extension, all the time is effectively up.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

Owen Smith now joining in the chorus of Labour titans calling for resistance to a snap election. 

What do they do? Vote confidence in the govt? Ludicrous.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> But if Johnson wins and doesn't want an extension, all the time is effectively up.


If Johnson wins, we're all fucked.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 2, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Opposing no deal is not opposing Brexit.


Right so back to my previous question how does the LP stop 'no deal' without either getting legislation to extend A50 through parliament (which the gov is now treating as a confidence matter) or going for a GE?


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Presumably the process of calling a GE is quicker if it's via a 2/3 vote rather than vonc. The latter has 14 days (?) for various people to have a go getting a workable coalition together.


I think that's right. I'm more wondering how long there has to be between calling the election and it being held


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Owen Smith now joining in the chorus of Labour titans calling for resistance to a snap election.
> 
> What do they do? Vote confidence in the govt? Ludicrous.



Wow. Just seen that. See, this is what I mean, can honestly see Johnson's plan backfiring because the opposition just refuse to fight an election. 

The only reason I can think of that he would say this is he just wants to replace the govt without an election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think that's right. I'm more wondering how long there has to be between calling the election and it being held


min? six weeks. max? who knows?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think that's right. I'm more wondering how long there has to be between calling the election and it being held


6 weeks I think.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Presumably the process of calling a GE is quicker if it's via a 2/3 vote rather than vonc. The latter has 14 days (?) for various people to have a go getting a workable coalition together.



If you have a govt ready to go it could call an election straight away. And would probably be quite unpopular if it didn't.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> . They're in desperation territory.


The lead they've built up in the polls not looking very desperate any more


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you have a govt ready to go it could call an election straight away. And would probably be quite unpopular if it didn't.


he's not going to march people up to an election then back down like gordon brown did


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The lead they've built up in the polls not looking very desperate any more



Lead in the polls is pretty meaningless without an election. Leading in the polls doesn't equal a strong majority.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Lead in the polls is pretty meaningless without an election. Leading in the polls doesn't equal a strong majority.


True, but mapping does suggest a strong enough majority, as it stands. Big 6 weeks of election campaign if it happens.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Big 6 weeks of election campaign if it happens.


Indeed. A lot can change in that time as we saw in 2017.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you have a govt ready to go it could call an election straight away. And would probably be quite unpopular if it didn't.


Yes, that looks to be it. Here's the relevant bit from the FTPA (wiki)



> *Provisions[edit]*
> Section 3(1)[9] of the Act originally[10] stated that Parliament should be automatically dissolved 17 working days before a polling day of a general election. This was subsequently amended by the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 to 25 working days. Section 1 of the Act provides for such polling days to occur on the first Thursday in May of the fifth year after the previous general election, starting with 7 May 2015.
> 
> The Prime Minister is given the power to postpone this date by up to two months by laying a draft statutory instrument before the House proposing that polling day is held up to two months later than that date. If the use of such a statutory instrument is approved by each House of Parliament, the Prime Minister has the power, by order made by statutory instrument under section 1(5), to provide that polling day is held accordingly.
> ...


 The underlined bit makes it look like 5 weeks, but working back from the set election date rather than '5 weeks from now'. I may well be confused though.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

https://inews.co.uk/news/brexit/bor...st-house-of-lords-brexiteers-pro-remain-bias/ 



> Boris Johnson is preparing to create large numbers of Brexiteer peers within months – to correct what he sees as a heavy pro-Remain bias in the House of Lords.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

yeh if a week's a long time in politics six weeks is an eternity


----------



## Flavour (Sep 2, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Right so back to my previous question how does the LP stop 'no deal' without either getting legislation to extend A50 through parliament (which the gov is now treating as a confidence matter) or going for a GE?


 
I don't think they can. It's May's deal with some different fonts used or No deal. Labour will buckle and vote for the deal at the last, you just watch it happen


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

Flavour said:


> I don't think they can. It's May's deal with some different fonts used or No deal. Labour will buckle and vote for the deal at the last, you just watch it happen


you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think may's deal's ever going to be reintroduced to the commons in any font. it's been a rotting corpse for many months.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 2, 2019)

I think a GE before 31st October brings a lot of risk to Johnson.  There are quite a few variables which could have a big impact.  One of the biggest is the role of the Brexit Party and whether they stand all their candidates.  They will have a choice of either standing their candidates and risk Labour winning the most seats or trust Johnson that he is going full no deal.

I'd say its highly likely that Johnson would renege on any deal with the BP if he thought he could get a deal with the EU through Parliament.  That would be the BP's one chance fucked.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 2, 2019)

I'd be very interested to know what effect it would have on the GE result if Labour campaigned on 2nd ref, May's deal vs remain on the ballot. I think it will lose them shit tons of votes in the North but increase their majority in the London seats they always win anyway


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think a GE before 31st October brings a lot of risk to Johnson.  There are quite a few variables which could have a big impact.  One of the biggest is the role of the Brexit Party and whether they stand all their candidates.  They will have a choice of either standing their candidates and risk Labour winning the most seats or trust Johnson that he is going full no deal.
> 
> I'd say its highly likely that Johnson would renege on any deal with the BP if he thought he could get a deal with the EU through Parliament.  That would be the BP's one chance fucked.



With a majority of one, at least 30-40 remainers in his ranks and the DUP offering 'confidence and supply' support in the way a rope supports a hanging man I do not think he's got any other serious option. 

In terms of the BP Johnson is already eating in to their support. Farage will cut a deal to stand in Labour leave seats rather than finish second in lot of places and ether face a hard grind against a Labour coalition or a resurgent Tory Party who captured power without him.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think a GE before 31st October brings a lot of risk to Johnson.  There are quite a few variables which could have a big impact.  One of the biggest is the role of the Brexit Party and whether they stand all their candidates.  They will have a choice of either standing their candidates and risk Labour winning the most seats or trust Johnson that he is going full no deal.
> 
> I'd say its highly likely that Johnson would renege on any deal with the BP if he thought he could get a deal with the EU through Parliament.  That would be the BP's one chance fucked.



I am not convinced that the BP standing will make any big difference, I think most claiming they intend to vote BP, come the day, will vote Tory as the only hope of (a) getting some form of brexit, and (b) keeping Corbyn out. 

I am not sure what tactical voting could happen regarding the remain parties.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Corbyn's fatal error is the surrender to middle class liberals on Brexit. But given its happened, given Johnson's commitment to leave by 31/10 in all circumstances and given the emerging consensus that a snap GE is needed (before 31/10) to settle the question once and for all - what exactly would you have him do?




What would you have him do? Suddenly announce now that the 70% of Labour voters that voted Remain are poncey middle class liberals and that Labour are in fact the undisputed heirs of Brexit?


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

As has been said, it's a minimum of six weeks between calling and holding, but it's up to the outgoing PM to choose the date.

Brexit: Election discussions in No 10 amid Brexit battle


> If Parliament were dissolved on Friday then the earliest possible date for an election would be Friday 11 October. With polls normally taking place on a Thursday, 17 October is potentially the more likely earliest opportunity. But those who back a negotiated Brexit deal, or want to remain in the EU, are concerned the PM could delay the poll to the start of November, after the UK has left the EU, making it impossible to stop a no-deal Brexit.



And that leaves just two weeks between the likely earliest date of an election and the current exit date of 31 Oct...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think may's deal's ever going to be reintroduced to the commons in any font. it's been a rotting corpse for many months.



I'm not sure it's that dead, Johnson would happily bring it back if it had a majority to get it through.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> As has been said, it's a minimum of six weeks between calling and holding, but it's up to the outgoing PM to choose the date.
> 
> Brexit: Election discussions in No 10 amid Brexit battle
> 
> ...



The outgoing PM can be someone different if a VoNC succeeds though.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The outgoing PM can be someone different if a VoNC succeeds though.


Are you suggesting that if a new (anti-no-deal) PM emerged after a VoNC, they would then call an election?

What would be the point of that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not sure it's that dead, Johnson would happily bring it back if it had a majority to get it through.


there will never be a majority to get it through. not unless significant portions of the document are changed: namely the words.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 2, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What would you have him do? Suddenly announce now that the 70% of Labour voters that voted Remain are poncey middle class liberals and that Labour are in fact the undisputed heirs of Brexit?


I don't think Labour will ever commit themselves to a clear position now. It might be that events rule out some of their options and that _provides them with_ a position, but I'm still not convinced they'll have anything clear to say right up to polling day.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> Are you suggesting that if a new (anti-no-deal) PM emerged after a VoNC, they would then call an election?
> 
> What would be the point of that?



That's a fair point but Corbyn and McDonnell have suggested that if they led some sort of coalition govt then they would seek an election. And I think a caretaker govt led by some Labour right type or whoever would be under a lot of pressure to call an election.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there will never be a majority to get it through. not unless significant portions of the document are changed: namely the words.



What if Johnson had a majority of say 70 MP's, didn't need any DUP support and said something to the effect of 'we are happy to accept a customs border in the Irish sea'? 

I reckon some Labour MP's would vote for that just to get this over with, never mind the Tories. DUP would hate it but they wouldn't really matter any more.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 2, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think a GE before 31st October brings a lot of risk to Johnson.  There are quite a few variables which could have a big impact.  One of the biggest is the role of the Brexit Party and whether they stand all their candidates.  They will have a choice of either standing their candidates and risk Labour winning the most seats or trust Johnson that he is going full no deal.
> 
> .



It's a pretty transparently desperate move. That doesn't mean he won't get away with it. Corbyn looks a spent force right now.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's a fair point but Corbyn and McDonnell have suggested that if they led some sort of coalition govt then they would seek an election. And I think a caretaker govt led by some Labour right type or whoever would be under a lot of pressure to call an election.


But whoever did that would have to get a Brexit extension *first*, because there certainly wouldn't be time to do so after.

So Corbyn is imagining he would win his VoNC, become PM, and then give up being PM to fight an election on the basis that he had just postponed Brexit *again*. Can you see any problem arising there?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> But whoever did that would have to get a Brexit extension *first*, because there certainly wouldn't be time to do so after.
> 
> So Corbyn is imagining he would win his VoNC, become PM, and then give up being PM to fight an election on the basis that he had just postponed Brexit *again*. Can you see any problem arising there?



Absolutely I can, I wasn't saying it was without risk or even the best idea. I just meant there is a route for someone other than Johnson to determine the date of the election.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What would you have him do? Suddenly announce now that the 70% of Labour voters that voted Remain are poncey middle class liberals and that Labour are in fact the undisputed heirs of Brexit?



The damage is done.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Owen Smith now joining in the chorus of Labour titans calling for resistance to a snap election.
> 
> What do they do? Vote confidence in the govt? Ludicrous.


Do that and wait 6 months. The pie is cooked.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 2, 2019)

Main opposition party opposing/being perceived to oppose a GE is a shit look at any time, in current context it would be fucking mental


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

FBPE types have managed to get #CrossTheFloor trending on twitter.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Main opposition party opposing/being perceived to oppose a GE is a shit look at any time, in current context it would be fucking mental



It's like giving your opponent a 5 second head start in a foot race.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Main opposition party opposing/being perceived to oppose a GE is a shit look at any time, in current context it would be fucking mental


Particularly when 'calling for a GE' has basically been repeated for 3 years when asked about their Brexit position.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Absolutely I can, I wasn't saying it was without risk or even the best idea. I just meant there is a route for someone other than Johnson to determine the date of the election.


OK, fair enough. I'm ultimately less concerned with who chooses the date or what that date might be than with the likely consequences of a snap election, and I don't see it going well for those trying to stop a No Deal or for Corbyn and Labour.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

andysays said:


> OK, fair enough. I'm ultimately less concerned with who chooses the date or what that date might be than with the likely consequences of a snap election, and I don't see it going well for those trying to stop a No Deal or for Corbyn and Labour.



*shrug* the other option is Johnson staying in power.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What if Johnson had a majority of say 70 MP's, didn't need any DUP support and said something to the effect of 'we are happy to accept a customs border in the Irish sea'?
> 
> I reckon some Labour MP's would vote for that just to get this over with, never mind the Tories. DUP would hate it but they wouldn't really matter any more.


yeh that's quite a significant change from the document as it stands


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Owen Smith now joining in the chorus of Labour tits calling for resistance to a snap election.
> 
> What do they do? Vote confidence in the govt? Ludicrous.


c4u


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh that's quite a significant change from the document as it stands



Wouldn't require any change in the text!


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Wouldn't require any change in the text!


sorry misread tired and bored, you're quite right.

i'd be astonished if he did that as that would be a volte-face of titanic proportions


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> sorry misread tired and bored, you're quite right.
> 
> i'd be astonished if he did that as that would be a volte-face of titanic proportions



True, but (assuming he has a strategy) it's that, right?


----------



## Flavour (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> True, but (assuming he has a strategy) it's that, right?



has to be. the only disadvantage to it is that it won't fully extinguish farage and the brexit party like No deal would, because the consequence of leaving with May's deal + customs border in irish sea will be that that segment doesn't go away, but keeps on lashing the tories from the right. 

i guess that would all be solved if NI leaves the UK (whether as an independent country or to rejoin Republic)... which tbh i think a lot of 21st century tories would actually be quite happy about.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> True, but (assuming he has a strategy) it's that, right?


it would see him torn limb from limb by enraged brexiteers before he managed to flee the cabinet meeting room

nigel farage would think he'd won the euromillions


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Flavour said:


> has to be. the only disadvantage to it is that it won't fully extinguish farage and the brexit party like No deal would, because the consequence of leaving with May's deal + customs border in irish sea will be that that segment doesn't go away, but keeps on lashing the tories from the right.
> 
> i guess that would all be solved if NI leaves the UK (whether as an independent country or to rejoin Republic)... which tbh i think a lot of 21st century tories would actually be quite happy about.






Pickman's model said:


> it would see him torn limb from limb by enraged brexiteers before he managed to flee the cabinet meeting room
> 
> nigel farage would think he'd won the euromillions



Can is kicked down the road for a few years though. And how do Farage and the Brexit Party remain relevant with no more European Parliament elections?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 2, 2019)

Flavour said:


> .. which tbh i think a lot of *21st century tories* would actually be quite happy about.



Not sure there are any Tories born in the 21st century.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

I work with one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I work with one.


what as a co-worker?


----------



## a_chap (Sep 2, 2019)




----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what as a co-worker?


Aye, she's an admin where I teach


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Here we fucking go II


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

They really mean to leave. It said so when I tried to buy a rod licence today. 
Buy a rod fishing licence


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Here we fucking go II
> 
> View attachment 182935



It will be a ploy to wriggle out of Merkels 30 day challenge.
No bugger can solve the land border conundrum, and on this occasion he can't get one of his fags to stop warming the bog seat for him and do his homework instead.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 2, 2019)

Any bets on Johnson coming out of number ten wearing a homburg and smoking a cigar?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

It won't be an election called. It'll be "this is what MPs have to choose" or some toss.


----------



## emanymton (Sep 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Laura Kuenssberg (sorry) thinks there could be a 2/3 vote for a GE, with a pre-31 Oct date, which the Government could then unilaterally change to a post31 Oct date.
> Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter
> Paul Mason would, _literally_, explode if they did that.


Am I alone in thinking this would be the best possible outcome for Labour?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> It won't be an election called. It'll be "this is what MPs have to choose" or some toss.



I'm preparing for disappointment. Can't be an election can it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

emanymton said:


> Am I alone in thinking this would be the best possible outcome for Labour?



It certainly wouldn't be a bad outcome compared to lots of others. But seems unlikely.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm preparing for disappointment. Can't be an election can it?


I'd be extremely surprised.


----------



## emanymton (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It certainly wouldn't be a bad outcome compared to lots of others. But seems unlikely.


I agree, i can't see it happening. I don't see what Johnson has to gain by doing that.

Unless he really has a deep personal commitment to the UK leaving the EU. But he doesn't.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

PM seal on plinth - not an election


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

The wittering on the BBC to fill the wait time are worthy of radio4 longwave test coverage.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> It won't be an election called. It'll be "this is what MPs have to choose" or some toss.


 Apparently it can't be that because there is a Government Crest on the podium they've put out


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 2, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The wittering on the BBC to fill the wait time are worthy of radio4 longwave test coverage.


I was about to say, I feel sorry for him!


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

Harry Smiles said:


> Apparently it can't be that because there is a Government Crest on the podium they've put out


As I posted two posts above yours


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I was about to say, I feel sorry for him!


He got reinforcements now.


----------



## andysays (Sep 2, 2019)

TopCat said:


> The wittering on the BBC to fill the wait time are worthy of radio4 longwave test coverage.


"Oh look, a red bus has just driven down Whitehall..."


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

What were they drinking?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Jolly good row in the background.
Fair play.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It certainly wouldn't be a bad outcome compared to lots of others. But seems unlikely.



Is this because you think Labour would do better in a post Brexit GE or be finally annihilated?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

Weather?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

It's an election campaign speech.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

What's being chanted?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 2, 2019)

Stop the coup? Or has it changed


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 2, 2019)

Shop for soup!


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

Reiteration. Rhetoric.  What else?


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 2, 2019)

Fuck Your Soup!


----------



## TopCat (Sep 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Stop the coup? Or has it changed


Oh is that what it is? Certainly a loud demo.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

The cunt knows he's lost tomorrow's vote.


----------



## Johnny Doe (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> As I posted two posts above yours


Yeah, I took ages to press 'Post Reply'


----------



## agricola (Sep 2, 2019)

Voting against the Government will cut its legs off in negotiations, says man who voted against the government twice and cut its legs off in negotiations.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 2, 2019)

Nothing if not consistent then eh?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

Reined in somehow.
Bottler.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Is this because you think Labour would do better in a post Brexit GE or be finally annihilated?



I think they would find an election easier if they didn't have to say what they would do about Brexit. Why do you think I think a Tory landslide would be positive?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

He knows, and probably wants, it to go to a GE, but is setting-up others to blame for it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The cunt knows he's lost tomorrow's vote.



Even if he has, then what? He's said he's not going to ask for an extension.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He knows, and probably wants, it to go to a GE, but is setting-up others to blame for it.


He's just set out the redest of fucking red lines ever; he'll never ask for an extension.
Only one consequence of a 'rebel alliance' victory tomorrow.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Even if he has, then what? He's said he's not going to ask for an extension.


Get rid of this Parliament.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He's just set out the redest of fucking red lines ever; he'll never ask for an extension.
> Only one consequence of a 'rebel alliance' victory tomorrow.



He's set a trap, and Labour/the rebels have no choice but to walk into it.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 2, 2019)

Can someone give me a summary? I've had a busy few days but I'm concerned that my elderly mother has just text me suggesting I should stock up on soup


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

14th October is mooted if he loses in Parliament.
Don't do it guys. Get organised and set another extension at least.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He's just set out the redest of fucking red lines ever; he'll never ask for an extension.
> Only one consequence of a 'rebel alliance' victory tomorrow.



Why don't they just go straight to the VoNC? Or do they have to do this pantomime thing and go through the motions do you think?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

Guys


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Can someone give me a summary?



Something is going to happen.


----------



## chilango (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Something is going to happen.



...or not.


----------



## agricola (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's set a trap, and Labour/the rebels have no choice but to walk into it.



Oh its a trap, but it is the equivalent of a plastic cup propped up by a stick.  He loses the vote tomorrow, resigns saying its a vote of no confidence, Corbyn tries but fails to form a government but then lets someone else do so instead.  Boris et al feel a bit stupid and then spend the next six months going on about treason.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Something is going to happen.


Is Boris ever going to say what he thinks or is everything he thinks written on a piece of paper for him?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Reined in somehow.
> Bottler.


You’ve misread this, I think. He’s very clearly said _if you vote for Corbyn’s waste of time, you will be responsible for what follows._. He said he doesn’t want a general election, but the very clear subtext is that if the parliament votes with Corbyn, there will need to be a general election. So the rebels are going to be blamed when it’s called. And Corbyn cannot vote against having one, because he’ll be seen as a time wasting bottler.

So, yes, he thinks he’ll lose the vote tomorrow, but he’s sprung a trap the opposition can do nothing but walk into with their eyes open.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 2, 2019)

agricola said:


> Oh its a trap, but it is the equivalent of a plastic cup propped up by a stick.  He loses the vote tomorrow, resigns saying its a vote of no confidence, Corbyn tries but fails to form a government but then lets someone else do so instead.  Boris et al feel a bit stupid and then spend the next six months going on about treason.


Rather than resigning he'll surely put going to a GE to a vote.

EDIT: Or that's the implicit threat anyway.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 2, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Rather than resigning he'll surely put going to a GE to a vote.
> 
> EDIT: Or that's the implicit threat anyway.


Indeed. He’ll put it to the vote, and Corbyn will have no choice but to vote in favour.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 2, 2019)

My brain hurts trying to work out what the fuck is going on


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> You’ve misread this, I think. He’s very clearly said _if you vote for Corbyn’s waste of time, you will be responsible for what follows._. He said he doesn’t want a general election, but the very clear subtext is that if the parliament votes with Corbyn, there will need to be a general election. So the rebels are going to be blamed when it’s called. And Corbyn cannot vote against having one, because he’ll be seen as a time wasting bottler.
> 
> So, yes, he thinks he’ll lose the vote tomorrow, but he’s sprung a trap the opposition can do nothing but walk into with their eyes open.


Yep, that's it.
Looks like he knew he'd lost tomorrow when he cancelled the meeting with the tory 'rebels'.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 2, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He knows, and probably wants, it to go to a GE, but is setting-up others to blame for it.



Johnson although not endowed with a fathomless depth of intelligence has a backroom full of assistants who are.
Coupled with his cunning and slyness. That creates our current  problem.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

I'm no fan, but Goodwin nails Johnson's speech..


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 2, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed. He’ll put it to the vote, and Corbyn will have no choice but to vote in favour.


And whatever you think of Johnson he's at least doing something that the Remain Alliance has shown itself incapable of - seeking a _political_ (as opposed to technical) solution.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 2, 2019)

And, the drinks party in No. 10's garden continues, a sign that we should all turn to alcohol for an answer.


----------



## chilango (Sep 2, 2019)

If Johnson calls an October election and loses, he'll become the shortest serving PM* breaking the current record of 119 days held George Canning.

*Anomalies excepted.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

I think calling it a trap is giving them more credit than they really deserve: simple fact is, there is no real way through without a general election, and everyone knows it - this isn't a trap, it's just an early stump speech.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

chilango said:


> If Johnson calls an October election and loses, he'll become the shortest serving PM* breaking the current record of 119 days held George Canning.
> 
> *Anomalies excepted.


It would certainly be a record low number of days of Parliamentary scrutiny; at present he's faced the commons for the grand total of 1 day.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think calling it a trap is giving them more credit than they really deserve: simple fact is, there is no real way through without a general election, and everyone knows it - this isn't a trap, it's just an early stump speech.


Exactly; he wouldn't do it if he could win in the commons tomorrow. Johnson is boxed into this.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

So if he's nearly got a plan which he pleads MPs not to vote against then when is the content of this plan going to be revealed? Or have I misunderstood something?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think they would find an election easier if they didn't have to say what they would do about Brexit. Why do you think I think a Tory landslide would be positive?



I don’t think the latter, but some people on here claim they would welcome the destruction of the Labour Party and its reformist ways. It’s a convenient fall back when faced with the sullying dilemmas of electoral politics.

Unfortunately a snap election after Brexit doesn’t necessarily mean Brexit is settled. It becomes how close can you align or what is your view on rejoining or what sort of trade deal? Labour problem with Brexit persists. They still have to say what they think is best.

No deal and the Remain half will be baying for some sort of alignment. A deal on the basis of the withdrawal agreement and many will be desperate to reapply. Fertile for the Lib Dems.

It’s a schism for a long time to come and the nationalistic half will want confidence, belief and trade deals. They won’t look to Corbyn’s Labour for it. They identify him as unpatriotic and lacking the charisma needed to present Britain to the world.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think calling it a trap is giving them more credit than they really deserve: simple fact is, there is no real way through without a general election, and everyone knows it - this isn't a trap, it's just an early stump speech.


Yes, he was forced into this move. That said, he had a choice, and I don’t think May would have made this move. She’d have fluffed her opportunity to get the blame in first, but tried to claim it retrospectively.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I don’t think the latter, but some people on here claim they would welcome the destruction of the Labour Party and its reformist ways. It’s a convenient fall back when faced with the sullying dilemmas of electoral politics.



Not my style, you have to struggle on all fronts including electorally. 




Mr Moose said:


> It’s a schism for a long time to come and the nationalistic half will want confidence, belief and trade deals. They won’t look to Corbyn’s Labour for it. They identify him as unpatriotic and lacking the charisma needed to present Britain to the world.



It is a schism which will have an effect for a long time, but if you think it's simply a divide between nationalists and cosmopolitans, you haven't understood what's happening.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, he was forced into this move. That said, he had a choice, and I don’t think May would have made this move. She’d have fluffed her opportunity to get the blame in first, but tried to claim it retrospectively.



Aye he's definitely positioned himself much better than May in 2017.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye he's definitely positioned himself much better than May in 2017.


This time he's had the assistance of the entire British state


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> This time he's had the assistance of the entire British state



If you consider the FT calling for a VoNC in his govt help - and I think it probably will help him - then yeah.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye he's definitely positioned himself much better than May in 2017.


As always when someone says something like this, I'd invite you to look back at what people thought of May's tactics & positioning when she actually called the election in 2017. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you consider the FT calling for a VoNC in his govt help - and I think it probably will help him - then yeah.


I don't know what sociologists inform your view of society but I can't think of one who would lump the media in with the state in a country like the uk


----------



## chilango (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't know what sociologists inform your view of society but I can't think of one who would lump the media in with the state in a country like the uk



Althusser maybe?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

chilango said:


> Althusser maybe?


Possibly


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 2, 2019)

chilango said:


> If Johnson calls an October election and loses, he'll become the shortest serving PM* breaking the current record of 119 days held George Canning.
> 
> *Anomalies excepted.



Tbh that's the one glimmer of hope, that TCJ and his cabinet of anti-Talents are consigned to nowt but this odd footnote in wikipedia political records section...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I don't know what sociologists inform your view of society but I can't think of one who would lump the media in with the state in a country like the uk






chilango said:


> Althusser maybe?



Ideological state apparatus innit. 

You could also have Gramsci and I wouldn't consider it out of step with Lenin and Trotsky either.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> As always when someone says something like this, I'd invite you to look back at what people thought of May's tactics & positioning when she actually called the election in 2017. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.



I remember it very well. Within 15 minutes of May announcing that election I lumped on a hung Parliament, and then again a few days later when the odds went longer. Made a packet betting on constituencies. This time around I'm not so confident to be honest.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Tomorrow's Matt...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Ideological state apparatus innit.
> 
> You could also have Gramsci and I wouldn't consider it out of step with Lenin and Trotsky either.


Are lenin or trotsky included in the ranks of sociologists?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Are lenin or trotsky included in the ranks of sociologists?



Are non-sociologists not allowed a view?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not my style, you have to struggle on all fronts including electorally.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I didn’t say it was, your words. I just mentioned nationalists, who I don’t believe Labour will tempt. There are working class people on either side of the divide. It’s a too often made assumption on here that Leave more accurately expresses _the_ working class view.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 2, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are non-sociologists not allowed a view?


When you quote a post about sociologists it seems frankly peculiar to introduce the views of a couple of mass killers


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes, he was forced into this move. That said, he had a choice, and I don’t think May would have made this move. She’d have fluffed her opportunity to get the blame in first, but tried to claim it retrospectively.



In fact you are both right. Killer B is correct in that the balance of forces meant Johnson was always ending up here whatever he did. But you've correctly pointed out that he’s played a shit hand very deftly and I think, over the coming days we’ll see just how cleverly.

I’m not expecting a Tory campaign that attacks its own base on social care or robotic ‘strong and stable’ shite. If he pulls of an alliance with Farage he’s played, unfortunately, a bad hand superbly


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m not expecting a Tory campaign that attacks its own base


wasn't there some policy floated the other week about raising the retirement age to 75?


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> wasn't there some policy floated the other week about raising the retirement age to 75?



“Opportunities” for older poors. Maybe people with huge private pensions or other investments will also want to work in B&Q but I doubt it somehow.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 2, 2019)

> Conservative Party chairman James Cleverly tells the BBC that Tory MPs who vote against the government could be expelled from the party.
> 
> "MPs who seek to *take power away from their prime minister, their party* and hand it to someone else are stepping over a line," he says.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Anyway, maybe Johnson is going to hammer Labour into the ground with his machiavellian 4-d chess moves, but tbh it feels a lot like _2017 but harder_ to me right now.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> wasn't there some policy floated the other week about raising the retirement age to 75?



I explicitly said ‘their own base’ not people not like my dad


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Smithson picking up Waugh's question to Benn as a sign that Labour might not give Johnson the 2/3 he needs for a GE.


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 2, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> “Opportunities” for older poors. Maybe people with huge private pensions or other investments will also want to work in B&Q but I doubt it somehow.



Maybe they could work up a snappy slogan for it like, I dunno... The Old Society!


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Smithson picking up Waugh's question to Benn as a sign that Labour might not give Johnson the 2/3 he needs for a GE.
> 
> View attachment 182969


Does that not sort of play into Johnson's hands, at least public perception-wise?

Labour said they want a GE, now given the chance they vote against it? Now Johnson is twice "on the side of democracy" (trying to respect the referendum and now trying to take it to the people) and Labour are twice against it?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Does that not sort of play into Johnson's hands, at least public perception-wise?
> 
> Labour said they want a GE, now given the chance they vote against it? Now Johnson is twice "on the side of democracy" (trying to respect the referendum and now trying to take it to the people) and Labour are twice against it?


Yes, it would look terrible.
But I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't concoct some sort of rationale for having Johnson placed in a position where he'd have to resign as PM. If the legislation passes, ND is off the table and Johnson has said that he wouldn't extend...I can certainly see how the centrist PLP would be easily persuaded.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When you quote a post about sociologists it seems frankly peculiar to introduce the views of a couple of mass killers



You're peculiar.


----------



## gosub (Sep 2, 2019)

EU could declare no-deal Brexit a major natural disaster


A couple of things  1) a they finaly grasp that it's quite natural for the UK to want to leave the EU  (2) In age of increasingly energetic weather systems £500 mil is a lot and I m surprised given the way things have been this year they haven't dipped into it alreasy


----------



## philosophical (Sep 2, 2019)

Johnson has less than three weeks to meet Merkels deadline. So far the UK have not approached the EU with anything.
Johnson is a lazy bastard, and probably thinks along the lines of pulling an all nighter to get a D grade assignment in just before the deadline.
Either way the deadline comes well before the date in October he keeps going on about.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Smithson picking up Waugh's question to Benn as a sign that Labour might not give Johnson the 2/3 he needs for a GE.
> 
> View attachment 182969


There was another Labour MP (can't remember who ETA: Jenny Chapman) on the radio this afternoon saying the same thing. So that's going to be the line, it seems. If it holds, Johnson will be forced into leading a negotiation he is currently depicting as doomed to failure, or else resign.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 2, 2019)

Raheem said:


> There was another Labour MP (can't remember who) on the radio this afternoon saying the same thing. So that's going to be the line, it seems. If it holds, Johnson will be forced into leading a negotiation he is currently depicting as doomed to failure, or else resign.


Might be the gin but I'm not following what's going on here. Can you or brogdale explain it very slowly?


----------



## Gerry1time (Sep 2, 2019)




----------



## Raheem (Sep 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Might be the gin but I'm not following what's going on here. Can you or brogdale explain it very slowly?



That Labour will say no GE until no deal on 31st October is impossible, because that is the immediate priority. Johnson will want to stand on a platform of no deal on 31st October, so that is how Labour gives itself a pretext for voting against a GE.

You probably can't tell, but I honestly did type that as slowly as I could manage.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 2, 2019)

14 october is the date being mooted - so labour would have to back it.

Whats crucial to the tories hopes is the position of Farage - if he stands down his party in tory target seats in return for copper bottom promise to deliver a "proper brexit" - i.e. - no deal then we would have the very real danger of johnson winning a majority. 
An tory victory on the back of a toxic and divisive "people vs the elites" campaign followed by a no deal crash out will be a fucking disaster - it would put a reactionary, far right disaster capitalists in the driving seat, backed by a popular base of ultra nationalist xenophobes - all  in a time of chaos. Scary scary shit. things would get very very ugly.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Might be the gin but I'm not following what's going on here. Can you or brogdale explain it very slowly?


There's going to be a motion put down tomorrow that - if passed - will force whoever is prime minister on the 16th October to ask for an extension until January 2020, unless a deal is in place. If it's passed, Johnson will call an election - which will need two thirds of the house to vote for it to pass. Current FBPE thinking seems to be that If enough of the opposition vote against an early election - Corbyn will whip to vote for probably, but plenty of his backbenchers might not - Johnson will be forced to either pass a deal somehow, ask for the extension or resign to trigger a new election.


----------



## B.I.G (Sep 2, 2019)

Only if the racist working class vote for the Brexit party in labour seats, which of course they will, or are they not racist but just thick, thinking that it won’t get worse for them with another five years under the tories. 

Thank god they will get the chance to find out.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

All of which brings us back to Labour having demanded a GE at every turn now deciding it doesn’t want one. Johnson blames them for the delay and stasis and waits for the electorate to deliver its verdict in due course. Even by FBPE loonery this is piss poor. The best chance they have to stop brexit, and specifically a no deal brexit, is to return a Labour/SNP/liberal/green/plaid coalition government


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

And Johnson will seek to ignore any vote mandating him to do anything.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> All of which brings us back to Labour having demanded a GE at every turn now deciding it doesn’t want one.


This isn't happening though. If Johnson calls an election, Labour will vote for it, and be whipped to vote for it. Corbyn quoted this evening: "I will be delighted when the election comes, I’m ready for it, you’re ready for it, we’ll take that message out there and we will win, and defeat this lot.”


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

the question is whether enough of his backbenchers vote with the whip.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

it's fucking insane that anyone thinks the answer to this is another fucking 6 months of this bullshit.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 2, 2019)

can johnson call a parliamentary vote for a general election before anyone else can call for a vote of no confidence?  with a VONC, there's a couple of weeks for attempts to be made to form a new government.  with the former, presume there isn't...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> can johnson call a parliamentary vote for a general election before anyone else can call for a vote of no confidence?  with a VONC, there's a couple of weeks for attempts to be made to form a new government.  with the former, presume there isn't...


Effectively not as the FTPA requires a 2/3 of all MPs vote to trigger a GE. They'd obviously not support that until they'd had the chance to stop ND.


----------



## kenny g (Sep 2, 2019)

Wtf is FBPE?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> This isn't happening though. If Johnson calls an election, Labour will vote for it, and be whipped to vote for it. Corbyn quoted this evening: "I will be delighted when the election comes, I’m ready for it, you’re ready for it, we’ll take that message out there and we will win, and defeat this lot.”



I haven’t seen any confirmation that Labour will whip for a GE. If they do, with the SNP the DUP, and presumably most of the Tories then Benn at al will be struggling for 25%


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Wtf is FBPE?



Follow Back Pro-European. Twitter loons


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I haven’t seen any confirmation that Labour will whip for a GE. If they do, with the SNP the DUP, and presumably most of the Tories then Benn at al will be struggling for 25%


those are not the words of someone who isn't going to whip for a GE.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Effectively not as the FTPA requires a 2/3 of all MPs vote to trigger a GE. They'd obviously not support that until they'd had the chance to stop ND.



dunno.

is it 2/3 of the MPs who take part in that particular vote, or 2/3 of the total number of MPs whether they vote or not?  

while nothing's predictable at the moment, it's hard to see labour (who have been calling for a general election at least until very recently) voting against one now.  tinge etc would probably vote against (as they will almost certainly lose their seats), limp dems will want to do the opposite of labour but probably feel they can pick up seats in remain areas so will be keen.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 2, 2019)

this has just come up on tweeter

 

colour me confused


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno.
> 
> is it 2/3 of the MPs who take part in that particular vote, or 2/3 of the total number of MPs whether they vote or not?
> 
> while nothing's predictable at the moment, it's hard to see labour (who have been calling for a general election at least until very recently) voting against one now.  tinge etc would probably vote against (as they will almost certainly lose their seats), limp dems will want to do the opposite of labour but probably feel they can pick up seats in remain areas so will be keen.


It's 2/3 of the 650 total.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> this has just come up on tweeter
> 
> View attachment 183017
> 
> colour me confused


Er yeah that'll be bullshit then


----------



## Raheem (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> it's fucking insane that anyone thinks the answer to this is another fucking 6 months of this bullshit.


Insanely optimistic. It'll end up being passed on to one of Rees-Mogg's great grandchildren.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> those are not the words of someone who isn't going to whip for a GE.



Newsnight are suggesting others in the shadow cabinet, who I assume to be Starmer etc, may not be lined up for a whipping operation on the GE


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 2, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Er yeah that'll be bullshit then



or possibly a different species - someone on that thread has called for a GNU to take power.   needless to say it is not being taken entirely seriously


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 2, 2019)

Have heard this theory that Johnson will move date of GE until after 31/10 a few times now. Maybe I'm missing something but it sounds like bollocks, even sympathetic voters don't tend to like politicians being open snakes and would mean he'd have to fully own no deal. Maybe I'm not getting something but it does sound like rabbit hole panic stuff


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 2, 2019)

> "We can see Boris Johnson is playing a political game," a diplomat from a country traditionally very close to the UK told me. "But we don't understand the rules or the strategy."




Brexit: EU studies backstop while watching MPs in uproar


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Have heard this theory that Johnson will move date of GE until after 31/10 a few times now. Maybe I'm missing something but it sounds like bollocks, even sympathetic voters don't tend to like politicians being open snakes and would mean he'd have to fully own no deal. Maybe I'm not getting something but it does sound like rabbit hole panic stuff


there's a lot of magical thinking and insane conspiracy shit going on, on all sides tbf.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> those are not the words of someone who isn't going to whip for a GE.



And have a listen to Tony Lloyd now on Newsnight. He’s confirmed labour won’t ‘allow Boris Johnson to control the date of the election’


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

I'm not watching newsnight, what do you take me for?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

And now Mary Creagh also confirms Labour won’t be voting for ‘a GE until Brexit is sorted’

Incredible


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Mary Creagh doesn't speak for Labour though.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> Mary Creagh doesn't speak for Labour though.



Tony Lloyd does though. He’s in the shadow cabinet.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

there's a difference between what you've quoted Lloyd saying and what you've quoted Creagh saying. _Not allowing Johnson to control the date of the election _means not letting him set the date for after 31st October, not voting against an election altogether.


----------



## Anju (Sep 2, 2019)

Tories just seem more up for it and better prepared for an election. 

Sun and DM have run NHS health tourist stories over last few days. Bit of outrage over immigrants crossing the Chanel as well. 

Shit like this.



Not really seen anything to counter this or any indication that something is being worked on.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> there's a difference between what you've quoted Lloyd saying and what you've quoted Creagh saying. _Not allowing Johnson to control the date of the election _means not letting him set the date for after 31st October, not voting against an election altogether.



Yeah, agree. Lloyd was given a second bite and seemed to confirm agreement with Creagh but he wasn’t very clear


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

The LOTO is on record tonight more or less yelling 'bring it on you cunts.' - I don't think something a bit unclear someone in his shadow cabinet said on newsnight really gives us a better steer on which way the party will be voting in any imminent early election vote in parliament.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 2, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Johnson has less than three weeks to meet Merkels deadline. So far the UK have not approached the EU with anything.
> Johnson is a lazy bastard, and probably thinks along the lines of pulling an all nighter to get a D grade assignment in just before the deadline.
> Either way the deadline comes well before the date in October he keeps going on about.



Fuck me but you're thick.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 2, 2019)

killer b said:


> The LOTO is on record tonight more or less yelling 'bring it on you cunts.' - I don't think something a bit unclear someone in his shadow cabinet said on newsnight really gives us a better steer on which way the party will be voting in any imminent early election vote in parliament.



Their position won’t be ‘bring it on you cunts’ by this time tomorrow. It’ll be ‘we want to work together to stop no deal, secure an extension, and then have a GE’.


----------



## killer b (Sep 2, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Their position won’t be ‘bring it on you cunts’ by this time tomorrow. It’ll be ‘we want to work together to stop no deal, secure an extension, and then have a GE’.


perhaps it will be, but lets wait until it actually is before confidently asserting it's their position.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 2, 2019)

Assuming that all tories & other parties voted for a Johnson proposed GE, by my reckoning he'd only need about 35 Labour votes to get him over the 429 (2/3 of 650) line.

Obvs that figure would rise if he had any 'rebels' and/or the minor opposition parties decided for some reason not to support his call for a GE. 

Either way, if Corbyn whips to support, it would take a improbably staggeringly large example of LP indiscipline to threaten the chance of a GE.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fuck me but you're thick.



Quite impressed a dimwit like you can string as many as five words together.
Why on earth are you inviting me to fuck you?


----------



## Raheem (Sep 3, 2019)

It would be completely stupid, surely, to assent to a general election that could well cement the Tories in power for the next five years when the alternative is to pummel them after they again fail to deliver Brexit and they're too busy looking for each other in the rubble to even bother.

Or, to put it another way, the government has backed itself into such a corner that an election before the October EU summit is its only way out. I don't necessarily rate Corbyn as a tactical genius, but surely not giving them the one thing that can save them is a no-brainer.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> The LOTO is on record tonight more or less yelling 'bring it on you cunts.' - I don't think something a bit unclear someone in his shadow cabinet said on newsnight really gives us a better steer on which way the party will be voting in any imminent early election vote in parliament.


It took Emily Maitliss a long, long time to stop Lloyd waffling, but by the very end it sounded like he and Creagh were in agreement. It didn't quite come down to 'Labour won't vote for a GE that takes place before Oct 31st but will for one after that date', but that was the logical conclusion. That segment was followed by jounos and spin doctors saying that Labour's response was unexpected and fucks Johnson's strategy (particularly if done in conjunction with an anti-no deal bill passing tomorrow). Presumably they'll try and get a straight answer out of Corbyn tomorrow. Good luck with that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

johnson cant really complain (although he will) if the opposition decide to shamelessly piss about with parliamentary procedures in order to fuck him up the arse.
I really dont know what the fuck will happen now.
Johnsons is playing really high stakes and risks trashing  himself, brexit and tory party itself. But he cunt may well pull it off.
If he is going for october 14th as a GE date - can the opposition credibly claim that they cant support GE that in order to avoid "no deal"?

If they can get away with avoiding a GE - it would be very very funny though. Johnson could be left having to climb down from this threat to explee tory rebels and being forced to ask for an extension off the EU.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 3, 2019)

People seem baffled, don't they? Like people have learned nothing in their lives. Yes, shit things can and do happen. Not necessarily aimed at anyone here, I respect the contributions here and elsewhere; however, people have to know what they are talking about. You can't say everyone's opinion is correct or worth listening to. And I've no qualms about saying this applies across every class. In fact I'm biased, if anything, to the hardship end of the scale, at least they've learnt a few lessons.

But what we need is reason. People being trans isn't poison, Tories are. We need to bollock each other. I'm saying DON'T have a fistfight, I'm saying change the argument, have an argument. It's bleak though. Gobshites are obvious. I'm not saying people are stupid, I'm saying, genuinely, a lot of people have been deceived. They've been robbed. Any floating readers, check out the recent threads in this forum.

What do you want me say? The left puts money in the people's pockets, and it's not immigrants who take it out but the Tories (BP are Tories). The Tories tell you 'it is' and enough people are fooled to vote them back in and the selfish fuckers fool you again?


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 3, 2019)

gosub said:


> Clearly not, Percy iirc was in series 2.  General Sir Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett, VC, KCB, DSO was in Series 4.  Philiophical showing a poor grasp of history there



Percy was also in series 1 but not sure if he was a "Sir". And there was a Lord Melchett in series 2...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> johnson cant really complain (although he will) if the opposition decide to shamelessly piss about with parliamentary procedures in order to fuck him up the arse.
> I really dont know what the fuck will happen now.
> Johnsons is playing really high stakes and risks trashing  himself, brexit and tory party itself. But he cunt may well pull it off.
> If he is going for october 14th as a GE date - can the opposition credibly claim that they cant support GE that in order to avoid "no deal"?
> ...


If Labour won't support an October GE and if the opposition gets 'no-no deal' through this week, Johnson is running out of options, certainly.  He might have to go back and talk to those European chaps!  I suppose Johnson's real moment of weakness, perhaps to state the obvious, is if misses 31st October for anything other than a technical extension. In those circs the Brexit Party becomes a real threat so he leaves the election off for a couple of years.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

I suppose they could also argue that a GE would scupper any chance of johnsons securing this shiny new deal from the EU that he has been promising. So they are helping him really


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

well ive just watched newsnight and  - well its a whole big helping of "what the fuck?!" with a side order of "nobody knows". Labour bods sounded pretty adamant that they weren't going to grant johnson an election.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It would be completely stupid, surely, to assent to a general election that could well cement the Tories in power for the next five years when the alternative is to pummel them after they again fail to deliver Brexit and they're too busy looking for each other in the rubble to even bother.





Kaka Tim said:


> If they can get away with avoiding a GE - it would be very very funny though. Johnson could be left having to climb down from this threat to explee tory rebels and being forced to ask for an extension off the EU.


This is the same type of reasoning that has the League just being 'defeated' in Italy because of the daft stitch up between the PD and M5S. It is crazily short sighted. And once again disregards the political for the technical.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 3, 2019)

Yes, precisely. Blair and pals might think refusing to support an election (after 3 years where Labour’s position on Brexit was ‘call an election’) is a great wheeze. It may even cause Johnson problems in the short term. The problem, of course, is that Labour will eventually need to account for the decision in an election and with a public in an unforgiving mood. Not only will Labour MPs be out calling for remain and for the democratic result to be overturned they’ll also need to explain why they’ve dragged everything out even further.

I think we also need to remember that for Blair and Creagh etc their top two political priorities are:

1. Defeat the referendum result
2. Defeat Corbyn

Their desperation to do him in has to be factored into their ‘sage advice’. Corbyn should ignore it


----------



## muscovyduck (Sep 3, 2019)

I don't think it's been discussed recently - how many vocal remain voters do yous have in your workplace or anywhere else you get stuck at regularly? 

I've just finished a uni course and it was pretty dire, a group of very wealthy middle age people who were also quite xenophobic were massive fans of the EU and it was a real eye opener who else got sucked in to it. The one thing I'm greatful for is that Brexit has really weeded out the middle class saviour types and now those of us who are a bit younger and more naive know to spend our energy building movements around or even against these people and not with them. I'm expecting my new workplace to be Brexit/Lexit/soft remain based on the people I already know who work there


----------



## Poi E (Sep 3, 2019)

https://assets.publishing.service.g...mand-paper-scrutiny-transparency-27012019.pdf

How FTAs will be done after Brexit. 7 pages. Plays down listening to the Aussies or Kiwis about how they've managed the balancing act of US and China over decades of hard work. Course the oiks in the colonies can't help.

Bye bye Britain.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> . It is crazily short sighted. And once again disregards the political for the technical.



is it short sighted? I don't know. The priority has to be preventing a no deal crash out and stopping johnsons power grab in its tracks. Maybe voting down a GE at this point helps that, maybe it doesn't. I don't see any political principles being compromised - its a tactical move. If (a very big if) - if  it fucks the tories and helps labour im for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> is it short sighted? I don't know. The priority has to be preventing a no deal crash out and stopping johnsons power grab in its tracks. Maybe voting down a GE at this point helps that, maybe it doesn't. I don't see any political principles being compromised - its a tactical move. If (a very big if) - if  it fucks the tories and helps labour im for it.


If it fucks labour and it fucks the tories (lib dems etc go without saying) then I'm for it


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Problem with tactical moves is that most people aren't political geeks and it's how it is perceived by the wider electorate that matters


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Problem with tactical moves is that most people aren't political geeks and it's how it is perceived by the wider electorate that matters


How the opposition move is explained by their opposition.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Well first when you say


Kaka Tim said:


> is it short sighted? I don't know. The priority has to be preventing a no deal crash out and stopping johnsons power grab in its tracks.


Who's priority is this? Yours? Fine but don't pretend that it is, or should be, shared by everyone. It's not my priority and I'd argue that it should not be the priority of any social democrat party.



Kaka Tim said:


> Maybe voting down a GE at this point helps that, maybe it doesn't. I don't see any political principles being compromised - its a tactical move.


It's a tactical move that may win an unimportant skirmish while losing a war. Like voting Macron to keep out Le Pen, like PD and M5S blocking an election in Italy, like the CDU and SDP huddling together in Germany over fear of the AfD - not only does a refusal to back a GE not solve anything, in the medium/long term it benefits Johnson and the Tories.

You (general you) are, in effect, saying that you don't have/want a political solution so you'll use technical solutions to achieve the aim you want - ignoring that fact that much of the vote for Leave (and populisms) is based opposition for such technical solutions


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Problem with tactical moves is that most people aren't political geeks and it's how it is perceived by the wider electorate that matters



well you could argue that the fact that most people are utterly uninterested in parliamentary procedural bollocks means labour could get away with it. Im really unsure. Part of me thinks - fuck it - lets go. Its a bit like being when a football team is challenging for promotion and arguing that maybe it would be better to go up next season cos team would be "more ready" - when you really have to grab it whenever the opportunity comes along. 
But having an election when it is not at all clear weather the UK is crashing out or not two weeks later is fucked - and may allow the torys enough ambiguity to get away with it. 
Maybe that if we dont get an election and than Johnsons is pushed past oct 31 without a deal, there will be so much shit flying that nobody will remember or care who voted for what when he treid to call a GE.  
Or maybe the talk from labour that they might no go for a GE is a bluff to put the shits up johnson?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 3, 2019)

As I understood it, when the election comes, Labour will run on a policy of offering a new referendum on Remain or a ‘viable’ Leave option. 

I have fears that this will appeal to the few and not the many.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Who's priority is this? Yours? Fine but don't pretend that it is, or should be, shared by everyone. It's not my priority and I'd argue that it should not be the priority of any social democrat party.



I absolutely do think it should be a priority - both would be a total fucking disaster for millions of people in the uk - especially people with the least power and wealth.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I absolutely do think it should be a priority - both would be a total fucking disaster for millions of people in the uk - especially people with the least power and wealth.


OK, well I'll go back to the question I asked before when you said 


Kaka Tim said:


> a hard right tory party forcing a no deal crash out will be a fucking disaster - especially for the working class. it should absolutely be resisted by any means necessary.


Does this mean allying with Remain-inclined Tories? The LDs? Blair, Brown and the New Labour pricks? The CBI and BoE? 

To me the above is effectively saying that socialists should disregard their politics and instead become an appendage of liberalism. Sorry I won't do it - the priority for any socialist/communist/anarchist must be to help develop the self-organisation and power of the working class. That doesn't mean not opposing no deal, I recognise there are comrades that support remaining in the EU, that argue for that position on the basis of socialist principles (remain and reform). I disagree with them but I can appreciate their position and will still work with them. But whether one favours remaining or leaving the politics has to be built on socialist principles.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

As much as I like and respect you Kaka Tim I'll be damned if I'm going to spend time organising for some Rebel Alliance government of national unity or similar. Or push a pro-EU message.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> OK, well I'll go back to the question I asked before when you said
> Does this mean allying with Remain-inclined Tories? The LDs? Blair, Brown and the New Labour pricks? The CBI and BoE?
> 
> To me the above is effectively saying that socialists should disregard their politics and instead become an appendage of liberalism. .



How is being opposed to the same things necessarily "allying" with them? What politics are being disregarded by opposing no deal? a far right tory government and no deal are a clear and present danger - which will make the task of building solidarity from the bottom up even harder and further inflame ultra nationalist forces.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> How is being opposed to the same things necessarily "allying" with them? What politics are being disregarded by opposing no deal? a far right tory government and no deal are a clear and present danger - which will make the task of building solidarity from the bottom up even harder and further inflame ultra nationalist forces.


You said "_by any means necessary"_. 
I don't see how that can mean anything but that that allying with neo-liberals and disregarding socialism is a course of action to be undertaken if it stops 'no deal'


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> OK, well I'll go back to the question I asked before when you said
> Does this mean allying with Remain-inclined Tories? The LDs? Blair, Brown and the New Labour pricks? The CBI and BoE?


perhaps even the CofE


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You said "_by any means necessary"_.
> '



fair spot - in my mind that was burning barricades and strikes - not electoral pacts with lib dems or similar shite


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> OK, well I'll go back to the question I asked before when you said
> Does this mean allying with Remain-inclined Tories? The LDs? Blair, Brown and the New Labour pricks? The CBI and BoE?
> 
> To me the above is effectively saying that socialists should disregard their politics and instead become an appendage of liberalism. Sorry I won't do it - the priority for any socialist/communist/anarchist must be to help develop the self-organisation and power of the working class. That doesn't mean not opposing no deal, I recognise there are comrades that support remaining in the EU, that argue for that position on the basis of socialist principles (remain and reform). I disagree with them but I can appreciate their position and will still work with them. But whether one favours remaining or leaving the politics has to be built on socialist principles.


A useful post offering some perspective.
Socialists and anarchists reduced to arguing the merits of alternative neoliberal state arrangements as effected through the prism of capital's Parliamentary repdem parties.
Sad times.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> fair spot - in my mind that was burning barricades and strikes - not electoral pacts with lib dems or similar shite


Fair enough. I was quite surprised when you first said it.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

Shami Chakrabarti on the today program - 



> She said Labour would “need to get the sequencing right” before backing an election, and would first need “a locked in guarantee that Britain would not crash out of the EU during a campaign period”.
> 
> Chakrabarti said if they could “lock things down to ensure we don’t crash out” then, of course, they would want a general election. “We are geared up for a general election and we want it as soon as possible.”


in line with wot thingy and doo-dah were saying on newsnight - election off?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## tim (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps even the CofE



They had the foresight to exit the UK years ago


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

SNP coming out with the same line - 



> Now, the SNP’s Europe spokesman, *Stephen Gethins*.
> 
> _Q: What is your attitude towards a general election?_
> 
> “We’re really keen to see a general election and see the back of this dangerous and damaging Tory government” he says, but cautions that getting no-deal Brexit off the table is the priority. Gethins says he does not trust the prime minister and wants to focus on


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> SNP coming out with the same line -


Maybe cummings is not so good at 5 dimensional chess', after all?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

So, if the Benn bill is passed, together with a 'lock-in' date of the 14th Oct for a GE, and the Tories win, surely they could then cancel the Benn bill, with it's deadline of the 19th Oct to stop 'no deal'.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

And hoofing out 15-20 of your own MPs looks like cummings has fucked this up as well.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 3, 2019)

tim said:


> They had the foresight to exit the UK years ago



Many, many a night in Astoria !


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> SNP coming out with the same line -


To me that's not saying no GE. The above is saying (1) get the extension to A50, (2) have a GE. 

I see that as a very different line to the one FBPE loons are coming out with.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

When's this vote then


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> When's this vote then


This pm, unless cummings takes the Marinus van der Lubbe route.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This pm, unless cummings takes the Marinus van der Lubbe route.


Let's assume for a minute I don't know what that means (apart from the PM bit)


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Let's assume for a minute I don't know what that means (apart from the PM bit)


Burning the Reichstag.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Burning the Reichstag.


...and blaming the commies.


----------



## andysays (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> ...and blaming the commies.


Presumably in today's context that would mean blaming Corbyn


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> ...and blaming the commies.


Council communist! There's one for the new intake.

He did do it btw


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, if the Benn bill is passed, together with a 'lock-in' date of the 14th Oct for a GE, and the Tories win, surely they could then cancel the Benn bill, with it's deadline of the 19th Oct to stop 'no deal'.



Presumably so.  With a commons majority he can trust he could presumably reverse the law change.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Council communist! There's one for the new intake.
> 
> He did do it btw


Indeed.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Council communist! There's one for the new intake.
> 
> He did do it btw


Didn't the German state eventually pardon him (posthumously)?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Didn't the German state eventually pardon him (posthumously)?


& much good it did him


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Didn't the German state eventually pardon him (posthumously)?


His conviction was overturned for sure (with no damages to be paid of course). Not sure if it's a formal pardon. It's better than a pardon as it involves no grovelling.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> His conviction was overturned for sure (with no damages to be paid of course). Not sure if it's a formal pardon. It's better than a pardon as it involves no grovelling.


Yeah...a gradualist approach to justice moving at a glacial pace.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> A useful post offering some perspective.
> Socialists and anarchists reduced to arguing the merits of alternative neoliberal state arrangements as effected through the prism of capital's Parliamentary repdem parties.
> Sad times.



Until the glorious day that’s what there is, at least on this national rather than local scale. It’s a neoliberal world system and we get half of our food from it.

Hard Brexit and what do we have, either a very capital friendly Neo Lib Tory Party tying us strongly into global capital with few protections or a potentially unstable Labour Govt, managing scarcity (unless you see the economy maintaining and what would that take) not something that went well in the 70s. It would be unable to stand alone as capital flees and the press hound it for its ‘failures’.

There are many socialist principles including jobs and food on the table. Not losing is another good one. Build and redistribute.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This pm, unless cummings takes the Marinus van der Lubbe route.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 3, 2019)

I'd always done my moving to France calculations at unity ...

Google translation  ...

*The scenario 1 euro = 1 pound becomes precise *
The Circle-Opinion. At the rate where it plummets, the pound will soon reach parity with the euro. She would have lost one-third of her value in twenty years, writes Pierre Gruson. The risks of Brexit fulfill their work.

Google Translate

Le scénario 1 euro = 1 livre se précise


----------



## Cid (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> And hoofing out 15-20 of your own MPs looks like cummings has fucked this up as well.
> 
> View attachment 183033



Hadn't really thought of that... But yeah, parliamentary supremacy effectively allows anything to be passed on a simple majority. 

Actually vaguely recall it being discussed in the early days of May seeking an election.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 3, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> The Circle-Opinion. At the rate where it plummets, the pound will soon reach parity with the euro. She would have lost one-third of her value in twenty years, writes Pierre Gruson. The risks of Brexit fulfill their work.
> 
> Google Translate
> 
> Le scénario 1 euro = 1 livre se précise



Never knew the pound was feminine.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 3, 2019)

I can't find the phrase "cercle-opinion" used anywhere else


----------



## Flavour (Sep 3, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Never knew the pound was feminine.



In italian it's "la sterlina"... cos the official name is actually "La lira sterlina" (the old Lira is feminine... and the still-existing "lira" in countries like Turkey). The corona (czech, danish etc) also feminine, as is the indian "rupia" (rupee).

while the dollar (dollaro), and the euro are masculine. as is the ruble (rublo), the peso, the chinese Yuan and Japanese Yen.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

So, have I got this right as the logic of the next few days, assuming anti-no deal thing gets through: johnson then tries to get an election > most of the opposition (probably) fail to support him > short of trying to move a vonc against himself, johnson then forced to do real negotiations with the EU and ask for an extension (now without the threat of no deal) > this means johnson has breached his promise to get out come what may on the 31st October > resigns/implodes etc.

That all assumes a) 'the rebels' win today and b) the opposition do reject an early election. But if that does happen is johnson forced to suspend the ftpa, invent some even wilder circumvention of 'parliamentary traditions'? The pincer movement of legislating against no-deal and rejecting an election does seem like a hole in Johnson's defence, giving him very few choices. Perhaps I'm overthingking the ability of the opposition to deliver this - Corbyn will certainly have a good go at fucking it up. But still, is johnson up shit creek?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, have I got this right as the logic of the next few days, assuming anti-no deal thing gets through: johnson then tries to get an election > most of the opposition (probably) fail to support him > short of trying to move a vonc against himself, johnson then forced to do real negotiations with the EU and ask for an extension (now without the threat of no deal) > this means johnson has breached his promise to get out come what may on the 31st October > resigns/implodes etc.
> 
> That all assumes a) 'the rebels' win today and b) the opposition do reject an early election. But if that does happen is johnson forced to suspend the ftpa, invent some even wilder circumvention of 'parliamentary traditions'? The pincer movement of legislating against no-deal and rejecting an election does seem like a hole in Johnson's defence, giving him very few choices. Perhaps I'm overthingking the ability of the opposition to deliver this - Corbyn will certainly have a good go at fucking it up. But still, is johnson up shit creek?



I don't think it's credible that they can force him to ask for an extension and refuse an election. But who knows?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, have I got this right as the logic of the next few days, assuming anti-no deal thing gets through: johnson then tries to get an election > most of the opposition (probably) fail to support him > short of trying to move a vonc against himself, johnson then forced to do real negotiations with the EU and ask for an extension (now without the threat of no deal) > this means johnson has breached his promise to get out come what may on the 31st October > resigns/implodes etc.
> 
> That all assumes a) 'the rebels' win today and b) the opposition do reject an early election. But if that does happen is johnson forced to suspend the ftpa, invent some even wilder circumvention of 'parliamentary traditions'? The pincer movement of legislating against no-deal and rejecting an election does seem like a hole in Johnson's defence, giving him very few choices. Perhaps I'm overthingking the ability of the opposition to deliver this - Corbyn will certainly have a good go at fucking it up. But still, is johnson up shit creek?



You are trying too hard, even MPs & 'experts' haven't a fucking clue how it's going to play out ATM.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Buzzfeed have 14 'confirmed' tory rebels - it seems unlikely there will be many Labour MPs tempted to vote with the government on this, so it looks like a fairly nailed on government loss tonight.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I don't think it's credible that they can force him to ask for an extension and refuse an election. But who knows?


I suppose I was thinking that Johnson would become weaker in his negotiations with the EU at that point and would realise his only weapon is actually doing no deal. I suspect he still doesn't want that, not because he gives a shit about anyone else, but because it could go badly wrong and see him kicked out in a vonc by the end of the year.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> Buzzfeed have 14 'confirmed' tory rebels - it seems unlikely there will be many Labour MPs tempted to vote with the government on this, so it looks like a fairly nailed on government loss tonight.


Tonight certainly, though I haven't heard how it gets past a Lords filibuster.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I suppose I was thinking that Johnson would become weaker in his negotiations with the EU at that point and would realise his only weapon is actually doing no deal.


He's already at that point, no? He has nothing new to offer at negotiations. And I have had the distinct impression for a while now that certain parties in the EU, notably Macron, are really not scared of no deal at all.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> In italian it's "la sterlina"... cos the official name is actually "La lira sterlina" (the old Lira is feminine... and the still-existing "lira" in countries like Turkey). The corona (czech, danish etc) also feminine, as is the indian "rupia" (rupee).
> 
> while the dollar (dollaro), and the euro are masculine. as is the ruble (rublo), the peso, the chinese Yuan and Japanese Yen.



Who decides these things? When the French or Italians make up a new word, who decides whether it's a boy word or a girl word? Never understood that.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You are trying too hard, even MPs & 'experts' haven't a fucking clue how it's going to play out ATM.


Oh, I agree, I don't know, they don't know. I'm just wondering if that's become one of key scenarios that both Johnson's cabal and Labour are now gaming. I'm largely hanging that on a very waffly Newsnight interview last night, but that's about as good as it gets in terms of rune reading at the moment.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> He's already at that point, no? He has nothing new to offer at negotiations. And I have had the distinct impression for a while now that certain parties in the EU, notably Macron, are really not scared of no deal at all.


Yes, but the one bit I'm adding in his that Johnson may not have the option of getting a new GE and increasing his majority before the end of October. It becomes purely a game of chicken between him, Macron/Merkel and the 31st October. Paradoxically, if Parliament votes to 'take control' it actually takes itself out of the equation. Johnson + Diocalm vs Halloween.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who decides these things? When the French or Italians make up a new word, who decides whether it's a boy word or a girl word? Never understood that.



In France it's the Academié française, in Italian the Accademia della Crusca.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> In France it's the Academié française, in Italian the Accademia della Crusca.


They may like to think they decide such matters. In reality, usage wins. It's decided in the court of public opinion.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, but the one bit I'm adding in his that Johnson may not have the option of getting a new GE and increasing his majority before the end of October. It becomes purely a game of chicken between him, Macron/Merkel and the 31st October. Paradoxically, if Parliament votes to 'take control' it actually takes itself out of the equation. Johnson + Diocalm vs Halloween.



He may just try and ignore the legislation if Parliament does pass it.  Its all scorched earth at the moment anyway plus hastily brought about legislation is usually full of holes and difficult to implement / enforce.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 3, 2019)

.


----------



## klang (Sep 3, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> .


there is a seperate thread discussing the point based immigration system post brexit somewhere.


----------



## gosub (Sep 3, 2019)

krtek a houby said:


> Percy was also in series 1 but not sure if he was a "Sir". And there was a Lord Melchett in series 2...



Exactly my point, an entirely different Melchett.  You fuck with the entire space time continuum if they werte one and the same


Teaboy said:


> He may just try and ignore the legislation if Parliament does pass it.  Its all scorched earth at the moment anyway plus hastily brought about legislation is usually full of holes and difficult to implement / enforce.



Happened before apparently  Is all a bit odd really, Parliament doesn't usually do the trade deals/relationship thing, thats down to HMG to sort out, then Parliament yes/no's it.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 3, 2019)

Greetings from Frankfurt, the belly of the beast. 

I was going to post a photo of German newspapers with Brexit headlines but there's no such thing; they are more interested in their own elections.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Today is the day that silly Bercow explodes with excitement.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 3, 2019)

It’s like a shit John Le Carre novel


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> In France it's the Academié française, in Italian the Accademia della Crusca.


Never liked this shit. Language via bureaucracy (which is a french word undermining my point but fuck it)


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Tonight certainly, though I haven't heard how it gets past a Lords filibuster.


some of the labour 'big beasts' seen entering parliament carrying heavy 'walking sticks' this morning.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> some of the labour 'big beasts' seen entering parliament carrying heavy 'walking sticks' this morning.


For Lord Privy Seal culling?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Farage's mob saying they won't challenge tory seats if Johnson guarantees no deal. 

Not sure if they're really stupid enough to hang anything on a Boris Johnson pinkie promise but who knows. Farage I suspect is more interested in propping up right neoliberalism than in actually leaving with no deal.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Never liked this shit. Language via bureaucracy (which is a french word undermining my point but fuck it)



In the UK its the Oxford English dictionary that decides what words get added every year. Not very different really. Similarly in countries where there's some state body "deciding", what people actually say and how they say it is still up to them and "mistakes" stop being mistakes if everyone makes them consistently


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I suppose I was thinking that Johnson would become weaker in his negotiations with the EU at that point and would realise his only weapon is actually doing no deal.



That Johnson negotiating tactic in full:


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 3, 2019)

I'm confused - are the pro-democracy people now against an election?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm confused - are the pro-democracy people now against an election?


I feel a march coming on.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm confused - are the pro-democracy people now against an election?


apparently one prominent labour mp will oppose any motion for an election using the phrase 'sometimes you can have too much democracy'


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 3, 2019)

Mason is hilarious - laying out the conditions under which he'll allow an election to take place.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> In the UK its the Oxford English dictionary that decides what words get added every year. Not very different really.



The OED documents usage - it makes no judgement. The annual new words thing is just a bit of PR - they add to the corpus constantly.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> When's this vote then





That 10min rule motion on Clean Air looking a dead cert. then?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Farage's mob saying they won't challenge tory seats if Johnson guarantees no deal.
> 
> Not sure if they're really stupid enough to hang anything on a Boris Johnson pinkie promise but who knows. Farage I suspect is more interested in propping up right neoliberalism than in actually leaving with no deal.


For those of us of a certain age, it seems a long time since it was James Goldsmith, Alan Sked and the like leading the charge on the EU. Now they are in a position of strength where they can support a PM, who will betray them, in an election that Labour might not support, though they've had no other policy for 18 months, on the 14th October, or after the 31st October... heady days. That twat who wasn't at Hillsborough and didn't play professional football, who didn't have a PhD and didn't live in the Constituency he claimed must be thinking 'it coulda been me'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 183048
> 
> That 10min rule motion on Clean Air looking a dead cert. then?


that 10 min rule motion concerns the plague of flatulence in the commons


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> For those of us of a certain age, it seems a long time since it was James Goldsmith, Alan Sked and the like leading the charge on the EU. Now they are in a position of strength where they can support a PM, who will betray them, in an election that Labour might not support, though they've had no other policy for 18 months, on the 14th October, or after the 31st October... heady days. That twat who wasn't at Hillsborough and didn't play professional football, who didn't have a PhD and didn't live in the Constituency he claimed must be thinking 'it coulda been me'.


I've actually forgotten the twat's name!
How many 'leaders' ago was that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've actually forgotten the twat's name!
> How many 'leaders' ago was that?


roll 2d6 and add 1


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've actually forgotten the twat's name!
> How many 'leaders' ago was that?


69ad is known as the year of the four emperors ( in no particular order nero, galba, otho, vespasian). ukip get through four leaders in the average month.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Before MPs vote today, they should remember that UKIP MEPs punched each other unconscious so that today could happen. Don't let their sacrifice go to waste.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Before MPs vote today, they should remember that UKIP MEPs punched each other unconscious so that today could happen. Don't let their sacrifice go to waste.


only unconscious?  unconscionable


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've actually forgotten the twat's name!
> How many 'leaders' ago was that?


Paul Nuttall. And the nominatively determined puncher was ... Mike Hookem,


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> roll 2d6 and add 1


I thought it was X 9/5 +32?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've actually forgotten the twat's name!
> How many 'leaders' ago was that?


I've entirely forgotten who the woman who replaced him for about 5 days was. Even Wikipedia is too far away for me to look.


----------



## gosub (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I feel a march coming on.


That's ages away, let's at least get through Autumn


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Paul Nuttall. And the nominatively determined puncher was ... Mike Hookem,


That's it...I remember all the lol threads now...


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Paul Nuttall. And the nominatively determined puncher was ... Mike Hookem,



Which was the one who was dating the racist model?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Mason is hilarious - laying out the conditions under which he'll allow an election to take place.



Natural progression from demanding Corbyn organises a second referendum really.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I thought it was X 9/5 +32?


that's the number of italian governments since the second world war


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's the number of italian governments since the second world war


I sit corrected, Sir.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Which was the one who was dating the racist model?


Batten! Must admit, they do have some good solid names these chumps. Even when they haven't they change it to something solid, like Tommy... oh.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Natural progression from demanding Corbyn organises a second referendum really.


Picky about their people's votes.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Or was it Bolton?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 183048
> 
> That 10min rule motion on Clean Air looking a dead cert. then?



And the full timetable if the SO24 application is granted


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Or was it Bolton?


Wanderers?

Keep losing 5:0


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

In my extensive research for the witterings on this page, I've just discovered Nuttall jumped ships to the Brexit Party and is now an MEP.  In fact they put him in charge of the whole thing, while giving him a few months off to lead a mission to Mars and take on Vassily Lomachenko.


----------



## gosub (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Picky about their people's votes.


Article in the Indy about it explaining how "principalled" Coybn and Labour are being. Which stumped me for a minute until I remembered Peter and his principals.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Wanderers?
> 
> Keep losing 5:0


I was just thinking there's a Northwest football theme emerging. Bolton, Nuttall _may have_ played for Tranmere... I bet Sam Allardyce is in the mix as well.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

So then, today is the day that Corbyn the Cobra strikes?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Corbyn, 'we have mechanisms in place to keep in contact with other parties'.

Someone has introduced granddad to whatsapp.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn, 'we have mechanisms in place to keep in contact with other parties'.
> 
> Someone has introduced granddad to whatsapp.


... and in light of those discussions, the NEC will carefully consider Labour's position and may set a date at which we will announce further talks...


----------



## andysays (Sep 3, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I'm confused - are the pro-democracy people now against an election?


Democracy is for MPs, not the wider population, silly.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

andysays said:


> Democracy is for MPs, not the wider population, silly.


The ftpa makes it clear that democracy only occurs every five years, so most people only get to do democracy around 12 times in their life. Or when there's brexit in the air, we get to do democracy every year. Hang on, these are the most democratic times ever! Hooray!


----------



## mauvais (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Corbyn, 'we have mechanisms in place to keep in contact with other parties'.
> 
> Someone has introduced granddad to whatsapp.


You can't commune with the Lib Dems over WhatsApp. You have to wring all the blood from your own hands and then sacrifice a goat all your principles upon an altar of purest egocentrism.

The DUP is similar but you have to set fire to millions of pounds on a remote island and after a while you get through to them instead of an increasingly irritated Bill Drummond.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

JFF....Will Davies has drawn this amusing vermin-Brexit/Fyre festival analogy and posed a good q...



Anyone?


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> JFF....Will Davies has drawn this amusing vermin-Brexit/Fyre festival analogy and posed a good q...
> 
> View attachment 183058
> 
> Anyone?


I think the likely consequence of a serious unravelling - a majority Labour government under Corbyn - will keep things from coming too unstuck tbh.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> JFF....Will Davies has drawn this amusing vermin-Brexit/Fyre festival analogy and posed a good q...
> 
> View attachment 183058
> 
> Anyone?



Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

My suggestion was a pic of the first (handwritten) "No Beer" signs going up outside 'spoons. That'd be the tipping point IMO


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.


'Yeah, don't worry love, we'll protect your Andy. Might make him Ambassador to the EU'


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.



It'd have been more a shock if he had told the truth.  Pretty much they only thing we can be sure of in this whole process is that Johnson is lying about everything.

I know a guy from a sports team I play for who works in the civil service and he was telling me how demoralising and annoying it is to spend hours briefing Johnson's people only to see Johnson on TV a couple of hours later saying pretty much the opposite, basically standing there with an inferno engulfing his pants.  Same guy was saying most of the priorities seem to be focused around dodging the blame when the shit its the fan.  He fully expects to thrown under the bus and be out of a job soonish.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.


this is not going to be any kind of tipping point.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> this is not going to be any kind of tipping point.



The whole court case thing is a bit of a weird sideshow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.



Nobody cares.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nobody cares.



Well, I wasn't being amazingly serious. It's hardly likely to impress a bunch of Tory voters though


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's hardly likely to impress a bunch of Tory voters though


they don't care.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.



Are you suggesting she should be treated differently to the rest of of us?


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Judging by some of the documents disclosed today during the Scottish court hearing: Johnson lied to the Queen.



Is that still punishable by gibbeting?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Is that still punishable by gibbeting?


if we can get johnson to the gibbet then it will be


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

think about all the things tory voters are supposed to care about which it turned out didn't matter after all: adultery, drug use, a stable currency, etc etc. They don't give a fuck.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you suggesting she should be treated differently to the rest of of us?



For fucks sake - I was not entirely seriously responding to brogdale's not entirely serious post about the unexpected thing that leads to the final meltdown.  That's all.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> For fucks sake - I was not entirely seriously responding to brogdale's not entirely serious post about the unexpected thing that leads to the final meltdown.  That's all.


A fraught day/week/year & all that!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> For fucks sake - I was not entirely seriously responding to brogdale's not entirely serious post about the unexpected thing that leads to the final meltdown.  That's all.



Sorry mate. It's just getting tedious, apologies for jumping on you.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> For fucks sake - I was not entirely seriously responding to brogdale's not entirely serious post about the unexpected thing that leads to the final meltdown.  That's all.


i thought cupid_stunt wasn't being entirely serious either


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> For fucks sake - I was not entirely seriously responding to brogdale's not entirely serious post about the unexpected thing that leads to the final meltdown.  That's all.



Excellent, because I wasn't being entirely serious about my reply to your reply to not being entirely serious, etc.

ETA - As per what Pickman's model just posted above, the fucker.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Didn't realise Rees Mogg was Leader of the Commons now. Japes.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

I love you guys x


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Trump regime poking their noses in again...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Trump regime poking their noses in again...
> 
> View attachment 183069


now that's what i call a glitter ball


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Trump regime poking their noses in again...





> American Vice-President Mike Pence has taken a very deliberate swipe at the EU, suggesting they have not acted in good faith during the Brexit negotiations.
> 
> His intervention, made in Dublin, will have been the exact opposite of what the Irish government would have hoped to gain from visit.
> 
> Speaking at an event alongside Taoiseach Leo Varadkar, Mr Pence warned that Ireland and the EU need to allow the UK protect its sovereignty.



US Vice President Mike Pence urges Ireland and EU to negotiate Brexit 'in good faith' with Boris Johnson - Independent.ie


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> US Vice President Mike Pence urges Ireland and EU to negotiate Brexit 'in good faith' with Boris Johnson - Independent.ie


They're very pro-Brexit, the yanks, aren't they?


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought cupid_stunt wasn't being entirely serious either


I didn't think any of us were tbh


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I didn't think any of us were tbh


then we're all friends together  which is so very rare here


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They're very pro-Brexit, the yanks, aren't they?



Currently, yes. Trump hates the Germans, and hates the the French even more.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> then we're all friends together  which is so very rare here



 Ah Brexit, the great uniter !


----------



## Flavour (Sep 3, 2019)

anyway we're all glad the pan's back on the boil after this long, tepid, boring summer


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I didn't think any of us were tbh



I was. Why don't you take me seriously?


----------



## klang (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> .


_[...] and jest stems from a spot of sobriety._

Manfred von Gieslbach 18:55/6f**


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Or was it Bolton?


Yup.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

littleseb said:


> _[...] and jest stems from a spot of sobriety._
> 
> Manfred von Gieslbach 18:55/6f**


song of solomon 4:7


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Predictions for today:


Somebody does something with the Mace
Somebody soils themselves in the Chamber (literally, not a euphemism)
Bercow starts break dancing


----------



## klang (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> deuteronomy 32:5


i agree as i i don't think it would be fair to hold one's offspring responsible for one's skin condition.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Predictions for today:
> 
> 
> Somebody does something with the Mace
> ...


in that order? - or, with regard to your second, in that ordure?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> in that order? - or, with regard to your second, in that ordure?


*Ordure, ordure!*


----------



## Fez909 (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Predictions for today:
> 
> 
> Somebody does something with the Mace
> ...



Ian Blackford gets too excited and has to retract a remark


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Predictions for today:
> 
> 
> Somebody does something with the Mace
> ...


Conflate the two latter bullets and we're genuinely in for a televisual highlight.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Conflate the two latter bullets and we're genuinely in for a televisual highlight.


a couple of bullets in the house and things would sure liven up, might well be a genuine televisual highlight


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> Ian Blackford gets too excited


and he just can't hide it?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

if true


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Former Tory Govt Minister Philip Lee has left the Tories and joined the Lib Dems. Don't know who he is but he has apparently.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Sounds like Johnson's majority is now zilch.  Phillip Lee to the lib dems.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

This thread today has reminded me somewhat of the build-up programmes that we used to get before the (3.00pm) FA Cup Final, particularly the Cup Final version of _It's a knockout _in which the fans of the respective teams slugged it out for the lols


----------



## Smangus (Sep 3, 2019)

Boris isn't as good at this PMing thing  as he thought he was


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Sounds like Johnson's majority is now zilch.  Phillip Lee to the lib dems.



Yep.



> A Tory MP has officially defected from the Conservatives to the Lib Dems - costing Boris Johnson his majority.
> 
> The Prime Minister is now running a minority government after the shock move by the ardent Remainer.
> 
> ...



Tory Phillip Lee joins Lib Dems as Boris Johnson officially loses his majority


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 183074
> 
> if true



I really can't figure Cummings out.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Why, whenever I hear Johnston say, 'we are leaving at the end of October, come what may', I think he's trolling May?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> I really can't figure Cummings out.


Nah, if true, that's quality.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Nah, if true, that's quality.



Yeah, but I mean I just can't figure him out in general.  He is on record as saying the Tories are a bunch of crooks who hate poor people, but it's hard to gauge the tone of that.  Is he unambiguously evil and cacking in everyone's face, or is he trolling the country, or is something else afoot?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> I really can't figure Cummings out.



He's mental.

Proper fruitcake. He's a, err... _focused _individual. Fanatic. Simply unable to see anything outside of the drinking straw, and probably doesn't believe that anything exists outside of the drinking straw.

Convinced of his own genius, and convinced that everyone - and I mean everyone - else is a drooling fuckwit.

Clever, bold, but not nearly as clever as he thinks he is, and few - though there are some - are as stupid as he thinks they are.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 3, 2019)

LOL Philip Lee to the Lib Dems


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

kebabking said:


> He's mental.
> 
> Proper fruitcake. He's a, err... _focused _individual. Fanatic. Simply unable to see anything outside of the drinking straw, and probably doesn't believe that anything exists outside of the drinking straw.
> 
> ...



Agree with all of that.
But what does he *want*?

Was the admission about the Tories just a deranged moment of "poking the bear"?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Agree with all of that.
> But what does he *want*?
> 
> Was the admission about the Tories just a deranged moment of "poking the bear"?



Money and power I assume.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Agree with all of that.
> But what does he *want*?
> 
> Was the admission about the Tories just a deranged moment of "poking the bear"?



Probably just telling it how he see's it.  He's probably right as well it just doesn't mean he won't take their money and he couldn't give a fuck as long as he's doing OK.


----------



## chilango (Sep 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> anyway we're all glad the pan's back on the boil after this long, tepid, boring summer



Nah.

They've just shoved the pan outside to get it warmed up by the sunshine.


Except it's overcast and drizzling as usual


----------



## kebabking (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Money and power I assume.



Power. He has a plan/ideology, and he needs power to bring it about. Nothing I've read or heard about him suggests he's particularly interested in great wealth.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Agree with all of that.
> But what does he *want*?
> 
> Was the admission about the Tories just a deranged moment of "poking the bear"?


Channel 4's Brexit: The Uncivil War gives quite a good portrait of the man. 

Brexit: The Uncivil War - All 4


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Sounds like Johnson's majority is now zilch.  Phillip Lee to the lib dems.



majority now = minus one.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> Channel 4's Brexit: The Uncivil War gives quite a good portrait of the man.
> 
> Brexit: The Uncivil War - All 4



Yeah, I saw it.  Always hard to tell how much is really accurate.  What do you reckon?


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Trump regime poking their noses in again...



When the tories were going on about a ‘red,white and blue’ Brexit I have a worrying feeling it wasn’t our flag they were championing...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Agree with all of that.
> But what does he *want*?


Lawyers, guns and money.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yeah, I saw it.  Always hard to tell how much is really accurate.  What do you reckon?


Really enjoyed it, had a little read around at the time and came to the conclusion that I think it captures his attitude pretty well, he seems to think he knows best, and if you cant see that then your an idiot and a waste of time, he thinks the whole parliamentary process is fundamentally flawed, and countries should be run like businesses.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> Channel 4's Brexit: The Uncivil War gives quite a good portrait of the man.
> 
> Brexit: The Uncivil War - All 4



One thing I took from that which is potentially relevant is that Cummings thinks Farage is a prick and didn’t want him anywhere near the official leave campaign. I wonder if that opinion is still held and whether it might make any Brexit Party pact unlikely.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> One thing I took from that which is potentially relevant is that Cummings thinks Farage is a prick and didn’t want him anywhere near the official leave campaign. I wonder if that opinion is still held and whether it might make any Brexit Party pact unlikely.


that and the way the brexit party will implode.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

They may still have an interesting role to play if we do have a GE before 31st October.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> One thing I took from that which is potentially relevant is that Cummings thinks Farage is a prick and didn’t want him anywhere near the official leave campaign. I wonder if that opinion is still held and whether it might make any Brexit Party pact unlikely.



That's the thing that is odd.  He seems to be right about a great many things, and then deliberately goes and does the wrong thing in a driven and single-minded manner.
Looking around the internet, it seems it's not just me that is flummoxed.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

Hello, I know nothing about politics, buuuuut... would the Brexit Party pull more votes away from Tories or Labour? I think I saw upthread the suggestion that there might be an agreement with the Tories not to contest the same seats?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Hello, I know nothing about politics, buuuuut... would the Brexit Party pull more votes away from Tories or Labour? I think I saw upthread the suggestion that there might be an agreement with the Tories not to contest the same seats?



Apparently they'd only do a deal if Johnson agrees to no deal as the only option.  Given his official position is all about getting a deal I doubt he would agree to this.  Even if he does agree to it the BP would be mugs to believe him.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's the thing that is odd.  He seems to be right about a great many things, and then deliberately goes and does the wrong thing in a driven and single-minded manner.
> Looking around the internet, it seems it's not just me that is flummoxed.


He described David Davis as being "thick as mince" 
David Cameron called him a "career psychopath"


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> the BP would be mugs to believe him.


I mean, at this stage let's not rule anything out...

So if he doesn't go for no deal, does TBP have the potential to damage Tories more than Labour?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> He described David Davis as being "thick as mince"
> David Cameron called him a "career psychopath"



Maybe Cameron has the closest bead on him.
Apropos of nothing, here's a 237 page essay about education that he wrote some time back.

It's like he views the political system of the UK as a complex sandbox system that he wants to break in various ways to see what happens.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I mean, at this stage let's not rule anything out...
> 
> So if he doesn't go for no deal, does TBP have the potential to damage Tories more than Labour?


yeah. it's all pretty moveable tho tbf.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I mean, at this stage let's not rule anything out...
> 
> So if he doesn't go for no deal, does TBP have the potential to damage Tories more than Labour?



I would have thought so, theoretically anyway.  There are so many variables though and if the GE is all about Brexit which it probably will be then I would expect people who feel strongly about it to vote tactically.  That could mean supporting tories in tory seats but supporting BP in Labour seats.


----------



## mod (Sep 3, 2019)

How can a general election by held with only 6 weeks preparation but we are continually told another referendum would take longer?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

mod said:


> How can a general election by held with only 6 weeks preparation but we are continually told another referendum would take longer?


because by law a ref has to be preceded by a campaign of great length and immense tedium lasting months


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

mod said:


> How can a general election by held with only 6 weeks preparation but we are continually told another referendum would take longer?



Rhetorical question, I presume.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

mod said:


> How can a general election by held with only 6 weeks preparation but we are continually told another referendum would take longer?


The question for a GE is already written. The question for a referendum would have to get ticked off by both parliament and the electoral commission.


----------



## Santino (Sep 3, 2019)

mod said:


> How can a general election by held with only 6 weeks preparation but we are continually told another referendum would take longer?


I think because with a referendum there is a drawn-out process to agree what the actual question will be, and who will get to run the official campaigns on either side. With an election the format and campaigning rules are already in place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The question for a GE is already written. The question for a referendum would have to get ticked off by both parliament and the electoral commission.


and after a few weeks we'd all be ticked off


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Maybe Cameron has the closest bead on him.
> Apropos of nothing, here's a 237 page essay about education that he wrote some time back.
> 
> It's like he views the political system of the UK as a complex sandbox system that he wants to break in various ways to see what happens.


Just from the first page of that he says:
"Most politicians, ofﬁcials, and advisers operate with fragments of philosophy, little knowledge of maths or science (few MPs can answer even simple probability questions yet most are conﬁdent in their judgement), and little experience in well-managed complex organisations"

I wonder how he's finding working with Boris


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The question for a GE is already written. The question for a referendum would have to get ticked off by both parliament and the electoral commission.



Yes, terribly complex, writing the question "do you still want to leave the EU right now, or would you like to stay in (whether that be to have a little think for a bit, or with the intention of remaining indefinitely"?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yes, terribly complex, writing the question "do you still want to leave the EU right now, or would you like to stay in (whether that be to have a little think for a bit, or with the intention of remaining indefinitely"?



Yeah see that question would definitely be thrown out.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yes, terribly complex, writing the question "do you still want to leave the EU right now, or would you like to stay in (whether that be to have a little think for a bit, or with the intention of remaining indefinitely"?


I’d be surprised if parliament could agree on something that succinct.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> Just from the first page of that he says:
> "Most politicians, ofﬁcials, and advisers operate with fragments of philosophy, little knowledge of maths or science (few MPs can answer even simple probability questions yet most are conﬁdent in their judgement), and little experience in well-managed complex organisations"
> 
> I wonder how he's finding working with Boris



There is a lot in there I agree with, and some very interesting insights into his worldview.  
Take a look at page 9, and also from half way down page 214.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah see that question would definitely be thrown out.



I have no doubt. 

How about angry face vs. sad face?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yes, terribly complex, writing the question "do you still want to leave the EU right now, or would you like to stay in (whether that be to have a little think for a bit, or with the intention of remaining indefinitely"?


Who, sensible, is proposing such a referendum? Certainly not the rebel alliance.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Who, sensible, is proposing such a referendum? Certainly not the rebel alliance.



But that would basically be the question asked in a 'second referendum' (were one to come about), no?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> But that would basically be the question asked in a 'second referendum' (were one to come about), no?


No.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No.



Go on then, let's hear your version.

(I agree that the question would have been significantly different this time last year)


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> There is a lot in there I agree with, and some very interesting insights into his worldview.
> Take a look at page 9, and also from half way down page 214.


At work so only had a quick look at the pages you pointed out and this jumped out:
" Many studies have shown that deliberating groups can be very poor at aggregating information, can suppress the diversity of views, can overvalue information held in common, and increase conﬁdence in a wrong decision."
Will definitely read more of it when I have the time.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> That's the thing that is odd.  He seems to be right about a great many things, and then deliberately goes and does the wrong thing in a driven and single-minded manner.
> Looking around the internet, it seems it's not just me that is flummoxed.



Could just be that stopped clock thing, in that he thinks everybody is a prick and is therefore probably right about 87% of the time if he’s hanging out with politicians.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

what's going to be asked, if we ever have another referendum, is going to be 'should we stay in the eu?' and both boxes will be yes


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Go on then, let's hear your version.


There have been loads of different proposals - deal vs remain, no deal vs remain, three way deal vs no deal vs remain - hence the challenge of getting any 2nd referendum through parliament. But I've not seen anyone serious propose leave (terms undefined) vs stay in (for some unknown length of time)


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> At work so only had a quick look at the pages you pointed out and this jumped out:
> " Many studies have shown that deliberating groups can be very poor at aggregating information, can suppress the diversity of views, can overvalue information held in common, and increase conﬁdence in a wrong decision."
> Will definitely read more of it when I have the time.



It's your basic "angry young man" screed, just with a bit more mental horsepower behind it than average.
It's quite good fun in a way.


----------



## ricbake (Sep 3, 2019)

Why would the result of a second referendum be any more meaningful than the results of the 2016 referendum?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 3, 2019)

ricbake said:


> Why would the result of a second referendum be any more meaningful than the results of the 2016 referendum?


Because it might be the correct result this time, obviously.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 3, 2019)

Boris Johnsons' father apologises for comment about Irish people shooting each other

Johnson's father has Irish people all killing each other ... one wonders is it going to be a case of "like father, like son".


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> There have been loads of different proposals - deal vs remain, no deal vs remain, three way deal vs no deal vs remain - hence the challenge of getting any 2nd referendum through parliament. But I've not seen anyone serious propose leave (terms undefined) vs stay in (for some unknown length of time)



The only deal available has been rejected, Boris is pretending he will get a deal but won't <but let's indulge the possibility>, and this would be the third referendum so a remain result would clearly not mean "for ever".

Hence this is the only framing of the question that can be made within available timelines (granted that you may want to tinker with the language).

The question may still change of course.  I was answering the question of 'what would the question be _right now_?', and the answer (by which I mean the question, natch) seems obvious.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Boris Johnsons' father apologises for comment about Irish people shooting each other
> 
> Johnson's father has Irish people all killing each other ... one wonders is it going to be a case of "like father, like son".


i'd hope boris not alive by the time he'd be stanley's age


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

ricbake said:


> Why would the result of a second referendum be any more meaningful than the results of the 2016 referendum?



It would be no _more_ meaningful.  It would mean something different.  And no matter the result, nothing will be settled for a very long time, so let's not have either 'side' posturing that any result would lead to any kind of closure.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Hoey is backing Johnson in news that will surprise no one.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Hoey is backing Johnson in news that will surprise no one.



She has also implied that while she won't stand again for Labour, she might stand again for another party.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> She has also implied that while she won't stand again for Labour, she might stand again for another party.



Brexit Party I would have thought most likely.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Brexit Party I would have thought most likely.



She ruled that out.


----------



## ricbake (Sep 3, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Because it might be the correct result this time, obviously.



Only about half of the people will think it correct whatever the result and whether or not they voted


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Hoey is backing Johnson in news that will surprise no one.


That actually does surprise me somewhat. She didn't vote every time for May's deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Hence this is the only framing of the question that can be made within available timelines (granted that you may want to tinker with the language).


Yet the only person arguing for such nonsense appears to be you.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Not relevant to the outcome, but Johnson's performance was a bit shit today. Not so much the usual bluster as hesitant and nervous. Corbyn nothing to write home about but held it together. Needless to say I have no affection for the (pre) Blairite wankers, but John Smith would have destroyed Johnson today. Forensic, but also 'twinkly'. Anyway, Johnson's made a career out of being a windbag, but today he really looked like a ... windbag.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yet the only person arguing for such nonsense appears to be you.



You seem to be confused.  I am not _arguing for_ anything.  I am _describing_ something.

What I have described *is* the only meaningful framing of the question at this point, if a referendum was to be called immediately and "further delays" was not to be considered an option.

This was by way of taking the piss out of any implication that such a question might be a complex and vexed matter, which the politicians might possibly claim as a political device, in the case of needing to "tick it off".

You then suggested the question would be different, so I asked what your alternative would be <if you just want to add a "further delays" option, then I concede that you could conceivably do that, stupid as it would be>.

Perhaps you are engaging in this discussion this during glances at your phone while simultaneously the shopping*, so I thought best to clear things up in a single post. 

* - we've all done it

edit - tl;dr - my contention was that while the election questions have been written, the idea that writing the referendum question would add significant time would be down to filibustering stupidity (I agree this is possible), not due to any real doubt over what the question is.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> What I have described *is* the only meaningful framing of the question at this point, if a referendum was to be called immediately and "further delays" was not to be considered an option.


Only in your mind.

EDIT: 


8ball said:


> edit - tl;dr - my contention was that while the election questions have been written, the idea that writing the referendum question would add significant time would be down to filibustering stupidity (I agree this is possible), not due to any real doubt over what the question is.


Rubbish it takes the EC ages to sign off on a question. They do a whole load focus group testing before choosing the final version.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

ricbake said:


> Why would the result of a second referendum be any more meaningful than the results of the 2016 referendum?



Well presumably the line is that we'd now have some idea of what we were voting for, whether May's bullshit deal, no deal or cancel the whole thing. 

What would actually happen is that the campaign around a second referendum would be even less grounded in reality than the first one. Even the brexit party doesn't actually make a case for brexit, because they don't have to. All they have to do is play to the gallery and use trigger words like 'betrayal' as often as possible and the voters come running. I wouldn't expect much different from the other side in a second referendum campaign either. What I would expect from both sides would be naked, all-consuming contempt for the public.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Only in your mind.



GOTO #31289

Stay in the loop, or not, I'm running out of fucks to give.


----------



## tim (Sep 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd hope boris not alive by the time he'd be stanley's age



In the depths of hell being eternally poked with a red-hot pitchfork by a well-oiled Bob Crowe


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Rubbish it takes the EC ages to sign off on a question. They do a whole load focus group testing before choosing the final version.



So what?  I said you can fiddle with the words.

GOTO #31289


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Gove has just pointed out, that Labour's current position is to...

1 - Win election & get a long extension.
2 - Get a new deal.
3 - Have a second referendum, with remain as a option.
4 - Campaign for remain.

I hadn't thought of that, but that actually does seem to be their position.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove has just pointed out, that Labour's current position is to...
> 
> 1 - Win election & get a long extension.
> 2 - Get a new deal.
> ...


Gove sounds curiously defeatist.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove has just pointed out, that Labour's current position is to...
> 
> 1 - Win election & get a long extension.
> 2 - Get a new deal.
> ...



So much of this reads like it could have been written by Joseph Heller.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

I think they've been less than clear about 4) tbf.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> So what?  I said you can fiddle with the words.
> 
> GOTO #31289


You really don't have a clue what you are talking about. This is not 'fiddling with the words'


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You really don't have a clue what you are talking about. This is not 'fiddling with the words'



You still seem badly confused about the point I was making.
The fucks garden is now barren.  Good day to you.

later edit:  now feeling  like I was maybe a little unclear at some point and may have been being unfair.  Bloody guilt monkey...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove has just pointed out, that Labour's current position is to...
> 
> 1 - Win election & get a long extension.
> 2 - Get a new deal.
> ...



Not really wrong is he? Fucking ludicrous stuff.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think they've been less than clear about 4) tbf.



Gove was clearly taking the piss, but the point remains Labour has been all over the fucking place on brexit, and they need to own that.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

he is wrong. The leadership has repeatedly refused to say which way they would campaign in such a referendum (although individual cabinet members have indicated they'd campaign for remain).


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove was clearly taking the piss, but the point remains Labour has been all over the fucking place on brexit, and they need to own that.



It's more like point 4 is the Momentum sub-faction's clear intention, and the party is riven over this, hence making such a bizarre formulation possible.

IMO.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove was clearly taking the piss, but the point remains Labour has been all over the fucking place on brexit, and they need to own that.


That's all he can do. Today is not about Labour; it's all about the Johnson regime imploding.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 3, 2019)

With Boris' majority now at minus one, and that includes the angry brigade from Ireland, in theory, if all non-Tory/DUP MPs agreed, could Corbyn not give Brenda a call today and form a government?


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> With Boris' majority now at minus one, and that includes the angry brigade from Ireland, in theory, if all non-Tory/DUP MPs agreed, could Corbyn not give Brenda a call today and form a government?


There would need to be a confidence vote first.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> With Boris' majority now at minus one, and that includes the angry brigade from Ireland, in theory, if all non-Tory/DUP MPs agreed, could Corbyn not give Brenda a call today and form a government?


But there is a logic to making sure that the beast is dead before approaching.


----------



## Bonfirelight (Sep 3, 2019)

is it that bizarre?

if the ultimate aim is having a second referendum with a final leave deal in place vs remaining then it seems sensible. kinda like we maybe should have had in the first place.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Gove sounds curiously defeatist.



He's not as stupid as Johnson, is probably why.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> There would need to be a confidence vote first.



that would be covered by 





> if all non-Tory/DUP MPs agreed


 - no?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> he is wrong. The leadership has repeatedly refused to say which way they would campaign in such a referendum (although individual cabinet members have indicated they'd campaign for remain).



You are technically right, but I would expect them to campaign for Remain in any referendum. And I don't think (assuming they were to form a govt and get some sort of deal) they would then be able to avoid a referendum on it. So I'd say it looks pretty likely they would then campaign for Remain, against whatever deal they've got. 

Who knows, and obviously it's a hypothetical that we may never reach, but it seems the most likely *if* they were to get into govt and get a deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Bonfirelight said:


> is it that bizarre?
> 
> if the ultimate aim is having a second referendum with a final leave deal in place vs remaining then it seems sensible. kinda like we maybe should have had in the first place.



Imagine the campaign. "We've got a deal. We succeeded where the Tories failed! Well done us. It's a shit deal. We're better off Remaining. Don't vote for our deal! Vote Remain." 

I mean sure, no one looks very credible any more. But you have to at least attempt to look credible.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Imagine the campaign. "We've got a deal. We succeeded where the Tories failed! Well done us. It's a shit deal. We're better off Remaining. Don't vote for our deal! Vote Remain."
> 
> I mean sure, no one looks very credible any more. But you have to at least attempt to look credible.


Not really; we're well into 'land of the blind' territory here.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove has just pointed out, that Labour's current position is to...
> 
> 1 - Win election & get a long extension.
> 2 - Get a new deal.
> ...



Pretty sure they'd back their own deal. They've said they'd back remain in a referendum against either no deal or May's deal.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Gove was clearly taking the piss, but the point remains Labour has been all over the fucking place on brexit, and they need to own that.



Even the BBC has managed to point out that while both parties have been all over the shop on brexit, only one of them has been in power and in a position to negotiate with the EU.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Imagine the campaign. "We've got a deal. We succeeded where the Tories failed! Well done us. It's a shit deal. We're better off Remaining. Don't vote for our deal! Vote Remain."
> 
> I mean sure, no one looks very credible any more. But you have to at least attempt to look credible.


I've read reasonably well informed speculation that Corbyn would like to run any referendum on a Labour negotiated deal in the same way as Labour ran their campaign 1975, where the party didn't support either side and MPs could support whichever campaign they chose.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> that would be covered by  - no?


don't think there's time for it to be voted on today - they need to make space in the parliamentary timetable, so the earliest a no confidence vote could be put to the vote is tomorrow (or more likely Thursday)


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I've read reasonably well informed speculation that Corbyn would like to run any referendum on a Labour negotiated deal in the same way as Labour ran their campaign 1975, where the party didn't support either side and MPs could support whichever campaign they chose.



That's certainly interesting and it wouldn't surprise me if that's what Corbyn did want to do. But a) he doesn't often get what he wants and b) that would probably mean every member of the PLP except him campaigning for Remain which wouldn't be a great look.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

Out of interest, is the general opinion on this thread that the 'no deal' scenario is the most probable outcome at this point?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Out of interest, is the general opinion on this thread that the 'no deal' scenario is the most probable outcome at this point?



Nah. Almost certainly not IMO.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

BBC hammering this "surrender" line, which have to think is a fairly conscious dog whistle.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Out of interest, is the general opinion on this thread that the 'no deal' scenario is the most probable outcome at this point?


No, Johnson's fucked it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's certainly interesting and it wouldn't surprise me if that's what Corbyn did want to do. But a) he doesn't often get what he wants and b) that would probably mean every member of the PLP except him campaigning for Remain which wouldn't be a great look.


There's a substantial block of pro-brexit Labour MPs - at least 50-100, maybe more would campaign for any Labour negotiated deal.


----------



## agricola (Sep 3, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> BBC hammering this "surrender" line, which have to think is a fairly conscious dog whistle.



Today of all days especially


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, Johnson's fucked it.



I hope you're right!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> There's a substantial block of pro-brexit Labour MPs - at least 50-100, maybe more would campaign for any Labour negotiated deal.



You're right, I'd forgotten about them. Fair point.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah. Almost certainly not IMO.





brogdale said:


> No, Johnson's fucked it.



Thanks.  Was just genuinely interested.  It does feel kind of like that going by the blow-by-blow discussion on here. 
Seems like the pieces have moved significantly over the course of just today.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I've read reasonably well informed speculation that Corbyn would like to run any referendum on a Labour negotiated deal in the same way as Labour ran their campaign 1975, where the party didn't support either side and MPs could support whichever campaign they chose.



Except that Corbyn isn't the one who'd get to decide that - the membership are sufficiently remainy that they would force it through that it was party policy for _the party _to campaign for remain.

By the time we get to a second ref there will be none of the creative ambiguity left, it's in threads now, with only Corbyn giving it lip service.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

So this vote. Half nine or something?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So this vote. Half nine or something?



Just to be clear, in case things have changed again, the vote on what?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 3, 2019)

Lucy Fur said:


> He described David Davis as being "thick as mince"
> David Cameron called him a "career psychopath"


Tricky, because I think David Cameron is as thick as mince, and on that basis wouldn't trust his opinion on Cummings 

However, I also think that David Davis is as thick as very thick mince.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> I've read reasonably well informed speculation that Corbyn would like to run any referendum on a Labour negotiated deal in the same way as Labour ran their campaign 1975, where the party didn't support either side and MPs could support whichever campaign they chose.



Really hard to see this working. Brexiteers will have little confidence in Labour’s ability to negotiate a deal and in any case what would that be like? Something with a customs union? So vote whether you prefer _a_ or _the_ customs union. Would lack credibility.

1975 was way different. Government could largely go about its business working options up unhindered to present them to a public blissfully yet to discover 24hr news or Twitter. This would be seen as yet more ambiguity. A gift to the Lib Dem bastards.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So this vote. Half nine or something?


Whatever; the vermin have lost.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

8ball said:


> Just to be clear, in case things have changed again, the vote on what?


Oh, I dunno 

Whether to make a no deal Brexit illegal. This thing Tory MPs are being threatened with their jobs over


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Lol


----------



## 8ball (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Oh, I dunno
> 
> Whether to make a no deal Brexit illegal. This thing Tory MPs are being threatened with their jobs over



I’ve read a few contradictory things today about when they are actually going to be properly deciding that.

Everyone seems confused.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Whatever; the vermin have lost.


I'm not so sure that BoZo will lose here, If he loses the vote which looks likely and he can't get support for a GE, he then either has to resign or ask the EU for an extension so he can fight an election on a People vs Parliament basis.
He is a slippery cunt and might very well be able to sell it as "I Had Absolutely No Choice Because Of The Traitors"


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

The house has being filling-up, the application is now being made for an urgent debate.

And, big John has agreed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Fucks sake Bercow stop grandstanding and get on with it.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Debate has been set for tonight, and if I heard it right, big John has set a 3 hour limit, based on it starting before 7 pm.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

_Batten_, ffs


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

I dunno how you people are watching HoC live, I've just tried for about five minutes, fuck that


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Tricky, because I think David Cameron is as thick as mince, and on that basis wouldn't trust his opinion on Cummings
> 
> However, I also think that David Davis is as thick as very thick mince.


You never had to eat my Nan's mince and tatties. It was like dish water over wall paper paste. They are thick though.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I dunno how you people are watching HoC live, I've just tried for about five minutes, fuck that


I ain't, I'm listening to Prince Far I and waiting for a bus


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

Alright here we go. Season 3 of brexit has got off to a gripping start!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> View attachment 183094
> 
> _Batten_, ffs


.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Alright here we go. Season 3 of brexit has got off to a gripping start!


Hope a main character dies early on!


----------



## Supine (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Hope a main character dies early on!



Stabbed in the back no doubt


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Supine said:


> Stabbed in the back no doubt


But hopefully eaten by pigs


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Hope a main character dies early on!



When Angela Eagle throws a brick she found in her office.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> But hopefully eaten by pigs


You're thinking of the other one. The one who died at the end of season one.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Raheem said:


> You're thinking of the other one. The one who died at the end of season one.


True


----------



## mauvais (Sep 3, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I'm not so sure that BoZo will lose here, If he loses the vote which looks likely and he can't get support for a GE, he then either has to resign or ask the EU for an extension so he can fight an election on a People vs Parliament basis.
> He is a slippery cunt and might very well be able to sell it as "I Had Absolutely No Choice Because Of The Traitors"


An extension until when, 2022?

His crappy 'surrender' speech earlier suggests he'd have to resign.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Hope a main character dies early on!


Just the one? 

I think they could do a clear out like they did at the end of season 4 of the polish drama 'sejm' Smolensk air disaster - Wikipedia


----------



## pesh (Sep 3, 2019)

talking of clear outs


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> .



I misread that as "Brexithanos" and wondered if zapping half the MPs out of existence would improve the situation.


----------



## Supine (Sep 3, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I misread that as "Brexithanos" and wondered if zapping half the MPs out of existence would improve the situation.



I don't see what we've got to lose at this point. May as well give it a go.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

I'm a bit surprised with these comments that Johnson has fucked it and no deal is not the most likely outcome.  He inherited the tiny of tiniest majorities, he was always going to have to go to the people.  He would have known there was a very good chance it'd be before October 31st.  This way he has provoked Parliament into forcing his hand and will therefore blame them.  Everything about the strategy is making sure the blame lies elsewhere.

If he wins an increased majority at the GE which is a definite possibility then what else will it be but no deal?  He may present a slightly different version of May's deal but I'm not sure how he'd get that past the speaker but I'm sure they have a plan if that's what they want.  To be honest it wouldn't surprise me if no deal is the plan and just blame everyone else if it goes to shit.

To my mind Brexit happening on the 31st is still the most likely outcome and the route to no deal looks more straight forward than deal.  The only way I can it not happening is if Labour can win enough seats to scrape some sort of coalition together.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In my extensive research for the witterings on this page, I've just discovered Nuttall jumped ships to the Brexit Party and is now an MEP.  In fact they put him in charge of the whole thing, while giving him a few months off to lead a mission to Mars and take on Vassily Lomachenko.


Plus saving Bolton Wanderers, obvs.  Twat.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I'm a bit surprised with these comments that Johnson has fucked it and no deal is not the most likely outcome.  He inherited the tiny of tiniest majorities, he was always going to have to go to the people.  He would have known there was a very good chance it'd be before October 31st.  This way he has provoked Parliament into forcing his hand and will therefore blame them.  Everything about the strategy is making sure the blame lies elsewhere.
> 
> If he wins an increased majority at the GE which is a definite possibility then what else will it be but no deal?  He may present a slightly different version of May's deal but I'm not sure how he'd get that past the speaker but I'm sure they have a plan if that's what they want.  To be honest it wouldn't surprise me if no deal is the plan and just blame everyone else if it goes to shit.
> 
> To my mind Brexit happening on the 31st is still the most likely outcome and the route to no deal looks more straight forward than deal.  The only way I can it not happening is if Labour can win enough seats to scrape some sort of coalition together.



But with Lee's defection to the LDs, he's no longer got a working majority, and I'd bet the entire contents of my bank account (I'm overdrawn) on there being further defections. In fact I'll stick my neck out and say that 3 more Tories will defect (but probably not before tonight's vote).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I'm a bit surprised with these comments that Johnson has fucked it and no deal is not the most likely outcome.  He inherited the tiny of tiniest majorities, he was always going to have to go to the people.  He would have known there was a very good chance it'd be before October 31st.  This way he has provoked Parliament into forcing his hand and will therefore blame them.  Everything about the strategy is making sure the blame lies elsewhere.
> 
> If he wins an increased majority at the GE which is a definite possibility then what else will it be but no deal?  He may present a slightly different version of May's deal but I'm not sure how he'd get that past the speaker but I'm sure they have a plan if that's what they want.  To be honest it wouldn't surprise me if no deal is the plan and just blame everyone else if it goes to shit.
> 
> To my mind Brexit happening on the 31st is still the most likely outcome and the route to no deal looks more straight forward than deal.  The only way I can it not happening is if Labour can win enough seats to scrape some sort of coalition together.



Agree that he knew he needed to win an election but he needs to win an election to get a deal very much like May's through.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> He may present a slightly different version of May's deal but I'm not sure how he'd get that past the speaker



If it's a new session of Parliament he could even bring back May's deal, fuck all the speaker could do to stop that.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> But with Lee's defection to the LDs, he's no longer got a working majority, and I'd bet the entire contents of my bank account (I'm overdrawn) on there being further defections. In fact I'll stick my neck out and say that 3 more Tories will defect (but probably not before tonight's vote).



Hence the forthcoming general election.



SpackleFrog said:


> Agree that he knew he needed to win an election but he needs to win an election to get a deal very much like May's through.



Yup.  Its a high risk strategy but that's the game they are playing.  May tried to play it safe and it blew up in her face.  Johnson and Cummings have chosen to roll the dice and fuck the consequences.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 3, 2019)

I am glad Johnson may suffer from election issues in the very near future.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> If he wins an increased majority at the GE which is a definite possibility then what else will it be but no deal?  He may present a slightly different version of May's deal but I'm not sure how he'd get that past the speaker but I'm sure they have a plan if that's what they want.


Big difference is no backstop, border in the sea


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Hence the forthcoming general election.
> 
> 
> 
> Yup.  Its a high risk strategy but that's the game they are playing.  May tried to play it safe and it blew up in her face.  Johnson and Cummings have chosen to roll the dice and fuck the consequences.



What consequences?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 3, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I am glad Johnson may suffer from election issues in the very near future.


Electoral dysfunction


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What consequences?



The damage to the tory party and the union for starters.	If we do end up with no deal the fall out could be fairly serious as well, whether you believe it will be ultimately worth it or not.  I'm not going to start doom mongering but lets be honest its going to be a bit more than a few queues at Calais for a month or two.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

Jacob Rees-Smog referring to the illuminati earlier will have the conspirallons cumming in their pants 

"I can see the fnords my lord"


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Jacob Rees-Smog referring to the illuminati earlier with have the conspirallons cumming in their pants
> 
> "I can see the fnords my lord"


Did he?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The damage to the tory party and the union for starters.	If we do end up with no deal the fall out could be fairly serious as well, whether you believe it will be ultimately worth it or not.  I'm not going to start doom mongering but lets be honest its going to be a bit more than a few queues at Calais for a month or two.



He can stop no deal whenever he wants.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

On a personal level, Brexit scares the shit outta me (as I am sure it does for those in a similar position). I think I can say that, whether there's a deal or not, the sick, disabled, those on low incomes and the elderly will be the first to be thrown under Johnson's fucking bus! I can't afford to stockpile (not that I have the room, even if I could). Brexit to me is a fast approaching train, and I am tied to the tracks.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Except that Corbyn isn't the one who'd get to decide that - the membership are sufficiently remainy that they would force it through that it was party policy for _the party _to campaign for remain.
> 
> By the time we get to a second ref there will be none of the creative ambiguity left, it's in threads now, with only Corbyn giving it lip service.


Well, maybe - I'm sure it's a plan that will face opposition at conference: but there's also a decent wedge of the party who will support it, for ideological or strategic reasons so I'm not totally sure it wouldn't work - In 1975 the party voted overwhelmingly against membership, but they still went to the country officially neutral. 

Either way, I was just reporting what I'd heard he wanted to do, not commenting on how likely it was to work. Problem is, while this probably wouldn't, neither does any other plan. And round we go.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Did he?


He did.

I'm actually warming to the Father of the house for the way he's just turned Moggy over 

ETA It's my Discordian quote in speech marks but he mentioned the "illuminati" in relation to the topper most of the topper most intelligence on parliamentary presidents and "you lot being a bunch or wrong-uns".


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> On a personal level, Brexit scares the shit outta me (as I am sure it does for those in a similar position). I think I can say that, whether there's a deal or not, the sick, disabled, those on low incomes and the elderly will be the first to be thrown under Johnson's fucking bus! I can't afford to stockpile (not that I have the room, even if I could). Brexit to me is a fast approaching train, and I am tied to the tracks.


Presumably, when you use the term Brexit, you're referring to a chaotic withdrawal from the supra-state without any agreed deal?


----------



## ricbake (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Well presumably the line is that we'd now have some idea of what we were voting for, whether May's bullshit deal, no deal or cancel the whole thing.
> 
> What would actually happen is that the campaign around a second referendum would be even less grounded in reality than the first one. Even the brexit party doesn't actually make a case for brexit, because they don't have to. All they have to do is play to the gallery and use trigger words like 'betrayal' as often as possible and the voters come running. I wouldn't expect much different from the other side in a second referendum campaign either. What I would expect from both sides would be naked, all-consuming contempt for the public.


So should the second referendum have 3 options
	1 Leave no matter what
	2 Take the best deal Johnson can get by the 31st October, which is May's deal
	3 Stay in the EU
It would need to be held before the 18th October which gives 6 weeks...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Most of the MPs appear to have gone to the pub.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most of the MPs appear to have gone to the pub.


Clarke clearly had, but made the mistake of returning to address the house.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most of the MPs appear to have gone to the pub.


You can't expect them to make vital decisions with a clear head FFS.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> On a personal level, Brexit scares the shit outta me (as I am sure it does for those in a similar position). I think I can say that, whether there's a deal or not, the sick, disabled, those on low incomes and the elderly will be the first to be thrown under Johnson's fucking bus! I can't afford to stockpile (not that I have the room, even if I could). Brexit to me is a fast approaching train, and I am tied to the tracks.


To be honest I thought you had started stock piling when you posted those pics of your gaff. What are you worried about chuck. Stockpiling food, meds, knickers?

All that shit is meant to make us worry and allow these twats to just roll us over so they can make more profit. Sit tight their matey. If you need some pasta and some baccy urban will provide.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

ricbake said:


> So should the second referendum have 3 options
> 1 Leave no matter what
> 2 Take the best deal Johnson can get by the 31st October, which is May's deal
> 3 Stay in the EU
> It would need to be held before the 18th October which gives 6 weeks...



That would be viewed as a remainer stitch-up. 

I don't think there is a solution to this shitshow tbh. Not one that we can get to from here at any rate.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Most of the MPs appear to have gone to the pub.


I think they go to a club not a pub.






Where Boris is dancing for votes.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> To be honest I thought you had started stock piling when you posted those pics of your gaff. What are you worried about chuck. Stockpiling food, meds, knickers?
> 
> All that shit is meant to make us worry and allow these twats to just roll us over so they can make more profit. Sit tight their matey. If you need some pasta and some baccy urban will provide.


I did mention I had a certain supply of codeine on another thread and was hoping to open up a bidding war. 

Then I went into work today and got into swaps for weed. Well, offers of weed 'when I see you next week'. With Brexit there is no 'next week'. 

Anyway, next week I'll be offering tramadol for bog paper and toothpaste. When they're gone they're gone.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I did mention I had a certain supply of codeine on another thread and was hoping to open up a bidding war.
> 
> Then I went into work today and got into swaps for weed. Well, offers of weed 'when I see you next week'. With Brexit there is no 'next week'.
> 
> Anyway, next week I'll be offering tramadol for bog paper and toothpaste. When they're gone they're gone.



You are Harry Lime and I claim my white fiver!


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> You are Harry Lime and I claim my white fiver!


pssst… can do you a deal on prorogation. Throw a FTPA in for your good lady as well.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 3, 2019)

Just tuned in to the parliament channel and A Soubry is on, straight on mute. Oh wait, its Grieve now, sounds like he isn't going to shit out this time. We shall see.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

Assuming it goes ahead, which given current proceedings is far from a safe assumption, what would happen during the 5 weeks of progrockation?

Opposition (and Tory rebels..?  ) hold a symbolic parliament somewhere else? Johnson goes on a Brexit tour on a new, better bus?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Just tuned in to the parliament channel and A Soubry is on, straight on mute. Oh wait, its Grieve now, sounds like he isn't going to shit out this time. We shall see.


Sounded close to a breakdown, tbh.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 3, 2019)

i think they are acting like a right bunch of...

oh.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Something something progrocknation something voting Yes something


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Do they still name babies Cedric? Dominic Grieve should be a Cedric.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Do they still name babies Cedric? Dominic Grieve should be a Cedric.


964th most popular in 2019 apparently


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Alright here we go. Season 3 of brexit has got off to a gripping start!


Hmm. It’s a bit repetitive so far! Sure I’ve heard/seen all this in series 1&2.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Presumably, when you use the term Brexit, you're referring to a chaotic withdrawal from the supra-state without any agreed deal?



Well, no, because whether a deal or not, as I've just said, it will be those of us who are reliant - in whole or in part - on the welfare state (and therefore already suffering due to austerity) who will be the ones who will lose out. As much as I am not a fan of Blair, but I did get an amount that I could at least survive on (of course prices were lower then) I am getting barely half of that now, and everything is, thanks to Brexit, far more expensive. I honestly don't know how I'm going to survive. We simply don't matter, and those of us in the ironically named 'support' group matter least of all. I'm glad I'm not getting hassled but - and I'm trying to be careful with words here, because I know that the vast majority of those in the WRAG don't deserve to be - but this is all we have to live on and welfare will get squeezed and squeezed until there's fuck all left. 

Perhaps… oh I don't fucking know, I'm just too fucking drained to think about it (and I'm no fucking good at words, I always say things that end up upsetting/offending people when I don't mean to). Just fucking fuck all this fucking shite! They don't care about us. Never have, never will (and I mean ALL of them - Tory, Labour, Lib Dem, Greens… Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Purple - whatever fucking colour they are). Oh, FFS, it's JRM again! Fuck off ya fucking disingenuous, lying Nazi, thing! 

If I've upset anyone, I'm sorry. Had enough, GS out.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Maitlis using that time machine...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maitlis using that time machine...
> 
> View attachment 183117


Perhaps she could drop Jacob rees mogg off in 1720.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Perhaps she could drop Jacob rees mogg off in 1720 _fathoms_.



No charge.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I did mention I had a certain supply of codeine on another thread and was hoping to open up a bidding war.
> 
> Then I went into work today and got into swaps for weed. Well, offers of weed 'when I see you next week'. With Brexit there is no 'next week'.
> 
> Anyway, next week I'll be offering tramadol for bog paper and toothpaste. When they're gone they're gone.


Will do you one broccoli for every two trammies. Serious offer


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Well, no, because whether a deal or not, as I've just said, it will be those of us who are reliant - in whole or in part - on the welfare state (and therefore already suffering due to austerity) who will be the ones who will lose out. As much as I am not a fan of Blair, but I did get an amount that I could at least survive on (of course prices were lower then) I am getting barely half of that now, and everything is, thanks to Brexit, far more expensive. I honestly don't know how I'm going to survive. We simply don't matter, and those of us in the ironically named 'support' group matter least of all. I'm glad I'm not getting hassled but - and I'm trying to be careful with words here, because I know that the vast majority of those in the WRAG don't deserve to be - but this is all we have to live on and welfare will get squeezed and squeezed until there's fuck all left.
> 
> Perhaps… oh I don't fucking know, I'm just too fucking drained to think about it (and I'm no fucking good at words, I always say things that end up upsetting/offending people when I don't mean to). Just fucking fuck all this fucking shite! They don't care about us. Never have, never will (and I mean ALL of them - Tory, Labour, Lib Dem, Greens… Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Purple - whatever fucking colour they are). Oh, FFS, it's JRM again! Fuck off ya fucking disingenuous, lying Nazi, thing!
> 
> If I've upset anyone, I'm sorry. Had enough, GS out.


I see.
Thanks for being clear, although you are obviously upset.
It seems as though you don't want to continue to debate this which, given your circs is understandable, but i would just point out that the changing social policy outcomes affecting your own personal circumstances have all occurred whilst we have been (and continue to be) a member of the supra-state.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

Have I missed anything momentous? Back from the first meeting for organising Orkney Pride next year, that’s bloody momentous. Fuck you Phillip Lee!


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Have I missed anything momentous? Back from the first meeting for organising Orkney Pride next year, that’s bloody momentous. Fuck you Phillip Lee!


For the result check 5 posts back.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> For the result check 5 posts back.


Cheers, everyone was kicking off on the BBC and this guy was saying he’d been arrested for threatening to kill Bojo, it was all very confusing.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Well, no, because whether a deal or not, as I've just said, it will be those of us who are reliant - in whole or in part - on the welfare state (and therefore already suffering due to austerity) who will be the ones who will lose out. As much as I am not a fan of Blair, but I did get an amount that I could at least survive on (of course prices were lower then) I am getting barely half of that now, and everything is, thanks to Brexit, far more expensive. I honestly don't know how I'm going to survive. We simply don't matter, and those of us in the ironically named 'support' group matter least of all. I'm glad I'm not getting hassled but - and I'm trying to be careful with words here, because I know that the vast majority of those in the WRAG don't deserve to be - but this is all we have to live on and welfare will get squeezed and squeezed until there's fuck all left.
> 
> Perhaps… oh I don't fucking know, I'm just too fucking drained to think about it (and I'm no fucking good at words, I always say things that end up upsetting/offending people when I don't mean to). Just fucking fuck all this fucking shite! They don't care about us. Never have, never will (and I mean ALL of them - Tory, Labour, Lib Dem, Greens… Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Purple - whatever fucking colour they are). Oh, FFS, it's JRM again! Fuck off ya fucking disingenuous, lying Nazi, thing!
> 
> If I've upset anyone, I'm sorry. Had enough, GS out.


Calm down dear! Don't panic Capt !









> I'm no fucking good at words



You seem to be doing fine across the board other than dealing with these attempts board posters make to respond to what you're posting in open threads.

You're on a discussion board not a ranting platform. If people respond and quote take it as an invitation to engage in discussion not an affront of your views. 

We're all here to communicate with each other, that's the point of Urban. It's not a set of cell walls where you can write your angst on them using your own shit. We're a bit more helpful than that and care about the well-being of our clan.

If you can't handle it maybe, with all kindness, you should take a break x


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I see.
> Thanks for being clear, although you are obviously upset.
> It seems as though you don't want to continue to debate this which, given your circs is understandable, but i would just point out that the changing social policy outcomes affecting your own personal circumstances have all occurred whilst we have been (and continue to be) members of the supra-state.




So the EU cut welfare in the UK?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So the EU cut welfare in the UK?


My point (obviously poorly expressed) was precisely the opposite; the supra-state has neither improved nor worsened our national welfare provision.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Have I missed anything momentous? Back from the first meeting for organising Orkney Pride next year, that’s bloody momentous. Fuck you Phillip Lee!



Still debating in parliament. It's a waste of time. The same points are going back and forth over and over again.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

"Paint me like one of your French girls"


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

Meanwhile...


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> "Paint me like one of your French girls"
> 
> View attachment 183120


Made me think of this...






I bet Moog changs the lang.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

Incidentally on the drive back my mate had said the usual why didn’t Corbyn just come out against brexit etc- to cut a long boring post short I had to run through the basics re the EU - how it operates, yadda yadda and it was like she hadn’t heard any of it before and she’s pretty educated. 3 years after the ref and how many into the debate? It was always going to be this, wasn’t it.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

Also: making the case for leave is 57 per cent more of a distraction than loud music whilst driving. Don’t!


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> "Paint me like one of your French girls"
> 
> View attachment 183120



Reminds me of this.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> 964th most popular in 2019 apparently



Out of 650, that's quite some achievement


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 3, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Made me think of this...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Is that slang for "likes Bay City Rollers"


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Is that slang for "likes Bay City Rollers"


Yeah once you go brown anything is down.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Ooh a thing might happen soon. Not sure what it is.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Ooh a thing might happen soon. Not sure what it is.


Division! Clear the labia.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 3, 2019)

My favourite edit from this eve.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 3, 2019)

its all down to the eyes and the nose now.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 3, 2019)

Meanwhile John 'Two-Jags' Prescott has been unavailable for comment


----------



## WWWeed (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> "Paint me like one of your French girls"
> 
> View attachment 183120



Smug dreams....


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Will do you one broccoli for every two trammies. Serious offer


WTO rules?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

BBC news now gone Facebook Live in the commons. Is that usual? They seem to be working themselves up somewhat.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

27 defeat.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

"Not a good start Boris" lol


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Boris kneecapped on day one. Fun times.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Know I'm clinging here but fuck me I hope we see a 2017+ turnaround in the next few weeks


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

Corbyn just seems to get fired up in times of high drama. Maybe he will pull it out of the bag again.


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 3, 2019)

GE soon then?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Boris kneecapped on day one. Fun times.


Now the useless cunt has got to kick out a sizeable chunk of his own MPs.


----------



## chilango (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 27 defeat.


Is that closer than expected?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is that closer than expected?



No I'd say it's worse than expected for Johnson.


----------



## stdP (Sep 3, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Boris isn't as good at _______________  as he thought he was



You can fill that blank space with pretty much any verb and it still works.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

What a collection of hooting cunts


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is that closer than expected?


Wouldn't have thought so; with Elphicke he's still got an effective maj of 1. So a loss of 27 looks like a bit of a kicking tbh.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is that closer than expected?





chilango said:


> Is that closer than expected?



Assuming the 17 Tory rebels figure is right, that's 9 from other side - all labour/ex labour I'd imagine


----------



## D'wards (Sep 3, 2019)

Jesus, what a fucking mess. I literally cannot see a way out. It's a stalemate all round


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Assuming the 17 Tory rebels figure is right, that's 9 from other side - all labour/ex labour I'd imagine



Usual suspects Hoey, Field etc no doubt.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Wankface has already said he's going to ignore it, of course…


----------



## Cloo (Sep 3, 2019)

I still fear that, come what may, Johnson & co will find a way to ignore the 'No No-Deal' thing and we'll end up with it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Oh god not fucking Swinson.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Assuming the 17 Tory rebels figure is right, that's 9 from other side - all labour/ex labour I'd imagine


Don't think that's right.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

lol. 

Boris Johnson is shit. exposed as an incompetent blustering bullshitter. Looking forward to the vile fuckwit taking Mays crown as "most useless campaigner" in the coming election campaign.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

So boring. Just get to the fucking election.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Oh god not fucking Swinson.


Hilarious contribution from Swindle; she's so crap.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> lol.
> 
> Boris Johnson is shit. exposed as an incompetent blustering bullshitter. Looking forward to the vile fuckwit taking Mays crown as "most useless campaigner" in the coming election campaign.



Let's fucking hope so.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Lol, I thought that vote was to make a no deal Brexit illegal but that was just the right to vote to make a no deal Brexit illegal


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> lol.
> 
> Boris Johnson is shit. exposed as an incompetent blustering bullshitter. Looking forward to the vile fuckwit taking Mays crown as "most useless campaigner" in the coming election campaign.



Day by day you can see the mask slipping with him. In as much as there ever was a mask.


----------



## D'wards (Sep 3, 2019)

I wish that cunt who's always yelling in Parliament Square would fuck off.

He's not really helping


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

Lol who said “not a good start Boris”?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

BBC saying 21 tory rebels.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Lol who said “not a good start Boris”?


Bercow


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Lol, I thought that vote was to make a no deal Brexit illegal but that was just the right to vote to make a no deal Brexit illegal



Exactly. The* really* interesting shit happens tomorrow.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Like he'll sack 21. But I doubt not doing so would have much of an impact


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Bercow


Thought so hahahaha


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Bercow



Nice thought, but that wasn't Bercow's voice. Think it was someone from Labour.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

By the way, for fucks sake leave rees mogg alone, he's been up all night changing nappies.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Lol, I thought that vote was to make a no deal Brexit illegal but that was just the right to vote to make a no deal Brexit illegal



Makes the former look like a formality though. Getting it through the lords is the tricky bit.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 3, 2019)

Fuck's sake is he kicking out the rebels or not?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Gods do these people ever stop talking about sheep?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Nice thought, but that wasn't Bercow's voice. Think it was someone from Labour.


My mistake- it’s not a nice thought Bercow is a terrible twat


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Fuck's sake is he kicking out the rebels or not?



I highly doubt it.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Do I really have to watch this all over again tmoz? I expect Mogg will turn up in his starched night cap.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its all down to the eyes and the nose now.


Heads shoulders knees and toes…


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Nice thought, but that wasn't Bercow's voice. Think it was someone from Labour.


Ah I see.. pity


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Makes the former look like a formality though. Getting it through the lords is the tricky bit.


So if it passed he calls an election for Oct 14th, which the opposition won't agree to because they want to wait until after 31st?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Bercow's speaking patterns are out of phase with our corner of the space time continuum.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 3, 2019)

He’s proud Parliament stood up and said they would take no deal off the table. HOW MANY VOTES DID THAT TAKE FFS


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Tell you what, whoever got on that eu beret grift must have made a few quid


----------



## steveo87 (Sep 3, 2019)

.


----------



## Streathamite (Sep 3, 2019)

This is a massive defeat for a government


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Cull the commies...

Bebb Benyon Brine Burt Clark G Clarke K Gauke Greening Grieve Gyimah Hammond P Hammond S Harrington James Letwin Milton Nokes Sandbach Soames Stewart R Vaizey


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So if it passed he calls an election for Oct 14th, which the opposition won't agree to because they want to wait until after 31st?



There might, hilariously, not be time to get a motion for a general election through parliament before Johnson's brilliantly conceived proroguation kicks in.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> He’s proud Parliament stood up and said they would take no deal off the table. HOW MANY VOTES DID THAT TAKE FFS



A few more yet.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cull the commies...
> 
> Bebb Benyon Brine Burt Clark G Clarke K Gauke Greening Grieve Gyimah Hammond P Hammond S Harrington James Letwin Milton Nokes Sandbach Soames Stewart R Vaizey


Any idea who voted no from other side?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> There might, hilariously, not be time to get a motion for a general election through parliament before Johnson's brilliantly conceived proroguation kicks in.


 When does it?


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Gods do these people ever stop talking about sheep?



Sometimes they talk about pork.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> When does it?



Monday? There seems to be some wiggle room there.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Any idea who voted no from other side?


Not yet, no.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

21 tories rebelled? any abstained? 

#tory death spiral


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

It's proper mental all of this
I'm still not sure on how the election gets called. Do 2/3 of MPs have to agree to it and for it to be held on a certain date?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Any idea who voted no from other side?



Hoey and Mann, apparently


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

D'wards said:


> I wish that cunt who's always yelling in Parliament Square would fuck off.
> 
> He's not really helping


I've just yelled "Shut the fuck up, you fucking twat!" at the screen in solidarity.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

Leadsom says no withdrawing the whip tonight, only if the 21 "fail to reconsider their decision" and vote against the government tomorrow.

Bottlers...

SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT SHEEP WHY AM I STILL WATCHING THIS SHIT


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Hoey and Mann, apparently


Kate Hoey, John Mann... your boys took one helluva beating!


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Sometimes they talk about porkies.



Fixed that for you.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Leadsom says no withdrawing the whip tonight, only if the 21 "fail to reconsider their decision" and vote against the government tomorrow.
> 
> Bottlers...



Lol, bullshit.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 3, 2019)

Mr Johnson has not just lost the vote, he and Dominic Cummings' bullying approach to keeping Tory rebels and parliament in check is dead in the water.  Its downhill from now on for the proroguers.


----------



## steveo87 (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Seem to have lost the stream on the BBC News website now.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 3, 2019)

Bollocks, I was looking forward to them kicking out the rebels


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

We really, _really_ mean it this time


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 3, 2019)

D'wards said:


> I wish that cunt who's always yelling in Parliament Square would fuck off.
> 
> He's not really helping



I like the fact he has a opinion...how he still has a voice I don't know. 

'Boris Johnson is a liar'....

He's right of course.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> It's proper mental all of this
> I'm still not sure on how the election gets called. Do 2/3 of MPs have to agree to it and for it to be held on a certain date?


Under the Fixed Term Parliament Act, as I understand it, the PM will announce a date and then it will be voted on, and there MUST be a clear two-thirds majority, or no election.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

The 'rebels' should spend tomorrow line dancing between the 2 sides of the house.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

So assuming the Ayes carry the day tomorrow and Johnson tables a motion for an election, what are the chances of that motion being defeated?


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Leadsom says no withdrawing the whip tonight, only if the 21 "fail to reconsider their decision" and vote against the government tomorrow.
> 
> Bottlers...
> 
> SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT SHEEP WHY AM I STILL WATCHING THIS SHIT


So this could get worse for them....


----------



## steveo87 (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The 'rebels' should spend tomorrow line dancing between the 2 sides of the house.



They should deliberately leave spaces on the benches.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Leadsom says no withdrawing the whip tonight, only if the 21 "fail to reconsider their decision" and vote against the government tomorrow.
> 
> Bottlers...
> 
> SHUT THE FUCK UP ABOUT SHEEP WHY AM I STILL WATCHING THIS SHIT



Leadnone Sackednone


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So assuming the Ayes carry the day tomorrow and Johnson tables a motion for an election, what are the chances of that motion being defeated?


I think under FTPA he needs two thirds which he can't get. I think he'd need to go for VONC which would open the door to Corbyn to try to form a government.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So assuming the Ayes carry the day tomorrow and Johnson tables a motion for an election, what are the chances of that motion being defeated?



2/3rds of the house is a lot.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Didn't Johnson say tonight's vote was a confidence issue? So, 21 vote that they have no confidence and … zip?  

(((Strong and Stable)))


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

So potentially Johnson could end up trapped into fighting an election having completely failed to deliver the one thing he promised to do.

I mean I'm not saying he wouldn't win anyway but that would be funny.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 3, 2019)

Vicki Young of the BBC saying that all 21 rebels are being kicked out!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Hoey has lost it. Wtaf voting against this. Brexit is more important to her than ousting Johnson.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So assuming the Ayes carry the day tomorrow and Johnson tables a motion for an election, what are the chances of that motion being defeated?


Who knows. It will be fucking hilarious.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

steveo87 said:


> They should deliberately leave spaces on the benches.


A few well timed watch taps and beckoning gestures.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So assuming the Ayes carry the day tomorrow and Johnson tables a motion for an election, what are the chances of that motion being defeated?



It almost certainly will be, there's no fucking way he's going to get the 2/3rds majority (i.e. roughly 430).


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 3, 2019)

... or chaos with ed milliband


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Is it just me or are there not six weeks between now and the 14th of October?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 3, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> ... or chaos with ed milliband


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Is it just me or are there not six weeks between now and the 14th of October?


Prorogue the fuck out of your calendar young grasshopper.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Didn't Johnson say tonight's vote was a confidence issue? So, 21 vote that they have no confidence and … zip?
> 
> (((Strong and Stable)))


They get another chance to vote the right way tomorrow it seems. It's May on steroids.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

So Ken Clarke who has been an MP longer than I've been alive is getting sacked for voting with the rebels. Wowsers


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 3, 2019)

all 21 have had the whipp removed..


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> all 21 have had the whipp removed..



Have they?


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Is it just me or are there not six weeks between now and the 14th of October?



It's you. There are exactly six weeks between now and 14/10.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> all 21 have had the whipp removed..


I thought Loathsome was giving them a resit tomorrow?


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 3, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> all 21 have had the whipp removed..


Guaranteeing defeat tomorrow? Why would they change their minds now?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 3, 2019)

just heard it on the radio , could all change i suppose


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> It's you. There are exactly six weeks between now and 14/10.



But tomorrow, there won't be. And tomorrow is out of the goverment's hands.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So Ken Clarke who has been an MP longer than I've been alive is getting sacked for voting with the rebels. Wowsers



So is Winston Churchill's grandson, lol


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 3, 2019)

according to bbc news they are getting the boot. mental.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I thought Loathsome was giving them a resit tomorrow?



Andrea Readnone, clearly


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I thought Loathsome was giving them a resit tomorrow?



She is. If they rebel tomorrow - which they will - that's absolutely, 100%, definitely, the final straw. Probably.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

Still, David Cameron's autobiography is out in a couple of weeks hahahaha

For old time's sake:


----------



## BCBlues (Sep 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Lol, I thought that vote was to make a no deal Brexit illegal but that was just the right to vote to make a no deal Brexit illegal



You missed the bit earlier where they voted that they had finished talking about voting on the right to vote on voting a no deal brexit illegal. It was mesmerising.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> according to bbc news they are getting the boot. mental.



Toys and pram no longer in the same county even.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

Hahahahaha, Leadsom didn't know what she was talking about 

This is fun.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> But tomorrow, there won't be. And tomorrow is out of the goverment's hands.



That is very true, mon ami, but tomorrow never comes… (Gaia isn't sober).  Seriously, it's only a day (but to paraphrase Harold Wilson, a day is a long time in politics…).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

It is serving Johnson's purpose. 

I don't want an election but they have left me no choice. They are the wreckers.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Scorched earth time innit
Must be relying heavily on Lord Filibuster and his 99 problems (but a Brexit ain't one) to save the shitshow


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 3, 2019)

So now we'll have some Tory on Tory bloodshed at least.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 3, 2019)

This is fucking hilarious! De Pfeffel now has a majority of minus twenty!


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 3, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> So now we'll have some Tory on Tory bloodshed at least.


That's what I'm enjoying. Fuck, I _want _Brexit, but it's brilliant watching the Tories clawing each others' black hearts out.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is serving Johnson's purpose.
> 
> I don't want an election but they have left me no choice. They are the wreckers.


Yes, in all seriousness (  ) it is. But from those numbers, he ain't getting one for a wee while. Wouldn't like t be cumming's cat tonight.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Should McDonnell be ordering that taxi at this point? Brenda should still be up, arguing with Phil about Bake Off, I'm sure...


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is serving Johnson's purpose.
> 
> I don't want an election but they have left me no choice. They are the wreckers.



It'll NEVER be Wankface's fault, and Letwin's comment was apposite (the one he made about Johnson standing on one side of the Grand Canyon, the rebels on t'other and yelling that if they weren't going to toe the line (which, in case you didn't know, refers to the line down the length of the Chamber in front of the benches), he was going to throw himself into it). Point is, bullies are cowards, and he's running scared. He knows he can't beg them, because that'll make him look weak, so he's trying to bully them (which has the effect of making him look even weaker). 

I have to admit that I was impressed with JC's performance tonight (and many of you will be well aware of my feelings about The Sainted One). He just has to put his money where his mouth is…


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Must be up to about 40 independents now (some booted out, some resigned, some sex cases etc.).


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 3, 2019)

Dominic cummings wants brexit, but he doesn’t like the Tory party does he? Is he trying to destroy it?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It is serving Johnson's purpose.
> 
> I don't want an election but they have left me no choice. They are the wreckers.



2 days ago an election would have been Johnson standing on a platform of (any) Brexit - Brexit purists would still be hearing about no deal, others would still see it as a negotiation tactic for a deal.

With negotiation tactics "cut off at the knees" by tomorrow's vote (big assumption, the ayes have it) Johnson has made it clear that there isn't a deal to be had before October 31st.  He's been backed into a GE standing on an explicit no deal platform.

Brexit Party are dead*, and all their votes go Tory.  However, any who wanted "an orderly Brexit with a deal" are no longer necessarily on board.

Basically, no one knows.

*They're not actually dead.  An exact replica of the Brexit Party, a single-issue party of ideologues, have just announced themselves with 289 MPs including the sitting Prime Minister.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Must be up to about 40 independents now (some booted out, some resigned, some sex cases etc.).


Yep, if the 21 are kicked out, that would be 36 Indeps & 5 TiGs


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Must be up to about 40 independents now (some booted out, some resigned, some sex cases etc.).



Nah, there are very few actual independents, most have crossed the floor and joined the Lib Dems, as actual independents, there's really only Soubry and Allen (and the latter will likely join the LDs) oh and Nick Boles. Nope, can't think of any more. Angela Smith and Joan Ryan…? I think they're still CUK. Oh I dunno, I can't keep up with it either,


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Rory Stewart not standing for re-election. Presumably yearns for the political stability he found in Afghanistan


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> It'll NEVER be Wankface's fault, and Letwin's comment was apposite (the one he made about Johnson standing on one side of the Grand Canyon, the rebels on t'other and yelling that if they weren't going to toe the line (which, in case you didn't know, refers to the line down the length of the Chamber in front of the benches), he was going to throw himself into it). Point is, bullies are cowards, and he's running scared. He knows he can't beg them, because that'll make him look weak, so he's trying to bully them (which has the effect of making him look even weaker).
> 
> I have to admit that I was impressed with JC's performance tonight (and many of you will be well aware of my feelings about The Sainted One). He just has to put his money where his mouth is…


Letwin can fuck off . Stupid racist cunt.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Rory Stewart not standing for re-election. Presumably yearns for the political stability he found in Afghanistan


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 3, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Makes a change from their usual bollocks, which are a combination of Diana/miracle cures/weather.
Shameless rag.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 3, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Rory Stewart not standing for re-election. Presumably yearns for the political stability he found in Afghanistan


that and the moreish opium


----------



## Gaia (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep, if the 21 are kicked out, that would be 36 Indeps & 5 TiGs



I didn't think there were that many but, like I said, I can't keep up. I'll go have a butcher's on They Work For You. According to its list there are 19 (18 if you ignore O'Mara, which I am). All MPs - TheyWorkForYou


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 3, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Should McDonnell be ordering that taxi at this point? Brenda should still be up, arguing with Phil about Bake Off, I'm sure...



Good luck getting a cab to Balmoral at this time of night. "North of the Border, mate? Naaaah"


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Love a bit of blue on blue


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 3, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



What sort of prick prices a daily newspaper at 65p? 'sake. Think of all the dicking around counting out the change for that, running for a train.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Nah, there are very few actual independents, most have crossed the floor and joined the Lib Dems, as actual independents, there's really only Soubry and Allen (and the latter will likely join the LDs) oh and Nick Boles. Nope, can't think of any more. Angela Smith and Joan Ryan…? I think they're still CUK. Oh I dunno, I can't keep up with it either,


Current State of the Parties


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

Parliament Surrenders To The EU - What Would Diana Think?

On another shameful day in our so-called democracy, which saw record temperatures across the Southeast of England, rebel MPs vote to betray Brexit as Marxist Terrorist Sympathiser Corbyn vows to block PMs snap election, in a move guaranteed to lower YOUR house price.

There you go Express, I fixed it.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Parliament Surrenders To The EU - What Would Diana Think?
> 
> On another shameful day in our so-called democracy, which saw record temperatures across the Southeast of England, rebel MPs vote to betray Brexit as Marxist Terrorist Sympathiser Corbyn vows to block PMs snap election, in a move guaranteed to lower YOUR house price.
> 
> There you go Express, I fixed it.


Immigrants


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Surely sacking all 21 tonight means it's guaranteed they'll vote same tomorrow. I mean they almost certainly would have anyway but waiting a day gives you a chance to try and pick one of two off. Must think there are more out there so go in hard as a warning to others


----------



## MrSki (Sep 3, 2019)

52% to 48% oh the irony.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Immigrants



They're in the cancer story on pages 2, 3 ,5, 8 and the science-free double page spread in the centre.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Parliament Surrenders To The EU - What Would Diana Think?
> 
> On another shameful day in our so-called democracy, which saw record temperatures across the Southeast of England, rebel MPs vote to betray Brexit as Marxist Terrorist Sympathiser Corbyn vows to block PMs snap election, in a move guaranteed to lower YOUR house price.
> 
> There you go Express, I fixed it.


*Corbyn Uses the Prorogation of Parliament to Nip Round and Urinate in the Diana Fountain!*


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Surely sacking all 21 tonight means it's guaranteed they'll vote same tomorrow. I mean they almost certainly would have anyway but waiting a day gives you a chance to try and pick one of two off. Must think there are more out there so go in hard as a warning to others


You just don’t realise how clever Cummings is.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Parliament Surrenders To The EU - What Would Diana Think?
> 
> On another shameful day in our so-called democracy, which saw record temperatures across the Southeast of England, rebel MPs vote to betray Brexit as Marxist Terrorist Sympathiser Corbyn vows to block PMs snap election, in a move guaranteed to lower YOUR house price.
> 
> There you go Express, I fixed it.



*It's a tax on common sense!*


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 3, 2019)

* 4D chess klaxon *



brogdale said:


> You just don’t realise how clever Cummings is.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 3, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Rory Stewart not standing for re-election. Presumably yearns for the political stability he found in Afghanistan


Or the mines of Moria, Ffs he looks like fucking gollum


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Surely sacking all 21 tonight means it's guaranteed they'll vote same tomorrow. I mean they almost certainly would have anyway but waiting a day gives you a chance to try and pick one of two off. Must think there are more out there so go in hard as a warning to others


Or they want more and more to out themselves and be deselected for the upcoming election. 

He can't not have known that this would happen.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

Tory conference should be a laugh! 

For all the action today I don't think much has changed really. Doesnt matter if the Tories bump off a few MPs - there will be an election at some point before 1st Nov, and the only question is who will win it. Tonight's action is pure fuel for the Tory press fire and will help their campaign cause along. 

If the Tories win it with a big enough majority they can do May's deal with the border in the sea, or similar. All other election results probably most likely lead to a second referendum.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 3, 2019)

Chaos is the political theatre campaign plan nowadays isn't it? It's working for others elsewhere, it feels like the plan to me.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> that and the moreish opium



Look, if you can't let your hair down at an islamic wedding, you're... err... prolly female


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

I see Weirdo Williamson abstained


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Looks like, in addition to the NI Neanderthals, Johnson picked up votes from Hoey, Mann, their own alleged sex offender (Elphicke) and the cunts Ian Austin & Ivan Lewis.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I see Weirdo Williamson abstained


& woodCOCK


----------



## kebabking (Sep 3, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Or they want more and more to out themselves and be deselected for the upcoming election.
> 
> He can't not have known that this would happen.



Risky strategy - Hammond is very popular in his constituency, indeed he was reselected by his constituency party yesterday - as is Stewart. Local voters, let alone party activists, may not take kindly to their MP being sacked, and so there's a good chance that whatever lickspittle gets parachuted in may not get much support.

I wouldn't be remotely surprised if a good number of the seats involved change hands, which would make a Johnson government rather less likely.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Chaos is the political campaign plan now isn't it? It's working for others elsewhere, it feels like the plan to me.


I think so too, but I think there are two types of chaos model out there (at least two)

I think the Surkov/Russian chaos model was slightly different: funding two opposing sides and positioning Putin as a strong man to sort out the mess , and bring order to the created chaos.

This chaos-creation is much more Bannon/Trumpian - drain the swamp (removing the whip fits that), make the party political divide bigger, position as anti-establishment, abandon any semblance of the centre, generally break protocol


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 3, 2019)

Wonder if Hoey and Mann will lose whip


----------



## MrSki (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Risky strategy - Hammond is very popular in his constituency, indeed he was reselected by his constituency party yesterday - as is Stewart. Local voters, let alone party activists, may not take kindly to their MP being sacked, and so there's a good chance that whatever lickspittle gets parachuted in may not get much support.
> 
> I wouldn't be remotely surprised if a good number of the seats involved change hands, which would make a Johnson government rather less likely.


Incredibly risky strategy. But he's been on this high-stakes path from day 1 when he purged the cabinet. He may very well crash and burn. Fingers crossed.


----------



## A380 (Sep 3, 2019)

TCABDPJ’s hearts not in is it. You could see it in his face at the dispatch box. Like most privileged bullies he hasn’t the wind for a proper stand up fight.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> & woodCOCK



Recently opened an office and I'm convinced genuinely believes he's gonna be re-elected as an independent


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wonder if Hoey and Mann will lose whip


Johnson has opened a door to deselecting and removing the whip as if it was nothing - would be nice to see Corbyn using that as a moment to give a few of them the boot too


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wonder if Hoey and Mann will lose whip


The wise thing to do is surely to do nothing. It's an opportunity to appear superior - we're not just about brexit, etc.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wonder if Hoey and Mann will lose whip


Not for this. It would be a shit strategic move as much as anything else - let the tories own their petty bloodletting rather than indulge in it too.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

Hoey's a gonner anyway IIRC - standing down before next election?


----------



## ska invita (Sep 3, 2019)

killer b said:


> Not for this. It would be a shit strategic move as much as anything else - let the tories own their petty bloodletting rather than indulge in it too.


yes, but next time - and there will no doubt be a next time....


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Hoey's a gonner anyway IIRC - standing down before next election?


said the other day she wouldn't be standing for Labour in the next election (so hinting she'd be standing for someone else, presumably Brexit). 

One reason not to boot Hoey is simply to avoid the Brexit party getting it's first MP tbh


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Tory conference should be a laugh!
> 
> For all the action today I don't think much has changed really. Doesnt matter if the Tories bump off a few MPs - there will be an election at some point before 1st Nov, and the only question is who will win it. Tonight's action is pure fuel for the Tory press fire and will help their campaign cause along.
> 
> If the Tories win it with a big enough majority they can do May's deal with the border in the sea, or similar. All other election results probably most likely lead to a second referendum.


Yeah, Johnson/cummings et al have fucked up, but I still see them winning an election whenever it is called. The only thing that can stop them is if he's forced to seek an extension from the EU, which pushes the Brexit Party right back into things. Logically, if the anti-no deal thing is passed and if he fails to get an election agreed before prorogation, he has to seek an extension I'd have thought. But just because that's the logic of those votes, it doesn't mean he will do it, he almost certainly won't. But what then? Strange days etc,

Are we now in some weird universe where he decides not to prorogue, to give himself more time to get a general election? No, we are not, even now, but I bet that will soon crop up in some newspaper graphic on the possible ways forward.


----------



## killer b (Sep 3, 2019)

ska invita said:


> yes, but next time - and there will no doubt be a next time....


nah, you can't boot MPs from the party for voting against the whip.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wonder if Hoey and Mann will lose whip


Prisoner exchange?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

I wondered about May tonight, did she speak in the debate? Anyway, she's been pictured grinning from ear to ear leaving parliament tonight:
Brexit: Boris Johnson to table motion for general election – live news


----------



## xenon (Sep 3, 2019)

A380 said:


> TCABDPJ’s hearts not in is it. You could see it in his face at the dispatch box. Like most privileged bullies he hasn’t the wind for a proper stand up fight.



TCABDPJ?


Also what exactly has been voted on, a bill to rule out no deal? And, if so, what is being voted on tomorrow if it has tonight passed?


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Sep 3, 2019)

Mayhem, pictured leaving the HoP this evo:


----------



## MrSki (Sep 3, 2019)




----------



## Wilf (Sep 3, 2019)

And just one more sleep till we do it all again.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Johnson/cummings et al have fucked up



I'm not sure they have tbh. 

They've successfully identified and removed every Remain Tory with enough of a spine to ringlead future rebellions (and given the state of the active grassroots most of those will be replaced by Leavers). 

Which means they'll go into the election on mostly a full Leave slate, likely removing most of the threat from Farage's crew, having rhetorically set a weak and fractured Labour up in the soft Remain camp where it'll be competing with the Lib Dems etc and potentially loses a load of voters in Leave heartlands.

The numbers are sketchy at best for Labour here, and look good for Johnson, with a strong possibility of breaking the deadlock which afflicted May. I'm not saying it's all going according to plan, but it doesn't look like a mess for him either.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

I dont buy this "cunning plan" stuff - they are careering from crises to crises making it up as they go along.


----------



## A380 (Sep 4, 2019)

xenon said:


> TCABDPJ?
> 
> 
> Also what exactly has been voted on, a bill to rule out no deal? And, if so, what is being voted on tomorrow if it has tonight passed?


Keep up. That cad* Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.

* maybe I don’t mean cad...


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

I think the only thing that hasn't gone to plan/expectation has been they didn't expect the refusal from the opposition to call an election immediately. That might still prove problematic for them.

The removal of the whip was obviously a deliberate choice.


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

A380 said:


> Keep up. That cad* Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
> 
> * maybe I don’t mean cad...


I'm embarrassed for you.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

Rob Ray said:


> I'm not sure they have tbh.
> 
> They've successfully identified and removed every Remain Tory with enough of a spine to ringlead future rebellions (and given the state of the active grassroots most of those will be replaced by Leavers).
> 
> ...


Well, as I said, I think he'll win an election (at any point this side of Christmas, certainly) and I think Labour have been a disaster. But his route through from prorogation to a general election and then a deal on his terms with the EU has been disrupted. We are probably back to the situation where nobody on either side has a clear route through to anything. He's certainly over reached himself over the last 48 hours. He was also fucking useless in parliament today (not that that is important, but it is funny).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Mayhem, pictured leaving the HoP this evo:


_Worst prime minister ever? I'm not even the worst prime minister this year. _


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I dont buy this "cunning plan" stuff - they are careering from crises to crises making it up as they go along.


Cunning plans can also include thinkng through and opting for the next best way of doing things, always punting to maintain your position/power. Not your ideal but.. You can't polish a turd, but you can talk about how it's better than the smelly, misshapen shit it could be and even though people don't actually believe you, you can silence any and everyone that continues to talk about the smell and appearance etc, eventually many of them will hold their noses and/or get used to the bad smell.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> _Worst prime minister ever? I'm not even the worst prime minister this year. _


_'Not even the best drummer in the Beatles'._


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

i dont think a johnsons election victory is a sure thing at all - certainly its a major risk - but he is going for whipping up the core of the hard brexit vote on a "no deal" ticket - and that in itself provokes a backlash. They will lose seats to the lib dems in the south - and all of their scottish mps, labour vote may well hold up better than expected because of hatred of the tories and tactical voting may be greater than ever.


----------



## xenon (Sep 4, 2019)

A380 said:


> Keep up. That cad* Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson.
> 
> * maybe I don’t mean cad...



That's a bit rubbish.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i dont think a johnsons election victory is a sure thing at all - certainly its a major risk - but he is going for whipping up the core of the hard brexit vote on a "no deal" ticket - and that in itself provokes a backlash. They will lose seats to the lib dems in the south - and all of their scottish mps, labour vote may well hold up better than expected because of hatred of the tories and tactical voting may be greater than ever.


It's not a sure thing at all and tonight certainly disrupts his route to 31st October. But I just can't see Labour re-establishing a sufficient core vote to get them anywhere near power. Everything depends on the circumstances/timing of an election, but I'd see Labour losing more remain votes to the libdems than the Tories lose leavers to Brexit Party. Labour just aren't doing/saying anything to either just attract voters or make natural labour voters feel like the party speaks their has their back or even knows how to talk to them.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Parliament Surrenders To The EU - What Would Diana Think?
> 
> On another shameful day in our so-called democracy, which saw record temperatures across the Southeast of England, rebel MPs vote to betray Brexit as Marxist Terrorist Sympathiser Corbyn vows to block PMs snap election, in a move guaranteed to lower YOUR house price.*
> 
> There you go Express, I fixed it.


There’s a DM/Express/S*n headline generator somewhere

*and probably give you cancer. Oh wait, wrong shitrag.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

killer b said:


> said the other day she wouldn't be standing for Labour in the next election (so hinting she'd be standing for someone else, presumably Brexit).
> 
> One reason not to boot Hoey is simply to avoid the Brexit party getting it's first MP tbh


I thought she was fucking off completely…?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> 2 days ago an election would have been Johnson standing on a platform of (any) Brexit - Brexit purists would still be hearing about no deal, others would still see it as a negotiation tactic for a deal.
> 
> With negotiation tactics "cut off at the knees" by tomorrow's vote (big assumption, the ayes have it) Johnson has made it clear that there isn't a deal to be had before October 31st.  He's been backed into a GE standing on an explicit no deal platform.
> 
> ...



I think you've misunderstood. He'll be running on Brexit with a Deal. The BP will very much be a factor.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Questions I have:

Are we all waiting to see if tomorrow's bill makes it through the Lords? Seriously? Why haven't the 'Rebel Alliance' just gone for a VoNC?

Did Corbyn ask the other party leaders to support a VoNC? If he didnt he's even more useless than I thought.

If he did, and they said no, why isn't he naming and shaming? Fuck is wrong with him?

I feel unsettled. 

Round 2 tomorrow I guess.


----------



## BristolEcho (Sep 4, 2019)

I've never really understood Labours consistent push for an election that they will most likely lose. I know It's probably a shit approach, but Brexit is an absolute shit storm to deliver and whoever does it is going to come out fucked up. It will then be easier to approach a General Election from the other side.

I doubt I'm alone in this but I struggle to have any enthusiasm for a G.E. at all. I'll definitely be leaving social media when it's announced.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think you've misunderstood. He'll be running on Brexit with a Deal. The BP will very much be a factor.



So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...

Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...
> 
> Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.



Let's keep things simple, eh?


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It's not a sure thing at all and tonight certainly disrupts his route to 31st October. But I just can't see Labour re-establishing a sufficient core vote to get them anywhere near power. Everything depends on the circumstances/timing of an election, but I'd see Labour losing more remain votes to the libdems than the Tories lose leavers to Brexit Party. *Labour just aren't doing/saying anything to either just attract voters or make natural labour voters feel like the party speaks their has their back* or even knows how to talk to them.



During an actual GE, that won't _automatically_  stay the case case, or not to the same extent. They'll try and re-run 2017 ..... 
[/------>> General Election thread  ]


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Based on the yougov poll conducted on Mon & Tue (see here), the Electoral Calculus predicts this...

 
* to be taken with a massive pinch of salt, but still...


----------



## Winot (Sep 4, 2019)

Why are the Brexit Party on zero?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

Because they are unlikely to win any seats.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

Winot said:


> Why are the Brexit Party on zero?



FPTP


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...
> 
> Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.



Yes that's basically it. And yet somehow he's on course to stand on that position in a general election and win.


----------



## Winot (Sep 4, 2019)

I was misreading table


----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)

The fact that the name 'Rebel Alliance' has been coined has just lost the Tories/Brexiteers/Cunts a lot of support


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

Winot said:


> I was misreading table



It's a pretty shit table to be fair.


----------



## A380 (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...
> 
> Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.


Not quite.  A deal, as Merkel said, anew Commission could probably do in about 2 years. What is actually being argued about is the scaffolding of what is agreed during the transition


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...
> 
> Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.


It’s all so simple really


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

This new bill, as far as I understand it, centres on there being an extension. In the event of an election I don't think it ties the Tory leader standing in that election to reject No Deal, anymore than any of the other No Deal blocking moves have done in the past. We'd be back at the same thing where there's a new deadline and the default would be No Deal if that date is reached without a deal.

Which means BJ could stand at the coming election on a New Deal with No Deal as a threat platform.
Right?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Based on the yougov poll conducted on Mon & Tue (see here), the Electoral Calculus predicts this...
> 
> View attachment 183139
> * to be taken with a massive pinch of salt, but still...


Maybe wildly optimistic but I think hung parliament, no overall majority. Would stick money on it but only odds I found were 4/6 and I'm not that confident. I def don't see Tories getting a big majority of a hundred


----------



## mauvais (Sep 4, 2019)

ska invita said:


> This new bill, as far as I understand it, centres on there being an extension. In the event of an election I don't think it ties the Tory leader standing in that election to reject No Deal, anymore than any of the other No Deal blocking moves have done in the past. We'd be back at the same thing where there's a new deadline and the default would be No Deal if that dates is reached without a deal.
> 
> Which means BJ could stand at the coming election on a New Deal with No Deal as a threat platform.
> Right?


Correct - Parliament can't bind its successors.

The bill's real purpose is to prevent a no-deal happening before a delayed election, e.g. November.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

Rob Ray said:


> I'm not sure they have tbh. They've successfully identified and removed every Remain Tory with enough of a spine to ringlead future rebellions (and given the state of the active grassroots most of those will be replaced by Leavers). Which means they'll go into the election on mostly a full Leave slate, likely removing most of the threat from Farage's crew, having rhetorically set a weak and fractured Labour up in the soft Remain camp where it'll be competing with the Lib Dems etc and potentially loses a load of voters in Leave heartlands.
> 
> The numbers are sketchy at best for Labour here, and look good for Johnson, with a strong possibility of breaking the deadlock which afflicted May. I'm not saying it's all going according to plan, but it doesn't look like a mess for him either.


Backing that view, The Telegraph are painting the whip removal as 'Day of the Remainer purge: how Dominic Cummings ranted at Tory rebels in Downing Street'

Telegraph have got a new paywall system the bypass isnt working on anymore, but this paints the picture:
"If the 15 Tory rebels who headed to 10 Downing Street were hoping that Boris Johnson and his team would 'love bomb' them with entreaties not to vote against the Government, they were sorely mistaken.  "I don't know who any of you are!" Mr Johnson's chief adviser Dominic Cummings yelled at a some of them as they waited to meet the Prime Minister outside the Cabinet room. The former head of the Vote Leave campaign - wearing his trademark crumpled white shirt - continued to hector the smartly dressed MPs in this way for a "considerable period of time". Mr Cummings should of course have been able to pick out a few of them including former Cabinet ministers Greg Clark, Philip Hammond, David Gauke..>"

That may well be spin, but I think the notion of PURGE fits the pattern of a wider plan.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Winot said:


> Why are the Brexit Party on zero?


Currently on 299 seats, and falling...


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

One does wonder whether Boris, assuming today's bill passes, might try to resurrect May's deal.  The ERG might support it now (given that no deal has been taken off the table and they now control the government), as will the ex-Tory rebels and the group around Kinnock.  He could then get it passed before October 31st, call an election and simultaneously claim credit for Brexit whilst denying the Brexit that was achieved was anything to do with him.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> One does wonder whether Boris, assuming today's bill passes, might try to resurrect May's deal.  The ERG might support it now (given that no deal has been taken off the table and they now control the government), as will the ex-Tory rebels and the group around Kinnock.  He could then get it passed before October 31st, call an election and simultaneously claim credit for Brexit whilst denying the Brexit that was achieved was anything to do with him.


Can you imagine the utter humiliation for the government if after everything that's happened they try to bring back a deal rejected thrice by the commons?


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Can you imagine the utter humiliation for the government if after everything that's happened they try to bring back a deal rejected thrice by the commons?



I think if the last few days have proved anything, it is that they derive pleasure from utter humiliation.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> One does wonder whether Boris, assuming today's bill passes, might try to resurrect May's deal.  The ERG might support it now (given that no deal has been taken off the table and they now control the government), as will the ex-Tory rebels and the group around Kinnock.  He could then get it passed before October 31st, call an election and simultaneously claim credit for Brexit whilst denying the Brexit that was achieved was anything to do with him.


No deal hasn’t been taken off the table - it’s still the default and more likely than ever.

What’s bozo’s (cumming’s?) strategy? If there’s a general election - assuming the tories win - is BoZo planning on bringing some slightly modified form of may’s Deal back and getting it through with his increased majority? Or is it actually to go for no deal? I’m not sure...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Can you imagine the utter humiliation for the government if after everything that's happened they try to bring back a deal rejected thrice by the commons?


And lost again with the ERG & several cab ministers voting it down!


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> I think if the last few days have proved anything, it is that they derive pleasure from utter humiliation.


They'd be humiliated to a whole new level when the speaker told them where they could put the deal


----------



## Poi E (Sep 4, 2019)

I think the strategy is to be first PM of England and Wales.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Dominic cummings wants brexit, but he doesn’t like the Tory party does he? Is he trying to destroy it?



Possibly the best explanation of the Cummings phenomenon that I’ve seen so far...


----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

I think anything less than No Deal will now be perceived as betrayal by a minority large enough to cause the Tories problems. Anything with a backstop attached isn't acceptable, hence trying to deliver No Deal without taking responsibility for No Deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

ska invita said:


> This new bill, as far as I understand it, centres on there being an extension. In the event of an election I don't think it ties the Tory leader standing in that election to reject No Deal
> Right?


How could any bill bind a future (majority) government in such a way?


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> What’s bozo’s (cumming’s?) strategy? If there’s a general election - assuming the tories win - is BoZo planning on bringing some slightly modified form of may’s Deal back and getting it through with his increased majority?


I think so - bigger majority, ditch the DUP, Mays Deal tweaked with the border in the sea so no Backstop
I dont believe they want a No Deal, its jsut there for tactical purposes


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

Surely it's better for Labour to fight an election once it's clear Johnson's promise to leave the EU on Oct 31st has come to naught?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper mess...so it looks like organised chaos and they're letting no deal happen and blaming everyone else. They're a useless shower.
Cant understand why the country isn't going on strike in protest at the sheer uselessness of the government. 
Surely at this stage the people living in the UK deserve to be involved much more in their future?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Surely it's better for Labour to fight an election once it's clear Johnson's promise to leave the EU on Oct 31st has come to naught?



Anything else would look incredibly inconsistent and cowardly imo.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I think anything less than No Deal will now be perceived as betrayal by a minority large enough to cause the Tories problems. Anything with a backstop attached isn't acceptable, hence trying to deliver No Deal without taking responsibility for No Deal.




this is it - its a charade. the deal they want -no irish backstop - they are never going to get. they know it as well. I think the "strategy" is to throw so much shit that other people get the blame for the disaster and they somehow stay in power.
The daily express front page - "parliament surrenders to the EU" - is exactly the narrative they want. Its delusional, unhinged - but very very dangerous. A large chunk of voters see brexit as a national liberation struggle - so arguing about the pain and disruption of "independence" is something they can shrug off as the price of "liberation" - in fact they partly welcome it as it plays into their narrative of struggle and sacrifice.
Thing is - johnson doesn't believe this nonsense for a second, but loves playing his role as brexit's churchill.
How to counter this? I would guess to expose johnson and co as charlatans at every turn.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Anything else would look incredibly inconsistent and cowardly imo.


So you think after this thing (presumably) goes through today and Johnson tables a motion to go to the electorate, Corbyn, Swinson et al will have to say "bring it" rather than "after Halloween" or else appear like shiteouts?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> How to counter this? I would guess to expose johnson and co as charlatans at every turn.


What does this mean and how is it to be done?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What does this mean and how is it to be done?


Presumably for Labour to do it. P.3 of the Mirror


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So you think after this thing (presumably) goes through today and Johnson tables a motion to go to the electorate, Corbyn, Swinson et al will have to say "bring it" rather than "after Halloween" or else appear like shiteouts?



After saying so long that their goal is a GE, I think the general perception of shiteoutness will be unavoidable and very damaging.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 4, 2019)

This is quite funny 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Presumably for Labour to do it. P.3 of the Mirror


Sure but how? By getting experts to tell people why X is wrong, by 'exposing' the government as liars? 

The 'exposing' of the claims on that bloody bus, or the millions of hours spent 'proving' that Trump is a liar - at best useless, more probably actually helpful to those being 'exposed'.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

I fear very much that none of this will matter in an election. All the games, all the insight and bullshit and lies...it'll be just Wacky Blonde who was on telly Vs Evil Commie

And that's how the vote will go.


----------



## alsoknownas (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> After saying so long that their goal is a GE, I think the general perception of shiteoutness will be unavoidable and very damaging.


No, they're already communicating in terms of trying to tie an election to an immovable date legally. No elephants to be harmed, etc.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

Dominic Cummings is nothing other than a real version of Cal Richards, the  fucker!


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> No, they're already communicating in terms of trying to tie an election to an immovable date legally. No elephants to be harmed, etc.



Been having trouble keeping up the last couple of days... that’s better than it could be.  Haven’t seen how the right wing press is spinning it, mind.

I would guess the WWII narrative is about to go into super-overdrive (assuming that hasn’t already happened).


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I fear very much that none of this will matter in an election. All the games, all the insight and bullshit and lies...it'll be just Wacky Blonde who was on telly Vs Evil Commie
> 
> And that's how the vote will go.


Pension age to 75, their houses flogged to pay for care, no free TV licence and no more bus passes. That should help.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever posted about this but didn't want to post any tweets but me, well i don't mind. Something really dodgy going on here:



.....


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Been having trouble keeping up the last couple of days... that’s better than it could be.  Haven’t seen how the right wing press is spinning it, mind.
> 
> I would guess the WWII narrative is about to go into super-overdrive (assuming that hasn’t already happened).


Pissed on his own chips by sacking Churchill's grandson on the anniversary of the day war was declared. The oldies won't like that.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

they want bj to be forced to ask for an extension and look like a right tit in front of his own party (again) in order to maximise damage from the Brexit Party in eventual future GE. 

there'll be some lovely "Game Theory" case studies to be made out of this for generations to come


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Poi E said:


> I think the strategy is to be first PM of England and Wales.


the premier premier of england and wales?


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Pissed on his own chips by sacking Churchill's grandson on the anniversary of the day war was declared. The oldies won't like that.



Though Soames could just revert to a Liberal like his granddad was originally.
Though shooting striking miners might prove problematic.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 4, 2019)

A red white and blue Lubyanka to be constructed for the coming 650 show trials


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the premier premier of england and wales?


((Wales))


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the premier premier of england and wales?



Soon after to become the premier premier of England.  Possibly.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2019)

The hated Tony Blair warned on Monday for opponents not to be manoeuvred into an election.
The art of war says to engage the enemy at a time and a place of your choosing, not theirs.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Pissed on his own chips by sacking Churchill's grandson on the anniversary of the day war was declared. The oldies won't like that.



I don't know, maybe they'll compare it to their own experience of having disappointing Remoaner grandchildren.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> ((Wales))
> 
> View attachment 183150


could you show me the darts offer?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Soon after to become the premier premier of England.  Possibly.


and then reduced to being the premier of one of the heptarchy kingdoms, if not slaughtered out of hand


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> could you show me the darts offer?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> A red white and blue Lubyanka to be constructed for the coming 650 show trials


by no means. the trials will be held in westminster hall, where all 650 will lie in state. then they'll lie again in parliament square once they've been executed


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> by no means. the trials will be held in westminster hall, where all 650 will lie in state. then they'll lie again in parliament square once they've been executed



"No need to get up, Mr Rees-Mogg."


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The hated Tony Blair warned on Monday for opponents not to be manoeuvred into an election.
> The art of war says to engage the enemy at a time and a place of your choosing, not theirs.





philosophical said:


> One thing Blair said this morning was to not go along with Boris Johnson calling an immediate election, or more particularly an election before the brexit mess is played out a lot more.
> He says an election would be a mash up of brexit and Corbyn 'fear', when that combination would play into Boris Johnsons hand.
> In the Art of War it says to engage the enemy at a time and a place of your choosing, not theirs which makes sense to me.
> Johnson should be back footed and wrong footed as much as possible, his attempt to set the agenda with Cummings needs fucking up.



Getting a bit repetitive phil.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

So ken Clarke - father of the house - kicked out the party (or should that be The Party).

This doesn’t sound very johnson-esque. Thought he was a manipulator and a flatterer.

I assume it’s all cummings’ idea.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I fear very much that none of this will matter in an election. All the games, all the insight and bullshit and lies...it'll be just Wacky Blonde who was on telly Vs Evil Commie
> 
> And that's how the vote will go.


Got into a bit of a ding song with a mate who is far more loyal Labour than I am about that. Add onto that, I think Johnson-sceptics are far more likely to hold their nose and vote blue than Corbyn-sceptics are to hold their nose and vote (commie) red.

At this point, I'm of a "just get the Tories out" mindset.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> This doesn’t sound very johnson-esque. Thought he was a manipulator and a flatterer.


whatever else johnson is, he's a liar first and foremost.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 183153


and a maximum of 78 until johnson receives his p45.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Pension age to 75, their houses flogged to pay for care, no free TV licence and no more bus passes. That should help.



Boris isn't going to run on the same platform as May and he may even dredge up some p that 'charisma' the leave voters see in him.

He's also going to offer an insane amount of bribes (with no intention of actually supplying them) to get the conservatives back in for another 5 years with a clear majority.


----------



## Poot (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Pension age to 75, their houses flogged to pay for care, no free TV licence and no more bus passes. That should help.


I visited a Tory voter of my acquaintance at the weekend who fits this demographic. Even as she was explaining what a nob BJ is and how they're a fucking shambles I could see behind her eyes that she's still going to vote Tory. I don't think she's alone, and I don't think anything at all is going to make a difference while there is no perceived choice. I suppose the Lib Dems might do alright but honestly I think dyed in the wool older Tories are really clinging on regardless of every fucking thing.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Poot said:


> I visited a Tory voter of my acquaintance at the weekend who fits this demographic. Even as she was explaining what a nob BJ is and how they're a fucking shambles I could see behind her eyes that she's still going to vote Tory. I don't think she's alone, and I don't think anything at all is going to make a difference while there is no perceived choice. I suppose the Lib Dems might do alright but honestly I think dyed in the wool older Tories are really clinging on regardless of every fucking thing.


Maybe, but remember that we're where we are with Johnson unable to call a GE & stuck in the shitshow of his own making precisely because their demographic has failed to give them a large commons majority since 1987.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

Fuck it, I'mma play Crusader Kings 2 all day. Far less complicated than all this shite. (I'm 130 hours in and only just getting to grips with about a quarter of it.)


----------



## Poot (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but remember that we're where we are with Johnson unable to call a GE & stuck in the shitshow of his own making precisely because their demographic has failed to give them a large commons majority since 1987.


I think she's viewing BJ as a blip 

I mean, she used lots of other words, too, but yeah. A blip.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but remember that we're where we are with Johnson unable to call a GE & stuck in the shitshow of his own making precisely because their demographic has failed to give them a large commons majority since 1987.


Yeah, so can Labour still be seen as shit-outs if Johnson doesn't actually get the numbers for an election? As usual Labour's position is unclear. What would they campaign on? They can't go remain because that would cost them too many votes. So presumably vanilla Brexit, which will presumably alienate the Remaniacs still hoping for a second ref.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

Hopefully Cameron and Osborn will form a new Party.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Poot said:


> I think she's viewing BJ as a blip
> 
> I mean, she used lots of other words, too, but yeah. A blip.


Well, yeah...they're not at 30% in polling without a lot of folk actually saying they'll vote for the fuckers. But, since the late 1980's the fabled electoral juggernaut of the C&UP has not been able to amass a sizeable majority. Hence coalition, FTPA, referendum...


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

Just thought this would be a fun pic to repeat-post at this point.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Been having trouble keeping up the last couple of days... that’s better than it could be.  Haven’t seen how the right wing press is spinning it, mind.
> 
> I would guess the WWII narrative is about to go into super-overdrive (assuming that hasn’t already happened).


MrSki put up the front page of today’s Express last night, it’s gone with summat about it being the day we surrender to the EU (with analysis on pages 2-5 and 11-12 - probably summat along the lines of how Diana would never have let this happen…and then how the EU murdered her…).


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Just thought this would be a fun pic to repeat-post at this point.
> 
> View attachment 183156


there are comparatively few people i would not mind if they had an awful accident and lost the use of their legs but neil horan's one of them.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Yeah, so can Labour still be seen as shit-outs if Johnson doesn't actually get the numbers for an election? As usual Labour's position is unclear. What would they campaign on? They can't go remain because that would cost them too many votes. So presumably vanilla Brexit, which will presumably alienate the Remaniacs still hoping for a second ref.


Actually, as Labour's position appears to be just part of the 'opposition alliance's' current strategy to nail no 'No-Deal', then move onto VoNC/GE it looks clearer to me than it has done in some while.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Yeah, so can Labour still be seen as shit-outs if Johnson doesn't actually get the numbers for an election? As usual Labour's position is unclear. What would they campaign on? They can't go remain because that would cost them too many votes. So presumably vanilla Brexit, which will presumably alienate the Remaniacs still hoping for a second ref.



In power, Labour would negotiate a deal, likely Norway + arrangement. They will then call a Referendum and allow MPs a free vote. Yes, it's not an easy soundbite but at this point is at least honest and doesn't involve having to kick the minority view out of the party like the Tories have ended up doing.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 183153


I know it’s probably just me, but the Leave.eu livery still puts me in mind of the old Tesco Value branding.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> In power, Labour would negotiate a deal, likely Norway + arrangement. They will then call a Referendum and allow MPs a free vote. Yes, it's not an easy soundbite but at this point is at least honest and doesn't involve having to kick the minority view out of the party like the Tories have ended up doing.


Can that be sold to the electorate, though?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Just thought this would be a fun pic to repeat-post at this point.
> 
> View attachment 183156


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

I tell you what, he's totally lost the plot since he disbanded The Divine Comedy


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Can that be sold to the electorate, though?



Tricky, but probably easier under GE conditions than at the moment when Emily Maitlis etc just shout "You're for Remain" at any Labour spokesman every two seconds regardless of what they're saying.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Tricky, but probably easier under GE conditions than at the moment when Emily Maitlis etc just shout "You're for Remain" at any Labour spokesman every two seconds regardless of what they're saying.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 4, 2019)

Corbyn better than no-deal Brexit, say investment banks as anti-capitalist Labour wins unlikely new City fans



Lols


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Corbyn better than no-deal Brexit, say investment banks as anti-capitalist Labour wins unlikely new City fans
> 
> 
> 
> Lols


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Corbyn better than no-deal Brexit, say investment banks as anti-capitalist Labour wins unlikely new City fans


Surprising, given his longstanding red support.

For Arsenal *bm-tsh*

Coat.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Surprising, given his longstanding red support.
> 
> For Arsenal *bm-tsh*
> 
> Coat.


Man, that's a get your coat, waterproof trousers, cagoule, hiking boots, tent, sleeping bag and woolly hat kind of joke


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

I'll be seeing you, then


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 4, 2019)

But we’ll not be seeing your pic.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 4, 2019)

Stability and a solid workable plan is what the city want, irrespective of the end product. Jezkins and the shadow chancellor have been trying to sell their product to the city for a while
Now. McDonnell personally has garnered a bit of respect, if not any support


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> I'll be seeing you, then


is this what you were looking for?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Saying he'll stand again as an independent candidate. Another seat lost by Johnson.


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Poot said:


> I visited a Tory voter of my acquaintance at the weekend who fits this demographic. Even as she was explaining what a nob BJ is and how they're a fucking shambles I could see behind her eyes that she's still going to vote Tory. I don't think she's alone, and I don't think anything at all is going to make a difference while there is no perceived choice. I suppose the Lib Dems might do alright but honestly I think dyed in the wool older Tories are really clinging on regardless of every fucking thing.



Yep.

I've seen the same.

Full of bitterness about the direction of travel but going along with it anyway because years, decades, of ideology leaves them nowhere else to go (apart from UKIP/BP in the euros)


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Saying he'll stand again as an independent candidate. Another seat lost by Johnson.


Yes I think he is a popular local MP.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yep.
> 
> I've seen the same.
> 
> Full of bitterness about the direction of travel but going along with it anyway because years, decades, of ideology leaves them nowhere else to go (apart from UKIP/BP in the euros)



Exactly.  Even if some of them could tolerate Labour under Blair they were seldom likely to vote for him.  They'll never vote for Corbyn.  The best Labour can hope for is that they just don't turn up to vote.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

I'm looking forward to what Ken Clarke has to say lol


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Exactly.  Even if some of them could tolerate Labour under Blair they were seldom likely to vote for him.  They'll never vote for Corbyn.  The best Labour can hope for is that they just don't turn up to vote.



Which is plausible. I've heard some saying they won't vote or will spoil.


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Further idle musings...

If, and it's a big if, Farage stands down the Brexit Party from the GE to let Johnson have a free run at it would UKIP step into the gap and grab a chunk of those voters?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Which is plausible. I've heard some saying they won't vote or will spoil.



I've heard a good few talking about how they will never vote again on the basis of this.
40 years too fucking late, but hey ho.

In my constituency they despise Anna Soubry, but vote for her anyway.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Further idle musings...
> 
> If, and it's a big if, Farage stands down the Brexit Party from the GE to let Johnson have a free run at it would UKIP step into the gap and grab a chunk of those voters?



No, UKIP are a totally busted flush.  They were really only ever the Farage party which was bolstered by a couple of loans from the tories.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> View attachment 183165 But we’ll not be seeing your pic.





Pickman's model said:


> is this what you were looking for?


I tried three bloody times to sort that out, and even changed the picture. If you quote it, you can see it, I think.

I will, of course, be blaming this on Brexit.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Further idle musings...
> 
> If, and it's a big if, Farage stands down the Brexit Party from the GE to let Johnson have a free run at it would UKIP step into the gap and grab a chunk of those voters?



No fucking way


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Further idle musings...
> 
> If, and it's a big if, Farage stands down the Brexit Party from the GE to let Johnson have a free run at it would UKIP step into the gap and grab a chunk of those voters?



He'll only do this if Johnson commits to a No Deal exit, and Johnson won't do that because he won't take responsibility for a No Deal exit (plus Farage is counting on spinning any deal as a betrayal which keeps his lucrative political career going for another decade).


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

One thing that been good about recent political events is its making parties become that bit closer to what they claim to be, and slightly less uneasy coalitions, as MPs leave/stand down/get deselected/split/'dont recognise their own parties anymore' etc. Hopefully that trend will continue. Though in theory that should mean a mass pile in to the Lib Dems in the fullness of time...probably depends how good an election result the LDs have. En marche!!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

ska invita said:


> One thing that been good about recent political events is its making parties become that bit closer to what they claim to be, and slightly less uneasy coalitions, as MPs leave/stand down/get deselected/split/'dont recognise their own parties anymore' etc. Hopefully that trend will continue. Though in theory that should mean a mass pile in to the Lib Dems in the fullness of time...probably depends how good an election result the LDs have. En marche!!


Well your final two words show how this might not be a good thing. But yes, I think we kind of take for granted that established parties will be around for ever, but they're not necessarily. I think it's conceivable at least that the Tories could be destroyed by this, but the interests they represent will have somewhere else to go that may be just as bad. In Aus, the 'tories' are called 'liberals' already.


----------



## souljacker (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yep.
> 
> I've seen the same.
> 
> Full of bitterness about the direction of travel but going along with it anyway because years, decades, of ideology leaves them nowhere else to go (apart from UKIP/BP in the euros)



Add in a very strong desire to never ever vote for the Marxist Corbyn!


----------



## rekil (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 183158
> 
> View attachment 183159


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

souljacker said:


> Add in a very strong desire to never ever vote for the Marxist Corbyn!


But should Corbyn or Labour care about that? They got 40% to vote for their 'marxist' last time. Getting those people back out to vote Labour, along with as many young voters as possible, is the trick here, surely, far more than attracting disaffected right-wingers.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> He'll only do this if Johnson commits to a No Deal exit, and Johnson won't do that because he won't take responsibility for a No Deal exit (plus Farage is counting on spinning any deal as a betrayal which keeps his lucrative political career going for another decade).


It's the key to the corbyn 'strategy'.
He knows, better than anyone, that it is essential not to let Johnson stand as the 'all things to all men' candidate before 31/10. 
If there's a GE before that date Johnson will present as a 'No-Dealer' to his own loons & the Faragists...and as a (states)man/deal-maker to his other deluded flock. If Corbyn can force the GE to after 31/10 he's got him where he wants him, one way or another.


----------



## souljacker (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But should Corbyn or Labour care about that? They got 40% to vote for their 'marxist' last time. Getting those people back out to vote Labour, along with as many young voters as possible, is the trick here, surely, far more than attracting disaffected right-wingers.



No, not at all. Just making the point like.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

genuine lol

eta: supposedly#anofficerandagentleman is trending now


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 4, 2019)

copliker said:


> View attachment 183168


Indeed.

https://www.urban75.net/forums/search/89214523/


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

As I’ve just posted on another thread we may well see the treat at lunchtime of Johnson’s first and last PMQs.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Yep.
> 
> I've seen the same.
> 
> Full of bitterness about the direction of travel but going along with it anyway because years, decades, of ideology leaves them nowhere else to go (apart from UKIP/BP in the euros)


This works both ways tbf, plenty of tory and labour voters who vote that way because they always did without sharing much in terms of political outlook. Is changing although older voters more likely to vote same way as always I suppose


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> So let me get this straight, if I follow correctly...
> 
> Johnson wants a deal, which he'll get by threatening full no deal.  After today/tomorrow, barring parliamentary shenanigans, he won't be able to threaten no deal.  So the only way to get a deal via no deal is an election, where he'll tell people that a majority will reverse today/tomorrow's no no deal vote, getting no deal back on the table in order to get a deal, despite there not being time post election to negotiate a deal (via no deal) before October 31st.  So the no deal he says he doesn't want (because of the deal it gets) and currently can't have is in the end what happens.



No, if he wins an election with a decent majority he can pass May's deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Though Soames could just revert to a Liberal like his granddad was originally.
> Though shooting striking miners might prove problematic.



Yeah he'll struggle to find any.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> As I’ve just posted on another thread we may well see the treat at lunchtime of Johnson’s first and last PMQs.


12pm.
He lost his control after the vote announcement last night. Be interesting to see if he can hold his temper in for a couple of hours today.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Getting closer to deploying the VONC.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 12pm.
> He lost his control after the vote announcement last night. Be interesting to see if he can hold his temper in for a couple of hours today.



I reckon we'll see full on ugly thug Johnson today.  It doesn't take much for bumbling, lovable rogue mask to slip.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I reckon we'll see full on ugly thug Johnson today.  It doesn't take much for bumbling, lovable rogue mask to slip.


Every little helps. Given that what popularity he does have rests on nothing much beyond that act, I think he could lose it really very easily. He might be thinking that bringing Rees-Mogg into government wasn't such a smart idea too after last night.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I reckon we'll see full on ugly thug Johnson today.  It doesn't take much for bumbling, lovable rogue mask to slip.



Oh, I do hope so.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Well your final two words show how this might not be a good thing. But yes, I think we kind of take for granted that established parties will be around for ever, but they're not necessarily. I think it's conceivable at least that the Tories could be destroyed by this, but the interests they represent will have somewhere else to go that may be just as bad. In Aus, the 'tories' are called 'liberals' already.


I dont think it destroys the Tories....the membership are probably loving it on the whole, so far not unpoplular in the polls either

Let the others Marche on if they want to - would rather politicians were honest about what their politics really are...all this red tory, blue labour stuff needs to go. The slow collapse of the centre is a good thing, and those who want to go down with it should do so.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

It'd be quite nice if this saw the end of party politics, and MPs just voted depending on each vote.

Won't happen, but, y'know, it'd be nice.


----------



## Santino (Sep 4, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> It'd be quite nice if this saw the end of party politics, and MPs just voted depending on each vote.
> 
> Won't happen, but, y'know, it'd be nice.


How do you know who to elect as an MP?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> It'd be quite nice if this saw the end of party politics, and MPs just voted depending on each vote.
> 
> Won't happen, but, y'know, it'd be nice.


do you mean as instantly recallable delegates?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 12pm.
> He lost his control after the vote announcement last night. Be interesting to see if he can hold his temper in for a couple of hours today.


he'll brain bercow with the mace, mark my words


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

If there is a successful VoNC, does BJ stay as Tory party leader in the unlikely event of corbyn forming a coalition with LD/SNP/possibly the 21 martyrs?


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

Santino said:


> How do you know who to elect as an MP?


Because of what they say and, more importantly, do?


Pickman's model said:


> do you mean as instantly recallable delegates?


Yeah, or something. Look, it's not like I've actually thought this through


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he'll brain bercow with the mace, mark my words


With his rebels choosing to retain their seats over his left shoulder, he'll get confused about who to call an "Honourable friend".


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> If there is a successful VoNC, does BJ stay as Tory party leader in the unlikely event of corbyn forming a coalition with LD/SNP/possibly the 21 martyrs?


yes, unless he resigns or there's a successful leadership challenge


----------



## andysays (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> If there is a successful VoNC, does BJ stay as Tory party leader in the unlikely event of corbyn forming a coalition with LD/SNP/possibly the 21 martyrs?


Yes, we're talking about a VoNC in him as PM,  not as Tory leader


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> If there is a successful VoNC, does BJ stay as Tory party leader in the unlikely event of corbyn forming a coalition with LD/SNP/possibly the 21 martyrs?


yes. he will head the queue marching onto the ships at tilbury, the first step of the former people's journey to south georgia


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

I think he might go red in the face, depart from any script he has and snap at critics. 
If his affable mask slips, as littlebabyjesus has mentioned, he has little left. He will quickly be perceived as a nutter who should be kept away from the toolbox.


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I reckon we'll see full on ugly thug Johnson today.  It doesn't take much for bumbling, lovable rogue mask to slip.


be prepared to hear a lot of 'No Surrender to the I..  Jeremy Corbyn'


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> With his rebels choosing to retain their seats over his left shoulder, he'll get confused about who to call an "Honourable friend".


he will have a meltdown and it won't be pretty. but it will be amusing.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> be prepared to hear a lot of 'No Surrender to the I..  Jeremy Corbyn'



That and Corbyn has stopped Brexit etc.  Those are going to be the main themes from now on until the end of the election.


----------



## andysays (Sep 4, 2019)

Not sure if it's been mentioned, or actually if it's still relevant, but the judge has thrown out the legal challenge to Johnson's parliamentary shutdown, according to BBC website


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Here we go.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

Isn't the first question in PMQs supposed to be a softball?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Surrender bill mentions. Can we count them. 
2 so far?


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

1 question - two mentions of Surrender already


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Isn't the first question in PMQs supposed to be a softball?


it was  - the list of engagements


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

"Dither and delay" seems to be another buzzphrase he's trying to get going.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Mask is slipping.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I think he might go red in the face, depart from any script he has and snap at critics.
> If his affable mask slips, as littlebabyjesus has mentioned, he has little left. He will quickly be perceived as a nutter who should be kept away from the toolbox.



You know we're desperate when we're left with hoping they fuck up.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 4, 2019)

Calling Corbyn a chlorinated chicken is undoubtedly the path forwards to resolve the Brexit mess. Why didn’t I think of that?

What a leader to have in a time of crisis.....


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

That pointing finger thing is proper bully boy.  Make sure people know their place.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know we're desperate when we're left with hoping they fuck up.


Not desperate. This was foreseeable for a long time. Good to watch.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 4, 2019)

Has Raab been chasing the dragon before entering the chamber?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Really bad jokes from bozo.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

General strike? Eh?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Shit or bust? He has thrown the mask on the floor.


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Shit or bust? He has thrown the mask on the floor.


he should be suspended from the House for that!


Another 3 'Surrenders'


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Surrendering Scottish fish.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Speaking so quickly! Ranting!


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Surrendering Scottish fish.



It's real Punch & Judy stuff.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Surrendering Scottish fish.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

5 surrenders inc fish.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> 5 surrenders inc fish.



More than that surely.  It's now "the surrender bill".


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> More than that surely.  It's now "the surrender bill".


I left the room briefly to get lunch out the fridge.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You know we're desperate when we're left with hoping they fuck up.


Yeah, I feel like that. It's funny as fuck watching the calculating and failing that's going on on both sides of brexit, but every twist and turn emphasises that it's a game being played by them. It's playing out between different bits of the state, court executive and parliament and different branches of neo-liberalism. The 2016 vote was a 'moment', an ambiguous moment certainly in that there were various and conflicting reasons why people voted leave, but a moment still. We're not back with business as usual, to say the least, but there's not been much material progress from a left and working class perspective.


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Worth watching pmqs on catch up?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, I feel like that. It's funny as fuck watching the calculating and failing that's going on on both sides of brexit, but every twist and turn emphasises that it's a game being played by them. It's playing out between different bits of the state, court executive and parliament and different branches of neo-liberalism. The 2016 vote was a 'moment', an ambiguous moment certainly in that there were various and conflicting reasons why people voted leave, but a moment still. We're not back with business as usual, to say the least, but there's not been much material progress from a left and working class perspective.


A split Tory party, their vote eroded by the Bexit party, is excellent.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Worth watching pmqs on catch up?



I've tried catch-up after urban threads, and the threads are usually better.
Granted, I'm not normally contrubuting...


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

I think I've spotted a tic he has when he's lying.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Attacking Sadiq now. Weird tangent.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think I've spotted a tic he has when he's lying.


Start compiling a video montage now.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

<hears the sound of a million fact-checkers' keyboards clicking..>


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Attacking Sadiq now. Weird tangent.


its been a popular thing on the right for a while now, sadiq has ruined london. Ties into the _islamification of europe_ shit bubbling away behind.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Start compiling a video montage now.



It's in the eyes.  Like he knows his smile is false and is overcompensating in an effort to make it look sincere.
Theresa May had a mouth tic, like the words tasted really nasty when coming out but she was fighting to suppress it.

If I was clever with media stuff I'd do a montage, but I'm not.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> A split Tory party, their vote eroded by the Bexit party, is excellent.


Surely this all drains support from the brexit party? The only circumstances in which farage's lot stop Johnson winning are if he asks for an extension, or at a lesser level, if they revive May's deal with a few frills and bows.  Whatever crazed path Johnson and his cabal are on, they are unlikely to do any of that. All bets are off in terms of outcomes, but the one thing that seems clear is that the tories are better placed that labour for an election.


----------



## stdP (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Start compiling a video montage now.



If you compiled a montage of Johnson's lies over the years, it's likely to be longer than this tenure as Prime Minister.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> A split Tory party, their vote eroded by the Bexit party, is excellent.



That is absolutely true. But I don't feel like we are capitalising on it. At the moment at least.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> All bets are off in terms of outcomes, but the one thing that seems clear is that the tories are better placed that labour for an election.


I don't think that's true at all. If it's an election with six weeks' lead-up, I can only see the polls going in one direction.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That is absolutely true. But I don't feel like we are capitalising on it. At the moment at least.


The ground is being laid.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

What's the political betting?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

stdP said:


> If you compiled a montage of Johnson's lies over the years, it's likely to be longer than this tenure as Prime Minister.



True. 
Very few clear lies in the last 5 mins.

Creative cherry-picking of stats seems to be the same as telling the truth to him.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the political betting?



Hung Parliament with Tory's as largest party seems like the bookies favourite, but then I suppose that would just give us some sort of GNU. 

Which is how I've seen this playing out since the start, but I'm worried the handful of decent left Labour MP's will participate in it I guess.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Surely this all drains support from the brexit party? The only circumstances in which farage's lot stop Johnson winning are if he asks for an extension, or at a lesser level, if they revive May's deal with a few frills and bows.  Whatever crazed path Johnson and his cabal are on, they are unlikely to do any of that. All bets are off in terms of outcomes, but the one thing that seems clear is that the tories are better placed that labour for an election.



It's one hell of a bet. Go scorched earth in terms of Scotland, London and Con/Lib seats in the South, waging you can pick up enough Labour voters in the North and Midlands with a culture war. It's not a bet I'd put good money on tbh. (It's essentially what Mason has been advocating Labour do the other way around, and I think he's wrong too).


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hung Parliament with Tory's as largest party seems like the bookies favourite, but then I suppose that would just give us some sort of GNU.
> 
> Which is how I've seen this playing out since the start, but I'm worried the handful of decent left Labour MP's will participate in it I guess.


I think hung parliament with Labour as largest party is very doable from here. Think what was the bookies' favourite six weeks out from the last election. A campaign can only go badly for the Tories - Johnson has already passed 'peak boris', imo.


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

Brexit is not an end, but a means to Farage et al - they are not going to back off: by setting a condition no Tory leader could agree to - running an election campaign with an explicit promise of no deal - they guarantee there will be no pact, and a sizeable chunk of the brexit-voting electorate will vote for them whatever.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think hung parliament with Labour as largest party is very doable. Think what was the bookies' favourite six weeks out from the last election. A campaign can only go badly for the Tories - Johnson has already passed 'peak boris', imo.



Hmmmm. It's possible. But then there's the danger Corbyn goes into coalition with the liberals which would be awful. 

The ruling class would shit themselves with laughter if Corbyn revoked A50 and then got eviscerated at the next election.


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

God, Jo Swinson is unbelievably shit


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> It's one hell of a bet. Go scorched earth in terms of Scotland, London and Con/Lib seats in the South, waging you can pick up enough Labour voters in the North and Midlands with a culture war. It's not a bet I'd put good money on tbh. (It's essentially what Mason has been advocating Labour do the other way around, and I think he's wrong too).



High stakes certainly - except Johnson probably wouldn't mind being in opposition if he stays leader of the Tories.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> God Jo Swinson is unbelievably shit



It's like watching a sheep attempt to recite Shakespeare.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> God, Jo Swinson is unbelievably shit



Boris handled that one pretty well.  More comfortable because he knew there were no more difficult ones coming.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hmmmm. It's possible. But then there's the danger Corbyn goes into coalition with the liberals which would be awful.
> 
> The ruling class would shit themselves with laughter if Corbyn revoked A50 and then got eviscerated at the next election.


Yes that is a danger. More likely perhaps would be a coalition with the SNP, if that gave him the numbers. The SNP would be in a bit of a bind over that - they'd surely want Indyref2 in return, but difficult to demand both indyref2 and brexitref2, given that the main legitimating basis for requesting the former is brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes that is a danger. More likely perhaps would be a coalition with the SNP, if that gave him the numbers. The SNP would be in a bit of a bind over that - they'd surely want Indyref2 in return, but difficult to demand both indyref2 and brexitref2, given that the main legitimating basis for requesting the former is brexit.



They might need both. 

I see the 'Rebel Alliance' is holding up well - Sturgeon already in election mode and taking the fight to Labour.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think I've spotted a tic he has when he's lying.


He keeps taking out and replacing his pen(?) out of his left pocket.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Labour don't actually need to support a GE for it to happen if Tories, SNP and DUP do.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't think that's true at all. If it's an election with six weeks' lead-up, I can only see the polls going in one direction.


It's all a mess in all sorts of ways and it's no longer a pendulum of support shifting from one party to another. But it's hard to deny the polls are showing a substantial lead at the moment.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> It's one hell of a bet. Go scorched earth in terms of Scotland, London and Con/Lib seats in the South, waging you can pick up enough Labour voters in the North and Midlands with a culture war.



I'm not sure Johnson could get through a national campaign without at least one Gordon Brown-style hot mic moment in which he referred to all Northerners as pie-eating monkeys. He's probably already done so in his Spectator columns.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 4, 2019)

have we discussed alleged machiavelli Cummings drunken antics last night? Three sheets to the wind apparently.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> have we discussed alleged machiavelli Cummings drunken antics last night? Three sheets to the wind apparently.


More please.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> More please.


Stumbling around pissed up on red wine apparently


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

doesn't have to be a coalition - some sort of confidence and supply thing like the vermin have with lady whiteadder's DUP. 
I think major constitutional change is on the way though - johnsons antics has seen to that, and lib dems would almost certainly make it a condition of voting through labour policies -  PR in return for labours manifesto is something labour mps would maybe accept? 
I think labour as biggest party is a realistic prospect - johnson's strategy is fraught with risk and would repel many voters even as it (re)captures the brexit vote


----------



## Combustible (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think I've spotted a tic he has when he's lying.


Opening his mouth?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> He keeps taking out and replacing his pen(?) out of his left pocket.



Did you correlate that with anything in particular?
Aside from changes in tension levels, I mean.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its been a popular thing on the right for a while now, sadiq has ruined london. Ties into the _islamification of europe_ shit bubbling away behind.


The fact London Has A Muslim Mayor is big news amongst racists across Europe and also the US, courtesy of Trump. 
If BJ mentioned it today it's case closed they're on the Bannon playbook


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> doesn't have to be a coalition - some sort of confidence and supply thing like the vermin have with lady whiteadder's DUP.
> I think major constitutional change is on the way though - johnsons antics has seen to that, and lib dems would almost certainly make it a condition of voting through labour policies -  PR in return for labours manifesto is something labour mps would maybe accept?
> I think labour as biggest party is a realistic prospect - johnson's strategy is fraught with risk and would repel many voters even as it (re)captures the brexit vote


Isn't it going to be a case of which party loses fewer votes this time? I can't see either the tories or labour topping 40%, but 35% could be enough for a clear majority, as it was in 2005. That is where my hope/confidence comes in - I think labour stand a chance of keeping more of their votes than the tories. The recent euro elections and by-elections suggest that as well.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

ska invita said:


> The fact London Has A Muslim Mayor is big news amongst racists across Europe and also the US, courtesy of Trump.
> If BJ mentioned it today it's case closed they're on the Bannon playbook


It just struck me he was floundering and went into ground he was used to, his previous experience as Mayor vs Sadiq.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I'm not sure Johnson could get through a national campaign without at least one Gordon Brown-style hot mic moment in which he referred to all Northerners as pie-eating monkeys. He's probably already done so in his Spectator columns.


he can barely walk from the bench to the dispatch box without a hot mic moment


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think I've spotted a tic he has when he's lying.



He opens his mouth and words come out?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That pointing finger thing is proper bully boy.  Make sure people know their place.


He also referred to Corbyn as 'he' several times, which is mildly unparliamentary I'd have thought. Needless to say I don't give a shit about those conventions, but it adds to your point.

Whilst Johnson is a bully, I suspect there's an element of calculation in this, a contrast to the May period, stop fucking about, get on with it type stuff. He's probably right to think there's a lot of 'just get on with it' sentiment in the country, but he's somehow failing to calibrate and get the right tone.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

I don't think he answered a single question apart from his own bench.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

when's the next vote then?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

I've just noticed that my banana is *really* bendy.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> He also referred to Corbyn as 'he' several times, which is mildly unparliamentary I'd have thought. Needless to say I don't give a shit about those conventions, but it adds to your point.
> 
> Whilst Johnson is a bully, I suspect there's an element of calculation in this, a contrast to the May period, stop fucking about, get on with it type stuff. He's probably right to think there's a lot of 'just get on with it' sentiment in the country, but he's somehow failing to calibrate and get the right tone.



Yeah, he is setting himself up as the outsider to Parliament.  Everyone is apparently pissed off with Parliament so he is the remedy.  There were lots of norms he didn't adhere to and got told by the speaker.  He won't care its all part of the plan.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

This whole surrender thing. It's war terms.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yeah, he is setting himself up as the outsider to Parliament.  Everyone is apparently pissed off with Parliament so he is the remedy.  There were lots of norms he didn't adhere to and got told by the speaker.  He won't care its all part of the plan.


He regularly used to lose it when questioned by GLA members. The arrogance comes out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> He regularly used to lose it when questioned by GLA members. The arrogance comes out.


and this is why he'll lose the election, it's not so much that labour will do a grand job of attracting voters back to them as johnson will do a fantastic job of repelling them.

if he shows this sort of contempt for people on the labour benches, i'm sure millions of people will have all too good an idea of the sort of contempt he has for them


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes that is a danger. More likely perhaps would be a coalition with the SNP, if that gave him the numbers. The SNP would be in a bit of a bind over that - they'd surely want Indyref2 in return, but difficult to demand both indyref2 and brexitref2, given that the main legitimating basis for requesting the former is brexit.


SNP don't need to demand indyref2 now they just need the right to call one devolved to Holyrood currently they can't hold one without Westminster's permission. Changing that will be their top priority


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

For example:
Get stuffed, says Boris Johnson as he loses temper with political opponent


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> For example:
> Get stuffed, says Boris Johnson as he loses temper with political opponent


every time he does this it's several thousand votes for the labour party


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and this is why he'll lose the election, it's not so much that labour will do a grand job of attracting voters back to them as johnson will do a fantastic job of repelling them.
> 
> if he shows this sort of contempt for people on the labour benches, i'm sure millions of people will have all too good an idea of the sort of contempt he has for them


It's fantasy to think they will mop up Labour leave voters. I can't see people voting for Rees Mogg and his ilk.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

I'm hoping Rees Mogg will speak tonight. He could spark an uprising on his own.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I'm hoping Rees Mogg will speak tonight. He could spark an uprising on his own.


Totally. I want to see him in the national media as often as possible. At what point do they realise this and take him out?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It's fantasy to think they will mop up Labour leave voters. I can't see people voting for Rees Mogg and his ilk.


i don't think they'll mop up labour voters: but labour will mop up working class people who might otherwise have voted for other parties or not voted at all. david cameron's sense of entitlement is as nothing by comparison with boris johnson's or rees-mogg's.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Totally. I want to see him in the national media as often as possible. At what point do they realise this and take him out?


He's known this lot forever. They were at school together. They are going to patronise and hector and alienate whole swathes of working class people.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Totally. I want to see him in the national media as often as possible. At what point do they realise this and take him out?


Someone will have to scoop him up out of his chaise lounge first


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Where is Chuka to advise us?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

You don't have to be popular to win an election, you just have to run a better campaign than the other side.


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I'm hoping Rees Mogg will speak tonight. He could spark an uprising on his own.


Nicked from A380
JRM's little uprising;


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> He's known this lot forever. They were at school together. They are going to patronise and hector and alienate whole swathes of working class people.


boris johnson is the one man in the country who may be able to deliver a corbyn government


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

Good piece from Seymour here - worth reading the Statesmen article he links to about how popular with the electorate No Deal is too - much more of a push policy than a pull one IMO.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


>


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

killer b said:


> Good piece from Seymour here - worth reading the Statesmen article he links to about how popular with the electorate No Deal is too - much more of a push policy than a pull one IMO.



I'm not so sure that is a good piece. If I've understood correctly he's saying that Labour must force Johnson to hold an election after he has asked for an extension and after October 31st. How does he do this? Johnson has said he won't go back to the EU and that he will call an election instead. The SNP will give him the support he needs to get an election straightaway. 

What evidence is there that proroguing Parliament was unpopular, out of interest?


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The SNP will give him the support he needs to get an election straightaway.



Are you sure of that? Have they said that?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You don't have to be popular to win an election, you just have to run a better campaign than the other side.


you don't even need to do that


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If I've understood correctly he's saying that Labour must force Johnson to hold an election after he has asked for an extension and after October 31st. How does he do this? Johnson has said he won't go back to the EU and that he will call an election instead


you must have skimmed it because he says just that in so many words- theres no way Johnson will go back to the EU, hence election on the cards


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not so sure that is a good piece. If I've understood correctly he's saying that Labour must force Johnson to hold an election after he has asked for an extension and after October 31st. How does he do this? Johnson has said he won't go back to the EU and that he will call an election instead. The SNP will give him the support he needs to get an election straightaway.
> 
> What evidence is there that proroguing Parliament was unpopular, out of interest?


well, Yougov have just released a poll (commissioned by People's Vote so maybe treat with caution) which suggests 46% opposed vs 32% in support (not seen the full poll but it's on the graun live blog).


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

killer b said:


> well, Yougov have just released a poll (commissioned by People's Vote so maybe treat with caution) which suggests 46% opposed vs 32% in support (not seen the full poll but it's on the graun live blog).



Cheers.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> you must have skimmed it because he says just that in so many words- theres no way Johnson will go back to the EU, hence election on the cards



Yes, I saw that but he seems to be suggesting it is a good strategy to force a delay. How can Labour do this is my question?

He says: 

"They want Johnson to go into an election, weakened and humiliated by the same parliament against which he has been agitating. And it was effective...Ideally, Johnson would have his hands bound by the 'no deal' blocking legislation. He would be required to go Europe and beg for an extension. Only then would a snap election be called, perhaps for some date after 31st October - just to make sure that Johnson goes into an election having clearly _not_ delivered what he said he would deliver."

https://www.patreon.com/posts/29700213


----------



## ozu (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not so sure that is a good piece. If I've understood correctly he's saying that Labour must force Johnson to hold an election after he has asked for an extension and after October 31st. How does he do this? Johnson has said he won't go back to the EU and that he will call an election instead. The SNP will give him the support he needs to get an election straightaway.
> 
> What evidence is there that proroguing Parliament was unpopular, out of interest?



SNP support wouldn't be enough though if Labour didn't back it. Would need significant number of Labour rebels too.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 4, 2019)

Why can't they just create a bill saying that no deal can't happen rather than a bill with a further extension to January 31st?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Are you sure of that? Have they said that?



Not sure if the tweet is showing up but yeah, they're already daring Labour to agree one. 



SpackleFrog said:


> They might need both.
> 
> I see the 'Rebel Alliance' is holding up well - Sturgeon already in election mode and taking the fight to Labour.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

killer b said:


> well, Yougov have just released a poll (commissioned by People's Vote so maybe treat with caution) which suggests 46% opposed vs 32% in support (not seen the full poll but it's on the graun live blog).


That does seem consistent with other polls. There appears to have been a relatively stable 30-odd per cent in favour of no deal for a while, and opinions on other things seem to reflect that. I guess that is the 'core' that Johnson needs to get pretty much all of in an election. If he splits them with the brexit party, he's fucked.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

ozu said:


> SNP support wouldn't be enough though if Labour didn't back it. Would need significant number of Labour rebels too.



Off the top of my head - 289 Tories + 39 SNP + 10 DUP = 338


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That does seem consistent with other polls. There appears to have been a relatively stable 30-odd per cent in favour of no deal for a while, and opinions on other things seem to reflect that. I guess that is the 'core' that Johnson needs to get pretty much all of in an election. If he splits them with the brexit party, he's fucked.


They don't all vote in 'ordinary' elections, though.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Are you sure of that? Have they said that?


‘SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford said he was "delighted" that MPs had expressed a "very clear view" in favour of a law to block no deal.

"Yes, there must be an election, but an election that follows on from securing an extension to the [Brexit deadline]."’

(BBC)


So, with caveats. And it’s the caveat that Johnson wants to avoid by calling the election.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> So, with caveats. And it’s the caveat that Johnson wants to avoid by calling the election.


Yep, that's my reading. Johnson is in big trouble if he goes into an election being opposed by the brexit party, which he would be if he agreed to an extension. Oh dear, what a pickle.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> ‘SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford said he was "delighted" that MPs had expressed a "very clear view" in favour of a law to block no deal.
> 
> "Yes, there must be an election, but an election that follows on from securing an extension to the [Brexit deadline]."’
> 
> ...



I might be totally mixed up but my understanding is that SNP are saying an election must be forced as soon as no deal bill goes through. Which doesn't sit with Seymour's suggestion that the election be delayed until after October.


----------



## ozu (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Off the top of my head - 289 Tories + 39 SNP + 10 DUP = 338



Thought they need two thirds of MP's to vote for it under the fixed term parliaments act. Could be clever for Labour to hold off for now and let Johnson stumble over a few more times.


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's my reading. Johnson is in big trouble if he goes into an election being opposed by the brexit party, which he would be if he agreed to an extension. Oh dear, what a pickle.


he's going into an election opposed by the brexit party either way


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Parliamentary website has caught up with Johnson's axing...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I might be totally mixed up but my understanding is that SNP are saying an election must be forced as soon as no deal bill goes through. Which doesn't sit with Seymour's suggestion that the election be delayed until after October.


Johnson can't possibly afford to delay an election, can he? That exposes the lie that he is getting somewhere with his phantom renegotiations. Surely he needs an election before 31 Oct more than anyone.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

ozu said:


> Thought they need two thirds of MP's to vote for it under the fixed terms parliament act. Could be clever for Labour to hold off for now and let Johnson stumble over a few more times.



Fuck knows if this is right or not but I've seen a few papers saying it only needs a simple majority.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's my reading. Johnson is in big trouble if he goes into an election being opposed by the brexit party, which he would be if he agreed to an extension. Oh dear, what a pickle.



Aren't they likely to join forces in some way to make sure Johnson's wins and delivers brexit of whatever kind?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

ozu said:


> Thought they need two thirds of MP's to vote for it under the fixed term parliaments act. Could be clever for Labour to hold off for now and let Johnson stumble over a few more times.


I think that would be very stupid. Labour should just come straight out and say 'right, election now'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson can't possibly afford to delay an election, can he? That exposes the lie that he is getting somewhere with his phantom renegotiations. Surely he needs an election before 31 Oct more than anyone.



No, he wants an election ASAP, but I was talking about the Seymour piece that says Labour can delay it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I might be totally mixed up but my understanding is that SNP are saying an election must be forced as soon as no deal bill goes through. Which doesn't sit with Seymour's suggestion that the election be delayed until after October.


You're arguing with something that isn't there: he's saying _ideally _the election should be after Johnson has failed to deliver on his promise to get us out by 31st October, but _in practice _he'll do everything possible to avoid that happening so it's not likely to happen.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Any opposition party giving Johnson the get-out clause of a GE before 31/10 would be bonkers.


----------



## Brainaddict (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson can't possibly afford to delay an election, can he? That exposes the lie that he is getting somewhere with his phantom renegotiations. Surely he needs an election before 31 Oct more than anyone.


Why would Johnson be worried about a lie being exposed? Did you see him talking about his 'hobby' of building model buses? He was literally trying to impress people with his ability to lie and nobody seemed to mind.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Aren't they likely to join forces in some way to make sure Johnson's wins and delivers brexit of whatever kind?



Nah, Farage will only do that if Johnson pledges to leave without a deal.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Aren't they likely to join forces in some way to make sure Johnson's wins and delivers brexit of whatever kind?


I think so, but only if Johnson fails to rule out no deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

killer b said:


> You're arguing with something that isn't there: he's saying _ideally _the election should be after Johnson has failed to deliver on his promise to get us out by 31st October, but _in practice _he'll do everything possible to avoid that happening so it's not likely to happen.



Maybe, but I'm not convinced by his general view that delaying and in his words "caging" the executive is some sort of killer strategy. Anyway. We shall see.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson can't possibly afford to delay an election, can he? That exposes the lie that he is getting somewhere with his phantom renegotiations. Surely he needs an election before 31 Oct more than anyone.



Yes, an election after the 31st would mean either Johnson going to the public having delayed brexit again when his whole thing was that he wouldn't do that, or going to the public in the midst of chaos brought about by a no deal brexit. We needn't give any credit to the notion of him somehow producing a viable deal in the next seven weeks.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

ozu said:


> Thought they need two thirds of MP's to vote for it under the fixed term parliaments act. Could be clever for Labour to hold off for now and let Johnson stumble over a few more times.



No, they could bring forward a new Act, along the lines of 'this house agrees to a GE election on the 15th Oct.', which would over-ride the FTP Act, and only need a majority of one.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah, Farage will only do that if Johnson pledges to leave without a deal.



Are you certain of that?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yes, an election after the 31st would mean either Johnson going to the public having delayed brexit again when his whole thing was that he wouldn't do that, or going to the public in the midst of chaos brought about by a no deal brexit. We needn't give any credit to the notion of him somehow producing a viable deal in the next seven weeks.


But I think a delay damages Labour as well, especially if the delay is seen to have been caused by Labour. Chaos of a no-deal, which labour had the chance to prevent by forcing a pre-Halloween election. Not a good look for labour either. Just grab the bull by the horns and force the election now.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, they could bring forward a new Act, along the lines of 'this house agrees to a GE election on the 15th Oct.', which would over-ride the FTP Act, and only need a majority of one.


What makes you think that Johnson could muster any sort of majority? Folk in every party think he's a liar.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah, Farage will only do that if Johnson pledges to leave without a deal.





littlebabyjesus said:


> I think so, but only if Johnson fails to rule out no deal.



I wonder if Farage would compromise and go along with it as long as Brexit is delivered.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

8ball said:


> Are you certain of that?



That's what he's saying and he knows that Johnson won't promise that so I assume he is saying it in order to provide a justification for standing against the Tories. 

He could always come out and say they won't stand against Tory candidates who pledge to support a no deal exit I suppose.


----------



## killer b (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> I wonder if Farage would compromise and go along with it as long as Brexit is delivered.


He doesn't really want Brexit delivered


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What makes you think that Johnson could muster any sort of majority? Folk in every party think he's a liar.



Hasn't stopped previous liars.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No, they could bring forward a new Act, along the lines of 'this house agrees to a GE election on the 15th Oct.', which would over-ride the FTP Act, and only need a majority of one.


this would be the majority which has disappeared


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> I wonder if Farage would compromise and go along with it as long as Brexit is delivered.



Nah he's pretty clear on not compromising. Why would he?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What makes you think that Johnson could muster any sort of majority? Folk in every party think he's a liar.



What makes you think, I think Johnson could muster any sort of majority?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah he's pretty clear on not compromising. Why would he?


Because his political identity/relevance has been built around campaigning for and achieving it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> What makes you think, I think Johnson could muster any sort of majority?


your suggestion for a means by which the 2/3 majority required by the ftpa could be circumvented


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hasn't stopped previous liars.


Fair point, but do you seriously suggest that he could form a coalition to produce a majority? Who?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this would be the majority which has disappeared



Well, it was reported on the news that Sturgeon said the SNP would support a GE ASAP, although Blackford seems to be saying the opposite. *shrugs*


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Because his political identity/relevance has been built around campaigning for and achieving it?



And would disappear if we ever actually left the EU. That's why it's all about No Deal now, so that if we leave with a deal he can say it isn't really leaving. Which it wouldn't be, to be fair.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well, it was reported on the news that Sturgeon said the SNP would support a GE ASAP, although Blackford seems to be saying the opposite. *shrugs*


The Westminster opposition parties have made clear that they're operating as an allied group for the time being. I presume Sturgeon's comments were for her domestic audience?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> your suggestion for a means by which the 2/3 majority required by the ftpa could be circumvented



It's not my suggestion, it's what has been wildly reported.

And, on the basis no government can be held to laws passed by previous governments, it makes perfect sense that they could pass a new law to over-ride the FTP Act.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Fair point, but do you seriously suggest that he could form a coalition to produce a majority? Who?



Yeah, I think it's possible. It's all about the dynamics of an election campaign now. 

A lot rests in my opinion on what Labour's position on Brexit in an election would be. If Corbyn changes the 2017 position I think he could lose badly.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's what he's saying and he knows that Johnson won't promise that so I assume he is saying it in order to provide a justification for standing against the Tories.
> 
> He could always come out and say they won't stand against Tory candidates who pledge to support a no deal exit I suppose.



Wasn't arguing against you, your logic is sound.  Farage can be something of a wild card, though, and I can see Rutita's point that the comprehensive removal of no-deal from the menu will change the calculus significantly.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah, I think it's possible. It's all about the dynamics of an election campaign now.
> 
> A lot rests in my opinion on what Labour's position on Brexit in an election would be. If Corbyn changes the 2017 position I think he could lose badly.



Current State of the Parties



Don't see it.


----------



## mod (Sep 4, 2019)

Watching Boris Johnson's horror show over the last 2 days has been wonderful. Its the first time I've enjoyed Brexit. In the back of my mind I keep fearing this is all an act and Cummings has an ingenious masterplan that will deceive us all but it looks like they've fucked up big time. Any myth that BJ is a charismatic orator have been shattered. He's a bumbling, cantankerous, bullshitting, racist prick.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

I can't help but think we're all getting a bit wrapped up in the Parliamentary pantomime a bit here. 

It's the dynamics of the election campaign itself that matter.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

If an election is delayed until after 31 Oct, I would actually see that as Johnson's best hope of winning it. He brazenly crashes the UK out of the EU with no deal. We all deal with that best we can, but as the dust clears, Johnson is now a brexit hero to some, while to others, a thing that can't be undone has been done and Johnson can still try to present himself as the best person to sort things out from there.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I can't help but think we're all getting a bit wrapped up in the Parliamentary pantomime a bit here.
> 
> It's the dynamics of the election campaign itself that matter.


There can be no campaign dynamics without a GE, and without a majority Johnson cannot make that happen. The timing of the next election is in the hands of the combined opposition parties.
Atm Johnson is trapped in the sound and fury of his fantasy Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If an election is delayed until after 31 Oct, I would actually see that as Johnson's best hope of winning it. He brazenly crashes the UK out of the EU with no deal. We all deal with that best we can, but as the dust clears, Johnson is now a brexit hero to some, while to others, a thing that can't be undone has been done and Johnson can still try to present himself as the best person to sort things out from there.


I'm sure that's what Dominic has told him.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I'm sure that's what Dominic has told him.


tbh I don't want to take that risk. If he were to succeed in driving through a crash-out, we would then be in a whole different arena. He might destroy himself and the tory party in doing such a thing. Or something else. I don't know.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> There can be no campaign dynamics without a GE, and without a majority Johnson cannot make that happen. The timing of the next election is in the hands of the combined opposition parties.
> Atm Johnson is trapped in the sound and fury of his fantasy Brexit.



But how does that play out? 

Johnson and the SNP are in campaign mode already. What are the headlines going to look like if Labour vote against an election? There will be one soon.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's not my suggestion, it's what has been wildly reported.
> 
> And, on the basis no government can be held to laws passed by previous governments, it makes perfect sense that they could pass a new law to over-ride the FTP Act.


yeh i am not so sanguine it would pass atm


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 4, 2019)

The opposition need to take a leaf out of the rumble in the jungle rope a dope this cunt and get him so he loses his rag all the time and fucks himself up. He’s no George foreman either.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But how does that play out?
> 
> Johnson and the SNP are in campaign mode already. What are the headlines going to look like if Labour vote against an election? There will be one soon.


what are the headlines going to look like if labour vote for an election? yeh there will be an election soon: and it's in johnson's interests to have it sooner than it is in the labour party's.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> The opposition need to take a leaf out of the rumble in the jungle rope a dope this cunt and get him so he loses his rag all the time and fucks himself up. He’s no George foreman either.


he'd never be made a supervisor let alone a foreman


----------



## ozu (Sep 4, 2019)

Starmer said just now in HoC they won't back election till No Deal bill has been implemented ie extension.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

ozu said:


> Starmer said just now in HoC they won't back election till No Deal bill has been implemented ie extension.


yeh and that'll only happen over johnson's dead body


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But how does that play out?
> 
> Johnson and the SNP are in campaign mode already. What are the headlines going to look like if Labour vote against an election? There will be one soon.



Labour were already torn to shreds by right wing scum like Ferrari this morning for not instantly accepting the election offer, rather saying they will take it up just once this bit of legislation is safely through, Kier Starmer was patiently explaining that they couldn't take Johnson's word that he would hold it before 31st October on account of him being a massive Billy Bullshitter.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he'd never be made a supervisor let alone a foreman



Nice.


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's not my suggestion, it's what has been wildly reported.
> 
> And, on the basis no government can be held to laws passed by previous governments, it makes perfect sense that they could pass a new law to over-ride the FTP Act.


He could, but it would take a while to get it on the order paper and through all its parliamentary stages. It could be done in a couple of days, but that would still require an actual majority on the HoC which Johnson doesn't have. 

Meanwhile Hammond says “I would sooner boil my head than hand power to [Corbyn].” tho hopefully both could be arranged.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what are the headlines going to look like if labour vote for an election? yeh there will be an election soon: and it's in johnson's interests to have it sooner than it is in the labour party's.



We're having an election, you can vote for Labour or the Tories?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh i am not so sanguine it would pass atm



Nor me.

I was only answering ozu's question about needing two thirds of MP's to vote for a GE, by pointing out there was a way around that, in theory.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

Also: If the Lords filibuster the Stop No Deal bill, what happens then?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But how does that play out?
> 
> Johnson and the SNP are in campaign mode already. What are the headlines going to look like if Labour vote against an election? There will be one soon.


The headlines will look like they always look, whatever tactic the LP take wrt Johnson's escape plan.  All of the opposition parties have the opportunity to fuck up Johnson's plan by refusing to take the bait, until they agree it is in their interests to do so. The narrative of Johnson as the unreliable, lying chancer is worth nurturing until his bluff has been called. 
Nov 7th looks like a good date.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But I think a delay damages Labour as well, especially if the delay is seen to have been caused by Labour. Chaos of a no-deal, which labour had the chance to prevent by forcing a pre-Halloween election. Not a good look for labour either. Just grab the bull by the horns and force the election now.



There's no version of this that's ideal for labour. They've clearly weighed it up and decided on a delayed election as the least worst option. The messaging for that has clearly been well rehearsed: yes we want an election, but we need to stop no deal first. Maybe labour lose some votes among the no deal nutters but tbh no deal nutters wouldn't vote labour whatever happened, not with the brexit party and an ostensibly pro-no deal tory party to choose from.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> The opposition need to take a leaf out of the rumble in the jungle rope a dope this cunt and get him so he loses his rag all the time and fucks himself up. He’s no George foreman either.



McDonnel seems to be working on that.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But how does that play out?


How does any if it play out? We have no idea really. But Boris’ narrative is a strong one: Parliament has failed to deliver the referendum result and MPs need their heads knocking together. He may have been unimpressive in PMQ,  but nobody watches that. If you heard the headlines on the radio you’d get his line that Corbyn wants to “dither and delay”, and in other news that proroguing Parliament was perfectly legal. 

Will it carry? Who knows, but on the face of it. it’s a better story than Labour’s, who need to sell why they’re delaying Brexit yet more and avoiding a general election.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> How does any if it play out? We have no idea really. But Boris’ narrative is a strong one: Parliament has failed to deliver the referendum result and MPs need their heads knocking together. He may have been unimpressive in PMQ,  but nobody watches that. If you heard the headlines on the radio you’d get his line that Corbyn wants to “dither and delay”, and in other news that proroguing Parliament was perfectly legal.
> 
> Will it carry? Who knows, but on the face of it. it’s a better story than Labour’s, who need to sell why they’re delaying Brexit yet more and avoiding a general election.


Yes, tactics & strategy are one thing, but there also has to be a credible narrative.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, that's my reading. Johnson is in big trouble if he goes into an election being opposed by the brexit party, which he would be if he agreed to an extension. Oh dear, what a pickle.


My feeling is there's a simple exchange going on between Johnson and the Brexit Party. The more he fails to deliver, the more votes are available for Farage. The more he ploughs on and keeps no deal in view (difficult after today), the more he keeps the BP % vote in single figures. But the problem is on the Labour side. They haven't got much of a dialogue going on with their voters/communities and have spent the last couple of years thinking about having a meeting to come up with a policy. After all that, the Libs, snp and greens will have as much call on the remain vote as Labour. And even if they go full metal jacket remain, Labour then start to risk losing northern seats.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

As in...this makes complete (party) political sense IMO, but translating that into an electoral message...well.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

First vote coming up very soon, with the second around 7 pm.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes, tactics & strategy are one thing, but there also has to be a credible narrative.



Open goal really. Tories promised a deal, they've had three years and not delivered. They need to leave off the 'no mandate for no deal' stuff and try and focus on the real world stuff that Corbyn can gain ground on.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> How does any if it play out? We have no idea really. But Boris’ narrative is a strong one: Parliament has failed to deliver the referendum result and MPs need their heads knocking together. He may have been unimpressive in PMQ,  but nobody watches that. If you heard the headlines on the radio you’d get his line that Corbyn wants to “dither and delay”, and in other news that proroguing Parliament was perfectly legal.
> 
> Will it carry? Who knows, but on the face of it. it’s a better story than Labour’s, who need to sell why they’re delaying Brexit yet more and avoiding a general election.


It's bonkers really. Johnson is prime minister but with no majority in the very place from which the legitimacy of his government emanates. So it is the opposition that is dithering and delaying, not him. He can't do a damn thing. Yet he is still prime minister, despite that, despite not commanding the authority to form a government. What next? He calls for a vote of no confidence in himself? Why not? Everything else is topsy-turvy already.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

The division vote has been called, yet there're very few MPs actually in the commons.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 4, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> How does any if it play out? We have no idea really. But Boris’ narrative is a strong one: Parliament has failed to deliver the referendum result and MPs need their heads knocking together. He may have been unimpressive in PMQ,  but nobody watches that. If you heard the headlines on the radio you’d get his line that Corbyn wants to “dither and delay”, and in other news that proroguing Parliament was perfectly legal.
> 
> Will it carry? Who knows, but on the face of it. it’s a better story than Labour’s, who need to sell why they’re delaying Brexit yet more and avoiding a general election.



I agree, my worry is that if the Tory narrative is that Corbyn is 'dithering and delaying' then it just plays into that to force an extension (read delay) on Brexit and delay an election at the same time.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The division vote has been called, yet there're very few MPs actually in the commons.


On the terrace  drinking?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

I think a margin of 36 or higher. He has pissed off so many people in the last 24 hours.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I think a margin of 36 or higher. He has pissed off so many people in the last 24 hours.


Another 42 tory rebels would be good. After removing the whip from them Johnson would then have made the LP the largest party in the commons and given them the right to form a new administration.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Result = win with majority of 29!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Passed by 329 votes to 300 votes.

Government lost by 29.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

So he could only whip 300; interesting.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

Marvellous


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 4, 2019)

The Lords could still fuck it up mind;
"
They will seek to filibuster in the upper chamber to prevent a motion being voted on which would ensure the legislation can be passed before Parliament is prorogued.

A total of 86 amendments have been tabled to a motion by Labour’s leader in the Lords, Baroness Angela Smith, which sets out the timetable for the bill to block a no-deal to go through its various stages."

Tory peers launch bid to block no-deal bill with filibuster in House of Lords


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Johnson better get on and present May's deal again, because that's all he's got now; completely fucked.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and that'll only happen over johnson's dead body



ah - thats a private members bill we could all get behind


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

Lol so the number of “rebels” has gone up?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Lol so the number of “rebels” has gone up?



Yeah former party chairman (chairperson? )Spelman voted with the government yesterday and against today.  Obviously not feeling the Johnson charm.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

I had heard this mentioned on the news, first article I've found to confirm it...



> But Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP leader, hit out at Labour’s caution, tweeting: “It's starting to feel like Labour doesn't want an election at all ... and leaving this PM in place knowing he'll try every trick in book to get what he wants would be irresponsible. Opposition must get bill through and then seek to force election BEFORE parliament prorogued.”
> 
> SNP support could be enough to deliver a 15 October election if – after defeat under the fixed term parliaments act tonight – Mr Johnson tries another route next week. He could bring forward a bill to overturn the FTPA, which would require a simple majority rather than the support of two-thirds of MPs.



Jeremy Corbyn's election strategy contains fatal flaw, top Labour figures fear


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Sep 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh and that'll only happen over *johnson's dead body*



Sounds like a strategy to me.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Johnson better get on and present May's deal again, because that's all he's got now; completely fucked.



Don't think that's an option, what with the Brexit Party waiting in the electoral wings.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

I'm not going to start giving it the 'kicking out a man like ken Clarke with 50 years' blather, but Johnson has got some brass neck. As well as himself voting against the whip on may's stuff he could have been a fucking remainer himself on pretty much the turn of a coin. There is a wee bit of Trump type stuff here where facts and even very recent history gets bulldozed.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Johnson better get on and present May's deal again, because that's all he's got now; completely fucked.


The deal that Bercow threw out?


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Johnson better get on and present May's deal again, because that's all he's got now; completely fucked.


He can't do that in this parliament though, unless he ties a new bow on it somehow.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Don't think that's an option, what with the Brexit Party waiting in the electoral wings.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Excellent.
No options at all, then.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had heard this mentioned on the news, first article I've found to confirm it...
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn's election strategy contains fatal flaw, top Labour figures fear





The SNP and Labour have very different aims.   Labour are trying to win an GE, the SNP want to win a referendum on independence.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had heard this mentioned on the news, first article I've found to confirm it...
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn's election strategy contains fatal flaw, top Labour figures fear


Or to put it another way, Johnson's only route to survival is being nice to Nicola Sturgeon.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The SNP and Labour have very different aims.   Labour are trying to win an GE, the SNP want to win a referendum on independence.



... and both want to defend what Westminster seats they have against the other.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Meanwhile in the Commons, Bill Cash is claiming that Johnson's overwhelming victory in the Tory leadership election is the biggest mandate any Tory leader has ever had.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> Meanwhile in the Commons, Bill Cash is claiming that Johnson's overwhelming victory in the Tory leadership election is the biggest mandate any Tory leader has ever had.



Bigger than May when no one even stood against her let alone vote against her?

Cash is a maniac.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Bigger than May when no one even stood against her let alone vote against her?
> 
> Cash is a maniac.



He's been followed by Chope.  Imagine the scenes.


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Bigger than May when no one even stood against her let alone vote against her?
> 
> Cash is a maniac.


That ones doesn't count.  But Cameron v Davis does, and Cameron got a much bigger vote, majority and percent of the vote.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Bigger than May when no one even stood against her let alone vote against her?
> 
> Cash is a maniac.


Not so much one who has taken over the asylum but one who, until last night, _thought they had_.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> He's been followed by Chope.  Imagine the scenes.


He's the sort that doesn't even need the word "CUNT" tattooed across his forehead.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He's the sort that doesn't even need the word "CUNT" tattooed across his forehead.


He's the man who took the C out of hope and gave it to UNT.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Chope now banging on that if this bill passes, it will mean "modern slavery".  Then claims that the "EU's collaborators in this house" are to blame for this state of affairs, and ends up by saying they are assisting the EU in dictating the terms of our surrender.

IDS up next.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The SNP and Labour have very different aims.   Labour are trying to win an GE, the SNP want to win a referendum on independence.



Indeed!

Yet, when I mentioned it earlier, as a 'possible' way of Jonson getting his GE, various replies on here were along the lines of 'but, all the opposition parties have agreed to work as one on this, the SNP will not vote for a GE at this point.' 

The SNP has it's own agenda, they could go either way.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> Chope now banging on that if this bill passes, it will mean "modern slavery".  Then claims that the "EU's collaborators in this house" are to blame for this state of affairs, and ends up by saying they are assisting the EU in dictating the terms of our surrender.
> 
> IDS up next.



Why are you watching?


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I had heard this mentioned on the news, first article I've found to confirm it...
> 
> 
> 
> Jeremy Corbyn's election strategy contains fatal flaw, top Labour figures fear


Well Thornberry made it very clear last night that Labour would NOT vote for a GE, because Johnson could very likely be bullshitting (that was the gist, anyway). Thinking (I'm very tired so bear with me) - do we actually have time for a GE…? And besides when it comes to a GE, most PPCs concentrate on domestic issues, rather than stuff like Brexit (and by 'domestic issues' I mean the NHS, welfare, policing, etc., all of which will, of course, be affected by Brexit).

My feeling is that calling a GE would just be another way to look like they're doing something, whilst in fact doing fuck all and running down the clock (which is, of course, exactly what Johnson and the ERG want). I honestly can't see a way out of this that wouldn't leave us totally fucked (although I've always been extremely pessimistic). I can't get the livestream to work at the moment, so can't follow proceedings.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Well Thornberry made it very clear last night that Labour would NOT vote for a GE...



If Johnson gets SNP support for a GE, he doesn't need any Labour votes.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

agricola said:


> Meanwhile in the Commons, Bill Cash is claiming that Johnson's overwhelming victory in the Tory leadership election is the biggest mandate any Tory leader has ever had.



Twat. Being voted into office by 0.016% of the population isn't a mandate for anything. We need a system whereby we DO directly elect the PM. A PM can only command a mandate if they're given it by the people, not by a few thousand members of their own party. He has no mandate and now no majority, either. 

(and if I'm not making sense it's because I'm tired).


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If Johnson gets SNP support for a GE, he doesn't need any Labour votes.



Why are you bothering to respond?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Why are you bothering to respond?



Good point, well made.


----------



## ffsear (Sep 4, 2019)

Politically dyslexic question...

If the government no longer has a working majority,  then when are they still on that side of the house?  Can new coalitions be formed without a GE?  Should a GE not be the deflect in this situation?


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

ffsear said:


> Politically dyslexic question...
> 
> If the government no longer has a working majority,  then when are they still on that side of the house?  Can new coalitions be formed without a GE?  Should a GE not be the deflect in this situation?


Because the _government _does - 289 conservatives, 10 DUP & 21 ex-Conservatives. They didn't cross the floor, so they still support the government.

Yes.

What?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> Because the _government _does - 289 conservatives, 10 DUP & 21 ex-Conservatives. They didn't cross the floor, so they still support the government.
> 
> Yes.
> 
> What?


Yes basically agree, but I'm really not sure that their seating necessarily implies continued support for the Johnson administration. I'm thinking it might have been a rather more pragmatic decision based upon actual bum space tbh.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 4, 2019)

I either heard or dreamed that there is something called a 'notwithstanding' (thingy), that can override the fixed term parliament act and have an election called if there is a simple majority in parliament.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Twat. Being voted into office by 0.016% of the population isn't a mandate for anything. We need a system whereby we DO directly elect the PM. A PM can only command a mandate if they're given it by the people, not by a few thousand members of their own party. He has no mandate and now no majority, either.
> 
> (and if I'm not making sense it's because I'm tired).


You've not been making sense for a while, your bit about the Labour Party being a communist organisation particularly perplexing. Don't think it all can be put down to tiredness


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I either heard or dreamed that there is something called a 'notwithstanding' (thingy), that can override the fixed term parliament act and have an election called if there is a simple majority in parliament.



Any government can introduce an Act that cancels any previous legislation, assuming they can get a majority to pass it, no government can be tied by any legislation passed by a previous government.

The FTP Act isn't worth the vellum it's printed on.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If Johnson gets SNP support for a GE, he doesn't need any Labour votes.



But under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, he has to have the support of ⅔ of the House. He's not going to get that without Labour votes, there aren't enough MPs from other parties.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> But under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, he has to have the support of ⅔ of the House. He's not going to get that without Labour votes, there aren't enough MPs from other parties.



READ THE FUCKING THREAD, OR JUST FUCK OFF.

You could start with the post just above yours.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> Twat. Being voted into office by 0.016% of the population isn't a mandate for anything. We need a system whereby we DO directly elect the PM. A PM can only command a mandate if they're given it by the people, not by a few thousand members of their own party. He has no mandate and now no majority, either.
> 
> (and if I'm not making sense it's because I'm tired).



I wish people would stop saying this. That's how politics works in Britain. He does have a mandate as the people voted for a Tory government under a system which allows those who have enough votes in the house to choose the PM usually that's the largest party. Johnson, May, and Brown all have/had perfectly acceptable mandates.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> READ THE FUCKING THREAD, OR JUST FUCK OFF.
> 
> You could start with the post just above yours.



I apologise. The post just above mine, is from philosophical, which bears no relation to anything. I'm doing. the best that I can, but I am very tired. I find some things difficult to understand. I'm sorry that I am stupid. I am autistic, therefore I am stupid. I'll try to do better. Peace. I don't want to fall out with anyone. I can only do my best (which I admit is shite).


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Kinnock amendment wins by default because no tellers turned up!!


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Apparently, I should add


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> Kinnock amendment wins by default because no tellers turned up!!


Which one was that? I can’t keep up


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Which one was that? I can’t keep up


something like going back to (the month) May's cross-party talks near agreement and finessing it.  I think.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Why are you watching?



Was waiting for launderette machines to complete their work.


----------



## ozu (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Which one was that? I can’t keep up



To put the version of the withdrawal agreement that was formulated during the cross party talks to a vote. Apparently it exists..


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Cock up or conspiracy? Quite a few MP's don't seem to have any idea either.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Which one was that? I can’t keep up



If I am keeping up - the one that allows May's deal to be brought back to the house, the government didn't put up tellers to stop it.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)

Amendment 19 was well received


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

MPs started voting on Stephen Kinnock’s amendment 6. But then, a few minutes into voting, Lindsay Hoyle, announced that the division had been called off because the amendment had been passed - because MPs opposed to it did not put up tellers.

Here is the explanation of what the Kinnock amendment does.

This amendment would set out as the purpose of seeking an extension under article 50(3) TEU the passage of a withdrawal agreement bill based on the outcome of the inter-party talks which concluded in May 2019 – see NC1 for contents of the Bill and Amendment XX for text of the request letter to the European Council.

This means that, if the PM needs to request an article 50 extension (because he has not negotiated a new deal, and MPs have not voted to approve a no-deal Brexit), then getting an extension to pass a version of the Theresa May deal becomes government policy.

Effectively, that means that any Brexit delay would not be a blind delay; it would be a delay to enable a version of the Theresa May going through.

It is not clear whether this has passed by accident - or as a result of some cunning plot.


Grauniad blog


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

belboid said:


> Cock up or conspiracy? Quite a few MP's don't seem to have any idea either.



It does make a limited amount of sense, if you accept that the ERG has always been going for no deal and that the Benn bill would have ruled it out.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> I wish people would stop saying this. That's how politics works in Britain. He does have a mandate as the people voted for a Tory government under a system which allows those who have enough votes in the house to choose the PM usually that's the largest party. Johnson, May, and Brown all have/had perfectly acceptable mandates.



But he wasn't directly elected. We do not directly elect the PM (and I think we should) and, under FPTP can it really be argued that he has a mandate from the people…? There are more Tory safe seats than those for any other party (and I'm not including Scotland because that's likely to remain majority SNP). The leader of the party that forms the government elects their leader and that leader becomes PM. That is not having a directly elected premier, because it excludes everyone who is not a member of that party. That's what I am trying to say. Nobody outside of the majority party gets to elect the prime minister. That's not democratic. 

And the Tories have tried several times to rearrange the constituency boundaries in an attempt to remain in power forever. FPTP will ALWAYS benefit the Tories. Always.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Here you go...



> But the amendments ask that the final version of Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement Bill be published. Although May's deal was defeated three times, the bill on the latest version was never put to a vote in anticipation of a fourth failure.
> 
> It incorporated ten further points agreed through talks between May and MPs, including guarantees of MP approval on future treaties with the EU, protections for workers' rights, continuation of environmental commitments and "will seek as close to frictionless trade in goods with the EU as possible" outside the Single Market.
> 
> *It also committed May to a vote on whether the final deal should be put to the public in a referendum.*



BIB is interesting. 

Who are the rebel opposition MPs calling for the return of Theresa May's deal?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

I do like the way the media keep saying the 'Rebel Alliance', it's all very Star wars, isn't it?


----------



## belboid (Sep 4, 2019)

Meanwhile Labour have halted the trigger ballot process and advertised the remaining seats without an agreed/sitting candidate.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I do like the way the media keep saying the 'Rebel Alliance', it's all very Star wars, isn't it?



_The ERG?  We don't need that scum._


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Johnson up now, and I assume about to ask support for a GE.

Where the hell is Corbyn?


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Johnson up now, and I assume about to ask support for a GE.
> 
> Where the hell is Corbyn?



I don't know, but the T34/85 that used to be on Mandela Road has disappeared.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

I don't really understand all this


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't really understand all this



Nobody does.


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Ken Clarke "I think the Prime Minister has a great skill in keeping a straight face whilst he is being so disengenous"


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't really understand all this



All jolly japes from people who have secured income and a very decent pension.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't really understand all this


You've got a lot of company


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Kenneth Clarke is ripping him to bits.


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Ouch.

Clarke is pretty scathing.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Oh, I seem to have missed some fun, whilst getting more beer from the garage.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

So the Kinnock amendment is essentially a strategy for a softer brexit supported by kinnock, champion et al, which the govt let pass by not standing tellers because a) it makes some form of brexit more likely or b) ERG aside the goal has always been a softer brexit or c) just to cause trouble in the recently more united anti no deal alliance?


----------



## agricola (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So the Kinnock amendment is essentially a strategy for a softer brexit supported by kinnock, champion et al, which the govt let pass by not standing tellers because a) it makes some form of brexit more likely or b) ERG aside the goal has always been a softer brexit or c) just to cause trouble in the recently more united anti no deal alliance?



A and C, and if there is a way to get Brexit then this is the only way it can pass provided the ERG vote for it


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So the Kinnock amendment is essentially a strategy for a softer brexit supported by kinnock, champion et al, which the govt let pass by not standing tellers because a) it makes some form of brexit more likely or b) ERG aside the goal has always been a softer brexit or c) just to cause trouble in the recently more united anti no deal alliance?



Dunno.  But probably one of these things that seems like a big deal now but in the morning won't even be talked about.  More Parliament theatre probably designed to piss of Corbyn.  

What was the phrase earlier?  Trying to smoke out those who say they want a deal but vote against everything?


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't really understand all this



It signals that HMG would accept that deal but are working on a better one.  Did think there was another way of doing it last night, but fair play.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 4, 2019)

ffsear said:


> Politically dyslexic question...
> 
> If the government no longer has a working majority,  then when are they still on that side of the house?  Can new coalitions be formed without a GE?  Should a GE not be the deflect in this situation?



my understanding is that whoever has been appointed by HM the Q as PM stays in that role, even if their majority falls away (following by-elections, defections, collapse of a coalition or whatever) until such time as there's a parliamentary vote of no confidence - if that happens, there's 14 days for someone else (usually the leader of the opposition) to try and form a government and get a vote of confidence) 

it's up to the opposition parties (or possibly the leader of the opposition) to call a vote of no confidence.  there's only any point in the leader of the opposition calling this if s/he's pretty confident of winning - the last one was keenly supported by the limp dems and blairites and tinge-ites when they knew it stood little chance of passing so as to make jeremy corbyn look silly


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Ian Blackford needs someone to edit his speeches.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

I don’t understand what went on with the teller thing? What happened? Why would the govt want to bring back any form of may’s deal - isn’t that electoral suicide?


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Ian Blackford needs someone to edit his speeches.



He is no Angus Robertson


----------



## Badgers (Sep 4, 2019)

Understand the SNP will not back a Johnson election


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I don’t understand what went on with the teller thing? What happened? Why would the govt want to bring back any form of may’s deal - isn’t that electoral suicide?



Coz WE ARE LEAVING 31st Oct.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

Be interesting to see the brexit party response to govt allowing the kinnock amendment to pass


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Ian Blackford needs someone to edit his speeches.



Or, just put a bullet in his head.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Be interesting to see the brexit party response to govt allowing the kinnock amendment to pass



I would imagine its the same as everyone else. Urrghh Stephen Kinnock.


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Understand the SNP will not back a Johnson election



Yeah their Westminster leader made it clear in parliament that they did trust Boris or what he was up to with this.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I don’t understand what went on with the teller thing? What happened? Why would the govt want to bring back any form of may’s deal - isn’t that electoral suicide?


They don't, it's just parliamentary games.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

Jo Swindon is pants.


----------



## xenon (Sep 4, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I don’t understand what went on with the teller thing? What happened? Why would the govt want to bring back any form of may’s deal - isn’t that electoral suicide?



 I think knowing that if it is brought back, it will likely get voted against again, thus returning to no Deal as the last option. 

 Yes that’s right, the fun never stops.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Jo Swindon is pants.



As is Johnson, Corbyn & Blackford.

WTF did we do to deserve these fucking hopeless 'leaders'?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Jo Swindon is pants.



I just wish she'd pick one accent and stick to it. She's all over the shop. Worse than Russel Crowe doing Robin Hood.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

Do these cunts get overtime for this


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> They don't, it's just parliamentary games.



Game? And just within Parliament?  Assuming there is an election before 31st Mr Johnson would have Farage gnawing at his vote, a Nay teller would have allowed Tories/Brexit to cut a deal.  Still its got to get through the Lords yet - gives them something relevant to discuss over the next day and a half.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

xenon said:


> I think knowing that if it is brought back, it will likely get voted against again, thus returning to no Deal as the last option.
> 
> Yes that’s right, the fun never stops.


I see.... ffs


----------



## Flavour (Sep 4, 2019)

Still got a bit to go before they vote against having a GE. What an evening in the commons! Hilarious. I really hope it's sinking for people who'd never really questioned the existence of (at the very very least, the British style of) parliamentary democracy before: its a crock of shit


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Do these cunts get overtime for this



Nope.  But they didn't back in the day before Blair removed the fillibuster rights and cut the hours Commons could debate to either.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> Assuming there is an election before 31st Mr Johnson would have Farage gnawing at his vote, a Nay teller would have allowed Tories/Brexit to cut a deal.


Don't believe that, I think killer b is on the money re the BP.

And it should be noted that some argue that the amendment basically does sweet FA.



			
				Graeme Cowie said:
			
		

> I’m not sure what this amendment actually does. It attaches a purpose for the desired extension, but it doesn’t actually compel the Government (or anyone else for that matter) to actually introduce a Bill.


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Still got a bit to go before they vote against having a GE. What an evening in the commons! Hilarious. I really hope it's sinking for people who'd never really questioned the existence of (at the very very least, the British style of) parliamentary democracy before: its a crock of shit



tbf Most of UK Parliamentary democracy is done in the Committee rooms, which is why the Chamber is usually sparsely attended. (they are available for streaming though http://www.parliamentlive.tv/


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

Jess Phillips is kicking off.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

Can’t help it, I love jess Phillips!


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

elbows said:


> Jess Phillips is kicking off.


I can see her on the BBC but can't hear her.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 4, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Still got a bit to go before they vote against having a GE. What an evening in the commons! Hilarious. I really hope it's sinking for people who'd never really questioned the existence of (at the very very least, the British style of) parliamentary democracy before: its a crock of shit


I hope and slightly think that last few years will have political consequences that aren't yet as apparent as they will be, a loss of faith in political structures and process which creates space. Would be good if we could have something as toxic as the expenses scandal to go alongside it, would be great that


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As is Johnson, Corbyn & Blackford.
> 
> WTF did we do to deserve these fucking hopeless 'leaders'?



We did nothing, that is why we have the leaders we have. Our apathy is our millstone.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Jo Swindon is pants.



Who is "Jo Swindon" and why is he/she pants?


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> We did nothing, that is why we have the leaders we have. Our apathy is our millstone.



Nah.

Parties and their leaders are nothing to do with me.


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I can see her on the BBC but can't hear her.



Luckily for me it was at that moment that I ditched their online news parliament feed and went to their parliament channel, so I got to hear her.

I'll wait for the transcript, dont have enough brain power to expand on what she said tonight.


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Who is "Jo Swindon" and why is he/she pants?



Brenda from Bristols aunt, who is much keener on elections, as long as they dont involve cynical cliff-edge timing antics.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Who is "Jo Swindon" and why is he/she pants?



Not knowing who she is, demonstrates that she is pants.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not knowing who she is, demonstrates that she is pants.



Please tell me who "Jo Swindon" is because I cannot find a single reference to this person on the internet.  But then just because somebody has never been mentioned by anybody on the internet does not necessarily mean that they are pants.  You say that "Jo Swindon" is a woman. How do you know?  Is she one of your personal friends that you have fallen out with?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Quite something to see every opposition party in Parliament turn down Johnson's offer out because he's a lying, sneaky cunt.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Please tell me who "Jo Swindon" is because I cannot find a single reference to this person on the internet.  But then just because somebody has never been mentioned by anybody on the internet does not necessarily mean that they are pants.  You say that "Jo Swindon" is a woman. How do you know?  Is she one of your personal friends that you have fallen out with?



Are you taking the piss?

Jo Swindon - Google Search - returns around 2 million results!


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 4, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> Please tell me who "Jo Swindon" is because I cannot find a single reference to this person on the internet.  But then just because somebody has never been mentioned by anybody on the internet does not necessarily mean that they are pants.  You say that "Jo Swindon" is a woman. How do you know?  Is she one of your personal friends that you have fallen out with?


'Jo Swindon' is the new leader of the Liberal Emocrats.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Are you taking the piss?
> 
> Jo Swindon - Google Search - returns almost 2 million results!



No that is "Jo Swinson" NOT "Jo Swindon"


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

Is there some reason why the opposition can't amend this motion to set a later date?


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is there some reason why the opposition can't amend this motion to set a later date?



Which motion…? The call for a GE…? There's no time, the GE has to be held prior to the 31st.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 4, 2019)

Interesting tone from the Mail...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> No that is "Jo Swinson" NOT "Jo Swindon"



Oh, so are taking the piss out of a dyslexic person.

Now fuck, and die, you cunt.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

Blimey. No correctng spelling mistakes that lead to confusion then? Calm the fuck down yourself.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 4, 2019)

Is De Pfeffel going to be the first Prime Minister to lose all his votes or has it happened before?


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is there some reason why the opposition can't amend this motion to set a later date?



I don't think anyone is showing any sign of doing that, and I was wondering why not myself


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 4, 2019)

Election vote about to happen right now anyway ...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Blimey. No correctng spelling mistakes that lead to confusion then? Calm the fuck down yourself.



There was no confusion, they knew exactly who was being referenced, and was just playing silly pointless games.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> Is there some reason why the opposition can't amend this motion to set a later date?



My understanding is that the FTPA cannot be amended, a particular motion and wording has to be used. There's no way they can pass this without handing the power over timing to the government.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, so are taking the piss out of a dyslexic person.
> 
> Now fuck, and die, you cunt.



And I'm autistic which means I have problems with comprehension, didn't stop you telling me to fuck off did it…?! Sometimes I misunderstand things, sometimes you misspell things (and 'd' and 's' being next to each other, it was obviously a typo). You want people to make allowances for you, but you won't make allowances for other people. I struggle to process information, I always have, that's why I left school with fuck all qualifications. I find this hard, but I am doing my best.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Quite something to see every opposition party in Parliament turn down Johnson's offer out because he's a lying, sneaky cunt.



And also to see the clear personal loathing that many of them have for him. Former colleagues and oppo alike.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> My understanding is that the FTPA cannot be amended, a particular motion and wording has to be used. There's no way they can pass this without handing the power over timing to the government.



Just to catch up, is Johnson's current move calling an election using standard FTPA procedure (i.e 2/3 majority)?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> My understanding is that the FTPA cannot be amended, a particular motion and wording has to be used.



A very short Bill along the lines of "Notwithstanding the FTPA, a general election shall be held on xx/xx/xxxx" would, on a simple majority vote, do the trick.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Just to catch up, is Johnson's current move calling an election using standard FTPA procedure (i.e 2/3 majority)?



Yes


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Just to catch up, is Johnson's current move calling an election using standard FTPA procedure (i.e 2/3 majority)?



Yes. I'm aware there's talk on here of another possible measure but that's not what is happening atm. They don't even have a simple majority for an election right now anyway.


----------



## chilango (Sep 4, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> A very short Bill along the lines of "Notwithstanding the FTPA, a general election shall be held on xx/xx/xxxx" would, on a simple majority vote, do the trick.




...but, then, a Bill could be amended right?


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Yes. I'm aware there's talk on here of another possible measure but that's not what is happening atm. They don't even have a simple majority for an election right now anyway.



Yeah, that's what I thought... Weird.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Clarke giving his tuppence worth.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, then, a Bill could be amended right?



Yes, but easier to pass than one with a 2/3 threshold.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 4, 2019)

chilango said:


> ...but, then, a Bill could be amended right?



It may well be a theoretical possibility but it would be amended to say only after no deal Brexit is ruled out so it won't happen.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 4, 2019)

Vote’s been lost anyway.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Yes, but easier to pass than one with a 2/3 threshold.



I suppose it's something you'd generally want to avoid doing. But I mean Johnson has already shown he's willing to piss procedure up the wall, so can't quite see why he wouldn't take that route. It would be slower I suppose.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> And I'm autistic which means I have problems with comprehension, didn't stop you telling me to fuck off did it…?! Sometimes I misunderstand things, sometimes you misspell things (and 'd' and 's' being next to each other, it was obviously a typo). You want people to make allowances for you, but you won't make allowances for other people. I struggle to process information, I always have, that's why I left school with fuck all qualifications. I find this hard, but I am doing my best.



I didn't spell her name wrong, I just didn't spot the original misspelling, and the pointless posts from toblerone3 over a typo, were basically pointless, which is rare for them.

Whereas just about about every post you make is pointless, so welcome to my massive 'ignore list', of one.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

Pass me my spare pantaloons, I fear I have pissed this pair whilst chortling.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Johnson defeated. ⅔ majority not attained (impossible without Labour votes).


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

This just gets funnier and funnier.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 4, 2019)

4 in a row.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

So you need to secure 2/3 of the house rather 2/3 of the vote... That's a high bar, the fuck made him think he could win it?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

I think he could be about to hold the record for the shortest time a PM spends in office...


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Is cupid_stunt in charge of the Beeb captions now - who the fuck's Keith Starmer…?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> So you need to secure 2/3 of the house rather 2/3 of the vote... That's a high bar, the fuck made him think he could win it?


Arrogance, most likely.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 4, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> I think he could be about to hold the record for the shortest time a PM spends in office...


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> So you need to secure 2/3 of the house rather 2/3 of the vote... That's a high bar, the fuck made him think he could win it?


He knew he wouldn’t, but I guess he gets to play the “Labour are blocking the electorate from having a say” card. People vs Parliament etc


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> He knew he wouldn’t, but I guess he gets to play the “Labour are blocking the people from having a say” card. People vs Parliament etc



Yeah, true.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 4, 2019)

I have enjoyed watching Theresa May enjoying herself enormously in the last 24 hours...


----------



## Gaia (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> So you need to secure 2/3 of the house rather 2/3 of the vote... That's a high bar, the fuck made him think he could win it?



Clearly he thought that Labour were blustering when they said they'd not support one, as they'd been calling for one for at least 2 years. ⅔ of MPs have to vote in favour for the motion to pass, yes, impossible without Labour votes.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Watching the Lords - blue on blue carnage right now.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> So you need to secure 2/3 of the house rather 2/3 of the vote... That's a high bar, the fuck made him think he could win it?



Under the FTP Act, yes.

However, he could come back with a new Act to over-ride that, which would only a require of a majority of one, and it's 'possible' with SNP support that could be passed.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

Plus he gets to push the buck onto 'the people' when it all goes Pete tong, rather than take responsibility for his part in this cluster fuck.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 4, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Watching the Lords - blue on blue carnage right now.



Utter filth!


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> He knew he wouldn’t, but I guess he gets to play the “Labour are blocking the electorate from having a say” card. People vs Parliament etc



Yes, although on its own that doesnt seem enough, so I wait for the next amazing segment of the cunning plan to emerge.

Maybe it will  involve a songs with lyrics about jump you fucker jump, and the revelation that there was no blanket.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 4, 2019)

kebabking said:


> I have enjoyed watching Theresa May enjoying herself enormously in the last 24 hours...


Yeah, she earned that. Can't stand the woman but I bet she took a certain amount of enjoyment from watching this epic fail.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

Jo Swinson looked lovely tonight


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Meh, she's still the fuck up who got it to this point.

*May, not frieda's crush.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> Utter filth!



Filth proceeding at a rather stately pace, it has to be said. *nostalgia face* Not that there's anything wrong with that...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 4, 2019)

equationgirl said:


> Yeah, she earned that. Can't stand the woman but I bet she took a certain amount of enjoyment from watching this epic fail.


Up to 77 more days of sod 'im


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Under the FTP Act, yes.
> 
> However, he could come back with a new Act to over-ride that, which would only a require of a majority of one, and it's 'possible' with SNP support that could be passed.



Yeah, I know... It would be weird, but nothing in theory to stop it. Another flaw in our system to hang out.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Meh, she's still the fuck up who got it to this point.
> 
> *May, not frieda's crush.


I thought that was the pig fucker?


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I thought that was the pig fucker?



What, frieda's crush?


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Nah, pig fucker and Hallam's shame started this nebulous walk, but May is still the standout fuckwit of the last 10 years imo.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> What, frieda's crush?


I could not possibly comment on frieda's crush.


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I thought that was the pig fucker?



Yeah he drove the bus, but legged it at the motorway services before the final destination. May took over but proceeded to drive the bus round the car park for several years. 

Boris has had the bus armour plated and fitted it with a red wine cannon, but has yet to make a notable difference to its location.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 4, 2019)

apparently the reason the kinnock motion got passed was cos it was a government ruse that failed - they didn't provide tellers to oppose it, expecting the other side to table counter amendments so it could then go back and forth to the lords and take up time. But the opposition didn't bite.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> He knew he wouldn’t, but I guess he gets to play the “Labour are blocking the electorate from having a say” card. People vs Parliament etc



Is anyone actually listening to him now anyway?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

*Shocking Admission, #1 in a short series: *_m_uch as I detest her politics, I quite like listening to Jess Phillips speeches. I'm sure there's every bit as much artifice in there as any of the fuckers, but she does a good job of _almost _speaking normally_. _

There, I said it. Could my ban start from Midnight please?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Nah, pig fucker and Hallam's shame started this nebulous walk, but May is still the standout fuckwit of the last 10 years imo.


She is looking pretty good compared to her successor.


----------



## elbows (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *Shocking Admission, #1 in a short series: *_m_uch as I detest her politics, I quite like listening to Jess Phillips speeches. I'm sure there's every bit as much artifice in there as any of the fuckers, but she does a good job of _almost _speaking normally_. _
> 
> There, I said it. Could my ban start from Midnight please?



Yes thats the sort of thing I should have said earlier when I mentioned her kicking off in her speech, but I ran out of energy to say more.

I also recorded what she said because I think my Mum will like to hear it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, I know... It would be weird, but nothing in theory to stop it. Another flaw in our system to hang out.



I think it would be more weird if a government could be tied by a law passed by a previous government. 

The FTP Act was only introduced because the LibDems demanded it, to secure their 5-years in the coalition government, it is basically a pointless waste of vellum.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think it would be more weird if a government could be tied by a law passed by a previous government.
> 
> The FTP Act was only introduced because the LibDems demanded it, to secure their 5-years in the coalition government, it is basically a pointless waste of vellum.



Well, I mean it's pretty standard procedure basically everywhere else. Constitutional law that's difficult to amend governing electoral procedure etc, legislature deciding on policy.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I could not possibly comment on frieda's crush.


That dress was just made for her


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> She is looking pretty good compared to her successor.



Dunno. Johnson has many ways to spin this into something positive, and he will. Or at least he probably will, he does sometimes seem to totally lose confidence in himself. But he is far better at that kind of thing than May... And remember the opposition would be clamouring for that GE if they thought they had a chance of winning it.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

Haven't been watching any of this tonight so bear with me -  can the govt come back tomorrow and try to get an election via suspending the ftpa? Presumably wouldn't win even with the need for only a simple majority, but it would be another way of rubbing it in that Labour is 'frit'. 

I've hated the word frit since Thatcher used it circa 1987.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 4, 2019)

Have any newspaper front pages been released yet?


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

Gaia said:


> A I find this hard, but I am doing my best.


 The only thing I think you are finding hard is actually dealing with other posters here challenging your dodgey dogshit opinions/the multiple horrible things you have posted around here in recent weeks. You seem to be doing your best to avoid engaging in a meaningful way but managing to stay awake and focused on the things that you want to and posting more shitty nonsense.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Well, I mean it's pretty standard procedure basically everywhere else. Constitutional law that's difficult to amend governing electoral procedure etc, legislature deciding on policy.



We don't have a written constitution, everything can be amended by the commons.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Haven't been watching any of this tonight so bear with me -  can the govt come back tomorrow and try to get an election via suspending the ftpa? Presumably wouldn't win even with the need for only a simple majority, but it would be another way of rubbing it in that Labour is 'frit'.
> 
> I've hated the word frit since Thatcher used it circa 1987.



Not suspending the ftpa, just bypassing it. But yeah.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We don't have a written constitution, everything can be amended by the commons.



Yes, I know, that's my point. afaik we're the only place that does that.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Hmm... Maybe NZ actually. And possibly some of the other places that still cleave tightly to our system. But very few.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Have any newspaper front pages been released yet?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> The only thing I think you are finding hard is actually dealing with other posters here challenging your dodgey dogshit opinions/the multiple horrible things you have posted around here in recent weeks. You seem to be doing your best to avoid engaging in a meaningful way but managing to stay awake and focused on the things that you want to and posting more shitty nonsense.



Who is this directed towards?

You haven't quoted anyone, it makes no sense.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Yeah, there you go. That's why Johnson can still come out of this looking a lot better than May.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who is this directed towards?
> 
> You haven't quoted anyone, it makes no sense.


You've just ignored them you loon


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who is this directed towards?
> 
> You haven't quoted anyone, it makes no sense.



Yes I have and yes it does.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You've just ignored them you loon



Oh, fair enough, sorry Rutita1, I've never put someone on ignore before, so it's a learning curve.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, fair enough, sorry Rutita1, I've never put someone on ignore before, so it's a learning curve.



putting people on ignore can make threads a bit surreal - especially on mobile when i can't see post numbers - wandered in to a thread recently that at first appeared to be just people telling each other to fuck off, then realised there was a hidden post between most of them...


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Yeah, I think it's just NZ and UK that have full parliamentary sovereignty... There are quite a few other countries that have it to one degree or another, but most have at least some level of constitutional law that requires more than a simple majority.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> The only thing I think you are finding hard is actually dealing with other posters here challenging your dodgey dogshit opinions/the multiple horrible things you have posted around here in recent weeks. You seem to be doing your best to avoid engaging in a meaningful way but managing to stay awake and focused on the things that you want to and posting more shitty nonsense.


It is a rather strange modus operandi isn't it?

One where one can post very coherent responses to others but cant converse about some of the things they have posted when engaged with because they claim they dont have the social skills of an adult.

It kind or wears a bit thin after a while.


----------



## rekil (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> *Shocking Admission, #1 in a short series: *_m_uch as I detest her politics, I quite like listening to Jess Phillips speeches. I'm sure there's every bit as much artifice in there as any of the fuckers, but she does a good job of _almost _speaking normally_. _
> 
> There, I said it. Could my ban start from Midnight please?


A couple of minutes spent watching her gallivanting about with Rees Mogg should remedy any such uncomradely sentiments.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, fair enough, sorry Rutita1, I've never put someone on ignore before, so it's a learning curve.




Almost a funny as gromit getting his pronouns in a twist


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 4, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Almost a funny as gromit getting his pronouns in a twist



I am glad you said 'almost', I think.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, there you go. That's why Johnson can still come out of this looking a lot better than May.


History will judge him but losing your first four votes in Parliament & expelling 21 MPs & a defection plus a by election defeat is not a good start. He has been shown up in his first question time & his veneer has cracked.

I expect a few tories,both MPs & members, are waking up & smelling the coffee which has a tang of the sewer. He might not be their saviour afterall.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 4, 2019)

copliker said:


> A couple of minutes spent watching her gallivanting about with Rees Mogg should remedy any such uncomradely sentiments.


Okay, I'll dial it back and start admiring Angela Rayner talking about being bullied for being ginger.

24 hours watching the mother of parliament in all it's finery and my Geiger counter's fucked. Luckily I just watched _Hunger _and proper cheered when the screw got shot in the back of the head. I'm back in the room.


----------



## T & P (Sep 4, 2019)

I’ve just come here to say that since the Remainer MPs are now widely referred to as the Rebel Alliance, I’m very disappointed by the lack of Star War memes thus far.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Okay, I'll dial it back and start admiring Angela Rayner talking about being bullied for being ginger.
> 
> 24 hours watching the mother of parliament in all it's finery and my Geiger counter's fucked. Luckily I just watched _Hunger _and proper cheered when the screw got shot in the back of the head. I'm back in the room.



Frankly between you and frieda these recent revelations are more shocking than anything happening in parliament.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

copliker said:


> A couple of minutes spent watching her gallivanting about with Rees Mogg should remedy any such uncomradely sentiments.



She's not the only one who as a new MP was taken in by Rees-Mogg. Mhairi Black was too. I think they both know better now.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 24 hours watching the mother of parliament in all it's finery and my Geiger counter's fucked.



*grumble grumble* England is the mother of parliament


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

Just think if Ed Milliband had never eaten that bacon sandwich none have this would ever of happened.


----------



## gosub (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> History will judge him but losing your first four votes in Parliament & expelling 21 MPs & a defection plus a by election defeat is not a good start. He has been shown up in his first question time & his veneer has cracked.
> 
> I expect a few tories,both MPs & members, are waking up & smelling the coffee which has a tang of the sewer. He might not be their saviour afterall.



Creation of some what would be cross bench Lords in the New Years Honours will go some way to pour oil on troubled waters .

 Lean crew with direction beats coralled cats when it comes to actually moving forward's. 

Some good speeeches tonight. Shame the barracking or reading has fallen out of favour. BUT there were several  that reflected exactly what I think and others that gave me pause for thought


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 4, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Just think if Ed Milliband had never eaten that bacon sandwich none of this would ever of happened.


----------



## Cid (Sep 4, 2019)

What happened with this Kinnock amendment?


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> What happened with this Kinnock amendment?


Its waiting to come back to haunt us


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 4, 2019)

Well, alright.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 4, 2019)

Cid said:


> What happened with this Kinnock amendment?



"Accidentally" brings the May Withdrawal Agreement back into play. I suspect it suits pretty much everyone for the only actual agreement there is with the EU to still be available.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 4, 2019)

..


----------



## Ming (Sep 5, 2019)

MrSki said:


>


Look at the snarl on his face. The mask’s truly dropped off. We’re seeing Alexander ‘King of the World’ Johnson now. Affable Boris is no more.


----------



## gosub (Sep 5, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Well, alright.



I sea what you did there


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, there you go. That's why Johnson can still come out of this looking a lot better than May.


Or it just makes the torygraph look like the Express but with longer words. The FTPA was a Tory idea ffs, an idea from the continuity tory govt that is still um in power (smirk). Labour had nothing to do with it.

If Johnson really wants an election, he should call a vote of no confidence in himself.


----------



## belboid (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The FTPA was a Tory idea ffs, an idea from the continuity tory govt that is still um in power (smirk). Labour had nothing to do with it.


Labour did actually support the idea of the FTPA, it was in their manifesto.  Can't remember which way round it was, but both them and the LibDems included it, for either four or five years


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

belboid said:


> Labour did actually support the idea of the FTPA, it was in their manifesto.  Can't remember which way round it was, but both them and the LibDems included it, for either four or five years


It was brought in by Cameron, though. telegraph just makes itself look ridiculous with that front page. I'm not sure what I think about Labour holding out for further guarantees, but to have Corbyn as the front page story is absurd.


----------



## belboid (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It was brought in by Cameron, though. telegraph just makes itself look ridiculous with that front page. I'm not sure what I think about Labour holding out for further guarantees, but to have Corbyn as the front page story is absurd.


I dig that, and was just being a pedant.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 5, 2019)

Cid said:


> Frankly between you and frieda these recent revelations are more shocking than anything happening in parliament.


I await urban's wrath.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 5, 2019)

I reckon they are all fucked. Not us, them. We all are just enjoying it


----------



## JimW (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh, fair enough, sorry Rutita1, I've never put someone on ignore before, so it's a learning curve.


Were you previously a political fixer for Boris Johnson?


----------



## Humberto (Sep 5, 2019)

They probably think you are like them, that's is why they are such cunts. And the more cunty people 'deserve' a bigger slice.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 5, 2019)

That's your Boris, Queen sanctioned Prime Minister.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 5, 2019)

He's trying to run the world's most hierarchical and centralised states with feudal social structures and land ownership patterns. He thinks the UK has a place in the modern world, and events keep on wrong footing him. No-one wants to bite the bullet and chuck the towel in on the Union.


----------



## Cid (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It was brought in by Cameron, though. telegraph just makes itself look ridiculous with that front page. I'm not sure what I think about Labour holding out for further guarantees, but to have Corbyn as the front page story is absurd.



Not sure what your point is... They're criticising Corbyn for not backing a GE after saying he'd back a GE for x years. They're not criticising the FTPA. That may be a somewhat dishonest reading of the situation, but so what? They're trying to convince middle England tory voters, not urban politics.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

So if lords will pass Benn amendment by 5pm tonight, does that mean Johnson can then put GE to house again and easily get 2/3rds with SNP and (more) Labour support?

Or have I got something wrong. Hate all this backward harry potter shit tbh


----------



## Supine (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So if lords will pass Benn amendment by 5pm tonight, does that mean Johnson can then put GE to house again and easily get 2/3rds with SNP and (more) Labour support?
> 
> Or have I got something wrong. Hate all this backward harry potter shit tbh



In theory that is correct I think. It'd be more fun to see Johnson call a VoNC in his own government though


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So if lords will pass Benn amendment by 5pm tonight, does that mean Johnson can then put GE to house again and easily get 2/3rds with SNP and (more) Labour support?
> 
> Or have I got something wrong. Hate all this backward harry potter shit tbh


Are we sure that the SNP aren't just pulling his pisser?


----------



## fucthest8 (Sep 5, 2019)

T & P said:


> I’ve just come here to say that since the Remainer MPs are now widely referred to as the Rebel Alliance, I’m very disappointed by the lack of Star War memes thus far.



I know, right? Where's the deepfake of Rees-Mogg as Peter Cushing/Moff Tarkin calling them "Rebel scum"?


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Are we sure that the SNP aren't just pulling his pisser?


SNP have no reason to avoid an election. The only certainty is they will do very well.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Are we sure that the SNP aren't just pulling his pisser?


The SNP abstained and said Boris’ election call is a plot to force through No Deal.  

“First Minister of Scotland and leader of the SNP, Nicola Sturgeon, tweeted that the opposition parties must "seek to force [an] election" after the bill becomes law but before Parliament is suspended.

She added: "It's starting to feel like Labour doesn't want an election at all and leaving this PM in place knowing he'll try every trick in book to get what he wants would be irresponsible."”

They want an election. Just not on Johnson’s timetable.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Are we sure that the SNP aren't just pulling his pisser?


Thing is its a win of sorts for SNP if new GE called, tories get majority and ends with no deal isn't it, indy support grows and entrenches

Edit - alternatively a minority labour govt propped up by snp = referendum (but possibly less support for yes)


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 5, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> SNP have no reason to avoid an election. The only certainty is they will do very well.



It’s not just how well they do but whether they get to hold the balance of power and obtain concessions. Extra MPs are of no benefit to them if the scum return with an overall majority and don’t need to cut a deal. A damaged/humiliated Johnson makes this less likely, which might mean they get to play a part.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So if lords will pass Benn amendment by 5pm tonight, does that mean Johnson can then put GE to house again and easily get 2/3rds with SNP and (more) Labour support?
> 
> Or have I got something wrong. Hate all this backward harry potter shit tbh


I don't think anything will happen on an election till Monday and the bill is in law.  



			
				SNP spokesperson said:
			
		

> The SNP wants a general election "as quickly as possible" - but only after legislation to prevent a no-deal Brexit is secure.
> 
> The party is "very keen" for the process to be taken "back to the people", Drew Hendry, business spokesperson for the SNP, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.
> 
> But he added: "It's absolutely vital that we don't allow Boris Johnson and his government to game the system and somehow find a way of making us crash out with a no deal on 31 October."


That's not really different to what McDonnell was saying and certainly does not hold them to going to an election immediately after the Benn bill is in law.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Thing is its a win of sorts for SNP if new GE called, tories get majority and ends with no deal isn't it, indy support grows and entrenches


Johnson is the best recruiting sergeant they’ve had. And not just in terms of votes for them. Anecdotally, I’ve heard people who were ardent No voters in indyref1, if not exactly becoming pro-independence, now countenancing independence as a tactic to get away from the Westminster/Brexit farrago. And I’m talking about people who were very anti Yes previously.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s not just how well they do but whether they get to hold the balance of power and obtain concessions. Extra MPs are of no benefit to them if the scum return with an overall majority and don’t need to cut a deal. A damaged/humiliated Johnson makes this less likely, which might mean they get to play a part.


Well tory majority less beneficial in tactical sense but surely better in political sense - might have less ability to leverage a ref but greater political momentum for building solid yes support


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> That's not really different to what McDonnell was saying and certainly does not hold them to going to an election immediately after the Benn bill is in law.


Correct.

The difference is that they are obliged to also get in a dig at Labour. But that doesn’t alter the fact that their positions are very similar.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The difference is that they are obliged to also get in a dig at Labour. But that doesn’t alter the fact that their positions are very similar.


Party politics within the Rebel Alliance, now that is a surprise.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 5, 2019)

Scotland fucks off, build close links with Europe which ends up getting run by Le Pen/Salvini and similar loons, remnant Britain builds a socialist paradise out of the ruins of post-brexit catastrophe. They won’t feel so clever then, will they?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

So we could see a situation with hard border in irish sea and an almost unstoppable SNP/indy juggernaut in scotland. Lol


----------



## Winot (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So we could see a situation with hard border in irish sea and an almost unstoppable SNP/indy juggernaut in scotland. Lol



Followed by a hard border between England and an independent Scotland back in the EU.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

The united kingdom of great britain and northern ireland wrapped up in gaffer tape


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2019)

So the flaccid blustercunt is taking to the lectern again?
Let's hope he's carrying the revolver.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 5, 2019)

Cid said:


> Not sure what your point is... They're criticising Corbyn for not backing a GE after saying he'd back a GE for x years. They're not criticising the FTPA. That may be a somewhat dishonest reading of the situation, but so what? They're trying to convince middle England tory voters, not urban politics.



So what? Other than it’s an utterly dishonest reading of the situation cobbled together by a collection of billionaires seeking to impose disastrous governance on us for their profit? 

It has to make the blood boil, the fucking state of this nation and its ‘free’ press.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So the flaccid blustercunt is taking to the lectern again?


In Downing Street? Now?


----------



## mauvais (Sep 5, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> View attachment 183249


Meanwhile in Scotland...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In Downing Street? Now?


"Today"

"A Number 10 spokesman said the prime minister will today “speak directly to the public, setting out the vital choice that faces our country”.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> In Downing Street? Now?


I wish the media wouldn't encourage him by reporting his every utterance


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "Today"
> 
> "A Number 10 spokesman said the prime minister will today “speak directly to the public, setting out the vital choice that faces our country”.


He could walk outside the Westminster bubble and talk directly to the public, perhaps in Liverpool or Glasgow


----------



## brogdale (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> He could walk outside the Westminster bubble and talk directly to the public, perhaps in Liverpool or Glasgow


Save the revolver bullet.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)

..


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 5, 2019)

Ooh, has Dominic Cummings sacked him?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 5, 2019)

Winot said:


> Followed by a hard border between England and an independent Scotland back in the EU.



Easy border to manage. Not like NI.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Or it just makes the torygraph look like the Express but with longer words. The FTPA was a Tory idea ffs, an idea from the continuity tory govt that is still um in power (smirk). Labour had nothing to do with it.
> 
> If Johnson really wants an election, he should call a vote of no confidence in himself.



The FTPA was LibDem policy, forced on the Tories as part of the coalition agreement, it was important for the LibDems, they wanted their 5 years of 'glory', and not find themselves out of power early.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 5, 2019)

Here’s yer P45 Johnson, you know what to do with it 

P45 (KP4543)


----------



## Supine (Sep 5, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Easy border to manage. Not like NI.



Rebuild of Hadrians wall?


----------



## mauvais (Sep 5, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Easy border to manage. Not like NI.


It's not _that_ easy, since noone knows where the independent Scottish border actually begins. It's somewhere near that fancy farm shop motorway services, I think. Maybe Gloucester.


----------



## klang (Sep 5, 2019)

MrSki said:


> ..


pls share your thoughts once you joined the dots.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

So it seems Johnson has two routes to the GE he wants.  Either put forward a bill to suspend the FTP Act or call a vote of no confidence in his government.  I would imagine the first route would be the one to go down.  Weirdly its not inconceivable that he could win a vote of no confidence unless his own party abstain.

What tickles me the most though is that he may run out of time to do either because the arrogant fool has brought forward the suspension of Parliament.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's not _that_ easy, since noone knows where the independent Scottish border actually begins. It's somewhere near that fancy farm shop motorway services, I think. Maybe Gloucester.


Most middle class services ever, £6 for a gourmet hand made sausage roll


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

Looks like he's agreed not to filibuster the no deal Bill in the Lords in exchange for an election. 

Bill designed to stop no-deal 'will clear Lords'


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's not _that_ easy, since noone knows where the independent Scottish border actually begins. It's somewhere near that fancy farm shop motorway services, I think. Maybe Gloucester.



The people that run Tebay services also run Gloucester services


----------



## Poot (Sep 5, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> View attachment 183249



Yeah, it's all Corbyn's fault, all of this. 

I was going to say something along the lines of Opposition's gonna opposition, but in fact just standing idly by and saying 'nah' occasionally seems to be the current strategy which is working out okay to my mind.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Looks like he's agreed not to filibuster the no deal Bill in the Lords in exchange for an election.
> 
> Bill designed to stop no-deal 'will clear Lords'


If so that's a stupid mistake by Labour imo


----------



## Poot (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Most middle class services ever, £6 for a gourmet hand made sausage roll


I was there two days ago. For a wee. Take that The Man.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)

Meanwhile negotiations with Europe.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

Could labour call a vonc after the bill receives royal assent?


----------



## bluescreen (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Could labour call a vonc after the bill receives royal assent?


They could. They might want to give him more rope though.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Could labour call a vonc after the bill receives royal assent?



Yes.  Though how would it turn out?  

You'd figure unless the government were happy to go to the polls (which they appear to be) that everyone on the government benches (including the recently whippless) would vote for the government.  There is also an assortment of independents on the opposition benches that could feasibly vote with the government either because they are still tories at heart or they know that another election means the end of their career's.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yes.  Though how would it turn out?
> 
> You'd figure unless the government were happy to go to the polls (which they appear to be) that everyone on the government benches (including the recently whippless) would vote for the government.  There is also an assortment of independents on the opposition benches that could feasibly vote with the government either because they are still tories at heart or they know that another election means the end of their career's.



Ideal scenario is Johnson calls a vote of no confidence in himself, and then he can't even win that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> If so that's a stupid mistake by Labour imo



Nah once they've ruled out no deal they have to take the election. They can't say "we want to leave you in power just for fun, to see you squirm"


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Could labour call a vonc after the bill receives royal assent?



Would look a bit daft after he's tried to go to the country to seek a fresh mandate.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah once they've ruled out no deal they have to take the election. They can't say "we want to leave you in power just for fun, to see you squirm"


Yeah
I'm all confused 

So there can't be a no deal now, right? Is that where we are?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So there can't be a no deal now, right? Is that where we are?



Not quite. Johnson (or prime minister Insert Name Here) will be required by law to ask the EU for an extension should they fail to get a withdrawal agreement through parliament, and to accept whatever extension the EU offers.


----------



## Cid (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> So what? Other than it’s an utterly dishonest reading of the situation cobbled together by a collection of billionaires seeking to impose disastrous governance on us for their profit?
> 
> It has to make the blood boil, the fucking state of this nation and its ‘free’ press.



I’m not sure you understand my point. We’re talking about 2 things; impact on a GE and how Johnson will go down in mainstream history. Not how I or most people here feel about it.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Yeah
> I'm all confused
> 
> So there can't be a no deal now, right? Is that where we are?



Seemingly not in the short term but it is still very much in play in the medium term.  Johnson could win an election with a majority and simply press ahead with no deal knowing he had the numbers to defeat any motion against it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would look a bit daft after he's tried to go to the country to seek a fresh mandate.


I dunno, it has its appeal. You don't get to go on your terms. You go on ours. You need to declare no confidence in yourselves if you want an election. Assuming this bill gets through on Monday, and the signs are that it will, Labour will be able to show that it has got something out of the few days of delay. It provides some clarity to their brexit position - we're the no 'no deal' party; we're the grown-ups; and we have shown that we are prepared to act accordingly.

After all, the whole idea of the FTPA was that the government of the day should not be allowed to set the date for elections purely for its own convenience. That's what May did anyway, and it's clearly what Johnson wants to do as well. It's the most pointless, toothless piece of legislation imaginable.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The FTPA was LibDem policy, forced on the Tories as part of the coalition agreement, it was important for the LibDems, they wanted their 5 years of 'glory', and not find themselves out of power early.


Weak, ineffectual, beside the point. LibDem idea? Makes sense.


----------



## chilango (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah once they've ruled out no deal they have to take the election. They can't say "we want to leave you in power just for fun, to see you squirm"



I dunno.

I think that'd be quite popular.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah once they've ruled out no deal they have to take the election. They can't say "we want to leave you in power just for fun, to see you squirm"



However, every day they can keep the squeeze on Johnson will increase the damage he inflicts on himself and his party. Proroguing parliament is already starting to look like a trap Johnson has set for himself.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

chilango said:


> I dunno.
> 
> I think that'd be quite popular.



It's just my opinion, but if I were Corbyn, what I would say above all else, every single day, is that people have suffered horrendously under nine years of the Tories and it can't go on any longer.

This is the thing with all these antics. You get wrapped up in them and you forget the Tories are in power and people are suffering daily.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

I want an election. Ok it carries risk of a tory majority on five year fixed term. But chance that tories out. Risk/reward innit


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Seemingly not in the short term but it is still very much in play in the medium term.  Johnson could win an election with a majority and simply press ahead with no deal knowing he had the numbers to defeat any motion against it.



unless I'm missing something Johnson wants a majority so he can out-flank the ERG & get some sort of May-lite / back-stop fudged deal through


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I dunno, it has its appeal. You don't get to go on your terms. You go on ours. You need to declare no confidence in yourselves if you want an election. Assuming this bill gets through on Monday, and the signs are that it will, Labour will be able to show that it has got something out of the few days of delay. It provides some clarity to their brexit position - we're the no 'no deal' party; we're the grown-ups; and we have shown that we are prepared to act accordingly.
> 
> After all, the whole idea of the FTPA was that the government of the day should not be allowed to set the date for elections purely for its own convenience. That's what May did anyway, and it's clearly what Johnson wants to do as well. It's the most pointless, toothless piece of legislation imaginable.



Also risks some sort of GNU being formed. Which probably wouldn't include Corbyn or Johnson but would be Corbyn's fault if he pushed the VoNC.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yes.  Though how would it turn out?
> 
> You'd figure unless the government were happy to go to the polls (which they appear to be) that everyone on the government benches (including the recently whippless) would vote for the government.  There is also an assortment of independents on the opposition benches that could feasibly vote with the government either because they are still tories at heart or they know that another election means the end of their career's.


My thought was - and it’s probably misinformed so hopefully somebody with more knowledge of the process will correct me -
If they called a vonc on Monday and it passes they then get 2 weeks to form a new govt? If that fails 6 weeks minimum before new election? Takes them into November?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

hot air baboon said:


> unless I'm missing something Johnson wants a majority so he can out-flank the ERG & get some sort of May-lite / back-stop fudged deal through



Yeah but question asked was whether it would be possible for Johnson to do no deal anyway.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> My thought was - and it’s probably misinformed so hopefully somebody with more knowledge of the process will correct me -
> If they called a vonc on Monday and it passes they then get 2 weeks to form a new govt? If that fails 6 weeks minimum before new election? Takes them into November?



Yes that's correct but think it would be 28th October earliest or summat like that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Also risks some sort of GNU being formed. Which probably wouldn't include Corbyn or Johnson but would be Corbyn's fault if he pushed the VoNC.


That's true. But let's say the no no deal bill gets through on Monday. Labour says 'ok bring back a bill for an election and we'll vote for it', govt says 'oh, but we've dismissed parliament for a month now'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is the thing with all these antics. You get wrapped up in them and you forget the Tories are in power and people are suffering daily.



And I think Corbyn is very aware of that. Flipside of it is that an election he's unlikely to win is no use to the suffering millions, and if a fortnight's delay changes the arithmetic on that then it's worth it. That at least is what the likes of Starmer are clearly telling him.

Also Corbyn needs a clear position to take into a GE. If it's 'we'll negotiate a proper deal' then that has to be credible, ie the deadline has to be more than three days after election day.


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> It's not _that_ easy, since noone knows where the independent Scottish border actually begins. It's somewhere near that fancy farm shop motorway services, I think. Maybe Gloucester.


I'd be happy for Scotland to annex northern England.  Save me having to apply for a Scottish passport once they declare independence.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes that's correct but think it would be 28th October earliest or summat like that.


Ah so it’s not 2 weeks plus 6 weeks but 6 weeks in total?
Well they should call it in a couple of weeks then!?
Does prorogation mean they can’t?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> I'd be happy for Scotland to annex northern England.  Save me having to apply for a Scottish passport once they declare independence.


From Berwick to the (Welsh) Dee.


----------



## Lorca (Sep 5, 2019)

Can you take the midlands as well?


----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 5, 2019)

Lorca said:


> Can you take the midlands as well?


No, England can keep that.


----------



## Lorca (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## Cid (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's just my opinion, but if I were Corbyn, what I would say above all else, every single day, is that people have suffered horrendously under nine years of the Tories and it can't go on any longer.
> 
> This is the thing with all these antics. You get wrapped up in them and you forget the Tories are in power and people are suffering daily.



Problem is it’s difficult to tell whether he has. Not like the press would bother reporting it... maybe he needs some ‘carthago delenda est’ type phrase to open every speech.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

One good thing in all this, the really annoying 'Mr no brexit shouty man', who been a pain the arse for the broadcasters on College Green, has lost his voice.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## farmerbarleymow (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> From Berwick to the (Welsh) Dee.


If the line was drawn so the North West, Yorkshire and the North East was annexed by Scotland it would quadruple the population, boosting Scotland's economy.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I want an election. Ok it carries risk of a tory majority on five year fixed term. But chance that tories out. Risk/reward innit


Yep. Absolutely this. I kind of understand the stuff Labour are doing this week, but I want the election asap.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

hot air baboon said:


> unless I'm missing something Johnson wants a majority so he can out-flank the ERG & get some sort of May-lite / back-stop fudged deal through



I thought that originally but now I'm beginning to wonder whether that actually is the case and whether Ken Clarke is actually right when saying Johnson's plan all along was no deal and pin the blame on Parliament and the EU.  Chaos both spontaneous and planned does seem to be the order of the day.

Let's just say that the recent bill didn't pass and no deal was still on for the 31st October.  Its quite clear there are absolutely no negotiations going on at all.  This just leaves him pitching up at the next EU shindig and saying cut me a deal of my choice or its no deal.  He must know under those circumstances he'd be told to go whistle so he'd have to go no deal.  Its by far and away the most likely outcome so the only conclusion really is that is currently his preferred option.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

farmerbarleymow said:


> If the line was drawn so the North West, Yorkshire and the North East was annexed by Scotland it would quadruple the population, boosting Scotland's economy.


A new kind of citizenship. Virtual borders. So you can be Scottish and living in Scotland wherever you are. The border exists only in the cold, mizzly uplands of the mind. Everywhere can be Aberdeen.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

Cid said:


> Problem is it’s difficult to tell whether he has. Not like the press would bother reporting it... maybe he needs some ‘carthago delenda est’ type phrase to open every speech.



I mean now though. Starmer is saying not until after the EU have agreed now. That's putting Brexit above austerity. That's not how Labour should play this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I mean now though. Starmer is saying not until after the EU have agreed now. That's putting Brexit above austerity. That's not how Labour should play this.


Delaying for one or two weeks isn't putting brexit above austerity, though. I dunno. If they get this bill through and then an election is forced next week somehow, I think they may have played this well.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I mean now though. Starmer is saying not until after the EU have agreed now. That's putting Brexit above austerity. That's not how Labour should play this.



Did you not hear?  Austerity is over, Javid told us all yesterday.  The good times are back and its time to rejoice!


----------



## klang (Sep 5, 2019)

I'm off to Westfields for a bit of senseless shopping then


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> He must know under those circumstances he'd be told to go whistle so he'd have to go no deal.  Its by far and away the most likely outcome so the only conclusion really is that is currently his preferred option.



It's possible he really does believe he can bowl up at the EU and demand whatever he wants. His recent travails should have shown him that the world doesn't work like that, but that reality is up against decades of entitlement and arrogance.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Delaying for one or two weeks isn't putting brexit above austerity, though. I dunno. If they get this bill through and then an election is forced next week somehow, I think they may have played this well.



It's possible they may have picked the best bad strategy available.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 5, 2019)

In other news, Johnson the Younger has finally concluded that his older brother is a complete power-drunk, crazed, debauched, loon and has resigned from the Cabinet and stood down as an MP. 

Jo Johnson quits as MP and minister


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

LIVE: PM's brother Jo Johnson quits as MP and minister

He's pissed off with his brother!

Oops.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

P.M.S.L.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> P.M.S.L.



Prime Minister’s Sibling Leaves?


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Sep 5, 2019)

Is that a "quitting with immediate effect" or a standing down at the inevitable but not yet called election?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

littleseb said:


> I'm off to Westfields for a bit of senseless shopping then



Stick it on the never never.  The good times will never end.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Is that a "quitting with immediate effect" or a standing down at the inevitable but not yet called election?



The latter I believe.

Which begs a question, do you still get the golden handshake even if you don't stand for reelection?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

Former Labour MP Luciana Berger, who went to Change & then left, has now joined the LibDems.

I suspect a few more independents/change MPs will do the same, it's their only slight chance of re-election.

Blimey, this is fun.


----------



## killer b (Sep 5, 2019)

The only info yet in the public domain is a single tweet from Johnson, so it's not yet clear what he means.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

There's one o too many in the final paragraph


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> From Berwick to the (Welsh) Dee.


I know this is a pun but wtf are you stopping at the Dee for m8


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> The only info yet in the public domain is a single tweet from Johnson, so it's not yet clear what he means.


He will tweet some cute puppy pictures as a deflection technique.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> The only info yet in the public domain is a single tweet from Johnson, so it's not yet clear what he means.


Oh it's clear, he's taking the auld Chiltern hundreds route.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I know this is a pun but wtf are you stopping at the Dee for m8


A pee. A pee in the dee.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 5, 2019)

Surprised he didn't choose to resign from the Johnson family instead.


----------



## mauvais (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> LIVE: PM's brother Jo Johnson quits as MP and minister
> 
> He's pissed off with his brother!
> 
> Oops.


A rare example of quitting in order to spend less time with his family.

Nicked that off some Labour MP.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

Gaia said:


> In other news, Johnson the Younger has finally concluded that his older brother is a complete power-drunk, crazed, debauched, loon and has resigned from the Cabinet and stood down as an MP.
> 
> Jo Johnson quits as MP and minister


He has stood down yes, as to why, probably not what you have posted.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Surprised he didn't choose to resign from the Johnson family instead.



Still time for that.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Surprised he didn't choose to resign from the Johnson family instead.



In families like that there is always some great aunt or distant relative leaving them vast sums of money, probably every few months.  He aint going to resign from that.


----------



## tommers (Sep 5, 2019)

This is fucking glorious.

Yes, we may all be eating our pets in a year's time but just enjoy the moment.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I know this is a pun but wtf are you stopping at the Dee for m8


Ran out of steam. It was only a half hearted invasion. It’s chips for tea.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's just my opinion, but if I were Corbyn, what I would say above all else, every single day, is that people have suffered horrendously under nine years of the Tories and it can't go on any longer.
> 
> This is the thing with all these antics. You get wrapped up in them and you forget the Tories are in power and people are suffering daily.



So you say that those same people will suffer hugely under the consequences of a no deal Brexit. And as soon as those people are protected from a No Deal Brexit (so the bill recieves assent as Boris acts on it) bring on the election. Anything else is playing with people's lives for politics.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> *So you say that those same people will suffer hugely under the consequences of a no deal Brexit*. And as soon as those people are protected from a No Deal Brexit (so the bill recieves assent as Boris acts on it) bring on the election. Anything else is playing with people's lives for politics.



You highlight that it is not just those same people, but the middle-classes will be thrown in to penury too...


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You highlight that it is not just those same people, but the middle-classes will be thrown in to penury too...


Which fits perfectly with their slogan 'for the many, not the few'. There can be a consistent narrative to all this.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> So you say that those same people will suffer hugely under the consequences of a no deal Brexit. And as soon as those people are protected from a No Deal Brexit (so the bill recieves assent as Boris acts on it) bring on the election. Anything else is playing with people's lives for politics.



Nah, I don't buy that. Firstly because people have heard this line already for too long - Brexit will harm the most vulnerable - and it doesn't play because people are already suffering, that's why people wanted to leave. Secondly though it will only be understood as delaying and jockeying for political advantage ie let's make Johnson look really foolish while leaving him in power.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah, I don't buy that. Firstly because people have heard this line already for too long - Brexit will harm the most vulnerable - and it doesn't play because people are already suffering, that's why people wanted to leave. Secondly though it will only be understood as delaying and jockeying for political advantage ie let's make Johnson look really foolish while leaving him in power.


I think plenty of people are really fucking anxious about the chaos of no deal. And if your line is that it is totally irresponsible and likely to both cost huge amounts of money and quite possibly result in deaths, how can you say those things while not making stopping it from happening a priority? You can also spin the reverse - jumping at an election before securing no no deal as jockeying for political advantage at the expense of dealing with real problems. _Labour are trying to be the grown-ups in the room, and that means sorting no deal right now._ That's a consistent position, and you could argue that any other position would be inconsistent.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 5, 2019)

mauvais said:


> A rare example of quitting in order to spend less time with his family.
> 
> Nicked that off some Labour MP.



Hahahah do you know who said that? Because it’s hilarious


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think plenty of people are really fucking anxious about the chaos of no deal. And if your line is that it is totally irresponsible and likely to both cost huge amounts of money and quite possibly result in deaths, how can you say those things while not making stopping it from happening a priority? You can also spin the reverse - jumping at an election before securing no no deal as jockeying for political advantage at the expense of dealing with real problems. _Labour are trying to be the grown-ups in the room, and that means sorting no deal right now._ That's a consistent position, and you could argue that any other position would be inconsistent.



There's danger in pretty much every move.  Whilst sending Johnson to go grovel for an extension could be seen as humiliating the tory leader it will also be seen as the UK Prime Minister being humiliated in Europe.  There was already a a belief out that that the EU had humiliated May.


----------



## mauvais (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Hahahah do you know who said that? Because it’s hilarious


Theresa Griffin, MEP not MP.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There's danger in pretty much every move.  Whilst sending Johnson to go grovel for an extension could be seen as humiliating the tory leader it will also be seen as the UK Prime Minister being humiliated in Europe.  There was already a a belief out that that the EU had humiliated May.



Johnson's humiliating himself in the same way May did, by starting with unrealistic red lines.


----------



## killer b (Sep 5, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Hahahah do you know who said that? Because it’s hilarious


every second account on twitter.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think plenty of people are really fucking anxious about the chaos of no deal. And if your line is that it is totally irresponsible and likely to both cost huge amounts of money and quite possibly result in deaths, how can you say those things while not making stopping it from happening a priority? You can also spin the reverse - jumping at an election before securing no no deal as jockeying for political advantage at the expense of dealing with real problems. _Labour are trying to be the grown-ups in the room, and that means sorting no deal right now._ That's a consistent position, and you could argue that any other position would be inconsistent.



If they can't win the election the risk of no deal is still there. This idea that they can prevent certain outcomes without being in power is batshit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If they can't win the election the risk of no deal is still there. This idea that they can prevent certain outcomes without being in power is batshit.


True. But if the date were put back to after 31 Oct? Johnson's scorched earth tactics fit with the idea of setting the election for November, crashing out, and taking his chances in the ensuing mayhem. We've already seen with the proroguing nonsense that he's perfectly prepared to make nakedly political manoeuvres that are constitutionally questionable but not outright illegal. Delaying the election after it's been voted for and making up a ludicrous rationale for it that he sticks to shamelessly and forces his ministers to stick to shamelessly would fit the pattern.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah, I don't buy that. Firstly because people have heard this line already for too long - Brexit will harm the most vulnerable - and it doesn't play because people are already suffering, that's why people wanted to leave. Secondly though it will only be understood as delaying and jockeying for political advantage ie let's make Johnson look really foolish while leaving him in power.



Only one in five people in the UK favour No Deal, and I'd wager that's mostly more comfortable Leave voters. There's certainly a Brexit weariness but that's not translating to people supporting No Deal.  I think it's massively irresponsible, if politically harder, not to see this strategy through.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think plenty of people are really fucking anxious about the chaos of no deal..


Based on what? Most of the polling shows that the people angered by no deal are those that voted remain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Based on what? Most of the polling shows that the people angered by no deal are those that voted remain.


anxiety and anger are two different things.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Johnson's humiliating himself in the same way May did, by starting with unrealistic red lines.


but johnson's abject humiliation has only just begun


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Based on what? Most of the polling shows that the people angered by no deal are those that voted remain.


here's an example





The public are more afraid of Jeremy Cobyn in Number 10 than No Deal Brexit  | Daily Mail Online

i'd say 35% of people saying no deal brexit worst possible outcome is plenty of anxious people, painful though it is to agree with the liberal lbj


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Based on what? Most of the polling shows that the people angered by no deal are those that voted remain.


Polling shows around a third wanting out, deal or no deal. I'd be interested to see the demographic split of that. It represents about 3/5 of the original leave vote. Plenty with friends from the EU are anxious. Fuck, you've got people who are scared to leave the country for fear of not being let back in. People talk about 'remain bubbles' but I think there are very much 'leave bubbles' around the place of people who don't see the direct consequences of this fuck up for those around them and so can still think of no deal in abstract ways.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

soz just looking at 




i noticed it adds up to 103%, which cannot be right


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> anxiety and anger are two different things.


Well if they are anxious it does not really appear in the polling - the population that opposes/supports no deal is largely the same as the population that opposes/supports any deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Well if they are anxious it does not really appear in the polling - the population that opposes/supports no deal is largely the same as the population that opposes/supports any deal


i am amazed. i'd have expected them to be two different but similarly sized populations.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz just looking at
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's from the Mail, so inaccuracies are to be expected.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's from the Mail, so lies are to be expected.


Fixed for you


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Polling shows around a third wanting out, deal or no deal. I'd be interested to see the demographic split of that. It represents about 3/5 of the original leave vote.


Where are you getting that info. The polling I've seen has > 80% of those that voted leave in 2016 still supporting leave and I've just posted that data showing 75% of leave voters supporting a no deal leave.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Where are you getting that info. The polling I've seen has > 80% of those that voted leave in 2016 still supporting leave and I've just posted that data showing 75% of leave voters supporting a no deal leave.


so roughly 32% v 28% of the electorally registered


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so roughly 32% v 28% of the electorally registered


Sorry do you mean leave vs remain, oppose vs support no deal or something else?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry do you mean leave vs remain, oppose vs support no deal or something else?


i mean that the two camps you're talking about consist of about 32% of the electorate for the 2016 leavers and about 28% of the electorate for the 2016 remainers.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> True. But if the date were put back to after 31 Oct? Johnson's scorched earth tactics fit with the idea of setting the election for November, crashing out, and taking his chances in the ensuing mayhem. We've already seen with the proroguing nonsense that he's perfectly prepared to make nakedly political manoeuvres that are constitutionally questionable but not outright illegal. Delaying the election after it's been voted for and making up a ludicrous rationale for it that he sticks to shamelessly and forces his ministers to stick to shamelessly would fit the pattern.



Yes, but who cares? 

The election campaign is already happening. Has been since the summer. Labour need to speed up.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz just looking at
> 
> 
> 
> ...


well it is the DM , not known for their honesty..


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> It's from the Mail, so inaccuracies are to be expected.


beat me to it


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> beat me to it


brilliant minds think alike


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Only one in five people in the UK favour No Deal, and I'd wager that's mostly more comfortable Leave voters. There's certainly a Brexit weariness but that's not translating to people supporting No Deal.  I think it's massively irresponsible, if politically harder, not to see this strategy through.



No Deal isn't actually a reality though. What has already happened is. Johnson doesn't want No Deal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> brilliant minds think alike



Fools seldom differ.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i mean that the two camps you're talking about consist of about 32% of the electorate for the 2016 leavers and about 28% of the electorate for the 2016 remainers.


Sure but 'no deal' is not really opposed by a greater % of the population than which opposes any deal. There are very few votes Labour will get from opposing 'no deal' rather than 'a deal'

Both the 2016 leave vote and the remain vote are solid and largely polarised.


----------



## chilango (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> brilliant minds think "a like"



ffy.

and, yeah, you got some.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Sure but 'no deal' is not really opposed by a greater % of the population than which opposes any deal. There are very few votes Labour will get from opposing 'no deal' rather than 'a deal'


i don't think anyone's opposing 'a deal', but there is a lot of division on what an acceptable deal would look like.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think anyone's opposing 'a deal',


Well that's where I don't agree with you. A very large proportion of the 2016 Remain vote do oppose leaving on any terms.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Well that's where I don't agree with you. A very large proportion of the 2016 Remain vote do oppose leaving on any terms.


how large a proportion?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how large a proportion?


Well 88% of the 2016 remain vote say they would still vote remain. Support for a second referendum (with remain on the ballot) correlates very strongly with the 2016 remain vote.


----------



## chilango (Sep 5, 2019)

I oppose (in no particular order)


no deal
a deal
revoking a50
a 2nd referendum

I support (in no particular order)


----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## elbows (Sep 5, 2019)

He ran the 4 minute bile.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

Have we had an indictation on when the lectern (sans crest) will be coming out?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Have we had an indictation on when the lectern (sans crest) will be coming out?



When he next goes for a shit.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 5, 2019)

another notch on his long success sheet
he must be absolutely loving it


----------



## killer b (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Have we had an indictation on when the lectern (sans crest) will be coming out?


He announced their intention to call an election in parliament, and they had a vote on it last night (another expected on Monday) - what would he be announcing from the lectern?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

I wish the Tory ruination would slow down a little bit so I could relish it more.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> He announced their intention to call an election in parliament, and they had a vote on it last night (another expected on Monday) - what would he be announcing from the lectern?


I dunno, I thought he was going to do another announcement today


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

.


----------



## killer b (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I dunno, I thought he was going to do another announcement today


He's doing a speech this afternoon I think. But unless he's got something wild to spring on us, it's not going to contain anything new.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> I wish the Tory ruination would slow down a little bit so I could relish it more.



In your strange universe are you allowed to enjoy it if you didn't vote in favour of it?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> In your strange universe are you allowed to enjoy it if you didn't vote in favour of it?



In your strange universe what motivated you to quote my post and ask this particular question?


----------



## andysays (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> In your strange universe are you allowed to enjoy it if you didn't vote in favour of it?


I think philosophical owes all of us leave voters both an apology and some thanks, TBH


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> In your strange universe what motivated you to quote my post and ask this particular question?



Because for the past fuck knows how many 100's of pages all you've done is bleat that those who voted for Brexit must own Brexit. Those that voted Brexit have caused the vermin to tear themselves to shreds, so why are you now happy to share in the glory?


----------



## klang (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> .


his speech is likely to leave us with more ?s than .s.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> I think philosophical owes all of us leave voters both an apology and some thanks, TBH



If you voted leave to fuck shit up then so far so


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Because for the past fuck knows how many 100's of pages all you've done is bleat that those who voted for Brexit must own Brexit. Those that voted Brexit have caused the vermin to tear themselves to shreds, so why are you now happy to share in the glory?



Share the glory?
The relish is mine, not to share with you.
Would you like an empty room to start a fight in?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

killer b said:


> He's doing a speech this afternoon I think. But unless he's got something wild to spring on us, it's not going to contain anything new.



He's removing the whip from himself this time.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Share the glory?
> The relish is mine, not to share with you.
> Would you like an empty room to start a fight in?




You not sharing your relish, earlier today:



philosophical said:


> I wish the Tory ruination would slow down a little bit so I could relish it more.









Bahnhof Strasse said:


> *You are a massive wanker though*, given multiple opportunities to engage but don’t. So fuck you. And if as you claim me putting a cross in the leave box will be the last thing that goes through your mind before your die; good.





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The EU has exactly that, well 325 miles long, on its eastern flank, erected to explicitly keep brown people from entering EU territory. And after a week of your rubbish not one thing you have posted has changed *my opinion of you as a massive wanker.*





Bahnhof Strasse said:


> *Still a massive wanker then.*


----------



## andysays (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You not sharing your relish, earlier today:


TBF, philosophical will get the last laugh when Brexit relish is no longer available in the shops after Brexit because it can't be imported any longer


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBF, philosophical will get the last laugh when Brexit relish is no longer available in the shops after Brexit because it can't be imported any longer




((((( Chlorinated relish )))))


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You not sharing your relish, earlier today:



I have no idea if this post is addressed to me.
If it is, then your opinion of me as a wanker is a bit of sharing I suppose.
Crack on.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBF, philosophical will get the last laugh when Brexit relish is no longer available in the shops after Brexit because it can't be imported any longer



We could smuggle it across the border in Ireland.


----------



## krink (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We could smuggle it across the border in Ireland.



fuck that!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

George Osborne seems to be enjoying it, according to the BBC, the Evening Standard's headline has been changed to...

*Blow for Bojo as Bro Jo go goes.*
*


*


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 5, 2019)

All this _*'i'm a leave voter so I get to relish this, you have to thank me for it' *_is really cringey.

Are you also going to claim responsibility for the utter misery the leave vote has caused people in terms of the rise in anti-migrant/immigrant sentiment and attacks, plus the stress/worry/uncertainty of having to get settled status? Fucks sake.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 5, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> All this _*'i'm a leave voter so I get to relish this, you have to thank me for it' *_is really cringey.
> 
> Are you also going to claim responsibility for the utter misery the leave vote has caused people in terms of the rise in anti-migrant/immigrant sentiment and attacks, plus the stress/worry/uncertainty of having to get settled status? Fucks sake.


Who are you quoting?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 5, 2019)

Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.

Can Labour’s be ‘Love all the people’ instead?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.
> 
> Can Labour’s be ‘Love all the people’ instead?



Not sure I'd want to overuse the word 'trust' if I was Boris Johnson.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.
> 
> *Can Labour’s be ‘Love all the people’ instead?*



So, they can mop up the hippy vote?


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.
> 
> Can Labour’s be ‘Love all the people’ instead?


As in "Trust the people who are working hard to negotiate a Brexit deal"


----------



## Wilf (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.
> 
> Can Labour’s be ‘Love all the people’ instead?


Trust the People sounds like a very British, populist, people vs MPs slogan. But it provides plenty of ammunition along the lines of 'so, why didn't you trust the people over the NHS' type stuff. Also, Johnson's own personal list of lies undermines the whole push.

Labour? 'We have consistently applied 6 Love Tests and at the NEC meeting in 2027 we will consider...'


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Sep 5, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Peston reporting that the Tories have been testing ‘Trust the people’ as their campaign slogan.



If they do Labour should use it, same type face, colours whatever, just change it to 'Trust these people?' above a picture of Boris/Gove/JRM telling a lie.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> So, they can mop up the hippy vote?



Hey, don’t knock it. That’s a big and easily led segment.

I was thinking Bill Hicks tho. Some of that rhetoric would spice it up.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> All this _*'i'm a leave voter so I get to relish this, you have to thank me for it' *_is really cringey.
> 
> Are you also going to claim responsibility for the utter misery the leave vote has caused people in terms of the rise in anti-migrant/immigrant sentiment and attacks, plus the stress/worry/uncertainty of having to get settled status? Fucks sake.


who 'you' here ru?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBF, philosophical will get the last laugh when Brexit relish is no longer available in the shops after Brexit because it can't be imported any longer


philosophical never laughs


----------



## andysays (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We could smuggle it across the border in Ireland.


The hardest of hard borders will be descending across the Irish border at 23.00 hours on 31st October and it will be impossible for anyone or anything to cross.

Haven't you been reading philosophical's posts?


----------



## Lucy Fur (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical never laughs


or....does he? My name is Alain de Botton and tonight etc etc


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> The hardest of hard borders will be descending across the Irish border at 23.00 hours on 31st October and it will be impossible for anyone or anything to cross.
> 
> Haven't you been reading philosophical's posts?



If you are referring to me, I have not written what you say.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical never laughs



You are mistaken.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are mistaken.


oh I don't think so


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBF, philosophical will get the last laugh when Brexit relish is no longer available in the shops after Brexit because it can't be imported any longer



Don't need it in Yorkshire we've got Hendersons Relish


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

I just got lectured by the 18 year old Tory I worked with because I said I usually spoil my paper. Got proper snippy.
 "People died for your right to vote!"
"Who did?"
"That woman. Run over by a horse."
"Ah, the socialist Emily Davison?"


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I just got lectured by the 18 year old Tory I worked with because I said I usually spoil my paper. Got proper snippy.
> "People died for your right to vote!"
> "Who did?"
> "That woman. Run over by a horse."
> "Ah, the socialist Emily Davison?"



Silly twat. Whenever that people died for your right to vote comes up they need reminding that Ms Davison, the Necessary Woman, died and many others struggled for our right not to vote too.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Silly twat. Whenever that people died for your right to vote they need reminding that Ms Davison, the Necessary Woman, died and many others struggled for our right not to vote too.


Yep, I said that but she did not agree. The certainty of youth, eh


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I just got lectured by the 18 year old Tory I worked with because I said I usually spoil my paper. Got proper snippy.
> "People died for your right to vote!"
> "Who did?"
> "That woman. Run over by a horse."
> "Ah, the socialist Emily Davison?"


Just cos people die for something doesn't make it right, people die for all manner of silly reasons


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I just got lectured by the 18 year old Tory I worked with because I said I usually spoil my paper. Got proper snippy.
> "People died for your right to vote!"
> "Who did?"
> "That woman. Run over by a horse."
> "Ah, the socialist Emily Davison?"



My parents (life long tories) named my sister Emily.  When we were young we were told it was after the feminist.  As we grew up and went to school it made sense that it was Emily Davison.  We must have been mid teens when my parents casually dropped in that she was named after _Emily _Pankhurst. 

Its for this and many other things I don't really have much to do with the fucking twats.  My sister is cool though.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> oh I don't think so



You are wrong.
The next move is to say your dad is bigger than my dad isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You are wrong.
> The next move is to say your dad is bigger than my dad isn't it?


No, wrong game


----------



## belboid (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No, wrong game


you are wrong tho.  He's one of those who laughs at his own 'brilliant' points while everyone else looks on going 'wtf??'


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> My parents (life long tories) named my sister Emily.  When we were young we were told it was after the feminist.  As we grew up and went to school it made sense that it was Emily Davison.  We must have been mid teens when my parents casually dropped in that she was named after _Emily _Pankhurst.
> 
> Its for this and many other things I don't really have much to do with the fucking twats.  My sister is cool though.


Emmeline not even the best Pankhurst ffs


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

belboid said:


> you are wrong tho.  He's one of those who laughs at his own 'brilliant' points while everyone else looks on going 'wtf??'


I thought that sound meant he was about to chuck


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Emmeline not even the best Pankhurst ffs


Who is your favourite pankhurst?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Who is your favourite pankhurst?



A long overdue urban thread.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Who is your favourite pankhurst?


Geoff


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> oh I don't think so, muhaha, muhahahaha, MUHAHAHAHAHA..



FFY.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Who is your favourite pankhurst?


Sylvia. One of the heroines of U75 council communism.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Sylvia. One of the heroines of U75 council communism.


Obviously Sylvia.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 5, 2019)

Geoff was a knob.


----------



## binka (Sep 5, 2019)

YouGov asking me today how sympathetic I am to the difficulties MPs are facing trying to sort out Brexit


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 5, 2019)

binka said:


> YouGov asking me today how sympathetic I am to the difficulties MPs are facing trying to sort out Brexit



They deserve a holiday.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 5, 2019)

binka said:


> YouGov asking me today how sympathetic I am to the difficulties MPs are facing trying to sort out Brexit


Poor dears. *snigger*


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

binka said:


> YouGov asking me today how sympathetic I am to the difficulties MPs are facing trying to sort out Brexit



Did you send them a picture of an empty field?


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Sep 5, 2019)

binka said:


> YouGov asking me today how sympathetic I am to the difficulties MPs are facing trying to sort out Brexit



Kin ell! Dry caviar down the tie?


----------



## JimW (Sep 5, 2019)

I did six hard years in Pankhurst and I never even got a drink out of that caper.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 5, 2019)

belboid said:


> you are wrong tho.  He's one of those who laughs at his own 'brilliant' points while everyone else looks on going 'wtf??'


Yes, but have _you _sorted out the border issue. Come on, do it, now!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 5, 2019)

Just watching C4 news and the contempt and hatred people were expressing towards politicians was heart warming, tick tock motherfuckers


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 5, 2019)

That's just brilliant. So nauseated with Boris she had to bail  Make her Chief.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 5, 2019)

Intriguing offer from Johnson.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> George Osborne seems to be enjoying it, according to the BBC, the Evening Standard's headline has been changed to...
> 
> *Blow for Bojo as Bro Jo go goes.
> 
> ...


----------



## teqniq (Sep 5, 2019)

Hmmmm...


----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)

MrSki said:


> He keeps taking out and replacing his pen(?) out of his left pocket.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 5, 2019)

Boris is turning into a really, really shit parody of Trump. It's great


----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## Raheem (Sep 5, 2019)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Intriguing offer from Johnson.


And everyone said that the second referendum question would be impossible to get consensus on.


----------



## Schmetterling (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## tommers (Sep 5, 2019)

News at ten is fucking hilarious.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 5, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Boris is turning into a really, really shit parody of Trump. It's great



A Trumpet.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)




----------



## MrSki (Sep 5, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> That's just brilliant. So nauseated with Boris she had to bail  Make her Chief.



How it should be done.


----------



## 2hats (Sep 5, 2019)

Though it has been suggested that the EU would just write to the UK every 6 months asking them to nominate one.


----------



## mauvais (Sep 5, 2019)

There's no mechanism to expel a state, is there? As has come up with Orban etc


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 5, 2019)

2hats said:


> Though it has been suggested that the EU would just write to the UK every 6 months asking them to nominate one.




Ultimately however tempting it must be becoming to the EU just to kick the UK out, they won't do that to Ireland.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 5, 2019)

If anyone is watching QT, Emily Thornberry is trying out the Labour line: "We really want an election, you jolly well bet we do, but we can't have one because we don't trust that Boris."

I recommend people see it because it is a graphic illustration of why this line about not having an election is going to go down like a cup of cold sick. Ian Blackford has just pointed at Kwazi Kwarteng and said that he doesn't want an election because "we are in control of Parliament now". The Lib Dem has just said she doesn't think there should be an election at all. This is nuts.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If anyone is watching QT, Emily Thornberry is trying out the Labour line: "We really want an election, you jolly well bet we do, but we can't have one because we don't trust that Boris."
> 
> I recommend people see it because it is a graphic illustration of why this line about not having an election is going to go down like a cup of cold sick.



It is, but she dealt with it especially badly, possibly in part because there doesn't seem to be a clear party line, and because, as a politician, she can't just say 'because we can't be sure we'd win'.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 6, 2019)

how difficult is it to say "we don't want to agree an election when that twat johnson could then just move the date to 1 november and close government down until then"?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

but - there will be an election very soon. will anyone really give a fuck that the opposition parties put it back a few weeks?  and it fucks the tories more than labour - as it will force them to get an extension past oct 31st.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 6, 2019)

Is the obligation to have a "meaningful vote" in parliament before any deal is signed off on still applicable to the Muppet Johnson administration?  Or was that a commitment which only applied to Theresa May's government and has now expired?  Could Muppet Johnson get a No Deal Brexit by disguising it as a "deal" just to get it through a loophole in the No Deal legislation which is being passed?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> as it will force them to get an extension past oct 31st.



would it, though?

what would stop him from agreeing an election, then dissolve parliament, then say that the election will be 1 november, let 'no deal' happen (without parliament being there to make any difficulties about it all) and he can go in to the election with a lot of union jack waving (zipwire optional), claiming he has delivered brexit in the face of opposition parties' obstruction

or am i missing something here?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would it, though?
> 
> what would stop him from agreeing an election, then dissolve parliament, then say that the election will be 1 november, let 'no deal' happen (without parliament being there to make any difficulties about it all) and he can go in to the election with a lot of union jack waving (zipwire optional), claiming he has delivered brexit in the face of opposition parties' obstruction
> 
> or am i missing something here?



well all the pundits reckon that the election is now going to be in november. i assume they know what they are talking about on this (briefings - analysis of procedures etc etc). 
If that's the case - johnsons whole strategy has gone from "machlivean genius" to complete and utter failure.  suspending parliament and expelling over 20 mps has just united and glavanised the opposition and repelled and outraged many within his own party - let alone the non- hard - brexiteer voters.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> johnsons whole strategy has gone from "machlivean genius" to complete and utter failure. suspending parliament and expelling over 20 mps has just united and glavanised the opposition and repelled and outraged many within his own party - let alone the non- hard - brexiteer voters.



oh crikey


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 6, 2019)

I'm watching Goerge's last ride from Boys from the Blackstuff and I'm crying
I can't help we're fucked.

_those dreams of long ago they still give me hope and faith in my class...I can't believe that there's no hope...can't

_


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

To explain not agreeing the election labour should try the line 'go on Johnson, you said it would be easy to get a deal, right, get on with it. Do yer fucking job'.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 6, 2019)




----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If anyone is watching QT, Emily Thornberry is trying out the Labour line: "We really want an election, you jolly well bet we do, but we can't have one because we don't trust that Boris."
> 
> I recommend people see it because it is a graphic illustration of why this line about not having an election is going to go down like a cup of cold sick. Ian Blackford has just pointed at Kwazi Kwarteng and said that he doesn't want an election because "we are in control of Parliament now". The Lib Dem has just said she doesn't think there should be an election at all. This is nuts.



Sounds bad. Why can’t she just say “we want an election to be called in a couple of weeks once we make sure the threat of no deal has passed”??


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> but - there will be an election very soon. will anyone really give a fuck that the opposition parties put it back a few weeks?  and it fucks the tories more than labour - as it will force them to get an extension past oct 31st.



This. Bojo's 'do or die in a ditch' posturing has meant it'll be far to appealing for other parties, to make sure he does exactly that.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 6, 2019)

'dying in a ditch rather than obeying the law' isn't going down overly well in establishment, middle class Tory circles.

That cohort always thought he was a chancer, a charlatan and was playing Trump to the BP gallery - but his Trump impression is a lot better than forecast, and they don't like him one bit.

He's losing Tory voters like it's going out of fashion. Whether they are being replaced by BP voters I don't know, but here he's toxic - match that with an MP who's not popular or respected, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories lose seats like Worcester and Wyre Forest because centerist, and remain leaning Tories stay at home....


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

kebabking said:


> 'dying in a ditch rather than obeying the law' isn't going down overly well in establishment, middle class Tory circles.
> 
> That cohort always thought he was a chancer, a charlatan and was playing Trump to the BP gallery - but his Trump impression is a lot better than forecast, and they don't like him one bit.
> 
> He's losing Tory voters like it's going out of fashion. Whether they are being replaced by BP voters I don't know, but here he's toxic - match that with an MP who's not popular or respected, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories lose seats like Worcester and Wyre Forest because centerist, and remain leaning Tories stay at home....


On other hand, and know it's anecdotal, but BBC did a walk around in a car factory in crewe (bentley I assume but didn't catch which one - anyway a very marginal labour/tory seat) with quite a few workers saying they'd always voted labour but would go tory purely to secure brexit, one saying he'd be the first in his family to ever go blue, a sort of mixture of defiance and shame in his tone. Tories might take and lose some weird seats (take from labour lose to libdems) and Labour is going to have to attempt to salvage/deal with its acrimonious divorce from its natural constituency


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 6, 2019)

Urgh just saw an emily T question time clip - what a car crash!


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> On other hand, and know it's anecdotal, but BBC did a walk around in a car factory in crewe (bentley I assume but didn't catch which one - anyway a very marginal labour/tory seat) with quite a few workers saying they'd always voted labour but would go tory purely to secure brexit, one saying he'd be the first in his family to ever go blue, a sort of mixture of defiance and shame in his tone. Tories might take and lose some weird seats (take from labour lose to libdems) and Labour is going to have to attempt to salvage/deal with its acrimonious divorce from its natural constituency


Yes no deal, proroguing parliament and removing the whip there may be causing horror in the Westminster bubble and with many of those that want to remain in the UK. But there's a good deal of support (and/or not giving a fuck) for them in the vote the Tories are trying to capture.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 6, 2019)

kebabking said:


> 'dying in a ditch rather than obeying the law' isn't going down overly well in establishment, middle class Tory circles.
> 
> That cohort always thought he was a chancer, a charlatan and was playing Trump to the BP gallery - but his Trump impression is a lot better than forecast, and they don't like him one bit.
> 
> He's losing Tory voters like it's going out of fashion. Whether they are being replaced by BP voters I don't know, but here he's toxic - match that with an MP who's not popular or respected, and I wouldn't be surprised if the Tories lose seats like Worcester and Wyre Forest because centerist, and remain leaning Tories stay at home....





Even Boris fanboy Ferrari turned against him this morning, “If his own brother can’t trust him how can we expect Labour to do so?”


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes no deal, proroguing parliament and removing the whip there may be causing horror in the Westminster bubble and with many of those that want to remain in the UK. But there's a good deal of support (and/or not giving a fuck) for them in the vote the Tories are trying to capture.


It's quite a fucked up mix at moment too, woman I work with was telling me in long run she wants corbyn as PM because of NHS but would vote johnson in GE to get (no deal) brexit. I didn't really have any response to that


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 6, 2019)

It's that old Brexit-as-totem syndrome. It's not and arguably never was about the practicalities of leaving the EU, and it's now all that matters to so many. I'm concerned Johnson gets in to "save Brexit" and then sells the country to anybody buying.


----------



## Poot (Sep 6, 2019)

In all of this chaos, I admit that I know little about the finer details of politics and that there are greater minds than mine at work here, but I wanted to wish you all a happy Friday and remind you all to just savour this a little. 

General election? Nah. That would mean getting out of this deckchair.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> On other hand, and know it's anecdotal, but BBC did a walk around in a car factory in crewe (bentley I assume but didn't catch which one - anyway a very marginal labour/tory seat) with quite a few workers saying they'd always voted labour but would go tory purely to secure brexit, one saying he'd be the first in his family to ever go blue, a sort of mixture of defiance and shame in his tone. Tories might take and lose some weird seats (take from labour lose to libdems) and Labour is going to have to attempt to salvage/deal with its acrimonious divorce from its natural constituency



yeah - its all about wether the vermin can make up voters lost to the lib dems with digruntled labour leavers. they also have the brexit party to contend with. id say thay is a very risky gamble - and i dont see johnsons as an asset in winning anyone over other than hard core brexit party voters.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> yeah - its all about wether the vermin can make up voters lost to the lib dems with digruntled labour leavers. they also have the brexit party to contend with. id say thay is a very risky gamble - and i dont see johnsons as an asset in winning anyone over other than hard core brexit party voters.


Brexit party won't be an issue for tories if the election is on leaving on no deal or not, only a threat if tories end up in a softer position eg may deal +/-. Not trying to be all doom and gloom cos lots of middle class voters are appalled by johnson and w/c voters who don't prioritise brexit over all else won't flock to him, but there are a lot of w/c voters who see whether UK leaves being about whether they are listened to not about the material stuff and it's more the long term implications that concern me. It's not as if labour not already far down the road of seperation from a voter base that historically voted labour unthinkingly, add this and that process accelerated. Could be good if space opens, could be bad depending on who occupies that space


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 6, 2019)




----------



## MickiQ (Sep 6, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


>



Whilst I am as eager for a GE as anyone waiting a few extra weeks for a far greater chance of getting rid of him seems like a good idea to me


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

46-30 looks better than 46-28 to me tbh


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 6, 2019)

Just a couple of completely speculative questions to which I have no answers : 

To what extent does the "I'm utterly bored by Brexit" factor outnumber (or not?) the "Just get on with Brexit" factor in voter number terms?

In an election, would most of the former group pretty much merge with the latter "simply" to "get rid of it"?

Or would any of the "Brexit -- fucking tedious ... " group prefer or even welcome a change of subject in an election? I bet Corbyn is hoping so ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> 46-30 looks better than 46-28 to me tbh



What does "46" mean? Explain please??


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 6, 2019)

Is Brexit as a concept now so monolithic that any attempt to shift the narrative towards the NHS, education, nine years of cruel Tory rule etc is utterly impossible? I'm not sure Corbyn has the stones or the character to get that message heard over the bullshit.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 6, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Just a couple of completely speculative questions to which I have no answers :
> 
> To what extent does the "I'm utterly bored by Brexit" factor outnumber (or not?) the "Just get on with Brexit" factor in voter number terms?
> 
> ...



A change of subject worked well for Corbyn in 2017. I think 'people sick of hearing about brexit and worried about fucked up schools, hospitals and crime' are a key deomgraphic. Johnson has no domestic policy beyond chucking a few quid at a few things his own party sabotaged in the first place and that'll be the next thing that gets found out.


----------



## eoin_k (Sep 6, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> What does "46" mean? Explain please??


It's the sum of Tory's  and Bxp's  share of the vote. Labour's share appears to have dropped from 30 to 28, so holding out might be such a good strategy.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Brexit party won't be an issue for tories if the election is on leaving on no deal or not


The tory election offer can't be no deal.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> The tory election offer can't be no deal.



I'm increasingly coming around to Starmer's view that the election should be put off until an extension has been set. That would leave Johnson to go into an election with nothing at all, assuming he doesn't just blow his brains out before we even get to that point.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 6, 2019)

With FPTP Labour want the 46-28 because 18% Brexit vote will fuck up the Tories more even if their vote drops. There'll be a lot of tight Tory/Lab marginals which will be decided on the basis of how much support the Tories can get back from the Brexit Party.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> The tory election offer can't be no deal.


We'll see. Just as labour's position of we want opportunity to agree a deal is perceived as remain, Johnson's position of we want opportunity to agree a deal is perceived as no deal. Anyway if that was already the case then what is argument for labour not backing a GE now?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> With FPTP Labour want the 46-28 because 18% Brexit vote will fuck up the Tories more even if their vote drops. There'll be a lot of tight Tory/Lab marginals which will be decided on the basis of how much support the Tories can get back from the Brexit Party.


Yeah well I was a bit glib when I said 46 - 30 better than 46 - 28 because brexit party % won't translate into seats in same way tory/labour % will - but I'm not sure a resurgent brexit party in that 46 - 28 split would mostly hammer tories at all. LibDems biggest threat to tory seats surely


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> We'll see. Just as labour's position of we want opportunity to agree a deal is perceived as remain, Johnson's position of we want opportunity to agree a deal is perceived as no deal. Anyway if that was already the case then what is argument for labour not backing a GE now?


The argument doesn't have to rest on reality, only perception. The real reason Labour want to hold off until October is because they're more likely to win, but they can't say that. As Johnson has been wanking on about no deal since forever and is a notoriously untrustworthy shit, he's given them a reason to delay which is totally believable, but actually not real.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> The argument doesn't have to rest on reality, only perception. The real reason Labour want to hold off until October is because they're more likely to win, but they can't say that. As Johnson has been wanking on about no deal since forever and is a notoriously untrustworthy shit, he's given them a reason to delay which is totally believable, but actually not real.


Yeah I agree it's perception that matters, that's why I brought perception into it. I'm just not convinced that labour delaying a GE to get parliamentary block on no deal passed is the checkmate it's being portrayed as. The perception will remain that Johnson wants no deal


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

I don't think there's any checkmate move tbh.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> The tory election offer can't be no deal.



In practice a TOry majority win means No Deal is firmly back on the table...whether and how they can communicate that is another matter


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't think there's any checkmate move tbh.






Dithering British don’t deserve another Brexit extension, says France


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't think there's any checkmate move tbh.


Right. And main opposition delaying a GE pending process of anti no deal entrenches support for Johnson while reinforcing the people v parliament strategy, surely


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah well I was a bit glib when I said 46 - 30 better than 46 - 28 because brexit party % won't translate into seats in same way tory/labour % will - but I'm not sure a resurgent brexit party in that 46 - 28 split would mostly hammer tories at all. LibDems biggest threat to tory seats surely


I haven't done the analysis, so I may be wrong, but aren't con/lab marginals key here? Eg Labour have got to win back places like Hastings to stand a chance. And that's where bp votes might lose the tories seats.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 6, 2019)

I still can't see a deal happening between the Tories and the bp. After kicking the 21 mps out it would split the Tories further apart.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Right. And main opposition delaying a GE pending process of anti no deal entrenches support for Johnson while reinforcing the people v parliament strategy, surely


That's definitely a risk - but likewise there's other risks from giving Johnson an election in October. I'm not sure which risks are the most significant - Stephen Bush also makes a compelling case that delaying til October essentially gives us another month of an (undeclared) general election campaign with no purdah rules and no pressure from parliament giving Johnson daily egg on his face. But really, fuck knows.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I still can't see a deal happening between the Tories and the bp. After kicking the 21 mps out it would split the Tories further apart.


There will be no deal. The Brexit Party don't want Brexit delivered.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I haven't done the analysis, so I may be wrong, but aren't con/lab marginals key here? Eg Labour have got to win back places like Hastings to stand a chance. And that's where bp votes might lose the tories seats.


Yeah, I haven't done analysis either but off top of my head, crewe, barrow, dudley, stockton etc, all seats that have to be defended, all leave majority, all places where a decent % to brexit party could cost labour to tories. Fuck knows but I don't think labour delaying is playing well


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> There will be no deal. The Brexit Party don't want Brexit delivered.


or actually they do, but they don't want it delivered on their terms. They need to be outside the process.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> or actually they do, but they don't want it delivered on their terms. They need to be outside the process.



so now, having the election after we have left, is to help the Brexit party?


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> so now, having the election after we have left, is to help the Brexit party?


I don't get you. No-one is saying we should have the election after we've left are they?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, I haven't done analysis either but off top of my head, crewe, barrow, dudley, stockton etc, all seats that have to be defended, all leave majority, all places where a decent % to brexit party could cost labour to tories. Fuck knows but I don't think labour delaying is playing well


Yeah works both ways of course, which is where the analysis comes in.

This may be quite a strange election regarding overall vote share and number of seats. I can't see the bp getting many seats at all but they are a crucial spoiler. The general pattern so far wrt the various elections there have been this year has been that bp takes a lot more votes from tories than labour, but of course it matters in which seats those votes are taken.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't get you. No-one is saying we should have the election after we've left are they?



Well I really don't see Seamus Milne having that much leverage over President Macron's suggested veto of an extension.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 6, 2019)

Legitimising farage is not an option for the political classes surely


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> Well I really don't see Shamus Milne having that much leverage over President Macron's veto of an extension.


Macron doesn't want no deal either. If there's an extension requested for a General Election, it'll be granted.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Macron doesn't want no deal either. If there's an extension requested for a General Election, it'll be granted.


It was Macron who forced this Halloween deadline, mind. Without him, it would have been nine months or a year. That said, I don't think a longer extension would have changed much. It would just have led to an extra few months of dithering by Johnson before we got to about this point. The fucking brass neck of him for calling out Labour for dithering.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Macron doesn't want no deal either. If there's an extension requested for a General Election, it'll be granted.



says who?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> says who?


I reckon that's right, though. They granted an extra 6 months on the basis of really nothing at all aside from UK inability. The promise of an immediate election would be a concrete offering of a democratic process that it would be pretty much impossible for the EU to ignore. Even if Macron wanted no deal on 31 Oct, it would be hard for him to get it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> says who?


Says politics


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I reckon that's right, though. They granted an extra 6 months on the basis of really nothing at all aside from UK inability. The promise of an immediate election would be a concrete offering of a democratic process that it would be pretty much impossible for the EU to ignore. Even if Macron wanted no deal on 31 Oct, it would be hard for him to get it.



Extension is by the unanimous consent of the member states of the European Union


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> Extension is by the unanimous consent of the member states of the European Union


Yes, and that's what they would have to do. Otherwise _they_ become the anti-democracy wreckers here. How can they possibly say 'no you can't have an election to sort this out'? They can't.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, and that's what they would have to do. Otherwise _they_ become the anti-democracy wreckers here. How can they possibly say 'no you can't have an election to sort this out'? They can't.



Absolute fucking tly.  October 15 it is then.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Accidentally posted this on the wrong thread, so in case people aren't reading both this is defo worth reading

Stephen Bush in the Staggers morning mailout has some interesting things to say:

_Tough times for Johnson? It depends on where you look. Don't forget that the places that really matter as far as elections are concerned, in no particular order, are the six and ten o'clock news, the brief newsbreaks on music radio, Facebook and the BBC's homepage. 

On the six and the ten, and on music radio, the personally damaging story about his brother is leading - but on the BBC homepage, a picture of Boris Johnson, the Downing Street lectern, a big picture of the police and his pledge to take us out of the EU come what may got top billing. And the most widely travelling political story on Facebook looks to be Jacob Rees-Mogg's slouching, a story with the potential to reinforce the perceptions of a weird-and-posh party that David Cameron worked so hard to erase.

So it's mixed. But the important thing about all of those stories is they show an executive using (sometimes to self-destructive effect) the powers that come with the premiership outside of election time. While there is a fierce row about Johnson's politicization of the police, Downing Street will judge, rightly in my view, that they gain more from the photograph than they lose from the circumstances of it. 

Elsewhere, Robert Jenrick is announcing a cash bounty for 100 marginal constituencies and with the full might of Whitehall's press officers, social media channels and advertising budget behind him. Elections between the government and the opposition parties are by definition asymmetrical but that the opposition is increasingly united in believing the best way forward is a long two month period in which the benefits of incumbency can be used in full means that the Conservative party still retains the ability to do well where it matters even when the news in the bubble turns against it._


----------



## Winot (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> says who?



The French aren’t ready for no deal (apparently).


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

Winot said:


> The French aren’t ready for no deal (apparently).


according to?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> how difficult is it to say "we don't want to agree an election when that twat johnson could then just move the date to 1 november and close government down until then"?



If I was interviewing you, and you were trying to make that point, and I was trying to make you look stupid, you would find making that point very difficult. Think about it. Johnson can do what he likes if he wins.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

This very good piece in The Graun about the coming culture war election campaign deserves everyone's attention too. 

Johnson thinks a ‘culture war’ will win crucial working-class votes. He’s wrong | Lynsey Hanley


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> but - there will be an election very soon. will anyone really give a fuck that the opposition parties put it back a few weeks?  and it fucks the tories more than labour - as it will force them to get an extension past oct 31st.



Yes people will care because every time Labour are asked about this they will look ridiculous. It matters. The campaign has started. You cannot pretend it hasn't started.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Accidentally posted this on the wrong thread, so in case people aren't reading both this is defo worth reading
> 
> Stephen Bush in the Staggers morning mailout has some interesting things to say:
> 
> ...


Yeah I was thinking similar the other day following Johnson's roasting in the Commons. He got his key words and phrases out - surrender, dither and delay - and that's what really mattered. Theresa May was actually rather good at doing the Commons. Fat lot of use it was to her.

In the last few months, the BBC front page has looked like it is being edited by a government minister, tbh.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Sounds bad. Why can’t she just say “we want an election to be called in a couple of weeks once we make sure the threat of no deal has passed”??



That also sounds bad!


----------



## andysays (Sep 6, 2019)

Legal bid to stop suspension of parliament rejected


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> This very good piece in The Graun about the coming culture war election campaign deserves everyone's attention too.
> 
> Johnson thinks a ‘culture war’ will win crucial working-class votes. He’s wrong | Lynsey Hanley


Good piece. Although I think tories can get traction on it if labour fails to get it's message right


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes people will care because every time Labour are asked about this they will look ridiculous. It matters. The campaign has started. You cannot pretend it hasn't started.


No they don't, they really dont.  

Labour need to do two things - make sure Johnson breaks his unbreakable promise, that we'll be out by Oct 31, and to make sure that he is still pretending to demand some kind of deal so that the Brexit party will stand and maximise their vote.  If the election was Oct 15 he would obviously be able to still leave in the 31st, and the BP vote would be minimised because everyone is expecting no deal at that point (unless he has somehow cooked something up which would convince the DUP to go for it).  Just look at the poll fakeplasticgirl posted up last night, a later poll masively beneifts Labour.

Also, leaving it till after the 31st gives enough time for trigger ballots to be run, and to get rid of a few of the shittiest MP's.  It is literally impossible to do so with an Oct 15th ballot. 

Do you still want no deal, now you've left the SP?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> This very good piece in The Graun about the coming culture war election campaign deserves everyone's attention too.
> 
> Johnson thinks a ‘culture war’ will win crucial working-class votes. He’s wrong | Lynsey Hanley



That's a good piece, one paragraph ending  “the outside world ceased to matter when they were struggling to survive” reminded me of something i read in the new Wendy brown book last night (In the Ruins of Neoliberalism: The Rise of Antidemocratic Politics in the West) that i'm going to quote as it's very apt i think and it also challenges the previous left-understanding of the broad range of conservative attacks since 1979 as unwittingly having brought down the family and related things rather than having weaponised them as neoliberalism has managed.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's a good piece, one paragraph ending  “the outside world ceased to matter when they were struggling to survive” reminded me of a piece i read in the new Wendy brown book last night (In the Ruins of Neoliberalism: The Rise of Antidemocratic Politics in the West) that i'm going to quote as it's very apt i think and it also challenges the previous left-understanding of the broad range of conservative attacks since 1979 as unwittingly having brought down the family and related things rather than having weaponised them as neoliberalism has managed.
> 
> View attachment 183365
> 
> ...


this is good, ta.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's a good piece, one paragraph ending  “the outside world ceased to matter when they were struggling to survive” reminded me of a piece i read in the new Wendy brown book last night (In the Ruins of Neoliberalism: The Rise of Antidemocratic Politics in the West) that i'm going to quote as it's very apt i think and it also challenges the previous left-understanding of the broad range of conservative attacks since 1979 as unwittingly having brought down the family and related things rather than having weaponised them as neoliberalism has managed.
> 
> View attachment 183365
> 
> ...


That looks like a good book.  Did you get it by ebook?  The physical copies seem to all come from the US for plenty of money.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

kabbes said:


> That looks like a good book.  Did you get it by ebook?  The physical copies seem to all come from the US for plenty of money.


I'll pm you in a sec


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Me too please!


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

If Labour had embraced that sense of community and material protection they might have had a way through the last 3 years and a way of linking the needs of their leave areas and remain areas. They would have still needed a 'line' on brexit but that line would have been based on something real. The 6 tests shite is a kind of abstraction of some of the things in that article, but so far removed from real communities that it doesn't do anything to create a working class politics.

That's ultimately the problem with Labour's approach, it's a (highly conservative) strategy, keeping all the balls in  the air but not engaging with leave voters in particular. Given that it's now being entirely driven by strategy and games, they might as well put the election off till November to maximise Johnson's problems. In some ways, they might as well embrace full on remain now. I don't actually think they _should_ do that, for all the reasons rehearsed on this thread, but it has become little more than a gaming decision. Which is the problem.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> No they don't, they really dont.
> 
> Labour need to do two things - make sure Johnson breaks his unbreakable promise, that we'll be out by Oct 31, and to make sure that he is still pretending to demand some kind of deal so that the Brexit party will stand and maximise their vote.  If the election was Oct 15 he would obviously be able to still leave in the 31st, and the BP vote would be minimised because everyone is expecting no deal at that point (unless he has somehow cooked something up which would convince the DUP to go for it).  Just look at the poll fakeplasticgirl posted up last night, a later poll masively beneifts Labour.
> 
> ...



That polls shows that an election after 31st disadvantages the Tories, it doesn't advantage Labour. I really recommend you watch QT from last night to see how badly this comes across, particularly in the context of what the SNP and Lib Dems (who are only trying to appeal to Remain voters anyway) are saying alongside it.

I don't want No Deal neccessarily but it seems irrelevant since No Deal is definitely not going to happen.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If Labour had embraced that sense of community and material protection they might have had a way through the last 3 years and a way of linking the needs of their leave areas and remain areas. They would have still needed a 'line' on brexit but that line would have been based on something real. The 6 tests shite is a kind of abstraction of some of the things in that article, but so far removed from real communities that it doesn't do anything to create a working class politics.
> 
> That's ultimately the problem with Labour's approach, it's a (highly conservative) strategy, keeping all the balls in  the air but not engaging with leave voters in particular. Given that it's now being entirely driven by strategy and games, they might as well put the election off till November to maximise Johnson's problems. In some ways, they might as well embrace full on remain now. I don't actually think they _should_ do that, for all the reasons rehearsed on this thread, but it has become little more than a gaming decision. Which is the problem.



Agree, and their game is clear : to legitimise the concerns of those tempted by the Brexit Party, for theoretical electoral advantage, and then presumably back to vilifying same said views.  Cynical as fuck, glad they are not in Government.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That polls shows that an election after 31st disadvantages the Tories, it doesn't advantage Labour. I really recommend you watch QT from last night to see how badly this comes across, particularly in the context of what the SNP and Lib Dems (who are only trying to appeal to Remain voters anyway) are saying alongside it.
> 
> I don't want No Deal neccessarily but it seems irrelevant since No Deal is definitely not going to happen.



What is the point of being a Labour member in Scotland

No Deal definitely may happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> What is the point of being a Labour member in Scotland


it makes you stand out from the crowd


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

Didn't see QT, but I can imagine Labour's line on the election sounding dreadful. They need to do the aggressive version: 'So 'Boris', you said you are well on with getting a deal. In fact in your own campaign you said it would be a piece of piss. Right, crack on, let's see it and then hold a GE as soon as possible after that'.  To be followed with various prods around 'still not a deal eh?'.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That polls shows that an election after 31st disadvantages the Tories, it doesn't advantage Labour. I really recommend you watch QT from last night to see how badly this comes across, particularly in the context of what the SNP and Lib Dems (who are only trying to appeal to Remain voters anyway) are saying alongside it.
> 
> I don't want No Deal neccessarily but it seems irrelevant since No Deal is definitely not going to happen.


They are level with the tories after the 31st, a small drop in their vote, but still level pegging with the leaders, and that is before a campaign where they will probably do better than the opposition. 

Sure, Thornberry was poor last night, but that's cos she can't decide on when she wants the election to be.  Come the actual vote that will be irrelevant.

And where the hell are you living if you think no deal is definitely not going to happen? Sure, Johnson wants to sell a deal, but he can no more square the circle than May could, so there is no deal he can sell, barring miracles. 

I'm not 100% convinced that waiting is right, but there is a definite logic to it, and anyone who is 100% convinced of anything right now needs their head examining.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> They are level with the tories after the 31st, a small drop in their vote, but still level pegging with the leaders, and that is before a campaign where they will probably do better than the opposition.
> 
> Sure, Thornberry was poor last night, but that's cos she can't decide on when she wants the election to be.  Come the actual vote that will be irrelevant.
> 
> ...


Rather than getting caught up in the 'frit' narrative, Labour and the opposition should sort their shit out and start actively and loudly arguing for a November poll. They should also be adding an extra line of: 'hold a GE in the middle of this chaos, you must be mad. Let's do it in November when the voters can make a judgement on your deal making'.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 6, 2019)

Any news on Paul Mason?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Any news on Paul Mason?


_Provisional Paul Mason_ or _Continuity Paul Mason_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> _Provisional Paul Mason_ or _Continuity Paul Mason_?


real paul mason


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

he's somewhere in london waving a placard on facebook live


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> he's somewhere in london waving a placard on facebook live


Maybe he'll do a virtual hunger strike or self immolate his profile on prorogation day.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> They are level with the tories after the 31st, a small drop in their vote, but still level pegging with the leaders, and that is before a campaign where they will probably do better than the opposition.
> 
> Sure, Thornberry was poor last night, but that's cos she can't decide on when she wants the election to be.  Come the actual vote that will be irrelevant.
> 
> ...



As I've said I think Johnson will happily get May's deal through without the backstop of he wins a majority. He's said he would accept it if the backstop goes.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Any news on Paul Mason?





WHAT DO WANT?
DEMOCRACY!

WHEN DO WE WANT IT?
Paul is unable to answer your call at the moment, please leave your message after the beep.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> WHAT DO WANT?
> DEMOCRACY!
> 
> WHEN DO WE WANT IT?
> Paul is unable to answer calls at the moment, please leave your message after the beep.




This is another reason this isn't gonna work. You can't demand democracy and refuse an election at the same time.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> As I've said I think Johnson will happily get May's deal through without the backstop of he wins a majority. He's said he would accept it if the backstop goes.


and how does he get rid of the backstop?


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is another reason this isn't gonna work. You can't demand democracy and refuse an election at the same time.


bourgeois elections are the be all and end all of democracy are they?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> What is the point of being a Labour member in Scotland
> 
> No Deal definitely may happen.



Presumably if you have some faith in the Corbyn project and want to take on the Blarites in Scottish Labour. 

Theoretically No Deal can happen but realistically I doubt it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> and how does he get rid of the backstop?



He offers a customs border in the Irish Sea and divergence for NI. NI stays in the EU effectively. This is perfectly possible if he has a sizeable majority.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> and how does he get rid of the backstop?


By renaming it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> bourgeois elections are the be all and end all of democracy are they?



I'm not saying that am I?

All I am saying is that arguing that you're defending democracy while refusing to have an election isn't a solid campaigning message. 

The argument has to become 'Defend Democracy' but specifically the bit of democracy where we can criticise a govt that has lost its majority and control Parliament, not the bit where you get to elect a new govt.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> he's somewhere in london waving a placard on facebook live



Deep down we all knew that this was how the revolution was going to get started.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

I don't mind mad paul that much tbf. At least he gets stuck in.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Deep down we all knew that this was how the revolution was going to get started.


It's a bit like Occupy, but without the occupation.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He offers a customs border in the Irish Sea and divergence for NI. NI stays in the EU effectively. This is perfectly possible if he has a sizeable majority.


He can't possibly say he wants that tho, can he? He has to support the 'integrity of the United Kingdom.'  That's why he is blathering about an All Ireland Agricultural Zone, way short of what is required, but all that could be acceptable to the DUP.

Let the fucker stew.   Just because we want to storm the Bastille, you don't do it just cos Louis XVI said this is a good time to do it.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't mind mad paul that much tbf. At least he gets stuck in.


I've got a soft spot for him since I found out he's an old Northern Soul man


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't mind mad paul that much tbf. At least he gets stuck in.


A mate posted up a comment that listening to PM is always a combination of insight, frustration and total bollocks, but it's always interesting.


----------



## maomao (Sep 6, 2019)

So if we do end up with a Tory majority at least we get a united Ireland. Silver linings.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> _Provisional Paul Mason_ or _Continuity Paul Mason_?



Third period Paul Masonism


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> I don't mind mad paul that much tbf. At least he gets stuck in.


I had the misfortune once of being on holiday in the middle of nowhere with only his book Postcapitalism to read


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I had the misfortune once of being on holiday in the middle of nowhere with only his book Postcapitalism to read


Where were you?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> He can't possibly say he wants that tho, can he? He has to support the 'integrity of the United Kingdom.'  That's why he is blathering about an All Ireland Agricultural Zone, way short of what is required, but all that could be acceptable to the DUP.
> 
> Let the fucker stew.   Just because we want to storm the Bastille, you don't do it just cos Louis XVI said this is a good time to do it.



He is saying he wants a deal but he's prepared to leave with no deal. But that he doesn't want to. That's all he needs to say. 

Having said that it is possible none of this matters if the media make sure stuff like this gets lots of coverage.

'You should be in Brussels; you're in Morley'


----------



## Cloo (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He's said he would accept it if the backstop goes.


Yes,  but he's a pathological liar. I doubt he even remembers saying that


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I had the misfortune once of being on holiday in the middle of nowhere with only his book Postcapitalism to read


Christ, I wouldnt read a book by him.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> They are level with the tories after the 31st, a small drop in their vote, but still level pegging with the leaders, and that is before a campaign where they will probably do better than the opposition.



One poll. Come on now


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Christ, I wouldnt read a book by him.


It's a far more coherent book than his recent posts.  Haven't read the new one yet, but it will have various interesting points in it.  And 'Why Its Kicking off All Over' is definitely excellent.


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 6, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Where were you?


Cullar Baza about an hour and a half outside Granada


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> One poll. Come on now


of course, and what if polls like that are dodgier than Johnson. But it is almost definitely true that a post Oct31 poll, with the UK still in the EU, would see some of that 'Boris will see us out!' vote drfit back to the BP.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He is saying he wants a deal but he's prepared to leave with no deal. But that he doesn't want to. That's all he needs to say.
> 
> Having said that it is possible none of this matters if the media make sure stuff like this gets lots of coverage.
> 
> 'You should be in Brussels; you're in Morley'



yes and no.  He's actually meeting real people , when was the last PM that did that? Its been the stage managed 'bubble on tour' since at least Blair.  (harder work for Close Protection lot)


----------



## Supine (Sep 6, 2019)

The always excellent Chris Grey blog. Depressing reading week in and week out. 

The Brexit Blog: Johnson bulldozes Britain deeper into chaos


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> yes and no.  He's actually meeting real people , when was the last PM that did that? Its been the stage manage bubble on tour since at least Blair.  (harder work for Close Protection lot)


Brown did it - remember the 'bigoted woman'?  The security services complained about Cameron's walkabouts, as a security risk.  May did them too, until she was told not to because she was so awful.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> Brown did it - remember the 'bigoted woman'?  The security services complained about Cameron's walkabouts, as a security risk.  May did them too, until she was told not to because she was so awful.


May's appearances with children. I had sort of forgot how badly she came across.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> Brown did it - remember the 'bigoted woman'?  The security services complained about Cameron's walkabouts, as a security risk.  May did them too, until she was told not to because she was so awful.


You mean the woman that was a Labour party member and activist?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> You mean the woman that was a Labour party member and activist?


No, you mean previous labour voter.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> You mean the woman that was a Labour party member and activist?


Gillian Duffy was a 'lifelong labour voter' but she wasn't a member


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

There have been a couple of guardian digs at him looking 'tired' today. All bubbly bubble stuff, but there is an issue about his ability to keep grinding on, facing the same questions everyday, pushing back without losing it. John Major and Theresa May were vile scum but did have that ability to keep keeping on, derided in the press, no majority etc. Who knows, nobody knows anything at the moment, but I struggle to see Johnson carrying on like this for too long. Don't mean he'll necessarily resign if he misses Halloween, but there'll be some mad side shows and fuck ups certainly.


----------



## chilango (Sep 6, 2019)

TopCat said:


> May's appearances with children. I had sort of forgot how badly she came across.



She turned up at my daughter's class once


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> Gillian Duffy was a 'lifelong labour voter' but she wasn't a member


Mis remembered then.sorry But point from that stands from the recording Brown thought it a diaster that he was meeting someone not blowing smoke up his are,  sorry "on message". 

We all know there has to be a bubble element once you get living with a police outside the door and chauffered everywhere.  How them allow some randomness from outside the bubble is important, else it is all Potemkin villages.


----------



## Winot (Sep 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> according to?



I can't remember where I read it but it wasn't just one source. Might be wishful thinking of course.

A quick search found this. No idea if the source is reputable.
French customs struggles to cope with no-deal Brexit planning


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Yes,  but he's a pathological liar. I doubt he even remembers saying that



I'm not saying this because I trust him, I'm saying this because it fits with his interests. He wants to get some sort of fudge through, take the credit for 'sorting out' Brexit and move on. He doesn't want No Deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Toby Young is suggesting on Twitter that Johnson should resign, and allow Corbyn to form a govt, go to the EU and ask for the extension. Then Johnson could call a VoNC in Corbyn. 

It would be a pretty baller move, and I'm not sure it's really Johnson's style, but it would be silly to ignore the fact that that is possible.


----------



## gosub (Sep 6, 2019)

Winot said:


> I can't remember where I read it but it wasn't just one source. Might be wishful thinking of course.
> 
> A quick search found this. No idea if the source is reputable.
> French customs struggles to cope with no-deal Brexit planning



Cheers for looking.   What I read there is French attendee of Council of Europe will have analysis of month long tests at next meeting


----------



## andysays (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Toby Young is suggesting on Twitter that Johnson should resign, and allow Corbyn to form a govt, go to the EU and ask for the extension. Then Johnson could call a VoNC in Corbyn.
> 
> It would be a pretty baller move, and I'm not sure it's really Johnson's style, but it would be silly to ignore the fact that that is possible.


Would Johnson be able to win a VoNC in those circumstances? It's by no means certain. 

Also, *Toby Young...??!?*


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

Johnson resigning wouldn't dissolve the govt would it? It would be another tories go.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> Would Johnson be able to win a VoNC in those circumstances? It's by no means certain.
> 
> Also, *Toby Young...??!?*



He wouldn't have to convince people to put him in back power, just VoNC Corbyn and have an election. Once Corbyn had secured the extension, I can't see Parliament allowing him to negotiate with the EU. Maybe they'd let him stay on if he volunteered to revoke A50 and take all the flack.

E2A: Yeah I couldn't bring myself to link but he used the word 'frit'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Johnson resigning wouldn't dissolve the govt would it? It would be another tories go.



Would they not have to demonstrate they had a working majority to do that?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Would they not have to demonstrate they had a working majority to do that?


Oh i thought you meant as tory leader. You mean as PM. Yes, and so would corbyn, and it's not likely to me that Johnson would remain as tory leader following such a resignation anyway.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> E2A: Yeah I couldn't bring myself to link but he used the word 'frit'.


we need a banned word list, this one is at the top. 

cf. steve bannon's playbook


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

'frit'? I'm guessing I don't really want to know.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Oh i thought you meant as tory leader. You mean as PM. Yes, and so would corbyn, and it's not likely to me that Johnson would remain as tory leader following such a resignation anyway.



That's true but it wouldn't neccessarily have to be Corbyn, could be anyone that commanded a majority on the promise of securing an extension and calling an election. 

Do you think he would be pressured to resign as Tory leader? It would be pretty clear it was in order to position himself for an election, and it would be pretty clear the Tories would have to fight a GE too. The only reason they've allowed him to be leader is because a GE is coming.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 6, 2019)

So Wetherspoons are slashing 20p off a pint as an example of how leaving the customs union can lead to lower import tariffs. 
The problem with this is we are still in the customs union so in reality they are just reducing their prices to presumably attract some of their lost custom due to having a knobhead as the owner.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> we need a banned word list, this one is at the top.
> 
> cf. steve bannon's playbook


I was going to comment on just that phrase (allied with trump today) but the poster has me on ignore so didn't bother. I would like to know the contents of it, it's never outlined. It's almost like it means everything and precisely sweet FA.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I was going to comment on just that phrase (allied with trump today) but the poster has me on ignore so didn't bother. I would like to know the contents of it, it's never outlined. It's almost like it means everything and precisely sweet FA.


it just means _something something populism *waves hands*_


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's true but it wouldn't neccessarily have to be Corbyn, could be anyone that commanded a majority on the promise of securing an extension and calling an election.
> 
> Do you think he would be pressured to resign as Tory leader? It would be pretty clear it was in order to position himself for an election, and it would be pretty clear the Tories would have to fight a GE too. The only reason they've allowed him to be leader is because a GE is coming.


I think he/they would have no choice - they're creaking now as a party without a massive gamble with an unproven and flaky leader following _an act of responsibility_ from Corbyn (that's the only possible choice really) _in the wider national interest_. Of course, this doesn't mean they have anyone better waiting.


----------



## maomao (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Toby Young is suggesting on Twitter that Johnson should resign, and allow Corbyn to form a govt, go to the EU and ask for the extension. Then Johnson could call a VoNC in Corbyn.
> 
> It would be a pretty baller move, and I'm not sure it's really Johnson's style, but it would be silly to ignore the fact that that is possible.


If he resigned he wouldn't even be leader of the opposition and in no position to call a VoNC.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's true but it wouldn't neccessarily have to be Corbyn, could be anyone that commanded a majority on the promise of securing an extension and calling an election.
> 
> .


_A government of all the talents_...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I think he/they would have no choice - they're creaking now as a party without a massive gamble with an unproven and flaky leader following _an act of responsibility_ from Corbyn (that's the only possible choice really) _in the wider national interest_. Of course, this doesn't mean they have anyone better waiting.



But their leader is currently PM and has chosen to withdraw the whip from 21 of their MP's. They're already in massive gamble territory. And if they lose the election with Johnson as leader they can blame him can't they?


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's true but it wouldn't neccessarily have to be Corbyn, could be anyone that commanded a majority on the promise of securing an extension and calling an election.


There isn't anyone who isn't Corbyn who could command a majority on this premise. Also, neither can Corbyn.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

maomao said:


> If he resigned he wouldn't even be leader of the opposition and in no position to call a VoNC.



He would be leader of the opposition.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He would be leader of the opposition.


if he resigned he would be leader of the opposition? i don't know how things work in your party, comrade, but in most parties when the leader resigns they are no longer the leader.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> But their leader is currently PM and has chosen to withdraw the whip from 21 of their MP's. They're already in massive gamble territory. And if they lose the election with Johnson as leader they can blame him can't they?


Well, the tories didn't get where they are today by doubling down on already reckless gambles. I think this scenario is too far out there and reliant on so many unlikely things.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> There isn't anyone who isn't Corbyn who could command a majority on this premise. Also, neither can Corbyn.



They definitely have the numbers to do it and it's what they say they want.


----------



## maomao (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He would be leader of the opposition.


How if he resigned? He can't resign as PM without resigning as leader of opposition.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if he resigned he would be leader of the opposition? i don't know how things work in your party, comrade, but in most parties when the leader resigns they are no longer the leader.



Not as the leader, as the PM. Keep up!


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They definitely have the numbers to do it and it's what they say they want.


who is 'they'?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

maomao said:


> How if he resigned? He can't resign as PM without resigning as leader of opposition.



PM and LoTO are two different things.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

are you really running with Toby Jones' bollocks btw?


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

maomao said:


> How if he resigned? He can't resign as PM without resigning as leader of opposition.


and he wouldn't be the opposition.  The government is still the government.  AND he'd have to vote for JC to become PM, thus destroying his key argument that JC can never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> PM and LoTO are two different things.


if someone resigns as minister of defence they are no longer minister of defence
but if someone resigns from the premier job in government they would, i suspect, also be resigning as leader of their party


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> are you really running with Toby Jones' bollocks btw?



I'm not 'running with it'. I'm just pointing out that this is the kind of stuff that will be thrown up if Labour attempts to keep this Parliament going when it's done.




belboid said:


> and he wouldn't be the opposition.  The government is still the government.  AND he'd have to vote for JC to become PM, thus destroying his key argument that JC can never be allowed anywhere near the levers of power.



I said I didn't think Johnson would do it! But it's possible.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if someone resigns as minister of defence they are no longer minister of defence
> but if someone resigns from the premier job in government they would, i suspect, also be resigning as leader of their party



In this scenario, it's merely positioning, so no, they wouldn't.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not 'running with it'. I'm just pointing out that this is the kind of stuff that will be thrown up if Labour attempts to keep this Parliament going when it's done.


no it isn't.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not 'running with it'. I'm just pointing out that this is the kind of stuff that will be thrown up if Labour attempts to keep this Parliament going when it's done.


We're gonna get all kinds of batshit ideas until well after any election, because nobody knows any way out of the maze. Nobody.



> I said I didn't think Johnson would do it! But it's possible.


technically, it probably is possible. But it is also so mindbogglingly stupid that only Toby Young could have come up with it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In this scenario, it's merely positioning, so no, they wouldn't.


doesn't matter anyway as before we've finished discussing the lunatic possibilities johnson will be gone


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> We're gonna get all kinds of batshit ideas until well after any election, because nobody knows any way out of the maze. Nobody.
> 
> 
> technically, it probably is possible. But it is also so mindbogglingly stupid that only Toby Young could have come up with it.



The way out is to win an election. If I were Johnson, it's what I would do.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> doesn't matter anyway as before we've finished discussing the lunatic possibilities johnson will be gone



Not without an election. Which is currently being blocked.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

I'm kind of with Rutita1 's reminder that there are going to be real victims from any kind of tory lead brexit, but somehow still finding every mad twist and turn of it funny as fuck. 'Parliament' lol. Might as well go the whole absurdist hog and elevate Ken Clarke to join Paul Mason as joint leaders of the 'Resistance'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Not without an election. Which is currently being blocked.


he might find he's expelled all his mps


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The way out is to win an election. If I were Johnson, it's what I would do.


and that's why Labour is blocking an election!  To force Johnson into doing one of two things he has said adamantly _must not be done_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm kind of with Rutita1 's reminder that there are going to be real victims from any kind of tory lead brexit, but somehow still finding every mad twist and turn of it funny as fuck. 'Parliament' lol. Might as well go the whole absurdist hog and elevate Ken Clarke to join Paul Mason as joint leaders of the 'Resistance'.


to be fair there will be real victims from any brexit, tory-led or otherwise.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> and that's why Labour is blocking an election!  To force Johnson into doing one of two things he has said adamantly _must not be done_.



So now you're saying he might do this?


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So now you're saying he might do this?


He might well end up having to delay leaving, yes. 

It's a risky strategy, he could well also try to force a crash out in that scenario, but every strategy is risky.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> and that's why Labour is blocking an election!  To force Johnson into doing one of two things he has said adamantly _must not be done_.


It's hard to say whether Johnson could get an overall majority out of a GE, my guess is that he might well. But the irony now is that his biggest opponent isn't Labour but his own words/promises.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> He might well end up having to delay leaving, yes.
> 
> It's a risky strategy, he could well also try to force a crash out in that scenario, but every strategy is risky.


if he forces a crash out i think we can safely say goodbye to the brexit party and goodbye to the conservative party


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not 'running with it'. I'm just pointing out that this is the kind of stuff that will be thrown up if Labour attempts to keep this Parliament going when it's done.


What, total fanciful, unworkable bollocks? Let's have more of the likes of Young speaking there branes.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> He might well end up having to delay leaving, yes.
> 
> It's a risky strategy, he could well also try to force a crash out in that scenario, but every strategy is risky.



So which is the other thing? Labour are trying to force him to ask for an extension or resign?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What, total fanciful, unworkable bollocks? Let's have more of the likes of Young speaking there branes.



Doesn't look that unworkable to me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Doesn't look that unworkable to me.


It's entirely unworkable. Corbyn would need to be able to demonstrate a majority in the commons remember. Young glosses over that bit.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

Labour should dig out a few quotes from Johnson about how easy it would be for him to get a deal. I dunno, maybe paint them on the side of a big red bus.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's entirely unworkable. Corbyn would need to be able to demonstrate a majority in the commons remember. Young glosses over that bit.



Are you saying he couldn't get that if he promised to ask for an extension, avert no deal and then call an election? Isn't that what everyone in Parliament wants?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you saying he couldn't get that if he promised to ask for an extension, avert no deal and then call an election? Isn't that what everyone in Parliament wants?


And that would help Johnson how exactly? I won't ask for an extension, but I'll willingly hand over power to someone else who will?  He would look utterly ridiculous, and more importantly, the brexit party would have a field day.

If it came to it, he would be far better off going to Brussels, asking for an extension having been compelled to do so by Parliament and doing it with a clear indication that this isn't what he wants, but he is a 'democrat and will observe the rule of law', blah blah. He'd also look weak then of course, but not nearly as weak as he would resigning to let Corbyn do it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you saying he couldn't get that if he promised to ask for an extension, avert no deal and then call an election? Isn't that what everyone in Parliament wants?


he... he's already offered this and they all told him to get to fuck and get behind Ken Clarke instead.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> he... he's already offered this and they all told him to get to fuck and get behind Ken Clarke instead.



*shrug* So Ken Clarke does it. Same difference.


----------



## andysays (Sep 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> to be fair there will be real victims from any brexit, tory-led or otherwise.


And arguably there have been and continue to be "victims" of our membership of the EU, which is how we have arrived at this position of a majority vote to leave which the political class didn't think would happen and are still struggling to deal with.

Playing "won't somebody *please* think of the victims" isn't getting anybody anywhere


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if he forces a crash out i think we can safely say goodbye to the brexit party and goodbye to the conservative party


Tories would do fine with an election shortly thereafter, before the effects were really felt. They'd brush off the initial chaos as teething problems.



SpackleFrog said:


> So which is the other thing? Labour are trying to force him to ask for an extension or resign?


The other thing is allowing Corbyn to become PM. Labour want to make him ask for an extension, and then will demand an election.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And that would help Johnson how exactly? I won't ask for an extension, but I'll willingly hand over power to someone else who will?  He would look utterly ridiculous, and more importantly, the brexit part would have a field day.



Then he can go into the election saying "I refused to ask for an extension, I said I'd rather die, I wanted this over with, Corbyn asked for an extension and he doesn't even know what his policy is". Which is a much better line than Labour's. And on top of this he avoids what Labour are trying to do ie humiliate him by forcing him to ask for an extension.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> *shrug* So Ken Clarke does it. Same difference.


Corbyn would never whip to back Ken Clarke either. Have you missed an entire fortnight of politics or something?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> *shrug* So Ken Clarke does it. Same difference.


And why would Corbyn allow that??? I think that's equally fanciful.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> Tories would do fine with an election shortly thereafter, before the effects were really felt. They'd brush off the initial chaos as teething problems.
> 
> 
> The other thing is allowing Corbyn to become PM. Labour want to make him ask for an extension, and then will demand an election.



So you do think what Young is suggesting is possible. Thanks.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

killer b said:


> Corbyn would never whip to back Ken Clarke either. Have you missed an entire fortnight of politics or something?






littlebabyjesus said:


> And why would Corbyn allow that??? I think that's equally fanciful.



Have you both missed the last few years? _Corbyn doesn't have any authority within the PLP. _


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So you do think what Young is suggesting is possible. Thanks.


I refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer



belboid said:


> technically, it probably is possible. But it is also so mindbogglingly stupid that only Toby Young could have come up with it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Have you both missed the last few years? _Corbyn doesn't have any authority within the PLP. _


And yet the maximum Labour rebellion throughout the brexit shitshow has been about six or seven MPs, nearly all of them from the lunatic fringe. Currently it's down to two fuckwits who are about to leave the party anyway.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Have you both missed the last few years? _Corbyn doesn't have any authority within the PLP. _


he has enough to block any possible unity government under anyone else. seriously, this is a mid-august political argument that was put to bed ages ago - why are you having it now?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 6, 2019)

*shrug* I think there is not a lot of recognition here about how Parliament is likely to function in the absence of a working majority. But fine.

In any case, I'm just saying there are a lot of possible scenarios that could be created by Labour attempting to prevent this Parliament dissolving.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

Opposition just about got past Corbyn's, ahem, 'dithering', and agreed to push the GE into November and therefore an extension:
Opposition parties agree to block election until Brexit delay secured

Aside from Johnson getting a GE via suspending the ftpa and simple majority, which he would almost certainly lose, that logically leaves Johnson with the option of seeking a deal with the EU before the end of October. Which would be May's deal with an imaginary bow on it. He may have some other nuclear option up his sleeve, but the walls are closing in. Dead in a ditch?


----------



## Crispy (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> May's deal with an imaginary bow on it.


Would it pass this time? If it really was for really real this time Deal or No Deal?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> And arguably there have been and continue to be "victims" of our membership of the EU, which is how we have arrived at this position of a majority vote to leave which the political class didn't think would happen and are still struggling to deal with.
> 
> Playing "won't somebody *please* think of the victims" isn't getting anybody anywhere


no, i quite agree. it's obvious every move from here has negative consequences for some groups of people, so can we just take that as read.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Would it pass this time? If it really was for really real this time Deal or No Deal?


With a light dusting of the conditions Labour tried to introduce at the end of may period, possibly. Might get the Kinnock faction on board. But then the erg would shit their pants and so it would go on.

By the by, in the absence of a GE, could some block of MPs resign their seats in order to get a something or other public vote on something or other? Not at all suggesting it will happen, I just haven't heard that variant yet and we've had everything else.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> But then the erg would shit their pants


their nannies didn't do a very good job of potty training them


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 6, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Legitimising farage is not an option for the political classes surely



He's already legitimised, and has been for ages. The main parties have all joined in with the immigrant bashing precisely because it's not only legitimate, it's now a requirement if you want any chance at winning the all important reactionary fuckwit vote. 

The time to stand up to Farage, to actually make a case for immigration and for the EU, has long since been and gone. Everyone is playing his game now.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> One poll. Come on now


And one poll asking people intentions on a hypothetical. It says more about the solidness of sport for leaving the UK (and that they are willing to use the BP to achieve that aim) than anything else


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Labour should dig out a few quotes from Johnson about how easy it would be for him to get a deal. I dunno, maybe paint them on the side of a big red bus.



Buses, mugs, giant slabs of rock; surely the 'writing slogans on stuff' trope is played out now.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Buses, mugs, giant slabs of rock; surely the 'writing slogans on stuff' trope is played out now.


Look mate, just keep calm and...


----------



## Badgers (Sep 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Labour should dig out a few quotes from Johnson about how easy it would be for him to get a deal. I dunno, maybe paint them on the side of a big red bus.


Leave that work to Led by Donkeys


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

So I know Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch but what happens if this great parliamentary checkmate lacks the check and he does go for another extension, gets three months or whatever, political context changes. Maybe he even gets a deal that placates the ex tories (whip restored) and the ERG and enough labour to pass. We have Johnson until 22.

Maybe I'm not a master parliamentary strategist but can't shake this thought that, after calling for a general election for three years and in light of volatile and shifting polling over same period, the opposition passing on a GE is thick as fuck


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Maybe he even gets a deal that placates the ex tories (whip restored) and the ERG and enough labour to pass. We have Johnson until 22.


Swinson for PM is more likely than that


----------



## TopCat (Sep 6, 2019)

chilango said:


> She turned up at my daughter's class once


How's your daughter now?


----------



## chilango (Sep 6, 2019)

TopCat said:


> How's your daughter now?



Better than I am after encountering May's husband in a changing room recently.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

chilango said:


> Better than I am after encountering May's husband in a changing room recently.


(((chilango)))


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So I know Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch but what happens if this great parliamentary checkmate lacks the check and he does go for another extension, gets three months or whatever, political context changes. Maybe he even gets a deal that placates the ex tories (whip restored) and the ERG and enough labour to pass. We have Johnson until 22.
> 
> Maybe I'm not a master parliamentary strategist but can't shake this thought that, after calling for a general election for three years and in light of volatile and shifting polling over same period, the opposition passing on a GE is thick as fuck



But everyone gets it’s just passing on it for the meantime. 

Labour are not well placed to win right now. The breathing space gives them time to get some sort of an election strategy together and the more Johnson appears unable to control events the more likely Corbyn will seem a plausible alternative. And as Labour seem unlikely to ditch him that’s vital as he is not popular with the voters right now.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Maybe he even gets a deal that placates the ex tories (whip restored) and the ERG and enough labour to pass. We have Johnson until 22.



I'm torn between betting on this and betting on myself winning the nobel prize for economics.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 6, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm torn between betting on this and betting on myself winning the nobel prize for economics.


Do an accumulator.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> So I know Johnson said he'd rather be dead in a ditch but what happens if this great parliamentary checkmate lacks the check and he does go for another extension, gets three months or whatever, political context changes. Maybe he even gets a deal that placates the ex tories (whip restored) and the ERG and enough labour to pass. We have Johnson until 22.
> 
> Maybe I'm not a master parliamentary strategist but can't shake this thought that, after calling for a general election for three years and in light of volatile and shifting polling over same period, the opposition passing on a GE is thick as fuck


Yeah, if in doubt, keep things simple. Labour can't be criticised for accepting the election. And it presents a clear way to stop no deal brexit, which is by voting for them. And as has been said, Johnson can always start all over again and try on no deal with the new parliament if he wins.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

Just watched last night's QT, Emily Thornberry - I'll work for a better deal, put it to the people, and campaign to remain. 

Seriously?  Fucking comedy gold.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> But everyone gets it’s just passing on it for the meantime.



That's ok then, sure the Tories would just allow another GE at a later point when it's not politically expedient for them out of a sense of fairness


----------



## Raheem (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> That's ok then, sure the Tories would just allow another GE at a letter point when it's not politically expedient for them out of a sense of fairness


They are a minority government, so they're just going to carry on needing to have an election.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

Raheem said:


> They are a minority government, so they're just going to carry on needing to have an election.


They're a minority govt that could restore the whip to 21 and have independents like Field and Austin who would provide a majority on brexit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 6, 2019)

Thing is, while I do understand the reasoning for the delay, I also agree with PT that it looks bad and results in people justifying it with things that sound bad. Johnson and Cummings aren't master strategists. They want an election? So what, so do we, bring it on! With all the disadvantages that have been pointed out for an opposition in an election, which are true pretty much for any election, especially one between the tories and a leftish labour, where the vast majority of the 'free' press is horribly biased against them. But those will always be there. That's the challenge whenever it happens.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

The 'Rebel Alliance' claims they will not back BJ on Monday for a GE, because they don't trust him to set a date before 31/10.

If he brings forward a bill saying the election will be on 15/10, what are they going to do?


----------



## kebabking (Sep 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> They're a minority govt that could restore the whip to 21 and have independents like Field and Austin who would provide a majority on brexit



The 21 simply aren't going to sign up to a no deal brexit, so merely restoring the whip isn't going to change his arithmetic - something like half of them have already indicated that they'll stand as Indies, and a good few of them think they'll win.

There simply isn't a brexit that Gauke, Stewart etc.. would sign up to that the loons on the ERG would also sign up to, so the idea of a _Tory _brexit is fairly dead. It can only get through on a Tory + basis - for May's deal minus the backstop he'd still need something like 50 non-tory/DUP votes to make up for the ERG voting against. For no deal, he'd probably need 30-40 or so, but that number might explode if he offends what's left of the non-ERG Tory party any further.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The 'Rebel Alliance' claims they will not back BJ on Monday for a GE, because they don't trust him to set a date before 31/10.
> 
> If he brings forward a bill saying the election will be on 15/10, what are they going to do?



apparently its very difficult for johnson to get an election till november. hes boxed in. its the consensus across all the political correspondents.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

I know an ex-mp who is friendly with john mcdonnell. He tells me that labour's big worry is that the tories have done a deal with farage allowing the brexit party a free run at a string of leave supporting labour seats. make of that what you will.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I know an ex-mp who is friendly with john mcdonnell. He tells me that labour's big worry is that the tories have done a deal with farage allowing the brexit party a free run at a string of leave supporting labour seats. make of that what you will.


Unless they are tory lab marginals it means sweet fanny .And they're not going to leave them seats alone. They're going to be prime targets.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> apparently its very difficult for johnson to get an election till november. hes boxed in. its the consensus across all the political correspondents.



But, the 'Rebel Alliance' claims their only reason for not supporting a GE on Monday, is they don't trust him to call it on the 15/10, and instead delay it until after 31/10.

If a bill was presented, confirming the GE would be on the 15/10, that destroys their fears.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, the 'Rebel Alliance' claims their only reason for not supporting a GE on Monday, is they don't trust him to call it on the 15/10, and instead delay it until after 31/10.
> 
> If a bill was presented, confirming the GE would be on the 15/10, that destroys their fears.



they want the election after the brexit extension has been confirmed by the EU. I mean - im not an expert - its what all the political correspondents are saying - "oct election now very unlikely". meaning johnson has to get a deal or "die in a ditch".


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, the 'Rebel Alliance' claims their only reason for not supporting a GE on Monday, is they don't trust him to call it on the 15/10, and instead delay it until after 31/10.
> 
> If a bill was presented, confirming the GE would be on the 15/10, that destroys their fears.


How would this bill affirming this date work with the FTPA?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Unless they are tory lab marginals it means sweet fanny .And they're not going to leave them seats alone. They're going to be prime targets.



dunno - maybe there's polling showing that there are safe-ish labour seats where brexit party could win (sunderland?) .


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> How would this bill affirming this date work with the FTPA?


you _can _repeal it, and insert new law here.  But not in time for the 15th


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

The only reason UKIP 'stood aside' in any seats last time is because they were fucked and weren't going to get anywhere anyway. Brexit Party can't stand aside this time, unless they're similarly fucked - in which case, it won't matter anyway.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> dunno - maybe there's polling showing that there are safe-ish labour seats where brexit party could win (sunderland?) .


Crazy tim


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> you _can _repeal it, and insert new law here.  But not in time for the 15th


So that's why.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> How would this bill affirming this date work with the FTPA?



It would over-ride the FTPA, no government can be held to laws passed by a previous government.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Crazy tim



just reporting back what i heard today. fuck knows tbh. he was genuinely worried about it though. cant see it going down well the CLP.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It would over-ride the FTPA, no government can be held to laws passed by a previous government.


I know that - oddly enough. It's in my playbook. But how/when?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> just reporting back what i heard today. fuck knows tbh. he was genuinely worried about it though. cant see it going down well the CLP.


Commie panic nutter obv


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Just watched last night's QT, Emily Thornberry - I'll work for a better deal, put it to the people, and campaign to remain.
> 
> Seriously?  Fucking comedy gold.



And it would still have more chance of passing than whatever Boris brings back after his 'do or die' posturing!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I know that - oddly enough. It's in my playbook. But how/when?



It could be introduced on Monday, and IF it got the majority of one, it could clear both houses by next Thursday, the current final deadline for suspending parliament.

As the current objection to the GE is not trusting him to hold it on the 15/10, but a bill is introduced to hold it on that day, they are going to look fucking daft not to vote for it.


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It could be introduced on Monday, and IF it got the majority of one, it could clear both houses by next Thursday, the current final deadline for suspending parliament.
> 
> As the current objection to the GE is not trusting him to hold it on the 15/10, but a bill is introduced to hold it on that day, they are going to look fucking daft not to vote for it.


25 working days before an election could be called after that, which would be October 18


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It could be introduced on Monday, and IF it got the majority of one, it could clear both houses by next Thursday, the current final deadline for suspending parliament.
> 
> As the current objection to the GE is not trusting him to hold it on the 15/10, but a bill is introduced to hold it on that day, they are going to look fucking daft not to vote for it.


Not sure you have your dates rights, but have you told toby young about this?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

belboid said:


> 25 working days before an election could be called after that, which would be October 18



Not if it's a new law, with a specific date, over-riding the FTPA.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Not sure you have your dates rights...



What date do you think is wrong?


----------



## belboid (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Not if it's a new law, with a specific date, over-riding the FTPA.


It might over ride the FTPA but it would also have to repeal the ERAA, and replace the provisions of that act. It ainst as simple as a simple bill, that's why May didn't bother with it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> What date do you think is wrong?


Whose going to pass this? What's the punishment if they don't? look daft?

There is more than just passing a simple bill and that's it. There ain't time, that's the dates.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Whose going to pass this? What's the punishment if they don't? look daft?
> 
> There is more than just passing a simple bill and that's it. There ain't time, that's the dates.



I don't think they would pass it, but it destroys their excuse for not going for a GE, and hands the tosser a stick to beat them with.


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As the current objection to the GE is not trusting him to hold it on the 15/10, but a bill is introduced to hold it on that day, they are going to look fucking daft not to vote for it.



I dont know where you got this impression from.

Their timing mistrust is about Boris & Co using election timing to have us leave the EU by default. The likes of the SNP are insisting that the extension is secured first. So the sticking point is certainly not that they dont believe the election date he said, and if the 15th were somehow guaranteed that would not make any difference to their position.


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

And they dont want him to go to the electorate when there is still the theoretical chance he could stick to his end of October deadline. They want his bluff to have been well and truly called before the election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 6, 2019)

elbows said:


> And they dont want him to go to the electorate when there is still the theoretical chance he could stick to his end of October deadline. They want his bluff to have been well and truly called before the election.


He'll be exposed as the fraud he is


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

elbows said:


> I dont know where you got this impression from.
> 
> Their timing mistrust is about Boris & Co using election timing to have us leave the EU by default. The likes of the SNP are insisting that the extension is secured first. So the sticking point is certainly not that they dont believe the election date he said, and if the 15th were somehow guaranteed that would not make any difference to their position.



I got the idea from what Labour, the SNP & LibDems have been saying - they have all been saying they don't trust him on the date, therefore they will wait until an extension is requested.

Of course, they are using the date as an excuse.

FFS, even yesterday Corbyn was saying he would back a GE once the 'no-deal' law was passed, before back-peddling today.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Any news on Paul Mason?


Hurrahing for the HOUSE OF LORDS i think.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> just reporting back what i heard today. fuck knows tbh. he was genuinely worried about it though. cant see it going down well the CLP.



not clp - i meant tory mps.


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I got the idea from what Labour, the SNP & LibDems have been saying - they have all been saying they don't trust him on the date, therefore they will wait until an extension is requested.
> 
> Of course, they are using the date as an excuse.
> 
> FFS, even yesterday Corbyn was saying he would back a GE once the 'no-deal' law was passed, before back-peddling today.



I still dont think you've explained how they look fucking daft for not voting for it. The main negative for them delaying the election is the chicken propaganda, and that has already happened, so it will just be a bit more of the same.

Meanwhile the reasons to delay are numerous, ranging from actual brexit-related stuff to making Boris look shit, to having more students registered to vote by then.

This is how the stance was described by the FT today:

Subscribe to read | Financial Times



> Mr Corbyn and SNP Westminster leader Ian Blackford agreed in principle on Thursday that an election should not take place until Mr Johnson had sought the extension to the Article 50 exit process at an EU summit on October 17-18. But opposition MPs have been deeply divided over tactics beyond that point. Mr Corbyn’s team and some SNP figures had considered calling a vote of no confidence on Monday to trigger an election in late October, with Brussels having agreed to delay Brexit. Other Labour MPs and the smaller parties have argued that there should be no attempt to force an election until after November 1 to ensure that a no-deal Brexit is impossible. Opposition MPs emerged from Friday morning’s conference call with a broad understanding that they will now hold off from a vote of confidence next week. Liz Saville Roberts, leader of Plaid Cymru in Westminster, said an election before November 1 now seemed unlikely given no opposition party would put down a no-confidence motion on Monday.



Some variations in position, but none of them fit the strange picture you came up with, that their mistrust of Boris was centred around the suspicion that he wouldnt really have it on the 15th. That wasnt it at all, and barely featured in any of the rhetoric from any of the opposition parties. And none of them wanted it on the 15th.


----------



## maomao (Sep 6, 2019)

I don't think the public are keen enough on an election to give a fuck about some jockeying for position. The last election seemed to piss a lot of people off given the Tories had a working majority at the time. This one might be seen as a little more necessary but I doubt it'll be any more popular.


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> they want the election after the brexit extension has been confirmed by the EU. I mean - im not an expert - its what all the political correspondents are saying - "oct election now very unlikely". meaning johnson has to get a deal or "die in a ditch".



I suppose I cant remove the 'EU fails to agree an extension' possibility off the list just yet.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 6, 2019)

elbows said:


> Some variations in position, but none of them fit the strange picture you came up with, that their mistrust of Boris was centred around the suspicion that he wouldnt really have it on the 15th. That wasnt it at all, and barely featured in any of the rhetoric from any of the opposition parties. And none of them wanted it on the 15th.



It's featured in loads of speeches from the various 'Rebel Alliance' parties, and has been wildly reported, I am amazed that anyone could have missed it, TBH. 



> They are concerned that Mr Johnson would not stick to his pledge to have the election on 15 October, and would instead wait until after the UK leaves the EU on 31 October - potentially without a deal.
> PM says his opponents 'don't trust the people'


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Corbyn's promise in the house to give the tories an election once the anti-no-deal law had passed was clearly just a ruse to get them to pass it quick. Now it's in law he's rowed back and there's not really much they can do about it as they've already spent the last 24 hours calling him a chicken and that seems to be all they've got.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

Good to see strategic genius Dominic Cummings at work finally anyway.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 6, 2019)

I guess i need to start again, again.....

.


----------



## killer b (Sep 6, 2019)

don't bother


----------



## miktheword (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The 'Rebel Alliance' claims they will not back BJ on Monday for a GE, because they don't trust him to set a date before 31/10.
> 
> If he brings forward a bill saying the election will be on 15/10, what are they going to do?




amend it, to a different date, which would pass. 
That's the reasoning behind Tories not putting in a one line bill stating eg ' notwithstanding FTPA.  election will be on 15th October'


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 6, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I guess i need to start again, again.....
> 
> .View attachment 183417


Probably need to start adding a question mark as well


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's featured in loads of speeches from the various 'Rebel Alliance' parties, and has been wildly reported, I am amazed that anyone could have missed it, TBH.



Well I was probably neglecting it because I was talking about the current context, not the context earlier in the week. I was wrong to say it was never much a part of the rhetoric.

They went on most about date-related trust when the 'you must ask for an extension' bill was in its early stages. But the way they talked about it and the other stuff they also mentioned to do with trust and timing made it no surprise that their rhetoric about trust then simply moved on to the next target - actually getting the extension from the EU.

I must admit I was still surprised the BBC were using the 'afraid he wont stick to his election date pledge' thing as their description of the main opposition concern today. Stopping no deal is actually the main stated concern, at least in the rhetoric I've been reading today, perhaps I moved on too quickly or overlooked fresh date stuff because of all the other stated concerns about lack of trust in Johnson and what stunts he might pull. When I speak of the latest rhetoric I mostly mean the angles that they've probably all agreed to focus on after the latest meeting to agree a stance over Boris's next attempted election vote.

Either way there isnt much for them to gain from abandoning their actual objectives just to look like one of their stances was straightforward and consistent and all there was to it. Everyone has long seen the various ways that, for example, Labour has tried to have its cake and eat it with its various Brexit stances over time. So this is just more of the same, and it may as well be, since there is little to salvage from doing otherwise, and more to be gained from thwarting Boris, and being seen to be pushing for something specific (instead of fence-sitting) to happen at this stage of Brexit.


----------



## elbows (Sep 6, 2019)

Fucking hell I'm boring myself. Sorry about that. I should have looked at the likely crap Brexit political intrigue timetable and taken a long weekend off the subject!


----------



## MrSki (Sep 6, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 6, 2019)

Have to say, given the political capital that could have been made from current situation by the party that gave us labour isn't working, just going 'chicken' is really snatching fail from the jaws of glory


----------



## teqniq (Sep 6, 2019)

What, you mean like this?



'this great Party of ours'


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 6, 2019)

Cleverley is such an ‘apple for teacher’ grade A prick, rigorously on the party line at all times. Cock.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 6, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Cleverley is such an ‘apple for teacher’ grade A prick, rigorously on the party line at all times. Cock.




Can Cleverley be put on maximum levels of election duty straight away?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> What, you mean like this?
> 
> View attachment 183442
> 
> 'this great Party of ours'


It's just cringey as fuck, chicken and girly swot, I thought with cummings about it would be all calling people cunts and clever nastiness, they can't even do that right


----------



## Badgers (Sep 7, 2019)




----------



## Combustible (Sep 7, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Cleverley is such an ‘apple for teacher’ grade A prick, rigorously on the party line at all times. Cock.


A fine example of anti-nominative determinism


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

fuck me, it get worse


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 7, 2019)

Tories are eating themselves. Tbf Corbyn could be forgiven for being tempted to indulge in a few more days  of this.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 7, 2019)

Arlene Foster rules herself out as candidate in snap general election

Mrs Foster said today that she would not be a candidate if a general election was called.

“My focus is very much on the return of devolution and the return of Stormont, that’s what I am focused on,” she said.
She wants to concentrate on what??? 
Lol.. that thing she's not done for 2.5 years? 
Michelle Gildernew says it all....
"Arlene Foster claims she wants to concentrate on restoring the powersharing institutions at Stormont.
“She cannot be serious, given the fact she’s had two and a half years to work on restoring the political institutions,” she said.
“The DUP are currently not engaged meaningfully in any talks process – and have previously walked away from a deal"

So...Arlene is full of shite. Dangerous  woman.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 7, 2019)

Keep in mind that Ahlene is not an MP and has not indicated any desire to be one afaik


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 7, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> Keep in mind that Ahlene is not an MP and has not indicated any desire to be one afaik



Yep. You'd swear she was one though the way she controls DUP MPs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

MPs 'set to take PM to court to make him ask for Brexit extension'


> Former Conservative leader Iain Duncan Smith encouraged Mr Johnson to break the law, saying he would be seen as a Brexit "martyr" if judges opted to put him jail for breaching Parliament's terms.
> 
> If Mr Johnson fails to carry out the will of Parliament, he risks being taken to court and, if a judge ordered him to obey Parliament, he could be held in contempt and even jailed if he refused, reported The Telegraph.



Johnson off to jail, that would be funny.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 7, 2019)

It's so weird that in two months we could have anything from a PM losing their seat and being jailed and his party destroyed for a generation, or a government of batshit right wingers determined to destroy the country and with five clear years in which to do it. And anything in between.


----------



## andysays (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> MPs 'set to take PM to court to make him ask for Brexit extension'
> 
> 
> Johnson off to jail, that would be funny.


It might be funny, but it isn't really going to happen.

And anyway, he'll be dead in a ditch rather than in prison


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> It might be funny, but it isn't really going to happen.



If you don't have a dream, how can you have a dream come true?


----------



## dessiato (Sep 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> ...
> And anyway, he'll be dead in a ditch rather than in prison



I'd put money on someone, somewhere being able to arrange that.


----------



## flypanam (Sep 7, 2019)

Epsteined in prison is my preferred option for him.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 7, 2019)

A quick Google doesn't show up any pm ever being jailed while pm. BloJob could be the first, is this why he's said about wanting more places, and said about people having to serve full prison terms? Is there a secret fetish hiding in plain sight?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 7, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Epsteined in prison is my preferred option for him.




I'd say nobody ever said no to Boris Johnson in his entire life. He's a swirling mass of ego mixed with narcissism. And the shock of realising that he's not the saviour of Britain and that there are people who do not agree with him might well put him over the edge.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

High quality stuff this.


----------



## killer b (Sep 7, 2019)

I'm reminded of this evergreen tweet


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes people will care because every time Labour are asked about this they will look ridiculous. It matters. The campaign has started. You cannot pretend it hasn't started.


The only people who think labour look ridiculous are people who would never vote for them anyway


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> The only people who think labour look ridiculous are people who would never vote for them anyway


I don't know about 'ridiculous' but plenty of people that have voted Labour previously don't like the current LP position on leaving the EU, either because it is too supportive or remaining in the UK or not supportive enough of remaining in the UK, hence the loss of voters to either the LDs/Grns/SNP/PC or BP/eurosceptic independents.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> High quality stuff this.



Beats the nonsense on display in Westminster of late.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't know about 'ridiculous' but plenty of people that have voted Labour previously don't like the current LP position on leaving the EU, either because it is too supportive or remaining in the UK or not supportive enough of remaining in the UK, hence the loss of voters to either the LDs/Grns/SNP/PC or BP/eurosceptic independents.


I meant re labour pushing for an election in November. The only people who seem furious about this are tories and BP voters who were hardly going to vote labour anyway.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Where is the 15% that Labour has lost gone btw?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> What, you mean like this?
> 
> View attachment 183442
> 
> 'this great Party of ours'


*J*oke's *F*ailed, *C*levery.

He makes it so easy


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Where is the 15% that Labour has lost gone btw?



Compared to the GE, polling is up around 10% for the LibDems, and 12% for BP/UKIP, so a mix of those two seems logical.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I meant re labour pushing for an election in November. The only people who seen furious about this are tories and BP voters who were hardly going to vote labour anyway.


Ironically it is Tory, BP and 2016 Leave voters that are the least keen on an election 


> While 46% of Britons don’t want to have to go back to the polls (compared to 35% who do), those most opposed to an election are Leave voters (65%) and Conservative (70%) and Brexit Party backers (77%). By contrast, most Labour backers support a new election (63%), as do a plurality of Remain voters (48%), while Lib Dem supporters are split 45% to 44%


But it is wrong to say that people who are inclined to vote Con/BP in 2019 'were hardly going to vote labour anyway', in many cases these people did vote Labour in the past. I don't think there is any accurate data of the BP vote yet (insufficient data) but UKIP did attract a significant amount of former Labour voters. Writing these people off does not seem a sensible way to win a majority - especially as there is a not insignificant number of them in marginal seats.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> *J*oke's *F*ailed, *C*levery.
> 
> He makes it so easy


He's fucked now.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Compared to the GE, polling is up around 10% for the LibDems, and 12% for BP/UKIP, so a mix of those two seems logical.


So they would take the labour position on the EU seriously enough to vote someone else?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Been out of the loop for a couple days so apols if we've been over this, but has the question of the UK government's EU veto (as 1 of 28 EU members) been raised here yet?

Heard mentioned on radio that some peers concerned that Johnson may indeed comply with new legislation compelling him to seek A50 extension, but then ensure EU refusal to comply with that request by enacting the UK's veto.

is this a thing?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

No, of course it isn't.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, of course it isn't.


As in cannot or would not?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> As in cannot or would not?


They have no such veto.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> They have no such veto.


I've had a quick look at the last A50 extension and have seen reported that..


> The extension required the _unanimous agreement in the European Council_, the grouping of all EU heads of state and government.


Reporting around the decision mentioned the votes of the "EU27" but I'm unclear whether that was just journalistic assumption that one member having requested extension would obviously not veto their own request, or that the exclusion from veto of the requesting member state is explicitly stated.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Ironically it is Tory, BP and 2016 Leave voters that are the least keen on an election
> 
> But it is wrong to say that people who are inclined to vote Con/BP in 2019 'were hardly going to vote labour anyway', in many cases these people did vote Labour in the past. I don't think there is any accurate data of the BP vote yet (insufficient data) but UKIP did attract a significant amount of former Labour voters. Writing these people off does not seem a sensible way to win a majority - especially as there is a not insignificant number of them in marginal seats.


I know that but since brexit they appear to have all but abandoned labour so unless labour goes for a no deal approach I don’t see what else they can do?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've had a quick look at the last A50 extension and have seen reported that..
> 
> Reporting around the decision mentioned the votes of the "EU27" but I'm unclear whether that was just journalistic assumption that one member having requested extension would obviously not veto their own request, or that the exclusion from veto of the requesting member state is explicitly stated.


The EU established directives setting out EU27 vs the UK in 2017. EU27 is the negotiating body and you cannot veto an agreement that you're not party to. The agreement isn't with the UK, it's _within _the eu27.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 7, 2019)

I also don't think that "corbyn chicken" stuff has much traction outside people who wouldn't vote labour anyway. the opposition parties are united on it and the argument that "wait a few weeks cos we dont trust johnson" is pretty coherent.
Amongst "don't know" voters -   i guess many  will be  rolling their at the cynical political game playing - but they will be doing that at johnson as well - "plague on both their houses" -  but i cant see it will any sort of game changer.
far more likely to decide people either way come the election is how they view the idea of "no deal" being blocked.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I know that but since brexit they appear to have all but abandoned labour so unless labour goes for a no deal approach I don’t see what else they can do?


Well, have those voters abandoned the LP or has the LP abandoned them. Brexit might have accelerated some of the movement away from Labour but it certainly did not start it.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The EU established directives setting out EU27 vs the UK in 2017. EU27 is the negotiating body and you cannot veto an agreement that you're not party to. The agreement isn't with the UK, it's _within _the eu27.


For agreeing the WA, yes. But the A50 wording for extension looks ambiguous enough to be a lawyers dream.


The European Council must be unanimous in its decision to extend. Unless I've read this wrong, until Oct 31st the UK will remain a member of that council.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

The council established in 2017 the EU27 to be it's negotiating body. The UK is not part of that body. That is who we are negotiating with, not the council. The UK agreement referred to above is in asking for an extension - it's agreement exists in its asking. Which the EU27 then votes on. Not the UK. The UK has no veto. It has no role whatsoever in the EU27.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The council established in 2017 the EU27 to be it's negotiating body. The UK is not part of that body. That is who we are negotiating with, not the council. The UK agreement referred to above is in asking for an extension - it's agreement exists in its asking. Which the EU27 then votes on. Not the UK. The UK has no veto. It has no role whatsoever in the EU27.


I'm sure that you're right, and I really shouldn't take notice of what peers say. That said, I can easily imagine that No 10 have legal teams all over this, particularly when this extension request (if it comes) emanates from the legislature, not the executive. Does pose the question to the EU of what it recognises as 'the member state'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 7, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I also don't think that "corbyn chicken" stuff has much traction outside people who wouldn't vote labour anyway. the opposition parties are united on it and the argument that "wait a few weeks cos we dont trust johnson" is pretty coherent.
> Amongst "don't know" voters -   i guess many  will be  rolling their at the cynical political game playing - but they will be doing that at johnson as well - "plague on both their houses" -  but i cant see it will any sort of game changer.
> far more likely to decide people either way come the election is how the view the idea of "no deal" being blocked.



It's a good illustration about how the tories and the tabloids get their messaging from the same whiteboard, and also how detached they both are from what people actually care about. Of course Corbyn is game playing, but it's a game he got dragged into by Johnson's unhinged brinkmanship. Nobody who pays any kind of attention to anything is going to fail to spot that.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

Even KFC have trolled them over it.


----------



## elbows (Sep 7, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's a good illustration about how the tories and the tabloids get their messaging from the same whiteboard, and also how detached they both are from what people actually care about.



I would expect them to go especially overboard with this sort of thing these days because they envy/fear the success 'the left' have had with social media/meme-based propaganda. I've yet to see any evidence they can really compete on this front.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

They are spectacularly useless at it.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Looks at the same level as canary shit to me.

And just to let people know, the scottish s*n is still the s*n - don't post it on here please.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

The Lib Dems have called a "Bollocks to Boris! Bollocks to Brexit!" Demo here for this lunchtime. It's supported by the Greens and our local Trespass wearing fbpe retiree group.

I've seen no publicity for it beyond a copy of a forwarded email where they admit they've never called a demo before so will probably look unprofessional.

I'm not attending, obviously.

But that the practice of demo calling has been passed to the Lib Dems is an sad state of affairs.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

It is indeed the Scum but it is interesting to see the comparison between the two editions. So completely blatant.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 7, 2019)

Listened to the FT podcast today and a sizeable chunk of it was devoted to talking about how a) the FT is now seriously covering the 2017 Labour Manifesto and b) how everyone in Labour is super stoked that the FT are now paying attention to them.

Could we see the FT endorse JC in an election?


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

Almost anything seems to be possible atm.


----------



## elbows (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Listened to the FT podcast today and a sizeable chunk of it was devoted to talking about how a) the FT is now seriously covering the 2017 Labour Manifesto and b) how everyone in Labour is super stoked that the FT are now paying attention to them.
> 
> Could we see the FT endorse JC in an election?



No.


----------



## killer b (Sep 7, 2019)

chilango said:


> our local Trespass wearing fbpe retiree group


Oof. Harsh


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 7, 2019)

So Johnson is hinting he would ignore the law and not seek an extension.

Clearly even a PM can’t legally do that, but what sanctions are there to stop him?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So Johnson is hinting he would ignore the law and not seek an extension.
> 
> Clearly even a PM can’t legally do that, but what sanctions are there to stop him?



The rebel alliance is already planning legal action to force him, if the Courts make an order that he must, he would be in contempt of court, so could be jailed, as IDS has suggested. Unlikely he would go for that option.

What seems to be gaining traction, is the suggestion he would resign, let the rebels appoint a new PM to ask for the extension, letting them own it.

Then go for the GE, blaming them, on a 'people-v-parliament' campaign.

I've not heard any other options being discussed. 

* This, of course, all assumes he doesn't get a deal that gets passed by parliament.


----------



## agricola (Sep 7, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So Johnson is hinting he would ignore the law and not seek an extension.
> 
> Clearly even a PM can’t legally do that, but what sanctions are there to stop him?



None; the bill doesn't contain any provision for punishing anyone for breaching it.  

All they can do is vote of no confidence him, and it is perhaps the one good idea they've had since he became PM - it will expose how meaningless the Libs, the ex-Tories, ex-TIG, SNP and Remain Labour commitment is to "s_topping No Deal at any cost_", given that there is a cost they are not willing to pay.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 7, 2019)

Would love to see him being dragged down to the cells yelling, “I did it for trade deals with Uzbekistan!!!”


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 7, 2019)

Maybe not then!

Wouldn't be at all surprised to see them back Remain tactical voting though based on constituencies.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oof. Harsh


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

All EU flags and LibDem leaflets


----------



## JimW (Sep 7, 2019)

Sure that's not just the queue for Davina's offy?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 7, 2019)

That's Reading.  There's normally a big queue for KFC.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

It is interesting though, this conflict in establishment capital (shit phrase but represented by FT) between restrictions on frictionless flow of capital via leaving EU and a supposedly radical labour economic agenda. Rock and hard place.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

Worst of both worlds for them would be great wouldn't it


----------



## teuchter (Sep 7, 2019)

What's with the focus on the wearing of budget/affordable outdoor gear? What's the significance of what people can afford here? Is it code for pensioners who don't do useful work any more and whose opinion shouldn't be valued?


----------



## maomao (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's with the focus on the wearing of budget/affordable outdoor gear? What's the significance of what people can afford here? Is it code for pensioners who don't do useful work any more and whose opinion shouldn't be valued?


I think some posters just have strong feelings about outdoor wear.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 7, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That's Reading.  There's normally a big queue for KFC.





JimW said:


> Sure that's not just the queue for Davina's offy?



And then some further snobbery for good measure.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's with the focus on the wearing of budget/affordable outdoor gear? What's the significance of what people can afford here? Is it code for pensioners who don't do useful work any more and whose opinion shouldn't be valued?


The hungry masses of the libdems


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> And then some further snobbery for good measure.



Fuck off you prick.  I lived in Reading for 10 years and there is usually a big queue there as I was often in it.  Now off you fuck you judgmental fuckwit.


----------



## JimW (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> And then some further snobbery for good measure.


Bizarre, the suggestion is merely that locals are likely spending their time more fruitfully than protesting in favour of the EU. Telling that you might imagine snobbery where none intended though.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 7, 2019)

You give yourself away all the time teuchter  projecting snobbery onto others when its always you.  Always.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

There's also those yellow sailing style jackets that the women wear. From Joules i expect.

And it's teucther ffs his name even has eu and big fucking yawn it it.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

I suspect he takes himself and things in general far too seriously.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's with the focus on the wearing of budget/affordable outdoor gear? What's the significance of what people can afford here? Is it code for pensioners who don't do useful work any more and whose opinion shouldn't be valued?


Back under yon bridge


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> I suspect he takes himself and things in general far too seriously.



He's just trolling.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> None; the bill doesn't contain any provision for punishing anyone for breaching it.


Not sure that's right. Think it would be contempt of Parliament, and punishable with a prison sentence, in principle.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> There's also those yellow sailing style jackets that the women wear. From Joules i expect



Joules and Sea Salt, ubiquitous


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Listened to the FT podcast today and a sizeable chunk of it was devoted to talking about how a) the FT is now seriously covering the 2017 Labour Manifesto and b) how everyone in Labour is super stoked that the FT are now paying attention to them.
> 
> Could we see the FT endorse JC in an election?



Yep, their interest was a surprising turn...And made me consider a campaign where JFC reaches out to remain minded institutions (and how they might hold their nose and support him)...

Only to be reminded, from todays front pages, he or McDonnell either accidentally snatching defeat or purposely re-inforcing their anti-capitalist credentials (y'know, just in case any of his supporters thinking he's being a bit fair-weather on the whole lefty schtick...) by reminding the financial world how he will change shit up.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

Wearing a half zip fleece over a shirt is something too isn't it, some sort of indicator


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

Hope not...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Not sure that's right. Think it would be contempt of Parliament, and punishable with a prison sentence, in principle.



MPs can't be jailed for contempt of Parliament, although in theory they can be committed to the clock tower. 



> MPs accused of contempt of Parliament may be suspended or expelled.[19] They may also be committed to the clock tower of the Palace of Westminster,[19] although this practice has not been used since Charles Bradlaugh was detained in 1880. Strangers (those who are not members of the House) may be committed to prison during the life of the Parliament. The House of Lords has the power to fine as well as to order imprisonment for a term of years.
> Contempt of Parliament - Wikipedia



That's why the rebels are looking at legal action, so it would become in contempt of the court, which then can result in jail.


----------



## agricola (Sep 7, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Not sure that's right. Think it would be contempt of Parliament, and punishable with a prison sentence, in principle.



I doubt that a lot; the fact that Parliament has brought (or at least, is about to bring) in an Act and not put any sanctions on breaching it means that there are no sanctions for breaching it.


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Fuck off you prick.  I lived in Reading for 10 years and there is usually a big queue there as I was often in it.  Now off you fuck you judgmental fuckwit.


Block him instead of swearing at him.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 7, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Fuck off you prick.  I lived in Reading for 10 years and there is usually a big queue there as I was often in it.  Now off you fuck you judgmental fuckwit.


All that matters is how your comment appears to readers, including those from Reading who may have taken offence. You should be more considerate and thoughtful when you comment.


----------



## Winot (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> For agreeing the WA, yes. But the A50 wording for extension looks ambiguous enough to be a lawyers dream.
> 
> View attachment 183470
> The European Council must be unanimous in its decision to extend. Unless I've read this wrong, until Oct 31st the UK will remain a member of that council.



The member state concerned cannot simultaneously request an extension and not agree to it. The suggestion is nonsensical.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Block him instead of swearing at him.


This should be quick.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Block him instead of swearing at him.



It's customary to tell teuchter to fuck off, newbie.


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This should be quick.


Why say that? 
If you have nothing nice to say don't post it.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Why say that?
> If you have nothing nice to say don't post it.


This website would be even more dead than it is


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's customary to tell teuchter to fuck off, newbie.


Ok then you rude imbecile. You don't understand why you aren't liked.
Didn't you used to post on bigfooty?


----------



## agricola (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's why the rebels are looking at legal action, so it would become in contempt of the court, which then has the power to jail.



They are, but they'd be wrong to do so.  One would think that even a bad lawyer would be able to make the argument that if this Parliament intended for this measure to be enforceable then it should have put it in the Act it passed, and in case of any breach it should have taken the very easy, constitutionally correct path open to it of removing a PM who breached it themselves.  

Trying to enforce this through the courts would be a monstrous abuse - of the Courts, of Parliament and of the public purse.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Why say that?
> If you have nothing nice to say don't post it.


Because you will be here and gone quickly. That's why.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Ok then you rude imbecile. You don't understand why you aren't liked.
> Didn't you used to post on bigfooty?



Try reading the terms of service & rules, before posting again.



> Even more briefly: Don't act like a dick and we'll all get along fine.
> 
> *Please read the boards for a while before posting.*
> Terms of Service and Rules | urban75 forums



You are acting like a dick, as you will see if you take the time to get to understand this site.


----------



## Winot (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> I doubt that a lot; the fact that Parliament has brought (or at least, is about to bring) in an Act and not put any sanctions on breaching it means that there are no sanctions for breaching it.



It’s the law. If he breaks the law then the courts enforce that. Same as any law.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Why say that?
> If you have nothing nice to say don't post it.





thinking cat said:


> Ok then you rude imbecile. You don't understand why you aren't liked.
> Didn't you used to post on bigfooty?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

I suspect thinking cat could be nardy, who started a thread moaning about the word 'cunt' being used on here, and got banned. 

ETA - I didn't report them, but it looks like I was right.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> Ok then you rude imbecile. You don't understand why you aren't liked.
> Didn't you used to post on bigfooty?


Yes, he's aussie rules mad.


----------



## gosub (Sep 7, 2019)

maomao said:


> I think some posters just have strong feelings about outdoor wear.


 should definitely be worn outdoors!  Price isn't always the best indicator of limitations of kit


----------



## gosub (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> There's also those yellow sailing style jackets that the women wear. From Joules i expect.
> 
> And it's teucther ffs his name even has eu and big fucking yawn it it.



You can't expect a highlander not have curiosity with regard to outdoor kit.


----------



## agricola (Sep 7, 2019)

Winot said:


> It’s the law. If he breaks the law then the courts enforce that. Same as any law.



Enforce _what_, though?  The Bill directs the PM to do something; if he doesn't do it then there is no sanction for not doing it, nor is there any offence he would commit by not doing it.  This law is not the same as very many other laws.

The Court might (though I have profound doubts they would) issue an order for him to do it, which he might be in contempt of for ignoring - but if he ignored that it is hard to see a Court doing anything about it because the matter behind it has nothing backing it up.  I'd bet they would turn around and say this is a matter for Parliament to deal with.


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Yes, he's aussie rules mad.


Thought so


----------



## thinking cat (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I suspect thinking cat could be nardy, who started a thread moaning about the word 'cunt' being used on here, and got banned.


Nup, not me. 
I'm not that dorky.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> Enforce _what_, though?  The Bill directs the PM to do something; if he doesn't do it then there is no sanction for not doing it, nor is there any offence he would commit by not doing it.  This law is not the same as very many other laws.
> 
> The Court might (though I have profound doubts they would) issue an order for him to do it, which he might be in contempt of for ignoring - but if he ignored that it is hard to see a Court doing anything about it because the matter behind it has nothing backing it up.  I'd bet they would turn around and say this is a matter for Parliament to deal with.



I think you are probably right, the courts so far have shown no interest in getting dragged into this shitstorm, they are more likely to tell parliament to sort it out themselves with a VONC.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What's with the focus on the wearing of budget/affordable outdoor gear? What's the significance of what people can afford here? Is it code for pensioners who don't do useful work any more and whose opinion shouldn't be valued?



Ftr Trespass isn't particularly cheap. And is very poor quality for the money. I've just come out of Decathlon too.

So I win.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

On a, slightly, more serious note we were sat outside Pret having a quick drink when the march shuffled past us.

My wife looked at me and said "it's very _tame_, isn't it?" whilst my daughter asked "why are they shouting 'stop the coup'? What's a coup?"

Neither answer paints the protest in a positive light.


----------



## editor (Sep 7, 2019)

thinking cat said:


> I'm not that dorky.


Definitely that 'banny' though. Off you pop.


----------



## JimW (Sep 7, 2019)

I've got a Lowe Alpine top I've had for nearly twenty five years, remember some bloke once squinting at the logo and saying. "What's Love Alone supposed to mean?" So maybe that is a wanky label.


----------



## Winot (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> Enforce _what_, though?  The Bill directs the PM to do something; if he doesn't do it then there is no sanction for not doing it, nor is there any offence he would commit by not doing it.  This law is not the same as very many other laws.
> 
> The Court might (though I have profound doubts they would) issue an order for him to do it, which he might be in contempt of for ignoring - but if he ignored that it is hard to see a Court doing anything about it because the matter behind it has nothing backing it up.  I'd bet they would turn around and say this is a matter for Parliament to deal with.



What if the Prime Minister deliberately broke the law over extending Article 50?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Interesting use of 'breach the law' there by the lib-dem member and high profile remain supporter - without bothering to establish why a _law _requires him to do something rather than not do something.


----------



## xenon (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The rebel alliance is already planning legal action to force him, if the Courts make an order that he must, he would be in contempt of court, so could be jailed, as IDS has suggested. Unlikely he would go for that option.
> 
> What seems to be gaining traction, is the suggestion he would resign, let the rebels appoint a new PM to ask for the extension, letting them own it.
> 
> ...



Johnson is absolutely not going to prison.
He is not going to resign either.
How does he go for a GE if he's resigned anyway?
I think LBC's Magid Nawaz has it right. Bj will ask for an extention and spam the media with a marter act. Look how I was forced into this. I'm on the people's side. We'll have an election and remember I'm for the people etc.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 7, 2019)

chilango said:


> Ftr Trespass isn't particularly cheap. And is very poor quality for the money. I've just come out of Decathlon too.
> 
> So I win.


Doesn't answer the question though.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't answer the question though.



What's your question?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

> Lord MacDonald, who held the senior prosecutor post between 2003 and 2008, said legal action would mean a court ordering that "the law should be followed".
> "A refusal in the face of that would amount to contempt of court which could find that person in prison", he said.



So it is possible, but perhaps more likely...



> However it is also possible that a court could demand another figure in government authorises the delay.



Boris Johnson could go to jail if he refuses to delay Brexit, says former prosecutions chief


----------



## teuchter (Sep 7, 2019)

chilango said:


> What's your question?


Playing dumb then. 

PS I remember the snobbery extended to Mountain Warehouse as well a few pages back, can't remember who the culprit was though.


----------



## agricola (Sep 7, 2019)

Winot said:


> What if the Prime Minister deliberately broke the law over extending Article 50?



er - putting the PM on trial for misconduct in a public office is not something that they could really do in less than two weeks.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

xenon said:


> He is not going to resign either.
> How does he go for a GE if he's resigned anyway?



The suggestion has been that he could resign, allowing Corbyn or someone else to ask for the extension, then this new 'government' would be dissolved, resulting in a GE.

Now, there's a new suggestion, that the court could order someone else in government to ask for the extension.

Having written to party members yesterday, saying there's no way he will ask for an extension, he has drawn a fucking red line there.


----------



## chilango (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Playing dumb then.
> 
> PS I remember the snobbery extended to Mountain Warehouse as well a few pages back, can't remember who the culprit was though.



Wasn't me. But, again MW is poor quality for the money. It's markets itself as "cheap" but you can usually find better products cheaper elsewhere .

I'm still awaiting your question.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Winot said:


> The member state concerned cannot simultaneously request an extension and not agree to it. The suggestion is nonsensical.


Just because something is nonsensical does not necessarily mean that it is unlawful, though. I've yet to find a text that categorically states that a member state seeking an A50 extension is explicitly debarred from the European Council decision whether or not to grant it.


----------



## Winot (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> er - putting the PM on trial for misconduct in a public office is not something that they could really do in less than two weeks.



Well you’re obviously a bit of an expert so I’ll defer to you.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Winot said:


> Well you’re obviously a bit of an expert so I’ll defer to you.


Most passive aggressive post of the day winner here i think.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

I would hope agricola does know a bit about the law anyway.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Playing dumb then.
> 
> PS I remember the snobbery extended to Mountain Warehouse as well a few pages back, can't remember who the culprit was though.


Me. Bite me tuchtuer


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

*wrong thread*


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Massive (_Peter Storm) _imposter syndrome.
May not be able to post for a while.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The suggestion has been that he could resign, allowing Corbyn or someone else to ask for the extension, then this new 'government' would be dissolved, resulting in a GE.
> 
> Now, there's a new suggestion, that the court could order someone else in government to ask for the extension.
> 
> Having written to party members yesterday, saying there's no way he will ask for an extension, he has drawn a fucking red line there.



If only Corbyn could Karrimor with him.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 7, 2019)

agricola said:


> er - putting the PM on trial for misconduct in a public office is not something that they could really do in less than two weeks.



Reconvene some of them super-speedy courts they managed to get going after the Mark Duggan Riots.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 7, 2019)

its a surreal experience trying to make sense of a thread where an ignore is in place


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

Latest LeFT blog by David Jamieson, an excellent read:

Since the coronation of Boris Johnson, the British state crisis has reached a new peak. This has revealed all the morbid symptoms of the system that socialists have, for years, insisted lies behind Brexit. The conspiracy theory of a Machiavellian elite faction bent on ‘disaster capitalism’ has lost credibility (among those paying attention) with every dire turn in the Brexit story.

The repeated defeats of Theresa May should have put paid to this tired concept. The rise of Boris Johnson and his senior adviser Dominic Cummings gave it new life.

Many on the left are so traumatised by decades of defeat that they view every blunder of the rich as a power-play. Every squalid manoeuvre and failed initiative to emerge from Downing Street in recent days has been heralded as part of a long game that doesn’t exist.

The undead conspiracy theory took another bound into irrationality with the notion that Johnson’s threat to prorogue the parliament represented a ‘coup’. This misunderstood both the class character of the British state and the position of weakness currently occupied by the ruling class, including the ramshackle faction around Johnson.

The commitment to prorogue parliament did not indicate the overturning of the constitutional form of the British state. What it did indicate was both the elevation of that constitution to its natural anti-democratic height, and simultaneously its point of essential dysfunction.

The British constitution could be thrown together so haphazardly through the formative history of British capitalism because the state could rely on a hegemonic party – the Conservative party.

That party has been able, in every generation (with a few key Labour interventions), to construct a bloc sufficient to rule British capitalism through the travails of the international system and internal class tension.

What we are witnessing is an historic moment in the collapse of that party’s cohesion and therefore of the whole functioning of British politics.

The diverging strategic orientations which have presented themselves to the Corbyn project and wider left throughout its development are now presented again in the most blatant terms; is the left’s mission to stave-off the crisis and restore order to a battered system, or to ride the tiger of the crisis and assert a radical programme that favours the working class?

There are worrying indications in this regard. The business press is warming to Labour, and this was preceded by a more co-operative tone from John McDonnell towards the City, and promises to secure the independence of the Bank of England.

In a fit of self-delusion, some on the left are telling themselves and anyone who will listen that the Overton window is shifting, a new Bretton-Woods settlement is in the ascendancy, and the radical left is hegemonising the centre via a ‘Popular Front’ - or some other flippant nonsense, armed with the lowest kind of historical analogy.

The more accurate description of these dynamics is the most obvious; it is the left that is being incrementally hegemonised by the centre.

Right now British capitalism is like a man falling down the stairs. With the Tory party no longer by his side, he lashes out a hand to grab something, anything, to break his fall.

If what he finds is the Corbyn project and wider layers of leftwing opinion, then the radical potential of those forces will be rapidly spent.

What then follows in the wake of the Conservative party’s decline is not a radical social alternative, but a reactionary alternative. 

Corbynism must attack the political system with a demand for a general election which will be a referendum on the entire social order. Socialists must tell the country in plain English that the current state of affairs cannot continue and that sweeping change on every front is urgently required. The politics of the defence of institutions, from the parliament to the City to the EU, will result in certain failure.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Sep 7, 2019)

Reports of fash in Parliament Sq kicking off, chucking metal barriers at plod.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 7, 2019)

chilango said:


> Ftr Trespass isn't particularly cheap. And is very poor quality for the money. I've just come out of Decathlon too.
> 
> So I win.


Must depend where you buy it, the kids trespass coats you get in M and Co up here cost 19.99, and good for the whole bad winter, although tbf always end up with a hole in them somewhere.


----------



## elbows (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Many on the left are so traumatised by decades of defeat that they view every blunder of the rich as a power-play. Every squalid manoeuvre and failed initiative to emerge from Downing Street in recent days has been heralded as part of a long game that doesn’t exist.
> 
> The undead conspiracy theory took another bound into irrationality with the notion that Johnson’s threat to prorogue the parliament represented a ‘coup’. This misunderstood both the class character of the British state and the position of weakness currently occupied by the ruling class, including the ramshackle faction around Johnson.



Its almost like Johnson has gone from Stalin to Mr Bean. Ahem.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Latest LeFT blog by David Jamieson, an excellent read:
> 
> Since the coronation of Boris Johnson, the British state crisis has reached a new peak. This has revealed all the morbid symptoms of the system that socialists have, for years, insisted lies behind Brexit. The conspiracy theory of a Machiavellian elite faction bent on ‘disaster capitalism’ has lost credibility (among those paying attention) with every dire turn in the Brexit story.
> 
> ...


Really don't see the logic of highlighting May's 3 WA defeats as evidence that there is no oligarchic 'disaster capitalism' agenda behind Ribrexit? The fact that her concessions were defeated surely evidences the influence of the ERG?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Oh, and now we're all conspiraloons if we attempt to explore the influence of the Brexit faction of the right party of capital. Great.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Oh, and now we're all conspiraloons if we attempt to explore the influence of the Brexit faction of the right party of capital. Great.


I don't agree with everything in that blog (too much focus on 'Corbynism' for me) but it's hard to deny that there is a large streak of, at best naivety  at worst loonary, coming from the remain camp. You only have to look on this thread - Cameron deliberately planning the referendum in order so that leave can win, the framing of a squabble between parliamentary factions as a 'coup', 'disaster capitalism' has been directly cited by at least one poster.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't agree with everything in that blog (too much focus on 'Corbynism' for me) but it's hard to deny that there is a large streak of, at best naivety  at worst loonary, coming from the remain camp. You only have to look on this thread - Cameron deliberately planning the referendum in order so that leave can win, the framing of a squabble between parliamentary factions as a 'coup', 'disaster capitalism' has been directly cited by at least one poster.


Yes, but you don't have to be 'remain' to see what the NoDealer, atlanticist, free-market fundamentalist faction of the right party have been up to for years regarding Brexit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

Thought the point that it's the left (specifically, the corbyn 'project') that is accomodating the centre not the other way round was good


----------



## andysays (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't agree with everything in that blog (too much focus on 'Corbynism' for me) but it's hard to deny that there is a large streak of, at best naivety  at worst loonary, *coming from the remain camp*. You only have to look on this thread - Cameron deliberately planning the referendum in order so that leave can win, the framing of a squabble between parliamentary factions as a 'coup', 'disaster capitalism' has been directly cited by at least one poster.


This is true, at least if we qualify it as *some* in the remain camp, but the article as posted is talking about "the left".

Also this


> In a fit of self-delusion, some on the left are telling themselves and anyone who will listen that the Overton window is shifting, a new Bretton-Woods settlement is in the ascendancy, and the radical left is hegemonising the centre via a ‘Popular Front’ - or some other flippant nonsense, armed with the lowest kind of historical analogy.


seems to be overdoing it a little


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

When comrades start labelling those who seek to understand the motivations of the right as consprialoonery it's frankly fucking depressing.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Latest LeFT blog by David Jamieson, an excellent read:
> 
> Since the coronation of Boris Johnson, the British state crisis has reached a new peak. This has revealed all the morbid symptoms of the system that socialists have, for years, insisted lies behind Brexit. The conspiracy theory of a Machiavellian elite faction bent on ‘disaster capitalism’ has lost credibility (among those paying attention) with every dire turn in the Brexit story.
> 
> ...



This is a bit hasty. Is it based on one article in the FT that proposed that a Corbyn Government might not lead to the end of civilisation as we know it? Otherwise it seems anti-Corbyn business as usual through the mouthpieces of the bosses.

The idea of a referendum on the ‘entire social order’ within months is fanciful. That kind of change has to be built out of some success or other and have some grass roots input. Not a cobbled together and imposed list either. It would get slaughtered at the hustings. 

Labour should take the opportunity to show that it can govern wisely built on principles of redistribution. That simple victory would make a lot of difference and provide a platform for more radical demands about democracy, ownership and work life balance.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Oh, and now we're all conspiraloons if we attempt to explore the influence of the Brexit faction of the right party of capital. Great.



It’s weird that this faction is not even included within ‘British Capitalism’ a separate entity ‘falling down the stairs’.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> This is true, at least if we qualify it as *some* in the remain camp, the the article as posted is talking about "the left".


Yes should have said some. But these people do think of themselves as 'the left', look at this thread (incidentally this is why I think the term is totally fucking useless now). 


andysays said:


> seems to be overdoing it a little


Well it is rhetorical but it's a pretty accurate summary of Mason's thoughts on this.



			
				Paul Mason said:
			
		

> The gauntlet I want to throw down to modern liberals is, who’s your main enemy? We have a joint interest in defending democracy, human rights, and the rule of law. You don’t like fascism any more than we do, so let’s defeat it. And that’s the basis of Popular Front 2.0.





brogdale said:


> When comrades start labelling those who seek to understand the motivations of the right as consprialoonery it's frankly fucking depressing.


Woah, the piece never says that. It criticises a tendency to _assign_ motives to some of 'the rich' not an analysis that seeks to understand such motives.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 7, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Reports of fash in Parliament Sq kicking off, chucking metal barriers at plod.


Doesn't surprise me. Despite that they also seem to have been given general licence to hang around being cunts all around central London, as is the case every time.


----------



## belboid (Sep 7, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> This is a bit hasty. Is it based on one article in the FT that proposed that a Corbyn Government might not lead to the end of civilisation as we know it? Otherwise it seems anti-Corbyn business as usual through the mouthpieces of the bosses.
> 
> The idea of a referendum on the ‘entire social order’ within months is fanciful. That kind of change has to be built out of some success or other and have some grass roots input. Not a cobbled together and imposed list either. It would get slaughtered at the hustings.
> 
> Labour should take the opportunity to show that it can govern wisely built on principles of redistribution. That simple victory would make a lot of difference and provide a platform for more radical demands about democracy, ownership and work life balance.


It's all a bit hasty. A Counterfire writer accommodating to their stalinist friends in Stop the War.   Various fair points about the nature of the British state (as made by many others, ie everyone who doesn't say 'its a coup') but then avoiding the main point - that they dont want an election delayed because they explicitly want No Deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> seems to be overdoing it a little


And just afterwards you have 


Mr Moose said:


> Labour should take the opportunity to show that it can *govern wisely* built on principles of redistribution. That simple victory would make a lot of difference and provide a platform for more radical demands about democracy, ownership and work life balance.


(my emphasis)


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

Three things to note:

1. The article is by David. I don’t agree with all of it. I posted it because I think it raises important points about where matters are now.

2. The central argument, that I do agree with, it that the centre is attempting to hegemonise corbyn whilst much of the left mistakenly believes the opposite approach is taking place. This is a pretty critical charge and one that needs to be engaged with. If there is evidence that suggests Labour is moving the centrists, is shifting the political axis, the let’s hear it.

Those on the left, and there are lots and lots of them, who think labour engaging in parliamentary wheezes and delaying elections is clever or even political are wide of the mark.

3. As it stands, far from terrifying capital, Labour is increasingly being positioned as its saviour. Remember, the corbyn project is about a decisive and irreversible step away from neo-liberal order or it’s nothing. To do that it first needs to win an election, secondly it’s got to say what it would do about Brexit, the current policy formulation is lunacy, and finally it needs to own the mass popular revulsion with the entire political class and its games instead of being captured by them or even leading them (as the Blairites increasingly assertively demand).


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

belboid said:


> It's all a bit hasty. A Counterfire writer accommodating to their stalinist friends in Stop the War.   Various fair points about the nature of the British state (as made by many others, ie everyone who doesn't say 'its a coup') but then avoiding the main point - that they dont want an election delayed because they explicitly want No Deal.



No. We want a policy position from Labour that a) isn’t insane b) can win an election c) owns the mass revulsion against the political class instead of being captured by it and d) opens a space where a decisive step can be taken away from the neo-liberal order. We say to do that Britain must leave the EU.


----------



## belboid (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No. We want a policy position from Labour that a) isn’t insane b) can win an election c) owns the mass revulsion against the political class instead of being captured by it and d) opens a space where a decisive step can be taken away from the neo-liberal order. We say to do that Britain must leave the EU.


But much of the rest of the platform (including from Jamieson) _is _CPB left nationalism.  It doesn't have to be, and I'm certainly not writing off LeFt at this point, but its weaknesses must also be noted.

thus



Smokeandsteam said:


> 2. The central argument, that I do agree with, it that the centre is attempting to hegemonise corbyn whilst much of the left mistakenly believes the opposite approach is taking place. This is a pretty critical charge and one that needs to be engaged with. If there is evidence that suggests Labour is moving the centrists, is shifting the political axis, the let’s hear it.
> 
> Those on the left, and there are lots and lots of them, who think labour engaging in parliamentary wheezes and delaying elections is clever or even political are wide of the mark.


The resistance to this move is not restricted to those who support LeFt. Even the AEIP lot warn against it, and I haven't seen anyone claim that Corbyn is shifting the parliamentary centre leftwards, it's just not letting them lead. 

You recognise that Labour must try to win the election, in which case it is wisest for it to try to set the terms for when that happens, and not follow Tory terms. Waiting until they are at their most split is certainly a valid tactic, even if you don't agree it is the right one. But that is not addressed here at all. Because they are happy to leave with No Deal - indeed I've seen various people close to, if not supporters of (I haven't been through all the list of names again and again) LeFt saying that all of the dangers of ND are nothing but scaremongering that wont happen.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

LeFT is a coalition of groups and individuals Belboid. It’s inaccurate to attempt to portray it as a CPB lash up. It isn’t. As it happens, I agree with you that it can go either way at the moment but it deserves more than the benefit of the doubt at present.

Your second point however fails to set out how Labour leading/not being led by the parliamentary farce, and increasingly acting as part of a centrist bloc is avoiding what the article suggests. And, your second point fails to engage with the other key point we make - that Labour is increasingly seen as the representatives of a disgusting political order by the order itself and the public. A potential disaster.

A potential disaster that becomes less avoidable the longer Labour denies an election that at some point it will have to face


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

And here is the evidence to prove the LeFT case:

Survation 


Best PM


Boris 46%

Corbyn 26%

Don't know 29%


Political class serving best interests of country


No 75%

Yes 13%

D/k 12%


Should there be an early election


Yes 48%

No 31%

D/k 20%


Corbyn PM v No Deal


Corbyn 31%

No Deal 52% 

D/k 17%


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Three things to note:
> 
> 1. The article is by David. I don’t agree with all of it. I posted it because I think it raises important points about where matters are now.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the clarification.
Maybe I'm being a bit slow, but who is "David"?
When you say that "..the centre is attempting to hegemonise corbyn whilst much of the left mistakenly believes the opposite approach is taking place." I'm not sure that I get what you mean. Any chance of explaining that?

What advantage do you see in the LP facilitating Johnson's desire to hold a GE that would enable his ND Brexit desire.

Lastly, I thought that the LP's policy of desiring a Brexit-lite withdrawal based on retaining the CU &/or single market was explicit?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Thanks for the clarification.
> Maybe I'm being a bit slow, but who is "David"?
> When you say that "..the centre is attempting to hegemonise corbyn whilst much of the left mistakenly believes the opposite approach is taking place." I'm not sure that I get what you mean. Any chance of explaining that?
> 
> ...




David Jamieson. It’s his article. 

Labour’s current position is to negotiate a deal and then possibly campaign for remain against their own deal. It’s an absolute mess of a policy. Remain and reform is the surest way of losing an election whenever it is called


----------



## belboid (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> LeFT is a coalition of groups and individuals Belboid. It’s inaccurate to attempt to portray it as a CPB lash up. It isn’t. As it happens, I agree with you that it can go either way at the moment but it deserves more than the benefit of the doubt at present.


I'm not claiming that, altho the CPB is definitely the key organisation (look at the TUC fringe meeting line up, 4 CPB members! And Eddie Dempsey).



> Your second point however fails to set out how Labour leading/not being led by the parliamentary farce, and increasingly acting as part of a centrist bloc is avoiding what the article suggests.


It's trying to win an election. Without taking office with centrist backing, and not letting a centrist alternative to take over. So it is resisting the centrist takeover whilst still engineering an election on its own (or as close to its own as possible at the moment) timing.  Something I'd have thought they'd be supporting.



> And, your second point fails to engage with the other key point we make - that Labour is increasingly seen as the representatives of the political order by the order itself and the public. A potential disaster.
> 
> A potential disaster that becomes less avoidable the longer Labour denies an election that at some point it will have to face


Your use of we is amusing. Yes, Labour is seen by some of the bourgeoisie as a better bet than the catastrophe Tories, though it is still quite a stretch to say that that equates to being 'a representative of the political order.' The poll you quote doesn't really show any move to Labour being seen as such by the public either.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> When you say that "..the centre is attempting to hegemonise corbyn whilst much of the left mistakenly believes the opposite approach is taking place." I'm not sure that I get what you mean. Any chance of explaining that?


The Mason piece I linked to above gives a good example of the idea that 'the left' can use a 'progressive' alliance to advance its policies. (EDIT: also see this)


> There is only one proven response in history that beats an alliance of far-right populists and conservative amoralists: a temporary alliance of the centre and the left. That’s what the Greens, Plaid and the Lib Dems achieved in Brecon – and it looks like a big chunk of 2017 Labour voters took part in it.



I'd cite the focus on parliamentary politics, the increasing demand for the Labour not only to remain but actually articulate a pro-EU position, the desire for 'governing wisely' as examples that the opposite is taking place.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> And here is the evidence to prove the LeFT case:
> Survation....


And the latest Opinium polling 


> The Conservatives are up 3 points to 35% of the vote, while the Brexit party is down 3 points to 13%. The Liberal Democrats are up 2 points to 17%, with Labour down 1 point to 25%.
> ....
> Johnson’s decision to prorogue parliament has not upset leave voters. The public as a whole is divided on this: 33% support the prime minister’s prorogation of parliament, while 36% oppose it. This is split evenly along EU referendum lines: 59% of leavers support the prorogation, while 61% of remainers oppose it.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

How the actual fuck can the vermin be on 35%? I despair.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 7, 2019)

teqniq said:


> How the actual fuck can the vermin be on 35%? I despair.



Because Brexit is driving voters back to them instead of a Labour Party committed to leaving. Putting an end to the games and appealing to the electorate on the basis of genuine change. Their position on the EU is sucking the energy out of them.

It’s a depressing as fuck. But instead of despair and mischaracterising game playing as left politics Labour needs to be put under pressure from the left


----------



## Flavour (Sep 7, 2019)

i think Boris's polling will drop if he doesn't "get results" from Brussels during his prorogation of parliament though. if it ends up being may's deal with a new font being put back to parliament in mid-october i honestly can't see non-hardcore tory voters being very impressed.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Because Brexit is driving voters back to them instead of a Labour Party committed to leaving. Putting an end to the games and appealing to the electorate on the basis of genuine change. Their position on the EU is sucking the energy out of them.
> 
> It’s a depressing as fuck. But instead of despair and mischaracterising game playing as left politics Labour needs to be put under pressure from the left



What about all the remain Labour voters?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> What about all the remain Labour voters?


Is that you? Tell us what you will do then.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And just afterwards you have
> (my emphasis)



What on Earth do you expect a party forming a Government to aspire to? Do you think people struggling to make ends meet and find housing want _unwise_ Government?

When I say ‘wise’ Government I know you think this means selling off everything down to fillings in our teeth, but there is plenty to be gained by a Government left enough to halt the sell off, but sensible enough not to get immediately booted out for creating crises they cannot control.

Debating with you is like a game of lefty top trumps. Yes you can say the most left wing thing in the room. Well done.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 7, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What on Earth do you expect a party forming a Government to aspire to? Do you think people struggling to make ends meet and find housing want _unwise_ Government?


I think lots of people could not give a shit about what you and centrist politics consider _wise_. In fact I think they are so contemptuous of such that they actively want to stick two fingers up at you. Hence the rejection of experts, hence the support for 'no deal' despite the 'economic consequences', hence the opposition to free trade agreements, the support for proroguing parliament, etc.

Your 'wise' government has made their lives worse, has made their kids lives worse, it is more of the politics they despise and they want to break with it.


> But the very extravagance of Long’s plan established a political divide between him and the powers-that-be that could not easily be bridged. It defined the movement’s radicalism the way free silver, the sub-treasury plan, and the nationalization of railroads defined the People’s Party


----------



## MrSki (Sep 7, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

The lamppost thing is weird tbh though, it's normally used in the context of people being mussolinied (although strictly speaking not a lamppost)


----------



## MrSki (Sep 7, 2019)

Biggest surprise of the day is John Mann is to quit as a Labour MP to become the Govt. Antisemitism advisor.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Biggest surprise of the day is John Mann is to quit as a Labour MP to become the Govt. Antisemitism advisor.



Blimey!

https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/...-parilament-over-corbyn-antisemitism-1.488332


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

Uh-huh


----------



## maomao (Sep 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The lamppost thing is weird tbh though, it's normally used in the context of people being mussolinied (although strictly speaking not a lamppost)


We've got a metal gantry for you doesn't have the same ring to it.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 7, 2019)

Fit more on it though.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 7, 2019)

h&s gone mental


----------



## MrSki (Sep 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Blimey!
> 
> https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/...-parilament-over-corbyn-antisemitism-1.488332


Sorry I was being sarcastic.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 7, 2019)

Why are Labour trying to put Johnson in prison...? I've been at the seaside.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why are Labour trying to put Johnson in prison...? I've been at the seaside.


Contempt of parliament (jail us all)


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Turn aroooound


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Contempt of parliament (jail us all)



Nope, he can't be jailed for contempt of parliament.

It they get a court order, he could be held in contempt of court, which in theory could result in jail, but highly unlikely.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Biggest surprise of the day is John Mann is to quit as a Labour MP to become the Govt. Antisemitism advisor.



I’m surprised he’s stayed this long.
Ah well.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 7, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Woah, the piece never says that. It criticises a tendency to _assign_ motives to some of 'the rich' not an analysis that seeks to understand such motives.



Since when was "assigning" motives to elements of capital and their political representatives seen as conspiracy theory?

It's long been obvious that RW, atlanticist, free-market fundamentalists within the right parties of capital have regarded the UK's withdrawal (and consequent undermining of the supra-state's political union) as central to the acceleration of their neoliberal agenda.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Biggest surprise of the day is John Mann is to quit as a Labour MP to become the Govt. Antisemitism advisor.


I'll trump that with Amber Rudd resigning from the cabinet. 
Amber Rudd resigns from cabinet and surrenders Conservative whip


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 7, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'll trump that with Amber Rudd resigning from the cabinet.
> Amber Rudd resigns from cabinet and surrenders Conservative whip



Beat me to it. 

Johnson is fucked.


----------



## Supine (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Beat me to it.
> 
> Johnson is fucked.



Great isn't it


----------



## Wilf (Sep 7, 2019)

Any attempt to get the 22 (?) of them back in the parliamentary party is going to look _really _weak.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 7, 2019)

This is joyful to watch


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Beat me to it.
> 
> Johnson is fucked.


Is he?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 7, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Is he?


And not in a good way


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 7, 2019)

I mean, in any sane world he’s obviously fucked and will be resigning very soon.

But, you know, anything seems to go nowadays


----------



## Supine (Sep 7, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> I mean, in any sane world he’s obviously fucked and will be resigning very soon.
> 
> But, you know, anything seems to go nowadays



Favorite to win the next election?  Mad mad world.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 7, 2019)

Supine said:


> Favorite to win the next election?  Mad mad world.


Well, quite. _They’re still ahead in the polls_. The world is fucking mad


----------



## belboid (Sep 7, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Since when was "assigning" motives to elements of capital and their political representatives seen as conspiracy theory?
> 
> It's long been obvious that RW, atlanticist, free-market fundamentalists within the right parties of capital have regarded the UK's withdrawal (and consequent undermining of the supra-state's political union) as central to the acceleration of their neoliberal agenda.


the same author decries people complaining about russian interference (in this, the first article following the one S&S posted) in western politics. It's a bizarre combination of soft putinism he just being against the idea that there are _specific _interests, that act accordingly. It's all just 'capital'


----------



## killer b (Sep 7, 2019)

Aaand this just in from comres. Wide open.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 7, 2019)

killer b said:


> Aaand this just in from comres. Wide open.


Hmmm. Last ComRes had tories on 31% and brexit on 16%, weird the drop in tory vote for GE in November doesn't translate to equiv increase for brexit party


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 7, 2019)

.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 7, 2019)

Anyone heard anything about this?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Anyone heard anything about this?




It's been rumored for a few days, so wouldn't be surprising TBH.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Anyone heard anything about this?



Wonder if they’ll campaign using a party banner flown from a light aircraft?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 8, 2019)

what happened to our eons old tradition of consitutional convention?


----------



## rekil (Sep 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The lamppost thing is weird tbh though, it's normally used in the context of people being mussolinied (although strictly speaking not a lamppost)


Even more strictly speaking, the corpses were hoisted to protect them from being pulped. _"Well at least it's a warning to all remaining fascists."_



Spoiler








Hanging partisans from lampposts was a very Italian fascist thing to do. Eg Silvio Corbari and Iris Versari in Forli. e2a: Also the Bassano del Grappa massacre.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 8, 2019)

copliker said:


> Even more strictly speaking, the corpses were hoisted to protect them from being pulped. _"Well at least it's a warning to all remaining fascists."_



Said in a really quite jaunty fashion, too.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 8, 2019)

Just caught up with tonight's events.


Ahahahahahahahahaha. 


Message ends.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Since when was "assigning" motives to elements of capital and their political representatives seen as conspiracy theory?


When people are assigning these motives based on nothing more than 'Tories are bad'. 

A analysis of how and why certain sections of the Tory party (and lets not confuse the CP or parliament with capital) support leaving the EU fine. Coups, stolen elections, disaster capitalism, people secretly supporting Leave - shit that is all over U75 - conspiracy nonsense.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> what happened to our eons old tradition of consitutional convention?



Turns out traditions are useful reasons for sharing a meal but not running a country.


----------



## Sue (Sep 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Anyone heard anything about this?



BBC were reporting this this morning, citing Andrea Leadsom. Also mentioned that there wasn't any love lost personally between her and Bercow after he (allegedly) called her 'stupid'. Stopped clock etc.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 8, 2019)

Sue said:


> BBC were reporting this this morning, citing Andrea Leadsom. Also mentioned that there wasn't any love lost personally between her and Bercow after he (allegedly) called her 'stupid'. Stopped clock etc.



Here's the link - Tories bid to depose Speaker after Commons revolt



> The Conservative Party plans to stand a candidate against Speaker John Bercow for his role in allowing MPs to take control of the Commons agenda.
> 
> Business secretary Andrea Leadsom accused the Speaker in the Mail on Sunday of "flagrant abuse" of process.
> 
> Breaching convention, the party plans to oppose Mr Bercow in his Buckingham constituency at the next election.


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

Twitter thread about report that Johnson/Cummings will ignore Benn bill and provoke Supreme Court into enforcing to delay until after 31/10. 

Dinah Rose QC replies to point out that 10 days is more than enough to hear original case and appeal and that “the courts could do it in 48 hours if they had to”.


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

IMO this is not about a real intention on Johnson’s part to break law. It’s about embedding a narrative with the public that he is _prepared_ to do so in a fight against The Establishment in order to protect Brexit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 8, 2019)

Winot said:


> IMO this is not about a real intention on Johnson’s part to break law. It’s about embedding a narrative with the public that he is _prepared_ to do so in a fight against The Establishment in order to protect Brexit.


Yeah exactly. It's about insulation for an election. We did everything we could to honour your vote. They stopped us. Elect us and we'll make it happen.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> When people are assigning these motives based on nothing more than 'Tories are bad'.
> 
> A analysis of how and why certain sections of the Tory party (and lets not confuse the CP or parliament with capital) support leaving the EU fine. Coups, stolen elections, disaster capitalism, people secretly supporting Leave - shit that is all over U75 - conspiracy nonsense.


I’m not sure what audience David Jamison thought he was writing the LeFT piece for, but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have primarily been U75?

Assigning ND Brexit motives to some elements of the Tory party because they are “bad” is not a “conspiracy theory”, it’s just simplistic. If the LeFT group are attempting to garner or harness support for their Lexit position (?) labelling voters who hate the tories as conspiloons does not look like the smartest of moves.

Of course one challenge for those promoting Lexit has always been that it appears to coincide with the interests of a very influential sub-set of capital (& their political wings) that believe that oligarchic neoliberalism can be accelerated without supranational entities. But that fact shouldn’t translate into implied criticism of those keen to expose the motivations of those individuals & groups promoting right Brexit.

Thought much of that piece was poor tbh.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 8, 2019)

This is all a bit Blackadder...

Cummings: “I have a plan, sir.”
Johnson: “Really, Cummings? A cunning and subtle one?”
Cummings: "Well, cunning, if not subtle!"



> Boris Johnson is threatening to sabotage the EU to make it cave in on a Brexit deal – or reject MPs’ plan to stop the UK crashing out of the bloc.
> 
> In a dramatic escalation of its battle with Brussels, Downing Street believes it has devised a way out of the crisis to make the EU no longer “legally constituted”, paralysing its decision-making. The extraordinary plan would see the UK refuse to appoint a commissioner, putting the EU in breach of its own legal duty for all 28 member states to be represented on its executive branch.
> 
> No 10 believes the UK would be “disrupting” Brussels life to such a degree that member states will then make it clear they will refuse to grant an Article 50 extension – even if asked for.



Boris Johnson plotting scheme to render EU ‘no longer legal’ in desperate bid to escape Brexit trap


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 8, 2019)

Tories looking to disrupt the mechanisms of power through withdrawing labour?

Interesting...


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland.


No, you read a piece on a blog that also circulated the founding statement of the group and assumed it was a group position. You have been put right on this already by multiple posters but prefer instead to publish the lie.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> No, you read a piece on a blog that also circulated the founding statement of the group and assumed it was a group position. You have been put right on this already by multiple posters but prefer instead to publish the lie.


So how do they have their leave without a controlled border? The 'blind eye' manoeuvre?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> So how do they have their leave without a controlled border? The 'blind eye' manoeuvre?


You're just going to pretend that this didn't happen then?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 8, 2019)

Winot said:


> IMO this is not about a real intention on Johnson’s part to break law. It’s about embedding a narrative with the public that he is _prepared_ to do so in a fight against The Establishment in order to protect Brexit.



Indeed. So the question that follows is what narrative is labour embedding with the public? What will they think of Corbyn etc when that election comes. In all of the debate this week here and across the left bubbie this fairly central point seems to have been overlooked. When mentioned it’s assumed a 2017 surge will materialise.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I’m not sure what audience David Jamison thought he was writing the LeFT piece for, but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have primarily been U75?
> 
> Assigning ND Brexit motives to some elements of the Tory party because they are “bad” is not a “conspiracy theory”, it’s just simplistic. If the LeFT group are attempting to garner or harness support for their Lexit position (?) labelling voters who hate the tories as conspiloons does not look like the smartest of moves.
> 
> ...



1. The piece was specifically aimed at the left. The aim: to start a discussion within it about the processes unfolding beneath the events of the last week.

2. I assume your second point is irony? How else to explain Labour and much of the left aligning and _publicly committing to work _in ‘the national interest’ with Tories, Liberals and the EU to dispense with the referendum result? You do know capital is split on this issue right and that much of it wants to remain? You do know the unifying politics of remain is the defence of the status quo?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2019)

I've attempted to find LeFT's position on the border in Ireland and found this article by Tommy MacKearney on the blog feed. Does this broadly represent the LeFT position on the border?

A belief that there will be no UK-based infrastructure and the border controls will be limited to the suprastate's located well into the Republic, safe from (dissident) republican attack?



> Boris Johnson has repeated on several occasions that the UK it will not impose tariffs on goods moving northwards. This means that any checks that may arise from a no-deal Brexit would be carried out in the Republic and there is every indication that these will take place well away from the frontier. Incidentally, since the island was partitioned almost a century ago there is no record of republicans ever attacking a southern Irish customs post.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 1. The piece was specifically aimed at the left. The aim: to start a discussion within it about the processes unfolding beneath the events of the last week.
> 
> 2. I assume your second point is irony? How else to explain Labour and much of the left aligning and _publicly committing to work _in ‘the national interest’ with Tories, Liberals and the EU to dispense with the referendum result? You do know capital is split on this issue right and that much of it wants to remain? You do know the unifying politics of remain is the defence of the status quo?


Thanks for the response Smokeandsteam
Apols if my criticism of your group's output appears overly confrontational, but I am keen to engage with and explore the Lexit position. But I will call out ill-informed nonsense when I see it; that does no-one any favours.

I think we can all agree that capital is divided over Brexit and those aware of my posting history will know that is a facet of the topic that I have long enjoyed discussing. Given that, it is the case that a significant and influential sub-set of capital have actively agitated for and support the UK's withdrawal from the supra state. It is not, and never has been conspiracy theory to explore, analyse or speculate about the motivations for right-wing Brexit, and it was, IMO, an error of judgement for LeFT to suggest otherwise.

There was no intended irony in any of my post.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You're just going to pretend that this didn't happen then?


What didn't happen? Do you mean the brexit vote?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> What didn't happen? Do you mean the brexit vote?


You repeatedly attributing a false position to LeFT' even after being put right. Blind eye to that right enough.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've attempted to find LeFT's position on the border in Ireland and found this article by Tommy MacKearney on the blog feed. Does this broadly represent the LeFT position on the border?
> 
> A belief that there will be no UK-based infrastructure and the border controls will be limited to the suprastate's located well into the Republic, safe from (dissident) republican attack?



It is an article that talks about checks away from the border. Not no border, it acknowledges a border being there. However it dismisses the notion of any conflict arising, but my contention is that responding to border transgressions will attract dissident response. There seems to be an assumption in the article that everybody will cooperate. This is why I ask above if the lexit and LeFT response to border transgressions is to turn a blind eye?


----------



## killer b (Sep 8, 2019)

I'm adding 'narrative' to the banned words list btw. No exceptions.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> It is an article that talks about checks away from the border. Not no border, it acknowledges a border being there. However it dismisses the notion of any conflict arising, but my contention is that responding to border transgressions will attract dissident response. There seems to be an assumption in the article that everybody will cooperate. This is why I ask above if the lexit and LeFT response to border transgressions is to turn a blind eye?


So we have you saying that "Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland." followed by a piece from them saying the opposite, which you then take to mean Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland. With no acknowledgement at all from you of what you've done or why. I think other posters will have to make their own mind up about that then. In fact, have probably already done so.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So we have you saying that "Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland." followed by a piece from them saying the opposite, which you then take to mean Lexit or LeFT want a controlled land border on the island of Ireland. With no acknowledgement at all from you of what you've done or why. I think other posters will have to make their own mind up about that then. In fact, have probably already done so.


Lexit or LeFT want the UK to leave the EU.
There has been no linked piece or article stating they don't want to leave, to remain.
It is a con to argue that you want the UK to leave the EU but as a result there won't be demarcation or a border.
It looks a lot like 'A little bit pregnant' position.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Thanks for the response Smokeandsteam
> Apols if my criticism of your group's output appears overly confrontational, but I am keen to engage with and explore the Lexit position. But I will call out ill-informed nonsense when I see it; that does no-one any favours.
> 
> I think we can all agree that capital is divided over Brexit and those aware of my posting history will know that is a facet of the topic that I have long enjoyed discussing. Given that, it is the case that a significant and influential sub-set of capital have actively agitated for and support the UK's withdrawal from the supra state. It is not, and never has been conspiracy theory to explore, analyse or speculate about the motivations for right-wing Brexit, and it was, IMO, an error of judgement for LeFT to suggest otherwise.
> ...





butchersapron said:


> Historically, govts were always very - centrally even - concerned with reproducing legitimation. That's one of the states roles in keeping wider capitalist relations going and one of the factors behind previous class compromises (say post-war social-democracy for example). The current govt in this country is dangerously cut off from the sort of productive capital understandings that lay behind those previous productions of legitimation and tied almost solely to the short-termism of the financial capital bloc of the ruling class and so are not playing the role that capitalism requires of the state, they are, in fact, undercutting that historical legitimaisation that the wider system relies upon.
> 
> But this isn't a new thing, this bloc have had control of the tory party since thatcher came to power, we're talking nearly 40 years here (and Heath was also of this ilk but too weak to do anything). This is what thatcherism looks like post-blair, this is the era of real thatcherism rather than the formal thatcherism we had before. Which makes the oh this lot are not really conservatives whining a bit cheeky.


This stood up rather well i think.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Lexit or LeFT want the UK to leave the EU.
> There has been no linked piece or article stating they don't want to leave, to remain.
> It is a con to argue that you want the UK to leave the EU but as a result there won't be demarcation or a border.
> It looks a lot like 'A little bit pregnant' position.


And ireland never left the UK.

That's it now anyway.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Lexit or LeFT want the UK to leave the EU.
> There has been no linked piece or article stating they don't want to leave, to remain.
> It is a con to argue that you want the UK to leave the EU but as a result there won't be demarcation or a border.
> It looks a lot like 'A little bit pregnant' position.


FWIW, I don't see the LeFT position like that. My concern with the position as expressed by MacKearney is that it is consistent with believing what both parties say they will do post-Brexit. I just don't trust either the UK state or supra-state to that degree.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 8, 2019)

> France isn’t prepared to postpone the Oct. 31 deadline for the U.K.’s departure from the European Union “in the current state of things” as British authorities aren’t providing evidence that they’ll offer new solutions to end the Brexit deadlock, French Foreign Affairs Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said.


Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

Well that could be a game changer, even if it's just a negotiation tactic, to put the shits up Johnson.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
> 
> Well that could be a game changer, even if it's just a negotiation tactic, to put the shits up Johnson.


They'll do what germany (near recession due to brexit) tell them. Of course he has to do his little independence dance first.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm adding 'narrative' to the banned words list btw. No exceptions.


You shouldn’t.  Humans understand the world exclusively through stories.  Who controls the story controls the world.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I’m not sure what audience David Jamison thought he was writing the LeFT piece for, but I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t have primarily been U75?



The usual routine of talking to themselves, in language largely inpenetrable to most people, about what 'the left' *should* be doing. I enjoyed the bit near the end where they demand that someone (else) should explain and sell the position to the public in 'plain English'.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 8, 2019)

Was it George Orwell who said never use a good long word when a good short word would do?


----------



## killer b (Sep 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You shouldn’t.  Humans understand the world exclusively through stories.  Who controls the story controls the world.


that's surely true, but we need to find some way of talking about it that isn't just going _narratives mate *taps nose*_


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The usual routine of talking to themselves, in language largely inpenetrable to most people, about what 'the left' *should* be doing. I enjoyed the bit near the end where they demand that someone (else) should explain and sell the position to the public in 'plain English'.


I enjoyed your use of the word "inpenetrable"


----------



## elbows (Sep 8, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Was it George Orwell who said never use a good long word when a good short word would do?



Well it wasnt Will Self.


----------



## belboid (Sep 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've attempted to find LeFT's position on the border in Ireland and found this article by Tommy MacKearney on the blog feed. Does this broadly represent the LeFT position on the border?
> 
> A belief that there will be no UK-based infrastructure and the border controls will be limited to the suprastate's located well into the Republic, safe from (dissident) republican attack?


There is no 'LeFT' position on anything other than the agreed initial statement, everything else you read is personal opinion.  This particular opinion may well reflect the wishful thinking of a wider group, but it is strong on that wishful thinking. Leaving the EU to patrol the border (which is what having checks in the Republic will do) is a sound idea, but just because ' Boris Johnson has repeated on several occasions that the UK it will not impose tariffs on goods moving northwards' hardly means the UK will have no interest in patrolling the border (even if Johnson actually CAN not impose tariffs).  As soon as one refugee walks over that border, that attitude will change somewhat.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 8, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I enjoyed your use of the word "inpenetrable"



I believe it's 'impenetrable', or is that the joke?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm adding 'narrative' to the banned words list btw. No exceptions.


Can I appeal? It was in my playbook.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Can I appeal? It was in my playbook.



'Playbook' is also on the list.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 8, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I believe it's 'impenetrable', or is that the joke?


Yeah, that's the joke


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You shouldn’t.  Humans understand the world exclusively through stories.  Who controls the story controls the world.


I (think) I like the word/idea. It's a useful way of understanding at least one level of politics and the day to day events, speeches, briefings and the rest. The problem with it is when it takes the place of understanding the material basis of politics, which it often does, even disguising it (certainly as used by the commentariat).

Right, what about _discourse_?
*scarpers*


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> 'Playbook' is also on the list.


I know.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm adding 'narrative' to the banned words list btw. No exceptions.


I was onto this nearly ten years ago, ahead of everyone else as usual. 

https://www.urban75.net/forums/thre...ative-an-indicator-of-pretentiousness.282382/


----------



## xenon (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I was onto this nearly ten years ago, ahead of everyone else as usual.
> 
> https://www.urban75.net/forums/thre...ative-an-indicator-of-pretentiousness.282382/



More accurately, nearly 8 years ago. Let's not have this slapdash approach to matters chronological.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Sep 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> You shouldn’t.  Humans understand the world exclusively through stories.  Who controls the story controls the world.



That's why we make Bran king.


----------



## killer b (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I was onto this nearly ten years ago, ahead of everyone else as usual.
> 
> https://www.urban75.net/forums/thre...ative-an-indicator-of-pretentiousness.282382/


I'm not banning it because it's pretentious though. I don't really believe in pretentiousness.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> More accurately, nearly 8 years ago. Let's not have this slapdash approach to matters chronological.


8 is nearly 10.


----------



## Libertad (Sep 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm adding 'narrative' to the banned words list btw. No exceptions.





SpookyFrank said:


> 'Playbook' is also on the list.



cf. Shenanigans


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm not banning it because it's pretentious though. I don't really believe in pretentiousness.


Are you banning it for a reason that is just a pretentious other way of saying it's pretentious?


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

Great stuff guys.


----------



## xenon (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> 8 is nearly 10.



It's near 6 as well. Why not just say the number of years it's actually closest to. 10 years is exaggerating simply to suit your narrative of being ahead of the curve, an alufe critic and it's just the sort of thing that's spoiling this otherwise wonderful thread.


----------



## maomao (Sep 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> It's near 6 as well.


Eight is not nearly six.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> It's near 6 as well. Why not just say the number of years it's actually closest to. 10 years is exaggerating simply to suit your narrative of being ahead of the curve, an alufe critic and it's just the sort of thing that's spoiling this otherwise wonderful thread.



6 is roundable to 10.

Just like 48 and 52 are both roundable to 50, which is a fact relevant to the discourse of this thread.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> 6 is roundable to 10.



526 is roundable to 1000, but it’s still 474 short of that mark!!

And yes, I did use a calculator...


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Sep 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I (think) Right, what about _discourse_?
> *scarpers*



Nothing wrong with discourse in the Foucauldian sense of a set of regularities which determine what can be said, written, thought; a set of regularities which can be both submitted to and resisted.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 8, 2019)

Has this been posted yet?

Boris Johnson plotting scheme to render EU ‘no longer legal’ in desperate bid to escape Brexit trap


----------



## xenon (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> 6 is roundable to 10.
> 
> Just like 48 and 52 are both roundable to 50, which is a fact relevant to the discourse of this thread.



 It’s closer to 0 than 100. Why is 10 significant?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

xenon said:


> It’s closer to 0 than 100. Why is 10 significant?


Over time I've found the decade to be the most appropriate and useful unit of measure for the advancement of my sociocultural analysis relative to the general mass of urban75 posters. Smaller units are needlessly precise and I don't think I need to explain why the century would be silly, although for the future, who knows.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I don't think I need to explain why the century would be silly, although for the future, who knows.



A dark future awaits


----------



## teuchter (Sep 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A dark future awaits


I for one look forward to quoting 526-year-old posts once science has made us all immortal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I for one look forward to quoting 526-year-old posts once science has made us all immortal.



Why don't you bugger off and derail another thread, and bore the fuck out of other urbs?


----------



## killer b (Sep 8, 2019)

_but that was almost a millenium ago - my thinking on the matter has developed in the centuries since I posted that_


----------



## agricola (Sep 8, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I for one look forward to quoting 526-year-old posts once science has made us all immortal.



Merely the way one searches through that much from the vault will be regarded as an art form in itself.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 8, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> That's why we make Bran king.


That fuckwit did nothing with the stories he knew.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 8, 2019)

From bread to medical prescriptions: What will a no-deal Brexit mean for you? - Independent.ie

"A recent Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) report shows World Trade Organisation tariffs and associated costs would push the price of tea, coffee and cocoa drinks up by 20pc. Breakfast cereals will face increases of 30pc. Meat prices would rise an extra 24pc and milk, cheese and eggs face 46pc increases."


*Brexit*
*From bread to medical prescriptions: What will a no-deal Brexit mean for you?*
*Wayne O'Connor and Maeve Sheehan*
8 September 2019 2:30 AM

_






 17
Stock picture
Will I still be able to get my medical prescriptions filled? Yes. Last week Michael Gove, the UK minister in charge of planning for a no-deal Brexit, suggested medicine shortages would hit Ireland if Britain leaves Europe without a deal.

The Department of Health says significant work has been undertaken to identify potential vulnerabilities in medicine supplies and to put contingencies in place.

According to the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association (IPHA), the representative body representing the pharmaceutical industry here, the supply chain that gets medicines from manufacturers to patients may change, but availability for patients will not be affected. It says that of the 4,000 medicines marketed here, 60-70pc come from or through the UK, but new ways of getting these to Ireland have been identified. “Brexit will disrupt how medicines are moved around the supply chain but, crucially, it won’t affect their availability,” the IPHA says.

SHOULD I STOCKPILE MY MEDICINE JUST IN CASE?

The Irish Pharmacy Union has warned against stockpiling. It says medicine supplies can run short from time to time but these challenges are met with zero fuss. It remains in regular contact with the Department of Health and other industry bodies on the matter.








 17
Stock Image
“We have been told that there are several months’ supplies of medicines in the supply chain in Ireland, which will prevent any immediate interruption to supply. We are still advising members that they do not need to stockpile additional quantities,” it said.

SHOPPING

IS IT TRUE THAT OUR SUPERMARKET SHELVES COULD START TO RUN BARE WITHIN TWO DAYS OF A HARD BREXIT?

These concerns centre on the fact that Irish stores have very little capacity to stockpile the essential items we use everyday that come here via distribution centres in the UK. Many of these products arrive on shop shelves 24 hours after they are ordered by retailers, but new checks at ports will cause delays. Ironing out these details means it is realistic that some shelves will empty in the days after Britain leaves the EU and it will take longer for stocks to be replenished.

WHAT ABOUT BREAD?

Bread will pose a problem because we don’t mill a lot of flour here. Most of the flour our bakers use to make bread comes here from the UK.







 17
Bread shortages during Storm Emma. Photo: Arthur Carron
In the event of no deal, goods coming here via the UK will incur extra tariffs applied to countries outside the single market. These costs will have to be passed on to consumers. Current estimates indicate price increases of around 30pc.

WHAT ABOUT OTHER PRODUCTS LIKE MILK, CEREAL, MEAT, CHEESE?

A recent Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) report shows World Trade Organisation tariffs and associated costs would push the price of tea, coffee and cocoa drinks up by 20pc. Breakfast cereals will face increases of 30pc. Meat prices would rise an extra 24pc and milk, cheese and eggs face 46pc increases.

WILL GOODS I BUY FROM THE UK END UP COSTING ME MORE?


Yes. Consumers will be hit with extra tax and customs charges for online shopping. At present, any item purchased from a non-EU country that costs more than €22 — or €45 for a gift — is subject to VAT. Any item costing more than €150 is also subject to import duty.  These rules will apply to purchases from the UK if it is no longer in the EU. Examples of such charges on Revenue’s website show a €173 pair of designer jeans is will cost up to €266 when additional tariffs are applied.

WHAT ABOUT THE PRICE OF ALCOHOL?

Diageo, which makes Guinness, has warned Brexit could cost it tens of millions of euros because border controls would impact its suppliers. It is hard to imagine any cost hikes would not be passed on to consumers.







 17
Pints of stout served at the Guinness Brewery
A hard Brexit could herald the return of the ‘‘booze cruise’’ across the Irish Sea — common before the EU banned duty-free sales within the single market 20 years ago — as shoppers go in search of cheap alcohol and cigarettes. The price of a packet of 20 cigarettes will be as little as €3 for people travelling from the UK into this country. Spirits would also be  dramatically cheaper.

BILLS

WILL I PAY MORE FOR CAR, HOUSE AND HEALTH INSURANCE?

Earlier this year some brokers warned customers away from renewals with UK-based insurers because they were unsure if policies could still be underwritten post-Brexit. Some firms are taking steps to address this and putting contingencies in place but it remains a concern. Experts say it is important to seek advice before renewing insurance. With premiums already on the rise it is hard to imagine Brexit won’t contribute to further hikes.

WILL MY ENERGY BILLS GO UP?

We currently import about 88pc of our energy requirements, mainly from or through the UK. The Government insists supplies of oil, gas and coal will not be disrupted by a hard Brexit. However, Brexit is expected to cause disruption to fuel markets, which will negatively impact prices. The situation with electricity is more complicated because the sector operates as a single market on the island of Ireland.
_

Really shit and depressing. 
Fuck Brexit and the shitstains who decided it was a great idea...
Really very unfair to have this inflicted on Ireland.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 8, 2019)

I am totally fucking confused. They say are going to follow the law but won't ask for an extension to the European Union which is what the law now stipulates. Which is it?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 8, 2019)

Holy C&P Lupa


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 8, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Holy C&P Lupa



Yeah...well I intended copying one snippet and then the whole thing pasted. 

Did you read it? 
It's pretty fucking shit for Ireland.


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I am totally fucking confused. They say are going to follow the law but won't ask for an extension to the European Union which is what the law now stipulates. Which is it?



They seem to be floating the idea that the law as passed is ambiguous and needs court interpretation. Thereby introducing delay and getting them over the Brexit line. However as noted above (a) there’s no actual evidence of ambiguity and (b) the courts can move very quickly when they need to. Also it is rumoured that the Attorney General and Lord Chancellor would both resign if Johnson tried to evade law.

In all likelihood this is about preparing for a “people -v- parliament” GE. Trouble is Johnson’s fucked if he can’t force an election before 19 October (the date the Benn Act requires him to seek an extension from the EU). 

Labour just needs to hold its nerve.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 8, 2019)

Winot said:


> Labour just needs to hold its nerve.



To achieve what precisely? Why? And for whom and whose interests?


----------



## Supine (Sep 8, 2019)

Nothing would surprise me anymore


----------



## Flavour (Sep 8, 2019)

That Dom Cummings eh. Probably the first non-MP political power player to deliberately model himself on Peter Capaldi's character in The thick of it


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2019)

I just find myself wondering what the social consequences would be, if Johnston were successful in somehow crowbarring the system in such a way as to force through a completely unplanned Brexit by default. I think it would be a Pyrrhic victory for those in favour of Brexit, because every single - and they would be manifest - setback that could possibly laid at their door would be. We could end up with a nation divided like never before, outside of a civil war.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2019)

Flavour said:


> That Dom Cummings eh. Probably the first non-MP political power player to deliberately model himself on Peter Capaldi's character in The thick of it


He does seem to be like a bit of a shit version. You'd imagine him as the man who had Capaldi's character as his ultimate nemesis...


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> To achieve what precisely? Why? And for whom and whose interests?



To fuck the Tories. In the short term at least. A month’s delay for GE is neither here nor there in the scheme of things (imo).


----------



## killer b (Sep 8, 2019)

Supine said:


> Nothing would surprise me anymore



If you read the thread he's quoting, you'll see it's bollocks. Westminster conspiracy theory.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> To achieve what precisely? Why? And for whom and whose interests?


To prevent a no-deal Brexit, so no-one ever finds out how brilliant it would have been.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

Amid all the nonsense about making the EU illegal, breaking the law parliament just passed and the rest, unless something changes sharpish, Johnson is going to have to try at least one of these. Unless... gasp.... lol... he actually gets a deal.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Amid all the nonsense about making the EU illegal, breaking the law parliament just passed and the rest, unless something changes sharpish, Johnson is going to have to try at least one of these. Unless... gasp.... lol... he actually gets a deal.


I wonder if we're getting close to the point where the "no deal" Brexiteers would regard leaving with a deal as some kind of betrayal of our sovereignty..."what do you mean, you agreed stuff with them? They're the ENEMY!"


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

At least Johnson has still got the support of Andrew '2000 sexual texts' Griffiths. 
Tory MP cleared of wrongdoing for sending explicit texts


----------



## Wilf (Sep 8, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I wonder if we're getting close to the point where the "no deal" Brexiteers would regard leaving with a deal as some kind of betrayal of our sovereignty..."what do you mean, you agreed stuff with them? They're the ENEMY!"



I keep trying to think about the whole thing in terms of game playing, situational logics, prisoner's dilemmas and the like. At that rate, whenever the _final _final deadline falls, one side or other will be panicked into a solution to avoid something worse. That may still happen, but we're getting close to the point where most outcomes are equally unlikely. The EU are certainly not going to be panicked into giving him anything better than May got.


----------



## binka (Sep 8, 2019)

Wilf said:


> At least Johnson has still got the support of Andrew '2000 sexual texts' Griffiths.
> Tory MP cleared of wrongdoing for sending explicit texts


_"I am not persuaded that the texts he exchanged with the two women have caused significant damage to the reputation of the House of Commons as a whole, or of its Members generally."_

Probably right tbf


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2019)

binka said:


> _"I am not persuaded that the texts he exchanged with the two women have caused significant damage to the reputation of the House of Commons as a whole, or of its Members generally."_
> 
> Probably right tbf


Yeah, because let's face it, as a sex pest MP he's hardly in a minority of one...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> To prevent a no-deal Brexit, so no-one ever finds out how brilliant it would have been.



Forgive my naivety in the face of the tactical savvy on display here but isn’t the best way to prevent no deal to have an election and get Johnson out? 

Labour can then go and negotiate their own deal with the EU and then campaign against it.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Forgive my naivety in the face of the tactical savvy on display here but isn’t the best way to prevent no deal to have an election and get Johnson out?
> 
> Labour can then go and negotiate their own deal with the EU and then campaign against it.


Yebbut, the first problem is trusting Johnson to stick to any election date he agrees to. He has the right to change it, so he could agree to a pre-31st October election, dissolve Parliament, and then unilaterally decide to make it 20th November, and allow the Brexit deadline to pass, thus achieving a no-deal Brexit by default, with nothing anyone could do about it.


----------



## Cloo (Sep 8, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I just find myself wondering what the social consequences would be, if Johnston were successful in somehow crowbarring the system in such a way as to force through a completely unplanned Brexit by default. I think it would be a Pyrrhic victory for those in favour of Brexit, because every single - and they would be manifest - setback that could possibly laid at their door would be. We could end up with a nation divided like never before, outside of a civil war.


Whatever happens now, leave of stay, the damage has been done.

More extreme RW populists will blame everything bad that happens after leaving or not leaving (and we're headed for a global downturn whatever happens) on doing whatever we did and on the EU/'intellectuals'/'liberals'/'the elite'/foreigners/women/immigrants/black people/etc etc ad nauseum, in a way that totally overpowers that it was the fault of the fucking Tories and the real 'elite'.

The big thing in my mind now is how we prepare to fight that narrative and stop it tearing us apart, which social media will eagerly assist it in doing.


----------



## gosub (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Forgive my naivety in the face of the tactical savvy on display here but isn’t the best way to prevent no deal to have an election and get Johnson out?
> 
> Labour can then go and negotiate their own deal with the EU and then campaign against it.



Not sure that would work.  If they were to have an election where they weren't specifically referencing revoking Article 50, then I don't see how they would be able to actually revoke article 50 ahead of us leaving at the end of next month.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 8, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yebbut, the first problem is trusting Johnson to stick to any election date he agrees to. He has the right to change it, so he could agree to a pre-31st October election, dissolve Parliament, and then unilaterally decide to make it 20th November, and allow the Brexit deadline to pass, thus achieving a no-deal Brexit by default, with nothing anyone could do about it.



Yes, I’ve heard the excuses. 

Let’s at least be honest about what’s happening here. For the Blairites, liberals, Tory Remainiacs etc the priorities (in order) are:

Overturning the referendum result;
Keeping Corbyn out of power; and 
Avoiding an encounter with the public via a ballot for as long as is possible. 

I get that. What I don’t get is why the left are cheering them on in the jaunt


----------



## Winot (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, I’ve heard the excuses.
> 
> Let’s at least be honest about what’s happening here. For the Blairites, liberals, Tory Remainiacs etc the priorities (in order) are:
> 
> ...



What’s wrong with an election on 1 November?


----------



## RD2003 (Sep 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, I’ve heard the excuses.
> 
> Let’s at least be honest about what’s happening here. For the Blairites, liberals, Tory Remainiacs etc the priorities (in order) are:
> 
> ...


It's because 'the left', in all its forms, was all washed up after 1989 and has never managed to register the fact.
What we've had since is simply liberalism and middle class pseudo-radicalism. As seen on here. The rush to defend the EU is the absolute nadir.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> What’s wrong with an election on 1 November?



If it means that the johnson government, having dissolved parliament, could just run the clock down and wait for 'no deal' to happen, and that's pretty shit if you're coming at it from the angle of not wanting 'no deal' to happen, which is the policy (one way or another) of most of the other parties in the commons, and a few tory MPs who haven't yet bailed out.



RD2003 said:


> The rush to defend the EU is the absolute nadir.



snag is, being against 'no deal' as it could be enacted by the likes of johnson, rees mogg and co, and cheered on by the likes of trump and putin (i find it hard to believe that they are acting in the interests of the british working class) isn't necessarily the same as defending the EU.  

As others have said somewhere in this thread, neither of the options on offer was / is good.


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> If it means that the johnson government, having dissolved parliament, could just run the clock down and wait for 'no deal' to happen, and that's pretty shit if you're coming at it from the angle of not wanting 'no deal' to happen, which is the policy (one way or another) of most of the other parties in the commons, and a few tory MPs who haven't yet bailed out..



You misunderstand - I meant an election on 1 Nov _assuming that the Benn Act had been followed and that Johnson had been forced to obtain an extension to the Art 50 deadline_.

My view as stated above is that Labour should refuse an election until after this has happened.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 9, 2019)

RD2003 said:


> What we've had since is simply liberalism and middle class pseudo-radicalism. As seen on here.



which one are you then?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 9, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think lots of people could not give a shit about what you and centrist politics consider _wise_. In fact I think they are so contemptuous of such that they actively want to stick two fingers up at you. Hence the rejection of experts, hence the support for 'no deal' despite the 'economic consequences', hence the opposition to free trade agreements, the support for proroguing parliament, etc.
> 
> Your 'wise' government has made their lives worse, has made their kids lives worse, it is more of the politics they despise and they want to break with it.



What is it you think a Labour Government can do? Really do? The art of the possible and all that.

If you are arguing for a revolution, fine, but the article was arguing for the Labour Party to campaign on the basis of the rejection of the entire social order. What would that look like and do you honestly think that would win a Parliamentary election? In the next couple of months? Elements of it certainly could, but the whole would be rejected as fantasy and worse. But enjoy your righteous anger.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 9, 2019)

Lupa said:


> From bread to medical prescriptions: What will a no-deal Brexit mean for you? - Independent.ie
> <snip>
> _WHAT ABOUT BREAD?
> Bread will pose a problem because we don’t mill a lot of flour here. Most of the flour our bakers use to make bread comes here from the UK.
> ...



That’s some genius journalism right there. Most of the flour bought by bakers in Ireland comes from the UK, therefore if there’s a no deal, the price of bread will rise in Ireland by 30 percent.

It doesn’t seem to have occurred to the smart people writing this article that maybe, just maybe if the price of flour from the UK rises by 30 percent overnight, the Irish bakers would perhaps buy their flour from somewhere else?

I’m assuming the rest of the article is also nonsense, as after noting that gem of business illogic, I didn’t bother to read the rest.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I wonder if we're getting close to the point where the "no deal" Brexiteers would regard leaving with a deal as some kind of betrayal of our sovereignty..."what do you mean, you agreed stuff with them? They're the ENEMY!"


By its very nature, every incarnation of brexit is both delivering and betraying brexit simultaneously


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> By its very nature, every incarnation of brexit is both delivering and betraying brexit simultaneously


A Dialectical immaterialism.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 9, 2019)




----------



## Yossarian (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I wonder if we're getting close to the point where the "no deal" Brexiteers would regard leaving with a deal as some kind of betrayal of our sovereignty..."what do you mean, you agreed stuff with them? They're the ENEMY!"



It's probably why they like calling no-deal a "clean break Brexit," implying that it's preferable to some dirty, messy entanglement with the countries that supply a third of the nation's food.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I wonder if we're getting close to the point where the "no deal" Brexiteers would regard leaving with a deal as some kind of betrayal of our sovereignty..."what do you mean, you agreed stuff with them? They're the ENEMY!"


So you are saying that we are getting to the point where people who want no deal, in fact want no deal?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> You misunderstand - I meant an election on 1 Nov _assuming that the Benn Act had been followed and that Johnson had been forced to obtain an extension to the Art 50 deadline_.
> 
> My view as stated above is that Labour should refuse an election until after this has happened.



oh i see

that still relies on johnson sticking to that and not finding / making up some bit of law to side-step it


----------



## tommers (Sep 9, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> It's probably why they like calling no-deal a "clean break Brexit," implying that it's preferable to some dirty, messy entanglement with the countries that supply a third of the nation's food.



"clean break but we still need to negotiate a trade deal (a process which will take a number of years)" Brexit.


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> oh i see
> 
> that still relies on johnson sticking to that and not finding / making up some bit of law to side-step it



Yep. But that’s not looking so easy for him, despite the bar stool legal comment being floated (send two letters! don’t use a stamp! use disappearing ink!).


----------



## rutabowa (Sep 9, 2019)

I bet he is going to break out the magna carta soon.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 9, 2019)

or sign the act as "boris of the family johnson"


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yeah, because let's face it, as a sex pest MP he's hardly in a minority of one...


The _Honourable_ Sex Pest. Let's have it right.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What is it you think a Labour Government can do? Really do? The art of the possible and all that.
> 
> If you are arguing for a revolution, fine, but the article was arguing for the Labour Party to campaign on the basis of the rejection of the entire social order. What would that look like and do you honestly think that would win a Parliamentary election? In the next couple of months? Elements of it certainly could, but the whole would be rejected as fantasy and worse. But enjoy your righteous anger.



Where is this clamour to defend the 'social order?'  

Wherever the centrists have tried to win elections by emphasising their managerial ability of the existing social order in terms of work, services, crime, services, lost futures they've been routed. They have failed in America, and they have failed across Europe. The entire appeal of Corbyn in 2017 was a simple feeling of change/insurgency. The Brexit vote, whether you like it or not, was propelled at base by a similar popular feeling for change. 

So, for Labour the road they have set off to travel down could now be perceived as defence of the social order. The consequences of that decision will be that both capital and the public will increasingly see a vote for labour as a vote for what you call the 'social order'. Look at the polls, look at the experience of other centrist groupings who've adopted a 'national interest' first pose and you'll see where the road Labour is going down ends.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Look at the polls, look at the experience of _other centrist groupings who've adopted a 'national interest_' _first pose_ and you'll see where the road Labour is going down ends.



SNP?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> oh i see
> 
> that still relies on johnson sticking to that and not finding / making up some bit of law to side-step it



Bar possibly preventing an exit by 31/10, and as you suggest even that is far from guaranteed, it achieves nothing. 

The idea that kicking a can down the road is _politics, _the notion that working class people are sat at home silently hoping for positive news of the Benn Bill is fantasy. The suggestion that Parliamentary ruses by either side can move society on this issue are, frankly, pathetic. 

As I have said before I can see where the centrists - Swinson, Hammond, Benn, Cooper, Blair etc - are coming from entirely. They hope to stumble across a route to overturning the referendum via a device. They know they would be destroyed in an election either within Labour or among the population. Their only hope is to defeat the people and do in Corbyn in the blowback.   

What I do not understand is why alleged lefts are going along with it, painting it as politics or even cheerleading it.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> SNP?



First of all let's not pretend the SNP are radicals. Second, it is the desire for change and not a desire to 'defend the social order' that is driving it. 

Last, and for specific reasons of historical development and experience, a popular feeling exists in Scotland that social democratic independence offers the change desired. A similar feeling exists in Catalonia (which incidentally the EU helped to ruthlessly put down) and in the Basque Country. 

So change and the demand for it is manifesting itself in different ways in different places.

Where is the desire for Mr Moose defence of the social order on the move?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2019)

Not following you, sorry. The SNP are a centrist group who have adopted a (Scottish) national interest pose, and are doing well. Doesn't that go against your point about where Labour are heading?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Bar possibly preventing an exit by 31/10, and as you suggest even that is far from guaranteed, it achieves nothing.
> 
> The idea that kicking a can down the road is _politics, _the notion that working class people are sat at home silently hoping for positive news of the Benn Bill is fantasy. The suggestion that Parliamentary ruses by either side can move society on this issue are, frankly, pathetic.
> 
> ...


er it is politics even if it's not decent politics

parliamentary ruses can move society on this issue, certainly you'll see quite what they can do if there are cackhanded attempts to use parliamentary ruses to overturn the referendum result.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> SNP?


perdition


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yebbut, the first problem is trusting Johnson to stick to any election date he agrees to. He has the right to change it, so he could agree to a pre-31st October election, dissolve Parliament, and then unilaterally decide to make it 20th November, and allow the Brexit deadline to pass, thus achieving a no-deal Brexit by default, with nothing anyone could do about it.



He wouldn't do that though and everyone knows he wouldn't.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> er it is politics even if it's not decent politics
> 
> parliamentary ruses can move society on this issue, certainly you'll see quite what they can do if there are cackhanded attempts to use parliamentary ruses to overturn the referendum result.



We live in hope.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> First of all let's not pretend the SNP are radicals. Second, it is the desire for change and not a desire to 'defend the social order' that is driving it.
> 
> Last, and for specific reasons of historical development and experience, a popular feeling exists in Scotland that social democratic independence offers the change desired. A similar feeling exists in Catalonia (which incidentally the EU helped to ruthlessly put down) and in the Basque Country.
> 
> ...



It’s a fantasy that the ‘desire for change’ expressed by the Leave vote is anything like what you think. It starts with a demand for the state to control our borders harshly, not to replace the constitutional monarch or nationalise all large industry.

Where sections of it can be engaged is around redistribution, public services, work life balance and democratic reform, such as abolition of the Lords.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Bar possibly preventing an exit by 31/10, and as you suggest even that is far from guaranteed, it achieves nothing.
> 
> The idea that kicking a can down the road is _politics, _the notion that working class people are sat at home silently hoping for positive news of the Benn Bill is fantasy. The suggestion that Parliamentary ruses by either side can move society on this issue are, frankly, pathetic.
> 
> ...


'defeat the people'? 

This is also part of the problem, the idea that the referendum of 2016 represents some kind of definitive expression of 'the people's will' that justifies any kind of brexit over any kind of process that leads to compromise. The bird has probably flown on a withdrawal that looks like Norway +, one that would acknowledge things like the EU people living here, the fact that 48% voted remain, the Good Friday Agreement, and myriad other considerations that make anything other than Norway + a pretty definitive expression of something that goes way beyond anything the referendum told us. And the reason that bird has flown is that the Tories consciously and explicitly sought something that went way beyond that - first May and now Johnson. Opposition to their nationalist, populist 'red lines' should be the first call here. 

You're playing into the hands of the right leavers by repeating this people vs parliament narrative. That's not what is happening here, and it's foolish to think it is.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s a fantasy that the ‘desire for change’ expressed by the Leave vote is anything like what you think. It starts with a demand for the state to control our borders harshly, not to replace the constitutional monarch or nationalise all large industry.
> 
> Where sections of it can be engaged is around redistribution, public services, work life balance and democratic reform, such as abolition of the Lords.



If you want to continue this at least look at the evidence. 

The Brexit vote was motivated by a basket of grievances and desires. At base the propellent was a demand for change, to be seen and heard. Brexit has shone a light on a broken political and social hegemony that Labour was able to partly mobilise in 2017.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'defeat the people'?
> 
> This is also part of the problem, the idea that the referendum of 2016 represents some kind of definitive expression of 'the people's will' that justifies any kind of brexit over any kind of process that leads to compromise. The bird has probably flown on a withdrawal that looks like Norway +, one that would acknowledge things like the EU people living here, the fact that 48% voted remain, the Good Friday Agreement, and myriad other considerations that make anything other than Norway + a pretty definitive expression of something that goes way beyond anything the referendum told us. And the reason that bird has flown is that the Tories consciously and explicitly sought something that went way beyond that - first May and now Johnson. Opposition to their nationalist, populist 'red lines' should be the first call here.
> 
> You're playing into the hands of the right leavers by repeating this people vs parliament narrative. That's not what is happening here, and it's foolish to think it is.



Jesus wept. This. Again. How referendum's work is simple. A binary vote is taken. It is then enacted.

If you don't _feel _everywhere a growing mood that indicates a fundamental breaking down of the past - of the ruled doing what the rulers say, of a decisive moment approaching - then you obviously don't get out much.

The people playing into the hands of the right wingers are the clowns giving this utter farce credibility rather than demanding an election where this can be had out properly.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If you want to continue this at least look at the evidence.
> 
> The Brexit vote was motivated by a basket of grievances and desires. At base the propellent was a demand for change, to be seen and heard. Brexit has shone a light on a broken political and social hegemony that Labour was able to partly mobilise in 2017.



Saying nothing here. 

A demand for what change, how has this been coherently expressed? Millions of voters across the Shire counties of England. What change do they want? What policies would offer to them that constitute a fundamental rupture?

You are right, it is a basket, a very mixed one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> We live in hope.


you may do. i see nothing hopeful to come out of the current impasse, whether we remain in the eu, or whether we depart with or without a deal. frankly i think it all but certain that not only on 1 november we will be part of the european union but we will also be so next march and, yes, next november. the utterly fuckwitted way this has all be handled has led to a position where we're left with the two unhappiest alternatives being the only ones really left in the box - a no deal departure or a withdrawal of article 50. leaving to be part of efta or somehow within the eea was cast off a long time ago, and would be i think widely rejected now. there's a lot of unhappiness ahead.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Saying nothing here.
> 
> A demand for what change, how has this been coherently expressed? Millions of voters across the Shire counties of England. What change do they want? What policies would offer to them that constitute a fundamental rupture?
> 
> You are right, it is a basket, a very mixed one.



The failure of 17 million people to enunciate a complex nexus of demands via a referendum vote is clearly a major flaw on their part? Wow.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you may do. i see nothing hopeful to come out of the current impasse, whether we remain in the eu, or whether we depart with or without a deal.



One very tentative teeny glimmer of hopefulness I've seen is that I've seen quite a lot of people, whether at the office, the pub, on public transport etc., having conversations about politics which are well outside the old technocratic Overton window, and in some cases are showing signs of being quite well informed.
Not much in itself, but some changes become a lot closer to possible once they become thinkable.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

8ball said:


> One very tentative teeny glimmer of hopefulness I've seen is that I've seen quite a lot of people, whether at the office, the pub, on public transport, having conversations about politics which are well outside the old technocratic Overton window, and in some cases are showing signs of being quite well informed.
> Not much in itself, but some changes become a lot closer to possible once they become thinkable.


sadly it's politicians in charge of the process and i've pointed out several times i don't think the denizens of the palace of westminster have the wherewithal to resolve any of this well.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

8ball said:


> One very tentative teeny glimmer of hopefulness I've seen is that I've seen quite a lot of people, whether at the office, the pub, on public transport etc., having conversations about politics which are well outside the old technocratic Overton window, and in some cases are showing signs of being quite well informed.
> Not much in itself, but some changes become a lot closer to possible once they become thinkable.



Yes, it's almost like if there was an insurgent party that captured the imagination of all of these millions of people, that set out how life could get better, that had a radical plan to take _just one decisive step _away from the rotten shit of the last 40 years, that it could sweep Johnson, Blair, Benn and the rest of these fuckers into the past where they belong.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> sadly it's politicians in charge of the process and i've pointed out several times i don't think the denizens of the palace of westminster have the wherewithal to resolve any of this well.



They've been a lost cause for quite some time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, it's almost like if there was an insurgent party that captured the imagination of all of these millions of people, that set out how life could get better, that had a radical plan to take _just one decisive step _away from the rotten shit of the last 40 years, that it could sweep Johnson, Blair, Benn and the rest of these fuckers into the past where they belong.


i never think 'hilary' when i see benn, i either think nigel or tony.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i never think 'hilary' when i see benn, i either think nigel or tony.



I liked Nigel Benn. Good street fighter style. 
I also liked Tony Benn. He opposed neo-liberalism in all of its emenations.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, it's almost like if there was an insurgent party that captured the imagination of all of these millions of people, that set out how life could get better, that had a radical plan to take _just one decisive step _away from the rotten shit of the last 40 years, that it could sweep Johnson, Blair, Benn and the rest of these fuckers into the past where they belong.



Instead, we've had a 3 year omnishambles.
Better than nothing, but not great in terms of bang for your buck.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I also liked Tony Benn. He opposed neo-liberalism in all of its emenations.



The apple fell quite far from the tree that time.


----------



## Anju (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i never think 'hilary' when i see benn, i either think nigel or tony.



Your  thinking is wrong. This is the real Benn.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 9, 2019)

Anju said:


> You're thinking is wrong. This is the real Benn.
> View attachment 183702



Your.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

Anju said:


> You're thinking is wrong. This is the real Benn.
> View attachment 183702



That's a third Benn I like...


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The failure of 17 million people to enunciate a complex nexus of demands via a referendum vote is clearly a major flaw on their part? Wow.



Look I’m trying to debate with you reasonably. Don’t try to turn it on me in that fashion. I’m making no criticism of people at the bottom sick to death of this shit.

However, it is you that is claiming that ‘at base a propellant for change’. You should at least be able to separate out some of those desires from that ‘basket’ and say how that manifesto for a fundamental challenge to the social order by the Labour Party would/could coincide. 

Play the ball please.


----------



## Anju (Sep 9, 2019)

8ball said:


> Your.



Thanks. I had deliberately changed to you're for some reason.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2019)

Apparently today is Prorogation Day. TBF when you are facing a 'national crisis' it's always best to shut down for a month and have a trip to the seaside.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If you want to continue this at least look at the evidence.
> 
> The Brexit vote was motivated by a basket of grievances and desires. At base the propellent was a demand for change, to be seen and heard. Brexit has shone a light on a broken political and social hegemony that Labour was able to partly mobilise in 2017.


What evidence are you talking about here?


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Apparently today is Prorogation Day. TBF when you are facing a 'national crisis' it's always best to shut down for a month and have a trip to the seaside.n undeclared general election campaign


fixed that for you


----------



## Badgers (Sep 9, 2019)

Wonder how they will react if A50 is withdrawn or there is a second referendum


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Wonder how they will react if A50 is withdrawn or there is a second referendum




i don't honestly see how you could revoke A50 without first putting it to the public (from where we are)


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Wonder how they will react if A50 is withdrawn or there is a second referendum



badly. very badly.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> fixed that for you


By the by, I wonder if the tories will keep up the 'corbyn is a raving Marxist' line till the election? It seemed very clumsy when Johnson tried it in parliament and red scares don't exactly hit the spot nowadays. Evidence the tory attack strategy ('playbook' ) is stuck in a Thatcherite timewarp than anything else. And more to the point, nowhere near where voters and their concerns are.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He wouldn't do that though and everyone knows he wouldn't.


How are you so sure?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> How are you so sure?



Why would he? How would it advantage him?


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the by, I wonder if the tories will keep up the 'corbyn is a raving Marxist' line till the election? It seemed very clumsy when Johnson tried it in parliament and red scares don't exactly hit the spot nowadays. Evidence the tory attack strategy ('playbook' ) is stuck in a Thatcherite timewarp than anything else. And more to the point, nowhere near where voters and their concerns are.




Yep, be far better to go with MacDonald is a raving Marxist


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> Yep, be far better to go with MacDonald is a raving Marxist


mcdonnell

auld macdonald has a farm, but it isn't a collective one


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> mcdonnell



Sorry, my mistake.  McDonald's marxist? we are not that through the looking glass


----------



## Argonia (Sep 9, 2019)

Ramsay MacDonald wasn't Marxist either


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the by, I wonder if the tories will keep up the 'corbyn is a raving Marxist' line till the election? It seemed very clumsy when Johnson tried it in parliament and red scares don't exactly hit the spot nowadays. Evidence the tory attack strategy ('playbook' ) is stuck in a Thatcherite timewarp than anything else. And more to the point, nowhere near where voters and their concerns are.


Corbyn's unpopularity is clearly a cornerstone of their election strategy (I read that the Johnson team are keen on lots of head-to-head debates with Corbyn, which doesn't strike me as a wise move - Corbyn is strong in that format, while Johnson is pretty weak), but at the same time they've got an extra month before purdah to use the government stationary for electioneering - look at this list of tory target seats: the ones with crosses next to them are seats which are getting money in the new Towns Fund the government announced on Friday (from Jen Williams at the MEN)


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

these are the top Labour targets (line means it's not in England so not eligible, cross means it got cash in the towns fund. It's pretty naked.


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

Top bantz


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)




----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Why would he? How would it advantage him?


One could ask the same question about the many and various wizard wheezes he seems to have come up with along the way, not least of which is "Ask for an extension? Not gunna ". Anyone capable of that level of irrational defiance is more than capable of a bit of too-clever-by-half arsing around with the semantics.

When I was at school, there was a kid who, whatever he was told, tried to find a way to defy it. It was obvious pretty quickly that the defiance was the issue, not the question of not wanting to be told to do something (or not to). The result was a kind of blatant defiance that positively invited the Authorities to come down heavily on him - it was utterly counterproductive, and actually pissed everyone off. So, some rule would come in, and this one would set out to rub the staff's noses in the fact that HE wasn't going to follow it, with the usual result that, after a little bit of slack had been cut for a while, the rulehammer would come down, and, thanks to twatface, we'd have some draconian thing that was far worse than whatever else. So twatface regularly found himself doing the innocent "what, me?" routine as fellow pupils were weighing in on him to wind his neck in.

That behaviour looks an awful lot like what we're seeing from the People's Prime Minister - and it all fits rather nicely with the whole "Whizz for Atomms" personal style he seems to have brought with him, straight from Eton's quad.


----------



## JimW (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> Corbyn's unpopularity is clearly a cornerstone of their election strategy (I read that the Johnson team are keen on lots of head-to-head debates with Corbyn, which doesn't strike me as a wise move - Corbyn is strong in that format, while Johnson is pretty weak), but at the same time they've got an extra month before purdah to use the government stationary for electioneering - look at this list of tory target seats: the ones with crosses next to them are seats which are getting money in the new Towns Fund the government announced on Friday (from Jen Williams at the MEN)


Why oh why won't they bribe my mum in Stroud? See Pudsey also left off - was it hard to set criteria to catch what I presume are wealthier areas? Didn't catch how this fund has been framed. ETA Though looking at targets Stoke on Trent South can't be that leafy


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> Top bantz





  It’s a fucking  trap jezza


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> Top bantz



That'll be why he was so desperate for a GE.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2019)

Too many leaks , too convenient.  It’s not operation mass appeal scale but..


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> One could ask the same question about the many and various wizard wheezes he seems to have come up with along the way, not least of which is "Ask for an extension? Not gunna ". Anyone capable of that level of irrational defiance is more than capable of a bit of too-clever-by-half arsing around with the semantics.
> 
> When I was at school, there was a kid who, whatever he was told, tried to find a way to defy it. It was obvious pretty quickly that the defiance was the issue, not the question of not wanting to be told to do something (or not to). The result was a kind of blatant defiance that positively invited the Authorities to come down heavily on him - it was utterly counterproductive, and actually pissed everyone off. So, some rule would come in, and this one would set out to rub the staff's noses in the fact that HE wasn't going to follow it, with the usual result that, after a little bit of slack had been cut for a while, the rulehammer would come down, and, thanks to twatface, we'd have some draconian thing that was far worse than whatever else. So twatface regularly found himself doing the innocent "what, me?" routine as fellow pupils were weighing in on him to wind his neck in.
> 
> That behaviour looks an awful lot like what we're seeing from the People's Prime Minister - and it all fits rather nicely with the whole "Whizz for Atomms" personal style he seems to have brought with him, straight from Eton's quad.


to end his behaviour they should have given him a position of responsibility, milk monitor or whatnot


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

JimW said:


> Why oh why won't they bribe my mum in Stroud? See Pudsey also left off - was it hard to set criteria to catch what I presume are wealthier areas? Didn't catch how this fund has been framed. ETA Though looking at targets Stoke on Trent South can't be that leafy


I guess maybe they left a few out as a fig-leaf.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> Corbyn's unpopularity is clearly a cornerstone of their election strategy (I read that the Johnson team are keen on lots of head-to-head debates with Corbyn, which doesn't strike me as a wise move - Corbyn is strong in that format, while Johnson is pretty weak), but at the same time they've got an extra month before purdah to use the government stationary for electioneering - look at this list of tory target seats: the ones with crosses next to them are seats which are getting money in the new Towns Fund the government announced on Friday (from Jen Williams at the MEN)


Yes, they'll certainly be focusing on Corbyn, I just though the Marxist stuff was weak. I suspect the, ahem, 'narrative' will be Corbyn/Labour's vacillation and cowardice on brexit vs Johnson's 'decisive action'. Something that will probably resonate because it's, kind of, true. Then there'll be the labour's spending plans... union bosses... anti-Semitism - all of which feels a bit tired. Hard to tell whether they are planning to do the culture wars and who would benefit if they do.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> to end his behaviour they should have given him a position of responsibility, milk monitor or whatnot


That would have required a level of forward thinking and artifice that was completely lacking in my own real-world experience of St Custards.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> That would have required a level of forward thinking and artifice that was completely lacking in my own real-world experience of St Custards.


i don't know whether they taught it then, but i am sure they teach it now - the auld michael corleone quote - keep your friends close and your enemies closer. when combined with the notion that power corrupts and trivial power corrupts completely a position as a minor functionary within the school system could have diverted his youthful rebelliousness into adult conformity


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes, they'll certainly be focusing on Corbyn, I just though the Marxist stuff was weak. I suspect the, ahem, 'narrative' will be Corbyn/Labour's vacillation and cowardice on brexit vs Johnson's 'decisive action'. Something that will probably resonate because it's, kind of, true. Then there'll be the labour's spending plans... union bosses... anti-Semitism - all of which feels a bit tired. Hard to tell whether they are planning to do the culture wars and who would benefit if they do.


The Mail is running a story today about Corbyn & Mcdonnell going to the wedding of one of the Birmingham Six. They're through the bottom of the barrel and halfway to digging their own grave.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't know whether they taught it then, but i am sure they teach it now - the auld michael corleone quote - keep your friends close and your enemies closer. when combined with the notion that power corrupts and trivial power corrupts completely a position as a minor functionary within the school system could have diverted his youthful rebelliousness into adult conformity


Cunningly, they left those lessons for the inmates to figure out. I was as much of a non-conformist as his nibs, but his example taught me to do my refusenik stuff a) discreetly, and b) with humour. The shame of it is that I didn't realise until years afterwards how well that had worked , although with hindsight, a 14 year old boy's idea of "discreet non-conformism" doesn't really fit any usable definition of "discreet". But at least I was more discreet than him


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> One could ask the same question about the many and various wizard wheezes he seems to have come up with along the way, not least of which is "Ask for an extension? Not gunna ".



But if the question is 'How do we know he's not full of shit?', the answer can't be that he's threatened something that he hasn't yet done.


----------



## maomao (Sep 9, 2019)

I don't see the advantage to Johnson personally of a fudge or a compromise. A really good deal would work but that won't happen. He's already made enough of a prick out of himself that if he compromises he'll go down in history as even worse than May. The only advantage to him is in sticking to his guns. One in a million they did lock him up it would be one of them cushty nicks not Belmarsh with Tommy.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 9, 2019)

I would luv it if De Pfeffel goes to prison


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

He's not going to, but tbh I can't imagine a better campaigning tool than a short stretch in prison for trying to enact the will of the people.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 9, 2019)

He could write a book while he's there.


----------



## chilango (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> He's not going to, but tbh I can't imagine a better campaigning tool than a short stretch in prison for trying to enact the will of the people.



Maybe.

But I doubt that Johnson could bring himself to go through with it.

I mean, he doesn't give a damn about Brexit either way. And has never struggled for anything.

...but I guess he's happy to play this card now when there's plenty of time to avoid it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

chilango said:


> Maybe.
> 
> But I doubt that Johnson could bring himself to go through with it.
> 
> ...


it's not going to happen - I just don't think it's something that should be desired by his opponents.


----------



## maomao (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> it's not going to happen - I just don't think it's something that should be desired by his opponents.


Yeah, I'd prefer they just hanged him.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> Yeah, I'd prefer they just hanged him.


In fact John Bercow has just been seen sporting a 'Hang Boris Johnson' T shirt.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In fact John Bercow has just been seen sporting a 'Hang Boris Johnson' T shirt.


Claiming it was his wife's T-shirt.


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

The Uxbridge Mandela


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> The Uxbridge Mandela


_Thirty-one years in depravity 
His trousers too small to fit his gut 
His body abused and his mind is shot 
Are you so blind that you cannot see..._


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> One could ask the same question about the many and various wizard wheezes he seems to have come up with along the way, not least of which is "Ask for an extension? Not gunna ". Anyone capable of that level of irrational defiance is more than capable of a bit of too-clever-by-half arsing around with the semantics.
> 
> When I was at school, there was a kid who, whatever he was told, tried to find a way to defy it. It was obvious pretty quickly that the defiance was the issue, not the question of not wanting to be told to do something (or not to). The result was a kind of blatant defiance that positively invited the Authorities to come down heavily on him - it was utterly counterproductive, and actually pissed everyone off. So, some rule would come in, and this one would set out to rub the staff's noses in the fact that HE wasn't going to follow it, with the usual result that, after a little bit of slack had been cut for a while, the rulehammer would come down, and, thanks to twatface, we'd have some draconian thing that was far worse than whatever else. So twatface regularly found himself doing the innocent "what, me?" routine as fellow pupils were weighing in on him to wind his neck in.
> 
> That behaviour looks an awful lot like what we're seeing from the People's Prime Minister - and it all fits rather nicely with the whole "Whizz for Atomms" personal style he seems to have brought with him, straight from Eton's quad.



Leaving aside the pop psychology for a second - it benefits him to defy the extension because it fits with his electoral strategy. It doesn't benefit him to fight an election on no deal.


----------



## gosub (Sep 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Claiming it was his wife's T-shirt.



hell of a time to admit to wearing his wifes clothes, but I suppose it explains that time all she had left in her wardrobe was a sheet


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Thirty-one years in depravity
> His trousers too small to fit his gut
> His body abused and his mind is shot
> Are you so blind that you cannot see..._


tbh he's more 'lonely man of spandau'

Lonely isn't the word to use
For a man who's lost the right to choose
So many years upon his head
All of those days of constant dread
Freedom is a dirty word
With four grey walls so absurd


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Just when Johnson thinks he's pulled a fast one...


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Leaving aside the pop psychology for a second - it benefits him to defy the extension because it fits with his electoral strategy. It doesn't benefit him to fight an election on no deal.


Never mind. I think you're trying to argue this into levels of complexity I'm not really interested in going to. Think of it, perhaps, as my equivalent of your "pop psychology", eh?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 9, 2019)

It did sound like Grieve was up to something.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 9, 2019)

Time for those who live in the shadows to dust off that white Fiat uno and give it a service, might come in useful again very soon


----------



## Flavour (Sep 9, 2019)

if BJ _does _have to ask for an extension in the end, as he very well may do, it will be narrativized (killer b) as corbyn forcing a surrender, then up comes GE and boris is somehow still in business, corbyn perhaps less so. i don't think the prorogation is going to help Labour at all tbh, as BJ surely knows he can do 5 weeks of trying his best to look like he's really trying to negotiate with those awkward, unbending Brussels technocrats who refuse to accept scout's honor and common sense


----------



## Flavour (Sep 9, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Time for those who live in the shadows to dust off that white Fiat uno and give it a service, might come in useful again very soon



what, fascist cops committing armed robberies? that's what the White Uno gang did


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Flavour said:


> what, fascist cops committing armed robberies? that's what the White Uno gang did



Death of Diana, Princess of Wales conspiracy theories - Wikipedia


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Flavour said:


> if BJ _does _have to ask for an extension in the end, as he very well may do, it will be narrativized (killer b) as corbyn forcing a surrender, then up comes GE and boris is somehow still in business, corbyn perhaps less so. i don't think the prorogation is going to help Labour at all tbh, as BJ surely knows he can do 5 weeks of trying his best to look like he's really trying to negotiate with those awkward, unbending Brussels technocrats who refuse to accept scout's honor and common sense


But...the more Johnson 'negotiates' with the supra-state, the more he'll have the BP breathing down his neck and the calls of betrayal will get louder and louder.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 183717
> Death of Diana, Princess of Wales conspiracy theories - Wikipedia



Scarier cos real: the White Uno Gang


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Time for those who live in the shadows to dust off that white Fiat uno and give it a service, might come in useful again very soon


Or start handing out the hill-walking maps.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Scarier cos real: the White Uno Gang


i see they've not been active since the duke of edinburgh had them off diana, which makes me wonder if he had _them_ offed


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

The yanks have black helicopters, we have white Fiat Unos. Typical I guess.


----------



## elbows (Sep 9, 2019)

Flavour said:


> if BJ _does _have to ask for an extension in the end, as he very well may do, it will be narrativized (killer b) as corbyn forcing a surrender, then up comes GE and boris is somehow still in business, corbyn perhaps less so. i don't think the prorogation is going to help Labour at all tbh, as BJ surely knows he can do 5 weeks of trying his best to look like he's really trying to negotiate with those awkward, unbending Brussels technocrats who refuse to accept scout's honor and common sense



Didnt the prorogation only make a few days difference to the timetable anyway? I say that because conference season is looming large.


----------



## Poot (Sep 9, 2019)

Please can someone explain whether it is possible for Johnson to find a way, legally, of suspending parliament again before 31.10? Or of lengthening this prorogation to 1.11?


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 9, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> That’s some genius journalism right there. Most of the flour bought by bakers in Ireland comes from the UK, therefore if there’s a no deal, the price of bread will rise in Ireland by 30 percent.
> 
> It doesn’t seem to have occurred to the smart people writing this article that maybe, just maybe if the price of flour from the UK rises by 30 percent overnight, the Irish bakers would perhaps buy their flour from somewhere else?
> 
> I’m assuming the rest of the article is also nonsense, as after noting that gem of business illogic, I didn’t bother to read the rest.




Buying from anywhere other than the UK will mean  an increase in price also....buying from France will be more expensive. 

Medicines will be more expensive.
Gas which comes via the UK will be more expensive. They're already talking about the price of oil going up. Because it is cheaper to get everyhing via the UK than to source from  France or Germany. 

Not sure what's confusing you?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Buying from anywhere other than the UK will mean  an increase in price also....buying from France will be more expensive.
> 
> Medicines will be more expensive.
> Gas which comes via the UK will be more expensive. They're already talking about the price of oil going up. Because it is cheaper to get everyhing via the UK than to source from  France or Germany.
> ...


I'm not sure he's that confused, really.


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

Poot said:


> Please can someone explain whether it is possible for Johnson to find a way, legally, of suspending parliament again before 31.10? Or of lengthening this prorogation to 1.11?


who knows? I've not seen any speculation that he could do this anywhere though, and jesus christ if it was vaguely possible someone would have written a 62-post thread on twitter about it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 9, 2019)

Bercow announces that he is standing down at the next election, I think? 

Although he also seems to be saying that he will step down as speaker on October 31st if there is not an election.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Bercow announces that he is standing down at the next election, I think?
> 
> Although he also seems to be saying that he will step down as speaker on October 31st if there is not an election.


Yep, that. "Next election, or October 31st, whichever comes first".


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 9, 2019)

Corbyn now showering him with praise. Bleurgh.


----------



## Poot (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> who knows? I've not seen any speculation that he could do this anywhere though, and jesus christ if it was vaguely possible someone would have written a 62-post thread on twitter about it.


Thank you. 

 It seemed too obvious. But I couldn't imagine him doing it anyway because that's not really what this is about, it wouldn't really leave any room for blaming someone else if/when it all went tits up. 

But yeah, I doubt it's possible anyway.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Reckon Farage will have noticed, tbh.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Reckon Farage will have noticed, tbh.
> 
> View attachment 183724


Yeh he's got eagle eyes for bs


----------



## Poi E (Sep 9, 2019)

Naughty BBC webmaster


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Watching Dominic Grieve rather forensically set out the case for forcing disclosure of documents. If one tenth of what he implies is true, we are looking at a grave breach of trust.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Watching Dominic Grieve rather forensically set out the case for forcing disclosure of documents. If one tenth of what he implies is true, we are looking at a grave breach of trust.


Which docs?


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Which docs?


the legal advice ministers received about the Parliament suspension, plus the Operation Yellowhammer no-deal planning documents, apparently


----------



## elbows (Sep 9, 2019)

'government communications' including anything relevant on electronic communications platforms that are a tad more obscure than Whatsapp (eg telegram), and presumably anything left in bins from a particularly intense brexit-themed version of the rizla game.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Which docs?


This


----------



## andysays (Sep 9, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> This



I don't quite understand how the requirement to "lay before this house not later than 11pm Wednesday" will work though, given that they're packing up and going home at close tonight until Oct 14th.


----------



## elbows (Sep 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't quite understand how the requirement to "lay before this house not later than 11pm Wednesday" will work though, given that they're packing up and going home at close tonight until Oct 14th.



Is it some kind of smart arse attempt to keep the house sitting till then, unless the government can produce all those documents sooner?


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> I don't quite understand how the requirement to "lay before this house not later than 11pm Wednesday" will work though, given that they're packing up and going home at close tonight until Oct 14th.


I imagine that a point is being made. Given the amount of comment on the prorogation, I suspect that this humble address is about pointing out all the Really Important Stuff that a prorogation would prevent us from seeing.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 9, 2019)

Educated guess: 'Lay before this house' is a formulaic way of saying 'Make available in the HoC library', rather than 'Get someone to read aloud from the dispatch box'.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

"...and should my words have been misinterpreted, I shall, of course, withdraw them immediately" - Rachel Maclean, Conservative

11/10 for disingenuousness


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 9, 2019)

So basically the tories have been pulling a Clinton by using private email, whatsapp and burner phones.  Lock him up etc.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i never think 'hilary' when i see benn, i either think nigel or tony.


Or Mr.







Edit: bollocks, didn't see anjus post above, I fucking loved Mr benn though


----------



## killer b (Sep 9, 2019)

Has the Johnson government actually won any votes at all yet?


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 9, 2019)

he won a vote for the call for a GE

cannie think of another


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 9, 2019)

killer b said:


> Has the Johnson government actually won any votes at all yet?



No.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 9, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> he won a vote for the call for a GE



What?


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> What?


Division 443,  Early Parliamentary General Election - Hansard

He won the vote, but not the required two thirds majority. So it’s still a no


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 9, 2019)

woops 

assumed he had to win a vote to call for a vote in  parliment on his idea to call a snap election


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 9, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> woops
> 
> assumed he had to win a vote to call for a vote in  parliment on his idea to call a snap election


Shakes fist at erskine may


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 9, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> Division 443,  Early Parliamentary General Election - Hansard
> 
> He won the vote, but not the required two thirds majority. So it’s still a no



He needed a two thirds majority, so he didn't win the votes required.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 9, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> What is it you think a Labour Government can do? Really do? The art of the possible and all that.
> 
> If you are arguing for a revolution, fine, but the article was arguing for the Labour Party to campaign on the basis of the rejection of the entire social order. What would that look like and do you honestly think that would win a Parliamentary election? In the next couple of months? Elements of it certainly could, but the whole would be rejected as fantasy and worse. But enjoy your righteous anger.


To argue for redistribution within 'wise government' is as nonsensical as New Labour's aim to improve 'equality of opportunity' via the 'third way'. Increasing equality has to involve attacking capital, undoing trade union restrictions, nationalising industries, it will have to be made in the opposition of the BoE, the EU, the IMF, economist etc. Your desire to turn Labour policy back to Miliband (at best) can only result in more attacks on the working class.

Moreover,  the idea that moving back from the current mild social democratic policies will result in the LP getting into government is faulty. Governing wisely was exactly what the LP under Miliband ran on and lost, it is what the SDP in Germany and PS in France have done, and it has destroyed them. It was precisely because the LP ran on a challenge to the current social order (if more in rhetoric than actual policy) that the LP  achieved the success it did at the 2017 GE.


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He needed a two thirds majority, so he didn't win the votes required.


I was throwing him a bone on the number of ayes, he’s had a bad couple of weeks


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 9, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> I was throwing him a bone on the number of ayes, he’s had a bad couple of weeks



Couple of weeks?

It's only been one week! 

* Although feels longer.


----------



## Supine (Sep 9, 2019)

Grieve motion passed. I cant see private phones and conversations being given up easily.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 9, 2019)

Johnson's really only got a chance of winning a Parliamentary division if he tables a NI only backstop version of May's WA , and even then it would be without a big chunk of his own side. 
Other than that, can't see him winning any vote this side of the GE.


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

Supine said:


> Grieve motion passed. I cant see private phones and conversations being given up easily.



The motion only requires communications relevant to prorogation to be disclosed. It’s well-established that you can’t escape FOIs by using private accounts to communicate work business.


----------



## Supine (Sep 9, 2019)

Winot said:


> The motion only requires communications relevant to prorogation to be disclosed. It’s well-established that you can’t escape FOIs by using private accounts to communicate work business.



Is there precedent for private phones and encrypted messages from WhatsApp / Signal etc being FOI'd successfully?


----------



## agricola (Sep 9, 2019)

Ian Austin to be appointed as anti-Left Wing extremism tsar within days, at least based on his speech today.


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

Supine said:


> Is there precedent for private phones and encrypted messages from WhatsApp / Signal etc being FOI'd successfully?



Don’t know. Enforcement is clearly a potential issue. However once they’ve started disclosing some messages it’ll be possible to piece together the chronology and gaps will become apparent. 

The civil courts are very good at handling this disclosure (as it’s called) and there are strict rules about compliance. I wouldn’t like to be up against Grieve on this.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, I’ve heard the excuses.
> 
> Let’s at least be honest about what’s happening here. For the Blairites, liberals, Tory Remainiacs etc the priorities (in order) are:
> 
> ...


Maybe if you left a bit of your prejudice out of your premises, their behaviour might be slightly more explicable?


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 9, 2019)

Jo Swinson's a marvellous parliamentarian

Profile - Jo Swinson - BBC Sounds


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 9, 2019)

So if (when) the government refuses to disclose - can they ask the courts to order disclosure?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Maybe if you left a bit of your prejudice out of your premises, their behaviour might be slightly more explicable?



Go on then. Explain their agenda free of a ‘bit of prejudice’...

ETA, I mean the lefty cheerleaders.


----------



## Supine (Sep 9, 2019)

Hahaha 

https://voteleave.uk/


----------



## Winot (Sep 9, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> So if (when) the government refuses to disclose - can they ask the courts to order disclosure?



I think so, yes.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Go on then. Explain their agenda free of a ‘bit of prejudice’...
> 
> ETA, I mean the lefty cheerleaders.



You probably mean people like me.	My agenda is what is best for the prosperity of the country as a whole

But I'm not a Tory cheerleader.  If you want to see people on the left supporting the aims of the ERG/ BP etc, you need to look elsewhere


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 9, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> You probably mean people like me.	My agenda is what is best for the prosperity of the country as a whole



The National Interest.


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 9, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I would luv it if De Pfeffel goes to prison






"And he's got to go to Brussels and get something..."


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 9, 2019)

Had Edward Leigh been cast as Baron Harkonnen in the new adaptation of Dune?


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 9, 2019)

Orang Utan said:


> Had Edward Leigh been cast as Baron Harkonnen in the new adaptation of Dune?









Separated at birth


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The National Interest.



You're probably trying to make a point but I have no idea what


----------



## belboid (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Go on then. Explain their agenda free of a ‘bit of prejudice’...
> 
> ETA, I mean the lefty cheerleaders.


We have gone through this before, exactly why the 'lefty cheerleaders' disagree with your arguments. You chose to ignore them.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 9, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Go on then. Explain their agenda free of a ‘bit of prejudice’...
> 
> ETA, I mean the lefty cheerleaders.


I wasn't offering to explain, merely offering a possible explanation as to your perplexity. HTH.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 9, 2019)

LDs to go Full Remain

Liberal Democrats poised to back revoking article 50


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 9, 2019)

Lib dems set to go full remain, revoke article 50 and make it 2012 again. So you know who to thank if a no deal brexit does turn out to be a Beyond Thunderdome type situation


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 9, 2019)

Labour getting a bit more remainy has pushed them into that position, the LD polling has dropped a bit lately so need to try and outflank them.


----------



## agricola (Sep 9, 2019)

Have the SNP just come out for a General Election now?

edit:  no, he just didn't mention it until the end of his speech


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

7th consecutive defeat coming up for Johnson


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 7th consecutive defeat coming up for Johnson



first, the stuffed gerbils will be served:


----------



## Humberto (Sep 10, 2019)

Fucking hell!1


----------



## Humberto (Sep 10, 2019)

Just a daft useless toff who has been watching too many Churchill films.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 10, 2019)

These toffs with their opportunistic kindliness to the lower orders warm the cockles of my heart.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 10, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Fucking hell!1


Did you enlarge by any chance. Christ, those eyes!


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

293 = 5 less tories (fellow travellers) than the last try!


----------



## Humberto (Sep 10, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> Did you enlarge by any chance. Christ, those eyes!
> View attachment 183753



SHIT!!


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 10, 2019)




----------



## pesh (Sep 10, 2019)

its like the end of a really shit telethon


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 10, 2019)

neonwilderness said:


> View attachment 183754


I thought it was seven. Six will do though


----------



## Raheem (Sep 10, 2019)

pesh said:


> its like the end of a really shit telethon


The end? If only.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 10, 2019)

The state, their 'nanny', provides for _them_ but now they just look stupid.

In other words they are fucked. Fun times.


----------



## Ming (Sep 10, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> Did you enlarge by any chance. Christ, those eyes!
> View attachment 183753


Windows of the soul.


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 10, 2019)

Bit of a scuffle going on


----------



## pesh (Sep 10, 2019)

they're having a bit of a ruck


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 10, 2019)

Hold my beer


----------



## Calamity1971 (Sep 10, 2019)

' you're okay, Skinner's on holiday'. 
I'm so glad I stayed up . Or very sad, can't decide.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

1 libdem voted for an election then.  TIGfc votes split


----------



## Wilf (Sep 10, 2019)

Some people did a few pirouettes in one place, then some other people in another place put some hats on, then they went back to the first place and two men _almost _started shouting at each other. Then some of those people from the first place went round to the second place but not all of them. After that, they probably went to one of their many homes and had their tea off plates from John Lewis.

_If any of your kids are doing GCSE Politics, feel free to use any of that._


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> You're probably trying to make a point but I have no idea what


Ripping your pomposity a bit?


----------



## neonwilderness (Sep 10, 2019)

Calamity1971 said:


> ' you're okay, Skinner's on holiday'.
> I'm so glad I stayed up . Or very sad, can't decide.


I went to bed at 1 and missed it kicking off


----------



## ruffneck23 (Sep 10, 2019)

LBC in meltdown this morning


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Ripping your pomposity a bit?


A line from the tanita tikaram song, twist in his pomposity


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Sep 10, 2019)

Who did what when? I just woke up. Kerfuffle?


----------



## killer b (Sep 10, 2019)

Not really, just embarassing theatrics

Details here: Brexit: chants of 'shame' as suspension of parliament descends into chaos


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 10, 2019)

Yeah glad it's not just me, what's all this about it kicking off then?

I reckon instead of an election Corbyn and Johnson should have a fight to the death. 

Corbyn would win. I reckon he's like the skinny swatty kid at school that everyone left alone cos they were so inoffensive but who turns out to be 5th Dan black belt in ninja karate or something and kicks the living shit out of the bully on the last day of school to everyone's delight and amusement. Johnson as the insecure bully who received the beating.

Or something.


----------



## Poot (Sep 10, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yeah glad it's not just me, what's all this about it kicking off then?
> 
> I reckon instead of an election Corbyn and Johnson should have a fight to the death.
> 
> ...


Can we give them Gladiator-type names? Can I run a book?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 10, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

72 days of sod 'im left. Possibly fewer


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

killer b said:


> Not really, just embarassing theatrics
> 
> Details here: Brexit: chants of 'shame' as suspension of parliament descends into chaos


As strong an argument for periodic revolutions as I've ever heard


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 10, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> To argue for redistribution within 'wise government' is as nonsensical as New Labour's aim to improve 'equality of opportunity' via the 'third way'. Increasing equality has to involve attacking capital, undoing trade union restrictions, nationalising industries, it will have to be made in the opposition of the BoE, the EU, the IMF, economist etc. Your desire to turn Labour policy back to Miliband (at best) can only result in more attacks on the working class.
> 
> Moreover,  the idea that moving back from the current mild social democratic policies will result in the LP getting into government is faulty. Governing wisely was exactly what the LP under Miliband ran on and lost, it is what the SDP in Germany and PS in France have done, and it has destroyed them. It was precisely because the LP ran on a challenge to the current social order (if more in rhetoric than actual policy) that the LP  achieved the success it did at the 2017 GE.



Maybe you need to define what you mean by opposing the whole social order, which was the demand in the blog that Smokeandsteam put up. I take that to mean measures at the next election opposing the constitutional monarchy or seeking to abolish private schools early doors. 

I certainly don’t want a Labour manifesto less radical than the mild proposition currently offered. I’ve not said return to Miliband’s incoherent policies of some part largesse and harshness with the other hand. I don’t want PFI or a celebration of ‘wealth creators’ I want and end to privatisation and a reverse gear, esp in housing. I want tough laws on second home ownership for example. You are right that Labour must formulate plans that would incur the displeasure of the BoE and others, including cautious nationalisation and repeal of union laws.

But it must redistribute and grow services above all and it has to do that at first within a global capitalist economy. So when you say ‘attack capital’ do you mean attack or resist? What would that entail in this next Labour manifesto?


----------



## TopCat (Sep 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 183772


How tall is vein boy?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 10, 2019)

TopCat said:


> How tall is vein boy?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

I reckon about 5.5


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 10, 2019)

Google tells me 5 foot 7 and a half


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Google tells me 5 foot 7 and a half


I was close


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 10, 2019)

Same height as our Prime Minister


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

Is this how the prorogation is gonna be?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Is this how the prorogation is gonna be?


Short?


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 10, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yeah glad it's not just me, what's all this about it kicking off then?
> 
> I reckon instead of an election Corbyn and Johnson should have a fight to the death.



I would pay good money to watch this on pay-per-view - ideally, Corbyn would say that the dispute should be taken care of with constitutional methods, before pulling out a baseball bat with 'CONSTITUTIONAL METHODS" scrawled on it.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

Are there any pictures of Bercow being pinned to his chair by Lloyd Russell-Moyle? It's being reported that he 'lay across Bercow'.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Sep 10, 2019)

I believe the proroguing of parliament will last longer than the stated time. Much longer.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 10, 2019)

Is this the incident?


----------



## Supine (Sep 10, 2019)

Dillinger4 said:


> I believe the proroguing of parliament will last longer than the stated time. Much longer.



I think madge has already been invited to the opening of brexit series 5.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 10, 2019)




----------



## andysays (Sep 10, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Short?


Don't forget ugly and brutish


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> View attachment 183778 Is this the incident?



Ta. An image for the times.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Are there any pictures of Bercow being pinned to his chair by Lloyd Russell-Moyle? It's being reported that he 'lay across Bercow'.


I liked the bit about the speaker being drowned out by actual members of fucking parliament while holding signs saying silenced. Mental.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 10, 2019)

S☼I said:


>



I was expecting more chaos than that.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 10, 2019)

The ginger lad who laid across Bercow later tried to nick the Mace


----------



## BristolEcho (Sep 10, 2019)

It wasn't quite like Georgia on boxing day was it?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The ginger lad who laid across Bercow later tried to nick the Mace



That’s Russell-Moyle. A Labour MP allegedly


----------



## Poot (Sep 10, 2019)

Dillinger4 said:


> I believe the proroguing of parliament will last longer than the stated time. Much longer.


2022 and we will be luring them out of hiding with fois gras and wild promises about honourary titles. That's my prediction.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

S☼I said:


> The ginger lad who laid across Bercow later tried to nick the Mace


Not for the first time; Kemptown's finest is a serial offender.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> That’s Russell-Moyle. A Labour MP allegedly


'Allegedly'?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

_


brogdale said:



			Not for the first time; Kemptown's finest is a serial offender.
		
Click to expand...



On 10 December 2018, Russell-Moyle was suspended from the House of Commons for the remainder of the day's sitting after he seized the ceremonial mace in protest at the government's eleventh hour deferral of the vote on the EU Withdrawal Agreement, which had been scheduled for the following day._


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 10, 2019)

They should have brushed up on Parliament Scuffles on the day before. 
They work best if you offer a trick present such as a bouquet before unleashing your scuffle


----------



## killer b (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 'Allegedly'?


no true Labour MP would disrespect the speaker or the mace.


----------



## gosub (Sep 10, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Yeah glad it's not just me, what's all this about it kicking off then?
> 
> I reckon instead of an election Corbyn and Johnson should have a fight to the death.
> 
> ...



I'd go with something.  Corbyn is probably better at making jam than Johnson though.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Are there any pictures of Bercow being pinned to his chair by Lloyd Russell-Moyle? It's being reported that he 'lay across Bercow'.


Rule 34


----------



## gosub (Sep 10, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> As strong an argument for periodic revolutions as I've ever heard


Aren't they called elections?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

gosub said:


> Aren't they called elections?


no

next


----------



## kabbes (Sep 10, 2019)

I had a meeting with a lord this morning.  It was weird talking about work crap whilst knowing (a) he gets to have some direct influence over all this Brexit stuff and (b) he spent the weekend trying to exert that influence.  Never have I felt the divide of power so sharply.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 10, 2019)

A load of pissed people staying up all night shouting at each other about politics until at one in the morning a few of them go completely nuts.

Can't think what website that reminds me of.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 10, 2019)

Dillinger4 said:


> I believe the proroguing of parliament will last longer than the stated time. Much longer.


11 years?


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 10, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I had a meeting with a lord this morning.  It was weird talking about work crap whilst knowing (a) he gets to have some direct influence over all this Brexit stuff and (b) he spent the weekend trying to exert that influence.  Never have I felt the divide of power so sharply.



Yeah I'm in a Facebook messenger chat with a Lord and his insight is really interesting into all this. He's made some spot on predictions


----------



## teuchter (Sep 10, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> Yeah I'm in a Facebook messenger chat with a Lord and his insight is really interesting into all this. He's made some spot on predictions


We look forward to seeing your messages laid before the house in due course.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

Dillinger4 said:


> I believe the proroguing of parliament will last longer than the stated time. Much longer.



#stopthecoup


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 10, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> 11 years?



As you wish.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 10, 2019)

I bet Paul Mason was coordinating the Parliamentary 'disorder'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I bet Paul Mason was coordinating the Parliamentary 'disorder'.


he couldn't coordinate an outfit


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I bet Paul Mason was coordinating the Parliamentary 'disorder'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

> A cross-party group of MPs has formally launched a campaign to win support in the Commons for Brexit via a managed deal, arguing both a no-deal departure or a second referendum would cement political divisions and cause endless uncertainty.
> 
> The organisers claim up to 50 MPs so far may back the plan, which would involve using elements of Theresa May’s Brexit proposals as the basis for an agreement which Boris Johnson could steer through parliament, possibly in time for a 31 October departure.



Group of cross-party MPs launch bid to reach compromise Brexit deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Group of cross-party MPs launch bid to reach compromise Brexit deal


read your link as 'group of cross-dressing mps launch bid to reach compromise...'


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Group of cross-party MPs launch bid to reach compromise Brexit deal


Maybe it's just me, but this looks like it's really been the only Parliamentary 'game in town' for some time.
Clearly Arlene has rumbled what Johnson's about to cut with the supra state.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe it's just me, but this looks like it's really been the only Parliamentary 'game in town' for some time.
> Clearly Arlene has rumbled what Johnson's about to cut with the supra state.


johnson couldn't cut a cake


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> johnson couldn't cut a cake


He's about to cut a state!


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He's about to cut a state!


he'll miss and cut a vein or artery


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

Here we go then? 

Customs border in the Irish Sea, the only thing that could ever work with May's 'red lines'. Enough Labour mps support the bill for it to get through without the DUP. Johnson gets his deal and the UK leaves on 31 October with something looking in all other respects very much like May's deal. Johnson romps to victory in a November election. 

Or... 

Johnson secures this deal, takes it to the Commons, the Commons rejects it, Johnson, under the strongest possible protest, gets the extension and calls an election on the promise of forcing through his deal if he wins. Johnson romps to victory in a November election. 

I presume Corbyn et al considered these possibilities when they refused the election?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we go then?
> 
> Customs border in the Irish Sea, the only thing that could ever work with May's 'red lines'. Enough Labour mps support the bill for it to get through without the DUP. Johnson gets his deal and the UK leaves on 31 October with something looking in all other respects very much like May's deal. Johnson romps to victory in a November election.
> 
> ...


the only time johnson romps it's not crowned with victory. 

every time johnson opens his mouth he vomits forth former tory voters.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we go then?
> 
> Customs border in the Irish Sea, the only thing that could ever work with May's 'red lines'. Enough Labour mps support the bill for it to get through without the DUP. Johnson gets his deal and the UK leaves on 31 October with something looking in all other respects very much like May's deal. Johnson romps to victory in a November election.
> 
> ...


With a "majority" of minus 43, or whatever it's sunk to...who needs the Loyalist nut jobs?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we go then?
> 
> Customs border in the Irish Sea, the only thing that could ever work with May's 'red lines'. Enough Labour mps support the bill for it to get through without the DUP. Johnson gets his deal and the UK leaves on 31 October with something looking in all other respects very much like May's deal. Johnson romps to victory in a November election.
> 
> ...


why would he romp to victory in either scenario? DUP go apreshit in either circumstance, Farage calls it an outrageous betrayal, stands in 635 seats and deprives Johnson of a majority.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> With a "majority" of minus 43, or whatever it's sunk to...who needs the Loyalist nut jobs?



If, and it remains a big IF, he gets a deal, the Tories rebels will back it under promise they can return to the party, doesn't need too many Labour or other MPs to get it over the line.

* ERG remains a problem, but faced with a deal or yet another extension, they may go for it too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> why would he romp to victory in either scenario? DUP go apreshit in either circumstance, Farage calls it an outrageous betrayal, stands in 635 seats and deprives Johnson of a majority.


DUP going apeshit doesn't really matter now does it? As for what Farage does, well we don't know. With the promise of a real brexit happening, his howls of betrayal may find little resonance given that he doesn't actually have a workable brexit plan himself.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Here we go then?
> 
> Customs border in the Irish Sea, the only thing that could ever work with May's 'red lines'. Enough Labour mps support the bill for it to get through without the DUP. Johnson gets his deal and the UK leaves on 31 October with something looking in all other respects very much like May's deal. Johnson romps to victory in a November election.
> 
> ...



That's a very pessimistic reading of the situation.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That's a very pessimistic reading of the situation.


Yes I know. I'm pretty pessimistic about all this.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> DUP going apeshit doesn't really matter now does it? As for what Farage does, well we don't know. With the promise of a real brexit happening, his howls of betrayal may find little resonance given that he doesn't actually have a workable brexit plan himself.


40 odd tory MPs will take their lead from the DUP, if they dont go for it, the ERG and co wont either. _Maybe _it could still sneak through, but only at a high cost to the scum. 

Farage will do whatever keeps him in the limelight.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That's a very pessimistic reading of the situation.


it's a very daft reading of the situation, there is no way in which johnson 'romps to victory' after 31 october and it's extremely unlikely he'd 'romp to victory' on 15 october. the greatest chance is a similarly composed house of commons to that we have, maybe with a few more lib dems, but a tory majority?  in lbj's dreams.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 10, 2019)

The only romping he does is with other peoples wives (allegedly )


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> DUP going apeshit doesn't really matter now does it? As for what Farage does, well we don't know. With the promise of a real brexit happening, his howls of betrayal may find little resonance given that he doesn't actually have a workable brexit plan himself.



It (the DUP going apeshit) might - if he does what they appear to be doing (to sell out the DUP for a deal like that) the possibility of an alternate Government being formed (rather than a new GE) before the 31st is much more likely.  I doubt that any Labour MP - including Hoey - would vote for it either on account of it being so blatantly shameless an act of betrayal.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

agricola said:


> It (the DUP going apeshit) might - if he does what they appear to be doing (to sell out the DUP for a deal like that) the possibility of an alternate Government being formed (rather than a new GE) before the 31st is much more likely.  I doubt that any Labour MP - including Hoey - would vote for it either on account of it being so blatantly shameless an act of betrayal.


I think you may be right about Labour not voting for it, but that leaves option B in my scenarios. Johnson can credibly point to a concrete deal that he would get through if only he had a majority, even if it were only a small majority. In such a situation, delaying brexit becomes far less unattractive a thing for Johnson to do. And anyone who wants a hard brexit knows full well that it can't be done without a border at the Irish Sea. That has always been true.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 10, 2019)

Duty-free purchases of cigarettes and alcohol to return under no-deal Brexit


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Smangus said:


> The only romping he does is with other peoples wives (allegedly )


quite


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> View attachment 183799
> 
> Duty-free purchases of cigarettes and alcohol to return under no-deal Brexit


But no more stocking up the van at Calais. 200 fags and a couple of bottles of spirits each.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

LBJ is right to wonder what the Labour strategy is if Johnson gets a deal and brings it to the house. 

Presumably, given their current strategy is to negotiate a May style deal and then campaign against it, Labour would whip to vote against it and becomes a full 'revoke A50' party'?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you may be right about Labour not voting for it, but that leaves option B in my scenarios. Johnson can credibly point to a concrete deal that he would get through if only he had a majority, even if it were only a small majority. In such a situation, delaying brexit becomes far less unattractive a thing for Johnson to do. And anyone who wants a hard brexit knows full well that it can't be done without a border at the Irish Sea. That has always been true.


Option B is no option. The ERG wont support it, the people who would have just had the whip removed, it would split the party even more and give Farage a free run.  Disaster for them either way.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think you may be right about Labour not voting for it, but that leaves option B in my scenarios. Johnson can credibly point to a concrete deal that he would get through if only he had a majority, even if it were only a small majority. In such a situation, delaying brexit becomes far less unattractive a thing for Johnson to do. And anyone who wants a hard brexit knows full well that it can't be done without a border at the Irish Sea. That has always been true.



It is, but he'd need every single ounce of effort from the Press and his cheerleaders to try and obscure the fact that such a deal (if that is what he is negotiating) is something even worse (for the union) than May's deal was, which he voted against (twice).  He'd also have his many statements on the subject brought back up and thrown into his face.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> LBJ is right to wonder what the Labour strategy is if Johnson gets a deal and brings it to the house.
> 
> Presumably, given their current strategy is to negotiate a May style deal and then campaign against it, Labour would whip to vote against it and becomes a full 'revoke A50' party'?



Apparently its negotiate a deal which is more in line with the six tests (or was it five?), put it to a referendum of that deal vs remain and then allow people to campaign on either side.  I think it would almost certainly get to the point of having the referendum, but after that it would be anyone's guess.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

agricola said:


> Apparently its negotiate a deal which is more in line with the six tests (or was it five?), put it to a referendum of that deal vs remain and then allow people to campaign on either side.  I think it would almost certainly get to the point of having the referendum, but after that it would be anyone's guess.



Aye, but what happens if Johnson comes back with a deal. Does Labour vote against it? Presumably yes. That leaves them with essentially nowhere to go except as a full on ‘Revoke A50’ party.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Aye, but what happens if Johnson comes back with a deal. Does Labour vote against it? Presumably yes. That leaves them with essentially nowhere to go except as a full on ‘Revoke A50’ party.



Not really; they could make the simple point that the Tories have negotiated two deals and they were both so awful that large numbers of their own / allied MPs didn't vote for them either.  "Give us the chance to negotiate instead" would probably be the cry.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

Also this is on the Guardian's liveblog at the moment:  



> Boris Johnson has secretly ordered the Cabinet Office to turn the government's public internet service into a platform for "targeted and personalised information" to be gathered in the run-up to Brexit, BuzzFeed News has learned.
> 
> In a move that has alarmed Whitehall officials, the prime minister has instructed departments to share data they collect about usage of the GOV.UK portal so that it can feed into preparations for leaving the European Union at the end of next month.
> 
> ...



Revealed: The Secret Plan To Track User Data That Dominic Cummings Says Is The Government's "TOP PRIORITY"


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Aye, but what happens if Johnson comes back with a deal. Does Labour vote against it? Presumably yes. That leaves them with essentially nowhere to go except as a full on ‘Revoke A50’ party.


Nonsense. Sets them  up ideally as the only party that can pass a deal.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

agricola said:


> Not really; they could make the simple point that the Tories have negotiated two deals and they were both so awful that large numbers of their own / allied MPs didn't vote for them either.  "Give us the chance to negotiate instead" would probably be the cry.



LBJs post speculates that ‘May plus’ brings the tories and others back into the fold. The DUP would go insane. But some Labour MPs would back it. 

In those circumstances a “”give us a chance”, even though we don’t currently want an election, to get a May Plus deal of our own. Which we’ll then campaign to reject” begins to look utterly abysmal.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Nonsense. Sets them  up ideally as the only party that can pass a deal.



A unique reading of the situation.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 10, 2019)

agricola said:


> Not really; they could make the simple point that the Tories have negotiated two deals and they were both so awful that large numbers of their own / allied MPs didn't vote for them either.  "Give us the chance to negotiate instead" would probably be the cry.



I think the really bad scenario for Labour is if Johnson comes back with a deal and Labour whip against it but it still passes somehow.  The Labour leadership would struggle to come back from that.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 10, 2019)

From the get go Johnson has had a deal; May's WA is still on the table.
His only contribution to this process is his attempt to convince Parliament that the 'immovable deadline' will necessitate an acceptance of a straight choice between the WA (minus GB CU etc.) and 'No Deal'.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think the really bad scenario for Labour is if Johnson comes back with a deal and Labour whip against it but it still passes somehow.  The Labour leadership would struggle to come back from that.



Part of the PLP strategy, and no doubt LD/Tory ‘rebel’/nats thinking too, will be if and how corbyn can be done in as well as the referendum. 

However, the question is this: does Corbyn and his advisers have a plan bar a rightward collapse into ‘support the national interest and stop no deal’


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> A unique reading of the situation.


Hardly. 


Smokeandsteam said:


> LBJs post speculates that ‘May plus’ brings the tories and others back into the fold. The DUP would go insane. But some Labour MPs would back it.


Who would it bring back into the fold? The MP's he's expelled? The ERG who are adamantly against it (as long as the DUP are)?  It will fail. No chance. 



> In those circumstances a “”give us a chance”, even though we don’t currently want an election, to get a May Plus deal of our own. Which we’ll then campaign to reject” begins to look utterly abysmal.


Except that won't be the argument, will it?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think the really bad scenario for Labour is if Johnson comes back with a deal and Labour whip against it but it still passes somehow.  The Labour leadership would struggle to come back from that.


Good thing no serius person thinks it has a chance then,.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> LBJs post speculates that ‘May plus’ brings the tories and others back into the fold. The DUP would go insane. *But some Labour MPs would back it. *
> 
> In those circumstances a “”give us a chance”, even though we don’t currently want an election, to get a May Plus deal of our own. Which we’ll then campaign to reject” begins to look utterly abysmal.



Really?  Of the Labour MPs the group around Kinnock would not be likely to back a deal which was worse than May's and which (in the way it came about, ie: via a betrayal of the DUP) would make it even more clear that Johnson's word cannot be trusted on anything.  That leaves Hoey, who would be even more lonely than she is now if she backed a deal that put a border in the Irish Sea, and the ex-Tories who are not really likely to follow someone who still won't let them back in and who had showed such contempt for Unionism.

If that is the deal, I cannot see how it passes or indeed gets even to 300 MPs backing it.  

That then leaves Labour with either having a General Election (against what presumably would be a Tory Party that had to deal with Farage's cries of betrayal) or forming a government and then negotating its own deal, which would then have to get past the Commons (probably with a public vote).  I think that would find it far more likely to get passed than anything Johnson would do.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Except that won't be the argument, will it?



Well it is at the moment. And the only other option open is full Revoke A50


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

The DUP has turned-up for talks at No. 10.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Well it is at the moment. And the only other option open is full Revoke A50


it isn't now, and wont be then.  Absolutely zero chance of Labour going Revoke. Zero.

It seems likely that Labour wont take a formal position as a party and will leave it to individual MPs to argue for whatever they want.
Labour manifesto unlikely to reveal Brexit stance


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 10, 2019)

agricola said:


> Also this is on the Guardian's liveblog at the moment:
> 
> 
> 
> Revealed: The Secret Plan To Track User Data That Dominic Cummings Says Is The Government's "TOP PRIORITY"


Analytics data are of course very useful for people wanting to make websites better by highlighting commonly sought information, streamlining user journeys and so on. They are also very useful for targeting propaganda at issues and questions people are worried about, and even if you're aware of it there isn't a lot you can do to block its collection if you have to be logged in to access certain sections (which you do). In the business world this propaganda data would be a normal part of what is sent to the marketing department, but then for a business there isn't a distinction.

OTOH I say "would be a normal part" but this is best case. All the companies I've worked for have been rubbish at analysing these data - they collect vast amounts and do cock all because nobody actually understands what they can do with it or what it means. The threat of big data collection should always be in the context by the reality of general incompetence.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

Tuesday afternoon news briefing: Brexit-hater to handle trade talks



> They will form a tough trade negotiating team. The European Commission has named Phil Hogan - an Irish politician with a hatred of Brexit - to lead the department that will negotiate a free trade agreement with Britain. The man known as "Big Phil" will team up with Sabine Weyand, a formidable German known for her scathing analysis of the consequences of leaving the EU.



Well, that's taking the piss.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Good thing no serius person thinks it has a chance then,.



No, it looks unlikely now but mainly because of Johnson's approach since taking over.  It was still a possibility when he first took over and who knows what might happen in the next few weeks.  This is all very fast moving.


----------



## agricola (Sep 10, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> No, it looks unlikely now but mainly because of Johnson's approach since taking over.  It was still a possibility when he first took over and who knows what might happen in the next few weeks.  This is all very fast moving.



It is, and its that failure to give the people they need to back the deal any reason to do so is what has ruined both PMs approach (apparently deliberately so in Johnson's case).  I can't see his ego allowing him to do that, or even if he did that the people they need to back it would believe him anyway.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> it isn't now, and wont be then.  Absolutely zero chance of Labour going Revoke. Zero.
> 
> It seems likely that Labour wont take a formal position as a party and will leave it to individual MPs to argue for whatever they want.
> Labour manifesto unlikely to reveal Brexit stance



They were promising ‘a people’s Brexit’ 18 months ago.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

*Labour’s Brexit slide – Martin Hall*
bLeave, Fight, Transform 

As Boris Johnson and the Tories cling to power, many people could be forgiven for wondering what is going on in the Labour Party. Having rightly had a stated policy of prioritising a general election these last two years, it has now turned down the chance to have one twice in under a week.

Furthermore, its stated reason for doing so the first time – the need to ensure the bill forcing the government to seek a further extension of Article 50 and prevent no deal passed – had evaporated by the time it refused an election on Monday night. 

Why is this?

There is no answer to this question that makes any sense other than seeing this as an another retreat, as evidence of the tack rightwards, and of the balance of forces pushing Labour away from being
anything resembling an insurgent movement and back to being a party of moderation and accommodation.

What we are seeing then in Labour is a further shifting in the balance of power within the party towards those forces that are against
both the left and honouring the 2016 EU referendum. Labour went into the 2017 general
election with a policy of enacting a People’s Brexit. 

By the end of that summer, this had started to slide, first via an announcement that a transitional deal would be sought, followed by the phrase ‘People’s Brexit’ leaving the Labour lexicon, to be replaced by a ‘jobs-first Brexit’, then the
fudge agreed at conference in 2018. 

Since then, after huge pressure from the
pro-remain (and anti-Corbyn) majority, this has become a policy of putting any deal that a Labour government could get back to the people with remain on the ballot. There has even been talk
this week of potentially putting May’s deal, with a tweak or two, up against remain. While Jeremy Corbyn’s speech at the TUC today was welcome in its criticism of what the Tories plan to do after Brexit, as was his emphasis on class, trade unionism and Labour’s plan to extend workers’ rights, he did also confirm a referendum on deal vs remain as Labour’s policy. 

This slide has had other pit stops along the way, but that is a general summary of what has happened. 

While there are many socialists who support remain and a radical, transformative government under Jeremy Corbyn, it is not them who are calling the shots. Labour has got itself into an alliance
with the Lib Dems, the SNP, the Greens, Plaid Cymru and a rump of rebel Tories.

The effect of such alliances is to subordinate the left’s needs to those of capital, and that is exactly what is happening here. Witness the relative praise
coming out of the serious capitalist press this last week or two. Of course, _the vast majority of capital wants to remain_, and would cope with a defanged Labour government far more than a no deal Brexit. 

Last night in parliament, endless voices from the so-called 'rebel alliance' were asking for a second referendum having just refused a general election. The Lib Dems were talking about revoking Article 50 while calling for political change. Labour’s current position is politically incoherent and, we should suspect, can’t hold. 

No party can expect to be taken seriously going into a general election saying they will allow their own front bench to campaign against their own negotiated deal. Moreover, when Kier Starmer sits down in Brussels, those across the table from him will know that he will himself campaign against what he is trying to achieve. That is a negotiating position that would make Syriza’s in 2015 look like a card sharp holding a Royal Flush. Therefore, the logical conclusion of this drift is to go full remain and simply go into the election promising to hold another referendum.

In the context of a Tory party presenting itself as
anti-establishment and for the people against an obstructive, rump parliament, a left movement of insurgency and transformation at a time of great crisis cannot hope to resolve that crisis in its favour by returning to its position as the second party of capital. That is what the establishment has wanted since 2016. 

At times when the Tories cannot function as the first party of capital, in this case because it cannot resolve the contradictions that Brexit has caused
for it, the ruling class looks to a right social democratic Labour party to maintain its interests. Jeremy Corbyn in the leader’s chair had put paid to
that. They couldn’t unseat him in 2016. 

Manufactured crises have had little effect on the polls. Therefore the tactic has been to push the party over time towards positions that stymie the ability of a Labour government to affect radical change. This has led to a situation where John McDonnell is saying that Labour is putting ‘country above party’. What this really means is country
above class. _There is no national interest. There are our interests, and there are theirs._

Despite all this, sections of the Labour left are acting like the leadership are playing an intricate game of chess. Wishful thinking and hopes and dreams will get us nowhere. Politics is concrete, and based on material reality and the balance of forces. There must now be the greatest pressure put upon Labour to go into the election promising to campaign for a deal that will benefit the working class and allow it to implement a radical
programme free from EU rules and regulations. The confrontation with British capital and the establishment will be tough enough, without also having to take on the EU in legislative and judicial terms. 

LeFT says this to the labour movement:

If you want a radical, transformative government, whatever your views on Brexit, it cannot be achieved by siding with people who’ve spent the last four years trying to destroy the growing left in the UK.

They don't want what we want.

They will attempt to subordinate our politics to theirs. This is already happening.

As soon as the election comes, they will tack even more rightwards.

Labour need to distance themselves now and go into the coming election arguing for a Brexit in the interests of working people.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 10, 2019)

I've no idea where/when Labour will adopt an actual positive position and the EU are equally aware of this. Don't see Macron and Merkel doing much 'reaching out' to Corbyn, though I might have missed it and there will be _some _contacts. We are now just about at the point where only Johnson can bounce Labour into doing anything. Labour might go back to where they were at the end of the May period - 'we'll support your plan if you add in x, y and z' - but I'm struggling to see the process and mechanisms that get us from here to that happening in Parliament (short of a Labour GE victory and I'm assuming that won't happen tbh).


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Tuesday afternoon news briefing: Brexit-hater to handle trade talks
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's taking the piss.


TBF I suspect one thing where U75 and the EU Commission see totally eye to eye is a complete disdain for BoZo, it's a safe bet they won't appoint anyone who might give him an easy ride.


----------



## alsoknownas (Sep 10, 2019)

.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> *Labour’s Brexit slide – Martin Hall*
> bLeave, Fight, Transform
> 
> As Boris Johnson and the Tories cling to power, many people could be forgiven for wondering what is going on in the Labour Party. Having rightly had a stated policy of prioritising a general election these last two years, it has now turned down the chance to have one twice in under a week.
> ...



Don't disagree with any of that to be fair.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

Has a LBC caller come up with the answer for Johnson?



> Speaking to the LBC presenter, John said: "If I were Boris, you know what I’d do? I’d revoke Article 50, that would remove the need to ask for an extension. "I’d then engineer an election, hopefully, get a large enough majority to revoke Article 50 again and say we’re leaving the next day or the next week."
> 
> Mr Dale appeared surprised about the suggestion, saying no one else appeared to have put it forward before but questioning whether the UK would be able to avoid entering another two years of negotiations with the EU under the scenario proposed.
> 
> But John pointed out the two-year deadline included in Article 50 is "the maximum time" an EU member state is given to negotiate its withdrawal from the bloc.



'Is No 10 listening?!' Iain Dale stunned as caller offers 'ingenious' Brexit solution

Because, he's bloody right, if you evoke article 50 again, you can leave anytime.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has a LBC caller come up with the answer for Johnson?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I seem to remember something about the EU saying if A50 is revoked it can't simply be evoked again straight away, or terminology to that effect.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> *Labour’s Brexit slide – Martin Hall*
> bLeave, Fight, Transform
> 
> As Boris Johnson and the Tories cling to power, many people could be forgiven for wondering what is going on in the Labour Party. Having rightly had a stated policy of prioritising a general election these last two years, it has now turned down the chance to have one twice in under a week.
> ...


Well, the first half is a bit hypocritical, especially considering Labour party policy is decided upon by conference. If the election had been held when Johnson and the pro-no deal left wanted, Labour would have been stuck with the old policy, now we have a chance to change it!  Good thing, eh?

Also the parliamentary centrists have been outplayed by Corbyn, so he wrong on that.

But it is quite right tho that it is ridiculous to send Starmer or Thornberry to negotiate a deal that they will then argue against. That should be our next key argument within Labour.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Also the parliamentary centrists have been outplayed by Corbyn



Have they...?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I seem to remember something about the EU saying if A50 is revoked it can't simply be evoked again straight away, or terminology to that effect.



As such a thing would never have been considered as a possibly, I doubt there's anything in EU law that could prevent it.

But, if you can find a link, I would be very interested in reading it.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Have they...?


Is Ken Clarke PM? Has the election been held on Johnson' terms? No, everyone else had to do what Corbyn wanted.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As such a thing would never have been considered as a possibly, I doubt there's anything in EU law that could prevent it.
> 
> But, if you can find a link, I would be very interested in reading it.



I *think* it's about 600 pages back. From February/March this year. Knock yourself out!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Is Ken Clarke PM? Has the election been held on Johnson' terms? No, everyone else had to do what Corbyn wanted.



That sort of depends on what Corbyn wanted and what the Parliamentary centrists wanted. 

My understanding is that the Parliamentary centrists wanted to legislate to stop no deal instead of having an election. Which is what's happening, no?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That sort of depends on what Corbyn wanted and what the Parliamentary centrists wanted.
> 
> My understanding is that the Parliamentary centrists wanted to legislate to stop no deal instead of having an election. Which is what's happening, no?


Everyone apart from cretins wanted legislation to stop no deal.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Tuesday afternoon news briefing: Brexit-hater to handle trade talks
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's taking the piss.



Taking the view of the Telegraph is completely taking the piss


----------



## Winot (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> As such a thing would never have been considered as a possibly, I doubt there's anything in EU law that could prevent it.
> 
> But, if you can find a link, I would be very interested in reading it.



Some discussion here and following posts:



Winot said:


> The ECJ judgement is clear that revocation of Art. 50 *cannot *be used as a delaying tactic. It needs to be to stop Brexit, following a democratic mandate. I think this could be a vote in Parliament or a 2nd Ref (which would then need a vote in Parliament anyway).


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has a LBC caller come up with the answer for Johnson?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> Some discussion here and following posts:



Yep...



> A senior lawyer at the ECJ said that "appropriate legal instruments" could be used if a member state tried to trigger and revoke Article 50 in order to secure a better withdrawal deal.



But, that's not the suggestion being made.

Revoke in order to have a GE, evoke again based on any agreement already available or no deal, but not to secure a better deal.

I am sure the lawyers could have lots of fun with it, TBH.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Everyone apart from cretins wanted legislation to stop no deal.



That's sort of dodging the question, isn't it?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

Winot said:


> Some discussion here and following posts:



Thanks


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

Anyone seen this dubious announcement? Chancellor announces return of duty-free


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's sort of dodging the question, isn't it?


No.

The centrists wanted various things - including one most sane people want - the fact that they got that, and only that, doesn't mean they won. They were clearly outplayed.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Anyone seen this dubious announcement? Chancellor announces return of duty-free



200 fags, max init?
and 1 or 2L spirits...


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 10, 2019)

People will now also have the alternative option to buy limited amounts of duty-free alcohol and cigarettes at duty free shops in Europe instead. For example, a holidaymaker could save more than £12 on two crates of beer. The travel industry has been calling on the government to re-introduce duty-free, which stopped when the EU Single Market was introduced.

Who brings 2 crates of beer on a fucking plane?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> No.
> 
> The centrists wanted various things - including one most sane people want - the fact that they got that, and only that, doesn't mean they won. They were clearly outplayed.



Again, how have they been 'outplayed'? I don't think citing the fact that Ken Clarke is not PM is sufficient evidence for your claim.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> People will now also have the alternative option to buy limited amounts of duty-free alcohol and cigarettes at duty free shops in Europe instead. For example, a holidaymaker could save more than £12 on two crates of beer. The travel industry has been calling on the government to re-introduce duty-free, which stopped when the EU Single Market was introduced.
> 
> Who brings 2 crates of beer on a fucking plane?



Bet you're not much fun on a 12 hour flight


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Again, how have they been 'outplayed'? I don't think citing the fact that Ken Clarke is not PM is sufficient evidence for your claim.


oh well, that's your problem. Corbyn set and led the agenda, not them. 

Still, that is the least important of the points I raised, so whatever.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> oh well, that's your problem. Corbyn set and led the agenda, not them.
> 
> Still, that is the least important of the points I raised, so whatever.



Blair set the agenda. He was the one saying the election was a trap. Corbyn was initially well up for an election. 

I can't see what other point you have raised, when asked for evidence of how Corbyn had outplayed the centrists, you stated: 



belboid said:


> Is Ken Clarke PM? Has the election been held on Johnson' terms? No, everyone else had to do what Corbyn wanted.



I can't really see what point you're making.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 10, 2019)

Corbyn isnt PM either though. 

They both compromised.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Anyone seen this dubious announcement? Chancellor announces return of duty-free


don't open it! cummings will track you!


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 10, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> People will now also have the alternative option to buy limited amounts of duty-free alcohol and cigarettes at duty free shops in Europe instead. For example, a holidaymaker could save more than £12 on two crates of beer. The travel industry has been calling on the government to re-introduce duty-free, which stopped when the EU Single Market was introduced.
> 
> Who brings 2 crates of beer on a fucking plane?


I will at every opportunity


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Blair set the agenda. He was the one saying the election was a trap. Corbyn was initially well up for an election.
> 
> I can't see what other point you have raised, when asked for evidence of how Corbyn had outplayed the centrists, you stated:
> 
> ...


Oh well. You remember the call for an alternative candidate for PM? And where that went.... 

The outcome is precisely what Labour wanted, so far.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Oh well. You remember the call for an alternative candidate for PM? And where that went....
> 
> The outcome is precisely what Labour wanted, so far.



Which bit of the Labour? Because I remember Corbyn saying bring on the election and Blair saying Labour must not allow an election because it's a trap. 

Come on belboid you're better than this. You claim Corbyn has "outplayed" the centrists. You've made the claim. Explain what you mean. Arguing Corbyn has resisted the idea of Ken Clarke as PM is not going to cut it here.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Oh well. You remember the call for an alternative candidate for PM? And where that went....
> 
> The outcome is precisely what Labour wanted, so far.


Labour wanted a general election straight away, it was the centrists that wanted to wait?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Which bit of the Labour? Because I remember Corbyn saying bring on the election and Blair saying Labour must not allow an election because it's a trap.
> 
> Come on belboid you're better than this. You claim Corbyn has "outplayed" the centrists. You've made the claim. Explain what you mean. Arguing Corbyn has resisted the idea of Ken Clarke as PM is not going to cut it here.


I have done. I cant keep helping you not be at least a fortnight behind everyone else when it comes to the parliamentary game.  Sorry, I just cba to go round and round in circles.

the fact that you are obsessing on this point tho does mean you agree with the other two tho? 


fakeplasticgirl said:


> Labour wanted a general election straight away, it was the centrists that wanted to wait?


The centrists wanted a replacement government led by a 'uniting figure' that would delay an election for months - until at least next year. They wanted this parliament to decide on the eventual outcome, if at all possible. The tiggies and the tories dont want an election at all.  The libs want to revoke. The SNP are, admittedly, perfectly happy.

Labour never said they wanted an election before ensuring no deal was ruled out, it was always just a question of how to do that. And the vast majority of labour, not just the centrists, wanted it after Oct 14 to ensure maximum tory disunity.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

The purpose of the delay was to box Johnson in and force him to do something he didn't want to do. A May+ deal with NI exceptionalism gives Johnson something to take into an election, something concrete that he can pledge to do if he gets a majority. That doesn't seem like weakening his hand to me. By contrast, Labour's position boils down to 'more uncertainty'. 

Is this better than a short pre-brexit deadline campaign in which Johnson is still willy-waving the 'no deal' placard? I'm not very sure about that.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 10, 2019)

Is this actually Dominic cummings’ Twitter? Is he hinting at something?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

I’m saving these latest posts from belboid where we not only get the benefit of his unique analysis but we learn that thIs entire parliamentary charade is in fact the carefully controlled assertion of political control by Corbyn and friends.


----------



## tommers (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m saving these latest posts from belboid where we not only get the benefit of his unique analysis but we learn that thIs entire parliamentary charade is in fact the carefully controlled assertion of political control by Corbyn and friends.


Where are you saving them?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

tommers said:


> Where are you saving them?



In my special file marked ‘delusional bollocks’


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m saving these latest posts from belboid where we not only get the benefit of his unique analysis but we learn that thIs entire parliamentary charade is in fact the carefully controlled assertion of political control by Corbyn and friends.


you may be saving them, but you're not meaningfully replying to any of them, are you?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

Thing is, what exactly is Corbyn in control of at the moment? Five weeks' suspension of parliament, a media that largely ignores most of what he says, five weeks of Johnson Johnson Johnson. Johnson may very well fuck this all up, but that isn't in Corbyn's control at the moment.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> you may be saving them, but you're not meaningfully replying to any of them, are you?



To what? Your assertion that labour is controlling events? Even you must know that that doesn’t warrant a serious reply....


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Thing is, what exactly is Corbyn in control of at the moment? Five weeks' suspension of parliament, a media that largely ignores most of what he says, five weeks of Johnson Johnson Johnson. Johnson may very well fuck this all up, but that isn't in Corbyn's control at the moment.



Nothing. He’s being pushed rightwards. Everyone (except Belboid) can see the process unfolding.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> The centrists wanted a replacement government led by a 'uniting figure' that would delay an election for months - until at least next year. They wanted this parliament to decide on the eventual outcome, if at all possible. The tiggies and the tories dont want an election at all.  The libs want to revoke. The SNP are, admittedly, perfectly happy.
> 
> Labour never said they wanted an election before ensuring no deal was ruled out, it was always just a question of how to do that. And the vast majority of labour, not just the centrists, wanted it after Oct 14 to ensure maximum tory disunity.



As much as the centrists might have “wanted” it I don’t think any of them realistically thought that a general election could be delayed for months and the outcome of brexit  decided by this parliament. I thought they wanted somebody like Clarke to negotiate an extension then call a general election? Not too dissimilar to the current situation...


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Thing is, what exactly is Corbyn in control of at the moment? Five weeks' suspension of parliament, a media that largely ignores most of what he says, five weeks of Johnson Johnson Johnson. Johnson may very well fuck this all up, but that isn't in Corbyn's control at the moment.


he controlled what he could. Can't do more than that. 

Beyond that, as I have said repeatedly, everything is up in the air.  Those who say this is definitely the way to go, the thing to do are fooling themselves.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> the fact that you are obsessing on this point tho does mean you agree with the other two tho?



I can't remember if I agreed with the other points or not but they certainly didn't seem as odd to me. You've made the claim that Corbyn has 'outplayed' all the centrists. You now seem to be suggesting that's because they didn't want an election until next year, whereas Corbyn will get one whenever he wants. This is not guaranteed - if Johnson is forced to seek an extension he may then decide he doesn't want an election. 

In any case, I challenged your claim because as I'm sure you'll agree, there is far too much uncritical praise of Corbyn and how clever he is being when he is digging a deeper and deeper hole in the graveyard of Parliamentary manouvres. And I think I was right to do so. If you're suggesting Corbyn has 'outplayed' the centrists because they wanted to have an election next year, then that is ridiculous. The centrists - which include the majority of the PLP - outnumber Corbyn and they will have more say on when an election takes place than Corbyn will.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> he controlled what he could. Can't do more than that.
> 
> Beyond that, as I have said repeatedly, everything is up in the air.  Those who say this is definitely the way to go, the thing to do are fooling themselves.


I don't pretend to have all the answers. But a simple 'right, election, 15 October, let's do this now' has clarity of purpose and spirit. Every day that passes I worry that Labour have missed a trick here - events could unfold in any number of unexpected ways, and the reason they gave for wanting the delay - that Johnson is unprincipled and not to be trusted - is precisely the reason to get the election campaign running now. 

Who knows if Labour could win that election? I think they stood a chance at least of being biggest party in a hung parliament, which is a win from where we are now. And fuck knows where we will be when the election is finally called - Johnson may have got his shit together somehow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> he controlled what he could. Can't do more than that.
> 
> Beyond that, as I have said repeatedly, everything is up in the air.  Those who say this is definitely the way to go, the thing to do are fooling themselves.



Hang on. You said he 'outplayed' everyone. Which is it? He controlled what he could and everything is up in the air or he outplayed everyone?


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> To what? Your assertion that labour is controlling events? Even you must know that that doesn’t warrant a serious reply....


Nothing you can copy and paste then? 

The advantage delaying the election has had is obvious, and I've stated it several times, which you ignored.

It will either force a Boris deal (which I dont think is possible) , in which case BP will run a major campaign and split their vote, or it will force a delay which he said he'd never do.  Either way, the tories are even more massively split.  Good thing.
It allows Labour conference which can both improve the brexit policy and allow further improvements to LP democracy
It allows trigger ballots to happen to remove some of the worst Labour MP's
It removes No Deal from the immediate agenda which would have a bloody awful effect upon working class lives

If you disagree with any of them, please do, but dont pretend they aren't real arguments.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't pretend to have all the answers. But a simple 'right, election, 15 October, let's do this now' has clarity of purpose and spirit. Every day that passes I worry that Labour have missed a trick here - events could unfold in any number of unexpected ways, and the reason they gave for wanting the delay - that Johnson is unprincipled and not to be trusted - is precisely the reason to get the election campaign running now.
> 
> Who knows if Labour could win that election? I think they stood a chance at least of being biggest party in a hung parliament, which is a win from where we are now. And fuck knows where we will be when the election is finally called - Johnson may have got his shit together somehow.


Clarity, maybe.  But still allows for Johnson bluster, bullshit and quite possibly fiddling the bloody date.  

Either way, it's too late now anyway, that point has been passed. Onwards.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Either way, it's too late now anyway, that point has been passed. Onwards.


Well this is certainly true enough.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> It allows Labour conference which can both improve the brexit policy and allow further improvements to LP democracy
> It allows trigger ballots to happen to remove some of the worst Labour MP's



It does allow more time for trigger ballots. But the Labour left have had 4 years to get their shit together on that. So I wouldn't hold your breath. 

It also allows Labour conference to set a policy. Which could well be - enthusiastically supported by the Labour right of course - a policy of full on Remain. Which will delight the centrists. And possibly see Labour smashed in an election. 

We do understand the feted advantages of delaying the election. The thing is, those advantages are more clearly in the favour of the centrist parties who are going to run on Remain anyway. What is the advantage to Labour, who will need to make a coherent pitch to Leave voters during the election, and how will they overcome the allegation that they have acted to stop Brexit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Either way, it's too late now anyway, that point has been passed. Onwards.



This _does not _mean that we simply refuse to discuss the merits of the move. We should all be attempting to learn from events.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It does allow more time for trigger ballots. But the Labour left have had 4 years to get their shit together on that. So I wouldn't hold your breath.


Almost by definition, you dont get trigger ballots until an election is in the offing. And it's only two years since the last election.



> It also allows Labour conference to set a policy. Which could well be - enthusiastically supported by the Labour right of course - a policy of full on Remain. Which will delight the centrists. And possibly see Labour smashed in an election.


Absolutely, so that is where the battleground is. Let's take it there. 



> We do understand the feted advantages of delaying the election. The thing is, those advantages are more clearly in the favour of the centrist parties who are going to run on Remain anyway. What is the advantage to Labour, who will need to make a coherent pitch to Leave voters during the election, and how will they overcome the allegation that they have acted to stop Brexit?


Disagree, but we aren't going to agree, so I'll leave it there.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This _does not _mean that we simply refuse to discuss the merits of the move. We should all be attempting to learn from events.


you too


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Nothing you can copy and paste then?]
> 
> The advantage delaying the election has had is obvious, and I've stated it several times, which you ignored.
> 
> ...



Ooooh. At least I didn’t say ‘we’ this time as I know is upsets/amuses you.

I do disagree and, as you’ve asked, will do so properly tomorrow. For now, I merely note events have gone from under Corbyn’s iron control to ‘up in the air’


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I do disagree and, as you’ve asked, will do so properly tomorrow. For now, I merely note events have gone from under Corbyn’s iron control to ‘up in the air’


If you're going to make things up, don't bother.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Nothing. He’s being pushed rightwards. Everyone (except Belboid) can see the process unfolding.



The labels left and right are unhelpful in this context. Corbyn's position is moving away from that of Rees-Mogg, Farage and co. How is that moving to the right?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> If you're going to make things up, don't bother.



Erm, you’ve been the one constructing the ludicrous argument that Corbyn is controlling events.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 10, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> The labels left and right are unhelpful in this context. Corbyn's position is moving away from that of Rees-Mogg, Farage and co. How is that moving to the right?



Read the LeFT blog post (wot I cut and pasted) above for the full explanation of the forces pushing Corbyn to the right


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

Never mind all the internal labour bollocks, labour avoiding an election plays badly with normal people (in a political sense), based on my unscientific analysis of politically normal non-weirdos I know anyway but I stand by it. How could it not look shit. Labour are the opposition, have spent a year or so up until recently leading the polls, have spent two years calling for an election, and we're in the midst of a political crisis, how are people supposed to accept saying no to a general election is either a smart or principled stance. Ffs


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 10, 2019)

belboid said:


> Disagree, but we aren't going to agree, so I'll leave it there.



Fair enough.


----------



## belboid (Sep 10, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Erm, you’ve been the one constructing the ludicrous argument that Corbyn is controlling events.


In relation to the parliamentary shenanigans, yes. Nowt else. That’s all in your imagination.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 10, 2019)

A delayed GE with the possibility of a version of May's deal on the table offers the opportunity to split the Tories for a generation or permanently. Regardless of the actual outcome of any voting of any of the questions in a GE or potential rerun  referendum. That's got to be worth it.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 10, 2019)

Aye, master stroke this delaying a GE is looking

BBC News - Brexit: Labour deputy Tom Watson calls for referendum ahead of election
Labour deputy urges Brexit vote before election


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 10, 2019)

Robert Peston: Labour will campaign for a referendum but NOT for Remain in election


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Watson has clearly been outplayed here.


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Watson has clearly been outplayed here.


But wait...
Brexit: Labour deputy Tom Watson calls for referendum ahead of election


> Labour must prioritise reversing Brexit through another referendum, over winning power in a general election, its deputy leader Tom Watson is to say. He will warn that a snap election before the end of the year may fail to resolve the current deadlock. Putting himself at odds with Jeremy Corbyn, he will say there is "no such thing as a good Brexit deal" and Labour must campaign unequivocally to remain.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 11, 2019)

Watson's big play.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Watson's big play.


What he wrote.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 11, 2019)

1111; how long to 2222?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

Watson’s move was inevitable once Corbyn gave ground.

So now we have the possibility of no election and a second referendum (which the LDs and possibly the Nats are already lined up behind) being floated by the deputy leader. A renewed call for a unity government, not led by Corbyn of course, to ‘steer Britain through in the national interest’ will inevitably resurface.

Watson’s big move indeed, but this time Momentum can’t be gathered fully against the labour right as Corbyn has been manoeuvred into playing this latest attack out in Parliament.

ETA:

1. Tom Watson “My experience on the doorstep tells me most of those who’ve deserted us over our Brexit policy did so with deep regret and would greatly prefer to come back; they just want us to take an unequivocal position that whatever happens we’ll fight to remain, and to sound like we mean it,” 
2. West Bromwich East Leave Vote: 69%


----------



## brogdale (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Watson’s move was inevitable once Corbyn gave ground.
> 
> So now we have the possibility of no election and a second referendum (which the LDs and possibly the Nats are already lined up behind) being floated by the deputy leader. A renewed call for a unity government, not led by Corbyn of course, to ‘steer Britain through in the national interest’ will inevitably resurface.
> 
> Watson’s big move indeed, but this time Momentum can’t be gathered fully against the labour right as Corbyn has been manoeuvred into playing this latest attack out in Parliament


Maybe a bit early for my brain...but I'm struggling to see much difference between Watson & 'the Labour position'.
What am I missing?


----------



## Winot (Sep 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe a bit early for my brain...but I'm struggling to see much difference between Watson & 'the Labour position'.
> What am I missing?



Watson = 2nd ref before GE
Corbyn = 2nd ref after GE

?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe a bit early for my brain...but I'm struggling to see much difference between Watson & 'the Labour position'.
> What am I missing?



Watson is calling for a GE to be put back indefinitely and for a referendum to take place first. 

Labour is calling for a GE, unclear when but after 31/10, if they win they will negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum with the deal v remain. 

Both shit. But different


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

Winot said:


> Watson = 2nd ref before GE
> Corbyn = 2nd ref after GE
> 
> ?



Yes


----------



## Winot (Sep 11, 2019)

Labour are in a bind either way though. Committing to get a new deal and to then argue against it in a 2nd ref is nuts (now side-stepped by the LDs).


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Watson is calling for a GE to be put back indefinitely and for a referendum to take place first.
> 
> Labour is calling for a GE, unclear when but after 31/10, if they win they will negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum with the deal v remain.
> 
> Both shit. But different


So the Watson 'strategy' is EUrefII (which might very well = L , maybe 51 : 49) and then go to the nation on a full-fat remain ticket?


----------



## flypanam (Sep 11, 2019)

Lupa said:


> From bread to medical prescriptions: What will a no-deal Brexit mean for you? - Independent.ie
> _Really shit and depressing. _
> Fuck Brexit and the shitstains who decided it was a great idea...
> Really very unfair to have this inflicted on Ireland.



It is depressing but lets not forget that everyone from Leo to the insurance industry are using Brexit as a cover for their policies (eg the FG administration brougt in legislation that sees the handicapped and disabled now have to pay 20 euros a week to get transport to and from day care) of increasing austerity and profitability for their own benefit. Insurance premiems will go up, not beacuse of Brexit but because its a profit run industry that has run without oversight for decades.

It's galling that Howlin' Brendan of the Labour party was condemning Austerity and saying it went too far yet he was one of the chief architects of the policy and is using Brexit to try to climb Labour out of the grave.

The point is Brexit may or may not happen, but its essentially a British issue. We've our own troubles that start and end in Government buildings, IBEC and boardrooms up and down the land. The beef farmers have the right idea strike, blockade, protest.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Labour gone up in the polls since becoming more “remainey”


----------



## killer b (Sep 11, 2019)

The polls are all over the place, and theres too many things going on to attribute any change in them to any particular event.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

Ministers reverse May-era foreign student rules

Pushing for the youth and/or wealthy migrant vote?

International student fees are insane, so it's generally the most well-off that come over here anyway, I think, which would arguably be the Tories' demographic.

Or just sticking it to May?

Interesting to see how this plays with the anti-migrant Brexit crowd; Tories presumably banking on gaining more than they lose, and again, may be able to convince some of them that these are the 'right kind' of migrants (plus the fact that many are from outside the EU so won't be affected Brexit anyway).


----------



## Poi E (Sep 11, 2019)

Wife works for a post grad institution and they are having a tough time attracting the numbers of international students they did. Questions about bigotry and the safety of prospective students, which never used to be asked.

Australia beats UK for overseas students


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> International student fees are insane, so it's generally the most well-off that come over here anyway, I think, which would arguably be the Tories' demographic.


the over-65s?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 11, 2019)

BREAKING NEWS - Scottish Court, on appeal, has ruled Johnson's suspension of parliament is illegal.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - Scottish Court, on appeal, has ruled Johnson's suspension of parliament is illegal.


Supreme Court then now is it. Although no idea what difference it might make given its already happened


----------



## philosophical (Sep 11, 2019)

By the time everything crawls through the legal system Parliament will be back.


----------



## maomao (Sep 11, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Ministers reverse May-era foreign student rules
> 
> Pushing for the youth and/or wealthy migrant vote?
> 
> ...



Foreign students don't get to vote so I'm not sure how that would work. It was always a stupid rule from any angle. May did it out of petty racism and desparation due to her  completed inability to get anywhere near the stupid and arbritary immigration target she'd set herself.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Supreme Court then now is it. Although no idea what difference it might make given its already happened



I suppose the key reason for doing it is so that they can say Johnson broke the law during the election campaign. More genius strategy.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Supreme Court then now is it. Although no idea what difference it might make given its already happened


Fucks sake, I hope they don't bring them back in, Bercow's smugness would be worse than anthrax.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Fucks sake, I hope they don't bring them back in, Bercow's smugness would be worse than anthrax.



They won't apparently.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

maomao said:


> Foreign students don't get to vote so I'm not sure how that would work. It was always a stupid rule from any angle. May did it out of petty racism and desparation due to her  completed inability to get anywhere near the stupid and arbritary immigration target she'd set herself.


With everything that’s going on with BoZo I’d almost forgotten how loathsome May is. Thanks for reminding me.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Supreme Court then now is it. Although no idea what difference it might make given its already happened



If I'm reading the interim judgement right, on a purely legal basis it didn't actually happen "null, and of no effect".


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Will they get the grieve disclosure in time for the Supreme Court hearing? Anybody know what’s happening with that?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Loathsome is apparently refusing to publish all of the Yellowhammer documents. Back to the court on that one? FFS, the heat death of the universe can't come a day too soon.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Would love to see cummings right now in no.10. Bet he’s gone full Tucker.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

It's great that we're going to defeat the Tories in the courts. Just like they defeated Trump in the courts in the US!

...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Would love to see cummings right now in no.10. Bet he’s gone full Tucker.


I won't go as far as saying this all helps Johnson, but it certainly adds to the narrative of Johnson, Brexit and the People Vs Scaredy Cat Corbyn, 'The Establishment', the Courts etc.

Edit: well, I think I _would_ say it does help Johnson. Adds to the mess and chaos and firms up anybody who thinks he's an idiot. But in the bigger picture he's becoming 'Beleaguered Boris, Battling for the People'. Actually, fuck it, I've no idea who benefits. It's an irrelevance.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's great that we're going to defeat the Tories in the courts. Just like they defeated Trump in the courts in the US!
> 
> ...


Can see only positive political repurcussions from technical victories for remain relating to a referendum they lost, the future's bright


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Can see only positive political repurcussions from technical victories for remain relating to a referendum they lost, the future's bright



"So you see children, a lot of people were misled into voting for something Bad, by naughty people who broke the rules. But it was all alright in the end, because the Liberal intelligentsia rolled up their sleeves and they jolly well put their faith in the rule of law and the Judge said it didn't count. So we didn't leave the EU and we all had lemonade instead!"


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> "So you see children, a lot of people were misled into voting for something Bad, by naughty people who broke the rules. But it was all alright in the end, because the Liberal intelligentsia rolled up their sleeves and they jolly well put their faith in the rule of law and the Judge said it didn't count. So we didn't leave the EU and we all had lemonade instead!"


And everybody lived happily ever after with no deep seated resentments which only found an outlet through an insurgent radical right


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I won't go as far as saying this all helps Johnson, but it certainly adds to the narrative of Johnson, Brexit and the People Vs Scaredy Cat Corbyn, 'The Establishment', the Courts etc.
> 
> Edit: well, I think I _would_ say it does help Johnson. Adds to the mess and chaos and firms up anybody who thinks he's an idiot. But in the bigger picture he's becoming 'Beleaguered Boris, Battling for the People'. Actually, fuck it, I've no idea who benefits. It's an irrelevance.


I agree it probably doesn’t add anything new to the narrative. No dealers will be incensed that the remainer establishment is thwarting the will of the people, remainers will feel vindicated. Is just same old.

But if parliament was shut down illegally history will NOT be kind to bozo.

It will probably be overturned in the Supreme Court...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I agree it probably doesn’t add anything new to the narrative. No dealers will be incensed that the remainer establishment is thwarting the will of the people, remainers will feel vindicated. Is just same old.
> 
> But if parliament was shut down illegally history will NOT be kind to bozo.
> 
> It will probably be overturned in the Supreme Court...


history won't be kind to him anyway


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I agree it probably doesn’t add anything new to the narrative. No dealers will be incensed that the remainer establishment is thwarting the will of the people, remainers will feel vindicated. Is just same old.
> 
> But if parliament was shut down illegally history will NOT be kind to bozo.
> 
> It will probably be overturned in the Supreme Court...


At least Mrs Windsor will be pissed off that she's been 'dragged into politics'.  Actually, that might be a line that the liberals end up coming out with today.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Actually fucking hell the courts have just found that BoZo lied to the queen.

I studied law so while I’ve forgotten most of it this is FUCKING BIG.

No matter how BoZo spins it.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Cummings might be a genius political strategist but he comes across as legally illiterate.

Of course this doesn’t matter when you’re spinning a people v establishment narrative...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Actually fucking hell the courts have just found that BoZo lied to the queen.
> 
> I studied law so while I’ve forgotten most of it this is FUCKING BIG.
> 
> No matter how BoZo spins it.



Yep; he told Brenda that he needed to prorogue parliament so she could come and waffle on in it for a bit, when he was really doing it for his own political expediency.  The rotten scallywag.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

I hope to see a ceremonial return to parliament of the rebel alliance, Chuka Umunna bursting through the doors, sweeping Black Rod aside. Hand to hand fighting, but John Bercow finally resumes the chair. A grateful nation rejoices.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Yep; he told Brenda that he needed to prorogue parliament so she could come and waffle on in it for a bit, when he was really doing it for his own political expediency.  The rotten scallywag.


If the prorogation was illegal/naughty, it probably means they don't actually come back in, but does it also mean they didn't end the session to allow them all to fuck off to their conferences?  Of course they will fuck off to the seaside, but still... crazy stuff if your trap yourself in the internal logic of this shite.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I hope to see a ceremonial return to parliament of the rebel alliance, Chuka Umunna bursting through the doors, sweeping Black Rod aside. Hand to hand fighting, but John Bercow finally resumes the chair. A grateful nation rejoices.



With Heidi Allen as Princess Leia?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> If the prorogation was illegal/naughty, it probably means they don't actually come back in, but does it also mean they didn't end the session to allow them all to fuck off to their conferences?  Of course they will fuck off to the seaside, but still... crazy stuff if your trap yourself in the internal logic of this shite.



Whatever, it fulfils Johnson's need to not have parliament sitting to ask more awkward questions about his headlong rush for no-deal.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> With Heidi Allen as Princess Leia?


I do have a star wars character in mind for Bercow, but I'm far too PC to go there. 

Corbyn is basically that Obi Wan just after he's been killed and an empty gown flutters to the floor.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

"Yeah, hi, I know I didn't actually book my annual leave, but I'm already in Scunthorpe now, so, y'know, fuck it? We'll sort it out when I'm back"


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 11, 2019)

Bercow just reminds me of the goblin or elf or whatever that shows Harry his gold stash in the Philosopher's Stone


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Whatever, it fulfils Johnson's need to not have parliament sitting to ask more awkward questions about his headlong rush for no-deal.


Could they "take parliament to him" in some way? He's still going to be out in public, they could surely get some people asking some tricky questions somewhere?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Bercow just reminds me of the goblin or elf or whatever that shows Harry his gold stash in the Philosopher's Stone


dobby?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> dobby?


No, in the bank vault. Dobby isn't in the first film


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> No, in the bank vault. Dobby isn't in the first film


i thought it was wrong as soon as i posted it


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Whatever, it fulfils Johnson's need to not have parliament sitting to ask more awkward questions about his headlong rush for no-deal.


Yeah, absolutely (and I wasn't suggesting you  were stuck in that logic). But certainly, Parliament is the one place Johnson doesn't want to be at the moment. It's the place where he shows just how bad he is at 'being a PM'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Parliament is the one place Johnson doesn't want to be at the moment.


i don't think he'd like to be in the bahamas or in liverpool either.

or anywhere where he can meet members of the public. he'd be pleased as punch to be on rockall.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

Quick Google suggests maybe Filius Flitwick, as played by Warwick Davis in the film?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Could they "take parliament to him" in some way? He's still going to be out in public, they could surely get some people asking some tricky questions somewhere?


Do it in Runnymede.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Do it in Runnymede.


do it at tyburn


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> do it at tyburn


Anywhere with a ditch really.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Anywhere with a ditch really.


i was thinking anywhere with a tree or indeed a lamppost


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 11, 2019)

I thought locked in a hold-all inside a hotel wardrobe would be good.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Fucks sake, I hope they don't bring them back in, Bercow's smugness would be worse than anthrax.


It would be worth it to see loathsome leadsome’s sour face though.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I thought locked in a hold-all inside a hotel wardrobe would be good.


Locked in hold-all inside an empty prorogued House of Commons chamber.

*muffled cry* 'help, help!'


----------



## kebabking (Sep 11, 2019)

Perhaps some _secluded woodland _would be appropriate - or the ante room at the Palace, with a glass of whisky, a revolver, and a few moments to set his affairs in order...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Perhaps some _secluded woodland _would be appropriate - or the ante room at the Palace, with a glass of whisky, a revolver, and a few moments to set his affairs in order...


'And to my unspecified number of children, I leave my...'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Fucks sake, I hope they don't bring them back in, Bercow's smugness would be worse than anthrax.


I can't see it happening, but surely we should want it to. It would be a genuine humiliation for Johnson and as said above, he's really shit at being PM in the Commons. We need to see him in there as much as possible.


----------



## tommers (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can't see it happening, but surely we should want it to. It would be a genuine humiliation for Johnson and as said above, he's really shit at being PM in the Commons. We need to see him in there as much as possible.



He's just been found guilty by a court of lying to the Queen.  It would be fucking hilarious.


----------



## Supine (Sep 11, 2019)

Anyone know what happens to someone who breaks this law?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

tommers said:


> He's just been found guilty by a court of lying to the Queen.  It would be fucking hilarious.


It is. But my money is on it being overturned by the Supreme Court. Until the SC upholds it, it's a sideshow really. And there will be other pressures on the SC. This ruling is also potentially extremely awkward for the monarch.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I can't see it happening, but surely we should want it to. It would be a genuine humiliation for Johnson and as said above, he's really shit at being PM in the Commons. We need to see him in there as much as possible.


True, but there is one irony about Johnson's defeats in the commons and now the courts. The one thing the opposition should be doing in light of all that failure is bring a vonc. And that's not happening.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Watson is calling for a GE to be put back indefinitely and for a referendum to take place first.
> 
> Labour is calling for a GE, unclear when but after 31/10, if they win they will negotiate a deal and put it to a referendum with the deal v remain.
> 
> Both shit. But different



Watson's version is more shit though, as there's currently no brexit deal for people to vote on and no prospect of there being one until the Johnson rump government is replaced.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> True, but there is one irony about Johnson's defeats in the commons and now the courts. The one thing the opposition should be doing in light of all that failure is bring a vonc. And that's not happening.



It's not happening because there's no parliament.


----------



## N_igma (Sep 11, 2019)

Does anyone know if he actually broke any law? It seems that he may have acted in bad faith (which alone is grounds for resignation) but that’s not the same as breaking the law.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> True, but there is one irony about Johnson's defeats in the commons and now the courts. The one thing the opposition should be doing in light of all that failure is bring a vonc. And that's not happening.


Yep, but now the no no deal law is in place, what's to stop Labour calling one as soon as they are recalled? Another irony is that the vonc doesn't automatically trigger an election. Corbyn could be compelled to try to cobble together an alliance when really he just wants an election.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not happening because there's no parliament.


Yeah, I know. I was commenting on where things would normally be if they were called back in (which they won't - and as lbj says this will be overturned). If the Supreme Court _does_ agree with the Scottish court, Johnson really is out on a limb, way beyond the point any PM would go. But even that is unlikely to have any material consequences.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 11, 2019)

N_igma said:


> Does anyone know if he actually broke any law? It seems that he may have acted in bad faith (which alone is grounds for resignation) but that’s not the same as breaking the law.



Misleading parliament is a fairly big deal IIRC.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 11, 2019)

Supine said:


> Anyone know what happens to someone who breaks this law?


Pulled apart by horses.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Misleading parliament is a fairly big deal IIRC.


He is, of course, fucking about with the constitution, 'dragging the queen' into political stuff and all the rest - cynical certainly. But how has he misled parliament?


----------



## Winot (Sep 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Pulled apart by horses.



corgis


----------



## andysays (Sep 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Misleading parliament is a fairly big deal IIRC.


But it doesn't necessarily equal breaking the law. 

There appears to be some disagreement between the judges involved as to whether he broke the law or not.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> At least Mrs Windsor will be pissed off that she's been 'dragged into politics'.  Actually, that might be a line that the liberals end up coming out with today.



They already have several times. Swinson has used it a lot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> He is, of course, fucking about with the constitution, 'dragging the queen' into political stuff and all the rest - cynical certainly. But how has he misled parliament?


Yeah this is why I reckon the SC will overturn this. We all know why he suspended parliament, but if he sticks to his stated reason - to give him time to prepare a super-doopa Queen's Speech - they'll need some kind of proof that he's lying. And very compelling proof at that, given the monarch's role is now involved. The SC may not always act in the interests of the government, but it will act in the interests of the monarchy if it can.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 11, 2019)

andysays said:


> There appears to be some disagreement between the judges involved as to whether he broke the law or not.



Yes and I fully expect this all to be kicked into the long grass. It would suit nobody in the establishment to create a precedent requiring important people to tell the truth.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Pulled apart by horses.



An introduction to Michel Foucault's concept of Power | Workers Solidarity Movement


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but now the no no deal law is in place, what's to stop Labour calling one as soon as they are recalled? Another irony is that the vonc doesn't automatically trigger an election. Corbyn could be compelled to try to cobble together an alliance when really he just wants an election.



He wouldn't be compelled too. Unless someone else could demonstrate that they had the confidence of a majority of MP's, in which case I suppose you could argue he should try to persuade MP's to back him instead but I'm not sure it's what I'd do. An election happens if no one can command a majority.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah this is why I reckon the SC will overturn this. We all know why he suspended parliament, but if he sticks to his stated reason - to give him time to prepare a super-doopa Queen's Speech - they'll need some kind of proof that he's lying. And very compelling proof at that, given the monarch's role is now involved. The SC may not always act in the interests of the government, but it will act in the interests of the monarchy if it can.


That’s why those grieve documents need to be disclosed...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep, but now the no no deal law is in place, what's to stop Labour calling one as soon as they are recalled? Another irony is that the vonc doesn't automatically trigger an election. Corbyn could be compelled to try to cobble together an alliance when really he just wants an election.


Doesn't have to be Corbyn does it?

This might be bollocks but it could work to Corbyn/labour left's advantage if a national unity govt riven with contradictions formed a govt, unstable, inevitably collapses not long after - provided remains labour leader would place Corbyn back where comfortable as clean break and back in with Johnson as democrat v the liberal dictatorship ready for a GE. I might be talking terrible shit here tho


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yeah this is why I reckon the SC will overturn this. We all know why he suspended parliament, but if he sticks to his stated reason - to give him time to prepare a super-doopa Queen's Speech - they'll need some kind of proof that he's lying. And very compelling proof at that, given the monarch's role is now involved. The SC may not always act in the interests of the government, but it will act in the interests of the monarchy if it can.


there's a man who's never heard of the mordaunt divorce or tranby croft

surely the interests of the monarchy are in this instance firmly opposed to the interests of the government.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He wouldn't be compelled too. Unless someone else could demonstrate that they had the confidence of a majority of MP's, in which case I suppose you could argue he should try to persuade MP's to back him instead but I'm not sure it's what I'd do. An election happens if no one can command a majority.


It wouldn't be a good look not to try to form a govt, though, would it?

Problem there might be if a bunch of non-labour mps got together and made him an offer he would find it hard to refuse - we'll back you as PM to steer us through to a second referendum, _then_ we can have an election. He could find himself in the history books as the temporary PM who averted brexit then got chucked out on his ear. 

Given Corbyn's historic animosity towards the EU, _that_ would be ironic.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wouldn't be a good look not to try to form a govt, though, would it?
> 
> Problem there might be if a bunch of non-labour mps got together and made him an offer he would find it hard to refuse - we'll back you as PM to steer us through to a second referendum, _then_ we can have an election. He could find himself in the history books as the temporary PM who averted brexit then got chucked out on his ear.


In this event it wouldn't just be corbyn consigned to dustbin of history. Labour party would be unequivocally divorced from err labour


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I might be talking terrible shit here tho


there's no better place to talk it


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wouldn't be a good look not to try to form a govt, though, would it?
> 
> Problem there might be if a bunch of non-labour mps got together and made him an offer he would find it hard to refuse - we'll back you as PM to steer us through to a second referendum, _then_ we can have an election. He could find himself in the history books as the temporary PM who averted brexit then got chucked out on his ear.
> 
> Given Corbyn's historic animosity towards the EU, _that_ would be ironic.



Hasn't he already said that if he would form a short term government solely to rule out no deal and call an election? There is 0% chance Corbyn would agree to a second referendum before an election precisely because it would destroy him. It's why Tom Watson really wants it.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 11, 2019)

Any Corbyn cobblers unity government could only form on the proviso of 2nd referendum


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

Talking of terrible shit:


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Talking of terrible shit:
> 
> View attachment 183873


yeh that is terrible shit. for labour to win an election boris johnson must remain tory leader


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> In this event it wouldn't just be corbyn consigned to dustbin of history. Labour party would be unequivocally divorced from err labour


Fuck knows what would happen following this sort of eventuality. But if Corbyn were granted, let us say, three months to negotiate a new deal and put it to a new referendum before calling an election, the best thing for Corbyn and Labour would surely be for the new deal to win the referendum. 

Strange times.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It wouldn't be a good look not to try to form a govt, though, would it?
> 
> Problem there might be if a bunch of non-labour mps got together and made him an offer he would find it hard to refuse - we'll back you as PM to steer us through to a second referendum, _then_ we can have an election. He could find himself in the history books as the temporary PM who averted brexit then got chucked out on his ear.
> 
> Given Corbyn's historic animosity towards the EU, _that_ would be ironic.



It might not look good, but if he put forward his terms and conditions for MP's to support him he could set the terms of the debate. They would likely refuse but then they've refused, so it doesn't look bad.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Paul Mason should write a book on his erratic political journey, possibly involving a technicolour dreamcoat


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Hasn't he already said that if he would form a short term government solely to rule out no deal and call an election? There is 0% chance Corbyn would agree to a second referendum before an election precisely because it would destroy him. It's why Tom Watson really wants it.


Lots of politicians are saying lots of things at the moment. But what if the threat were that someone else would head the interim govt if he refused? He'd also be finished if he refused the chance to be temp PM.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 11, 2019)

Its a never ending merry go round of shitness.

The judges are right though, in the sense that it was bloody obvious what Johnson was up to and it wasn't what he claimed.  Whether or not that's down to the judges is another matter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Lots of politicians are saying lots of things at the moment. But what if the threat were that someone else would head the interim govt if he refused? He'd also be finished if he refused the chance to be temp PM.



Who else has any possibility of leading an interim govt?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Still, it's all grist to the mill. A normally placid colleague (pretty sure voted remain) has just messaged the work group WhatsApp to say hang them all, so reckon this could all work out quite well


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

I'm an accelerationist now


----------



## Argonia (Sep 11, 2019)

This all just gets funnier and funnier


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Who else has any possibility of leading an interim govt?


Commander Starmer


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Who else has any possibility of leading an interim govt?


Once Corbyn has refused his first dibs, perhaps any number of people.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm an accelerationist now


Not so fast...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Heidi Allen's higher school of mechanics


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Paul Mason should write a book on his erratic political journey, possibly involving a technicolour dreamcoat



I’m thinking we need a separate thread for Mason. He’s becoming an important metaphor for the liberal left.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Paul Mason should write a book on his erratic political journey, possibly involving a technicolour dreamcoat


I was thinking he must have shot an albatross at some point and been condemned to talk bollocks to everyone he meets.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I was thinking he must have shot an albatross at some point and been condemned to talk bollocks to everyone he meets.


perhaps he was a spurs supporter in a past life


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m thinking we need a separate thread for Mason. He’s becoming an important metaphor for the liberal left.


I vaguely remember somebody leaving the Communist Party and joining the SDP in the 80s. One of the comments was 'without having the decency to join the labour party on route'. Fuck knows where Mason is heading, the full Icke?


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 11, 2019)

FFS


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Paul Mason should write a book on his erratic political journey, possibly involving a technicolour dreamcoat


Technicolour turncoat.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> FFS



Very British though. In a proper parliamentary lockout there'd be a ring of steel to keep out the errant legislators.

_'Wave after wave of MPs threw selves against the riot cops_...'.


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Very British though. In a proper parliamentary lockout there'd be a ring of steel to keep out the errant legislators.
> 
> _'Wave after wave of MPs threw selves against the riot cops_...'.



Parliamentary scabbing


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Technicolour turncoat.


Turn again Dick Whittington.

No cats were harmed in the making of this liberal fandango.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 11, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Very British though. In a proper parliamentary lockout there'd be a ring of steel to keep out the errant legislators.
> 
> _'Wave after wave of MPs threw selves against the riot cops_...'.


in a proper parliamentary lockout there'd be a ring of errant mps' heads on spikes to show what happened to recalcitrant politicos.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 11, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> FFS



You say that, but given the legal stuff going on, maybe he can just pass any law he wants to by debating it with himself, shouting 'unlock' and walking into the aye lobby. Maybe he's not the twat he looks.


----------



## belboid (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’m thinking we need a separate thread for Mason. He’s becoming an important metaphor for the liberal left.


you dont know what a metaphor is, do you?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> Parliamentary scabbing


At least Andrew Griffiths can send hundreds of sexualised texts to young women work from home.


----------



## Winot (Sep 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The judges are right though, in the sense that it was bloody obvious what Johnson was up to and it wasn't what he claimed.  Whether or not that's down to the judges is another matter.



This is basically what Jonathan Sumption (ex law Lord) has just said on R4. He’s obviously reading your posts.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Talking of terrible shit:
> 
> View attachment 183873



How come when I look on twitter, Paul Mason doesn't seem to have retweeted that, and it's actually a reply to a Paul Mason article?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> How come when I look on twitter, Paul Mason doesn't seem to have retweeted that, and it's actually a reply to a Paul Mason article?
> 
> View attachment 183886



Looks like facts are temporarily ruining the fun.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Would assume he's unretweeted due to loads of people going 'what the fuck paul you mad bellend'


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

He’s un-tweeted it now but it was genuine. 

If it was a mistake, then it’s an unfortunate one in respect of timing given Watson’s announcement this morning and Mason’s own bizarre journey


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 11, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




There are some similarities


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

PMQ's would have happened today. Surprised they haven't been following Johnson around with cameras asking him questions. Missed a trick there really.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 11, 2019)

Saying on the news they might scrap the party conferences. That would be a massive blessing for Corbyn.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> PMQ's would have happened today. Surprised they haven't been following Johnson around with cameras asking him questions. Missed a trick there really.


Some feller not answering questions from some other feller. We now no longer live in a parliamentary democracy.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Saying on the news they might scrap the party conferences. That would be a massive blessing for Corbyn.


Double hit for the hotels and hospitality industry - first brexit and now this!


----------



## Wilf (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Saying on the news they might scrap the party conferences. That would be a massive blessing for Corbyn.


((( Union bully boys)))


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 11, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> FFS




I see the heavily subsidised bars and restaurants have not been prorogued.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I see the heavily subsidised bars and restaurants have not been prorogued.


I wonder what it's like working in one of those places, are they civil servants or outsourced, what do they earn, just how much do they hate and hold in contempt the clientele etc


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I wonder what it's like working in one of those places, are they civil servants or outsourced, what do they earn, just how much do they hate and hold in contempt the clientele etc


Constant sexual harassment apparently, in the bars anyway. Hard to believe I know.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I wonder what it's like working in one of those places, are they civil servants or outsourced, what do they earn, just how much do they hate and hold in contempt the clientele etc



I think GMB organise the staff in the HoC.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I think GMB organise the staff in the HoC.


Are they public sector?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Look like directly employed, barista here for 20-25k pa

Internal Opportunities - Houses of Parliament


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 11, 2019)

flypanam said:


> It is depressing but lets not forget that everyone from Leo to the insurance industry are using Brexit as a cover for their policies (eg the FG administration brougt in legislation that sees the handicapped and disabled now have to pay 20 euros a week to get transport to and from day care) of increasing austerity and profitability for their own benefit. Insurance premiems will go up, not beacuse of Brexit but because its a profit run industry that has run without oversight for decades.
> 
> It's galling that Howlin' Brendan of the Labour party was condemning Austerity and saying it went too far yet he was one of the chief architects of the policy and is using Brexit to try to climb Labour out of the grave.
> 
> The point is Brexit may or may not happen, but its essentially a British issue. We've our own troubles that start and end in Government buildings, IBEC and boardrooms up and down the land. The beef farmers have the right idea strike, blockade, protest.





Ach. .
I know that... 

This is about Brexit and it's adder impact on us.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Look like directly employed, barista here for 20-25k pa
> 
> Internal Opportunities - Houses of Parliament



Is that salary range what London baristas typically get paid?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Is that salary range what London baristas typically get paid?


No idea but I reckon it probably is based on the other roles and salaries on there


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Is that salary range what London baristas typically get paid?


Upper end. With Reed, average in Central London is 19k. 

Average Barista Salary in Central London - reed.co.uk

That job at 23k plus civil service leave/pension is better than most will be on. Fixed 12-month contract, mind, so you could be out of a job in a year. Maternity cover?

Bet the application procedure is a ball-ache.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Bet the application procedure is a ball-ache.



Plus enhanced disclosure etc


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Look like directly employed, barista here for 20-25k pa
> 
> Internal Opportunities - Houses of Parliament



Funny how these jokers are happy to outsource everything in the land except for the things they use


----------



## agricola (Sep 11, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Funny how these jokers are happy to outsource everything in the land except for the things they use



even the sauce itself is kept in-house, I hear


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Would they have to sign the official secrets act? Wondering why we don't get many leaks about Guto Bebb doing loads of flake in the disabled loos or whatever


----------



## SpineyNorman (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Would they have to sign the official secrets act? Wondering why we don't get many leaks about Guto Bebb doing loads of flake in the disabled loos or whatever


What kind of qualifications do you reckon you'd need for one of the chef jobs? I've got some special seasonings that I just know tory MPs will love 

I haven't got a fucking clue what any of the jobs listed for 50k plus are, PC non-jobs I bet


----------



## agricola (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Would they have to sign the official secrets act? Wondering why we don't get many leaks about Guto Bebb doing loads of flake in the disabled loos or whatever



Probably not, as they wouldn't be expected to deal with any documents that would have a classification.  The fact that it is such a pleasant place to work, most of the staff are looked after well (in London terms at least) and the media having an interest in keeping it an agreeable place to visit probably keeps a lot of that sort of story out of the headlines.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Would they have to sign the official secrets act? Wondering why we don't get many leaks about Guto Bebb doing loads of flake in the disabled loos or whatever



I had to visit Parliament a few years back with work.  I work in construction and they had some giant water tank with some problem or other.  I was surprised how easy it was to get in.  Sure I was signed in by the guy who met me but he was a contractor who knew nothing about me apart from the company I worked in.

Once in we were just milling around with everyone else.  Took a lift at one point and as the doors opened to get out there stood IDS and Ben Bradshaw chatting away like old mates.

Basically its far harder to get on a Easyjet flight than it is to get into Parliament.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I had to visit Parliament a few years back with work.  I work in construction and they had some giant water tank with some problem or other.  I was surprised how easy it was to get in.  Sure I was signed in by the guy who met me but he was a contractor who knew nothing about me apart from the company I worked in.
> 
> Once in we were just milling around with everyone else.  Took a lift at one point and as the doors opened to get out there stood IDS and Ben Bradshaw chatting away like old mates.
> 
> Basically its far harder to get on a Easyjet flight than it is to get into Parliament.


Must have been tempting


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Must have been tempting



I think about it a lot.  Both of them, just there in their expensive suits literally slimeing.  If only I'd had a milkshake...


----------



## Argonia (Sep 11, 2019)

I was bored one day in London and decided to go into parliament to cause trouble and got booted out of an economics select committee for being noisy. On my way in I passed by Geoffrey Howe and nearly bumped into him. Anybody wanting to assassinate someone would have an easy time of it in there.


----------



## Supine (Sep 11, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I was bored one day in London and decided to go into parliament to cause trouble and got booted out of an economics select committee for being noisy. On my way in I passed by Geoffrey Howe and nearly bumped into him. Anybody wanting to assassinate someone would have an easy time of it in there.



Yeah - when I was a cycle courier I delivered a parcel to an mp. I was surprised to find I could just walk into that main room that's often on tv. There were loads of mp's and journalists milling around.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 11, 2019)

National Urban Drinks in 2020: let’s all get pished and head to Westminster to cause a disturbance.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 11, 2019)

I think it may be a bit harder nowadays.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Wow. I'd have thought they would at least have cited national security. 

No no, I'm not concerned at all that you're holding stuff back cos it might concern me. My mind is totally at ease.


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

Yellowhammer docs have been released. Trying to find a full set (apparently no.15 has been redacted, cue much speculation).


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Yellowhammer docs have been released. Trying to find a full set (apparently no.15 has been redacted, cue much speculation).


No you don't want to know about no.15. It will only concern you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

How long will it take for no.15 to be leaked then I wonder.


----------



## belboid (Sep 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> How long will it take for no.15 to be leaked then I wonder.


(as noted on one of the other threads) - Rosamund Irwin who got the original leak says its the same bar the title and the fact that hers was unredacted.  So she should be able to tell us


----------



## belboid (Sep 11, 2019)

apparently its this


----------



## Lord Camomile (Sep 11, 2019)

belboid said:


> (as noted on one of the other threads) - Rosamund Irwin who got the original leak says its the same bar the title and the fact that hers was unredacted.  So she should be able to tell us


Ahhh, sorry, did have a quick scan of the familiar threads but hadn't seen that one


----------



## belboid (Sep 11, 2019)

Lord Camomile said:


> Ahhh, sorry, did have a quick scan of the familiar threads but hadn't seen that one


there are a few knocking about out there.  Almost as many as Labour Party policies on Brexit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 11, 2019)

Kent becomes a car park. Oh how concerning... How unexpected.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 11, 2019)

What no.15 said:


----------



## existentialist (Sep 11, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Perhaps some _secluded woodland _would be appropriate - or the ante room at the Palace, with a glass of whisky, a revolver, and a few moments to set his affairs in order...


It's going to take Johnson a bit longer than a few moments to set his *affairs* in order... *rimshot*


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> PMQ's would have happened today. Surprised they haven't been following Johnson around with cameras asking him questions. Missed a trick there really.



Could have been an occasion to bring out the hignfy tub of lard.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 11, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Could have been an occasion to bring out the hignfy tub of lard.



that may be on its way to brussels* in case the government tries to balls the next session of the EU up by not sending anyone

* - or wherever such things happen these days


----------



## MrSki (Sep 11, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 12, 2019)

Selling England by the pound ....


----------



## Libertad (Sep 12, 2019)

flypanam said:


> legislation that sees the handicapped and disabled now have to pay 20 euros a week to get transport to and from day care



'Handicapped' is not a word that is used in this context these days.


----------



## flypanam (Sep 12, 2019)

Look I've a brother with Cerebal Palsy, when I'm home I spend my time looking after him, the whole gamut of care from toilet, feeding, washing and sleeping.  Sorry that my language has slipped but when the campaigners against this attack on services talk to the media they use the word.

So apologies.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 12, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Kent becomes a car park. Oh how concerning... How unexpected.



I'm shocked by this. I thought Kent already was a car park.


----------



## tonysingh (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm shocked by this. I thought Kent already was a car park.



No no. It's a shithole, quite a different thing.


----------



## Winot (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm shocked by this. I thought Kent already was a car park.



The car park of England.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Selling England by the pound ....


kilo i think you'll find


----------



## gosub (Sep 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> kilo i think you'll find


£ I think you'll find


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2019)

gosub said:


> £ I think you'll find


i think you'll discover selling by the £ is becoming less attractive than by the $ or the €


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

tonysingh said:


> No no. It's a shithole, quite a different thing.


Maybe just me no getting the humour (?) but I'm always a bit uneasy when we dismiss each others home areas & communities like this.
Could be that living in an area that's often the butt of 'jokes' has over-sensitised me, but it always feels a bit too close to negative solidarity to me when we laugh at where some people choose to/have to live.
There's many good comrades in Kent that struggle on in areas electorally dominated by the right.


----------



## gosub (Sep 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you'll discover selling by the £ is becoming less attractive than by the $ or the €



Well when you have Mark Carney telling Jackson Hole that he's been talking to Zuckerberg about cyrpto currencies, I am not surprised, fucker never even bothered turning up at Parliament when he was asked to.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe just me no getting the humour (?) but I'm always a bit uneasy when we dismiss each others home areas & communities like this.
> Could be that living in an area that's often the butt of 'jokes' has over-sensitised me, but it always feels a bit too close to negative solidarity to me when we laugh at where some people choose to/have to live.
> There's many good comrades in Kent that struggle on in areas electorally dominated by the right.



I think tonysingh lives in Kent.  

It was just a joke.  There are probably more comments on this website calling London a shithole than any other subject.  It don't matter to me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe just me no getting the humour (?) but I'm always a bit uneasy when we dismiss each others home areas & communities like this.
> Could be that living in an area that's often the butt of 'jokes' has over-sensitised me, but it always feels a bit too close to negative solidarity to me when we laugh at where some people choose to/have to live.
> There's many good comrades in Kent that struggle on in areas electorally dominated by the right.


one of the greatest perils of brexit is to our famous sense of humour


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think tonysingh lives in Kent.
> 
> It was just a joke.  There are probably more comments on this website calling London a shithole than any other subject.  It don't matter to me.


Fair enough; just something that jars with me.
As you were.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> one of the greatest perils of brexit is to our famous sense of humour


I clearly need to establish my very own backstop against this possibility.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Bye bye Arlene...


----------



## andysays (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Bye bye Arlene...
> 
> View attachment 183964



Arlene good night, Arlene good night
Good night, Arlene, good night Arlene 
I'll see you in my dreams...


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 12, 2019)

andysays said:


> Arlene good night, Arlene good night
> Good night, Arlene, good night Arlene
> I'll see you in my dreams...


Outside the barracks, by the corner light
I'll always stand and wait for you at night
We will create a world for two
I'll wait for you the whole night through
For you Lili Arlene
For you Lili Arlene


----------



## steeplejack (Sep 12, 2019)

Did I get in a time machine back to 2003 and johnnycanuck2 has hacked everyone's account in order to post song lyrics?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

Could the DUP be moving to a compromise on special arrangements of some sort, just for NI rather than the whole of the UK?



> There were some indications in Northern Ireland on Wednesday that the North was heading into “I can’t believe it’s not the backstop” territory.
> 
> There is still considerable fog clouding what Boris Johnson, Arlene Foster and Nigel Dodds might be doing to devise a resolution to the Brexit chaos and crisis but it did seem clear that the Tories and the DUP are trying to fashion a compromise that avoids a no-deal exit from Europe.
> 
> ...



Foster’s repeated call for ‘sensible deal’ hints at new mood of compromise


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe just me no getting the humour (?) but I'm always a bit uneasy when we dismiss each others home areas & communities like this.
> Could be that living in an area that's often the butt of 'jokes' has over-sensitised me, but it always feels a bit too close to negative solidarity to me when we laugh at where some people choose to/have to live.
> There's many good comrades in Kent that struggle on in areas electorally dominated by the right.



As a person born in Essex, I sympathise with this perspective.

Kent is shit though.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 12, 2019)

I have a mate from Hastings who is rude about Kent to a level that makes the South Wales football rivalry seem timid and good natured.


----------



## Supine (Sep 12, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Selling England by the pound ....



For a pound more like


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

This probably helps to get the DUP to shift their position a bit.



> Just over half of people in Northern Ireland would vote for Irish unification if there was a border poll tomorrow, according to a survey.
> 
> The, poll published by Lord Ashcroft, shows that 45% of those survey said they would stay in the UK, while 46% said they would vote to leave and join the Republic of Ireland. The figures break down to 51% to 49% for unification when those who don't know and others who say they would not vote are excluded.
> 
> ...



Poll: 51% of Northern Ireland voters back united Ireland, according to Lord Ashcroft survey - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## killer b (Sep 12, 2019)

Interesting blog on vote switching here - shows Labour leave voters won't be switching to the tories, but may switch to Brexit, but a much bigger problem on the remain flank:

Volatility and vote switching (Part I: 2017 Labour voters)


----------



## tommers (Sep 12, 2019)

Kent is the Garden of England. And you can all (ALL) fuck off.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> This probably helps to get the DUP to shift their position a bit.
> 
> 
> 
> Poll: 51% of Northern Ireland voters back united Ireland, according to Lord Ashcroft survey - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


One of the totally unexpected side effects of Brexit especially a No Deal is that for the first time Eire can actually offer the people of NI something positive that staying in the UK won't 
It is also obvious that whilst being in the UK is very important to most Unionists, most people on the mainland don't give a fig about it and many Brexiteers would happily dump NI if it gives them Brexit.
The Unionists are starting to feel distinctly unloved.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> Kent is the Garden of England. And you can all (ALL) fuck off.



You've just quoted from that big sign the locals have erected on the White Cliffs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

> A legal challenge in Belfast High Court that argued the Government's Brexit strategy will damage the Northern Ireland peace process has been dismissed.
> 
> Lord Justice Bernard McCloskey delivered his ruling on Thursday morning on three joined cases against Prime Minister Boris Johnson's handling of the UK's European Union exit.
> 
> The trio of challenges contended that a no-deal Brexit on October 31 would undermine agreements involving the UK and Irish governments that were struck during the peace process and which underpin cross-border co-operation between the two nations.



Belfast High Court dismisses no-deal Brexit challenge


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

killer b said:


> Interesting blog on vote switching here - shows Labour leave voters won't be switching to the tories, but may switch to Brexit, but a much bigger problem on the remain flank:
> 
> Volatility and vote switching (Part I: 2017 Labour voters)



Interesting stuff.
Shame the fw is from 6 months ago; obvs things could have changed since then?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 12, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> One of the totally unexpected side effects of Brexit especially a No Deal is that for the first time Eire can actually offer the people of NI something positive that staying in the UK won't


Not exactly unexpected

Sinn Féin calls for vote on Irish reunification if UK backs Brexit


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> Kent is the Garden of England. And you can all (ALL) fuck off.


Well...real Kent, East of the Medway is.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Not exactly unexpected
> 
> Sinn Féin calls for vote on Irish reunification if UK backs Brexit



That article is over 3 years old, thanks for bringing us this breaking news.


----------



## killer b (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Interesting stuff.
> Shame the fw is from 6 months ago; obvs things could have changed since then?


sure - it echos something I read about recently (possibly here?) that the tory vote went up less in places where UKIP stood aside in 2017 - which suggests Labour leave voters might be prepared to vote UKIP or BP, but will either mostly vote Labour or not at all before voting tory.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 12, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I have a mate from Hastings who is rude about Kent to a level that makes the South Wales football rivalry seem timid and good natured.



I always thought Hastings was in Kent.


----------



## Crispy (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I always thought Hastings was in Kent.


East Sussex


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I always thought Hastings was in Kent.



No, East Sussex.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> kilo i think you'll find


(((The Metric Martyr)))


----------



## teuchter (Sep 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That article is over 3 years old, thanks for bringing us this breaking news.


Yeah, that is the whole point. It was expected 3 years ago.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I always thought Hastings was in Kent.


Obvs wrong.
Kent = _Invicta; _the brave Jutish folk of the county scared the bastard away with their fearsome branches....unlike the South Saxon surrender monkeys.


----------



## tommers (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Well...real Kent, East of the Medway is.



For the record I welcome our West Kent brethren into the family  Exactly the same as if they were real people.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

tommers said:


> For the record I welcome our West Kent brethren into the family  Exactly the same as if they were real people.


Personally, I'd be happy to cede West Kent to Surrey where the inhabitants pretend they live. If it means we can take back control with Kexit, I'd say it's a price worth paying.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Personally, I'd be happy to cede West Kent to Surrey where the inhabitants pretend they live. If it means we can take back control with Kexit, I'd say it's a price worth paying.


Surrey is succeeding from the union.  Sexit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 12, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Surrey is succeeding from the union.  Sexit.


Something the whole country can get behind there


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 12, 2019)

I'm taking a duvet day...


----------



## kabbes (Sep 12, 2019)

I meant seceding of course, but my autocorrect error works nonetheless


----------



## existentialist (Sep 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That article is over 3 years old, thanks for bringing us this breaking news.


If it was breaking 3 years ago, it must be broken news by now...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Some people did a few pirouettes in one place, then some other people in another place put some hats on, then they went back to the first place and two men _almost _started shouting at each other. Then some of those people from the first place went round to the second place but not all of them. After that, they probably went to one of their many homes and had their tea off plates from John Lewis.
> 
> _If any of your kids are doing GCSE Politics, feel free to use any of that._


If any of your offspring are doing A Level Law, here's another free lesson:


English Court - the PM definitely didn't lie to the queen
Scottish Court - he fucking did!
North Irish Court = nah!
The Supremes, next week - erm, ah, he, sorry, what was the question? Can I phone Paul Mason?


----------



## gosub (Sep 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Bye bye Arlene...
> 
> View attachment 183964


I thought they didn't want a hard border


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 12, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I always thought Hastings was in Kent.



I want you to say that to my mate


----------



## tonysingh (Sep 12, 2019)

There's two Hastings ain't there? Or am I thinking of Ashford?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

tonysingh said:


> There's two Hastings ain't there? Or am I thinking of Ashford?



Don't think there's two Hastings, but there is a Ashford in both Kent & Surrey.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 12, 2019)

There are two Ashfords.  The one in Kent is by far the better it has to be said.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There are two Ashfords.  The one in Kent is by far the better it has to be said.



Having lived in the other one for a while, I concur.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Don't think there's two Hastings, but there is a Ashford in both Kent & Surrey.



on the trains, some things say ashford (surrey) and others say ashford (middlesex)

both ashford town fc sides nearly ended up in the same bit of non-league a few years back


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 12, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> on the trains, some things say ashford (surrey) and others say ashford (middlesex)



It's only been in Surrey since Middlesex was abolished back in the 60's, give them a chance to catch-up.


----------



## Cid (Sep 12, 2019)

Well this took an odd turn. Do you lot want a home counties forum?


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 12, 2019)

Hastings is only interested in nicking bent coppers.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 12, 2019)

Cid said:


> Well this took an odd turn. Do you lot want a home counties forum?


You'd think the piston heads and cliff richard forums would be enough


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 12, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> on the trains, some things say ashford (surrey) and others say ashford (middlesex)
> 
> both ashford town fc sides nearly ended up in the same bit of non-league a few years back



The locals of the Surrey one kicked off when SWR started to call it Ashford Surrey, so they changed it back to Middx. Have noticed Surrey creeping back in recently though. If Santa brings me some green crayons for Christmas I might write and complain...


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> You'd think the piston heads and cliff richard forums would be enough


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> on the trains, some things say ashford (surrey) and others say ashford (middlesex)
> 
> both ashford town fc sides nearly ended up in the same bit of non-league a few years back


As opposed to the real one that's called Ashford International.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 12, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> There are two Ashfords.  The one in Kent is by far the better it has to be said.



The other one must be pretty fucking dreadful then.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 12, 2019)

The only thing I recall from Ashford in Kent is clambering over a WW1 tank while pissed, then the police arrived.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 12, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> The only thing I recall from Ashford in Kent is clambering over a WW1 tank while pissed, then the police arrived.


East Kent night out.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 12, 2019)

I signed the petition against prorogation & the response seems to be at odds to what the Govt. is arguing. 


> The Government has responded to the petition you signed – “Do not prorogue Parliament”.
> 
> Government responded:
> 
> ...


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 12, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The Supremes, next week -



Live??


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Live??


Old classics with a twist, “Stop! In the name of European unity”
“You can’t hurry brexit”
“Where did our seat at the table go”
“You keep me hanging on” - a Brexiteer anthem because they want to remain impartial being pop stars. 
I hear the set will be on a par with Donna Summer’s “Gonna see the Arsenal playing some Hot Stuff!”
Which as you’ll remember just rolled off the tongue.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 12, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:
			
		

> Old classics with a twist, “Stop! In the name of European unity”
> “You can’t hurry brexit”
> “Where did our seat at the table go”
> “You keep me hanging on” - a Brexiteer anthem because they want to remain impartial being pop stars.
> ...



Don't give up that day job now


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 12, 2019)

<Above post just edited, because I always add the quote I'm replying to, when there's a random page-break   >


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 12, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Don't give up that day job now


I thought adding that clunky Arsenal Anthem at the end was a good punchline man


----------



## Ming (Sep 13, 2019)

More Brexit murkiness. Anyone heard of Black Swan? It's the code name of a more severe outcome scenario than Yellow Hammer that's been discussed apparently. It's being denied of course.
No-Deal Brexit Risks Food, Fuel and Drugs Shortages, Leaked U.K. Files Say


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 13, 2019)

Was it written by Charlie Brooker? I can imagine his outlook on things being a bit distopian.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 13, 2019)

Ming said:


> More Brexit murkiness. Anyone heard of Black Swan? It's the code name of a more severe outcome scenario than Yellow Hammer that's been discussed apparently. It's being denied of course.
> No-Deal Brexit Risks Food, Fuel and Drugs Shortages, Leaked U.K. Files Say


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 13, 2019)

"After the release of the Black Swan report, leaked files suggested the existence of a third outcome scenario, code-named Brown Trousers..."


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2019)

The fact they’ve called it “black swan” indicates to me that they are trying to imagine the unimaginable in order to construct mitigation strategies rather than envisage a credible scenario.  A black swan event means something gamechanging that nobody saw coming because it wasn’t in the data.  Risk professionals try to play those out all the time in major project planning precisely to avoid being caught out on the hop.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> trying to imagine the unimaginable



"Brexit goes smoothly, Britain enters new age of prosperity, Normandy requests to rejoin England, Boris Johnson hailed as greatest prime minister of all time."


----------



## Ming (Sep 13, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "After the release of the Black Swan report, leaked files suggested the existence of a third outcome scenario, code-named Brown Trousers..."


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The fact they’ve called it “black swan” indicates to me that they are trying to imagine the unimaginable in order to construct mitigation strategies rather than envisage a credible scenario.  A black swan event means something gamechanging that nobody saw coming because it wasn’t in the data.  Risk professionals try to play those out all the time in major project planning precisely to avoid being caught out on the hop.



We've had this conversation before but I still feel the name is inaccurate.  If its a black swan then by its nature its entirely unpredictable.


----------



## Ming (Sep 13, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "Brexit goes smoothly, Britain enters new age of prosperity, Normandy requests to rejoin England, Boris Johnson hailed as greatest prime minister of all time."


I'm guessing they're trying be clever by calling it Black Swan because of that Taleb book.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 13, 2019)

I want to read the white rabbit scenario


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2019)

Rightly or wrongly, “black swan” has just now become standard terminology for imagining extreme events.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 13, 2019)

Black dog scenario: everything stays the same


----------



## brogdale (Sep 13, 2019)

Black market-based scenario: everything gets worse


----------



## andysays (Sep 13, 2019)

Johnson/Cummings' new motto

Imagine the unimaginable; think the unthinkable; achieve the unachievable


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 13, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I want to read the white rabbit scenario



Well, good news! 

Thanks to established smuggling routes the supply of illegal chems is probably the only thing that will be unaffected by Brexit.  Acid for all!  We're going to need it.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 13, 2019)

Was only thinking this the other day when the LP suggested it would move towards a 4-day week policy. 
Why the lack of ambition? If they had their own Cummings it would be opening with a call for the 1-day week.
Whatever happened to 'demand the impossible'?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Rightly or wrongly, “black swan” has just now become standard terminology for imagining extreme events.



"Rightly or wrongly"

Pick a side man.  This is urban.  Its going to be a long day at work otherwise.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 13, 2019)

To back up kabbes, I did a 'black swan' exercise at Shrivenham recently that put together a ridiculous combination of _incredibly _unlikely, but theoretically possible events - I won't use the actual exercise but it was on a similar level as the idea that Russia could spend 6 months training the hell out of its military, taking a month to resupply and fix everything, then mobilising its entire regular and reserve force without a single intelligence gathering agency in Europe or the states noticing, invading the Baltic States and Poland, and at the same time every single NATO weapon system stopped working _and _some 90% of the Armed Forces outing themselves as being Russian sleeper agents.

At which stage we're back to being King Harold's Shield Wall at Hastings.

This exercise wasn't designed to simulate any kind of potential reality for which there is an actionable solution, it's an exercise to learn about the organisation and what it does when faced with impossible challenges - _that _is then used to inform your response to _possible/probable _challenges.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2019)

The trouble is that people will either misunderstand or purposely misreport this kind of thing. It’s like if I planned for what we would do if a meteorite hit and the papers then ran a story saying “kabbes expects a meteorite to hit!”


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 13, 2019)




----------



## killer b (Sep 13, 2019)

I think the black swan planning is only really being discussed to knock a hole in the government's contention that the yellowhammer doc is a worst case scenario tbf


----------



## kabbes (Sep 13, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think the black swan planning is only really being discussed to knock a hole in the government's contention that the yellowhammer doc is a worst case scenario tbf


The government said it was their realistic worst case.  I think that's reasonable enough in principle.  You can have unrealistic bad day scenarios too in order to kick the tyres, as per kebabking .


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> “kabbes expects a meteorite to hit!”


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 184033


69 days - or less - till johnson gets his marching orders


----------



## Winot (Sep 13, 2019)

Ming said:


> I'm guessing they're trying be clever by calling it Black Swan because of that Taleb book.



Probably not because of the Aronofsky film.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2019)

The Black Swan in Ockham was always known as the Mucky Duck

*taps nose


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 13, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "Brexit goes smoothly, Britain enters new age of prosperity, Normandy requests to rejoin England, Boris Johnson hailed as greatest prime minister of all time."


you've seen a future issue of the volkischer beobachter


----------



## belboid (Sep 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The Black Swan in Ockham was always known as the Mucky Duck
> 
> *taps nose


as was the one in Sheffield, where The Clash played their first gig.

I'd guess 99% of pubs called The Black Swan were also called the Mucky Duck.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> as was hjte one in Sheffield, where The Clash played their first gig.
> 
> I'd guess 99% of pubs called The Black Swan were also called the Mucky Duck.



The one in Ockham was a favourite haunt of the Hells Angels and a convoy meeting point for us cheesy-quavers back in the day, has now been tarted up and I imagine that no one calls that place the mucky duck any more


----------



## belboid (Sep 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The one in Ockham was a favourite haunt of the Hells Angels and a convoy meeting point for us cheesy-quavers back in the day, has now been tarted up and I imagine that no one calls that place the mucky duck any more


I bet they serve Mucky Duck with razor clams for £35 a plate.  Or, more likely, a slate.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 13, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The one in Ockham was a favourite haunt of the Hells Angels and a convoy meeting point for us cheesy-quavers back in the day, has now been tarted up and I imagine that no one calls that place the mucky duck any more


And it used to have a parrot. I did hear that if it shat in your beer, you'd get a free refill.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 13, 2019)

belboid said:


> as was the one in Sheffield, where The Clash played their first gig.
> 
> I'd guess 99% of pubs called The Black Swan were also called the Mucky Duck.


Think I'm still banned from one in Heywood.


----------



## gosub (Sep 13, 2019)

For the Record: signs of trouble before David Cameron book hits shelves

“We will probably get one or two people asking for it but I’m not going to make a big thing – we might get firebombed,” said Jane Howe, the owner of the Broadway Bookshop in Hackney.   Interesting statement.  I wonder what Heinrich Heine would think?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 13, 2019)

The foreigner’s guide to what the f**k has happened to Britain

*FOREIGN? Then you’re probably wondering why the mother of parliaments is collapsing like an Albanian pyramid scheme. We try to explain:  

Who is leader of the UK?*

In theory, it’s Boris Johnson, who you can tell apart from other politicians because he looks like a child transforming into his evil self in front of a funhouse mirror. In practice, it appears to be Dominic Cummings, a shadowy political strategist hoping to play Jafar in a regional tour of _Aladdin. _


*Who is the opposition?*

Technically it’s Jeremy Corbyn, but he is so far below anyone’s radar that many think him just an unsettling dream. In opposition to the Conservative Party are the slightly less mad bits of the Conservative party. Eastern Europeans from one-party states may remember the kind of thing.

*Is there going to be an election?*

As things stand British politics is so flamboyantly corrupt it is almost Italian, and Britons wouldn’t be surprised if Boris Johnson turned Westminster into his own personal Bunga-Bunga palace for a Channel 5 reality series. But probably.

*Are you ever going to do Brexit?*

It is beginning to feel like Brexit cannot be done. But they said that about colonising Mars, which also cannot be done.

*Should I be glad I don’t live there?*

Yes.


----------



## alsoknownas (Sep 13, 2019)

What does Arlene Foster mean by this - "We will not support any arrangements that create a barrier to East West trade."?


----------



## Winot (Sep 13, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> What does Arlene Foster mean by this - "We will not support any arrangements that create a barrier to East West trade."?



Doesn’t want NI-only backstop because that shifts border to Irish Sea and means NI is treated differently in trade terms to GB.


----------



## tommers (Sep 13, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The government said it was their realistic worst case.  I think that's reasonable enough in principle.  You can have unrealistic bad day scenarios too in order to kick the tyres, as per kebabking .


They didn't. They said it was the "base" scenario.

And then changed it to "worst case".


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 13, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> What does Arlene Foster mean by this - "We will not support any arrangements that create a barrier to East West trade."?



It's a soundbite, nothing more.

The DUP, seeing their poll ratings drop, and under pressure from their own members/voters & NI businesses, they are back-tracking a bit, but need to cover their arses.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 13, 2019)

Does anybody more knowledgeable on the north of ireland have any idea of how the next assembly elections in 2022 are likely to go? Is support for DUP solid or will they see vote eaten by another unionist party like UUP (or even lose votes to the likes of Alliance)?


----------



## alsoknownas (Sep 13, 2019)

Why the term 'East West', is that to stop having to say 'Ireland' or something?  Is it a bit like when people say 'The Six Counties', or The Island of Ireland?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 13, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Why the term 'East West', is that to stop having to say 'Ireland' or something?  Is it a bit like when people say 'The Six Counties', or The Island of Ireland?


Yeah it's cos Ulster is British. It's just west a bit is all.


----------



## alsoknownas (Sep 13, 2019)




----------



## N_igma (Sep 13, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Does anybody more knowledgeable on the north of ireland have any idea of how the next assembly elections in 2022 are likely to go? Is support for DUP solid or will they see vote eaten by another unionist party like UUP (or even lose votes to the likes of Alliance)?



Recent polling suggests that they are under threat in 3 of their Westminster seats with the Alliance Party seemingly the ones to beat them. Also talk of parties uniting to put forward single Remain candidates to oust them. 

Assembly elections are different, there’s always the personality effect with people voting for candidates based on that rather than party allegiance. The UUP are pretty much done as a party and have been on a downward trajectory for 15 odd years. I wouldn’t be surprised if they work out a deal with the DUP to create one unified Unionist Party in the coming years because that’s the only hope Unionism will have with all the demographic changes that are happening. 

Despite all this the DUP still rule the roost when it comes to getting the Unionist vote and Unionist voters have yet to punish the party even through all the recent scandals they’ve been involved in. So I don’t see any drastic changes to the status quo for the foreseeable future.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 13, 2019)

Esther wants to know if you're a Re-leaver?


----------



## Supine (Sep 13, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> What does Arlene Foster mean by this - "We will not support any arrangements that create a barrier to East West trade."?



She should vote for remain


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 13, 2019)

BBC News - People's Vote: Hundreds at Newport rally for new EU referendum
Hundreds attend rally for new EU referendum

Adam Price (Plaid Cymru leader and self described socialist), awful tory wanker Guto Bebb, Owen Smith, and Anna Soubry.

It's getting like the states where parties mean shit isn't it


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 14, 2019)

“You’re lining up with Boris Johnson”


----------



## Ming (Sep 14, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Esther wants to know if you're a Re-leaver?
> 
> View attachment 184105


She lied to me to my face once and i called her on it (West Wirral 2005).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Tbh loads of middle class university challenge sensible centre types doing street stalls and emergency callouts and demanding general strikes is a political development I wouldn't have forecast a few years back



Now now, don't be dissing the University Challenge. Pickman's model and former Urbanite nemo will get upset.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Fozzie Bear said:


> It was a Brexit party banner and there was just jeering from both sides. A pro-Brexit guy in a wheelchair got told off huffily too.
> 
> it was one of the most middle class things I have seen and I have been to a Stockhausen opera.
> 
> ...



Fortunate Lisa didn't spot Grayling then. Last time I had a drink with her - a meeting about council housing in May - she referred to him as "that pretentious cunt".  She may have also made remarks about Harmony Hair Spray and Grayling, too.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Where do people even buy combat trousers these days, is there a stockpile somewhere



Army surplus, or Next.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Who dares occupy our Queen? She can trace her ancestry back to cerdic, first king of wessex, and beyond him back to woden



Pfft. She can trace her ancestry back to some chancer called Sir Dick, who humped her Hanoverian great-great-grandmother, twice removed. Promiscuous, those Krauts.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 182412



He's spunked down the leg of his strides. Mason has become a parody of himself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Fairly sure our parliamentary democracy was a bag of shit 50+ years ago too tbf



It's always been a bag of shit, so add another 300 years to your 50.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 14, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> Now now, don't be dissing the University Challenge. Pickman's model and former Urbanite nemo will get upset.


No i won't


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 14, 2019)

Ming said:


> She lied to me to my face once and i called her on it (West Wirral 2005).



By coincidence, I did the same with her odious, racist father-in-law.
Doncaster 2010.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No i won't



Spoilsport bastard!


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No i won't


Any screen-shot/images of the glorious event(s?)?


----------



## treelover (Sep 14, 2019)

Apologies if posted up thread, this woman was great, incisive, not losing her temper, etc.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 14, 2019)

Might be better on the monster twat thread treelover which is specific to Johnson.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 14, 2019)

Many, many EU flags and hats at the Last Night of the Proms.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 14, 2019)

Almost everything about the LNotP makes me want to be sick.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 14, 2019)

_wider still and wider_
Lebensraum


----------



## Wilf (Sep 14, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Almost everything about the LNotP makes me want to be sick.


Do they still have the conductor doing a deranged 'comedy' routine with the audience?

Fucking hell, it's the cuntocracy at play.


----------



## Ming (Sep 15, 2019)

Love these guys.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 15, 2019)

Ming said:


> Love these guys.



I lasted 3 minutes. When does it stop being shit?


----------



## Humberto (Sep 15, 2019)

Cunt


----------



## Gaia (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Esther wants to know if you're a Re-leaver?
> 
> View attachment 184105



As a homeless disabled person, I'd fucking love to see it 're-leaved' of its job! I honestly can't think of a politician I loathe more (not even BJ). She's been moved around all the cabinet positions where she can do the most damage to the lives of the most vulnerable (I'm honestly surprised she wasn't given the Home Office to fuck up).


----------



## Gaia (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Esther wants to know if you're a Re-leaver?
> 
> View attachment 184105



Anyone else wondering if these "remain-voting, but now leave" friends of Esther's exist anywhere but in her imagination…? I struggle to imagine her having any…


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I lasted 3 minutes. When does it stop being shit?


Never


----------



## brogdale (Sep 15, 2019)

I'll just leave this here...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

Quick UK, you're going to miss the empire balloon



(apols for source of course)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I'll just leave this here...
> 
> View attachment 184216


Great stuff, exceptional


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Quick UK, you're going to miss the empire balloon


I had to watch that twice to make sure it really was a call for a new european empire


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I had to watch that twice to make sure it really was a call for a new european empire


Invited to do so and applauded for doing so by an audience of lib-dems.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Invited to do so and applauded for doing so by an audience of lib-dems.


When they revoke, maybe we'll have a 'national' day of celebration on the 2nd Monday in March. It could be called....


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> When they revoke, maybe we'll have a 'national' day of celebration on the 2nd Monday in March. It could be called....


Empire Day Two: Electric Boogaloo


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

Good: empire
Bad: imperial measurments


----------



## brogdale (Sep 15, 2019)

Swinson should propose a referendum to decide which of the world empires we join.
#Brempire


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

#LibDempire


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 15, 2019)

_Brexit voters were too stupid to know what they were voting for_


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

Day Two of LibDem conference: why we need a post-graduate junta


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 15, 2019)




----------



## Flavour (Sep 15, 2019)

Next step: retake Hong Kong


----------



## chilango (Sep 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> #LibDempire


#limpire


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

_Make two, theee many Congos._


----------



## rekil (Sep 15, 2019)

The only plausible choice for emperor.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

Get the chinese and indians before they get us


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 15, 2019)

Nice little snide aside about the USA being a Spanish speaking country too


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Nice little snide aside about the USA being a Spanish speaking country too


He says the EU empire is needed to defend the european way of life - both a dog whistle and an obvious attempt to thieve the very idea of europe for the EU. The nutter has also been very vocal in his support for Macron's plan for an Imperial EU army.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He says the EU empire is needed to defend the european way of life - both a dog whistle and an obvious attempt to thieve the very idea of europe for the EU. The nutter has also been very vocal in his support for Macron's plan for an Imperial EU army.


Rejection of the EU as a political state is inherently racist though


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Rejection of the EU as a political state is inherently racist though


An act of pure anti-empire prejudice. Something i thought we had moved well beyond. Maybe we're just not as illiberal as we all like to think we are?


----------



## philosophical (Sep 15, 2019)

On Andrew Marr this morning Priti Patel said that from November 1st there would be extra checks on people at the borders.
So she has a 300+ mile land border between the EU and the UK to contend with and 46 days to set up those checks.
I don't know how she will do it, but she did say negotiations were secret. Maybe she has consulted everybody who voted leave for an answer and one of them has supplied the solution.
Or maybe the Queen of Smirk will realise no border means no brexit.
Priti Patel can enjoy the special ministerial benefits whilst she can, I don't see them lasting.
I find her to be one of the nastiest of the lot of them.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> On Andrew Marr this morning Priti Patel said that from November 1st there would be extra checks on people at the borders.
> So she has a 300+ mile land border between the EU and the UK to contend with and 46 days to set up those checks.



Not on the Irish border, both sides are part of the 'common travel area', which has been in place long before the EU, you plonker.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 15, 2019)

The common travel area situation has been altered somewhat by both countries joining the EU, the violent troubles, and the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, and now the brexit victory.
I think the political landscape is different now to when the common travel area was established in the 1920's.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The common travel area situation has been altered somewhat by both countries joining the EU, the violent troubles, and the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement, and now the brexit victory.
> I think the political landscape is different now to when the common travel area was established in the 1920's.



The common travel area will continue whether we leave the EU with or without a deal, you plonker.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The common travel area will continue whether we leave the EU with or without a deal, you plonker.


Evidence?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> Evidence?





> If you are a British citizen or an Irish citizen you do not need to take any action to protect your status and rights associated with the CTA. After the UK leaves the EU, you will continue to enjoy these rights, no matter what the terms of the UK’s exit. Both the UK and Irish Governments have committed to taking all necessary measures to ensure that the agreed CTA rights and privileges are protected in all outcomes.
> 
> Common Travel Area Guidance



Have you any evidence to suggest otherwise?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

CTA is a tricky one tbf cos it has never been formally binding and UK did ignore it for a while. But wasn't there some sort of agreement reached a few months ago between UK and ROI about british and irish nationals with or without an EU trade agreement?


----------



## belboid (Sep 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Have you any evidence to suggest otherwise?


This is all true, although there are a few people on the island who are neither British nor Irish citizens who might occasionally wish to cross the border.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

Anyway getting bogged down in legislation etc is mostly pointless. Would the UK want to have to try and enforce an unenforceable land border, no, so will they, well it's very unlikely isn't it


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> ... wasn't there some sort of agreement reached a few months ago between UK and ROI about british and irish nationals with or without an EU trade agreement?



Yes. 



belboid said:


> This is all true, although there are a few people on the island who are neither British nor Irish citizens who might occasionally wish to cross the border.



Which isn't a problem, as none of the states within the CTA are part of the schengen area.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 15, 2019)

belboid said:


> This is all true, although there are a few people on the island who are neither British nor Irish citizens who might occasionally wish to cross the border.



Currently a Russian in the UK with a UK visa needs a separate visa to visit the Republic of Ireland, in spite of the CTA. Nothing will change for that person. A French person in the Republic of Ireland will have had to show a passport or ID card to enter the Republic from France, that also won’t change. What will change for the French person is that they won’t be able to enter the UK to take up work without UK approval.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He says the EU empire is needed to defend the european way of life - both a dog whistle and an obvious attempt to thieve the very idea of europe for the EU. The nutter has also been very vocal in his support for Macron's plan for an Imperial EU army.



This. This is what Lloyd Russell-Moyle, Clive Lewis, Paul Mason, Tom Watson and the rest are fighting for. No more ‘remain and reform’ fantasy. It’s this. Nothing more. Corbyn needs to decide if he is or isn’t.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 15, 2019)

It's all over.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's all over.





The LibDems always make promises they can't keep, knowing they'll not form a government.

Although, they tripped themselves up by forming the coalition government, the twats.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's all over.
> 
> View attachment 184251


That if carrying a lot of weight there


----------



## treelover (Sep 15, 2019)

PARDON?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> That if carrying a lot of weight there


Oh, that?
Hmm


----------



## kebabking (Sep 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The LibDems always make promises they can't keep, knowing they'll not form a government.
> 
> Although, they tripped themselves up by forming the coalition government, the twats.



Nah, going into coalition means they can dump the unicorns crap that they use to pull in the loons and fantasists. It's an excellent strategy.


----------



## existentialist (Sep 15, 2019)

treelover said:


> PARDON?


Granted, but if you could open a window for a bit...


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2019)

S☼I said:


> He means _for his people_



Yep, ye olde _haut bourgeoisie_.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 15, 2019)

Brainaddict said:


> Maybe it depends where you are. I dare you to go into any of the Aldis or Lidls around me in South London and tell people they're middle class...



True. Most of them - including me - would reply somewhere along the lines of "you fucking what, you cunt?", then smack you round the head with a 2l bottle of snide cola.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I had to watch that twice to make sure it really was a call for a new european empire


Same.
Made the mistake of sharing it with a remain voter thinking some common ground could be had.
Snowballed into a bun fight. When will it not be too soon.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> True. Most of them - including me - would reply somewhere along the lines of "you fucking what, you cunt?", then smack you round the head with a 2l bottle of snide cola.


Haha, incidentally I was in Lidls earlier and had considered taking a picture of the clientele, that two pages of craziness in my mind. The Lidls shopping bill is half that of Tesco but if you are having a more flush day it’s easier to avoid it because of all the fucking double backing you have to do along their aisles. Shopping is bad enough without having to think about your trajectory. That and the veg goes off much sooner. Two main gripes I’ve heard- foreign muck. Less so. If ever.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Same.
> Made the mistake of sharing it with a remain voter thinking some common ground could be had.
> Snowballed into a bun fight. When will it not be too soon.


I've got some hardcore remainers in my family and social circle. Don't discuss shit any more. Even quite bland and uncontroversial criticisms without stating an overall position on leaving or remaining ends up with being accused of falling for a bus advert or being a Farageist so why bother, I save it for online where I don't care if somebody sees their arse.


----------



## kenny g (Sep 15, 2019)

Aldi on a Saturday deserves an Ian Dury tune methinks..


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 15, 2019)

Some of the remainers in my family would probably be quite keen on the idea of being in an Iron Europe, steadfast in defence of its culture and heritage against the Muslim hordes. There's no way I am going anywhere near that though. I have in the past pretended to be asleep.


----------



## kenny g (Sep 15, 2019)

Aldi on a Saturday night
all the ones looking for a fight
chicken with blood 
bruised broken bones
flesh sagging
girls hanging
trolleys pushing
where's the biscuits?
might be a bargain
if you can afford it
what you looking for?
give the boy space 
no, no, no, no , no
you don't need it.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

Apparently there might be a flaw in the Benn act:


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 15, 2019)

This sort of apocalyptic fascist dream is par for the course now though isn't it? The EU, the no-deal loons in government here, the US, Australia... it's not yet completely dominant but it's well into the realms of "acceptable" and is getting worse. When climate change really starts to bite, with the ensuing population movements, it will probably go to insane levels if it's left alone now.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Apparently there might be a flaw in the Benn act:


Rambling garbage from a pro-EU loon.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Rambling garbage from a pro-EU loon.


how is he incorrect?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 15, 2019)

To be incorrect he would have to have a argument that was coherent - something that seems beyond the knob. _If some people behave in a way they aren't likely to then something might cause something else to happen! Support the EU! _


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Rambling garbage from a pro-EU loon.


But he’s clearly shown he’s only a footstep behind The Legal Experts!


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> To be incorrect he would have to have a argument that was coherent - something that seems beyond the knob. _If some people behave in a way they aren't likely to then something might cause something else to happen! Support the EU! _


Let's try this again: he claims there is a loophole in the legislation. If he is mistaken please explain how. Preferrably without the abuse.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> But he’s clearly shown he’s only a footstep behind The Legal Experts!


While crying over John 'Hang Nelson Mandela' Bercow standing down. Definitely someone to listen to.


----------



## gosub (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Rambling garbage from a pro-EU loon.



I do see it very differently, but interesting non the less.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 15, 2019)

kenny g said:


> Aldi on a Saturday deserves an Ian Dury tune methinks..


Part 4 ?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> While crying over John 'Hang Nelson Mandela' Bercow standing down. Definitely someone to listen to.


Prior to that Bercow was also secretary of the Immigrant and Repatriation Committee in the Monday Club. (believing in “assisted repatriation”). He views his time there and views as “boneheaded”. That was in 82, it was in 86 he chaired the Federation of Conservative Students. 
But he’s definitely sorry now.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

But we were all twats in our youth.
24 years old he was saying hang Nelson Mandela eh.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 15, 2019)

> Peter Hain, whose parents fled to the UK after becoming 'banned persons' in South Africa due to their opposition to the racist regime, held old Tory sympathisers to account in the most aggressive speech of the day.
> 
> His targets included Speaker John Bercow, who was chairman of the pro-apartheid Federation of Conservative Students before he drifted to the left.
> 
> "You, Mr Speaker, were on the wrong side of the apartheid argument," Hain told the Speaker, who nodded gravely.





> The former Labour minister credited Bercow with renouncing his past and praised David Cameron for apologising for the Tory party's previous support for apartheid.


He is a cunt & was a bigger one in the past. does not mean he is not upholding his office.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

MrSki said:


> He is a cunt & was a bigger one in the past. does not mean he is not upholding his office.


Well you’ve moved slightly and admitted he’s a cunt in the present. Progress!


----------



## Ming (Sep 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Apparently there might be a flaw in the Benn act:



That guy’s really good. I’m a subscriber.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Well you’ve moved slightly and admitted he’s a cunt in the present. Progress!


He is the only speaker that the HOC has & in recent months I would say he has been playing a blinder. Probably because I have agreed with his rulings. 
If this makes me a hypocrite then fair enough.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 15, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> To be incorrect he would have to have a argument that was coherent - something that seems beyond the knob. _If some people behave in a way they aren't likely to then something might cause something else to happen! Support the EU! _


How is anything in that video remotely incoherent? 

He's a 'knob' because you disagree with him, yet can't even articulate why?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

My general advice would be to not get news or views or anything really from youtube. Imo there is only one thing youtube is good for and that's putting peppa pig videos on for long car journeys. Even with my entire history being peppa videos it keeps recommending peadopie to me. Terrible website full of blaggers and dickheads. Cheers.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

And anybody with a patreon is by definition a dickhead


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

MrSki said:


> He is the only speaker that the HOC has & in recent months I would say he has been playing a blinder. Probably because I have agreed with his rulings.
> If this makes me a hypocrite then fair enough.


So how much of a cunt would he have to be before you ditched “he’s the only speaker the HOC has” defence. Where is your red line Mr Ski?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> And anybody with a patreon is by definition a dickhead


Pay me to say that.


Here is why. Just death


----------



## MrSki (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> So how much of a cunt would he have to be before you ditched “he’s the only speaker the HOC has” defence. Where is your red line Mr Ski?


Well I doubt I am as forgiving as Nelson Mandela but as he is the only speaker of the HOC I am not sure. Back in the day when I spent a good few nights in Trafalgar Sq. outside SA House I would have been all for stringing him up.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> My general advice would be to not get news or views or anything really from youtube. Imo there is only one thing youtube is good for and that's putting peppa pig videos on for long car journeys. Even with my entire history being peppa videos it keeps recommending peadopie to me. Terrible website full of blaggers and dickheads. Cheers.


I don’t think I’ve ever had Pew Die recommended to me


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I don’t think I’ve ever had Pew Die recommended to me


I get recommended him and loads of bitcoin stuff. I've cleared history and cookies in case it was caused by clicking a link somewhere or something, but no still get same recommendations when all my history is just kids videos


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Well I doubt I am as forgiving as Nelson Mandela but as he is the only speaker of the HOC I am not sure. Back in the day when I spent a good few nights in Trafalgar Sq. outside SA House I would have been all for stringing him up.


So, exactly the amount as him. Fuck off.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I get recommended him and loads of bitcoin stuff. I've cleared history and cookies in case it was caused by clicking a link somewhere or something, but no still get same recommendations when all my history is just kids videos


Must be some weird fetish. Like all these unwitting owners of Pampas Grass. 


Of course.... PIGS!


----------



## rekil (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> all my history is just kids videos


Someone on here had part of one of their posts screenied by Sky news and read out by Kay Burley a few years ago. C'mon Kay do this one.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

This tugging board.


----------



## stdP (Sep 15, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I've cleared history and cookies in case it was caused by clicking a link somewhere or something



<derail>
<tinfoil>
Modern day analytics don't rely on inspecting your history or cookies, if you don't run an ad-blocker and/or a script blocker they just use browser fingerprinting or cookies sourced from analytics domains.

* This very web page attempts to load tracking scripts from googletagmanager.com, one of the friendly rebrands of google analytics. Any web page you visit that you let load any scripts from google analytics automatically knows every other site you've visited that loads any scripts from google analytics, which is most of the pages on the internet
</derail>


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> This tugging board.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

stdP said:


> <derail>
> <tinfoil>
> Modern day analytics don't relay on inspecting your history or cookies, if you don't run an ad-blocker and/or a script blocker they just use browser fingerprinting or cookies sourced from analytics domains.
> 
> ...


Oh yeah cause your ebay buys turn up on Facebook etc


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 15, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> View attachment 184294


} 
They're coming. Useful and not a death trap


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 15, 2019)

stdP said:


> <derail>
> <tinfoil>
> Modern day analytics don't relay on inspecting your history or cookies, if you don't run an ad-blocker and/or a script blocker they just use browser fingerprinting or cookies sourced from analytics domains.
> 
> ...


I never look for bitcoin or ironic gamer racists elsewhere on internet though


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 15, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> }
> They're coming. Useful and not a death trap



 

I’m sorry I’ll stop


----------



## kabbes (Sep 15, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Let's try this again: he claims there is a loophole in the legislation. If he is mistaken please explain how. Preferrably without the abuse.


He spends so much time interrupting himself, it’s hard to figure out what the hell he is claiming.  But he seems to be saying that Johnson will bring back a three times refused deal, that this time it will pass and that then he will somehow prorogue parliament again despite having no justification for it.

I’m quaking.


----------



## gosub (Sep 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> He spends so much time interrupting himself, it’s hard to figure out what the hell he is claiming.  But he seems to be saying that Johnson will bring back a three times refused deal, that this time it will pass and that then he will somehow prorogue parliament again despite having no justification for it.
> 
> I’m quaking.


When does the boat happy rule kick in?


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 15, 2019)

kabbes said:


> He spends so much time interrupting himself, it’s hard to figure out what the hell he is claiming.  But he seems to be saying that Johnson will bring back a three times refused deal, that this time it will pass and that then he will somehow prorogue parliament again despite having no justification for it.
> 
> I’m quaking.



I agree that the specific scenario described in the video seems far fetched but in general terms that a desperate Tory administration could try and run the clock down with legal challenges over parliamentary procedure with No Deal as the default seems exactly what they would try to do.


----------



## stdP (Sep 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I never look for bitcoin or ironic gamer racists elsewhere on internet though



There's a world of difference between what you actually want and what they think they can convince you to waste your clicks and advertising views on...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

stdP said:


> There's a world of difference between what you actually want and what they think they can convince you to waste your clicks on...


Analytics are even more shit than those AI things that seemingly learned from people talking to them. I mean they keep telling you to buy things you already bought, plus they don’t know if you clicked on something out of interest or out of morbid curiosity- and going by some of the posts on here people often look for the latter more than the former. The brexiteers are saying this.  What’s the daily mail take on it? 
Maybe all the remain voters got those targeted posts from the Russians


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

The flaw in the Benn Act

How is Maugham a loon? He’s the prorogation lawyer.

That said, while I’m sure the technicalities he describes are accurate, I don’t think even Johnson would be stupid enough to go for no deal after actually getting a deal through. I’m pretty sure he’d prefer a deal...


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> The flaw in the Benn Act
> 
> How is Maugham a loon? He’s the prorogation lawyer.
> 
> That said, while I’m sure the technicalities he describes are accurate, I don’t think even Johnson would be stupid enough to go for no deal after actually getting a deal through. I’m pretty sure he’d prefer a deal...


I think it’s the second point RS was getting at, though i could be wrong, I usually am. It’s not Maugham he called a loon anyhow.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> The flaw in the Benn Act
> 
> How is Maugham a loon? He’s the prorogation lawyer.
> 
> That said, while I’m sure the technicalities he describes are accurate, I don’t think even Johnson would be stupid enough to go for no deal after actually getting a deal through. I’m pretty sure he’d prefer a deal...


He is a twat though.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> He is a twat though.


I like him


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I like him


UGHHH!
Haha... I’ve just read his blog- I see the guy who made the video took that and ran all over the shop with it. What Maugham is actually doing is just pushing for revoking article 50 citing DANGEROUS flaws. That’s just Maugham’s agenda, always has been. The video man put on the tinfoil hat.

Edit: sorry, actually they both sort of have. But Maugham is just bullshitting, with “circumstantial evidence” that seems a massive stretch, so now he’s explained to a PM he thinks is desperate to get a no deal precisely how to do it. And video man reports this as “CUMMINGS AND JOHNSON ARE NOW AWARE”


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> UGHHH!
> Haha... I’ve just read his blog- I see the guy who made the video took that and ran all over the shop with it. What Maugham is actually doing is just pushing for revoking article 50 citing DANGEROUS flaws. That’s just Maugham’s agenda, always has been. The video man put on the tinfoil hat.


Ha my bad I didn’t actually watch the video - just saw the headline and assumed it referred to the blog post I’d read... 
just clicked on the video and he does seem a bit loony!


----------



## stdP (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Analytics are even more shit than those AI things that seemingly learned from people talking to them. I mean they keep telling you to buy things you already bought



AI and most of the rest of the nonsensoleum coming out of places like google is lipstick on the rapidly decomposing pig of online marketing revenue that is in a steep decline (and has been for years, but they have to keep up the pretence to maintain their share prices).

(My last post on this derail in this thread I promise, anyone interested in further musings should probably make a thread in computer or DrJazzz conspiraloon dustbin or something )


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

stdP said:


> AI and most of the rest of the nonsensoleum coming out of places like google is lipstick on the rapidly decomposing pig of online marketing revenue that is in a steep decline (and has been for years, but they have to keep up the pretence to maintain their share prices).
> 
> (My last post on this derail in this thread I promise, anyone interested in further musings should probably make a thread in computer or DrJazzz conspiraloon dustbin or something )


Don’t mention old posters comrade. Urban will have you hung by sunrise


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Edit: sorry, actually they both sort of have. But Maugham is just bullshitting, with “circumstantial evidence” that seems a massive stretch, so now he’s explained to a PM he thinks is desperate to get a no deal precisely how to do it. And video man reports this as “CUMMINGS AND JOHNSON ARE NOW AWARE”


Yeah it’s circumstantial, and also maybe not what they’ve got planned, but technically it does sound like a loophole?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Yeah it’s circumstantial, and also maybe not what they’ve got planned, but technically it does sound like a loophole?


Aye it does. But I’m less convinced it’s all part of the plan.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Yeah it’s circumstantial, and also maybe not what they’ve got planned, but technically it does sound like a loophole?


I mean the evidence Boris has planned this- supposedly backed up by circumstantial stuff at the end of the blog? Naaaaah


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Aye it does. But I’m less convinced it’s all part of the plan.


Maugham is probably just worried that BoZo will actually get “may plus” through and is trying to make sure MPs don’t vote for it..


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Maugham is probably just worried that BoZo will actually get “may plus” through and is trying to make sure MPs don’t vote for it..


Aye, plus revoke as default. Totally.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

I still like him though


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I still like him though


You’re on the list of substitutes for the list. ONE MORE TRANSGESSION.....


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I think it’s the second point RS was getting at, though i could be wrong, I usually am. It’s not Maugham he called a loon anyhow.


No that's an accurate summary of my point. Maugham is not a loon just a liberal prick (who BTW _advises_ Bright Blue, "an independent think tank and pressure group for liberal conservatism", lovely). Moorhouse is a ignoramus.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 16, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No that's an accurate summary of my point. Maugham is not a loon just a liberal prick (who BTW _advises_ Bright Blue, "an independent think tank and pressure group for liberal conservatism", lovely). Moorhouse is a ignoramus.


Oh really? His blog bio says he advised labour  

Edit: Advisory council |  Bright Blue

*cries*


----------



## N_igma (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Oh really? His blog bio says he advised labour



Liberal conservatism aptly describes most of the PLP tbf.


----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Let's try this again: he claims there is a loophole in the legislation. If he is mistaken please explain how. Preferrably without the abuse.


I wouldn't bother mate. The P&P central party caucus is always on message. I've got most of them on ignore (good for the blood pressure). What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked what their 'analysis' will be.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wouldn't bother mate. The P&P central party caucus is always on message. I've got most of them on ignore (good for the blood pressure). What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked what their 'analysis' will be.


You mean a royal fucking is yet to happen to us? I’m not convinced.


----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> You mean a royal fucking is yet to happen to us? I’m not convinced.


More.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> How is Maugham a loon? He’s the prorogation lawyer.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 16, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Oh really? His blog bio says he advised labour
> 
> Edit: Advisory council |  Bright Blue
> 
> *cries*


He did advise Labour too. I should be clear that I'm not arguing that he supports all the politics of Bright Blue, no doubt he'd stress this statement


> Our Advisory Council members are from different political and professional backgrounds. They do not necessarily share our philosophy or all of our policy ideas.


But the fact that he's willing to act as an advisor to such a group does tell you something about his politics. As does this


> In unguarded moments Labour talks about having the desire to effect an “irreversible” change in the country. That is uncomfortable language to use in a democracy. But more than that: we don’t know what that irreversible change looks like.



I'd also note that whatever his legal understanding, his political understanding is very poor indeed. I mean the below is just total twaddle (I said before he wasn't a loon the below does come close to loonery). 


> Labour’s leadership is anxious that we should leave the EU. And I find it hard to rationalise this otherwise than by reference to the fact that it wants to jettison the constraints that the EU represents; *it wants unlimited power to remake the country.* Labour says we need to leave the EU to jettison rules on state aid. But there is nothing in Labour’s 2017 manifesto that EU law would prohibit.


 (my emphasis)


----------



## JimW (Sep 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


>


Jolyon


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 16, 2019)

JimW said:


> Jolyon


I'm begging you please don't take my man


----------



## JimW (Sep 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm begging you please don't take my man


...date


----------



## brogdale (Sep 16, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm begging you please don't take my man



Impressive start to the new week!


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wouldn't bother mate. The P&P central party caucus is always on message. I've got most of them on ignore (good for the blood pressure). What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked what their 'analysis' will be.




We may have no choice but to look forward to that!

I'm increasingly of the view that legislation means fuck all to people like Boris. We all know that the legal consequences may be minimal at best. Sure it means he can't stand as an MP, but that just means a nice sabbatical. He can hang out with his mates, present programmes about the railways or the romans for the BBC, and then, a year or two later, make a return as the brexit hero. Or get a consulting job for Farage Industries or something.

He won't care. They can't physically force his signature and if it doesn't happen we crash out, oopsie!


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 16, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> We may have no choice but to look forward to that!
> 
> I'm increasingly of the view that legislation means fuck all to people like Boris. We all know that the legal consequences may be minimal at best. Sure it means he can't stand as an MP, but that just means a nice sabbatical. He can hang out with his mates, present programmes about the railways or the romans for the BBC, and then, a year or two later, make a return as the brexit hero. Or get a consulting job for Farage Industries or something.
> 
> He won't care. They can't physically force his signature and if it doesn't happen we crash out, oopsie!


There are still lots of things that could happen re brexit, but the UK crashing out because Johnson has defied parliament and refused to seek an extension isn't one of them.


----------



## andysays (Sep 16, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> There are still lots of things that could happen re brexit, but the UK crashing out because Johnson has defied parliament and refused to seek an extension isn't one of them.


Quoted for posterity...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wouldn't bother mate. The P&P central party caucus is always on message. I've got most of them on ignore (good for the blood pressure). What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked what their 'analysis' will be.


That's the spirit.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

What role do you fancy in this EU Empire Ming? Overlord? Sergeant? Recruiter? Loyal Servant?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 16, 2019)

How does Raab actually hold down any kind of paying job ?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Quoted for posterity...


He's right on this one.


----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> We may have no choice but to look forward to that!
> 
> I'm increasingly of the view that legislation means fuck all to people like Boris. We all know that the legal consequences may be minimal at best. Sure it means he can't stand as an MP, but that just means a nice sabbatical. He can hang out with his mates, present programmes about the railways or the romans for the BBC, and then, a year or two later, make a return as the brexit hero. Or get a consulting job for Farage Industries or something.
> 
> He won't care. They can't physically force his signature and if it doesn't happen we crash out, oopsie!


There's no oopsie in this situation. It's all planned. Like the short positions on sterling.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

Wow, imagine if super rich people made money from the UK voting to stay in the EU! Imagine!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> There's no oopsie in this situation. It's all planned. Like the short positions on sterling.


_Soros style._


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Wow, imagine if super rich people made money from the UK voting to stay in the EU! Imagine!


it's like that time everyone started thinking William Hill had some kind of super accurate election prediction machine because the betting markets briefly reflected the result of an election better than the polls.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> it's like that time everyone started thinking William Hill had some kind of super accurate election prediction machine because the betting markets briefly reflected the result of an election better than the polls.


It wasn't a machine it was soros' number.

Sensible remain types must be shaking their heads these last few day.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> I wouldn't bother mate. The P&P central party caucus is always on message. I've got most of them on ignore (good for the blood pressure). What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked what their 'analysis' will be.


What continues to impress me is how much this issue has been dichotomised into only two choices: you have to _love_  the EU or _love_ the neocon no deal Singapore Brexit. That’s all the options.  It’s like overnight it was decided that people either _love_ anchovies or they _love_ capers. There’s no room for not liking either. There’s no room for thinking they’re both horrible but one is very horrible and the other is very, very, very horrible. Nope. If you don’t love one you have to love the other.

It’s depressing.

For the record, I think the working class will be fucked by either side. That’s my analysis.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What continues to impress me is how much this issue has been dichotomised into only two choices: you have to _love_  the EU or _love_ the neocon no deal Singapore Brexit. That’s all the options.  It’s like overnight it was decided that people either _love_ anchovies or they _love_ capers. There’s no room for not liking either. There’s no room for thinking they’re both horrible but one is very horrible and the other is very, very, very horrible. Nope. If you don’t love one you have to love the other.
> 
> It’s depressing.
> 
> For the record, I think the working class will be fucked by either side. That’s my analysis.


And are being fucked now - i would love to see ming's 'analysis' of the status quo.


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

I love anchovies _and_ capers. WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE ME, LA ROUGE?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> And are being fucked now - i would love to see ming's 'analysis' of the status quo.


Indeed and precisely.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I love anchovies _and_ capers. WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE ME, LA ROUGE?


Typical caper lover. What’s wrong with anchovies, eh?


----------



## Santino (Sep 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What role do you fancy in this EU Empire Ming? Overlord? Sergeant? Recruiter? Loyal Servant?


I fancy colonial-administrator-turned-novelist, like Orwell or something. Or an Imperial poet with a conscience.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

Santino said:


> I fancy colonial-administrator-turned-novelist, like Orwell or something. Or an Imperial poet with a conscience.


Mr Kipling.


----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What continues to impress me is how much this issue has been dichotomised into only two choices: you have to _love_  the EU or _love_ the neocon no deal Singapore Brexit. That’s all the options.  It’s like overnight it was decided that people either _love_ anchovies or they _love_ capers. There’s no room for not liking either. There’s no room for thinking they’re both horrible but one is very horrible and the other is very, very, very horrible. Nope. If you don’t love one you have to love the other.
> 
> It’s depressing.
> 
> For the record, I think the working class will be fucked by either side. That’s my analysis.


That's false equivalency. Of course a no deal Brexit will fuck the working class more than staying in the EU. It's not going to create a political space for the left to flourish. The Murdoch press will take care of that. The EU provides legislation which protects workers. Maybe not as much as you'd like but still. Wait until you see what Dominic Cummings has for you.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Mr Kipling.


If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With loyalty for either smiling boss,
Theirs is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And - which is more - either way, your loss!


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> That's false equivalency. Of course a no deal Brexit will fuck the working class more than staying in the EU. It's not going to create a political space for the left to flourish. The Murdoch press will take care of that. The EU provides legislation which protects workers. Maybe not as much as you'd like but still. Wait until you see what Dominic Cummings has for you.


Do I get to shout "bingo!" now?


----------



## Ming (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Do I get to shout "bingo!" now?


Halloween.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> Halloween.


Mate.  You just did exactly what I complained that people were doing, and then did it again.  You're polarising into imaginary camps.  Have a search of the thread and see if you can find where I've said a no deal Brexit is a good idea.  See if you can find me supporting it.  Go on.

I mean, it's a much easier way to debate.  You just make up your interlocutor's position and argue with that.  Saves time and effort trying to understand where they're coming from.

If that seems unduly sarcastic, it's because I'm fed up with the whole thing.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> That's false equivalency. Of course a no deal Brexit will fuck the working class more than staying in the EU. It's not going to create a political space for the left to flourish. The Murdoch press will take care of that. The EU provides legislation which protects workers. Maybe not as much as you'd like but still. Wait until you see what Dominic Cummings has for you.



tell us more about this political space where the left flourish within the EU


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I love anchovies _and_ capers. WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE ME, LA ROUGE?


Me too. This is almost as disappointing as when danny la rouge dismissed Springsteen


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Me too. This is almost as disappointing as when danny la rouge dismissed Springsteen


I don’t like Van Morrison either.  Although probably that means I do like Springsteen but I just don’t realise it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

I've been trying to get into springsteen recently, and it's a bit of a struggle tbh.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t like Van Morrison either.  Although probably that means I do like Springsteen but I just don’t realise it.


Some things you just keep to yourself.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I've been trying to get into springsteen recently, and it's a bit of a struggle tbh.



Nebraska is good, but only because it doesn't sound like Bruce Springsteen.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 16, 2019)

I prefer _Born in the EUSA_


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

I like some of the big hits - thunder road, born to run, that one he wrote for Patti Smith - but try as I might I can't love whole albums of that stuff.

It may have been a mistake to put Townes Van Zandt on after him, mind - the contrast wasn't a good one for Springsteen


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 16, 2019)

Is there any deal that Boris can get at this point? At all?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I like some of the big hits - thunder road, born to run, that one he wrote for Patti Smith - but try as I might I can't love whole albums of that stuff.
> 
> It may have been a mistake to put Townes Van Zandt on after him, mind - the contrast wasn't a good one for Springsteen


That's what playlists are for. Tag it with a USA flag. Sorted.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Is there any deal that Boris can get at this point? At all?


Spotify premium.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Is there any deal that Boris can get at this point? At all?



Given that he's making no attempts to get a deal, I'd say no.


----------



## Poot (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Spotify premium.


I'm sure he'd somehow fuck it up before it downloaded but i admire your optimism.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Spotify premium.



I wouldn't trust him not to Grayling it and end up with a MySpace Music account instead.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming said:


> There's no oopsie in this situation. It's all planned. Like the short positions on sterling.


Thinking people taking advantage of or benefitting from events, uncertainty, volatility etc is actually wholly planned by a cabal sounds a bit, you know, rothschild lizards and that


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 16, 2019)

If BoZo refuses, as he has told the EU, to request an extension, thereby breaking the law, what are his chances of doing porridge?


----------



## JimW (Sep 16, 2019)

This has made me play Steve Earle for first time in ages. Cheers Boris.


----------



## chilango (Sep 16, 2019)

JimW said:


> This has made me play Steve Earle for first time in ages. Cheers Boris.



Might just do that myself!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 16, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> If BoZo refuses, as he has told the EU, to request an extension, thereby breaking the law, what are his chances of doing porridge?


I'd guess fuck all chance really


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

JimW said:


> This has made me play Steve Earle for first time in ages. Cheers Boris.


Now, that’s a choice I can get onside with. Along with Townes Van Zandt.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 16, 2019)

<places bet on rain tomorrow>

Tomorrow it rains

HE CONTROLS THE WEATEHR!!!!


----------



## andysays (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> If you can fill the unforgiving minute
> With loyalty for either smiling boss,
> Theirs is the Earth and everything that's in it,
> And - which is more - either way, your loss!


Isn't there a joke about an exceedingly good Brexit in there somewhere?


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

andysays said:


> Isn't there a joke about an exceedingly good Brexit in there somewhere?


That takes the biscuit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

No, I don’t mean cake. Biscuit means biscuit.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 16, 2019)

JimW said:


> This has made me play Steve Earle for first time in ages. Cheers Boris.





chilango said:


> Might just do that myself!





danny la rouge said:


> Now, that’s a choice I can get onside with. Along with Townes Van Zandt.


Good idea


----------



## Raheem (Sep 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Is there any deal that Boris can get at this point? At all?


Think if he tried for a 3 for 2 offer at Boots he'd just get the tactics wrong.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t like Van Morrison either.


 Me too. And would this be a good point to suggest Zappa is overrated and that Captain Beefheart was a bit of a daft bastard?

There Brexit, look what you've made me say.


----------



## maomao (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, I don’t mean cake. Biscuit means biscuit.


I reckon their Viennese whirl is a biscuit anyway so your original joke was fine.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Me too. And would this be a good point to suggest Zappa is overrated and that Captain Beefheart was a bit of a daft bastard?
> 
> There Brexit, look what you've made me say.


I love Beefheart, but agree about Zappa.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

_Irk the purists_. But yeah, he's proper shit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _Irk the purists_. But yeah, he's proper shit.


Del Amitri, John Coltrane.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Have a search of the thread and see if you can find where I've said a no deal Brexit is a good idea.  See if you can find me supporting it.  Go on.



Ming is the only one on the thread who wants a No Deal Brexit.



Ming said:


> What i'm really looking forward to is after we crash out and the working class get royally fucked.



Mind you, he might also want a no deal brexit so he doesn't have to cough up for the server fund again.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Now, that’s a choice I can get onside with. Along with Townes Van Zandt.



I would get onside, but I'm just waiting around to die.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, I don’t mean cake. Biscuit means biscuit.



If we become the 51st state of the US, "biscuit" will mean "scone-like thing".


----------



## brogdale (Sep 16, 2019)

I see the Luxys empty chaired the great tub of lard that is the UK's Prime Minister.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> I would get onside, but I'm just waiting around to die.


Nah, keep on rambling, drinking booze and gambling.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 16, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> If we become the 51st state of the US, "biscuit" will mean "scone-like thing".


Biscuit means half man.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 16, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I see the Luxys empty chaired the great tub of lard that is the UK's Prime Minister.
> 
> View attachment 184335



You mean the incredible hulk of lard?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 16, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Biscuit means half man.



There'll be a riot down in Trumpton tonight, if word gets out.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 16, 2019)

ViolentPanda said:


> You mean the incredible hulk of lard?


Last time I buy any of that Luxembourg....er....
#BoycottLuxembourg


----------



## kabbes (Sep 16, 2019)

Ming apparently doesn’t realise that for somebody to short Sterling, somebody else equally capitalist and financially hard nosed had to go long in it.  Derivatives are a zero-sum game.  For somebody to win, somebody else has to lose on the exact same bet.  More realistically, though, both sides are probably just hedging other exposures they have to currency movements.


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

No-one actually rates Zappa anymore do they?


----------



## Serge Forward (Sep 16, 2019)

Serious? Zappa is fuckin mint.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

> No-one actually rates Zappa anymore do they?





] Serge Forward said:


> Serious? Zappa is fuckin mint.



He just goes 'you're stupid' don't he?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 16, 2019)

It's doing weird quote thing - serge and killer sort it out yourself. Lazy.


----------



## killer b (Sep 16, 2019)

You've just deleted a bracket somewhere. I got it though.


----------



## Cloo (Sep 16, 2019)

What a shock! PM of Luxembourg says Johnson didn't come with any new ideas whatsoever for negotiation, who'd a thunk it? etc

Presumably some people might ask how I _dare_ to believe some eurobloke over our esteemed prime minister, but while I know nothing about the PM of Luxembourg, I _do _know that Boris Johnson is a pathological liar.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 16, 2019)

Cloo said:


> , I _do _know that Boris Johnson is a pathological liar.



Yes and very dangerous with it , people still fall for his charming buffon shtick, can't believe it but they do.


----------



## Cloo (Sep 16, 2019)

Smangus said:


> Yes and very dangerous with it , people still fall for his charming buffon shtick, can't believe it but they do.


The minute he said they were working flat out for a deal I was like 'You're not doing a fucking thing, are you?'


----------



## Cloo (Sep 16, 2019)

He's either aiming for no deal or hoping that the EU will crack at the prospect of losing our magnificence at the last minute and he'll be able to pull an acceptable plan out of his arse.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 16, 2019)

Cloo said:


> He's either aiming for no deal or hoping that the EU will crack at the prospect of losing our magnificence at the last minute and he'll be able to pull an acceptable plan out of his arse.


I think the simplest explanation is that he doesn't know what he's doing. Theresa May didn't know what she was doing. Her plan was derailed, but she kept on with it anyway, despite the inevitability of failure. Johnson's plan wasn't 'get a deal' or 'force through no deal'. It was clearly 'get an election'. Now he's just flailing around impotently, like May did, hoping something he hasn't thought of will happen to help him out. His talent, such as it is, lies in getting himself elected. It most certainly doesn't lie in getting anything meaningful done.


----------



## Smangus (Sep 16, 2019)

He's just setting up the blame game for when all the shit comes down. 

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## MrSki (Sep 16, 2019)

Anyone wanting to watch the Supreme Court proceedings live should be able to via here.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think the simplest explanation is that he doesn't know what he's doing. Theresa May didn't know what she was doing. Her plan was derailed, but she kept on with it anyway, despite the inevitability of failure. Johnson's plan wasn't 'get a deal' or 'force through no deal'. It was clearly 'get an election'. Now he's just flailing around impotently, like May did, hoping something he hasn't thought of will happen to help him out. His talent, such as it is, lies in getting himself elected. It most certainly doesn't lie in getting anything meaningful done.



yep. hes winging it. which is what hes done all his life. I think a big motivator is not to be responsible for fucking up brexit - so a lot of it is about shifting the blame onto the oppostion and the EU.


----------



## Ming (Sep 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> yep. hes winging it. which is what hes done all his life. I think a big motivator is not to be responsible for fucking up brexit - so a lot of it is about shifting the blame onto the oppostion and the EU.


I still think there's a big money element to it. These hedge fund fuckers don't make mistakes


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> I still think there's a big money element to it. These hedge fund fuckers don't make mistakes



they do. all the time. and they are not controlling it - they are just looking to make a quick buck out of the chaos. and they'll also probably make money if it ends up as remain.


----------



## maomao (Sep 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> they do. all the time. and they are not controlling it - they are just looking to make a quick buck out of the chaos. and they'll also probably make money if it ends up as remain.


It's literally why hedge funds are called hedge funds. They hedge their bets by holding long and short positions on the same stock. If they had all their money on Brexit they'd have to change their name to eggs-in-one-basket funds.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> It's literally why hedge funds are called hedge funds. They hedge their bets by holding long and short positions on the same stock. If they had all their money on Brexit they'd have to change their name to eggs-in-one-basket funds.



Which is a trick you can only pull when there’s significant market volatility, hence the suspicion that characters like Farage are bankrolled by hedge funds and others who will profit from chaos.


----------



## JimW (Sep 17, 2019)

After all, capital would never go into crisis (again) without some devious scheme.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

JimW said:


> After all, capital would never go into crisis (again) without some devious scheme.



Or be divided over the best way to maintain its position


----------



## kabbes (Sep 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> I still think there's a big money element to it. These hedge fund fuckers don't make mistakes


Who do you think is on the _other_ side of these currency deals if not other hedge funds?


----------



## kabbes (Sep 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> I still think there's a big money element to it. These hedge fund fuckers don't make mistakes


Worst Performing Hedge Funds of 2018

“Investors hoping that 2018 would have brought a change in fortunes for the hedge fund industry were likely disappointed...

...Unfortunately for many funds, this is nothing new, as the hedge fund sphere has offered lackluster performance for years, and at a cost that many investors are increasingly perceiving to be excessive as well. All told, the hedge fund industry declined by 4.1% on a fund-weighted basis, according to data by Hedge Fund Research.”

No mistakes here.  No sirree


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> It's literally why hedge funds are called hedge funds. They hedge their bets by holding long and short positions on the same stock. If they had all their money on Brexit they'd have to change their name to eggs-in-one-basket funds.


All your eggs on one Brexit


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 17, 2019)

Everything seems to be grouped under hedge fund these days by the media and it’s not really true - still a gamble with other people’s money in most cases / not all the funds are direction neutral and covered.  Not that I give a shite for the risk of the investors


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> I still think there's a big money element to it. These hedge fund fuckers don't make mistakes



They absolutely do. In fact, despite the absurd sums of money traders make, they are on average less effective at what they do than a monkey picking trades at random would be.

More and more financial stuff is done by algorithms these days, but the algorithms are invented by humans and most definitely make 'mistakes' such as getting trapped in positive-feedback loops with themselves or other algorithms and extrapolating decisions to the point of absurdity before any human can intervene.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think the simplest explanation is that he doesn't know what he's doing. Theresa May didn't know what she was doing. Her plan was derailed, but she kept on with it anyway, despite the inevitability of failure. Johnson's plan wasn't 'get a deal' or 'force through no deal'. It was clearly 'get an election'. Now he's just flailing around impotently, like May did, hoping something he hasn't thought of will happen to help him out. His talent, such as it is, lies in getting himself elected. It most certainly doesn't lie in getting anything meaningful done.


Must admit, I was one who originally thought May would get her deal through,  with a mixture of the usual arm twisting and brinkwomanship - and because by and large, parties normally manage to 'find a way'. Obviously she failed, largely because a block of her MPs were never going to vote for it but also because of her personality and that of her team. She just couldn't schmooze it. Johnson's different he's a mixture of paper thin bullishness and bonhomie along with a spectacular dose of dishonesty. At an obvious level he's stuck, can't go forward and can't go back after making all those promises about the end of October. He's not well placed for squeezing an unsatisfactory compromise at the 11th hour, though that's the one thing he is trying to do. But the thing he does have in his favour are the polls. If the Tories were 10 points behind he might still be following the same path, but the majority of his party would long since have abandoned him.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2019)

By the by, if this supreme court thing is won by the John Major/Gina Miller lot, what happens in terms of the parliamentary recall? If the prorogation was illegal then, logically, parliament hasn't been suspended to allow them to go to the conferences. It's being reported that if he loses, Johnson will have to _recall_ parliament, but even if he did (which he might not do anyway), he'd surely have to suspend it immediately to let Labour wander off to Brighton at the weekend.


----------



## mod (Sep 17, 2019)

I really, really hope the supreme court confirms what the Scottish court said and that cunt Johnson is forced back to parliament with his racist tail between his legs so parliament can continue to expose him for the charlatan wanker he is.


----------



## mod (Sep 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the by, if this supreme court thing is won by the John Major/Gina Miller lot, what happens in terms of the parliamentary recall? If the prorogation was illegal then, logically, parliament hasn't been suspended to allow them to go to the conferences. It's being reported that if he loses, Johnson will have to _recall_ parliament, but even if he did (which he might not do anyway), he'd surely have to suspend it immediately to let Labour wander off to Brighton at the weekend.



If it goes that way surely he'd have to resign?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 17, 2019)

That's what parliament has been doing?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 17, 2019)




----------



## MrCurry (Sep 17, 2019)

mod said:


> If it goes that way surely he'd have to resign?



It’s very hard to see that a PM who was found to have acted illegally could continue without resigning, but does it matter? The whole government is on borrowed time anyway, as the opposition and Tory rebels surely only need to choose their moment to bring it down with a VONC.

What happens next, who knows. But the EU mutterings about needing a reason to grant the Uk a further extension will surely be answered with the reason being that an election is to take place and a new government will bring a new approach.

Boris will be remembered as the least successful Prime Minister ever IMHO, which should result in a rare moment of consensus amongst the whole Brexit mess.


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> By the by, if this supreme court thing is won by the John Major/Gina Miller lot, what happens in terms of the parliamentary recall? If the prorogation was illegal then, logically, parliament hasn't been suspended to allow them to go to the conferences. It's being reported that if he loses, Johnson will have to _recall_ parliament, but even if he did (which he might not do anyway), he'd surely have to suspend it immediately to let Labour wander off to Brighton at the weekend.


It would be quite amusing to see various MPs who a week or so ago were complaining about coups and being silenced coming up with arguments about why their party conference suddenly takes precedence over parliament


----------



## mwgdrwg (Sep 17, 2019)

They announced some official actions in Wales yesterday, such as more food banks and medicine stockpiling (sunlit uplands eh).

Another thing they announced was that they are going to use the A55 as a giant car park for lorries heading to Ireland via Holyhead. Now, I use this road to get over to the mainland for work, and even a small hiccup leads to hours of queing at the bridges.

Basically, it'll take me several hours to get to work rather than 30 minutes, that's even if I manage to get off the island at all.

Something to look forward to.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2019)

when is the decision expected? could be fun. and hard to call.


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> when is the decision expected? could be fun. and hard to call.


Case is scheduled to take three days with decision on Thursday


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> Case is scheduled to take three days with decision on Thursday



oh ffs. does it really take that long to decide that johnson is a cunt?


----------



## andysays (Sep 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> oh ffs. does it really take that long to decide that johnson is a cunt?


I managed to make my mind up on that question quite some time ago and without recourse to legal proceedings


----------



## Argonia (Sep 17, 2019)

If they find against the government does that mean that parliament has to start again straight away?

(sorry posted before I read Wilf's question above)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 17, 2019)

Argonia said:


> If they find against the government does that mean that parliament has to start again straight away?
> 
> (sorry posted before I read Wilf's question above)



i dont think anyone knows. can government appeal? will they whip up a proto-fascist hate mob and then "restore order" via martial law? are their any sanctions for them ignoring the rulings? 

logically you'd think deliberately misleading the head of state for nakedlly poltical purposes would mean he had to resign - but johnson would probably abolish the house of windsor and make the position of monarch a prize on a reality ~TV show.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 17, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i dont think anyone knows. can government appeal? will they whip up a proto-fascist hate mob and then "restore order" via martial law? are their any sanctions for them ignoring the rulings?
> 
> logically you'd think deliberately misleading the head of state for nakedlly poltical purposes would mean he had to resign - but johnson would probably abolish the house of windsor and make the position of monarch a prize on a reality ~TV show.


No appeal. This is the highest court. Maybe the European Court would be higher? 

tbh I had assumed the Supreme Court would rule in favour of not provoking a consitutional crisis wrt the monarch, but who knows? Johnson refusing to repeat his denial that he lied to brenda under oath isn't a good look.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2019)

mod said:


> I really, really hope the supreme court confirms what the Scottish court said and that cunt Johnson is forced back to parliament with his racist tail between his legs so parliament can continue to expose him for the charlatan wanker he is.


If/when Parliament returned, I'm not even sure what it would do. Would it be a new session or a queen's speech???  But on the point you raise, I have a feeling we might have reached peak rebel alliance. They could do Johnson on the prorogation and do him on the no deal issue. But if Benn/Corbyn/Libdems or whoever start pushing it further they might find the votes get closer. And Johnson can get very shouty about the opposition being 'frit', maybe even call a vonc himself. He'll be shouting let the people decide, Libs will be shouting (politely) let the people decide (in a different way) and Corbyn will saying not much.

Short version: it's humiliating for Johnson to go back to parliament, but it strengthens his 'Johnson and the people Vs MPs' narrative.


----------



## JimW (Sep 17, 2019)

They could bring in VAR


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 17, 2019)

JimW said:


> They could bring in VAR



don't Mention the VAR!


----------



## Winot (Sep 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> Case is scheduled to take three days with decision on Thursday



More likely to be Friday or even next week apparently.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 17, 2019)

Time for an elected judiciary.

This could be a great wedge. _No, i'm too stupid to elect them etc me, not anyone else, they're all great and i trust them and their capabilities. I really do just mean me._


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 17, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> They absolutely do. In fact, despite the absurd sums of money traders make, they are on average less effective at what they do than a monkey picking trades at random would be.
> 
> More and more financial stuff is done by algorithms these days, but the algorithms are invented by humans and most definitely make 'mistakes' such as getting trapped in positive-feedback loops with themselves or other algorithms and extrapolating decisions to the point of absurdity before any human can intervene.


Cat Beats Professionals at Stock Picking


----------



## Gaia (Sep 17, 2019)

I'm pleased to note that the finest traditions of British irony are being upheld and that Gina Miller's QC is Lord David Pannick.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 17, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Time for an elected judiciary.
> 
> This could be a great wedge. _No, i'm too stupid to elect them etc me, not anyone else, they're all great and i trust them and their capabilities. I really do just mean me._



forgive me but haven't caught your meaning: who is the voice in italics?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 17, 2019)

The defenders of democracy. One minute shouting about legislative supremacy then cheering it getting knocked off. You know, just _them_.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 17, 2019)

Yes unfortunately most of them have so little contact with people outside their bubble that they react with bemusement and "you're just playing the role of the funny, ironic brit at the party" when confronted with alternative analyses. and I meet a lot of them. the EU-loving liberal intelligentsia across Europe are very similar to the radical remainers in the UK itself I find. another example of class being more important than nationality in forming worldview.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2019)

Gaia said:


> I'm pleased to note that the finest traditions of British irony are being upheld and that Gina Miller's QC is Lord David Pannick.


... and where will M'Lord Pannick be, the very moment he steps out of the Supreme Court?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

Here is further detailed academic research indicating neoliberalism as the _key motivating _factor propelling the working class leave vote. This article builds on the growing body of work - cited in the journal article - suggesting that working class leave voters cite a lack of political representation, neoliberal economy, lost futures and deindustrialisation is the _central narrative _that explains motivating factors.

Labour’s political collapse rightwards, away from a ‘People’s Brexit’ in 2017 through a variety of positions to 2019 a second vote with a choice of remain or a deal offered by an EU that has no motives whatsoever for offering a real one will be a disaster in areas like Teeside:

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals


The three key findings:


Focusing on neoliberal effects on working-class life over the last 40 years provides an important explanatory framework for the vote;


(b) The Labour Party’s abandonment of the working class appears to be a principal reason why these people voted to leave;


(c) The EU referendum offered a unique opportunity for working-class people to voice their dissatisfaction with the dominant social, cultural and political hegemon in contemporary England.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Here is further detailed academic research indicating neoliberalism as the _key motivating _factor propelling the working class leave vote. This article builds on the growing body of work - cited in the journal article - suggesting that working class leave voters cite a lack of political representation, neoliberal economy, lost futures and deindustrialisation is the _central narrative _that explains motivating factors.
> 
> Labour’s political collapse rightwards, away from a ‘People’s Brexit’ in 2017 through a variety of positions to 2019 a second vote with a choice of remain or a deal offered by an EU that has no motives whatsoever for offering a real one will be a disaster in areas like Teeside:
> 
> ...


When liberals say...but things will get worse for you dullards.


----------



## belboid (Sep 17, 2019)

Some interesting reading, but their methodology looks like bullshit.

Interviewed 27 people, eight from one working mans club and the rest their acquaintances (that's what 'snowball sampling' is). 20 men, seven women. All over 45 (or so they initially say.  Later on they say one of them women is 42.  Such inconsistency is poor for an academic paper). All white. It's not exactly a representative sample of _anything_, is it? 

It's good the piece recognises that almost a third of their selectorate was motivated by fears around immigration (cant tell whether all eight were 'hostile and racist' - I'd presume not, or they couldn't be described as a small minority) and the usual blather about people getting 'something for nothing.'  But it's never expanded upon. The authors seems to simply subsume that argument under more specific objections to neo-liberalism and how that has destroyed notions of community and belonging.

And that may well be true (cant say for sure without seeing rather more of the actual comments), but _simply _saying 'it's all neo-liberalism' without countering the racist aspect means that racism will go unchallenged and will be an open door for the right.  There isn't a _single _narrative we can impose on the referendum result without missing other key factors that also need addressing.  This piece has some value in doing that, but still looks to have a lot of shortcomings.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> Some interesting reading, but their methodology looks like bullshit.
> 
> Interviewed 27 people, eight from one working mans club and the rest the authors acquaintances (that's what 'snowball sampling' is). 20 men, seven women. All over 45 (or so they initially say.  Later on they say one of them women is 42.  Such inconsistency is poor for an academic paper). All white. It's not exactly a representative sample of _anything_, is it?
> 
> ...


It's a shame they don't publish the full transcripts of the interviews.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> Some interesting reading, but their methodology looks like bullshit.
> 
> Interviewed 27 people, eight from one working mans club and the rest their acquaintances (that's what 'snowball sampling' is). 20 men, seven women. All over 45 (or so they initially say.  Later on they say one of them women is 42.  Such inconsistency is poor for an academic paper). All white. It's not exactly a representative sample of _anything_, is it?
> 
> ...



It’s not, and I’m not, suggesting that there is a single narrative. Race is clearly a factor according to this report. But not the dominant factor. The dominant factor is the crisis in working class political representation. This is important because the narrative of liberalism and much of the left places these issues the other way round or ignores the former completely. Accepting neoliberalism as the dominant factor in working class leaver motivations would pose too many difficult questions possibly.

Work is being done on black and Asian voters who voted brexit by the way. Initial indications are that race wasn’t the dominant factor for them either.

It’s almost like liberalism has and is deliberately mischaracterising the motivations and feelings of leavers, maybe because it’s easier write people off as racists rather than engage with the issues they actually report and discuss as important to them


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It's a shame they don't publish the full transcripts of the interviews.



They will be transcribed. I’ll ask one of the authors for a copy of them and if I can share them


----------



## belboid (Sep 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It’s almost like liberalism has and is deliberately mischaracterising the motivations and feelings of leavers, maybe because it’s easier write people off as racists rather than engage with the issues they actually report and discuss as important to them


Yes, that is the narrative the Full Brexiteers want to push.  Whilst ignoring, or in many cases, completely denying racism had _any _effect whatsoever. Which means not only that that motivations is mischaracterised, but also that that racism goes unchallenged. Which is obviously disastrous for our class.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> Yes, that is the narrative the Full Brexiteers want to push.  Whilst ignoring, or in many cases, completely denying racism had _any _effect whatsoever. Which means not only that that motivations is mischaracterised, but also that that racism goes unchallenged. Which is obviously disastrous for our class.



Fucks sake Belboid. Full Brexiteers really don’t push the narrative that there is a crisis of working class political representation or that neoliberalism is the dominant motivating factor of the working class leave vote. You can do better than this...


----------



## belboid (Sep 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fucks sake Belboid. Full Brexiteers really don’t push the narrative that there is a crisis of working class political representation or that neoliberalism is the dominant motivating factor of the working class leave vote. You can do better than this...


eh?  That is exactly what they do.

Full Brexiteers are the CPB types, yeah?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> eh?  That is exactly what they do.
> 
> Full Brexiteers are the CPB types, yeah?



Time for your lie down...


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> ... and where will M'Lord Pannick be, the very moment he steps out of the Supreme Court?



 

?


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 17, 2019)

Loved the way the BBC news was going on and on about how the supreme court thing was so compelling and dramatic. It really wasn’t, I turned over to watch something about catching fly tippers with hidden cameras instead. I don’t think they have any idea what people are interested in, weird bubble stuff.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 17, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who do you think is on the _other_ side of these currency deals if not other hedge funds?


Why do you think that hedge funds are so into donating money to Johnson?
Interesting article here.


> That 65% of Boris Johnson’s donations came from hedge funds, city traders and rich investors is problematic – politically. That up to 30 of them have connections to hedge funds which have increased their short positions over his assuming the leadership of the Conservative Party is problematic – politically.
> 
> The inference is not that the hedge funds are doing anything wrong or are motivated to make donations through profit rather than ideology, but that Boris Johnson’s decision-making could be swayed by his reliance on financial institutions and hedge funds for donations.
> 
> As the Ministerial Code makes clear, ministers should not only be free from conflicts of interest, but free from the appearance of conflicts of interests. That is where the problem lies; that there could be a perception that the country’s interests are diverging from the financial forces surrounding the Prime Minister.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 17, 2019)

And where do you think the Remain money is coming from?  The unions?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 17, 2019)

kabbes said:


> And where do you think the Remain money is coming from?  The unions?


Unions have been traditionally split over europe but why are hedge fund managers so keen on Johnson?


----------



## kabbes (Sep 17, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Unions have been traditionally split over europe but why are hedge fund managers so keen on Johnson?


Hedge funds are also keen on Remain.  You’re mistaking what some funds want for what all funds want.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 17, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> ?



At least one person got it.


----------



## paolo (Sep 18, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who do you think is on the _other_ side of these currency deals if not other hedge funds?



Your suggestion is that only hedge funds trade in FX.

I’m fairly sure that’s BS. Call me on it, and I’ll come back to you.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 18, 2019)

paolo said:


> Your suggestion is that only hedge funds trade in FX.
> 
> I’m fairly sure that’s BS. Call me on it, and I’ll come back to you.


My ongoing suggestion, as I have already posted, is that these positions are mostly being taken to, you know, *hedge*, not speculate.

Look, the idea that capital is lining up behind Brexit as a money making scheme is preposterous.  For every speculator betting on Brexit, there are a thousand exploitative corporations relying for superprofit on the free flow of capital and labour — and the cherry picking of tax authority — that the EU grants them.  Why do you think that both EU and U.K. stocks are hit by the thought of no deal, if it’s not because no deal will hurt their profits?  The only reason that the speculators you fear can bet on downward movements is because there would be these downward movements.  And those downward movements are effectively others betting against no deal and that they’ll be able to continue profiting out of the EU machine.

Ming’s whole obsession is like ignoring the raging beast thats eating you to concentrate on the parasite living on the back of the beast.  Yes, there is a parasite.  No, that’s not what’s important here.


----------



## paolo (Sep 18, 2019)

kabbes said:


> My ongoing suggestion, as I have already posted, is that these positions are mostly being taken to, you know, *hedge*, not speculate.



Agreed... and to clarify: at the other end of a hedge fund FX trade could be a pension fund acting for workers money, hedging an investment in something not in the fund’s currency, as basic protection. It’s not a morally zero sum game, which is what your reply implied - “only dogs eating dogs” (my metaphorising of your comment)

The rest of your reply, no dispute on that.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 18, 2019)

paolo said:


> Agreed... and to clarify: at the other end of a hedge fund FX trade could be a pension fund acting for workers money, hedging an investment in something not in the fund’s currency, as basic protection. It’s not a morally zero sum game, which is what your reply implied - “only dogs eating dogs” (my metaphorising of your comment)
> 
> The rest of your reply, no dispute on that.


As is most of the money going short on Sterling.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 18, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2019)

Seeing more and more articles like this: Forget the election: It's time to replace Johnson with a government of national unity

I have a worrying feeling that at some point A50 actually will get revoked and what's worse is that I can see myself turning into a mirror image of some of the posters on here obsessing about how we're going to leave with no deal and the world will end. _"They're going to revoke A50 and then we'll all be fucked."_


----------



## Wilf (Sep 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Seeing more and more articles like this: Forget the election: It's time to replace Johnson with a government of national unity
> 
> I have a worrying feeling that at some point A50 actually will get revoked and what's worse is that I can see myself turning into a mirror image of some of the posters on here obsessing about how we're going to leave with no deal and the world will end. _"They're going to revoke A50 and then we'll all be fucked."_


Wow. I find just about every sentence of that offensive, but I'll just quote this bit:



> By contrast, all that a general election in November will do is to put Farage and Johnson back in their comfort zones, rabble rousing their way across the country, hogging the media limelight, and lying to audiences who have lost their appetite for truth. It gives them a chance of winning when there is no legitimate reason to do so


'Audiences who have lost their appetite for truth'. Gosh. Oh my.

Weren't we all happier in the days when Charles Turner thought we were just racist thickos?

Edit: the comments on that piece are quite something as well.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 18, 2019)

I know. "It gives them a chance at winning (an election)." Terrifying stuff.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know. "It gives them a chance at winning (an election)." Terrifying stuff.


Here's yer man saying we, _literally_, need to take an exam before having a vote on Brexit:
A citizens’ assembly is the best way out of the Brexit mess

Read the whole thing, it's only short, but here's an appetizer:


> One idea might be a people’s vote but this time without a campaign at all, on the grounds that people could make better use of their time preparing for their vote by informing themselves. What if we went further and invoked a principle that has spread into many areas of life in the last couple of decades, namely ‘informed consent’, and said to people, if you are going to make this major change, you really do need to know what it is you are endorsing, so if you want a ballot card, you need to take an exam?
> 
> Pie in the sky? In practice, it probably is, though it’s not a bad principle. After all, anyone not born in the UK who wants to become a British citizen and thus be entitled to vote as well as pay tax here has to take the life in Britain test that many of us would fail. A basic but rigorous test, with a time limit for completion, could be devised, on the EU’s rules and institutions, and the proposals themselves. If they passed the test people would be able to print off their barcoded voting form in the way you print off any machine-readable ticket, take it along to the polling station, have it checked off and vote as individuals who have thought things out for themselves.



He concludes that it may be difficult to stop people cheating (boo! hiss!) so it will have to be a Citizen's Assembly. Fine stuff.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 18, 2019)

Outside of racist nonsense, that must be close to the worst and most offensive thing I've seen in the whole brexit palaver.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> ... and where will M'Lord Pannick be, the very moment he steps out of the Supreme Court?



This didn't get nearly enough appreciation.


----------



## JimW (Sep 18, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> This didn't get nearly enough appreciation.


Only just got it thanks to your post, doh.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Wow. I find just about every sentence of that offensive, but I'll just quote this bit:
> 
> 
> 'Audiences who have lost their appetite for truth'. Gosh. Oh my.
> ...


This one stood out. Fuck me. 


> Any referendum should be based on the same original question but this time it should be compulsory to vote as then we will find out the intentions of the ones who chose not to vote last time and aslo it will be the TRUE Will of the people as it would be a majority of ALL eligible voters and would be finite in its conclusion.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Here's yer man saying we, _literally_, need to take an exam before having a vote on Brexit:
> A citizens’ assembly is the best way out of the Brexit mess
> 
> Read the whole thing, it's only short, but here's an appetizer:
> ...


I agree with him there should be a citizens' assembly, tho I'd call it a constituent assembly, and rather than work alongside the failed bourgeois parliament I see a ca as replacing it for an interim period before a more substantive democratic structure can be constituted. As a preliminary the relocation of former people to the southern industrial projects would of course be a priority.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 18, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> This one stood out. Fuck me.


Just remembered a radio programme I heard in the months after the 2016 vote. Some bloke who might have been from the same stable as Charles Turner suggesting the Brexit vote should have been weighted to allow the votes of younger votes to have more impact than older ones. His logic was that the oldies wouldn't have to live through much of the post Brexit world. As well as being truly  it would have taken a wee while at the count.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> And that may well be true (cant say for sure without seeing rather more of the actual comments), but _simply _saying 'it's all neo-liberalism' without countering the racist aspect means that racism will go unchallenged and will be an open door for the right.  *There isn't a single narrative we can impose on the referendum result without missing other key factors that also need addressing.*



Seems to me there's something about the unknown of Brexit that means everyone sees what their preconceptions want them to see...ive been looking for an analogy, best I can think of is the Roscharch inkblot test. It makes trying to move on through through talk pointless...its clear infront of everyone's eyes and no new fact or event changes what they see.

The fact that the streets rang out with the shout We Voted Leave Now Leave on the day after the referendum may as well have not happened - nothing to do with racism and xenophobia - nothing to see here. Reductionism about class and motivation have just got more concentrated the more time that passes. Working class voted this, middle class that nonsense. (Came across this Danny Dorling piece recently which is a good corrective on that front btw - though I probably like it because it also confirms my Roscharch bias - no one is immune)

I've been trying to read a 1930s communist era text recently - total reductionist absurdism about how the proletariat will do this the bourgeoisie that etc. Time has shown it to be the most failed wishful thinking, and the world is even more complex now then it was then. The dynamic feels very familiar.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 19, 2019)

Further evidence of the DUP shifting their position.



> The Democratic Unionist party’s leader, Arlene Foster, has signalled it is ready to do a Brexit deal, indicating for the first time a willingness to accept a bespoke solution for Northern Ireland.
> 
> She was speaking just hours before she held an “unplanned” meeting with the Irish taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, amid signs of a Brexit thaw between Belfast and Dublin.
> 
> In a break with previous rhetoric where she has strongly opposed treating the region differently to the rest of the UK, Foster said the final deal would have to recognise Northern Ireland’s unique historical and geographical position and the fact it will be the UK’s only land border with the EU.



Arlene Foster signals DUP shift on Northern Ireland border issue


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 19, 2019)

Ulster says maybe.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 19, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Co Down man may be liable for damages after selling southern Tayto in NI


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2019)

EU tells Boris Johnson he has 12 days to reveal Brexit plans or ‘it’s over’

Or something


----------



## Argonia (Sep 19, 2019)

De Pfeffel hasn't got any fucking Brexit plans so those twelve days will pass by without anything happening.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 19, 2019)

UK 'cannot meet' EU deadline for Brexit plan and needs another year, government says

Not long now then


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> UK 'cannot meet' EU deadline for Brexit plan and needs another year, government says
> 
> Not long now then



What?

This is not very on message.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2019)

So No Deal
or another year.....

how long before they just say fuck it, and tell us to jog on?


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> UK 'cannot meet' EU deadline for Brexit plan and needs another year, government says
> 
> Not long now then





Ranbay said:


> So No Deal
> or another year.....
> 
> how long before they just say fuck it, and tell us to jog on?



Can you see this UK government potentially going another year as things are?  And what happens as a result of the change? is it to a government that wants an are you sure? referendum or one that wants to pretend the referendum didn't happen.....

Sounds like the preliminary tests at the French bottleneck are going well (else why were prepared to back this ultimatum?)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What?
> 
> This is not very on message.


He means UK should be given until end of implementation period in December 2020 to find backstop workaround while still leaving with a deal at end of October, not that there should be a 15 month extension.


----------



## killer b (Sep 19, 2019)

Everyone should read the article before posting about it - the headline is a little misleading.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 19, 2019)

killer b said:


> Everyone should read the article before posting about it - the headline is a little misleading.



Seems like effort....


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> Seems like effort....



It bloody well is what with all the pop ups and videos loading.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 19, 2019)

killer b said:


> Everyone should read the article before posting about it - the headline is a little misleading.


Everyone should look at the favicon before bothering to read the article.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 19, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It bloody well is what with all the pop ups and videos loading.


Indeed.  Won't be clicking on that anytime soon.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 19, 2019)

The Indie is up there with local rags for killing my PC.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 19, 2019)




----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> He means UK should be given until end of implementation period in December 2020 to find backstop workaround while still leaving with a deal at end of October, not that there should be a 15 month extension.


In that case, he's not really saying anything at all. They are free to work on a backstop workaround with May's deal. Indeed, that's what the backstop is for - something that provides guarantees in case a workaround isn't found.


----------



## killer b (Sep 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Everyone should look at the favicon before bothering to read the article.


a reasonable point.


----------



## killer b (Sep 19, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> In that case, he's not really saying anything at all.


yeah, it's empty clickbait


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 19, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> He means UK should be given until end of implementation period in December 2020 to find backstop workaround while still leaving with a deal at end of October, not that there should be a 15 month extension.



Yes but EU will just say it's a backstop that kicks in if another solution can't be found.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2019)

JimW said:


> Only just got it thanks to your post, doh.


In truth, Lord Pannick is seeking to heal the Brexit divide. In addition to his work in London he also has chambers in the Irish capital as well as his practice on the Firth of Tay. He's even tried to take the law to the Brexit wilds of one of those unitary authorities in the East Riding. I think he also works with Lord Carlisle.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 19, 2019)

When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?



Who cares?


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> In truth, Lord Pannick is seeking to heal the Brexit divide. In addition to his work in London he also has chambers in the Irish capital as well as his practice on the Firth of Tay. He's even tried to take the law to the Brexit wilds of one of those unitary authorities in the East Riding. I think he also works with Lord Carlisle.



I don't think you can necessarily heal in a court room what is at is culmination of rights multilateral agreement vs unliteral dissent (both within the Nations of the UK and wider European Union.  But has certainly helped moved forward agenda for future tweaking devolved settlement.  

Also interesting to see that at EUropean level the humiliation the UK had over Spitenkandidaten would have gone the UK's way this time


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?


expected tomorrow


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2019)

gosub said:


> I don't think you can necessarily heal in a court room what is at is culmination of rights multilateral agreement vs unliteral dissent (both within the Nations of the UK and wider European Union.  But has certainly helped moved forward agenda for future tweaking devolved settlement.
> 
> Also interesting to see that at EUropean level the humiliation the UK had over Spitenkandidaten would have gone the UK's way this time


 To be honest, the world won't listen.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?



No one knows.



SpackleFrog said:


> Who cares?



M'learned friends mostly.  Whatever the outcome there will be an interesting precedent set and it will have implications.

For the rest of us though, it'll mean fuck all apart from a cheap laugh at Johnson if they give him a kick like the Scottish judges did.


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, the world won't listen.



That would be a shame. Though in truth, as John Calhoun found, there are only two patterns to work with.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> To be honest, the world won't listen.



And John Major will bear more grudges than lonely high court judges.


----------



## andysays (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who cares?


_What Difference Does It Make?  _surely


----------



## Argonia (Sep 19, 2019)

I am so glad I am not a lawyer. Watching the Supreme Court on telly and I am literally falling asleep.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> _What Difference Does It Make?  _surely



I suppose it Paints a Vulgar Picture.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I am so glad I am not a lawyer. Watching the Supreme Court on telly and I am literally falling asleep.



I don't know.  Being a self-important pontificating arse for a huge salary has a certain appeal.  We have people on here that do it for free.


----------



## Cloo (Sep 19, 2019)

I'm assuming that if SC finds against Johnson he'll just wave his hands, make a sound like someone shaking out a rubber glove and ignore it somehow


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

#


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I am so glad I am not a lawyer. Watching the Supreme Court on telly and I am literally falling asleep.


You should be recording it for those nights of intolerable insomnia


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2019)

Cloo said:


> I'm assuming that if SC finds against Johnson he'll just wave his hands, make a sound like someone shaking out a rubber glove and ignore it somehow



That seems to be what will happen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That seems to be what will happen.


And if the pm ignores the sc why should anyone pay greater heed to lower courts?


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> And if the pm ignores the sc why should anyone pay greater heed to lower courts?



Because rules are for those people not the gentry.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Jo Swinson looked lovely tonight




Have some more of the lovely Ms Swinson...



Followed by this...

Treaty of Lisbon (No. 7) - Hansard




			
				Jo Swinson said:
			
		

> the Liberal Democrats would like to have a referendum on the major issue of whether we are in or out of Europe.


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Have some more of the lovely Ms Swinson...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I'd say the better quote is the next bit "I also say to the hon. Gentleman that I have had a total of nine representations from my constituents on this, so it is clearly not the top issue in my mailbag.' coz in effect that the direction she has verred her party its now might as well be a single issue party :-fuck what 17mil odd had to say.  Well done to her nine constituents that knew this this was political bedrock. Certainly shaken things up a bit


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I am so glad I am not a lawyer. Watching the Supreme Court on telly and I am literally falling asleep.



I'm still processing the fact we have a supreme court. Calling serious organs of state 'supreme' is childish behaviour only suitable for americans. Well, americans and daleks.


----------



## Winot (Sep 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?



Expected early next week. Not tomorrow.


----------



## Poot (Sep 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm still processing the fact we have a supreme court. Calling serious organs of state 'supreme' is childish behaviour only suitable for americans. Well, americans and daleks.


And chickens.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 19, 2019)

Today I looked at government advice for operating post Brexit if you want to travel to the EU and ship products there. I can only describe it as many many steps backward. I like the single market and what it meant for people who wanted to do business with and travel in Europe. It will become a lot more complicated after Brexit that is for sure.


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2019)

This thread has now had over a million views and nearly 34,000 replies and there's still no answer to the question...


----------



## rutabowa (Sep 19, 2019)

weltweit said:


> Today I looked at government advice for operating post Brexit if you want to travel to the EU and ship products there. I can only describe it as many many steps backward. I like the single market and what it meant for people who wanted to do business with and travel in Europe. It will become a lot more complicated after Brexit that is for sure.


What's this "brexit" thing you mention? i presume it is some kind of portmanteau word?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

editor said:


> This thread now has over a million views and there's still no answer to the question...


The simple answer is "no"


----------



## chilango (Sep 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The simple answer is "no"



Although in many ways it's already a "yes".


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2019)

editor said:


> This thread has now had over a million views and nearly 34,000 replies and there's still no answer to the question...


Some people wearing wigs will sort it out tomorrow. If they don't a man who sits on a carved throne in a big chamber has said he will sort it out.  Disappointingly, he only wears a gown nowadays.  Let us Face the Future.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

chilango said:


> Although in many ways it's already a "yes".


Our feeble politicians will end up acknowledging their inability to extricate the country from the eu


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Some people wearing wigs will sort it out tomorrow. If they don't a man who sits on a carved throne in a big chamber has said he will sort it out.  Disappointingly, he only wears a gown nowadays.  Let us Face the Future.


Thankfully he keeps the gown on


----------



## chilango (Sep 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Our feeble politicians will end up acknowledging their inability to extricate the country from the eu



Nah.

They'll never admit it. They'll blames someone else.

In the meantime millions will have Brexited in their hearts, and in their heads anyway.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

chilango said:


> Although in many ways it's already a "yes".


Maybe.


----------



## editor (Sep 19, 2019)

Even the FT is putting the boot in 

Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

chilango said:


> Nah.
> 
> They'll never admit it. They'll blames someone else.
> 
> In the meantime millions will have Brexited in their hearts, and in their heads anyway.


There will be trouble ahead


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Our feeble politicians will end up acknowledging their inability to extricate the country from the eu


If they find we are still in the EU come November it'll be like having a party and finding the most pissed person is still there in the morning, in a pool of sick and Lambrusco. When Jean Claude's mam and dad get home, he be in bother.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 19, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Some people wearing wigs will sort it out tomorrow. If they don't a man who sits on a carved throne in a big chamber has said he will sort it out.  Disappointingly, he only wears a gown nowadays.  Let us Face the Future.


They don't wear wigs in the Supreme Court. Along with televising it they tried to move into the 20th Century in 2009.
Through work I once met Baroness Hale of Richmond. Give her her dues when asked how she should be addressed she did answer 'Brenda' which won her a few brownie points.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 19, 2019)

MrSki said:


> They don't wear wigs in the Supreme Court. Along with televising it they tried to move into the 20th Century in 2009.
> Through work I once met Baroness Hale of Richmond. Give her dues when asked how she should be addressed she did answer 'Brenda' which won her a few brownie points.




Clearly has a monarch-delusion....


----------



## MrSki (Sep 19, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Clearly has a monarch-delusion....


She has a book coming out next month too. ETA it is about her and written with her input.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 19, 2019)

editor said:


> This thread has now had over a million views and nearly 34,000 replies and there's still no answer to the question...


Well I for one am nailing my colours to the post. 

Jo Swinson is lush 

The way she walks, the way she talks,...

Still got no idea about this brexit shit though. I only voted leave because DotCommunist told me it would be a bit of a spanner in the clanger and would prove what a bumbling bunch of self serving cunts our politicians are so on that front he was bang on as usual, I was right and Jo Swinson is ....a lovely lovely woman. 

Even my wife agrees with me


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 19, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Have some more of the lovely Ms Swinson...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can't hear what she's saying. I just get lost in those large pauses whilst she thinks about her next sentence. 



I'm sorry if it all sounds letchy but I haven't had a crush like this since Beth turned up in Brookside


----------



## gosub (Sep 19, 2019)

rutabowa said:


> What's this "brexit" thing you mention? i presume it is some kind of portmanteau word?



officially we got as far as a colour scheme, but its moving forward a bit


Wilf said:


> If they find we are still in the EU come November it'll be like having a party and finding the most pissed person is still there in the morning, in a pool of sick and Lambrusco. When Jean Claude's mam and dad get home, he be in bother.



That should be in the Brexit analogy thread


----------



## Wilf (Sep 19, 2019)

MrSki said:


> They don't wear wigs in the Supreme Court. Along with televising it they tried to move into the 20th Century in 2009.
> .


 I knew that, I knew that... Anyway, they wear them under their lounge suits.

That came out as 'lunge suits' on my first go, but then I've just got a new bag of weed.


----------



## A380 (Sep 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe just me no getting the humour (?) but I'm always a bit uneasy when we dismiss each others home areas & communities like this.
> Could be that living in an area that's often the butt of 'jokes' has over-sensitised me, but it always feels a bit too close to negative solidarity to me when we laugh at where some people choose to/have to live.
> There's many good comrades in Kent that struggle on in areas electorally dominated by the right.


You’ve never been to Luton then obvs...


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> I can't hear what she's saying. I just get lost in those large pauses whilst she thinks about her next sentence.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry if it all sounds letchy but I haven't had a crush like this since Beth turned up in Brookside


Genuinely can’t tell if you’re being serious or not


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> I can't hear what she's saying. I just get lost in those large pauses whilst she thinks about her next sentence.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry if it all sounds letchy but I haven't had a crush like this since Beth turned up in Brookside


You'll regret this post in the weeks and months ahead.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Genuinely can’t tell if you’re being serious or not


It's not the sort of thing anyone would joke about


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

A380 said:


> You’ve never been to Luton then obvs...


I've visited many Northern towns and cities but, as you correctly surmise, Luton is not amongst that list. What have I missed?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I've visited many Northern towns and cities but, as you correctly surmise, Luton is not amongst that list. What have I missed?



Luton isn't in the North. If it was, maybe it wouldn't be such a shit hole.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Luton isn't in the North.



Rather depends upon where you're starting from.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 19, 2019)

Seriously friedaweed, you need to stop making loads of posts about your crush on Jo Swinson, it's not a good look.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 19, 2019)

Luton didn't seem that bad when I went there.

Anyway all the worst places in UK are the twatty up their own arse places eg Hebden Bridge, Chester, Cirencester, mainly Chester tho


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Luton isn't in the North.



Of course it is!





brogdale said:


> Rather depends upon where you're starting from.



Indeed.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

Shocking thread derail; my bad; apols.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Of course it is!
> 
> View attachment 184545


What's Clapham doing in the south there? And Angmering is in Mordor. Someone's sold you a dodgy map.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Shocking thread derail; my bad; apols.



You should be sorry. The North is the North, regardless of where you happen to be.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Of course it is!
> 
> View attachment 184545


Yep.
The North London cathedral...in the North.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Seriously friedaweed, you need to stop making loads of posts about your crush on Jo Swinson, it's not a good look.


Let's hope he's not been sending her emails and letters


----------



## brogdale (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You should be sorry. The North is the North, regardless of where you happen to be.


True dat; especially so atm.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What's Clapham doing in the south there? Someone's sold you a dodgy map.



Google maps. 

But, there's part of that village, that's actually called Clapham Common.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 19, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Luton isn't in the North. If it was, maybe it wouldn't be such a shit hole.


Luton is a northern working class town which happens to be in southern England.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 19, 2019)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Luton is a northern working class town which happens to be in southern England.


It really isn't


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Still got no idea about this brexit shit though. I only voted leave because DotCommunist told me it would be a bit of a spanner in the clanger and would prove what a bumbling bunch of self serving cunts our politicians are so on that front he was bang on as usual





friedaweed said:


> Jo Swinson is ....a lovely lovely woman.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Sep 19, 2019)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Luton is a northern working class town which happens to be in southern England.



It feels more like the midlands to me (it feels more midlands than bedford does, which is further north, but then some places don't quite fit where they are.  slough is similar...)

although administratively, bedfordshire is in the east of england region, which strikes me as bollocks.


----------



## William of Walworth (Sep 19, 2019)

To continue the complete irrelevance, an old mate's a life-long Watford fan, and he claims that years ago, a favourite anti-Luton chant in bubble-match derbies  , and in boring bits of other matches, was 'Bedscum' while fingerpointing at 'Hatters' fans  from the Watford stand 

I'm sure Brixton Hatter knows this. Oxford v Swindon matches contain similar levels of immaturity


----------



## kabbes (Sep 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Seriously friedaweed, you need to stop making loads of posts about your crush on Jo Swinson, it's not a good look.


Posting on message boards about how attractive you find a female politician — in the context of modern culture and the historic subjugation and objectification of women — is, each and every time, a little poison reminder to women that their worth is bound up in their ability to appeal to men.  So yes, I agree.  It’s not a good look.  Every time he does it, I lose a bit more respect.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 20, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> It feels more like the midlands to me (it feels more midlands than bedford does, which is further north, but then some places don't quite fit where they are.  slough is similar...)
> 
> although administratively, bedfordshire is in the east of england region, which strikes me as bollocks.



Your feelings are wrong. Luton is London overspill. It’s not the Midlands geographically, industrially, historically or in any other way.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 20, 2019)

Slightly more positive comments from Juncker.



> A Brexit deal is possible, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said on Thursday, adding that if the Irish border backstop which the British government wants removed could be replaced with alternatives, it would not be needed.
> 
> Asked about reports that Northern Ireland could follow EU rules on food and agriculture with other checks being done away from the border, the journalist who interviewed Juncker quoted him as saying: “It is the basis of a deal... it is the starting point and the arrival point.”



EU's Juncker says on Brexit: I think we can have a deal - Reuters

It comes from an exclusive Sky News interview, the full version to be aired during Sophy Ridge on Sunday, from 8.30 am.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Slightly more positive comments from Juncker.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That’s just Junker reiterating that it is up to Boris to come up with a workable alternative to the backstop, which he can’t, or else no deal is down to  him.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2019)

Brixton Hatter said:


> Luton is a northern working class town which happens to be in southern England.


 
Grim, but not North.

In fact, plenty of it isn’t even especially grim.


----------



## chilango (Sep 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Posting on message boards about how attractive you find a female politician — in the context of modern culture and the historic subjugation and objectification of women — is, each and every time, a little poison reminder to women that their worth is bound up in their ability to appeal to men.  So yes, I agree.  It’s not a good look.  Every time he does it, I lose a bit more respect.



I've probably been spending a bit too much time poring over semiotic analysis of images recently, but I'm getting pretty suspicious of the photos the media are using for Swinson.


----------



## Sue (Sep 20, 2019)

chilango said:


> I've probably been spending a bit too much time poring over semiotic analysis of images recently, but I'm getting pretty suspicious of the photos the media are using for Swinson.


How do you mean, chilango?


----------



## chilango (Sep 20, 2019)

Sue said:


> How do you mean, chilango?



To put it crudely they seem to constantly focus on her breasts.

The angles, the shadows, the composition etc all seem to direct the _gaze_ in that direction.

I may be reading too much into it, but I can't shake off this nagging suspicion.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2019)

chilango said:


> To put it crudely they seem to constantly focus on her breasts.
> 
> The angles, the shadows, the composition etc all seem to direct the _gaze_ in that direction.
> 
> I may be reading too much into it, but I can't shake off this nagging suspicion.



Lol. The woman was there. The media reported. Are you suggesting some sort of digital enhancement?

Not to say that physical appearance isn’t important. Both men and women invest heavily in the ‘right’ size of big bust. It’s an electoral commonplace that bald blokes can’t get elected or are unlikely to. Tall men with hair do better in the boardroom etc. 

Jo Swinson will certainly have a stylist and that stylist will be looking to do things that men and women alike will admire.


----------



## belboid (Sep 20, 2019)

chilango said:


> To put it crudely they seem to constantly focus on her breasts.
> 
> The angles, the shadows, the composition etc all seem to direct the _gaze_ in that direction.
> 
> I may be reading too much into it, but I can't shake off this nagging suspicion.


A quick google image search for Swinson and Abbott does show a lot more mid-shots of Swinson, whereas Abbott's are far more tightly head and shoulders.


----------



## Sue (Sep 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Jo Swinson will certainly have a stylist and that stylist will be *looking to do things that men and women alike will admire*.



Like what exactly?


----------



## chilango (Sep 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Lol. The woman was there. The media reported. Are you suggesting some sort of digital enhancement?
> .



Photographs aren't neutral, objective things.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 20, 2019)

Haven't noticed it with swinson but when leadsom was running against may loads of the photos got leadsom's legs in.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Posting on message boards about how attractive you find a female politician — in the context of modern culture and the historic subjugation and objectification of women — is, each and every time, a little poison reminder to women that their worth is bound up in their ability to appeal to men.  So yes, I agree.  It’s not a good look.  Every time he does it, I lose a bit more respect.


No sorry- I would be first in the queue these days to deliver a kick in the goolies if I thought a guy was being sexist/inappropriate in that way but he’s just saying he has a crush on her. It’s fine, we all have them. Don’t be so patronising - to us women like. “ a little poison reminder” honestly


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2019)

Scrap that


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 20, 2019)

This is a key reason I can't get my head around dating apps that demand that people make a snap judgement based on appearance.
I had an overtly left wing, happily partnered and normally level-headed colleague who couldn't shake off a minor fixation with Marine Le Pen 
Mind you, he was a Francophile, and a husky tobacco voice works magic with some people.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 20, 2019)

Dear Editor,
To answer your question if brexit means 'leave' then it won't happen in my view. If brexit means feck everything to the chite then it has happened, is happening, and will continue to happen in my view.


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Posting on message boards about how attractive you find a female politician — in the context of modern culture and the historic subjugation and objectification of women — is, each and every time, a little poison reminder to women that their worth is bound up in their ability to appeal to men.  So yes, I agree.  It’s not a good look.  Every time he does it, I lose a bit more respect.


You're right and I apologise. I'll stop fucking about now if it's impacting on our long friendship on these boards


----------



## kabbes (Sep 20, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> No sorry- I would be first in the queue these days to deliver a kick in the goolies if I thought a guy was being sexist/inappropriate in that way but he’s just saying he has a crush on her. It’s fine, we all have them. Don’t be so patronising - to us women like. “ a little poison reminder” honestly


He’s not “just said it”, though.  He’s saying it again and again and it’s all he says about her.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 20, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> You're right and I apologise. I'll stop fucking about now if it's impacting on our long friendship on these boards


thank you


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> thank you


You're welcome


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 20, 2019)

I dread to think of what the million viewers of this thread will make of the bizarre derail by Chilango.

ETA: And the equally bizarre 'Luton turn'


----------



## Supine (Sep 20, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> You're welcome



I don't think apologising and accepting the apology are in the spirit of urban


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 20, 2019)

Supine said:


> I don't think apologising and accepting the apology are in the spirit of urban


It's time for change.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 20, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> It's time for change.



For the many and not the few


----------



## friedaweed (Sep 20, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> For the many and not the few


Strong and stable relationships.


----------



## chilango (Sep 20, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I dread to think of what the million viewers of this thread will make of the bizarre derail by Chilango.



It's not that bizarre really is it?


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 20, 2019)

We are all getting on a bit


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 20, 2019)

chilango said:


> It's not that bizarre really is it?



In the context of thread titled "Is Brexit going to happen'? Yes, it is.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 20, 2019)




----------



## maomao (Sep 20, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I dread to think of what the million viewers of this thread will make of the bizarre derail by Chilango.
> 
> ETA: And the equally bizarre 'Luton turn'


A million views not a million viewers. Lets face it. It's 20 people with 50,000 views each.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 20, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I dread to think of what the million viewers of this thread will make of the bizarre derail by Chilango.
> 
> ETA: And the equally bizarre 'Luton turn'



'Light relief' until we hear from the Supremes?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2019)

I miss the days of naked right wing oxford economist woman, Geldof raging like Moses in the old testament etc


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 20, 2019)

. dopplepost


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 20, 2019)

maomao said:


> A million views not a million viewers. Lets face it. It's 20 people with 50,000 views each.


----------



## wtfftw (Sep 20, 2019)

chilango said:


> Photographs aren't neutral, objective things.


Classic male gaze innit.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 20, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> I miss the days of naked right wing oxford economist woman, Geldof raging like Moses in the old testament etc


Didn't Moses lead his people out of the tyranny of a powerful empire? Parted the Red Sea and avoided a hard border iirc.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 20, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Didn't Moses lead his people out of the tyranny of a powerful empire? Parted the Red Sea and avoided a hard border iirc.



Exodus 8:23 "An lo, God proclaimed that Moses must lead the children of Israel to the promised land and protect the integrity of the single market."


----------



## Wilf (Sep 20, 2019)

_'Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham Jo Grimond to David Lembit Opik, fourteen from David Lembit Opik to the exile to Babylon Brussels, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah frieda's mate'._


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 20, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 'Light relief' until we hear from the Supremes?



"EU keep me hanging on"

"revoke - in the name of love"

"Im Gonner Make EU Love me" 

etc.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 20, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> "EU keep me hanging on"
> 
> "revoke - in the name of love"
> 
> ...


I'll set 'em up; you spike.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Haven't noticed it with swinson but when leadsom was running against may loads of the photos got leadsom's legs in.



Noticed when Gove was running there were lots of shots of what can only be described as a really unpleasant face.


----------



## Winot (Sep 20, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Didn't Moses lead his people out of the tyranny of a powerful empire? Parted the Red Sea and avoided a hard border iirc.



BJ is ahead of you:

‘Let my people go’: Boris lampooned for ridiculous Moses analogy for PM May on Brexit


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2019)

kabbes said:


> He’s not “just said it”, though.  He’s saying it again and again and it’s all he says about her.


Ok I was wrong to post after a night shift- expanding  on patronising- sometimes the over correcting bothers me because we’ve spent all our lives dodging creeps and we all know the difference between a creep and a guy that’s got the hots for a famous person, or any person.  Now it’s being talked about more- you get stuff like “look for enthusiastic consent” and this kind of stamping down on the stuff of life - people fancying other people and being forthright about it- as if to say “yes it is a minefield and men can’t say anything anymore”. Except it’s not, a creep is a creep is a creep and always was a creep. Does that make sense? I’m still working my way through this stuff though so I might change my mind 

ETA: “look for enthusiastic consent” as if rapists were previously confused and it wasn’t a deliberate act.


----------



## JimW (Sep 20, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 184592


Will he have his head right up his arse on actual Brexit day?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2019)

Rest Of World Wondering How The Hell Brits Ever Managed To Conquer Half The Planet




my guess: something to do with rum ration


----------



## Poot (Sep 20, 2019)

JimW said:


> Will he have his head right up his arse on actual Brexit day?


I assumed he was bracing himself for 'the deal'.


----------



## JimW (Sep 20, 2019)

Poot said:


> I assumed he was bracing himself for 'the deal'.


Practising kissing his arse goodbye.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 20, 2019)

gosub said:


> Rest Of World Wondering How The Hell Brits Ever Managed To Conquer Half The Planet
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Answer: got others to do the heavy lifting.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 20, 2019)

gosub said:


> Rest Of World Wondering How The Hell Brits Ever Managed To Conquer Half The Planet
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The unshakeable self belief of the ruling class.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 20, 2019)

gosub said:


> Rest Of World Wondering How The Hell Brits Ever Managed To Conquer Half The Planet
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That would do it for me. AMA PIRATE!


----------



## brogdale (Sep 20, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The unshakeable self belief of the ruling class.


and this...


----------



## Poi E (Sep 20, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The unshakeable self belief of the ruling class.



Justified given their ongoing significant presence in Britain today.


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Justified given their ongoing significant presence in Britain today.


What's that you say? Ireland would like a seat on the Security Council?


----------



## gosub (Sep 20, 2019)

How to be liberal by calling everyone else racist


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Sep 21, 2019)

gosub said:


> How to be liberal by calling everyone else racist




Confronted with the unpalatable fact that many Britons are against the status quo, liberals took about 48 hours to decide the only possible reason could be racism. Whatever your stated reason for voting leave, you’re one goose-step away from an ‘I Heart Hitler’ T-shirt.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 21, 2019)

Isn't today day thirty? Is BloJob going to present anything? Or is there going to be greater fudging?


----------



## Poi E (Sep 21, 2019)

There no hurry. In the unlikely event the supreme court orders the executive to recall parliament it can safely be ignored. Doddery head of state, no entrenched laws for the courts to work with, army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets. It's like a wish list. Wait for the end of October job done.


----------



## A380 (Sep 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Didn't Moses lead his people out of the tyranny of a powerful empire? Parted the Red Sea and avoided a hard border iirc.


And snuffed it before he himself got to the promised land. So there’s that to hope for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 21, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Isn't today day thirty? Is BloJob going to present anything? Or is there going to be greater fudging?


Johnson is stuffing his face with chocolate and leaving handmarks on the wallpaper


----------



## Ming (Sep 21, 2019)

Poi E said:


> There no hurry. In the unlikely event the supreme court orders the executive to recall parliament it can safely be ignored. Doddery head of state, no entrenched laws for the courts to work with, army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets. It's like a wish list. Wait for the end of October job done.


Running the clock down.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 21, 2019)

Ming said:


> Running the clock down.


This struck me as a good way forward, until I noticed the L in clock.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 22, 2019)

gosub said:


> How to be liberal by calling everyone else racist


In fairness the Golliwog stuff is cause people keep putting “SHARE THIS GOLLIWOG BEFORE FACEBOOK DELETES IT” memes on Fb. 
I’ve commented with a basic history of the Golliwog on such posts only to get “yeah but when we were kids it wasn’t racist at all”
Yeah but like... CAN YOU ACCEPT IT IS NOW? 
I’ll always excuse ignorance, it’s easy to be ignorant of stuff cause since when was there an obligation- hell, even time-  to sit on the Internet keeping up with every new development, I wish I could switch it off forever and just be alone with my garden to be honest. But once you’ve been told and you’re still waving the EU flag around? Naaah. Oh wait... Sorry, Golliwogs


----------



## Humberto (Sep 22, 2019)

The EU bods are saying "they haven't got any proposals", which they obviously haven't. Johnson is a bollix. It's no deal or no Brexit surely?


----------



## Humberto (Sep 22, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I wish I could switch it off forever and just be alone with my garden to be honest. But once you’ve been told and you’re still waving the EU flag around? Naaah. Oh wait... Sorry, Golliwogs



This is a good thing to do. For a bit at least.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 22, 2019)

gosub said:


> What's that you say? Ireland would like a seat on the Security Council?



I loved Alabama 3, they seem to be a Scottish fave don’t they. T in the Park/Belladrum stalwarts.


----------



## Celyn (Sep 22, 2019)

Poi E said:


> ... army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets. It's like a wish list. Wait for the end of October job done.



Army has no *official* recent history of killing civilians on British streets in the last century, or does it? I don't doubt that it will will do so, though. This will not be fun.

I wander off to look again at Reginald Perrin and Jimmy's secret army.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 22, 2019)

Poi E said:


> There no hurry. In the unlikely event the supreme court orders the executive to recall parliament it can safely be ignored. Doddery head of state, no entrenched laws for the courts to work with, army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets. It's like a wish list. Wait for the end of October job done.


Whose wishlist? Is this a “keeping saying fascist coup and it will come!” field of dystopian dreams sort of thing?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Army has no *official* recent history of killing civilians on British streets in the last century, or does it? I don't doubt that it will will do so, though. This will not be fun.
> 
> I wander off to look again at Reginald Perrin and Jimmy's secret army.



bloody sunday in '72


----------



## Celyn (Sep 22, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> bloody sunday in '72



And a whole big lot more murdering. Many times in many places.

I was replying to a post that said "British".  

I did carefully say "British", you know.  Stuff the army did in the six counties/Northern Ireland, they haven't been doing in Britain. Yet.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> And a whole big lot more murdering. Many times in many places.
> 
> I was replying to a post that said "British".
> 
> I did carefully say "British", you know.  Stuff the army did in the six counties/Northern Ireland, they haven't been doing in Britain. Yet.


That’s amazing pedantry right there


----------



## Celyn (Sep 22, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> That’s amazing pedantry right there


Well, thank you kindly.  Slight pedantry on my part but not really, I think, it is just a matter of trying to get the facts right and being careful to note in what way they are described.

Right, I have now looked to find the post to which I was replying.


Poi E said:


> There no hurry. In the unlikely event the supreme court orders the executive to recall parliament it can safely be ignored. Doddery head of state, no entrenched laws for the courts to work with, *army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets.* It's like a wish list. Wait for the end of October job done.



It doesn't really, does it? It has mostly not done much of that recently. So far.  

The army, in terms of doing its job which I take to be making life safer for civilians, all people all population, really, had a great old time doing some Very Bad Things in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland is not in Britain. To think that the army is 





> ... army with a history of killing civilians and working on British streets. ...


 is slightly worrying in that it suggests that it was usual in England, Scotland, Wales.

I think I find it odd, that's all, to be told that the army has been busy killing people in Britain. Because, given that it hasn't really been doing much of that, there is a risk, perhaps, of telling people that the evil army was killing civilians locally, and when that turns out not to be true  then anyone arguing against the British Army or British state might lose credibility.

Just better to stick to facts, really. Insofar as they can be found.

Or, I suppose - don't cry wolf. (But be aware of the wolf and prepare)


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2019)

Fair enough. It's dramatic.  But come with me to South Africa where I am now and you will never, ever make any argument excusing those bastards again. Fuck them. Fuck the British state. Time for it to go to the dustbin of history with its blood-soaked myths and appalling treatment of the working class of Britain and Ireland.

Apol. Trips to former British colonies bring this out in me. The crimes of the British state and its quislings are everywhere and the state that did it has never been reconstituted. It remains a war-like state and now with deeply unstable political structures. Some in Britain have a belief of an essential "rightness" that can be rediscovered at the heart of Britain. Remain or Leave, left or right. I can't share that.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 22, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Whose wishlist? Is this a “keeping saying fascist coup and it will come!” field of dystopian dreams sort of thing?



Doesn't have to be fascist.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> And a whole big lot more murdering. Many times in many places.
> 
> I was replying to a post that said "British".
> 
> I did carefully say "British", you know.  Stuff the army did in the six counties/Northern Ireland, they haven't been doing in Britain. Yet.


If you’re relying on pedantry then you should really bear in mind that the adjective used to describe stuff from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is still “British”.

British | meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary

So Bloody Sunday was indeed the British army killing British people on British streets.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 22, 2019)

I recall a real fear during the industrial disputes on the British Mainland in the early seventies, that regarding The British Army, what was happening on Bogside could quickly transfer to Merseyside and Clydeside.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> Well, thank you kindly.  Slight pedantry on my part but not really, I think, it is just a matter of trying to get the facts right and being careful to note in what way they are described.
> 
> Right, I have now looked to find the post to which I was replying.
> 
> ...


The army of course has such a history whether you admit it or no, and just because it's not such a recent history on this island doesn't erase it. The army killing people like the many hundreds if not thousands killed by them in the Gordon ríots was one reason the police were brought in, to deal with public order with fewer casualties.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I recall a real fear during the industrial disputes on the British Mainland in the early seventies, that regarding The British Army, what was happening on Bogside could quickly transfer to Merseyside and Clydeside.


I have been told clearly and directly, with no margin for misunderstanding, by Dave Douglass that the army were dressed as cops during the miners' strike


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 22, 2019)

As for British streets, you may recall the killing of Mairéad Farrell, Seán Savage and Daniel McCann in Gibraltar in 1988, and I am told Gibraltarians feel strongly they are British


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I have been told clearly and directly, with no margin for misunderstanding, by Dave Douglass that the army were dressed as cops during the miners' strike



That, without doubt happened. Far too many local striking miners testified they saw relatives they knew to be in the army in unnumbered police uniforms.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> And a whole big lot more murdering. Many times in many places.
> 
> I was replying to a post that said "British".
> 
> I did carefully say "British", you know.  Stuff the army did in the six counties/Northern Ireland, they haven't been doing in Britain. Yet.



Oh, well if they were killing foreigners (they weren't, incidentally) then that's fine.


----------



## mauvais (Sep 22, 2019)

Celyn said:


> And a whole big lot more murdering. Many times in many places.
> 
> I was replying to a post that said "British".
> 
> I did carefully say "British", you know.  Stuff the army did in the six counties/Northern Ireland, they haven't been doing in Britain. Yet.


'British streets' don't have to be physically in Great Britain.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 22, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> That, without doubt happened. Far too many local striking miners testified they saw relatives they knew to be in the army in unnumbered police uniforms.



im really not convinced - its all hearsay. In 35 years, not a single ex-squaddie has come forward and said "i was put into a coppers uniform and sent to a picket line" - too many people would have been involved for something like this to be kept quiet for this long.


----------



## gosub (Sep 22, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> In fairness the Golliwog stuff is cause people keep putting “SHARE THIS GOLLIWOG BEFORE FACEBOOK DELETES IT” memes on Fb.
> I’ve commented with a basic history of the Golliwog on such posts only to get “yeah but when we were kids it wasn’t racist at all”
> Yeah but like... CAN YOU ACCEPT IT IS NOW?
> I’ll always excuse ignorance, it’s easy to be ignorant of stuff cause since when was there an obligation- hell, even time-  to sit on the Internet keeping up with every new development, I wish I could switch it off forever and just be alone with my garden to be honest. But once you’ve been told and you’re still waving the EU flag around? Naaah. Oh wait... Sorry, Golliwogs


I did used to know one of the heirs to Robertson jam, interesting fella. That, coincidently I met in a village where Enid Blyton started her writing (I think, weell she certainly lived and worked there) But I don't remember golliwogs ever coming up in conversation.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 22, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> im really not convinced - its all hearsay. In 35 years, not a single ex-squaddie has come forward and said "i was put into a coppers uniform and sent to a picket line" - too many people would have been involved for something like this to be kept quiet for this long.


At the time of the miner's strike in spent a lot of time with police of different ranks who were directly involved in controlling the miners. I also had access to their planning documents. At no time, and in nothing I read, did using the army dressed as police get a mention.

I would have thought that the army were busy enough in NI at that time.

But I wouldn't be surprised if troops were used. But I'd need to see some hard evidence.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 22, 2019)

dessiato said:


> At the time of the miner's strike in spent a lot of time with police of different ranks who were directly involved in controlling the miners. I also had access to their planning documents.



Were you never tempted to do something with that?


----------



## dessiato (Sep 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Were you never tempted to do something with that?


At that time no. With the benefits of age and hindsight I really wish I had. Especially when I think of how the miners were made to suffer, and continue to do so. But, for my shame, I was a Thatcherite. I soon learned the error of my ways though.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 22, 2019)

dessiato said:


> Especially when I think of how the miners were made to suffer, and continue to do so. But, for my shame, I was a Thatcherite. I soon learned the error of my ways though.



 
St. Margaret of Grantham watches over you.


----------



## dessiato (Sep 22, 2019)

It was sitting with coppers and listening to their tales of derring-do that helped me realise what a bunch of cunts they were, and why Thatcher needed to go. Within a year I'd moved as far to supporting the miners as I dared within my role. I've moved steadily left ever since.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2019)

In what role were you seeing these official plans of how the strike was to be policed? You were in the army then weren't you?


----------



## treelover (Sep 22, 2019)

> Conversation
> Jessica Simor QC Retweeted
> 
> Brexitshambles
> ...





posted on social media, nonsense?


----------



## binka (Sep 22, 2019)

Yes! Been waiting years but finally we have our own FEMA camps


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 22, 2019)

the rumours of squaddies / copper were rampant during the strike, I heard them every time I went to to picket. it was always a cousin or whatever that had seen his son in the coppers uniform but never first hand. Given the amount of working class kids from those areas in the army at the time, I would have expected something solid  to have popped up by now . I dunno, The presence of ranks coppers from obviously other areas may not have helped contain the rumour mill.i Know coppers used barracks etc to doss in aswell . Has anything actually come out to confirm this happened?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 22, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> the rumours of squaddies / copper were rampant during the strike, I heard them every time I went to to picket. it was always a cousin or whatever that had seen his son in the coppers uniform but never first hand. Given the amount of working class kids from those areas in the army at the time, I would have expected something solid  to have popped up by now . I dunno, The presence of ranks coppers from obviously other areas may not have helped contain the rumour mill.i Know coppers used barracks etc to doss in aswell . Has anything actually come out to confirm this happened?


Maybe dessiasto who was in the army at the time and was routinely viewing live police plans could tell us?


----------



## Humberto (Sep 23, 2019)

Whatever proposals are eventually forthcoming are going to be from a position of weakness, such is the weakness of this administration. They are a joke quite honestly. They don't seem to be able to handle the situation and deal with it practicably. The whole show is just fictitious.


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 23, 2019)

What is the best flow chart that Brexit has produced?


----------



## dessiato (Sep 23, 2019)

The police were in army barracks, including TA barracks. I believe it is common knowledge that police were sent in from all over the country. I think this might have been the origins of the assumption that the army was supporting the police on the picket lines.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 23, 2019)




----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 23, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 184860



Why is there a shamrock and Irish flag colours on it? 
We aren't leaving.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2019)

dessiato said:


> The police were in army barracks, including TA barracks. I believe it is common knowledge that police were sent in from all over the country. I think this might have been the origins of the assumption that the army was supporting the police on the picket lines.


So , in what role whilst in the army, were you privy to police plans to "controlling the miners"?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 23, 2019)

dessiato said:


> The police were in army barracks, including TA barracks. I believe it is common knowledge that police were sent in from all over the country. I think this might have been the origins of the assumption that the army was supporting the police on the picket lines.



i know for sure that RUC / forces were involved at a kinda consultanty level 'cos of the NI riot background- were there any squaddies on the ground ?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 23, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Why is there a shamrock and Irish flag colours on it?
> We aren't leaving.



it's says 38 on it, just look at that bit.


----------



## hot air baboon (Sep 23, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> the rumours of squaddies / copper were rampant during the strike, I heard them every time I went to to picket. it was always a cousin or whatever that had seen his son in the coppers uniform but never first hand. Given the amount of working class kids from those areas in the army at the time, I would have expected something solid  to have popped up by now . I dunno, The presence of ranks coppers from obviously other areas may not have helped contain the rumour mill.i Know coppers used barracks etc to doss in aswell . Has anything actually come out to confirm this happened?



also its not unknown for people to leave the army & then join the police force - as its an oddly small world they might have been clocked by someone they knew


----------



## gosub (Sep 23, 2019)

Argonia said:


> When is the fucking Supreme Court going to come to a verdict?


1030 Tuesday Morning


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> it's says 38 on it, just look at that bit.


it's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## kebabking (Sep 23, 2019)

treelover said:


> posted on social media, nonsense?



Yup.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

Are Labour gonna go full Remain and commit electoral suicide then? I'm not holding my breath I have to say.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are Labour gonna go full Remain and commit electoral suicide then? I'm not holding my breath I have to say.


how many times must that party commit suicide before they finally die?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how many times must that party commit suicide before they finally die?



Alright, temporary suicide. Something will limp on!

Unison and TSSA backing Remain. Musicians Union expected to do the same. That's 3 out of 12 - any others anyone knows about? Unite solidly supporting Corbyn's neutral/whatever it is position.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Unite solidly supporting *Corbyn's neutral/whatever it is position*.



 Did you see the Andrew Marr Show yesterday?

Marr asked him, if he got 'his deal', as in everything he wants from the EU, would he campaign for 'his deal' or 'remain' in a second referendum, and he wouldn't answer.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Did you see the Andrew Marr Show yesterday?
> 
> Marr asked him, if he got 'his deal', as in everything he wants from the EU, would he campaign for 'his deal' or 'remain' in a second referendum, and he wouldn't answer.



Yeah did watch that. Bit painful. It wasn't bad exactly, just...ugh. Such a mess.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are Labour gonna go full Remain and commit electoral suicide then? I'm not holding my breath I have to say.



Maybe they'll go full leave and commit electoral suicide.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 23, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Did you see the Andrew Marr Show yesterday?
> 
> Marr asked him, if he got 'his deal', as in everything he wants from the EU, would he campaign for 'his deal' or 'remain' in a second referendum, and he wouldn't answer.


Trouble is, this kind of nonsense from Corbyn even makes Johnson's lumbering through the undergrowth, crashing into trees, outright lying and the rest look decisive.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

rubbershoes said:


> Maybe they'll go full leave and commit electoral suicide.



I'm not going to claim that fully supporting Leave wouldn't alienate a lot of voters at this point (although it depends how you do it, and, if you can remember 2017, you will know that they did pretty well in 2017 when they promised a "jobs first Brexit" with "no new immigration controls") but you only need to look at the Lib Dems to see how badly ignoring a referendum in which everyone was told their vote mattered will go. That's fine for the Lib Dems because they're mainly aiming to pick up seats in Remain Tory areas, but Labour can't win a majority with that position. You might not like it, but it is reality.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Trouble is, this kind of nonsense from Corbyn even makes Johnson's lumbering through the undergrowth, crashing into trees, outright lying and the rest look decisive.



Lying decisively is a step up from honestly not having a fucking clue.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how many times must that party commit suicide before they finally die?



They seem to have a problem bringing anything to fruition these days.


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 23, 2019)

Labour party is divided, now we know to remain and neutral. I hope not many MPs are for remain, and I hope neutral means leave with a good deal.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 23, 2019)

I teach a lady on Saturdays whose fella is in  the army. She tells me every week he's being "got ready for Brexit cos it's going to kick off".


----------



## 8ball (Sep 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I teach a lady on Saturdays whose fella is in  the army. She tells me every week he's being "got ready for Brexit cos it's going to kick off".



Not sure how many weeks she's been telling you that, but I have a work mate who is an army reservist.  Very early in the year he was on some sort of standby, then it died down a bit, now they seem to be ramping up again.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 23, 2019)

Difficult to see solution to Brexit impasse - Barnier



> In a quip about British talk of virtual checks on the border, Mr Barnier said: "I don't know how to inspect a cow with virtual methods."



It's already been proposed that there should be a single regulatory regime north and south of the Irish border for food and agriculture, you thick cunt Barnier.


----------



## Cid (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not going to claim that fully supporting Leave wouldn't alienate a lot of voters at this point (although it depends how you do it, and, if you can remember 2017, you will know that they did pretty well in 2017 when they promised a "jobs first Brexit" with "no new immigration controls") but you only need to look at the Lib Dems to see how badly ignoring a referendum in which everyone was told their vote mattered will go. That's fine for the Lib Dems because they're mainly aiming to pick up seats in Remain Tory areas, but Labour can't win a majority with that position. You might not like it, but it is reality.



65% of labour voters. It would totally fuck them to fully support leave... with the one caveat that consistently advocating a specific, remainish leave might have had legs.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

Cid said:


> 65% of labour voters. It would totally fuck them to fully support leave... with the one caveat that consistently advocating a specific, remainish leave might have had legs.



Who will those Labour voters vote for instead? The Lib Dems? The Tories? 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'Remainish Leave', it sounds a bit like that other nebulous term, soft Brexit. But it is possible - even now - to articulate a vision for leaving the EU which is not based on rounding up migrants and doing trade deals with the US.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Labour can't win a majority with that position. You might not like it, but it is reality.



A reality that barely seems to warrant a passing thought these days. Yet again, a parliamentary process has assumed more importance than the world outside of the bubble. 

Given the majority of the seats Labour need to win are leave. Given that the collapse towards a neo-liberal remain places them in a shoot off with the liberals, greens, nats, TIG and various independent loons for 48% of the electorate and given that every concession by Corbyn merely produces demands for even more of them it's clear that actually winning the GE has been abandoned. A second ref and bringing down Corbyn is now the game.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 23, 2019)

Cid said:


> 65% of labour voters. It would totally fuck them to fully support leave... with the one caveat that consistently advocating a specific, remainish leave might have had legs.



65% of Labour voters in 2017. Not of 2015 or 2010 or the millions who left under Blair.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 23, 2019)

AnandLeo said:


> Labour party is divided, now we know to remain and neutral. I hope not many MPs are for remain, and I hope neutral means leave with a good deal.



there isn't a good deal to be had. the last 2.5 years have emphatically demonstrated that.  Which is the major weakness of corbyn's position. The only coherent argument for brexit is one based on a narrative  that its "liberation from oppressive control by brussels/ECB etc" .


----------



## killer b (Sep 23, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 65% of Labour voters in 2017. Not of 2015 or 2010 or the millions who left under Blair.


The problem with regaining these voters is that they were lost over a generation - it would take a generation again to get them back.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 23, 2019)

killer b said:


> The problem with regaining these voters is that they were lost over a generation - it would take a generation again to get them back.


That's absolutely true but surely that should be the aim of socialists in the LP.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2019)

Piling up remain votes in seats that they won't and never have won in, whilst losing seats they hold and have a long term base and vote in is madness. Like it or not, not all votes are worth the same. Trade gold ones for shifty changeable ones is suicide.


----------



## gosub (Sep 23, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Difficult to see solution to Brexit impasse - Barnier
> 
> 
> 
> It's already been proposed that there should be a single regulatory regime north and south of the Irish border for food and agriculture, you thick cunt Barnier.




Saw this on facebook earlier https://nypost.com/2019/07/14/swedi...medium=site+buttons&utm_campaign=site+buttons   (rather them than me) but if you can do that  with people why can't you do that with cows?  If you have  both sides testing the qualitiy of the data that ends up hanging on the chips, you'd end up with increased market and consumer protection. Plus irrc Findus 'Donkey' Lasagna was RoI into UK problem not the other way round


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 23, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Piling up remain votes in seats that they won't and never have won in, whilst losing seats they hold and have a long term base and vote in is madness. Like it or not, not all votes are worth the same. Trade gold ones for shifty changeable ones is suicide.



At the moment Labour is polling as low as 22% so it’s hardly clear it’s policy of presenting a choice between BRINO or Remain is appealing to anyone much. It appears to be risking metropolitan seats as well as traditional.

If it’s clear that it would take a generation to get back former Labour voters now swayed to a Brexit that is a proper severance, then there is little hope this fudge is going to make any quick inroads as it is. Something else needs to change about Labour’s offer for it to win votes from either camp, either the offer itself or the leadership offering it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 23, 2019)

'Full Remain Now' motion lost. Some people complaining on Twitter that Jennie Formby told the Chair not to count the votes. 

I think I'm relieved, although obviously it's still quite a weird position to get across in an election.


----------



## belboid (Sep 23, 2019)

Formby was (I think) arguing against a card vote, as it wasn't as close as yesterdays votes which _did _go to a card vote.

Looked pretty clear majorities for the leadership position from the telly.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Sep 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's wicked to mock the afflicted



Who are you saying is afflicted Pickman's model ?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I think I'm relieved, although obviously it's still quite a weird position to get across in an election.



It’s almost worth it to see a crestfallen Starmer and other Blairites on TV tonight. Another failed coup. Another Remainer defeat. A blow to their hopes of installing an unelected national government to impose a neo-liberal remain


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It’s almost worth it to see a crestfallen Starmer and other Blairites on TV tonight. Another failed coup. Another Remainer defeat. A blow to their hopes of installing an unelected national government to impose a neo-liberal remain


Wouldn’t call starmer a blairite.
Keir Starmer: Sorry, Mr Blair, but 1441 does not authorise force


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> 65% of Labour voters in 2017. Not of 2015 or 2010 or the millions who left under Blair.


A big labour turnout - 40 per cent of the vote. And that 40 per cent voted for corbyn's labour not Blair or Miliband or Brown. And that is with a still terrible youth turn out , something that is still there to be mobilised . Just about the only consistent pattern in the referendum is that everywhere younger voters voted more remain than older voters. Not just a bit more. Much more.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

Look littlebabyjesus you've got what you all said you wanted. Labour’s position is the PV position that blarities have demanded. 

You’ve achieved:

1. A second ref 
2. Remain on the ballot paper 
3. No deal off the ballot paper
4. Remain only has to beat a deal the EU will offer 
5. Labour will be neutral/offer a free vote on the issue 

Seriously, if any of these young remainers don’t think that’s enough to vote for the only party that can beat the Tories then they need to give their heads a wobble


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

I dont think the people campaigning most vigorously for remain in Labour are the blairites, and a substantial number of blairites - kinnock, flint etc - back supporting a deal. It's a far more complicated split of loyalties than simply Labour remain = a blairite project.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Why is there a shamrock and Irish flag colours on it?
> We aren't leaving.


I think this answers your question, when the salient issue on the image is the 38 days bit


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> I dont think the people campaigning most vigorously for remain in Labour are the blairites, and a substantial number of blairites - kinnock, flint etc - back supporting a deal. It's a far more complicated split of loyalties than simply Labour remain = a blairite project.



Then why aren’t they dancing in the streets of Brighton? They’ve achieved the fundamental change in Labour policy they wanted. The People’s Vote position is the Labour position. 

You have to conclude that what they wanted was a second ref that also acted as a Trojan horse to remove Corbyn.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Then why aren’t they dancing in the streets of Brighton? They’ve achieved the fundamental change in Labour policy they wanted. The People’s Vote position is the Labour position.
> 
> You have to conclude that what they wanted was a second ref that also acted as a Trojan horse to remove Corbyn.


I’m a remainer and I’m ok with labour’s position.

But maybe they’re worried this will split the labour vote in labour/Tory marginals (lots of labour remainers saying they will now vote lib dem) and hand it to the Tories?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Look littlebabyjesus you've got what you all said you wanted. Labour’s position is the PV position that blarities have demanded.
> 
> You’ve achieved:
> 
> ...


Aye, this firmly puts remain as most likely outcome (if labour largest party). Seems it all has less to do with the material or the probable, it's an image & perception thing - empty words and slogans like bollocks to brexit and wrapping yourself in EU flag matters more to the remain nutters than anything concrete


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I’m a remainer and I’m ok with labour’s position.
> 
> But maybe they’re worried this will split the labour vote in labour/Tory marginals (lots of labour remainers saying they will now vote lib dem) and hand it to the Tories?



Everyone, everyone, knows the seats Labour need to win are almost entirely leave seats. This is the policy chosen to contest them.

In my opinion it’s a disaster and these seats are now lost - unless by a miracle everyone forgets Brexit during a GE. The best that can be said is that it shores up the Labour vote in seats they won in 2017.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Everyone, everyone, knows the seats Labour need to win are almost entirely leave seats. This is the policy chosen to contest them.
> 
> In my opinion it’s a disaster and these seats are now lost - unless by a miracle everyone forgets Brexit during a GE. The best that can be said is that it shores up the Labour vote in seats they won in 2017.



You got a link with info re: that? This is what I’ve read and it’s old.. FactCheck: would Labour win an election if it backed remain?

Also what about the seats labour need to hold on to? What’s the leave/remain split? Genuinely don’t know hence asking.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Then why aren’t they dancing in the streets of Brighton? They’ve achieved the fundamental change in Labour policy they wanted. The People’s Vote position is the Labour position.
> 
> You have to conclude that what they wanted was a second ref that also acted as a Trojan horse to remove Corbyn.


who are you talking about here?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 24, 2019)

I shouldn't be surprised or upset by the fact that so many people will only vote on Brexit in a GE, forgetting or ignoring or just not knowing what the Tories have done in the last decade and will double up on if they win again.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> who are you talking about here?



Watson, Starmer, Thornberry, Lewis, Benn, Cooper, Kyle, Mason, PV loons


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Watson, Starmer, Thornberry, Lewis, Benn, Cooper, Kyle, Mason, PV loons


are these the blairites you were talking about above?


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

When did Cooper become a _PV loon_ btw?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> When did Cooper become a _PV loon_ btw?



Eh? There is a comma indicating it’s those named and PV loons


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Eh? There is a comma indicating it’s those named and PV loons


Is she supportive of the campaign for a people's vote though? She's been fairly noteable by her absence from this particular debate, unless I've missed something.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> Formby was (I think) arguing against a card vote, as it wasn't as close as yesterdays votes which _did _go to a card vote.
> 
> Looked pretty clear majorities for the leadership position from the telly.


It was a stitch up for a fudge. Will that work on the doorstep?.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 24, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> You got a link with info re: that? This is what I’ve read and it’s old.. FactCheck: would Labour win an election if it backed remain?
> 
> Also what about the seats labour need to hold on to? What’s the leave/remain split? Genuinely don’t know hence asking.


The key assumption in that Fact Check is it using a UNS. 

If you look at the Labour target seats and Labour marginals they confirm the fact that (as usual) the next government will be decided in Tory-Lab and Lab-Tory seats. (For instance there are only two seats in the country where Lab are realistically competing with the LDs)

And of those Lab-Tory seats a majority had (estimated) majorities for Leave in the 2016 referendum. 



redsquirrel said:


> Leave % for top 10 Con-Lab marginals
> Southampton Itchen - 60
> Pudsey - 49
> Hastings and Rye - 56
> ...


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It was a stitch up for a fudge.


they should probably have allowed a card vote just to put this kind of bollocks to bed.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Given the majority of the seats Labour need to win are leave. Given that the collapse towards a neo-liberal remain places them in a shoot off with the liberals, greens, nats, TIG and various independent loons for 48% of the electorate and given that every concession by Corbyn merely produces demands for even more of them it's clear that actually winning the GE has been abandoned. A second ref and bringing down Corbyn is now the game.



This thing of everyone staying exactly where they were three years ago and voting only according to their position on brexit is rubbish IMO. There are no seats which voted to leave, because seats didn't get a vote. Individuals voted. Not necessarily the same individuals who would vote in a GE, nor in the same way.

Worth remembering also that the referendum vote was gerrymandered by the exclusion of EU citizens resident in the UK. Not so a general election, although the huge numbers of EU folk turned away from polling stations at the recent EU elections should be a big concern. Strangely not a big concern to the suddenly and savagely pro-democracy Brexit supporters, or indeed remainers, or anyone come to think of it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Worth remembering also that the referendum vote was gerrymandered by the exclusion of EU citizens resident in the UK. Not so a general election...



Most EU citizens don't get to vote in general elections, with the exception of the Irish and Commonwealth citizens from Cyprus or Malta.

ETA - (I forgot about Cyprus and Malta)


> Note: EU citizens (who are not Citizens of the Republic of Ireland, Cyprus or Malta) are not able to vote in UK Parliament elections.



Which elections can I vote in?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> EU citizens don't get to vote in general elections, with the exception of the Irish.



That appears to be true. I should stop listening to what people tell me.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

the rule of thumb is to double check everything you read on twitter before quoting it as fact.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> the rule of thumb is to double check everything you read on twitter before quoting it as fact.



As Theodore Roosevelt tweeted


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> the rule of thumb is to double check everything you read on twitter before quoting it as fact.



I don't read anything on twitter, in this instance I've got my bad information from actual meatspace humans.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I don't read anything on twitter, in this instance I've got my bad information from actual meatspacs humans.


I bet they got it off twitter though.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 24, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 184953


ah, there's red white and blue on your image today 

but also beige


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 24, 2019)

think i posted that one before... you know or similar...


----------



## philosophical (Sep 24, 2019)

If Labour get elected and gets a 'deal' where there is any kind of divergence either side of the land border in Ireland they will have to explain how that border is managed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If Labour get elected and gets a 'deal' where there is any kind of divergence either side of the land border in Ireland they will have to explain how that border is managed.


i would expect they'd have had to explain during negotiations and before the completion of the deal how they envisaged the border being managed


----------



## kebabking (Sep 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If Labour get elected and gets a 'deal' where there is any kind of divergence either side of the land border in Ireland they will have to explain how that border is managed.



No they won't, because no one gives a shit.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 24, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 184953



Im curious - what is this really badly photoshopped guff?


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 24, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Im curious - what is this really badly photoshopped guff?



37 Days (TV Mini-Series 2014– ) - IMDb


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> they should probably have allowed a card vote just to put this kind of bollocks to bed.


They would have lost, that's why they didn't do it.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

Outside the supreme court this morning.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i would expect they'd have had to explain during negotiations and before the completion of the deal how they envisaged the border being managed



Yes they will have to explain in advance, which suggests to me that they won't be able to (nobody has even come close so far) suggest anything other than a controlled border. A concept that will be in all likelihood defeated by Geography.
I think it is virtually impossible for Labour to negotiate a deal that avoids confronting the importance of the Good Friday Agreement.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> This thing of everyone staying exactly where they were three years ago and voting only according to their position on brexit is rubbish IMO. There are no seats which voted to leave, because seats didn't get a vote. Individuals voted. Not necessarily the same individuals who would vote in a GE, nor in the same way.
> 
> Worth remembering also that the referendum vote was gerrymandered by the exclusion of EU citizens resident in the UK. Not so a general election, although the huge numbers of EU folk turned away from polling stations at the recent EU elections should be a big concern. Strangely not a big concern to the suddenly and savagely pro-democracy Brexit supporters, or indeed remainers, or anyone come to think of it.


The first part of this is true, and some individual voters who voted Leave may be prepared to vote for a Remain supporting Labour party, but as a general point if the majority of Labour's target seats were leave voting, coming out as explicitly Remain (which they haven't, yet) certainly wouldn't do much for their GE chances overall.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Yes they will have to explain in advance, which suggests to me that they won't be able to (nobody has even come close so far) suggest anything other than a controlled border. A concept that will be in all likelihood defeated by Geography.
> I think it is virtually impossible for Labour to negotiate a deal that avoids confronting the importance of the Good Friday Agreement.


Maybe you should nip down to Brighton and ask the assembled party about this, because no one here is really bothered by your mono-maniac obsession with the Irish border, TBH


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

William Joyce was the last one to be hanged for treason ....
by all accounts the penalty was kept as an option until 1998...

High treason in the United Kingdom - Wikipedia


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who will those Labour voters vote for instead? The Lib Dems? The Tories?



Tbh yeah... Certainly in some seats. I know labour primarily needs to win in brexit seats, that's usually what I'm saying outside urban when people are exasperated that labour 'don't just back remain'... But they are doing so fucking badly in the polls that for once it might actually carry through to GE results.



> I'm not quite sure what you mean by 'Remainish Leave', it sounds a bit like that other nebulous term, soft Brexit. But it is possible - even now - to articulate a vision for leaving the EU which is not based on rounding up migrants and doing trade deals with the US.



I think a full labour leave is impossible now. It might have been if it had formed part of the 2017 position, or if they'd articulated it shortly after... But you have to remember they'd basically be going against the entire media... You'd get the old 'sensible tory economics' bollocks, Corbyn as a lefty idealist. But with a couple of years, a lot of negotiation with the EU and other potential trade partners they should have been able to bring something back. They didn't though, and there are a multitude of reasons for that... Certainly something they should have explored.


----------



## philosophical (Sep 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> Maybe you should nip down to Brighton and ask the assembled party about this, because no one here is really bothered by your mono-maniac obsession with the Irish border, TBH



Are you a site moderator?
Or do you feel the need to call on back up ('no one here') because you lack confidence as an individual to stand your ground on your own?


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> They would have lost, that's why they didn't do it.


You're wrong, as even the most casual check of the footage from the hall would confirm. Maybe you could fall back to saying the delegate selection was fixed instead, like everyone else.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2019)

It's been astonishing just how quickly conspiracism spread through the sensible grown up adult centre. The referendum result really did act like a sort of 911 style accelerator didn't it?.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's been astonishing just how quickly conspiracism spread through the sensible grown up adult centre. The referendum result really did act like a sort of 911 style accelerator didn't it?.


It's not even conspiracy in this case though, more the kind of _trumpian_ (sorry) denial of reality they claim to be against.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Are you a site moderator?
> Or do you feel the need to call on back up ('no one here') because you lack confidence as an individual to stand your ground on your own?


No and no.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> I dont think the people campaigning most vigorously for remain in Labour are the blairites, and a substantial number of blairites - kinnock, flint etc - back supporting a deal. It's a far more complicated split of loyalties than simply Labour remain = a blairite project.



You're absolutely right that it's complicated, but in the case of Kinnock and Flint, their preference for a deal is based on their own constituencies - they prefer May's deal because they see it as making a Corbyn govt unlikely. The Blairites (right wingers is probably a better term) may advocate different positions based on circumstance but their goal is resolving Brexit without a Corbyn led govt coming to power.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> Tbh yeah... Certainly in some seats. I know labour primarily needs to win in brexit seats, that's usually what I'm saying outside urban when people are exasperated that labour 'don't just back remain'... But they are doing so fucking badly in the polls that for once it might actually carry through to GE results.
> 
> 
> 
> I think a full labour leave is impossible now. It might have been if it had formed part of the 2017 position, or if they'd articulated it shortly after... But you have to remember they'd basically be going against the entire media... You'd get the old 'sensible tory economics' bollocks, Corbyn as a lefty idealist. But with a couple of years, a lot of negotiation with the EU and other potential trade partners they should have been able to bring something back. They didn't though, and there are a multitude of reasons for that... Certainly something they should have explored.



I'm not convinced large numbers of people would risk a Tory election win and no deal to vote for the Lib Dems but who knows. 

I think Labour think this customs union/single market thing is easy enough to agree. Would be interesting to know detail of discussions they'd had with EU leaders.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's not even conspiracy in this case though, more the kind of _trumpian_ (sorry) denial of reality they claim to be against.


I agree - conspiracism is (at least in a current slew of post-trump election books) distinguished from classic conspiracy theory though through it's simple 'denial of reality', denial of anything they don't think should have happened, rather than an elaborate unverifiable model of what did actually happen. And it seems to be inherently 'political'.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> You're wrong, as even the most casual check of the footage from the hall would confirm. Maybe you could fall back to saying the delegate selection was fixed instead, like everyone else.


If they were sure, why not let it go to a card vote?, pack the hall and do a show of hands.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

sounds like johnson's getting shat on by the supreme court


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

"Decision unlawful"

Wonder what happens now...


----------



## mod (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> sounds like johnson's getting shat on by the supreme court



Fucking YESSSSS!!!!


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 24, 2019)

Wow. This is big. 

BoJo to go?


----------



## mod (Sep 24, 2019)

They are really sticking the boot into the cunt.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 24, 2019)

Hahahahahahaha


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 24, 2019)

Looks like power given to Speaker to act. 

This is fucking hilarious


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

Wow, unanimous, unlawful, it isn't valid, it never was valid, it never happened, in effect, speaker in control now.

That's as bad as it possibly could have been for Johnson.

And unanimous so no minority verdict. This is it.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 24, 2019)

This is glorious


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)




----------



## Winot (Sep 24, 2019)

I'm grinning like a loon here.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 24, 2019)

I predict an _emotional _Cabinet meeting...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2019)

I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?


----------



## T & P (Sep 24, 2019)

Fucking get in


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?


Haven't read the judgement, obviously,  but isn't the underlying logic that the PM isn't sovereign?


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> It was a stitch up for a fudge. Will that work on the doorstep?.


Stitch up?  Please expand. The main thing was defeating the 'referendum now' motion (which was proposed by a former member of these boards) so that an election wasn't gone into with the _utterly _moronic position of negotiating an agreement they'd then argue against.



sleaterkinney said:


> If they were sure, why not let it go to a card vote?, pack the hall and do a show of hands.



The vote was clearly lost.  A card vote would have been a bad idea as it would have exacerbated the split between unions and membership, given the grauniad carte blanche to scream about a betrayal of the membership blah blah and been more of a distraction. As it is, its strong wind in a teacup.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> Haven't read the judgement, obviously,  but isn't the underlying logic that the PM isn't sovereign?



That's my understanding.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?


This is specifically dealing with the limits of the royal prerogative, as used by the PM. Unless you understand something I don't, that's more or less the opposite.


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Eh? There is a comma indicating it’s those named and PV loons


stick to copy n pasting, son, you're just embarrassing yourself.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?


Thats not it though is it? Surely the judgement is that Parliament is exactly that, and that the PM can't simply plough through what he wants?


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?



When did Parliament decide to prorogue itself? This judgement limits the executive power, no?

In my understanding the real problem is the FTPA allows for the continuation of an executive which doesn't command a majority in Parliament, currently being exploited by all sides in this abject mess.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Sep 24, 2019)

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-summary.pdf


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's my understanding.



And mine.  I do not see how there cannot be a vote of no confidence after that ruling.  Whether an alternative government can get its act together in the two weeks after remains to be seen.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2019)

The judgement says that a prorogation of parliament (not just this time - but when done _properly_) is inherently an imposition on parliament:

_The next and final question, therefore, is what the legal effect of that finding is and therefore what remedies the Court should grant. The Court can certainly declare that the advice was unlawful. The Inner House went further and declared that any prorogation resulting from it was null and of no effect. The Government argues that the Inner House could not do that because the prorogation was a “proceeding in Parliament” which, under the Bill of Rights of 1688 cannot be impugned or questioned in any court. But it is quite clear that the prorogation is not a proceeding in Parliament. It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both Houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of Parliament which the Bill of Rights protects. Quite the reverse: it brings that core or essential business to an end._


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 24, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2019-0192-summary.pdf





> This Court has already concluded that the Prime Minister’s advice to Her Majesty was unlawful, void and of no effect. This means that the Order in Council to which it led was also unlawful, void and of no effect and should be quashed. This means that when the Royal Commissioners walked into the House of Lords it was as if they walked in with a blank sheet of paper. The prorogation was also void and of no effect. Parliament has not been prorogued.
> 
> This is the unanimous judgment of all 11 Justices. 4 It is for Parliament, and in particular the Speaker and the Lord Speaker to decide what to do next. Unless there is some Parliamentary rule of which we are unaware, they can take immediate steps to enable each House to meet as soon as possible. It is not clear to us that any step is needed from the Prime Minister, but if it is, the court is pleased that his counsel have told the court that he will take all necessary steps to comply with the terms of any declaration made by this court. It follows that the Advocate General’s appeal in the case of Cherry is dismissed and Mrs Miller’s appeal is allowed. The same declarations and orders should be made in each case.


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> And mine.  I do not see how there cannot be a vote of no confidence after that ruling.  Whether an alternative government can get its act together in the two weeks after remains to be seen.



I also do not think, Mr Johnson should consider his position as Conservative leader, he inherited a very sticky wicket.  It will be interesting to see how the Tory Confertence goes, after all it is his party's decision.


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> This is specifically dealing with the limits of the royal prerogative, as used by the PM. Unless you understand something I don't, that's more or less the opposite.


No, the PM is still the decider, he just had to follow (unwritten) rules in making that decision.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 24, 2019)

Please let him appeal this decision to the ECJ


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 24, 2019)

Hey Boris...


----------



## chilango (Sep 24, 2019)

Let's be absolutely clear - this not a victory for _us_.

It is however a defeat for some of _them_.

I do wonder what has pushed them to turn on each other so openly though.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> No, the PM is still the decider, her just had to follow (unwritten) rules in making that decision.



Without wishing to sound too fucking Lib Dem-y, these rules might need to get written down at some point.


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I'm not convinced large numbers of people would risk a Tory election win and no deal to vote for the Lib Dems but who knows.



Yeah the picture is really uncertain. Though I’d definitely agree they’re fucked if they abandon the brexit marginals.



> I think Labour think this customs union/single market thing is easy enough to agree. Would be interesting to know detail of discussions they'd had with EU leaders.



Yeah, but then they need to present that and other potential options convincingly. Which I think is what’s confused me about their approach more than anything else. They have to hedge, but hedge with some clear options.

Anyway, on to the Supreme Court discussion.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 24, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Please let him appeal this decision to the ECJ



It's not a matter in scope for ECJ


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

I'm not celebrating the specifics cos it's not something to celebrate but I am enjoying the continuing shitshow and the potential long term effect this will have on public mood. Bring on the water cannons.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

I predict Remainders sudden fondness for the courts will mean this is glossed over.

'No evidence' of Brexit campaign crimes

Interesting that it comes on the same day.


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Without wishing to sound too fucking Lib Dem-y, these rules might need to get written down at some point.



Surely that would be a  breach of the Constitution?


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I predict Remainders sudden fondness for the courts will mean this is glossed over.
> 
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49807401l
> 
> Interesting that it comes on the same day.


404 not founds come most days!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> 404 not founds come most days!



Sorry, fixed it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I predict Remainders sudden fondness for the courts will mean this is glossed over.
> 
> 'No evidence' of Brexit campaign crimes
> 
> Interesting that it comes on the same day.


No law against a sizeable chunk of the electorate being racist morons either.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> No law against a sizeable chunk of the electorate being racist morons either.



Booooooooooooring.


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> Surely that would be a  breach of the Constitution?



If Parliament voted for it, no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> No law against a sizeable chunk of the electorate being racist morons either.


philosophical seems to have nicked your login


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 24, 2019)




----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical seems to have nicked your login


I include my own parents in that.


----------



## TopCat (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I include my own parents in that.


You know your parents but are making hasty assumptions about the rest IMHO.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I include my own parents in that.


No, you're including others in your parents.


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> If Parliament voted for it, no.


What deliberately binding successors : You'd have to included a mechanism by which said written rules could be overturned


----------



## Plumdaff (Sep 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> What deliberately binding successors : You'd have to included a mechanism by which said written rules could be overturned



We already bind successors, and we already have a means of overriding it.


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> philosophical seems to have nicked your login


dont be daft.  he didn't mention the border


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 24, 2019)

Boris really does go to extraordinary lengths to maintain his “hapless” image, doesn’t he?


----------



## treelover (Sep 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> Stitch up?  Please expand. The main thing was defeating the 'referendum now' motion (which was proposed by a former member of these boards) so that an election wasn't gone into with the _utterly _moronic position of negotiating an agreement they'd then argue against.
> 
> 
> 
> The vote was clearly lost.  A card vote would have been a bad idea as it would have exacerbated the split between unions and membership, given the grauniad carte blanche to scream about a betrayal of the membership blah blah and been more of a distraction. As it is, its strong wind in a teacup.



Who was that?


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> Who was that?


who was what?


----------



## treelover (Sep 24, 2019)

The proposer of the referendum motion to Conf, on here i mean.


----------



## AnandLeo (Sep 24, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> there isn't a good deal to be had. the last 2.5 years have emphatically demonstrated that.  Which is the major weakness of corbyn's position. The only coherent argument for brexit is one based on a narrative  that its "liberation from oppressive control by brussels/ECB etc" .


I tend to regard the current deal which has been rejected by the parliament contains many of the polices of liberation from the Brussels, such as farming and fisheries, and many others, even though with some compromises. Free movement of people can be brought under a sensible system of control without harm to EU citizens living and working in UK, and future EU citizens who would like move freely for travel, study, business or work. The remaining  key elements of Corbyn’s position are Customs Union, and free trade etc. that will preserve the smooth transition of trade and industry after the Brexit, which is the biggest threat to the economy and way of life. I advocated this stance during the May’s government that was not cocky as the present government. The conservative governments have not considered the path of Customs Union and free trade. Neither the Corbyn’s idea of a Customs Union, that would also eliminate the Northern Ireland border impasse, has been considered, because Corbyn is not a party to the negotiations. I can forlorn not seeing this happening. Besides, I have other personal matters to brood.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> Who was that?


I think he's got something mixed up tbh, the only ex urbanite I can think of with any swing in labour right now is articul8, who is solidly party line.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 24, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Boris really does go to extraordinary lengths to maintain his “hapless” image, doesn’t he?


Maybe he could try and get May's deal through?


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 24, 2019)

Has anyone mentioned the 'Noble Officium' yet? 

Part of Joanna Cherry's case up here was to invoke this. It literally means 'a gap in the law'. It is used in this context id Boris refuses to sign the extension to staying in the EU on 17th October. If he refuses the 'Nobile Officium' ios invoked and the law then states that it does not need to be the PM who signs the delay request but the Court who signs it and requests the extension. 

Special power of the Court of Session could force Boris Johnson to extend Article 50


----------



## teuchter (Sep 24, 2019)

For me the significance of the supreme court ruling is that it confirms that the Scottish courts are right and the English ones wrong. It's reasonable and inevitable to extrapolate this to Scottish people, and English people, in general, and in all matters. A victory for common sense.


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> I think he's got something mixed up tbh, the only ex urbanite I can think of with any swing in labour right now is articul8, who is solidly party line.


aah, that was what he meant!

No, it was deffo an ex-urbanite, just not a very regular one, and not for many years. There are quite a few of them about, you know!  He used to live in this house, so I should know him.  You dont need any swing in Labour to propose a motion to conference.


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

Fedayn said:


> Has anyone mentioned the 'Noble Officium' yet?
> 
> Part of Joanna Cherry's case up here was to invoke this. It literally means 'a gap in the law'. It is used in this context id Boris refuses to sign the extension to staying in the EU on 17th October. If he refuses the 'Nobile Officium' ios invoked and the law then states that it does not need to be the PM who signs the delay request but the Court who signs it and requests the extension.
> 
> Special power of the Court of Session could force Boris Johnson to extend Article 50



They can request it by all means, however you do have to wonder what it would mean to a EUropean Council which requires unanimous approval for granting an 'unconditional' extension....This Noble Officium would presumably be babysitting the Country whilst we are having an election.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 24, 2019)

Why is news24 interviewing Norris off Corrie about this at the moment?


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 24, 2019)

Hahahahahaaha. Hahahahaha. Fucking hell.

“The effect on the fundamentals of democracy are extreme”. She might as well have said bozo is acting like a dictator.

Hahahahahaha


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Why is news24 interviewing Norris off Corrie about this at the moment?


norris off corrie gave up a promising career as a parliamentary historian to appear in the soap


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> What deliberately binding successors : You'd have to included a mechanism by which said written rules could be overturned



Depends what you mean... you could codify the whole lot, all the conventions etc, but still leave Parliamentary sovereignty intact. I.e you’d have a written constitution, but it could be altered at any point... frankly it would clarify a lot of stuff.

Or you could try and change the nature of the constitution and have a body of constitutional law that can’t be changed on a simple majority. Though tbh I don’t see how you could do that. The next majority parliament could just come along and say your constitution was unconstitutional and ignore it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> Depends what you mean... you could codify the whole lot, all the conventions etc, but still leave Parliamentary sovereignty intact. I.e you’d have a written constitution, but it could be altered at any point... frankly it would clarify a lot of stuff.
> 
> Or you could try and change the nature of the constitution and have a body of constitutional law that can’t be changed on a simple majority. Though tbh I don’t see how you could do that. The next majority parliament could just come along and say your constitution was unconstitutional and ignore it.


a lot of places have a 2/3 majority required to change constitutions


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> Depends what you mean... you could codify the whole lot, all the conventions etc, but still leave Parliamentary sovereignty intact. I.e you’d have a written constitution, but it could be altered at any point... frankly it would clarify a lot of stuff.
> 
> Or you could try and change the nature of the constitution and have a body of constitutional law that can’t be changed on a simple majority. Though tbh I don’t see how you could do that. The next majority parliament could just come along and say your constitution was unconstitutional and ignore it.


This is why I had initially assumed the Supreme Court would fudge this. It exposes the contradictions inherent to the idea of a royal prerogative. The solution would be an elected head of state who could make their own judgements as to the constitutionality of something like this. As it stands, the monarch is simply the puppet of a prime minister, even a weak one. In this case, the weak PM clearly wasn't prepared to risk jail, so refused to submit any reason under oath. We've uncovered a limit to what Johnson is prepared to do. That's what killed him here.

There is no real solution to the fudge that is a 'constitutional monarchy' - it's an oxymoron that only survives as long as it isn't tested too much. Bad day for Johnson, but also a bad day for the monarchy. Double win.


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 24, 2019)

gosub said:


> They can request it by all means, however you do have to wonder what it would mean to a EUropean Council which requires unanimous approval for granting an 'unconditional' extension....This Noble Officium would presumably be babysitting the Country whilst we are having an election.



I bet they would enjoy the rather cold revenge of accepting it after Boris bluff and bluster about being on top of the job and being like the Hulk. As soon as he refuses it will be requested. The recent moves by Merkel, Varadkar and Barnier are clearly against a no deal brexit. It would be strange if they tehn refused it.


----------



## Badgers (Sep 24, 2019)

> The pound rose against the dollar and the euro as traders digested the verdict from the Supreme Court that the prime minister's decision to prorogue Parliament was unlawful.


Good good


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Good good


wish they'd done it two weeks ago before i went on holiday


----------



## Weller (Sep 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Why is news24 interviewing Norris off Corrie about this at the moment?


Is this online do you mean bbc 24 do you have a link please for catchup 
I have reasons to view and save  that


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 24, 2019)

From Wings.


> _ Fun trivia fact: UK electoral law requires 25 working days between the dissolution of Parliament and the date of a general election. There are exactly 27 working days (inclusive) between now and 31 October._


----------



## toblerone3 (Sep 24, 2019)

helicopters over central London circulating


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> From Wings.


more proof wings is a worthless buffoon only followed by imbeciles


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> a lot of places have a 2/3 majority required to change constitutions



Yes, but they have the advantage that their nations were founded on that basis. Or at least on the basis that there is a body of constitutional law separate from normal legislation.

The problem in the UK is that any party that tries to do that has to do it within a system that upholds Parliamentary sovereignty. Which effectively means any successor government with a sufficient majority can appeal to that earlier principle and overrule your changes.

The only way to do it would be to completely throw out the old system, monarch, lords and all. Probably turn the hoc into a museum too.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 24, 2019)

I see the spider brooch is attracting a lot of comment and being seen as a message that BoJo is a liar. “Oh what a tangled web we weave...” etc!


----------



## strung out (Sep 24, 2019)

I met her once


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Good good


Got to feel for people with TC holidays booked - now off, months until refund, and their £ would have gone further into the bargain


----------



## gosub (Sep 24, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> I see the spider brooch is attracting a lot of comment and being seen as a message that BoJo is a liar. “Oh what a tangled web we weave...” etc!
> 
> View attachment 184975




When, looking up with wistful eye,
The Bruce beheld a spider try
His filmy thread to fling
From beam to beam of that rude cot--
And well the insect's toilsome lot
Taught Scotland's future king.
Six times the gossamery thread
The wary spider threw;--
In vain the filmy line was sped,
For powerless or untrue
Each aim appeared, and back recoiled
The patient insect, six times foiled,
And yet unconquered still;
And soon the Bruce, with eager eye,
Saw him prepare once more to try
His courage, strength, and skill.
One effort more, his seventh and last!--
The hero hailed the sign!--
And on the wished-for beam hung fast
That slender silken line!
Slight as it was, his spirit caught
The more than omen; for his thought
The lesson well could trace,
Which even "he who runs may read,"
That Perseverance gains its meed,
And Patience wins the race.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

Sweepstake on the timing of Cummings' going? 

I'm going to go for tomorrow morning, 9 AM.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sweepstake on the timing of Cummings' going?
> 
> I'm going to go for tomorrow morning, 9 AM.


tomorrow lunchtime i think you'll find, when there's more on the news agenda to obscure it


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

immediately after the next general election


----------



## Weller (Sep 24, 2019)

*"Joris Bonson " new Prime Minister   love the way he leans back to emphasize "to sort this brexit out"*
*saw this bit on bbcnews live a lot of  Brexit confusion among some *
**


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> Depends what you mean... you could codify the whole lot, all the conventions etc, but still leave Parliamentary sovereignty intact. I.e you’d have a written constitution, but it could be altered at any point... frankly it would clarify a lot of stuff.
> 
> Or you could try and change the nature of the constitution and have a body of constitutional law that can’t be changed on a simple majority. Though tbh I don’t see how you could do that. The next majority parliament could just come along and say your constitution was unconstitutional and ignore it.



Nah. Parliamentary sovereignty. Just need Parliament to bring it in.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 24, 2019)

Weller said:


> *"Joris Bonson " new Prime Minister  *
> *saw this bit on bbcnews live a lot of  Brexit confusion among some *
> **



i thought joris bonson was a belgian confectioner from namur


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nah. Parliamentary sovereignty. Just need Parliament to bring it in.



Not sure what your point is there.


----------



## a_chap (Sep 24, 2019)

"In today’s modern Galaxy there is, of course, very little still held to be unspeakable.

Many words and expressions which only a matter of decades ago were considered so distastefully explicit that were they merely to be breathed in public, the perpetrator would be shunned, barred from polite society, and, in extreme cases, shot through the lungs, are now thought to be very healthy and proper, and their use in everyday speech is seen as evidence of a well-adjusted, relaxed, and totally unf**ked-up personality.

So, for instance, when in a recent national speech, the prime minister of the United Kingdom actually dared to say that due to one thing and another, and the fact that no one had made any food for awhile and parliament seemed to have died, and that most of the population had been on holiday now for over three years, the economy had now arrived at what he called, “One whole juju-flop situation,” everyone was so pleased he felt able to come out and say it, that they quite failed to notice that their two-thousand-year-old civilisation had just collapsed overnight.

But though even words like “juju-flop,” “swut,” and “turlingdrome” are now perfectly acceptable in common usage, there is one word that is still beyond the pale. The concept it embodies is so revolting that the publication or broadcast of the word is utterly forbidden in all parts of the galaxy except one - where they don’t know what it means.

That word is “Brexit”..."

With thanks to the late Douglas Adams.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 24, 2019)

Its been another day which seems like a pretty big thing has happened but its hard to work out the implications and if indeed much will change.  Johnson is still in charge and the Brexit date still exists.  Load of opposition people saying he should resign but very few calling for a vonc.

Parliament will be sitting again but what real difference will it make?  Will it just be a load of self-important waffle or is anything concrete going to come out of it?


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

It's cut short the Labour conference and allowed Corbyn to swerve a couple of uncomfortable events (Tom Watson's speech and the freedom of movement vote), so they'll be happy.


----------



## killer b (Sep 24, 2019)

Oh no, it's still on tomorrow. No-one is paying attention now though.


----------



## belboid (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> Oh no, it's still on tomorrow. No-one is paying attention now though.


Considering Weds is normally just the leaders speech, pretty much, they could move the FoM debate to then, I suppose.


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 24, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its been another day which seems like a pretty big thing has happened but its hard to work out the implications and if indeed much will change.  Johnson is still in charge and the Brexit date still exists.  Load of opposition people saying he should resign but very few calling for a vonc.
> 
> Parliament will be sitting again but what real difference will it make?  Will it just be a load of self-important waffle or is anything concrete going to come out of it?



It'll make Mail readers even angrier, which can only be a good thing


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i thought joris bonson was a belgian confectioner from namur


I'm hearing a Monty Python sketch  ....


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's cut short the Labour conference and allowed Corbyn to swerve a couple of uncomfortable events (Tom Watson's speech and the freedom of movement vote), so they'll be happy.



That is convenient timing


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

Cid said:


> Not sure what your point is there.



A government with a working majority could bring in a written constitution. It's not a new idea.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 24, 2019)

have to wait and see but does any of this really change much? Unless Labour call a VONC which they don't plan to do till ...sometime in the future...doesn't Boris just stroll on?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

ska invita said:


> have to wait and see but does any of this really change much? Unless Labour call a VONC which they don't plan to do till ...sometime in the future...doesn't Boris just stroll on?



Yeah basically.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A government with a working majority could bring in a written constitution. It's not a new idea.


Constitutional reform is generally something parties talk well about in opposition, then do fuck all about in office, finding the unwritten stuff rather convenient to their needs, especially if they have a working majority.


----------



## ska invita (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah basically.


only thing i can see it changing is them getting to go back to parliament early for non tories to fire more blanks
doubt it will effect polling even


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Constitutional reform is generally something parties talk well about in opposition, then do fuck all about in office, finding the unwritten stuff rather convenient to their needs, especially if they have a working majority.



Sure but they talk a grand job of it in opposition.


----------



## Cid (Sep 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A government with a working majority could bring in a written constitution. It's not a new idea.



I know it’s not a new idea. My point was that it can only have a limited effect... it’s fine if you just want to clear up all the conventions etc, and expect subsequent governments to go along with that. But you’ll always run up against parliamentary sovereignty if you try to go further than that.


----------



## andysays (Sep 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> more proof wings is a worthless buffoon only followed by imbeciles



Band on the Run wasn't too bad...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> Band on the Run wasn't too bad...



Wash your mouth out


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

I'm probably chatting shit here but is there any prospect of Johnson govt calling a VONC itself (lol) to get a GE (just) before 31 October? Have heard it bandied about, dunno if it's just bollocks


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm probably chatting shit here but is there any prospect of Johnson govt calling a VONC itself (lol) to get a GE (just) before 31 October? Have heard it bandied about, dunno if it's just bollocks


I was wondering exactly that as well. It feels like the next move tbh. Only problem is that it doesn't automatically trigger an election.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was wondering exactly that as well. It feels like the next move tbh. Only problem is that it doesn't automatically trigger an election.


Yeah true would gamble on nobody else forming a govt and it's 14 days to try isn't it? Shit then


----------



## 8ball (Sep 24, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I was wondering exactly that as well. It feels like the next move tbh. Only problem is that it doesn't automatically trigger an election.



I think there's a good chance things will get crazier and we'll see more actions that aren't on the standard menu.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

A VONC looks a distant possibility as the liberals, dissident tories, possibly even PLP members wouldn’t support a Corbyn government.

So there either needs to be a GE. Or a 2nd ref. In the case of the former do we sense a genuine desire for one? In the case of the latter then we can expect the parliamentary chatter and game to move on to who leads the ‘national government of unity’ to oversee it.


----------



## mod (Sep 24, 2019)

Who's up for coming to see this with me?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 24, 2019)

mod said:


> Who's up for coming to see this with me?



Washing me hair.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wonder if all the champions of parliamentary sovereignty have any problems with the underlying logic of the judgement that parliament is not sovereign?


Don’t understand this comment? The point of the judgment is that parliament is sovereign, and that bozo’s actions undermined that fundamental principle.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 24, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Don’t understand this comment? The point of the judgment is that parliament is sovereign, and that bozo’s actions undermined that fundamental principle.


I haven't read the judgement, but I imagine it was that the prorogation was done for political reasons/was dishonest/otherwise invalid. It didn't strike against the principle that the government can prorogue or for that matter the ability of governments to shape the parliamentary timetable, agenda etc.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Don’t understand this comment? The point of the judgment is that parliament is sovereign, and that bozo’s actions undermined that fundamental principle.



The decision was made by unelected judges is the point of the comment. It’s somewhat ironic to therefore to celebrate today’s judgment as a victory for democracy/the sovereignty of parliament.

The overlooking of the sleights of hand in the judgment, most notably the attempt to present this as an entirely normal exercise of the judicial role,  is dangerous.

Whatever your views on Brexit, it’s important to note that it’s not just Johnson who is diving into uncharted waters


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm probably chatting shit here but is there any prospect of Johnson govt calling a VONC itself (lol) to get a GE (just) before 31 October? Have heard it bandied about, dunno if it's just bollocks


I think (but am not certain)  there needs to be six weeks between an election being called and the election so the boat has been missed on this one.


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The decision was made by unelected judges is the point of the comment. It’s somewhat ironic to therefore to celebrate today’s judgment as a victory for democracy/the sovereignty of parliament.
> 
> The overlooking of the sleights of hand in the judgment, most notably the attempt to present this as an entirely normal exercise of the judicial role  is dangerous.
> 
> Whatever your views on Brexit, it’s important to note that it’s not just Johnson who is diving into uncharted waters




unelected PM that called for the "progulation" to be fair


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I haven't read the judgement, but I imagine it was that the prorogation was done for political reasons/was dishonest/otherwise invalid. It didn't strike against the principle that the government can prorogue or for that matter the ability of governments to shape the parliamentary timetable, agenda etc.


The Govt lawyers did not produce any evidence (apart from one memo) to suggest that the prorogation for 5 weeks was to prepare for a new Queens speech.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> unelected PM that called for the "progulation" to be fair



Yes, which should have been dealt with by the _political process. _In this case a GE. Which was rejected.

Instead dealing with Johnson’s manoeuvre was subcontracted to unelected judges.

Can anyone see why celebrating this as a victory for democracy is insane?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, which should have been dealt with by the _political process. _In this case a GE. Which was rejected.
> 
> Instead it was subcontracted to unelected judges.
> 
> Can anyone see why celebrating this as a victory for democracy is insane?


It stops the Executive from becoming unaccountable to Parliament. As the UK is a parliamentary democracy then yes it is a victory for democracy.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

MrSki said:


> It stops the Executive from becoming unaccountable to Parliament. As the UK is a parliamentary democracy then yes it is a victory for democracy.



I don’t think I can add anything to what I’ve just written. Either you see a massive problem with unelected judges deciding that this is within their ambit or you don’t.


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes, which should have been dealt with by the _political process. _In this case a GE. Which was rejected.
> 
> Instead dealing with Johnson’s manoeuvre was subcontracted to unelected judges.
> 
> Can anyone see why celebrating this as a victory for democracy is insane?



so you are angry that the opposition party in goverment avoiding a trap meaning 
that the  encombient could postpone goverment debate and voting untill after we leave the eu with a hard brexit 

and you believe in democracy


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> so you are angry that the opposition party in goverment avoiding a trap meaning
> that the  encombient could postpone goverment debate and voting untill after we leave the eu with a hard brexit
> 
> and you believe in democracy



No. I believe the opposition should have demanded an election because I believe that change comes from political struggle and not from judicial reviews or parliamentary charades.

If we want to discuss ‘democracy’ in the terms that you mean, we could start with the result of the referendum. But my post was specifically about the role, remit and results of the SC ruling


----------



## King Biscuit Time (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The decision was made by unelected judges is the point of the comment. It’s somewhat ironic to therefore to celebrate today’s judgment as a victory for democracy/the sovereignty of parliament.




What are you on about? The judges did the absolute bare minimum - all they did was wrestle power way from the PM, and hand all the power directly back to Parliament.

It's totally up to Parliament to decide what to do next.

Bozza could prorogue Parliament into the middle of next century if Parliament passed a rule saying it was cool with them.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Sep 24, 2019)

Has a grouplet sent out a pamphlet about "unelected judges" tonight or what?


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 24, 2019)

so is it EU judges or British judges scrutiny that you want to escape from


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

King Biscuit Time said:


> What are you on about? The judges did the absolute bare minimum - all they did was wrestle power way from the PM, and hand all the power directly back to Parliament.
> 
> It's totally up to Parliament to decide what to do next.
> 
> Bozza could prorogue Parliament into the middle of next century if Parliament passed a rule saying it was cool with them.



I really don’t think my point could have been clearer. And it wasn’t about the rights and wrongs of prorogation


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 24, 2019)

was it about immigrants


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 24, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> so is it EU judges or British judges scrutiny that you want to escape from



Given I’ve just replied to you saying that I believe political change comes from working class struggle -and not from appeals to Judges or Parliamentary manoeuvre - that the answer is ‘all of them’ should be obvious.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I don’t think I can add anything to what I’ve just written. Either you see a massive problem with unelected judges deciding that this is within their ambit or you don’t.





> *Appointment*. Judges of the *Supreme Court* are *appointed* by The Queen by the issue of letters patent, on the advice of the Prime Minister, to whom a name is recommended by a special selection commission.


The whole of the House of Lords is unelected. All bills of parliament have to pass through the HoLs so unless you have a problem with an unelected 2nd chamber (which I have) then why the Supreme Court?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I don’t think I can add anything to what I’ve just written. Either you see a massive problem with unelected judges deciding that this is within their ambit or you don’t.



most countries have a written constitution that sets limits on what the executive does and thats interpreted by the courts. 
The UK doesn't - its convention and tradition. Johnson has tried to exploit that so the judges are involved to effectively define the unwritten constitution in law. In effect its the same as the US supreme court putting trump back in his box on shit like his "muslim travel ban".
I suspect after the brexit dust has settled the UK is going to end up with a major constitutional overhaul that puts all this stuff down on paper. 
Whats happened today is a  clumsy and messy route to a written constitution - i find that far less troubling the exploitation of the powers of royal prerogative by a cunt like johnson


----------



## belboid (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Don’t understand this comment? The point of the judgment is that parliament is sovereign, and that bozo’s actions undermined that fundamental principle.


There are two bits of the judgement that are key,  and butchersapron and I were both - wrongly  - relying on the wrong section, tho we can blame the Guardian for implying it was the key one.

That section - "It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of parliament which the Bill of Rights protects." - refers solely to what remedy is available, and means that judges can actually comment upon the case, because it isn't a 'parliamentary' decision.

The key bit, is:
"55.Let us remind ourselves of the foundations of our constitution. We live in a representative democracy. The House of Commons exists because the people have elected its members. The Government is not directly elected by the people (unlike the position in some other democracies). *The Government exists because it has the confidence of the House of Commons. It has no democratic legitimacy other than that. This means that it is accountable to the House of Commons* -and indeed to the House of Lords -for its actions, remembering always that the actual task of governing is for the executive and not for Parliament or the courts. The first question, therefore, is whether the Prime Minister’s action had the effect of frustrating or preventing the constitutional role of Parliament in holding the Government to account.56.The answer is that of course it did..." 

Thus, while the government can indeed prorogue, and can do so to their advantage, they can't do so to simply stop parliament doing it's job.  It has to be _reasonable_.

Whilst there are obviously significant (lets be generous) issues with parliamentary democracy as being the genuine will of the people, it is more democratic than a semi-elected dictatorship.   So you can welcome this judgement whilst maintaining a staunch criticism of it, and the judiciary and their role in the process.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 25, 2019)

We also have to remember that Johnson insisted it had nothing to do with Brexit. 

That is until the ruling went against him.


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 25, 2019)

*Referendum*: "Here is an unhelpful Yes/No answer to a poorly-defined question that is sort-of politically but not constitutionally binding"
*Sort-of elected public "representatives" acting mostly along party lines:* "We cannot decide how to implement this in the best interests of the most influential forces currently abroad in the body politic"
*Barely-elected buffoon and his headbanging mate:* "We can sort this out by telling the sort-of elected public 'representatives' to fuck off out of it and then doing what we want in the cause of our particular alliance of interests"
*Unelected judicial body:* "We disagree with you and think the sort-of elected public 'representatives' should go back to shouting at each other."

*Media/Public 1:* Cool well done to the judiciary, which has said what we wanted it to say so we're not going to inquire too closely as to what actual power they might have to say it.
*Media/Public 2:* TRAITORS! Barely-elected buffoon has done nothing wrong and the judiciary shouldn't have a say!


----------



## MrSki (Sep 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If we want to discuss ‘democracy’ in the terms that you mean, we could start with the result of the referendum.


Or we could look at other countries that use referenda as part of there political set-up and take their example of what to do when voters were poorly informed.
Court overturns referendum as voters were poorly informed ... in Switzerland

Swiss court orders historic vote re-run


----------



## TopCat (Sep 25, 2019)

Should have said so up front


----------



## MrSki (Sep 25, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 25, 2019)

MrSki said:


> The whole of the House of Lords is unelected. All bills of parliament have to pass through the HoLs so unless you have a problem with an unelected 2nd chamber (which I have) then why the Supreme Court?


If you think Smokeandsteam does not have a problem with the HoL (or the HoC for that matter) you really have not understood his point. 


MrSki said:


> Or we could look at other countries that use referenda as part of there political set-up and take their example of what to do when voters were poorly informed.
> Court overturns referendum as voters were poorly informed ... in Switzerland


_Leave politics to the experts_


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Sep 25, 2019)

My bewilderment at all this is a bit like this thread: 

You'd think that after God knows how many  years of British democracy everybody would know what can and can't be done.  

Or that after 3 years, 1143 pages and 34287 posts there'd be an answer to the frigging question 'Is Brexit actually going to happen?'


----------



## rubbershoes (Sep 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I really don’t think my point could have been clearer. And it wasn’t about the rights and wrongs of prorogation



Have you read the judgment?


----------



## MrSki (Sep 25, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> If you think Smokeandsteam does not have a problem with the HoL (or the HoC for that matter) you really have not understood his point.
> _Leave politics to the experts_


What like leaving rulings on the law to 11 Supreme Court judges? Whose combined legal experience runs into hundreds of years. 
Still nice of you to add your opinion.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 25, 2019)

MrSki said:


> What like leaving rulings on the law to 11 Supreme Court judges? Whose combined legal experience runs into hundreds of years.
> Still nice of you to add your opinion.


Whooosh!


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

JuanTwoThree said:


> My bewilderment at all this is a bit like this thread:
> 
> You'd think that after God knows how many  years of British democracy everybody would know what can and can't be done.
> 
> Or that after 3 years, 1143 pages and 34287 posts there'd be an answer to the frigging question 'Is Brexit actually going to happen?'


There is. It is no, it won't happen. Not because there is no desire to leave but because our crop of politicians are utterly worthless incompetent scum.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The decision was made by unelected judges is the point of the comment. It’s somewhat ironic to therefore to celebrate today’s judgment as a victory for democracy/the sovereignty of parliament.
> 
> The overlooking of the sleights of hand in the judgment, most notably the attempt to present this as an entirely normal exercise of the judicial role,  is dangerous.
> 
> Whatever your views on Brexit, it’s important to note that it’s not just Johnson who is diving into uncharted waters


I'm celebrating it as a defeat for the nefandous Johnson. I have no problem with unelected judges deciding this or other cases, not because I think that in a democratic society this should be the role of unelected judges but because I abhor all aspects of the constitutional monarchy within which we live. If this is the way that system goes, so be it. I see it as as democratic as anything else we have.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm celebrating it as a defeat for the nefandous Johnson. I have no problem with unelected judges deciding this or other cases, not because I think that in a democratic society this should be the role of unelected judges but because I abhor all aspects of the constitutional monarchy within which we live.



We are all enjoying the spectacle. At times it’s been thrilling and also hilarious to see the administration wing of capital flailing, fighting and bringing into sharp focus their unfitness and that of the system they administer.

The rest of your post outlines a coherent political position. I largely agree with it. But it’s a different position to others on here who have either welcomed the SC opinion as some sort of victory for democracy.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2019)

_The situation is excellent _- we have the centrist liberal slop having to rely on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty on essentially powellite grounds, whilst undermining it with legal actions and forcing the judgements in those actions to highlight - or _establish_ -  the limits to their claimed sovereignty. Whilst those on the slightly further  right are forced back on to relying on the principle of popular sovereignty whilst undermining it through every measure possible because they are fully aware of the danger this represents to both them and the faction of the political class they are currently battling. Both sides are attacking the central legitimating myths of the democratic ideology and widening the gap between them and actually existing capital. Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy etc Dangerous dangerous grounds.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> _The situation is excellent _- we have the centrist liberal slop having to rely on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty on essentially powellite grounds, whilst undermining it with legal actions and forcing the judgements in those actions to highlight - or _establish_ -  the limits to their claimed sovereignty. Whilst those on the slightly further  right are forced back on to relying on the principle of popular sovereignty whilst undermining it through every measure possible because they are fully aware of the danger this represents to both them and the faction of the political class they are currently battling. Both sides are attacking the central legitimating myths of the democratic ideology and widening the gap between them and actually existing capital. Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy etc Dangerous dangerous grounds.


Anyone able to translate this into plain English or is that not a reasonable ask because this is the politics forum?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Anyone able to translate this into plain English or is that not a reasonable ask because this is the politics forum?


If you cannot comprehend what butchersapron is saying, use a dictionary.


----------



## andysays (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Anyone able to translate this into plain English or is that not a reasonable ask because this is the politics forum?


Boris has shit the bed


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2019)

I reckon skipping teuchter's sub-ern faux-posts might be a good move today. Most days in fact.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> If you cannot comprehend what butchersapron is saying, use a dictionary.


Yes, because as long as a sequence of words consists only of words that are in the dictionary, it's easy to understand.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Yes, because as long as a sequence of words consists only of words that are in the dictionary, it's easy to understand.


So you don't understand powellite

You could just have said so instead of throwing a temper tantrum


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I haven't read the judgement, but I imagine it was that the prorogation was done for political reasons/was dishonest/otherwise invalid. It didn't strike against the principle that the government can prorogue or for that matter the ability of governments to shape the parliamentary timetable, agenda etc.


I have read the judgment and they didn’t say it was for political reasons or that it was dishonest. They avoided that altogether and focused on the *effect* of prorogation - namely that it prevented the constitutional role of parliament in holding the executive to account.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So you don't understand powellite



Best to start with basalt and work towards it in baby steps.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> There are two bits of the judgement that are key,  and butchersapron and I were both - wrongly  - relying on the wrong section, tho we can blame the Guardian for implying it was the key one.
> 
> That section - "It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of parliament which the Bill of Rights protects." - refers solely to what remedy is available, and means that judges can actually comment upon the case, because it isn't a 'parliamentary' decision.
> 
> ...



Sorry I think I’m being a bit thick but I still don’t understand. The court held that the PM’s prorogation for five weeks prevented the constitutional role of parliament and was therefore unlawful. And as you say we live in a parliamentary democracy.  So where does the staunch criticism come from? I thought it was a very elegant judgment which deftly used basic constitutional law principles to define the separation of powers.
V happy to be corrected in what I’ve missed though.

Edit - or are you saying the judgment didn’t go far enough in curbing executive power?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Anyone able to translate this into plain English or is that not a reasonable ask because this is the politics forum?


Both sides of political establishment are fucking each other and themselves and undermining their own legitimacy in the process, although I reckon you probably already understood it really


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Both sides of political establishment are fucking each other and themselves and undermining their own legitimacy in the process, although I reckon you probably already understood it really



And also undermining the legitimacy of the grounds for any 'democratic legitimacy' at all (in our system's paradigm).  Not just burning the house down, but jackhammering the foundations and leaving a minefield on the site.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So you don't understand powellite



No, google can tell me what it means.

Knowing what each word means does not necessarily mean that the sentences they form are clear or easy to understand.

As you know.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> No, google can tell me what it means.
> 
> Knowing what each word means does not necessarily mean that the sentences they form are clear or easy to understand.
> 
> As you know.


None of the words butchersapron uses are difficult to understand, nor is the sense in which he uses them so I am forced to conclude your inability to understand his post is wilful rather than anything else


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> No, google can tell me what it means.
> 
> Knowing what each word means does not necessarily mean that the sentences they form are clear or easy to understand.
> 
> As you know.


I am at a loss as to what it is you don’t understand about what I saw as a concise and cogent summary of the difficulties the generic “right” are getting themselves into at the fundamental structural level.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> None of the words butchersapron uses are difficult to understand, nor is the sense in which he uses them so I am forced to conclude your inability to understand his post is wilful rather than anything else


Yes, more a matter of troubling, 'inconvenient truths' for the centre/right than incomprehension.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 25, 2019)

I think it’s time to hit the “show ignored content ” feature to try and make sense of today’s posts so far. It’s like a captain beefheart  lyric at the
Minute


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

So for starters



butchersapron said:


> Both sides are attacking the central legitimating myths of the democratic ideology and widening the gap between them and actually existing capital. Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy etc


1. What specifically are the 'central legitimising myths of the democratic ideology" that are under attack?
2. What is "actually existing capital"? What's the meaning of "actually existing capital" vs "existing capital"?
3. What is the "actual state"? What's the meaning of 'actual state' vs 'state'?
4. Autonomy from what or compared to what, and what does the 'etc' encompass?


----------



## Ax^ (Sep 25, 2019)

so the plan for bojo today is to come back ask for another general election and then spend the rest of the week calling the other party leaders chicken's.


or am I missing something


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> so the plan for bojo today is to come back ask for another general election and then spend the rest of the week calling the other party leaders chicken's.
> 
> 
> or am I missing something


*shakes fist at Westminster*


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes, more a matter of troubling, 'inconvenient truths' for the centre/right than incomprehension.



To most people, what butchersapron wrote above would simply be gobbledegook. Go on and claim otherwise.

It's posted on a politics forum, so of course, the expectations are different, because you can assume some prior knowledge and shared understanding of what certain terms mean, or are intended to mean.

I'm not a well-read politics geek, but I can largely follow most of the discussion here. When I try and read that post, I understand some of it but am not clear about the intended meaning of all of it. I believe I am not alone in that. Having been here for some time now, I realise that butchersapron is not interested in communicating with anyone with significantly less prior understanding than himself, which is why I asked if anyone else can translate it for me (and others). And the response, as per usual, is that it's wilful incomprehension, or the "inconvenient truths" nonsense.

If it contains an important point and message then why the resistance to requests to put it in more understandable terms? Even if my request is insincere, wouldn't that be of benefit to others?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 25, 2019)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 25, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> so the plan for bojo today is to come back ask for another general election and then spend the rest of the week calling the other party leaders chicken's.



He's suggesting that the people get a say through a GE? Rather than let the politicians or judges - the experts - sort it out? What a fascist bastard. Defend the nation state!


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> To most people, what butchersapron wrote above would simply be gobbledegook. Go on and claim otherwise.
> 
> It's posted on a politics forum, so of course, the expectations are different, because you can assume some prior knowledge and shared understanding of what certain terms mean, or are intended to mean.
> 
> ...


I don’t really understand all of it either & would be grateful if it was explained. I’m sure this is probably my ignorance - not a politics geek just following the discussion with interest...


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2019)

S☼I said:


> View attachment 185067


Are you suggesting we need a Lord Protector rather than a caretaker PM?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 25, 2019)

Genuinely looking forward to Johnson having to face the music and the heckles


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2019)

MrSki said:


>


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Are you suggesting we need a Lord Protector rather than a caretaker PM?


I'm suggesting Chuka knows where to stand


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 25, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



Ah, Superinjunction Schneider. Big fan of the courts. Allegedly, allegedly


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I'm suggesting Chuka knows where to stand



But not which party to stand for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So for starters
> 
> 
> 1. What specifically are the 'central legitimising myths of the democratic ideology" that are under attack?
> ...


It's very clear, the actions of both remain and brexit wings in parliament are undermining the legitimating myths - those things the state relies on us believing - which tell us we live in a democracy. Things like we live in a liberal democracy. That the judiciary are independent. That Parliament is sovereign. That the British constitution adapts over time making it the best in the world etc. Parts of the ruling class would set themselves up as the real legit ruling class in opposition to other parts. That it's a right fucking mess in the ruling class atm.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's very clear, the actions of both remain and brexit wings in parliament are undermining the legitimating myths - those things the state relies on us believing - which tell us we live in a democracy. Things like we live in a liberal democracy. That the judiciary are independent. That Parliament is sovereign. That the British constitution adapts over time making it the best in the world etc. Parts of the ruling class would set themselves up as the real legit ruling class in opposition to other parts. That it's a right fucking mess in the ruling class atm.



It may be clear to you, and to many of us on here, but when I joined this forum (u75, not p&p specifically), it would have been incomprehensible to me. 
The idea that all genuine questions are sincerely answered strikes me as spurious (mostly they are, sometimes not).  It seems more like when someone is jumped on (often relating to prior content they have posted), the post hoc justification is to return to this claim in a question-begging manner (ie. "your question was clearly not genuine because we all jumped on you").


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



That tweet says so much about what is wrong with this shitshow. About how far the left has been overtaken by liberals - and about how fucked up the liberals have become about even their own liberalism.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's very clear, the actions of both remain and brexit wings in parliament are undermining the legitimating myths - those things the state relies on us believing - which tell us we live in a democracy. Things like we live in a liberal democracy. That the judiciary are independent. That Parliament is sovereign. That the British constitution adapts over time making it the best in the world etc. Parts of the ruling class would set themselves up as the real legit ruling class in opposition to other parts. That it's a right fucking mess in the ruling class atm.


If that is what was meant, it doesn't seem very convincing to me. The court has not only ruled against the government, it has ruled in a way that clarifies some limits to the royal prerogative. That places a tension on the monarchy and its role, leaving a situation where, if Johnson were to further attempt to abuse this power, it would force the Queen into making an actual constitutional decision, the very thing the monarchy relies on never having to do in order to survive unquestioned. But it doesn't undermine the idea of an independent judiciary. If anything it strengthens it - the judiciary has acted against the interests of both the government and the crown. And it has done so precisely in order to maintain the overarching principle that parliament is sovereign. It strengthens this principle rather than weakening it, reinforcing the concept that a government exists only because of parliament, not the other way round, which is a bedrock of the legitimating process of the British constitutional arrangement. By doing so, it stops Johnson from acting like a dictator, again reinforcing the idea that we have some kind of a democratic system.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If that is what was meant, it doesn't seem very convincing to me. The court has not only ruled against the government, it has ruled in a way that clarifies some limits to the royal prerogative. That places a tension on the monarchy and its role, leaving a situation where, if Johnson were to further attempt to abuse this power, it would force the Queen into making an actual constitutional decision, the very thing the monarchy relies on never having to do in order to survive unquestioned. But it doesn't undermine the idea of an independent judiciary. If anything it strengthens it - the judiciary has acted against the interests of both the government and the crown. And it has done so precisely in order to maintain the overarching principle that parliament is sovereign. It strengthens this principle rather than weakening it, reinforcing the concept that a government exists only because of parliament, not the other way round, which is a bedrock of the legitimating process of the British constitutional arrangement. By doing so, it stops Johnson from acting like a dictator, again reinforcing the idea that we have some kind of a democratic system.



I took BA's post to mean that getting into the state where we have the judiciary making a ruling in the direction that many* expected makes them appear a shill to those interests to some, and at the very least to more neutral observers seems like they are being dragged in as a partisan tool.

Also, it is clear from what Remainers were saying that they (the Remainers) were loving the idea of being able to commandeer the judiciary to slap down the Brexiteers.

* - the subset who see the judiciary as beholden to elite interests that are trying to scupper Brexit


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

And tbh, what any of this has to do with capital is quite beyond me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> I took BA's post to mean that getting into the state where we have the judiciary making a ruling in the direction that many* expected makes them appear a shill to those interests to some, and at the very least to more neutral observers seems like they are being dragged in as a partisan tool.


But is that convincing? The Daily Express thinks it is. I don't.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's very clear, the actions of both remain and brexit wings in parliament are undermining the legitimating myths - those things the state relies on us believing - which tell us we live in a democracy. Things like we live in a liberal democracy. That the judiciary are independent. That Parliament is sovereign. That the British constitution adapts over time making it the best in the world etc. Parts of the ruling class would set themselves up as the real legit ruling class in opposition to other parts. That it's a right fucking mess in the ruling class atm.



You are Adam Curtis AICM£5


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's very clear, the actions of both remain and brexit wings in parliament are undermining the legitimating myths - those things the state relies on us believing - which tell us we live in a democracy. Things like we live in a liberal democracy. That the judiciary are independent. That Parliament is sovereign. That the British constitution adapts over time making it the best in the world etc. Parts of the ruling class would set themselves up as the real legit ruling class in opposition to other parts. That it's a right fucking mess in the ruling class atm.


That partially answers my question 1 but none of questions 2 to 4.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> I took BA's post to mean that getting into the state where we have the judiciary making a ruling in the direction that many* expected makes them appear a shill to those interests to some, and at the very least to more neutral observers seems like they are being dragged in as a partisan tool.
> 
> Also, it is clear from what Remainers were saying that they (the Remainers) were loving the idea of being able to commandeer the judiciary to slap down the Brexiteers.
> 
> * - the subset who see the judiciary as beholden to elite interests that are trying to scupper Brexit


Say the default was that we remain in the EU at the end of October rather than leave with no deal. If Chuka Umunna was PM (in his dreams) and had used prorogation to shut down parliament to stop MPs getting a deal through so that art.50 was repealed by default, then on the court’s reasoning, this would also have been unlawful - so don’t really understand this...


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> You are Adam Curtis AICM£5



 ... but it was a trap!


----------



## belboid (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Sorry I think I’m being a bit thick but I still don’t understand. *The court held that the PM’s prorogation for five weeks prevented the constitutional role of parliament and was therefore unlawful. And as you say we live in a parliamentary democracy. * So where does the staunch criticism come from? I thought it was a very elegant judgment which deftly used basic constitutional law principles to define the separation of powers.
> V happy to be corrected in what I’ve missed though.
> 
> Edit - or are you saying the judgment didn’t go far enough in curbing executive power?


absolutely that - the bolded bit.  The staunch criticism refers to the wider role of the judges rather than their judgement here.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If that is what was meant, it doesn't seem very convincing to me. The court has not only ruled against the government, it has ruled in a way that clarifies some limits to the royal prerogative. That places a tension on the monarchy and its role, leaving a situation where, if Johnson were to further attempt to abuse this power, it would force the Queen into making an actual constitutional decision, the very thing the monarchy relies on never having to do in order to survive unquestioned. But it doesn't undermine the idea of an independent judiciary. If anything it strengthens it - the judiciary has acted against the interests of both the government and the crown. And it has done so precisely in order to maintain the overarching principle that parliament is sovereign. It strengthens this principle rather than weakening it, reinforcing the concept that a government exists only because of parliament, not the other way round, which is a bedrock of the legitimating process of the British constitutional arrangement. By doing so, it stops Johnson from acting like a dictator, again reinforcing the idea that we have some kind of a democratic system.


This is an excellent post and puts much more eloquently why I don’t understand/was questioning some of the criticism on here re the judgment.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> So for starters
> 
> 
> 1. What specifically are the 'central legitimising myths of the democratic ideology" that are under attack?
> ...




1.The answer is directly given.


butchersapron said:


> the centrist liberal slop having to rely on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty on essentially powellite grounds, whilst undermining it with legal actions and forcing the judgements in those actions to highlight - or _establish_ -  the limits to their claimed sovereignty. Whilst those on the slightly further  right are forced back on to relying on the principle of popular sovereignty whilst undermining it through every measure possible because they are fully aware of the danger this represents to both them and the faction of the political class they are currently battling.


Is parliament sovereign, in which case whence the legitimacy in restricting its sovereignty?  Or is there a popular sovereignty, in which case how is this defined and what does it mean in practice?

2. “Actually existing capital” in this context I take to mean those who own capital and are exercising its power, whose interests are not necessarily aligned with those in political power (but in practice will tend to be).  I don’t think there is any intent to draw a distinction with “existing capital”.  The “actual” is just an emphasis.

3.  The “actual state” are those who get to define what the state is and means, and control its direction.  Again, “actual” is more emphasis than strict distinction.

4. This crisis has exposed the fault lines between each of the above, and they are all, in short, seeking a power grab.

Now, all that is just my interpretation.  Butchers can correct my misunderstandings where they exist.  But to say the passage is gobbledygook is nothing but aggressive and unwarranted insult.  The points made can both be interpreted meaningfully and also are interesting to consider.  Assuming that your incomprehension lies outside your own ability to make such interpretation and consideration, teuchter, says more about you than it does about butchers.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> But is that convincing? The Daily Express thinks it is. I don't.



Not convincing to everyone, but to a large number, and is part of the background of our crisis of legitimacy.
Anyway, I'm going to stop speaking for BA now - I could be getting large bits of it wrong.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> absolutely that - the bolded bit.  The staunch criticism refers to the wider role of the judges rather than their judgement here.


What wider role are you referring to though?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Say the default was that we remain in the EU at the end of October rather than leave with no deal. If Chuka Umunna was PM (in his dreams) and had used prorogation to shut down parliament to stop them getting a deal through so that art.50 was repealed by default, then on the court’s reasoning, this would also have been unlawful - so don’t really understand this...


Exactly. Johnson tried to pull a fast one, and got a slap for it. And let's not forget that one of the main reasons this ruling went as it did is because Johnson refused to repeat his lie under oath. Any ruling other than the one they gave would have been a really shitty day for democracy in the UK as it would have clarified the limits of the royal prerogative as meaning that it can be used to fuck parliament. Anyone who objects to this ruling because they want brexit has really lost it imo. There are more important things than fucking brexit.


----------



## belboid (Sep 25, 2019)

Wilf said:


> That tweet says so much about what is wrong with this shitshow. About how far the left has been overtaken by liberals - and about how fucked up the liberals have become about even their own liberalism.


why does an ultra-liberal being ultra-liberal say anything about 'left' politics?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> Not convincing to everyone, but to a large number, and is part of the background of our crisis of legitimacy.
> Anyway, I'm going to stop speaking for BA now - I could be getting large bits of it wrong.


Sorry but how large? the Express and Mail are squealing about it but that doesn't mean there are huge numbers of people around the country thinking this. Again, this is another example of the 'thickie proles' narrative in mirror image.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If that is what was meant, it doesn't seem very convincing to me. The court has not only ruled against the government, it has ruled in a way that clarifies some limits to the royal prerogative. That places a tension on the monarchy and its role, leaving a situation where, if Johnson were to further attempt to abuse this power, it would force the Queen into making an actual constitutional decision, the very thing the monarchy relies on never having to do in order to survive unquestioned. But it doesn't undermine the idea of an independent judiciary. If anything it strengthens it - the judiciary has acted against the interests of both the government and the crown. And it has done so precisely in order to maintain the overarching principle that parliament is sovereign. It strengthens this principle rather than weakening it, reinforcing the concept that a government exists only because of parliament, not the other way round, which is a bedrock of the legitimating process of the British constitutional arrangement. By doing so, it stops Johnson from acting like a dictator, again reinforcing the idea that we have some kind of a democratic system.


oh do engage brain before posting.

you're doing what you so often do, which is to ignore perspectives other than your own

have you not seen people from the ruling class yesterday and today deriding the supreme court's judgment? have you not seen newspapers proclaiming that the supreme court has been political and is standing against brexit? do you honestly not recognise the way that the judiciary are and indeed have been denigrated for their judgments on matters of law, which have been made out to be political judgments?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Sorry but how large? the Express and Mail are squealing about it but that doesn't mean there are huge numbers of people around the country thinking this. Again, this is another example of the 'thickie proles' narrative in mirror image.



Your problem is that you can only see through a Remainer prism.


----------



## belboid (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> What wider role are you referring to though?


They still generally rule on laws created by and for bastards, to protect property rights.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Any ruling other than the one they gave would have been a really shitty day for democracy in the UK as it would have clarified the limits of the royal prerogative as meaning that it can be used to fuck parliament.



As indeed it can.  Nice to have things out in the open.
If you don't want the Queen involved in politics, then the solution is to keep her separate from politics.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> Your problem is that you can only see through a Remainer prism.


Nah. That's Daily Express-level reasoning. Brexit has created some very strange bedfellows. In this instance, Butchersapron and the Express.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> Your problem is that you can only see through a Remainer prism.


exactly. through an old-fashioned remainer prism at that, which sees institutions as they are rather than how they're portrayed. while lbj may be formally correct as a matter of law, he is woefully ill-equipped to deal with the matters of perception which form such an important part of political discourse these days.


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> 1.The answer is directly given.
> 
> Is parliament sovereign, in which case whence the legitimacy in restricting its sovereignty?



Where has its sovereignty been restricted?


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> so the plan for bojo today is to come back ask for another general election and then spend the rest of the week calling the other party leaders chicken's.
> 
> 
> or am I missing something


Nope got it in one


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> As indeed it can.


Except that in this case it couldn't, cos the SC ruled against it and parliament is sitting as we type.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. That's Daily Express-level reasoning. Brexit has created some very strange bedfellows. In this instance, Butchersapron and the Express.



You can probably name which fallacy that is.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> They still generally rule on laws created by and for bastards, to protect property rights.


well yeah - that’s because they don’t make the law..

I still don’t understand but I’m going to leave it because I’m just going to start feeling like I’m really thick


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I still don’t understand but I’m going to leave it because I’m just going to start feeling like I’m really thick


tell you what, stick about and have a read and keep asking questions. i think we're discussing important things, and where i can i'd like to shed some light on it for you - as, i expect, would other posters.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Except that in this case it couldn't, cos the SC ruled against it and parliament is sitting as we type.



Yes, that's where we started from. 
But you're getting somewhere with this, in that there are lots of conceivable cases where it can.

If things had gone differently it would simply have been a case of highlighting the fact (which no one in the establishment wants, hence the panic and hair-tearing over Boris's antics).


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Now, all that is just my interpretation.  Butchers can correct my misunderstandings where they exist.  But to say the passage is gobbledygook is nothing but aggressive and unwarranted insult.  The points made can both be interpreted meaningfully and also are interesting to consider.  Assuming that your incomprehension lies outside your own ability to make such interpretation and consideration, teuchter, says more about you than it does about butchers.



I didn't say it was gobbledygook - I said that it would appear as much to most people - that is people who don't spend time reading politics forums, people whose interest in political theory doesn't go beyond a modest level. For example I think most people in the UK would not even understand the use of 'capital' as a noun to describe a group of people in a certain position.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> You can probably name which fallacy that is.


I'm actually serious about this - the same reasoning and the same conclusion, with the same paranoia about a remainiac conspiracy in place of an actual consideration of the case as put to the Supreme Court and the consequences of it having ruled other than how it did.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm actually serious about this - the same reasoning and the same conclusion, with the same paranoia about a remainiac conspiracy in place of an actual consideration of the case as put to the Supreme Court and the consequences of it having ruled other than how it did.



We could quibble over whether it *technically* counts as a conspiracy, but all you're trying to do here is poison the well.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> Where has its sovereignty been restricted?


Well, that’s the question under consideration, isn’t it?  The law lords assert they are not doing so, but others seem to see it differently.  The one imposing their power can say they are not doing so but this doesn’t make it fact.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

I think Dominic Cummings might agree with some people here!


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Well, that’s the question under consideration, isn’t it?  The law lords assert they are not doing so, but others seem to see it differently.  The one imposing their power can say they are not doing so but this doesn’t make it fact.



Which others? What’s their argument?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> We could quibble over whether it *technically* counts as a conspiracy, but all you're trying to do here is poison the well.


the problem is more a way of thinking like we were still in the pre-referendum days. what's happening now, and there's clear evidence for it, a range of examples present themselves from this and the other side of the atlantic. in the present case there's the clear opposition being drawn between 'the people' and 'parliament/the judiciary' who, it is claimed, wish to frustrate the 17.4m's vote for brexit


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> Which others? What’s their argument?


Have you not seen how different groups are interpreting this intervention?  Why don’t you go and tell each one of them they’re wrong?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I didn't say it was gobbledygook - I said that it would appear as much to most people - that is people who don't spend time reading politics forums, people whose interest in political theory doesn't go beyond a modest level. For example I think most people in the UK would not even understand the use of 'capital' as a noun to describe a group of people in a certain position.


i don't think anyone here posts with 'most people in the uk' as their anticipated audience


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I didn't say it was gobbledygook - I said that it would appear as much to most people - that is people who don't spend time reading politics forums, people whose interest in political theory doesn't go beyond a modest level. For example I think most people in the UK would not even understand *the use of 'capital' as a noun to describe a group of people* in a certain position.



_...capital is not a thing, but rather a definite social production relation, belonging to a definite historical formation of society...
_
No wonder you're having problems.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think anyone here posts with 'most people in the uk' as their anticipated audience



From my original post:



teuchter said:


> To most people, what butchersapron wrote above would simply be gobbledegook. Go on and claim otherwise.
> 
> *It's posted on a politics forum, so of course, the expectations are different*, because you can assume some prior knowledge and shared understanding of what certain terms mean, or are intended to mean.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> For example I think most people in the UK would not even understand the use of 'capital' as a noun to describe a group of people in a certain position.



To be fair, i took that as the meaning (well, something similar), but I wasn't 100% sure that I hadn't gone wrong.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> From my original post:


that's by no means your original post.

i have to question why you bring up 'most people', 'most people in the uk' in subsequent posts. it now seems like you have understood what butchersapron has been posting and your affected lack of understanding was but a ploy or jape.


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Have you not seen how different groups are interpreting this intervention?  Why don’t you go and tell each one of them they’re wrong?



I haven’t seen any convincing arguments that the judgment restricts parliamentary sovereignty.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> _...capital is not a thing, but rather a definite social production relation, belonging to a definite historical formation of society...
> _
> No wonder you're having problems.
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Kabbes' definition:



kabbes said:


> 2. “Actually existing capital” in this context I take to mean those who own capital and are exercising its power, whose interests are not necessarily aligned with those in political power (but in practice will tend to be). I don’t think there is any intent to draw a distinction with “existing capital”. The “actual” is just an emphasis.



And there's the problem with using that kind of shorthand - even amongst those who say they understand it, there's not agreement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> I haven’t seen any convincing arguments that the judgment restricts parliamentary sovereignty.


it doesn't. but that isn't the point, the point is that recourse to the courts is being treated as an attempt to stymie brexit. what's being portrayed isn't necessarily real, it's written for distinct audiences who will take it as real.


----------



## treelover (Sep 25, 2019)

Has Brian Blessed become a M.P?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

treelover said:


> Has Brian Blessed become a M.P?


no

next


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> I haven’t seen any convincing arguments that the judgment restricts parliamentary sovereignty.


And others haven’t seen any convincing arguments that it doesn’t.  Your perspective probably rather depends on your axioms of where democracy derives from.  Which was rather butcher’s point.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Kabbes' definition:
> 
> 
> 
> And there's the problem with using that kind of shorthand - even amongst those who say they understand it, there's not agreement.


There’s no contradiction in that.


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it doesn't. but that isn't the point, the point is that recourse to the courts is being treated as an attempt to stymie brexit. what's being portrayed isn't necessarily real, it's written for distinct audiences who will take it as real.



Oh yeah, completely. But I think some people on this thread have been going further than that... butchers certainly seemed to be suggesting that this judgment sets limits on sovereignty, which is wrong.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

Just watching them in Parliament - the tories are turning on the Supreme Court, furious by the judgment!


----------



## treelover (Sep 25, 2019)

Geoffrey Cox is doing a very good job of impersonating him


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> Oh yeah, completely. But I think some people on this thread have been going further than that... butchers certainly seemed to be suggesting that this judgment sets limits on sovereignty, which is wrong.


Not sets, _demonstrates_.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

treelover said:


> Geoffrey Cox is doing a very good job of impersonating him








brian blessed





geoffrey cox

can you tell the difference?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's by no means your original post.
> 
> i have to question why you bring up 'most people', 'most people in the uk' in subsequent posts. it now seems like you have understood what butchersapron has been posting and your affected lack of understanding was but a ploy or jape.



In the first instance it was part of my acknowledgement that the writing takes into account its expected audience and in the second, in response to kabbes' implication that I had said the post was out and out gobbledegook, which is not what I said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> In the first instance it was part of my acknowledgement that the writing takes into account its expected audience and in the second, in response to kabbes' implication that I had said the post was out and out gobbledegook, which is not what I said.


your original post surely the one where you asked for a translation of ba's post


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> In the first instance it was part of my acknowledgement that the writing takes into account its expected audience and in the second, in response to kabbes' implication that I had said the post was out and out gobbledegook, which is not what I said.


Ah, sophistry.  That’s alright then.


----------



## belboid (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not sets, _demonstrates_.


Yeah, but he was wrong.


----------



## maomao (Sep 25, 2019)

treelover said:


> Geoffrey Cox is doing a very good job of impersonating him


I spoke to Brian Blessed on the phone once. He nearly broke my eardrum. Geoffrey Cox couldn't hold a candle to him.


----------



## Flavour (Sep 25, 2019)

Tbf Geoff cox does have a belting voice


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Not sets, _demonstrates_.



tbh I’m on my phone and it’s a sod trying to find the right posts. The one I can find he says something along the lines of highlights and establishes the limits to sovereignty (which I don’t think it does). Could have sworn there was another one where he quoted the judgment, but maybe I’m confusing it with belboid’s reply. 

I’ve just got distracted by work and forgotten the other point I was going to make, so leave that for this eve.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 25, 2019)

Cid said:


> I’ve just got distracted by work and forgotten the other point I was going to make


an occupational hazard


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> 1.The answer is directly given.
> 
> Is parliament sovereign, in which case whence the legitimacy in restricting its sovereignty?  Or is there a popular sovereignty, in which case how is this defined and what does it mean in practice?



ok. then I think it should say

instead of 
"both sides are attacking the central legitimising myths of the democratic ideology"

something like
"each side is attacking the central legitimising myth of the democratic ideology favoured by the other; in one case popular sovereignty and in the other, parliamentary sovereignty"



kabbes said:


> 2. “Actually existing capital” in this context I take to mean those who own capital and are exercising its power, whose interests are not necessarily aligned with those in political power (but in practice will tend to be).  I don’t think there is any intent to draw a distinction with “existing capital”.  The “actual” is just an emphasis.



What's it emphasising though?



kabbes said:


> 3.  The “actual state” are those who get to define what the state is and means, and control its direction.  Again, “actual” is more emphasis than strict distinction.



But who are they? Whoever the reader believes are the people who get to define what the state is and control its direction? The Judiciary? MPs? 'Capital'? Who's included in this and who isn't? The word 'actual' implies that the common assumption of who it is, is different from the reality. But no explanation is given.



kabbes said:


> 4. This crisis has exposed the fault lines between each of the above, and they are all, in short, seeking a power grab.



Again, who's seeking a power grab? Who exactly are each of the above - we have seemingly overlapping definitions of groups of people throughout the passage - the 'centrist liberal slop' vs 'those slightly further right' - we have a 'faction of the political class' which is not defined, other than something that both of the other groups are battling (?), we have 'actually existing capital' and we have 'different sections of the actual state'. There are fault lines between all these groups, some of which may contain portions of each other. I want to be convinced it's not just a wordy and pretentious way of saying 'everyone's arguing with each other'.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Ah, sophistry.  That’s alright then.


No, not sophistry. What I said.


----------



## killer b (Sep 25, 2019)

shit derail lads.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 25, 2019)

belboid said:


> why does an ultra-liberal being ultra-liberal say anything about 'left' politics?


Dunno. I said the left has been _overtaken_ by liberals on brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> r I want to be convinced it's not just a wordy and pretentious way of saying 'everyone's arguing with each other'.


I suspect it isn't much more than that, tbh. What Daniel Dennett calls a deepity - something that is either not true or, if true, is only trivially so and adds nothing to understanding. I don't see why the word 'capital' is in there otherwise when this case was to do with parliamentary sovereignty. 

There is one group of people who aren't arguing with each other. That's the Supreme Court judges. All eleven of them agreed to every word of the judgement.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> brian blessed
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Brian can act for a start


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> ok. then I think it should say
> 
> instead of
> "both sides are attacking the central legitimising myths of the democratic ideology"
> ...


So we agree that the post is intelligible now, right?  We’re into the point of discussing its ideas instead?


----------



## YouSir (Sep 25, 2019)

I wonder how all of this is playing out behind the scenes. Both sides are firmly establishment, both sides are basically trying to fight their own power base and class - as has been said - but what end game does either side see? Whatever comes of Brexit they've got to know how badly they're undermining themselves in the long run and whoever wins they're going to rely on the exact same mechanisms they're attacking to maintain themselves. Unless someone's fantasising about some kind of grand authoritarian shift of course, which they might be I suppose. Bet the OxBridge reunions are going to be a blast this year.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> So we agree that the post is intelligible now, right?  We’re into the point of discussing its ideas instead?



I would not say that it is entirely usefully intelligible to me yet. 

However, we seem to be discussing some ideas resulting from other people's interpretations of it, which I'm happy to do.


----------



## ferdinand (Sep 25, 2019)

I worry about the original vote. We were never given the consequences of leaving the EU. A large number of voters (including myself) were incapable of understanding the future outside Europe. Many voted for change hoping their situations would improve. 
Here in the North East we have benefited enormously from nominated EU grants. I worry that the future under the Whitehall would see all funding concentrated in the South East.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 25, 2019)

We get access to all the papers at work to skim. Today sun is utterly furious at yesterday’s pantomime- incandescent rage


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2019)

Corbyn demanding Johnson apologise to Brenda.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Corbyn demanding Johnson apologise to Brenda.


Be honest whatever your politics lying to old ladies is not on


----------



## Chz (Sep 25, 2019)

Oh gods...


> *Tom Brake*, the Lib Dem Brexit spokesman, asks how Britain will be safer than before when the police will not have access to EU crime and justice databases in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
> 
> Because Border Force staff will have extra new powers, says Gove.


Now I don't give two fucks about the EU crime database. I'm sure we could count on our fingers the number of times it's made a measurable difference in a criminal case in the UK. What _really_ bothers me is "extra new powers". As if the US border guards aren't shitty enough, we need to compete with them.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 25, 2019)

maomao said:


> I spoke to Brian Blessed on the phone once. He nearly broke my eardrum. Geoffrey Cox couldn't hold a candle to him.



Good stuff. How disappointing would it be if you got to talk to Brian Blessed and he wasn't bellowing his lungs out?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Be honest whatever your politics lying to old ladies is not on



Oh give over, I couldn't give a fuck. In any case he hasn't lied, he has just issued an instruction.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 25, 2019)

The Beeb’s interviewing Redwood. Fucking hell he’s actually said summat sensible!


----------



## gosub (Sep 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Be honest whatever your politics lying to old ladies is not on


.

  This 'righteous' indignation over what was said what to whom of a conversation and whether it was true or not whilst remaiing a secret is so Iimpossibly British . The people involved know what actually happened.  The Supreme Court  chaps , who demonstrated their independence based on submitted evidence are more likely to find themselves in a position to actually ask,. 

Now that wannabe author fella  that got somewhere through a nepotism ice relationship with Her Majesty's Lady in Waiting has spilled the beans on what to look for they might understand the answer.
I might actually watch the Queens Xmas broadcast this year.

If in the future there is another indy ref will the monarch have to wear shades for the duration?


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> . in the present case there's the clear opposition being drawn between 'the people' and 'parliament/the judiciary' who, it is claimed, wish to frustrate the 17.4m's vote for brexit



A counter argument could be fairly presented that sees the ‘unelected’ executive & advisors trying to frustrate the will of however many people voted for parties that wanted to oppose or moderate Brexit in 2017, which is also a more recent measure of public mood. Should maybe work out the numbers for each side on that one then ram them down the throat of Faragists every time they imply 17 billion voted for no deal.


----------



## Gaia (Sep 25, 2019)

Am I the only one watching Hezza on the BBC News channel and thinking …?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 25, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> A counter argument could be fairly presented that sees the ‘unelected’ executive & advisors trying to frustrate the will of however many people voted for parties that wanted to oppose or moderate Brexit in 2017, which is also a more recent measure of public mood. Should maybe work out the numbers for each side on that one then ram them down the throat of Faragists every time they imply 17 billion voted for no deal.


Yep. As soon as any politician quotes 17.4 million, you know that the last thing on their minds is upholding democracy.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 25, 2019)

Just away from the pantomime of Parliament.  Somebody is continuing to brief Kuenssberg on a chance of a deal over the horizon.

What if... Boris Johnson does get a Brexit deal?

What happens next if the PM gets a Brexit deal?

It raises an interesting question.  The DUP do seem to be softening towards a deal and hardening (in a roundabout way) towards no deal.  Presumably because they fear a mauling at the next election in the event of a messy crash out.

The timetable is still there to get a deal of sorts back to Parliament.  Is there a possibility it could pass?  There does seem to be a route through albeit an unlikely one.  The other thing is would Bercow allow another vote given we are still in the same Parliament as of yesterday's ruling from the Supreme Court?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Just away from the pantomime of Parliament.  Somebody is continuing to brief Kuenssberg on a chance of a deal over the horizon.
> 
> What if... Boris Johnson does get a Brexit deal?
> 
> ...



I wouldn't put money on it, but there's a chance he could get changes to the deal, which the DUP would accept, which brings over the ERG lot. The EU is sick of all this, as much as we are, so it's possible that they will say - it's this deal or no deal, we will not extend again. 

That I think would ensure it gets passed.

Bercow couldn't stop a vote on it, because it would be a new deal, very slightly different to the May deal, but enough.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I wouldn't put money on it, but there's a chance he could get changes to the deal, which the DUP would accept, which brings over the ERG lot. The EU is sick of all this, as much as we are, so it's possible that they will say - it's this deal or no deal, we will not extend again.
> 
> That I think would ensure it gets passed.
> 
> Bercow couldn't stop a vote on it, because it would be a new deal, very slightly different to the May deal, but enough.



“Slightly different” in that we keep the part about being the EU’s bitch for an unspecified amount of time?


----------



## treelover (Sep 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> brian blessed
> 
> 
> 
> ...



for gods sake, did you hear his voice, it booms!


----------



## tommers (Sep 25, 2019)

8ball said:


> “Slightly different” in that we keep the part about being the EU’s bitch for an unspecified amount of time?


That's always going to be the case. Well unless they collapse, which is a possibility I suppose.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2019)

tommers said:


> That's always going to be the case. Well unless they collapse, which is a possibility I suppose.



Yeah, but there are obvious issues with getting that one through.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I don’t really understand all of it either & would be grateful if it was explained. I’m sure this is probably my ignorance - not a politics geek just following the discussion with interest...



To expand:

The post starts with an allusion to Mao's  motto _Everything under heaven is in utter chaos;  therefore the situation is excellent_. It then goes on to outline that the centrists are forced to adopt a position that is utterly reliant on the theory of parliamentary sovereignty most forcefully and influentially (in constitutional politics)develped by Powell. Powell used this position to aggressively reject the EU and any outside impositions on parliament. So there's that that little irony to kick it off. They then go on to immediately undermine this by forcing a judgement from the supreme court that explicitly recognises that it is for the courts to recognise when parliamentary sovereignty can justifiably be imposed upon or restricted - and that is when a proper prorogation process has been followed - (to make clear, i am not referring to the judgement and the cases put by either side -  i could not care less about them -  this is what the court admitted in a supporting paragraph where it defined exactly why prorogation is not a parliamentary procedure, it is an imposition from outside by the govt and that courts now have the power to decide on whether it was done properly or not. The imposition on parliamentary sovereignty is recognised as legitimate). That is what this decision establishes for the first time - what i refer to as "Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy " - an 10 year old supreme court attempting, in a time of disorder, to mark out and expand the limits of its own powers and necessarily against that of the other sections of the state at the same time.

So this is the soft-leftists and the liberals relying - inconsistently and blatantly with a political objective in mind - setting their stall on the age old idea of good old british parliamentary sovereignty. Against this, those on the more tory leave section are just as unfaithfully relying on the idea of popular sovereignty - that is, that parliamentary sovereignty derives from and depends on continued popular assent that can be withdrawn at any point and revert back to 'the people'.  Every single tory knows how dangerous and unconservative this is and that it is in no way genuinely meant or believed beyond achieving their own counter-objective. That it in fact, opens up ideas and vistas that they have spent hundreds of years stamping down - hand in hand with the liberals in fact.

Historically, govts were always very - centrally even - concerned with reproducing legitimation, of hegemony - that is of securing ongoing popular assent via a range of non-violent methods. That's one of the states roles in keeping wider capitalist relations going and one of the factors behind previous class compromises (say post-war social-democracy for example). The key political one since the from-above 1688 settlement in this country is that of political equality, expressed through representative democracy practised as parliamentary sovereignty - _the democratic ideology_.  There might be rampant economic inequality, ongoing authoritarianism, all sorts of illegal state activity etc but we are all democratically equal. Now we have both sides in this charade kicking at the supporting struts of that structure - essentially saying that no, that's not how things work, or have to work. That's the glimpse of sunshine in this disorder - that the old ways are dissolving in front of our eyes. The danger that i mention is that this is happening in a situation where the two sides to the argument above (and by that i want to be clear that this is not inter-class conflict, it's a brothers war) are both utterly committed to the pursuit, to the acceleration of the neo-liberalism that's wiping away the conditions that gave that democratic myth any social purchase. That is the old collective traditions of economic and political representation, of collective provision of health education and housing and so on. The very things that saved these people above and their interests in the past are now their immediate targets for destruction - on every single level, politically, economically, ideologically.

Capital doesn't like this sort of situation. In the past it has reacted to such breakdowns and legitimation crisis' in very nasty ways.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 25, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> I think Dominic Cummings might agree with some people here!


Where some of us would 'agree' with Cummings is in putting the political before the legal and/or technical.

What we have seen over the last 30 or so years is the liberal left attempting to defend themselves behind the law, to reduce political disputes to technical disputes. We can see this in the defence of the EU, a reliance on EU law (the law of a neo-liberal institution) to protect workers, rather than the power of workers themselves. Rather than looking for a strong workers movement to force a Labour Party to provide concessions we have the focus on electing an LP behind who's legs workers can hide. Rather than a political confutation with the hard right we have the invoking of the state to oppose racism and fascism.

And the results of this retreat from politics, is now that much of the left is no longer able to mount any political fight, all it has left is some flimsy pieces of paper to wave. At this very moment I'm feeling the effect of this retreat from politics in my workplace, my union is currently balloting for industrial action and we probably aren't going to make the 50% turnout because our union no longer conceives of itself as a political body organising to take the fight to bosses but rather an insurance policy plus a couple of seats on some pointless committees.  

The fact is that the technocratic and legalistic avenues that some want to use are _themselves the enemy_. Pro-working class anti-fascism/anti-racism is going to have to be made in opposition to liberal/state anti-fascism. Measures to increase equality and economic democracy are going to have to "damage the economy" and in the face of the law (see private schools already threatening to use the law against the proposals the LP made this week). The retreat from politics has only led to increasing inequality and a diminishing power of labour, we need to re-embrace politics and that necessarily means attacking the institutions - the state, parliament, the courts, the EU - that rely and create the diminution of politics.

We are currently seeing liberal institutions coming under greater pressure than they have been for some time, the actions of the working class are creating cracks in neo-liberal political system (like the weakening of the democratic myths butchersapron mentioned). To argue, as some are, that rather than embracing these opportunities socialists/communists/anarchists should support the state, the law, the EU is crazy. None of which  means, contra littlebabyjesus's smears, that myself, BA, Smokeandsteam etc are supporting the Daily Express, Cummings, the Brexit Party etc (unlike him and other we can both walk and chew gum).

EDIT: Just to add it's been really good having someone who's not a P&P regular posting  fakeplasticgirl so I really hope you stick around.


----------



## kabbes (Sep 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> To expand:
> 
> The post starts with an allusion to Mao's  motto _Everything under heaven is in utter chaos;  therefore the situation is excellent_. It then goes on to outline that the centrists are forced to adopt a position that is utterly reliant on the theory of parliamentary sovereignty most forcefully and influentially (in constitutional politics). Powell used this position to aggressively reject the EU and any outside impositions on parliament. So there's that that little irony to kick it off. They then go on to immediately undermine this by forcing a judgement from the supreme court that explicitly recognises that it is for the courts to recognise when parliamentary sovereignty can justifiably be imposed upon or restricted - and that is when a proper prorogation process has been followed - (to make clear, i am not referring to the judgement and the cases put by either side -  i could not care less about them -  this is what the court admitted in a supporting paragraph where it defined exactly why prorogation is not a parliamentary procedure, it is an imposition from outside by the govt and that courts now have the power to decide on whether it was done properly or not. The imposition on parliamentary sovereignty is recognised as legitimate). That is what this decision establishes for the first time - what i refer to as "Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy " - an 10 year old supreme court attempting, in a time of disorder, to mark out and expand the limits of its own powers and necessarily against that of the other sections of the state at the same time.
> 
> ...


Bravo.

Well, teuchter ?  Does that satisfy you?


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> To expand:
> 
> The post starts with an allusion to Mao's  motto _Everything under heaven is in utter chaos;  therefore the situation is excellent_. It then goes on to outline that the centrists are forced to adopt a position that is utterly reliant on the theory of parliamentary sovereignty most forcefully and influentially (in constitutional politics). Powell used this position to aggressively reject the EU and any outside impositions on parliament. So there's that that little irony to kick it off. They then go on to immediately undermine this by forcing a judgement from the supreme court that explicitly recognises that it is for the courts to recognise when parliamentary sovereignty can justifiably be imposed upon or restricted - and that is when a proper prorogation process has been followed - (to make clear, i am not referring to the judgement and the cases put by either side -  i could not care less about them -  this is what the court admitted in a supporting paragraph where it defined exactly why prorogation is not a parliamentary procedure, it is an imposition from outside by the govt and that courts now have the power to decide on whether it was done properly or not. The imposition on parliamentary sovereignty is recognised as legitimate). That is what this decision establishes for the first time - what i refer to as "Different sections of the actual state striking out and trying to claim autonomy " - an 10 year old supreme court attempting, in a time of disorder, to mark out and expand the limits of its own powers and necessarily against that of the other sections of the state at the same time.



Yeah, it doesn't do that though. 



> The judgement says that a prorogation of parliament (not just this time - but when done _properly_) is inherently an imposition on parliament:
> 
> _The next and final question, therefore, is what the legal effect of that finding is and therefore what remedies the Court should grant. The Court can certainly declare that the advice was unlawful. The Inner House went further and declared that any prorogation resulting from it was null and of no effect. The Government argues that the Inner House could not do that because the prorogation was a “proceeding in Parliament” which, under the Bill of Rights of 1688 cannot be impugned or questioned in any court. But it is quite clear that the prorogation is not a proceeding in Parliament. It takes place in the House of Lords chamber in the presence of members of both Houses, but it is not their decision. It is something which has been imposed upon them from outside. It is not something on which members can speak or vote. It is not the core or essential business of Parliament which the Bill of Rights protects. Quite the reverse: it brings that core or essential business to an end._




All they're doing is saying that prorogation is something that, by convention, isn't a power exercised by parliament... The effect of that is to say that prorogation is an external imposition, but that is simply interpreting the law as it stands. For it to define the limits of parliamentary sovereignty as a principle, as well as the simple practical operation of parliament, they would have to add that they think parliament can't change the conventions relating to prorogation, they don't do that. The principle of parliamentary sovereignty is maintained because parliament could turn around tomorrow and say 'right, the situation is ridiculous, from now on we'll use a bill presented in the HoC conventionally at <x> date to prorogue'. 

Within the axioms of parliamentary democracy the court is doing exactly what it's supposed to do, interpreting the law as it stands. And yes, parliament must operate according to those procedures, up until the point a party with a sufficient majority is able to pass legislation through the HoC that changes them. No effect on the principle of sovereignty.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 25, 2019)

I haven't said there that the judgement limits parliamentary sovereignty, i said that in it's supporting remarks it recognised that a situation in which parliamentary sovereignty can be justly limited exists - exactly by a correctly proceeded prorogation. And that the courts are now the arbiters of if the correct procedures have been followed. I haven't said a single thing about the courts verdict - which could have been this this prorogation was legal for all the difference it would make to what i'm saying -  and pointed this out.


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I haven't said there that the judgement limits parliamentary sovereignty, i said that in it's supporting remarks it recognised that a situation in which parliamentary sovereignty can be justly limited exists - exactly by a correctly proceeded prorogation. And that the courts are now the arbiters of if the correct procedures have been followed. I haven't said a single thing about the courts verdict - which could have been this this prorogation was legal for all the difference it would make to what i'm saying -  and pointed this out.



Just to be clear, exactly which bit of the supporting remarks are you talking about?


----------



## teuchter (Sep 25, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Bravo.
> 
> Well, teuchter ?  Does that satisfy you?


Yes, I now have a much clearer understanding of what is being said.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 25, 2019)

butchersapron interesting, that’s for elaborating.
Edit: ditto redsquirrel


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2019)

I think I agree with the broader point incidentally, just not with the specific effect of that bit of the judgment (I can't be arsed to find exactly where this is, so am going to just call it the judgment).


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 25, 2019)

I wonder if Johnson has chosen a ditch yet?


----------



## Raheem (Sep 25, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I wonder if Johnson has chosen a ditch yet?


A flat in Shore-ditch, apparently.


----------



## Duncan2 (Sep 25, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> I wonder if Johnson has chosen a ditch yet?


An unlikely working-class hero for sure.


----------



## Ted Striker (Sep 25, 2019)




----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 26, 2019)

Ted Striker said:


> View attachment 185117



Haven’t we heard a bit too much from experts?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

If Johnson did harbour any intent to get a deal II through the commons with Labour support, that prospect has surely now receded.
Can’t really imagine that any PLP would now go through the lobby with him.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If Johnson did harbour any intent to get a deal II through the commons with Labour support, that prospect has surely now receded.
> Can’t really imagine that any PLP would now go through the lobby with him.



The entire process now seems to have been reduced to ‘feelings’ and language. Some MPs have even claim that this is what’s driving the deep hatred of the political class. It’s really not.

If the May deal comes back on 19 October, with single market alignment, I think it would be passed. The alternative is a brexit election which even the dogs on the street know the outcome of.

A deal, where we ‘leave’ but remain shackled to all extents and purposes to the dying carcass of EU neoliberalism, would probably suffice if remainers don’t want to press the nuclear button.

There would still need to be a GE but instead of one conducted in the fury of betrayal it would be a ‘what now’ election which suits Labour much better.

The alternative - VONC Johnson, install Harman/Clarke/Beckett/even Corbyn and call ref 2 has two major flaws: 1. They would probably lose it and 2. Whatever the result they will need to stand before the people in a GE. Far too rich for the blood of MPs


----------



## killer b (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The alternative is a brexit election which even the dogs on the street know the outcome of.


I asked a dog on the street, it said 'woof' and tried to fuck my leg.


----------



## Yossarian (Sep 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> I asked a dog on the street, it said 'woof' and tried to fuck my leg.



It didn't have floppy blonde hair, did it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The entire process now seems to have been reduced to ‘feelings’ and language. Some MPs have even claim that this is what’s driving the deep hatred of the political class. It’s really not.
> 
> If the May deal comes back on 19 October, with single market alignment, I think it would be passed. The alternative is a brexit election which even the dogs on the street know the outcome of.
> 
> ...


you're having a laugh 

there is *no way* on god's green earth that parliament could accept membership of the single market, with its exclusion on negotiating trade deals with other countries. and especially *no way* the current prime minister could seriously propose it as it would make a fucking nonsense of everything he has been saying on the subject - see eg this

so it's going to be some sort of brexit election.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If the May deal comes back on 19 October, with single market alignment, I think it would be passed. The alternative is a brexit election which even the dogs on the street know the outcome of.


I'm not so sure it would be passed now. Labour are increasingly committed to an extension and a second ref on any deal. That means voting no regardless of the nature of the deal. Meanwhile, the tory exiles have little incentive to vote for any deal of any kind now, and the nats, greens and libdems will vote against any deal. 

I agree with you that pushing for a 'soft' leave along the lines of Common Market 2, aligning the UK with Norway, Switzerland and Iceland, and then getting it, could have been good for Labour. I'm a bit surprised more in labour haven't been pushing for this as the sensible 'grown-up' compromise solution that 'honours' (hate that word in this context - 'reflects' would be better) the referendum, and pushing back hard against anyone claiming it didn't do that. Labour made a very bad mistake by initially going along with the false notion that the referendum result meant the requirement for new immigration controls, something they are now rowing back from. A clear 'we will go back to EFTA' (keeping 'the common market that we voted for in 1975' but rowing back further integration - one of the many strands of reasons given for voting leave by older people) right from the start might have put Labour in a much stronger position now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> A clear 'we will go back to EFTA' (keeping 'the common market that we voted for in 1975' but rowing back further integration - one of the many strands of reasons given for voting leave by older people) right from the start might have put Labour in a much stronger position now.


this would be the auld efta which involves taking eu laws but not having a voice in determining them. that's not happening.

what's going to happen is that we're going to remain within the european union and your paltry arguments will be as wind.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The entire process now seems to have been reduced to ‘feelings’ and language. Some MPs have even claim that this is what’s driving the deep hatred of the political class. It’s really not.
> 
> If the May deal comes back on 19 October, with single market alignment, I think it would be passed. The alternative is a brexit election which even the dogs on the street know the outcome of.
> 
> ...


Unsurprising that the issue of Brexit should reduce to 'feelings & language'; what else is it?

There's zero chance of Johnson getting a BRINO through his own revolutionary guard.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you're having a laugh
> 
> there is *no way* on god's green earth that parliament could accept membership of the single market, with its exclusion on negotiating trade deals with other countries. and especially *no way* the current prime minister could seriously propose it as it would make a fucking nonsense of everything he has been saying on the subject - see eg this
> View attachment 185139
> so it's going to be some sort of brexit election.



You make two assumptions: 1. That Johnson means what he says. His final calculation on a deal or not will be this: does this win me an election. 2. That MPs and the opposition, despite their piss and bluster, think they can win a brexit GE. They can’t. Labour want and need an election about ‘what now’

Finally, ’the Prize’ for the HoC has always been ‘frictionless trade with the EU’. In other words remain part of the bloc and accept the rules. Any deal which offers this will, given the alternatives, attract support from MPs across the parties


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You make two assumptions: 1. That Johnson means what he says. His final calculation is this: does this win me an election. 2. That MPs and the opposition, despite their piss and bluster, think they can win a brexit GE. They can’t.
> 
> Finally, ’the Prize’ for the HoC has always been ‘frictionless trade with the EU’. In other words remain part of the bloc and accept the rules. Any deal which offers this will, given the alternatives, attract support from MPs across the parties


that's utter utter tosh, i'm sorry to say. there is no way at all that such a deal could be seriously proposed after all the talk of vassal states and so on. perhaps boris johnson could bring himself to ignore his rhetoric on the hulk, on vassal states and so on and shamelessly commend it to the house. but even if he could, he'd be toast the same day. it'd be signing his political death warrant, his party will never ever go for that. and nor will the opposition, not when the end game is in sight, the end game which results in the uk remaining in the eu.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You make two assumptions: 1. That Johnson means what he says. His final calculation on a deal or not will be this: does this win me an election. 2. That MPs and the opposition, despite their piss and bluster, think they can win a brexit GE. They can’t. Labour want and need an election about ‘what now’
> 
> Finally, ’the Prize’ for the HoC has always been ‘frictionless trade with the EU’. In other words remain part of the bloc and accept the rules. Any deal which offers this will, given the alternatives, attract support from MPs across the parties



I dunno you seem to be making a lot of assumptions as well.  Firstly that any "brexit election" as you call it would be a walk in the park for the tories and a large majority.  I don't see it as clearly as that by any means.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I dunno you seem to be making a lot of assumptions as well.  Firstly that any "brexit election" as you call it would be a walk in the park for the tories and a large majority.  I don't see it as clearly as that by any means.


the next parliament will look the same as this one, sure some faces will change but there will be no party with any real majority.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's utter utter tosh, i'm sorry to say. there is no way at all that such a deal could be seriously proposed after all the talk of vassal states and so on. perhaps boris johnson could bring himself to ignore his rhetoric on the hulk, on vassal states and so on and shamelessly commend it to the house. but even if he could, he'd be toast the same day. it'd be signing his political death warrant, his party will never ever go for that. and nor will the opposition, not when the end game is in sight, the end game which results in the uk remaining in the eu.



The end game requires the opposition to win a referendum and a GE. Bluntly, I think they lack the bollocks. They will need to weigh up a deal that guarantees single market rules against winner takes all. Labour won’t risk a Brexit GE if at all possible. Let’s see


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The end game requires the opposition to win a referendum and a GE. Bluntly, I think they lack the bollocks. They will need to weigh up a deal that guarantees single market rules against winner takes all. Let’s see


the end game doesn't require that at all.

in fact a hung parliament makes a return to the people more certain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

from today's mail Most British voters want a snap poll and think 'the Establishment' is determined to block Brexit  | Daily Mail Online

there's no sign there that the tories will romp home


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I dunno you seem to be making a lot of assumptions as well.  Firstly that any "brexit election" as you call it would be a walk in the park for the tories and a large majority.  I don't see it as clearly as that by any means.


Yep. Totally agree. If you include a hung parliament with labour as the largest party as a win for labour from here regardless of the circumstances of the election, which I think we should, I think that's eminently possible.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. Totally agree. If you include a hung parliament with labour as the largest party as a win for labour from here regardless of the circumstances of the election, which I think we should, I think that's eminently possible.



Except vote share is irrelevant. As with every GE it will turn on the marginals. The seats Labour need to win are overwhelmingly leave. They can pile votes up on remain seats it means fuck all.

Anyway, everyone, including me, is repeating arguments over and over here. So I’ll leave it there


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Anyway, everyone, including me, is repeating arguments over and over here. So I’ll leave it there


part of that is due to your attributing assumptions where they're not warranted, like your 'the opposition think they can win a ge'. tbh i think they think they can. but i don't think they can. i've been up front about this before so i don't know why you say things i neither think nor have given you grounds to believe i think.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's utter utter tosh, i'm sorry to say. there is no way at all that such a deal could be seriously proposed after all the talk of vassal states and so on. perhaps boris johnson could bring himself to ignore his rhetoric on the hulk, on vassal states and so on and shamelessly commend it to the house. but even if he could, he'd be toast the same day. it'd be signing his political death warrant, his party will never ever go for that. and nor will the opposition, not when the end game is in sight, the end game which results in the uk remaining in the eu.



I agree GE is likely to lead to a hung Parliament. But to be fair Johnson has said himself he would accept May's deal without the backstop.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I agree GE is likely to lead to a hung Parliament. But to be fair Johnson has said himself he would accept May's deal without the backstop.


that's very different to Smokeandsteam's deal incorporating membership of the single market. as johnson shows no signs of cobbling together an alternative to the backstop i am confident the dead deal is dead.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> from today's mail Most British voters want a snap poll and think 'the Establishment' is determined to block Brexit  | Daily Mail Online
> 
> there's no sign there that the tories will romp home



Jeez.  Its difficult to pick the bones out of that.  It just adds to the general picture of division everywhere and no clear route through it*.


*Apart from bloody revolution followed by full communism obvs.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's very different to Smokeandsteam's deal incorporating membership of the single market. as johnson shows no signs of cobbling together an alternative to the backstop i am confident the dead deal is dead.



Provided he can't win a majority, yes, probably.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Jeez.  Its difficult to pick the bones out of that.  It just adds to the general picture of division everywhere and no clear route through it*.
> 
> 
> *Apart from bloody revolution followed by full communism obvs.


i've picked out three things

i don't see the state of the parties changing much, the bp one may be one to watch as they're imo more likely to take votes from the tories and so may gift labour some seats. the referendum question interesting, i really don't think that's going to swing back to brexit and is if anything going to move (imho) more to remain. and whether boris johnson can actually count on tory voters is open to question, i don't know whether he can.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Provided he can't win a majority, yes, probably.


yeh well he can't win a majority


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> from today's mail Most British voters want a snap poll and think 'the Establishment' is determined to block Brexit  | Daily Mail Online
> 
> there's no sign there that the tories will romp home


Majority of tories think johnson should go, lol


----------



## Cid (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> from today's mail Most British voters want a snap poll and think 'the Establishment' is determined to block Brexit  | Daily Mail Online
> 
> there's no sign there that the tories will romp home



hmm... yougov’s latest (with times) a bit more in depth...

Johnson’s approval ratings are interesting. 70% of potential BP voters rate him as ‘competent’... 80% as ‘likeable’ (only 14 as incompetent/unlikeable)... which potentially indicates that many will end up ticking the conservative box when it comes to an actual election.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 26, 2019)

there is no deal johnson could get through parliament. The only deal he can get from the EU is  May's deal  - and (as pickmans says) that would be political suicide. opposition wont vote for it without 2nd ref attached - and his own party would never back that. 
And nobody has any real idea what will happen in GE. 
The tories will definitely loose seats to the lib dems - the brexit party will take votes from tory and labour - but its difficult to predict how many because we dont know where brexit will be. Also Johnson's tactic of acting the cunt in order to fire up the brexit base (and fend off farage) also has the potential to mobilise opposition to him - so could provoke a high degree of tactical voting. 
Most likely outcome is another hung parliament - but there are so many variables its impossible to predict.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Cid said:


> hmm... yougov’s latest (with times) a bit more in depth...
> 
> Johnson’s approval ratings are interesting. 70% of potential BP voters rate him as ‘competent’... which potentially indicates that many will end up ticking the conservative box when it comes to an actual election.


i'm not going to get too deeply into psephology, which is imo - to paraphrase john lydon - mind games for the middle classes. but i think boris johnson is the person with most influence on the result. he could have had some hope of a majority if he'd been able to call an election immediately. but i think that the longer there isn't an election, the more his own weakness is going to become apparent. no previous prime minister has even been forced to harang or beg the opposition to go to the country. and the artificial deadline of 31 october marks the start of what i expect to be a decline in the tory vote and a rise for the brexit party. i don't foresee any bp mps but i wouldn't be surprised if the bp hand labour (or the lib dems) some tory scalps. the longer this goes on for, the more boris johnson's shortcomings are displayed to the electorate, the weaker i feel will be the tory share of the vote. esp if the claims about hacker house and the far right have validity.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> The tories will definitely loose seats to the lib dems - the brexit party will take votes from tory and labour - but its difficult to predict how many because we dont know where brexit will be.



At present, we don't...but by the day of the next GE, we will.
That's the merit of Corbyn's position of boxing the tories into the mess of their own making.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 26, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



yeh it will be, there will be a degree of bile hitherto unseen


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

No shit...



One notable obstacle being the Conservative & Unionist party.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Except vote share is irrelevant. As with every GE it will turn on the marginals. The seats Labour need to win are overwhelmingly leave. They can pile votes up on remain seats it means fuck all.
> 
> Anyway, everyone, including me, is repeating arguments over and over here. So I’ll leave it there



Fair enough not to want to labour this point, but from a clear two-horse race last time with nearly 85% of votes cast going to two parties, it will be very different this time. Both parties are likely to lose a large part of their vote, so the struggle isn't so much to convert people as to keep those you have. Who loses the most voters is the question here. I can see that being the tories, who have a lot to lose in remain areas. And who loses most to the brexit party? All the polls say it's the tories. Paradoxically, in places that voted majority leave that are con/lab marginals, anger about brexit not happening could let labour in - I'm thinking of places like Hastings.  Sure labour will win huge majorities in places like London and liverpool that they would have won anyway, but not all this dynamic points to useless voter share.


----------



## Wilf (Sep 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> If Johnson did harbour any intent to get a deal II through the commons with Labour support, that prospect has surely now receded.
> Can’t really imagine that any PLP would now go through the lobby with him.


My pure guess is that last night played well for the tories at least in terms of firming up their story of 'just get it done... labour are waffling traitors... HoC is irrelevant etc.' Same time,, that's them stuck now, can't really dial it back. Labour will be left going on about decency and the constitution or summat. They still haven't got anything convincing to say on brexit itself. Don't know where it ends, but Johnson's bulldozer is careering in, from his perspective, vaguely the right direction.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 26, 2019)

My only fall back pleasure in all of this shite is the holderlim paradigm


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh well he can't win a majority



He can if he can get an election, potentially.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He can if he can get an election, potentially.


potentially i could turn into gold but no one expects it to happen


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh it will be, there will be a degree of bile hitherto unseen


I have campaigned against Bear Bile in the past, I am in a quandary.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 26, 2019)

It doesn't seem to me that MPs spending large amounts of HoC time going on about their own working conditions, threats and so on, is likely to be very popular with the portion of the electorate which already thinks they are just faffing around instead of getting on with doing Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It doesn't seem to me that MPs spending large amounts of HoC time going on about their own working conditions, threats and so on, is likely to be very popular with the portion of the electorate which already thinks they are just faffing around instead of getting on with doing Brexit.


An MP was murdered by some random over brexit. They're entitled to be concerned.


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It doesn't seem to me that MPs spending large amounts of HoC time going on about their own working conditions, threats and so on, is likely to be very popular with the portion of the electorate which already thinks they are just faffing around instead of getting on with doing Brexit.



We have been discussing this, very heatedly at times this morning at work. The palaver is driving some previous Labour voters into a rage.
The majority are considering voting BP or spunking cock in protest.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> potentially i could turn into gold but no one expects it to happen



I wish I shared your confidence. Johnson will go into an election with a narrative about how he wanted to deliver Brexit but the liberal establishment has used the courts to stop him, which to be fair is (unusually for him) pretty  much true. How that plays out is unpredictable. 

I agree that the most likely outcome is another hung Parliament. But I also think there is a possibility he can win a majority.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

Wilf said:


> My pure guess is that last night played well for the tories at least in terms of firming up their story of 'just get it done... labour are waffling traitors... HoC is irrelevant etc.' Same time,, that's them stuck now, can't really dial it back. Labour will be left going on about decency and the constitution or summat. They still haven't got anything convincing to say on brexit itself. Don't know where it ends, but Johnson's bulldozer is careering in, from his perspective, vaguely the right direction.


That's fine..._*if...*_the blustercunt is capable of 'getting it done'.


----------



## Cid (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I wish I shared your confidence. Johnson will go into an election with a narrative about how he wanted to deliver Brexit but the liberal establishment has used the courts to stop him, which to be fair is (unusually for him) pretty  much true. How that plays out is unpredictable.
> 
> I agree that the most likely outcome is another hung Parliament. But I also think there is a possibility he can win a majority.



He also has that kind of Teflon personality that is always going to be appealing to a pretty large segment of the voting public. Diminished but not ineffective.

I disagree on the effects of liberal interfering via courts, but we’re just going round in circles on that, and it’s certainly an effective narrative either way.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Cid said:


> He also has that kind of Teflon personality that is always going to be appealing to a pretty large segment of the voting public. Diminished but not ineffective.
> 
> I disagree on the effects of liberal interfering via courts, but we’re just going round in circles on that, and it’s certainly an effective narrative either way.



If you agree that it's an effective narrative, then where do we disagree? 

Another part of the narrative is going to be that *only* Johnson wanted to have an election and that everyone else didn't want one. That will work well for him too.


----------



## teuchter (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> An MP was murdered by some random over brexit. They're entitled to be concerned.


Yes, but it seems like something that ought to be dealt with separately from the main business of parliament.


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 26, 2019)

Is that survey taken amongst Mail readers or the whole population?  53% remain is surprisingly high if it’s the former.


----------



## Cid (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you agree that it's an effective narrative, then where do we disagree?
> 
> Another part of the narrative is going to be that *only* Johnson wanted to have an election and that everyone else didn't want one. That will work well for him too.



I don’t think the liberal establishment has actually prevented him doing much, at least not through this court action. In a wider sense by not accepting a GE and various other stuff, I’d agree though. Certainly he’d be fully justified in painting his opponents as prevaricating, dishonest and at least attempting to use extra-parliamentary means to disrupt progress.


----------



## Cid (Sep 26, 2019)

But the underlying fact that he’s achieved precisely fuck all, and that it’s mostly his and his party’s fault remains.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

Cid said:


> I don’t think the liberal establishment has actually prevented him doing much, at least not through this court action. In a wider sense by not accepting a GE and various other stuff, I’d agree though. Certainly he’d be fully justified in painting his opponents as prevaricating, dishonest and at least attempting to use extra-parliamentary means to disrupt progress.



He will be able to say they have prevented him from delivering Brexit on the 31st October, which they have (assuming he would somehow have got a deal in time which is generous obviously but he will say he would have).


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> He will be able to say they have prevented him from delivering Brexit on the 31st October, which they have (assuming he would somehow have got a deal in time which is generous obviously but he will say he would have).


Crucially, doesn't shoot Farage's fox, though.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Crucially, doesn't shoot Farage's fox, though.



Yes, that's true, but as Labour moves further and further towards Remain the BP will cause plenty of problems for Labour too.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

Cid said:


> I don’t think the liberal establishment has actually prevented him doing much, at least not through this court action. In a wider sense by not accepting a GE and various other stuff, I’d agree though. Certainly he’d be fully justified in painting his opponents as prevaricating, dishonest and at least attempting to use extra-parliamentary means to disrupt progress.


If he doesn't want to be in government, he could always resign. or call a vote of no confidence in himself and instruct his cabinet to vote against themselves. I just checked, and while it would be unusual, there's nothing to stop him from doing it.

I don't think he's justified in anything he does. He should call a vote of confidence in order to demonstrate that he has a right to form a government in the first place. In fact, that is how he could frame it - instructing his cabinet to vote 'confidence', he asks parliament to do the same to give him the moral authority to form the government and negotiate brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If he doesn't want to be in government, he could always resign. or call a vote of no confidence in himself and instruct his cabinet to vote against themselves. I just checked, and while it would be unusual, there's nothing to stop him from doing it.
> 
> I don't think he's justified in anything he does. He should call a vote of confidence in order to demonstrate that he has a right to form a government in the first place.



It's not a great argument though is it? "If you really want an election, call a vote of no confidence in yourself, because we don't want to do it."


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's not a great argument though is it? "If you really want an election, call a vote of no confidence in yourself, because we don't want to do it."


That's the labour party's problem. For the rest of us, we don't have to see anything Johnson does to try to cling to/win power as justified.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's the labour party's problem. For the rest of us, we don't have to see anything Johnson does to try to cling to/win power as justified.



Including an election? 

And isn't it your argument in this circumstance? "I don't want an election, call a vote of no confidence in yourself"?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Including an election?
> 
> And isn't it your argument in this circumstance? "I don't want an election, call a vote of no confidence in yourself"?


I don't have an argument at this particular point. I'm merely pointing out the options Johnson has if he really wants to dissolve his government. And given those options, I don't see anything he accuses others of as justified.

It's already constitutionally dubious whether or not he has the right to form a government now. If he actually cared about such things, he's call a vote of confidence immediately before doing anything else.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> If he doesn't want to be in government, he could always resign. or call a vote of no confidence in himself and instruct his cabinet to vote against themselves. I just checked, and while it would be unusual, there's nothing to stop him from doing it.
> 
> I don't think he's justified in anything he does. He should call a vote of confidence in order to demonstrate that he has a right to form a government in the first place.



As I posted on the Johnson massive twat thread...



cupid_stunt said:


> I think so, they could go on record as the only government to loss every vote, which is probably why they don't seem to want to call a vote of no confidence in themselves, it would be embarrassing doing so, but imagine going on to loss it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't have an argument at this particular point. I'm merely pointing out the options Johnson has if he really wants to dissolve his government. And given those options, I don't see anything he accuses others of as justified.
> 
> It's already constitutionally dubious whether or not he has the right to form a government now. If he actually cared about such things, he's call a vote of confidence immediately before doing anything else.



This is spurious. You could equally argue that if the oppositon parties cared about whether or not he has the right to govern, then they would call a VoNC. The fact is that this govt's authority rests upon the will of Parliament, and that the will of Parliament is that the Johnson govt remain (ahem, sorry) in govt but not actually  be able to do anything.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think so, they could go on record as the only government to loss every vote, which is probably why they don't seem to want to call a vote of no confidence in themselves, it would be embarrassing doing so, but imagine going on to loss it.



*If* they lost a VoNC in themselves though they could then claim a mandate to continue to govern. 

I think... 

God this is making my head hurt.


----------



## Teaboy (Sep 26, 2019)

But the point of Johnson calling a vonc would be to lose it and in doing so bring about the GE they claim to want so badly.  It may be the worry that some short term government would form and delay Brexit and the government don't want that but I think that would fit with their current strategy anyway.

Its almost as if they don't want the election now either and its all just parliamentary games.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> But the point of Johnson calling a vonc would be to lose it


----------



## killer b (Sep 26, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I don't see anything he accuses others of as justified.


It doesn't really matter how you see it tbf. He's not talking to you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> *If* they lost a VoNC in themselves though they could then claim a mandate to continue to govern.
> 
> I think...
> 
> God this is making my head hurt.



They could, but they wouldn't actually be able to 'govern' in any meaningful way.


----------



## Cloo (Sep 26, 2019)

Johnson's going to take us out with No Deal just to show that he can,  isn't he?


----------



## steveo87 (Sep 26, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Johnson's going to take us out with No Deal just to show that he can,  isn't he?


Yes.


----------



## killer b (Sep 26, 2019)

No.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 26, 2019)

Maybe.


----------



## eoin_k (Sep 26, 2019)

Neither


----------



## Argonia (Sep 26, 2019)

All of the above.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 26, 2019)

And, if you think you know what's going to happen, you haven't been following developments.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Johnson's going to take us out with No Deal just to show that he can,  isn't he?


if he does that on 31 october then the country will be fucked come close of business on 1 november

unless someone can work a way around eu data transfer rules


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, if you think you know what's going to happen, you haven't been following developments.


it's because i've been following developments that i know what's going to happen


----------



## andysays (Sep 26, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> This is spurious. You could equally argue that if the oppositon parties cared about whether or not he has the right to govern, then they would call a VoNC. The fact is that this govt's authority rests upon the will of Parliament, and that the will of Parliament is that the Johnson govt remain (ahem, sorry) in govt but not actually  be able to do anything.



Johnson wants to win the next election, whenever it is. Failing at actually delivering Brexit by his effectively self imposed deadline, he sees his best chance as being able to point to the opposition as to blame for that failure. He certainly seems unlikely to be able to point to any positive success on his part.

Most of the opposition parties are (understandably from their point of view) primarily interested in stopping a No Deal Brexit on 31st Oct, and a successful VoNC now would put that in doubt. It seems reasonable and sensible (again from their point of view) to attempt to ensure we don't have a No Deal exit and then hold a VoNC.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's because i've been following developments that i know what's going to happen



You don't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 26, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You don't.


so you say


----------



## Poi E (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if he does that on 31 october then the country will be fucked come close of business on 1 november
> 
> unless someone can work a way around eu data transfer rules



Fucking extraordinary this one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 26, 2019)

killer b said:


> It doesn't really matter how you see it tbf. He's not talking to you.


Sure. But that doesn't mean we have to succumb to any elements of his narrative of bullshit, just because some other people might be sympathetic to it.


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 26, 2019)

BoZo isn't a Brexit zealot he cares only for himself so long as he can firmly pin the blame on someone else he will ask for an extension and then point the finger during an election campaign
There are no words strong enough to describe what a self serving shit he is


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 26, 2019)

something about his siter saying something, i saw it on twatter etc


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> something about his siter saying something, i saw it on twatter etc



Good contribution 

(runs off to find it)


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 26, 2019)

Or something


----------



## Badgers (Sep 26, 2019)




----------



## pogofish (Sep 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>





Fuck, I had successfully buried any memory of that dirge and avoided it for decades...!


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Fascinating. I always thought Snow was a journalist during the mod 80’s with the miners strike, mass unemployment, racism and the class war unleashed by Thatcher.

It was a period when class war, rather than a tiresome spat between the admin section of the ruling class, raged. Bubble wanker


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fascinating. I always thought Snow was a journalist during the miners strike, mass unemployment, racism and the class war unleashed by Thatcher.



I'd say brexit has beaten all of those in the 'breaking our country' competition


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'd say brexit has beaten all of those in the 'breaking our country' competition



Really? A row over trading arrangements with a failing bloc ‘beats’ the battle to defeat the organised working class and overhaul Keynesian economic management to usher in neo-liberalism.

Fascinating


----------



## philosophical (Sep 26, 2019)

Now it looks like something called the civil contingencies act 2004 might come into play.

Apparently it would be a legal way of forcing no deal.


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

It certainly is fascinating. More dangerously - brexit has split the working, middle and upper classes. It has also split the left and right. It's a fundamental sea change that impacts everyone in the UK. None of your quoted examples have anywhere near the long term impact. Unfortunately.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> It certainly is fascinating. More dangerously - brexit has split the working, middle and upper classes. It has also split the left and right. It's a fundamental sea change that impacts everyone in the UK. None of your quoted examples have anywhere near the long term impact. Unfortunately.



People are certainly angry about the delays in implementing the decision/that they lost -but when you have a militarised police occupying working class communities, millions of jobs deliberately  thrown away and the construction of a narrative of ‘an enemy within’ to justify class war as policy, then I’d argue Snow is talking out of his hole.


----------



## killer b (Sep 26, 2019)

You mistake Brexit for a cause, rather than a symptom. All those divisions were there already - if this crisis hadn't have happened, another would have been along soon enough. Look at the world around you.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 26, 2019)

The dismantling of the welfare state and imposition of neo-liberalism did not have a fundamental impact. Totally mad. Brexit really has driven some liberals crazy


----------



## ska invita (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> A row over trading arrangements with a failing bloc


i know you dont give a shit about it, but spare just a little thought for the 10s to 100s of thousands of people who are due to be made illegal and deportable in 18 months.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

ska invita said:


> i know you dont give a shit about it, but spare just a little thought for the 10s to 100s of thousands of people who are due to be made illegal and deportable in 18 months.



How do you know I don’t ‘give a shit about it’? Plus what the fuck has that got to do with the tweet by Snow?


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

I'd argue that looking at things purely through the prism of class is limiting your view on the affects. No idea what you mean about militarism police though.

You hit the nail on the head about throwing away millions of jobs though. That's more significant than the quoted examples you made earlier on its own.

Add to that our loss of FOM, our withdrawal from international relationships (non capital related), the alienation of settled foreigners living here, our influence in science and technology, and the rise of right wing racism etc. Brexit is doing nothing positive for our country and a hell of a lot of damage.

But blue passports...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> I'd argue that looking at things purely through the prism of class is limiting your view on the affects.



I’d argue the failure of much of the left to _look at things through the prism of class _is possibly a more pressing point.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 26, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Now it looks like something called the civil contingencies act 2004 might come into play.
> 
> Apparently it would be a legal way of forcing no deal.


No, that's not credible.
Explained here.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 26, 2019)

Just a minor effect here 


> *Health inequalities across the UK are at their widest since Victorian times, a study says.*
> The researchers looked at the life expectancy for 10 different poverty groups from 1992 to 2003 although the report admitted the gap had been widening since the 1980s.
> 
> They found over that period the gap had widened by 0.15 of a year, with the poorest living 76.2 years on average while the wealthiest lived until 80.3 years old.


----------



## MrSki (Sep 26, 2019)




----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The dismantling of the welfare state and imposition of neo-liberalism did not have a fundamental impact. Totally mad. Brexit really has driven some liberals crazy



I totally agree with that as a significant reason for the brexit vote. People have been getting a reduced share of the countries gains and it has made us angry. For me that's an argument against shit bag tory governments but not directly related to the EU though. Austerity was a UK policy.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Just a minor effect here


That's from fucking 2005!


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> People are certainly angry about the delays in implementing the decision/that they lost -but when you have a militarised police occupying working class communities, millions of jobs deliberately  thrown away and the construction of a narrative of ‘an enemy within’ to justify class war as policy, then I’d argue Snow is talking out of his hole.



Having still been in nappies during the miner's strike I didn't feel any of its affects. I think it's very clearly more than just rowing over trade deals, on a nation wide level anyway but yes, when it's put like that things were volatile then too but it feels to me there's divisions everywhere and not just class and divisions within the same class. Brexit's divided at family level. Whole families are divided over Brexit, communities and friendship groups. There were certainly divisions before but it seems to me Brexit has driven them deeper. When you have families literally breaking up over Brexit (and no I don't give a shit about the prime cunt's brother flouncing) it seems to me Brexit has added another deeper layer to the already existing divisions.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> Having still been in nappies during the miner's strike I didn't feel any of its affects. I think it's very clearly more than just rowing over trade deals, on a nation wide level anyway but yes, when it's put like that things were volatile then too but it feels to me there's divisions everywhere and not just class and divisions within the same class. Brexit's divided at family level. Whole families are divided over Brexit, communities and friendship groups. There were certainly divisions before but it seems to me Brexit has driven them deeper. When you have families literally breaking up over Brexit (and no I don't give a shit about the prime cunt's brother flouncing) it seems to me Brexit has added another deeper layer to the already existing divisions.




Capitalism v the organised working class 
Dominic Grieve v Rees-Mogg


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 26, 2019)

_Thatcherism isn't real because I was too young to remember her as PM
_
Top stuff


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Capitalism v the organised working class
> Dominic Grieve v Rees-Mogg



It's clearly not just Grieve v Rees-Mogg though is it? I'm in general agreement with you but you don't have to resort to disingenuous shit like that to make your point.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

S☼I said:


> _Thatcherism isn't real because I was too young to remember her as PM
> _
> Top stuff



What's with the disingenuous shit here? Do you have a habit of making shit up and stuffing words into people's mouth or did you just feel like a laugh?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 26, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> That's from fucking 2005!


So what. You think things have changed? They haven't


> Socio-economic inequalities in life expectancy are also widening in both sexes, as a result of greater gains in life expectancy in less deprived populations. Between 2011–13 and 2014–16, the difference in life expectancy between the most and least deprived widened by 0.3 years among males and 0.4 years among females, and life expectancy among the most deprived females fell over this period.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> It's clearly not just Grieve v Rees-Mogg though is it? I'm in general agreement with you but you don't have to resort to disingenuous shit like that to make your point.



The debate is, essentially, a battle over the best direction to protect the interests of capital. The left has abandoned any pretence at thinking about the possibilities that might open up and collapsed into team remain. I’m afraid that is the substance of it


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> So what. You think things have changed? They haven't


I can assure you...if I want to know the infant mortality rate in males in 1841...well...I'm not.

But if you want to go further back I do have a thing for ancient Egyptians.


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The debate is, essentially, a battle over the best direction to protect the interests of capital. The left has abandoned any pretence at thinking about the possibilities that might open up for team remain. I’m afraid that is the substance of it



Some of us are arguing it's about much more than capital. You just don't seem to get those points or you skip over them.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The debate is, essentially, a battle over the best direction to protect the interests of capital. The left has abandoned any pretence at thinking about the possibilities that might open up for team remain. I’m afraid that is the substance of it



Yeah I completely agree with that but you're making out that that's all it is. It's clearly not just that to loads ordinary people who have a whole boat load of views about Brexit.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Supine said:


> Some of us are arguing it's about much more than capital. You just don't seem to get those points or you skip over them.



No. I get it. But what I’m stating is that it isn’t. There might be all sorts of issues, pre-existing, bubbling up. But the debate about IN/OUT is, at base, about trading relations with a bloc.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> Yeah I completely agree with that but you're making out that that's all it is. It's clearly not just that to loads ordinary people who have a whole boat load of views about Brexit.



Yes. As I’ve explained on here, at great length, the issues that drove the vote in working class areas was driven by political alienation. It is the dominant explanatory narrative. 

But, the debate about Brexit isn’t addressing any of that. Is it?


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’d argue the failure of much of the left to _look at things through the prism of class _is possibly a more pressing point.


Didn't you get the memo Smokeandsteam class does not matter anymore. It's not like it effects your education, your health, when you will die, what job opportunities you are likely to have.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Yes. As I’ve explained on here, at great length, the issues that drove the vote in working class areas was driven by political alienation. It is the dominant explanatory narrative.
> 
> But, the debate about Brexit isn’t addressing any of that. Is it?



No and it never was going to address any of that was it? Liberals still don't learn evidenced by their desire to just revoke article 50 and ignore what leave voters are telling them, tories wanna fuck us even harder and the left are just as fucking useless as they've always been. So yeah, business as usual really only more shouty.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 26, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> No and it never was going to address any of that was it? Liberals still don't learn evidenced by their desire to just revoke article 50 and ignore what leave voters are telling them, tories wanna fuck us even harder and the left are just as fucking useless as they've always been. So yeah, business as usual really only more shouty.



So we can conclude that Jon Snow, locked in his bubble in London, was talking shite then....


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> So we can conclude that Jon Snow, locked in his bubble in London, was talking shite then....



More or less, yeah


----------



## Supine (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> So we can conclude that Jon Snow, locked in his bubble in London, was talking shite then....



Or the opposite


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 26, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Didn't you get the memo Smokeandsteam class does not matter anymore. It's not like it effects your education, your health, when you will die, what job opportunities you are likely to have.


That is from 2009!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 26, 2019)

Awful lot of libdems on here these days


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 26, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> So we can conclude that Jon Snow, locked in his bubble in London, was talking shite then....



He might be meaning the divisions and anger within the political class rather than wider society, was the miner’s strike era characterised by friction in parliament itself? Genuine question as I can’t remember myself as a bit young and it wasn’t televised then.

It’s a bit apples and oranges anyway - the 80s was workers vs state, there wasn’t almost half of society going ‘fuck the miners’ and threatening to kick off if the government didn’t close the pits. This is different and maybe more serious as separate from the parliamentary clownshow it is society vs society with an almost even split, divided across classes. This makes us all weaker and easier for nefarious shit to be enacted by those at the top, while people are distracted and disunited. Fuck knows how this is resolved but beware of opportunistic shit from Randist factions in power.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 27, 2019)

If they are fucked if they don't deliver X, support Y. Now, if they are blocked or can sell it as such, that gives them a good hand. If we let them get on with it, and leave them to it, our interests are shrunken.

Therefore, the move is to oppose them, change government (i.e. Labour largest amount of MPs), delay and 'remain and reform' or leave with a competently realised deal.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 27, 2019)

Latest LeFT blog on the SC ruling:

Thread by @LeFTCampaign: "The central role the UK Supreme Court has played in the Brexit process is an indictment of the entire political system - wealthy individuals […]"


----------



## MrSki (Sep 27, 2019)

Today's Times front page.


----------



## krtek a houby (Sep 27, 2019)

Johnson allies seem to be doing that fear-mongering tactic that they've been so dismissive of, up to now. Interesting. I wonder does Cummings' musings on the "real world" extend to the 6 counties and indeed, the entire 32 counties? Let's see how much he enjoys it all, when it all really kicks off.


----------



## Ming (Sep 27, 2019)

This is a wee bit scary. A legal way to force a no-deal in spite of everything.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 27, 2019)

I’m hearing a lot of talk of them having tricks up their sleeve to still get away with a no-deal exit. This could of course just be bluffing - either aimed at the EU so that it appears to still be ‘on the table’ (as effective as if it still was) or aimed at opposition within parliament, hoping they will believe him, panic and go for a no-confidence vote that plays into his hands.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 27, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> He might be meaning the divisions and anger within the political class rather than wider society, was the miner’s strike era characterised by friction in parliament itself? Genuine question as I can’t remember myself as a bit young and it wasn’t televised then.


Infighting in the LP resulting in the expulsion of Militant and rejection of social democracy by the LP
Defection of gnat of four to set up new party -> merger with liberals 
Attempted assassination of PM
Beginnings of the rise of the SNP


Dogsauce said:


> It’s a bit apples and oranges anyway - the 80s was workers vs state, there wasn’t almost half of society going ‘fuck the miners’ and threatening to kick off if the government didn’t close the pits. This is different and maybe more serious as separate from the parliamentary clownshow it is society vs society with an almost even split, divided across classes. This makes us all weaker and easier for nefarious shit to be enacted by those at the top, while people are distracted and disunited. Fuck knows how this is resolved but beware of opportunistic shit from Randist factions in power.


Not half of society but a not insignificant number of people were going 'fuck the miners’. You had right wing groups planning for the removal a PM. Major confrontations between labour and capital.


----------



## andysays (Sep 27, 2019)

Meanwhile...

Brexit talks resume amid growing EU pessimism over new deal


> Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay will travel to Brussels later, amid growing pessimism on the continent over whether a new withdrawal deal can be agreed. The EU's chief negotiator, Michel Barnier, told diplomats on Thursday the UK's proposed alternative to the Irish backstop was unworkable.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Latest LeFT blog on the SC ruling:
> 
> Thread by @LeFTCampaign: "The central role the UK Supreme Court has played in the Brexit process is an indictment of the entire political system - wealthy individuals […]"


Much plain sense in that, with the exception of the obvious contradiction of welcoming the frustration of untrammelled executive power and casting those who effected that as “anti-democrats”.


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Infighting in the LP resulting in the expulsion of Militant and rejection of social democracy by the LP
> Defection of gnat of four to set up new party -> merger with liberals
> Attempted assassination of PM
> Beginnings of the rise of the SNP


Plus an actual decades-long civil war


----------



## emanymton (Sep 27, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> I’m hearing a lot of talk of them having tricks up their sleeve to still get away with a no-deal exit. This could of course just be bluffing - either aimed at the EU so that it appears to still be ‘on the table’ (as effective as if it still was) or aimed at opposition within parliament, hoping they will believe him, panic and go for a no-confidence vote that plays into his hands.


You think they might have secret tricks that they might use to get a result they don't want?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Things may kick off a bit at rallies, but Brexit themed riots seem highly unlikely. 

Brexit in itself is a weak cause, it doesn’t put food on the table. Some people may have voted for it out of frustration because they are being ground down. But if they riot it’ll be about that (or some sort of price hike) rather than something that engaged them once three years ago. And most Brexit voters are not in that position. They are en masse, older, non metropolitan. Hardly riot material and any rioters won’t have their support.

Putting this on the front of a newspaper seems like someone’s wishful thinking.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

emanymton said:


> You think they might have secret tricks that they might use to get a result they don't want?



Who even knows with these fucking people.


----------



## Supine (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Things may kick off a bit at rallies, but Brexit themed riots seem highly unlikely.
> 
> Brexit in itself is a weak cause, it doesn’t put food on the table. Some people may have voted for it out of frustration because they are being ground down. But if they riot it’ll be about that (or some sort of price hike) rather than something that engaged them once three years ago. And most Brexit voters are not in that position. They are en masse, older, non metropolitan. Hardly riot material and any rioters won’t have their support.
> 
> Putting this on the front of a newspaper seems like someone’s wishful thinking.



Is it not the people who lost the vote who are supposed to riot?


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 27, 2019)

You can bet there were people in the 80s going 'meh, this is nothing we had an actual war on in the 40s and we were on our own against the fascists preparing for invasion'

I just don't see the point in 'yeah, well things were worse in my day' and? That was nearly 40 years ago. I'm interested in now and the future direction I'm being taken in by a bunch of vicious cunts. Very few people under 40 want brexit, pointing that out doesn't make you some sort of all in EU bum licking remainer or, worse, a liberal fucking democrat.


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

From the BBC 



> .
> Former Prime Minister Sir John Major - who on Thursday accused Mr Johnson of "wilfully" destroying the prospects of a cross-party agreement on Brexit - expressed concern that *the government might sidestep the law by suspending the Benn Act until after 31 October.*
> 
> Sir John said he thought ministers might be planning to do this *by passing an Order of Council, which can be approved by Privy Councillors - government ministers - and has the force of law.*


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> Is it not the people who lost the vote who are supposed to riot?



Well apparently this is THE most exciting thing that has ever happened and half the country simply can’t live without it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> From the BBC



I suppose by having it in the open is safer ...



Spoiler: video explanation from Phil Moorhouse - scary - I have nothing to add


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

On riots.

It might be the case that most Brexit voters don't fit the profile of a rioter.

But the communities that many of them live in might.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> From the BBC





> Sir John said he thought ministers might be planning to do this by passing an Order of Council, which can be approved by Privy Councillors - government ministers - and has the force of law.



The privy council is far wider than govt ministers - Corbyn is a member ffs.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 27, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> You can bet there were people in the 80s going 'meh, this is nothing we had an actual war on in the 40s and we were on our own against the fascists preparing for invasion'
> 
> I just don't see the point in 'yeah, well things were worse in my day' and? That was nearly 40 years ago. I'm interested in now and the future direction I'm being taken in by a bunch of vicious cunts. Very few people under 40 want brexit, pointing that out doesn't make you some sort of all in EU bum licking remainer or, worse, a liberal fucking democrat.


You had a go at @*S☼I* earlier for putting words in your mouth and your now going to come out with this nonsense. Nobody has even mentioned 'worse' or 'better' what they have (rightly) challenged is the utter garbage that the political transition from the post-war to neo-liberal consensus was not a huge fundamental change with profound results to society. 

And the dismissal of class does make one a liberal, if not necessarily a Liberal Democrat.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 27, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You had a go at @*S☼I* earlier for putting words in your mouth and your now going to come out with this nonsense. Nobody has even mentioned 'worse' or 'better' what they have (rightly) challenged is the utter garbage that the political transition from the post-war to neo-liberal consensus was not a huge fundamental change with profound results to society.
> 
> And the dismissal of class does make one a liberal, if not necessarily a Liberal Democrat.



Where did I dismiss class? And where did anyone say that transition wasn't a huge fundamental change? Anyone saying that isn't the case is obviously talking nonsense. All I'm saying is the impression I get is if you mention anything other than class, even though class is a fundamental aspect, or express your concerns about the current climate you're some kind of wet liberal who doesn't know they're born. It's tedious.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 27, 2019)

Doctor Carrot said:


> Where did I dismiss class?


I did not say you did. I deliberately used 'one'.


Doctor Carrot said:


> And where did anyone say that transition wasn't a huge fundamental change? Anyone saying that isn't the case is obviously talking nonsense.





Supine said:


> It certainly is fascinating. More dangerously - brexit has split the working, middle and upper classes. It has also split the left and right. It's a fundamental sea change that impacts everyone in the UK. None of your quoted examples have anywhere near the long term impact. Unfortunately.


Really if you are going to have a go at people for misinterpreting things reading the thread might be a good idea.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> On riots.
> 
> It might be the case that most Brexit voters don't fit the profile of a rioter.
> 
> But the communities that many of them live in might.



Can you give an example? Somewhere a largely white nationalist themed (if Brexit is to be the cause) riot could gain wider support?

If people riot together they will be putting aside Brexit and it will be about prices, fuel, rents, policing etc. It won’t be about membership of an economic community of nations.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I suppose by having it in the open is safer ...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: video explanation



FFS this is the second time this crappy video has been posted without any explanation. 

If you cannot be bothered to give a sentence summary on what you are linking to do not bother posting at all. It's against the rules for a reason.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 27, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I did not say you did. I deliberately used 'one'.
> 
> 
> Really if you are going to have a go at people for misinterpreting things reading the thread might be a good idea.



I'm sure supine can speak for themselves but I don't think they're saying the 80s weren't a fundamental change just not the same league as brexit. I think they're wrong about that as Brexit stems from it but we're still living through brexit so don't know what the long term consequences will be yet. I just know that personally, being under 40, ive never seen things this bad. Snow should probably know better though.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 27, 2019)

emanymton said:


> You think they might have secret tricks that they might use to get a result they don't want?



What result do they want? I guess the goal is re-election in the very near future with a good working majority, a mandate to do what they like. Brexit is just a means of achieving this, one way or another. Johnson is ramping up a crisis that might help him achieve this result, to hell with what else falls over along the way.

At the moment no deal seems the only possibility as parliament has been sufficiently pissed off that they will never give Johnson the victory of a deal, and he must be aware of this and working around it, despite the pretence of negotiation.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Supine said:


> Is it not the people who lost the vote who are supposed to riot?


Lol


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 27, 2019)

Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one. 

What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)

*runs and hides*


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can you give an example? Somewhere a largely white nationalist themed (if Brexit is to be the cause) riot could gain wider support?



Yeah they might not be white nationalist themed, for info.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> I suppose by having it in the open is safer ...
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: video explanation



What’s in the video? How long is it? Why should we watch it? Do you agree or disagree with it? What is the source? You know, the usual kind of basic courtesy to fellow posters.

Many of us work in locations where playing audio clips is not appropriate or maybe even forbidden. If you want us to bother going back to the video after work, then please just tell us why.

This is a general plea to all. I’m not singling you out. A few brief words is all that’s needed.

“Here’s a 15 min video by x about y. It really gets to the point, although it is probably wrong about z, but I’ll let them off because it’s funny/pithy/well lit”.  That sort of thing.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one.
> 
> What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)
> 
> *runs and hides*


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yeah they might not be white nationalist themed, for info.



Who else cares enough?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one.
> 
> What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)
> 
> *runs and hides*



I'll try and give a really brief answer: liberals generally believe that there can be a harmony of interests between classes ie that something can be good for the working class and the ruling class at the same time. A lot of people here would disagree. 

Case in point would be EU membership. Liberals say that EU membership is good for everybody and don't understand why anyone would vote against it. But if you leave in a deindustrialised community which has been stripped of jobs by the last 40 years of neoliberal transformation, you may not see it that way.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one.
> 
> What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)
> 
> *runs and hides*


It’s a fair question. The word “liberal” is sprayed about as an insult, but for me the issue is something like this:


danny la rouge said:


> If I call you a liberal, I mean it in a specific sense.  Not to mean that you belong to a capital L political party, nor, as those the American right do, to mean that you are somewhere to the left of wherever the speaker stands, nor do I mean that you are generous in some way.
> 
> Rather, I use it to mean that your position ignores the structural issues in the problem being discussed.  I use it to mean that you are seeing the problem in terms of individual behaviour rather than social construction.  I use it to mean you are missing some important systemic formation, such as class. Usually class.
> 
> ...



There’s a great entry _Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society_ by Raymond Williams, which butchersapron once posted a link to the pdf of. I’ll see if I can find that...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Who else cares enough?



Do you honestly think the only people in Britain who really care about Brexit are white nationalists? Because if you do, you're even denser than I thought. 

You have to see things in context. Phone hacking, expenses scandals, economic crisis, austerity, the Lib Dems promising free education and then doing the opposite. Now on top of all that the political class have held a referendum, told everyone it mattered and want to find a way to forget it happened. Not every one who is angry about that is a white supremacist?


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Case in point would be EU membership. Liberals say that EU membership is good for everybody and don't understand why anyone would vote against it. But if you leave in a deindustrialised community which has been stripped of jobs by the last 40 years of neoliberal transformation, you may not see it that way.


Agreed.
But there are plenty of liberals saying that withdrawal from the EU is good for everybody.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 27, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> The privy council is far wider than govt ministers - Corbyn is a member ffs.



The privy council is a bit odd, there's over 600 members, but they don't all meet up, most have no political power. The privy council monthly meetings with the queen only has to have 3 attend, and all must be government ministers, it's only ministers acting for the government that have political powers.


----------



## danny la rouge (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl here: Are you a Marxist


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Who else cares enough?


There are lots of people with the view that they have never had political agency or a voice except for referendum in 2016 and are aggrieved at idea that this one isolated event when they did might just be ignored, hence why leave means leave has purchase and why for many it's a point of principle divorced from the material. They may not express it this way but it's the sum of it.


----------



## gentlegreen (Sep 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> What’s in the video? How long is it? Why should we watch it? Do you agree or disagree with it? What is the source? You know, the usual kind of basic courtesy to fellow posters.
> 
> Many of us work in locations where playing audio clips is not appropriate or maybe even forbidden. If you want us to bother going back to the video after work, then please just tell us why.
> 
> ...


It basically explains how it might happen. I find it unsettling, but can offer nothing on the obscure workings of the archaic UK parliamentary system which appears to be full of cynically exploitable loopholes...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Agreed.
> But there are plenty of liberals saying that withdrawal from the EU is good for everybody.



Well, actually they say it would be good for Britain. National rather than universal interest.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Do you honestly think the only people in Britain who really care about Brexit are white nationalists? Because if you do, you're even denser than I thought.
> 
> You have to see things in context. Phone hacking, expenses scandals, economic crisis, austerity, the Lib Dems promising free education and then doing the opposite. Now on top of all that the political class have held a referendum, told everyone it mattered and want to find a way to forget it happened. Not every one who is angry about that is a white supremacist?



Not that some of those things could generate a riot (phone hacking!) the idea at question is that Brexit in itself could.

If there is a diverse uprising about austerity, that is not about Brexit. 

Get over your ridiculous fantasies about Brexit unifying the working class.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a fair question. The word “liberal” is sprayed about as an insult, but for me the issue is something like this:
> 
> 
> There’s a great entry _Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society_ by Raymond Williams, which butchersapron once posted a link to the pdf of. I’ll see if I can find that...


Her's the updated version (2015). I'll screen shot the entry in a sec.

  

edit: of course, the point of the book was to then go and look up the other terms and concepts included in the entry...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> It basically explains how it might happen. I find it unsettling, but can offer nothing on the obscure workings of the archaic UK parliamentary system which appears to be full of cynically exploitable loopholes...



What might happen?


Mr Moose said:


> Not that some of those things could generate a riot (phone hacking!) the idea at question is that Brexit in itself could.
> 
> If there is a diverse uprising about austerity, that is not about Brexit.
> 
> Get over your ridiculous fantasies about Brexit unifying the working class.



Firstly, I haven't at any time suggested that Brexit can unify the working class. Either find a post where I have or retract this comment please. 

Secondly, _riots never have one single underlying cause. _They happen because of conditions in society in general. 

In 2011 the Mark Duggan shooting sparked riots. But that was the spark, it wasn't the cause. No one is suggesting that Brexit can cause riots but it is possible it could act as a spark for riots.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> There are lots of people with the view that they have never had political agency or a voice except for referendum in 2016 and are aggrieved at idea that this one isolated event when they did might just be ignored, hence why leave means leave has purchase and why for many it's a point of principle divorced from the material. They may not express it this way but it's the sum of it.


Yes, that's obviously the perception held by many.
Reality is that their 'voice'/'agency' was permitted by the right party of capital via a single expression of direct democracy set in the context of a bourgeois state governed by a party system of Parliamentary representative democracy.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well, actually they say it would be good for Britain. National rather than universal interest.


You've just reminded me of the old "where do mansplainers get their water from?" joke!


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> There are lots of people with the view that they have never had political agency or a voice except for referendum in 2016 and are aggrieved at idea that this one isolated event when they did might just be ignored, hence why leave means leave has purchase and why for many it's a point of principle divorced from the material. They may not express it this way but it's the sum of it.



Sure and they may care enough to vote Brexit Party, but riot? That will take a lot and there is a lot, but that isn’t Brexit.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What might happen?
> 
> 
> Firstly, I haven't at any time suggested that Brexit can unify the working class. Either find a post where I have or retract this comment please.
> ...



No, the Times is suggesting a minister thinks that not delivering Brexit May cause riots.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 27, 2019)

Coked up cashed up suburban middle class on the rampage.


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can you give an example? Somewhere a largely white nationalist themed (if Brexit is to be the cause) riot could gain wider support?
> 
> If people riot together they will be putting aside Brexit and it will be about prices, fuel, rents, policing etc. It won’t be about membership of an economic community of nations.



The second part of your post answers the first imo.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You've just reminded me of the old "where do mansplainers get their water from?" joke!


Something about taking the piss no doubt


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> The second part of your post answers the first imo.


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## belboid (Sep 27, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Fascinating. I always thought Snow was a journalist during the mod 80’s with the miners strike, mass unemployment, racism and the class war unleashed by Thatcher.
> 
> It was a period when class war, rather than a tiresome spat between the admin section of the ruling class, raged. Bubble wanker



to be fair to him, he was in Vietnam and Washington at that time.


----------



## krink (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Something about taking the piss no doubt




from a 'well, actually...'


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Something about taking the piss no doubt


_Well, actually _


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Well, actually _


I think the punchline could be improved


----------



## krink (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _Well, actually _



sorry i nicked your line


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think the punchline could be improved



Well, actually, it's a very clever punchline if you think about it...


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's wicked to mock the afflicted



But then it’s not about Brexit. 

Are you really in such fevered form you think riots about Brexit are likely?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well, actually, it's a very clever punchline if you think about it...



Actually I’m still having a good laugh about expenses and phone hacking leading to riots. Maybe Hugh Grant could kick them off for you.


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> But then it’s not about Brexit.
> 
> Are you really in such fevered form you think riots about Brexit are likely?



See the point someone made above about the difference between _triggers_ and _causes_.

I think its worth remembering at this point that even the Brexit vote wasn't (just) about Brexit.

The vote to Leave is a symptom of other causes.

Just as the vote to remain is not (just) about wanting to stay in the EU but, again, reflects wider concerns.

Brexit is just a _point de capiton_ for all of these.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> See the point someone made above about the difference between _triggers_ and _causes_.
> 
> I think its worth remembering at this point that even the Brexit vote wasn't (just) about Brexit.
> 
> ...



If Farage’s long march was anything to go by it is the spark for very few people.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> See the point someone made above about the difference between _triggers_ and _causes_.
> 
> I think its worth remembering at this point that even the Brexit vote wasn't (just) about Brexit.
> 
> ...


Absolutely, but it's also worth remembering that the right party of capital regards the Brexit vote as nothing other than a vote for their Brexit. Plenty of scope for unrest when that dawns on folk.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> But then it’s not about Brexit.
> 
> Are you really in such fevered form you think riots about Brexit are likely?


Brexit and the effects of brexit, yes. There have been riots about all manner of things, prices of theatre tickets, performances of the rite of spring, at the first performance of playboy of the western world so it's entirely feasible for there to be Brexit-based disorder.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yes, that's obviously the perception held by many.
> Reality is that their 'voice'/'agency' was permitted by the right party of capital via a single expression of direct democracy set in the context of a bourgeois state governed by a party system of Parliamentary representative democracy.


Yeah absolutely. But that perception is what counts (and is quite toxic)


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Sure and they may care enough to vote Brexit Party, but riot? That will take a lot and there is a lot, but that isn’t Brexit.


Well I wouldn't imagine any hypothetical riot would have one isolated cause, it will be a lot of things reaching a critical mass, including the feeling of being excluded from having any control/agency. The far right inroads into this field should give some indication of its potential (not that it's likely but that it's possible)


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 27, 2019)

anyone seen this?

it's a video from the internets.

it;s timed for the bit about the Woman who sells crabs.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 27, 2019)




----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well I wouldn't imagine any hypothetical riot would have one isolated cause, it will be a lot of things reaching a critical mass, including the feeling of being excluded from having any control/agency. The far right inroads into this field should give some indication of its potential (not that it's likely but that it's possible)



True, but then Brexit seems an unlikely spark.

The far right involvement that you mention also demonstrates the problem. If they are the spark then where would they gain support? I can’t think of anywhere that they wouldn’t get a hiding. Most people will not join it if they lead it.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Brexit and the effects of brexit, yes. There have been riots about all manner of things, prices of theatre tickets, performances of the rite of spring, at the first performance of playboy of the western world so it's entirely feasible for there to be Brexit-based disorder.



Theatre tickets? Another Remain fuelled outrage.

Most riots in this country are related to the Police, discrimination, deprivation, industrial disputes or football. For it to be deprivation that’s usually within a community. I can’t think where the community is that will kick off about Brexit being revoked let alone delayed.

This is a confection of the Right, unnamed Tory ministers, the Murdoch press, blowhards on Twitter. It’s a projection of their desire not reality.


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but then Brexit seems an unlikely spark.
> 
> The far right involvement that you mention also demonstrates the problem. If they are the spark then where would they gain support? I can’t think of anywhere that they wouldn’t get a hiding. Most people will not join it if they lead it.



Do you not remember the almost million votes the BNP got? Or all the councillors they had?

I'm willing to take a punt that they were mainly in places that are now regarded as "strong leave areas".


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Sep 27, 2019)

SNP saying they would support Corbyn now as interim caretaker...

But wouldn’t it make more sense for it to be ken Clarke? Let a Tory take the blame for thwarting brexit?

Although what do I know?


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> *SNP saying they would support Corbyn now as interim caretaker...*
> 
> But wouldn’t it make more sense for it to be ken Clarke? Let a Tory take the blame for thwarting brexit?
> 
> Although what do I know?



The lib dems won't go for it, the only prize here for them is ratfucking the labour left


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

There is no way you could get the whole of the PLP to support Ken Fucking Clarke as prime minister. Rightly so, he's scum.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one.
> 
> What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)
> 
> *runs and hides*



Shortest possible answer: because 'left liberal' is a contradiction in terms.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Theatre tickets? Another Remain fuelled outrage.
> 
> Most riots in this country are related to the Police, discrimination, deprivation, industrial disputes or football. For it to be deprivation that’s usually within a community. I can’t think where the community is that will kick off about Brexit being revoked let alone delayed.
> 
> This is a confection of the Right, unnamed Tory ministers, the Murdoch press, blowhards on Twitter. It’s a projection of their desire not reality.


It's disappointing but not surprising to see you post such tosh


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> Do you not remember the almost million votes the BNP got? Or all the councillors they had?
> 
> I'm willing to take a punt that they were mainly in places that are now regarded as "strong leave areas".



Not many riots then and there apart from confrontations with anti fascist groups around the Steven Lawrence demos or the Welling bookshop.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It's disappointing but not surprising to see you post such tosh



It’s not surprising you have nothing else of note to say. Are you really going to indulge this fantasy of riots about Brexit? Thought you had a bit more in your noggin.


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

2001 Oldham riots - Wikipedia


----------



## belboid (Sep 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> 2001 Oldham riots - Wikipedia


not to mention Bradford and Harehills in the same year.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Are you suggesting that a Brexit related riot would be on those lines?


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

I'm suggesting your post saying 'not many riots then' is innacurate.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

I'm surely not alone in easily envisaging the "_we thought things would be better/different after Brexit" _vox poops recorded in front of the smouldering ruins of what remained of the interviewee's shopping centre?


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm suggesting your post saying 'not many riots then' is innacurate.



Fair enough, but this suggests riots in conflict with other working class groups. And I believe there will be little appetite for that.


----------



## Winot (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> From the BBC



Consensus on legal Twitter is that the mooted sidestepping of the Benn Act is bollocks. 

Don’t know if that’s correct but I’ve seen no commentary from any legal experts that suggests otherwise. Of course all lawyers are Remoaners etc.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> SNP saying they would support Corbyn now as interim caretaker...
> 
> But wouldn’t it make more sense for it to be ken Clarke? Let a Tory take the blame for thwarting brexit?
> 
> Although what do I know?



If Labour - and here I mean the leadership and the membership - explicitly say that Corbyn _isn't _the best/only person who can do this 'interim PM' job, they know that they are telling the electorate at the GE two months later that even they accept that he'd be a dead loss as PM.

That's why they bash so hard on this 'it can only be the leader of the opposition' thing - when in fact it can be any MP from any party who can find either 320-something other MP's to support him, or just more MP's than any other MP can find - if they publicly accept that Corbyn isn't the right/only man for the job because only those he pays (and not even all of them..) will support him, then they may as well not bother turning up to November's GE.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I'm surely not alone in easily envisaging the "_we thought things would be better/different after Brexit" _vox poops recorded in front of the smouldering ruins of what remained of the interviewee's shopping centre?



I predict that shortly after Brexit it will transpire that nobody voted leave at all so there'll be nobody to interview. Oh, this smouldering ruin? It was like that when I got here.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

So, is this what the Johnson regime are sniggering about?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So, is this what the Johnson regime are sniggering about?
> 
> View attachment 185257



Sounds like bollocks to me. 'European law usurps British law' does not sound like the words of a person who knows about laws. The Benn act does not overrule article 50 anyway, it's a set of rules for what the government must do _given that _article 50 is in effect.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Sounds like bollocks to me. 'European law usurps British law' does not sound like the words of a person who knows about laws. The Benn act does not overrule article 50 anyway, it's a set of rules for what the government must do _given that _article 50 is in effect.


Probs.
Wonder if the 'ruse' is basically as simple as asking for an extension (as per) then not accepting the offer?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Probs.
> Wonder if the 'ruse' is basically as simple as asking for an extension (as per) then not accepting the offer?



I believe the Benn act requires Johnson to accept any extension offered by the EU.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I believe the Benn act requires Johnson to accept any extension offered by the EU.


Oh, right; I suppose they'd have thought that one through?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Oh, right; I suppose they'd have thought that one through?



It was worded very carefully on the (valid) assumption that leaving any loopholes or wiggle room would make the whole thing a waste of time.


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I believe the Benn act requires Johnson to accept any extension offered by the EU.


(subject to a vote in the commons)


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> (subject to a vote in the commons)



Which would be a formality, although possibly one which allowed some scope for timewasting.


----------



## Winot (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Probs.
> Wonder if the 'ruse' is basically as simple as asking for an extension (as per) then not accepting the offer?



Interestingly, Article 50(3) doesn't even require the departing member state to request an extension. It simply requires the European Council to decide unanimously to extend the period "in agreement with the Member State concerned".


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

For the record Mr Moose, I'm not saying there _will_ be riots should Brexit not happen. Nor am I predicting what form or character they would take. I'm just saying it's not implausible.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but then Brexit seems an unlikely spark.
> 
> The far right involvement that you mention also demonstrates the problem. If they are the spark then where would they gain support? I can’t think of anywhere that they wouldn’t get a hiding. Most people will not join it if they lead it.



I'm wondering how these Brexit riots are going to get started - you always need some kind of spark, and I don't think there's a clear chain of command between the rioters and Johnson, and putting subliminal messages in _Britain's Got Talent_ might be a bit hit and miss.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 27, 2019)

There will def be a riot on Twitter.


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

Brendan O'Neill has just 'called for riots' on _Politics Live.

_


----------



## chilango (Sep 27, 2019)

.]


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> For the record Mr Moose, I'm not saying there _will_ be riots should Brexit not happen. Nor am I predicting what form or character they would take. I'm just saying it's not implausible.



Fair enough and I wouldn’t say never either given the possibility of confrontations and issues building upon issue (for example heavy handed policing). I agree there is lots of anger about a lot of things. 

But I find the idea that Brexit frustration in itself would be enough to set people off fanciful. There is a reason that until the referendum itself Europe barely made the top ten of issues voters cared about when voting for a GE. It’s a big leap that this is worth a riot and possible time for more than a very few of the boniest headed. Yet this appears to be what the masters would like us to think.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm wondering how these Brexit riots are going to get started - you always need some kind of spark, and I don't think there's a clear chain of command between the rioters and Johnson, and putting subliminal messages in _Britain's Got Talent_ might be a bit hit and miss.



KFC shortage.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> KFC shortage.



I thought that just led to 999 calls, but if it happened at the right time, who knows?
Does 5 people count as a riot?


----------



## belboid (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> I thought that just led to 999 calls, but if it happened at the right time, who knows?
> Does 5 people count as a riot?


needs to be 12 or more.

5 is merely a kerfuffle


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

belboid said:


> needs to be 12 or more.
> 
> 5 is merely a kerfuffle



Oh, I was hoping for at least a palaver.


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

riots are generally triggered by heavy-handed policing, so I don't expect to see many over Brexit tbh


----------



## Sprocket. (Sep 27, 2019)

Riots! More likely to be projectile tutting.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> I'm wondering how these Brexit riots are going to get started - you always need some kind of spark, and I don't think there's a clear chain of command between the rioters and Johnson, and putting subliminal messages in _Britain's Got Talent_ might be a bit hit and miss.



Protests arranged at constituency offices or MPs homes, angry mob style. Give them a target. If I wanted to cause trouble over this I’d organise something like that on fb, wouldn’t need that big a crowd to get a bit messy.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Protests arranged at constituency offices or MPs homes, angry mob style. Give them a target. If I wanted to cause trouble over this I’d organise something like that on fb, wouldn’t need that big a crowd to get a bit messy.



I think after Jo Cox they might steer clear of that.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 27, 2019)

i think there could be some pro-brexit demos that could get quite lively - but id be more worried about  "freelance" far right stuff. Would not be at all surprised if we get another joe cox.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 27, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Protests arranged at constituency offices or MPs homes, angry mob style. Give them a target. If I wanted to cause trouble over this I’d organise something like that on fb, wouldn’t need that big a crowd to get a bit messy.



yeah - i could see this happening.


----------



## belboid (Sep 27, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Protests arranged at constituency offices or MPs homes, angry mob style. Give them a target. If I wanted to cause trouble over this I’d organise something like that on fb, wouldn’t need that big a crowd to get a bit messy.


Hopefully they'd be the target, though I'd fear they'd go for 'easier' targets.  Wouldn't like to own a Polish shop in Mansfield.


----------



## Poot (Sep 27, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> i think there could be some pro-brexit demos that could get quite lively - but id be more worried about  "freelance" far right stuff. Would not be at all surprised if we get another joe cox.


Yep. Dont make the mistake of thinking it will all be spirited, robust groups. Some will be weirdo loners with a fixation and access to weapons. So yeah, another jo cox is quite likely.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Fair enough and I wouldn’t say never either given the possibility of confrontations and issues building upon issue (for example heavy handed policing). I agree there is lots of anger about a lot of things.
> 
> But I find the idea that Brexit frustration in itself would be enough to set people off fanciful. There is a reason that until the referendum itself Europe barely made the top ten of issues voters cared about when voting for a GE. It’s a big leap that this is worth a riot and possible time for more than a very few of the boniest headed. Yet this appears to be what the masters would like us to think.


 
yep. Let's not forget the pitiful March To Leave. The talk of an angry mass of people prepared to take to violence to ensure that the Will Of The People is expressed is mostly coming from politicians and agitators with a self-serving interest in talking such stuff up. Evidence on the ground is that there will be no such thing except from a fringe of racist cunts like the EDL and others with cunty acronyms.

One thing I have found very striking in recent times has been the use of the 'my constituents are telling me' by pro-brexit MPs. They give the impression of some kind of united front of anger. But it's just meaningless bluster.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

Burning of Lab/LD constituency offices would not be surprising, either.


----------



## Raheem (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> Oh, I was hoping for at least a palaver.


I'll swap you a to-do and half a tizzy.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Burning of Lab/LD constituency offices would not be surprising, either.



Kind of more likely that my local Tory's gaff gets done.

(Soubry - voted in as a Tory, at least)


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> Kind of more likely that my local Tory's gaff gets done.


Given 3 weeks of food shortages & 'spoons running dry post Halloween; yep.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> There is a reason that until the referendum itself Europe barely made the top ten of issues voters cared about when voting for a GE.



Bit misleading that though, cos the economy and immigration were consistently and both have now been wrapped up in the brexit bow from both sides


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

This LD posturing is just so absurd.

_If _Corbyn really has bought the Nationalists onside (presumably with vague some promise of an Indy ref?) it's only the LD standing in the way of a successful VoNC & new administration extending A50. What are they going to do; vote with Johnson to pretty much ensure ND?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 27, 2019)

the volume and ceaseless nature of unending rage on breixt orientated social media is deeply worrying IMHO. Its all talk of "traitors" "string em up" "send in the army" - their is no debate beyond - "we won - we are leaving - end of". Absolute moral certainty. 
A disturbingly high number of these people see political violence as not only justified - but necessary - and they are being explicitly encouraged by johnson and co. I don't think they have the organsiation or numbers to do really big numbers on demos - also i would guess these people are older and more isolated that the usual protesters.  But i definitely think some of them will be spurred into violent action  - alone or co-ordinated.


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the volume and ceaseless nature of unending rage on breixt orientated social media is deeply worrying IMHO. Its all talk of "traitors" "string em up" "send in the army" - their is no debate beyond - "we won - we are leaving - end of". Absolute moral certainty.
> A disturbingly high number of these people see political violence as not only justified - but necessary - and they are being explicitly encouraged by johnson and co. I don't think they have the organsiation or numbers to do really big numbers on demos - also i would guess these people are older and more isolated that the usual protesters.  But i definitely think some of them will be spurred into violent action  - alone or co-ordinated.


One of the LP's National Campaign days tomorrow; plenty of bods will be out street stalling with leaflets. Plenty of scope for nutcase attention.


----------



## maomao (Sep 27, 2019)

Just to clarify. In the unlikely event of a HoC VoNC followed by a Corbyn caretaker gov (the lib dems might come in if 2nd ref promised too?) Johnson remains Tory leader and remains the most likely post GE PM?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Given 3 weeks of food shortages & 'spoons running dry post Halloween; yep.



There is no fpoon.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

maomao said:


> Just to clarify. In the unlikely event of a HoC VoNC followed by a Corbyn caretaker gov (the lib dems might come in if 2nd ref promised too?) Johnson remains Tory leader and remains the most likely post GE PM?



Corbyn might make a good caretaker.  I bet he's got all the kit.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

maomao said:


> Just to clarify. In the unlikely event of a HoC VoNC followed by a Corbyn caretaker gov (the lib dems might come in if 2nd ref promised too?) Johnson remains Tory leader and remains the most likely post GE PM?


Or they get rid. Imagine his personal polling would play a part as they went Johnson so he could get them over line in a GE. If that looks dicey based on polling then knives out I'd have thought.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 27, 2019)

e


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> A disturbingly high number of these people see political violence as not only justified - but necessary


tbf they aren't _really_ wrong. They're just mostly wrong about what it's justified for, and where it's necessary.


----------



## BCBlues (Sep 27, 2019)

It's a great song but one line has always stuck out for me..."I cant remember such a bitter time". I never thought we would see such divisions again after Thatcher was booted out but here we are again.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Sep 27, 2019)

maomao said:


> Just to clarify. In the unlikely event of a HoC VoNC followed by a Corbyn caretaker gov (the lib dems might come in if 2nd ref promised too?) Johnson remains Tory leader and remains the most likely post GE PM?


These things can turn very quickly. If his government were to fall to be replaced by some caretaker govt, Johnson would find it very hard to characterise himself as anything other than a failure - either to those who already think he is one or those who currently back him because he wants to 'get brexit done'. I can imagine the Brexit Party having a field day, then who knows what would happen at an election? Could see the tories virtually wiped out in parts of the country, but I don't think anyone has any real idea what would happen.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Bit misleading that though, cos the economy and immigration were consistently and both have now been wrapped up in the brexit bow from both sides



Yes, but it’s not the case that Brexit offers anything or is the solution to anything. There is no simple demand like fuel prices to drag it forward. The excitement about it is an artifice requiring frequent piss boiling to stay in focus.


----------



## kebabking (Sep 27, 2019)

8ball said:


> I think after Jo Cox they might steer clear of that.



Who is 'they'?

Any brexit related fisticuffs isn't going to be orchestrated in some Russian money financed 'war room', it's going to be local fuckwits off the internet - the kind of idiots who post a stream of Britain First tripe - getting pissed and bashing constituency offices, Polish shops and MP's surgeries. It might, depending on circumstances there and then, go further than that or it may just stay as half-cut rantings and the odd brick thrown through a window.

What it won't be, in any real sense, is organised.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Actually I’m still having a good laugh about expenses and phone hacking leading to riots. Maybe Hugh Grant could kick them off for you.



Sigh. 

The reason I mention those things is that trust in the establishment is the lowest that it has been in the post war period, because of a whole range of things. Brexit adds to that.

I'm not seeing we will see riots. But if Parliament or the courts effectively overrule a democratic process and revoke A50 at some point, I wouldn't rule it out. There is deep anger in society and it will find an expression one way or another regardless of whether you can comprehend that anger or not.


----------



## Winot (Sep 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> tbf they aren't _really_ wrong. They're just mostly wrong about what it's justified for, and where it's necessary.



Do you really believe that? Can you give me an example of political violence in the UK that you would think justified?


----------



## killer b (Sep 27, 2019)

Well, we all cheered when someone bricked Tommy Robinson when he came to town in the summer.


----------



## Supine (Sep 27, 2019)

killer b said:


> Well, we all cheered when someone bricked Tommy Robinson when he came to town in the summer.



I'm more of a milkshake kind of a guy


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 27, 2019)

Poll tax riots. That was brilliant.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes, but it’s not the case that Brexit offers anything or is the solution to anything. There is no simple demand like fuel prices to drag it forward. The excitement about it is an artifice requiring frequent piss boiling to stay in focus.


I wasn't referring to a trigger for social disorder, I was responding to your post that nobody was arsed about the EU before 2016. It's misleading because the issues that are wrapped up in brexit are the same issues that were common concerns before. All three of tories, labour, and libdems called for referendums prior to Cameron actually doing it, that didn't come from nowhere, Ukip dominating EU elections didn't come from nowhere.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Anyway, something about riots being the language of the unheard or something


----------



## Steel Icarus (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I wasn't referring to a trigger for social disorder, I was responding to your post that nobody was arsed about the EU before 2016. It's misleading because the issues that are wrapped up in brexit are the same issues that were common concerns before. All three of tories, labour, and libdems called for referendums prior to Cameron actually doing it, that didn't come from nowhere, Ukip dominating EU elections didn't come from nowhere.


I voted No2EU in 2014's Euro Parliament election, for example


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I wasn't referring to a trigger for social disorder, I was responding to your post that nobody was arsed about the EU before 2016. It's misleading because the issues that are wrapped up in brexit are the same issues that were common concerns before. All three of tories, labour, and libdems called for referendums prior to Cameron actually doing it, that didn't come from nowhere, Ukip dominating EU elections didn't come from nowhere.



I think you are doing that thing where people imagine Brexit is anything they want it to be. Any disatisfaction expressed during our membership is de facto an expression of disatisfaction with the EU whatever the gift of our Government was to address those issues. The EU and it’s neoliberal rules is a part for sure, but its position in pole place was a fringe activity until recently.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I voted No2EU in 2014's Euro Parliament election, for example


I campaigned and almost stood for them in 2009 haha


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> I think you are doing that thing where people imagine Brexit is anything they want it to be.



I'm really not. Was the economy a common concern pre 16 yes/no, is it a factor in brexit yes/no, was immigration a common concern pre 16 yes/no, is it a factor in brexit yes/no. Come on now.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Sep 27, 2019)

maomao said:


> Just to clarify. In the unlikely event of a HoC VoNC followed by a Corbyn caretaker gov (the lib dems might come in if 2nd ref promised too?) Johnson remains Tory leader and remains the most likely post GE PM?



In this scenario the sane thing for the tories to do would be to drop Johnson like a hot rock but then they'd run into the same problem that got Johnson the job in the first place, namely the dearth of better candidates for leadership. Considering it's now mandatory to chase the brexiteer lunatic fringe vote at the expense of all others a relatively sane moderate would be out of the question, so that drains a perilously shallow gene pool further still.

Again, Johnson remaining as leader after losing a VONC (as well as losing literally everything else) is both utterly absurd and, somehow, the least absurd scenario.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 27, 2019)

My problem with the brexit riots thing is that it's obviously being pushed to tie into the fantasies of the loons and loon-adjacent - that loyal Englishmen are going to take up arms against the traitors, quislings and fifth columnists of the deep state Marxist conspiracy if the will of the people is thwarted. This is not something we want to encourage.


----------



## Cid (Sep 27, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> the volume and ceaseless nature of unending rage on breixt orientated social media is deeply worrying IMHO. Its all talk of "traitors" "string em up" "send in the army" - their is no debate beyond - "we won - we are leaving - end of". Absolute moral certainty.
> A disturbingly high number of these people see political violence as not only justified - but necessary - and they are being explicitly encouraged by johnson and co. I don't think they have the organsiation or numbers to do really big numbers on demos - also i would guess these people are older and more isolated that the usual protesters.  But i definitely think some of them will be spurred into violent action  - alone or co-ordinated.



Yeah... brexit, especially no deal, seems to track more closely to age than anything else (e.g survey). I think that and a relatively high proportion of socially conservative types will limit wider direct action. And among those left leaning leavers a reluctance to associate with many of the other groups likely to be promoting protests.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I'm really not. Was the economy a common concern pre 16 yes/no, is it a factor in brexit yes/no, was immigration a common concern pre 16 yes/no, is it a factor in brexit yes/no. Come on now.



Yes, but Brexit isn’t an answer to issues like the economy. It’s not a new economic model, its key deliverables as expressed by the Conservative and Brexit Parties are neoliberal trade arrangements. All you can really wrap up in it is the desire to be out of the EU and in itself that wasn’t a big deal until recently.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I voted No2EU in 2014's Euro Parliament election, for example


as did I. Spacklefrog stood for them unless my memory betrays me


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> My problem with the brexit riots thing is that it's obviously being pushed to tie into the fantasies of the loons and loon-adjacent - that loyal Englishmen are going to take up arms against the traitors, quislings and fifth columnists of the deep state Marxist conspiracy if the will of the people is thwarted. This is not something we want to encourage.



And even possibly as a reason to suspend the Benn Bill. It all seems very concerted today.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 27, 2019)

kebabking said:


> Who is 'they'?
> 
> Any brexit related fisticuffs isn't going to be orchestrated in some Russian money financed 'war room', it's going to be local fuckwits off the internet - the kind of idiots who post a stream of Britain First tripe - getting pissed and bashing constituency offices, Polish shops and MP's surgeries. It might, depending on circumstances there and then, go further than that or it may just stay as half-cut rantings and the odd brick thrown through a window.
> 
> What it won't be, in any real sense, is organised.



I don't seriously expect organisation in the way you mean, but in terms of the messaging, I don't think clear links between Boris-supportive media outlets and content pointing in the direction of MP's (as opposed to dark warnings of riots in general), is likely to be seen as an acceptable strategy.

I mean acceptable in terms of risk of backfire, obviously.


----------



## Winot (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> And even possibly as a reason to suspend the Benn Bill. It all seems very concerted today.



Summary here of all the ways people have suggested BJ can get round Benn Act with commentary on why they are unlikely to work.


----------



## klang (Sep 27, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> e


bit too early in the day for me, but might get back to you later on that. how much?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 27, 2019)

Cummings, Johnson et al want to see the deployment of leaver rage, but only at the level of shouting on question time, giving Lab and Lib MPs a hard time, creating a hostile atmosphere for remainers of all stripe. They want all that to propel their 'out by the 31st' juggernaut through all the inconvenient parliamentary hurdles. But they will be worried about where it goes. I don't see another Jo Cox, but who knows. You can't predict the random one off. I also can't see there being riots in the normal sense. It _is_ likely to be demos outside MPs offices, maybe even this weekend. I think that all works for Johnson and he'll have a readymade line, 'look you caused that by ignoring the 2016 result'. But anything more than that is massively problematic. MP actually shoved to the floor? Their kids spat at? 100% rise in rape/death threats to female MPs?  Not all that grand for the people being shoved/spat on/threatened of course, but adds plausibility to those arguing that Johnson is 'dangerous'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Sep 27, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> as did I. Spacklefrog stood for them unless my memory betrays me



I didn't. Did some canvassing though.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes, but Brexit isn’t an answer to issues like the economy. It’s not a new economic model, its key deliverables as expressed by the Conservative and Brexit Parties are neoliberal trade arrangements. All you can really wrap up in it is the desire to be out of the EU and in itself that wasn’t a big deal until recently.



Crikey. We're going round in circles here tbh. I appreciate you don't think they are linked but it doesn't matter what you personally think, it matters how a big chunk of people perceive it and what motivates them. And if the last wasn't a big deal until recently then, again, why did all three of the big parties call for referendums, why did ukip dominate EU elections going back to Kilroy days etc. Come on. Anyway it's Friday and I'm gonna leave work now and eat and get pissed


----------



## Rob Ray (Sep 27, 2019)

chilango said:


> Brendan O'Neill has just 'called for riots' on _Politics Live.
> 
> _




I doubt he'll get arrested for incitement (he's almost certainly well within the criteria) but it'd be quite something if, after years of moaning about gammons being silenced by the left, O'Neill finally saw a bit of what actual repression of free speech looks like.


----------



## Argonia (Sep 27, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> e



mdma


----------



## tommers (Sep 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'look you caused that by ignoring the 2016 result'.



I'm hearing this a lot.  It was a bit of a theme on last night's QT.  I'm struggling with it, how is talking incessantly about something for three years ignoring it?  How is revoking article 50 ignoring it?  How is working out a deal (however bad that was) ignoring it?

It's never going to make people happy, even amongst the subset who actually voted for it but it hasn't been ignored.  Turns out it's quite a tricky thing to do.

Didn't Johnson vote against the deal himself anyway (before changing his mind probably)?  So is he one of these people too?


----------



## Wilf (Sep 27, 2019)

tommers said:


> I'm hearing this a lot.  It was a bit of a theme on last night's QT.  I'm struggling with it, how is talking incessantly about something for three years ignoring it?  How is revoking article 50 ignoring it?  How is working out a deal (however bad that was) ignoring it?
> 
> It's never going to make people happy, even amongst the subset who actually voted for it but it hasn't been ignored.  Turns out it's quite a tricky thing to do.
> 
> Didn't Johnson vote against the deal himself anyway (before changing his mind probably)?  So is he one of these people too?


Yep, once maybe twice (?). That's part of the absolute fucking hypocrisy of the man. 'Dear PM, we'd actually have a deal if it wasn't for people like... YOU'. His version of 'let's get brexit done' is no more valid than May's 'let's get brexit done'. In terms of obstructing any legitimacy handed down by the referendum result, he's every bit as much a 'traitor' as the rest of them.


----------



## tommers (Sep 27, 2019)

I should be used to the bollocks by now but it still depresses the fuck out of me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s not surprising you have nothing else of note to say. Are you really going to indulge this fantasy of riots about Brexit? Thought you had a bit more in your noggin.


You've a great void in your noggin with the piffle you've been coming out with, this guff about how brexit won't lead to any disorder, that communities will remain placid, that the consequences of Brexit anticipated in the yellowhammer documents aren't a concern for you. I haven't expressed any desire, any fantasy, for riots. You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think there won't be outbreaks of disorder flowing from a fucked up brexit


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 27, 2019)

im really not convinced that the ranting gammons spitting rage represent  "misguided"  working class rage - their a bunch of proto- fascist macho cunts who need to be opposed. 
And plenty of working class people - especially the younger ones (like under 40s) - and the non white ones -  do not support brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> True, but then Brexit seems an unlikely spark.
> 
> The far right involvement that you mention also demonstrates the problem. If they are the spark then where would they gain support? I can’t think of anywhere that they wouldn’t get a hiding. Most people will not join it if they lead it.


Do you in fact know what a riot is? Such a scenario as you describe could easily be a riot - see eg Waterloo 12.9.92


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 27, 2019)

Disorder is required to keep brexit on track - disorder from either side will do


----------



## brogdale (Sep 27, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Disorder is required to keep brexit on track - disorder from either side will do


I saw the 750 billion (Waitrose) man march through London; there won't be any riots coming from that side.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You've a great void in your noggin with the piffle you've been coming out with, this guff about how brexit won't lead to any disorder, that communities will remain placid, that the consequences of Brexit anticipated in the yellowhammer documents aren't a concern for you. I haven't expressed any desire, any fantasy, for riots. You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you think there won't be outbreaks of disorder flowing from a fucked up brexit



We were talking about a frustrated Brexit. I never mentioned crashing out. Kindly read the posts before you spaff off.


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Do you in fact know what a riot is? Such a scenario as you describe could easily be a riot - see eg Waterloo 12.9.92



Yes I was there that day and the fash got mullered.

For that reason, riots provoked by boneheads won’t be popular.

I did say that rallies would likely have some skirmishes but that’s not what’s implied by the debate today. Certain people want us to think Britain will be in flames.

Crashing out and things run short is a whole new ball game. People start dropping due to lack of meds and we could see Farage fleeing to safety abroad yet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

,,


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> ,,



Your apology has been noted. Much love.


----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes I was there that day and the fash got mullered.
> 
> For that reason, riots provoked by boneheads won’t be popular.
> 
> ...


There are very few boneheads these days. So obvs any riots provoked by them unpopular. But riots provoked by syl or nf or similar could be rather better attended. And in the result of either no deal or no brexit I anticipate a degree of empowerment of the far right, in the second case from disenchanted and disenfranchised brexiters and in the first from what will be seen as a victory for them.


----------



## treelover (Sep 27, 2019)

> Tory MPs beware: if you whip up an angry mob, they may end up angry with you
> Dominic Cummings wants a ‘people v parliament’ election. But what happens afterwards? You, then, are ‘parliament’
> Marina Hyde
> 
> Tory MPs beware: if you whip up an angry mob, they may end up angry with you | Marina Hyde



Yes, blowback


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 27, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> SNP saying they would support Corbyn now as interim caretaker...
> 
> But wouldn’t it make more sense for it to be ken Clarke? Let a Tory take the blame for thwarting brexit?
> 
> Although what do I know?


SNP said Corbyn or anyone who could bring consensus amongst the opposition parties.  

It _ should_ be the father of the house, Ken,  or the mother, Harman.

Not happening though.


----------



## Anju (Sep 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a fair question. The word “liberal” is sprayed about as an insult, but for me the issue is something like this:
> 
> 
> There’s a great entry _Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society_ by Raymond Williams, which butchersapron once posted a link to the pdf of. I’ll see if I can find that...



Thanks, found that really helpful. Inspired me to invest £1.99 in the Raymond Williams book.


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yep, once maybe twice (?). That's part of the absolute fucking hypocrisy of the man. 'Dear PM, we'd actually have a deal if it wasn't for people like... YOU'. His version of 'let's get brexit done' is no more valid than May's 'let's get brexit done'. In terms of obstructing any legitimacy handed down by the referendum result, he's every bit as much a 'traitor' as the rest of them.



That's the problem. Brexit can't just be "done." Apart from revoking A50, which would result in the "gammon" tendency fulminating for a bit (and which, anyway, seems most unlikely) any brexit outcome is going to be fraught, painful and long drawn out, very probably into decades. "Just get on with it" may be the popular mantra of Question Time, but it's nonsense.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 28, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> That's the problem. Brexit can't just be "done." Apart from revoking A50, which would result in the "gammon" tendency fulminating for a bit (and which, anyway, seems most unlikely) any brexit outcome is going to be fraught, painful and long drawn out, very probably into decades. "Just get on with it" may be the popular mantra of Question Time, but it's nonsense.



Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done. The issue is the 3 plus year delay to get the first step done.

Second, your use of ‘gammon’ reveals your pitiful misunderstanding of the nature of the class responses set in motion. A newsnight report this week, which could have been packaged a ‘Dispatch on what the northern working class scum think about it’ went up the road from me to Walsall.

What was striking, and what alleged lefts like yourself should be _interested_ in, is that the political alienation of those in these communities - young, old, black, white, leaver and remained alike - is being  embedded more deeply by the parliamentary farce. _Everything_ they think is being confirmed back to them by it. Politicians are corrupt, the process is bent, every time they offer an opinion they are demonised or sneeringly dismisses as racists, their lives are irrelevant: nobody gives a fuck about people like us.

Pathetic dribble about boneheads, gammons and their ability to kick it off reveals just how disconnected some are from a mass _feeling_ that has been strengthening and which Brexit has merely given focus and voice to. It is generated and continues to grow from a million grievances, which we can summarise as political alienation, peripheralisation and lost futures.

This is what the political class are terrified about unleashing. This is what we've seen in France.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done.



Do you not have a telly in your house? ‘Getting Brexit done’ is the main Tory soundbite at present.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

The Conquest of Brexit


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 28, 2019)

ffs


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done. The issue is the 3 plus year delay to get the first step done.
> 
> Second, your use of ‘gammon’ reveals your pitiful misunderstanding of the nature of the class responses set in motion. A newsnight report this week, which could have been packaged a ‘Dispatch on what the northern working class scum think about it’ went up the road from me to Walsall.
> 
> ...



Are you suggesting that "gammon" is a term that ignores why (some) working class/people in poverty folk think brexit is a good thing?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 28, 2019)

Jesus christ wells, not today.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 28, 2019)




----------



## butchersapron (Sep 28, 2019)

I love twiiter and history, I wonder if there was someeay i could combine the two in an easy way without saying fuck all (because that's dangeous).

Fucking posts by twitter proxy, jesus.


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done. The issue is the 3 plus year delay to get the first step done.
> 
> Second, your use of ‘gammon’ reveals your pitiful misunderstanding of the nature of the class responses set in motion. A newsnight report this week, which could have been packaged a ‘Dispatch on what the northern working class scum think about it’ went up the road from me to Walsall.
> 
> ...



Firstly, a LOT of people ARE suggesting that brexit can "just be done." Secondly, where exactly in my "dribble" did l mention "boneheads" or "northern working-class scum"? 

There you go...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Sep 28, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Firstly, a LOT of people ARE suggesting that brexit can "just be done." Secondly, where exactly in my "dribble" did l mention "boneheads" or "northern working-class scum"?
> 
> There you go...



You suggested that the worst that would happen when your friends overthrow the result is ‘gammon fulminating’. I’ve pointed out that you are not just wide of the mark, you’re on a different planet.

There you go...


----------



## teqniq (Sep 28, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



This was just down the road in Newport, Gwent police are investigating. Not that I expect anything will actually happen to him as a consequence.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 28, 2019)

teqniq said:


> This was just down the road in Newport, Gwent police are investigating. Not that I expect anything will actually happen to him as a consequence.
> 
> View attachment 185345


Fuck all will happen to him.

Or this guy.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Sep 28, 2019)

teqniq said:


> This was just down the road in Newport, Gwent police are investigating. Not that I expect anything will actually happen to him as a consequence.
> 
> View attachment 185345



He'll get away with that, 'take the knife to them' could easily mean cutting their jobs.


----------



## teqniq (Sep 28, 2019)

Yeah I thought that too.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He'll get away with that, 'take the knife to them' could easily mean cutting their jobs.



That's their defence. The idiots following these scumbags on twitter just laugh it all off, even when you point out their language has been used by people to harm others, including murder. They are completely disconnected from reality and believe that because it's a 'common turn of phrase' nothing bad can come from it. They have normalised violence


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You suggested that the worst that would happen when your friends overthrow the result is ‘gammon fulminating’. I’ve pointed out that you are not just wide of the mark, you’re on a different planet.
> 
> There you go...



My "friends"?


----------



## gosub (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done. The issue is the 3 plus year delay to get the first step done.
> 
> Second, your use of ‘gammon’ reveals your pitiful misunderstanding of the nature of the class responses set in motion. A newsnight report this week, which could have been packaged a ‘Dispatch on what the northern working class scum think about it’ went up the road from me to Walsall.
> 
> ...


Didn't see the the Walsall piece but did see the Cleveland policing....Middlesbourgh voted 65% leave.Thats a year on from the first BBC piece that highlighted how things are. Now you have a leave PM talking about restoring police numbers whilst being called a facist for wanting to increase police numbers by Hesiltine(remainer). A former Home Secretary that became PM (remainer) that sits om the backbenchrsmust bear some  responsibility.  And f"or the record" another former 'remainer' PM thinks austerity could have been done harder.   Another Remainer PM ĺwice pushed that the future was empowering authority to be able to march who they lied to the cash point - I suppose it would have removed the need for Charles Lynton'paperwork


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> That's their defence. The idiots following these scumbags on twitter just laugh it all off, even when you point out their language has been used by people to harm others, including murder. They are completely disconnected from reality and believe that because it's a 'common turn of phrase' nothing bad can come from it. They have normalised violence



Indeed! It's impossible to talk about the profound, malign, hateful effects of brexit without breaking Godwin's Law.....


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> Didn't see the the Walsall piece but did see the Cleveland policing....Middlesbourgh voted 65% leave.Thats a year on from the first BBC piece that highlighted how things are. Now you have a leave PM talking about restoring police numbers whilst being called a facist for wanting to increase police numbers by Hesiltine(remainer). A former Home Secretary that became PM (remainer) that sits om the backbenchrsmust bear some  responsibility.  And f"or the record" another former 'remainer' PM thinks austerity could have been done harder.   Another Remainer PM ĺwice pushed that the future was empowering authority to be able to march who they lied to the cash point - I suppose it would have removed the need for Charles Lynton'paperwork



And there's a "Prime Minister" in thrall to an advocate of game theory and eugenics who thinks the way forward in the biggest peacetime crisis in living memory is illegally to shut down Parliament, peppering his commentary thereupon with the invective of war (like, well... you know who)? 

"Which side are you on?" indeed!


----------



## not-bono-ever (Sep 28, 2019)

farage doesnt make a foxes paw like that, its a purposeful and deliberate message - but one that he will argue can be used for another end.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 28, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> And there's a "Prime Minister" in thrall to an advocate of game theory and eugenics who thinks the way forward in the biggest peacetime crisis in living memory is illegally to shut down Parliament, peppering his commentary thereupon with the invective of war (like, well... you know who)?
> 
> "Which side are you on?" indeed!


Well?


----------



## isvicthere? (Sep 28, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Well?



Well indeed!


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 28, 2019)

This is still happening, another present from Scotland.

Special power of the Court of Session could force Boris Johnson to extend Article 50


----------



## MrCurry (Sep 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> These things can turn very quickly. If his government were to fall to be replaced by some caretaker govt, Johnson would find it very hard to characterise himself as anything other than a failure - either to those who already think he is one or those who currently back him because he wants to 'get brexit done'. I can imagine the Brexit Party having a field day, then who knows what would happen at an election? Could see the tories virtually wiped out in parts of the country, but I don't think anyone has any real idea what would happen.



I would have thought it would be just the opposite.  Boris removed from post within a month of the Oct 31 deadline gets to go into the next election saying that he was just about to deliver Brexit and was stopped by those nasty SNP, labour and Lib Dems, and the only way to get the Brexit you want is to vote Tory and give him a majority in the commons. 

Taking him out with a VONC lets him off the hook and prevents the voters seeing him balls it all up when it comes to the crunch.


----------



## gosub (Sep 28, 2019)

Germany Will Not Agree To Delay Brexit “Just For The Sake Of It”


----------



## Flavour (Sep 28, 2019)

Yes they will


----------



## MickiQ (Sep 28, 2019)

gosub said:


> Germany Will Not Agree To Delay Brexit “Just For The Sake Of It”


We'll file that one in the same drawer as "We Hold All The Cards", "Just Leave" and "The Backstop Must Go"


----------



## Marty1 (Sep 28, 2019)

Just watching itv and a govt. ‘get ready for Brexit’ leaving 31st Oct advert came on.

I guess it’s really happening then.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Sep 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Just watching itv and a govt. ‘get ready for Brexit’ leaving 31st Oct advert came on.
> 
> I guess it’s really happening then.


did they say how?


----------



## Marty1 (Sep 28, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> did they say how?



Just this link:

Get ready for Brexit


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Just this link:
> 
> Get ready for Brexit


Have you had a look around there?  It's a fucking nightmare.   And that's the info after 3 years  of brexit passing.   3 years, that's what there is.   Mental.


----------



## Supine (Sep 28, 2019)

Looks easy 

All I need to do in the next month is:




> Take out appropriate travel insurance with health cover before travelling to the EU
> 
> You may be charged for your care if you do not get health cover with your travel insurance.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mr Moose (Sep 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Firstly, no-one is suggesting that Brexit can just be done. The issue is the 3 plus year delay to get the first step done.
> 
> Second, your use of ‘gammon’ reveals your pitiful misunderstanding of the nature of the class responses set in motion. A newsnight report this week, which could have been packaged a ‘Dispatch on what the northern working class scum think about it’ went up the road from me to Walsall.
> 
> ...



I acknowledge a lot of what you say, but I think your overstate how most people feel, how nuanced their reactions are.

I know that area pretty well, visit relations in Cradley Heath every month. People are sceptical and colourfully disdainful of politicians, but that’s hardly new nor is disillusionment. And most people don’t engage in it to the degree boards like this do. That sense of crisis isn’t there for everyone, or at least it’s a bit of theatre at the periphery of the daily whirl and making ends meet. Most people are far too canny and robust to take Brexit seriously enough to throw a brick for it.


----------



## Supine (Sep 28, 2019)

I'd disagree with the last sentence. I have good friends who have been refused to stay in the UK. I'm very angry about loosing my friends just so that some old cnut can be happy to receive their blue passport.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Sep 29, 2019)

I don’t really remember the blue passport thing blowing up until after the ref. 
And I really shouldn’t open this thread during night shift in a care home. Ugly, regressive, bollocks.


----------



## Dogsauce (Sep 29, 2019)

Tbh I suspect a lot of those who ‘just want it done’ aren’t xenophobes or free market ideologues, they’re just sick to death of hearing about it. This will include quite a lot who voted remain too. The inability to deliver and the endless news cycle about it all is pretty wearing even for those of us with a reasonable interest/tolerance of politics. Johnson is on to something when he goes on about delivering it do or die. Just do it and figure the rest out afterwards, it’ll probably be fine.


----------



## Marty1 (Sep 29, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> IS BREXIT ACTUALLY GOING TO HAPPEN?
> I dont think Brexit is going to happen. The forces who don't want it to happen are too great.
> 
> *Opposed are the majority of the british political establishment*, the Civil Service, the education and arts institutions,  the City of London, large corporate interests, the TUC, the US, the EU, international finance, Scotland, Northern Ireland and half the population - and that proportion is likely to grow as the cluster fuck unfolds.



For an op made back on 27th June 2016 *that* assertion has proved not only prophetic but also an understatement based on recent revelations.


----------



## Ming (Sep 29, 2019)

Interesting piece on Farage helping his mates in the hedge fund industry short the pound on the night of the referendum.


----------



## Humberto (Sep 29, 2019)

Ming said:


> Interesting piece on Farage helping his mates in the hedge fund industry short the pound on the night of the referendum.



 Stop posting videos


----------



## Humberto (Sep 29, 2019)

Like many Farage bought into his own mythos and decided to make it about him.


----------



## redsquirrel (Sep 29, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Ok here I go. I’m going to regret this one.
> 
> What’s so awful about being on the liberal left? (And I don’t mean being a Lib Dem!)
> 
> *runs and hides*


Bit late as I've been busy the last couple of days but this article in Tribune provides an example of the differences that danny and butchers highlighted. This example is specifically in the context of the Labour Party but the points it makes are of wider relevance. 


> In recent decades, socialism has declined and been replaced on the left by progressivism, a project to build majorities by uniting those with progressive social views. These views often extend to the economy too, with theses like Kate Pickett and Richard Wilkinson’s _The Spirit Level_ summing up the alignment between progressive social views and economic equality.* But the coalition they imply remains based upon attitudes rather than interests.*


 (my emphasis) 

Or to put it in crude terms - a worker who holds reactionary opinions about immigrants may be a dick but they are still a worker, their class interest are still aligned with mine (and presumably yours). A boss may be lovely and progressive, may be implementing all kinds of policies that tackle discrimination, inequality and even workplace democracy but at a fundamental level their interests are in opposition to those of their workers.


----------



## Poi E (Sep 29, 2019)

Explains some of right mind voting lib dem.


----------



## gosub (Sep 29, 2019)

Subscribe to read | Financial Times


----------



## The39thStep (Sep 29, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Bit late as I've been busy the last couple of days but this article in Tribune provides an example of the differences that danny and butchers highlighted. This example is specifically in the context of the Labour Party but the points it makes are of wider relevance.
> (my emphasis)
> 
> Or to put it in crude terms - a worker who holds reactionary opinions about immigrants may be a dick but they are still a worker, their class interest are still aligned with mine (and presumably yours). A boss may be lovely and progressive, may be implementing all kinds of policies that tackle discrimination, inequality and even workplace democracy but at a fundamental level their interests are in opposition to those of their workers.


It’s capitalism that drives that dynamic


----------



## Kaka Tim (Sep 29, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> For an op made back on 27th June 2016 *that* assertion has proved not only prophetic but also an understatement based on recent revelations.



not really prophetic - membership of the EU has been a central plank of british political strategy since the the early 70s and supported by all the main parties. That wasn't going to change without a lot of resistance. 
And its not just the "establishment" opposed to it but most of what you could call "civil society" plus half the electorate. 
Perfect recipe for an ugly political, constitutional and democratic clusterfuck - with a  side order of brexit-boosted  ultra nationalism and xenophobia


----------



## Marty1 (Sep 29, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




Police have investigated resulting (unsurprisingly) in no further action.

No police action over Nigel Farage comments


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 29, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Police have investigated resulting (unsurprisingly) in no further action.
> 
> No police action over Nigel Farage comments


I am Jack's lack of surprise.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Sep 29, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> It’s capitalism that drives that dynamic


That’s going to be smashed after Brexit.


----------



## DexterTCN (Sep 29, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> ...Or to put it in crude terms - a worker who holds reactionary opinions about immigrants may be a dick but they are still a worker, their class interest are still aligned with mine...


You mean a racist, yeah?

lol 'reactionary opinions about immigrants'


----------



## Humberto (Sep 30, 2019)

I am expecting delay. They aren't in a position to leave so they need more time. What Johnson said is that it will all be sorted in short order and it hasn't been. As we knew it wouldn't. They aren't and will not be prepared in time. A positive attitude and claims of delivering a new 'golden age' doesn't cut it. Johnson was talking bollocks.

They are though (the House) to all intents and purposes determined to 'get it done' and 'deliver the will of the people'. Obviously that's far from unanimous. However, the House seems determined.  It'll be an 'on your own heads be it' move in terms of 'this is what you wanted now obey the law'. By which I mean, the collapse of numerous industries (e.g the car industry) will be because these industries 'dragged their heels' or some such nonsense.


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 30, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Sep 30, 2019)

Humberto said:


> I am expecting delay. They aren't in a position to leave so they need more time. What Johnson said is that it will all be sorted in short order and it hasn't been. As we knew it wouldn't. They aren't and will not be prepared in time. A positive attitude and claims of delivering a new 'golden age' doesn't cut it. Johnson was talking bollocks.
> 
> They are though (the House) to all intents and purposes determined to 'get it done' and 'deliver the will of the people'. Obviously that's far from unanimous. However, the House seems determined.  It'll be an 'on your own heads be it' move in terms of 'this is what you wanted now obey the law'. By which I mean, the collapse of numerous industries (e.g the car industry) will be because these industries 'dragged their heels' or some such nonsense.


it ain't happening


----------



## brogdale (Sep 30, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it ain't happening



La Loathsome offers the counterpoint...


----------



## Marty1 (Sep 30, 2019)

brogdale said:


> La Loathsome offers the counterpoint...




I think she was the warm up for the headliner (JRM).


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 30, 2019)

Don't post the S*N ffs.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 30, 2019)

What part of standing up for the w/c is the S*N doing i wo*nder?


----------



## andysays (Oct 1, 2019)

Brexit: Government to reveal detailed plan for EU negotiations


> The government has prepared the legal text of an updated Brexit deal, government sources have told the BBC. It is expected to make more of the plans public in the next few days, a senior government figure says.





> The government has suggested creating "customs clearance zones" in Northern Ireland and Irish Republic, as part of the proposals put to the EU. But Ireland's Deputy Prime Minister Simon Coveney said the plans were a "non-starter".


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 1, 2019)

Looking like all Johnson has up his sleeve is a fudged version of May's deal that won't get past parliament or the EU. Nobody saw that coming


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 1, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Oct 1, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Looking like all Johnson has up his sleeve is a fudged version of May's deal that won't get past parliament or the EU. Nobody saw that coming



Certainly looks that way.  Presumably a proposal which would have been delivered to MP's in the week before the 31st October to present as a binary choice of this deal or no deal.  It may have worked had it not been for the Benn Act and the total sledge hammer approach they have taken.  Its hard to see how any deal Johnson gets will be acceptable for enough people in Parliament because he's pissed so many people off who is going to walk through the lobby with him?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 1, 2019)

Wrong thread.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 1, 2019)

This morning as far as I can tell Boris Johnson says that in Ireland establishing a common cross border system for agri goods is a _concession _by the UK, and therefore the rest of the border issue needs proposals from the EU to get rid of what he calls the 'undemocratic backstop'.
If that is the case the EU should rightly say there can't be a border, therefore you can't have your 'leave'.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> This morning as far as I can tell Boris Johnson says that in Ireland establishing a common cross border system for agri goods is a _concession _by the UK, and therefore the rest of the border issue needs proposals from the EU to get rid of what he calls the 'undemocratic backstop'.
> If that is the case the EU should rightly say there can't be a border, therefore you can't have your 'leave'.


share your insight with michel barnier


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2019)

tell you what, give him a call


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> This morning as far as I can tell Boris Johnson says that in Ireland establishing a common cross border system for agri goods is a _concession _by the UK, and therefore the rest of the border issue needs proposals from the EU to get rid of what he calls the 'undemocratic backstop'.
> If that is the case the EU should rightly say there can't be a border, therefore you can't have your 'leave'.



That's a theme on what they've been saying for a while now.  Thing is though its just a drip feed of leaks, briefings and cagey and contradictory interviews.  Its virtually impossible to know for sure what the plan is or if there is even a plan.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That's a theme on what they've been saying for a while now.  Thing is though its just a drip feed of leaks, briefings and cagey and contradictory interviews.  Its virtually impossible to know for sure what the plan is or if there is even a plan.


there is a plan
it is not to have a plan


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 185610


i see there's the colours of the cornish flag on your post, is this of any special significance?


----------



## philosophical (Oct 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> That's a theme on what they've been saying for a while now.  Thing is though its just a drip feed of leaks, briefings and cagey and contradictory interviews.  Its virtually impossible to know for sure what the plan is or if there is even a plan.



If there is a viable plan for the border it will be a huge surprise given the issues. 
They want to bluff it and wing it and fool and blame enough people with the sole intention of power for powers sake.
No change there.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 1, 2019)

Has anyone mentioned the Irish border issue recently?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 1, 2019)

philosophical said:


> If there is a viable plan for the border it will be a huge surprise given the issues.
> They want to bluff it and wing it and fool and blame enough people with the sole intention of power for powers sake.
> No change there.





cupid_stunt said:


> Has anyone mentioned the Irish border issue recently?



Is there anything to be said for another Mass?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Is there anything to be said for another Mass?


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 1, 2019)

There is no border issue, if you move the border....


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 1, 2019)

Getting rid of a hard border by creating a larger, wider border.

Genius.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has anyone mentioned the Irish border issue recently?


You mean apart from it being on the front of all the newspapers today?


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 1, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Has anyone mentioned the Irish border issue recently?



Not on my version of this thread. First time I’ve ever put anyone on ignore...


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 1, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Getting rid of a hard border by creating a larger, wider border.
> 
> Genius.



It’s like that old parable where a bloke gets rid of a hole in a blanket by cutting it out with scissors.


----------



## andysays (Oct 1, 2019)

McDonnell saying VoNC unlikely before Oct 17, and insisting that Corbyn must head any interim government


----------



## 8ball (Oct 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> McDonnell saying VoNC unlikely before Oct 17, and insisting that Corbyn must head any interim government


----------



## Libertad (Oct 1, 2019)

^^^ Look at him, the fucking bearded Beelzebub.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> McDonnell saying VoNC unlikely before Oct 17, and insisting that Corbyn must head any interim government


I haven't got a clue any more as to the logic of when the vonc takes place, how it avoids no deal and the rest. But there looks to be something deceptively simple in there - 17 oct + 14 days to form new government = Halloween. Can't be that simple, can it??


----------



## Wilf (Oct 1, 2019)

By the way, let's whisper this, I don't want to wake philosophical up, but the border stuff is getting ... really quite silly. They seem to have moved on from 'computers' being the answer to now some nonsense about _pretend borders in different places_. Three fucking years!  At least the supercomputer in Hitchhikers Guide came up with a concrete figure.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 1, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> unelected PM that called for the "progulation" to be fair



Doesn't surprise me that Johnson is a fan of Prog.


----------



## andysays (Oct 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I haven't got a clue any more as to the logic of when the vonc takes place, how it avoids no deal and the rest. But there looks to be something deceptively simple in there - 17 oct + 14 days to form new government = Halloween. Can't be that simple, can it??


As I understand it, it's a maximum of 14 days. 

If Corbyn (or anyone else) were able to demonstrate that he could command a majority the day after a successful VoNC, there would be no need to wait for two weeks to go by.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> As I understand it, it's a maximum of 14 days.
> 
> If Corbyn (or anyone else) were able to demonstrate that he could command a majority the day after a successful VoNC, there would be no need to wait for two weeks to go by.



Correct.


----------



## killer b (Oct 1, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I haven't got a clue any more as to the logic of when the vonc takes place, how it avoids no deal and the rest. But there looks to be something deceptively simple in there - 17 oct + 14 days to form new government = Halloween. Can't be that simple, can it??


The approach of a cliff edge is the only thing that can force whoever is going to crumble to crumble, so yeah probably.


----------



## killer b (Oct 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> If Corbyn (or anyone else) were able to demonstrate that he could command a majority the day after a successful VoNC, there would be no need to wait for two weeks to go by.


Corbyn (or anyone else) is going to need the full two weeks, regardless of what could happen.


----------



## andysays (Oct 1, 2019)

There might also be an argument for waiting to see if Johnson ignores the Benn act when that deadline is reached, I think that's Oct 19th...


----------



## andysays (Oct 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> Corbyn (or anyone else) is going to need the full two weeks, regardless of what could happen.



Not necessarily. 

Surely the point of the various opposition parties meeting and talking beforehand is to at least attempt to ensure they have an agreement on a majority ready to go before holding the VoNC


----------



## killer b (Oct 1, 2019)

It's essentially a game of chicken though. No-one is going to jump until the final second.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 1, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Tbh I suspect a lot of those who ‘just want it done’ aren’t xenophobes or free market ideologues, they’re just sick to death of hearing about it. This will include quite a lot who voted remain too. The inability to deliver and the endless news cycle about it all is pretty wearing even for those of us with a reasonable interest/tolerance of politics. Johnson is on to something when he goes on about delivering it do or die. Just do it and figure the rest out afterwards, it’ll probably be fine.



The above (from page 1159) is excellent I think 

About three weeks ago I put up** a post wondering how much the 'Utterly Bored/Fucked Off by all this Banging On About Brexit  ' group would overlap (or *NOT!*) with the 'Just Get on With It' group.
**Can't find it now though  

There's no easy answer to that because predictions are for fools, but I wonder whether part of Labour's election preparations are about trying their absolute best to change the bloody subject and try to engage with 'Bored By Brexit' people who could, still, be attracted by _some_ of their policies/manifesto.

And are obsessives about Brexit-dominated politics (I don't mean on here, I more mean what some have called bubble-media) in danger of underestimating how fucking bored _generally_ by Brexit a load of people must be?

And in danger of understimating Labour at an actual election when they do try to change or broaden the subject?? 

Apologies, I don't have any answers, this is obviously just speculation. And I'm certainly not predicting anything ...


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 1, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> The above (from page 1159) is excellent I think
> 
> About three weeks ago I put up** a post wondering how much the 'Utterly Bored/Fucked Off by all this Banging On About Brexit  ' group would overlap (or *NOT!*) with the 'Just Get on With It' group.
> **Can't find it now though
> ...



Trouble is, people are going to go on being bored to death because post-Brexit negotiations, whatever sort of Brexit we have, are going to go on for YEARS. And all bets are off in terms of fulfilling manifesto promises if the economy tanks after Johnson has done his worst.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 1, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Trouble is, people are going to go on being bored to death because post-Brexit negotiations, whatever sort of Brexit we have, are going to go on for YEARS. And all bets are off in terms of fulfilling manifesto promises if the economy tanks after Johnson has done his worst.



Depressingly , I agree with that -- but people who think 'Just Getting On With It' will make for a clean and simple Brexit are misguided ..... 

....... but they surely??  aren't in complete overlap with the straightforwardly 'Utterly Bored/Fucked Off with Brexit' people anyway. I'm more interested right now in the importance (or not) of the latter group  ....


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 1, 2019)

Labour won't be doing any of them any favours unless it comes straight out and tells people they've been misled and lied to (by the Tories et al) about how quick and simple the process was supposed to be. Otherwise, it's like a kind of Ponzi scheme where you're always promising the impossible and then the time comes when you can't deliver.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 1, 2019)

andysays said:


> McDonnell saying VoNC unlikely before Oct 17, and insisting that Corbyn must head any interim government



...so Corbyn gets to be holding the bomb when it goes off. Not entirely convinced by this strategy, but then what else is there?  

Media were always going to give a Corbyn government a very tough time, but if he becomes the Man Who Stole Brexit it’s going to be somewhere beyond this.


----------



## chilango (Oct 1, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> ...so Corbyn gets to be holding the bomb when it goes off. Not entirely convinced by this strategy, but then what else is there?
> 
> Media were always going to give a Corbyn government a very tough time, but if he becomes the Man Who Stole Brexit it’s going to be somewhere beyond this.



I dunno. They might be cautious about pushing that line too hard as, especially in the circles they move in, "stopping Brexit" would be a positive to many.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 1, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> ...so Corbyn gets to be holding the bomb when it goes off. Not entirely convinced by this strategy, but then what else is there?


Make an arch-remainer such as Ken Clarke PM. But Corbyn/Labour will just be blamed all the same. Plus, it would be a slightly obscene thing to have agreed to.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 1, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Make an arch-remainer such as Ken Clarke PM. But Corbyn/Labour will just be blamed all the same. Plus, it would be a slightly obscene thing to have agreed to.



It’s almost like people have forgotten that a government with a majority for the last three years hasn’t managed to get this ‘done’. It’s somehow the fault of parties without any power...


----------



## Raheem (Oct 1, 2019)

The reality is that Johnson has nothing up his sleeve, and Labour can safely just sit back and wait for an article 50 extension. Trouble is, they have been saying the he is intent on no deal, so it would be inconsistent not to be seen to try to prevent it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 2, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s almost like people have forgotten that a government with a majority for the last three years hasn’t managed to get this ‘done’. It’s somehow the fault of parties without any power...


The government has not had a majority for over two years.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 2, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> The government has not had a majority for over two years.



They have just not one worth pissing on.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 2, 2019)

Javid promises 'significant response' to no-deal



Spoiler


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 2, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s almost like people have forgotten that a government with a majority for the last three years hasn’t managed to get this ‘done’. It’s somehow the fault of parties without any power...



People haven't forgotten it, the media have simply ignored it.


----------



## Supine (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Javid promises 'significant response' to no-deal



Because it'll be such a shit show disaster!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 2, 2019)

Wonder what would have happened with no 2017 GE - Corbyn probably would have gone with no popularity bump and May might even have got her deal through (possibly with border in irish sea). Lol.


----------



## maomao (Oct 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wonder what would have happened with no 2017 GE - Corbyn probably would have gone with no popularity bump and May might even have got her deal through (possibly with border in irish sea). Lol.


A majority of 12. With twenty odd Tory rebels she might have ended up relying on the DUP anyway.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 2, 2019)

maomao said:


> A majority of 12. With twenty odd Tory rebels she might have ended up relying on the DUP anyway.


Yeah true. Reasons for seeking a bigger majority wouldn't have gone away. Still, position would have been healthier


----------



## 8ball (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Javid promises 'significant response' to no-deal
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler




Ah, all those new alleged hospitals *and* tax cuts for the rich.

One of those will happen.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 2, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 2, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> They have just not one worth pissing on.


No they don't. The May government lost its majority in 2017.


----------



## killer b (Oct 2, 2019)

maomao said:


> A majority of 12. With twenty odd Tory rebels she might have ended up relying on the DUP anyway.


She would have had to rely on Labour rebels, but I suspect she might have managed it. But it would have been a massive struggle, and she was 20 points ahead against one of the least popular leaders in Labour history, so an election was a no-brainer really. Lol.


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 2, 2019)

Why does a certain Bob Jovi song keep coming to mind?. Boris Johnson tells Tory conference: UK is ready for no-deal Brexit


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Why does a certain Bob Jovi song keep coming to mind?


it's a sign you need to widen the range of music you listen to


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No they don't. The May government lost its majority in 2017.


ah! but now they have a *negative* majority


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Why does a certain Bob Jovi song keep coming to mind?. Boris Johnson tells Tory conference: UK is ready for no-deal Brexit


You give referenda a bad name?


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 2, 2019)

Is it the well known poodle-rock classic 'Boris Johnson is a Cunt'?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 2, 2019)

Just read Johnson's proposals for the border.

Full of bluster and still banging on about finding magical technology to sort things out at some point in the unspecified future.  The DUP have been bribed with more cash and a promise they can duck out of the whole agreement at any time should they not like it.

Absolutely nothing new and totally designed for a domestic audience rather than any real attempt at reaching compromise.  I would say it has zero chance of getting past the EU let alone Parliament.

Link here if you're not already sick to fuck of the whole thing: UK proposals for a new Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland


----------



## 8ball (Oct 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's a sign you need to widen the range of music you listen to



But you used to bang on all the time about Bob Jovi’s harmonica playing on Ruddy Yurts’ seminal _Plastic Cunt Variations Part 2.. _


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Just read Johnson's proposals for the border.
> 
> Full of bluster and still banging on about finding magical technology to sort things out at some point in the unspecified future.  The DUP have been bribed with more cash and a promise they can duck out of the whole agreement at any time should they not like it.
> 
> ...


Ireland won't be keen, to say the least, but also increasingly panicked about no deal. Part of what happens next takes us back to the issue of how much the EU are willing to stongarm/abandon Ireland. 3 dimensional brinkmanship, along with a rebel alliance that won't support the leader of the opposition in a caretaker government. What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> But you used to bang on all the time about Bob Jovi’s harmonica playing on Ruddy Yurts’ seminal _Plastic Cunt Variations Part 2.. _


Yeh but we're talking about his talentless brother bon


----------



## 8ball (Oct 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh but we're talking about his talentless brother bon



I can only go by what Jeremiah18.17 said.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> I can only go by what Jeremiah18.17 said.


my bad. but even listening to the sublime bob jovi can pall after a while


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 2, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's a sign you need to widen the range of music you listen to



Or narrow it, if you're listening to Bon Jovi.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 2, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Ireland won't be keen, to say the least, but also increasingly panicked about no deal. Part of what happens next takes us back to the issue of how much the EU are willing to stongarm/abandon Ireland. 3 dimensional brinkmanship, along with a rebel alliance that won't support the leader of the opposition in a caretaker government. What could possibly go wrong?



Ireland will reject it, and if any EU Member State rejects the deal, it's off the table. Ciao ciao Boris.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 2, 2019)

I feel his master plan is it’s designed to fail, he will go for another porogation (sp) let the clock wind down and force no deal.

but it would be lovely if Brenda told him to fuck off , and into the tower you go.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 2, 2019)

ruffneck23 said:


> I feel his master plan is it’s designed to fail, he will go for another porogation (sp) let the clock wind down and force no deal.
> 
> but it would be lovely if Brenda told him to fuck off , and into the tower you go.


Not impossible, though it would be more likely that she told him to fuck off 'via the usual channels'. Propriety must be maintained, even when telling a fucker to fuck off.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 2, 2019)

I love the way one of the awful rags (can't remember if Mail or Express) was leading with: 'BORIS: HERE'S THE DEAL TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT' as though he was this hardman delivering an awesome deal that the other party would be a fool to refuse, rather than some hastily assembled crap that will perfectly rightly make the EU go 'Nah, we'll leave it, thanks'


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

So at 0001 on 1 Nov data transmissions from Europe will by and large cease. We will continue transmitting but few responses will be heard


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 2, 2019)

EU will offer an extension and (UK) parliament will reject johnson deal surely


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

Cloo said:


> I love the way one of the awful rags (can't remember if Mail or Express) was leading with: 'BORIS: HERE'S THE DEAL TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT' as though he was this hardman delivering an awesome deal that the other party would be a fool to refuse, rather than some hastily assembled crap that will perfectly rightly make the EU go 'Nah, we'll leave it, thanks'


If Donald Tusk, the former hooligan, squared up to the corpulent auld Etonian, Johnson would soil his pants and blubber for nanny


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> EU will offer an extension and (UK) parliament will reject johnson deal surely


Johnson will be defenestrated


----------



## 8ball (Oct 2, 2019)

Is there actually a deal now? (I find urban more bearable than the msm for updates atm).

Last thing I saw was some comedic plan for dealing with the Ireland thing.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 2, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> EU will offer an extension and (UK) parliament will reject johnson deal surely


My other half noted the other day that chair of Tories on R4 kept repeating, when questioned about honouring Benn Act 'We will honour the law', which sounds awfully like 'We have a loophole to get No-Deal through' in politics-speak.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> Is there actually a deal now? (I find urban more bearable than the msm for updates atm).
> 
> Last thing I saw was some comedic plan for dealing with the Ireland thing.


No.
There can be no deal without the other party agreeing and they won't.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> Is there actually a deal now? (I find urban more bearable than the msm for updates atm).
> 
> Last thing I saw was some comedic plan for dealing with the Ireland thing.


That is the Johnson deal which won't get as far as the shitty may deal


----------



## 8ball (Oct 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No.
> There can be no deal without the other party agreeing and they won't.



Yeah, should have said “proposed deal” or similar...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

8ball said:


> Yeah, should have said “proposed deal” or similar...


It's been pre-rejected


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 2, 2019)

Cloo said:


> My other half noted the other day that chair of Tories on R4 kept repeating, when questioned about honouring Benn Act 'We will honour the law', which sounds awfully like 'We have a loophole to get No-Deal through' in politics-speak.



The Benn act didn’t actually specify what sort of extension he had to ask for, so he’s going to write to the EU requesting a penis extension, then crash out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 2, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> The Benn act didn’t actually specify what sort of extension he had to ask for, so he’s going to write to the EU requesting a penis extension, then crash out.


Or a hair extension


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 2, 2019)

Cannot be a never-ending Brexit saga??I for one don't imagine civil-unrest,much less riots in the streets, but something at some point has got to give.I'm right about that at least am I not?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 2, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> The Benn act didn’t actually specify what sort of extension he had to ask for...









Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 2, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Cannot be a never-ending Brexit saga??I for one don't imagine civil-unrest,much less riots in the streets, but something at some point has got to give.I'm right about that at least am I not?


We’ve had rioting not so long ago.... I dunno “and now you lot needn’t bother voting either” could easily be a straw? Who knows, you can’t really predict it like the weather. I think it’s all been a bit too drawn out for rioting now though. The Stock-Yer-Cupboards up crew have managed to maintain a high level of anguish but I don’t see it anywhere else.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 2, 2019)

he logic towards a no deal is sound but

"The EU..We'll give you a deal as long as it does not result with a hard border in North Ireland"

"Boris "here my deal which will have a hard border plus we get a little bit of a land grab in the Replublic"

Can see why the Orange me.. sorry DUP went with Boris line of thinking


----------



## gosub (Oct 2, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> We’ve had rioting not so long ago.... I dunno “and now you lot needn’t bother voting either” could easily be a straw? Who knows, you can’t really predict it like the weather. I think it’s all been a bit too drawn out for rioting now though. The Stock-Yer-Cupboards up crew have managed to maintain a high level of anguish but I don’t see it anywhere else.




Remainer stockpiling self-righteousness for no-deal Brexit


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 2, 2019)

Ian Blackford is an absolute terminal blow-hard


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Ian Blackford is an absolute terminal blow-hard



He's like your mum in that respect.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 2, 2019)

a blow hard compared to who marty


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Ian Blackford is an absolute terminal blow-hard



Yeah, Raab's great, ain't he?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, Raab's great, ain't he?



Well he doesn’t grandstand in his responses, compared to Blackford who appears to think he’s giving the speech of his life every time he gets the chance to open his gob.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Well he doesn’t grandstand in his responses, compared to Blackford who appears to think he’s giving the speech of his life every time he gets the chance to open his gob.


He looks like the bastard lovechild of a serial child murderer and a stockbroker and has politics to suit. 

I'm beginning to get the impression that you're a bit thick to be honest marty.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Well he doesn’t grandstand in his responses, compared to Blackford who appears to think he’s giving the speech of his life every time he gets the chance to open his gob.


Yeah, we like him, don't we?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 2, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> He looks like the bastard lovechild of a serial child murderer and a stockbroker and has politics to suit.
> 
> I'm beginning to get the impression that you're a bit thick to be honest marty.



I wasn’t commenting on their appearance


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 2, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I wasn’t commenting on their appearance


You're just confirming my suspicions now marty. I quite clearly said he had politics to suit his appearance, you could have focused on that but instead you focus on what divides us. It's disappointing that's all. 

Marty marty marty, what happened to you to make you like this? I care, honestly I do. I think you need some therapy from your uncle spiney.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 2, 2019)

Innit?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 2, 2019)

I'd always kind of thought about the tory party as being this super well oiled powerholding and evil doing machine that when it came to it knew what the fuck it was doing and I think definitely in thatchers time that was a sensible way to view them.

Look at the fucking state of them now. Boris Johnson. It still doesn't quite feel real. Back to basics was a roaring success compared to brexit.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 2, 2019)

Not especially Brexit-specific, but the following from Arditya Chakrabortty is definitely worth a read from today's Guardian :

The Tories' 'Angry White Men' act is desparate and dangerous



> look no further than Monday afternoon and one of the biggest fringe events of the week. On stage lounged Jacob Rees-Mogg, self-styled “hardman of Brexit” Steve Baker, and Andrea Jenkyns. In front of them teemed hundreds of activists, packing out the room and sitting on the floor despite some being of an age where standing up again requires a little time and planning. The subject was – what else? – Brexit ... ...


----------



## tim (Oct 2, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No.
> There can be no deal without the other party agreeing and they won't.



Some Labour MP's seem willing to back it

_
Although parliamentary calculations will only become relevant if the EU backs the proposals, the Labour MPs Gareth Snell and Ruth Smeeth, both from leave-voting constituencies, have told the BBC they will back Johnson’s proposals if they are put before parliament.

Stephen Kinnock, the MP for Aberavon, told the Mirror that up to 30 Labour MPs could back it. “If Dublin and Brussels are happy, we are happy,” he reportedly said._



MPs voice cautious support for Johnson’s Irish border proposals


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 2, 2019)

Nick Boles was on R4 earlier saying he and a bunch of other Tory refuseniks would 'reluctantly' vote for it if a deal were acceptable to the 27. He reckoned that with a bit of wriggling on each side it would be achievable.
But I don't see how the imaginary electronic checks will ever be acceptable to the 27, nor that the 27 will abandon Ireland/the GFA to the whim of the DUP.

(edited to add ref to GFA)


----------



## Ming (Oct 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'd always kind of thought about the tory party as being this super well oiled powerholding and evil doing machine that when it came to it knew what the fuck it was doing and I think definitely in thatchers time that was a sensible way to view them.
> 
> Look at the fucking state of them now. Boris Johnson. It still doesn't quite feel real. Back to basics was a roaring success compared to brexit.


I think they still are but they've changed from 'build stuff and trade' capitalism to speculation capitalism. Billions to be made from Brexit if you've got liquidity.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 3, 2019)

Parliament to be prorogued on Tue 8th Sept:

Parliament to be prorogued next Tuesday

Govt to set out deal to MP’s, but BJ repeats the UK will leave the EU on 31 October, with or without a deal.

Government to set out Brexit plan to MPs


----------



## Poi E (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Well he doesn’t grandstand in his responses, compared to Blackford who appears to think he’s giving the speech of his life every time he gets the chance to open his gob.



He sure pisses of those who support the bloodstained Union and its history of horrors. Why do you support British brutality, Marty? Why does the thought of the British exploiting others excite you?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Parliament to be prorogued on Tue 8th Sept:
> 
> Parliament to be prorogued next Tuesday
> 
> ...


You mean October.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 3, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Oct 3, 2019)

Poi E said:


> He sure pisses of those who support the bloodstained Union and its history of horrors. Why do you support British brutality, Marty? Why does the thought of the British exploiting others excite you?



That’s quite a jump from a comment I made about Blackford.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I'd always kind of thought about the tory party as being this super well oiled powerholding and evil doing machine that when it came to it knew what the fuck it was doing and I think definitely in thatchers time that was a sensible way to view them.
> 
> Look at the fucking state of them now. Boris Johnson. It still doesn't quite feel real. Back to basics was a roaring success compared to brexit.



Too well-oiled for its own good. It's now so effective at elevating amoral scumbags to positions of power that the scumbags don't even need a scrap of intelligence or political tact, just grasping ambition. This may turn out to be bad for the long term prospects of the party but that's OK because it's not great for the long term prospects of the country either, so there's still a good chance the one will last as long as the other.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Too well-oiled for its own good. It's now so effective at elevating amoral scumbags to positions of power that the scumbags don't even need a scrap of intelligence or political tact, just grasping ambition. This may turn out to be bad for the long term prospects of the party but that's OK because it's not great for the long term prospects of the country either, so there's still a good chance the one will last as long as the other.


It has now become Chaotic  Evil under Maggie T (and even Cameron) it was at least Lawful Evil


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> It has now become Chaotic  Evil under Maggie T (and even Cameron) it was at least Lawful Evil


i think it's more neutral evil


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think it's more neutral evil



neutral or natural?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> neutral or natural?



The Alignment System - Neutral Evil


----------



## eoin_k (Oct 3, 2019)

The Prime Minister presents his final proposals for a deal before the House of Commons and the good folks of Urban75 P&P can't muster the enthusiasm to maintain a running comentary on proceedings.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 3, 2019)

The relatively positive response to this new deal seems to me to be a bit






No one wants to be the first traitor to dismiss it


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

There's a lack of MPs on both benches, the lazy bastards.


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> There's a lack of MPs on both benches, the lazy bastards.


They might be as fed up with it as everyone else by now. Apathetic and morose.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

Sprocket. said:


> They might be as fed up with it as everyone else by now. Apathetic and morose.



But, I was expecting a major bun-fight like last week.


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, I was expecting a major bun-fight like last week.



what if they gave a bun-fight and no one came?
We now have an answer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> The Prime Minister presents his final proposals for a deal before the House of Commons and the good folks of Urban75 P&P can't muster the enthusiasm to maintain a running comentary on proceedings.


It needs no commentary when the pm vomits nonsense


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

eoin_k said:


> The Prime Minister presents his final proposals for a deal before the House of Commons and the good folks of Urban75 P&P can't muster the enthusiasm to maintain a running comentary on proceedings.



He actually presented them yesterday at conference and I offered my opinions at the time.  To paraphrase _they're a complete crock._


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

So, looks like parliament might well pass this, but EU probably won't. Allows Johnson to go no deal, blaming the EU. Alternatively, he wibbles the deal a bit more towards what the EU want and they _may_ agree it. His problem then is Brexit Party in the coming election, particularly as it will be May's deal with some bordery wibbles.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 3, 2019)

it's the slowest, longest train wreck in british political history


----------



## brogdale (Oct 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> It needs no commentary when the pm vomits nonsense


Indeed.
Saw some of it; Johnson looks even more like a wrong'un when he's attempting to conduct himself in a reasonable manner.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

Flavour said:


> it's the slowest, longest train wreck in british political history


Yep, repeal of the corn laws was a piece of piss alongside this.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 3, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> It has now become Chaotic  Evil under Maggie T (and even Cameron) it was at least Lawful Evil



LOL wat?


----------



## Ming (Oct 3, 2019)

So they deliver a deal they knew would be rejected because of the backstop and then tell their MP's to act like the EU is 'crazy'. They want a no deal.
EU parliament: Boris Johnson Brexit plan not remotely acceptable

EU parliament: Boris Johnson Brexit plan not remotely acceptable


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 3, 2019)

Yeah, pretty obvious this is according to plan. The fact that it's blatantly shoddy enough to be deemed 'not _remotely _acceptable' is telling: Johnson really doesn't give a fuck whether anyone believes it was a sincere attempt.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

The amount of MP's including ERG types who rallied against May's deal (the worst deal ever etc) that are now willing to back the self same deal with just a bit of vagueries  about the Irish border is astonishing.  So much for dearly felt objections and positions of principle.   Shallow cunts.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The amount of MP's including ERG types who rallied against May's deal (the worst deal ever etc) that are now willing to back the self same deal with just a bit of vagueries  about the Irish border is astonishing.  So much for dearly felt objections and positions of principle.   Shallow cunts.


Presume we are still paying 60 billion as well.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Presume we are still paying 60 billion as well.



I prefer to call it surrender money.


----------



## rubbershoes (Oct 3, 2019)

Will the border be smaller or further away?


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 3, 2019)

I’m going to stick my neck out and say the negotiations will succeed and there will be a deal by end of Oct (yes, this year...)

And that’s the first time I’ve felt remotely positive about the prospects of Brexit progressing. I just think both sides need to get it done and the necessary concessions and compromises will be made. That plus “everyone knows” Boris is gunning for no deal, and when an idea is such common currency, it’s usually total BS. 

Well anyway, that’s me looking foolish at the start of November then.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> I’m going to stick my neck out and say the negotiations will succeed and there will be a deal by end of Oct (yes, this year...)
> 
> And that’s the first time I’ve felt remotely positive about the prospects of Brexit progressing. I just think both sides need to get it done and the necessary concessions and compromises will be made. That plus “everyone knows” Boris is gunning for no deal, and when an idea is such common currency, it’s usually total BS.
> 
> Well anyway, that’s me looking foolish at the start of November then.



Brave of you! 

TBH, I've been saying the same IRL, but also saying I wouldn't actually put money on it.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 3, 2019)

PSNI top cop ain't having it...

"We have been working closely with the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) to understand our constitutional position in relation to any proposed changes to border arrangements, and I have been clear with the NIO in particular it will not be the role of the PSNI to staff any form of border security.

We are clearly there to facilitate normality and day-to-day policing, but not to carry out custom checks and the function of other agencies in whatever proposal is or isn’t agreed in the next few weeks and indeed I have taken legal advice on that basis to confirm to me the independence of the office of chief constable and the duties I have to make sure that police officers are used for legitimate policing purpose"


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

Surely that goes without saying?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

flypanam said:


> PSNI top cop ain't having it...
> 
> "We have been working closely with the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) to understand our constitutional position in relation to any proposed changes to border arrangements, and I have been clear with the NIO in particular it will not be the role of the PSNI to staff any form of border security.
> 
> We are clearly there to facilitate normality and day-to-day policing, but not to carry out custom checks and the function of other agencies in whatever proposal is or isn’t agreed in the next few weeks and indeed I have taken legal advice on that basis to confirm to me the independence of the office of chief constable and the duties I have to make sure that police officers are used for legitimate policing purpose"



I mentioned here previously that I have a contact in the treasury who is involved in the border discussions. Basically for the UK government its a fiscal matter and they don't really give a shit about other repercussions.  Its little wonder the cops are pissed.  Wait till the smuggling gets really going and the police will have more to worry about than being used as makeshift customs officers.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

The rebel alliance is looking a bit threadbare today with the like of Burt peeling away, along with a few of the others who had the whip withdrawn. Why predict anything, it's daft, oh go on, I will - yeah, as of today I'd say Johnson has a 60% chance of getting a deal in Parliament (tories, most of the tories who had the whip withdrawn a few days ago, dup, assorted tory sex cases with the whip withdrawn, handful of labour MPs). Getting it through the EU with a few more tweaks, no more than 40%, but then we get into the game of chicken over the last few days of October. Who the feck knows, but maybe all that gives him a 50/50 chance of both getting a deal and remaining as PM (which in  turn makes him odds on to win an election). Shit. 

Edit: at least the fucker will be fully bald by 2022.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Wait till the smuggling gets really going and the police will have more to worry about than being used as makeshift customs officers.



Was home in Monaghan at the weekend, went out and met mates who said that a 'certain section' of the local population are gleefully looking forward to border/custom posts being put up. There is a shed load of anger not only at Westminster but at Brussels too.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The rebel alliance is looking a bit threadbare today with the like of Burt peeling away, along with a few of the others who had the whip withdrawn. Why predict anything, it's daft, oh go on, I will - yeah, as of today I'd say Johnson has a 60% chance of getting a deal in Parliament (tories, most of the tories who had the whip withdrawn a few days ago, dup, assorted tory sex cases with the whip withdrawn, handful of labour MPs). Getting it through the EU with a few more tweaks, no more than 40%, but then we get into the game of chicken over the last few days of October. Who the feck knows, but maybe all that gives him a 50/50 chance of both getting a deal and remaining as PM (which in  turn makes him odds on to win an election). Shit.


by 60% you mean 0% i suppose, as this is even worse than the backstop (ni business organisations say no deal would be better)


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> The rebel alliance is looking a bit threadbare today with the like of Burt peeling away, along with a few of the others who had the whip withdrawn. Why predict anything, it's daft, oh go on, I will - yeah, as of today I'd say Johnson has a 60% chance of getting a deal in Parliament (tories, most of the tories who had the whip withdrawn a few days ago, dup, assorted tory sex cases with the whip withdrawn, handful of labour MPs). Getting it through the EU with a few more tweaks, no more than 40%, but then we get into the game of chicken over the last few days of October. Who the feck knows, but maybe all that gives him a 50/50 chance of both getting a deal and remaining as PM (which in  turn makes him odds on to win an election). Shit.
> 
> Edit: at least the fucker will be fully bald by 2022.



Its got to get past the EU before Parliament get their vote and the noise from the continent is not positive.

I'll probably end up regretting saying this but I think there may be a route to a Labour victory even if Johnson does get his deal through and the UK leaves.  Labour is weak on Brexit but stronger on domestic stuff.  Whilst Johnson will be strutting around given it the full 'I won Brexit' Labour could concentrate on the bread and butter domestic stuff.  A sort of Attlee 1945 thing (sorry for the shitty comparison).  Brexit has been a total pain for Labour and a particular problem for Corbyn, though no doubt the plp will just eat itself by blaming Corbyn for failing to stop Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its got to get past the EU before Parliament get their vote and the noise from the continent is not positive.
> 
> I'll probably end up regretting saying this but I think there may be a route to a Labour victory even if Johnson does get his deal through and the UK leaves.  Labour is weak on Brexit but stronger on domestic stuff.  Whilst Johnson will be strutting around given it the full 'I won Brexit' Labour could concentrate on the bread and butter domestic stuff.  A sort of Attlee 1945 thing (sorry for the shitty comparison).  Brexit has been a total pain for Labour and a particular problem for Corbyn, though no doubt the plp will just eat itself by blaming Corbyn for failing to stop Brexit.


i am as confident now as i have ever been that the uk will remain within the eu on 1 november 2019 and will still be there on 1 november 2020


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its got to get past the EU before Parliament get their vote and the noise from the continent is not positive.
> 
> I'll probably end up regretting saying this but I think there may be a route to a Labour victory even if Johnson does get his deal through and the UK leaves.  Labour is weak on Brexit but stronger on domestic stuff.  Whilst Johnson will be strutting around given it the full 'I won Brexit' Labour could concentrate on the bread and butter domestic stuff.  A sort of Attlee 1945 thing (sorry for the shitty comparison).  Brexit has been a total pain for Labour and a particular problem for Corbyn, though no doubt the plp will just eat itself by blaming Corbyn for failing to stop Brexit.



Nice idea, but IRL who will people trust most in negotiations about our future relationship with the EU?

The tosser that delivered brexit, assuming he does, or granddad that has just been flapping about like a fish out of water for the last three years?


----------



## andysays (Oct 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, looks like parliament might well pass this, but EU probably won't. Allows Johnson to go no deal, blaming the EU. Alternatively, he wibbles the deal a bit more towards what the EU want and they _may_ agree it. His problem then is Brexit Party in the coming election, particularly as it will be May's deal with some bordery wibbles.


I thought the idea was to be able to blame parliament and so clean up at the GE. 

Blaming the EU might work, but arguably not so well.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am as confident now as i have ever been that the uk will remain within the eu on 1 november 2019 and will still be there on 1 november 2020



Fantastic.  I'm enjoying myself so much I never want it to end!



cupid_stunt said:


> Nice idea, but IRL who will people trust most in negotiations about our future relationship with the EU?
> 
> The tosser that delivered brexit, assuming he does, or granddad that has just been flapping about like a fish out of water for the last three years?



Fight the election on bread and butter issues (as they did last time) and its possible.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 3, 2019)

andysays said:


> I thought the idea was to be able to blame parliament and so clean up at the GE.
> 
> Blaming the EU might work, but arguably not so well.



I think the idea was to blame Parliament, the EU, basically everyone and anyone except where the actual blames lies. That wretched party.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 3, 2019)

Wilf said:


> , as of today I'd say Johnson has a 60% chance of getting a deal in Parliament (tories, most of the tories who had the whip withdrawn a few days ago, dup, assorted tory sex cases with the whip withdrawn, handful of labour MPs). Getting it through the EU with a few more tweaks, no more than 40%, but then we get into the game of chicken over the last few days of October. Who the feck knows, but maybe all that gives him a 50/50 chance of both getting a deal and remaining as PM (which in  turn makes him odds on to win an election). Shit.



That gives him a (0.6 x 0.4) 0.24 or 24% chance of getting it through both.


/stats pedant


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Its got to get past the EU before Parliament get their vote and the noise from the continent is not positive.
> 
> I'll probably end up regretting saying this but I think there may be a route to a Labour victory even if Johnson does get his deal through and the UK leaves.  Labour is weak on Brexit but stronger on domestic stuff.  Whilst Johnson will be strutting around given it the full 'I won Brexit' Labour could concentrate on the bread and butter domestic stuff.  A sort of Attlee 1945 thing (sorry for the shitty comparison).  Brexit has been a total pain for Labour and a particular problem for Corbyn, though no doubt the plp will just eat itself by blaming Corbyn for failing to stop Brexit.


I think Labour comes out of this looking worse than the tories, irrelevant even, in most likely scenarios. Maybe several disastrous months of job losses, a few deaths due to medicine shortages and the rest and it starts to even out. But the election is likely to be December sometime I'd guess.  Yeah, Labour can certainly do better if we revert to a 'peacetime agenda', but they may well have a liberal 'democrat problem', enough pro EU former voters sticking with the vermin second XI to make things that bit worse.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 3, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> That gives him a (0.6 x 0.4) 0.24 or 24% chance of getting it through both.
> 
> 
> /stats pedant


Nah, it's the chicken/prisoner's dilemma period in the last days of October that might put push the EU above 40%. No come backs.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Fight the election on bread and butter issues (as they did last time) and its possible.



Brexit will be the main issue, whether we have left or not. Remember last time both main parties were leave parties, Labour's message now is very confused, but is looking more like a remain party. 

Corbyn got lucky last time, he was fresh & he's a great campaigner, May wasn't, she totally fucked-up. Corbyn has just flapped about for the last 2+ years, not impressing anyone, he'll be up against Johnson, and no matter what you & I think of the cunt, he's great campaigner. It'll be a very different game.


----------



## chilango (Oct 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Nice idea, but IRL who will people trust most in negotiations about our future relationship with the EU?



Whaddya mean "future relationship"?

Leave means leave godammit!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 3, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Was home in Monaghan at the weekend, went out and met mates who said that a 'certain section' of the local population are gleefully looking forward to border/custom posts being put up. There is a shed load of anger not only at Westminster but at Brussels too.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 3, 2019)

Without irony...



*No surrender (bill)!*


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 3, 2019)

The biggest thing I hate about May, was her crawling into bed with the DUP - the Dinosaur Unionist Pricks.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I think the idea was to blame Parliament, the EU, basically everyone and anyone except where the actual blames lies...


Yeah...like brexit voters are doing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Yeah...like brexit voters are doing.



What do you know about Brexit voters? I thought nobody voted Brexit in Scotland?


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What do you know about Brexit voters? I thought nobody voted Brexit in Scotland?


This.


redsquirrel said:


> ...Or to put it in crude terms - a worker who holds* reactionary opinions about immigrants* may be a dick but they are still a worker, their class interest are still aligned with mine (and presumably yours)...


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> This.


Why do you keep deliberately misrepresenting people who voted to leave?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 3, 2019)

Ming said:


> I think they still are but they've changed from 'build stuff and trade' capitalism to speculation capitalism. Billions to be made from Brexit if you've got liquidity.


That's the impression youve got over the last 3 years is it? That they know what they're doing but their aims have changed? 

This is clearly a massive fuck up for them and they don't know their way out. Kind of on the tinfoil end of the spectrum to make out this is actually some devious masterplan.

Can you link it back to 9/11 by any chance?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Why do you keep deliberately misrepresenting people who voted to leave?


I don't think it is deliberate. He really is that fucking thick.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Why do you keep deliberately misrepresenting people who voted to leave?


By quoting them?

Maybe give me your take on it


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> By quoting them?
> 
> Maybe give me your take on it


On what?


----------



## maomao (Oct 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I don't think it is deliberate. He really is that fucking thick.


I think it's deliberate _and_ he's thick.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 3, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> By quoting them?
> 
> Maybe give me your take on it


No u


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> No u


You.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 3, 2019)

Dexter has reactionary opinions about understanding


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 3, 2019)

And everything else too.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 3, 2019)

JRM summed up Brexit perfectly today in Parliament;

_‘the courts, Parliament and her majesty’s government are all accountable to the British people and 17.4 million people voted to leave, and whatever laws we passed and whatever court judgements come through, we must remember that it is the people who have the ultimate say and that is the foundation of our democracy’._


----------



## teqniq (Oct 3, 2019)

EU calls on Boris Johnson to publish Brexit plan in full

The back of a fag packet declined because it was embarrassed on behalf of the authors.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM summed up Brexit perfectly today in Parliament;
> 
> _‘the courts, Parliament and her majesty’s government are all accountable to the British people and 17.4 million people voted to leave, and whatever laws we passed and whatever court judgements come through, we must remember that it is the people who have the ultimate say and that is the foundation of our democracy’._


That's quite an imperfect definition of a number of things, including Brexit.
The accountabilities of the judiciary, the legislature and the executive are, by definition of the separation of powers, quite distinct and varying. Also there is little constitutional clarity regarding the competing legitimacies of Parliament and Plebiscite; but clearly laws & judgements can trump any advisory referendum.
Just because he speaks as though he has authority, doesn't mean that he knows what he's talking about.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 3, 2019)

brogdale said:


> That's quite an imperfect definition of a number of things, including Brexit.
> The accountabilities of the judiciary, the legislature and the executive are, by definition of the separation of powers, quite distinct and varying. Also there is little constitutional clarity regarding the competing legitimacies of Parliament and Plebiscite; but clearly laws & judgements can trump any advisory referendum.
> Just because he speaks as though he has authority, doesn't mean that he knows what he's talking about.



Do you think it would be democratic to have Article 50 revoked and call the whole thing off?


----------



## teqniq (Oct 3, 2019)

Government proposes Schrodingers Irish Border, which exists when you want sovereignty and doesn’t exist when you want frictionless trade


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do you think it would be democratic to have Article 50 revoked and call the whole thing off?


That would be undemocratic.

Knowing what it actually means 3 years after it was voted on and weeks before it happens...that's not unreasonable.

You know...common sense, non-insanity-wise.   Especially when people are insisting on getting 'it' done.   Would just be nice to know what 'it' is.

Tens of thousands of jobs are gone, international relations are fractured, the UK looks like ending as an entity, the people in charge of it are the worst of tories...ever...thatcher doesn't have a look-in on this mob, the DUP are getting to try and kick off the 'troubles', there's a mass deportation scheme going on...and only the super-rich will gain.

So whatever 'it' is...must be fucking awesome.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do you think it would be democratic to have Article 50 revoked and call the whole thing off?


Strange response (have you mistaken me for a remainer?)...but howsomedever...under our constitution, it is possible that there could be a scenario in which a Parliamentary decision to overturn a previous Parliament's decision to trigger A50 could be described as 'democratic'. No Parliament can bind its successor, and if a party promising to revoke A50 secured a Parliamentary majority, of course it could revoke.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 3, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM summed up Brexit perfectly today in Parliament;
> 
> _‘the courts, Parliament and her majesty’s government are all accountable to the British people and 17.4 million people voted to leave, and whatever laws we passed and whatever court judgements come through, we must remember that it is the people who have the ultimate say and that is the foundation of our democracy’._




that's  an extremely debatable interpretation of the UK constitution - and not backed up in law. Its entirely a moral - rather than legal -  argument about how much authority the referendum result should have over elected representatives. And that vile entitled slug would be entirely happy to argue the exact opposite in equally pompous tones if he felt it necessary.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 3, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> that's  an extremely debatable interpretation of the UK constitution - and not backed up in law. Its entirely a moral - rather than legal -  argument about how much authority the referendum result should have over elected representatives. And that vile entitled slug would be entirely happy to argue the exact opposite in equally pompous tones if he felt it necessary.


Exactly this. Anyone quoting 17.4 million has anything butvdemocracy in mind when doing so.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM summed up Brexit perfectly today in Parliament;
> 
> _‘the courts, Parliament and her majesty’s government are all accountable to the British people and 17.4 million people voted to leave, and whatever laws we passed and whatever court judgements come through, we must remember that it is the people who have the ultimate say and that is the foundation of our democracy’._


And you actually believe he means it you it mug


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 4, 2019)

How clueless and credulous do you have to be to think Jacob rees mogg actually believes the people should have the ultimate say? Quite remarkable levels of muggery.

If the people had the ultimate say that cunt would be sent to comrade Pickman's model 's department of public works.


----------



## BristolEcho (Oct 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> How clueless and credulous do you have to be to think Jacob rees mogg actually believes the people should have the ultimate say? Quite remarkable levels of muggery.
> 
> If the people had the ultimate say that cunt would be sent to comrade Pickman's model 's department of public works.



Exactly this. The fact people lap up shit said by JRM about "the people" is utterly hilarious. He would fuck us all over if it meant him and his mates got his way.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

Mogg has an innate understanding of what the great mass of ordinary folk want, come on, he spent thousands of hours with Nanny


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 4, 2019)

Jacob Rees Mogg, defender of the common man and working class hero.


----------



## teqniq (Oct 4, 2019)




----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do you think it would be democratic to have Article 50 revoked and call the whole thing off?



Well, since leave committed electoral fraud, that would seem the sane option...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2019)

Artaxerxes said:


> Jacob Rees Mogg, defender of the common man and working class hero.


Some quip about cultural hegemony & hedge-money


----------



## existentialist (Oct 4, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> He's like your mum in that respect.


Perfect comeback


----------



## existentialist (Oct 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Well he doesn’t grandstand in his responses, compared to Blackford who appears to think he’s giving the speech of his life every time he gets the chance to open his gob.


Raab doesn't grandstand because if wit were shit, and shit was dynamite, he still wouldn't have enough to blow his socks off.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 4, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Do you think it would be democratic to have Article 50 revoked and call the whole thing off?


Yep, given what appears to be the alternative.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

Fabulous thread over the last few pages. Supposed lefts taking a position or basing their analysis on what the political class are doing/saying.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Yep, given what appears to be the alternative.


fuck the proles


----------



## Winot (Oct 4, 2019)

Northern Ireland voted overall to remain in the EU and yet has had DUP MPs calling the shots on the Brexit negotiations. Sinn Fein doesn’t take its seats at Westminster and so hasn’t had that influence.

Johnson’s deal seems to have gone down like a bucket of cold sick with businesses and the public generally in Northern Ireland. We are probably going to have an election before the conclusion of Brexit. Is there not a chance that the centrist parties in Northern Ireland win a greater share of the vote for the above reasons, reducing the influence of the DUP?

Perhaps someone with more knowledge of Northern Ireland politics then I could weigh in.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> fuck the proles


Fuck the scheming cunts who lied and deceived their way to a marginal win in a non-binding referendum which they then misrepresented as a mandate to do something whose details hadn't even been figured out.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 4, 2019)

Winot said:


> Northern Ireland voted overall to remain in the EU and yet has had DUP MPs calling the shots on the Brexit negotiations. Sinn Fein doesn’t take its seats at Westminster and so hasn’t had that influence.
> 
> Johnson’s deal seems to have gone down like a bucket of cold sick with businesses and the public generally in Northern Ireland. We are probably going to have an election before the conclusion of Brexit. Is there not a chance that the centrist parties in Northern Ireland win a greater share of the vote for the above reasons, reducing the influence of the DUP?
> 
> Perhaps someone with more knowledge of Northern Ireland politics then I could weigh in.



Much movement in seat numbers in either direction and the DUP's influence disappears anyway. They only have the leverage they do because of the particular situation that came out of the last election. If they get a few more seats then the Tories will happily bin them off, a few less and they won't be able to get a majority even with the DUP.


----------



## Winot (Oct 4, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Much movement in seat numbers in either direction and the DUP's influence disappears anyway. They only have the leverage they do because of the particular situation that came out of the last election. If they get a few more seats then the Tories will happily bin them off, a few less and they won't be able to get a majority even with the DUP.



Odd then that people are talking about the Stormont lock (which will kick in in 4 years)  as being “a veto for the DUP”.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Fuck the scheming cunts who lied and deceived their way to a marginal win in a non-binding referendum which they then misrepresented as a mandate to do something whose details hadn't even been figured out.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 4, 2019)

'Democracy' has differing features in all kinds of different circumstances. It is not a fixed or immutable concept.
If you want to compare one 'democratic' event with another it is helpful to compare like for like.
I am impressed that some posters feel comfortable in their certainty that something is or isn't 'democratic' when reality seems much more nuanced.
For example one would assume that the most votes win every time, but in a non two horse race the most votes are often less than 50%. The referendum in Scotland allowed 16 year olds to vote, but not the UK referendum. Trump gets elected with less votes than Clinton, or the Greens get a million votes yet one MP.
I imagine there are quite a lot of other 'democratic' variables.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2019)

Nobile Officium just about to be launched southwards.  A little democratic present from Scotland for boris.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

Politically there is no such thing as a non-binding referendum fyi


----------



## Santino (Oct 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nobile Officium just about to be launched southwards.  A little democratic present from Scotland for boris.


Nob off


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2019)

Santino said:


> Nob off


Trying our best


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 4, 2019)

Winot said:


> Odd then that people are talking about the Stormont lock (which will kick in in 4 years)  as being “a veto for the DUP”.



From my understanding, that's because of how the Northern Ireland Assembly works, requiring at least 40% of each of the nationalist and unionist members present and voting to agree, and the DUP holds well over 40% of the unionist seats.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 4, 2019)

I wish people would fuck off with the "non binding referendum" shite - what sort of fucking argument is that? People were told by the government that they would abide by the decision - to argue against doing that because you don't _legally_ have to is a cunts argument - and would be seen  as exactly that by any voter who isn't Joe Swinson.


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Nice idea, but IRL who will people trust most in negotiations about our future relationship with the EU?
> 
> The tosser that delivered brexit, assuming he does, or granddad that has just been flapping about like a fish out of water for the last three years?


I also think Boris is handier interface with Trump for the international  community than Corbyn ever would be. not that I think he'll be a two termer or that he could necessarily get a trade deal through in his remaining time ..US is becoming too politically charged and like this side of the Atlantic the system skewed to stopping things rather than enabling


----------



## existentialist (Oct 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Politically there is no such thing as a non-binding referendum fyi


But is there any such thing as a binding referendum, legally?



Kaka Tim said:


> I wish people would fuck off with the "non binding referendum" shite - what sort of fucking argument is that? People were told by the government that they would abide by the decision - to argue against doing that because you don't _legally_ have to is a cunts argument - and would be seen  as exactly that by any voter who isn't Joe Swinson.


Except that, if you have a referendum on something that is supposed to be binding, it rather helps if a) you don't tell a shedload of lies about the outcome, and b) you have some clue about how you're going to implement that outcome.

It's fucking crazy, whatever someone has said prior to the referendum, to effectively lash yourself to the mast of a sinking ship, purely because you said you'd do something without actually considering the possibility that you'd find yourself having to.

And, let's face it, the author of this whole clusterfuck didn't lash himself to anything once the hole appeared in the bottom of the ship - he fucked off to write his 20/20 hindsight memoirs, while a succession of fools pretended they could square the unsquareable circle anyway.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

existentialist said:


> But is there any such thing as a binding referendum, legally?



A referendum is a referendum, it is seeking a mandate from a simple majority of the public, whether that is legally defined as advisory, confirmatory, whatevery, it doesn't matter. Legally doesn't count for shit, it's what is politically possible and digestible and acceptable that matters. It doesn't matter that, legally, it was advisory (as any referendum would be, because it is parliament that passes laws). It means fuck all. Are people supposed to accept the withdrawal of their agency because somebody pops up afterwards and says actually it was just advisory, because that is never going to happen. It isn't politically possible.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

existentialist said:


> But is there any such thing as a binding referendum, legally?
> 
> 
> Except that, if you have a referendum on something that is supposed to be binding, it rather helps if a) you don't tell a shedload of lies about the outcome, and b) you have some clue about how you're going to implement that outcome.
> ...



The question was this: "*Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
*
What is it, specifically, do you think people didn't understand about it?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A referendum is a referendum, it is seeking a mandate from a simple majority of the public, whether that is legally defined as advisory, confirmatory, whatevery, it doesn't matter. Legally doesn't count for shit, it's what is politically possible and digestible and acceptable that matters. It doesn't matter that, legally, it was advisory (as any referendum would be, because it is parliament that passes laws). It means fuck all. Are people supposed to accept the withdrawal of their agency because somebody pops up afterwards and says actually it was just advisory, because that is never going to happen. It isn't politically possible.



That this needs to be pointed out. On here. To socialists. Is fucking incredible, and depressing.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The question was this: "*Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
> *
> What is it, specifically, do you think people didn't understand about it?



The question is incredibly straight forward but the implications of the answer are not.  The real question is 'if not a member of the EU what should our relationship be?'.  Nobody could have truly understood that because 3 years later we still don't fully understand.  Its all just guesswork.

For me the result of the referendum has to be carried out and the UK needs to leave.  I still think its fine to say the way the referendum was carried out was stupid in the extreme and has caused enormous and irreparable damage to the UK.  Mind you, some of that I welcome.


----------



## Supine (Oct 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The question was this: "*Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?"
> *
> What is it, specifically, do you think people didn't understand about it?



Member of the European Union is many many relationships. Single market, customs union, erasmus, medicines agency, nuclear and flight controls to name a few. The question was far too simple to gather any information about which parts people actually wanted to leave.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> Member of the European Union is many many relationships. Single market, customs union, erasmus, medicines agency, nuclear and flight controls to name a few. The question was far too simple to gather any information about which parts people actually wanted to leave.



Nope. it was very simple. Do you stay or do you want to leave. We want to leave. Revoke A50 directly breaches the decision.


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A referendum is a referendum, it is seeking a mandate from a simple majority of the public, whether that is legally defined as advisory, confirmatory, whatevery, it doesn't matter. Legally doesn't count for shit, it's what is politically possible and digestible and acceptable that matters. It doesn't matter that, legally, it was advisory (as any referendum would be, because it is parliament that passes laws). It means fuck all. Are people supposed to accept the withdrawal of their agency because somebody pops up afterwards and says actually it was just advisory, because that is never going to happen. It isn't politically possible.


It isn't polically possible to leave the EUropean Union?


----------



## Supine (Oct 4, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Nope. it was very simple. Do you stay or do you want to leave. We want to leave. Revoke A50 directly breaches the decision.



Life isn't that simple - are you disputing what I said or just in denial?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> It isn't polically possible to leave the EUropean Union?


i don't think it's administratively possible for our crop of politicians to do it no matter how much politically (or financially) they desire to do so


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> It isn't polically possible to leave the EUropean Union?


Possibly not. I'm not making a leave means leave point, I'm just responding to the specific 'oh it was only advisory' nonsense


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> It isn't polically possible to leave the EUropean Union?



not really. cluster fuck doesn't really do it justice. Theres reasonable arguments for a 2nd ref (like on a deal vs remain) - but canning it cos "not legally binding" is no argument at all. Any outcome is going to be shit and divisive  - its been about damage control ever since the referendum result came in.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> Life isn't that simple - are you disputing what I said or just in denial?



"Leave politics to the experts and the narrating class"


----------



## Rob Ray (Oct 4, 2019)

Guardian making a big note on a submission to the courts by Boris suggesting he'd abide by the Benn Act.

Brexit: Johnson 'will seek extension if no withdrawal deal agreed in time' – live news


----------



## Fedayn (Oct 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nobile Officium just about to be launched southwards.  A little democratic present from Scotland for boris.



Democratic????


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 4, 2019)

Rob Ray said:


> Guardian making a big note on a submission to the courts by Boris suggesting he'd abide by the Benn Act.
> 
> Brexit: Johnson 'will seek extension if no withdrawal deal agreed in time' – live news



So he's not going to be dead in a ditch on the 1st November?  Fucks sake.  What am I going to do with all this champagne?  Its still hanging around from when he was going to get run over by a JCB outside Heathrow airport.  I'm beginning to suspect this PM cannot always be taken at his word.


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> not really. cluster fuck doesn't really do it justice. Theres reasonable arguments for a 2nd ref (like on a deal vs remain) - but canning it cos "not legally binding" is no argument at all. Any outcome is going to be shit and divisive  - its been about damage control ever since the referendum result came in.


Damage Control?  Its beeen a litany of what not to do, and you don't think that's damaging....There are reasonable arguments for not having another referendum too.


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So he's not going to be dead in a ditch on the 1st November?  Fucks sake.  What am I going to do with all this champagne?  Its still hanging around from when he was going to get run over by a JCB outside Heathrow airport.  I'm beginning to suspect this PM cannot always be taken at his word.



tbf.  You could do a two for one by combining both scenarios


----------



## brogdale (Oct 4, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> So he's not going to be dead in a ditch on the 1st November?  Fucks sake.  What am I going to do with all this champagne?  Its still hanging around from when he was going to get run over by a JCB outside Heathrow airport.  I'm beginning to suspect this PM cannot always be taken at his word.


Sometimes, Mason can make a very good point...


----------



## gosub (Oct 4, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Sometimes, Mason can make a very good point...
> 
> View attachment 185910



Hypocryte.   Its what about a month that he was demanding infront of media outside Parliament that people meet on Saturday outside Downing Street at 1pm , by which time he was back in Manchester


----------



## Flavour (Oct 4, 2019)

gwan giz a GE


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 4, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Well, since leave committed electoral fraud, that would seem the sane option...


Joined the LibDems yet? You can tug your forelock to the EU commissioners with the yellow scum to your hearts content


----------



## andysays (Oct 4, 2019)

Johnson has now said he *will *request an extension from the EU if he hasn't got a deal by Oct 19.

Better get digging that ditch...


----------



## mod (Oct 4, 2019)

No.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 4, 2019)

andysays said:


> Johnson has now said he *will *request an extension from the EU if he hasn't got a deal by Oct 19.
> 
> Better get digging that ditch...


He said he’d ‘send the letter’, but Downing St are still saying we’ll be leaving on 31st. How both events are possible is unexplained.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

ignatious said:


> He said he’d ‘send the letter’, but Downing St are still saying we’ll be leaving on 31st. How both events are possible is unexplained.


Gets lost in the post, the old 'I sent a cheque last week', we've all done it, easy


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 4, 2019)

Both the Irish Taoiseach, and his deputy, are now saying they think a deal by mid-October is possible, are the sands shifting?


----------



## andysays (Oct 4, 2019)

ignatious said:


> He said he’d ‘send the letter’, but Downing St are still saying we’ll be leaving on 31st. How both events are possible is unexplained.


One way it's possible is if the EU don't grant an extension,  but either way he previously said he'd rather be dead in a ditch than ask for one


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Joined the LibDems yet? You can tug your forelock to the EU commissioners with the yellow scum to your hearts content



So, err..... if you state an incontrovertible fact (leave committed electoral fraud) that reveals what party you support? Brexit "logic" indeed!


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Both the Irish Taoiseach, and his deputy, are now saying they think a deal by mid-October is possible, are the sands shifting?



It really is hard to say because what people are saying in public is going to be very different to what is going on behind closed doors.  Its worth remembering though that Johnson's language the other day was all about how much the UK has compromised and how now the onus is on the EU to reciprocate.  Its this shifting of blame thing again.  The EU have got to make it seem like they are trying everything to avoid being the fall guy so of course they are going to make positive noises even if they think there is no chance.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 4, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> So, err..... if you state an incontrovertible fact (leave committed electoral fraud) that reveals what party you support? Brexit "logic" indeed!


You are arguing for the same politics as the LDs - revoke A50, wilful blindness to the neo-liberal anti-democratic nature of the EU - it's democratic because people's representatives have voted for it. Pathetic 

You have argued a series of regressive politics on this issue for ages, politics that are an excellent fit for the yellow scum.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 4, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Both the Irish Taoiseach, and his deputy, are now saying they think a deal by mid-October is possible, are the sands shifting?



Electorate will not forgive him if he caves in to Johnson and the rest of the bastards.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 4, 2019)

gosub said:


> Damage Control?  Its been a litany of what not to do, and you don't think that's damaging....There are reasonable arguments for not having another referendum too.



the efforts of most of the  political class has been based on damage control - how to minimise damage to their respective parties and the economy and the union  as a result of  brexit. For the tory government this has meant trying reconcile completely contradictory positions - hence, cluster fuck. 
And of course they are very good arguments for not having another referendum - it will be shit - but all options are shit and were from the moment the referendum result was announced.


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You are arguing for the same politics as the LDs - revoke A50, wilful blindness to the neo-liberal anti-democratic nature of the EU - it's democratic because people's representatives have voted for it. Pathetic
> 
> You have argued a series of regressive politics on this issue for ages, politics that are an excellent fit for the yellow scum.



"Yellow scum"? There's a measured, considered, not-at-all-hysterical frame of reference.


----------



## Cid (Oct 4, 2019)

I disagree with RS on many things, but the LDs are amongst the worst players in this clusterfuck. And in general.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 4, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> "Yellow scum"? There's a measured, considered, not-at-all-hysterical frame of reference.



It's certainly an accurate description of the lib dems. Do you think it needs further consideration?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

ignatious said:


> He said he’d ‘send the letter’, but Downing St are still saying we’ll be leaving on 31st. How both events are possible is unexplained.


Basically, it's as if Schrodinger was caught in two minds, kept his options open and was a cunt. 

Physics and politics, never let you down.


----------



## NoXion (Oct 4, 2019)

Going over spending limits is electoral fraud? I thought a bit more than that was required for it to be so.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's certainly an accurate description of the lib dems. Do you think it needs further consideration?


Piss-yellow scum I think you'll find.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

Supine said:


> Member of the European Union is many many relationships. Single , customs union, erasmus, medicines agency, nuclear and flight controls to name a few. The question was far too simple to gather any information about which parts people actually wanted to leave.


Maybe it was complex, though I'm not sure the variety of specific purpose bodies is that relevant to the overall, key question. Maybe they should have put something in place to allow people to vote on the deal May made (I'm not that fussed, I'm neither a leaver or remainer in the terms this is playing out) - but they didn't. The one thing that remains was a political promise to leave the EU if people voted for that. And they did. 

In this whole omnishambles, fuck up, meta-fuck up, the only single clear, unambiguous point was a vote by the people to leave.  FWIW, I think a tory/johnson led leave _will _make things worse for the working class and in the short term will depress economic activity. All sorts of issues for Scotland and Ireland certainly. Yeah, I'm not running this show, _we _are not running this show.  But y'know, that pesky vote.

'Oh but lies, oh but populism, oh but something on buses...'.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 4, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> "Yellow scum"? There's a measured, considered, not-at-all-hysterical frame of reference.


Yeah I think scum pretty well describes neo-liberal pricks that are ideologically committed to exploitation of workers, who purposely imposed swinging cuts to public services, who support privatisations and free markets, who transferred vast sums from the poor to the rich


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah I think scum pretty well describes neo-liberal pricks that are ideologically committed to exploitation of workers, who purposely imposed swinging cuts to public services, who support privatisations and free markets, who transferred vast sums from the poor to the rich


I've always gone with 'libdem lice', though on reflection I think this is unfair to our tiny itchy comrades.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

I favour cat stranglers


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I favour cat stranglers


It's true, I think the Catbin Woman ran Paddy Ashdown close when he was elected leader.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 4, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Piss-yellow scum I think you'll find.



Some of us stay properly hydrated


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I've always gone with 'libdem lice', though on reflection I think this is unfair to our tiny itchy comrades.



Your comrades maybe, not mine


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> It's true, I think the Catbin Woman ran Paddy Ashdown close when he was elected leader.


My cousin is a refuse collector in Bournemouth and said that after the 2017 LibDem conference they were fishing feline corpses out of wheelie bins and gutters for weeks, like a Daily Mail vision of the 1970s but with cats


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Your comrades maybe, not mine


Look, I admit they are currently unorganised and many work freelance, but come the day we'll leave johnson and his buddies in their capable hands in their cells for the pre-execution month.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> My cousin is a refuse collector in Bournemouth and said that after the 2017 LibDem conference they were fishing feline corpses out of wheelie bins and gutters for weeks, like a Daily Mail vision of the 1970s but with cats


----------



## Smangus (Oct 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I've always gone with 'libdem lice', though on reflection I think this is unfair to our tiny itchy comrades.



I think our cat is recruiting for when the revolution comes.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 4, 2019)

_'Collect 6 'Kill a Libdem' vouchers from tins of Whiskers...'_


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 4, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> I wish people would fuck off with the "non binding referendum" shite - what sort of fucking argument is that? People were told by the government that they would abide by the decision - to argue against doing that because you don't _legally_ have to is a cunts argument - and would be seen  as exactly that by any voter who isn't Joe Swinson.



The ‘referendum is only advisory’ argument is usually followed with the ‘people didn’t understand what they were voting for/were lied to’ argument, however, I’m sure I saw a recent Comres poll showing support for Brexit had increased to 60% leave, suggesting remainers jumping ship now wanting to get on with Brexit.  Maybe they were sickened by what’s been going on with Parliament, Bercow et al?


----------



## Libertad (Oct 4, 2019)

Lick me.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah I think scum pretty well describes neo-liberal pricks that are ideologically committed to exploitation of workers, who purposely imposed swinging cuts to public services, who support privatisations and free markets, who transferred vast sums from the poor to the rich


Isn't it the case that the tens of thousands of working class (so far) that have lost their jobs were exploited by brexiteers...or have all you _proper_ working class brexiteers set up crowdfunds and shit for those that are fucked by this...that must be it eh...you've all been putting your hands in your pockets for them.

Yeah?   You've been helping those working class that have already lost thousands of jobs.

Haven't you?

Brother.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 4, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Isn't it the case that the tens of thousands of working class (so far) that have lost their jobs were exploited by brexiteers...or have all you _proper_ working class brexiteers set up crowdfunds and shit for those that are fucked by this...that must be it eh...you've all been putting your hands in your pockets for them.
> 
> Yeah?   You've been helping those working class that have already lost thousands of jobs.
> 
> ...



Fuck me but you're unpleasant.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Fuck me but you're unpleasant.


You speaking for the ex-workers or for squirrel...two different things.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 4, 2019)

not even sure even why people in north ireland would go with the deal

would the double boarder not make things more expensive


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 4, 2019)

.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 4, 2019)

.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 4, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> not even sure even why people in north ireland would go with the deal
> 
> would the double boarder not make things more expensive


This particular proposal expands the border south allowing the DUP and their troops supporters to expand in that direction.

Some would say.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 4, 2019)

It's not going to go well if everyone in parliament is playing games and not being straightforward. The problem is, Labour get the brunt of the criticism for this, but it is the Tories who are the most venal and corrupt in their motivations. I.e they want cash for themselves and their mates. To do that they don the robes of 'democracy'. 'Get it done', 'Brexit means Brexit', 'uphold the will of the people' etc. Yet it's Labour who are criticised for being 'too careful'. They've had to be. They are besieged to some extent in parliament, the press and by those in their own party that nearly led it into oblivion.

More generally in terms of 'where should we go from here?': the public/the electorate have to hold them all to account; hold them to their words and not get played by them. Again. Dominic Cummings can fuck right off for a start.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 4, 2019)

Being a socialist = crowdfunding is the bit that most jumped out at me


----------



## Winot (Oct 4, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Maybe it was complex, though I'm not sure the variety of specific purpose bodies is that relevant to the overall, key question. Maybe they should have put something in place to allow people to vote on the deal May made (I'm not that fussed, I'm neither a leaver or remainer in the terms this is playing out) - but they didn't. The one thing that remains was a political promise to leave the EU if people voted for that. And they did.



If the argument is made that the *type* of Brexit can be put to one side in relation to the referendum (and it’s a reasonable argument given the phrasing of the question) then it’s illogical to also argue that a Brexit of a particular type doesn’t honour the result of the referendum. 

(Not suggesting that this is your argument)


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 5, 2019)

ignatious said:


> He said he’d ‘send the letter’, but Downing St are still saying we’ll be leaving on 31st. How both events are possible is unexplained.



He could keep within the law by asking for a 5min extension.


----------



## Rob Ray (Oct 5, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He could keep within the law by asking for a 5min extension.



The Act specifies that he ask for January 2020.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 5, 2019)

Rob Ray said:


> The Act specifies that he ask for January 2020.


He could use prerogative power to reduce the length of a month to 100 seconds. That will probably tomorrow's Telegraph headline.


----------



## andysays (Oct 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Some of us stay properly hydrated



Clearly not the LibDems though


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

Humberto said:


> Dominic Cummings can fuck right off for a start.



What, him in the vanguard against neo-liberalism, with "the will" of "the people" at heart, and with absolutely no dark agenda whatsoever?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A referendum is a referendum, it is seeking a mandate from a simple majority of the public, whether that is legally defined as advisory, confirmatory, whatevery, it doesn't matter.



I think the Brexit referendum was fucked up because the vote was restricted to British citizens - including those who had lived abroad for 15 years or less - when it would have been perfectly legal to allow the millions of EU citizens who live in Britain to vote.

Even if the vote had been restricted to EU citizens who had lived in Britain for 15 years or longer, there would probably have been a different result. But instead, these people who moved to Britain legally and built lives here - and I bet a lot of them now wish they had gone to Germany or France instead - have been fucked over by years of uncertainty and worry because the country's leaders are incapable of negotiating any kind of agreement.

There has been a third of a decade of Brexit fan fiction with scenarios ranging from a unregulated free-market paradise to a socialist government carrying out a massive programme of nationalisation after Britain is freed from the neoliberal shackles of the EU - but nothing solid to reassure EU citizens that they have any rights at all.

And why didn't people from the EU who moved to Britain apply for citizenship sooner? Maybe because the government raised the price for applying for citizenship to more than a thousand pounds - hands up who has that kind of money to spare to give to the government for an application with no guarantee of success - it's not per family, it's per individual, so it's more than £5,000 to file applications for a family of 5.

TL-DR: People who talk about Brexit being the "will of the people" are treating millions of working class people as an afterthought.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I think the Brexit referendum was fucked up because the vote was restricted to British citizens - including those who had lived abroad for 15 years or less - when it would have been perfectly legal to allow the millions of EU citizens who live in Britain to vote.
> 
> Even if the vote had been restricted to EU citizens who had lived in Britain for 15 years or longer, there would probably have been a different result. But instead, these people who moved to Britain legally and built lives here - and I bet a lot of them now wish they had gone to Germany or France instead - have been fucked over by years of uncertainty and worry because the country's leaders are incapable of negotiating any kind of agreement.



Yeah that's fair and justified criticism and a solid foundation to argue against the referendum outcome, as opposed to 'oh it was just advisory let's ignore it' which is the specific position my post was responding to


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah that's fair and justified criticism and a solid foundation to argue against the referendum outcome, as opposed to 'oh it was just advisory let's ignore it' which is the specific position my post was responding to



Yeah, sorry, I was kind of replying to your post in the first paragraph then I just vented for a few more paragraphs.

It's too bad there doesn't seem to be any posters here who are EU residents in Britain and could give their own perspective, though I do have an elderly German mother-in-law who lives in Scotland and has been extremely stressed about Brexit for a long time.


----------



## Winot (Oct 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I think the Brexit referendum was fucked up because the vote was restricted to British citizens - including those who had lived abroad for 15 years or less - when it would have been perfectly legal to allow the millions of EU citizens who live in Britain to vote.
> .



Exactly. It was based on an assumption that EU citizens living here had no right to determine their own status. In other words it was biased towards a Leave result, both structurally and in outcome.


----------



## AnandLeo (Oct 5, 2019)

After the EU has now rejected the Brexit proposal of the Boris Johnson led UK government, various scenarios composed of combinations of possible events and actions are forecast in the media. The likely events vary from extension to Article 50 to referendum, general election, court decisions, no deal Brexit, and a revised deal. Of these, the last is least likely.

With regard to a revised deal, the only efficient solution that will eliminate the backstop and save the UK from Brexit debacle, initiates in my mind is a deal with a reformed Customs Union, and Single Market. I cannot imagine the Johnson government adopting a reformed Customs Union and Single Market, because their tenet is Customs Union and Single Market tie UK to EU rules that the UK has no say. Johnson government does not want to explore the idea of reformed Customs Union and Single Market because they are not acquiescent to a reformed Customs Union and Single Market on terms agreeable to both EU and UK which UK has a say. Reformed implies UK has say in it at the time of Brexit, and will have a say in future developments. 

The Labour plan for Brexit includes a reformed Customs Union and Single Market. However, they have not published any details of a reformed Customs Union and Single Market they envisage. It is true that Labour is not in government to make an efficient move for Brexit. However, Labour should be able to present the details of key components of their Brexit strategy.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 5, 2019)

on teh tweeter


----------



## teqniq (Oct 5, 2019)

There is speculation on twitter that they will ask for an extention of article 50 knowing that Hungary will veto it as a dodgy deal has been done with then thus precipitating a crash out with no deal.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 5, 2019)

teqniq said:


> There is speculation on twitter that they will ask for an extention of article 50 knowing that Hungary will veto it as a dodgy deal has been done with then thus precipitating a crash out with no deal.


Hmmm. The repurcussions of it coming to light that the UK govt had conspired with far right antisemitic authoritarians makes this sound unfeasible but who the fuck knows, I wouldn't put any money on it tho


----------



## agricola (Oct 5, 2019)

teqniq said:


> There is speculation on twitter that they will ask for an extention of article 50 knowing that Hungary will veto it as a dodgy deal has been done with then thus precipitating a crash out with no deal.



If that is the plan, it is a ludicrous one.  Even if Orban went along with it (and TBH I'd have thought Macron would be a more likely candidate to veto an extension if there is no actual purpose for it other than just kicking the can down the road), one would think the result of it would be Boris' government getting no confidenced and then the incoming regime just cancelling A50 because of the lack of any other option (and because the process had been irredeemably corrupted, which would be clear from what they had just done).


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Smangus said:


> I think our cat is recruiting for when the revolution comes.


Cats are also neoliberal individualist scum, the reason lib dems love to murder them is a bit like the reason lefties reserve their harshest criticism for other lefties. They're the competition.

Cats are also serial killing sociopaths and I have no idea why anyone keeps them as pets. Vicious little bastards.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I favour cat stranglers


This was their other campaign alongside _votes for paedos!_


----------



## flypanam (Oct 5, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Yeah, sorry, I was kind of replying to your post in the first paragraph then I just vented for a few more paragraphs.
> 
> It's too bad there doesn't seem to be any posters here who are EU residents in Britain and could give their own perspective, though I do have an elderly German mother-in-law who lives in Scotland and has been extremely stressed about Brexit for a long time.



There are. I’m one* I voted leave. The whole thing has been a costly ball ache for me and my wife. However, I am enjoying the leeching away of authority of the ‘natural party of government’. 

* I’m not sure Irish counts as eu citizenship as there isn’t much change for us except the Settled Status scheme for partners.


----------



## paolo (Oct 5, 2019)

flypanam said:


> There are. I’m one* I voted leave. The whole thing has been a costly ball ache for me and my wife. However, I am enjoying the leeching away of authority of the ‘natural party of government’.
> 
> * I’m not sure Irish counts as eu citizenship as there isn’t much change for us except the Settled Status scheme for partners.



For leave, what’s the right solution for Ireland?


----------



## flypanam (Oct 5, 2019)

32 county workers’ republic is my preferred option but failing that I’ll take a customs border down the Irish Sea.

ETA the movement in the unionist community is remarkable with some wondering openly if a United Ireland wouldn’t be better. That would not have happened 3 years ago.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 5, 2019)

Hungry won't veto an extension. It would put them even more in the doghouse with the EU - whatever the UK offers them is not going to be worth the political price of taking a bribe to veto a deal so as to throw a fellow member state under a bus. 
The "leaks" about doing a deal with hungary just shit posting to apply pressure  by johnson and cummings to try and keep up the pretence that the uk will leave on oct 31


----------



## paolo (Oct 5, 2019)

flypanam said:


> 32 county workers’ republic is my preferred option but failing that I’ll take a customs border down the Irish Sea.
> 
> ETA the movement in the unionist community is remarkable with some wondering openly if a United Ireland wouldn’t be better. That would not have happened 3 years ago.



I said to an Irish friend a year ago, this is surely an open goal for a united Ireland

He didn’t reveal his personal affiliation (and I didn’t ask) but his reckoning was it needs 10-20 years.

( I don’t have “boots on the ground” knowledge on people’s views.)


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 5, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Hungry won't veto an extension. It would put them even more in the doghouse with the EU - whatever the UK offers them is not going to be worth the political price of taking a bribe to veto a deal so as to throw a fellow member state under a bus.
> The "leaks" about doing a deal with hungary just shit posting to apply pressure  by johnson and cummings to try and keep up the pretence that the uk will leave on oct 31


Exactly. Absurd idea. Hungary is a huge net recipient of EU money. Now there are questions about who benefits from that investment - who owns the companies winning the contracts, where do the profits go. But it is nevertheless jeopardising way more than anything the UK could possibly offer. Piss off Germany to please a weak UK govt that might fall any day? No chance.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 5, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> on teh tweeter
> 
> View attachment 186004



Those are quite picturesque, I'm sure we can find him a rancid little drainage culvert behind a retail park or something.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 5, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Exactly. Absurd idea. Hungary is a huge net recipient of EU money. Now there are questions about who benefits from that investment - who owns the companies winning the contracts, where do the profits go. But it is nevertheless jeopardising way more than anything the UK could possibly offer. Piss off Germany to please a weak UK govt that might fall any day? No chance.


Plus, like fuck does Johnson actually want to leave without a deal in any case.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 5, 2019)

paolo said:


> I said to an Irish friend a year ago, this is surely an open goal for a united Ireland
> 
> He didn’t reveal his personal affiliation (and I didn’t ask) but his reckoning was it needs 10-20 years.
> 
> ( I don’t have “boots on the ground” knowledge on people’s views.)



Your friend could be right, but the unionist monolith is cracking and those cracks are becoming deeper and wider. Ironically the backstop would sure up the Union for the foreseeable.


----------



## andysays (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Hmmm. The repurcussions of it coming to light that the UK govt had conspired with far right antisemitic authoritarians makes this sound unfeasible but who the fuck knows, I wouldn't put any money on it tho


I can't remember the details now, but there was something on the BBC website yesterday about UK govt denials of something along these lines after the Hungarian ambassador to the UK was filmed going in or out of No.10 or meeting Johnson or one of his advisors or ministers or something.

I realise that's a bit vague...


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It's certainly an accurate description of the lib dems. Do you think it needs further consideration?



Well, let me see. Anyone on the same side of the argument as Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Cummings, Farage, Trump, Putin and Tommy Robinson might be more circumspect about whom they call "scum."


----------



## Treacle Toes (Oct 5, 2019)

Irish passport applications from UK skyrocket with Brexit deadline looming | The Irish Post

I wonder how many of these applications are from people who voted Leave?

Self-serving hypocrites.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Well, let me see. Anyone on the same side of the argument as Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Cummings, Farage, Trump, Putin and Tommy Robinson might be more circumspect about whom they call "scum."


He's not on the same side as them by any sensible measure though is he? 

This is the crux of it though isn't it? Not meaning to pick on you as you're far from alone in this but this 'you're either a remainer or you love Boris, Tommy and probably national socialism' bollocks has to stop if we're to get anywhere.

They're none of them on my side. They're all my enemies.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> He's not on the same side as them by any sensible measure though is he?
> 
> This is the crux of it though isn't it? Not meaning to pick on you as you're far from alone in this but this 'you're either a remainer or you love Boris, Tommy and probably national socialism' bollocks has to stop if we're to get anywhere.
> 
> They're none of them on my side. They're all my enemies.


We are in the tradition of Benn, Bob Crow and Scargill


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> He's not on the same side as them by any sensible measure though is he?



"By any sensible measure"? Well, it depends on how you define sensible, but "wanting exactly the same thing" and "being on the same side" are quite close, l would venture, in the lexicon of, well... almost everybody.


----------



## extra dry (Oct 5, 2019)

I wish that europe would pull the plug.
  Uk will come running back in less than 8 years.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Why do you keep deliberately misrepresenting people who voted to leave?



Because he's a cunt.

HTH.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 5, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> We are in the tradition of Benn, Bob Crow and Scargill



I did enjoy pointing out to one or two 'little englander' leave types in the run up to the referendum that they were planning to vote with george galloway and arthur scargill





SpineyNorman said:


> but this 'you're either a remainer or you love Boris, Tommy and probably national socialism' bollocks has to stop if we're to get anywhere.



what about the 'you're either a leaver or you love david cameron, george osborne and big business' bollocks from some quarters?

it's all bollocks


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> "By any sensible measure"? Well, it depends on how you define sensible, but "wanting exactly the same thing" and "being on the same side" are quite close, l would venture, in the lexicon of, well... almost anybody.


Apologies, I must have missed the Tory manifesto that promised workers control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> He's not on the same side as them by any sensible measure though is he?
> 
> This is the crux of it though isn't it? Not meaning to pick on you as you're far from alone in this but this 'you're either a remainer or you love Boris, Tommy and probably national socialism' bollocks has to stop if we're to get anywhere.
> 
> They're none of them on my side. They're all my enemies.


This. 
It's amazing that so basic a point seems beyond so many people.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Well, let me see. Anyone on the same side of the argument as Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Cummings, Farage, Trump, Putin and Tommy Robinson might be more circumspect about whom they call "scum."


Have you been asleep for a decade? The pricks you are currently defending were in government with the first three for five years FFS.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> what about the 'you're either a leaver or you love david cameron, george osborne and big business' bollocks from some quarters?
> 
> it's all bollocks



I don't see as much of this though. Incritical support for the EU will result in deserved criticism and scorn but I completely respect the likes of pickmans and mauvais in favouring remain on lesser evil grounds. 

It is undignified the way some people have been fawning over the likes of Ken Fucking Clarke and Rory whatsisface though and anyone doing so deserves what they get.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Well, let me see. Anyone on the same side of the argument as Johnson, Gove, Rees-Mogg, Cummings, Farage, Trump, Putin and Tommy Robinson might be more circumspect about whom they call "scum."


Chelsea get about 40,000 at their homegames - every single one is a member of the Headhunters, right?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> We are in the tradition of Benn, Bob Crow and Scargill


And James Connolly (sort of)  neither king nor keiser.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Chelsea get about 40,000 at their homegames - every single one is a member of the Headhunters, right?


Especially the pensioners


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Apologies, I must have missed the Tory manifesto that promised workers control of the means of production, distribution and exchange.



Oh yes, because not wanting brexit = tory. Or does it, as stated by a poster previously (sorry, forget the name)  make you LibDem "yellow scum"? Having a naive belief that brexit will deliver a workers' paradise in one country (even though there's a hateful RW tory government) is, indeed, a broad church.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Especially the pensioners



Most of them probably aren't far off being pensioners by now tbf.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Oh yes, because not wanting brexit = tory. Or does it, as stated by a poster previously (sorry, forget the name)  make you LibDem "yellow scum"? Having a naive belief that brexit will deliver a workers' paradise in one country (even though there's a hateful RW tory government) is, indeed, a broad church.


Nobody has said not wanting Brexit makes you a Tory. Making the exact same arguments and asking for the exact same things as the Lib Dems, with teh same reasoning, will result in that association though.

Sorry to shatter your illusion but nobody thinks Brexit will deliver a workers paradise. The strongest claim I've seen anyone make on here is that it could result in a political crisis that may or may not be taken advantage of by the working class and pro working class forces. They've been proven at least half right already.

FTR I didn't vote in the referrendum and would rather it hadn't happened. Because it's not my fight and when my enemies are fighting one another I'd rather stand aside and let them.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

_Having a naive belief that brexit will deliver a workers' paradise in one country
_
Out this bastard vic. Should be easy.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Most of them probably aren't far off being pensioners by now tbf.


Was thinking more of these lads


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> How clueless and credulous do you have to be to think Jacob rees mogg actually believes the people should have the ultimate say? Quite remarkable levels of muggery.
> 
> If the people had the ultimate say that cunt would be sent to comrade Pickman's model 's department of public works.



It's a level of cluelessness so deep that you expect a young Ray Winstone to come along and smack his face in for being a clueless mug cunt.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 5, 2019)

You know who else was a vegetarian? That's right,


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

maaag caaahnt!


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You know who else was a vegetarian? That's right,


Morrissey


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Morrissey


No further questions your honour


----------



## Wilf (Oct 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You know who else was a vegetarian? That's right,


Tim Farron, apparently -  I rest my case. (Libdem = Remoaner = Vegetarian = 3rd Reich - don't worry, I can show my workings).


----------



## Wilf (Oct 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Morrissey


_'Every Day is Like... 31st October'_


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 5, 2019)

Rutita1 said:


> Irish passport applications from UK skyrocket with Brexit deadline looming | The Irish Post
> 
> I wonder how many of these applications are from people who voted Leave?
> 
> Self-serving hypocrites.


In all fairness I suspect not many, Northern Irish are entitled to Irish citizenship if they want it under the GFA, it doesn't surprise me that they're applying since for the first time in centuries (ever in fact) being an Irish citizen may soon be worth more than being a British one which is definitely a side effect of Brexit no-one expected.
Those applying from mainland UK are going to be people with Irish parents/grandparents who've never bothered before and I would lay a modest bet they're more likely to have voted Remain than Leave. My daughter's boyfriend is Irish (lived in the UK for about 8yrs now), and she has told us that when they start a family they will definitely apply for joint Irish-British citizenship for any kids as soon as they're born (Mrs Q picked up on the use of the word when rather than if).
You're right though any Leaver voter now applying for an Irish passport is definitely being hypocritical, bit like someone I know who announced that if Brexit isn't delivered he will move to Europe, not sure how I should have answered that.
Whilst it hasn't happened to him personally, daughter's boyfriend does say he knows other Irish people who have been harassed by people accusing them of trying to derail Brexit.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 5, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> In all fairness I suspect not many, Northern Irish are entitled to Irish citizenship if they want it under the GFA, it doesn't surprise me that they're applying since for the first time in centuries (ever in fact) being an Irish citizen may soon be worth more than being a British one which is definitely a side effect of Brexit no-one expected.
> Those applying from mainland UK are going to be people with Irish parents/grandparents who've never bothered before and I would lay a modest bet they're more likely to have voted Remain than Leave. My daughter's boyfriend is Irish (lived in the UK for about 8yrs now), and she has told us that when they start a family they will definitely apply for joint Irish-British citizenship for any kids as soon as they're born (Mrs Q picked up on the use of the word when rather than if).
> You're right though any Leaver voter now applying for an Irish passport is definitely being hypocritical, bit like someone I know who announced that if Brexit isn't delivered he will move to Europe, not sure how I should have answered that.
> Whilst it hasn't happened to him personally, daughter's boyfriend does say he knows other Irish people who have been harassed by people accusing them of trying to derail Brexit.


People who voted just went into a booth and put a cross against one of two boxes, having been asked a question they hadn't asked to be asked. I don't think any should be held to account in that way for the clusterfuck that has developed since then. That's one of the big problems with direct democracy of this kind, of course, where no plan is presented that is to be endorsed - the absence of accountability for the consequences of the decision.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> My cousin is a refuse collector in Bournemouth and said that after the 2017 LibDem conference they were fishing feline corpses out of wheelie bins and gutters for weeks, like a Daily Mail vision of the 1970s but with cats



Reportedly, Paddy Ashdown couldn't pop a boner unless he'd strangled a couple of kittens first.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Cats are also neoliberal individualist scum, the reason lib dems love to murder them is a bit like the reason lefties reserve their harshest criticism for other lefties. They're the competition.
> 
> Cats are also serial killing sociopaths and I have no idea why anyone keeps them as pets. Vicious little bastards.



They're kept as distractions should a Lib Dem come door-knocking. They bend down to pick up the cat and strangle it, allowing you a clear neck-shot.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Those are quite picturesque, I'm sure we can find him a rancid little drainage culvert behind a retail park or something.



Very rancid. Slick with the decomposed bodies of generations of rats and mice. What better place for Tory vermin, than a bed of other vermin?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Especially the pensioners



Red-coated old cunts!


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Cats are also neoliberal individualist scum, the reason lib dems love to murder them is a bit like the reason lefties reserve their harshest criticism for other lefties. They're the competition.
> 
> Cats are also serial killing sociopaths and I have no idea why anyone keeps them as pets. Vicious little bastards.


You can't really expect a superior species to care for the opinions of monkeys who've got ideas above their station


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Have you been asleep for a decade? The pricks you are currently defending were in government with the first three for five years FFS.



Sorry, by pointing out that BoZo, Trump, Tommeh et al are pro-brexit, whom am I "defending"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Sorry, by pointing out that BoZo, Trump, Tommeh et al are pro-brexit, whom am I "defending"?


Surely who


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Surely who


 
No, direct object. Definitely whom.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Sorry, by pointing out that BoZo, Trump, Tommeh et al are pro-brexit, whom am I "defending"?


Who are you helping? What are you clarifying? This is a child's game from one pretending to be neutral but who actually left the country in disgust at the vote.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 5, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Sorry, by pointing out that BoZo, Trump, Tommeh et al are pro-brexit, whom am I "defending"?


You specifically took issue with me (and others) calling the LDs wankers. 
You also defended the anti-democratic nature of the EU by falsely equating commissioners with civil servants (despite this being pointed out to you as nonsense).


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> You can't really expect a superior species to care for the opinions of monkeys who've got ideas above their station


Cats are shit. Name one major scientific breakthrough made by a cat (Shroedinger's cat doesn't count). They've produced no works of fine art, nothing in the way of literature. All they've ever produced is a load more cats. /Cook


----------



## teqniq (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> ...(Shroedinger's cat doesn't count)...


....or maybe it does.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Cats are shit. Name one major scientific breakthrough made by a cat (Shroedinger's cat doesn't count). They've produced no works of fine art, nothing in the way of literature. All they've ever produced is a load more cats. /Cook


Don't roll over and degrade themselves for treats though do they


----------



## andysays (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Don't roll over and degrade themselves for treats though do they


Nope, that's LibDems you're thinking of...


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 5, 2019)

Chatting last night to my friend in the civil service is heavily involved in one aspect of Brexit.  News from the front line is literally no one believes Johnson's proposals stand any chance at all. The belief is at some point mid-week the EU will kick them into touch.

It was fairly obvious from not just the proposals themselves but also from the way Johnson delivered them he knew they were pointless.  Its just who gets the blame which is the government's priority, well that how it seems to me.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Don't roll over and degrade themselves for treats though do they


Neither did Ted bundy and I wouldn't have him as a pet either


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Don't roll over and degrade themselves for treats though do they


They'd degrade themselves for a quote in an article


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Neither did Ted bundy and I wouldn't have him as a pet either


Are you related to 'spinny' norman who works in libdem pr?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Are you related to 'spinny' norman who works in libdem pr?


He's my evil twin


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Chatting last night to my friend in the civil service is heavily involved in one aspect of Brexit.  News from the front line is literally no one believes Johnson's proposals stand any chance at all. The belief is at some point mid-week the EU will kick them into touch.
> 
> It was fairly obvious from not just the proposals themselves but also from the way Johnson delivered them he knew they were pointless.  Its just who gets the blame which is the government's priority, well that how it seems to me.


That's nice of the civil service as repped by your mate.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's nice of the civil service as repped by your mate.



Ok


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

I was chatting to my civil service mate last night who is heavily involved in this secret stuff and he was braying in the pub for all to hear that it would be great - oddly enough.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I was chatting to my civil service mate last night who is heavily involved in this secret stuff and he was braying in the pub for all to hear that it would be great - oddly enough.



Ok


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 5, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Chatting last night to my friend in the civil service is heavily involved in one aspect of Brexit.  News from the front line is literally no one believes Johnson's proposals stand any chance at all. The belief is at some point mid-week the EU will kick them into touch.
> 
> It was fairly obvious from not just the proposals themselves but also from the way Johnson delivered them he knew they were pointless.  Its just who gets the blame which is the government's priority, well that how it seems to me.



That's how it seems to you the _democratic _civil service as  a whole thought of it as told you by one of them?

What seemed it 'to you'? Did you see plans, hear plans? Because it reads like a sort of load of made up bollocks to support your own reading. 

Ok?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 5, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That's how it seems to you the _democratic _civil service as  a whole thought of it as told you by one of them?
> 
> What seemed it 'to you'? Did you see plans, hear plans? Because it reads like a sort of load of made up bollocks to support your own reading.
> 
> Ok?



Ok.  The 1st paragraph of my post was from him, the second paragraph is my guess which is why I said 'seems to me'.  Just reporting what I was told as it may be of interest to some people here or it may not.  Unfortunately, like you, I have nothing better to do this evening.


----------



## Supine (Oct 5, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Cats are shit. Name one major scientific breakthrough made by a cat (Shroedinger's cat doesn't count). They've produced no works of fine art, nothing in the way of literature. All they've ever produced is a load more cats. /Cook



Behind every great scientist there is a cat running things


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Behind every great scientist there is a cat running things


You've fallen for feline propaganda. Those are actually foxes who've had a hair cut, hence the fox's popular image as clever, devious and cunning.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 5, 2019)

paolo said:


> I said to an Irish friend a year ago, this is surely an open goal for a united Ireland
> 
> He didn’t reveal his personal affiliation (and I didn’t ask) but his reckoning was it needs 10-20 years.
> 
> ( I don’t have “boots on the ground” knowledge on people’s views.)




my sister is married to a fella from ian paisley backyard

he is the biggest trump supportor and brexiter we have in the family


still awaiting how this end up with an united ireland from the fella

Brexit - ? - Profit


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 5, 2019)

Supine said:


> Behind every great scientist there is a cat running things


Evil Masterminds always seem to have cats, I'm far from convinced that the one in Downing St is there just to catch mice


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

And goodies always have dogs. Like in scooby doo


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 5, 2019)

You know who else had a dog? That's right,


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 5, 2019)

S☼I said:


> You know who else had a dog? That's right,


Blondi


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 5, 2019)

Keith Lard


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Bart Simpson


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 5, 2019)

Also, Adrian Mole


----------



## rubbershoes (Oct 5, 2019)

Dick Dastardly


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2019)




----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

Paul O'Grady


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 6, 2019)

Ken Dodd’s dad


----------



## maomao (Oct 6, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Blondi


----------



## MrSki (Oct 6, 2019)

Is this bloke for real or is he taking the piss?


----------



## Poi E (Oct 6, 2019)

He's just saying what about 80% of England think. That desperate need to think the country is liked by others, or has a role to play in the modern world. Crushingly insecure. "Stood alone for years...billions in the Empire". A nation in meltdown on a fundamental level.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Is this bloke for real or is he taking the piss?




He's got a deadpan delivery if he's taking the piss and he's meeting Nige.

Though I doubt, if you had a longer conversation with him, what he really wants is for the UK to subjugate half the globe.

But Brexit, it's not really not the one decision of the world's workers that can't be challenged.


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Is this bloke for real or is he taking the piss?



Are any of us for real or are we all just taking the piss?

It's so hard to tell these days...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2019)

Poi E said:


> He's just saying what about 80% of England think. That desperate need to think the country is liked by others, or has a role to play in the modern world. Crushingly insecure. "Stood alone for years...billions in the Empire". A nation in meltdown on a fundamental level.


Not gonna disagree, and the help for heroes tee is probs quite a good heuristic.
But...let's not overlook some of the potential psychological drivers of such stuff. Given that he's, say early - mid 60's (?) he's part of that cohort that experienced a) the last vestiges of empire & b) the high-point of capital concessions via the post-war 'social-contract'/consensus.
So this heavily Brexit cohort look back and remember fondly (through rose-tinted nostalgia specs) better times of employment, disposable income, material advancement, community cohesion and labour solidarity and conflate it with a time when 'britain punched above its weight'. An easily exploitable confusion of correlation and causation.
Not excusing this crap, just attempting some sort of rationalising where it comes from, like.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Not gonna disagree, and the help for heroes tee is probs quite a good heuristic.
> But...let's not overlook some of the potential psychological drivers of such stuff. Given that he's, say early - mid 60's (?) he's part of that cohort that experienced a) the last vestiges of empire & b) the high-point of capital concessions via the post-war 'social-contract'/consensus.
> So this heavily Brexit cohort look back and remember fondly (through rose-tinted nostalgia specs) better times of employment, disposable income, material advancement, community cohesion and labour solidarity and conflate it with a time when 'britain punched above its weight'. An easily exploitable confusion of correlation and causation.
> Not excusing this crap, just attempting some sort of rationalising where it comes from, like.



Yeah. It's been noted before eg rise of the right and that ilk that a big driver for modern far right is the attacks on the concessions of mid 20c and social contract and that, defo true in same way it is in states with the MAGA stuff


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

So what we have above then is people laughing at those getting shafted by capital. Some strong _politics _here.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

Last few days pages of this thread are an utter embarrassment. Again.


----------



## Libertad (Oct 6, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Ken Dodd’s dad



Tbf his dog's dead.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 6, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> Hungry won't veto an extension. It would put them even more in the doghouse with the EU - whatever the UK offers them is not going to be worth the political price of taking a bribe to veto a deal so as to throw a fellow member state under a bus.
> The "leaks" about doing a deal with hungary just shit posting to apply pressure  by johnson and cummings to try and keep up the pretence that the uk will leave on oct 31


Hungary's far-right government says it won’t veto Brexit extension as favour to Boris Johnson


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 6, 2019)

Portuguese elections today. Current 'coaltion/ruling arrangement' of SP, Left block and CP have managed to grow economy by partially reversing the austerity imposed by the EU bailout agreed by the previous government. Positions on EU : SP remain, Left Block remain reform and if not possible leave, CP reform or leave and support UK in doing so. SP likely grow to be largest party with Left Block around 10 percent and CP 6-8 percent. What ever happened to remain and reform on the British left?


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

andysays said:


> Are any of us for real or are we all just taking the piss?
> 
> It's so hard to tell these days...


I think I'm sort of both.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Portuguese elections today. Current 'coaltion/ruling arrangement' of SP, Left block and CP have managed to grow economy by partially reversing the austerity imposed by the EU bailout agreed by the previous government. Positions on EU : SP remain, Left Block remain reform and if not possible leave, CP reform or leave and support UK in doing so. SP likely grow to be largest party with Left Block around 10 percent and CP 6-8 percent. What ever happened to remain and reform on the British left?


It became remain and defend.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It became remain and defend.


 Remain and worship for some


----------



## andysays (Oct 6, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> I think I'm sort of both.



That's the quantum nature of reality for you, Schrodinger's piss taking


----------



## YouSir (Oct 6, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Portuguese elections today. Current 'coaltion/ruling arrangement' of SP, Left block and CP have managed to grow economy by partially reversing the austerity imposed by the EU bailout agreed by the previous government. Positions on EU : SP remain, Left Block remain reform and if not possible leave, CP reform or leave and support UK in doing so. SP likely grow to be largest party with Left Block around 10 percent and CP 6-8 percent. What ever happened to remain and reform on the British left?



Never existed, did it? Not beyond the slogan. Still yet to see anyone say what reforms they imagine are practically possible.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

There's actually  a great piece in the new Capital and Class about how the remain and reform approach played out in Greece - it's not properly online at the CSE site yet but i'll upload it when it is. Though i suspect the odd use of renationalisation rather than a less loaded or more apt term is going to send some shrieking.

(It's also part of the Streeck-Tooze debate that was mentioned here. It's actually what that was about really, the prior Habermas-Streeck debate, and i'll upload their two contributions as well)

This is the gist:

The Habermas-Streeck debate revisited: Syriza and the illusions of the left-Europeanism:


The crucial question of the Habermas-Streeck debate on the crisis in Europe was, ‘Should the political forces resisting the de-democratization of capitalism strive for renewal of the European Union through its deeper integration, as per Habremas, or for peaceful dissolution of the European Union and a retreat to a national state, as per Streeck?’ In this article, the arguments of each author are examined against the background of the left-wing Syriza party’s challenge to European austerity in Greece. Three conclusions are drawn. First, Syriza’s nationally charged populism in opposition coincided with Streeck’s considerations. Second, Syriza’s governmental strategy reflected Habermas’s views. Third, Syriza’s sudden rise to power and its subsequent failure to reverse the austerity both substantiate Streeck’s thesis that at the present juncture renationalization of economic policy represents a condition of the possibility for egalitarian politics in Europe.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So what we have above then is people laughing at those getting shafted by capital. Some strong _politics _here.



Maybe he shouldn’t spaff off on the TV? 

Who under your rule of thumb can or cannot be laughed at for the stupid things they say? Given that you are often so vociferous on the failings of others? If he gets a free pass it’s a bit patronising.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Maybe he shouldn’t spaff off on the TV?
> 
> Who under your rule of thumb can or cannot be laughed at for the stupid things they say? Given that you are often so vociferous on the failings of others? If he gets a free pass it’s a bit patronising.


I wasn't on about him specifically - i was on about the social tensions based on inequality and the like brought about by the conditions that brogdale outlined that undoubtedly played a massive part in bringing out the leave vote. A political approach that basically says _hah hah you're fucked you idiots_ to the people on the shitty end of that stick is not only not useful it's actively dangerous - yet we see it being played out day after day after day on here and elsewhere by those who consider themselves as on the left. The second the result was announced we got _hah hah cornwall you cretins._ And this from people who  - as the last three years of their responses  have shown - consider themselves to be in loco parentis over these idiot children.

And calm down, it's too early for that tone.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Wales gets a lot of that. You voted leave you idiots, can't you see all those signs on your roundabouts.


----------



## Supine (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Wales gets a lot of that. You voted leave you idiots, can't you see all those signs on your roundabouts.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Supine said:


> View attachment 186101


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 6, 2019)

And you paid for that propaganda.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 6, 2019)

We all know BJ is a remainer at heart so it's entirely plausible that whether or not he admits it, even to his inner circle, that he's fully on board with the "remain in stages" conspiracy and is only too happy to be kicked out of downing street post vonc/ge if it means someone else (even Corbyn) can take the blame for betraying brexit while he gets to ride the brexit high horse for a long time to come. Given there's going to be another stock market crash in the next 12-24 months and perhaps sooner it's probably a good idea not to be in office when it happens too.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We all know BJ is a remainer at heart so it's entirely plausible that whether or not he admits it, even to his inner circle, that he's fully on board with the "remain in stages" conspiracy and is only too happy to be kicked out of downing street post vonc/ge if it means someone else (even Corbyn) can take the blame for betraying brexit while he gets to ride the brexit high horse for a long time to come. Given there's going to be another stock market crash in the next 12-24 months and perhaps sooner it's probably a good idea not to be in office when it happens too.


People are forever claiming there's going to be another crash.


----------



## YouSir (Oct 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> People are forever claiming there's going to be another crash.



Because there is going to be one.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> People are forever claiming there's going to be another crash.



There will be another crash. It's inevitable. It's always inevitable. 

And tbf that there will be either a crash or a crisis/stagnation in the short term/near future is a prediction with very solid foundations


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> There will be another crash. It's inevitable. It's always inevitable.
> 
> And tbf that there will be either a crash or a crisis/stagnation in the short term/near future is a prediction with very solid foundations


Yes, but you can't predict the time frame. It might be next month, next year or eight years hence. If you could predict the timing of crashes, they wouldn't happen.


----------



## YouSir (Oct 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, but you can't predict the time frame. It might be next month, next year or eight years hence. If you could predict the timing of crashes, they wouldn't happen.



People did predict the last one, they just weren't listened too. Global finance might be based on greed and bullshit but even with that there are those who can read the entrails


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 6, 2019)

YouSir said:


> People did predict the last one, they just weren't listened too. Global finance might be based on greed and bullshit but even with that there are those who can read the entrails


Yep. People predicted it way back in 1999/2000, very precisely too in that they identified the subprime mortgages that would precipitate it. But it still took eight years to happen.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yes, but you can't predict the time frame. It might be next month, next year or eight years hence. If you could predict the timing of crashes, they wouldn't happen.


Yeah, or you'd be very wealthy anyway. But growth/GDP forecasts down in US/UK/EZ, all flirting with technical recessions, FTSE/DOW/DAX all volatile and all had a circa 3% drop in one day last week, investors going long into bonds and fixed interest - nothing is categorical but they think trouble is coming soon


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, or you'd be very wealthy anyway. But growth/GDP forecasts down in US/UK/EZ, all flirting with technical recessions, FTSE/DOW/DAX all volatile and all had a circa 3% drop in one day last week, investors going long into bonds and fixed interest - nothing is categorical but they think trouble is coming soon


You don't need to be a professional prognosticator to see that we're in for a rocky ride with the numerous foci of uncertainty and instability. Say trump not impeached and re-elected for a second term, if there's not a crash in the next year. What sort of trade wars would beckon then? And that's before the institutional factors tending toward another financial crisis take into account


----------



## mauvais (Oct 6, 2019)

Flavour said:


> We all know BJ is a remainer at heart


Show us some evidence that Boris is anything at heart. What political strategies has he ever pursued beyond those selected to serve him best?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah, or you'd be very wealthy anyway. But growth/GDP forecasts down in US/UK/EZ, all flirting with technical recessions, FTSE/DOW/DAX all volatile and all had a circa 3% drop in one day last week, investors going long into bonds and fixed interest - nothing is categorical but they think trouble is coming soon


It's amazing how long systems can stagger along with in-build contradictions, though. There are various contradictions in there - the US can never repay its foreign debts, for instance: imperialism through bankruptcy. Japan has basically staggered along with stagnation and ever-increasing debt (admittedly owed domestically) since 1990. It's still going.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

LBJ right though that anybody predicting exactly when a crash or crisis will occur is blagging. I remember the glee in the SP back in 08/09 about how the party had been saying this would happen, problem was it was every newspaper the SP published predicting it imminently for last twenty years. Same as with the sudden upturn of working class socialist forces and all that. It's always right round the corner.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


>


Yep, almost always on, or very close, to sites of major deindustrialisation that occurred almost wholly within the period of UK membership of the supra state 'kindly' providing the sticking plaster. And they wonder why people didn't vote for more of the same.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yep, almost always on, or very close, to sites of major deindustrialisation that occurred almost wholly within the period of UK membership of the supra state 'kindly' providing the sticking plaster. And they wonder why people didn't vote for more of the same.



Often on roads now needed to take people away from their homes to other places with jobs


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 6, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wasn't on about him specifically - i was on about the social tensions based on inequality and the like brought about by the conditions that brogdale outlined that undoubtedly played a massive part in bringing out the leave vote. A political approach that basically says _hah hah you're fucked you idiots_ to the people on the shitty end of that stick is not only not useful it's actively dangerous - yet we see it being played out day after day after day on here and elsewhere by those who consider themselves as on the left. The second the result was announced we got _hah hah cornwall you cretins._ And this from people who  - as the last three years of their responses  have shown - consider themselves to be in loco parentis over these idiot children.
> 
> And calm down, it's too early for that tone.



I agree it doesn’t help to belittle and the Remain and everything’s rosy is an equally dense position that would simply lead to Brexit conditions again. The Libs announcing Nicola Horlick as a candidate shows just how wedded that part of the Remain ticket is to BAU and the economic and social relations that go with it.

But at some point we also have to call out the irrational rubbish that vociferous Leavers spout. It is in general the most useless and backward looking politics that won’t be satiated by Leave at all costs.


----------



## Ming (Oct 6, 2019)

More Brexit murkiness. Michael Gove and Dominic Cumming’s dodgy dealings over the referendum.


----------



## pesh (Oct 6, 2019)

Lorry drivers stuck in Brexit traffic jams may cause rise in ‘dogging’



> Ministers working hard to prepare for a no-deal Brexit have been dogged by an unlikely new problem with 25 days to go.
> 
> Officials planning to ease any congestion on the transport links to Dover have encountered the potential for an embarrassing issue: a rise in “dogging”.
> 
> ...


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You specifically took issue with me (and others) calling the LDs wankers.
> You also defended the anti-democratic nature of the EU by falsely equating commissioners with civil servants (despite this being pointed out to you as nonsense).



I think the term was "scum" rather than "wankers."

However, my issue was rather that, by being - like a significant proportion of the population - against the mendacious, fraudulent and, in a lot of cases, flagrantly racist brexit vote, you hysterically assumed I somehow support a party I have never, and would never, vote for.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2019)

Quite divisive, this topic, innit?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 6, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> However, my issue was rather that, by being - like a significant proportion of the population - against the mendacious, fraudulent and, in a lot of cases, flagrantly racist brexit vote, you hysterically assumed I somehow support a party I have never, and would never, vote for.


No it was because you are making the same arguments as they are based on the same reasoning - the proposition that anti-democratic nature of the EU actually makes it democratic; the insistence that those that voted leave where fooled into voting for leave; etc


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Quite divisive, this topic, innit?



No shit, Sherlock!


----------



## Supine (Oct 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Quite divisive, this topic, innit?



That's an understatement


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

Ming said:


> More Brexit murkiness. Michael Gove and Dominic Cumming’s dodgy dealings over the referendum.



Another thing traditional conspiraloons and Liberal remain conspiracy theorists have in common. An overdependence on YouTube as a source of information. It's it those two know nothing clowns in the pub again?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No shit, Sherlock!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 6, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> People are forever claiming there's going to be another crash.



There is, because of maths.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Another thing traditional conspiraloons and Liberal remain conspiracy theorists have in common. An overdependence on YouTube as a source of information. It's it those two know nothing clowns in the pub again?


They should shut down youtube imo. Wind it up. Was meant to be music videos and cats falling off tables and goals from the chilean second division but it's not worked out. Get rid.


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 6, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Another thing traditional conspiraloons and Liberal remain conspiracy theorists have in common. An overdependence on YouTube as a source of information. It's it those two know nothing clowns in the pub again?



Yes, because all enthusiasts of brexit rely on utterly impeccable, peer-reviewed, pure science sources, don't they?


----------



## isvicthere? (Oct 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No it was because you are making the same arguments as they are based on the same reasoning - the proposition that anti-democratic nature of the EU actually makes it democratic; the insistence that those that voted leave where fooled into voting for leave; etc



You're on thin ice, as an enthusiast of brexit, doing the guilt-by-association schtick...


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 6, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> You're on thin ice, as an enthusiast of brexit, doing the guilt-by-association schtick...


You aren't even bothering to read what people are posting are you. The only person doing guilt-by-association is you. 

You are not being criticised for supporting Remain you are being criticised for your politics - the pretence that the anti-democratic nature of the EU commissioners is actually democratic; that leave voters are anti-immigrant fools, duped by politicians.


----------



## B.I.G (Oct 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> You aren't even bothering to read what people are posting are you. The only person doing guilt-by-association is you.
> 
> You are not being criticised for supporting Remain you are being criticised for your politics - the pretence that the anti-democratic nature of the EU commissioners is actually democratic; that leave voters are anti-immigrant fools, duped by politicians.



Leave voters aren’t anti-immigrant fools, as they say themselves when asked, they aren’t anti-immigrant they just think there are too many of them.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 6, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> Leave voters aren’t anti-immigrant fools, as they say themselves when asked, they aren’t anti-immigrant they just think there are too many of them.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Yes, because all enthusiasts of brexit rely on utterly impeccable, peer-reviewed, pure science sources, don't they?


Yes, that's exactly what I said. 

Why don't you go for a lie down or something? This is embarrassing.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 6, 2019)

And just when you think we could not get a more moronic poster posting on this thread along comes the anti-humanistic prick that calls train drivers racist.


----------



## B.I.G (Oct 6, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And just when you think we could not get a more moronic poster posting on this thread along comes the anti-humanistic prick that calls train drivers racist.



Tube drivers.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 6, 2019)

B.I.G said:


> Leave voters aren’t anti-immigrant fools, as they say themselves when asked, they aren’t anti-immigrant they just think there are too many of them.


glad that's been cleared up


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Quite divisive, this topic, innit?


This is going to carry on for years, maybe decades, yet too - see last dozen or so posts, stamping on your face, forever


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

My mum is a remain nutter, in three and a half decades she never asked me to sign one petition, now every time I check my email there is something in there from her. She knows I voted leave really but we don't talk about it, she just sends me petitions to sign. Fortunately she won't vote libdem cos she has plaid to vote for instead so small mercies.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> My mum is a remain nutter, in three and a half decades she never asked me to sign one petition, now every time I check my email there is something in there from her. She knows I voted leave really but we don't talk about it, she just sends me petitions to sign. Fortunately she won't vote libdem cos she has plaid to vote for instead so small mercies.


The way Plaid have been talking recently, not sure they're so different from the libdems tbh. Total euroliberaleconomics freaks - an independent Wales within the EU will be the new Ireland!


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> They should shut down youtube imo. Wind it up. Was meant to be music videos and cats falling off tables and goals from the chilean second division but it's not worked out. Get rid.



To ‘shut down’ YouTube seems a very extreme position considering YT is the second largest search engine after Google who also own YT, so it’s very relevant.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> To ‘shut down’ YouTube seems a very extreme position considering YT is the second largest search engine after Google who also own YT, so it’s very relevant.


Yeah but it's full of dickheads


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> To ‘shut down’ YouTube seems a very extreme position considering YT is the second largest search engine after Google who also own YT, so it’s very relevant.


We should shut down Google too.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> They should shut down youtube imo. Wind it up. Was meant to be music videos and cats falling off tables and goals from the chilean second division but it's not worked out. Get rid.



Who is 'they'? And what else should they be able to shut down?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The way Plaid have been talking recently, not sure they're so different from the libdems tbh. Total euroliberaleconomics freaks - an independent Wales within the EU will be the new Ireland!


Oh yeah they are dogshit, especially since price took over. I wouldn't vote for them. But not as grim as libdems, also fuck all chance of them ever getting elected in my mum's constituency.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Who is 'they'? And what else should they be able to shut down?


Dunno, google or whoever owns it. Replace it with that vine one, that was ok


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh yeah they are dogshit, especially since price took over. I wouldn't vote for them. But not as grim as libdems, also fuck all chance of them ever getting elected in my mum's constituency.


It's why you should never trust a nationalist. Plaid used to be kind of green socialists. Now they've ditched that, and they'll ditch what they have now again if they think it serves the nationalist purpose.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

They should put me in charge of the Internet. There'd only be urban, the Sheffield Wednesday discussion forum and Netflix left and the world would be better for it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> This is going to carry on for years, maybe decades, yet too - see last dozen or so posts, stamping on your face, forever


_They say it'll all be over by christmas..._


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah but it's full of dickheads



So is virtually all aspects of the internet but I’m not advocating shutting down the internet.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 6, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> So is virtually all aspects of the internet but I’m not advocating shutting down the internet.


I am


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> So is virtually all aspects of the internet but I’m not advocating shutting down the internet.


List of YouTubers - Wikipedia


----------



## campanula (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> They should shut down youtube imo



O no, I would still be helplessly looking at my Tilley Lamp, too worried to fiddle with paraffin and pumps without helpful Youtubers - although they do all love the sound of their own voices - had to wade through 8 minutes of drivel before getting down to  the mysteries of the meths cup.


----------



## Dom Traynor (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> They should shut down youtube imo. Wind it up. Was meant to be music videos and cats falling off tables and goals from the chilean second division but it's not worked out. Get rid.


Wasn't it started as a dating site or place to post videos of hot women? Something creepy anyway.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

Dom Traynor said:


> Wasn't it started as a dating site or place to post videos of hot women? Something creepy anyway.


According to wikipedia it was started because some bloke couldn't find a video of janet jackson's tits online


----------



## Dom Traynor (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> According to wikipedia it was started because some bloke couldn't find a video of janet jackson's tits online



That's right I remember now creepy ass shit


----------



## Cid (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah but it's full of dickheads



There is 'breadtube', loosely associated leftist youtubers. But the best content tends to be more toward debunking alt-right types and their fellow travellers than good stuff on theory/praxis. Still, stuff like youtube can't be ignored, particularly if you want to talk to people under 35.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 6, 2019)

Cid said:


> There is 'breadtube', loosely associated leftist youtubers. But the best content tends to be more toward debunking alt-right types and their fellow travellers than good stuff on theory/praxis. Still, stuff like youtube can't be ignored, particularly if you want to talk to people under 35.


Breadtube has some good content.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> List of YouTubers - Wikipedia


----------



## jakejb79 (Oct 6, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

jakejb79 said:


> View attachment 186160


Photo on the right - presumably the gunboats are out of sight


----------



## gosub (Oct 6, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Photo on the right - presumably the gunboats are out of sight


You have read the new Head of Commissions recrd whilst Minister of Defense in Germany?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 6, 2019)

gosub said:


> You have read the new Head of Commissions recrd whilst Minister of Defense in Germany?


Von der leyen? No can't say I know that much beyond her being a sort of liberal tory type, must be a McKinsey report somewhere though


----------



## Raheem (Oct 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Photo on the right - presumably the gunboats are out of sight


By a hundred-odd years. What are you suggesting?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 7, 2019)

Raheem said:


> By a hundred-odd years. What are you suggesting?


I'm suggesting a meme showing the EU as 15 cats happily getting along sharing everything is a bit bollocks


----------



## Poi E (Oct 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I wasn't on about him specifically - i was on about the social tensions based on inequality and the like brought about by the conditions that brogdale outlined that undoubtedly played a massive part in bringing out the leave vote. A political approach that basically says _hah hah you're fucked you idiots_ to the people on the shitty end of that stick is not only not useful it's actively dangerous - yet we see it being played out day after day after day on here and elsewhere by those who consider themselves as on the left. The second the result was announced we got _hah hah cornwall you cretins._ And this from people who  - as the last three years of their responses  have shown - consider themselves to be in loco parentis over these idiot children.
> 
> And calm down, it's too early for that tone.



Not sure anyone on here is laughing at how fucked things have become. Absent violent revolution there is no reform. It's fatalism.

Mention of Empire is going to bring out a contemptuous reaction from me. Fuck 'em and their shit history lessons.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Not sure anyone on here is laughing at how fucked things have become. Absent violent revolution there is no reform. It's fatalism.
> 
> Mention of Empire is going to bring out a contemptuous reaction from me. Fuck 'em and their shit history lessons.


So when you get your scottish state you're going to be calling for violent revolution to overthrow it?

Well, without wanting to start a fight with you, i'd say your own posts have increasingly shown a one-sided empire obsession such that it appears that you view all things through that prism now. That's not politically healthy and is going to lead you up all sorts of garden paths. Speaking of which, that bloke above is just dexter with the terms reversed isn't he?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 7, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 7, 2019)

jakejb79 said:


> View attachment 186160



Germany eating from Greece's bowl not pictured.


----------



## andysays (Oct 7, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 186188


60 days refund if not totally satisfied


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> 60 days refund if not totally satisfied


So much to enjoy in there; even _Long time member _made me chortle!


----------



## Badgers (Oct 7, 2019)

andysays said:


> 60 days refund if not totally satisfied


Only if you don't live in the UK of course


----------



## Libertad (Oct 7, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 186188



Doesn't post to the United Kingdom.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2019)

_Delivery: varies
_
Innit?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 7, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Germany eating from Greece's bowl not pictured.


Greece is the little one fourth on left. The stuff in the bowl is just red letters from the IMF


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

In his retirement, Dame Nigel Farage will buy up the remains of UK Gold to make a living broadcasting Brexit coverage from the past. Inbetween he will show live commentary from the safari park he will fashion from the remains of the El Dorado set.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Greece is the little one fourth on left. The stuff in the bowl is just red letters from the IMF


Where's Ukraine? Oh. Enjoying it's EU sponsored _peace _probably.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

Hardly a surprise:
Brexit: UK moves to scrap ‘level playing field’ with EU


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



Fucking hell cashew (!) kill her, it's the only way!

An ice cube ffs?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 7, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Hardly a surprise:
> Brexit: UK moves to scrap ‘level playing field’ with EU



Hardly a story - more off the record briefings. Given Johnson needs labour votes to get a deal through the HoC this would be an unusual approach don't you think?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

face meet palm


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Hardly a story - more off the record briefings. Given Johnson needs labour votes to get a deal through the HoC this would be an unusual approach don't you think?


I dont think him and cummings want a deal. If they do they've done a good job persuading me otherwise


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Where's Ukraine? Oh. Enjoying it's EU sponsored _peace _probably.



It’s not in the meuw.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> Nobile Officium just about to be launched southwards.  A little democratic present from Scotland for boris.


Or crushed.

_Damns scots. They ruined scotland.
_
edit: or is that tuedsay?


----------



## Libertad (Oct 7, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s not in the meuw.



Is this your coat?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Or crushed.
> 
> _Damns scots. They ruined scotland.
> _
> edit: or is that tuedsay?


the people who have really won from brexit are the constitutional lawyers


----------



## kalidarkone (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



Take it for a walk Ffs!


----------



## treelover (Oct 7, 2019)

> * Britain is less polarised than the media would have us believe *
> 
> John Harris
> In Milton Keynes I found few signs of the Brexit culture war that supposedly defines our times
> ...



John Harris's latest, from Milton Keynes, although it voted for Brexit, he remarks on the absence of the 'anger and division' he has saw in many other post industrial towns and cities(MK is not one.) Is there something in this?, even now when people in say Barnsley say 'they want out', is is more to do with how they were shafted, I know plenty has been discussed on these lines on here.

Though I thought Harris' USP was about examining these divisions.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 7, 2019)

treelover said:


> people in say Barnsley say 'they want out',



They're saying a lot more than this if people could put Brexit aside.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 7, 2019)

I can't help thinking we're crashing out. May zeus have mercy


----------



## editor (Oct 7, 2019)

Science


----------



## editor (Oct 7, 2019)

But in happier news Fears lorry drivers will turn to dogging while stuck in no-deal Brexit traffic


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

Scottish court has ruled Boris won’t be forced to get Brexit extension.

Judge dismisses no-deal Brexit court move


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Scottish court has ruled Boris won’t be forced to get Brexit extension.
> 
> Judge dismisses no-deal Brexit court move


You say that like it changes something


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Scottish court has ruled Boris won’t be forced to get Brexit extension.







> In his ruling, Lord Pentland said t*he UK government had accepted it must "comply fully" with the act and would not seek to "frustrate its purpose".*
> 
> As a result, he said there was "no proper basis" on which the court could decide that the government would fail to deliver on that undertaking.





> *Lord Pentland said the prime minister and the government had given "unequivocal assurances" to comply with the 2019 Act.*
> 
> As a result, he was "not persuaded that it was necessary for the court to grant the orders sought or any variant of them".


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> You say that like it changes something



Tell that to Jo Maugham.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Tell that to Jo Maugham.


I've no dog in the fight, but it quite obviously was a case that the appellants could not lose; either they'd win or they'd get a confirmation from the judiciary that [TC] Johnson has no option, so an instruction was unnecessary.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Tell that to Jo Maugham.


bollocks. utter bollocks. there will be no brexit. should bj in some way fail to go for an extension i am sure this will be revisited in court and having promised the court they would obey the law a subsequent failure to would I imagine have profound consequences. but be that as it may we will be in the eu on 2/11/19 and indeed 2/11/20


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> bollocks. utter bollocks. there will be no brexit. should bj in some way fail to go for an extension i am sure this will be revisited in court and having promised the court they would obey the law a subsequent failure to would I imagine have profound consequences. but be that as it may we will be in the eu on 2/11/19 and indeed 2/11/20



That remains to be seen.  One thing that hasn’t changed is the government’s position to leave the EU on the 31st Oct 2019.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> That remains to be seen.  One thing that hasn’t changed is the government’s position to leave the EU on the 31st Oct 2019.


The government may desire to leave the EU on 31 Oct. But if we depart without a deal protecting the gfa there will be no us trade deal, and a no deal brexit means fuck all data transfers from Europe from 0001 on 1/11/19. The government will not depart at the end of the month, as commerce with Europe would be fucked. Fucking trade with the US and eu at one and the same time really rather stupid.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> That remains to be seen.  One thing that hasn’t changed is the government’s position to leave the EU on the 31st Oct 2019.



But, considering Johnson has said he will comply with the law, and not even the best legal minds can find a loophole in it, haven't you considered that's probably just a bluff?


----------



## maomao (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The government may desire to leave the EU on 31 Oct. But if we depart without a deal protecting the gfa there will be no us trade deal, and a no deal brexit means fuck all data transfers from Europe from 0001 on 1/11/19. The government will not depart at the end of the month, as commerce with Europe would be fucked. Fucking trade with the US and eu at one and the same time really rather stupid.


Can you expand on this? Does it not just mean UK websites won't be viewable in the eu until they are gdpr compliant which they all are anyway because gdpr applies in the UK. If it meant no financial transactions or anything were possible it would surely be more widelly discussed?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, considering Johnson has said he will comply with the law, and not even the best legal minds can find a loophole in it, haven't you considered that's probably just a bluff?



We can all speculate yet Jo Maugham QC seems rattled enough.

Todays decision is being appealed tomorrow and is likely to end up at the Supreme Court.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> We can all speculate yet Jo Maugham QC seems rattled enough.



 

He's not rattled, he's earning a mint out of this, and laughing all the way to the bank, thanks to Dale Vince funding this action.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He's not rattled, he's earning a mint out of this, and laughing all the way to the bank, thanks to Dale Vince funding this action.


I thought he was acting pro bono? His fees are not the only legal costs involved.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

He funded this - ha ha ha, excellent.

JimW  - why is this freak-energy coming from Stroud right now?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> I thought he was acting pro bono? His fees are not the only legal costs involved.



Every report I've read names Dale Vince as funding this action, none have mentioned Maugham has been acting pro bono.

You could be right, got any link?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

maomao said:


> Can you expand on this? Does it not just mean UK websites won't be viewable in the eu until they are gdpr compliant which they all are anyway because gdpr applies in the UK. If it meant no financial transactions or anything were possible it would surely be more widelly discussed?


A no-deal Brexit may trigger a data disaster, and UK companies don't have a clue | WIRED UK


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, considering Johnson has said he will comply with the law, and not even the best legal minds can find a loophole in it, haven't you considered that's probably just a bluff?



Bluffing with a terrible hand. I don't think the EU is sweating.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 7, 2019)

Lol, would love it if the forest green wanker went bust, didn't he just close his electricity business and lay off all the staff, hippy prick


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

But maomao it is imo academic as the chances of us leaving recede with every day that passes


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Every report I've read names Dale Vince as funding this action, none have mentioned Maugham has been acting pro bono.
> 
> You could be right, got any link?


Nothing more than this, from which I assumed the Good Law Project was paying Maugham's expenses only, as before. 
"The rule of law is not a thing to be grifted – not even by the Prime Minister." - The Good Law Project


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> A no-deal Brexit may trigger a data disaster, and UK companies don't have a clue | WIRED UK


Why are you so confident that TPTB actually understand any of this? Or if they do, that they care? These are the people saying 'Get Brexit done' as if it were a once-and-for-all thing, not a process that is going to last years. I mean, you may well be right, and the Get Brexit Done thing is probably no more than an electioneering slogan, but Johnson is one of the most intellectually lazy people ever to inhabit No 10.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 7, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Why are you so confident that TPTB actually understand any of this? Or if they do, that they care? These are the people saying 'Get Brexit done' as if it were a once-and-for-all thing, not a process that is going to last years. I mean, you may well be right, and the Get Brexit Done thing is probably no more than an electioneering slogan, but Johnson is one of the most intellectually lazy people ever to inhabit No 10.


I'm not confident they understand it but I am confident that they recognise fucking the economy would shit all over their ability to gain and wield political power in the future


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Nothing more than this, from which I assumed the Good Law Project was paying Maugham's expenses only, as before.
> "The rule of law is not a thing to be grifted – not even by the Prime Minister." - The Good Law Project



But, that link says ... "The costs of the proceedings will be born by Dale Vince, OBE. Mr Vince will also fund two Fellowships at Good Law Project who will work in the sphere of strategic litigation with a particular focus on environmental litigation."

Nothing to suggest Maugham is working for free.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'm not confident they understand it but I am confident that they recognise fucking the economy would shit all over their ability to gain and wield political power in the future


Even if they can lay the blame elsewhere? That's what they seem to be planning to do, and if enough people believe them then we will have both a fucked economy AND the fucking Tories in power for the foreseeable.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> But, that link says ... "The costs of the proceedings will be born by Dale Vince, OBE. Mr Vince will also fund two Fellowships at Good Law Project who will work in the sphere of strategic litigation with a particular focus on environmental litigation."
> 
> Nothing to suggest Maugham is working for free.


Ah, OK. But not raking it in.
Governance - The Good Law Project


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> But maomao it is imo academic as the chances of us leaving recede with every day that passes



You must have some serious money on no Brexit on 31st?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 7, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Ah, OK. But not raking it in.
> Governance - The Good Law Project



You don't think up t0 £76k as a basic salary, plus extras from elsewhere on top, isn't raking it in? 



> As Director, Jo Maugham may be paid a salary by the GLP. That salary will never be more than that received by a backbench Member of Parliament


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

That "educate" is scary.


----------



## Supine (Oct 7, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> You don't think up t0 £76k as a basic salary, plus extras from elsewhere on top, isn't raking it in?



Not compared to other top lawyers


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Supine said:


> Not compared to other top lawyers


Don't compare it then. Instead, add on all the other work.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> You must have some serious money on no Brexit on 31st?



Best odds you'll get against a no deal Brexit are 1/5. Not really worth it.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 7, 2019)

Supine said:


> Not compared to other top lawyers


Not even in the same ballpark, not the same sport.   That's helper money.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 7, 2019)

Interesting political commentary speculating  various Brexit scenarios, one discussed is the possibility of Article 50 being revoked leading to a national crisis.



Spoiler: The Duran


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 7, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Interesting political commentary speculating  various Brexit scenarios, one discussed is the possibility of Article 50 being revoked leading to a national crisis.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: The Duran



You mean like they've been running it down for the last three years?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Yes, the people who are publicly against but secretly for it it did just that. All agreed beforehand too. Even campaigning against it as part of the plan. 

*winks*

See?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> That "educate" is scary.


Isn't it just. 

_The courts will...teach you a lesson._


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 7, 2019)

I'm being thick here but where is the educate from?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 7, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 186188



are they remoulds of the 31 march ones?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Good Law Project above:


*To find and fight cases to defend, define or change the law*
*To use litigation to engage and educate*
*This is essentially like what koch brothers and other well funded foundations do in the US. Get stuff in law, avoid any - even weak - form of democratic scrutiny.*


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

Unless we, suddenly, as left-wingers, are now required  - as well as defending the constitution - to now also have to defend the judiciary. I may have missed a meeting or something.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 7, 2019)

Racists are fine though...as long as they're working class.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 7, 2019)

See Poi E ?

A civic-nationalist curdling himself into ethno-nationalism making up some rancid anti-racist guff.

Best avoided.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 7, 2019)

No true scotsman could be a racist


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 7, 2019)

Anyone really looking?

At some point, you know...


----------



## JimW (Oct 7, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> He funded this - ha ha ha, excellent.
> 
> JimW  - why is this freak-energy coming from Stroud right now?


Been away too long to say for sure, but it was always there in one shape or other. Lib demmery on steroids and that sort of bubble where people convince themselves they're good and right would help too.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

Idle prediction. 

An EU member state (probably France) will, at some point in the next two weeks, give Johnson an ultimatum: May's deal, second referendum or no extension.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Idle prediction.
> 
> An EU member state (probably France) will, at some point in the next two weeks, give Johnson an ultimatum: May's deal, second referendum or no extension.


Why would they?


----------



## Ming (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Idle prediction.
> 
> An EU member state (probably France) will, at some point in the next two weeks, give Johnson an ultimatum: May's deal, second referendum or no extension.


I think Macron said end of this week.


----------



## gosub (Oct 8, 2019)

Ming said:


> I think Macron said end of this week.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Why would they?


Because as long as the UK is allowed to just dick around, that's what it will do. The EU needs to cut across domestic UK politics.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 8, 2019)

The strength of the state is not one of 'we are most important and are being held back', the state is far stronger being in 'the club'. We aren't a 'hard' country in the 'community of nations' (like say America or China), there is no underlying strength politically (in terms of institutions), wealth or a balance in society to take one on the chin and unite. The country will sink if it leaves the EU.

But will it leave the EU? We/they don't have the power or the capability to leave. Politics should have a sound doctrine. There isn't anything like that. We are relying on goodwill; from Trump? The commonwealth?

I think spirits are low and the country is dysfunctional, Thatcherism is the cause. Like America, Britain is walking wounded. Societal ills are inevitable unless we change things for all our sakes. Thatcherism was, is and always will be poison. FFS, Winston Churchill didn't 'win the war', build the railways, the motorways, build and pilot the planes and boats that defeated the Nazis. It was us and our friends and families. Because we stood together.

Boris reckons he is the Churchill of our time. First off he is a deluded idiot. Secondly, he should be shot down, and the whole shambles called to an end.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Because as long as the UK is allowed to just dick around, that's what it will do. The EU needs to cut across domestic UK politics.


Fair enough. I've never bought the idea that it costs the 27 as much as the UK because, hey, it's spread across 27 - but France has a lot to lose from hard borders. Still, Macron has a lot to gain from playing the hard man.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

.


----------



## gosub (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Because as long as the UK is allowed to just dick around, that's what it will do. The EU needs to cut across domestic UK politics.



Quite the opposite.  What comes next detrmines everything if its a referendum then we stay in, if its am election then we leave



Best way forward (I think) is Boris lose VoNC over Queen's speech, then a two week squabble proving no one figure can herd cats (especially if involving getting  May's deal through (and if they are not are they really telling EU that they want a different go at a deal?), so we get through 31st with no PM and in election mode thus qualifying for an extension) all be it a short one.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

Well, I'm just going to have to order more popcorn. 
That, and tackle the non-renewable stash of cheap wine.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> Quite the opposite.  What comes next detrmines everything if its a referendum then we stay in, if its am election then we leave.


I'd say if it's an election then fuck knows. The common mistake is imagining that an election gives a mandate to the EU to agree to whatever our government asks for, which it obviously doesn't.

Either way, though, the EU would be bonkers to grant an extension so that there can be an election.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I'd say if it's an election then fuck knows. The common mistake is imagining that an election gives a mandate to the EU to agree to whatever our government asks for, which it obviously doesn't.
> 
> Either way, though, the EU would be bonkers to grant an extension so that there can be an election.


Because? 
(I know there's a 'because' but I need it spelt out, please.)


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Because?
> (I know there's a 'because' but I need it spelt out, please.)


Because it's unlikely there would be a change of government, so it would just give them more of the same.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Because it's unlikely there would be a change of government, so it would just give them more of the same.


Ah, OK. I was hoping for a more convoluted answer but this works just as well. 
Sigh.


----------



## gosub (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I'd say if it's an election then fuck knows. The common mistake is imagining that an election gives a mandate to the EU to agree to whatever our government asks for, which it obviously doesn't.
> 
> Either way, though, the EU would be bonkers to grant an extension so that there can be an election.



No an election gives a mandate to whoever in the UK wins it to negotiate on behalf of the UK.  It would be churlish not to extend whilst further input is taken from a public. 42.4% in favor of no deal is better than a bad deal last time of asking -2 years ago - who knows might actually get some proper internal dialogue on what sort of relationship we'd actually want  with our neighbours


----------



## gosub (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Because it's unlikely there would be a change of government, so it would just give them more of the same.



By that I assume you are saying ..the tory's would win an election, cos I don't think if Boris lost a vote of No Confidence, but no one had actually formed one we'd have a government.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> Quite the opposite.  What comes next detrmines everything if its a referendum then we stay in, if its am election then we leave
> 
> 
> 
> Best way forward (I think) is Boris lose VoNC over Queen's speech, then a two week squabble proving no one figure can herd cats (especially if involving getting  May's deal through (and if they are not are they really telling EU that they want a different go at a deal?), so we get through 31st with no PM and in election mode thus qualifying for an extension) all be it a short one.


Is that real? Christ. Surely all that will do is make sure there is a united front on all backing further delay


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Is that real? Christ. Surely all that will do is make sure there is a united front on all backing further delay


All a bit 'directing the Army Detachment Steiner' from the bunker. 
If they're trying to give the impression that they've gone a bit madmen, it's working.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

I suppose that the Johnson regime fear/envisage that if an extension is granted it will be a long one...no more faffing around with 3 monthers. That would spell substantial electoral damage to Johnson.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Is that real? Christ. Surely all that will do is make sure there is a united front on all backing further delay



Plus, post hard Brexit they’ll be back negotiating with the EU and therefore unable to punish the french and reward the Bulgarians or whatever.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> All a bit 'directing the Army Detachment Steiner' from the bunker.
> If they're trying to give the impression that they've gone a bit madmen, it's working.


Of course backing all of EU into corner of backing further delay could be the intention, ensures there won't be no deal and keeps impression govt has done everything it can.

I do wonder with this pivot to a sort of hardline populism though, with this stuff and calling XR nose ringed crusties etc - ok it shores up a certain base but alienates soft support, makes enemies of the ambivalent. The positives of us and them is it makes a resilient us but the negatives are it makes a hostile and fairly unified them. It's a dynamic we saw with 'corbynism' which was borne of necessity (because they would never have made it any other way) and any left political force with weight would be the same, great bring it on, but that is underpinned by some sort of wider political project and aims. It doesn't seem wise to me for a tory govt from the heart of the establishment.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> All a bit 'directing the Army Detachment Steiner' from the bunker.
> If they're trying to give the impression that they've gone a bit madmen, it's working.



Wasn't Trump quite vocal on the suggestions he made to Theresa May regarding negotiating tactics?  Always be the maddest person in the room.  Seems like Johnson has taken that advice and Cummings was already well down that road.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 8, 2019)

They just seem to be continuing with the same strategy.


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I suppose that the Johnson regime fear/envisage that if an extension is granted it will be a long one...no more faffing around with 3 monthers. That would spell substantial electoral damage to Johnson.


I'm not sure it would y'know. All this shouting is probably just to show everyone that really, he_ is _trying. It could even work.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> I'm not sure it would y'know. All this shouting is probably just to show everyone that really, he_ is _trying. It could even work.


Who knows, but this would play into Farage's hands.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 8, 2019)

gosub said:


> Quite the opposite.  What comes next detrmines everything if its a referendum then we stay in, if its am election then we leave



This is pathetic even for him, amongst his innumerable other failings he's clearly shit at poker, This comes across as a desperate man who realises he has no cards to play and is resorting to hollow threats and throwing tantrums. Does anyone imagine that the EU will be impressed by this?


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Who knows, but this would play into Farage's hands.


Or, It wouldn't. That's precisely what we don't know. If Johnson can make the argument that he's been foiled by parliament and the courts and needs a majority in parliament to get this through and enough people believe him, Farage could end up as relevant as UKIP were in 2017. And tbf, if Johnson makes that argument, who can really disagree?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 8, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> This is pathetic even for him, amongst his innumerable other failings he's clearly shit at poker, This comes across as a desperate man who realises he has no cards to play and is resorting to hollow threats and throwing tantrums. Does anyone imagine that the EU will be impressed by this?



No.  Then again it sounds more like hard man posturing for a domestic audience.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> Or, It wouldn't. That's precisely what we don't know. If Johnson can make the argument that he's been foiled by parliament and the courts and needs a majority in parliament to get this through and enough people believe him, Farage could end up as relevant as UKIP were in 2017. And tbf, if Johnson makes that argument, who can really disagree?


Yep; could be.
I'm just thinking that Johnson might then be boxed into a (relatively) nuanced position of having to explain his failure to deliver his promise based upon the detail of (relatively) complicated constitutional stuff. Farage, OTOH, merely has to scream betrayal.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 8, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> No.  Then again it sounds more like hard man posturing for a domestic audience.



More like Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Because it's unlikely there would be a change of government, so it would just give them more of the same.



Which they would be fine with.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> If Johnson can make the argument that he's been foiled by parliament and the courts and needs a majority in parliament to get this through and enough people believe him, Farage could end up as relevant as UKIP were in 2017. And tbf, if Johnson makes that argument, who can really disagree?



This is _precisely_ where we are going. I note Blair and friends have gone quiet about 'elephant traps' despite them marching Corbyn and Labour into this one. A pose as radical insurgents is hard to pull off when you've spent the last 12 months using the courts, engaged in parliamentary game playing and establishment ruses. Even worse among the constituency who might welcome the approach in Scotland they won't be voting Labour and in England and Wales there is the LD's eating into the support and all the time demonising Corbyn.

That said I still don't rule out Johnson doing a deal with Farage and then immediately presenting it as not a deal.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> Or, It wouldn't. That's precisely what we don't know. If Johnson can make the argument that he's been foiled by parliament and the courts and needs a majority in parliament to get this through and enough people believe him, Farage could end up as relevant as UKIP were in 2017. And tbf, if Johnson makes that argument, who can really disagree?



Foiled by Parliament to do what though? He voted against May’s deal twice. No deal is clearly not the desire of either Parliament or any opinion poll of the people. There is a way out of the EU it just represents a massive climb down for him and his fellow travellers. 

Sure it can be presented differently, but it’s not difficult to argue against.


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

I'm not making any predictions about how successful a strategy it will be, and sure - lots of people will think it's a good thing he's been foiled by parliament and the courts. But it's a simple message to run with, and one which could be fairly bulletproof against more nuanced criticism due to being essentially true.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This is _precisely_ where we are going. I note Blair and friends have gone quiet about 'elephant traps' despite them marching Corbyn and Labour into this one. A pose as radical insurgents is hard to pull off when you've spent the last 12 months using the courts, engaged in parliamentary game playing and establishment ruses. Even worse among the constituency who might welcome the approach in Scotland they won't be voting Labour and in England and Wales there is the LD's eating into the support and all the time demonising Corbyn.
> 
> That said I still don't rule out Johnson doing a deal with Farage and then immediately presenting it as not a deal.


What sort of deal could he do with Farage? I can't see any kind of pre-election pact as workable. Surely the tories, just like labour, have to present candidates in every constituency. What other kind of deal could there be?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What sort of deal could he do with Farage? I can't see any kind of pre-election pact as workable. Surely the tories, just like labour, have to present candidates in every constituency. What other kind of deal could there be?


don't talk such rubbish. do you honestly think that either labour or the tories will stand in every constituency? two words: northern ireland.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> What sort of deal could he do with Farage? I can't see any kind of pre-election pact as workable. Surely the tories, just like labour, have to present candidates in every constituency. What other kind of deal could there be?


Yeah both lab and tories have to stand in every constituency (bar NI as pickman's model points out) but there are constituencies that tories have no hope in where BP could in right conditions; there are constituencies where a BP campaign aimed firmly at labour's vote could open door to tories; and there are constituencies the tories could hold if BP didn't focus on them or attacking tories but could lose if they did. Loads of benefits for tories, whether BP would be happy being just a tory ginger group with no ambitions beyond that is a different matter though.


----------



## Winot (Oct 8, 2019)

Poi E said:


> More like Gloria Swanson in Sunset Boulevard.



“I’m ready for my close-up now Mr Trump”


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

The only kind of deal that could really happen is the BP 'standing aside' in no-deal MPs seats, as UKIP did last time. There's zero benefit to the tories in going easy on the seats the BP could win, as they're also seats the tories came close to winning in 2017 - why wouldn't they go for them this time?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> The only kind of deal that could really happen is the BP 'standing aside' in no-deal MPs seats, as UKIP did last time. There's zero benefit to the tories in going easy on the seats the BP could win, as they're also seats the tories came close to winning in 2017 - why wouldn't they go for them this time?


Well there are some seats Tories can't win eg the two Barnsley seats but with heavy leave vote

Edit - meant two not three there


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 8, 2019)

If this is true, clearly there's no chance of a deal.



> Following a morning phone call between the German chancellor and Prime Minister, a Downing Street source said: "The call with Merkel showed the EU has adopted a new position.
> 
> "She made clear a deal is overwhelmingly unlikely... the UK cannot leave without leaving Northern Ireland behind in a customs union and in full alignment forever."
> 
> Angela Merkel tells PM that Brexit deal is 'overwhelmingly unlikely'


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well there are some seats Tories can't win eg the two Barnsley seats but with heavy leave vote
> 
> Edit - meant two not three there


they aren't winnable by the BP either though.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Well there are some seats Tories can't win eg the three Barnsley seats but with heavy leave vote


But given that they have to stand a candidate anyway, I'm not sure they can really do much. They can't say 'don't vote for our candidate'. Both Labour and the Tories virtually ignore unwinnable seats in any case - they simply don't have much influence in such places.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If this is true, clearly there's no chance of a deal.



"a downing street source" is Cummings stirring the pot, I'd have thought.
Wait and see what the German side of the story is


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

Crispy said:


> "a downing street source" is Cummings stirring the pot, I'd have thought.
> Wait and see what the German side of the story is


We already know what the German position is, though. Merkel has made it very clear in the past that she sees parallels between the NI border and the Berlin Wall. She would find it hard to go back on the things she has said about the importance of the GFA, and I don't see why she would want to, tbh. I would be inclined to take her pretty much at her word on this particular issue.

It is a rather bizarre situation where the EU is the one pointing out the problems of the UK's proposed 'deal' wrt the GFA. The UK govt is simply ignoring them. Reality is that this was never intended to be a workable deal in the first place.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> they aren't winnable by the BP either though.


Well it's untested but they got three times the labour vote in EU elections (I know EU elections are a different kettle but you know)


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

Where are the votes coming from to sweep the Brexit Party to victory in Barnsley Central? You'd say it was a fantasy if someone was claiming the Lib Dems could take down a similar lead in a remain supporting constituency. And you'd be right.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> Where are the votes coming from to sweep the Brexit Party to victory in Barnsley Central? You'd say it was a fantasy if someone was claiming the Lib Dems could take down a similar lead in a remain supporting constituency. And you'd be right.


Yeah you're probably right


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 8, 2019)

This is a bit of a mess isn’t it ?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 8, 2019)

Oh dear...



> Mr Tusk tweeted: " Boris Johnson , what’s at stake is not winning some stupid blame game.
> 
> "At stake is the future of Europe and the UK as well as the security and interests of our people.
> 
> ...



Donald Tusk savages Johnson's 'stupid blame game' as Brexit talks near collapse


----------



## kabbes (Oct 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If this is true, clearly there's no chance of a deal.


What’s in it for either Ireland or the EU to have no deal and thus a hard border, though?  I don’t understand this attitude of “a border would be a disaster so if we can’t have exactly the kind of no border we want, we best have a border”.


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

It's a giant game of chicken is all.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s in it for either Ireland or the EU to have no deal and thus a hard border, though?  I don’t understand this attitude of “a border would be a disaster so if we can’t have exactly the kind of no border we want, we best have a border”.



According to 'reports', the stalemate is caused by the Irish Taoiseach, who seemed happy to negotiate before the Benn Act was passed, but now is refusing to do so, on the basis it will result in an extension & general election. His hope being Labour/remain coalition could win & it result in us staying in the EU, or if the Tories win, then he will negotiate on the offer that has been put forward.

Basically, why negotiate now when there's a slim possibly of us not leaving, a giant game of chicken, as killer b says.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What’s in it for either Ireland or the EU to have no deal and thus a hard border, though?  I don’t understand this attitude of “a border would be a disaster so if we can’t have exactly the kind of no border we want, we best have a border”.


Nothing. But no deal isn't going to happen, at least not this month. 

And it is just tone-deaf not to realise the wider significance of any kind of border in NI. May seemed to realise that. Johnson is such a twat he offered the DUP an effective veto on the process. But he must have known that was never going to fly. And everyone else must have known that he knew that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> According to 'reports', the stalemate is caused by the Irish Taoiseach, who seemed happy to negotiate before the Benn Act was passed, but now is refusing to do so, on the basis it will result in an extension & general election. His hope being Labour/remain coalition could win & it result in us staying in the EU, or if the Tories win, then he will negotiate on the offer that has been put forward.
> 
> Basically, why negotiate now when there's a slim possibly of us not leaving, a giant game of chicken, as killer b says.


Negotiate what, though? This isn't a negotiation. So far, what we have is the UK unilaterally suggesting new terms with minimal shift in the UK's 'red lines'. And then accusing the EU of intransigence!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Negotiate what, though? This isn't a negotiation. So far, what we have is the UK unilaterally suggesting new terms with minimal shift in the UK's 'red lines'. And then accusing the EU of intransigence!



The DUP has been pushed into a major u-turn in accepting staying in the single market for agriculture, food, AND goods, and accepting checks in the Irish sea. But, clearly leaving them with the chance to veto it every 4 years is nuts, that's a point for negotiation.

And, there's room for negotiation over how customs checks can be done away from the border.

That's the two sticking points, as far as Ireland is concerned.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The DUP has been pushed into a major u-turn in accepting staying in the single market for agriculture, food, AND goods, and accepting checks in the Irish sea. But, clearly leaving them with the chance to veto it every 4 years is nuts, that's a point for negotiation.
> 
> And, there's room for negotiation over *how customs checks can be done away from the border*.
> 
> That's the two sticking points, as far as Ireland is concerned.


*magic*

Just to be crystal clear on that, there is no negotiation to be done on how customs checks can be done _because the UK government does not know how customs checks can be done_.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 8, 2019)

killer b said:


> It's a giant game of chicken is all.


It is, certainly, but also one that has to resolve in the next 2 weeks or so, or at least part resolve if it's to be an extension. At one level this is simple international politics, but fairly unique in the UK in the length it has gone, the lack of progress and the lack of a workable solution that could secure some kind of political backing. I think both sides still want a deal, in the sense that even Johnson has some sense of the problems that will follow no deal - risks to himself, certainly. But the situation has moved him to a point where he now may well prefer the outcome that his 'sensible head'  doesn't want. In a narrow sense politics has taken over from political economy and game playing has taken over from politics, at least in the minds of Johnson's cabal. If we do go no deal or minimal deal, he will probably find that political economic reality is still there/to be faced, even after the hollow victory of an election in December.

Fwiw, that rambling isn't an argument that leaving is _irrational_ - I don't think that. It's the process where by the fucked up _version_ of events has become close to being the only game in town.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 8, 2019)

The Guardian - of all places - offers a pithy and highly perceptive analysis of the politics, motivations and sheer dismalness of the parliamentary wing of Remain. Written by someone from the usually Blairite IPPR as well. 

It's worth remembering that _this political mess _of ambition/feelings of divine rights to rule/return to narrating class rule is what some on the left and on here have been cheering on over the last month. It's also worth reflecting on the points made about those on the Labour frontbench and how they would be treated under these centrist fantasies.  

The fantasy of a ‘national unity government’ is a gift to Brexiters | Tom Kibasi


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

Cunt ended up singing _One World Cup & two World Wars _down the line to her_, _apparently...


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 8, 2019)

Who knows whether that is true but its believable.  Johnson seems to have two sides, the clowning around joker and the obnoxious over bearing bully.  I can't imagine that either side would endear him to Merkel.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 8, 2019)

Merkel - whatever you think of her - is made of far stronger stuff than this spoilt man child


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 8, 2019)

Time to invest in this I think

Cold War bunker up for sale for £25,000


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Merkel - whatever you think of her - is made of far stronger stuff than this spoilt man child


Probably not a popular opinion here, but Merkel impressed me with the stance she took over admitting refugees. She didn't have to do it. She knew she would take a big political hit in doing it. But she did it anyway. I can only think that she was acting out of principle. Politicians do do that sometimes. And she appears to be acting out of principle here too.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Probably not a popular opinion here, but Merkel impressed me with the stance she took over admitting refugees. She didn't have to do it. She knew she would take a big political hit in doing it. But she did it anyway. I can only think that she was acting out of principle. Politicians do do that sometimes. And she appears to be acting out of principle here too.


The principle being that if you want to leave our club we’ll shaft you every which way?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Probably not a popular opinion here, but Merkel impressed me with the stance she took over admitting refugees. She didn't have to do it. She knew she would take a big political hit in doing it. But she did it anyway. I can only think that she was acting out of principle. Politicians do do that sometimes. And she appears to be acting out of principle here too.



She did it because Germany was the only economy in Europe capable of utilising the increased cheap labour at that time and she U-turned as soon as it became politically expedient to do so. 

Lets please not forget that Merkel is every bit as bad as the Tories.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 8, 2019)

In all the business negotiations I’ve been involved in, nobody has ever sought to play chicken.  You identify what your assumptions and needs are in a transparent way, you identify what that means in terms of what the settlement needs to look like and then you find where the differences are with the other side and focus in to find where the middle ground is on those.  You don’t just pretend it’s all or nothing and wait for the other guy to blink first.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> She did it because Germany was the only economy in Europe capable of utilising the increased cheap labour at that time and she U-turned as soon as it became politically expedient to do so.
> 
> Lets please not forget that Merkel is every bit as bad as the Tories.


has she really had a hand in the deaths of 130,000 or thereabouts german residents?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> has she really had a hand in the deaths of 130,000 or thereabouts german residents?



If she believed that the kind of austerity policies pursued by the Tories would benefit German capitalism would she hesistate for a second?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

ignatious said:


> The principle being that if you want to leave our club we’ll shaft you every which way?


No. The principle being that Ireland does not get shafted just to please the UK.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If she believed that the kind of austerity policies pursued by the Tories would benefit German capitalism would she hesistate for a second?


that's a 'no' then.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> She did it because Germany was the only economy in Europe capable of utilising the increased cheap labour at that time and she U-turned as soon as it became politically expedient to do so..


Nah. It was never politically expedient for her to open Germany up to refugees in the way she did.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that's a 'no' then.



Are you honestly trying to claim some sort of lesser evil status for Merkel?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. It was never politically expedient for her to open Germany up to refugees in the way she did.



She thought it was.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you honestly trying to claim some sort of lesser evil status for Merkel?


No I'm not. I'm saying that even politicians like Merkel can act out of principle sometimes. And that you risk misjudging her and mis-predicting her actions by forgetting that.

First May and now Johnson badly misjudged how strongly the EU would back Ireland, for instance. Why did they misjudge it? Did they underestimate the strength of belief in a wider European project as a good in and of itself?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> In all the business negotiations I’ve been involved in, nobody has ever sought to play chicken.  You identify what your assumptions and needs are in a transparent way, you identify what that means in terms of what the settlement needs to look like and then you find where the differences are with the other side and focus in to find where the middle ground is on those.  You don’t just pretend it’s all or nothing and wait for the other guy to blink first.


  Wot, like adults ?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are you honestly trying to claim some sort of lesser evil status for Merkel?


why not? she can be steve ovett to boris johnson's seb coe


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No I'm not. I'm saying that even politicians like Merkel can act out of principle sometimes. And that you risk misjudging her and mis-predicting her actions by forgetting that.
> 
> First May and now Johnson badly misjudged how strongly the EU would back Ireland, for instance. Why did they misjudge it? Did they underestimate the strength of belief in a wider European project as a good in and of itself?



It wasn't a response to you. But to be clear - the only principle that Merkel operates on is what is in the best interests of German capitalism. You are completely failing to understand what she is and what her actions represent. 

May and Johnson know exactly what the EU is, which is why they would favour a customs border in the Irish sea. It's got nothing to do with the EU backing Ireland and everything to do with the EU protecting the single market and the customs union.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> why not? she can be steve ovett to boris johnson's seb coe



Well then from where I'm standing then that's an uncharacteristically poor position for you to take.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> She thought it was.


She could have viewed it as being economically beneficial while recognising that it might not be entirely politically expedient, and perhaps judging that the benefits outweighed the risks.

But that has very little relevance to her current stance on Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

andysays said:


> She could have viewed it as being economically beneficial while recognising that it might not be entirely politically expedient, and perhaps judging that the benefits outweighed the risks.
> 
> But that has very little relevance to her current stance on Brexit.



That's a fair analysis and as you say, not relevant to her current stance on Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Well then from where I'm standing then that's an uncharacteristically poor position for you to take.


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> First May and now Johnson badly misjudged how strongly the EU would back Ireland, for instance. Why did they misjudge it? Did they underestimate the strength of belief in a wider European project as a good in and of itself?


What makes you think this? Complaints about European intransigence over Ireland are entirely for the domestic market - neither of them can have been in any doubt whether the EU would 'back' Ireland.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> the only principle that Merkel operates on is what is in the best interests of German capitalism. You are completely failing to understand what she is and what her actions represent.
> .


I think that's dangerously simplistic. There are many different ways both to interpret and to represent the best interests of German capitalism, or any other version of capitalism. And the conclusions you reach will depend on a fair number of things, including things that might be interpreted as 'principles'. The idea that those who promote a vision of pan-Europeanism are solely motivated by the best interests of capital is, well, questionable, and questionably reductionist. And it will result in misjudgements as to how people will react to certain situations.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I think that's dangerously simplistic. There are many different ways both to interpret and to represent the best interests of German capitalism, or any other version of capitalism. And the conclusions you reach will depend on a fair number of things, including things that might be interpreted as 'principles'. The idea that those who promote a vision of pan-Europeanism are solely motivated by the best interests of capital is, well, questionable, and questionably reductionist. And it will result in misjudgements as to how people will react to certain situations.



Wat I can't even we're talking about FUCKING MERKEL.

I am in a bit of pain today (waiting to get my wisdom teeth sorted out) and I have nothing more to say to this right now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Wat I can't even we're talking about FUCKING MERKEL.


euw  i'll have some mind bleach i think


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

With these odds, pretty impressive to have hit the jackpot!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> bollocks. utter bollocks. there will be no brexit. should bj in some way fail to go for an extension i am sure this will be revisited in court and having promised the court they would obey the law a subsequent failure to would I imagine have profound consequences. but be that as it may we will be in the eu on 2/11/19 and indeed 2/11/20



I sometimes have a nagging feeling that Johnson wishes to destroy the judiciary, and re-institute some form of Court of Star Chamber.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Probably not a popular opinion here, but Merkel impressed me with the stance she took over admitting refugees. She didn't have to do it. She knew she would take a big political hit in doing it. But she did it anyway. I can only think that she was acting out of principle. Politicians do do that sometimes. And she appears to be acting out of principle here too.


Yeah as spacklefrog has said, this was a hard nosed political calculation based on German economic needs and labour market demands which she ditched as soon as conditions changed. Let's not read any nobility or principle into it


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 8, 2019)

For instance, did she change the status of turkish migrant workers in germany? Did she fuck. Because there was no economic/labour market need to. She's exactly the same as all of them


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> With these odds, pretty impressive to have hit the jackpot!
> 
> View attachment 186348


 

A beautiful but somehow disturbing sight. johnson, The politician, assured me we were in no danger

He was convinced that there could be no brexit failure on that remote forbidding continent 

The chances of no deal are a million to one he said, but still, it came


----------



## kabbes (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No. The principle being that Ireland does not get shafted just to please the UK.


A principle that is SO important to her that she’s happy to have a hard border occur by default as a result of preferring no deal over anything that compromises the integrity of the EU free market


----------



## ViolentPanda (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. It was never politically expedient for her to open Germany up to refugees in the way she did.



Socially and economically needful, though. People tend to ignore the depopulation of the former East Germany of its professionals. What Merkel did was calculate that accepting a cohort of skilled and semi-skilled refugees - drs, nurses, teachers, lawyers, scientists etc - into Germany, would fill a gaping hole in Ossi society in 5-10 yrs. Time will show whether she hit a six or shat the bed.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> A principle that is SO important to her that she’s happy to have a hard border occur by default as a result of preferring no deal over anything that compromises the integrity of the EU free market


Does she or anyone else really believe Johnson will seek a no-deal, though? Why would she, given that the Benn act forbids it?


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 8, 2019)

Of course revoking A50 remains an option in the event that at the end of Oct an extension is not forthcoming.  And it doesn’t have to be Johnson who does this, a Corbyn / AN other caretaker picking up the pieces after a VONC could find it’s the only option at that point.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 8, 2019)

Unilaterally revoking A50 would be total madness.  The lib dems can only shout about it because they know they are not going to be in a position to do it.


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Does she or anyone else really believe Johnson will seek a no-deal, though? Why would she, given that the Benn act forbids it?


Perhaps because she isn't as naive as you - the Benn act doesn't prevent no deal or "forbid him from seeking it", it instructs him, under certain circumstances, to write a letter asking for an extention


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 8, 2019)

We didn’t win two world wars to be pushed around by a kraut! scream Leave.eu scummers noticeably not on roll call at the end of WW2.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 8, 2019)

Sources close to No.10 say...

Starmer responds to Gove.


----------



## treelover (Oct 8, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> We didn’t win two world wars to be pushed around by a kraut! scream Leave.eu scummers noticeably not on roll call at the end of WW2.





Really is the Hard Right in action.


----------



## editor (Oct 8, 2019)

Out and out xenophobic filth.


----------



## maomao (Oct 8, 2019)

One of my colleagues came back from lunch today having finally worked out what the backstop is. His solution? Invade Ireland.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

maomao said:


> One of my colleagues came back from lunch today having finally worked out what the backstop is. His solution? Invade Ireland.


You don't work with David Davis, do you?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 8, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The fantasy of a ‘national unity government’ is a gift to Brexiters | Tom Kibasi


Kibasi has written a couple of decent pieces.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> In all the business negotiations I’ve been involved in, nobody has ever sought to play chicken.  You identify what your assumptions and needs are in a transparent way, you identify what that means in terms of what the settlement needs to look like and then you find where the differences are with the other side and focus in to find where the middle ground is on those.  You don’t just pretend it’s all or nothing and wait for the other guy to blink first.


While they are still a long way off the bullshit of the EU-UK negations the employer-union negotiations I've been involved in did not resemble the above - I'm not saying that what you say is not accurate but I guess negotiations between businesses are quite different from my experience.


Proper Tidy said:


> For instance, did she change the status of turkish migrant workers in germany? Did she fuck. Because there was no economic/labour market need to. She's exactly the same as all of them


Indeed, this wet social-democrat love in for Merkel is pretty revolting. Fuck her, the CDU and the SPD (and the Greens and AfD etc)


----------



## killer b (Oct 8, 2019)

kabbes said:


> In all the business negotiations I’ve been involved in, nobody has ever sought to play chicken.  You identify what your assumptions and needs are in a transparent way, you identify what that means in terms of what the settlement needs to look like and then you find where the differences are with the other side and focus in to find where the middle ground is on those.  You don’t just pretend it’s all or nothing and wait for the other guy to blink first.


politics isn't business though. the forces at play are totally different.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 8, 2019)

It's more like John Ringo and George trying to convince Paul not to leave the band


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cunt ended up singing _One World Cup & two World Wars _down the line to her_, _apparently...
> 
> View attachment 186340


When you attempt humour employing (what you thought to be) extreme absurdity and...


----------



## andysays (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> When you attempt humour employing (what you thought to be) extreme absurdity and...


With reality the way it is these days, satire is pointless.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 8, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Unilaterally revoking A50 would be total madness.


Wheres the current situation is perfectly sane and rational?


----------



## MrSki (Oct 8, 2019)

Considering the prisons are full, how much space is there in detention centres?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Considering the prisons are full, how much space is there in detention centres?


Simple. Empty the prisons.


----------



## Ahlan (Oct 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No I'm not. I'm saying that even politicians like Merkel can act out of principle sometimes. And that you risk misjudging her and mis-predicting her actions by forgetting that.
> 
> First May and now Johnson badly misjudged how strongly the EU would back Ireland, for instance. Why did they misjudge it? Did they underestimate the strength of belief in a wider European project as a good in and of itself?


The idea that Merkel, the representative of a hugely polutting fossil fuel driven industrial behemoth, acts on any principles is comical.
Remember, the German migrant 'crisis' was immediately preceded by the German led Troika negotiations with Greece. At the time Greece was the prime entry point to the EU for Syrian refugees. Germany's negotiations had the effect of all credibility of the Dublin Convention being abandoned, and leaving Verufakis with no other option but to wave any refugees through on the basis that his government had just been bankrupted by Germany.
With other EU leaders not liking the idea of having these refugees turn up at their border without any benifits  (i.e. making their banks wealthier), or the precidence set by Germany / Troika hardballing against fellow union members in any future negotiations.
Merkel had no other option but to open the floodgates. Or better said, she made the conscientious decision to not walk away empty handed from a 70Billion repayment negotiation that thecame with a cost of taking in the 1Million cheap labour that were needed anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

Ahlan said:


> The idea that Merkel, the representative of a hugely polutting fossil fuel driven industrial behemoth, acts on any principles is comical.
> Remember, the German migrant 'crisis' was immediately preceded by the German led Troika negotiations with Greece. At the time Greece was the prime entry point to the EU for Syrian refugees. Germany's negotiations had the effect of all credibility being abandoned for the Dublin Convention, and leaving Verufakis with no other option but to wave any refugees through on the basis that his government had just been bankrupted by Germany.
> With other EU leaders not liking the idea of having these refugees turn up at their border without any benifits  (i.e. making their banks wealthier), or the precidence set by Germany / Troika hardballing against fellow union members in any future negotiations.
> Merkel had no other option but to open the floodgates. Or better said, she made the conscientious decision to not walk away empty handed from a 70Billion repayment negotiation that thecame with a cost of taking in the 1Million cheap labour that were needed anyway.


So she's conscientious but unprincipled


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 8, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Simple. Empty the prisons.


The former people will fill those cells while transport to the south atlantic industrial zone is arranged


----------



## Ahlan (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So she's conscientious but unprincipled


Yes


----------



## Raheem (Oct 8, 2019)

Flavour said:


> It's more like John Ringo and George trying to convince Paul not to leave the band


Great, that's settled, I've left the Beatles. So, see you all at the next recording session.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 8, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The former people will fill those cells while transport to the south atlantic industrial zone is arranged


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 8, 2019)

Parliarment (hehe) prorogued again. Go for it Boris, what have ye to lose you daft twat


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 8, 2019)

Sorry it's later, i was in Ierland (while i still can)


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 8, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Oct 8, 2019)

brogdale said:


> With these odds, pretty impressive to have hit the jackpot!
> 
> View attachment 186348


Weird in it? It’s almost like he was lying and knew exactly what the outcome was going to be.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 9, 2019)

Ming said:


> Weird in it? It’s almost like he was lying and knew exactly what the outcome was going to be.


Bit more like he had no clue and was just saying stuff.


----------



## Ming (Oct 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Bit more like he had no clue and was just saying stuff.


Outcomes, Raheem. Outcomes. Boris does lie y'know. Let's see what the outcome is. And whether it benefits financial speculators who backed the Brexit campaign. He's not stupid and neither are Dom and Nigel.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 9, 2019)

I had an idea to try and speak to why the political constitution/establishment throws up this shambolic mismanagement and here it goes... it might amuse the regulars to give their own take.

Firstly, they don't work for us. That is supposed to be the deal but it is a brutal lie. They work to serve themselves and their interconnected class interest. 

Then they play 'the game', thinking of themselves as 'the good guys'

Then they look at their income and bank balance and think, 'yes I rather like this idea so lets keep it going'. So they adhere to poisonous doctrine that says massive social and economic inequality is healthy natural and the best way.

There needs to be ructions, we need to dissolve this privilege for the few.


----------



## Ming (Oct 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Bit more like he had no clue and was just saying stuff.


Check this out.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 9, 2019)

So when and at what point will Boris Johnson be arrested for 'contempt of court' as yer man with a YouTube account says? Answer in three days.

Plus he speaks like a fool.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 9, 2019)

Guardian has found an (Oxbridge) liberal historian willing to write about what we've been talking about for years on Urban...


> the Tories now represent the interests of a small section of capitalists who actually fund the party.



Catching up, I suppose?


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 9, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> One of my colleagues came back from lunch today having finally worked out what the backstop is. His solution? Invade Ireland.



So, we get out of the EU by invading it?

It's really not that hard to get away with being an absolute fuckwit these days is it? Still, even if his opinion is demonstrably insane and he spent less time coming up with it than I spent typing this sentence, he's entitled to have that opinion taken seriously. For some reason.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Guardian has found an (Oxbridge) liberal historian willing to write about what we've been talking about for years on Urban...
> 
> 
> Catching up, I suppose?



Interesting use of the word 'now'


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 9, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Guardian has found an (Oxbridge) liberal historian willing to write about what we've been talking about for years on Urban...
> 
> 
> Catching up, I suppose?



dunno

think the argument in the article is that the tories used to be the party of big business, now they are bankrolled by an even smaller bunch of dubious hedge fund types


----------



## brogdale (Oct 9, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno
> 
> think the argument in the article is that the tories used to be the party of big business, now they are bankrolled by an even smaller bunch of dubious hedge fund types


Yes, perhaps more broadly about the transition from seeking to represent the interests of UK capital towards a neoliberal, consolidator state party governing for globalised, oligarchic capitalists? Making May's "If You Believe You are a Citizen of the World, You are a Citizen of Nowhere" particularly ironic.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

Sorry for the source, but they are quoting The Times, and their article is behind a paywall.



> EU capitals are considering a unilateral exit clause from the controversial Northern Ireland backstop after a set number of years. Under the plans, the Northern Ireland Assembly would be handed a vote on whether to continue with or revoke the measure, as long as both communities in the province agree to it. This could essentially set a five-year time-limit to the backstop, which would be seen as a huge victory for the Prime Minister.
> 
> “A landing zone on consent could be a double majority within Stormont, to leave, not to continue with arrangements after X years,” a European source told the Times.
> EU considers major climbdown to hand Boris Brexit deal victory in last minute panic



Sounds like a fair & reasonable compromise, but I am not sure the DUP would go for it, as they are not fair & reasonable, and if they didn't, the ERG probably wouldn't.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 9, 2019)

that's quoting the express so is complete cockwombles to begin with


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> that's quoting the express so is complete cockwombles to begin with



As I said they are quoting The Times, it's also on The Telegraph's site, but they are both behind paywalls. Sky News is also reporting it.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 9, 2019)

A referendum in NI on continuing the backstop is not going to be without incident.


----------



## belboid (Oct 9, 2019)

Here'a the full thing (there are plugins, you know! )




			
				The Times said:
			
		

> The EU is ready to make a major concession on a Brexit deal by providing a mechanism for the Northern Irish assembly to leave a new Irish backstop after a set number of years, _The Times_ has learnt.
> 
> Diplomatic sources close to the talks said European governments are prepared to concede a unilateral revocation of the withdrawal treaty by Stormont after a period of time. The date of 2025 has been mooted, as long as both communities agree to it.
> 
> ...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

Poi E said:


> A referendum in NI on continuing the backstop is not going to be without incident.



Who's suggesting a referendum in NI?


----------



## belboid (Oct 9, 2019)

Both Sinn Fein and DUP have rejected the idea, anyway.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who's suggesting a referendum in NI?



Anyone who thinks they might win one, or anyone who thinks they might accrue political capital from the other side denying them one.

Which will cover pretty much every politician and Twitter twat in NI.


----------



## Ming (Oct 9, 2019)

Blimey. Who'd a thunk it?? 
Brexit talks in Brussels between EU and the UK come to a halt

Brexit talks in Brussels between EU and the UK come to a halt


----------



## flypanam (Oct 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Who's suggesting a referendum in NI?



I think it's a misreading by Poi E which is easily done. As belboid says both the major parties in the north have rejected it. Surely it's obvious that as a mechanism it all depends on Stormont sitting which it won't be doing in the forseeable as kind of 'Direct' rule there now is much more preferable to the DUP.

But hypothetically, if stormont was sitting and the NI backstop was in place, given the way stormont runs with a majority from both major parties needed for legislation NI is stuck within the backstop forever. Given that unless there is serious gerrymandering, in creating much smaller unionist constituencies not even a petition of concern could break NI away from this backstop. Or is my thinking that wayward?


----------



## Ming (Oct 9, 2019)

No one cares. It's all about money. 
HAPPY HALLOWEEN!!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

Ming said:


> No one cares. It's all about money.
> HAPPY HALLOWEEN!!


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 9, 2019)

flypanam said:


> I think it's a misreading by Poi E which is easily done. As belboid says both the major parties in the north have rejected it. Surely it's obvious that as a mechanism it all depends on Stormont sitting which it won't be doing in the forseeable as kind of 'Direct' rule there now is much more preferable to the DUP.
> 
> But hypothetically, if stormont was sitting and the NI backstop was in place, given the way stormont runs with a majority from both major parties needed for legislation NI is stuck within the backstop forever. Given that unless there is serious gerrymandering, in creating much smaller unionist constituencies not even a petition of concern could break NI away from this backstop. Or is my thinking that wayward?


That's what the proposal looks like to me. Would serve the DUP right if it happened. It's the only logical outcome for NI of a brexit that involves new customs borders. They will hate this, I would assume. I hope so. Stupid cunts.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

I assumed the DUP would reject it, not sure why SF has rejected it, as to end the arrangement would require their agreement, which they wouldn't give. Basically it moved the veto from the DUP to SF, shame it couldn't just be a simple majority, but that's sadly not how Stormont works.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 9, 2019)

Stormount has not worked in 3 year tbf


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> Stormount has not worked in 3 year tbf


stormont hasn't worked


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I assumed the DUP would reject it, not sure why SF has rejected it, as to end the arrangement would require their agreement, which they wouldn't give. Basically it moved the veto from the DUP to SF, shame it couldn't just be a simple majority, but that's sadly not how Stormont works.


The whole point of the GFA was that a simple majority within those particular borders led to the oppression of a sizeable minority. And let's not forget how and why 'Ulster' was constituted - how and why certain bits of the historical Ulster were left out of the political entity of NI. It's that very history that makes the imposition of any kind of  border along those border lines a non-starter.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The whole point of the GFA was that a simple majority within those particular borders led to the oppression of a sizeable minority. And let's not forget how and why 'Ulster' was constituted - how and why certain bits of the historical Ulster were left out of the political entity of NI. It's that very history that makes the imposition of any kind of  border along those border lines a non-starter.



Yes I know all that.

However, at present the unionist parties actually hold under 50% for the seats, and some of the more moderate unionist parties are less likely to vote with the DUP on something like this.


----------



## gosub (Oct 9, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> So, we get out of the EU by invading it?
> 
> It's really not that hard to get away with being an absolute fuckwit these days is it? Still, even if his opinion is demonstrably insane and he spent less time coming up with it than I spent typing this sentence, he's entitled to have that opinion taken seriously. For some reason.


Annexing Eire does seem slightly unreasonable and possibly counter productive to British peace keeping by piece keeping on the island of Ireland


----------



## newbie (Oct 9, 2019)

Crispy said:


> "a downing street source" is Cummings stirring the pot, I'd have thought.
> Wait and see what the German side of the story is


Is anyone reading German language media?  I've been told this phone call doesn't get a mention, which doesn't seem credible, but it's always worth checking and I can't read German.

Johnson does have form for being pranked   Boris Johnson tricked into 18-minute phone call with fake Armenian prime minister


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

newbie said:


> Is anyone reading German language media?  I've been told this phone call doesn't get a mention, which doesn't seem credible, but it's always worth checking and I can't read German.
> 
> Johnson does have form for being pranked   Boris Johnson tricked into 18-minute phone call with fake Armenian prime minister


if it was a prank i think it'd get a very big mention


----------



## gosub (Oct 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yes I know all that.
> 
> However, at present the unionist parties actually hold under 50% for the seats, and some of the more moderate unionist parties are less likely to vote with the DUP on something like this.


Did hear some Minister a couple of weeks ago saying Trimble had a problem with the backstop.  

Trimble to me was a significant name to drop , actually involved with GFA and not mired with the corrupt agr heating scandle


----------



## newbie (Oct 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if it was a prank i think it'd get a very big mention


so do I, both side of the channel.  But that's what I've been told, and rather than dismissing it out of hand I thought I'd ask here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> Did hear some Minister a couple of weeks ago saying Trimble had a problem with the backstop.
> 
> Trimble to me was a significant name to drop , actually involved with GFA and not mired with the corrupt agr heating scandle


how many battalions can he muster?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

newbie said:


> so do I, both side of the channel.  But that's what I've been told, and rather than dismissing it out of hand I thought I'd ask here.


i think much is being made of johnson's feeble efforts to extricate himself from his dire position here: whether that's accorded the same significance in europe i rather doubt.


----------



## gosub (Oct 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> how many battalions can he muster?


Thing about that quote...Soviets weren't quite so cocky once there was a Polish pope.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> Thing about that quote...Soviets weren't quite so cocky once there was a Polish pope.


the chances of david trimble ever having the full resources of the vatican and international catholicism at his direction are, despite rumours to the contrary, negligible.


----------



## gosub (Oct 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the chances of david trimble ever having the full resources of the vatican and international catholicism at his direction are, despite rumours to the contrary, negligible.


You are quite deliberately coming at this at angle somewhere between 90 -180 degrees


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> Did hear some Minister a couple of weeks ago saying Trimble had a problem with the backstop.
> 
> Trimble to me was a significant name to drop , actually involved with GFA and not mired with the corrupt agr heating scandle



Problem with the backstop, but more positive about Johnson's plan.



> Former First Minister David Trimble has said Boris Johnson's proposals for post-Brexit Northern Ireland meet the EU's original aims better than their 'Irish backstop' plan.
> 
> In an article for Conservative Home, written jointly with Roderick Crawford, the former UUP leader - now a Conservative peer - says the backstop plan fails to protect the Belfast Agreement, and undermines the basis of north-south co-operation.
> 
> The authors claim the EU has constantly moved the negotiating goalposts - under pressure from the Dublin Government. They argue that the new proposals put forward by the UK Government should be given a fair hearing.



PM's proposals meet EU objectives better than backstop: David Trimble - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

gosub said:


> You are quite deliberately coming at this at angle somewhere between 90 -180 degrees


and you at an angle between 180° and 360°


----------



## flypanam (Oct 9, 2019)

Trimble is Yesterday's man yesterday.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 9, 2019)

flypanam said:


> Trimble is Yesterday's man yesterday.


yeh he's a former person today


----------



## gosub (Oct 9, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> and you at an angle between 180° and 360°


Indeed, I wasn't trying  to be (a)cute, telling somebody that is being obtuse that they are being obtuse -in the most obtuse manner I can think of, is to me an instinctive reaction


----------



## Mezzer (Oct 9, 2019)

Whilst knowing that The Express is off its collective rocker, how can any idiot ignore the ridiculously pathetic list of countries we've currently signed up a 'continuity' deal with and the startling stats on the chart illustrating economic loss by country in their own article: 

Brexit latest: What trade deals has the UK already got in place for a no deal Brexit?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 9, 2019)

Arron Banks apologises for xenophobic tweet targeting Merkel


----------



## Poi E (Oct 9, 2019)

Mezzer said:


> Whilst knowing that The Express is off its collective rocker, how can any idiot ignore the ridiculously pathetic list of countries we've currently signed up a 'continuity' deal with and the startling stats on the chart illustrating economic loss by country in their own article:
> 
> Brexit latest: What trade deals has the UK already got in place for a no deal Brexit?



It's been a long time since the UK negotiated free trade deals. A very long time.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 9, 2019)

Mezzer said:


> Whilst knowing that The Express is off its collective rocker, how can any idiot ignore the ridiculously pathetic list of countries we've currently signed up a 'continuity' deal with and the startling stats on the chart illustrating economic loss by country in their own article:
> 
> Brexit latest: What trade deals has the UK already got in place for a no deal Brexit?



8% of UK trade!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 9, 2019)

OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?


----------



## teqniq (Oct 9, 2019)

Lots of obfuscation garnished with jingoistic nastiness mainly.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 9, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?



No.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 9, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No.


Well, there was that thing where Boris Johnson was holding a coffee cup and then he wasn't.


----------



## Ming (Oct 9, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?


I’d say it’s becoming increasingly clear that Dom, DeFeffel and Nigel actually want a no-deal because of their speculator backers’ short positions in the markets. But that’s just me.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 9, 2019)

Ming said:


> I’d say it’s becoming increasingly clear that Dom, DeFeffel and Nigel actually want a no-deal because of their speculator backers’ short positions in the markets. But that’s just me.



You've been saying that for a lot longer than two weeks.


----------



## Ming (Oct 10, 2019)

How times (and positions) change...


----------



## gosub (Oct 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?



Wales 29 : Fiji 17
Scotland 61 : Russia 0

typhoon inbound


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?



A recent ComRes poll showed 51.2% of brits are in favour of a no deal Brexit with 48.8% favouring a delay.

Aside from that, lots of shouty rhetoric.


----------



## bimble (Oct 10, 2019)

One thing that might not have found space in the news yet:
Government last week sent out a letter to a bunch of charities & NGOs working with refugees in the UK who are currently in receipt of funding from an EU grant called the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) to say that in the event of no deal on 31st their funding (used to help people access stuff like housing & mental health support) would stop immediately. This despite having reassured them for months that this funding would continue regardless of brexit outcomes. Didn't say why they've made this u-turn. 
If anyone's got a minute to sign this its a letter from refugee council asking that gov reverse this decision:
Emergency action: sign the letter - Refugee Council


----------



## Crispy (Oct 10, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> A recent ComRes poll showed 51.2% of brits are in favour of a no deal Brexit with 48.8% favouring a delay.


This one, that excludes 18% don't know?

Tables: https://www.comresglobal.com/wp-con...elegraph_Voting_Intention_Tables_Oct_2019.pdf


----------



## 2hats (Oct 10, 2019)

Crispy said:


> This one, that excludes 18% don't know?


With a sample size of ~2000 equating to at least 2 percent margin of error estimate?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 10, 2019)

2hats said:


> With a sample size of ~2000 equating to at least 2 percent margin of error estimate?


Even so, the poll finding is something of a record of just how far that Overton window has been shifted.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 10, 2019)




----------



## newbie (Oct 10, 2019)

bimble said:


> One thing that might not have found space in the news yet:
> Government last week sent out a letter to a bunch of charities & NGOs working with refugees in the UK who are currently in receipt of funding from an EU grant called the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) to say that in the event of no deal on 31st their funding (used to help people access stuff like housing & mental health support) would stop immediately. This despite having reassured them for months that this funding would continue regardless of brexit outcomes. Didn't say why they've made this u-turn.
> If anyone's got a minute to sign this its a letter from refugee council asking that gov reverse this decision:
> Emergency action: sign the letter - Refugee Council


this government is vile


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 10, 2019)

hmm quick Google search of comres polling history and it founders Twitter is quite interesting


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 10, 2019)




----------



## Ranbay (Oct 10, 2019)




----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 10, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> OK I've totally taken my eye off this whole shitshow in the last week or so and I can't be arsed to read 20 pages of this thread, has anything actually happened yet?




  We are now free and sovereign


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 10, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> We are now free and sovereign



OK great, they had me worried there for a second.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 10, 2019)

So, the queen's back in charge? She's been secretly re-bending bananas for weeks.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 10, 2019)

> Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar have agreed they can see a “pathway to a possible Brexit deal” but warned there were still challenges ahead if an agreement was to be struck at next week’s EU summit.



Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar say they 'see pathway' to Brexit deal


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar say they 'see pathway' to Brexit deal


no 'deal' johnson fudges together will last long in the commons before being humiliatingly rejected.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 10, 2019)

rumours johnson is to present a spoof gameshow for comic relief are false, number ten has said. stories that he would present a 'no deal or no deal' skit had circulated in westminster for weeks but have now been officially denied.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar say they 'see pathway' to Brexit deal


As well as shifting the border round, the answer to far has been 'computers'. Maybe they've nipped down to see PC World to see what's on offer. Of course this is an area of expertise for Johnson, after his 'technology lessons'.


----------



## andysays (Oct 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> As well as shifting the border round, the answer to far has been 'computers'. Maybe they've nipped down to see PC World to see what's on offer. Of course this is an area of expertise for Johnson, after his 'technology lessons'.


He's probably promised his technology teacher a nice sinecure as a consultant...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar say they 'see pathway' to Brexit deal


Both furiously digging those blame-game foundations.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Boris Johnson and Leo Varadkar say they 'see pathway' to Brexit deal



which the DUP will reject


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 10, 2019)

> Irish premier Leo Varadkar has said that a treaty agreement on the UK’s withdrawal from the EU is “possible” by the end of October, amid reports of concessions from Boris Johnson ahead of next week’s make-or-break Brussels summit.
> 
> And he indicated that there may not be sufficient time for a breakthrough by next week’s meeting of EU leaders at the European Council in Brussels, sparking speculation of a special Brexit summit later in the month.
> 
> “I think it is possible to come to an agreement to have a treaty agreed to allow the UK to leave the EU in an orderly fashion and to have that done by the end of October,” said Mr Varadkar.



Brexit deal ‘possible’ by end of month, says Irish PM after meeting with Johnson



The markets seem positive...



> The pound mounted its biggest rally against the dollar in almost a year on Thursday, as investors seized on hopes of a Brexit breakthrough following last-ditch talks between Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Irish counterpart Leo Varadkar.
> 
> Pound jumps most in 11 months after Varadkar says Brexit deal is ‘possible’


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 10, 2019)

which the DUP will reject


Boris can make all the promises to leo  He wants..


these Gobshites  voted against the good friday agreement


Saying that Blaming the DUP might work for both of them


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 10, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 186617


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 10, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Both furiously digging those blame-game foundations.



Absolutely! It wasn't me gov honest.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Supine (Oct 10, 2019)

Irish only backstop with enough mp support to stop dup blocking? A unity deal that shafts the dinosaurs?

Who fucking knows. Probably not though.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 10, 2019)

I see John Bercow has been meeting with the EU president, plotting to prevent a no deal Brexit.  Isn’t Bercow supposed to be impartial?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 10, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I see John Bercow has been meeting with the EU president, plotting to prevent a no deal Brexit.  Isn’t Bercow supposed to be impartial?


Between capitalism and human decency? No, he's a cunt.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 10, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Between capitalism and human decency? No, he's a cunt.



It's perfectly possible for John Bercow to multitask simultaneously between being a cunt (his main role  ) but *also* for him to have a go at doing his Parliamentary job 

And don't just take Marty1 's take on it (with no link!) as the whole story, just because you hate him, Wilf -- nobody really knows what's going on there ... and I can't see myself why Bercow would need to met the EU President either. But still!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 11, 2019)

So it's a customs border in the Irish sea then? WORRA SHOCKER.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 11, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> It's perfectly possible for John Bercow to multitask simultaneously between being a cunt (his main role  ) but *also* for him to have a go at doing his Parliamentary job
> 
> And don't just take Marty1 's take on it (with no link!) as the whole story, just because you hate him, Wilf -- nobody really knows what's going on there ... and I can't see myself why Bercow would need to met the EU President either. But still!


As Marty1 said, 'plotting' to prevent a no-deal brexit. There's every reason for him to be talking to top bods in the EU - he will no doubt be explaining the Benn Act and its implications, and making sure the govt does not attempt to circumvent the will of Parliament. Yes, he's taking sides here. But he's been pretty consistent through all of this that the side he is on is that of the sovereignty of parliament.


----------



## gosub (Oct 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> So it's a customs border in the Irish sea then? WORRA SHOCKER.


Not an expert but isn't there achance of the fella that puts the barrier up and down might drown


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 11, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> which the DUP will reject
> 
> 
> Boris can make all the promises to leo  He wants..
> ...



Are the DUP even relevant any more? Johnson has gouged too big a hole in his own majority for their support or lack of it to make any difference.


----------



## killer b (Oct 11, 2019)

there's 20 or 30 Labour MPs said they'll vote for a deal isn't there? add the majority of the ex-tories who'll also vote for it, and if they can keep the ERG onboard the DUP don't matter.


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 11, 2019)

Wouldn't this be the beginning of the end for the UK and were not the ERG only recently describing this as the sort of thing that no supposedly sovereign government could think of signing up to?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 11, 2019)

None of us know what exactly broke the deadlock yesterday, so it's impossible to predict how this is going to play out.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 11, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Wouldn't this be the beginning of the end for the UK and were not the ERG only recently describing this as the sort of thing that no supposedly sovereign government could think of signing up to?



It turns out the ERG types are OK with the deal when it comes from a man they like rather than a woman they don't.


----------



## Poot (Oct 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> None of us know what exactly broke the deadlock yesterday, so it's impossible to predict how this is going to play out.



If indeed anything. 

('Psst! Shall we come out smiling and shaking hands? The pound could do with a bit of a boost.'
'Yeah, sure, why not.')


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 11, 2019)

Poot said:


> If indeed anything.



Well something has clearly happened, because the 'pathway' Ireland & the UK found yesterday, has lead us into the EU's 'tunnel' of intense negotiations.


----------



## Poot (Oct 11, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well something has clearly happened, because the 'pathway' Ireland & the UK found yesterday, has lead us into the EU's 'tunnel' of intense negotiations.


Lovely though that sounds (!) I think I could be forgiven for thinking there is an element of arbitrariness and spin to a lot of what goes on. Under the veneer of 'grown-ups are talking - you wouldn't understand.'


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It turns out the ERG types are OK with the deal when it comes from a man they like rather than a woman they don't.


The woman they don't like prepared the ground for this, though. A situation in which polling gives a significant proportion of the population in favour of 'no deal'. Without May's initial work, that would have been impossible, and the ERG should be delighted by the outcome, I would have thought. This is hard brexit - out of the common market, out of the customs union, new borders up around Britain, if not NI, end of free movement of people across the EU, various anti-immigrant initiatives, end of close cooperation over a whole range of areas. That's all shit they wanted, and they would get with this deal.


----------



## Supine (Oct 11, 2019)

Poot said:


> Lovely though that sounds (!) I think I could be forgiven for thinking there is an element of arbitrariness and spin to a lot of what goes on. Under the veneer of 'grown-ups are talking - you wouldn't understand.'



The tunnel is a promise not to leak the fuck out of the next bit of the negotiation. Wonder how well that will go...


----------



## Crispy (Oct 11, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The woman they don't like prepared the ground for this, though. A situation in which polling gives a significant proportion of the population in favour of 'no deal'. Without May's initial work, that would have been impossible, and the ERG should be delighted by the outcome, I would have thought. This is hard brexit - out of the common market, out of the customs union, new borders up around Britain, if not NI, end of free movement of people across the EU, various anti-immigrant initiatives, end of close cooperation over a whole range of areas. That's all shit they wanted, and they would get with this deal.


Boris seems to be going even further, talking about regulatory divergence. Manufacturing industries not keen, as you might imagine
Government faces industry backlash on Brexit plans


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 11, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Boris seems to be going even further, talking about regulatory divergence. Manufacturing industries not keen, as you might imagine
> Government faces industry backlash on Brexit plans


It's David Davis's fantasy of striking deals across the world, each with its own set of regulations - so you create things in one way for export to the EU and in another way for export to India or China. Davis was explicit about this in his Brexit pamphlet back in 2016. It is an absurd idea that could never happen - why would the EU allow it, why would UK companies want it? - and ignores the plain fact that the EU is the UK's biggest and most important trading partner, and will continue to be so.

May's deal at least recognised some of the realities of brexit and some of the limits on the UK's actions that would still exist after Brexit. Johnson has joined Davis in neoimperialist fantasyland.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 11, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> It turns out the ERG types are OK with the deal when it comes from a man they like rather than a woman they don't.



This is only the first stage, just getting out into a transition phase. Having Johnson in charge of that means they will largely get their way with what follows, rather than having an adult like Hammond moderating any transatlantic cock-gobbling. If Johnson can swing an election in the post-exit period of rapture, all these Tory seats needing new candidates with local membership stuffed with kipper entryists will be adding more swivel-eyed types to the parliamentary party, all of us under Mark Francois’s boot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 11, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> This is only the first stage, just getting out into a transition phase. Having Johnson in charge of that means they will largely get their way with what follows, rather than having an adult like Hammond moderating any transatlantic cock-gobbling. If Johnson can swing an election in the post-exit period of rapture, all these Tory seats needing new candidates with local membership stuffed with kipper entryists will be adding more swivel-eyed types to the parliamentary party, all of us under Mark Francois’s boot.


Yep. that is also a very valid point. _Rees-Mogg_ is a cabinet minister now ffs. The govt is being remade largely in the ERG image.

this next election is going to be the most important one in decades. We're proper fucked if Johnson wins it.

And _any_ Labour MP who votes for _any_ deal that comes out of the next week or so is a total cunt.


----------



## newbie (Oct 12, 2019)

So Geordie Greig, editor of the Daily Mail told the FT last week 





> that his main concern was ensuring a new Conservative government. “Main mantra: ABC. Anything But Corbyn. I’d much rather have no deal than Corbyn. We’re going to support Boris if he does call an election … After Brexit, I think Boris will seem quite a centrist figure.”



chilling.

should that be taken as a threat of what the Mail and allies are preparing to unleash in the next phase of their 'take back control' agenda?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 12, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Yep. that is also a very valid point. _Rees-Mogg_ is a cabinet minister now ffs. The govt is being remade largely in the ERG image.
> 
> this next election is going to be the most important one in decades. We're proper fucked if Johnson wins it.
> 
> And _any_ Labour MP who votes for _any_ deal that comes out of the next week or so is a total cunt.



If the new proposals are workable for all sides in Ireland (a big ask) then Labour is going to run out of excuses not to back it. It would have to hold the principle of a confirmatory referendum above all else, because any other objection (such as a UK wide customs union) could be sorted in the next phase should they win the election.

But they look a bit fucked to be honest. If the deal goes through Johnson will be like a war hero. The next act becomes who do you trust to bring home the deliverables, a US trade deal etc and that won’t have Brexit voters running to Labour.

Labour needs a new trick and soon.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 12, 2019)

Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?




An empty milkshake cup left on the step as a chilling warning.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?



fucking snowflakes


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 12, 2019)

My local Tory association has a shop unit as an office, the windows has been smashed at least half a dozen times, I see they have installed shutters now.


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?





> People who work in politics should not have to face this.


No, they should face the gallows!


----------



## Poi E (Oct 12, 2019)

Hope they post of photo of the plants repotted. This Tory story needs a happy ending.


----------



## Poot (Oct 12, 2019)

You may all laugh but during those years of austerity no one could have imagined that a pot plant might suffer. Bastards.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 12, 2019)

wake up sheeple! its fake news! they kicked over the pot plant themselves so as to smear the remainers as  cacti killers! #crisisactors


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 12, 2019)

its the lib dems 'bollocks to brexit' slogan, maybe it was done by an enraged one of them


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 12, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its the lib dems 'bollocks to brexit' slogan, maybe it was done by an enraged one of them


A stark warning of the social disorder alienated libdems are capable of. First they came for the gnomes


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> No, they should face the gallows!


why should they face the gallows, that won't get the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge built

it won't drain falkland sound

it won't dig canals on south georgia

there is a tension between your desire to hasten their end and the national interest in getting some labour out of them for a few weeks or months.


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> why should they face the gallows, that won't get the grytviken - buenos aires friendship bridge built
> 
> it won't drain falkland sound
> 
> ...


They can work in the salt mines for a few years before they face the gallows.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> They can work in the salt mines for a few years before they face the gallows.


there will  be no gallows. 

there will be processed penguin food.


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there will  be no gallows.
> 
> there will be processed penguin food.


(((penguins)))


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> (((penguins)))


if the penguins don't like it the corgis will


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 12, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if the penguins don't like it the corgis will


ISTR the corgis are no more. When the last one snuffed it, there was no replacement because they were considered a trip hazard for the pore old thing.
/derail


----------



## fishfinger (Oct 12, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> ISTR the corgis are no more. When the last one snuffed it, there was no replacement because they were considered a trip hazard for the pore old thing.
> /derail


Fuck the monarchy! Bring back the corgis


----------



## Poi E (Oct 12, 2019)

Get yer freedom mugs now


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?




Pissed up Remainer on way home from pub places sticker on door. Trips over flower pot. It’s not threat to civil order Tory sad faces would like it to be.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 12, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> ISTR the corgis are no more. When the last one snuffed it, there was no replacement because they were considered a trip hazard for the pore old thing.
> /derail


New corgis will be obtained to whom e2 will be fed


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 12, 2019)

((((Corgis))))


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?




We haven't seen carnage like this since the dark days when that evil bastard Jeremy Corbyn used to be leader of the labour party.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 12, 2019)

they will be knocking over hanging baskets next


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 12, 2019)

First they came for the Fuchsia


----------



## Raheem (Oct 12, 2019)

If you want a vision of the fuchsia...


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 12, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Terrible. Pot plants turned over, sticker put on the notice. Whatever next?




My money is on Owen Jones.

Has Special Branch been called in?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 13, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> My money is on Owen Jones.
> 
> Has Special Branch been called in?


I used to live near a conservative office. It was on the way home from my local. I did a lot to that place. Never left a note though.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I used to live near a conservative office. It was on the way home from my local. I did a lot to that place. Never left a note though.


I thought that. It is almost a standard action to damage their property or stuff shit through the letterbox isn't it?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 13, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I used to live near a conservative office. It was on the way home from my local. I did a lot to that place. Never left a note though.



Hello Owen.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 13, 2019)

Badgers said:


> I thought that. It is almost a standard action to damage their property or stuff shit through the letterbox isn't it?


Yeah. They know why people hold their urge to piss for the last two hours in the pub. They know they are hated by a significant proportion of society. A note is just ego and foolish. A symptom of our times.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 13, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I used to live near a conservative office. It was on the way home from my local. I did a lot to that place. Never left a note though.


'_Dear Sir/Madam/Cunts. I've just pissed through your letter box. There's plenty more to come.

P.S. In future I'd appreciate it very much if you could take the spring off the letterbox.'_


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 13, 2019)

Wilf said:


> _ P.S. In future I'd appreciate it very much if you could take the spring off the letterbox.'_


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2019)

The cruise companies know their customer base. 

Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines launches new ‘Brexit Promise’ – with a full refund AND free cruise guarantee


----------



## Badgers (Oct 13, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Yeah. They know why people hold their urge to piss for the last two hours in the pub. They know they are hated by a significant proportion of society. A note is just ego and foolish. A symptom of our times.


A greater man than me..  

_*So far as I am concerned they are lower than vermin.*_

Time has not changed this. If anything they are more cruel, stupid and greedy now.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 13, 2019)

I got arrested by appointment for sticking stickers on the labour mp's constituency office door. Not even my most embarrassing arrest either.


----------



## alex_ (Oct 13, 2019)

Badgers said:


> The cruise companies know their customer base.
> 
> Fred. Olsen Cruise Lines launches new ‘Brexit Promise’ – with a full refund AND free cruise guarantee



As if they’ll still be in business to honour this if they have to cancel cruises !


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 13, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> its the lib dems 'bollocks to brexit' slogan, maybe it was done by an enraged one of them



Yellow Scum are blates plagiarists  -- those "Bollocks to Brext" stickers existed a fair few months _before_ the LD's used the stolen slogan in the Euro elections


----------



## Supine (Oct 14, 2019)

I think the tunnel has a few leaks


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 14, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Oct 14, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



What she wasn't forced to say is significant there.
"_My government's _*priority *_has always be to secure..."_
Not "we will".
Caved.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 14, 2019)

I don't want the Tories to get a deal because I believe that will ensure another tory victory if they go to the polls any time soon. Nobody seems to care enough about poverty or the misery of their henioius welfare reforms, for example, to vote them out. Fuck Britain


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 14, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I don't want the Tories to get a deal because I believe that will ensure another tory victory if they go to the polls any time soon. Nobody seems to care enough about poverty or the misery of their henioius welfare reforms, for example, to vote them out. Fuck Britain



What do you want? A referendum? What happens if you lose that? Again? 

Where in the world - seeing as you want to fuck Britain - have you identified people who do care enough about poverty and welfare reform that you might live there instead?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 14, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What she wasn't forced to say is significant there.
> "_My government's _*priority *_has always be to secure..."_
> Not "we will".
> Caved.



Yes, very wishy washy.


----------



## gosub (Oct 14, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What she wasn't forced to say is significant there.
> "_My government's _*priority *_has always be to secure..."_
> Not "we will".
> Caved.



'caved' as in didn't try and replicate roundheads vs cavaliers


----------



## editor (Oct 14, 2019)

Twat gets tattoo


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2019)

This twitter thread *could* save us all some time number crunching and afford more time for quaffing Bishop's (or other ale).


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2019)

editor said:


> Twat gets tattoo



'Grandad, what was your tattoo for?'
- Oh, errr, it was to celebrate the day we agreed a technical extension for 3 months, prior to the establishment of all party talks and a series of votes, along with some mild backtracking on the Irish border... oh and Boris Johnson got in a ditch and got back out again....
'Wow'


----------



## Wilf (Oct 14, 2019)

editor said:


> Twat gets tattoo



Must admit, I do like his idea of renaming vegetables.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 14, 2019)

editor said:


> Twat gets tattoo



_Someone's going to be looking silly.
_


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 14, 2019)

editor said:


> Twat gets tattoo





surely that is a pisstake


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 14, 2019)

editor said:


> Twat gets tattoo


I'll give 5-1 that'll be a lobster in six months


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 14, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> What do you want? A referendum? What happens if you lose that? Again?
> 
> Where in the world - seeing as you want to fuck Britain - have you identified people who do care enough about poverty and welfare reform that you might live there instead?



Yeah let's shit on people for just venting. FFS


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 14, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Grandad, what was your tattoo for?'
> - Oh, errr, it was to celebrate the day we agreed a technical extension for 3 months, prior to the establishment of all party talks and a series of votes, along with some mild backtracking on the Irish border... oh and Boris Johnson got in a ditch and got back out again....
> 'Wow'


"it was the day I got arrested for smashing up the pub when we didn't leave the EU"


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 14, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Grandad, what was your tattoo for?'
> - Oh, errr, it was to celebrate the day we agreed a technical extension for 3 months, prior to the establishment of all party talks and a series of votes, along with some mild backtracking on the Irish border... oh and Boris Johnson got in a ditch and got back out again....
> 'Wow'



Surely BJ has gone beyond bluffing now and seems confident he can deliver Brexit on time?

Could be wrong of course but he’s certainly put his political reputation on the line.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 14, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Yeah let's shit on people for just venting. FFS



You were the one slagging off millions of people tbf


----------



## tommers (Oct 14, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You were the one slagging off millions of people tbf


Can we not slag off tory voters any more? This place has changed.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 14, 2019)

tommers said:


> Can we not slag off tory voters any more? This place has changed.



He said ‘Fuck Britain’ which includes me (I’m not a Tory) and presumably you as well.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 14, 2019)

Smokeandsteam : I suspect that was much more just a frustration-based-mini-rant, rather than anything at all serious really.


----------



## Combustible (Oct 14, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Could be wrong of course but he’s certainly put his political reputation on the line.


Good point, people may even start to doubt his honesty


----------



## gosub (Oct 14, 2019)

They've all put their reputation on the line. Actually think he's been found less wanting.(how any of them expects ANY enthusiasm is beyond me


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> 'Grandad, what was your tattoo for?'



"Can you narrow it down a bit?"

"The one with the English flag and some writing that's all smudgy now."

"Can you narrow it down a bit more?"


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

gosub said:


> They've all put their reputation on the line. Actually think he's been found less wanting.(how any of them expects ANY enthusiasm is beyond me


Yes. Johnson is dishonest to the core and in every manoeuvre, but on 'getting brexit done' he's the one doing what he said he would do. Even if he doesn't achieve it, iyswim.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes. Johnson is dishonest to the core and in every manoeuvre, but on 'getting brexit done' he's the one doing what he said he would do. Even if he doesn't achieve it, iyswim.


Not really. If he sticks to a 'deal' that he knows could never be accepted, he is just playing a stupid game like anyone else. If he were really interested in 'getting brexit done', he'd be exploring ways of doing it that could actually work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yes. Johnson is dishonest to the core and in every manoeuvre, but on 'getting brexit done' he's the one doing what he said he would do. Even if he doesn't achieve it, iyswim.


he's going through the motions with this deal, which is certain to be dealt a death blow either by our european friends or in the commons. or maybe both


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

IF the ERG are accepting it, and Labour 'rebels' will accept it, isn't there a chance it will go through without DUP support?

E2A Some temporarily-ex-Tories have already indicated support.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 15, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> IF the ERG are accepting it, and Labour 'rebels' will accept it, isn't there a chance it will go through without DUP support?
> 
> E2A Some temporarily-ex-Tories have already indicated support.


"..it.." ?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "..it.." ?


Johnson's proposal, whatever it is....


----------



## brogdale (Oct 15, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Johnson's proposal, whatever it is....


Well, it's precisely nothing without the agreement of the other party.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

I think Varadkar will be happier with a border down the Irish Sea than on the island, which is the alternative that Johnson is offering him. He might call his bluff, but it's a huge risk.


----------



## elbows (Oct 15, 2019)

> Conservative Party leaflets obtained by the BBC suggest the party is preparing for a delay to Brexit.
> 
> The leaked leaflets, made available to agents and activists last week, also reveal some of the arguments the party may use against their opponents in a general election.
> 
> One says voting for The Brexit Party would mean "more delay" because Nigel Farage's party "can't deliver Brexit".



Tory election leaflets suggest Brexit delay


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 15, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I used to live near a conservative office. It was on the way home from my local. I did a lot to that place. Never left a note though.


I once went to a party at a Conservative club. I top decked the toilet


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 15, 2019)




----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

French champagne, I see. Can't Lance Forman MEP drink the English stuff? And just think, after Brexit they will be able to call it champagne!


----------



## TopCat (Oct 15, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> ISTR the corgis are no more. When the last one snuffed it, there was no replacement because they were considered a trip hazard for the pore old thing.
> /derail


She killed the Corgi's? Fucking bitch


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 15, 2019)

TopCat said:


> She killed the Corgi's? Fucking bitch



She probably didn't do it herself tbf.

She has Philip around for when there's killing to do.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 15, 2019)

Boris Johnson 'on brink of Brexit deal' after border concessions


> Boris Johnson appears to be on the brink of reaching a Brexit deal after making major concessions to EU demands over the Irish border. A draft treaty could now be published on Wednesday morning, according to senior British and EU sources.
> 
> It is understood that the negotiating teams have agreed in principle that there will be a customs border down the Irish Sea. The arrangement was rejected by Theresa May as a deal that no British prime minister could accept.
> 
> Johnson will still have to win over parliament – including the Democratic Unionist party (DUP) and the hardline Tory Brexiters, the European Research Group – on the basis that, under the deal, Northern Ireland will still legally be within the UK’s customs territory.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 15, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Boris Johnson 'on brink of Brexit deal' after border concessions



I'll believe it when I see it.  For every news story that comes out there is one seconds later completely contradicting the first.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I'll believe it when I see it.  For every news story that comes out there is one seconds later completely contradicting the first.


Indeed, but if he does get a deal my guess is he'll get it through. That will involve some mental and political cartwheels from the Spartans and the dup too, but that's the stage in the game we are at. I think. Possibly.


----------



## agricola (Oct 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Indeed, but if he does get a deal my guess is he'll get it through. That will involve some mental and political cartwheels from the Spartans and the dup too, but that's the stage in the game we are at. I think. Possibly.



They'll probably just be paid off, at huge expense.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 15, 2019)

.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

I'm certainly looking forward to a before and after graphic of the things Johnson and various 'spartans' said about May's deal and what they've ended up/may end up voting for.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm certainly looking forward to a before and after graphic of the things Johnson and various 'spartans' said about May's deal and what they've ended up/may end up voting for.


Well, at least that's _something_ to look forward to.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

Bravely bold Sir Boris
Rode forth from Brexitavalon
He was not afraid to die
Oh, brave Sir Boris
He was not at all afraid
To be killed in nasty ways
Brave, brave, brave, brave Sir Boris

He was not in the least bit scared
To be mashed into a pulp
Or to have his eyes gouged out
And his elbows broken
To have his kneecaps split
And his body burned away
And his limbs all hacked and mangled
Brave Sir Boris

His head smashed in
And his heart cut out
And his liver removed
And his bowels unplugged
And his nostrils raped
And his bottom burnt off
And his penis split and his...

"That's... that's enough music for now, lads."

Brave Sir Boris ran away
(No!)
Bravely ran away away
(I didn't!)
When danger reared its ugly head
He bravely turned his tail and fled
(No!)
Yes, brave Sir Boris turned about
(I didn't!)
And gallantly he chickened out
Bravely taking to his feet
(I never did!)
He beat a very brave retreat
(All lies!)
Bravest of the brave, Sir Boris!
(I never!)


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 15, 2019)

If johnson gets this deal through the commons (and i cant see the DUP going for it) farage and co will be screaming betrayal. Its Mays deal - but even more humiliating from a UK prestige point of view. The ERG may pretend otherwise - but  greater gammonland will go apeshit.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> If johnson gets this deal through the commons (and i cant see the DUP going for it) farage and co will be screaming betrayal. Its Mays deal - but even more humiliating from a UK prestige point of view. The ERG may pretend otherwise - but  greater gammonland will go apeshit.


I'm not so sure about that. Ain't got a clue how it will be received and it's an open goal for farage, but the weariness on all sides might mean Johnson gets away with it. If indeed he does get a deal of course.


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> If johnson gets this deal through the commons (and i cant see the DUP going for it) farage and co will be screaming betrayal. Its Mays deal - but even more humiliating from a UK prestige point of view. The ERG may pretend otherwise - but  greater gammonland will go apeshit.



The tories have been doing tons of polling and message testing lately. They've probably come to realise what remainers have been saying for a while. That the number of people genuinely passionate about brexit is actually quite small, and most of the impression of support has been through the online astroturfing efforts of the right. So yes, some people may go apeshit. Will it affect the result of an election? Probably not.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 15, 2019)

Gerry1time said:


> The tories have been doing tons of polling and message testing lately. They've probably come to realise what remainers have been saying for a while. That the number of people genuinely passionate about brexit is actually quite small, and most of the impression of support has been through the online astroturfing efforts of the right. So yes, some people may go apeshit. Will it affect the result of an election? Probably not.


Yes, there's probably a distinction between those with an ideological take on it vs those just wanting it to end/happen. And on that distinction Johnson will at least survive and may well get a working majority.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 15, 2019)

nah - i think brexit party will take a big chunk out of the tory vote if they go with this deal. Its a massive, humiliating climb down by johnson. No they are not a majority - but if the brexit party get above 15% the tories are in big trouble.


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> nah - i think brexit party will take a big chunk out of the tory vote if they go with this deal. Its a massive, humiliating climb down by johnson. No they are not a majority - but if the brexit party get above 15% the tories are in big trouble.



I really do hope you're right of course, but the difference in votes for the Brexit Party / UKIP between euro and general elections is I think instructive. People vote for TBP / UKIP in elections where they think it doesn't matter, but they don't as much in elections where it does matter.


----------



## agricola (Oct 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> nah - i think brexit party will take a big chunk out of the tory vote if they go with this deal. Its a massive, humiliating climb down by johnson. No they are not a majority - but if the brexit party get above 15% the tories are in big trouble.



Not sure it is a climb down so much as (if they have signed up to customs checks between NI and the mainland) the most pro-Republican gesture ever made by a British Prime Minister.


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 15, 2019)

I think forty four per cent voted leave in NI-wonder how they view the prospect of transition to a half-in,half-out status?


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 15, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> I think forty four per cent voted leave in NI-wonder how they view the prospect of transition to a half-in,half-out status?



and the precedent it sets for Scotland. I wonder if they’ll still call themselves the Conservative and Unionist Party after this.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 15, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> If johnson gets this deal through the commons (and i cant see the DUP going for it) farage and co will be screaming betrayal. Its Mays deal - but even more humiliating from a UK prestige point of view. The ERG may pretend otherwise - but  greater gammonland will go apeshit.


Objectively, this would be a very very hard brexit. End of free movement of people (except NI), out of the customs union (except NI), out of the common market (except NI). 'free', somehow, of something or other that was controlling um something (except NI).

But let's be honest here, how many people voting leave gave even one thought to the good friday agreement or the implications of brexit for Ireland? How many of those same people give a shit about NI either way, in or out, now? 

If this happens, it will be a massive victory for the little Englanders. If Johnson goes on to win the election after it, we're all fucking fucked (except, possibly, NI).


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 15, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Objectively, this would be a very very hard brexit. End of free movement of people (except NI), out of the customs union (except NI), out of the common market (except NI). 'free', somehow, of something or other that was controlling um something (except NI).
> 
> But let's be honest here, how many people voting leave gave even one thought to the good friday agreement or the implications of brexit for Ireland? How many of those same people give a shit about NI either way, in or out, now?
> 
> If this happens, it will be a massive victory for the little Englanders. If Johnson goes on to win the election after it, we're all fucking fucked (except, possibly, NI).


Yeah, the irony is that NI could experience a bit of a boom, given its liminal status.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 15, 2019)

how many issues in British history have been caused by forgetting or ignoring Ireland


----------



## N_igma (Oct 15, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> I think forty four per cent voted leave in NI-wonder how they view the prospect of transition to a half-in,half-out status?



Lots of bluster lately from loyalist quarters that there’ll be civil disobedience and possibly a return to violence if this arrangement is agreed. We’ll just have to wait and see but you never know what some of those cunts are capable of.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 16, 2019)

oh.

he meant metaphorically.

bugger.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 16, 2019)

Promises are one thing. From cabinet ministers: they don't mean anything. What we want is the wealth that they hoard for themselves to be distributed among us all. It's quite simple. Now, when the pearl clutching begins, when the process happens, I say: fuck you you selfish manipulative time wasters.

They need to concede to our terms or face the inevitable unwinnable fight. They need to be blasted away. They can leave or whatever, but I won't live in a society governed solely in their interest if I can help it.  Marx said, to paraphrase, the capitalists do have some genius and credibility, but we are dying on our arses. It's class before country every single time.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

[





Kaka Tim said:


> nah - i think brexit party will take a big chunk out of the tory vote if they go with this deal. Its a massive, humiliating climb down by johnson. No they are not a majority - but if the brexit party get above 15% the tories are in big trouble.





Gerry1time said:


> I really do hope you're right of course, but the difference in votes for the Brexit Party / UKIP between euro and general elections is I think instructive. People vote for TBP / UKIP in elections where they think it doesn't matter, but they don't as much in elections where it does matter.



In the 2015 GE UKIP polled 12.6%, so it's possible for the Brexit Party to do similiar.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 16, 2019)

ERG are saying there support for johnson's deal is dependant on what the DUP say. Cant see the DUP agreeing to border in Irish Sea. Looks like johnson has just pretty much replicated may journey between multiple brick walls and humiliations - just in  a shorter time frame and with more shouting.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 16, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> ERG are saying there support for johnson's deal is dependant on what the DUP say. Cant see the DUP agreeing to border in Irish Sea. Looks like johnson has just pretty much replicated may journey between multiple brick walls and humiliations - just in  a shorter time frame and with more shouting.


#GetInTheDitch


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 16, 2019)

What we need is an all day Brexit negotiation  countdown channel like Sky do for transfer deadline day


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 16, 2019)

with flashy CGI graphics, as we get on election night


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 16, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> with flashy CGI graphics, as we get on election night


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 16, 2019)

How are mp's going to have time to scrutinise whatever deal Johnson trawls from the abyss?


----------



## chilango (Oct 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How are mp's going to have time to scrutinise whatever deal Johnson trawls from the abyss?



They can dust off any one of the copies of May's deals. It'll be the same.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 16, 2019)

chilango said:


> They can dust off any one of the copies of May's deals. It'll be the same.


...and yet, at the same time, somehow worse.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 16, 2019)

only really need to read it if the dup/erg bangers seem up for it, because if they aren't its waste paper surely


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm not so sure about that. Ain't got a clue how it will be received and it's an open goal for farage, but the weariness on all sides might mean Johnson gets away with it. If indeed he does get a deal of course.



The EU will definitely go for it. It's a massive win for them.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> What we need is an all day Brexit negotiation  countdown channel like Sky do for transfer deadline day



A million times this. I want to see camera's going live to 'Arry Redknapps car as he smuggles Benjani back across the border in the boot while Rees Mogg and Francois have a fight over whether or not it's a surrender bill.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> How are mp's going to have time to scrutinise whatever deal Johnson trawls from the abyss?



Whether MPs back it or not will have little to do with what it actually says. Swinson's already on record saying her shower will vote for any deal with a confirmatory referendum rider attached to it, which is insane on at least two levels.

I can see a scenario where the fucking lib dems were the ones to get this deal over the line as well. It'd be the only way they could possibly top the levels of fuckery seen during their time in Cameron's coalition.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Whether MPs back it or not will have little to do with what it actually says. Swinson's already on record saying her shower will vote for any deal with a confirmatory referendum rider attached to it, which is insane on at least two levels.



Bloody hell did she? That is madness.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Bloody hell did she? That is madness.



Yep, she was on the news this morning touting that line with a bit of Johnson's 'anyone but Corbyn' messaging thrown in for good measure.

She actually said _any deal no matter how bad it is. _In case Johnson was wondering who he could turn to for some support for his very bad deal, and was a bit slow on the uptake. I was almost surprised she didn't turn to camera and wink theatrically.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

Just seen it. Apologies for terrible source material. WATCH: Lib Dems could vote for Brexit deal if it secures a People's Vote -  Swinson


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Just seen it. Apologies for terrible source material. WATCH: Lib Dems could vote for Brexit deal if it secures a People's Vote -  Swinson


once again the lib dems show they cannot be trusted.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yep, she was on the news this morning touting that line with a bit of Johnson's 'anyone but Corbyn' messaging thrown in for good measure.
> 
> She actually said _any deal no matter how bad it is. _In case Johnson was wondering who he could turn to for some support for his very bad deal, and was a bit slow on the uptake. I was almost surprised she didn't turn to camera and wink theatrically.


Whenever this line about holding a confirmatory referendum has cropped up, I've thought how mad it is. Unless the deal put to the people is completely batshit (it will be in some ways, but I'm talking uber-batshit) it will almost certainly pass. It really would be the libs 'getting brexit done'.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> once again the lib dems show they cannot be trusted.



They can be trusted to turn everything they touch to shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> They can be trusted to turn everything they touch to shit.




quite right  what i meant is they can't be trusted to keep their promises


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Whenever this line about holding a confirmatory referendum has cropped up, I've thought how mad it is. Unless the deal put to the people is completely batshit (it will be in some ways, but I'm talking uber-batshit) it will almost certainly pass. It really would be the libs 'getting brexit done'.


yeh i think it'll end up with article 50 revoked by parliament as we've all seen what happens when matters are entrusted to the people.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Whenever this line about holding a confirmatory referendum has cropped up, I've thought how mad it is. Unless the deal put to the people is completely batshit (it will be in some ways, but I'm talking uber-batshit) it will almost certainly pass. It really would be the libs 'getting brexit done'.



Hmmmm I don't know actually, if you put what is essentially May's deal but with NI remaining in the EU forever to a referendum, including the campaign, it could fall. Could we see Farage campaign for Remain?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Hmmmm I don't know actually, if you put what is essentially May's deal but with NI remaining in the EU forever to a referendum, including the campaign, it could fall. Could we see Farage campaign for Remain?


tbh as this appears to be essentially theresa may's deal with a bit of fudge i don't know whether the speaker will allow it as it's not a substantially new document and parliament's made its feelings very plain on the matter thrice now


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 16, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Whether MPs back it or not will have little to do with what it actually says. Swinson's already on record saying her shower will vote for any deal with a confirmatory referendum rider attached to it, which is insane on at least two levels.
> 
> I can see a scenario where the fucking lib dems were the ones to get this deal over the line as well. It'd be the only way they could possibly top the levels of fuckery seen during their time in Cameron's coalition.


Surely her position isn't simply parliamentary scrutiny but full on second referendum or at least a GE campagined on the basis of cancel brexit


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Surely her position isn't simply parliamentary scrutiny but full on second referendum or at least a GE campagined on the basis of cancel brexit



Yes, oddly enough that's why I said 'confirmatory referendum' and not 'parliamentary scrutiny'.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tbh as this appears to be essentially theresa may's deal with a bit of fudge i don't know whether the speaker will allow it as it's not a substantially new document and parliament's made its feelings very plain on the matter thrice now



Isn't it a new session? In any case the backstop is gone (replaced with just leaving NI in the EU pretty much) so it's different.


----------



## maomao (Oct 16, 2019)

Border in the Irish Sea is definitely substantially different.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Isn't it a new session? In any case the backstop is gone (replaced with just leaving NI in the EU pretty much) so it's different.


yeh, i bow to your judgement: but i am certain that it ain't going to get past parliament.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 16, 2019)

I doubt Johnson's going to want to put his deal to a public vote, surely?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 16, 2019)

One thing we know for sure is that there can be no way that Johnson could be trying to get a deal with the consequence that £ rises (like, for example the way it has already risen 5% this week), because Ming has already assured us that this is impossible, what with the certainty that Johnson has backers that stand to make a fortune from £’s imminent collapse.

So you can put that one in the bank.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh, i bow to your judgement: but i am certain that it ain't going to get past parliament.



*shrug* I mean it's possible? Sort of depends on how many of the ERG loons are willing to swallow their pride really.

If rumours of IDS exploding  at the thought of it are to be believed, then yeah it probably doesn't go through, but if the Lib Dems are prepared to vote for it maybe it will.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 16, 2019)

I reckon if it had a second referendum amendment then it would certainly go through.  And yes, that is just a reckon.

I don’t reckon, however, that the amendment will be successful in being adopted.


----------



## gosub (Oct 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I reckon if it had a second referendum amendment then it would certainly go through.  And yes, that is just a reckon.
> 
> I don’t reckon, however, that the amendment will be successful in being adopted.


Courae it would mind you do want this deal or a no deal seems a bit no brainer


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I reckon if it had a second referendum amendment then it would certainly go through.  And yes, that is just a reckon.
> 
> I don’t reckon, however, that the amendment will be successful in being adopted.



Could be right there - although would be interesting to see how many Tories voted against it and how many anti-Brexit types voted for it in that scenario. Agree it seems unlikely the amendment will get through.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

gosub said:


> Courae it would mind you do want this deal or a no deal seems a bit no brainer



No deal is never getting on any ballot paper. It will be the deal versus remain.


----------



## maomao (Oct 16, 2019)

gosub said:


> Courae it would mind you do want this deal or a no deal seems a bit no brainer



All sides seem a little short on brains.


----------



## gosub (Oct 16, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> No deal is never getting on any ballot paper. It will be the deal versus remain.


Didn't we do leave vs remain a while back? Pretty sure we did.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 16, 2019)

gosub said:


> Didn't we do leave vs remain a while back? Pretty sure we did.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> I doubt Johnson's going to want to put his deal to a public vote, surely?



Depends on whether he would actually want his deal to win that vote.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

Michel Barnier optimistic of deal after PM makes concessions on Irish border


> Michel Barnier has spoken of his optimism that a Brexit deal can be reached by the end of Wednesday, but EU sources said an extension to Britain’s withdrawal beyond 31 October may still be required if an agreement is secured.
> 
> Talks between the negotiating teams are ongoing with the Democratic Unionist party’s issues with the tentative agreement still threatening to derail Downing Street’s plans. The deal on the table would involve the drawing of a regulatory and customs border down the Irish Sea.
> 
> Despite the last-minute threat to Downing Street’s plans, the EU’s chief negotiator told Jean-Claude Juncker’s team of commissioners on Wednesday morning that he believed a deal could be salvaged in the next few hours. A key meeting of EU ambassadors with Barnier that was set for 1pm London time was pushed back to 4pm to allow extra time for Johnson to win over the unionist party.



Looks like it's all down to the DUP, and how much dosh they can get out of Johnson to win them over.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

the mail's take

Boris Johnson scrambles to win over DUP and Tory hardliner 'Spartans' for Brexit deal | Daily Mail Online

it's all over bar the blaming


----------



## Badgers (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it's all over bar the blaming


Pleasing if correct


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 16, 2019)

Is it ditch time yet?


----------



## flypanam (Oct 16, 2019)

N_igma said:


> Lots of bluster lately from loyalist quarters that there’ll be civil disobedience and possibly a return to violence if this arrangement is agreed. We’ll just have to wait and see but you never know what some of those cunts are capable of.


Some talk especially in the liberal circles of D'olier st that Foster's days are numbered and that there is a power struggle going on behind the scenes between Donaldson and Dodds. David McWilliams thinks its a battle between CofI and the Free Prezzies. I'm not sure. Their meeting with senior loyalists does suggest as you say some civil disturbances  are planned if there is 'downgrading' of the union, if it esclates further than that, no doubt, catholics will die.

anyway this is a happy headline Northern Ireland is a burden on the rest of the UK. We can't let it get in the way of Brexit


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 16, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Is it ditch time yet?


might as well be


----------



## Badgers (Oct 16, 2019)

Sounds like straws are being grabbed if true


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

TBF that ^^^ was predicted when he first expelled them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Sounds like straws are being grabbed if true



straws should be grabbed. and then jabbed into johnson's eyes to make him squeal like a pig.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 16, 2019)

Had not seen this. 

DUP defends Arlene Foster's 'astonishing' meetings with senior loyalists


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 16, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> only really need to read it if the dup/erg bangers seem up for it, because if they aren't its waste paper surely


Depends on how large a pot for economic aid/ regeneration Johnson offers them .


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 16, 2019)




----------



## Cloo (Oct 16, 2019)

This really is a clusterfuck of the highest order.

As anyone with half a brain could have predicted 3 years ago.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

Cloo said:


> This really is a clusterfuck of the highest order.
> 
> As anyone with half a brain could have predicted 3 years ago.


i don't think anyone could really have predicted the abject fuckwittery which has occurred over the past three years

we all expected some nonsense

but this is above and beyond anything which could really have been anticipated


----------



## Smangus (Oct 16, 2019)

_  I_t's great , finally exposed them for the fuckwits they are.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 16, 2019)

List of people who died climbing Mount Everest - Wikipedia

I presume there are ditches on Everest right?


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> List of people who died climbing Mount Everest - Wikipedia
> 
> I presume there are ditches on Everest right?



Always appeared to me the summit was quite clear, it's just you starve your brain of oxygen trying to get there. While a lot of people die in the process


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 16, 2019)

The LibDems voting for the deal in order to get a referendum on it sounds like someone indulging in wild speculation to me.
If they vote for a deal on Sat and it passes there is absolutely no guarantee that their motion will pass on Tue so they will have abandoned every principle they have in order to secure a GE victory for BoZo.
I don't think Swinson is that dumb and if she trusts a word that comes out of BoZo mouth she is dumber than I can imagine.
As for BoZo offering an amnesty to those he kicked out, that I can imagine. Shame is not a concept he is big on.
Don't know how many would accept though doubtful it would be all of them.
Not that I think BoZo will get a deal he can sell anyway, his best hope is to agree an extension, blame it on everyone else and aim to try and win a majority. The thing is that he is so fucking arrogant he thinks he can still force through what he wants


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The LibDems voting for the deal in order to get a referendum on it sounds like someone indulging in wild speculation to me.
> If they vote for a deal on Sat and it passes there is absolutely no guarantee that their motion will pass on Tue so they will have abandoned every principle they have in order to secure a GE victory for BoZo.



I think you are mixing two things up, from my understanding, she is going for two options:

1 - The motion for a second referendum next week, park that to one side for now.

2 - Voting for the agreement on Saturday, on condition an amendment is attached to it, that it is subject to a second referendum.

If she gets [2], [1] doesn't go forward.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 16, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you are mixing two things up, from my understanding, she is going for two options:
> 
> 1 - The motion for a second referendum next week, park that to one side for now.
> 
> ...


Typical lib dem shenanigans


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 16, 2019)

ska invita said:


> List of people who died climbing Mount Everest - Wikipedia
> 
> I presume there are ditches on Everest right?



He's not on the hillary step, he's channelling mallory


----------



## 8115 (Oct 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Sounds like straws are being grabbed if true



Specifically heard a rebel on the news earlier round about midday saying she had not been offered to be given the whip again if she voted for the deal.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 16, 2019)

So when will we end up paying duties and taxes on anything bought from the UK?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Typical lib dem shenanigans



Not that I am defending her or her party*, but like a game of chess, it's fair play to consider your move(s) beyond your next move. 

*They are cunts.


----------



## andysays (Oct 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So when will we end up paying duties and taxes on anything bought from the UK?


After 23.00 31.10.19


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

Lupa said:


> So when will we end up paying duties and taxes on anything bought from the UK?



Not for years, if ever.


----------



## killer b (Oct 16, 2019)

The39thStep said:


>


I found this twitter thread offered a useful different perspective on the motivations of the DUP - worth reading IMO


----------



## Cloo (Oct 16, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think anyone could really have predicted the abject fuckwittery which has occurred over the past three years
> 
> we all expected some nonsense
> 
> but this is above and beyond anything which could really have been anticipated


 yeah,  you're not wrong.  We didn't foresee tories calling an election and losing their majority,  for example


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Is it ditch time yet?



You missed it by a couple of years.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 16, 2019)

Cloo said:


> yeah,  you're not wrong.  We didn't foresee tories calling an election and losing their majority,  for example



A stunning move.


----------



## treelover (Oct 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Michel Barnier optimistic of deal after PM makes concessions on Irish border
> 
> 
> Looks like it's all down to the DUP, and how much dosh they can get out of Johnson to win them over.



If there is another extension I guarantee there will be all sorts of manouveres in that extra time.


----------



## treelover (Oct 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>




Disgusting, wonder what the postal workers will make of that, hope it changes many of their views on Brexit.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 16, 2019)

*A GROUP of Remain MPs have headed to Brussels today, as part of secret EU talks to secure a Brexit extension and prevent a no deal exit.*


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

Have you got any point to make, Marty1?


----------



## treelover (Oct 16, 2019)

> Remainers are attempting to create a narrative "this is just politics". But basically it is their politics. The Remain class in the UK (the civic, cultural, economic elites) are the same people who populate similar positions in France and Germany. These are people with the same outlook and objectives. Together they have formed a bloc of people - entrenched elitist interests - that is basically saying "this is the way it is like or lump it". The argument that this is all 'inevitable' is of course damning of the concept of democracy and equal votes.
> 
> The view of Remainers is that ultimately a technocratic class of 'experts' are in charge and that the votes of the ordinary person is of no importance. That view cannot sustain a stable democracy. If Brexit is overturned although I personally doubt in the short term civil disobedience will follow, I do believe millions of people will internalise the fact that the political system will never listen to them. The more rational people realize that in the end this is end of our current system. The right approach was always to do everything to allow the UK to leave with a good deal. That should have been internalised by the EU and UK elites from day one. But sadly they never were able to stop themselves in their pique at being defied. For Remainers to believe the rest of us will just shut up and go away only reflects the utter immaturity and arrogance of that class



Posted elsewhere, I think I agree with much of it.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Have you got any point to make, Marty1?



Yes, the article highlights the frenzy on both sides now as the deadline tightens, particularly the hardcore remain MP’s and MEP’s.


----------



## treelover (Oct 16, 2019)

Two trends i would really love to go away,  'unicorns' 'low information voters'


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 16, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Yes, the article highlights the frenzy on both sides now as the deadline tightens, particularly the hardcore remain MP’s and MEP’s.



I'll ask again, do you have actually have a point?

In particular regarding the second image you posted?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 16, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted elsewhere, I think I agree with much of it.


Who are "Remainers"? 
Yes there are some hard-core FBPE types that fit the above very well but to set up a block of people as "Remainers" is as silly and counterproductive as the attempts of some (on U75 and in the wider world) to characterise Leavers as anti-immigrant "gammons"


----------



## tommers (Oct 16, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>





Cool. Sure it'll be fine.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 16, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Who are "Remainers"?
> Yes there are some hard-core FBPE types that fit the above very well but to set up a block of people as "Remainers" is as silly and counterproductive as the attempts of some (on U75 and in the wider world) to characterise Leavers as anti-immigrant "gammons"




Agree with that. I'd also like to know the source of the quote treelover posted in #35700-- or am I missing something?


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 16, 2019)

killer b said:


> I found this twitter thread offered a useful different perspective on the motivations of the DUP - worth reading IMO



Thanks , interesting read.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 16, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I think you are mixing two things up, from my understanding, she is going for two options:
> 
> 1 - The motion for a second referendum next week, park that to one side for now.
> 
> ...


Don't think even that is likely, any kind of support to get any kind of deal through is liable to kill what little credibility they have. The last time they sold out their principles it didn't go so well for them.
But it's getting obvious that the moment, the LD's are as much a sideshow as Lab
Any deal that treats NI as different to the rest of the UK sets them on the path to reunification and i just can't see the DUP going for that unless there is a big enough Tory majority for BoZo to just ignore them


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 16, 2019)

Are the Brexit Party lot being deliberately quiet over this, or is it just the media ignoring them? I’d have thought they’d be screaming ‘betrayal’ but maybe they’ve decided to let Johnson off the hook for a bit realising the alternative would be another big extension, still a good chance they’ll get the crash-out they’re after.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 16, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Are the Brexit Party lot being deliberately quiet over this, or is it just the media ignoring them? I’d have thought they’d be screaming ‘betrayal’ but maybe they’ve decided to let Johnson off the hook for a bit realising the alternative would be another big extension, still a good chance they’ll get the crash-out they’re after.


Ukip/BP was never truly independent of the Tories. They're probably going to need to wait to see whether or not a deal gets through before they decide whether they can support it or not.


----------



## andysays (Oct 17, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Agree with that. I'd also like to know the source of the quote treelover posted in #35700-- or am I missing something?


He gets most of his material from CiF at the Guardian


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 17, 2019)

andysays said:


> He gets most of his material from CiF at the Guardian



Cheers. I rarely go there myself (being an old-fashioned paper-print-person  )
That one was worth a read (tbf/IMO) but I still think redsquirrel had it about right.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

BREAKING NEWS - DUP has released a statement - 'that as things stand' they are unable to support the new deal, because concerns over both customs & consent issues.

ETA -


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

That looks like a memo written circa 2004.  The typeface of the logo, the Times New Roman lettering, the centred bold underlined heading.  It’s nice to see that the DUP are decades behind the times in typesetting as well as political beliefs.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted elsewhere, I think I agree with much of it.



Just strikes me as the other side of the coin from 'all leavers are thicko racists'.  Both examples of over simplified and over generalised guff which has polluted this topic since the referendum result was announced. Probably before...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> BREAKING NEWS - DUP has released a statement - 'that as things stand' they are unable to support the new deal, because concerns over both customs & consent issues.
> 
> ETA -
> 
> View attachment 187320



DUP turning their noses up at Johnson’s deal? Just cos it is the same as May’s deal? Who could have foreseen that?


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 17, 2019)

So after all these months and years of searching for a deal which can be agreed on both sides, not only have those who promised how easy it would all be, been shown to be massive liars, but I’m amazed there isn’t a greater swing towards remain in public opinion polls. 

I wonder at what point during the “failure to deliver Brexit” farce, people finally just get sick enough of it to take the option which won the poll at the top of this thread: “let us slink back in feeling a bit fucking stupid”?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

treelover said:


> Posted elsewhere, I think I agree with much of it.


Tbh that doesn't really commend the viewpoint


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 17, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> So after all these months and years of searching for a deal which can be agreed on both sides, not only have those who promised how easy it would all be, been shown to be massive liars, but I’m amazed there isn’t a greater swing towards remain in public opinion polls.
> 
> I wonder at what point during the “failure to deliver Brexit” farce, people finally just get sick enough of it to take the option which won the poll at the top of this thread: “let us slink back in feeling a bit fucking stupid”?
> 
> View attachment 187322



Based on the false premise of no one wants no deal.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 17, 2019)

The dup know they are a dead party if they agree to any deal that effectively keeps NI in the EU. Whatever they're being offered isn't enough.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

Also, of course a deal is possible.  It just might not be possible with this parliament.  But Johnson hopes that he can win an election with a decent majority, which would clear his decks quite comfortably to make any deal he likes, or no deal at all.  Both the EU and the DUP should bear that in mind, really — better to get a deal done whilst you hold the cards rather than wait for your opposite number to get a better hand.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> The dup know they are a dead party if they agree to any deal that effectively keeps NI in the EU. Whatever they're being offered isn't enough.


They want 1690 and no one can give them that


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 17, 2019)

Does anyone know what the exact wording of the Benn Act is? Can Johnson send the letter asking for an extension, but worded in such a way that he won’t get it? “ Give me an extension you cunts”. Or follow it with another letter saying “Actually, ignore that. We’re a-crashin’ out.”

I have no way of knowing whether Johnson really wants a deal. But he does _seem_ to want to leave on the 31st. Does he have an actual plan, do you think?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 17, 2019)

He's just gung-hoing it from one day to the next. There's no strategy. Let's not give the Tories too much credit as people so often do, buying into the myth of "the natural party of government"


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> He's just gung-hoing it from one day to the next. There's no strategy. Let's not give the Tories too much credit as people so often do, buying into the myth of "the natural party of government"


Natural party of government my arse


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Does anyone know what the exact wording of the Benn Act is? Can Johnson send the letter asking for an extension, but worded in such a way that he won’t get it? “ Give me an extension you cunts”. Or follow it with another letter saying “Actually, ignore that. We’re a-crashin’ out.”
> 
> I have no way of knowing whether Johnson really wants a deal. But he does _seem_ to want to leave on the 31st. Does he have an actual plan, do you think?


No

He does not have a plan


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No
> 
> He does not have a plan


I didn’t really require an answer.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I didn’t really require an answer.


Better to have it out in the open 

Everyone knows it's Dominic Cummings who has the plans in number ten


----------



## inva (Oct 17, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> So after all these months and years of searching for a deal which can be agreed on both sides, not only have those who promised how easy it would all be, been shown to be massive liars, but I’m amazed there isn’t a greater swing towards remain in public opinion polls.


The vote to leave wasn't based on the easiness of leaving or the honesty of politicians and the public face of remain hasn't learnt a single lesson from the referendum so I don't see why it should be surprising.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Does anyone know what the exact wording of the Benn Act is? Can Johnson send the letter asking for an extension, but worded in such a way that he won’t get it? “ Give me an extension you cunts”. Or follow it with another letter saying “Actually, ignore that. We’re a-crashin’ out.”



Short answer is no, he can’t do that. The Act says he “must” try to seek an extension and then defines the way to do that (send the letter). If he does something in addition to sending the letter which frustrates the overall objective then he is failing to meet his obligations under the Act.

There is also a general principle of public law determined under something called the Padfield case which I don’t really understand but apparently means he can’t frustrate the will of Parliament.

The text of the Act itself is here:
European Union (Withdrawal) (No. 2) Act 2019


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

Who would have ever guessed that the DUP would have put their own interests first? Totally out of the blue that one.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 17, 2019)

Winot said:


> Short answer is no, he can’t do that. The Act says he “must” try to seek an extension and then defines the way to do that (send the letter). If he does something in addition to sending the letter which frustrates the overall objective then he is failing to meet his obligations under the Act.
> 
> There is also a general principle of public law determined under something called the Padfield case which I don’t really understand but apparently means he can’t frustrate the will of Parliament.
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think also a court would find he was going against the spirit of the law. It was just early morning musing aloud really. I’m at a loss to see what he thinks he can do. But that’s probably because I can’t quite believe anyone relies totally on self belief, despite many years of evidence to the contrary.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Also, of course a deal is possible.  It just might not be possible with this parliament.  But Johnson hopes that he can win an election with a decent majority, which would clear his decks quite comfortably to make any deal he likes, or no deal at all.  Both the EU and the DUP should bear that in mind, really — better to get a deal done whilst you hold the cards rather than wait for your opposite number to get a better hand.


. 

I used to coerce drunken friends into a card game in the old days called “turn of a card for money” no skill or plan , just highest card gets the pot. This is the game Johnson is playing


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Does anyone know what the exact wording of the Benn Act is? Can Johnson send the letter asking for an extension, but worded in such a way that he won’t get it? “ Give me an extension you cunts”. Or follow it with another letter saying “Actually, ignore that. We’re a-crashin’ out.”
> 
> I have no way of knowing whether Johnson really wants a deal. But he does _seem_ to want to leave on the 31st. Does he have an actual plan, do you think?



He will be reassured that so far the polls and the Twitter noise of Leavers doesn’t seem to want to blame him for having to extend. The ‘die in a ditch’ comment will be embarrassing, but he’s seemingly immune to personal embarrassment.

He will take heart from being able to present a deal as being close and reboot for a General Election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> He will be reassured that so far the polls and the Twitter noise of Leavers doesn’t seem to want to blame him for having to extend. The ‘die in a ditch’ comment will be embarrassing, but he’s seemingly immune to personal embarrassment.
> 
> He will take heart from being able to present a deal as being close and reboot for a General Election.


a deal isn't close. he's not really tested the mood of the commons. no one's actually seen the fucking thing yet - as dominic grieve pointed out on the toady programme. and he has a negative majority.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> The dup know they are a dead party if they agree to any deal that effectively keeps NI in the EU. Whatever they're being offered isn't enough.



I dunno about that, I think tey sense now is the moment to become THE Unionist party in the statelet. I think they believe they can bring all the stands of unionism together with Brexit as an opportunity for a modern sort of Ulster Convention. The only problem while they may be able to unite unionism in the short term the issues that are splintering unionism are still there, their version of  semi deteched house Unionism isn't going to carry the same weight as the Big House unionism they are seeking to replace. Brexit may unite Loyalists but the fact that H&W were shafted by the DUP, in the same way as Wrightbus is being shafted will splinter them.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 187328


and not much longer for johnson


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 17, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 187328


Cummings, yesterday


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Ditch time.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Also, of course a deal is possible.  It just might not be possible with this parliament.  But Johnson hopes that he can win an election with a decent majority, which would clear his decks quite comfortably to make any deal he likes, or no deal at all.  Both the EU and the DUP should bear that in mind, really — better to get a deal done whilst you hold the cards rather than wait for your opposite number to get a better hand.



is it not the case even is Boris get his "Glorious no Deal"

he still will to go to the EU the following week to get a trade deal

Holding all the cards against the EU

Rightio


----------



## Flavour (Oct 17, 2019)

It's impressive how much media noise there has been about all this progress they are making towards agreeing a deal. A lot in euro newspapers. Basically cos all the movement is coming from BJ conceding stuff, the EU hasn't compromised at all. This is a huge victory for the Bloc if the UK does indeed leave with a deal of this calibre. I think the last 3 years will be enough to dissuade other countries from trying to leave anyway.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> Holding all the cards against the EU
> 
> Rightio


Having a better hand doesn’t mean you now get all the cards


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Flavour said:


> It's impressive how much media noise there has been about all this progress they are making towards agreeing a deal. A lot in euro newspapers. Basically cos all the movement is coming from BJ conceding stuff, the EU hasn't compromised at all. This is a huge victory for the Bloc if the UK does indeed leave with a deal of this calibre. I think the last 3 years will be enough to dissuade other countries from trying to leave anyway.



We don't know the full details of this deal, but the EU has certainly made some compromises, in particular re-opening the withdrawal agreement, which they said they would never do, plus introducing a method of consent, which in theory would allow NI to leave the arrangement, rather than being trapped forever.

Regarding other countries leaving, they wouldn't have the same problem, which is basically the Irish border issue & keeping the peace.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

What is the ideal Brexit outcome for the DUP?  I mean in terms of an agreement rather than domestically?

They don't appear to want no deal yet any hard brexit deal will inevitably have to mean compromises they seem unwilling to accept.  Seems to me they'd be better off with a soft brexit yet they're firmly aligned with the party of hard brexit.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 17, 2019)

There has so far been six very powerful (in my opinion) documentaries shown on the BBC under their secret history series on 'The Troubles'.
Possibly a lot of those who voted brexit don't realise how serious the Irish issue is and might benefit from trying to watch those documentaries on iPlayer.


----------



## Winot (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> What is the ideal Brexit outcome for the DUP?  I mean in terms of an agreement rather than domestically?
> 
> They don't appear to want no deal yet any hard brexit deal will inevitably have to mean compromises they seem unwilling to accept.  Seems to me they'd be better off with a soft brexit yet they're firmly aligned with the party of hard brexit.



The best _Brexit_ outcome for them is a soft Brexit for the whole of the UK (EEA).


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

*ponder what Boris gave the DUP*

another few billion and put a stop to the idea of abortion in north ireland maybe


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

A deal has been agreed between the EU & UK to go forward to the other 27 members at the summit.


----------



## Crispy (Oct 17, 2019)

Now for parliament...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There has so far been six very powerful (in my opinion) documentaries shown on the BBC under their secret history series on 'The Troubles'.
> Possibly a lot of those who voted brexit don't realise how serious the Irish issue is and might benefit from trying to watch those documentaries on iPlayer.


thank god you've raised that issue now


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

> There are reports from Brussels that a deal has been done with the DUP on board.



Brexit deal latest news: Boris Johnson confirms a 'great new deal has been done'



ETA - Sky is reporting the DUP isn't on board.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

the DUP could keep this up all day


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

interesting take


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> the DUP could keep this up all day


until a load of money's shovelled into their pockets


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> until a load of money's shovelled into their pockets


exactly what I just said to my workmates a moment ago...


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

and a veto in stormont to foil the dastardly Catholics


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 17, 2019)

philosophical said:


> There has so far been six very powerful (in my opinion) documentaries shown on the BBC under their secret history series on 'The Troubles'.
> Possibly a lot of those who voted brexit don't realise how serious the Irish issue is and might benefit from trying to watch those documentaries on iPlayer.


Perhaps those who voted Remain should as well as I've never met anyone who voted remain because of the 'Irish issue'


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

New Brexit deal agreed, says Boris Johnson



> A Brexit deal has been agreed between UK and EU negotiating teams before a meeting of European leaders in Brussels.
> 
> Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeted: "We've got a great new deal that takes back control."
> 
> ...


----------



## Badgers (Oct 17, 2019)

> Prime Minister Boris Johnson tweeted: "We've got a great new deal that takes back control."



a 'great new deal' sounds ominous


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

So new deal, will go to parliament, will fail, extension, election. Lol I love this shit


----------



## Epico (Oct 17, 2019)

It'll be Theresa May's deal that has undergone hefty reference to a thesauraus.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

Epico said:


> It'll be Theresa May's deal that has undergone hefty reference to a thesauraus.



That’s what Farage has been warning of for some time now.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Epico said:


> It'll be Theresa May's deal that has undergone hefty reference to a thesaurus.



Like that time May suddenly rushed across to Strasbourg because there had suddenly been a _major breakthrough in the negotiations_ and it turned out to be a slightly different typeface and a larger font.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Epico said:


> It'll be Theresa May's deal that has undergone hefty reference to a thesauraus.


that's where the problem's been, finding a tory who can use a thesaurus


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Epico said:


> It'll be Theresa May's deal that has undergone hefty reference to a thesauraus.


Anyone else reading that sp. as _thesauranus, _or just me?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

A mate has just suggested that it's possible the EU could say this is the final offer, it's this deal or no deal, there will be no further extension, that would ensure it would be passed by the commons. 

I think it's unlikely, but the EU does seem to have had enough, and wants to move on.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

If the letter is sent they are legally obliged to extend, no?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

If Junker is happy then there’s a very strong chance this new agreed deal will be absolute shit.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> If the letter is sent they are legally obliged to extend, no?



No. It has to be agreed by every member state, it only takes one of the other 27 to veto it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> If Junker is happy then there’s a very strong chance this new agreed deal will be absolute shit.


being as there's no chance of it entering existence i don't suppose it matters


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

This is, though, Johnson's golden pass for the next GE, irrespective of where it goes from here. He got the supra state to open the WA & gained concessions; the electoral platform is assured.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This is, though, Johnson's golden pass for the next GE, irrespective of where it goes from here. He got the supra state to open the WA & gained concessions; the electoral platform is assured.


i think you are speaking too soon


----------



## philosophical (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> thank god you've raised that issue now


I think the documentary series I referred to is very recent, so no need to thank god about the 'now', I mention it today because the series is current.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think you are speaking too soon


Maybe, but he already has in his pocket what he most desired for the GE battleground.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 17, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Perhaps those who voted Remain should as well as I've never met anyone who voted remain because of the 'Irish issue'



It is true we haven't met.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but he already has in his pocket what he most desired for the GE battleground.


what he most desires is nigel farage's head on a spike and i don't see that in his pocket


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but he already has in his pocket what he most desired for the GE battleground.



Werther’s originals?


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but he already has in his pocket what he most desired for the GE battleground.


Really? Corbyn has now taken the second referendum position, negating the Lib Dem’s, and the Brexit Party will campaign for a no-deal.

Tories looking a bit squeezed I’d have thought.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> That’s what Farage has been warning of for some time now.


Has Our Nigel or the Brexit 'party' said anything about this? Using words like 'surrender' or 'blitz' yet?


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has Our Nigel or the Brexit 'party' said anything about this? Using words like 'surrender' or 'blitz' yet?


He’s currently being pulled from a sea of his own raging spittle, I’m told.


----------



## mx wcfc (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> If the letter is sent they are legally obliged to extend, no?


It was the revocation of Article 50 that a Court decided we could do unilaterally.  Cupid is right - all 27 have to agree to an extension request afaik.  Hasn't Johnson lined Hungary up to veto it?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has Our Nigel or the Brexit 'party' said anything about this? Using words like 'surrender' or 'blitz' yet?



Not sure but you can expect incoming  strong language no doubt.

He’s certainly on form recently.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe, but he already has in his pocket what he most desired for the GE battleground.



Precisely.

Those, including some on here, predicting he’d never get a deal will need to refocus now. The ‘he wants to leave without a deal’ line will also need to quietly retire it for now.

So, they are back to ‘okay, he’s got a deal, but we can’t possibly support it for blah reason’.

From Johnson’s perspective he can now sit back. Either, he gets it through the HoC and is the PM who delivered Brexit. Or the HoC vote it down and he can return to his ‘Parliament v the People’ narrative with renewed energy.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

mx wcfc said:


> It was the revocation of Article 50 that a Court decided we could do unilaterally.  Cupid is right - all 27 have to agree to an extension request afaik.  Hasn't Johnson lined Hungary up to veto it?


Hungary have dismissed that idea. It’s hard to see what we could possibly offer any of the 27 that could entice them to go against the bloc. You only need to watch Eurovision to see how low our stock has fallen in those parts.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Has Our Nigel or the Brexit 'party' said anything about this? Using words like 'surrender' or 'blitz' yet?


  Hopefully he is being water boarded with his own piss at the
Minute


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2019)

mx wcfc said:


> It was the revocation of Article 50 that a Court decided we could do unilaterally.  Cupid is right - all 27 have to agree to an extension request afaik.  Hasn't Johnson lined Hungary up to veto it?



no. its was just "aggro signalling". Hungary will not veto it - it will put them even more in the shit with the rest of the EU for no tangible benefit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Precisely.
> 
> Those, including some on here, predicting he’d never get a deal will need to refocus now. The ‘he wants to leave without a deal’ line will also need to quietly retire it for now.
> 
> ...


tosh. i've said our politicians don't have the wherewithal to take us out of the european union: and they don't.

in any sensible negotiation you start off with a goal and work backwards from there to see how you'd arrive at your desired end state. and no one on the british side has done that since the referendum. in any sensible negotiation you find out what people on your side will accept and build that into your negotiating strategy. you don't arrive at an agreement and then find out people you were relying on to help get it through parliament aren't happy.

as matters stand it's not the remainers who are standing in the way of any deal, it's the pro-brexit dup. everyone knows the snp, large parts of the labour party, the green mp, the lib dems will oppose - not news. but it's the former tories and the dup and the tories who follow the dup lead on this who will thwart johnson.

it's not parliament v the people, it's the pm v common sense


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> From Johnson’s perspective he can now sit back. Either, he gets it through the HoC and is the PM who delivered Brexit. Or the HoC vote it down and he can return to his ‘Parliament v the People’ narrative with renewed energy.



This is a fair point.  He doesn't really need the DUP anymore as he can't get any business done in Parliament anyway and an election is imminent.  The thing that could damage him is attacks from the right of his own party and the BP.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This is, though, Johnson's golden pass for the next GE, irrespective of where it goes from here. He got the supra state to open the WA & gained concessions; the electoral platform is assured.



Yeah... I think I’m leaning this way. For all the farce, he’s managed to (or at least look like he’s managed to) do what he set out to do. He can keep plugging this anti establishment line convincingly, along with chaotic, indecisive opposition. I think brexit fatigue will also be a factor when it comes to an election - a ‘just get it done’ vote should swing people from BP to con.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. i've said our politicians don't have the wherewithal to take us out of the european union: and they don't.
> 
> in any sensible negotiation you start off with a goal and work backwards from there to see how you'd arrive at your desired end state. and no one on the british side has done that since the referendum. in any sensible negotiation you find out what people on your side will accept and build that into your negotiating strategy. you don't arrive at an agreement and then find out people you were relying on to help get it through parliament aren't happy.
> 
> ...



Yes that's the reality, but the election pitch will be parliament v people.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> ...Or the HoC vote it down and he can return to his ‘Parliament v the People’ narrative with renewed energy.



But the ‘people’, ie: Brexiteers, will be badly split because of the deal he’s negotiated. Old school tories might find the ground given to the republicans a hurdle too far. Others will want no-deal and go to Farage. He’s fought himself into a bit of corner here.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> tosh. i've said our politicians don't have the wherewithal to take us out of the european union: and they don't.
> 
> in any sensible negotiation you start off with a goal and work backwards from there to see how you'd arrive at your desired end state. and no one on the british side has done that since the referendum. in any sensible negotiation you find out what people on your side will accept and build that into your negotiating strategy. you don't arrive at an agreement and then find out people you were relying on to help get it through parliament aren't happy.
> 
> ...



This won’t be about what the situation actually is though, it’ll be about perception and whoever can spin the best story out of it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yes that's the reality, but the election pitch will be parliament v people.





Cid said:


> This won’t be about what the situation actually is though, it’ll be about perception and whoever can spin the best story out of it.


i think he'd be better advised to try another tack because anyone who is paying attention, and indeed many who aren't, will see right through that flimsy lie.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> This is a fair point.  He doesn't really need the DUP anymore as he can't get any business done in Parliament anyway and an election is imminent.  The thing that could damage him is attacks from the right of his own party and the BP.



Correct. I suspect if he was honest he’d want the HoC to vote it down. They’ll own the decision and a) Labour’s line that they would negotiate a deal instead of this deal so they are voting it down looks pish and b) Johnson will want them to vote it down so he can go to the country and in the event of a win go back to Brussels with a stronger mandate

ETA: Labour really are in a hole of their own digging now and the decision not to pull the GE trigger looks more stupid by the day


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Precisely.
> 
> Those, including some on here, predicting he’d never get a deal will need to refocus now. The ‘he wants to leave without a deal’ line will also need to quietly retire it for now.
> 
> ...


The myth is secured.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> But the ‘people’, ie: Brexiteers, will be badly split because of the deal he’s negotiated. Old school tories might find the ground given to the republicans a hurdle too far. Others will want no-deal and go to Farage. He’s fought himself into a bit of corner here.



How many genuine, hard line no dealers are there though? That won’t be swung by an effective ‘sensible party, get this done’ line. He can even tell the truth and point out that there must be a deal at some point and that no deal is a BP fantasy.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> But the ‘people’, ie: Brexiteers, will be badly split because of the deal he’s negotiated. Old school tories might find the ground given to the republicans a hurdle too far. Others will want no-deal and go to Farage. He’s fought himself into a bit of corner here.




Well, they’ll possibly be split between Tory and BP but they won’t be voting labour or LD


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think he'd be better advised to try another tack because anyone who is paying attention, and indeed many who aren't, will see right through that flimsy lie.



Hope you're right.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think he'd be better advised to try another tack because anyone who is paying attention, and indeed many who aren't, will see right through that flimsy lie.



You’re talking about a country that elected Theresa May.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> You’re talking about a country that elected Theresa May.


well... that's debateable


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> How many genuine, hard line no dealers are there though? That won’t be swung by an effective ‘sensible party, get this done’ line. He can even tell the truth and point out that there must be a deal at some point and that no deal is a BP fantasy.


10-15% maybe. Certainly enough to be the difference between a majority or otherwise.

Fatigue is a bit of an unknown too. People are now so entrenched that giving any ground may be impossible.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This is, though, Johnson's golden pass for the next GE, irrespective of where it goes from here. He got the supra state to open the WA & gained concessions; the electoral platform is assured.


Potentially, yeah. But depends on fall out. If BxP take view, and mainstream the view, that Johnson has done a May then could be a disaster electorally, his centre piece becomes a massive negative, with that gone everything else becomes more important - the acuri/london mayor stuff particularly.

Obv could go other way and his thwarted liberator routine gets a massive tory majority, taking votes from people who have never voted tory before but will forever now be open to it.

High stakes innit


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> How many genuine, hard line no dealers are there though? That won’t be swung by an effective ‘sensible party, get this done’ line. He can even tell the truth and point out that there must be a deal at some point and that no deal is a BP fantasy.



This is the _key_ question now. Johnson’s gamble is that he can split enough away from the BP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Correct. I suspect if he was honest he’d want the HoC to vote it down. They’ll own the decision and a) Labour’s line that they would negotiate a deal instead of this deal so they are voting it down looks pish and b) Johnson will want them to vote it down so he can go to the country and in the event of a win go back to Brussels with a stronger mandate
> 
> ETA: Labour really are in a hole of their own digging now and the decision not to pull the GE trigger looks more stupid by the day


i expect the next house of commons to look much like this house of commons, i see no prospect of one party having a majority.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i expect the next house of commons to look much like this house of commons, i see no prospect of one party having a majority.



I know you do. I disagree. Time will tell.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

Craig Murray ( yes I know) stating  that the deal has been conducted in bad faith with Johnson group considering overruling any backstop progress due to non specific force majeure invocation.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I know you do. I disagree. Time will tell.



Time seems to have picked up a habit of consistently getting things wrong lately.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Craig Murray ( yes I know) staring that the deal has been conducted in bad faith with Johnson group considering overruling any backstop progress due to non specific force majeure invocation.


they'd have to find an equivalent english expression


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

“Shit the bed”


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> You’re talking about a country that elected Theresa May.


29% of the electorate voted Conservative.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Potentially, yeah. But depends on fall out. If BxP take view, and mainstream the view, that Johnson has done a May then could be a disaster electorally, his centre piece becomes a massive negative...


Yup, and for the first time he’s actually put his name to something that is now there to be picked apart. 
Previously it was just fudge and bluster.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This is the _key_ question now. Johnson’s gamble is that he can split enough away from the BP.



Very true.

Those Tory election leaflet ideas published the other day, which points out 'the BP can't deliver any form brexit, only we can', which is a basic fact, could well see a big shift of BP support going to the Tories.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

Do we have to take everything exactly literally on urban? Clearly I mean she was elected within the terms of a fptp general election. Shouldn’t have to add lengthy qualifying phrases about ‘but obviously that is not a true mandate’ because we’ve been over this stuff countless times before.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Potentially, yeah. But depends on fall out. If BxP take view, and mainstream the view, that Johnson has done a May then could be a disaster electorally, his centre piece becomes a massive negative, with that gone everything else becomes more important - the acuri/london mayor stuff particularly.
> 
> Obv could go other way and his thwarted liberator routine gets a massive tory majority, taking votes from people who have never voted tory before but will forever now be open to it.
> 
> High stakes innit


what you've got is one tory pm saying 'this is a deal no pm could sign up to' and the next tory pm signing up to it.

johnson's on a very sticky wicket


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Have UKIP made an official statement yet?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> Do we have to take everything exactly literally on urban? Clearly I mean she was elected within the terms of a fptp general election. Shouldn’t have to add lengthy qualifying phrases about ‘but obviously that is not a true mandate’ because we’ve been over this stuff countless times before.


i meant it was debateable as the 2017 election left her with a minority administration reliant on the bribed dup for survival. i didn't mean i wanted to actually debate it!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Have UKIP made an official statement yet?


yes, they're looking for a new leader


----------



## Badgers (Oct 17, 2019)

'elected'


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Anyway.  As I'm off to Europe this weekend the pound jumping is great news.  Just need to hope the inevitable cold water isn't poured over the agreement before Monday.  Hopefully it won't be published till then.

Then again when you look at what 'jumping' actually means I can't see its going to make much difference.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This is, though, Johnson's golden pass for the next GE, irrespective of where it goes from here. He got the supra state to open the WA & gained concessions; the electoral platform is assured.


And if mp's vote it down on saturday then they doom their election chances


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

Fuck me, May managed to command the most significant minority of those who voted, in spite of having all the charisma of a mouldy towel, and running against what undoubtedly was the high point of Corbyn’s popularity.

The point is that, if the tories can edge it in that situation, they can certainly win against a weaker Labour Party with at least some Lib Dem swing. Of course the BP is a factor (it also is for labour), and there’ll be some minor demographic changes to take into account. But I think with strong campaigning (and Johnson will be better at that than May) and the right message, they stand a decent chance at a majority. If not a sizeable one.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Correct. I suspect if he was honest he’d want the HoC to vote it down. They’ll own the decision and a) Labour’s line that they would negotiate a deal instead of this deal so they are voting it down looks pish and b) Johnson will want them to vote it down so he can go to the country and in the event of a win go back to Brussels with a stronger mandate
> 
> ETA: Labour really are in a hole of their own digging now and the decision not to pull the GE trigger looks more stupid by the day


TBF this situation would be the same. Boris would have declared the date to be next month or beyond and, having now secured a deal (as it wwere), will be riding high. Labour look bad either way. The whole brexit situation has played them totally. I don't see what they could have done


----------



## ska invita (Oct 17, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Are the Brexit Party lot being deliberately quiet over this, or is it just the media ignoring them? I’d have thought they’d be screaming ‘betrayal’ but maybe they’ve decided to let Johnson off the hook for a bit realising the alternative would be another big extension, still a good chance they’ll get the crash-out they’re after.


Farage Has Spoken


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Anyway.  As I'm off to Europe this weekend the pound jumping is great news.  Just need to hope the inevitable cold water isn't poured over the agreement before Monday.  Hopefully it won't be published till then.
> 
> Then again when you look at what 'jumping' actually means I can't see its going to make much difference.



If the pound goes up before you change your money then down again before you change it back (which it will assuming you're away from the UK for more than four hours) then you win both ways.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 17, 2019)

Johnson will win an election because he's funny


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Farage Has Spoken



Interesting that he's been forced onto linguistic territory that will leave most BP supporters cold.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Johnson will win an election because he's funny


but who's laughing now


----------



## Cloo (Oct 17, 2019)

Soooo. Government will reject deal. Johnson will try to get through No Deal in defiance of Benn Act. Not sure what happens then. And that’s my salient analysis.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Farage Has Spoken




He'll not be happy until the whole of the UK is physically towed out into the mid atlantic.

Ah who are we kidding, pretending he even gives a shit. He wants this all to drag on as long as possible because it keeps in in business.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Soooo. Government will reject deal. Johnson will try to get through No Deal in defiance of Benn Act. Not sure what happens then. And that’s my salient analysis.


johnson would look really stupid if the government reject the deal he negotiated


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Anyway.  As I'm off to Europe this weekend the pound jumping is great news.



I'm just waiting for a refund from an Italian hotel for a payment taken wrongly a couple of months ago so the pound had better not jump too much


----------



## Badgers (Oct 17, 2019)

Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I'm just waiting for a refund from an Italian hotel for a payment taken wrongly a couple of months ago so the pound had better not jump too much


that's the best argument for johnson's deal i've so far heard


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Interesting that he's been forced onto linguistic territory that will leave most BP supporters cold.



Yes, really quite a reserved response.  Interesting.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?


she says she hates it, so that's a yes


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Interesting that he's been forced onto linguistic territory that will leave most BP supporters cold.


or searching for a dictionary


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?


but,but,but,REVOKE is the only way


----------



## Ming (Oct 17, 2019)

So do I throw 20 quid to the server fund on the 31st or not?
 I will anyway on point of principle. 
It's just politically annoying.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?



Let's run through the lib dem decision making algorithm and find out:

1. _Is it bad for just about everyone in the country?
-_Yes

2. _Where do I sign?_


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Anyway.  As I'm off to Europe this weekend the pound jumping is great news.  Just need to hope the inevitable cold water isn't poured over the agreement before Monday.  Hopefully it won't be published till then.
> 
> Then again when you look at what 'jumping' actually means I can't see its going to make much difference.


The only time it 'jumped ' to any significant step in the past five years was due to the EU/Greece crisis.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> So do I throw 20 quid to the server fund on the 31st or not?
> I will anyway on point of principle.
> It's just politically annoying.



20 quid or 0.0004 euros.


----------



## Idaho (Oct 17, 2019)

Surely we have a pre Christmas election and an EU giving us an extension whether we ask for it or not?


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Andrew Neil is suggesting that the Govt have asked the EU to state unequivocally that there will be no further extensions, effectively making Saturdays vote a choice between no-deal and this one, and taking the Benn Act out of the equation.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?


anything that comes with the second reff rider no matter how bad. Because they are convinced a remain vote is in the bag


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 17, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Farage Has Spoken




He sounds like he's been sedated.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> He sounds like he's been sedated.


he should be pts with a dnr tied round his neck


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Swinson will endorse the deal I assume?


I doubt that. LDs won't endorse without 2nd ref and Johnson's unlikely to attach that.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

Personal reckons:

a) deal gets through... not that likely, but maybe with abstentions. Mandate GE to follow? Though opp could continue with current tactics. Not a good look now though.

b) deal voted down. Johnson asks for extension with caveat of GE, forcing opposition hand. Possibly leave without a deal, but I do actually think he’d prefer to leave with his deal.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Correct. I suspect if he was honest he’d want the HoC to vote it down. They’ll own the decision and a) Labour’s line that they would negotiate a deal instead of this deal so they are voting it down looks pish and b) Johnson will want them to vote it down so he can go to the country and in the event of a win go back to Brussels with a stronger mandate
> 
> ETA: Labour really are in a hole of their own digging now and the decision not to pull the GE trigger looks more stupid by the day



I agree with you he never wanted no deal. But why would he want this voted down? What deal would he want instead? If he can win a majority he will just push this through. 

Labour have dug themselves into a whole load of holes but this is May's deal, complete with ECJ oversight of state aid - if they came out swinging and said this is a shit deal the EU will be able to stop us renationalising stuff and rebuilding our industry Johnson would be fucked. 

They won't of course. 

But the DUP, BxP and ERG could definitely destroy Johnson if they decide to go with a narrative of betraying Britain. It's there to be used.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> Andrew Neil is suggesting that the Govt have asked the EU to state unequivocally that there will be no further extensions, effectively making Saturdays vote a choice between no-deal and this one, and taking the Benn Act out of the equation.



The government can ask but the EU would be mad to box themselves into a corner like that.  They'll probably be some independent statements of the like from France etc but directly from the EU?  I doubt it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> I doubt that. LDs won't endorse without 2nd ref and Johnson's unlikely to attach that.



Can he stop that happening? Also, if the Lib Dems and Blairites will vote for the deal if it comes with a 2nd ref, doesn't that give him the perfect excuse to allow it, cos he needs the votes?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> Andrew Neil is suggesting that the Govt have asked the EU to state unequivocally that there will be no further extensions, effectively making Saturdays vote a choice between no-deal and this one, and taking the Benn Act out of the equation.



Doesn't surprise, that would give them their best chance of getting the deal over the line, in the commons.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> So do I throw 20 quid to the server fund on the 31st or not?
> I will anyway on point of principle.
> It's just politically annoying.



Yes.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> Andrew Neil is suggesting that the Govt have asked the EU to state unequivocally that there will be no further extensions, effectively making Saturdays vote a choice between no-deal and this one, and taking the Benn Act out of the equation.


Would it not be a choice between (a) this deal, and (b) a new situation where the choice became no-deal vs revoke.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Doesn't surprise, that would give them their best chance of getting the deal over the line, in the commons.


Yes, and also lays the groundwork for any ensuing blame game.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Can he stop that happening? Also, if the Lib Dems and Blairites will vote for the deal if it comes with a 2nd ref, doesn't that give him the perfect excuse to allow it, cos he needs the votes?



Good point... though problem with a ref is that a specific deal is always going to look a bit crap. Even on a straight run between revoke and ‘this deal’ it probably favours revoke.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> The government can ask but the EU would be mad to box themselves into a corner like that.  They'll probably be some independent statements of the like from France etc but directly from the EU?  I doubt it.



And, I reckon the threat from the likes of France to veto any extension would be enough to put the shits up the commons.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Hang on I thought they went to court to make sure Parliament has a voice...

Legal bid to stop MPs debating Brexit deal

I'm just confused now.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 17, 2019)

First indications seem to be that SURPRISE! It's May's deal again


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Would it not be a choice between (a) this deal, and (b) a new situation where the choice became no-deal vs revoke.


No-deal vs revoke is not really an option for this Govt is it? Unless there’s some mechanism where Parliament could insist on that, how would it come about?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

Cloo said:


> First indications seem to be that SURPRISE! It's May's deal again



Well none of the red lines have gone so it was never going to be anything else but the same shit with a different way of kicking the Northern Ireland can down the road.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

Cloo said:


> First indications seem to be that SURPRISE! It's May's deal again



My current understanding is it's May's deal, but with some worse deals for the UK in it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> Good point... though problem with a ref is that a specific deal is always going to look a bit crap. Even on a straight run between revoke and ‘this deal’ it probably favours revoke.



Obviously but Johnson wouldn't care.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

DUP has come out & confirmed they will be voting against the deal.


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

He doesn't need to ask for an extension now because there is a deal. So how would a referendum be squeezed in anyway?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> He doesn't need to ask for an extension now because there is a deal.



He does, if it's voted down.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 17, 2019)

"Deal"


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> I doubt that. LDs won't endorse without 2nd ref and Johnson's unlikely to attach that.



Shadow NI secretary on Radio this morning suggesting Labour’s position will be the same as that suggested here of Swinson .


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 17, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Shadow NI secretary on Radio this morning suggesting Labour’s position will be the same as that suggested here of Swinson .


I’m guessing that this is where Kinnock’s “rebels” come into play.....


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> No-deal vs revoke is not really an option for this Govt is it? Unless there’s some mechanism where Parliament could insist on that, how would it come about?


Same process as brought about the Benn act, etc


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Jeremiah18.17 said:


> Shadow NI secretary on Radio this morning suggesting Labour’s position will be the same as that suggested here of Swinson .



It would have to be I guess.  They're current stated policy to is to put a deal they negotiate to the people so it follows that they believe this deal should be as well.  Makes sense.

So it will come down to whether an amendment can be added and whether that amendment is allowed to be voted on, is that right?  Oh God, its Bercow again isn't it?  I bet he's creaming his pants.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Same process as brought about the Benn act, etc



Would require Labour support and I can't see Corbyn going along with that.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Hang on I thought they went to court to make sure Parliament has a voice...
> 
> Legal bid to stop MPs debating Brexit deal
> 
> I'm just confused now.


The bid is to give them more time to debate it, not to stop them debating it, no?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Would require Labour support and I can't see Corbyn going along with that.


Even with a crash-out imminent?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

Ming said:


> So do I throw 20 quid to the server fund on the 31st or not?
> I will anyway on point of principle.
> It's just politically annoying.


Instead, just post up another video about how Johnson wants no deal because Money


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The bid is to give them more time to debate it, not to stop them debating it, no?



Well yes, but actually its about making Johnson write that letter.  The court case in itself though is specifically to stop a parliamentary debate.



teuchter said:


> Even with a crash-out imminent?



Benn act is still in play if the deal is voted down.  I cannot see how Corbyn could agree to a straight this deal or revoke referendum.  These are strange times though.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Same process as brought about the Benn act, etc


He’s going to need another ditch.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

If anyone can be arsed, there's 64 pages - Full text of Brexit deal - CNN


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Benn act is still in play if the deal is voted down.  I cannot see how Corbyn could agree to a straight this deal or revoke referendum.  These are strange times though.



The Benn act would still be in play, but irrelevant if the EU had already stated that they would not accept any further extension.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The Benn act would still be in play, but irrelevant if the EU had already stated that they would not accept any further extension.



Why would they say that?  Johnson wants it but what do they owe him?

ETA: They know full well there is a decent chance this will be voted down in Parliament and then the EU would be the ones responsible for the crash out as they've refused the extension.  As part of the on-going blame game that is a scenario they have been very keen to avoid.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If anyone can be arsed, there's 64 pages - Full text of Brexit deal - CNN



We're pressed for time.  Could you sum that up in one word?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Why would they say that?  Johnson wants it but what do they owe him?


I was simply discussing the hypothetical scenario where they say it. I've not said anything about the likelihood of such a scenario coming about.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> We're pressed for time.  Could you sum that up in one word?



No.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No.



A noise?


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No.


Good word


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

I need to speak to a legal type after this has been digested. NI aside , this doesn’t look like we will be free and unfettered as the sales pamphlet said. It’s a May analogue


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I was simply discussing the hypothetical scenario where they say it. I've not said anything about the likelihood of such a scenario coming about.



OK.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> No.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> It’s a May analogue



A cynic might suggest such a thing is a fig leaf for a No Deal plan.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 17, 2019)

Brexit is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma. Hope they get it sorted before Countdown is on.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

Farage ever the opportunist


----------



## Badgers (Oct 17, 2019)

From the vague reporting of BBC 5Live I understand that Corbyn, Farage, Swinson and DUP are all anti the deal?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

Badgers said:


> From the vague reporting of BBC 5Live I understand that Corbyn, Farage, Swinson and DUP are all anti the deal?



Would assume so. Would certainly hope so in Corbyn's case.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> A cynic might suggest such a thing is a fig leaf for a No Deal plan.



Only thing Johnson gives a shit about is his legacy. I doubt he’s in any way attached to no deal.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 17, 2019)

Cid said:


> Only thing Johnson gives a shit about is his legacy.



You know, I don't think he even gives a toss about that.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 17, 2019)

Blimey
The Londoner: Momentum chief backs Keir Starmer and Jess Phillips


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Blimey
> The Londoner: Momentum chief backs Keir Starmer and Jess Phillips



Jess Phillips?  Let's just get Hard Brexit over with now.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

*Juncker has said the EU will rule out any extension if the deal is voted down!*


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> *Juncker has said the EU will rule out any extension if the deal is voted down!*



Daft twat.  Probably pissed again.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## Santino (Oct 17, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Blimey
> The Londoner: Momentum chief backs Keir Starmer and Jess Phillips





Plumdaff said:


> Jess Phillips?  Let's just get Hard Brexit over with now.



According to The Standard.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 17, 2019)

MPs win bid to vote on second Brexit referendum in Saturday parliament showdown


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> *Juncker has said the EU will rule out any extension if the deal is voted down!*



It's not in his gift though.


----------



## Fedayn (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> *Juncker has said the EU will rule out any extension if the deal is voted down!*




That may well tip the balance and Johnson gets his deal


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> *Juncker has said the EU will rule out any extension if the deal is voted down!*


He said there is no need for an extension now that there is a deal on the table. Plenty of wriggle room if the deal gets voted down


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> He said there is no need for an extension now that there is a deal on the table. Plenty of wriggle room if the deal gets voted down



Indeed.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> It's not in his gift though.



Indeed.

But, if Johnson is asking for no extension and Juncker is saying that, it will carry a lot more weight amongst the 27. I wasn't expecting him to come out with such a statement before the EU council makes their statement.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Fedayn said:


> That may well tip the balance and Johnson gets his deal


i don't think he will, the end game approaches and i think it'll be a choice between no deal and no brexit. other options are available.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

No more credible coming from Juncker than from Johnson.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

There's no way the EU27 wouldn't offer an extension if the alternative is no deal. Ireland won't vote for it.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> There's no way the EU27 wouldn't offer an extension if the alternative is no deal. Ireland won't vote for it.


Ireland will vote for it, you mean. But it needs unanimity.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

I'm struggling to see this as anything other than a strategic boost for Johnson, getting something through parliament - and thus a kick in the teeth for the forces of remain. But Junker has done this after forcing Johnson to give way over the last week or two. So, it's a helping hand for Johnson on the back of a kick in the balls (other mixed metaphors are available).

Edit: it's a helping hand for Johnson as far as Saturday, but if he doesn't get a majority then, we are back to a swirling pit of anything.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'm struggling to see this as anything other than a strategic boost for Johnson, getting something through parliament - and thus a kick in the teeth for the forces of remain. But Junker has done this after forcing Johnson to give way over the last week or two. So, it's a helping hand for Johnson on the back of a kick in the balls (other mixed metaphors are available).


at the moment it's a strategic boost for de pfeffel. but on saturday it will be anything but as his deal's ripped to shreds.

if as seems to be the case this is largely a reheated may deal with a side helping of fudge then i think it will be a strategic blow for johnson, as the amount of shit levelled at that agreement over the last period has i think made it anathema to brexiteers.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> at the moment it's a strategic boost for de pfeffel. but on saturday it will be anything but as his deal's ripped to shreds.
> 
> if as seems to be the case this is largely a reheated may deal with a side helping of fudge then i think it will be a strategic blow for johnson, as the amount of shit levelled at that agreement over the last period has i think made it anathema to brexiteers.


He should certainly be done for if he loses the vote on Saturday and then one way or another we remain beyond 31st Oct.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> He should certainly be done for if he loses the vote on Saturday and then one way or another we remain beyond 31st Oct.


he'd better be gone by 20 november


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> at the moment it's a strategic boost for de pfeffel. but on saturday it will be anything but as his deal's ripped to shreds.
> 
> if as seems to be the case this is largely a reheated may deal with a side helping of fudge then i think it will be a strategic blow for johnson, as the amount of shit levelled at that agreement over the last period has i think made it anathema to brexiteers.


But 'ripped to shreds' will be cast almost universally by the media as traitors/enemies of the people/elite/establishment/surrender monkeys stopping our brave leader from effecting the will of the people. Added to which it will be claimed that those doing so are single-handedly risking the future of the realm by leading us to NoDeal exit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> But 'ripped to shreds' will be cast almost universally by the media as traitors/enemies of the people/elite/establishment/surrender monkeys stopping our brave leader from effecting the will of the people. Added to which it will be claimed that those doing so are single-handedly risking the future of the realm by leading us to NoDeal exit.


the rabid journos will be utterly apoplectick when it in fact leads us to remain.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

I had to check this wasn't parody...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I had to check this wasn't parody...
> 
> View attachment 187359


there's a remarkable lack of self-awareness in that tweet

i thought farage's entire career was based around power without accountability


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I had to check this wasn't parody...
> 
> View attachment 187359




There must be some twisted, Cresta-Run, downhill slalom or something in farage's head for him to come up with that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I had to check this wasn't parody...
> 
> View attachment 187359



There's a trick with a twist. 



Wilf said:


> There must be some twisted, Cresta-Run, downhill slalom or something in farage's head for him to come up with that.



Well, not really though, is it? Because the May deal isn't really Brexit, according to Farage (I'd probably agree) and he/we can see the EU is applying pressure on Parliament to pass it. So, in a way, it's logical. Although I'm surprised he mentioned the Benn Act. 

Hypothetically, if there was to be a referendum on this deal (which allows ECJ to overrule Parliament on state aid for example) versus remain, wouldn't the brexiteers mostly opt for remain? 

Realistically, on saturday if this threat of no extension is deemed credible, won't most brexiteers vote against the deal and most remainers vote for?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there's a remarkable lack of self-awareness in that tweet
> 
> i thought farage's entire career was based around power without accountability


Some evidence of just how significantly Johnson has wrong-footed his opposition. Electorally he's placed himself in a win:win position.
Deal passes; it's the national saviour GE.
Deal fails; it's the full-on populist enemies of the people GE.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2019)

Does Farage think Juncker's office is subject to an Act of the UK parliament?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Deal fails; it's the full-on populist enemies of the people GE.


Unless it's a second referendum.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Does Farage think Juncker's office is subject to an Act of the UK parliament?


That does seem to be the sort of thing that brixiteers think.


----------



## extra dry (Oct 17, 2019)

Will the result of this election be carried? 
  What if, as caused civil unrest in the not so distant past, it gets ignored or rejected?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Unless it's a second referendum.


You mean the '_you voted and decided once and now they want you to change your minds like they did with Ireland..." _GE strategy?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Some evidence of just how significantly Johnson has wrong-footed his opposition. Electorally he's placed himself in a win:win position.
> Deal passes; it's the national saviour GE.
> Deal fails; it's the full-on populist enemies of the people GE.


he hasn't put himself in a win-win position by any stretch of the imagination

he has made rods for his own back. although he has a deal it is a reheated theresa may deal with a topping of fudge. the very people the greater part of the negotiations we know of were to be helped by this deal - the dup - want no part of it. johnson has savaged his own parliamentary party by expelling more than 20 of his own mps.

he's talked up no deal to the point where even sane and reasonable people see it as by no means the worst option: and where anything less will be seen by some brexiters as betrayal.

this deal will be seen by many people taken in by his clean break nonsense as betrayal. i wouldn't be surprised if theresa may speaks on saturday and points out the great similarities with her own deal which saw her so brutally treated by her own party.

this deal will please no one. he'll get rather a shock, i think, if he tries to portray himself as the national saviour when so many people outside london loathe him: and not a few in london itself.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> You mean the '_you voted and decided once and now they want you to change your minds like they did with Ireland..." _GE strategy?


If it's a second referendum, it will happen before a general election.

To be honest, I think the Tories will win a GE in all circumstances, so it's as broad as it is long.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 17, 2019)

Raheem said:


> That does seem to be the sort of thing that brixiteers think.



Product of Dulwich College. Dear me.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Product of Dulwich College. Dear me.


yeh he's hardly a good advert for the institution


----------



## extra dry (Oct 17, 2019)

The train is nearing the end of tracks, unless something is pulled from the hat.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

extra dry said:


> The train is nearing the end of tracks, unless something is pulled from the hat.


Hey presto! More track...


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Hey presto! More track...


----------



## extra dry (Oct 17, 2019)

The crowd gasps, read all about it another three months, and then another and so on till 2028.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 17, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Hey presto! More track...



With a different gauge.


----------



## T & P (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he hasn't put himself in a win-win position by any stretch of the imagination
> 
> he has made rods for his own back. although he has a deal it is a reheated theresa may deal with a topping of fudge. the very people the greater part of the negotiations we know of were to be helped by this deal - the dup - want no part of it. johnson has savaged his own parliamentary party by expelling more than 20 of his own mps.
> 
> ...


No doubt all of those reactions (& more) will emerge, but electorally Johnson is now set up to deploy a potentially popular/populist electoral strategy whatever the Parliamentary maths.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No doubt all of those reactions (& more) will emerge, but electorally Johnson is now set up to deploy a potentially popular/populist electoral strategy whatever the Parliamentary maths.


He’s also, inadvertently, set up Farage to do the same.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

JRM endorses PM’s new deal with EU.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No doubt all of those reactions (& more) will emerge, but electorally Johnson is now set up to deploy a potentially popular/populist electoral strategy whatever the Parliamentary maths.


that may be his strategy but i doubt it will work and tbh his appeal will, i believe, ebb with time as it is strictly time limited.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Hey presto! More track...


Dead rabbits?


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM endorses PM’s new deal



I wonder what this all means for Rees-Mogg’s section 55 Act. It does seem to be quite the about turn.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM endorses PM’s new deal with EU.



I got about 90 seconds in but it looked like he was heading for the vinegar stroke so I stopped it sharpish.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> that may be his strategy but i doubt it will work and tbh his appeal will, i believe, ebb with time as it is strictly time limited.


Only polling, I know, but all of the current psephological research suggests otherwise, that it might well work. And let's not forget that Johnson's & the tories' current poll leads have all built up during a period when Brexit was still hypothetical; it is now tangibly within grasp. I hate to say so, but I don't think Corbyn has a snowball's chance of substantially denting the polling now.


----------



## gosub (Oct 17, 2019)

T & P said:


>




nah its more ;
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




Thems in SW1A should think long and hard about trying to reverse their gravy train


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> JRM endorses PM’s new deal with EU.



Of course he does, no shame at all from the pencil necked cunt


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I got about 90 seconds in but it looked like he was heading for the vinegar stroke so I stopped it sharpish.



He doesn’t go into any real detail of the new deal other than to inform he thinks it super and expects everyone to feel the same once they get the opportunity to scrutinise it.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> He doesn’t go into any real detail of the new deal other than to inform he thinks it super and expects everyone to feel the same once they get the opportunity to scrutinise it.



Just trying to sell it to the 'no deal is the only true Brexit' types.  Its going to be a tough sell and the BP kick off and stand as many candidates as they claim they will they could still damage Johnson a lot.  I still think he's most vulnerable on his right flank.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> There's a trick with a twist.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, I was just amused by the notion of Farage - on this at least - allying himself with the forces of remain, further extensions and the Benn Act - the very thing put in place to stop no deal. What he said would make more sense if he'd come out against Johnson's latest deal, which he doesn't seem to have done (though I may be wrong in this fastmoving shitshow).

Oh and yes, I agree, May's deal certainly wasn't a full brexit.


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Only polling, I know, but all of the current psephological research suggests otherwise, that it might well work. And let's not forget that Johnson's & the tories' current poll leads have all built up during a period when Brexit was still hypothetical; it is now tangibly within grasp. I hate to say so, but I don't think Corbyn has a snowball's chance of substantially denting the polling now.



I agree that the reality of Brexit makes a big difference, but that works both ways.  If it happens, a lot of the reason to not back Labour ("Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer" / "he betrayed the stereotype northern voter") evaporates away as well and we end up back in 2017 with a contest that is largely fought on domestic politics.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Well, I was just amused by the notion of Farage - on this at least - allying himself with the forces of remain, further extensions and the Benn Act - the very thing put in place to stop no deal. What he said would make more sense if he'd come out against Johnson's latest deal, which he doesn't seem to have done (though I may be wrong in this fastmoving shitshow).
> 
> Oh and yes, I agree, May's deal certainly wasn't a full brexit.



Farage has just said its not brexit.


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> I wonder what this all means for Rees-Mogg’s section 55 Act. It does seem to be quite the about turn.
> 
> View attachment 187362


They're all the fucking same. They'll drop every belief they ever pretended to hold for a sniff of a ministerial car.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Only polling, I know, but all of the current psephological research suggests otherwise, that it might well work. And let's not forget that Johnson's & the tories' current poll leads have all built up during a period when Brexit was still hypothetical; it is now tangibly within grasp. I hate to say so, but I don't think Corbyn has a snowball's chance of substantially denting the polling now.


i think if brexit is delivered, at the next election (ie the one following the imminent election) the party that brought it in will be defenestrated


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

Yeah, I dunno, I have no evidence whatever but have a feeling that Boris might win the 'war' and lose the peace. Brexit has been so divisive I wonder if there's any party that can attract enough votes to form a majority. The only possible way is a genuinely transformational campaign and if Brexit is off the table, can the Tories do that?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think if brexit is delivered, at the next election (ie the one following the imminent election) the party that brought it in will be defenestrated


2024/5?
Seems a long way off tbh.


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think if brexit is delivered, at the next election (ie the one following the imminent election) the party that brought it in will be defenestrated



No doubt that Cummings will attempt another Window Tax, to prevent that coming to pass.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> I agree that the reality of Brexit makes a big difference, but that works both ways.  If it happens, a lot of the reason to not back Labour ("Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer" / "he betrayed the stereotype northern voter") evaporates away as well and we end up back in 2017 with a contest that is largely fought on domestic politics.


Brexit 1945 analogy ahoy: the flamboyant war leader expects to win and is expected to win, but the quiet man banging on about health, benefits and nationalisation pulls it off?

I can't see it, particularly as Johnson might well get a 'getting it done' bonus in the polls, but at least there would have to be an element of truth in the above for Labour to stop the tories getting a majority.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

Does he have the numbers to get this through without promising a second referendum?


----------



## gosub (Oct 17, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Farage has just said its not brexit.



And everybody else has said its not Farage.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> I agree that the reality of Brexit makes a big difference, but that works both ways.  If it happens, a lot of the reason to not back Labour ("Corbyn is a closet Brexiteer" / "he betrayed the stereotype northern voter") evaporates away as well and we end up back in 2017 with a contest that is largely fought on domestic politics.


yep, that's a good point and one that Corbyn's supporters might feel more optimistic about...but...if Johnson's deal does yield withdrawal on 31/10, then he'll be playing that endlessly in the campaign and sure as hell (then) letting everyone know that Brexit ain't over at all...in fact we're only just beginning; there's so much more to negotiate and...do you want the enemies of the people doing that for you?
Don't share that optimism, i'm afraid.


----------



## extra dry (Oct 17, 2019)

Or civil war. 

Will the uk be torn apart?

Find out soon


Yeah, I am working out some clickbait lines ;-/ hoping the uk stays in.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Ah, beaten to it:



Plumdaff said:


> Yeah, I dunno, I have no evidence whatever but have a feeling that Boris might win the 'war' and lose the peace. Brexit has been so divisive I wonder if there's any party that can attract enough votes to form a majority. The only possible way is a genuinely transformational campaign and if Brexit is off the table, can the Tories do that?


----------



## gosub (Oct 17, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Does he have the numbers to get this through without promising a second referendum?



Still think that is a waste of paper, people will take this deal over a no deal brexit


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Yeah, I dunno, I have no evidence whatever but have a feeling that Boris might win the 'war' and lose the peace. Brexit has been so divisive I wonder if there's any party that can attract enough votes to form a majority. The only possible way is a genuinely transformational campaign and if Brexit is off the table, can the Tories do that?


Pre-deal polling says yes.


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> yep, that's a good point and one that Corbyn's supporters might feel more optimistic about...but...if Johnson's deal does yield withdrawal on 31/10, then he'll be playing that endlessly in the campaign and sure as hell (then) letting everyone know that Brexit ain't over at all...in fact we're only just beginning; there's so much more to negotiate and...do you want the enemies of the people doing that for you?
> Don't share that optimism, i'm afraid.



He absolutely will, but of course the very simple answer to that is that May had a deal as well and it was stopped by him and his chums.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Pre-deal polling says yes.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> He absolutely will, but of course the very simple answer to that is that May had a deal as well and it was stopped by him and his chums.


May is, very much, yesterday's woman and I can't see her or her deal being of any consequence whatsoever in the forthcoming GE campaign.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 187372


It's Com Res, but I take the point. I dunno, I still have a possible naive feeling that all might change if it is actually a done deal.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> May is, very much, yesterday's woman and I can't see her or her deal being of any consequence whatsoever in the forthcoming GE campaign.


She’ll be of consequence in that it can be frequently pointed out that he got her booted out of office and then nicked off with her deal.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> She’ll be of consequence in that it can be frequently pointed out that he got her booted out of office and then nicked off with her deal.


Those saying they'll vote for Johnson won't give 2 hoots about it.


----------



## gosub (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 187372



Given the exact wording of what they were asked : that 7% is very much in line with the cretins out of a hundred that millions of episodes of pointless has drummed into me


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Those saying they'll vote for Johnson won't give 2 hoots about it.


What about those in two minds about him?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2024/5?
> Seems a long way off tbh.


I think that should brexit occur, the next government will be in a very unhappy position as the size of the task ahead becomes clear.


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> May is, very much, yesterday's woman and I can't see her or her deal being of any consequence whatsoever in the forthcoming GE campaign.



The deal won't, but Johnson's behaviour in it will be.  What better example could you have of his untrustworthy nature* than his role in that - agreeing the strategy, then resigning because he didn't agree with the strategy, then voting twice against it because of what it would do to the union and to support the DUP, then voting for it, then negotiating something that is even worse and which the DUP oppose.

* that doesn't involve his libido


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> What about those in two minds about him?


The ones that are in no mind about Corbyn?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> She’ll be of consequence in that it can be frequently pointed out that he got her booted out of office and then nicked off with her deal.


Don't think so. Johnson's will be the loudest voice in the election as will the 'we got it done' message. Any kind of libdem or labour lines of attack will be weak, particularly the latter. Unless the economy has tanked brexit will be the last thing labour want to talk about - wtf could they say?  It will be about whether people's minds move onto domestic issues - and I'm not convinced that will be enough to deny the tories a majority.

Edit: and in the absence of economic collapse, street fighting or whatever, farage's will be the most effective lines of attack.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> The deal won't, but Johnson's behaviour in it will be.  What better example could you have of his untrustworthy nature* than his role in that - agreeing the strategy, then resigning because he didn't agree with the strategy, then voting twice against it because of what it would do to the union and to support the DUP, then voting for it, then negotiating something that is even worse and which the DUP oppose.
> 
> * that doesn't involve his libido


Polling says that his supporters couldn't care less about his trustworthiness.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The ones that are in no mind about Corbyn?


No, the other ones.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I think that should brexit occur, the next government will be in a very unhappy position as the size of the task ahead becomes clear.


But in power (with a majority).
Cue bonfire of the workers' rights.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

ignatious said:


> No, the other ones.


Polling says not enough to stop him.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2024/5?
> Seems a long way off tbh.



By that time we’ll be in the death throes of water/food wars & climate Armageddon


----------



## ignatious (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Polling says not enough to stop him.


Polling’s said a lot over the last few years. 

The optics of this deal aren’t great for Johnson. Whether labour can take advantage of that is debatable but the door is ajar if they can come up with a cohesive campaign that ticks the right boxes.


----------



## Santino (Oct 17, 2019)

Polling. Remain sneaks a victory. Clinton thumps Trump. Theresa May with a 200 seat majority.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

FWIW, Goodwin has done the math for us...



Not sure about the title of the 1st scenario column; most likely?


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Polling says that his supporters couldn't care less about his trustworthiness.



Indeed, but that polling says he is somewhere between 30 and 37% of the electorate.  It may not be enough to win outright, or win at all for that matter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> But in power (with a majority).
> Cue bonfire of the workers' rights.


The next hoc will look very similar to this hoc, I don't see the fat blond pig getting a majority


----------



## kabbes (Oct 17, 2019)

Who are the 3 Tories and 4 Labour who don’t vote?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The next hoc will look very similar to this hoc, I don't see the fat blond pig getting a majority


Maybe I'm just in an especially pessimistic mood today...but...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Who are the 3 Tories and 4 Labour who don’t vote?


Speaker & deputies.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Maybe I'm just in an especially pessimistic mood today...but...


Every day the nefandous Johnson lives reinforces my pessimism


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 17, 2019)

My best guess as to how an election goes is another hung parliament, but that polling means fuck all until we've had a couple of weeks of media coverage on the deal. You can't really poll for that.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Accept all that's said above about polling...but...the tracker polling tells us that significant numbers of respondents were willing to buy into the narrative that Johnson *could* 'get us out'. He's now offered them the evidence that they were justified in their simplistic faith. Powerful electoral stuff.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Meanwhile...over in tin-foil hat land...


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

Reckon the vermin will be polling in the 40's within a few days.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Accept all that's said above about polling...but...the tracker polling tells us that significant numbers of respondents were willing to buy into the narrative that Johnson *could* 'get us out'. He's now offered them the evidence that they were justified in their simplistic faith. Powerful electoral stuff.
> 
> View attachment 187379


Yep. Notwithstanding the caveats about 2017, polls and methodologies, there have always been questions as to why labour haven't had consistent leads over the last year at least. But when you add in Johnson's 'getting it done' line, even more so if he _does_ get it done, it's hard to see anything other than a Tory working majority.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Reckon the vermin will be polling in the 40's within a few days.


Yep. What happens to the libdem/labour interface will be interesting, I'm guessing the libs will poll higher than Labour. But the other (less likely) possibility is that those voters see that the battle over brexit has been lost and return to labour.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 17, 2019)

Agreement. 
And neither a hard border...nor a soft border  
Hmm.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

Jason statham hard level brexit tonight. Let’s flood the channel tunnel and scuttle the P&O fleet in the entrance to Dover docks.its what the queen mum would have wanted


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Jason statham hard level brexit tonight. Let’s flood the channel tunnel and scuttle the P&O fleet in the entrance to Dover docks.


IT based regulatory no checks border with refunds - the new Maginot Line.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 17, 2019)

To liven up further a lively day, Farage makes utter tit of himself misunderstanding both what Juncker said and the Benn Act.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 17, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> To liven up further a lively day, Farage makes utter tit of himself misunderstanding both what Juncker said and the Benn Act.




Not sure how he thinks UK legislation is supposed to be binding on the EU but OK.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Agreement.
> And neither a hard border...nor a soft border
> Hmm.



Well the Taoiseach seems very happy with it, and it does seem like a win-win for the north - benefiting from north-south trade without any border controls, whilst also benefiting from being in the UK customs territory, aiding east-west trade.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 17, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> My best guess as to how an election goes is another hung parliament, but that polling means fuck all until we've had a couple of weeks of media coverage on the deal. You can't really poll for that.


I think Tories will win another election with super-weak majority as anti-Brexit vote will be too split, and will blame absolutely everyone else for the complete shitshow they've put the country in. And people will believe them.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 17, 2019)

so the union is kinda dead now i suppose


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 17, 2019)

Cloo said:


> I think Tories will win another election with super-weak majority as anti-Brexit vote will be too split, and will blame absolutely everyone else for the complete shitshow they've put the country in. And people will believe them.


I agree this is the most likely scenario. In fact I'm going to predict a workable majority of 30-40 and Labour losing a lot of votes to the LibDems.


----------



## binka (Oct 17, 2019)

Dodds and Foster looked furious on the BBC news there


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

They always look furious.

Right pair of miserable cunts.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> They always look furious.
> 
> Right pair of miserable cunts.


Literally all they do, be angry at stuff.


----------



## Supine (Oct 17, 2019)

binka said:


> Dodds and Foster looked furious on the BBC news there



So brexit does have an upside


----------



## A380 (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 187389


Why has he (or the guitarist photoshopped) got his left hand behind the capo? That doesn't make sense.


----------



## A380 (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> Why has he (or the guitarist photoshopped) got his left hand behind the capo? That doesn't make sense.


Don’t fret.


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

A380 said:


> Don’t fret.


I thought you'd give me a proper answer but you're just stringing me along.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

A380 said:


> Don’t fret.


M8, he's stringing you along.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)




----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> Why has he (or the guitarist photoshopped) got his left hand behind the capo? That doesn't make sense.


It’s a few years old, but my understanding was that it was real. And came after an interview in which he said he could play guitar.

I wouldn’t put him past doing it on purpose.


----------



## Cid (Oct 17, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s a few years old, but my understanding was that it was real. And came after an interview in which he said he could play guitar.
> 
> I wouldn’t put him past doing it on purpose.



Warning: extreme awkwardness


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> Why has he (or the guitarist photoshopped) got his left hand behind the capo? That doesn't make sense.


I was thinking that and also trying to work out the chord. If it's anything like he talks it would be a cacophony of bum notes and shite.


----------



## JimW (Oct 17, 2019)

Putting the rectum in plectrum.


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I was thinking that and also trying to work out the chord. If it's anything like he talks it would be a cacophony of bum notes and shite.


Someone's tuned him up a nice open d and told him to keep his left hand out of the way.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Well the Taoiseach seems very happy with it, and it does seem like a win-win for the north - benefiting from north-south trade without any border controls, whilst also benefiting from being in the UK customs territory, aiding east-west trade.




Oh yes. I know. 
But the unionists will not be happy...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

JimW said:


> Putting the rectum in plectrum.


Rectum? nearly blew 'em off... etc.

coat


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

JimW said:


> Putting the rectum in plectrum.


A dick with a pick.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Oh yes. I know.
> But the unionists will not be happy...



They seemed happy enough with the customs arrangements/border in the Irish sea earlier this week, until they lost their chance of having a veto on continuing those arrangements 4 years down the line, because they lost their chance of blackmailing both London & Dublin every 4 years.

There's some logic in both communities agreeing on internal policies in the north, but not with an international treaty, that should be down to a simple majority, perfectly reasonable, but the DUP is far from reasonable.


----------



## maomao (Oct 17, 2019)

Ming'll be back in a minute to tell us how Boris is making a lot of lute out of Brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

So, if he loses at the weekend and then sends 'the letter', will Corbyn support the inevitable motion from Johnson for an election/bring a vonc himself? Not sure how he can avoid doing that, however much he'll be bricking it. Johnson certainly ain't going to resign, aside from a strategic resignation.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

maomao said:


> A dick with a pick.


Prick with an acoustic.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, if he loses at the weekend and then sends 'the letter', will Corbyn support the inevitable motion from Johnson for an election/bring a vonc himself? Not sure how he can avoid doing that, however much he'll be bricking it. Johnson certainly ain't going to resign, aside from a strategic resignation.



No. Corbyn will support a second referendum and leave Johnson in power. McDonnell and others have indicated as much. 

In summary Labour are against no deal, against Johnson’s deal and against a GE. 

They are for: their own unspecified deal and a 2nd ref.

amazing


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Fucking hell, could you imagine being a guitar teacher with Johnson as your pupil? 

'So, I erm, press this sort of thing down about here and, golly, wave my other hand up and down a bit ..'
He'd be wearing it within five minutes


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

Labour is in more of a mess than the fucking Tories, you couldn't make it up.


----------



## agricola (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No. Corbyn will support a second referendum and leave Johnson in power. McDonnell and others have indicated as much.
> 
> In summary Labour are against no deal, against Johnson’s deal and against a GE.
> 
> ...



Why would anyone, given what happened last time, want a second referendum and trust Johnson to run it?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No. Corbyn will support a second referendum and leave Johnson in power. McDonnell and others have indicated as much.
> 
> In summary Labour are against no deal, against Johnson’s deal and against a GE.
> 
> ...


Even leaving the core issues aside, that's just about the worst imaginable 'look'.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> Why would anyone, given what happened last time, want a second referendum and trust Johnson to run it?



Good question. Fuck knows


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Even leaving the core issues aside, that's just about the worst imaginable 'look'.



When I’ve quizzed momentum types their response seems to be it’ll all be okay when the GE is finally called because everyone will have forgotten the last 3 years, Johnson will run a May style disaster campaign and the ‘Oh, Jeremy Corbyn’ surge will appear.

I think they are being optimistic...


----------



## belboid (Oct 17, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, if he loses at the weekend and then sends 'the letter', will Corbyn support the inevitable motion from Johnson for an election/bring a vonc himself? Not sure how he can avoid doing that, however much he'll be bricking it. Johnson certainly ain't going to resign, aside from a strategic resignation.


Yes, he will. The only question is can he get enough support from the other parties for it.   While McDonnell has, foolishly, said he'd be happy with referendum first, he still would prefer a GE. That is the push.  A referendum on Johnson's deal aint gonna happen (in this parliament), the tories hate the idea.


----------



## belboid (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> When I’ve quizzed momentum types their response seems to be it’ll all be okay when the GE is finally called because everyone will have forgotten the last 3 years, Johnson will run a May style disaster campaign and the ‘Oh, Jeremy Corbyn’ surge will appear.
> 
> I think they are being optimistic...


I haven't met a single person, in Momentum or anywhere else ion the labour left, who would say that. Not one.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> Yes, he will. The only question is can he get enough support from the other parties for it.   While McDonnell has, foolishly, said he'd be happy with referendum first, he still would prefer a GE. That is the push.  A referendum on Johnson's deal aint gonna happen (in this parliament), the tories hate the idea.



Corbyn won’t need the other parties - if Johnson’s deal goes down it’ll be a Tory motion for a GE. All he has to do is support it


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

There's a discussion on Sky News, four in the studio, and Anna Soubry on a screen in the background, appearing remotely from what appears to be her kitchen.

As usual she has been constantly trying to interrupt, someone at Sky decided that was a no-no & turned-down the volume on the remote link - you could see her ranting & raving, but not hear her - funny as fuck.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

Haha at the other EU leader hinting at another extension


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

belboid said:


> A referendum on Johnson's deal aint gonna happen (in this parliament), the tories hate the idea.


I don't exactly know how likely a referendum is, but I'm not sure the Tories are quite united enough for that to be the main obstacle.


----------



## belboid (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Corbyn won’t need the other parties - if Johnson’s deal goes down it’ll be a Tory motion for a GE. All he has to do is support it


The bugger will be getting other Labour MP's to support the motion. Not much of a problem if it came from Labour, but it will be trickier with some of the fuckers if it is a tory motion.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

agricola said:


> Why would anyone, given what happened last time, want a second referendum and trust Johnson to run it?


Because it's that or guaranteed Tory rule for at least the next decade.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

Better just to not go for the deal, force an extension

and watch the fall out no


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> Better just to not go for the deal, force an extension
> 
> and watch the fall out no


That only works if it starts to look like Johnson can't win an election, which looks unlikely now. Otherwise, his party rallies round him, and pretty much everyone (edit: well, a sizeable majority of everyone) blames Labour, although for different and contradictory reasons.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 17, 2019)

The BBC is reporting the new deal will mean the UK paying over £33bn in the settlement.

Wasn't it £39bn before?


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

being forced to ask for his extension could damage his "do or Die" approach and expose him as the clueless gobshite he really is


plus more negotiations and more concessions on his part would weaken his support


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The BBC is reporting the new deal will mean the UK paying over £33bn in the settlement.
> Wasn't it £39bn before?


Did Corbyn not trying to get Boris to admit in july it was down to 33billion
interesting spin that


*



Does the UK owe the EU £39bn?

Click to expand...

*As Brexit was delayed from 29 March to 31 October, some of that money has been paid as part of the UK's normal membership contributions, which means it is no longer part of the "divorce bill". The OBR estimates that the bill is now £33bn


----------



## Supine (Oct 17, 2019)

If we delay for 100 years they'll owe us money!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The BBC is reporting the new deal will mean the UK paying over £33bn in the settlement.
> 
> Wasn't it £39bn before?


Cue more 'cash' for hospitals/schools/nurses/veterans/sheep...etc. whatever...christ this is dire.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

having spent 6 billion and the unbiased BBC reporting they saved this amount


even after posting a reality check article themselves


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

I have a horrible feeling that much of this analysis from Smithson's (LibDemy) betting site is sound:

politicalbetting.com  » Blog Archive   » Welcome to the Looking-Glass


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 17, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> There's a discussion on Sky News, four in the studio, and Anna Soubry on a screen in the background, appearing remotely from what appears to be her kitchen.



handily close to the cooking sherry.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 17, 2019)

SNP gonna love this from Gove...


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 17, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I have a horrible feeling that much of this analysis from Smithson's (LibDemy) betting site is sound:
> 
> politicalbetting.com  » Blog Archive   » Welcome to the Looking-Glass


Thats quite succinct especially 1) Labours weak position 
2) "Britain signalled to the EU exactly where its weak spots were. And the EU has used them. It has _appeared_ to concede on the backstop (by shifting it while allowing the PM to say it has gone) while _in reality_ getting everything that mattered to it from the previous deal – and then some.
3." The Brexit party – its leader now wanting an extension – looks churlishly idiotic." 
4."The genius of Boris is to turn a genuine question about Britain’s relationship with the EU and the terms on which it departs solely into a question about what is good for him and the party he leads."


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

still not sure

trying to strong arm people over the Irish problem took 700 year to even calm down


3 years pfft

the second half of the Tory name is quite often omitted


----------



## Cloo (Oct 17, 2019)

Ugh, that deal is a mandate for a shabby, cheap and nasty UK. Make it attractive to businesses with longer hours and fewer workers' rights (which businesses will conveniently forget doesn't = productivity, whatever Priti Fuckwit Patel thinks), while making it a shit place to actually live.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Ugh, that deal is a mandate for a shabby, cheap and nasty UK. Make it attractive to businesses with longer hours and fewer workers' rights (which businesses will conveniently forget doesn't = productivity, whatever Priti Fuckwit Patel thinks), while making it a shit place to actually live.



Um, we’ve already got long hours, the most restrictive labour laws in Europe and a shabby UK. All of that happened under EU membership.

The way we reverse or fight that is the way we always have


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

when is the last time you signed a document agreeing to work over 48 hours a week...


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

Get your drink on, it's Michael Gove!


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Um, we’ve already got long hours, the most restrictive labour laws in Europe and a shabby UK. All of that happened under EU membership.
> 
> The way we reverse or fight that is the way we always have



Not to mention the growth of the highly exploitative gig economy that the likes of Amazon have taken more than full of advantage of all under the EU that have done fuck all to protect workers.

The EU can get fucked.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> when is the last time you signed a document agreeing to work over 48 hours a week...



WTR is pish weak. I represent workers every week who have zero control over their working hours


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> WTR is pish weak. I represent workers every week who have zero control over their working hours



WTR do you mean what the fuck? 

free trade rules and this will help uk workers how...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 17, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Not to mention the growth of the highly exploitative gig economy that the likes of Amazon have taken more than full of advantage of all under the EU that have done fuck all to protect workers.
> 
> The EU can get fucked.



Perfectly put


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> WTR do you mean what the fuck?
> 
> free trade rules and this will help uk workers how...


Working time directive. Which UK was allowed to amend, which doesn't apply to the self employed (or 'self employed'), which doesn't help if you're on a zero hours etc.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

Amazing how many people seem to think the EU is a massive trade union looking to secure glorious workers rights for all or something, batshit, defies actually existing reality. By all means oppose no deal or leave at all or whatever but get out the fucking rabbit hole


----------



## editor (Oct 17, 2019)

Capt Jean Luc Picard is not having it

Sir Patrick Stewart to pay for protesters from Yorkshire to get to People's Vote march


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 17, 2019)

if only Duncan smith had not quoted "work will set you free'"


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 17, 2019)

editor said:


> Capt Jean Luc Picard is not having it
> 
> Sir Patrick Stewart to pay for protesters from Yorkshire to get to People's Vote march


"Make it stop"


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The way we reverse or fight that is the way we always have


Just times 20.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 17, 2019)

.


----------



## tommers (Oct 17, 2019)

I'm sure a rejuvenated Conservative party will outlaw zero hours contracts the first chance they get and then set out a programme of radical new policies to reverse growing wealth inequality across the country.

I'm glad we're losing our biggest trade partner. Gives Boris a chance to really enact the policies he wants. He can properly go for it, the shackles are off!


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 17, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> *Amazing how many people seem to think the EU is a massive trade union looking to secure glorious workers rights for all* or something, batshit, defies actually existing reality. By all means oppose no deal or leave at all or whatever but get out the fucking rabbit hole



Is there a _single_ person posting here (Remain or Leave) on here who actually believes or thinks that bonkersly caricatured shit? Or posts so?

And beyond this site and in IRL, there can't be more than a few ultra-Remainiac loons who'd say anything similar. No doubt a few on here will succesfully rummage for one or two stupid  Guardian opinion-pieces that'll contradict me, but that's not 'IRL' is it? 

True, TU activism can/should/sometimes does help us cling on to some rights that we have (says the PCS member  ).
And such rights aren't EU-sourced mostly ... or even much at all with the odd exception.

*But* despite that, there's *nothing* so bad about being in the EU (employment rights wise) that an ultra-Tory hard-Brexit deal, or no deal, won't make a lot worse, given Tory intentions


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Is there a _single_ person posting here (Remain or Leave) on here who actually believes or thinks that bonkersly caricatured shit? Or posts so?



Well my post was in response to a couple of posts from somebody else so yeah


----------



## pinkmonkey (Oct 17, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> being forced to ask for his extension could damage his "do or Die" approach and expose him as the clueless gobshite he really is
> 
> 
> plus more negotiations and more concessions on his part would weaken his support


Ditch or No Ditch


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 17, 2019)

Is there a single thing about Cloo 's point (see below) re the deal, that in any way confirms your exaggerated caricature of Remainiac  "EU -- Workers' Rights Paradise" bollocks though?? 

I actually agree with Smokeandsteam 's earlier bit about workplace rights being pretty fucking shabby now. 
But my own dispute with this line of argumant, and I'm TU myself, is my strong feeling that a hard Brexit won't make *any* difference to that shitty state of affairs.

As I said, there's plenty of forms of Brexit, very much including this latest "deal", that can and will make things that much worse.




			
				Cloo said:
			
		

> Ugh, that deal is a mandate for a shabby, cheap and nasty UK. Make it attractive to businesses with longer hours and fewer workers' rights (which businesses will conveniently forget doesn't = productivity, whatever Priti Fuckwit Patel thinks), while making it a shit place to actually live.



There are better arguments against the above than distorting it beyond reality .. surely?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 17, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Is there a single thing about Cloo 's point (see below) re the deal, that in any way confirms your exaggerated caricature of Remainiac  "EU -- Workers' Rights Paradise" bollocks though??
> 
> I actually agree with Smokeandsteam 's earlier bit about workplace rights being pretty fucking shabby now.
> But my own dispute with this line of argumant, and I'm TU myself, is my strong feeling that a hard Brexit won't make *any* difference to that shitty state of affairs.
> ...


It had nothing to do with cloo's post


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Accept all that's said above about polling...but...the tracker polling tells us that significant numbers of respondents were willing to buy into the narrative that Johnson *could* 'get us out'. He's now offered them the evidence that they were justified in their simplistic faith. Powerful electoral stuff.
> 
> View attachment 187379



I take your point but it isn't possible to tell what percentage of that polling was based on people who either thought Johnson would go for no deal or who thought Johnson would get a better deal than May got. Neither of those things has happened, so now a section of that support will be pretty fucked off and we don't know how large or vocal that section of support will be. Yes, he will be able to say he has "got Brexit done" (assuming deal goes through Parliament) but that doesn't mean that people will buy the soundbite, especially as we don't yet know how vocal Brexit headbangers will be in criticising it.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy : OK, sorry I read it like that then (   ), but my broader points still stand.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> so the union is kinda dead now i suppose



Reasons to be cheerful


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Oh yes. I know.
> But the unionists will not be happy...



Was just thinking this thread was lacking a bit of sectarianism, cheers for popping up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> when is the last time you signed a document agreeing to work over 48 hours a week...



Most of the job interviews I've ever had.


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I take your point but it isn't possible to tell what percentage of that polling was based on people who either thought Johnson would go for no deal or who thought Johnson would get a better deal than May got. Neither of those things has happened, so now a section of that support will be pretty fucked off and we don't know how large or vocal that section of support will be. Yes, he will be able to say he has "got Brexit done" (assuming deal goes through Parliament) but that doesn't mean that people will buy the soundbite, especially as we don't yet know how vocal Brexit headbangers will be in criticising it.




I think you've got a very good point, but that still risks (?) underestimating the strength of 'Just Get On With It/Over With' feeling.
Partly in overlap with the 'Utterly Fucking Bored by Brexit' tendency, those who just want the whole tedious malarkey to go away.
And I think Johnson and all his Tory Big Media pals could be quite effective at exploiting all that


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

tommers said:


> I'm glad we're losing our biggest trade partner. Gives Boris a chance to really enact the policies he wants. He can properly go for it, the shackles are off!



We're not losing our biggest trade partner. They're maintaining control over our economic policy while not having to deal with British politicians any more.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I think you've got a very good point, but that still risks (?) underestimating the strength of 'Just Get On With It/Over With' feeling.
> Partly in overlap with the 'Utterly Fucking Bored by Brexit' tendency, those who just want the whole tedious malarkey to go away.
> And I think Johnson and all his Tory Big Media pals could be quite effective at exploiting all that



Yeah, that's absolutely true and those are unknowns was just pointing to a flaw in brogdale 's argument.

However, it ain't done yet. To get the bounce the deal needs to get through Parliament.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> We're not losing our biggest trade partner. They're maintaining control over our economic policy while not having to deal with British politicians any more.


Under the deal, they're probably not so much maintaining as gaining control. At present, the EU can create trading rules for the EU. But the power dynamics under the deal will mean they can tailor trading rules for the UK as best suits them. Cherry-picking, they call it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Under the deal, they're probably not so much maintaining as gaining control. At present, the EU can create trading rules for the EU. But the power dynamics under the deal will mean they can tailor trading rules for the UK as best suits them. Cherry-picking, they call it.



That's probably a fair assessment, aye. But doesn't that undermine somewhat your claim that the Tories will be in power for the next ten years? When their voters figure that out there will be a backlash.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's probably a fair assessment, aye. But doesn't that undermine somewhat your claim that the Tories will be in power for the next ten years? When their voters figure that out there will be a backlash.


No, cos the deal's not happening.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> No, cos the deal's not happening.



Doesn't seem like that helps your prediction either.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> WTR do you mean what the fuck?
> 
> free trade rules and this will help uk workers how...


You mean free trade deals like CETA and TTIP. Empires


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> Is there a _single_ person posting here (Remain or Leave) on here who actually believes or thinks that bonkersly caricatured shit? Or posts so?


Five posts above your you have someone defending the EU as a body for workers rights and against trade deals.
If you can't see what Proper Tidy was talking about you have not been reading this, or other, threads.

EDIT: And a significant section of the LP is pushing not just a argument for remaining in the UK but a pro-EU politics.


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Oh yes. I know.
> But the unionists will not be happy...



I'm sure Arlene and chums reckon smiling is the devil's work.


----------



## jontz01 (Oct 18, 2019)

I haven't really been following this whole brexit malarkey since I'm not currently living in the UK, but I do have English bank accounts with a couple of quid for emergencies etc. Given the impending doom, does anyone reckon it would be worth buying euros or dollars, waiting for the pound to crash, then buying back? When is the chaos due to actually strike?


----------



## emanymton (Oct 18, 2019)

'Greased piglet' Boris Johnson could pass deal, says David Cameron



> The thing about the greased piglet is that he manages to slip through other people’s hands



Well I guess he would know a thing or two about that sort of thing.


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

emanymton said:


> 'Greased piglet' Boris Johnson could pass deal, says David Cameron
> 
> 
> 
> Well I guess he would know a thing or two about that sort of thing.


Is he oblivious or revelling in it? Hard to tell with these public school motherfuckers.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Was just thinking this thread was lacking a bit of sectarianism, cheers for popping up.




Lol......come on......the DUP are *never* happy. They've refused to work for the past 2 years... because really they dont want power sharing. They pay lip service to it and now they're all "lets get unionists and nationalists working together" but the current DUP are as sectarian as you could ever get and were previously happy in their May power trip but now they're not needed and even though they've got what everyone wants (no border) they'll pretend they're losing connections with the UK because they really back of it all *do* want a border on the island. They want a border in order to distance NI from the rest of Ireland. If they could separate NI completely from the island of Ireland they would. The current DUP has little interest in the nationalist population in NI let alone anyone else living on the island of Ireland. They've yet to recognise the fact that the majority in NI voted to remain in the EU. Most of the ordinary people in NI (nationalist and unionist) do not want a border and want to remain in the EU. The DUP has not done those people any favours. Even ordinary unionists  have come out declaring they are happy there is no border...but the DUP will try their best to scupper the current deal because they think they are losing the union with the UK. The idea of Stormont was to allow NI governance of itself. It's a pity that is not happening and we all know why. DUP and Arlene covering up their own corruption. 
David Trimble was spot on when he said that Stormont had to work for everyone in NI. But Arlene has no real inclination towards power sharing.


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

jontz01 said:


> I haven't really been following this whole brexit malarkey since I'm not currently living in the UK, but I do have English bank accounts with a couple of quid for emergencies etc. Given the impending doom, does anyone reckon it would be worth buying euros or dollars, waiting for the pound to crash, then buying back? When is the chaos due to actually strike?


Ming seems to know all about making money out of Brexit, in fact he's still convinced the whole thing is just a get-even-richer-quick scheme for a handful of Johnson's mates.

Maybe he can help...


----------



## krtek a houby (Oct 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Lol......come on......the DUP are *never* happy. They've refused to work for the past 2 years... because really they dont want power sharing. They pay lip service to it and now they're all "lets get unionists and nationalists working together" but the current DUP are as sectarian as you could ever get and were previously happy in their May power trip but now they're not needed and even though they've got what everyone wants (no border) they'll pretend they're losing connections with the UK because they really back of it all *do* want a border on the island. They want a border in order to distance NI from the rest of Ireland. If they could separate NI completely from the island of Ireland they would. The current DUP has little interest in the nationalist population in NI let alone anyone else living on the island of Ireland. They've yet to recognise the fact that the majority in NI voted to remain in the EU. Most of the ordinary people in NI (nationalist and unionist) do not want a border and want to remain in the EU. The DUP has not done those people any favours. Even ordinary unionists  have come out declaring they are happy there is no border...but the DUP will try their best to scupper the current deal because they think they are losing the union with the UK. The idea of Stormont was to allow NI governance of itself. It's a pity that is not happening and we all know why. DUP and Arlene covering up their own corruption.
> David Trimble was spot on when he said that Stormont had to work for everyone in NI. But Arlene has no real inclination towards power sharing.



You're too kind. The DUP have shown utter contempt to the people of Ireland, North *and* South. Fuck 'em.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Was just thinking this thread was lacking a bit of sectarianism, cheers for popping up.



I am sure Lupa meant the DUP rather than unionists in general, at least that's how I took it in view of the discussion being about their position in relation to brexit.

ETA - Oh, she did, as clarified in her post just above.


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> Ming seems to know all about making money out of Brexit, in fact he's still convinced the whole thing is just a get-even-richer-quick scheme for a handful of Johnson's mates.
> 
> Maybe he can help...



Ask JRM he runs a company doing exactly that. And they love a good bounce on the pound.


----------



## jontz01 (Oct 18, 2019)

He's having a lie down.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

jontz01 said:


> I haven't really been following this whole brexit malarkey since I'm not currently living in the UK, but I do have English bank accounts with a couple of quid for emergencies etc. Given the impending doom, does anyone reckon it would be worth buying euros or dollars, waiting for the pound to crash, then buying back? When is the chaos due to actually strike?


Buy gold


----------



## mauvais (Oct 18, 2019)

jontz01 said:


> I haven't really been following this whole brexit malarkey since I'm not currently living in the UK, but I do have English bank accounts with a couple of quid for emergencies etc. Given the impending doom, does anyone reckon it would be worth buying euros or dollars, waiting for the pound to crash, then buying back? When is the chaos due to actually strike?


Sounds like a bad idea to me. You don't know what will happen, or when, or presumably when you'll need access to the money in one currency or another, and even if you were successful, it's not a given that the movements will be big enough to eclipse the transaction fees.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

Bookies think 1-3 on deal passing, 3-1 on extension/not leaving. I think if you've got a spare ton it's a great way to make £33, those odds are wrong, fuck all chance of this getting passed


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

Labour will be issuing a three line whip to vote against the deal. The DUP are not going to vote for it. Fuck knows what the Lib Dem’s will do, vote to reinstate Pol Pot in Cambodia or something, possibly. SNP won’t go for it, it’s dead.


----------



## mauvais (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Bookies think 1-3 on deal passing, 3-1 on extension/not leaving. I think if you've got a spare ton it's a great way to make £33, those odds are wrong, fuck all chance of this getting passed


Isn't that the wrong way round? Or at least £300


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Labour will be issuing a three line whip to vote against the deal. The DUP are not going to vote for it. Fuck knows what the Lib Dem’s will do, vote to reinstate Pol Pot in Cambodia or something, possibly. SNP won’t go for it, it’s dead.


Three line whips aren't what they were. There will be Labour rebels. See how many of the twenty odd that got kicked out last month he can get to vote for it. It might squeak past.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 18, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> *But* despite that, there's *nothing* so bad about being in the EU (employment rights wise) that an ultra-Tory hard-Brexit deal, or no deal, won't make a lot worse, given Tory intentions


That's the core of my point... I am not saying the EU is some miraculous haven of rights but at least it may offer some kind of check on Tories. The fact is, even if the EU couldn't have stopped things getting worse with us in it, when we leave, in order to 'attract business' and tell Daily Mail readers that We Are Free of Europe and Things Are Different Now, the Tories are likely to make further attacks on workers rights. We know that ministers like Priti Patel believe that workers have 'too many rights' and they will gleefully trumpet that 'Now we've left Europe we can make it easier for hard-working businesses to fire shirkers and layabouts' (which is most likely to be people who get ill or have caring responsibilities). And also they'll have the excuse that now we'll have to be competitive with Europe, without free movement, it seems likely they'll decide that giving employers as much of a whip hand as humanly possible is the way to do that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

mauvais said:


> Isn't that the wrong way round? Or at least £300


Yeah I've fucked it, sorry everybody

Wait there, no I haven't, I've got all confused now


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Three line whips aren't what they were. There will be Labour rebels. See how many of the twenty odd that got kicked out last month he can get to vote for it. It might squeak past.



The vote is tomorrow, yeah? At a time when >1million voters will be marching past demanding Brexit be stopped. That will focus minds of anyone going in to vote, especially those who voted against May’s deal, as this is the same deal, but a bit worse for the UK, seeing as it actually effectively cedes UK territory to the EU...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah I've fucked it, sorry everybody
> 
> Wait there, no I haven't, I've got all confused now



Evens on the deal being rejected.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Evens on the deal being rejected.


Crikey, there are some idiots placing bets right now


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Crikey, there are some idiots placing bets right now



When is that not the case?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 18, 2019)

I really hope the deal is rejected but it's squeaky bum time. Not as confident as some of the rest of you. Labour rebels might turn up in numbers. Wouldn't put it past the lib dem scum to be split on it either.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Three line whips aren't what they were. There will be Labour rebels. See how many of the twenty odd that got kicked out last month he can get to vote for it. It might squeak past.



If so whoever in Labour supports the deal will have won us another five years of Boris Johnson.


----------



## tommers (Oct 18, 2019)

Cloo said:


> That's the core of my point... I am not saying the EU is some miraculous haven of rights but at least it may offer some kind of check on Tories. The fact is, even if the EU couldn't have stopped things getting worse with us in it, when we leave, in order to 'attract business' and tell Daily Mail readers that We Are Free of Europe and Things Are Different Now, the Tories are likely to make further attacks on workers rights. We know that ministers like Priti Patel believe that workers have 'too many rights' and they will gleefully trumpet that 'Now we've left Europe we can make it easier for hard-working businesses to fire shirkers and layabouts' (which is most likely to be people who get ill or have caring responsibilities). And also they'll have the excuse that now we'll have to be competitive with Europe, without free movement, it seems likely they'll decide that giving employers as much of a whip hand as humanly possible is the way to do that.


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## tommers (Oct 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> If so whoever in Labour supports the deal will have won us another five years of Boris Johnson.


Some of them would prefer it to Corbyn.

This is passing.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Oct 18, 2019)

tommers said:


> Some of them would prefer it to Corbyn.
> 
> This is passing.


Ronnie Campbell, who has confirmed he’s voting for the deal, is a close ally of corbyn so don’t think that’s got anything to do with it. 

I think it squeaks through


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> If so whoever in Labour supports the deal will have won us another five years of Boris Johnson.



Boris wins the PR battle either way. He's either the hero who got Brexit through or the hero who was held back by an uncooperative parliament.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> If so whoever in Labour supports the deal will have won us another five years of Boris Johnson.


Yeah, but the fuckers will be incentivised by the prospect of it hastening Corbyn's demise.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Boris wins the PR battle either way. He's either the hero who got Brexit through or the hero who was held back by an uncooperative parliament.


Yup, he'll win an election and say things only aren't wonderful because of everyone else's intransigence,  deal or no.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Boris wins the PR battle either way. He's either the hero who got Brexit through or the hero who was held back by an uncooperative parliament.


their win:win ---> win strategy


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Lupa said:


> Lol......come on......the DUP are *never* happy. They've refused to work for the past 2 years... because really they dont want power sharing. They pay lip service to it and now they're all "lets get unionists and nationalists working together" but the current DUP are as sectarian as you could ever get and were previously happy in their May power trip but now they're not needed and even though they've got what everyone wants (no border) they'll pretend they're losing connections with the UK because they really back of it all *do* want a border on the island. They want a border in order to distance NI from the rest of Ireland. If they could separate NI completely from the island of Ireland they would. The current DUP has little interest in the nationalist population in NI let alone anyone else living on the island of Ireland. They've yet to recognise the fact that the majority in NI voted to remain in the EU. Most of the ordinary people in NI (nationalist and unionist) do not want a border and want to remain in the EU. The DUP has not done those people any favours. Even ordinary unionists  have come out declaring they are happy there is no border...but the DUP will try their best to scupper the current deal because they think they are losing the union with the UK. The idea of Stormont was to allow NI governance of itself. It's a pity that is not happening and we all know why. DUP and Arlene covering up their own corruption.
> David Trimble was spot on when he said that Stormont had to work for everyone in NI. But Arlene has no real inclination towards power sharing.



I know the DUP are sectarian. My point was that so are you.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I am sure Lupa meant the DUP rather than unionists in general, at least that's how I took it in view of the discussion being about their position in relation to brexit.
> 
> ETA - Oh, she did, as clarified in her post just above.



Lupa has form.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Bookies think 1-3 on deal passing, 3-1 on extension/not leaving. I think if you've got a spare ton it's a great way to make £33, those odds are wrong, fuck all chance of this getting passed



Every £1 bet returns £3 pus stake. So £10 returns £40.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Every £1 bet returns £3 pus stake. So £10 returns £40.


Yeah if it is 3-1. Wait I have fucked this, ignore me.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 18, 2019)

And if it is 1-3 then your original thing of winning £33 was right

it can’t be 3-1 on one and 1-3 on the other though, or you could bet on both and make money either way


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but the fuckers will be incentivised by the prospect of it hastening Corbyn's demise.


aren’t the anti Corbyn brigade remainers?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

Hopeful of seeing off the last 7 SLP MPs, Sturgeon stirring it with a bit of conspiratorial pre-crime..


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 18, 2019)

full list of odds
Brexit Betting Odds | Politics


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 18, 2019)

kabbes said:


> And if it is 1-3 then your original thing of winning £33 was right
> 
> it can’t be 3-1 on one and 1-3 on the other though, or you could bet on both and make money either way



No you couldn't. But you could bet on both and not lose (or win) any money.

1/3 = 75%
3/1 = 25%


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but the fuckers will be incentivised by the prospect of it hastening Corbyn's demise.


pompeiians voting for an eruption


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know the DUP are sectarian. My point was that so are you.


not sure it's sectarian not to like the dup, more of an obligation i'd have thought


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> aren’t the anti Corbyn brigade remainers?


Not the likes of Onn, Snell, Smeeth, Flint, Fitzpatrick, Kinnock & Barron.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> aren’t the anti Corbyn brigade remainers?



Still. I suspect the likes of Chris Leslie hates Corbyn far more than he cares about Brexit. There are others still in Labour whose only interest is in sticking knives in Corbyn's back, although probably not enough to make up for the DUP votes or the tory exiles who won't vote with the government.

That leaves the balance of power with *checks notes* Jo fucking Swinson. So we're doomed, obviously.


----------



## kabbes (Oct 18, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> No you couldn't. But you could bet on both and not lose (or win) any money.
> 
> 1/3 = 75%
> 3/1 = 25%


Sorry, I was thinking like a gambler, ie not losing any money = winning


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 18, 2019)

Yesterday the Independent claimed a second referendum was being appended to this new deal as an option. Letwin on the wireless claimed otherwise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Yesterday the Independent claimed a second referendum was being appended to this new deal as an option. Letwin on the wireless claimed otherwise.


but what do you think?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 18, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> aren’t the anti Corbyn brigade remainers?


Nobody has a majority for anything.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> not sure it's sectarian not to like the dup, more of an obligation i'd have thought



Wasn't saying it was, there's a difference between the DUP and ordinary unionist voters.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Wasn't saying it was, there's a difference between the DUP and ordinary unionist voters.


i don't think i've ever seen you draw the same distinction between the conservative and unionist party and ordinary tory voters.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

kabbes said:


> And if it is 1-3 then your original thing of winning £33 was right
> 
> it can’t be 3-1 on one and 1-3 on the other though, or you could bet on both and make money either way


It's ladbrokes odds according to wales online, but this doesn't include leaving on no deal (quoted as 6-1)


----------



## kabbes (Oct 18, 2019)

I agree with your first post then, that those odds look surprisingly generous taken as a whole.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 18, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


>



they have the wrong person on top of the train


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i don't think i've ever seen you draw the same distinction between the conservative and unionist party and ordinary tory voters.



The sectarian dynamic isn't really present there is it?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> aren’t the anti Corbyn brigade remainers?


Again it varies - e.g. Watson pro-EU, S Kinnock willing to back a deal (it not this one)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> The sectarian dynamic isn't really present there is it?


so iyo people who vote for the conservative and unionist party aren't ordinary unionists. extraordinary unionists perhaps.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> Boris wins the PR battle either way. He's either the hero who got Brexit through or the hero who was held back by an uncooperative parliament.


Yeah and consequently there's no route to anything good for Labour or, on a UK wide basis, anti-Tory forces.  If Johnson is forced into an extension (and if it's given, which it almost certainly will regardless of Barnier's comments yesterday) he remains PM. Aside from being a twat, he's in a position of strength still and will ignore all his promises about getting it done by 31st October. We are then back into general election territory, which he will win. Labour might do better in an election about domestic affairs, but it will be a brexit election. The other pathway of course if Johnson wins on Saturday, which leads directly to a GE victory in January or so. It's a rash claim to make in such a snakepit of chaos theory and Schrodinger's this that and the other, but I suspect it really is that simple now,


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

Just thinking that there's a chance that tomorrow's vote on Johnson's deal could result in another tie. That would necessitate Bercow casting his vote with the Government (unless I've misunderstood the convention?).
Would be something quite sweetly ironic in seeing one of Bercow's last acts as finally bringing about Brexit.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

BTW - and I'm saving myself from googling - is this an _Act of Parliament_? Haven't heard anything about committee stages, house of lords etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> BTW - and I'm saving myself from googling - is this an _Act of Parliament_? Haven't heard anything about committee stages, house of lords etc.


this is an in principle vote on the deal


----------



## Flavour (Oct 18, 2019)

That would be very funny (bercow voting for it)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> BTW - and I'm saving myself from googling - is this an _Act of Parliament_? Haven't heard anything about committee stages, house of lords etc.



Super Saturday: Why is Parliament sitting this weekend and when will the Brexit vote take place?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Flavour said:


> That would be very funny (bercow voting for it)


Black Rod dragging him by the ear into the Yes lobby.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187439
> Super Saturday: Why is Parliament sitting this weekend and when will the Brexit vote take place?


ta.


----------



## Poot (Oct 18, 2019)

When Juncker says that no 'prolongation' will take place, he is just attempting to give a helping hand to getting it through, isn't he? Or he is just hungover and grumpy or something? I mean, does anyone think he is serious?


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just thinking that there's a chance that tomorrow's vote on Johnson's deal could result in another tie. That would necessitate Bercow casting his vote with the Government (unless I've misunderstood the convention?).
> Would be something quite sweetly ironic in seeing one of Bercow's last acts as finally bringing about Brexit.


I'm about has hardcore atheist you can get but that might convince even me that there is a God and he has a nasty sense of humour


----------



## ska invita (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187439
> Super Saturday: Why is Parliament sitting this weekend and when will the Brexit vote take place?




Thats not true though - thats Telegraph spin - there would be an extension


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

Poot said:


> When Juncker says that no 'prolongation' will take place, he is just attempting to give a helping hand to getting it through, isn't he? Or he is just hungover and grumpy or something? I mean, does anyone think he is serious?


I suspect that he was serious in his attempt to assist Johnson getting it through the commons; casting the vote as deal:no-deal is an obvious attempt to wrap the process up.
However, many commentators quickly pointed out that Juncker does not have the power to make such a decision, that would lie with the 27/Tusk.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

A certain newspaper - hurrah for the.. - claims the following will back Johnson. I'm sure that's at least 50% soggy guesswork, but it's the first list I've seen:

Ex-Tory MPs: 

Ed Vaizey

Oliver Letwin

Nicholas Soames

Stephen Hammond

Margot James 

Richard Benyon 

Labour MPs: 

John Mann 

Ronnie Campbell

Jim Fitzpatrick

Kevin Barron

ERG members: 

Andrea Jenkyns

Andrew Bridgen

David Jones

James Duddridge

Peter Bone

Priti Patel

Ranil Jayawardena

Theresa Villiers


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I suspect that he was serious in his attempt to assist Johnson getting it through the commons; casting the vote as deal:no-deal is an obvious attempt to wrap the process up.
> However, many commentators quickly pointed out that Juncker does not have the power to make such a decision, that would lie with the 27/Tusk.


On cue...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> so iyo people who vote for the conservative and unionist party aren't ordinary unionists. extraordinary unionists perhaps.



In the dentist and in no mood for your pedantry!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> On cue...
> 
> View attachment 187443



Interesting. Juncker trying to help Johnson get the deal through, Merkel trying to help the Remainers/Brexiters block it?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Interesting. Juncker trying to help Johnson get the deal through, Merkel trying to help the Remainers/Brexiters block it?


Some commentators framing this as Juncker's desire for political legacy against Merkel's pragmatic, economic concerns.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

ska invita said:


> View attachment 187440
> Thats not true though - thats Telegraph spin - there would be an extension


there would be an application for an extension, which may or may not be granted.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> In the dentist and in no mood for your pedantry!


i am simply astonished by your notion that people who vote for the tory party aren't unionists


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am simply astonished by your notion that people who vote for the tory party aren't unionists


*'God save our gracious border down the Irish Sea...'*


----------



## ska invita (Oct 18, 2019)

If it really is just two votes in it that's a pretty insanely close margin


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there would be an application for an extension, which may or may not be granted.


There will be an extension, Juncker is an important man but he's still a flunky, the real power is still with the heads of state, especially Merkel and Macron.


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The vote is tomorrow, yeah? At a time when >1million voters will be marching past demanding Brexit be stopped. That will focus minds of anyone going in to vote, especially those who voted against May’s deal, as this is the same deal, but a bit worse for the UK, seeing as it actually effectively cedes UK territory to the EU...



I reckon the protest will be a bit more 'robust' this time,students back, etc, and the high stakes.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> I reckon the protest will be a bit more 'robust' this time,students back, etc, and the high stakes.



The mild-mannered solicitor in the office next to me is going, I have already advised him to take a knuckle-duster with him He says he'll think about it.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 18, 2019)

Poot said:


> When Juncker says that no 'prolongation' will take place, he is just attempting to give a helping hand to getting it through, isn't he? Or he is just hungover and grumpy or something? I mean, does anyone think he is serious?


Why wouldn't he be. The EU are as sick of this as the UK are.


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The mild-mannered solicitor in the office next to me is going, I have already advised him to take a knuckle-duster with him He says he'll think about it.



I'm not talking poll tax levels, i mean some road blocks, etc.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> I'm not talking poll tax levels, i mean some road blocks, etc.


when you have a great big march like you will tomorrow, why do you need road blocks? do you not think the size of the demonstration will be sufficient to block the roads?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> high stakes.


even though it would gladden my heart i doubt any tory mps will be impaled tomorrow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i am simply astonished by your notion that people who vote for the tory party aren't unionists



They are not unionists in the same way that people who live in unionist communities in Northern Ireland are.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The vote is tomorrow, yeah? At a time when >1million voters will be marching past demanding Brexit be stopped. That will focus minds of anyone going in to vote, especially those who voted against May’s deal, as this is the same deal, but a bit worse for the UK, seeing as it actually effectively cedes UK territory to the EU...



Are they demanding Brexit be stopped or demanding a second ref? If the line is going to be that if you don't vote for this deal it's no deal, what will there slogans be?

Almost tempted to go to find out. But no.


----------



## Winot (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are they demanding Brexit be stopped or demanding a second ref? If the line is going to be that if you don't vote for this deal it's no deal, what will there slogans be?



There will be a mixture of points of view. I will be there, have been to a number of the marches, and have never been in favour of a 2nd referendum (I want Parliament to decide).


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Are they demanding Brexit be stopped or demanding a second ref? If the line is going to be that if you don't vote for this deal it's no deal, what will there slogans be?
> 
> Almost tempted to go to find out. But no.



AFAIK they want it stopped, the call for a 2nd ref is in the belief that the 2nd ref will put a stop to Brexit. Pretty much can guarantee not one person marching tomorrow is looking for a 2nd ref, sorry, People's Vote, in order to strengthen the mandate to leave.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

Winot said:


> There will be a mixture of points of view. I will be there, have been to a number of the marches, and have never been in favour of a 2nd referendum (I want Parliament to decide).



You want Brexit stopped though, no?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You want Brexit stopped though, no?


the revocation of the edict of may


----------



## Winot (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> You want Brexit stopped though, no?



I personally want it stopped, yes. However, I wouldn't want it stopped just by _fiat_ - I want it stopped in a way which is legitimate constitutionally. That's why I want Parliament to stop it, ideally after a further GE. What I really want is for Labour to make the argument for Remain and to convince Labour voters to support that.

(I don't think I'm going to get my way btw)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

i know it's not going to happen, but it'd be lovely if the seven sinn fein mps turned up tomorrow to stiff johnson


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> AFAIK they want it stopped, the call for a 2nd ref is in the belief that the 2nd ref will put a stop to Brexit. Pretty much can guarantee not one person marching tomorrow is looking for a 2nd ref, sorry, People's Vote, in order to strengthen the mandate to leave.



Aye but what slogan will they use? Final Say? Put it to the People? Stop Brexit? Vote for this deal to stop no deal?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i know it's not going to happen, but it'd be lovely if the seven sinn fein mps turned up tomorrow to stiff johnson



If they did turn up they'd probably vote for it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye but what slogan will they use? Final Say? Put it to the People? Stop Brexit? Vote for this deal to stop no deal?


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye but what slogan will they use? Final Say? Put it to the People? Stop Brexit? Vote for this deal to stop no deal?



Probably a mixture.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Probably a mixture.


you can always tell a trot, they ask about the slogans people will be using


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 18, 2019)

can always just fall back on 'oos streets?' if a more complex chant cannot be agreed


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If they did turn up they'd probably vote for it.


The only good thing about it is the border down the Irish Sea.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you can always tell a trot, they ask about the slogans people will be using



Slogans are important.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> The only good thing about it is the border down the Irish Sea.



And to Sinn Fein it's a very very very good thing.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Aye but what slogan will they use? Final Say? Put it to the People? Stop Brexit? Vote for this deal to stop no deal?


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187452


I was thinking more _Please, please, please, let me get what I want, this time_, although admittedly that will look a bit cumbersome on a placard


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> I was thinking more _Please, please, please, let me get what I want, this time_, although admittedly that will look a bit cumbersome on a placard


a rush and a push and the land is ours


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> a rush and a push and the land is ours


I have a strange feeling of deja vu...


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2019)

"TUC off your knees call a peoples' vote!"

(for those of us of a certain vintage )


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> "TUC off your knees call a peoples' vote!"
> 
> (for those of us of a certain vintage )


at least 'they say cut back' shouldn't make an appearance at the demo. 

build a bonfire almost certainly will put in a cameo appearance


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> at least 'they say cut back' shouldn't make an appearance at the demo.



"They say backstop, we say what's that?"


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2019)

"UK UK UK.In! In! In!"


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2019)

"Whose treaty? Our treaty!"


----------



## chilango (Oct 18, 2019)

"Guy Verhofstadt is our friend, is our friend, is our friend. Guy Verhofstadt is our friend. He tweets liberals!"


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

chilango said:


> "Whose treaty? Our treaty!"


whose tweets? our tweets!


----------



## flypanam (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> The only good thing about it is the border down the Irish Sea.


But the 6 counties are still part of the UK. No amount of moving an economic border changes that.


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

flypanam said:


> But the 6 counties are still part of the UK. No amount of moving an economic border changes that.


It's a step in the right direction.


----------



## flypanam (Oct 18, 2019)

May be that your right.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Slogans are important.


I always remember Cockers intervention on slogans which was Stop The War didnt have the right position because it should have been Stop The War Now.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> I always remember Cockers intervention on slogans which was Stop The War didnt have the right position because it should have been Stop The War Now.





That's hilarious.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 18, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That's hilarious.





> The General Strike and rally to stop the War was set for 2.00 o’clock .Elisabeth Violet had gone home and brought her cat to watch Cockers and the other star speakers. They decided to hold the rally to stop the war on the park green outside the Pound shop and Squats 4U , the anarchist estate agents. Ginger, Henry, Elisabeth Violet ,and Douglas set up a platform and made some posters whilst Cockers practised his speech in the window of the anarchist estate agents.
> The posters read STOP THE WAR. STOP THE WAR IMMEMDIATELY proclaimed another. STOP THE WAR JUST THIS MINUTE said another. Elizabeth Violet had produced one that said STOP THE WAR OR I WILL SQUEEM AND SQEEM AND SQUEEM UNTILL I AM SICK
> “Wait a minute” said Cockney “Wait a minute. Isn’t that slogan pandering to the more backward elements ?” He stroked his beard again , “ I know, how about you shouldn’t have started the war in the first place?
> “Don’t you call my cat backward,” said Elisabeth Violet “otherwise I will get her to scratch you Cockney and she won’t vote for you as leader of our Workers Power group and I will stop her from attending the REVO meetings and anyway that slogan is too long and won’t fit on the placard.”


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

maomao said:


> The only good thing about it is the border down the Irish Sea.


It's the border guards I feel sorry for.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's the border guards I feel sorry for.


seasick as a parrot


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's the border guards I feel sorry for.


They'll need wetsuits.


----------



## Argonia (Oct 18, 2019)

What time is the vote tomorrow?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2019)

Argonia said:


> What time is the vote tomorrow?



Sometime after 2 pm, could be much, much later.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i know it's not going to happen, but it'd be lovely if the seven sinn fein mps turned up tomorrow to stiff johnson


I had that thought last night and had an image of them dancing the hokey cokey on the threshold of the commons. Trouble is there'd be a shortage of spaces on the green benches - _'hutch up our Arlene_!'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Sometime after 2 pm, could be much, much later.



It's usually much much later by the time every self-important tosspot in the commons has puffed their chest out and blathered on about principles and the public good, knowing full well that they and everyone else in the room will ignore both those things and vote according to their own self-interest.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Sometime after 2 pm, could be much, much later.


 
 Better not interrupt Spiral - there are more important things to life than waiting for our professional betters to decide what is best for their fucking mates


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

ska invita said:


> If it really is just two votes in it that's a pretty insanely close margin



I suspect that's correct, in the sense that if you go through each MP you can pretty much predict where they are up to give or take, literally, the odd one or two who might studying the text, talking to their constituency association etc. Trouble is, it's so close that there's nothing in there that works as a useful prediction. Yes, even a draw is possible now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Better not interrupt Spiral - there are more important things to life than waiting for our professional betters to decide what is best for their fucking mates


yeh can't be having the saturday night murder interrupted


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Smellygraph is reporting 2 govt ministers on 'resignation watch' currently, which would almost certainly kill the deal off (though that kind of breathless reporting is on a par with all the players Man United 'might' buy in the next transfer window). Certainly there will be a rare old trade in peerages and knighthoods tonight.

edit: whereas the FT are now hedging towards Johnson winning by 1 (Graham Stringer being the tipping point)


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

Guardian reporting that Oliver Letwin will be tabling an amendment, supported by Labour saying that there won't be a vote tomorrow on the deal, only on the legislation once it is put forward.


----------



## Argonia (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Guardian reporting that Oliver Letwin will be tabling an amendment, supported by Labour saying that there won't be a vote tomorrow on the deal, only on the legislation once it is put forward.



My brain hurts again trying to figure all this bollocks out - Could the Letwin amendment delay Brexit?


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

Sarah Champion is backing the deal.  Looks like there could be 12 labour votes there, which could just be enough.  Or not if the Letwin amendment goes through.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> Guardian reporting that Oliver Letwin will be tabling an amendment, supported by Labour saying that there won't be a vote tomorrow on the deal, only on the legislation once it is put forward.


FFS, how to make friends and influence people!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

just have the fucking vote, let johnson wipe the egg from his face, and let's all move on


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

Argonia said:


> My brain hurts again trying to figure all this bollocks out - Could the Letwin amendment delay Brexit?


So that would force Johnson to write his extension begging letter, even if MPs vote for his deal tomorrow, at least I think that's what is intended


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> So that would force Johnson to write his extension begging letter, even if MPs vote for his deal tomorrow, at least I think that's what is intended


apparently dominic cummings' cunning plan is to send a begging letter written in akkadian or some similar language which no one in brussels will be able to understand


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> apparently dominic cummings' cunning plan is to send a begging letter written in akkadian or some similar language which no one in brussels will be able to understand


Nothing would surprise me at this stage,  TBH


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Dread to think how many posts I've made on this thread, I'm not going to even look it up. But you feel yourself trapped in the psychodrama, leading to the (potentially) final step tomorrow(ish), along with lots of battles on the thread about substantive issues. Just have to pull yourself up short at times and remember, both sides are our fucking enemies. What a fucking shower of neo-liberal shites. Fuck 'em.

There' I've got my head straight for the weekend.

Right, now, if Graham Stringer got locked in the lavs...


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> So that would force Johnson to write his extension begging letter, even if MPs vote for his deal tomorrow, at least I think that's what is intended


Yup.  There is a chance the madmen of the ERG could still approve this vote, but then vote down the details when it comes to the legislation needed to actually implement the deal.  With no request for an extension, we'd then tumble out by default.


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Dread to think how many posts I've made on this thread, I'm not going to even look it up. But you feel yourself trapped in the psychodrama, leading to the (potentially) final step tomorrow(ish), along with lots of battles on the thread about substantive issues. Just have to pull yourself up short at times and remember, both sides are our fucking enemies. What a fucking shower of neo-liberal shites. Fuck 'em.
> 
> There' I've got my head straight for the weekend.
> 
> Right, now, if Graham Stringer got locked in the lavs...


No matter what happens, tomorrow isn't final. The free trade deal Johnson wants if the deal is passed will cause just as many rows and splits.  We've got another five years or so to go yet.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> No matter what happens, tomorrow isn't final. The free trade deal Johnson wants if the deal is passed will cause just as many rows and splits.  We've got another five years or so to go yet.


not to mention that the deal as stands might fuck any chance of a us trade deal, as the house of representatives is saying they won't allow one if the gfa's pissed about with


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> Yup.  There is a chance the madmen of the ERG could still approve this vote, but then vote down the details when it comes to the legislation needed to actually implement the deal.  With no request for an extension, we'd then tumble out by default.


That new Chris Morris film isn't supposed to be that good. He should have done this.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> That new Chris Morris film isn't supposed to be that good. He should have done this.


plots of thrillers which were rejected by every publisher as too unlikely are now turning up in the six o'clock news


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> No matter what happens, tomorrow isn't final. The free trade deal Johnson wants if the deal is passed will cause just as many rows and splits.  We've got another five years or so to go yet.


Yeah, sure, but I suspect that everything from perhaps January onwards will be done with a tory working majority. Less surreal, but even more depressing.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> apparently dominic cummings' cunning plan is to send a begging letter written in akkadian or some similar language which no one in brussels will be able to understand


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Yeah, sure, but I suspect that everything from perhaps January onwards will be done with a tory working majority. Less surreal, but even more depressing.


if there is a tory majority in january you'll not see a subsequent one for many years, as the privilege of forming the next government will be as poisoned a chalice as ever there was


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Buckaroo said:


>


donald tusk won't know whether to send it to the museum or to mount it on a plinth in the foyer of his office building


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> Yup.  There is a chance the madmen of the ERG could still approve this vote, but then vote down the details when it comes to the legislation needed to actually implement the deal.  With no request for an extension, we'd then tumble out by default.


"Dear EU, the UK parliament has voted to accept the deal, but can we have a three month extension anyway, love Boris"

Be interesting to see how whoever is responsible for responding would react in such a bizarre situation


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

andysays said:


> "Dear EU, the UK parliament has voted to accept the deal, but can we have a three month extension anyway, love Boris"
> 
> Be interesting to see how whoever is responsible for responding would react in such a bizarre situation


If the Letwin amendment passes, we wont have voted to accept the deal.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> donald tusk won't know whether to send it to the museum or to mount it on a plinth in the foyer of his office building



Nah Tusk knows what it means, he speaks that language!


----------



## andysays (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> If the Letwin amendment passes, we wont have voted to accept the deal.


I get that the point of the amendment is to compel Johnson to request an extension, but if it actually prevents MPs from either accepting or rejecting the deal then they are effectively refusing to vote on it. 

I can see that potentially pissing off some EU members and backfiring to the extent that no extension is granted.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Dread to think how many posts I've made on this thread, I'm not going to even look it up.



953.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Dread to think how many posts I've made on this thread, I'm not going to even look it up.


you've some way to go before you catch up with me


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> you've some way to go before you catch up with me



3162, blimey.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> 3162, blimey.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 18, 2019)

DUP are going 'No Surrender'. Fintan O'Toole calls it recreational Britishness. It's over, No deal it is. that's all folks!


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 18, 2019)

How can you check?


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> 3162, blimey.


wow, I see the philosophical one has managed to mention the Irish border British border in Ireland in a full 90% of his posts!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> wow, I see the philosophical one has managed to mention the Irish border British border in Ireland in a full 90% of his posts!



Only 90% ?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Is there any way I could start subtracting my posts, to allow me to return to civilian life?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 18, 2019)

Maybe there's a Bobby Ewing in the shower moment and we all wake up to find Prime Minister Miliband is heading off to another EU Summit, with very little of any importance to discuss.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is there any way I could start subtracting my posts, to allow me to return to civilian life?



Just select the Urban Demob option etc


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Only 90% ?


10% are just trading insults, which seems about average.


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is there any way I could start subtracting my posts, to allow me to return to civilian life?



You're only making matters worse with further posts


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 18, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> 3162, blimey.


Tbf that's about Pickman's Model's average for most threads.


----------



## A380 (Oct 18, 2019)

belboid said:


> No matter what happens, tomorrow isn't final. The free trade deal Johnson wants if the deal is passed will cause just as many rows and splits.  We've got another twenty five years or so to go yet.



FTFY


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 18, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Tbf that's about Pickman's Model's average for most threads.


90% of them are trading insults


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 18, 2019)

How many Labour MPs going to break ranks ?


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 18, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Maybe there's a Bobby Ewing in the shower moment and we all wake up to find Prime Minister Miliband is heading off to another EU Summit, with very little of any importance to discuss.


Is this the same reality in which Trump is just an annoying game show host? Sounds nice.


----------



## maomao (Oct 18, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Is this the same reality in which Trump is just an annoying game show host? Sounds nice.


Couldn't he just be dead? I really really hated American Apprentice.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 18, 2019)

Sounds positive 

Brexit: Prepare for potential sleepovers, schools told


----------



## Cloo (Oct 18, 2019)

Woo! Sleepovers!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 18, 2019)

Cloo said:


> Woo! Sleepovers!


Definitely looking forward to Brexit now, I've always wanted to get my hair braided and talk about boys.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

So what happens if


The39thStep said:


> How many Labour MPs going to break ranks ?


10 and rising..
1 journo, can't remember who, estimated that the last to declare (Melanie Onn) took Johnson into majority.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 18, 2019)

I have a feeling he will get it through, I hope to be wrong


----------



## belboid (Oct 18, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So what happens if
> 
> 10 and rising..
> 1 journo, can't remember who, estimated that the last to declare (Melanie Onn) took Johnson into majority.


First time she’ll have voted for a deal. Very promising for Johnson


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

History will judge labour mp's who vote for this shit deal. Maybe history won't but I definitely will


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 18, 2019)

Supine said:


> History will judge labour mp's who vote for this shit deal. Maybe history won't but I definitely will


Let's face it, history will be all "why did these cunts do nothing about climate change" and Brexit will be just on the list of things they used to distract from it. Footnoted to Appendix C and under the category "Just Plain Stupid Shit".


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2019)

Coming from a bloke that voted for a homophobic austerity supporting yellow Tory. Revealing.

EDIT: at Supine not FM


----------



## gosub (Oct 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> plots of thrillers which were rejected by every publisher as too unlikely are now turning up in the six o'clock news


It's based on a true story about exactly that


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 18, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Definitely looking forward to Brexit now, I've always wanted to get my hair braided and talk about boys.



You must have a teen daughter too I’m guessing?

My daughter had a sleep over with about five of her pals about a month ago, lot of hair braiding before they all settled in the front room to watch jump/shock horror films past midnight (couldn’t get to sleep due to screams and giggling).

Came down in the morning to find they’d all decided to sleep on the trampoline in garden overnight (clearly pre-planned as they were all in sleeping bags)!


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Coming from a bloke that voted for a homophobic austerity supporting yellow Tory. Revealing.



Naff off and stick your reveals where the sun doesn't shine. The only other choice here is the brexit/cons so I'm comfortable with my choice. So is the next door neighbour who is an ex labour mp!


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> You must have a teen daughter too I’m guessing?
> 
> My daughter had a sleep over with about five of her pals about a month ago, lot of hair braiding before they all settled in the front room to watch jump/shock horror films past midnight (couldn’t get to sleep due to screams and giggling).
> 
> Came down in the morning to find they’d all decided to sleep on the trampoline in garden overnight (clearly pre-planned as they were all in sleeping bags)!


I always remember one of the sleep overs my girls had . They all had beds on the top floor of our Victorian house and I came back from the pub to hear them shout out of the windows ‘ are there any boys out there we are trapped ‘


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 18, 2019)

Supine said:


> Naff off and stick your reveals where the sun doesn't shine. The only other choice here is the brexit/cons so I'm comfortable with my choice. So is the next door neighbour who is an ex labour mp!


No the other choices are not to vote, to vote for Labour, to vote Green/independant, or you could spoil.

You choose to back someone who spent five years attacking workers and their communities. If you are going to make that choice out of lesser evilism - fine I don't agree with that position but I can understand it. But then why would you not apply the same less evilism to Labour MPs? Because at heart your politics is far closer to the LDs than the current LP, a politics that is shared by a number of former MPs from the LP.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 18, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> How many Labour MPs going to break ranks ?



Probably increased once John Lansman tried to threaten them. I applaud the sentiment, but tactically questionable. Nothing like an MP in a huff to justify them doing something rank.


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

So labour mp's who vote for the deal won't be losing the whip. Good work Jeremy on showing weak leadership but also sneakily fighting for what you really want


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

This morning I was absolutely confident it wouldn't get through, now... fucks sake, deal and rapid GE, five year fixed term tory majority. Grim as fuck. I would fucking love it if he gets fucked off tomorrow, love it ('he's got to go to middlesborough and get something')


----------



## tommers (Oct 18, 2019)

Be interesting to see which employment regulations they remove first.

My money is on reducing statutory holidays. Or maybe maternity /paternity leave. Possibly that thing where companies need to include holiday payments in contractor's hourly rates.


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

wonder if he will be buying in 'new' watercannons.


----------



## binka (Oct 18, 2019)

This afternoon the odds on it failing were slight favourites at 4/5 (1.80) against passing at 9/10 (1.90) but looks like money is coming in and passing is now a clear favourite at 8/11 (1.72) with it being rejected going out to evens. 

I did see Ronnie Campbell on C4 news earlier, he's one of the labour MPs minded to support it. He did seem to have genuine reservations about it though, especially about workers rights and he said he wouldn't make a final decision until tomorrow


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

Can't believe Melanie Onn is going to vote for a Johnson deal in any capacity.


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

They will be getting lots of pressure from comrades, old and new.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> This morning I was absolutely confident it wouldn't get through, now... fucks sake, deal and rapid GE, five year fixed term tory majority. Grim as fuck. I would fucking love it if he gets fucked off tomorrow, love it ('he's got to go to middlesborough and get something')



If I'm reading the runes right (big if, tbf) then it's Letwin's thing that is most important tomorrow. If that passes - and it looks like it probably will - then there will be an extension request and then things cut to the chase: the Withdrawal Agreement Bill. The WAB hasn't been seen by MPs yet, but it has to be passed by both Houses at some point- it's the actual bit of legislation after all. The shape of the unseen Bill of course follows the deal.

And of course it is amendable. So that means that Johnson's deal isn't necessarily what passes into law. For example, May's deal proposed tying things like workers rights, food standards, environmental protection etc into measurable EU standards (the level playing field). The Johnson deal has kicked those into the Political Declaration in more of a woolly fashion - which means fuck-all, really, as we know fine well.

I think there's a majority in Parliament as it stands to lessen the transitional turbofucking, by essentially recreating some of the safeguards that were in May's deal.

Oh christ, I don't know, I'm so tired of this


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 18, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> This morning I was absolutely confident it wouldn't get through, now... fucks sake, deal and rapid GE, five year fixed term tory majority. Grim as fuck. I would fucking love it if he gets fucked off tomorrow, love it ('he's got to go to middlesborough and get something')



Boris has already secured 287 Tory votes so needs an extra 33 votes.  

19 labour MP’s have indicated they will vote for the deal so he’d need the rest of votes to be made up from former Tory MP’s who were expelled but could still vote with the govt with possibly some independents who may vote for the deal, so the DUP may not be needed.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 18, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Let's face it, history will be all "why did these cunts do nothing about climate change" and Brexit will be just on the list of things they used to distract from it. Footnoted to Appendix C and under the category "Just Plain Stupid Shit".



I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 18, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.



‘The Battle of Brexit’ sounds much more dramatic.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 18, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.


That's more or less how The Empire started at the beginning of The Phantom Menace


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 18, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Boris has already secured 287 Tory votes so needs an extra 33 votes.
> 
> 19 labour MP’s have indicated they will vote for the deal so he’d need the rest of votes to be made up from former Tory MP’s who were expelled but could still vote with the govt with possibly some independents who may vote for the deal, so the DUP may not be needed.


Hopefully he'll have a massive heart attack before the vote or something


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

S☼I said:


> That's more or less how The Empire started at the beginning of The Phantom Menace


No-one's going to remember the Phantom Menace either.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 18, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> And of course it is amendable. So that means that Johnson's deal isn't necessarily what passes into law.


They can amend the bill, but not the deal.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> wonder if he will be buying in 'new' watercannons.



With Patel in the home office the police will be getting cannons.


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.



It's more likely to be called "An analytical investigation into the quality of data analytics applied to disruptive political manoeuvres in aid of financial gain. A study of the UK political climate from 2016-2027"


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 18, 2019)

Raheem said:


> They can amend the bill, but not the deal.



You are quite right. I should have said something along the lines of "Johnson's deal isn't necessarily the entirety of what passes into law, albeit constrained by the wider parameters of the deal"


----------



## treelover (Oct 18, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.



Er, the corn laws?


----------



## weltweit (Oct 18, 2019)

Wonder what the whip-less tory rebels have negotiated for their votes?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 18, 2019)

treelover said:


> Er, the corn laws?



The American War of Independence? Tax/trade whevs


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 18, 2019)

From The Telegraph (hidden behind pay wall so I’ve screen shot).

Remainer MPs in disarray as confusion reigns over plans to force vote on a second referendum


----------



## kebabking (Oct 18, 2019)

weltweit said:


> Wonder what the whip-less tory rebels have negotiated for their votes?



Given that most of them have said that they won't be standing in the coming GE, probably not much. Soames and Gauke have said they'll support it - their objection was no-deal, this is a deal, ergo... Stewart hasn't said anything, but he's not standing in the GE and wants to stand as in independent in the London Mayoral election, and the Tories already have a candidate.


----------



## friedaweed (Oct 18, 2019)

I went to see Christy Moore at the Philharmonic in Liverpool on Wednesday night and he paused to have some mid song banta with the crowd and he commented on how he was getting so old that his tour of the Uk was getting shorter and shorter every year...

"Sure we used to do about 15 gigs but Jesus we're down to two nights away from home now. Manchester last night, Liverpool tonight and then pack up the gear in the van and then drive to Holyhead before it's back home to *Europe*"


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 18, 2019)

All remainers right now:


----------



## Supine (Oct 18, 2019)

So government estimates are £800-£2000 pounds less per person in the UK if brexit occurs. Not good.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 18, 2019)

Supine said:


> So government estimates are £800-£2000 pounds less per person in the UK if brexit occurs. Not good.



Aye, plus we’ve still got the damage government predicted we’ve suffer if we didn’t join the Euro. So it’ll be even worse than that


----------



## Winot (Oct 18, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> I don't think even history buffs are going to give a shit - can't see "Exciting European Trade Disputes of the Early 21st Century" being a best-seller.



What like “18th century taxation dispute over tea imports?”

Edit - TheHoodedClaw got there before me


----------



## tommers (Oct 18, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Aye, plus we’ve still got the damage government predicted we’ve suffer if we didn’t join the Euro. So it’ll be even worse than that


But the £350 million a week for the NHS will counterbalance it a bit.


----------



## Ming (Oct 18, 2019)

tommers said:


> But the £350 million a week for the NHS will counterbalance it a bit.


Easiest deal in the world, we hold all the cards, unicorns, rainbows, etc, etc. The narrative seems to have changed somewhat.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 18, 2019)

Yeah, right...sure you have.
La Flint trusts the vermin.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2019)

One good thing about the deal passing, if it does, is that i can do a big multi-quote post of all the people on here saying very confidently that boris will never get a deal through parliament. So there's that.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> One good thing about the deal passing, if it does, is that i can do a big multi-quote post of all the people on here saying very confidently that boris will never get a deal through parliament. So there's that.


You must feel like a big winner.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> One good thing about the deal passing, if it does, is that i can do a big multi-quote post of all the people on here saying very confidently that boris will never get a deal through parliament. So there's that.


At least I never called him Boris, though.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Aye, plus we’ve still got the damage government predicted we’ve suffer if we didn’t join the Euro. So it’ll be even worse than that



Don’t forget war and genocide.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> What like “18th century taxation dispute over tea imports?”
> 
> Edit - TheHoodedClaw got there before me



Well yeah, if the Brexit process does lead to a big Revolutionary War with EU soldiers fighting British patriots and Nigel Farage riding through the countryside shouting "The Belgians are coming! The Belgians are coming!", then future historians are probably going to find this era a little more interesting.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 19, 2019)

Ming said:


> Easiest deal in the world



Quite, only took Bojo 85 days to get to this point.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Well yeah, if the Brexit process does lead to a big Revolutionary War with EU soldiers fighting British patriots and Nigel Farage riding through the countryside shouting "The Belgians are coming! The Belgians are coming!", then future historians are probably going to find this era a little more interesting.



It seems like we’ve got enough going on to justify a few research grants in any case.


----------



## N_igma (Oct 19, 2019)

Just after speaking on LBC arguing for Lexit not sure if anyone heard but they didn’t want none of it.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 19, 2019)

N_igma said:


> Just after speaking on LBC arguing for Lexit not sure if anyone heard but they didn’t want none of it.



what did you say if you don't mind?


----------



## N_igma (Oct 19, 2019)

Humberto said:


> what did you say if you don't mind?



Just argued that those who voted Brexit weren’t racist then I used some stats from the North East that secure unionised jobs were replaced with insecure service industry jobs at the same time and was swiftly removed.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

What a weird position it is to want Brexit* but for Johnson to lose every vote and have every plan fail and then lose a GE. 

*usual caveats apply


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

I don't understand the pushing for an extension thing. Remainers want to remain and everyone else wants it over with. A second ref would at least make some sort of sense but an extra three months fucking about? What's that for?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> I don't understand the pushing for an extension thing. Remainers want to remain and everyone else wants it over with. A second ref would at least make some sort of sense but an extra three months fucking about? What's that for?


I think it would ruin Johnson's "credibility"


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> I don't understand the pushing for an extension thing. Remainers want to remain and everyone else wants it over with. A second ref would at least make some sort of sense but an extra three months fucking about? What's that for?


Isn't it ensuring that there isn't a default no deal exit if something fucks up?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

That too


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I think it would ruin Johnson's "credibility"


He's got that Trump thing though. He doesn't need credibility. He could make Jennifer Arcuri Chancellor of the Exchequer and 30% of the population would think it was a great idea.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I think it would ruin Johnson's "credibility"



I think there's a danger that MPs effectively refusing to vote on this deal and instead insisting he asks for a three month extension plays further into Johnson's strategy of blaming parliament for blocking his attempts to get a deal done, giving him exactly what he wants going into a GE campaign.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> I don't understand the pushing for an extension thing. Remainers want to remain and everyone else wants it over with. A second ref would at least make some sort of sense but an extra three months fucking about? What's that for?


Maybe something to do with the idea signing up to something cobbled together in a hurry in the middle of the night, that no-ones had a chance to read properly, and which has been given just a couple of hours for debate in Parliament.


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 19, 2019)

Just heard someone on Radio 4 talk about the deal being the means of bringing Britain back together; I'd have thought that in the medium to longer term it was rather more likely to do exactly the opposite. The self interest and shortsightedness of Johnson and Co is consistent if nothing else.

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

This march today looks fairly crap. Can't see the liberals rioting if the deal gets through.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> Remainers want to remain and everyone else wants it over with.



Not to pick on you particularly - it's just a handy quote to quote - but whatever happens with the WA and WAB isn't _in any way_ getting it over with. That's just stage one, the holding transition position before the future relationship negotiations start.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> What a weird position it is to want Brexit* but for Johnson to lose every vote and have every plan fail and then lose a GE.
> 
> *usual caveats apply



This is probably quite childish and is definitely not a well worked out political view but I have to admit a big part of me just wants to see Johnson lose because I hate his fucking horrible self satisfied face a little bit more every time I have to see it.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> This is probably quite childish and is definitely not a well worked out political view but I have to admit a big part of me just wants to see Johnson lose because I hate his fucking horrible self satisfied face a little bit more every time I have to see it.



No that’s pretty valid


----------



## Jeremiah18.17 (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> He's got that Trump thing though. He doesn't need credibility. He could make Jennifer Arcuri Chancellor of the Exchequer and 30% of the population would think it was a great idea.



I think the delay thing is partly about attempting to bring the Brexit party into play to split the right/populist vote in any subsequent election. Quite a dangerous strategy, similar to what was tried in France and contributed to the success/legitimation of the Le Pen’s family project.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> This is probably quite childish and is definitely not a well worked out political view but I have to admit a big part of me just wants to see Johnson lose because I hate his fucking horrible self satisfied face a little bit more every time I have to see it.



Too bad that the entitled piece of shit is probably already looking forward to writing his memoirs and adding to his bank balance on the lecture circuit - even if he resigned in disgrace tomorrow, he'd probably still be smirking as he walked away.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Supine said:


> So government estimates are £800-£2000 pounds less per person in the UK if brexit occurs. Not good.


Not per person. Minimum wage will protect many.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Too bad that the entitled piece of shit is probably already looking forward to writing his memoirs and adding to his bank balance on the lecture circuit - even if he resigned in disgrace tomorrow, he'd probably still be smirking as he walked away.


walking? let him run, run the gauntlet from downing street to trafalgar square


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Not per person. Minimum wage will protect many.



Depends when it's next increased... Given that it's already below living wage. And how it relates to potential increases in living costs.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> Depends when it's next increased... Given that it's already below living wage. And how it relates to potential increases in living costs.


Well obviously. But as it stands it would protect many.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Not per person. Minimum wage will protect many.



If costs go up minimum wage will be even shitter than it is now. If this deal passes and we have another five years of Boris can you them mitigating the losses for minimum wage workers?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> This is probably quite childish and is definitely not a well worked out political view but I have to admit a big part of me just wants to see Johnson lose because I hate his fucking horrible self satisfied face a little bit more every time I have to see it.



Johnson, despite being crap at what he does, is often cited as a _winner_. So to defeat his project wiping the smile off his face is a pretty high priority. Every defeat and set back for him is going to have its plus points.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> If costs go up minimum wage will be even shitter than it is now. If this deal passes and we have another five years of Boris can you them mitigating the losses for minimum wage workers?


If inflation goes up...


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

All these ifs


----------



## Badgers (Oct 19, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> This is probably quite childish and is definitely not a well worked out political view but I have to admit a big part of me just wants to see Johnson lose because I hate his fucking horrible self satisfied face a little bit more every time I have to see it.


I would like to see him lose, then fall over and hurt himself pretty bad.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

I can play if's too. 

If we crash out without a deal. Pound plunges. To pay for UK trade deficit interest rates go up to 12% and mass repossessions of largely middle class owned houses and flats commence.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> All these ifs



I've no idea where Supine 's figures come from, what basis they're on etc... just saying that minimum wage isn't in any way a protection unless policy maintains its relationship to costs of living.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I can play if's too.
> 
> If we crash out without a deal. Pound plunges. To pay for UK trade deficit interest rates go up to 12% and mass repossessions of largely middle class owned houses and flats commence.


I'd be in a position to lose my house if that happened and I'm not fucking middle class cheers.


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I can play if's too.
> 
> If we crash out without a deal. Pound plunges. To pay for UK trade deficit interest rates go up to 12% and mass repossessions of largely middle class owned houses and flats commence.


How does it help working class people, though, if that happens? It just means that the very rich will own more houses surely?


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> I would like to see him lose, then fall over and hurt himself pretty bad.



If it happens in that order, the physical pain might be a welcome distraction from the pain of the humiliation - I'd like to see him fall over and hurt himself pretty badly, then lose.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Oct 19, 2019)

Boris Johnson to order his own MPs to boycott Brexit deal vote if delaying amendment passes


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> How does it help working class people, though, if that happens? It just means that the very rich will own more houses surely?


I didn't say it helped anyone. Just if people are going to throw potentials around then look at the impact on the middle class. They will get it up 'em.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> How does it help working class people, though, if that happens? It just means that the very rich will own more houses surely?


Rents will come down .


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

House Prices will come down.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Buy to let types all go bankrupt.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Party time.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I didn't say it helped anyone. Just if people are going to throw potentials around then look at the impact on the middle class. They will get it up 'em.





TopCat said:


> Rents will come down .





TopCat said:


> House Prices will come down.



All these ifs...


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

People who bray  "my house earns more than I do" all have to eat shit.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> All these ifs...


Innit.


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> House Prices will come down.


Not for long because there won't be any point building them. Then they'll be scarce. And owned by very rich people.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> All these ifs...


But as it stands. Minimum wages will protect many yeah?


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

If there's one thing the Tories are going to try to protect, in light of 2008 and in light of their own bank balances and love of buy to let types, it's property prices.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> Not for long because there won't be any point building them. Then they'll be scarce. And owned by very rich people.


That has never happened previously.


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> How does it help working class people, though, if that happens? It just means that the very rich will own more houses surely?



It depends how you implement it - in that circumstance a government could say that as part of the price of a bailout for a bank (which would also be happening in the event of mass repossessions) the state would take over the mortgages that bank owns at the price bad debt is usually sold at (ie: several pence in the £).  

People would stay in their homes and then pay off an amount (which would be less than the mortgage was for but more than the state paid for it), which would both bring in revenue to the government and prevent the government spending more money on supporting those people in social housing.  It would also probably reduce house prices considerably and in a controlled way.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> If there's one thing the Tories are going to try to protect, in light of 2008 and in light of their own bank balances and love of buy to let types, it's property prices.


Do you know much about our trade deficit and how we manage it?


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> That has never happened previously.


Brexit has never happened previously. 

I'm not arguing, I don't have a clue. Just pondering. Anything could happen, as you say.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I can play if's too.
> 
> If we crash out without a deal. Pound plunges. To pay for UK trade deficit interest rates go up to 12% and mass repossessions of largely middle class owned houses and flats commence.



So the banks are going to take back houses and flats from middle class people and ... sell them to working class people at a discount?

I'm far from an expert in these matters, but it seems like they'd be able to make more money selling the repossessed houses and flats to overseas investors taking advantage of the weak pound who would rent them out for the same price, or possibly with a bit of a markup now that so many people who couldn't afford to pay their mortgages are now also looking for somewhere to rent.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> Not for long because there won't be any point building them. Then they'll be scarce. And owned by very rich people.


House prices are not determined by supply.
Its confidence and affordability.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> So the banks are going to take back houses and flats from middle class people and ... sell them to working class people at a discount?
> 
> I'm far from an expert in these matters, but it seems like they'd be able to make more money selling the repossessed houses and flats to overseas investors taking advantage of the weak pound who would rent them out for the same price, or possibly with a bit of a markup now that so many people who couldn't afford to pay their mortgages are now also looking for somewhere to rent.


The banks who repossess will sell to the highest bidder at auction.
Someone in your street with a similar house to you gets repossessed? The new value of your house has thus been redetermined.

I did the housing ladder twice. Bought at the bottom, sold at top.

I'm waiting and laughing a bit as I have never seen the house price market so ridiculously overpriced.


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I did the housing ladder twice. Bought at the bottom, sold at top.



Did your house earn more than you did?


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Did your house earn more than you did?


No. Well maybe for a bit.  I had a shit job
I did not brag though. My ex wife got the top of the pile house in the end. She voted remain. Wants to move to Ireland.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> So the banks are going to take back houses and flats from middle class people and ... sell them to working class people at a discount?
> 
> I'm far from an expert in these matters, but it seems like they'd be able to make more money selling the repossessed houses and flats to overseas investors taking advantage of the weak pound who would rent them out for the same price, or possibly with a bit of a markup now that so many people who couldn't afford to pay their mortgages are now also looking for somewhere to rent.


After brexit everything is going to change because people will start to vote in governments who take a totally different approach to housing and the distribution of wealth. People can't do that at the moment because of the EU. That's why we keep getting these Tory governments. It'll all be different and better.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Well yeah, if the Brexit process does lead to a big Revolutionary War with EU soldiers fighting British patriots and Nigel Farage riding through the countryside shouting "The Belgians are coming! The Belgians are coming!", then future historians are probably going to find this era a little more interesting.



The Corn Laws, learnt about them at school?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> My ex wife got the top of the pile house in the end.


Must be some kind of brexit analogy in here somewhere.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> Brexit has never happened previously.
> 
> I'm not arguing, I don't have a clue. Just pondering. Anything could happen, as you say.


if you don't have a clue, you're better informed and have a better understanding than most mps.


----------



## FiFi (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> After brexit everything is going to change because people will start to vote in governments who take a totally different approach to housing and the distribution of wealth. People can't do that at the moment because of the EU. That's why we keep getting these Tory governments. It'll all be different and better.


Maybe my critical facilities are blunted by spending too much time on the internet, But I can't tell if this is sarcasam or not


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> Did your house earn more than you did?


I'm only laughing really as the remainer ignore the rest mentality is going peak froth today.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

FiFi said:


> Maybe my critical facilities are blunted by spending too much time on the internet, But I can't tell if this is sarcasam or not


It's an attempt at sarcasm that strives too hard thus is transparent and just doesn't quite work..3/10


----------



## Yossarian (Oct 19, 2019)

treelover said:


> The Corn Laws, learnt about them at school?



Yeah, we all sat raptly to attention as good old Mr. Whatshisname talked engagingly about the Corn Laws for hours and I didn't fall asleep for a moment, sir, I just had something in my eye so maybe it looked like I did.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It's an attempt at sarcasm that strives too hard thus is transparent and just doesn't quite work..3/10



Much like most of his posts.


----------



## gosub (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> It's an attempt at sarcasm that strives too hard thus is transparent and just doesn't quite work..3/10


Indeed. It will be different. ..That change can be good as well as bad is true but is at the end day is down us  (it is what you make it) but what do remain types actually offer  cones across as-you never had it so good and if you don't get that you must be a racist/fascist/idiot


----------



## teuchter (Oct 19, 2019)

Surely if sarcasm isn't transparent then it's not sarcasm.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Must be some kind of brexit analogy in here somewhere.


I'm a typical, bitter, brexiter.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Surely if sarcasm isn't transparent then it's not sarcasm.


I'm not sure I can be bothered.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

teuchter said:


> After brexit everything is going to change because people will start to vote in governments who take a totally different approach to housing and the distribution of wealth. People can't do that at the moment because of the EU. That's why we keep getting these Tory governments. It'll all be different and better.



'They believe a good king is better than a bad parliament'


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

One consequence of having UK Parliament on during the day is my 7 year old  asking what the difference is between May and Johnson's deal. She's probably got a better handle on it than most Question Time audience members.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 187545


I don't get this.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> View attachment 187545



lots of stereotyping there, oozing with class condescension.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> I don't get this.


The head is made of gammon and working class people wear puffa jackets.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

Remainiacs are pretty dangerous folk, imo.


----------



## friedaweed (Oct 19, 2019)

tommers said:


> But the £350 million a week for the NHS will counterbalance it a bit.


Yeah at least we'll be able to die of starvation in a clean hospital bed unlike them fucking foreigners over the water


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> The head is made of gammon and working class people wear puffa jackets.


Yeah, I get the stereotype, shit as it is. But what difference does it make what your stereotypical Brexit voter thinks of the deal MPs are voting on?


----------



## manji (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> This march today looks fairly crap. Can't see the liberals rioting if the deal gets through.


It’s bigger than the XR last week . Big deal.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

treelover said:


> Remainiacs are pretty dangerous folk, imo.


I think as are much closer to leave day the mask will slip further, displayed on today's demonstrations.

Edit. Not all remainers, not all the time.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

manji said:


> It’s bigger than the XR last week . Big deal.


More people but it's just A to B and speeches. A million people would be enough to tear parliament to pieces if they wanted to but they'll wave some flags and go home on time. At least ER got themselves noticed.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 19, 2019)

if the deal passes today (as i predict it will), can we look forward to another year of remainers floundering between scottish courts, the guardian and amendments named after MPs to try and cancel brexit or get a 2nd ref / "people's vote" during the transition period (which I'm assuming would still run until dec 31 2020 as under may's deal)


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Yeah, I get the stereotype, shit as it is. But what difference does it make what your stereotypical Brexit voter thinks of the deal MPs are voting on?



I saw it more mocking ERG MPs who were adamantly opposed to May's deal but are now voting for Johnson's deal despite it breaking lines in the sand they previously held. The gammon thing is shite but the jacket is just the image from the common meme it copies. ( I think it's Drake, but I'm old so may have that wrong)


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I saw it more mocking ERG MPs who were adamantly opposed to May's deal but are now voting for Johnson's deal despite it breaking lines in the sand they previously held. The gammon thing is shite but the jacket is just the image from the common meme it copies.


Its multi targeted.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

What are the numbers predicted on the vote anyone?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What are the numbers predicted on the vote anyone?


319 for
319 against

bercow slits wrists in speakers chair rather than vote for deal


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> More people but it's just A to B and speeches. A million people would be enough to tear parliament to pieces if they wanted to but they'll wave some flags and go home on time. At least ER got themselves noticed.


Queues for Waitrose will be legendary.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Queues for Waitrose will be legendary.


The placards will attract attention.


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 319 for
> 319 against
> 
> bercow slits wrists in speakers chair rather than vote for deal


I believe there is a dance off and then it goes to head judge Shirley. 

Then Bercow slits his wrists etc.


----------



## gosub (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> 'They believe a good king is better than a bad parliament'


House of Commons Hansard Debates for 20 Nov 1991 

Still pertinent


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 19, 2019)

treelover said:


> lots of stereotyping there, oozing with class condescension.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What are the numbers predicted on the vote anyone?



Graun (E2a there’s a pic somewhere in there, but live feed) reckons it could slip through by about 3 votes. But obviously the margins are so low it’s impossible to say. Erg on side has obviously helped.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What are the numbers predicted on the vote anyone?


Guardian has (had) 321 for 318 against but who knows. 

Anyway latest reports are saying if the Letwin amendment passes (which some think it will) then the Gov will pull the bill until next week.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

They’ve lost Norman Lamb (lib dem who’d vote for) apparently. 320-319


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> Graun (E2a there’s a pic somewhere in there, but live feed) reckons it could slip through by about 3 votes. But obviously the margins are so low it’s impossible to say. Erg on side has obviously helped.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 319 for
> 319 against
> 
> bercow slits wrists in speakers chair rather than vote for deal


Fucking hello. It's not too outlandish at this stage.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> View attachment 187553



Ta, that minus the Lib Dem in the top block then.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

I will write to Melanie Onn if it does, though not sure if it will do anything.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

What time is the amendment getting voted on approx?  I'm still not through the bath?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Can someone please shut Blackford fucking up, every time he stands up, it's the same fucking statement, over & over again.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can someone please shut Blackford fucking up, every time he stands up, it's the same fucking statement, over & over again.


i'm at work so don't have to put up with listening to this


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm at work so don't have to put up with listening to this


That very, very rare thing; a good day to be at work.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> That very, very rare thing; a good day to be at work.


the library stamp i was looking for yesterday still hasn't turned up 

without it work cannot be done


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2019)

friedaweed said:


> Yeah at least we'll be able to die of starvation in a clean hospital bed unlike them fucking foreigners over the water


With no fucking foreigners to look after us because a huge chunk of the NHS staff have gone home.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm at work so don't have to put up with listening to this



I'm at home and don't need to be listening to this, but I am, I must be a fucking masochist.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Flavour said:


> if the deal passes today (as i predict it will), can we look forward to another year of remainers floundering between scottish courts, the guardian and amendments named after MPs to try and cancel brexit or get a 2nd ref / "people's vote" during the transition period (which I'm assuming would still run until dec 31 2020 as under may's deal)



Once we’re out, we’re out. The transition period is just a stand-still on various rules. Brexit can’t be cancelled then as it will have happened. If we want to go back in, we have to negotiate to do so under the same rules as Albania.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

I have a house full of OAPs, injured people and screaming children. Glad to be at work so I can listen to it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> Once we’re out, we’re out. The transition period is just a stand-still on various rules. Brexit can’t be cancelled then as it will have happened. If we want to go back in, we have to negotiate to do so under the same rules as Albania.


Using the Euro will be awfully convenient when we stay at our Tuscan villas.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> I can play if's too.
> 
> If we crash out without a deal. Pound plunges. To pay for UK trade deficit interest rates go up to 12% and mass repossessions of largely middle class owned houses and flats commence.



We’re all on five-year fixed rates. We’re not daft.


----------



## Zapp Brannigan (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> They’ve lost Norman Lamb (lib dem who’d vote for) apparently. 320-319



Pardon my ignorance if there's some subtle nuance I've missed, but given that the Lib Dems are by now every bit as much of a single issue protest camp as UKIP ever were would Lamb voting to leave not have been like a kipper voting remain?


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> Once we’re out, we’re out. The transition period is just a stand-still on various rules. Brexit can’t be cancelled then as it will have happened. If we want to go back in, we have to negotiate to do so under the same rules as Albania.



Yes, however the UK, even in a post Brexit slump, has some economic attractiveness to the EU that Albania does not possess. Far more difficult should the UK ever want to rejoin would be convincing them that they wouldn't be letting themselves in for decades more of this shit.


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Pardon my ignorance if there's some subtle nuance I've missed, but given that the Lib Dems are by now every bit as much of a single issue protest camp as UKIP ever were would Lamb voting to leave not have been like a kipper voting remain?



Lib Dem’s are weird. Tbh all I know is that he was the Lib Dem who was a probable ‘for’, but now he’s not.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Buy to let types all go bankrupt.



Last time it crashed it was a bonanza for cash buyers, certainly where I was living. Landlords don’t lose their income, but nobody else can get a mortgage so they fill their boots. Road where I was living went downhill due to a few dodgy landlords taking places that would have gone to families in normal circumstances.


----------



## friedaweed (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> With no fucking foreigners to look after us because a huge chunk of the NHS staff have gone home.


Well there is that, and the plumbers, and the taxi drivers, and the doctors, and the dentist, and the school teachers, and the Polski Schlep, It's all gonna go Pete Tong innit?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can someone please shut Blackford fucking up, every time he stands up, it's the same fucking statement, over & over again.



Christ, over 20 minutes later & he's still banging on about Scotland having not voted for brexit, as if we didn't fucking know. 

ETA - The speaker has now put a 5 minute limit on others that wish to speak.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> With no fucking foreigners to look after us because a huge chunk of the NHS staff have gone home.


Perhaps we could expand NHS bursaries , launch a wide scale recruitment/training and reskilling programme for the young, returning to work or those looking for a career change and generally plan our recruitment needs rather than relying on widespread use of temporary agency staff and short term overseas  recruitment. Of course if we need to recruit from abroad fine but there is no reason why we should be so reliant on it.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

No reason we should be, except we are.


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Perhaps we could expand NHS bursaries , launch a wide scale recruitment/training and reskilling programme for the young, returning to work or those looking for a career change and generally plan our recruitment needs rather than relying on widespread use of temporary agency staff and short term overseas  recruitment. Of course if we need to recruit from abroad fine but there is no reason why we should be so reliant on it.


We could do all sorts of things but _right now _the NHS is absolutely dependent on foreign workers. As is most of the service industry.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Christ, over 20 minutes later & he's still banging on about Scotland having not voted for brexit, as if we didn't fucking know.
> 
> ETA - The speaker has now put a 5 minute limit on others that wish to speak.


That's Philip Davies fucked then


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> We could do all sorts of things but _right now _the NHS is absolutely dependent on foreign workers. As is most of the service industry.


It has been for the past decade, its chosen to do that rather than look to the long term.


----------



## AnandLeo (Oct 19, 2019)

It goes without saying that the Brexit negotiations were flawed from the beginning. At the outset, the government was naïve as much as the rest of the nation about how the Brexit may be implemented. EU was equally clueless of how the negotiations will progress because it has never been attempted before. UK negotiators unilaterally drafted their proposals without consultation with the EU counterparts to assess the feasibility of the UK proposals for a mutually agreeable deal. When the EU leaders saw the proposals first time, they ridiculed some of the ideas as untenable. Anyway, that was good enough for a start. Then there was a UK principle that the finally agreed deal with the EU has to be approved by the UK parliament to be effective. As transpired, the UK parliament is erratically divided on the Brexit formula, causing divisions within the two main parties, and cataclysm in the Conservative party, which is running a minority government. Not a good omen on your own soil for such a contentious deal. 		

Brexit negotiations have never seen a roadmap plan for a strategy. Negotiations have proceeded on a piecemeal reactive form, somewhat resembling the British constitution. While catastrophically faltering, the Prime Minister Boris Johnson made a breakthrough, by negotiating with the Irish Prime Minister who is a key stakeholder of the Brexit. However, the PM Johnson has not made any attempt to reconcile with the utterly fragmented UK parliament that is assigned with the final approval of the Brexit deal. You cannot make a meaningful agreement by evading a crucial stakeholder. Brexit negotiations reveal an ad-hoc reactive trend, not a proactive regime. Brexit negotiators have wasted more than 3 years without a Brexit deal, because they have not bothered to consult and include UK parliament in the negotiations.


----------



## campanula (Oct 19, 2019)

Ah  sod this - off to allotment (to build my new strawberry tower). Birthday outing tonight (Ouse Valley Singles Club) and woods tomorrow -. Oblivious.

Yes, I know it's not the weekend thread and I make an effort to keep up but honestly - fuck them all.


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> It has been for the past decade, its chosen to do that rather than look to the long term.


That's the reality of modern politics and it's only going to get worse, IMO.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

The campaign to stop Brexit has never found the right words | Andy Beckett

Lots of good insights here, the remain campaign has been appalling.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

PIcard is go, as is Paul McGann, march begins


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Can someone please shut Blackford fucking up, every time he stands up, it's the same fucking statement, over & over again.



Thank god I missed that interminable bore during the journey back from my daughter’s netball practice!


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> I have a house full of OAPs, injured people and screaming children. Glad to be at work so I can listen to it.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Zapp Brannigan said:


> Pardon my ignorance if there's some subtle nuance I've missed, but given that the Lib Dems are by now every bit as much of a single issue protest camp as UKIP ever were would Lamb voting to leave not have been like a kipper voting remain?



Lamb has always been a waverer. He represents a very pro leave constituency. He came out against a second referendum sometime ago.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 19, 2019)

This is only going through because Johnson’s over-confident public school bluster actually works with the type of people in parliament. In most workplaces we have a bit more of a radar for this sort of bullshit. May’s deal with further concessions. Suspect also the likes of Rees Mog just didn’t like having a women in charge, but will defer to the Head Boy.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Hints that the DUP will back the Letwin amendment.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Sky News saying votes are expected on the motions around 2.30 pm or soon after, first up being the Letwin's amendment.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

Actually Mattha's whole Twiiter coverage is full of gems like this


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Sky News saying votes are expected on the motions around 2.30 pm or soon after, first up being the Letwin's amendment.


Looks like its going to interfere with the 3 o'clock kick offs


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Looks like its going to interfere with the 3 o'clock kick offs


depending on the way the vote goes there may be an additional 3 o'clock kick-off


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Actually Mattha's whole Twiiter coverage is full of gems like this



You're not kidding. 

Ex-militant _conspirator _Roger Silverman's son (? - it can't be himself can it? Doesn't look old enough) featured there  - the On The Brink one.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

Financial Times voting prediction


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Financial Times voting prediction


makes 52/48 seem a clear result


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

dp


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

De Pfeffel will be so gutted if it goes to 319 votes for.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 19, 2019)

treelover said:


> PIcard is go, as is Paul McGann, march begins


Warp factor light stroll, number one.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

Rebecca Long Bailey thundering well from the dispatch box.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Warp factor light stroll, number one.




he's manoeuvering under impulse power, obvs


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

Who are the Independents TM and how do they differ from the Independent Group for Change? There are so many independents knocking around now it's fucking confusing.


----------



## gentlegreen (Oct 19, 2019)

Welcome to another decade of Tory rule.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You're not kidding.
> 
> Ex-militant _conspirator _Roger Silverman's son (? - it can't be himself can it? Doesn't look old enough) featured there  - the On The Brink one.


The charcuterie company only delivers to the UK


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Who are the Independents TM and how do they differ from the Independent Group for Change? There are so many independents knocking around now it's fucking confusing.


It's Gavin Shukar and John Woodcock (Allen, Berger and Smith were in at one point but then defected to the LDs) - basically it was just a set of independents sharing facilities/administration resources


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Who are the Independents TM and how do they differ from the Independent Group for Change? There are so many independents knocking around now it's fucking confusing.



they are the ones who split from tinge but haven't joined the limp dems


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

Are there any clear numbers on the Letwin amendment?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Allen, Berger and Smith


sound like a shit cover band playing crosby stills and nash


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187564



Full report - Ukip attempts to suspend leader amid fresh power struggle within party



> Braine said: “As I understand it the chairman has asked that I am suspended but I am not really sure whether that’s possible or whether she has the authority to do that. But at any rate – so what. I don’t really accept that the chairman has that power.
> 
> “If the NEC of the party wishes to get rid of a leader then it has a vote of no confidence. I’m not aware that there has been any vote.”
> 
> ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

as the country's future is decided...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Welcome to another decade of Tory rule.



In the event that the deal passes then two things could happen: - a) a debate about what comes next begins. Giving Labour a second chance to get this right and to set out what a progressive Britain could and should look like freed from the fetters of EU neo-liberalism and b) there will need to be a GE. A GE about a) and also about issues where Labour want the debate to be about like jobs, the economy, workers rights etc. 

Labour, it’s true, will need to own it’s pathetic position on brexit but that’s a better scenario than a Brexit GE


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Finally they are off to vote on Letwin's amendment.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Finally they are off to vote on Letwin's amendment.


are they under starter's orders?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> are they under speaker's orders?



C4Y - yes.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187564


_Super Saturday_


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

So...eyes down for Letwin, then?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Just announced, the DUP is voting for the Letwin's amendment..


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

I'm going with Letwin to pass and then the deal to pass next week


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

If true that's 10+ for the amendment, then.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm going with Letwin to pass and then the deal to pass next week



I am inclined to agree on that.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

DUP saying _Yes surrender!
_


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Saying that, extending into next week could give Labour whips more time to twist arms


----------



## bellaozzydog (Oct 19, 2019)

What’s ducking going on 

Keep the details rolling

I’m on fuck all intermittent  internet on a boat


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

I'm going with Letwin to pass and the deal to fail next week


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 19, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> What’s ducking going on
> 
> Keep the details rolling
> 
> I’m on fuck all intermittent  internet on a boat


I envy you on your boat, and I don't even like the sea that much.


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

here we go


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> here we go


or not, as it were


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> What’s ducking going on
> 
> Keep the details rolling
> 
> I’m on fuck all intermittent  internet on a boat


Basically MPs are voting on whether to ask the EU for an extension (until 31st Jan) before voting on whether they vote on the deal or not.


----------



## 8115 (Oct 19, 2019)

bellaozzydog said:


> What’s ducking going on
> 
> Keep the details rolling
> 
> I’m on fuck all intermittent  internet on a boat


Letwin's fucked it.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Labour source says govt has lost


----------



## Cloo (Oct 19, 2019)

Current feeling - some kind of delay that still ultimately ends in No Deal. Because a GE is not actually going to change anything for the better.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Back to #GetInTheDitch


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Letwin's amendment, 'this house will not approve a deal until the related legislation has been passed so the PM must still seek an extension'...

Yes - 322
No -  306

Majority - 16

So, that's it, Johnson has to ask for an extension, and there's unlikely to be a vote on the deal today after all, what a fucking waste of a time.


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

322-306

lol DUP


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

How is "no deal" going to happen? Cloo


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 19, 2019)

I'll get him a shovel


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Johnson confirms there's no point in having a meaningful vote now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> I'm going with Letwin to pass and the deal to fail next week


i like your thinking


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Letwin's amendment, 'this house will not approve a deal until the related legislation has been passed so the PM must still seek an extension'...
> 
> Yes - 322
> No -  306
> ...


by no means, it's enlivened my day at work


----------



## Cid (Oct 19, 2019)

I suppose super Saturday rolls over to Meaningful Monday then.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 19, 2019)

Johnson thanking everyone for “giving up their time” (Saturday) - fuck me


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Cid said:


> I suppose super Saturday rolls over to Meaningful Monday then.


mendacious monday
whitewash wednesday
fraudulent friday


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Johnson thanking everyone for “giving up their time” (Saturday) - fuck me



I don't need his thanks.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Johnson thanking everyone for “giving up their time” (Saturday) - fuck me


it's not giving up their time when they're well paid for being there and have half the fucking year off


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

The only advantage of this deal was the 'just get it fucking over with' aspect. And now it won't be just getting it fucking over with more specific objections will be raised and it will flounder next week. 

I think a second ref is the only realistic way out. The thought of a GE with the vermin then forcing through any old crap is just too painful.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> The only advantage of this deal was the 'just get it fucking over with' aspect. And now it won't be just getting it fucking over with more specific objections will be raised and it will flounder next week.
> 
> I think a second ref is the only realistic way out. The thought of a GE with the vermin then forcing through any old crap is just too painful.


if people think thus far is bad, it's the next 5-10 years of turgid negotiations that'll be far worse. 2nd ref, aye, the only way forward


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 19, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Johnson thanking everyone for “giving up their time” (Saturday) - fuck me


Does anyone know if these bastards get paid overtime?


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if people think thus far is bad, it's the next 5-10 years of turgid negotiations that'll be far worse. 2nd ref, aye, the only way forward


Forward to what?


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

Hasn't de Pfeffel lost every vote that has been presented to parliament? Isn't that eight now or something?


----------



## belboid (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Hasn't de Pfeffel lost every vote that has been presented to parliament? Isn't that eight now or something?


He's won one!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Hasn't de Pfeffel lost every vote that has been presented to parliament? Isn't that eight now or something?



Yep.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> He's won one!



Has he?


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> He's won one!



Which one did he win?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 19, 2019)

How are the Brexit voters taking this news? Kicking off much? Any kettling or baton charges yet?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

Does this mean he'll fuck off the actual vote now then?


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Does this mean he'll fuck off the actual vote now then?



Yes, might be Tuesday


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## belboid (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Which one did he win?


Environment (Legislative Functions from Directives) regulations 2019 - by 280-206


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

Of course the eu _could_ tell us to stick our extension up our arses.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Labour votes against Letwin amendment 
- Caroline Flint 
- Kevin Barron
- Ronnie Campbell
- Jim Fitzpatrick
- John Mann
- Kate Hoey


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> How are the Brexit voters taking this news? Kicking off much? Any kettling or baton charges yet?



Hmm i may have to avoid visiting the folks this weekend

the friggin ear bashing i would get


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> Environment (Legislative Functions from Directives) regulations 2019 - by 280-206


So, the only thing he has succeeded in doing as PM is implementing some new EU law...


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Labour votes against Letwin amendment
> - Caroline Flint
> - Kevin Barron
> - Ronnie Campbell
> ...



Woodcock voted against it as well (and apologies to everyone who had forgotten he existed for this reminder that he does).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

I struggle understanding all this parliamentary stuff tbh. Anyway what are chances of movement in voting intentions with a few more days?


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

He’s still going to get his deal through though*, just later than 31 October. 

(*unless some MPs who’ve said they will support change their mind on seeing the detail)


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> Of course the eu _could_ tell us to stick our extension up our arses.


£30 billion quid up the swannee.


----------



## belboid (Oct 19, 2019)

Raheem said:


> So, the only thing he has succeeded in doing as PM is implementing some new EU law...


It's transferring existing EU law into UK law, I think.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> He’s still going to get his deal through though*, just later than 31 October.
> 
> (*unless some MPs who’ve said they will support change their mind on seeing the detail)



It still could get done next week.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Forward to what?


soz should be out rather than forward, forward suggests some sort of progression


----------



## Badgers (Oct 19, 2019)

Does the taxpayer get any of the DUP Bribe money back now they have cheated the corrupt cunts?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I struggle understanding all this parliamentary stuff tbh. Anyway what are chances of movement in voting intentions with a few more days?



The second reading is Tuesday I believe. A number of MPs, including Letwin, have indicated that they will vote for the Bill at that point. Some Labour MPs are also likely to change their vote at this point.

But....


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> soz should be out rather than forward, forward suggests some sort of progression



so does out, in some contexts

perhaps "decay" would be a better word


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Does the taxpayer get any of the DUP Bribe money back now they have cheated the corrupt cunts?


They were bribed by May and voted with May.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> so does out, in some contexts
> 
> perhaps "decay" would be a better word


we fade to grey


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> Woodcock voted against it as well (and apologies to everyone who had forgotten he existed for this reminder that he does).


Yes so did Austin, Field and Hopkins but strictly speaking they are not Labour MPs


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Does the taxpayer get any of the DUP Bribe money back now they have cheated the corrupt cunts?


you'd have thought that a billion pounds would be them rather than just rent them


----------



## Badgers (Oct 19, 2019)

maomao said:


> They were bribed by May and voted with May.


So a one off bung then?


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yes so did Austin, Field and Hopkins but strictly speaking they are not Labour MPs



So did Lewis and Green, so that is basically 100% of the 2015-2017 Parliament MPs who have been accused of bad behaviour opposing the Letwin amendment.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Johnson now saying he will not negotiate a delay with the EU, despite what's just happened


----------



## alsoknownas (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The second reading is Tuesday I believe. A number of MPs, including Letwin, have indicated that they will vote for the Bill at that point. Some Labour MPs are also likely to change their vote at this point.
> 
> But....


But, what? Don't leave us hanging!

With May Deal, resistance to it crumbled away at the edges with each passing of time. What is there to suggest the direction of travel will be different this time? I'm concerned.


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Johnson now saying he will not negotiate a delay with the EU, despite what's just happened



What happens if he doesn't ask for an extension? Will he end up in court again?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Johnson now saying he will not negotiate a delay with the EU, despite what's just happened



The law doesn't require him to 'negotiate a delay with the EU', only to ask for one.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

I don't really understand what's going on, but it seems like the government is trying to ignore the Letwin amendment and simply go to a vote in Parliament on Monday.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> But, what? Don't leave us hanging!
> 
> With May Deal, resistance to it crumbled away at the edges with each passing of time. What is there to suggest the direction of travel will be different this time? I'm concerned.


Think the factor that's different is Tories thinking they're fucked if anyone other than Magic Johnson is their leader.

That said, I think the extra time is still more likely to go against the deal than for it.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I don't really understand what's going on, but it seems like the government is trying to ignore the Letwin amendment and simply go to a vote in Parliament on Monday.



The government will put down the Bill for a reading on Monday. MPs can vote for the Bill knowing they now have ‘an insurance policy’ preventing a no deal brexit move by Johnson. 

I suspect the Withdrawal Bill might pass on Monday


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 19, 2019)

Dare I say it, but I was quite impressed with Boris’s performance today. And I really don’t like him, so it took me by surprise, but his beseeching tones and his appeals for consensus seemed quite effective.  Only once did the mask slip, when he started bashing Corbyn.

I still think he’s an godawful cunt, but he seemed to bat fairly well today nonetheless.


----------



## Spymaster (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Basically MPs are voting on whether to ask the EU for an extension (until 31st Jan) before voting on whether they vote on the deal or not.


So "no deal" has been taken off the table, right?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I don't really understand what's going on, but it seems like the government is trying to ignore the Letwin amendment and simply go to a vote in Parliament on Monday.



The Letwin amendment doesn't stop the withdrawal bill coming before the house & being voted on, Letwin himself has said he will vote for the deal next week.


----------



## bellaozzydog (Oct 19, 2019)

That feels like it should be a relief but this cunt is like the big boss with extra powers, how many times does he go down before you actually finish him off


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> So "no deal" has been taken off the table, right?



Not completely. The EU can refuse an extension.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> So "no deal" has been taken off the table, right?


No Deal is never entirely off the table until a deal is done


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The Letwin amendment doesn't stop the withdrawal bill coming before the house & being voted on, Letwin himself has said he will vote for the deal next week.



Letwin himself has just said that what the government is trying to do is contrary to the amendment just passed - they are trying to avoid having the legislation debated, amendments being discussed and trying to go to a straight vote again.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Spymaster said:


> So "no deal" has been taken off the table, right?


Well strictly speaking the EU could reject any request for extension and I suppose you could have a situation that an extension until 31st Jan happens only for no deal to occur then, but practically those options are unlikely.


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

Didn't Juncker say they wouldn't agree to an extension?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Not completely. The EU can refuse an extension.


I would guess they can also just sit on the request.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Not completely. The EU can refuse an extension.



Or just put the request 'om hold' until the commons votes on the bill next week.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Didn't Juncker say they wouldn't agree to an extension?



It’s not up to him. It’s up to the PMs of the 27 countries


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Not completely. The EU can refuse an extension.


And even if they grant a three month extension, no deal is still possible at the end of that period if a deal hasn't been agreed


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Didn't Juncker say they wouldn't agree to an extension?



Not in as many words....


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Or just put the request 'om hold' until the commons votes on the bill next week.



Correct. The most likely option


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> And even if they grant a three month extension, no deal is still possible at the end of that period if a deal hasn't been agreed



Indeed. Your earlier post was correct that a no deal remains possible until there is a deal.


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

Argonia said:


> Didn't Juncker say they wouldn't agree to an extension?


Yeah but he was just trying to help to get the deal through before everyone loses the will to live. 

I really don't think a no deal is likely. It doesn't suit either party.


----------



## belboid (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> No Deal is never entirely off the table until a deal is done


Not even then. Failure to negotiate a free trade deal could see us do it at the end of next year.


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The government will put down the Bill for a reading on Monday. MPs can vote for the Bill knowing they now have ‘an insurance policy’ preventing a no deal brexit move by Johnson.
> 
> I suspect the Withdrawal Bill might pass on Monday



The problem there is that to pick up support from the likes of Letwin relies on him complying with the Benn Act today; if he doesn't (and he certainly implied he wouldn't) then the number of votes he got today would go down for the WA (probably by about 30) and it would probably tip the ex-Tories in particular to the point of actually supporting a no confidence vote in him.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

belboid said:


> Not even then. Failure to negotiate a free trade deal could see us do it at the end of next year.


That's the sequel, No Deal 2, the Trade Wars.

The franchise could run for a few years after that...


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> The problem there is that to pick up support from the likes of Letwin relies on him complying with the Benn Act today; if he doesn't (and he certainly implied he wouldn't) then the number of votes he got today would go down for the WA (probably by about 30) and it would probably tip the ex-Tories in particular to the point of actually supporting a no confidence vote in him.



Johnson said he wouldn’t negotiate an extension. That’s not the same as saying he won’t comply with the Benn Act


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 19, 2019)

It's not that no deal is off the table, it's the table that has been removed and replaced with a plasma cushion. They're going to use magnetic coil powered skateboards to transport us to 2022.


----------



## alsoknownas (Oct 19, 2019)

Raheem said:


> That said, I think the extra time is still more likely to go against the deal than for it.


Why? I'd like to think people's optimism on that point is justified, but I can't see what it's based on.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> Why? I'd like to think people's optimism on that point is justified, but I can't see what it's based on.


Extra time for party whips/members/public to push MPs in particular directions, also extra opportunity for amendments to be attached.


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Extra time for party whips/members/public to push MPs in particular directions, also extra opportunity for amendments to be attached.



Extra time for people to read what it actually contains, as well.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Extra time for party whips/members/public to push MPs in particular directions, also extra opportunity for amendments to be attached.



All that was already available even if they had the meaningful vote today.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> All that was already available even if they had the meaningful vote today.


No necessarily. You can easily imagine someone like Onn who indicated she was prepared to vote for this deal today now being worked on by Labour whips, local party members, constituents etc and deciding to back track.


----------



## alsoknownas (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Extra time for party whips/members/public to push MPs in particular directions, also extra opportunity for amendments to be attached.


Yeah, cool, but prior to this point whenever there's been a delay to the process (I'm going back to the May deal here) it worked in the government's favour. I can only recall (vaguely) one time when the voting shifted the other way.
The resistance to that deal, especially from the tory right, I expected to be fairly solid, but crumbled round the edges every time it was given time to ruminate.

Different deal /circumstances /time frame, etc. But I can't see any actual pointers to suggest that the tide will flow in the other direction this time.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Basically what Kevin McGuire has just said on BBC, politics is about momentum. 

Johnson had some momentum going into today having got a deal that lots of people said he could not get. That momentum has now been halted.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No necessarily. You can easily imagine someone like Onn who indicated she was prepared to vote for this deal now being worked on by Labour whips, local party members, constituents etc and deciding to back track.



Onn could have voted for it today, but still changed her mind next week.

That's the whole point of the Letwin amendment to prevent people changing the minds, and accidentally resulting in no deal.


----------



## alsoknownas (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Basically what Kevin McGuire has just said on BBC, politics is about momentum.
> 
> Johnson had some momentum going into today having got a deal that lots of people said he could not get. That momentum has now been halted.


I hope so. May was defeated many times over, but every time the voting got closer. Boris seems to have a massive head start this time.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That's the whole point of the Letwin amendment to prevent people changing the minds, and accidentally resulting in no deal.


Maybe for a few but that's not the purpose of most backing it. The purpose was to delay and put up another set of roadblocks.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

alsoknownas said:


> I hope so. May was defeated many times over, but every time the voting got closer. Boris seems to have a massive head start this time.


Don't get me wrong I'm not saying that I agree with that line of thinking just that that is what it is based on.

I do think it is unlikely that the whole process will be completed by the 31st though. Making "no deal" unlikely makes it easier for leave inclined Labour MPs to go with the whip.


----------



## gosub (Oct 19, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Johnson said he wouldn’t negotiate an extension. That’s not the same as saying he won’t comply with the Benn Act


Absolutely he only has to write to the EU.  What Dillon the dog does with letter after he's written it is an entirely unrelated issue


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Rumours that the DUP might even consider supporting a second referendum in order to stop this Brexit going through.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> Rumours that the DUP might even consider supporting a second referendum in order to stop this Brexit going through.


Where is that coming from? I'm a bit skeptical of that.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Tory party Twitter confirming that Johnson will not ask for a delay


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Where is that coming from? I'm a bit skeptical of that.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> ..


Yeah that's a bit of breathless journalism. Long way from "examine all amendments" to backing a referendum


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Yeah that's a bit of breathless journalism. Long way from "examine all amendments" to backing a referendum



Yeah that’s why I said ‘rumours’. I don’t have a direct line to the DUP funnily enough.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 19, 2019)

But it's not even rumours is it. It's a journalist trying to fluff up a bit of politician speak.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> With no fucking foreigners to look after us because a huge chunk of the NHS staff have gone home.


Be nice for their home countries. Having the staff you invested so much in, treating your countries patients.


----------



## editor (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Be nice for their home countries. Having the staff you invested so much in, treating your countries patients.


You don't think they get any training here?


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> You don't think they get any training here?


Some foreign (EU and otherwise) NHS staff may get some training here, but I'd be amazed if the vast majority didn't get the vast majority of their medical training in their home countries.

And you're right that the NHS is now hugely dependant on foreign staff, so much so that I'd be amazed if they are forced to return to their home countries if/when Britain leaves the EU. If some choose or have chosen to leave, that's entirely up to them and, as has been said, of benefit to their home countries.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> Yeah that’s why I said ‘rumours’. I don’t have a direct line to the DUP funnily enough.


So you say. We have always wondered.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Be nice for their home countries. Having the staff you invested so much in, treating your countries patients.



Far too simplistic. Filipinos are the third largest nationality in the NHS behind Brits and Indians. The Philippines, rightly or wrongly, deliberately export their people, to all parts of the globe. The NHS relies heavily on this exportation. So much so that hospitals like the Whittington in North London have been known to go and head hunt staff there. And should Filipinos be sent back home, first there is little chance of them getting a job, let alone a similar job. And second, the economy is so poor that the guaranteed minimum wage there is roughly £7 a day.

Not nice for them, nor their home country.


----------



## Argonia (Oct 19, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Far too simplistic. Filipinos are the third largest nationality in the NHS behind Brits and Indians. The Philippines, rightly or wrongly, deliberately export their people, to all parts of the globe. The NHS relies heavily on this exportation. So much so that hospitals like the Whittington in North London have been known to go and head hunt staff there. And should Filipinos be sent back home, first there is little chance of them getting a job, let alone a similar job. And second, the economy is so poor that the guaranteed minimum wage there is roughly £7 a day.
> 
> Not nice for them, nor their home country.



If the Phillipines export their people maybe mrjoshua would like to come and do something useful?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Far too simplistic. Filipinos are the third largest nationality in the NHS behind Brits and Indians. The Philippines, rightly or wrongly, deliberately export their people, to all parts of the globe. The NHS relies heavily on this exportation. So much so that hospitals like the Whittington in North London have been known to go and head hunt staff there. And should Filipinos be sent back home, first there is little chance of them getting a job, let alone a similar job. And second, the economy is so poor that the guaranteed minimum wage there is roughly £7 a day.
> 
> Not nice for them, nor their home country.


Quite selective. What about the South Africans?


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Quite selective. ?



Second biggest overseas nationality in the NHS. So not that selective TC.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

editor said:


> You don't think they get any training here?


They come qualified. We are taking the trained nurses and doctors from poor countries leaving their countries ill people without.

It's interesting how attitudes change. Libs and left used to criticize when nurses and doctors from the uk went to work in the US.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Second biggest overseas nationality in the NHS. So not that selective TC.


What about the South Africans?


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Lots of countries are pissed with their expensively trained staff going to richer countries to treat their people. 

Denying this is silly.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What about the South Africans?


I've only ever met one South African in a hospital here. I was very ill and she told me I was 'pale for a white fella' lol.


----------



## maomao (Oct 19, 2019)

How big was this march today? Traffic disruption has been minimal. No way we're there a million people.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Fash sieg heiling today outside their favourite central London 'spoons.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

The idea that overseas NHS workers will all leave the UK to return to their home countries health services is sweet, but remarkably naive. Some may, most will likely find work in other Northern European countries, the US and Canada, Australia and the Middle East. Given the fire sale of the NHS that is likely should this deal pass and the Tories win the next election, they'd be followed by many British health professionals.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> The idea that overseas NHS workers will all leave the UK to return to their home countries health services is sweet, but remarkably naive. Some may, most will likely find work in other Northern European countries, the US and Canada, Australia and the Middle East.


Patronising count


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> They come qualified. We are taking the trained nurses and doctors from poor countries leaving their countries ill people without.
> 
> It's interesting how attitudes change. Libs and left used to criticize when nurses and doctors from the uk went to work in the US.


The issue for me is rather than people just say 'well thats the way it is' is that I would rather have a discussion on the what kind of health service we should have , how we train and staff it and what sort of workforce planning do we need.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What about the South Africans?



There are 1600 South African staff within the NHS. There are nearly 19000 Filipino staff. Perhaps, as you suggest, it would be better for S.Africa for their staff to repatriate. I don’t know. What I do know is that for the much larger numbers of Filipino staff it would be worse for them and worse for the NHS.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Patronising count



Call me what you like, I'm not wrong.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

I might be missing something but why are we discussing the prospect of filipinos and other non EU nationals having to leave the NHS and the UK in event of brexit? Only speculating here but would think barriers to non-EU migration would be lesser without EU freedom of movement (of labour)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I might be missing something but why are we discussing the prospect of filipinos and other non EU nationals having to leave the NHS and the UK in event of brexit? Only speculating here but would think barriers to non-EU migration would be lesser without EU freedom of movement (of labour)


non-eu immigration has risen as eu immigration has fallen


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I might be missing something but why are we discussing the prospect of filipinos and other non EU nationals having to leave the NHS and the UK in event of brexit? Only speculating here but would think barriers to non-EU migration would be lesser without EU freedom of movement (of labour)



Can't speak for others but a lot of this is in the gift of the British government in or out of the EU. I disagree with the notion that the current Johnson deal, which is committed to ending freedom of movement, a hostile environment, the shredding of workers rights and the sell off of the NHS is OK because some nurses might return to Zimbabwe or Nigeria. Absolutely that's not a given of any Brexit deal, but it is a given of this deal by this government. The Home Office has already started deporting people.

Granted, I'd happily support a Leave Deal that was about taking NHS recruitment out of market forces and investing in UK training, but this isn't it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Can't speak for others but a lot of this is in the gift of the British government in or out of the EU. I disagree with the notion that the current Johnson deal, which is committed to ending freedom of movement, a hostile environment, the shredding of workers rights and the sell off of the NHS is OK because some nurses might return to Zimbabwe or Nigeria. Absolutely that's not a given of any Brexit deal, but it is a given of this deal by this government. The Home Office has already started deporting people.
> 
> Granted, I'd happily support a Leave Deal that was about taking NHS recruitment out of market forces, but this isn't it.


No it isn't, this is a deal for leaving the EU, not a deal for departing from the world


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> I disagree with the notion that the current Johnson deal, which is committed to ending freedom of movement, a hostile environment, the shredding of workers rights and the sell off of the NHS is OK because some nurses might return to Zimbabwe or Nigeria.



Has anyone here actually said this though? The original suggestion was that the NHS would collapse because of the forced exodus of foreign staff. This claim is highly questionable.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I might be missing something but why are we discussing the prospect of filipinos and other non EU nationals having to leave the NHS and the UK in event of brexit?



Purely because a statement was made (by Editor) responded to in a certain way (by TopCat) and it went a bit off tangent from there because I, for one, thought it was interesting to note the nuances of global economies rather than some blanket “it’ll be better for their countries” that TC suggested.

Nothing more than that. The usual message board difficulties in keeping a topic strictly on topic.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> No it isn't, this is a deal for leaving the EU, not a deal for departing from the world



We're having a referendum on that next year, once Johnson wins a GE


----------



## weltweit (Oct 19, 2019)

I think I understand the Letwin motion that was passed, to demand an extension such that if all laws were not passed by the 31st we would not crash out without a deal, what I don't understand is why it meant the main deal was not also voted on today?


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> Has anyone here actually said this though? The original suggestion was that the NHS would collapse because of the forced exodus of foreign staff. This claim is highly questionable.



@Top Cat said staff leaving the UK would be good because they would return to work in their home countries health services, I said this was laughably naive, they said I was a cunt for pointing this out.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> Can't speak for others but a lot of this is in the gift of the British government in or out of the EU. I disagree with the notion that the current Johnson deal, which is committed to ending freedom of movement, a hostile environment, the shredding of workers rights and the sell off of the NHS is OK because some nurses might return to Zimbabwe or Nigeria. Absolutely that's not a given of any Brexit deal, but it is a given of this deal by this government. The Home Office has already started deporting people.
> 
> Granted, I'd happily support a Leave Deal that was about taking NHS recruitment out of market forces and investing in UK training, but this isn't it.


Yeah I agree it is down to political choices the govt could make inside or outside of the EU. But those choices ultimately rest on political expediency and economic necessity. With a smaller domestic labour market to fall on (as the domestic bit is a lot smaller - UK not EU wide) then non-EU migration will be relied upon to compensate. Unless the UK govt invests heavily in developing the labour market to fill the gaps, which it won't, but even if it did would take decades or probably generations, but it won't anyway.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> We're having a referendum on that next year, once Johnson wins a GE


The government have entered discussions with the vogons to excise the UK from the earth and transport us to a more Tunbridge Wells like world


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Fash sieg heiling today outside their favourite central London 'spoons.
> 
> View attachment 187577


They've been there for hours - they were around when I was there at 1pm or so and I hear they're still there and being even worse.


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> @Top Cat said staff leaving the UK would be good because they would return to work in their home countries health services, I said this was laughably naive, they said I was a cunt for pointing this out.


But in the context of Brexit, following on from Editor's post, we're talking about NHS staff from other EU countries (supposedly, because it won't happen to the extent that's being claimed) going back to their home EU country (or elsewhere if they wish, obvs).


----------



## andysays (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The government have entered discussions with the vogons to excise the UK from the earth and transport us to a more Tunbridge Wells like world


"Leave means Leave"


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> They've been there for hours - they were around when I was there at 1pm or so and I hear they're still there and being even worse.
> 
> View attachment 187584
> 
> View attachment 187585


£1.69 pint Ruddles (20p off 'Brexit bonus' price) must be helping.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

weltweit said:


> I think I understand the Letwin motion that was passed, to demand an extension such that if all laws were not passed by the 31st we would not crash out without a deal, what I don't understand is why it meant the main deal was not also voted on today?



Just the way Parliament works I think. Letwin amended the Govt motion and that passed, so there was no unamended Govt motion to vote on.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 19, 2019)

andysays said:


> But in the context of Brexit, we're talking about NHS staff from other EU countries (supposedly, because it won't happen to the extent that's being claimed) going back to their home EU country (or elsewhere if they wish, obvs).



Yes, and I still think it's laughably naive, and the exodus is already happening.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> View attachment 187564


Who knew?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> £1.69 pint Ruddles (20p off 'Brexit bonus' price) must be helping.


Also I think all the other pubs on Whitehall ban large groups of angry men who are there to shout at passers-by. (The Red Lion has had some small groups in the past but not seen any recently.) Yet somehow the Lord Moon is fine with them, to the point where I saw their door staff have a go at a Remainer who had wandered into the area and wasn't even trying to go inside.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

I wonder why the two or three thousand left remaining in ukip rump stay there rather than jump ship to an insurgent brexit party, what's their aims that can't be met by switching?


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> £1.69 pint Ruddles (20p off 'Brexit bonus' price) must be helping.


Not  a bad pint and an excellent price


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Also I think all the other pubs on Whitehall ban large groups of angry men who are there to shout at passers-by. (The Red Lion has had some small groups in the past but not seen any recently.) Yet somehow the Lord Moon is fine with them, to the point where I saw their door staff have a go at a Remainer who had wandered into the area and wasn't even trying to go inside.



Is the bierkeller Martin's bunker?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Not  a bad pint and an excellent price


I've drank ruddles in wetherspoons when a bit skint, it can be ok but every three or so pints you get one that's proper manky, sort of sweaty mouldy taste


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

~


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

Mrs SI and her mum reckon Johnson is obliged to request an extension but not legally required to. I've lost track of what's going on.

What could happen now before 31st to stop a no deal crash out?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Not  a bad pint and an excellent price


When I was last in 'spoons having an 'inter-generational' my eldest told his (Ruddles fan/cheapskate) Grandfather that it tastes like ash-tray liquid.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

TopCat said:


> They come qualified. We are taking the trained nurses and doctors from poor countries leaving their countries ill people without.
> 
> It's interesting how attitudes change. Libs and left used to criticize when nurses and doctors from the uk went to work in the US.



Nuttall’s the ‘brightest and the best’.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Also I think all the other pubs on Whitehall ban large groups of angry men who are there to shout at passers-by. (The Red Lion has had some small groups in the past but not seen any recently.) Yet somehow the Lord Moon is fine with them, to the point where I saw their door staff have a go at a Remainer who had wandered into the area and wasn't even trying to go inside.



British pubs for British alcoholics.


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Mrs SI and her mum reckon Johnson is obliged to request an extension but not legally required to. I've lost track of what's going on.
> 
> What could happen now before 31st to stop a no deal crash out?



The law says he must seek an extension to 31 Jan. However the EU member states then have to all agree to grant one.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Mrs SI and her mum reckon Johnson is obliged to request an extension but not legally required to. I've lost track of what's going on.
> 
> What could happen now before 31st to stop a no deal crash out?


Season 4 of Brexit starts tomorrow


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Mrs SI and her mum reckon Johnson is obliged to request an extension but not legally required to. I've lost track of what's going on.
> 
> What could happen now before 31st to stop a no deal crash out?


I can't help feeling that a bit too much emphasis is being put on the 31st Oct as 'the deadline'. If it looks like the deal will pass, I reckon it will pass and the letter and the date will just be a distraction.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Season 4 of Brexit starts tomorrow


well Season 3 certainly ended on a cliffhanger


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> well Season 3 certainly ended on a cliffhanger


You won't believe what happens next


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Season 4 of Brexit starts tomorrow



Let’s hope it takes _The Walking Dead’s_ approach to writing characters out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 19, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Let’s hope it takes _The Walking Dead’s_ approach to writing characters out.


Last minute changes are being made to the screenplay and some longstanding characters may meet unexpected ends


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 19, 2019)

It's a shame because the Lord Moon is quite a nice pub on the inside, but it does follow the trend of Wetherspoons buying nice buildings, keeping the interiors nice, yet filling them full of arseholes.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's a shame because the Lord Moon is quite a nice pub on the inside, but it does follow the trend of Wetherspoons buying nice buildings, keeping the interiors nice, yet filling them full of arseholes.


Slightly harsh; some of us live in places with little other option. Our only alternative (an Antic place) closed down 2 months ago


----------



## Winot (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> I can't help feeling that a bit too much emphasis is being put on the 31st Oct as 'the deadline'. If it looks like the deal will pass, I reckon it will pass and the letter and the date will just be a distraction.



Well yes, but it’s BJ that’s put all the emphasis on 31 Oct - ‘do or die’ etc.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Slightly harsh; some of us live in places with little other option. Our only alternative (an Antic place) closed down 2 months ago


Not that everyone who goes to Wetherspoons is an arsehole obviously (I do a lot - ok, I am an arsehole, but I'm not claiming to be representative) but I'd say they don't have a very tight door policy for arseholes as a chain. There are worse e.g. Belushi's, Yates'.

The Lord Moon is an extreme case though, where there seems to be an "arseholes only" policy on a regular basis.


----------



## A380 (Oct 19, 2019)

weltweit said:


> I think I understand the Letwin motion that was passed, to demand an extension such that if all laws were not passed by the 31st we would not crash out without a deal, what I don't understand is why it meant the main deal was not also voted on today?


Because Alexander is a coward as well as a liar and cunt. He knew he’d almost certainly lose and needs to get permission from Dom as to the next move.


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Fash sieg heiling today outside their favourite central London 'spoons.
> 
> View attachment 187577



Mmm, Little Britain sign, not a good look

and yes i know this was about nationalists, but


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Not that everyone who goes to Wetherspoons is an arsehole obviously (I do a lot - ok, I am an arsehole, but I'm not claiming to be representative) but I'd say they don't have a very tight door policy for arseholes as a chain. There are worse e.g. Belushi's, Yates'.
> 
> The Lord Moon is an extreme case though, where there seems to be an "arseholes only" policy on a regular basis.


Yeah, mostly when there's a demo they're told they don't agree with.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 19, 2019)

This thread is a bit shit. Can only skim it as it’s full of rubbish even though the topic is one that is of course of interest.

The last time I was in hospital, every nurse was from the Philippines, so wtf does the NHS have to do with Brexit?

The Moon pub is the closest Spoons to my office, but is a classic Spoons hall. Awful place, so many other really good boozers within 5 minutes walk.

Is Boris fucked? Sounds like he is. This thread should deliver that info...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 19, 2019)

i pop in during the week sometimes and its got an ok mix of civil servants and tourists having a slap up feed. fucking nightmare at brexit demo time though eg every weekend. have the twats moved from the red lion now?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Is Boris fucked? Sounds like he is. This thread should deliver that info...


Doubt it; next week the 'tory rebels' will show their true mettle.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 19, 2019)

Johnson's letter to MPs that confirms he has/will send the letter to the commission requesting delay...and other shite attempting to spook them into voting with him on Monday.


----------



## alsoknownas (Oct 19, 2019)

Poot said:


> I can't help feeling that a bit too much emphasis is being put on the 31st Oct as 'the deadline'. If it looks like the deal will pass, I reckon it will pass and the letter and the date will just be a distraction.


This. Unfortunately.


----------



## Poot (Oct 19, 2019)

Winot said:


> Well yes, but it’s BJ that’s put all the emphasis on 31 Oct - ‘do or die’ etc.


Yeah. But that's because he's using it to play chicken with both sides. And he does talk an awful lot of shit.


----------



## kebabking (Oct 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Doubt it; next week the 'tory rebels' will show their true mettle.



The 21 (or the overwhelming majority of the 21) rebelled against no-deal. Johnson has provided a deal, so there's nothing to rebel against.

They aren't martyrs for remain, and anyone thinking they were hasn't been paying attention.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 19, 2019)




----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

kebabking said:


> The 21 (or the overwhelming majority of the 21) rebelled against no-deal. Johnson has provided a deal, so there's nothing to rebel against.
> 
> They aren't martyrs for remain, and anyone thinking they were hasn't been paying attention.


Tbf, 90% of Tory MPs are probably potential martyrs for remain. It would only take one or two of them not to be self-serving cowards for a day. But I don't know how to work out the odds of that.


----------



## gosub (Oct 19, 2019)

kebabking said:


> The 21 (or the overwhelming majority of the 21) rebelled against no-deal. Johnson has provided a deal, so there's nothing to rebel against.
> 
> They aren't martyrs for remain, and anyone thinking they were hasn't been paying attention.


Anyone thinking 'paying attention' is what a bated breath public is doing has disappeared up their own fundament.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Does anyone know what the exact wording of the Benn Act is? Can Johnson send the letter asking for an extension, but worded in such a way that he won’t get it? “ Give me an extension you cunts”. Or follow it with another letter saying “Actually, ignore that. We’re a-crashin’ out.”
> 
> I have no way of knowing whether Johnson really wants a deal. But he does _seem_ to want to leave on the 31st. Does he have an actual plan, do you think?


Fuck me. I was only half joking, too.

“Boris Johnson will send a letter to the EU by 00:00 BST to request a Brexit delay - but he will not sign it, according to a Downing Street source.

The request will be accompanied by a second letter, signed by Mr Johnson, which will say he believes that a delay would be a mistake, the source said”

PM to send unsigned letter seeking Brexit delay


----------



## treelover (Oct 19, 2019)

Rees Mogg, Gove, etc, had quite large police protection as they were robustly barracked by remain protesters, quite startling images, as they have been very passive uptil now.


----------



## weltweit (Oct 19, 2019)

I still don't understand why the passing of Letwin's vote meant that the main deal could not be voted on today?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 19, 2019)

Fucking hell danny la rouge that was prescient of you!


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



shame the austerity marches didnt get as much coverage or even interest


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



Crowds watching live screen displays from the House of Commons. Not quite Live Aid is it


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 19, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Crowds watching live screen displays from the House of Commons. Not quite Live Aid is it


No, because it isn't Live Aid.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

weltweit said:


> I still don't understand why the passing of Letwin's vote meant that the main deal could not be voted on today?


I think basically because that's part of what his amendment said. Something like 'this house reserves judgement on the deal', replacing 'this house approves the deal'.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 19, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> No, because it isn't Live Aid.


Really?


----------



## ignatious (Oct 19, 2019)

weltweit said:


> I still don't understand why the passing of Letwin's vote meant that the main deal could not be voted on today?



Because there is no exit legislation in place and Letwin’s bill requires that as an insurance that the Govt don’t railroad through a no-deal Brexit.

Govt will try to get the necessary legislation passed next week, but it is likely to be closely scrutinised so any backdoor ‘promises’ he’s made to any parties are likely to be exposed. There is also the possibility that any legislation gets tied to a second referendum.

The extra time also allows his deal itself to be further scrutinised.

There will be pressure points on all sides and it wouldn’t surprise me if the MPs, now that there is a specific deal rather than a series of vague promises on the table, decide to pass ownership back to the public. Given the changed mood since 2016 I think they could make the argument that it would be the ‘democratic’ thing to do.

caveat: I am the wrong side of a bottle of red and may be wide of the mark here.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

It's a fucking shambles though isn't it, photocopied unsigned letters and that, sending one letter and another going don't agree to first letter. Whatever your views on brexit or party politics and that, how can anybody not think fucks sake look at these knobheads why don't we just chuck them all in a pit, this parliamentary stuff just hasn't worked out has it


----------



## agricola (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's a fucking shambles though isn't it, photocopied unsigned letters and that, sending one letter and another going don't agree to first letter. Whatever your views on brexit or party politics and that, how can anybody not think fucks sake look at these knobheads why don't we just chuck them all in a pit, this parliamentary stuff just hasn't worked out has it



I am honestly surprised that the clever way out of the Letwin bill didn't involve delivering the letter by traction engine.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 19, 2019)

Boris missed a trick. He should have sent the letter 2nd class.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> I am honestly surprised that the clever way out of the Letwin bill didn't involve delivering the letter by traction engine.


David Davis on Newsnight insisting sending it by carrier pigeon was justifiable and denying accusations they force fed it bacon lardons for six weeks so that it sank over the channel


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 19, 2019)

ignatious said:


> Because there is no exit legislation in place and Letwin’s bill requires that as an insurance that the Govt don’t railroad through a no-deal Brexit.


You do realise that the EU can say "enough is enough" and not give us an extension so we leave on the 31st anyway regardless of the Letwin or Benn act don't you?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> You do realise that the EU can say "enough is enough" and not give us an extension so we leave on the 31st anyway regardless of the Letwin or Benn act don't you?


Not going to though are they


----------



## ignatious (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> You do realise that the EU can say "enough is enough" and not give us an extension so we leave on the 31st anyway regardless of the Letwin or Benn act don't you?


Yes they could, but most commentators seem to think that is unlikely.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> You do realise that the EU can say "enough is enough" and not give us an extension so we leave on the 31st anyway regardless of the Letwin or Benn act don't you?


Depends on your definition of 'can'.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Not going to though are they


Are you sure? EU has said repeatedly that they are ready for a no deal Brexit.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's a fucking shambles though isn't it, photocopied unsigned letters and that, sending one letter and another going don't agree to first letter. Whatever your views on brexit or party politics and that, how can anybody not think fucks sake look at these knobheads why don't we just chuck them all in a pit, this parliamentary stuff just hasn't worked out has it



It’s beyond bizarre that the PM sends multiple letters effectively asking the EU to sort it out because the UK can’t. 

Taking back control, lol.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Fuck me. I was only half joking, too.
> 
> “Boris Johnson will send a letter to the EU by 00:00 BST to request a Brexit delay - but he will not sign it, according to a Downing Street source.
> 
> ...


Woah


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Are you sure? EU has said repeatedly that they are ready for a no deal Brexit.


Yes I'm sure


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 19, 2019)

This is all definitely a big joke where are the cameramen hiding?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 19, 2019)

I bet the second letter says he has never consented to mercantile law.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Boris missed a trick. He should have sent the letter 2nd class.




or without a stamp AND LET THE UNLECTED FAT CATS PAY FOR THE EXTRA POSTAGE CHARGE  1111!!!!!!Eleven


----------



## Smangus (Oct 19, 2019)

This is so fucking amateurish , unsigned letter - is that the best he can do? fucking knobber.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 19, 2019)

Smangus said:


> This is so fucking amateurish , unsigned letter - is that the best he can do? fucking knobber.



Invisible ink?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 19, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I bet the second letter says he has never consented to mercantile law.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 19, 2019)

he could have signed breris jensen and then it wouldnt have been a legally binding document a bloke in the pub told me


----------



## Artaxerxes (Oct 19, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Boris missed a trick. He should have sent the letter 2nd class.



DPD


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It's a fucking shambles though isn't it, photocopied unsigned letters and that, sending one letter and another going don't agree to first letter. Whatever your views on brexit or party politics and that, how can anybody not think fucks sake look at these knobheads why don't we just chuck them all in a pit, this parliamentary stuff just hasn't worked out has it


Exactly this. What a bunch of fucking cunts. Ha ha jolly japes


----------



## ignatious (Oct 19, 2019)

Perhaps he’s having a Letter of the Week competition with The Donald.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 20, 2019)

stampy spoilt child. and this is what we have as our leading statesman ?


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 20, 2019)

Smangus said:


> This is so fucking amateurish , unsigned letter - is that the best he can do? fucking knobber.



The actual letter has "Prime Minister of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" in the signature block, lest Brussels be confused about who sent it. He really is such a Billy Bunter man-child cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 20, 2019)

So Johnson is inviting the EU to make a judgement on the UK constitution? Why would they even consider him to be in charge now? UK government is the government because it has the consent of parliament. By what authority does Johnson now speak? As a private citizen? Can we all send letters? 

It's hard to know wtf any more ,but this feels like a bad miscalculation by Johnson.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 20, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> So Johnson is inviting the EU to make a judgement on the UK constitution? Why would they even consider him to be in charge now? UK government is the government because it has the consent of parliament. By what authority does Johnson now speak? As a private citizen? Can we all send letters?
> 
> It's hard to know wtf any more ,but this feels like a bad miscalculation by Johnson.


UK is basically a joke, has been for a while now. Long before Johnson. Shaming for anyone who identifies as British.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 20, 2019)

*Boris Johnson sends the EU THREE letters: One (not signed by him) asks to delay Brexit beyond Oct 31, the second makes clear the first is from Parliament - not the Government, and the third urges Brussels NOT to grant an extension*


----------



## Don Troooomp (Oct 20, 2019)

Smangus said:


> This is so fucking amateurish , unsigned letter - is that the best he can do? fucking knobber.



According to Reuters it was a photocopy not an original, so it appears the well designated 'fucking knobber' can do better.

Johnson sends photocopied letter to EU asking for Brexit delay - S.Times


----------



## Wilf (Oct 20, 2019)

Smangus said:


> This is so fucking amateurish , unsigned letter - is that the best he can do? fucking knobber.


Maybe it's not a Legal Name.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 20, 2019)

Bet he farted in the envelope as well.


----------



## Poot (Oct 20, 2019)

Oh dear. A bit bleary eyed but it seems that now people in Northern Ireland have had time to digest the contents of 'the deal' pretty much every party, every person of any belief and none, unionists, loyalists, a small boy delivering newspapers, EVERYONE seemed to be saying to Radio 4, 'wait just a fucking minute!'

I mean, not that it matters, I'm sure that Johnson will just railroad everyone as per. They are insignificant to him. But people really do have righteous anger and this is likely to blow up sooner rather than later by the sounds of it.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

Plumdaff said:


> @Top Cat said staff leaving the UK would be good because they would return to work in their home countries health services, I said this was laughably naive, they said I was a cunt for pointing this out.


I never said this. Read my post again perhaps.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> It's a shame because the Lord Moon is quite a nice pub on the inside, but it does follow the trend of Wetherspoons buying nice buildings, keeping the interiors nice, yet filling them full of arseholes.


We just need to go there at opening and hold it.


----------



## andysays (Oct 20, 2019)




----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Not that everyone who goes to Wetherspoons is an arsehole obviously (I do a lot - ok, I am an arsehole, but I'm not claiming to be representative) but I'd say they don't have a very tight door policy for arseholes as a chain. There are worse e.g. Belushi's, Yates'.
> 
> The Lord Moon is an extreme case though, where there seems to be an "arseholes only" policy on a regular basis.


I would suggest that the police have had a chat with the management about a preference for keeping certain types all in one place.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

treelover said:


> Rees Mogg, Gove, etc, had quite large police protection as they were robustly barracked by remain protesters, quite startling images, as they have been very passive uptil now.


Mm not sure about that. I can recollect a remainer march a year ago where a clutch of remainers attacked a woman with a Brexit now banner.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

agricola said:


> I am honestly surprised that the clever way out of the Letwin bill didn't involve delivering the letter by traction engine.


Or sending a civil servant who had really sore feet.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> You do realise that the EU can say "enough is enough" and not give us an extension so we leave on the 31st anyway regardless of the Letwin or Benn act don't you?


The EU lurve kicking the can down the road. It's what capitalists do.


----------



## tim (Oct 20, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Mm not sure about that. I can recollect a remainer march a year ago where a clutch of remainers attacked a woman with a Brexit now banner.



Once you finally get the indignant  urban bourgeoisie going there's no predicting what they're capable off. 

Barcelona; Hong Kong; London!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 20, 2019)

The repercussions of brexit will echo for generations


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 20, 2019)

This is the one thing we didn't want to happen


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

tim said:


> Once you finally get the indignant  urban bourgeoisie going there's no predicting what they're capable off.
> 
> Barcelona; Hong Kong; London!


Generally, it's this mob who usher in facism.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

What's the reaction from the EU? Little Macron surely is spitting blood.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Oct 20, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the reaction from the EU? Little Macron surely is spitting blood.



That would be one up on Boris J talking shit.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2019)

TopCat said:


> What's the reaction from the EU? Little Macron surely is spitting blood.



As expected...



> Mr Tusk said he would begin consulting EU leaders "on how to react" - a process one diplomat said could take a few days.
> 
> Mr Johnson has already spoken to the leaders of France, Germany and the Netherlands to press his case - and Paris warned yesterday that a Brexit delay was "in nobody's interest".



EU mulls Johnson's reluctant Brexit delay request


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

They don't have to grant the extension but they will. Even Macron will do what he is told.


----------



## Santino (Oct 20, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Can we all send letters?


Don't go giving The Guardian any ideas.


----------



## A380 (Oct 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> David Davis on Newsnight insisting sending it by carrier pigeon was justifiable and denying accusations they force fed it bacon lardons for six weeks so that it sank over the channel


Did Speckled Jim die in vain?


----------



## Cloo (Oct 20, 2019)

Cloo said:


> My other half noted the other day that chair of Tories on R4 kept repeating, when questioned about honouring Benn Act 'We will honour the law', which sounds awfully like 'We have a loophole to get No-Deal through' in politics-speak.


Well looks like my husband correctly called Johnson's intentions, although not sure the PM will get the result he wants. Be funny if EU says 'We accept the UK _government's _request for an extension'


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 20, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> That would be one up on Boris J talking shit.


Don't laugh at your own jokes please, it's very undignified and a bit embarrassing when nobody else does.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 20, 2019)

Johnson still thinks he's at Eton doesn't he? The good old days when you could promise your fag an extra bowl of Eton mess at elevenses then get out of it by revealing that you had your hand behind your back, fingers crossed. This is the political equivalent of that.

Bit rusty on the rules for how this stuff works but I think if the EU can show it also had its fingers crossed the letter is still valid and they can grant the extension.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 20, 2019)

Tomorrow will be interesting.


----------



## planetgeli (Oct 20, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> This thread is a bit shit. Can only skim it as it’s full of rubbish even though the topic is one that is of course of interest.
> 
> The last time I was in hospital, every nurse was from the Philippines, so wtf does the NHS have to do with Brexit?
> 
> ...



Oh no! A thread went slightly (if informatively) off-topic for half a dozen posts and was then explained why a few posts later.



planetgeli said:


> Purely because a statement was made (by Editor) responded to in a certain way (by TopCat) and it went a bit off tangent from there because I, for one, thought it was interesting to note the nuances of global economies rather than some blanket “it’ll be better for their countries” that TC suggested.
> 
> Nothing more than that. The usual message board difficulties in keeping a topic strictly on topic.



Call the cops.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 20, 2019)

An interesting read.

Attic Bug: The real origins of Brexit



> It's not that long ago we seemed to be cruising serenely towards a particular future. The pieces were in place, the scene was set, even if a little fine-tuning was needed. The arrangement seems obvious now to those not too invested to notice: we were, and still are, in the grip of a professional elite who expect a decisive say in how the country is run, and in how its people should think, behave and be treated, without ever having their own sovereignty or supremacy challenged, and despite bringing very little to the table in terms of talent or achievement. At one point we seemed destined for more of the same, but Brexit was a vote for a change of direction.
> 
> What's curious is how all this came to pass on the watch of supposedly egalitarian governments, in an evermore progressive culture. What were the ideological underpinnings of a development that saw well-heeled nonentities accumulating ever more wealth and prestige, while contributing precious little to the national good?


----------



## andysays (Oct 20, 2019)

This also makes interesting reading

Reluctant EU considers Brexit extension request


> ...Don't expect any speedy EU action, for starters. On Saturday, French President Emmanuel Macron repeated his view that a new Brexit extension was not good for anyone. Boris Johnson literally spelling out his opposition to prolonging the Brexit process by writing a separate letter to Brussels to say so, makes it easier for his peers Mr Macron, Angela Merkel and others to drag their feet a little...





> They prefer first to look to the prime minister to make good on his promise to them that their newly-negotiated Brexit deal will *definitely* be passed by parliament. And time (relatively speaking, of course) is on the prime minister's and EU leaders' side. Under EU law the Brexit deadline is not until 31 October. *In theory, Europe's leaders could wait until the morning of the 31st to hold an emergency summit to discuss an extension.*


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 20, 2019)

andysays said:


> This also makes interesting reading
> 
> Reluctant EU considers Brexit extension request


It's all a scam to get people to stock up on supplies. Must be a youtube video about how big beans did brexit, where's ming


----------



## brogdale (Oct 20, 2019)

The EU will grant an extension pdq if Johnson fails to get his deal through on Monday; they'll then realise that he'll not win over enough opposition support whilst NoDeal is still a possibility. Only a matter of time, now.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2019)

Best front page headline award for today goes to the Sunday Mail...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 20, 2019)

Labour to officially back bid for second Brexit referendum this week



> Labour will whip its MPs to back a second referendum on Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal during the passage of ratification legislation through parliament, shadow cabinet minister Sir Keir Starmer has said.
> 
> But the shadow Brexit secretary said any amendment was likely to be tabled by backbench MPs rather than the Labour leadership, in order to try to enable the broadest possible cross-party coalition in the House of Commons.
> 
> Starmer indicated that Labour could vote for the prime minister’s deal with a referendum attached in order to force a Final Say vote.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Labour to officially back bid for second Brexit referendum this week


The independent has been confidently telling us for three years that Labour is  on the brink of delivering a second referendum within hours. It never happens.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 20, 2019)

> He's been branded "pathetic" and "shameful", one Labour peer joking "surely there should be a fourth letter too, saying 'my name is Boris Johnson and I am five years old'."


----------



## andysays (Oct 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Best front page headline award for today goes to the Sunday Mail...
> 
> View attachment 187636


Traditionally it was Ollie telling Stanley what a find mess he'd got them into

Just sayin'


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 20, 2019)

Raab is a top drawer sycophant I have realised


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> An interesting read.
> 
> Attic Bug: The real origins of Brexit



Gosh, a privileged elite with their thumb on the scales. What won't they think of next.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 20, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Raab is a top drawer sycophant I have realised


He's just Raa Raa


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Raab is a top drawer sycophant I have realised



Watching him hold forth on the wonders of the same deal he resigned in protest over six months ago was a particularly nauseating experience.


----------



## steveo87 (Oct 20, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> He's just Raa Raa


Raaaasuptin lover of the Russian queen?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Labour to officially back bid for second Brexit referendum this week



I wonder why they think the public would entrust them to honour a second referendum when they can’t honour the first.


----------



## Poot (Oct 20, 2019)

I know it's a few months out of date but this is an excellent reminder of why Raab can fuck off.

15 things you should know about the new Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I wonder why they think the public would entrust them to honour a second referendum when they can’t honour the first.



They're not the government though are they? All sorts of people can't 'honour' the referendum result (and what the fuck does that mean anyway) because they're not running the country. The people who _are_ running the country have made a rancid dog's arsehole of the whole thing, take it up with them.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Best front page headline award for today goes to the Sunday Mail...
> 
> View attachment 187636


Remainers shouldn't forget letwin's role in the poll tax which is rarely recalled, the man's a vile turd


----------



## Poot (Oct 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Remainers shouldn't forget letwin's role in the poll tax which is rarely recalled, the man's a vile turd


Yeah, he can fuck off too.

Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset - TheyWorkForYou

Quite fond of a bedroom tax is old Oli. And despite his apparent fondness for stretching Brexit out for as long as possible, his voting record confirms his contempt for any sort of workers' protection legislation being kept, and in fact it goes against many of his other votes regarding Brexit. Maybe he just wanted some attention.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Remainers shouldn't forget letwin's role in the poll tax which is rarely recalled, the man's a vile turd


And wanting to destroy the NHS.


----------



## maomao (Oct 20, 2019)

Poot said:


> Yeah, he can fuck off too.
> 
> Oliver Letwin MP, West Dorset - TheyWorkForYou
> 
> Quite fond of a bedroom tax is old Oli. And despite his apparent fondness for stretching Brexit out for as long as possible, his voting record confirms his contempt for any sort of workers' protection legislation being kept, and in fact it goes against many of his other votes regarding Brexit. Maybe he just wanted some attention.


He's a shocking racist too. He's a fucking Tory MP. There are no nice Tory MPs.


----------



## Poot (Oct 20, 2019)

maomao said:


> He's a shocking racist too. He's a fucking Tory MP. There are no nice Tory MPs.


And he has the kind of face that you would never, ever tire of punching. Possibly even more than Johnson, actually.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 20, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> They're not the government though are they?



 Labour are part of the ‘remain alliance’ that are actively doing their best to prevent Brexit.

The former Lord Chief Justice makes some salient points.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 20, 2019)

It is amazing how labour boxed themselves into a corner of being part of remain alliance for leavers and crypto leavers for remainers isn't it. I actually don't think their position was bad and was probably best they could have gone for until they fucked it recently but what do I know cos they absolutely fucked the perception


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It is amazing how labour boxed themselves into a corner of being part of remain alliance for leavers and crypto leavers for remainers isn't it. I actually don't think their position was bad and was probably best they could have gone for until they fucked it recently but what do I know cos they absolutely fucked the perception



I’m amazed more people haven’t noticed this decisive shift. In part I suspect it’s because it’s because it’s one that suits the position of a lot of its high profile supporters and activists. But also, I suspect it’s because it’s out of loyalty to corbyn, who clearly isn’t driving the policy any longer but it clearly a hostage to it

ETA: the policy as outlined by Starmer today has moved significantly, in tone and intent, even from the policy agreed at conference last month


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 20, 2019)

Labour policy wasn’t going to withstand the rise of the Brexit Party and the counter by the Libs. And then it only had one way to go. It’s still not entirely unreasonable.


----------



## A380 (Oct 20, 2019)

I must say I’m somewhat disappointed. With Cummings’ self described brain the size of a planet and a Prime Minister who has made an entire life from lies and weaselling out of things I was expecting something really imaginative for not sending a letter. A gnu broke into the cabinet office and ate the letter, Reese-Mogg was rushed to hospital to have a top hat surgically removed from his arse or BOJo was zip-wireing to the post box and got stuck. 

But not signing the letter. My mum used to do that with the cheque for the gas bill back in the 70s.


----------



## treelover (Oct 20, 2019)

> t's not that long ago we seemed to be cruising serenely towards a particular future. The pieces were in place, the scene was set, even if a little fine-tuning was needed. The arrangement seems obvious now to those not too invested to notice: we were, and still are, in the grip of a professional elite who expect a decisive say in how the country is run, and in how its people should think, behave and be treated, without ever having their own sovereignty or supremacy challenged, and despite bringing very little to the table in terms of talent or achievement. At one point we seemed destined for more of the same, but Brexit was a vote for a change of direction.
> 
> What's curious is how all this came to pass on the watch of supposedly egalitarian governments, in an evermore progressive culture. *What were the ideological underpinnings of a development that saw well-heeled nonentities accumulating ever more wealth and prestige, while contributing precious little to the national good? *



James Purnell comes to mind, stratospheric rise, now head of digital at the BBC

though the article is a bit Spiked like

actually, its right wing libertarian so is Spike like.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 20, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Labour policy wasn’t going to withstand the rise of the Brexit Party and the counter by the Libs. And then it only had one way to go. It’s still not entirely unreasonable.



It is a complete volte farce from the 2017 manifesto. It’s not even what their conference agreed last month. Some people may describe that as ‘unreasonable’


----------



## TopCat (Oct 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Remainers shouldn't forget letwin's role in the poll tax which is rarely recalled, the man's a vile turd


Remind us?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> An interesting read.
> 
> Attic Bug: The real origins of Brexit



Nigel Farage would love that analysis. 

No racism until multiculturalism and immigration invented it.
The NHS an organisation for hangers on.
Only economically productive life ‘the bottom line’ worth speaking of, not culture or creativity.
A strange narrative that doesn’t even attempt to guess at what different sections of the working class, Black people for example, made of it. Presumably just had their heads filled with hateful rhetoric from progressives.

I agree it’s deplorable that certain progressives think they are superior, but they hardly invented that bourgeois superiority and it wouldn’t disappear if they did. I agree many of those roles it refers to are tokenist. I doubt they have real power. 

The article is way too absolutist and Brexit, voted for as it was by swathes of middle class middle England for deregulation and trade deals can’t simply be wished into being uprising only.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 20, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Remind us?



Suggesting using Scotland as guinea pigs, apparently.  More here (I wasn't aware or had forgotten)

and possibly a tad dubious on race relations as well - more here


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2019)

TopCat said:


> Remind us?


His idea


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 20, 2019)

Labour MP Lucy Powell just interviewed on Sky News informs of her worry of a GE if U.K. hasn’t left the EU with a deal.



Farage also interviewed doesn’t accept Boris’s new deal (Theresa May’s deal with 5% favourable amendments) actually delivers a ‘clean cut Brexit’ and wants a short delay followed by a GE to deliver a genuine Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Labour MP Lucy Powell just interviewed on Sky News informs of her worry of a GE if U.K. hasn’t left the EU with a deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Farage also interviewed doesn’t accept Boris’s new deal (Theresa May’s deal with 5% favourable amendments) actually delivers a ‘clean cut Brexit’ and wants a short delay followed by a GE to deliver a genuine Brexit.



Lucy Powell: no one likes an informer


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 20, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> It is a complete volte farce from the 2017 manifesto. It’s not even what their conference agreed last month. Some people may describe that as ‘unreasonable’



It was pretty clear then that it did not support a Tory Brexit (or the direction the Tories have followed) and it still doesn’t. It doesn’t rule out a Brexit that it could commend to the voters or Remain.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Lucy Powell: no one likes an informer



Lucy lips sink ships


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 20, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It is amazing how labour boxed themselves into a corner of being part of remain alliance for leavers and crypto leavers for remainers isn't it. I actually don't think their position was bad and was probably best they could have gone for until they fucked it recently but what do I know cos they absolutely fucked the perception



I agree, but even in Leave seats something like 60-70% of their 2017 voters were Remain. I suspect they were losing so many Remain voters in the effort to hang on to Leavers that in the end they went for the shift. They should have come out more confidently with their previous position but I can't help thinking that with everything so polarised a compromise position was never going to curry favour with enough people on either 'side'.


----------



## not a trot (Oct 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Labour MP Lucy Powell just interviewed on Sky News informs of her worry of a GE if U.K. hasn’t left the EU with a deal.
> 
> 
> 
> Farage also interviewed doesn’t accept Boris’s new deal (Theresa May’s deal with 5% favourable amendments) actually delivers a ‘clean cut Brexit’ and wants a short delay followed by a GE to deliver a genuine Brexit.




Any chance Farage could be made to look like that permanently.


----------



## Ming (Oct 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> His idea


Not big on the NHS either.
Letwin: 'NHS will not exist under Tories'


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 20, 2019)

Tory in 'is a Tory' shocker


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 20, 2019)

Ni could be a goldmine for those in the position of running import vat refund etc scams


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 20, 2019)

This been done?


----------



## andysays (Oct 21, 2019)

And the legal challenges rumble on...

Court asked to consider if PM's Brexit delay tactic is lawful


> Scotland's highest court is to consider whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson has fully complied with a law requiring him to ask for a Brexit delay. He sent an unsigned letter to Brussels asking for an extension along with a signed letter saying he believed a further delay would be a mistake. The Court of Session will be asked to decide whether this broke a promise not to "frustrate" the so-called Benn Act.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 21, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2019)

Just a matter of waiting for the next Johnson U-turn now, then?

1. "no border in the Irish sea"
2. "no extension letter"
3. ?

Customs Union ahoy, and there we have it; soft Brexit.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Just a matter of waiting for the next Johnson U-turn now, then?
> 
> 1. "no border in the Irish sea"
> 2. "no extension letter"
> ...



Next U-turn, no 6/7th child?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Next U-turn, No 6/7th child?


Honestly, couldn't care less about that aspect of the oxygen waster.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2019)

it's at this point that the proper humiliation of alexander boris de pfeffel johnson really begins


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 21, 2019)

So what's happening today? What strange link in the road and bizarre reversal can we expect?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So what's happening today? What strange link in the road and bizarre reversal can we expect?


bercow refusing the countenance the motion the government wishes to put


----------



## brogdale (Oct 21, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So what's happening today? What strange link in the road and bizarre reversal can we expect?


Guardian has it all taped up...



Test later.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 21, 2019)

Sky's take, fwiw, and _pace_ Rees-Mogg, is that the House has already voted on the deal as amended so Bercow will not allow it to be heard again.
Brexit: It is very unlikely that the PM will get his way today - here's why


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> It is amazing how labour boxed themselves into a corner of being part of remain alliance for leavers and crypto leavers for remainers isn't it. I actually don't think their position was bad and was probably best they could have gone for until they fucked it recently but what do I know cos they absolutely fucked the perception



If you stand in the middle of the road you are liable to get run over.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you stand in the middle of the road you are liable to get run over.



To be fair Starmer, Watson, Khan, Thornberry and McDonnell aren't in the middle of the road. And are successfully pulling Labour towards a 2nd ref & a remain campaign. A historic moment and one academics will debate for years to come I suspect.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> To be fair Starmer, Watson, Khan, Thornberry and McDonnell aren't in the middle of the road. And are successfully pulling Labour towards a 2nd ref & a remain campaign. A historic moment and one academics will debate for years to come I suspect.



They might debate it for years to come or they might just come up with some bollocks to justify it all and blame Corbyn for being too 'radical'.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 21, 2019)

go on corbyn surprise us all and draw for the vonc cannon TODAY


----------



## Winot (Oct 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you stand in the middle of the road you are liable to get run over.



Thatcher’s quote


----------



## kabbes (Oct 21, 2019)

Winot said:


> Thatcher’s quote


To be fair, you can’t say she didn’t know something about winning elections.


----------



## Winot (Oct 21, 2019)

kabbes said:


> To be fair, you can’t say she didn’t know something about winning elections.



It’s a good quote and I wish the Labour Party had taken note of it in this instance.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> They might debate it for years to come or they might just come up with some bollocks to justify it all and blame Corbyn for being too 'radical'.



Well. in one sense you are right - they will talk bollocks. But, and this must be apparent to even the most clueless professor, there are going to be profound, deepening and reverberating consequences for Labour in some of its ex-heartland areas.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 21, 2019)

It's a Nye quote.

And he was probably only using an already well known thing.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> It's a Nye quote.
> 
> And he was probably only using an already well known thing.



It's a quote from hundreds of people but his is the earliest use I know of (having done zero research).


----------



## Raheem (Oct 21, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Sky's take, fwiw, and _pace_ Rees-Mogg, is that the House has already voted on the deal as amended so Bercow will not allow it to be heard again.
> Brexit: It is very unlikely that the PM will get his way today - here's why


The fact that they are timewasting like that tells you they don't have the numbers. Or they are not confident, at least.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Well. in one sense you are right - they will talk bollocks. But, and this must be apparent to even the most clueless professor, there are going to be profound, deepening and reverberating consequences for Labour in some of its ex-heartland areas.



The electorate are a bit more clued up than this. Labour voters will be well aware of its dilemmas. Many who are only loosely adhered to Brexit will not desert Labour for the Tories and the Brexit Party performance is hard to predict given that we don’t know the state of play going into an election. But at some point it fades away.

Relevance per se is Labour’s issue. It can be relevant to people with or without Brexit or it can be irrelevant. It was becoming more and more irrelevant when it lost the 2010 election and the EU simply wasn’t a factor. I wonder what Labour’s chances would appear like, whatever its Brexit position if it had a new working class figurehead like Rebecca Long Bailey or Laura Pidcock to sell its vision.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Process wise... something like Bercow says you can't have another vote today (very likely); government then has 2nd reading of legislation on Tuesday; some Labour backbenchers or fellow travellers try and attach a customs union amendment (which has a chance but _probably_ fails); if that passes, Johnson then withdraws the legislation... and we are back to something happening or not happening on the 31st (almost certainly an EU agreement to further extension)??


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Or to put it another way:

Johnson's got the numbers for a yes/no thing, but if it moves to the usual processes of a bill with amendments, the chances of opposition forces shifting the thing in the direction of brino increase to almost 50/50. Chances of 2nd ref look to be receding, just at the point labour supports it.


----------



## Cid (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Process wise... something like Bercow says you can't have another vote today (very likely); government then has 2nd reading of legislation on Tuesday; some Labour backbenchers or fellow travellers try and attach a customs union amendment (which has a chance but _probably_ fails); if that passes, Johnson then withdraws the legislation... and we are back to something happening or not happening on the 31st (almost certainly an EU agreement to further extension)??



Yeah, think that’s about it... Johnson now knows he has an effective out by just withdrawing whenever an amendment is proposed. Given he’s much less attached to getting his deal through than May was, no deal becomes an effective threat... and the parliamentary tactics opposition parties were trying to use become irrelevant.

If the EU grants another extension, it’s going to highlight opposition reluctance to go to a GE.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Chances of 2nd ref look to be receding, just at the point labour supports it.



When did the chances of a 2nd ref ever seem significant? I don't think they ever have. But I honestly wouldn't be surprised if a 2ndRef amendment passed were it to be voted on this week.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Cid said:


> Yeah, think that’s about it... Johnson now knows he has an effective out by just withdrawing whenever an amendment is proposed. Given he’s much less attached to getting his deal through than May was, no deal becomes an effective threat... and the parliamentary tactics opposition parties were trying to use become irrelevant.
> 
> If the EU grants another extension, it’s going to highlight opposition reluctance to go to a GE.


Seems to me we've got something close to a grand coalition in favour of the Johnson deal, all Tory MPs along with just enough Labour, independent and ex-Tory MPs - along with the EU itself, on the specific issue of getting the deal through or not. It's always fair to admit Labour had a weak hand with divides in their MPs, activists and most of all voter base(s). But they've still managed to play that hand awfully. Every step of the way it's been Starmer comes out with a remain statement, followed by Corbyn saying just about nothing. Regardless of the rights of remain neo-lib vs leave neo-lib, they looked like they had a strategy, with the Norway + workers rights/env protection (on May's 3rd attempt?). They may well be back with that this week, but it's too late. Again, it's not my position, not my politics, but it _might_ have been something they could have run with and had a stab at bringing together their working class leave base with other Labour areas. In reality though, they've been everything Boris Johnson has said about them, scared of their own shadow, responsive, inconsistent.  The Tory party has done just about everything wrong since 2016, right up to the ongoing shambles this week, but here we are with them heading for another 5 years, positioned as the party of the people.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Suppose what I'm on about was if you are a centre left party that says is wants to respect the referendum, you are not likely to embrace a full on Lexit. But you should at least be able to embrace a centre left vision of Brexit (CLexit?  ). You at least need to convince voters that you have proposals to stop the NHS being sold to Trump or whatever, some active proposals about improving on the working time directive etc. With all that in place for the last couple of years Labour should have been chomping at the bit for an election.


----------



## Cid (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Suppose what I'm on about was if you are a centre left party that says is wants to respect the referendum, you are not likely to embrace a full on Lexit. But you should at least be able to embrace a centre left vision of Brexit (CLexit?  ). You at least need to convince voters that you have proposals to stop the NHS being sold to Trump or whatever, some active proposals about improving on the working time directive etc. With all that in place for the last couple of years Labour should have been chomping at the bit for an election.



Can’t be clexit... that was the 2017 Sheffield Hallam result.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 21, 2019)

Speaker's statement to the house - he declines permission for the 'meaningful vote' being put to the house again, hardly surprising, so they move forward with the withdrawal bill instead.

There's a lot of empty seats on the government benches, so clearly they were expecting this outcome.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 21, 2019)

no vote today, get your amendments in while they're hot


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 21, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Speaker's statement to the house - he declines permission for the 'meaningful vote' being put to the house again, hardly surprising, so they move forward with the withdrawal bill instead.
> 
> There's a lot of empty seats on the government benches, so clearly they were expecting this outcome.




The DUP walked. 
Did a few more join them?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 21, 2019)

Lupa said:


> The DUP walked.
> Did a few more join them?



There was plenty of empty seats on the government's benches before the speaker even started to give his statement, they clearly knew he wasn't going to let them debate again exactly what they debated on only 2 days ago.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Mother of Parliaments.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Suppose what I'm on about was if you are a centre left party that says is wants to respect the referendum, you are not likely to embrace a full on Lexit. But you should at least be able to embrace a centre left vision of Brexit (CLexit?  ). You at least need to convince voters that you have proposals to stop the NHS being sold to Trump or whatever, some active proposals about improving on the working time directive etc. With all that in place for the last couple of years Labour should have been chomping at the bit for an election.


Blexit


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

Third wexit


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

Euston Manifexit


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Motherfucker of Parliaments.



Corrected.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

Weapons of mass destructexit


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 21, 2019)

All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy. 

It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.


----------



## bemused (Oct 21, 2019)




----------



## belboid (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.
> 
> It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.


You obviously didn't seen the dramatisation of the original campaign.  It was shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.
> 
> It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.


I prefer the live reality show


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 21, 2019)

bemused said:


>



An oldie, but it keeps on giving, as does this one...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Mother of Parliaments.


Or as de pfeffel refers to it, the motherfucker of parliaments


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Seems to me we've got something close to a grand coalition in favour of the Johnson deal, all Tory MPs along with just enough Labour, independent and ex-Tory MPs - along with the EU itself, on the specific issue of getting the deal through or not. It's always fair to admit Labour had a weak hand with divides in their MPs, activists and most of all voter base(s). But they've still managed to play that hand awfully. Every step of the way it's been Starmer comes out with a remain statement, followed by Corbyn saying just about nothing. Regardless of the rights of remain neo-lib vs leave neo-lib, they looked like they had a strategy, with the Norway + workers rights/env protection (on May's 3rd attempt?). They may well be back with that this week, but it's too late. Again, it's not my position, not my politics, but it _might_ have been something they could have run with and had a stab at bringing together their working class leave base with other Labour areas. In reality though, they've been everything Boris Johnson has said about them, scared of their own shadow, responsive, inconsistent.  The Tory party has done just about everything wrong since 2016, right up to the ongoing shambles this week, but here we are with them heading for another 5 years, positioned as the party of the people.


Yeh well let's see how it looks in a week or two. You don't want to be caught out with your prediction like poor theresa may was with hers in 2017


----------



## Raheem (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.
> 
> It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.


It all won't have finished up.


----------



## bemused (Oct 21, 2019)

I've taken to watching the Sky News Brexit Free channel, it's a joy.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 21, 2019)

bemused said:


> I've taken to watching the Sky News Brexit Free channel, it's a joy.



I do like the third and fourth words in that news channel's name, might tune in if they can improve on the first two.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Blexit


Brexeunt, pursued by a bear.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Weapons of mass destructexit



On a roll.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Brexeunt, pursued by the Russian bear.



FFY


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Seems to me we've got something close to a grand coalition in favour of the Johnson deal, all Tory MPs along with just enough Labour, independent and ex-Tory MPs - along with the EU itself, on the specific issue of getting the deal through or not. It's always fair to admit Labour had a weak hand with divides in their MPs, activists and most of all voter base(s). But they've still managed to play that hand awfully. Every step of the way it's been Starmer comes out with a remain statement, followed by Corbyn saying just about nothing. Regardless of the rights of remain neo-lib vs leave neo-lib, they looked like they had a strategy, with the Norway + workers rights/env protection (on May's 3rd attempt?). They may well be back with that this week, but it's too late. Again, it's not my position, not my politics, but it _might_ have been something they could have run with and had a stab at bringing together their working class leave base with other Labour areas. In reality though, they've been everything Boris Johnson has said about them, scared of their own shadow, responsive, inconsistent.  The Tory party has done just about everything wrong since 2016, right up to the ongoing shambles this week, but here we are with them heading for another 5 years, positioned as the party of the people.



Trouble is there is more than one area to be consistent in. Labour could have stuck with honour (so much ‘honour’ on display) the referendum, but once they were shut out by May, then honouring it meant submission to Tory triumph. Fuck that for a game of soldiers.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.
> 
> It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.


How long are you planning to live?


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.


“Mini” series? This will make Game of Thrones seem lacking in length and drama.


----------



## Plumdaff (Oct 21, 2019)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> “Mini” series? This will make Game of Thrones seem lacking in length and drama.



There's probably a few people here and there quite pleased by the GOT ending. 

Brexit, however, is guaranteed to satisfy absolutely nobody.


----------



## pesh (Oct 21, 2019)

reckon it will be more like Chernobyl than GoT
17.4m... not great, not terrible


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> If you stand in the middle of the road you are liable to get run over.


Doesn't make any sense. Wherever in the road you stand you are liable to get run over. In the very middle you might have a better chance of survival than standing in the middle of one of the lanes. If you are on a road with an odd number of lanes then the middle is a bad place to stand but most roads have an even number. If you don't want to get run over then you need to get off the road altogether. Unless there is very effective traffic calming, or a zebra crossing.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 21, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> How long are you planning to live?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't make any sense. Wherever in the road you stand you are liable to get run over. In the very middle you might have a better chance of survival than standing in the middle of one of the lanes. If you are on a road with an odd number of lanes then the middle is a bad place to stand but most roads have an even number. If you don't want to get run over then you need to get off the road altogether. Unless there is very effective traffic calming, or a zebra crossing.


Honestly though if you walk on the side of the road there is less chance of getting whammed by a lorry, mad I know but also true


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Honestly though if you walk on the side of the road there is less chance of getting whammed by a lorry, mad I know but also true


What does this mean in the analogy though - best to stick to peripheral politics, or are you advocating that the extreme right or left is where people should be?


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit. So many twists and turns. Intrigue, deception and outright conspiracy.
> 
> It’s gonna be great and I hope I’ve managed to forget how it all finishes up before I sit down to watch it.



You wait til Jar Jar Binks turns up


----------



## kabbes (Oct 21, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> All I can say is I’m looking forward to the Netflix mini-series dramatisation of Brexit.


Netflexit


----------



## gosub (Oct 21, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Netflexit



Now theres an idea.  We leave the EU, but do a bing EU subscription for 30 days once a year


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What does this mean in the analogy though - best to stick to peripheral politics, or are you advocating that the extreme right or left is where people should be?


I don't see what relevance your 'extreme right or left' thing has, it's about making a political decision and not trying to be all things to all people eg if you sit on the fence you'll get splinters in your arse


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 21, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The electorate are a bit more clued up than this. Labour voters will be well aware of its dilemmas. Many who are only loosely adhered to Brexit will not desert Labour for the Tories and the Brexit Party performance is hard to predict given that we don’t know the state of play going into an election. But at some point it fades away.
> 
> Relevance per se is Labour’s issue. It can be relevant to people with or without Brexit or it can be irrelevant. It was becoming more and more irrelevant when it lost the 2010 election and the EU simply wasn’t a factor. I wonder what Labour’s chances would appear like, whatever its Brexit position if it had a new working class figurehead like Rebecca Long Bailey or Laura Pidcock to sell its vision.



You keep doing this. You assume the issue is ‘Brexit’ and these voters are glued to the telly willing on the segment of the political class who are backing Johnson. 

What I’m talking about goes deeper, runs deeper and feels more visceral than the trading relations a failing neo-liberal state has with a failing neo-liberal trading bloc. 

Political alienation, peripheralisation, having your instincts about ‘what they think about people like us’ confirmed once and for all and the knowing you’ll never be seen or heard. This is what I’m sensing everywhere and the long run consequences will be profound and far reaching for Labour and others


----------



## teuchter (Oct 21, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't see what relevance your 'extreme right or left' thing has, it's about making a political decision and not trying to be all things to all people eg if you sit on the fence you'll get splinters in your arse


There are plenty of situations where sitting on the fence would be perfectly sensible. There are worse things than splinters - eg. getting eaten alive by crocodiles, and that's something that could happen on one side of a fence.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 21, 2019)

If you sit in the middle of Boots, after a while you get asked to leave.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 21, 2019)

Fences won't stop a crocodile.


----------



## Ming (Oct 21, 2019)

Raheem said:


> If you sit in the middle of Boots, after a while you get asked to leave.


Is crying while you wank wrong? The security guard in WH Smiths certainly seemed to think so.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't make any sense. Wherever in the road you stand you are liable to get run over. In the very middle you might have a better chance of survival than standing in the middle of one of the lanes. If you are on a road with an odd number of lanes then the middle is a bad place to stand but most roads have an even number. If you don't want to get run over then you need to get off the road altogether. Unless there is very effective traffic calming, or a zebra crossing.


I don't believe you.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> There are plenty of situations where sitting on the fence would be perfectly sensible. There are worse things than splinters - eg. getting eaten alive by crocodiles, and that's something that could happen on one side of a fence.


A crocodile would fuck the fence up big time, smash it to bits. You're fucked all ways but at least if you pick a side you've got a 50/50 chance of getting a bit of a head start. 

Also, I don't believe you


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 21, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Doesn't make any sense. Wherever in the road you stand you are liable to get run over. In the very middle you might have a better chance of survival than standing in the middle of one of the lanes. If you are on a road with an odd number of lanes then the middle is a bad place to stand but most roads have an even number. If you don't want to get run over then you need to get off the road altogether. Unless there is very effective traffic calming, or a zebra crossing.



Do us a favour and go and test out where the best place to stand is eh? Let me know what you find out and I'll happily correct my post.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> A crocodile would fuck the fence up big time, smash it to bits. You're fucked all ways but at least if you pick a side you've got a 50/50 chance of getting a bit of a head start.
> 
> Also, I don't believe you


If there's crocodiles on both sides of the fence then I'm going to go for the fence. Also if there's crocodiles on one side, and a lava field on the other. You can 'pick a side' for the sake of making a point and you can try dialing 999 whilst swimmimg in a crocodile infested swamp but I am going to do so whilst sat relatively comfortably on the fence, a location where i will be more visible to the emergency services when they arrive.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 22, 2019)

What would happen if say the Johnson administration got what they wanted, and then things after leaving went to shit? e.g If this is all a big experiment, and we don't know how the economy will fare. It's a heck of a gamble to trust this man and this administration with this task. The govt. and its civil service could fall apart quite quickly. i.e They will be ordered to make everything better, but they can only realistically make things shitter.

I simply don't see the UK prospering with this intended course of action. And there is no real reasonable argument among those who are leading it. Is the country ready, or governed well by a minority of Tories that seem to love playing to the public gallery? These guys are fucking pricks. Dangerous ones. They probably do think they 'can do it'; I don't believe they can.

It's coming to a head. What we don't want or need in these circumstance is Jacob Rees Mogg and Dominic Cummings blatantly in it for themselves. Their own glory, esteem and prosperity. These guys get rich off austerity for us. Immiserate us while, to all intents and purposes, sneering at us and calling us stupid cunts. FWIW I believe they are making a deadly mistake which will see them sink, not soon enough.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Political alienation, peripheralisation, having your instincts about ‘what they think about people like us’ confirmed once and for all and the knowing you’ll never be seen or heard. This is what I’m sensing everywhere and the long run consequences will be profound and far reaching for Labour and others



Yes, the next GE should be interesting.  Perhaps that will be the real second referendum, a referendum on the turkeys who have cowardly conspired against 17.4 million voters.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If there's crocodiles on both sides of the fence then I'm going to go for the fence. Also if there's crocodiles on one side, and a lava field on the other. You can 'pick a side' for the sake of making a point and you can try dialing 999 whilst swimmimg in a crocodile infested swamp but I am going to do so whilst sat relatively comfortably on the fence, a location where i will be more visible to the emergency services when they arrive.



Phoning 999 wouldn't get you far. You'd have to ring 911 or 112.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Kevin McGuire (the Mirror's political correspondent) argued on Saturday that there was no "masterplan" from the Johnson administration but rather that the government was trying one thing, finding that path blocked and then looking for another route. I largely agree with that analysis but while there may be no masterplan the government it does have a strategy - put the political front and centre and the technical/legal will follow, the exact opposite to the opposition parties.

Johnson is a venal, egotistical, self-serving fool but the fact is that his government is very close to getting MPs to agree (in principle anyway) to leave the EU. After the extension to 31st October I thought remain in stages was the most likely option, and I still don't discount such an outcome entirely, but the government has not just got closer to leaving the EU than the previous one but has succeeded in mapping out a passage (a pretty narrow, tortuous one I admit) to leaving the EU. By putting the political first this government has managed to get a "new" agreement, it has cleaved off the ERG from the DUP,  neutralised the wet's within their own party and at least managed to stop the flow of support to the BP if not reverse it. They may be inept and stupid but they are still less inept and stupid than the Remain campaign.

On the Question Time thread the below was posted


stavros said:


> Which producer thought the following was a good question to have on?
> 
> "Isn't it time for MPs to ratify the deal and get Brexit done?"


which encapsulates why Remain lost very well. You may not like this question, you might argue that it is a loaded question but it is a question that millions of people are asking. The idea that it is somehow illegitimate is crazy. The inability to recognise that, to deal with things politically - rather than retreating behind the courts and/or parliamentary procedure has given this government a better chance of leaving the EU than it should have ever had.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

The suggestion is that he'll win the first vote tonight, on the second reading of the withdrawal bill, but may lose the vote on the 'time-table' he wants to get it cleared on Thursday by the commons, so it can go to the lords over the weekend, resulting in a short extension from the EU.

Then, of course, it's also down to if any amendments, such as 2nd ref or customs union, are passed, in which case he would withdraw the withdrawal bill, resulting in a longer extension from the EU, and probably a GE.

Bloody pantomime.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If there's crocodiles on both sides of the fence then I'm going to go for the fence. Also if there's crocodiles on one side, and a lava field on the other. You can 'pick a side' for the sake of making a point and you can try dialing 999 whilst swimmimg in a crocodile infested swamp but I am going to do so whilst sat relatively comfortably on the fence, a location where i will be more visible to the emergency services when they arrive.


Pretty sure lava will burn through a fence and I don't believe you.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

Varadkar 'wants Brexit done' by October 31 so he can go see Cher concert



> Leo Varadkar wants a Brexit breakthrough so he can go to see Cher in concert.
> 
> The Irish Mirror has learned the Taoiseach told colleagues he “wants it done” by October 31 like Boris Johnson, but for a very different reason.
> 
> He has tickets for the pop legend in Dublin’s 3Arena on November 1 and wants to enjoy it properly.



Well, that's it, it needs to be done.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You keep doing this. You assume the issue is ‘Brexit’ and these voters are glued to the telly willing on the segment of the political class who are backing Johnson.
> 
> What I’m talking about goes deeper, runs deeper and feels more visceral than the trading relations a failing neo-liberal state has with a failing neo-liberal trading bloc.
> 
> Political alienation, peripheralisation, having your instincts about ‘what they think about people like us’ confirmed once and for all and the knowing you’ll never be seen or heard. This is what I’m sensing everywhere and the long run consequences will be profound and far reaching for Labour and others



I’m not sure why this is your reply. You wrote of the consequences of the LP’s Brexit position. That it goes well beyond Brexit is what I am saying and therefore well beyond whatever position Labour takes on Brexit. It won’t ultimately be the test of Labour’s relevance.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

In the long run we're all dead
-j.m. keynes


----------



## Kaka Tim (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Kevin McGuire (the Mirror's political correspondent) argued on Saturday that there was no "masterplan" from the Johnson administration but rather that the government was trying one thing, finding that path blocked and then looking for another route. I largely agree with that analysis but while there may be no masterplan the government it does have a strategy - put the political front and centre and the technical/legal will follow, the exact opposite to the opposition parties.
> 
> Johnson is a venal, egotistical, self-serving fool but the fact is that his government is very close to getting MPs to agree (in principle anyway) to leave the EU. After the extension to 31st October I thought remain in stages was the most likely option, and I still don't discount such an outcome entirely, but the government has not just got closer to leaving the EU than the previous one but has succeeded in mapping out a passage (a pretty narrow, tortuous one I admit) to leaving the EU. By putting the political first this government has managed to get a "new" agreement, it has cleaved off the ERG from the DUP,  neutralised the wet's within their own party and at least managed to stop the flow of support to the BP if not reverse it. They may be inept and stupid but they are still less inept and stupid than the Remain campaign.
> 
> ...



agree with this. Id add that what has made johnson's position potentially successful is that public opinion has not decisively  turned against leaving. Iike many others - I felt that when the brexit unicorns failed to appear, then public opinion would turn. But it hasn't - there has been some movement but - as far as polling can tell us - it been marginal. 
The remain camp has been woefully inept at trying to change peoples minds - instead it has 
banged on about process, that the referendum was "only advisory", that the referendum was illegitimate because dodgey electoral funding, that leavers are all stupid racists whose opinions shouldn't count. There has been an abject failure to even to attempt to understand why "leave" won in the first place.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> agree with this. Id add that what has made johnson's position potentially successful is that public opinion has not decisively  turned against leaving. Iike many others - I felt that when the brexit unicorns failed to appear, then public opinion would turn. But it hasn't - there has been some movement but - as far as polling can tell us - it been marginal.
> The remain camp has been woefully inept at trying to change peoples minds - instead it has
> banged on about process, that the referendum was "only advisory", that the referendum was illegitimate because dodgey electoral funding, that leavers are all stupid racists whose opinions shouldn't count. There has been an abject failure to even to attempt to understand why "leave" won in the first place.


Frankly the remain camp's abject leadership has remained in 2016 while most other people have developed new arguments for or against leaving based on more recent events.


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Varadkar 'wants Brexit done' by October 31 so he can go see Cher concert
> 
> 
> 
> Well, that's it, it needs to be done.


If only we could all turn back time...


----------



## Poot (Oct 22, 2019)

andysays said:


> If only we could all turn back time...


You'd think he'd had enough of Gypsies, tramps and thieves.


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2019)

Poot said:


> You'd think he'd had enough of Gypsies, tramps and thieves.


My knowledge of songs by Cher is now exhausted


----------



## Poot (Oct 22, 2019)

andysays said:


> My knowledge of songs by Cher is now exhausted


Didn't she sing one called Bunch of Nefarious Self-Serving Cunts? Oh. Shame.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

right come on tory webels vote for the fucking customs union so we can ruin Varadkar's weekend


----------



## kabbes (Oct 22, 2019)

I got EU, babe?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)




----------



## mystic pyjamas (Oct 22, 2019)

So long as I’ve got you babe we’ll be ok.


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I got EU, babe?


How could I forget that one!


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 22, 2019)

How could you forget the 1998 autotune smash "Beleave"?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

the sun ain't gonna shine anymore after brexit


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Yes, the next GE should be interesting.  Perhaps that will be the real second referendum, a referendum on the turkeys who have cowardly conspired against 17.4 million voters.



As that probably includes the Labour Party, the Greens and the Nats exactly which barrel of wankers are you hoping to prevail?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Kevin McGuire (the Mirror's political correspondent) argued on Saturday that there was no "masterplan" from the Johnson administration but rather that the government was trying one thing, finding that path blocked and then looking for another route. I largely agree with that analysis but while there may be no masterplan the government it does have a strategy - put the political front and centre and the technical/legal will follow, the exact opposite to the opposition parties.
> 
> Johnson is a venal, egotistical, self-serving fool but the fact is that his government is very close to getting MPs to agree (in principle anyway) to leave the EU. After the extension to 31st October I thought remain in stages was the most likely option, and I still don't discount such an outcome entirely, but the government has not just got closer to leaving the EU than the previous one but has succeeded in mapping out a passage (a pretty narrow, tortuous one I admit) to leaving the EU. By putting the political first this government has managed to get a "new" agreement, it has cleaved off the ERG from the DUP,  neutralised the wet's within their own party and at least managed to stop the flow of support to the BP if not reverse it. They may be inept and stupid but they are still less inept and stupid than the Remain campaign.
> 
> ...


What would be a 'political' rather than 'technical' argument for remain, that would get people to change their minds?


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> As that probably includes the Labour Party, the Greens and the Nats exactly which barrel of wankers are you hoping to prevail?



Presumably this one (new YouGov poll for the Times)


----------



## gosub (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If there's crocodiles on both sides of the fence then I'm going to go for the fence. Also if there's crocodiles on one side, and a lava field on the other. You can 'pick a side' for the sake of making a point and you can try dialing 999 whilst swimmimg in a crocodile infested swamp but I am going to do so whilst sat relatively comfortably on the fence, a location where i will be more visible to the emergency services when they arrive.


Not sure which emergency service deals with the old crocodile lava conundrum.  Best to find the most flame retardent fence post sit on break fence and let the lava and crocodiles argue it out between themselves


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What would be a 'political' rather than 'technical' argument for remain, that would get people to change their minds?


Something like a genuine remain and reform argument, as opposed to remain and retain the same or cultural nonsense about how your car is german and everybody likes pain au chocolat


----------



## Don Troooomp (Oct 22, 2019)

Are MPs elected to exercise their own judgement or do their constituents’ bidding? | YouGov

This is less than good news for democracy. MPs think they know better than the people who voted them in, and are willing to go against their constituents. 
This is going to, if they have brains, going to worry MPs when it comes to deciding their Brexit votes.


----------



## gosub (Oct 22, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> How could you forget the 1998 autotune smash "Beleave"?


It took a deliberate effort on my part which, you fucking barstard have completely undermined


----------



## gosub (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Something like a genuine remain and reform argument, as opposed to remain and retain the same or cultural nonsense about how your car is german and everybody likes pain au chocolat


This reform would be swimming against the tide, in a manner that leavers already gave up on


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> Are MPs elected to exercise their own judgement or do their constituents’ bidding? | YouGov
> 
> This is less than good news for democracy. MPs think they know better than the people who voted them in, and are willing to go against their constituents.
> This is going to, if they have brains, going to worry MPs when it comes to deciding their Brexit votes.


this really shouldn't surprise after other debacles of our time like the iraq war, the poll tax, student fees etc but hey if it's the first time you've noticed it, well done you


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this really shouldn't surprise after other debacles of our time like the iraq war, the poll tax, student fees etc but hey if it's the first time you've noticed it, well done you


Representative democracy; clue in the name.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Kevin McGuire (the Mirror's political correspondent) argued on Saturday that there was no "masterplan" from the Johnson administration but rather that the government was trying one thing, finding that path blocked and then looking for another route. I largely agree with that analysis but while there may be no masterplan the government it does have a strategy - put the political front and centre and the technical/legal will follow, the exact opposite to the opposition parties.
> 
> Johnson is a venal, egotistical, self-serving fool but the fact is that his government is very close to getting MPs to agree (in principle anyway) to leave the EU. After the extension to 31st October I thought remain in stages was the most likely option, and I still don't discount such an outcome entirely, but the government has not just got closer to leaving the EU than the previous one but has succeeded in mapping out a passage (a pretty narrow, tortuous one I admit) to leaving the EU. By putting the political first this government has managed to get a "new" agreement, it has cleaved off the ERG from the DUP,  neutralised the wet's within their own party and at least managed to stop the flow of support to the BP if not reverse it. They may be inept and stupid but they are still less inept and stupid than the Remain campaign.
> 
> ...



The question that hangs above simple Leave or not is regulatory alignment. Parliament and indeed the Country as a whole is still unsure about whether it is better to stay within the EU’s orbit (even if outside of the EU) or to seek wider trade alignments, esp with the US. The consequences of shifting that alignment is what this battle is about and it doesn’t go away if people stamp their feet going ‘get on with it’. Unfortunately it’s a Trojan horse for full out Remain politics as well as Little England daydreaming.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Representative democracy; clue in the name.


Indeed.

Don needs to read up on Burke.

Internet Archive Search: ((subject:"Burke, Edmund" OR subject:"Edmund Burke" OR creator:"Burke, Edmund" OR creator:"Edmund Burke" OR creator:"Burke, E." OR title:"Edmund Burke" OR description:"Burke, Edmund" OR description:"Edmund Burke") OR ("1729-1797" AND Burke)) AND (-mediatype:software)


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Don needs to read up on Burke.
> 
> Internet Archive Search: ((subject:"Burke, Edmund" OR subject:"Edmund Burke" OR creator:"Burke, Edmund" OR creator:"Edmund Burke" OR creator:"Burke, E." OR title:"Edmund Burke" OR description:"Burke, Edmund" OR description:"Edmund Burke") OR ("1729-1797" AND Burke)) AND (-mediatype:software)


it's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Phoning 999 wouldn't get you far. You'd have to ring 911 or 112.


Not true.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Not true.


999 doesn't work abroad


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 999 doesn't work abroad


Not true.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Oct 22, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> this really shouldn't surprise after other debacles of our time like the iraq war, the poll tax, student fees etc but hey if it's the first time you've noticed it, well done you



It was more about the poll and Brexit


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Not true.


Don't believe you


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Not true.


Name the countries which use both 999 and have crocodiles. Alphabetic order if possible. Thanks.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Name the countries which use both 999 and have crocodiles. Alphabetic order if possible. Thanks.



Bangladesh. Botswana. Ghana. Kenya. Malaysia. Mauritius. Singapore. Swaziland. Trinidad & Tobago. Zimbabwe.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

Actually while only ten countries use 999 (999 (emergency telephone number) - Wikipedia) including UK, the first three I checked (Bangladesh, HK, Malaysia) all have crocodiles. Gave up after that although reckon Poland is probably a safe no. Fucks sake.


----------



## chilango (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Name the countries which use both 999 and have crocodiles. Alphabetic order if possible. Thanks.


Bangladesh
Botswana
Ghana
Kenya
Malaysia
Swaziland
Trinidad & Tobago
Zimbabwe

Singapore/Hong Kong idk


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

Alright fucking hell


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Actually while only ten countries use 999 (999 (emergency telephone number) - Wikipedia) including UK, the first three I checked (Bangladesh, HK, Malaysia) all have crocodiles. Gave up after that although reckon Poland is probably a safe no. Fucks sake.


But do they have active volcanoes?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

andysays said:


> But do they have active volcanoes?


Yes got the bastard


----------



## MrSki (Oct 22, 2019)




----------



## chilango (Oct 22, 2019)

No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius


----------



## pesh (Oct 22, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius


Oh yea

Pui Pui (crocodile) - Wikipedia


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yes got the bastard





chilango said:


> No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius





pesh said:


>


teuchter once again shown to be full of fail


----------



## chilango (Oct 22, 2019)

Kenya and Malaysia have 999, crocodiles and active volcanoes.

We're getting there.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> Kenya and Malaysia have 999, crocodiles and active volcanoes.
> 
> We're getting there.


Ok so we're sat on a fence in Kenya or Malaysia and


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 22, 2019)

If the crocodiles escaped from the zoo
you'd want to ring 112.


chilango said:


> No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius


Si.World's smallest crocodile, primate go on show in HK


----------



## chilango (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Oh yea
> 
> Pui Pui (crocodile) - Wikipedia





> No one knows where it came from but the authorities suspect it was a pet that escaped or was dumped into the river after it grew too big


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

It's not where you're from it's where you're at


----------



## Poot (Oct 22, 2019)

MrSki said:


>



That's a crock. 

Or a crook.


----------



## chilango (Oct 22, 2019)

Poot said:


> That's a crock.
> 
> Or a crook.



Or a croc?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius



https://www.yatra.com/international...tius-island/crocodile-and-giant-tortoise-park


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Flavour said:


> https://www.yatra.com/international...tius-island/crocodile-and-giant-tortoise-park


and volcanos?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Ok so we're sat on a fence in Kenya or Malaysia and


how high is this fence?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

Trou aux cerfs, mate


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

chilango said:


> No crocs in Hong Kong or Mauritius





Spoiler: I am sure they do...


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is there any way I could start subtracting my posts, to allow me to return to civilian life?



Nope. Blood in, blood out.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> What would be a 'political' rather than 'technical' argument for remain, that would get people to change their minds?


That depends on your politics



Mr Moose said:


> The question that hangs above simple Leave or not is regulatory alignment.


It might be for you. For plenty of others that is *not* the question. I don't see the relevance of your post regarding the point I made?


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Don needs to read up on Burke.



It’s fair to say though that this is one of the big dividing issues surrounding Brexit. I suspect many think that the Brexit referendum result trumps any vote in Parliament. They have more confidence in their vote to Leave than their vote in a General Election (in which their candidate may not win or may choose to exercise their own judgement once elected).

I am a big fan of representational democracy as a system, but it needs to do a lot of work to re-establish its value with the electorate.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> I am a big fan of representational democracy as a system,


I’m not.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> That depends on your politics
> 
> It might be for you. For plenty of others that is *not* the question. I don't see the relevance of your post regarding the point I made?



The last part of your post was more ‘get it done’. I’m just asking get what done? 

It’s a fundamental problem that this relationship was not defined before the question was asked. Now two differing visions are at war over it. Never mind that you don’t share either, that’s the Parliamentary battleground.


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I’m not.



Good for you.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> Good for you.


The point is that Burke gives the rationale for MPs deciding what is best (in a paternalistic, power-retained way). They "represent" rather than are mandated. That MPs still believe that rationale important and of virtue is hardly surprising, given, you know, history.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Don needs to read


c4u


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2019)

Laura Kuensberg passing on briefings as to what the govt will do if they lose the timetable vote tonight (which would I think, leave them facing a further extension... if offered by the eu):
Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter

Seems to be somewhere along the lines of the government 'going on strike' and/or trying to get an election again. Complete mess, parliament act, rinse and repeat but still a win-win scenario for Johnson. Either he gets us out and wins an election before or just after new year or he gets an election on a 'getting it done/people vs parliament' ticket and then gets the brexit he wants after gaining a majority. Basically, labour are going to have to face the music at some point.

Risible, dishonest and the rest and seeking even further deregulation, but Johnson has also outplayed the rebel alliance at every turn. I'll avoid star wars analogies but somehow every technical/legal defeat has really helped his case.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2019)

All as said much better by...



redsquirrel said:


> Kevin McGuire (the Mirror's political correspondent) argued on Saturday that there was no "masterplan" from the Johnson administration but rather that the government was trying one thing, finding that path blocked and then looking for another route. I largely agree with that analysis but while there may be no masterplan the government it does have a strategy - put the political front and centre and the technical/legal will follow, the exact opposite to the opposition parties.
> 
> Johnson is a venal, egotistical, self-serving fool but the fact is that his government is very close to getting MPs to agree (in principle anyway) to leave the EU. After the extension to 31st October I thought remain in stages was the most likely option, and I still don't discount such an outcome entirely, but the government has not just got closer to leaving the EU than the previous one but has succeeded in mapping out a passage (a pretty narrow, tortuous one I admit) to leaving the EU. By putting the political first this government has managed to get a "new" agreement, it has cleaved off the ERG from the DUP,  neutralised the wet's within their own party and at least managed to stop the flow of support to the BP if not reverse it. They may be inept and stupid but they are still less inept and stupid than the Remain campaign.
> 
> ...


----------



## Winot (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> The point is that Burke gives the rationale for MPs deciding what is best (in a paternalistic, power-retained way). They "represent" rather than are mandated. That MPs still believe that rationale important and of virtue is hardly surprising, given, you know, history.



Yeah I’m familiar with the criticisms of representational democracy. I was interested though in the clash between direct and representational democracy in relation to the Brexit debate.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> Yeah I’m familiar with the criticisms of representational democracy. I was interested though in the clash between direct and representational democracy in relation to the Brexit debate.


Well indeed. But and so was I. But I felt it best to point out that I’m something of an outside observer, rather than have people assuming I belong to one of the two poles that everyone increasingly assumes are the only possible positions.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> Yeah I’m familiar with the criticisms of representational democracy. I was interested though in the clash between direct and representational democracy in relation to the Brexit debate.


Of course referenda, whilst a form of 'at a distance direct democracy', still contain all the problems of 'democracy'. They are premised on the executive/parliament having the power and seeking occasional views from those who don't - us.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Laura Kuensberg passing on briefings as to what the govt will do if they lose the timetable vote tonight (which would I think, leave them facing a further extension... if offered by the eu):
> Laura Kuenssberg (@bbclaurak) on Twitter
> 
> Seems to be somewhere along the lines of the government 'going on strike' and/or trying to get an election again. Complete mess, parliament act, rinse and repeat but still a win-win scenario for Johnson. Either he gets us out and wins an election before or just after new year or he gets an election on a 'getting it done/people vs parliament' ticket and then gets the brexit he wants after gaining a majority. Basically, labour are going to have to face the music at some point.
> ...


proof the devil has the best tunes


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

Winot said:


> Yeah I’m familiar with the criticisms of representational democracy. I was interested though in the clash between direct and representational democracy in relation to the Brexit debate.


Well yes, Cameron's huge failing was to enable this clash of legitimacy without the normal context of a split Parliament or the prospect of using the outcome as leverage with the supra state.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Well indeed. But and so was I. *But I felt it best to point out that I’m something of an outside observer*, rather than have people assuming I belong to one of the two poles that everyone increasingly assumes are the only possible positions.



Revolutionary abstentionism eh?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Revolutionary abstentionism eh?


So those of us who chose not to engage with the right party of capital's referendum offering the choice between supranational & nationalistic variants of neoliberalism somehow deserve a  ?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The last part of your post was more ‘get it done’. I’m just asking get what done?


No it wasn't. Sorry but that's just in your imagination. 

I do think lots or people so want it over and done with - and that any political opposition to that needs to have an answer to people asking that question but I did not make any implicit or explicit argument in favour (or against) 'getting it done'.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Revolutionary abstentionism eh?


Something like that. More that I see in front of me a tussle between two standpoints  - broadly, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism - and I’m not inclined to back either. As for parliaments - they’ve shown that they aren’t a mechanism to represent the will of the people to the power elites, but rather a mechanism for the power elites to impose their will on the people. We’re just waiting to see which faction is going to triumph in the tussle to impose its will on us. I’ll be fighting back either way.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> getting it done'.


Not least because we have no clarity from Johnson what “it” is.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not least because we have no clarity from Johnson what “it” is.



It =


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 22, 2019)

Or


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No it wasn't. Sorry but that's just in your imagination.
> 
> I do think lots or people so want it over and done with - and that any political opposition to that needs to have an answer to people asking that question but I did not make any implicit or explicit argument in favour (or against) 'getting it done'.



Ok, you weren’t using ‘millions of people’ as a method to say what you thought despite being unhappy with the manoeuvring. So what do you think? About getting ‘it’ done?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not least because we have no clarity from Johnson what “it” is.



The problem in a nutshell.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So those of us who chose not to engage with the right party of capital's referendum offering the choice between supranational & nationalistic variants of neoliberalism somehow deserve a  ?



Who said that?  I wasn't saying that?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Who said that?  I wasn't saying that?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Something like that. More that I see in front of me a tussle between two standpoints  - broadly, neoliberalism, and neoconservatism - and I’m not inclined to back either. As for parliaments - they’ve shown that they aren’t a mechanism to represent the will of the people to the power elites, but rather a mechanism for the power elites to impose their will on the people. We’re just waiting to see which faction is going to triumph in the tussle to impose its will on us. *I’ll be fighting back either way*.



But future tense. What if neither faction decisively triumphs?


----------



## Supine (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not least because we have no clarity from Johnson what “it” is.



we’ve had the detail about what “it” is since last night. Dodgy Johnson is trying to ram it through parliament before it can be properly read and understood


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Or


Well, indeed.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Supine said:


> we’ve had the detail about what “it” is since last night. Dodgy Johnson is trying to ram it through parliament before it can be properly read and understood


Have we, though? I have no way of knowing if Johnson actually wants his deal to succeed as he says, or whether actually he’s gaming for a no deal.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Ok, you weren’t using ‘millions of people’ as a method to say what you thought despite being unhappy with the manoeuvring.


For goodness sake please read what people are actually posting not what you think they are posting.

My point was that whether one is in political sympathy with with government or not (and for the avoidance of doubt I am not) it has managed to to make considerable progress on it's aims. And that progress has been made because the strategy of the government has been political.

You may not like the question on QT but it _is_ one that millions of people are asking - and those that want to remain in the UK need to address it politically. I don't like it when people ask me the question "what's the point of going on strike it doesn't change anything?", I think it's a silly question and one that is obviously false but I have to deal with it politically if I want our branch to vote for strike action, to grow and get better density,



Mr Moose said:


> So what do you think? About getting ‘it’ done?


In what way? I'm an anarchist/communist, for me the fight is between capital and labour, not Conservative and Labour and not Remain and Leave.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

First vote on the withdrawal bill happening now, which the government is likely to win.

Followed soon after by the 'time-table' vote, which is on a knife-edge.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> In what way? I'm an anarchist/communist, for me the fight is between capital and labour, not Conservative and Labour and not Remain and Leave.


Precisely.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 22, 2019)

must admit after 3 years of the Tory losing the majority to control the exit, infighting, throwing out mays deal 3 times and then rehashing it to whatever Boris is trying to sell

the method of blaming the remainers for it all and the resulting levels of support is pretty impressive

which is why we are all kinda fucked at this stage


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 22, 2019)

.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> .





Ax^ said:


> .


Good points.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

Ooh, quick editing!


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm an anarchist/communist, for me the fight is between capital and labour, not Conservative and Labour and not Remain and Leave.



Thirded.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 22, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Ooh, quick editing!



for some reason it posted 3 times from my end

and the one i was trying to keep vanished


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

Vote for the second reading of the withdrawal bill -

Yes - 329
No - 299
Maj - 30

Government win, with a surprising majority.

First time the commons have actually voted for a brexit agreement, I am on the edge of the sofa for the next vote on the 'time-table', i.e passing it in the commons in just 3 days.

Johnson has said if the 'time-table' vote goes against him, he'll put the bill & go for a GE.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

Boris finally wins a vote!!! Pop open the champers


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Johnson has said if the 'time-table' vote goes against him, he'll put the bill & go for a GE.



He won't.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 22, 2019)

Just leaving this here whilst we wait for the vote.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

And, now the 'time-table' motion -

Yes - 308
No - 322

Government lost by - 14


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

So now he pulls apparently... will he though


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 22, 2019)

sure he will just like he is going to lay down in front of the bulldozers in sipson


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

Two in a row still beyond him


----------



## 8115 (Oct 22, 2019)

What time are they voting on the timetable? Is it today?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

He's basically withdrawn the bill for now.


----------



## 8115 (Oct 22, 2019)

Oh shit, I see they've voted and they've lost.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

8115 said:


> What time are they voting on the timetable? Is it today?



See my post just above yours.


----------



## 8115 (Oct 22, 2019)

What was the withdrawal bill about?


----------



## 8115 (Oct 22, 2019)

It's ok, I'm off to bbc news.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

8115 said:


> What was the withdrawal bill about?



Leaving the EU.  /


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

C4 news reporting some unnamed labour mp spoke to journo in tears saying they were considering giving up politics altogether. God I hope there are loads of mp's feeling like that, embrace the chaos, fuck them up pal


----------



## 8115 (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Leaving the EU.


So, they said yes to leaving the EU under the (scrutinised) deal but no to doing it in 3 days?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> C4 news reporting some unnamed labour mp spoke to journo in tears saying they were considering giving up politics altogether. God I hope there are loads of mp's feeling like that, embrace the chaos, fuck them up pal


Poor dears. Crying all the way to the bank with their pensions


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

8115 said:


> So, they said yes to leaving the EU under the (scrutinised) deal but no to doing it in 3 days?



Basically yes, and BJ has basically withdrawn the bill for now.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 22, 2019)

Going back to redsquirrel post this morning on the politics, Johnson has now shown a) he can negotiate a deal with Brussels and b) unite the Tory party around it. 

The piss, bluster and administrative delays put in his way are being knocked down one by one.

Is his deal shit? Yes 
Despite the deal being garbage is this a significant achievement, which many on here stated he would never achieve either of? Yes 
Does the failure of the Labour Party to call a GE when one was offered begin to look even more abysmal? Yes


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He won't.



He has.



Proper Tidy said:


> So now he pulls apparently... will he though



Yes.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He has.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.


No, he's done neither.
He's paused the bill (as he has to do with no agreed programme motion), and not attempted to precipitate a GE.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 22, 2019)

Are we still getting those new Brexit 50p coins?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He has.


He hasn’t (triggered a GE). 

He could have. He has a commons majority for his deal. That’s a strong thing to go to the electorate with. But I remain to be convinced he actually wants the deal.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 22, 2019)

Any refund on this?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, he's done neither.
> He's paused the bill (as he has to do with no agreed programme motion), and not attempted to precipitate a GE.



He has pulled the bill for now, pending discussions with the EU over an extension, it's up to him to ask for a short extension in the hope of getting this across the line, or a longer one for a GE, that's his choice, and it's up to the EU to agree one or the other.

I think he wants a GE to ensure a comfortable majority to get this deal done, without amendments.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He has pulled the bill for now, pending discussions with the EU over an extension, it's up to him to ask for a short extension in the hope of getting this across the line, or a longer one for a GE, that's his choice, and it's up to the EU to agree one or the other.


In other words, at present he has not pulled it.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

teuchter said:


> In other words, at present he has not pulled it.



He has, you waste of human DNA.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 22, 2019)

Crazy shizz.

I thought the delusion that this would make it all go away was in with a good chance of swinging it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Labour MPs that voted for WAB

Barron, Sir Kevin
Champion, Sarah
Cooper, Rosie
Cruddas, Jon
De Piero, Gloria
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flint, Caroline
Hill, Mike
Jarvis, Dan
Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma
Mann, John
Morris, Grahame
Nandy, Lisa
Onn, Melanie
Peacock, Stephanie
Platt, Jo
Smeeth, Ruth
Smith, Laura
Snell, Gareth

Labour MPs that voted for timetable 

Barron, Kevin
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flint, Caroline
Hoey, Kate
Mann, John


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> He has pulled the bill for now, pending discussions with the EU over an extension, it's up to him to ask for a short extension in the hope of getting this across the line, or a longer one for a GE, that's his choice, and it's up to the EU to agree one or the other.
> 
> I think he wants a GE to ensure a comfortable majority to get this deal done, without amendments.


He really hasn't 'pulled the bill' at all. All Johnson said is that he has 'paused' the legislation until he finds out what extension Tusk will give him.

btw, he really doesn't want a GE at all; remember that he's given the BP the oxygen they need to campaign for a 'real' (ND) Brexit and do enough electoral damage to see him lose seats.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Labour MPs that voted for WAB
> 
> Barron, Sir Kevin
> Champion, Sarah
> ...



WAB is my new word of the day, then. Just catching up now - been taking a bit of a ‘Brexit holiday’...


----------



## toblerone3 (Oct 22, 2019)

^^^ So Kate Hoey voted against the deal but for the accelerated timetable to get it through the commons. Baffling.


----------



## agricola (Oct 22, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> ^^^ So Kate Hoey voted against the deal but for the accelerated timetable to get it through the commons. Baffling.



After telling everyone how outraged she was on Twitter all week at what the deal did to the DUP.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> C4 news reporting some unnamed labour mp spoke to journo in tears saying they were considering giving up politics altogether. God I hope there are loads of mp's feeling like that, embrace the chaos, fuck them up pal



Worse thing about that is the fucker has obviously enjoying the whole experience up until this point.


----------



## Supine (Oct 22, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> ^^^ So Kate Hoey voted against the deal but for the accelerated timetable to get it through the commons. Baffling.



the deal isn’t hardcore enough for the headbangers.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> He really hasn't 'pulled the bill' at all. All Johnson said is that he has 'paused' the legislation until he finds out what extension Tusk will give him.
> .



Pulled or paused, it's just playing with words, he has stopped it going forward until he decides otherwise.



> btw, he really doesn't want a GE at all; remember that he's given the BP the oxygen they need to campaign for a 'real' (ND) Brexit and do enough electoral damage to see him lose seats



You reckon? He has the perfect campaign lined-up: We have a deal to deliver brexit, the BP can never deliver anything. 

It's Corbyn that's worried about a GE.


----------



## 8ball (Oct 22, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> ^^^ So Kate Hoey voted against the deal but for the accelerated timetable to get it through the commons. Baffling.



I’m not sure why that’s necessarily baffling.  Isn’t that like saying you don’t want your legs waxed, but would sooner they didn’t draw it out if you don’t get your wish?

Am a bit behind on this stuff tbf.  I find the urban thread a lot more tolerable than the msm for keeping up on this stuff.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Pulled or paused, it's just playing with words, he has stopped it going forward until he decides otherwise.


Not just words, really.
If HMG had 'pulled' the bill that would have been quite something; they didn't, it's merely paused until Tusk tells him when the next extension ends. Then...the legislation will proceed.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

toblerone3 said:


> ^^^ So Kate Hoey voted against the deal but for the accelerated timetable to get it through the commons. Baffling.


No she abstained on the deal


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 22, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Going back to redsquirrel post this morning on the politics, Johnson has now shown a) he can negotiate a deal with Brussels and b) unite the Tory party around it.
> 
> The piss, bluster and administrative delays put in his way are being knocked down one by one.
> 
> ...


How? Had they called on Boris would have had the privilege to set the date. The risk of no deal made that impossible


----------



## Badgers (Oct 22, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, now the 'time-table' motion -
> 
> Yes - 308
> No - 322
> ...


What % split is that?


----------



## Supine (Oct 22, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What % split is that?



49:51


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

They're up and running again.
Johnson breaks his promise and even then will only get an amended alternative of May's WAB through.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> C4 news reporting some unnamed labour mp spoke to journo in tears saying they were considering giving up politics altogether



i thought a lot of labour mp's gave up politics a long time ago...


----------



## andysays (Oct 22, 2019)

Bercow has apparently described the Brexit bill as being "in limbo"


----------



## ska invita (Oct 22, 2019)

Looks like a massive win for Johnson to me -
Brexit stage 1 is approved
When they do get around to amendments I cant see any amendment for second ref or customs union passing - never mind locking in the playing field on rights
If an election does happen he'll be even stronger
- what am I missing?


----------



## Gerry1time (Oct 22, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Looks like a massive win for Johnson to me -
> 
> If an election does happen he'll be even stronger
> - what am I missing?


2 things;
a) (on their 'left') a fair chunk of the vermin's seats (2015/17) relate to the electoral collapse of the junior coalition partner & the polling suggests that they'll struggle to hold on to those gains
b) (on their 'right') Farage now has attack lines on Johnson; he's failed to produce on 31/10 and even when he does get the bill through, the BP will be able to cast it as a modified version of May's BRINO that stiffed the Unionists.

Will have to be a hell of a Brexit bounce to compensate for such factors.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Looks like a massive win for Johnson to me -
> Brexit stage 1 is approved
> When they do get around to amendments I cant see any amendment for second ref or customs union passing - never mind locking in the playing field on rights
> If an election does happen he'll be even stronger
> - what am I missing?



was that not the reason for the last GE

aside from that its another embarrassment for a PM who was won 3 votes in the commons since being elected

he is not Maggie or Churchill


----------



## ska invita (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2 things;
> a) (on their 'left') a fair chunk of the vermin's seats (2015/17) relate to the electoral collapse of the junior coalition partner & the polling suggests that they'll struggle to hold on to those gains
> b) (on their 'right') Farage now has attack lines on Johnson; he's failed to produce on 31/10 and even when he does get the bill through, the BP will be able to cast it as a modified version of May's BRINO that stiffed the Unionists.
> 
> Will have to be a hell of a Brexit bounce to compensate for such factors.


I follow that logic...still election aside, he's got the withdrawal to pass, and the "fear" of subsequent amendments is overstated IMO.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

ska invita said:


> I follow that logic...still election aside, he's got the withdrawal to pass, and the "fear" of subsequent amendments is overstated IMO.


Dunno, all the time the DUP are fuming, they'll be quite vulnerable and it'll be the delay that will see support leach away to Farage.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 22, 2019)

Meanwhile, in Brussels, Guy Verhofstadt is getting demob-happy


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 22, 2019)

Not sure which is the greater prick


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 22, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Not sure which is the greater prick


The one you're going to be stuck with.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 22, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Oct 22, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Meanwhile, in Brussels, Guy Verhofstadt is getting demob-happy






Farage certainly is Verhofstadt’s kryptonite.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 22, 2019)

DexterTCN said:


> The one you're going to be stuck with.


Don't be so hard on yourself


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 22, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> was that not the reason for the last GE
> 
> aside from that its another embarrassment for a PM who was won 3 votes in the commons since being elected
> 
> he is not Maggie or Churchill


Sadly he's not spencer perceval either


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Oct 22, 2019)

Farage wanted an extension this time didn't he?  Or was that an imaginary universe created by my semi-consciousness, induced by too little sleep, too much sugar/cheese and having watched four seasons of Elementary inside three weeks!?

NB: Just as I typed that, the chinese/english dictionary just flew off my bookshelf  Are they involved? I'm being gaslit by someone I'm sure...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> They're up and running again.
> Johnson breaks his promise and even then will only get an amended alternative of May's WAB through.
> 
> View attachment 187868



He must be over the moon about this latest farce.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 22, 2019)

Nine Bob Note said:


> Farage wanted an extension this time didn't he?



Not in public, but obviously he wants whatever gives his party cause to continue existing.


----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 22, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Don't be so hard on yourself


----------



## Flavour (Oct 22, 2019)

let's not overstate how much success BJ has had strategically though. he got the WAB through 9 days before the dreaded no deal exit after complying with Benn Act and no extension agreed. it's hardly impressive.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 22, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2 things;
> a) (on their 'left') a fair chunk of the vermin's seats (2015/17) relate to the electoral collapse of the junior coalition partner & the polling suggests that they'll struggle to hold on to those gains
> b) (on their 'right') Farage now has attack lines on Johnson; he's failed to produce on 31/10 and even when he does get the bill through, the BP will be able to cast it as a modified version of May's BRINO that stiffed the Unionists.
> 
> Will have to be a hell of a Brexit bounce to compensate for such factors.



Farage won’t want a Tory defeat and will do everything to avoid this - the risk from this flank won’t be as strong, they’ll be looking to fuck up Labour if they can.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Flavour said:


> let's not overstate how much success BJ has had strategically though. he got the WAB through 9 days before the dreaded no deal exit after complying with Benn Act and no extension agreed. it's hardly impressive.


What's impressive is the willingness of _any_ MPs to vote something through they haven't had a chance to look at. As if they trusted HMG to be honest with them and to get things right when all the evidence points to the contrary.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 22, 2019)

What has he done to succeed (to the extent he has) that May couldn’t do? Is it just acting resolute all the time that has done this, Head Boy bluster drawing in the ERG lot? Has the parliamentary Tory party just seen that getting behind him is the best for their electoral chances regardless of how shoddy the deal is and how it contradicts things he has said only a few months ago, so cast aside principles (yes I know) for the bigger prize?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 22, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Farage won’t want a Tory defeat and will do everything to avoid this - the risk from this flank won’t be as strong, they’ll be looking to fuck up Labour if they can.


Yes, you make a good point.
It's just that the GE will either be before the delayed Brexit (Betrayal/told you so themes) or after an amended WAB (Betrayal/BRINO/told you so themes).


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 22, 2019)

i bet farage hasn't and won't read the bill


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> i bet farage hasn't and won't read the bill


Your point being? Would Brexit UK be better if he had/does?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 22, 2019)

Sorry, that sounds ruder than I meant. But still: what's Farage's impact on this, informed or uninformed, do you think?


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 22, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> they’ll be looking to fuck up Labour if they can.


Labour don't need helping to be fucked up they are managing fine by themselves.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 22, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Farage won’t want a Tory defeat and will do everything to avoid this - the risk from this flank won’t be as strong, they’ll be looking to fuck up Labour if they can.



Well hang on. Most likely outcome is hung Parliament. Farage is hardly worried about a Corbyn govt. Farage can't go easy on Johnsons surrender deal, that would destroy his career.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 22, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Farage is hardly worried about a Corbyn govt.


Think the money will be contingent on not delivering that.


----------



## Humberto (Oct 23, 2019)

The lack of honest argument is painful to see. Its all 'this unnamed source said this' and we must outmaneuver them in the public arena while treading carefully. Say what you really want and make the case. At least people would respect the institution a bit more. To be honest, this administration, for a minority government lacking in any real credibility are treated like they have authority and circumspection instead of the dangerous chancers that they appear to me and many others. The whole thing is lacking in decency. Everyone in it for themselves.

We are back in the realm of 'spin-doctors' rather than information and real argument. Very few of them are worth their salt.


----------



## gosub (Oct 23, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Meanwhile, in Brussels, Guy Verhofstadt is getting demob-happy




Result! Makes sense, next plannery session of EUropean Parliament is  mid Nov, reads like technical extension to me


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> 2 things;
> a) (on their 'left') a fair chunk of the vermin's seats (2015/17) relate to the electoral collapse of the junior coalition partner & the polling suggests that they'll struggle to hold on to those gains
> b) (on their 'right') Farage now has attack lines on Johnson; he's failed to produce on 31/10 and even when he does get the bill through, the BP will be able to cast it as a modified version of May's BRINO that stiffed the Unionists.
> 
> Will have to be a hell of a Brexit bounce to compensate for such factors.


There is more support for the current deal than that which May obtained.


> For example, when Survation asked voters whether they supported or opposed what [May] she had brought back from Brussels, just 16% said they backed it. Nearly twice as many (30%) were opposed.
> ....
> In response to exactly the same question, 31% support Mr Johnson's deal while only 25% are opposed.


There is also more support for the deal than outright opposition (though with a large % of don't knows).

As 2017 showed things can change quickly in a GE campaign but at the moment the Tories are in a much better place than their opponents (bar the SNP in Scotland).


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 23, 2019)

So, it looks like we are heading for a GE, once the EU has agreed the extension until January 31st, surely Labour will not stop it, in view of what they have been saying for weeks?


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> Bercow has apparently described the Brexit bill as being "in limbo"


And Rees Mogg has said that Brexit is in Purgatory...


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 23, 2019)

Do we know what is in the bill? Really have had enough of this shit and have been busy at work so not followed it. Heard snippets of customs union, does the bill make us stay in that?


----------



## Winot (Oct 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Do we know what is in the bill? Really have had enough of this shit and have been busy at work so not followed it. Heard snippets of customs union, does the bill make us stay in that?



No. Only NI.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

Flavour said:


> let's not overstate how much success BJ has had strategically though. he got the WAB through 9 days before the dreaded no deal exit after complying with Benn Act and no extension agreed. it's hardly impressive.


If he'd got the wab through it would be the waa


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Do we know what is in the bill? Really have had enough of this shit and have been busy at work so not followed it. Heard snippets of customs union, does the bill make us stay in that?


Only if it's amended. Part of what's confusing people perhaps is how a bill goes through parliament. It's had what's called its first and second readings and now people can amend it, and it's still not received the actual approval of the house and it's still nowhere near its likely final form, nor has it entered law.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> There is more support for the current deal than that which May obtained.
> There is also more support for the deal than outright opposition (though with a large % of don't knows).
> 
> As 2017 things can change quickly in a GE campaign but at the moment the Tories are in a much better place than their opponents (bar the SNP in Scotland).


How much of your earth money do the tories have in comparison to the labour party?


----------



## maomao (Oct 23, 2019)

We're so used to government bills falling at the first hurdle now that everyone's forgotten that it's actually quite a lengthy process.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

maomao said:


> We're so used to government bills falling at the first hurdle now that everyone's forgotten that it's actually quite a lengthy process.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Do we know what is in the bill? Really have had enough of this shit and have been busy at work so not followed it. Heard snippets of customs union, does the bill make us stay in that?


NI is in the backstop, rest has barebones fta. If fta not agreed then no deal exit in 2020. Why any labour mp voted for it is a mystery. The opposite of Lexit.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 23, 2019)

So if NI stays in the customs union it must retain free movement, yeah? And cos NI people hold regular UK passports then UK people retain that too. No?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 23, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> NI is in the backstop, rest has barebones fta. If fta not agreed then no deal exit in 2020. Why any labour mp voted for it is a mystery. The opposite of Lexit.



A lot of them were said to be ready to amend it, by voting for a customs union to be added to the bill.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So if NI stays in the customs union it must retain free movement, yeah? And cos NI people hold regular UK passports then UK people retain that too. No?


AFAIK, no.
FoM derives from the single market, not a CU.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 23, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> So if NI stays in the customs union it must retain free movement, yeah? And cos NI people hold regular UK passports then UK people retain that too. No?



It's not staying in the customs union, just following its rules on customs & regulatory matters.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> NI is in the backstop, rest has barebones fta. If fta not agreed then no deal exit in 2020. Why any labour mp voted for it is a mystery. The opposite of Lexit.


Don't get that. 'Lexit' & 'Rexit' are both merely justifications for withdrawal from the supra state, which requires a WAB, either way?


----------



## krink (Oct 23, 2019)

Wab means tit here. Brexit is certainly getting on my wabs.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 23, 2019)

Theres talk of an election in 2019 - I read a thing a couple of weeks back saying the earliest it could happen is mid Feb 2020 because church halls and other polling station places couldn't be made free etc - logistics basically. If true and if  the EU extension is till end of January then BJ will have to ask for another extension!


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Theres talk of an election in 2019 - I read a thing a couple of weeks back saying the earliest it could happen is mid Feb 2020 because church halls and other polling station places couldn't be made free etc - logistics basically. If true and if  the EU extension is till end of January then BJ will have to ask for another extension!


There have been November and December GEs before, but not since the pre War period. Post War, October and February are the coldest weather months that have seen GEs.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

Frank Field said yesterday


> Is not one of the real problems faced by this and the previous Parliament that when we voted, for whatever reason, to give the decision back to the people, we decided to be not representatives but delegates? That means that, on this one issue only, we are _delegated_ to carry out the wishes of the majority. That does not mean that we should ignore the minority, but why, after saying that we should be delegates, are the same people advocating a second a referendum in which we would be delegates, when they cannot manage the first one?



The final question is very well put, but is the premise reasonable?  Should they really behave as delegates to a decision made 3 years ago?  Is that duty completely unaffected by the subsequent GE?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Theres talk of an election in 2019 - I read a thing a couple of weeks back saying the earliest it could happen is mid Feb 2020 because church halls and other polling station places couldn't be made free etc - logistics basically. If true and if  the EU extension is till end of January then BJ will have to ask for another extension!


Technically, if an election were called before tomorrow, it could take place on November 28th. (25 working days of Parliament has to pass)


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> Frank Field said yesterday
> 
> 
> The final question is very well put, but is the premise reasonable?  Should they really behave as delegates to a decision made 3 years ago?  Is that duty completely unaffected by the subsequent GE?


No, in a representative democracy the representatives are just that, not delegates. Field is, unsurprisingly, talking through his arse.


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> The final question is very well put, but is the premise reasonable?  Should they really behave as delegates to a decision made 3 years ago?  Is that duty completely unaffected by the subsequent GE?



My answer would be because the public is capable of changing their minds, and a second referendum would provide a more up to date decision on which MPs can act as delegates.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> My answer would be because the public is capable of changing their minds, and a second referendum would provide a more up to date decision on which MPs can act as delegates.


you think they should have been, and should in future be, delegates? 

brogdale says they can't be.  I get that position, but then I've only ever lived under 'representative democracy' and have never really understood how delegated democracy should work, either on the broad brush or on detail.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> brogdale says they can't be.


No, he said they aren't.  Which is true.


----------



## maomao (Oct 23, 2019)

I wasn't a second referendum fan but if the deadlock is over Brexit then a second ref makes more sense than a GE where all parties will be trying to be all things to all people. However without no deal on the ballot paper it would always be viewed as a betrayal and the establishment would never allow it.

(a proper second ref would be two stages, the first with three or four (nd, May's deal, Boris's deal and remain) options with the highest scoring two going to a final round)


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> For goodness sake please read what people are actually posting not what you think they are posting.
> 
> My point was that whether one is in political sympathy with with government or not (and for the avoidance of doubt I am not) it has managed to to make considerable progress on it's aims. And that progress has been made because the strategy of the government has been political.
> 
> ...



You do precisely the thing you accuse me of. I didn't say anything about the QT question. Maybe you could read what is posted rather than reply to what you jump to believe.

My point is that people saying 'get it done" doesn't really lead us nearer to get _what _done. Something that you dodge at the end of your post, though it's hard to believe you don't have a view or have at least an emotion one way or other when the Parliamentary votes are announced.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, he said they aren't.  Which is true.


drawing a distinction between 'aren't' and 'can't be' implies there are circumstances (within the context of rd) where they could be delegates, yet this isn't one?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> drawing a distinction between 'aren't' and 'can't be' implies there are circumstances (within the context of rd) where they could be delegates, yet this isn't one?


No; wouldn't be repdem, then.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> drawing a distinction between 'aren't' and 'can't be' implies there are circumstances (within the context of rd) where they could be delegates, yet this isn't one such?


No, in the context of the constitutional set up we now have, MPs are representatives.  If different laws were passed, it is possible to create circumstances in which they aren't, but no such legislation has been passed nor is it likely to be.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 23, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> It's not staying in the customs union, just following its rules on customs & regulatory matters.


Ah ok, they're not in the customs union, they just follow it's rules and regulations, with an internal border and tariffs to the rest of the uk. That's ok then.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, in a representative democracy the representatives are just that, not delegates. Field is, unsurprisingly, talking through his arse.


Field is a prick. But socialists should be arguing for delegate democracy, the IWCA councillors may have been elected as representatives but they made it clear from the start that they would act as delegates. That's a correct view to take.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Technically, if an election were called before tomorrow, it could take place on November 28th. (25 working days of Parliament has to pass)


It won't be called for a while yet and yes technically is one thing but  supposedlly civil  service have basically said it's not doable for a range of reasons. Wish j could remember where I read it now, sounded convincing. ETA, did find this which has the civil service quote 
When will the next election be? And will it be this year?
As Danny says February is hardly ideal either from a weather point of view. Could be Match at the earliest even! 

All speculation of course and up to Corbyn to an extent too!


----------



## Flavour (Oct 23, 2019)

looking like boris deal exit at end of jan after GE delivers tory majority, innit


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> No, in the context of the constitutional set up we now have, MPs are representatives.  If different laws were passed, it is possible to create circumstances in which they aren't, but no such legislation has been passed nor is it likely to be.



Fair enough.

The corollary is that the ref was purely advisory, and that the many representatives who appear to be following their own consciences in seeking to thwart its intentions are behaving acceptably.

Which many, many Leavers would disagree with.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> It won't be called for a while yet and yes technically is one thing but  supposedlly civil  service have basically said it's not doable for a range of reasons. Wish j could remember where I read it now, sounded convincing. ETA, did find this which has the civil service quote
> When will the next election be? And will it be this year?
> As Danny says February is hardly ideal either from a weather point of view. Could be Match at the earliest even!
> 
> All speculation of course and up to Corbyn to an extent too!


Weather not an issue for the vermin voters; they all turn up in their Jags & Rollers!


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> You do precisely the thing you accuse me of. I didn't say anything about the QT question. Maybe you could read what is posted rather than reply to what you jump to believe.
> 
> My point is that people saying 'get it done" doesn't really lead us nearer to get _what _done. Something that you dodge at the end of your post, though it's hard to believe you don't have a view or have at least an emotion one way or other when the Parliamentary votes are announced.


FFS. Your point about 'getting it done' was specifically in the context of the question stavros quoted from QT.
The 2nd paragraph is just more dishonesty. I don't have to accept your liberal political assumptions, that's not dodging the question that's acting like a socialist.


----------



## Cid (Oct 23, 2019)

maomao said:


> I wasn't a second referendum fan but if the deadlock is over Brexit then a second ref makes more sense than a GE where all parties will be trying to be all things to all people. However without no deal on the ballot paper it would always be viewed as a betrayal and the establishment would never allow it.
> 
> (a proper second ref would be two stages, the first with three or four (nd, May's deal, Boris's deal and remain) options with the highest scoring two going to a final round)



I think 2nd ref runs into a lot of problems with fairness... e.g in the situation you describe you might get a lot of people who'd lean to Customs union or some kind of lexit reluctantly voting remain, rather than endorsing a Tory lead option, or an option that doesn't make a lot of sense.

It might be fairer to have a two stage single ballot with remain/leave, then options on leaving. But that runs into the same problem if your only leave options are May/Johnson/ND... and if you have a Customs union option then that kind of wins by default as every remainer would vote for it. Same problem for run off voting.

But then I suppose that reflects the whole sorry mess anyway.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> The corollary is that the ref was purely advisory, and that the many representatives who appear to be following their own consciences in seeking to thwart its intentions are behaving acceptably.
> 
> Which many, many Leavers would disagree with.


There’s a difference here between constitutional acceptability and what we might call a moral imperative.  There’s no doubt in my mind that MPs are behaving correctly within the constitution and according to its supporting dogma. Whether or not they _should_ be is a matter of taste. 

(I am not a supporter of representative democracy).


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> The corollary is that the ref was purely advisory, and that the many representatives who appear to be following their own consciences in seeking to thwart its intentions are behaving acceptably.
> 
> Which many, many Leavers would disagree with.


Our system of parliamentary sovereignty means that any Act giving effect to a referendum result could be reversed by a subsequent Act of Parliament; so referendums can't be constitutionally binding.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 23, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Ah ok, they're not in the customs union, they just follow it's rules and regulations, with an internal border and tariffs to the rest of the uk. That's ok then.



Yep, typical political fudge.


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> There have been November and December GEs before, but not since the pre War period. Post War, October and February are the coldest weather months that have seen GEs.


I wasn't aware that winter elections were that rare, though it certainly makes sense.

If we do get to the point where an early GE is thought to be the best/most effective/most expedient way forward, I don't think problems around weather will be allowed to delay things.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Field is a prick. But socialists should be arguing for delegate democracy, the IWCA councillors may have been elected as representatives but they made it clear from the start that they would act as delegates. That's a correct view to take.



broggers and danny are obviously right that this is and remains repdem, and IDS agrees with them (see below) but tbh I think he and you have caught the political realities better. 


Any of the current lot could, if they wished, have made it clear they would act as delegates in respect of the ref and vote accordingly, whatever their personal view.

That fits with the strongly expressed opinion that in this circumstance obstructive MPs voting according to conscience are betraying the will of the people.

Many Leavers have demanded that their MP, should act as though delegated by the outcome of the ref.  In this topsy turvey situation I've heard lifelong tories praise the likes of Barron, Flint and Mann (who'd all claim to be solid socialists I think) because they've consistently voted for Leave (or to sustain a tory government, as others have called it). They have nothing but contempt for Grieve or Letwin for not doing as delegated and support moves to deselect them. 

We're now three years on from the ref. Inevitably the questions have changed, what was once red line unthinkable is now policy.  So should socialists explicitly electedon a promise to act as, or choosing the act as, delegates still be bound only by the ref, or should they be swayed by the current views of their local party, trades council or whoever?

eg if the local party really wants to leave but doesn't want a customs border with NI, how should their MP vote in line by line scrutiny? 



ps I agree with the general sentiment about Field, but he has a clarity of language, that's the only reason for quoting him.

pps fwiw IDS said, in reply to Field


> When we passed the European Union Referendum Act 2015, we made it very clear—and we confirmed this after the referendum—that, although we are a House of representatives and not delegates, we were handing back to the British people the sovereign power that comes from them to us for the period of a Parliament. We gave that power back to them to make the decision. They have made that decision and, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister knows, we now must act on it. As far as I am concerned, the deal has flaws and includes things that I do not particularly like, but I recognise that the overarching priority right now is to deliver on the referendum and leave the European Union, and this remains the only way that we can achieve that


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> broggers and danny are obviously right that this is and remains repdem, and IDS agrees with them (see below) but tbh I think he and you have caught the political realities better.
> 
> 
> Any of the current lot could, if they wished, have made it clear they would act as delegates in respect of the ref and vote accordingly, whatever their personal view.
> ...


No, dunked in shit is plainly wrong. The logic of his position would require that the outcome of the 1975 referendum were honoured and not over-turned. Under our constitution MPs cannot 'hand Parliamentary sovereignty' to anyone; it is what it is; referendums can never bind Parliament.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

Farage working the inevitable BP GE line on Johnson's deal..."..._that just isn't Brexit."


_
So, game on for Leave vote.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, dunked in shit is plainly wrong. The logic of his position would require that the outcome of the 1975 referendum were honoured and not over-turned. Under our constitution MPs cannot 'hand Parliamentary sovereignty' to anyone; it is what it is; referendums can never bind Parliament.


of course you're right about the constitutional position.  However the individual position of MPs in the current political reality is much less clear.  Both Field and IDS have points to prove, obviously, but simply saying constitutionally their Q&A are meaningless doesn't really get to the current political reality they were discussing.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> Many Leavers have demanded that their MP, should act as though delegated by the outcome of the ref.


Yes they have. And they have a strong case: they were told by both sides that MPs would “respect the result”.  But in that case MPs would, as you rightly say, be “acting as though” delegated.  But it would be a self imposed ordinance of no legal standing and with no lasting force.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Weather not an issue for the vermin voters; they all turn up in their Jags & Rollers!


Saw a poll which has the Tories 17% ahead in CD2 votes?


----------



## Winot (Oct 23, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes they have. And they have a strong case: they were told by both sides that MPs would “respect the result”.  But in that case MPs would, as you rightly say, be “acting as though” delegated.  But it would be a self imposed ordinance of no legal standing and with no lasting force.



The referendum question did not specify how long it would take to achieve Brexit nor what type of Brexit. Accordingly, the only MPs not to respect the results are MPs which vote to revoke article 50


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Farage working the inevitable BP GE line on Johnson's deal..."..._that just isn't Brexit."
> 
> 
> _
> So, game on for Leave vote.



I may well be proved wrong in a couple of days when we see polling data with fieldwork after yesterdays WAB vote, but my guess is the Brexit Party won't be doing any better. In fact in a GE I'd expect the Tories to pull votes back from the BP. The message of 'we got it done/would have it done if it wasn't for parliament' will be a strong one - and actually a correct one. I can't see much appetite for Farage's inevitable betrayal line. People are just too weary. And when all's said and done the Tories will have got it done (ish).


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Yes they have. And they have a strong case: they were told by both sides that MPs would “respect the result”.  But in that case MPs would, as you rightly say, be “acting as though” delegated.  But it would be a self imposed ordinance of no legal standing and with no lasting force.


of course they have a strong case. That's implicit in the question (and I'm not convinced Field's rhetoric was intended to be taken quite so literally).  IDS is quite clear in the bit I quote that he sees his role as to implement the ref, whatever his personal reservations about the detail. That, for want of better phrasing, is acting as a delegate, despite the reality of the constitutional position. That's why I quoted him.

IDS remains a (slimy, untrustworthy, tory) representative who would argue the opposite if that was his personal view. He, and other ideologically commited Leavers will happily pretend to act as delegates in order to get what they personally want.  The same is true of those on the other side.

Nonetheless the call that MPs should vote as delegated by the overall result of the ref is implicit in every reference to 17.4 million people, 52% and so on.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> eg if the local party really wants to leave but doesn't want a customs border with NI, how should their MP vote in line by line scrutiny?


This is the nub of the whole thing. A customs border, the ending of free movement, the termination of various reciprocal arrangements. None of these were on the ballot paper, even if you accept that the referendum was a fully legitimate democratic process (which I don't, as it happens - millions of people who are affected by this decision more than anyone else that lives here were denied a vote). Generally, those public voices calling for the referendum 'to be honoured', meaning that this deal, any deal, must be pushed through in the name of democracy, have anything but democracy in their minds when they do so. They are attempting to subvert the 'meat and drink' version of democracy that exists in the UK, namely representative democracy.

And I have nothing but contempt for the 19 labour MPs who voted for this. Tory-enabling cunts, the lot of them.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 23, 2019)




----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2019)

Even if MPs were delegates, and everyone agreed they were delegates, it wouldn't solve the problem of what exactly they have been delegated to do.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I may well be proved wrong in a couple of days when we see polling data with fieldwork after yesterdays WAB vote, but my guess is the Brexit Party won't be doing any better. In fact in a GE I'd expect the Tories to pull votes back from the BP. The message of 'we got it done/would have it done if it wasn't for parliament' will be a strong one - and actually a correct one. I can't see much appetite for Farage's inevitable betrayal line. People are just too weary. And when all's said and done the Tories will have got it done (ish).


Well, of course, OTWT and we're all speculating...but...it's always important to bear in mind that we tend to be a very unrepresentative, self-selecting cohort of folk who choose to follow politics pretty closely. I'm thinking that many of Johnson's 'supporters' will have clocked his promise to leave on 31/10 and notice that he's failed.
Farage's 'party' will be looking to exploit that un-nuanced perspective.


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 23, 2019)

I expect now that in the forthcoming GE the Tories will present themselves as the voice of a Brexit that can reasonably be delivered, with the Brexit Party as shouting powerlessly from the sidelines, able to bump their gums about their ideal Brexit but unable to negotiate anything.

I hate everything about this government and Brexit but within these narrow parameters, the Brexit Party and Farage likely to hold onto only the diehard pro-Brexit zealots and true believers, and will quickly be shunted to the sidelines. I don't think it'll be quite like the NF rout in the Thatcher election of 1979 but all of a sudden, looks like they won't be much of a factor. From hoping for 20-30 seats I think they'll be lucky to get 1 or 2 if the GE happens before Christmas.

I'm pretty certain the EU will offer three months with the possibility to leave earlier of the matter is resolved. Offering a take-it-or-leave-it two year extension forcing Britain to nominate a commissioner would be top trolling, but I don't think they want to be seen to be "interfering" in domestic politics.

All of a sudden hopes of a "people's vote" look pretty remote. The route to a general election is also fraught with danger and far from straightforward. Any predictions beyond more paralysis and indecision look fanciful, to be honest. In Scotland, the Tories will be wiped out, and in Wales they will lose a lot of ground. The undermining of the DUP may well have electoral consequences for them in NI. They key I think is the former industrial heartlands in the North and the Midlands and the battle for the working class vote.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And I have nothing but contempt for the 19 labour MPs who voted for this. Tory-enabling cunts, the lot of them.





teuchter said:


> Even if MPs were delegates, and everyone agreed they were delegates, it wouldn't solve the problem of what exactly they have been delegated to do.


or whether they've been delegated by the overall result (incidentally including Gibraltar, which no-one has mentioned for months) or by their local voter pattern, which in the case of the above, has been to vote for (self described) socialists with an implied expectation they should never bolster a viciously right wing tory pm.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> From hoping for 20-30 seats I think they'll be lucky to get 1 or 2 if the GE happens before Christmas.


With respect, the BP's prospects of gaining a Parliamentary seat is largely irrelevant; it's their _potential _to damage Tory electoral prospects that matters. 

Just look at the Blue(dark)/Blue(light) mirror pattern in polling this year:


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> or whether they've been delegated by the overall result (incidentally including Gibraltar, which no-one has mentioned for months) or by their local voter pattern, which in the case of the above, has been to vote for (self described) socialists with an implied expectation they should never bolster a viciously right wing tory pm.


Referendum means 'brexit', if you accept how it was done, but it's not a mandate for hard brexit. Any mp, even one accepting the legitimacy of the referendum, could very reasonably say that _this brexit_ is not acceptable - some kind of EFTA, Norway+, is also 'honouring the referendum', and maybe I'd vote for that, which might also be 'honouring' the majority in the country who did not vote 'leave' in 2016, but I won't vote for this.

Too many people have twisted this around to suggest that 'my brexit' must be done otherwise you're ignoring 'the people'. It's nakedly self-serving and needs calling out. 'your brexit', whatever it is, was not on the ballot paper.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Any mp, even one accepting the legitimacy of the referendum, could very reasonably say that _this brexit_ is not acceptable


that's only really true if they are acting according to conscience, ie as reps. Many of their voters think they should do as they've been told and suppress their own qualms in order to deliver the ref result.

I'm hoping redsquirrel will come back to this, as they've been the most vocal that acting as delegate is what socialists should do, which, as you said, means supporting a tory government.


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> or whether they've been delegated by the overall result (incidentally including Gibraltar, which no-one has mentioned for months) or by their local voter pattern, which in the case of the above, has been to vote for (self described) socialists with an implied expectation they should never bolster a viciously right wing tory pm.


The logic of the "delegates" argument is that MP s are delegated by voters in their particular constituencies, so MPs from Remain constituencies would be entirely justified in obstructing Brexit by any and all parliamentary means.

But they're not delegates and never have been, so it's an entirely pointless argument (should be good for 3 or 4 more pages until something else turns up...)


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> it's an entirely pointless argument (should be good for 3 or 4 more pages until something else turns up...)


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 23, 2019)

The39thStep said:


>






Thats pretty accurate so far tbf.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> The logic of the "delegates" argument is that MP s are delegated by voters in their particular constituencies, so MPs from Remain constituencies would be entirely justified in obstructing Brexit by any and all parliamentary means.
> 
> But they're not delegates and never have been, so it's an entirely pointless argument (should be good for 3 or 4 more pages until something else turns up...)


of course it's pointless, this is urban. 

What you claim is not what Field/IDS/Leavers are demanding. Nationally the people have spoken and must be obeyed.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Thats pretty accurate so far tbf.


I was sent that (from Austria) on the 17th, so it's been trending for a while now.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 23, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> Why any labour mp voted for it is a mystery.


Worried about losing their jobs at the next GE for not supporting their constituents?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

Winot said:


> The referendum question did not specify how long it would take to achieve Brexit nor what type of Brexit. Accordingly, the only MPs not to respect the results are MPs which vote to revoke article 50


That’s also a strong case under parliamentary convention. The job of the chamber is to interrogate legislation, not to assume it is fit for purpose just because it claims to be.

(For me this is like a cup final between teams I don’t support in a sport I’m guiltily enjoying watching but don’t actually approve of).


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> of course it's pointless, this is urban.
> 
> What you claim is not what Field/IDS/Leavers are demanding. Nationally the people have spoken and must be obeyed.


Well, that's a different claim and has nothing to do with MPs being delegates. 

There is clearly a tension between two competing ideas of democracy at work here, with people on both sides attempting to demonstrate that what they want is somehow more democratic reflection popular opinion than what their opponents want, which is another reason why I'm enjoying the fallout from Cameron's idiotic gamble.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

People at the sharp end of this, such as the millions of EU citizens who live here, aren't enjoying it so much. We're not all as disinterested.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> Well, that's a different claim and has nothing to do with MPs being delegates.


did you read what IDS said, quoted at #37060?  It's exactly to do with the Leaver argument that MPs have been instructed (or delegated) to do as they're told by the national result.



> There is clearly a tension between two competing ideas of democracy at work here, with people on both sides attempting to demonstrate that what they want is somehow more democratic reflection popular opinion than what their opponents want, which is another reason why I'm enjoying the fallout from Cameron's idiotic gamble.


More than two. Part of the tension is between locally and nationally expressed opinion because at the ref the most striking division was geographic- from memory greater than class, gender, education or age.


----------



## belboid (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> that's only really true if they are acting according to conscience, ie as reps. Many of their voters think they should do as they've been told and suppress their own qualms in order to deliver the ref result.
> 
> I'm hoping redsquirrel will come back to this, as they've been the most vocal that acting as delegate is what socialists should do, which, as you said, means supporting a tory government.


I dont really think being delegates actually makes much sense in this circumstance.  You could claim to be so by triggering article 50, thus representing referendum 1 result, and then by voting your party line, seeing as you were returned as an MP. Anything else is guesswork.  For MP#s and councillors, how are they meant to accurately gauge their electors opinions? A nice sounding idea not backed up by reality.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 23, 2019)

Slight derail , Norways train drivers strike against EU's directive to open up state railway to the private sector
Strike leaves Norway’s trains at a standstill: here are your rights as a passenger


----------



## sleaterkinney (Oct 23, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Worried about losing their jobs at the next GE for not supporting their constituents?


They might save their jobs, but they gave Johnson a deal to wave around.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Well, of course, OTWT and we're all speculating...but...it's always important to bear in mind that we tend to be a very unrepresentative, self-selecting cohort of folk who choose to follow politics pretty closely. I'm thinking that many of Johnson's 'supporters' will have clocked his promise to leave on 31/10 and notice that he's failed.
> Farage's 'party' will be looking to exploit that un-nuanced perspective.


Farage has got to have a crack at the 31st, try and get some kind of intervention at the end of next week about 'still being in, still beholden to this that and the other', maybe a couple of ditch references. He also has to hope that narrative builds into a GE. On this I'm reduced to no more than guesses, but it just doesn't feel like that narrative will stick. There's the weariness with the whole thing along with  the fact that, three years in, Johnson has got the UK closest to the exit door we have ever been. Also, as of yesterday's discussion on here, he's had a _political victory_ over Labour and remain, positioning them as legalistic fiddlers, avoiding the will of the people.


----------



## newbie (Oct 23, 2019)

belboid said:


> I dont really think being delegates actually makes much sense in this circumstance.  You could claim to be so by triggering article 50, thus representing referendum 1 result, and then by voting your party line, seeing as you were returned as an MP. Anything else is guesswork.  For MP#s and councillors, how are they meant to accurately gauge their electors opinions? A nice sounding idea not backed up by reality.


that's partly why I was intrigued by the Q&A yesterday, as a case in point, with very real pressure being exerted on MPs to "_recognise that the overarching priority right now is to deliver on the referendum and leave the European Union, and this remains the only way that we can achieve that_" (IDS).

Although not to be taken as literally as some of this discussion- everyone agrees they are not really delegates- there is undoubted pressure on MPs to behave as though delegated by the national ref result, rather than by their local vote or their own conscience/opinion. 

For a long time there has been an opinion on the left that delegated democracy is preferable to the representative sort we're used to. Yet in this case- which is about as real as we're likely to see- there's little support for that proposal.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> Slight derail , Norways train drivers strike against EU's directive to open up state railway to the private sector
> Strike leaves Norway’s trains at a standstill: here are your rights as a passenger


Good on em


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No, dunked in shit is plainly wrong. The logic of his position would require that the outcome of the 1975 referendum were honoured and not over-turned.


I don't see how that follows at all. IDS is a dick and MPs are not delegates but that does not mean that a position once reached cannot be overturned. 

There is nothing illogical about a group mandating delegates to carry out one course of action only to insist on a change in that course of action later. Hell that is why delegate democracy is stronger than representative democracy. You may have a union branch delegating its negotiators to reject a deal, then decide after the few months that they will mandate their delegates to accept the same deal, that's not illogical


----------



## andysays (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> did you read what IDS said, quoted at #37060?  It's exactly to do with the Leaver argument that MPs have been instructed (or delegated) to do as they're told by the national result.
> 
> 
> More than two. Part of the tension is between locally and nationally expressed opinion because at the ref the most striking division was geographic- from memory greater than class, gender, education or age.


TBH, I'm not really interested in what IDS says. MPs aren't delegates, and if he is claiming that they have been delegated to do something, that merely suggests that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word.


----------



## maomao (Oct 23, 2019)

Presumably a delegate democracy would need something more than a three and a half year old referendum result with illdefined options to go on.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I don't see how that follows at all. IDS is a dick and MPs are not delegates but that does not mean that a position once reached cannot be overturned.
> 
> There is nothing illogical about a group mandating delegates to carry out one course of action only to insist on a change in that course of action later. Hell that is why delegate democracy is stronger than representative democracy. You may have a union branch delegating its negotiators to reject a deal, then decide after the few months that they will mandate their delegates to accept the same deal, that's not illogical


To an extent we're talking at cross purposes...I think, slightly led astray by newbie 

I wasn't disputing the notion that delegates can be 're-delegated', (I was a union rep.), but the suggestion from Dunked in Shit that, within our repdem system, referendums could bind Parliament.

Specifically, this:


> we were handing back to the British people the sovereign power that comes from them to us for the period of a Parliament. We gave that power back to them to make the decision. They have made that decision and, as my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister knows, we now must act on it.


is tosh.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

maomao said:


> Presumably a delegate democracy would need something more than a three and a half year old referendum result with illdefined options to go on.


Exactly. Extending the union analogy, 'we'll take brexit on these terms, but not those terms, and certain forms of brexit are so bad that we'd want you to vote to revoke the whole thing rather than allow them to happen'. 

One of the most depressing aspects of the entire process has been that the Tory party has completely dictated what the terms would be, where any red lines would be drawn, and which of those red lines might be withdrawn. One of the many reasons why any Labour MP voting for this deal is a total cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBH, I'm not really interested in what IDS says. MPs aren't delegates, and if he is claiming that they have been delegated to do something, that merely suggests that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word.


He doesn't understand the meaning of that word


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

Reasonably clear Guardian piece (  ) about the 3 methods of precipitating an early GE under the provisions of the FTPA.

How can Boris Johnson get a general election before January?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 23, 2019)

the labour party must know they're gonna get a spanking in the forthcoming GE. starmer is clearly positiong himself to be next leader already.

as soon as that extension is agreed corbyn's got no excuse not to back the GE though, and will vote for it. guess there'll be no VONCing then. nor any changes to FTPA.

i predict the boris deal will go through unamended after tory majority votes down any and all amendments post-GE.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

Flavour said:


> the labour party must know they're gonna get a spanking in the forthcoming GE. starmer is clearly positiong himself to be next leader already.
> 
> as soon as that extension is agreed corbyn's got no excuse not to back the GE though, and will vote for it. guess there'll be no VONCing then. nor any changes to FTPA.
> 
> i predict the boris deal will go through unamended after tory majority votes down any and all amendments post-GE.


Yeh how is their money situation looking for the campaign


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 23, 2019)

Gon be a _nasty_ GE run-up. Labour have to highlight how the Tories have fucked the country over the last decade, but I reckon even if they do Johnson's just going to shout "Marxist!", and though Brexit will be more or less done with it's still going to be the Brexit election
 Brelection
Brextion
I dunno


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yeh how is their money situation looking for the campaign



Could probably afford one by-election’s worth of campaigning in the safest of safe seats. Maybe Islington North.


----------



## tim (Oct 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Gon be a _nasty_ GE run-up. Labour have to highlight how the Tories have fucked the country over the last decade, but I reckon even if they do Johnson's just going to shout "Marxist!", and though Brexit will be more or less done with it's still going to be the Brexit election
> Brelection
> Brextion
> I dunno



Boris's Big Brexrection!


----------



## Wilf (Oct 23, 2019)

tim said:


> Boris's Big Brexrection!


Great Brexpectations!


----------



## fucthest8 (Oct 23, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Labour have to highlight how the Tories have fucked the country over the last decade, but I reckon even if they do Johnson's just going to shout "Marxist!", and though Brexit will be more or less done with it's still going to be the Brexit election



I've resigned myself to the Tories getting another 4 years. Looks to me like there is a majority comprised of (a) those who actually stand to profit under the Tories (b) those who think they stand to profit and (c) those who lack the critical thinking to understand what the Tories are responsible for. 

Plus Corbyn is, let's be honest, a frigging disaster as that same majority suck up the Marxist/IRA supporter stories that they're fed.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Oct 23, 2019)

Five years, isn't it?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

fucthest8 said:


> I've resigned myself to the Tories getting another 4 years. Looks to me like there is a majority comprised of (a) those who actually stand to profit under the Tories (b) those who think they stand to profit and (c) those who lack the critical thinking to understand what the Tories are responsible for.
> 
> Plus Corbyn is, let's be honest, a frigging disaster as that same majority suck up the Marxist/IRA supporter stories that they're fed.


4 years? Under ftpa it'll be 5.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 23, 2019)

fucthest8 said:


> I've resigned myself to the Tories getting another 4 years.



OK, take a seat and let me tell you about the Fixed-term Parliaments Act.


----------



## fucthest8 (Oct 23, 2019)

Ah shite


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 23, 2019)

fucthest8 said:


> Ah shite



Look on the bright side - with 5 years of that Tory mop haired twat, give it 6 months before we’re all chucking bricks.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 23, 2019)

inclusion of "citizens rights" is interesting in this tweet


follows this yesterday







....suggests they might use this moment to squeeze the government over their plans to deport/make illegal Eu citizens in the UK who dont get the rubber stamp - making it a condition of the extension???


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Labour's decision to refuse an election a few weeks ago is starting to look like a poor one now.


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> With respect, the BP's prospects of gaining a Parliamentary seat is largely irrelevant; it's their _potential _to damage Tory electoral prospects that matters.
> 
> Just look at the Blue(dark)/Blue(light) mirror pattern in polling this year:
> 
> View attachment 187905



sure...the point being that their prospects of significantly damaging the Tory vote appear to be ebbing significantly with a deal on the table.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Labour's decision to refuse an election a few weeks ago is starting to look like a poor one now.



It looked fucking stupid then to be honest.


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 23, 2019)

Anyway, all the folk predicting an early election, there's a way to go yet. One faction think it mad with a deal on the table. The Vote Leave cabal around Cummings pushing hard for an early election which they think Johnson will win. 

No. 10 at war over election strategy


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It looked fucking stupid then to be honest.


It felt like a mistake. I was hoping I'd be proved wrong.


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 23, 2019)

I'm not getting this pro-Johnson / huge Tory majority pessimism, to be honest.

I think significant unease at how willing he seems to break the law / ignore conventions amongst the electorate, as well as his manifest corruption / unfitness for office.

Yes the Brexit diehards will flock to his banner leaving Farage and the BP largely shafted. I also think the "Liberal resurgence" is being totally overplayed; expect much laughter at Swinson after the GE and her buffoonish ambitions to win. 

Everyone wrote off Corbyn in 2017. I don't see him playing any differently in this election. I suspect another hung parliament with the smaller parties as potential kingmakers. A Labour minority government with a confidence and supply deal with the SNP, with the promise of a second referendum, is not beyond the bounds of possibility.

Oddly a second referendum which voted to Remain would largely take the wind out many's sails for another independence vote here, particularly with a Labour government that is half-decent.

Oh look, a purple llama.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Labour's decision to refuse an election a few weeks ago is starting to look like a poor one now.



We'll never know. They've been faced with a long line of damned if you do, damned if you don't decisions and I doubt any path through the last few months of nonsense was ever going to get Corbyn into number 10.

 Their chances may be as good now as they'll ever be tbh. Johnson has failed to hit his 31st October deadline, he's fucked off much of his own party, he's not looking like a man destined to romp home at a general election.

If there's an election before christmas I predict a largely unchanged picture, possibly with some lib dem gains at labour's expense but still no majority for anyone. I don't really know what I'm basing that on, besides a general feeling that the current level of disarray feels like it's going to keep rolling on basically forever.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> We'll never know. They've been faced with a long line of damned if you do, damned if you don't decisions and I doubt any path through the last few months of nonsense was ever going to get Corbyn into number 10.
> 
> Their chances may be as good now as they'll ever be tbh. Johnson has failed to hit his 31st October deadline, he's fucked off much of his own party, he's not looking like a man destined to romp home at a general election.
> 
> If there's an election before christmas I predict a largely unchanged picture, possibly with some lib dem gains at labour's expense but still no majority for anyone. I don't really know what I'm basing that on, besides a general feeling that the current level of disarray feels like it's going to keep rolling on basically forever.


If the LDs gain seats, I don't think it'll be predominantly at Labour expense.


----------



## belboid (Oct 23, 2019)

Labour would almost definitely have lost if the election had been held on Johnson's timetable.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

Brexit 31st advertising still running on telly


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit 31st advertising still running on telly



Yeah, was still up on video billboards around London this morning too.

As a taxpayer, I am of course delighted to be paying for all this.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yeah, was still up on video billboards around London this morning too.
> 
> As a taxpayer, I am of course delighted to be paying for all this.


There's been a few billion spent on the fake No Deal Yellowhammer stuff too


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Labour's decision to refuse an election a few weeks ago is starting to look like a poor one now.


How so?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> I'm hoping redsquirrel will come back to this, as they've been the most vocal that acting as delegate is what socialists should do, which, as you said, means supporting a tory government.


No. Taking the result of a one off referendum (whether on a constituency basis or over the whole country) as how to vote is still acting as a representative. 

Acting as a delegate would require MPs to engage with their constituents, run meetings where options would be discussed and voted on, it would require MPs to act in a very different manner than they do. Being mandated by their electors to follow undertake a certain set of actions not trying to act on "behalf' of their electors.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Yeah, was still up on video billboards around London this morning too.
> 
> As a taxpayer, I am of course delighted to be paying for all this.


It is probably Corbyn's fault


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I wasn't disputing the notion that delegates can be 're-delegated', (I was a union rep.), but the suggestion from Dunked in Shit that, within our repdem system, referendums could bind Parliament.
> 
> Specifically, this:
> 
> is tosh.


I think you are confusing standard political language for something more. Even within representative democracy there is the notion that policies the public have voted for should 'be respected', hence the tradition that the Lords should not block measures put in a manifesto.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

ska invita said:


> There's been a few billion spent on the fake No Deal Yellowhammer stuff too


We should get it all back with the £350m and other free trade stuff


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

So if the embarrassing failure is delayed till 31/01/20 will the EU tax laws have any long term bearing on the fraudsters?


----------



## bemused (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think you are confusing standard political language for something more. Even within representative democracy there is the notion that policies the public have voted for should 'be respected', hence the tradition that the Lords should not block measures put in a manifesto.


Given Farage and Johnson can't agree what the public voted for its reasonable that Parliament define it. Problem is no version seems to pass anyMPs purity test; leave or remain. I'd image if Johnson slapped in a customs union it would pass.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)




----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

bemused said:


> Given Farage and Johnson can't agree what the public voted for its reasonable that Parliament define it.


Yes, we should all tug our forelocks and leave it to our betters. Urgh. Mind you this crap is consistent with the EUs politics.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> No. Taking the result of a one off referendum (whether on a constituency basis or over the whole country) as how to vote is still acting as a representative.
> 
> Acting as a delegate would require MPs to engage with their constituents, run meetings where options would be discussed and voted on, it would require MPs to act in a very different manner than they do. Being mandated by their electors to follow undertake a certain set of actions but trying to act on behalf of them.


Second referendum then.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 23, 2019)

That would no more be delegate democracy than the first one was


----------



## brogdale (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I think you are confusing standard political language for something more. Even within representative democracy there is the notion that policies the public have voted for should 'be respected', hence the tradition that the Lords should not block measures put in a manifesto.


Not really, both matters relate to Parliamentary sovereignty.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 23, 2019)

newbie said:


> that's only really true if they are acting according to conscience, ie as reps. Many of their voters think they should do as they've been told and suppress their own qualms in order to deliver the ref result.
> 
> I'm hoping redsquirrel will come back to this, as they've been the most vocal that acting as delegate is what socialists should do, which, as you said, means supporting a tory government.


I missed this earlier. I thought I’d cleared this up in an earlier post, but there’s understandably still some confusion and crossed purpose talk going on.

There’s what socialism should want, which is mandated recallable delegates attending decision making forums on behalf of communities. That’s what I’d like to see. That’s what redsquirrel would like to see. But it isn’t what we have. Not today, not tomorrow, not as the constitution stands.

Then there’s Burkean Representative Democracy, which is what we have. That’s what brogdale has been describing, albeit not admiringly.  

I don’t personally think that even if an MP in parliament as it exists decided to vote according to what they think their electorate wants as opposed to what their preference is that would constitute direct democracy, participatory democracy, libertarian municipalism, Communalism, or socialism. It would still be representative democracy. Parliament runs in a way Walter Bagehot would still approve of: those in power putting on displays to convince the masses of their legitimacy. That’s what this dance is about.


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> Look on the bright side - with 5 years of that Tory mop haired twat, give it 6 months before we’re all chucking bricks.



Do you think so, I don't, i do think there will be battles between left, etc and emergent new right groups, been very little opposition to austerity since 2012 TUC demo, occupy, etc

If the deaths of hundreds, maybe thousands of disabled and sick people, the most vunerable in the UK doesn't motivate that level of anger, what will.


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> It looked fucking stupid then to be honest.



It’s time for Labour to bite the bullet and embrace an election | Owen Jones

Owen Jones is saying similar, could you expand, tx


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> I'm not getting this pro-Johnson / huge Tory majority pessimism, to be honest.
> 
> I think significant unease at how willing he seems to break the law / ignore conventions amongst the electorate, as well as his manifest corruption / unfitness for office.
> 
> ...



Still a huge support/membership base to mobilise, though lost lots of young members, Cummings spending large amount on silly/corny memes, etc, so the left will share etc.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 23, 2019)

Labour MP hit with vile abuse for backing Brexit bill's second reading


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Labour MP hit with vile abuse for backing Brexit bill's second reading


To be honest ALL the MPs are getting abuse at the moment regardless of what club or side they belong to.

The only thing that is worth mentioning is who created hostile environments before some come bleating to the press.


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2019)

She could have been a future leader, not sure now.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

treelover said:


> She could have been a future leader, not sure now.


I think everyone else is


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> The only thing that is worth mentioning is who created hostile environments before some come bleating to the press.



Parliament?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Parliament?


Some of yes.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Labour MP hit with vile abuse for backing Brexit bill's second reading


Got to be careful about what we call 'abuse' in this context. Saying she's selfish or ignorant, or despicable, or indeed more of a fascist than a socialist, is simply fair comment. Whether you agree with it or not, we have the right to hold her or any other politician in utter contempt.


----------



## treelover (Oct 23, 2019)

Lisa is nothing approaching a fascist!


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Got to be careful about what we call 'abuse' in this context. Saying she's selfish or ignorant, or despicable, or indeed more of a fascist than a socialist, is simply fair comment. Whether you agree with it or not, we have the right to hold her or any other politician in utter contempt.


Not just the right but the duty


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Way to miss the point. at treelover


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 23, 2019)

considering what's said daily about jeremy corbyn / labour left MPs, i find it a bit hard to go along with a tory rag suddenly acting morally superior about it


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Saying she's selfish or ignorant, or despicable, or indeed more of a fascist than a socialist, is simply fair comment.



No it’s not. It’s fucking ridiculous.im embarrassed for them


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> That would no more be delegate democracy than the first one was


Assuming it offered specific feasible options, which voters then chose one of, it would be very much closer to delegate democracy than the first one which only asked a vague question and left it to parliament to decide what specifically happens.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 23, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Brexit 31st advertising still running on telly


OPINION: The latest 'Get Ready for Brexit' ad is worse than bad: it's forgettable

Marketing perspective


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Got to be careful about what we call 'abuse' in this context. Saying she's selfish or ignorant, or despicable, or indeed more of a fascist than a socialist, is simply fair comment. Whether you agree with it or not, we have the right to hold her or any other politician in utter contempt.



Did you purposely *ignore*:



> However, she has been blasted over email after following through on her stance, branded "total *scum*" and "despicable".





> *"You should have your fat a*** kicked out of the party.* I don't know how anyone could walk past you without holding their nose. *I hope you rot in hell."*



?


----------



## teuchter (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Did you purposely *ignore*:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Calling people 'scum' tends to be seen as fairly acceptable on urban75, unfortunately.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 23, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Calling people 'scum' tends to be seen as fairly acceptable on urban75, unfortunately.



We’re discussing MP’s who are perhaps a touch more sensitive.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No it’s not. It’s fucking ridiculous.im embarrassed for them


That's different from saying it's out of order for people to say such things, which is what is being claimed by some.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

I miss when it was uncontroversial to call politicians scum who should all be chucked off a wall tbh, now it's all be nice to MPs and hug a peer or something. The emails sent to Nandy quoted in that piece were shit, not for me, but still, MPs, fuck them


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Did you purposely *ignore*:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No, I thought those were out of order. I picked up on comments that I didn't think were out of order in the same way precisely because they are all being lumped together as the same thing, by that MP and apparently also by you.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 23, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I miss when it was uncontroversial to call politicians scum who should all be chucked off a wall tbh, now it's all be nice to MPs and hug a peer or something. The emails sent to Nandy quoted in that piece were shit, not for me, but still, MPs, fuck them


We'll be being told off for disrespecting Thatcher next.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We'll be being told off for disrespecting Thatcher next.


Sad innit. Police, we love you and all that


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 23, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's different from saying it's out of order for people to say such things, which is what is being claimed by some.



To claim that Lisa Nandy is closer to being a fascist than a socialist (social democrat) is pathetic. They did it. You agreed with them


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 23, 2019)

It might disarm Johnson’s ‘people vs parliament’ shtick if opposition politicians/the press were a little louder in pointing out how he and some of his cabinet had voted against May’s deal and ‘frustrated Brexit’ at that time. It’s ludicrous that he can capitalise on coming back with a worse deal and yet plays the hero, and there is little challenge to this.


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> She could have been a future leader, not sure now.





> It wasn’t him, Charley, it was you. Remember that night in the Garden you came down to my dressing room and you said, “Kid, this ain’t your night. We’re going for the price on Wilson.” You remember that? “This ain’t your night”! My night! I coulda taken Wilson apart! So what happens? He gets the title shot outdoors on the ballpark and what do I get? A one-way ticket to Palooka-ville! You was my brother, Charley, you shoulda looked out for me a little bit. You shoulda taken care of me just a little bit so I wouldn’t have to take them dives for the short-end money. You don’t understand. I coulda had class. I coulda been a contender the leader of the Labour Party*.* I coulda been somebody, instead of a bum, which is what I am, let’s face it. It was you, Charley.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I miss when it was uncontroversial to call politicians scum who should all be chucked off a wall tbh, now it's all be nice to MPs and hug a peer or something. The emails sent to Nandy quoted in that piece were shit, not for me, but still, MPs, fuck them


I thought it was hang a peer


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Calling people 'scum' tends to be seen as fairly acceptable on urban75, unfortunately.


It's fairly acceptable generally esp directed against politicians


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Calling people 'scum' tends to be seen as fairly acceptable on urban75, unfortunately.



There's always the evergreen 'don't be scum' option.

I only ever see that word use here to describe people's behaviour or what they say. Mistreating the vulnerable, creating hatred and division, playing for spurs; these are all legitimately characterised as the actions of scumbags.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> There's always the evergreen 'don't be scum' option.
> 
> I only ever see that word use here to describe people's behaviour or what they say. Mistreating the vulnerable, creating hatred and division, playing for spurs; these are all legitimately characterised as the actions of scumbags.


'scumbag' is not the same word as 'scum'. 
People are regularly described as 'scum' here. The meaning of that word is that they are entirely disposable, not just contemptible.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> The meaning of that word is that they are entirely disposable, not just contemptible.



Not really, no.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> OPINION: The latest 'Get Ready for Brexit' ad is worse than bad: it's forgettable
> 
> Marketing perspective



I got as far as 'not only does it damage public trust in the marketing profession...' and gave up. Next it'll be pirhanas whinging about lack of trust from the open water swimming community.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 24, 2019)

Any news on the Brexit Dividend ?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 24, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It might disarm Johnson’s ‘people vs parliament’ shtick if opposition politicians/the press were a little louder in pointing out how he and some of his cabinet had voted against May’s deal and ‘frustrated Brexit’ at that time. It’s ludicrous that he can capitalise on coming back with a worse deal and yet plays the hero, and there is little challenge to this.


I agree but the opposition and particularly Labour don't seem to be able to do that fighting fire with fire thing. They've called him 'untrustworthy' in parliament, but they don't have the instincts to get that message out there, particularly to leave voters.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I agree but the opposition and particularly Labour don't seem to be able to do that fighting fire with fire thing. They've called him 'untrustworthy' in parliament, but they don't have the instincts to get that message out there, particularly to leave voters.



Labour aren’t interested in getting any message out anywhere. Their instincts are to travel the other way. To win and lose in the House. Their entire strategy is focussed on HoC shenanigans and calculations that if they do ‘a’ then ‘x’ might happen.

I posted here on the night of the votes a series of amendments that Corbyn could have put down that would have signalled to the public Labour intent for what a left-led leave position would be. On that basis they could have both exposed the dreck that is the deal. They could have mobilised support in and _outside of the HoC _(handy if you intend to be competitive in an election). It would, as Red Squirrel highlighted, have countered the politics of Brexit as practised by Johnson with a set of political ideas around the issue of their own. It would have signalled to the public that a vote for them would see the referendum enacted, jobs and workers rights and environmental rights protected and which showed leadership and fight.

Instead, we got pissy defensive dribble.

Now I read that Corbyn can’t persuade half of the PLP to even support a vote for a GE. What the fuck did he expect to happen? He’s created the dynamic. He’s given it room to breathe and grow.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Any news on the Brexit Dividend ?



Apparently Boris is debating how to proceed, try to continue in enacting his deal or go for a GE.

Reports of a split in the Tory party on how to move forward have been dismissed.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Instead, we got pissy defensive dribble.


i've never expected anything else from the labour party


----------



## Badgers (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Apparently Boris is debating how to proceed, try to continue in enacting his deal or go for a GE.
> 
> Reports of a split in the Tory party on how to move forward have been dismissed.


But we still get all the dividend monies yeah?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i've never expected anything else from the labour party



Me neither. But, many on here clearly did


----------



## Wilf (Oct 24, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Labour aren’t interested in getting any message out anywhere. Their instincts are to travel the other way. To win and lose in the House. Their entire strategy is focussed on HoC shenanigans and calculations that if they do ‘a’ then ‘x’ might happen.
> 
> I posted here on the night of the votes a series of amendments that Corbyn could have put down that would have signalled to the public Labour intent for what a left-led leave position would be. On that basis they could have both exposed the dreck that is the deal. They could have mobilised support in and _outside of the HoC _(handy if you intend to be competitive in an election). It would, as Red Squirrel highlighted, have countered the politics of Brexit as practised by Johnson with a set of political ideas around the issue of their own. It would have signalled to the public that a vote for them would see the referendum enacted, jobs and workers rights and environmental rights protected and which showed leadership and fight.
> 
> ...


I agree with every word of that, though Labour have just lost the ability to make that move outside of parliament. They haven't got the instincts, they haven't got the contacts. In terms of contact/communication with leave areas and working class voters, Corbyn's Labour Party is now even less than social democratic. It was so obvious when he was elected leader that the only way it would get anywhere was if labour at least took on some of the aspects of a social movement. And it's Corbyn himself who seems the most clueless on this. And so here we are: this plays out as some micro spat between Sir Keir Starmer and some other irrelevances in the shadow cabinet about some irrelevant tactic or other.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 24, 2019)

Are we getting white dog poo back after brexit? Pretty sure that was banned by the EU about a decade or two ago.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are we getting white dog poo back after brexit? Pretty sure that was banned by the EU about a decade or two ago.



Of all your unhealthy obsessions, the white dog poo one is definitely the weirdest.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> I'm not getting this pro-Johnson / huge Tory majority pessimism, to be honest.
> 
> I think significant unease at how willing he seems to break the law / ignore conventions amongst the electorate, as well as his manifest corruption / unfitness for office.
> 
> ...



Agree that it's not a foregone conclusion Johnson can win an election, but disagree on your working out. 

Brexit diehards will sooner or later turn on this deal - it's basically May's deal - but the 'Lib Dem resurgence' is very much built upon Remain Tory voters. 

A second referendum resulting in Remain would simply open up a best of three contest.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2019)

There's no way there'd be a third - the second they get that result in they want SNAP - never to be opened on this or any other issue ever again.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Any news on the Brexit Dividend ?



I've got mine, but only because I changed all my savings to euros back in May 2016.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> There's no way there'd be a third - the second they get that result in they want SNAP - never to be opened on this or any other issue ever again.



Sure, but imagine the _years _of tedious demands for another referendum.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Are we getting white dog poo back after brexit? Pretty sure that was banned by the EU about a decade or two ago.



White dog poo _and_ rickets.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sure, but imagine the _years _of tedious demands for another referendum.


Yes. Not something to look forward to.


----------



## Libertad (Oct 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> White dog poo _and_ rickets.



and TB and measles,			 oh.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I agree with every word of that, though Labour have just lost the ability to make that move outside of parliament. They haven't got the instincts, they haven't got the contacts. In terms of contact/communication with leave areas and working class voters, Corbyn's Labour Party is now even less than social democratic. It was so obvious when he was elected leader that the only way it would get anywhere was if labour at least took on some of the aspects of a social movement. And it's Corbyn himself who seems the most clueless on this. And so here we are: this plays out as some micro spat between Sir Keir Starmer and some other irrelevances in the shadow cabinet about some irrelevant tactic or other.


havent got the contacts or instincts?  the largest party in western europe, with a still very active activist base? Utter nonsense.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Sure, but imagine the _years _of tedious demands for another referendum.


They're on their way whatever happens


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> White dog poo _and_ rickets.


rickets has been back since 2013


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> rickets has been back since 2013



There you go then. And people say the tories haven't achieved anything.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> They're on their way whatever happens



Even if the deal passes? It's not a very Brexit deal.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> TBH, I'm not really interested in what IDS says. MPs aren't delegates, and if he is claiming that they have been delegated to do something, that merely suggests that he doesn't understand the meaning of the word.


Or, more likely, that he is knowingly choosing a self-serving interpretation that gets him what he wants.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> A second referendum resulting in Remain would simply open up a best of three contest.



A second referendum and a slim majority for remain is pretty much the worse outcome I reckon.  It amazes me that _people's vote_ types don't see this possible outcome and the fallout from it.


----------



## treelover (Oct 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I agree with every word of that, though Labour have just lost the ability to make that move outside of parliament. They haven't got the instincts, they haven't got the contacts. In terms of contact/communication with leave areas and working class voters, Corbyn's Labour Party is now even less than social democratic. It was so obvious when he was elected leader that the only way it would get anywhere was if labour at least took on some of the aspects of a social movement. And it's Corbyn himself who seems the most clueless on this. And so here we are: this plays out as some micro spat between Sir Keir Starmer and some other irrelevances in the shadow cabinet about some irrelevant tactic or other.



Labour(well its membership) has indeed become a social movement on some issues, environment, free movement, etc, but much less on others, social security, housing, etc.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour(well its membership) has indeed become a social movement on some issues, environment, free movement, etc, but much less on others, social security, housing, etc.


uhh, we've had demos and campaigns against UC for months.  Its far more active than the campaign around free movement.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 24, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A second referendum and a slim majority for remain is pretty much the worse outcome I reckon.  It amazes me that _people's vote_ types don't see this possible outcome and the fallout from it.



tbf, that would make Brexit Party rise to the fore, taking votes from Tories and Labour, leaving the party of the people's vote to clean up.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> uhh, we've had demos and campaigns against UC for months.  Its far more active than the campaign around free movement.



In some places maybe, but not everywhere.


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Agree that it's not a foregone conclusion Johnson can win an election, but disagree on your working out.
> 
> Brexit diehards will sooner or later turn on this deal - it's basically May's deal - but the 'Lib Dem resurgence' is very much built upon Remain Tory voters.
> 
> A second referendum resulting in Remain would simply open up a best of three contest.



no chance- if there is another referendum on Europe, it will be the last.

In any case the "second referendum" I was referring to in my original post was on Scottish independence; SNP would only do confidence and supply with Corbyn on that basis, I suspect. I should have been clearer. Probably in return for a promise not to interfere with Corbyn's desire to negotiate a "Labour Brexit" (however nonsensical that may appear in the real world) for most of the next parliament.

The "Lib Dem resurgence" I expect exists in few places outside of Jo Swinson's head. They are likely to be swept off the map in Scotland (NE Fife, Caithness and Orkney/Shetland their best chances of holding on; only Orkney/Shetland really sure-fire).Even Swinson herself isn't certain of holding on. Maybe in a small number of places like Richmond and Cheltenham in England, but I doubt many others. In any case, what is a "Tory moderate" these days? The party has been steadily morphing into old UKIP in the course of this parliament.

My suspicion is that all but the most dogmatic Brexiteers will vote Tory as the only pragmatic way to try and force a pro-Brexit majority in parliament, and end what they will see as frustrating procedural game-playing. Farage's purism will only play to the diehards and ultras. At least Johnson can point to having got the upper hand on the BP for the first time since they were formed. Farage can complain all he likes but calling for a further extension in order to build support for a fantasy "clean break" option makes him look even madder than usual, especially with a viable deal on the table- and one offering a harder Brexit than T May. 

Moreover, Farage won't be in a position to deliver anything, which is the position he enjoys the most. He might actually have to do some work otherwise.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour(well its membership) has indeed become a social movement on some issues, environment, free movement, etc, but much less on others, social security, housing, etc.


soz do you mean they're like a social movement on some issues because they're in the labour party, or they're in the labour party to become part of a social movement on some issues? there are lots of people in political parties and people who aren't members of such campaigning on the environment, free movement etc, i'm not sure you know what your actual social movement is if you say labour has become a social movement on specific issues.


----------



## treelover (Oct 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> uhh, we've had demos and campaigns against UC for months.  Its far more active than the campaign around free movement.



I think thats largely down to one person, who own health is affected by such amazing activity,


----------



## treelover (Oct 24, 2019)

Groups organising around the LP, another europe is possible, campaign for free movement, green new deal, etc.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 24, 2019)

belboid said:


> havent got the contacts or instincts?  the largest party in western europe, with a still very active activist base? Utter nonsense.


That's the point, they've got the numbers but what are they doing? The activists may be doing activism, I'm not sure how much or on what, but maybe they are. But what's that got to do with anything? Particularly in the context of a discussion about Labour and leave voters/areas, they don't need activism, they need roots, they need organisation, they need involvement. They've been obsessed with defending Corbyn when they should have been defending the working class.


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2019)

EU expected to make/announce extension decision on Friday


----------



## brogdale (Oct 24, 2019)

andysays said:


> EU expected to make/announce extension decision on Friday


Shall we give Ranbay a hand for tomorrow's post?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 24, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> tbf, that would make Brexit Party rise to the fore, taking votes from Tories and Labour, leaving the party of the people's vote to clean up.



And (presumably) fuck the consequences.  Wankers.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

treelover said:


> I think thats largely down to one person,


No it isn't.  You are talking rubbish.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

Wilf said:


> That's the point, they've got the numbers but what are they doing? The activists may be doing activism, I'm not sure how much or on what, but maybe they are. But what's that got to do with anything? Particularly in the context of a discussion about Labour and leave voters/areas, they don't need activism, they need roots, they need organisation, they need involvement. They've been obsessed with defending Corbyn when they should have been defending the working class.


Make your mind up, you were complaining about the lack of activism before, now apparently that's unnecessary. Labour does still have roots in those communities, that's where the activists come from. Could be much better in some places, but it still exists.  And we've been out defending working-class interests most weekends, campaigning and talking to people about UC, fracking, the NHS, climate change, even bloody Brexit.  Of course the media totally focuses on parliament cos that's all they know, but there is shitloads of activity going on beyond their ken.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 24, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A second referendum and a slim majority for remain is pretty much the worse outcome I reckon.  It amazes me that _people's vote_ types don't see this possible outcome and the fallout from it.



If you are using this as an argument against a second referendum: such an outcome would demonstrate that had there been no second referendum, we would have had a Brexit that most people didn't want *at all* as well as a *type of Brexit* that we wouldn't even know was the one that most Brexit voters wanted.

So I don't see how it can be the worst outcome.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If you are using this as an argument against a second referendum: such an outcome would demonstrate that had there been no second referendum, we would have had a Brexit that most people didn't want *at all* as well as a *type of Brexit* that we wouldn't even know was the one that most Brexit voters wanted.
> 
> So I don't see how it can be the worst outcome.



You've highlighted my point perfectly.  Thank you.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 24, 2019)

A slim majority for the outcome I didn't want is terrible and should be opposed but a slim majority for the one I do want at second time of asking is fine, I see no problems or consequences, hi


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 24, 2019)

If there's a second referendum, which could be 'leave' again anyway, but lets say it ended with a slim majority for 'remain', does anyone seriously think that would end things, and it wouldn't bubble-up yet again, when the EU next makes a power grabbing move in its endless march towards a United States of Europe?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 24, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> If there's a second referendum, which could be 'leave' again anyway, but lets say it ended with a slim majority for 'remain', does anyone seriously think that would end things, and it wouldn't bubble-up yet again, when the EU next makes a power grabbing move in its endless march towards a United States of Europe?


Would also be the breakthrough from euros to generals/locals/welsh elections that ukip/bxp/whoever have been chasing, final nail in labour's divorce from its industrial working class constituency, insurgent far right etc. Success is great at growing movements but betrayal is even better.


----------



## belboid (Oct 24, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Even if the deal passes? It's not a very Brexit deal.


The Libs will demand another one to get us back in. And they'll carry on doing so until we do/it collapses.

Tho they cant get there second referendum amendment to be debated, apparently.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If you are using this as an argument against a second referendum: such an outcome would demonstrate that had there been no second referendum, we would have had a Brexit that most people didn't want *at all* as well as a *type of Brexit* that we wouldn't even know was the one that most Brexit voters wanted.
> 
> So I don't see how it can be the worst outcome.


there are none so blind as those that will not see


----------



## teuchter (Oct 24, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> A slim majority for the outcome I didn't want is terrible and should be opposed but a slim majority for the one I do want at second time of asking is fine, I see no problems or consequences, hi


This wilfully ignores the fact that on the basis of the initial referendum there is not a majority, slim or otherwise, for anything.

Or are you going to argue that we currently have a majority for either a BRINO or a no-deal? That we simultaneously have a clearly expressed majority (slim or otherwise) for two different things?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

I'm opening a sweepstake on how many pages long this thread will be before we have an actual answer to the OP's question.

Sorry but 2841, 18,306 and 4.78x10^19 are already taken.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> I'm opening a sweepstake on how many pages long this thread will be before we have an actual answer to the OP's question.
> 
> Sorry but 2841, 18,306 and 4.78x10^19 are already taken.


i'm going to go 4.78x10^19-1


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 24, 2019)

teuchter said:


> This wilfully ignores the fact that on the basis of the initial referendum there is not a majority, slim or otherwise, for anything.
> 
> Or are you going to argue that we currently have a majority for either a BRINO or a no-deal? That we simultaneously have a clearly expressed majority (slim or otherwise) for two different things?


and out pops another teuchter fart ^


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i'm going to go 4.78x10^19-1



Ooh you're a poor sport sir.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

Brexit latest news: Boris Johnson calls for a Dec 12 election urging Jeremy Corbyn to 'end this nightmare'


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Brexit latest news: Boris Johnson calls for a Dec 12 election urging Jeremy Corbyn to 'end this nightmare'
> 
> 
> 
> ...



End this nightmare created by *checks notes* Johnson and his two tory predecessors.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Brexit latest news: Boris Johnson calls for a Dec 12 election urging Jeremy Corbyn to 'end this nightmare'



Yes, as pointed out on the other thread, for the opposition parties this offer looks about as tempting as a shit sandwich.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> End this nightmare created by *checks notes* Johnson and his two tory predecessors.



Innit!


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Yes, as pointed out on the other thread, for the opposition parties this offer looks about as tempting as a shit sandwich.



Apparently Labour are hinting they would support a GE if the EU gives Boris an extension.


----------



## andysays (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Apparently Labour are hinting they would support a GE if the EU gives Boris an extension.


They can't really do anything else, can they.

As far as the offer to set the GE for Dec 12th and allow another week to attempt to get the current deal through before parliament is dissolved on Nov 6th, if they simply refuse that they will once again be allowing Johnson to portray them as seeking to block Brexit.

And given that the timing of the extension has effectively been set by parliament, and any election needs to happen asap to allow time for potential negotiations before Jan 31st, they can't complain about the timing either.

It really is put up or shut up time...


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)




----------



## DexterTCN (Oct 24, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> ..In any case the "second referendum" I was referring to in my original post was on Scottish independence; SNP would only do confidence and supply with Corbyn on that basis, I suspect...


Labour have rejected every offer of help from the SNP to defeat the tories.  In fact in Scotland labour and tories combine to control councils and seats when they get the opportunity. A labour leader told voters to vote tory if labour couldn't win the seat.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 24, 2019)

Right, I'm off to book the 13th of December off work and beat the rush.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>



I'm not listening to that posh boy softy out of the beano  cunt speak for half an hour. Any chance of a summary?


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 24, 2019)

See this thread spiney


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 24, 2019)

Made it to 10 seconds and he's droning on about labour being afraid of the voters. 

Coming from the cunt who went canvassing and took his nanny with him, and the Labour candidate had to step in to stop him getting the shit kicked out of him by the locals.

Don't think I need the summary, it's just more hypocrisy from a whiny posh cunt.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Any chance of a summary?



Something about tomorrow being St. Crispin’s day, the anniversary of Agincourt.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Made it to 10 seconds and he's droning on about labour being afraid of the voters.
> 
> Coming from the cunt who went canvassing and took his nanny with him, and the Labour candidate had to step in to stop him getting the shit kicked out of him by the locals.
> 
> Don't think I need the summary, it's just more hypocrisy from a whiny posh cunt.



So he does canvass? I wish he’d knock on my door, the scrawny posh fuck. I’d gladly do time.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 24, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Made it to 10 seconds and he's droning on about labour being afraid of the voters.
> 
> Coming from the cunt who went canvassing and took his nanny with him, and the Labour candidate had to step in to stop him getting the shit kicked out of him by the locals.
> 
> Don't think I need the summary, it's just more hypocrisy from a whiny posh cunt.



he'll bring his kids next time and the nanny

to get headlines from it


----------



## brogdale (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Something about tomorrow being St. Crispin’s day, the anniversary of Agincourt.


Cobblers from Faversham.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 24, 2019)

Guardian doing its best to cause a stir...


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 24, 2019)

just were do they put these research polls or do you get idea the data is managed

jesus even organised protests cannot get that level of action


----------



## brogdale (Oct 24, 2019)

So...to be (vaguely) serious for a mo...what next?

Presumably the oppo will have to get their shit together regarding:
a) the legislation saying we leave on the 31st Oct (Bill Cash's obsession)
b) gain control of Commons business to definitively legislate against any ND exit
then
c) contemplate a VoNC/GE?

Dunno...anyone?
(Caveat: Bishop's has been taken)


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Guardian doing its best to cause a stir...
> 
> View attachment 188022


C4 went to Thurrock to see how much enthusiasm there was for a GE as a step towards resolving the impasse on Brexit.Of the four people they spoke to there was only one young chap who seemed in favour.The other three just looked,literally, like they wanted to throw up.I voted leave but the waste of Parliamentary-time has almost become the central issue.A large number of people would ,i think,be fairly happy to park the referendum result now for five years or so.Would that things were that easy.
Apols as usual for the derail.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 24, 2019)

This whole crisis was manufactured by the Tories to placate the far right loony element in their far right loony party. No one here forgets that, whether they are pro or anti Brexit, but the Labour party aren't making the capital from it that they should. They really should. It's a Tory crisis. Labour should be leading the way out. Even if they can't provide a solution they should be pointing the finger at the Tories so at least there's a chance of winning this wretched election. The thought of five more years of Tory destruction is too much.

The EU was #7 in voters' concerns until it all got whipped up - not as a reasoned debate but as appeal to brute emotion.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So...to be (vaguely) serious for a mo...what next?
> 
> Presumably the oppo will have to get their shit together regarding:
> a) the legislation saying we leave on the 31st Oct (Bill Cash's obsession)
> ...



As I like a punt, I’m going for a VONC


----------



## agricola (Oct 24, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> As I like a punt, I’m going for a VONC



if the government goes on strike, definately


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

agricola said:


> if the government goes on strike, definately



my thoughts exactly!


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

Corbyn now saying he won’t support a GE unless Boris takes no deal off the table.  And he awaits the EU’s response to whether they will grant extension or not.


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Corbyn now saying he won’t support a GE unless Boris takes no deal off the table.  And he awaits the EU’s response to whether they will grant extension or not.



He’s been saying that for weeks!

fuck me (x3 again)


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 24, 2019)

Mr.Bishie said:


> He’s been saying that for weeks!
> 
> fuck me (x3 again)



I think this time he really means it (furrowed brow whilst interviewed).


----------



## Mr.Bishie (Oct 24, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I think this time he really means it (furrowed brow whilst interviewed).



His middle name is “furrowed brow” ffs


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 24, 2019)




----------



## existentialist (Oct 25, 2019)

Listening to Javid on Today. 

Was there a more stupid, dogmatic, sloganeering, patronising merchant of bullshit ever? 

Oh yes, all the rest of Johnson's cabinet


----------



## maomao (Oct 25, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Listening to Javid on Today.
> 
> Was there a more stupid, dogmatic, sloganeering, patronising merchant of bullshit ever?
> 
> Oh yes, all the rest of Johnson's cabinet


Javid is the intellectual giant of that particular cabinet.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 25, 2019)

I’ve been asleep for 7 hours so a bit behind on things - have we left yet and can I still get pecorino?


----------



## Louis MacNeice (Oct 25, 2019)

Is it possible for the Speaker to give control of business to someone other than the government and for whoever that is to then take the Johnson deal plus whatever amendments forward?

Cheers - Louis MacNeice


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

agricola said:


> if the government goes on strike, definately


if the government goes on strike the country would be better governed


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> (Caveat: Bishop's has been taken)


queen to queen's level three


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Listening to Javid on Today.
> 
> Was there a more stupid, dogmatic, sloganeering, patronising merchant of bullshit ever?
> 
> Oh yes, all the rest of Johnson's cabinet


osborne in his day was as stupid, dogmatic, sloganeering and indeed a patronising merchant of bullshit


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> queen to queen's level three


 3 or 4


----------



## existentialist (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> osborne in his day was as stupid, dogmatic, sloganeering and indeed a patronising merchant of bullshit


I don't recall him blundering around quite so clod-hoppingly as Javid, though. He had to temporise on several pretty softball questions (usually by sloganeering), and it made him sound like he was a _summa cum laude_ graduate of the Priti Patel School of Witlessness


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I don't recall him blundering around quite so clod-hoppingly as Javid, though. He had to temporise on several pretty softball questions (usually by sloganeering), and it made him sound like he was a _summa cum laude_ graduate of the Priti Patel School of Witlessness


i well remember listening to osborne on the toady programme and thinking how his stupidity and economic illiteracy shone through. they're not so far apart.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Something about tomorrow being St. Crispin’s day, the anniversary of Agincourt.





Pickman's model said:


> if the government goes on strike the country would be better governed



O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

_That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made, 
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
_
Blue, obvs.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> _That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
> Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
> And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
> We would not die in that man's company
> ...


i note the speech was delivered in france


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i note the speech was delivered in france


Back when Calais was properly English, though.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Back when Calais was properly English, though.


back when rather more than calais adhered to the english crown


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> back when rather more than calais adhered to the english crown


I think we're being suitably patriotic for cobblers day!


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 25, 2019)

Oh. what fun...



> BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union governments are unlikely to decide on Friday whether to grant Britain’s requested for an extension of the Brexit deadline and will probably postpone decision until Monday, senior EU diplomats said.
> 
> “I’d be surprised if we land today,” one senior diplomat said. “There is too much pressure to wait and to see what happens on Monday,” the diplomat said.
> 
> ...



EU officials doubtful of Brexit extension decision on Friday


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Oh. what fun...
> 
> 
> 
> EU officials doubtful of Brexit extension decision on Friday


This fucking obsession with 'landing' and 'landing strips'; wtf.


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Corbyn now saying he won’t support a GE unless Boris takes no deal off the table.  And he awaits the EU’s response to whether they will grant extension or not.


I wonder what exactly he means by this, given that the only way to literally take no deal off the table is to cancel A50


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> I wonder what exactly he means by this, given that the only way to literally take no deal off the table is to cancel A50


i think what he means is that he wants the abominable johnson to declare that he will not seek a no deal brexit under any circumstances.


----------



## Winot (Oct 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> I wonder what exactly he means by this, given that the only way to literally take no deal off the table is to cancel A50



Perhaps he’s about to defect to the LibDems?


----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> This fucking obsession with 'landing' and 'landing strips'; wtf.



Airstrip one from nineteen eighty four


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i think what he means is that he wants the abominable johnson to declare that he will not seek a no deal brexit under any circumstances.



I don't think he or anyone would take Johnson's word on anything.  It is literally worthless. 

Johnson has negotiated a deal which he has said is great.  He has said his deal will pass at some point and logically it follows that keeping no deal on the table as a negotiating tactic is no longer relevant.  This being the case why doesn't he just pass a quick law or some such to forbid no deal and doing so call Corbyn's bluff.  I mean why not?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I don't think he or anyone would take Johnson's word on anything.  It is literally worthless.
> 
> Johnson has negotiated a deal which he has said is great.  He has said his deal will pass at some point and logically it follows that keeping no deal on the table as a negotiating tactic is no longer relevant.  This being the case why doesn't he just pass a quick law or some such to forbid no deal and doing so call Corbyn's bluff.  I mean why not?


yeh i quite agree but i don't know what else corbyn can mean


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

elbows said:


> Airstrip one from nineteen eighty four


Doubleplusungood times.


----------



## gosub (Oct 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> I wonder what exactly he means by this, given that the only way to literally take no deal off the table is to cancel A50


Agree.  The only justification the EU will accept for ANY extension is a plebiscite of some sort..  

A lot will depend on Downing Streets written response to Montchalin;  but  to me technical extension to the 15 Nov still seems the most rational option.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 25, 2019)

teuchter said:


> This wilfully ignores the fact that on the basis of the initial referendum there is not a majority, slim or otherwise, for anything.
> 
> Or are you going to argue that we currently have a majority for either a BRINO or a no-deal? That we simultaneously have a clearly expressed majority (slim or otherwise) for two different things?



Nice logic. So it's actually only possible to have a majority for Remain and the sooner the proles realise that the better. 

Wooky seems to have disappeared which is making me think (probably wrongly) that of all the terrible contributions on this massive thread yours might be the worst.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

It's all over...



One they'd made earlier...


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 25, 2019)

The guy who got a Brexit Tattoo must be feeling a bit stupid about now


----------



## gosub (Oct 25, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Nice logic. So it's actually only possible to have a majority for Remain and the sooner the proles realise that the better.
> 
> Wooky seems to have disappeared which is making me think (probably wrongly) that of all the terrible contributions on this massive thread yours might be the worst.


Spending time with some arch remainers  and it's clear they really only think in 3 dimensions and want to go back to the magical land of 2016... How EU could get another round of constitutional reform past the UK"s treaty referendum lock ...a manana problem. 
There has also been the massive elephant over what sort of direction EU will head when we do leave  coz the Germans ,the French and the smaller nations of EUrope have differing ideas in where to take things ...and while it won't be down to UK we will still be neighbours ..And bunch of hippies who borrow the occasional cup of sugar and the fella that demands you pay for the upkeep of his fence are very different types of neighbour.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The guy who got a Brexit Tattoo must be feeling a bit stupid about now


Probably no more than usual. The sort of person who's going to get a Brexit tattoo is not, I suspect, going to be someone much given to careful self-examination (says the bloke with an alto clef and E major key signature tattoo )


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The guy who got a Brexit Tattoo must be feeling a bit stupid about now



A bit?


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2019)

Apparently the EU have agreed a delay, but there's a delay in deciding how long a delay


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 25, 2019)

andysays said:


> Apparently the EU have agreed a delay, but there's a delay in deciding how long a delay



Can they be offered an extension to delay deciding on the delay or will that mean no further delay?


----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can they be offered an extension to delay deciding on the delay or will that mean no further delay?



They are setting up an external panel of experts including Tom DeLay and Daley Thompson to consider the matter.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 25, 2019)

the EU effectively pressuring corbyn to agree to GE cos of no deal threat. deflects from BJ quite nicely.


----------



## andysays (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can they be offered an extension to delay deciding on the delay or will that mean no further delay?


Let me get back to you on that, maybe on Monday...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> It's all over...
> 
> View attachment 188073
> 
> ...


royal mint employees have been seen going home with bulging pockets


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 25, 2019)

Everyone bar Labour is about 30 short of what BoZo needs to call a GE.
It's the only card Corbyn has so can't really blame him for playing it.
As for the EU they must be has sick of Boris as anyone, they are probably enjoying making him sweat


----------



## BCBlues (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can they be offered an extension to delay deciding on the delay or will that mean no further delay?



Surely a referendum across the EU states is called for here to decide how long to Brelay


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 25, 2019)

EU agrees to Brexit delay - but no date yet


----------



## existentialist (Oct 25, 2019)

BCBlues said:


> Surely a referendum across the EU states is called for here to decide how long to Brelay


Oh, I think at least *two* referenda...


----------



## BCBlues (Oct 25, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh, I think at least *two* referenda...



Then we need a vote on whether to have one or two referenda


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

BCBlues said:


> Then we need a vote on whether to have one or two referenda


why stop at two?


----------



## BCBlues (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> why stop at two?


It's an even number, it could end up one all. Then we could start all over again from the beginning, Buses with numbers on and all that.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

BCBlues said:


> It's an even number, it could end up one all. Then we could start all over again from the beginning, Buses with numbers on and all that.


yeh but 3 is a magic number


----------



## BCBlues (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh but 3 is a magic number



The Holy Trinity


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> EU agrees to Brexit delay - but no date yet


This from the BBC would appear to offer a credible explanation of the delay in announcing the supra-state's decision on the precise length of the extension.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

BCBlues said:


> The Holy Trinity


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 25, 2019)

All just games isn't it, pin the tail on the donkey, load of bollocks


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 25, 2019)

Johnson appears to have found an unlikely ally in the shape of Emmanuel Macron.

Empty dance, it may be, but this after the agreement winning a vote in the commons puts Corbyn in a difficult position. Those 19 Labour defectors have made a massive difference here.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

So...we've got to wait until Parliament rejects Johnson's 'offer' of a GE, then...and only then...the supra-state will inform us that our full membership has next been extended to Jan 31st 2020.

Betting on the next date after that?
June seems to have a ring about it?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson appears to have found an unlikely ally in the shape of Emmanuel Macron.


Go on...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So...we've got to wait until Parliament rejects Johnson's 'offer' of a GE, then...and only then...the supra-state will inform us that our full membership has next been extended to Jan 31st 2020.
> 
> Betting on the next date after that?
> June seems to have a ring about it?


yeh it's when de pfeffel has his birthday


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Go on...


oh he will, and on and on


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson appears to have found an unlikely ally in the shape of Emmanuel Macron.



A camp faux hard man and a piss poor womble tribute act?  What a double act.  I smell a sitcom...


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Go on...



Macron has hinted he would veto any extension.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Go on...


From what I'm reading, but for France, the three-month extension as requested by the Benn Act would have been agreed and announced today. Johnson would have had no option but to accept it.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh it's when de pfeffel has his birthday


ʾIn shāʾ Allāh


----------



## Flavour (Oct 25, 2019)

if there's no bloody VONCing between now and christmas and no GE i am going to be sorely disappointed. this is getting boring now.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 25, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Macron has hinted he would veto any extension.


He does that every time...obviously his own media lap this shite up.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> if there's no bloody VONCing between now and christmas and no GE i am going to be sorely disappointed. this is getting boring now.



I don't know.  Urban is pretty quiet on days when nothing is happening with Brexit.  We'll miss it when its gone.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 25, 2019)

Flavour said:


> if there's no bloody VONCing between now and christmas and no GE i am going to be sorely disappointed. this is getting boring now.



‘Brexit fatigue’ seems to be the new sound bite.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> A camp faux hard man and a piss poor womble tribute act?  What a double act.  I smell a sitcom...


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I don't know.  Urban is pretty quiet on days when nothing is happening with Brexit.  We'll miss it when its gone.


yeh well we're already averaging about 1,400 posts a day


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> yeh well we're already averaging about 1,400 posts a day



True.  But 200 of those are me calling Awesome Wells a cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> True.  But 200 of those are me calling Awesome Wells a cunt.


1185 are other people calling awesome wells a cunt too


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 25, 2019)




----------



## A380 (Oct 25, 2019)




----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2019)

A rare opportunity to use the phrase 'Maybot had better moves'


----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2019)

More likely to be a real person making a joke by pretending to be a Boris bot in this case though I suppose.


----------



## elbows (Oct 25, 2019)

Years from now, Bob Gravytrain and the Division Bell Bots will sing about these times. But first rectal microphone technology must be perfected.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 25, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So...we've got to wait until Parliament rejects Johnson's 'offer' of a GE, then...and only then...the supra-state will inform us that our full membership has next been extended to Jan 31st 2020.
> 
> Betting on the next date after that?
> June seems to have a ring about it?



The extension must be long enough for Labour to get ahead in the polls. This could be a while.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The guy who got a Brexit Tattoo must be feeling a bit stupid about now


Perhaps he should add 'circa' to the 31st October?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 25, 2019)

If the EU don't want to seem to be influencing the UK's politics they should give a longer but finally final flextension so everyone can fight it out with whatever tools the extension may allow, whether election, and/or referendum or sudden death of who or whatever.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 25, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> If the EU don't want to seem to be influencing the UK's politics they should give a longer but finally final flextension so everyone can fight it out with whatever tools the extension may allow, whether election, and/or referendum or sudden death of who or whatever.


Let Corbyn and Johnson appoint champions to fight it out in parliament square


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Johnson appears to have found an unlikely ally in the shape of Emmanuel Macron.
> 
> Empty dance, it may be, but this after the agreement winning a vote in the commons puts Corbyn in a difficult position. Those 19 Labour defectors have made a massive difference here.


Yes. I don't see an obvious route to any kind of Labour administration when it comes to an _election_, but we've also got to a point where both Labour and the remain alliance are losing out in the _parliamentary games_ (and by tripping each other up). Not quite game set and match, but close.


----------



## T & P (Oct 25, 2019)

Brexit coins 'paused' amid uncertainty


----------



## Raheem (Oct 25, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The guy who got a Brexit Tattoo must be feeling a bit stupid about now


If he wasn't feeling stupid at the time, he's probably incapable.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 25, 2019)

Raheem said:


> If he wasn't feeling stupid at the time, he's probably incapable.


Tattoo Fixers - All 4


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 25, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Let Corbyn and Johnson appoint champions to fight it out in parliament square


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 25, 2019)




----------



## binka (Oct 25, 2019)

Louis MacNeice said:


> Is it possible for the Speaker to give control of business to someone other than the government and for whoever that is to then take the Johnson deal plus whatever amendments forward?
> 
> Cheers - Louis MacNeice


Speaker was asked that on a point of order the other night. I can't remember his exact words but he said basically yes but not just yet. there will be a new speaker after next week so who knows what they'll think though I'm pretty sure they just make it up as they go along anyway


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> The extension must be long enough for Labour to get ahead in the polls. This could be a while.


If only we could forget Brexit and concentrate on Labours economic policies type approach . Unfortunately Labours problems run deeper than than that .


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 25, 2019)

Growing risk of no-deal in six days after Macron blocks Brexit extension


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 25, 2019)

Corbs is backed into a corner if this is true, His current position is he won't agree to a GE without No Deal and someone who he has no influence over is forcing his
hand by saying either agree to a GE or it will be No Deal anyway.
That said I reckon  Macron is bluffing since he has accepted the role of 'bad cop' vs Merkel's 'good cop'.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 25, 2019)

I am not sure Macron is trying to force a GE, I think he's trying to force parliament to agree the deal, in view of reports that he's suggesting a short extension until the end of Nov.


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 25, 2019)

It’s almost as if they are saying _do something, FFS anything!_


----------



## Supine (Oct 25, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It’s almost as if they are saying _do something, FFS anything!_



What do you mean almost!


----------



## Don Troooomp (Oct 25, 2019)

Extention (almost) agreed - maybe

EU agrees to Brexit delay - but no date yet



> EU ambassadors have agreed to delay Brexit, but will not make a decision on a new deadline date until next week.
> 
> The European Commission said work on this would "continue in the coming days".
> 
> The talks came after Chancellor Sajid Javid admitted the government's deadline to deliver Brexit next Thursday "can't be met".



Is an early election on the cards?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 25, 2019)

I broadly agree with Owen Jones' analysis here - December election is the least worst option. Corbyn needs to get back on the front foot - you can have your December election, but Brexit is extended to the end of January and your deal doesn't go through pre-election. Push the line that any deal now needs a fresh mandate.

As Jones says, it might fail, but the bigger danger is in not trying.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 25, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I broadly agree with Owen Jones' analysis here - December election is the least worst option. Corbyn needs to get back on the front foot - you can have your December election, but Brexit is extended to the end of January and your deal doesn't go through pre-election. Push the line that any deal now needs a fresh mandate.
> 
> As Jones says, it might fail, but the bigger danger is in not trying.


The man makes an excellent point, being indecisive and dithering is what got Corbyn into this mess, more dithering won't help get him out. Taking bold action just might.


----------



## A380 (Oct 25, 2019)




----------



## Lurdan (Oct 25, 2019)

Lead story in tomorrows FT. I'm shocked, shocked...






I've never worked out when the FT's paywall chooses to work or not so here's an archived copy of the story.

Fears rise over post-Brexit workers’ rights and regulations


----------



## Ming (Oct 25, 2019)




----------



## Ming (Oct 25, 2019)

Smell the bullshit. JRM vs James O’Brien.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

Lurdan said:


> Lead story in tomorrows FT. I'm shocked, shocked...
> Fears rise over post-Brexit workers’ rights and regulations


If labour had some decent policies they could win a GE and then set decent rights and regulations. It was labour that introduced the equal pay act back in 1970? that was then followed in several other countries. That was before we joined the EU so JC is wrong that we need to be in the EU to protect workers rights.

We are also ahead of most of Europe with eco measures like PV and wind power. So again JC is wrong that we don't need to be in the EU to protect environmental matters either.


----------



## Raheem (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> If labour had some decent policies they could win a GE and then set decent rights and regulations. It was labour that introduced the equal pay act back in 1970? that was then followed in several other countries. That was before we joined the EU so JC is wrong that we need to be in the EU to protect workers rights.



We don't need anything to protect workers' rights except to protect workers' rights. But Brexit is fundamentally about removing workers' rights. 

The Equal Pay Act was, in part, part of the UK's preparations for EEC membership, because equal pay legislation was required by the Treaty of Rome.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 26, 2019)

So troops already on standby.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2019)

MrSki said:


> So troops already on standby.



"Cleverly"


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "Cleverly"
> 
> View attachment 188156


A litlle bit Ísis >>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Chilli.s (Oct 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Smell the bullshit. JRM vs James O’Brien.




That cunt (RM) is only concerned about getting out at any cost so his phenomenalny rich businesses aren't subject to incoming eu tax laws. Anything else is probably connected as well, he's such a snake.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 26, 2019)

Someone should email Jazzz to let him know he seems to be welcome back on here


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

Raheem said:


> The Equal Pay Act was, in part, part of the UK's preparations for EEC membership, because equal pay legislation was required by the Treaty of Rome.


There was no requirement for equal pay anywhere in the world before we introduced it.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Smell the bullshit. JRM vs James O’Brien.




Good jousting, James O’Brien certainly comes across as a tortured soul.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> There was no requirement for equal pay anywhere in the world before we introduced it.


Traditionally the us equal pay act of 1963 precedes the UK equal pay act of 1970


----------



## Ming (Oct 26, 2019)

Chilli.s said:


> That cunt (RM) is only concerned about getting out at any cost so his phenomenalny rich businesses aren't subject to incoming eu tax laws. Anything else is probably connected as well, he's such a snake.


Brexit can't be about money. Surely you can't be serious?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> There was no requirement for equal pay anywhere in the world before we introduced it.


It's article 119 of the Treaty of Rome. Google it and eat your own face-palm.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's article 119 of the Treaty of Rome. Google it and eat your own face-palm.


Was a bit useless though really


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2019)

For those with the time/inclination to explore the development of social policy within the supra-state, I'd recommend this longer (NLR) piece from Streeck: (possible £-wall access issues?)

https://newleftreview.org/issues/II118/articles/wolfgang-streeck-progressive-regression


----------



## Badgers (Oct 26, 2019)




----------



## gosub (Oct 26, 2019)

Badgers said:


>


Um can't the government pay for it...in 50p's
Though by Mr Snows maths 50p's are already worth £1.15.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Traditionally the us equal pay act of 1963 precedes the UK equal pay act of 1970


Strange how the Ford bosses didn't seem to think it necessary at their Dagenham plant.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 26, 2019)

Badgers said:


>




10 million 50p coins cost 11 million quid? Someone tell Javid I'll sell him 50p coins for 75p each and save him a fortune. 20p coins I do at four for a quid.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

Raheem said:


> It's article 119 of the Treaty of Rome. Google it and eat your own face-palm.


Fair enough but it wasn't imposed in Europe until 1976 by the ECJ. 6 years after it was introduced in the UK. Funny as well how if it was a European ruling that the Europeans ignored it until forced to. Seems to be another case of 'do as we say not do as we do' and therefore another reason to get out.


----------



## Ming (Oct 26, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> 10 million 50p coins cost 11 million quid? Someone tell Javid I'll sell him 50p coins for 75p each and save him a fortune. 20p coins I do at four for a quid.


 Brexit's definitely not about money.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Brexit's definitely not about money.



This is a big departure from your previous theories.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Brexit's definitely not about money.


Money’s not about money.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 26, 2019)

cost of production. The coins don't spring from the earth stamped with ER's head on it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Strange how the Ford bosses didn't seem to think it necessary at their Dagenham plant.


Bosses in ignore the law shocker


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> There was no requirement for equal pay anywhere in the world before we introduced it.



Who's we? Last time I checked there wasn't equal pay anywhere. Maybe Iceland. Are you Icelandic?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

Now I'm not an economist but surely if the cost of manufacturing physical units of currency is greater than the face value of said unit then. I don't fucking know. Doesn't sound right though does it. Quantitative easing to offset the cost of minting stuff or something


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 26, 2019)

Its ironic that Brexit is now apparently going to herald a bonfire of the rights at work of millions of people. Significant  drivers of the Brexit vote were surely the relentless rise of de-unionised Agency work and the consequent cavalier attitude of bosses to their workers dignity, rights and entitlements .Rightly or wrongly many thought that open borders stood in the way of any possible solution to this. Au contraire,they now hear, EU membership and the protective shield of regulation that goes with it is the only thing that has hitherto preserved for them a status slightly above serfdom.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Its ironic that Brexit is now apparently going to herald a bonfire of the rights at work of millions of people. Significant  drivers of the Brexit vote were surely the relentless rise of de-unionised Agency work and the consequent cavalier attitude of bosses to their workers dignity, rights and entitlements .Rightly or wrongly many thought that open borders stood in the way of any possible solution to this. Au contraire,they now hear, EU membership and the protective shield of regulation that goes with it is the only thing that has hitherto preserved for them a status slightly above serfdom.


Yeah, but what sort of a 'shield' facilitates such a 'relentless rise' of erosion?


----------



## xenon (Oct 26, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> cost of production. The coins don't spring from the earth stamped with ER's head on it.


Yeah but they don't cost more to produce than the face value, otherwise the mere act of minting currency would cause a defosit.

Flog them on Ebay to collectors.


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Now I'm not an economist but surely if the cost of manufacturing physical units of currency is greater than the face value of said unit then. I don't fucking know. Doesn't sound right though does it. Quantitative easing to offset the cost of minting stuff or something


once they are made they are in circulation for a decade plus so factor that in to overall costing. Also, if the coins themselves were worth more than the face value at any time they would get melted down or chipped at like players did to gold and silver coinage in ye days of old.


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 26, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Yeah, but what sort of a 'shield' facilitates such a 'relentless rise' of erosion?


Quite.Couldn't access the Streeck article btw.


----------



## BCBlues (Oct 26, 2019)

Badgers said:


>




Chris Grayling is your man to sort out Brexit related issues that dont exist

(Edit it's the useless coins tweet)


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> Quite.Couldn't access the Streeck article btw.


Sorry about that; I'm afraid it's far too long to c&p and I don't know how to put it up as a pdf or whatnot. Sometimes butchersapron is able to do that sort of thing; maybe he'd be able to link to an accessible version?


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 26, 2019)

Here


----------



## brogdale (Oct 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Here


Ta.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 26, 2019)

xenon said:


> Flog them on Ebay to collectors.



Not a bad idea as they may well substantially rise in price similarly to Nike’s Betsy Ross flag themed trainers/sneakers.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Who's we? Last time I checked there wasn't equal pay anywhere. Maybe Iceland. Are you Icelandic?


The UK labour governments equal pay act of 1970.


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Bosses in ignore the law shocker


Or maybe because the US equal pay act of 1963 had so many loopholes in it it rendered it useless.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

WouldBe said:


> Or maybe because the US equal pay act of 1963 had so many loopholes in it it rendered it useless.


Or maybe because us law does not apply to the uk


----------



## Duncan2 (Oct 26, 2019)

As governed by ‘European’ or international law, immigration may also
function in essence as social policy. The arrival of unskilled workers
may undermine collective bargaining in low-wage sectors, to the extent
that it still exists; it may also increase income inequality. In the process,

it may furthermore weaken public perceptions of poverty and inequal-
ity as a problem—and, indeed, allow opponents of social protection to

declare acceptance of domestic inequality a commandment of global
solidarity with the ‘really poor’. Immigration may also exert pressure

on social-assistance budgets while weakening the willingness of citi-
zens to be taxed for them, as a growing share of the expenditure may

be going to newly arriving non-citizens.

The above is a cut and paste from Streeck's Progressive Regression.The dead-pan way in which this is stated seems to me to conceal the fact that not everyone would agree with this.If I were asked to put this into a category as being right-wing or left-wing commentary I am not sure I would know how to answer.An interesting read though thankyou.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 26, 2019)

Still planning for a no deal.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 26, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Still planning for a no deal.




We’ll still have motorways if there’s a no deal Brexit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

Duncan2 said:


> As governed by ‘European’ or international law, immigration may also
> function in essence as social policy. The arrival of unskilled workers
> may undermine collective bargaining in low-wage sectors, to the extent
> that it still exists; it may also increase income inequality. In the process,
> ...


But today, today we have naming of parts


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 26, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> We’ll still have motorways if there’s a no deal Brexit?


Yes but they will be renamed car- and lorryparks


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes but they will be renamed car- and lorryparks



The M25 has been that for bloody years.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 26, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Good jousting, James O’Brien certainly comes across as a tortured soul.


I think, by "tortured soul", what you actually mean is "thinking person".

Some people (some might say around 52% of the population, but I couldn't possibly comment) might find that distinction difficult to make.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> I think, by "tortured soul", what you actually mean is "thinking person".



How condescending of you.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

James O'Brien is a cock


----------



## existentialist (Oct 26, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> How condescending of you.


Thank you. I like to play to my strengths.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> James O'Brien is a cock


And yet still manages to end up being far less cock-like than many of the people he speaks to...


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> And yet still manages to end up being far less cock-like than many of the people he speaks to...


That's because that's his routine. It's just jeremy kyle for liberals


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> James O'Brien is a cock


100%


----------



## Wilf (Oct 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> And yet still manages to end up being far less cock-like than many of the people he speaks to...


Fucking hell, _I'm_ less of a cock than the people he interviews.


----------



## eoin_k (Oct 26, 2019)

...


----------



## MrSki (Oct 26, 2019)

Lib Dems & SNP send joint letter to EU & will try for election on 9th December.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 26, 2019)

existentialist said:


> And yet still manages to end up being far less cock-like than many of the people he speaks to...



Subjective.


----------



## Poi E (Oct 27, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Lib Dems & SNP send joint letter to EU & will try for election on 9th December.




Is that good, bad, anything? Can't be arsed thinking this shit through anymore.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 27, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Is that good, bad, anything? Can't be arsed thinking this shit through anymore.


None of it is good because you wouldn't start from here, but this is embarrassing. Or brazen. Or embarrassing.


----------



## not a trot (Oct 27, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Is that good, bad, anything? Can't be arsed thinking this shit through anymore.



Corbyn couldn't have put it better himself. It really is time he took some responsibility for all this shit.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

Poi E said:


> Is that good, bad, anything? Can't be arsed thinking this shit through anymore.


It's politico "jolly japes" and the public will be rolling their eyes if they can even be bothered.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 27, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Lib Dems & SNP send joint letter to EU & will try for election on 9th December.



They haven't signed the letter


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

teuchter said:


> They haven't signed the letter


It's all the rage.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2019)

Today's reminder from the 'Friends of the Oligarchs' that Brexit is not a right wing coup because it's anti-globalcap & green. 

So there you go.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> View attachment 188283
> 
> Today's reminder from the 'Friends of the Oligarchs' that Brexit is not a right wing coup because it's anti-globalcap & green.
> 
> So there you go.


The author of that ran for Green leader last year. Now in brexit party I believe


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The author of that ran for Green leader last year. Now in brexit party I believe


Yep, Leslie Rowe.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Lib Dems & SNP send joint letter to EU & will try for election on 9th December.



So Johnson is aiming for an election on December 12th, but the SNP and LibDems want to preempt him and have one on December 9th (a Monday  ) instead? 

That will show him...


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

I don't get why the prevailing logic is that the Tories will win an election. They got the Brexit bill passed then when asked for more time for the legislation have called an election. They've blocked Brexit themselves. It's not a winning strategy IMHO.


----------



## Cloo (Oct 27, 2019)

I think the feeling is the Tories win by default because the other votes will be split.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> So Johnson is aiming for an election on December 12th, but the SNP and LibDems want to preempt him and have one on December 9th (a Monday  ) instead?
> 
> That will show him...


Anyone who has worked on a Monday knows why a Monday election would be a really bad idea


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> I don't get why the prevailing logic is that the Tories will win an election...



Only one of two people are likely to be PM, the most recent recent approval ratings puts Johnson on -1, and Corbyn on -36.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> So Johnson is aiming for an election on December 12th, but the SNP and LibDems want to preempt him and have one on December 9th (a Monday  ) instead?
> 
> That will show him...


I don’t like Mondays.


----------



## FiFi (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t like Mondays.


No one really does, so have the bloody election and get it over with. The sooner we start a new Tory government, the sooner we can start trying to vote it out again.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

The *purpose* of having the election before Dec 12th is to remove the possibility of Johnson being able to get his deal through before that.

I still think there's a strong chance that will actually play into his hands by supporting his "this parliament is simply blocking Brexit by various procedural measures; give me a proper parliamentary majority and I'll get it sorted" theme.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Only one of two people are likely to be PM, the most recent recent approval ratings puts Johnson on -1, and Corbyn on -36.


Tbh if Corbyn made two changes, making the Labour policy on brexit clearer and reducing the amount of contradiction between senior Labour politicians, then while his personal rating might not greatly change the Labour poll ratings might rather improve


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> The *purpose* of having the election before Dec 12th is to remove the possibility of Johnson being able to get his deal through before that.
> 
> I still think there's a strong chance that will actually play into his hands by supporting his "this parliament is simply blocking Brexit by various procedural measures; give me a proper parliamentary majority and I'll get it sorted" theme.


He couldn't sort a deck of cards


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Tbh if Corbyn made two changes, making the Labour policy on brexit clearer and reducing the amount of contradiction between senior Labour politicians, then while his personal rating might not greatly change the Labour poll ratings might rather improve



Can you give an example of a possible clarification that would achieve this and who it would appeal to? And then who it would upset?

Unfortunately I don’t think Labour’s policy speaks to either cohort driving the debate. Its idea that its policy is a unifying position is perfectly reasonable, laudable even other than it doesn’t appear to appeal to very many. The noisy ones on either side all want red meat.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can you give an example of a possible clarification that would achieve this and who it would appeal to? And then who it would upset?
> 
> Unfortunately I don’t think Labour’s policy speaks to either cohort driving the debate. Its idea that its policy is a unifying position is perfectly reasonable, laudable even other than it doesn’t appear to appeal to very many. The noisy ones on either side all want red meat.


Yes


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Yes



Phew. That’s a relief.

I’m a bit busy, but if you could let Comrade Corbo know we’d all be grateful.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Phew. That’s a relief.
> 
> I’m a bit busy, but if you could let Comrade Corbo know we’d all be grateful.


Not a lot of people know this but he used to post here till he got banned


----------



## gosub (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Not a lot of people know this but he used to post here till he got banned


Not in politics he didn't.  But the arguments about jam making in suburban were something else


----------



## steeplejack (Oct 27, 2019)

Think Corbyn ended up on Turbo Island after all that suburban tomfoolery.


----------



## gosub (Oct 27, 2019)

steeplejack said:


> Think Corbyn ended up on Turbo Island after all that suburban tomfoolery.


The practicalities of his hobnob redistribution scheme were unworkable anyway


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t like Mondays.



I want to shoot the whole day the whole rotten parliamentary democracy system and all the so-called representatives down


----------



## xenon (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> I don't get why the prevailing logic is that the Tories will win an election. They got the Brexit bill passed then when asked for more time for the legislation have called an election. They've blocked Brexit themselves. It's not a winning strategy IMHO.



Cos loads of cunts will still vote for them. They'd never vote labour or Libdem, obviously. UKIP are a joke and the Brexit Party are too much of a gamble / not standing in their constituency.


----------



## The39thStep (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Anyone who has worked on a Monday knows why a Monday election would be a really bad idea


isnt this something to do with students voting before they fuck off for more holidays?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

The39thStep said:


> isnt this something to do with students voting before they fuck off for more holidays?


It's more to do with all the things that go wrong at work on mondays


----------



## maomao (Oct 27, 2019)

Elections are always on Thursdays in this country. I could understand asking for a weekend election as it might get a higher turnout but don't see the point of a Monday election other than to disagree with Labour and the vermin without getting closer to Chrimble.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

The Tories position is completely and obviously stupid.

Tory: "It's the people against parliament!"

Everyone Else: "Parliament voted for the deal, but since you want an election let us say how we'd run the country better"

It's the simplest of responses. I also wouldn't underestimate people's anger at what they might deem another unnecessary election. "The deal passed, why did you call an election?" How do they counter that?


----------



## gosub (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> The Tories position is completely and obviously stupid.
> 
> Tory: "It's the people against parliament!"
> 
> ...


The principle of a deal passed. The timetable for scrutiny of the deal didn't  (reasonably understanbly)


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> The principle of a deal passed. The timetable for scrutiny of the deal didn't  (reasonably understanbly)


I know and calling an election delays things even more. It's a daft position.


----------



## gosub (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> I know and calling an election delays things even more. It's a daft position.


They won't get another extension  (beyond a short technical one) without the justification of some sort of plebiscite


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> They won't get another extension  (beyond a short technical one) without the justification of some sort of plebiscite


They don't want a long extension. Again, it's a stupid position. They're flailing about but we're meant to believe in a landslide.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

gosub said:


> They won't get another extension  (beyond a short technical one) without the justification of some sort of plebiscite



What do you base that on? Everything I've read suggests that the EU don't want to do *anything* which could be seen as interfering in the UK's internal political and decision making processes


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> I know and calling an election delays things even more. It's a daft position.


It’s not a daft position in the constituency it’s intended for: “this Parliament is using procedural tactics to delay and frustrate Brexit. We need a new Parliament”. It makes perfect sense.

And at 40% in the polls, it’s worth a punt.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s not a daft position in the constituency it’s intended for: “this Parliament is using procedural tactics to delay and frustrate Brexit. We need a new Parliament”. It makes perfect sense.
> 
> And at 40% in the polls, it’s worth a punt.


Had the deal not passed that'd be spot on but it did so I feel that he opposition have an easy counter. Perhaps that's all too simplistic but sometimes a simplistic message is all that's necessary.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> Had the deal not passed that'd be spot on but it did so I feel that he opposition have an easy counter. Perhaps that's all too simplistic but sometimes a simplistic message is all that's necessary.


But ask anyone why the deal’s not going through.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> But ask anyone why the deal’s not going through.


Because an election has been called instead.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> Because an election has been called instead.


Ask other people.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> Had the deal not passed that'd be spot on but it did so I feel that he opposition have an easy counter. Perhaps that's all too simplistic but sometimes a simplistic message is all that's necessary.


But the deal hasn't properly passed, it's effectively been blocked by what danny correctly describes as procedural tactics. 

Johnson has offered another opportunity to vote it through or vote it down next week, and this new SNP/LibDem ploy seeks to block it again.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Ask other people.


They're all out.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

andysays said:


> But the deal hasn't properly passed, it's effectively been blocked by what danny correctly describes as procedural tactics.
> 
> Johnson has offered another opportunity to vote it through or vote it down next week, and this new SNP/LibDem ploy seeks to block it again.


It's not been blocked. They voted for more time to do it properly. An election throws it all up in the air again.

I think the Tories lose if an election happens. Their message is garbage.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> I think the Tories lose if an election happens. Their message is garbage.



Clearly Labour thinks otherwise, hence they are shitting themselves about a election.


----------



## andysays (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> It's not been blocked. They voted for more time to do it properly. An election throws it all up in the air again.
> 
> I think the Tories lose if an election happens. Their message is garbage.


Parliament voted the Letwin bill, which purports to give more time to do it properly, though some who supported it undoubtedly want to block it altogether.

But this current SNP/LibDem plan for an election on Dec 9th is *explicitly* aimed at making it impossible to debate and decide on the Johnson deal


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Clearly Labour thinks otherwise, hence they are shitting themselves about a election.


Perhaps, but in a way it's kinda nicely setup for the opposition. If an election was forced by a VONC then the Tories have a simple message about Parliament blocking things, but they're calling it themselves so they've fucked the message.


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> Perhaps, but in a way it's kinda nicely setup for the opposition. If an election was forced by a VONC then the Tories have a simple message about Parliament blocking things, but they're calling it themselves so they've fucked the message.



Just because you and a sizeable bunch of others see through a message doesnt mean its fucked. You are not the intended audience.


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

elbows said:


> Just because you and a sizeable bunch of others see through a message doesnt mean its fucked. You are not the intended audience.


My argument is that it's easily countered in an election campaign. Really easily. Perhaps I'm wrong but I hope not.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 27, 2019)

I think we are now at the point where there's _almost_ no way to lose for Johnson.  He'll get brexit and he'll get 5 more years. And at this point, even if they got their act together,  there's no way to win for labour .  This isn't something that can be turned round with a good election campaign.


----------



## Weller (Oct 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> This isn't something that can be turned round with a good election campaign.



I think you vastly underestimate what can and often does go wrong or indeed right when the polls say otherwise to swing things in any election campaign or referendum these days 
If anything the last 3 years or few months have shown me that much and we are in unknown territory for many reasons including real data and facts , figures as well as fuck ups all spread and available extremely quickly on the internet
Some including Corbyn are better campaigners than others especially if they can be bothered to campaign  or turn up and be able to speak to the public or debate on TV in the first place as May wouldnt or turn up anywhere without putting a  foot in it , lying or slagging off potential voters on camera etc

anything can happen and a week is a small time in politics even  in normal circumstances plus it helps if you have a good campaigning army of energetic agents and knowledgeable , likeable dedicated members to go out canvasing locally for free something the Tories are still severely lacking

"that stupid bigoted Rochdale pensioner" Corbyn is a better speaker when out and about and election campaigner than that even if he leaves his microphone on but Boris could easily piss off many of his followers realty quickly either with ill thought out policy or antics on camera imho
anything can happen yet many have said many times that Corbyn is hopeless and finished and only good for jam making or a russian spy or terrorist etc a lot of that shite didnt work last time either its also already thrown old political shit the stuff that many are fed up with and now see as false hes very good in campaign mode with lots of energy as he has shown before

Who knows what stupidity buffoonery or lies Boris can come out with next thats funny to many when not going for 5 years prime ministers job of getting things done  but I do know some  who believed in him for a long time to be worthy   but now want the bumbling bullshitting clown to either deliver on his promise of brexit or die in a ditch else  they will punish him by voting elsewhere

I think there is plenty of time for the polls to change not that I take much notice yet


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I think we are now at the point where there's _almost_ no way to lose for Johnson.  He'll get brexit and he'll get 5 more years. And at this point, even if they got their act together,  there's no way to win for labour .  This isn't something that can be turned round with a good election campaign.



I dont know, its an election where I will fear the tories romping home, but thats only one of a number of possibilities, I dont take it as a given.

If the electorate were a single collective brain, its easy to imagine the 'just get on with it, give someone the big numbers they need for a workable majority' attitude prevailing. But that sentiment may have no way of actually leading to that result in the election. I dont know, there are so many ways that the splitting of various votes could happen in places where it matters, or not. It could be an election where little is actually settled, where any winners dont win big enough. I'm not predicting this, but there is no way I could rule it out either, not with the way elections have gone in the last decade.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

The tories haven't really romped home since 1987


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 27, 2019)

magneze said:


> My argument is that it's easily countered in an election campaign. Really easily. Perhaps I'm wrong but I hope not.


It can easily be answered, but will the answer be to any avail? My bet is no.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I think we are now at the point where there's _almost_ no way to lose for Johnson.  He'll get brexit and he'll get 5 more years. And at this point, even if they got their act together,  there's no way to win for labour .  This isn't something that can be turned round with a good election campaign.


I'd like to see Johnson get five years


----------



## brogdale (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> I'd like to see Johnson get five years


More than enough; that Southern hemispheric bridge-building should take it toll long before the sentence expires.


----------



## treelover (Oct 27, 2019)

Sajid Javid has only added to Brexit turmoil by delaying the budget | Richard Partington
*Sajid Javid's budget delay only adds to the turmoil over Brexit *

apparently no budget speech on 6th November

shambles continues.


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> The tories haven't really romped home since 1987



Yeah that influences my thinking. It means I wont take confident tory predictions seriously unless and until they actually come true. But I also try to psychologically prepare myself should such a day ever come, shock is not a reaction I want on top of the other horrors.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s not a daft position in the constituency it’s intended for: “this Parliament is using procedural tactics to delay and frustrate Brexit. We need a new Parliament”. It makes perfect sense.
> 
> And at 40% in the polls, it’s worth a punt.


40% in the polls sounds good

But it's not really going to go higher, there's no way it'll rise to 45 or 50%

And if it goes down, as it almost certainly will over the course of an election campaign, the tories look weak. By contrast the Labour rating isn't going to go down much if at all and is much more likely to improve, making them look by comparison stronger than the tories - they'd be winning the argument while the tories' are shedding support.

So I don't buy the it's all over bar the counting surrender talk here, it's going to be much closer and throughout the campaign you can be sure that previous promises Johnson's made on the campaign trail will come back to haunt him


----------



## magneze (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It can easily be answered, but will the answer be to any avail? My bet is no.


I'm not convinced. Then again, I'm not a dog.


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2019)

brogdale said:


> More than enough; that Southern hemispheric bridge-building should take it toll long before the sentence expires.



Many commented that his offer to literally be used as part of the bridge was the most useful thing he ever did. Leading to the traditional folk song that is sung when using the bridge. 

Every day we drive fast and pray that he is more strong and stable than May.


----------



## treelover (Oct 27, 2019)

Weller said:


> I think you vastly underestimate what can and often does go wrong or indeed right when the polls say otherwise to swing things in any election campaign or referendum these days
> If anything the last 3 years or few months have shown me that much and we are in unknown territory for many reasons including real data and facts , figures as well as fuck ups all spread and available extremely quickly on the internet
> Some including Corbyn are better campaigners than others especially if they can be bothered to campaign  or turn up and be able to speak to the public or debate on TV in the first place as May wouldnt or turn up anywhere without putting a  foot in it , lying or slagging off potential voters on camera etc
> 
> ...



Labour sacked quite a lot of officials recently, or they just left, plus the Momentum youth are just not there in the same numbers anymore, I have been amazed at Corbyn and co calling for an election for so long..


----------



## belboid (Oct 27, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour sacked quite a lot of officials recently,


No they didn't.  Why do you keep making stuff up?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour sacked quite a lot of officials recently, or they just left, plus the Momentum youth are just not there in the same numbers anynore, I have been amazed at Corbyn and co calling for an election for so long..


There's a difference between labour sacking lots of people and lots of people leaving. Perhaps you could decide which it is.


----------



## treelover (Oct 27, 2019)

belboid said:


> No they didn't.  Why do you keep making stuff up?





> Many of the senior officials responsible for Labour’s effort during the 2017 campaign have been purged from party headquarters or paid off. I hear that some are now being sounded out about coming back, such are the fears that Labour is not in a fit state to fight a campaign.
> 
> Turkeys won’t vote for Christmas when the polls are telling them they’ll be stuffed | Andrew Rawnsley



OK, Rawnsley/Observer fake news.


----------



## Weller (Oct 27, 2019)

treelover said:


> Labour sacked quite a lot of officials recently, or they just left, plus the Momentum youth are just not there in the same numbers anymore, I have been amazed at Corbyn and co calling for an election for so long..


Really dont see that here I do know some youth that stopped the membership contributions because of needing funds elsewhere etc but  many see the sacking of anyone or leaving that were against the party at the top  during a critical time etc as the right decision and will be campaigning again or for the first time too , very clued up youth now too
Even if it were true they were leaving or many sackings or now non believers  there are still many young and old ready and willing as they did last time to go out in all weathers , many more than the Tories and for certain Momentum youth or otherwise labour canvassers wont be switching to campaigning for Boris Swinson or Fromage instead


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

elbows said:


> Many commented that his offer to literally be used as part of the bridge was the most useful thing he ever did. Leading to the traditional folk song that is sung when using the bridge.
> 
> Every day we drive fast and pray that he is more strong and stable than May.


When I spoke to the project team overseeing the construction of the south atlantic projects they told me they were looking forward to drawing on Johnson's experience with the garden bridge


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 27, 2019)

Weller said:


> Really dont see that here I do know some youth that stopped the membership contributions because of needing funds elsewhere etc but  many see the sacking of anyone or leaving that were against the party at the top  during a critical time etc as the right decision and will be campaigning again or for the first time too , very clued up youth now too
> Even if it were true they were leaving or now non believers  there are still many young and old ready and willing as they did last time to go out in all weathers , many more than the Tories and for certain Momentum youth or otherwise wont be switching to campaigning for Boris Swinson or Fromage instead


Treelover is notorious for his dislike of anything socialist


----------



## Weller (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Treelover is notorious for his dislike of anything socialist


Well at least he still likes trees or maybe he doesn't things are very confusing at the moment for me what any ism stands for or really wants or is angry about but I like trees 

there seems to be a lot of unknowns at the moment about all sorts of stuff some dont even know what they are angry about or what they are most looking forward too in a Brexit or have forgotten what they wanted or voted for any more 

a good labour election campaign may change that and remind people about real issues not being sorted but I strongly suspect that the polls are wrong anyway and many people are now more clued up and will be extremely angry about the right stuff ,  will remember all Mays promises coming to nothing they may just  see Boris as the same if he fails on oct 31st to either deliver the  brexit they expected or instead die in a ditch
I think people are fed up of broken promises 
The full exposure of this  "new brexit deal" may change polls  a lot too most leavers I know wanted May out because her deal was so bad if the only one now is worse and is being forced through or even does not happen again and he doesnt throw himself in a ditch who knows , hes certainly done stupider things than land in a ditch and have Gove save him though , so who knows what more risky plans he has


----------



## treelover (Oct 27, 2019)

treelover said:


> OK, Rawnsley/Observer fake news.




anyone?


----------



## elbows (Oct 27, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When I spoke to the project team overseeing the construction of the south atlantic projects they told me they were looking forward to drawing on Johnson's experience with the garden bridge



It was nice of them to offer him the chance to have his death ditch be part of the new bridge, since he was gutted that its previous home on the garden bridge never came to be.


----------



## Ted Striker (Oct 27, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Can you give an example of a possible clarification that would achieve this



Preface every mention of it with "Look, we've been perfectly clear..."


----------



## Ming (Oct 27, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> I don’t like Mondays.


Tell me why?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 27, 2019)

Weller said:


> I think you vastly underestimate what can and often does go wrong or indeed right when the polls say otherwise to swing things in any election campaign or referendum these days
> If anything the last 3 years or few months have shown me that much and we are in unknown territory for many reasons including real data and facts , figures as well as fuck ups all spread and available extremely quickly on the internet
> Some including Corbyn are better campaigners than others especially if they can be bothered to campaign  or turn up and be able to speak to the public or debate on TV in the first place as May wouldnt or turn up anywhere without putting a  foot in it , lying or slagging off potential voters on camera etc
> 
> ...


I agree there's time for the polls to change, but we need _reasons _for them to change. As with any campaign, things can happen, events dear boy and all that. But what is the political momentum or set of ideas that turn everything on their head? This isn't purely a brexit election, but labour have lost enough people on brexit (both leavers and remainers) to make this a fight they can't win. Oh, and the final bit is that they haven't actually been doing any fighting for the last 18 months.


----------



## Ming (Oct 28, 2019)

One of the things i find fascinating about big stuff like this is how normalised it becomes. Like it's an accident like the weather.
ETA:  How it's perceived sometimes. Like it's dumb nuts Tories going mental.


----------



## Smangus (Oct 28, 2019)

The longer it goes before an election the better for Labour I reckon, leave Cunty chops flailing about unable to achieve anything and he willbjust piss people off.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I agree there's time for the polls to change, but we need _reasons _for them to change. As with any campaign, things can happen, events dear boy and all that. But what is the political momentum or set of ideas that turn everything on their head? This isn't purely a brexit election, but labour have lost enough people on brexit (both leavers and remainers) to make this a fight they can't win. Oh, and the final bit is that they haven't actually been doing any fighting for the last 18 months.



what's really beginning to piss me off is the 'oh the tories have this in the bag' which after 2017 you'd have thought would have been humanely smothered by now, or at least put to bed.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> what's really beginning to piss me off is the 'oh the tories have this in the bag' which after 2017 you'd have thought would have been humanely smothered by now, or at least put to bed.



It’s not that unhelpful if it leads to the same kind of arrogance/complacency by the tories as in 2017. They were so confident they even thought they could get away with putting repeal of anti-hunting legislation in the manifesto. Sadly I don’t think they’ll be so stupid this time.


----------



## andysays (Oct 28, 2019)

Extension to Jan 31st


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> It’s not that unhelpful if it leads to the same kind of arrogance/complacency by the tories as in 2017. They were so confident they even thought they could get away with putting repeal of anti-hunting legislation in the manifesto. Sadly I don’t think they’ll be so stupid this time.


sadly i don't think that what's posted on u75 is going to have that sort of impact on the tories


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Extension to Jan 31st


3 wasted months await

but i've been proven right that the uk would be in the eu on 1/11/19


----------



## teuchter (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 3 wasted months await
> 
> but i've been proven right that the uk would be in the eu on 1/11/19



Not yet, as it is a flextension.


----------



## andysays (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> 3 wasted months await
> 
> but i've been proven right that the uk would be in the eu on 1/11/19


Don't speak too soon, Johnson could still get his deal through before Thursday...

...he won't,  but he could, in theory


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Not yet, as it is a flextension.


it is 28 october today. there is no chance the deal will be through parliament before the end of this week.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Oct 28, 2019)

Well whatever else happens, we're looking good for being able to laugh at the bloke with the tattoo.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it is 28 october today. there is no chance the deal will be through parliament before the end of this week.


In any case you also said we would still be in on the 1/11/20 so you are not off the hook yet.


----------



## andysays (Oct 28, 2019)

Interesting that a decision like this was apparently announced by Donald Tusk tweeting it


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

teuchter said:


> In any case you also said we would still be in on the 1/11/20 so you are not off the hook yet.


do you mean to appear devoid of intelligence?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)

Will be some red faces today


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Will be some red faces today


At least we'll have a new name for Oct 30th (this Wednesday)..._DoOrDieEve _or, in some parts of the realm, _DitchingEve._


----------



## kabbes (Oct 28, 2019)

How much is it that Ming is currently in hock to the server fund for?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

Next extension; June(ish) or the full 1/2 years?


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 28, 2019)

I don’t suppose there is any likelihood of the Ditch scenario coming about?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

November 1st...or _The feast of stockpile _as it will henceforth be known.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> November 1st...or _The feast of stockpile _as it will henceforth be known.


Like a harvest festival of fail


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)




----------



## ska invita (Oct 28, 2019)

Can someone explain what those Lib Dem genius Brexit stoppers hope to gain by gifting Bojo this election?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Can someone explain what those Lib Dem genius Brexit stoppers hope to gain by gifting Bojo this election?


----------



## MrCurry (Oct 28, 2019)

Someone at the highways agency still seems to believe a no-deal exit on 31st Oct remains on the cards. 

No-deal Brexit motorway plan operational

I’m sure all those lorry drivers trundling along at 30mph are feeling well disposed towards this over caution.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> anyone?


Apparently not. You'll have to do your own homework


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Apparently not. You'll have to do your own homework


that's the last we'll hear of that then


----------



## andysays (Oct 28, 2019)

The People's Vote campaign have chosen a great time for a rather public and acrimonious bust up.


----------



## philosophical (Oct 28, 2019)

Visiting in the West of Ireland at the moment the vibe I get is the whole thing is a bemused nightmare, that nationalists are poised to...err...'react' to events if they happen, and the whole mess is down to the old adversaries who are the privileged mainly English  establishment selfish reactionary cunts. (Actually eejits, I have taken the liberty of translating the sentiment).


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> The People's Vote campaign have chosen a great time for a rather public and acrimonious bust up.


everyone thought they'd wound up so they needed to prove they were still about


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Visiting in the West of Ireland at the moment the vibe I get is the whole thing is a bemused nightmare, that nationalists are poised to...err...'react' to events if they happen, and the whole mess is down to the old adversaries who are the privileged mainly English  establishment selfish reactionary cunts. (Actually eejits, I have taken the liberty of translating the sentiment).



Did they say anything about the border?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Did they say anything about the border?


i suppose they've hosted him before so knew better than to trigger his bugbear


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> The People's Vote campaign have chosen a great time for a rather public and acrimonious bust up.



Has split into two bitterly opposed groups, the People’s Popular Vote Front and the People’s Front for a Popular Vote.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Someone at the highways agency still seems to believe a no-deal exit on 31st Oct remains on the cards.
> 
> No-deal Brexit motorway plan operational
> 
> I’m sure all those lorry drivers trundling along at 30mph are feeling well disposed towards this over caution.



Drove to Devon on Saturday and then multi-gazillion £ signs on the motorways were warning that we need to sort our docs out if heading to the continent. This is Johnson all over, say it enough times and hope it becomes true.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> How much is it that Ming is currently in hock to the server fund for?



Good point - Ming has me on ignore so can someone please remind him that he has lost his bet to me - again - and he owes the server fund £20? 

Also maybe ask him if he knows why all those omnipotent hedge fund types have suddenly gone off a no deal Brexit on 31st October, cos I'm confused man. Maybe he has a breathless-but-informative youtube video that can help us all understand?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

Ming SpackleFrog would like you to be reminded you have it seems lost your bet with him and he says you owe the server fund £20


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Oct 28, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Good point - Ming has me on ignore so can someone please remind him that he has lost his bet to me - again - and he owes the server fund £20?
> 
> Also maybe ask him if he knows why all those omnipotent hedge fund types have suddenly gone off a no deal Brexit on 31st October, cos I'm confused man. Maybe he has a breathless-but-informative youtube video that can help us all understand?



The hedge-fund wallahs are making more cash shorting Ming than they could ever hope to out of Brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 28, 2019)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> The hedge-fund wallahs are making more cash shorting Ming than they could ever hope to out of Brexit.



Excellent use of 'wallahs'


----------



## Weller (Oct 28, 2019)

Thought this had some interesting points about polls and seats etc 



> * The polls may seem dismal. But here’s how Labour could win a general election *
> Tom Kibasi



The polls may seem dismal. But here’s how Labour could win a general election | Tom Kibasi


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Can someone explain what those Lib Dem genius Brexit stoppers hope to gain by gifting Bojo this election?


They'll probably gain a few seats if they poll anything like the numbers they've got at the moment, but that's about it. Looks like they may well prefer that to actually stopping brexit. On that, the only way they can get to anything like a second ref or even 'bollocks to brexit', is with labour doing well which is a problem. It looks like pure positioning but with the added extra that this positioning may actually lead to an election.


----------



## elbows (Oct 28, 2019)

BBC points out what a failure Johnson is.



> For the PM, there is a risk of calling an election without Brexit being resolved, as he may be punished for it at the ballot box.
> 
> So, while it buys more time, it also creates an element of uncertainty for the prime minister.
> 
> He will now campaign for an election in the knowledge that he has failed in his signature policy which he campaigned for in the Conservative leadership election.



EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January


----------



## treelover (Oct 28, 2019)

Awful to think that milllions will vote for him, and his party, and that he could win

and of course the yellow liars will be waiting in the wings.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

Haven't really been arsed following all this shit over today and last few days. So libdems will support tory plans for GE, is that about sum of it?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Haven't really been arsed following all this shit over today and last few days. So libdems will support tory plans for GE, is that about sum of it?



Yes, both them & the SNP.


----------



## Ming (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Ming SpackleFrog would like you to be reminded you have it seems lost your bet with him and he says you owe the server fund £20


I will on the 31st.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Yes, both them & the SNP.


Yellow cunts, all yellow cunts.

Although tbh I want a GE, fuck it in for a penny


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2019)

Labour are being totally shit and week about this. But it's still quite funny that Cameron created this beast  in an attempt to slay once and for all internal enemies. And the monster has devoured 2 Tory PMs and damaged a third.


----------



## andysays (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Haven't really been arsed following all this shit over today and last few days. So libdems will support tory plans for GE, is that about sum of it?


Certainly not. The LibDems would never *dream* of supporting Tory plans for a GE on Dec 12th 

They and the SNP are pushing for a completely different thing, a GE on Dec 9th...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 28, 2019)

Monkeygrinder's Organ said:


> Well whatever else happens, we're looking good for being able to laugh at the bloke with the tattoo.


I suppose October and January have one letter in common. It's a starting point for the tattoo fixers. Pity he didn't predict NovEMBER and end up with DecEMBER, much less painful. In fact if he'd thought we'd been out early Summer and Mrs May had got us out a few weeks later he could have gone from JUne to JUly - could have even pretended it was a birthmark.


----------



## Flavour (Oct 28, 2019)

Has Macron finished his stompy veto dance now then?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


>




Desperate stuff from McDonnell. Not only is a Lib-Tory pact impossible because of Brexit, but what exactly is the point of top down parliamentarianism if it’s not to gain power? I used to have some respect for McDonnell but he needs to do a _lot _better than this


----------



## philosophical (Oct 28, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i suppose they've hosted him before so knew better than to trigger his bugbear


They?


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I used to have some respect for McDonnell but he needs to do a _lot _better than this


Compared to who?


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 28, 2019)

Flavour said:


> Has Macron finished his stompy veto dance now then?


Macron was just playing his bad cop role, no way was he really going to veto it.
It shows what a farce this has become that British politicians were hoping a French one would deliver what they want.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Compared to who?



The rest of the dribble that is the PLP.


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The rest of the dribble that is the PLP.


Pfft


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Desperate stuff from McDonnell. Not only is a Lib-Tory pact impossible because of Brexit, but what exactly is the point of top down parliamentarianism if it’s not to gain power? I used to have some respect for McDonnell but he needs to do a _lot _better than this



Yes, because it’s not like the Libs to sell out the voters on something they more or less swore on their mother’s lives to oppose, for a brief whiff of influence is it?


----------



## Raheem (Oct 28, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Macron was just playing his bad cop role, no way was he really going to veto it.
> It shows what a farce this has become that British politicians were hoping a French one would deliver what they want.


Instead he delivered what they asked for.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Oct 28, 2019)

Can somebody explain to me what labour’s plan is if it doesn’t back an election now the 3-month extension has been confirmed? No election = Johnson able to ram through his shitty brexit deal surely and then head to the polls triumphant?


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 28, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Can somebody explain to me what labour’s plan is if it doesn’t back an election now the 3-month extension has been confirmed? No election = Johnson able to ram through his shitty brexit deal surely?



I don’t think even Labour know what their plan is.

Diane Abbott suffers car-crash interview as Marr mocks Labour’s ‘bizarre’ Brexit strategy


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Can somebody explain to me what labour’s plan is if it doesn’t back an election now the 3-month extension has been confirmed? No election = Johnson able to ram through his shitty brexit deal surely?



Presumably if no election, Johnson will bring the agreement back before parliament, where it will get debated, amended, etc, etc and probably fail to pass the next stage, causing a further extention to be requested in January.

The fun never ends.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Oct 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> They?


While I don't wish to speak for Pickman's model I think by 'they' he presumably means the people in Western Ireland whose views on Brexit you were relaying. 

If you get confused like this again and can't remember the contents of your own posts, just click the little arrows on the quotes and you can revisit the conversation.

Did they mention the border though? You've not actually answered my question.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Oct 28, 2019)

xenon said:


> Presumably if no election, Johnson will bring the agreement back before parliament, where it will get debated, amended, etc, etc and probably fail to pass the next stage, causing a further extention to be requested in January.
> 
> The fun never ends.


Even if that happened and his deal didn’t get through (though I think it might) - that would just mean an election in February? Or EU refusing an extension and no deal.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 28, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Can somebody explain to me what labour’s plan is if it doesn’t back an election now the 3-month extension has been confirmed? No election = Johnson able to ram through his shitty brexit deal surely?



Not even those at the top of the Labour party can explain their position.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Yes, because it’s not like the Libs to sell out the voters on something they more or less swore on their mother’s lives to oppose, for a brief whiff of influence is it?



This isn't about the Lib-Dems, although it would be fucking brilliant if they became pro-leave just for the resultant middle class outrage, but alas I can't see it. It's about the hole that Labour has dug for itself, which some of us have warned about repeatedly, which McDonnell's useless tweet suggests has finally dawned on them.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 28, 2019)

elbows said:


> BBC points out what a failure Johnson is.
> 
> 
> 
> EU agrees Brexit extension to 31 January



No doubt Boris’s campaign will have the clear message of ‘People Vs Parliament’.


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2019)

fakeplasticgirl said:


> Even if that happened and his deal didn’t get through (though I think it might) - that would just mean an election in February? Or EU refusing an extension and no deal.



Yeah probably. The only thing that's changed is there's another deal to be scrutinised. It's like half a step forward from where we were 6 months ago.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> No doubt Boris’s campaign will have the clear message of ‘People Vs Parliament’.


Clear to the point at which it's revealed that he is a member of Parliament.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 28, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Clear to the point at which it's revealed that he is a member of Parliament.


----------



## fakeplasticgirl (Oct 28, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Can someone explain what those Lib Dem genius Brexit stoppers hope to gain by gifting Bojo this election?


What’s the alternative though? No election, BoZo manages to ram through his “deal”, and an election is called a bit later with bozo triumphant having “delivered brexit”.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> They?


Yes, they


----------



## existentialist (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> The rest of the dribble that is the PLP.


Oh look! Your agenda just peeked out!


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


>


Who has twice voted against a Brexit deal.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 28, 2019)

Quite a sizeable sample (2433):


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This isn't about the Lib-Dems, although it would be fucking brilliant if they became pro-leave just for the resultant middle class outrage, but alas I can't see it. It's about the hole that Labour has dug for itself, which some of us have warned about repeatedly, which McDonnell's useless tweet suggests has finally dawned on them.



Did you really warn about it in a way that would have protected its voter share?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> They?


If you are going to take someone to task for using a term you should address your concerns to the first person to use it, if you don't want to appear a fuckwit


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh look! Your agenda just peeked out!


What agenda? What are you implying here?


----------



## treelover (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> This isn't about the Lib-Dems, although it would be fucking brilliant if they became pro-leave just for the resultant middle class outrage, but alas I can't see it. It's about the hole that Labour has dug for itself, which some of us have warned about repeatedly, which McDonnell's useless tweet suggests has finally dawned on them.




So, what should Labour have done?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Did you really warn about it in a way that would have protected its voter share?



I’ve been pointing out since the GE that the task for Labour was to build on its manifesto commitment on Brexit and to flesh this out with both a political explanation and _political, economic and social _ideas around what leave could look like. Alongside this I’ve argued for the need for a mass mobilisation of 500,000 members into working class communities and workplaces to explain it and win support for it.

ETA: However, at this point, even a coherent remain and reform argument would have been preferable to the execrable dogs dinner of a position they’ve collapsed into


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)

> After accepting #brexit extension Boris Johnson has paused the government’s Get Ready for Brexit on 31 October public information campaign


Should save us a few quid


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> So, what should Labour have done?



I refer you to my last post


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh look! Your agenda just peeked out!



Care you spell out what you mean so I can engage with it?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ve been pointing out since the GE that the task for Labour was to build on its manifesto commitment on Brexit and to flesh this out with both a political explanation and _political, economic and social _ideas around what leave could look like. Alongside this I’ve argued for the need for a mass mobilisation of 500,000 members into working class communities and workplaces to explain it and win support for it.
> 
> ETA: However, at this point, even a coherent remain and reform argument would have been preferable to the execrable dogs dinner of a position they’ve collapsed into



It was never going to be possible to get 500k members to sell what 400k+ never believed in.


----------



## existentialist (Oct 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> What agenda? What are you implying here?


Oh, nothing.


----------



## TopCat (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I’ve been pointing out since the GE that the task for Labour was to build on its manifesto commitment on Brexit and to flesh this out with both a political explanation and _political, economic and social _ideas around what leave could look like. Alongside this I’ve argued for the need for a mass mobilisation of 500,000 members into working class communities and workplaces to explain it and win support for it.
> 
> ETA: However, at this point, even a coherent remain and reform argument would have been preferable to the execrable dogs dinner of a position they’ve collapsed into


There is a strange whiff to this.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh, nothing.



Right. Well done then.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> It was never going to be possible to get 500k members to sell what 400k+ never believed in.



You wouldn’t need to. Even 10,000 could have made a massive impact. Instead the entire strategy has been reactive and contracted out to the Blairite Starmer.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh, nothing.


Come on, you are clearly implying something. It's pretty shitty to make a comment like that and then refuse to explain (or justify) it.

I don't know if you meant to imply that Smokeandsteam is some sort of right winger but your post certainly _could_ be interpreted in that way.
And that is total nonsense, you might disagree with S&S's criticism of the LP, of his support for leaving the EU but they are clearly and explicitly based around a socialist politics. I don't agree with all of his criticisms/positions but he's criticised the LP is _from the left_.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Come on, you are clearly implying something. It's pretty shitty to make a comment like that and then refuse to explain (or justify) it.
> 
> I don't know if you meant to imply that Smokeandsteam is some sort of right winger but your post certainly could be interpreted in that way.
> And that is total nonsense, you might disagree with S&S's criticism of the LP, of his support for leaving the EU but they are clearly and explicitly based around a socialist politics. I don't agree with all of his criticisms/positions but he's criticised the LP is _from the left_.



Oh. Is that what they meant. Remainers bang on the money as ever


----------



## treelover (Oct 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I don’t think even Labour know what their plan is.
> 
> Diane Abbott suffers car-crash interview as Marr mocks Labour’s ‘bizarre’ Brexit strategy



the Express is very very hostile to Labour, not that I am defending her, don't know enough about what happened.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Oh, nothing.


That does read like “#InnocentFace”.

What do you think Smokeandsteam ’s agenda is? If you can imply it you can say it.


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Oh. Is that what they meant.


I'm genuinely unsure, existentialist could be imply that you have some ultra-left agenda. But I don't think it is an unreasonable possible interpretation of his post.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm genuinely unsure, existentialist could be imply that you have some ultra-left agenda. But I don't think it is an unreasonable possible interpretation of his post.



Whether it’s an ultra left, Blairite or Stalinist, it’s instructive that the attempt to undermine LeFT and those on the left who oppose the EU trading bloc has increasingly become about smears rather than the issue itself.

If existentialist or anyone else wants to come out and support Labour’s position then crack on and let’s debate it


----------



## existentialist (Oct 28, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> That does read like “#InnocentFace”.
> 
> What do you think Smokeandsteam ’s agenda is? If you can imply it you can say it.


Let's just say that I find all these protestations to tolerant views of people does tend to ring somewhat hollow against the pretty singleminded opinions that gets presented on this thread by them.

ETA: as evinced, in timely manner, by the somewhat binary viewpoint betrayed by the post above this.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Let's just say that I find all these protestations to tolerant views of people does tend to ring somewhat hollow against the pretty singleminded opinions that gets presented on this thread by them.
> 
> ETA: as evinced, in timely manner, by the somewhat binary viewpoint betrayed by the post above this.



‘Protestations to tolerant views’? I haven’t made any.

I’ve commented on the pathetic and craven position of Labour. You’ve suggested this reveals my true agenda. I’m asking you what you think this true agenda is....


----------



## Badgers (Oct 28, 2019)




----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper left wing politics:


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 28, 2019)

treelover said:


> don't know enough about what happened.


This is not unusual


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Proper left wing politics:



The country isn’t broken apart, he’s seeking a happy ending to the miserable  story these cunts have been writing themselves, with the help of a load of middle class wee brats who will apparently swallow anything meanwhile the rest of us just get on with it.  Fuck off.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Oct 28, 2019)

John McDonnell. The wettest fart of 2019.


----------



## Spandex (Oct 28, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> The country isn’t broken apart


tbf, the country is broken apart, but it's nothing to do with brexit and everything to do with 10 years of austerity.

Taking my kids to school we set out to find two smackheads shooting up in our front garden again. We walked past a dozen homeless people sleeping in boarded up shop doorways on the high street. We get to school to find they're collecting to raise money to save a SEN teacher's job.

A guy walks into the beauty supply wholesalers over the road. He picks up a £100 pair of barbers scissors and walks out knowing nothing will happen. The minimum wage shop staff look at him nervously but dont do a thing - they're not risking getting stabbed for £7.70ph, and he knows where they are if they make a fuss.

This shit didn't happen 10 years ago. The country is fucked, but all we hear about is fucking brexit


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 28, 2019)

existentialist said:


> Let's just say that I find all these protestations to tolerant views of people does tend to ring somewhat hollow against the pretty singleminded opinions that gets presented on this thread by them.
> 
> ETA: as evinced, in timely manner, by the somewhat binary viewpoint betrayed by the post above this.


I’m afraid I don’t quite follow that. You’re saying that Smokeandsteam is a critic of the Labour Party? I’ll put my hand up, too: I’m a critic of the Labour Party - its current leadership; its PLP; the New Labour sewer; and so on. I’d say I have an agenda too. Anarchist communism in my case.

Don’t we all?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

I don't think it's about labour, it's this one dimensional view that any criticism of anything perceived as a remain position is some sort of crypto toryism or something. I dunno, don't really get the dynamics, I think basically lots of remain type people have had their brains melted or something


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 28, 2019)

Reaction as PM loses 12 December election vote - BBC News


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't think it's about labour, it's this one dimensional view that any criticism of anything perceived as a remain position is some sort of crypto toryism or something. I dunno, don't really get the dynamics, I think basically lots of remain type people have had their brains melted or something



Works on the other side to

We vote for it... they lied to you

does not matter


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> Works on the other side to
> 
> We vote for it... they lied to you
> 
> does not matter


See this is what I mean. Nothing about my post was expressing a political position. Brains have melted.


----------



## Ax^ (Oct 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> See this is what I mean. Nothing about my post was expressing a political position. Brains have melted.



You said that some of the  remain  side has had its brains melted .. then i gave an example of why some of the other side of the argument heads have also been melted

when did i hint at you're political position


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2019)

There's brain mushy divs on all sides TBF. The duey eye'd EU flag waving you monsters have destroyed my children's future whiners.
The spittle flecked leave means leave, don't care about the consequences, screaming about trators loons.


----------



## xenon (Oct 28, 2019)

And actually I think we're relatively free of both those caracatures on here.


----------



## BristolEcho (Oct 28, 2019)

xenon said:


> There's brain mushy divs on all sides TBF. The duey eye'd EU flag waving you monsters have destroyed my children's future whiners.
> The spittle flecked leave means leave, don't care about the consequences, screaming about trators loons.



I think the majority of us are sick of the lot of them too.


----------



## Buckaroo (Oct 28, 2019)

BristolEcho said:


> I think the majority of us are sick of the lot of them too.


Sick to the death of it.

eta Class War.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 28, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> You said that some of the  remain  side has had its brains melted .. then i gave an example of why some of the other side of the argument heads have also been melted
> 
> when did i hint at you're political position


Fair enough, might have got wrong end of stick. Yeah I work with a mad brexiteer type who thinks any divergence from no deal leave and banning french cheese is a traitorous liberal so fair point


----------



## WouldBe (Oct 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> If existentialist or anyone else wants to come out and support Labour’s position then crack on and let’s debate it


It will be a bit hard considering labour don't actually have a position.


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 29, 2019)

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?



> Thousands of 50-pence coins minted to commemorate Brexit on Oct. 31 will be melted down after Prime Minister Boris Johnson accepted an extension from the European Union, two people familiar with the matter said.





> A spokesman for the Treasury said the U.K. will still produce a coin to mark its departure from the EU -- *whenever that takes place*.


----------



## Dogsauce (Oct 29, 2019)

Daft thing is he managed to get a deal that could get through parliament but fucked up the strategy (didn’t help by sacking numerous MPs from the party). But that doesn’t matter since getting Brexit sorted was never the priority, it was always about securing a bigger Tory majority and the resultant power to fuck people over.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 29, 2019)

UK to destroy limited edition coins after Brexit delay
*UK to destroy limited edition coins after Brexit delay*

"Limited edition Brexit 50p coins, dated 31 October 2019, are set to be shredded and melted down after the UK's departure from the EU was delayed by three months.
The special coins were originally designed to be minted in time for Britain leaving the trading bloc this Friday.
A HM Treasury Spokesman said: "We will still produce a coin to mark our departure from the European Union, and this will enter circulation after we have left."


----------



## teqniq (Oct 29, 2019)

On top of wasting large sums of money on an advertising campaign we now have this. How much more wasted money I wonder?


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> On top of wasting large sums of money on an advertising campaign we now have this. How much more wasted money I wonder?


And who's been making money out of all this? Advertisers, designers, consultants... It never happens for no reason.


----------



## newbie (Oct 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I don't think it's about labour, it's this one dimensional view that any criticism of anything perceived as a remain position is some sort of crypto toryism or something. I dunno, don't really get the dynamics, I think basically lots of remain type people have had their brains melted or something


Almost everybody has had their brains melted by this.

Does anyone remember all the way back to the 2015 GE, because that's when this hare started to run.  Before that, few people cared much about Europe. I still don't, fwiw.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

newbie said:


> Almost everybody has had their brains melted by this.
> 
> Does anyone remember all the way back to the 2015 GE, because that's when this hare started to run.  Before that, few people cared much about Europe. I still don't, fwiw.
> 
> View attachment 188474


Exactly. It's a crisis manufactured by the Tory party for its own advantage.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> And who's been making money out of all this? Advertisers, designers, consultants... It never happens for no reason.


...fraudulent ferry companies...


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Exactly. It's a crisis manufactured by the Tory party for its own advantage.



Well, I suppose that’s one theory.

My theory is simply politicians being incompetent.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Good for 13/01/20 ?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Well, I suppose that’s one theory.
> 
> My theory is simply politicians being incompetent.


Cameron's own auto-biog pretty much revealed it was his unwillingness to listen to Osborne that led us to where we are. He admits that he was advised not to put a referendum ahead of a new treaty and not make it in/out. Ignoring that advice he conjured up an expression of direct democracy that could never lead to any renegotiation, merely the confrontation with the supra state we've seen.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cameron's own auto-biog pretty much revealed it was his unwillingness to listen to Osborne that led us to where we are. He admits that he was advised not to put a referendum ahead of a new treaty and not make it in/out. Ignoring that advice he conjured up an expression of direct democracy that could never lead to any renegotiation, merely the confrontation with the supra state we've seen.


i hope you didn't pay for cameron's turgid tome


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i hope you didn't pay for cameron's turgid tome


No...all those observations are derived from Runciman's review in the LRB...saves time & £


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

Yes, not denying the incompetence, Cameron's first of all. But it's weaponised incompetence. Tories have weaponised public concern about things like immigration and housing, projecting false stories, and when they could have stepped back (numerous occasions, like when to trigger Article 50, how to negotiate, red lines, etc etc) they have pushed the right wing line. And now hope to consolidate an even righter wing parliament,


----------



## teuchter (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> And who's been making money out of all this? Advertisers, designers, consultants... It never happens for no reason.


Provides employment. It's good for the economy


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Yes, not denying the incompetence, Cameron's first of all. But it's weaponised incompetence. Tories have weaponised public concern about things like immigration and housing, projecting false stories, and when they could have stepped back (numerous occasions, like when to trigger Article 50, how to negotiate, red lines, etc etc) they have pushed the right wing line. And now hope to consolidate an even righter wing parliament,


Yes, having lost and after Cameron's ("I physically wretched") lot cleared off, the whole tory exercise was classic SWOT matrix crap...how to turn that weakness into an opportunity. One ideological faction of the right party of capital were better than the others at that.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Provides employment. It's good for the economy


_Wealth creators_


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Provides employment. It's good for the economy


no it doesn't and no it isn't

it's a teuchter fact which is less to be relied upon than a tobyjug fact


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Exactly. It's a crisis manufactured by the Tory party for its own advantage.



You've got this completely and utterly wrong.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You've got this completely and utterly wrong.


OK. Are you saying it's a genuine working class movement for change that the Tories are simply mishandling?


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> OK. Are you saying it's a genuine working class movement for change that the Tories are simply mishandling?



No. I am saying you have completely misunderstood the issue of Europe and the Conservative Party.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Cameron expected to 'win' the referendum, exactly as he had with the Indy ref; the crisis was not manufactured by 'the tory party', it was brought about by a faction within it.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 29, 2019)

newbie said:


> Does anyone remember all the way back to the 2015 GE, because that's when this hare started to run.  Before that, few people cared much about Europe. I still don't, fwiw.
> 
> View attachment 188474


You could argue that the debate over leave or remain is more about immigration and its knock-on effects than it is about the EU project, per se.


----------



## newbie (Oct 29, 2019)

ignatious said:


> You could argue that the debate over leave or remain is more about immigration and its knock-on effects than it is about the EU project, per se.


I suppose I could, but wouldn't.  If you want to say all Leavers are xenophobes then fill yer boots, but don't expect me to agree.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

ignatious said:


> You could argue that the debate over leave or remain is more about immigration and its knock-on effects than it is about the EU project, per se.



You could if you wanted to be wrong.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Good for 13/01/20 ?
> 
> View attachment 188476


Mad thing about all those ads is that they are wholly negative. If you're going to Europe, you will need new papers, health insurance, etc. Almost like there isn't actually an upside to leaving the EU, like maybe being in the EU is quite a good idea.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> No. I am saying you have completely misunderstood the issue of Europe and the Conservative Party.


I was under the impression that Europe was an issue that had divided the party since the time of Heath, and that the Powellite wing was gaining ascendancy, that Cameron sought to disable them with the referendum but succeeded merely in strengthening them so that now they define the Tory party, particularly with the sacking of the rebels. But tell me more.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> No...all those observations are derived from Runciman's review in the LRB...saves time & £


Runciman also argued that Cameron 



> is rightly resentful of the claim that he called the Brexit vote simply to resolve an internal Tory Party dispute. As he says, if that were true, then why had all the main political parties – including Labour and the Lib Dems – gone into general elections over the previous decade promising an EU referendum?



The review itself is the usual high-handed elite rubbish i expect from the lRB (and from Runciman and Sedley in particular) in their brexit coverage. What should i expect from a journal that intended to become the intellectual voice of the SDP and Lib-dems.


----------



## Santino (Oct 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> What should i expect from a journal that intended to become the intellectual voice of the SDP and Lib-dems.


I didn't know that, but now I do I am glad I hate the LRB.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> I was under the impression that Europe was an issue that had divided the party since the time of Heath, and that the Powellite wing was gaining ascendancy, that Cameron sought to disable them with the referendum but succeeded merely in strengthening them so that now they define the Tory party, particularly with the sacking of the rebels. But tell me more.



You've claimed that this is a crisis manufactured by the Tories. It's the opposite. Europe represents a crisis _within _the Tory Party. It's a long run crisis as you suggest, and at its base, is an existential disagreement about the best route for the flow and protection of capital.

There isn't anything manufactured about it. It has effectively split their Party between those who want to invest political capital in the the EU and believe this type of neo-liberal bloc is essential and to prioritise the continued free movement of capital within its boundaries (what the EU has increasingly seen its founding purpose as) as the best way of maintaining profit. On the other side are those who look to developing markets and think profit can best be maximised outside of the EU.


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You've claimed that this is a crisis manufactured by the Tories. It's the opposite. Europe represents a crisis _within _the Tory Party. It's a long run crisis as you suggest, and at its base, is an existential disagreement about the best route for the flow and protection of capital.
> 
> There isn't anything manufactured about it. It has effectively split their Party between those who want to invest political capital in the the EU and believe this type of bloc is essential to ensure the continued free movement of capital within the boundaries (what the EU has increasingly seen its founding purpose as) as the best way of maintaining profit and those who look to developing markets and think profit can best be maximised outside of it.


Ah, I see, we're probably at cross purposes. I meant this crisis as in - _is it going to be March, is it going to be October, is it going to be January?_ A perpetual crescendo, rather than the perennial rumbling background noise we've all got used to..


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Runciman also argued that Cameron
> 
> 
> 
> The review itself is the usual high-handed elite rubbish i expect from the lRB (and from Runciman and Sedley in particular) in their brexit coverage. What should i expect from a journal that intended to become the intellectual voice of the SDP and Lib-dems.



Cameron might be resentful of the claim but, for him, there's the inconvenient truth of the reported May 2012 "Chicago pizza meeting" with Hague & Llewellyn at which the strategy to stem the leakage of support & MPs to UKIP was confirmed.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Ah, I see, we're probably at cross purposes. I meant this crisis as in - _is it going to be March, is it going to be October, is it going to be January?_ A perpetual crescendo, rather than the perennial rumbling background noise we've all got used to..



Don't understand that, but okay.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Cameron might be resentful of the claim but, for him, there's the inconvenient truth of the reported May 2012 "Chicago pizza meeting" with Hague & Llewellyn at which the strategy to stem the leakage of support & MPs to UKIP was confirmed.


Runciman says that he is correct to be resentful and the claim - now common sense - is not fair. Maybe the book goes into this is some more detail and depth that has convinced him of this. And is leaking support and MPs strictly an internal party matter? I would call it pretty much the definition of an external matter. Someone outside the party dealing you damage?


----------



## Mr Moose (Oct 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You've claimed that this is a crisis manufactured by the Tories. It's the opposite. Europe represents a crisis _within _the Tory Party. It's a long run crisis as you suggest, and at its base, is an existential disagreement about the best route for the flow and protection of capital.
> 
> There isn't anything manufactured about it. It has effectively split their Party between those who want to invest political capital in the the EU and believe this type of neo-liberal bloc is essential and to prioritise the continued free movement of capital within its boundaries (what the EU has increasingly seen its founding purpose as) as the best way of maintaining profit. On the other side are those who look to developing markets and think profit can best be maximised outside of the EU.



Agree with this and it’s interesting how this then translates into how people think, justify it, with regard to sovereignty, nationalism, regulation etc and how they then sell that beyond those elite groups.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Runciman says that he is correct to be resentful and the claim - now common sense - is not fair. Maybe the book goes into this is some more detail and depth that has convinced him of this. And is leaking support and MPs strictly an internal party matter? I would call it pretty much the definition of an external matter. Someone outside the party dealing you damage?



I don't really think it's necessarily fruitful to argue whether the threat to the tory party perceived by Cameron was endo or 'exogenetic' (was both, wasn't it?)...but we do know that he reacted against some strong, influential advice to commit to the in/out ref in late 2012 in the face of the growing threat  posed by Euroscepticism.


----------



## ignatious (Oct 29, 2019)

newbie said:


> I suppose I could, but wouldn't.  If you want to say all Leavers are xenophobes then fill yer boots, but don't expect me to agree.


I didn’t suggest all leavers are xenophobic, I suggested that for the approx. 45% of the population for whom immigration was an important issue, the EU debate was an obvious outlet for them to get involved with.


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> I don't really think it's necessarily fruitful to argue whether the threat to the tory party perceived by Cameron was endo or 'exogenetic' (was both, wasn't it?)...but we do know that he reacted against some strong, influential advice to commit to the in/out ref in late 2012 in the face of the growing threat  posed by Euroscepticism.


I have never really liked the idea that Cameron simply called the referendum because of internal party politics because it always seems to come bundled with the idea that everything was going swimmingly before a blundering intervention - people were happy and now they've been stirred up for no reason. And this comes bundled with the idea that those staples of everyday political priorities - health education welfare etc - were not in any way being effected across europe - being attacked in fact -  by the eu and it's own disgusting priorities. And this comes bundled with _the little people should leave politics to the technocratic experts and not worry themselves about what they don't and can't understand. _

It's Tusk and  Guy Verhofstadt smirking at you having such daft idea as even paying lip-service to democratic participation or legitimacy.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

The 2015 "Migrant Crisis" dominating the MSM agenda throughout 2015/6 obviously gave Cameron a major challenge having committed to the referendum.

Given all the caveats rightly highlighted by butchersapron , here's the part of the Runciman review that concerns Cameron's reaction/non-reaction to the weaponisation of immigration by the Leave campaigns:


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> I have never really liked the idea that Cameron simply called the referendum because of internal party politics because it always seems to come bundled with the idea that everything was going swimmingly before a blundering intervention - people were happy and now they've been stirred up for no reason. And this comes bundled with the idea that those staples of everyday political priorities - health education welfare etc - were not in any way being effected across europe - being attacked in fact -  by the eu and it's own disgusting priorities. And this comes bundled with _the little people should leave politics to the technocratic experts and not worry themselves about what they don't and can't understand. _
> 
> It's Tusk and  Guy Verhofstadt smirking at you having such daft idea as even paying lip-service to democratic participation or legitimacy.


I don't think that the two perceptions are mutually exclusionary.
Yes, 'euro-scepticism' has literally been simmering since 1961, but I do think that the triggers for Cameron's 2012 strategic disaster were primarily ones of party self-interest.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

Mr Moose said:


> Agree with this and it’s interesting how this then translates into how people think, justify it, with regard to sovereignty, nationalism, regulation etc and how they then sell that beyond those elite groups.



Indeed. Brexit has bubbled these questions up. (Part of my general frustration is the failure of much of left to engage in any serious debate recognising the type of longer term questions now being posed. The best that Labour have come up with so far is to cling to the sinking raft of the Customs Union and therefore accept the logic of the the entre EU project - which has to be closer formal union or its nothing).  

The root problem for both of their camps is that capitalism is failing to produce significant economic growth or upturns in wages and standards of living in late capitalist economies. There are vanishingly few reasons for supposing it will. Previous cyclical rules seemingly no longer apply. Even the dogs on the street see that this state of affairs cannot hold in perpetuity.

It is entirely possible that once  this phase of neo-liberalism has run its course we will see what Polanyi called a double movement. I think Trump is a harbinger of this. But managing wherever they end up  - policing it, achieving consent for it, the attempted development of a political social and cultural hegemony for it etc - is going to be of critical importance.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

teqniq said:


> On top of wasting large sums of money on an advertising campaign we now have this. How much more wasted money I wonder?


Strangely enough, I was driving across the M62 and up the A1M last night. There were no illuminated signs advising drivers of the change in travel documents after 31st October. But neither were there any Dead in a Ditch signs.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

Lupa said:


> UK to destroy limited edition coins after Brexit delay
> *UK to destroy limited edition coins after Brexit delay*
> 
> "Limited edition Brexit 50p coins, dated 31 October 2019, are set to be shredded and melted down after the UK's departure from the EU was delayed by three months.
> ...


Weren't there some pennies that were withdrawn at some point in the early 20th Century and only 8 of them remain in circulation? Worth a mint in a 100 years if you get one of these 10 shilling 50p coins.


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Weren't there some pennies that were withdrawn at some point in the early 20th Century and only 8 of them remain in circulation? Worth a mint in a 100 years if you get one of these 10 shilling 50p coins.



They have not been released at all so inless someone stashes a few from the mint (illegally) they wont see the light of day.


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 29, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> You've got this completely and utterly wrong.


What is it then?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> What is it then?


Try reading the thread; usually makes for more effective trolling


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Try reading the thread; usually makes for more effective trolling


Kill yourself


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

What's noise I can hear? Sounds like some sort of a hammer...


----------



## Rivendelboy (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> What's noise I can hear? Sounds like some sort of a hammer...


YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 29, 2019)

I'm shit at this game. Who did this used to be?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.


if you hate it here so much why do you come back so frequently you sad loser?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm shit at this game. Who did this used to be?



https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/banned-returners.367910/


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/banned-returners.367910/


Ah of course, Wells. See, I'm really shit at this game.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> if you hate it here so much why do you come back so frequently you sad loser?


Rivendelboy come on let's have an answer


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. *Fuck you, kill yourself*. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.


at least it's a change from wishing cancer on people


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.



How dare you. I’ve never been a punk and am still not a punk now.


----------



## andysays (Oct 29, 2019)

This thread is going awesomely well


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> This thread is going awesomely well


----------



## SpookyFrank (Oct 29, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Ah, I see, we're probably at cross purposes. I meant this crisis as in - _is it going to be March, is it going to be October, is it going to be January?_ A perpetual crescendo, rather than the perennial rumbling background noise we've all got used to..



It's not really a crisis for the ordinary punter, unless they've worked themself into such a frenzy that the prospect of being in the EU for a bit longer causes them genuine distress. Crisis, as in actual bad things happening, is still to come.


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not really a crisis for the ordinary punter, unless they've worked themself into such a frenzy that the prospect of being in the EU for a bit longer causes them genuine distress. Crisis, as in actual bad things happening, is still to come.


yeh another 10 to 15 years of bollocks about brexit if we leave and the same if we stay


----------



## bluescreen (Oct 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> It's not really a crisis for the ordinary punter, unless they've worked themself into such a frenzy that the prospect of being in the EU for a bit longer causes them genuine distress. Crisis, as in actual bad things happening, is still to come.


Oh I don't know. It's meant that Parliament has been incapable of doing much else. OTOH there is the point of view that it's been keeping them out of trouble.

E2A But agree that the real trouble for the ordinary punter lies ahead.


----------



## xenon (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.



 For fuck‘s sake. Why do you always blow up like this.


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 29, 2019)

xenon said:


> For fuck‘s sake. Why do you always blow up like this.



Because that is who he is.  The real question is why he keeps coming back expecting things to be different?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> Because that is who he is.  The real question is why he keeps coming back expecting things to be different?


Comes back more often than the Withdrawal Bill.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.


I think you may have mistaken me for someone else; have we met?


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself.


----------



## ska invita (Oct 29, 2019)

So these amendments which would allow 16-17 year olds and the 3-4 million 'EU Citizens' a vote (cant they vote already?) might well not be called by the speaker. Does anyone know on what basis an amendment gets called? Is it just purely on the whim of the Speaker?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> So these amendments which would allow 16-17 year olds and the 3-4 million 'EU Citizens' a vote (cant they vote already?) might well not be called by the speaker. Does anyone know on what basis an amendment gets called? Is it just purely on the whim of the Speaker?


EU citizens can presently only vote in local elections.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

So, if they pass the 16/17 year old thing (I doubt it will pass, tbh), Johnson pulls the bull and... _the fun carries on_?


----------



## Pickman's model (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, if they pass the 16/17 year old thing (I doubt it will pass, tbh), Johnson pulls the bull and... _the fun carries on_?


fun fun fun till her daddy takes the t-bird away


----------



## butchersapron (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, if they pass the 16/17 year old thing (I doubt it will pass, tbh), Johnson pulls the bull and... _the fun carries on_?


We've gone from pigs to bulls since brexit. There is movement.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> EU citizens can presently only vote in local elections.



And in the UK's EU elections.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And in the UK's EU elections.


Yes, indeed.
It may yet come to that again?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

Rivendelboy said:


> YOu're a cunt, just another of the bullies on here. Fuck you, kill yourself. YOu don't even understand the question asked but decided to shit all over it. Just like the rest of the cunts on here. YOu claim to be left wing, claim to care about society, but that's bullshit. Just a sad old crew of old punks moaning and bullying anyone that doesn't agree while providing no evidence for your claims.



Glad to see you banned, you cunt.


----------



## Fez909 (Oct 29, 2019)

ska invita said:


> So these amendments which would allow 16-17 year olds and the 3-4 million 'EU Citizens' a vote (cant they vote already?) might well not be called by the speaker. Does anyone know on what basis an amendment gets called? Is it just purely on the whim of the Speaker?


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 29, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> fun fun fun till her daddy takes the t-bird away



Earworm inserted, thank you.


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Glad to see you banned, you cunt.



He will no doubt return in a later episode.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2019)

I have a 17 yr old who normally shows no interest in politics but is hoping that the amendment passes so she can stick two fingers up to Wheeler (sniff of pride) 
I've added her to the Electoral Register last couple of times but she will be really pissed if she can't vote this time


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I have a 17 yr old who normally shows no interest in politics but is hoping that the amendment passes so she can stick two fingers up to Wheeler (sniff of pride)
> I've added her to the Electoral Register last couple of times but she will be really pissed if she can't vote this time


I'll excuse my own laziness in not looking this up as I'm working, but how could it work allowing 16 year olds on the register? Isn't the current one something along the lines of anyone who would turn 18 in the coming 12 months? In other words it picks up 17 year olds, but not 16s? Would there just have to be ad hoc registrations of 16 year olds if it was passed?


----------



## Teaboy (Oct 29, 2019)

No taxation without representation does seem like a fair point.  Certainly on 16 & 17 year olds.

My g/f's youngest cousin has just joined the army at 16.  Before his 17th birthday he will have theoretically passed through enough training to be sent to a warzone.  In practice he's unlikely to be sent but the point still stands.  Old enough to pay income tax and be sent to a shit hole to die for no reason but not old enough to be given a vote even in a crappy rigged system.

The practicalities of getting it sorted in such a short time do make it seem unlikely this time around but I do think it should happen.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

We could just ask the Conservative & Unionist party how to do it; they happily allowed children as young as 15 to vote for their 'leader'/our Prime Minister.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> No taxation without representation does seem like a fair point.  Certainly on 16 & 17 year olds.
> 
> My g/f's youngest cousin has just joined the army at 16.  Before his 17th birthday he will have theoretically passed through enough training to be sent to a warzone.  In practice he's unlikely to be sent but the point still stands.  Old enough to pay income tax and be sent to a shit hole to die for no reason but not old enough to be given a vote even in a crappy rigged system.
> 
> The practicalities of getting it sorted in such a short time do make it seem unlikely this time around but I do think it should happen.



And, yet it's illegal for under 18's to buy alcohol or cigarettes.


----------



## agricola (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And in the UK's EU elections.



... and elections for the Welsh, Scottish and NI Assembly - in fact in terms of elections, its Parliamentary ones that are the odd one out.  I can see why the vote at 16 amendment won't be called because it is a change of the franchise, but the EU citizens one isn't (as they are already part of the franchise for all the other elections we have).


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'll excuse my own laziness in not looking this up as I'm working, but how could it work allowing 16 year olds on the register? Isn't the current one something along the lines of anyone who would turn 18 in the coming 12 months? In other words it picks up 17 year olds, but not 16s? Would there just have to be ad hoc registrations of 16 year olds if it was passed?


The current  form says 16/17 yrs olds should be added but they can't vote till they turn 18
It so if a election falls after they turn 18 but before the next election they don't lose out.
My youngest turns 18 in May, I can't remember when the form comes but I have definitely included her name on the last 2


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> The current  form says 16/17 yrs olds should be added but they can't vote till they turn 18
> It so if a election falls after they turn 18 but before the next election they don't lose out.
> My youngest turns 18 in May, I can't remember when the form comes but I have definitely included her name on the last 2


Ta.


----------



## danny la rouge (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> I'll excuse my own laziness in not looking this up as I'm working, but how could it work allowing 16 year olds on the register? Isn't the current one something along the lines of anyone who would turn 18 in the coming 12 months? In other words it picks up 17 year olds, but not 16s? Would there just have to be ad hoc registrations of 16 year olds if it was passed?


Not sure about England, but 16 year olds in the devolved countries are already registered.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2019)

And after I posted the above I remembered it does have a column where i entered her birthday


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2019)

And I meant before the next form not the next election. I am being out witted by Samsung auto correct


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 29, 2019)

the deputy Speaker only selected two date change amendments: one for the GE to be on the 9th December rather than the 12th, and another for a GE on May 7th 2020 (  )


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Not sure about England, but 16 year olds in the devolved countries are already registered.


Cheers. I've got a rather hazy memory of the register being just for those at or past their 17th birthday, way back from the era of paper registers and when I was involved in the Labour Party. Ah, happy pointless days...


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> the deputy Speaker only selected two date change amendments: one for the GE to be on the 9th December rather than the 12th, and another for a GE on May 7th 2020 (  )


 Is that an attempt to pretend May's absurd election in 2017 didn't happen?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

agricola said:


> ... and elections for the Welsh, Scottish and NI Assembly - in fact in terms of elections, its Parliamentary ones that are the odd one out.  I can see why the vote at 16 amendment won't be called because it is a change of the franchise, but the EU citizens one isn't (as they are already part of the franchise for all the other elections we have).



I don't think any other EU countries allow other EU-citizens to vote in their national elections, EU law only requires the right to vote in local & EU elections, so I see no reason for that to change in the UK now.


----------



## andysays (Oct 29, 2019)

Amendments on lowering voting age and allowing EU citizens the vote NOT selected


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Is that an attempt to pretend May's absurd election in 2017 didn't happen?



I think so? Odd anyway.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I don't think any other EU countries allow other EU-citizens to vote in their national elections, EU law only requires the right to vote in local & EU elections, so I see no reason for that to change in the UK now.



The UK and Ireland have a mutual can-vote-in-GE thing going, and Maltese and Cypriot citizens can vote in the UK too (via their Commonwealth membership). But generally you are correct.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> I don't think any other EU countries allow other EU-citizens to vote in their national elections, EU law only requires the right to vote in local & EU elections, so I see no reason for that to change in the UK now.


"EU law"?
But...we're taking back control, aren't we?
What's wrong with setting an excellent example of enabling all workers to vote in the polity their employers happen to be located in?


----------



## ska invita (Oct 29, 2019)

Fez909 said:


>



Going by that it would be suspect if the Labour amendments were not chosen.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Oct 29, 2019)

I want them to fuck with franchise and let 16 year olds and EU citizens vote not out of any principle or belief, but purely because the more they fuck with this stuff the deeper and more widespread the lack of faith in 'our democratic structures' blah. Tick tock.

Sell you the rope to hang them with and all that


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> The UK and Ireland have a mutual can-vote-in-GE thing going, and Maltese and Cypriot citizens can vote in the UK too (via their Commonwealth membership). But generally you are correct.



They are exceptions to the standard rules, because of the history between the UK & Ireland, and the Commonwealth membership for Maltese and Cypriot.

Interestingly, whilst Brits can vote in Dail elections, they can't in presidential ones, nor referendums.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> "EU law"?
> But...we're taking back control, aren't we?
> What's wrong with setting an excellent example of enabling all workers to vote in the polity their employers happen to be located in?



We haven't left yet.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I want them to fuck with franchise and let 16 year olds and EU citizens vote not out of any principle or belief, but purely because the more they fuck with this stuff the deeper and more widespread the lack of faith in 'our democratic structures' blah. Tick tock.
> 
> Sell you the rope to hang them with and all that


Let cats vote.


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> Amendments on lowering voting age and allowing EU citizens the vote NOT selected


So, are we at the point of 'right Corbyn, just vote for the fucking thing'?

Probably not.


----------



## brogdale (Oct 29, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We haven't left yet.


Reckon they might throw us out if we broke their law?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Reckon they might throw us out if we broke their law?


Maybe that's Dominic Cummings next tactic, Johnson and Gove doing a dirty protest in the Commission headquarters. The John Lewis List Blanket Men.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Reckon they might throw us out if we broke their law?



If only it was that easy.


----------



## not a trot (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Let cats vote.




Fuck off. they'd all vote for Mogg.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> So, are we at the point of 'right Corbyn, just vote for the fucking thing'?
> 
> Probably not.



Think he is gonna vote for it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Oct 29, 2019)

not a trot said:


> Fuck off. they'd all vote for Mogg.



I was all for enfranchising the cats but you've given me paws for thought there.


----------



## andysays (Oct 29, 2019)

MPs pass second reading without vote


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Let cats vote.



would they vote for remeown candidates?


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

andysays said:


> MPs pass second reading without vote


_'Quick, quick, go through that door_!'
- are you sure, are we ayes or nays?
'Ooh, I don't know. _Quick, quick, go the other way!'

_
Mother of Parliaments_! _


----------



## nemoanonemo (Oct 29, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would they vote for remeown candidates?


They would if there was a feline whip


----------



## cupid_stunt (Oct 29, 2019)

nemoanonemo said:


> They would if there was a feline whip


----------



## Wilf (Oct 29, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> would they vote for remeown candidates?


I do remember TS Eliot wrote something about MPs, _Old Possum's Practical Book of Twats_.


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 29, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Let cats vote.


No cat would demean itself over politics


----------



## krink (Oct 29, 2019)

I do try to keep up with all this but there's a lot of good ol' urban noise on these threads 

This is a genuine question, by the way; What is the point of having an election before we have left the eu? 

Having an election before it happens means the election is a proxy re-run of the referendum doesn't it? that's how the people i live and work with see it. And the same people I know* see it as a labour government before we leave means we won't leave. Surely it would make more sense to both parties to wait until we've officially left and then the election would be about who is going to make the best job of running post eu britain? is this "no deal off the table" meant to be the same as I what I'm saying? I've lost track and I'm not the sharpest so would appreciate a brief run-down of wtf is going on if anyone can be arsed, cheers

*for context, I live and work with a mixed bunch of leave and remain in Sunderland aka the Brexiteers capital city!


----------



## ska invita (Oct 29, 2019)

krink said:


> make more sense


...not words to be using in regards to Brexit


----------



## ska invita (Oct 29, 2019)

krink said:


> I do try to keep up with all this but there's a lot of good ol' urban noise on these threads
> 
> This is a genuine question, by the way; What is the point of having an election before we have left the eu?
> 
> ...



It is weird. The Tories seem to not want to just get Brexit done after all, but rather have an election because they're fearful of amendments being added to it, both now and at later stages. By having an election and banking on getting a bigger majority they hope they can better shape Brexit into a Maximum Arsehole Constellation.

It would make more sense to pass this bit of the bill and then have an election - thats what many in Labour wanted - but as above, Tories are trying to gain maximum advantage. And once LibDems and SNP got on board with this early election model (fuck knows why) there was no going back really.

Though the juiciest bit of negotiating Brexit hasnt even started yet, so "the election would be about who is going to make the best job of running post eu britain?" isnt exactly - its about who would negotiate and shape the next section. And then i guess yeah, running it (into the ground most likely)

No Deal is never really off the table. Current default deadline is end of January 2020. There seem to be other moments in the future where a default is technically possible.

You're not missing much in the detail tbh Krink. Main thing to note is the country is run by cunts of the highest order, and they might be about to win Five More Years.


----------



## krink (Oct 29, 2019)

cheers ska invita


----------



## Raheem (Oct 29, 2019)

not a trot said:


> Fuck off. they'd all vote for Mogg.


Some might go for Cat Smith.


----------



## Ranbay (Oct 30, 2019)

I quit


----------



## brogdale (Oct 30, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> I quit


----------



## Wilf (Oct 30, 2019)

10, 9, 8, 7,6,5,4,3,2... doh!


----------



## Marty1 (Oct 30, 2019)

Amber Rudd has just bailed.

General election: Amber Rudd confirms she won't stand again as MP


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 30, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Amber Rudd has just bailed.
> 
> General election: Amber Rudd confirms she won't stand again as MP



Again!


----------



## Badgers (Oct 30, 2019)

> Boris Johnson's Brexit deal will leave the UK £70bn worse off than if it had remained in the EU, a study by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) has found.


Brexit deal means ‘£70bn hit to UK by 2029'

Is that £70bn before or after the £350m per week and the brexit dividend are taken into account?


----------



## William of Walworth (Oct 30, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Amber Rudd has just bailed.
> 
> General election: Amber Rudd confirms she won't stand again as MP



<Optimistic fantasy mode   > :

Subscreen tickertape flash on BBC GE coverage at 02:37 am**, Friday 13th December 2019 :

*Labour Gain Hastings & Rye*

**Would rather Rudd was still around for that to happen tbh


----------



## not-bono-ever (Oct 30, 2019)

"so ruddster wont be around hastings any more" I said to my south coast chum today on the dog and phone
"she never was" came the dry response


----------



## Wilf (Oct 31, 2019)

Amber Rudd = orange fish - I've only just noticed. Anyway, it's too late now.


----------



## A380 (Oct 31, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2019)

Anyone else feeling festive today?

_"I saw three shits come sailing in
 On Brexit Day, on Brexit Day
 I saw three shits come sailing in
 On Brexit Day in the morning"_


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2019)

A380 said:


> View attachment 188642


Is it just me that thinks that could have been funnier with a shorter wig and a subterranean Parisian backdrop.


----------



## Sprocket. (Oct 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Is it just me that thinks that could have been funnier with a shorter wig and a subterranean Parisian backdrop.



I think you suffer from tunnel vision!


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Is it just me that thinks that could have been funnier with a shorter wig and a subterranean Parisian backdrop.


the white fiat uno of our hearts in the background


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2019)

So what are we all going to be doing at 11pm?

Surely we'll try, in some U75 way, to mark the phantom historical instant when we didn't leave the supra-state?
Any suggestions of a suitable activity for the very moment when it didn't happen?


----------



## maomao (Oct 31, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> "so ruddster wont be around hastings any more" I said to my south coast chum today on the dog and phone
> "she never was" came the dry response


Is dog and phone rhyming slang for bone?


----------



## Flavour (Oct 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So what are we all going to be doing at 11pm?
> 
> Surely we'll try, in some U75 way, to mark the phantom historical instant when we didn't leave the supra-state?
> Any suggestions of a suitable activity for the very moment when it didn't happen?



put the clocks back another hour?


----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2019)

Flavour said:


> put the clocks back another hour?


Cleaner than I expected, tbf.


----------



## MrSki (Oct 31, 2019)




----------



## brogdale (Oct 31, 2019)

Only 1 hour to go...before...nothing happens. Let's hope that operation Brock can hold.
Anyone started on their stockpile of Romaine Hearts yet?


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Only 1 hour to go...before...nothing happens. Let's hope that operation Brock can hold.
> Anyone started on their stockpile of Romaine Hearts yet?


Nope but long since drunk all the stockpiled booze


----------



## MickiQ (Oct 31, 2019)

I have to confess that I am unhappy with Boris and his "I would rather be Dead in a Ditch that not leave the EU at the End of October" Spiel, Here we are still in the EU and the ditches remain disappointingly free of dead politicians, I'm beginning to think he might not have been entirely truthful.


----------



## teuchter (Oct 31, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So what are we all going to be doing at 11pm?
> 
> Surely we'll try, in some U75 way, to mark the phantom historical instant when we didn't leave the supra-state?
> Any suggestions of a suitable activity for the very moment when it didn't happen?


I was watching newsnight. They had a big countdown clock thing. It was pretty exciting.


----------



## Ming (Nov 1, 2019)

My Paypal account's gone a bit weird but if i can't fix it i'll send a twenty quid cheque. Brexit's expensive.


----------



## Ming (Nov 1, 2019)

Bet settled.


----------



## Ming (Nov 1, 2019)

I lose either way anyway. Still. Such is life.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 1, 2019)

Did they sneak it through?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 1, 2019)

MrSki said:


>






That one's a classic. In the end of course they all went to the Spoons.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

teuchter said:


> I was watching newsnight. They had a big countdown clock thing. It was pretty exciting.


Ah but did they have a lock on the studio door?


----------



## killer b (Nov 1, 2019)

very enjoyable twitter thread here with an alternative perspective on the effectiveness of the Leave campaign in the referendum


----------



## gosub (Nov 1, 2019)

brogdale said:


> So what are we all going to be doing at 11pm?
> 
> Surely we'll try, in some U75 way, to mark the phantom historical instant when we didn't leave the supra-state?
> Any suggestions of a suitable activity for the very moment when it didn't happen?


I remember being in a pub and I remember Hotel California being on the juke box which it was a lot last night (like every third play) personally hate that song bit did make for surreal experience - one that could have been topped only by a few I've got you babe's into the mix


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> very enjoyable twitter thread here with an alternative perspective on the effectiveness of the Leave campaign in the referendum






> Leaveland is a country of the old, the white and the nostalgic, of ruined factories and boarded-up shops. Rushing along the network of high-speed rail corridors that enable Remainians to move from point to point around their country without touching Leaveland, a middle-aged Remainian writer confronts the possibility that unification of the two nations is not Remainia’s greatest hope, but its greatest fear.’


----------



## Cid (Nov 1, 2019)

killer b said:


> very enjoyable twitter thread here with an alternative perspective on the effectiveness of the Leave campaign in the referendum




Good... though think it’s overstated a little - I mean VL did have some very effective messaging (vote leave, take back control). And I think I disagree when they say they should have been making cases like EU reform being impossible. Complicated message to get across.

They also reckon Cambridge Analytica was largely snake oil, which I don’t think is supported by other uses of big data in advertising.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 1, 2019)

Not a single leave voter voted leave because of any official campaign.


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> I have to confess that I am unhappy with Boris and his "I would rather be Dead in a Ditch that not leave the EU at the End of October" Spiel, Here we are still in the EU and the ditches remain disappointingly free of dead politicians, I'm beginning to think he might not have been entirely truthful.



There was a problem aligning the ditch with EU regulations.


----------



## Supine (Nov 1, 2019)

elbows said:


> There was a problem aligning the ditch with EU regulations.



I’ll happily dig a ditch to any specification he wants if he promises to use it.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

Supine said:


> I’ll happily dig a ditch to any specification he wants if he promises to use it.


there are ditches of a sufficient quality up and down the land, so there is no need to excavate a new one for him. if he wants a ditch specifically dug for him, he can do it himself on south georgia as part of the penguin sewer improvements which are scheduled to start in the austral autumn


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> there are ditches of a sufficient quality up and down the land, so there is no need to excavate a new one for him. if he wants a ditch specifically dug for him, he can do it himself on south georgia as part of the penguin sewer improvements which are scheduled to start in the austral autumn


here's why these sewage works are necessary


so the plan is to excavate a vast sloping pit and then roof it over with various channels to collect the ordure and funnel it into the cess pit where methane from the excreta will be gathered and burned to provide underfloor heating to the penguins during the long antarctic winter. on a regular basis former people will empty the cess pit from whence the shit will be taken to other parts of south georgia and used as fertiliser for crops.


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2019)

I dont know, being surrounded by that much shit might give them too much comfort via nostalgia.

Also one of those penguins got hit right in the face by a gusher near the end of that video. Insert dated Mark Oaten joke here.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

elbows said:


> I dont know, being surrounded by that much shit might give them too much comfort via nostalgia.
> 
> Also one of those penguins got hit right in the face by a gusher near the end of that video. Insert dated Mark Oaten joke here.


it is anticipated that penguins' diet would receive greater variety as any former people who drowned in the subterranean pit would be scooped out, cleaned, and - if of sufficient nutritional value - served as a form of _tartare_ to the penguin colony


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> it is anticipated that penguins' diet would receive greater variety as any former people who drowned in the subterranean pit would be scooped out, cleaned, and - if of sufficient nutritional value - served as a form of _tartare_ to the penguin colony



Well there is still time to refine these plans.

Personally, I favour something that would be a brave new take on the trickle down concept.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

elbows said:


> Well there is still time to refine these plans.
> 
> Personally, I favour something that would be a brave new take on the trickle down concept.


given the volume of faeces there is no trickle down solution, it would have to flow much more quickly than that


----------



## Fozzie Bear (Nov 1, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Leaveland is a country of the old, the white and the nostalgic, of ruined factories and boarded-up shops. Rushing along the network of high-speed rail corridors that enable Remainians to move from point to point around their country without touching Leaveland, a middle-aged Remainian writer confronts the possibility that unification of the two nations is not Remainia’s greatest hope, but its greatest fear.’



Thanks for posting that! Sent it to my Dad, who campaigned for Leave in St Albans...


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 1, 2019)

The former people will relish descending into the lower guano levels for long shifts of repetitive tasks.


----------



## elbows (Nov 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> given the volume of faeces there is no trickle down solution, it would have to flow much more quickly than that



A market based approach to supply and demand may work. If the number of independent trickles is increased exponentially, and a clever form of shititive easing is employed, equilibrium in the system may yet be possible.

Plus once the moulding and drying procedures are perfected, the faecal coin may become viable currency.

As a last resort, butt plug backstops may be considered, although this usually comes with inflationary pressures.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

elbows said:


> A market based approach to supply and demand may work. If the number of independent trickles is increased exponentially, and a clever form of shititive easing is employed, equilibrium in the system may yet be possible.
> 
> Plus once the moulding and drying procedures are perfected, the faecal coin may become viable currency.
> 
> As a last resort, butt plug backstops may be considered, although this usually comes with inflationary pressures.


oh no no no no no

there will be no bust here, and measures have been taken to prevent the boom of a gas explosion. neither will there be an equilibrium, rather the aim is to transit the faeces from ground level to the working area of the former people as rapidly as possible, to maximise collection of methane and to help the former people expiate their crimes through hard physical labour. there would be no hard physical labour if some sort of equilibrium could emerge. that would never do. 

there will be no fecal coin. not because of any actual disagreement with the suggestion, but because former people will have no need of money as a means of exchange in the south atlantic industrial zone. simply put, they will not be there long enough to require such.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)




----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)




----------



## Teaboy (Nov 1, 2019)

I dunno, I have the feeling the above is going to amount to absolutely fuck all.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> I dunno, I have the feeling the above is going to amount to absolutely fuck all.


I expect you will be right but you never know. One can hope.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)

It would be funny as fuck if Johnson was barred from standing for re-election.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 1, 2019)

MrSki said:


> It would be funny as fuck if Johnson was barred from standing for re-election.


It would be funny as fuck if he loses his seat


----------



## Flavour (Nov 1, 2019)

MrSki said:


>




0%


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 1, 2019)

Imagine the self-importance of attaching ‘QC’ to your twitter handle. Might go and stick ‘MEng’ or ‘BAGA4’ after mine to be a dick too.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Imagine the self-importance of attaching ‘QC’ to your twitter handle. Might go and stick ‘MEng’ or ‘BAGA4’ after mine to be a dick too.


Or it might imply she has a bit of legal knowledge rather than just spouting crap.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 1, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I expect you will be right but you never know. One can hope.



What would you be hoping for exactly? It wouldn't harm Johnson in the election - the opposite in fact.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 1, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> What would you be hoping for exactly? It wouldn't harm Johnson in the election - the opposite in fact.


Would it harm Johnson in the election if he was barred from standing?

I would hope that eventually he gets done for electoral fraud but I expect that is too much to wish for.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 2, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Imagine the self-importance of attaching ‘QC’ to your twitter handle. Might go and stick ‘MEng’ or ‘BAGA4’ after mine to be a dick too.



I quite agree

Puddy Tat Esq


----------



## MrSki (Nov 2, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> I quite agree
> 
> Puddy Tat Esq


Does it take 15 years after qualifying to become a PT Esq? or a Meng? 

I don't support the structure of the present legal system but you you certainly don't just stumble on being a QC.


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 2, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Does it take 15 years after qualifying to become a PT Esq? or a Meng?



dunno really

if i'd gone in for designing roads and bridges and so on, I could have been Puddy Tat MICE

(member of the institute of civil engineers)


----------



## MrSki (Nov 2, 2019)

Puddy_Tat said:


> dunno really
> 
> if i'd gone in for designing roads and bridges and so on, I could have been Puddy Tat MICE
> 
> (member of the institute of civil engineers)



My old man was a MICE but didn't have to do 15 years to get there. Even after 15 years it is not a shoe on. I think it depends on how you use twitter, if it is for a professional point of view & you are tweeting about legal shit then it is handy to know that someone knows their onions but if it is posting pictures of your kitten then it is a bit anal.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 2, 2019)

The initials after my name are MA FIA


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 2, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Would it harm Johnson in the election if he was barred from standing?
> 
> I would hope that eventually he gets done for electoral fraud but I expect that is too much to wish for.



It would boost support for Johnson and he wouldn't be barred from standing. Don't need to be a QC to know that.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 2, 2019)

Not sure where to post this


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 2, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Not sure where to post this




If Farage runs all 650 of his 'fully vetted' barrel-scrapings there'll be a lot more of this.


----------



## teqniq (Nov 2, 2019)

Not that I'm exactly expecting anything to come of it...

Zelo Street: Bozo And Dom REFERRED TO CPS


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 3, 2019)

teqniq said:


> Not that I'm exactly expecting anything to come of it...
> 
> Zelo Street: Bozo And Dom REFERRED TO CPS



They certainly seem to have broken the rules by funnelling £675,315 through another pro-Brexit youth group, BeLeave, but otherwise they were short of their £7m spending limit by £325,434*‬, so their over spend was actually under £350k.

It makes me laugh that some remoaners think this impacted on the vote, making it void, it's a tiny amount in the overall scheme of things, basically peanuts. 

The total spent by all groups on the leave side was £13.3m, and on the remain side about 50% more at £19.3m*, and that doesn't include anything spent before the official campaign period, such as the £9m spent by the government on sending a booklet to every household telling us we should remain.  

* SOURCE - Campaign spending at the EU referendum


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 3, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> They certainly seem to have broken the rules by funnelling £675,315 through another pro-Brexit youth group, BeLeave, but otherwise they were short of their £7m spending limit by £325,434*‬, so their over spend was actually under £350k.
> 
> It makes me laugh that some remoaners think this impacted on the vote, making it void, it's a tiny amount in the overall scheme of things, basically peanuts.
> 
> ...



Probably best to just ignore crimes then.

You'll get your wish I'm sure. Johnson will remain unscathed by this.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 3, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Probably best to just ignore crimes then.
> 
> You'll get your wish I'm sure. Johnson will remain unscathed by this.



That wasn't my point, you plank.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 3, 2019)

Well written and argued analysis from Wales on Brexit and the political questions thrown up. The alienation driving the vote in the deindustrialised parts of south and north wales can break either way. “_There is a sharp breakdown in the relationship between the mass of ordinary people and the political system that has governed over them for decades. This goes all the way back to Thatcher but it intensified with Iraq and the austerity decade following the financial crisis. And that breakdown can present itself as a rightward force, as in the recent European elections, or it can present itself as a more leftwing phenomenon, as was the case in the general election of 2017”:

The Valleys Banlieues?




_


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 3, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Well written and argued analysis from Wales on Brexit and the political questions thrown up. The alienation driving the vote in the deindustrialised parts of south and north wales can break either way. “_There is a sharp breakdown in the relationship between the mass of ordinary people and the political system that has governed over them for decades. This goes all the way back to Thatcher but it intensified with Iraq and the austerity decade following the financial crisis. And that breakdown can present itself as a rightward force, as in the recent European elections, or it can present itself as a more leftwing phenomenon, as was the case in the general election of 2017”:
> 
> The Valleys Banlieues?
> 
> ...


Not sure I agree with the conclusion that wales is ripe for any sort of imminent social spark or violence. I wish it was but in post industrial wales there is all the stuff he argues, a deep divide with labour as is, a political desire for change that can as easily go to right as it can to leftish promises of change like corbynism, a welsh labour party that is hopelessly out of touch and incapable of speaking to this constituency, anger, resentment etc. Even the welsh equivelent of momentum (welsh labour grassroots) seems incapable of motivating a support base in same way as its english counterpart, even if that is largely middle class in composition. But ime the overwhelming outcome of this is a malaise and social depression that doesn't have any of the spark that existed in eg early 90s, a mood which expresses itself in a more isolated and inward way. Maybe I'm just being overly negative and from this can spring something in the foreseeable but I just don't see it.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 3, 2019)

I agree with you. I think the ennui and internalisation you describe is more prevalent.

But I think the article is well written and the key point - that alienation isn’t expressed in one political direction (and that these communities and areas are in play for us and the right) - is the key argument here. The idea that Brexit is ‘a right wing’ or reactionary phenomena is a myth that we need to keep exposing


----------



## Badgers (Nov 4, 2019)




----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 4, 2019)

Badgers said:


> View attachment 189047
> 
> View attachment 189048
> 
> View attachment 189049


An email every fortnight as a benefit, fucks sake.

How did you obtain this though


----------



## Badgers (Nov 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> An email every fortnight as a benefit, fucks sake.
> 
> How did you obtain this though


Sorry, was enjoying the pics and forgot the links.

The Brexit Party has launched a £100-a-month 'club'

The Brexit Party are being ridiculed after launching £100-a-month club

Also from the horses arse mouth::The Brexit Club

Tweet with pics:


----------



## maomao (Nov 4, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> An email every fortnight as a benefit, fucks sake.


If you don't join they send you an email every week.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Sorry, was enjoying the pics and forgot the links.
> 
> The Brexit Party has launched a £100-a-month 'club'
> 
> ...




£100 per month?!


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Nov 5, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> £100 per month?!



to show you're not part of this "metropolitan elite" thing, i guess...


----------



## Badgers (Nov 5, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> £100 per month?!


Access to the inner circle


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Access to the inner circle


surprised a great wagner fan like farage hasn't termed it the ring


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


>



i make £100 a month £1200 a year


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 5, 2019)

I thought sending stupid amounts of money to an unelected club and not getting much in return was the kind of thing these people were against.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> i make £100 a month £1200 a year



Discounted to £1000 for mugs that pay a year upfront.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Discounted to £1000 for mugs that pay a year upfront.


perhaps they don't get the fortnightly emails for the two 'bonus' months


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 5, 2019)

Seems like a decent way to hide the true origins of where your funding is actually coming from.  Should you need to that is.


----------



## Ranbay (Nov 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Access to the inner circle



You can access mine for ~£10 a month


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 5, 2019)

Ranbay said:


> You can access mine for ~£10 a month



Don't sell yourself short, you could charge £15 a month if those fuckers are charging a ton. Could offer bespoke 'X number of days to Brexit' memes as a benefit.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 5, 2019)

Good video showing the work of Led by Donkeys through the campaign.


----------



## Ming (Nov 5, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Discounted to £1000 for mugs that pay a year upfront.


Wonder if they’d take the payment in Euros?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 5, 2019)

Displaying credentials in the realm where you really need to prove you know your shit is fine (bridge builders, surgeons etc). But trailing any letters or titles you have before or after your name, in real life or on social media, is the height of wankerdom.

I work in a university and most of my colleagues are _very _keen on displaying their credentials. But even where they aren't and they just want their name on the door, the fucking institution insists on the full palaver.

And no, I'm not bitter about my lack of Dr, Prof type stuff.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 5, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> If Farage runs all 650 of his 'fully vetted' barrel-scrapings there'll be a lot more of this.


Yeah, elsewhere I was wondering what #650 would be like. I suspect she isn't it.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 6, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Discounted to £1000 for mugs that pay a year upfront.


No doubt the small print says that after the BP is wound up in a few weeks, the cash remains in the hand of by then unemployed ex Euro MP, Mr Farage.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 6, 2019)

Mind you, if your hundred quid gets you within headbutting distance of NF...


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 6, 2019)

Ming said:


> Wonder if they’d take the payment in Euros?



No problem taking it in Rubles, as long as properly laundered through Banks.


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 6, 2019)

Government pushes ahead with plans for 'festival of Brexit'



> However, figures from arts institutions have privately expressed concern about the project, which some say is likely to alienate remain-supporting visitors at museums and galleries that are expected to take part.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> Government pushes ahead with plans for 'festival of Brexit'


What fresh £120m madness this is?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What fresh £120m madness this is?


they're spaffing our money against the wall


----------



## gentlegreen (Nov 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What fresh £120m madness this is?


You'd have thought the Millennial Dome would've warned 'em off..
Clearly aimed at those who were around for the Festival of Britain ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

gentlegreen said:


> You'd have thought the Millennial Dome would've warned 'em off..
> Clearly aimed at those who were around for the Festival of Britain ...


clearly aimed at some of their chums' bank balances


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)

He kept that quiet 

Bercow: Brexit 'biggest foreign policy mistake'


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> He kept that quiet
> 
> Bercow: Brexit 'biggest foreign policy mistake'



A 'secret' every fucker knew.


----------



## Cid (Nov 6, 2019)

Wilf said:


> Displaying credentials in the realm where you really need to prove you know your shit is fine (bridge builders, surgeons etc). But trailing any letters or titles you have before or after your name, in real life or on social media, is the height of wankerdom.
> 
> I work in a university and most of my colleagues are _very _keen on displaying their credentials. But even where they aren't and they just want their name on the door, the fucking institution insists on the full palaver.
> 
> And no, I'm not bitter about my lack of Dr, Prof type stuff.



Had a timber yard sales rep round recently... he’s got an MA (Cantab) according to his card.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 6, 2019)

Cid said:


> Had a timber yard sales rep round recently... he’s got an MA (Cantab) according to his card.


So really he's a ba who had a tenner to spare


----------



## Badgers (Nov 6, 2019)




----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Good video showing the work of Led by Donkeys through the campaign.




Yes videos characterising this bizarre period as a 'civil war' are just brilliant. 

Please stop posting this drivel.


----------



## pinkmonkey (Nov 7, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> perhaps they don't get the fortnightly emails for the two 'bonus' months


Like a super expensive version of an 80's pop band fan club where the band splits after two months leaving you gutted because you're gonna get no more badly produced newsletters. Nor a refund. The waahmbulance is waiting round the side.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 7, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Yes videos characterising this bizarre period as a 'civil war' are just brilliant.
> 
> Please stop posting this drivel.


It does fit the definition of a civil war. There might not be any muskets or pikes involved but the country is at war with itself. Are you a roundhead or a bellend? 

I will post what I see as relevant to this and welcome your feedback.

LedbyDonkeys have been key in exposing the vote leave bollocks & deserve their publicity. 

Exactly which bit of the video was nonsense?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 7, 2019)

MrSki said:


> It does fit the definition of a civil war. There might not be any muskets or pikes involved but the country is at war with itself. Are you a roundhead or a bellend?
> 
> I will post what I see as relevant to this and welcome your feedback.
> 
> ...


It's still quite a civil war


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2019)

MrSki said:


> It does fit the definition of a civil war. There might not be any muskets or pikes involved but the country is at war with itself. Are you a roundhead or a bellend?
> 
> I will post what I see as relevant to this and welcome your feedback.
> 
> ...



That song talks about doors being smashed in and people being taken away. The only people that can reasonably said to happen to are non EU migrants and that has been happening since before the referendum or Brexit. 

I don't appreciate you posting that video, because in my opinion it is not only offensive but dangerous. 

What is essentially a bureaucratic dispute over a trade bloc at this point does not meet any definition of a civil war.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 8, 2019)

Badgers said:


> What fresh £120m madness this is?



To be fair by then 120 million quid will only be about 95 euros.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That song talks about doors being smashed in and people being taken away. The only people that can reasonably said to happen to are non EU migrants and that has been happening since before the referendum or Brexit.
> 
> I don't appreciate you posting that video, because in my opinion it is not only offensive but dangerous.
> 
> What is essentially a bureaucratic dispute over a trade bloc at this point does not meet any definition of a civil war.


See that last sentence just isn't right. Millions of people have been forced to register in a process that will include who knows what fuck-ups - we can be sure that there will be fuck-ups, and people will fall through the cracks and suffer for it down the line, Windrush-style. It is hopelessly - and dangerously - naive to think otherwise. So no, it isn't just 'essentially a bureaucratic dispute over a trade bloc'. It is a luxury afforded you by your status to even think it might be.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> See that last sentence just isn't right. Millions of people have been forced to register in a process that will include who knows what fuck-ups - we can be sure that there will be fuck-ups, and people will fall through the cracks and suffer for it down the line, Windrush-style. It is hopelessly - and dangerously - naive to think otherwise. So no, it isn't just 'essentially a bureaucratic dispute over a trade bloc'. It is a luxury afforded you by your status to even think it might be.



You're talking about something that you think may happen in the future. Not about *a civil war* with *people having there doors smashed in* now. Which is pretty crass when this is really happening to people as a result of the hostile environment. Perhaps this crassness is "a luxury afforded to you by your status" as you put it.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> You're talking about something that you think may happen in the future. Not about *a civil war* with *people having there doors smashed in* now. Which is pretty crass when this is really happening to people as a result of the hostile environment. Perhaps this crassness is "a luxury afforded to you by your status" as you put it.


I'm talking about something that is happening now. You may not have noticed but EU residents have already been told to register.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm talking about something that is happening now. You may not have noticed but EU residents have already been told to register.



Don't jump in and defend that bullshit and then start moving the goalposts. That drivel that was posted before talked about a civil war in which peoples doors were smashed in. That's what you have chosen to defend. Nobody is denying that the settled status scheme is happening.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't jump in and defend that bullshit and then start moving the goalposts. That drivel that was posted before talked about a civil war in which peoples doors were smashed in. That's what you have chosen to defend. Nobody is denying that the settled status scheme is happening.


if there's one thing lbj likes doing, it's shuffling the goalposts. he'd be a groundskeeper's nightmare moving them about all the time


----------



## MrSki (Nov 8, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> That song talks about doors being smashed in and people being taken away. The only people that can reasonably said to happen to are non EU migrants and that has been happening since before the referendum or Brexit.





> You're talking about something that you think may happen in the future.


The song is obviously set in the future. As in 'What did you do daddy?' So it is possible that EU citizens living in the UK will have their doors kicked if they lose the right to live in the UK or have failed to register.

The rise in the far right with UKIP & the Brexit party has led to an increase of abuse to all migrants whether they are EU or otherwise.

History will record what happened and why.


----------



## andysays (Nov 8, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm talking about something that is happening now. You may not have noticed but EU residents have already been told to register.


EU citizens residents in the UK being asked to register appears to me to be closer to a bureaucratic process than an outbreak of civil war, TBH, but maybe that's a luxury afforded me by my status as well.


----------



## Supine (Nov 8, 2019)

This is slightly getting away from the videos actual message about lies told by Brexiteers. Led By Donkeys have done a great job highlighting the mendacious nature of their campaign.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 9, 2019)

Credit ratings agency Moody’s changes outlook on UK’s (Aa2) rating from stable to negative. Pretty damning release says Brexit has been a catalyst in an “erosion in institutional strength” which is now seriously undermining faith in the UK.

#takingbackcontrol


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2019)

Ahh, those nice apolitical ratings agencies. What did they say about Greece? What would they say about a proper social democratic government?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 9, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> Ahh, those nice apolitical ratings agencies. What did they say about Greece? What would they say about a proper social democratic government?



Still, at least they predicted the 2008 crisis and took decisive action to mitigate it.

Oh, wait no it says here they were and are complicit in the endemic criminality of the financial sector and should all be rounded up and shot.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 9, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> Don't jump in and defend that bullshit and then start moving the goalposts. That drivel that was posted before talked about a civil war in which peoples doors were smashed in. That's what you have chosen to defend. Nobody is denying that the settled status scheme is happening.


 I'm not defending anything. I'm taking issue with what you said. Brexit is already far more than just an argument over a technicality. First may then Johnson have made sure of that.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I'm not defending anything. I'm taking issue with what you said. Brexit is already far more than just an argument over a technicality. First may then Johnson have made sure of that.



Incorrect.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2019)

Supine said:


> This is slightly getting away from the videos actual message about lies told by Brexiteers. Led By Donkeys have done a great job highlighting the mendacious nature of their campaign.



Well done them for pointing out that politicians lie truly they have changed the world.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> The People's Vote campaign have chosen a great time for a rather public and acrimonious bust up.


People's Vote chief takes leave of absence after harassment claims

The chief executive of the People’s Vote campaign has taken a leave of absence before an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment made by three female members of staff.

Patrick Heneghan has stepped down from the cross-party campaign group after female staff wrote a letter saying they did not feel safe returning to work while Heneghan was “in a position of power and authority”, the Sunday Times reported.

...

Stuart Hand, a former Conservative party elections official, has been appointed acting head of the campaign.

____

_Ugh _all round.


----------



## andysays (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> People's Vote chief takes leave of absence after harassment claims
> 
> The chief executive of the People’s Vote campaign has taken a leave of absence before an investigation into allegations of sexual harassment made by three female members of staff.
> 
> ...


Ugh indeed


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

Foreign press seem to have more of a handle on this than the UK.


----------



## maomao (Nov 9, 2019)

Oh so it was the _Russians_ made me vote leave. I thought we'd all decided it was Dominic Cummings.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> Oh so it was the _Russians_ made me vote leave. I thought we'd all decided it was Dominic Cummings.


No it was the Russians. Cummngs' job is to make you sceptical that it was the Russians.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 9, 2019)

Crafty, these russians. Can't trust them.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Foreign press seem to have more of a handle on this than the UK.



Rather than people in the UK telling you why over and over?


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> Oh so it was the _Russians_ made me vote leave. I thought we'd all decided it was Dominic Cummings.


Maybe if Johnson had allowed the report to be published it might have been clearer.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Rather than people in the UK telling you why over and over?


Do you think a report on Russian interference in UK politics should have been blocked before a GE?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Do you think a report on Russian interference in UK politics should have been blocked before a GE?


What an odd reply.

I could not give a fuck tbh as i'm clearly not operating on the same basis as to what drove brexit as you. But yeah, go for it, use the blockage to put some pressure or whatever. The idea that this is about what brexit is about is the height of remain loonery. 

How can you not just look around you and see why it happened?


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Foreign press seem to have more of a handle on this than the UK.




Yes, *Rachel Maddow* has a handle on the issues. Why don't you try getting a handle on reality you vacuous tool?


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> Oh so it was the _Russians_ made me vote leave. I thought we'd all decided it was Dominic Cummings.


The commie facist alliance


----------



## Sweet FA (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> How can you not just look around you and see why it happened?


Amen.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Maybe if Johnson had allowed the report to be published it might have been clearer.



lol.

The Russian trope bs didn’t work with Trump so don’t know why anyone would think it would work for Brexit.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

This prat did vote for simple far-right wing reasons though.


----------



## maomao (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Do you think a report on Russian interference in UK politics should have been blocked before a GE?


Do you honestly think that the woman in your clip has 'more of a handle' on the reasons for Brexit than British people? When she's straight up saying, not even implying, that it's a Russian created problem from start to finish? Cause that's what you've just said. Would be nice if you stuck around long enough to argue the poiby for once but I'm sure there'll be a really funny lbd tweet about Jacob Rees-Mogg in a minute.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 9, 2019)

Russia don't need to break up the EU, because they already have Germany by the balls. Their absolutely fucking stupid policy of closing down perfectly functional nuclear power plants has seen to that.


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 9, 2019)

Russia has every interest in weakening the EU given the EU has parked tanks on ‘their’ lawn in Ukraine. Of course they would have tried to influence the Brexit vote, but that doesn’t mean it made enough of a difference. The vote was won by mobilising people, getting the vote out, which was Cumming’s work.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

maomao said:


> Do you honestly think that the woman in your clip has 'more of a handle' on the reasons for Brexit than British people? When she's straight up saying, not even implying, that it's a Russian created problem from start to finish? Cause that's what you've just said. Would be nice if you stuck around long enough to argue the poiby for once but I'm sure there'll be a really funny lbd tweet about Jacob Rees-Mogg in a minute.


I said the foreign press seems to be more interested in the blocking of a report than the UK press which I find concerning. Still without knowing what is actually in the report it is hard to argue the potential impact it might have on the current election or the legality of the 2016 referendum. 

Here is a clip of a discussion about fake news in the Irish Parliament where it is being discussed by I expect not your favourite journalist.


----------



## NoXion (Nov 9, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> Russia has every interest in weakening the EU given the EU has parked tanks on ‘their’ lawn in Ukraine. Of course they would have tried to influence the Brexit vote, but that doesn’t mean it made enough of a difference. The vote was won by mobilising people, getting the vote out, which was Cumming’s work.



Russia already has what it wants - the Crimea - and the EU isn't doing diddly squat to take that away from them.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

Why is a film maker with no role in any of this of any relevance? What on earth is him offering nothing but an_ i reckon_ worth posting? Because he has the lord prefix? Off your knees serfs.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> The vote was won by mobilising people, getting the vote out, which was Cumming’s work.


Who spent three years in Russia which has raised questions regarding his level of security clearance.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

Do watch this thing that's been doing the remain nutter rounds all day - all 47 seconds of it's damning evidence.

Jesus christ.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Who spent three years in Russia which has raised questions regarding his level of security clearance.


You are now a proper loon. How quickly it all collapsed. Liberalism was always a paper tiger.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 9, 2019)

NoXion said:


> Russia already has what it wants - the Crimea - and the EU isn't doing diddly squat to take that away from them.


This. Ever since they got their hands on Crimea they've been impeccably behaved, and we can confidently expect that to go on forever.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I said the foreign press seems to be more interested in the blocking of a report than the UK press which I find concerning. Still without knowing what is actually in the report it is hard to argue the potential impact it might have on the current election or the legality of the 2016 referendum.
> 
> Here is a clip of a discussion about fake news in the Irish Parliament where it is being discussed by I expect not your favourite journalist.




No you didn't you lying toerag you said they had more of a handle on it. We can see what you wrote.


----------



## gosub (Nov 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> No it was the Russians. Cummngs' job is to make you sceptical that it was the Russians.


Dominic Cummings,  who once worked in Russia.




How are defining foreign power ? Coz we had Obama fly in during the referendum telling us to remain .  It was also an ex SIS man that dug up Trump's piss tapes ...SO we have has a bit of an exception that proves the rule with the other side of the pond but big phama and NATO / EU are going to be in sharp focus by the end of the election


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 9, 2019)

I just can't get my head around why so many people think there must be some form of conspiracy, domestic or foreign. Lots of people are fucked off for lots of reasons, mostly connected to increased inequality, insecurity, falling living standards. There was a referendum with two options - keep as is or rip it up. The rip it up option was opposed by a large majority of the political class. That's it, that's all it needed. People aren't thick. They knew it would cause chaos. That's why they did it.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why is a film maker with no role in any of this of any relevance? What on earth is him offering nothing but an_ i reckon_ worth posting? Because he has the lord prefix? Off your knees serfs.


Well I expect he wasn't invited to the Irish Parliament just for his autograph.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Well I expect he wasn't invited to the Irish Parliament just for his autograph.


So where is the expert testimony?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I just can't get my head around why so many people think there must be some form of conspiracy, domestic or foreign. Lots of people are fucked off for lots of reasons, mostly connected to increased inequality, insecurity, falling living standards. There was a referendum with two options - keep as is or rip it up. The rip it up option was opposed by a large majority of the political class. That's it, that's all it needed. People aren't thick. They knew it would cause chaos. That's why they did it.


Classic conspiracy theory started with the french rev. A set of rich people couldn't understand how it could have happened. They didn't have the intellectual tools or social understanding to grasp why something they didn't want to happen actually happened. This new iteration is _evidence led_ and _sensible _though.

The common theme is the idea that _you _and _people like you_ own society.


----------



## gosub (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Classic conspiracy theory started with the french rev. A set of rich people couldn't understand how it could have happened. They didn't have the intellectual tools or social understanding to grasp why something they didn't want to happen actually happened. This new iteration is _evidence led_ and _sensible _though.
> 
> The common theme is the idea that _you _and _people like you_ own society.


Tbf The  whole thing has sailed so close to the wind in echoes of so many 'how the fuck did that happrn events of history that it's helped give a better insight into them


----------



## gosub (Nov 9, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I just can't get my head around why so many people think there must be some form of conspiracy, domestic or foreign. Lots of people are fucked off for lots of reasons, mostly connected to increased inequality, insecurity, falling living standards. There was a referendum with two options - keep as is or rip it up. The rip it up option was opposed by a large majority of the political class. That's it, that's all it needed. People aren't thick. They knew it would cause chaos. That's why they did it.


Political class is it now, not disagreeing  but how does that fucking work? At least they don't have the timerity to call themselves a polical elite any more they couldn't run a bath


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 9, 2019)

Raheem said:


> This. Ever since they got their hands on Crimea they've been impeccably behaved, and we can confidently expect that to go on forever.


NoXion didn't say anything like that.

One can dismiss the conspiracyloonery of MrSki and co while still thinking the Russian government despicable. Or at least some of us can, other seem to find that that too complicated.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> So where is the expert testimony?


Possibly in the report that you don't give a fuck about being published. 

Still maybe some of it will surface in tomorrow's papers.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Possibly in the report that you don't give a fuck about being published.
> 
> Still maybe some of it will surface in tomorrow's papers.



From Lord Puttman who has nothing to do with any of it in some part of the the irish Parliament. You literally posted someone saying that they reckon boris Johnson was up to no good. That's all it was.

Why was he there, do you even know?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 9, 2019)

andysays said:


> Ugh indeed


People's Vote and similar: entirely corporate structure of boards, executives and 'employees'. Oh and funded by millionaires (and yes, before anybody pipes up that leave was too, _I know_ ). The _people_, but not 'those people'.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

They really think that's how and why we voted _because of campaigns._ We  couldn't do it on our own of course.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> From Lord Puttman who has nothing to do with any of it in some part of the the irish Parliament. You literally posted someone saying that they reckon boris Johnson was up to no good. That's all it was.
> 
> Why was he there, do you even know?


No. I presume that because it was the 'International Committee on Disinformation & Fake News' that he was invited for a reason but no I don't know the details.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> No. I presume that because it was the 'International Committee on Disinformation & Fake News' that he was invited for a reason but no I don't know the details.


Why would he be there? What's his expertise? All, you have is a film maker telling us what he reckons and nothing else in  2 seconds, yet you posted it as some sort of proof. Did you even watch it first? I'd have made very sure not to have done so if it was me.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

The gradual day by day acceptance  of loonery if it agrees with what your wider belief is is how it gets purchase. Rather than boosting it, _challenge it_.  Less conspiracy theory. We all win, even lib-dems.


----------



## Raheem (Nov 9, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> NoXion didn't say anything like that.
> 
> One can dismiss the conspiracyloonery of MrSki and co while still thinking the Russian government despicable. Or at least some of us can, other seem to find that that too complicated.


NoXion appeared to be suggesting that any interest Moscow might have had in meddling in EU politics will have expired because their success regarding Crimea has satiated them. If they think that's a misunderstanding of their position, I'm sure they will clarify. 

There might be some wilful belief involved in imagining that the whole house of cards is on the verge of collapsing and Brexit will be shown to be nothing more than an elaborate FSB marionette show. But I think it's also egregiously naive to dismiss the idea of Russian support to the leave side as implausible. They certainly had motive, capability and form. Beyond that, we can't be sure of much.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why would he be there? What's his expertise? All, you have is a film maker telling us what he reckons and nothing else in  2 seconds, yet you posted it as some sort of proof. Did you even watch it first? I'd have made very sure not to have done so if it was me.


Yes I watched it & posted it as an example of how it seems the suppression of the report seems to get more coverage abroad than it is in the UK media. 

Surprisingly the Police probe into the PM has been shelved till after the election too.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

You watched all 2 seconds of someone going yeah i reckon this. Well i suppose i should thank you for posting that and bringing otherwise unknown views to out attention. Your video isn'gt eviden e of suppression. It's a bloke down the pub saying that he thinks it is. Leaving aside their motivations for saying so. 

This is not good enough. I would not accept this from any leave source.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> You watched all 2 seconds of someone going yeah i reckon this. Well i suppose i should thank you for posting that and bringing otherwise unknown views to out attention. Your video isn'gt eviden e of suppression. It's a bloke down the pub saying that he thinks it is. Leaving aside their motivations for saying so.
> 
> This is not good enough. I would not accept this from any leave source.



You don't give a fuck about the report being published but insist on evidence for anything else? I don't claim to know what is in the report but would at least like to have access to it before judgement. Just out of interest why don't you give a fuck about possible Russian interference in UK politics? 

Why don't you give a fuck?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> You don't give a fuck about the report being published but insist on evidence for anything else? I don't claim to know what is in the report but would at least like to have access to it before judgement. Just out of interest why don't you give a fuck about possible Russian interference in UK politics?
> 
> Why don't you give a fuck?


Mad post. You posted something that you would be censured for adding to the discussion. Then you bounced on ignoring me saying good luck and crack on with your obsession. Your stuff, clearly, has nothing whatsoever, to do with mine. Nothing.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Mad post. You posted something that you would be censured for adding to the discussion. Then you bounced on ignoring me saying good luck and crack on with your obsession. Your stuff, clearly, has nothing whatsoever, to do with mine. Nothing.


No. I just asked you why you don't give a fuck about the report. Why?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> No. I just asked you why you don't give a fuck about the report. Why?


Go back to when you asked me. What were you replying to?


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Go back to when you asked me. What were you replying to?


Why not answer why you don't give a fuck about the report?


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 9, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Why not answer why you don't give a fuck about the report?


Why not do the other?

I have explained that i'm not a conspiracy theorist. I don't care if your box is opened or not. In fact, i said if it can apply pressure then crack on. Don't though, ever tell me how and what i choose to prioritise you presumptive prick.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 9, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Why not do the other?
> 
> I have explained that i'm not a conspiracy theorist. I don't care if your box is opened or not. In fact, i said if it can apply pressure then crack on. Don't though, ever tell me how and what i choose to prioritise you presumptive prick.


Charmed I'm sure. Why not answer why you don't give a fuck about the report? I will not add personal insults because they don't really add to anything. Just answer the question. Why don't you give a fuck about the report?


----------



## teuchter (Nov 10, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> There was a referendum with two options - keep as is or rip it up. The rip it up option was opposed by a large majority of the political class. That's it, that's all it needed. People aren't thick. They knew it would cause chaos. That's why they did it.



Are you predicting a big Brexit Party vote at the GE? Because if 17.4M people were voting to 'rip it up' they are not now going to vote for one of the traditional parties, right?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 10, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Are you predicting a big Brexit Party vote at the GE?



No



> Because if 17.4M people were voting to 'rip it up' they are not now going to vote for one of the traditional parties, right?



Also no. It's a general election not a referendum.



> People aren't thick


----------



## teuchter (Nov 10, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Also no. It's a general election not a referendum.



If 17 odd million people want chaos and to 'rip it up' why would they vote for one of the 'more of the same' traditional parties in a general election?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 10, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If 17 odd million people want chaos and to 'rip it up' why would they vote for one of the 'more of the same' traditional parties in a general election?



A lot of older more conservative people don’t want change, they wanted things to stay the same, not hearing people speaking a different language in the street, not having the post office close, bendy buses, wheelie bins, back to grammar schools etc. There is a strong component of wanting things back how they were, not radical upheaval and change. It’s a challenge to the system causing those changes, but not a desire for some overarching change to the system, otherwise we would see that reflected in polling.

Anyway, it’s daft to speak of either ‘camp’ as a ‘we’, as leave/remain voters had a multitude of motivations and political leanings. Sick of this being how people are defined.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 10, 2019)

Raheem said:


> But I think it's also egregiously naive to dismiss the idea of Russian support to the leave side as implausible. They certainly had motive, capability and form. Beyond that, we can't be sure of much.


But no one (on this thread at least) has done that. Or, to put it less crudely, no one has dismissed the idea of the Russian government using propaganda to advance its aims and objectives. Attacking the type of sheeple conspiracyloonary of some U75 posters does not imply otherwise. Again as hard as it seems for some to grasp my enemies friend is NOT my friend. 

(I also think your interpretation of NoXion's post incorrect but as you say they can speak to that)


----------



## philosophical (Nov 10, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> A lot of older more conservative people don’t want change, they wanted things to stay the same, not hearing people speaking a different language in the street, not having the post office close, bendy buses, wheelie bins, back to grammar schools etc. There is a strong component of wanting things back how they were, not radical upheaval and change. It’s a challenge to the system causing those changes, but not a desire for some overarching change to the system, otherwise we would see that reflected in polling.
> 
> Anyway, it’s daft to speak of either ‘camp’ as a ‘we’, as leave/remain voters had a multitude of motivations and political leanings. Sick of this being how people are defined.



If it is possible then to put aside motivations, does it follow that people are therefore defined by their actions in casting their vote for plain leave or plain remain?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 10, 2019)

teuchter said:


> If 17 odd million people want chaos and to 'rip it up' why would they vote for one of the 'more of the same' traditional parties in a general election?


Because not one of the parties is campaigning on 'more of the same' unlike the remain campaign, because people want their vote to count and to decide who forms the govt, because it's a general election not a referendum so people haven't been devolved agency on a yes/no question, because of lots of very obvious reasons which should be apparent


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 10, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:
			
		

> I just can't get my head around why so many people think there must be some form of conspiracy, domestic or foreign. Lots of people are fucked off for lots of reasons, mostly connected to increased inequality, insecurity, falling living standards. There was a referendum with two options - keep as is or rip it up. The rip it up option was opposed by a large majority of the political class. That's it, that's all it needed. People aren't thick. They knew it would cause chaos. That's why they did it.





Dogsauce said:


> A lot of older more conservative people don’t want change, they wanted things to stay the same, not hearing people speaking a different language in the street, not having the post office close, bendy buses, wheelie bins, back to grammar schools etc. There is a strong component of wanting things back how they were, not radical upheaval and change. It’s a challenge to the system causing those changes, but not a desire for some overarching change to the system, otherwise we would see that reflected in polling.
> 
> Anyway, it’s daft to speak of either ‘camp’ as a ‘we’, as leave/remain voters had a multitude of motivations and political leanings. Sick of this being how people are defined.



Both excellent posts 

Agree with both -- the fact that I voted Remain in 2016 is nearly irrelevant to understanding the whole malarkey much better now.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 10, 2019)

Dogsauce said:


> A lot of older more conservative people don’t want change, they wanted things to stay the same, not hearing people speaking a different language in the street, not having the post office close, bendy buses, wheelie bins, back to grammar schools etc. There is a strong component of wanting things back how they were, not radical upheaval and change. It’s a challenge to the system causing those changes, but not a desire for some overarching change to the system, otherwise we would see that reflected in polling.
> 
> Anyway, it’s daft to speak of either ‘camp’ as a ‘we’, as leave/remain voters had a multitude of motivations and political leanings. Sick of this being how people are defined.


Older voters are more brexity and likely to vote tory, yes, measurably. But beyond that I think you get pretty much all of your examples wrong (I'll grant that there are some age related attitudes to migration). Older people of whatever age have been living through decades of rapid change, industrially, socially and politically. Whatever nostalgia there may be isn't for a fixed point, it could be 70 year olds yearning for a time when they were healthy and doing what they wanted 20 years ago, it may be 60 year olds who have just lost their job at the Steelworks in Redcar. It needs to be related to real experience and particularly to the vast inequalities and the further shifts of power away from people's lives and communities. Suppose I'm really saying this generic 'oh, old people are conservative' doesn't help. Older people are as varied and make real political choices every bit as much as any other group.


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 10, 2019)

And what does conservative mean?
Wanting post offices not to close - that sounds pretty good to me. Wanting a single state company for facilities rather than a bunch of thieving spivs - I might not be in total agreement (workers control rather than state) but I am sympathetic. Wanting to be able to see a future in which their children and grandchildren have a better quality of life than they do? 

And wanting things to go "back how they were" _is_ a demand for radical change, that is precisely part of what is driving populism.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 10, 2019)

redsquirrel said:


> And And wanting things to go "back how they were" _is_ a demand for radical change, that is precisely part of what is driving populism.



Yeah. Even when it's clearly reactionary (see brexit party using air raid sirens) it still represents a desire for change, retrograde change maybe but it isn't wanting to preserve the political status quo. Although shouldn't ignore a current of wanting to preserve cultural status quo eg migration, don't hear english on tube anymore etc


----------



## NoXion (Nov 10, 2019)

Raheem said:


> NoXion appeared to be suggesting that any interest Moscow might have had in meddling in EU politics will have expired because their success regarding Crimea has satiated them. If they think that's a misunderstanding of their position, I'm sure they will clarify.
> 
> There might be some wilful belief involved in imagining that the whole house of cards is on the verge of collapsing and Brexit will be shown to be nothing more than an elaborate FSB marionette show. But I think it's also egregiously naive to dismiss the idea of Russian support to the leave side as implausible. They certainly had motive, capability and form. Beyond that, we can't be sure of much.



Actually, my position is that the Russians don't need to break up the EU to get what they want out of their meddlings in EU politics, given that the effective lynchpin of that union, Germany, is the biggest consumer of Russian gas. Given that Germany's fucking idiot "energiewende" policy has seen perfectly functional nuclear fission plants being shut down early while not growing renewables, this has resulted in Germany burning more Russian gas. This failure of German energy policy may or may not itself be down to Russian influence, but it is certainly proving to be profitable for Gazprom.

As a side note, if Germany was serious about reducing their carbon emissions, they would be expanding their nuclear fission capability, not reducing it like the fucking morons that they are.

The degree of Russian meddling required to render the Leave result invalid would be obvious enough not need a report released. Also the people talking about this kind of loon shit seem to be under the impression that the US/Western interests would never, ever, try to influence the outcome of a referendum, even though they have just as much  - if not more -  than the Russians in terms of means and motivation. I doubt that if Remain had won, that the liberal types who now dribble on about Russians under the bed would be going about the insidious influence of the CIA or the Five Eyes or whatever.

They're all bastards, they're all dirty, they're all at it.


----------



## maomao (Nov 10, 2019)

I'd be flabbergasted if the Russians (or the US or the Chinese or the British) didn't have resources devoted to meddling in foreign elections. Its what superpowers do. The problem is when it's sold as a conspiracy. That the good people of Britain would have made the sensible choice if it hadn't been for those pesky Russians and all we have to do is expose the conspiracy and all will be okay again. Cause that's patently bollocks.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 10, 2019)

maomao said:


> I'd be flabbergasted if the Russians (or the US or the Chinese or the British) didn't have resources devoted to meddling in foreign elections. Its what superpowers do. The problem is when it's sold as a conspiracy. That the good people of Britain would have made the sensible choice if it hadn't been for those pesky Russians and all we have to do is expose the conspiracy and all will be okay again. Cause that's patently bollocks.


Yep, this is the right way to think about it, to me. A) there has always been interference in the internal affairs of countries by other countries, sometimes sly, sometimes overt, sometimes real life, sometimes online . Strong countries, we've done it for decades/centuries aka imperialism. B) In any close election there are numerous issues in the mix, any one of which can tip the result, so I'm prepared to entertain the argument over brexit. But it's hard to calibrate the effects of any interference and equally hard to see it creating a 4% margin. but then as you say, the problem is the elevation of this to a conspiracy, to a 'if it hadn't happened, we would have won' argument. 

_If _there was interference, if there were 'lies' from the leave campaign (there were, as indeed there were from remain and still are), a much more important question is _why _people could have been receptive to those arguments, which takes you right back to material conditions and the effects of neo-liberalism - real people making adult decisions about their lives.  Just to be clear, I'm not accepting that brexit was swung by slogans on buses, bots and the rest, just saying that those who do believe that don't take it to the logical place they should be going to. They park it at 'thick people can be swayed and manipulated'. In reality, the brexit vote and campaign might have been different to other elections in the UK, but still had people doing what they do in other elections. Thinking, getting mad, reflecting,, voting...


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 10, 2019)

And, let's not forget how much more groups supporting remain spent, compared to those on the leave side.

The total spent by all groups on the leave side was £13.3m, and on the remain side about 50% more at £19.3m, and that doesn't include the £9m spent by the government on sending a booklet to every household telling us we should remain taking the total to £28.3m, over double what was spent on the leave side.

Campaign spending at the EU referendum.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 10, 2019)

And who that money came from. Who funds People's Vote etc


----------



## paolo (Nov 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, let's not forget how much more groups supporting remain spent, compared to those on the leave side.
> 
> The total spent by all groups on the leave side was £13.3m, and on the remain side about 50% more at £19.3m, and that doesn't include the £9m spent by the government on sending a booklet to every household telling us we should remain taking the total to £28.3m, over double what was spent on the leave side.
> 
> Campaign spending at the EU referendum.



Sounds convincing. Vote for Johnson? He’s got your back, right?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> Sounds convincing. Vote for Johnson? He’s got your back, right?


If you think he's got your back he's just easing your wallet out of your pocket


----------



## redsquirrel (Nov 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> Sounds convincing. Vote for Johnson? He’s got your back, right?


Oh FFS. There's nothing in that post (let alone CS's past posting history) that implies support for Johnson.  

This is exactly what I was talking about above with some people unable distinguish enemies enemy from friends.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> Sounds convincing. Vote for Johnson? He’s got your back, right?



WFT have you been smoking?


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 10, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> And, let's not forget how much more groups supporting remain spent, compared to those on the leave side.
> 
> The total spent by all groups on the leave side was £13.3m, and on the remain side about 50% more at £19.3m, and that doesn't include the £9m spent by the government on sending a booklet to every household telling us we should remain taking the total to £28.3m, over double what was spent on the leave side.
> 
> Campaign spending at the EU referendum.



The thing those facts emphasise most is how utterly incompetent the Remain campaign was in 2016, how counterproductive their strategy, how wasteful of money.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 10, 2019)

paolo said:


> Sounds convincing. Vote for Johnson? He’s got your back, right?


You know those puzzles you get in the newspapers? Start off with a word, change one letter to make another word. Keep doing that till you get something entirely different. Bet you'd be good at that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 10, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> The thing those facts emphasise most is how utterly incompetent the Remain campaign was in 2016, how counterproductive their strategy, how wasteful of money.


Yeah defo. I think they saw the narrow no vote in scotland in '14 as a blueprint, it's amazing how many of the same type that ran remain in '16 still crow about that, completely failing to recognise that the 'winners' lost on pretty much every count and the losers visa versa


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah defo. I think they saw the narrow no vote in scotland in '14 as a blueprint, it's amazing how many of the same type that ran remain in '16 still crow about that, completely failing to recognise that the 'winners' lost on pretty much every count and the losers visa versa


Yeah but gammon etc

That shitty campaign has not stopped for a second and is now unquestioned common sense amongst middle class progressives.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

Switched from the GE thread:



SpackleFrog said:


> That sounds a bit like you think it would win. And probably lots of people would be worried it would win, and wouldn't want it on the ballot paper. Which is why it won't work teuchter.



Then don't have it on the ballot paper. A second referendum without no-deal as an option is still better than some kind of deal being boshed through parliament which we have no idea whether it's what most people want.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Switched from the GE thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Then don't have it on the ballot paper. A second referendum without no-deal as an option is still better than some kind of deal being boshed through parliament which we have no idea whether it's what most people want.



How is it better? More palatable to you maybe


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> How is it better?





teuchter said:


> Then don't have it on the ballot paper. A second referendum without no-deal as an option is still better than some kind of deal being boshed through parliament *which we have no idea whether it's what most people want.*


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 11, 2019)

Right, and excluding an option that polls consistently high in a second referendum would be an agreeable solution with no political consequences would it


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Switched from the GE thread:
> 
> 
> 
> Then don't have it on the ballot paper. A second referendum without no-deal as an option is still better than some kind of deal being boshed through parliament which we have no idea whether it's what most people want.



My interest was purely in your suggestion that no deal be on the ballot paper. How would you feel if no deal was on the ballot paper and won?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 11, 2019)

maomao said:


> I'd be flabbergasted if the Russians (or the US or the Chinese or the British) didn't have resources devoted to meddling in foreign elections. Its what superpowers do. The problem is when it's sold as a conspiracy. That the good people of Britain would have made the sensible choice if it hadn't been for those pesky Russians and all we have to do is expose the conspiracy and all will be okay again. Cause that's patently bollocks.



It's not really a question of _if_ at this point.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

SpackleFrog said:


> My interest was purely in your suggestion that no deal be on the ballot paper. How would you feel if no deal was on the ballot paper and won?


Well, I'd be disappointed but would accept it.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Well, I'd be disappointed but would accept it.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Right, and excluding an option that polls consistently high in a second referendum would be an agreeable solution with no political consequences would it



It would be a least worst solution, and of course it would have political consequences.

Do you have some kind of agreeable solution with no political consequences to propose as an alternative?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> It would be a least worst solution, and of course it would have political consequences.
> 
> Do you have some kind of agreeable solution with no political consequences to propose as an alternative?


Why do you think it would be the least worst solution?


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Why do you think it would be the least worst solution?


Because it has the best chance of matching what happens to what people actually want. As I've already said. As you know.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> Because it has the best chance of matching what happens to what people actually want. As I've already said. As you know.


But what about all the people - the largest slice of the pie according to some polling - who want no deal. Or do you think what they 'actually' want is not what they say they want


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> But what about all the people - the largest slice of the pie according to some polling - who want no deal. Or do you think what they 'actually' want is not what they say they want


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 11, 2019)

teuchter said:


> View attachment 189721







teuchter said:


> Then don't have it on the ballot paper. A second referendum without no-deal as an option is still better than some kind of deal being boshed through parliament which we have no idea whether it's what most people want.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 11, 2019)

?


----------



## Cloud (Nov 12, 2019)

I just enjoy the whole thing pissing off the bunch of thuggish retards i seem to have as friends on social media. I know it's a stereotype but the people i get posting fkn memes all day are plain stupid and the majority seem to just be up for a fight. It's quite funny really because I've see a serious police turnout at Bradford EDL (same bunch as my brexit fans tbh) and erm do they really understand what where civil unrest is going to get them cos some of the dumb fucks think marching on parliament was some fucked up medieval assault.
I unfortunately know some really dumb cunts which is probably a bit obvious given where i live.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2019)

teuchter said:


> ?


clueless again i see


----------



## brogdale (Nov 12, 2019)

Connected to nothing much at all...friend of mine told me yesterday that her 2 kids (8 & 10 ish) had sat in the back of their car on a longish trip and made up a song about Brexit to the tune of _Baa Baa Black Sheep..._can only remember the first line...but a godd'un:


> Blah Blah Brexit


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 12, 2019)

Accurate. No further lyrics needed really.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 12, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Accurate. No further lyrics needed really.


Innit?
1265 pages says so..


----------



## isvicthere? (Nov 12, 2019)

Cloud said:


> I unfortunately know some really dumb cunts which is probably a bit obvious given where i live.



Luton? Stoke? Sunderland?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Connected to nothing much at all...friend of mine told me yesterday that her 2 kids (8 & 10 ish) had sat in the back of their car on a longish trip and made up a song about Brexit to the tune of _Baa Baa Black Sheep..._can only remember the first line...but a godd'un:


blah blah brexit
going on and on


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 12, 2019)

The wheels on the Brexit bus,
goes round and round...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 12, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> The wheels on the Brexit bus,
> goes round and round.


the wheels on the brexit bus
fall off and off
off and off
off and off
the wheels on the brexit bus
fall off and off
all day long


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Connected to nothing much at all...friend of mine told me yesterday that her 2 kids (8 & 10 ish) had sat in the back of their car on a longish trip and made up a song about Brexit to the tune of _Baa Baa Black Sheep..._can only remember the first line...but a godd'un:


Have you any deal


----------



## maomao (Nov 12, 2019)

isvicthere? said:


> Luton? Stoke? Sunderland?


Earth.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 12, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Have you any deal


no sir
no sir
£350 mill


----------



## brogdale (Nov 12, 2019)

Top Blahing Urbz...makes yer proud.

I'm now thinking I need to ring her back and get the full kids' lyrics!


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 12, 2019)

The revolution consumes it’s own.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Nov 12, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Blah Blah Brexit


Blah Blah Brexit
Can we have some fun?
Yes sir, let's have a proper Tory cull
Start with Boris Johnson and finish with Patel
And piss on their graves as they all burn in hell


----------



## krtek a houby (Nov 13, 2019)

Cloud said:


> I just enjoy the whole thing pissing off the bunch of thuggish retards



"retards", though?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 13, 2019)

Shame about the Tesla factory and the proposed R&D base not coming to the UK


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2019)

Possibly brexit driven but let’s be honest - an inexpensive spacious altbau  in Berlin and nights out at berghain with currywurst at dawn vs a a barrat brookside  estate outside Birmingham , a bullring Wetherspoons and chips n gravy next to spaghetti junction- I know which one I would go for if I was a Tesla expat


----------



## Badgers (Nov 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Possibly brexit driven but let’s be honest - an inexpensive spacious altbau  in Berlin and nights out at berghain with currywurst at dawn vs a a barrat brookside  estate outside Birmingham , a bullring Wetherspoons and chips n gravy next to spaghetti junction- I know which one I would go for if I was a Tesla expat


 

Surprised the tax dodging cunt didn't opt for the UK 
Not like he would be staying over that often or eating at Wimpy


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 13, 2019)

Ps  nothing to do with brum but more with Berlin iykwim


----------



## pseudonarcissus (Nov 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Ps  nothing to do with brum but more with Berlin iykwim



..and to think we once led the world in EV technology


----------



## teuchter (Nov 13, 2019)

not-bono-ever said:


> Possibly brexit driven but let’s be honest - an inexpensive spacious altbau  in Berlin and nights out at berghain with currywurst at dawn vs a a barrat brookside  estate outside Birmingham , a bullring Wetherspoons and chips n gravy next to spaghetti junction- I know which one I would go for if I was a Tesla expat


No snooty bouncers on the door at wetherspoons though, so there is that.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> No snooty bouncers on the door at wetherspoons though, so there is that.


For some reason you knocking about Kreuzberg seems a strange fit


----------



## teqniq (Nov 13, 2019)

Emily Maitliss earning her salary for a change. I wonder what else he's done wrong to receive such a roasting?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 14, 2019)

> Brussels is set to sue the United Kingdom over Boris Johnson’s refusal to appoint a member of the next European Commission, escalating a dispute with London over the obligations that arise from last month’s Brexit delay. Brussels will make the move after the UK rejected repeated requests from Ursula von der Leyen, the EU commission’s incoming president, to propose a British member of her team, according to several people familiar with the matter.
> 
> Under the EU’s treaties, the commission’s ruling college is supposed to have one member from each EU country, but the British government wrote to Brussels this week to say that the UK could not make a nomination during its period of election purdah. The commission will launch a formal “infringement procedure” against the UK, a process that in theory could lead to Britain being hauled before the European Court of Justice for refusing to comply.
> 
> Subscribe to read | Financial Times



Johnson playing games.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

#getbrexitdone


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2019)

London ballroom hosts showcase event for 'golden passports' | The super-rich | The Guardian

Sounds decent 


> Three prime ministers took to a stage in the ballroom of a five-star London hotel this week offering the world’s wealthiest people “golden passports” and citizenship of their countries in return for hundreds of thousands of pounds of investment or flat “contributions”.
> 
> Allen Chastanet, the prime minister of the Caribbean island of St Lucia, told about 300 members of the super-rich elite and their advisers gathered at the Rosewood hotel for “global citizenship conference” that his country’s economic mission was “going after high net-worth individuals and giving them a comfortable place to live”.
> 
> He promised that in return for a $100,000 (£78,000) “contribution to the national economic fund” applicants would be granted St Lucian citizenship within three months. With it comes a so-called “golden passport”


----------



## The39thStep (Nov 16, 2019)

Badgers said:


> London ballroom hosts showcase event for 'golden passports' | The super-rich | The Guardian
> 
> Sounds decent


They do golden passports in Portugal as well.I think both the UK and Canada have similar schemes but with a visa as the outcome rather than a passport.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Nov 18, 2019)




----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 18, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> View attachment 190273


"Hey Siri how do I make sprouts worse"


----------



## Poi E (Nov 18, 2019)




----------



## Yossarian (Nov 18, 2019)

sleaterkinney said:


> View attachment 190273





"Nothing whatsoever to do with Brussels, unless you count the £29,000 in subsidies from Brussels."


----------



## not-bono-ever (Nov 18, 2019)

Badgers said:


>




paul fucking marshal underwrites this


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 18, 2019)

Are they trying for Brendan O'niell's beat as contrarian arseholes or something.


----------



## killer b (Nov 18, 2019)

DotCommunist said:


> Are they trying for Brendan O'niell's beat as contrarian arseholes or something.


It's always been aiming for the spiked-curious crowd tbf


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

#arronbanksleaks


----------



## Crispy (Nov 19, 2019)

Over 2GB of his private twitter data. Blimey. Got to be all sorts of tasty stuff in there


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Over 2GB of his private twitter data. Blimey. Got to be all sorts of tasty stuff in there


#thiswillgowell


----------



## Crispy (Nov 19, 2019)

Anyone can go rooting around in there btw. The download links are on his own twitter (for now)


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Anyone can go rooting around in there btw. The download links are on his own twitter (for now)


Let's wait (hopefully not too long) and see what CC has got


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

People seem upset


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 19, 2019)

Haha, this could definitely yield some interesting stories. Wonder how much will get suppressed from publication by injunctions?


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 19, 2019)

People use Twitter for private information?  Wtf?


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Leak means LEAK


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Cash eh?


----------



## ruffneck23 (Nov 19, 2019)

id like the 10k if its going


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## MrCurry (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Yossarian (Nov 19, 2019)

"Nobody look at the messages or you're going to jail."


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> "Nobody look at the messages or you're going to jail."
> 
> View attachment 190365


Nothing to hide


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

It was the Met Police what done it


----------



## Poi E (Nov 19, 2019)

Going off the deep end. Great fun.


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 19, 2019)

It’s always a good day when people in power have reason to be feeling nervous. Andy “lives in Belize” Wigmore should know better than to start quoting UK legislation as though it applies to the whole world. And what mechanism he thinks might be available to him to discover who has downloaded the from the links is a worthwhile question.  Mega.nz don’t have a reputation for folding under legal pressure, so I doubt a list of IPs would be provided even if requested.

I’m going to sit back and wait for the stories to emerge, because trying to follow that hashtag on Twitter is becoming a bit tiresome. Only so many popcorn gifs you can see in one day...


----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 19, 2019)

Teaboy said:


> People use Twitter for private information?  Wtf?



Stupid people. Stupid people with five-letter passwords.


----------



## elbows (Nov 19, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> Stupid people. Stupid people with five-letter passwords.



That password might be for the download, not the password used on the twitter account.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 19, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> I’m going to sit back and wait for the stories to emerge, because trying to follow that hashtag on Twitter is becoming a bit tiresome. Only so many popcorn gifs you can see in one day...





sorry.


----------



## Yossarian (Nov 19, 2019)

His day's not getting any better.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## SpookyFrank (Nov 19, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> His day's not getting any better.
> 
> View attachment 190367



Genie's out the bottle now anyways.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


>



so money can't buy everything, moments like this are priceless


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## MrSki (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## Crispy (Nov 19, 2019)

Those ones are fake, unfortunately


----------



## MrSki (Nov 19, 2019)

Crispy said:


> Those ones are fake, unfortunately


Are you sure? How do you know? I know twitter sources are not reliable but are coming from a lot of places.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 19, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Are you sure? How do you know? I know twitter sources are not reliable but are coming from a lot of places.



'Regards, Raab' seems something of a giveaway on that one.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 19, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Regards, Raab' seems something of a giveaway on that one.


Well it has been taken down so you are probably right & Crispy too.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


>


This is also fake I am sad to say


----------



## MrSki (Nov 19, 2019)




----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> This is also fake I am sad to say



And, I bet you go around telling kids that Santa Claus isn't real.


----------



## danny la rouge (Nov 19, 2019)

Badgers said:


> This is also fake I am sad to say


Wait, does Prince Andrew sweat or not?


----------



## teuchter (Nov 19, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Are you sure? How do you know? [/MEDIA]



You can tell within about 10 nanoseconds of reading them.


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 19, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> 'Regards, Raab' seems something of a giveaway on that one.



Hats off to them for realising that anything formatted as a convincing looking text file would be RTd a thousand times today, but nil points for the content of the message.  They could’ve had Banks reflecting that it’s lucky voters will never experience Nigel’s earth shattering gingivitis and that it’s the main reason they have to put him on a raised platform at events.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 19, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Wait, does Prince Andrew sweat or not?


We live in a confusing world. Prince Andrew can't sweat, yet apparently dogs _can_ look up.


----------



## bluescreen (Nov 19, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> We live in a confusing world. Prince Andrew can't sweat, yet apparently dogs _can_ look up.


Which is just as well, or they would be difficult to hypnotise.


----------



## agricola (Nov 19, 2019)

Is the Dan Hodges one true?

If so:


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2019)

Few Bish in, but this made me chortle...


----------



## elbows (Nov 19, 2019)

agricola said:


> Is the Dan Hodges one true?
> 
> If so:



Much duller when read in context, so I've heard.


----------



## brogdale (Nov 19, 2019)

Locker room bantz...


----------



## agricola (Nov 19, 2019)

elbows said:


> Much duller when read in context, so I've heard.



bah


----------



## agricola (Nov 19, 2019)

brogdale said:


> Locker room bantz...
> 
> View attachment 190414



the Guardian's Marina Hyde no less


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 19, 2019)

Amusingly obvious fake video by Matt Hancock and team:


----------



## phillm (Nov 19, 2019)

Elliot Alderson (@fs0c131y) on Twitter


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)

All the Aaron Banks leaks have been published now. Is it okay to link to them?


----------



## Dogsauce (Nov 20, 2019)

MrSki said:


> All the Aaron Banks leaks have been published now. Is it okay to link to them?



Are there any juicy bits? Not seen anything showstopping on Twitter. Plus there’s lots of fake ones in circulation which is possibly being done to cast doubt on the real ones.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

MrSki said:


> All the Aaron Banks leaks have been published now. Is it okay to link to them?


What's the worst that could happen?


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> What's the worst that could happen?


I don't know. Don't want to get the site in trouble so I reported my own post. Will PM link to anyone who is interested though till I hear it is okay to put it here.


----------



## shakespearegirl (Nov 20, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I don't know. Don't want to get the site in trouble so I reported my own post. Will PM link to anyone who is interested though till I hear it is okay to put it hear.



I’m interested


----------



## Cid (Nov 20, 2019)

MrSki said:


> I don't know. Don't want to get the site in trouble so I reported my own post. Will PM link to anyone who is interested though till I hear it is okay to put it here.



A decent test would be to look at what uk papers are publishing. E.g I can’t see anything by the graun (beyond reporting the leak).

e2a: though best to err on the side of caution.


----------



## elbows (Nov 20, 2019)

In regards the legal picture.

Arron Banks' private messages leaked by hacker



> One expert said the hacker, if caught, could be prosecuted under the Computer Misuse Act, and that others who made use of the material would be walking into a legal minefield.
> 
> "Even if Arron Banks was using Twitter in a private capacity rather than as Leave.EU, the data was misappropriated from Twitter and that likely engages the Data Protection Act," commented Tim Turner, a data protection consultant.
> 
> ...


----------



## MrCurry (Nov 20, 2019)

I think you’re potentially going to get in trouble for posting a link to a site which makes available illegally obtained private info.  However, if people follow the #arronbanksleaks hashtag on twitter they might find several sites publishing the info in plain text. Not that I would encourage anyone to do so.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> I think you’re potentially going to get in trouble for posting a link to a site which makes available illegally obtained private info.  However, if people follow the #arronbanksleaks hashtag on twitter they might find several sites publishing the info in plain text. Not that I would encourage anyone to do so.


I think if it hosted abroad then it is not a problem but I have very little legal knowledge in this field so have not risked it.

ETA twitter blocked accounts with the leaked material quoted last night.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 20, 2019)

Yeah, let's play it safe and not post any links to it on the boards please. I doubt anything would happen but y'know.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 20, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Yeah, let's play it safe and not post any links to it on the boards please. I doubt anything would happen but y'know.


No problem. As MrCurry said you don't need to be Sherlock to find it on twitter.


----------



## Teaboy (Nov 20, 2019)

Is it worth finding?  Or is it just another 'this is going to be massive' when it just turns out that some bloke everyone knows is a dick is also a dick on twitter?


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 20, 2019)

.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 20, 2019)

It's all still obfuscated by memberid instead of username so of limited interest


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Nov 20, 2019)

Crispy said:


> It's all still obfuscated by memberid instead of username so of limited interest


There are processed versions which have looked up the twitter accounts concerned (when they still exist).

Having said that it's still a huge dump of mostly very dull messages. It's probably only really useful if you have a particular interest in, and existing knowledge of, Brexiteer shenanigans, which would give you some names and topics to focus on. It's supportive material for the future rather than providing any massive shocks right now I'd say.

I suppose if someone didn't realise that journos and politicians and lobbyists were generally really matey despite their public political positions, it might be a bit shocking to see some of the cosy chats he's had, but I wasn't.


----------



## Badgers (Nov 21, 2019)

> Noel Gallagher from Oasis who told Remainers
> 
> “To f***king get over it & stop whining about Brexit”
> 
> ....has now confirmed he has a recently acquired Irish passport to enable him to maintain his freedom of movement & associated EU rights.


You've got to roll with it


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 21, 2019)

Badgers said:


> You've got to roll with it


Cheese first then onion


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 23, 2019)

Noting much would seem to have changed, considering remain actually had a slightly bigger lead in the exit poll on the day.


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 23, 2019)

That the leave vote remains so solid after three years is telling.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2019)

So a tory win -> 10 more years of brexit
A labour win quite possibly 10 years and 6 months of brexit


----------



## Raheem (Nov 23, 2019)

Campaign slogan: Let's savour Brexit.


----------



## andysays (Nov 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> So a tory win -> 10 more years of brexit
> A labour win quite possibly 10 years and 6 months of brexit


Brexit means Brexit, now and forever...


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2019)

andysays said:


> Brexit means Brexit, now and forever...


Brexit without end, amen


----------



## brogdale (Nov 23, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Brexit without end, amen


The Trinity; Father, son and holy fuck what a monstrous cunt.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 23, 2019)

brogdale said:


> The Trinity; Father, son and holy fuck what a monstrous cunt.
> 
> View attachment 190831


The sooner they become holy ghosts the better


----------



## Azrael (Nov 25, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> Noting much would seem to have changed, considering remain actually had a slightly bigger lead in the exit poll on the day.



'Cause nothing much _has_ changed, and won't unless we actually leave. So long as it's all castles in the air, there's little incentive to move position.

That stalemate'll change rapidly once exit happens. If Al "Boris" Johnson's in charge of exiting the bloc, however nominally, it'll be such a mess that E.U. secession as a concept will be tainted for decades at least, likely for good, and Britain could well end up rapidly rejoining, finishing the sorry process further enmeshed in the project than she ever was.

As someone who supported secession long before the unfortunate "Brexit" was even a word, I hope the current attempt fails, or the future possibility of a moderate, E.E.A. based exit is finished.


----------



## Ming (Nov 26, 2019)

EU law expert dissects de Pfeffel's great new deal.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> EU law expert dissects de Pfeffel's great new deal.



Wouldn't trust de pfeffel johnson to deal a pack of top trumps


----------



## Ming (Nov 26, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Wouldn't trust de pfeffel johnson to deal a pack of top trumps


His conclusions aren’t flattering (i always liked the superhero and monster packs of Top Trumps best).


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> His conclusions aren’t flattering (i always liked the superhero and monster packs of Top Trumps best).


No one after objectively considering our nefandous prime minister can regard him other than with contempt


----------



## Azrael (Nov 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> EU law expert dissects de Pfeffel's great new deal.



Exactly why the examples of European countries outside the E.U. that get wheeled out by Brexiteers are all in the single market. Peter Lilley did it again on yesterday's _Newsnight_, parading Iceland and Switzerland (and typically, wasn't pulled up on it). If these fools ever get to implement their hard Brexit, Brexit's done for (hopefully taking the decrepit neologism with it).


----------



## MrSki (Nov 26, 2019)

Talk about a perfect answer.


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2019)

The Ghost of Christmas yet to come: Sir Ivan Roger's Brexit lecture full text - Policy Scotland


----------



## butchersapron (Nov 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> EU law expert dissects de Pfeffel's great new deal.




Jean Monnet is widely seen as the principal architect of the various incarnations of the current EU. This prof is holder of the Jean Monnet chair at the university. It's an EU funded chair. So, his wages (or a hefty part of them) come directly from the EU.

The Jean Monnet program btw is a massive tax-payer funded EU proganda initiative. It itself is part of a much wider tax-payer funded half billion pound pro-eu propaganda program.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Jean Monnet is widely seen as the principal architect of the various incarnations of the current EU. This prof is holder of the Jean Monnet chair at the university. It's an EU funded chair. *So, his wages (or a hefty part of them) come directly from the EU*.



This doesn't seem to be correct, according to him.



> *Personal Statement*
> Michael graduated in Law from the University of Cambridge (BA Hons in 1996; PhD in 2001). He has previously worked as a Lecturer in Law at the University of Cambridge and at University College London. He was appointed Professor of European Law at the University of Liverpool in 2004.
> 
> A note on the University of Liverpool's "Jean Monnet Chair in EU Law" (which has been the subject of extensive misinformation, both before and after the 2016 referendum):
> ...



Michael Dougan - University of Liverpool


----------



## Ming (Nov 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> This doesn't seem to be correct, according to him.
> 
> 
> 
> Michael Dougan - University of Liverpool


Not sure what you mean there.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 26, 2019)

Ming said:


> Not sure what you mean there.


No part of his wages come directly from the EU. The stuff butchersapron was saying about his position being funded by the EU seems to come from something a UKIP candidate said a couple of years back and which this guy, Michael Dougan, has explained is incorrect.


----------



## Santino (Nov 26, 2019)

Jean Monnet Chairs are usually part-funded by the Erasmus Programme.


----------



## Ming (Nov 26, 2019)

teuchter said:


> No part of his wages come directly from the EU. The stuff butchersapron was saying about his position being funded by the EU seems to come from something a UKIP candidate said a couple of years back and which this guy, Michael Dougan, has explained is incorrect.


Well i mainly posted it for his analysis of the likely consequences of Alex's deal rather than any perceived bias due to funding. He was a professor for two years before he was awarded the chair.


----------



## prunus (Nov 26, 2019)

gosub said:


> The Ghost of Christmas yet to come: Sir Ivan Roger's Brexit lecture full text - Policy Scotland



Hooray, we’re fucked


----------



## gosub (Nov 26, 2019)

France and Germany propose EU overhaul after Brexit upheaval


----------



## Azrael (Nov 26, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Jean Monnet is widely seen as the principal architect of the various incarnations of the current EU. This prof is holder of the Jean Monnet chair at the university. It's an EU funded chair. So, his wages (or a hefty part of them) come directly from the EU.
> 
> The Jean Monnet program btw is a massive tax-payer funded EU proganda initiative. It itself is part of a much wider tax-payer funded half billion pound pro-eu propaganda program.


Dougan clarifies on p.9 of this article. Despite the name, the "Jean Monnet Chair" isn't an academic position, it's a three-year teaching post awarded as part of the Erasmus programme. Liverpool University received a grant of €36,000 paid between 2006-09, spent on holding a conference, sending PhD students to gain teaching experience, and teaching E.U. law. (More info on the E.U.'s own site.) Dougan's salary's paid by his uni.

I carry no torch for Dougan (especially as he's so down on the Norway option), but this line of attack does the secessionist cause no favours.

*ETA* Just seen *Teuchter*'s earlier reply, pipped to the post!


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2019)

Azrael said:


> Dougan clarifies on p.9 of this article. Despite the name, the "Jean Monnet Chair" isn't an academic position, it's a three-year teaching post awarded as part of the Erasmus programme. Liverpool University received a grant of €36,000 paid between 2006-09, spent on holding a conference, sending PhD students to gain teaching experience, and teaching E.U. law. (More info on the E.U.'s own site.) Dougan's salary's paid by his uni.
> 
> I carry no torch for Dougan (especially as he's so down on the Norway option), but this line of attack does the secessionist cause no favours.
> 
> *ETA* Just seen *Teuchter*'s earlier reply, pipped to the post!


As part of the Erasmus programme. There’s a clue in there somewhere  



teuchter said:


> No part of his wages come directly from the EU. The stuff butchersapron was saying about his position being funded by the EU seems to come from something a UKIP candidate said a couple of years back and which this guy, Michael Dougan, has explained is incorrect.


Wow, really? BA is lifting stuff from UKIP candidates? This is mental even for you.


----------



## William of Walworth (Nov 27, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> As part of the Erasmus programme. There’s a clue in there somewhere



I'm not at all clued up about the Erasmus Programme, so genuine and open question : what (specifically) is wrong with it?


----------



## Azrael (Nov 27, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> As part of the Erasmus programme. There’s a clue in there somewhere


It's a cunning ruse to brainwash students in borderline heretical Christian humanism?

No one's denied that Erasmus is an E.U. programme (it'd be hard, seeing as I linked an E.U. website). They've corrected the claim that Dougan's "wages (or a hefty part of them) come directly from the EU," 'cause they don't.

Not that I accept the underlying argument since it's honking great ad hom. Even if Dougan were based in the Espace Léopold, draped in a blue and gold flag, and paid directly from Juncker's wine cellar as he bellowed out Beethoven, it wouldn't invalidate his arguments.


----------



## Azrael (Nov 27, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm not at all clued up about the Erasmus Programme, so genuine and open question : what (specifically) is wrong with it?


Nothing, outside stale Kipper allegations of bias.

Along with the newer Erasmus+, it's a student exchange programme, exactly the kinda perk that the Brexiteers in power should be trying to maintain access to. Instead, they're aiming to remove all that pro-E.U. voters care about, and in the process have conjured Continuity Remain into being. Bravo!


----------



## teuchter (Nov 27, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> Wow, really? BA is lifting stuff from UKIP candidates? This is mental even for you.



According to Michael Dougan, the claim about his post being funded by the EU started here - an article written by Richard North. Only butchersapron can tell you what his source was for his wrong information. Maybe he came up with it independently.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm not at all clued up about the Erasmus Programme, so genuine and open question : what (specifically) is wrong with it?


Named after a renaissance man


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm not at all clued up about the Erasmus Programme, so genuine and open question : what (specifically) is wrong with it?


I’ve absolutely no idea to be honest, but Azrael had liked a comment upthread saying the JMC is part funded by this programme - which is also confirmed by the link, which to me would suggest aye, it’s part funded by the EU even if Jean Claude Juncker himsel didn’t wire the money into Dougans bank, but I could be missing something.


----------



## teuchter (Nov 27, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> I could be missing something.


eg. all the stuff that has been posted just up there ^^ by both Azrael and I that explains exactly, with links, what is/was funded and how.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 27, 2019)

William of Walworth said:


> I'm not at all clued up about the Erasmus Programme, so genuine and open question : *what (specifically) is wrong with it?*


It's funded by the EU. Not sure there's much more to it than that. Can anyone really object to the idea of bursaries for students to spend time studying in another country? It's not exactly evil.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 27, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's funded by the EU. Not sure there's much more to it than that. Can anyone really object to the idea of bursaries for students to spend time studying in another country? It's not exactly evil.


depends on who is offering the bursaries, to which students and to study what

if putin was offering bursaries to far-right students in western europe to study at russian military academies i suppose you'd say no i can't see anything objectionable there


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2019)

Azrael said:


> It's a cunning ruse to brainwash students in borderline heretical Christian humanism?
> 
> No one's denied that Erasmus is an E.U. programme (it'd be hard, seeing as I linked an E.U. website). They've corrected the claim that Dougan's "wages (or a hefty part of them) come directly from the EU," 'cause they don't.
> 
> Not that I accept the underlying argument since it's honking great ad hom. Even if Dougan were based in the Espace Léopold, draped in a blue and gold flag, and paid directly from Juncker's wine cellar as he bellowed out Beethoven, it wouldn't invalidate his arguments.


It would a bit, I’d certainly be looking to other sources if he was doing shit like that and being paid from Junckers own wine cellar, would you keep suggesting I’m a kipper then eh? Eh?


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Nov 27, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> It's funded by the EU. Not sure there's much more to it than that. Can anyone really object to the idea of bursaries for students to spend time studying in another country? It's not exactly evil.


No one did as I’m sure you are aware, but i see the confusion now, the funding as part of the Erasmus programme was years ago. Good to see I’m not the only one not reading the thread


----------



## Azrael (Nov 27, 2019)

HoratioCuthbert said:


> It would a bit, I’d certainly be looking to other sources if he was doing shit like that and being paid from Junckers own wine cellar, would you keep suggesting I’m a kipper then eh? Eh?


I'm happy to confirm that the only smoked kipper (served to those back for breakfast) is the hoary allegation. If Dougan were being paid from Juncker's wine bunker, I'd certainty be checking his work against other sources, sources that were safely Kipper-free.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2019)

Azrael said:


> I'm happy to confirm that the only smoked kipper (served to those back for breakfast) is the hoary allegation. If Dougan were being paid from Juncker's wine bunker, I'd certainty be checking his work against other sources, sources that were safely Kipper-free.


Azrael, my old friend!

Welcome back


----------



## Azrael (Nov 27, 2019)

Cheers. 

Great to see the old crew still around.


----------



## Spymaster (Nov 27, 2019)

Shit's changed.

You weren't there maaaan. In the shit. Nose in the dirt!


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 28, 2019)

Well, here's a surprise:

Corbyn nationalisation plans for energy sector to collide with EU law


----------



## Azrael (Nov 28, 2019)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Well, here's a surprise:
> 
> Corbyn nationalisation plans for energy sector to collide with EU law


Here's the key part: "The law firm Clifford Chance has said EU’s energy charter treaty (ECT) would force the party to offer compensation at a 'fair market value', and would rule out the option of paying shareholders for their assets in government-backed bonds."

Even taking that at face value, the Acquis doesn't clash with the fundamental policy objective of nationalization, merely the price offered and means of payment. Any trade deal sufficiently broad and deep enough to not crash the British economy would contain similar restrictions to stop a post-Brexit U.K. setting London up as the fabled Singapore on Thames.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Nov 28, 2019)

Azrael said:


> Here's the key part: "The law firm Clifford Chance has said EU’s energy charter treaty (ECT) would force the party to offer compensation at a 'fair market value', and would rule out the option of paying shareholders for their assets in government-backed bonds."
> 
> Even taking that at face value, the Acquis doesn't clash with the fundamental policy objective of nationalization, merely the price offered and means of payment. Any trade deal sufficiently broad and deep enough to not crash the British economy would contain similar restrictions to stop a post-Brexit U.K. setting London up as the fabled Singapore on Thames.



Labour's policy is that the HoC not the EU would decide compensation levels and, of course, offer compensation in the form of Bonds. I agree entirely that prima facie it doesn't clash with the policy objective. 

But in terms of debt, borrowing rates and other priorities that Labour want to borrow for this is significant.


----------



## belboid (Nov 28, 2019)

Here's the even more key part:

"This article was amended on 28 November 2019. An earlier version referred to the energy charter treaty (ECT) as an EU law when it meant to refer it as an international treaty, which applies to most EU countries. This article has also been amended to say that any legal action would take place in tribunals, not the European courts."


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

Thought you may be interested. My Polish students, the one's who are politically engaged anyway, still don't think Brexit is going to happen because they say that the UK and Johnson are too weak.

My response was that's probably why it is going to happen.

It's a funny old thing, hubris.

Anyway, it means in my anecdotal experience, perception of UK from abroad is a weak nation.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

What does “weak” mean in this context?


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> What does “weak” mean in this context?



Economically weak, lacking in allies who won't just rinse them, and also chickenshit, if I understood correctly.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

What's was interesting for me was the disparity between the British perception of themselves and how young Poles see the Brits (as a nation, obvs).

The lesson that surprised me most (I've been asking all my students about it but this class are 16/17 yo) Part of the lesson was about moving abroad and the challenges it can bring. The two most proficient English speakers don't want to leave Poland at all. Of the other 5 one was interested in going to the US in his words "to see the difference between the southern rednecks and the Liberal North.. It would be an interesting cultural experience".

The one person who wanted to go to the UK to work for a bit was interested in the strong pound. "It's a better currency than our Polish zloty, and you get more money there".

Was interesting, anyway.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Economically weak, lacking in allies who won't just rinse them, and also chickenshit, if I understood correctly.


The former is nonsensical.  It’s a country in the top 6 in the world for economic output. The latter is totally meaningless when applied to a nation.

This kind of woolly thinking that acts as if countries are individual people helps nobody.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> This kind of woolly thinking that acts as if countries are individual people helps nobody.



Probably not, but it's very much the way of thinking round here. Remember Poland was wiped off the map for 200 years. And they have a huge narritive about keeping friends and allies/enemies running through their politics.  Infact all of this region of Europe does.

The majority I've talked to here do not think the UK can survive without friends and allies in Europe. They say they may have a strong currency, but are still too "weak" (economically/politically) to go it alone against the US/Russia/EU.

Most of them laugh about Brexit like it's just some stupid pipe dream. Literally belly laughs. 

The demographic I come in contact with, is obviously not a wholesale view of everyone, and limited to mainly  city students/professionals.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Nov 28, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> The majority I've talked to here do not think the UK can survive without friends and allies in Europe



We will still have friends and allies in Europe when [if] brexit happens, we are leaving the EU, not Europe.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Probably not, but it's very much the way of thinking round here. Remember Poland was wiped off the map for 200 years. And they have a huge narritive about keeping friends and allies/enemies running through their politics.  Infact all of this region of Europe does.
> 
> The majority I've talked to here do not think the UK can survive without friends and allies in Europe. They say they may have a strong currency, but are still too "weak" (economically/politically) to go it alone against the US/Russia/EU.
> 
> ...


:Shrug:  

That’s a problem that lies with your students, not the British nation.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> We will still have friends and allies in Europe when [if] brexit happens, we are leaving the EU, not Europe.



Maybe. But at the moment you [we], and the press, are doing a very good job of making the rest of Europe think you hate them.

The way Brexit is playing out here is really denting the perception of the UK on the ground.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> The former is nonsensical.  It’s a country in the top 6 in the world for economic output. The latter is totally meaningless when applied to a nation.
> 
> This kind of woolly thinking that acts as if countries are individual people helps nobody.


The idea that the UK might be lacking in allies not intent of rinsing it isn't so nonsensical, though. The idea that the EU will be the party dictating the terms of a post-brexit trade deal between the UK and the EU isn't nonsensical. And the idea that the UK is in a far weaker negotiating position wrt those intent on rinsing it on its own rather than inside the EU bloc is far from nonsensical. 

And of course we know that there are those inside the UK who will welcome such rinsing and asset-stripping. They and their chums will personally do very well out of it.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

Sorry, which nation again is the one that is generally against rinsing others?  As far as I can see, capitalism is based on the powerful always doing as much rinsing as possible.  Britain is no exception either.  The idea that you’ll be okay if you can just pally up to mates is ridiculous.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Sorry, which nation again is the one that is generally against rinsing others?  As far as I can see, capitalism is based on the powerful always doing as much rinsing as possible.  Britain is no exception either.  The idea that you’ll be okay if you can just pally up to mates is ridiculous.


The stronger will rinse the weaker, if they can. Just take a glance of US-Latin America relations over the last century or so. So the US will attempt to rinse the UK if it can. And wrt 'pallying up' with 'mates', that's really a very sensible thing to do if you want to hold firm on certain standards - the EU as a negotiating bloc has far greater leverage than any individual country from within it trying on its own.

you're making the mistake of thinking I was talking about morality above. I wasn't.


----------



## Fez909 (Nov 28, 2019)

FabricLiveBaby! said:


> Maybe. But at the moment you [we], and the press, are doing a very good job of making the rest of Europe think you hate them.
> 
> The way Brexit is playing out here is really denting the perception of the UK on the ground.


I'm not saying they're wrong, but wouldn't you imagine that EU governments will portray Brexit in a bad light? It's in their interests to make the UK look foolish.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> And wrt 'pallying up' with 'mates', that's really a very sensible thing to do...


Like the way Germany protected Greece, you mean?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> Like Germany protected Greece, you mean?


No. But like Greece enjoys the same terms as Germany of a trade agreement with, for instance, Canada.

Again, you're confusing this with morality.

You cannot deny, because it's there in black and white, that US trade negotiators would like to dismantle the UK's EU-related trading standards. This probably can't happen because the EU will insist on keeping those standards in its trade agreement, but one thing we can be damn sure of is that any post-tory brexit trade agreements will not be characterised by standards that are higher than those of the EU.


----------



## FabricLiveBaby! (Nov 28, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> I'm not saying they're wrong, but wouldn't you imagine that EU governments will portray Brexit in a bad light? It's in their interests to make the UK look foolish.



Of course. That is obvious.


----------



## kabbes (Nov 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> No. But like Greece enjoys the same terms as Germany of a trade agreement with, for instance, Canada.
> 
> Again, you're confusing this with morality.


I’m questioning the idea that “allies” will protect a country from being rinsed by those with more economic power.  And the EU provides one of the best counterexamples you could hope for in that regard.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I’m questioning the idea that “allies” will protect a country from being rinsed by those with more economic power.  And the EU provides one of the best counterexamples you could hope for in that regard.


If brexit happens, the most likely outcome will be a de facto alignment with the EU for the foreseeable future. However, that's not what the tory brexit fantasists (Davis, Fox, DuncanSmith, Mogg, etc) want. They want a race to the bottom that would not be possible from within the EU. And they're not some extreme lunatic fringe within tory ranks - in any Johnson govt, those voices will be strong, and there will be pressure, I'm guessing, to show that brexit means more than just a de facto alignment with the EU.

Nothing but potential shit results from brexit, and this is central to the 'take back control' lie. Brexit will probably result in the UK having less autonomy over its affairs than it had within the EU - precisely because it will be a smaller, and therefore weaker, partner in various negotiations.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 28, 2019)

The EU is about rinsing each other for the benefit of a small section though so not really any different. If we're going to reduce it to national blocs then some get rinsed for their talent, some get rinsed for their low tax environments, etc. The same people win and the same people lose broadly with or without the EU. There is nothing magical about either being in or out.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2019)

Fez909 said:


> I'm not saying they're wrong, but wouldn't you imagine that EU governments will portray Brexit in a bad light? It's in their interests to make the UK look foolish.


To be fair our unspeakable ruling class have an unenviable ability to make the country look foolish without any assistance


----------



## Santino (Nov 28, 2019)

Fuck nation states.


----------



## Pickman's model (Nov 28, 2019)

Santino said:


> Fuck nation states.


Yes long live the suprastate


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Nov 28, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> The EU is about rinsing each other for the benefit of a small section though so not really any different. If we're going to reduce it to national blocs then some get rinsed for their talent, some get rinsed for their low tax environments, etc. The same people win and the same people lose broadly with or without the EU. There is nothing magical about either being in or out.


Magical, no, of course not. But that doesn't mean 'the UK' is somehow not going to face problems outside the EU that it would not face inside the EU. And I put 'the UK' in scare quote precisely because this is not necessarily _my battle_. It's not 'we'. 

This whole bit of the discussion was framed initially in a way I'm not that concerned with, but kabbes's response was as simplistic and, imo, wrong as the thing he was trying to refute. I personally don't give a toss about the UK securing free trade deals, but if you're going to frame a discussion around that, a response is going to have to include a firm rebuttal of the total nonsense that is very often spouted about the subject. Same thing about sovereignty. I give little of a fuck about Westminster losing sovereignty on various issues to the likes of the EU, but if you're going to frame a discussion around sovereignty, again, the stinking mountain of bullshit about that wrt brexit needs challenging.


----------



## Azrael (Nov 28, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> The stronger will rinse the weaker, if they can. Just take a glance of US-Latin America relations over the last century or so. So the US will attempt to rinse the UK if it can. And wrt 'pallying up' with 'mates', that's really a very sensible thing to do if you want to hold firm on certain standards - the EU as a negotiating bloc has far greater leverage than any individual country from within it trying on its own.
> 
> you're making the mistake of thinking I was talking about morality above. I wasn't.


Exactly why major nations, including the USA, are members of their local economic blocs. Safety in numbers. That's what Verhofstadt was getting at in his epically misjudged "empires" speech to the Lib Dem conference.

I oppose the current attempt at Brexit not because I've any love for the E.U., but because it's led by a rogues' alliance of fantasists and fraudsters who'd make Charles Ponzi look like a decent fellow striving after an honest buck. If they're not stopped, they'll do incalculable harm to their country (before breaking it apart in acrimony) and taint the concept of E.U. secession permanently. The end result of their Singapore on Thames fantasies is likely to be whatever's left of the U.K. back in the E.U. as a humiliated supplicant, terrified of ever going it alone again.

Britain can leave the E.U. whenever she wants. Let these crooks attempt it, and she'll never get out.


----------



## MrSki (Nov 29, 2019)

Discussions on Wednesday relating to the Russia report.


----------



## Marty1 (Nov 29, 2019)

Bercow comes clean on his (obvious) anti-Brexit bias.

John Bercow says he 'facilitated' blocking a no-deal Brexit

No wonder his nickname is the ‘poison dwarf’ the horrible little shit.


----------



## Flavour (Nov 29, 2019)

what you talkin about, he's one of your mates


----------



## planetgeli (Nov 29, 2019)

Talking about Wexit just now on Any Questions. As in Wales exit. That’s a new one on me.

Does that make Scotland Sexit?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Nov 29, 2019)

planetgeli said:


> Talking about Wexit just now on Any Questions. As in Wales exit. That’s a new one on me.
> 
> Does that make Scotland Sexit?


Should be Callanfa


----------



## Ming (Nov 29, 2019)

MrSki said:


> Discussions on Wednesday relating to the Russia report.



Weird innit? Almost like the whole thing was planned.


----------



## Supine (Nov 29, 2019)

Ming said:


> Weird innit? Almost like the whole thing was planned.



By Russians and lexiteers?


----------



## Ming (Nov 29, 2019)

Supine said:


> By Russians and lexiteers?


Robert Mercer got Steve Bannon and Kelly Anne Conway onto Trump’s (at the time floundering) ticket. Turned it around. He also donated Cambridge Analytica (which he owned) to the Brexit campaign for free.
Make of this what you will.
Robert Mercer - Wikipedia


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 30, 2019)

Please can we ban the next person who says lexit, lexiteer or any other variation?


----------



## Azrael (Nov 30, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Please can we ban the next person who says lexit, lexiteer or any other variation?


Only if we ban the pukesome neologism "Brexit," which sounds like a cut-price laxative and produces equally toxic results.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Nov 30, 2019)

Azrael said:


> Only if we ban the pukesome neologism "Brexit," which sounds like a cut-price laxative and produces equally toxic results.


Agreed, though to me it sounds like a post breakfast bowel movement.


----------



## Azrael (Nov 30, 2019)

If infinitely less satisfying (TMI).


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 1, 2019)

Ukeave


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 1, 2019)

EU starting to get nervous.



> THE European Union are panicking about the risk of a Boris Johnson majority following the December election - with concern in Brussels that an overwhelming victory could spark a British fightback against EU demands.



Tory majority poll sets off Brussels panic as fired-up Boris plans to defy EU demands


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 1, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> EU starting to get nervous.
> 
> 
> 
> Tory majority poll sets off Brussels panic as fired-up Boris plans to defy EU demands


Express link? No thanks!


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 1, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Express link? No thanks!



Yes.  No probs!

(Basically the EU are bricking it as Boris has refused to take a no deal Brexit off the table and the polls are in his favour despite Labour promising everything for free).


----------



## Supine (Dec 1, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Yes.  No probs!
> 
> (Basically the EU are bricking it as Boris has refused to take a no deal Brexit off the table and the polls are in his favour despite Labour promising everything for free).



If you fancy a more considered take on the EU...


----------



## Badgers (Dec 2, 2019)

Have we got a fucking trade deal yet?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 2, 2019)

Election 2019: Stricter checks on EU visitors under border clampdown

Wonder if the EU will respond in kind?


----------



## Libertad (Dec 2, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Have we got a fucking trade deal yet?



Big up the Faroe Islands, my supplies of seal blubber are secure.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 2, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Election 2019: Stricter checks on EU visitors under border clampdown
> 
> Wonder if the EU will respond in kind?


The article suggests the EU will do likewise.

The two biggest impacts I can imagine from that will be a fall in tourism from the EU, but more importantly, also mentioned in the article, it will necessitate a more muscular deportation regime.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 2, 2019)

Checks upgraded at UK borders.
Going to be interesting how that is implemented on the EU/UK land border in Ireland.
That border issue, even after all these years now, still remains the fundamental factor as to what constitutes 'leave' in my opinion, and no brexiter has ever come up with a solution so far.


----------



## andysays (Dec 2, 2019)

Is it just me, or is there a funny echo in here?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Election 2019: Stricter checks on EU visitors under border clampdown
> 
> Wonder if the EU will respond in kind?


yes

when i went to russia last year we had to fill out a very long and complicated visa form, listing every trip abroad (with precise dates, if you please) for the last 10 years, asking about previous jobs, asking about parents... in conversation with some russians i met, it turned out that the uk had imposed a similar form on russians wanting to come here so putin turned round and imposed the same. i'm sure the eu will mirror anything the government introduces.


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 2, 2019)

Voters must solve stuff.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 2, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Voters must solve stuff.


Thats exactly what they are doing - solving the immigration problem by voting Tory + Farage


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Thats exactly what they are doing - solving the immigration problem by voting Tory + Farage


Whatever the actual problem is, that’s not the solution.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Thats exactly what they are doing - solving the immigration problem by voting Tory + Farage


and fucking the nhs etc at the same time


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 2, 2019)

ska invita said:


> Thats exactly what they are doing - solving the immigration problem by voting Tory + Farage


I'll ask the same question I've asked before and that you have not answered. How far do you take this logic? Are those that voted LD in 2010 supporters of austerity? Those that you said should vote Macron supporters of neo-liberalism and privatisation? Those that vote for the German Greensfor supporters of aggressive military interventions?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 4, 2019)




----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2019)

Libertad said:


> Big up the Faroe Islands, my supplies of seal blubber are secure.


We have our own supplies of blubber in this country, as you'll see when Boris Johnson blubbers


----------



## stolinski (Dec 4, 2019)

I hate the man, but I do love how BoJo says "free trade deals" he just sounds so excited (even if he ain't never gonna get one)


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 4, 2019)

stolinski said:


> I hate the man, but I do love how BoJo says "free trade deals" he just sounds so excited (even if he ain't never gonna get one)


He's spaffed in every pair of trousers he owns while pursuing votes


----------



## stolinski (Dec 4, 2019)

stolinski said:


> I hate the man


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2019)

Boris Johnson refuses to rule out no-deal Brexit and abruptly ends press conference

Oh good


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

The unhinged trumpeting of "no-deal Brexit" is proof positive that Brexit's become a doomsday cult, alien to E.U. secession as it used to be. Leaving by whatever means has become an end in itself, a magical event that'll save us all.

What quicker route to reverse Brexit could there be than chaos at the border, and shops and garages running dry. The government would fall within days at best, and ministers in whatever provisional replacement would be sobbing on the phone to Brussels, recanting and begging to be allowed back it.

Why yes of course you may come in from the cold, will purr the silk-tongued Eurocrat. Just a few _requests_, old chap: Schengen, you're in it; rebate, whatever's that; opt-outs, never heard of them; and your doubled membership fee -- not to mention the tens of billions in compensation you're about to so generously offer -- we'll be taking it in euros. Now pip-pip, expect your people would like to eat sometime this week.

That anyone who claims to be a patriot could contemplate for a microsecond such national abasement speaks volumes about where their loyalties truly lie.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2019)

Azrael said:


> The unhinged trumpeting of "no-deal Brexit" is proof positive that Brexit's become a doomsday cult, alien to E.U. secession as it used to be. Leaving by whatever means has become an end in itself, a magical event that'll save us all.
> 
> What quicker route to reverse Brexit could there be than chaos at the border, and shops and garages running dry. The government would fall within days at best, and ministers in whatever provisional replacement would be sobbing on the phone to Brussels, recanting and begging to be allowed back it.
> 
> ...


Depends where they're a patriot for


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Depends where they're a patriot for


Da.

Russia's ruthlessly pursuing her own national interests*; far more interesting to me is why we're not doing likewise.

* Although if a botched Brexit ends up driving Britain deeper into the E.U. than ever, Vlad's losing his touch.


----------



## Flavour (Dec 5, 2019)

Azrael said:


> What quicker route to reverse Brexit could there be than chaos at the border, and shops and garages running dry. The government would fall within days at best, and ministers in whatever provisional replacement would be sobbing on the phone to Brussels, recanting and begging to be allowed back it.
> Why yes of course you may come in from the cold, will purr the silk-tongued Eurocrat. Just a few _requests_, old chap: Schengen, you're in it; rebate, whatever's that; opt-outs, never heard of them; and your doubled membership fee -- not to mention the tens of billions in compensation you're about to so generously offer -- we'll be taking it in euros. Now pip-pip, expect your people would like to eat sometime this week.



This definitely would not / will not happen. It would take years of a consistent government favorable to re-entry (look around: who's gonna do that?) going through the motions, agreeing to all sorts of shit the UK has never agreed to before and never will (giving up the Pound, for instance)... this is bonkers stuff.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2019)

Azrael said:


> Da.
> 
> Russia's ruthlessly pursuing her own national interests*; far more interesting to me is why we're not doing likewise.
> 
> * Although if a botched Brexit ends up driving Britain deeper into the E.U. than ever, Vlad's losing his touch.


the uk national interest is traditionally identified with the governing party's interests


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Boris Johnson refuses to rule out no-deal Brexit and abruptly ends press conference
> 
> Oh good


you could pluck the doziest, most ignorant soak from any wetherspoons at this time of day (0845), install them in number 10, and tell them to run things and they'd do a better job than the useless alexander boris de pfeffel johnson


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

Flavour said:


> This definitely would not / will not happen. It would take years of a consistent government favorable to re-entry (look around: who's gonna do that?) going through the motions, agreeing to all sorts of shit the UK has never agreed to before and never will (giving up the Pound, for instance)... this is bonkers stuff.


Events, dear politicians, events.

It was obviously exaggerated for rhetorical effect, but with the pound in freefall, shelves running empty and most of Kent becoming a car park, the pressure to give in to Brussels' demands will be overwhelming. It may suit them to leave us rotting for a while first, but they get to decide.

Remember the panic at the turn of the century when the fuel refineries were blockaded, forecourts ran dry and supermarket shelves emptied? I'll never forget it. The one moment in its entire run that new Labour's grip on power looked touch-and-go. No deal would make that look like a cakewalk.

As for the practicalities of a rapid deal, as shown by the E.U. rushing through the latest withdrawal agreement when Whitehall caved to all their demands, when delay's in Brussels interests the Acquis moves by inches in months; when speed suits, it's miles overnight.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2019)

Boris Johnson's Brexit plans will cost UK economy up to £20bn a year, report warns

Probably a Conservative estimate


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> the uk national interest is traditionally identified with the governing party's interests


And vice versa. The establishment gains far less from Brexit than they do from E.U. membership, which is why they've been overwhelmingly pro-Brussels for years.

The absurdly named "Eurosceptic" MPs were the very worst, harrumphing about independence and Churchill in opposition, then meekly waving through the latest firesale of national competencies when the whips snapped their fingers. A tradition they've maintained with flying colours by unanimously supporting Johnson's cave-in withdrawal agreement.

One of the strongest arguments for Brexit is that British politicians have used first EEC then E.U. membership as an excuse to get lazy, allow Whitehall to atrophy, and let Brussels do the hard business of governing for them. Dancing to the tune of a hostile foreign power is, however, taking it a bit far.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 5, 2019)

BrexShit


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

The very best of laxatives, guaranteed to leave nothing behind ...


----------



## Flavour (Dec 5, 2019)

Azrael said:


> One of the strongest arguments for Brexit is that British politicians have used first EEC then E.U. membership as an excuse to get lazy, allow Whitehall to atrophy, and let Brussels do the hard business of governing for them.



this is not even remotely true.


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

Flavour said:


> this is not even remotely true.


In 2016, a former permanent secretary to the Foreign Office noted how, due to a lack of negotiators, the U.K. was woefully ill-prepared to cut its own independent trade deals. A situation that'd barely improved by 2018. As I said in the original post, the fault lies with Whitehall, not Brussels.


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

For background, this 2010 parliamentary briefing's probably the best summary of the extent of E.U. legislation and regs in domestic governance. In short, no-one knows exactly how extensive it is, with estimates running from 20% of domestic legislation originating in Brussels to 80% if regulations, adminstrative measures and "soft law" like resolutions are factored in.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Boris Johnson's Brexit plans will cost UK economy up to £20bn a year, report warns
> 
> Probably a Conservative estimate


The Conservative election campaign has cleverly shifted focus from Johnson's deal. There's a shit storm waiting to happen with trade deals, Ireland, Scotland & the economy but instead it's all about out bidding Labour with sorting the domestic etc


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

DJWrongspeed said:


> The Conservative election campaign has cleverly shifted focus from Johnson's deal. There's a shit storm waiting to happen with trade deals, Ireland, Scotland & the economy but instead it's all about out bidding Labour with sorting the domestic etc


A strategy Labour's been happy to go along with to paper over their own Brexit woes. When they have addressed it, it's been through the prism of the NHS and Trump. To seriously attack the government's approach would raise some extremely awkward questions about FoM, what "alignment" with the single market actually means, and where "a" customs union springs from.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Dec 5, 2019)

Azrael said:


> A strategy Labour's been happy to go along with to paper over their own Brexit woes. When they have addressed it, it's been through the prism of the NHS and Trump. To seriously attack the government's approach would raise some extremely awkward questions about FoM, what "alignment" with the single market actually means, and where "a" customs union springs from.


Agree, all the parties seem complicit even the Lib Dems.


----------



## Azrael (Dec 5, 2019)

DJWrongspeed said:


> Agree, all the parties seem complicit even the Lib Dems.


Yup, it's been pitiful. That focus group on C4 News the other day speaks volumes: voters are still parroting the Vote Leave line about spending the E.U. membership dues on the NHS.

No attempt's been made to drive home that the fees are more than recouped through single market membership, 'cause Labour want to ... well, we don't know, 'cause "align" could mean anything from EEA membership (which they opposed in mid-2018, supported in early-2019, then appeared to oppose again in the subsequent negotiations with May) to a FTA with some level playing field provisions.

Selling another referendum would be a lot easier if the debate had been reframed over the last few years.


----------



## Ming (Dec 5, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Boris Johnson's Brexit plans will cost UK economy up to £20bn a year, report warns
> 
> Probably a Conservative estimate


It’s great how the rhetoric’s changed. It used to be ‘easiest deal in the universe’, ‘we hold all the cards’, ‘unleash the POWER of the UK’, etc, etc. Now it’s ‘it’ll be shite but let’s just get it done’. For some reason.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 6, 2019)

Top British diplomat Alexandra Hall Hall quits with Brexit tirade - CNN


> In a searing resignation letter delivered just over a week before the UK general election, Alexandra Hall Hall, the lead envoy for Brexit in the British Embassy in Washington, said that she had become increasingly dismayed by the demands placed on the British civil service to deliver messages on Brexit which were not "fully honest."


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 6, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Top British diplomat Alexandra Hall Hall quits with Brexit tirade - CNN


I saw that and checked and yes her name really is Alexandra Hall Hall.


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 6, 2019)

She must be known as "Two Halls".


----------



## two sheds (Dec 6, 2019)




----------



## elbows (Dec 6, 2019)

BBC version of the Hall Hall story, which is gleaned from the CNN thing so probably no additional detail.

British diplomat resigns over Brexit 'half-truths'

Posted partly because I did not want to miss the opportunity to quote this:



> "I am also at a stage in life where I would prefer to do something more rewarding with my time, than peddle half-truths on behalf of a government I do not trust."


----------



## maomao (Dec 6, 2019)

That is an impressively posh surname. Even de Pfeffel Johnson doesn't quite match up to it. 'No it's not Hall, it's Hall Hall you fucking ignorant prole'


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 6, 2019)

I gather she changed her name from Joyce


----------



## billy_bob (Dec 6, 2019)

There must be a students' union somewhere named Terry Hall Hall, surely?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 6, 2019)

billy_bob said:


> There must be a students' union somewhere named Terry Hall Hall, surely?


There is an Alexandra Hall in Aberystwyth (just one Hall) so maybe the name has been changed to avoid confusion.

I look forward to an anti-Brexit campus setting up Alexandra Hall Hall Hall.


----------



## agricola (Dec 6, 2019)

billy_bob said:


> There must be a students' union somewhere named Terry Hall Hall, surely?



there is a Thermopylae Gate, E14 which is sort of similar


----------



## Crispy (Dec 6, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> There is an Alexandra Hall in Aberystwyth (just one Hall) so maybe the name has been changed to avoid confusion.
> 
> I look forward to an anti-Brexit campus setting up Alexandra Hall Hall Hall.


I was extremely dissapointed that they didn't call this

 

the Queen Elizabeth the Second Third Forth Bridge.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 7, 2019)

I'm going to burgle her and not share any of the loot with my accomplices. That way, I will be able to hail a whole Hall Hall haul. Ha!


----------



## two sheds (Dec 7, 2019)

"You've left too much space between the and and and and and" there.


----------



## Ming (Dec 7, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> There is an Alexandra Hall in Aberystwyth (just one Hall) so maybe the name has been changed to avoid confusion.
> 
> I look forward to an anti-Brexit campus setting up Alexandra Hall Hall Hall.


Two of my mates did library and information systems at Aberystwyth.


----------



## JimW (Dec 7, 2019)

She used to front a Chuck Berry covers band called Hall Hall Rock n Roll.


----------



## Raheem (Dec 7, 2019)

JimW said:


> She used to front a Chuck Berry covers band called Hall Hall Rock n Roll.


Think that was a bit before she formed a duo with Derrick Oates Oates.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 7, 2019)

Ming said:


> Two of my mates did library and information systems at Aberystwyth.


A late contender for post of the year 2019.


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 7, 2019)

Raheem said:


> I'm going to burgle her and not share any of the loot with my accomplices. That way, I will be able to hail a whole Hall Hall haul. Ha!



If she got sick on a flight to Tel Aviv there'd be an ill Al Hall Hall on El Al.


----------



## Badgers (Dec 7, 2019)

Good read this


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Dec 7, 2019)

two sheds said:


> "You've left too much space between the and and and and and" there.



*Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo*


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 7, 2019)

fishfinger said:


> She must be known as "Two Halls".


It’s pronounced Haw Haw.


----------



## fishfinger (Dec 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> It’s pronounced Haw Haw.


Lord!


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> I gather she changed her name from Joyce






danny la rouge said:


> It’s pronounced Haw Haw.



Bit upset my more subtle rendition bombed


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Bit upset my more subtle rendition bombed


Sorry, missed yours! I hate it when people tell my gags in dumbed down form and get the laughs. 

I’m so ashamed.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 7, 2019)

danny la rouge said:


> Sorry, missed yours! I hate it when people tell my gags in dumbed down form and get the laughs.
> 
> I’m so ashamed.


Nah, you knew your audience and pitched accordingly


----------



## danny la rouge (Dec 7, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> Nah, you knew your audience and pitched accordingly


Do you think they could spell Pinocchio?


----------



## Badgers (Dec 11, 2019)

Is this going to be a benefit? 

U.S. trade offensive takes out WTO as global arbiter


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Is this going to be a benefit?
> 
> U.S. trade offensive takes out WTO as global arbiter


let's wait and see who the leader of the tory party is at opening time on friday before concerning ourselves with the wto


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 11, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Is this going to be a benefit?
> 
> U.S. trade offensive takes out WTO as global arbiter


it's all fucked


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 13, 2019)

So what now?  Fast Brexit with planned transition period limited to end 2020 as per pre-election deal between Boris and Farage?  Inevitable missed deadline and extension to transition period, since Boris can never, ever, keep his promises?

Much howling from Scotland with indyref2 becoming inevitable?  Influx of remainers into Scotland, followed by split with UK and massive “fuck you UK” investment into Scotland from EU, as soon as it becomes EU member 28...?

Over 50% of us in the poll on this thread thought Brexit would never happen - anyone still feel that way?


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 13, 2019)

With Boris Johnson in 10 Downing Street celebrating a landslide Conservative victory on a platform to "Get Brexit Done" and boasting about his "huge great stonking mandate" to deliver Brexit, I don't think many people will now be betting against Brexit happening - unless this is actually early 2016 and this is all a worst-case scenario being presented by the Ghost of Brexit Future.


----------



## JuanTwoThree (Dec 13, 2019)

Yossarian said:


> With Boris Johnson in 10 Downing Street celebrating a landslide Conservative victory on a platform to "Get Brexit Done" and boasting about his "huge great stonking mandate" to deliver Brexit, I don't think many people will now be betting against Brexit happening - unless this is actually early 2016 and this is all a worst-case scenario being presented by the Ghost of Brexit Future.



And Cameron/Bobby Ewing comes out of the shower; it was all a horrible dream.


----------



## Winot (Dec 13, 2019)

Johnson can pretty much do what he wants now. He doesn’t even have to worry about pressure from the ERG.


----------



## MrCurry (Dec 13, 2019)

Winot said:


> Johnson can pretty much do what he wants now. He doesn’t even have to worry about pressure from the ERG.



Maybe his priorities will shift towards what will be necessary to placate the Scots and keep them within the union.  I’d be surprised if the subject doesn’t come up during his chat with the Queen this morning.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 13, 2019)

MrCurry said:


> Maybe his priorities will shift towards what will be necessary to placate the Scots and keep them within the union.  I’d be surprised if the subject doesn’t come up during his chat with the Queen this morning.



Sending in the troops has worked historically.


----------



## teuchter (Dec 13, 2019)

Winot said:


> Johnson can pretty much do what he wants now. He doesn’t even have to worry about pressure from the ERG.


At least whatever happens now can't be blamed on anyone else.


----------



## two sheds (Dec 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> At least whatever happens now can't be blamed on anyone else.



Course it can - immigrants, feckless unmarried mothers, excessive taxes on entrepreneurs ...


----------



## tommers (Dec 13, 2019)

teuchter said:


> At least whatever happens now can't be blamed on anyone else.


Hahaha. Nice one.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 13, 2019)

Looks like our departure from the EU is now certain.



> Mr Johnson said "politicians have squandered the last three years, three and a half years in squabbles", but "this election means that getting Brexit done is now the irrefutable, irresistible, unarguable decision of the British people".
> 
> "I will put an end to all that nonsense and we will get Brexit done on time by the January 31 - no ifs, no buts, no maybes," he said.



General election: Boris Johnson wins huge election victory and 'stonking mandate' for Brexit


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 13, 2019)

Wow, thanks for the breaking news!

Prat.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Dec 13, 2019)

Badgers said:


> Is this going to be a benefit?
> 
> U.S. trade offensive takes out WTO as global arbiter


   I mentioned this the other day. this gives the big boys the ability to flex their muscles. What is the future of WTO if it cannot arbitrate on beefs ?   As shite as the WTO was, it was something. It’s finished


----------



## Azrael (Dec 13, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Looks like our departure from the EU is now certain.


Just as certain as our arrival in vassalage, vassalage set to become permanent thanks to Johnson's reckless promise to get a future relationship negotiated, signed and ratified inside a year. Brussels can't believe their luck: with his idiotic deadlines, Johnson's backed himself into the same corner he previously occupied with the Irish Border, and as he showed then, he's more than willing to escape by selling out his allies and caving to Brussels' demands.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2019)

Winot said:


> Johnson can pretty much do what he wants now. He doesn’t even have to worry about pressure from the ERG.


tbh that may well mean a de facto customs union and close alignment for the foreseeable future. As you say, he now doesn't have to worry about the ERG, and a degree of pragmatism may well kick in. My guess: an initial agreement containing within it the idea in principle that the UK could diverge from the EU, making customs checks out of NI necessary, but in practice these checks never kick in because the UK remains aligned. He'll get an end to free movement, and we'll all pay a cost for that wrt travelling to and working or studying in the EU, but business will be placated. Free movement for goods and capital; free movement for the rich; and an end to free movement for the rest of us.


----------



## Azrael (Dec 13, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> [...] He'll get an end to free movement, and we'll all pay a cost for that wrt travelling to and working or studying in the EU, but business will be placated. Free movement for goods and capital; free movement for the rich; and an end to free movement for the rest of us.


Since the Treaty of Rome's four freedoms are indivisible, free movement of goods and capital requires free movement of labour. Not only would leaving the E.E.A. devastate Britain's services sector, many of the Eastern European countries who must sign off on the future relationship want it to continue. And, of course, it's yet to sink in that it's reciprocal: when it does, a substantial majority support it.

Johnson doesn't care either way, and previously said he'd like it to continue (story's pinned at the top of Jonathan Lis' Twitter feed). Brussels will have overwhelming leverage in the negotiations, and are ruthless in using it: they crushed Switzerland's attempt to end FoM by threatening to end her single market treaties.

Another betrayal pending ...


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 13, 2019)

butchersapron said:


> Wow, thanks for the breaking news!
> 
> Prat.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 13, 2019)

You are right about Switzerland. Another referendum fuck-up.  But the UK is bigger and more powerful than Switzerland. Maybe you're right and Johnson won't get an end to free movement. We'll see. My guess is that he will. It is in the EU's interests for the UK to remain in the customs union (whether officially or merely de facto), after all.

Whatever happens, this is merely the beginning of the real brexit problems, not the end of them.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 13, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Whatever happens, this is merely the beginning of the real brexit problems, not the end of them.



You mean that it won’t be all done and dusted by the end of January? That cuddly, wuddly, lovable rogue Boris, lied?


----------



## Puddy_Tat (Dec 14, 2019)

is circulating bits of twitter

i needed something to laugh at...


----------



## toblerone3 (Dec 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Free movement for goods and capital; free movement for the rich; and an end to free movement for the rest of us.



Fuck that for a game of dominoes. That is going to be toppled very quickly.


----------



## Ax^ (Dec 14, 2019)

withstanding the result we will still be arguing this shit at the next election

so be it


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> withstanding the result we will still be arguing this shit at the next election
> 
> so be it


And the one after it


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 14, 2019)

Ax^ said:


> withstanding the result we will still be arguing this shit at the next election
> 
> so be it



They’re not going to let such a successful wedge issue be resolved so quickly, they’ll need it to carry on for another couple of elections so they have time to sort out the important stuff like fox hunting and tax breaks for private healthcare.


----------



## Don Troooomp (Dec 14, 2019)

I voted for the first option and, apart from the Scotland bit that could still happen, I was right. I also notice I was in the minority on this issues, but still right.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 14, 2019)

Front page of today’s Guardian.

 

Newspaper headlines: Boris Johnson's 'Christmas message of healing' — BBC News


----------



## maomao (Dec 14, 2019)

Don Troooomp said:


> I voted for the first option and, apart from the Scotland bit that could still happen, I was right. I also notice I was in the minority on this issues, but still right.


You're in an another minority too. Pointless fucking cunts.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2019)

At the moment the proposed arrangement for the UK to leave is to cut Northern Ireland adrift.
Eventually there is going to be two different systems either side of the land border in Ireland in order to make leave happen.
With no checks, controls or system for dealing with transgressions the UK will not have left the EU and become separate.
With checks, controls or systems for dealing with transgressions the peace process is over.
When Boris Johnson says get Brexit done he is unsurprisingly being a cunt.


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2019)

I have him on ignore so can somebody let me know if philosophical has admitted yet that Brexit is not actually a theoretical impossibility, and that one of the solutions for NI suggested right at the start of of this thread — namely a border in the Irish Sea — is actually going to happen after all?


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I have him on ignore so can somebody let me know if philosophical has admitted yet that Brexit is not actually a theoretical impossibility, and that one of the solutions for NI suggested right at the start of of this thread — namely a border in the Irish Sea — is actually going to happen after all?


He literally said in the post above that the UK cannot leave the EU. And all the rest. Word for word from any of his other posts.


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2019)

kabbes said:


> I have him on ignore so can somebody let me know if philosophical has admitted yet that Brexit is not actually a theoretical impossibility, and that one of the solutions for NI suggested right at the start of of this thread — namely a border in the Irish Sea — is actually going to happen after all?


No, he actually said this

_At the moment the proposed arrangement for the UK to leave is to cut Northern Ireland adrift.
Eventually there is going to be two different systems either side of the land border in Ireland in order to make leave happen.
With no checks, controls or system for dealing with transgressions the UK will not have left the EU and become separate.
With checks, controls or systems for dealing with transgressions the peace process is over.
When Boris Johnson says get Brexit done he is unsurprisingly being a cunt.
_
I think we can all agree with his final sentence though


----------



## kabbes (Dec 14, 2019)

Cross my heart, I genuinely had no idea that his was the post above mine.  It was just something I’d been wondering!


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 14, 2019)

Gina Miller just won’t go away 



> REMAINER activist Gina Miller has insisted that the battle against Brexit “is not over” as she revealed a shocking new plan to stop Boris Johnson’s EU talks despite the Conservatives overwhelming victory.



Gina Miller admits NEW plot to wreck Boris Johnson's Brexit – despite Remainer humiliation — Express


----------



## two sheds (Dec 14, 2019)

Nothing about Princess Di being resurrected? Explains a lot that you take your information from the Express though.


----------



## butchersapron (Dec 14, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Gina Miller just won’t go away
> 
> 
> 
> Gina Miller admits NEW plot to wreck Boris Johnson's Brexit – despite Remainer humiliation — Express


You didn't even read that drivel beyond the bullshit headline. if you had you either wouldn't have posted it - because it's not true an makes people who believe it look like gullible dicks, or you'd be pointing this out. And what do we find you doing?


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2019)

The referendum vote was for the whole of the UK to leave the EU.
A border in the Irish sea is not the whole of the UK leaving.
The Boris Johnson deal cuts part of the UK adrift.
It is not leave (Brexit) either in theory or in practical terms.
Ergo Boris Johnson saying this is getting brexit done are unsurprisingly the words of a lying cunt.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2019)

tbf 'Brexit' is a portmanteau of Britain and exit. One could argue that a border in the Irish Sea is the truest Brexit of all.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Dec 14, 2019)

And it could be so much fun watching , if everything else doesn't go to shit , this story is far from over , I think


----------



## philosophical (Dec 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> tbf 'Brexit' is a portmanteau of Britain and exit. One could argue that a border in the Irish Sea is the truest Brexit of all.


 You have a point, except the word Brexit wasn't on the ballot paper.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You have a point, except the word Brexit wasn't on the ballot paper.


I wouldn't worry too much. A majority in NI voted remain, while most of those voting in Britain didn't give NI or its particular problems with 'leave' even a moment's thought.


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> I wouldn't worry too much. A majority in NI voted remain, while most of those voting in Britain didn't give NI or its particular problems with 'leave' even a moment's thought.


*I think many moments of thought were given to it by the Tory party. Along the lines of: "How can we get rid of this millstone of a money pit, without appearing to be the cunts...I know, let's let them think it's what they voted for.".



* I am a bit pissed and stoned right now, so my opinion may have changed by the morning


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Dec 14, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> *I think many moments of thought were given to it by the Tory party. Along the lines of: "How can we get rid of this millstone of a money pit, without appearing to be the cunts...I know, let's let them think it's what they voted for.".
> 
> 
> 
> * I am a bit pissed and stoned right now, so my opinion may have changed by the morning


Nah. The Tory party, or at least the bit of it that called the referendum, didn't give a moment's thought to what it might do if leave won. May tied herself up in knots over it. One of the few highlights of the last couple of years to watch her trying to achieve the impossible - appease the DUP.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 14, 2019)

philosophical said:


> You have a point, except the word Brexit wasn't on the ballot paper.


Nor was the word word


----------



## andysays (Dec 14, 2019)

littlebabyjesus said:


> Nah. The Tory party, or at least the bit of it that called the referendum, didn't give a moment's thought to what it might do if leave won. May tied herself up in knots over it. One of the few highlights of the last couple of years to watch her trying to achieve the impossible - appease the DUP.


May needed to appease the DUP to get her deal through;  Johnson no longer needs the DUP for that purpose so will be quite happy to abandon them.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 15, 2019)

andysays said:


> May needed to appease the DUP to get her deal through;  Johnson no longer needs the DUP for that purpose so will be quite happy to abandon them.


I do like the idea of the DUP being shafted by the Conservative and Unionist Party.  It has a certain poetry about it.


----------



## gosub (Dec 16, 2019)

Boris Johnson will amend Brexit bill to outlaw extension


That will mess with the thought criminals heads.


----------



## Supine (Dec 17, 2019)

gosub said:


> Boris Johnson will amend Brexit bill to outlaw extension
> 
> 
> That will mess with the thought criminals heads.



So removing a key lever from his negotiation toolbox. Slow hand clap for something that appeases his domestic audience only.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Dec 17, 2019)

Supine said:


> So removing a key lever from his negotiation toolbox. Slow hand clap for something that appeases his domestic audience only.



So the EU will just offer a steaming pile of poo as the deal, we will have no choice but to take it or crash out as the date to leave is set in stone, only Johnson is a liar, so he will fossick around in his thesaurus for another word for extension...


----------



## Supine (Dec 17, 2019)

I don't think the EU will know what kind of deal will work until the UK decide how they want to diverge from current rules and standards. Apparently the cabinet haven't even discussed this yet but it will be driven by the us trade negotiation which will drive UK change required. It's a mess from a position of negotiation, leaving the mess of politics aside.


----------



## dessiato (Dec 17, 2019)

I still can't see anything better than the agreement we have.


----------



## Poi E (Dec 17, 2019)

Look forward to seeing the realisation that the MFN clauses the US will proffer seriously binds the UK from other negotiations...


----------



## Dogsauce (Dec 17, 2019)

The US will offer Britain a good deal to try and split other nations off from the trading block. They’ve been wanting to crack open European protectionism and standards forever, and this is their best chance of fracturing the alliance.  Of course, if Trump disappears there might be a different tack, though I suspect the forces pushing for more liberalisation will still have the upper hand there. 

Also keep an eye on the leverage of big US tech firms, and who they will help. They really don’t want their comfy tax affairs fucked around with by EU meddling.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 17, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I still can't see anything better than the agreement we have.



The withdrawal agreement cuts Northern Ireland away.


----------



## Azrael (Dec 17, 2019)

dessiato said:


> I still can't see anything better than the agreement we have.


E.E.A. membership via EFTA has much to recommend it, retaining access to European markets (including services) while extricating the U.K. from policies like Common Agriculture and Fisheries, alongside the political dimension of the E.U.

Unless Johnson pivots to this, Brexit will be rapidly despised then reversed, unlikely ever to be attempted again, at least within the lifetimes of most posting here (particularly spry urbanites may live to witness the 22nd century Eng-xit campaign).


----------



## MickiQ (Dec 17, 2019)

philosophical said:


> The withdrawal agreement cuts Northern Ireland away.


Yup certainly does however polls indicate that most English Leave voters given a choice of Brexit or keeping NI prefer Brexit
Not going to happen tomorrow but I really don't see how Irish unification will not happen now


----------



## 8ball (Dec 17, 2019)

MickiQ said:


> Yup certainly does however polls indicate that most English Leave voters given a choice of Brexit or keeping NI prefer Brexit
> Not going to happen tomorrow but I really don't see how Irish unification will not happen now



Guess it will just be England and Wales soon enough.
Would we still call it Britain?  Or update it to a portmanteau?

How about Wangland?


----------



## Saul Goodman (Dec 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> Guess it will just be England and Wales soon enough.
> Would we still call it Britain?  Or update it to a portmanteau?
> 
> How about Wangland?


Englandfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. Or just Englland.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> Guess it will just be England and Wales soon enough.
> Would we still call it Britain?  Or update it to a portmanteau?
> 
> How about Wangland?


mercia


----------



## 8ball (Dec 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> mercia



De rien.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> De rien.


darien i think you'll find


----------



## Yossarian (Dec 17, 2019)

8ball said:


> Guess it will just be England and Wales soon enough.
> Would we still call it Britain?  Or update it to a portmanteau?
> 
> How about Wangland?



El Wandangles


----------



## Idris2002 (Dec 17, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> darien i think you'll find


Silence


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 17, 2019)

Have we reached peak Brexitania yet?


----------



## Supine (Dec 17, 2019)

Saul Goodman said:


> Englandfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch. Or just Englland.



Haha


----------



## 8ball (Dec 17, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Have we reached peak Brexitania yet?



I wasn't aware Brexitania was in the race.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 17, 2019)

gosub said:


> Boris Johnson will amend Brexit bill to outlaw extension
> 
> 
> That will mess with the thought criminals heads.



So he's passing a law to limit his own actions. Smart move. Maybe he should also write a law requiring prime ministers to know their children's names.


----------



## Libertad (Dec 18, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> mercia



Wessex.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

More than 50 MPs have launched a campaign to get Big Ben to chime as Britain leaves the European Union on 31 January.



> The early day motion urges Commons authorities "to make arrangements to ensure that Big Ben will chime at 11pm [on January 31], to provide an appropriate national focus for this truly historic event."



MPs in fresh demand for Big Ben chime to mark Brexit 'freedom' day — PoliticsHome

Sounds good to me.


----------



## maomao (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> More than 50 MPs have launched a campaign to get Big Ben to chime as Britain leaves the European Union on 31 January.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nice to know our MPs are focused on the important issues facing us. He's not named but I guarantee my prick MP is one of the fifty. Pointless turd eater.


----------



## prunus (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> More than 50 MPs have launched a campaign to get Big Ben to chime as Britain leaves the European Union on 31 January.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ask not for whom the bells tolls, it tolls for us all.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> More than 50 MPs have launched a campaign to get Big Ben to chime as Britain leaves the European Union on 31 January.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


When you think this is the first thing mps have lined up behind since the election, thus the most important issue facing the country, it indicates what a dearth of awareness and a surfeit of self-satisfaction they have


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> When you think this is the first thing mps have lined up behind since the election, thus the most important issue facing the country, it indicates what a dearth of awareness and a surfeit of self-satisfaction they have



Oh I don’t know, I think ‘freedom day’ has a nice ring to it (no pun intended).

Of course freedom will mean different things to people whether you are a leaver or remainer but perhaps we could all be glad to be free from the constant battle that has been raging over Brexit up till now, where we now have clarity that our departure from the EU is certain.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Oh I don’t know, I think ‘freedom day’ has a nice ring to it (no pun intended).
> 
> Of course freedom will mean different things to people whether you are a leaver or remainer but perhaps we could all be glad to be free from the constant battle that has been raging over Brexit up till now, where we now have clarity that our departure from the EU is certain.


We have long been told we are free, part of the free world with the United States etc. Are you saying we've been lied to for many years, that the UK has been unfree since the middle of the cold war?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> We have long been told we are free, part of the free world with the United States etc. Are you saying we've been lied to for many years, that the UK has been unfree since the middle of the cold war?



Free from the EU.  I think the soundbite is ‘unshackled’.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Free from the EU.  I think the soundbite is ‘unshackled’.


but we were already free. we were always being told how free we were, how the poor east germans and that were enslaved by the evil soviet union but by contrast us lucky people in western europe had liberty. 'unshackled' makes it sound like we were slaves.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> but we were already free. we were always being told how free we were, how the poor east germans and that were enslaved by the evil soviet union but by contrast us lucky people in western europe had liberty. 'unshackled' makes it sound like we were slaves.



I dare say, some might say we have become slaves to EU standardisation, bureaucracy etc.

Regardless, hopefully the country will be less fixated on Brexit when we do leave, at least one part of the argument will be settled.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I dare say, some might say we have become slaves to EU standardisation, bureaucracy etc.
> 
> Regardless, hopefully the country will be less fixated on Brexit when we do leave, at least one part of the argument will be settled.


no it won't. should we leave on 31 january 2020 everything will still be up in the air about how we relate to europe. it'll rattle on for many years.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no it won't. should we leave on 31 january 2020 everything will still be up in the air about how we relate to europe. it'll rattle on for many years.



You’re probably right, Gina Miller, Lord Heseltine etc have already set their next battle for a super soft Brexit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I dare say, some might say we have become slaves to EU standardisation, bureaucracy etc.


on this basis we should be leaving nato too (there are a great number of nato standardisation agreements), the un and indeed pretty much every international body to which we belong.


----------



## tommers (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> no it won't. should we leave on 31 january 2020 everything will still be up in the air about how we relate to europe. it'll rattle on for many years.


Nonsense. Boris will have got Brexit done. That's it. All done.


----------



## tommers (Dec 19, 2019)

Dancing on the streets of Redcar.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

tommers said:


> Dancing on the streets of Redcar.


will life ever be sane again?


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

actually with a couple of alterations the smiths' 'panic' could be made wholly relevant to the unhappy times in which we find ourselves. simply changing 'dj' to 'bj' would do it. and doing something to the line about the music he plays.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> More than 50 MPs have launched a campaign to get Big Ben to chime as Britain leaves the European Union on 31 January.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is the saddest thing I've seen all week


----------



## Poi E (Dec 19, 2019)

Shit Brit symbolism. Lots of it about.


----------



## andysays (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Oh I don’t know, I think ‘freedom day’ has a nice ring to it (no pun intended).
> 
> Of course freedom will mean different things to people whether you are a leaver or remainer but perhaps we could all be glad to be free from the constant battle that has been raging over Brexit up till now, where we now have clarity that our departure from the EU is certain.


I wish we could all be freed from your idiotic comments


----------



## Supine (Dec 19, 2019)

tommers said:


> Dancing on the streets of Redcar.



Until they realise the remaining big factories are shutting down and next year's fishing quota negotiation doesnt give them unlimited rights to fish.


----------



## LDC (Dec 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> This is the saddest thing I've seen all week



Wait for the Brexit commemorative saucer/thimble/carriage clock/toilet seat set...


----------



## Sprocket. (Dec 19, 2019)

tommers said:


> Dancing on the streets of Redcar.



Dancing in the streets of Don Valley.
‘Fuck off, ah waint dance wi missus, am not dancin wi thee!’


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 19, 2019)

Proper Tidy said:


> This is the saddest thing I've seen all week



Just wait until the ‘STOP BREXIT!’ man turns up with new chant, ‘SOFT BREXIT!’


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 19, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Just wait until the ‘STOP BREXIT!’ man turns up with new chant, ‘SOFT BREXIT!’



That twat has finally given up, after wasting 847 days of his life. 



> For over two years, he has been the bane of every news report broadcast from College Green, outside the Houses of Parliament.
> 
> But after 847 days of heckling MPs, journalists and leavers, Steve Bray, 50, has decided to hang up his grey top hat and Union Flag.



Steve Bray who shouted Stop Brexit during BBC News finally admits defeat | Metro News


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

LynnDoyleCooper said:


> Wait for the Brexit commemorative saucer/thimble/carriage clock/toilet seat set...


chamberpot


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That twat has finally given up, after wasting 847 days of his life.
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Bray who shouted Stop Brexit during BBC News finally admits defeat | Metro News


he must have been awarded some sort of guinness world record


----------



## gosub (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> he must have been awarded some sort of guinness world record



Brian Haw he is not


----------



## Anju (Dec 19, 2019)

Fucking fantastic. I still don't understand why people thought it was a good move to enable this. Workers rights and child refugees targeted already and the NHS is clearly top of the menu, as it was always going to be. 

Johnson revises EU bill to limit parliament's role in Brexit talks


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 19, 2019)

Anju said:


> Fucking fantastic. I still don't understand why people thought it was a good move to enable this. Workers rights and child refugees targeted already and the NHS is clearly top of the menu, as it was always going to be.
> 
> Johnson revises EU bill to limit parliament's role in Brexit talks


Even if more money goes into the NHS, it'll likely go to the private concerns to whom services are contracted


----------



## Anju (Dec 19, 2019)

Pickman's model said:


> Even if more money goes into the NHS, it'll likely go to the private concerns to whom services are contracted



Yes,  just like when a new private development gets planning permission in a poor area. Suddenly lots of cosmetic work done in the immediate area. Blocks get painted, little local parks get done up, regular street cleaning starts, anti gang police operations move on the same people residents have been complaining about for years. All  just to make the new private properties more saleable.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 20, 2019)

To answer the thread question - yes.

Unsurprisingly the withdrawal agreement bill was passed today by 358 votes to 234, majority 124.


----------



## DexterTCN (Dec 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> To answer the thread question - yes.
> 
> Unsurprisingly the withdrawal agreement bill was passed today by 358 votes to 234, majority 124.


Yup...just like anything else the tories decide to do for the next 5-10 years.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 20, 2019)

cupid_stunt said:


> That twat has finally given up, after wasting 847 days of his life.
> 
> 
> 
> Steve Bray who shouted Stop Brexit during BBC News finally admits defeat | Metro News



Don’t know if it’s true but apparently Mr. Stop Brexit was been paid by an unknown backer for his duration and provided with a free flat in Westminster


----------



## Proper Tidy (Dec 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Don’t know if it’s true but apparently


----------



## gosub (Dec 20, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Don’t know if it’s true but apparently Mr. Stop Brexit was been paid by an unknown backer for his duration and provided with a free flat in Westminster



It was a crowd funder same as Gina Miller.. Doesn't have to be sinister but we are already down the rabbit hole in terms of money influence and the hidden persuaders.


It's a thing and there are no easy solutions but it's played to often and more as a way of ignoring the ball


----------



## two sheds (Dec 20, 2019)

Every bit of his legislation needs to be eradicated, like he's systematically done for Obama, and then some.

Ain't going to happen either.


----------



## gosub (Dec 22, 2019)

Three New Year’s Wishes for Britain and the EU | by Michel Barnier


----------



## Ming (Dec 23, 2019)

Analysis of why we’ll be getting the long planned No-deal Brexit. Hold on to your pensions, NHS, work place rights, environmental legislation, domestic food industry, etc..bargains galore if you have liquidity!


----------



## nuffsaid (Dec 25, 2019)




----------



## Marty1 (Dec 27, 2019)

Bye bye Brexit or wishful thinking?

Edit: Boris rambling on about putting Brexit behind us, then cuts to bloke from EU (who’s name I can’t remember) saying there’s not enough time for negotiations in Boris’s deadline but they will do their very best to accommodate.

(Video is under 2mins).


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Dec 27, 2019)

Honestly, if people are going to post videos can they summarise them or at least the conclusions they get to? I'm never going to watch any of the damn things.


----------



## redsquirrel (Dec 27, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Honestly, if people are going to post videos can they summarise them or at least the conclusions they get to? I'm never going to watch any of the damn things.


This times a million.


----------



## HoratioCuthbert (Dec 27, 2019)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Honestly, if people are going to post videos can they summarise them or at least the conclusions they get to? I'm never going to watch any of the damn things.


I’m not going to interrupt Spotify unless poster can convincingly promise 100 per cent satisfaction guaranteed within seconds, like Grace Blakeley’s Authentic Working Class Moment- exact time provided- that’s your example post right there.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Dec 27, 2019)

Just been to Bulgaria, and the general consensus by the Bulgarians was that that brexit is great and will somehow that was never fully explained was that it will be great for Britain and Bulgaria. So odd.


----------



## nuffsaid (Dec 27, 2019)

nuffsaid said:


>






FridgeMagnet said:


> Honestly, if people are going to post videos can they summarise them or at least the conclusions they get to? I'm never going to watch any of the damn things.





redsquirrel said:


> This times a million.



A tuneful reposte to various Remain factions - underlined by the election result. Effectively stating, very succinctly, a 17.4 million Fuck Offs.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

What could actually stop brexit from happening now? Looks to me like parliament has made it's mind up and, on the whole, agreed with the PM.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> What could actually stop brexit from happening now? Looks to me like parliament has made it's mind up and, on the whole, agreed with the PM.


Wow, thanks for checking in and putting us right.  (But in future, please mind your grammar.)


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> What could actually stop brexit from happening now? Looks to me like parliament has made it's mind up and, on the whole, agreed with the PM.


Nothing.  Brexit is happening.

The only question now is the extent to which the tories damage this country in the process.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

mx wcfc said:


> Nothing.  Brexit is happening.
> 
> The only question now is the extent to which the tories damage this country in the process.


I agree and I firmly believe that brexit, especially with a tory govt, will be a massive disaster. It might be good for Labour though afterall that they won't be the ones delivering it.


----------



## mx wcfc (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> I agree and I firmly believe that brexit, especially with a tory govt, will be a massive disaster. It might be good for Labour though afterall that they won't be the ones delivering it.


which is precisely why the silly fuckwits shuldnt have allowed the tories to get away with an election when they did.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> I agree and I firmly believe that brexit, especially with a tory govt, will be a massive disaster. It might be good for Labour though afterall that they won't be the ones delivering it.



And if it’s a success?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> And if it’s a success?


It won't be


----------



## two sheds (Dec 27, 2019)

fair point that

although likely to be a roaring success for some


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> It won't be



Even if it’s a success it won’t be?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Even if it’s a success it won’t be?


You clearly have serious problems 'using' your brain.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

two sheds said:


> fair point that
> 
> although likely to be a roaring success for some


Yeah, it'll be a massive success for the already very rich people who will profit even more from it financially.


----------



## philosophical (Dec 27, 2019)

A lot depends on what Brexit is supposed to be these days. I had assumed it meant leave.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Even if it’s a success it won’t be?


Do you think it'll be a success for most working class people?


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> Do you think it'll be a success for most working class people?


Aren't you just trolling Lexiters? Haven't we seen you somewhere before?


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Aren't you just trolling Lexiters? Haven't we seen you somewhere before?


I'm not trolling anyone


----------



## rekil (Dec 27, 2019)

nuffsaid said:


> A tuneful reposte to various Remain factions - underlined by the election result. Effectively stating, very succinctly, a 17.4 million Fuck Offs.


Maybe mention that it's by a whining 'anarcho-capitalist' maggot with an endlessly punchable little face. _Did you know that national SOCIALISM was tried in Germany?_

link to dickhead removed


----------



## Supine (Dec 27, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> And if it’s a success?



I’ll eat my hat


----------



## nuffsaid (Dec 27, 2019)

copliker said:


> Maybe mention that it's by a whining 'anarcho-capitalist' maggot with an endlessly punchable little face.



That seems subjective,  I was merely stating facts. Which I believe is all the guy was singing about, with a total leave bias of course, but then that is what the majority of voters voted for.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 27, 2019)

Cuckula eh
Nothing suss about that as a username, oh no


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Cuckula eh
> Nothing suss about that as a username, oh no


Oh god. See also
The 2019 General Election


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 27, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Cuckula eh
> Nothing suss about that as a username, oh no


No there isn't. It's an ironic name.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> No there isn't. It's an ironic name.


How did you find the site?


----------



## two sheds (Dec 27, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> Oh god. See also
> The 2019 General Election



And listens to Donovan


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> No there isn't. It's an ironic name.


It's weird really, because if someone were to choose an ironic name this would be far down the list. (After names like frex Donald Troooomp.) And if one were to choose a site to come and ironise on, of all the sites in all the world, this is a pretty obscure one.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

two sheds said:


> And listens to Donovan


Eh??


----------



## two sheds (Dec 27, 2019)

What are you listening to thread 



Count Cuckula said:


>




Game over


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 27, 2019)

Bless.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> Do you think it'll be a success for most working class people?



No, they’ll be the hardest hit, apart from Redcar where they will be ‘dancing in the streets’ fwiu.

But that’ll teach them tho, make them realise just how good they had it before Brexit.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

S☼I said:


> How did you find the site?


A mate of mine told me about it


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> What are you listening to thread
> 
> 
> 
> Game over


One of the best anti war songs ever, not written by him admittedly, but if you ask me he sings the best version.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

bluescreen said:


> It's weird really, because if someone were to choose an ironic name this would be far down the list. (After names like frex Donald Troooomp.) And if one were to choose a site to come and ironise on, of all the sites in all the world, this is a pretty obscure one.


It's ironic because I'm not a right wing troll. I also like disarming the words right wing trolls use.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

A self confessed Europhile provides his owns reasons for voting to leave the EU.




1. Centralised power is the wrong way to go.
2. Fringe nations perform better.
3. Regulations should be local.
4. The economic disaster that is Southern Europe.
5. The importance of immigration policy.
6. Trade deals are a red herring.
7. Further integration with the EU = economic decline.
8. Democratic accountability matters.
9. Land ownership and the CAP.
10. Common fisheries policies.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> It's ironic because I'm not a right wing troll. I also like disarming the words right wing trolls use and speaking personally the name count cuckula makes me laugh.


----------



## andysays (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> I'm not trolling anyone


Because if you *had* just signed up to Urban as a troll, Count Cuckula is the very last name you would have chosen, right?


----------



## maomao (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> It's ironic because I'm not a right wing troll. I also like disarming the words right wing trolls use and speaking personally the name count cuckula makes me laugh.



I would have gone with 'Cunt Fuckula'. Never been good at subtlety.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

andysays said:


> Because if you *had* just signed up to Urban as a troll, Count Cuckula is the very last name you would have chosen, right?


exactly


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> A self confessed Europhile provides his owns reasons for voting to leave the EU.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So? This is a (well-known) Brexit Party candidate with views that align with the Brexit Party. "His own".


----------



## rekil (Dec 28, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So? This is a (well-known) Brexit Party candidate with views that align with the Brexit Party. "His own".


 He posted this Dominic Frisby anarcho-capitalist wanker video because someone else foolishly posted one of his shit songs. Look at that disgusting malevolent little face ffs. Fuck off marty you loon cunt.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

S☼I said:


> So? This is a (well-known) Brexit Party candidate with views that align with the Brexit Party. "His own".



So - his ten reasons are more than reasonable and well presented imo, I simply posted as potential interest to others within the topic of this thread.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

copliker said:


> He posted this Dominic Frisby anarcho-capitalist wanker video because someone else foolishly posted one of his shit songs. Look at that disgusting malevolent little face ffs. Fuck off marty you loon cunt.



You are certainly doing a sterling job with that post as a non-loon of course.


----------



## rekil (Dec 28, 2019)

I find myself asking _'why is this or that dickhead still here?'_ a lot but really, why. Fuck off you cunt.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> So - his ten reasons are more than reasonable and well presented imo, I simply posted as potential interest to others within the topic of this thread.


But you've posted them as if it's something different posters might not be aware of. This thread is nearly 1300 pages long, one of the longest on the entire site. Do you seriously think those points made by someone else on the internet haven't been covered within these pages?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> A mate of mine told me about it


Do they post here?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

S☼I said:


> But you've posted them as if it's something different posters might not be aware of. This thread is nearly 1300 pages long, one of the longest on the entire site. Do you seriously think those points made by someone else on the internet haven't been covered within these pages?



I understand your point but you also make a point for my posting - this thread is near 1300 pages long so difficult to trawl through to see if a post has already covered this.

If it has, I’m happy to be directed to it and subsequent responses.

I really don’t understand some of the abuse and vitriol thrown out (not particularly you).


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

S☼I said:


> Do they post here?


I don't know, it was ages ago and we're not friends anymore.


----------



## nogojones (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> I don't know, it was ages ago and we're not friends anymore.


Welcome to Urban 

Can I ask why you're not friends anymore


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

nogojones said:


> Welcome to Urban
> 
> Can I ask why you're not friends anymore


dunno, we just ceased contacting each other over time.


----------



## AmateurAgitator (Dec 28, 2019)

two sheds said:


> What are you listening to thread
> 
> 
> 
> Game over


Surely Jason Donovan would have been more of a concern.


----------



## nogojones (Dec 28, 2019)

Count Cuckula said:


> dunno, we just ceased contacting each other over time.


Did you not even send them an Xmas card?

Hit them up. They'll surely be missing your company


----------



## philosophical (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> A self confessed Europhile provides his owns reasons for voting to leave the EU.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Load of wank though because there is no solution to the land border in Ireland mentioned.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Load of wank though because there is no solution to the land border in Ireland mentioned.


Why didn't you mention this before?


----------



## editor (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> A self confessed Europhile provides his owns reasons for voting to leave the EU.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Who gives a fucking shit what this pointless posh no-mark cunt thinks? Why are you wasting everyone's time posting up such drivel?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

editor said:


> Who gives a fucking shit what this pointless posh no-mark cunt thinks? Why are you wasting everyone's time posting up such drivel?



Is Brexit actually going to happen?


----------



## editor (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Is Brexit actually going to happen?


He's a cunt. A posh pointless cunt. The fact that you seem so proud of yourself for posting up this drivel speaks volumes.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 28, 2019)

editor said:


> He's a cunt. A posh pointless cunt. The fact that you seem so proud of yourself for posting up this drivel speaks volumes.



I’m not a posh cunt if that is what you are inferring.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Dec 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Load of wank though because there is no solution to the land border in Ireland mentioned.



Yawn.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 28, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I’m not a posh cunt if that is what you are inferring.


Nope, just fucking thick (it clearly wasn't what he was inferring either)


----------



## gosub (Dec 28, 2019)

philosophical said:


> Load of wank though because there is no solution to the land border in Ireland mentioned.



Equally true of the Royal Institute Christmas Lectures


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 29, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> I’m not a posh cunt if that is what you are inferring.



He's implying, you're inferring. And a tedious arse besides.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 29, 2019)

SpookyFrank said:


> He's implying, you're inferring. And a tedious arse besides.



Ok boomer.


----------



## bluescreen (Dec 29, 2019)

Oh God, is he still here?


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 31, 2019)

Positive bit of news.



> After years of Brexit-driven underperformance, fund managers and analysts think UK equities could be set for big things this year.
> 
> Morgan Stanley named the UK “the standout equity opportunity for 2020” and a third of money managers surveyed by the Association of Investment Companies (AIC) think the UK will produce the best stock market returns globally in 2020.



UK stocks tipped for big things in 2020 — Yahoo Finance UK


----------



## maomao (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Positive bit of news.


For who? You got a lot tied up in the stock market?


----------



## belboid (Dec 31, 2019)

Three cheers for Morgan Stanley!


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 31, 2019)

maomao said:


> For who? You got a lot tied up in the stock market?



British buisnesses.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> British buisnesses.


Fuck business


----------



## kabbes (Dec 31, 2019)

For every business article predicting big gains in the immediate future, I’ll find you another predicting big losses.  And vice versa.  Because that’s what the market price is — the consensus between the current views.  If everybody thought the price was about to go up, the price would already have gone up to the point everybody thought it was going to reach.  Morgan Stanley have one view, other investors have different views.

(FWIW, which is the square root of fuck all, my view is the the U.K. stockmarket is currently at almost exactly it’s long term value given current conditions.  It had value a month ago but its recent rise of almost 10% has wiped that out now.)


----------



## maomao (Dec 31, 2019)

SpineyNorman said:


> Fuck business


And buisnesses too.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Positive bit of news.
> 
> 
> 
> UK stocks tipped for big things in 2020 — Yahoo Finance UK




fss - file next to the daily express long range weather forecasts.


----------



## Marty1 (Dec 31, 2019)

Kaka Tim said:


> fss - file next to the daily express long range weather forecasts.



Plenty of people already predicting certain doom and gloom, I guess their forecasts are the right forecasts and nothing else.


----------



## maomao (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Plenty of people already predicting certain doom and gloom, I guess their forecasts are the right forecasts and nothing else.


I think the point you're missing is that a stock market boom is not incompatible with doom and gloom for us downtrodden masses.


----------



## Serge Forward (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Positive bit of news.
> 
> 
> 
> UK stocks tipped for big things in 2020 — Yahoo Finance UK


Prick.


----------



## Pickman's model (Dec 31, 2019)

Marty1 said:


> Plenty of people already predicting certain doom and gloom, I guess their forecasts are the right forecasts and nothing else.


Good results on the stock market mean doom and gloom for most people


----------



## SpookyFrank (Dec 31, 2019)

Serge Forward said:


> Prick.



I cannot fault this analysis.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 5, 2020)

On an entirely different note, I hear that nice Nigel chappie is planning a party in parliament on the 31st, a celebration, not a wake


----------



## not a trot (Jan 5, 2020)

hash tag said:


> On an entirely different note, I hear that nice Nigel chappie is planning a party in parliament on the 31st, a celebration, not a wake


Bring your own milkshakes.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 7, 2020)

I hate the word ‘Brexit’, but I’m convinced that that one simple word, whatever it actually ends up meaning, won the referendum for the Leave campaign. It’s a shame the Remain side didn’t come up with ‘Brinnit’, to indicate Britain staying in the EU. Then they could have had the slogan ‘I’m for Brinnit, innit?’. Given the pitiful level of public debate on the subject at the time that could have swung the vote the other way.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 7, 2020)

Kevbad the Bad said:


> I hate the word ‘Brexit’, but I’m convinced that that one simple word, whatever it actually ends up meaning, won the referendum for the Leave campaign. It’s a shame the Remain side didn’t come up with ‘Brinnit’, to indicate Britain staying in the EU. Then they could have had the slogan ‘I’m for Brinnit, innit?’. Given the pitiful level of public debate on the subject at the time that could have swung the vote the other way.



Definitely you should have been the campaign manager for Remain.


----------



## Kevbad the Bad (Jan 7, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> Definitely you should have been the campaign manager for Remain.


I’ve obviously missed my vocation. Praps in another 25 years.


----------



## MickiQ (Jan 7, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Good results on the stock market mean doom and gloom for most people


not really, Good Results on the stock market don't have much actual impact at all on the lives of ordinary people, whilst you (well some people probably not you) could argue that the huge amount of money tied up in Pension Funds makes us all stakeholders, it's so remote from the lives of most people that the effect is minimal.
Bad Results on the other hand do mean doom and gloom because companies react negatively to it often with cutbacks.
So whilst we want Good Results and they are overall a goodish thing it's more because we really don't want bad results.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 7, 2020)

MickiQ said:


> not really, Good Results on the stock market don't have much actual impact at all on the lives of ordinary people, whilst you (well some people probably not you) could argue that the huge amount of money tied up in Pension Funds makes us all stakeholders, it's so remote from the lives of most people that the effect is minimal.
> Bad Results on the other hand do mean doom and gloom because companies react negatively to it often with cutbacks.
> So whilst we want Good Results and they are overall a goodish thing it's more because we really don't want bad results.


Good results are predicated either on companies exploiting people really well or fat pig gamblers gambling


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 8, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Good results are predicated either on companies exploiting people really well or fat pig gamblers gambling



And, because nothing comes from nowhere, rises in the markets are only ever borrowed from whatever the next crash is going to be.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 8, 2020)

Windrush mk II


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> Windrush mk II


this is a very stupid decision which will doubtless lead to all manner of unhappiness for uk nationals resident in europe


----------



## andysays (Jan 8, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> this is a very stupid decision which will doubtless lead to all manner of unhappiness for uk nationals resident in europe


And vice versa. 

I'm not sure that describing it as "Windrush mk II" is particularly enlightening or helpful though


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 8, 2020)

andysays said:


> And vice versa.
> 
> I'm not sure that describing it as "Windrush mk II" is particularly enlightening or helpful though


yeh, uk nationals in europe will be treated the same way as eu citizens here, so much misery all round. and i wouldn't describe it as windrush mark 2, not least because in windrush mark i the government admitted it'd been wrong (even if it hasn't done much to make it right)


----------



## Flavour (Jan 9, 2020)

i think we'll see a disparity in the treatment of uk nationals according to which euro country it is. those that benefit from tourism and british pensioners spending their money there probably won't want to make life too hard for them (looking primarily at Spain) while others for whom the british can't be said to add much to the economy but perhaps just fuck around without paying many taxes might go harder (Germany - thinking mainly of Berlin)


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 10, 2020)

Airbus 'sees potential to expand' after Brexit
					

The company had warned it could move wing-building out of the UK in the event of no deal.



					www.bbc.co.uk
				




At least no one here was silly enough to fall for Airbus' threats


----------



## cupid_stunt (Jan 10, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> Airbus 'sees potential to expand' after Brexit
> 
> 
> The company had warned it could move wing-building out of the UK in the event of no deal.
> ...



It was all part of 'project fear', which the majority of people never believed, especially after the sky didn't fall in after the referendum vote to leave.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 14, 2020)

Boris Johnson suggests £500,000 public fundraiser so Big Ben can bong for Brexit
					

‘We are working up a plan so people can bung a bob for a Big Ben bong,’ prime minister says




					www.independent.co.uk
				




so the brexiters are being asked to fund their own bong...


----------



## fishfinger (Jan 14, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> http://[URL='https://www.independen...ration-fundraising-a9282671.html[/URL[/COLOR]]
> 
> so the brexiters are being asked to fund their own bong...


Definitely going for the older crowd, seeing as we haven't used "bobs" in nearly 50 years.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 14, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> Over 50% of us in the poll on this thread thought Brexit would never happen - anyone still feel that way?



Well, some form of it might happen, but it will never be "done" in the disingenuous, simplistic way the tories suggested in the election.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 14, 2020)

I've been meaning to ask - I keep seeing stuff claiming that shadowy people in the global financial markets would benefit from a no-deal, crashout Brexit, and that this is still therefore on the cards, regardless of what Boris says or does.

Is there  any truth at all to that one? I write as someone for whom this sort of thing is above his pay grade.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> I've been meaning to ask - I keep seeing stuff claiming that shadowy people in the global financial markets would benefit from a no-deal, crashout Brexit, and that this is still therefore on the cards, regardless of what Boris says or does.
> 
> Is there  any truth at all to that one? I write as someone for whom this sort of thing is above his pay grade.


people in the global financial markets win whether or not there's a no-deal, crashout brexit.


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 14, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> people in the global financial markets win whether or not there's a no-deal, crashout brexit.


Well, yes, quite, but there was talk of a bigger than normal pay day for the stripy shirted shits in the even of a no-deal crash landing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> Well, yes, quite, but there was talk of a bigger than normal pay day for the stripy shirted shits in the even of a no-deal crash landing.


a holiday in other people's misery


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> Well, yes, quite, but there was talk of a bigger than normal pay day for the stripy shirted shits in the even of a no-deal crash landing.



Not sure myself, but the larger the swings in currency, share values, hedge funds etc the more profit is there to be made. Particularly if you've got the fast software (and inside knowledge) to take advantage.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 14, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> I've been meaning to ask - I keep seeing stuff claiming that shadowy people in the global financial markets would benefit from a no-deal, crashout Brexit, and that this is still therefore on the cards, regardless of what Boris says or does.
> 
> Is there  any truth at all to that one? I write as someone for whom this sort of thing is above his pay grade.


Some will profit.  A lot more will lose, though — and much of these losers is serious capital.  If I was betting on an outcome based on where the heavyweight interests lie, it would have been on staying in the EU.  I think all this shows that these powerbrokers don’t quite have the power they thought they did.


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Jan 14, 2020)

fishfinger said:


> Definitely going for the older crowd, seeing as we haven't used "bobs" in nearly 50 years.



It's been a fair few years since I used a bong as well tbh.


----------



## isvicthere? (Jan 14, 2020)

fishfinger said:


> Definitely going for the older crowd, seeing as we haven't used "bobs" in nearly 50 years.



Given the relentless atavism of some brexit enthusiasts, we might be getting the bob back, or maybe even Danegeld.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 14, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Some will profit.  A lot more will lose, though — and much of these losers is serious capital.  If I was betting on an outcome based on where the heavyweight interests lie, it would have been on staying in the EU.  I think all this shows that these powerbrokers don’t quite have the power they thought they did.



Won't the losers include the more conservative investors like Pension Funds, so the rest of us?


----------



## kabbes (Jan 14, 2020)

two sheds said:


> Won't the losers include the more conservative investors like Pension Funds, so the rest of us?


Probably.  I was talking about businesses rather than investors, but even so—probably.

It’s so hard to predict, though, because markets are so driven by sentiment and by comparative advantage (after all, the money always has to be _somewhere_).  A collapse in GBP, for example, is a problem if you’re a local UK importer.  But if you’re UK oil company, your profit in GBP has just increased.  And the pension company is also better off if it has invested in USD companies.  So where is your pension invested — local UK importer, UK multinational or US?  

And when Johnson got in, the rebound from relief at avoiding Corbyn was so great that it seemed to overwhelm the Brexit worries sentiment overrules all in the short term.

In the long run, the pension scheme is invested in mostly UK but also worldwide capital interests, ie industry.  So in the long run, in sure it will be just fine.  Capital still rules the world.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2020)

MrCurry said:


> Over 50% of us in the poll on this thread thought Brexit would never happen - anyone still feel that way?



Good question. 

I have to say my assumption was that we would end up staying in the single market and this would be sold as Brexit - so yeah didn't think it would happen in a meaningful way. 

I suppose I didn't expect the sheer veracity of the campaign to ignore/overturn/cancel the referendum, which I think made a sort of pseudo Brexit/staying in the single market impossible. 

May/Johnson's deal still allows for EU/ECJ intervention in to the UK economy, and given that we don't yet know what the terms of trade access with the EU would be, we don't knwo how wide ranging they would be. 

It's definitely a fudge and not a dramatic departure from the EU - at least at this stage. But I think that will just anger people more eventually and means that a) Brexit will continue as an issue and b) further divergence will follow.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2020)

Not quite sure what this is by the way but it's a thing:

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">We’re in the first meeting of the EU-UK Friendship group, chaired by <a href="Terry Reintke (@TerryReintke) on Twitter">@TerryReintke</a>, talking about how we can maintain our links with our friends &amp; colleagues in EU Parliament. This will be a cross-party group, to promote values of democracy &amp; human rights 🇪🇺🇬🇧💚 <a href="#Erasmus hashtag on Twitter">#Erasmus</a> <a href="News about #Brexit on Twitter">#Brexit</a> <a href="Gina Dowding MEP on Twitter">pic.twitter.com/IwFrJ4HkIt</a></p>&mdash; Gina Dowding MEP (@GinaDowdingMEP) <a href="">January 14, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


----------



## Poot (Jan 14, 2020)

fishfinger said:


> Definitely going for the older crowd, seeing as we haven't used "bobs" in nearly 50 years.


Imagine if you had tendered for the repair and maintenance of Big Ben. You'd given your carefully constructed estimated timescales (four years in total) and your price. You'd hired a team of experts to carry out research and carefully restore it, and then suddenly that fuckwit comes crashing in and says he wants it for a fortnight Friday.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2020)

Poot said:


> You'd given your carefully constructed estimated timescales (four years in total) and your price. You'd hired a team of experts to carry out research and carefully restore it



Lets face it this scenario is fairly unlikely - whoever got it probably just whacked in the lowest bid and worked out the details after.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 14, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> Lets face it this scenario is fairly unlikely - whoever got it probably just whacked in the lowest bid and worked out the details after.



My only hope for this next few years is that after years of warnings about the shoddy state of the building, parliament legit falls down while the bastards are in session.


----------



## Poot (Jan 14, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> Lets face it this scenario is fairly unlikely - whoever got it probably just whacked in the lowest bid and worked out the details after.


I think you're failing to understand that this is Westminster and there's glory (and cash) to be had. It'll be someone's artisanal brother-in-law doing the experting at great expense. Probably.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 14, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> My only hope for this next few years is that after years of warnings about the shoddy state of the building, parliament legit falls down while the bastards are in session.


while from beneath their feet the odorous thames bubbles up and drowns the villains in their seats


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 14, 2020)

Poot said:


> I think you're failing to understand that this is Westminster and there's glory (and cash) to be had. It'll be someone's artisanal brother-in-law doing the experting at great expense. Probably.



I'm sceptical.

And correctly so since it's being done by McAlpine. All your questions about the Elizabeth Tower and Big Ben works answered


----------



## gosub (Jan 14, 2020)

Poot said:


> Imagine if you had tendered for the repair and maintenance of Big Ben. You'd given your carefully constructed estimated timescales (four years in total) and your price. You'd hired a team of experts to carry out research and carefully restore it, and then suddenly that fuckwit comes crashing in and says he wants it for a fortnight Friday.



Well they've priced accordingly they have the original to sand mold ffs. Makes pub refebs look value for money


----------



## Poi E (Jan 15, 2020)

Yeah, saw the mold at the bell foundry. Guy said it wasn't one of their better ones. Mind you, they ripped the Yanks off with the Liberty Bell. Should have been sent for scrap.


----------



## Cid (Jan 15, 2020)

Didn't the bell foundry get sold off to developers?


----------



## hash tag (Jan 15, 2020)

Only 43% of Brits voted for brexit


Spoiler: Care


----------



## teqniq (Jan 19, 2020)

Whilst I could see good rasons for leaving from another pespective,you have to laugh.









						United Kingdom wins Darwin Award - LCD Views
					

The Darwin Awards are always funny to read about, how some idiot leaned over the edge of a cliff to take a selfie and fell to their doom, or forgot to put -




					www.lcdviews.com


----------



## kabbes (Jan 20, 2020)

The Darwin awards are vicious, elitist, eugenic crap at the best of times.  But now they’ve broken their own rules— Brexit does not make somebody less likely to pass their genes on to the next generation.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 20, 2020)

kabbes said:


> The Darwin awards are vicious, elitist, eugenic crap at the best of times.  But now they’ve broken their own rules— Brexit does not make somebody less likely to pass their genes on to the next generation.



That's a satire story - I don't know who the chairman of the Darwin Awards is but I'm pretty sure he's not called "Stu Pidkunz."


----------



## kabbes (Jan 20, 2020)

That’s what I get for not bothering to click the link


----------



## Combustible (Jan 20, 2020)

kabbes said:


> Brexit does not make somebody less likely to pass their genes on to the next generation.



That depends, I imagine being prime minister might require one to rein it in a little bit.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Jan 20, 2020)

brexit britain


----------



## two sheds (Jan 20, 2020)

The first comment on there 

Compassionate and tolerant fascists clearly.


----------



## hash tag (Jan 22, 2020)

I've just been and paid my respects to Europe and said farewell


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 22, 2020)

Didnt see this when it came out but found it very interesting


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 22, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Didnt see this when it came out but found it very interesting




Oh great, I was just thinking the other day how I hadn't heard enough from people over 50 who do little else but talk about how things were in the 20th century and their reasons for voting Brexit.

I can't wait for Lexit and the dawn of a new socialist Britain 👍


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> Oh great, I was just thinking the other day how I hadn't heard enough from people over 50 who do little else but talk about how things were in the 20th century and their reasons for voting Brexit.
> 
> I can't wait for Lexit and the dawn of a new socialist Britain 👍



I know. I’m sick of hearing from working class people in deindustrialised towns. Why can’t the media focus on the views, culture and politics of the urban middle class? Why shouldn’t we hear what politicians have to say? How about well educated people with loads of cultural and social capital? These voices are being drowned out by the endless working class northern voices.

We should remember some Tories and Brexit Party support Brexit. Why hasn’t Brexit been endlessly presented in their terms rather than these prole, trade unionist racist scum eh eh?

A disgrace


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 23, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> I know. I’m sick of hearing from working class people in deindustrialised towns. Why can’t the media focus on the views, culture and politics of the urban middle class? Why shouldn’t we hear what politicians have to say? How about well educated people with loads of cultural and social capital? These voices are being drowned out by the endless working class northern voices.
> 
> A disgrace



I was talking about an age demographic rather than a class one but this is urban and a response like yours is one you can set your watch to.  

For the record I do actually agree with you and I get why brexit happened. I dont really give a toss about the EU or Brexit anymore though I just find the whole thing comical now and this was another funny thing about it. Virtually every person I hear from who voted brexit has grey hair and always, without fail, goes on and on about how things were better in the past. This country is stuck in a nostalgic loop to the point of farce. But I'm sure now that people in deindustrialised towns have voted in a right wing populist government will have their lives improve immediately on the 31st Jan when we forge a bright new post brexit future.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> I was talking about an age demographic rather than a class one but this is urban and a response like yours is one you can set your watch to.
> 
> For the record I do actually agree with you and I get why brexit happened. I dont really give a toss about the EU or Brexit anymore though I just find the whole thing comical now and this was another funny thing about it. Virtually every person I hear from who voted brexit has grey hair and always, without fail, goes on and on about how things were better in the past. This country is stuck in a nostalgic loop to the point of farce. But I'm sure now that people in deindustrialised towns have voted in a right wing populist government will have their lives improve immediately on the 31st Jan when we forge a bright new post brexit future.



The main problem I had with your post is that you are talking total bollocks.

The pro-Brexit argument has been, almost exclusively, presented in terms of the Tory Party/Farage psychodrama. The motivations of those voting for it have been dismissed as racist, nostalgia or stupidity. Research highlighting political alienation as the key motivating factor has been (deliberately) overlooked.

But given I’ve never seen anything like this - working class trade unionists talking about why they voted leave - the idea that we should be ‘sick of hearing’ from them is pathetic. We haven’t heard nearly enough of them.

ETA. Your point about age is a fair one however. We definitely need to hear a LOT more from young people in places like Doncaster and why they also voted leave.


----------



## sunnysidedown (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> I was talking about an age demographic rather than a class one but this is urban and a response like yours is one you can set your watch to.
> 
> For the record I do actually agree with you and I get why brexit happened. I dont really give a toss about the EU or Brexit anymore though I just find the whole thing comical now and this was another funny thing about it. Virtually every person I hear from who voted brexit has grey hair and always, without fail, goes on and on about how things were better in the past. This country is stuck in a nostalgic loop to the point of farce. But I'm sure now that people in deindustrialised towns have voted in a right wing populist government will have their lives improve immediately on the 31st Jan when we forge a bright new post brexit future.



From my experience, when people talk of the past being better they are reffing to communities. The sort of communities that have been destroyed by decades of neoliberalism. It seems from your conceited tone that you are a typical example of someone who has done rather well out of neoliberalism. The level of social decay found around large parts of the UK has obviously never bothered the likes of you previously, so it should not come as a surprise to find you mocking those communities now.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> Oh great, I was just thinking the other day how I hadn't heard enough from people over 50 who do little else but talk about how things were in the 20th century and their reasons for voting Brexit.
> 
> I can't wait for Lexit and the dawn of a new socialist Britain 👍



Yep the idea of people over 50 wanting a better future for their kids and grandkids based on an elected Labour government providing properly paid jobs, investing in decent transport , housing, economic growth  and thriving communities is not only  boring but  repulsive


----------



## B.I.G (Jan 23, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Yep the idea of people over 50 wanting a better future for their kids and grandkids based on an elected Labour government providing properly paid jobs, investing in decent transport , housing, economic growth  and thriving communities is not only  boring but  repulsive



Its certainly make believe as they voted Tory.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Yep the idea of people over 50 wanting a better future for their kids and grandkids based on an elected Labour government providing properly paid jobs, investing in decent transport , housing, economic growth  and thriving communities is not only  boring but  repulsive



This would make sense if brexit hadn't torpedoed the Labour party and empowered the tory right.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 23, 2020)

The UK has no plan to implement the leave vote. Neither over the past four years, nor at the end of this month, and given the experience so far no plan to implement the leave vote at the end of the year.
This is despite the local and Euro elections, and two General Elections.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 23, 2020)

I think I've seen that 'Lexiteers' video before - good to hear more from that perspective and I agree with a lot of what they had to say - Brexit could have been a very good thing for Doncaster, as long as it was combined with a government willing to roll back 40 years of Thatcherism. Just the latter part would also have been good, tbf.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 23, 2020)

Some of the looking backwards to the past is a problem*, but it should not exclude the fact that in many ways things were better in the past.
Inequality was lower.
Social mobility was higher.
The % of GDP that went to workers wages was higher.
In recent years the US has seen a dip in life expectancy. I'm not aware of the same occurring in the UK but there is an increasing gap between sectors of the population.
The simple fact is that for quite a lot of people they are worse off materially than their parents and they can see that their children will be worse off then them. 


*there's a good discussion on this Winlow, Hall and Tredwell's Rise of the Right: English nationalism and the transformation of working class politics


redsquirrel said:


> The authors then place the comments of the interviewees, and especially their sense of some sort of loss, into the wider political framework. In particular they discuss 'mourning vs melancholy', in mourning something you ultimately accept it has gone and move on, while in the melancholy mindset there is an inability to move past the loss. The authors connect the nationalist views they have observed with the melancholia, and link it to the inability of the liberal left to fundamentally challenge nationalism/populism, if all you can offer is more of the same but not quite so bad how can people overcome their melancholia be begin to mourn. A similar analysis continues in the conclusion and postscript (which deals with the EU referendum vote).


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 23, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This would make sense if brexit hadn't torpedoed the Labour party and empowered the tory right.



Can you see the way this circuit works?

1. working class labour supporters in seats like Doncaster vote leave.
2. They are roundly condemned as racists, gammons, thickos often by those professing to be on the left and ‘on their side’
3. Labour campaigns for remain but promises to respect the result, only to then pivot towards the PV positon complete with people like Starmer and Thornberry saying they haven’t gone far enough.
4. Meanwhile the leftie distaste for Brexit means the field is left open to people like BP and the Tories to define what Brexit means economically and culturally. No serious attempt is made to describe - from our side - what it could look like, how lives could be improved and what was perfectly described in aspirational terms by the trade unionists in this film.
5. Working class labour voters vote in a GE where only one party promises to ‘get Brexit done’


----------



## redsquirrel (Jan 23, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This would make sense if brexit hadn't torpedoed the Labour party and empowered the tory right.


Aren't you an anarchist? Why are you limiting politics to the LP?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 23, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> This would make sense if brexit hadn't torpedoed the Labour party and empowered the tory right.



Actually The Labour Party tried to to torpedo Brexit  that was what empowered the Tory right.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2020)

redsquirrel said:


> Aren't you an anarchist? Why are you limiting politics to the LP?



The point I was responding to was about those who specifically want a Labour government. Those people do not include me.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 23, 2020)

The left are as impotent when faced with the majority vote to leave as any other viewpoint on the spectrum. The elephant in the room which is not faced by the left, right or centre is, surprise surprise, the land border between the UK and the EU. No bugger has suggested a workable solution so far that will manifest the vote to leave whatever the ideology or social standing.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Can you see the way this circuit works?
> 
> 1. working class labour supporters in seats like Doncaster vote leave.



What proportion of working class labour supporters in seats like Doncaster voted leave?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> What proportion of working class labour supporters in seats like Doncaster voted leave?


Have you watched the video?


----------



## Winot (Jan 23, 2020)

This is a good summary of the issues to be discussed over the next year:









						Brexit 2020: Everything you need to know about Boris Johnson's trade deal nightmare
					

The withdrawal bill has passed. Brexit is happening. But Johnson's European nightmare is just beginning. Here is everything you need to know about the year ahead.




					www.politics.co.uk


----------



## ska invita (Jan 23, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Didnt see this when it came out but found it very interesting



The history bit aside, the video boils down to the point about 9 minutes in: we voted Leave so a future Labour government would be able to renationalise industry as it is illegal to do so under EU rules, and allow us greater room for protectionist measures. We are told that leaving the EU "would have a very peripheral effect in the short term", and the potential long term ability to nationalise and protect is central.

And since we're going round in circles talking over this again, to answer those two main points:
-many working class people felt a right wing Conservative led Brexit would NOT have "a very peripheral effect in the short term", it would have an extremely negative one, on multiple levels. Those negative effects don't even seem to be considered by those in the video, much as they were ignored, or even unconsidered, by other lexiters pre-referendum. There's not even a nod made to the potential negative outcomes.


-the issue around a future Labour government nationalising industries in spite of the EU rules (rules that UK politicians were previously central in creating and enforcing) are complicated. Based on my reading while its not as clear cut as sometimes presented, it seems certain that a nationalising Labour government would hit against EU rules at some stages of the process.

One alternative reality is that could've be tested in practice, and if massively blocked would then have been a better platform under which to hold a leave the EU referendum. That process would've created the conditions for a Lexit case, campaign, consciousness and grounds for a future relationship.

But we are where we are, and what negative effects are to come in the next five years will be there to be fought against as per, and hopefully the prize of being able to nationalist freely will be won..... but from what I've read recently in the lead up to the coming negotiations, that's far from a given. The complexity of international trade rules and layers is such that it is far from certain that if the UK leave-leaves (by December 2020 or whenever) it will no longer be bound to "competition" commitments.

Last time I checked it was Tories who supported deeper privatisation and not nationalisation, and it is the Tories who will be as ever creating the rules and running the negotiations here, and doing so from a position of weakness. Those banking on a certainty that state aids rules will be dismantled once we leave might yet be disappointed.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 23, 2020)

They don't need to be dismantled if they don't apply here.

(The breaking of the EU is the only way they're going to be dismantled across the rest of the continent as well).


----------



## tommers (Jan 23, 2020)

7 days till it's done.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Have you watched the video?


No. Does it contain the answer to my question?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2020)

tommers said:


> 7 days till it's done.


and another decade or more


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

B.I.G said:


> Its certainly make believe as they voted Tory.



They didn't. One of them is Tosh Mcdonald, do you know who that is? For all his faults he's no Tory voter. 



SpookyFrank said:


> This would make sense if brexit hadn't torpedoed the Labour party and empowered the tory right.



Whose fault is that? 



The39thStep said:


> Actually The Labour Party tried to to torpedo Brexit  that was what empowered the Tory right.



Exactly.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> What proportion of working class labour supporters in seats like Doncaster voted leave?



The majority. The same working class Labour voters gave Labour its biggest vote share in Doncaster since 1947 in the 2017 election.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

philosophical said:


> The left are as impotent when faced with the majority vote to leave as any other viewpoint on the spectrum. The elephant in the room which is not faced by the left, right or centre is, surprise surprise, the land border between the UK and the EU. No bugger has suggested a workable solution so far that will manifest the vote to leave whatever the ideology or social standing.



I know this is your favourite topic and I'm sorry to ruin it for you but they have now decided they're just going to put a border down the Irish sea.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> The majority. The same working class Labour voters gave Labour its biggest vote share in Doncaster since 1947 in the 2017 election.


Where are your numbers from - I've not managed to find them broken down by constituency in that detail.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I've not managed to find them broken down by constituency in that detail.


try harder


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 23, 2020)

ska invita said:


> The history bit aside, the video boils down to the point about 9 minutes in: we voted Leave so a future Labour government would be able to renationalise industry as it is illegal to do so under EU rules, and allow us greater room for protectionist measures. We are told that leaving the EU "would have a very peripheral effect in the short term", and the potential long term ability to nationalise and protect is central.
> 
> And since we're going round in circles talking over this again, to answer those two main points:
> -many working class people felt a right wing Conservative led Brexit would NOT have "a very peripheral effect in the short term", it would have an extremely negative one, on multiple levels. Those negative effects don't even seem to be considered by those in the video, much as they were ignored, or even unconsidered, by other lexiters pre-referendum. There's not even a nod made to the potential negative outcomes.
> ...



They didn't vote tory though, they voted leave. In context of a tory party that, like labour, was overwhelmingly remain with a remain leadership. When the votes were cast in 2016 it wasn't for a 'conservative led brexit' and it wasn't driven by an idea that tory privatisation would lead to labour nationalisation.

All that has come afterwards and it's come from the political class, that is who has determined what brexit means, that it will be tory led


----------



## ska invita (Jan 23, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> When the votes were cast in 2016 it wasn't for a 'conservative led brexit'


It was clear who was setting the agenda for leave and what the narrative and forces at play were
It was only ever going to be a brexit of the right in practice in the first instance, this was also clear for those who daren't not vote for leaving having seen the forces lined up behind it, as it was surely clear vice-versa, and it couldn't have been more explicit at the last election either. Its not a political act happening in a vacuum.

I'm bowing out talking about this looking-back part of it again as its too much after 4 years of it. 

I did want to add that one new bit though, which is don't anyone be surprised if regulations on state aid etc don't change very much once the deal is done. I hope they do - it would be nice to get something positive out of all this - but.....far from a given.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 23, 2020)

ska invita said:


> I did want to add that one new bit though, which is don't anyone be surprised if regulations on state aid etc don't change very much once the deal is done. I hope they do - it would be nice to get something positive out of all this - but.....far from a given.



I bet they will - state aid for whom though?


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> try harder


I suspect they don't exist. 
If they do exist, and you and SpackleFrog know where to find them, I wonder why you're unwilling to share your info.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> All that has come afterwards and it's come from the political class, that is who has determined what brexit means, that it will be tory led


The first past the post system has determined it will be tory led, by magnifying a substantial but not quite majority portion of the electorate who wanted it to be tory led.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I suspect they don't exist.
> If they do exist, and you and SpackleFrog know where to find them, I wonder why you're unwilling to share your info.


Because you have to learn to stand on your own two feet rather than relying on the kindness of strangers


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 23, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Have you watched the video?



I know you're responding to someone else but it fits me too because no, I didn't. I just have though and now I feel a bit mean for taking the piss out of it earlier. When I made my earlier post I'd watched up to the bit where it said 'So tell me about how Doncaster used to be' and I just thought  here we fucking go again, old people droning on about the good old days and I just glazed over.

Having watched it though it does make a lot of sense, even if there still is a bit of nostalgia for times gone by which I still maintain we're too caught up in as a country. The predicament of Doncaster and towns like it isn't solely down to the EU though. It's still played a role of course but a much smaller one than successive governments who've managed their decline over several decades. But if that decline has occurred in direct correlation to EU membership, as has been the case for Doncaster, then of course you're going to tell the EU to fuck off at the first given opportunity. It's the voting tory that I really struggle with but hey, 'Get Brexit Done' simple slogan, oldest electioneering trick in the book and it worked.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Where are your numbers from - I've not managed to find them broken down by constituency in that detail.



LMGTFY.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> I suspect they don't exist.
> If they do exist, and you and SpackleFrog know where to find them, I wonder why you're unwilling to share your info.



Disingenuous muppet.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> LMGTFY.







__





						2019 general election results by social grade and brexit vote at constituency level - Google Search
					





					www.google.com
				




I don't find anything in those results. What exactly do you suggest I google?


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> I know you're responding to someone else but it fits me too because no, I didn't. I just have though and now I feel a bit mean for taking the piss out of it earlier. When I made my earlier post I'd watched up to the bit where it said 'So tell me about how Doncaster used to be' and I just thought  here we fucking go again, old people droning on about the good old days and I just glazed over.
> 
> Having watched it though it does make a lot of sense, even if there still is a bit of nostalgia for times gone by which I still maintain we're too caught up in as a country. The predicament of Doncaster and towns like it isn't solely down to the EU though. It's still played a role of course but a much smaller one than successive governments who've managed their decline over several decades. But if that decline has occurred in direct correlation to EU membership, as has been the case for Doncaster, then of course you're going to tell the EU to fuck off at the first given opportunity. It's the voting tory that I really struggle with but hey, 'Get Brexit Done' simple slogan, oldest electioneering trick in the book and it worked.


Well at least you watched it . Yup both  the Tories or Blair stripped the guts out of those areas and the EU straight jacket has ensured their cannot be any revival . I don’t recall any of them saying vote Tory though.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2020)

ska invita said:


> I did want to add that one new bit though, which is don't anyone be surprised if regulations on state aid etc don't change very much once the deal is done. I hope they do - it would be nice to get something positive out of all this - but.....far from a given.



Pretty sure it's part of the deal that was just given assent that we remain bound by the EU's rules on state aid, at least in matters which affect Northern Ireland. But it seems to be the European Comission that gets to decide what affects Northern Ireland and what doesn't. We'll be in a shit position to demand any movement on this issue, and scrutiny of any deals that get made will be even more non-existent after the 31st of January when it'll be all 'we did it!' and never mind what exactly it was we did.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What have you tried thus far?


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 23, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> They didn't vote tory though, they voted leave. In context of a tory party that, like labour, was overwhelmingly remain with a remain leadership. When the votes were cast in 2016 it wasn't for a 'conservative led brexit' and it wasn't driven by an idea that tory privatisation would lead to labour nationalisation.
> 
> All that has come afterwards and it's come from the political class, that is who has determined what brexit means, that it will be tory led



The tories were in government at the time, and an election wasn't due for another four years under the FTPA. Obviously it was going to be tory led. That was the reason I didn't vote to leave.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 23, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> The majority. The same working class Labour voters gave Labour its biggest vote share in Doncaster since 1947 in the 2017 election.


The biggest vote share in Doncaster central was 97, in Don valley it was 74 with 97 the most recent and in Doncaster north it was 97.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Jan 23, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> They didn't vote tory though, they voted leave. In context of a tory party that, like labour, was overwhelmingly remain with a remain leadership. When the votes were cast in 2016 it wasn't for a 'conservative led brexit' and it wasn't driven by an idea that tory privatisation would lead to labour nationalisation.
> 
> All that has come afterwards and it's come from the political class, that is who has determined what brexit means, that it will be tory led


This is bull, the tries were front and center of the campaign to leave, the figurehead is the one in charge now, brexit has always been theirs.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 23, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> What have you tried thus far?


Asking people who claim to have the information to hand. They don't want to share it with me. I think it's because it doesn't exist.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 23, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> This is bull, the tries were front and center of the campaign to leave, the figurehead is the one in charge now, brexit has always been theirs.



The tories were front and centre of remain too. The figurehead was the prime minister at the time. Another figurehead was the chancellor of the exchequer. Another figurehead was the next prime minister.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

SpookyFrank said:


> The tories were in government at the time, and an election wasn't due for another four years under the FTPA. Obviously it was going to be tory led. That was the reason I didn't vote to leave.



And yet we had 2 general elections before 2020. One or both of which could have been won by Labour. 

We could have another one before this is all done and dusted.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Jan 23, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> The tories were front and centre of remain too. The figurehead was the prime minister at the time. Another figurehead was the chancellor of the exchequer. Another figurehead was the next prime minister.



Do you mean May? She wasn't that prominent for remain was she? Anyway, it was to me always obvious Brexit was going to be a right wing English project and was the in fact the main reason I voted remain. Then again if remain won Cameron and Osbourne would've solidified their power but who knows what might've happened at the election we were due in 2021.... Ha, Brexit is so ridiculous I'm now saying things like 'Who knows what might've happened in the future?'


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 23, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Asking people who claim to have the information to hand. They don't want to share it with me. I think it's because it doesn't exist.


try using an internet search engine


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 23, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> The biggest vote share in Doncaster central was 97, in Don valley it was 74 with 97 the most recent and in Doncaster north it was 97.



The constituencies have changed massively in that time, from 97 to 2010 there were 4 rather than 3 in the Doncaster area and now there are 3 again. 

In any case, the point is that the 70% of the electorate in Doncaster who voted leave overwhelmingly then voted Labour in 2017, with vote shares of 55-60% in every constituency. Not for the Tories as was implied.

They didn't vote Labour in such big numbers in 2019 of course. Wonder why?


----------



## Azrael (Jan 23, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> [...] The predicament of Doncaster and towns like it isn't solely down to the EU though. It's still played a role of course but a much smaller one than successive governments who've managed their decline over several decades. But if that decline has occurred in direct correlation to EU membership, as has been the case for Doncaster, then of course you're going to tell the EU to fuck off at the first given opportunity. [...]


If they assume correlation's causation, sure; alternatively, they don't assume that, and have been persuaded by decades of anti-E.U. advocacy. Not just anti-E.U., either: for this to work economically, not only must the E.E.A. and its predecessors have somehow triggered Doncaster's economic decline, but leaving them must somehow trigger her renaissance. To those taking that position, I'd simply ask how?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 23, 2020)

Azrael said:


> If they assume correlation's causation, sure; alternatively, they don't assume that, and have been persuaded by decades of anti-E.U. advocacy. Not just anti-E.U., either: for this to work economically, not only must the E.E.A. and its predecessors have somehow triggered Doncaster's economic decline, but leaving them must somehow trigger her renaissance. To those taking that position, I'd simply ask how?



If you watch the video they specifically do not make this point, one fella remarking that leaving EU would have a peripheral effect.

Is the EU the direct cause of deindustrialisation in places like doncaster, no, is the EU a political body entirely about the political and economic current that results in deindustrialisation and broken communities and pliant labour, yes


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 24, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> If you watch the video they specifically do not make this point, one fella remarking that leaving EU would have a peripheral effect.
> 
> Is the EU the direct cause of deindustrialisation in places like doncaster, no, is the EU a political body entirely about the political and economic current that results in deindustrialisation and broken communities and pliant labour, yes



except for the UK was pulling sooner and harder in that direction than most other EU members, so not sure why the EU would be singled out in this respect, nor why people taking this position would support a government formed of the sort of cunts that in their youth when they should have been out banning the bomb or whatever instead saw the harm thatcher was doing and eagerly signed up to the project.  Think there was more to it than a rejection of neo-liberal economics.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 24, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> except for the UK was pulling sooner and harder in that direction than most other EU members, so not sure why the EU would be singled out in this respect, nor why people taking this position would support a government formed of the sort of cunts that in their youth when they should have been out banning the bomb or whatever instead saw the harm thatcher was doing and eagerly signed up to the project.  Think there was more to it than a rejection of neo-liberal economics.



One of the people in the video is tosh mcdonald, former president of ASLEF, I think in this instance it very clearly was a rejection of neoliberalism. But then I think in a lot of instances people's votes were motivated by seeing their lot deteriorate, which is a rejection of neoliberalism as well even though that won't be the words used.


----------



## philosophical (Jan 24, 2020)

SpackleFrog said:


> I know this is your favourite topic and I'm sorry to ruin it for you but they have now decided they're just going to put a border down the Irish sea.


Which is quite a bit of my point. The vote was to leave, not leave part of the UK out of things.
When you say 'just' it kind of makes it sound like not very much, but it is not leave, and it is a holding pattern until the UK with it's system has a land border with the EU with it's system.
There will be difficulties ahead with no suggestions as to how to overcome them, unless the holding pattern carries on which is not what was voted for despite now being called brexit.


----------



## SpackleFrog (Jan 24, 2020)

philosophical said:


> Which is quite a bit of my point. The vote was to leave, not leave part of the UK out of things.
> When you say 'just' it kind of makes it sound like not very much, but it is not leave, and it is a holding pattern until the UK with it's system has a land border with the EU with it's system.
> There will be difficulties ahead with no suggestions as to how to overcome them, unless the holding pattern carries on which is not what was voted for despite now being called brexit.



It is Leave - in a very loose sense, there will not be much regulatory divergence - just not all of the UK is going to leave.


----------



## Azrael (Jan 25, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> If you watch the video they specifically do not make this point, one fella remarking that leaving EU would have a peripheral effect.
> 
> Is the EU the direct cause of deindustrialisation in places like doncaster, no, is the EU a political body entirely about the political and economic current that results in deindustrialisation and broken communities and pliant labour, yes


Leaving the E.U. by itself is economically peripheral, yes; but given the advocacy of state aid and other protectionist measures, what they appear to be arguing is for a very hard Brexit indeed.

They don't explain how those measures can begin to compensate for the economic shock of severing E.E.A. supply chains. And some of what's said just isn't defensible, particularly the claim that Doncaster was self-sufficient 40 years ago, let alone that crashing out with no deal is nothing to fear. Likewise, the person making the argument against free movement of labour himself admits that the issue's not with FoM itself, but using posted workers to undercut wages (the E.U.'s now taking measures against what it calls "social dumping").

Found it enormously frustrating because I while I agree with their diagnosis of the diseases, couldn't disagree more about the cure. Agree with everything they say about Thatcher, deindustrialization and nationalisation, but their strong arguments against her economic warfare are not only aimed at the wrong target, Vote Leave have empowered the very people who've caused the problems to begin with, and leaving in this way will accelerate the very processes they rightly condemn.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 25, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> They didn't vote tory though, they voted leave. In context of a tory party that, like labour, was overwhelmingly remain with a remain leadership. When the votes were cast in 2016 it wasn't for a 'conservative led brexit' and it wasn't driven by an idea that tory privatisation would lead to labour nationalisation.
> 
> All that has come afterwards and it's come from the political class, that is who has determined what brexit means, that it will be tory led



So what you’re saying is - many people who voted Conservative aren’t actually Tories, but leavers?

 But does that make them vermin?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 25, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> So what you’re saying is - many people who voted Conservative aren’t actually Tories, but leavers?
> 
> But does that make them vermin?



I was talking about people who voted leave in 2016, not voters in last GE.

Not all people who have voted tory are vermin but all tories are vermin


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 26, 2020)

Anyone else going to avoid Made in the USA food if there's a deal with the US?


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> I was talking about people who voted leave in 2016, not voters in last GE.
> 
> Not all people who have voted tory are vermin but all tories are vermin



Just as well seeing as Corbyn has endorsed John Bercow, a lifelong Tory, for a peerage.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just as well seeing as Corbyn has endorsed John Bercow, a lifelong Tory, for a peerage.



Hang John Bercow


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jan 26, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Anyone else going to avoid Made in the USA food if there's a deal with the US?


Yes. . . . But isn't origin coming off packaging as well? I guess it may be the case that if meat is coming from somewhere decent it will proudly display that it isn't from the states or chlorinated etc.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Hang John Bercow



Too late, he’s hung himself.









						Fresh doubts cast over John Bercow’s peerage as bullying claims resurface
					

David Leakey, a former Black Rod, accuses ex-Commons Speaker of being a ‘Jekyll and Hyde character’




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 26, 2020)

EU maps show the Brexit customs checks Boris Johnson denies exist
					

Boris Johnson claimed there won't be any new customs checks after Brexit, so the EU produced maps showing where they will be.



					amp.businessinsider.com
				






So Boris declared this was not happening. Yet the EU is clear that it's happening. 

Who is telling the truth?


----------



## Serge Forward (Jan 26, 2020)

Johnson. He's not your mate, he's a cunt.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2020)

A very naughty cunt


----------



## Baronage-Phase (Jan 26, 2020)

Serge Forward said:


> Johnson. He's not your mate, he's a cunt.





two sheds said:


> A very naughty cunt



He also said..
"that if any business was asked to fill in such paperwork, they should telephone Downing Street and Johnson would "direct them to throw that form in the bin."


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 26, 2020)

Badgers said:


> Are we still getting those new Brexit 50p coins?





Master of the mint, fucking harry potter shit


----------



## ska invita (Jan 26, 2020)

Harry Potter and the Arrivist Cunt
Man couldn't master a Polo




and breathe


----------



## SpineyNorman (Jan 26, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> I was talking about people who voted leave in 2016, not voters in last GE.
> 
> Not all people who have voted tory are vermin but all tories are vermin


Marty definitely is vermin though


----------



## gosub (Jan 26, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> View attachment 196732
> 
> Master of the mint, fucking harry potter shit



Back in the day was a very significant role.  Stephenson's Baroque trilogy more than Harry Potter


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> View attachment 196732
> 
> Master of the mint, fucking harry potter shit



Yeah, released this Friday to commemorate Brexit.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 26, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Yeah, released this Friday to commemorate Brexit.
> 
> View attachment 196770
> View attachment 196771


Catalonians will be pleased to receive our friendship.


----------



## two sheds (Jan 26, 2020)

as will Catatonians


----------



## teqniq (Jan 26, 2020)

I'll raise you:


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

Remainers are fighting back with their own unofficial 50p coin.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 26, 2020)

You did that yourself didn't you?


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

teqniq said:


> You did that yourself didn't you?



My handwriting isn’t that neat


----------



## teqniq (Jan 26, 2020)

A mate then. Over a pint of overpriced beer. Either way I don't care too much.


----------



## Supine (Jan 26, 2020)

teqniq said:


> You did that yourself didn't you?



I’m going to do that on every brexit coin I get


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 26, 2020)

teqniq said:


> A mate then. Over a pint of overpriced beer. Either way I don't care too much.



Nope, even though you clearly want it to be


----------



## teqniq (Jan 27, 2020)

I think this belongs here inasmuch as it was very much part of the part of the strategy used by the right-wing press pre-Brexit:









						Migrants are off the agenda for the UK press, but the damage is done
					

The Express and Mail headlines have gone, but the deep divisions they caused are the real crisis




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## ska invita (Jan 27, 2020)

teqniq said:


> I think this belongs here inasmuch as it was very much part of the part of the strategy used by the right-wing press pre-Brexit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That article ends with a common misconception, that print media is on the wane, sales are in freefall, and they "may never be able to mount such a campaign again"... But it ignores website views which are massive and have a seemingly bigger reach than the paper versions ever had.

The increasing irrelevance of the papers is overstated imo


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 27, 2020)

teqniq said:


> I think this belongs here inasmuch as it was very much part of the part of the strategy used by the right-wing press pre-Brexit:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Home Secretary talking to Sky News regarding the end of free movement - going for a Aussie points based system and also will be looking to stop cheap unskilled labour pouring in from the EU continuing.

From approx 10mins in.



Been some talk of this amongst fellow delivery drivers as this may impact the Amazon driver workforce as there are many EU drivers - some contractors having all EU workers from the likes of Romania, Poland etc, which could fit into the category of unskilled work (despite the job imo being far from ‘unskilled’).


----------



## Dogsauce (Jan 27, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Yeah, released this Friday to commemorate Brexit.
> 
> View attachment 196770
> View attachment 196771



There’s a thing going round the usual social media places where people are pledging to donate every Brexit 50p they get to refugee charities.


----------



## butchersapron (Jan 27, 2020)

Interesting - given this sort of stuff


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Remainers are fighting back with their own unofficial 50p coin.
> 
> View attachment 196795


why is that an unofficial coin?


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 27, 2020)

Did ur-Brexiteers write stuff on that old "circle of hands" 50p?


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 27, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> why is that an unofficial coin?





Spoiler







Because the royal mint aren’t employing people to scribble the heart sign with ‘EU’ in permanent marker.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 27, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...


so what you mean is it is a defaced official coin. the coin you illustrate your post (quoted) with would be an unofficial coin. whereas i could go into any shop in the land with the defaced 50p and provide it in part payment for goods.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 27, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> so what you mean is it is a defaced official coin. the coin you illustrate your post (quoted) with would be an unofficial coin. whereas i could go into any shop in the land with the defaced 50p and provide it in part payment for goods.





lol


----------



## gosub (Jan 27, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Anyone else going to avoid Made in the USA food if there's a deal with the US?



I'd personally bend  on GM soya rather than the animal welfare side of chlorinated chicken.

There was a bit in the run up to the election where Lab and Tories were ripping off KFC..on a cowdice type thing. Felt really sorry for KFC who I'm sure can and do abide by UK food hygiene standards they have fuck all input in setting yet I get the feeling will bear brunt of clorinated chicken debate


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Jan 27, 2020)

On Holocaust Memorial Day....


----------



## William of Walworth (Jan 27, 2020)

I admit I've been a remainer to the point of iac at points in the not far distant past,  but the above is simply *beyond* embarassing 

Not to mention fucking shit


----------



## Shechemite (Jan 27, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> Anyone else going to avoid Made in  food?



I would if I were you


----------



## teqniq (Jan 28, 2020)

What the fuck is this shit?


----------



## Idris2002 (Jan 28, 2020)

That bulldog needs a vet.


----------



## teqniq (Jan 28, 2020)

Yeah i was wondering what was with the green.


----------



## 2hats (Jan 28, 2020)

Idris2002 said:


> That bulldog needs a vet.


As the tweet immediately below it points out, that particular bulldog is almost certainly dead by now.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 28, 2020)

Carrying on the state aid conversation from anotehr thread here instead



SpookyFrank said:


> The EU, or let's call a spade a spade and just say 'Germany', really hates state aid. They took Greece to court for bailing out their shipyards, and attempted to do likewise with Spain. They won't need to bother taking us to court, they can just say 'deal's off, have fun starving to death'.


And the Tories aren't exactly massive fans either, and what with just having come very close (in 2017 at least) to a Corbyn government that had nationalisation at the heart of its manifesto its hard to imagine where the incentive would come for this cabinet to fight for that particular change in the relationship with the EU. Its just the kind of issue they'd be happy to back down on in the hope of getting something they actually want. Any words from the Tories that claim they really want rid of state aid rules are most likely positioning for future horse trading.

For example yesterdays FT suggests a big fight over state aid - especially as BJ has supposedly been making sounds that are designed to signal (to the public) that he wants the state to Buy British etc




__





						Subscribe to read | Financial Times
					

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication




					www.ft.com
				



however they key bit is " British officials have insisted that Mr Johnson does not envisage a big increase in state aid after Brexit, rather that he wants to be able to intervene more promptly; they cite attempts by the government to help the UK steel industry in 2015, which they claim were hindered by a “50 day” wait for state aid approval from Brussels. " (in fact they used it as cover not to have to act)

Some other bits from that article

" if Britain is able to use public money to bolster key companies in a way that EU countries are not, it will give UK businesses a competitive advantage — something Brussels is determined to prevent."

and

" The sensitivities around state aid are heightened by the concessions that Britain had to make on the issue when it hammered out a Brexit deal with the EU. A core part of arrangements for preventing a hard border on the island of Ireland is that Northern Ireland must stay within the EU’s state-aid regime.   EU officials note that in practice this means the UK will need to notify state-aid decisions for review by Brussels — even if they only have indirect relevance for Northern Ireland. Making that system mesh with the broader state-aid conditions attached to a trade deal will be fiendishly difficult."

Finishes to say EU holds all the cards and the UKs self imposed deadline means the game of chicken is one the UK government is more readily going to lose. So yeah, Id say the odds of seeing state aid rules being binned is very unlikely-to-zero


----------



## ska invita (Jan 28, 2020)

This is a good summary I think  sounds right








						State aid after Brexit | UK in a changing Europe
					

Professor David Bailey discusses EU state aid and Johnson's commitment to developing new state aid rules after the UK leaves the EU.




					ukandeu.ac.uk
				



concludes:
"All of which suggests that Johnson’s state aid suggestions are more of an election pitch to win over seats in the Midlands and the North.
Don’t expect much to change on state aid whoever is in government if we want any sort of free trade deal with the EU in the near future."


----------



## Smangus (Jan 28, 2020)

Flybe.....


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 28, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Home Secretary talking to Sky News regarding the end of free movement - going for a Aussie points based system and also will be looking to stop cheap unskilled labour pouring in from the EU continuing.
> 
> From approx 10mins in.
> 
> ...



 Wont affect any of the existing Amazon workforce providing they are legit. If  however there was a labour shortage what would Amazon have to do to recruit?


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 29, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Wont affect any of the existing Amazon workforce providing they are legit. If  however there was a labour shortage what would Amazon have to do to recruit?



Not sure but I know they struggle for drivers in Scotland.  Drivers from England are always offered higher pay to do stints of work up there (£130 per day including hotel accommodation, £165 per day over Xmas).

Apparently it’s commonplace for recruiters in Scotland to advertise jobs to have prospective Scots call them but hang up as soon as they hear the job is delivering for Amazon.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 29, 2020)

They might have to raise the wages then if they cant recruit


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 29, 2020)

teqniq said:


> What the fuck is this shit?
> 
> View attachment 196899


another vote for vet


----------



## dessiato (Jan 29, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> They might have to raise the wages then if they cant recruit


And treat them decently.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 29, 2020)

dessiato said:


> And treat them decently.


And of course this situation would be ripe for trade union action


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 29, 2020)

Dogsauce said:


> There’s a thing going round the usual social media places where people are pledging to donate every Brexit 50p they get to refugee charities.



Ah, nice touch, unfortunately Lord Adonis is having none of it!



The machinations of the unreconciled?


----------



## Ranbay (Jan 30, 2020)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Ah, nice touch, unfortunately Lord Adonis is having none of it!
> 
> View attachment 197022
> 
> The machinations of the unreconciled?


a strange message on a coin issued by xenophobes.


----------



## Bahnhof Strasse (Jan 30, 2020)

One thing I was unaware of until just now; Germany constitutionally bans the extradition of German citizens for crimes committed abroad, except to EU states. So from Saturday any German Urbs can nip over here, pull off a heist and leg it back to the fatherland and sit comfortably in the knowledge they are home and dry


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 30, 2020)

saw this on twitter, wasn't sure if the picture was a pisstake or not


----------



## brogdale (Jan 30, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> saw this on twitter, wasn't sure if the picture was a pisstake or not



Liking the 'audience' member in the mirror (below photographer) who appears to be peering somewhat incredulously at a badly drawn picture of David Walliams.


----------



## Raheem (Jan 30, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> saw this on twitter, wasn't sure if the picture was a pisstake or not



"Nigel, I don't suppose you've had any thoughts about what to do with the twenty grand left in the party accounts?"

"As a matter of fact, yes I have."


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 30, 2020)

Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.

‘_Britain will triumph outside of the EU’_


----------



## Poot (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.
> 
> ‘_Britain will triumph outside of the EU’_




She believes a lot of things. 

_Huhtasaari is a creationist and has stated that the theory of evolution is a 'totally impossible theory'._


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 30, 2020)

Bahnhof Strasse said:


> One thing I was unaware of until just now; Germany constitutionally bans the extradition of German citizens for crimes committed abroad, except to EU states. So from Saturday any German Urbs can nip over here, pull off a heist and leg it back to the fatherland and sit comfortably in the knowledge they are home and dry



Gumtree is gonna be humming with cannibals


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.
> 
> ‘_Britain will triumph outside of the EU’_




Who


----------



## rekil (Jan 30, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Who


Creationist loon from the Finns Party. Part of the "Identity and Democracy" grouping - Salvini, Le Pen, AfD etc. Stop indulging this cunt.


----------



## The39thStep (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.
> 
> ‘_Britain will triumph outside of the EU’_



Apparently Labour the Greens and Lib Dem’s MEPs voted against the withdrawal agreement meaning if the motion had been lost it would have been no deal


----------



## editor (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.
> 
> ‘_Britain will triumph outside of the EU’_



Just so you know: if you keep on posting up videos from far right loons without adding any meaningful comment, you will be warned and then banned if you continue.


And you can take your first warning now.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 30, 2020)

editor said:


> Just so you know: if you keep on posting up videos from far right loons without adding any meaningful comment, you will be warned and then banned if you continue.
> 
> 
> And you can take your first warning now.



With all due respect, you’ve made it pretty clear I’m unwelcome here which is a shame as there’s a lot of good people here I get along with.

I get the message.


----------



## editor (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> With all due respect, you’ve made it pretty clear I’m unwelcome here which is a shame as there’s a lot of good people here I get along with.
> 
> I get the message.


The rules are quite explicit about posting up videos with no comment, so I've no idea why you think the rules don't apply to you or why you're being somehow victimised.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 30, 2020)

editor said:


> The rules are quite explicit about posting up videos with no comment, so I've no idea why you think the rules don't apply to you or why you're being somehow victimised.



My comment accompanying the video:

‘Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.


----------



## editor (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> My comment accompanying the video:
> 
> ‘Great optimism and well wishes from Laura Huhtasaari.


And your_ opinion _about the video?


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 30, 2020)

editor said:


> And your_ opinion _about the video?



It’s a positive speech of goodwill to Britain and I hope she’s right about us being a success once out of the EU.

I thought the video was simply something nice to post tbh.


----------



## Supine (Jan 30, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> It’s a positive speech of goodwill to Britain and I hope she’s right about us being a success once out of the EU.
> 
> I thought the video was simply something nice to post tbh.



If you hear that as a goodwill speech your a fucking numpty!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 30, 2020)

At least our own nutters will no longer be there in the European Parliament being a national embarrassment.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 30, 2020)

it's only a national embarrassment if you buy into the idea of the nation as an entity, like all germans should be ashamed or something. Weird way of thinking.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2020)

Yes, I predicted someone would be along to claim that they don't buy into notion of the nation as an entity. Sometimes I like to pretend I don't. Good way of winding certain people up.


----------



## gosub (Jan 31, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> it's only a national embarrassment if you buy into the idea of the nation as an entity, like all germans should be ashamed or something. Weird way of thinking.



If you don't buy into the idea of the nation as an entity you walk away from large chunks tax raising and expenture the impact of mainsteam media all sorts

I think the sense of shame  felt by the history is taught in German schools, which was a deliberate policy., understandably I think.  Does not mean this generation is accountable for the actions of Grandparents -neither does it mean WW2 Germans weren't individually capable of some  noble acts and there was definitely bravery and skills, and its equally true Allie solders did some pretty bad stuff.

But what surprised me during the 100th Anniversery ww1 was finding out that war sin't really t taught in Germany whilst here its pretty much taught how I caused the Second


----------



## krtek a houby (Jan 31, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> It’s a positive speech of goodwill to Britain and I hope she’s right about us being a success once out of the EU.
> 
> I thought the video was simply something nice to post tbh.



Nothing wrong with wishing the UK good luck but why did you choose her, in particular, given her background?

I think you are far more aware than you let on and like to see how far you can push this kind of thing.


----------



## BCBlues (Jan 31, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> It’s a positive speech of goodwill to Britain and I hope she’s right about us being a success once out of the EU.
> 
> I thought the video was simply something nice to post tbh.



It's not nice at all. She's literally Sieg Heiling at the end. Nasty stuff you have rightfully been pulled up on.


----------



## Poot (Jan 31, 2020)

gosub said:


> But what surprised me during the 100th Anniversery ww1 was finding out that war sin't really t taught in Germany whilst here its pretty much taught how I caused the Second



It was you?! Well, that's a turn up for the books. I mean, I was beginning to wonder whether it may have been someone here but I had my money on other posters tbh.


----------



## tommers (Jan 31, 2020)

Happy Brexit day everybody! Finally free from the tyranny of the insidious European death empire and able to strike out on our own like a small child venturing into the busy road for the first time.

We got it done!


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jan 31, 2020)

And all this at the low low price of tory rule forever.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2020)

On radio 4 news they have been having a recap on what brexit is, how it has divided opinion etc. 

Useful for anyone who didn't notice it was happening.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 31, 2020)

gosub said:


> If you don't buy into the idea of the nation as an entity you walk away from large chunks tax raising and expenture the impact of mainsteam media all sorts



The nation state as a means of government is different to allowing the nation state you are from to be such a part of your identity that you are embarrassed and ashamed of dickheads who also happen to be from the same nation state. It's a weird way of thinking. French politician, wanker, not my problem, some prick from margate, oh I'm so ashamed, pardon, spiacente, lo siento


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2020)

tommers said:


> Happy Brexit day everybody! Finally free from the tyranny of the insidious European death empire and able to strike out on our own like a small child venturing into the busy road for the first time.
> 
> We got it done!


eu empire or the scrappy remnants of the british empire. what a choice! what out for that artic, johnson!


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2020)

Congratulations on your political insight, everyone.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Jan 31, 2020)

Turns out you can't rely on the political insight of wreckhead, Fosters Mackem, or Chris P Duck


----------



## pesh (Jan 31, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> there’s a lot of good people here I get along with.


----------



## ska invita (Jan 31, 2020)

The UK is about to get eaten alive in a desperate clock-ticking US trade deal, and is left hanging on the kindness of the best deal maker in the world, Mr D Brexit's generosity.
Wouldn't it be funny though if Bernie Sanders won the presidency in November just ahead of our real 51st State exit date of 1st Jan 21 and scuppered the whole deal in the name of international socialism. Oh how we'd laugh as the Tories switch from blaming the EU to blaming the US.

File under all the other things that won't happen because of Brexit.



teuchter said:


> View attachment 197157
> 
> Congratulations on your political insight, everyone.


tbf if May hadnt called her snap election we'd have had Norway


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2020)

teuchter said:


> View attachment 197157
> 
> Congratulations on your political insight, everyone.


My name's not on that list, in fact I don't think I voted in the thread poll, but I think it's a little early to be dismissing the possibility of a  'face saving fudge out of hand.


----------



## kabbes (Jan 31, 2020)

To be fair, up until 3 months ago, it still seemed about 50/50 on that 2nd referendum.


----------



## teuchter (Jan 31, 2020)

kabbes said:


> To be fair, up until 3 months ago, it still seemed about 50/50 on that 2nd referendum.


By definition, it seemed likely to the people who said they thought it was likely to happen.

Doesn't make them any less wrong though.

Anyway, the point is, those of us smart enough not to make a wrong prediction can hold our heads high on this day, Brexit day.


----------



## Poot (Jan 31, 2020)

We've yet to see anything change. I'm saying fudge and I didn't even vote on this thread.


----------



## strung out (Jan 31, 2020)

teuchter said:


> View attachment 197157
> 
> Congratulations on your political insight, everyone.


Looks like 52% were wrong.


----------



## Yossarian (Jan 31, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Turns out you can't rely on the political insight of wreckhead, Fosters Mackem, or Chris P Duck



Never known Lt. Fizzyquim to get anything wrong before. 

Looks like the end result might be some crappy mix of all 3 options anyway, kind of like when you mix all the paint colours together and get brown.


----------



## Marty1 (Jan 31, 2020)

BCBlues said:


> It's not nice at all. She's literally Sieg Heiling at the end. Nasty stuff you have rightfully been pulled up on.



Blimey! Yeah, it’s just as well we’re leaving if they’re letting Nazi’s become MEP’s.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jan 31, 2020)

teuchter said:


> Anyway, the point is, those of us smart enough not to make a wrong prediction can hold our heads high on this day, Brexit day.


you never cease to surprise with your stupidity


----------



## Teaboy (Jan 31, 2020)

andysays said:


> My name's not on that list, in fact I don't think I voted in the thread poll, but I think it's a little early to be dismissing the possibility of a  'face saving fudge out of hand.



Yes, I'm also keeping my powder dry.  A watching brief if you will...


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2020)

Yet another link from Marty1 which, unknown to him, turns out to be of a far right loon. What are the chances?

Serious run of bad luck, I guess...


----------



## andysays (Jan 31, 2020)

Eta Apologies,  misread who the post I was responding to was from...


----------



## teqniq (Jan 31, 2020)

Apologies if someone's alredy posted this but, done 3 years ago but I've only just seen it. Absolute quality.


----------



## Chz (Jan 31, 2020)

teuchter said:


> View attachment 197157
> 
> Congratulations on your political insight, everyone.


Don't think I've ever been quite so distraught at being right.


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 31, 2020)

Yes


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

Some actual fireworks here


----------



## editor (Jan 31, 2020)

And now the national anthem for the bald middle aged white men to sing along to.


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 31, 2020)

Begun, the dark times have...


----------



## skyscraper101 (Jan 31, 2020)

Don’t forget to set your clocks back 47 years tonight.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 31, 2020)

editor said:


> And now the national anthem for the bald middle aged white men to sing along to.



Oh get over it, you race obsessed whiner


----------



## Helen Back (Jan 31, 2020)

I hear racist fireworks outside.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

Whither dignity
Both sides
Grubby innit


----------



## editor (Jan 31, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> Oh get over it, you race obsessed whiner


If by 'race obsessed' you mean 'someone who has opposed and fought against racism and xenophobia all his life,' I'll say: so fucking what?  How am I supposed to get over something that has directly led to a huge increase in racist incidents and has left people feeling unsure and frightened about their future in the UK?  Should they just 'get over it' too?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

Helen Back said:


> I hear racist fireworks outside.


 

Gunpowder isn't a race!


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

editor said:


> If by 'race obsessed' you mean 'someone who has opposed and fought against racism and xenophobia all his life,' I'll say: so fucking what?  How am I supposed to get over something that has directly led to a huge increase in racist incidents and has left people feeling unsure and frightened about their future in the UK?  Should they just 'get over it' too?


You could start a petition


----------



## editor (Jan 31, 2020)

S☼I said:


> You could start a petition


Yeah it's all such a laugh.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

editor said:


> Yeah it's all such a laugh.


I'm not laughing, boss. It's all a fucking midden.


----------



## brogdale (Jan 31, 2020)

Finally felt confident...was just about to cast my vote in the thread poll...then, looked at the options and couldn't find one that worked.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 31, 2020)

Brexit hasn't happened though. We're still negotiating our future relationship with the EU. We've also got a year or so of transition period too, where little will change. I've never even been sure what 'a fully independent Britain' in the poll option above means anyway. For us to be fully independent we'd have to be completely isolationist, which the historical and archaeological records show we've never succeeded at as a bunch of people living on a relatively small island. We've always had close and open trading links with the continent, from at least the bronze age onwards, so we've always been to some degree dependent on other countries. All we've just done is effectively imposed trade sanctions on ourselves. The most well known time our trading links with the continent went backwards was after the end of the roman empire, when we returned to tribalism and internal conflict, and lost a great many of the societal advances we'd made over the previous few hundred years. This island does well when it has strong links with many other countries. It does poorly when it gets cut off. We're about to enter another period of cut offness.

The government will get obvious short term credit for being seen to 'get brexit done', but will now likely have a hard time explaining why they're going to have to make compromises around trading rights during the negotiations, because they too know that an island cannot survive by itself. 'Thankfully' for them, they've tortured the country andlet real people die through 10 years of extreme ideologically driven cuts, so they can now start to act like a normal government again and start spending money, just in time to soften the blow of brexit and distract attention from the EU compromises they'll have to make in the name of capitalism. 

How people on the left celebrate this situation I've genuinely no idea.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

You literally answered your final paragraph in the penultimate one


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 31, 2020)

S☼I said:


> You literally answered your final paragraph in the penultimate one



I'm a bit lost here. Are you saying people on the left should celebrate a tory government imposing ten years of cuts then reversing those cuts in order to buy popularity and distract from their capitalist agenda?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Jan 31, 2020)

editor said:


> If by 'race obsessed' you mean 'someone who has opposed and fought against racism and xenophobia all his life,' I'll say: so fucking what?  How am I supposed to get over something that has directly led to a huge increase in racist incidents and has left people feeling unsure and frightened about their future in the UK?  Should they just 'get over it' too?



No. By race-obsessed I mean trotting out the tedius 'oh look at the gammons' line, which, even if what you say about the rise in hate crimes is true, is a completely hypocritical and counter-productive response to the situation.

Putting that aside, the whole narrative about there being a rise in hate crimes after the referendum due to some sort of Brexit induced mania, is a lie used to smear leave voters. The facts of the matter are that improved reporting mechanisms have resulted in a year-on-years rise in reported hate incidents since at least 2012, but this is completely disconnected from Brexit, and began many years before the referendum was even on the cards.



As for the temporary spike in incidents that occurred around the time of the referendum, this was merely the annual spike that occurs every year around June/July. A spike occurred in 2014, and again in 2015, and again in 2016, and again in 2017, and again in 2018, and again in 2019. There will be a spike in 2020 as well.



All of the reporting around this issue has been nothing but a cynical manipulation of statistics that does nothing other than further alienate leave voters, whilst simultaneously frightening minorities into believing they are more at risk now than they were before the referendum.

Racism exists. Hate exists. Brexit had no effect on these perennial evils.









						Hate Crime Statistics
					

This briefing paper looks at Hate Crime in England & Wales using figures provided by the Crime Survey of England and Wales (CSEW) and the Police Recorded Crime Series. The paper also presents d…




					researchbriefings.parliament.uk


----------



## yield (Jan 31, 2020)

Gerry1time said:


> I'm a bit lost here. Are you saying people on the left should celebrate a tory government imposing ten years of cuts then reversing those cuts in order to buy popularity and distract from their capitalist agenda?


Corbyn has shifted the overton window to the left. The Tories have to appeal the newly won northern constituencies.

Or better late than never. HTH


----------



## Steel Icarus (Jan 31, 2020)

Gerry1time said:


> I'm a bit lost here. Are you saying people on the left should celebrate a tory government imposing ten years of cuts then reversing those cuts in order to buy popularity and distract from their capitalist agenda?


Nah, I'm saying that right now the only thing to cheer is them getting in a mess.


----------



## Gerry1time (Jan 31, 2020)

yield said:


> Corbyn has shifted the overton window to the left. The Tories have to appeal the newly won northern constituencies.



I don't think he has. I think the country has stayed relatively where it always was, whilst labour ran off the the left of that, and the tories ran off to the right. All that happened was that the tories noticed this situation before labour did, and ran back to the relative centre in time for the election, whilst labour consumed itself with factional infighting over the nuances of a left wing political ground that no-one else wanted to fight over. It's why the tories keep on winning. They're ideological until it costs them votes, at which point they become compromising pragmatists, because all they care about is power and the trappings for them and their friends that come with it.


----------



## Voley (Feb 1, 2020)

Genuinely feel saddened by all this now.


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

Sad angry old white men have got what they think thy want.  Brexit, lexit, it's still angry old white men.  Hasn't the world had quite enough of you.  Fuck off now.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

Jesus wept


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> Sad angry old white men have got what they think thy want.  Brexit, lexit, it's still angry old white men.  Hasn't the world had quite enough of you.  Fuck off now.


It's a night for high emotions, granted, but framing it like this is back to the 'thick racists' narrative. It's no good.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

It's a fucking shambles


----------



## 2hats (Feb 1, 2020)

Gerry1time said:


> I've never even been sure what 'a fully independent Britain' in the poll option above means anyway.


As in "independent nuclear deterrent", presumably. 



ItWillNeverWork said:


> As for the temporary spike in incidents that occurred around the time of the referendum, this was merely the annual spike that occurs every year around June/July. A spike *occurred in 2014, and again in 2015, and again* in 2016, and again in 2017, and again in 2018, *and again in 2019*. There will be a spike in 2020 as well.
> 
> View attachment 197268
> 
> ...


That's not what that graph, report or the source data from the given URL show.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Feb 1, 2020)

2hats said:


> As in "independent nuclear deterrent", presumably.
> 
> 
> That's not what that graph, report or the source data from the given URL show.



It's the most reasonable interpretation of the graph, regardless of what interpretation is given by those interested in pushing the same old lie about Brexit causing hate crime.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 1, 2020)

Anything happened yet that we can blame Brexit for?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Feb 1, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Anything happened yet that we can blame Brexit for?



Us Urbanites got grumpy at an unreasonable time of the morning.


----------



## ohmyliver (Feb 1, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> View attachment 197268
> 
> All of the reporting around this issue has been nothing but a cynical manipulation of statistics that does nothing other than further alienate leave voters, whilst simultaneously frightening minorities into believing they are more at risk now than they were before the referendum.
> 
> ...



err, you do realise that you've posted up a graph which shows that these spikes weren't occurring before the referendum and that the low points are higher each year after the referendums.

It seems a bit _ironic _to complain about a 'cynical manipulation of statistics' when you have actually posted up a graph which shows that Brexit has clearly had an effect, as evidence that is hasn't had an effect.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Feb 1, 2020)

ohmyliver said:


> err, you do realise that you've posted up a graph which shows that these spikes weren't occurring before the referendum and that the low points are higher each year after the referendums.
> 
> It seems a bit _ironic _to talk about a 'cynical manipulation of statistics' when you have actually posted up a graph which shows that Brexit has clearly had an effect.



There are June/July spikes occurring both before and after 2016. Every year. The upward trend starts in 2012. So no, it is not ironic.


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

Wilf said:


> It's a night for high emotions, granted, but framing it like this is back to the 'thick racists' narrative. It's no good.


_I'm talking about you and your apologist ilk.  Aw, but you're all OK.  My manager has been denied settled status and my husband has no faith in the paperwork. post windrush  Well done,. Remember what you enabled. _


----------



## 2hats (Feb 1, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> It's the most reasonable interpretation of the graph


0/10


----------



## ohmyliver (Feb 1, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> There are June/July spikes occurring both before and after 2016. Every year. The upward trend starts in 2012. So no, it is not ironic.



C'mon, look at what you posted, look at the difference between the spikes before and after the referendum.


----------



## Gerry1time (Feb 1, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Anything happened yet that we can blame Brexit for?



We walked away from a position of considerable influence and power in the european union, carefully built up over decades. I think brexit's probably responsible for that.


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Feb 1, 2020)

ohmyliver said:


> C'mon, look at what you posted, look at the difference between the spikes before and after the referendum.



The earlier part of the graph looks more squished due to the scale of the graph being altered by the higher figures later on - higher figures that are a result of increased reporting. If you plotted just 2014 and 2015 the spikes would be more obvious.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> _I'm talking about you and your apologist ilk.  Aw, but you're all OK.  My manager has been denied settled status and my husband has no faith in the paperwork. post windrush  Well done,. Remember what you enabled. _


Do you think I voted for Brexit?


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

Wilf said:


> Do you think I voted for Brexit?


I don't know.


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> I don't know.


Well, you said I 'enabled it'.

To my mind, wherever it ends up, however bad  it ends up being, the people who 'enabled it' are 2 generations of neo-liberal politicians and their associated business pals. But then we've all been round the block on this.


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

But there were plenty here who were proud of their brexit vote. And here is a song for them


----------



## Wilf (Feb 1, 2020)

Oh dear.


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

Yes oh dear . It's the damage angry old white men do.


----------



## Nine Bob Note (Feb 1, 2020)

So, are fag runs still allowed? If so, for how long?


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> Yes oh dear . It's the damage angry old white men do.



Bunch of gammons


----------



## 2hats (Feb 1, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> The earlier part of the graph looks more squished due to the scale of the graph being altered by the higher figures later on - higher figures that are a result of increased reporting. If you plotted just 2014 and 2015 the spikes would be more obvious.
> 
> View attachment 197271


----------



## tommers (Feb 1, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> The earlier part of the graph looks more squished due to the scale of the graph being altered by the higher figures later on - higher figures that are a result of increased reporting. If you plotted just 2014 and 2015 the spikes would be more obvious.
> 
> View attachment 197271


. Genuine LOL.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 1, 2020)

#gotourfreedomback


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2020)

Nor


tommers said:


> Happy Brexit day everybody! Finally free from the tyranny of the insidious European death empire and able to strike out on our own like a small child venturing into the busy road for the first time.
> 
> We got it done!



No we didn't. Northern Ireland has been left out of what you may describe as your definition of 'we', it is now treated differently,  but Northern Ireland wasn't left out of the referendum ballot paper.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Feb 1, 2020)

Was gonna report that mad "angry white men" nonsense but given the chief recipient is all over that as a concept it's a bit pointless. 

State of some of the unchanged unthinking narrative though, my word


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

Everybody who voted brexit is a weak minded racist cunt. Anybody trolling , thinking LOL, lets wind up the peoples on teh interwebs who `virtue signals` , your more part of the problem then your fragmented little brains could ever concive . Lets see if you find the racist attacks LOL eh ? DIE SLOWLY CONFORMIST SCUM ... DIE .


----------



## andysays (Feb 1, 2020)

philosophical said:


> Nor
> 
> 
> No we didn't. Northern Ireland has been left out of what you may describe as your definition of 'we', it is now treated differently,  but Northern Ireland wasn't left out of the referendum ballot paper.


Northern Ireland has been "left out", or more accurately been treated differently to the rest of the UK because of elements of the GFA, which you have previously argued at length it was important to follow. 

Are you now trying to argue that the terms of the GFA don't matter and that NI should be treated in the same way as any other part of the UK?


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

S☼I said:


> Was gonna report that mad "angry white men" nonsense but given the chief recipient is all over that as a concept it's a bit pointless.
> 
> State of some of the unchanged unthinking narrative though, my word


Truth hurts eh


----------



## philosophical (Feb 1, 2020)

andysays said:


> Northern Ireland has been "left out", or more accurately been treated differently to the rest of the UK because of elements of the GFA, which you have previously argued at length it was important to follow.
> 
> Are you now trying to argue that the terms of the GFA don't matter and that NI should be treated in the same way as any other part of the UK?



Not at all.
I am stating what seems an obvious situation in that on the ballot paper there was no mention of the GFA, no mention of the UK only meaning Wales, Scotland and England. No mention that Northern Ireland would *not *be treated the same way as any other part of the UK.
Leave voters have demanded that their result is honoured especially because they knew what they were voting for, what is happening is not honouring the result of the referendum as it was framed both on the ballot paper, and dare I say in the campaign at the time.
I believe the terms of the GFA do matter, and this still remains the issue that leave voters have to explain to the rest of us when there are two different systems either side of a land border.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> Truth hurts eh


Not as much as ignorance


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

Nine Bob Note said:


> So, are fag runs still allowed? If so, for how long?


Until you get caught


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

S☼I said:


> Not as much as ignorance


It's wicked to mock the afflicted


----------



## harpo (Feb 1, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> It's wicked to mock the afflicted


Angry old white men being angry.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 1, 2020)

Joining the EEC took the UK state at least 12 years to accomplish from the first application in 1961...so...if the Government is keen to hedge their bets...a Brejoin by 2032 might well require a formal application today.


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

harpo said:


> Angry old white men being angry.


It'd be worth more if what you were saying were either original, interesting, or adding to the discussion


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

I, for one, am astonished that a political movement that called the people it was trying to persuade _racist scum who should die _failed to get those same people to change their minds.

Astonished, astonished I say....


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Everybody who voted brexit is a weak minded racist cunt. Anybody trolling , thinking LOL, lets wind up the peoples on teh interwebs who `virtue signals` , your more part of the problem then your fragmented little brains could ever concive . Lets see if you find the racist attacks LOL eh ? DIE SLOWLY CONFORMIST SCUM ... DIE .



Calm down. It's not as bad as it seems.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> I, for one, am astonished that a political movement that called the people it was trying to persuade _racist scum who should die _failed to get those same people to change their minds.
> 
> Astonished, astonished I say....



Perhaps, just a suggestion mind, just putting it out there as an idea, if the movement to leave the EU hadn’t been headed by, front of housed by and sponsored by racists the Remain move might not have called them racist?


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

Well, the sky is still where it was yesterday, and the turnip-based diet hasn't yet come to fruition....


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Perhaps, just a suggestion mind, just putting it out there as an idea, if the movement to leave the EU hadn’t been headed by, front of housed by and sponsored by racists the Remain move might not have called them racist?


you don't remember the guardian, for example, saying during the ref campaign that the only people who'd vote for Brexit were thick working class racists


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Calm down. It's not as bad as it seems.



Yes it is.  Have you talked to the working classes recently ? Hook line and sinker ! This is simply another stunning victory for the manipulation techniques devoloped by Cambridge Analytica Ltd. No more democracy ! As Nigel said ... this Populism is really catching on .


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 1, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> you don't remember the guardian, for example, saying during the ref campaign that the only people who'd vote for Brexit were thick working class racists



If I took the guardian seriously I’d have bigger problems than brexit


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Perhaps, just a suggestion mind, just putting it out there as an idea, if the movement to leave the EU hadn’t been headed by, front of housed by and sponsored by racists the Remain move might not have called them racist?



Do you think butchersapron is racist, or Peter Shore is racist, or any other people who have consistently argued for leaving the EU from a left position for the 40+ years - like MC Corbo for example - have you not read the endless research that has repeatedly made clear that leave voters were motivated by many things, many of them complaints against neo-liberalism?

Have you not grasped in your own life that if you call someone _scum who should die _they are somewhat less likely to come round to your way of thinking than might otherwise be the case?


----------



## Steel Icarus (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> If I took the guardian seriously I’d have bigger problems than brexit


Do you NOT have bigger problems than Brexit?


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> If I took the guardian seriously I’d have bigger problems than brexit


nice evasion. The guardian as perhaps the greatest media proponent of remain played a great part in framing the remain arguments and the notion that people who desired to leave were by necessity thick and working class. These tropes don't come from nowhere, you know


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Do you think butchersapron is racist, or Peter Shore is racist, or any other people who have consistently argued for leaving the EU from a left position for the 40+ years - like MC Corbo for example - have you not read the endless research that has repeatedly made clear that leave voters were motivated by many things, many of them complaints against neo-liberalism?
> 
> Have you not grasped in your own life that if you call someone _scum who should die _they are somewhat less likely to come round to your way of thinking than might otherwise be the case?



This is not just about leaving the EU. This is about unacountable sources of power manipulating elections and stimulating fascism.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Perhaps, just a suggestion mind, just putting it out there as an idea, if the movement to leave the EU hadn’t been headed by, front of housed by and sponsored by racists the Remain move might not have called them racist?



Yeah I agree that leaving the racist right to lead leave uncontested pre and post referendum was a serious error and that those on left who have thrown their lot in with the EU and european capital should have a good long think


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 1, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah I agree that leaving the racist right to lead leave uncontested pre and post referendum was a serious error and that those on left who have thrown their lot in with the EU and european capital should have a good long think


Tbh from my pov the choice was between shit and shitter, which isn't really a great set of options


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Yes it is.  Have you talked to the working classes recently ? Hook line and sinker ! This is simply another stunning victory for the manipulation techniques devoloped by Cambridge Analytica Ltd. No more democracy ! As Nigel said ... this Populism is really catching on .



Calling for people to die isn't helping.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Calling for people to die isn't helping.



Believing that political opinions you don't like can only be the result of some underhand manipulation and propaganda isn't going to help either.


----------



## Doctor Carrot (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> View attachment 197295
> View attachment 197296
> View attachment 197297
> Well, the sky is still where it was yesterday, and the turnip-based diet hasn't yet come to fruition....



The shit breakfasts have though! Where the fuck is the sausage? The bacon looks like it's been microwaved too. Unless it's a spoons breakfast of course in which case as you were.


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

Doctor Carrot said:


> The shit breakfasts have though! Where the fuck is the sausage? The bacon looks like it's been microwaved too. Unless it's a spoons breakfast of course in which case as you were.



The sausages were last night - and the bacon, which was delicious, was grilled.

Two hour walk in the forest, during which time we met no one and watched the sun rise, a cooked breakfast upon return, followed by some moderately exuberant sex.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 1, 2020)

where the sausage under the beans


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Believing that political opinions you don't like can only be the result of some underhand manipulation and propaganda isn't going to help either.


But they are the result of manipulation and properganda . Do I really need to point to the evidence ?


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> But they are the result of manipulation and properganda . Do I really need to point to the evidence ?



I think your opinions are the result of too much hysterical Twitter...


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> I think your opinions are the result of too much hysterical Twitter...


Strange . That is my exact opinion of you.
I have never touched it.
 Do I need to point to the evidence ?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

The amount of manipulation and propaganda from the government & the establishment to get people to vote remain far outweighed that from the various leave campaigns, some people conveniently forget that it was a dirty campaign by both sides.   

Plus the amount spent on the remain side was about 50% more than that on the leave side, £19.3m v £13.3m, and that excludes the £9.3m the government spent on sending that booklet to every household.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

That could be seen as a government attempting to protect itself from ,let's face it, a new iteration of pr  , that is highly effective and massively funded .


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> That could be seen as a government attempting to protect itself from ,let's face it, a new iteration of pr  , that is highly effective and massively funded .



Resend key, Over....


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> The amount of manipulation and propaganda from the government & the establishment to get people to vote remain far outweighed that from the various leave campaigns, some people conveniently forget that it was a dirty campaign by both sides.
> 
> Plus the amount spent on the remain side was about 50% more than that on the leave side, £19.3m v £13.3m, and that excludes the £9.3m the government spent on sending that booklet to every household.



Not to mention the non-spend spend - getting the governor of the BofE to say that if you vote for brexit you'll be eating rotting turnips in the sodden fields has got to have been worth a few quid...

I wouldn't trust people from the Leave campaign as far as I could throw them, but anyone thinking that the remain campaign was nothing but Truth, Honestly, Wisdom and Altruism needs to give their head a shake - and then cut it off.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

You can stick your head in the sand if you want, but right-wing funding for Brexit out ways government funding for remain  .


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Not to mention the non-spend spend - getting the governor of the BofE to say that if you vote for brexit you'll be eating rotting turnips in the sodden fields has got to have been worth a few quid...



That's included in the 'amount of manipulation and propaganda from the government & the establishment.'


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> You can stick your head in the sand if you want, but right-wing funding for Brexit out ways government funding for remain  .



Source?


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Strange . That is my exact opinion of you.
> I have never touched it.
> Do I need to point to the evidence ?



So, when Corbyn voted to leave the EC in the 1975 referendum, he did so only because he'd been brainwashed by reading twitter and Facebook - some 35 years or so before they'd been invented?

Have you actually considered what it is you're writing?


----------



## sleaterkinney (Feb 1, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Yeah I agree that leaving the racist right to lead leave uncontested pre and post referendum was a serious error and that those on left who have thrown their lot in with the EU and european capital should have a good long think


The left were never in a position to lead or influence the outcome though.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> So, when Corbyn voted to leave the EC in the 1975 referendum, he did so only because he'd been brainwashed by reading twitter and Facebook - some 35 years or so before they'd been invented?
> 
> Have you actually considered what it is you're writing?


Bless you. 
We are talking about the recent Brexit campaign not the issue of leaving the EU. There is a difference.


----------



## Azrael (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> The amount of manipulation and propaganda from the government & the establishment to get people to vote remain far outweighed that from the various leave campaigns, some people conveniently forget that it was a dirty campaign by both sides.
> 
> Plus the amount spent on the remain side was about 50% more than that on the leave side, £19.3m v £13.3m, and that excludes the £9.3m the government spent on sending that booklet to every household.


This estimate not only excludes undeclared funding and foreign intervention, it doesn't drill down into how the money was spent, and how effectively. It's not for nothing that Remain campaign groups were fined small amounts for technical breaches, while Leave groups drew much heavier sanctions.

If we're to have an electoral free-for-all in Britain, OK, but to be remotely fair it must be decided openly before the campaign. Allowing one side to flout rules the other considers itself bound-by is indefensible, an issue that goes way beyond the 2016 vote.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> The left were never in a position to lead or influence the outcome though.



It was in the same position it is for every political issue


----------



## kebabking (Feb 1, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Bless you.
> We are talking about the recent Brexit campaign not the issue of leaving the EU. There is a difference.



Really? You think the 2016 referendum had nothing to do with the issue of EU membership?

Have the crazies come out to play or something?


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

Azrael said:


> This estimate not only excludes undeclared funding and foreign intervention, it doesn't drill down into how the money was spent, and how effectively. It's not for nothing that Remain campaign groups were fined small amounts for technical breaches, while Leave groups drew much heavier sanctions.
> 
> If we're to have an electoral free-for-all in Britain, OK, but to be remotely fair it must be decided openly before the campaign. Allowing one side to flout rules the other considers itself bound-by is indefensible, an issue that goes way beyond the 2016 vote.



IIRC the largest over spend by a leave campaign group was £600k, peanuts when you look at the total spent by both sides.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Source?


In town on my phone... will sort you out in a bit.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Really? You think the 2016 referendum had nothing to do with the issue of EU membership?
> 
> Have the crazies come out to play or something?


Dont think I said Brexit was exlucively not about leaving the EU.


----------



## Azrael (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> IIRC the largest over spend by a leave campaign group was £600k, peanuts when you look at the total spent by both sides.


That's why I also highlighted how the money was spent. Did any remain group have a Facebook operation half as sophisticated as the various leave groups?

Regardless of Brexit, this is a sector crying out either for proper regulation, or the abandonment of caps and other limits so that all groups can at least have a fighting chance. At present, Britain's stuck with a situation as hopelessly lopsided as this.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Source?


 who own the sun and the daily fail


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

And the guardian, the independent, the standard, the metro. Who funds the new european. How do you people believe capital wanted brexit, the EU is literally a trade bloc


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

Azrael said:


> That's why I also highlighted how the money was spent. Did any remain group have a Facebook operation half as sophisticated as the various leave groups?
> 
> Regardless of Brexit, this is a sector crying out either for proper regulation, or the abandonment of caps and other limits so that all groups can at least have a fighting chance. At present, Britain's stuck with a situation as hopelessly lopsided as this.



I have no idea on the first point, as I don't get involved in Facebook, the odd occasion I end-up looking on there I've never seen any ads, as I use an ad-blocker.

On the second point, I strongly believe online political advertising during campaigns should be banned, as per with radio & TV.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 1, 2020)

Ax^ said:


> who own the sun and the daily fail



Nothing to do with campaign funding.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 1, 2020)

never said it was but it was right wing money being spent to premote the exit


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

Ax^ said:


> never said it was but it was right wing money being spent to premote the exit



It was right wing money to promote staying too though


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 1, 2020)

The Sun and the Mail (mass circulation far right propaganda sheets) as well as the Express and Telegraph have been feeding a nationalist, anti-foreigner, anti-European narrative based on British exceptionalism for decades. Such a mindset is now pretty much normalised. The woolly Guardian, Independent, etc meanwhile could never compete with that.


----------



## Raheem (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> View attachment 197295
> View attachment 197296
> View attachment 197297
> Well, the sky is still where it was yesterday, and the turnip-based diet hasn't yet come to fruition....


You took those photos yesterday. Nobody's fooled.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Feb 1, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> It was in the same position it is for every political issue



In this country? Irrelevant then.

Or busy eating itself.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> In this country? Irrelevant then.
> 
> Or busy eating itself.



It's as irrelevant as it makes itself. For instance by abdicating any political agency and instead chucking itself in with liberals as a perceived least worst option. Which makes it even less relevant. Repeat.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 1, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Source?



shit

Due to the ongoing criminal investigation into Brexit funding the particulars are currently not readily available im afraid. But it`s bloody obvious .



> The five donors – including Leave.EU’s Arron Banks, Crystal Palace co-owner Jeremy Hosking, investment billionaire Peter Hargreaves, motoring entrepreneur Robert Edmiston and hedge fund manager Crispin Odey – contributed £14.9m out of the total *£24.1min* donations and loans given to the leave campaigns in the five months leading up to the referendum.



I am not just talking about the leave campaign parties . Include all dodgy funding and promotion of rightwing facefuck muppet groups as well . The alt-right in the UK as a whole.



> Eleven wealthy American donors who have given a total of more than $3.7m (£2.86m) to rightwing UK groups in the past five years have been identified, raising questions about the influence of foreign funding on British politics.
> 
> 
> The donations have been given to four British thinktanks that have been vocal in the debate about Brexit and the shape of the UK’s future trade with the EU, and an organisation that claims to be an independent grassroots campaign representing ordinary British taxpayers.











						Wealthy US donors gave millions to rightwing UK groups
					

Revelations raise questions about influence of foreign funding on British politics




					www.theguardian.com
				




Of course funding is only half the issue as Cambridge Anylitica unleashed a weaponised properganda system far more effective than anything used before, which is what i am trying to discuss .



RTWL said:


> The Great Hack is out on the torrents currently. It really pulls the curtains back on Cambridge Anylitica; exposing it as a highly weaponised properganda machine and pointing out the right wing influence: Steve Bannon.
> 
> There is also these interviews from DemocracyNow!
> 
> ...


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 1, 2020)

kebabking said:


> View attachment 197295
> View attachment 197296
> View attachment 197297
> Well, the sky is still where it was yesterday, and the turnip-based diet hasn't yet come to fruition....



We get such beautiful clear skies now that all industry has collapsed, the pollution is one thing I won't miss. Do you remember when planes used to cross the sky sometimes, leaving little trail behind them? Crazy people said the government was spraying mind-control chemicals.

Three eggs in a single breakfast seems extravagant, but it's important to keep up morale, even in these early days - they say the powdered ones are just as nutritious anyway, so it's really just a matter of aesthetics.


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2020)

Artaxerxes said:


> Perhaps, just a suggestion mind, just putting it out there as an idea, if the movement to leave the EU hadn’t been headed by, front of housed by and sponsored by racists the Remain move might not have called them racist?



True but the not wanting to be associated with anyone associated with virtue signal did nothing but alienate those leavers sympatic to fuck xenophobia..for whom leaving EU was about entirely other thibg. They are probably the ones who sit quietly in the pub when Brexit comes up...As the debate crystallized around the strawmen of the worst kind of argument of what it all means


----------



## gosub (Feb 1, 2020)

Yossarian said:


> We get such beautiful clear skies now that all industry has collapsed, the pollution is one thing I won't miss. Do you remember when planes used to cross the sky sometimes, leaving little trail behind them? Crazy people said the government was spraying mind-control chemicals.
> 
> Three eggs in a single breakfast seems extravagant, but it's important to keep up morale, even in these early days - they say the powdered ones are just as nutritious anyway, so it's really just a matter of aesthetics.



Contrails still stick cos a checkerboard is more about still air. Cloud seeding using silver nitrate is a real but expensive thing -tgey used it to protect Moscow from Chernobyl.
 But if there is any chemical in the usual contrail it's residual pareafin from the jet fuel or glycol and they've com up with a more devious way of getting that into local air most vape juice is aircraft deicer


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

kebabking said:


> Believing that political opinions you don't like can only be the result of some underhand manipulation and propaganda isn't going to help either.



Oh, for sure. Propaganda played no part in the outcome. Both sides were completely honest. Neither needed propaganda because such a tool has never worked in the history of mankind, ever.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> shit
> 
> Due to the ongoing criminal investigation into Brexit funding the particulars are currently not readily available im afraid. But it`s bloody obvious .



I guess it's bloody obvious if you pluck out one set of figures from The Independent published 24/4/17, that a total of £24.1m was given to Leave campaigns in the five months before the referendum, but fails to explain where the figure came from, nor goes into details on what was spent & when. It mentions a 5 month period, but the rules on spending only covers the campaign period of 10 weeks, plus the article fails to mention how much was given to the remain campaigns in those five months, so no comparison can be made, making it both bias and pointless.

Here's a couple of more honest & balanced links, showing a comparison between the leave & remain campaign groups:

1 - Rival Remain and Leave campaigners in the EU referendum raised £15.6m in the ten weeks to 21 April, according to the Electoral Commission. The official campaign for Britain to stay in the EU - Britain Stronger in Europe - raised £6.9m - more than twice as much as Vote Leave's £2.8m. *But the sum raised by all registered leave campaigners was £8.2m - higher than the remain campaigners' £7.5m.* (source BBC)

2 - At the Electoral Commission’s last count of donations, more than £7,500 (the ones that have to be declared)*, *groups arguing for a leave vote had raised £12.1m, while £9m had been given to those backing remain. *(source The Guardian)  * This bit is slightly misleading, all donations have to be declared, but only those over £7.5k require the source to be declared.

Now you maybe thinking that proves leave spent more than remain, but it doesn't, because it's donations, not what was spent during the campaign period. In addition there are other groups & individuals that funded the campaigns, for example, *political parties (UKIP & DUP) spent almost £1.5m on leave, whilst Labour, LidDems, SNP, PC & Greens spent over £7m on remain. *



Remain: £19,309,588 (excluding government spending of over £9m)
Leave: £13,332,569





__





						Campaign spending at the EU referendum
					






					www.electoralcommission.org.uk
				






> I am not just talking about the leave campaign parties . Include all dodgy funding and promotion of rightwing facefuck muppet groups as well . The alt-right in the UK as a whole.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



This is a straw man argument, it has no relevance to the referendum, it mentions almost £3m was donated to right wing think-tanks during a 5 year period, it was published almost three & half years after the fucking referendum, meaning much of it was donated after the referendum, it also makes no claims that any of this money was spent on the campaign. In the case of the donation to the Adam Smith Institute, it was to make a film about Magna Carta and to fund scholarships. 0/10 



> Of course funding is only half the issue as Cambridge Anylitica unleashed a weaponised properganda system far more effective than anything used before, which is what i am trying to discuss .



I agree that the involvement of Cambridge Analytica's tactics was dodgy, hence Facebook getting the maximum fine at the time, £500k, for allowing them access to data. But, you are over egging any impact they may have had, it's widely reported that they had access to data for around a million UK Facebook users, the odds are about half of those planned to vote leave anyway. The big question is how many of the other half million decided to vote leave as a result of targeting by Cambridge Analytica? Frankly it doesn't matter, because leave won by over a million votes anyway, so more than the total number CA held data on.

The remain side had the advantage in the campaign, there's nothing on the leave side that comes anywhere near what was spent by remain side, nor anywhere to the level of the government propaganda campaign, including the whole project fear nonsense.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Yes it is.  Have you talked to the working classes recently ? Hook line and sinker ! This is simply another stunning victory for the manipulation techniques devoloped by Cambridge Analytica Ltd. No more democracy ! As Nigel said ... this Populism is really catching on .


Lol have you talked to the working classes recently? Where did this utter stone bonker come from?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 2, 2020)

SpineyNorman said:


> Lol have you talked to the working classes recently? Where did this utter stone bonker come from?



Somebody has had a plumber round


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Yes it is.  Have you talked to the working classes recently ? Hook line and sinker ! This is simply another stunning victory for the manipulation techniques devoloped by Cambridge Analytica Ltd. No more democracy ! As Nigel said ... this Populism is really catching on .


There wasn't democracy to start off with


----------



## Pickman's model (Feb 2, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Somebody has had a plumber round


Poor plumber having to listen to RTWL


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

SpineyNorman said:


> Lol have you talked to the working classes recently? Where did this utter stone bonker come from?



Where the fuck do you think shit for brains ? If you havent noticed the massive swing to the right within working class culture than your the ones fucking detached from working class culture !  I am working class btw.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Where the fuck do you think shit for brains ? If you havent noticed the massive swing to the right within working class culture than your the ones fucking detached from working class culture !  I am working class btw.



Prove it. Sing chim chimminey


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

*clears throat

oh fuck off 

Are you saying that you have not noticed a swing to the right within the working class ?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 2, 2020)

A broom for the shaft and a broom for the flume


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Where the fuck do you think shit for brains ? If you havent noticed the massive swing to the right within working class culture than your the ones fucking detached from working class culture !  I am working class btw.



Surely it's only a few dicks online and those who like a photo op, like the other night?


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

No . I live in SE England . I work all over SE England and i have witnessed it everywhere .... in every pub , on every job ... a proper stoking of facsistic tendancies i have witnessed.


----------



## Steel Icarus (Feb 2, 2020)

Alright Poundshop Yoda


----------



## chilango (Feb 2, 2020)

"working class culture"? Go on...


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> No . I live in SE England . I work all over SE England and i have witnessed it everywhere .... in every pub , on every job ... a proper stoking of facsistic tendancies i have witnessed.



But that's mere anecdotage, where's the hard evidence?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 2, 2020)

Darts and meat raffles


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

Why dont you start you judgmental nitpicking cunt ? I love to be told what my culture is by middle class cunts . IIIIII LOOOOVVEEE IIIIITTTTT.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Why dont you start you judgmental nitpicking cunt ? I love to be told what my culture is by middle class cunts . IIIIII LOOOOVVEEE IIIIITTTTT.



Not telling you anything, mate, just asking for some evidence.


----------



## chilango (Feb 2, 2020)

In fairness to RTWL there are plenty of "Tommy" types in the South East. Thing is they're (IME) small business owning BTLers who've made a mint out of the property bubble...talking in a shit high pitched mockney accent and wearing "clobber" doesn't make them working class.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> But that's mere anecdotage, where's the hard evidence?



What ? ! So i am guessing you have not noticed ? I dont really want to take this observation beyond anecdote TBH .


----------



## kebabking (Feb 2, 2020)

This, I predict, will go well.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

chilango said:


> In fairness to RTWL there are plenty of "Tommy" types in the South East. Thing is they're (IME) small business owning BTLers who've made a mint out of the property bubble...talking in a shit high pitched mockney accent and wearing "clobber" doesn't make them working class.



And the people i am working with atm. Gardeners... builders ... roofers ... All about the place. Maybe they had tendancies before... but now they feel proud to shout about it.
I have actually quit one job within the past year beacause of it .
My only tactic is to subtely outline how they are class traitors and should feel ashamed about such nonsense. I do try and avoid violence .


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> What ? ! So i am guessing you have not noticed ? I dont really want to take this observation beyond anecdote TBH .



There's nothing much to notice, just a few occasional idiots making themselves visible. It's a storm in a teacup. Brexit has brought out the best in people. You need to focus on the positives.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Where the fuck do you think shit for brains ? If you havent noticed the massive swing to the right within working class culture than your the ones fucking detached from working class culture !  I am working class btw.



Well now I've seen this well reasoned if a little spittle flecked post I'm with you. Looks like we need workers defence squads to me, only with guardian columnists instead of workers cos they're all fascists or something.


----------



## SpineyNorman (Feb 2, 2020)

RTWL said:


> Why dont you start you judgmental nitpicking cunt ? I love to be told what my culture is by middle class cunts . IIIIII LOOOOVVEEE IIIIITTTTT.


It's a live one


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 2, 2020)

SpineyNorman said:


> Well now I've seen this well reasoned if a little spittle flecked post I'm with you. Looks like we need workers defence squads to me, only with guardian columnists instead of workers cos they're all fascists or something.


To guard _against _the w/c no less.

Bring back c66 or whatever it was he changed his name to.


----------



## chilango (Feb 2, 2020)

I'm sure there's someone who can point us towards some more concrete stuff but isn't it precisely this fraction of the middle class that has always provided the numbers for the right?

The insecure shopkeepers and self-employed small business owners, the small scale entrepreneurs and wide boys? Those whose material interests depend upon a parasitical relationship with their w/c neighbours yet who lack the social and cultural capital to establish themselves more permanently amongst the traditional m/c?


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 2, 2020)

On here we have had the hard-liberals insisting that the majority of the brexit vote was middle class house owning old people and w/c people were underrepresented in leave voters, we have a scottish nationalist insisting that w/c vote was decisively against leaving, we have had people arguing that w/c people who voted leave are not really w/c anymore, not like what there is in london, we have had a nutter arguing that the entire north is racist and so are tube and trains drivers because their union supported leave, and now we have some ghastly _works with their hands type _simultaneously arguing that the w/c is racist and voted leave and that they're proud to be w/c.

It's broken many people this brexit thing.


----------



## RTWL (Feb 2, 2020)

Shit... i should have said white working class. I hang out with some Ghanaians in Crawley and they are not to happy about it . 

Just to clarify. I belive the majority of right wingers exist within the middle and upper classes (for obvious reasons) . Political chancers are currently targetting the working class .. hence the anti-establisment vein of the right wing (alt-right) . It is (as usuall) a nasty and underhanded evil trick! I belive we can shake it off with a bit of education.


----------



## chilango (Feb 2, 2020)

butchersapron said:


> On here we have had the hard-liberals insisting that the majority of the brexit vote was middle class house owning old people and w/c people were underrepresented in leave voters, we have a scottish nationalist insisting that w/c vote was decisively against leaving, we have had people arguing that w/c people who voted leave are not really w/c anymore, not like what there is in london, we have had a nutter arguing that the entire north is racist and so are tube and trains drivers because their union supported leave, and now we have some ghastly _works with their hands type _simultaneously arguing that the w/c is racist and voted leave and that they're proud to be w/c.
> 
> It's broken many people this brexit thing.



Ftr I'm not talking about leave voters.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 2, 2020)

chilango said:


> Ftr I'm not talking about leave voters.


Just to clarify, though my post followed yours it wasn't a response to it. But yes, much left-inclined analysis of classical fascism sees a classical petit bourgeois and state tied middle class fearing losing status and so looking for protection which mainstream capital cannot provide (in fact, is predicated on not doing so) and so a wilder develops group on the right gaining support until they get the attention of the big boys which is when things start to get hairy. Today, employment structures are very very different, status is not so much tied to it and is enforced in all sorts of other ways that don't work so directly politically, certainly not in terms of formal membership and ideological attachment. The classism expressed towards leave voters since the referendum vote (and was percolating nicely all along, see use of _chavs _etc)- on here and elsewhere are examples of what in the past may well have been directed into classical far-right groups. Those feeling pressure view themselves as utterly socially liberal and progressive and i can't see them wanting to get their hands dirty with anything formally, they'll be getting behind hands off technocracy, making sure democratic participation is further limited or restricted to consumer choice type stuff you have to earn the right to express, franchise limitations for some and  franchise extensions for others. A democratic-authoritarianism. All the worst bits of the EU in fact. But classical fascism, unlikely.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 2, 2020)

Brilliant post butchersapron

Watching the, often unhinged, hate and classicism pour out from some remainers this weekend I’ve been wondering where it goes next, how it will manifest itself politically and culturally and the specific forms it might take.

I suspect a lot depends on what happens over the next period. But we should not underestimate the pressure felt by middle class liberals - those who’ve long considered themselves, and been considered, the narrating class. Those who decide what we think about things. Those who consciously signed up to the economic tenets of neoliberalism in return for influence - and a role - within its cultural sphere.


----------



## bimble (Feb 2, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> Brexit has brought out the best in people.


lol


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 2, 2020)

krtek a houby said:


> There's nothing much to notice, just a few occasional idiots making themselves visible. It's a storm in a teacup. Brexit has brought out the best in people. You need to focus on the positives.




the best ? really


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 2, 2020)

What I find the most dispiriting is the stressing over loss of unaccountable commissioners with no democratic control bestowing (alleged) rights and protections and how outside of EU with tory govt there is no way of making gains or stopping erosion. This completely pathetic passive mindset and idea of how politics is done and things are achieved, or rather bestowed through benevolence or something. Beggars. Properly depressing

Edit should have been quote of smokeandsteam there


----------



## Yossarian (Feb 2, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Watching the, often unhinged, hate and classicism pour out from some remainers this weekend



I'd never seen Plato quoted with such reckless abandon.


----------



## Smokeandsteam (Feb 2, 2020)

Yossarian said:


> I'd never seen Plato quoted with such reckless abandon.



I could have typed ‘the bile, hate and condescension directed to the most powerless, fucked over and politically abandoned in society’ instead I suppose


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 2, 2020)

Just out of interest, what classifies someone as wc and mc on here?


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 2, 2020)

depends on your rendition of "chim chimney"


----------



## teqniq (Feb 2, 2020)

Gibraltar has become an issue again. Losing a nice little tax haven will be considered unnaceptable to certain people, though you can be sure it won't be portrayed in the media that way.









						Gibraltar + Brexit = OH DEAR
					

While happy Brexiteers celebrated getting back something they never lost on Friday evening, the reality of the UK leaving the EU was b...




					zelo-street.blogspot.com


----------



## gosub (Feb 2, 2020)

Smokeandsteam said:


> Brilliant post butchersapron
> 
> Watching the, often unhinged, hate and classicism pour out from some remainers this weekend I’ve been wondering where it goes next, how it will manifest itself politically and culturally and the specific forms it might take.
> 
> I suspect a lot depends on what happens over the next period. But we should not underestimate the pressure felt by middle class liberals - those who’ve long considered themselves, and been considered, the narrating class. Those who decide what we think about things. Those who consciously signed up to the economic tenets of neoliberalism in return for influence - and a role - within its cultural sphere.



Someone I used to get on with posted this on FB on Friday "Brexiteers always preach hate and need a scapegoat immigrant, homeless, disabled etc. This is not me. I will never believe hate is the answer. Love is always the answer. ".    Its been quite a thing, watching a descent into bigotry and hate dressed up as virtue signalling


----------



## redsquirrel (Feb 2, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> What I find the most dispiriting is the stressing over loss of unaccountable commissioners with no democratic control bestowing (alleged) rights and protections and how outside of EU with tory govt there is no way of making gains or stopping erosion. This completely pathetic passive mindset and idea of how politics is done and things are achieved, or rather bestowed through benevolence or something. Beggars. Properly depressing
> 
> Edit should have been quote of smokeandsteam there


Probably shouldn't just keep on quoting EMW but how's this one for apt


> How, then, to explain the irony that the theoretical expulsion of the working class from the centre of the socialist project .... One possible explanation for this apparent paradox is that a new pessimism about the revolutionary potential of the working class has been engendered by precisely such displays of militancy, because they have failed to issue in a decisive battle for socialism. It is as if the only struggle that counts is the last one.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 2, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> The earlier part of the graph looks more squished due to the scale of the graph being altered by the higher figures later on - higher figures that are a result of increased reporting. If you plotted just 2014 and 2015 the spikes would be more obvious.
> 
> View attachment 197271


That's a totally mad interpretation. This graph is very honestly plotted, in the sense that the timeline across the bottom is constant, and the y-axis starts at 0. And it shows a distinctly different, and far higher, annual pattern that starts very precisely at the start of the EU referendum campaign. The graph provides strong evidence for exactly the opposite of what you claim.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 2, 2020)

Ax^ said:


> the best ? really



Simply.


----------



## Serge Forward (Feb 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just out of interest, what classifies someone as wc and mc on here?


As an Amazon driver, you would be working class... but no less a cunt.


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Just out of interest, what classifies someone as wc and mc on here?


We've set up a small online committe  usually able to get back to you with an analysis within 24 hours.


----------



## B.I.G (Feb 2, 2020)

Serge Forward said:


> As an Amazon driver, you would be working class... but no less a cunt.



What class are people that pretend to be amazon drivers?


----------



## ItWillNeverWork (Feb 2, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's a totally mad interpretation. This graph is very honestly plotted, in the sense that the timeline across the bottom is constant, and the y-axis starts at 0. And it shows a distinctly different, and far higher, annual pattern that starts very precisely at the start of the EU referendum campaign. The graph provides strong evidence for exactly the opposite of what you claim.



And every July since then we've been having an annual reenactment of Brexit induced hate crime. And it's just a coincidence that prior to the referendum, every year sees hate crime peak in July. 

I tell you what, I'll bet you anything we see a peak in July this year and also next. How much you want to bet?


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 2, 2020)

ItWillNeverWork said:


> And every July since then we've been having an annual reenactment of Brexit induced hate crime. And it's just a coincidence that prior to the referendum, every year sees hate crime peak in July.
> 
> I tell you what, I'll bet you anything we see a peak in July this year and also next. How much you want to bet?


That's not the point. The low points today are higher than the peaks pre brexit. The rise in hate crime due to brexit wasn't just a brief spike but a general rise across the year. Surely you can see that from your graph?


----------



## emanymton (Feb 2, 2020)

littlebabyjesus said:


> That's not the point. The low points today are higher than the peaks pre brexit. The rise in hate crime due to brexit wasn't just a brief spike but a general rise across the year. Surely you can see that from your graph?


They have also made the argument that the general increase is due to increased reporting/recording. I don't get why so many are missing that point. 

I have no idea how true this is. I suspect it is probably a bit of both an actual increasing and an increase in recording. But people do seem intent on ignoring the actual argument being made.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Feb 2, 2020)

emanymton said:


> They have also made the argument that the general increase is due to increased reporting/recording. I don't get why so many are missing that point.
> 
> I have no idea how true this is. I suspect it is probably a bit of both an actual increasing and an increase in recording. But people do seem intent on ignoring the actual argument being made.


Yet the step change in the graph starts precisely at the point the ref campaigning started.


----------



## Anju (Feb 2, 2020)

I suspect that the increase is probably greater than what is shown in the graph. I know 4 people who experienced street racism for the first time in their lives after the referendum result, including a really horrific situation where a group of young men verbally abused my niece and her daughter, which was enough to make her leave London. Happily she is back now but had to spend ages arranging a three way home swap. Plus it's not just the direct incidents that affect people. The feeling of not being welcome and of your contribution to the country being dismissed and replaced with the scrounger / job stealer has been hard to deal with for some people I know.

Look here's a graph though. It shows there's been spikes in hate crime before so the victims must be OK with it because it's normal and they should be grateful to have a chance to live here.


----------



## chilango (Feb 2, 2020)

I think it's entirely plausible to link the Brexit vote to a rise in racism. 

However, I also think a vote to Remain could equally have been plausibly linked to a rise in racism. As, I suspect, a refusal to hold a referendum in the first place could've been.

The conditions were already there.


----------



## butchersapron (Feb 2, 2020)

chilango said:


> I think it's entirely plausible to link the Brexit vote to a rise in racism.
> 
> However, I also think a vote to Remain could equally have been plausibly linked to a rise in racism. As, I suspect, a refusal to hold a referendum in the first place could've been.
> 
> The conditions were already there.


The EU and it's actions are directly related to the rise of right-wing racism in the EU - i'm an internationalist and so oppose this. I'm not a little-enflander non-racist.

Easy this stuff isn't it. Of course, it ignores or hides how and why racism is produced in favour of either apolitical childish-priest positions that simply assert personal moral purity like some pathetic trendy liberal vicars pogrom, or openly argues that that what is and has always driven racism doesn't.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 2, 2020)

chilango said:


> I think it's entirely plausible to link the Brexit vote to a rise in racism.



I'd say that link is beyond doubt. Or, let's say a rise in overtly racist acts. The attitudes leading to this shit didn't appear from nowhere.


----------



## bimble (Feb 2, 2020)

The people who say 'oh no wheres my nice tolerant country gone everything was fine before' are the worst kind of idiots but surely this isn't even something that needs to be argued about. 
Presume most people have seen this already but a good little example of how of course nobody turned racist overnight but they have become louder.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 2, 2020)

^^^ What a complete cunt.


----------



## teuchter (Feb 2, 2020)

One idiotic notice in a lift somewhere doesn't prove anything either way.


----------



## gosub (Feb 2, 2020)

teuchter said:


> One idiotic notice in a lift somewhere doesn't prove anything either way.



It was on the fire door on every floor, and its fucking shit. And it to me it IS an example of some arseholes getting emboldened.. But ain't the norm, and shouldn't be.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 2, 2020)

bimble said:


> The people who say 'oh no wheres my nice tolerant country gone everything was fine before' are the worst kind of idiots but surely this isn't even something that needs to be argued about.
> Presume most people have seen this already but a good little example of how of course nobody turned racist overnight but they have become louder.
> 
> View attachment 197431



If that’s for real then it’s shitty and I say if because there’s always a possibility that it’s a hoax.

Calm heads and all that.


----------



## gosub (Feb 2, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> If that’s for real then it’s shitty and I say if because there’s always a possibility that it’s a hoax.
> 
> Calm heads and all that.











						‘Happy Brexit Day’ poster telling residents to speak English being investigated as racially motivated incident
					

Police are treating a poster tacked on doors of a tower block telling residents they should only speak English as a “racially aggravated public order incident”.The posters, titled ‘Happy Brexit Day,’ were found stuck on fire doors across every floor of Winchester Tower in Norwich on Friday morning.




					uk.news.yahoo.com


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 2, 2020)

gosub said:


> ‘Happy Brexit Day’ poster telling residents to speak English being investigated as racially motivated incident
> 
> 
> Police are treating a poster tacked on doors of a tower block telling residents they should only speak English as a “racially aggravated public order incident”.The posters, titled ‘Happy Brexit Day,’ were found stuck on fire doors across every floor of Winchester Tower in Norwich on Friday morning.
> ...



Let’s hope the police find the culprit/s.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 2, 2020)

chilango said:


> I think it's entirely plausible to link the Brexit vote to a rise in racism.
> 
> However, I also think a vote to Remain could equally have been plausibly linked to a rise in racism. As, I suspect, a refusal to hold a referendum in the first place could've been.
> 
> The conditions were already there.



think you can also link it to the banking Crisis and the austarity that result from it..

racism raises as people pockets start to tighten and start looking around for people to blame for it as it cannot be their fault

also easy to manipulate people into the idea that immigrates are getting a better deal than other people..

It will get worse


----------



## BristolEcho (Feb 3, 2020)

Ax^ said:


> think you can also link it to the banking Crisis and the austarity that result from it..
> 
> racism raises as people pockets start to tighten and start looking around for people to blame for it as it cannot be their fault
> 
> ...



It's important to hear people's concerns and direct that anger up at the government. It can be done.


----------



## Ax^ (Feb 3, 2020)

it can be hindered by giving the tory party a large majority


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 3, 2020)

Positive news from Nissan.









						Nissan to 'pull out of Europe and concentrate on UK' in event of hard Brexit — PoliticsHome
					

Nissan will pull out of mainland Europe and instead focus on its UK plant if Brexit leads to tariffs on car exports, it has been reported. According to the Financial Times, the car giant plans to "double down" on its Sunderland base in a bid to dramatically increase its share of the UK market...




					apple.news


----------



## Raheem (Feb 3, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Positive news from Nissan.


Give it a read. Not news from Nissan at all.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 3, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Give it a read. Not news from Nissan at all.



 Looks like I got carried away from reading just the first paragraph.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Feb 3, 2020)

> A spokesman for Nissan Europe said: "We deny such a contingency plan exists.
> 
> "We’ve modelled every possible ramification of Brexit and the fact remains that our entire business both in the UK and in Europe is not sustainable in the event of WTO tariffs.
> 
> "We continue to urge UK and EU negotiators to work collaboratively towards an orderly balanced Brexit that will continue to encourage mutually beneficial trade



LOL.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 3, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> LOL.





I think I could have a career at the FT.


----------



## brogdale (Feb 3, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> I think I could have a career at the FT.


Thought you had already?


----------



## The39thStep (Feb 3, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> I think I could have a career at the FT.


Fortean Times


----------



## SpookyFrank (Feb 3, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Let’s hope the police find the culprit/s.



He said, deleting the file from his hard drive and erasing his printer log.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 3, 2020)

.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 8, 2020)

Will anything come from this? I very much doubt it but you can only hope.


----------



## oryx (Feb 8, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Will anything come from this? I very much doubt it but you can only hope.



The clip shown on the tweet is old news (you may well have realised that.)

Latest news I've seen on it, on a wider level, is this from the BBC. Where is the Russian interference report?


----------



## MrSki (Feb 8, 2020)

oryx said:


> The clip shown on the tweet is old news (you may well have realised that.)
> 
> Latest news I've seen on it, on a wider level, is this from the BBC. Where is the Russian interference report?


 Nope my hopes were raised by things being retweeted.   & being a bit pissed. 
Well I expect the the NCA & the MPS will be so slow in investigating anything that the next news will probably be from the Carole Cadwalladr case that has been brought against her. The Russia report will not surface in its original format & the redacted version will spring up in April at the earliest. 
I was duped and just hopeful. Bollocks.


----------



## toblerone3 (Feb 8, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> What I find the most dispiriting is the stressing over loss of unaccountable commissioners with no democratic control bestowing (alleged) rights and protections and how outside of EU with tory govt there is no way of making gains or stopping erosion. This completely pathetic passive mindset and idea of how politics is done and things are achieved, or rather bestowed through benevolence or something. Beggars. Properly depressing
> 
> Edit should have been quote of smokeandsteam there



No, no, no, you are so wrong. I am/was a passionate remainer but I'm not going to give up fighting for the environment, worker's protection and consumer rights just because we have left the EU. Its all still to fight for. And maybe with padded gloves off the fight will be different. We will have to defend what we really value, not some vague package of hypothetical rights.


----------



## oryx (Feb 8, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Nope my hopes were raised by things being retweeted.   & being a bit pissed.
> Well I expect the the NCA & the MPS will be so slow in investigating anything that the next news will probably be from the Carole Cadwalladr case that has been brought against her. The Russia report will not surface in its original format & the redacted version will spring up in April at the earliest.
> I was duped and just hopeful. Bollocks.


The opposition (not just LP but SNP, LDs and anyone else) should be really going for the jugular over the suppression/delay/redaction of the Russian interference report.


----------



## MrSki (Feb 8, 2020)

oryx said:


> The opposition (not just LP but SNP, LDs and anyone else) should be really going for the jugular over the suppression/delay/redaction of the Russian interference report.


Totally agree. It should have been published before a GE was allowed to occur.


----------



## oryx (Feb 8, 2020)

MrSki said:


> Totally agree. It should have been published before a GE was allowed to occur.


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## Marty1 (Feb 9, 2020)

oryx said:


> The opposition (not just LP but SNP, LDs and anyone else) should be really going for the jugular over the suppression/delay/redaction of the Russian interference report.



The problem with the Russian interference report is that most people don’t give a fuck.


----------



## krtek a houby (Feb 9, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> The problem with the Russian interference report is that most people don’t give a fuck.



Sources, links, citations?


----------



## oryx (Feb 9, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> The problem with the Russian interference report is that most people don’t give a fuck.


I agree with you  - the day of the BBC article the general public were far more interested in Philip Schofield coming out.

That doesn't mean that the Russia report doesn't matter.


----------



## gosub (Feb 10, 2020)

oryx said:


> I agree with you  - the day of the BBC article the general public were far more interested in Philip Schofield coming out.
> 
> That doesn't mean that the Russia report doesn't matter.



He did?  Who recruited him Michael Rosen? Bloody Soviets indoctrinating our kids


----------



## oryx (Feb 10, 2020)

gosub said:


> He did?  Who recruited him Michael Rosen? Bloody Soviets indoctrinating our kids


----------



## Proper Tidy (Feb 14, 2020)

Inappropriate of mr tumble tbh


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 8, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Give it a read. Not news from Nissan at all.



Hold that thought.









						Nissan gives Sunderland plant £400m boost to build new Qashqai | Autocar
					

Japanese firm commits to British factory despite concerns over potential lack of UK trade deal with EU




					www.autocar.co.uk
				




Fantastic news and a real boom for Nissan workers at Sunderland.


----------



## editor (Mar 8, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Hold that thought.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Yes. It's great that the uncertainty about Brexit didn't end up killing off this deal that was going to happen anyway.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Not gonna disagree, and the help for heroes tee is probs quite a good heuristic.
> But...let's not overlook some of the potential psychological drivers of such stuff. Given that he's, say early - mid 60's (?) he's part of that cohort that experienced a) the last vestiges of empire & b) the high-point of capital concessions via the post-war 'social-contract'/consensus.
> So this heavily Brexit cohort look back and remember fondly (through rose-tinted nostalgia specs) better times of employment, disposable income, material advancement, community cohesion and labour solidarity and conflate it with a time when 'britain punched above its weight'. An easily exploitable confusion of correlation and causation.
> Not excusing this crap, just attempting some sort of rationalising where it comes from, like.


Guardian going with 'story' about some polling around the Empire question from last June.



Obvious where they want to go with the findings...but, have to say, finding that nearly 1 in 6 remain voters favour a return to Empire is kinda funny, ironic and sad at the same time.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Guardian going with 'story' about some polling around the Empire question from last June.
> 
> View attachment 201261
> 
> Obvious where they want to go with the findings...but, have to say, finding that nearly 1 in 6 remain voters favour a return to Empire is kinda funny, ironic and sad at the same time.


i'd quite like the uk to have a gaumont too.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> i'd quite like the uk to have a gaumont too.


Unfortunately, we've still got a Royal.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> Guardian going with 'story' about some polling around the Empire question from last June.
> 
> View attachment 201261
> 
> Obvious where they want to go with the findings...but, have to say, finding that nearly 1 in 6 remain voters favour a return to Empire is kinda funny, ironic and sad at the same time.


The longer YG piece here.


----------



## redsquirrel (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> The longer YG piece here.


Rather different, and more accurate, interpretation than the Guardian piece.


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2020)

redsquirrel said:


> Rather different, and more accurate, interpretation than the Guardian piece.


the guardian really is shit


----------



## editor (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> The longer YG piece here.
> 
> View attachment 201273


Bloody hell:



> Digging down into the British figures reveals that there is a deep political divide over the Empire between Remain and Leave voters (as well as Conservative and Labour voters, whose views almost identically match those of Leave and Remain voters respectively).
> 
> For instance, while 50% of Leave voters feel the empire is more something to be proud of, only 20% of Remain voters say the same. By contrast, only 9% of Leave voters tend to be more ashamed of the empire, compared to 30% of Remainers.
> 
> Similarly, 51% of Leave voters think Britain’s former colonies are better off for their inclusion in the empire, compared to 22% of Remain voters. And while Remain voters don’t wish the empire was still around by 66% to 16%, Leave voters are split with 39% wishing it was and 40% willing to leave it in the past.


----------



## brogdale (Mar 11, 2020)

Perfect edge issue, really.
can be endlessly exploited with absolutely zero implications for actual policy or cost implications.


----------



## ruffneck23 (Mar 11, 2020)

Brexit trade talks to be shelved due to coronavirus, government reveals
					

‘We have had indications today, from Belgium, that there may be specific public health concerns’




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 11, 2020)

ruffneck23 said:


> Brexit trade talks to be shelved due to coronavirus, government reveals
> 
> 
> ‘We have had indications today, from Belgium, that there may be specific public health concerns’
> ...


we'll not have advanced much further by the end of the year


----------



## skyscraper101 (Mar 11, 2020)

It was already going to be tight to get it done by Dec 31. Will there be any likelihood of an extension to the transition period?


----------



## Spandex (Mar 11, 2020)

brogdale said:


> The longer YG piece here.
> 
> View attachment 201273


Fucking hell. 23% of _Belgians_ are proud of their empire and a further 45% are neither proud or ashamed. That's two thirds of Belgians who are proud of or fine with the notoriously brutal hell state Belgium created in the Congo.

It does suggest that more education about what empires really meant might be a good idea. I don't think I touched on empire in history at school (did a bit on the slave trade, and how the British bravely bought it to an end...).


----------



## kabbes (Mar 11, 2020)

In my entire history education at school from 5 to 15, I could have gone without ever knowing Britain even had an empire, let alone what it got up to.


----------



## sleaterkinney (Mar 17, 2020)

I wonder if we will have a brexit now?


----------



## ska invita (Mar 17, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> I wonder if we will have a brexit now?


Definitely delayed.  By a year at the very least I would hazard a guess. Could be longer. Will be a different political landscape then.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 18, 2020)

sleaterkinney said:


> I wonder if we will have a brexit now?



It's already happened. The transition period might take a while longer than initially planned though ie the extension option that is available until July 2020 will happen, bumping the transition end date to end 2021 or 2022.


----------



## toblerone3 (Mar 18, 2020)

We are going to have a big reset. Brexit might be cancelled but so might the EU.


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 18, 2020)

kabbes said:


> In my entire history education at school from 5 to 15, I could have gone without ever knowing Britain even had an empire, let alone what it got up to.



Same. By the time I left secondary school I knew more about Roman history than Scottish/British. I did do Latin O-grade though, can't even remember what the history classes we did pre O-grade covered.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 18, 2020)

toblerone3 said:


> We are going to have a big reset. Brexit might be cancelled but so might the EU.



Yeah. I dunno what yet but the (temporary) closing of borders in schengen and the longer term state intervention that will be required by individual member states, often in conflict with EU rules, to address the consequences of this crisis has to have some sort of implications in longer term


----------



## TheHoodedClaw (Mar 18, 2020)

toblerone3 said:


> We are going to have a big reset. Brexit might be cancelled but so might the EU.



Brexit has already happened! At the end of this shitshow I suspect we''ll cleave rather closer to the EU than anticipated even three months ago.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 18, 2020)

Any truth in this ventilator thing?


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 18, 2020)

8ball said:


> Any truth in this ventilator thing?



Is this the thing about the ventilator drive? I saw something about this doing rounds on remain social media, appeared to be praising the EU for including the UK. Didn't really understand because until the end of the transition period the UK is still in effect in the EU.


----------



## 8ball (Mar 18, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Is this the thing about the ventilator drive? I saw something about this doing rounds on remain social media, appeared to be praising the EU for including the UK. Didn't really understand because until the end of the transition period the UK is still in effect in the EU.



Yeah, wasn’t sure about it myself.
Figured there was a good chance some folks would know more about than me.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 18, 2020)

TheHoodedClaw said:


> Brexit has already happened! At the end of this shitshow I suspect we''ll cleave rather closer to the EU than anticipated even three months ago.


Yes. At a minimum I would expect the transition period to be extended (by a year, I would guess), to be followed by negotiations with a very different tone from the ones thus far, depending on how exactly all this shit plays out. 

If food shortages kick in, that will demonstrate immediately which trade routes are the important ones to the UK. And it ain't those from Boston.


----------



## teuchter (Mar 18, 2020)

I now have a nostalgia for the days when listening to the news each morning was just to hear what the latest Brexit disaster was.


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 19, 2020)

Looking less likely for this year with Michel Barnier saying he has tested positive.


----------



## Teaboy (Mar 19, 2020)

You'd think this will be a salient lesson for all the no deal or nothing shouters.  Look what has happened when there actually isn't any problems with our supply chain. Imagine if we had broken and disrupted all those supply chains at the end of the year.

I won't hold my breath though.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Mar 19, 2020)

i think the world will be a very different place in a years time - or however long it takes to get through the C-19 crises. International trade and relations, the entire global economy likely to be transformed as its  is going to suffer its biggest hit in history. The priority across the world will be to prevent complete meltdown and making sure people basic needs are met - and state control of the economy is going to be massive as key parts of it are nationalised to prevent them collapsing. I would think the entire EU fiscal policy will be in the shredder and the uk will be  begging for health workers from every corner of the globe. 
I think brexit will be shelved for a while whilst the government concentrates on keeping the lights on and making sure everyone has a ration book. 
And with a bit of luck the bat flu will take out farage (only fair seeing as Barnier has it).


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 19, 2020)

If there was any justice in the world, this chain-smoking, beer-swilling moron would be testing the theory for himself - preferably later on when there are no ICU beds available...









						Nigel Farage suggests coronavirus will make people less afraid of a no-deal Brexit
					

Brexiteer Nigel Farage appears to be more concerned about the UK's departure from the EU during the coronavirus outbreak than public...




					www.theneweuropean.co.uk


----------



## gentlegreen (Mar 22, 2020)

"Come, friendly virus ...."









						How the extreme Brexiteers have delivered the worst takes over the coronavirus
					

STEVE ANGLESEY takes a look at the staggering responses to the coronavirus from some of the most outspoken voices in the Leave camp.




					www.theneweuropean.co.uk


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 22, 2020)

gentlegreen said:


> "Come, friendly virus ...."
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Tbf farage probably right that this will make a trade deal easier, by creating the political space where it can happen and of course because it will be more attractive. Possibly a bit grim to be talking about it too much mid crisis, I dunno, but there we are


----------



## Raheem (Mar 22, 2020)

Proper Tidy said:


> Tbf farage probably right that this will make a trade deal easier, by creating the political space where it can happen and of course because it will be more attractive. Possibly a bit grim to be talking about it too much mid crisis, I dunno, but there we are


Who knows? But I think it's likely to make any idea of not extending the transition period seem absurd.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 22, 2020)

Not sure about that PT, but i think Hannan is on to something when he says "a woman breathes something of herself into her curtsy -  She can swish her skirts alluringly or bob coldly" . The future sounds amazing.


----------



## Proper Tidy (Mar 22, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Who knows? But I think it's likely to make any idea of not extending the transition period seem absurd.



Yeah without doubt really


----------



## teuchter (Mar 22, 2020)

gentlegreen said:


> "Come, friendly virus ...."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You can really see how the journalist there has worked to give the facts in as neutral and objective way as possible.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 22, 2020)

teuchter said:


> You can really see how the journalist there has worked to give the facts in as neutral and objective way as possible.


Whatever. Kipper cunts are cunts clear as day to anyone with eyes to see. Their words speak for themselves. 
I remember that Bong Bongo Land prick...was a Tory at the time IIRC. Of course he's washed up in the Brexit asylum, where else.


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 22, 2020)

cupid_stunt said:


> Looking less likely for this year with Michel Barnier saying he has tested positive.



Pretty sure Boris is not extending the deadline despite this pandemic and our chief negotiator Frost also testing positive.

Nothing to stop Barnier and Frost using Skype tho.


----------



## ska invita (Mar 22, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Pretty sure Boris is not extending the deadline despite this pandemic


"Pretty sure" based on what?
You should read the Sunday Times piece. The government is running around like headless chickens, exhausted, and not surprisingly turning to drink. This situation is only going to get worse thanks to their let em die attitude. Its gong to be all consuming for them. Its about to get out of control. If you think the ranks of smirking arseholes are about to start posturing about fish quota you're living in a dream world


----------



## Marty1 (Mar 22, 2020)

ska invita said:


> "Pretty sure" based on what?
> You should read the Sunday Times piece. The government is running around like headless chickens, exhausted, and not surprisingly turning to drink. This situation is only going to get worse thanks to their let em die attitude. Its gong to be all consuming for them. Its about to get out of control. If you think the ranks of smirking arseholes are about to start posturing about fish quota you're living in a dream world











						Boris Johnson says 'no Brexit extension' despite coronavirus emergency
					

Draft legal texts were exchanged on Wednesday evening.




					metro.co.uk


----------



## Raheem (Mar 22, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Boris Johnson says 'no Brexit extension' despite coronavirus emergency
> 
> 
> Draft legal texts were exchanged on Wednesday evening.
> ...


So, you're pretty sure on the basis of something BJ said middle of last week...


----------



## Pickman's model (Mar 22, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Boris Johnson says 'no Brexit extension' despite coronavirus emergency
> 
> 
> Draft legal texts were exchanged on Wednesday evening.
> ...


Your credulity seems limitless


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Mar 22, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Pretty sure Boris is not extending the deadline despite this pandemic and our chief negotiator Frost also testing positive.
> 
> Nothing to stop Barnier and Frost using Skype tho.


You nob. Tell you what, I'll do a deal with you. If the deadline isn't extended, I'll leave Urban. If it is, _you_ leave.


----------



## eatmorecheese (Mar 22, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Boris Johnson says 'no Brexit extension' despite coronavirus emergency
> 
> 
> Draft legal texts were exchanged on Wednesday evening.
> ...



Keep gripping that. It's all there is.


----------



## gosub (Mar 26, 2020)

EU president criticises member states for closing borders to each other during coronavirus pandemic
					

Commission has warned of 24 hour hold-ups of medical supplies to get through border checks




					www.independent.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Mar 26, 2020)

gosub said:


> EU president criticises member states for closing borders to each other during coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> Commission has warned of 24 hour hold-ups of medical supplies to get through border checks
> ...



Yep, the EU is working so well together again, turning their backs on the likes of Italy & Spain, just like they did after the financial crash.


----------



## Dr. Furface (Mar 26, 2020)

gosub said:


> EU president criticises member states for closing borders to each other during coronavirus pandemic
> 
> 
> Commission has warned of 24 hour hold-ups of medical supplies to get through border checks
> ...


Strange that after all the talk of the importance of controlling our own borders during Brexit, that as this crisis unfolded we chose not to close ours and not to bother testing people arriving at airports from badly affected areas, whilst many EU member states were doing just the opposite.


----------



## teqniq (Apr 2, 2020)

For want of anywhere better to put this:









						Arron Banks fails in effort to use European laws to avoid £162,000 tax bill
					

HMRC says millionaire owes money for inheritance tax liability on Ukip donations




					www.theguardian.com
				




where is my tiny violin?


----------



## Cloud (Apr 3, 2020)

Not a great idea in hindsight was it tbh?


----------



## Marty1 (Apr 3, 2020)

Report suggesting Boris may extend the Brexit deadline after all.









						Britons FURIOUS amid fears coronavirus will force PM into Brexit extension –'Don't do it!'
					

BRITONS have reacted furiously following reports Boris Johnson may be forced to request an extension to Brexit.




					www.express.co.uk


----------



## two sheds (Apr 3, 2020)

Haha Britons FURIOUS 

(((((marty1 you're so sweet))))


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 4, 2020)

Right now i imagine most britons dont give a flying fuck about an extension to the transition period.


----------



## two sheds (Apr 4, 2020)

No I and everyone I know are FURIOUS. Along with Diana's KILLING we're still FURIOUS about that too.


----------



## gentlegreen (Apr 4, 2020)

"Britons" ?


----------



## gosub (Apr 20, 2020)

Brussels red-faced after Hungary gets more EU coronavirus cash than Italy
					

EU rules for regional aid meant that Hungary got far more emergency cash than stricken Italy, where the need is far greater




					www.telegraph.co.uk


----------



## cupid_stunt (Apr 20, 2020)

gosub said:


> Brussels red-faced after Hungary gets more EU coronavirus cash than Italy
> 
> 
> EU rules for regional aid meant that Hungary got far more emergency cash than stricken Italy, where the need is far greater
> ...


----------



## MrCurry (Apr 29, 2020)

Marty1 said:


> Report suggesting Boris may extend the Brexit deadline after all.



He needs Farage to get taken out by covid first, as it was his dodgy deal with Nige that resulted in the pledge to not extend the transition past the end of this year. 

Kind of bizarre that Brexit, which so dominated the news sphere in the past couple of years, has barely warranted a mention in recent times. If anyone had told us last year that in the first months of 2020 Brexit would drop out of the headlines, I wonder what we could possibly have imagined might allow that to happen.


----------



## Humberto (Apr 29, 2020)

They've timed this Brexit well.


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 29, 2020)

Humberto said:


> They've timed this Brexit well.


its only a dry run for Italy leaving so its a learning curve


----------



## Flavour (Apr 29, 2020)

he's got the best excuse ever for extending the transition period if the negotiations literally can't happen (in person) and all the Zoom invites from the EU end up in the spam folder. remember this: Boris and his friends do NOT want a no deal exit, which is what will happen on Dec 31 if no extension is agreed. and they've got the perfect bogeyman. i'd put money on an extension of another year being agreed in the autumn.


----------



## Raheem (Apr 29, 2020)

Flavour said:


> he's got the best excuse ever for extending the transition period if the negotiations literally can't happen (in person) and all the Zoom invites from the EU end up in the spam folder. remember this: Boris and his friends do NOT want a no deal exit, which is what will happen on Dec 31 if no extension is agreed. and they've got the perfect bogeyman. i'd put money on an extension of another year being agreed in the autumn.


Think it will be sooner than the autumn. Because the EU will be pressuring for earlier, and because it will be better from the UK's perspective (more precisely, its government's) to u-turn in a context where it will dominate the news for less time.


----------



## The39thStep (Apr 29, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Think it will be sooner than the autumn. Because the EU will be pressuring for earlier, and because it will be better from the UK's perspective to u-turn in a context where it will dominate the news for less time.


Think you'll find that the EU has been very very busy with equally imoptant issues ie trying to keep the southern states on board through the corona virus crisis. Brexit is only one thing on its very crowded agenda


----------



## ska invita (Apr 29, 2020)

Raheem said:


> Think it will be sooner than the autumn. Because the EU will be pressuring for earlier, and because it will be better from the UK's perspective to u-turn in a context where it will dominate the news for less time.


Yes i read that if "sufficient progress" hasn't happened by June the EU will be switching all energies to prepare for a Crash Out Brexit - which is fair enough, both sides will need 6 months at least to prepare for that outcome. It could be clever positioning, but I think the June deadline was one originally set by the Tories


----------



## Raheem (Apr 29, 2020)

The39thStep said:


> Think you'll find that the EU has been very very busy with equally imoptant issues ie trying to keep the southern states on board through the corona virus crisis. Brexit is only one thing on its very crowded agenda


Yer don't say.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2020)

What the fuck is this shit?









						UK government preparing ‘shock and awe’ Brexit media campaign
					

Military term features in plan to inform public about end of transition period.




					www.politico.eu


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2020)

teqniq said:


> What the fuck is this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 "*take action"*
Looks like a repeat of the government's approach to a virulent, invisible virus...

Funny how they failed to mention “loss avoidance” four  years ago ...

“new opportunities.”
We'd better all switch to boomerang manufacture ...



> The current plan is to split the publicity across four “bursts.” Between July and August there will be a drive to “nudge” or “shove” people to take action by warning of the “consequences and opportunity” ahead, before moving to a “shock and awe” approach between September and November.
> Between December and January the campaign will focus on “loss avoidance” and from January 2021 onward it will be about “new opportunities.”


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2020)

They're paying an advertising agencey a no doubt sizable sum for this nonsense.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2020)

teqniq said:


> They're paying an advertising agencey a no doubt sizable sum for this nonsense.





> The plan forms part of a £4.5 million advertising deal the government has struck with media agency MullenLowe London, which has also been working on communications around the coronavirus pandemic. The contract was found on the Tussell government procurement database.


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2020)

Lol yes I did read all of it. I just couldn't remember the details.


----------



## brogdale (Jun 18, 2020)

teqniq said:


> What the fuck is this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The reason that Johnson retained Cummings at all costs.

When the propaganda about propaganda tells you that this will be the "most important Government campaign this year" (this year !) you know that you're deep into the Leave style targeted, social media psy-ops that aim to 'unify' the nation into some quasi-military mass mobilisation. Of a piece with the Johnson playbook with allusions to military conflict, and a "gung-ho", turbocharged Churchillian bollocks.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jun 18, 2020)

teqniq said:


> What the fuck is this shit?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Brexit is more important than the pandemic campaign.

Sigh.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2020)

I would hazard a guess that those paid in the advertising company are cunt mates of cunt Tories.
Brexit is betrayed because it does not apply equally to the whole of the UK.


----------



## gentlegreen (Jun 18, 2020)

Reading that article and other stuff it seems we're still in the "game" of convincing the EU that we "mean business" and won't blink first ...


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2020)

gentlegreen said:


> Reading that article and other stuff it seems we're still in the "game" of convincing the EU that we "mean business" and won't blink first ...


I think the numerous repetitions mean we're trying to convince ourselves we mean business rather than persuading the eu


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2020)

philosophical said:


> I would hazard a guess that those paid in the advertising company are cunt mates of cunt Tories.
> Brexit is betrayed because it does not apply equally to the whole of the UK.


Atac


----------



## teqniq (Jun 18, 2020)

I suspect the EU collectively gave up giving a shit quite some time ago.


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2020)

Pickman's model said:


> Atac



Advanced tactical air command?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jun 18, 2020)

philosophical said:


> Advanced tactical air command?


Like acab only different


----------



## philosophical (Jun 18, 2020)

Ah.
Penny dropped.
All Tories Are Cunts.


----------

